Fertilizer Recommendation Support Tool to Digitize Crop Nutrient Management Launches Nationwide

Apr 10, 2024

Project partners of the Fertilizer Recommendation Support Tool announce the nationwide release of FRST, a decision-aid that provides an unbiased, science-based interpretation of soil test phosphorus and potassium values for crop fertilization.

The FRST project is a collaboration of over 100 soil science and agronomic professionals representing nearly 50 universities, four divisions of the USDA, several not-for-profit organizations and one private sector partner. This diverse partnership underscores the collective effort and expertise invested in the development of FRST.

“We are extremely excited about the launch of the decision support tool,” said Javed Iqbal, agronomy and horticulture assistant professor at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and a member of the team. “FRST was developed in response to the pressing need to harmonize soil testing across state boundaries. It represents an improvement in our ability to evaluate soil test correlation.”

The new web-based tool represents a significant advancement in soil testing for phosphorus and potassium and nutrient management that uses data from across the United States with the hope of potentially saving farmers millions of dollars annually while reducing excess nutrient losses to the environment.

“Until now, soil fertility faculty in each state worked independently,” said Deanna Osmond, professor of soil science at North Carolina State University and one of the FRST’s leaders. “But for farmers who work across state lines, it’s difficult to compare or assimilate multi-state guidelines. Our goal is to improve the accuracy of nutrient recommendations through independent, scientifically developed nutrient management best practices that farmers can believe in and adopt.”

Currently, the FRST provides critical phosphorus and potassium soil test values. Critical soil test values indicate where there is no expected yield increase from phosphorus or potassium fertilizer application. In the next phase, the FRST will provide research-based phosphorus or potassium rate response information to assist farmers in selecting the minimum fertilizer rate expected to produce maximal crop yield.

The current version – FRST v1.0 – includes data from nearly 2,500 phosphorus and potassium trials for 21 major agricultural crops, with the majority as corn and soybean. It includes a map of the U.S. that shows the location of phosphorus and potassium trials represented in the database and can be used to identify where the need for additional research data is greatest.

The database was constructed from both historical and current research data and includes trials from 40 states and Puerto Rico. The team has plans to expand to other crops, cropping systems and other nutrients, such as sulfur.

Key features of FRST include:

Data-Driven: FRST utilizes a dynamic database of soil test correlation data that is constantly updated to improve testing confidence.
Crop Specific: The database currently covers 21 major commodity crops.
Geographically Diverse: Includes published and unpublished trial data from 40 states and Puerto Rico.
Unbiased: Blended data removes political and institutional bias in soil test interpretation.
Scientifically Sound: Data represents a minimum dataset that provides reliable outcomes.

“The FRST project has accomplished two really important objectives to advance phosphorus and potassium management for crop production,” said Nathan Slaton, assistant director of the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture and a leader on the project.

“The first was developing a national database to archive soil test correlation and calibration research ensuring that research information that supports crop fertilization recommendations is not lost as scientists retire,” Slaton said. “The second is providing a tool that anyone can use to review the research results relevant to their crop, soils and geographic area to check their soil-test-based fertilizer recommendations.”

Hosted in a neutral space with common access, FRST fosters collaboration and innovation in soil fertility research, paving the way for future advancements in nutrient management.

“The design of FRST has always been focused on the end user being able to easily use the tool and understand the results,” said Greg Buol, business and technical application analyst at North Carolina State University. Buol has provided database and programming support for FRST.

"We believe that FRST will not only benefit farmers by improving farm economics and conservation practices but also contribute to global sustainability," Iqbal said.

Source : unl.edu

Video: The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety!

Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it.

The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere—and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026–27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson—one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group—a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult—and particularly costly—to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not simply how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines—far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s.

But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses.

That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”