Hi Christiane and List, I believe that Mr Goldstein have lost one great opportunity when it comes to comment the so called Albrecht Model. The Model is good in my oppinion and it works. However, I cannot accept that in all the world with plenty of good labs only two labs are capable of doing the job. I know that there is that variability among labs but it does not get into my mind that only two guys in the world are capable of analysing soils and giving recommendations like the idea that is officially sold by Kinsey.
Jose Jose, and other contributors to the CEC debate Jose, Mr Goldstein and many other authors, scientists are not saying that Albrecht was wrong. They are saying that 'soils ain't soils', meaning the correct formula for the interaction of climate-soil-plant at one locality of the globe might not be the ideal formula at another locality. Perhaps Albrecht never claimed that his formula is ideal for every spot on the earth? And it is only the marketing of the few private laboratories who use his formula for fertiliser recommendation who do that? I posed the original question and I got lots of answers. Thanks to everyone who contributed! I conclude that Albrecht's concept of looking at soil management and fertilisation ought not to be discarded, but balanced with local and crop conditions and the other concept of supplying the crops needs with fertiliser. In practice it means for me that, when a soil laboratory tests my soil and comes up with fertiliser recommendations, I want to know which concept they used so that I can put their recomendation into the context of my management strategy Christiane
