No-Till is here to Stay! No-till, Nitrogen and Manure Management Jeffrey Graybill, MS, CCA Penn State Extension Lancaster County, PA jgraybill@psu.edu 717-394-6851 It works! In 2009: 1.25 Million acres of row crops 57.7% no-till 770,000 a. of corn 315,000 a. of beans 110,000 a. of wheat 36% of alfalfa seeding Savings in Time,& Labor Benefits: Erosion, Tilth, OM, Yield? 1
Manure is a valuable resource! (but is it here to stay?) Raises OM in soils Improves water holding capacity Increases CEC and natural fertility Improves soil structure Adds Macro nutrients N, P, K, Mg, Ca, S, Cl Adds Micro nutrients B, Zn, Mo, Fe, Mn, Co, Great micro package And We have a lot of it! Cow 54.0 Billion # of raw manure Hefiers 8.5 B. Beef 4.0 B. Hogs 5.4 B. Layers 1.8 B. Broiler 3.0 B. Total production in PA: 38.4 Million Tons* *Graybill estimate using 2007 Ag Statistics 2
Pennsylvania Manure Production By Region Average Daily Production and Total Nutrient Content of Manure Agronomy Guide Table 1.2-13 Manure % Analysis Animal type Daily production dry matter units N P 2O 5 K 2O Comments Dairy cattle Lactating Cows, Liquid 13 gal/au/day <5% lb/1,000 gal 28 13 25 Production does not include dilution. Analysis includes dilution to approximately 5% solids. Lactating Cows, Solid 106 lb/au/day 12 lb/ton 10 4 8 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Dry Cow 82 lb/au/day lb/ton 9 3 7 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Calf and Heifer 87 lb/au/day lb/ton 7 2 7 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Veal 3.5 gal/au/day 4 lb/1,000 gal 36 27 55 Production and analysis do not include dilution. Beef cattle Cow and Calf 60 lb/au/day 12 lb/ton 11 7 10 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Calf 60 lb/au/day 12 lb/ton 11 7 10 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Steer 75 lb/au/day 8 lb/ton 14 5 8 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Swine These comments apply to all swine categories: Gestation 4 gal/au/day 4 lb/1,000 gal 30 35 15 Production includes a typical amount of in-barn dilution Lactation 10 gal/au/day 2 lb/1,000 gal 25 20 15 water but not rainfall for an outdoor storage Nursery 14 gal/au/day 6 lb/1,000 gal 40 40 25 Analysis includes dilution to approximately Grow-finish 11 gal/au/day 7 lb/1,000 gal 50 55 25 the % dry matter indicated. Farrow to Feeder 7 gal/au/day 4 lb/1,000 gal 40 35 15 Swine, anaerobic lagoon Supernatant 0.25 lb/1,000 gal 2.9 0.6 3.2 Sludge 7.6 lb/1,000 gal 25 23 63 These figures apply only to a treatment lagoon. Sheep 40 lb/au/day 25 lb/ton 23 8 20 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Horse 45 lb/au/day 20 lb/ton 12 5 9 No bedding included in production or analysis figures. Poultry Layer (364 d) 1 26 lb/au/day 41 lb/ton 37 55 31 Pullet (126 d) 1 48 lb/au/day 35 lb/ton 43 46 26 Light Broiler (44 d) 1 22 lb/au/day 34 lb/ton 79 62 42 Production and analysis figures include litter. Heavy Broiler (57 d) 1 20 lb/au/day 25 lb/ton 66 63 47 Production and analysis figures include litter. Turkey (tom) (123 d) 1 13 lb/au/day 60 lb/ton 52 76 42 Production and analysis figures include litter. Turkey (hen) (88 d) 1 11 lb/au/day 65 lb/ton 73 88 46 Production and analysis figures include litter. 1 Typical production days 1990 Crop Reporting Service Data 3
Manure provides a lot of Nitrogen However, N is a slippery beast most of it is lost! Form of N varies with type of manure Mineral forms vs. Organic forms Availability varies w/ time of application w/ handling practices Lost N has negative consequences Agronomic, Economic, & Environmental Manure Nitrogen Availability Agronomy Guide Table 1.2-14 Planned Manure Application Season Spring or Summer Early Fall 2 Late Fall or Winter 3 Grazing Planned Manure Target Crop Utilization Spring utilization by grass hay and small grains Summer utilization by corn, other summer annuals and grass hay Summer utilization by grass hay Fall and spring utilization by grass hay and small grains Following summer utilization by corn or other summer annuals Spring utilization by small grains and grass hay Following summer utilization by corn or other summer annuals Late spring through early fall grazing Year round grazing Application Management Incorporation the same day Incorporation within 1 day Incorporation within 2-4 days Incorporation within 5-7 days Incorporation after 7 days or no incorporation Incorporation within 2 days Incorporation within 3-7 days Incorporation after 7 days or no incorporation Nitrogen Availability Factor 1 Poultry Manure 0.75 0.50 0.45 0.30 0.15 0.50 0.30 0.15 Swine Manure 0.70 0.60 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.45 0.30 0.20 Other Manure 0.50 0.40 0.35 0.30 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.20 All situations 0.15 0.20 0.20 All situations 0.50 0.45 0.40 No cover crop Cover crop harvested for silage Cover crop used as green manure Manure deposited more less continuously by grazing cattle Manure deposited more less continuously by grazing cattle 0.15 0.15 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.45 0.20 0.20 0.40 - - 0.20 - - 0.30 4
Penn State Field Scale Research Broadcast application 6 Treatments Broadcast Disk Injection Aerator/ Aeroway Chisel/Disk DGI Pressure Injection No Manure Variables: (Effects on) Residue Nitrogen loss at NH4 Odor P runoff Not Highlighted Soil Nutrient Erosion Nitrate leaching 6000 gal/ac Surface 5
Shallow disk injection Aerator w/banded manure 6000 gal/ac No manure 6000 gal/ac 30 in (adjustable) 30 6 in Shallow Disk 4 in 6 in Aerator 3 in 6
Residue cover (%) No-Till Manure Management High pressure injection 6000 gal/ac Rock Springs Trials: Residue (2006-2007 average) 100 75 Manure 50 25 6 in 10 in 0 3 in High Pressure 3 in No manure Chisel Plow Pressure Disk Inject Aeration Surface 7
Ammonia emission (kg/ha) Ammonia-N Loss (lbs/ac) No-Till Manure Management Ammonia Loss: more manure on the surface, more ammonia emitted Dairy manure (6,000 gal/ac) 75 50 25 Chisel Aeroway Disc Injection Broadcast Rock Springs Trials: N Loss (2006-2007 average) 60 40 20 99% less 84% less 61% less 79% less 24% less 0 0 2 4 6 0 Manure on soil surface (mg/m 2 ) No manure Chisel Plow Pressure Disk Inject Aeration Surface Data courtesy C. Dell, USDA-ARS Data courtesy C. Dell, USDA-ARS 8
Dissolved P (mg/l) No-Till Manure Management Odor Phosphorus: more on the surface, more dissolved phosphorus in runoff 200 ft Brandt, PSU One Pass with Manure Water extractable P on surface (mg) 9
Total P runoff (lbs/ac) No-Till Manure Management Rock Springs Trials 2006 and 2007 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 What s up with these two??? Alternatives to broadcasting manure in no-till Generally slower Require more horsepower (up to 30%) Equipment costs more Contract application with injectors costs more Greater nutrient use efficiency = lower application rates Can it be competitive economically???? 0 No manure Chisel Plow Pressure Disk Inject Aeration Surface 10
Farm net returen ($/cow) Relative Loss No-Till Manure Management Economics $$$ Integrated Farming Systems Model $775 Application Method Comparison Dairy Manure 1.20 1.00 Taller bars are worse except for economics $750 $725 $700 $675 Chisel Plow Disk injection Aeration Surface Pennsylvania 100 cow dairy 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20 0.00 Surface Chisel Shallow Disk Aerator Application Method Ammonia Nitrate Phosphorus Sediment Odor Economics Data courtesy A. Rotz, USDA-ARS 11
2010-13: NRCS - CIG Program (Conservation Innovation Grant) Research taken from university farms into the hinterland 5 Commercial haulers will receive disk injectors 5 Counties w/ minimum of 2-3 cooperators each Berks Bradford Franklin Lancaster Lehman Ag Dauphin 2010-12: NRCS - CIG Program Manure Broadcast vs. Shallow Disk Injection Replicated strips on corn silage or Grain fields Manure applied in spring Parameters measured: PSNT, Stalk test, Yield, No-till compatibility This is part of an integrated system Will include cover crops, N management, ryelage, etc Soil test nutrient balances will be tracked 12
2010-13: NRCS - CIG Program: Lancaster & Dauphin Co. Manure Broadcast vs. Shallow Disk Injection Kopp farm: Dauphin Co.- Middletown 150 cows, Corn grain after Corn grain Approx. 7,000 gallons broadcast & injected Cover crop after year 1 No additional nutrients Garman farm: Lancaster Co.- N. Holland 60 cows, Corn Silage after Soybeans Approx. 7,500 gallons broadcast & injected Cover crop both years No additional nutrients 2010-12: NRCS - CIG Program: Lancaster & Dauphin Co. Manure Broadcast vs. Shallow Disk Injection Third cooperator added in 2011 Zimmerman farm: Lancaster Co.- Manheim 95 cows, 100 acres Corn silage after Corn silage Approx. 7,000 gallons broadcast & injected Rye then Triticale Clover forage No additional nutrients 13
Shots at Kopp Dairy: Shots at Kopp Dairy: 14
Shots at Kopp Dairy: Shots at Kopp Dairy: Seeding date: August 25 th 30% Crimson Clover 39% Ryegrass 10% Radish 15% M. Red Clover Seeding Rate: 25# acre 750 acres in 10 mixed success 15
Shots at Kopp Dairy: Fall 2010 March 28th, & May 12 th, 2011 Oct 20 th 2010 16
May 12 th, 2011: Injection and broadcasting June 21 st, 2011 (Where is the cover crop?) 17
Kopp Farm: Stalk N near Black Layer 3 reps per treatment each year Kopp Farm Stalk Nitrate (PPM) Year Broadcast Injected 2010 92 156 2011 118 83 2012 64 86 < 700 low; 700 2000 optimum; > 2000 High 2010 2012 Yield Data: Kopp Farm (7,000 Gallon & No additional N, cover crop 2011 only) Kopp Farm Grain Yield (Bu/acre), (% Mst) Year Broadcast Injected 2010 118 Bu 16.5 % 123 Bu 16.0 % 2011 152 Bu 24.7 % 157 Bu 24.1 % 2012 178 Bu 27.7 % 173 bu 27.7 % 18
Shots at the Garman Farm Shots at the Garman Farm 19
Shots at the Garman Farm Shots at the Garman Farm: Oct 13 20
Test field March 8 th, 2011 Crimson Clover Silage May 9 th, 2011 (21% CP, 26% ADF, 34.5% NDF 185 RFV) 21
Application following forage harvest Garman Farm (2010-2012 data), (7,000 Gallon, No N, legume cover crop 2011 only) Garman Farm Stalk Nitrate (PPM) year Broadcast Injected 2010 599 3860 2011 4717 8000 2012 232 534 Garman Farm Silage Yield (t/a) Rep Broadcast Injected 2010 21.1 21.8 2011 18.7 18.5 2012 17.0 17.1 < 700 low; 700 2000 optimum; > 2000 High 22
Zimmerman farm, Manheim Zimmerman Yields: 2011 Yields: T/Acre Treat 1 2 3 averages 1 Injected 18.4 19.3 20.4 19.4 a 2 Broadcast 18.7 19.9 19.6 19.4 a 2012 Yields: Bu/acre Treat 1 2 3 4 5 averages 1broadcast 153.4 153.6 155.8 145.4 175.2 156.7 2injected 133.9 162.0 143.5 164.9 167.4 154.3 23
Franklin Co 3 farms all saw benefits in 2012 Farm 1 22.4 bu/a better grain harvest for injection plots (145.2 vs 122.8 bu/a) Farm 2 1.6 T/A better for injection. However yields at this farm were low (13.9 T/A vs 12.3 T/A) so water probably limited growth. Late planting and poor canopy lead to weed competition. Perhaps injected manure held more moisture here. Farm 3 2.0 T/A better for injection (20.9 vs 18.9 T/A). Yields were better here. Corn planted earlier than at Farm 2. 2013 Farm Information 2013 Lancaster County CIG-NFWF Cooperator Contacts Steve Harnish - dairy; Joel Harnish - crops/manure; Andy Harnish - Business FARM LOCATION: Bluerock Road, Washington Boro, PA Dave Hess 549 Second Lock Rd, Lancaster, PA 17603 Lamar Stoner 100 Marcticville Rd, Lancaster, PA 17603 24
2013 Silage Yield Differences Thoughts: Harnish Farm Average yields from 3 large plots of each treatment Stoner Farm Average yields from 4 large plots of each treatment Concentrated band of manure Dairy manure stimulated root growth What about nutrient stratification What about hog manure Inject plot avg = 23.2 T/A Broadcast avg = 21.6 T/A Injection gain = 1.6 T/A Inject plot avg = 22.6 T/A Broadcast avg = 20.9 T/A Injection gain = 1.7 T/A Corn Stalk Nitrate Tests for all inject and broadcast plots at both farms were in the Low category, meaning that N soil supply was inadequate and probably limited growth. Equipment performance Minimal soil disturbance Could easily no-till with well equipped planter Thick manure can be a problem Maintenance? Time management? Cost? 25
Thoughts: Steve Lehman s Thoughts Can it be Cost Competitive? Application Time Depends on field dimensions Broadcast: 3-5 mph Inject: 6-8 mph Actual emptying time is the same! Estimate about 25% longer on medium field With experience costs will come down Has done several commercial fields (Duck, Hog & Dairy) May be even better with Hog manure?! Yes it can!! No-till, Nitrogen and Manure Management Questions? Jeffrey Graybill, MS, CCA Penn State Extension Lancaster County, PA jgraybill@psu.edu 717-394-6851 : 26