Pre-Germination Magnetic Seed Treaters

Results also indicate that much of the seed being sown may have inadvertently been magnetically treated in regular handling of grain. All results indicate that no one should be recommending magnetic seed treating for prairie grain crops. If a producer still wishes to magnetically treat seed, it is recommended that choice of seed treater should be on the basis of price and convenience of use. Certainly, anyone using magnetically treated seed should not expect yield increases due to the treatment.

In keeping with the intent of the Canadian Metric Commission, this report has been prepared in S.I. units. For comparative purposes, the following conversions may be used:

1 acre = 0.4047 hectare (ha)
1 pound (lb.) = 0.4536 kilogram (kg)
1 lb/acre = 1.121 kg/ha
1 Gauss (G) = 0.1 milli Tesla (mT)

Introduction
Many conflicting statements about the effectiveness of magnetic seed treaters have recently appeared. Proponents of magnetic seed treating claim startling yield increases, earlier emergence, earlier maturity and better tillering. Conversely, the majority of field tests conducted in the prairies have shown no benefit from magnetic seed treating.

To help prairie farmers assess the value of magnetic seed treating, the Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute decided to gather all available information into one report. This report. contains results of field tests conducted by the Crop Science Department, University of Saskatchewan (Figure 3) and by Agriculture Canada at Melfort (Figure 1), Swift Current (Figures 4 and 5), Indian Head (Figure 2) and Lethbridge. In addition, the report lists specifications of most of the magnetic seed treaters presently being sold in the prairie provinces. Much of the initial work on magnetic seed treating must be credited to Dr. U.J. Pittman of the Agriculture Canada Research ,Station at Lethbridge, Alberta. The field data presented by Dr. Pittman however, outlined only spot observations of selected treatments within a series of plots but did not include overall results or their statistical significance. It was therefore, not possible to prepare a figure representing results of field trials at Lethbridge.

From work conducted by Dr. Pittman and by other researchers, it is apparent, in many cases, when plants are grown in ideal environmental conditions (in growth chambers with controlled temperature, lighting, humidity and nutrient feeding) the rate of emergence, overall plant vigour, the amount of tillering and subsequent plant yield are all improved by magnetic seed treating. However, from analysis of field data (in plots grown in actual field conditions) no conclusive benefits of magnetic seed treating can be shown. It appears that the effect of environmental factors such as soil moisture content and temperature completely mask any of the possible benefits of magnetic treating which may be shown in growth chamber trials.

The farm press often contains articles by knowledgeable people and advertisements with testimonials outlining the benefits of magnetic seed treating. As mentioned previously, many of these are based on misinterpretation of data or presentation of spot data which do not include an analysis of overall results or their statistical significance. As an example of how this is easily done, refer to Figure 4. It is correct to say that magnetic treatment significantly increased yields in field trials on Wascana durum at Eastend and on Sioux oats at Swift Current in 1974. However, this only describes a small part of the experiment. To be correct, we have to conclude from Figure 4 that in 28 field trials conducted by the Swift Current Research Station in 1974, two fields showed a significant yield increase due to magnetic seed treating, two fields showed a significant yield decrease due to magnetic seed treating and in 24 fields there was no significant difference in yields among magnetically treated seed or untreated seed.