Albrecht's Animals

More on Potassium and Salt

The cost of harvesting, cutting and wrapping a lamb went up 30% in 2009.  It's hardly a wonder.  Business has been so bad in this downturn that the butcher closed up shop for the summer and took a seasonal job until hunting season gave him some work to come home to.  Not a good sign, losing our infrastructure and seeing our fixed costs soar.  With grain "value priced" at $12.99 per 50-pound sack, getting away from grain feeding, and getting bigger lambs to market is more important than ever.  For harvest and processing, the cost is the same, whether it's a 70-pound lamb or a 120-pound lamb.  It's nice to see those half-Katahdin lambs nearly as big as their mothers at five weeks of age!

The good news is, we have finally tasted our first grilled 100% grassfed rib chops -  "lammie on a stick" - and they were so much tastier than any grainfed lambs we have produced.  There's a little inconsistency in tenderness, two were chewy, two were tender.  That was easily predicted by a liver mineral analysis we had done on two of the harvested lambs.  Consistent with previous analyses, the livers contained excessive amounts of potassium and very little calcium. What has that to do with tenderness?  Calcium is a factor in meat tenderness, but even more importantly, in animal health.  Moving up the food chain, it affects human health. A seemingly subjective preference for tender meat gives us a glimmer of what it means when we talk about diminishing mineral fertility in the soil.

"Diminishing mineral fertility" in the soil takes into account excesses as well as deficiencies.  Some minerals are naturally abundant in certain soils.  Some are naturally deficient.  Some are easily washed away by rain or irrigation.  Some were never present to begin with.  Some are "mined out" or over-applied by inappropriate agricultural practices.   In plant and animal life, excesses of certain minerals can create deficiencies of others through mutually antagonistic mechanisms.  Either way, we end up with nutritional disasters.

Here at Dogpatch, we have a history of high potassium in our soil and forage - AND lamb livers! Even though we have "topped up" the soil with calcium and magnesium, the excessive potassium is a culprit in bringing down the quality of our lamb by interfering with calcium and magnesium metabolism; from nutrient exchange between soil and roots to metabolism in the animal body.

Because the lambs are short lived, perhaps six months to one year, it is hard to detect sub-optimal health related to soil deficiencies.  Is it not so with short-lived annual vegetable crops? Beautiful broccoli, 60% lower in minerals than the broccoli of our parents' childhood! The annual lamb crop is not exempt from mineral decline. Unless the lambs are born with deficiency related disease, or their mothers die from it before they are born, they leave this fair earth before they have a chance to tell us something's wrong. Unfortunately, these deficiencies accumulate over a long human lifetime and manifest themselves as poor health at the top of the food chain.  It's not just about tender meat or healthy animals.  It's about nutrient dense human food.

The ewes lambed at pasture in the spring of 2009, entirely without supplemental feed, with the exception of minerals that we know are still deficient in our soil and forage. In our short growing season, the pasture did not remain nutritious enough to carry them through lactation in satisfactory flesh, so next year we will provide additional non-starch calories. 

*******************************************

When we graziers are sitting at the kitchen table, making decisions about next year's pasture fertility amendments, we tend to think of calcium only as a pH adjustor. If the need for it arises, generally amounts are called for that will enhance yield or correct acidity.  Little thought is given to animal metabolic health, because we can add dietary calcium through supplementation or hypodermic syringes.  We've been conditioned to believe that these methods are the nutritional equivalent of getting it from the plants.  So what's wrong with this approach?

 To initiate growth, plants take carbon, nitrogen and oxygen, mostly from the air, to biosynthesize the "starter compounds" of sugars and starches.  Some of these "starter compounds" are further biosynthesized into all the amino acids, enzymes, vitamins and immune substances that the plant needs to thrive and reproduce.  But this biosynthesis only takes place when some 18 soil minerals are available.  Calcium and magnesium are among the most important.  If they are not available, the plants cannot perform all their own metabolic processes, much less deliver optimal nutrition to the animal.  Now we begin to see the real source of equine metabolic disease, EMS, as being caused by poor protein, high carbohydrate/potassium hay grown on mineral deficient soil.  While we are busy meeting the "diabetic" horse's NRC requirements for raw minerals as suggested by a feed company nutritionist, we are completely ignoring the role of soil minerals in catalyzing thousands of phytonutrients into existence within the plant. Supplementing raw minerals to the animal will meet some of its needs for the minerals themselves, but how much better to deliver those minerals in the forage, AFTER they have transformed the raw products of photosynthesis into life sustaining proteins, enzymes, vitamins, pigments, ad infinitum.

Potassium is the "K" in the N-P-K fertilizer analysis that serves as the foundation for yield-based agriculture. 

Potassium has a tremendous effect on soil pH.  So if you have been putting potassium on year after year to enhance forage yield, and using only pH readings to predict calcium requirements, you may think that your soil calcium is plentiful if it reads 6.5 or higher.  In reality, constant applications of K may be disguising a hidden hunger for calcium by driving the pH up.

In a pasture, grasses are regular potassium hogs.  They will take up vastly more potassium than they require for their own metabolic processes.  Then they deliver the excess K to the herbivore.  Why is that?  One possible suggestion is that plants need to balance their sap pH, just like people need to balance their blood pH.  There is evidence to suggest that the plant will readily substitute one "cation" (positively charged ion) from the soil if the others are not available.  Once the plant's metabolic need for K is met, it will continue to take it in.  If the calcium is not there, and the magnesium is not there, or the soil is too cold for the microbes to push these cations into the plant, the roots will inhale potassium instead.

  Bottom line:  Even in the face of plenty (of soil calcium and magnesium) excessive potassium can accumulate in the plant, thence in the herbivore's body at the expense of calcium and magnesium. An excess of one produces a "hidden hunger" for the other two. The result is a disposition toward metabolic disease such as grass tetany and milk fever...and ultimately, reduced quality and nutrition at the top of the food chain.

  Forage levels of 2.5 - 3% K appear to be common for pasture grasses, especially during cold early spring, when soil life is not active, and just about the time the cattle and sheep are falling over dead from grass tetany.  Such problems are of course, usually dealt with by supplementing calcium and magnesium from the mineral box or the hypodermic needle.  Excessive K is not generally considered a player in these mineral deficiency diseases.  But what constitutes "excessive?"  This has been very difficult for me to find, primarily because prevailing thought suggests that "excess potassium is harmlessly excreted by the body."  As near as I can tell, horses need about 0.8% of dry matter.  A toxic level of K for the HYPP (hyperkalemic periodic paralysis) quarter horse is about 1%.  The excessive K may be excreted, but not before it's done considerable mischief, both to the plant and animal.

Sodium - Salt! - Imagined by some to be "toxic" at any level to soil and plant life, it occupies a place on the "base exchange" of a soil analysis.  Usually its significance is ignored unless there is too much.  Plants don't need salt, so in yield-based agriculture, it is not called for as a soil amendment.  But animals need salt!  Our hay reports always show sodium at grossly deficient levels for animal health.  So we supplement from the mineral box. Unfortunately, supplementing salt and calcium and magnesium from the mineral box do little to counteract the excessive potassium that the animals are ingesting.  Remember the lamb livers?  High potassium, low calcium.  The grassfed "product" suffered a slight quality problem as a result of the imbalance.  But more importantly the animals were flirting with a number of "hidden hungers."  They just didn't live long enough to express them.  Our longer-lived horses assume that burden when they start developing unexplained insulin resistance, laminitis and "Equine Metabolic Syndrome," and the almost automatic prescription for drugs for Cushing's disease.  Just like diabetic kids, these degenerative diseases seem to be striking horses at a younger and younger age.  Wouldn't it just be easier to grow healthy food for them?

Since plants don't need salt, and salt doesn't enhance yield, why would anyone consider using it as a "fertilizer?"  Plants will use it to balance their sap pH in place of some of that excessive spring potassium.  Excessive potassium makes forage bitter.  It encourages the overgrowth of "opportunistic pathogens" in the gut. It may even enhance the activity of endophyte in fescue. Salt makes forage taste good, so animals eat more forage, which generally results in better performance of food animals.  Excessive potassium actually depresses the craving for sodium, driving down healthy intake at the mineral box. Sodium can stand in as a cheap and effective substitute for part of the more expensive potassium fertilizer.  Next spring, I'll be able to tell you what happens when we put 100 pounds per acre of "sea solids," - mined sea salt - on our pasture late this coming winter.  If I've been misled, you will all know.

As Albrecht put it:  "Adding...mineral supplements the ration...also [has] become a habit.  This habit has led some persons to believe that calcium and phosphorus fed directly as limestone and bone meal...are as effective as when the ration contains forages and grain from soils well-stocked in lime and phosphate ...All are aware that oat straw is low in lime and phosphate.  It is also low in protein or nitrogen.

"Would you reason that oat straw supplemented with bone meal and saltpeter should be a good ration?  [We have concluded that] we can raise the animals by giving them the equivalent of excelsior [wood shavings] if only we use plenty of limestone and bone meal supplements...

"...Such reasoning gives calcium and phosphorus put into the soil no other function than to be dragged into the plant, to occupy space there, and to be thus transported into the animal's digestive tract as they would be if shoveled from the rock pile into the ration."

______________________________
Recommended Reading:

On Livestock Health Issues:
Too Little, Too Much, Early Spring by Woody Lane, Ph.D
www.tein.net/~msufergus/Ag/livestock/Grass%20Tetany%20Article.pdf

Don't Short Salt by T.W. Swerczek, DVM, PhD, Univ. of Kentucky Dept. of Veterinary Science
http://beefmagazine.com/mag/beef_dont_short_salt/ 
 

Principles of Cattle Production, by C.J.C. Phillips, CABI Publishing
Chapter Three, "Nutrient Requirements and Metabolic Diseases", subheading "Major Minerals"

Nitrate Toxicity, Sodium Deficiency and the Grass Tetany Syndrome by T.W. Swerczek, DVM, PhD, Univ. of Kentucky Dept. of Veterinary Science
http://www.growersmineral.com/livestock/indepth-articles/nitrate-toxicity-sodium-deficiency-and-the-grass

On Soil Fertility Issues:

Hands on Agronomy by Neal Kinsey, Kinsey Agricultural Services, www.kinseyag.com
Explanations of "Base Saturation," "Cation Exchange Capacity," "Cations," and Potassium's role in soil fertility.  Also explains differences between types of potassium used as fertilizer (potassium chloride, or muriate of potash, and potassium sulphate.)  Excellent overview of Albrecht principles.

The Ideal Soil by Michael Astera, www.soilminerals.com
Explanations as above, plus information on how to determine your own mineral fertility requirements without the help of a consultant.

Use of Salt in New Zealand Pastoral Farming, Dominion Salt, LTD
www.dominionsalt.co.nz/acatalog/SaltinNZpastoral.pdf

Topdressing Pasture with Salt (NaCl), Dominion Salt, LTD
www.dominionsalt.co.nz/acatalog/topdressing.pdf.

Principles of Cattle Production, by C.J.C. Phillips, CABI Publishing
Chapter Three, "Nutrient Requirements and Metabolic Diseases", subheading "Major Minerals"
Includes information on Potassium and sodium nutrition, as well as fertilizing with sodium.

Cation and Anion Relationships in Plants with Special Reference to seasonal Variation in the Mineral Content of Alfalfa, 1948, Arthur Wallace, Stephen J. Toth, and Firman E. Bear

Cation-Equivalent Constancy in Alfalfa, 1944, Firman E. Bear and Arthur L. Prince

Calcium, November 2009

Fall is lime time!  It's the traditional season for making whatever "topdressed" application of calcium to the soil that must be supplied, so the winter rains can soak it in.  

 

Fortunately, our pasture calcium content is holding up well and we can skip applying more for another year.  Most of our fertility needs for the pasture are settling down now, with a few exceptions, and we're looking at some relief from restocking our weathered and worn out soil with the missing minerals.  Our fertility "bank account" is fairly well stocked and hopefully we'll be mostly drawing off the interest and making more modest deposits in the future.  Our financial outlay for grain has gone down to zero.

 

Breathing life into the soil through remineralization causes no end of interesting surprises on the soil tests.  As the calcium and other minerals we have applied become more available, the little soil microbes and earthworms are scrambling to bring the soil into a state of equilibrium.  Minerals are microbe and earthworm food.  They, in turn, feed the plants.  That's why it's so exciting to witness the changes on the soil reports.  You don't just add "X" and "Y" and come up with "Z".  There are too many biological, chemical and electrical processes being ignited to predict with absolute certainty what the result of mineral applications will be.  The only certainty seems to be that when you do it right, the only predictable outcome is good.

 

For instance, we applied ferrous sulphate - iron - last year.  The objective was to get a detrimental "inverted" ratio of manganese-to-iron (more Mn than Fe) corrected.  The result was not more iron on the next soil report.  There was LESS iron, and LESS manganese, the ratio flipped and both ended up at desirable soil levels.  That is probably not entirely from adding more iron, but it was still the outcome of last year's various additions.  Molybdenum has taken a decided nosedive, where it was somewhat overabundant before.  My guess is the exploding population of clover is slurping it up.  

 

We've replaced the poor sheep genetics and hope to pick up some good Katahdin ewes in the spring.  We'll be living off the oversupply of 2009 lambs for a year, and hope to play with the horses more in 2010.  The horses, by the way, are shedding the evidence of insulin resistance.  Gizmo is losing his regional fat deposits, while Spunky has suddenly lost at least 6" around her gut.  It's taken a year and a half, but it seems they are responding well to our pasture fertility program.  Disease, begone!

 

*************************

 

 

Calcium is well known as a soil conditioner and pH adjuster.  We already know that calcium is needed by animals for strong bones.  What we need to explore now is why animals should get their dietary calcium from the plants they eat instead of a mineral box.

 

LIME AS A pH ADJUSTOR:

 

How does lime - calcium - raise soil pH (reduce acidity)?  We have to go back to the tiniest particles of clay in the soil, so small they require a microscope to see them.  These clay particles are called the clay colloid.  They take the form of thin layers and have a negative electrical charge.  Calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium and hydrogen and certain trace elements all have a positive+ electrical charge and are called "cations" (cat-eye-ons, not "cayshuns" which is how I first thought the word was pronounced!).  Negative attracts positive.  The +cations thus cling to the -clay colloid, and also to the negatively charged soil humus.  The hydrogen H+  ion has a positive electrical charge.  It is a non-nutritive cation, a gas.  When the soil is deficient in the other cations, hydrogen H+ will park in all the negative- "exchange sites" on the clay colloid.  Thus, the presence of large quantities of H+ in the soil is what makes it acid.  Hydrogen is what's left when all the nutrient cations are gone.  When calcium Ca++, with its double electrical charge is present, the hydrogen will be knocked off the clay and the pH moves upward.

 

It stands to reason, if the cation calcium Ca++ can change soil pH, then so can the other cations.  And they do!  Magnesium Mg++ has something like 1.67 times the pH-changing power of calcium by weight, and potassium K+  and sodium Na+ also have a potent influence.

 

The Albrecht school of thought regarding "base saturation," suggests ratios of the various cations to one another according to the "Cation Exchange Capacity" of a given soil.  CEC is the number on the soil analysis that predicts a given soil's ability to attract and hold on to the cations, thus its potential for maintaining fertility.

 

So if you are shooting for a pH of 7, or neutral, by means of calcium only, and then you add magnesium and potassium as fertilizer, not realizing their effect on soil pH, you can see why your crops may not be up to your expectations! Too much calcium fills up all the exchange sites on the clay colloid, leaving no room for the other cations.

 

If you add potassium to your soil every year in anticipation of the yield it will produce, a pH reading alone will never disclose a potential shortfall of calcium. 

 

Hydrogen will pretty much be gone from the soil when the pH reaches 7.  That's just fine if you are using root-feeding commercial fertilizers, especially since many of them tend to "acidify" the soil anyway.  But for the exchange of soil nutrients via microbial activity as happens in healthy soil, some hydrogen is required for the "exchange" of soil nutrients between roots and soil.  So a pH of around 6.5 is more desirable for most crops, and as you can see, should be achieved by balancing the cations, not just dumping on lime.  The plant roots take in a little calcium, give off a little hydrogen, and the cycle begins again.  Whatever is removed with the crop and taken off the farm has to be put back.

 

Soil pH affects the availability of all the other soil minerals.  Each mineral becomes more "available" to plant roots at different levels of pH.  The majority of them seem to be relatively available for plant uptake at around pH 6.5.  For all its virtues, too much calcium in the soil has its own health-depressing effects, notably by tying up a number of the other soil minerals and making them unavailable. 

 

To get calcium in the soil, we usually apply some form of lime. Different kinds of lime do different things to the soil.  Calcium carbonate, also called sweet lime or ag lime, is finely ground high calcium limestone.  It will help the soil structure become looser, allowing better air, water and root penetration.  It may not be the best choice for fast draining, loose sandy soil. Dolomite lime contains magnesium, which tends to tighten soil, and therefore may be a better choice for those sandy soils.  Tight soils may already contain too much Mg, so dolomite may not be the best bet there. Gypsum is a mixture of calcium and sulphur.  It does not change soil pH, but the two minerals together will be just the ticket where soils need both minerals. Gypsum is also used to correct a soil imbalance of too much magnesium, potassium or sodium, replacing them with calcium.

 

CALCIUM IN ANIMAL AND PLANT WELLNESS:

 

So much for soil.  My aim is to convince the reader that having our livestock obtain their minerals from nutrient dense forage produced on mineral-balanced soil is preferable to feeding minerals in supplement form.  Obtaining proof of this has been MUCH harder than I expected!  There is plenty written about soil fertility for healthy plants.  There is an equal amount of material that talks about mineral nutrition for the body.  The abyss that has been hard to bridge is finding everyday language about how minerals are used by plants to biosynthesize a vast array of other nutrients that are required for both plant and animal health, and that animals cannot make for themselves!  These nutrients are called "phytonutrients, from the Greek word "phyto," meaning plant.

 

The plants that our animals eat are not just convenient little bags of minerals, compartmented off from the vitamins, enzymes, proteins and myriad phytonutrients that we expect the forage to deliver to the animal.  In fact, the minerals are very much "second hand" bonus nutrients that come along with the plant after they've been used by soil microbes and plants to fabricate all of these other life-giving substances!  Feeding calcium carbonate in the mineral box can most definitely relieve a specific calcium deficiency in the animal, but there can also be deficiencies of other nutrients in the forage as a result of low calcium levels in the field soils.  That is why mineral supplementation can never take the place of forage-derived calcium. 

 

At the very genesis of nutrient cycling in the soil, "microbes eat at the table first."  In other words, the soil life take what they need of soil minerals before delivering them to plant roots in a form that the plants can use.  Earthworms are dependent upon an adequate supply of calcium for their existence, so in the first order, adequate soil calcium, along with the other soil minerals, underpins the foundations of living soil. 

 

Never take the soil microbes for granted.  There are more tons of soil life under the surface than could ever be stocked in cattle above.  Feed them well.

 

Calcium regulates the "protein pump" responsible for uptake and movement of nutrients into the roots and through the plant cells.  At the root level, calcium stimulates the protein channels that take up other soil nutrients, so adequate calcium must be available to the roots in order for the plant to take in the other minerals it requires for its metabolism.

 

Anything that short circuits plant metabolism will result in degraded nutrition for the animal

 

The first consideration when liming the pastures instead of liming the animals is that a deficiency of any one of the soil minerals becomes a limiting factor in the plant's ability to biosynthesize complete nutrition for the grazing animal.  When lime is applied only as a pH-adjusting factor, we ignore the role that calcium plays in the production of many other phytonutrients.

 

It was recognized as early as the mid 1920s that with a decrease in soil calcium comes a decrease in plant protein.  (Orr, Minerals in Pastures, 1929) That of itself should be enough to swing the pendulum toward liming pastures that show a need for calcium through a soil analysis.  The word "protein" embraces many substances, including amino acids and enzymes.  Amino acids and enzymes come from the "starter compounds" of plant sugars and starches. These sugars and starches are the products of photosynthesis, before the plant begins metabolizing them into a huge array of nutrients in the presence of adequate soil minerals.  It is no accident that our low protein, high water-soluble-carbohydrate hay that was slowly killing my horses (like it does all EMS/I-R horses) has corrected to a very desirable ratio of protein to carbs for such horses, with no manipulation of the plant population (i.e. no planting of supposedly "low sugar" grasses), only replacing soil minerals.

 

Amongst the proteins, there are fairly insoluble "fibrous" proteins, and water-soluble "globular" proteins, such as enzymes.  For horse owners faced with soaking hay to remove excess carbs and potassium, then supplementing minerals, it seems readily apparent that the loss of the globular proteins to the soak water is not desirable.

 

There are ten "essential" amino acids for the grazing animal.  That means they must all come from the diet, because the animal cannot biosynthesize them for itself.  One of the references I keep coming back to is the elevation of tryptophan in calcium-rich forage.  Tryptophan was a disappearing amino acid in forage plants as far back as the mid 20th century.

 

From a grower's point of view, adequate calcium makes the plants stronger and more able to resist pest and disease attacks.  The plant uses calcium to construct strong cell walls, and in the glue that holds cells together.  Strong cells are less liable to attack by opportunistic pathogens and bugs.  Some weeds, such as field bindweed, are able to etch enough calcium out of parent rock to thrive, and it positively loves potassium, as most weeds do.  Such a weed will frequently pull up stakes and move out when the soil chemistry is corrected to favor the more demanding and highly desirable forage plants.  We have almost eliminated grass-killing mats of oxeye daisy and Queen Anne's lace, simply by putting back the missing minerals.

 

Calcium is necessary for cell division and permeability of cell membranes and water movement in cells. It activates enzymes.  It regulates the absorption of nutrients across plasma cell membranes.  It is necessary for the uptake of nitrogen in plants, and nitrogen is the "mother" of protein.

 

For those of us managing horses with "Equine Metabolic Syndrome" or Insulin Resistance, some nutritionists are recommending dietary calcium-to-magnesium ratios of 2:1, in amounts at least 150% higher than National Research Council (NRC) recommendations.    Why isn't the daily recommendation for healthy animals 150% higher to begin with?  Why does a sick horse get more than a well horse?  If the well horse got 150% of the NRC requirement, would it not get sick in the first place?  Who knows?  My guess is the NRC researchers have never actually seen a true model of health, either in a pasture or a horse, or considered the impact of adequate mineral nutrition coming from the forage instead of the mineral box.

 

The current NRC requirement for calcium in the idle horse is 0.25% of the dietary dry matter and of magnesium, 0.10%.  The calcium content of our 2009 grass hay is 0.43% and of magnesium, 0.19%.  This is a "natural" unimproved sward growing on remineralized soil.  We are pushing close to 200% of the NRC-established requirement for maintenance horses.  It is just a little troubling that meeting the NRC "ideals" would require only half the minerals delivered by a mineral-rich meadow.

 

Soil needs calcium to maintain a structure where water, air and nutrients can penetrate.  Microbes need calcium for their own metabolic processes.  Plants need calcium in order to take up nitrogen and other minerals, for their metabolic processes, structural integrity and reproduction, and animals need the phytonutrients that are catalyzed into existence by plants in the presence of adequate calcium.

 

None of this comes from the mineral box.  It all needs to take place at the beginning of life, from the soil up.

 

 

Recommended Reading:

 

Plant Nutrition and Nutritional Disorders

http://ag.arizona.edu/CEAC/basics/notes/chapter7.pdf

 

Calcium Nutrition in Plants by Greg Patterson, CCA

http://www.calciumproducts.com/Calcium_Nutrition_in_plants.pdf

 

20 Mineral Elements for Plant Growth by Craig Dick

http://blog.calciumproducts.com/posts/20-mineral-elements-for-plant-growth.cfm

 

Plant Nutrients and Vitamins

http://plantcellbiology.masters.grkraj.org/html/Plant_Cellular_Physiology3-Mineral_Nutrients_And_Plant_Vitamins.htm

 

Equine Metabolic Syndrome, by Wellington Veterinary Clinic, Wellington, OH

http://wvc.relmax.net/forms/metabolic_syndrome.doc

 

How gypsum Works: http://www.hmhgypsum.com/why.htm

 

The Ideal Soil by Michael Astera, www.soilmineral.com

 

Hands On Agronomy by Neal Kinsey, www.kinseyag.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Boron - 1/1/10

As I begin this letter, it is the first day of January 2010.  Time to start our Celsius countdown!  Back on

March 2, 2007, the Capital Press, Oregon's agricultural weekly, ran an article called "Nutrient Input by

the Numbers." This article laid out a method for determining when to apply pasture fertility

amendments.  Beginning January 1, you start recording the high temperature in Celsius of each day

that is above freezing.  Say January 1 is 2 degrees Celsius and January 2 is 5 degrees Celsius.  The sum

is 7.  Just skip the freezing days.  When the sum reaches 100, it is time to fertilize.  The sum may

reach 100 as early as mid-January or February.  In 2008 and 2009, we hit 100 around January 15.  The

pasture may look dead or be covered in snow.  It seems that root growth actually begins in the dead

of winter and this method has been shown to increase pasture grass growth by as much as one third. 

I don't know about that, but it brings spring into the house early as we place our order for soil

amendments and look forward to spreading them just ahead of a good rain.  Our grazing season seems

to be starting weeks ahead of most other farms in the area, which is far more important to us than

actual tons of hay.  The more grazing we get, the merrier!

********************

So what's in the mineral soup for 2010?  Boron, for sure!  Yep, the same stuff that goes in your

washing machine to make your clothing whiter and brighter. 

What is Boron?

 

Boron is a fairly rare, metallic trace element that is reported in parts per million on a soil test.  It has

a negative electrical charge and so is not attracted to and held by the negatively charged clay colloid.

This means it leaches readily.  In high rainfall areas such as ours, boron will be continuously leached

and removed by crops. So for us, application of boron is an annual event.  Boron must be converted

into borate by soil microorganisms in order to be used by plants.

Boron in minute amounts is vitally important to both plant and animal health. Yet it may not be

considered by soil labs as necessary to nutrient-dense pasture production because of its potential

toxicity to plants and seedlings (and perhaps because it may not increase yield).  Soil labs are not

usually in the business of making fertilizer recommendations for animal health, but for yield.  Since

pasture is generally considered a "low value" crop, it may be overlooked in fertilizer

recommendations.  It is always assumed that shortfalls in pasture minerals can be made up in the

mineral box.  But a grass farmer knows the true value of grass. The health, reproductive vitality and

long life of the livestock and horses that feed upon it, and the subsequent health of humans who dine

on grassfed products and nutrient-dense veggies from a remineralized garden, cannot be measured in

dollars. So let's look at some reasons for considering boron as a pasture soil amendment.

Boron in the Diet

First, we'll look at why our animals need adequate boron in their diet.  We have already seen that it

may leach readily and become deficient in some soils because it is not held in the root zone by the

clay.  And yet we hear so little about supplementing either the soil or the animals with boron.  Can

we supplement boron in the mineral box?  If so, how much? Or is there a reason it should first pass

into a plant before being consumed by the animal?   We will establish a few good reasons why our

animals should get their boron from pasture plants instead of inorganic rocks, by taking a look at what

plants do with boron that animals can't do for themselves.

USDA studies performed by Dr. Curtiss Hunt, Research Biologist, have proved that 3mg of dietary

boron in humans will prevent the excretion of magnesium through the urine.  It plays a role in

delaying or preventing the onset of osteoporosis and osteoarthritis. Boron is linked to proper insulin

and glucose metabolism in both humans and animals.   We know that deficiency of magnesium is

implicated in grass tetany, and magnesium, glucose and insulin metabolism are players in the suite of

diseases known as Equine Metabolic Syndrome.   This makes boron of supreme importance to those of

us dealing with these diseases, and to those of us who never want to deal with them in the first

place! 

Boron works with calcium to maintain healthy bones.  Adequate intake of boron is involved in

anti-inflammatory processes.  It is involved in maintaining body temperature and antibody production. It

is very involved in calcium metabolism.  It is vital to hormonal health.

Albrecht and others showed that boron has considerable involvement in glycogen synthesis in the

liver.

Why do Plants need Boron?

In plants, boron increases nitrogen availability, and is vital to the nodulation of legumes.  That means

free nitrogen fertilizer, which should be motivation enough if one is trying to get away from

chemical nitrogen and establish a healthy stand of legumes in the pasture. 

Boron, along with calcium, is vital to cell wall strength, much as it is to bone strength in animals. 

Strong cell walls are more able to resist insect and disease attacks and lodging.  It is involved in cell

division, fruit and seed development, sugar transport, and hormone development. It is involved in the

movement of Calcium from the soil into the plant and in normal Calcium metabolism.  Boron increases

the rate of transport of sugars (which are produced by photosynthesis) from where they are created by

mature leaves, to storage sites, and to growing regions such as roots and shoots. Boron plays an

important role in regulating hormone levels in plants.

The Advantages of Plant-Derived Dietary Boron

What can plants do with boron that animals can't?  That is a very good question!  Boron can

influence the level of tryptophan content in alfalfa.  In one study, reported by Andre Voisin in his Soil,

Grass and Cancer, the tryptophan levels actually doubled when boron concentrations in the nutrient

solution were increased from 0.22 ppm to 1.08 ppm.  That means the alfalfa is producing more of an

essential amino acid (one the animal cannot produce for itself) in the presence of sufficient soil

boron.  Boron increases the carotene and chlorophyll content of alfalfa (Dregne and Powers, 1942)

How Much?

The National Research Council has not published a recommended daily allowance of boron for man or

beast.  It's not a question of whether boron is a necessary human and animal nutrient.  That fact has

been established.  The problem seems to be that boron is very difficult for researchers to find when

it's present in combination with other nutrients.  This makes it extremely difficult to determine just

how much of this element is necessary in the diet.  That does not mean we should ignore it in the

health of our soils and animals...or ourselves!

So how do we know how much is enough?  For humans, it's about 3mg dietary boron, according to Dr.

Hunt.  For animals, it's not really possible to say at this time.   Pat Coleby, in her Natural Farming

book, notes that she added one gram (about 1/4 teaspoon) of per head in her milking goat flock. For

horses, it's more like starting at 5 grams (about 1 tsp) per day, and reducing to about 2.5 grams per

day.  This can be supplied by ordinary 20 Mule Team Borax. These recommendations would be for

animals in known boron-deficient areas. She has noted these amounts to eliminate "clicking joints."  In

high rainfall areas of New Zealand, sheep arthritis has been cured by boron, however there is no

reference to the therapeutic dose in this particular paper.  Arthritis occurs most frequently in

Jamaica, which is the land mass with the least amount of soil boron.  Arthritis occurs least frequently

in India, the land mass which has the most soil boron, which is apparently delivered in plentiful supply

by the spice, turmeric.  Penn State University says that a healthy grass hay will contain around 5-10

ppm boron, clover 20 ppm and alfalfa around 30 ppm between bud and 1/10th bloom.  For our farm,

we trust that what is good for the plant is good for the animal.  Our last hay analysis showed 11ppm

boron.  We had made one application of boron and the next soil test showed that it was all either

used by that one crop, or perhaps leached in our high rainfall.  That probably means that boron

additions will be an annual requirement, especially as legumes increase in the sward. Not many forage

labs test for boron.  Texas A and M is one that does.

And for the Soil?

Keeping boron at the right amounts in the soil and the most available to the plants is the province of

the soil consultant that recognizes its importance, not only for the forage plants, but also for the

health of the animals consuming them.  DO NOT consider adding boron to your soil without this

advice.  It's best to get a thorough soil analysis done and follow the advice of your consultant before

considering the application of soil boron.

As with all minerals, too much of a good thing (boron) can become toxic.  Boron can be especially

"slippery" in the soil, as one source calls it.  Boron and Calcium are inextricably linked in the

metabolism of both plants and animals, and like so many other minerals, should be in balance with one

another.  Michael Astera of www.soilminerals.com, in his book, The Ideal Soil, recommends that

boron be present in the soil at one part boron to 1,000 parts calcium, up to a total of 4 parts per

million of boron.  The amount of calcium that should be present in a given type of soil is variable, and

as a result, so is the amount of boron.  Get a reliable soil test done!

 As far as availability to plants goes, it appears that boron is most active in a soil pH range of about

5.0 to 7.0 (more acid to neutral).  Too much of the pH-influencing minerals such as calcium and

magnesium will impact its availability to plants.

According to a 1942 paper entitled "Boron Fertilization of  Alfalfa and Other Legumes in Oregon" by H.E.

Dregne and W. L. Powers.  Dogpatch was boron deficient 70 years ago.  Imagine how badly our pasture

plants need boron now!

For More Reading on Boron:

http://www.ars.usda.gov/researchpublications/Publications.htm?seq_no_115
http://www.dcnutrition.com/minerals/Detail.CFM?RecordNumber=47
http://www.borax.com/agriculture/files/an203.pdf
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10026&page+510
http://soiltesting.tamu.edu/files/Forageweb2.pdf
The Ideal Soil, by Michael Astera, www.soilminerals.com
Hands On Agronomy, by Neal Kinsey, www.kinseyag.com
The Biological Farmer, by Gary Zimmer