There’s no need for reluctance, just an understanding of what they do.

As farming has increased in complexity in the past 25 years, there’s been a corresponding search for convenience and simple solutions. Advanced systems offering data gathering and interpretation or amendments to remediate soils and boost yields come with learning curves requiring a higher level of management and understanding. It’s little wonder that new technologies and practices that counter conventional thinking are greeted with reluctance or questions about their validity.

Nitrogen stabilizers can be one of those products. Although their usage dates back to the 1970s in the U.S., they are comparatively new in Canada, first registered in 2014 and as many as nine dual-action products now registered.

Why the distinction?

In making submissions for cost-share funding, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) included dual-action stabilizers as an eligible cost, with the goal of reducing nitrogen emissions into the environment. Agencies such as Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association (OSCIA) accepted the stipulation in programs like the Ontario On-Farm Climate Action Fund (OFCAF). The inclusion of dual-action stabilizers has been a cause for questions among some producers participating in these programs.

Outside of a cost-share funding initiative, farmers tend to be creatures of habit; they like what works and are often reluctant to try something new. Some of that’s a reflection of the current farming environment, where planting test strips is viewed as an inconvenience. Commodity prices, cost of production and taxation regimens can drive farmers to maximize production from “fencepost to fencepost”. Some reluctance to try new products or practices can be the result of questionable test data or higher-than-expected product claims.

The need to justify every cost and expenditure can be another factor. Younger farmers are succeeding their parents and grandparents with debt loads that can influence changes in management or field operations. They may choose to employ a nitrogen stabilizer as a means of enhancing their risk management strategy.

“Surface-applying nitrogen and seeing it volatilize into the air -there’s no pro to that.”

With nitrogen stabilizers there can be a disconnect in how they work. Despite a wealth of resources on the importance of nitrogen in crop production, emerging discoveries on the complexity of nutrient-soil interactions can challenge current practices. Environmental concerns surrounding denitrification or volatilization have spurred the development of new products to limit those unwanted releases of nitrogen. That’s why nitrogen stabilizers -and specifically nitrification- and urease-inhibitors have become so important, both in general uptake among growers and also affecting grant eligibility.

Give and take

For Wayne Black, the evolution of information available to growers about nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium -N, P and K -has been both a blessing and a curse. It’s provided farmers and retailers with an extraordinary amount of insight on soil-plant interactions and the need for balanced fertility plans. Yet that expanding knowledge bank is forcing many in agriculture to rethink some of their closely held beliefs. Trying to grasp the extent of micronutrient interactions, the effects of pH or base saturation of cations can be daunting. Within that framework, nitrogen stabilizers need to be part of a tiered approach to help soil and productivity.

“There’s a difference between putting down a product that’s detrimental to the uptake of nitrogen and putting down a product that limits nitrogen loss,” says Black, national sales manager with A&L Canada Laboratories. “I’ve seen a nitrogen stabilizer provide significant value to farmers in periods of heavy rain. But surface-applying nitrogen and seeing it evaporate or volatilize into the air -there’s no pro to that.”

He qualifies that with a reminder that there is no such thing as a quick-fix solution. It’s better to consider a systems approach in using a dual-action N-stabilizer, and one that Black advocates is a four-tiered plan:

1. a balanced fertility program
3. a soil test of all nutrients, micronutrients, pH and cation-exchange capacity
4. observance of the 4R Nutrient Stewardship standards (right source, right rate, right time and right place)
5. use of a dual-action N-stabilizer

“With regards to nitrogen in general, a lot of people don’t fully understand the mechanics of how it moves through the soil and the plant,” he adds, noting something like compaction in soils will limit nitrogen-use efficiency. “Waterlogged soils will increase volatilization and low pH soils will reduce the efficiency of N.”

Detailed analysis

It’s more than learning the difference between denitrification and ammonification, it’s considering the soil’s ability of feed a beneficial microbial population instead of creating an environment for bad activity. To get to that point, growers need a complete soil analysis with all micronutrients (including aluminum), base saturation of cations and the effects of pH (the lower the pH, the higher percentage of fertilizer is wasted).

“A nitrogen stabilizer is going to significantly reduce your nitrogen losses.”

Finding that balance is not a simple matter, especially with variables in weather, soil types and removal rates from different crop rotations. It’s impossible to put a timeline on an N-stabilizer.

“I don’t know what the weather’s going to be, whether it’ll be hot and dry or cold and wet,” says Black. “But a nitrogen stabilizer is going to significantly reduce your nitrogen losses and improve your nitrogen-use efficiency -provided you try it in concert with other sound scientific principles -such as proper soil test, balanced fertility -and proper placement.”