In any sort of field or competition being second is not enough. It is a strong fact that a large percentage of creatures on the planet strive hard in order to be named the best. In simpler terms it’s important to be on top of the food chain. Various people and inventions have outlasted the competition throughout the years one of which is an agricultural brand called biodynamic gardening and farming. Let’s see what the ratings say.

There has been a wide array of research studies performed in order to graph comparisons between the performances and outcomes of various agricultural methods. The results indicate that biodynamic techniques and principles have left the competition sniffing on its dust. Both organic and conventional methods do not stand up against the soil quality of farmed areas based on biodynamic concepts. The deciding factor is actually the presence of compost. Let’s peep closer.

A study was done in New Zealand farms during 1993. Reports came out with biodynamic farms wiping away the competition. It was stated that the soil had higher levels of physical and biological quality. There is a significant increase in composition and activities of microbes, higher number of earthworms, greater amount of organic matter, thicker topsoil, easier penetrability, and lower bulk density. In terms of economic aspects biodynamic farms were easily maintained and managed.

There was also a long period of study engaged in at a commercial vineyard in California. The focus was the comparison of the effects of biodynamic preparations on a certain vineyard block to another vineyard block that was tended with general organic farming methods. Further highlight and attention was given to the soil and crop quality. During the first six years of the study no significant difference was noted in the parameters that included the yield per vine, cluster and berry weight, and clusters per vine.

Nevertheless there was significant stat that attracted the attention of the researchers. There was a difference in the yield-to-pruning weight ratio with a p-value of less than 0.05. This indicated an ideal vine balance for the production of high-quality wine grapes for the crops that were treated with biodynamic preparations while those crops with general organic treatments came out as slightly overcropped. In one specific year of the study the wine grapes that were treated biodynamically showed significant boosts in Brix and notable increased amounts of anthocyanins and phenols.

An even longer study of 21 years was conducted by the FiBL Institute in Switzerland wherein a comparison of the agronomic and ecological capacities of two conventional systems, organic, and biodynamic methods were done. The study pointed out that nutrient input for biodynamic and organic systems was 34 to 51 percent lower as compared to the conventional systems and crop yield was 20 percent lower on average. This meant that biodynamic and organic systems have more capacity for efficiency in production.

The total amount of energy required to come up with a dry matter unit of crop was 20 to 56 percent lower and pesticide input was decreased by 100 percent for the biodynamic system. In aspects of humus formation, soil calcium, microbial mass, soil aggregate stability, and faunal biomass, the biodynamic system edged out even the organic system. Both the biodynamic and organic system outclassed the conventional systems during the conclusion of the study.

Biodynamic gardening and farming is a potent form of agricultural method. It is even more effective when the practitioner puts every concept into action by heart.