 Amanda Weidner. I'm going to be speaking on a portion of my dissertation that I wrote a serigrant on and hopefully, question before we get started. Hopefully this helps you guys, but are any of you researchers besides you? Because I already know. No? Okay. Then I will not spend the time. I'll spend my time wisely. Okay. So what I've just tried to answer a few questions in this presentation. I'll give you some site history, but we're looking at long term tillage, long term no till, long term other till. And we wanted to ask, does soil, carbon, sequestration, does it saturate after 50 years of no till? So that's the site that I was gifted generously to work on my PhD. Does the no till system after 50 years benefit air quality? What soil health indicators explain crop yield? And does no till profitability, including those ecosystem benefits, possibly outweigh yield losses? So we're just going to work our way through these four questions, one at a time. So some site history just so you can get an understanding is, well before I was thought of from 1970 to 1990, this site was in a continuous grade production. Just corn continuous for the first 20 years. The next 30 years was a corn soybean rotation where fertility treatments were only applied in the corn yields years. That's pretty typical that soybean was not fertilized for the next 30. And then I step in and I took a lot of data. This is just a portion of it. I'm going to be working through these four tillage treatments. Don't worry about the fertility treatments. There were fertility treatments in a split plot design. But in this case, I will only be talking about the treatments that had typical fertility, nothing else. So we don't have to worry about that variable. But I'm going to be using these same colors for these same treatments. So I'm going to spend a little time to commit to memory. The first one is mobile plow. It's red. It's what was originally 1970 labeled conventional tillage. So that's not what we label it anymore. But that plow is 15 to 20 centimeters deep. Our alternate tillage is what I call the AT alternate tillage. It's two years no till. And then the third year is a mobile plow. If I had my way, it would be third year chisel disc that I believe would simulate. I'm no tilling. I'm doing these things from my soil. But oh, wow, my weed bank has got a little out of control. My pressure has got a little too high. I'm going to till it this one year. And then I'm going to let the soil rest for several more years. But it is a mobile plow. Then we have a typical chisel disc and then no till. All these have been implemented for 50 years. I will always list them in the order of most intense to least intense. Seeing a mobile plow, alternate tillage, chisel disc, no till. It'll always be in that order. Just to help go through these graphs. Field plot design, I'll say the plots are small. They're 8 by 6 centimeters, very small meters. But the main point is that our plots, we always drive the tractor the same way in the same direction. So the tractor tread, we're always avoiding. We don't sample in the tractor tread. We don't sample anything. Yield nothing. We avoid the tread because it looks like this. So we just avoid that. Materials and methods, I'll go through quickly. We soil sampled. We used probes. We used trucks. We went to multiple depths. Aggregation. This is, I really like this photo. We took aggregation, both dry and wet stability. But here's a sampling of kind of the portion out of aggregates and what those look like. We took aggregate associated carbon and nitrogen. We're going to be talking a lot about what's happening within each aggregate size. And, oh, it was fun. Let's see. We took soil volumetric water content. That's just the moisture content of the soil. I measured it basically every time I was in the field. So 14 times during the growing season in 2018. And that was only on a few treatments. And then for corn grain harvest, these are very small plots. And so because the plots are so small, we only sample, harvest the center two rows. There's only eight rows in these plots. So we harvest the center two, and then we do some math and that's our yield. We want to avoid kind of all areas of the side. And because it's so small, we just go right down the center. We took penetration resistance. That's just how compacted the soil is. We took both density. We took mean weight diameter, geometric mean weight diameter. That's just a fraction of aggregation. Oh, we sampled a lot a lot. We sampled refraction of nitrogen as well. Lots of sub samples. Here's something that's interesting. We sampled for nitrous oxide. In our nitrous oxide sampling, that's what the chamber looks like. The lid comes off. So there's just, once we planted, well, really before we plant, we pound these into the ground so that there's metal, there's beveled edges that's pounded into the soil and it sits open just like any other portion of the soil. We take it out to plant, we put it back in after planting and it stays in between the rows. There's soybeans on the other side for the entire planting season until it's time to harvest and then we take it out and then we put it back in again. But what that is doing is the lid stays off all the time. And then when I show up to take soil samples, so when it rains, it gets wet in the chamber. When anything, when we fertilize, it gets fertilized in the chamber. Everything happens outside of the chambers in the chamber and when I show up I put the lid on the chamber. I hit stopwatch times zero and at periodic time points I put a syringe right into that little rubber stopper and I take an air sample and that's how I can see what gases are coming off this soil. And then when I'm done, I take the chamber off. The chamber is water sealed if you're curious. I pour water in here so that no air can get through. And we calculate nitrous oxide flux. More soil samples. We took PLFA. So you're talking about PLFA before, sir? We'll do a little PLFA. Getting matter. I sample for nematodes. I like worms. I like earthworms. I like nematodes. We get to go through a little bit of that data. We'll talk about free-living nematodes which are not, they don't live in the root. They're not the root-dwelling nematodes. They just move through the soil. That's kind of everything we did. So we'll get to the meat and potatoes. First question. Does soil carbon sequestration saturate after 50 years of no-till? So to answer this, I just want to get into what is aggregation in soil carbon briefly. This is a fine example of an aggregate. We'll plant root running through it. There's microaggregates within this aggregate size which, to me, coming into soil science that was something, it took me a while to grasp is I have one, one shape and size when aggregate and I break it down. And now there's microaggregates and I can break those aggregates down. I can break those aggregates down. And it broke my brains. Where does it end? But basically what an aggregate is is those primary particles, sand-silk clay, held together by organic materials. Plant roots, microfire, or fungal guys and all kinds of stuff. It's all held together like a glue. So if we just get into some baseline data, this is a dry aggregate size. So I'm always going to list them in the same order. So we go mobile plow, alternate tillage, chisel desk, no till. Mobile plow, alternate tillage, and it'll go. The whole presentation. But when we're looking at it, this is kind of the macro categorizations where this is considered large aggregates. There's no difference in large aggregate size. This is considered small aggregates. We're going to go into large and small aggregates later. So if you just remember small aggregates is this kind of 0.25 to 2 millimeter size. And then micro and then just silt and clay. But this is the same data. Mobile plow and no till had roughly the same percentage of large aggregates. That was very surprising after 50 years. But what we found, and I will see in a second, these micro aggregate or these large aggregates right here, they were not water stable. There's something that we call false aggregation due to tillage time that once they once when both of these large aggregates were put in water, this one held and this one dissolved. So they were just that was false aggregation. No till did promote the highest of the one to two millimeter aggregate size. That's still a decent sized aggregate. And then what was interesting is chisel disc had the highest amount of smallest aggregation. This is a proportion. And so because it had the lowest amount of large aggregates, it had the highest amount of small aggregates. But no till had the smallest as well. So you can see in these proportions no till alternate tillage and mobile plow all kind of performed very similarly. Even when one was only performed every three years, which was interesting. Here's where it shows those large aggregates, they just broke. Because if we look, these are all the same. And that large aggregate stayed together for no till. So this is our water stability. Small, large, stable, unstable. I know it's a lot, a small state. Most of our results were in the small aggregates. Large aggregate size, it really only gave us unstable differences. It did not give us stable differences. But within the small aggregate size, the way I said, Oh, I always present these stepwise, it presented stepwise, which is always so nice to have in data coming out. But it reduced the water stable aggregate size as we went down in intensity, which means to this is pretty intense. Our aggregate associated carbon nitrogen. So we've looked at aggregates, we're just going to keep getting closer and closer. We've looked at aggregates. Then we looked at in their sizes, then we looked at are they stable or water stable? Now we're going to get within the fraction of nutrients within those aggregates. And so within these aggregate sizes, we had a larger storage. This is the same amount of aggregates, right? Aggregate associated carbon in both small and large aggregate sizes in no till dramatically increased. And I'll turn it till it actually is a little bit lower. That was really interesting. And when we look at our aggregate associated nitrogen, we still have no till outperforming. So within those aggregates, even though aggregates are there in the other tillage treatments, they have less carbon and less nitrogen stored within those aggregates, which was very surprising. Okay, deeper. Within those aggregates, within the carbon, we have poxy, which is active carbon. This is the available carbon. And poxy was very high within these aggregate sizes in the no till. Great, what we would expect. And then didn't expect this. Alternate tillage was lower than the rest of them. Semi significantly, I wouldn't say like, whoa, it's not all the way significant. It's not all the way not significant. It doesn't mean something. And what we found, I'm sorry, I'm going to forget the citation. But what we found was that in those two years of building aggregates, that alternate tillage was not tilled. They were building aggregates. It was storing carbon within the aggregates. When those aggregates were broken apart, because it only had two years, that carbon was more susceptible to basically just decomposing and disappearing from the system. And where if it was tilled every year, it didn't have the chance to build the aggregates, but store the carbon and then break apart and leach out where it just wasn't building aggregates. So it wasn't losing as much. It had just had a higher loss potential, because it had somewhere to store it. It's like, if you have a cupboard, you're going to put something in it. It's kind of that ordeal. We also looked at it by depth. So this is pretty what you would expect. We're looking at no till. No till had the highest amount of carbon, highest amount of nitrogen. At this depth, we're looking at our centimeters here. We're pretty shallow as we got deeper. Basically what we really wanted to see is, it's not penetrating lower. These benefits are, after 50 years, they're still not getting to the 15 centimeter, the six inch mark at all. We expected that. That's fine. What was nice to see is that nitrogen was not tied up in carbon, despite this higher carbon. Nitrogen was also high. So carbon nitrogen ratio was the same across all treatments. Very nice to see. And that same difference with Poxy. That was not a big deal. And then Poxy by depth. And then we're done with this aggregation business. But if we look by depth, it's what we would expect. The active carbon portion in the Poxy was much higher in no till. These all performed similarly, which is, again, not quite what we were expecting. A chisel disc actually had the lowest amount of Poxy in this medium depth. No differences, no differences. That's fine. How do you define active carbon? Active carbon is the available form of carbon for microbes. It's measured in particulate. Do you remember what Poxy stands for? I'm not going to remember what Poxy stands for. But it's measured in the active form that is available for microbial intake and inactive carbon. That is not solid. No. Yes? No. No, no, no. I don't remember when the university came out with the program. I got a lot of... It's... In other words, what is a good number? What is a good number next? I'll show you what it's associated with. Yeah. So to answer our question, does carbon sequestration saturate? We were really thinking it might. It didn't. That's great. Continued to build carbon, but limited to the surface. Therefore, some type of fibrous plentiful root system to drive that carbon nitrogen deeper into the soil would be beneficial. But carbon does not saturate up until 50 years. This is what we know in this particular soil. A basaltile silt loam if you're interested. Okay. So second question. Does no till system after 50 years benefit air quality? Here's we get the gas emissions. Little diddy here is greenhouse gas emissions that are emitted through the microbial process. To increase that microbial process, you're going to have increased respiration of those microbes and then you're going to have increased gas emission. We looked at nitrogen oxide because it is 300 times more polluting than carbon and it's driven through our fertilization. It's driven by temperature and humidity. There's a bunch of rain and it's very hot. That's going to spike. Type of vegetation, lots of variables. No. Well, it's a poll. It's a little more complicated. It is a it's part of the denitrification cycle, but I wouldn't define it as denitrification. So looking at nitrogen oxide flux, this is over 2018 to 2020. Those these are corn years. That's what I should say. We weren't looking at nitrogen during the soybean years. We don't fertilize during soybean years. So it's too complicated. So looking at corn years when we are fertilizing. So I have it broken up into here's our baseline. Here's our post-tillage and fertilization. This is where we plant. This is where we have major rainfall events and there's plenty of nitrogen available because we just fertilized here. And this is end of season where we do have large rainfall events, but nitrogen is limited at that point. The plant has taken up most of the nitrogen that we put on. So this is 2018 and this is 2020. You can say we had a little crazy in 2020, but this kind of background, it might be a bright in here to see is the precipitation laid over. And you can see here this is daily rainfall in centimeters. We are lucky enough to have a weather station on my research station. So I get to it's not like I was out there with a rain gauge every day, but I got to collect this data lucky me. And then we're looking at no-till without fertilizer and no-till with fertilizer because we wanted to fuss out that fertilizer data. And then we're looking at chisel disc without fertilizer. It's control chisel disc with fertilizer MPK. I'm sorry. These are terrible abbreviations. But you see there's no differences, no differences were going on in the year. And then we hit this major rainfall events after we fertilized. You can see our nitrous oxide flux went up here and it really went up here. These are on the same scale, right? 1000 grams nitrous oxide nitrogen per hectare per day. If it rained, if there was something significant happening or tried to get out there, I could also tell if it hadn't rained we hadn't fertilized. And you can see my every time every point is a sample, sampling day. You can see how the sampling gets get spread out more here. There's not, I know there's not a lot going on. There's not a lot to pick up, but there's a lot of sampling days in here where I get those. Here I think I actually missed one. I think that should have been like one day sooner and I might have had a bigger spike. But what we found was that early in the growing season, there's no differences in the flux. But during major rainfall events, when nitrogen is not limited, chisel discs produced more emissions likely due to higher soil and availability. So you can see chisel disc is red. I'm sorry, this doesn't follow my rules and I hate it, but chisel disc up here, no till down here. Chisel disc up here, no till down here. Looking cumulatively over the year. That was daily. This is cumulatively. Cumulatively looked, you know, pretty regular. Chisel disc had higher N2O emissions like then NT, no till. So you can see the differences cumulatively. Not in 2018. It wasn't significantly different cumulatively. This was likely due to site differences as well in 2020 because it's a small plot. There's one block, one block that is just a little bit more wet than the rest of the blocks. Sometimes I throw it out of the data. Sometimes it's absolutely insane. Sometimes I keep it in. It depends on the data. It depends what my outliers are looking like. But in this case, I do think it was affecting it because it's randomized within the block and those chisel disc sites just happened by random to be in some of the wettest site in that block and no till was it. Now, it's that does accumulate. But then we have, I didn't put label on this one. This one's kind of confusing. So I just want you to look at one one place in 2020. We're looking at soil nitrous oxide, nitrogen emissions. And this is not daily but categorically in these kind of day chunks. This is in that time period where it spiked. So we're just looking in that time period where it spiked and we're lumping some of those days together to see what we can. And greater immobilization of applied fertilizer to the nitrogen or to the no till systems because of the crop residues may have been the point of reduction in N2O or N03N concentrations. So what we're saying is the nitrous oxide emissions were lowered by no till but not because of any reason. Otherwise the no till just had more residue and it was tying up some of the nitrogen. So less was available to the plant therefore less was available to be released. We also looked at moisture and temperature. This is just interesting on its own but these are some of the drivers of those emissions. Here we can see chisel disc. I just circulate. This is where it's significantly different is with these stars. Here's where it's significantly different. There's no differences again in the later season but in these earlier seasons are water content early in the season and our water content early in the season much warmer no till. Soil temperature cooler and chisel disc. I honestly thought the differences in soil temperature would be much greater. After 50 years walking across the field you have to step up to go into a no till and step down to go into the rest of it. It's pretty significant and I thought I would see greater differences. Sure water content yeah definitely. I think this is helpful just as a little side note to know that our climate is getting a little more volatile and we can't always rely on the spring rains anymore. They come all at once and then none. It's not that consistent spring rain that we used to be able to rely on. It's just a little bit more volatile. In those volatile systems holding on to your water content that's better that's excellent. After 50 that is that is a great difference. Percent water content that's these were sampled at the exact same time so it's pretty big deal. And then we looked at bulk density. This is nothing you wouldn't expect. Bulk density was lower in no till. It's mesoporosity. So these are terrible. Mesoporosity and macro porosity were higher. Chisel disc followed in macro porosity. That was pretty expected. And this is the water table. I guess I showed you that before I just but interesting factors and affecting these N2O emissions. So we ran this little guy we got our PCs don't worry about it but we have our nitrous oxide emissions and our nitrogen here and inversely related we have gram negative bacteria. So that means the higher the nitrous okay let me get this right. The higher the nitrous oxide emissions the higher the amount of nitrogen the lower the gram negative bacteria were. Which means inversely technically the higher the gram positive bacteria were. Gram negative bacteria are kind of like this boom and bust they're not great. If you're talking about bacteria you have gram negative and you have gram positive. They're a good indicator. These were just some other things I threw in that I thought might be drivers but you can see they're kind of jutting off left and right not really telling us anything definitive. But with this low gram negative bacteria that has been associated with higher carbon availability. So the more carbon availability you have the less gram negative bacteria you have. All that data does it benefit air quality? Absolutely it does. When scaled per bushel N2O emissions were almost half of chisel disc tillage. Due to differences in boom boom boom boom soil moisture, nitrogen mobilization soil structure and lower percentage of gram negative bacteria. I just love that result. These will get faster. Okay third question what soil health indicators explain crop yield? I apologize this is the worst graph that's ever existed. This is yield. There's no differences and I'm so sorry I haven't remade it a thousand times but year was significant tillage was not that's what it's saying. So corn yield not significant not significant not significant tilletry was not significant but each year there were significant differences same with soybean yield. This year was great these years were poor but you can see that alternate tillage and no till did follow an insignificant trend of being higher in soybean years. The alternative till was pretty interesting because because it's every third year that means that sometimes it's corn and the other time it's soybean so it's never falls it could be four but then it always fall in the same one so it's meant to fall between the rotation. Um so I just got I have to back up for a second so we had no differences in yield. What are nematodes? We're going to talk about nematodes and we just got what are they? They are a they're a lot of things but they're the most abundant animal in the world at four out of five animals in the world is a nematode. They live on your skin they live in the ground they live inside of you they live on surfaces they could be living here right now but what's so unique about soil living nematodes these are free living nematodes they're not living within a plant they're living within the soil and they're really moving in the soil kind of water surface like around those aggregates they'll be water held tightly they can they're so small they can move within that water they move very little in their lives but they occupy a cross section of the entire soil footprint that's why they are so interesting so cool so important so they eat bacteria they eat fungi they eat plants they eat each other they eat a combination of many of those and I get to look at them in the microscope some of them are cute some of them are real cute and by looking at each of these nematodes we get to see oh there's a lot of bacteria eating nematodes there must be a lot of bacteria there same with fungus same with eating each other um we also have um they're classified into cp units and cp units are colonizer persister units and they're I don't know why they're not called rk strategist because it's the same thing where um in rk strategists you have this was a forest and it was burned and then you have your you know first little weedy plants grow up those are the ours right and when it becomes a full forest again those are the k's same with cp units but it goes one to five one being these guys can live anywhere it doesn't matter they will persist they make a lot of babies they're always going to be and then we have five which is they they need the right conditions they have low fecundi so they only make a few eggs at a time they have long lifespans those kind of things so we get to look at these and interpret um our soul food web which is amazing and for our nematode community analysis I will preface this is one year of data um I don't want to talk about what happened with my second year and I will someone threw it away it was terrible um and I didn't get to take the second year but for my first year of data this is what the community looked like and each point is a full nematode community so uh the nematode I type every by genus genus genus and I have a full spreadsheet and I'm like okay I have all these different types of nematodes I have ones and twos and threes underneath all of them and it all gets compressed down into one point and that's the entire community and um when that's compressed if there's a nematode there that is um a cp5 nematode so it has a long lifespan it makes very few babies um it doesn't live everywhere it gets weighted heavier than having lots and lots of the ones that can just exist wherever and there's tons of them so we can say alternate tillage this is also I know this is a weird no no that's not a weird block alternate tillage had the most variation which I thought was really interesting um where these kind of they all collapse onto each other we do see the separation between no till and mobile plow but it kind of hits everybody it's kind of like right in the middle we have this I'm trying to remember what was happening in this one I want to say the nematode count was just very low in general I thought about throwing it out but there was already the very wet block I already threw out of this data it was all over the place it didn't make much sense but there was no significant difference between those communities given another year I think there would have been given more sampleings yes um but over the entire community no but that's fine because we have other things to look at um next I looked at these indices so what these indices are I'll step you through them but each number ranges from one to five and it's really just ranking on that cp level one two three four five five being wow um there's a there's a lot of those guys there one being really boomer bus situation this is a maturity index it's exactly what it sounds like how mature is the soil food web how mature are those nematodes maturity index two through five this is like oh those ones can be out of control so we actually calculate a little bit different I like to look at both you can see they are a little bit different this is the sum of maturity index again it's it's very similar these are just three different ways to calculate the same thing and depending on what system you're in it depends on how you're calculating it um but if we looked at the sum maturity this is what captured you know my significant data with this ecological data I do always argue that um point one can be considered significant because this is 50 years of data it'd be ashamed to not glean things from it but it follows the same trend so I just focus on the sum maturity index but the soil environment cultivated by this no-till long-term no-till encourages um higher cp unit groups and that's why you're seeing this higher number um and that means that despite the fertilization which when you fertilize it will bring that number down when you till it will bring that number down when you disturb your soil in any way it will bring the number down um despite there being tillage and fertilization that there was stable soil system developed and a lack of short-term enrichment so you can see the certificate higher this was stepwise um surprisingly those two years of no-till did build some compared to the mobile plow obviously it was very destructive but chisel disc it isn't that far behind which I was very surprised about but alternate tillage letting it rest really helped it was closer than chisel disc um if we look more the rest then we have the structure indicee this was really interesting because we see the at's like almost performing as well as as no-till and we come here and look at at and it was the most perturbed by disturbance this is called the structure index so it's saying okay the cp units on the on the nematodes they were higher yeah that's fine um but then looking at the structure it's like wow the this is looking at the overall soil structure it was much lower in at it was more detrimental to let it build and then when you go through until to have that boom and bust scenario where all that carbon is then um you know introduced into into the system and let go that we talked about earlier where you have a mixture of all these nutrients of the of the fertilization of the nitrogen into the soil you have all these things happening and it's more detrimental than just tilling every year because you're letting things build and then destroying it um that was very interesting I didn't expect that and we're going to get to a multivariate analysis oh no I moved my okay these are supposed to be here and that is supposed to be there um I moved it over put that in and then I forgot about that um so we're looking at our multivariate analysis this is where some of those handy tests that you're talking about comes into play and but really I'm just looking at yield I want to look at our soil yield and our corn yield and I laid a bunch of stuff on top and I just really want to through stuff at the loss what what'll stick what's going to happen here we've got aggregation we've got all kinds of stuff but if I'm looking at cumulative corn yield this is a positive um association and I'm looking at cumulative soil yield this positive association anything over here is negatively associated so if this goes up then that goes there um so the soil yield was largely associated with these large aggregates that's a pretty strong correlation where soil you can say I can't say it's driven by large aggregates but I can say it is strongly correlated with large aggregates out of everything that I threw into this graph additionally corn um corn yield here was this is a little bit this is kind of weak but it was weakly associated with this plant parasitic index there was a greater number of plant parasitic nematodes based on corn yield thank you um and that was most likely due to a greater root density that's really all it's saying is you're going to have plant parasitic nematodes there most of them aren't a huge deal some of them are in specific numbers but um what we really saw was no don't look don't look hang on I don't know how I just jumped to the end but as you can see we're very close so hang with me that's not the right way no don't look okay okay so what we're bringing it down to is our soil yield was associated with this larger aggregate size corn yield was associated with greater root biomass if we're looking at the soil health indicators that explain crop yield I want to go that to that bacteria both were associated with a high percentage of bacteria not gram negative bacteria but bacteria um actinomycesia bacteria it makes up a very large portion of the bacteria in the soil um then we have percent bacteria here uh look no different the lines mean nothing um so it's just like where the like it's where these fall in association each other the longer the line the stronger the association what's I'm sorry I didn't explain these are the nematode communities laid on top I I totally blew past that so these are the nematode communities um no no no these are not the nematode communities these are this is the yield data laid on top to see like what's happening what's being associated with this yield data you can see that none of them are outperforming because it wasn't significant the next one's no I know I'm sorry I'm sorry we just have one more um but they mean nothing so much as they're associated together like all these are pointing at no till these are positively associated with no till yes um all these are loosely pointing it to the list because it was very variable um these are associated with mobile plow yes okay we don't worry we're gonna get in this graph again um so this is starting to point at a functioning soil ecosystem so what soil health indicators explain it really that actinomyces bacteria really pointed out it's really quite interesting fortunately nematodes didn't tell us too much but last question I promise it's just one slide there's no till profitability including ecosystem benefits outweigh possible yield losses okay here's where we get into the the green circle if we look at no till I know it's so small um we can see our maturity indexes we can see our microbial active carbon right here um we see carbon here here's your soil health indicator in the test um we have organic matter we have this size aggregate which we saw like way thousand slides ago um and we have the water soluble total organic carbon here all these were associated with no till these none of these are yield but all those are great great things and if we look loosely but negatively associated with chisel disc which is the standard it's not it's not saying it's bad detrimental but it it's associated with very small aggregation and it's associated with more compaction and I'm seeing this fungal two bacterial percentage that you were talking about earlier um was much higher in actually chisel disc and lowest in no till so it from fungus to bacteria that was much a wide region yes yes um and then you know alternate till there's more plow they kind of get when it gets sucked towards the center it's really not you can't take too many conclusions from it so my personal opinion sit in there's no number it's just a fungal two bacterial um this is yep I don't I could pull up data if you want me to send it to you but I couldn't say it off top my head I'm very sorry yeah um I can if you and me you can all send it to you but um my opinion yes look at all these amazing things and that was just a portion of my dissertation I went deeper I I just focused on that no till if you could think of it I took it and with no statistical differences in yield obviously there was minor differences in yield but statistically no differences I would say yes thank you for your patience I appreciate it so much thank you for ser if you want to look up the rest of the results of my research um my grant number is GNC 19-292 um I put out a lot of informational material in that grant my professor and co-PI Dr. Amir Sadikpur he spoke here earlier he's at Enric he's down the hall and of course they're gonna agree in conference because they are so delightful to me but thank you guys