Roosevelt County Spring Wheat and Peas

Brant U. Roosevelt County, MT

Spring Wheat and Peas AgriGro Trial

Soil Prebiotic Application 2024-2025 Growing Seasons

Year 1

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Plants collected from soil treated with AgriGro are displayed on the left, while those from the untreated control side are shown on the right of each picture. The spring wheat plants grown in AgriGro-treated soil demonstrated higher plant counts and tiller production, demonstrated an evenness in height of heads, and produced more spikelets and kernels per head compared to the control plants.

GRAIN PRODUCTION

The spring wheat heads collected from plants treated with AgriGro in the South Quarter field averaged 6 additional kernels per head compared to those from the control plants. The heads collected from the Northwest Quarter field treated with AgriGro averaged 1 more kernel per head. The 1,000-kernel weight of the spring wheat was comparable with less than a 2-gram difference.

Spring Wheat:

LATE SEASON TISSUE SAMPLE ANALYSIS

The tissue sample results exhibited the AgriGro-treated soils tracking higher in 2-3 macronutrients and 1-2 micronutrients. The Agrigro-treated soils also shows more balanced levels of sulfur and boron.

SOIL MICROBIAL ACTIVITY

The Microbiometer test results reveal that the AgriGro-treated soil shows increased soil microbial activity and improved fungal-to-bacterial ratios compared to the control.

COLLECTED DATA

The in-field data shows that plants grown in AgriGro-treated soil had increased vegetative cover, improved microbiometer readings, more kernels per head, greater 1,000-kernel weight, and an increase in root exudates causing soil to adhere to the soil better.

After collecting and analyzing in-field data, including tissue, soil, and microbiometer tests, it is evident that plants treated with AgriGro prebiotics display greater above ground biomass, healthier characteristics, and increased soil microbial activity compared to the control.

Year 2

PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

Plants collected from soil treated with AgriGro are displayed on the right, while those from the untreated control side are shown on the left of each picture. The spring wheat plants grown in AgriGro-treated soil demonstrated higher plant counts, increased tiller production, and produced more kernels per head when compared to the control plants. The pea plants treated with AgriGro demonstrated more pods per plant and were slightly taller.

GRAIN PRODUCTION

Spring wheat heads collected from AgriGro-treated plants in the Northeast Quarter field showed a slight increase in kernels per head compared to control plants. Similarly, the AgriGro-treated pea plants exhibited a higher number of seeds per pod than the control pods.

PLANT & TISSUE SAMPLE ANALYSIS

The tissue sample results indicated that the AgriGro-treated plants had balanced levels of two macronutrients and two micronutrients compared to the control sample. The most notable difference in the soil sample was an increase in organic matter in the AgriGro-treated soil compared to the control soil.

SOIL MICROBIAL ACTIVITY

The Microbiometer test results reveal that the AgriGro-treated soil showed a 353 ug/g increase in soil microbial activity and improved fungal-to-bacterial ratios when compared to the control soil results.

COLLECTED OBSERVATIONS

The in-field observations show that plants grown in the AgriGro-treated soil had increased vegetative cover, improved microbiometer readings, more kernels per head, and seeds per pod.

Yield

The spring wheat trial field was the only location where the grower was able to complete harvest and collect reliable yield data. Yield measurements were taken from the designated comparison strips and converted to bushels per acre using the standard 60-lb test weight for spring wheat. The control treatment produced 584 lb/ac (9.7 bu/ac), while the AgriGro treatment produced 561 lb/ac (9.4 bu/ac), a difference of 23 lb/ac (0.3 bu/ac) in favor of the control.

Season-long weather challenges had a substantial impact on crop development and harvest operations. Persistent and poor weather created unfavorable growing conditions, limiting both yield potential and field accessibility. Due to these constraints, the grower was unable to obtain harvestable yield data from the additional trial fields. These environmental limitations should be carefully considered when interpreting the results, as the weather likely suppressed yields across all treatments.

OVERVIEW

Although the spring wheat yield favored the control by a small margin, the overall agronomic observations throughout the season consistently showed stronger plant performance on the AgriGro side. This included increased vegetative cover, greater microbial biomass, and improved stand characteristics. However, the growing season was highly unfavorable, with poorly timed rainfall events that significantly limited yield potential and hindered harvest. Given these conditions, this year's yield results should be interpreted with caution. The visual assessments and in-field observations suggest that prior to the onset of adverse weather, the yield potential was higher on the AgriGro side. These trials will be repeated during the 2026 growing season.

Third party observations and data collection done by Landry May of Big Sky Roots Agronomy.