I just spoke to Ivana, the pr person, and the first thing she said was "we could have worded that better" ... apparently she's been hearing as much all day.
She said they were pleased that TK was as good as KCl, but disappointed that it wasn't better, in terms of both yield and quality of the carrots. (This is news to me, I don't recall them saying they expected TK to be 'better', only more 'efficient', so to speak).
She confirmed that the control was no fert at all, but couldn't explain why neither TK nor KCl had done any better (which still, to my mind, begs the question of what exactly does all this prove other than the null hypothesis) ... she said she'd get in touch with an agronomist and get back to me on this.
I asked her to ask the agronomist whether this granularity issue would likely affect other ongoing field trials, or whether it might be something particular to the root structure of carrots, but she told me she didn't think there would be any other results coming before September (?), that the other crops were only being sown now, and that these results would therefore certainly be taken into account (i.e., the granularity would be adjusted).
I still can't get my head around how they managed to prove the null hypothesis re. KCl though. |
