Crop Production
Commercial Greenhouse Trial of Organic, Sustainable, and Chemical Fertilizers in
Organic and Peat Moss based media.
Marc Uecker and Aaron VanWingerden
DH Gardens Greenhouse
Larkspur, Colorado
We like many of our compatriots in the commercial greenhouse production industry have fielded many
questions and inquiries over the years in regards to organic crop production of flowers, veggies, and
perennials.
Previously our response has always been that it didn’t make sense to produce crops organically, because
of the fear that both quality and cost would be inhibiting factors.
The main concerns previously in producing organic bedding plants were that we hadn’t found an organic
soil medium (without chemical wetting agent) that was ideal for growing plants.
Most of the organic soil media that we had seen previously in the marketplace didn’t hold water well, or
those that did had major issues with porosity and “wet” roots.
Two years ago we were approached by a new organic compost producer (Mojogro), to do growing trials
on a product that they were developing for both the bulk commercial and retail markets. They believed
that this product solved the previous growing issues that many others before us have well documented.
Growing problems caused by issues with moisture capacity, consistency, pH, porosity, balanced
nutrients, etc.
Mojogro utilizes lignin and dairy manure feedstocks, double composting, and microbial enhancement
techniques during composting to create a finished product that has a high water retention capacity and
porosity similar to peat moss.
We were hesitant at first, but still agreed to do a few, very limited crop production cycles using their
product for Poinsettias and Fall Mums along-side our regular plants. Surprising to us, there was very
little difference in plant quality in using this new organic compost soil medium versus growing in our
standard peat moss and perlite blends for these crops. Interesting to us, was that the Mojogro organic
medium also seemed to possess a longer water retention curve than our peat moss blends. These
previous trials were conducted with our standard chemical 17-4-17 fertilizer.
Since we now had an organic medium which showed promise, we also decided it was finally time to look
at whether liquid soluble organic fertilizers could in fact produce the same quality results as chemical
fertilizers? Also, could an organic compost soil medium possibly produce better results with an organic
fertilizer? Theoretically an organic compost which possesses high levels of nitrifying bacteria would
more efficiently convert organic fertilizers then peat moss growing media.
We identified several organic fertilizer producers as possibilities, based on factors such as cost,
reliability, and knowledgeable sales staff. After careful consideration, we decided on using Daniels Plant
Fertilizers for this research study.
Daniels Plant Fertilizer has two products designed for the commercial greenhouse industry; 1.) Daniels
10-4-3 (sustainable but NOT Organic), 2.) Daniels Pinnacle 3-1-1 (Organic).
Daniels 10-4-3 is a liquid soluble, organically-based (why it is considered sustainable) complete fertilizer
with both ammonical and nitrate N, and a full complement of macro and micro nutrients.
Daniels 3-1-1 is a liquid soluble organic, complete fertilizer which is derived primarily from oil seed
extracts.
The objective was to see the actual results under normal commercial greenhouse production conditions
with different soil media and fertilizer combinations.
How the plants were grown
Rooted liners were purchased or grown in-house of Calibrachoa (Callie Rose in a 30mm Elle pot), Tomato
(Better Boy 512 plug), Zonal Geranium (Rocky Mtn Red in a 30mm Elle pot), Petunia (Supertunia Vista
Silver Berry in a 30mm Elle pot), Impatien (Super Elfin XP Violet in a 288 plug), and Marigold (Safari Mix
in a 288 plug).
These rooted young plants, were all relatively equally sized (same sow date and tray), and planted on
the same date (June 13, 2011).
Each Treatment (soil/fertilizer/plant combination) consisted of 16 6” pots, in trays. These plants were
planted on ebb/flood heated floors in an MX style glass greenhouse in Larkspur, CO. Total quantity of
pots for this trial was 576.
The soil (control peat moss blend) was mixed in house using Sungro peat and 25% perlite, 1 lb hydrated
lime, and 1.5 lbs gypsum per cubic yard (calibrachoa). Standard pH crops (Tomato, Petunia, and
Impatiens) had a lime rate of 3 lbs per cubic yard. High pH crops (Geranium and Marigold) had 6 lbs per
cubic yard.
Mojogro organic potting soil was shipped directly from the manufacturer (pre-blended with 10%
perlite). Perlite is considered to be an acceptable additive for organic soil media approval by OMRI.
The irrigation well water has approximately 135ppm CaCO3. The water is treated with sulfuric acid to
maintain an alkalinity of 70ppm CaCO3. The well water also contains 58ppm Na.
Greenhouse daytime temperatures averaged 64 – 77 degrees, and night time temperatures averaged
62-69 degrees (fahrenheit).
Each fertilizer was applied at 125ppm, twice weekly, for 7 weeks.
The fertilizers used for the growing trial:
Greencare
Daniels
Daniels Pinnacle Organic
17-4-17
10-4-3
3-1-1
Plants were watered as needed, with normal periodic leaching and dry down of all plants once every 710 days depending on light conditions, and media water saturation levels.
On August 12, after good growth had commenced, the trial was ended.
Results:
Plants fertilized with Daniels 10-4-3 produced the highest average fresh weights in all 6 plant varieties
tested. 4 of the highest average fresh weight plant varieties were produced in the Mojogro organic
compost soil medium with 10-4-3, and 2 times it was in our normal peat moss blend with 10-4-3. The
fresh weights were taken after all plants had been watered equally, 2-4 hours prior.
The t-test statistical significance of the measured fresh weights was not significantly different for
Tomato, Petunia, and Calibrachoa between 10-4-3 and 17-4-17.
Mojogro medium grown plants (by plant variety) on average exhibited a 5%-10% standard deviation in
fresh weight as a percentage of total weight. *Meaning that all the plants grown of a particular variety
didn’t vary more than 5% to 10% from one another in the trial.
Peat moss medium grown plants (by plant variety) on average exhibited a 10%-15% standard deviation
in fresh weight as a percentage of total weight. The total average deviation in fresh weight in Mojogro
was on average 5% less than peat moss (% of total weight), meaning its’ standard deviation was 33%
lower per each plant variety tested.
The lower standard deviation of plants grown in Mojogro versus peat moss was surprising to us in this
trial. We had anticipated that an organic compost derived soil media (Mojogro), would exhibit greater
variations of growth per plant variety because it is comprised of multiple feed stocks. Whereas peat
moss is comprised of a single ingredient, and normally we would expect this media to have better
uniformity in growth.
Daniels 10-4-3 grown plants exhibited a 3% lower standard deviation in fresh weight (calculated as a
percentage of each variety’s total weight), than 17-4-17 across all plants, and media.
Daniels Pinnacle 3-1-1 exhibited the highest standard deviation in fresh weights (calculated as a
percentage of each variety’s total weight), and was 1% greater than 17-4-17.
The statistical significance of these standard deviation differences was lower between fertilizer
treatments than it was soil media.
*Each plant was weighed individually, and the average weight for each treatment was collected. The full
list of individual plant weights by variety and treatment can be supplied upon request.
Best Fertilizer / Soil Combinations by Plant (average of 16 qty plants in each treatment weighed):
Geranium
10-4-3 Peat Moss (90 grams)
10-4-3 Mojo (89 grams)
17-4-17 Peat Moss (89 grams)
17-4-17 Mojo (87 grams)
Tomato
10-4-3 Peat Moss (171 grams)
17-4-17 Peat Moss (142 grams)
10-4-3 Mojo (135 grams)
3-1-1 Mojo (130 grams)
Petunia
10-4-3 Mojo (99 grams)
17-4-17 Mojo (85 grams)
17-4-17 Peat Moss (84 grams)
10-4-3 Peat Moss (83 grams)
Impatiens
10-4-3 Mojo (100 grams)
10-4-3 Peat Moss (81 grams)
3-1-1 Mojo (81 grams)
17-4-17 Mojo (80 grams)
Marigold
10-4-3 Mojo (58 grams)
17-4-17 Peat Moss (36 grams)
3-1-1 Mojo (32 grams)
17-4-17 Mojo (26 grams)
Calibrachoa
10-4-3 Mojo (46 grams)
10-4-3 Peat Moss (40 grams)
17-4-17 Mojo (37 grams)
17-4-17 Peat Moss (32 grams)
*These fresh weight results were very consistent to our qualitative visual assessments, which
are shown later, and why we didn’t go further and also measure dry weights.
EC and pH.
Growth medium EC was taken at the beginning (June 13), the middle (4 weeks later on July
19), and the end of the trial (August 12). Statistically the differences in EC weren’t significant.
EC by Soil Medium and Fertilizer Treatment (averages of pots tested):
Peatmoss
Mojogro
3-1-1
After 4 Weeks
1.45 EC
1.76 EC
10-4-3
After 4 Weeks
1.49 EC
1.56 EC
17-4-17
After 4 Weeks
1.95 EC
1.44 EC
From this study and previous, the organic Mojogro compost soil medium EC is higher than
peat moss in the beginning. After 2-4 weeks of growing however the EC is similar to peat
moss.
pH by Soil Medium and Fertilizer Treatment (averages of pots tested):
Peatmoss
Mojogro
3-1-1
4 Weeks
7.19
7.21
10-4-3
4 Weeks
6.63
6.63
17-4-17
4 Weeks
6.39
6.81
The Daniels 10-4-3 and ………….. 17-4-17 had similar effects on the pH of both the peat moss and
Mojogro soil media (acidifying) throughout the growing trial.
The Daniels Pinnacle 3-1-1 Organic had elevated levels of pH versus the other fertilizers, which we feel
was in part due to our high sodium water, and because it seems to have attributes of a neutral feed
(neither acid or alkaline).
Despite the high average pH of the growing media in this trial, all soil media and fertilizers grew
calibrachoa without signs of iron deficiency. The higher pH fertilizer 3-1-1 treatments had foliar growth
which averaged 10% less than the respective media with 17-4-17 in peat moss, but these plants were
still all good quality sellable plants. Under normal circumstance, we would grow calibrachoa with a more
acid fertilizer than what we utilized for this trial.
Several of the plant varieties used in this trial, are pH suppressors, which will normally drop pH through
root zone acidification. The impact of this was not taken into consideration when calculating averages,
or excluding plant varieties for further pH evaluation.
The picture below shows the 3 fertilizer treatments effect on Calibrachoa.
Plants are from left to right, 6” pots of 17-4-17, 3-1-1, and 10-4-3 calibrachoa in peatmoss.
Note* Our results differed from a growing study done previously by UMass which compared organic and
chemical fertilizer growth with calibrachoa. (Cox, D. 2010. Calibrachoa Response to Chemical and
Organic Fertilizers). The authors may have pre-mixed all of their 3-1-1 into a single batch at the
beginning, and used it over the entire growing trial. We mixed our 3-1-1 fresh for each application
applied. In our previous experience, not mixing organic fertilizers fresh may negatively impact growing.
Next Page – Media Testing Results
Laboratory Media Testing Results (collected at the end of the trial):
TOMATO 3-1-1
TOMATO 10-4-3
Components
Peat
Mojo
Peat
Mojo
pH
6.85
6.44
6.27
5.76
EC
0.90
0.70
0.85
0.54
Nutrient - ppm
NO3-N
4.00
15.90
11.40
NH4- N
1.30
1.10
3.50
0.40
P
7.60
21.63
8.56
23.43
K
8.29
16.57
5.68
5.16
Ca
29.95
20.97
26.38
17.60
Mg
9.31
6.14
8.20
5.62
SO4 -S
86.37
61.95
101.37
51.84
Fe
2.17
3.20
1.93
1.49
Mn
0.21
0.15
0.20
0.05
B
0.06
0.14
0.07
0.07
Cu
0.05
0.12
0.06
0.07
Zn
0.08
0.08
0.13
0.06
Na
179.54
129.12
167.74
94.82
Components
pH
EC
Nutrient - ppm
NO3-N
NH4- N
P
K
Ca
Mg
SO4 -S
Fe
Mn
B
Cu
Zn
Na
GERANIUM
Peat
6.39
1.38
55.00
1.00
7.34
48.89
33.84
17.26
122.35
0.94
0.03
0.12
0.05
0.03
223.48
3-1-1
Mojo
6.34
1.20
0.70
34.43
54.07
44.45
14.84
163.39
3.70
0.22
0.20
0.11
0.11
180.28
TOMATO 17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
6.09
6.16
0.45
0.60
2.00
3.04
8.00
21.90
7.95
42.74
2.15
0.16
0.12
0.07
0.17
83.47
3.00
0.40
19.91
24.43
24.00
7.33
67.90
2.30
0.07
0.18
0.11
0.08
94.77
GERANIUM 10-4-3
Peat
Mojo
5.85
4.79
1.01
1.08
GERANIUM 17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
6.27
5.27
1.27
1.64
35.20
0.50
4.66
8.30
39.04
21.78
101.87
0.67
0.04
0.13
0.05
0.03
149.32
54.60
1.10
1.90
51.52
47.97
27.33
113.77
0.43
0.03
0.17
0.05
0.02
154.77
54.00
0.40
31.48
15.47
80.39
23.87
78.71
0.49
0.07
0.22
0.06
0.05
99.22
88.90
0.70
28.11
76.85
132.93
39.10
138.79
0.64
0.05
0.41
0.06
0.05
115.49
CALIBRACHOA 3-1-1
Components
pH
EC
Nutrient - ppm
NO3-N
NH4- N
P
K
Ca
Mg
SO4 -S
Fe
Mn
B
Cu
Zn
Na
CALIBRACHOA 10-4-3
Peat
5.91
1.21
Mojo
5.82
1.08
Peat
5.49
1.29
Mojo
5.04
1.43
22.70
1.20
6.50
39.57
41.71
19.57
153.06
1.27
0.03
0.11
0.05
0.03
185.21
49.30
0.40
24.54
58.58
42.60
14.05
84.17
0.50
0.03
0.21
0.07
0.04
129.08
29.40
0.90
11.06
24.96
59.73
32.77
179.17
0.88
0.05
0.13
0.05
0.05
169.94
67.20
1.30
38.03
46.20
113.02
29.95
144.39
0.76
0.07
0.28
0.07
0.05
127.70
CALIBRACHOA 17-417
Peat
Mojo
5.88
5.84
1.25
1.15
4.20
0.90
3.20
53.09
51.38
25.70
182.22
1.03
0.02
0.18
0.05
0.05
166.31
38.70
0.40
20.18
83.43
69.58
20.74
129.76
0.66
0.04
0.30
0.07
0.04
92.85
Leaf Analysis
The following are some of the data from the tissue samples we sent to the laboratory for different plant
varieties:
CONTINUED NEXT PAGE
Foliar Tissue Analysis Results
Tomato
10-4-3
3-1-1
N
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Fe (ppm)
Mn (ppm)
B (ppm)
Cu (ppm)
Na (ppm)
Peat
3.99
0.41
2.31
1.49
0.79
1.96
114
109
62
3
2,578
Mojo
3.81
0.60
2.65
1.91
0.57
1.86
70
14
65
6
3,127
Peat
3.50
0.33
1.46
1.99
0.75
2.24
94
155
77
4
3,647
Mojo
3.37
0.91
1.99
2.57
0.58
2.08
65
32
88
7
2,198
17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
3.60
3.64
0.23
0.59
2.87
2.74
2.36
2.41
0.81
0.61
2.30
2.02
97
90
186
22
87
74
6
7
2,476
2,408
Mojo
2.85
0.46
2.48
1.41
0.26
0.25
110
42
44
7
5,068
Geranium
10-4-3
Peat
Mojo
3.21
2.99
0.30
0.45
1.49
2.49
1.48
1.85
0.39
0.29
0.29
0.28
184
136
246
97
50
51
5
7
9,361
5,960
17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
2.70
2.62
0.23
0.37
1.92
2.64
1.53
1.92
0.34
0.26
0.26
0.33
155
148
227
102
45
61
6
7
6,394
7,254
Mojo
3.12
0.35
2.55
1.38
0.47
0.75
106
40
48
5
5,544
Calibrachoa
10-4-3
Peat
Mojo
3.23
3.36
0.34
0.39
1.76
2.53
1.58
1.55
0.77
0.50
0.92
0.64
109
82
252
54
44
47
4
7
5,421
3,042
3-1-1
N
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Fe (ppm)
Mn (ppm)
B (ppm)
Cu (ppm)
Na (ppm)
Peat
3.09
0.37
1.89
1.88
0.41
0.38
204
240
58
5
8,689
3-1-1
N
P
K
Ca
Mg
S
Fe (ppm)
Mn (ppm)
B (ppm)
Cu (ppm)
Na (ppm)
Peat
3.11
0.33
1.97
1.39
0.65
1.15
117
235
39
3
8,913
17-4-17
Peat
2.81
0.26
2.15
1.58
0.69
1.00
131
257
41
4
5,461
Mojo
3.43
0.32
2.58
1.69
0.53
0.70
131
48
58
7
3,884
Examination of the tables above doesn’t indicate much of an N deficiency in Mojogro versus peat moss.
However, based on visual assessment of the Geranium and Tomato leaves by our internal growers and
an visiting PhD that consults for our commercial operation, we believe that optimum growth would
probably be achieved utilizing an extra 10-15ppm N feed with Mojogro. Our assessment is that Mojogro
is slightly N deficient compared with peat moss for N uptake.
Mojogro possess an advantage over peat moss in plant availability for uptake of P, K, and Ca based on
both the foliar and media laboratory results (see media laboratory data below which was collected from
plants at the end of the trial).
Plants grown in Mojogro seemed to be slightly deficient in Mn versus Peatmoss, however no visual
symptoms of this deficiency nor any other were present.
Of additional interest to us was the lower overall Na foliar ppm absorbed by the plants grown in
Mojogro compared with Peatmoss (we have high salinity water), and this was probably due to the
higher beginning K nutrient content in the Mojogro medium providing a buffer against salinity uptake.
Laboratory Media Testing Results (collected at the end of the trial):
TOMATO 3-1-1
TOMATO 10-4-3
Components
Peat
Mojo
Peat
Mojo
pH
6.85
6.44
6.27
5.76
EC
0.90
0.70
0.85
0.54
Nutrient - ppm
NO3-N
4.00
15.90
11.40
NH4- N
1.30
1.10
3.50
0.40
P
7.60
21.63
8.56
23.43
K
8.29
16.57
5.68
5.16
Ca
29.95
20.97
26.38
17.60
Mg
9.31
6.14
8.20
5.62
SO4 -S
86.37
61.95
101.37
51.84
Fe
2.17
3.20
1.93
1.49
Mn
0.21
0.15
0.20
0.05
B
0.06
0.14
0.07
0.07
Cu
0.05
0.12
0.06
0.07
Zn
0.08
0.08
0.13
0.06
Na
179.54
129.12
167.74
94.82
Components
pH
EC
Nutrient - ppm
NO3-N
NH4- N
GERANIUM 3-1-1
Peat
Mojo
6.39
6.34
1.38
1.20
55.00
1.00
0.70
GERANIUM 10-4-3
Peat
Mojo
5.85
4.79
1.01
1.08
35.20
0.50
54.00
0.40
TOMATO 17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
6.09
6.16
0.45
0.60
2.00
3.04
8.00
21.90
7.95
42.74
2.15
0.16
0.12
0.07
0.17
83.47
3.00
0.40
19.91
24.43
24.00
7.33
67.90
2.30
0.07
0.18
0.11
0.08
94.77
GERANIUM 17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
6.27
5.27
1.27
1.64
54.60
1.10
88.90
0.70
P
K
Ca
Mg
SO4 -S
Fe
Mn
B
Cu
Zn
Na
Components
pH
EC
Nutrient - ppm
NO3-N
NH4- N
P
K
Ca
Mg
SO4 -S
Fe
Mn
B
Cu
Zn
Na
7.34
48.89
33.84
17.26
122.35
0.94
0.03
0.12
0.05
0.03
223.48
34.43
54.07
44.45
14.84
163.39
3.70
0.22
0.20
0.11
0.11
180.28
CALIBRACHOA 3-1-1
Peat
Mojo
5.91
5.82
1.21
1.08
22.70
1.20
6.50
39.57
41.71
19.57
153.06
1.27
0.03
0.11
0.05
0.03
185.21
49.30
0.40
24.54
58.58
42.60
14.05
84.17
0.50
0.03
0.21
0.07
0.04
129.08
4.66
8.30
39.04
21.78
101.87
0.67
0.04
0.13
0.05
0.03
149.32
31.48
15.47
80.39
23.87
78.71
0.49
0.07
0.22
0.06
0.05
99.22
CALIBRACHOA 10-4-3
Peat
Mojo
5.49
5.04
1.29
1.43
29.40
0.90
11.06
24.96
59.73
32.77
179.17
0.88
0.05
0.13
0.05
0.05
169.94
67.20
1.30
38.03
46.20
113.02
29.95
144.39
0.76
0.07
0.28
0.07
0.05
127.70
1.90
51.52
47.97
27.33
113.77
0.43
0.03
0.17
0.05
0.02
154.77
28.11
76.85
132.93
39.10
138.79
0.64
0.05
0.41
0.06
0.05
115.49
CALIBRACHOA 17-4-17
Peat
Mojo
5.88
5.84
1.25
1.15
4.20
0.90
3.20
53.09
51.38
25.70
182.22
1.03
0.02
0.18
0.05
0.05
166.31
38.70
0.40
20.18
83.43
69.58
20.74
129.76
0.66
0.04
0.30
0.07
0.04
92.85
Visual
Visual evaluation and plant comparison is subjective in nature, and less scientific. However, being
commercial growers, who owe our success or failure to whether or not a consumer will choose our
plants in stores, we pay extra attention to visual characteristics.
Further complicating the application of a visual judgment criteria for this growing trial, is that each plant
variety was grown with the same PPM of fertilizer (normally we would feed some varieties a higher PPM
of N). Also, normally we would use plant growth regulators on some of the plant varieties such as
geranium and calibrachoa to achieve a fuller and more uniform shape.
These complications required us to visually assess the growth aspects of the plant, while taking into
consideration the effect or lack of effect of these other factors.
Our visual assessment applies several different factors: Color of Foliage, Branching, Flowers, and
Uniformity of shape, in addition to Size. The rating was performed by assessing a value of 1-5 for each
of the plants. A score of 2 or less would mean the product was unsellable, and a product score of 3 or
higher is required to maintain good sell through to the end consumer.
Our visual assessment for the plants grown in this trial; All plants were of “good” quality for foliage,
branching, flowering, and uniformity of shape, and averaged 3’s or better.
The plants grown in peat moss with the Daniels Pinnacle 3-1-1 for geranium, impatiens, and marigold
were all on the small side versus the other fertilizers, but maintained high scores in the other categories
which means they were still of good enough quality for retail (Mid 3’s). All other plants varieties
performed well in peat moss and 3-1-1.
The plants grown in Mojogro organic potting soil with Daniels Pinnacle 3-1-1 for these same plant
varieties were all of good/acceptable size (50% higher average fresh weight), then peat moss grown 3-11 for geranium, impatiens, and marigold. These were assessed as high 3’s to low 4’s for quality
purposes.
The Daniels 10-4-3 plants exhibited better color and visual attributes then the 17-4-17 chemical fertilizer
plants. The Daniels 10-4-3 were predominantly assessed as mid grade 4’s, and the 17-4-17 were
predominantly low 4’s and high 3’s.
None of the plants and varieties exhibited yellowing of the leaves or any other obvious visual signs of
deficiencies or toxicities.
The following pictures were taken after 6 weeks of growing, with plants representative of the average in
each treatment:
The above pots are in the following order Left to Right: Peat 17-4-17, Mojo 17-4-17, Peat 3-1-1, Mojo 31-1, Peat 10-4-3, Mojo 10-4-3.
The above pots are in the following order Left to Right: Peat 17-4-17, Mojo 17-4-17, Peat 3-1-1, Mojo 31-1, Peat 10-4-3, Mojo 10-4-3.
The above pots are in the following order Left to Right: Peat 17-4-17, Mojo 17-4-17, Peat 3-1-1, Mojo 31-1, Peat 10-4-3, Mojo 10-4-3.
The above pots are in the following order Left to Right: Peat 17-4-17, Mojo 17-4-17, Peat 3-1-1, Mojo 31-1, Peat 10-4-3, Mojo 10-4-3. These plants look different from what we normally ship, because we
didn’t use PGR’s on them like we would do normally (less ideal uniformity and fullness when PGR’s
aren’t applied).
The above pots are in the following order Left to Right: Peat 17-4-17, Mojo 17-4-17, Peat 3-1-1, Mojo 31-1, Peat 10-4-3, Mojo 10-4-3.
Conclusion
The Daniels 10-4-3 (sustainable) fertilizer which is organically-based, outperformed both of the other
fertilizers (Daniels 3-1-1 Organic and Greencare 17-4-17).
The Mojogro organic potting soil medium performed every bit as well as our standard peat moss blend,
with all fertilizer treatments. We were particularly impressed that the plants grown in Mojogro
exhibited a higher degree of uniformity, with less variance in size between one another than the
standard peat moss blend.
We felt that the Daniels Pinnacle 3-1-1 organic fertilizer grew “better” quality, and larger plants in the
same time in the Organic soil medium from Mojogro then it did in peat moss. We believe that this could
be in part due to the wide diversity of soil bacteria and microbes present in compost which more
efficiently convert the organic fertilizers into available nutrients for plant uptake.
We believe that the results from this trial indicate that there are available organic soil media and water
soluble fertilizers that make it possible for commercial growers to produce organic bedding plants
without negative implications of quality.