Formulation and quality
Product identity, composition, manufacturing specification, stability conditions and results, and emulsification records for the liquid formulations.
Science & evidence
Results with their conditions.
Claims with their evidence.
Review measured product outcomes, formulation-quality testing and the remaining milestones for animal nutrition. Original records are available for confidential technical diligence.
Public evidence summary
Compare the findings, not just the headlines.
| Product & setting | Study & comparison | Result or status |
|---|---|---|
| EIR BiostimulantPepper greenhouse · Bangkok region | 250 m²; five zones; 29 days. EIR 0.1% versus untreated and chemical standards. | Disease severity: 2.89 → 0.08 at 0.1%; final untreated score 5.00. Disease response, not a yield measurement. Product brief (PDF) |
| EIR PESTOXPepper aphids · Tzrufa · March 2022 | Four replicates; three assessors; assessment at three days. Flonicamid 0.015% as a commercial comparator. | 85.8% control at 0.25%; 86.7% at 0.5%; comparator 29.2%. Observed means; no inferential statistics supplied. Product brief (PDF) |
| EIROLITTERBroilers · Galilee · Dec 2025–Jan 2026 | Two houses, 25,000 birds each. One treated house and one control house. | 1–5 ppm ammonia in the treated house across the cycle; control 44.2 ppm at week six. Day-42 weight +14.4%. One comparison, not replicated house-level evidence. Product brief (PDF) |
| EIR AVIBIOMELaying-hen nutrition | Completed formulation and laboratory work; animal field trials next. | No product-specific animal performance results are reported here. Detailed laboratory methods and results are reviewed in the dossier. Product brief (PDF) |
| EIR BOVIBIOMECattle nutrition | Completed formulation and laboratory work; animal field trials next. | The 60% rumen-retention and 85% intestinal-release figures are design targets, not demonstrated outcomes in this summary. Product brief (PDF) |
Additional plant-health observations and trial interpretation
In a separate preventive banana TR4 challenge, none of the ten treated plants at 0.2% were lost, compared with 80% mortality in the infected untreated group. A 2024 research-institute laboratory report also recorded lethal activity against five tested plant pathogens.
Crop, application rate, comparator and endpoint must remain attached to each result. The EIROLITTER ammonia and weight figures are two outcomes of the same two-house trial; they should not be counted as independent replications.
Evidence on disease severity does not by itself quantify nutrient-use efficiency, stress tolerance or yield. Intended commercial claims are matched to the corresponding evidence in the selected registration route.
Quality assurance
Formulation quality and market readiness
Completed formulation testing
EIR Biostimulant, EIR PESTOX and EIROLITTER have completed stability testing. Emulsification performance has also been tested for the relevant liquid formulations. These checks form part of the technical basis for the finished products.
Traceable technical evidence
Investors and commercial partners can review formulation specifications, trial reports and quality-testing records under a mutual NDA. The review connects each result with the product, method and conditions to which it applies.
Registration and commercial use
The next step for the field-tested products is market-specific registration and marketing. Approved uses, labels and jurisdiction-specific dossier requirements are addressed as part of that commercial route.
Technical review
What belongs in the product dossier.
Methods and results
Laboratory methods and datasets, trial protocols, application conditions, controls and endpoints. Feed-additive release targets are reviewed separately from measured release data and animal outcomes.
Scientific background
Science informing the product portfolio
Published research informs ingredient selection, delivery design and the outcomes we measure. The studies discussed below provide scientific context; findings for NONTOXECO formulations are presented above.
Crop vitality: measuring the plant’s response
Agricultural objective
Biostimulant evaluation examines plant performance when water, temperature or nutrient availability limits growth. Relevant endpoints include nutrient uptake, biomass, marketable yield and quality. Disease suppression is assessed separately.
The research context
Biostimulant research examines nutrient-use efficiency and tolerance to abiotic stress (du Jardin 2015; Yakhin et al. 2017). Meta-analyses examine responses across crops and conditions (Li et al. 2022; Nkebiwe et al. 2024). Work on defence priming, including grapevine studies, offers a further research direction (Jacquens et al. 2022). This work informs the endpoints and mechanisms studied in the EIR Biostimulant program.
Crop protection: efficacy that fits the growing system
Agricultural objective
Crop-protection evaluation measures control of the target pest at practical application rates, alongside crop tolerance, residues and compatibility with beneficial organisms and other management practices.
The research context
Research on arthropod resistance explains why mode of action and resistance management matter (Van Leeuwen et al. 2010; Kewedar et al. 2025; Sparks & Nauen 2015). Studies of pesticide effects on beneficial arthropods and botanical insecticides help frame compatibility questions (Desneux et al. 2007; Isman 2006). A multi-mechanism formulation still requires direct evaluation.
Animal nutrition: intestinal delivery and function
Nutritional objective
The nutritional value of a protected ingredient depends in part on its stability during digestion and release at the intended intestinal site. Release testing, feed handling, tolerance and controlled animal trials connect delivery design with feeding outcomes.
The research context
Butyrate research examines intestinal energy metabolism, barrier function and microbial interactions (Hamer et al. 2008; Peng et al. 2009; Bedford & Gong 2018). Studies in laying hens investigate calcium butyrate and performance or eggshell outcomes (Song et al. 2022; Zhang et al. 2024). Cattle research informs the importance of ruminal metabolism and delivery (Górka et al. 2018). This work informs the biological rationale and evaluation priorities for EIR AVIBIOME and EIR BOVIBIOME.
Animal environments: sustained litter acidification
Housing conditions
Moisture, organic loading, temperature and ventilation vary throughout the production cycle. Evaluation therefore measures both litter conditions and air quality at bird level over time.
The research context
Published work examines ammonia exposure and broiler performance (Miles et al. 2004), and acidification as a way to shift ammonia toward ammonium and retain nitrogen in litter (Moore et al. 2000). The EIROLITTER design uses progressive acid availability to address continuing demand; its duration and performance must be measured in the conditions of use.
Published scientific background and references
- Li, Van Gerrewey & Geelen (2022), Front. Plant Sci., doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.836702
- Nkebiwe et al. (2024), Front. Plant Sci., doi:10.3389/fpls.2024.1333249
- du Jardin (2015), Scientia Horticulturae, doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2015.09.021
- Yakhin et al. (2017), Front. Plant Sci., doi:10.3389/fpls.2016.02049
- Jacquens et al. (2022), Front. Plant Sci., doi:10.3389/fpls.2022.998273
- Van Leeuwen et al. (2010), Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol., doi:10.1016/j.ibmb.2010.05.008
- Kewedar et al. (2025), Insects, doi:10.3390/insects16050440
- Sparks & Nauen (2015), Pestic. Biochem. Physiol., doi:10.1016/j.pestbp.2014.11.014
- Desneux et al. (2007), Annu. Rev. Entomol., doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091440
- Isman (2006), Annu. Rev. Entomol., doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.51.110104.151146
- Hamer et al. (2008), Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther., doi:10.1111/j.1365-2036.2007.03562.x
- Peng et al. (2009), J. Nutr., doi:10.3945/jn.109.104638
- Bedford & Gong (2018), Anim. Nutr., doi:10.1016/j.aninu.2017.08.010
- Song et al. (2022), J. Poult. Sci., doi:10.2141/jpsa.0200127
- Zhang et al. (2024), Anim. Nutr., doi:10.1016/j.aninu.2023.10.008
- Górka et al. (2018), J. Dairy Sci., doi:10.3168/jds.2017-14086
- Miles et al. (2004), Poult. Sci., doi:10.1093/ps/83.10.1650; Moore et al. (2000), J. Environ. Qual. 29:37–49.
These sources inform mechanisms and study methods. They do not replace product-specific evidence.
The next conversation
From evidence to market entry.
Explore investment, licensing or distribution for a defined product and territory.