5 min read
Highlights
Agricultural biologicals are creating a new farm-input operating system, not simply replacing chemistry with biology.
- The Pivot Bio signal: Gene-edited nitrogen-fixing microbes are being designed to work alongside synthetic fertiliser and deliver nitrogen at the root zone.
- Three biological engines: Biofertilisers, biostimulants and biocontrols address different agronomic problems and shouldn’t be treated as identical products.
- A growing commercial category: Market growth is being driven by input economics, nutrient efficiency, resilience and pressure to reduce environmental losses.
- The resilience dividend: Reducing fertiliser requirements can protect farms from shipping disruption, energy shocks and geopolitical supply risk.
- The credibility test: Biologicals must prove consistent performance across locations, seasons, soils and complete farm budgets.
- The strategic opportunity: Microbes, plants, chemistry, genetics and data will increasingly operate as one integrated production system.
Pivot Bio shows where the market is heading
Agricultural biologicals are moving from the experimental edge of farming into the centre of the farm-input conversation.
The clearest starting point is Pivot Bio’s PROVEN G3. The product uses gene-edited, nitrogen-fixing microbes applied at planting. It’s designed to deliver nitrogen in the root zone, including while synthetic nitrogen is still present.
That last point matters. The future of agricultural biologicals isn’t necessarily a clean break with conventional fertiliser. It’s more likely to be a gradual integration of biological and chemical inputs, each performing the task for which it’s best suited.
Pivot Bio’s 2025 field-performance release reported 134 trials in corn involving 129 growers. According to the company, PROVEN G3 replaced an average of 33 pounds of synthetic nitrogen per acre, approximately 37 kilograms per hectare, while producing a yield advantage of 2.1 bushels of corn per acre, approximately 0.13 tonnes per hectare, compared with standard practice. Pivot also reported consistent nutrition delivery in 90% of those trials.
These figures should be understood as company-reported performance data, not as independently verified industry-wide evidence. Even so, they illustrate the commercial question that matters to growers and boards alike. I think if it was smoke and mirrors farmers would have called this out well before this, they’re “no BS” sort of people!
Can a biological product reduce input exposure, maintain or improve yield, and fit existing farm operations?
Pivot’s wider programme extends across corn, cotton, sorghum, wheat and other small grains. Its significance goes beyond one product. It’s helping shift nitrogen from being viewed purely as a manufactured commodity towards being treated as a biological service delivered where the crop needs it.
Synthetic fertiliser production is energy intensive, and fertiliser prices can move sharply with energy markets, geopolitics and supply disruptions. If part of a crop’s nitrogen requirement can be generated or unlocked closer to the root, the farm gains another tool for managing both cost and risk.
Biological nitrogen + existing fertility systems = more flexible nutrient management.
Three categories are driving the biologicals rise
The term agricultural biologicals covers a wide field. Not every product is a soil microbiome product, and not every biological works through the same mechanism.
The three broad categories are as follows.
1. Biofertilisers
Biofertilisers include microbes that fix nitrogen or improve the availability of nutrients such as phosphorus and potassium.
Pivot Bio is pursuing microbial nitrogen fixation in broadacre crops. Kula Bio is taking a related but distinct approach using Xanthobacter autotrophicus, a naturally occurring microbe known for nitrogen fixation. The company says its products are designed to produce nitrogen at the root zone and be applied through standard irrigation systems.
BioConsortia is working with microbial selection, genomics and multi-strain systems. Its platform is aimed at nitrogen fixation, nutrient availability, disease control and crop performance. The distinction is important. Rather than focusing only on one organism or one nutrient, the company is developing microbial combinations and selecting for traits such as stability, usability and field performance.
Rizobacter represents a more established biologicals model, with inoculants and biofertilisers supporting nitrogen fixation, nutrient uptake and crop establishment. Its experience is particularly relevant in Latin America, where inoculation is already an important part of legume production systems.
2. Biostimulants
Biostimulants are products intended to support plant growth, nutrient uptake or tolerance to abiotic stress such as drought, heat, salinity or poor soil conditions.
Sound Agriculture’s SOURCE is designed to activate beneficial microbes already present in the soil. The company describes it as a soil activator that mimics a plant signal and helps improve access to nitrogen, phosphorus and micronutrients. Its BLUEPRINT product is positioned around fungi that expand the effective reach of plant roots.
Puna Bio is exploring extremophile microbes, organisms that have evolved in harsh environments. The commercial logic is compelling. Microbes that survive extreme conditions may contain traits useful for crops facing drought, heat or low fertility. Puna Bio’s products include microbial biostimulants and biofertilisers for crops such as soybean, cotton, wheat and barley.
Groundwork BioAg focuses on mycorrhizal fungi. These fungi form symbiotic relationships with plant roots and can extend the effective root system, helping plants access water and nutrients beyond the immediate root zone.
3. Biocontrols
Biocontrols include microbes, fungi and natural compounds used to manage pests and diseases.
BioConsortia is developing microbial solutions that include disease-control applications, using microbial selection and genomics to identify useful traits and combinations. Its approach reflects the broader move towards biological products designed for specific crop and pathogen challenges.
Novonesis brings a broad platform of microbes and enzymes to plant health and crop protection. Its scale and biological toolkit show how agricultural biologicals are moving beyond specialist startups and into integrated input portfolios.
Rizobacter offers biological products that support crop establishment, nutrient efficiency and disease management. Its experience in Latin American agriculture is particularly relevant to the commercial integration of inoculants and biocontrols.
Puna Bio is exploring extremophile microbes for agricultural applications, including biological products that may help crops manage disease and environmental stress. The company illustrates how unusual microbial traits can become a source of new crop-protection options.
The mechanisms differ widely. Some organisms compete with pathogens. Some produce compounds that suppress disease. Others stimulate the plant’s own defence response.
That’s why comparing biologicals only by product label misses the bigger picture. The strategic question is how each product changes the crop system.
A market is forming around living infrastructure
The market signals are becoming difficult to ignore.
DunhamTrimmer’s 2025 Global Biostimulant Market Report estimated the global biostimulant market at approximately USD 4.47 billion and projected about 9.9% compound annual growth through 2030. The report focused on non-microbial biostimulants, so it shouldn’t be treated as a valuation of all agricultural biologicals or all soil microbiome products.
A Stratovation Group study reported that approximately 45% of US row-crop producers were purchasing or using agricultural biologicals in 2024, up from 37% in 2022. McKinsey’s 2024 Global Farmer Insights survey of 4,400 farmers reported that about 90% expected to maintain or increase spending on bio-based products.
Brazil is also a major and fast-growing biologicals market, particularly for microbial products, inoculants and biocontrols. Its climate diversity, high-value crop production and strong biological research base make it an important testing ground for the next generation of inputs.
Market figures vary depending on definitions, geography and whether they include biostimulants, microbial fertilisers, biocontrols, inoculants or biological seed treatments. But the direction is clear. Biologicals are becoming an investable and operational category within agriculture.
The drivers are practical.
- Nitrogen-use efficiency can reduce unnecessary fertiliser exposure and vulnerability to supply shocks.
- Biological inputs can provide another response to fertiliser price volatility.
- Root and microbial relationships may improve drought and heat resilience.
- Better nutrient capture can reduce runoff and nitrous oxide emissions.
- Soil health is becoming an asset that influences productivity, finance and supply-chain commitments.
- Products that work alongside conventional inputs are easier to trial than products demanding an immediate system-wide transformation.
The FAO’s sustainable nitrogen-management framing is relevant here. The goal isn’t simply to apply less nitrogen. It’s to minimise losses, improve recycling and synchronise supply with crop demand while maintaining food production.
That is also consistent with the wider direction of OECD fertiliser-market research. Efficient nutrient use is becoming an economic necessity, not just an environmental aspiration.
Fertiliser resilience is now a food-security issue
The Strait of Hormuz disruption has made the resilience argument more immediate. WTO analysis reported that shipping through the strait had effectively collapsed after the outbreak of conflict in February 2026. The region accounts for approximately 25% of global nitrogenous fertiliser exports and 11% of phosphatic fertiliser exports.
The consequences moved quickly. Urea prices more than doubled to above USD 850 per tonne in April 2026 before retreating, while phosphate fertilisers were also affected by scarcity of sulphur. Freight costs and war-risk insurance added another layer of uncertainty for major importers, including India, Brazil and Australia. The wider WTO analysis of fertiliser trade and the Strait of Hormuz conflict shows why farm-input security can no longer be separated from geopolitics.
This is where reducing resource requirements becomes a strategic advantage. A biological that helps a crop produce, capture or use nitrogen more efficiently won’t eliminate the need for fertiliser in every field. It can, however, reduce exposure to a fragile global supply chain. Every tonne of avoided or better-targeted fertiliser is less dependent on gas markets, distant shipping lanes, port capacity and emergency purchasing.
That’s the logic behind the FAO’s sustainable nitrogen-management approach. The goal isn’t simply to use less nitrogen. It’s to synchronise supply with crop demand, reduce losses and maintain production when markets are under stress. Agricultural biologicals become valuable not only because they may reduce emissions, but because they can provide another layer of food-system resilience.
For Boards, this changes the question. The issue isn’t just the cost of a biological product compared with a bag of fertiliser. It’s the value of having a more flexible nutrient system when energy prices spike, shipping routes close or geopolitical risk reshapes supply.
Biologicals + nutrient efficiency + risk management = a more resilient farm balance sheet.
The companies aren’t identical competitors
It’s tempting to create a league table of biologicals companies. I believe that would be misleading.
Pivot Bio and Kula Bio are closest in their focus on microbial nitrogen. Sound Agriculture is activating native soil biology. Groundwork BioAg is extending root access through mycorrhizal fungi. Puna Bio is searching extreme environments for resilience traits.
BioConsortia is developing microbial discovery and optimisation capabilities across several modes of action. Novonesis brings a broad platform spanning microbes and enzymes for plant health, nutrient efficiency and crop protection. Indigo Ag combines seed and foliar biological treatments with digital agronomy and data programmes.
These are different modes of action, commercial models and routes to adoption.
Some products add a new organism. Some stimulate organisms already present. Some extend the root system. Some protect the plant from disease. Others combine biologicals with data, carbon programmes or established distribution networks.
This is closer to the rise of cloud computing than to the launch of one new fertiliser product. The winning system won’t necessarily be a single technology. It’ll be the architecture that connects multiple technologies in a way that works for farmers.
The credibility test is still ahead
The biologicals market has a trust problem.
Growers have seen products arrive with impressive laboratory results and disappointing field outcomes. Soil is not a sterile production vessel. It’s a complex, competitive and changing ecosystem.
Performance can vary with soil type, pH, moisture, temperature, crop genetics, application timing and chemical compatibility. A microbe that performs well in one location may not behave the same way in another.
The operational barriers are equally real.
- Shelf life and storage conditions can affect product viability.
- Application timing can determine whether a biological reaches the right plant or root zone.
- Tank-mix compatibility must be proven rather than assumed.
- Regulatory definitions remain inconsistent across markets.
- Farmers need practical education from trusted agronomists.
- Return on investment must be measured after product cost, labour, application and yield are included.
The standard of proof must therefore rise. Growers need multi-location and multi-season data. They need independent trials where possible. They need performance measured against the farm’s complete fertility and crop-protection programme.
A biological promise is not a commercial result.
Field evidence + farm economics + operational simplicity = durable adoption.
From soil microbiomes to the future food system
This story connects directly to the broader food-technology system I explore through Alternative Proteins, Cellular Agriculture, Genomics, Microbiome and Synthetic Biology.
Genomics helps identify organisms and traits with useful agricultural functions. Synthetic biology can help design, optimise or scale those functions. Microbiome science helps us understand how soil organisms interact with roots, nutrients and each other.
Together, these fields are turning agriculture from a relatively blunt input system into a more responsive biological platform.
That matters because future demand won’t be measured only by human population. We’ll need to feed 11 billion entities by 2050, made up of 9.7 billion humans and 1.3 billion pets.
The question is not whether agriculture will use biology. Agriculture has always used biology. The question is whether we can understand and manage biological systems with enough precision to improve productivity without increasing ecological damage.
That’s where my TECHXponential™ framework becomes useful. Exponential technologies rarely arrive as isolated innovations. They converge. Genomics informs microbiome discovery. Synthetic biology improves manufacturing. Data measures field performance. Artificial intelligence may eventually help match biological products to specific soils, crops and weather conditions.
The next farm-input operating system will be biological, chemical, genetic and digital at the same time.
For Boards, agribusiness leaders and food-industry executives, the strategic issue is no longer whether biologicals deserve attention. It’s how quickly the category will move from product trials into integrated production systems, procurement strategies and supply-chain commitments.
The soil beneath the crop is becoming a technology platform.
Microbes + plants + chemistry + genetics + data = the next agricultural operating system.
For an earlier discussion of Pivot Bio and the transformation of food production, read Reimagining our global food system. For the wider soil-health and resilience context, explore The Regenerative Shift.
To continue the conversation email me at tony@tonyhunterspeaker.com