Substrate Porosity

[aquabillpers]

It has been stated that one of the benefits of specialized substrates is
that ". . . the porosity allows faster cycling of nutrients and remineralization . . ." and that " . . . porosity also enhances nutrient retention. "

"Porous" is defined as "admitting the passage of gas or liquid through pores or interstices" and "Easily crossed or penetrated."

From that it would seem that the larger the grain of the substrate material, the greater would be its porosity, within reason, of course. Gravel, being more porous than a clay-based substrate, would thus provide faster cycling of nutrients.

Or am I missing something?

Bill

 

[Tom Barr]

Re: Substrate Porosity

There is a limit to it, a happy medium.
There is a good amount that allows for a fair amount of aerobic exchange and then mainly internal anaerobic exchange.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Actually, gravel is for the "poor us" that can't afford them fancy store-bought
substrates I have a problem with the premise that gravel is more porous
than Schultz's Clay Soil Conditioner, Turface, Flourite, etc. It is certainly heavier, more adamantine, than those materials. I soak my clay soil conditioner
in rainwater for several days before using to ensure some of it will not float.
I don't have to do this with gravel.....

Per cc of clay particles to cc of gravel, which absorbs more water?

Bill

 

[aquabillpers]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Actually, gravel is for the "poor us" that can't afford them fancy store-bought substrates

I definitly agree! But if I could find a reason that the expensive stuff is better than the poor man's substrate, I'd spring for it. (Well, probably.) Greater "porosity", which apparently brings more water column nutrients to the roots, might be one reason. But if the cheap stuff with larger particles permits greater water movement, then . . .

Per cc of clay particles to cc of gravel, which absorbs more water?

I don't know. It would seem to me that if one added one cc of gravel to one container of that volume and added one cc of say, flourite or play sand, to another, and then added water to each a drop at a time, the container with the gravel would accomodate more drops before overflowing. But I don't know.

I soak my clay soil conditioner in rainwater for several days before using to ensure some of it will not float.

Might that not suggest that the water has trouble penetrating the clay?




If "porous" means letting the nutrient-containing water flow through the gravel more easily, then I'd think that 2mm - 3mm gravel would be more "porous" than, say, 1mm - 2mm gravel, and both would be more porous than a finer grained material, like sandbox sand. I know through observation that water flows very slowly if at all through modeling clay. Also, clay soils are considered to hold water better than sandy soils, which suggests that the latter are more porous.

Bill

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

I don't know. It would seem to me that if one added one cc of gravel to one container of that volume and added one cc of say, flourite or play sand, to another, and then added water to each a drop at a time, the container with the gravel would accomodate more drops before overflowing. But I don't know.




Might that not suggest that the water has trouble penetrating the clay?

Bill, (can I call you "Bill" ) it suggests to me that the pores are smaller and
more of them, which would increase the time to absorb the water.

If "porous" means letting the nutrient-containing water flow through the gravel more easily, then I'd think that 2mm - 3mm gravel would be more "porous" than, say, 1mm - 2mm gravel, and both would be more porous than a finer grained material, like sandbox sand. I know through observation that water flows very slowly if at all through modeling clay. Also, clay soils are considered to hold water better than sandy soils, which suggests that the latter are more porous.

Well, porous here means they act like little sponges, when all those little holes
get filled with nutrient-enriched water. Sand being smaller particles have less pores, less sponge capacity, so water goes right on by them after they are filled. I may be all wet in this, but that's ok, I've got pores, too, lots of 'em!


Bill Ruyle

 

[Ian H]

Re: Substrate Porosity

For the sake of argument can I adjudicate and say you're both right, and indeed you're both wrong also.

Your differences are not based on a sound starting definition. Gravel for instance is a loose term. Gravel can be based in different materials. I assure you that my substrate gravel which is granite based has virtually no porosity. If it were sandstone or limestone based it would have more, and so on. Similar story for clay, some modified clays are very porous, expanded clay pebbles for instance.

As I said you are both right and wrong. I have the potential to be the most right because I have observed the base line.

Ian

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Gee, Ian, you're no fun at all!

Bill Ruyle

 

[Ian H]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Sorry Bill but it could have gone on for ever.

By the way the H in my signature stands for Hunt. You are in my town, and in fact I may own your house. So watch it.

Ian

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Ian, thanks for euthanizing our discussion Actually, having been here a
couple of years, I like the name "Huntspatch" better

I'm sure you'd make a fine landlord

Bill

 

[Ian H]

Re: Substrate Porosity

I would make a superb landlord because I know what type of gravel to lay in your drive.

Ian

 

[aquabillpers]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Bill and Ian,

I just got done with a strenuous workout and I am perspiring profusely, through my porous, I assume.

Bill

 

[Tom Barr]

Re: Substrate Porosity

An increase porosity does not mean it's not dense.
EC, MPV and ADA, Flora base etc are light weight, Flourite/onyx sand are heavy.

MPV is cheap...........add sand(40:60/50:50 etc) to that and it's got the weight.

These other costly substrates are useful since they are a one time expense. They last forever(onyx, EC and Flourite do anyway).
Folks had few issues spending 300-600$ for heating cables and those did not do anything as far as plant health.

Took me several years to show that, but they are seldom sold in many places today.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

An increase porosity does not mean it's not dense.

Exactly right, there, Tom...I'm about as dense as they come and I got lotsa
pores!

Bill

 

[Ian H]

Re: Substrate Porosity

An increase porosity does not mean it's not dense.
EC, MPV and ADA, Flora base etc are light weight, Flourite/onyx sand are heavy.

MPV is cheap...........add sand(40:60/50:50 etc) to that and it's got the weight.

These other costly substrates are useful since they are a one time expense. They last forever(onyx, EC and Flourite do anyway).
Folks had few issues spending 300-600$ for heating cables and those did not do anything as far as plant health.

Took me several years to show that, but they are seldom sold in many places today.

Regards,
Tom Barr

OK Tom I think I've just about got it sorted and you throw another gravel on the drive. What the heck is MPV...................Never come across that one.

I get your point about the one time expense, if going through the hassle and cost of changing to EC or even MPV, then as long as there is a decent chance that I will obtain positive,long term benefit I'll do it.

I still am feeling that EC is my best route. How about if I add black sand to the EC, would it add weight to enable me to plant securely? Also would it, in time, sift to the lower layers?

Ian

 

[Tom Barr]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Exactly right, there, Tom...I'm about as dense as they come and I got lotsa
pores!

Bill

"Orifices" would be the correct term unless you are a dematologist, in which case flourite makes an excellent skin ex foliator.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[Tom Barr]

Re: Substrate Porosity

OK Tom I think I've just about got it sorted and you throw another gravel on the drive. What the heck is MPV...................Never come across that one.

Same thing as Prolfile but 5-10x cheaper.
If you played baseball instead of cricket, you'd be familar with it.
They put it on baseball diamonds.

I still am feeling that EC is my best route. How about if I add black sand to the EC, would it add weight to enable me to plant securely? Also would it, in time, sift to the lower layers?
Ian

To some degree it will sort out, but if you uproot every so often and rearrange things, then it's less of an issues.

EC is inconsistent in sizing and yes, the biggest lightest piece will move to the top.

If it were reversed, I'd like it a lot more.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

OK Tom I think I've just about got it sorted and you throw another gravel on the drive. What the heck is MPV...................Never come across that one.

MPV stands for multi-purpose vehicle (Mazda). And for your substrate, EC
does it, okay there, Thread Slayer? Thankyougoodnite,

Bill

 

[Ian H]

Re: Substrate Porosity

You're just being a silly billy now.

Ian

 

[chubasco]

Re: Substrate Porosity

You're just being a silly billy now.

Ian

Ummm, perhaps....when you get the EC, have a grownup post pics of your setups, thanks.

Bill

 

[Ian H]

Re: Substrate Porosity

Will post as requested but it will take some time to afford the EC on the proceeds of my paper delivery round. Then I've got to buy the camera , then find a grown up. By then this forum may allow direct attachments to be posted.

You seam to be the second person I've upset using the term silly on this forum. Does silly mean something more severely critical in the States than the UK?

I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.I must stop saying silly.

Ian