Explainer: Surge in use of nano fertilisers: Experts highlight benefits, flag risks

The growing interest in nano-liquid fertilisers as an alternative to conventional urea and DAP (Di-Ammonium Phosphate) came into focus at a workshop organised by the Indian Farmers Fertilizer Cooperative (IFFCO) in Amritsar recently.During the event — which was attended by farmers — scientists, government officials and experts emphasised balanced fertilisation using IFFCO’s Nano Urea Plus and Nano DAP, which are being promoted as cost-saving and environment-friendly innovations.What are Nano fertilisersNano fertilisers are fertilisers that contain nutrients in nano-scale form — that is one thousand millionth of a metre. For perspective, a human hair is roughly 80,000 nanometres wide.Due to their tiny size, these particles have a larger surface area and are believed to offer controlled, slow and targeted nutrient release to the crops. For instance, IFFCO nano-urea is a ‘chitosan biopolymer’ based encapsulated urea fertiliser. Chitosan is a type of natural polymer derived from chitin, the structural component found in the exoskeletons of small organisms.It has a four per cent nano-nitrogen solution or 20 gm nitrogen per 500 ml, which has been recommended to be applied twice as foliar spray at initial growth stage and before flowering. According to reports, it reduces conventional soil-applied urea requirements by approximately 50 per cent in rice and wheat cultivation.How do they differ from traditional fertilisersSimply speaking, nano fertilisers differ from traditional fertilisers primarily in their particle size and how they release nutrients. There are claims that their small size results in better nutrient utilisation, reduced fertiliser usage and potentially less environmental impact.Traditional fertilisers like urea and DAP are applied directly to or mixed with the soil. Their nutrient use efficiency (NUE) is low, with only about 35-45 per cent nitrogen being actually absorbed by crops while the rest is lost to leaching, volatilisation or runoff.In contrast, nano fertilisers are applied via spraying them and are said to deliver nutrients directly to plant tissues, thereby reducing waste. IFFCO officials have also claimed that nano fertilisers reduce input costs and environmental damage.Views by expertsWhile some farmers who attended the workshop claim visible improvements in yields after replacing a portion of traditional fertilisers with nano formulations. Retailers have also observed repeated demand from farmers and cited a positive feedback, however, there is also a contrarian view by some experts.Dr Rajeev Sikka, head (Soil Science) at Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, has a different opinion and urges caution. “A multi-year field study covering 2019-2025 by the department found that using nano urea as a partial replacement actually led to a 13-17 per cent decrease in rice yield and an 11.5-21.6 per cent decline in wheat grain nitrogen content,” said Sikka.“Even if 100 per cent use efficiency is achieved by this nano formulation, requisite nitrogen nutrient could not be provided to the growing crop compared to the nitrogen provided by 45 kg of conventional urea. The grain yields obtained with foliar application of nano urea and granular urea were found to be equivalent,” he said.Dr Sikka warns that depending heavily on nano fertilisers could harm food and nutritional security, especially for staples like rice and wheat. Additionally, he notes that nano urea is nearly 10 times more expensive than traditional urea and that the reduced nitrogen in leftover straw complicates soil health management due to higher carbon-to-nitrogen ratios.The growing number of companies introducing nano fertilisers without adequate testing or regulatory approval is another issue. According to Dr Sikka, many products enter the market with no validated data on crop response, soil impact or long-term sustainability. This aggressive, often misleading marketing, may expose farmers to economic losses and reduce trust in genuine innovation.Experts stress that scientific logic and field data must guide adoption rather than marketing slogans. Until more robust and independent trials confirm their benefits across crops and climates, nano fertilisers should be seen as supplements and not replacements for traditional nutrient management.

Explainer: Surge in use of nano fertilisers: Experts highlight benefits, flag risks

Charanjit Singh Teja

Tribune News Service

Explainer: Surge in use of nano fertilisers: Experts highlight benefits, flag risks

Charanjit Singh Teja

Tribune News Service

Unlock Premium Insights in This Article