Kiril, Mudd, ICT this should intrest you!

[Kiril]

Originally Posted by Tim Wilson

Kiril

You are perhaps correct concerning my generosity of credit;

I posted the article previously in Humus Debate Reborn thread and can't repost it and the search function is too much for me to wrestle with now so if you can't find it email me and I'll send it to you.

This one?

http://www.lawnsite.com/attachment.p...6&d=1214229501

Here is a couple you might be interested in from my archive.

http://www.suprahumic.unina.it/home/...omy%202002.pdf

http://soil.scijournals.org/cgi/reprint/69/1/57.pdf

[terrapro]

Originally Posted by Smallaxe

How much Magnesium can be removed by bagged clippings?
Does anyone have a site that shows the makeup of a grass blade?

I think the OM that would take away from the turf would outweigh any benefits of bagging to keep Mg levels low...if it even applies here.

Healthy grass is what like 80-85% water content and maybe some lignin.

[Tim Wilson]

Originally Posted by Kiril

This one?

http://www.lawnsite.com/attachment.p...6&d=1214229501

Here is a couple you might be interested in from my archive.

http://www.suprahumic.unina.it/home/...omy%202002.pdf

http://soil.scijournals.org/cgi/reprint/69/1/57.pdf

Yes, that is it.

[Kiril]

Originally Posted by Tim Wilson

Yes, that is it.

OK, then you lost me.

I will assume here you are referring to the humic polymer model, however I am not seeing anything in that paper that specifically addresses covalent bonding beyond the review of photochemical reactions. Lots of stuff on non-covalent bonding though.

[Smallaxe]

Originally Posted by terrapro

I think the OM that would take away from the turf would outweigh any benefits of bagging to keep Mg levels low...if it even applies here.

Healthy grass is what like 80-85% water content and maybe some lignin.

I agree. Mulching into the soil will probably do more for compaction issues than balancing the Ca/Mn ratio.

It would still be interesting to know what kind of nutrients are removed in bags.

[Kiril]

Originally Posted by Smallaxe

I agree. Mulching into the soil will probably do more for compaction issues than balancing the Ca/Mn ratio.

Axe, I believe you mean Ca:Mg ratio (note syntax)

[starry night]

Kiril, Gotta love your precision.

[Tim Wilson]

Originally Posted by Kiril

OK, then you lost me.

I will assume here you are referring to the humic polymer model, however I am not seeing anything in that paper that specifically addresses covalent bonding beyond the review of photochemical reactions. Lots of stuff on non-covalent bonding though.

Quite simply there is a definition of humus which is still degrading and evolving organic matter which is non-covalent aggregately bonded

AND

There is a definition of humus which is stable having formed a stable molecular structure or is covalent bonded.

Covalent bonds comprise material which shares electrons in varying degrees and complexities to form electro-chemical configurations, thereby becoming reliable substances. A polymer is simply a complex covalent bonded structure, such as cellulose and in some schools humus.

I use the terms covalent and non-covalent to draw a more simply defined contrast for purposes of explanation rather than getting into polymeric [sic] chains.

[Kiril]

Originally Posted by Tim Wilson

There is a definition of humus which is stable having formed a stable molecular structure or is covalent bonded.

Covalent bonds comprise material which shares electrons in varying degrees and complexities to form electro-chemical configurations, thereby becoming reliable substances. A polymer is simply a complex covalent bonded structure, such as cellulose and in some schools humus.

I use the terms covalent and non-covalent to draw a more simply defined contrast for purposes of explanation rather than getting into polymeric [sic] chains.

I looked around briefly for info on this and could find none that discussed the model in detail. I have seen (as previously mentioned) suggestions of metal complexing and possible covalent bonding, but nothing on the humic polymer model and related chemistry. What little that paper did discuss the model, it appeared to be limited to a specific set of substances produced under a specific set of conditions in a lab, and not an "all inclusive" model, per what is generally accepted as comprising "humic substances". Perhaps I am mistaken or perhaps one needs to define "humus" or "humic substances" to fit the model?

In any event there is, by far (it appears), more supporting evidence for supramolecules, so until this changes I will continue to pitch my tent in that camp.

[Tim Wilson]

When I originally posted the article it was to illustrate that there is no set definition for humus and the debate over what truly defines it will likely never be settled. I tend to not go one way or the other, just using the humus from my worms.

I equate it to some degree to the opposing definitions for compost. Some believe that compost has chunks of wood in it while others maintain no substance should be recognizable. I side with the latter in this case.