⇦ Back to Fertilizer Lime Amendment Technology and Use Home
This Crop File discusses different methods used to express agricultural lime (“aglime”) quality. This is not intended to be an inclusive listing, but should represent the methods used by states not included in the listing.
¶ Table 1. Lime Rate Calculation Examples |
| 1. Required rate = 1.5 tons ECC/ac; aglime source = 70% ECC 2.14 tons aglime/ac = 1.5 ÷ (70 ÷ 100) |
| 2. Required rate = 2.5 tons RNV/ac; aglime source = 55% RNV 4.55 tons aglime/ac = 2.5 ÷ (55 ÷ 100) |
| 3. Required rate = 4200 lb ECCE/ac; aglime source = 1300 lb ECCE/ton 6,460 lb aglime/ac = 4200 ÷ (1300 ÷ 2000) |
| 4. Required rate = 1600 lb ENM/ac; aglime source = 550 lb ENM/ton 2,327 lb aglime/ac = 1800 ÷ (520 ÷ 800) |
¶ Table 2. Conversions for ENM (Effective Neutralizing Material) |
| Converting from ENM |
| Kansas: tons 100% ECC/ac = ENM/ac ÷ 800 |
| Iowa: lb 100% ECCE/ac = ENM/ac x 2.5 |
| Indiana: tons 65% RNV/ac = ENM/ac x 1.54 |
| Arkansas: tons 100% ELM/ac = ENM/ac ÷ 800 |
| Converting to ENM |
| Kansas: ENM = tons 100% ECC/ac x 800 |
| Iowa: ENM = lb 100% ECCE/ac x 0.40 |
| Indiana: ENM = tons 65% RNV/ac x 520 |
| Arkansas: ENM = tons 100% ELM/ac x 0.40 |
¶ Table 3. Lime Quality Expression by State |
||
| State | Lime quality expression | At 100% “pure” calcium carbonate equivalent, liming material contains: |
| Arkansas | % ELM, Effective Liming Material | 2000 lb ELM/ton |
| Illinois | % RNV1, Relative Neutralizing Value | 2000 lb RNV/ton |
| Indiana | % RNV, Relative Neutralizing Value | 2000 lb RNV/ton |
| Iowa | ECCE lb/ton, Effective Calcium Carbonate Equivalent | 2000 lb ECCE/ton |
| Kansas | % ECC, Effective Calcium Carbonate | 2000 lb ECC/ton |
| Kentucky | % RNV, Relative Neutralizing Value | 2000 lb RNV/ton |
| Louisiana | % ELM, Effective Liming Material | 2000 lb ELM/ton |
| Michigan | % ECC, Effective Calcium Carbonate | 2000 lb ECC/ton |
| Minnesota | % ENP, Effective Neutralizing Power | 2000 lb ENP/ton |
| Missouri | ENM lb/ton, Effective Neutralizing Material | 800 lb ENM/ton |
| Mississippi | % RNV, Relative Neutralizing Value | 2000 lb RNV/ton |
| Nebraska | % ECC, Effective Calcium Carbonate = | 2000 lb ECC/ton |
| Ohio | % ENP, Effective Neutralizing Power | 2000 lb ENP/ton |
| Oklahoma | % ECCE, Effective Calcium Carbonate Equivalent | 2000 lb ECCE/ton |
| Pennsylvania | % ENV, Effective Neutralizing Value | 2000 lb ENV/ton |
| Texas | % ELM, Effective Liming Material | 2000 lb ELM/ton |
| Wisconsin | % NI, Neutralizing Index | 2000 lb NI/ton |
¶ Table 4. Sieve Size Ranges and Acidity-Neutralization Efficiency Factors Used by Various States |
|
| Particle size range (mesh size) |
Efficiency factor (percent) |
| ARKANSAS — Effectiveness Rating | |
| Coarser than 10 | 0% |
| 10 to 60 | 40% |
| 60 to 100 | 100% |
| Finer than 100 | 100% |
| ILLINOIS, one year — Total Fineness Efficiency Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 5% |
| 8 to 30 | 20% |
| 30 to 60 | 50% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| ILLINOIS, four year — Total Fineness Efficiency Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 15% |
| 8 to 30 | 45% |
| 30 to 60 | 100% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| INDIANA — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 60 | 50% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| IOWA — Total Fineness Efficiency | |
| Coarser than 4 | 0% |
| 4 to 8 | 10% |
| 8 to 60 | 40% |
| Finer than 100 | 100% |
| KANSAS — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 60 | 50% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| KENTUCKY — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 10 | 0% |
| 10 to 50 | 50% |
| Finer than 50 | 100% |
| LOUISIANA — Effectiveness Rating | |
| Coarser than 10 | 0% |
| 10 to 60 | 40% |
| 60 to 100 | 100% |
| Finer than 100 | 100% |
| MICHIGAN — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 60 | 50% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| MINNESOTA — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 20 | 20% |
| 20 to 60 | 60% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| MISSISSIPPI — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 10 | 0% |
| 10 to 50 | 50% |
| Finer than 50 | 100% |
| MISSOURI — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 40 | 25% |
| 40 to 60 | 60% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| NEBRASKA — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 4 | 0% |
| 4 to 8 | 10% |
| 8 to 60 | 40% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| OKLAHOMA — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 4 | 0% |
| 4 to 8 | 10% |
| 8 to 60 | 50% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| OHIO — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 10 | 0% |
| 10 to 30 | 20% |
| 30 to 60 | 60% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| PENNSYLVANIA — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 20 | 0% |
| 20 to 60 | 40% |
| 60 to 100 | 80% |
| Finer than 100 | 100% |
| TEXAS — Effectiveness Rating | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 20 | 20% |
| 20 to 60 | 60% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |
| WISCONSIN — Fineness Factor | |
| Coarser than 8 | 0% |
| 8 to 20 | 20% |
| 20 to 60 | 60% |
| Finer than 60 | 100% |