A few years ago there was a flurry of talk about "open source science" enabled by information and communication technologies. The idea was that with so many people potentially in communication with one another that discoveries would be made by them outside traditional research institutions. I'm not sure if this is still be discussed much, perhaps it's just taken as given now.

This may be a relevant example.

The International Biochar Initiative (IBI) proposes to establish a network of IBI assisted demonstration field trials utilizing biochar as an agronomic soil amendment. The purpose of the network will be to promote, support, and coordinate field trials and the sharing of their results in a manner that builds the research record and allows comparisons of the data in projects across diverse geographic areas, climate, soil, crops, and management practices. It is anticipated that the IBI demonstration project network will help speed the research and demonstration horizon for biochar utilization and commercialization in varied settings.

As part of this network, IBI proposes to make available, through its many participants, standardized reference biochar (SRB) for voluntary utilization in these demonstration trials. The materials will be made available to project developers who wish to include these SRB materials as part of their project protocols, but their use will not be a condition for participation in IBI supported or assisted trials.

There is also "A Guide to Conducting Biochar Trials" with tips and score sheets etc.

A data base of user experiences would be a boon to practitioners as well as answering some open questions for researchers. Like all science it will raise as many or more questions as it answers, but this is a good thing.

Most of the ag trials that I have read about seem woefully incomplete. They seldom do a competent job of characterizing initial conditions, and seldom do a complete analysis of the interventions they try. For example, they may amend soil with manure or compost, but don't have an accurate analysis of the materials applied, as if all manure or compost was the same.

Use of a SRB for trials could make the trials more useful, but offering biochar testing services might be even better. It would complicate subsequent cross-trial comparison and analysis, but would also yield information about the value of various char formulations. All of the trials would be improved by the use of competent testing to characterize soils, water and even seeds. Records of local micro-climates during the test period would be of value too. Not all places are the same and not all years are the same.

Ag is complicated. Even the endemic soil micro and macro organisms matter.