Maize Starch Increase 2012

Field test results, 2012
Better Quality and 35% Starch

Increase In Conventional
Maize Farming
“New science”
We understand what we were taught.
Real innovation lies in trying to understand what we see,
and to accept, what we don’t understand.
Kees de Vries
March 2, 2013
Page 1
®
Maize project Agrosensi NL
Abstract
The aim of this project is to test if a large increase in starch production in conventional
maize farming is possible. Tests are done on 14 hybrid maize species of KWS, grown
on sandy soil in the Netherlands. KWS is a main supplier of maize seeds. The control
field size is 100%. Agrosensi 904 and Agrosensi 1905 are to be tested. These prod-
ucts do not contain any chemicals and can be used without soil exhaustion to generate an in-
crease of 35% in starch production, together with an increase of mineral content from 3% to 33%
Quality and quantity increase at the same time.
There is a strong difference in results between individual species. This reports shows a compari-
son between treated and untreated plants in a field trial. The conventional treatment with herbi-
cides and fertilizer is the same. The only difference is 3 applications of Agrosensi products, spe-
cially designed for growth enhancement and biosphere optimisation. Since 2008 the same prod-
ucts have shown to be effective in other agricultural trials in crops like potatoes, sugar beets, on-
ions, flowers, lettuce, cucumbers, etc. Yield increases from 6% to 35%
have been observed.
Results (Metric) in maize:
Product: Extra: Species Percentage
Silage + 10.000 Kg / Hectare (Torres) + 15.3 %
Dry matter + 3.300 Kg / Hectare (Millesim) + 14 %
Starch + 2.170 Kg / Hectare (Grosso) + 35 %
Grains per plant + 120 grains (Kajuns / Amball) + 33 %
Results (US) in maize:

120 grains extra per cob
Product: Extra: Species percentage
x 86.000 plants per ha.
Silage + 8960 pounds / acre (Torres) +15.3 % = over 10 million grains per ha.
Dry matter + 2968 pounds / acre (Millesim) + 14 %
Starch + 1960 pounds / acre (Grosso) + 35 %
Grains per plant + 120 grains (Kajuns / Amball) + 33 %
over 4 pallets extra starch per hectare One 10-ton trailer extra fresh silage per hectare
Large test site of 8 rows wide, 84 meters deep, 14 different species © Photographs: Agrosensi
Page 2
®
Introduction
According to the UN the world population will rise to 9 billion people in 2050. 2 billion more
mouths to feed. Together with a declining area of arable land, due to urbanisation and increas-
ing soil salinity, often caused by fertilizer use or sea level rises, production per acre needs to
increase with roughly 50% to sustain today’s way of living. There are just a few options under
scrutiny, to try to feed the world and increase production per acre to reach this goal:
1. NPK (Nitrogen, Phosphor, Potassium) fertilisation combined with better hybrid species
and improved chemical disease control
2. GMO’s with proprietary chemical control (GMO= genetically modified organism)
3. Controlled environment, growth of food in multi story city gardens
4. Returning to the “old” way of organic farming
5. Change the way we live
6. Something else, not yet known, the focus of this research project
1. Exhaustion of artificial fertilizer

The pressure on the sources of fertilizers is huge. Some reports show an expected depletion in 15 to
20 years. This means that artificial fertilizers are not an option to feed the world in 2050 and beyond.
Before depletion the price will rise dramatically.
2. Conditioned growth
Growing food in multiple storage buildings close to, or in cities are an option for wealthy nations.
Building of these controlled environments requires enormous investments. Food prices will rise dra-
matically.
3. Genetically modified organism’s, GMO’s

The GMO’s and their proprietary chemicals don’t show much of a promise. The results of GMO show
a 5% to 10% decrease in yield, combined with an over the years increasing amount of chemicals
needed, to start and support germination and growth. Reports from India, the US and France also
show severe health risks. The interaction with the surrounding environment has not been thoroughly
studied and holds enormous risks and is a possible threat to human existence.
(Source: Genetic Roulette, Smith Jeffrey M., ISBN 978-0-9729665-2-8, 2007)
“. . . Reports on GMO are showing frightening side effects in cattle, like crippled immune systems, pre
cancerous cell growth, liver damage, abnormal development of certain body organs, sterility, and pre-
mature death. . . . “(Source: How to grow top quality corn, Dr. Harold Willis, 2009, page 12, ISBN 978-1-60173-014-5)
4. Organic farming
Organic farming is seen by some as the solution. Some others have different opinions. Main reason
to deny organic farming in discussions is that yields are down 25% compared to modern day farming
(chemically supported). This research shows a yield increase of 35% to 45%, so organic farming is a
possible option to solve the food crisis of the coming years. Organic food contains more vitamins and
minerals and people eat less of it to get fed properly. The amounts of chemical residue is substan-
tially less, often zero. Even the most critical reports on organic farming show this truth. (Stanford univer-
sity, Dr. Olkin et al, “Are Organic Foods Safer or Healthier Than Conventional Alternatives?”, September 4, 2012)
5. Change the way we live

Change the way we eat, consume less meat, decreases the strain on the land. In the US about 70%
of all arable land is used to grow cattle feed and energy crops (Source: USDA). Hamburgers and cars
seem very important. 20% less could make a real difference.
6. New approach
A whole new approach is needed to feed the people and take care of the environment. The scientific
model we use is the evidence based model. We tested the new products in a controlled environment,
without bias. We just looked at what happened in the field. The materials, Agrosensi 904 en 1905, are
completely new products. The production process is fundamentally different from what we know. Dis-
cussing the principles is not the scope of this research. The only thing we do, is report what we saw,
tested and weighed in relation to the effects of Agrosensi on maize. Result is the only thing that
counts, theory will come later, if needed. This is not the place, nor the time to discuss scientific the-
ory.
The only things that matter are results, results and results.
The basic philosophy is pragmatic: “Theory is not edible, maize is”

Page 3
®
Method
The overall methods used to grow maize are the same as always on this farm and in the Neth-
erlands and Belgium.
Test field
Location: De Ruurhoeve, Hoogeloon, Noord-Brabant NL,
representative for the south of Holland and the north of Belgium
Soil Sandy
Pattern 8 rows per species
Distance between rows 75 cm.
Field length 84 meters
Number of seeds per hectare: 92.000
Total area 14 fields of 84 meters deep. Compared to the normal test field size of
4 rows of 6 meters deep, this size can be compared to a full field test.
Harvesting Harvesting of 6 rows out of 8. One row on the left and one row on the
right were left standing to avoid possible pollution by crossover
pollination
.
Means
Agrosensi 904 and 1905 are products designed to increase quality and quantity of crops. They are effective
on, leaves and roots. The whole biosphere is supported. Agrosensi 1905 is a special design for growing
maize. Agrosensi 904 is sprayed directly after or during seeding to stimulate germination. Agrosensi 1905 is
sprayed the second and third time, a few weeks after sowing. Spraying of both products can be done in com-
bination with fertilizers and herbicides, so no extra work needs to be done.
Soil treatment
The treatment of the field is decided upon by the farmer. The way he works is the same as every year.
Ploughing, fertilizing, spraying herbicides etc.
Growing season
The growing season of 2012 was whet and cold.
Sowing : May 1
Harvest : September 26
Growing time : 149 days
Results Agrosensi® from 2008:

Previous results of using Agrosensi 904 are:
Yield increase of 6 to 35%
Lager sizes of fruits
Less under sized fruits and potatoes
Shorter time between sowing and harvest
Better quality
Higher sugar content
Higher mineral content
In the lesser case, there were no changes
Better taste, like garden cress with the taste of the past
Lettuce and radish postpone growing seeds with a difference of 3 to 6 weeks, so delayed harvest is pos-
sible
Dying trees may be restored to life after application of a few buckets of water mixed with Agrosensi 904
Improved germination, e.g. up to 38% more seed germination in an onion project in 2009
Page 4
®
Test field set-up
Field:
Road
Start
Farm
Legenda:
Blue = Treated with Agrosensi 904 & Agrosensi 1905
Brown = Path
White = Untreated
Orange = Heavy weeds, up to 1 meter high
The paths, 4,5 meters wide, are harvested first and not used in the results. This area is possibly sprayed /
contaminated with the Agrosensi products. The individual fields are harvested one at a time. The exact field
size is measured, to calculate the total amount per hectare. Every field is weighed with special mobile weigh-
ing equipment behind the tractor. 4 samples are taken per species to be evaluated by the lab. There are two
fields with treated maize and two fields with untreated maize, separated by 21 meters of maize field. This
set-up removes uncertainties of soil, fertilization, weeds etc. The setup of all the 56 test fields is optimized.
During harvest samples of every field are taken in 10 steps to fill one bag, this sampling is done in the trailer,
see photo.
Harvesting 6 rows out of 8. One row on the left Airtight bags to transport the test materials to the lab.
and on the right were left standing to avoid Lab testing started within 24 hours of harvest.
results of crosspollination.
Page 5
®
Fertilising
Fertilisation is done with a combination of manure and artificial fertilizers, see below. The
amounts have been tested by BLGG laboratories, see page 14.
Fertilisation is done before and during seeding.
Amounts:
1. 10.000 Kg. manure, wet
2. 37.260 Kg. cow manure (see below)
3. Row fertilisation during seeding, 146 kg / ha.
(22,5N + 8P + 0K + 0,1B + 1,5S)
4. Row fertilisation during seeding, 40 kg / ha
(7,6N + 11P + 10K + 0,8Zn)
5. Herbicides and Agrosensi 904 & 1905
May 25 25 days after seeding (should have been done on day one)
May 31 61 days after seeding
June 28 89 days after seeding
Analysis cow manure:

Weight : 37.260 Kg
Nitrogen (N) : 258 Kg
Phosphate : 23 Kg
Nitrogen / ton : 6,93 Kg
Phosphate P2O5 Kg / ton : 0,63
Potassium (K) Kg / ton K2O : 9,5
Total area of 17 hectare.

Analysis by Laboratorium Zeeuws-Vlaanderen
Approval of Agrosensi 904 and 1905 in the European Union:

The use of Agrosensi products in the EU is approved, due to acceptance in official order (EEG) nr. 2092/91
and taken over by article 21, section 2 of official order (EG) nr. 834/2007. This also means that the use of
Agrosensi products in organic farming is approved. The basic material of Agrosensi is mentioned in the list of
admitted basic materials of these official orders. The basic materials also satisfy directive 98/83/EG of the
council of November 3, 1998.
Page 6
®
Tallying of plants:
The number of plants is counted on 13,3 meters in a single row. Multiply this by 1000 and you
know the total number of plants per hectare, at a row spacing of 75 cm. As an extra, we only
counted the plants that had a kernel, large enough to mature. Counting took place in the 2 mid-
dle rows.
Distance between rows : 75 cm (29,5 Inch)

Seeds per hectare : 92.000
Counting : Per block van 21 meters 3 samples have been taken, a total of 6 sam-
ples of treated and 6 samples of untreated plants per species. The aver-
age per species is found in table 1. Not all species have been counted.
Germination per specie:

Specie: Seeds/ha.: Treated % germinated untreated % germinated:
Grosso 92.000 83.250 90,5% 80.250 87,2%
Torres 92.000 78.250 85,0% 78.500 85,3%
Millesim 92.000 82.000 89,1% 85.200 92,6%
Ronaldinio 92.000 86.166 93,7% 85.833 93,3%
Amball 92.000 83.500 90,8% 80.833 87,9%
Kajuns 92.000 84.333 91,7% 87.333 94,9%
Average on all the species: 90,13% 90,20%
Tabel 1
Remark 1:
At Kajuns the pressure of weeds was very high. Sees page 4, the orange parts of the field. Note the high germination
of seeds in the high pressure weeds sections.
Remark 2:
Low germination is caused by low temperatures and the late spraying of Agrosensi 904. (24 days too late)
The field showed a lot of plants germinated, but too small to come to maturity, see picture below. If this germinated
plants had come to maturity, an increase of 5000 to 9000 maize plants per hectare would have been possible, that
means a yield increase of about 10%.
Germination was too late for this plant, it grew

up in the shade of its neighbours
Page 7
®
Intermediate plant sap results:

Samples taken on 2 species on July 6, 2012 (Ambrosini en Millesim) and on August 23. The
plants suffer from a cold and wet season. Temperatures are as low as 12 to 13 degrees Celsius
during daytime.
This type of analysis shows contents of minerals in young leaves. Samples have been taken
from equal looking leaves. Samples of 2 plants are combined as one.
Comparison treated vs. untreated:

A large portion of the minerals are mobile (Nitrogen, Potassium, Magnesium, Phosphate), and flow from the
leaves to the rest of the plant. Other elements are immobile and largely stay in the leaves (Calcium and Bor-
ium). Another part is partly mobile and will move on when the time has come. (Sulpher, Iron, Manganese,
Zinc, Copper and Molybdenum)
2012, July 6 2012, August 23
Value: Ambrosini Millesim Ambrosini Millesim

Sugar + 33,3% + 50% + 31,8% + 109,1%
Ph value - 3,3% - 1,7% + 0,0% + 0,0%
Calcium + 30,8% + 29% - 22,2% - 2,3%
Magnesium + 13% + 50% - 12,5% + 7,3%
Sodium + 16,7% + 71% - 25,0% + 8,7%
Chlorine - 19,3% - 12,8% - 2,4% - 39,3%
Sulpher + 3,6% + 19,1% - 0,6% - 2,8%
Phosphor + 39,6% + 5,8% + 6,7% - 21,8%
Silica + 6,7% + 8,2% - 14,7% - 27,1%
Manganese + 38,3% + 39,7% + 14,1% - 34,0%
Zinc - 8,9% + 26,9% - 30,1% - 11,7%
Borium + 41,3% - 11,2% + 38,1% + 14,7%
Copper + 17,9% + 19,9% + 29,0% + 23,3%
Aluminium + 2,8% + 6,4% + 6,7% + 44,3%
Molybdenum -10,0% + 11,1% - 9,3% - 5,1%
Iron - 7,6% + 17,0% + 10,7% - 9,0%
Tabel 2
Values are from treated and untreated young leaves on July 6 and August 23, 2012. See appendix A for values of grains on August 23.
(Lab: NovaCropControl, Udenhout, NL) Note the large differences in Borium levels.
Stages of a maize plant:

1. Germination and seed establishment
2. Vegetative growth
3. Flower (tassel and ear) formation
4. Flowering (pollen shedding and silking)
5. Kernel development and maturation
6. Maturity and drying
These stages are all the same in all the different species. The time it takes to mature differs per specie. The
total time is presented in FAO. FAO runs from 160 up to 900. The species that grow and mature during short
summers, have low numbers. Tropical species, suitable for long summers, have high numbers.
Page 8
®
Weight and number of kernels per cob
Tests of August 23. Maturity of kernels is “young” and has a dry matter of 45% (see table 4).
Weight:
Differences between treated and untreated plants are minus 5% to plus 25% (see table 3)
Kernels per cob:

The number of kernels per cob differ between species. Differences run from minus 78 (Lapromessa) per
cob to plus 120 kernels (Amball and Kajuns). A number of cobs per specie are taken, the average of these cobs are in
table 3.
MV=Medium early V= Early ZV=Very early Green = treated, Purple = untreated
Average Cob Kernel pat- Kernels Kernel dif-

Specie weight % difference tern per cob ference %
Grosso MV 330 +11,9 41 X 14 574 +70 +12,2
295 36 X 14 504
Torres MV 355 +22,84 36 X 16 576 +100 +17,4

289 34 X 14 476
*) Millesim MV 301 +20,40 32 x 15 480 +74 +15,4

250 29 x 14 406
Ronaldinio MV 261 +12,99 31 x 16 496 +48 +9,7

231 28 x 16 448
Amball V 269 +1,51 32 X 16 512 +120 +23,4

265 28 X 14 392
Ricardinio V 309 +17,05 37 X 16 592 +74 +12,5

264 37 x 14 518
Porfavor V 260 +10,64 31 x 16 496 +52 +0,5

235 37 x 12 444
Ambrosini V 277 -3,48 46 X 14 644 +20 +3,1

287 39 X 16 624
*) Kajuns V 288 +25,22 32 x 15 480 +120 +5,0

230 30 X 12 360
Lacta V 213 0,00 38 X 12 456 +24 +5,3

213 36 X 12 432
Lapromessa ZV 274 -3,52 39 x 12 468 -78 -16,7

284 39 x 14 546
*) Coryphee ZV 262 +25,96 36 X 13 468 +104 +22,2

208 26 X 14 364
*) Lapriora ZV 250 -5,30 35 X 15 525 -69 -13,1

264 33 X 18 594
Table 3.
*) Odd counts of kernel patterns per cob are due to growth problems ie. plant stress, cold or dry weather, Borium shortage. Nor-
mal patterns show even numbers.
Page 9
®
Ripening
Phase Milk Milk Dry
Line Line Matter %
Table 4, Source: KWS Benelux
Harvest time © Foto’s: Agrosensi

Untreated Treated
Ton/Ha
Ton/ha un- Dry matter Ton dry Agrosensi Dry matter Ton dry Increase in % dry matter
Nr Specie treated % matter 904 / 1905 % matter ton/ha difference
®
longer time to harvest (FAO 270).

Harvest weighing:
*) 1 Atletico 53,8 34,8% 18,7 57,8 34,2% 19,8 1,0 5,3
2 Grosso 62,7 32,0% 20,1 71,4 30,8% 22,0 1,9 8,8
3 Torres 62,9 31,8% 20,0 72,5 31,2% 22,6 2,6 11,6
4 Millesim 62,1 32,6% 20,2 70,2 33,5% 23,5 3,3 13,9
Table 5, Values of dry matter from Altic Laboratory, Dronten NL

5 Ronaldinio 62,8 33,2% 20,8 66,7 35,0% 23,3 2,5 10,7
Page 10
6 Amball 52,6 37,3% 19,6 57,3 34,7% 19,9 0,3 1,3

testing on dry matter and starch. Fields are recalculated to hectares.
7 Ricardinio 59,8 34,0% 20,3 65,8 34,4% 22,6 2,3 10,2
8 Porfavor 59,4 35,3% 21,0 65,7 34,6% 22,7 1,8 7,8
9 Ambrosini 51,2 38,7% 19,8 53,1 35,2% 18,7 -1,1 -6,0
10 Kajuns 48,0 37,6% 18,0 52,0 37,7% 19,6 1,6 7,9
11 Lacta 48,9 35,4% 17,3 53,8 33,2% 17,9 0,6 3,1
12 Lapromessa 43,2 40,6% 17,5 47,1 39,0% 18,4 0,8 4,5

Plants were harvested on September 26, 2012. All 56 fields have been weighed separately. From every
field 10 samples have been taken. The 2 untreated and 2 treated fields were combined into 1 sample for
13 Coryphee 46,2 38,8% 17,9 46,3 39,4% 18,2 0,3 1,7
14 Lapriora 38,8 40,3% 15,6 38,5 39,5% 15,2 -0,4 -2,8
*) The results of Atletico are very poor. Circumstances of hard pan, shade of trees on test site and Atletico is a specie that needs much
Untreated Treated
Nr Species VEM VEVI Starch VC-OS VEM VEVI Starch VC-OS
VEM: Calculated Food value for dayry

1 Atletico 983 1029 369 77,0 983 1031 377 77,0 cows
Forage values
VEVI: Calculated Food value for meat

2 Grosso 943 979 308 74,0 983 1030 380 77,0 cattle
®
VC-OS: Digestion coefficient of organic

3 Torres 1010 1066 365 78,0 1004 1058 371 78,0 matter
4 Millesim 985 1032 361 77,0 998 1049 380 78,0
5 Ronaldinio 985 1032 342 77,0 1007 1061 364 78,0
6 Amball 1000 1052 394 78,0 1011 1067 419 78,0
Table 6, Values tested and calculated by Altic Laboratory, Dronten NL

7 Ricardinio 1004 1058 364 78,0 1009 1064 382 78,0
Page 11
8 Porfavor 1010 1064 375 78,0 1003 1056 375 78,0
9 Ambrosini 1006 1059 381 78,0 1013 1069 373 78,0
10 Kajuns 1018 1075 401 79,0 1020 1079 391 79,0
11 Lacta 991 1040 385 77,0 981 1028 349 77,0
12 Lapromessa 1038 1102 419 80,0 1015 1072 392 79,0
13 Coryphee 1003 1057 394 78,0 1037 1101 430 80,0
14 Lapriora 1039 1103 458 80,0 1017 1074 430 79,0

Page 12
®
Yields
Specie 1 to 14 Red zero line = untreated maize
15 13,9
11,6
10,7 10,2
10 8,8
7,8 7,9
5,3
4,5
5
3,1
1,3 1,7
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
-2,8
-5
-6
-10
Table 7, Dry matter yields of treated and untreated maize. (Percentage)
Fresh silage
Opbrengst verseyield
maïs
80
70
60
Ton per hectare
50
Agrosensi
40
Untreated
Onbehandeld
30
20
10
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Specie r
Ge wasnumme
Table 8, increase / decrease in tons of fresh silage per hectare treated vs untreated
No Species No Species
1 Atletico 8 Porfavor
2 Grosso 9 Ambrosini (High weed pressure)
3 Torres 10 Kajuns (High weed pressure)
4 Millesim 11 Lacta (High weed pressure)
5 Ronaldinio 12 Lapromessa (High weed pressure)
6 Amball 13 Coryphee
7 Ricardinio 14 Lapriora
Page 13
®
Dry matter and starch per hectare
Ton dry Ton dry

matter/ Ha matter/ Ha Extra % dry mat- extra Kg dry matter extra Kg. starch per Ha,
Specie FAO untreated Agrosensi ter Agrosensi per hectare Agrosensi
Grosso 245 20,1 22,0 + 9,5 + 1900 + 2170 Kg
Torres 240 20,0 22,6 + 13,0 + 2600 + 1080 Kg
Millesim 240 20,2 23,5 + 16,3 + 3300 + 1640 Kg
Ronaldinio 240 20,8 23,3 + 12,0 + 2500 + 1370 Kg
Amball 225 19,6 19,9 + 1,5 + 300 + 620 Kg

Porfavor 225 21,0 22,7 + 8,1 + 1700 + 640 Kg
Ricardinio 220 20,3 22,6 + 11,3 + 2300 + 1240 Kg
*) Ambrosini 215 19,8 18,7 - 5,6 -1100 - 570 Kg
*) Kajuns 220 18,0 19,6 + 8,9 + 1600 + 450 Kg
*) Lacta 220 17,3 17,9 + 3,5 + 600 - 410 Kg
*) Lapromessa 200 17,5 18,4 + 5,1 + 900 - 120 Kg

Coryphee 180 17,9 18,2 + 1,7 + 300 + 770 Kg
Lapriora 170 15,6 15,2 - 2,6 -400 - 610 Kg
Atletico 270 18,7 19,8 + 5,9 + 1100 + 560 Kg

Table 9 Green= Agrosensi
*) See appendix C and Appendix F for corrections on Ambrosini, Kajuns, Lacta and Lapromessa Black= untreated
Heavy weeds in this part of the field
Remarks:
Table 9 shows differences between treated and untreated maize in percentage of dry matter and a total
weight of starch per hectare. FAO suitable for this region (170 to 260/270), in combination with harvest date
is between 220 and 245. Everything over or under these numbers does not perform well.
The “demo field effect” is that results of the different species are not comparable with each other, because
not all species are harvested on the correct date. This “demo field effect” has an effect because all are
seeded and harvested on the same date. If the farmer should only use one species, the total time in the field
would be considered when planning harvest. The table 12 figures for some species could be much better
because of this effect.
Page 14
®
Soil samples
Green = Within limits or no limits set / available
Orange = Above or below limits. See column 7 (surplus or deficiency)
Results come from soil sampling of the test fields of Grosso, the specie with the largest in-
crease in starch production (+ 2,2 ton / ha). Table 10 shows the implications on soil conditions.
No exhaustion is seen. Column 6 shows regional averages.
March 3, 2012 Nov 31, 2012 Nov 31, 2012

Regional
Element Unit Before test untreated Agrosensi average Target
Total Nitrogen mg N/Kg 1300 1500 1430 - -
C/N ratio 14 15 15 16 13 - 17
N capacity Kg N/Ha 65 69 65 54 93 - 147
S total mg S/kg - 290 270 - -

C/S ratio - 80 79 - 50 - 75
S capacity Kg S/Ha - 12 12 11 20 - 30
P available mg P/Kg 0,6 1,3 1,4 6,4 1,3 - 2,6

P-storage mg P2O5/100g 48 57 63 72 30 - 46
P-buffering - 44 45 - 17 - 27
PW mg P2O5/l 33 43 47 - -
K-available mg K/Kg 92 99 89 - 70 - 110

K-count 21 21 19 18 -
K-storage mmol+/Kg 2,4 2,6 3,1 - 1,9 - 2,9
CA available Kg CA/Ha - 136 151 - 239 - 557

CA Storage Kg CA/Ha - 2720 3015 - 2275 - 3415
Mg available mg Mg/kg 121 128 156 76 49 - 82
Na available mg Na/Kg - 25 19 - 49 - 77
MN-available mcg Mn/kg - 2980 2430 2920 2000 - 3100

Cu-available mcg Cu/kg - 62 51 - 40 - 65
B-available mcg B/kg - 246 254 139 129 - 176
Zn-avaialble mcg Zn/kg - 1070 910 - -
Zn-count - 40 42 41 35 - 45
Acidity / pH 5,8 6 6,3 5,3 5,6 - 6,1
Organic matter % % 3,2 4 3,7 3 -
Clay % - 3 2 - -
Silt % - 14 19 - -
Sand % - 79 75 - -
Clay-humus (CEC) mmol+.kg 47 56 62 74 >42

CEC % - 99 97 69 >95
Living matter mg N/kg - 46 39 - 60 - 80
Table 10. Tests performed by BLGG AgroXpertus, fertilisation advice for treated and untreated areas are the same.
CONCLUSION: No exhaustion of soil is seen, even with an increase of 2,2 tons of starch. Though an increase in some fertilising com-
ponents is advisable, to optimize yield even more. The first test, before planting, shows some blanks due to a less extensive test.
Page 15
®
Conclusions:
The facts presented in this research project give some clues and raise some questions.
1. The extra 2.2 tons of starch per hectare (+ 35%) show there is no reason to worry about soil exhaus-
tion. It looks like the extra yields come from optimisation of the available elements and boosting the
biosphere. On Grosso at the same time the contents of elements is elevated by up to 33.3% (see
appendix G)
2. Species developed for this region are doing much better than others. (FAO numbers), Grosso, Tor-
res, Millesim, Ronaldinio and Ricardinio stand out in this region
3. Yields would be higher when the first spraying of Agrosensi 904 would have been on time. Due to
family circumstances this was done too late (24 days) . A main function of the Agrosensi 904 is ger-
mination support. A test on onions in 2009 showed a 38% increase in germination. Tallying shows a
possible increase of 10%, on top of the already achieved 35% . So 45% is the aim for next year.
4. The measuring of plant sap contents during the season shows the various stages of growth. Huge
differences between treated and untreated maize have been observed. Because no action has been
taken on this data (ie. extra fertilisation during growth) these data are not relevant for this type of re-
search. The price of maize cannot be extended further, so extra fertilisation is not economically vi-
able.
5. Weeds have a positive influence on germination. (See data on Ambrosini)
6. In the 2013 growing season new research projects will be started to look into the relation of herbicide
use and yields and quality of maize, since weeds seem to have an influence on germination and on
yield. (see point 6.)
7. The yield on species with the right FAO for the region, show an increase of 0,6 to 2,2 Tons of starch
per hectare. The increase is up to 35%. Milk and meat in cattle are “made” of starch.
8. A decrease of the Sodium content of the soil is observed. (page 14) Grosso and Torres desalinate soil
in this setting. Maybe there is a possible new function for growing maize on saline soils. Worldwide
one million hectares of arable land are lost every year, due to increasing soil salinity, often as a result
of artificial fertilisation. Further test will be carried out in 2013.
9. Increases of Sodium in Grosso and Torres kernels are enormous. (See appendix A on Grosso and Torres.).
An increase of 275% and 233% of Sodium in kernels is seen. Sodium increases taste, so cattle will
like this maize better. Too little Sodium in forage causes muscle degeneration and weight loss in cat-
tle. Too little Sodium is less meat, more Sodium is more meat. (up to a certain level). Although maize
is seen as a salt sensitive crop, Torres and Grosso do not show these negative characteristics and
flourish. (Source: Horst Marschner, Mineral nutrition of higher plants, second edition, 2006, Pg 410)
10. Organic farming is an option (again) to feed the world in 2050. The known decrease of 25% in yield,
seen in this method of farming is history, since a yield increase of 35% to 45% is possible. Organic
“output” changes from minus 25% to plus 9%.
Page 16
®
References
Literature
- Lawrence E. Datnoff, et al, 2009, Mineral nutrition and plant disease, The American Phytopathological
society
- Brady C. Nyle, Ray R. Weil, The nature and properties of soils, 14e editie, 2008, Pearson education Inc.
- Koch Carl, Bodemkrant, 2010, Koch bodemtechniek / Eurolab Deventer
- Fageria Nand Kumar et al, 2011, Growth and mineral nutrition of field crops, 3e edition, CRC Press
- Epstein Emanuel, Arnold J. Bloom, 2005, Mineral nutrition of plants, principles and perspectives,
Sinauer Associates Inc.
- Marschner Horst, 1986, 2e edition 2006, Mineral nutrition of higher plants, Elsevier Ltd.
- Mengel Konrad et al, 2001, Principles of plant nutrition, Kluwer academic publishers
- Harols L. Willis, 2009, 2e edition, How to grow top Quality Corn, Acres USA
- Vries de, Kees, 2012, internal prepress, Mineralen in de Landbouw, Agrosensi
- Smith Jeffrey M., 2007, Genetic Roulette, the Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered
Foods, Yes! Books
Acknowledgement:
We like to thank all the people and organisations who worked together in making this test a success.
Special thanks is to Walter Ansems, the farmer of “De Ruurhoeve”, who has an open mind and is looking for
new ways to make life better for his cattle. Also his focus on good healthy food for his customers is admira-
ble. We also want to mention the pleasant cooperation with our contact at KWS, Pieter Swinkels.
1. NovaCropControl Udenhout, plant sap analysis of young leaves and grains

2. Altic Dronten, dry matter and nutritional values of fresh silage, fat, protein, ash, VC OS, starch VEM, VEVI,
DVE, EOB, OEB-2, VOS, FOSp, FOSp2, NDF, ADF, HEMIC etc.
3. KWS, Etten-Leur, NL, dry matter analysis
4. Laboratorium Zeeuws Vlaanderen, Graauw, NL, fertilizer analysis
5. BLGG AgroXpertus, NL, soil analysis
6. De Ruurhoeve, Hoogeloon NL, Walter Ansems, farmer
7. Pieter Swinkels, KWS-Benelux maize advisor
8. Paul van den Biggelaar, area manager KWS-Benelux, South-Nederland,
Project funded by:

Agrosensi
Gompenstraat 35a
5145 RM Waalwijk
The Netherlands
(31) 416 33 47 37
Contact: info@agrosensi.com
Technical questions: k.devries@agrosensi.com
Species Plant Sui-
Sugar N from
ker% Nitrate
N uit
Part
RAS Deel % K Ca Mg Na NH4 NO3 nitraat N tot. Cl S P Si Fe Mn Zn B Cu Mo Al
Grosso Veld 2 1+3 Kolf Veld 2 1+3 Vrucht 2,3 4366 26 347 15 268 1 0 1704 265 191 1085 10,4 2,38 0,90 5,56 1,43 0,50 0,30 0,11
Veld 2 2+4 Kolf Veld 2 2+4 Vrucht 2,2 4053 17 272 4 266 7 2 1679 295 174 977 12,1 1,99 0,91 5,22 1,89 0,51 0,30 0,1
Verschil %
% Difference 4,5 7,7 52,9 27,6 275,0 0,8 -85,7 -100,0 1,5 -10,2 9,8 11,1 -14,0 19,6 -1,1 6,5 -24,3 -2,0 0,0 10,0
Torres Veld 3 1+3 Kolf Veld 3 1+3 Vrucht 1 4357 30 219 10 294 6 1 2045 229 204 1038 10,3 1,92 0,71 5,12 2,21 0,51 0,31 0,13
Verschil %
% Difference 100,0 1,1 -3,2 0,9 233,3 0,3 -45,5 -50,0 10,7 2,7 3,6 -1,5 22,6 30,6 -7,8 2,8 -5,6 8,5 3,3 18,2
Millesim Veld 4 1+3 Kolf Veld 4 1+3 Vrucht 1,6 4444 9 210 1 287 18 4 2022 243 154 1009 8,4 1,99 0,59 6,05 1,77 0,53 0,25 0,2
Veld 4 2+4 Kolf Veld 4 2+4 Vrucht 2 4164 16 223 2 260 9 2 1868 245 161 993 10,1 1,67 0,70 5,51 1,70 0,56 0,25 0,13
®
Verschil %
% Difference -20,0 6,7 -43,8 -5,8 -50,0 10,4 100,0 100,0 8,2 -0,8 -4,3 1,6 -16,8 19,2 -15,7 9,8 4,1 -5,4 0,0 53,8
Ronaldinio Veld 5 1+3 Kolf Veld 5 1+3 Vrucht 2,7 4610 20 294 3 301 4 1 2332 233 283 1174 17,1 1,81 1,02 6,13 1,60 0,84 0,38 0,11
% Difference
Verschil % 17,4 22,5 -31,0 -5,8 -62,5 7,5 0,0 0,0 27,3 10,4 23,0 11,7 11,8 -6,2 -8,1 4,1 12,7 12,0 -2,6 -8,3
Amball Veld 6 1+3 Kolf Veld 6 1+3 Vrucht 2,4 4079 24 237 3 230 4 1 1731 269 231 1143 12,8 1,63 1,14 6,03 1,94 0,94 0,41 0,09
Appendix A, Kernel analysis on elements
Verschil %
% Difference 0,0 -1,4 -29,4 -3,7 -40,0 6,5 -55,6 -50,0 23,3 -1,1 11,6 -2,6 -14,7 -4,1 -11,6 2,9 -8,5 -6,9 -8,9 -25,0
Ricardinio Veld 7 1+3 Kolf Veld 7 1+3 Vrucht 1,5 4265 27 423 1 252 0 0 1666 294 275 1067 10,6 3,05 1,14 7,36 2,61 1,04 0,33 0,11
Verschil
% %
Difference -53,1 3,1 0,0 8,5 -50,0 2,4 -100,0 -100,0 -7,6 0,0 3,0 5,6 -10,9 19,6 0,0 5,9 6,5 15,6 13,8 -8,3
Page 17
Porfavor Veld 8 1+3 Kolf Veld 8 1+3 Vrucht 3,2 4371 28 317 8 269 7 2 2008 334 259 1037 10,5 1,90 1,22 6,55 2,95 1,09 0,32 0,09
Table 11. Kernel analysis. Atletico is missing due to a sampling error in the field
Verschil
% %
Difference 39,1 5,4 33,3 9,7 166,7 3,1 -36,4 0,0 14,7 0,3 6,1 9,4 20,7 5,0 20,8 11,2 15,2 11,2 -5,9 -10,0
Ambrosini Veld 9 1+3 Kolf Veld 9 1+3 Vrucht 2,9 3760 21 274 1 243 2 0 1345 232 207 816 10,1 1,55 0,92 6,56 1,17 0,93 0,29 0,08
Verschil
% %
Difference 7,4 -3,1 -8,7 -22,2 -66,7 5,7 -80,0 -100,0 -4,1 6,4 -5,5 -11,9 -7,3 12,3 -5,2 13,7 -15,2 4,5 -3,3 -11,1
Kajuns Veld 10 1+3 Kolf Veld 10 1+3 Vrucht 2,7 4357 18 325 2 273 9 2 1968 162 229 1117 9,8 1,75 0,94 6,37 1,99 0,69 0,3 0,08
Verschil
% %
Difference 17,4 4,7 -10,0 -2,1 100,0 8,8 200,0 100,0 -3,7 -11,0 14,5 11,4 5,4 -10,3 -4,1 -6,2 8,7 -21,6 -9,1 14,3
Lacta Veld 11 1+3 Kolf Veld 11 1+3 Vrucht 1,2 3902 19 279 4 230 7 2 1644 208 231 1004 12,1 1,77 1,08 6,12 2,44 0,86 0,32 0,09
Verschil %
% Difference -42,9 2,3 -5,0 -6,1 100,0 8,5 -46,2 -33,3 8,2 -20,9 1,8 3,3 23,5 -5,9 0,0 -1,3 13,0 -20,4 -5,9 0,0
Lapromessa Veld 12 1+3 Kolf Veld 12 1+3 Vrucht 2,6 4121 12 245 1 233 10 2 2117 213 238 1042 7,4 1,51 0,92 7,09 1,99 1,06 0,41 0,08
% Difference
Verschil % 0,0 1,2 0,0 -10,9 0,0 -8,3 150,0 100,0 -2,5 -0,9 -2,1 0,6 -23,7 -22,2 2,2 3,1 6,4 -13,8 13,9 -11,1
Coryphee Veld 13 1+3 Kolf Veld 13 1+3 Vrucht 1,3 4149 19 224 3 272 12 3 1891 203 188 1081 5,8 1,6 1,32 7,88 2,45 0,75 0,4 0,12
% Difference
Verschil % 18,2 1,1 11,8 -9,7 50,0 6,7 = = 10,4 -15,4 -0,5 0,6 -12,1 9,6 10,9 5,6 9,9 -11,8 5,3 33,3
Lapriora Veld 14 1+3 Kolf Veld 14 1+3 Vrucht 1,9 4234 20 386 2 288 3 1 2085 208 268 1059 8,1 2,28 1,13 8,04 2,6 1,19 0,31 0,1
Agrosensi and untreated on august 23, 2012, aprox. 45% dry matter
Green text is Agrosensi - Black text is untreated - Red text is difference
Verschil %
% Difference 26,7 2,0 33,3 39,4 -50,0 29,1 = = -1,6 1,0 8,1 -6,6 -12,9 49,0 1,8 22,9 -15,9 10,2 -22,5 0,0
Page 18
®
Appendix B, tons of dry matter

Dry matter in tons per hectare, 100 = 20,2 tons/hectare
Whole plant dry matter, 100 = 35% Dry Matter

Table 12. Tons of dry matter per hectare, treated versus untreated. Presentation in percentages. Note the difference between orange and green
Orange = untreated
Green = Agrosensi 904 and 1905
Page 19
®
Appendix C, Tons of dry matter and tons of fresh silage per Hectare
Lapriora Agrosensi 15,2

38,5
untreated
Lapriora onbehandeld 15,6
38,8
Coryphee Agrosensi 18,2
46,3
Coryphee onbehandeld 17,9
untreated 46,2
Lapromessa Agrosensi 18,4
47,1
untreated
Lapromessa onbehandeld 17,5
43,2
Lacta Agrosensi 17,9
53,8
untreated
Lacta onbehandeld 17,3 Red lines
48,9
indicate
Kajuns Agrosensi 19,6
52 heavy
weeds.
Kajuns onbehandeld
untreated 18
48 See ap-
18,7 pendix
Ambrosini Agrosensi 53,1 F for cor-
19,8 rected
untreated
Ambrosini onbehandeld 51,2 version
Porfavor Agrosensi 22,7
65,7
untreated
Porfavor onbehandeld 21 Ton DS
Dry matter
59,4 Ton
Ricardinio Agrosensi 22,6 Ton vers
fresh product
65,8
untreated
Ricardinio onbehandeld 20,3
59,8
Amball Agrosensi 19,9
57,3
Amball untreated
onbehandeld 19,6
52,6
Ronaldinio Agrosensi 23,3
66,7
untreated
Ronaldionio onbehandeld 20,8
62,8
Millesim Agrosensi 23,5
70,2
untreated
Millesim onbehandeld 20,2
62,1
Torres Agrosensi 22,6
72,5
Torres untreated
onbehandeld 20
62,9
Grosso Agrosensi 22
71,4
Grosso onbehandeld
untreated 20,1
62,7
Atletico Agrosensi 19,8
57,8
untreated
Atletico onbehandeld 18,7
53,8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Table 13, Dry matter versus fresh silage in tons per hectare
Page 20
®
Appendix D, Tons of dry matter
15,2
Laprio ra 15,6
17,3
18,2
Co ryphee 17,9
19,1
18,4
Lapro messa 17,5
19,3 Green: Agrosensi
White: Untreated
17,9 Orange: KWS
Lacta 17,3
18,6
19,6
Kajuns 18
21,4
18,7
Ambro sini 19,8
21,4
22,7
P orfavor 21
20,1 Agrosensi
Onbehandeld
22,6 KWS brochure
Ricardinio 20,3
21,1
19,9
Amball 19,6
20,4
23,3
Ronaldinio 20,8
21,3
23,5
M illesim 20,2
20,6
22,6
Torres 20
21,5
22
Grosso 20,1
20,4
19,8
A tletico 18,7
21,6
0 5 10 15 20 25
Table 14, Ton dry matter, Agrosensi vs. untreated vs data from KWS brochure called “Maïsrassenbrochure 2012”
Page 21
®
Appendix E, Fat, protein and starch in g/kg of dry matter
450
419
394
400 377 380 380 382
369 365 371
361 364 364
342
350
308
300
250
200
150
100
73 69 67 71 69 71 71 74 70 70
63 58 61 65
50 33 32 31 34 34 34 34 34 29 32 33 35 33 32
0
Onbeh. Agrosensi Onbeh. Agrosensi Onbeh. Agrosensi Onbeh. Agrosensi Onbeh. Agrosensi Onbeh. Agrosensi Onbeh. Agrosensi
Atletico Atletico Grosso Grosso Torres Torres Millesim Millesim Ronaldinio Ronaldinio Amball Amball Ricardinio Ricardinio
500
458
450 419
430 430
401 392 394
391 385
400 375 375 381 373
349
350
300
Ruw eiwit
250 RuwVet
Zetmeel
200
150
100 69 69 69 70 72 69 75 73 72 75 74 75 80 74
50 30 30 32 31 33 33 32 31 32 32 30 30 36 35
Porfavor Porfavor Ambrosini Ambrosini Kajuns Kajuns Lac ta Lacta LapromessaLapromessa Coryphee Coryphee Lapriora Lapriora
Table 15, Fat, protein, Starch in grams / Kg of dry matter
Green : Protein
Pink : Fat
Green : Starch
Page 22
®
Appendix F, Corrected for weed

Yields in weed invested areas decrease. Appendix F is a correction on appendix C. The weigh-
ings of field 1 and 2 are discarded. Compare appendix C with appendix F within the boundaries
of the red line
Example: Ambrosini Agrosensi changes from 18,7 ton DS to 20,4 ton/Ha. and fresh silage from 53,1 to 57,9 ton/Ha.
Lapriora Agrosensi 15,2

38,5
Lapriora onbehandeld 15,6
untreated 38,8
Coryphee Agrosensi 18,2
46,3
Coryphee onbehandeld 17,9
untreated 46,2
Lapromessa Agrosensi 18,4
47,1
untreated
Lapromessa onbehandeld 17,5
43,2
Lacta Agrosensi 17,3
52
19,9 Red: compare
untreated
Lacta onbehandeld 53,3 to appendix C
Kajuns Agrosensi 20,7
54,8
untreated
Kajuns onbehandeld 19,8
52,7
Ambrosini Agrosensi 20,4
57,9
20,4
untreated
Ambrosini onbehandeld 52,7
Porfavor Agrosensi 22,7
65,7
untreated
Porfavor onbehandeld 21
59,4 Ton DS
Ricardinio Agrosensi 22,6 Ton vers
65,8
20,3
untreated
Ricardinio onbehandeld 59,8
Amball Agrosensi 19,9
57,3
untreated
Amball onbehandeld 19,6
52,6
Ronaldinio Agrosensi 23,3
66,7
Ronaldionio onbehandeld 20,8
untreated 62,8
Millesim Agrosensi 23,5
70,2
untreated
Millesim onbehandeld 20,2
62,1
Torres Agrosensi 22,6
72,5
20
untreated
Torres onbehandeld 62,9
Grosso Agrosensi 22
71,4
untreated
Grosso onbehandeld 20,1
62,7
Atletico Agrosensi 19,8
57,8
untreated
Atletico onbehandeld 18,7
53,8
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Table 16, Yellow is ton dry matter, Green is fresh silage, both is tons per hectare.
Page 23
®
Appendix G. Quality of the kernel, content and elements
The tests of the kernel contents has been carried out by Altic Laboratories in Dronten NL.
The test shows various results between the species. Some results are better and some results
are worse.
The species that really stands out in this field test is Grosso. Increased starch production (35%) and in-
creased quality at the same time (Equal to +33.3% depending on element).
Grosso untreated Grosso Agrosensi % difference

Better Element
K Potassium 10,2 11,6 + 13,7
N Nitrogen 9,3 11,0 + 18,3
Mg Magnesium 0,9 1,0 + 11,1
Ca Calcium 0,8 0,9 + 12,5
P Phosfor 1,4 1,8 + 28,6
Mo Molybdenum 0,3 0,4 + 33,3
Zn Zink 20,0 25,0 + 25,0
Mn Manganese 10,0 12,0 + 20,0
Cu Copper 2,2 2,7 + 22,7
Fe Iron 34,0 35,0 + 02,9
Na Sodium < 0,1 0,1 +
No difference
B Boron <5 <5 -
Se Selenium < 20 < 20 -
Co Cobalt < 20 < 20 -
Ch Chlorine - - -
S Sulpher 1,0 1,0 -
Table 17. shows the tested elements in the kernels of Grosso.

Other species show lesser or equal results, comparing between treated and untreated plants.
Test site
Test site “De Ruurhoeve”, Hoogeloon, the Netherlands Photo: Google maps
Agrosensi, PO box 83, 6700 AB Wageningen, the Netherlands

www.agrosensi.com

Maize Starch Increase 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Maize Starch Increase 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Field test results, 2012

Better Quality and 35% Starch

Results (US) in maize:

1. Exhaustion of artificial fertilizer

3. Genetically modified organism’s, GMO’s

5. Change the way we live

The basic philosophy is pragmatic: “Theory is not edible, maize is”

Results Agrosensi® from 2008:

Test field set-up

Analysis cow manure:

Total area of 17 hectare.

Approval of Agrosensi 904 and 1905 in the European Union:

Distance between rows : 75 cm (29,5 Inch)

Germination per specie:

Germination was too late for this plant, it grew

Intermediate plant sap results:

Comparison treated vs. untreated:

2012, July 6 2012, August 23

Value: Ambrosini Millesim Ambrosini Millesim

Stages of a maize plant:

Kernels per cob:

MV=Medium early V= Early ZV=Very early Green = treated, Purple = untreated

Average Cob Kernel pat- Kernels Kernel dif-

Torres MV 355 +22,84 36 X 16 576 +100 +17,4

*) Millesim MV 301 +20,40 32 x 15 480 +74 +15,4

Ronaldinio MV 261 +12,99 31 x 16 496 +48 +9,7

Amball V 269 +1,51 32 X 16 512 +120 +23,4

Ricardinio V 309 +17,05 37 X 16 592 +74 +12,5

Porfavor V 260 +10,64 31 x 16 496 +52 +0,5

Ambrosini V 277 -3,48 46 X 14 644 +20 +3,1

*) Kajuns V 288 +25,22 32 x 15 480 +120 +5,0

Lacta V 213 0,00 38 X 12 456 +24 +5,3

Lapromessa ZV 274 -3,52 39 x 12 468 -78 -16,7

*) Coryphee ZV 262 +25,96 36 X 13 468 +104 +22,2

*) Lapriora ZV 250 -5,30 35 X 15 525 -69 -13,1

Table 4, Source: KWS Benelux

Harvest time © Foto’s: Agrosensi

longer time to harvest (FAO 270).

*) 1 Atletico 53,8 34,8% 18,7 57,8 34,2% 19,8 1,0 5,3

2 Grosso 62,7 32,0% 20,1 71,4 30,8% 22,0 1,9 8,8

3 Torres 62,9 31,8% 20,0 72,5 31,2% 22,6 2,6 11,6

4 Millesim 62,1 32,6% 20,2 70,2 33,5% 23,5 3,3 13,9

Table 5, Values of dry matter from Altic Laboratory, Dronten NL

6 Amball 52,6 37,3% 19,6 57,3 34,7% 19,9 0,3 1,3

7 Ricardinio 59,8 34,0% 20,3 65,8 34,4% 22,6 2,3 10,2

8 Porfavor 59,4 35,3% 21,0 65,7 34,6% 22,7 1,8 7,8

9 Ambrosini 51,2 38,7% 19,8 53,1 35,2% 18,7 -1,1 -6,0

10 Kajuns 48,0 37,6% 18,0 52,0 37,7% 19,6 1,6 7,9

11 Lacta 48,9 35,4% 17,3 53,8 33,2% 17,9 0,6 3,1

12 Lapromessa 43,2 40,6% 17,5 47,1 39,0% 18,4 0,8 4,5

13 Coryphee 46,2 38,8% 17,9 46,3 39,4% 18,2 0,3 1,7

14 Lapriora 38,8 40,3% 15,6 38,5 39,5% 15,2 -0,4 -2,8

Nr Species VEM VEVI Starch VC-OS VEM VEVI Starch VC-OS

VEM: Calculated Food value for dayry

VEVI: Calculated Food value for meat

VC-OS: Digestion coefficient of organic

4 Millesim 985 1032 361 77,0 998 1049 380 78,0

5 Ronaldinio 985 1032 342 77,0 1007 1061 364 78,0

6 Amball 1000 1052 394 78,0 1011 1067 419 78,0

Table 6, Values tested and calculated by Altic Laboratory, Dronten NL

8 Porfavor 1010 1064 375 78,0 1003 1056 375 78,0

9 Ambrosini 1006 1059 381 78,0 1013 1069 373 78,0

10 Kajuns 1018 1075 401 79,0 1020 1079 391 79,0