View Single Post
  #20  
Old 11-15-2013, 10:17 AM
Skipster Skipster is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Billings, MT
Posts: 655
Most of the posters here have latched onto the easy (and emotionally charged) topic of P fertilization and water pollution, but everyone has glossed over the outlandish claims in the OP's article. I'm not sure what the point of the article is, but it is littered with inaccuracies.

1) What was his "experiment" about? He planted some plants directly into different P fertilizers? What does this accomplish?

2) Triple superphosphate (0-46-0) DOES NOT bond directly to Zn, Fe, or Mn.

This guy obviously does not understand soil chemistry or fertility. Soil P does not "lock up" other nutrients!

3) It is not a valid comparison to say that Texas A&M uses a different soil test extractant than private labs, so it must be wrong. The state soil lab usually chooses an extractant that will give the most representative results for the greatest number of soils in that state. A private lab chooses its extractant based on price, lab director's preference, and area of the country that most of its samples come from.

This is a very poorly writen article with no science behind it and no truth in it. We should be commenting on how anyone could write such nonsense and not be ostracized. The whole P fert and water thing is a seperate issue.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.03806 seconds with 7 queries