T&J Enterprises
BioVam and Other fine organic products    
The Leading Standard of Excellence in Growing
Applied Research, Sales and Marketing 

Study

Production Comparisons of BioVam Inoculated
vs.
Non-inoculated Spinach Plantings

by
Elaine Hale
Hale Research & Environmental Consulting
P.O. Box 734
Santa Maria, CA   93456
 
For
 
B.Probiotics
Moorpark, California
 
Trial Number: ECO97.05
 
Study Location: Gold Coast Farms, Santa Maria, CA.
 
Principal Investigators:
Elaine Hale
Hale Research & Environmental Consulting
P.O. Box 734
Santa Maria, CA 93456
805 925 4518

ABSTRACT

Note:  Spinach is a non-mycorrhizal plant.  The benefits attributed to Spinach were due to other biotics present in BioVam.

      An experiment was conducted to determine potential production benefits when using the BioVam Inoculate on Fresh Market Spinach.
      The test was conducted to evaluate the actual weight per acre differences between non-inoculated and inoculated areas of the field. The BioVam was applied at a rate of 30 lbs. product/acre, using a Gandy box unit attached to the tractor's planting bar setup. The inoculum was spread in the seed furrow, behind the furrow shoe, and prior to the seed placement. Seed and inoculum were incorporated by soil enclosure through the attachment of a small drag chain, which folded in the furrow sides and was then pressed firm by a roll wheel.
      Fertilizer practices (involving N-P-K-) were to be decreased in the BioVam plot by at least 50%, but due to the plot incorporation into a field serviced with a commercial chemigation setup, fertilizers were not decreased. Current commercial trends to use foliar fertilizers as pesticides will continue to curtail input reduction.
      The root mass for each subplot was separated, washed and weighed for both treatments. Data indicates an average root mass for BioVam Inoculant of 1.96oz/9.9sqft compared to 1.21oz for the non-inoculated. This represents an increase of 38.3% in root mass development with BioVam.
      There were statistically significant differences in the subplot production weights when comparing treated versus untreated. When converting data to a per acre basis, the BioVam Inoculant (7.8 tons/ac) produced a 1.1 ton increase over the non-inoculated (6.7 ton/ac). This represents an increase of 14.2% production between the two treatments, in BioVam's favor.
      This field made a crop in 32 days, which is a significant pressure on the BioVam Inoculant to perform in such a short-lived crop. But significant attention should be paid to the fact that the grower felt that there was a significant enough difference that a second trial was set up for commercial harvest techniques.

EVALUATION

      At the single cut harvest the roots of the spinach plants were weighed separately from the marketable stems and leafy tops.   Phytotoxicity ratings for foliage were recorded on 3 separate dates.  Duncan's MST was used for analysis of the data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

      Observations made by the grower three days prior to harvest indicated a color differentiation between the two treatments; the inoculated section being a lighter, brighter green color. This may have been due to the difference in Nitrogen uptake or the inoculated area's reaction to over-nitrification.
      The subplot harvest of ten randomly-selected areas of the two plots indicated a weight difference in favor of the BioVam treatment (3lbs. 8oz/9.9 square feet) versus the non-inoculated production (3.0 lbs./9.9 square feet). When these figures are converted to a per acre production mass,
 
[10 replications X Average amount harvest/ 9.9 sqft plot = Total Plot Volume Harvested] {10 X 3.0 = 30 lbs./97.5 sqft (non- inoculated) } {10 X 3.5 = 35 lbs/97.5 sqft (BioVam) }
 
this equates to total tonnage per acre for BioVam of 7.8 tons/acre (14.2% increase) versus the non-inoculated area at 6.7 tons/acre: