168
Subtle Agroecologies
Between the 1960s and 1980s, Popp’s thesis made a comeback among some scientists in Germany.
Popp argued that high-quality food contains measurable amounts of biophotons and that these could
have a nutritive value for humans and may help us to stay healthy. At this time, there was growing
scepticism in Europe about the supposed benefts of mineral fertilisers and synthetic pesticides. This
raised the question of whether organically grown food might be qualitatively different from that which
was industrially grown. In this context, FES was developed, with the aim of determining food quality
in a holistic way. Differences between crop samples grown under organic and conventional conditions
were explored, as well as the effects of the biodynamic preparations, which at that time were known
by some farmers to be potent, but whose mechanistic pathways were not yet understood scientifcally.
More recently, scientifc research has confrmed the real differences in soil parameters, plant
health, product quality and more, between industrial and organic/biodynamic farming (e.g. Geier
et al., 2016; Mäder et al., 2006; Mie et al., 2017). Research also shows that the use of biodynamic
preparations may 1 result in enhanced product quality, which is measurable through picture-forming
methods (Doesburg et al., 2014; Fritz et al., 2017; Bloksma et al., 2001, 2007) as well as by FES
(Stolz et al., 2019; Strube and Stolz, 2010). With ongoing developments in analytical capacity, these
differences can also be shown by the metabolic pattern (or ‘metabolomics’; Shewry et al., 2018;
Zörb et al. 2009), by 1H-NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy) (Picone et al., 2016) or
by modern gas-chromatographic and mass-spectrometric devices (Bigot et al., 2018).
This chapter describes the general methodology of the FES measurement and provides some
relevant results and refections on the epistemology of the approach. The aim is to encourage the
reader not only to think in terms of the dominant mainstream worldview that focuses on material
form, but also to consider life processes. Light energy mediates such life processes and is thus also
of importance when studying metabolites, and this light- and life-process-related aspect of food
quality needs to be taken into consideration when evaluating FES results.
THE METHOD OF FES MEASUREMENTS
The procedure of FES consists of an illumination (excitation) of the sample and a measurement
of the subsequent emission of photons (see Figure 15.1). The measurements are conducted in a
climate-controlled dark room (at 15 ± 1°C with 40 ± 5% relative humidity). The excitation is done
by projecting light in seven different colours (i.e. red, yellow, blue, etc.) one after the other onto the
sample, each colour representing a defned range of wavelengths of visible light. Detection after
each colour excitation is realised by a photomultiplier which counts the subsequent emitted photons
at intervals, and the declining curve over time is documented (Figure 15.2). The data evaluation
is performed on the basis of repeated measurements of each sample, and parameters such as the
short-time emission (the frst data point of the declining curve, Mw1) or the long-term emission (the
mean of the last 40 or 80 data points of the declining curve, R40) for each excitation colour are of
interest, as well as the relationships between them.
A more detailed description of the method and the devices used is given in Stolz et al. (2019) and
Wohlers and Stolz (2019).
EFFECTS OF FARMING SYSTEMS ON FOOD QUALITY, MEASURED BY FES
To date, thousands of such FES measurements have been performed at the research institute
KWALIS in Germany, many of which focusing on the impact of farming systems on food quality.
To explain the concept of quality evaluation via FES, four examples are provided which show the
following:
1 The term ‘may’ is used here rather than ‘does’ because the biodynamic preparations do not work like standard industrial
inputs, such as nitrogen fertiliser, and thus should not be compared to or treated as such. The preparations enhance quality in the way that is appropriate for each given situation; they encourage growth and enable other possibilities without
forcing the plant.
Subtle Agroecologies
Between the 1960s and 1980s, Popp’s thesis made a comeback among some scientists in Germany.
Popp argued that high-quality food contains measurable amounts of biophotons and that these could
have a nutritive value for humans and may help us to stay healthy. At this time, there was growing
scepticism in Europe about the supposed benefts of mineral fertilisers and synthetic pesticides. This
raised the question of whether organically grown food might be qualitatively different from that which
was industrially grown. In this context, FES was developed, with the aim of determining food quality
in a holistic way. Differences between crop samples grown under organic and conventional conditions
were explored, as well as the effects of the biodynamic preparations, which at that time were known
by some farmers to be potent, but whose mechanistic pathways were not yet understood scientifcally.
More recently, scientifc research has confrmed the real differences in soil parameters, plant
health, product quality and more, between industrial and organic/biodynamic farming (e.g. Geier
et al., 2016; Mäder et al., 2006; Mie et al., 2017). Research also shows that the use of biodynamic
preparations may 1 result in enhanced product quality, which is measurable through picture-forming
methods (Doesburg et al., 2014; Fritz et al., 2017; Bloksma et al., 2001, 2007) as well as by FES
(Stolz et al., 2019; Strube and Stolz, 2010). With ongoing developments in analytical capacity, these
differences can also be shown by the metabolic pattern (or ‘metabolomics’; Shewry et al., 2018;
Zörb et al. 2009), by 1H-NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy) (Picone et al., 2016) or
by modern gas-chromatographic and mass-spectrometric devices (Bigot et al., 2018).
This chapter describes the general methodology of the FES measurement and provides some
relevant results and refections on the epistemology of the approach. The aim is to encourage the
reader not only to think in terms of the dominant mainstream worldview that focuses on material
form, but also to consider life processes. Light energy mediates such life processes and is thus also
of importance when studying metabolites, and this light- and life-process-related aspect of food
quality needs to be taken into consideration when evaluating FES results.
THE METHOD OF FES MEASUREMENTS
The procedure of FES consists of an illumination (excitation) of the sample and a measurement
of the subsequent emission of photons (see Figure 15.1). The measurements are conducted in a
climate-controlled dark room (at 15 ± 1°C with 40 ± 5% relative humidity). The excitation is done
by projecting light in seven different colours (i.e. red, yellow, blue, etc.) one after the other onto the
sample, each colour representing a defned range of wavelengths of visible light. Detection after
each colour excitation is realised by a photomultiplier which counts the subsequent emitted photons
at intervals, and the declining curve over time is documented (Figure 15.2). The data evaluation
is performed on the basis of repeated measurements of each sample, and parameters such as the
short-time emission (the frst data point of the declining curve, Mw1) or the long-term emission (the
mean of the last 40 or 80 data points of the declining curve, R40) for each excitation colour are of
interest, as well as the relationships between them.
A more detailed description of the method and the devices used is given in Stolz et al. (2019) and
Wohlers and Stolz (2019).
EFFECTS OF FARMING SYSTEMS ON FOOD QUALITY, MEASURED BY FES
To date, thousands of such FES measurements have been performed at the research institute
KWALIS in Germany, many of which focusing on the impact of farming systems on food quality.
To explain the concept of quality evaluation via FES, four examples are provided which show the
following:
1 The term ‘may’ is used here rather than ‘does’ because the biodynamic preparations do not work like standard industrial
inputs, such as nitrogen fertiliser, and thus should not be compared to or treated as such. The preparations enhance quality in the way that is appropriate for each given situation; they encourage growth and enable other possibilities without
forcing the plant.