engineer_22 a day ago

Count this among discoveries that should have been obvious.

  • troyvit a day ago

    Yeah the headline is not great. Organic fertilizers are literally fertilizers with Carbon in them. So ... yeah more carbon in the soil.

    The meat of the article tells a little more. First, the test was on a plot that had been no-till for 22 years. That's important to me because it means the organic fertilizer wasn't tilled into the soil, but instead rested on the surface.

    Second is how the carbon was stored. It was a combination of carbon being "preserved in pores" (I don't understand whose pores they're talking about), and that the carbon attached itself to minerals in the soil.

    Third, these soils contained more microbial carbon. In other words the manure actually helped support biological processes in the soil. I think that was also something that farmers and producers "knew" because they know their land, but that soil scientists needed to prove.

    The Synchrotron is interesting. My partner spends a lot of time digging up soil samples and, sifting them, etc. It's a time and labor intensive process.

    • gus_massa 17 hours ago

      IANAF, but doesn't no-till improve the the carbon content even with normal fertilizers?

      • troyvit 17 hours ago

        Me either, but I thought it did too from what I've heard. I heard that tilling breaks up the soil and allows a lot of carbon release.