Should I be Concerned About High Soil Test Levels on my Farm?

Similar documents
Nutrient Management in Crop Production

Agriculture Action Packet DRAFT Attachment # FARM MAP EXAMPLE DRAFT

Act 38 Nutrient Balance Sheet Standard Format Word Version User Guide & Sample Nutrient Balance Sheet October 2017

Irrigated Spring Wheat

Fertilizing Corn in Minnesota

To 4R or Not to 4R Is There an Option?

Exercise 2: Determining a Phosphorus Nutrient Recommendation and Fertilizer Rate

HOW CHANGES IN NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS WILL AFFECT FORAGE PRODUCTION

Phosphorus for the Ontario CCA 4R Nutrient Management Specialty

Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project

Lessons Learned from Iowa On-Farm Studies Testing Manure Nitrogen Availability

Phosphate Fertilizer Management for Irrigated Corn Production

Update to Iowa phosphorus, potassium, and lime recommendations

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

Outline. Farmer Goals/Needs for their Soil 1/23/2017. Compost. Challenges Using Compost. Other Support

Attachment # 1. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Code. Title 25. Environmental Protection. Department of Environmental Protection

Do not oven-dry the soil

2004 CROP PRODUCTION EXAM Area Crops Contest

Grant County Blake s Point RE, LLC information sheet for a sow farm

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

Using No-till and Cover Crops to Reduce Phosphorus Runoff

Nutrient Management (NM)

Increasing Importance of Sulfur for Field Crops

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

LIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1

Irrigating for Maximum Economic Return with Limited Water

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

LAND APPLICATION OF SWINE MANURE

Phosphorus for the Ontario CCA 4R Nutrient Management Specialty

Liquid Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project

TRI-STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS CORN, SOYBEANS, WHEAT & ALFALFA FOR. Michigan State University The Ohio State University Purdue University

FACTORS THAT AFFECT THE PRICE OF MANURE AS A FERTILIZER Ray Massey, Economist University of Missouri, Commercial Ag Program

Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Center Webcast Series June 20, From: G. Albrecht P. Ristow

Land Application and Nutrient Management

Foliar Fertilization of Field Crops

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

Interpreting Nitrate Concentration in Tile Drainage Water

Nutrient Management in Kentucky

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

Three-Fold Manure Management Data Collection Sheet

A Presentation of the 2011 IA MN SD Drainage Research Forum. November 22, 2011 Okoboji, Iowa

Recordkeeping Manure and Fertilizer. Marilyn L. Thelen, Educator MSU Extension

know and what we don t

Agricultural Phosphorus Management

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

Determining Optimum Nitrogen Application Rates for Corn Larry Bundy, Todd Andraski, Carrie Laboski, and Scott Sturgul 1

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

Science Project. Michael Jones

Precision Ag. Back to Basics

The Vermont Dairy Farm Sustainability Project, Inc.

OSU Soil Test Interpretations

The 4Rs and Potassium. Sally Flis, Ph.D., CCA. Director of Agronomy, The Fertilizer Institute, Washington, D.C.

Using Paired Edge of Field Data to Assess Impacts of Management on Surface and Subsurface P Loss

Worksheet for Calculating Biosolids Application Rates in Agriculture

ph Management and Lime Material Selection and Application

On Farm Assessment of Critical Soil Test Phosphorus and Potassium Values in Minnesota. AFREC Year 4 Summary Report 8/31/2014 for

Nitrogen Fertilizer Movement in Wheat Production, Yuma

Soil Test Interpretations and Fertilizer Recommendations

1. Wheat stubble burning: Pros and Cons 1 2. Management options for drought-stressed corn 3

Nitrogen Management Guidelines for Corn in Indiana

Utilizing farmers changed nitrogen application technologies to demonstrate improved nutrient management practices year 2

Corn/Soybean Efficient Fertility Management. Robert Mullen Nutrient Management/Soil Fertility Specialist Ohio State University January 14, 2008

Kansas Custom Rates 2016

No-till, Nitrogen and Manure Management

Bulletin 604 OHIO LIVESTOCK MANURE MANAGEMENT GUIDE

Manure Spreader Calibration

Particulate Soil Phosphorus and Eutrophication in Lakes and Streams

Resources Conservation Practices Tillage, Manure Management and Water Quality

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

Cover Crops and Nutrient Cycling TIM REINBOTT

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

Monroe Land & Livestock Lovelock, Nevada

SULFUR AND NITROGEN FOR PROTEIN BUILDING

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

Swine Manure Production and Nutrient Content

Long-term Impacts of Poultry Manure Application

Nitrate, Well Testing and Rules

Manure Management Manual Revisions

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

Nutrient Management for Vegetable Production

How Do Cover Crops Affect Fertilizer Recommendations?

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF RYE COVER CROP SYSTEMS

2013 Purdue Soybean On-Farm Trial ROW WIDTHS

2012 STATE FFA FARM BUSINESS MANAGEMENT TEST PART 2. Financial Statements (FINPACK Balance Sheets found in the resource information)

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

From the Fields to the Great Lakes

The estimated costs of corn, corn silage, soybeans,

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

Michigan Dairy Review

Developed and Edited by

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

Pulp and paper companies in Maine

What Works: Farming Practices

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

Estimated Costs of Crop Production in Iowa 2002

Kapil Arora, Carl Pederson, Dr. Matt Helmers, and Dr. Ramesh Kanwar. DATE SUBMITTED: October 23, INDUSTRY SUMMARY

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

Methods The trial was designed as a randomized complete block.

SULFUR AND TENNESSEE ROW CROPS

SMart On-Farm Part 1. Michigan Soybean Committee, PO Box 287, Frankenmuth, MI FRANKENMUTH, MI PERMIT 20 PAID US POSTAGE NON-PROFIT

Transcription:

Should I be Concerned About High Soil Test Levels on my Farm? Ohio Swine Symposium, February 11, 2015 Greg LaBarge, Field Specialist Agronomic Systems Ohio State University Extension labarge.1@osu.edu

How much water per day should a healthy adult living in a temperate climate drink? Men is roughly 3 liters Women is 2.2 liters The Institute of Medicine

As an Agronomist Manure is great for plant production Manure provides most (if not all) of the 16 essential elements for crop production Adds stable organic matter components Take advantage of moisture in liquids

Discussion How high is too high? Water Quality Crop production? Nutrient Balance Legislation

From both economic return and water quality there are two priority situations with phosphorus Fields that have a high soil test level As soil test are higher you lose nutrient use efficiency and more nutrient enters stream at edge of field Risk at fertilizer application Nutrient on the surface when a runoff producing rainfall event occurs (closer event is to application higher the loss)

Potential for DRP loss based on soil test Source: Sharpley, et.al. Journal of Environmental Quality 2001 30: 6: 2026-2036

Soil Test and Water Quality Ohio Edge of Field Study Source: Kevin King

Edge of Field Studies Soil silt loam, silty clay loam and clay loam Soil test range 9-380 ppm M3 Manure 12 sites (6 pairs) Tillage (No-till, strip till, conservation) Base line period

Edge of field study-year 1-2 Results

Why the Agricultural Focus? Back of the envelope calculations State Ohio Indiana Acres 3,806,780 821,540 Michigan 1,313,420 Total 5,941,740 Percentage Ag Ag Acres Lbs/A (EOF 1 Year) 72% 4,278,052 1.7 US Tons P (DRP) 3,636 P task Force non point US Tons 4,395

Tri-State Critical Level and Maintenance Limit Provide Target Range for Soil Test Nutrient Phosphorus (Bray P1) Crops in Rotation Cation Exchange Capacity (CEC) Critical Level Maintenance Limit Corn & NA 15 30 Soybean Wheat & Alfalfa NA 25 40 Potassium NA 10 100 130 NA 20 125 155

Crop Effects of High P and K Soil Test Values Phosphorus Zinc deficiency is seen on soils with high P levels especially where ph is more alkaline (6.5 or higher) Potassium Antagonism to uptake of several nutrient especially Magnesium (in forages) Forage nutrient imbalances Salt Injury

Zinc Deficiency Source: University of Illinois

Salt Injury Source: University of Delaware-Kent County

Nutrient Balance - a check of soil test results To calculate : beginning soil test and ending soil test for the period Crop yields off yield map or from weighed strips corresponding to soil test point Fertilizer/manure applied for period in lbs P205/acre Outcomes of Nutrient Balance Calculation How did soil test level change; did soil test level increase or decrease Did we apply more nutrient or less nutrient than crop removed? Is our sampling point reliable based on nutrient balance observed? What is the rate of soil test change; up or down as it relates to yield taken off and fertilizer applied?

Nutrient Balance Crop Removal Total Nutrient Removal From Grain and Forage Track trends in soil test value and yield response over time Fertilizer Added Total of Annual Fertilizer Application per Acre Crop Removal minus Fertilizer Added Change in Soil Value=Start-End Pounds of P205 to Change soil test 1ppm Nappanee Soil Type NW Ohio

Phosphorus and Potassium-Expected Soil Test Changes The buildup equations in the Tri-states 6 to 10 lbs./a of K2O are required to change soil test K one ppm (CEC interaction). 20 lbs./a of P2O5 to change soil test P levels one ppm.

Phosphorus Crop Removal Rates Crop Unit of Yield Removal Rate P 2 O 5 in lbs. per bushel 2013 Ohio Yield 2013 Removal Rate P 2 O 5 in lbs. Corn bushel 0.37 174 64 Corn Silage ton 3.30 28 92 Soybeans bushel 0.80 49 39 Wheat-Grain bushel 0.63 63 40 Wheat-Straw bushel 0.09 63 6 Alfalfa ton 13.00 3.5 46

Potassium Crop Removal Rates Crop Unit of Yield Removal Rate K 2 O in lbs. per bushel 2013 Ohio Yield 2013 Removal Rate K 2 O in lbs. Corn bushel 0.27 174 47 Corn Silage ton 8.00 28 224 Soybeans bushel 1.40 49 69 Wheat-Grain bushel 0.37 63 23 Wheat- bushel 0.91 63 60 Straw Alfalfa ton 50.00 3.5 175

Nutrient Balance- Bi-Annual Application

Nutrient Balance- Annual Application

Swine Finishing (3) 2002 Total Acres under Center Pivot = 103 acres Total Annual Rate under Pivots = 30,000 gallons Manure Analysis lbs per 1,000 gallons NH4 Organic N P2O5 K2O 6.3 lbs 2.2 lbs 2.7 lbs 18.8 lbs Total K2O applied per acre per year = 564 lbs. Total P2O5 applied per acre per year = 81 lbs Site: 1 2 3 K Level (ppm) 303 560 345 TEC 15 15 16

Potassium Levels under Manure Irrigation Swine Farrowing(1) 2003 Total Acres under Center Pivot = 53 acres Total Annual Rate under Pivot = 108,000 gallons Manure Analysis lbs per 1,000 gallons NH4 Organic N P2O5 K2O 4.64 lbs 0.25 lbs 0.41 lbs 7.29 lbs Total K 2 O applied per acre per year = 787 lbs. Total P 2 O 5 applied per acre per year = 44 lbs Soil Test Values Center Pivot Field divided into 4 quads Site: 1 2 3 4 K Level (ppm) 244 402 745 902 TEC 22 19 19 16

High Soil Test Fields- Legacy Fields Phosphorus Soil Test Value Annual Removal P 2 O 5 250 bu Corn Crop Annual Soil Test reduction in ppm Years to Critical Level 15 ppm 1000 ppm 92.5 4.6 214 300 ppm 92.5 4.6 60 200 ppm 92.5 4.6 40 150 ppm 92.5 4.6 30 80 ppm 92.5 4.6 14 50 ppm 92.5 4.6 8

Potential for DRP loss based on soil test Source: Sharpley, et.al. Journal of Environmental Quality 2001 30: 6: 2026-2036

Edge of field study-year 1-2 Results

What's next with legislation?

Legislation Ohio Ag Pollution Abatement Laws-Sediment Bound Nutrient Ohio Permitted Livestock Facilities-Environmental impact (2014) House Bill 150- Established Agricultural Fertilizer Applicators Certification by 9/30/17 and Affirmative Defense against civil law suite process. (2015 Proposed) Senate Bill 1 Application Conditions Criteria 2015 Bloom, then what???

Summary Manure is a great source of nutrients, that when used in an agronomic way, can lower fertilizer purchases. Look at manure application logistics and plan out based on soil test levels strategies to take the greatest advantage. When soil test levels are built up beyond agronomic needs the risk of off site movement increase dramatically. There will be another round of legislation in 2015, it will most likely affect application field conditions. What is next when the algae bloom happens in summer 2015?

Questions? For More Information http://agcrops.osu.edu/specialists/fertility Greg LaBarge Field Specialist, Agronomic Systems labarge.1@osu.edu