Effects of Pulses in Rotations

Transcription

1 Effects of Pulses in Rotations Mervin St. Luce Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Swift Current, SK Pulse & Soybean Agronomy Workshop November 7-8, 2017, Saskatoon, SK

2 Acknowledgements 2 Collaborators: Cynthia Grant Lead Investigator Yantai Gan John O Donovan Bernie Zebarth Noura Ziadi Robert Blackshaw Neil Harker Kelly Turkington Guy Lafond Bill May Eric Johnson Mohammad Khakbazan Elwin Smith Newton Lupwayi Debra McLaren Sukhdev Malhi Numerous AAFC support staff. Funding and partners: Sustainable Agricultural Environment Systems of AAFC SaskPulse SaskCanola Canola Council of Canada Alberta Canola Alberta Barley Manitoba Canola Growers

3 Pulse Production in Canada 3 Source: Statistics Canada

4 Pulse Benefits 4 Nitrogen benefits. Non-nitrogen benefits. Economic benefit through lower energy use; fertilizer cost savings. Environmental benefit through lower carbon footprint, and lower nitrogen fertilizer losses.

5 Nitrogen Fixation & Supply 5 Pulses Walley et al kg N ha -1 Hossain et al Faba bean Field pea Lentil Dry bean 34 9 Chick pea $$$$ Savings!!! Nodules on pulse roots Source: University of Minnesota

6 Pulse Benefits 6 Nitrogen benefits. Non-nitrogen benefits (break up pest and disease cycles, increased available water, enhanced soil tilth, phosphorus and water uptake). Economic benefit through lower energy use (mostly related to lower inorganic fertilizer use). Environmental benefit through lower carbon footprint, and lower nitrogen fertilizer losses.

7 7 More information on the positive impact of integrating pulses into cropping systems is still required for enhanced decision making.

8 Objectives 8 To compare the impact of different pulse species with canola and wheat on yield, quality, N requirements and profitability of cropping systems. To compare pulses grown for seed vs. green manure. To examine the expected duration of pulse benefits in cropping systems.

9 Field Experiment 1 9 Year Crop grown Nitrogen management 2010 Wheat, Canola, Faba bean seed, Faba bean Green Manure, Field pea, Lentil Pulses inoculated; canola and wheat fertilized for moderate yield based on soil test Spring Wheat N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as subplots Canola N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as subplots. Experimental design Randomized complete block with four replicates. Split-plot with crops grown in 2010 as main plots and N rates as sub-plots. Split-plot with crops grown in 2010 as main plots and N rates as sub-plots. Crops grown for seed in 2010 were swathed, then harvest at maturity using a plot combine, with straw returned to the soil. Faba bean GRM was sprayed at the early flat pod stage, moved in fall and entire plant returned to the soil. St. Luce et al. 2015

10 Experimental Sites 10 Lacombe Scott Melfort Lethbridge Indian Head Brandon

11 Yield Response Curve 11 Based on grain price and N fertilizer cost Economic yield Maximum yield Economic optimum N rate (EONR): N rate at which $1 of additional N returns $1 in grain value. The estimated EONR is used to derive the economic optimum yield (EOY).

12 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites St. Luce et al. 2015

13 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat St. Luce et al. 2015

14 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites 4124 Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat Canola St. Luce et al. 2015

15 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat Canola Faba bean St. Luce et al. 2015

16 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat Canola Faba bean Faba GRM St. Luce et al. 2015

17 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat Canola Faba bean Faba GRM Field pea St. Luce et al. 2015

18 Wheat Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat Canola Faba bean Faba GRM Field pea Lentil Compared to wheat: 17% more yield with 27-30% less N fertilizer. Beneficial based on either target yield or N rate. St. Luce et al. 2015

19 Canola Response in Average response across sites Average response across sites (lower than expected due to adverse conditions). Yield (bu/ac) EONR (lb/ac) Wheat Canola Faba bean Faba GRM Field pea Lentil Estimated was > highest N rate. Compared to wheat and canola: Similar yield but 40-55% less N fertilizer. St. Luce et al. 2015

20 Economic Yield and N Rate 20 Wheat in 2011 Canola in 2012 Economic N Economic yield Economic N Economic yield Lacombe Scott Lacombe Scott Lacombe Scott Lacombe Scott Preceding crop lb/ac bu/ac lb/ac bu/ac Wheat Canola Faba bean Faba bean GRM Field pea Lentil Estimated N rate was negative. EONR and yield depends on preceding crop, background soil fertility and site conditions. St. Luce et al. 2015

21 Grain yield (kg ha -1 ) Nitrogen and Non-N Effects? 21 Mostly N benefit Crop N uptake (kg ha -1 ) Both N and non-n benefits St. Luce et al. 2015

22 Non-Nitrogen Benefits 22 Greater residual soil moisture Enhanced microbial diversity and activity Enhanced soil tilth & root penetration Improved phosphorus, water and nutrient use Break up of pest & disease cycles St. Luce et al. 2015

23 Average N Credit 23 Wheat as subsequent crop in 2011 Based on traditional method (lb/ac) Based on EONR (lb/ac) Preceding crop Compared to wheat stubble in 2010 Faba bean 45 2 Faba bean GRM Field pea Lentil Compared to canola stubble in 2010 Faba bean 18 1 Faba bean GRM Field pea Lentil Traditional method: N rate following wheat/canola that gives an equivalent wheat grain yield to the unfertilized wheat following a pulse crop. Based on data from St. Luce et al. 2015

24 Nitrogen Effect 24 Preceding crop Biomass / straw yield in 2010 (kg ha -1 ) Crop residue N returned in 2010 (kg ha -1 ) Spring NO 3 -N in 2011 (kg ha -1 ) Spring NO 3 -N in 2012 (kg ha -1 ) Wheat Canola Faba bean Faba bean GRM Field pea Lentil Biological N 2 fixation was not measured. Below-ground crop residue N input was not taken into consideration. St. Luce et al. 2015; 2016

25 Field Experiment 2 25 Year Crop grown Nitrogen management Experimental design 2009 Wheat, Canola, Faba bean seed, Faba bean Green Manure, Field pea, Lentil Pulses inoculated; canola and wheat fertilized for moderate yield based on soil test Canola N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as subplots Malting Barley N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as subplots. Randomized complete block with four replicates. Yield Response & Economic Analysis 2012 Canola N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as sub-plots. Split-plot with crops grown in 2009 as main plots and N rates as sub-plots. Split-plot with crops grown in 2009 as main plots and N rates as sub-plots. Split-plot with crops grown in 2009 as main plots and N rates as subplots Spring wheat N not applied Same as above 2014 Canola N not applied Same as above Grant et al. 2016

26 Experimental Sites 26 Beaverlodge Lacombe Scott Lethbridge Swift Current Indian Head Brandon

27 Canola Response in Gain/loss compared to wheat stubble Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Location Canola Faba bean Faba bean GRM Field pea Lentil Indian Head Scott Swift Current Average Oil concentration (g kg -1 ) Indian Head Scott Swift Current Average Values in red are significantly different from wheat stubble (P < 0.05). O Donovan et al. 2014

28 Barley Response in Gain/loss compared to wheat stubble Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Location Canola Faba bean Faba bean GRM Field pea Lentil Indian Head Scott Swift Current Average Protein concentration (g kg -1 ) Indian Head Scott Swift Current Average Values in red are significantly different from wheat stubble (P < 0.05). O Donovan et al. 2014

29 Average Annual Net Revenue 29 Preceding crop (PC) Canola (2010) Barley (2011) Canola-Barley PC-Canola- Barley $ ha -1 Wheat 348b 94b 223bc 169b Canola 240c 103b 172c 188b Faba bean 373b 113b 242b 256a Faba bean GRM 586a 161a 373a 76c Field pea 425b 100b 272b 284ab Lentil 442b 124ab 281b 292ab Values within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P > 0.05). Faba bean green manure significantly improved the yield and revenue for subsequent crops but the increased yields were not sufficient to compensate for the lost revenue during the green manure phase. Khakbazan et al. 2014

30 Field Experiment 1 30 Year Crop grown Nitrogen management Experimental design 2009 Wheat, Canola, Faba bean seed, Faba bean Green Manure, Field pea, Lentil Pulses inoculated; canola and wheat fertilized for moderate yield based on soil test Canola N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as sub-plots Malting Barley N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as sub-plots. Randomized complete block with four replicates. Split-plot with crops grown in 2009 as main plots and N rates as subplots. Split-plot with crops grown in 2009 as main plots and N rates as subplots. Yield Response & Economic Analysis 2012 Canola N rates: 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 kg ha -1 as sub-plots. Split-plot with crops grown in 2009 as main plots and N rates as subplots Spring wheat N not applied Same as above 2014 Canola N not applied Same as above Grant et al. 2016

31 Wheat Response in 2013: 31 4 Years After Yield and quality response were due mostly to previous N application ( ), and not to preceding crops. At Indian Head, spring wheat protein concentration was slightly higher where wheat or field pea were grown 4 years prior. Interactive effect at Beaverlodge: greater protein concentration at the highest N rate where faba bean GRM or lentil were grown 4 years prior. Interactive effect at Swift Current: protein concentration in the unfertilized plot was lower where wheat or canola rather than pulses were grown 4 years prior. Crops grown 4 years prior affected N accumulation at 3 sites. Grant et al. 2016

32 Canola Response in 2014: 32 5 Years After No significant effect of crops grown 5 years prior. Yield, quality and N accumulation were due mostly to previous N application ( ). Magnitude of response to previous N varied by site. Grant et al. 2016

33 Cropping System Net Revenue 33 Preceding crop Canola-Barley-Canola Wheat-Canola $ ha -1 yr -1 Canola-Barley PC-C-B-C-W-C Wheat 326bc 282ab 291c Canola 279c 259b 284c Faba bean 340b 259b 293c Faba bean GRM 431a 299a 249d Field pea 311bc 276ab 340b Lentil 324bc 275ab 396a Values within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P > 0.05). Pulses had positive benefits in the first three years. Positive pulse benefits were almost non-existent thereafter. Overall, growing lentil and field pea for seed increased the net revenue of the whole cropping system compared to wheat and canola. Khakbazan et al. 2017, in press

34 Summary 34 Pulses grown for seed can enhance the yield of subsequent crops, without adversely affecting quality. Green manure may reduce oil and protein concentration, especially at higher N fertilizer rates. Pulses grown for seed can increase net revenues and energy use efficiency of cropping systems by lowering N fertilizer requirements, leading to lower carbon footprints.

35 Summary 35 Pulse benefits depend on the overall performance of the pulse crop, N 2 fixation, soil fertility, and environment. Faba bean green manure, field pea and lentil grown for seed provided more benefits than faba bean grown for seed. There is a loss of revenue in the green manure phase; subsequent benefits may not be sufficient to compensate for the lost revenue. More beneficial to organic producers or as a fallow replacement. Faba bean seed cost???? Positive pulse benefits in crop rotations may persist for up to three years, depending on site conditions and pulse species.

36 Thank you! For more information, please contact: