Paper · 2000 · American Journal of Alternative Agriculture

Biodynamic preparations: Short-term effects on crops, soils, and weed populations

Lynne Carpenter-Boggs; John P. Reganold; Ann C. Kennedy

9
claims
19
verbatim quotes
45
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Biodynamic agriculture is an organic farming system that utilizes fermented herbal and mineral preparations as compost additives and field sprays. This study was conducted to determine whether biodynamic preparations affect lentil and wheat growth and yield, soil fertility, or weed populations in the short run. Each of four nutrient treatments, biodynamically prepared compost, non-biodynamic compost, mineral NPK fertilizer, and no fertilizer, were tested with and without biodynamic field sprays. Crop yield, crop quality, and soil fertility were similar in plots treated with mineral NPK fertilizers, biodynamic compost, or non-biodynamic compost. Use of compost raised soil pH from 6.0 without compost to 6.5 with compost. Compost application reduced the broadleaf weed population by 29% and reduced the grass weed population by 78%. Biodynamic sprays altered soil and grain N chemistry, but the effects are of unknown biological significance. Use of the biodynamic field sprays correlated with higher yield of lentil per unit plant biomass, lower grain C and crude protein contents, greater content in soft white spring wheat, and greater content in soil. In general, soils and crops treated with biodynamic preparations showed few differences from those not treated. Application of composts with or without the preparations produced similar crop yields with lower weed pressure, compared with equal nutrients supplied by mineral fertilizer, but any additional short-term benefits from biodynamic preparations remain questionable.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Crop yield and quality were similar across mineral fertilizer and both composts.

Treatment
biodynamic composte0
Outcome
Crop yield, crop qualitye0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
mineral NPK fertilizerse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Crop yield, crop quality, and soil fertility were similar in plots treated with mineral NPK fertilizers, biodynamic compost, or non-biodynamic compost”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 510–660 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Compost raised soil pH from 6.0 to 6.5.

Treatment
composte0
Outcome
soil pHe0
Direction
raisede0
Value
6.5e0
Comparator
without composte0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Use of compost raised soil pH from 6.0 without compost to 6.5 with compost”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 662–736 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Compost reduced broadleaf weeds by 29%.

Treatment
Compost applicatione0
Interactor
broadleaf weede0weed
Outcome
broadleaf weed populatione0
Direction
reducede0
Value
29%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compost application reduced the broadleaf weed population by 29%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 738–802 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Compost reduced grass weeds by 78%.

Treatment
Composte2
Interactor
grass weede0weed
Outcome
grass weed populatione0
Direction
reducede0
Value
78%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“reduced the grass weed population by 78%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 807–847 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“Compost”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 738–745 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biodynamic sprays altered soil and grain nitrogen chemistry.

Treatment
Biodynamic sprayse0
Outcome
soil and grain N chemistrye0
Qualifier
unknown biological significancee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Biodynamic sprays altered soil and grain N chemistry, but the effects are of unknown biological significance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 849–957 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biodynamic sprays correlated with higher lentil yield per unit biomass.

Taxon
lentilLens culinarise0
Treatment
biodynamic field sprayse0
Outcome
yield of lentil per unit plant biomasse0
Direction
highere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Use of the biodynamic field sprays correlated with higher yield of lentil per unit plant biomass”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 959–1055 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biodynamic sprays correlated with lower grain carbon and crude protein contents.

Treatment
biodynamic field sprayse0
Outcome
grain C and crude protein contentse0
Direction
lowere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Use of the biodynamic field sprays correlated with higher yield of lentil per unit plant biomass, lower grain C and crude protein contents”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 959–1097 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biodynamic sprays correlated with greater content in soft white spring wheat; the measured constituent is unspecified.

Taxon
soft white spring wheate0
Treatment
biodynamic field sprayse2
Outcome
greater contente0
Direction
greatere0

Verbatim

e0

“greater content in soft white spring wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1099–1141 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“Use of the biodynamic field sprays correlated with higher yield of lentil per unit plant biomass”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 959–1055 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Composts yielded similarly to mineral fertilizer with lower weed pressure.

Treatment
composts with or without the preparationse0
Outcome
crop yieldse0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
equal nutrients supplied by mineral fertilizere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Application of composts with or without the preparations produced similar crop yields with lower weed pressure, compared with equal nutrients supplied by mineral fertilizer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1284–1456 · show in text ↑
e1

“lentil and wheat growth and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 233–266 · show in text ↑

fertilization · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

85 papers: 49 positive, 36 negative or no effect

48 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

81 papers more in this group

See all 85 papers →

fertilization · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results differ

99 papers: 86 positive, 13 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

95 papers more in this group

See all 99 papers →

fertilization · quality: general · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

173 papers: 146 positive, 27 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 146 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

169 papers more in this group

See all 173 papers →

fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

322 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3,115 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 papers →

fertilization · weed · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.