AgriNova AITry the field demo
AgriNova AI
Try the field demo

Case Studies · Company-reported

Historical field studies from Iran, 2021

The following examples summarize company-reported field work in Iran. They illustrate how satellite observations informed field investigation, rather than establish Canadian performance or validate every feature planned for AgriNova.

01 · Observation02 · Field check03 · Learning
Company-reported · Iran · 2021 · NDVI · not a controlled trial

Investigating an uneven maize field

The observation

The team's study notes describe a persistently weaker vegetation signal in part of a maize field. Repeated imagery helped identify an area for a closer ground inspection.

The field check

According to the study, the inspection identified a heavy-clay area where irrigation water was ponding. The grower then carried out drainage-related field work.

What the example shows

A persistent pattern helped focus an investigation. The imagery indicated where to look; the ground inspection helped explain what was happening.

This is a summary of a historical company case study. It does not establish a controlled yield comparison or a guaranteed result for another field.

What these notes do not show

  • No control plot: nothing untreated was supplied for comparison.
  • No harvest weights: no measured yields were supplied.
  • No counterfactual calculation: nothing shows what would have happened without the follow-up.

These notes therefore cannot show whether the follow-up changed the yield, or by how much.

Source & method
What it is
A company-reported summary of satellite vegetation observations (NDVI) and a ground inspection on one maize field. Observations only; no outcome figures are shown.
Source
AgriNova AI founders' pitch deck, p. 16 (an internal document, not published) (link: Not available), access date: Not available
Who measured
The team, in its own field work in 2021, as AgriNova AI reports it. No independent party measured it, and no AgriNova AI analysis or AMI score is claimed for 2021.
Where / when
Abyek, Qazvin, Iran; the 2021 growing season.
Sample size or area
One field, 6.5 hectares (16.1 acres).
Baseline / method
Repeated NDVI maps showed one part of the field persistently weaker than the rest; a ground inspection followed. No control plot and no comparison with an untreated area.
Known limits
No control plot, harvest weights or calculation of what would have happened otherwise were supplied. No imagery, chart or field outline is shown without the grower's consent. Observations on maize in Iran do not show how Canadian crops would respond.
Last reviewed
October 4, 2026 (this summary's wording; the founders' method record has not been reviewed independently)
Company-reported · Iran · 2021 · NDVI · not a controlled trial

Following barley conditions after cold weather

Frost recovery tracking, not frost protection: the observations followed the field after the cold weather and are not presented as a frost warning or as protection for the crop.

The observation

The team's study notes describe changes in a satellite-derived vegetation trend following late-March and early-April cold events. The imagery provided a sequence of observations to review over time.

The follow-up

The account describes follow-up by the grower and a later rebound in the vegetation signal. Those observations formed part of the field's seasonal record.

What the example shows

Comparing observations through time can help organize questions about a field's response to changing conditions. An association with cold weather is not, by itself, proof of a particular cause or treatment effect.

The example is historical and company-reported. It is not a Canadian validation study or evidence that the current assistant predicts or treats frost damage.

What these notes do not show

  • No control plot: nothing untreated was supplied for comparison.
  • No harvest weights: no measured yields were supplied.
  • No counterfactual calculation: nothing shows what would have happened without the follow-up.

These notes therefore cannot show whether the follow-up changed the yield, or by how much.

Source & method
What it is
A company-reported summary of satellite vegetation observations (NDVI) on one barley field before and after cold weather: frost recovery tracking, not frost protection. No outcome figures are shown.
Source
AgriNova AI founders' pitch deck, pp. 18–19 (an internal document, not published) (link: Not available), access date: Not available
Who measured
The team, in its own field work in 2021, as AgriNova AI reports it. No independent party measured it, and no AgriNova AI analysis or AMI score is claimed for 2021.
Where / when
Markazi, Iran; cold events in late March and early April 2021.
Sample size or area
One field, 45 hectares (111.2 acres).
Baseline / method
NDVI observations over the season, compared before and after the cold weather, and follow-up by the grower. No control plot and no comparison with an untreated area.
Known limits
No control plot, harvest weights or calculation of what would have happened otherwise were supplied. No imagery, chart or field outline is shown without the grower's consent. Observations on barley in Iran do not show how Canadian crops would respond.
Last reviewed
October 4, 2026 (this summary's wording; the founders' method record has not been reviewed independently)

What these observations mean for Canada

These observations were made in Iran, on maize and barley. Canadian crops and conditions differ, and models must be retuned for Canadian wheat, canola and barley before they are production-ready. The planned Prairie beta would test whether similar signals are useful on Prairie farms.

Try the field demo

Next step

A Canadian result would have to meet a stricter reporting standard before AgriNova AI reports it.

How we will report Canadian results