June 17, 1918 



Inorganic Composition of a Peat 



609 



In Table IV a comparison is made of the losses suffered by three widely 

 differing soil-forming materials in their transformation to soils. As 

 previously stated, the behavior of the lime in the saw grass is strikingly 

 different from that in the other cases cited and considerably more 

 potash also was removed. 



Table IV. — Comparison of tlie losses of three soil-forming materials in their transforma- 

 tion to soils 



Constituent. 



Silica 



Iron ox id. 

 Alumina. 



Lime 



Magnesia. 

 Potash. .. . 



Soda 



Nitrogen . 



Percentage losses suffered by parent material in 

 soil formation. 



Arkansas lime- 

 stone (8 parts 

 yield i of soil)." 



. 00 



■56 



•35 

 ■93 

 •38 

 ■36 

 .26 



Granite (1.7 



parts yield i 



of soil).'' 



52-45 

 14-35 

 00. 00 

 100. 00 

 74.70 

 83-52 

 95-03 



Saw grass (7 



parts yield i 



of peat). 



O. CO 



12. 2 



23.8 

 40 « 



96-3 

 84.6 



32. 8 



o Penrose, R. A. F. loc. cit. 



* Mbrrii,!,, G. p. loc. cit. 



CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY 



In this article the inorganic composition of typical samples of Ever- 

 glades peat is given together with analyses of the parent material from 

 which the peat was formed — namely, saw grass {Cladium efjusum). 

 Brief descriptions of both products are also given. Assuming that no 

 silica was lost during the transformation, about 7 parts of saw grass 

 were required to yield i of peat. Based on this assumption, the constitu- 

 ents were leached to the following extent: 



Iron oxid and alumina, 12.2 per cent; lime, 24 per cent; magnesia, 41 

 per cent; potash, 96 per cent; soda, 84.6 per cent; phosphoric acid, 70 

 per cent; and nitrogen, 33 per cent. The losses suffered by two other 

 common soil-forming substances, granite and limestone, are shown for 

 the sake of comparison. 



