Companies and the Technological Convergence Driving the Future of Biostimulants

This week I read How Will Ag Technology Impact the Growth of Biologicals? and there are several great thoughts.

I wanted to add some additional comments around where the convergence of technology is likely to influence adoption and utilization of biologicals (specifically biostimulants).

I think it’s worth calling out — technology is only one component.

It’s not the technology alone. It’s the companies that make the difference. People solve problems with technology. Teams find ways to elegantly change human behavior. Humans identify how to apply technology effectively.

Peter Thiel has touched on that frequent misunderstanding— teams, not technology are the compelling aspects and with that in mind I don’t want to only talk about the technologies, but what companies are out there as well.

Index

1. Genetic Engineering with VAFs and the Genome

2. Predictive Technology Influencing Timing and Targeting

3. Soil Sensors and Closing the Feedback Loop

4. Precision Application and Autonomy

5. Formulation Technology

6. Fermentation and Delivery Technology

7. Final Thoughts

The future of biologicals (biostimulants, living or non-living) and value-added fertilizers (VAFs) is not just about trying to get more product broadly and randomly applied to every field — it's about integrating plant science, equipment technology, formulation technology and data layers to create better outcomes through a convergence of seemingly unrelated technologies.

Several trends, companies and technologies are converging to show why growth in VAFs will occur and why we should see an increase in ROI and results overtime: advanced crop genetics, predictive analytics, sensor technologies, and more capable application equipment.

Genetic Engineering with VAFs and the Genome

Crop breeding and genetic engineering coulod enable the development of varieties with unique capabilities to derive more from VAFs, such as altered root architectures, and more efficient nutrient uptake pathways (eg: better foliar uptake), or increased exudate production.

The rationale may seem farfetched, but now that major genetics and trait companies like Corteva are involved in the biostimulant, microbe discovery and nutrition sector, they have increased incentive and capability to tie these segments together.

Consider:

• Companies developing genotype or variety specific nutrient formulations. This means VAFs could evolve to be designed to amplify genetic expression, for example.

• Given the unique ability for VAF products to enhance the varieties and their ability to be distributed through traditional farm channels (eg: Pioneer), it uniquely positions these products to be sold in a more direct tie to the seed, like Corteva has alluded to.

• New in-plant sensors, like those from InnerPlant (disclosure: Upstream Ag Ventures Inc. is an investor) could be dialled in to signal a specific abiotic stress or nutrient deficiency at some point in the future.

• ‘Omics’ is becoming more common— Syngenta announced a partnership with TraitSeq specifically to improve understanding of biostimulant product performance in relation to specific crops and genes. There are increasing services from the likes of Foresight Agronomics that can deliver insights into how a product impacts a specific crop and new technology from the likes of CropDiagnostix that can give more frequent readings into what a plant is experiencing.

• RNA technology can address abiotic stress by mimicking the plant’s natural biology, using RNAs to trigger protective responses like stomatal control, and enhanced root growth without altering the plant’s DNA. RNA formulations could be rapidly tailored to specific crops and conditions, enabling better enabling adaptation to abiotic stress. Newly launched company Terrana Bio is an example working on this opportunity.

Predictive Technology Influencing Timing and Targeting

Subscribe to Upstream Ag Professional to read the rest.