Trials
Irrigated maize trial: 30% more kernels per row
A bigger average yield is good. A bigger average yield where the whole paddock performs the same is better, because it tells you the result is repeatable. Our irrigated maize trial at Hopefield delivered both.
The setup
The trial ran on a property at Hopefield, New South Wales, managed by Tim T sown by Monk & Sons Ag Services. The crop was irrigated maize on chromosol soils. Agnano liquid fertiliser went in-furrow at sowing on 26 November 2025, with a control strip alongside under the same irrigation and management. An independent agronomist measured the crop on 12th of February, 27th of April and 5th of May 2026.
Every parameter moved
The Agnano plants outperformed the control on every measured parameter.
Metric | Control | Agnano | Increase |
|---|---|---|---|
Ear weight (g/ear) | 246.5 | 291.1 | +18% |
Kernels per row | 24.6 | 31.9 | +30% |
Grain weight (g/ear) | 202.8 | 241.8 | +19% |
Filled ear length (mm) | 187.1 | 204.5 | +9% |
Cob weight (g) | 42.0 | 49.0 | +17% |
Base stem thickness (cm) | 7.8 | 9.4 | +20.5% |
Kernels per row is the headline. A 30% lift there flows straight into grain weight, because more filled kernels along each row is more saleable grain per cob. The thicker stem base matters too. A stronger plant stands up to wind and water, which protects yield late in the season when the crop is heaviest.
Irrigated maize trial at Hopefield, New South Wales.
We pulled ears from matched plants and weighed them. Five Agnano plants gave a total dehusked grain weight of 746 grams against 449 grams from the control. On a per-plant basis that is 149.2 grams against 89.8 grams, a 66% increase in dehusked grain per plant.
The uniformity result
The agronomist flagged one finding beyond the averages. The Agnano group held consistent, uniform values across the sampled plants, while the control showed high variance. In plain terms, the treated plants performed alike, and the untreated ones were all over the place.
That points to something useful. Agnano steadies plant metabolism and carries stress tolerance across the whole population, not just the strongest plants. A uniform crop is easier to manage, easier to harvest, and more predictable to budget against.
Why it happens
Maize is a hungry crop with a long feeding window. Conventional water-soluble fertiliser dumps its load early, then runs short later when the cob is filling. That mismatch is costly. Across the world’s cropping systems only about 47% of applied nitrogen is taken up by crops, and more than half is lost to the environment (Lassaletta et al., 2014). Agnano releases slowly because the nutrients are pre-complexed into micro and sub-micron particles that stay at the root zone rather than leaching away. Matching nutrient supply to crop demand is the whole point of controlled-release nutrition (Shaviv and Mikkelsen, 1993), and independent reviews of nano-scale fertilisers report median efficiency gains of around 20 to 30% over conventional products (Kah et al., 2018). The plant gets a steady supply through grain fill, which is exactly when kernel number and grain weight are set.
Final Results
In the Hopefield irrigated maize trial, the treated crop delivered more yield and a more nutrient-dense product. Independent laboratory analysis of the harvested grain showed gains across yield, mineral density, and feed quality.
Yield: up 20%
Mineral density
Calcium: up 175%
Iron: up 67%
Boron: up 50%
Zinc: up 30%
Manganese: up 19%
Magnesium: up 12%
Phosphorus: up 10%
Sulphur: up 3%
Feed and grain quality
Water soluble carbohydrates: up 14%
Crude fat: up 11%
Crude protein: up 5%
Crude fibre: down 13%, meaning better digestibility
A crop that yields more while carrying more zinc, iron, and calcium is worth more twice over: greater volume at harvest and a more nutritious product for the feed and food markets that increasingly value it. Season, soil and water all move the result, so we always recommend running a control strip on your own country to see what it does on your ground.
References
Lassaletta, L., Billen, G., Grizzetti, B., Anglade, J. and Garnier, J. (2014). 50 year trends in nitrogen use efficiency of world cropping systems. Environmental Research Letters, 9(10), 105011. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/9/10/105011
Shaviv, A. and Mikkelsen, R.L. (1993). Controlled-release fertilizers to increase efficiency of nutrient use and minimize environmental degradation: a review. Fertilizer Research, 35(1-2), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00750215
Kah, M., Kookana, R.S., Gogos, A. and Bucheli, T.D. (2018). A critical evaluation of nanopesticides and nanofertilizers against their conventional analogues. Nature Nanotechnology, 13(8), 677-684. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-018-0131-1
