From the report’s conclusion: “Summa Grow (SumaGrow) at 1.0 gallons per acre did positively improve soybean performance (growth and yield) in low P2O5 and K2O soils despite having the recommended fertilizer rate reduced by 30%. This indicates that properly used, bio-stimulants can improve plant health and thereby improve yield. Even where no fertilizer was used, Summa Grow (SumaGrow) increased yield and performance of soybeans…”
This study is somewhat unique for a university study in that the study compared a product to both a Control and to a Grower Standard. We have long maintained that the typical study (touted by many of our competitors) compares a product to a Control of nothing but soil. This is NOT the real world.
Farmers want to know how a product will improve _their_ results in the real world. This means comparing what they are presently doing, referred to as Grower Standard, to whatever is recommended using a new product, in this case SumaGrow. While we believe the yield increase would have been higher than 13% if fertilizer had been reduced more than the 30% reduction used in this study, the 13% yield increase is a real world number which a farmer would have achieved since it compared what they are doing now to using SumaGrow with a reduction in fertilizer, which is recommended. SumaGrow with zero fertilizer even out-yielded the Grower Standard.
For the record, when comparing the SumaGrow results to the Control, again, used by most of our competitors, the yield increase was 20% according to this study.
The full study can be accessed by clicking on this link: Mississippi State University– Soybeans