Different Fertility Approaches in Organic Hemp ( Cannabis sativa L.) Production Alter Floral Biomass Yield but Not CBD:THC Ratio

Dylan Bruce, Grace Connelly and Shelby Ellison
Additional contact information
Dylan Bruce: Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1575 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA
Grace Connelly: Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1575 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA
Shelby Ellison: Department of Horticulture, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1575 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA

Sustainability, 2022, vol. 14, issue 10, 1-11

Abstract: Industrial hemp is once again legal in the United States but agronomic practices are not well characterized, especially for organic production systems. Many producers are concerned that while increased fertility may increase biomass yield it will also disproportionally increase that rate of total tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) accumulation, making their crop more likely to be noncompliant at harvest. We measured the effect of four organic fertility treatments: (1) no fertility (NA); (2) manure-based compost (CM); (3) an industry-standard organic fertilizer blend (ST); and (4) an intensive fertility treatment designed for cannabis production (BQ), on biomass yield and cannabinoid accumulation over multiple timepoints and two years. We found that higher fertility (ST and BQ) led to increased biomass but did not influence the ratio of cannabidiol (CBD) to THC over time. We also found the ST treatment yielded the most consistently across years, whereas CM and BQ were less predictable and more costly, respectively. Our results show that fertility recommendations can be made to increase biomass yield without increasing the chance of noncompliance. Additional research addressing specific fertility requirements in organic cropping systems for hemp will be needed to meet consumer demand while remaining profitable and sustainable for growers.

Keywords: organic agriculture; Cannabis sativa; hemp; THC; CBD; fertility; compliance; biomass (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6222/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6222/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6222-:d:819852

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().