ASHS 2024 Conference

In container nursery production, the potting substrate serves as the foundation of the crop, providing essential nutrients, aeration, and moisture retention. A well-chosen substrate is crucial for optimizing plant health and growth, and ultimately influences a nursery’s economic viability since substrate is estimated to be 13% of the total variable costs of 3-gallon production. Our objective is to determine the cost of common potting substrate components. The study goal is to identify opportunities for nursery producers to reduce costs and increase profits by optimizing their substrate components. Email surveys supplemented by interviews were used to collect data from six Tennessee container nursery producers. All growers were within a 117-mile radius of McMinnville, Tennessee, and provided the prices they paid in the last 12 months for the primary components of their potting substrate. Delivery fees and fuel surcharges were not considered in the cost when these expenses were itemized. However, one producer’s prices included delivery expenses. Participating nursery producers self-identified as having 100 (66.7%) acres in container production. Growers in this case study paid an average of $19.07 (SD=$5.53) per yard3 for pine bark; however, the prices ranged from $14.53 to $29.00 per yard3. In general, smaller producers paid more for pine bark. Sand ranged from $40.50 to $49.95 per yd3. Nursery producers paid $1.12 to 1.32 per pound for controlled release fertilizer (CRF), an input estimated at 5% of total variable costs. Therefore, some growers paid 18% more for CRF than others. Growers paid from $0.01 to $0.11 per pound for lime. Tennessee nursery producers were paying on average $66.79 per cubic yard for wood fiber-based substrate and vermicompost, 250% more than the average cost of pine bark but just 46% of the market price for peat. These preliminary data show 1) individual nurseries pay a range of prices for the same potting substrate components, and 2) the relatively high cost of peat replacements, i.e., wood fiber and vermicompost. The data highlight the range of prices being paid for CRF and its relative expense, underscoring the opportunity for growers to reduce costs by optimizing their use and placement of CRF. Additional research is needed to more broadly sample nurseries for these data and determine the influence of nursery size on substrate component costs. cparwutcakwt8uvpamtb