Clay soils, are they dead?

[gixxerific]

It is my understanding that all soils including clay are high naturally in the main nutrients NPK and all that. It just may be that those nutrients aren't available in a form readily taken up by plants. I am also thinking the only difference is the minute particles that make clay. I can't seem to find where I saw this. I also seem to remember reading that clay soil area actually high in organic matter. MY PC is on the fritz (stupid virus, I'm working on it) I'm on my boys right now and don't have my wealth of bookmarks at hand, plus this thing is SLOW.

Any thought on this?

Thanks

Dono

[Ozark Lady]

According to Rodale...
A typical clay soil may be composed of approximately 60 percent actual clay, 20 percent sand and 20 percent silt.

Such a soil tends to compact, which makes cultivation difficult and interferes with the oxygen suppy for plant roots.

Clay soil needs organic matter. Adding sand to clay, just allows the sand to gradually work to the surface and let the clay sink under it. Whereas, organic matter will actually, break up clay hardpans, and help to release some of the minerals that are in clay soil. I have clay soil, and it stays red, no matter what I do to it. It gets to be a browner red, with organic matter added. When we dug our pond the soil was so red...
I don't think that all clay soil is red, but mine sure is.

[Tater]

granite sand-it is cracked and has sharper egdes that other sands.

[Toil]

This is a great argument for reading the book referenced in the meaning of weeds thread.

what better way to get organic matter down past the hardpan? roots!

[gixxerific]

I'll be back

Thanks

Toil that is where I read that about clay but can't remember exactly what was stated. I'm talking biological here, about the amount of nutrients that are in clay soils. I have clay I know what it is I know the particle size of it. Just can't remember if it is full of the nutrients to support life albeit in the wrong form too compact not allowing air in and all that. I'm being flamed because of something I said and want to right myself.

[applestar]

Don't have time right now to look it up but I remember something along those lines in the greensand research -- greensand being under/part of marl clay deposits... clay soil being acidic in nature... lime helping to unlock those nutrients...??? Something like that. You have to balance this argument with all the stuff HG and Toil brought up... was it it the ACT thread? This was when Garden5 (I think) was asking all those questions). I remember HG arguing against using too much lime somewhere. Wait, I think he was discussing that with YOU.

You know you'll probably be able to answer more coherently next month after our Teaming with Microbes book study starts up.

[gixxerific]

I actually got a hold of a copy of Teaming with Microbes first edition it might have been there where I read about the CEC being high in clays allowing it to be able to at least store more nutrients. I will have to look again.

[rainbowgardener]

I don't think dead, just compacted, but very rich in nutrients. Sandy soils (opposite end from clay) tend to be very low in nutrients because they are so free draining, everything just leaches out. Clay soil holds the moisture and the nutrients. Good stuff actually, if you just can fix it so your plants can breath, not be too waterlogged, and push their roots through it. Some plants actually like heavy clay soil.

[gixxerific]

I have been researching it a bit. They are not dead I know that. Someone was telling me I'm a fool. And that made me a little upset. I was told that most soils are lacking in nutrients I believe the contrary that most soils have plenty of nutrients whether or not they are in a plant soluble form is another question. I'm just trying to fight the notion that organics added to soils even clay would be better in long run and even the short run than haphazardly adding mass amount of fertilizer especially without a soil test being done first. I am still learning all this myself so it is somewhat hard to get in depth when trying to educate others but I'm trying.

I just don't like being made to look like a fool. Sorry to bring my grievances here just trying to educate myself more so that I may edcuate others better.

[farmerlon]

It's my understanding that Clay soil has good capacity to retain (or store) nutrients. As "rainbowgardener" stated, a Sandy soil is more likely to leach out it's nutrients.
Though a Clay soil is likely to have a good store of NPK; that would not be guaranteed solely because of the Clay soil structure.

To find out for sure what you have to work with, you could have your local County Extension office process a soil sample for you.
It's usually less than $10 for a soil test; and that will give you a lot of information about your soil.

[top_dollar_bread]

hey gix!!!, how yea been bud
I'm hoping I can help but if not shoot me a PM and maybe I can help w/ links.

heavy clay soils tend to be nutrient rich and hold moisture well because most of the particles that make up clay soils are negatively charged. so they attract and pick up positively charged particles like cal, P, mag and others.

the down side is it drains slow, compact easy and not really a good place to plant certain crops.
to fix is easy, just may take some time
compost and organic matter.
cover crops and weeds will also help break the clay and let the microbes get in ther and fix things up for you but the key I believe is good management with organic matter.
get some beneficial microbes in ther
ACT, compost, EWC or top mulches, or any weed/plant that can grows ther. ther rhizosphere should harbor a diversity of soil life and they will help fix things up for you..

so clay soils do hold nutrients better and should have nutrients with in, the key to unlocking most nutrients is the microbes and compost should give you those beneficials. compost will adjust ph, increase soil biology/diversity and help make all the minerals or organic matter more easily available.
in simple terms most clay soils are rich in minerals, they just lack good soil structure. fix that (compost,microbes) and the soil should be very productive
hope this helped

[gixxerific]

Top Dollar! BOOM BOOM BOOM that's it, that is what I'm looking for.

How ironic you came in here after being gone so long I believe we had a similar discussion about the same person last year who was calling me out. I'm more educated now but still learning.

But I realized I don't want to push this any further and lower my standards.

Thanks TDB glad to have you back.

[top_dollar_bread]

Top Dollar! BOOM BOOM BOOM that's it, that is what I'm looking for.

How ironic you came in here after being gone so long I believe we had a similar discussion about the same person last year who was calling me out. I'm more educated now but still learning.

But I realized I don't want to push this any further and lower my standards.

Thanks TDB glad to have you back.

here to help bud, I havent been posting but I do come here to read lots...
any way I'm glad to help a like minded gardener like your self...
if I remember correctly you also use to be a punker and like your kids I was boy scout as well. troop 549!!!

[gixxerific]

I was a scout myself.

[Sage Hermit]

great thread! HG told me about adding banana peels. They can help soilize your .. soil. Is that even a word? They break down super quick and help hold the soil together and lock in nutrients. I haven't tried full bannanas but I have so much peels. They are like 39 cents a lbs. here.

[The Helpful Gardener]

Great discussion, gang. Mind if I chime in a few thoughts?

We have a tendency to think of clay as an entity unto itself, but it is simply another state of the breakdown of a parent material (you may know parent materials by the more common name of ROCKS )

We start with a mountain. It becomes boulders which become rocks, which become sand, which becomes silts, and finally, clays. The increased surface area is what makes it so amazingly colloidal (a sponge for nutrients), but this can be a two edged sword. If there is no biology to break the bonds that bind that nutrition to the soil, it can just lock up there. We often see this with calcium, a very colloidal ion. Clay is not inherently more nutritive, but it tends to be from its nature...

The other huge issue is compaction. Clay tends towards a flake like form; think of throwing up thousand of sheets of paper high into the air. As they settle we spray with a hose. Soon we have an inpenetrable, impermeable barrier of soggy paper right? Say we find something to ball up the paper (like polysaccharide exudates from roots and bacteria) and put hoses and beams between the sheets (fungal hyphae and roots). Suddenly there are spaces in between that allow for the free exchange of gasses and air, which encourages living things, which furthers our natural release of tied up nutrition...

Suddenly clay soils are not a bad thing but a good one. We now have a soil that will retain nutrition rather than allow solubilized ions to wash away. What was once our problem now becomes a solution...

OL, exactly right about sand; it's just a raw material for more eventual clay. A temporary fix at best.

Toil, right on about the roots. They are our best claybuster we have because they encourage ALL the other factors...

and TDB, an elegant synopsis. I have waxed on about minor details, but you hit the nuts and bolts in a most thorough manner. I am SURE it was helpful, in the best traditions of this site. Nice job.

HG

[Sage Hermit]

Originally posted by TZ - OH6
I have tried to amend clay soil with bags of compost, mulch, and peat moss, and it is difficult and expensive to get enough into the soil to change the consistency for any period of time. For the longest time it seemed that each spring I started out with the same compact clay soil I amended the year before. When I broke ground for a new plot a few years ago I decided to hit the problem with a big hammer and am very happy with the results. This is what I learned.

For 30x30 garden with clay soil I wouldn't try to make a perfect garden the first year via purchased bags of amendments etc., but rather do some major bulk work for long term soil improvement that will pay off in the second year and beyond.

This would mean adding a large quantity of cheap/free bulk organic material, which is rarely fully composted. Wood chips, which are high in lignin, break down into long term stable humus, which will really help your clay. The rough texture also helps mix with the clay and break it up, while fine-grained bagged compost and peat moss tend to just coat chunks of clay.

There are many sources of bulk material. The guy I get to chip my brush also trims trees and keeps his own piles of composting chips, more than he needs, and he keeps offering it to me. Many areas have local municipal composting facilities (many counties take yard waste and tree trimmings and provide the mixed chipped mulch free of charge). You can also check out local race tracks and fair grounds for big piles of free manure mixed with lots of straw and sawdust bedding material. If you can find one of these sources you can get much more raw material by hiring/renting a truck and/or trailer to load up bulk material compared to what you could buy in bags at the store. If you have a mushroom farms nearby you may also be able to get bulk mushroom compost cheap.

Starting a new garden from crappy residential soil is a lot different than rejuvenating an existing garden or working with deep rural soil. House construction strips off topsoil, compacts the clay subsoil and then puts on a thin layer of topsoil and sod for the new lawn. This results in a garden that is only one shovel blade deep before hitting a clay pan that roots can't penetrate. It doesn't much matter what your soil test tells you if you are only working with a thin layer or topsoil.

Digging a short trench two feet (three shovel blade lenghts) deep will give you an idea of what the roots have to work with, and how much bulk organic material you need. If you have easy digging then plants will have no trouble and you can get away with adding a little bit of compost and your choice of fertilizer based on a soil test for a good first season, but if you have to hack down through clay, doing some serious ground breaking and rough amending would help in the long run. You might have to add a bit more nitrogen fertilizer (organic bloodmeal, or inorganic urea lawn fertilizer) when adding uncomposted woody material but the organic material will hold onto the extra nitrogen and make it available in the following years.


One of my new garden plots was bad clay, and for a 20 x 15 ft area I added a 5 inch layer of half composted wood chips (two pickup beds full) and mixed that into the top 12 inches. It didn't grow everything well the first year, but at the end of the first year what once was yellow clay was now chocolate brown and the consistency of potting soil. Soil texture nd plant growth just improved after that. This was a lot of work with a shovel (too rocky for a tiller) but well worth it. If I had more money and less enthusiasm for hand digging I would have done it right and brought in a back hoe for a half a day to break all the way through the clay layer (down to about 18 inches) so that roots could get to the water table, or bought some lumber to make raise beds. In either case a great deal of organic matter would still have had to mixed into the soil.

Twenty feet away past the original construction zone, I have a plot that is topsoil all the way down, and soil that has been growing grass/weeds is naturally high in organic material from roots so it didn't really need to be amended right away. The first year it didn't get any compost because it didn't need it yet, and that gave me time to gather compost material and let it mature. From that point on I could simply add the recommended thin layer of compost (2") every year to maintain organic content.

This is from another thread about the same [url=https://www.helpfulgardener.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20889]topic[/url] on page 2 in the compost lobby.

[gixxerific]

We have a tendency to think of clay as an entity unto itself, but it is simply another state of the breakdown of a parent material (you may know parent materials by the more common name of ROCKS )



HG

Boom! yet again, see this is what I was trying to convey to a certain individual but he just didn't get. Thinking to modern I believe. Thinking with his bag of fertilizer and not with soil and nutrients that he already has. I just can't get over the comment he made about MOST soils lacking in nutrients.

Oh and thanks for everyone bearing with me. And HG heck no I don't mind you chiming in. I was actually waiting for your input.

[gixxerific]

The Helpful Gardener wrote:

We start with a mountain. It becomes boulders which become rocks, which become sand, which becomes silts, and finally, clays.


HG


I know I'm gonna regret this but you forgot ............which becomes silt which become clays and finally into humus. Razz Keeping a Low Profile

[The Helpful Gardener]

In a word? No. I completely disagree.

Humus is comprised ONLY of living material. We can convert a mineralized substance into a living one, but in NO way shape or form does humus enter the mineral cycle otherwise (post edit; as sedimentary rock, I forgot ). Clay is as small as we get without solubilizing the mineral into component ions...

Do NOT confuse weathering with decomposition; they are seperate funtions for the most part...

Feeling regretful yet...

HG

[gixxerific]

I somehow knew that was coming in one form or another but hey I'm learning and that's all that matters.

I see what you are saying though. thank for showing me up once again. Keep 'em coming.

[The Helpful Gardener]

Showing up?

Nah, just showin'...

S

[gixxerific]

You know I meant that with much respect.

[Toil]

HG, what about microagregates? I guess they can be mixed in but not part of humus?

[gixxerific]

I'm gonna go with no until I figure out this mess from the USDA Agricultural Research Service:

Microaggregates (5 to 50 um) in Midwestern prairie soils are composed primarily of intimate associations of diffuse filamentous humic substances and smectite. The humic material coats surfaces of the smectites and bridges from one smectite quasicrystal to another and between different locations on the same quasicrystal thus holding the microaggregates together. Sodium saturation and dispersion readily separates humic substances from the smectite surfaces, thus suggesting that the humic substances are bonded to smectite surfaces primarily by cation bridging involving polyvalent cations (primarily calcium (Ca)). The humic substances associated with smectite surfaces in soil microaggegates have a carbon:nitrogen (C:N) ratio of about 10 and are a mixture of alkyl, O-alkyl, and carboxylic C with little aromatic C. This humic material has modern radio C dates and is relatively bioavailable during incubations. Discrete particles of rigid organic C are physically associated with coarse clay particles (primarily quartz, feldspars, kaolinite and 10 A-illite). Some of these discrete particles appear to be entrapped or enmeshed within the microaggregates while others exist as discrete particles separate from the microaggregates. The discrete C particles have a C:N ratio >15 and are dominated by single and condensed ring aromatic structures but also contain some aliphatic and carboxylic C. Radio C dates of the discrete C particles are old (70 to 730 Years Before Present (YBP)) and during incubations C in the discrete particles is biologically less available than the C associated with the smectite surfaces. These discrete C particles are believed to have a charcoal core that has adsorbed small biogenic organic molecules while in the soil.

[The Helpful Gardener]

As I see it the polysaccharide glues, plant and animal mucilage and all the other humic components are still humus, just binding together the clays or silt particles, even sand, as we get to macroaggregation. Add water in sufficient quantity and you can dissolve many of these (but not the carbon).

It does harden into something else for sedimentary rock, hence my hasty addition, and we can susbstitute humate as humus. I am likely drawing too firm a line at a time when the rest of my lines are quickly erasing; I should probably question my thinking more stringently.

But note it talks about humic substances ASSOCIATING with smectite surfaces; that's not becoming mineral, just attaching in a colloidal fashion, I think.

And define a"diffuse filamentous humic substance" for me. Hyphae? Actinobacters? I think they are just talking about biology and trying not to use the word. Chemists and geologists... hmmph. And all joined around a charcoa core... terra preta anyone?

Don't worry about not understanding this stuff, Gixx. I'm not real solid on it myself but it isn't written to be clear, it's written to get someone a doctorate and so scientists can talk to each other without informing anyone else that might need the info...

And the plants don't read anyway...

HG

[Ozark Lady]

One definition of a plant...
A blooming idiot...
Most of that whole discussion went Zoom right over my head.
Is there a way to say that again... in hillbilly english, and without the scientisteze... ha ha.

I got lost in technical terms... can you break it down... I think I must be blooming... ha ha

[gixxerific]

How about this OL dig a hole, plant a seed and watch it grow. That's a little better isn't.

But than again should we dig the hole or even water it, Ruth what is your opinion on this?

[Ozark Lady]

I am not sure that Ruth dug an actual hole in the soil, mostly she just dug down through the mulch to get contact with the soil for the seeds.

She started with 8" of mulch, over the entire garden.

I have beds, and yet, it is difficult to keep just 2" of mulch on the garden year round. I usually can get to the 8" mark first thing in spring, with hay, leaves and all. But, it begins to break down.. and continues to break down... I soon have 2" or less. Until I can consistently hold the mulch at the 8" mark... I lose moisture, I have harder soil, I do not have the fertility noticed by Ruth and the One Straw Revolution guy.

I still water daily or nearly daily. Well, I did build the raised beds so that the clay soil would drain... and drain it does. Until I get enough humus there, and mulch holding, it will continue to drain very well, too well...

[Toil]

OL, I think I have a good way of explaining aggregates (er, I think so anyway).

Let's say we stuff everyone in a small room and say nothing. I mean they are in a crowded room. How will they be grouped? Big clumps right? Now say we tell everyone in the room they have to hold hands with two other people. Or we tell half the people to hold hands.

How do they look now? Microaggregates are kind of like that. In soil, that leaves room for air yet somehow holds more water.

[gixxerific]

I am not sure that Ruth dug an actual hole in the soil, mostly she just dug down through the mulch to get contact with the soil for the seeds.

I know that's why I said it. Speaking in half thoughts again. Maybe to get others to think.

She started with 8" of mulch, over the entire garden.

I have beds, and yet, it is difficult to keep just 2" of mulch on the garden year round. I usually can get to the 8" mark first thing in spring, with hay, leaves and all. But, it begins to break down.. and continues to break down... I soon have 2" or less. Until I can consistently hold the mulch at the 8" mark... I lose moisture, I have harder soil, I do not have the fertility noticed by Ruth and the One Straw Revolution guy.

I still water daily or nearly daily. Well, I did build the raised beds so that the clay soil would drain... and drain it does. Until I get enough humus there, and mulch holding, it will continue to drain very well, too well...

Do you not have more mulch to put on the beds? I have to reapply several times a year, but that is good meaning the mulch is breaking down and that's what we want.

[Ozark Lady]

Yes, and no. I have leaves to spare.
What I need is lawn mower set up to feed leaves to it and let it grind them up... I don't own a lawn mower. I wonder, if I put leaves in a bag, and walked on them... would they shatter into smaller bits? Perhaps a burlap bag, so it doesn't break so easily?

And I still vacillate between... are the leaves good or bad. Somedays... the leaves are good win, and I pile them on... some days the leaves are overdoing it wins, and I pull them off. A double-minded person gets no where... I have got to go whole hog one way or the other!

[gixxerific]

I'm looking into getting a shredder/chipper for the unlimited supply of leaves I have just up the road. Just an idea. I brought h9ome several truckloads last year but like you said they don't break down very fast when they are whole.

[GeorgiaGirl]

Gix, my shredder/chipper is one of the very best things I've ever purchased. We have a hundred cajillion leaves (part of our property is wooded and there are woods all around us, as well as fallen branches galore).

It used to be a pain to figure out what to do with all the fallen branches all the time.

Now, I look at them with my eyes gleaming. "More MULCH!!!"

And of course being able to shred all these glorious leaves is a wonderful thing.

I bought mine locally through eBay... it was a $700 chipper/shredder that I got for a steal at $300. They don't have to be that expensive but I wanted something that could handle 3" wide branches.

[The Helpful Gardener]

I have been looking for my scientistese to hillbilly dictionary and just found it...

It says under "Microaggregation by diffuse filamentous humic substances"

"The dead and living goop holds together the rock dust."

How's that?

About scientistic folk, Fukuoka-sensei says,

"He pores over books night and day, straining his eyes and becoming nearsighted, and if you wonder what on earth he has been working on all that time-- it is to become the inventor of eyeglasses to correct nearsightedness"

and

"People find something out, learn how it works, and put nature to use, thinking this will be for the good of humankind. The result of all this, up to now, is that the planet has become polluted, people have become confused, and we have invited the chaos of modern times."

We need to move away from scientistese and start speaking hillbilly; the plants do not need the big words and the even worse ideas they often convey. Understanding nature is important, but not imperative. Observe, as Fukuoka-san and OL have done, experiment as Ruth has done, emulate the masters as Emile has done. These will all get you to the best possible results for you, your garden, and your planet.



HG

[rainbowgardener]

A friend of mine used to talk about "misinformation disguised as B-S-."

If you put enough big fancy vague but nice sounding words around something, people don't notice that the underlying information is wrong or ideas are terrible!

I have a little chipper-shredder that I bought on ebay for $100, but it is smaller, doesn't handle branches more than 1/2" in diameter. But it's great for my purposes. But the leaves I lay down for mulch in the fall I don't shred. I just lay them down. By the spring they are pretty weatherized. When I trowel them under I just crunch them up a bit by hand. But I only have a few raised beds to deal with, so I can do labor intensive. Otherwise lay them down on a tarp and run the lawn mower over them.

[gixxerific]

A friend of mine used to talk about "misinformation disguised as B-S-."

If you put enough big fancy vague but nice sounding words around something, people don't notice that the underlying information is wrong or ideas are terrible!

I have a little chipper-shredder that I bought on ebay for $100, but it is smaller, doesn't handle branches more than 1/2" in diameter. But it's great for my purposes. But the leaves I lay down for mulch in the fall I don't shred. I just lay them down. By the spring they are pretty weatherized. When I trowel them under I just crunch them up a bit by hand. But I only have a few raised beds to deal with, so I can do labor intensive. Otherwise lay them down on a tarp and run the lawn mower over them.

Have you ever used your shredder for leaves or garden vegetation, if so how did it work? That's what I would want something around $100. I don't really have any trees that I could chip except my willows that are always dropping their tiny little branches. Not totally sure it would be worth it for me I could just do the mower thing myself.

[rainbowgardener]

Yes, I use my chipper for chipping up woody plant stems to go in the compost, leaves, and small size brush into wood chips. Works great for all that and I've had it a few years now.

[Ozark Lady]

I like that... The dead and the living goop holds the rock dust together...
I get it! Thanks.

I was thinking of how clay makes the humus hold together so well, and thought about mentioning it, but it seemed to go the wrong direction of the thread.

Someone had told me: Don't ever put sand on clay... it makes cement.
Being nosey, and not believing it... I picked one bed, and dumped the kids sandbox on it, at the end of summer. And it has only proven... no cement... just sand setting on top of clay! ha ha

I have double dug it twice, and it still reverts back to sand setting on top of clay.

[The Helpful Gardener]

OL, I think you just have the clay/humus thing backwards; it's humus that hold clay together. But it's hard to tell without a college education and a $50,000 dollar microscope, and the plants don't care anyway...

HG