|
IA/MN/WI | I agree with much of what you say and think Jon, but you do not have any replicated valid data that proves Source moved your fertility levels a single lb. You let Source use you for marketing purposes, and you took a soil sample from the treated half of a field and a sample from the untreated half and said source must work because the test on the treated side was higher... there were no samples from the same field locations prior to the application being made. No samples from the same locations from the previous year. You have zero baseline data to go on to compare.
I know you are a proponent of AMF for soil health. But I think its VERY important to preface that AMF will only colonize and grow in soil with a C:N ratio of 18:1 or higher. So for about 90% of farmers, if they use AMF it will be dead in the soil in about 20-30days. Bacillus strains need about 14:1-16:1, so again, the vast majority of farmers are going to struggle to capture any benefit from a biological product until they sufficiently improve carbon levels.
Max Systems has good quality products, they have virtually no data, and none of the data they do have is from a third party research company, same goes for Sound Ag, except their product success rate was even worse than PivotBio, which is probably why 50% of the employees that worked at Sound 3yrs ago now work for Redox. | |
|
So what has worked. World of biologicals. So what’s worked.
