Sulphur Fertilizer Application in Crop Production

Similar documents
G Fertilizing Winter Wheat I: Nitrogen, Potassium, and Micronutrients

Fertilizing Small Grains in Arizona

Benchmark Sampling to Monitor Soil Fertility and Assess Field Variability Problem Background and Research

Manure Management Facts Managing Manure within Tillage Systems and Crop Rotations

Do not oven-dry the soil

Crop Rotations Under Irrigation. Irrigation Agronomy Workshop April 9, 2013 Outlook, SK Gary Kruger PA CCA Irrigation Agrologist

Irrigated Spring Wheat

P 2 O 5, tonnes. Beausejour Steinbach Winkler Portage Brandon Melita Roblin NW Interlake. % testing low

Birdsfoot Trefoil Production and Utilization in Indiana ID-139

Best Management Practices for Nitrogen Use in SOUTHWESTERN AND WEST-CENTRAL MINNESOTA

Pulse Crop Inoculation and Fertilization January 13, 2017 Hill County Extension Pulse Workshop

ORGANIC FIELD CROPS OVERVIEW. Farm production 1 (per cent) Cereals 97% 133,000. Forages 64% 81,000. Pulses 63% 19,000.

ORGANIC VEGETABLE NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

The Potash Development Association Grain Legumes need Potash

Keywords: Phosphorus, sulphur, seed-placed fertilizer, canola (Brassica napus), plant stand, seed yield

SOIL ACIDIFICATION. Clain Jones ) Rick Engel )

LIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1

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

Watermelon Response to Soluble and Slow Release Nitrogen Fertilizers

Analysis of chicken litter

Soil firmness is critical for successful stand establishment in smallseeded legumes and grasses primarily to provide _seed-soil water

The Potash Development Association Forage Maize Fertiliser Requirements

Protecting Your Water and Air Resources

2004 CROP PRODUCTION EXAM Area Crops Contest

From City to Farm: Greenbin-derived Compost Agricultural Trials. Compost Council of Canada Workshop January 22, 2013

Fertility requirements for peas and alternative crops. Rich Koenig, Extension Soil Fertility Specialist

Central Region Ag Agent Update Choteau, April 4, 2017

Nutrient Management of Forages and Legumes Crop Pest Management School Bozeman, January 6, 2010

Livestock production in

Specialists In Soil Fertility, Plant Nutrition and Irrigation Water Quality Management. Larry Zibilske, Ph.D.

Nitrogen Fertilizer Movement in Wheat Production, Yuma

Soil Nutrient Management: Testing, Sources, and Foliar Application Soils Workshops for Hill, Blaine and Phillips Counties Feb.

Cotton Cultural Practices and Fertility Management 1

SULFUR AND NITROGEN FOR PROTEIN BUILDING

FACTORS AFFECTING CROP NEEDS FOR POTASSIUM WESTERN PERSPECTIVE TERRY A. TINDALL AND DALE WESTERMANN MANAGER OF AGRONOMY J.R

For nmental. of 10. Written By: Agustin o, Professor. Developed in. and justice for all. Department of. funded by activities. )

APPENDIX F. Soil Sampling Programs

NITROGEN, SULFUR, POTASSIUM AND PHOSPHORUS FERTILIZATION IN ALFALFA WHEN ARE THEY NECESSARY? Richard T. Koenig 1 ABSTRACT

ALFALFA FERTILITY AND COMPOST MANAGEMENT. Glenn E. Shewmaker 1 and Jason Ellsworth RATIONALE

FERTILIZATION OF FORAGES. Wheatland County May 19, Clain Jones

Crop Nutrition Key Points:

THE BENEFITS OF MANAGING MANURES WITH ALFALFA. Roland D. Meyer

Using No-till and Cover Crops to Reduce Phosphorus Runoff

School of Forest Resources and conservation

ROCKY MOUNTAIN CERTIFIED CROP ADVISER. Local Performance Objectives For Exams and Continuing Education Programs

Manitoba Flax Production

SF723 (Revised) Barley

Grain Sorghum 101. Copyright 2015 Sorghum Partners All Rights Reserved

33. Fate of pesticides in soil and plant.

Resources Conservation Practices Tillage, Manure Management and Water Quality

Nutrient management. Cassava

November 2008 Issue # Nutrient Management Considerations in a High-Cost Environment

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF RYE COVER CROP SYSTEMS

A light rain shortly after the water recedes / drains might be beneficial to wash off the mud on plants.

Timing of Foliar Applications

Understanding Salt Index of Fertilizers. Carrie Laboski Department of Soil Science University of Wisconsin-Madison

Sugarbeet Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates K.A. Rykbost and R.L. Dovell

Tillage RootMax Annual Ryegrass

Number 271 November 12, 2010

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT. philosophy/approach for determining N rate guidelines for corn.

Fertilizing Corn in Minnesota

Liquid vs Dry Phosphorus Fertilizer Formulations with Air Seeders

Nutrient Requirements of Pea

Bourgault Agronomy Trials March 13, 2017 Bourgault Industries Ltd Curtis de Gooijer PAg, CCA

University of California Cooperative Extension Kings County Small Grain News. Volume V, Issue 1 March 2008

EVALUATING WATER REQUIREMENTS OF DEVELOPING WALNUT ORCHARDS IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY

Weed control reality. Landscape weed control James Altland Oregon State University. Redroot pigweed. Weeds. Landscape weed control

SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN FERTILIZER REGIMES FOR SNAP BEANS IN VIRGINIA

COVER CROPS RESEARCH UPDATE. Matt Ruark Ken Albrecht A.J. Bussan Mack Naber Jim Stute Kevin Shelly Heidi Johnson

Nutrient Management (NM)

Nitrogen Rate Determination for Winter Wheat. Maximizing the Yield of Winter Wheat. Dale Cowan Agri-Food Laboratories

Objective 1: Manage the demonstration site using common agricultural practices and monitor runoff quantity and quality.

Using Dairy Manure as a Fertilizer Source for Forage Crops. Workgroup. Marsha Campbell Mathews University of California Farm Advisor Stanislaus County

In-Crop Application of Liquid Hog Manure in Irrigated Potato Production

Vegetable Gardening and Season Extension

SULFUR AND TENNESSEE ROW CROPS

COVER CROPS AND SOIL HEALTH

Water and Nitrogen BMPs for Tomato and Watermelon: Water Quality and Economics 1

Interpreting Nitrate Concentration in Tile Drainage Water

FERTILIZATION AND COVER CROP INTERACTIONS FOR STRIP-TILL COTTON

Manure, Crops and Soil Health Jeff Schoenau PAg Department of Soil Science S.S. Malhi AAFC Melfort

Large-Scale Evaluations of In-Season Liquid NPK Applications to Push Alfalfa Production

Camelina a Potential New Oilseed for Washington, Idaho, and Oregon

ph Management and Lime Material Selection and Application

Managing Soil Fertility for Sustainable Agriculture in Taihang Mountain Piedmont, North China

Unit F: Soil Fertility and Moisture Management. Lesson 3: Applying Fertilizers to Field Crops

SAMPLE FARM Nutrient Management Plan

Lennox Alternative Wheat Interim grower notes 2013/14 (Autumn sown)

SOIL APPLIED AND WATER APPLIED PHOSPHORUS APPLICATION. M. J. Ottman, T. L. Thompson, M. T. Rogers, and S. A. White 1 ABSTRACT

Where do Pulse Crops Fit into Soil Health? The Role of Pulse Crops in Improving Soil Health

Success with Cover Crops

History. Grass Seed Production. Uses. Uses. Oregon Grass Seed. Environment Requirements 2/7/2008

15. Soil Salinity SUMMARY THE ISSUE

Managing Soils for Improved Pasture

Urea Volatilization and Enhanced Efficiency Nitrogen Fertilizers for Small Grains Crop Pest Management School January 6, 2011

Experiences with Kura Clover in Agricultural Systems in Wisconsin

The University of Wisconsin-Platteville

VEGETATIVE WEED ID. 1. This weed is

Improving Fertilizer Use Efficiency for Horticultural Crops. Tom Obreza and Jerry Sartain Soil and Water Science Dept.

LAND APPLICATION OF SWINE MANURE

Transcription:

Revised November 200 Agdex 542-0 Introduction Sulphur Fertilizer Application in Crop Production Sulphur (S) is an essential plant nutrient for all crop production. This situation is especially true for canola, which has a higher requirement for S than other annual crops such as wheat (Table ). Sulphur is essential for protein synthesis and the formation of chlorophyll. Sulphur is required in the development of fertile canola flowers and must be present for good nodule development on alfalfa roots. Table. Nutrients removed by average yields of canola, wheat and alfalfa in Alberta Crop Canola Wheat Alfalfa Yield 35 bu/ac 50 bu/ac Crop Part Seed/ straw Straw/ straw Nutrients Removed (lbs/acre) N P K S 05 22 69 2 06 7 67 3 5 tons/ac Tota l 290 32 250 Adapted from Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Soil and Crop Diagnostic Centre Laboratory Yield Increase tables (N = nitrogen, P = phosphorus, K = potassium, S = sulphur) In Alberta, 7 million acres are considered S deficient for optimum canola production, and the acreage is increasing. Plants use S in the sulphate (SO 4 -S) form, which like nitrate (NO 3 -N), is very mobile in the soil and leachable. Soil organic matter is the primary source of plant available SO 4 -S. Soils that are sandy, low in organic matter and found in upper to mid-slope positions are especially prone to S deficiency since the small amount of SO 4 -S released from organic matter is susceptible to leaching loss. (high S demand). Brown and Dark Brown soils are usually not considered S deficient because they often have gypsum (CaSO 4 ) laden subsoils. However, within all soil zones, various combinations of high rainfall, high yield potential, low organic matter, topography and coarse texture predispose fields to S deficiency. Soils most prone to S deficiency are the Grey Wooded, Thin Black and Black soils (Figure ) because they were formed in areas of relatively high rainfall (>leaching) and have greater yield potential Figure. Soils map of Alberta

Sulphur deficiency symptoms Sulphur deficiency symptoms vary between crops. In canola, deficiency symptoms may begin as early as the one leaf stage (Figure 2a), with the newest leaves turning yellowish green with dark vein coloration. Leaves may take on a cupped appearance, later reddening from the leaf margins (Figures 2b and 2c). Flowers are small and pale, and they produce small underdeveloped purple pods (Figure 2d). Under mild S deficiency, there may be good vegetative growth, but flowers and pods will be underdeveloped. For cereals and forage grasses, yellowing of newly emerging leaves is a strong indicator of S deficiency (Figure 3). Depending on the degree of deficiency, the leaves may be a shade of light green to entirely yellow. Yellowing of the new growth occurs because S is immobile in the plant. Thus, newly emerging leaves cannot scavenge S from older leaves. This situation is in contrast to nitrogen deficiency symptoms in which the older leaves turn yellow first because nitrogen is being scavenged from older leaves to support new growth. Figure 2a: Sulphur deficiency symptoms in canola: sulphur deficient seedling. Figure 2b: Sulphur deficiency symptoms in canola: leaf cupping. Figure 2c: Sulphur deficiency symptoms in canola: dark vein coloration and purpling of leaf margins. Figure 2d: Sulphur deficiency symptoms in canola: small pale flowers and poor pod development. 2

Figure 4b. Sulphur deficiency in alfalfa: In the field, sulphur deficient alfalfa on the right. Similar symptoms Figure 3. Yellowing of newly emerging leaves is an indicator of sulphur deficiency in wheat, other cereals and forage grasses. Sulphur deficient alfalfa is short in stature with pale green to yellow leaves (Figure 4a and b). The yellowing is often but not always localized to newly emerging leaves. Sulphur deficiency can result in nitrogen deficiency in alfalfa since S is required for health and function of nitrogen fixing nodules. Many other stressors can cause similar symptoms in canola to those caused by S deficiency. Group 4 herbicides such as 2,4-D or dicamba (Banvel) can cause leaf cupping in canola (Figure 5a); however, these leaves lack the dark vein coloration associated with S deficiency. Figure 4a. Sulphur deficiency in alfalfa: deficient plant on left is short in stature with yellowing most severe on young leaves. Figure 5a. Canola leaf cupping from Banvel injury. 3

Figure 6. Canola grown from bare seed (left) versus Vitavaxtreated (right ). Inset: Close-up of canola grown from bare seed showing sulphur deficiency resulting from seedling blight. Figure 5b. Purpling of older leaves resulting from Muster sprayed just prior to heavy rainfall. Like S deficiency, Group 2 herbicides can cause purpling of canola leaves, but unlike the leaves of S deficient canola, the purpling does not develop from the leaf margins. Figure 5b shows Muster (ethametsulfuron-methyl) injury on canola. Muster is a registered herbicide (Group 2) on canola, but injury can occur if a heavy rainfall occurs shortly after spraying, facilitating the uptake of the herbicide via the roots. Other Group 2 herbicides such as Ally (metsulfuronmethyl) or Pursuit (imazethapyr) can carryover in the soil and cause purpling of the older canola leaves. If Group 2 herbicides are sprayed directly on canola as a tank contaminant, purpling of the youngest leaves will occur. Boron deficiency can produce thin purple pods in canola, which are hard to distinguish from S deficiency symptoms. Fortunately, boron deficient soils are relatively uncommon. Sun scald produces purpling, but the discoloration is confined to the sunny side of stems and pods. Indirect causes of sulphur deficiency Sulphur deficiency in canola can occur despite adequate application of S fertilizer. Any stressor causing root pruning, reducing the plant s ability to take up nutrients, can potentially produce S and other nutrient deficiencies. Herbicide carryover and acidic soils can cause root pruning and S deficiency symptoms. Root rot disease, which is preventable with seed treatment, can cause the development of sulphur deficiency in canola (Figure 6). Soil testing for sulphur Crop-available S in the soil is determined by measuring the soluble sulphate content. This soil test provides a reliable basis for making S fertilizer recommendations if a representative sample can be obtained from the field. Ideally, samples should be taken just before seeding. However, fall sampling will also provide reliable fertilizer recommendations when taken after the surface soil temperature drops below 5 C (generally after October ). Either a soil sampling auger or probe should be used to obtain samples. Take soil samples from 0 to 6 in., 6 to 2 in. and 2 to 24 in. depths. Fertilizer recommendations for phophorous and potassium are based on the 0 to 6 in. depth. Soil testing laboratories will provide fertilizer recommendations for S based on a 0 to 6 in. depth; however, this approach may provide a poor recommendation because available S in the subsoil will be missed. With each extra sample taken from a greater soil depth (6 to 2 in., 2 to 24 in.), the fertilizer recommendations for S become more precise. Even with proper sampling depth, obtaining a representative sample from the field can still be a challenge. Studies across all soil zones have found the level of crop-available S can vary greatly within a field. For example, grid sampling (0-60 cm) within a field near Stettler found sulphate levels varied from 9 to 6,3 mg/ Kg with the average being 588 mg/kg. Based on a random composite sample, no fertilizer recommendation for S would be made for this field. However, the mode (the value of most frequent occurrence) was mg/kg. Based on this number, S fertilizer would be recommended. If the soil test results from the composite 4

sample were followed, the majority of this field would be lacking adequate S. Obtaining a representative sample from fields highly variable in available S is difficult. The benchmark system of soil sampling can help with fertilizer decisions. With the benchmark system, representative site(s) that are 00 feet by 00 feet are located within the field. Every year, 5 to 20 sample cores are taken from each benchmark site. Provided the benchmark sites are representative, this system gives a better indication of the nutrient status of the field and how it varies from year-to-year. Finding good benchmark sites may be difficult. However as a general rule, top slope and sandy soils are often associated with S deficiency and should be sampled separately from low-lying or heavy textured soils. Sulphur fertilizer type and method of application Sulphur fertilizers are most commonly available in either the soluble sulphate or elemental forms (S ). In Alberta, products containing ammonium sulphate (2-0-0-24, 20-0-0-24 and 9-3-0-22) predominate the marketplace whereas products comprised of elemental S, 0-0-0-90 (Tiger 90 CR ) and 0-0-0-95 (SulFer 95), are only recently finding increased market acceptance. Provided there is adequate soil moisture, ammonium sulphate fertilizers quickly dissolve to release SO 4 -S (the sulphate form). As stated earlier, SO 4 -S is highly mobile in the soil and is the only form of S directly utilized by plants. Because ammonium sulphate fertilizers are so rapidly available, they can be applied to crops in many different ways. The efficiency of soluble sulphate fertilizer is the same whether it is broadcast and incorporated or banded. However, banding may favor crop growth over weeds, since this method places the fertilizer in closer proximity to the crop. Some sulphate loss to runoff may occur if ammonium sulphate fertilizers are broadcast on deep snow covering frozen ground, particularly if slopes are steep. If detected early enough, S deficiency can be corrected in many crops by broadcasting ammonium sulphate. In the case of canola, broadcasting ammonium sulphate up until early flower can correct much of the S deficiency provided there is enough rain to dissolve and move the SO 4 -S into the root zone (Figure 7). The greatest risk from using soluble sulphate fertilizers occurs on sandy soils subjected to heavy rainfall. Under these conditions, SO 4 -S may leach below the rooting zone. Figure 7. Canola on the left was rescued from sulphur deficiency by applying 00 lbs/ac of 20-0-0-24 applied at early flower. For fertilizer manufacturers and producers, elemental sulphur (S ) has the advantages of ready supply, lower production costs and, because of its high analysis, lower transportation cost and fewer drill fills during field operations. In addition, the application of S does not add any extra nitrogen, which could reduce yields of legumes such as alfalfa. Excessive soil nitrogen can reduce legume yields by interfering with proper nodule formation. Despite these benefits, the adoption of S has been limited. Elemental sulphur must be oxidized by soil microbes to SO 4 -S before it is available to crops. Thus, it takes considerably more time for S to become available compared to soluble sulphate forms of fertilizer. The rate of conversion from S to plant available SO 4 -S mainly depends on the particle size to which the product degrades and the method of application. Research has determined that S granules that break down into particles smaller than 50 Microns (0-6 m) convert quickly, since particles of this size (and smaller) provide sufficient surface area for microbes to act on. After two simulated wet/freeze cycles and one rainfall, SulFer 95 (0-0-0-95) are all <74 microns whereas only 25 per cent of Tiger 90 particles were <50 microns. The evolution of elemental S products is rapid. Some of the products available at the time of this publication include Tiger 90cr, SulFer 95, Montana 90, Keg River 85 and Brimstone 90. Industry is continually striving to improve the dispersing nature of their S products, making it difficult to give current comparisons between various S products. Regardless of brand, all S products should be surface broadcast without immediate (or no) incorporation for at least a year before the crop. Elemental sulphur sitting on the soil surface is more easily oxidized by soil microbes because rainfall and freeze/thaw cycles break down and disperse the granules. 5

Banding or immediate incorporation is an inefficient method of applying S. The surrounding soil keeps the S granule intact, reducing the exposed S surface area and vastly reducing the conversion rate to SO 4 -S. Even with broadcast applications, the rate of conversion from S to SO 4 -S can vary from less than a year to several years or more. One research study showed that surface applied applications after seeding of the S product SulFer 95 produced yields similar to 20-0-0-24 (Table 2). By contrast, another study demonstrated that on sandy dry soils, the rate of conversion of S can be much slower. Canola yields were found to be significantly greater when fertilized with a spring banded application of ammonium sulphate (20-0-0-24) compared to spring or even fall broadcast Tiger 90 or SulFer 95 (Table 3, Figure 8). In both studies, surface applied applications of Tiger 90 produced lower yields compared to SulFer 95, indicating a slower conversion rate. Table 2. Effect of sulphur source and method of application on Polish canola yield (two years) Fertilizer No S and No N N only 20-0-0-24 plus N S95 plus N S95 plus N T90 plus N T90 plus N S Rate (lb S/ac) 0 0 N applied as a band at 20 lb N/ac. Application Method None None Band Band Surface Band Surface after seeding (SAS) after seeding (SAS) Yield (bu/ac) Table 3. Effect of sulphur source and method of pplication on Argentine canola yield (Fort Vermilion) a Fertilizer No S 20-0-0-24 Check T90 T60 Sulfer 95 T90 T60 Sulfer 95 Rate (lb/ac) 0 Application Method None Spring banded Spring broadcast Spring broadcast Spring broadcast Fall broadcast Fall broadcast Fall broadcast 34 25 39 35 38 29 32 Yield of Check (%) 2. 00 7.6 58.3 23.8 9.8 49.8 35.7 ll treatment received 72 lb/ac of banded N and 75 lb/ac of broadcast P A 2 O 5. Figure 8. Fall applied Tiger 90 (left) vs spring banded 20-0-0-24 (right). Animal manure as S fertilizer Animal manure, particularly liquid swine effluent, is low in S relative to nitrogen. It has been observed that N:S ratios varied from 7: to 7: for cattle manure and from 3: to 25: for pig slurry. The majority of these N:S ratios are too great for optimum canola production, which requires an N:S ratio of 7:. In the majority of cases, supplemental S fertilization will be required when using animal manure to fertilize canola. Summary Sulphur is an essential plant nutrient that is of particular importance to canola production. Sulphur deficiency is common in Alberta soils and is increasing. Sulphur deficiency symptoms vary between crops. Symptoms of S deficiency in canola include leaf cupping, purpling and underdeveloped pods. If applied early enough, a broadcasted application of ammonium sulphate can correct S deficiency. Fertilizer recommendations should be based on representative soil samples taken to depths of 2 or 24 inches. Fertilizers that supply S in the sulphate form are immediately available to crops. Elemental S fertilizers must be surface applied where they can be oxidized to plant available SO 4 -S. Depending on soil type and environmental conditions, this conversion can take from less than a year to more than two years. 6

Prepared by: Mike Hall - Integrated Crop Management Specialist, Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Fort Vermilion (780) 927-373 Elston Solberg - Manager, Agri-Knowledge Division, Agri-Trend Agrology Photo credits: Figure 2b - Phil Thomas Figure 4a & 5a - Agronomy Unit collection All remaining photos taken by Mike Hall References Eriksen, J. 997. Animal Manure as S Fertilizer. Sulphur in Agriculture. 20:27-. Hall, M.R. 999. Effect of Sulphur Source and Placement on Canola Yield. North Peace Applied Research Association Annual Report. pp.45-48. Penney, D.C., McKenzie, S.C., Nolan, S.C. and Goddard, T.W. Use of Crop Yield and Soil-Landscape Attribute Maps for Variable Rate Fertilization. (unpublished data) /0/M 7