Agronomist Notes
Hello Reader
The 2013 crop year is quickly coming to a close and what a successful year it was for most. The conditions during seeding were ideal with few rain delays, followed by 6 weeks of rains through the end of May and June. The tap turned off in July-August which led to a dry finish and a pleasant harvest. Once again wheat was the shining star amidst the heavy rains with canola and barley yields taking a little hit. At the end of it all, gross margins will be above average once again and we`re set to weather the storm in 2014, whatever may come.This is our 46th and final issue and covers some the year`s favorite stories and innovations. We`re back with Volume 9 of Beyond Agronomy News in the New Year and we hope you'll join us! Have a wonderful Christmas and thank you for your continued support. I wish you all a tremendous 2014!
Photo: Steve, Vanessa, Ava, Wyatt, Devin Larocque. Photo credit: White Fire Photography
Pushing wheat yields with split apps of nitrogen & fungicide
One + One = Three times the yield
I had the pleasure of taking in Peter Johnson's presentation on breaking the wheat yield barrier at FarmTech recently. WheatPete is his Twitter handle and he is Ontario's provincial wheat specialist and an entertaining speaker. He discussed the importance of pushing wheat yields through proper seeding depth, residue management, seed treatment and multiple applications of nitrogen and fungicide. On farm-scale trials in Ontario they were able to achieve a winter wheat yield of 188 bu/ac! Today, we'll focus on the use of multiple fungicides and nitrogen applications, a technique long used by the European's and record setting Kiwi's.Fungicides
As we all know, fungicides play a significant role in managing disease but they also have the ability to delay senescence, which keeps plants healthier and alive longer. Fungicides do this by altering the microflora on plants that normally play a role in leaf senescence or retard the breakdown of chlorophyll biochemically. The end result is a plant that is able to utilize additional inputs like nitrogen later in the growing season. In New Zealand I discovered that every day you delay natural senescence you add 250 kg/ha to yield in wheat. For the imperial folks that's 3.7 bu/ac per day!
In order to generate a long lasting stay green effect, fungicides should be applied at two stages, flag leaf and flowering. The flag leaf application provides protection from leaf disease and the application at flowering not only protects against head diseases but also helps delay senescence at a time when plants are aging more quickly and more prone to dying off.
Now to deflate the excitement about fungicides somewhat, Peter Johnson's research found an average 7% yield increase in winter wheat whether applied at flag or at flag plus flowering. It's still impressive and his research increased wheat yields from 93 bu/ac to 99 bu/ac. However, the real magic happened when he combined the stay green effects from multiple fungicides with split applications of nitrogen.
Nitrogen
The list of research explaining the benefits of split applications of nitrogen is long. We know that delaying nitrogen timing avoids excessive vegetative growth, reduces nitrogen immobilization and allows nitrogen to become available during the critical reproductive phase. In Peter Johnson's research, he found an average 7% yield increase when split applying UAN 28-0-0 with streamer nozzles at nitrogen rates up to 150 lbs N/ac without using fungicides.
I won't go into detail about specific strategies on split applying nitrogen but I will include an excellent summary from fellow Nuffield Scholar Richard Heath from Australia [http://www.nuffield.com.au/report/2000-05/richard-heath-2002-report.pdf]. Richard summarizes the split app strategies used in England, US, Canada and Australia. (Beginning on page 7.)
Fungicides + Nitrogen
So, if you add a 7% yield increase from fungicides with a 7% yield increase from split applying nitrogen, you should see a 14% yield increase right? No, actually. When you combine multiple fungicides with split apps of nitrogen the yield increase becomes more like 20%! As Peter explains, one plus one does not equal two, it equals three. Combining the two strategies is when the magic happens.
The chart above outlines the results of Peter's research from 2008-2010. Following the numbers marked in red, you can see no fungicide and 90 lbs N achieved 93 bu/ac. The addition of 30 lbs of N generated a yield of 105.1 bu/ac. Adding two fungicides plus 150 lbs of N produced a total of 111.1 bu/ac. In 2009 the same 150 N plus two fungicides produced 9 bu/ac more than the same treatment with only one fungicide. Let's run the numbers to make some sense of the risk reward offered with two fungicides and split applications of nitrogen.
I won't get tied up with nitrogen rates here. I've done the Steve's quick math and can tell you that even the 150 lbsN/ac with two fungicides netted the highest margin but by a small amount. Okay, here goes.
Steve's quick math: Wheat $8.00 bu, $0.65 lb N
90N: $744.00/ac - $58.5 N/ac = $685.50/ac
120N + 1 Fungicide: 105.1 bu/ac x $8.00/bu – $78.00 ac/N - $10 Fungicide = $752.80/ac
150N + 2 Fungicides: 111.1 bu/ac x $8.00/bu – $97.50 ac/N - $20 Fungicide = $760.00/ac
The key is to remember that in order to maximize the gains of split applications of nitrogen, the plant must be kept healthy to generate the yield benefit. A plant that is dying off prematurely does not have the photosynthetic capacity to utilize the additional nitrogen. Most split application nitrogen trials have never looked at the combination of fungicides with nitrogen. The same applies with multiple fungicides; they are never in conjunction with additional nitrogen to realize the benefit of the two systems together. So, the next time you're pushing high N rates in wheat, remember to focus on keeping the plants healthy. Only then will you realize the full potential of either input. Perhaps this information will help you take yields to the next level. Well done, Pete. SL
Research results of nitrogen and fungicide on wheat by Peter Johnson, 2008-2010. Special mention to Canadvance, Grain Farmers of Ontario, and Dr. David Hooker.
Controlling soil temperature with inter-row sowing
I was looking into the effects of temperature on wheat yield and came across some great research by Ag Canada in my own backyard near Three Hills, AB. The research measured the effects of soil temperature on wheat yield in no-till versus conventional tillage and the results were very surprising. Standing residue and soil cover during grain fill can seriously improve wheat yields in most years.The results showed that by reducing soil temperature during the grain fill stage, increased aboveground biomass between 33-160% and wheat yield by 18-147% except in one year when heat and moisture stress were limited. The take home from the research showed that soil temperature had a greater impact on wheat yield than above ground plant temperature. In fact when soil temperature was heated to 35C for a given time, yields in wheat dropped by 60%. The same plants exposed to 35C temperatures above ground only suffered a 48% yield loss.
The research also revealed that every 1C soil temperature above 20C during grain fill dropped grain weights in wheat by 3%. So, for example, if you're daytime high and low was 30C and 15C respectively, your average temperature would be 22.5C, which is 2.5C above the critical level. That works out to a 7.5% reduction in grain weight. On a 55 bu/ac wheat crop that works out to a 4 bu/ac loss or $33.00/ac at today's wheat prices.
If you look at the chart above it shows soil temperature readings across five weather stations from Lethbridge (purple), Morrin (yellow), St Albert (green), Dapp (blue) and Fairview (red) from June 30 to Sept 1, 2012. Most of the province had excellent rainfall, which kept ground temperatures cool except for the south. You can see the Lethbridge average is a few degrees above 20C throughout grain fill. According to the research, grain weights in this area would have dropped 9% from hot soil temperatures. A little Steve's quick math will tell you that's $30 to $40/ac in lost revenue for those without proper residue cover.
In Western Canada, we rarely think about heat causing a concern except perhaps during flowering. Even fewer would think temperatures between 20C and 30C could affect wheat yield. The reality is that poor soil cover, seeding on a diagonal and exposing soil, 10 to 12-inch row spacing or SBU's below 40% could easily put soil temperatures in this critical range during grain fill. Our black soils are heat magnets and without residue cover or standing stubble soil temperatures can rise well above 20C during grain fill.
The solution to managing soil temperature is simple. Instead of relying on combines to provide even residue spread (which they don't), or heavy harrows to move straw (which they struggle with), inter-row seeding is the answer. Having the area between the rows filled with standing stubble is a great way to reflect light and reduce soil temperature. As you can see in the photo above, the chickpeas are growing between last years stubble. The stubble acts as an insulator and reflects heat. It allows you to cut taller and reduce the amount of residue on the surface so it doesn't impact germination and emergence, which is a win-win. Inter-row seeding has worked very well on our farm. Reducing soil temperatures during grain fill is just another benefit everyone should be taking advantage of. There could be $30 to $40/ac in it for your time. SL
Research:
Chart: Alberta Climactic Centre: Soil temperatures down to 20cm.
Photo: Inter-row sown chickpeas. Source Andrew Newall, Horsham, Vic
The nitty gritty on 178 bu/ac wheat
How to bring a combine to its knees in New Zealand
I had the opportunity to jump in the combine with Craige Mackenzie near Methven, New Zealand as he harvested the biggest spring wheat crop I've ever seen. Walking into the field I grabbed a head to do a kernel count. Sixty kernels per head, double what we produce in Western Canada. The yield monitor was hitting up to 208 bu/ac with a final average of 178 bu/ac on 80 acres. Jaw dropping!Agronomy geek that I am, I asked Craige the details on his incredible spring wheat yield and he kindly obliged:
Agronomy for 178 bu/ac (12.5 T/ha)
Previous crop: Ryegrass seed Soil type: Silty loam
Rainfall & Irrigation: 380 mm + 120 mm (20")
Field prep: Plowed, cultivated twice and rolled prior to sowing
Planted: September 7th, 2012 with Sunflower double disk drill, 7.5" row spacing
Fertilizer pre-plant: 90 lb/ac urea broadcast applied 225 lb/ac of 0N-5P-15K-14S-13Ca applied pre-plant, broadcasted and incorporated
Variety: Morph
Seeding rate: 107 lb/ac aiming for 20 plants M2 Plants stand: 40 heads ft2
Post seed: 20 days, Firebird 140 ml/ac, 240 ml/ac Starane Extra
GS 30: Applied PGR, Cycocel 800 ml/ac + Opus 120 ml/ac
GS 31: 110 lb/ac of urea
Flag leaf minus 1: 110 lb/ac urea which was 12 days later than first app
Flag leaf: Commett (strob) 160 ml/ac + Opus Ultimate (Tria) 160 ml/ac
Boot stage: 135 lb/ac urea Flowering: Commett 160 ml/ac + Folicur 160 ml/ha + Seguris Flexi 500 ml/ac
Total N: 205 lbs/N/ac
Harvested March 2nd, 2013 or 180 days
Notes: The field was under variable rate irrigation and the pre-plant fertilizer was variable rate applied.
Cost of Inputs: $1,000/ha NZ
Gross margin: 12 T/ha x $450/T = $4,500/ha
Net margin: $4,400/ha or $1,780/ac NZ
Achieving 178 bu/ac hard red spring wheat is incredible and gives me the confidence to know we can push a lot higher than we think. We can learn a lot about the timing of the inputs to achieve these types of yields from top producers like Craige and tailor them to our own context. What interests me most is the combination of multiple fungicides along with multiple nitrogen application timings. The nitrogen applications are applied to match peak demand periods to generate higher uptake efficiency. The use of multiple fungicides helps delay senescence, which keeps the plants greener, longer so it able to utilize the additional nitrogen.
You can see the margins are excellent at today's prices even with an intensive input system. I believe we really need to review how we apply nitrogen and how we can improve uptake efficiency. Matching nitrogen demand in combination with maintaining a healthy plant is key to improving yields. To apply split applications of nitrogen alone or fungicide alone is futile. Applying them together is where the magic happens. After visiting with Craige, I'm itching to get started. SL
What a rush! Harvesting an average yield of 178bu/ac at Craige and Roz Mackenzie's, near Methven, NZ. Photo S. Larocque
Valmar air cart attachment improves metering
Metering small-sized products out of today's air carts can be a real challenge. When calibrating small seeds like canola or fine products like inoculant and micronutrients, it's easy to be 15 to 25% off the mark. If you have a John Deere, CNH or Bourgault air tank you likely know what I'm talking about. It's hard to believe that for a price tag of $90,000 to $150,000, we're satisfied with 80% accuracy at best. Well, Doug Clemens from Mossleigh, AB wasn't satisfied and solved his metering problem by mounting a Valmar to his JD 1910 air cart.Doug made a number of modifications to mount the Valmar to the front of the air cart. Take a look at the photo gallery under the link below called Doug's modifications. You'll see in the photo gallery that he built the frame to mount the Valmar, mounted a drive shaft assembly including a revolution counter, and added hydraulics to run the fan. The product delivery lines out of the Valmar tie directly into the base of the seed towers, so they enter into the air stream just before the hit the manifold.
The cost to mount the Valmar all in for Doug was around $8,500.00 which includes $7,000.00 for the Valmar, $300.00 for shafts, sprockets and bearings, $300.00 for the revolution counter assembly and $500.00 for hydraulic hoses and fittings. The Valmar kit doesn't come bolt-on ready like it shows on the website so be ready to MacGyver a bit to fit it to your air cart.
There's nothing worse than calibrating an air drill only to use an arbitrary calibration number or application rate that happens to work out with your acres per fill. With today's canola seed prices, being 15% high on your seeding rate because of inaccurate metering adds another $8.00 acre to your input costs. At any scale that is a lot of money and the return on your $8,500 investment would be fairly quick. A big thanks to Doug for walking us through this set up. SL
Valmar Air Seeder Mount
Doug's modifications
Pictured above: Ipsum lorum, Dell naga photicia by Pieter Brown
Variable rate plant growth regulators
Thinking outside the box
I've been using plant growth regulators for the last three years to try and get a handle on how they perform in our system. Our high yield wheat and barley trials sponsored by ACIDF have given us some valuable knowledge. I'm now at the point where I can see variable rate PGR's being a better fit than flat rate given the variability in our fields. Unfortunately, there is very little data on VR PGR's outside of cotton in the US. The only one I know using this strategy in cereals is fellow Nuffield Scholar Craige Mackenzie from Methven, New Zealand.Craige shared some of his strategies for adjusting PGR rates across zones. He's in the early stages but seeing some positive results to the tune of 15% increases in ryegrass seed yield and 7% increases in wheat with an overall reduction in PGR use and more even maturity. Here are some comments from Craige on his approach to VR PGR's.
1) Farmers/agronomists need to be in the field early on to take plant stand density counts, tiller counts and conduct a mineral N test if possible to determine N availability. This will determine the need for PGR's and will help in the decision making process to decide whether you can drive yield in those areas and keep the plants standing to intercept the full amount of light.
2) You need to take a pragmatic view of PGR's. I use zone maps based on soil texture and elevation. I know the approximate productivity level inside each zone and which zones lodge on a regular basis. From there, the best way to predict lodging potential is to measure biomass using a GreenSeeker/ Crop sensors in the different zones right before you apply a PGR. We now use a handheld GreenSeeker to measure NDVI values in each zone by popping into the field and taking real time measurements.
3) Next, we look at NDVI readings (0.1 low to 1.0 high) and if an area has an NDVI of .7 and this is because of biomass and not nitrogen then it will get 2.8 L/ha of Moddus. An NDVI reading of 0.6 might get 1.4 L/ha and a reading of 0.5 might get 0.8 L/ha of Moddus. This would be an example of a strategy used in ryegrass seed production.
4) The best way to assess how much to apply to each zone is to look at each zone as different fields and make the decision based on that. From there, deciding how much PGR to apply in each zone becomes clearer. You can massage the rates later to make sure your applying equal to or below a standard blanket application.
6) In cereals, we would typically apply 2 L/ha of Cycocel as a blanket rate and mix in 200 ml/ha of Moddus as a top up. It makes it a bit tricky with 2 products but it still works out to be proportional to the different zones. We would also make the decision to run with Cyclocel as a blanket rate at GS 30 and then come back with a VRA of Moddus based on a GreenSeeker map. You have until GS 32 but I believe what really makes it work is to hit GS30, but you will know your situation best.
7) What makes the decisions really easy now is the handheld GreenSeeker, which allows you to measure NDVI real time in select spots inside your zones. The hand held GreenSeeker has a different camera and therefore gives you a slightly different number than the RT200 boom mounted sensors. If the readings are between 0.65 and 0.75 the numbers don't vary much between the RT200 and hand held. Outside of that, you must use a calculation factor of 1.06 then the number will be useful for either an algorithm of just making recommendations. For example, if the hand held is reading 0.55, multiply it by 1.06 = 0.583 to bring it to an RT200 equivalent.
The end result for Craige has been a more uniform crop, an increase in yield and a reduction in PGR volume. A simple walk into the field to ground truth zones with a hand held GreenSeeker provides a simple way to assess lodging risk and allow you to adjust PGR rates accordingly. It also forces you to walk into the field to ground truth your zones which helps fine tune your observation skills. I think Craige is really on to something and I appreciate his insight's given the minute amount of research in this area. VR PGR's makes a lot of sense in a semi-arid climate where PGR's allow us to push the high yielding areas even further.
Side dressing nitrogen in narrow row crops
Improving nitrogen use efficiency
In an effort to improve nitrogen use efficiency, top dressing liquid nitrogen has become very popular. Applying all the nitrogen needs at seeding works, but it leads to lodging, excessive straw, N losses in wet areas and leaching in lighter soils. Top dressing nitrogen through streamer nozzles (6 stream or 4 stream) using UAN (28-0-0) works really well but only when followed by rain to take the product to the roots. I believed there had to be a way to avoid the losses that come with applying nitrogen on the surface and the reliance on rainfall to generate a response. Well, there is indeed a method to do just that. We recently brought together a concept used in row crop corn called side dressing nitrogen and tailored the technique to our CTF system on 12-inch row wheat.Side dressing nitrogen is a technique used in the corn-belt where producers use coulter s to inject nitrogen (UAN or NH3) beside each corn row. Applying nitrogen closer to peak demand reduces the risk of loss, increases yield and ensures nitrogen is available just prior to peak demand and without the rain requirement. Mitch and I purchased a FAST 8100 60-foot toolbar with 20-inch coulters spaced every 24 inches and a 1,800 gallon tank. The axle spacing is 120 inches or 10 feet, which matches our tram lines and other implements. We applied liquid nitrogen (28-0-0) between two rows every two feet like a mid-row band concept.
See the toolbar in action on early flag leaf wheat here.
This year we trialed 60 acres in two wheat fields applying 20 gal/ac (60 N/ac) at 7 mph, 3 inches deep at early flag leaf. We would have preferred to apply the nitrogen a little earlier at GS 31 or the start of stem elongation but the unassembled toolbar was dropped in our lap in early June. It was everything we could do to get it assembled (and slightly modified) before the application window closed. The optimal timing to apply nitrogen begins at stem elongation and ends around GS32 if yield is the goal. Nitrogen applied after flag leaf will be directed toward protein. With the right protein premiums, side dressing may be a great fit to apply nitrogen late in the season without crop damage.
The cost of the 60-foot toolbar was $70,000, including a 1,800 gallon tank and 30 coulter units. When you compare the cost of streamer nozzles at about $20.00 a piece or $1,500 to fit a 120-foot boom it sounds ridiculously expensive. That said, a 3,000 acre farm top dressing 30 lbs/N/ac with no rain after application may see little to no response. At $0.70 lb/N or $21.00 ac, that's $63,000.00 in nitrogen laying on the surface doing little to no good. The toolbar would almost be paid for in that scenario. Then factor in the yield loss from poor performance or the yield gain from proper nitrogen placement with the toolbar and the side dress unit begins to make sense.
For those who don't have a CTF system, the toolbar will still work provided you have nailed down inter-row seeding and have RTK guidance. The 60-foot toolbar only requires a 150 hp tractor to pull the unit and has little draft. You can run duals to reduce compaction and apply nitrogen at 5-leaf, 2 tiller when the crop can still bounce back from wheel traffic. If you upgrade to the 2,400 gallon tank you can side dress 240 ac/fill with one man and one trailer. Most top dress application rates are around 10 gal/ac or 30 lbs/N/ac. At 7-10 mph on 60-foot you're running roughly 60 acre per hour. That's 4 hours between fills so you can get some work done in a day.
Field notes:
Always measure width! Toolbar was actually 58 feet wide not 60 feet wide so we needed to attach extensions to bring it out to 59 feet wide. One-foot of underlap on each side gave us a two-foot guess row to match our two-foot spacing on the coulters. Gauge wheels, 8-inches wide ride perfectly between the 12-inch rows and don't trample crop. Gauge wheels ride nicely on tram lines and entire unit holds firm on tram lines with very little movement side to side. A 30-foot drill with offset hitch makes it difficult to space coulters evenly on 60-foot toolbar because you have two different patterns on 60 ft. Travelling south on north seeded swath forces two gauge wheels to ride on crop which is not ideal. We will travel north on two swaths and south on two swaths to match the coulter spacing and gauge wheels so they ride between the rows on every pass.
At the end of the day, it's CTF and inter-row seeding that really makes this system perform. The ability to apply nitrogen at any stage without damaging the crop swings open the doors of opportunity. Now we're thinking about spacing nozzles on 12-inch spacing to apply fungicides on top of the rows with 80 degree nozzles (Thank you, Mr. Ruwoldt). We could apply herbicides between the rows to reduce herbicide application on our crops which causes undue stress. We could sow cover crops in-season while side dressing nitrogen and do two things at once. The possibilities are endless. I'd say we've only just begun with precision ag! SL
Photo: Our Fast 8100 toolbar side dressing wheat at 7mph. S. Larocque
Correcting drainage problems
Gold Digger tile plow
There are thousands of acres of cropland that suffer from poor drainage each year. Water ponding with nowhere to escape and high water tables cause significant yield loss. Aside from yield loss, the excessive overlap, lodging and time spent going around these areas is very costly. One unique solution to correct drainage problems is tile plowing like the one you see here. Craig Shaw at Lacombe and Mike Sulzle laid over 10,000 ft of tile this spring with the Gold Digger tile plow. I caught up with them to see a demo a few weeks back and went through some of the finer points on the use of this plow.Video of the tile plow in action
Top twenty reasons to tile plow
The Gold Digger tile plow is made by a company called Soil-Max out of Brazil, Indiana and has distributers in Ontario, Manitoba and Alberta. The pull-type tile plow has a maximum working depth of 6.5 feet and requires 400+ horsepower to pull. The limiting factor is usually traction, not horsepower to pull these units. You can purchase tile boots in 4, 6, 8 and 10-inch sizes, giving the ability to install 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 10-inch pipe.
The cost of the tile plow is roughly $30,000. Then you add the Ag Leader monitor, Intellislope software and stringer trailer to carry the tile for another $20,000. Next, you have to run RTK guidance so add another $20,000 for a total of $70,000. The fabric-socked tile costs roughly $0.75 per foot for 4-inch tile, relatively inexpensive. The socked tile is recommended for sandier soils to avoid plugging in the future. Tile without socks is cheaper still. The 6-inch socked tile costs $1.50 per foot and is normally used for main lines while the 4-inch lines are normally run into the 6-inch main lines.
The tile installation is a relatively simple process. You survey the area you want to tile by hitting the start button on survey mode. Then, you drive across the area you want to drain (with the plow out of the groundf). The Intellislope software calculates the optimim slope for proper drainage automatically and you begin tiling where you finished the survey. A small excavator is a handy tool to dig holes at the starting point of your drain to drop the plow into. The travel speed is roughly 1 to 1.5 mph but even at that speed you can lay 8,000 feet of tile an hour non-stop. Craig and Mike laid tile in selective areas that had shorter runs, which added some time in surveying and installation.
Now, after choking on the $70,000 cost, we need to do a little Steve's quick math to see how quickly you could generate an ROI with this unit. The beauty of the tile plow is that it can be shared with neighbors or sold within a year or two to recoup most of your investment. Here we go:
Steve's quick math
Cost of tile plow: $70,000 (plow) plus $20,000 (tile) = $90,000
Inputs: $200.00/ac, seed, fert, chemical
Lost revenue from drowned areas: $400ac
Total lost revenue $600.00/ac
Total acres needed to reclaim for ROI: 150 acres
In this example, you could generate an ROI within one year if you could bring 150 acres back into production. Cost sharing the plow with a neighbor or selling for 30% less when you're done plowing may only take 60 acres to generate an ROI in one year. You can amortize the cost anyway you like but the benefits are quick and real. Often you'll have water running out of the tile before you're finished laying it. That's how quickly it works.
For those who struggle with excess moisture in areas across the farm, you may want to look into the Gold Digger tile plow. I was very impressed with the simplicity of the unit and how well it works. It may be a great reclamation tool on less expensive, low-lying land. It's also the best way to bring land you already own into production. With land rents and land prices so high and new land hard to come by, I think reclaiming land with tile drainage is the next big step to increase production. Thanks to Craig and Mike for sharing their thoughts. Much appreciated. SL
For more on the Gold Digger Tile Plow go here
Photo: Craig Shaw's Gold Digger tile plow. Source: Steve Larocque
Vacuum planter vs. disk drill in field peas
Improved standabiity
In an effort to generate optimum yields in field peas field trails have begun comparing air disk drills versus vacuum planters. With large seeds and seeding rates above 200 lbs/ac, air distribution systems struggle to place seed evenly down each furrow. This leads to gaps, bunches and uneven densities across each furrow. In 2012 James Jackson from Jarvie, AB did a side-by-side trial comparing his JD 1870 Conservapak drill to a JD 7200 MaxEmerge vacuum planter. In 2013 James is comparing his JD 1895 disk drill to the 7200 MaxEmerge planter and this time, comparing the same row spacing.In 2012, James planted the green pea variety Cooper with the JD 1870 ConservaPak drill on 12-inch spacing versus the JD 7200 MaxEmerge planter on 15-inch spacing.
The initial results from 2012:
Conservapak: 56 bu/ac; 88 plants m-2; 101 days to maturity; 6.75 standability JD MaxEmerge: 53 bu/ac; 68 plants m-2; 103 days to maturity; 4.5 standability Note: yield difference was not significant.
The results from 2012 show a significant advantage in reduced lodging with the MaxEmerge planter on 15-inch row spacing. The lodging ratings are given between 0 and 10 with 0 being totally erect and 10 totally flat. Standability improved by 50% on the MaxEmerge 15-inch planter side compared to the Conservapak on 12-inch spacing. Unfortunately, the plant stand density was 30% lower on the MaxEmerge side, which likely led to the small reduction in yield. The difference in plant stand density was said to be a calibration error, not a seedling mortality issue. In 2013, James is comparing his JD 1895 disk drill on 10-inch spacing to the JD MaxEmerge planter on 10-inch spacing to get a true comparison of the two systems.
We know air delivery systems struggle to distribute seed evenly across the drill and within each furrow. The size and uniformity of field pea seed make them an ideal candidate for vacuum planters and seed singulation. The photo above says it all with a clumped row of peas on top with the JD 1895 single disk and singulated seed spaced every three inches on the planter side shown in the photo below. If we could generate high yielding peas with excellent standability and with that harvestability, we'd have a winning combination. Food for thought. SL
PGR trials in peas show big responses
Chlormequat on CDC Meadow peas
In my territory, pulse crops are not high on the priority list for crop rotations due to the reputation of poor harvestability and rotor crushing rocks. With this in mind, we decided to apply a plant growth regulator at a cut rate on CDC Meadow peas and crossed our fingers for improved standability. The initial results show serious potential!The peas were planted May 6th at 10 plants ft/2 (200 lbs/ac) with a double rate of TagTeam inoculant. Headline fungicide (160 ml/ac) was applied with Cycocel Extra (460 g/L) at 250 ml/ac at early flower on the treatment side with straight Headline fungicide on the rest of the field. The in-season observations showed up to a 10-inch difference in plant height and a slight improvement in lodging. The check was inter-row seeded into 14-inch wheat stubble so it was standing very well. The bottom photo you see here shows the peas standing erect in an 80+ bu/ac area of the field.
Check: 71 bu/ac with yields reaching up to 85 bu/ac
PGR: 80 bu/ac with yields reaching up to 95 bu/ac
Cost: $11.60/ac
Return: $80.00/ac
The 15% yield response was more than I expected and was not due to improved harvestability. The 250 ml/ac of chlormequat combined with Headline at early flower shortened the vines but seem to have improved moisture and nutrient use efficiency. For a first attempt and a wild guess on rate and timing, I think we might be on to something here. The next step will be more replicated trials and a request for companies like Engage Agro to seek registration. If we can boost pea yields by 15% and maintain standability, we'll see a greater adoption of field peas in Western Canada. SL
Photo: CDC Meadow peas standing tall after chlormequat application but yield boost did not come from improved harvestability. Jeff Skytt, Hi Heat Ltd.
Triumph with side dress nitrogen toolbar
A successful first attempt at boosting yield and protein with split N
We know that spit applications of nitrogen are a great way to boost yields, protein and harvestability by matching nitrogen demands throughout the growing season. I've heard wild tales of 30% yield increases in wheat with top dressing liquid nitrogen and each time rain chased the sprayer out of the field. I wanted to know how to capture a positive response without sacrificing nitrogen use efficiency by laying it on the surface and counting on rain that may never come.So, this summer, we took the concept of side dressing nitrogen in corn and applied it to our 12-inch wide narrow row wheat. See video of our 60-foot, FAST 8100 side dress toolbar in action on flag leaf wheat here. The toolbar is set up with 20-inch coulters on 24-inch spacing which fertilizes two rows every two feet like a mid-row banding concept. With CTF, the accuracy of the system allows us to run coulters between the rows very consistently with minimal crop damage. The liquid UAN 28-0-0 is placed 3 inches below the surface, right into moisture where roots have immediate access.
We set up three 40-acre side dress nitrogen trials in two wheat fields; two on a 160-acre field of hailed out pea stubble with 5-6% organic matter and one on a 230-acre field of canola stubble with 3.5 to 4% organic matter, both have 50 to 60% clay soil and pH between 6 and 7. The UAN was side dressed at flag leaf on one field and heads emerged on the other. Here are the details:
Pea Stubble Check
Variety: PR 5700 CPS wheat
Spring Fert: 90-27-0-0 (15 P as 11-52-0-0 and 12 P as 6-22-4)
Yield: 96 bu/ac
Protein: 12.1
Moisture: 14.8%
Trial 1
Spring Fert: 90-27-0-0 (15 P as 11-52-0-0 and 12 P as 6-22-4)
Side dress: 60 lbs/N using liquid 28-0-0 at flag leaf
Yield: 120 bu/ac
Protein: 12.2%,
Moisture: 15.0%,
Trial 2
Spring Fert: 15-17-0-0 (5 P as 11-52-0-0 and 12 P as 6-22-4)
Side dress: 60 lbs/N using liquid 28-0-0 at flag leaf
Yield: 86 bu/ac
Protein: 12.0%
Moisture: 15.0%
Canola Stubble Check
Variety: PR 5700 CPS wheat
Spring Fert: 100-27-0-0 (15 P as 11-52-0-0 and 12 P as 6-22-4)
Yield: 78 bu/ac
Protein: 10.5
Moisture: 12.5%
Trial 3
Spring Fert: 100-27-0-0 (15 P as 11-52-0-0 and 12 P as 6-22-4)
Side dress: 60 lbs/N using liquid 28-0-0 at heads emerged
Yield: 80 bu/ac
Protein: 12.2%,
Moisture: 10.5%,
Based on our results, we were amazed to see a 25% yield increase on the pea stubble while maintaining 12.2% protein. There was no delay in maturity with the added nitrogen as indicated by no change grain moisture content. The straw on the side dress trial did stay green longer than the check but that was rectified with pre-harvest glyphosate. The N removed in the grain worked out to 34 lbs/N/ac yet we applied 60 lbs/N/ac as a side dress. I would have expected a higher nitrogen use efficiency than 50% but we were roughly 10 days late in applying the nitrogen. I would prefer to have applied N at the ideal timing of GS 30-32 which is the beginning of stem elongation and not at flag leaf (GS39). Perhaps we drove yields higher in the tillers from the late N application but missed the main stems which contribute 50% towards final yield.
The 15N at seeding with 60N side dressed at flag leaf still yielded well at 86 bu/ac, which is a 10% decrease in yield over the check. This wasn't a true side by side because I had to sacrifice some phosphorus by cutting back the 90-15-0-0 blend to get my 15 lbs/N starter. Oddly enough, there wasn't any visual difference in plant height up until flag leaf but you could see disease like septoria and stripe rust come in early. What's interesting and encouraging is that we applied just 15 lbs/N at seeding and followed up with 60 N as a side dress late at flag leaf and still ended up with an 86 bu/ac wheat yield. That was an eye opener! The only data I have handy for split apps of N in spring wheat is from North Dakota back in 2002. They found a 23% yield increase with a 50/50 split N app using UAN at the 2nd node stage under irrigation. Source The dryland sites using 50/50 split N at seeding and at 2nd node stage saw a 5% yield decrease which tells you the importance of placing nitrogen in the ground and not relying on rainfall to wash the nitrogen into the root zone.
The last trial we had on canola stubble showed little difference in yield between the check and side dressed nitrogen. Granted, the wheat was at GS52 so heads were emerged but flowering had not begun when we applied the nitrogen. The difference showed up in the protein with a 1.7% increase in the side dress N side with a small drop in grain moisture content. The protein I understand increasing with late nitrogen but a drop in moisture content was interesting. We actually sped up maturity by laying on another 60 lbs/N for a total of 160 N/ac. We didn't delay maturity like most would think at such a high nitrogen rate.
This year's trials were very promising. The fact we saw a 25% yield increase on pea stubble with late nitrogen timing is amazing for a first trial run. What's encouraging is that we achieved yield responses with our side dress system that are comparable to results found under irrigation like that found in North Dakota on spring wheat source. My vision from the start was to create a system where timely rainfall was not required. If we're going to spend $30 to $40 an acre on nitrogen in-season we better make it count. With CTF, side dressing nitrogen between the rows is simple and proves we can apply at any growth stage in wheat up to flowering. There is potential to make radical improvements in nitrogen use efficiency by supplying nitrogen in stages. The side dress concept needs more trial work but in this first season, we've gained yield, protein and did it without delaying maturity. Win-win-win. SL
Photo: Our FAST 8100 side dress toolbar in flag leaf wheat.
Plant growth regulators in barley
Wise use & risky tools
I've been working with PGR's in feed and malt barley production for the last four years. Out of frustration I started to use PGR's because no matter what variety, fertility strategy or area I was in, applying nitrogen rates above 100 lbs/ac usually resulted in lodged barley and would void any gains we made through intensive agronomy. Even with the perceived risks of yield loss from PGR's like Ethrel (ethephon) we decided to push ahead anyway. Four years, two PGR's and various application rates and timing later I've come to some conclusions that will help allow malt and feed barley growers attain higher yields in our semi-arid climate.- First, the two PGR's I've been working with are Ethrel (ethephon) and Cycocel Extra (chlormequat). Ethrel is registered on barley but Cycocel Extra is not. From experience, the Cycocel Extra alone is not enough to reduce height and lodging and requires a second PGR application like Ethrel to follow up. For this reason, I'm putting Cycocel Extra on the back burner in barley and focusing on Ethrel. Here are the take home lessons I've learned:
- The label rate of Ethrel is 400 ml/ac, which is nuclear in my opinion and not suitable for our area. Perhaps under irrigation, heavy seeding rates, high nitrogen rates and a very lodge prone variety would I ever consider the 400 ml/ac rate.
- I've used the 333 ml/ac, 300 ml/ac and 250 ml/ac rate of Ethrel on both feed and malt barley. The 300-333 ml/ac rate will shorten crop height and reduce lodging but will open up the canopy and encourage late tillering. Rainfall, sunlight and an open canopy encourage late tillering.
- I've had success with the 250 ml/ac rate of Ethrel which reduces lodging but doesn't shorten crop height much and allow sunlight into the canopy. Late tillering is less likely with the 250 ml/ac rate so more suitable to a malt barley scenario.
- In almost all cases, a PGR like Ethrel leads to a decrease in protein. The PGR improves nitrogen use efficiency so the added nitrogen goes into yield not protein.
- The areas I would be very cautious using Ethrel are those that have temperatures in high 20's and low 30's in late June-July with windy days. Hot temperature, windy days can be very stressful to barley after an application of Ethrel. The active ingredient, ethephon, increases the resistance of water flow through plant tissue, so a hot, windy day with high crop water demand can stress plants and reduce yield.
- Ethrel requires 7 days to become activated in the plant and is not effective at reducing lodging before this time period. Ethrel also acts as a PGR by releasing ethylene in the plant tissues, which reduces cell elongation and crop height.
- Ethrel will delay heading by 3 to 5 days depending on temperature and application rate. Cooler days with high application rates can delay head emergence up to 5 days in my experience. Sounds bad but a lodged crop will take even longer to mature.
- The timing of the Ethrel is absolutely critical for the PGR to be effective and not cause crop injury. Apply Ethrel at late flag leaf or just prior to awn emergence. You want the main stem and the tillers to be in full flag leaf stage. Application before flag can kill off tillers, application at awn emergence will reduce kernel numbers
Research on ethephon here, here and here
Photo: S. Larocque
Vacuum planter trials in canola
2013 results
In 2013, Rocky Mountain Equipment from Balzac, AB provided a number of growers with a 40-foot, 15-inch row Case 1240 vacuum planter demo unit to plant canola. The goal was to evaluate the vacuum planter as a tool to plant canola and look at optimal plant densities. The planter was also set up with a liquid starter kit where Alpine 6-22-4-0 liquid phosphorus was applied. Herman Van Genderen from Pioneer supplied 45S54 canola seed and the Alpine fertilizer.All fields were banded with N-P-K-S in the spring prior to seeding. Some were hit with a heavy harrow and some rolled to smooth the surface after banding. A seedplaced application of liquid Alpine phosphorus was applied with each trial at 3-4 gal/ac in the seed row.
Farm 1
Plants/acre bu/ac Moisture
225,000 53.1 11.0%
300,000 55.1 11.0%
375,000 55.1 10.5%
300,000 49.1 11.0% No Alpine
6 lbs/ac 53.2 10.5% Air Drill
The yield results showed a 2 bu/ac increase with the 300,000 to 375,000 plant densities (not significant). The planter saved roughly $25.00/ac in seed costs compared to the air drill but the additional pass to band fertilizer reduced that advantage. Even at 150,000 plants/acre the distribution of seed in each furrow is quite variable. True singulation has not yet been achieved. The initial results from the starter Alpine phosphorus showed a 3-5 bu/ac increase over no starter phosphorus. There was 30 lbs/ac of phosphorus applied prior to seeding.
Farm 2
Plants/acre bu/ac Moisture Emergence
150,000 55.9 8.2% 85.2%
225,000 53.1 9.0% 71.8%
300,000 49.8 8.8% 71.6%
375,000 50.1 8.7% 70.0%
5 lbs/ac 48.9 10.1% Air Drill
The 300,000 and 375,000 plants/ac treatments yielded 3-6 bu/ac less than the 150,000 and 225,000 plants per acre. Lower plant stands yielded highest. Interesting! The highest emergence rates occurred with the lowest seeding rate. There was a 7 bu/ac difference between the air drill planted at 5 lbs/ac and the vacuum planter at 150,000 plants/ac.
Farm 3
Plants/acre bu/ac Moisture
375,000 38.2 8.8%
300,000 44.0 8.1%
225,000 43.9 7.9%
150,000 45.0 7.6%
300,000 44.8 7.6% No Alpine
300,000 45.9 7.6% Field average with planter
The lowest yielding treatment with the planter had the highest plant population again at 375,000 plants/ac. There was no difference between banded phosphorus and no liquid phosphorus starter. All treatments yielded very close to each other except for the high plant population.
Discussion
In general, the vacuum planter saved $20-$25 on seed costs and maintained or added a bit of yield. The lower plant densities achieved higher yields (150,000-250,000 plants/ac) than the higher plant densities, which is the opposite of the current recommendations. The Canola Council of Canada recommends 8-12 plants/ft2, which is 350,000 to 520,000 plants/ac. The ideal plant population is likely between 250,000 and 300,000 plants/ac with a vacuum planter or 5-7 plants ft2. This gives you room for some early spring frosts, which may wipe out 30 to 50% of your stand on the odd year.
The liquid P starter kit is a must for those with low P soils or cool, dry or wet conditions where phosphorus may be limiting. Starter phosphorus is very important and with narrow openers and wider rows, adding granular phosphate with the seed would be too risky and cause toxicity issues. Liquid P has a low salt index and neutral pH so it is safe to apply with the seed.
At this time, the two pass system required to band fertilizer ahead of the planter reduces the savings you achieve with lower seeding rates. For those who already have a two-pass system you may be further ahead with a planter. In the future I still see a hybrid drill with vacuum planter technology and a one-pass system. There is no reason you can't pull an air cart behind the planter and set up mid-row banders to place N-K-S. The liquid P starter is still a good idea in my opinion.
In the beginning I was looking at used Monosem and John Deere planters with $20,000 to $40,000 price tags. I thought I could put together a unit and add it to our system economically. The Case 1240, 40-foot planter on 15-inch rows is roughly $160,000 new, which really puts pressure on the ability of this machine to provide a return on investment. At this time, we're still in the early adoption phase for planters in a direct seeding system, which means there is still tuition to pay to learn the new practice. I look forward to another year or two of trial work before we run with the concept. SL
Photo: Case 1240, Steve Larocque
Market News
This final market news of 2013 will look at the market trends over the last seven years. They provide some excellent prospective of where grain prices were and where we are today.
Canola Jan 14: The long term trend is up and the short term trend is down.
HRS Wheat: Mar 14: The long term trend is flat and the short term trend is down.
Corn Mar 14: The long term trend is up and the short term trend is down.
Soybeans: Jan 14: The long term trend is up and the short term trend is down.
Canadian $: Jan 14: The long term trend is up and the short term trend is down.
USD: Jan 14: The long term trend is up and the short term trend is down.
