Sensor Based Fertilizer Nitrogen Management. Jac J. Varco Dept. of Plant and Soil Sciences

Similar documents
Using Multispectral Aerial Imagery to Estimate the Growth of Cotton Fertilized With Poultry Litter and Inorganic Nitrogen

Measuring canopy nitrogen nutrition in tobacco plants using hyper spectrum parameters

Improving Crop Input Use Efficiency Through Use Of Precision Ag Tools John Shanahan, Agronomy Research Manager

QUANTIFYING CORN N DEFICIENCY WITH ACTIVE CANOPY SENSORS. John E. Sawyer and Daniel W. Barker 1

Application of Remote Sensing On the Environment, Agriculture and Other Uses in Nepal

Precision Agriculture. John Nowatzki Extension Ag Machine Systems Specialist

ASSESSING BIOMASS YIELD OF KALE (BRASSICA OLERACEA VAR. ACEPHALA L.) FIELDS USING MULTI-SPECTRAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY

Development of On-the-go Nitrogen Application Algorithms for Cotton Production Based on Active Reflectance Sensors

2010 Beltwide Cotton Conferences, New Orleans, Louisiana, January 4-7, 2010

Managing Nitrogen for Corn. Jim Camberato Dan Emmert Bob Nielsen Brad Joern

High spatial and temporal variability of soil nitrate

Remote Sensing (C) Team Name: Student Name(s):

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

Plant Growth Regulators for Cotton

Estimating the Nitrogen Nutrition Index of Winter Wheat Using an Active Canopy Sensor in the North China Plain

Use of Chlorophyll Meters to Assess Nitrogen Fertilization Requirements for Optimum Wheat Grain and Silage Yield and Quality

A NOVEL SCREENING METHOD OF WATER STRESS IN MULTIPLE COTTON VARIETIES

NITROGEN MANAGEMENT 2013 YWTG

Sidedress. trogen Uptake. Seasonal Nit. 80% of requirement after V8-10

Cotton Cultural Practices and Fertility Management 1

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

Wheat and Cotton Nitrogen Research in 2005 and 2006 University of Missouri Delta Center, Portageville, MO Gene Stevens, David Dunn, and Matthew Rhine

Optimizing Nitrogen and Irrigation Timing for Corn Fertigation Applications Using Remote Sensing

Nitrogen Management in Sugarcane and Cotton in Louisiana

Fertilizer Management for Plant Health and Environmental Water Quality Protection

REAL-TIME VARIABLE RATE TECHNOLOGIES (VRT) PRECISION AGRICULTURE TECHNOLOGY ARCHITECTURE OUTLINE

ABSTRACT. The use of plant growth regulators (PGR) on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) to

Alternative Systems for Cultivating and Side Dressing Specialty Crops for Improved Nitrogen Use Efficiency

Sentinel-2 for agriculture and land surface monitoring from field level to national scale

Placement and Timing of Fertilizer Application for Greater Efficiency. Dave Franzen, PhD Professor of Soil Science NDSU Extension Soil Specialist

Sensor Based Nitrogen Management for Corn Production in Coastal Plain Soils

Abstract. Introduction

Estimating the Cost of Delaying Irrigation for Cotton on Clay Soil

Managing Pistachio Nutrition. Patrick Brown Muhammad Ismail Siddiqui

PROFIT POTENTIAL USING SPLIT PIVOT IRRIGATION STRATEGIES IN COTTON PRODUCTION. Bob Glodt. and Layton Schur

Preview of Summer 2014 Revision of Corn N Recommendations and N Issues

Growth Stage, Development, and Spatial Variability in Corn Evaluated Using Optical Sensor Readings

Monitoring water quality of the Southeastern Mediterranean sea using remote sensing

Evaluation of Compact Bed Geometries for Water, Nutrient, and Economic Efficiency for Drip-Irrigated Tomato and Pepper

Crop Monitoring System in Bangladesh, Main Challenges, Recent Initiatives and Prospects

Crop Growth Monitor System with Coupling of AVHRR and VGT Data 1

Agricumbia Study. Two Year Fertilization Study of Two Bermudagrass Cultivars. Summary: First Year Results:

Remote sensing: A suitable technology for crop insurance?

Nitrogen BMPs for horticultural crop production Tim Hartz UC Davis

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

Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)-Based Remote Sensing for Crop Phenotyping

Osamu Shigetomi 2 Saga Prefectural Agricultural Research Institute

New Approaches to Almond Nutrient Management. Sebastian Saa-Silva, Saiful Muhammad, Patrick Brown UC-Davis

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

The Role of Soil Testing in Precision Agriculture

Efficient nitrogen fertility and irrigation management in California processing tomato production

Nutrient Control BMPs: Soil Testing Plant Tissue Analysis Fertilizer Application Spill Prevention

Fertilizer Management in No- Tillage Cucurbits

Sampling, Nutrient Analysis, and Recommendations

CONTENTS. Information contained herein is available to all persons without regard to race, color, sex, or national origin. Page

1965 Comparing pima and upland cotton growth, development and fruit retention in california s San Joaquin Valley

Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production

Correlation between vegetation indices and nitrogen leaf content and dry matter production in Brachiaria decumbens

Real-time Live Fuel Moisture Retrieval with MODIS Measurements

Use of Sentinel 2 for agricultural operational applications at farm level - Talking Fields

Cotton Fertilization on Black Belt Soils - - Results of 2002 and 2003 On-farm Tests

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

AIRBORNE MAPPING OF VEGETATION CHANGES IN RECLAIMED AREAS AT HIGHLAND VALLEY BETWEEN 2001 AND Gary Borstad, Leslie Brown, Mar Martinez

wheat N small plot and OFT studies

Recovery From Hail Damage - Good Luck or Good Management?

Timing of Foliar Applications

A Remote Sensing Based Urban Tree Inventory for the Mississippi State University Campus

NPX2800 FERTILIZER APPLICATORS

Fertigation management for tomato production in saline soils

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

Grain Yield. Soybean Growth and Development. Yield Components of Soybean. Plants/Branches per area Lauer

CORN, COTTON AND SOYBEAN RESPONSE TO REDUCED TILLAGE STALE SEEDBED SYSTEMS

Precision Ag Opportunities for Peanut Producers

SULFUR AND TENNESSEE ROW CROPS

Institute of Ag Professionals

Crop Physiology Laboratory Department of Crop Sciences University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

LAND APPLICATION OF DAIRY MANURE

Design of an Agricultural Runoff Monitoring & Incentive System for Maryland

GOA Trial Site Report

Nitrogen Management on Sandy Soils: Review of BMPs. Carl Rosen Department of Soil Water and Climate University of Minnesota

SOILS AND PLANT NUTRITION

Irrigation Scheduling: Sensors, Technical Tools, and Apps

The role of Remote Sensing in Irrigation Monitoring and Management. Mutlu Ozdogan

LAND APPLICATION OF POULTRY MANURE

Evaluation of a method of estimating agricultural chemical use

IMPACT OF CONSERVATION PRODUCTION PRACTICES ON SOIL MOISTURE AVAILABILITY IN ALLUVIAL SOILS

RESEARCH REPORT SUWANNEE VALLEY AREC 92-5 August, 1992 COMPARISON OF VARIOUS N SCHEDULING METHODS FOR SNAPBEANS

Effects of Different Fertilizers and Continuous No-Till Production on Diseases, Growth, and Yield of Staked Tomato

The Use of Crop Sensors and Variable Rate Technology for Precision Application of Nitrogen to Cotton

Application of remote sensing technique for rice precision farming

IRRIGATED MULTIPLE-CROPPING USING BROILER LITTER IN CONSERVATION TILLAGE

ГЕОЛОГИЯ МЕСТОРОЖДЕНИЙ ПОЛЕЗНЫХ ИСКОПАЕМЫХ

Objectives: 1) Was there a relationship between irrigation rate in 2002 (50, 75, and 100 % ET) and pod rot at harvest?

EASY Efficient Agriculture Systems. Precision farming

Evaluation of Fertilizer Additives for Enhanced Nitrogen Efficiency in Corn. Final Project Report (2013 and 2014)

SandYare the strata-weighted mean, and standard

Forest Changes and Biomass Estimation

Deliverable 2 Final Report and Proposed P Soil Test Calibration FDACS Contract

Spatial Patterns of Water and Nitrogen Response Within Corn Production Fields

Transcription:

Sensor Based Fertilizer Nitrogen Management Jac J. Varco Dept. of Plant and Soil Sciences Mississippi State University

Nitrogen in Cotton Production Increased costs linked to energy costs Deficiency limits yield and lowers quality Excess rank growth, hbll boll rot, difficulty in harvesting, and increased need for growth regulators, insecticides, and defoliants

N availability is a determinant of Biomass Leaf area Greenness Physiological processes Yield

Theoretical Basis for Using Crop Reflectance Crop pgrowth is a result of an integration of all factors influencing growth including the size of the available soil N pool, available water, and climatic conditions Remote sensing/crop reflectance is an indication of growth Selected crop reflectance indices can be used as surrogate measurements e e for leaf N and N content t Spatial variances in crop reflectance are an indication of growth potential and at least a partial indication of the relative differences in the utilization i of and/or size of the available soil N pool

Crop Reflectance Based Fertilizer N Management What we know: Green band indices-effective for determining N status cotton (Buscalia and Varco, 2002;Peterson, 2002; Bronson et al., 2003) Leaf N and K concentrations can be predicted utilizing crop reflectance, especially in green and red edge spectral regions (Fridgen and Varco, 2004) Vegetative indices from aerial imagery most highly correlated with leaf N at peak bloom (Emerine, 2004) Structural indices (e.g. NDVI, SAVI etc.) related to canopy scattering and growth are better indicators of field variability at earlier growth stages, while chlorophyll related indices are better related at later stages (e.g. Green Index or GI) (Zarco-Tejada et al., 2005)

Use of Crop Sensors for Growth and N Detection REFLECTAN ANCE, % 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 2009 EARLY FLOWER 0 lb N/Acre 40 lb N/Acre 80 lb N/Acre 120 lb N/Acre GreenSeeker Crop Circle YARA N Sensor Representative crop reflectance in visible to NIR Wavelengths used by different sensors indicated in color Representative cotton canopy reflectance by N rate 0 400 500 600 700 800 900 WAVELENGTH, nm

Greenseeker 650 nm 770 nm Crop Circle 650 nm 880 nm YARA N Sensor five user selected 20 research mode YARA ALS 730 nm 760 nm Topcon Cropscan 735 nm and 808 nm calibrated to YARA ALS

RE EFLECTANC CE, % 60 0 lb N/Acre 40 lb N/Acre 80 lb N/Acre 120 lb N/Acre YARA N Sensor 40 20 2009 EARLY FLOWER YARA N Sensor Cotton Canopy Scan Wavelengths collected in research mode shown in blue 0 400 500 600 700 800 900 WAVELENGTH, nm

METHODS Plant Science Research Unit, Mississippi State, MS Randomized complete block design 4 Fertilizer N rates w/4 Reps 12 rows wide @ 38 row spacing 125 long 4 sub-locations for sampling

Treatments METHODS (CONT.) 04080and120lbN/acre 0, 40, 80, Planting (50%) Early square (50%) Cultural practices No-till/CT on beds DPL BG/RR 445, 2010 DPL 1028 No growth regulator applied Weed and insect control according to recommendations dti

Aug. 4, 2010 Late Flowering

Crop Response to Fertilizer N UAN 32%, 50% after planting 50% @ early square, 8-9 to one side of row, 3 deep Lint Yi ield, lb/acre 2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 Yearly NT/CT Cotton Yield, Miss. State 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 0 40 80 120 Fertilizer N Rate, lb/acre 1200 Average Yield Mississippi State 2004-2010 Lint Yield, lb/acre 1100 1000 900 800 R 2 =0.996 700 0 40 80 120 Fertilizer N Rate, lb/acre

0.52 2008 EARLY SQUARE 0.60 2009 EARLY SQUARE 050 0.50 0.48 0.55 NDVI 0.46 044 0.44 0.42 0.40 r ²=0.85 r ²=0.44 r ²=0.93 Crop Circle GreenSeeker YARA N Sensor 038 0.38 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 LEAF N, % NDVI 0.50 0.45 r ²=0.98 r ²=0.98 0.40 r ²=0.99 Crop Circle GreenSeeker YARA N Sensor 035 0.35 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 LEAF N, %

2008 EARLY FLOWER 2009 EARLY FLOWER 0.90 0.90 0.88 0.86 0.84 0.82 r ²=0.99 0.88 0.86 0.84 r ²=0.97 r ²=0.98 NDVI 0.80 0.78 r ²=0.94 NDVI 0.82 0.76 0.80 0.74 0.72 0.70 0.68 r ²=0.97 Crop Circle GreenSeeker YARA N Sensor 2.6 2.8 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 0.74 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 LEAF N, % LEAF N, % 0.78 0.76 r ²=0.98 Crop Circle GreenSeeker YARA N Sensor

2008 EARLY SQUARE 2008 EARLY FLOWER 0.54 0.80 0.52 r ²=0.61 078 0.78 r ²=0.83 0.50 0.76 GNDVI 0.48 046 0.46 GNDVI 0.74 0.44 0.72 0.42 0.70 040 0.40 068 0.68 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 PLANT HEIGHT, cm PLANT HEIGHT, cm 2008 PEAK FLOWER 0.80 0.78 r ²=0.78 GNDV VI 0.76 0.74 0.72 0.70 60 70 80 90 PLANT HEIGHT, cm

0.80 Mississippi State 0.75 0.70 GNDV VI 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 6/11/08 6/19/08 6/25/08 7/2/08 7/9/08 0.40 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Leaf N, %

2008 SEASON N UPTAKE, lbs N/AC CRE TO OTAL N UPTAKE 140 120 100 80 60 40 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 FERTILIZER RATE, lbs N/ACRE

0.84 0.82 r ²=0.86 2008/2009 PEAK FLOWERING 080 0.80 GN NDVI 0.78 0.76 0.74 0.72 0.70 0.68 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 LEAF N, %

Predicted Leaf N Map @ Peak Flowering 7/21/2004 8/04/2005 Leaf N nsense_boundary Prediction Map [72104dat.csv].[PreLeafN] Filled Contours 1.94371402-2.37742186 2.37742186-2.71331644 2.71331644-3.14702439 3.14702439-3.70702887 3.70702887-4.43010855 Leaf N Prediction Map [050804dat.csv].[PreLeafN] Filled Contours 2.79583001-3.22551918 3.22551918-3.62861252 3.62861252-4.00675678 4.00675678-4.40985012 4.40985012-4.83953905 nsense_boundary

Predicted Plant Height 8/04/2005 Leaf N nsense_boundary Predicted N Biomass Index 8/04/2005 Leaf N nsense_boundary Prediction Map Prediction Map [050804dat.csv].[PrePH] [050804dat.csv].[PreLNPH] Filled Contours Filled Contours 77.2931671-88.5834122 241.405075-274.747162 88.5834122-98.2801208 274.747162-312.119659 98.2801208-106.6082 312.119659-354.009796 106 6082-113 106.6082 113.760834 760834 354.009796-400.963623 113.760834-119.903915 400.963623-453.593262 119.903915-125.179947 453.593262-512.584839 125.179947-129.711304 512.584839-578.707336 129.711304-134.987335 578.707336-652.822815

Cotton Leaf N Early Flowering 2002

Cotton Leaf N Early Flowering 2003

5.0 Mississippi State 4.5 Leaf N, % 4.0 3.5 30 3.0 0lbN/acre 40 lb N/acre 80 lb N/acre 2.5 120 lb N/acre 2.0 6/9/2008 6/16/2008 6/23/2008 6/30/2008 7/7/2008 7/14/2008 Date

0.80 Mississippi State 0.75 0.70 GNDV VI 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 6/11/08 6/19/08 6/25/08 7/2/08 7/9/08 0.40 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Leaf N, %

On-The-Go Crop Reflectance YARA N Sensor Wavelength Channels: 20 user selectable Wavelength range: 450 to 900 nm, ± 5nm Optical inputs: 4 reflectance, 1 irradiance Acquisition interval: 1 second Area scanned: 50-100 m²/s Positioning Data: Trimble Pro XR Speed: 3.5 mph

Viewing i Geometry Positioning of optical inputs as viewed from overhead and from behind. Source: YARA (Hydro Agri), tec5hellma

Wavelengths - 550 (green), 650 (red), 700 (red edge), 710 (red edge), 840 (NIR) Currently also collecting 450, 500, 570, 600, 620, 640, 660, 670, 680, 720, 740, 760, 780, 800, and 850 Green Normalized Vegetation Index GNDVI = (NIR Green)/(NIR + Green) Normalized Vegetation Index NDVI= (NIR Red)/(NIR + red)

0.9 2008 2009 0.9 0.8 r ²=0.97 0.8 r ²=0.96 GNDVI 0.7 0.6 GNDVI 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 20 40 60 80 100 PLANT HEIGHT, cm 0.3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 PLANT HEIGHT, cm

EARLY SQUARE 25 June 2009 2nd WEEK OF SQUARE 1 July 2009 710 713 712 WAVELENGTH, nm 708 706 704 r ²=0.864 WAVELENGTH, nm 711 710 709 708 r ²=0.695 702 707 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 LEAF N, % 715 3rd WEEK OF SQUARE 8 July 2009 706 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 LEAF N, % 714, nm WAVELENGTH 713 712 711 710 r ²=0.805 709 708 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 5.0 LEAF N, %

EARLY SQUARE 25 June 2009 EARLY SQUARE 25 June 2009 0.60 710 0.55 708 NDVI 0.50 0.45 r ²=0.650 LENGTH, nm 706 r ²=0.864 0.40 WAVE 704 0.35 702 030 0.30 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.4 4.6 LEAF N, % LEAF N, %

0.85 Mississippi State 2008 80 lb N/acre 0.80 0.75 r 2 =0.96 GN NDVI 0.70 0.65 0.60 0.55 0.50 0.45 6/9/2008 6/16/2008 6/23/2008 6/30/2008 7/7/2008 7/14/2008 Date

5.0 Mississippi State 4.5 R 2 =0.99 eaf N, % L 4.0 35 3.5 2 R 2 =0.99 3.0 Early Square ave. 04, 05, 07, 08 Early Bloom ave. 04, 05, 07, 08 2.5 0 40 80 120 Fertilizer N Rate, lb/acre

1. Apply initial fertilization @ a rate which will promote favorable growth say 40 lb N/acre. 2. Allow cotton growth to progress to point where spatial variability is evident and N related and backed up by some sampling and tissue analyses. 3. Decide on side dress N rate which in combination w/initial application is a good field average rate. This will require some experience w/the field and grower input. In this case let s use 40 lb N/acre for a total applied of 80 lb N/acre. 4. Use the sensor to collect readings to establish a two point or more calibration curve or use a robust algorithm. 5. On-the-sensing establishes fertilizer equivalency of the standing crop and N rate is adjusted accordingly.

2008-3rd Week Squaring Estimated Sidedress N Rate 140 lb/acre Fertilize er N Rate, 120 Sensor based fertilizer equivalency Target total N rate Fertilizer N application rate 100 80 60 40 20 0-20 0.62 0.64 0.66 0.68 0.70 0.72 GNDVI

On-the-go sensors can assist in the mapping of spatial and temporal variations in growth and N nutrition Real time crop reflectance can assist in the application of fertilizer N to account for spatial differences in N availability, but systematic calibration is necessary to maximize accuracy The profit maximizing fertilizer N rate should continue to be pursued as the desired target

Questions/Comments?