Agriculture is increasingly being asked to do more with less: maintain productivity, adapt to climate pressures, reduce dependence on synthetic inputs, and protect the natural resources on which food production ultimately depends. At the center of this challenge lies an ecosystem that is easy to overlook because most of its activity happens beneath our feet: soil.
For Darina Štyriaková, Founder and CEO of ekolive, soil is not simply the medium in which crops grow, but a living biological system in which microorganisms, minerals, and plants interact continuously. With a background spanning biotechnology, geology, environmental sciences and bioleaching, Štyriaková has built her work around translating natural processes into practical solutions for agriculture. She leads ekolive, a company developing the InnoBioTech® eco-bioleaching technology, which replicates natural microbial weathering processes to produce ecological biostimulants and support the regeneration of soil and its microbiome.
Her scientific work has also explored the connection between bioleaching, mineral resources, soil remediation, and agricultural applications. Research associated with her work describes how eco-bioleaching can connect the mining sector with agriculture by transforming secondary or disused mineral resources into materials that can support soil restoration and plant health.
In the context of BIOservicES, Štyriaková brings this perspective to one of agriculture’s most pressing questions: can farmers reduce their dependence on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides without sacrificing yields?
Her presentation at BIOservicES, titled “Reducing Agrochemicals Without Yield Loss,” argues that the answer can be found not simply in replacing one agricultural input with another, but in restoring the biological processes that allow soil and plants to function more effectively.
Relearning how healthy soil works
Before synthetic fertilizers became a central component of modern agriculture, farmers depended much more directly on the natural processes taking place in soil. For Štyriaková, understanding those processes is essential to imagining a different agricultural model today.
Her interest in this field is also deeply personal. Her mother spent more than 35 years studying the interactions between microorganisms and minerals, work that shaped Štyriaková’s understanding of soil as a living system.
“Healthy soil is not a passive medium; it is a living system that feeds plants through a constant exchange between roots, bacteria, and minerals,” she says.
From this perspective, traditional agriculture offers an important lesson: rather than feeding plants directly, farmers historically relied on systems that supported the soil’s fertility.
“Before we had synthetic fertilizers, farmers didn’t ‘feed’ plants – they fed the soil, and the soil fed the plants,” Štyriaková explains.
For her, the challenge today is therefore not to recreate the past, but to understand the biological principles that made those systems function and apply them using modern science and technology.
Nature does not necessarily need to be replaced, she argues. It needs to be supported.
When soil becomes chemically dependent
The intensive use of fertilizers and pesticides has changed the relationship between plants, soil and microorganisms.
Štyriaková describes the consequences in particularly direct terms: soil can become dependent on chemical inputs while its biological functions deteriorate.
“We’ve essentially turned soil into a chemically dependent patient,” explains Darina Štyriaková.
In her view, the problem is not necessarily a lack of nutrients. In some soils, nutrients may be present in excess, but they may not be available to plants in the form and conditions required for effective uptake.
As microbial activity declines, farmers can become increasingly dependent on external inputs. Farmers may apply more fertilizer to compensate for declining biological function, while production costs rise and yields may stagnate.
This creates what Štyriaková describes as a vicious cycle: the more heavily soil depends on chemical inputs, the more difficult it becomes to restore the biological processes that support its long-term fertility.
The invisible engine of agricultural productivity
To understand why soil health matters, Štyriaková argues that we need to stop thinking of soil as simply a physical substrate.
A teaspoon of healthy soil can contain an extraordinary diversity of microorganisms. These communities perform functions fundamental to agriculture: breaking down organic matter, making minerals more available, supporting nutrient cycling, fixing nitrogen, and contributing to plant protection.
“When we talk about soil biodiversity, we’re not talking about ‘nice to have’ – we’re talking about the engine that makes agriculture possible,” says Štyriaková.
This perspective is closely aligned with the broader mission of BIOservicES, which investigates the links between soil organisms and the ecosystem functions and services that healthy soils provide. The project aims to develop indicators, tools and models that can help translate knowledge about soil biodiversity into more resilient management practices.
For Darina Štyriaková, the implications are straightforward: when soil biodiversity declines, the soil’s ability to function also declines.
Plants have their own defense systems.
The relationship between microorganisms and plants goes beyond nutrition.
Plants possess sophisticated mechanisms for responding to pathogens and environmental stress. Two of these mechanisms are Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR) and Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR).
According to Štyriaková, these processes are components of the plant’s own defense system. When a plant detects a threat, it produces signaling molecules such as salicylic acid and jasmonic acid, which activate a cascade of protective responses.
These responses can include producing antimicrobial proteins, strengthening cell walls, and other mechanisms that help plants respond to stress.
The agricultural implication is important: rather than trying to eliminate every threat externally, agricultural practices can aim to create conditions in which plants can better defend themselves.
“We can stimulate these natural defenses – not by fighting the pathogen directly, but by giving the plant the tools it needs to fight for itself,”Darina Štyriaková believes.
This principle is central to ekolive’s biostimulant approach.
Can agrochemicals be reduced without reducing yields?
The title of Štyriaková’s BIOservicES presentation addresses one of the most important practical questions surrounding regenerative agriculture.
Can synthetic fertilizers and pesticides be significantly reduced without compromising productivity?
According to the field experience she describes, the answer is yes.
Štyriaková points to more than 300 field trials across eight countries in which farmers reduced synthetic fertilizers and pesticides by 30% to 100% while maintaining or increasing yields. On degraded soils, she reports yield increases of up to 307%.
She also highlights results from trials in Africa: in Kenya, trials conducted with the World Food Program recorded a 51% increase in rice yield, while trials in Nigeria reached 57%.
The underlying argument is not that agricultural inputs should disappear. Rather, healthier soil can change the amount and type of external inputs required.
“We’re not reducing inputs at the expense of yields. We’re reducing inputs because the soil is healthier – and healthy soil produces healthy crops,” says Darina Štyriaková.
Working with minerals rather than against nature
One of the technologies developed by ekolive is InnoBioTech®, an eco-bioleaching process designed to reproduce and accelerate a natural process: the microbial weathering of minerals.
In natural ecosystems, microorganisms interact with minerals over long periods. Through organic acids and enzymes, they help release mineral elements into forms available to plants.
InnoBioTech® seeks to replicate this principle in a controlled process.
“Think of it as nature’s own mineral extraction process – just accelerated,” Štyriaková urges us.
According to Darina Štyriaková, naturally occurring bacteria leach elements from local minerals or residues. The process can release nutrients such as iron, potassium, calcium and magnesium into a form that can be used in agricultural applications.
The approach is designed to operate at ambient temperature and without the harsh chemical processes traditionally associated with mineral extraction and fertilizer production.
The result is a liquid biostimulant intended not only to support plants, but also to interact with the soil microbiome.
ekolive describes InnoBioTech® as a biotechnology innovation that replicates natural microbial weathering, with applications including soil and soil microbiome rehabilitation, mineral upgrading, and biostimulant production.
From laboratory conditions to real farms
One challenge of agricultural biotechnology is the gap between controlled experiments and the complexity of real agricultural environments.
Field conditions vary significantly. Soil composition can change from one field to another, while weather, crop varieties, farming practices and the history of a particular field can all influence results.
Štyriaková says this is one of the most important lessons ekolive’s practical experience has provided.
“Real farms are far more complex than any laboratory,”she emphasizes.
For this reason, she argues that biological treatments should not be considered a “silver bullet”. The strongest results come when farmers incorporate biostimulants into broader soil-management strategies.
She says the farmers who have seen the best outcomes are those combining biostimulants with practices such as reduced tillage, cover crops, and other regenerative approaches.
The objective, therefore, is not simply to replace one agricultural product with another.
It is to rebuild the system.
Why biochar and biostimulants can work together
Another example of this systems approach comes from combining biostimulants and biochar.
Štyriaková compares biochar to a habitat for microorganisms: its porous structure can provide a stable environment in which microbial communities can develop. Biostimulants, meanwhile, can provide nutrients and signaling compounds that support microbial activity.
“The biochar gives the microbes a home, and our biostimulants give them the tools to do their job,” she says.
She cites external trial results showing that the combination produced a yield improvement of up to 51.62% compared with biochar alone. In comparison, the Soil Quality Index increased by 166.93% compared with the control.
The trials also reported an almost 60% increase in organic matter, more than 50% growth in microbial biomass, and more than a 150% increase in aggregate stability when the approaches were combined.
For Štyriaková, these results illustrate an important principle: soil-health interventions can reinforce one another when designed around soil biology rather than individual inputs.
Measuring whether soil is really recovering
Yield remains one of the most important indicators for farmers. But it cannot, on its own, tell the full story of soil recovery.
Štyriaková identifies several additional indicators: microbial diversity and function, organic matter, nutrient availability, aggregate stability and soil structure.
These indicators provide a broader picture of whether the soil is becoming more biologically active and structurally resilient.
“We’re not just interested in this season’s yield, but in next decade’s soil,”says Darina Štyriaková.
This longer-term perspective matters because soil recovery is not always visible immediately above ground. A field can produce a crop while the biological processes beneath the surface are deteriorating.
Conversely, improvements in microbial activity, organic matter, and soil structure can represent progress toward a more resilient agricultural system even before the benefits become visible in yields.
Restoring soil can have effects beyond the field.
Soil degradation does not stop at the boundary of a cultivated field.
Soil biodiversity supports plant diversity, which in turn can influence insects, birds, and other organisms. For Štyriaková, rebuilding the soil microbiome can therefore help restore above-ground biodiversity as well.
She describes this as a cascading effect: healthy soil – healthier plants – more diverse ecosystems.
Farmers involved in ekolive’s trials have reported seeing more earthworms, pollinators and birds after adopting regenerative practices, according to Štyriaková.
The invisible microbial community beneath the soil can therefore become the starting point for broader ecosystem recovery.
The biggest barrier may be trust.
If science and technology are advancing, why aren’t regenerative and low-input practices adopted more widely?
Štyriaková identifies several barriers, including cost, access and knowledge. But she places particular emphasis on one factor: trust.
Farmers have been exposed to numerous claims about agricultural products, including biostimulants. When products fail to deliver the promised results, skepticism is a natural response.
“Trust is built through evidence, not marketing,” says Štyriaková.
For this reason, ekolive’s approach emphasizes demonstrations on real farms and open data sharing.
Access is another challenge. Even when effective products exist, they may not always be available through the distribution channels farmers already use.
For regenerative agriculture to scale, therefore, the challenge is not only scientific. It is also about building credible evidence, practical access and confidence among farmers.
A future in which agriculture manages living systems
Looking 10-20 years ahead, Štyriaková envisions a model in which agriculture is defined less by the quantity of external inputs used and more by how effectively farmers manage living systems.
In this future, farmers could be rewarded not only for agricultural production, but also for the soil health they build, the carbon they store and the biodiversity they support.
Biotechnology would have a role, but not as a replacement for natural processes.
“Biotechnology like ours will be the toolbox that makes this possible – not as a replacement for nature, but as a way of working with it,”believes Darina Štyriaková.
She also anticipates greater use of local, decentralized production of biostimulants from local mineral resources, potentially reducing dependence on imported fertilizers.
The broader shift would be from viewing farmers primarily as commodity producers to recognizing them as stewards of land and ecosystem health.
Connecting biotechnology, agriculture and environmental restoration
The breadth of Štyriaková’s work reflects the fact that soil degradation is not confined to a single scientific discipline.
Her work brings together biotechnology, agriculture, mineral resources processing and environmental restoration. This interdisciplinary perspective also shapes ekolive’s research and innovation activities, including work connecting secondary raw materials with agricultural applications.
For Štyriaková, these fields were never truly separate.
Her mother’s research influenced her professional path in microbiology and geology, and this background helped shape how she approaches environmental problems.
“We didn’t set out to build a ‘biotech company’ or an ‘agriculture company’. We set out to solve a problem – soil degradation – and that problem doesn’t respect academic disciplines,”explains Štyriaková.
Solving that problem, she argues, requires microbiology, geology, engineering and business to work together.
And perhaps this is one of the central lessons emerging from the conversation: restoring soil health cannot be reduced to a single product, technology or agricultural practice.
It requires a systems approach.
Making the invisible visible
Soil works quietly. Its microorganisms are invisible to the naked eye, its processes often take place over long periods, and the consequences of degradation may only become apparent after years of intensive pressure.
Yet this invisible ecosystem underpins some of the most visible aspects of human life: food production, biodiversity, water regulation and the resilience of agricultural communities.
For BIOservicES, understanding these hidden biological processes is essential to developing better ways of managing soil and the ecosystem services it provides. The project is studying soil organisms across 25 experimental sites, covering different land uses and biogeographic regions, with the broader goal of developing tools and models that can support climate-resilient management.
For Darina Štyriaková, the direction is clear: agriculture does not need to fight nature to remain productive.
It needs to understand how nature works – and create the conditions in which those processes can function again.
Because beneath every crop is a living system.
And the future of agriculture may depend on how well we learn to take care of it.
This article is part of the Key Opinion Leaders campaign developed within the BIOservicES project, an initiative aimed at connecting the project’s research and academic expertise with real business and real-life cases.
Through the voices of relevant soil health experts, the campaign aims to bring the consortium’s expertise closer to the wider public and turn scientific concepts related to soil biodiversity, regeneration, and climate resilience into accessible, meaningful conversations.