January 22, 2013

Agronomists Notes

Hello Reader,

I’ve been busy preparing for our Beyond Agronomy client meeting this Thursday and can’t wait to get the group together again. We have Aussie-Kenyan guests arriving tomorrow to visit and prepare for a keynote speech at FarmTech next week. I foresee many great conversations and a good laugh or two ahead!

First up this week, a sneak peek at the BA meeting agenda to keep you up to speed with what’s going on around here. Next, I’ll present my case for grid sampling variable rate zones and then I’ll review the research that hit 132 bu/ac wheat, 80 bu/ac canola and 212 bu/ac barley in Alberta. Lastly, I’ll update you on my app picks of the week. We’ll finish with technical grain market news.

Have a great week!

Beyond Agronomy Client Meeting

It's been awhile since our last meeting so the reunion is destined to be sweet and the ideas aplenty. Here’s a peek at some the of things we’ll be discussing on Thursday. If you have any questions, email me and I’ll send along the info I have at hand.

Cost of production Insurance with Global Ag Risk
Grain Price Discovery Mechanisms with Ag Value Group
High yield wheat and barley production, controlled traffic farming, inter-row seeding, variable rate analysis, yield mapping
Moving farms from Australia to Kenya with Stuart Barden

The case for grid sampling variable rate zones

There was a time when most agronomists used composite soil sampling to determine background nutrient levels and make fertilizer recommendations. We learned that benchmark sampling provided a more accurate measure of nutrient levels over time because the results were not blended from high and low levels across the field. Given that knowledge, why do we take a precision application like variable rate fertility and base recommendations off composite soil sampling? In my opinion, there is room for improvement.

Depending on the VR Company, zone maps are built using NDVI imagery, EM mapping or grid sampling. To test my theory on nutrient variability inside zones, we overlaid one-acre grid samples on top of NDVI and EM based zone maps and run statistical analysis. As predicted, the macro and micronutrients along with soil quality attributes like pH, organic matter and CEC have a high degree of variance. The map you see here shows a zone map with P levels over laid to show the variance in ppm/acre.

The table above shows the range of pH, OM and P that exists inside seven zones created using NDVI imagery. The range of pH, OM and P values were extracted using a lower 5% and 95% confidence level to remove outliers and provide statistical significance. As you can see in Zone 1, the OM ranges between 1.9% and 5.8% with an average of 4.15% OM. The P values in Zone 5 range from 11ppm to 51ppm with an average value of 32 ppm. In Zone 5 there are values bordering deficient at 11ppm and areas in excess at 51ppm. Now, blend Zone 5 together as a composite soil sample and its possible to end up with an average value of 32ppm depending on where the sample was taken.

So, based on the example in Zone 1, nitrogen mineralization rates from OM range between 13 and 40 lbs/N/ac inside that zone (based on a mineralization rate of 7 lbs/N for each percent of OM). This variance would cause some areas to be under fertilized and some areas over fertilized. The same applies to the range of P (phosphorus) levels in Zone 5. A composite sample would combine areas of high P with low P and come up with an average P level for that zone. Unfortunately, it too would lead to areas being under fertilized and some over fertilized.

The whole point of variable rate fertilizer is to match fertility with yield goals in each zone. If you don’t start with the right information, how can you produce a quality fertility recommendation with excellent results? My guess and my experience tell me to expect an average to slightly above average result from composite zone sampling compared to a single benchmark and no variable rate fertility. To further my point lets do a little math on the cost of composite zone versus grid sampling.

Steve’s quick math
Grid sampling: $65 sample 2 depth x 20 samples = $7.50 acre + consulting
Zone sampling: $65.00 sample 2 depth x 6 samples = $2.43 acre + consulting

Grid sampling adds another $5.00 an acre to a service that currently sells for $7.50 to $10.00 acre. I understand that cost is an issue and the most expensive component of variable rate fertility is soil sampling. However, the data has shown us that nutrients vary considerably across a field and within each zone. How much yield is lost from inaccurate fertility recommendations based on composite zone sampling? It’s time to move away from average and towards precision to make a true VR world. I look forward to your comments. SL

Sincere thanks to A&L Labs, SSG West, Point Forward Solutions, Ron-Cai and Zhiqiu from U of A for helping cover the costs of this research. I know it will yield positive results for VR in Western Canada.

205 bu/ac barley in Alberta?

The 1990s called. They want their yield back.

I was looking through some archived research from the early 1990’s that revealed impressive yield results from intensive crop management in Alberta. The research project evaluated a number of different ICM practices in wheat, barley and canola. The research sites were located in Lacombe, Calmar, Lethbridge and Vauxhaul. The project focused on high fertility, fungicides, growth regulators and high plant populations.

With higher commodity prices and new multi-peril insurance programs, I think it’s time to revisit the potential for intensive crop management once again. Seventeen years has passed since this research was published and advancements in genetics, technology and agronomy may give way to even better results.

Here is a summary of the treatments and results.

Wheat
Plant density: 315 plants/m2
Fungicide: Tilt at 200 ml/ac at flag leaf and Tilt at 200 ml/ac at ear emergence
Growth Regulator: Cerone sprayed at 400 ml/ac at booting stage
Nutrients: 146-27-54-27 + 5 lb Zn, 2 lb Mn, 2 lb B, 1 lb Cu deep banded prior to seeding. 27 lbs of P205 was seed placed.
Row spacing: 7 inches
Rotation: barley, wheat, canola
Variety: Katepwa
Yield Range: 61 bu/ac to 132.9 bu/ac

Barley
Plant density: 315 plants/m2
Fungicide: Tilt at 200 ml/ac at flag leaf and Tilt at 200 ml/ac at ear emergence
Growth Regulator: Cerone sprayed at 400 ml/ac at booting stage
Nutrients: 146-27-54-27 + 5 lb Zn, 2 lb Mn, 2 lb B, 1 lb Cu deep banded prior to seeding. 27 lbs of P205 was seed placed.
Row spacing: 7 inches
Rotation: canola, barley, wheat
Variety: Harrington, 2-row
Yield Range: 114 bu/ac to 205 bu/ac

Canola
Plant density: 7 lbs/ac
Fungicide: Benlate @ 500 g/ac
Growth Regulator: Terpal C @ 200 ml/ac at 30% bloom
Nutrients: 146-27-54-27 + 5 lb Zn, 2 lb Mn, 2 lb B, 1 lb Cu deep banded prior to seeding.â€¨27 lbs of P205 was seed placed.
Rotation: wheat, canola, barley
Variety: Westar or Pivot
Row spacing: 7 inches
Yield Range: 35.1 bu/ac to 80.1 bu/ac

The most interesting results from this study indicate that the fungicide treatment (flag and ear emergence) plus the growth regulator in barley was the highest yielding treatment with a maximum yield of 205 bu/ac. High plant populations increased wheat yields in most years but only 50% of the time in barley. The growth regulator treatments decreased wheat stem length by 10% and barley by 5% to 15%, but rarely increased yield in this study. The only significant effect on canola yields came from the high fertility rates compared to normal fertility rates.

Let me talk this through. The study had spring wheat yields rocking 132 bu/ac with an old school variety like Katepwa, which hits 98% of the check for yield in the Alberta seed guide today. The program used fungicides like Tilt, not Prosaro or Quilt. The fertility was relatively straightforward with a two-pass system. The row spacing was 7 inches wide, which according to research produces higher yields than 10 or 12-inch spacing. The genetics inside Westar canola or Pivot don’t compare with todays top hybrids and it was Harrington malt barley that rang the bell at 205 bu/ac!

How have we not advanced from 80 bu/ac canola, 205 bu/ac barley and 132 bu/ac wheat occurring seventeen years ago? We have better genetics, better fungicides, seed treatments and access to fertilizer. Even though the growth regulators rarely increased yield in this study, our recent field results show consistent yield increases in wheat and barley of 3 to 12 bu/ac. The potential is there; it’s time to start realizing it. Begin your own ICM program and start out small to manage risk and understand logistics. SL

Source: D.C. Penney, J. Helm and R.H. Mackenzie: Intensive Crop Management Systems for Dryland and Irrigated Barley, Wheat and Canola Production – Farming for the Future Project 1994.

Steve’s app picks for the week

This week we feature a handy land location finder tool for Apple and Android smart phones. These apps make it easy to find land locations across Western Canada to help you locate those remote farm sales in Saskachewan, like those with SOL as the first three digits in their postal code.

GPS Section Finder W Canada
I really like the “navigate to” function. It sends you to Google Maps and you can get directions from your current location to your land location.

Android

Apple

Prairie Locator

This app makes it simple to find land locations across Western Canada. However, it will only locate by section, not by quarter section. If you want to search by quarter section or by lat-long you have to pay $24.99 for the upgrade. The app is only available for iPhone and iPad.

Apple