Soil Test Levels in North America in relation to phosphorus sustainability

Transcription

1 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada 31 January 2 February 2017 Soil Test Levels in North America in relation to phosphorus sustainability Tom Bruulsema, Phosphorus Program Director

2 The International Plant Nutrition Institute is supported by leading fertilizer manufacturers. Formed in 2007 from the Potash & Phosphate Institute, its mission is to develop and promote science for responsible management of crop nutrition

3 Outline 1. IPNI s Soil Test Summary 1. Methods 2. Highlights for Western Canada 2. Sustainability Metrics 3. 4R Phosphorus

4 IPNI Soil Test Summary 2015 is the 4 th summary that provides descriptive statistics of soil test levels Median P, K, and ph values Relative frequency across soil test ranges for P, K, ph, Mg, S, Zn, Cl - Previous summaries: 2001, 2005, 2010

5 A&L Canada Laboratories Inc. Brookside Laboratories, Inc. Servi-Tech Laboratories A&L Great Lakes Laboratories Charter Soil Testing SGS Agri-Food Laboratories AgLab Express Dairy One SGS North America Agricultural Soil Management Inc. Dellavalle Laboratory, Inc. Spectrum Analytic Inc. AgroEnviroLab Farmer s Edge Laboratories Stratford Agri Analysis AgroLab Inc. Frontier Labs Sure-Tech Laboratories AgSource Laboratories, Ellsworth, Iowa AgSource Laboratories, Lincoln, Nebraska AgSource Laboratories, Umatilla, Oregon Agvise Laboratories ALS Environmental - Saskatoon American Agricultural Laboratory, Inc. GMS Laboratories, Inc. Key Agricultural Services, Inc. La Coop fédérée Midwest Laboratories Minnesota Valley Testing Laboratories Rock River Laboratory, Inc. synagri GEOSOL Laboratory United Soils, Inc. Ward Laboratories Inc. Waters Agricultural Laboratories, Inc. Waypoint Analytical

6 Auburn University Soil, Forage and Water Testing Laboratory Clemson University Agricultural Services Laboratory Iowa State University Soil and Plant Analysis Laboratory Kansas State University Soil Testing Lab Louisiana State University Soil Testing & Plant Analysis Lab Maine Soil Testing Service, University of Maine Michigan State University Soil and Plant Nutrient Laboratory Mississippi State University Extension Service Soil Testing Laboratory Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Soil, Plant, and Feed Lab North Carolina Department of Agriculture & Consumer Sciences Oklahoma State University Soil, Water and Forage Analytical Laboratory Pennsylvania State University Agricultural Analytical Services Lab Prince Edward Island Analytical Laboratory Rutgers Soil Testing Laboratory Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service Soil, Water and Forage Testing Laboratory UF/IFAS Analytical Services Laboratories (ANSERV Labs) University of Arkansas Soil Testing and Research Laboratory University of Connecticut Soil Nutrient Analysis Laboratory University of Delaware Soil Testing Program University of Georgia Extension Agricultural & Environmental Services Laboratory University of Kentucky Soil Testing Laboratories University of Minnesota Soil Testing Laboratory University of Missouri Soil and Plant Testing Laboratory University of Tennessee Soil, Plant, and Pest Center University of Vermont Agricultural and Environmental Testing Lab Virginia Tech Soil Testing Lab

7 soiltest.ipni.net

8 Survey Methods and Cautions

9 Data Requested in Protocol Provide numbers of samples falling into various soil test categories Report data from each state/province separately Report only farm samples (not lawn and garden) Separate manured from non-manured samples if possible Separate conventional samples from site-specific samples if possible Provide data for the 2015 cropping season

10 RI ND SK MB ON BC AB WA OR MT ID SD MN PQ NY PA OH IN IL IA WI MI WY UT NV CA AZ NM NB NS PEI ME NE KS MO KY WV VA MD DE NJ NC TN AR OK TX LA MS AL GA SC FL CO VT NH MA CT Steve Phillips Tom Bruulsema Tom Jensen Rob Mikkelsen Mike Stewart Scott Murrell

11 Cautions when Using Data In a few cases, respondents could not ensure all samples came from a specific state or province. Some laboratories submitted soil test ranges other than those specified in the protocol. The quantity of sample results is low in several states and provinces. Data on sample depth were not requested.

12 Cautions when Using Data There is a possible sample bias towards soil tests representative of better farm managers. Greater adoption of nutrient management plans may be generating more soil tests from fields with a manure history

13 Sample Counts for the 2015 Summary Soil Test Number of Samples (million) Bray and Kurtz P1 Equivalent 7.6 Ammonium Acetate K Equivalent 7.3 1:1 Soil:Water Equivalent ph 7.2 Ammonium Acetate Mg Equivalent 5.9 Calcium Phosphate Equivalent S 4.9 DTPA Equivalent Zn 4.4 Water Equivalent Cl Data available at: soiltest.ipni.net.

14 Quantity of samples, millions Soil sample volume increasing rapidly since ,000/yr ,000/yr 5 41,500/yr ,000/yr

15 Summary Results: Phosphorus

16 What is a Critical Level? A critical level is the soil test level below which nutrient inputs are required to meet soil fertility management objectives. These objectives vary among the states and provinces, with each representing considerations of short and long-term profit, market and environmental risks, accuracy and precision in soil fertility assessments, as well as many other factors. Critical levels therefore vary from state to state as various aspects of management receive different levels of emphasis.

17 Data available at: soiltest.ipni.net. P

18 Data available at: soiltest.ipni.net. K

19 Data available at: soiltest.ipni.net. ph

20 Data available at: soiltest.ipni.net. S

21 Data available at: soiltest.ipni.net. Zn

22 East versus West: a contrast in soil test P

23 East versus West: a contrast in soil test K

24 As a sustainability system, 4R Nutrient Stewardship needs METRICS.

25 Nutrient Stewardship Metrics for Sustainable Crop Nutrition Enablers (process metrics) Outcomes (impact metrics) Extension & professionals Infrastructure Research & innovation Stakeholder engagement Actions (adoption metrics) Cropland area under 4R [Requires regional definitions of 4R practices] 1. Farmland productivity 2. Soil health 3. Nutrient use efficiency 4. Water quality 5. Air quality 6. Greenhouse gases 7. Food & nutrition security 8. Biodiversity 9. Economic value

26 4R Outcome Metrics are influenced by 4R and more.

27

28 Using Soil Test Summary Information: Bruulsema, T.W Soil Phosphorus Trends in the Lake Erie Region. Better Crops 100(2):4-9

29 Example: Lake Erie Region Large portions of cropland in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Ontario drain into the western Lake Erie basin. Since the mid-1990s, the loads and concentrations of dissolved phosphorus have been increasing Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement Nutrients Annex targets a 40% reduction relative to 2008 Bruulsema, T.W Soil Phosphorus Trends in the Lake Eerie Region. Better Crops 100(2):4-9

30 Lake Winnipeg, and Lake Erie 30

31 Environmental Impact Eutrophication Hypoxia Harmful Algal Blooms Photo credit: Carrie Vollmer-Sanders, The Nature Conservancy

32 Example: Lake Erie Region

33 Example: Lake Erie Region

34 Example: Lake Erie Region 32% in % in % in % in 2015

35 Example: Lake Erie Region IPNI A Nutrient Use Information System (NuGIS) for the U.S., Peachtree Corners, GA.

36 Example: Lake Erie Region IPNI A Nutrient Use Information System (NuGIS) for the U.S., Peachtree Corners, GA. Bruulsema, T.W., R.W. Mullen, I.P. O Halloran, and D.D. Warncke Can. J. Soil Sci. 91:

37 Example: Lake Erie Region Declines in higher soil test levels and increases in lower soil test levels are consistent with P budgets Opportunities for improvement: Better direct P applications to lower testing soils, particularly on sols testing less than 15 ppm Additional conservation practices provide increased opportunities to reduce potential P loss and maintain or improve yields Bruulsema, T.W Soil Phosphorus Trends in the Lake Erie Region. Better Crops 100(2):4-9

38 Lake Erie total P loads Total P load does not explain the increase in algal blooms since ~1995 Maccoux MJ et al J Great Lakes Res (2016),

39 Lake Erie mean DRP loads Maccoux MJ et al J Great Lakes Res (2016),

40 Western Lake Erie: dissolved P trends increasing since 2002 Cumulative DRP load (lb P 2 O 5 /A) % 40% reduction target target 0.34 lb P 2 O 5 /A/y 0.74 lb P 2 O 5 per acre per year 1. David Baker & Laura Johnson, National Center for Water Quality Research, Tiffin, OH 2. Jarvie et al., 2016, J Environ. Qual.

41

42 Fertilizer P is Soluble P MAP ( ) has water solubility of 370 g/l = 84 grams P per litre = 84,000 mg P per litre Maumee river target for DRP = mg P per litre Targets for Lake Erie: Western Basin mg/l Central Basin mg/l Eastern Basin mg/l

43 Broadcast? at the right time to avoid runoff

44 Soil test P stratifies when moldboard plowing stops Soil test P distribution with depth in a long-term tillage experiment on a poorly drained Chalmers silty clay loam soil near West Lafayette, Indiana. Moldboard and chisel plots were plowed annually to a depth of 20 cm. Data from Gál (2005) and Vyn (2000). Fertilizer P applied broadcast.

45 Some growers fertilize all their crops in bands near the seed.

46 Fall Strip-till Banding Puts the P in the soil Keeps residue on the soil RTK GPS for precision planting Greg LaBarge, Ohio State University Extension

47 Strip tillage with granular placement puts P in the right place and controls erosion.

48 Defining 4R phosphorus practices at the continental scale.

49 4R P Practices - Participating Scientists 1. Brian Arnall, Oklahoma State U 2. Doug Beegle, Penn State U 3. Don Flaten, U of Manitoba 4. Laura Good, U of Wisconsin 5. Kevin King, USDA-ARS, Columbus, OH 6. Quirine Ketterings, Cornell U 7. Josh McGrath, U of Kentucky 8. Antonio Mallarino, Iowa State U 9. Rao Mylavarapu, U of Florida with input from other colleagues. 10. David Mulla, U of Minnesota 11. Nathan Nelson, Kansas State U 12. Keith Reid, Agriculture and Agri- Food Canada 13. Nathan Slaton, U of Arkansas 14. Charles Shapiro, U of Nebraska 15. Andrew Sharpley, U of Arkansas 16. Doug Smith, USDA-ARS, Temple, TX 17. Ivan O Halloran, U of Guelph 18. Deanna Osmond, North Carolina State U 19. David Tarkalson, USDA-ARS, Kimberly, ID

50 Regions and Cropping Systems 1. Western Corn and Soybean 2. Eastern Cereals and Oilseeds 3. Wheat in the Great Plains 4. Irrigated Potatoes in the Northwest Rice 6. Irrigated vegetables National Land Cover Database -

51 4R Phosphorus Practices for the Great Plains (including Canadian Prairie Provinces) Basic Source: known or guaranteed analysis Rate: recommended soil sampling and soil test interpretation, all P source accounted for, calibrated equipment Timing: avoid frozen and snow-covered soils, prior to or at planting Placement: subsurface band for no-till; on surface only when risk index is low Intermediate Source: manure sampled for nutrients using recognized procedures Rate: as in basic, plus: soil sampling either every year, or every 3-5 years if based on zones within fields Timing: fertilizer at planting, manure prior to planting Placement: fertilizer banded, manure injected or incorporated

52 4R Phosphorus Practices for the Great Plains (including Canadian Prairie Provinces) Advanced Source: as in intermediate Rate: as in intermediate, plus: zone-specific application Timing: as in intermediate Placement: as in intermediate, plus: manure injected; all fertilizer placed in seed row if recommendation is for starter only ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT Decisions are site-specific and adaptive to changing conditions. Practice definitions allow for a range of practices to be chosen from. Involvement of a Certified Crop Adviser or equivalent is encouraged.

53 4R efficacy for reducing P loss, % reduction - ranges found in field experiments across the USA and Canada Practice Dissolved P Particulate P Source Rate 60 to 88% negligible Time 41 to 42% negligible Place 20 to 98% -60% to NS Soil inversion NS to 92% -59% to NS Conservation tillage -308 to -40% -33 to 96% Dodd & Sharpley, Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems. 1. Wide range of efficacies demands more site-specific focus. 2. Trade-off between dissolved and particulate is important.

54 Phosphorus Sustainability Initiatives: resource consumption & use efficiency trace element loading water quality impacts Rostock (Germany), September 12-16, 2016 PHOSPHORUS 2020 CHALLENGES FOR SYNTHESIS, AGRICULTURE, AND ECOSYSTEMS

55 Phosphate Rock Reserves and Quality Grade, P 2 O 5 content, trace elements Phosphogypsum Peak phosphorus by 2033? Cordell & White, 2009:

56 Sources: IFDC; USGS (2002, 2013) Map of World P Resources 250 billion tonnes in >100 countries

57 Country Production Mt Reserves R/P ratio Years Morocco 30 50, South Africa 2 1, Jordan 7 1, Russia 12 1, USA 26 1, China 100 3, World Total , Source: USGS, 2016 No matter how much phosphate rock exists, it is a non-renewable resource IFDC, 2010

58 Summary IPNI s soil test summary provides one of several metrics essential to communicate sustainability of crop nutrition. 4R + conservation practices can limit phosphorus losses. With 4R, agri-retailers can engage the sustainability movement to build social trust. It s an opportunity to work with growers to document: 1. trends in right place, right time, right rate; 2. the resulting impact on things that matter.