National Association of County Agricultural Agents Annual Meeting

National Association of County Agricultural Agents Annual Meeting and Professional Improvement Conference 24 July 2006 Cincinnati, OH Soil Fertility Resources for Extension Agents Tom Bruulsema, Ph. D Northeast Director Potash & Phosphate Institute

PPI/PPIC Member Companies

PPI’s Northeast Region

Why Educate on Soil Fertility?

Nutrients: Benefits & Risks

Stratospheric Effects Atmosphere PM & Visibility Effects Ozone Effects NOx Greenhouse Effects Energy Production NOx Food Production NHx Soil Norg --Indicates denitrification potential N 2 O Forests & Grassland Animal Soil NO 3 Groundwater Effects Human Activities The Nitrogen Cascade NH 3 Agroecosystem Effects Crop People (Food; Fiber) Terrestrial Ecosystems Stream & River Effects Galloway & Cowling, 2002 Coastal Effects Aquatic Ecosystems N 2 O

15 No Data Square miles Hypoxic Area in Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia data by N. Rabalais, LUMCON

European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica Science 25 November 2005 Vol. 310. no. 5752, pp. 1285 - 1287

Greenhouse Gases N 2 O

Phosphorus & eutrophication

Improving Nutrient Use Efficiency

Improvement: % P: 108% N: 43% K: 90% Source: USDA-NASS; PPI Corn Yield: 55%

85 28 Galloway and Cowling, 2002

Ending Poverty Requires Fertilizer…

Best Management Practices Right rate Right time Right place

Who Needs to Know? • • • Everyone! Soil Fertility Specialists Producers Policymakers and Regulators Public – young & old

PPI Publications

• A complete course in soil fertility • All 17 essential elements • Color slides • Nutrient deficiency symptoms

How Potassium Moves in Soil

Elementary Education

Powerpoint Presentations • Phosphorus Nutrition – – – Alfalfa Canola Corn Cotton Wheat • Potassium Nutrition – Alfalfa – Cotton – Northern Great Plains

Quality for Health • Agriculture’s connection to food – Take a Closer Look – Fertilizer and Tofu – Functional Foods research – Fertilizer Impacts on Quality

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 PPI/PPIC/FAR Technical Bulletin 2005 -1 Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Private Laboratories A&L Analytical Labs, Inc. – Memphis, TN A&L Great Lakes Labs, Inc. – Fort Wayne, IN A&L Canada Laboratories, Inc. – London, ON A&L Plains, Ag Lab – Lubbock, TX Agri Analysis, Inc. – Leola, PA Agri-Food Laboratories – Guelph, ON AGVISE Laboratories – Northwood, ND Agri. Quanta – St-Ours, QC Agro-Enviro-Sol – La Pocatière, QC Alvey Lab – Belleville, IL Bradford Agri Lab – Yazoo City, MS Brookside Lab, Inc. – New Knoxville, OH Cooperative Federee de Quebec – Longueuil, QC Dairyland Laboratories, Inc. – Arcadia, WI Dellavalle Lab, Inc. – Fresno, CA Enviro-Test Labs – Calgary, AB LGI – Ellsworth, IA Litchfield Analytical Services – Litchfield, MI MDS Harris – Lincoln, NE Midwest Laboratories, Inc. – Omaha, NE Mowers Soil Testing Plus, Inc. – Toulon, IL Norwest Labs – Edmonton, AB Olsen’s Ag Lab – Mc. Cook, NE Precision Agri-lab – Madera, CA Rock River Lab – Watertown, WI Servi-Tech, Inc. – Amarillo, TX Servi-Tech, Inc. – Dodge City, KS Servi-Tech, Inc. – Hastings, NE Spectrum Analytic, Inc. – Washington Court House, OH Stratford Agri Analysis – Stratford, ON Stukenholtz Laboratory – Twin Falls, ID Syn. Agri – St-Hilaire, QC United Soils, Inc. – Fairbury, IL Ward Laboratories, Inc. – Kearney, NE Waters Agricultural Labs – Camilla, GA William Houde, Ltd. – St-Simon, QC Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Public Laboratories Auburn University Clemson University Colorado State University Cornell University Department of Natural Resources – Corner Brook, NL Iowa State University Kansas State University Kentucky Division of Regulatory Services Louisiana State University Mississippi State University New Brunswick Department of Agriculture and Rural Development New Mexico State University North Carolina Department of Ag North Dakota State University Oklahoma State University PEI Soil & Feed Testing Laboratory Rutgers University South Dakota State University Texas A&M University The Pennsylvania State University of Arkansas University of Connecticut University of Delaware University of Florida University of Georgia University of Guelph University of Maine University of Missouri University of Nebraska University of Tennessee University of Vermont University of West Virginia University of Wisconsin, Madison University of Wisconsin, Marshfield Utah State University Virginia Tech Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Figure 1. Fraction of Samples Analyzed by Specific P and K Soil Tests Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Figure 4. Soil test P frequency distribution for North America in 2005. North America Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Figure 7. Soil test K frequency distribution in 2001 and 2005. Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Soil Test Interpretation • Why not one recommendation for a given soil test level? Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

96 site-years Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Figure 8. Median soil p. H levels, 2005. Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Figure 11. Percent of soils testing less than 75 ppm Mg. Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Figure 12. Percent of soils testing less than 3 ppm S. Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

Soil Test Levels in North America, 2005 Summary • Approximately 3. 4 million samples from 70 laboratories are included in the summary • Results indicate the importance of regular soil testing because a large number of samples test in or near critical soil test ranges where nutrient recommendations vary greatly • Median P level is 31 ppm, with 41% of samples for 2005 crop year testing less than 25 ppm • Median K level is 154 ppm, with 33% of samples testing less than 120 ppm, and 53% less than 160 ppm • Median p. H for U. S. and Canada is 6. 3, with 31% of samples testing < 6. 0 • Need for soil testing is important to determine fertility status of specific fields Potash & Phosphate Institute / Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada Foundation for Agronomic Research

BMPs for Efficient Fertilizer Use 12 basic tips

Fertilizer BMPs 1. Measure what the soil can provide 2. Consider crop removal 3. Set realistic yield goals 4. Use all nutrient sources available

Fertilizer BMPs 5. Keep the proper balance of nutrients 6. Manage soil p. H 7. Manage for maximum economic yield 8. Time applications

Fertilizer BMPs 9. Control release 10. Band in the right place 11. Test on-farm 12. Consult a credible adviser

PPI Tools on the Web • • • www. ppi-ppic. org Crop Nutrient Response Tool PKalc Hybrid Maize Fertilizer Chooser

3 6 7 4 1 5 2

Thank You