"Hard" Akadama?

[Smoke]

LOL...yeah right.

I'll move on...you are always right and no one else is. Good luck with that!

This has nothing to with being right or wrong. This has to do with facts and common sense, this makes sense why you wish to move on. Your loss.

 

[Poink88]

This has nothing to with being right or wrong. This has to do with facts and common sense, this makes sense why you wish to move on. Your loss.

Not to be smug but how much chemistry did you take in college (if any?). I just wonder based on what you posted. Unless you have found the magic of alchemy.

There are lots of things you can handle with logic and common sense...changing chemical make up of anything is NOT one of them. If you refuse to accept that it is not my loss.

BTW, neither a flying bat makes it a bird, nor a swimming whale makes it a fish. Likewise, an inorganic acting as organic does...doesn't make it organic. Something for you to ponder.

 

[coh]

The chemical analysis of akadama is interesting. I would have thought there would be a decent amount of carbon in it. As for whether it is organic or not...does that really matter? And if so, it does seem to depend on your definition. "Organic" materials are often considered to be those that are carbon based or have a significant amount of carbon. Akadama apparently does not.

Regarding yard soil...I wouldn't use it as is because it doesn't drain well/allow enough air to the roots. If I could take my yard soil and easily/cheaply make it into akadama-sized particles that held together in a pot for a couple of years, then it would seem like a very good bonsai soil component.

Chris

 

[Jason_mazzy]

Ok so I'm just going to put this out there.
In the UK people use Cat Litter from Tescos supermarket! They use Tescos own brand that does not clump together when it gets wet!
The granuels are fired clay and are rock hard (no way you can crush them with your fingers) but still retain good moisture.

that is Diatomaceous earth

 

[QuintinBonsai]

I 'm using a baked clay product called hydrocorn. this is very hard material, does not breakdown, no fines, water retentive, pebble shape enhances oxygen flow and root growth, neutral PH, etc. found at hydroponic supply stores.

best wishes, sam

I've seen those before. Hydrocorn, which is a specific brand of very hard, high-fired, clay balls. From a small sample I had, the pebbles were much too large for bonsai. About the size of large marbles. Now I'm curious to know if they come in smaller sizes. Like maybe the size of a garden pea. Then we're talkin'.

 

[sam]

hydrocorn

size of hydrocorn pebbles varies from 4mm-16mm. I use hydrocorn straight from the bag for the drainage layer and a mixture of hydrocorn, medium size cinder, pumice and mulch for the planting media.

best wishes, sam

 

[markyscott]

Not to be smug but how much chemistry did you take in college (if any?). I just wonder based on what you posted. Unless you have found the magic of alchemy.

There are lots of things you can handle with logic and common sense...changing chemical make up of anything is NOT one of them. If you refuse to accept that it is not my loss.

BTW, neither a flying bat makes it a bird, nor a swimming whale makes it a fish. Likewise, an inorganic acting as organic does...doesn't make it organic. Something for you to ponder.

Took me a while to get the article. Bulk chemical composition appears to have been measured by XRF. XRF is not a particularly sensitive tool for measuring total organic carbon. In fact percentages below 5-10 wt% are more or less undetectable without special instrumentation which the authors did not mention they had. The XRD analysis is a crystallographic technique - it will detect organic crystals, but non crystalline organic structures such as cellulose or lignin will not be detected by this technique. To measure organic carbon quantitatively, the authors would have had to use wet chemistry or they would have had to use one of the various LOI (loss on ignition) techniques. The authors did not report having done either of these techniques.

From my quick read, I don't think you can rule out TOC less than 5-10 wt% based on this study. The question that the authors' posed did not require a good understanding of organic content and they did not measure for it carefully.

Scott

 

[Poink88]

Took me a while to get the article. Bulk chemical composition appears to have been measured by XRF. XRF is not a particularly sensitive tool for measuring total organic carbon. In fact percentages below 5-10 wt% are more or less undetectable without special instrumentation which the authors did not mention they had. The XRD analysis is a crystallographic technique - it will detect organic crystals, but non crystalline organic structures such as cellulose or lignin will not be detected by this technique. To measure organic carbon quantitatively, the authors would have had to use wet chemistry or they would have had to use one of the various LOI (loss on ignition) techniques. The authors did not report having done either of these techniques.

From my quick read, I don't think you can rule out TOC less than 5-10 wt% based on this study. The question that the authors' posed did not require a good understanding of organic content and they did not measure for it carefully.

Scott

Scott,

With what you said, let's assume the worst case scenario and it contains 10% organic...does it make Akadama organic?

If I collect river sand with leaf/organic decay mixed...is that sand organic?
A copper necklace plated with gold, can it be called gold?

My question is, when do you call it one or the other?

Thanks for a good response BTW.

 

[Vance Wood]

Ive also heard it was referred to as high fired to satisfy the AG folks as it would burn off anything potentially hazardous that could get "free ride" in the akadama. But if you have ever noticed sometimes you find plant or root remains or straw, etc that would have burned off it were high fired. If it were truly high fired it would lose its CEC benefits.

Goes to show you about the honesty of some of the vendors we are forced to deal with. Buyer beware.

 

[Vance Wood]

Ok so I'm just going to put this out there.
In the UK people use Cat Litter from Tescos supermarket! They use Tescos own brand that does not clump together when it gets wet!
The granuels are fired clay and are rock hard (no way you can crush them with your fingers) but still retain good moisture.

If the Cat Litter is as you have described and it has no deodorant chemicals added you guy are fortunate to have such an affordable source for this soil element. In America this is not the case. With the exception of Hartz Mountain which used to be as you have described, most Cat Litter products are useless and in some cases harmful.

 

[Vance Wood]

Terminology can be such a bitch. From a chemical point of view, an organic substance must have a carbon compound associated with it. Therefore, akadama can't be considered organic. Of course, being organic or inorganic has no bearing on whether something is good or bad for plants (or us). Some of the nastiest compounds around are "organic".

You are right, terminology can be a bitch. We say one thing and mean another, I can come up with several that come along on this forum at least once a year. In this case the term Organic usually, and in the minds of many, means anything collected and used for bonsai that does not come in a bag but is naturally occurring or dug from the ground. Of course this is wrong; in order for something to be organic it has to be a product, or by product, of something that at one time or another during the last Epoch--- been alive.

Usually things organic, that are over an epoch or two old and left to the elements, decompose down to the point where they become part of the inorganic world (as far as bonsai is concerned) like Ditomacious Earth which are the remains of more or less microscopic sea life.

Usually the term Organic suggest material that has been recently a living organism, and recognized as such regardless of its age.

 

[Vance Wood]

The chemical analysis of akadama is interesting. I would have thought there would be a decent amount of carbon in it. As for whether it is organic or not...does that really matter? And if so, it does seem to depend on your definition. "Organic" materials are often considered to be those that are carbon based or have a significant amount of carbon. Akadama apparently does not.

Regarding yard soil...I wouldn't use it as is because it doesn't drain well/allow enough air to the roots. If I could take my yard soil and easily/cheaply make it into akadama-sized particles that held together in a pot for a couple of years, then it would seem like a very good bonsai soil component.

Chris

This is exactly what we were forced to do back in the early 60's when we didn't have the products we can choose from that we have today. We would go soil harvesting in much the same way we went tree harvesting. We looked for different kinds of Clay, leaf mold, black dirt, and red dirt. We would collect it and sift out the fines to get the granuals prized in bonsai soil. We would of course buy commercially packaged agricultural sand, and peat moss the Canadian kind.

We would blend a soil mix together then wait to see if the tree would survive in it. If the tree survived and flourished we would continue with the same sources. Of course this mix did not retain its soil structure real well and you had to continually adjust your watering techniques over the years.

 

[Vance Wood]

As to whether or not Akadama is organic or not I would say for the sake of bonsai it is not. We do not recognize it, as being organic unless we choose to argue about, weather it is, using data and such. It may have some level of carbon in it, but I am not sure how that proves that it is organic. Using that as an argument why don't we put coal in our bonsai mix? It is organic in nature but inorganic in appearance. I would suspect that Lava stone does as well, but the presence of carbon does not meant the stuff is organic. We can argue over this till the sun explodes and watch the recreation of all the elements and we would find one of the first to appear is carbon. Carbon happens to be one of the basic building blocks of our world. My point is this: If you have to go to extremes of chemical analysis to prove something is organic, when it seems not to be anything but "Dirt", you are tilting at wind mills.

 

[crust]

I've seen those before. Hydrocorn, which is a specific brand of very hard, high-fired, clay balls. From a small sample I had, the pebbles were much too large for bonsai. About the size of large marbles. Now I'm curious to know if they come in smaller sizes. Like maybe the size of a garden pea. Then we're talkin'.

Hydrolite: 4-6 mm
Hydro corn gold label: 4-8 mm

 

[markyscott]

Scott,

With what you said, let's assume the worst case scenario and it contains 10% organic...does it make Akadama organic?

If I collect river sand with leaf/organic decay mixed...is that sand organic?
A copper necklace plated with gold, can it be called gold?

My question is, when do you call it one or the other?

Thanks for a good response BTW.

All I said was that the techniques used in the study you quoted do not measure organic content. The minerals, kaolin and allophase are clearly inorganic mineral phases , but most low grade claystones contain around 1 wt% organic carbon. Some contain significantly more.

Scott

 

[Poink88]

All I said was that the techniques used in the study you quoted do not measure organic content. The minerals, kaolin and allophase are clearly inorganic mineral phases , but most low grade claystones contain around 1 wt% organic carbon. Some contain significantly more.

Scott

I understand what you said (to some extent).

I just asked you this question "...when do you call it one or the other?", hoping to get your personal (or professional) view, IF you want to answer it. If not, that is fine too.

 

[markyscott]

I understand what you said (to some extent).

I just asked you this question "...when do you call it one or the other?", hoping to get your personal (or professional) view, IF you want to answer it. If not, that is fine too.

Like all soils, it is a mixture composed primarily of inorganic clays with a variable level of organic content - probably 1-2 wt%, but possibly quite a bit more. I would call it inorganic, but the label is less important than the knowledge that there can be some organics mixed in.

Scott

 

[Poink88]

Like all soils, it is a mixture composed primarily of inorganic clays with a variable level of organic content - probably 1-2 wt%, but possibly quite a bit more. I would call it inorganic, but the label is less important than the knowledge that there can be some organics mixed in.

Scott

Agreed. Thank you.

 

[Vance Wood]

AND----as we move down this road I think we are starting to lose track as to why all of this matters. I think this needs to be defined not pontificated. Who cares if member whotookadump 1234 won the argument over I8same32l. I don't mean, or desire, to get on anyone's case but we really do need to straighten this mess out.

 

[Poink88]

AND----as we move down this road I think we are starting to lose track as to why all of this matters. I think this needs to be defined not pontificated. Who cares if member whotookadump 1234 won the argument over I8same32l. I don't mean, or desire, to get on anyone's case but we really do need to straighten this mess out.

I thought Scott just did that.

Like all soils, it is a mixture composed primarily of inorganic clays with a variable level of organic content - probably 1-2 wt%, but possibly quite a bit more. I would call it inorganic, but the label is less important than the knowledge that there can be some organics mixed in.

Scott