# Soil



## Vinman409 (Jan 23, 2011)

i was wondering has anyone ever used scotts premium top soil if so how did it work out?


----------



## D9Vin (May 12, 2011)

I just bought some to mineralize. Kinda worried that it may have manure in it, but we will see what happens. We're you wanting to mineralize it or do it Walstad type?


----------



## Skizhx (Oct 12, 2010)

I use Scott's Premium Topsoil with Canadian Peat Moss.

I can't find the packaging on scott's website or anything, so it may be specific to my region.

The picture on the bag has a wheel barrel with a shovel in it on a lawn next to, I think it was a brick planter? I'm not at home so I can't check the bag for you...

It's be the best soil I've every used.

Very easy to work with. I've had no problems with uprooting established dwarf sag in my tank (just gotta go slow and tease the roots out). Any soil that escapes stays on the bottom and can be siphoned out easily.

This soil released no noticeable amount of tanins.

I supplemented a little bit of potassium during the early setup of my tank, but eventually stopped, and have no been dosing anything into the tank since.

So, this is my personal soil of choice...

(pardon some of my spelling)


----------



## D9Vin (May 12, 2011)

And you just use it out of the bag skiz?


----------



## Skizhx (Oct 12, 2010)

Yup, just pick out large twigs, etc.

Again, I don't know if I have a regional variety because I can't find the same packaging anywhere on google or their site.


----------



## Michael (Jul 20, 2010)

Skizhx, have you used Miracle Grow Organic Choice potting mix too? If so, how would you compare it to the Scott's?

MGOC has definite problems, including a high percentage of very coarse organic material. If the Scott's is better, and widely available, it would be great to have another product to recommend.


----------



## Skizhx (Oct 12, 2010)

Michael, yes, I have used MGOC. I believe we discussed this in another thread once before.

The only reason I would be hesitant to recommend this is because I can't find the packaging anywhere online, so I suspect it may be a region-specific product. I would post a picture but I wont be home for another 4-5 weeks at least. I can't find the product on their website either :\

But the bag of Scott's I've been using, whatever product it is, regional or whatever, I do prefer over the MGOC for three main reasons...

1) I find Scott's to be much easier to work with when submerged. It tends to stay together when it's disturbed, so it's easy to siphon the stray bits out of the tank, instead of having it disperse itself in a big cloudy mess. Do note that I'm using fluorite black sand as a cap, so this may have something to do with it as well...

2) Absolutely no tannin release

3) I suspect this soil doesn't have any organic fertilizers in it. The bag says that you should start using fertilizers with it immediately. It is a not a potting soil. Personally the initial break-in of my tank was easy. I had a bit of a diatom phase while the plants grew in, then once things got established, I haven't had to clean my glass or anything.

It does have obvious clumps of peat moss in it. I just left these in. There weren't too many large twigs, but I would still sift through it...

I can't speak for this soil in regards to what it has and what it lacks, since I haven't experimented with enough plants. Dwarf sag and E. Tennellus love the stuff though.

Otherwise, interesting experience with MGOC, someone tried to copy my aquariums using MGOC in a 10gal running 2 T8 fixtures. Their plants started doing poorly, and they were getting frustrated, so as a last resort I gave them my seachem root tabs to try. Plants seemed to stabilize. So might be something to that combination...


----------



## Michael (Jul 20, 2010)

Thanks for reminding me, I remember the discussion now.

I'm going to look for Scott's Premium Topsoil here in Texas and let you know what I find. The fact that they tell the buyer to start using fertilizers immediately is actually encouraging for aquarium use.


----------



## D9Vin (May 12, 2011)

I think I still have the bags at home, I will check when I get back, but it won't be for a while. I can tell you that my stuff has quite a few pieces of wood, large pieces too, and it also mentioned peat, but I didn't notice any large chunks.


----------



## Skizhx (Oct 12, 2010)

Like I said, my bag has "Canadian peat moss". The bag has a picture of a wheelbarrel on a lawn with a shovel in it, and I think there's a brick planter next to the wheelbarrel or something.

I bought the bag in Atlantic Canada. It could very well just be the same product but regional packaging.

Might try e-mailing Scott's to see if I can get a clear answer regarding this.

Yes Michael, I was happy that they advised using fertilizers immediately as well.


----------



## Michael (Jul 20, 2010)

I'm glad this topic came up again--it motivated me to get off my duff and do some research.

I needed some potting soil for terrestrial plants anyway, so I went to my local Home Depot. There I bought Miracle Grow Organic Choice potting mix, and Scott's Premium Topsoil. The Scott's bag was mostly red, with a photo of some flowers across the top, and a little drawing of a shovel sticking out of a pile of. . .stuff.

According to the bags:

*MGOC*

50-55% composted bark
Sphagnum peat moss
Pasturized poultry litter
organic wetting agent (whatever that is)

Analysis 0.10-0.05-0.05
total nitrogen 0.10%
available phosphate (P2O2) 0.05%
soluable potash (K2O) 0.05%
". . .feeds up to 2 months. . ."

*Scott's*

"This product is regionally formulated with organic materials (including one or more of the following: peat, composted forest products, aged rice hulls or compost) and sphagnum peat moss.

No analysis is given, but ". . .immediately begin a feeding program. . ."

So what does this tell us? First, neither of these is remotely similar to a natural top soil. Second, they are both 100% organic material, no minerals like clay or silt that might be desireable in an aquarium substrate.

Third, one can infer from the packaging that MGOC is a more consistent and more fertile product, otherwise they would not put an analysis on the bag. Scott's is more likely to vary in fertility and ingredients, but does not have any manure in it. It is probably never as fertile as MGOC.

What do you see when you open the bag? My two samples were virtually identical in appearance. I don't think I could tell two unlabeled samples apart. The Scott's might have slightly less coarse pieces in it, but I didn't do a sieve test to check.

The Scott's product is significantly less expensive, about 50% of the price of the MGOC.

My conclusion: with no manure and less fertility, Scott's is likely to be better straight from the bag, and might be easier to mineralize. Combined with its lower cost, I think Scott's looks like a slightly better product for our purposes.

Skizhx has had good results with it, and I'm going to try it the next time I make a batch of MTS. That won't be soon, since I have lots left over from my last batch.

I think we can recommend it.


----------

