March 13, 2012

Weekly Welcome

Hello Reader

As spring approaches producers are fine tuning their seeding decisions. There is plenty of talk about reducing wheat acres which may swing over to canola or maybe malt barley. Things could get interesting with wheat prices next year! What’s your bet?

I continue to hear about urea prices hitting $650 tonne by spring but I also have some clients taking home $600 urea today. It looks like phosphate, potash and sulphur will stay flat although, once again, ammonium sulphate is rumored to be short.

In this week’s newsletter, we’ll take a quick look at seeding rates and the impact of thousand kernels weights from 2012 seed. Next, we’ll consider why you should take inventory of your technology upgrades to make sure they are insured. We’ll also discuss the likelihood of hitting 220 bu/ac wheat. Last, I’ve included a call for Nuffield Scholarship applications and as always, we’ll finish up with technical grain market news.

Have a great week.

What would it take to produce 220 bu/ac wheat in Alberta?

The Guinness World Record wheat crop in New Zealand is just over 15 T/ha or 220 bu/ac. As an exercise for the mind I decided to dig a little further into what it would take to produce a 220 bu/ac wheat crop in Alberta. It might sound ludicrous but I think it's important to understand the details behind the production of a crop that size. Is it even possible in Alberta? The highest spring wheat yield I've hit with a client is 120 bu/ac with CDC Go and that was near Three Hills in 2010. Hey, we're only 110 bu/ac away from reaching the New Zealand record! Let's have some fun and run the numbers on plant populations, kernel numbers, TKW, required grain fill and the moisture necessary to produce a 220 bu/ac wheat yield.

When it comes to grain yield, it really comes down producing X amount of heads with X amount of kernels at X kernel weight per unit area. The calculation is: plants/m2 × heads/plant × kernels/head × TKW ÷ 1,000 grams ÷ 100,000 = T/ha. Based on this, I have come up with a theoretical plant stand density of 400 plants m2 (39 ft2) with an average of 32 kernels per head with a 40 gram TKW. This measurement would give us a theoretical yield potential of 15.36 T/ha or 227 bu/ac in Alberta. On the flip side of the globe I've given you a comparison of what the numbers look like for a 15 T/ha world record wheat crop in New Zealand.

Steve's quick math
Alberta
• 400 plants per m2
• Average 3 heads per plant (1 main stem + 2 tillers)
• Average 32 kernels per head
• TKW 40 grams (thousand kernel weight)
• 400 × 3 × 32 × 40 ÷ 100,000 = 15.36 T/ha (227 bu/ac)

New Zealand, Guinness World Record
• 125 plants per m2
• Average 4 heads per plant (1 main stem + 3 tillers)
• Average 60 kernels per head
• TKW 50 grams (thousand kernel weight)
• 125 × 4 × 60 × 50 ÷ 100,000 = 15.0 T/ha (222 bu/ac)

The next component to look at is the grain filling period, which begins at flowering and ends at physiological maturity. To set up a crop for a world record yield you need ample sunlight, low daily temperatures, a long grain fill period and adequate soil moisture. When we think of New Zealand, most of us know they are usually blessed with all four variables. So where do we stack up? The mean daily temperature, solar radiation (sunlight energy) and grain fill period comparing our 5-year average at Three Hills to the record setting 15T year in 2002-03 in New Zealand below:

Three Hills, AB, 5-year avg. 2006-2010
• Solar radiation: 17.3 MJ/M2/day
• Grain filling period: 45 days
• Moisture: 237 mm
• Avg. daily temp during grain fill: 14.5C

New Zealand, 2002-03
• Solar radiation: 26 MJ/M2/day
• Grain filling period: 51 days
• Moisture: 500 mm
• Avg. daily temp during grain fill: 16.5C

You can easily pick out the differences not in just moisture, but in solar radiation. New Zealand receives 50% more sunlight during the grain filling period than we do at that growth period. They say rain makes grain but in reality solar radiation is just as important when it comes to building yield. It's sunlight that turns rain into grain. Also, there's a common misconception that New Zealand enjoys a longer grain filling period, when in fact it's very close to ours at roughly 50 days. That being said, the grain filling period is highly variable from year to year and can be 30 days one year and 50 days the next in both countries.

New Zealand's 10-month growing season does allow the 500 mm of rain to be spread over a longer time frame. If you compare moisture use efficiencies we've got a long way to go to keep up. We can produce roughly 16 kg/mm/ha of wheat compared to New Zealand at 30 kg/mm/ha. If you work that back to standard units, that's 6 bu/ac/inch compared to 11.2 bu/ac/inch. With an average of 6 bu/ac/inch we would need 36 inches of rain to produce a 220 bu/ac crop, which is outrageous. In reality we should be introducing wheat genetics that provide us with 10 bu/ac/inch. There are numerous high yielding varieties that won't see registration in Canada at this time because they don't meet the quality criteria set out by the CFIA. For now that is.

Now on to the similarities and we do share a number with New Zealand that we can capitalize on. We have varieties that consistently produce 40 to 50 gram TKW's whether it's AC Superb and CDC Go or any varieties in the CPS, Durum and Extra Strong wheat class. Our average daily temperatures during grain fill are similar and we can get up to 20 inches of plant available water in the growing season, especially under irrigation. The biggest discrepancy between the two climates is solar energy and New Zealand’s ability to fill grain which tells me that's where we need to focus. If sunlight turns rain into grain then maximizing the number of grain filling days is a big key in unlocking a theoretical 220 bushel wheat yield.

In summary, this was an exercise to see what it would take to produce a 15 Tonne wheat crop. I think the take home message is the importance of the grain filling phase. We need to find new ways to maximize the number of grain filling days without risking frost at the end. Everything from starter and late-season nutrition (N, Mg, Cu), planting date, seeding rate, variety, seeding tools, fungicides, and the list goes on. I recommend we focus our attention on getting the plants to flower as soon as possible while keeping them green and healthy all the way to the end of the growing season. If mid-July is the average start date of flowering, start finding ways of getting the crop there a few days sooner each year. Is it possible? I see two-week delays in maturity from poor residue management alone every year. In the end, every day you can extend the grain fill period is one step closer to higher yields. SL

Guinness World Record Crop Summary

Photo source: Steve Larocque taken at Mike Solari's at Gore, New Zealand

Keep a close eye on your seeding rates in 2012

I been reviewing seeding rates with clients and have noticed a large variance in thousand kernel weights. The seed produced in 2011 in this area is the largest I’ve measured on record. Kernel weights are massive and even with incredible germination results, the seeding rates are high. If you’re thinking about seeding by the bushel you may be very disappointed in the results.

I’ve provided a chart showing varieties, thousand kernel weights, germination and seeding rates. Take a look at the TKW of CDC Go wheat at 47 grams. If you were to seed this variety at the standard 2 bu/ac rate, you would end up with 22 plants/ft2, which is 27% below the optimum target of 30 plants/ft2. The same applies for peas. If you were to seed peas at the standard 3 bu/ac rate you’d be 20% out.

Achieving maximum production inside such a short growing season is all about the details. Fine tuning seeding rates is one of the details that pay off big. Be sure to have your seed checked so you don’t start the year behind the eight ball. SL

Chart above: Seeding rates

Insuring technology is a priority

There has been a rapid increase in technology add-ons inside the equipment we run today. For many, it’s not hard to have $10,000 tied up in GPS unlocks and updated software programs in our displays. Mitch and I have $6,500 tied up in a Trimble FMX monitor from the cost of OmniStar, RTK and Glonass unlock codes. Unfortunately, if we were to have a fire or theft, we’d only be given replacement value on the hardware, not the unlock codes. Yesterday, I updated my insurance policy to include the value of the additional software. For $25 annually, it’s well worth it.

So, what should be listed in your policy? I came across some great comments from Michael Cline from www.precision-nerd.com. Basically, Michael states that anything with a serial number should be listed separately with its own individual values. Here’s how he breaks it down:

1. Displays
2. Receivers
3. Activations
4. RTK Equipment (radio, modem)
5. Steering Equipment (ATU, Ez-Steer, etc.)
6. Application Equipment (Rate Controllers, Ez-Boom, etc.)

The way I see it, assuming your insurance company has you completely covered is never a good thing. I have a client near Calgary whose Case 8120 combine was vandalized with the fire extinguisher which had been discharged inside the cab. The cab was ruined and the monitor and wiring had to be replaced. Had there been an RTK unlock code inside the display, he could have been on the hook for $6,500. Better to be insured for a few bucks than to be on the hook for thousands. SL