Agronomist Notes

This is the 46th and final issue of Beyond Agronomy News for 2011. What a year it’s been!

Agronomy

January 12 - Maximizing photosynthesis through plant architecture

After walking through 180 bushel barley crops and 210 bushel wheat crops in New Zealand last year, something dawned on me about the way the plants looked. They were a lush green at the medium dough stage, matured from the leaf tip down naturally, had heads the size of cigars but what was most interesting was the architecture of each plant.

Take a look at the flag leaves on this 208 bu/ac wheat crop of Mike Solari's, 2007 Guinness world record holder for wheat yield. Notice how the leaf tips point straight up? Why is this important? A leaf that is positioned vertically has the ability to absorb 50% more sunlight than a leaf that is positioned horizontally like ours in Western Canada. The result is higher photosynthetic rates, greater carbohydrate production and higher grain fill potential.

It's well documented that the flag and penultimate leaf account for 55% of grain fill potential in wheat and 80% of grain fill potential in barley. That being said, the undersides of the two most significant leaves in our wheat and barley crops face the ground, away from the sun. On top of that, they shade the leaves and stems underneath them. What if we could find a way to alter our leaves to make them more vertical? What kind of yield gains would we see through higher photosynthetic ability and higher grain fill potential if the sun could see both sides of the leaf?
 
Chris Dennison, former Guinness world record holder for wheat yield, caught my attention on this subject after having a chat in his 180 bu/ac barley crop last February. Chris mentioned that he liked to use a growth regulator not only to prevent lodging but to make the heads and leaves stand more erect. We walked through a check strip (pictured here to the right) where the sprayer had not applied a growth regulator and the heads and leaves were tipped over. The rest of the field in the two-row barley crop had heads standing almost vertical, even towards the end of grain fill.

Growth regulators inhibit cell elongation which tends to shorten inter node length and thicken cell walls. It's the thickening of the cell walls that helps keep heads and leaves more upright. In Alberta, products like Ethrel from Bayer and Cycocel Extra from BASF are only distributed through select retailers that strictly monitor the product's use. One wrong move and growth regulators can be disastrous; yield can be significantly cut if applied at the wrong stage, to the wrong crop or if drought conditions follow application.   

The economics play out well under irrigation where farmers around Brooks have seen 6-inch differences in crop height and between 2 to 20 bushel yield advantages. A full rate of a product like Ethrel runs around $11.20/ac at a rate of 1 L/ac. Including application costs you're looking at a $17.20/ac to cover costs. At $5.25 bu wheat, you'll need a 6 bushel yield advantage in wheat to give you a 2:1 return on investment. I think we need to talk to plant breeders to see if vertical leaf position is possible in wheat or barley and next, start researching ways to use growth regulators as a method to keep leaves more vertical to generate higher photosynthetic activity and ultimately more yield. SL

Boost proteins with liquid urea – jan 11

We all know that protein offers a premium in spring wheat yet many producers struggle to achieve protein levels above 13.5%. The usual approach is to keep applying more nitrogen at seeding. That doesn't necessarily mean you'll reach high protein. More yield perhaps, but not more protein. Achieving high protein comes down to the timing and form of nitrogen applied. With protein premiums increasing in 2011, perhaps we should take a second look at the way we apply nitrogen in spring wheat.

It's well documented that applying nitrogen during flowering or the doughy stage in wheat will increase protein. The problem we run into with our current one-pass system is the timing of nitrogen uptake. Applying all N at seeding leads to luxury consumption and tall leafy plants. Later in the season, nitrogen uptake is reduced during the reproduction phase. Root growth ceases during the reproductive phase which means roots are not actively exploring soil and taking up nitrogen. The solution, no pun intended, is liquid urea at flowering or milky dough.

Urea has a very small molecular size, a neutral charge and is readily absorbed into the plant through the stomata. Compare that to 28-0-0 UAN or broadcast urea- these forms must be washed into the ground and then taken up by plant roots, which may not be taking up nitrogen yet. Also, UAN contains only 50% urea, the nitrogen form which can be taken up through the leaves. We still get a protein response from foliar applied UAN but the response is coming from the urea portion, not the nitrate or ammonium.   

To give you an idea of the protein increases seen with urea rates here are just a few research examples:

• Gabala et al (2003), 9 lbs/ac of urea during flowering increased protein from 10.2 to 11.8%
• Johnson and Perfine (2002), 9 lbs/ac of urea at milky dough increased protein from 9.9 to 10.8%
• Svenson et al (2002), 11 lbs/ac of urea at doughy stage increased protein from 11% to 12.2%

Steve's quick math:
Assumption: $6.50 wheat and 60 bu/ac yield
Application cost: $3.50ac app + 3% yield loss from wheel tracks = $15.20/ac
Urea cost: 11 lbs/ac x $0.29 lb ($650T ÷ 2204lbs/T) = $3.24/ac
Total cost = $18.44/ac
1% protein increase: 60 bu/ac x $0.80 bu = $48.00

So, in this example, you could theoretically generate $29.56 an acre from increased protein provided you could achieve a 1% protein bump. If you don't count wheel tracks, you're looking at a $41.26 an acre net return on investment. Bottom line, liquid urea is a lower cost and more efficient strategy for applying foliar nitrogen to increase protein and something we should start planning now for 2011. We'll get into logistics and product mixing another time. SL

Source

Innovative land rental agreements – Jan 11

More often than not, I have a hard time fishing rental agreements out of producers outside my client base because it's in their best interest to hold their cards close and be prudent with the details. However, I heard of an interesting proposal for land rent that made me think twice about its potential. The producer offered his neighbour five years cash rent up front to farm the land during that time. Even with interest costs, which are tax deductible, he figured the principle and interest was worth it.

In this example, we'll look at offering a 5-year lump sum of rent on 1,000 acres at $50.00 an acre and 5.25% interest.

$50.00 acre × 1,000 acres = $50,000 annual rent
$50,000 × 5 years = $250,000 5-year payment
$250,000 × 5.25% over 5 years = $290,716.65 5-year payment or $58,143.33 annually
$58,143.33 ÷ 1,000 acres = $58.14 acre

In this example offering a lump sum to cover five years of rent would cost $58.14 an acre after interest and increase the land rental cost by 16%. This strategy does tie up capital for five years but I suspect the banks would prefer to see a highly leveraged client with 5-year rental agreements rather than 1 or 3-year agreements. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this strategy.

Another land rental agreement is one that links rental payments to grain prices, thereby allowing the land owner to share in the risks and returns. In this case, the November Pool Return Outlook on wheat from the Canadian Wheat Board is being used, but you could use the price of canola or another crop at a specific time. In this lease, there's a base amount per acre paid to the landlord. If wheat is $7.25 a bushel or better net to farmers at the end of November, the cash rent goes up by $5 an acre. If wheat is above $8.25, the cash rent goes up $10 an acre. If the wheat PRO is above $9.25 a bushel, the rent increase is $15 an acre above the base. However, if the tenant collects crop insurance for the crops on the leased land, there are no rental increases no matter what grain prices do. Interesting! SL

Adding a liquid kit to your drill: the costs, benefits, and opportunities – Jan 18

I had a chance to catch up with Jamie Christie from Arns Brae Farms at Trochu to look at their liquid fertilizer system. Two years ago, the Christie's attached an 800 gallon liquid fertilizer kit to their 60ft SeedMaster drill to help compliment their dry fertilizer system. If you remember my articles on the benefits of row loading with liquids (see links below) I think a liquid kit is a great option. In the Christie's case, they've increased seeding efficiency by 15 to 20 acres per fill. That's 40 to 60 more acres seeded per day instead of filling. 

When it comes to liquid kits, I believe there are three options. First, a standalone 250 to 800 gallon tank with a liquid metering system could be mounted on the air cart, hitch or tool bar. High product rates typically aren't needed when applying liquids in combination with granular fertilizer; the most applied at one time might be 5 gallons per acre so an 800 gallon tank is sufficient. The second option is limited but John Deere sells a 650 to 740 gallon liquid tank option on their 1910 air cart. Thirdly, you could purchase a tow behind 2,500 gallon liquid tank. I'm not excited about towing another cart so I'll focus on the first two options and what the Christie's did to minimize cost.

Option 1: Raven SCS Sidekick Injection System, $6,700+ CAN
The Raven SCS Injection system comes equipped with a 4-digit display console, 15-foot and 27-foot cables along with a duel piston positive displacement pump that delivers 150 to 6,000 ml per minute. The price tag is $6,700, not including the tank and delivery lines to each shank. All in, I think you'd be about $10,000.
Specs: Raven SCS Sidekick Injection System

Option 2: John Deere Liquid Fertilizer tank option, $2,260+ US
The liquid middle tank option on the John Deere 1910 comes with a $2,260 US discount because they no longer provide you with a dry metering system and roller. Basically, a smaller hole is cut in the top of the tank at the factory and the molded metering system is cut out from the bottom. You must supply your own liquid metering system but I was told that you could probably engineer the Raven Sidekick to work. The tank capacity ranges from 650 gal on the 340 bu tank and 744 gal on the 430 bu tank.
Specs: JD Liquid Fertilizer Tank

Option 3: The Christie's liquid system, $6,800 CAN
The Christie's outsourced a number of parts and installed the liquid kit themselves on their 60ft drill. They started with an 800 gallon liquid poly tank which cost them $1,300. They attached a John Blue liquid fertilizer pump for $300 to the base of the poly tank. The system and flow rates are controlled from the cab with a $1,600 MicroTrak flow meter. They ran 3/8ths lines from the pump to the openers for $60 per run, including Vari-Rate nozzles. The Vari-Rate nozzles alone are $30 a piece, but it allows them to vary the rate from 3 to 7 gallons an acre from the cab. 

In the end, the Christie's are very satisfied with their set up and did well to keep costs under control. I'd say the extra 40 to 60 acres seeded per day would more than provide a return on their investment within a year based on the improved timeliness during seeding. If you wanted to buy a liquid kit off the shelf, they typically run between $7,000 and $10,000.

Applying liquids in conjunction with dry fertilizer opens up more opportunities than just more acres per fill. Liquid kits give you the option of applying liquid micronutrients, fungicides, inoculants, humates, foo foo dust or whatever liquid you like and tailor the blend easily on a field by field basis. The ability to improve in-furrow support with products like I just mentioned along with increased seeding efficiencies could easily provide a serious return on your investment. SL

Previous articles on row loading:
http://www.beyondagronomy.com/newsletter/17_11_2009.htm
http://www.beyondagronomy.com/newsletter/2_2_2010.htm
http://www.beyondagronomy.com/newsletter/19_1_2010.htm

Reader comments on application of liquid urea to boost protein – Feb 1

In wheat, applying liquid urea in heat, drought stress and high evaporation would be a real concern. Anything over 20 degrees C is too hot. Even straight water can scorch at 30 degrees C. Ideally you want damp and humid conditions. Add more water to the mix if you if you find leaf burn. I have seen a bit of leaf scorch in canola when done at 26-28 degrees. Just gives speckling of the waxy cuticle on the stems and pods. There are no leaves by that stage, which is why it is less susceptible. Nick Ward, UK

We've found excess burning applying liquid urea on wheat. We like to apply in 18-30 degrees C and try to apply late in the afternoon on cloudy overcast days, with water rates around 10 US gal/ac. We try to apply it prior to flag leaf to reduce the effect from the leaf burn that does occur. We have some difficulty dissolving urea into water, finding it gets very cold? Our mixing method is to drop water and urea into a tank and bubble air up from the bottom to mix and agitate. Mark Modra, South Australia

In the past we have used between 21 and 32 US gal/ac of a 20% liquid urea solution, sprayed onto the crop at the flowering to milky dough stage. The application must be done when it's cool (i.e. early morning or in the evening to avoid scorch). The product can be watered down which also helps reduce any risk of crop damage. We do spray it on with a standard flat fan to get good coverage of the ears, whereas we normally use dribble bars for putting liquid 37% urea ammonium nitrate mix on earlier in the season. We have also been experimenting with using Nufol (trade name for 20% liquid urea) after flowering in canola. Research shows that N stops being translocated in the plant up to the pods at around this time, and therefore the argument goes, don't put so much into the stem but apply it directly to the pods. I'm sure there is sound reasoning behind this but we have yet to be convinced. Andrew Scoley, UK

Maximize seeded acres using NH3 and dry fertilizer  Feb 15

There are a growing number of one-pass NH3 users in my area, including clients. As you can imagine, the seeding efficiency with NH3 is much greater, in fact 1.75 times greater than straight dry fertilizer. Most one-pass NH3 users apply seed and P-K-S blends through the tow between air tank and apply all the nitrogen with the tow behind anhydrous tank. Depending on the set up, one product runs out well before the others which increases down time at seeding. 

Clients Doug and Mike Miller and I figured out that with their system, they could gain another 10 acres per fill if they added urea to the blend instead of relying on NH3 as the sole nitrogen source. The Millers operate a 70 ft NH SD 550 with a 430 bushel tow between Flexicoil tank and 2,000 US gallon tow behind NH3 tank. On a typical wheat blend with seed in the front and middle tank and a fertilizer blend of 90 lbs/ac in the back tank plus 80 lbs N as NH3, they could achieve roughly 95 acres per fill. This was good but the NH3 would run out before the seed and dry fertilizer blend.   

To calculate the number of acres per fill so that all tanks would run out at the same time, we worked back from the seed tanks. The seed tanks specifically in wheat require a high seeding rate and require two of the three tanks. From there we calculated the amount of product we needed to meet our nutrient goals and product rates. Here's the math on how it was done for a target of 80 lbs N:

New system
2,000 gal/US/tank × 90% × 5.15 lbs/gal/NH3 x 82% N = 7,601 lbs/N/tank
Flexi-coil 430 bushel tank capacity: (8,094 lbs back + 5,814 lbs middle) ÷ 130 lb/wheat/ac = 106 ac/fill 
Dry fert blend: 10,602 lbs front ÷ 106 ac/fill = 100 lb/ac (new 10-30-20-0 blend)
2,000 gal/US NH3 tank: 7,601 lbs/N/fill ÷ 106 ac/fill = 71 lbs/N/ac

Old system
2,000 gal/US/tank × 90% × 5.15 lbs/gal/NH3 × 82% N = 7,601 lbs/N/tank
Flexi-coil 430 bushel tank capacity: (8,094 lbs back + 5,814 lbs middle) ÷ 130 lb/wheat/ac = 106 ac/fill 
Dry fert blend: 10,602 lbs front ÷ 90 lbs/dry fert blend/ac (old 0-30-20-0 blend) = 117 ac/fill
2,000 gal/US NH3 tank: 7,601 lbs/N/fill ÷ 80 lbs/N/ac = 95 ac/tank
 
In this scenario, we increased the nitrogen content in the dry fertilizer blend by 10 lbs/N/ac using a urea blend of 10-30-20-0 at 100 lbs/ac. This little tweak dropped the NH3 required and added another 10 acres per fill. With an average of 4 fills per day, they were able to seed an extra 40 acres each day, which is roughly one more hour spent seeding per day rather than filling. The dry fertilizer blend and NH3 combo we designed for canola is better at 98 acres per fill, even with a 110 lb/N/ac fertilizer rate! I the love efficiencies we've made on this farm and it just goes to show what a little out of the box thinking can do. SL

Not all 400 bushel air carts are the same – Mar 1

I think we assume that air carts generally have the same capacity. I mean a 430 bushel John Deere or New Holland tank hold the same amount of volume right, so they should provide the same number of acres per fill with a given blend and seeding rate, right? When you breakdown the volume each compartment holds in each grain tank, you'll notice there are slight differences. Out of curiosity I took a look at the seeded acre capacity of the top seven air tanks in the 400 bushel class.

Let's run the numbers. I'll take a standard 230 lb/ac fertilizer blend with a 120 lb/ac seeding rate of wheat. We'll place seed in the front and fertilizer in the back compartment.

As you can see from the chart the clear winner is the Bourgault 6450 air tank with a minimum capacity of 72 acres per fill. It is the biggest air tank in the 400 bushel class with roughly 20 bushels more capacity than the rest.

The second runner up is the JD 1910 430 bushel tank with a minimum of 69 acres per fill. Giving up some size in the middle tank to make a larger 150 bushel tank makes sense.

The Case/NH and Morris tanks come in a close third and fourth. The Morris tank is 3 bushels bigger than the Case/NH but has an oddball tank split that forces you to have mega capacity in two tanks and only 62 acres per fill in one. I calculated the Morris tank two ways and 62 acres was the most I could get out of one fill. I think Morris should take a lesson from John Deere and give up some tank space in the middle to help increase the acres per fill.

The last two on the list are the two compartment SeedMaster and SeedHawk air tanks. The SeedMaster has 20 bushels more capacity than the SeedHawk but still comes in 4 acres less per fill. The two tank system really can't compete in this class and until these two manufacturers upgrade to three compartment tanks, I think more people will be hitching onto Case/NH and Morris tanks.

So the difference in efficiency from highest to lowest in the 400 bushel class is the Bourgault 6450 which can do 36% more seeded acres per fill than the last place SeedMaster SXG 425. The next time you decide to upgrade tanks, have a look at your fertilizer and seeding rate program, then run the numbers on which tanks are most efficient with your program. It just might save you time, money and have you finish seeding a little bit earlier next year. SL

Nail down these top 5 issues before inter-row seeding – Mar 15

One of the leading causes of uneven germination and emergence across my client base is excessive residue on the soil surface. Every year seedlings lose vigour, maturity and yield because they struggle to emerge from the massive amounts of straw placed on top of the furrow. I see phytotoxicity issues from too much chaff or increased disease pressure surrounding scattered piles of residue. I see high residue loads robbing the soil of nitrogen and the plants that surround them. One of the best solutions to date has been inter-row seeding and I'm pleased to say 70% of my clients have adopted it with more to come.

From what we've experienced over the last two years, inter-row seeding has improved residue flow dramatically around the openers. There has been a reduction in the amount of residue that gets caught up on the shanks which leaves straw piles all over the field, especially during tough conditions. Also, the stubble is no longer being dislodged which is the main culprit for plugging up shanks. Now that we're confident in our ability to achieve inter-row seeding consistently, stubble height will be left taller each year provided the conditions allow. Taller stubble reduces the amount of residue put through the combine and ultimately reducing what ends up on the field.

To begin inter-row seeding there are a few things you need to address:

1) Seedbed utilization: The first thing to address is seedbed utilization or SBU which is a measure of opener width and shank spacing. I believe that a 25% SBU (2.5" on 10" spacing) is the maximum you'd want in order to perform inter-row seeding consistently. This would allow you three years worth of room between each year's stubble. You can go out to 33% SBU (4" on 12" spacing) but you can't have more than two years of cereals in the rotation back to back.  

2) Guidance: You can inter-row seed using OmniStar HP or Starfire SF2 which offer 2" to 4" pass to pass accuracy. I've seen both GPS signals in action and they do a fine job of holding the line within an inch or two. To set up inter-row seeding on year two using these signals, simply look back on your first pass and nudge the GPS until the shanks line up between the stubble. The GPS signal should keep you locked in place for the rest of the field.

If you're fussy about setting things up perfectly then the next step is RTK guidance which, aside from drill skew, will hold you dead on with sub-inch pass to pass accuracy.

3) Cost: If you already own a Starfire SF1 GPS the upgrade to a Starfire SF2 will run you around $2,100 plus the $1,500 annual subscription cost. If you own a Trimble 262 or Easy Guide 500 then the upgrade cost to receive OmniStar HP signal will be $2,100 plus the $1,500 annual subscription cost. You can get both signals for only three months for $800. If you are experiencing severe skewing with your air drill, you can buy implement steering for an additional $6,000 plus installation for a Trimble True Guide system. 

4) Drill skew: Drill skew is a tough one to measure and differs greatly with drill manufacturers, shank spacing and opener type. Chris Nelson of AccuFarm ran a test with a GPS antenna on the drill and tractor and found up to 12 inches of skew with a FlexiCoil 5000 on relatively flat ground. From our own experience running RTK on a 30-ft Concord, I would argue we're down to 2 to 3 inches worth of skew in some areas on rolling topography.

One solution to reduce drill skew is the Trimble TrueGuide implement steering system. It claims to be able to reduce 8 inches of skew down to less than 3 inches and reduce side hill skew from 3 feet down below 12 inches or less. I would estimate the savings in fuel from less draft at seeding and less fuel at harvest from leaving taller stubble will more than pay for the system. I have a client who bought the True Guide this year so I'll keep you posted on its performance.  

5) Crop rotation: Managing crop rotation to fit inter-row seeding is part of the system. Ideally, you'd alternate a broadleaf with cereal crop. I worked on a few canola-wheat-lentil or peas-wheat-canola rotations just last week that look quite profitable. For the rest who don't grow pulses, a canola-wheat-wheat rotation works fine as well. The only way to plant three years of cereals and still inter-row seed would be a canola-barley-wheat-wheat rotation with volunteer barley becoming a risk outside of the Clearfield system. Barley stubble has a lower C:N ratio than wheat and breaks down faster. By planting after canola, it will be broken down enough to inter-row seed by year three. 

Finding a way to begin inter-row seeding will be different for everyone. Once you've nailed down the top five things to consider before starting, you'll be on your way. On your way to better residue flow, reduced draft and fuel use at harvest and less germination and emergence issues. You'll finally be able to buy back the maturity and yield you've been losing from heavy residue loads over the last five years. Good luck!  SL

Controlled traffic farming presentation – Mar 15

I had a chance to present a webinar on our controlled traffic farming system last Friday.  I discussed the case for controlled traffic along with the crazy modifications we made to begin this new farming system and the results from the 2010 season. Wheel traffic isn't an issue in Western Canada? Have a look. I've attached a pdf copy of my presentation for your viewing pleasure. Enjoy!

Controlled Traffic Farming - FLC presentation 

Farm.tv looks at our 2nd year of CTF – Jun 7

Morton Molyneux from Farm.tv stopped by the farm for an interview to discuss our second year of controlled traffic farming. Watch the segment
to see us in action and hear our thoughts on CTF. 

Single row vs. paired row experiement has interesting results in canola – Jun 14

I think many of us would agree that paired row openers are inconsistent with canola seed placement. We often find canola seeds too shallow or two deep or don't find them at all. In previous newsletters I've discussed how a client of mine reversed the seed and fertilizer tubes on his JD 1830 drill and the seed depth and emergence was greatly improved. This spring I had another client switch the seed and fertilizer tubes and test the theory by doing a side by side trial with his Dutch 4-inch paired row opener and 5-inch packers.

As you can see in the photo, the paired row is on the right and the reversed seed and fertilizer placement is on the left shown by a single row. After assessing plant stand density, crop staging and seeding depth, I found an advantage to reversing the seed and fertilizer and placing seed down a single row, even with a paired row opener. The seeding depth varied by 1 ¼" in the paired row versus just ½" in the single row. A lot of seeds were planted 2 inches deep in the paired row; the variability was found across the field and there were plants still emerging in the paired row right up to 3 leaf. The crop stage in the single row was fairly consistent with 80% at the 2 leaf stage and the rest at 1 leaf. I think this could have been improved if we'd been able to put starter fertilizer with the seed and not above and to the side in the paired row.

These experiments are pointing me toward an inherent design flaw in paired row openers. Here are my quick thoughts on what's happening:

• The wings on paired row openers lift up a great deal of soil that include last year's roots and stubble, lumps, clumps and some soft soil between the rows occasionally. The difference in soil texture and moisture content across each few inches of row can lead to a large variance of soil flow which effects seed placement.  
• Seeds are blown outside of the furrow where seed to soil contact is poor and seeding depth is highly variable. This is very common when seeding canola because the soil resistance on each side of the opener at shallow depth is low so seed is able to blow outside of the furrow easily.
• The majority of packers on the market are semi-pneumatic flat rubber packers and about an inch wider than the openers. Depending on the seed placement, there is a difference in packing pressure across the furrow because the packers run on the sides of the furrow. 
• The difference in packing pressure across the furrow leads to excessive packing for some seeds and not enough for others which reduces the consistency of germination and emergence.

For those who struggle with seed placement using paired row openers and aren't in the position to trade in their conventional hoe drill for a precision hoe drill with on row depth control, switching to a sideband opener may be just what you need and I'll tell you why. First, I like a narrower opener because it moves less soil and creates less variability in seeding depth.  Second, placing seed down the back of a sideband opener typically means the most pliable and mellow soil flows around the opener and on top of your seed. Third, the seed spread is typically about 2 inches side to side when shooting the seed down the back tube on a sideband opener. I feel that leaves enough room even on 12-inch spacing to place 30 to 35 plants per ft2 when targeting high plant densities. It's also narrow enough to benefit from being closer to started fertilizers to give us that pop up effect we're looking for. And finally, it's less iron, less draft, less horsepower, less cost per tip and less fuel consumption when moving from a paired row to sideband opener. On a 60 ft drill, moving from a 4-inch paired row to a 2-inch sideband means you're dragging 10 ft of iron and not 20 ft through the ground. It definitely makes a difference.

I hope I've given you something to chew on while you're out scouting for germination and emergence over the next few weeks. Perhaps you suffer from paired row syndrome and could stand to improve germination and emergence with a switch to a sideband opener. SL 

Wide row spacing in canola drops seed costs with the right drill – jul 26

I stopped by Doug Clemens near Mossleigh to look at some wide row spacing trials he has in canola this year. Doug is comparing 10 inch and 20 inch row spacing using his John Deere 1895 disk drill equipped with mid-row banders and liquid kit. As you may remember from last year, the folks who tried 15, 24 and 30 inch row spacing with canola using corn planters and a ConservaPak all outperformed 9 and 12 inch row spacing. Beyond Agronomy News - Nov 10 

Personally, I know we can achieve greater seed placement accuracy, faster maturity, higher yields and significantly reduced seed costs if we began using planters Beyond Agronomy News - July 10 , like those used in soybeans, corn and sugarbeets. What I like best on top of the benefits is the $20 and $30 acre savings in seed costs, which in most cases just about pays for the planter within a year or two.         

The photos you see here are an example of the plant stands we can achieve with low seeding rates and wider row spacing. The photo on top shows the 20 inch row spacing and the 10 inch row spacing is below. Visually, the 20 inch row spacing looks healthier and more efficient with wider leaves and thicker stalks. The 20 inch row spacing had a seeding rate of 3 lbs/ac and the 10 inch spacing had a seeding rate of 5 lbs/ac. Both stands were planted to the variety InVigor 5440. So, for $20.00ac less, we can achieve a healthier plant stand with no lag in maturity. Win win I'd say.

I think it's a matter of time before separate planters or disk drills are used to plant canola. The disk drill was able to seed at 3 lbs/ac but there's potential to get down to 1.5 to 2.5 lbs/ac when using a planter like a Monosem or John Deere planter. ConservaPak claims they can go down to 3 lbs/ac with canola and they can, they just cant offer seed singulation like a planter or have the ability to comfortably go down to 1.5 or 2.5 lbs/ac. You just can't meter out that little product with the majority of air tanks aside from the new SeedMaster tank which can meter down to 1.5 lbs/ac quite nicely. The SeedMaster seed singulation starts off well but falls off the rails when you try and send seed with varying sizes and weights down 60 or 70 ft of 1 1/4 inch hose. That's where the vacuum planters shine and offer the singulation and within row plant spacing we're looking for along with accurate metering and seed placement. SL

Optimizing leaf area index key to achieving high canola yields – Jun 21

One of the key drivers in canola yield is leaf area index or what's commonly known as green area index (GAI). GAI is the ratio of green plant material that covers a square meter of land and has a direct influence on crop vigour, root development, moisture use efficiency, weed suppression, carbohydrate storage and nutrient transport. In a nutshell, obtaining optimum GAI's can build bigger canola yields with less water and nutrients. 

In November 2009, I had a chance to discuss the use of green area index measurements with Nick Ward, farmer and Nuffield Scholar from Linconshire, UK. Nick measures GAI in his canola to calculate nitrogen uptake and application rates in order to achieve optimum GAI and yield. I had Nick explain how UK producers use green area index to measure nitrogen uptake and calculate nitrogen application rates:

Measuring Green Area Index

1. To quantify the amount of nitrogen taken up by the crop prior to bolting, a 1 square metre quadrant is placed in a representative area of crop. The entire green mass (stems and leaves) on this area is cut off at ground level and weighed (including dead leaves). Alternatively you can take a picture of 1 square metre of area standing above the crop and insert it into the BASF online GAI measurement tool
2. The weight of the green mass (stems and leaves) is measured in kilograms and multiplied by a factor of 0.8. This will give you a Green Area Index number. For example, 1 kg of green mass from 1 square metre would equate to a GAI of 0.8. (1kg × 0.8 = 0.8 GAI) or (0.750kg × 0.8 = 0.6 GAI) 
3. Pictures of GAI examples

Calculating nitrogen uptake and N application rate

1. It is assumed that each GAI of 1 contains 50kg/ha of N within the crop. If you want to convert kg/ha to lb/ac, simply multiply kg/ha by 0.893. For example, 50 kg/ha × 0.893 = 45 lb/ac of N within the crop. 
2. Now, multiply your GAI × 50 kg/ha to calculate the amount of nitrogen in the crop. For example: 0.75 GAI × 50 kg/ha = 37.5 kg/ha N within the crop or 33.5 lb/ac N
3. Next, the optimum sized canopy at full growth (bolting) has a GAI of 3.5. We need to build the crop canopy up to a target GAI of 3.5. Example: 3.5 - 0.75 = 2.75 GAI
4. To calculate the nitrogen necessary to build an additional GAI of 2.75 we need to multiply 2.75 GAI × 50 kg/ha. For example: 2.75 GAI × 50 kg/ha = 137.5 kg/ha N or 123 lb/ac N
5. Therefore, the crop needs 123 lbs/N/ac to reach its optimum canopy size and yield potential.

In Canada, a GAI of 4 is considered optimum for the crop canopy to intercept about 90% of the incoming solar radiation. (The picture above has a GAI of 1.8 to show you an example.) The larger the leaf area the crop can expose to the sun, the more dry matter the crop can produce per day. The more dry matter a crop can produce, the higher the yield potential. I'd like to run some numbers but instead, I'll challenge you to start measuring GAIs in 2011. Start questioning what it would take to produce a GAI of 4 in your cropping system. Is it a change in row spacing, opener width, fertility program, nutrient placement, seeding rate, fungicide or variety? Let this be the beginning of a new way of measuring yield potential in canola. SL
 
Source: Nick Ward, Lincolnshire, England
Canopy photo source: GRDC

Delta T method measures ideal spray conditions – Jun 19

With the recent high temperatures coinciding with fungicide applications, most producers will shut down when temperatures reach 26 degrees Celsius to avoid high evaporation losses. That seems to be the rule of thumb that we all live by and don't question. Unfortunately, temperature is just one half of the equation when it comes to determining evaporation losses. After doing some research I found out the Aussie's use a method called Delta T to determine when to shut down spraying to avoid evaporation losses. The equation includes humidity and temperature to determine the lifetime of a droplet on a leaf.

Delta T is becoming one of the standard indicators for acceptable spray conditions in Australia. It is indicative of evaporation rate and droplet lifetime. Delta T is calculated by subtracting the wet bulb temperature from the dry bulb temperature. The diagram shown here relates air temperature and relative humidity to values of Delta T. As temperature increases, spraying conditions deteriorate unless humidity also increases. When applying pesticides, Delta T should ideally be between 2 and 8.

I can't find dry bulb information but I did find wet bulb data on my Weatherbug weather station . However, based on the chart above we only need air temperature and relative humidity to come up with the appropriate Delta T value. For example, the daytime temperature has reached 28-30 degrees Celsius the last few days with a relative humidity in 70's and 80's. We would normally stop spraying at 26 degrees Celsius regardless of humidity levels but based on the Delta T values, we'd still be in the preferred range. We could have got a lot more spraying done in the last few days had we relied on an suitable measure of evaporation like the Delta T method offers.

I think most of us pay attention to temperature and wind speed when it comes to applying pesticides. Very few if any pay attention to humidity. I think the Delta T model is a more accurate tool to determine evaporation rates and allow us to spray during the optimum time of day and even beyond the rule of thumb we follow now. I can see the Delta T method improving the timing of foliar nutrients, herbicides and fungicides. With herbicides and fungicides costing most producers upwards of $40 and acre each year, it's time we look at how to get the most of those dollars. The Delta T method might be one more tool to help us achieve better efficacy in our pesticide applications.  SL

Source

Grain bag storage: top 10 things they don't tell you in the manual Aug 16

The use of grain bags for temporary storage has grown dramatically over the last few years. Producers have chosen grain bags for the simple benefits of loading B-train's (45T) in under 20 minutes, no bin bottoms to clean up, virtually no shoveling, few insect problems and the ability to store tough grain for long periods of time compared to upright storage. All these benefits can be realized for a $35,000 investment to purchase a bagger and an additional $30,000 to own an un-loader. After that, storage costs run roughly six to seven cents a bushel. All this sounds wonderful but what grain bags don't come with is a "what not to do" manual to help avoid the mishaps you often hear about. Oh, deer!

I had a chat with a seasoned grain bag veteran who's lived through long storage periods thanks to the CWB, and gone through one of the toughest winters and springs we've experienced in over a decade. He's paid his tuition to learn the little nuances of grain bag storage and is now better for it. With that, here are the top ten things you should know before you cover a single kernel of grain with a plastic bag:   

1. Do not load grain bags down slope; a slight incline to flat is best to fill bags properly. Also, be sure to keep them straight!   
2. Do not place grain bags on grass or pastures because mice and other rodents tend to hang out in undisturbed sites and will tear open bags. Same applies for coulee banks or areas where wildlife likes to congregate during the winter. A grain bag should not be a winter playground for deer.
3. Do not place grain bags side by side. Place them one in front of the other down the field to speed up unloading and alleviate snow drifts.
4. You can store tough grain but not wet grain. If you store grain higher than 20% moisture over winter you will turn that wet grain into a 10 x 250 ft frozen sausage that's impossible to unload or sell at the local farmer's market.  
5. Do not plow snow around the bags until you're ready to unload them, unless you've got wildlife running on top of them. Plowed snow sets up like concrete around the grain bag making it impossible to clear snow a second time without tearing the sides of the bag. 
6. Clean up grain spills around the bag to avoid attracting deer and rodents. A little bit of spilled grain can turn a grain bag into a feed bunk for Bambi.   
7. Some producers have found success spreading bone meal around the entire bag when deer have broken into the bags. Wooden pallets placed at the ends of the bag work like a cattle guard and discourage feeding.
8. Make sure the tractor is in neutral when loading a bag to avoid overfilling and splitting. Let the bag push the tractor.
9. Try to get the bags unloaded before the end of winter. There could be holes in the bottom of the bag from stubble or rodents and while this isn't a big deal when the snow is frozen, once it starts to melt there will be a river running through the inside of the bag.
10. Place bags in a north/south direction but understand that snow drifts are just something you have to manage.

The best way to discover the ins and outs of grain bags is to talk to the local rep who sells them and talk to farmers who've used them for a few years. Grain bags are a great storage alternative but they're not without risk and many a farmer has learned how not to store grain in bags the hard way. Don't be that guy and make a few phone calls first. SL

Thanks to Jason James, of Drumheller, AB, for passing along his insider secrets on grain bags.

Canola seed price increase make planters a better option Sept 13

I just saw the latest canola price list for 2012 that has varieties ranging from $9.50/lb up to $12.00/lb. I believe the $50.00 to $60.00/ac in seed costs will continue to climb with yield and margins the way they are. So where does that leave us? For me, it makes me look harder at a system that includes vacuum planters so we can improve emergence and reduce our seeding rates by 60%. A separate precision canola planter pays off quickly with canola seed prices north of $10.00/lb.

I was given a quote for a 40-foot Monosem planter on 22-inch spacing. The cost was $108,000 for this set up. Case IH and John Deere make planters as well but after watching Kip Cullers from Missouri pull off 160 bu/ac soybeans with his Monosem, he had me at hello. The best part is that you only need a small tractor to pull it so something like a 160 HP front wheel assist would give you all the horsepower you'd need if you farm steep slopes.

The Monosem planter or vacuum planters in general allow you to cut back canola seeding rates to 2 lb/ac or below. At $12.00/lb, that's a savings of $36.00/ac over the standard seeding rate! For those of you seeding at 3.5 lbs/ac with a precision drill, you'd still be $18.00/ac ahead using a planter. The downside is that it requires a second pass but the upside is 700/ac per fill, deadly accurate and a reduction in seed cost. Let's run the numbers to compare a one pass conventional system to a two pass vacuum planter system.   

Conventional one pass system
425 hp 4WD: $300,000
55 ft drill: $210,000
One pass application: $14.00/ac
Seed cost: $60.00/ac
Total: $74.00/ac

Two-pass system with Monosem planter
160 hp FWA: $135,000
Monosem 40 ft, 20" spacing: $108,000
Two pass application: $9.00/ac (fall fert) + $16.75/ac = $25.75/ac
Seed cost: $24.00/ac
Total: $49.75/ac

In this example, the two pass system using the Monosem drill will cost $24.25/ac less than the conventional one pass system. That doesn't account for yield increases or maturity benefits from the precision planter. For those of you planting 2,500 acres or more, you're looking at a two year return on investment for the Monosem drill. Those planting 1,500 acres of canola each year would have the investment paid off within three years. If you work backwards, most producers have 25 to 30% of their rotation in canola each year. If you divide 1,600 to 2,500 acres of canola by 30%, the economics work well on the 5,000 acre to 8,000 acre farms. This concept has definitely captured my attention and if seed costs continue to rise, we're going to see more producers looking into planters to offset the cost and do a better job at seeding canola. SL

Wheat responds to foliar copper on high copper soil – oct 13

I did a few trials this year with foliar copper in an attempt to reduce ergot levels in wheat. My theory began with Mulder’s nutrient interaction chart that showed high potassium soils and high nitrate levels actually block copper uptake. The potassium levels in my clients soils range from 850 lbs to 1,200 lbs in the top 6 inches (see chart). We typically apply between 80-100 lbs of nitrogen so the combination of high nitrate and high potassium blocking copper uptake had me curious. The interesting part of this experiment was the fact that we were applying copper on soils that were already high in available copper, in fact 1.4 ppm to 2.8 ppm in the top 6 inches. Critical soil test levels for copper in wheat are 0.4 ppm to 0.6 ppm so we were more than double the level of where we should see a response in wheat. It turns out we did see a significant response from foliar applied copper but it had nothing to do with reducing ergot.

The copper trials on two farms in heavy clay soils near Drumheller showed both a yield and protein increase but no reduction in ergot levels. We applied Stoller’s foliar MP Copper 5% at 500 ml/ac along with Folicur EW at 200 ml/ac at flag lef stage (GS 39). Results on one farm showed a six day delay in maturity, a 7% increase in yield and about a 1% increase in protein (11.9% vs. 12.8%). The cost of the MPCopper was $4.50 acre and applied during fungicide timing so the return on investment was $33.47 acre in yield and $17.50 acre in protein for a total of $50.97 acre.

We didn’t solve the ergot problem with our trial so we’re back to the drawing board on that one. We will, however, start doing more tests with foliar copper on high potassium soils given the response we had this year. Perhaps it was a fluke or maybe there is something else we’re missing on Mulders nutrient interaction chart but the results are encouraging. Have a look at your historical soil test results and consider Mulder’s nutrient interaction chart. There could be something holding back yield potential that a soil test alone will never tell you. SL
Pictured above: Soil tests results from fields with high copper levels.

A Case 2140 vacuum planter fits a Ponoka farm’s production system – Oct 25

A first season review

Back in July I stopped by a farm owned by Darren and Helko Feitsma at Ponoka to look at the canola they planted with a Case 1240 vacuum planter on 15-inch row spacing. This week I talked to Darren about the finer points of his first year seeding with the planter. Here are the details:
Planter system

• 38ft Case 1240 planter on 15-inch rows with two dry boxes
• Bourgault LFC 2000 liquid tow-between tank
• 1mm 120 hole discs for the canola
• Yetter residue cleaners in front of each row

Agronomics

• Banded fertilizer in the spring with Flexi-coil 5000, 5-inch openers on 12-inch spacing at 6.5 mph prior to seeding
• Planted InVigor 5440
• Had to request thousand kernel weight from Bayer for canola to adjust seeding rate
• Targeted 250,000 seeds per acre for a total of 2.6 lbs/ac

Residue management ahead of a vacuum planter is a universal challenge. The Yetter residue managers in front of the openers worked excellent in their Ponoka loam soil, moving residue and avoiding hair pinning. They may not be an option for those with heavier clay content. Some producers in Southern Alberta are strip tilling on RTK guidance and seeding into that fertilized row the next year. The Feitsma’s used their FlexiCoil 5000 to band fertilizer and manage residue. It does leave the risk of drying out the seedbed if it doesn’t rain soon after seeding.

The seed placement on this planter was excellent and very consistent at half an inch. However the seed spacing within each row was almost as inconsistent as an air drill which I found somewhat surprising. The reason behind the inconsistent seed spacing or singulation is the variability in canola seed size. Canola seed size can vary between 3 and 6 grams per thousand kernels, even in the same seed lot. The variability in seed size causes some seeds to double up in one hole while some seeds are too big to fit in the hole. In a perfect world you would have canola sized to a consistent seed size so the 1mm 120 hole disk would grab and separate one canola seed at a time instead of two seeds, then none and so on. You can see in the bottom picture where 7 plants are spaced unevenly in one foot of row. 

Some folks are nervous about wide rows because it may encourage weed growth from the lack of crop competition. If you look at the canola in the middle photo, the canopy is just about closed 40 days after seeding on June 26th. I would suggest that with the right variety, the crop could canopy quickly and still compete against weeds even in wider row spacing.

Darren figured the canola planted with the Case 1240 planter out yielded his Flexicoil 5000 with 5-inch openers and spreader tips by 10-bushels and acre. Even with a margin of error, Darren managed to save $25 an acre on seed costs and generate an additional $120 an acre in yield. You could half that yield increase and still be $85 an acre on the good side. If canola revenues continue to be as good as they are I think it’s time to start treating it like a high value row crop. The upside in putting together a row crop canola system pencils out quickly when you put the numbers to it. Just nail down the residue management, fertilizer pass and seed sizing first and then you’ll be on your way to higher returns. SL
If you’ve missed my previous articles on vacuum planters go to:
http://www.beyondagronomy.com/newsletter/20_7_2010.htm
http://www.beyondagronomy.com/newsletter/12_7_2010.htm
http://www.beyondagronomy.com/newsletter/19_10_2010.htm
For in-season photos of Fieitsma’s system, view here on thecombineforum.com.
Pictured above: (Top) Case 1240 planter, (Middle) Canola on 15-inch row spacing 40 days after seeding May 16th, 2011

Shielded sprayers to revolutionize attack on resistant weeds – Oct 25

I was first introduced to shielded sprayers at Robert Ruwoldt’s farm near Horsham, Victoria back in 2009. Robert built a 30-foot shielded sprayer to spray non-selective herbicides like glyphosate between his 30-inch rows in canola and fababeans. Shielded sprayers are an excellent tool to fight against herbicide resistant weeds like Group 2 kochia, wild buckwheat, Group 1 resistant wild oats or even problem weeds like Japanese and Downy brome which have limited control options.

I contacted a hooded sprayer manufacturer called Southern Precision in Australia who sells the CropStalker, a hooded sprayer with the ability to spray between 12-inch and 15-inch rows. The photo you see here is their 40-foot shielded sprayer spraying glyphosate in lentils on 12-inch rows.
The sprayer uses a Garford Robocrop XHD side shifter to guide row crop equipment accurately at speeds up to 7 mph within 12 and 15-inch row spacing. The RoboCrop XHD uses a camera to view the crop ahead of the sprayer. The camera image is scanned to find the higher concentrations of green pixels relating to the crop rows and uses prior knowledge of the row configuration to overlay a matching grid onto the image. This information is then utilised to bring the equipment onto the exact row centres via a hydraulic side shift.

Watch the CropStalker in action
Southern Precision currently offers a 40-foot wide shielded sprayer suited to spray between 12 and 15-inch rows. The 40-foot unit suited for 12-inch rows retails for $99,770 AUD including GST. They are currently researching sprayer widths up to 60 feet with shields on 10-inch spacing.
A little Steve’s quick math will tell you that even at a cost of $120,000, if you could avoid a 10% yield loss on a 1,680 lb/ac average red lentil crop across 1,500 acres, you’d have the sprayer paid for in two years. Or, if you could avoid a 5% yield loss in canola across 2,000 acres, you’ve have it paid for in two years.
I can really see a fit for shielded sprayers in the durum-lentil belt where they’ve been battling resistant weeds for years. I can also see it fitting into Liberty or Clearfield canola systems to improve herbicide options as well as in non-competitive crops like chickpeas and field peas. Take it a step further and I can see a great fit with wide row canola using precision vacuum planters. How about spraying Group 1 and 2 resistant wild oats between 12 inch rows of wheat and barley? I'd say shielded sprayers have a fit in our market place in Western Canada. SL
Pictured above: A CropStalker 40-foot shielded sprayer spraying glyphosate on lentils on 12-inch rows. Photo source Southern Precision

Pencil out an on-farm liquid urea plant – Nov 1

I recently visited a farm in the area who built an on-farm liquid urea plant to help reduce the costs of applying liquid nitrogen. The system was built by Mountainview Colony who dribble-band nitrogen in cereals to reduce the risk of leaching in their sandy soils. After spending copious amount of money on UAN (28-0-0-0) and the logistics and storage that comes along with liquid fertilizer, they decided to build their own liquid urea plant. Today, we’ll run the numbers to see what the breakeven cost of building your own set up would be.

Liquid UAN as a product is 50% urea, 25% ammonium and 25% nitrate. So, when you buy UAN you’re effectively buying a product that contains 50% urea. Liquid urea carries the risk of volatilization much like UAN if you spray it on the soil surface with heavy residue or high pH, or during dry weather, you stand to lose a certain percentage. It can also scorch leaves if applied at too heavy a rate and during high daytime temperatures. The three main uses for liquid urea would be to reduce leaching, increase tillering or protein in wheat late in the growing season. One final reason to use liquid urea is because it’s not caustic like most liquid fertilizers. It doesn’t corrode metal like liquid UAN.

The picture you see at the top is a 45 tonne epoxy coated urea storage bin which augers directly into the 10,000 Imp. gallon poly water tank which sits atop four load cells. The middle photo shows the natural gas powered steam boiler that heats the steam up to 400 degrees Celsius which blows into the water tank to agitate and warm the water to help dissolve the urea. The water, urea auger and steam boiler are all controlled from an electrical panel in the scale house. The finished liquid urea solution is pumped into the 20,000 gallon stainless steel storage tank you see in the middle photo.

The process works like this: 1) Water tank is filled to one third while the steamer is warming the water. The urea is then augured in at a rate of 39,000 lbs per 10,000 Imp. gallon batch. Water weighs 10 lbs/Imp. gal so you multiply 10,000 gal × 10 lbs/gal × 18% ÷ 46% to get the total amount of urea need per batch. The urea is circulated and dissolved within roughly 30 minutes per batch in this urea plant. The product is ready when it hits a specific gravity of roughly 1120. You can find one of these specific gravity kits at a wine store. Like a fine vintage, making liquid urea is an art. Each person will make their own tweaks to their urea plant to optimize the results. The reason 18% nitrogen is applied to the solution is because that is all that can be held in suspension. Solids start dropping out of suspension and plugging filters if the solution nears 20%.

So does it make economical sense to make your own liquid urea? Let’s do a little Steve’s quick math to find out. Fertilizer prices are based on current quotes. Application of 20 lbs/N/ac as a dribble band is fairly common as a top dress in our area.

Steve’s quick math

UAN: $0.70 lb/N
Urea: $0.62 lb/N
Application rates: 20 lbs/N/ac
Savings over UAN: 20 lbs/N/ac × ($0.70 lb/N/UAN - $0.62 lb/N/Urea) = $1.60/ac
Cost of urea plant: $18,000
Breakeven: $18,000 ÷ $1.60 = 11,250 acres

Making your own urea in this scenario would allow you to save $0.08 cents per lb of nitrogen. At a 20 lb/N/ac top dress rate you would need to cover 11,250 acres to breakeven in year one. You can amortize the cost of the urea plant over five or ten years if you like. Urea is a non-caustic substance so metal fittings and parts don’t corrode. Some urea plant owners have had their plants for 25 years with only motors being replaced over time.

Does it make sense? I know my overseas farmer friends use liquid urea successfully to boost protein in wheat at watery dough stage and bump yield in canola by applying it early pod stage. You can read articles from previous issues about liquid urea here BAN Aug 4 2010 and here BAN Nov 10 2010BAN Nov 10, 2009
Perhaps your own urea plant does make sense. SL

Pictured above: Mountainview Colony's liquid urea plant.

Intensifying malt barley production – Nov 22

Can it be done?
Striking a balance between high yield and malt quality barley is a difficult task. We are always hesitant to push nitrogen rates for the simple fear of generating too much protein and losing malt quality. Well, one of my challenges in 2011 was to try and intensify malt barley production through high nitrogen rates, growth regulators and multiple fungicides yet still maintain malt quality. Here are the details in our high yield malt trials at each location and what we learned along the way.
All trials are AC Metcalfe.

Strathmore
Fertilizer: 138N-40P-40K-10S
Seeding rate: 151 lbs/ac
Yield: 124 bu/ac
Plump: 93%
Protein: 12.4%
Rainfall: 10 inches, 2 inches stored soil moisture

Olds
Fertilizer: 85N-52P-56K-10S
Seeding rate: 177 lbs/ac
Yield: 127 bu/ac
Plump: 97%
Protein: 10.1%
Rainfall: 10 inches, 3 inches stored soil moisture

Carbon
Fertilizer: 140N-40P-40K-10S
Seeding rate: 170 lbs/ac
Yield: 110 bu/ac
Plump: 95%
Protein: 12.3%
Rainfall: 10 inches, 2 inches stored soil moisture

As you can see we still managed to achieve greater than 93% plump and below 12.4% protein even with nitrogen rates pushing 140 lbs/ac and seeding rates pushing 180 lbs/ac. All three sites had over three quarters of the in-season rainfall occur in May and June with the remainder in July and August. The Carbon site was on heavy clay and had excessive rains which reduced yield significantly to 110 bu/ac. With 140 lbs of nitrogen on that field you might wonder how we achieved protein under 13%. I suspect the dual fungicide and growth regulator really helped to improve nitrogen use efficiency and build plump kernels. The leaves and stems on this site were green right until the end, so much so that it had to be swathed.

The Strathmore site achieved 93% plumpness and 12.4% protein with 138 lbs of nitrogen but we did run into excessive late tillering which caused 3.5% green kernels, well above allowable limits. This was not the case at the other sites. I suspect tillering was encouraged after stressing it out with the fungicide and growth regulator combination. The label says not to mix Ethrel PGR with fungicides but we decided to do it as a trial and found out the hard way. Granted, 124 bu/ac isn’t anything to whine about.

These are the key findings and observations:

• There are three growth stages to focus on building yield: Phase 1) Germination and emergence to give you the desired number of plants, Phase 2) Tillering to build the desired number of heads, and Phase 3) Grain fill which determines kernel size.
• 30 plants per ft2 is the ideal plant density for malt barley in these areas. It reduces late tillers which are typically less plump. A target of 25 plants per ft2 is fine for feed barley.
• High nitrogen and phosphorus rates build strong tillers. The trial sites averaged three tillers per plant and generated 60% more heads per ft2 compared to the checks. N and P were the drivers.
• Start with a fungicide like at herbicide timing to buy you enough disease suppression to delay your second fungicide at head emergence. Use a quality fungicide like P