Fertilizer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A large, modern fertilizer spreader


A Lite-Trac Agri-Spread lime and fertilizer spreader at an agricultural show
Fertilizer (or fertiliser) is any organic or inorganic material of natural or synthetic origin (other than
liming materials) that is added to soil to supply one or more plant nutrients essential to the growth of
plants. Conservative estimates report 30 to 50% of crop yields are attributed to natural or synthetic
commercial fertilizer.
[1]
Global market value is likely to rise to more than US$185 billion until
2019.
[2]
The European fertilizer market will grow to earn revenues of approx. 15.3 billion in 2018.
[3]

Mined inorganic fertilizers have been used for many centuries, whereas chemically synthesized
inorganic fertilizers were only widely developed during the industrial revolution. Increased
understanding and use of fertilizers were important parts of the pre-industrial British Agricultural
Revolution and the industrial Green Revolution of the 20th century.
Inorganic fertilizer use has also significantly supported global population growth it has been
estimated that almost half the people on the Earth are currently fed as a result of synthetic nitrogen
fertilizer use.
[4]

Fertilizers typically provide, in varying proportions:
six macronutrients: nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg),
and sulfur (S);
eight
micronutrients: boron (B), chlorine (Cl), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), manganese (Mn), molybdenum (
Mo), zinc (Zn) and nickel (Ni) (1987).
The macronutrients are consumed in larger quantities and are present in plant tissue in quantities
from 0.15% to 6.0% on a dry matter (0% moisture) basis (DM). Micronutrients are consumed in
smaller quantities and are present in plant tissue on the order of parts per million (ppm), ranging
from 0.15 to 400 ppm DM, or less than 0.04% DM.
[5][6]

Only three other structural elements are required by all plants: carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen. These
nutrients are supplied by water (through rainfall or irrigation) and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Contents
[hide]
1 Labeling of chemical fertilizer
2 History
3 Forms
4 Inorganic commercial fertilizer
o 4.1 Controlled-release types
o 4.2 Application
o 4.3 Problems with inorganic fertilizer
4.3.1 Water pollution
4.3.2 Contamination with impurities
4.3.3 Soil acidification
4.3.4 Trace mineral depletion
4.3.5 Overfertilization
4.3.6 High energy consumption
4.3.7 Contribution to climate change
4.3.8 Impacts on mycorrhizas
4.3.9 Lack of long-term sustainability
5 Organic fertilizer
o 5.1 Benefits of organic fertilizer
o 5.2 Disadvantages of complex fertilizers
o 5.3 Comparison with inorganic fertilizer
5.3.1 Examples of organic fertilizer
o 5.4 Organic fertilizer sources
5.4.1 Animal
5.4.2 Plant
5.4.3 Mineral
6 Environmental effects
o 6.1 Eutrophication
o 6.2 Blue baby syndrome
o 6.3 Soil acidification
o 6.4 Persistent organic pollutants
o 6.5 Heavy metal accumulation
o 6.6 Radioactive element accumulation
o 6.7 Atmosphere
o 6.8 Other problems
6.8.1 Increased pest fitness
7 See also
8 References
9 External links
Labeling of chemical fertilizer[edit]
Main article: Labeling of fertilizer
In the US and Canada, the labeling scheme presents three numbers separated by dashes (e.g. 10-
10-10 or 16-4-8).
[7][8]
The first number represents the percentage of Nitrogen in the product; the
second number, Phosphorus; and the third, Potassium. The generalized form is N-P-K. A 50-pound
bag of fertilizer labeled 16-4-8 contains 8 pounds of nitrogen (16% of the 50 pounds), 2 pounds of
phosphorus (4% of 50 pounds), and 4 pounds of potassium (8% of 50 pounds). Australian
convention adds a fourth number for Sulphur.
[9]

History[edit]


Founded in 1812, Mirat, producer ofmanures and fertilizers, is claimed to be the oldest industrial business inSalamanca (Spain).
Main article: History of fertilizer
Management of soil fertility has been the pre-occupation of farmers for thousands of years. The start
of the modern science of plant nutrition dates to the 19th century and the work of German
chemist Justus von Liebig, among others.
John Bennet Lawes, an English entrepreneur, began to experiment on the effects of various
manures on plants growing in pots in 1837, and a year or two later the experiments were extended
to crops in the field. One immediate consequence was that in 1842 he patented a manure formed by
treating phosphates with sulphuric acid, and thus was the first to create the artificial manure industry.
In the succeeding year he enlisted the services of Joseph Henry Gilbert, with whom he carried on for
more than half a century on experiments in raising crops at the Rothamsted Experimental Station.
[10]

The BirkelandEyde process was one of the competing industrial processes in the beginning of
nitrogen based fertilizer production. It was developed by Norwegian industrialist and scientist Kristian
Birkeland along with his business partner Sam Eyde in 1903, based on a method used by Henry
Cavendish in 1784.
[11]
This process was used to fix atmospheric nitrogen (N
2
) into nitric acid (HNO
3
),
one of several chemical processes generally referred to as nitrogen fixation. The resultant nitric acid
was then used as a source of nitrate (NO
3
-
) in the reaction
HNO
3
H
+
+ NO
3
-

which may take place in the presence of water or another proton acceptor. Nitrate is an ion which
plants can absorb.
A factory based on the process was built in Rjukan and Notodden in Norway, combined with the
building of large hydroelectric power facilities.
[12]

The Birkeland-Eyde process is relatively inefficient in terms of energy consumption. Therefore, in the
1910s and 1920s, it was gradually replaced in Norway by a combination of the Haber process and
the Ostwald process. The Haber process produces ammonia (NH
3
) from methane (CH
4
) gas and
molecular nitrogen (N
2
). The ammonia from the Haber process is then converted into nitric
acid (HNO
3
) in the Ostwald process.
[13]

Forms[edit]
Fertilizers come in various forms. The most typical form is solid fertilizer in granulated or powdered
forms. The next most common form is liquid fertilizer; some advantages of liquid fertilizer are its
immediate effect and wide coverage.
There are also slow-release fertilizers (various forms including fertilizer spikes, tabs, etc.) which
reduce the problem of "burning" the plants due to excess nitrogen. Polymer coating of fertilizer
ingredients gives tablets and spikes a 'true time-release' or 'staged nutrient release' (SNR) of
fertilizer nutrients.
More recently, organic fertilizer is on the rise as people are resorting to environmental friendly (or
'green') products. Although organic fertilizers usually contain a lower concentration of nutrients, this
lower concentration avoids complication of nitrogen burn harming the plants. In addition, organic
fertilizers such as compost and worm castings break down slowly into complex organic structures
(humus) which build the soil's structure and moisture- and nutrient-retaining capabilities.
[citation needed]

Inorganic commercial fertilizer[edit]
Fertilizers are broadly divided into organic fertilizers (composed of organic plant or animal matter),
or inorganic or commercial fertilizers. Plants can only absorb their required nutrients if they are
present in easily dissolved chemical compounds. Both organic and inorganic fertilizers provide the
same needed chemical compounds. Organic fertilizers provided other macro and micro plant
nutrients and are released as the organic matter decaysthis may take months or years. Organic
fertilizers nearly always have much lower concentrations of plant nutrients and have the usual
problems of economical collection, treatment, transportation and distribution.
Inorganic fertilizers nearly always are readily dissolved and unless added have few other macro and
micro plant nutrients nor added any 'bulk' to the soil. Nearly all nitrogen that plants use is in the form
of NH
3
or NO
3
compounds. The usable phosphorus compounds are usually in the form of phosphoric
acid (H
3
PO
4
) and the potassium (K) is typically in the form of potassium chloride (KCl). In organic
fertilizers nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium compounds are released from the complex organic
compounds as the animal or plant matter decays. In commercial fertilizers the same required
compounds are available in easily dissolved compounds that require no decaythey can be used
almost immediately after water is applied. Inorganic fertilizers are usually much more concentrated
with up to 64% (18-46-0) of their weight being a given plant nutrient, compared to organic fertilizers
that only provide 0.4% or less of their weight as a given plant nutrient.
[14]

Nitrogen fertilizers are often made using the Haber-Bosch process (invented 1909) which uses
natural gas (CH
4+
) for the hydrogen and nitrogen gas (N
2
) from the air at an elevated temperature
and pressure in the presence of a catalyst to form ammonia (NH
3
) as the end product. This ammonia
is used as a feedstock for other nitrogen fertilizers, such as anhydrous ammonium nitrate (NH
4
NO
3
)
and urea (CO(NH
2
)
2
). These concentrated products may be diluted with water to form a
concentrated liquid fertilizer (e.g. UAN). Deposits of sodium nitrate (NaNO
3
) (Chilean saltpeter) are
also found the Atacama desert in Chile and was one of the original (1830) nitrogen rich inorganic
fertilizers used.
[15]
It is still mined for fertilizer.
[16]

In the Nitrophosphate process or Odda Process (invented in 1927), phosphate rock with up to a 20%
phosphorus (P) content is dissolved with nitric acid (HNO
3
) to produce a mixture of phosphoric
acid (H
3
PO
4
) and calcium nitrate (Ca(NO
3
)
2
). This can be combined with a potassium fertilizer to
produce a compound fertilizer with the three macronutrients N, P and K in easily dissolved form.
[17]

Phosphate rock can also be processed into water-soluble phosphate (P
2
O
5
) with the addition of
sulfuric acid (H
2
SO
4
) to make the phosphoric acid in phosphate fertilizers. Phosphate can also be
reduced in an electric furnace to make high purity phosphorus; however, this is more expensive than
the acid process.
Potash can be used to make potassium (K) fertilizers. All commercial potash deposits come
originally from marine deposits and are often buried deep in the earth. Potash ores are typically rich
in potassium chloride (KCl) and sodium chloride (NaCl) and are obtained by conventional shaft
mining with the extracted ore ground into a powder. For deep potash deposits hot water is injected
into the potash which is dissolved and then pumped to the surface where it is concentrated by solar
induced evaporation. Amine reagents are then added to either the mined or evaporated solutions.
The amine coats the KCl but not NaCl. Air bubbles cling to the amine + KCl and float it to the surface
while the NaCl and clay sink to the bottom. The surface is skimmed for the amine + KCl which is
then dried and packaged for use as a K rich fertilizerKCl dissolves readily in water and is available
quickly for plant nutrition.
[18]

Compound fertilizers often combine N, P and K fertilizers into easily dissolved pellets. The N:P:K
ratios quoted on fertilizers give the weight percent of the fertilizer in nitrogen (N), phosphate (P
2
O
5
)
and potash (K
2
O equivalent)
The use of commercial inorganic fertilizers has increased steadily in the last 50 years, rising almost
20-fold to the current rate of 100 million tonnes of nitrogen per year.
[19]
Without commercial fertilizers
it is estimated that about one-third of the food produced now could not be produced.
[20]
The use of
phosphate fertilizers has also increased from 9 million tonnes per year in 1960 to 40 million tonnes
per year in 2000. A maize crop yielding 69 tonnes of grain per hectare requires 3150 kg
of phosphate fertilizer to be applied, soybean requires 2025 kg per hectare.
[21]
Yara International is
the world's largest producer of nitrogen based fertilizers.
[22]

Controlled-release types[edit]
Urea and formaldehyde, reacted together to produce sparingly soluble polymers of various
molecular weights, is one of the oldest controlled-nitrogen-release technologies, having been first
produced in 1936 and commercialized in 1955.
[23]
The early product had 60 percent of the total
nitrogen cold-water-insoluble, and the unreacted (quick release) less than 15%. Methylene ureas
were commercialized in the 1960s and 1970s, having 25 and 60% of the nitrogen cold-water-
insoluble, and unreacted urea nitrogen in the range of 15 to 30%. Isobutylidene diurea, unlike the
methylurea polymers, is a single crystalline solid of relatively uniform properties, with about 90% of
the nitrogen water-insoluble.
In the 1960s, the National Fertilizer Development Center began developing Sulfur-coated urea;
sulfur was used as the principle coating material because of its low cost and its value as a
secondary nutrient.
[23]
Usually there is another wax or polymer which seals the sulfur; the slow
release properties depend on the degradation of the secondary sealant by soil microbes as well as
mechanical imperfections (cracks, etc.) in the sulfur. They typically provide 6 to 16 weeks of delayed
release in turf applications. When a hard polymer is used as the secondary coating, the properties
are a cross between diffusion-controlled particles and traditional sulfur-coated.
Other coated products use thermoplastics (and sometimes ethylene-vinyl acetate and surfactants,
etc.) to produce diffusion-controlled release of urea or soluble inorganic fertilizers. "Reactive Layer
Coating" can produce thinner, hence cheaper, membrane coatings by applying reactive monomers
simultaneously to the soluble particles. "Multicote" is a process applying layers of low-cost fatty acid
salts with a paraffin topcoat.
Besides being more efficient in the utilization of the applied nutrients, slow-release technologies also
reduce the impact on the environment and the contamination of the subsurface water.
[23]

Top users of nitrogen-based fertilizer
[24]

Country
Total N use
(Mt pa)
Amt. used for feed/pasture
(Mt pa)
China 18.7 3.0
U.S. 9.1 4.7
France 2.5 1.3
Germany 2.0 1.2
Brazil 1.7 0.7
Canada 1.6 0.9
Turkey 1.5 0.3
UK 1.3 0.9
Mexico 1.3 0.3
Spain 1.2 0.5
Argentina 0.4 0.1
Application[edit]
Synthetic fertilizers are commonly used for growing all crops, with application rates depending on the
soil fertility, usually as measured by a soil test and according to the particular crop. Legumes, for
example, fix nitrogen from the atmosphere and generally do not require nitrogen fertilizer.
Studies have shown that application of nitrogen fertilizer on off-season cover crops can increase the
biomass (and subsequent green manure value) of these crops, while having a beneficial effect on
soil nitrogen levels for the main crop planted during the summer season.
[25]

Nutrients in soil can be thrown out of balance with high concentrations of fertilizers. The
interconnectedness and complexity of this soil food web means any appraisal of soil function must
necessarily take into account interactions with the living communities that exist within the soil.
Stability of the system is reduced by the use of nitrogen-containing fertilizers, which cause soil
acidification.
Applying excessive amounts of fertilizer has negative environmental effects, and wastes the growers'
time and money. To avoid over-application, the nutrient status of crops should be assessed. Nutrient
deficiency can be detected by visually assessing the physical symptoms of the crop. Nitrogen
deficiency, for example has a distinctive presentation in some species. However, quantitative tests
are more reliable for detecting nutrient deficiency before it has significantly affected the crop.
Both soil tests and Plant Tissue Tests are used in agriculture to fine-tune nutrient management to
the crops needs.
Problems with inorganic fertilizer[edit]
See also Environmental effects
Water pollution[edit]
The nutrients, especially nitrates, in fertilizers can cause problems for natural habitats and for human
health if they are washed off soil into watercourses or leached through soil into groundwater.
[26]
In
Europe these problems are being addressed by the European Union's Nitrates Directive.
[27]
Within
Britain farmers are encouraged to manage their land more sustainably in 'catchment-sensitive
farming'.
[28]
In the US, excess fertilizer runoff is classified as non-point source pollutants due to the
inability to quantify the amount entering bodies of water and shallow aquifers.
[29]

Contamination with impurities[edit]
Phosphate rocks all contain hazardous elements such as fluorine, heavy metals and radioactive
elements.
[30]
Consequently, common agricultural grade phosphate fertilizers (which are derived from
these phosphate rocks) usually contain impurities such as fluorides, cadmium and uranium, although
concentrations of the latter two heavy metals are dependent on the source of the phosphate and the
fertilizer production process.
[31][32][33]
These potentially harmful impurities can be removed; however,
this significantly increases cost. Highly pure fertilizers are widely available and perhaps best known
as the highly water soluble fertilizers containing blue dyes used around households. These highly
water soluble fertilizers are used in the plant nursery business and are available in larger packages
at significantly less cost than retail quantities. There are also some inexpensive retail granular
garden fertilizers made with high purity ingredients.
Oregon and Washington, both in the United States, have fertilizer registration programs with on-line
databases listing chemical analyses of fertilizers.
[34][35]

The fluoride content of many widely used phosphate fertilizers has increased soil fluoride
concentrations, prompting considerable research into the possibility that soil productivity and food
quality may be compromised.
[33]
It has been found that food contamination from fertilizer is of little
concern as plants accumulate little fluoride from the soil; of greater concern is the possibility of
fluoride toxicity to livestock that ingest contaminated soils.
[36][37]
Also of possible concern are the
effects of fluoride on soil microorganisms.
[36][37][38]

Soil acidification[edit]
Also regular use of acidulated fertilizers generally contribute to the accumulation of soil acidity in
soils which progressively increases aluminium availability and hence toxicity. The use of such
acidulated fertilizers in the tropical and semi-tropical regions of Indonesia and Malaysia has
contributed to soil degradation on a large scale from aluminium toxicity, which can only be countered
by applications of limestone or preferably magnesian dolomite, which neutralises acid soil pH and
also provides essential magnesium.
Trace mineral depletion[edit]
Scientific investigations have indicated a trend of decreasing concentrations of minerals (such as
iron, zinc, copper and magnesium) in many foods over the last 50-60 years.
[39][40]
Intensive farming
practices, including the use of inorganic fertilizers are frequently suggested as reasons for these
declines and organic farming is often suggested as a solution.
[40]
Although improved crop yields
resulting from inorganic NPK fertilizers are known to dilute the concentrations of other nutrients in
plants,
[41][39]
much of the measured decline can be attributed to the use of progressively higher-
yielding crop varieties which produce foods with lower mineral concentrations than their less
productive ancestors.
[39][42][43]
It is, therefore, unlikely that organic farming or reduced use of
inorganic fertilizers will solve the problem; foods with high nutrient density are more likely to be
achieved using older, lower-yielding varieties or the development of new high-yield, nutrient-dense
varieties.
[39][44]

Inorganic fertilizers are, in fact, more likely to solve trace mineral deficiency problems than cause
them: In Western Australia deficiencies of zinc, copper, manganese, iron and molybdenum were
identified as limiting the growth of broad-acre crops and pastures in the 1940s and 1950s.
[45]
Soils in
Western Australia are very old, highly weathered and deficient in many of the major nutrients and
trace elements.
[45]
Since this time these trace elements are routinely added to inorganic fertilizers
used in agriculture in this state.
[45]
Many other soils around the world are deficient in zinc, leading to
deficiency in both plants and humans, and inorganic zinc fertilizers are widely used to solve this
problem.
[46]

Overfertilization[edit]
See also: Fertilizer burn


Fertilizer burn
Over-fertilization of a vital nutrient can be as detrimental as underfertilization.
[47]
"Fertilizer burn" can
occur when too much fertilizer is applied, resulting in drying out of the leaves and damage or even
death of the plant.
[48]

Fertilizers vary in their tendency to burn roughly in accordance with their salt index.
[49]

High energy consumption[edit]
In the USA in 2004, 317 billion cubic feet of natural gas were consumed in the industrial production
of ammonia, less than 1.5% of total U.S. annual consumption of natural gas.
[50]
A 2002 report
suggested that the production of ammonia consumes about 5% of global natural gas consumption,
which is somewhat under 2% of world energy production.
[51]

Ammonia is overwhelmingly produced from natural gas, but other energy sources, together with
a hydrogen source such as water (via water splitting or electrolysis),
[52]
can be used for the
production of nitrogen compounds suitable for fertilizers.
[53]
The cost of natural gas makes up about
90% of the cost of producing ammonia.
[54]
The increase in price of natural gases over the past
decade, along with other factors such as increasing demand, have contributed to an increase in
fertilizer price.
[55]

Contribution to climate change[edit]
The greenhouse gases carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are produced during
the manufacture of nitrogen fertilizer. The effects can be combined into an equivalent amount of
carbon dioxide. The amount varies according to the efficiency of the process. The figure for the
United Kingdom is over 2 kilogrammes of carbon dioxide equivalent for each kilogramme of
ammonium nitrate.
[56]
Nitrogen fertilizer can be converted by soil bacteria to nitrous oxide,
agreenhouse gas.
Impacts on mycorrhizas[edit]
High levels of fertilizer may cause the breakdown of the symbiotic relationships between plant roots
and mycorrhizal fungi.
[57]

Lack of long-term sustainability[edit]
Inorganic fertilizers are now produced in ways which theoretically cannot be continued indefinitely by
definition as the resources used in their production are non-renewable. Potassium and phosphorus
come from mines (or saline lakes such as the Dead Sea) and such resources are limited. However,
more effective fertilizer utilization practices may decrease present usage from mines. Improved
knowledge of crop production practices can potentially decrease fertilizer usage of P and K without
reducing the critical need to improve and increase crop yields. Atmospheric (unfixed) nitrogen is
effectively unlimited (forming over 70% of the atmospheric gases), but this is not in a form useful to
plants. To make nitrogen accessible to plants requires nitrogen fixation (conversion of atmospheric
nitrogen to a plant-accessible form).
Artificial nitrogen fertilizers are typically synthesized using fossil fuels such as natural gas and coal,
which are limited resources.
[citation needed]
In lieu of converting natural gas to syngas for use in
the Haber process, it is also possible to convert renewable biomass to syngas (or wood gas) to
supply the necessary energy for the process, though the amount of land and resources (ironically
often including fertilizer) necessary for such a project may be prohibitive.
Organic fertilizer[edit]
Main article: Organic fertilizer


Compost bin for small-scale production of organic fertilizer


A large commercial compost operation
Organic fertilizers include naturally occurring organic materials, (e.g. chicken litter, manure, worm
castings, compost, seaweed, guano, bone meal) or naturally occurring mineral deposits
(e.g. saltpeter). Poultry litter and cattle manure often create environmental and disposal problems,
making their use as fertilizer beneficial. Bones can be processed into phosphate-rich bone meal;
however, most are simply buried in landfills.
The extent of imbalance in the phosphate and other mineral cycles is such that if all human, animal
and plant wastes were recovered to the extent practical and used for fertilizer, mineral fertilizers and
synthetic nitrogen would be needed to make up for losses impractical to recover through leaching,
atmospheric dispersion and runoff.
[citation needed]

Benefits of organic fertilizer[edit]
Organic fertilizers have been known to improve biodiversity (soil life) and long-term productivity of
soil,
[58][59]
and may prove a large depository for excess carbon dioxide.
[60][61][62]

Organic nutrients increase the abundance of soil organisms by providing organic matter
and micronutrients for organismal relationships such as fungal mycorrhiza,
[63]
(which aid plants in
absorbing nutrients), and can drastically reduce external inputs of pesticides, energy and fertilizer, at
the cost of decreased yield.
[64]

Disadvantages of complex fertilizers[edit]
Some composted biowastes used as organic fertilizers may support the growth of pathogens
and other disease causing organisms if not properly composted.
[65]

Nutrient contents are variable and their release to available forms that the plant can use may not
occur at the right plant growth stage.
[66]

Comparison with inorganic fertilizer[edit]
Organic fertilizer nutrient content, solubility, and nutrient release rates are typically all lower than
inorganic fertilizers.
[67][68]
One study
[which?]
found that over a 140-day period, after 7 leachings:
Organic fertilizers had released between 25% and 60% of their nitrogen content
Controlled release fertilizers (CRFs) had a relatively constant rate of release
Soluble fertilizer released most of its nitrogen content at the first leaching
In general, the nutrients in organic fertilizer are both more diluted and also much less readily
available to plants. Although most organic fertilizers are 'slow-release' fertilizers and cannot cause
nitrogen burn or fertilizer burn, some (such as uncomposted animal manures, fish emulsion and
blood meal) can burn seedlings.
[69]

Organic fertilizers from composts and other sources can be quite variable from one batch to the
next.
[70]
Without batch testing, amounts of applied nutrient cannot be precisely known. Nevertheless,
one or more studies have shown they are at least as effective as chemical fertilizers over longer
periods of use.
[71]

Examples of organic fertilizer[edit]
Chicken litter, which consists of chicken manure mixed with sawdust, is an organic fertilizer that has
been shown to better condition soil for harvest than synthesized fertilizer. Researchers at
the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) studied the effects of using chicken litter, an organic
fertilizer, versus synthetic fertilizers on cotton fields, and found that fields fertilized with chicken litter
had a 12% increase in cotton yields over fields fertilized with synthetic fertilizer. In addition to higher
yields, researchers valued commercially sold chicken litter at a $17/ton premium (to a total valuation
of $78/ton) over the traditional valuations of $61/ton due to value added as a soil conditioner.
[72]

Other ARS studies have found that algae used to capture nitrogen and phosphorus runoff from
agricultural fields can not only prevent water contamination of these nutrients, but also can be used
as an organic fertilizer. ARS scientists originally developed the "algal turf scrubber" to reduce
nutrient runoff and increase quality of water flowing into streams, rivers, and lakes. They found that
this nutrient-rich algae, once dried, can be applied to cucumber and corn seedlings and result in
growth comparable to that seen using synthetic fertilizers.
[73]

Examples
Compost
Rock phosphate
Bone meal
[74]

Manure
Alfalfa
Wood chips/sawdust
[75]

Raw Langbeinite
Cover crops
Unprocessed natural potassium sulfate
Rock powder
Ash
[76]

Blood meal
Fish meal
Fish emulsion
[77]

Organic fertilizer sources[edit]
Animal[edit]
See also: Night soil


Decomposing animal manure, an organic fertilizer source
Animal-sourced and human urea are suitable for application organic agriculture, while pure synthetic
forms of urea are not.
[78]
The common thread that can be seen through these examples is
that organic agriculture attempts to define itself through minimal processing (in contrast to the man-
made Haber process), as well as being naturally occurring or via natural biological processes such
as composting.
[citation needed]

Besides immediate application of urea to the soil, urine can also be improved by converting it
to struvite already done with human urine by a Dutch firm.
[79]
The conversion is performed by adding
magnesium to the urine. An added economical advantage of using urine as fertilizer is that it
contains a large amount of phosphorus.
Recycled sewage sludge (aka biosolids) as soil amendment is only available to less than 1% of US
agricultural land. Industrial pollutants in sewage sludge prevents recycling it as fertilizer.
The USDA prohibits use of sewage sludge in organic agricultural operations in the U.S. due to
industrial pollution, pharmaceuticals, hormones, heavy metals, and other factors.
[80][81][82]
The USDA
now requires 3rd-party certification of high-nitrogen liquid organic fertilizers sold in the U.S.
[83]

Plant[edit]
Leguminous cover crops or fertilizer trees are also grown to enrich soil as a green
manure through nitrogen fixation from the atmosphere;
[84]
as well as phosphorus (through nutrient
mobilization)
[85]
content of soils.
Mineral[edit]
Mined powdered limestone,
[86]
rock phosphate and sodium nitrate, are inorganic (not of biologic
origins) compounds which are energetically intensive to harvest and are approved for usage in
organic agriculture in minimal amounts.
[86][87][88]

Environmental effects[edit]
See also: Environmental impact of agriculture, Human impact on the nitrogen cycle, Nitrogen
fertilizer Problems with inorganic fertilizer and Planetary boundaries Biogeochemical


Runoff of soil and fertilizer during a rain storm


An algal bloom caused by eutrophication

Eutrophication[edit]
Main article: Eutrophication
The nitrogen-rich compounds found in fertilizer runoff are the primary cause of serious oxygen
depletion in many parts of the ocean, especially in coastal zones. The resulting lack of dissolved
oxygen is greatly reducing the ability of these areas to sustain oceanic fauna.
[89]
Visually, water may
become cloudy and discolored (green, yellow, brown, or red).
About half of all the lakes in the United States are now eutrophic, while the number of oceanic dead
zones near inhabited coastlines are increasing.
[90]
As of 2006, the application of nitrogen fertilizer is
being increasingly controlled in northwestern Europe
[91]
and the United States.
[92][93]
If
eutrophication can be reversed, it may take decades
[citation needed]
before the accumulated nitrates in
groundwater can be broken down by natural processes.
Blue baby syndrome[edit]
High application rates of inorganic nitrogen fertilizers in order to maximize crop yields, combined with
the high solubilities of these fertilizers leads to increased runoff into surface water as well
as leaching into groundwater.
[94][95][96]
The use of ammonium nitrate in inorganic fertilizers is
particularly damaging, as plants absorb ammonium ions preferentially over nitrate ions, while excess
nitrate ions which are not absorbed dissolve (by rain or irrigation) into runoff or groundwater.
[97]

Nitrate levels above 10 mg/L (10 ppm) in groundwater can cause 'blue baby syndrome'
(acquired methemoglobinemia), leading to hypoxia (which can lead to coma and death if not
treated).
[98]

Soil acidification[edit]
See also: Soil pH
Nitrogen-containing inorganic and organic fertilizers can cause soil acidification when
added.
[99][100]
This may lead to decreases in nutrient availability which may be offset by liming.
Persistent organic pollutants[edit]
Main article: Persistent organic pollutant
Toxic persistent organic pollutants ("POPs"), such as Dioxins, polychlorinated dibenzo-p-
dioxins (PCDDs), and polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs) have been detected in agricultural
fertilizers and soil amendments
[101]

Heavy metal accumulation[edit]
The concentration of cadmium in phosphorus-containing fertilizers varies considerably; for example,
mono-ammonium phosphate fertilizer may have a cadmium content of as low as 0.14 mg/kg or as
high as 50.9 mg/kg.
[102]
This is because the phosphate rock used in their manufacture can contain as
much as 188 mg/kg cadmium
[103]
(examples are deposits on Nauru
[104]
and the Christmas
islands
[105]
). Continuous use of high-cadmium fertilizer can contaminate soil (as shown in New
Zealand)
[106]
and plants.
[33]
A proposal to limit the cadmium content of phosphate fertilizers
[107]
is
being considered by the European Commission.
[108][109]

Steel industry wastes, recycled into fertilizers for their high levels of zinc (essential to plant growth),
wastes can include the following toxic metals: lead
[110]
arsenic, cadmium,
[110]
chromium, and nickel.
The most common toxic elements in this type of fertilizer are mercury, lead, and arsenic.
[111][112]

Radioactive element accumulation[edit]
Phosphate rocks and fertilizers derived from them (whether they are processed with acids or merely
crushed rock) contain radioactive elements of the uranium-238 series and thorium-232 series.
Concentrations of these radionuclides in the fertilizers vary considerably, and depend both on their
concentrations in the parent phosphate rock, and on the fertilizer production process.
[31][33]
Uranium-
238 concentrations range can range from 7 to 100 pCi/g in phosphate rock
[113]
and from 1 to 67
pCi/g in phosphate fertilizers.
[114][115][116]
Where high annual rates of phosphorus fertilizer are used,
this can result in uranium-238 concentrations that are several times greater than are normally
present.
[115]
However, the impact of these increases on the risk to human health from radinuclide
contamination of foods is very small (less than 0.05 mSv/y).
[115][117][118]

Also, highly radioactive Polonium-210 contained in phosphate fertilizers is absorbed by the roots of
plants and stored in its tissues; tobacco derived from plants fertilized by rock phosphates contains
Polonium-210 which emits alpha radiation estimated to cause about 11,700 lung cancer deaths each
year worldwide.
[119][120][121][122][123]

For these reasons, it is recommended that nutrient budgeting, through careful observation and
monitoring of crops, take place to mitigate the effects of excess fertilizer application.
Atmosphere[edit]


Global methane concentrations (surface and atmospheric) for 2005; note distinct plumes
Methane emissions from crop fields (notably rice paddy fields) are increased by the application of
ammonium-based fertilizers; these emissions contribute greatly to global climate change as methane
is a potent greenhouse gas.
[124][125]

Through the increasing use of nitrogen fertilizer, which is was used at a rate of about 110 million
tons (of N) per year in 2012
[126][127]
to the already existing amount of reactive nitrogen, nitrous
oxide (N
2
O) has become the third most important greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide and
methane. It has a global warming potential 296 times larger than an equal mass of carbon dioxide
and it also contributes to stratospheric ozone depletion.
[128]

The use of fertilizers on a global scale emits significant quantities of greenhouse gas into the
atmosphere.
[citation needed]
Emissions come about through the use of:
animal manures and urea, which release methane, nitrous oxide, ammonia, and carbon
dioxide in varying quantities depending on their form (solid or liquid) and management
(collection, storage, spreading)
fertilizers that use nitric acid or ammonium bicarbonate, the production and application of which
results in emissions of nitrogen oxides, nitrous oxide, ammonia and carbon dioxide into the
atmosphere.
By changing processes and procedures, it is possible to mitigate some, but not all, of these effects
on anthropogenic climate change.
[129]

Other problems[edit]
Increased pest fitness[edit]
Excessive nitrogen fertilizer applications can also lead to pest problems by increasing the birth rate,
longevity and overall fitness of certain agricultural pests, such as aphids (plant
lice).
[130][131][132][133][134][135]

See also[edit]
Fertigation
History of organic farming
Milorganite
Phosphogypsum
Soil defertilisation
History of fertilizer
References[edit]
1. Jump up^

Integrated pest management
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


An IPM boll weevil trap in a cotton field (Manning, South Carolina).
Integrated pest management (IPM), also known as Integrated Pest Control (IPC) is a broad-
based approach that integrates practices for economic control of pests. IPM aims to suppress pest
populations below the economic injury level (EIL). The UN's Food and Agriculture
Organisation defines IPM as "the careful consideration of all available pest control techniques and
subsequent integration of appropriate measures that discourage the development of pest
populations and keep pesticides and other interventions to levels that are economically justified and
reduce or minimize risks to human health and the environment. IPM emphasizes the growth of a
healthy crop with the least possible disruption to agro-ecosystems and encourages natural pest
control mechanisms."
[1]
Entomologists and ecologists have urged the adoption of IPM pest control
since the 1970s.
[2]
IPM allows for safer pest control.
[clarification needed]
This includes managing insects,
plant pathogens and weeds.
Globalization and increased mobility open allow increasing numbers of invasive species to cross
national borders.
[3][4]
IPM poses the least risks while maximizing benefits and reducing costs.
[5]

For their leadership in developing and spreading IPM worldwide, Perry Adkisson and Ray F. Smith
received the 1997 World Food Prize.
Contents
[hide]
1 History
2 Applications
3 Principles
4 Process
5 Southeast Asia
6 See also
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links
History[edit]
Shortly after World War II, when synthetic insecticides became widely available, entomologists in
California developed the concept of "supervised insect control".
[6]
Around the same time,
entomologists in the US Cotton Belt were advocating a similar approach. Under this scheme, insect
control was "supervised" by qualified entomologists and insecticide applications were based on
conclusions reached from periodic monitoring of pest and natural-enemy populations. This was
viewed as an alternative to calendar-based programs. Supervised control was based on knowledge
of the ecology and analysis of projected trends in pest and natural-enemy populations.
Supervised control formed much of the conceptual basis for the "integrated control" that University of
California entomologists articulated in the 1950s. Integrated control sought to identify the best mix of
chemical and biological controls for a given insect pest. Chemical insecticides were to be used in the
manner least disruptive to biological control. The term "integrated" was thus synonymous with
"compatible." Chemical controls were to be applied only after regular monitoring indicated that a pest
population had reached a level (the economic threshold) that required treatment to prevent the
population from reaching a level (the economic injury level) at which economic losses would exceed
the cost of the control measures.
IPM extended the concept of integrated control to all classes of pests and was expanded to include
all tactics. Controls such as pesticides were to be applied as in integrated control, but these now had
to be compatible with tactics for all classes of pests. Other tactics, such as host-plant resistance and
cultural manipulations, became part of the IPM framework. IPM combined entomologists, plant
pathologists, nematologists and weed scientists.
In the United States, IPM was formulated into national policy in February 1972 when
President Richard Nixon directed federal agencies to take steps to advance the application of IPM in
all relevant sectors. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter established an interagency IPM Coordinating
Committee to ensure development and implementation of IPM practices.
[7]

Applications[edit]
IPM is used in agriculture, horticulture, human habitations, and preventive conservation.
Principles[edit]
An American IPM system is designed around six basic components:
[8]

Acceptable pest levelsThe emphasis is on control, not eradication. IPM holds that wiping out
an entire pest population is often impossible, and the attempt can be expensive and unsafe. IPM
programmes first work to establish acceptable pest levels, called action thresholds, and apply
controls if those thresholds are crossed. These thresholds are pest and site specific, meaning
that it may be acceptable at one site to have a weed such as white clover, but not at another
site. Allowing a pest population to survive at a reasonable threshold reduces selection pressure.
This lowers the rate at which a pest develops resistance to a control, because if almost all pests
are killed then those that have resistance will provide the genetic basis of the future population.
Retaining a significant number unresistant specimens dilutes the prevalence of any resistant
genes that appear. Similarly, the repeated use of a single class of controls will create pest
populations that are more resistant to that class, whereas alternating among classes helps
prevent this.
[citation needed]

Preventive cultural practicesSelecting varieties best for local growing conditions and
maintaining healthy crops is the first line of defense. Plant quarantine and 'cultural techniques'
such as crop sanitation are next, e.g., removal of diseased plants, and cleaning pruning shears
to prevent spread of infections. Beneficial fungi and bacteria are added to the potting media
of horticultural crops vulnerable to root diseases, greatly reducing the need for fungicides.
[citation
needed]

MonitoringRegular observation is critically important. Observation is broken into inspection
and identification.
[9]
Visual inspection, insect and spore traps, and other methods are used to
monitor pest levels. Record-keeping is essential, as is a thorough knowledge target pest
behavior and reproductive cycles. Since insects are cold-blooded, their physical development is
dependent on area temperatures. Many insects have had their development cycles modeled in
terms of degree-days. The degree days of an environment determines the optimal time for a
specific insect outbreak. Plant pathogens follow similar patterns of response to weather and
season.
Mechanical controlsShould a pest reach an unacceptable level, mechanical methods are the
first options. They include simple hand-picking, barriers, traps, vacuuming and tillage to disrupt
breeding.
Biological controlsNatural biological processes and materials can provide control, with
acceptable environmental impact, and often at lower cost. The main approach is to
promote beneficial insects that eat or parasitize target pests. Biological insecticides, derived
from naturally occurring microorganisms (e.g.Bt, entomopathogenic
fungi and entomopathogenic nematodes), also fall in this category. Further 'biology-based' or
'ecological' techniques are under evaluation.
Responsible useSynthetic pesticides are used as required and often only at specific times in a
pest's life cycle. Many newer pesticides are derived from plants or naturally occurring
substances (e.g.nicotine, pyrethrum and insect juvenile hormone analogues), but
the toxophore or active component may be altered to provide increased biological activity or
stability. Applications of pesticides must reach their intended targets. Matching the application
technique to the crop, the pest, and the pesticide is critical. The use of low-volume spray
equipment reduces overall pesticide use and labor cost.
An IPM regime can be simple or sophisticated. Historically, the main focus of IPM programmes was
on agricultural insect pests.
[10]
Although originally developed for agricultural pest management, IPM
programmes are now developed to encompass diseases, weeds and other pests that interfere with
management objectives for sites such as residential and commercial structures, lawn and turf areas,
and home and community gardens.
Process[edit]
IPM is the selection and use of pest control actions that will ensure favourable economic, ecological
and social consequences
[11]
and is applicable to most agricultural, public health and amenity pest
management situations. Reliance on knowledge, experience, observation and integration of multiple
techniques makes IPM appropriate for organic farming (excluding synthetic pesticides). For
conventional farms IPM can reduce human and environmental exposure to hazardous chemicals,
and potentially lower overall costs.
Risk assessment usually includes four issues: 1) characterization of biological control agents, 2)
health risks, 3) environmental risks and 4) efficacy.
[12]

Mistaken identification of a pest may result in ineffective actions. E.g., plant damage due to over-
watering could be mistaken for fungal infection, since many fungal and viral infections arise under
moist conditions.
Monitoring begins immediately, before the pest's activity becomes significant. Monitoring of
agricultural pests includes tracking soil/planting media fertility and water quality. Overall plant health
and resistance to pests is greatly influenced by pH, alkalinity, of dissolved mineral and Oxygen
Reduction Potential. Many diseases are waterborne, spread directly by irrigation water and indirectly
by splashing.
Once the pest is known, knowledge of its lifecycle provides the optimal intervention points.
[13]
For
example weeds reproducing from last year's seed can be prevented with mulches and pre-emergent
herbicide.
Pest-tolerant crops such as soybeans may not warrant interventions unless the pests are numerous
or rapidly increasing. Intervention is warranted if the expected cost of damage by the pest is more
than the cost of control. Health hazards may require intervention that is not warranted by economic
considerations.
Specific sites may also have varying requirements. E.g., white clover may be acceptable on the
sides of a tee box on a golf course, but unacceptable in the fairway where it could confuse the field
of play.
[14]

Possible interventions include mechanical/physical, cultural, biological and chemical.
Mechanical/physical controls include picking pests off plants, or using netting or other material to
exclude pests such as birds from grapes or rodents from structures. Cultural controls include
keeping an area free of conducive conditions by removing waste or diseased plants, flooding,
sanding, and the use of disease-resistant crop varieties.
[11]
Biological controls are numerous. They
include: conservation of natural predators or augmentation of natural predators, Sterile insect
technique (SIT).
[15]

Augmentation, inoculative release and inundative release are different methods of biological control
that affect the target pest in different ways. Augmentative control includes the periodic introduction of
predators.
[16][17][18][19][20]
With inundative release, predators are collected, mass-reared and
periodically released in large numbers into the pest area.
[18][21][22][23]
This is used for an immediate
reduction in host populations, generally for annual crops, but is not suitable for long run use.
[24]
With
inoculative release a limited number of beneficial organisms are introduced at the start of the
growing season. This strategy offers long term control as the organism's progeny affect pest
populations throughout the season and is common in orchards.
[24][25]
With seasonal inoculative
release the beneficials are collected, mass-reared and released seasonally to maintain the beneficial
population. This is commonly used in greenhouses.
[25]
In America and other western countries,
inundative releases are predominant, while Asia and the eastern Europe more commonly use
inoculation and occasional introductions.
[24]

The Sterile insect technique (SIT) is an Area-Wide IPM program that introduces sterile male pests
into the pest population to trick females into (unsuccessful) breeding encounters, providing a form
of birth control and reducing reproduction rates.
[15]
The biological controls mentioned above only
appropriate in extreme cases, because in the introduction of new species, or supplementation of
naturally occurring species can have detrimental ecosystem effects. Biological controls can be used
to stop invasive species or pests, but they can become an introduction path for new pests.
[26]

Chemical controls include horticultural oils or the application of insecticides and herbicides. A Green
Pest Management IPM program uses pesticides derived from plants, such as botanicals, or other
naturally occurring materials.
Pesticides can be classified by their modes of action. Rotating among materials with different modes
of action minimizes pest resistance.
[11]

Evaluation is the process of assessing whether the intervention was effective, whether it produced
unacceptable side effects, whether to continue, revise or abandon the program.
[27]

Southeast Asia[edit]
The Green Revolution of the 1960s and '70s introduced sturdier plants that could support the heavier
grain loads resulting from intensive fertilizer use. Pesticide imports by 11 Southeast Asian countries
grew nearly sevenfold in value between 1990 and 2010, according to FAO statistics, with disastrous
results. Rice farmers become accustomed to spraying soon after planting, triggered by signs of the
leaf folder moth, which appears early in the growing season. It causes only superficial damage and
doesn't reduce yields. In 1986, Indonesia banned 57 pesticides and completely stopped subsidizing
their use. Progress was reversed in the 2000s, when growing production capacity, particularly in
China, reduced prices. Rice production in Asia more than doubled. But it left farmers believing more
is betterwhether it's seed, fertilizer, or pesticides.
[28]

The brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens), the farmers' main target, has become increasingly
resistant. Since 2008, outbreaks have devastated rice harvests throughout Asia, but not in the
Mekong Delta. Reduced spraying allowed natural predators to neutralize planthoppers in Vietnam. In
2010 and 2011, massive planthopper outbreaks hit 400,000 hectares of Thai rice fields, causing
losses of about $64 million. The Thai government is now pushing the "no spray in the first 40 days"
approach.
[28]

By contrast early spraying kills frogs, spiders, wasps and dragonflies that prey on the later-arriving
and dangerous planthopper and produced resistant strains. Planthoppers now require pesticide
doses 500 times greater than originally. Overuse indiscriminately kills beneficial insects and
decimates bird and amphibian populations. Pesticides are suspected of harming human health and
became a common means for rural Asians to commit suicide.
[28]

In 2001, scientists challenged 950 Vietnamese farmers to try IPM. In one plot, each farmer grew rice
using their usual amounts of seed and fertilizer, applying pesticide as they chose. In a nearby plot,
less seed and fertilizer were used and no pesticides were applied for 40 days after planting. Yields
from the experimental plots was as good or better and costs were lower, generating 8% to 10%
more net income. The experiment led to the "three reductions, three gains" campaign, claiming that
cutting the use of seed, fertilizer and pesticide would boost yield, quality and income. Posters,
leaflets, TV commercials and a 2004 radio soap opera that featured a rice farmer who gradually
accepted the changes. It didn't hurt that a 2006 planthopper outbreak hit farmers using insecticides
harder than those who didn't. Mekong Delta farmers cut insecticide spraying from five times per crop
cycle to zero to one.
The Plant Protection Center and the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) have been
encouraging farmers to grow flowers, okra and beans on rice paddy banks, instead of stripping
vegetation, as was typical. The plants attract bees and a tiny wasp that eats planthopper eggs, while
the vegetables diversify farm incomes.
[28]

Agriculture companies offer bundles of pesticides with seeds and fertilizer, with incentives for volume
purchases. A proposed law in Vietnam requires licensing pesticide dealers and government approval
of advertisements to prevent exaggerated claims. Insecticides that target other pests, such
as Scirpophaga incertulas (stem borer), the larvae of moth species that feed on rice plants allegedly
yield gains of 21% with proper use.
[28]



What is Integrated Pest Management
(IPM)?
Integrated pest management, or IPM, is a process you can use to solve pest problems while minimizing risks to
people and the environment. IPM can be used to manage all kinds of pests anywherein urban, agricultural, and
wildland or natural areas. (Technical definition of IPM)

How does IPM work?
IPM is based on scientific research
Hear UC IPM scientist Pete Goodell talk about the scientific basis for IPM. (7 min)
WHAT IS A PEST?
Pests are organisms that damage or interfere with desirable plants in our fields and orchards, landscapes, or
wildlands, or damage homes or other structures. Pests also include organisms that impact human or animal
health. Pests may transmit disease or may be just a nuisance. A pest can be a plant (weed), vertebrate (bird,
rodent, or other mammal), invertebrate (insect, tick, mite, or snail), nematode, pathogen (bacteria, virus, or
fungus) that causes disease, or other unwanted organism that may harm water quality, animal life, or other
parts of the ecosystem.
IPM focuses on long-term prevention of pests or their damage by managing the ecosystem
With IPM, you take actions to keep pests from becoming a problem, such as by growing a healthy crop that can
withstand pest attacks, using disease-resistant plants, or caulking cracks to keep insects or rodents from entering a
building.
Rather than simply eliminating the pests you see right now, using IPM means you'll look at environmental factors
that affect the pest and its ability to thrive. Armed with this information, you can create conditions that are
unfavorable for the pest.
In IPM, monitoring and correct pest identification help you decide whether management is needed
Monitoring means checking your field, landscape, forest, or buildingor other siteto identify which pests are
present, how many there are, or what damage they've caused. Correctly identifying the pest is key to knowing
whether a pest is likely to become a problem and determining the best management strategy.
After monitoring and considering information about the pest, its biology, and environmental factors, you can decide
whether the pest can be tolerated or whether it is a problem that warrants control. If control is needed, this
information also helps you select the most effective management methods and the best time to use them.
IPM programs combine management approaches for greater effectiveness
The most effective, long-term way to manage pests is by using a combination of methods that work better together
than separately. Approaches for managing pests are often grouped in the following categories.
Biological control
Biological control is the use of natural enemiespredators, parasites, pathogens, and competitorsto control
pests and their damage. Invertebrates, plant pathogens, nematodes, weeds, and vertebrates have many
natural enemies.
Cultural controls
Cultural controls are practices that reduce pest establishment, reproduction, dispersal, and survival. For
example, changing irrigation practices can reduce pest problems, since too much water can increase root
disease and weeds.
Mechanical and physical controls
Mechanical and physical controls kill a pest directly or make the environment unsuitable for it. Traps for
rodents are examples of mechanical control. Physical controls include mulches for weed management, steam
sterilization of the soil for disease management, or barriers such as screens to keep birds or insects out.
Chemical control
Chemical control is the use of pesticides. In IPM, pesticides are used only when needed and in combination
with other approaches for more effective, long-term control. Also, pesticides are selected and applied in a way
that minimizes their possible harm to people and the environment. With IPM you'll use the most selective
pesticide that will do the job and be the safest for other organisms and for air, soil, and water quality; use
pesticides in bait stations rather than sprays; or spot-spray a few weeds instead of an entire area.
IPM programs
These IPM principles and practices are combined to create IPM programs. While each situation is different, five
major components are common to all IPM programs:
1. Pest identification
2. Monitoring and assessing pest numbers and damage
3. Guidelines for when management action is needed
4. Preventing pest problems
5. Using a combination of biological, cultural, physical/mechanical and chemical management tools
This Web site can help you learn about IPM and how you can apply it to your pest problems. Your local Cooperative
Extension office can also help.

How Organic Farming Could Release Us From the
Curse of Fertilizer
July 02, 2013 | 272,666 views

Spread the Word to
Friends And Family
By Sharing this Article.

3,962

80

128
605
Email

Print


By Dr. Mercola
Environmental pollution is a significant problem. But while most of the focus is placed on polluting
industries, toxins like mercury and small particle traffic pollution, a major source of environmental
devastation is caused by modern food production. Far from being life sustaining, our modern chemical-
dependent farming methods:
Strip soil of nutrients
Destroy critical soil microbes
Contribute to desertification and global climate change, and
Saturate farmlands with toxic pesticides, herbicides and fertilizers that then migrate into ground
water, rivers, lakes and oceans.
For example, many areas of Minnesota, which is prime farmland, now face the problem of having
dangerously elevated levels of nitrogen in their drinking water.
The conversion of grasslands and pastures into chemical-driven, industrial crop land has eliminated much
of the natural filtering of ground water that such native landscapes typically provide. Health risks of
nitrogen include a potential connection to cancer, as well as thyroid and reproductive problems in both
humans and livestock.
Looming Fertilizer Shortage Could Spell the End of Modern Agriculture
Modern fertilizer consists of varying amounts of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K). These
three are believed to be essential for plants to grow, (below, Ill discuss why NPK may not be as
necessary as we think.), and are extracted from the soil with each harvest.
This is why farmers spread fertilizer on their fields, to replace the nutrients lost. Its certainly not the ideal
and sustainable way to farm, but its thought to be the most efficient for large-scale farms. Strategies like
crop rotation and allowing large fields to rest would cut too deep into profits that are based on quantity,
opposed to quality.
Unfortunately, the Earth's soil is now being depleted of nutrients at more than 13 percent the rate it can
be replaced. Not only that, but according to some, we may also be facing looming shortages of two critical
fertilizer ingredients: phosphorus and potassium.
A 2012 article in Mother Jones1 discussed peak phosphorus and potassium, drawing lines of similarity
between the diminishing reserves of these natural elements and peak oil.
Unlike nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium cannot be synthesized, and our aggressive large-scale
farming methods, which deplete soils of nutrients that then must be replaced, are quickly burning through
available phosphorus and potassium stores.
According to well-known investor Jeremy Grantham, writing for Nature:
These two elements cannot be made, cannot be substituted, are necessary to grow all life forms, and are
mined and depleted. Its a scary set of statements. Former Soviet states and Canada have more than 70
percent of the potash. Morocco has 85 percent of all high-grade phosphates. It is the most important
quasi-monopoly in economic history.
What happens when these fertilizers run out is a question I cant get satisfactorily answered and, believe
me, I have tried. There seems to be only one conclusion: their use must be drastically reduced in the next
20-40 years or we will begin to starve.
This largely unknown issue may end up playing a more significant role than you can currently imagine,
because it cuts to the heart of the sustainability of modern agricultural practices, or rather the lack thereof.
[T]he next time someone facilely insists that the 'industrial farms are the future,' ask what the plan is
regarding phosphorus, Mother Jones writes. Developing an agriculture that's ready for a phosphorus
shortage means a massive focus on recycling the nutrients we take from the soil back into the soilin
other words, composting, not on a backyard level but rather on a society-wide scale.
It also requires policies that give farmers incentives to build up organic matter in soil, so it holds in
nutrients instead of letting them leach away... Both of these solutions, of course, are specialties of organic
agriculture.
Monoculture vs. Polyculture
Monoculture (or monocropping) is defined as the high-yield agricultural practice of growing a single crop
year after year on the same land, in the absence of rotation through other crops. Corn, soybeans, wheat,
and to some degree rice, are the most common crops grown with monocropping techniques. In fact, corn,
wheat and rice now account for 60 percent of human caloric intake, according to the UN Food and
Agriculture Organization.2
By contrast, polyculture (the traditional rotation of crops and livestock) better serves both land and
people. Polyculture evolved to meet the complete nutritional needs of a local community. Polyculture,
when done mindfully, automatically replenishes what is taken out, which makes it sustainable with
minimal effort.
If its true that we may at some point face a shortage of phosphorus and potassium, large-scale farming
facilities would be hard-pressed to produce much of anything after a short while. Such shortages might
even lead to geopolitical strife, as phosphate rock is primarily concentrated in the occupied territory of the
Western Sahara region of Morocco. It may sound farfetched to some, but how far would a nation go to
secure access to such a location if the future of the entire agricultural industry and food supply depended
on it?
Monocropping Is NOT the Way to Feed a Growing Population
The evidence tells us that forging more sustainable alternatives is imperative if we hope to survive. Yet
proponents of factory farms and genetically engineered cropsargue that monocropping, or crop
specialization, is the only way to feed the masses and that it's far more profitable than having small
independent farms in every township.
But is this really true? A number of studies show just the opposite! In fact, studies are showing that
medium-sized organic farms are far more profitable than ANY sized industrial agricultural operation.
For example, researchers at the University of Wisconsin's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and
Michael Fields Agricultural Institute3 (results published in 2008 in the Agronomy Journal)4 found that
traditional organic farming techniques of planting a variety of plants to ward off pests is more profitable
than monocropping. The organic systems resulted in higher profits than "continuous corn, no-till corn and
soybeans, and intensively managed alfalfa."
Not only that, but organic farming practices use natural, time-tested techniques that naturally prevents soil
depletion and destruction, and doesnt use chemical fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals that
pollute our soil, air, and waterways.
In the study just mentioned, the researchers concluded that government policies supporting monoculture
are "outdated," and that it's time for support to be shifted toward programs that promote crop rotation and
organic farming. As it turns out, when you eliminate the agricultural chemicals, specialized machinery and
multi-million dollar buildings, fuel costs, insurance costs, and the rest of the steep financial requirements
of a big industrial operation, your cost of producing food takes a serious dive into the doable. And did I
mention the food from organic farms tend to be far more nutritious, besides being free of toxic
contaminants?
Even the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is starting to question our current path of monoculture. It
recently released a report titled: "Climate Change and Agriculture in the United States."5 According to the
report, our current agricultural system, which is dominated by corn and soy, is unsustainable in the long
term. Should temperatures rise as predicted, the US could expect to see significant declines in yields by
the middle of this century. Food shortages would be inevitable, since little besides these crops are grown.
(Keep in mind the primary crops grown in the US are used in processed food production, so countless
numbers of food products would be affected by massive crop loss.)
Nitrogen Overuse Threatens the Environment
Going back to where we started, the overuse of nitrogen in farming is causing far more environmental
devastation than many currently comprehend. A recentNational Geographic article6 addresses this issue:
'Runaway nitrogen is suffocating wildlife in lakes and estuaries, contaminating groundwater, and even
warming the globes climate. As a hungry world looks ahead to billions more mouths needing nitrogen-
rich protein, how much clean water and air will survive our demand for fertile fields?'
China, the worlds largest producer of synthetic nitrogen, has hundreds of nitrogen factories, and the
countrys farmers apply vast amounts of nitrogen to their fields. One rice farmer reports spreading no less
than 530 pounds of urea, a dry form of nitrogen, on each acre. Vegetable farmers use even more than
that. According to the featured article,7 some use upwards of two tons of nitrogen each hectare (2.47
acres).
'Few of them think theyre doing anything harmful. No, no pollution,' says Song, when asked about the
environmental effects of fertilizer,' the article states. "Scientists tell a different story. 'Nitrogen fertilizer is
overused by 30 to 60 percent' in intensively managed fields, says Xiaotang Ju, of the China Agricultural
University in Beijing. 'Its misuse!' Once spread on fields, nitrogen compounds cascade through the
environment, altering our world, often in unwelcome ways. Some of the nitrogen washes directly from
fields into streams or escapes into the air. Some is eaten, in the form of grain, by either humans or farm
animals, but is then released back into the environment as sewage or manure from the worlds growing
number of pig and chicken farms.
Water pollution, as mentioned earlier, is one of the side effects of such overuse. In a matter of decades,
rivers that used to run crystal clear though Chinese provinces are now cloudy from overgrowth of
phytoplankton, fed by fertilizer runoff from the fields. According to National Geographic:
A recent national survey of 40 lakes in China found that more than half of them suffered from too much
nitrogen or phosphorus. (Fertilizer containing phosphorus is often to blame for algal growth in lakes.)
The best known case is Lake Tai, Chinas third largest freshwater lake, which regularly experiences huge
blooms of toxic cyanobacteria. A spreading bloom in 2007 contaminated water supplies for two million
people in the nearby city of Wuxi. Excess nutrients are damaging fisheries in Chinas coastal areas in the
same way that fertilizer runoff flowing down the Mississippi has destroyed fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico:
by creating dead zones in which algae and phytoplankton bloom, die, and decompose, using up oxygen
and suffocating fish.
Finding the Middle Ground of Good Harvests with Reduced Fertilizer Pollution
National Geographic describes a research project in Michigan that has been ongoing for the past two
decades. The project is part of Michigan State Universitys Kellogg Biological Station, near Kalamazoo.
Here, fields that are exactly one hectare in size provide side-by-side comparisons of four different farming
methods, ranging from conventional to organic. Everything that is added to or removed from each field is
carefully measured, including rainfall, fertilizer, nitrous oxide, water that leaches into groundwater, and the
harvest itself. According to the article:
Each field planted according to standard plowing and fertilizer recommendations released 610 pounds of
nitrogen per acre into Michigans shallow groundwater over the past 11 years... The organic fields in
Robertsons experiment, which received no commercial fertilizer or manure, lost only a third as much
but those fields also produced 20 percent less grain.
Intriguingly, the 'low input' fields, which received small amounts of fertilizer but were also planted with
winter cover crops, offered the best of both worlds: Average yields were about as high as those from the
conventional fields, but nitrogen leaching was much reduced, almost to the level of the organic fields.
If Americas farmers could cut their nitrogen losses to something close to this level... restored wetlands
and revived small streams could clean up the rest. As in China, though, many farmers find it hard to
change. When a familys livelihood is at stake, it may seem safer to apply too much fertilizer rather than
too little. 'Being a good steward currently has economic consequences that are unfair,' says Robertson.
How Sustainable Soil Science Can Help Rescue Our Environment and Food Supply
I recently interviewed Dr. Elaine Ingham,8 an internationally recognized expert on the benefits of
sustainable soil science. I also recently visited her at her new position at the Rodale Institute in
Pennsylvania. According to Dr. Ingham, a key component of successful agriculture lies in having the right
helper organisms in the soil; beneficial species of bacteria, fungi, protozoa, beneficial nematodes (not the
weedfeeders), microarthropods, and earthwormsall of which contribute to plant growth in a number of
different ways.
Nutrient cycling is another major issue. According to Dr. Ingham, theres no soil on Earth that lacks the
nutrients to grow a plant. She believes the concept that your soil is deficient and needs added
phosphorus or nitrogen etc in order to grow plants is seriously flawed, and largely orchestrated by the
chemical companies, because its based on looking at the soluble, inorganic nutrients that are partly
present in your soil.
The real nutrition your plants require is actually derived from microorganisms in the soil. These organisms
take the mineral material thats in your soil and convert it into a plant-available form. Without these
bioorganisms, your plants cannot get the nutrients they need. So what you need is not more chemical soil
additives, what you need is the proper balance of beneficial soil organisms. According to Dr. Ingham:
Its very necessary to have these organisms. They will supply your plant with precisely the right balances
of all the nutrients the plant requires. When you start to realize that one of the major roles and functions of
life in the soil is to provide nutrients to the plants in the proper forms, then we dont need inorganic
fertilizers. We certainly dont have to have genetically engineered plants or to utilize inorganic fertilizers if
we get this proper biology back in the soil.
If we balance the proper biology, we select against the growth of weeds, so the whole issue with
herbicides is done away with. We dont need the herbicides if we can get the proper life back into the soil
and select for the growth of the plants that we want to grow and against the growth of the weedy species.
Interestingly enough, you can use a starter culture to boost the fermentation and generation of beneficial
bacteria much in the same way you can boost the probiotics in your fermented vegetables. For compost,
this strategy is used if you want to compost very rapidly. In that case, you can use a starter to inoculate
the specific sets of organisms that you need to encourage in that compost.
For optimal physical health, you need plant foods to contain the full set of nutrients that will allow the plant
to grow in a healthy fashion, because thats the proper balance of nutrients for us human beings as well.
Dr. Ingham has written several books on this topic, including The Field Guide for Actively Aerated
Compost Tea, and The Compost Tea Brewing Manual.
How to Help Support Sustainable Agriculture
If you want to optimize your health, you simply must return to the basics of healthy food choices and
typically this includes buying your food from responsible, high-quality, sustainable sources. This is why I
encourage you to support the small family farms in your area. This includes not only visiting the farm
directly, if you have one nearby, but also taking part in farmer's markets and community-supported
agriculture programs.
Not only is the food so much tastier and healthier when you get it from sustainable, non-CAFO sources,
but there is something about shopping for fresh foods in an open-air, social environment that just feels
right. An artificially lit, dreary supermarket -- home to virtually every CAFO food made -- just can't
compete. If you want to experience some of these benefits first-hand, here are some great resources to
obtain wholesome food that supports not only you but also the environment:
1. Alternative Farming Systems Information Center, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA)
2. Farmers' Markets -- A national listing of farmers' markets.
3. Local Harvest -- This Web site will help you find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources
of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many
other goodies.
4. Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals -- The Eat Well Guide is a free online
directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns,
and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.
5. Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) -- CISA is dedicated to sustaining
agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.
6. FoodRoutes -- The FoodRoutes Find Good Food map can help you connect with local farmers to
find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local
farmers, CSAs, and markets near you.

Pesticide and fertilizer use
Despite land degradation, agricultural yields continue to increase, in part thanks to synthetic fertilizers and pesticides that
temporarily boost soil productivity. Fertilizer consumption has increased exponentially since the 1950s, so much so
that 50% of all commercial fertilizer ever produced has been applied since 1984.
Learn more
the connection between our
While fertilizer application can increase short term crop yields or keep the grass
on your lawn green through November, it comes with its share of detrimental
environmental and health effects. Many of the problems stem from the inability
of the soil to retain all of the fertilizer applied. In fact, it is estimated that about
onehalf of every metric ton of fertilizer applied to fields never even makes it into
plant tissue, but instead ends up evaporating or being washed into local
waterways.
Nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) are the primary major nutrients required for plant growth and are the
main components of most fertilizers. These chemicals are energy intensive to produce, create vast amounts of waste, and
contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Producing one unit of N requires 1.4 units of carbon and 3 units of carbon are
required to manufacture, transport and apply 1 unit of P as P2O5 fertilizer. For every ton of phosphoric acid produced, five
tons of phosphogypsum are generated. Over the past 50 years, more than 700 million metric tons of phosphogypsum have
accumulated in Florida alone, huge stacks at times covering more than 300 hectares at more than 60 meters high with
settling ponds that threaten local water sources. The production of nitric acid, the primary feedstock for synthetic
commercial fertilizer, is also a source of nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas 310 times more potent than carbon dioxide, and
accounted for 15.9 Tg CO2E in 2005, the equivalent emissions of 2.9 million vehicles.
According to the World Health Organization, some 3 million people a year suffer from severe pesticide poisoning. Pesticide
exposure can lead to cancer, birth defects and damage to the nervous system. Drinking water contaminated by pesticide
runoff is a main source of exposure.
Excess fertilizer use and runoff causes eutrophication in waterways which threatens animal and plant health. The surplus
nutrients stimulate excessive plant growth, such as algal blooms, which consume nearly all the available oxygen in the
water and cause other plants and animals to suffocate. Surplus nitrogen and phosphorus from fertilizer runoff, animal
manure, soil erosion and sewage have created a dead zone of more than 7000 square miles in the Gulf of Mexico near
the mouth of the Mississippi River. These huge algal blooms are starving out shellfish and threatening commercial fisheries
and area economies-the U.N. reported nearly 150 dead zones throughout the worlds oceans in 2007.
Solutions: Reduced fertilizer use
soils and our climate
the health of our soil
markets for compost products
best practices for organics
collection
In response to the
negative
environmental
effects of fertilizer
and pesticide
consumption, several
countries and U.S.
states have enacted
taxes upon or
The nitrogen concentration in compost is found in stable compounds in the organic matter.
The nitrogen compounds remain in the soil, available for uptake by the plant roots over a
long period of time, greatly reducing the threat of water pollution and eutrophication.
According to the European Commission, long-term application of compost will establish higher
nitrogen levels in soils such that compost will completely displace synthetic fertilizers.
Data quantifying the amount of reduced pesticide and fertilizer use attributable to compost use is not readily available
across a wide range of applications. Subsequently, models that calculate the climate benefits of improved organics
management through composting, such as the EPAs WAste Reduction Model (WARM), fail to account for the upstream
benefits of reduced chemical fertilizer and pesticide consumption. According to the EPA, To the extent that compost may
replace or reduce the need for these substances, composting may result in reduced energy-related GHG emissions.
In a study commissioned by Seattle Public Utilities, Morris and Bagby (2007) concluded that residents using natural lawn
care practices compared to synthetic practices produced an annual community benefit of $75 in ongoing public health,
ecological, water conservation and hazardous waste management benefits. Natural lawn care practices produced between
$16 and $21 of environmental benefits from reduced use of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, $8 of environmental
benefits for switching from gas to electricity for lawn mowing, $42 in cost savings due to reduced irrigation, and $5 or $6
from lower hazardous waste management costs. There also is a potential one time avoidance of $31 in construction costs
resulting from reduced need for storm water detention and diversion capacity.

Fertilizer Management
Home Agriculture & Water Quality Fertilizer Management

Fertilizers are generally defined as "any material, organic or inorganic, natural or synthetic, which supplies one or more of the chemical
elements required for the plant growth". Most fertilizers that are commonly used in agriculture contain the three basic plant nutrients:
nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. Some fertilizers also contain certain "micrnutrients," such as zinc and other metals, that are
necessary for plant growth. Fertilizers are applied to replace the essential nutrients for plant growth to the soil after they have been
depleted.
Excess amounts of fertilizers may enter streams creating sources of nonpoint pollution. Fertilizers most commonly enter water sources by
surface runoff and leaching from agricultural lands. Large amounts of nitrogen and phosphorous are present in the runoff. Increased
amounts of nitrogen, phosphorous, and other micronutrients can have negative impacts on public health and aquatic ecosystems.
Handling and Storing Fertilizer
Follow label directions
Lock or otherwise secure storage container valves when not in use
Storage buildings should have impermeable floors (impermeable secondary containment dikes can be used)
DO NOT store fertilizer underground in containers or pits
banned the use of
these
chemicals.Learn
more
Mix and load fertilizers at the application place when possible
Handle and store fertilizer away from wellheads and surface water
Immediately recover and reuse or properly dispose of fertilizer spills
Always store fertilizers in their original containers
Application of Fertilizer
Fertilizer application timing - Fertilizers with nitrogen present should be applied as closely as possible to the period of maximum crop
uptake. Partial application of fertilizer in the spring with small additions as needed can reduce leaching and improve nitrogen uptake.
Fertilizing in the fall has been shown to cause groundwater degradation.
Application Rates and Fertilizer Types - It is necessary to sample soil every year to determine crop nutrient needs for accurate fertilizer
recommendations. To calculate the optimal rate of application other sources that contribute nitrogen and phosphorous to the soil should
be considered. Previous crops, irrigation water, manure and organic matter can contribute nitrogen into the soil. Organic matter and
manure contribute phosphorous. Crops can quickly take up nitrate forms of nitrogen, but are subject to leaching loss. Fertilizer with
nitrogen should be limited when leaching potential is moderate to high. If the leaching potential is moderate to high, ammonium nitrogen
fertilizers should be used because they are not subject to leach immediately. However, in warm moist conditions ammonium quickly turns
into nitrate. More slowly available nitrogen fertilizers should be used in these situations. Although phosphorous is less prone to leach, loss
through surface runoff is common so phosphorous should only be applied as needed and at recommended rates.
Fertilizer application equipment should be checked and calibrated annually. The most efficient application method for many crops is to
place dry fertilizer in bands into the ground. Band or drilled row fertilizers can be recovered by the crop more efficiently because of their
close proximity to the seed. Surface-applied fertilizers should be mechanically incorporated into the soil to reduce losses through surface
runoff. Fertilizer should never be applied when the ground is frozen. Fertilizer application should be limited on slopes and areas with high
runoff.
Irrigated crop production has the highest potential for water contamination because of the large quantity of water that is applied. When
excess water is applied nitrogen and phosphorous can leach into groundwater or runoff into surface water. Using systems such as
sprinklers, low energy precision applications, surges and drips help producers apply water efficiently and uniformly. Delivery systems such
as lined ditches and gated pipes as well as reuse systems such as field drainage recovery ponds are efficient.
Why is it important to manage fertilizer use?
Environment
Nitrogen and phosphorous occur naturally in streams throughout Utah and are important
nutrients to aquatic ecosystems. However, too much of these nutrients can cause serious
problems in lakes and streams. Often times in agricultural areas, excess nitrogen enters the
system from animal operations or from irrigation return flow. These added nutrients may
lead to fish kills, noxious aquatic plant growth, and foul odors.

Human Health
Nitrogen fertilizer (organic and inorganic) can contribute to nitrates in drinking water.
Pregnant or nursing women and infants are especially vulnerable to nitrate related health
problems. Nitrate can interfere with the ability of blood to carry oxygen in infants 6 months
old or under. This is known as "blue baby syndrome". Infants may experience shortness of
breath. Infants that receive formula mixed with well water with a high nitrate concentration level may have an increased risk of getting
this syndrome. People over 6 years of age are not usually at risk for this syndrome because their digestive systems naturally absorb and
excrete nitrates.
Little is known about the long term effects of drinking water with elevated levels of nitrates. However, there has been some research
suggesting that nitrates may play a role in spontaneous miscarriages. Also, water sources that show nitrate contamination have the
potential for other contaminants like bacteria and pesticides to reach groundwater along with nitrates.
To test your water for nitrates you may purchase a kit at your local hardware store for approximately $10-20. You may use the following
table to help you interpret your results. For more information about nitrates, click here.


Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority
Pangasiwaan sa Pataba at Pestisidyo

FPA Logo
Attached Agency overview
Formed 30 May 1977
Preceding Attached
Agency
Fertilizer Industry Authority
Type Attached agency
Jurisdiction Government of the Philippines
Headquarters FPA Building, Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI)
Compound, Visayas Avenue, Vasra, Quezon City
143924.77N 121249.2E
Annual budget P57.903 million (2013)
[1]

Minister responsible Proceso Alcala, Secretary of Agriculture
Attached Agency
executive
Norlito R. Gicana, Director
Parent Attached
Agency
Department of Agriculture
Website www.fpa.da.gov.ph
The Philippines' Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority (Filipino: Pangasiwaan sa Pataba at Pestisidyo,
abbreviated as FPA), is an agency of the Philippine government under the Department of
Agriculture responsible for assuring adequate supply of fertilizer and pesticide at reasonable prices;
rationalizing the manufacture and marketing of fertilizer; protecting the public from the risks of the
inherent use of pesticides; and educating the agricultural sector in the use of these inputs.
Contents
[hide]
1 History
2 Vision
3 Mission
4 Strategic Thrusts
5 Program Thrusts
6 Institutional Activities
7 References
8 External links
History[edit]
In 19721973, Philippines was beset by rice production shortfalls resulting from the series
of typhoons and floods and fertilizer shortages spawned by the oil crisis. The resulting fourfold drop
in rice production prompted the government to directly intervene in the operations of the fertilizer
industry through the issuance of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 135 dated 22 February 1973,
creating the Fertilizer Industry Authority (FIA).
[2]

Fertilizer and pesticide are vital agricultural inputs in food production and must be supplied in
adequate quantities at reasonable costs at all times. The fertilizer and pesticide industries have
much in common in terms of clientele, distribution channels, system of application in farmers' fields
and technical supervision by the same farm management technicians under the government's food
production program. In view hereof, the government abolished the FIA and created the Fertilizer and
Pesticide Authority on 30 May 1977 by virtue of P.D. 1144.
The FPA is mandated to assure adequate supplies of fertilizer and pesticide at reasonable prices;
rationalize the manufacture and marketing of fertilizer; protect the public from the risks inherent in
the use of pesticides; and educate the agricultural sector in the use of these inputs. It is attached to
the Department of Agriculture.
Vision[edit]
Sustained agricultural productivity in a wholesome environment through integrated plant nutrients
management and safe crop protection systems.
Mission[edit]
To be a catalyst in the empowerment of farmers and fisherfolk by helping them become better
informed, and more efficient and conscientious in the management of their plant nutrition and crop
protection requirements and preservation of marine and aquatic resources.
Strategic Thrusts[edit]
1. .Integrated Plant Nutrition System [IPNS] -a systematic approach that relates plant nutrition
needs to actual soil fertility condition.
2. .Integrated Crop Protection System [ICPS] -wholistic crop protection system that relates farm
productivity to the protection of human health and the environment.
3. .Empowerment of Farmers/ Fisherfolk helping farmers/fisherfolk become more self-reliant
in meeting their needs for vital agricultural inputs.
4. .Close Networking with Stakeholders in Achieving Sustainable Farm Productivity thru IPNS &
ICPS.
Program Thrusts[edit]
1. .Empower farmers/fisherfolk
2. .Protect human health and the environment
3. .Use indigenous resources
4. .Develop and sustain partnership with all stakeholders.
Institutional Activities[edit]
1. .Regulation of the fertilizer and pesticide industries
efficacy and quality standards environmental impact product safety and agri-occupational
health
1. .Outreach services for farmers/ fisherfolk
plant Health Clinics on-site capability-building programs
1. .R & D
organic fertilizers natural pesticides
1. .Monitoring of pesticide residues in selected crops
2. .Public Information Campaign
health and environmental information techno-tips
1. .Crop Pest Infestation Monitoring