
|
A Natural Concentrate of Beneficial Soil Microorganisms |
|
|
Test for Sugar Content of Sugar
Cane Utilizing MicroSoil
Conducted in Yucatan, Mexico |
 |
|
| This test was primarily
conducted to determine whether or not MicroSoil would effect the sugar content of sugar
cane. The Brix Scale and Test were used to measure the results. The soils where this test
was conducted were in very poor condition, as nothing had ever been applied on them due to
a lack of funds. |
 |
General Observations:
|
This test was very
significant as it proves that:
- MicroSoil by itself should not be used in poor soils with low
nitrogen content
- MicroSoil works extremely well with reduced amounts of chemical
fertilizers
- MicroSoil was the determining factor in elevating the sugar content.
|
In
reference to #1 above, please note that in all our protocols we state categorically that
MicroSoil needs at least 2% organic matter (i.e. 80 lbs. of nitrogen per acre or 100 kg of
nitrogen per hectare) in order for MicroSoil to be effective. One half of the recommended
amount of nitrogen is needed for the microorganisms to proliferate and the other half is
needed by the plants in order to grow. If a soil has only one half of the recommended 2%
organic matter, then the soil microorganisms will use it up before the plants have a
chance to benefit from it and, therefore, the plants will suffer. This is precisely what
happened when only MicroSoil was used in these extremely poor soils. On the other hand,
when chemical fertilizers were used exclusively, the plants also suffered due to the lack
of balance between the macronutrients and micronutrients. However, when both a reduced
amount of chemical fertilizer was used along with MicroSoil, the soil was provided with
the necessary nutrients and in adequate amounts causing the plants to flourish.
MicroSoil is the catalyst which enhances and
balances the macronutrients and micronutrients which is the key to growing larger and
healthier crops, however, MicroSoil works within certain parameters which include a pH
between 5.5-7.5, a nitrogen content equivalent to 2% organic matter and adequate
macronutrients and micronutrients. A recommended protocol based on the results of a simple
soil analysis can greatly increase the chances of having a great harvest. |
 |
Test Results:
|
|
As expected where only MicroSoil was applied in soil
with very low nitrogen content, the sugar cane had to be harvested early due to weak
growth.
Where the Control crop was fertilized with chemicals
17-17-17, although the sugar cane was slightly taller, the stalks were thinner. (See GROSS COMPARISON diagram below)
The MicroSoil crop with reduced chemical fertilizer
17-17-17, was much greener and the stalks were much thicker in size. One liter of
MicroSoil was applied, along with 350 kg of 17-17-17 and 150 kg of urea. In the following
photograph you will notice that the distance between nodules was greater in the control
group than in those where the MicroSoil was used, but the growth is very uneven as
evidenced in the last 3 nodules in which the control reaches up to 16.6 cm but then drops
drastically to 6.7 cm. Those on which MicroSoil was used, maintained a balanced growth of
more or less 12 cm.
As shown in the tables
below, the sugar content of the MicroSoil crop yielded a 2.48
degree* increase in sugar, which calculates to an astonishing 10.69% higher sugar content.
Note the difference in the root structures as seen in
the photograph. The roots of the MicroSoil plant are much larger and more fully
developed.
|
|

MicroSoil treated Sugar Cane
is larger with better color and
sugar content than normal plants |
 |
Since the purpose of
the test was specifically to test the sugar content, the size (weight) of the crop yield,
estimated to be 30% higher, was not accurately measured. Please refer to the tables below for detailed
results.
*The Brix Scale: 1 degree on the Brix scale is the
equivalent of 18 grams of sugar per liter.
|
|
 |
| The thickness between nodules is shown in the
picture above. In the diagram on the right, a comparison of the largest nodule
cross-sections is presented graphically. A complete detailed
comparison of the nodule sizes and the sugar content between the Control plants and the
MicroSoil treated plants is presented in tabular form below. |

MicroSoil results in consistently
larger nodule cross-sections than normal |
|
|
 |
SUGAR CANE STUDY TABLE
 |
FIRST STAGE: November
14, 1997 - 3 MONTHS AFTER APPLICATION OF MICROSOIL
 |
| DISTANCE BETWEEN NODULES (cm) |
Nodules |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
TOTAL |
MicroSoil |
2.07 |
4.43 |
8.76 |
11.67 |
13.1 |
12 |
12.3 |
12.17 |
76.5 |
Control |
2.55 |
4.4 |
8.65 |
13.05 |
15.35 |
16.6 |
12 |
6.7 |
79.3 |
 |
Difference |
-0.48 |
0.03 |
0.11 |
-1.38 |
-2.25 |
-4.6 |
0.3 |
5.47 |
-2.8 |

THICKNESS BETWEEN NODULES (cm) |
Nodules |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
TOTAL |
MicroSoil |
3.16 |
3.03 |
2.86 |
2.73 |
2.56 |
2.53 |
2.53 |
2.6 |
22 |
Control |
2.6 |
2.8 |
2.65 |
2.65 |
2.5 |
2.45 |
2.2 |
2.3 |
20.15 |
 |
Difference |
0.56 |
0.23 |
0.21 |
0.08 |
0.06 |
0.08 |
0.33 |
0.3 |
1.85 |

SECOND STAGE: June 22, 1998 -
(5 Samples) AT HARVEST
 |
DEGREES (*BRIX SCALE) |
MicroSoil |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
TOTAL |
AVG |
|
BASE |
26.8 |
25.2 |
27 |
27 |
26 |
132 |
26.4 |
MEDIUM |
26.8 |
23.8 |
26 |
26 |
25 |
127.6 |
25.52 |
HIGH |
27 |
22.5 |
26 |
25 |
25 |
125.5 |
25.1 |
 |
77.02 |
TOTAL AVERAGE IN DEGREES (*BRIX SCALE) |
25.67 |

DEGREES (*BRIX SCALE) |
CONTROL |
1 |
2 |
3 |
TOTAL |
AVG |
|
BASE |
21 |
25.2 |
25 |
71.2 |
23.73 |
MEDIUM |
21 |
23 |
25 |
69 |
23 |
HIGH |
21.5 |
23 |
24 |
68.5 |
22.83 |
 |
69.56 |
TOTAL AVERAGE IN DEGREES (*BRIX SCALE) |
23.19 |
|
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
TREATMENTS |
(The equivalent of 10.69%
increase in sugar) |
2.48 |
*Brix is a scale for measuring the density or concentration of
sugar in solution. |
|
|
 |