(You won't find the quote below in this thread (it's from NOIDS and NICKNAMES), but to continue this discussion there is inappropriate.)

Roosterlorn said: I once lowered my pH down to 6.5 with good intentions because that's where it should be for most lilies. But in doing so, it made too much nutrition available and I ended up with some burned lilies.

I am very intrigued by your conclusion, Lorn. The pH change must have been quite drastic. Hmmm. Do you mean toxicity of certain heavy metals? Even that's difficult, unless the area was overdone to begin with. The copper from your frequent(?) fungicidal use? What did you acidify with? Maybe that was the culprit. How did you deduce that an overabundance of nutrients was the cause? And what was your solution?
Oh my, there's lots more questions...

Oh, I didn't mean it to be academically correct, Rick. We were on the topic of nicknames and it was meant to exemplify (as an example) of how nicknames, etc. are born. It's just a loose, undefined statement kept simple because the subect of garden chemistry is very, very complex as you know. Nonetheless, my situation was very real and I'm happy that you opened up a new thread on this very interesting topic. We can use my situation as a discussion example to start. I got a late start answering your post tonight and the dabate is coming on so I better watch it but I'll write up some background info tomarrow for open discussion.

I'm very interested in the discussion. I have only one decent area to grow martagons(light wise) and it is along my gravel driveway, which is very alkaline.

Well, martagons do fine in alkaline soil. They are very adaptable. Wouldn't like the salt though. Have you apply gypsum heavily there, and incorporated it into the soil? It does something, chemical-wise, the helps to allow sodium to drain through the soil. Usually sodium is not very mobile, and accumulates in the soil.

OK. My situation occurred back to the late 1990s. First, let me say that as understand it, most nutrients, whether macro, micro or trace are generally present in most all soils. But most all of them are either in elemental or compound or other cationic forms that a plant can't use efficiently, if at all. They must be put into a solution state that's either cationic (+) or anionic (-) that plants can utilize. To do that requires the the addition of some acid forming product, like Aluminun Sulfate or Calcium Sulfate--one which will in time will combine with water to form sulfuric acid, in which the macro, micro and trace units are soluable and in a state that a plant an 'take up' readily (and beautiful growth as a result, hopefully).

Now, Rick--before I go any further, if there's anything here that's not right or needs modifying or added in, please do that. This is an area where I think you have an abundance of helpful knowledge that we all benefit from. And me, I'm just your average gardener with good intentions who got caught up in a chemical trick.

Now, how does all this relate to my situation. Well, first of all, during the previous year or two, I thought my plants (all plants mixed, not just lilies) should be doing better. I had fertilized, had good sandy loam soil with pretty high amounts of organics, compost, rotting wood chips, etc. So, out of curiousity I took five soil samples in March from this 1100 sq ft garden to the county extension lab to be checked. The results showed the pH to be 7.5-7.6. for whatever reason. They suggested adding Aluminum Sulfate or Calcium Sulfate and have the soil rechecked in six weeks or so. I added Aluminum Sulfate, worked in and watered in well. And I also did a medium application of 10-10-10, non fortified fertilizer.

Within a few weeks my plants were up and growing like gangbusters. Geez, I thought--adjusting the pH was like waving a magic wand, things were growing so vigorously! By then it was time to recheck the pH and it was about 6.5-6.6. Great!

But things changed. It got hot! And the soil became drier. Certain plants like bleeding hearts started to wilt and soon after the lilies were wilting and some were turning brown on the bottom. My garden was turning into a disaster. I explained this to the county agent who loved taking solo field trips. When he came to take a look he explained that it was most probably nitrogen burning. He explained that when I lowered the pH, I in a sense, "opened the flood gates" to an over abundance of "banked nutrients" which the plants would use but that along with that they had taken up a correspondingly high amount of Nitrogen and in proportion with the rest of the nutrients which would be Ok as long as it was cool with ample moisture, but not when it got hot and that Nitrogen was so hygroscopic it held the moisture and that my plants were dying of thirst at the onset of hot weather. He suggested repeated heavy watering to grow thru it, which I did. I lost the bleeding hearts and a couple others but the lilies did survive.

Since then, I've learned to make my pH adjustments slowly over a period of a couple years if necessary. I've also learned that Aluminum Sulfate can be a bad actor as well--which is another story.

Rick--your comments and thoughts?

What about Calcium Chloride as a winter driveway salt? Calcium is a useful nutrient, right?

Lorn, your simple mention of your pH anecdote in the other thread is understood; the particulars aren't important there.

You are correct in your first paragraph, except for your assumption that an acid must be present to liberate usable elements. It is true that that considerably more elements and compounds become more plant-available with the decrease of pH (to an extent, of course, say pH 5-5.5), but not always. Molybdenum and selenium availability, for example, increase with increasing pH.

Soil chemistry and soil biochemistry (along with everything else that is pertinent) are extremely complex - no new news there, and I hardly begin to understand all the goings on myself. Keep in mind that there are hardly any absolutes. High pH soils, for instance, still have some H+ anions, but just increasing tiny amounts. Even water (H2O) is both an acid and base, as it brakes into H+ and OHˉ ions. (Incidentally, that is why things dissolve in it so well in it.)

Thanks for expounding on your pH decreasing foray. I didn't realize that nitrogen itself acted that way, but in general, your experience is what I would have expected.

For those of you who don't know, pH is measured in a logarithmic method. Each integer change is ten times more acidic or basic, depending on whether you move up the scale (more basic) or down (more acidic). For example, pH 5 is ten times more acidic than pH 6, and pH 4 is ten times more acidic than pH 5 (and one hundred times more acidic than pH 6).

If the aim was to change a whole pH point in just six weeks, that is drastic (as you found out). Usually, my preference is to use sulfur flakes that assimilate into the soil very slowly for acidifying. Even after a year, I can find individual flakes, still not completely dissolved.

The release of "banked" nutrients (and probably not only nitrogen) is normal with big pH changes. Temperature and dried or waterlogged soils can also have major effects on soil health and chemistry.

Fortunately, for most situations there is an ingredient that works pretty much like magic in large enough quantities. - compost. It practically does it all:
--- slightly acidic where most plants prefer
--- buffers pH (helps prevent otherwise drastic pH changes)
--- great aeration (that also affects nutrient/element availability)
--- provides nutrients
--- good CEC (the ability to hold nutrients)
--- good water holding capacity
--- supports a healthy balance of soil organisms and soil micro-organisms
--- more too, that I can't think of right now
--- smells good, too

That was a good lesson, Lorn:
"Don't mess with Mother Nature."

Just help it along.

--
postscript: Did I conjure up that Chiffon margarine commercial?

Rick, thanks for your easy to read explanation of things. I've learned a lot in those past 12 years or so since my bad experience. I agree with everything you said about all the good things a good uncontaminated compost mulch does and the list goes on and on. Even if a person didn't know anything about soil chemistry and pH, and could care less to find out the benefits, they'd still do OK by just adding good compost mulch and let Mother Nature maintain the balancing.

I want to talk a little bit about about two nutrients I call the 'green team', Nitrogen and Iron. I think Nitrogen is kind of a unique player. He's ever present in soils and his concentrations can vary up and down quite a bit depending plant usage vs bio recycling or fertilizer additions. Plants use it in virtually every aspect of growth, most notably the production of chlorophyll and the color green. But what I find unique is Nitrogen doesn't really care what the pH is; he performs his role equally well in either acidic or basic soils and is utilized equally well by both acidic and basic (alkaline) media loving plants. Pretty versatile character! The second half of 'green team'; teammate Iron, on the other hand, is not so socialable. He's highly insoluable at pH values greater than 7.2 or just slightly over neutral. pH values of the soil media must be adjusted downward to gain full advantage of Iron.

But Nitrogen can be a bad player too, in spite of its versatility--especially this time of the year and how it relates to lily bulbs. If there's excess Nitrogen left in a lily garden soil this time of year, it's likely to be taken into the bulbs still and because of its affinity for water, will cause the moisture content of the bulb to be excessive. When frozen, the expansion during crystal formation ruptures the cell tissue that could kill the bulb. One precautionary safe measure is to add some compost mulch. There's still enough warmth in the ground for microbial activity to further decomposition which in the process will use up some of that extra Nitrogen.

Now again, I like corrections and comments--anybody.

To answer your question, Lefty ~ yes, plus the ensuing clap of thunder.

listening and learning a thing or two

But gypsum is mainly Calcium Sulfate; that would tend to lower the pH, but apparently not enough to be a risk for Marts, in your case Moby because of all that crushed gravel base to your driveway. I guess I'm assuming you don't have crushed granite as a base.

One question I have (for Rick) is: If there is so little soluable Iron at pH levels above 7, then how is it that Martagons can be so green?

No granite here, just 80 years of plain ol' limestone gravel. With a pH >8, a couple are very chlorotic while other marties seem to fair somewhat better.

I've been using elemental sulphur for a couple years, plus Epsom salt on the worst cases, which does help. I'd like to put a barrier between the bed and drive to slow down the migration of lime ~ something like garden edging, but would need to be about a foot deep. Plus, getting through that much rock wouldn't be any fun.

Agreed: nitrogen is fairly unique. I was reading up on several university produced pdfs from wsu, umn, ucdavis, uw, etc. to make sure the assertions I will be making here are correct, but I also found that nitrogen is easily available to plants in soils of pH 4-8. That's a huge range. (Remember pH 8 is 10,000 times more alkaline than than pH 4!)

Which makes me wonder what "floodgates" would have opened to release so much nitrogen in your anecdote that started this whole conversation. Obviously, there is more than just pH in relation to nutrient availability involved. How things become "unbanked" or "unbound" is more than one simple chemical reaction in many cases. Nitrogen in the form usable by plants leaches easily, so I suspect your ensuing problem was related to the change from unusable (and non-toxic) to usable. All speculation here.

Nitrogen as a bad actor:
I am always a little more hesitant than most to take accepted wisdom as fact without back up. Remember how we used to think it was bad to fertilize your lawn in fall with high nitrogen? It was based on preconceived notions that certain nutrients are predominantly used for certain functions, and therefore applying these nutrients at the "wrong" time of year is inherently bad. what a farce that one turned out to be.

Likewise, with lilies in the fall, do we really know what a 10-10-10 fertilizer will do compared to a 0-10-10? I'd love to see any data on that, but I doubt anyone has scientifically tested it. Of course, there are always lots of variables. Frankly, I think that even in the fall a 10-10-10 will do better, even for lilies, than a 0-10-10. With nitrogen so mobile and soluble in the soil, it"s hard to believe that there would be excess nitrogen left from summer fertilizing that would carry over into fall, unless one was overfertilizing to begin with (and yet another topic for discussion). Again, compost can go a long way in buffering such a predicament. (Edit:be sure to continue reading to get the whole story...)

If you know of any data that backs up the nitrogen as a bad actor in bulb wintering preparation, I'd love to see that, too. Nitrogen probably is the limiting nutrient for all lilies in the wild all of their lives. More likely, nitrogen is just not used so much or used differently in the fall, whether it is in the soil at low or medium levels and perhaps even high levels.

Iron:
Homeowners buy a LOT of iron additives for their lawns because of the instant greening. If only they knew that the liming (that they also do) does the opposite!! Remember, applying lime raises the pH and iron becomes less available.

There is more to iron availability than just pH, too. Late this spring I had over a month of triple normal rainfall. many of my lilies, especially martagons, showed defficiency (or toxicity) symptoms. I didn't want to apply anything to the soil as I know that in waterlogged soils, toxicity is more common. So I tried foliar sprays, and that would give more immediate and verifiable results, too. An Epsom salt spray was first, and I don't think it did anything. Then I bought a solution that contained Fe, Zn, B, Cu, Mg and Mn. The element that was needed was one (or more) of those, perhaps even in conjunction, because noticeable interveinal greening occurred within two days. During the following week soils were still wet (and still raining), the greening had stopped, but still not even near complete. I sprayed again with mixed results - some improved and some had no change. Obviously, the spray was not the total answer, and taking a queue from mother nature (who does not fertilize in doses), I quit my applications, fearing it might make it worse. A little deficiency symptoms are not the end of the world. Plants, and lilies in particular, can deal with it. It's just us humans that have to have everything perfect.

Moby, I'll bet you'll have better results spraying with a multi-trace element product as I did, since all those elements are in extremely low availability in high pH. Mine was called "Liquid Iron +micro nutrients" by Bonide, with the "+micro nutrients" in tiny lettering. If you ever go the barrier route, I would rent a gas powwered trencher.

Roosterlorn said:One question I have (for Rick) is: If there is so little soluable Iron at pH levels above 7, then how is it that Martagons can be so green?

It's the nature of the beast. Martagons (and other plants that can grow in high pH) have adapted their physiological/morphological/chemical growth systems. Why can desert plants grow with so little water, when blue grass will die? Same reasoning. Keep in mind, too, that there are always multiple factors involved, known and unknown.

Getting back to pH, Gypsum does not change pH. There are always a few discrepancies now and then from paper to paper that I read about multiple subjects, but this conclusion is universal in the scientific community. However, it is certainly not inert, and I would assume a tiny (even scientifically measurable) change is possible, but for any practical purpose, gypsum does not change pH.

---
:greengrin: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

NO, no, no, Rick. In the case of the 'floodgates' and banked Nitrogen, that can never be. Remember, I've also said Nitrogen "doesn't really care what the pH is---" Let's see if this is easier to understand--what the county agent told me back then. Banked nutrients were released in large amounts when I lowered the pH that much, but Nitrogen, who doesn't care what the pH is, was never banked nor affected. What happened next was when the plants began to grow, they had access to all nutrients in large amounts which they utilized. And Nitrogen was consumed in a like quantity in proportion, stoichiometrically, lock step, to the other nutrients as required. This was fine with the cool, wet environment but when the weather turned hot, that large amount amount of nitrogen being consumed was holding water within the the entire plant system (including the roots). In fact, we dug one bleeding heart and its tap root was swelled and juicey. There always was plenty of Nitrogen around from my 10-10-10 application. Sorry, if I didn't explain it fully and understanably the first time; hope this is better.

Wow, Lorn. I went back and you did explain it correctly the first time. I just didn't grasp the gravity of the situation. In addition, I thought to myself: if it got hot, then it's probably normal that a Bleeding Heart would go dormant (Assuming it was D. spectabilis). Your observation of the dug root in the aftermath really brings home the point.

This is so very interesting, and of course leads to more questions...
In regards to overfertilization, your scenario was very extreme. Yes?
I mean, this same action doesn't routinely happen whenever a plant gets overfertilized in the heat. I don't think I have ever looked at the roots of an overfertilized plant. (It would be at the other extreme for me, and I don't think I have ever had the opportunity.) But I would never have expected them to be "bloated". Rather, my expectation would be shriveled.

He had more to say too, Rick. I can't quote him exactly anymore, but he explained it something like this: At any given instant, there are processes going on within the entire plant. And those processes are continual so at any given instant or snapshot (if one could take one) there are some virgin nutrients, some in process nutrients and consumed nutrients in the form of the plant and by products. So at any given time if you had a snapshot profile, you could see each nutrient in some state of process. He said that process rate is respondant to temperature; when it's cools, it slows down gradually, when its warms, it speeds up gradually. But, when it gets hot, plants go into a protective mode as in survival mode and things really slow down and that it's those partially processed and unprocessed nutrients within the plant that can cause problems, mainly those that have an affinity for water or those that are tieing up water at some partial state of process and then hold it there until normal process rates can resume. And, of all the nutrtients, Nitrogen was the one nutrient most to blame because it ties up so much water or tightly associated with so much water within the plant (processes) that wilting and eventual burning result: hence it's called Nitrogen burn. He went on to say that if it turned cool again, most all my plants would resume their processes and 'perk back up' to normal, but if the heat lasted a few more days many would die because the high Nitrogen/Water content in the roots (pointing at the bleeding heart roots) would cause them to rot (why?) Now, this was his explaination put forth in my words. I bought it because I had great trust of his vast, hands on, field knowledge. He seemed to know everything there was to know about plants--and confident. His explanation may or may not be totally accurate today tho. His age was about 70 at the time. Working back, that would mean his education was late 1940s/early50s timeframe. Sometimes, I question an education going that far back. I never even thought about running NPK test back then--what a shame!

Edit/No Edit-Scratch

Thanks a lot, Lorn. There are people who continually learn and leave open the possibility to change their ideas, and others who learn and then are closed minded (kinda sad, really). And that applies to just about everything, not just horticulture. Even politicians if they flip, I can respect them if they articulate their reasoning. Flip-flopping would take more convincing, though.

Not sure why bloated roots would rot after a time, but I can speculate that it must put a lot of pressure stress on the root surfaces (as well as cell walls), perhaps making entry points for disease organisms that usually love water and nitrogen. Or maybe it disrupts the normal chemical reactions that go on. If water isn't free to be taken above the soil surface, it must not be very free for whatever it is needed for in the roots either. Water, with its H+ and OHˉ ions is an incredibly useful compound.

Yes, I agree that Calcium Sulfate/Gypsum is pretty insignificant; I shouldn't have even brought it up. So let's scratch that one. And while we agree that Nitrogen is very mobile up and down in concentration and most likely lower in the Fall but in relation to me calling it a potential bad actor, we will differ. If there is significant enough Nitrogen around and an abundance of moisture, such as a rainy, wet Fall, the bulb(s) will become saturated. These bulbs are commonly called 'water heads' or 'water babies' (kind of a misnomer) by lilium bulb farmers and is kind of a common everyday term, used frequently as in casual conversation. It's probably even used by other type bulb growers too, but I don't have any association/relationship with them so can't say for sure. Anyway , I think everyone knows what happens when the water portion freezes and ruptures the cell structure within the bulbs--it will rot. This is different than water alone scenerio on the outside of the bulb which can cause another rotting condition called stump rot. but that's largely a Spring event with repeated freeze/thaw cycles So, I've sort of been schooled and learned along way that Nitrogen and Water combination in the Fall is something to be very mindfull of. Where you would be more apt to adding some 10-10-10, I would be doing exactly the opposite--I'd be adding compost to lessen the nitrogen, stop all watering and pray I don't have an overly wet Fall. Wow! Coming from you then, information I consider exceptionaly reputable, there must be two schools of thoughts/applications on this. Humm-interesting. I must have some information around here somewhere on the Nitrogen, Water and 'water baby' relationship. It may take a couple days to see what I have and then I'll either post it or tree mail it to you Rick.

I liked the old Mother Nature commercial--I think she's chased me out of the garden more than a few times--but it's fun teasing her isn't it!

I didn't realized the nitrogen/water problem was so "common" with lilies to actually be named! Maybe it's me who should be rethinking... I'm going to have to bring this up with some of the North Star Lily Society members. I can say that years back when we had falls in the more normal range, there were 2-3 really wet ones, and I worried all through the winters that bulbs would rot. (I didn't even know about the nitrogen/water relationship.) They always came through unscathed. But, I don't fertilize much, as my soil is already rich clay and varying amounts of compost. Perhaps I should have prefaced my preference for 10-10-10 over 0-10-10 with a caveat of my normally more hands off approach.

We are trending dry falls now, and we are currently in a drought with only a trace of precip since mid August and continuing. Very bad for woody plants especially.

Oh, I think that's a great idea! I'd be very interested too, in what they have to say. It could be too, that the method I speak of is moreso based on hands on field knowledge rather than acadenic scholarly knowledge that we apply today. Not sure how much of this modern technology can be applied to lily gardening, but many ideas and concepts are certainly there for us to be aware of.

Now, back to pH. I have a one garden situation just like Moby's. One shorter end is bounded by a blacktop, gravel base township road and the longer side is bounded by my own blacktop gravel base driveway. The pH creeps up to about 7.2-7.3 from 6.6-6.5 over a 2 or 3 year period, so I have to go in and do a little correcting every year. I had been using Aluminum Sulfate for quite a few years when necessary. But I switched to an Aluminum free product a couple years ago called 'Fast Acting Sulfur Plus, when I thought I better become more concerned over possible excess Aluninum build up and it's nutrient blocking potential--but, do we really need to be so concerned, if we typical lily gardeners would operate in a pH of 6.5-7.2?.

ENCAP
40.0% S
9.0% Combined S