Trey Cutts, Vice President of Commercial Agriculture Science, Tidal Grow AgriScience
Mark Freeman, Technical Services Manager for Plant Nutrition, BioWorks
Kelly Tanaka, Chief Science Officer, HGS BioScience
Bridget Hatfield, Technical Services Manager, Kemin Crop Technologies
Steven Borst, Vice President, Alltech Crop Science (Not pictured)
Kevin Johnson, Owner, Microbial Science Laboratories
Cameron Gerecke, Product Development Specialist, Nutrient TECH
Debatosh Das, Lead Researcher, Redox Bio-Nutrients
Gifford Gillette, Lead Researcher, Redox Bio-Nutrients
By Thomas Skernivitz, Senior Content Specialist, American Fruit Grower
Biofertilizers that combine modern approaches—such as upcycled amino acid nutrients and proteins, natural polymers, precision chemistry, and digital analytics—will define the next decade of crop nutrition, according to Trey Cutts, Vice President of Commercial Agriculture Science with Tidal Grow AgriScience.
“The next frontier isn’t just ‘biologicals vs. synthetics’—it’s integrated nutrient intelligence,” he says. “We’re focused on making these innovations measurable, scalable, and agronomically trusted across global production systems.”
Kelly Tanaka, Chief Science Officer with HGS BioScience, assigns responsibility to academics and industry leaders to continue to improve products in the biofertilizer space and educate growers as the market evolves.
Keep Reading →
“Biofertilizers,” he says, “are an exciting and growing segment of agriculture that will continue to become more relevant.”
We spoke with representatives of eight crop nutrition manufacturers—Alltech Crop Science, BioWorks, HGS BioScience (formerly NutriAg), Kemin Crop Technologies, Microbial Science Laboratories, Nutrient TECH, Redox Bio-Nutrients, and Tidal Grow AgriScience—to provide a detailed look at the current state of biofertilizers.
The Biological Products Industry Alliance (BPIA) notes that there is no official definition of “biofertilizer.” What definition, if any, do you relay to your grower-customers?
Tanaka (HGS BioScience): “I believe the definition is open to evolve over time, but I have always considered biofertilizers as microbial-based products that help crops grow through a number of different mechanisms. A few key ways are nitrogen (N) fixation, nutrient-use efficiency, and abiotic stress mitigation.”
Cutts (Tidal Grow): “At Tidal Grow, we describe biofertilizers as biologically active nutrient-delivery systems that enhance nutrient availability and uptake through microbial mechanisms or directly through nutrients in the amino acid form. Unlike biostimulants, which influence plant physiology, biofertilizers directly improve soil nutrient dynamics and root absorption. Our seafood hydrolysate delivery platforms bridge biology and nutrition, offering dynamic nutrient delivery and availability, with measurable agronomic benefits.”
Bridget Hatfield (Technical Services Manager, Kemin Crop Technologies): “I would consider a ‘biofertilizer’ to be made by or extracted from a biological organism, like algae extract, for example.”
Cameron Gerecke (Product Development Specialist, Nutrient TECH): “I define biofertilizer as a microbial-based fertilizer.”
Mark Freeman (Technical Services Manager for Plant Nutrition, BioWorks): “I find that it is best to avoid terminology like organic or natural and typically refer to biological nutrient sources as complementary to synthetic nutrient sources.”
Kevin Johnson (Owner, Microbial Science Laboratories): “I would say a biofertilizer is a fertilizer which contains beneficial soil microbes.”
Steven Borst (Vice President, Alltech Crop Science): “We're a fermentation company. So, when we ascribe a definition to a biological fertilizer or biological input, it is created from that fermentation process. Anything created by a microorganism or generated by a microorganism is what we ascribe to being a biofertilizer or a biological ingredient, whether we're talking about our amino acids that we generate from our yeast fermentation, our metabolites that we can generate from our bacterial fermentation process, or plant extracts that we create from our yucca plantation that we have in Serdan, Mexico.”
Gifford Gillette and Debatosh Das (Lead Researchers, Redox Bio-Nutrients): “We do not use the term ‘biofertilizer,’ as it originated in the 1970s and is still narrowly defined by many groups to refer mainly to microbial products that fix or supply N. That definition does not accurately describe our technology or the way our products function within the plant and soil system. Instead, we use the term ‘bio-nutrient,’ which reflects a more modern and comprehensive understanding of how plant-active compounds enhance mineral nutrition.
“A bio-nutrient is a nutritional input that combines mineral elements with one or more of the seven categories of biostimulants used in Redox Bio-Nutrients formulations, such as protein hydrolysates, fulvic and humic substrates, alginates, botanical extracts, and other carbon-based molecules. These biostimulants interact with nutrients through Redox Active Molecules to improve energy flow by combating metabolic congestion via nutrient mobility and plant charge balance. This approach supports more efficient nutrient use, stronger root development, improved stress tolerance, and better crop productivity across all growth stages.”
“Growers have an accelerated and better understanding of the overall ‘biological’ segment than we may give them credit for. They may not think about the products in specific categories, but over time that will happen." – Kelly Tanaka, HGS BioScience
Where are we in terms of growers understanding and appreciating the differences between biofertilizers, biostimulants, and organic fertilizers?
Tanaka (HGS): “Growers have an accelerated and better understanding of the overall ‘biological’ segment than we may give them credit for. They may not think about the products in specific categories, but over time that will happen. The lack of clear definitions is a contributing factor. Until biofertilizers, biostimulants, and organic fertilizers are well defined at the regulatory level, it will be difficult to have a concise message to the grower. However, growers do have a strong appetite for products that address soil health, plant health, and efficiency/fertilizer utilization. They know that to get to the next level of yield, products that improve soils, improve plant health, and stimulate better nutrient-use efficiency are the keys to unlocking greater returns compared to traditional methods.”
Gillette/Das (Redox): “Growers today are far more informed and sophisticated in their understanding of biological and organic inputs than they are often given credit for. Most now recognize that biofertilizers refer primarily to microbial inoculants, while organic fertilizers supply nutrients through natural sources. They also increasingly appreciate that biostimulants operate through plant-active compounds that directly influence metabolism, stress response, and nutrient-use efficiency.
“Their questions today focus heavily on integration: How to pair mineral nutrition with these purified bioactive compounds, how to support native microbial communities, and how to build more efficient, resilient nutrient programs. Growers are not only keeping up, but they are driving adoption forward.”
Gerecke (Nutrient TECH): “I find growers paying attention to these types of products understand the differences. Growth stimulation from biofertilizer microbes muddies the water. I think there is still some skepticism of biofertilizers. From my experience, there seems to be increasing comfort with biostimulants, and organic fertilizers are widely accepted.”
Freeman (BioWorks): “Industry always drives for differentiation of products for solid business reasons; this practice can add confusion to an already complex topic. Growing fruit crops is intensely challenging even with favorable weather and good labor availability. Timing optimal delivery of perishables within market swings and generating profits requires manufacturers of inputs to understand more about growers challenges to provide realistic solutions to production challenges that are easy to implement.”
Cutts (Tidal Grow): “Grower understanding has improved significantly, but there’s still overlap in perception. Many recognize that ‘biostimulants’ drive plant metabolism, while ‘biofertilizers’ directly impact nutrient availability. The term ‘organic fertilizer’ often gets used generically but is actually products made specifically for certified organic production, which are required to carry OMRI and CDFA certifications.”
"The question we get [from producers] is, ‘We have this problem. Do you have an answer or a solution for this problem?’ That's how we dictate which technology we're going to use, when we're going to use it. It is a very solution-driven process.” – Steven Borst, Alltech Crop Science
Hatfield (Kemin): “I feel that growers have a good handle on the differences between the three mentioned terms. However, I also think there may be gray areas or unknowns within these newly defined categories.”
Johnson (Microbial Science Laboratories): “Biofertilizers would be fertilizer containing beneficial soil microbes, biostimulants would be the beneficial microbes by themselves, and organic fertilizer is derived from nature with or without beneficial soil microbes. Obviously, any fertilizer, chemical or organic, that contains beneficial soil microbes would increase plant growth with many more benefits than just using fertilizer by itself.”
Borst (Alltech): “As far as biological technologies being incorporated, there is a large group of producers that are utilizing those more and more, so it is a growing segment. We don't get a question of, ‘OK, where does this classification fit in?’ The question we get is, ‘We have this problem. Do you have an answer or a solution for this problem?’ That's how we dictate which technology we're going to use, when we're going to use it. It is a very solution-driven process.”
How do you clarify when confusion arises?
Tanaka (HGS): “I would treat organic fertilizers as their own bucket, and defining what they are can be more challenging than defining a biofertilizer. I have always gone to the regulatory and scientific literature to help navigate definitions in this space. The 2018 Farm bill outlines 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.” The academic literature loosely suggests there are five general categories of biostimulants, and biofertilizers is one of those categories. The other four being humic substances, protein hydrolysates, plant extracts, and the catch-all ‘other’ category.”
Gillette/Das (Redox): “We find that growers respond best to clear, consistent education supported by real field experience. We make a strong effort to simplify complex topics by providing multiple learning pathways. Our agronomists undergo ongoing training to explain concepts like microencapsulation, targeted nutrient delivery, nutrient charge balance, Redox Active Molecules, and soil-plant interactions in practical, crop-specific terms.
“When confusion arises, we start with the agronomic function… Grounding the discussion in measurable outcomes, rather than marketing language, helps the various product concepts click for growers and advisors alike.” – Trey Cutts, Tidal Grow AgriScience
“When questions arise, we meet growers where they are—whether that means talking through chemistry at the root zone, walking fields together, or reviewing data side by side. The goal is always the same: provide straightforward, transparent scientific information that empowers growers to make confident decisions. Our experience is that growers appreciate clarity, and they quickly integrate accurate information when it is presented in a practical, accessible way.”
Freeman (BioWorks): “It depends upon the grower, but just highlighting the differences in crop physiology helps. Most growers know how plants adjust to seasonal changes and how important it is to match genetic attributes to their specific climate, soil, and water conditions. This framework of this logic tends to connect biological inputs as critical components in crop production.”
Cutts (Tidal Grow): “When confusion arises, we start with the agronomic function—what the product does in the soil or plant. We use side-by-side trials, nutrient-use efficiency data, and soil health metrics to quantify differences in outcomes. Grounding the discussion in measurable outcomes, rather than marketing language, helps the various product concepts click for growers and advisors alike.”
Hatfield (Kemin): “When confusion arises, I have a face-to-face or phone call conversation to understand the basis of the confusion and then answer the grower’s questions honestly and with data.”
Johnson (Microbial Science Laboratories): “Confusion is caused by misinformation (often from the internet) or not following directions. If the grower follows the directions on the label, there is usually not a problem. On our labels it states, ‘Do not use the microbes with pesticides, they can kill the microbes.’ If you have to use a pesticide, then wait seven to 10 days before applying the microbes. You can apply the microbes by adding them to your fertilizer, but they must be applied—with or without adding them to your fertilizer—within 24 hours; after that the microbes start to die off.”
How frequently do growers integrate two or all three of these products?
Tanaka (HGS): “Organic growers are more likely to integrate all three product types, but conventional growers are more likely to use one or two types. However, this is changing quickly, too.”
Gillette/Das (Redox): “Most growers already use two or all three categories of biofertilizers, biostimulants, and organic fertilizers because each plays a different role in crop performance. Organic fertilizers are widely used to build soil organic matter, while microbial inoculants are often applied during planting or establishment. The most consistent tends to be biostimulants or bio-nutrients.
“We see growers combining these inputs in a complementary way rather than choosing one over the others. When biostimulants are paired with organic amendments, nutrient mobility and root activity improve, increasing the value of the organic matter. Likewise, healthier soil conditions support both native and introduced microbes.
Nutrient TECH Product Development Specialist Cameron Gerecke finds it challenging to get growers to use more than one of three products — biofertilizers, biostimulants, and organic fertilizers — unless they are committed organic producers. "The greatest success that I have had with growers using both a biofertilizer and a biostimulant is with regenerative wine grape growers," he says. "Organic growers will often use an organic fertilizer and an organic biostimulant.”
Photo courtesy of Nutrient TECH
Gerecke (Nutrient TECH): “It is a challenge to get growers to use more than one of these products unless they are a committed organic producer. The greatest success that I have had with growers using both a biofertilizer and a biostimulant is with regenerative wine grape growers. Organic growers will often use an organic fertilizer and an organic biostimulant.”
Freeman (BioWorks): “It is rare to find a grower that is not using at least two of these product groups. Many use organic nutrient sources for soil management/improvements as a standard practice.”
Cutts (Tidal Grow): “We see a growing number of progressive operations layering all three—an organic base for soil carbon, a biofertilizer for nutrient efficiency, and a biostimulant for stress resilience. On high-value specialty crops and irrigated row crops, this combination is becoming more broadly adopted. Integration often follows proof from side-by-side field trials showing ROI and yield consistency.”
Hatfield (Kemin): “Growers regularly use fertilizer inputs to help replenish the soil from constant crop cycles. I think that biostimulant use is relatively new but rapidly picking up as growers begin to recognize the benefits of harnessing the plant’s inherent nature to improve productivity.”
Johnson (Microbial Science Laboratories): “We usually recommend two applications for herbaceous plants—apply when planting and then again three weeks later—and monthly applications for woody plants during the growing season.”
"I spoke with a golf course superintendent the other day. He said he puts down chemical fungicides every two weeks, rotating different fungicides each time, because they are not working as well as they used to," says Microbial Science Laboratories owner Kevin Johnson. "Microbes don’t have that problem.”
Shown here is canna seed before spraying with a microbial product (left) and seven days post-application.
To what degree are they replacing synthetic inputs?
Tanaka (HGS): “In the organic fruit and nut crop acres, there is better adoption since those growers don’t have the same synthetic input options. There has been significant adoption as regulations are mandated. For the conventional acre, the focus is more about supplement rather than replacement except for those using nitrogen-fixing bacteria, where the amount of applied conventional N would be decreased.”
Gillette/Das (Redox): “Growers are reducing synthetic inputs, but the degree of reduction depends on crop conditions, economics, grower goals, and understanding of layered-efficacy biostimulants.
“Because growers are highly skilled in managing fertility, they rarely eliminate synthetics outright. Instead, they replace the excess. The trend we see is strategic optimization: keeping synthetics where they are agronomically necessary but using Redox Bio-Nutrients to eliminate the waste—and often half of the N or the vast majority of phosphorus—while improving plant charge balance, strengthening stress resilience, and enhancing both soil and crop function.”
Gerecke (Nutrient TECH): “Biostimulants are best suited to compliment synthetic inputs rather than replace synthetic inputs. Biofertilizers can replace synthetic inputs, but calculating the number of units replaced can be complicated. An increasing use for biofertilizers is in place of an extra commercial fertilizer application. This may be to avoid an extra 30 units for corn in case there is either high yield potential or excessive rainfall that season. Organic fertilizers, by definition, replace synthetic inputs because synthetic inputs are not allowed in organic farming.”
Freeman (BioWorks): “The only growers totally replacing synthetic inputs are the organic-certified operations. Most are finding economic reasons to reduce synthetic inputs based upon nutrient-use efficiencies that are realized and reduction of pest control inputs due to increased plant health.”
“Whether the grower chooses to use an organic-based input vs a synthetic input is often dependent on their operation. I do think we are seeing a shift toward more natural-based crop inputs as concern about the environment, soil health, and sustainability continue to be top of mind topics.” – Bridget Hatfield, Kemin Crop Technologies
Cutts (Tidal Grow): “Most growers are pursuing partial substitution, not full replacement. Typically, biofertilizers replace 15-30% of synthetic N or phosphorus inputs, depending on soil health and crop demand. The key is precision—maintaining yield while reducing input intensity and improving nutrient recovery efficiency.”
Hatfield (Kemin): “Whether the grower chooses to use an organic-based input vs a synthetic input is often dependent on their operation. An organic grower will be limited by labels that are OMRI registered. A non-organic grower may still be using more synthetics due to lower input costs. I do think we are seeing a shift toward more natural-based crop inputs as concern about the environment, soil health, and sustainability continue to be top of mind topics.”
Johnson (Microbial Science Laboratories): “It depends on what is applied. There are many companies selling microbial fungicides to use on specific problems around the roots or on the leaves. They work extremely well. So, the need for chemical fungicides is dramatically reduced. Microbes work best as a preventive vs. killing the problem disease, although some are effective in doing that as well. Adding the microbes early when planting or early in the spring when the temperature reaches 50 degrees or higher is best. We ran trials on corn with Microbe Remedy one time, and it increased the N by 14%. So, with effective use of microbes in the soil, you can reduce N and phosphorus applications.”
Borst (Alltech): “With our technologies, it's in combination. Sometimes it is a replacement opportunity—‘Hey, Steve, we have some stringent guidelines with the food producers that are purchasing, and we want to limit our pesticide use. Do you have some products that we could fit into that?’—in combination with, ‘We incorporate our products to promote or to offset some of the challenges that they would run into using a synthetic technology.’ And then we have technologies that we're looking at from a soil perspective, ‘OK, how can we improve nutrient uptake, nutrient-use efficiency?’ That's where we would be directing our technology into that space to get out of the soil what is already there, more so than having to put back a substantial amount. So, as far as direct substitution, it depends on what the challenge is from the grower, and how we would dictate a program in that space.”
Why should they replace such inputs?
Tanaka (HGS): “Outside of the nitrogen-fixing bacteria, these products are not intended to fully replace synthetic inputs (conventional fertilizers). For long-term soil health, removal of nutrients must be considered, and therefore biostimulants and biofertilizers are only part of the solution.”
Gillette/Das (Redox): “High fertilizer loads bring an excess ionic charge that the plant must constantly buffer. This drains energy away from growth, root development, and stress adaptation. When nitrate, phosphate, or salt-based carriers exceed what the plant can metabolize, charge imbalance suppresses antioxidant capacity, disrupts carbohydrate flow, and weakens structure, reducing the plant’s ability to maintain optimal cell wall strength, sugar allocation, and canopy function. This makes crops more vulnerable to heat, drought, and salinity.
“Growers are incentivized to enhance test weight in grains, brix, and soluble solids in melons, sugar movement in fruit, and uniformity and size in vegetables. RNA-sequencing data show that bio-nutrients can activate genes involved in N assimilation, plant charge balance, and stress response, allowing the plant to use nutrients efficiently without the metabolic penalty of excess charge. Additionally, growers can save money on their inputs while maintaining or increasing yield. When growers increase efficiency of inputs, that also extends to their operational efficiency—real financial savings on tractor hours, pumps, and infrastructure.
“Growers aren’t replacing synthetics for the sake of using less. They are replacing excess charge so crops can perform with greater strength, quality, and consistency.”
Gerecke (Nutrient TECH): “Soil health can be improved through the application of biofertilizers. Biofertilizers have less risk of loss to the environment than commercial fertilizers.”
Freeman (BioWorks): “Greater efficiency in their production systems drives changes in raw material inputs. Overall yield improvement leads these decisions but gaining efficiency from management practices that can drive more production with less water, land, and labor inputs will lead growers to stronger businesses.”
Cutts (Tidal Grow): “Reducing synthetic inputs aligns with both economic and environmental goals. Beyond lowering costs, it decreases nitrate leaching, improves soil structure, and increases input use efficiency per bushel or pound produced. Our seafood hydrolysis technology helps growers transition responsibly, maintaining yield while moving toward regenerative nutrient management.”
Hatfield (Kemin): “Growers should consider replacing synthetic inputs because they can be quite harsh to the surrounding environment, particularly if leaching and runoff occur. Natural and organic products should have less environmental impact and give similar crop health benefits.”
Johnson (Microbial Science Laboratories): “Microbes help the environment and the plants; chemicals can pollute the environment. Workers can use microbes without fear of contamination. Fungicides are not working in many instances. I spoke with a golf course superintendent the other day. He said he puts down chemical fungicides every two weeks, rotating different fungicides each time, because they are not working as well as they used to. Microbes don’t have that problem.”
