Does Rock Dust Increase the Nutrient Density of Food?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- On todays episode we put two of the biggest claims Rock Dust puts forward. The first that it increases the trace minerals in the soil and that the nutrient density of the food grown in it is higher.
The posted lab results can be found at
www.albertaurba...
Thank you to Patrick Dolan from One Yard Revolution for helping with this episode and being a great partner in the trials : / oneyardrevolution
A special thanks to Maxxam Analytics for helping us run these samples and analyze them: maxxam.ca
Home Garden Field Trials Playlist : • Rock Dust and Biochar ...
Some of my favorite childhood memories are of gardening with my parents and brothers. This channel is about low cost organic urban gardening in zone 3. I am by no means an expert gardener however I love to share my experiments and journey garden year round. Please feel free to join the conversation and if you think you might like this channel subscribe. Have a great day!
Check us out on
RUclips: / stephenlegaree14
Webpage: www.albertaurbangarden.ca
Google +: google.com/+StephenLegaree
Facebook: / albertaurbangarden
Twitter: / northern1485
Pintrest: / aburbangarden
I am quite late to the party and I'm not disputing the results but as an analytical chemist, I would find the results more compelling with a few changes to methodology. First is the assumption that the bags of soil mix were identical. To eliminate any bias, all the soil components should have been thoroughly mixed then split between the two beds. Then composite samples are taken from each and analyzed as a baseline. Small amounts are taken from several areas of each bed and thoroughly combined for testing (each bed is kept separate, of course). This confirms an 'apples-to-apples' comparison and gives a sense of the relative error for each component. Then the rock dust is incorporated and the soil from that bed is sampled and analyzed again to measure the contribution of the rock dust. My concern is the much lower concentration of some of the elements-if they were supposed to be equal before the rock dust, where did they go? Even if the rock dust somehow bound it up, it would have been recovered in the testing (I'm guessing acid digest and ICP). Otherwise they would have migrated completely out of the bed and I don't see any scientific rationale for that to happen, if they weren't present in the plant tissue.
Also, in the veg testing phase, it might have been better to take larger samples of more than one pepper, weigh them to get an equal amount then puree and submit that as a sample. Again, large sample, totally homogenized.
The sample size for metals testing is typically small-one gram or less-so the need for a homogenous sample is critical. Actually, even better would be to test each sample separately before combining to get an idea of the distribution. So, take 9 scoops of soil from different spots, remove half for testing, combine the remaining halves, mix and test the composite. I know it's expensive and a pain but to quantify such small concentrations it's the only way to be sure. 30 years of lab experience here.
Lastly, it would have been nice to see the remaining plant tissues tested-leaves and stems. I'm not a botanist but is it possible micronutrients taken up by leaves contribute to the health of the plant but don't show up in the fruit?
Just some thoughts.
It does not make any difference if you did the test his way or your way because in real life people are spreading this on their gardens in what ever hap hazard way. Some people use a no till method where the rock particles lie of the surface, others till it in.
Rock dust is ground up rocks and it will ten of thousands of years for this 'dust' to be decomposed into small enough particles to me absorbed into plant roots. It makes no difference what is in your soil, what matters is the plants ability to absorb nutrients from the soil (cation exchange). This is a complex process.
If one tomato plant winds up with eight tomatoes and the rock dust soil plant produces twelve does that mean it was because of the that rock dust? Soil is a living organism that is very complex and is filled with trillions of living creatures that are both visible and invisible (bacteria, worms). Mineral content is only one factor in soil health.
Fascinating stuff. From the research I've done, it appears that soils with adequate microbiology can actually mine all of the minerals from the parent clay/silt/sand particles. The plants actually can release specific sugars from their roots that attract specific microorganisms that mine for specific minerals. So if the plant needs selenium at one point it will release the right sugar to attract that biology that will accumulate it and then release it as soluble plant-form selenium when it the bacteria/fungus dies back.
I agree the Mycorrhizal fungi relationship does the same thing.
To make plant sturdy and harder to bite for pest?
Writing what you wrote 8 years ago is incredible, as it wasn't known for too long that nutrients could be pulled from inorganic matter. Way to stay ahead of the curve!!!
@@tedmcgee6825 that's actually done by a biofilm of microbes on the plant surfaces. Bacteria and fungi release exudates which are glues and other compounds and create a physical barrier.
Healthy plants put out lots of exudates to feed microbes on all their surfaces (especially roots).
Unhealthy plants put out less, therefore feed less. Less feeding means less compounds released, less compounds means less shield aka pests bite through barrier easier (empty patches, thinner etc), fungal spores land on the leaf itself rather than barrier, and so on
Fascinating rock dust lab results, Stephen! While I'm not very surprised that rock dust didn't increase the nutrient density of the peppers, I am surprised by the lower level of trace minerals in the rock dust amended soil. Thanks so much for going the extra mile and having these results analyzed!
My pleasure Patrick ! I don't think I could have not gone this far. I need to know what's going on! Thank you for being a great partner and QA QC on this video. I appreciate it and have learnt so much. !
Not surprising at all since soil bacteria, fungi, protozoa, nematodes, arthropods, and earthworms were not already present. Was your potting soil NPK'd
Wow! For some strange reason for a second it felt like it was one of those paternity tests you see on TV. The suspense was dense :-)
suburban homestead ha ha ha. Your comment made me laugh. I didn't think about it that way until I read your comment.
Rock Dust you are NOT the father!
LOL!
suburban homestead lol that was unintentional however very funny :)
Conrad Cardinal lol
JulV Wildcat I love it :)
Comedy makes things easier to accept. :-)
It seems obvious to me that the height difference in the bed is the reason for the differences. The heavy elements are leeching out due to a flooding condition in the bed that is 3 1/2" lower. How is this system watered. If it is in a reservoir that should allow the heavy minerals to leech faster as the test showed.
Either way any good researcher would look at this and see a major difference I. The control group. Just do it again and do it correct. If you need simple common sense advice on the rest of the Errors in your experiment please let me know.
Wowzers! Great work ***** ... keep up the scientific studies to help us all become more informed gardeners. I like the idea of using rock dust as a feed supplement for livestock then using the manure as compost. The minerals will benefit the animal first then re-mineralize the soil. This would be a very gradual way, but perhaps more beneficial... time to go test some poop.
Pretty awesome. Thanks for sharing!
I've been adding rock dust and green sand to all my new beds. I should have used my own controls to evaluate its efficacy.
Bill grover thats why we are sharing our evidence. So far the short term claims are not looking good.
Blake Kirby im not sure if the products are safe for live stock consumption. based on the results of the control bed analysis the compost has more then enough elemental content.
***** some rock dust is used as mineral supplements for live stock.
1) Could the minerals missing from both the soil and the fruit have wound up in the stems/leaves/roots of the plants? They had to go *somewhere*, and now I'm eager to know where.
2) Idea for a fourth bed: base mix + rock dust + biochar.
3) Idea for a fifth bed: just compost, but try compost made with all your ingredients right from the start. Assuming you make your own compost, try adding the rock dust, worm castings, & biochar right up front; mix it into the raw browns & greens that first form your compost pile. That's how I get everything to incorporate as the compost gets made & turned, thus "inoculating" the biochar and letting the rock dust & worm castings interact with the composting microbes.
Good question. Do the variety of elements in rock dust displace some of the 13 essential for plants at the chemical compound level?
@Dingi hi I had punkins growing in rock dust, the most fruit I have ever had. They started in normal soil, and work along the ground til the rock dust, because the plant was fully developed it stored all nutrition in leaves and stems. The rock dust gave the plant magnesium for energy to move nutrition to the fruit as this energy requires an "ATP magnesium complex" to assists ATP and is needed for this energy. Plant to my knowledge has 2 phases Growth and fruiting stage, growth stage was complete, rock dust will not work in growth stage.
The soil pH was 8.5. I still playing around with this concept of high pH with Rick dust. Getting good results.
There a nice book call " bread from stone" written in about 1890. It's a great little read. Talks about lack of magnesium problems in soil. No magnesium no energy for growth.
I wish you did a whole series on different soil additives such as trace minerals and different lava rocks.
This whole trial has been very informative throughout the growing season and now detailed analysis of the soil and plant samples. It makes you wonder what sort of soil reaction with the azomite caused a decrease in some of the elements. Or some other variable ? Very interesting and looking forward to next years trials.
I am glad you enjoy it! I am keen to see what the evidence tells us !!
Very interesting results Stephen. I am glad that I didn't run out to try amending my soil with rock dust. Two thumbs up buddy!
I am very glad you enjoyed the results !
Hey... very good. I like the science behind the scenes. I think it is important for gardeners to understand what products are, what they do and how to use them sensibly.
I would suggest you might look at the plants themselves. You hit the soil and the fruit which was excellent. You have the roots system, stems and leaves. It is possible in my opinion that the plant itself might have used the elements as they use N-P-K and Mg-S-Ca. Maybe composting the different plants will release elements back into the soil at different levels. Just a thought.
Ill have to check out the other videos and see what I missed.
Gary Pilarchik Your right we are going to do a wider variety of tissues next year to see whats going on. Today really all we know is Rock Dust has lower elements in the soil and its not in the pepper tissue.
I could not agree with you more Gary I want people to have evidence so they can make decision on their own.
There is a playlist of the trial on my page it includes both my videos and OneYardRevolution
Gary Pilarchik I would think they should test the soil as well, like if the ph is off the uptake may be slowed (learned that from you in phosphorous video).
eveny119 we did test the soil in the last video of this series :)
Gary, you took the words right out of my mouth. That is exactly what I was thinking!! Having used rock dust for the first time this year, I personally noticed a huge difference between the overall health of the plants that were planted in raised beds where I used rock dust vs those that I did not. I felt overall the plants were so much stronger-ironically, I noticed it the most in my orange bell peppers that I had grown from seed!! I wasn't consciously trying to set up an experiment-it just worked out I had space available in one bed that I had amended with Azomite, and space available in another bed where I had run out of Azomite, so I just had the regular soil amended with compost. Same sun and watering conditions. My orange bell peppers in the bed with Azomite absolutely flourished, and we feasted on them to our hearts content and I still have a ton in the freezer. The orange bell peppers in the other bed grew, but at a snails pace and they never produced fruit. I personally saw how much the rock dust contributed to the overall health of the plant-it was my first year using it, and it made me a true believer!!! It is sad that it doesn't seem to contribute to the nutrient content of the fruit. But for me, a person who for three years has unsucessfully tried to get fruit off bell pepper plants-the fact that my peppers came to "fruition" only in the bed where I had amended with Azomite is proof enough-Bring It!!!
It is very hard to get farmers in the Philippines to stop farming in areas on the sides of dangerous volcanoes. The reason is because the mineral rich volcanic soil produces very good plant yields. This is proof that rock dust works in the long run, especially in areas that may have excessive amounts of rainfall. Of course, in the very long term, most rocks decompose into clay. Probably the best cheap source of rock dust is the local granite quarry. It is a byproduct of rock crushers.
Yeh I do agree but the amounts you are talking about would not be viable here!
No, it's just evidence that SOMETHING in the soil near volcanoes improves its fertility, it doesn't prove that rock dust is good for anything
same in japan everything is volcanic, strems have the mineral volcanica profile. Best nutrition for wasabi
Just wondering if you think the source of the dust would make a difference.. I have seen one popular brand is rock made from volcanic ash where what we get here is a basalt powder, still volcanic in origin but is formed differently.. Then there is the glacial dust too.. Just curious..
Would be worth experimenting, good thoughts Rob Bob
As a matter of fact I have been trying to find two of the leading brands to test just this ;)
The WSDA (probably usda too, but I'm in the pnw) provides analyses of commercially available sources like azomite, gaia green, et. al
agr.wa.gov/PestFert/Fertilizers/FertDB/Product1.aspx
Comparing just those two, they're notably different.
(edit: For some reason, the site doesn't allow linking directly to the fertilizer index, although the link above seems to get around that for me. If you're not taken directly to the a-z index, you may have to click a portal at the bottom. Something about being a state gov site I guess.)
Medi Kouhai very interesting thank you. I still will run them for analysis. It will help me understand what is going on having complete control over the process.
Medi Kouhai Thanks! I wonder why so many of the minerals (e.g., Fe,Cu,Mn,Mo,S,B) are left blank for Azomite and Gaia Green? And many of the Azominte numbers that are listed are lower than what Azomite claims. Interesting!
Great work Stephen! I will be interested in the results a few years down the road as it does take years for the rock dust to break down enough for the plants to use it. Thanks for all your time and energy.
Yes but the analysis we completed was for both available and unavailable. what these results tell me is the lower concentrations in rock dust really means it has completely left the soil.
I am really glad you like the video! How is your grandchild doing?
First off, rock dust takes years to break down and affect the soil, so I wouldn't draw conclusions from just one season - glad you're following up each year. Further, plants do not uptake minerals without help from the microbes in the soil. Build the soil so that it is full of life, and nutritional value increases. Also the soil is more porous and aerated, so the land is more resilient to drought an floods, and as an extra bonus, carbon is drawn from the atmosphere and stored in the soil. Some principles of building healthy soil full of microbes include minimal disturbance of the soil (no tilling), keeping living roots in the soil year round, increasing biodiversity, minimizing chemical and biological disturbance, incorporating animals into the mix (in home gardens, that might mean beneficial insects, birds, etc.) Microbes consume the sugary exudates from the roots. Bacteria and fungi are essential partners in delivering minerals and nutrients from the soil.
I was glad to hear your findings.
throwing a ton of rock duct into a small area was crazy. it's a pinch of rock dust per plant. the soil more than likely had no microbial bacteria to digest the minerals. your experiment would be the same as giving someone 10000 carrots, and seeing it his eyesight is better after your test. the soils in the US are depleted of minerals, any test can be rigged to shift any way you want, but for me rock dust is as important as compost.
Check mineralforteplus spraying 2.5kg on 10.000 meter,very good results.
John Phillips do,you have any trials or experimental evidence to,support your claim? Impressions are not evidence, even if they can be a good starting place for a hypothesis. Suggesting that this trial was ‘rigged’ demonstrates that you don’t understand how experiments are conducted. You might criticise the method, but there was nothing ‘rigged’ here. He explained exactly what materials were used and how he used them, and how the analysis was conducted.
@@CitizenAyellowblue at the moment we spray 2.5 kg MineralFortePlus with 300ltr water on 1 ha.(10.000 sqare meters)
Check it on MineralFortePlus.de.
The results are very good.
Rock dust is just a farce it may replace the minerals that the source rock has in it but on the whole dose nothing for plants you would be wiser to use silt from a river that has carried the dust from many sources and traces of the bacteria and fungi that can release the minerals and transition trace elements from it.
Rock dust can improve poor soils. The problem is that one mineral may lock other minerals out of the useful mix, example - phosphate will not dissolve in salt water but if the phosphate is already dissolved salt can be added. Adding large amounts of rock dust will in all cases lock up one or more minerals. The idea is that a little of everything is good in the mix, a lot of one thing is poison. rock dust contains much needed minerals and can be used to benefit plant growth it can also make life difficult for the soil bacteria and fungi if used in large quantities. A few ounces will usually suffice for a large garden applied as a fine dusting once every three years. Plants can only use dissolved minerals in solution when you eat plants you are getting your minerals all ready dissolved and ready for your body to use.
Kohler just jumped off his roof! This is a fantastic trial and scientific analysis. I think you hit the nail on the head in the beginning by saying remineralization is more beneficial in poorer soils - like farmland that has been depleted because of the industrial practices using petro's and not replacing matter back to the soil. Great job buddy.
LOL! He's not going to like this video! I knew rock dust was over hyped / rated.
Now don't get me wrong, I like some of his videos but he pushes too many products and is now even getting into pot growing crap. What "medical issue" does he have to warrant getting a medical waver for pot? He gets stranger every month.
I am working with a group near me to see if they would be willing to join the trials. They have some poor farm land soil that would be perfect for this.
I am glad you enjoyed the video my friend !
Kohler is a good dude, I agree the medicinal stuff is not up my alley - but his overall message about organics is pretty spot on. I think rock dust, teas and bio char are worth examining - but when it comes down to it, green and brown manures (composted) are the key to great plant growth. Everything else is just extra...
***** - continue on with the great work!
skunk farm
I don't know about the cry baby per se part but his over hyping of products turns me right off. I'm sure I'm not the only one. He obviously has some money, he travels all over the place. Now he's on a pot kick. I'm not against pot but it's not for me. COMPOST people! It's all you need.
What a conclusion of fabulous trial. Thanks for sharing.
Dibyendu Mukharjee I am very glad you enjoyed the video.
Stephen,I find all this fascinating. I have been following your videos as well as Patrick's. I do have some questions,or I should say, observations. I follow John Kohlers videos and was stunned with the one where a lady only used a 3 year covering of wood chips,rock dust and mushroom spores and got huge plants that tasted fantastic. It makes me think that rock dust alone, without the other components of soil bacteria from the wood chips,and the action of the spores,as well as the fact that worms would also be abundant and plants would be grown in non-raised bed that would allow mycelium to gather nutrients from a wider area, isn't the answer. But--I've heard experts in soil say that to get minerals into our food,we have to have minerals in our soil. But--these same experts say that unless mycelium act upon the minerals,the plants can't absorb those nutrients. Geoff Lawton had videos where a food forest suburb that had been growing for 30 years had fruit trees that produced fruit that was on the whole sweeter than he had ever tasted, and he believed it was because of the fact that swales gave the trees the ability to mine the minerals deep in the soil. It seems to me that taking components like rock dust, and trying to isolate the function,might not be giving us the whole story. We need minerals in our soil--if we need them and they aren't there, how do we supplement the soil? If not rock dust--what do we use?
Hi Julie. I don't agree that rock dust is being tested in isolation without the other factors that you mentioned. The trial beds were filled with compost and worm castings, which are very rich in beneficial bacteria. Stephen also mulched with a variety ingredients including leaves, which are similar to wood chips in that they break down primarily through the activity of fungi.
I agree that minerals are needed in the soil, but I don't agree that all soils are woefully deficient in minerals. Also, compost and mulch alone can supplement soils with minerals when they are lacking.
Julia DiGaetani further to what OneYardRevolution said it looks like the compost that we used in all three beds had more then enough of the trace minerals in them as well. If you take a look at the soil results for the control this should give us an idea of the base condition.
I have a sneaking suspicion with the exception of some extremely poor soils you would find all the required elements in the soil.
***** Chris, I agree that this process is leading Stephen and me to the question the whole mineral deficient soil paradigm. There are some soils that are, no doubt, deficient, but I think that the idea that most or all soils are deficient is a fallacy. Also, compost and mulch should be able to provide more than enough minerals to most soils when minerals are lacking. (I think we're also challenging the efficacy of rock dust too, though). ;-)
OneYardRevolution Compost, mulch, leaf mold, wood chip are just as good source of minerals as good the soils were where these staff been grown.
Companies often fortify their products with added elements ie. selenium what is often low in soils (higher in seawater but for those who don't eat fish).
atizeg Stephen, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the control soil had sufficient levels or surpluses of all the 8 essential elements. In this case, the native soil plus compost and worm castings clearly provided all of the essential elements.
Why are the control soil RDL values twice that of the rock dust soil RDL values and how does that affect the results if it does?
John Kohler will pull his hair off once he sees this
I simply hope the evidence helps people. I would hope no one loses hair !! Make patter baldness claims enough :) we don't need to help
@@AlbertaUrbanGarden Rock dust eliminates male pattern baldness--testing results to be released soon to prove that claim is false also. ;-)
@@AEON. You clicked the wrong reply button. I didn't make the video--I only responded to it--and my response was meant 100% to be humorous.
Frankly, your claims about rock dust are likely rubbish. If you had any integrity, you would prove what you preach just like the video author did.
Since you have provided no proof for YOUR claims, I can't think of a single reason why anyone would accept what you've written as true.
@@AEON. Rock dust work, www.soilandhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/02/0203CAT/020302rodale/02030209.html you have to activate it biochemically to initiate the biogeochemical processes to make rock dust powders a success and it depends if you use the right kinds of rocks and grind it in the right level of fineness which is as fine as baby powder and face powder and when it is REALLY EXTREMELY FINE then it should DISSOLVE in water. And you use a fermented compost called humus that has reduced the entire compost pile into humus.
@@AEON. I agree with this big time. Its well known that fungi are required for certain mineral transfers like zinc across root membranes. Further what was the break down of the rock dust used, if it was just ground feldspar then all you're adding is silica, so of course you're going to see a reduction in mineral variation, a better test would be to use AZOmite with known mineral breakdowns. Next there was no PH control, which again plays a massive roll in mineral exchange between plants, rock dusts can change soil PH wildly causing mineral lockout. Lastly is the binding effect of carbon additives like the biochar which bore noticeable changes in soil chemistry. So all of these factors combined makes this test nearly pointless. One of the biggest points of interest to me becomes IF there were high amounts of trace minerals in the rock dust where are they? I'd say that there was not enough carbon to hold them in the soil and they ran off with watering. Lastly many full spectrum rock dust products are recommended as foliar applications as leaves will take in certain minerals(like zinc) better from foliar feeds vs roots(especially when lacking fungal partners). I have used both AZOmite and Sonic bloom on my property for years now with the addition of carbon and have seen a MASSIVE difference, in yield, flavour, colour and most of all oddly the smell of my food. I have also been able to confirm that the brig rating of my apples has gone from an abysmal 8 to a respectable 12. This was from topdressing minerals and foliar feeding with the Sonic bloom product.
Ok this makes me a little relieved because I had considered purchasing rock dust. But I think the "ideal" soil presents itself in the forest where leafs and wood have decomposed over time, along with the aid of fungi
sillybunnns I would have to say I like that idea ;) Its what I model my garden practices ;)
:)
look at learnhowtogarden channel video is called rock dust in gardening --- the myth and the facts , you cant believe these guys on utube they are salesmen , dont fall for everything that comes down the pipe , this is a good video , listen to what he is telling you . he is not selling you something you dont need !
So Interesting! You have saved me the mistake of forking out 40 bucks for a worthless produce Azomite. Thanks!!
I am glad I could help!!!
Thank you for being so committed to examining this and other popular gardening advice. I wonder if the solubility of rock dust is a factor. It may take a very long time for the rock dust to break down where it's minerals are available, and if in the mean time, the rock dust binds the trace elements that are in the original compost/casting soil? Your research leads to a lot of questions that really need full scientific field trials and research to answer. But the most important thing your results did show is that adding amendments is not always helpful, and perhaps has the opposite effect than what we desire.
Hi Sher. One thing we could have made more clear is that the numbers represent the TOTAL quantity of trace elements - both available and unavailable. So, the unavailable elements are taken into account in the results.
Even more interesting. I am assuming the increase is in iron and not iron oxide (rust).? Could trace elements be converted to iron (total speculation). Needs a soil chemist to address all the possibilities.
Sher Thom no elements unless exposed to nuclear processes will remain in their own elemental from. for instance calcium in the soil will never change to iron.
your right it is very interesting!
I'm pretty sure rock dust was an idea for poor overused soil on farm lands. There should be no difference when in great soil because they will be able to pick up the nutrients needed.
Very interesting results! Makes me wonder about what other soil amendments may be either useless or causing a negative effect on our home garden crops.
Makes me think of a conversation I had with a commercial farmer this summer, he told me that if rock dust was as good as some people say then all of the farmers would already be using it. I think he may be right.
MrChipGardener You know farmers have a really good understanding of whats going on. More and more often I am amazed how much re-learning we are doing of old time farm knowledge!
trials are a great way to test other products! OneYardRevolution and i would be more then glad to help you run a trial!
yet a lot of farmers use poisons
Hi Stephen, thanks for sharing your test results and the corresponding data. A few questions: Have you had the actual rock dust analyzed at a lab? I'm interested in seeing the actual composition of the stuff you used. Also, do you think it would be good to analyze both soil samplings BEFORE adding the rock dust? Two bags of the the exact same brand of castings / compost could in fact have different compositions. Compost and castings can fluctuate so easily. A simple test, beforehand, would rule out whether this is the case.
The rock dust soil had only 1/4 as much lead as the control. Wet tissue showed twice as much lead in the rock dust peppers. One might wonder if the rock dust altered the bio-availability in such a way that more lead was absorbed.
To be honest, some of these results befuddle me. Why is there more K in your control DRY wt, but more K in the Rock Dust WET wt? That data makes no sense to me.
AlboPepper Thank you for taking the time to comment my friend!
here is the lab results for the rock dust. For comparison purposes I used fall leaves to compare againts.
ruclips.net/video/PkOwPAPDAZ0/видео.html
I should have tested the soil before anything happened your right. however as I am doing this all on my own budget I was not in a place where I could get the samples done at the beginning of the year. I will do more testing this year though. I did however ensure all of the ingredients were from the same bag and production lot number. at least in Canada that requites the analysis be with in a very tight parameter to qualify.
some of the lab stuff I am still working on but if you want me to ask any of my experts please let me know which questions.
kindest regards
Stephen
Perhaps, due to the molecular weight of the dust (being relatively unprocessed by nature), the charged particles attach and drag other trace minerals to the bottom during watering. I would like to see the bottom of the soil tested at the end of the experiment. I essentially think the dust is food for bacteria and fungus. They deliver minerals to the plant. It's all very interesting anyways. Kudos for them testing anyways..
Heavy minerals sank like gold during the watering and growing
Humus is obviously the most important part of any garden soil. But we also add things to address soil STRUCTURE. Things like perlite to help with aeration and vermiculite for moisture retention. I wonder if rock dust is useful for soil structure. After all, most soil found in the "wild" contains it. I wonder how you could test the benefit of rock dust as it pertains to soil structure?
A few points: there are different types of rock dust from different sources with different elemental compositions and ratios. Therefore, to be thorough it would be a good idea to test several different types, or alternatively, to mix several types of rock dust together and then mix them into the test soil.
When you create two soil mixes from identical ingredients and mix them thoroughly, there should be identical, or nearly identical, concentrations of each element in each sample from each of the mixes. Then, when you add something extra (e.g. rock dust) to the test soil mix, there should be increased concentrations of certain elements that were present in the rock dust in that mix, not lower concentrations. It is unlikely to lower the concentrations of the various elements by adding something extra, especially when that "something extra" is already shown to contain higher concentrations of the elements that you are testing for. There are a few possible reasons why Stephen obtained the results that he did, especially pertaining to the soil samples. Firstly, minerals can leach out of the soil. The raised beds in the video were at different heights above the ground, and it looked like it was possible that leachate from the higher bed could have found its way into the lower bed, thereby transferring minerals from one bed to the other. Secondly, it's highly possible that Stephen mixed up the soil samples, and from looking at the results from the elemental analysis of the two samples, this seems to be the most likely scenario. I could understand if both samples had similar concentrations of each element, but to have lower concentrations of elements in the test sample compared to the control was a red flag that there was some problem with the methodology or the execution. Thirdly, it is also possible that the initial soil mixes were not mixed thoroughly and that would have resulted in areas of relatively high and low concentrations of the different elements in each mix. Finally, it would've been helpful to see how he took the soil samples. For example, if he took a soil sample from an area with lots of roots, then it is reasonable to think that the soil minerals would be depleted in that area, relative to an area with few or no roots.
One improvement to the methodology would be, when preparing the soil, to mix the soil for the test and the control together in one large mixer, like a cement mixer or a proper soil mixer, remove the soil for the control, then add the rock dust to the remaining soil in the mixer, mix thoroughly, and then use that in the test bed. This would ensure that the soil mixes were more homogeneous, and differed only in the addition of the rock dust.
Probably the most important results were the tissue sample results, which showed no significant differences in the nutrient levels between the peppers grown in the test soil (with rock dust) and the control samples. This would seem to indicate that as long as you start with a rich soil mix (as he did) that the addition of rock dust will make no significant difference in the final result. This makes sense and seems to be a totally valid finding. One caveat that I would add is that if you are working with a relatively poor soil, then maybe rock dust would make a difference in the nutrient levels in the resulting produce. That might be an interesting test to do next.
We agree that the soil results are surprising. One possibility that you didn't mention is that the rock dust product may not be what it claims to be. To be clear, I am not suggesting that this is the case. However, Stephen will be sending a sample of the rock dust to the lab for analysis to find out.
OneYardRevolution Good point. That's a possibility that I hadn't considered. Good idea to get it tested too.
Btw, I think that this kind of empirical testing is a great idea, and I'm very interested in following future tests.
For the record, I have bought Azomite in the past and used it for one season. I did not notice any real difference in my plants, and as a result, I discontinued its use. I'm a firm believer in compost and worm castings, but I'm always open to new information from a good source. Thanks for your work.
Cryptopolis Stephen just confirmed that he has video evidence of his soil collection and packaging. No mix ups!
It sounds like you and I have a similar basic approach - compost and worm castings! Thanks for your thoughtful comments!
OneYardRevolution That's interesting. I wonder what could've caused the lower levels of Ca, P, S, etc. then?
Tannins, found in compost, can chelate cations like Ca++, but they would be present in both mixes and so should affect both equally. It's possible that there was more leaching from one bed compared with the other. Was the water ground water or rainwater? I find that if I have to use tap water (groundwater where I live) that I get a build-up of Ca & Mg in my soil, but if I use rainwater (depending on availability) that it tends to leach more minerals out of my soil.
It's a mystery for now, but hopefully we can figure out what is going on in the future. :-)
Cryptopolis Fantastic response my friend.
the beds were made with the exact same component material from the same batch numbers of each product. there is potential for slight variance however this is usually below the detection limit for regulated products in Canada.
all beds received all their water from rainfall or my hose. There was no marked difference in water regiment.
As OneYardRevolution said ill be running more analysis on the trials to see what is going on here. Starting with analysis of the product.
there are lots of possibilities but more investigation is in order before we can speculate.
To date though the first years product claims much as you observed are not well supported by this evidence.
I'm speechless. I can't believe rock dust actually lowers certain trace mineral level... After watching this video, I may skip the rock dust trail and only test the Bio Char. Wow, just wow...
It is excellent to have independent results! We still would love having you participate on both trials
In addition, tests like this one remind me most medical tests this days that look at the body at one single point in time, when in fact our body PH and fluids are changing throughout the day non stop changing all these levels... Test the plants in that bed next year and the year after see what will happen then report your results..
I knew it! Great job Stephen! A certain "green grower" will not be happy to hear this! My contention has always been COMPOST, COMPOST, COMPOST! Thanks for the great work!
I am glad you enjoyed it.
Two of my pillars that I use for organic growing are compost. That said I am going to test both as I want to know if it's the best way forward.
Nice...I bet all them gardeners that use everything but the kitchen sink to grow a tomato plant are mad because they live by rock dust...I am a old time gardener put it in the dirt and leave it!!!! Great compost and soil is all you need with a touch of H2O.
We are testing the product claims and right now your right it does not really hold up. IN fact I have spent quite a bit of time putting garden practices to the test.
Well done chap. Good work. We need more of this sort of experimentation,there are too many suppliers of miracle products out there that need to be called on their claims.
Jim i am pleased you enjoyed it. I will continue the good fight :)
In the case that you are working with artificial soil mediums then rock dust might actually have some benefit because you have no native soil in the mix. In the case of gardeners working in the native soil rock dust should have little effect other than emptying the wallet. Native soil is made mostly of rock dust. Adding more makes little sense. Some rock dusts actually do contain plant nutrients in greater concentrations than native soil but the products I have seen have no break down on the bag and all rocks are different. Some one out there is laughing all the way to the bank by selling bags of quarry dust to gardeners looking for that "magic bullet". I suggest focusing on good soil health rather than hoping some magic dust will improve yields. The key to good soil is mostly in the life and the organic matter it contains.
"Hear! Hear!" for the Citizen Scientist!
(or, is it "Here! Here!"...I was never sure what the British meant by this)
neither do I lol. Im glad you enjoyed it!
Where did the minerals go? They don't disappear. They must have gone into the roots and maybe the rest of the plant. You never commented on the size of the roots comparison or the sturdiness of the stems. In other words a healthy plant. How about resistance to pests, mildew.
The only pests we had were voles and they took down all the kale at once so no difference.
Your right we did not test the tissue but will this year.
It could have also leached out the bottom. But we shall see
More work is required for sure !
Thanks for taking the test to this level of analysis. It sure beats seat of the pants guessing. I got the rock dust last spring and added it to my plant medium but I think I will hold off before doing any more.
Make sure my friend to keep up with the trials. Although the this is not good evidence for short term claims we still are going to test the long term ones.
The error in your test is the form of the rock dust. If you used volcanic ash which never crystallized, the key elements are greater than volcanic rock which is crystallized. Crystallized rock takes longer to break down than volcanic ash.. Volcanic ash puts the key elements into the soil faster.
Stay analytical, and keep giving us the real facts. good video.
Will do MrMac5150
Robert Pavlin and Camp Rand are quite right. There is Rockdust and then there is Rockdust. Without a thorough analysis of the content of trace minerals and minerals in the Rockdust used, the test is lacking some vital factors. I am the Danish distributor of a Scottish basalt rockdust and the results we see are very good. Maybe not the first year, but the following years.Give it time. Check www.reminscotland.com/
Regards,
Claus B Henriksen
Denmark
Well I must say I wasn't expecting this! It just proving how you don't need to spend lots of money to improve garden soil. Like other people said, If John saw this he'd not like it at all because he as saying how amazing it is but your results have contraindicated the claims and also what other companies say. It is also harder to trust companies claiming things without the evidence like the trial you have done. I really wasn't expecting this but it really did prove a point and thank you so much Stephen for spending time getting all these detailed results. The next 2 years should be very interesting and I can't wait to join in and see what I get! The science behind growing veg is awesome and I'm excited to see how this trail will d and whether the soil improves over time, a fantastic video my friend! :)
My soil is also poor too so it would be interesting seeing how poor soil without any organic matter would do to the control soil and the rock dust or biochar soil. Just a thought anyway:)
HuwsNursery Huw we most definitely need you to join the trials. OneYardRevolution and I have been fielding questions about poor soil conditions. Analysis would be a fantastic addition to.
why didn't you test the soil before you planted anything to ensure everything was equal? also maybe it was just the way it looked on camera but it looked like the three test areas were different depths. I've also heard that mycorrhizae is necessary to help break down the dust and make it available.
In the spring I was not in a position to work with a lab like I am now. I used the exact same volume and batch numbers of each material. They should be with in an acceptable error rate. ( less then one times the DL )
The camera angle provides that illusion. I can't get a better shot as it would be in my other garden beds :)
Your right any mineral generally needs time and bacteria/fungi to break down. The test however did measure both the available and unavailable forms of the elements in the soil.
ya I always knew this, rock dust is not in a "nutrient available" form to your plants. Good compost, fungi, and proper bacteria is all your plants need. don't let john from Growing your Greens see this lol, he probably already thumbed this down.
Looking at the results from the control I believe your right. The soil already contains all the elements needed.
But doesn't freezing the pepper actually reduce the nutrients as well?
That's what I was thinking. I believe I heard that when meat is frozen it reduces the amounts of iron in it, anyhow. I'm no scientist... So that's the only reasoning I have to go on...LOL!
So glad you and Patrick did these tests. It will save the rest of us a lot of money I'm only out $30. I got in on the big sale that another channel convinced me to take advantage of. Never again. Thanks so much.
Gardening With Puppies Im glad OneYardRevolution and I could present these results my friend! Evidence based gardening is important to both us as and we hope to give you evidence so you can continue to improve your garden!
Was that rock dust soluble for the plants, did you have enought Bacteria to break all that minerals off and make it available for the plants? I agree with that in poor soils its where it does the big diference, your soil was good enought.
I was vey surprised by your findings as I was of the assumption that adding minerals to our soils would add and not deplete them from the soil or crops. I also added rock dust to 2 of my garden beds to test the on a taste and plant size evaluation only. I won't be able to find any results in that area until next years crops, my other soil additives were also the same for a 10-12 inch depth.
I had added a human mineral replacement to a previous bed (8 lbs. in a 9 x 9 ft. area, much less per sq. ft.) which didn't show results for 2-3 years then it had great results. I am wondering if the rock dust has to break down or is tied up for an amount of time like others have alluded to. It will be interesting to see what the next few years will bring. Thank you Stephen and Patrick for your hard work.
***** the analysis shown in this video was both the available and unavailable forms of the minerals.
it might be worth setting up a trial in your garden with a blind taste test.
There is way more research to do here before we have a really good understanding.
That's true and you guys have really taken the Bull by the Horns with this one to find out the truth. I love that you're doing this and I will do a taste, brix and plant growth test on my 2 beds, but that will be the extent on what I do. I will tape and log the results along with family and friends who participate. Thanks again.
Make sure to post the results on the Google + Page ;)
***** I certainly will.
what brand of rock dust did you use? and have you thought to do a test by just using rock dust to topsoil and with out worm castings or compost to much can be a bad thing
I would prefer not to name the brand in order to not be accused of slander.
I tested a healthy garden soil because the product is directed to home gardeners and claims to help.
In order to investigate the effects on poor soil we did set up a new trial plot with my local university.
I will be interested in seeing the soil and plant results for several years with the same beds. From what I have been told the dusts need to be broken down by microbes first. You are testing for the elements in the produce but what about the molecular compounds. To test for nutrition density you would need to compare those. I am talking about the vitamins, phytochemicals, carotenoids, sugars, proteins etc. The veggies would also need to be subjected to a blind taste panel. I added the dust that starts with A from Utah in my beds 3 years ago and I,ve noticed each year the vegetables taste better and stay fresh longer. Of course that is not a controlled study.
Scott thank you for the comment. The numbers in this video represent the available and unavailable elements.
I look forward to the future years results as well !
I did look into that testing however it's a 1000$/test to get done and being self funded it's a bit though.
Microbes, algae and lichens, etc transform the minerals in rock dust into protoplasm making bio-available minerals for the plant. This takes time. You don't just add rock dust and expect immediate response from the plants because the minerals need time to be unlocked within healthy soil biochemistry. I was disappointed that this was not taken into account or even mentioned within the video - hence the disappointment and even dismissal of the rock dust within your comments section which sadly you have not tempered with the facts. Glad you are willing to keep the experiment going a couple more years. Adding rock dust with lots of compost and Efficient Microbes is how people are correctly advised, and then giving time. Nothing empirical about these results yet - experiment is incomplete.
Well last years study was really to evaluate claims made by people sighting quick responses and huge first year results.
You are correct much like a mineral layer below the topsoil it takes time to release the elements.
That said there are plenty of sources of these elements as I have uncovered in my testing garden assumptions series.
I know it’s 6 years past, but that was a whole bag of rock dust? A box that big only need about 8 oz. of rock dust? Maybe over kill on the rock dust? Am I wrong?
Thank you for doing all this -- you've put in a lot of work, and those labs don't work for free either. Much appreciated.
It's great that you're continuing the trials next year. We certainly need more data, and the soil minerals must have gone somewhere. If they were taken up by soil fungi or other organisms, would they still have been detected by the lab? I'd have thought so, but that just deepens the mystery.
Onward to Innisfree yes the analysis we completed picks up all available and unavailable forms of the element regardless if its free in the soil or in a micro organism. What the bad does is a sting acid digestion basically dissolving everything before running it through a mass spectrometer .
There are lots more questions now but at least we have a few answers!
This is confusing Stephen. The introduction of minerals in the water has to be a factor but I fail to understand how Ca, a major element in Rock Dust can register lower. I wonder if the soil was obtained with a core sampler at different depths what the results would yield? Could the Rock dust have simply passed through the shorter raised bed media? Outstanding work and thanks for the info!
Its hard to tell where the elements have gone. that said the addition of rock dust has resulted in even lower then the base amount. meaning it not only took the calcium from the rock dust but from the soil mixture itself.
We do have a lot more testing to do to understand whats going on.
I understand statistical significance, though your explanation seems to exclude varying alpha levels of confidence. The fact that you didn't display the figures for tissue nutrient density made me think you are pulling a fast one. Even if you aren't, you should know that all results need to be presented equally. Fortunately you did provide the lab results. In looking at the differences and the RDL I saw a few nutrients where there was a statistically significant improvement such as Calcium, with Rockdust winning. There were also some where Rockdust lost by a big amount.
If you ever do a study again, please try Rockdust at the manufacturer recommended levels of amendment, not those of the John Kohler. I am curious if he is wrong in his assertion that you can't add too much. I suspect that there are diminishing returns and perhaps too much inhibits nutrient uptake. Also being from Las Vegas like him I understand the desire to inundate that shitty soil with nutrients.
I did post the lab results below. I had a hard time getting my old system to present the lab results in the video. In all newer ones I do.
We had a hard time finding recommended application rates. So we used what John's rates. We also have tested leaves vs the rock dust to see how they compare. Here is the clip. ruclips.net/video/PkOwPAPDAZ0/видео.html
Interesting Stephen, thank you for all the time you've devoted into this trial. All base soils where the same, right? The soil with Rock dust was more deficient in minerals than the Control bed. The fruit did not show any difference in minerals. Please correct me if I'm wrong up to this point Stephen. Assuming I understood up to this point, my questions are as follows: Is the Rock dust somehow suppressing the mineral or leaching soluble nutrients faster? Or could the plants tissue be the key to where the mineral went? In any case I find this fascinating, thank you!
your correct on the messaging in the first half of the question my friend.
To date all we know is there are less minerals in the rock dust soil. The analysis we did measures both the available and unavailable forms so breaking down is not required for it to be picked up.
The second thing we know is the elements are not in the pepper tissue. For this we are going to test more crops next year and see if there are other issues.
As for leaching it looks like that but more analysis is required. We are going to run a sample of rock dust to see whats in there as well.
Thank you Stephen, this has got to be the best Rock dust analysis I've seen. Keep up the good work.
I will my friend!
Great work! Glad to join your channel.
Thank you Paul! Im glad you enjoyed the video and channel.
I speculate that the free granite dust I got from a granite fabricator will improve my poor florida sandy soil for decades if for no other reason than it adds a different particle size to help hold water. I also speculate the rock dust soil tested poorer because it takes ongoing bacterial action to release the minerals in the rock dust, so the same amount of soil tested lower do to hidden inaccessible minerals.
Regarding a comment below: For meJohn Kohler of "Grow your.Greens" was the primary motivating force in this movement to grow eatables on urban property.
I am experiencing in your undertaking (1) a beautifully articulated refinement in practicality and (2) great science!, also beautifully articulated. Your efforts compliment and enhance the efforts of the early way-showers in the evolution of this movement.
I am quite glad you enjoyed the video. I want to make sure I test all of the garden practices.
As for the break down time of minerals we selected a strong acid analysis as such these results represent both the available and unavailable numbers. We did this so we could see everything.
I am glad the RUclips community could help you get inspired and grow in your own yard ! I am a huge supporter of growing your own foot regardless of method used ! Keep it up my friend and please feel free to post photos on my Facebook page I would love to see them !
Thanks for the information, much helpful....
epsom salt -magnesium, is recommended for better tasting fruits and vegetables...with the higher magnesium in the rock dust soil....any opinions on that?
thank you for your analysis
Your welcome!
Bummer! The concept of volcanic rock dust seemed so eloquent. Science wins.
Gypsy Jiver It was pitched really well to people hey! ;) Compost my friend has everything you need !
What should we add then to help in mineral traces.
Interesting results! It's strange. That the rock dust beds had less minerals. Could it have changed the composition of the soil and allowed the minerals to leech quicker? Where did they go?!
Well David we know it's not in the pepper tissue. We have to do a lot more analysis to figure out what's going on in the soil. Next is actually analyzing the raw rock dust.
***** And the control was higher up in slope, so that water could not have deposited extra minerals in it. Now, Stephen, you didn't use the native soil there is that correct, only compost and castings? Would it have a naturally lower amount of silt and clay than regular soil?
suburban homestead there are also drains in the beds to prevent leaching from bed to bed.
yes I used compost mostly in these beds and mulched with dry grass, leaves and used coffee grounds.
Ill be trying to set up a native soil trial next year to add to the results. it will be interesting!
***** yes, it is crazy that the results are opposite of what was hypothesized. ..i am interested to find out what is happening. An analysis of the rock dust was on my mind too...maybe it's not exactly what is listed on the bag! ?
David D and ***** we will be running analysis on Rock Dust to see what its made of ;) These results have me wondering as well. I could not hypothesize where they have gone. I need more data!
3 questions i have
pH of the rock dust soil and control at the beginning of the test and at the end.
What sort of rock dust is used
Particle size of the rock dust.
The pH at the beginning was optimal and no different then the end results which were optimal in all cases.
I would prefer not to name the product as I do not wish to be accused of slander.
Horticultural grade
***** What is an optimal pH in your eyes.I don't have to know the brand of the rock dust you've used, only what kind of rock dust, because there is a big difference in pH. Bentonite for example has a pH of 9, while lava dust can have a pH of 6.8 and even the compost you've used can have a different pH depends where you get it.
Another question which i forgot is do you have earthworms in the soil of the set ups??
E. Vendeville Optimal pH as noted by a few studies is between 5.5 and 6.5 depending on plant.
its a horticultural product and ill have the pH tested with its analysis coming up.
yes there are earth worms in the soil
so where do you think the extra minerals went? did you test both soils before you grew in them? you need a pre and post analysis to give a thorough answer. Ive always understood rock dust and other things to be an amendment for poor soil, that would be a more useful study, see what happens in otherwise poor soil. thanks for trying this!
What kind of rocks was the rock dust made of used in the trial?
The problem is, your bias is clear as day, you are anti rock dust, and that is cool but it leads to massive problems.
First, your sample area is way too small, and even next to each other there can be huge variations, what's the soil like 1, 2, 5 metres down, was there more shade, more water etc. Your bed size needs to be a minimum 10 times bigger, preferably 100 times. (Also multi areas as well but we can skip that.)
Second, you only tested the fruit, that was completely pointless, most fruits are generally a set average, the plants will fill them with enough and no more. You needed to test the plants' roots, stem and leaves. They will show differences in the soil. Also, you need to test, for densities of the stems and leaves, root mass, root - stem - leaf mass, cell structure etc.
Third, you have made no case on where the minerals have gone, even if they were say taken up by the rock dust, a lab test of the soil would show no change as they would be able to pick them up. So for your case to be that rock dust is not worth it, you need to explain or at least try to track down the discrepancies, it can only have gone into 4 places, into the rock dust (which your lab test has already proven to not be the case), deeper into the soil, into the air, or into the plants. Again if you had a more proper sample size, it would have helped. As well as proper testing of the plants.
Finally, your theory on elements needed for plants is shaky. Plants are NOT animals, you are lucky to be made up of 11 elements, around 25 in total if lucky. Plants have shown in excess of 100 different elements. Most of which we have no idea if they are good or bad, or what they are doing. Yes, a few main ones have been studied but most have not. Also a lot of elements that are toxic to you are not to plants.
The other problem we have is, do we have a natural process that we can look onto to see if we have an analogue to compare and we do. Volcanic ash. We know that wherever volcanoes erupt the ash it dumps onto the ground, this is inorganic rock and yes makes the lands around the volcano super fertile, if the theory goes that rock dust does nothing, then why does volcanic ash work so well,
I think this really needs more study, missing gaps in your research project etc.
I like your approach; I do think you are over simplifying how people garden with rock dust, biochar, etc however. You make very good videos, but you should do more research( not saying you're wrong just saying that more research is needed)
Any future trials should involve taking a sample of both beds before and after amending with rock dust. I am curious on where you collected the samples as well and how. Did you simply scoop dirt from the top of the box at the same spot or did you re-mix the soil first and then take the sample. Regarding the missing elements. You should take a sample of the plant tissue - leaves and stems - not just the fruit. I would also be curious to see if yield rates are better or worse. While rock dust may not make the food "better" it could make the plant healthier and subsequently have higher yields. Also, were the plants significantly different in appearance, size, etc.?
Keep up the good work. Thanks for taking the time to do this.
Hi Jerry.
Regarding yields, four rock dust field trial participants weighed all of their produce for the year from their field trial beds. We'll be releasing the results fairly soon, but I can tell you that the control group had a higher total yield than the rock dust group.
Jerry Anderson further to what OneYardRevolution said. sampling was also completed using industry standards and was recorded for our notes. we do plan in increasing the spectrum of tissues analyzed next year to get a better understanding of whats going on.
Are the plants healthier with a azomite rock dust I’m looking for strong healthy plants
You've merely confirmed that YOUR SOIL is already mineral rich - it says nothing about other people's soil.
Would bentonite or montmorrionite have better results? And how about greensand? Which used to be available here in NJ but I think isn't anymore. There is only one other source of greensand, as I understand, in the United States. Too bad.
but what kind of rock dust was it??
What type of rock dust is being used?
That rock dust looked terrible compared to the stuff we have in Australia, applying it straight to your bed is not the way you should be using it. I feed the dust to my worms so the grit can assist there digestion and the bacteria can begin to work on making the minerals available to the soil rather then just being suspended in it. You can also apply it to your compost pile and let the microbial life get to work on it.
Old chunk of coal. It’s cheaper then sand and worms need some grit
@@ashc3765 I do the same with my worms and in general that is how it gets to my garden or plants. About a teaspoon or tablespoon in the new bin. My 5 lb bag has lasted for about 10 years. I can say that my bins that have Azomite (volcanic rock dust) have higher worm population and produce vermicompost output a little faster compared to those that have not.
His control should have been yard soil and not compost and amended soil. I have sandy soil with little loam in an area that receives moderate to heavy rainfall so moat nutrients are leached away as soil tests indicate each time (so constant compost and heavy leaves/wood chips are needed because there isn't clay or loam to keep nutrients where needed).
His Canadian soil, if like One Yard revolution, is a clay / sand mixture. That soil should have been the control, the rock dust added to regular soil as the experiment, then another experiment would be the compost and garden soil mix and finally the rock dust, garden soil, compost. His findings/results don't provide info that is suitable for me with my sandy soil.
I'll keep adding the Azomite to my worm bins and enjoy the faster output and increased population of worms and vermicompost and keep apply heavy layers of leaf and wood chip mulch that decomposes faster than in the higher latitudes.
Charles Byrne your 100% correct Charles.
I use a mix of rock dust and crushed coals from my fire pit. It works great as a digestive aid for the worms and insures the minerals are added to the soil in a naturally way in the correct amounts. About a teaspoon a week is perfect amount sprinkled over the fresh added food scraps.
So what are we proving with this? Are we disclaiming yet more corporate advertising, cause that crap goes on all over the spectrum let alone gardening claims......
Was the rock dust used azomite? Any studies using kelp liquid fertilizers or worm castings? Thank you
Thank you ver much for your video. You have just saved my a huge chunk of money. I was going to spend thousands of dollars to put rock dust over three acres, preparing for the growing season in 2015. This is the third video I have watched tonight that showed no major deference between the test subject and the control. Thank you again:))
+Jack Bridges I am glad I could save you some money my friend! There are plenty of free and local resources that you can use to continue to build the soil !
Isn't this not only working in mineral depleted soil. Like where there bin growing crops for Many years and the soil is depleted from many minerals.
It seems you have already used rich soil before you added the rock dust, please try the experiment again with a poorer soil. Some soils are so rich, that anything you do to them can only make them worse.
thanks for this test.
try bigger plots next time and more plants to even out genetic differences between plants
The beds are at different heights and it is notable that 2 beds with the same medium in 2 beds of different heights yield varying results.
The same volume of soil was added to each of them and the contours on the bottom match.
The soil results will be posted next week. Make sure to check them out.
you have to put the rock dust in the compost so the bacteria break down the minerals for the plants to be able to absorb
do you want to put trace minerals in your soil?...try using actual dirt in it! lol. oh and thank you for using actual science. as opposed to anecdotal evidence that most people use. you should test with larger groups though, using one test subject is a far cry from a credible sample size. but again, thank you for using actual legitimate repeatable science...not enough people understand the value of scientific experiments these days. it saddens me.
omniXenderman As it would happen there are many other ways to add the elements you need to grow and I have analyzed a number of them. Ill drop the playlist below :)
You are right higher repetitions would increase the validity of the results. That said I do what I can with the resources I have available. I am self funded and only have so much space I hope others will start their own trials using the scientific method or use the evidence for what it is just one mans garden but enough to plant a seed of doubt.
I hope to give people the tools to investigate themselves instead of believing some wind bag on the internet like me :)
ruclips.net/p/PL5mfR-r4BXH3UTGH_3UAG6cB8NnlO8M1U
to be fair you are literaly the first person i have seen use actual science when it comes to organic gardening, so i think you are a windbag worth listening to ;)
Well thank you! I hope I don't remain the only one :)
Since some of the nutrients "disappeared" from the rock dust soil, is it possible they were taken up by the other plants grown in the soil? I know you tested the peppers because they're most often cited in the literature, but would it be possible the other plants took up the nutrients? And I might have missed it, but what was the rationale behind having the control group soil deeper than the rock dust plot?
GhoulishCop the control and rock dust beds had the same volume of soil added at the beginning. the bed just looks deeper as the camera is on an odd angle.
We are going to test a wider variety of produce next year to see if that is the case. What we can say today is its not in the peppers.
How can adding minerals to the soil make less?Sounds like you already had your mind made up before the trial.
Very interesting results. It confirms the feeling that i can about rockdust in general. In my experience (and others on youtube) rock dust doesn´t do anything unless our garden is a bit acidic or if you have a lot of mycorrhiza that can break it down. I would like to see if there are any difference between new beds and undisturbed beds with a lot of fungal activity. I also know that my local rock dust really doesn´t contain much of value. Some rock dust is basically a pure fertilizer and that might boost some things. My experience is that it usually just creates an unbalanced soil.
I´m still intrigued about that the content of minerals where lower in the rock dust bed. I would have expected that there would be no difference. Maybe the worms didn´t like the sharp rock dust...
It was sure a shock to see those results my friend!
all i have is anecdotal evidence that i had similar fungal development in all three of the beds as expressed by mushrooms on the soil when the plant canopy was thick. The analysis though did look at both available and unavailable forms of each element.
To continue the testing I am going to run some of the leading rock dust products through for analysis to see what they are made of :)
***** Keep up the good work! I found a report about fungi from The Agricultural Department in Sweden where I live. It´s very extensive, but they confirm that fungi do "eat" minerals by keeping the area between the mycorrhiza and the mineral a but acidic and wet. It also seems that the fungi don´t contribute to plant growth if you fertilize to much, especially with fosfor. My hunch is that fungi is the great equalizer in the forest and the garden... Too much of something and it shuts down, to little and it goes to work. Anyway I try to keep them happy and they do a good job breaking down all my carbon material.
pinkmonk999 your right OneYardRevolution and I just did an episode on Mycorrhizal fungi :) ruclips.net/video/2tdo3wSHVhA/видео.html
***** Yeah, I saw that! Thumbs up. I subscribe... :-)
Fantastic welcome to the community!
After reading and watching many sources of information on the use and results of rock dust I think that it is beneficial to root crops not for above the ground crops.
I would suggest adding a few root crops to your test beds for future tests.
Oh, and what is this Biochar soil that was out performing them both?
I did do root crops and went into much more detail in the first three videos in this playlist.
ruclips.net/p/PL5mfR-r4BXH1WwrNIH29H-KI4LGrEfHFd
Wow... Very surprising! The fact that mineral content in both the produce and soil was actually lower doesn't make sense. What do you think caused that to happen?
I have no idea. all we know is its not in the soil in any form and not in the pepper tissues. We have to do more analysis to understand more!
Thanks, was going to buy some rock dust, no more, lol. Is there anything you should amend your soil with if you are already applying wood chips, leaves, grass clippings, cow manure, and food scraps without having to test soil?
You can probably avoid using cow manure unless it has been hot composted other wise it will come with lots of weed seeds. The rest of what you mentioned is all I do and I have not been disappointed yet!
Excellent trial and very interesting results! I'm not particularly surprised though especially within a single season. I can't imagine rock dust, regardless of how finely ground it is, could become soluble and available to plants that quickly. I'm no professional, so I could certainly be wrong. I'm most surprised with the soil vs soil results. were the soil samples taken at the beginning or end of the experiment (or both). I just wonder how much is lost to leaching. The analysis should likely included before and after samples. Just a thought.
Excellent points. One thing to keep in mind is that the numbers represent the total quantity of trace elements - both available and unavailable. So, with a much lower total level of calcium, for example, it's less likely that the rock dust bed will have a higher available level than the control in the future.
The soil samples were taken at the end of the season, but keep in mind that all beds would be equally impacted by environmental factors that lead to nutrient leaching.
I see what you're saying, but something is going on. I'll let someone more knowledgeable that myself figure it out... (I left a similar comment on your vid so no need to reply twice). Thanks again!
Subedei's Garden Stephen will be sending the rock dust to the lab for analysis. This will hopefully shed some light.
Subedei's Garden Further to what OneYardRevolution said your right we need to do more analysis to figure out what is going on in the soil. There are lots of explanations for why the results came out this way. One thing we can rule out is the trace elements were taken up into the pepper tissue.
Just did some research- it depends on the action in your soil. So measuring it the first year and saying it does nothing is bad information.
I am very interested, i am glad that you are continuing the trials for two more years. because maybe it takes time to either build up or more must be added then one pound per square foot. awesome findings, thanks.
Well there are application rates that OneYardRevolution and I found up to pounds per square foot however this seems to be excessive.
The analysis measured both the available and unavailable forms of the elements.
We won't be adding more rock dust to allow the material to develop in the soil and not be masked with new entries.
would love to see an update video to this as everyone says it takes years for there to be any real benefits in the uptake to the items grown...good video none the less
What about home gardens with poor soil? Assuming that home gardens have good soil is a mistake.
It doesn’t act that quickly. It takes at least a year to break down minerals enough for the plants to uptake those nutrients.