Fertilizer Use Efficiency:

the North American Experience

IFA Agriculture Committee
Fertilizer Demand Meeting Philadelphia, PA May 26, 2003 David W. Dibb, Paul E. Fixen, and Mark D. Stauffer

Potash & Phosphate Institute/Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada

Fertilizer Use Efficiency: An Old Topic but With New Importance

International Nitrogen Initiative (INI) Goal: to optimize Ns beneficial role in sustainable food production and minimize Ns negative effects on human health and the environment resulting from food and energy production. Will focus attention on improving fertilizer N efficiency at a global scale Multiple Level Nutrient Management NRCS program under development to subsidize farmer practices that improve nutrient use efficiency Will test our collective understanding of nutrient use efficiency for N and P

Traditional Nutrient Efficiency Terms

Recovery efficiency (RE) = Increase in uptake per unit nutrient added usually expressed as %

Agronomic efficiency (AE) = Crop yield

increase per unit nutrient added such as bu/lb or kg grain/kg nutrient

Agronomic efficiency of fertilizer N used on corn grain in the U.S., 1964-2002

75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30

Kg grain per kg N .

59 43

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Since 1975:

39% increase in N efficiency 12% increase in fertilizer N per ha 40% increase in corn yields

N fertilizer recovery efficiency using on-farm measurements

Opportunity for improvement
Crop Region Number of farms 56 179 179 23 21 Avg N rate, kg/ha 103 117 112 Recovery, % 37 31 40 18 49

Maize Rice Wheat

NC USA Asia-farmer Asia-researcher India-poor weather India-good weather

145 123

Cassman et al., 2002

Areas of opportunity for improvement in fertilizer N efficiency

Continued improvement in cropping

system management
Realistic

estimation of attainable yield Yield potential protection pest management and other cultural practices Balanced nutrition

Balanced nutrition in the U.S.

Ohio State University dryland corn

80

ppm soil test K 139 ppm soil test K

No

45% N recovery 80% N recovery

Kansas State University irrigated corn

P applied 45 kg ha-1

35% N recovery 75% N recovery

Balanced nutrition in China

Treatment
Reference Crop N NPK

N recovery by crop,%

Zhu, 1994
Jin, 2001

Barley
Wheat (11 yrs) Corn (5 yrs)

28
31 35

51
70 66

Areas of opportunity for improvement in fertilizer N efficiency

Continued improvement in cropping

system management Use of site-specific precision ag technologies

Site Specific Management:

Accounting for spatial variability

Spatial variability in fertilizer N efficiency

Year 1 Uniform N rate 11.1 t/ha average yield
Soybeans In year 2

Indiana; two N rates based on soil type

Year 3 Variable N rate 11.3 t/ha average yield

N Efficiency, kg grain/kg N
28-39 39-50

50-62
62-73

Murrell and Murrell, 2002

Variable N rate contributed to increased N efficiency

40 ha field divided into 10 zones
9 8

Frequency of zones

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 28-39 39-50 1

Whole field year 1,

47 kg grain/kg N

Variable rate year 3, 53 kg grain/kg N 13% increase in fertilizer N efficiency

4

2
1 0 50-62

62-73

N use efficiency, kg grain/kg applied N

Murrell and Murrell, 2002

Areas of opportunity for improvement in fertilizer N efficiency

Continued improvement in cropping system

management Use of site-specific precision ag technologies Better prediction of soil N mineralization Improved timing of N application Improved manure management and crediting Improved fertilizers Biotechnology?

Is the concept of fertilizer use efficiency the same for P and K as it is with N?

The result of applying the definition of agronomic efficiency for N to P

The highest efficiency occurs when inadequate amounts

120
P use efficiency, kg corn/kg P

100

are applied at low soil test levels Building soil test levels to optimum reduces efficiency Efficient P use means reduced profitability, water use efficiency, N use efficiency, and land use efficiency
100
Relative yield, % .

80
60 40 20 0
5 10 15 Bray P-1, ppm

90 80 70 60 50
Low

**

**
20 25

*
Soil test level
High

We need to view P and K efficiency as different than N efficiency

A.E. Johnston and P Poulton The difference method (RE) is appropriate for N but is less useful for P and K where plant available reserves of these nutrients can accumulate in the soil from past applications of fertilizer.
Sustainable efficiency (for P&K) Nutrient

input needed to sustain the system at optimum productivity expressed as a removal to use ratio

P and K Sustainable Efficiency in N. America

Review current crop removal to use ratios Review current soil test levels Combine the two to assess efficiency
Information Sources: Soil Test Levels in North America, PPI/PPIC/FAR Technical Bulletin 2001-1. Plant Nutrient Use in North American Agriculture, PPI/PPIC/FAR Technical Bulletin 2002-1.

Partial K budgets for the U.S. (average of 1998-2000)

Crop Region removal Applied fertilizer Recov. manure* Removal to use fertilizer fert+man

------- K2O, billion kg -----U.S. 6 corn states 8.8 3.0 4.6 1.9 1.7 0.5 1.91 1.62 1.39 1.30

* USDA-NRCS, 2000; Due to manure distribution problems relative to crop demand, this likely overestimates the agronomic contribution.

Ratio of K removal by crops to fertilizer applied plus recoverable manure

BC

AB SK

MB ON PQ

WA ME MT OR ID SD WY IA NV UT CO CA MO NE IL IN OH
MD

NB

PEI

ND MN WI NY MI VT NH MA CT PA
NJ

NS

R/(F+M)
0.00-0.89 0.90-1.09 1.10-1.49 1.50-4.99 > 5.00

RI

WV VA KY NC

DE

KS

AZ

NM

OK AR MS TX

TN SC AL GA

LA

FL

Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower in K in 2001

North America 43%

Partial P budgets for the U.S. (average of 1998-2000)

Crop
Region removal

Applied
fertilizer

Recov.
manure*

Removal to use
fertilizer fert+man

------- P2O5, billion kg -----U.S. 6 corn states 5.2 2.3 4.0 1.4 1.5 0.4 1.30 1.71 0.95 1.33

*USDA-NRCS, 2000; Due to manure distribution problems relative to crop demand and unavailability of a portion of manure P, this likely overestimates the agronomic contribution.

Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer applied plus recoverable manure

BC

AB SK

MB ON PQ
PEI

WA

NB ME
MT ND MN ID SD WY IA NE IL UT CO MO IN PA OH
MD WV DE NJ VT NS

R/(F+M)
0.00-0.49 0.50-0.89 0.90-1.09 1.10-1.49 >1.50

OR

WI

NY MI

NH MA CT RI

NV

CA

VA KY NC

KS

AZ

NM

OK AR MS TX

TN SC AL GA

LA

FL

Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower in P in 2001

North America 47%

Viewing removal to use in light of soil test levels

Large regional differences exist across North

America in both current removal to use ratios and soil test levels 1 is often not the appropriate removal to use ratio target for a state or for a field

Soil test levels < optimum: ratio should be < 1 Soil test levels > optimum: ratio should probably be > 1

Starter fertilizer needs are often independent of

soil test levels or removal to use ratios

State level P assessment: R/(F+M)

Est. crop removal / (fertilizer + manure use)

1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25

Low and decreasing

SD

IA

High but decreasing

WI

AR

GA

Low and increasing

High and increasing

State median soil test level - target level, ppm

Target level = lower end of high category

Estimating target removal/use ratio for a field

Target K test = 150 ppm

Current test = 130 Build: (150 - 130) x 9 kg K2O/ppm = 180 kg K2O/ha To spread build over 4 yrs = 180/4 = 45 kg K2O/ha Avg crop removal per year = 67 kg K2O/ha Total to apply = 45 + 67 = 112 kg K2O/ha

Target removal to use ratio = 67/112 = 0.60

Examples of apparent recovery efficiency of P fertilizer in long term studies

Soil(s) Calcareous clay Clay loam, pH 7.3 28 soils, pH 6.2-7.9 4 soils, pH 6.7-7.6 Sandy loam, non-calcareous
GH = Green house; F = Field.

Applied
P2O5, kg/ha

No. of Crops 5 F 9 F 8 GH 19 GH 4 F

Recovery % 28 54 74 87 100

67 29 152 230 118

Fixen, 1992

If a field is at its optimum soil test level, and replacement of the P and K removed by crops maintains that optimum level, what is the efficiency of P or K?

100%
If use must exceed removal to maintain optimum productivity, soil erosion or fixation are often the cause: Reduce erosion losses Utilize banding and annual fertilizer application

Impact of Improving Efficiency on Fertilizer Demand

Critical to properly define efficiency for the

nutrient in question Nitrogen

Good progress has been made in improving agronomic efficiency Will be significant pressure to further improve agronomic efficiency without sacrificing yield potential Research shows there is room for improvement Yields will likely continue to increase faster than N use

Impact of Improving Efficiency on Fertilizer Demand (continued)

Phosphorus and potassium Will be increasing pressure to improve system efficiency by reducing P levels where excessive Sustainable efficiency will translate into increased P and K demand in some major production regions Pressure to improve N efficiency should result in increased support for balanced nutrition with P and K Higher future crop yields could require higher target soil test levels and temporarily impact demand The thermodynamic need to replace P and K removal at some soil level sets a lower limit for P and K use As food needs increase fundamentals of

natural systems indicate a permanent and expanding role for fertilizers in food production