Biostimulants, synthetic or naturally occurring substances and/or microorganisms that stimulate different growth processes in plants, are becoming a fast-growing part of the agriculture input market, and a highly attractive business opportunity for major players in agroindustry. Yet some growers are still hesitant to take the plunge into biostimulants – plant responses are often inconsistent (as overall effect does not depend only on the product itself, but also on the plant, management practices and agroclimatic conditions), and precisely deciphering the involved mechanism of action remains highly intricate.
Farmers in different countries have used biostimulants for many years, starting with seaweeds. In fact, the use of seaweeds in agriculture dates back thousands of years; during ancient Roman times, plant seedlings were covered with algae to promote their growth. In the coastal area of Europe, farmers incorporated seaweeds in the soil or used it as a compost. Indeed, as the dominant category of the biostimulant segment, seaweed extracts were key in this growing renown, and they are widely known as substances with the function of mitigating abiotic stress and enhancing plant productivity.
Today, in addition to seaweed extracts, biostimulants incorporate a diverse group of product technologies that includes microbial inoculants, biochemical materials, amino acids, humic acids, fulvic acids and more.
Biostimulants continue to gain traction in Europe, North America and other jurisdictions, as governing bodies work to develop legal definitions and regulatory frameworks. Yet grower hesitation remains.
According to Manel Cervera, international business director with DunhamTimmer, consistent return
on investment and grower willingness to pay for a product they consider in many cases to be not essential are two clear indicators that limit biostimulant adoption as a standard management tool.
“This is especially true in more extensive row crops and lower value crops, where in many cases the optimal timing and/or application of biostimulants does not fit with current management practices, i.e., few or no foliar applications late in the growing season,” notes Cervera.
Current growth trends of biostimulants
While both Europe and North American markets show good growth trends with biostimulants, DunhamTrimmer has observed some maturity symptoms in some countries in western Europe.
“Growth in absolute terms will continue in these two regions as very important and interesting markets,” notes Cervera. “Weather related stresses are becoming more common and the value of biostimulants in helping the crop tolerate these extremes will contribute to future growth. We also see synergy between precision ag technology with improved ability to monitor and detect crop stress earlier as benefiting timely application of biostimulant products.
“Central and eastern Europe will remain on a strong growth trajectory, particularly in the fruit and vegetable market in Poland, as the use of biostimulants did not begin to develop here until much later than western Europe,” adds Cervera.
DunhamTrimmer also posits that Latin America and Asia will be the faster growing regions in the near term with a lot of new market opportunities. As well, policy developments in China may help to support future development of the biostimulant market.
“We see southeast Asia expanding the use of biostimulants in tropical and plantation crops and also evaluating new uses in row crops,” says Cervera. “Meanwhile, in Latin America, Brazil will continue to dominate the region with intensive biostimulant use in horticultural crops as well as increasing use in some row crops such as soybeans and sugarcane. Use of biostimulants is also accelerating in Mexico which is the second largest country market in the region. Central American and Andean countries are expanding use in many plantation crops including bananas, coffee and pineapple.”
What can convince farmers? Despite these expected advancements, farmers are often not aware of the advantages that biostimulants can offer and have limited understanding on how to select the right product and how to apply it to for maximum benefit. Overall, it’s imperative users understand a biostimulant’s mode of action and adapt product uses to different agroclimatic and management practices.
According to the Biological Crop Protection team, including Drs. Rose Buitenhuis, Ana Pastrana, Qinglu Ying and David Liscombe, at the Vineland Research and Innovation Centre in Ontario, Canada, using biostimulants requires a preventative approach.
“Their efficacy often depends on factors like the environment, plant cultivar and production practices,” they note. “The best way to convince growers is to make them see the difference, for example through testing by independent research labs. It is also helpful if the company provides good support, for example through crop consultants and if the company has a good reputation. And definitely, more research is needed on innovative product development and application technologies.”
Vineland is currently testing and validating different biostimulant products for greenhouse vegetable production and nursery production, mainly looking at their effects on crop productivity and resistance to
abiotic stresses. Through metabolomics analysis, they are developing biomarkers that will reliably predict biostimulant efficacy. They are screening products to check their effect against plant diseases, and in a previous project, they also looked at the indirect effect of biostimulants on pest populations, through induced plant defenses.
Zheng Wang, vegetable crops and irrigation farm adviser with the University of California, agrees that unbiased data is the best way to convince growers to try biostimulants. “Also, if data are obtained from other successful/more experienced product users, the road to biostimulants might be better paved,” he says. “End users need a lot of guidance from selecting, using products, and interpretating crop responses, thereby they can gain experience and lessons to improve gradually. Selling products to grower is not the end, even not a start.”
Wang and his team are testing and validating different biostimulant products for open-field vegetable production, mainly looking at their effects on crop productivity and fruit quality. Vegetable crops that he has researched include fresh market and processing tomatoes, lettuce, spinach, carrot, squash and watermelon. Current applied projects Wang is working on involve the use of seaweed- and microbe-containing biostimulants to enhance processing tomato and watermelon productivity and fruit quality.
Initially, biostimulants like seaweed extracts and humic acids were mostly used in organic production but now they are being adopted broadly in greenhouse vegetable and ornamental production, as well as nursery production. And newly legalized cannabis sectors have great interest in using biostimulants. This has helped with the diversity of biostimulant products now available.
In North America, “greenhouse growers and small-acre farmers are more apt to try biostimulants,” says Wang. “Greenhouse conditions are manipulated more easily and less complicated than open fields. Also,
small farmers can have more time and more flexibility to try new things.”
Jarrett Chambers, president of ATP Nutrition, adds that in these high value crops, nutrient management is intense, and farmers are constantly tweaking nutrient management, and using biostimulants as a tool to drive that.
“I’ve been over to Europe 28 or 29 times now, and I’m still always so impressed. They are amazing at growing their crops; they manage the nutrients very scientifically, very strategically. Their nutrient management plans are incredibly sophisticated, and the way they’re driving their nutrient use efficiency is through biostimulants.”
Broadacre challenges While biostimulant usage on high-value horticulture and greenhouse crops is somewhat secure, it’s the broadacre crops that many biostimulant marketers are looking to. To that end, certain types of biostimulants, for example fulvic acids, are quite common in broadacre crops in North America, notes the Vineland researchers.
“Convincing these farmers would require proof of concepts, word of mouth from fellow farmers, demonstration of the benefits, etc. Farmers can also try biostimulants on a small area before using it on their entire crop,” they say. “Eventually, increasing food demand and production challenges (land, environment, climate etc.), and the need for enhance yield and quality will direct farmers to try biostimulants. What is needed is that governments and regulatory agencies develop clear legal definitions and regulatory frameworks.”
Wang agrees. “The use of products has to be really target-driven, e.g., nitrogen use efficiency, drought resistance, fruit quality improvement or releasing salinity. Being specific is important. You cannot just say to growers that use of these products will enhance crop production in general.”
Many companies try to sell their biostimulants as a stand-alone product, yet they often have a difficult time succinctly and technically accurately explaining what their product does, or how it works.
“People can’t get their head past that,” notes Chambers. I think we’re on a trajectory for a steep learning curve to understand biostimulants. At ATP Nutrition, we have taken a pretty strong initiative on education of biostimulants. But it is a slow process. What we’ve decided to do is
try to position and sell biostimulants based off return on investment. We refer to it like this: what is the risk that you wish to take and invest in that ingredient?”
The ultimate questions is, at what price would you look at this product with a price point to treat an entire farm? Chambers thinks the price point as a standalone is a little bit more than what people are willing to take a risk on.
“Selling things that stand alone only work if we can work with their nutrient management plan, and we price it so the risk to them is modest,” says Chambers. “And hopefully a lot of upside reward.”
Biostimulants x nutrients = success? It’s been demonstrated that biostimulants do work, but their success requires a whole new way of talking with farmers about how they work and how they can enhance a total nutritional package. Chambers says companies need to lead with science, reduce the promises and fix the price so it’s easy for farmers to use and the risk associated with it is not too high relative to the reward, adding that that will take some clever marketing on the part of companies.
“Especially in North America, we need to get the big crop protection companies to work with the biostimulants to really start to understand the products and how they fall under their sustainability platform. Working with fertilizer companies is, in my opinion, the sleeping giant,” says Chambers. “It has to be easy to use, it’s got to work into their system, it can’t be priced as a full input, it has to be priced as an additive to support a well-balanced nutrient program. It’s got to be priced so that the risk that the grower takes is not too high.
So, as science supporting biostimulant knowledge advances, and with all development and extension service done by leading companies in the space, it’s expected more growers will adopt biostimulants in an increasing number of crops and agroclimatic conditions/management practices going forward.
“I think it’s going to be slow and sure growth – and it’s imperative to have the big nutrient companies and/or crop protection companies starting to talk a different language about the same topic. And that will have a big input on the future of biostimulants,” says Chambers. ●
While sellers have been trying to demonstrate the efficacy of their biostimulant products, there has always been a debate in the background on how to define biostimulants. Two pieces of legislation have provided definitions, or draft definitions, both of which focus on the functions of a biostimulant rather than its composition.
In mid-2019, the European Union (EU) adopted Regulation No 2019/1009 – the new EU Fertilising Products Regulation (which comes into full regulatory force on 16 July 2022) – bringing clarity to the categorization of plant biostimulant products in terms of a definition. The regulation defines plant biostimulants as a fertilizing product that functions to stimulate plant nutrition processes independent from the product's nutrient content with the sole aim of improving one or more of the following characteristics of the plant or the plant rhizosphere: (a) nutrient use efficiency, (b) tolerance to abiotic stress, (c) quality traits, or (d) availability of confined nutrients in soil or rhizosphere. Helping this along is the European Biostimulant Industry Council (EBIC). Founded in 2011, EBIC promotes the contribution of plant biostimulants to make agriculture more sustainable and resilient and in doing so promotes the growth and development of the European biostimulant industry.
Slightly earlier on the timeline, the U.S. Farm Bill, signed into law in December 2018, was the first legislation to put out a definition, describing a plant biostimulant as “a substance or micro-organism that, when applied to seeds, plants or the rhizosphere, stimulates natural processes to enhance or benefit nutrient uptake, nutrient efficiency, tolerance to abiotic stress, or crop quality and yield.” However, in the 2019 USDA Report on Plant Biostimulants, they provide two alternative definitions, so the 2018 definition is still in its draft stages. ●
Manel Cervera, International Business Director, DunhamTimmer,
Type your quote here…
Zhang Wang, University of California
Jarrett Chambers, President ATP
Vineland Research and Innovation Centre is currently testing and validating different biostimulant products for greenhouse vegetable production and nursery production, mainly looking at their effects on crop productivity and resistance to abiotic stresses. Photo: Vineland Research and Innovation Centre
