Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production
|
|
- John Ramsey
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production 2009 Preliminary Research Report Dr. John Sawyer and Daniel Barker Professor and Assistant Scientist Department of Agronomy Iowa State University Introduction Previously conducted research had indicated few crop responses to sulfur (S) fertilizer application across major soil areas of Iowa (Sawyer and Barker, 2002; Sawyer et al., 2009). Recent research in northeast Iowa has documented S deficiency in alfalfa and yield increases to S application on specific areas within fields (lower organic matter, sideslope landscape position, silt loam and loam textured soils) (Lang et al., 2006). On similar soils (and coarse textured soils) in northeast Iowa where early corn growth was exhibiting strong visual S deficiencies, research has documented growth response and yield increase to S application. That research indicates S containing fertilizer products are becoming more important for crop production in that geographic area of Iowa. In conjunction with phosphorus (P) application needs when soils are deficient in available P (Sawyer et al., 2008) or P applications are made to replace harvested nutrients, coapplication of S with a P fertilizer product would enhance efficiency and consistency of the nutrient applications by meeting both fertilization requirements. The objective of this study was to evaluate the Mosaic S (MicroEssentials MES10) product [comprised of monoammonium phosphate (MAP) plus ammonium sulfate (AMS) and elemental S in equal proportions] as an S and P fertilizer source for corn production. A second objective was to provide additional data on the potential for corn response to S fertilization in Iowa. In addition to the planned objectives, a second MicroEssentials product (MESZ S-1Zn) was evaluated as a zinc (Zn) fertilizer source. Data from that product was analyzed separately from the MES10 evaluation. Materials and Methods Two sites were chosen that had potential for soil S deficiency. One site was no-till corn following soybean (several years of no-till) at the North Iowa Area Community College (NIACC), Mason City, IA on a Readlyn loam soil. This location has the same soil and crop management practices as the site used in 2008 where early S deficiency symptoms were observed on corn plants. The other site in 2009 was at a production field near Madrid, IA on Nicollet and Clarion loam soils with corn following soybean. The Madrid site was located on a sideslope landscape position with indications of previous soi erosion in that area of the field. The field was spring tilled before planting. Fertilizer treatments were broadcast applied in the spring, prior to planting at the Mason City site and at corn emergence at the Madrid site. At the Mason City site, the cooperator did not apply any fertilizer to the study area. At the Madrid site, the cooperator had
2 2 applied N (anhydrous ammonia) at 140 lb N/acre spring preplant and 180 lb K 2 O/acre spring preplant and incorporated prior to planting. The following S and P treatment combinations were used at both locations (Table 1). The exceptions were that the N rate applied to equalize N at the Madrid site was 50 lb N/acre (N applied in addition to the 140 lb N/acre applied by the cooperator) instead of the 150 lb N/acre rate normally used and no K fertilizer was applied with the plot treatments since the cooperator had applied 180 lb K 2 O/acre across the field. 1. S-CON: S control, zero S (equalize N to corn need for the rotation; add P at the highest MES product rate) 2. MES-10: 10 lb S/acre from MES product (equalize N; equalize P to highest P rate) 3. AMS-10: 10 lb S/acre from AMS (equalize N; equalize P to highest P rate) 4. SP-CON: S&P control, zero P and zero S (equalize N) 5. MES-30: 30 lb S/acre from MES product (equalize N; no additional P as this is the highest P rate) 6. AMS-30: 30 lb S/acre from AMS (equalize N; equalize P to highest P rate) 7. MAP-30: P rate used in the MES 30 lb S/acre rate applied from MAP (equalize N; apply AMS at highest S rate) This set of treatments allowed the following planned S and P application comparisons: MES vs. S&P control [5 vs. 4]; S control vs. S&P control [1 vs. 4]; MES vs. MAP [5 vs. 7]; MES vs. AMS [2&5 vs. 3&6]; S control vs. 10 lb S/acre (as AMS) [1 vs. 3]; and 10 lb S/acre vs. 30 lb S/acre (as AMS) [3 vs. 6]. An eighth treatment (MESZ-30) was the MESZ product applied at a rate to supply 30 lb S/acre, which also supplied 3 lb Zn/acre. The product rates were set by the rate of S application. Those rates were 10 and 30 lb S/acre. The P application rate was set by the highest rate of the Mosaic MES product (120 lb P 2 O 5 /acre). For correct comparisons, rates of P were equalized when required by the specific treatment with triple superphosphate. The P rate was constant at 120 lb P 2 O 5 /acre for all treatments except the S&P control where no S or P was applied. The N rate was constant at 150 lb N/acre (Mason City site) or 190 lb N/acre (Madrid site), with N added as ammonium nitrate as needed to equalize N. Potassium was applied at 60 lb K 2 O/acre as potassium chloride to all plots at the Mason City site, and no K was applied at the Madrid site since the cooperator had applied K to the field.. Treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replications at each site. Soil was collected in the spring prior to treatment application from the 0- to 6, 6- to 12, 12- to 24, and 24- to 36-inch depths in each replication. The soil samples were analyzed for extractable sulfate at all depths. Samples from the 0- to 6-inch depth will be analyzed for routine soil tests (ph, P, K, Zn, and organic matter). Due to a miscommunication with the lab, these soil samples were discarded before all analyses were completed. The sites will be re-sampled in the spring 2010 in order to obtain these routine test results. The 2009 report will be updated once those soil test results are
3 3 available. Ear leaf samples (10 leaves per plot) were collected at the R1 (silking) corn growth stage from all plots and analyzed for total S, total P, and total Zn concentration. Corn canopy normalized difference vegetative index (NDVI) and chlorophyll index (Chl) was determined at the V10 growth stage with a Crop Circle ACS-210 (Holland Scientific, Lincoln NE) optical canopy sensor. The NDVI index relates to plant canopy biomass (NDVI) and the Chl index plant canopy chlorophyll. Grain yield was determined for each plot and reported at 15.5% moisture. Results and Discussion Mason City Site Soil test results available for the Mason City site are DTPA Zn at 1.2 ppm (0-6 inch depth) and the extractable soil sulfate-s at 4, 5, 5, and 4 ppm, respectively, for the 0-6, 6-12, 12-24, and inch soil depths. These extractable sulfate-s results are low and at a consistent concentration with soil depth. The DTPA Zn test is in the Adequate range of the Iowa State University soil test interpretation for Zn (Sawyer et al., 2008). As mentioned earlier, soil test P for the site is not available at this time. Therefore, the soil test P interpretation for the site is not known or whether to expect a potential P response. There was a general increase in ear leaf S concentration with application of S fertilizer, either as AMS or MES10 products (Table 2). This is indicated by the across product mean leaf S concentration with applied S and the contrast of the MES-30 vs. the SP-CON treatment. However, the increase in leaf S concentrations with S application was small. Also, interpretation of corn ear leaf S concentration in regard to potential grain yield response is problematic as a wide range in critical concentrations have been reported in the literature and the relationship between leaf S concentration and yield response with recent research has been poor (Sawyer et al., 2009). The same general response was measured for ear leaf P concentration, with an increase in leaf P from 0.31% to 0.36% with the SP-CON vs. the S-CON treatments. These ear leaf S and P concentration increases indicate the crop availability of S and P from the fertilizer products, and a similar supply from each. However, the leaf P concentration without applied P is well above critical levels (Jones et al., 1990), therefore, expectation would be that corn yield would not be increased from P application. And that is what was measured (Table 2). The only contrast comparison that was significant was a lower yield for the MES-30 treatment. It is unknown why that product/rate would result in a reduced yield, and would not be expected due to either S or P application. Neither the lower MES-10 rate, nor the MAP-30 rate, resulted in a low yield. Interestingly, the canopy sensing indices (NDVI and Chl) had higher values for the S- CON compared to the SP-CON treatment, and for MES-30 vs. the SP-CON (Table 2). This indicates a response to the applied S and P in growth and greenness. With the treatment contrasts that are significant including the AMS-10 vs. AMS-30, the canopy response is from both S and P application. However, those measured responses did not translate to grain yield increase. Also, the increases in each index with S and P application were small. The canopy sensing also did not indicate any difference between
4 4 S or P fertilizer sources, nor did they give an indication of a lower yield with the MES-30 treatment. Madrid Site Soil test results available for the Madrid site are DTPA Zn at 0.8 ppm (0-6 inch depth) and the extractable soil sulfate-s at 4, 2, 2, and 3 ppm, respectively, for the 0-6, 6-12, 12-24, and inch soil depths. These extractable sulfate-s concentrations are quite low across the soil depth sampled, and approximately half the 3-foot profile sulfate than at the Mason City site. This is likely a reflection of the soil differences between sites, such as organic matter, landscape position, and A horizon depth/erosion. The DTPA Zn test result is at the concentration break between the Marginal and Adequate ranges of the Iowa State University soil test interpretation for Zn (Sawyer et al., 2008). As mentioned earlier, soil test P for the site is not available at this time. Therefore, the soil test P interpretation for the site is not known or whether to expect a potential P response. The ear leaf S concentration increased with S application, however, the increase was greatest and only significant with the higher 30 lb S/acre rate (Table 3). The leaf S concentration with no S applied was the same as at the Mason City site, but the increase with the 30 lb S/acre rate was greater at the Madrid site. Both S fertilizer products resulted in the same increase in leaf S concentration, indicating equivalent crop available S supply. P concentration was increased with P application (significant S-CON vs. SP-CON contrast), and the concentrations were the same with all P fertilizer products and rates (Table 3). The leaf P concentrations were lower than at the Mason City site, but above ear leaf critical concentrations. As with the Mason City site, this would indicate an expectation that corn yield would not be increased from P application. However, there was a yield increase with P application, as indicated by the significant contrast between the S-CON and SP-CON treatments, and the lack of response to S application from any product (Table 3). However, the yields with the highest rate of P from the MES and MAP products were the same as the SP-CON. It is unknown why those treatments did not have higher yield as did other P applications. Otherwise, yields were the same for the P fertilizer products, indicating similar crop available P supply. The canopy sensing indices had inconsistent results (Table 3). The canopy NDVI was greater with the MES-30 vs. the SP-CON treatment, with the S-CON vs. the SP-CON, and with the MES-30 vs. the MAP-30. All differences were small however. The canopy Chl index was greater only for the MES-30 compared to the MAP-30. No other treatment differences were found for either canopy index. As with the Mason City site, differences in canopy index values did not translate to yield differences. Across Sites When analyzed across sites, there was a consistent response where the leaf S, leaf P, canopy indices, and grain yield were higher for the S-CON compared to the SP-CON. This indicates a response to applied P. Also, for all measurements except grain yield, values for the MES-30 treatment were greater than the SP-CON, again indicating response to applied P. However, the difference in grain yield for that comparison was not significant. For some reason, and as noted for each site, the grain yield was
5 5 comparatively low for the MES-30 rate treatment. This result also caused the yield comparison of MES and AMS to be significant, with an average lower yield with the MES product than AMS (where triple superphosphate was applied to equalize P). It is not known why this difference occurred. It does not appear to be due to P availability as the leaf P was increased the MES product application. Also, the effect from the higher MES- 30 rate is similar to the MAP-30 rate, and no yield reduction occurred with the lower MES-10 rate. These results may indicate an issue with the high P rate, and an issue with the MES and MAP products at that rate. That, however, did not occur for treatments where triple superphosphate was applied to balance the P application, such as both AMS S rates and the S-CON. Applying the higher AMS rate resulted in a small increase in leaf S concentration and canopy NDVI and Chl, but no difference in grain yield. Evaluation of MESZ Comparative results for the MESZ product (MESZ-30 rate treatment) were contrasted with the S-CON, MES-30, and AMS-30 rate treatments. This allowed evaluation of the MESZ product as a Zn source, as well as an S and P source. Results are given in Table 5 for each site and combined across sites. At the Mason City site, all products had similar leaf S, P, and Zn concentrations, and the same as the S-CON. The leaf Zn concentrations were low, and below the 15 ppm critical concentration (Jones et al., 1990). Application of Zn in the MESZ product did not increase leaf Zn. The canopy indices were greater for all products than the S-CON, indicating an S response. The grain yields were variable, with the AMS and MESZ having the same and highest yield, with the MES-30 yield the same as the control. This is the same result with the MES-30 rate as noted in the S and P product comparison. At the Madrid site, the MES and AMS products increased the leaf S concentration but the MESZ did not. The leaf P and Zn concentrations or canopy indices were not different than the control for any product treatment. The leaf Zn concentrations were higher than at the Mason City site, and above the 15 ppm critical level. Grain yield was significantly lower for the MES product, as noted before. The soil test Zn was near to within the Adequate interpretation range (Adequate at the Mason City site and at the break between Marginal and Adequate at the Madrid site). Based on those test levels, a yield response from Zn application would be small or more likely not expected. When analyzed across sites, the MES, MESZ, and AMS products applied at 30 lb S/acre resulted in a small leaf S concentration increase, no difference in leaf P or Zn concentration, some small but inconsistent differences in canopy NDVI and Chl (generally higher than the S-CON, but not for all treatments), and the same yields as the S-CON except for the MES-30 treatment which was lower than the control and the other product applications. As stated before, it is unknown why the MES product when applied at 30 lb S/acre had a lower yield. Summary These results indicate some S plant uptake response to applied S from all S fertilizer products (similar response from each product), but no yield response to S application at either site in There was P plant uptake response to all P fertilizer products, and a yield increase to applied P at the Madrid site and when analyzed across sites. The yield increase from P application was present for each product, however, for an unknown
6 6 reason the yield with the MES product when applied at the 30 lb S/acre rate resulted in no yield response at both sites compared to the control. This also occurred for the MAP product at the Madrid site. The products were surface applied at both sites, with one difference being the Madrid site was tilled and the Mason City site no-tillage. However, other P and S product applications (either different product or lower rate of MES) did not result in low yield and all of those combinations had yield increase from P application. Based on the results in 2009, no real difference was noted between S or P fertilizer products. There was no yield increase with application of Zn as MESZ. The MESZ product also appeared to supply equivalent S and P compared to the AMS and MES products. The MESZ product did not have the yield issue as noted with the high rate of MES. This lends further evidence that the lower yield with the MES-30 and MAP-30 treatments was due to something besides product application, although that is unconfirmed. References Jones, J.B. Jr., H.V. Eck, and R. Voss Plant analysis as an aid in fertilizing corn and grain sorghum. p In R.L. Westerman (ed.) Soil testing and plant analysis. SSSA, Madison, WI. Lang, B., J. Sawyer, and S. Barnhart Dealing with sulfur deficiency in NE Iowa alfalfa production. p In Proc. 18th Annual Integrated Crop Manag. Conf Nov Iowa State Univ., Ames. Sawyer, J.E., and D.W. Barker Sulfur application to corn and soybean crops in Iowa. p In Proc. 14 th Annual Integrated Crop Manag. Conf. 4-5 Dec Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA. Sawyer, J.E., B. Lang, D.W. Barker, and G. Cummins Dealing with sulfur deficiency in crop production: the Iowa experience. p In Proc. Thirty-Ninth North Central Extension-Industry Soil Fertility Conf., Des Moines, IA Nov Vol. 25. International Plant Nutrition Inst., Brookings, SD. Sawyer, J.E., A.P. Mallarino, R. Killorn, and S.K. Barnhart A general guide for crop nutrient and limestone recommendations in Iowa. pm Iowa State Univ. Extension, Ames, IA.
7 7 Table 1. Combination of fertilizer products and rates of S and P. Fertilizer Product Treatment S Rate P Rate S S lb S/acre lb P 2 O 5 /acre lb product/acre S Control (S-CON) Mosaic MES (MES-10) (NH 4 ) 2 SO 4 (AMS-10) S&P Control (SP-CON) Mosaic MES (MES-30) (NH 4 ) 2 SO 4 (AMS-30) MAP (MAP-30) S, Mosaic MES10; S, ammonium sulfate; , ammonium nitrate; , triple superphosphate; ; monoammonium phosphate. The N application was equalized on all plots at 150 lb N/acre (at the Madrid site 50 lb N/acre was applied to equalize N rates, with that N in addition to 140 lb N/acre applied by the cooperator). Potassium was applied as , potassium chloride, at 60 lb K 2 O/acre to all plots at the Mason City site, but no K was applied with the fertilizer treatments at the Madrid site as the cooperator had applied 180 lb K 2 O/acre.
8 8 Table 2. Effect of S and P product applications on ear leaf S and P concentration, corn canopy index values, and grain yield at the Mason City site, Treatment Tissue S Tissue P NDVI Chl Grain Yield % % bu/acre 1 S-CON MES AMS SP-CON MES AMS MAP Treatment Contrast Statistics (p>f) MES-30 vs. SP-CON < S-CON vs. SP-CON MES-30 vs. MAP MES-10 & MES-30 vs. AMS-10 & AMS S-CON vs. AMS AMS-10 vs. AMS Indicates statistical significance of the contrast at p 0.10.
9 9 Table 3. Effect of S and P product applications on ear leaf S and P concentration, corn canopy index values, and grain yield at the Madrid site, Treatment Tissue S Tissue P NDVI Chl Grain Yield % % bu/acre 1 S-CON MES AMS SP-CON MES AMS MAP Treatment Contrast Statistics (p>f) MES-30 vs. SP-CON S-CON vs. SP-CON MES-30 vs. MAP MES-10 & MES-30 vs. AMS-10 & AMS S-CON vs. AMS AMS-10 vs. AMS Indicates statistical significance of the contrast at p 0.10.
10 10 Table 4. Effect of S and P product applications on ear leaf S and P concentration, corn canopy index values, and grain yield across sites, Treatment Tissue S Tissue P NDVI Chl Grain Yield % % bu/acre 1 S-CON MES AMS SP-CON MES AMS MAP Treatment Contrast Statistics (p>f) MES-30 vs. SP-CON < <0.001 < S-CON vs. SP-CON MES-30 vs. MAP MES-10 & MES-30 vs. AMS-10 & AMS S-CON vs. AMS AMS-10 vs. AMS Indicates statistical significance of the contrast at p 0.10.
11 11 Table 5. Evaluation of MESZ fertilizer, Treatment Mason City Tissue S Tissue P Tissue Zn NDVI Chl Grain Yield % % ppm bu/acre 1 S-CON 0.16a 0.36a 12a 0.728b 5.34b 223bc 5 MES a 0.36a 11a 0.738a 5.64a 216c 6 AMS a 0.34a 10a 0.744a 5.82a 232ba 8 MESZ a 0.34a 11a 0.737a 5.62a 237a Madrid 1 S-CON 0.16b 0.30a 19a 0.742a 5.75a 255a 5 MES a 0.29a 19a 0.742a 5.75a 233b 6 AMS a 0.30a 20a 0.744a 5.81a 255a 8 MESZ b 0.28a 20a 0.739a 5.67a 250a Across Sites 1 S-CON 0.16b 0.33a 15a 0.735b 5.55b 239a 5 MES a 0.32a 15a 0.740ab 5.69ab 225b 6 AMS a 0.32a 15a 0.744a 5.81a 244a 8 MESZ b 0.31a 15a 0.738b 5.64b 244a Means followed by a different letter in a column within the same site or across sites are statistically different at p 0.10.
STARTER POTASSIUM FOR CORN: WHY AND WHEN? Nicolas Bergmann, Antonio P. Mallarino, and Daniel E. Kaiser * Iowa State University, Ames.
STARTER POTASSIUM FOR CORN: WHY AND WHEN? Nicolas Bergmann, Antonio P. Mallarino, and Daniel E. Kaiser * Iowa State University, Ames Introduction Starter fertilizer application can complement broadcast
More informationIncreasing Importance of Sulfur for Field Crops
Increasing Importance of Sulfur for Field Crops John Sawyer, Professor Brian Lang, Extension Field Agronomist Daniel Barker, Assistant Scientist Iowa State University Sulfur Research History 40+ years
More informationResponse to Starter Applied Sulfur in Combination with Nitrogen and Phosphorus across a Landscape
Response to Starter Applied Sulfur in Combination with Nitrogen and Phosphorus across a Landscape Daniel E. Kaiser, John A. Lamb, and Ki-In Kim University of Minnesota Abstract Corn (Zea Mays L.) response
More informationLIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1
LIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1 John E. Sawyer Associate Professor, Extension Soil Fertility Specialist Department of Agronomy John P. Lundvall Extension Program Specialist
More informationCORN NITROGEN RATE RESPONSE AND CROP YIELD IN A RYE COVER CROP SYSTEM. Introduction
CORN NITROGEN RATE RESPONSE AND CROP YIELD IN A RYE COVER CROP SYSTEM John E. Sawyer 1, Jose L. Pantoja 2, Daniel W. Barker 1 1 Iowa State University, Ames, IA 2 Universidad de las Fuerzas Armadas, Sangolquí,
More informationSwine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project
Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project Final Report March 31, 2005 John Sawyer, Associate Professor, Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Antonio Mallarino, Associate Professor, Soil Fertility John Lundvall,
More informationEvaluation of Fertilizer Additives for Enhanced Nitrogen Efficiency in Corn. Final Project Report (2013 and 2014)
Evaluation of Fertilizer Additives for Enhanced Nitrogen Efficiency in Corn Final Project Report (2013 and 2014) Daniel Barker, John Sawyer, and Mike Castellano Assistant Scientist, Professor, and Assistant
More informationPOTASSIUM MANAGEMENT, SOIL TESTING AND CROP RESPONSE. Antonio P. Mallarino and Ryan R. Oltmans Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames
POTASSIUM MANAGEMENT, SOIL TESTING AND CROP RESPONSE Antonio P. Mallarino and Ryan R. Oltmans Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames Introduction New field research is conducted in Iowa as
More informationProcess Water from Soybean Soapstock Refining as a Nutrient Source for Corn Production
2010 Plant Management Network. Accepted for publication 6 November 2009. Published. Process Water from Soybean Soapstock Refining as a Nutrient Source for Corn Production Douglas A. Doty, Testing Operations
More informationNutrient uptake by corn and soybean, removal, and recycling with crop residue
211 Integrated Crop Management Conference - Iowa State University 13 Nutrient uptake by corn and soybean, removal, and recycling with crop residue Antonio P. Mallarino, professor, Agronomy, Iowa State
More informationQUANTIFYING CORN N DEFICIENCY WITH ACTIVE CANOPY SENSORS. John E. Sawyer and Daniel W. Barker 1
QUANTIFYING CORN N DEFICIENCY WITH ACTIVE CANOPY SENSORS John E. Sawyer and Daniel W. Barker 1 Precision agriculture technologies are an integral part of many crop production operations. However, implementation
More informationInstitute of Ag Professionals
Institute of Ag Professionals Proceedings of the 2013 Crop Pest Management Shortcourse & Minnesota Crop Production Retailers Association Trade Show www.extension.umn.edu/agprofessionals Do not reproduce
More informationLiquid Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project
Liquid Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project John Sawyer John Lundvall Antonio Mallarino Sudipta Rakshit Monica Barbazan Daniel Barker Angie Rieck-Hinz Liquid Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project
More informationOptimizing Nitrogen and Irrigation Timing for Corn Fertigation Applications Using Remote Sensing
Optimizing Nitrogen and Irrigation Timing for Corn Fertigation Applications Using Remote Sensing A.R. Asebedo, E.A. Adee and D.B. Mengel Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS Abstract Nitrogen (N) use
More informationEVALUATION OF THE ILLINOIS SOIL NITROGEN TEST IN THE NORTH CENTRAL REGION i. Abstract. Introduction
EVALUATION OF THE ILLINOIS SOIL NITROGEN TEST IN THE NORTH CENTRAL REGION i C.A.M. Laboski 1, J.E. Sawyer 2, D.T. Walters 3, L.G. Bundy 1, R.G. Hoeft 4, G.W. Randall 5, and T.W. Andraski 1 1 University
More informationSoil Amendment and Foliar Application Trial 2016 Full Report
Soil Amendment and Foliar Application Trial 216 Full Report Overview: This report summarizes Ohio State Soil Fertility Lab s efforts of a third party evaluation of proprietary soil amendments and foliar
More informationCrop Response to Shallow Placement of Anhydrous Ammonia in Corn
Crop Response to Shallow Placement of Anhydrous Ammonia in Corn Final Project Report John Sawyer 1, Daniel Barker 1, and Mark Hanna 2 1 Department of Agronomy, 2 Department of Agricultural and Biosystems
More informationUSE OF STRIP-TILLAGE FOR CORN PRODUCTION IN KANSAS
USE OF STRIP-TILLAGE FOR CORN PRODUCTION IN KANSAS W.B. Gordon, R.E., Lamond, and L.J. Ferdinand Department of Agronomy Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506 bgordon@oznet.ksu.edu. (785) 335-2836
More informationEVALUATION OF ADAPT-N IN THE CORN BELT. Introduction
EVALUATION OF ADAPT-N IN THE CORN BELT C.A.M. Laboski 1, J.J. Camberato 2, and J.E. Sawyer 3 1 Univeristy of Wisconsin-Madison, 2 Purdue University, 3 Iowa State University Introduction Nitrogen is the
More informationFertilizing Corn in Minnesota
Fertilizing corn in Minnesota : Nutrient Management : Agriculture : University of Minnes... Page 1 of 14 University of Minnesota Extension www.extension.umn.edu 612-624-1222 Nutrient Management Fertilizing
More informationIDENTIFICATION OF REASONS FOR HIGH TEMPORAL SOIL-TEST POTASSIUM VARIATION
IDENTIFICATION OF REASONS FOR HIGH TEMPORAL SOIL-TEST POTASSIUM VARIATION A.P. Mallarino, M.W. Clover, and R.R. Oltmans Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa Introduction Extensive research has focused on
More informationSoil Nitrogen and Carbon Management Project
Soil Nitrogen and Carbon Management Project John E. Sawyer Mahdi Al-Kaisi Daniel Barker Marc Kruse John Lundvall Department of Agronomy Iowa State University Soil Nitrogen and Carbon Management Project
More informationG Fertilizing Winter Wheat I: Nitrogen, Potassium, and Micronutrients
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln G02-1460 Fertilizing Winter Wheat I: Nitrogen, Potassium, and Micronutrients Jurg M. Blumenthal Donald H. Sander Nebraska
More informationResources Conservation Practices Tillage, Manure Management and Water Quality
Resources Conservation Practices Tillage, Manure Management and Water Quality T illage and manure application practices significantly impact surface and ground water quality in Iowa and other Midwestern
More informationTesting field-moist soil samples improves the assessment of potassium needs by crops
2012 Integrated Crop Management Conference - Iowa State University 137 Testing field-moist soil samples improves the assessment of potassium needs by crops Antonio P. Mallarino, professor, Agronomy, Iowa
More informationFor nmental. of 10. Written By: Agustin o, Professor. Developed in. and justice for all. Department of. funded by activities. )
Site-Specificc Nutrient Management For Nutrient Management Planning To Improve Crop Production, Environ nmental Quality, and Economic Return Sulfur: Chapter 5 of 10 Written By: Agustin Pagani,, Post-Doctoral
More informationPHOSPHORUS LOSS WITH RUNOFF AFTER APPLYING FERTILIZER OR MANURE AS AFFECTED BY THE TIMING OF RAINFALL
PHOSPHORUS LOSS WITH RUNOFF AFTER APPLYING FERTILIZER OR MANURE AS AFFECTED BY THE TIMING OF RAINFALL Antonio P. Mallarino and Mazhar U. Haq Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University INTRODUCTION Public
More informationBest Management Practices for Nitrogen Use in SOUTHWESTERN AND WEST-CENTRAL MINNESOTA
N Best Management Practices for Nitrogen Use in SOUTHWESTERN AND WEST-CENTRAL MINNESOTA B E S T M A N AG E M E N T P R AC T I C E S F O R N I T R O G E N A P P L I C AT I O N Best Management Practices
More informationLessons Learned from Iowa On-Farm Studies Testing Manure Nitrogen Availability
Lessons Learned from Iowa On-Farm Studies Testing Manure Nitrogen Availability Heartland Animal Manure Management Workshop Peter Kyveryga, PhD Operations Manager-Analytics Iowa Soybean Association April
More informationOptimizing Strip-Till and No-Till Systems for Corn in the Biofuel Era
Optimizing Strip-Till and No-Till Systems for Corn in the Biofuel Era Tony J. Vyn Agronomy Department, Purdue University Abstract: Recent developments in biofuel demand and the rapid adoption of modern
More informationNitrogen Management Products. John E. Sawyer Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Department of Agronomy
Nitrogen Management Products John E. Sawyer Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Department of Agronomy Data Source, IDALS Natural Gas Ammonia Synthesis Source of energy Source of H 2 CH 4 + H
More informationNUTRIENT MANAGEMENT. philosophy/approach for determining N rate guidelines for corn.
NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT AG-FO-3790-D (REVISED 2016) Fertilizing Corn in Minnesota Daniel E. Kaiser 1, Fabian Fernandez 1, John A. Lamb 1, Jeffrey A. Coulter 2, and Brian Barber 3 1/ Extension Specialist in
More informationPhosphorus and Potassium Recommendations for Illinois Crops
Phosphorus and Potassium Recommendations for Illinois Crops Fabián G. Fernández (PI), Antonio P. Mallarino (CoPI), Kristin Greer, and Chris Rudisill. Fernández is an Assistant Professor of nutrient management
More informationDIGITAL AERIAL IMAGERY GUIDES A STATEWIDE NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT BENCHMARKING SURVEY ABSTRACT
DIGITAL AERIAL IMAGERY GUIDES A STATEWIDE NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT BENCHMARKING SURVEY T.M. Blackmer and P.M. Kyveryga On-Farm Network Iowa Soybean Association Ankeny, Iowa ABSTRACT Large fluctuations in crop
More informationNitrogen Management Guidelines for Corn in Indiana
Purdue University Department of Agronomy Applied Crop Research Update Updated March 2017 URL: http://www.kingcorn.org/news/timeless/nitrogenmgmt.pdf Nitrogen Management Guidelines for Corn in Indiana Jim
More informationNitrogen dynamics of standard and enhanced urea in corn
Nitrogen dynamics of standard and enhanced urea in corn James H. Houx III and Felix B. Fritschi INTRODUCTION: Concerns about illegal uses of anhydrous ammonia and ammonium nitrate may make urea a preferred
More informationNovember 2008 Issue # Nutrient Management Considerations in a High-Cost Environment
Dept. of Soil Science, UW-Madison/UW-Extension, 1525 Observatory Dr., Madison, WI 53706/608-262-0485 November 2008 Issue #4 2008 Nutrient Management Considerations in a High-Cost Environment Carrie Laboski
More informationCORN RESPONSE TO SULFUR IN ILLINOIS
CORN RESPONSE TO SULFUR IN ILLINOIS F.G. Fernández, S. Ebelhar, K. Greer, and H. Brown F.G. Fernández is an assistant professor, Dept. of Crop Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana. S. Ebelhar is an
More informationProtein and Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer and Variation of Plant Tissue Analysis in Wheat
Protein and Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer and Variation of Plant Tissue Analysis in Wheat Daniel Kaiser, Department of Soils, Water and Climate, U of M Research Question The current N management
More informationSUSTAINABLE NITROGEN FERTILIZER REGIMES FOR SNAP BEANS IN VIRGINIA
SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN FERTILIZER REGIMES FOR SNAP BEANS IN VIRGINIA Mark S. Reiter 1* 1 Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia
More informationSOILS AND PLANT NUTRITION
The Journal of Cotton Science 3:126-131 (1999) http://journal.cotton.org, The Cotton Foundation 1999 126 SOILS AND PLANT NUTRITION Evaluation of Calcium Nitrate as an In-furrow Applied Starter For Cotton
More informationCommon and Not So Common Fertility Issues in the Region for Soybean and Wheat
Common and Not So Common Fertility Issues in the Region for Soybean and Wheat Dave Franzen, PhD Professor Soil Science NDSU Extension Soil Specialist Fargo, ND The goal of any crop nutrition program is
More informationDo not oven-dry the soil
Fertilizing Corn Fact Sheet No..38 Crop Series Soil by J.G. Davis and D.G. Westfall* Adequate soil fertility is one of the requirements for profitable corn production. Nitrogen (N) is the most yield-limiting
More informationSULFUR AND TENNESSEE ROW CROPS
SULFUR AND TENNESSEE ROW CROPS W 435 Sulfur (S) deficiencies have become more common in recent years. This publication outlines the importance and role of S in higher plants, summarizes recent research,
More informationUpdate to Iowa phosphorus, potassium, and lime recommendations
2013 Integrated Crop Management Conference - Iowa State University 137 Update to Iowa phosphorus, potassium, and lime recommendations Antonio P. Mallarino, professor and Extension soil fertility specialist,
More informationFertilizing Small Grains in Arizona
az1346 Revised 05/15 Fertilizing Small Grains in Arizona Michael J. Ottman and Tom Thompson Nitrogen Content of Crop Nitrogen is the primary fertilizer nutrient required by wheat and barley. A wheat crop
More informationAntonio Mallarino Professor, Department of Agronomy. Introduction
2003 Integrated Crop Management Conference - Iowa State University 121 USING THE IOWA PHOSPHORUS INDEX FOR AGRONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT OF FERTILIZER AND MANURE PHOSPHORUS Antonio Mallarino Professor,
More informationBEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. Anthony Bly and Ron Gelderman (retired professor, SDSU Plant Science Dept.)
CORN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CHAPTER 25 Liming South Dakota Soils Anthony Bly (Anthony.Bly@sdstate.edu) and Ron Gelderman (retired professor, SDSU Plant Science Dept.) Corn production can be limited
More informationNUTRIENT MANAGEMENT. Figure 1. The availability of P is affected by soil ph.
NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT FO 0792 F (REVISED 2016) Understanding Phosphorus in Minnesota Soils Paulo H. Pagliari, Daniel E. Kaiser, Carl J. Rosen, and John A. Lamb: Extension Specialists in Nutrient Management
More informationSugarbeet Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates K.A. Rykbost and R.L. Dovell
K.A. Rykbost and R.L. Dovell Introduction Fertilizer requirements for optimum sugarbeet production in the Klamath Basin have not been extensively evaluated to date. Studies in Malheur County have shown
More information2016 Southern Consultants Meeting High Yield Soybean Production
2016 Southern Consultants Meeting High Yield Soybean Production Daniel H. Poston February 25, 2016 Things That Drive Soybean Yield Light (Temperature) Nutrition Water (Drainage) Pest management What do
More informationMonitoring Soil Nutrients in Dryland Systems Using Management Units
EM 8920-E November 2006 Monitoring Soil Nutrients in Dryland Systems Using Management Units M.K. Corp, D.A. Horneck, D. Wysocki, and L. Lutcher The use of management units for soil testing and nutrient
More informationCROP ADVANCES Field Crop Reports
Cer2- - Starter Phosphorus Increases Winter Wheat Yields! CROP ADVANCES Field Crop Reports Volume 8 February 2, 2012 Field Crops Team, Agriculture Development Branch Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural
More informationNutrient Management for Hay Production and Quality
Nutrient Management for Hay Production and Quality by Clain Jones, Extension Soil Fertility Specialist clainj@montana.edu; 406 994-6076 http://landresources.montana.edu/soilfertility Sweet Grass County
More informationFor over 40 years, soil testing has been a recommended means
Part I Agronomic Crops 65 9 Soil Testing and Nutrient Recommendations Gary W. Hergert UNL Professor of Agronomy For over 40 years, soil testing has been a recommended means of predicting the kind and amount
More informationSoil Nutrient Management: Testing, Sources, and Foliar Application Soils Workshops for Hill, Blaine and Phillips Counties Feb.
Soil Nutrient Management: Testing, Sources, and Foliar Application Soils Workshops for Hill, Blaine and Phillips Counties Feb. 27 and 28, 2014 by Clain Jones, Extension Soil Fertility Specialist clainj@montana.edu;
More informationSOIL APPLIED AND WATER APPLIED PHOSPHORUS APPLICATION. M. J. Ottman, T. L. Thompson, M. T. Rogers, and S. A. White 1 ABSTRACT
SOIL APPLIED AND WATER APPLIED PHOSPHORUS APPLICATION M. J. Ottman, T. L. Thompson, M. T. Rogers, and S. A. White 1 ABSTRACT Many agricultural workers feel that 10-34-0 is a superior fertilizer for alfalfa
More informationReduced Tillage Fertilizer Management. Bill Verbeten NWNY Dairy, Livestock, & Field Crops Team
Reduced Tillage Fertilizer Management Bill Verbeten NWNY Dairy, Livestock, & Field Crops Team 2 Take Home Points Fertilizer placement is the main tool to manage crop fertility in reduced tillage systems
More informationLAND APPLICATION OF POULTRY MANURE
CHAPTER 5a LAND APPLICATION OF POULTRY MANURE Jim Camberato Land application of poultry manure to crop and forest land is an effective way of recycling the nutrients back to the land. There are four key
More informationSoil Quality, Nutrient Cycling and Soil Fertility. Ray Ward Ward Laboratories, Inc Kearney, NE
Soil Quality, Nutrient Cycling and Soil Fertility Ray Ward Ward Laboratories, Inc Kearney, NE www.wardlab.com Purposes of Soil Quality Employ new & modified crop management systems Increase efficiency
More informationRESEARCH REPORT SUWANNEE VALLEY AREC 92-5 August, 1992 COMPARISON OF VARIOUS N SCHEDULING METHODS FOR SNAPBEANS
RESEARCH REPORT SUWANNEE VALLEY AREC 92-5 August, 1992 COMPARISON OF VARIOUS N SCHEDULING METHODS FOR SNAPBEANS George Hochmuth 1 Bob Hochmuth 2 Ed Hanlon 3 INTRODUCTION Snapbean is an important crop to
More informationSoil ph and Liming. John E. Sawyer. Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Iowa State University
Soil ph and Liming John E. Sawyer Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Iowa State University What Is ph? Definition of ph Measure of acidity or alkalinity Negative log of hydrogen ion concentration
More informationOn Farm Assessment of Critical Soil Test Phosphorus and Potassium Values in Minnesota. AFREC Year 4 Summary Report 8/31/2014 for
On Farm Assessment of Critical Soil Test Phosphorus and Potassium Values in Minnesota AFREC Year 4 Summary Report 8/31/214 for AFREC Projects R29-9, 211 Project D, R212-14, R213-M Principal Investigator:
More informationNumber 209 September 11, 2009
Number 209 September 11, 2009 1. Preplant and planting time fertilizer decisions for wheat 1 2. Adjusting wheat seeding rates for unfavorable conditions 3 3. The importance of fall tillers in wheat yields
More informationA Presentation of the 2011 IA MN SD Drainage Research Forum. November 22, 2011 Okoboji, Iowa
A Presentation of the 2011 IA MN SD Drainage Research Forum November 22, 2011 Okoboji, Iowa 1 Phosphorus Loss Through Subsurface Tile Drainage A.P. Mallarino, M.U. Haq, M.J. Helmers, R.S. Kanwar, C.H Pederson,
More informationIrrigated Spring Wheat
Southern Idaho Fertilizer Guide Irrigated Spring Wheat Brad Brown, Jeffrey Stark, and Dale Westermann These fertilizer guidelines are based on relationships established between University of Idaho soil
More informationSF723 (Revised) Barley
SF723 (Revised) Fertilizing Malting and Feed Barley D.W. Franzen Extension Soil Science Specialist R.J. Goos Professor Soil Science Department Barley has been an important cash and rotational crop in North
More informationAnnual Report for Potash & Phosphate Institute (PPI)/Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada (PPIC) and Foundation for Agronomic Research (FAR)
Annual Report for Potash & Phosphate Institute (PPI)/Potash & Phosphate Institute of Canada (PPIC) and Foundation for Agronomic Research (FAR) Title: Variable-rate Phosphorus Fertilizer Applications for
More informationNitrogen Transformation Inhibitors and Controlled Release Urea
AGR-185 Nitrogen Transformation Inhibitors and Controlled Release Urea G.J. Schwab and L.W. Murdock The soaring cost of fossil fuels is an indicator that nitrogen (N) fertilizer prices are going to remain
More informationBEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. USDA photo by Bob Nichols
CORN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CHAPTER 26 USDA photo by Bob Nichols Starter, Banding, and Broadcasting Phosphorus Fertilizer for Profitable Corn Production Anthony Bly (Anthony.Bly@sdstate.edu), Graig
More informationNutrient Management. Things to Know. Chapter 16. Fertilizer Use Concerns. Goals of Fertilizer Usage. Nutrient Balance in Soil. p.
Things to Know Nutrient Management Chapter 16 p. 669-739 Goals of fertilizer use General concept of plant nutrient needs Fertilizer grades (e.g., 10-10-10) Fertilizer characteristics Application methods
More informationMinnesota Wheat Check- Off
Minnesota Wheat Check- Off On Farm Research Network What it is? Where it is? Who is involved? How to become involved? Results from 2012-2014 Continuing and Additional Projects for 2015 Northwest Minnesota
More informationNutrient Management in Crop Production
Nutrient Management in Crop Production Dr. John E. Sawyer Associate Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Focus On Agriculture Water Quality Hypoxia Pfiesteria piscicida Nitrate Tile Flow Sediment
More informationph Management and Lime Material Selection and Application
ph Management and Lime Material Selection and Application Quirine M. Ketterings Cornell University Nutrient Management Spear Program http://nmsp.cals.cornell.edu Acidity and ph Acidity = H + and Al 3+
More informationFACTORS AFFECTING CROP NEEDS FOR POTASSIUM WESTERN PERSPECTIVE TERRY A. TINDALL AND DALE WESTERMANN MANAGER OF AGRONOMY J.R
FACTORS AFFECTING CROP NEEDS FOR POTASSIUM WESTERN PERSPECTIVE TERRY A. TINDALL AND DALE WESTERMANN MANAGER OF AGRONOMY J.R. SIMPLOT COMPANY USDA-ARS SOIL SCIENTIST SOIL FACTORS--POTATOES Potassium uptake
More informationSULFUR APPLICATION TO CORN AND SOYBEAN CROPS IN IOWA 1
SULFUR APPLICATION TO CORN AND SOYBEAN CROPS IN IOWA 1 John E. Sawyer and Daniel W. Barker Associate Professor and Assistant Scientist Department of Agronomy Iowa State University Introduction and Background
More informationPulse Crop Inoculation and Fertilization January 13, 2017 Hill County Extension Pulse Workshop
Pulse Crop Inoculation and Fertilization January 13, 2017 Hill County Extension Pulse Workshop Clain Jones, Extension Soil Fertility Specialist clainj@montana.edu; 994-6076 MSU Soil Fertility Extension
More informationPurpose and Introduction:
Comparison of Crop Water Consumptive Use of,, and Jenny Rees, UNL Extension and Daryl Andersen, Little Blue Natural Resources District Purpose and Introduction: The purpose of this study is to compare
More informationCorn Response to Sulfur on Illinois Soils
Iowa State University From the SelectedWorks of John E. Sawyer 1985 Corn Response to Sulfur on Illinois Soils R. G. Hoeft, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign J. E. Sawyer, University of Illinois
More informationBEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES. CHAPTER 29 Evaluating the Success of N, K, and P Fertilizer Applications
CORN BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES CHAPTER 29 Evaluating the Success of N, K, and P Fertilizer Applications David Clay (David.Clay@sdstate.edu) and Daniel W. Clay (dwclay18@gmail.com) To assess whether the
More informationNITROGEN FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT OF TEMPORARILY FLOODED SOILS TO IMPROVE CORN PRODUCTION AND REDUCE ENVIROMENTAL N LOSS
NITROGEN FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT OF TEMPORARILY FLOODED SOILS TO IMPROVE CORN PRODUCTION AND REDUCE ENVIROMENTAL N LOSS Brendan Zurweller Graduate Research Assistant Kelly Nelson Research Agronomist Peter
More informationInterpreting Nitrate Concentration in Tile Drainage Water
Agronomy Guide AY-318-W SOILS (TILLAGE) Sylvie Brouder, Brenda Hofmann, Eileen Kladivko, Ron Turco, Andrea Bongen, Purdue University Department of Agronomy; Jane Frankenberger, Purdue University Department
More informationInstitute of Ag Professionals
Institute of Ag Professionals Proceedings of the 2014 Crop Pest Management Shortcourse & Minnesota Crop Production Retailers Association Trade Show www.extension.umn.edu/agprofessionals Do not reproduce
More informationEvaluation of ESN Fertilizer in Southcentral Montana
Evaluation of ESN Fertilizer in Southcentral Montana 2012-13 Results Kent A McVay Southern Agricultural Research Center Montana State University Why Enhance N Fertilizers? Worldwide fertilizer N use efficiency
More informationCrop Physiology Laboratory Department of Crop Sciences University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Crop Physiology Laboratory Department of Crop Sciences University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Farmer Research Summit UI Campus, Urbana, IL January 8, 2016 Do Growers Adequately Manage Soybean? The
More informationFUTURE OF TRI-STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS
FUTURE OF TRI-STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS December 14, 2016 Steve Culman School of Environment and Natural Resources The Ohio State University, OARDC culman.2@osu.edu, 330-822-3787 Tri-State Recommendations
More informationNutrient Management (NM)
Contents Nutrient Management (NM) Nutrient Management Fundamentals Nutrient Management Practices for WI Corn Production & Water Quality Protection (UWEX A3557) Sampling Soils for Testing (UWEX A2100) Optimum
More informationUsing precision agriculture technologies for phosphorus, potassium, and lime management with lower grain prices and to improve water quality
214 Integrated Crop Management Conference - Iowa State niversity 137 sing precision agriculture technologies for phosphorus, potassium, and lime management with lower grain prices and to improve water
More informationFertilizer Management in No- Tillage Cucurbits
Fertilizer Management in No- Tillage Cucurbits Dr. Alan Walters Southern Illinois University No-till is an agricultural technique: --increases the amount of water that infiltrates into the soil --increases
More informationN and P Placement and Timing of Dryland Winter Wheat Varieties K. J. Larson and L. Herron 1
N and P Placement and Timing of Dryland Winter Wheat Varieties K. J. Larson and L. Herron 1 Nitrogen fertilizer is commonly applied to winter wheat in the High Plains to achieve moderate to high yields.
More informationProceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show
Proceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show December 4 6, 2007 Minneapolis Convention Center Do not Reproduce or Redistribute Without Written Consent of the Author(s) Soil N Mineralization
More informationCentral Region Ag Agent Update Choteau, April 4, 2017
Fertilizer Management in a Down Market Central Region Ag Agent Update Choteau, April 4, 2017 Clain Jones clainj@montana.edu 994-6076 MSU Soil Fertility Extension Primary objective today: Assist you in
More informationDetermining Optimum Nitrogen Application Rates for Corn Larry Bundy, Todd Andraski, Carrie Laboski, and Scott Sturgul 1
February 25 Determining Optimum Nitrogen Application Rates for Corn Larry Bundy, Todd Andraski, Carrie Laboski, and Scott Sturgul 1 INTRODUCTION Nitrogen (N) application rate is the most critical factor
More informationManaging the Rotation from Alfalfa to Corn. Matt A. Yost, Jeffrey A. Coulter, and Michael P. Russelle
Managing the Rotation from Alfalfa to Corn Matt A. Yost, Jeffrey A. Coulter, and Michael P. Russelle Introduction Alfalfa provides many benefits to cropping systems. These benefits occur both during alfalfa
More informationSidedress. trogen Uptake. Seasonal Nit. 80% of requirement after V8-10
EPRI Greenhouse Gas Offsets Workshop Nov. 4, 2011, Washington, DC Common and Evolving Practices for Nitrogen Management in U.S. Agriculture Ron Gehl Dept. of Soil Science NC State University Nitrogen Management
More informationSampling, Nutrient Analysis, and Recommendations
Sampling, Nutrient Analysis, and Recommendations Patricia Steinhilber, Ph.D. Department of Environmental Science and Technology Ag Nutrient Management Program University of Maryland College Park General
More informationknow and what we don t
Biofuels in Wisconsin: What we know and what we don t M A T T R U A R K, D E P A R T M E N T O F S O I L S C I E N C E U N I V E R S I T Y O F W I S C O N S I N - M A D I S O N ; U N I V E R S I T Y O
More informationSplit Application- North Dakota Perspective. Dave Franzen, PhD Professor Soil Science Extension Soil Specialist, NDSU, Fargo
Split Application- North Dakota Perspective Dave Franzen, PhD Professor Soil Science Extension Soil Specialist, NDSU, Fargo Nitrogen Fantasy Land- -Apply N fertilizer any way at any time -Yield increases
More information