Blog Posts

BNI Wheat: Can the Crop Help Manage Its Own Nitrogen?

Nitrogen is one of the most important nutrients in crop production, but it is also one of the hardest to manage well. In organic agriculture, that challenge is even greater because we do not use synthetic nitrogen fertilizers. We depend on legumes, manure, compost, crop rotations, soil organic matter, and biological activity to supply nitrogen over time.

That makes nitrogen efficiency extremely important. Every pound of nitrogen released from manure, compost, legumes, or soil organic matter needs to be captured by the crop as effectively as possible. When nitrogen is lost, the farmer may lose yield potential, grain protein, forage value, and money. The environment can also lose because nitrogen may move into water or escape from the soil as nitrogen gases. This is why a concept called Biological Nitrification Inhibition, or BNI, has great potential and why we are looking at it in our wheat breeding programs.

What Is BNI?

BNI is a natural plant trait where roots release compounds that slow down nitrification, the microbial process that converts ammonium nitrogen into nitrate nitrogen.

That matters because ammonium nitrogen, written as NH₄⁺, tends to stay attached to soil particles. Nitrate nitrogen, written as NO₃⁻, is much more mobile and can move with water below the root zone. Nitrate can also be involved in soil processes that produce nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas.

In simple terms, BNI may help the crop slow the leak in the nitrogen bucket.

BNI does not stop nitrogen cycling. It does not sterilize the soil. It simply slows one part of the nitrogen cycle near the root so more nitrogen may remain available to the crop longer. Researchers describe BNI as root exudates suppressing ammonia-oxidizing bacteria and archaea, which are microbes involved in the first major step of nitrification (Coskun et al., 2017; Subbarao et al., 2013; Subbarao et al., 2021).

Why This Matters in Organic Farming

Organic farmers already work hard to build nitrogen through biology. Legume cover crops, compost, manure, crop residues, and soil organic matter all release nitrogen through natural processes. The challenge is timing. The crop needs nitrogen at certain growth stages, but the soil releases nitrogen according to moisture, temperature, microbial activity, and residue quality.

If nitrogen becomes nitrate too early, it may be lost before the crop can use it. BNI wheat may help by keeping more nitrogen in the ammonium form near the root system.

That does not replace good organic management. BNI wheat would still need good rotations, fertility planning, soil health, weed control, and adapted varieties. But if the crop can help hold nitrogen in the root zone longer, it may improve nitrogen-use efficiency in systems where nitrogen is often expensive, limited, or difficult to time correctly.

Why Wheat?

Wheat is one of the most flexible crops in American agriculture. It can be harvested for grain, cut for silage, grazed as forage, used in dual-purpose systems, or grown as a cover crop. That makes wheat especially important in organic systems. In Texas, wheat is often part of livestock systems and row-crop rotations. For organic dairy, beef, grain, and cover crop systems, a more nitrogen-efficient wheat could have value across the whole farm.

Is BNI Wheat Genetically Engineered?

No! The BNI wheat being discussed in current research is developed through conventional plant breeding methods, not genetic engineering. Researchers identified a strong BNI capacity in a wild relative of wheat called Leymus racemosus. The BNI-associated chromosome segment from that wild relative was transferred into wheat, and researchers have since developed BNI-enabled wheat lines such as MUNAL-BNI and ROELFS-BNI (Subbarao et al., 2021; Bozal-Leorri et al., 2022).

This work uses crossing, backcrossing, marker-assisted selection, root exudate testing, and field evaluation. These are conventional breeding tools, even though some are advanced. Marker-assisted selection simply helps breeders identify which plants inherited the desired chromosome segment. It does not create a genetically engineered plant. That distinction matters for organic agriculture because BNI wheat fits within the conventional plant breeding pathway.

What Do We Know So Far?

The science is still developing, but the early evidence is encouraging. Research has shown that BNI capacity exists in wild relatives of wheat and in some wheat landraces. One study found significant BNI activity in several wheat landraces, showing that BNI is not limited only to wild species (O’Sullivan et al., 2016). More recent work shows that wheat genotypes vary in root exudate chemistry and BNI activity, which means breeders may have useful natural variation to work with (Ghatak et al., 2025).

Studies with BNI-enabled wheat lines have reported reduced ammonia-oxidizing bacteria, lower nitrification potential, lower nitrate levels, greater ammonium retention, improved nitrogen uptake, and no yield penalty in many cases (Subbarao et al., 2021; Bozal-Leorri et al., 2022; Karwat et al., 2025).

That does not mean every question is answered. Soil type, pH, temperature, nitrogen source, crop stage, and variety background can all affect how well BNI works. But the evidence is strong enough to justify serious breeding, field testing, and organic systems research.

What Could BNI Wheat Mean for Farmers?

For organic grain farmers, better nitrogen-use efficiency could help with both yield and grain protein. Protein is especially important in bread wheat markets, and nitrogen availability is one of the major drivers of protein.

For organic dairy and livestock producers, BNI wheat could have value as forage, silage, grazing, or feed grain. If wheat can use nitrogen more efficiently, it may improve the economics of growing organic feed locally.

For organic crop rotations, BNI wheat could become another tool to help stabilize fertility. It will not replace legumes, compost, manure, or cover crops, but it may help the crop use those biological nitrogen sources more efficiently.

For the environment, BNI wheat may reduce nitrate leaching and nitrous oxide emissions. Reviews of BNI research suggest that BNI crops can improve nitrogen-use efficiency and reduce nitrogen losses, although field performance will depend on soil, climate, crop genetics, and management (Coskun et al., 2017; Subbarao et al., 2013; Saud et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2021).

References

Bozal-Leorri, A., Subbarao, G., Kishii, M., Urmeneta, L., Kommerell, V., Karwat, H., Braun, H., Aparicio-Tejo, P., Ortiz-Monasterio, I., González-Murua, C., & González-Moro, M. (2022). Biological nitrification inhibitor-trait enhances nitrogen uptake by suppressing nitrifier activity and improves ammonium assimilation in two elite wheat varieties. Frontiers in Plant Science, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.1034219

Coskun, D., Britto, D., Shi, W., & Kronzucker, H. (2017). Nitrogen transformations in modern agriculture and the role of biological nitrification inhibition. Nature Plants, 3. https://doi.org/10.1038/nplants.2017.74

Ghatak, A., et al. (2025). Natural variation of the wheat root exudate metabolome and its influence on biological nitrification inhibition activity. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 23, 4755–4772. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbi.70248

Karwat, H., et al. (2025). Nitrogen dynamics and yield performance of an elite bread wheat line with BNI capacity expressed in an alkaline soil. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.07.29.667244

O’Sullivan, C., Fillery, I., Roper, M., & Richards, R. (2016). Identification of several wheat landraces with biological nitrification inhibition capacity. Plant and Soil, 404, 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-016-2822-4

Subbarao, G. V., et al. (2021). Enlisting wild grass genes to combat nitrification in wheat farming: A nature-based solution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2106595118

Subbarao, G. V., et al. (2013). A paradigm shift towards low-nitrifying production systems: The role of biological nitrification inhibition (BNI). Annals of Botany, 112(2), 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcs230

Wang, X., et al. (2021). Effects of biological nitrification inhibitors on nitrogen use efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions in agricultural soils: A review. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 220, 112338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112338

Flame Weeding, Soil Biology, and Organic Farming: Questions Worth Asking

One of the interesting things about organic agriculture is that it constantly forces us to balance competing biological, ecological, and practical realities. Recently, I posted a short video showing a farmer using a propane flame weeder to suppress field bindweed, and it generated a spirited discussion about soil biology, climate impacts, and whether flame weeding even belongs in organic systems.1

Rather than turning that discussion into “who won the argument,” I think it raises some important questions that many farmers, gardeners, and consumers are already asking.

Field bindweed itself is a good example of why these conversations matter. Field bindweed is one of the most difficult perennial weeds in organic farming. It spreads aggressively through deep underground roots and rhizomes, and tillage can actually make infestations worse by cutting and moving living root fragments throughout the field.

Can flame weeding fit within a biologically minded organic system? Does flame weeding sterilize the soil?

This is probably the biggest concern people have when they first see flame weeding. The answer is no — not in the way many imagine.

Flame weeding is a very shallow, fast exposure of heat. The objective is usually not to incinerate the plant but to rupture plant cells in the foliage. Most flame weeding systems move rapidly across the soil surface, and soil itself is actually a very effective insulator.

Research has shown that the heat impact declines dramatically within just a few millimeters of soil depth. Surface microorganisms may certainly be affected, especially some bacteria very near the soil surface, but the overwhelming majority of the soil microbial ecosystem remains protected below that thin layer.2

That distinction matters because soil microbial communities are not static. Bacterial populations can rebound extremely quickly under favorable conditions. Fungi, spores, protected aggregates, organic matter, and deeper microbial habitats often remain largely intact.

A useful comparison is prescribed burning in rangelands and forests. Fire can temporarily suppress some organisms near the surface while simultaneously stimulating nutrient cycling, changing plant competition, reducing excess residue, and shifting ecological balance. The outcome depends heavily on intensity, duration, frequency, and what happens afterward.

Why would an organic farmer use flame weeding at all?

Texas A&M AgriLife weed research just got the new Red Dragon Engineering flaming attachment setup to allow for burndown as well as in-row applications. Hopefully, this will be another useful tool in the toolbox. The “weed team” will be testing it in organic cotton and sorghum this summer.

Organic farming is not simply “avoiding chemicals.” It is a management system focused on biological function, long-term productivity, and ecological balance. But organic farmers still have to manage weeds. Perennial weeds create especially difficult problems because many standard control methods can worsen the issue. With bindweed, repeated tillage often spreads the infestation. Herbicides are not available in certified organic systems. Hand labor is expensive and often impractical at field scale. In the case from the video, the farmer was not trying to permanently kill bindweed with a single flame pass. That would be unrealistic but instead, the goal was suppression.

The farmer was temporarily weakening the bindweed canopy until soil temperatures became warm enough to plant a highly competitive sorghum forage crop. Sorghum can become an extremely aggressive shading crop that competes strongly against bindweed while simultaneously contributing large amounts of root biomass and crop residue back into the soil.

Why do grasses like sorghum often stimulate bacterial activity?

Grass crops such as sorghum, corn, wheat, and other cereals typically produce extensive fibrous root systems. Those roots release large amounts of carbon compounds — called root exudates — into the rhizosphere, which is the narrow zone of soil surrounding roots. These exudates feed bacteria and other microorganisms.

Many soil biology tests, including PLFA (phospholipid fatty acid analysis) and Haney soil testing approaches, often show strong bacterial responses following vigorous grass growth. That does not mean fungi are unimportant. In fact, healthy soils need both fungal and bacterial communities. But grasses frequently shift the system toward greater bacterial dominance compared to some perennial or woody systems. The important point is that soil biology is dynamic. A single management event does not define the entire biological trajectory of a field.

What about climate concerns from propane?

That is also a fair question. Propane is a fossil fuel. There is no reason to pretend otherwise. But agricultural systems are rarely evaluated honestly if we isolate one input without comparing alternatives.

The comparison is not “flame weeding versus doing nothing.” The comparison is usually:

  • repeated tillage passes,
  • additional tractor operations,
  • cultivation,
  • soil disturbance,
  • diesel fuel use,
  • erosion risk,
  • moisture loss,
  • or long-term perennial weed spread.

In some situations, a targeted flame treatment may actually reduce total disturbance compared to aggressive tillage programs. Organic agriculture often involves choosing between imperfect tools while trying to move the system toward better long-term outcomes.

Can flame weeding be overused?

Absolutely! If someone used intense flame applications repeatedly with no larger biological or agronomic strategy, there could certainly be negative consequences. Like tillage, grazing, cover crops, fertilizers, or irrigation, the effect depends on how the tool is used. Flame weeding should generally be viewed as a targeted management tool, not the foundation of the farming system.

A biologically focused farmer should still prioritize:

  • living roots,
  • residue cover,
  • diverse rotations,
  • microbial habitat,
  • reduced disturbance,
  • carbon cycling,
  • and competitive crop canopies.

Organic farming is often about tradeoffs, not perfection

One challenge in discussing organic agriculture publicly is that people sometimes assume every organic practice must have zero environmental cost. Real farming does not work that way. Organic farming is a systems approach. Farmers constantly balance weed pressure, economics, soil biology, labor, fuel use, crop competition, erosion risk, and long-term field productivity.

The more useful question is usually not:
“Is this tool perfect?”

But rather:
“Does this tool move the overall system in a healthier direction over time?”

For difficult perennial weeds like bindweed, many organic farmers would argue that temporary suppression combined with competitive crops, biological improvement, and reduced tillage may be preferable to aggressive cultivation that spreads the weed even further. That does not end the discussion, but it does make the conversation more nuanced than simply saying “fire is bad for soil biology.”

References

  1. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-7/part-205#p-205.206(c)(5) ↩︎
  2. Rahkonen, J., Pietikäinen, J., & Jokela, H. (1999). The Effects of Flame Weeding on Soil Microbial Biomass. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture, 16, 363-368. https://doi.org/10.1080/01448765.1999.9755239. ↩︎

Additional Resources

“Probing Our Country’s Soil Health”

A new public-private partnership for improving how soil health can help with management decisions is being conducted in the United States. The project is called “Probing Our Country’s Soil Health”.  They are looking for farmers and ranchers to participate. In fact, the project is looking for 420 fields in Texas with up to 210 participants – just in Texas. The only restriction is that you be a farmer – sorry gardeners, just farmers should apply!

Organic Farmers should jump at this chance to get free soil health testing including someone to actually take the samples! At least ~$1200 in value……

Participating landowners will receive: 

  • Compensation for your time (~ 1 hour) for helping
  • A personalized soil health report of your fields. The value of this lab work (at no cost to you) is about a thousand dollars per field.
  • A copy of a book called “Probing Our Country’s Soil Health”. This will be a hard-copy photo book illustrating soil health across the country and the outcomes to this project.

To learn more about this project, click on Probing Our Country’s Soil Health to see a short video:

If interested in participating, you will need to:

  • Sign up for a one-hour Zoom Meeting where a facilitator will lead you through a management survey for 2 or 3 fields.
  • Grant access to fields for hand-probe soil sampling 2 or 3 sampling sites from each field. Normally this will happen 3-6 months after the survey; you will be notified beforehand.

To enroll as a landowner participant, click on this booking page link to schedule an appointment:

Select a Date & Time – Calendly

GOTS Version 8.0 – What It Means for Texas Organic Cotton

The Global Organic Textile Standard (GOTS) is the primary certification used to verify organic cotton as it moves from the farm through the gin and into textile markets. While USDA organic certification covers production, GOTS governs how that cotton is handled, processed, and sold as organic in the textile supply chain.

GOTS released Version 8.0 this spring (effective March 1, 2027), and while most of the discussion centers around global textile supply chains, there are several changes that matter directly to organic cotton producers and gins here in Texas. From my perspective, this update is less about changing how we grow cotton and more about tightening how the system verifies and documents what we are already doing. I hate more rules but we do operate in a global market!

One of the clearest shifts in Version 8.0 is the increased focus on the gin as the first control point in the organic textile chain. GOTS continues to define the gin as the “first processor,” but now places more emphasis on what happens at that stage—especially around segregation, documentation, and traceability. In practical terms, this means the gin is no longer just moving cotton through the system; it is playing a key role in protecting and verifying organic integrity.

Another area that will get attention is GMO testing at the gin level. GOTS 8.0 reinforces the requirement for testing, but it is important to understand what did not change. There is still no numeric GMO threshold written into the standard. Instead, certification decisions continue to be based on whether the farmer followed approved organic practices and whether the certifier can verify compliance. In other words, a test result by itself does not determine the outcome—the system and the documentation behind it still matter most.

The biggest structural change in GOTS 8.0 is the introduction of a more formal due diligence approach. That is a technical way of saying that every part of the supply chain—from farm to gin to buyer—is now expected to identify risks, document them, and show how they are being managed. For organic cotton, this puts more focus on real-world issues we already deal with, such as neighboring GMO crops, harvest handling, and maintaining clean separation through the gin.

Traceability also continues to tighten. GOTS has always relied on Scope Certificates and Transaction Certificates, but Version 8.0 reinforces that every step in the chain must be documented clearly and consistently. Clean paperwork and clear records are becoming just as important as clean cotton.

Finally, GOTS 8.0 continues to reinforce a rule that is especially important in Texas: no blending of conventional cotton into organic textile streams. With organic and conventional production often side by side, this keeps pressure on gins to maintain strict separation and handling practices.

What This Means on the Ground

From a practical standpoint, most organic farmers will not need to change what they are doing in the field. The fundamentals remain the same—approved seed, buffers, and a solid organic system plan. Where things are changing is in how well that system must be documented and verified after harvest.

For gins, the role is becoming more critical. There will be increased expectations around segregation, documentation, and participation in the verification process. The gin is now clearly a key link in maintaining organic integrity.

Bottom Line

GOTS 8.0 is not about rewriting organic production—it is about proving that the system worked all the way through the supply chain. That means more attention to testing, documentation, and traceability, but the foundation remains the same: organic certification is based on process and compliance, not just a single test result.

Building Local Hybrid Seed for Organic Farms (A Project to Watch)

One of the biggest limitations I continue to see in organic grain and dairy systems—especially here in Texas and across the southern region—is not just fertility or weed control. It is genetics. We simply do not have corn hybrids that are truly adapted to our heat, drought, and water-limited environments.

A new on-farm project as part of a Southern SARE grant is being led by Seth Fortenberry (New Deal Grain) is working directly on that problem. This work is supported through the Southern SARE program, which is designed to fund practical, on-farm research that can be quickly adopted by other farmers—making it a strong fit for advancing organic systems in our region.

What This Project Is About

This on-farm project is focused on building local hybrid corn seed production for organic systems. Instead of relying on seed developed and produced in the Midwest, the goal is to produce non-GMO hybrid seed right here in the South, under the same conditions farmers actually face.

A key part of this project—and one I think is worth highlighting—is the direct connection to public plant breeding. The hybrids being used in this work, including TAMZ106 and TAMZ107, were developed by Dr. Wenwei Xu, Texas A&M AgriLife Research corn breeder in Lubbock. His program has focused heavily on stress tolerance—heat, drought, and disease—which is exactly what our organic systems require in this region.

Why This Matters to Organic Farmers

From my perspective, this is where things get interesting.

  • Better adaptation – Hybrids developed by Dr. Xu are bred under Texas High Plains conditions, not Midwest environments
  • Improved water use – Critical for anyone pulling from the Ogallala
  • Stronger performance under stress – Organic systems don’t have “rescue tools,” so genetics matter more
  • Public breeding impact – This project creates a direct pathway for AgriLife-developed genetics to reach organic farmers
  • Local seed supply – Keeps value in our region and reduces dependence on outside companies

In simple terms, this project is trying to align genetics (G) with management (M) and environment (E)—something we know makes a big difference in organic systems.

What to Expect Moving Forward

This project is just getting started, but over the next two years we will be:

  • Producing parent lines and hybrid seed under organic conditions
  • Testing hybrids on working organic farms
  • Hosting field days and sharing results
  • Building toward a reliable regional seed supply

I will be involved on the Extension side—helping get information out, organizing field days, and making sure growers can see and evaluate this work in real conditions.

Final Thought

If we are serious about growing organic production in Texas and the southern region, we have to address seed. This project is a practical step in that direction—connecting public breeding with real-world organic production.

And I would add this—projects like this only work because of long-term investment in breeding programs like Dr. Xu’s. Without that foundation, we would not have the genetics to even begin this conversation.

More to come as we get into the field this season.

Organic Sorghum Resources (update)

Sorghum’s natural characteristics and compatibility with organic farming principles indeed make it an excellent crop for organic cultivation. While some traits like drought tolerance and non-GMO status are shared with conventional sorghum, these characteristics synergize particularly well with the goals and methods of organic agriculture, offering distinct advantages.

Click a link below to scroll down!

Post Updated 3/27/26

  1. Sorghum’s Advantages
  2. Buying seed?
  3. Sorghum Varieties
  4. Forage Sorghum Varieties
  5. Sorghum Sudan Grass Varieties
  6. Sorghum Seed Companies
  7. Other Resources (just click to see)

Sorghum’s Advantages

  • Drought Tolerance: Sorghum’s inherent drought tolerance makes it an ideal crop for organic systems, which prioritize water conservation and efficient use.
  • Low Fertilizer Needs: Sorghum’s ability to thrive in less fertile soils matches well with organic farming, which relies on natural fertility management rather than synthetic fertilizers.
  • Natural Resistance to Pests and Diseases: Sorghum’s inherent resistance to many pests and diseases minimizes the need for synthetic pesticides, making it easier for organic farmers to manage their crops.
  • Versatility in Use: Sorghum can be utilized in a variety of ways (grain, syrup, fodder) which allows organic producers to cater to diverse markets (food, feed, sweeteners) under organic labels.
  • Contribution to Soil Health: Sorghum’s deep rooting system can improve soil structure and increase water infiltration, beneficial effects that are particularly valued in organic systems focused on long-term soil health.
  • Crop Rotation and Diversity: Sorghum fits well into crop rotations, a cornerstone of organic farming, helping break pest and disease cycles and improving soil health without relying on chemical inputs.
  • Consumer Preference for Non-GMO: Even though there is no GMO sorghum on the market, the strong consumer preference for non-GMO products benefits organic sorghum producers, as their products are guaranteed to meet this demand.
  • Growing Demand for Organic Grains: The increasing consumer demand for organic products extends to grains, including sorghum, for both human consumption and organic animal feed.
  • Carbon Sequestration: Sorghum’s growth habit and biomass production can contribute to carbon sequestration, aligning with the environmental sustainability goals of organic farming.

While many of sorghum’s traits benefit both conventional and organic systems, its natural resilience, low input requirements, and versatility make it particularly well-suited for organic agriculture. These characteristics help organic sorghum producers minimize reliance on external inputs, align with organic principles, and tap into a growing market demand for organic products.

Buying seed?

The number of seeds per pound in sorghum varieties can vary significantly depending on the specific variety and the size of the seeds. Generally, this range can be broad, reflecting differences in genetics, breeding objectives, and end use (grain, forage, or specialty types). Here’s a general overview:

  • Small-Seeded Varieties: Can have as many as 16,000 to 18,000 seeds per pound.
  • Large-Seeded Varieties: May have fewer seeds per pound, typically ranging from 12,000 to 15,000 seeds per pound.
  • Forage sorghums and sorghum-sudangrass hybrid types tend to have larger seeds compared to grain sorghum varieties. The seeds per pound can range from 10,000 to 14,000 for forage types, with sorghum-sudangrass hybrids often on the lower end of this scale due to their larger seed size.

Sorghum Varieties

The varieties listed below are some planted by current organic growers. We are in the process of getting a better list together and will post them here!

These varieties are listed along with their respective websites for more detailed information. Company listings are down below and your source for qualified salespeople. Check with your certifier before buying any sorghum seed especially if the variety is not sold as organically produced. Since we do not have many organic, locally adapted sorghum varieties producers typically buy conventionally produced varieties without seed treatments.

BH Genetics has non-GMO and untreated sorghum and corn seed available for organic growers. To check out the list: BH Genetics Untreated Seed List

Forage Sorghum Varieties

Sorghum Sudan Grass Varieties

Sorghum Seed Companies

Richardson Seeds

DynaGro Seed (Nutrien Ag Solutions)

MOJO Seed

Sorghum Partners, S&W Seed Company

Scott Seed Co

  • 114 E New York St. or PO Box 1732, Hereford, TX  79045
  • Office: 806-364-3484
  • Coby Kreighauser
  • Mobile: 806-683-1868
  • coby@scottseed.net
  • Chuck Cielencki
  • Mobile: 806-683-1868
  • chuck@scottseed.net

Supra Ag International

  • 10808 S River Front Pkwy, Suite 3039, South Jordan, UT 84095
  • Office: 801-984-6723
  • Sales: 806-292-0031
  • info@supra.ag
  • Chris Hendrickson
  • chris@supra.ag

Warner Seeds

Integra, Wilbur-Ellis

LG Seeds

Golden Acres

Innvictis Seed Solutions

Alta Seeds by Advanta

DeKalb (Bayer)

BH Genetics

Other Resources (just click to see)