Fertilizer prices across Texas have nearly doubled since this time last year.\u00a0 High natural gas prices and high commodity crop prices do not appear to explain fully the price increase for N, P, and other fertilizer nutrients.\u00a0 P fertilizers may have supply issues.\u00a0 Nitrogen fertilizers appear likewise.\u00a0 Transportation \/ distribution costs and delays have also contributed to the problem.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Also, according to Dr. Mark Welch, jmwelch@tamu.edu<\/a>, AgriLife Extension grains economist, College Station, high commodity prices often enable farm suppliers to justify raising prices on inputs.\u00a0 Depending on where you farm, where you purchase inputs, and how soon you will need them, these factors influence farmer fertilizer decisions.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n You don\u2019t know and can\u2019t assume the status of your future crop.\u00a0 Other factors will be considered for N and your placement-limited fertilizers (P, K, etc.) before planting.\u00a0 The growth stage of your crop\u2014and its health\u2014will also factor in your management decisions.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Deferring N applications will enable adjustments in-season based on current crop condition and weather outlook. \u00a0While you should have a target yield goal in mind before planting based on projected cost and revenue and the agronomic potential of your environment, the ability to adjust inputs in-season can save money if crop or weather conditions become unfavorable. \u00a0This could include poor stands, drought, or excess soil moisture.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Every crop has a target growth stage for optimizing in-season or side-dress N applications. \u00a0Grain sorghum targets growing point differentiation. \u00a0This is when panicle (head) initiation occurs, about 30 to 35 days after planting (7- fully expanded leaves with leaf collars).\u00a0 The target for corn in V6 (6 visible leaf collars). \u00a0This growth stage proceeds initiation of ear development. \u00a0While V6 is the target, corn will respond favorably to later N applications. \u00a0For cotton, 20 to 40 days after planting is the best window to ensure all N is applied.\u00a0 Some research recommends pinhead square as the optimum timing in areas receiving less rainfall.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n When deferring N application to in-season timing, its good to apply at least 25% of total N at planting. This ensures enough N supply for early growth, and provides some flexibility if weather (or supply chains) delay in-season applications.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Could the condition of a summer crop could be related to factors other than weather?\u00a0 Insects and plant diseases, yes.\u00a0 But some producers produce agronomically induced stresses.\u00a0 The primary one is excessive seeding rates resulting in plant populations that are too high.\u00a0 The resulting population, anywhere in Texas, is more than what the crop can sustain in a dry year.\u00a0 You may artificially impose an undesired drought condition.\u00a0 This is what you see happens when cotton sheds squares or blooms.\u00a0 Corn and sorghum can\u2019t do that, but instead you may see reduced grain fill.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Applications of P and K will not reflect growth as these nutrients are best applied an incorporated prior to planting.\u00a0 Knife rigs for P are also a good means to provide P closer to the time of crop requirement.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n In any above case, the condition of you crop relative to growth stage is a guide to knowing if and when and how much in-season fertilizer to apply to reach an achievable yield goal.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Texas is generally in a current early 2022 La Nina<\/em> weather pattern which tends to mean drier conditions.\u00a0 It is normally dry anyway this time of year in the Rolling Plains, Concho Valley, and all the High Plains.\u00a0 Average rainfall in Central Texas in one month, even January, is more than what these westerly regions expect to receive over four months (Nov.-Feb.).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Estimating your available soil moisture, perhaps to 36\u201d deep, requires a soil moisture probe and knowledge of the water holding capacity of your soil.\u00a0 Your crop will tell you if it is under stress from lack of moisture.\u00a0 The prospects for this crop may color your decision on crop fertilization, especially nitrogen.\u00a0 If existing soil moisture is poor when fertilizer N decisions come, especially in-season, then N rates decline.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n This is hard to say.\u00a0 There are several factors at work here:\u00a0 A) natural gas prices, used in large amounts to make nitrogen fertilizer (ask us if you want to know why), are high; B) when crop commodity prices are high dealers for fertilizer, seed, chemicals, and other inputs lean toward raising prices as crop prices can support higher input prices; 3) there appears to be supply issues.\u00a0 N fertilizer is short and might not even be readily available.\u00a0 If N fertilizer must be brought from greater distance, then prices are higher.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n This issue is now further compounded by Russia\u2019s invasion of Ukraine.\u00a0 Russia is the world\u2019s largest producer and exporter of N fertilizer.\u00a0 Economic sanctions on Russia will surely slow exports and tighten supplies.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Likewise, fertilizer P, which mostly must come into port on the Texas coast, has supply bottlenecks.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Recent spot fertilizer price checks across Texas for popular N fertilizers were $910-950\/ton for urea (46-0-0) and $645-695\/ton for liquid urea-ammonium nitrate (UAN, 32-0-0).\u00a0 Hence the cost of a unit of nitrogen (1.0 lb. of actual N) is $1.00 to $1.09 (100 lbs. of urea would be 46 lbs. of actual nitrogen).\u00a0 This is the highest we have ever seen.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n AgriLife Extension economists believe fertilizer prices might moderate some as we move further into 2022 IF supply is not an issue.\u00a0 But prices will still be high.\u00a0 Growers in South and Coastal Texas, even Central Texas, may not likely see much moderation by the time they make fertilizer decisions.\u00a0 This is especially true for pre-plant P & K applications.\u00a0 Many southerly Texas farmers appear more likely to also apply most or even all N up front.\u00a0 Perhaps this is a year to wait on a portion of that and split your applications in the hope the price moderates.\u00a0 Summer cropping for the Texas High Plains region has more time for high fertilizer prices to abate some.\u00a0 But that may not occur now with the Russia issue.\u00a0 Much nitrogen purchase and application in the High Plains does not occur until mid-May to early July.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Spoiler alert<\/em>:\u00a0 If fertilizer N prices are high then your soil residual N down to at least 24\u201d is also worth more than ever. \u00a0How much do you have?\u00a0 (Hint:\u00a0 Soil test to find out; see below.)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Grain cash prices vs. selling on contract based off Dec2022 corn futures?\u00a0 Cotton on Dec2022?\u00a0 For grains, call area elevators for current pricing and details.\u00a0 In the Texas High Plains currently grain sorghum is about even basis to $0.50\/bu higher than for corn.\u00a0 Thus, grain sorghum is about $11.00-11.50\/cwt.\u00a0 Corn in the Texas High Plains is often about +$0.50\/bu above basis (Dec2022).\u00a0 Your Texas location will have an impact, too.\u00a0 A good example is grain sorghum on the Gulf Coast being most available to export meeting the high demand from China.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Again, our Extension economist colleague Dr. Mark Welch:\u00a0 The risk is we get all these high-priced inputs locked in and then see output (crop) prices fall by harvest<\/u>.\u201d<\/em>\u00a0 If you are spending money on higher cost inputs, then you may need to consider selling some crop to ensure you are better able to cover those costs.\u00a0 It is difficult to think about locking in a crop price and committing to deliver pounds or bushels when it is dry.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Soil sampling across Texas can identify subsoil nitrate-nitrogen (NO3<\/sub>–<\/sup>-N, the form of nitrogen readily available for crop uptake). \u00a0It has never been worth more!\u00a0 Texas A&M University research demonstrates that nitrate-N to at least 24\u201d deep is fully available to your crop.\u00a0 Routine soil samples are recommended to 6\u201d deep. \u00a0Sampling deeper in the soil can pay off.\u00a0 We want to know what nitrate-N is below your 6\u201d sampling depth.\u00a0 Then credit that deep soil N toward your plant N nutrient requirements, effectively saving you money.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n For the first time in my career, I am even recommending winter 2022 in-season<\/em> deep soil sampling for wheat in advance of topdress N decisions.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n If you have already applied nutrients in South and Coastal Texas it is late to engage soil testing.\u00a0 For a crop that is planted young in-season soil sampling now is an option.\u00a0 These subsoil samples for nitrate-N only can be run inexpensively.\u00a0 If you are conducting regular soil sampling, we suggest get 6-18\u201d or even 6-24\u201d (not easy to probe).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The impetus for soil testing is greater when fertilizer\u2014and crop commodity\u2014prices are high.\u00a0 On one hand you do not want to spend unnecessarily\u2014even if strong residual nutrient levels are high\u2014for fertilizer.\u00a0 On the other hand, you want to ensure potential for higher yields to take advantage of higher crop prices and increase profitability.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Remember, though, \u201cyou can\u2019t get something from nothing\u201d for very long if any crop has good growth potential but little nitrogen to support it.\u00a0 Second to available moisture, nitrogen is likely the next most important yield-yield limiting factor in Texas cropping.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n More on deep soil sampling<\/u>.\u00a0 Traditional soil test sampling and its calibration is for only a six-inch sample. \u00a0This is changing<\/strong> especially for nitrogen.\u00a0 The potential presence of nitrate-nitrogen (NO3<\/sub>–<\/sup>) is the driver for deeper soil sampling.\u00a0 Again, in any Texas soil, for any Texas crop, Texas A&M AgriLife research suggests nitrate-N down to at least 24\u201d is fully available<\/u> to your crop.\u00a0 Credit all<\/strong> this N toward your fertilizer requirement.\u00a0 It is not uncommon for farmers to find 30 to 60 lbs. of N per acre in the top 24\u201d, often double or more what is expected.\u00a0 This represents a potential current fertilizer N savings of at least $30 to $60 per acre at today\u2019s fertilizer N prices.\u00a0 (Major agriculture states like Kansas and North Dakota now recommend 24\u201d sampling (as one depth) for all<\/em> nutrients.\u00a0 They have the calibration data for such tests whereas Texas now also has soil test calibration for N at lower soil depths.)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Regardless your production objective, remember the first units of N you apply to a field or a crop are the most valuable.\u00a0 The first 33% of N you apply will give a better return than the last 33%.\u00a0 That is, the response to nitrogen is not completely linear, especially at higher application rates.\u00a0 At those higher nutrient applications yield response gradually tails off.\u00a0 Even though fertilizer N prices are high, at least some N likely still offers a more certain net return than larger amounts.\u00a0 Reducing N applications may be the right decision, but eliminating all N is not<\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n This is a simple guideline for grain sorghum, corn, and cotton.\u00a0 If you have questions about other crops like sesame, sunflower, summer annual forages, etc. please inquire.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Grain sorghum<\/u>:\u00a0 Generally, the nitrogen requirement\u2014not the fertilizer requirement\u2014for grain sorghum is about 2 lbs. of actual N per 100 lbs. of grain yield.\u00a0 This is N from all sources, not just fertilizer N.\u00a0 With a yield goal you can calculate your estimated N requirement then reduce the amount needed by existing soil N, release from manure\/compost, etc.\u00a0 If no soil test N data is available, you may be reduced to guesswork\u2014and spending more money than you need to.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Corn<\/u>:\u00a0 General N requirement for corn for yields to near 150 bu\/A is about 1.0 to 1.1 lbs. of N per each bushel of yield.\u00a0 For higher yields the N efficiency declines somewhat, and the simple guideline moves up a bit to about 1.1 to 1.2 lbs. of N per bushel.\u00a0 Corn N timing is not as straightforward as grain sorghum which focuses mostly on having N applied by a singular stage of growth and development.\u00a0 For further information on corn N timing, especially from the Texas High Plains, consult \u201cGetting the Most our of Your Nitrogen Fertilization in Corn\u201d (2011), see http:\/\/amarillo.tamu.edu\/files\/2010\/11\/NitrogenFertilization.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Cotton<\/u>:\u00a0 General rule of thumb for cotton yields in Texas A&M\u2019s soil test recommendations is 50 lbs. of N per bale of yield.\u00a0 Recent discussion suggests this could reliably reduced to 45 lbs. of N per bale per acre.\u00a0 There are many Extension personnel across Texas who handle cotton inquiries (Corpus, College Station, San Angelo, Vernon, Lubbock, Amarillo).\u00a0 Consult the nearest resource for regional variation on suggested N fertility targets for cotton in your area.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Any means you as a grower can incorporate surface-applied fertilizer or apply directly in the root zone is best. \u00a0Incorporation can include spreading granular fertilizer and lightly disking it in, or it can subsurface application using knives. \u00a0Soil is like a reservoir dam.\u00a0 It holds the N and other nutrients (and water!) until the crop needs it.\u00a0 In wetter areas of Texas leaching of nitrate-N below the root zone due to higher rainfall is a concern.\u00a0 But this is rare in the Rolling Plains, Concho Valley, and High Plains of Texas.\u00a0 (If you have enough rain to leach N in these drier regions of the state, you are so happy about the rain.\u00a0 It is worth more than the nutrients!)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Application methods for Texas summer crops are varied.\u00a0 With broadcast dry N you must hope for a rain soon or use tillage to incorporate.\u00a0 Rain only for P & K fertilizers is not efficient. P & K don\u2019t readily dissolve in rain or irrigation.\u00a0 Incorporation of P & K is best if possible.\u00a0 And especially for P, banding is a good efficient practice for row crops.\u00a0 You may be able to reduce your nutrient application relative to broadcast applications.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n We discourage you from broadcasting a liquid N source onto an existing crop or the soil unless you can irrigate it in immediately or a likely rain is imminent.\u00a0 This is not about possibly burning the leaves.\u00a0 Biological and environmental conditions on the leaf surface favor N loss.\u00a0 Foliar feeding is not occurring unless you use special formulations of N perhaps with materials to foster absorption.\u00a0 (Note<\/strong>:\u00a0 All crops have a highly specialized structure to acquire N for plant growth?\u00a0 Have you heard this?\u00a0 It\u2019s called a root<\/em>!)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Growers in no-till systems have to think more strategically about how to best get nutrients into the root zone.\u00a0 Soluble fertilizers like urea work provided you get the rain.\u00a0 But numerous insoluble fertilizers, like many of the P containing compounds, are only slowly and sometimes only partially available.\u00a0 For knife and coulter rigs for application, little of the soil surface is disturbed.\u00a0 So, this does not violate dogmatic absolute no-till principles.\u00a0 Nitrogen use efficiency is lower the great amount of N applied at one time.\u00a0 Hence split applications, especially applying N closer to the time of crop requirement, is a good method though multiple trips across a field have added cost, too.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n N efficiency is a moving target.\u00a0 You do your best to minimize possible N losses.\u00a0 Few Texas farmers who can incorporate have significant concerns about losing applied N.\u00a0 Surface applications that remain unincorporated could lead to N losses well above 20%.\u00a0 That is like wasting irrigation water.\u00a0 It is running the risk of wasting money and getting a poor return on expensive inputs.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Surface applications of ammonium-based fertilizers are problematic.\u00a0 The ammonium in urea, urea-ammonium nitrate, etc. may readily be converted to ammonia (NH3<\/sub>) and lost as a gas.\u00a0 Do not apply ammonium-based N fertilizers on moist soil in Texas if you can avoid it.\u00a0 Otherwise, losses can be high.\u00a0 Warmer weather conditions favor N gas losses.\u00a0 High pH soils, which most Texas fields are west of I-35 and in the Blacklands, also foster N losses.\u00a0 In areas of Texas with much more moisture waterlogging can also cause \u2018denitrification\u2019 which converts nitrate-N to a gaseous form which is lost.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Soils in central, east, and coastal Texas that sometimes receive excessive rainfall and don\u2019t drain well can also experience N losses.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n The worst conditions for N loss from urea or ammonium-based fertilizers are sandy soils, high pH, low rainfall, high winds, and time. Make sure your fertilizer does not set upon the soil surface for too long before the next rain.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Urease is an enzyme that converts N to ammonia which is potentially lost to the atmosphere as ammonia gas.\u00a0 There are several preventive products for this (a common active ingredient is NBPT).\u00a0 Research conclusions on the benefit of these products is dependent on conditions tested. Technically, they do what they say they will do. \u00a0Do you have the conditions that requires them?\u00a0 See the table below for a simple checklist of conditions that make the product more likely beneficial.\u00a0 Dr. Mowrer especially notes these products may cost several dollars per acre.\u00a0 The benefit should outweigh the cost several fold.\u00a0 Research across varied field conditions is often inconclusive.\u00a0 Many situations don\u2019t call for a chemical additive as losses are expected to be low.\u00a0 You would not consider a urease\/N stabilizer, for example, if you are incorporating the fertilizer.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Nitrification is the microbial conversion of in-soil nitrate to nitrogen oxides and eventually N2<\/sub> which are gassed into the air.\u00a0 This processed is mediated by microorganisms.\u00a0 This is more likely in Texas regions where wet and water-logged soils prevail.\u00a0 Nitrification inhibitors, too, have mixed results in their effectiveness.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u00b6Moist\/wet soils especially when warm strongly favor volatilization of ammonium-based surface-applied N.\u00a0 Urease inhibitors may not be able to overcome this.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Dr. Mowrer emphasizes that Texas producers should focus on incorporation of fertilizer<\/u>.\u00a0 Placement below the soil surface and near the upper root zone is important to protect from nutrient losses and enhance nutrient uptake.\u00a0 It is better to rely on incorporation than to trust a chemical to preserve your nitrogen.\u00a0 For no-till and strip-till farmers options are fewer but knifing\/banding any fertilizer product is still feasible.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Dr. Calvin Trostle, Extension Agronomy\/TAMU Dept. of Soil & Crop Sciences, Lubbock, (806) 746-6101, ctrostle@ag.tamu.edu<\/a><\/p>\n Dr. Jake Mowrer, Extension Soil Fertility\/TAMU Dept. of Soil & Crop Sciences, College Station, (979) 845-5366, jake.mowrer@tamu.edu<\/a><\/p>\n Dr. Ron Schnell, Extension Cropping Systems\/TAMU Dept. of Soil & Crop Sciences, College Station, (979) 845-2935, ronschnell@tamu.edu<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\n
\n <\/td>\n Is a Urease Inhibitor Beneficial?<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n <\/td>\n More likely<\/td>\n Less Likely<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Surface applied urea (46-0-0)<\/td>\n X<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Surface applied UAN (32-0-0)<\/td>\n X<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Dry soil, no rain projected<\/td>\n X<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Moist\/wet soil (avoid practice if possible)\u00b6<\/td>\n X<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Incorporate\/inject N fertilizer<\/td>\n <\/td>\n X<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Soil pH > 7.5<\/td>\n X<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Soil pH < 7.5<\/td>\n <\/td>\n X<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Prolonged soil surface temp \u2265 60\u00b0F (not air temp.)<\/td>\n X<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \n Prolonged soil surface temp < 60\u00b0F (not air temp.)<\/td>\n <\/td>\n X<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n