MUHAMMAD FAHAD ANSARI        12IEEM 14Characteristics& efficient Useof fertilizers
Characteristi                          cs &                     efficient Use                     of fertilizersPotash & P...
Fertilizer Use Efficiency:       An Old Topic but With New Importance International Nitrogen Initiative (INI)    Goal: t...
Traditional Nutrient Efficiency Terms Recovery efficiency (RE) = Increase in  uptake per unit nutrient added usually expr...
Agronomic efficiency of fertilizer N used              on corn grain in the U.S., 1964-2002                      75       ...
N fertilizer recovery efficiency using                      on-farm measurements                       Opportunity for imp...
Areas of opportunity for improvement        in fertilizer N efficiency Continued improvement in cropping system managemen...
Balanced nutrition in the U.S. Ohio State University – dryland corn   80 ppm soil test K        45% N recovery   139 pp...
Balanced nutrition in China                                   TreatmentReference       Crop           N           NPK     ...
Areas of opportunity for improvement        in fertilizer N efficiency Continued improvement in cropping  system manageme...
Site Specific Management:Accounting for spatial variability
Spatial variability in fertilizer N efficiency              Year 1              Soybeans               Year 3          Uni...
Variable N rate contributed to increased N                                     efficiency                                 ...
Areas of opportunity for improvement         in fertilizer N efficiency Continued improvement in cropping system  managem...
Is the concept of fertilizer useefficiency the same for P and K as it              is with N?
The result of applying the definition of                                              agronomic efficiency for N to P     ...
We need to view P and K efficiency       as different than N efficiency A.E. Johnston and P Poulton  “The difference meth...
P and K Sustainable Efficiency in N. America  Review current crop removal to use ratios  Review current soil test levels...
Partial K budgets for the U.S.                  (average of 1998-2000)                  Crop        Applied       Recov.  ...
Ratio of K removal by crops to fertilizer            applied plus recoverable manure           BC                         ...
Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower                   in K in 2001North America    43%
Partial P budgets for the U.S.                   (average of 1998-2000)                      Crop         Applied      Rec...
Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer       applied plus recoverable manure           BC                           AB ...
Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower                   in P in 2001North America    47%
Viewing removal to use in light of soil                   test levels Large regional differences exist across North  Amer...
Est. crop removal / (fertilizer + manure use)         State level P assessment: R/(F+M)                                   ...
Estimating target removal/use ratio for a field Target K test = 150 ppm                Current test = 130 Build: (150 - ...
Examples of apparent recovery efficiency           of P fertilizer in long term studies              Soil(s)         Appli...
If a field is at its optimum soil test level, and replacement of the P and  K removed by crops maintains that optimum leve...
Impact of Improving Efficiency on                 Fertilizer Demand Critical to properly define efficiency for the  nutri...
Impact of Improving Efficiency on              Fertilizer Demand (continued) Phosphorus and potassium   Will be increasi...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Characteristics & efficient use of fertilizers by MUHAMMAD FAHAD ANSARI 12IEEM 14

684 views

Published on

MUHAMMAD FAHAD ANSARI 12IEEM 14

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
684
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
48
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Characteristics & efficient use of fertilizers by MUHAMMAD FAHAD ANSARI 12IEEM 14

  1. 1. MUHAMMAD FAHAD ANSARI 12IEEM 14Characteristics& efficient Useof fertilizers
  2. 2. Characteristi cs & efficient Use of fertilizersPotash & Phosphate Institute/Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada
  3. 3. Fertilizer Use Efficiency: An Old Topic but With New Importance International Nitrogen Initiative (INI)  Goal: to optimize N’s beneficial role in sustainable food production and minimize N’s 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
  4. 4. 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
  5. 5. Agronomic efficiency of fertilizer N used on corn grain in the U.S., 1964-2002 75 70Kg grain per kg N . 65 59 60 55 43 50 45 40 35 30 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 39% increase in N efficiency Since 1975: 12% increase in fertilizer N per ha 40% increase in corn yields
  6. 6. N fertilizer recovery efficiency using on-farm measurements Opportunity for improvement Crop Region Number Avg N Recovery, of farms rate, % kg/ha Maize NC USA 56 103 37 Rice Asia-farmer 179 117 31 Asia-researcher 179 112 40 Wheat India-poor weather 23 145 18 India-good weather 21 123 49Cassman et al., 2002
  7. 7. Areas of opportunity for improvement in fertilizer N efficiency Continued improvement in cropping system management  Realisticestimation of attainable yield  Yield potential protection – pest management and other cultural practices  Balanced nutrition
  8. 8. Balanced nutrition in the U.S. Ohio State University – dryland corn  80 ppm soil test K 45% N recovery  139 ppm soil test K 80% N recovery Kansas State University – irrigated corn  No P applied 35% N recovery  45 kg ha-1 75% N recovery
  9. 9. Balanced nutrition in China TreatmentReference Crop N NPK N recovery by crop,%Zhu, 1994 Barley 28 51Jin, 2001 Wheat (11 yrs) 31 70 Corn (5 yrs) 35 66
  10. 10. Areas of opportunity for improvement in fertilizer N efficiency Continued improvement in cropping system management Use of site-specific precision ag technologies
  11. 11. Site Specific Management:Accounting for spatial variability
  12. 12. Spatial variability in fertilizer N efficiency Year 1 Soybeans Year 3 Uniform N rate In year 2 Variable N rate 11.1 t/ha average yield 11.3 t/ha average yield Indiana; two N rates based on soil type N Efficiency, kg grain/kg N 28-39 39-50 50-62 62-73Murrell and Murrell, 2002
  13. 13. Variable N rate contributed to increased N efficiency 40 ha field divided into 10 zones 9 8 Whole field year 1, 47 kg grain/kg N 8 Frequency of zones 7 Variable rate year 3, 53 kg grain/kg N 6 13% increase in fertilizer N efficiency 5 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 0 0 28-39 39-50 50-62 62-73 N use efficiency, kg grain/kg applied NMurrell and Murrell, 2002
  14. 14. 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?
  15. 15. Is the concept of fertilizer useefficiency the same for P and K as it is with N?
  16. 16. The result of applying the definition of agronomic efficiency for N to P  The highest “efficiency” occurs when inadequate amounts are applied at low soil test levels  Building soil test levels to optimum reduces “efficiency” 120  “Efficient” P use means reduced profitability, water useP use efficiency, kg corn/kg P 100 * efficiency, N use efficiency, and land use efficiency 80 60 ** 40 20 0 ** * 5 10 15 20 25 Bray P-1, ppm Low High
  17. 17. 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
  18. 18. 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 efficiencyInformation 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.
  19. 19. Partial K budgets for the U.S. (average of 1998-2000) Crop Applied Recov. Removal to use Region removal fertilizer manure* fertilizer fert+man ------- K2O, billion kg ------ U.S. 8.8 4.6 1.7 1.91 1.396 corn states 3.0 1.9 0.5 1.62 1.30* USDA-NRCS, 2000; Due to manure distribution problems relative to crop demand,this likely overestimates the agronomic contribution.
  20. 20. Ratio of K removal by crops to fertilizer applied plus recoverable manure BC AB MB SK ON PQ PEI WA NB ME MT ND NS OR MN R/(F+M) VT ID NH 0.00-0.89 NY WI SD MI MA 0.90-1.09 CT WY RI 1.10-1.49 IA NE PA 1.50-4.99 NV OH NJ IL IN MD > 5.00 UT WV DE CO MO VACA KS KY NC AZ NM OK TN AR SC MS AL GA TX LA FL
  21. 21. Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower in K in 2001North America 43%
  22. 22. Partial P budgets for the U.S. (average of 1998-2000) Crop Applied Recov. Removal to use Region removal fertilizer manure* fertilizer fert+man ------- P2O5, billion kg ------ U.S. 5.2 4.0 1.5 1.30 0.95 6 corn states 2.3 1.4 0.4 1.71 1.33*USDA-NRCS, 2000; Due to manure distribution problems relative to crop demandand unavailability of a portion of manure P, this likely overestimates the agronomiccontribution.
  23. 23. Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer applied plus recoverable manure BC AB MB SK ON PQ PEI WA NB ME MT ND NS R/(F+M) OR MN VT ID NH 0.00-0.49 NY WI SD MI MA 0.50-0.89 CT WY RI 0.90-1.09 IA NE PA 1.10-1.49 NV OH NJ IL IN MD >1.50 UT WV DE CO MO VACA KS KY NC AZ NM OK TN AR SC MS AL GA TX LA FL
  24. 24. Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower in P in 2001North America 47%
  25. 25. 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
  26. 26. Est. crop removal / (fertilizer + manure use) State level P assessment: R/(F+M) 1.8 1.6 Low and SD IA High but decreasing 1.4 decreasing WI 1.2 1.0 AR 0.8 0.6 0.4 GA 0.2 Low and increasing High and increasing 0.0 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 State median soil test level - target level, ppmTarget level = lower end of high category
  27. 27. 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
  28. 28. Examples of apparent recovery efficiency of P fertilizer in long term studies Soil(s) Applied No. of Recovery P2O5, kg/ha Crops % Calcareous clay 67 5 F 28 Clay loam, pH 7.3 29 9 F 54 28 soils, pH 6.2-7.9 152 8 GH 74 4 soils, pH 6.7-7.6 230 19 GH 87 Sandy loam, non-calcareous 118 4 F 100 GH = Green house; F = Field.Fixen, 1992
  29. 29. 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
  30. 30. 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
  31. 31. 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

×