smart fertilizer, control release of fertilizers, Nano fertilizer

1. Strategy for Sustainable
Agriculture
Smart fertilizer
1

2. INTRODUCTION
2

3. Based on projected global population growth, an annual
increase of the world cereal production of 0.9% reaching
3009 billion tones (3009,000Tg) will be required to meet
the demand (He et al., 2014).
Average global cereal yields will need to increase from
3.32 to 4.30 t ha-1 , with wheat yields rising from 2.8 to
3.8 t ha-1 (He et al., 2014).
3

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6
Sustainable Intensification

7. 7

8. Challenges in present
agricultural practices
Present agriculture is generally chemically intensive where using more doses of
chemicals for nutrient management to get maximum production per unit area
without caring about natural resources and ecosystems.
In present agriculture fertilizer contributes to the tune of 50% of the
agricultural production but higher doses of fertilizers does not guarantee to
improved crop yield but it leads to several problems like degradation of soil and
pollution of surface and underground water resources.
8

9. Trends in consumption of fertilizer nutrients
(1970-71, 1980-81, 1990-91, 2000-2001, 2010-11)
9

10. TO ENSURE FOOD SECURITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH FOR THE EXPANDING WORLD
POPULATION
In order to enhance nutrient use efficiency, new types of smart fertilizers
with controlled nutrient release are needed. The development of such
fertilizers could be based on the use of microorganisms (biofertilizers)
and/or nanomaterials (nanofertilizers).
In this context, nanotechnology is a promising, rapidly evolving field of
interdisciplinary research that has potential to revolutionize food
systems.
NEW TECHNOLOGIES
10

11. Nanotechnology involves the design, synthesis, and use of materials at
nanoscale level, ranging from 1 to 100nm (EPA,2007).
At this scale, the physical, chemical, and biological properties of materials
differ fundamentally from the properties of individual atoms, molecules, or bulk
matter .
Nanotechnology
It’s hard to imagine just how small nanotechnology is. One nanometer is a
billionth of a meter, or 10-9 of a meter. Here are a few illustrative examples:
There are 2,54,00,000 nanometers in an inch.
A sheet of newspaper is about 100,000 nanometers thick.
11

12. 108
107
10
6
105
104
Tennis
ball
Salt
grain
Cell
103
Comparison between Nano-
size
12

13. Comparison between Nano-
size
10-
1
102
1
0
1
Water
Virus
DNA
Protein
13

14. The application of nanotechnology to agriculture and food industries is growing
rapidly as shown by increasing numbers of publications and patents.
15

15. 01 Nanofertilizers
02
Slow- or controlled-release
fertilizers
03Polymers
04Biodegradable polymers
05Stabilized fertilizer
06Bio formulation fertilizers
07 Use of harvesting residues
SMART
FERTILIZER
FORMULATIONS
16

16. Nanofertilizers are either nanomaterials that can supply one or more nutrients
to the plants and enhance plant growth and yields or those that can improve
the performance of conventional fertilizers but do not directly provide crops
with nutrients.
1.Nanofertilizers
Nanofertilizers, as smart fertilizers, are designed to increase nutrient use
efficiency and consequently reduce adverse effects on the environment
compared to application of conventional mineral fertilizers
17

17. 01 Nanoscale fertilizer
synthesized
Nanoparticles
03 Nanoscale coating
Product
coated with
Nano polymer
02 Nanoscale additives
3 main types
of
Nanofertilizers
:
Bulk products with
nanoscale additives
According to Mastronardi
et al.(2015)
19

18. Nano fertilizers are advantageous over conventional fertilizers as
 They increase soil fertility, yield and quality parameters of the crop.
 They are nontoxic and less harmful to environment and humans.
 They minimize cost and maximize profit.
Nano particles increase nutrients use efficiency (80-100 times less requirement to chemical
fertilizers )and minimizing the costs of environment protection .
Improvement in the nutritional content of crops and the quality of the taste.
Enhance plants growth by resisting diseases, improving stability of the plants by anti-bending and
provide 10 times more stress tolerant by deeper rooting of crops.
Also suggested that balanced fertilization to the crop plant may be achieved through
nanotechnology.
Advantages of Nano fertilizers over traditional fertilizers
20

19. 22Yuvaraj m & Subramanian K. S. (2018)

20. According to Trenkel (1997), slow- or controlled-release fertilizers are those
containing a plant nutrient in a form, which either
(a)delays its availability for plant uptake and use after application, or
(b) is available to the plant significantly longer than a reference.
2. Slow / controlled-release fertilizers
Conceptually controlled- and slow-release fertilizers, also called “smart
fertilizers,” are prepared to release their nutrient content in a gradual fashion
and, if possible, match its release with the nutritional requirements of a plant or
to make its availability much longer than that of a reference product, such as
high soluble fertilizers, which rapidly make their nutrients available.
25

21. At least about 75%
released at the stated
release time
No more than
75% released in
28 days
No more than 15%
released in 24 hours
2
3
1
A fertilizer may be described as slow-
release if the nutrient, fallow's three
criteria at the temperature of 25°C :
26

22. Shaviv (2001) reported the following distinction:
the term “controlled-release fertilizers” is acceptable when applied to fertilizers
in which the factors that dominate the rate, type, and duration of release are
well known and controllable, during the preparation thereof;
“slow-release fertilizers” involve a slower nutrient release than usual, but the
rate, type, and release duration are not well controlled.
However, the distinction between the terms is not determinative because these
definitions are still open and modifiable.
27

23. Slow and control release fertilizer 2018
TOTAL CONSUMPTION 1.5 MILLON MT
UNITED
STATES36%
WESTERN EUROPE
10%
JAPAN
8%
CHINA
46%
Does not include bigger acreage
application
Source: HIS MARKET
28

24. Delayed
availability &
consistent
supply
Achieved
through
Chemical modification
Condensed aldehydes with urea, which are
much less soluble in water than urea
Larger particle size with a deeper application
of fertilizer reduces loss by leaching and
evaporation.
Physical size
compounds with low solubility, such as metal
ammonium phosphates and partially acidified
phosphate rocks
Inorganic compounds
Physical barriers
In which the fertilizer may be formatted as
tablets or coated granules (encapsulated)
As matrixes
Active soluble material is dispersed into a
continuous medium that restricts the nutrient
dissolution.
29

25. The two most important groups of slow and controlled-release fertilizers,
according to their production process are:
• Condensation products of urea and urea-aldehydes (slow-release fertilizers).
• Coated or encapsulated fertilizers (controlled-release fertilizers).
Of lesser or only regional importance are:
• Supergranules and others.
Types of Slow and Controlled-Release Fertilizers
30

26. Condensation products of urea and aldehydes
Urea-formaldehyde (UF) - 38% N
 Urea-isobutyraldehyde (IBDU) - 32% N
 Urea-crotonaldehyde (CDU) - 32.5% n
Whereas the urea-formaldehyde products have the largest share of the slow-
release fertilizer market, IBDU- and CDU-based products are less widely used,
due to even greater cost constraints in their production.
31

27. Coated/encapsulated controlled-release
fertilizers
These are conventional soluble fertilizer materials with rapidly available nutrients
which after granulation, prilling or crystallization are given a protective (water-
insoluble) coating to control the water penetration and thus the rate of dissolution
and the nutrient release. ‘A product containing sources of water soluble nutrients,
their release in the soil is controlled by a coating applied to the fertilizer’.
32

28. • Sulphur,
• Polymers (e.g. Pvdc-based copolymeres, polyolefine, polyurethane, etc.)
• Fatty acid salts (e.g. Ca-stereate),
• Latex, rubber, guar gum, petroleum derived anti-caking agents, wax,
• Ca + mg-phosphates, mg-oxide, mg-ammonium phosphate + mg potassium phosphate.
• Phosphogypsum, rock phosphate,
• Peat (encapsulating within peat pellets: organo-mineral fertilizers ),
• Neem coated urea
Agents currently used for coating/materials used in
manufacturing fertilizers with controlled release of
nutrients are:
33

29. Clays
Nanoclays (e.g., Allophane),
Nondegradable (polysulfone)
Biodegradable polymers (e.g., Alginate beads)
Among biodegradables, natural polymeric carbohydrates appear as an
alternative to nonbiodegradable materials acting as permeable or
impermeable membranes with tiny pores in slow-release fertilizers (e.g.,
urea). These highly degradable materials have also received attention
because of their low cost and low environmental damage due to
biodegradability and low accumulation in the environment.
Other coating materials used for slow nutrient
release
34

30. Carriers and Coating Materials Suitable for the
Development of Smart Fertilizers
Materials application
Brown coal,
charcoal, and
biochar
N retention,
Support material controlled-release fertilizer,
Sustained-release fertilizer
Slow-release N fertilizer
Biochar–fertilizer composite
Perlite, vermiculite,
bentonite
In superabsorbent composites of controlled-release fertilizers
Carrier in bioformulations of bacterial inoculants
Peat N-controlled fertilizer
Microbial carrier in bioformulations
Alginate beads,
calcium alginate gel
Double-coated control-release fertilizer
Microencapsulated bacterial fertilizer/encapsulation of
microorganisms in alginate–clay complexes
Polymeric
materials
Coating materials of controlled-release fertilizers
Non environmental friendly polymers (polyurethane,
polyacrylic acid, etc.) 35

31. Nanoclays, which naturally occur in soils, have been considered
important tools in modern agriculture due to their physicochemical
properties (Sekhon, 2014). Nanoclays can be used to stabilize enzymes
and thereby increase their catalytic activity.
Nanoclays
36

32. Nanocomposites are hybrid materials consisting of a continuous (polymer) phase or
matrix and a dispersed (nanofiller) phase. The dispersion of a small amount (<10%) of
nanomaterial in the polymer matrix can lead to marked improvement in physical and
mechanical properties (strengths, pH tolerance, storage stability, heat distortion, break
elongation) compared with a single polymer matrix.
Currently research is focused to develop nanocomposites to supply essential nutrients
through smart delivery system, synchronizing the release of them with the crop
uptake, so preventing undesirable nutrient losses to soil (e.g., leaching and
volatilization) (Bley et al., 2017).
Nanocomposites
37

33. The future development should focus on materials allowing for nutrient release
from nanofertilizers triggered by an environmental condition or simply at specific
time (grue`re, 2012). In this context, nanodevices or additives can be associated to
nanofertilizers to synchronize the fertilizer release with plant demand.
38

34. Polymers are widely used in agriculture especially for fertilizer development.
Smart polymeric materials have been applied to smart delivery systems of a
wide variety of agrochemicals. A broad range of synthetic materials, such as
petroleum-based polymers, have been used to encapsulate water-soluble
fertilizers.
 Polysulfone,
 Polyacrylonitrile,
 Polyvinyl chloride,
 Polyurethane,
 Polystyrene are the main materials currently used for coating
3. Polymers
39

35. 40

36. Yang et al.
42

37. These materials have increasingly been used as substitutes of others polymers
in agriculture.
Devassine et al. (2002) divided them in two main groups according to their
water vapor permeability, namely,
 Degradable synthetic polymers with a small permeability coefficient
(k<3000cm2 s-1 pa-1) (biopols, polylactic acids, and polycaprolactone), and
Modified polysaccharides with a higher permeability coefficient (k>4000cm2 s-
1 pa-1) (alginates, starches, agar).
4. Biodegradable Polymers
43

38. Biodegradable polymers have also been used in bioformulations, acting as
microbial carriers. These carriers protect microbial inoculants from various
stresses and prolong shelf life. For example, calcium alginate gel may protect
microbial cells with increase in shelf life (Wu et al., 2011).
44
Other options include utilization of semipermeable materials and sensors of
chemical or biological origin within the fertilizer. These are advanced materials,
whose physical or chemical properties can change in response to an external
stimulus such as temperature, pH, and electric or magnetic fields

39. Figure shows a comparison between a conventional
system and a controlled release for a particular active
ingredient.
46
c c
c

40. 47

41. Nitrification inhibitors :
Nitrification inhibitors are compounds that delay bacterial oxidation of the
ammonium-ion (NH4+) to nitrite by depressing the activities of Nitrosomonas
bacteria in the soil over a certain period of time.
The objective of using nitrification inhibitors is
 to control leaching of nitrate by keeping nitrogen in the ammonia form longer
 to prevent denitrification of nitrate-N and to increase the efficiency of
nitrogen applied.
Nitrification inhibitor
NH4+ NO2-
Nitrosomonas spp.
5. Stabilized fertilizers
48

42. Types of Nitrification inhibitors
Nitrapyrin: 2-chloro-6-(trichloromethyl)-pyridine,
DCD: dicyandiamide,
Terrazole: etridiazole,
CP: 2-cyanimino-4-hydroxy-6-methylpyrimidine,
2-ethylpyridine,
ATS: ammonium thiosulphate,
ZPTA: thiophosphoryl triamide,
Thiourea,
NCU: neemcake coated urea,
NICU: ‘nimin’ (neemcake extract) coated urea,
Soil fumigants also show nitrification
inhibiting properties.
Nitrification as well as urease
inhibitor.
.
49

43. 50
N-Source Base
Compound
Common
Names
N
Content
(%)
N Process Inhibition
Duration
(Weeks)
Nitrapyrin 2-chloro-6-
trichloromethyl
pyridine
N-Serve,
Stay-N
2000
- Nitrification
denitrificatio
n
2-6
DCD dicyandiamide DCD,
Ensan
1.6 - 4-8
DMPP 3,4dimethypyr
azole
phosphate
DMPP,
Entec
12-26 - 6-8
Common Nitrification Inhibitors
Source –Tisdle et al.(2014)

44. Urease
CO(NH2)2 + H2O 2 NH3 + CO2
Urease inhibitors prevent or depress over a certain period of time the
transformation of amide-N in urea to ammonium hydroxide and ammonium.
They do so by slowing down the rate at which urea hydrolyzes in the soil, thus
avoiding or reducing volatilization losses of ammonia to the air (as well as further
leaching losses of nitrate).
Urease inhibitors
54

45. Types of Urease inhibitors
Thiophosphoro triamides:
NBTPT (or NBPT): n-(n-butyl)thiophosphoric triamide
TPT: thiophosphoryl triamide,
PPD/PPDA: phenyl phosphorodiamidate,
HQ: hydroquinone,
P-benzoquinone,
ATS: ammoniumthiosulphate,
Thiopyridines, thiopyrimidines, thiopyridine-n-oxides,
Nn-dihalo-2-imidazolidinone,
NCU: neemcake coated urea / NICU: neem cake extract coated urea
Practical and
commercial importance
55

46. 56
Common Urease Inhibitors
N-Source Base Compound Common
Names
N Content
(%)
N Process Inhibition
Duration
(Weeks)
Thiosulphate Ammonium or
calcium
thiosulphate
ATS
CaTS
12 Volatilization,
nitrification
2-3
NBPT n-butyl-thio
phosphoric
triamide
Agrotain,
SuperU
46 Volatilization 2-3
Source –Tisdle et al.(2014)

47. 6. Bioformulation Fertilizer
Encapsulating microorganisms in carrier materials (bioformulation) is designed to
protect them during storage and from adverse environmental condition (pH,
temperature, etc.) thus ensuring a gradual and prolonged release.
57

48. High water-holding and water-retention capacity and suitable for as many bacteria as
possible/cost effective
Nearly neutral ph or easily adjustable and good ph buffering capacity
For carriers used for seed treatment, should assure the survival of the inoculants on
the seed since normally seeds are not immediately sown after seed coating.
For carriers that shall be used for seed coating, should have a good adhesion to seeds.
The inoculant should be nontoxic, biodegradable, and nonpolluting, and should
minimize environmental risks such as the dispersal of cells to the atmosphere or to the
ground water
Quality criteria of model carriers of Bioformulation
58

49. The mineral nutrients required for plant nutrition can be encapsulated inside
nanomaterials such as nanotubes or nanoporous materials, coated with a thin
Protective polymer film, or nanoscale particles.
Depending on the application, it is possible to use synthetic or natural
nanoparticles obtained from various sources, including plants, soils, and
Microorganisms.
59

50. 7. Use of Harvesting Residues
for Smart Fertilizer
FormulationsLignocellulosic Straw as Carrier and Coating Material
Biochar as Carrier and Coating Material
60

51. Lignocellulosic Straw as Carrier and Coating Material
These harvesting residues contain lignin, hemicelluloses, and cellulose. Cellulose
fibrils and lignin impart mechanical strength properties.
Wheat straw contains surface carboxyl, hydroxyl, ether, amino, and phosphate,
which enhance its reactivity and physicochemical properties, useful in the
preparation of adsorbent materials for the treatment of wastewater and slow-
release fertilizers.
61

52. Biochar as Carrier and Coating Material
Biochar is obtained through pyrolysis of agricultural or other
lignocellulosic biomass at temperatures ranging from 350°C to 700°C.
Biochar was found to increase the C sequestration potential of soil
through its high stability and the reduction of native soil OM
mineralization and to be an excellent microbial habitat.
The use of biochar as carrier for smart fertilizers could be highly
beneficial, as it combines nutritional benefits for plants with
improvement of many other soil functions due to the addition of
biochar itself. In particular, biochar addition to soils has positive effects
on water-holding capacity as well as C sequestration.
63

53. Cai et al. (2016) found that biochar produced from corncob, banana
stalk, and pomelo peel displayed an excellent retention ability in
holdingNH4+ associated to the presence of carboxyl and keto groups
when the material was prepared at 200°C, suggesting that this material
could be used as a slow-release carrier for N.
Zhao et al. (2016) observed that the combination of P fertilizers (triple
superphosphate and bone meal) premixed with sawdust and switch
grass biomass prior to biochar production was a good strategy for the
production of an effective slowrelease P fertilizer.
64

54. 65

55. CONCLUSIONS:
In order to meet sustainable development goals, agricultural production
needs to be increased and the pollution and GHG emissions related to
farming activity need to be decreased. We suggest that advances in the
application of biotechnology and nanotechnology have the potential to
facilitate improved nutrient management and use efficiency in
agroecosystems. Smart fertilizers based on slow-/controlled-release
and/or carrier delivery systems have been shown to improve crop yields,
soil productivity, and lower nutrient loss compared with conventional
fertilizers.
66

56. 67
Thank
you