Phosphorus Fertilizer Phosphorus Fertilizer Needs in North AmericaNeeds in North America

18th Annual Regional Phosphate Conference, Lakeland, Florida October

16, 2003

Paul Fixen

Potash & Phosphate Institute

Slide set available at http://www.ppi-ppic.org/ppiweb/napro.nsf

Take away messages about Take away messages about phosphorus in North Americaphosphorus in North America

1. Phosphorus removed from U.S. farmlands by today’s crops exceeds use by 30%30% if manure P is ignored due to its localized use.

2. Counting all recoverable manure P as agronomically useful, results in a barely balanced budgetbarely balanced budget, giving no opportunity to improveno opportunity to improve soil fertility or meet needs of the higher yielding crops of the future.

3. Nearly one out of every two soilsone out of every two soils sampled today indicates a need for a balanced or surplus P budget to produce to full potential.

4. An increase in P useincrease in P use must occurmust occur on many fields for farming systems to be sustainable … based on simple arithmetic.

5. The fertilizer industry has several excellent new programsexcellent new programs in place to increase awareness of P shortages.

Solid science-based evidence indicates an increasing Solid science-based evidence indicates an increasing role for fertilizer P in North American agriculturerole for fertilizer P in North American agriculture

Consumption of N, PConsumption of N, P22OO55, and K, and K22O in the U.S.O in the U.S.

N P2O5 K2O

Current P consumption is similar to the late 1960sCurrent P consumption is similar to the late 1960s

U.S. phosphate fertilizer U.S. phosphate fertilizer consumption by crop in 2001consumption by crop in 2001

USDA-ERS, USDA-NASS, AAPFCO, PPI

Corn grain38.4%

Other crops17.6%

AlfalfaAlfalfa7.5%7.5%

Soybeans7.7%

Wheat16.5%

Corn silage, 3.7%Corn silage, 3.7%

Cotton, 3.6%Cotton, 3.6%

Potatoes, 2.5%Potatoes, 2.5%

Sorghum, 2.5%Sorghum, 2.5%

Total PTotal P22OO55 consumption consumption

4.3 million short tons4.3 million short tons

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Rat

e A

pp

lied

, lb

/A .

Fertilizer use on corn in the U.S. Fertilizer use on corn in the U.S.

N

K2O

P2O5

Data source: USDA-ERS Chemical Use Survey

Current P rates on corn are similar to the late 1960sCurrent P rates on corn are similar to the late 1960s

Crop yield trends in the U.S. and CanadaCrop yield trends in the U.S. and Canada

y = 1.87x - 3610

y = 1.14x - 2160

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Yie

ld (

bu

/A)

U.S.

Canada

y = 0.407x - 773

y = 0.359x - 682

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

Yie

ld (

bu

/A)

U.S.

Canada

Corn yieldsCorn yieldshave have

increasedincreased75% 75%

Wheat yieldsWheat yieldshave have

increasedincreased40%40%

Since the Since the late 1960s late 1960s in the U.S.in the U.S. During thisDuring this

time periodtime periodP fertilizer useP fertilizer use

was flat orwas flat ordecreasing decreasing

while P while P removal by removal by

higher higher yielding crops yielding crops was markedly was markedly

increasing.increasing.

CornCorn

WheatWheat

Will the back end of a cow and nutrient Will the back end of a cow and nutrient management planning put you out of business?management planning put you out of business?

Need to put manure P in perspectiveNeed to put manure P in perspective

Manure P in the U.S. in 1997 according Manure P in the U.S. in 1997 according to NRCS relative to fertilizer Pto NRCS relative to fertilizer P

Manure data source: Kellogg et al., 2000

Million lb P2O5

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

1 Potash & Phosphate Institute (0.35 lb P2O5/bu corn for IA).2 Terry and Kirby, 2000, 2001. 3 Kellog et al., 2000 (1997 production).

Crop Applied Recov. Removal to use

Region Removal1 fertilizer2 manure3 fertilizer Fert + man

------- P2O5, million lbs ------

U.S. 11,400 8,800 3,300 1.30 0.94

Crop Applied Recov. Removal to use

Region Removal1 fertilizer2 manure3 fertilizer Fert + man

------- P2O5, million lbs ------

U.S. 11,400 8,800 3,300 1.30 0.94

IL 1,126 705 77 1.60 1.44

IA 1,100 621 234 1.77 1.29

NC 116 207 250 0.56 0.25

DEDE

ND

SKMB

ON

BCAB

WA

OR

MT

ID

SD

MN

PQ

NY

PAOHINIL

IA

WIMIMI

WYWY

UT

NV

CACA

AZAZ NM

NBNB

NSNS

PEIPEI

MEME

NHNH

VT

MAMACTCT

RIRI

NE

KSMO

KYKY

WVWVVAVA

MDMDNJNJ

NCNCTNTN

AROK

TXTX LALA

MSMS ALAL GAGA

SCSC

FLFL

CO

0.00-0.49

0.50-0.89

0.90-1.09

1.10-1.49

>1.50

R/F

Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer applied.applied.

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

ND

SKMB

ON

BCBCAB

WA

OR

MTMT

ID

SD

MN

PQPQ

NY

PAOHINIL

IA

WIMI

WY

UT

NV

CACA

AZ NM

NBNB

NSNS

PEIPEI

MEME

NH

VT

MAMA

CTCTRIRI

NE

KSMO

KY

WV

VAVA

MD

DEDE

NJNJ

NCNCTN

AROK

TX LA

MS ALAL GAGA

SCSC

FLFL

CO

1.10-1.49

0.50-0.89

0.00-0.49

0.90-1.09

>1.50

R/(F+M)

An Acre of Corn, 1970 to 2000An Acre of Corn, 1970 to 2000

Two decades of building soil P One decade of mining

1970 1980 1990 2000Yield (U.S. avg) bu/A 72 91 119 137

Crop removal lb P2O5/A 32 40 52 60

Erosion loss lb P2O5/A 6 4 3 2

Fertilizer use lb P2O5/A 64 57 51 44

Manure use lb P2O5/A 5 5 5 5

Balance lb P2O5/A 31 18 1 -13

101520

25303540

4550

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

P2O

5, lb

/AAverage P use on corn and soybeans Average P use on corn and soybeans

relative to crop removalrelative to crop removal

Use

Removal

Gap isgrowing

What are the consequences of negative What are the consequences of negative P budgets in crop production?P budgets in crop production?

It depends on the existing soil test level

Soil Test Level vs. Relative YieldSoil Test Level vs. Relative Yield

Soil test level

Rel

ativ

e yi

eld

(%

)

100

Critical range

Mining has Mining has no effectno effect

(land value?)(land value?)

Mining reduces Mining reduces yield, quality, yield, quality, & land value& land value

An extreme caseAn extreme caseAn extreme case

How does soil test P change with a How does soil test P change with a negative budget?negative budget?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

5019

75

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

Year

Bra

y P

1 (p

pm

)

298 lb P2O5 in 1975

0 lb P2O5 in 1975

Webb et al., 1992 (Iowa)

An insidious declineAn insidious declineresulting in gradual resulting in gradual erosion of potentialerosion of potential

Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower in P in 2001in P in 2001

NDND

SKSKMBMB

ONON

BCBCABAB

WAWA

OROR

MTMT

IDID

SDSD

MNMN

PQPQ

NYNY

PAPAOHOHININILIL

IAIA

WIWIMIMI

WYWY

UTUT

NVNV

CACA

AZAZ NMNM

NBNB

NSNS

PEIPEI

MEME

NHNH

VTVT

MAMA

CTCTRIRI

NENE

KSKSMOMO

KYKY

WVWVVAVA

MDMDDEDE

NJNJ

NCNCTNTN

ARAROKOK

TXTX LALA

MSMS ALAL GAGA

SCSC

FLFL

COCO

3737

7070

45457373

383825252424

3636

181822223434

5353

3131

454542424747

60604646

6161

5151

797960605858

3737

5959

6868

60605959 3939

696947475858 5959

4141 52527878 7878

6969

5959 8686

4747 2121

6262

4040

5858

4646

5050 26262828

North AmericaNorth America47% 47%

25251616

1515

5757

2525

Based on 2.5 million

soil samples

(at or below critical)

Percent of Soil Samples Testing Medium or Percent of Soil Samples Testing Medium or below in P in the Great Plains and Corn Beltbelow in P in the Great Plains and Corn Belt

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

Med

ium

or

belo

w, %

AB SK MB SD ND

NE KS OK

IA IL IN MN NE OH

For the six leading corn producing states, survey trends suggest that soilsFor the six leading corn producing states, survey trends suggest that soils have been slipping from high back into medium since about 1990. have been slipping from high back into medium since about 1990.

Nearly one out of every two soil Nearly one out of every two soil samples today indicates a need for a samples today indicates a need for a

balanced or surplus P budget to balanced or surplus P budget to produce to full potentialproduce to full potential

… and strong evidence indicates its … and strong evidence indicates its not happening.not happening.

What is PPI/FAR doing to make it happen?What is PPI/FAR doing to make it happen? Coordinate university-based researchuniversity-based research to develop strong P

recommendations KSU P FellowshipP Fellowship Center of Excellence Program Funded directly by Agrium,Cargill,IMC,PCS,Simplot

Conduct soil test summariessoil test summaries – 2001, 2005 Published: Plant Nutrient Use in North American Plant Nutrient Use in North American

AgricultureAgriculture – source of much of today’s data Educational materials on P, soil testing, & budgets

P nutrition PPT seriesP nutrition PPT series (slides, speaker notes, references) Site-specific precision agSite-specific precision ag materials … low P areas within fields PKalcPKalc: user friendly nutrient budget software … takes it to the farm Numerous other items: www.ppi-ppic.orgwww.ppi-ppic.org

Work with NRCS and other agenciesNRCS and other agencies on P policy and water quality issues – part of solution not part of problem

Provide technical support directly to our memberssupport directly to our members

Examples of member programsExamples of member programs

Directed at crop advisersand farmers. Focused on the basics of soil testing and balanced nutrition.

P-specific campaignwith public and privatesector partners to educatecrop advisers, farmers and the ag media (launched in September, 2003).

Multi-media program to educate the industry and arm them to communicate positive messages about P and other nutrients to their customers and communities.

Take away messages about Take away messages about phosphorus in North Americaphosphorus in North America

1. Phosphorus removed from U.S. farmlands by today’s crops exceeds use by 30%30% if manure P is ignored due to its localized use.

2. Counting all recoverable manure P as agronomically useful, results in a barely balanced budgetbarely balanced budget, giving no opportunity to improveno opportunity to improve soil fertility or meet needs of the higher yielding crops of the future.

3. Nearly one out of every two soilsone out of every two soils sampled today indicates a need for a balanced or surplus P budget to produce to full potential.

4. An increase in P useincrease in P use must occurmust occur on many fields for farming systems to be sustainable … based on simple arithmetic.

5. The fertilizer industry has several excellent new programsexcellent new programs in place to increase awareness of P shortages.

… … and solid science-based evidence and solid science-based evidence indicates it can have an increasing role indicates it can have an increasing role

in North American agriculturein North American agriculture