Less Complexity, More Impact: What Growers Want Now in Crop Inputs
March 23, 2026 Growers today are asking for fewer inputs with greater impact, according to Trey Cutts, VP of Commercial Ag Science at Tidal Grow AgriScience. From simplifying tank mixes to pairing biostimulants with synthetic chemistries, farmers want precision, measurable ROI, and solutions that deliver both yield and sustainability. In this interview, Cutts shares how ag retailers can adjust portfolios, leverage data-driven insights, and prioritize bio-based and foliar nutrient innovations to meet the evolving needs of modern growers — while preparing for the 2027-2028 growing seasons.
CropLife: From your vantage point across crop protection and crop nutrition, what are growers telling you they want more of — or less of — in today’s product offerings? How should retailers adjust their portfolios accordingly?
Trey Cutts, Tidal Grow
Trey Cutts: Growers are increasingly asking for fewer inputs with more impact. They’re tired of complexity — long tank mix lists, impractical application requirements, and products with unclear ROI. They need more simplicity, flexibility, and proof. If a product doesn’t have clear, repeatable data behind it, it’s hard to justify the spend, especially when margins are tight.
On the nutrition side, growers want precision. They can’t afford to lose any of their fertilizer investments to run-off, volatilization, or off-target applications. On crop protection, they are often pairing a biostimulant with a synthetic chemistry to drive improved efficacy.
Retailers are trying to adjust to some of the new realities as well, including scrutiny over environmental impacts and resistance management. This could mean adjusting fertility programs and crop protection programs that have been promoted for years but may not be yielding the same result as they once did. However, adding additional products into the program isn’t always tenable. Growers don’t need more options — they need better guidance on fewer, effective options.
CL: Are you seeing growers adopt integrated crop protection + nutrition programs more readily? What’s driving that shift, and where are retailers still missing opportunities to connect the dots?
TC: Yes, adoption is growing, but it’s still not as widespread as it could be. Growers recognize the need for less passes across the field while also looking to adopt split application fertility programs. But the tools to make both of these a reality has been limited. For example, there needs to be fertilizer options that tank mix with herbicides and fungicides but also deliver a high nutrient load to get increased adoption. Regarding split nitrogen programs, most of the industry is still front-loading their crops with nitrogen simply due to logistics. There are new innovations available now that enable growers to deliver effective nitrogen loads later in the season as crop demand increases, alongside crop protection products.
CL: In terms of formulation, delivery systems, or biological/specialty products, what innovations are actually gaining traction at the farm level — versus just generating buzz?
TC: Bio-solutions that offer new modes of action, improve the efficacy of traditional crop inputs, and optimize crop performance are gaining traction with growers. What is genuinely gaining traction are better nitrogen innovations in the foliar fertility space where better intake is driving better yields. These innovations can help deliver critical nutrients directly on and into the leaf, compared to traditional foliar products that still predominantly rely on root uptake through the soil.
Formulation-wise, liquid systems that are tank-mix compatible and reduce application passes are resonating with large-acre operators. On the delivery side, variable-rate technology tied to prescription agronomy is maturing. Growers who’ve invested in soil mapping and yield data are finally able to execute on it.
The innovations that will truly scale are the ones that are defensible with local, relevant data. That’s where retailers can play a critical role by running strip trials and small plot work with their grower customers to generate the field-level proof that national data sets can’t always provide.
CL: Sustainability and stewardship continue to shape buying decisions. How are growers defining “sustainable” today, and how can retailers better communicate value beyond the label?
TC: Growers are defining sustainability through an economic lens first. If a practice or product doesn’t pencil out financially, the environmental case alone won’t move the needle. I think that’s a legitimate position. Sustainable for most growers means maintaining or improving productivity over the long term without compounding input costs or degrading the resource base they’re farming.
That said, I’m seeing more growers genuinely engaged with soil health — not because of regulatory pressure, but because they’re seeing the agronomic payoff of improved biological activity, water infiltration, and reduced compaction. Practice changes including the implementation of alternative fertilizers, such as seafood protein hydrolysates, help optimize nutrient-use efficiency and boost soil quality. These are great sustainability tools gaining traction because growers can tie them to measurable outcomes.
For retailers, leading with sustainability as a marketing concept rather than an agronomic one can leave the wrong impression. Growers don’t want a lecture on stewardship, they want to know how a practice or product makes them a better farmer. Frame reduced-risk crop protection options around resistance management and long-term efficacy. Frame soil health practices around input efficiency and yield stability. When sustainability becomes synonymous with smart agronomy, it sells itself.
CL: Where do you see retailer advisors needing to level up — whether in technical knowledge, data interpretation, or program selling — to stay relevant to modern growers?
TC: The most urgent gap I see is data literacy around all the new tools available. Growers are swimming in information — yield maps, NDVI imagery, soil electrical conductivity data, weather stations, tissue test results — and they need someone who can synthesize it into actionable decisions. Many agronomists are still selling inputs reactively rather than a holistic crop input program based on soil condition, environment, and goals.
Technical depth on plant physiology and soil science also matters more than it used to. Growers who are asking nuanced questions about micronutrient interactions, biological activity, or mode-of-action resistance management need advisors who can engage at that level.
CL: Looking ahead, what product categories or agronomic challenges do you believe retailers should be preparing for now to meet 2027-2028 grower demand?
TC: Bio-based solutions will be a significant product category by 2027-2028, particularly as more growers participate in carbon markets or face nutrient management regulations. Retailers who invest now in understanding the science, building replicated local data, and identifying which products actually work in their growing conditions will have a significant first-mover advantage and are likely to gain market share.
Subscribe Today For
