Improving the Efficiency of Conventional

Phosphorus Fertilizers
It is known that water-soluble P (WSP) can be converted to waterinsoluble
P after reaction with soil minerals, which can result in a decrease of
P availability. Several terminologies, such as P sorption, adsorption,
retention, fixation, precipitation, and immobilization, have been used to
describe this process. The forms of reaction products depend on P sources
and soil minerals. In general, FeAlP minerals form in acidic soils
containing FeAloxide minerals, whereas CaP minerals form in alkaline
or calcareous soils. The P reaction process involves surface adsorption
and/or precipitation.
Often the FeAlP precipitates, if they indeed occur, are in the
amorphous instead of crystalline form, which makes identification of
mineral species rather difficult (Hsu, 1982a,b). In alkaline and calcareous
soils, often more crystalline CaP and/or NH4CaP compounds from TSP,
SSP, DAP, and MAP can be physically identified (Lindsay et al., 1989).
There has been some interest in research and development on modifying
the physical characteristics of conventional WSP fertilizers to reduce
P fixation by soil, and thereby increase the P efficiency for plant uptake.
Some of the recent findings are discussed below.
Recently, some fertilizer companies have developed thin coating of
WSP fertilizers (DAP, MAP, TSP) with water-insoluble polymers, with
or without S (e.g., trade name DAP-Star by Hi Fert), as a slow-releaseP
fertilizer. Another type is coated with water-soluble polymers (e.g., trade
name Avail by SFP) to reduce the rate of WSP conversion to
waterinsoluble P by soil fixation. Gordon and Tindall (2006) claimed that
Avail is a polymer with a very high surface charge density (about 1800 cmol
kg_1 of cation exchange capacity) that can inhibit P precipitation by acting
as a platform for sequestration of P-fixing cations, such as Ca and Mg in
high pH soils and Fe and Al in low pH soils. One study conducted by the
University of Georgia (G. J. Gascho, unpublished data) showed that MAP
coated with this polymer performed significantly better than uncoated MAP
when MAP was broadcast, but it did not when banded (Table 5). Since soil
fixation of WSP is higher when broadcast than when banded, as evidenced
by the lower grain yield of uncoated MAP when broadcast than when

banded, the result showed the benefit of MAP by polymer coating.

However, there is little information on the soil chemistry of this polymercoated P fertilizer published in the peer-reviewed scientific journals and
questions remain unanswered regarding the mechanisms of reducing P
fixation by the polymer.
For instance, it is known that WSP is adsorbed or precipitated on the
solid surfaces of Fe and Al oxide minerals in acid soils and CaCO 3 in
alkaline soils (Lindsay et al., 1989). What mechanism causes these Fe, Al,
and Ca cations to dissolve from their minerals and diffuse to the dissolved
polymercoated WSP granule sites, be adsorbed by the polymer via ionic
exchange, and thereby protect the WSP from precipitation? Furthermore,
shouldnt the soluble cations associated with the WSP fertilizers (Ca ions
from SSP and TSP, and NH4 ions from MAP and DAP) be first adsorbed by
the polymer and thereby reduce the polymers capacity to sequester soil
Fe, Al, and Ca ions? Research is needed to address these questions in
order to understand the merit of using WSP fertilizers coated with watersoluble or water-insoluble polymers. If indeed P release meets the crops
needs, and at the same time minimizes P fixation, the coated WSP
fertilizers may be effective for crop production provided the cost/benefit is
feasible compared to the uncoated WSP fertilizers.