In breaking with then normal flow of things at Lost in the
Farmer’s Market in this mini update, today I’ll be talking about the results of
the Azomite test. For those of you who
do not know the product well, Azomite is as the maker states the following.
‘AZOMITE® is unique highly mineralized ore that is a complex silica
(Hydrated Sodium Calcium Aluminosilicate or HSCAS) mined in Utah from a deposit
left by an ancient volcanic eruption that was ejected out of the side of a
mountain.’
All I have to say about that is
wow, now that is one heck of a description in all seriousness the manufacturer
goes on to state in their frequently asked questions that Azomite is not a
replacement for typical fertilizers as it does not provide nitrogen, potash or, potassium (N-P-K) You can find the
Azomite website here at this address.
So for the purposes of the tomato
trials the idea was to see if this amendment worked at all with additional
fertilizers or was simply a fluke. To see if it worked four tomato plants of
the same cultivar were selected. In the original trial four ‘Patio’ tomato
plants were selected, and treated with the following arrangement.
- Plant 1 (P1) – No Azomite or Epsom salts.
- Plant 2 (P2) – 1 application of Azomite.
- Plant 3 (P3) – 1 application of Epsom salts.
- Plant 4 (P4) – 1 application of Epsom salts and 1 application of Azomite.
Each of the plants was potted up
with a peat moss-free soil mix and given no fertilizer other then their
amendments. Water was supplied from water collected in rain barrels on the
property. As it was discovered patio tomatoes didn’t quite grow as perceptibly
as other tomatoes, often these plants would nudge out 1/16th an inch
of growth a day. Additionally the lack of a set measure point skewed the
results from already barely measurable plants.
The trial was restarted with a new
cultivar, this time ‘Mountain Spring’ a fairly well known variety available through
Totally Tomatoes. This variety is known for its determinate height good fruit
set and special resistance to cracking and blossom end rot.
These four test plants went under
the same setting with one change, instead of the peat moss-free soil mix a high
quality topsoil was used to better replicate the soil of a well established
farm environment. As above the plants were provided amendments in the same
order. The Azomite treated plants had their amendments added into the soil
before the plant was added to the pots. The Epsom salt treated plants had the Epsom
salts added to the soil surface and watered in. All tomatoes were planted ½”
deep as per tradition to promote better surface rooting. The results were as
follows
- Plant 1 (None) – 8 ¾” starting | 11” final |
- Plant 2 (Azom.) – 8 ¼” starting | 12 ½” final |
- Plant 3 (Epson) – 10 ¼” starting | 14 1/8” final |
- Plant 4 (Az+Ep) – 10” starting | 12 ¾” final |
With these results in mind collected
over the same two-week period you can
see a definite difference in the rate of growth between the four plants and
their treatments.
Plant #1 – grew 2.25 inches
Plant #2 – grew 4.25 inches
Plant #3 – grew 3.875 inches
Plant #4 – grew 2.75 inches
It is quite clear that overall the
Azomite plant definitely grew the most but, that difference for growth and
development is by a gap of 6/16th of an inch. For the sake of
agriculture and organic gardening purposes it’s enough to say that yes Azomite
does work. It is interesting to note that the double treated plant (#4) grew
less then the plants that received single treatments.
These are the Patio tomatoes weeks later in their 6" fluted pots.
As a related side note the Patio
tomatoes from the first attempt proved to display later characteristics that
are worthwhile of note. I did continue their trial treatment conditions for the
sake of seeing what would become of them in time. All four were placed in a
full sun location where they could soak up more natural heat and light
conditions. Each was transplanted into a 6” fluted pot with high quality
topsoil being added as the soil material.
Below are the results of that move
as noted on the same day as the second tomato trial concluded.
==========================================
| Category | Most to least |
==========================================
| Largest fruit| 2,4, 3&1 tied for third |
| Most fruit | 4,1,3,2. |
| Biggest Plant| 4,1,2,3. |
| Tallest Plant| 2,3,1,4. |
==========================================
| Category | Most to least |
==========================================
| Largest fruit| 2,4, 3&1 tied for third |
| Most fruit | 4,1,3,2. |
| Biggest Plant| 4,1,2,3. |
| Tallest Plant| 2,3,1,4. |
==========================================
Ironically over time, the dual
treatment plant (#4) had the most fruit and was overall biggest. The
Azomite-only treated tomato ended up leading in largest fruit and tallest
plant.
What these results tell me is that
Azomite again definitely does something and that is relative to the plant
treated. As it turned out the patio tomatoes hit a certain height and instead
of continuing to grow set impressive fruit. The mountain spring tomatoes turned
out to be just the sort of plant needed and displayed a different set of growth
characteristics that for the original context of this trial proved Azomite
works.
In short give it a try, and see if
it works for you, it certainly cant do any damage and apparently Azomite is
reasonably inexpensive. So I recommend giving it a try and determining if it
works or not.
No comments:
Post a Comment