Soil Amendment and Foliar Application Trial 2016 Full Report

Similar documents
Soil Amendment and Foliar Application Trial 2015 Full Report. Overview:

TRI-STATE FERTILIZER UPDATE

FUTURE OF TRI-STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS

UPDATING TRI STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS

DELINEATION OF HIGH RISK FIELD AREAS FOR VARIABLE SOURCE N FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS TO OPTIMIZE CROP N USE EFFICIENCY

2009 Cover Crop Termination Study

Rainout Shelter: A Tool for Understanding the Link between Soil Water, Irrigation, and Corn Yield

Purdue On-Farm Nitrogen Rate Trial Protocol

Nutrient Management in Tile Drained Fields

High-Yielding Soybean: Genetic Gain Fertilizer Nitrogen Interaction

Fertilizer Placement Options Demonstration

Top Strip-Till Practices for Corn and Soybean

Nutrient uptake by corn and soybean, removal, and recycling with crop residue

Soybean Response to Phosphorus and Potassium Fertilization Rate on Silt Loam Soils

Evaluation of Corn, Soybean and Barley Varieties for Certified Organic Production-Crawfordsville Trial, 2001

Do new corn hybrids and yield levels influence potassium fertilizer management?

2011 Protocol for On-Farm Research Trials: Evaluating Early-Applied Foliar Fungicide to Corn

Comparison of Organic and Conventional Crops at the Neely-Kinyon Long-Term Agroecological Research Site

Methods The trial was designed as a randomized complete block.

Maximizing Forage Yields in Corn Silage Systems with Winter Grains

Organic Systems Trial. Advisory Group Meeting 2008

Sidedressing Potassium and Nitrogen on Corn Evaluations made on yield effects.

Sure-K Rate Effect on Corn Yield (2002) Sure-K Rate Effect in Irrigated Corn (2003) Sure-K Rate Management in Irrigated Corn (2005) Potassium

BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND RESEARCH PROBLEM

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF RYE COVER CROP SYSTEMS

WISCONSIN CORN AND SOYBEAN RESPONSES TO FERTILIZER PLACEMENT IN CONSERVATION TILLAGE SYSTEMS 1/ Richard P. Wolkowski 2/

The Nutrient Value of Manure: What s it Really Worth? Brad Joern Department of Agronomy

AGRONOMY 375 EXAM II. November 7, There are 15 questions (plus a bonus question) worth a total of up to 100 points possible. Please be concise.

Objectives: Background:

2013 Purdue Soybean On-Farm Trial ROW WIDTHS

Rice Response to the Time and Rate of Potassium Fertilization

Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production

Effect of Added Micronutrients on Corn Yield (1996) Effect of Micronutrients Added to Corn Planter Fertilizer (2004) Sulfur Addition to Corn Planter

Nitrogen dynamics with a rye cover crop

Introduction. Materials and Methods

2014 Executive Summary

Ohio State University On-Farm Fertilizer Strip Trial Guidelines 2018 and beyond

2013 Purdue Soybean On-Farm Trial SEEDING RATES

Cover Crop Considerations. Charles Ellis Extension Natural Resource Engineer Lincoln County Extension Center

NORTH CAROLINA MEASURED CROP PERFORMANCE CORN and CORN SILAGE 2016

NORTH CAROLINA MEASURED CROP PERFORMANCE CORN and CORN SILAGE 2015

R.W. Heiniger Vernon G. James Research and Extension Center North Carolina State University

NITROGEN VALUE OF POTATO AND ONION SLUDGE FOR CORN PRODUCTION

Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production

Corn/Soybean Efficient Fertility Management - Manure

Western Illinois University/ Allison Organic Research Farm Cover Crop/ Corn Yield Experiment

2011 VERMONT ORGANIC NITROGEN TOPDRESSING OF WINTER WHEAT MATERIALS AND METHODS

2017 Soybean Management Yield Potential. Part 1: Yields

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AGRONOMY DAY. agronomyday.cropsci.illinois.edu

Estimating Nitrogen Mineralization in Organic Potato Production

The value of proper soil testing and use in precision Ag

Bruce Potter, Jeff Irlbeck and Jodie Getting, University of Minnesota Department of Entomology and Southwest Research and Outreach Center

IMPACT OF N FERTILIZER SOURCE AND DRAINAGE ON SPATIAL VARIATION IN NITROGEN USE EFFICIENCY AND ENVIRONMENTAL N LOSS. Steve Anderson Professor

On-Farm Corn and Soybean Planter Demonstration Trials

AGRONOMY 375 Exam II Key March 30, 2007

Evaluation of Tillage and Crop Rotation Effects in Certified Organic Production McNay Trial, 2002

2014 Winter Canola Soil Preparation x Fertility Timing Trial

Soybean and Corn Hybrid Variety Performance Under Organic and Conventional Systems

Use of Calcium Ammonium Nitrate for Fertilizing Smooth Bromegrass and Timothy Seed Stands

THE CHALLENGE OF PREDICTING NITROGEN AVAILABILITY FROM SOILS

2015 Tillage Radish Planting Date x Seeding Rate Trial

Effective Nitrogen and Potassium Banding for Corn with Strip Tillage and High-Clearance Applicators

Effect of a rye cover crop and crop residue removal on corn nitrogen fertilization

EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF AGRI-SC AND AGRISPON ON CORN AT WATERLOO IOWA IN 1990

2018 Soybean Management Yield Potential

Western Illinois University/ Allison Organic Research Farm Organic Dry Blended Fertilizer Study in Corn

Corn Residue Removal by Grazing and Effects on Grain Yield. Introduction

Corn Responds Positively to Rate & Timing of Environmentally Smart Nitrogen (ESN) & Urea

Cost-Effective N Management Using Reduced Rates of Polymer Coated Urea in Corn

2018 Soybean Planting Date x Variety Trial

(IRRIGATED & & DRYLAND

St. Peter Wellhead Protection

Soybean Response to Seeding Rates in 30-Inch Row Spacing

Optimizing Strip-Till and No-Till Systems for Corn in the Biofuel Era

CORN NITROGEN RATE RESPONSE AND CROP YIELD IN A RYE COVER CROP SYSTEM. Introduction

Peggy F. Lamb, Agronomy Research Associate, NARC, Havre Gregg R. Carlson, Associate Professor of Agronomy, NARC, Havre

Strip-till Research Results: Rotation, Automatic Guidance, and Fertilizer Placement. Tony J. Vyn & Graduate Students, Colleagues & Farmers

Although the use of urea ammonium

SULFUR FERTILIZATION RESPONSE IN IOWA CORN AND SOYBEAN PRODUCTION. John E. Sawyer, Brian Lang, and Daniel W. Barker 1

Nitrogen and Potassium Fertilizer Placement Consequences for Corn: A Look at Controlling Factors

Economics of Irrigation Ending Date for Corn 1

On-Farm Corn and Soybean Fertilizer Demonstration Trials

John Kovar and Doug Karlen. David Laird

ECONOMICS OF IRRIGATION ENDING DATE FOR CORN: USING FIELD DEMONSTRATION RESULTS

CONVENTIONAL, STRIP, AND NO TILLAGE CORN PRODUCTION UNDER DIFFERENT IRRIGATION CAPACITIES

Evaluation of soil fertility through cropping systems and different soil and climatic conditions

Corn Production: A Systems Approach. Sandy Endicott Senior Agronomy Manager, Canada and Latin America

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT. Figure 1. The availability of P is affected by soil ph.

2001 Beef Research Report Iowa State University

Emergence Uniformity in Corn: Is it Essential for Ear Size Consistency and Improved Yield?

The Effect of Phosphorus Fertilizer Rate and Application Time on Rice Growth and Yield

FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY

CORN AND SOYBEAN UPDATES FOR Angela McClure Corn and Soybean Specialist

LIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1

The Mid-Term Report Card: What does Corn Ear-Leaf Nutrient Analysis Tell Us?

How Does Row Placed Fertilizer Fit in Today s Agriculture. Dick Wolkowski Extension Soil Scientist University of Wisconsin

INCREASING ROOT MASS AND YIELD IN CORN THROUGH THE USE OF FERTILIZER ADDITIVES

NITROGEN MANAGEMENT USING REDUCED RATES OF POLYMER COATED UREA IN CORN

Minnesota Nutrient Management Initiative. On-Farm Evaluation of Nitrogen and Phosphorous Nutrient Management

Transcription:

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 applications products aimed at improving the mineral nutrition and productivity of crops. This service intends to provide timely and unbiased information on these products for farmers. In 216, we tested submitted products from the following companies: 1) AgZyme by Ag Concepts: http://agconcepts.com/products/agzyme/ 2) BAM-FX by Zero Gravity Solutions: http://bamagsolutions.com/ Corn Results Table 1. Soil Properties of the Three Corn Sites Before Application of Product. County ph CEC OM P K Ca Mg S cmol/1g (%) ----------------------- ppm ---------------------- Clark 6.8.9 2.2 27 123 2277 3 9 Wayne 6.6 7.6 1.6 26 149 1342 26 11 Wood 6.8 16. 2.6 62 199 26 44 11 Table 2. Corn Grain Yields for All Sites. Treatment Grain Yield (bu/acre) Control --.7 -- BAM-FX -- 14. -- Least Significant Difference 13.9 Interpretation: No treatment yielded significantly greater than the control. Soybean Results Table 3. Soil Properties of the Three Soybean Sites Before Application of Product. County ph CEC OM P K Ca Mg S cmol/1g (%) ----------------------- ppm ---------------------- Clark 6.6 12.1 1.8 22 119 1728 2 8 Wayne 6.7 9. 2. 23 133 1449 248 1 Wood 6.4 16.9 2.6 39 29 27 371 11

Table 4. Soybean Grain Yields for All Sites. Treatment Grain Yield (bu/acre) Control 71.2 37.4 67.1 AgZyme 68.1 43.3 6.4 BAM-FX -- 43.6 -- Least Significant Difference 3.7 1.7 2.6 Interpretation: At all three sites, no treatment yielded significantly greater than the control. Conclusions Across all three sites, no consistent trends were found with any of the tested products. No product significantly affected a measured property at more than 1 site. For both corn and soybean, no product treatment yielded significantly greater grain than the untreated control. As a result, only corn and soybean grain yields are reported here. This is only one year of field data, so interpretations should be made with caution, especially considering the dry weather encountered in the 216 field season. More information can be found: http://go.osu.edu/safa Please contact Steve Culman for more information: culman.2@osu.edu Methods: Field Operations Corn and soybean plots were planted at three sites on Ohio State University Research Farms (Clark County at the Western Agricultural Research Station in S. Charleston, Wayne County at the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center in Wooster and Wood County at the Northwest Agricultural Research Station in Custar). A randomized complete block design was implemented at each site with four replications. Sites were managed conventionally using best management practices and fertility followed the Tri-State Recommendations. Fields at all three sites have followed a cornsoybean rotation. Corn and soybean planted this year continued with that respective rotation pattern. All plots were 1 feet wide (4 rows of 3-inch corn, 7 8 rows of -inch soybean). Plot lengths for both crops were 4 feet in Clark and Wood Counties and 3 feet in Wayne County. Products were applied as instructed on the registration forms.

Clark County. No P or K fertilizer was applied this year and both crops were planted no-till. For corn, Seed Consultants hybrid SCS166AMX was planted on May 24 th at 33, seeds per acre. All plots were side-dressed with 28% UAN on June 21 st (total N rate 18 lbs/ acre) and corn was harvested on October 26, 216. For soybeans, Pioneer variety P34T72R was planted on May 2th in -inch rows at 17, seeds per acre and harvested on October 14, 216. Wayne County. A spring surface broadcast of K was applied to both crops with lbs. K 2 O/ acre on all corn plots and 2 lbs. K 2 O/acre on all soybean plots. Both crops were planted no-till. For corn, Seed Consultants hybrid SCS1HQ34 was planted on May 2 th at 33, seed per acre. Side-dressing of 28% UAN occurred on June 27 th (total N rate 18 lbs/ acre) and corn was harvested on October 29, 216. For soybean, Seed Consultants variety SCS9314RR was planted on May 27 th in -inch rows at 17, seed per acre and harvested on October 14, 216. Wood County. No P or K fertilizer was applied at this site. For the corn plots, the field was tilled in the fall of 2 with one pass of a disk and one pass of a field cultivator. Pioneer hybrid P6AM was planted on May 2 th at 34, seeds per acre. Side-dressing of 28% UAN occurred on June 14 th (total N rate 18 lbs/ acre) and corn was harvested on October 31, 216. For soybean plots, tillage also occurred in the fall of 2 with two passes of a disk. Pioneer variety 31T11 was planted on May 23 rd in -inch rows at 17, seeds per acre and harvested on September 1, 216. Data Collection: 1. Complete soil sample analysis prior to planting. Soil samples were collected by using a 7/8 inch push probe to composite eight, 8-inch soil cores from each plot. Soils were air-dried and sent to Spectrum Analytic for an S3 complete soil test: spectrumanalytic.com 2. Initial stand counts at V for corn and soybean. Initial stand counts were collected for corn plots by counting plants in a 17 feet, inch length (1/1 th of an acre with 3-inch rows) within one of the plot harvest rows. Initial stand counts for soybeans were collected by counting the number of plants in a 6 feet length within each of two harvest rows. 3. Whole plant sampling at V for total biomass and complete nutrient analysis. Vegetative stage plant samples were collected by clipping 1 plants at ground level from the plot border rows. Plants were oven-dried and weighed for total biomass. Samples were then sent to Spectrum Analytic for nutrient analysis (P2 test). 4. Leaf sampling at R1 for corn and soybean for complete nutrient analysis. Reproductive stage corn leaf tissue samples were collected by removing the ear leaf from 1 randomly selected plants. Soybean tissue samples were collected by removing the uppermost fully mature leaf trifoliate from 12 randomly selected plants. Samples were oven-dried and sent to Spectrum Analytic for processing and nutrient analysis (P2 test).. Final stand counts at maturity. Final stand counts for corn were collected by counting all plants in the center two harvest rows in each plot. Final stand counts for soybeans were

collected by counting the number of plants within a 6 feet length in each of two harvest rows. 6. Harvest grain yield with complete grain nutrient analysis. Grain was harvested with a small plot combine and moisture was adjusted to.% for corn and 13% for soybeans. A subsample of grain was oven-dried and sent to Spectrum Analytic for processing and nutrient analysis (P2 test). 216 Weather Data More information can be found here: http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/newweather/default.asp 2 Cumulative Precipitation (inches) 1 2 1 2 1 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Date Figure 1. 216 Cumulative Precipitation at the three field sites from May November.

Table 1. Cumulative Precipitation (inches) by Month at the three field sites. Site May June July August September October Clark 2.9 1.6 4.1. 4.8 1.8 Wayne 2. 1.3 2.9 3.9 2.4 3.8 Wood 2.2 2.9 1.6 3.1 4. 2.1 3 Growing Degree Days 2 1 3 2 1 3 2 1 May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Date Figure 2. 216 Cumulative Growing Degree Days at the three field sites from May November. Table 2. Average Temperatures (F) by Month at the three field sites. Site May June July August September October Clark 61 73 7 76 7 9 Wayne 9 7 74 7 68 6 Wood 6 72 7 76 69 8