Stratus Ag Research Biostimulant Survey 2024: Insights from American Growers

Stratus Ag Research is an independent agricultural market research firm that delivers data-driven insights to support agribusiness strategy and decision-making.

Over the last three years, they have delivered a Tracking Biostimulants: Grower Insight Survey Report that provides a timely and nuanced look at how grower purchasing behaviors are evolving surrounding biostimulants in the United States and Canada.

Stratus Ag Research is a collaborative partner of Upstream Ag Insights and has provided access to a dataset that further illustrates these takeaways that Upstream Ag Professional members gain access too.

Below you will find Five Takeaways from the Stratus Report along with a breakdown of of thoughts, and implications from the data delivered.

Please contact Kent Fraser [email protected] from Stratus Ag Research to learn more about how you can access the Tracking Biostimulant report to inform your strategic business decisions.

For publicly available data from Stratus Ag Research, check out their Insights Page.

Index

1. Biological Use is Growing Among Farmers

2. a. Satisfaction Not Growing

   b. Expectations

3. Intention to Use Biostimulants Remains Much Lower Than Crop Protection

4. The Four E’s of Biostimulant Positioning

5. Distribution = King

6. Final Thoughts

1. Biological Use is Growing Among Farmers

33% of farmers in the United States used some form of biostimulant in 2024— whether a Seaweed Extract or Botanical, Amino Acid, Organic Acid, N-Fixing or Beneficial Fungi/Bacteria:

However, Stratus highlighted the nuanced commentary from farmers signalling there are still obstacles to overcome before biostimulants are used consistently.

Attitude towards biostimulants, including openness to use is broadly improving, but:

2a. Satisfaction is Not Growing

A farmers perceived satisfaction after using a biostimulant is ~flat over the last 3 seasons:

This is even though more trusted advisors, farmers and crop protection/fertilizer manufacturers are engaging with and training their staff on biostimulants, so we should expect satisfaction to be increasing.

A notable takeaway is that farmer satisfaction within the Nitrogen Fixing category of biostimulants experienced the sharpest decline in terms of grower satisfaction.

N-fixing biostimulant companies have had the largest VC investment (among the biological segment) and biggest emphasis by traditional crop protection manufacturers— companies like Pivot Bio, Corteva (Utrisha) and Sound Agriculture (Source) are all examples and should be seeing satisfaction grow as they more effectively trial, position, support and improve their products, but that has seemingly not been the case over the last 3 seasons.

2b. Expectations

Expectations can vary by product based on how they are positioned.

When a farmer uses a bacteria or a fungal based product, they might look for less tangible benefits— plant health such as greener plants and bigger roots. This may be apart of what leads to lower expectation for return (Stratus data did not signal this, I am speculating) and be viewed more as a form of “insurance” (against abiotic stress) compared to other biostimulant segments like N fixing products.

When a farmer uses a N fixing based product, they expect yield. And the farmer may have adjusted their fertility plan accordingly— such as decreasing nitrogen applied per acre, or even increased other macronutrients to keep them from becoming the limiting factor.

For example, when we look at a product like PROVEN 40 (the “40” is based off their positioning of 40lbs of N per acre fixed), nitrogen availability can be quantified into more specific yield outcomes.

If a farmer is growing corn, they know one bushel of corn needs access to ~one pound of nitrogen. Through basic math we can begin to see that the farmer might begin to expect 40 bushels more (this is unrealistic, but we can extrapolate why expectations could get out of whack). Even if a farmer assumes that equates to 10 more bushels because they are getting 40lbs of nitrogen, that’s still a large expectation that is difficult to live up to, and something that often isn’t the case with other biostimulant categories.

(To be clear, Pivot Bio or Sound Agriculture (or any other N-fixing company) do not claim these levels of yield increase, I am just illustrating why expectations could increase when stating “40lbs of available N” which hinders the overall satisfaction.)

3. Intention to Use Biostimulants Remains Much Lower Than Crop Protection

Not only is satisfaction flat, but we are seeing a falling “commitment to continue to use.”

Subscribe to Upstream Ag Professional to read the rest.