Regenerative Agricultural Development LLC
Post-Call Overview  ·  The Microbes
We stand in the
light together.

— Barry Bonner, on our call

The microbial work we discussed, set out in full: the data, the honest limits, and the threads worth pulling between what you do and what we are building.

Thank you for
the conversation.

Ray put us together, and I am glad he did. You said it on the call, everybody just does a little, and the people who say they care the most often do the least. That has stuck with me. As Ray puts it, healing the land is the easy part; the humans are the issue. There is a stirring, though, and we are both pulling in the same direction.

You were direct with me about microbes, that you are not naturally interested because the category has burned everyone with overpromised products, and that biostimulants are where you have landed and are getting good results. I took that seriously. This document is written with your scepticism in mind, not against it. It sets out exactly what we are working with, what the data does and does not yet show, and the specific places our work could be useful to each other.

The reason for the call was the microbes, so that is what this is about. There is one personal item at the very end, about the friends you mentioned.

The mission

To help stop the desertification of the Midwest, from Texas through the Central Valley, by returning living microbial consortia to the soil at a price point that works outside America, not just inside it.

Two elements carry it: a baseline microbial consortium that can be tailored to the soil strata it is going into, and industrial hemp as a remediation rotation. The endocannabinoid side of my work is at the end of five years of R&D. The microbes are at the beginning, in year two. I am not going to present them as more finished than they are.

“Bug in the jug.”
You are right to be sceptical.

The microbial industry has a deserved reputation problem. There are a lot of rubbish products, a lot of labels claiming organisms that are simply not in the jug when you test it. It is, as you said, a bug in the jug, and that is a hard thing to sell to a farmer who has been let down before. I am not going to pretend that is not the landscape we are operating in.

What lets me stand behind this is the partner I am building it with and the verification underneath it. Every claim we make is proven out in our own genomics laboratory before it leaves the building. We are not selling a story about what is in the consortium. We can sequence it and show you, organism by organism, and we can show what changed in the soil afterwards. Where most programmes sample bulk soil, we pull root samples and sequence the rhizosphere directly, the narrow zone on the living root where the biology that matters actually operates.

The point. I am not asking you to believe a label. I am offering to put the consortium on a controlled strip next to a control, sequence both at the end of the season, and let the data speak. If it does not hold up, it does not hold up. That is the only way this category earns back trust, and it is the only way I am willing to build it.

Aster Bio.
Thirty-seven years of remediation science.

I tracked Aster Bio down after I moved to Texas. They are the private microbial company called in when the petrochemical industry makes a mess, they were part of the response that put the cork in the bottle on the hydrocarbons after Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf in 2010. Run by Eric Rambaud and Paul, they have thirty-seven years of experience building microbial consortia and a genomics laboratory in Houston. They have touched agriculture, rice paddies in Vietnam, asparagus growers here, but it was never their lane.

So I built RAD Microbes around it. Our agreement is straightforward: any agricultural microbes formulated under my organisation, we own the IP, and we split the profit once OPEX and COGS are out. Aster Bio stays focused on petrochemical bioremediation of soil and water. Agriculture, and every agricultural formulation, is mine. That gives us decades of formulation science and a serious lab on day one, with an independent agricultural mission sitting on top of it.

01
Remediation at scale
Aster Bio specialises in the biological response to petrochemical contamination of soil and water. That is the depth of science and field experience now sitting behind our agricultural work.
02
In-house genomics
A genomics laboratory in Houston runs every analysis internally. We do not outsource the proof. Consortium make-up and soil response are both verified in the same lab.
03
RAD owns agriculture
RAD Microbes is independent. All agricultural IP is ours, the products are mine to develop and sell, and the strategy and farmer relationships are set entirely by us.
No synthetic fertilizer.
Identical yield.

I will give you this exactly as it is, including the flaw. We ran a simple pre-farm corn trial across two neighbouring North Texas farms, two acres each, four acres in total. The treated plots had no synthetic fertilizer applied, only residual fertility from the prior season. The control was the farmer's normal NPK programme, $420 per acre. Yield came back identical, with a visibly healthier rhizosphere around the root structure on the treated plots.

The flaw, which I flagged on the call: the two farms were neighbours, same soil, same inputs, across a road from each other, so it is not the clean separation I would have wanted. It is an early signal, not a proof. Everything below is from end-of-season genomics, treated versus control.

786%
More nitrite oxidizers
The bacteria that complete the nitrification cycle and lock nitrogen into plant-available form. Higher in treated soil, the biology building its own fertility engine.
133%
More ammonia oxidizers
Driving the first stage of nitrogen transformation, the efficiency synthetic inputs can substitute for but never replicate.
179%
More filamentous bacteria
Responsible for soil aggregation, pore structure, and water retention. The biology that holds rain in the ground instead of letting it run off.
$420
Per acre, fertilizer not spent
The control spent $420 per acre on synthetic NPK. The treated plots matched its yield on none. A baseline saving of $200–$300 per acre is the conservative read.
Treated
only
Glycogen & phosphate accumulators
Glycogen accumulators appeared only in treated soil, supporting biological phosphorus removal; phosphate accumulators were also enriched.
Down
Pathogenic fungi
Pathogenic fungi present in the control were degraded in the treated soil, fungal suppression from the bacillus consortium alone, before any fungi were added.

Your point on soil testing, taken. You were right that we need to know the residual nitrogen going in. We are adding before-and-after soil tests through Regen Ag Labs in Nebraska across all trials from here, alongside the in-house molecular work and our standard Texas A&M / LSU agronomy sampling. Knowing the available nitrogen before planting, and the fungal-to-bacterial shift after, is exactly the missing layer. Thank you for it.

One building block.
Built deliberately, not broadly.

Right now we run one concentrated liquid Bacillus consortium, five species, with Bacillus megaterium as the main structure and Bacillus licheniformis alongside it, plus species drawn from arid environments selected for water retention in the root zone and heat tolerance in the plant. It costs us about $5.30 to make the one litre that covers an acre. We are deliberately not building a broad-spectrum kitchen-sink product, because if you throw everything in at once you cannot tell what is doing what, or what is downgrading something else. We prove one block, then add the next.

Bacillus megaterium
Main structure
Solubilises phosphate and trace minerals locked in the soil, and produces polysaccharides that promote root colonisation and deeper nutrient uptake. The backbone of the current consortium.
Bacillus licheniformis
Fertility & organic breakdown
Produces enzymes that degrade complex organic compounds, unlocking nutrients already present in the soil but unavailable to the plant. Begins restoring fertility in chemically managed ground.
Arid-environment species
Water & heat resilience
Two species native to arid environments, focused on water retention around the root structure and improved heat tolerance in the plant, naturally formulated for dryland conditions.
2027 — lichen. A photosynthetic metabolite cultured in the lab from silver birch bark, acting as an antimicrobial biocontrol and offering photosynthetic protection to the consortium in the root zone. It sits under the algae family, which is the territory you already work in.
2027 — white-rot and mycorrhizal fungi. The interconnectivity and resource-sharing of mycorrhizae is essential to a genuinely efficient consortium. It will not hold in a liquid, so it forces the move to a solid, pelletised format.
2027 — algae. We begin algae work, and the structures are part of the discussion. Where it pairs and why is still in R&D, but it is on the path.
2028 — pelletised delivery. A solid format carrying the fungal species and a richer microbial load, bound into hemp dust or biochar, for the dryland farming that covers most of America. Likely a small pelletised volume to test before then.

The advantage of getting to the living, fungal consortium is that it stops being something you reapply every year. It becomes a factory in the soil that builds its own enzyme tools and keeps going, a living organism procreating in the ground rather than a short-lived input.

Biostimulants, algae,
and combinations.

You are getting good results with biostimulants, the algae and blue-green algae, chlorella, bacteria, plant extracts, and you are applying things like Enso Algae at a fraction of our volume. That is genuinely the direction we are moving toward on the delivery side, and there is real overlap to explore once we have a solid format. None of this is something I would propose before proving it out, but it is worth naming.

The pellet as a carrier
A lightweight hemp-dust or biochar pellet is a natural place to consider blending complementary inputs, worm castings, a guayule byproduct, the kind of dry biostimulant material you already use, if the combination performs.
Guayule & BioDel Ag
The guayule byproduct you mentioned, and BioDel Ag’s lightweight dry material, are exactly the sort of force-multiplier worth testing alongside a pellet down the road. I have noted both.
Living, not transient
The distinction I would offer: an enzyme or extract is a powerful but short-lived tool. A living consortium builds the factory that keeps producing. The two are complementary, not competing.
Not a cash-crop pitch.
A soil input and a rotation.

I heard you clearly on hemp. You gave it twenty years and let it go, the fibre processing and harvesting economics have not arrived, the seed yields are low, and the gap between what people think hemp can do and what it actually does is wide. I am not going to argue the cash-crop case with someone who has lived it. Where hemp earns its place in our work is narrower and, I think, more defensible: as a remediation rotation and as a feedstock for the soil-input pellet, not as a fibre fortune.

Panda Biotech feedstock
Panda Biotech in Wichita Falls, Texas runs a roughly $100M extraction facility processing around 35,000 acres, working with ~50 farmers across three states. They capture the hemp dust and herd as byproduct, which is the raw material we would bind microbes into for a pellet.
A lighter pellet, with PFAS upside
A hemp pellet is cellulose-rich, labile carbon, food for soil microbes, and likely a better energy source than biochar. It is lighter to distribute, easier to stabilise, and carries potential for PFAS removal. Possibly a biochar-hemp-microbe combination for the best of both.
Better genetics
We are moving past poor seed (Yuma) toward stronger genetics through Hemp Farms Australia, King G and Awunggara seed. Within a 250-mile radius of Panda, some local farmers are matching corn revenue, but I treat that as the exception, not the promise.
Application, volume,
and getting it down.

You went straight to the real constraints, and they are the right ones. Here is where things stand and what I am taking back to the team.

How it is applied today
Dryland: one litre of concentrate into ~30 gallons of water with three tablespoons of molasses, stood 30 minutes to 4 hours to activate, then sprayed. Soil contact wants to be within about 24 hours.
Irrigated: add straight to the irrigation pool or main water supply. Simple.
Not with glyphosate: never apply the microbes when the soil is being nuked, it has to be a separate pass.
Drones: already trialled, the liquid behaves like water and does not clog. That part works.
The volume problem, and the answer
You are right that volume is the downside. 20–30 gallons of water per acre is too much for robotic weeders like Greenfield Robotics to carry.
We can change the concentration. The consortium is formulated at a set concentration; we can increase it and cut the water to fit a drone or robot’s carrying capacity.
Target: I am asking the team whether we can get down to a quart or two per acre, which is the threshold that makes robotic application genuinely interesting.
Pellets for dryland: longer term, dryland moves to the pellet and a stronger consortium, so liquid volume stops being the constraint there at all.
Key actions
from our conversation.

The standing offer: the microbes are free for any trial you want to run, and we cover shipping. One acre treated, one acre as control on the grower’s normal programme, full genomics at our cost. Here is what I took from the call, please correct anything I have misremembered.

Action items
Wheat trials, this fall. The one I most want. We have no wheat data, and you know growers in Kansas and Texas planting in the fall. A few acres at zero fertilizer and a few at 50% reduction, against their control. We supply, we sequence.
Soil testing through Regen Ag Labs. Adopting your recommendation across all trials, before-and-after, including available nitrogen and the fungal-bacterial ratio.
Golf intro. You offered to connect me with your regenerative compost expert in Ontario who knows the top golf-course world. We already have a seven-month bentgrass green trial running at Denton Country Club, treated front nine versus untreated back nine, so the timing is good.
Low-volume formulation for robotics. I raise the quart-per-acre concentration question at the Wednesday team meeting and report back, with Greenfield Robotics in mind.
Kiss the Ground Earth. Once the lightweight pellet exists, worth exploring a one-pound consumer bag for lawn and garden, the retail and Amazon angle you described, mindful of the state-by-state registration hassle.
Information pack. I send the Aster Bio overview, the trial one-pager, and the corn genomics data to the email you text me.
Your friends. The phytocannabinoid follow-up below, whenever you are ready.
For the friends
you mentioned.

You spoke about two friends carrying cancer, one who may already be gone, and one who has been at it three years, doing the alternative work, meditating, on the right path, but living hard by the freeway and the oil derricks and still in real discomfort. You asked how he could get hold of what I make. He does not need a trial. He can come straight into the program.

Separate from RAD Microbes, through my telehealth practice, I formulate phytocannabinoid preparations for specific conditions rather than off-the-shelf wellness products. I work with around eleven phytocannabinoids and their acidic precursors, not CBD alone, which on its own only scratches the surface. For rectal cancer specifically I know exactly which of my formulations applies: a targeted suppository built around delta-8, for its apoptotic activity, in organic cocoa butter, with apricot-seed amygdalin and a little beta-caryophyllene. Alongside that I work in topicals, a beeswax salve, a cannabis oil, and a sublingual, inside a five-pillar protocol. I have worked with more than six hundred people this way.

The simplest next step is the one Ray used for us: send a three-way text and I will reach out directly, educate, and take it from there, quietly and properly. Text me your email and I will send some reading first. No expectation attached, and entirely apart from the agricultural work, just a genuine offer between two people who both believe this plant has more to give than the market allows.