Soil pH is one area where I see the most dogmatic assertions on the forums and on the web. Today I found a Univeristy of Wisconsin site that said pine needles had a minimal affect on pH and a Univeristy of Minnesota site that said one should add lime to minimize the affect of pine needles on pH. Minnisota and Wisconsin should have similar pine needles shouldn't they? Similar soil?

Then there is the much needed area of cation exhange capacity. Persons dogmatically assert that it is simple. It is not. Wikipedia has a good page on soil pH with a link to cation exchange capacity but the page linked is empty, just sitting there waiting for someone.

I am absolutely game to learn and / or experiment about soil , botany and anything related to plants.

Albert have you seen the thread on the Soil forum about Terra Preta soil? Now that is obviously something interesting as far as cation exchanges and symbiosis etc. I was really excited to try and play with that here in Michigan until I pulled open my soil textbook (the only one I've got, as I have had but minimal training in landscape tech and botany) and saw what very different soil types we have here versus the amazon basin. I still would be very interested to try anything you might devise though related to that.

About your opuntia experiment with leaves, albert - for some reason there was not a follow up post form allowing me to respond on that thread but it was me who wrote the original post.....wow...what did the leaves look like ???? (I am pretty good with the technical terminology of leaf shape and such so please do feel free to use that. )

Kid,

I like the quote you provided -- extremely appropos to gardening.

Any gardener who has an inkling of how to do science should design an experiment and post it here. Posting periodically as the experiment is run and the results come in can be quite exciting because of the suspense.

I performed an experiment last spring and will be thinking of another one.

Jim

Here is a link that might be useful: My Experiment

Wow .. some contribution jimster ! I love the photos .. and included data.

Good Day ...

My experiment turned out to be somewhat elaborate in execution, although my research question was as simple as I could possibly make it. My advice is simplify, simplify, simplify!

The plant photos were taken with artificial light and a digital camera on a tripod. I marked the positions of everything so I could quickly duplicate the set-up each time. Still, the photos varied a little for reasons I'm not sure of.

The leaf photos were done on a scanner. This is extremely quick and easy and gives consistent results. Items don't even have to be absolutely flat for it to work. The leaves were flat, but I have scanned small, whole chili peppers with good results.

Experiments do

(This editor does peculiar things some times.)

Experiments don't need to be big or complicated to be scientific. Be on the lookout for opportunities to do a small, easy one. And don't be disappointed if the results aren't dramatic. They seldom are. My results were barely noticeable. I just accepted that as the answer to my research question.

Jim

Good advice ... there are many ways to approach science .. formal experiments are only one way not the only way.

.. this reminds me of the discovery of the "Bucky Ball" molecule ... the carbon molecule that is shaped like a soccer ball. If I remember correctly there was a beaker that contained a mixture of molecules including the bucky ball and no one could devise an experiment to isolate it without destroying the bucky ball's chemical structure ... scientist used all kinds of high tech methods without success. One day someone mindlessly left the beaker out on a shelf exposed to the air and a day or so later the mixture dried up containing only the completely intact bucky ball !!

Sometimes it's as simple as that ...

Good Day ...