Can biostimulation contribute to a higher sugar beet yield? In a single-factor field trial conducted in 2024 at SDOO Radostowo, one of the three tested EPIN treatments clearly stood out in terms of both root yield and earlier crop development. Differences were already visible during the growing season and were ultimately reflected in the final harvest results. The trial was carried out on the sugar beet variety BTS 7945N. An untreated control was compared with three EPIN treatments at concentrations of 0.01%, 0.1% and 0.5%.
How was the EPIN trial conducted?
Each treatment included three foliar applications carried out on 3, 17 and 28 June. The first treatment was applied at the 4–6 leaf stage, the second at approximately 50% row closure and the third at full row closure. No additional foliar boron, zinc or copper fertilisation was used during the trial, while soil fertilisation and crop protection followed standard sugar beet production practices. This trial design made it possible to compare crop response to three EPIN concentrations while maintaining the other elements of the production programme.
The 2024 season in Radostowo included periods of challenging weather conditions. Soil drought was recorded from the final week of May, followed by very high temperatures in July. However, the entire season was not uniformly dry – total rainfall reached 120.1 mm in August, compared with just 5.4 mm in September.
Which treatment produced the highest yield?
The highest average root yield was recorded in the 0.5% EPIN treatment – 948.77 dt/ha. By comparison, the untreated control produced 908.02 dt/ha. The 0.1% treatment reached 920.37 dt/ha, while the lowest concentration of 0.01% produced 912.96 dt/ha.
Treatment
Average root yield (dt/ha)
Difference vs control (dt/ha)
Difference vs control (%)
Control
908,02
–
–
EPIN 0,01%
912,96
+4,94
+0,54
EPIN 0,1%
920,37
+12,35
+1,36
EPIN 0,5%
948,77
+40,75
+4,94
The results show that the lowest EPIN concentration produced a yield close to the control, while the largest difference was recorded at 0.5%. In this treatment, average root yield was 4.49% higher than in the untreated control.
Higher yield was not the only difference
Differences between the treatments were already visible before harvest. Crop assessments carried out in June and July showed stronger rosette development particularly in the 0.1% and 0.5% EPIN treatments. The control and 0.01% treatment averaged 23 leaves per plant, compared with 34 leaves at 0.1% and 40 leaves at 0.5%.
A larger leaf area was also observed in the 0.5% treatment. The treatment that ultimately produced the highest root yield had therefore already stood out earlier in the season through a greater number of leaves and a larger leaf surface.
What is EPIN?
EPIN, or epibrassinolide, belongs to the group of brassinosteroids – naturally occurring plant compounds involved in the regulation of numerous physiological processes. Scientific reviews describe their role in regulating plant growth, photosynthesis and antioxidant mechanisms involved in responses to environmental stress.
EPIN is not a plant nutrient and does not replace fertilisation. Its role is to support physiological processes associated with plant growth, development and responses to environmental conditions. Field research on maize hybrids exposed to water deficit, as well as studies on young grapevine plants, indicate that exogenous 24-epibrassinolide can influence selected physiological parameters under drought stress. The results observed in the VitaFer sugar beet trial are consistent with this broader direction of research, although the Radostowo trial itself did not investigate the physiological mechanisms behind the response.
How should the single-factor trial be interpreted?
The trial indicates that EPIN may be an interesting component of sugar beet production programmes, particularly during periods of intensive growth and variable environmental conditions. The 0.5% treatment stood out both during the growing season and at harvest.
Under the conditions of this particular trial, EPIN application was associated with a higher root yield, with the strongest response recorded at the 0.5% concentration. The results should, however, be interpreted as values obtained in this specific location, variety and season. They should not be described as statistically significant without the relevant statistical analysis, nor automatically extrapolated to other growing conditions.
