Corn Nitrogen Rate Calculator Impact of Nitrogen Application Timing on Corn Production

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

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

Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production

Value of Poultry Manure Nutrients for Crop Production. Antonio Mallarino and John Sawyer Department of Agronomy

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

Liquid Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project

Nitrogen Management Guidelines for Corn in Indiana

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

Ontario Corn Nitrogen Soil N Survey 2015

LIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1

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

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

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

Fertilizer Management Considerations for Carrie Laboski, Dept. of Soil Science, UW-Madison

Institute of Ag Professionals

EVALUATION OF ADAPT-N IN THE CORN BELT. Introduction

Resources Conservation Practices Tillage, Manure Management and Water Quality

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

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

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

EVALUATION OF THE ILLINOIS SOIL NITROGEN TEST IN THE NORTH CENTRAL REGION i. Abstract. Introduction

Soil Nitrogen and Carbon Management Project

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF RYE COVER CROP SYSTEMS

Crop Response to Shallow Placement of Anhydrous Ammonia in Corn

Best Management Practices for Nitrogen Use in SOUTH-CENTRAL MINNESOTA

Fertilizer Management in No- Tillage Cucurbits

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

Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project

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

Institute of Ag Professionals

Proceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show

Nitrogen Management Products. John E. Sawyer Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Department of Agronomy

Nitrogen & Nutrient Strategies for 2014

Institute of Ag Professionals

Number 209 September 11, 2009

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

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

Nitrogen Transformation Inhibitors and Controlled Release Urea

Increasing Importance of Sulfur for Field Crops

Nutrient Management Conference Feb. 7, 2017, St. Cloud, MN Rick Gilbertson Pro Ag Crop Consultants, Inc.

Proceedings of the 3 rd Annual Nitrogen: Minnesota s Grand Challenge & Compelling Opportunity Conference

Fertilizing Corn in Minnesota

Central Region Ag Agent Update Choteau, April 4, 2017

The Role of Soil Testing in Precision Agriculture

NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSERVATION PRACTICE STANDARD. Nutrient Management. (Acre) Code 590

SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN FERTILIZER REGIMES FOR SNAP BEANS IN VIRGINIA

Nutrient Management (NM)

GRANULAR FERTILIZER 3 & 5 STAR

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

Evaluation of ESN Fertilizer in Southcentral Montana

Nitrogen mangement for organic potatoes. Dan M. Sullivan Soil Scientist Oregon State University Corvallis, OR

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

Is the soybean N credit real? Indiana CCA Conference Indianapolis, December 12, 2017

Timing of Foliar Applications

Nutrient Management Considerations in a High Cost. Carrie Laboski Dep. Soil Science, UW-Madison

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

Irrigated Spring Wheat

On-Farm Corn and Soybean Fertilizer Demonstration Trials

Nitrogen Management to Increase Nutrient Use Efficiency and Corn Grain Yield

Process Water from Soybean Soapstock Refining as a Nutrient Source for Corn Production

Iowa Senate Natural Resources Committee February 3, 2015

Reduced Tillage Fertilizer Management. Bill Verbeten NWNY Dairy, Livestock, & Field Crops Team

Nutrient Management in Crop Production

Agricultural. Nitrogen Management for. Water Quality Protection in the Midwest RP189

For the full report Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy go to

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

Nitrate-N Loss Reduction: Scale of In- Field and Edge-of-Field Practice Implementation to Reach Water Quality Goals

USE OF STRIP-TILLAGE FOR CORN PRODUCTION IN KANSAS

SOIL TEST N FOR PREDICTING ONION N REQUIREMENTS - AN IDAHO PERSPECTIVE. Brad Brown, University of Idaho Parma Research and Extension Center

Nitrogen dynamics of standard and enhanced urea in corn

NITROGEN MANAGEMENT 2013 YWTG

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

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

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

Soil-Test Biological Activity A Tool for Soil Health Assessment

For the full report Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy go to

Nutrient Management in Field Crops MSU Fertilizer Recommendations Crop*A*Syst 2015 Nutrient Management Training

Overview of the Principles of Nitrogen Management and Sources on Crop Production. Dave Franzen, Ph.D. NDSU Extension Soil Specialist

Interpreting Nitrate Concentration in Tile Drainage Water

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

NITROGEN FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT OF TEMPORARILY FLOODED SOILS TO IMPROVE CORN PRODUCTION AND REDUCE ENVIROMENTAL N LOSS

Institute of Ag Professionals

SULFUR AND NITROGEN FOR PROTEIN BUILDING

Nitrogen Response Index as a Guide to Fertilizer Management #

Addressing nitrogen controversies

Nutrient Management. Things to Know. Chapter 16. Fertilizer Use Concerns. Goals of Fertilizer Usage. Nutrient Balance in Soil. p.

Agronomic and soil quality trends after five years of different tillage and crop rotations across Iowa

Cover Crops, Crop Nutrition. Dave Franzen NDSU Extension Soil Specialist

New Practices for Nutrient Reduction: STRIPs and Saturated Buffers. Matthew Helmers and Tom Isenhart Iowa State University

STARTER POTASSIUM FOR CORN: WHY AND WHEN? Nicolas Bergmann, Antonio P. Mallarino, and Daniel E. Kaiser * Iowa State University, Ames.

Fertilizer Management for Plant Health and Environmental Water Quality Protection

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

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

Long-term Impacts of Poultry Manure Application

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

Fertility management in organic strawberries

Evaluation of the Illinois Soil Nitrogen Test in the North Central Region

Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy: Background Information

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

Transcription:

Corn Nitrogen Rate Calculator Impact of Nitrogen Application Timing on Corn Production John E. Sawyer Daniel W. Barker John P. Lundvall Department of Agronomy Iowa State University

http://cnrc.agron.iastate.edu/

Corn Nitrogen Rate Calculator Main Iowa Area

Comparison of Low and Upper End of Profitable N Rate Range Ames (Clarion Loam) SC (2000-2015) Using Low End of Profitable Range 121 lb N/acre MRTN Rate (0.10 price ratio) Using Upper End of Profitable Range 148 lb N/acre MRTN Rate (0.10 price ratio)

Comparison of Low and Upper End of Profitable N Rate Range Ames (Clarion Loam) SC (2000-2015) 2008 2008 Using Low End of Profitable Range 121 lb N/acre (0.10 price ratio) $0.35/lb N and $3.50/bu Potential Increase if Yearly EONR: $13.33/acre Using Upper End of Profitable Range 148 lb N/acre (0.10 price ratio) $0.35/lb N and $3.50/bu Potential Increase if Yearly EONR: $10.56/acre

Comparison of Low and Upper End of Profitable N Rate Range (and Dealing with Extremes) Ames (Clarion Loam) SC (2000-2015) Using Low End of Profitable Range 121 lb N/acre (0.10 price ratio) $0.35/lb N and $3.50/bu Potential Increase if Yearly EONR: $13.33/acre Using Upper End of Profitable Range 148 lb N/acre (0.10 price ratio) $0.35/lb N and $3.50/bu Potential Increase if Yearly EONR: $10.56/acre

Extremes in Nitrogen Response are Important Ames (Clarion Loam) SC (2000-2015) Years within ± 25 lb N/acre range (109-159 lb N/acre) of the MRTN at 134 lb N/acre (0.10 price ratio) $0.35/lb N and $3.50/bu Potential Increase if Used Yearly EONR Instead of MRTN: $2.44/acre 10 of 16 years within 109-159 lb N/acre range.

Spring Precipitation as a Tool for Decisions About Additional Nitrogen Application (Main Iowa)

The APSIM Model Agricultural Production Systems simulator A model is a computer program that integrates scientific knowledge in the form of mathematical equations and attempts to represent a real world system. rain temperature radiation Phenology Light interception Biomass accumulation Biomass partitioning Biomass retranslocation Leaf area development Senescence Plant death APSIM is a modular processbased model for simulating agricultural systems. ISU development/evaluation for optimal N-rate prediction in corn. Evaporation Runoff Drainage Decomposition Mineralization Immobilization Nitrification Denitrification Leaching Water uptake Nutrients uptake

APSIM Modelling Corn Yield Across N Rates Initial Evaluation of Model Performance (Ames Site CC) Yield (bu/acre) 240 160 80 Full N Zero N 0 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 Year Puntel et al., 2016 Frontier Plant Science

APSIM Modelling Optimal N Rate Initial Evaluation (Ames Site SC and CC) When Yearly EONR Is Within One of these Three N Rate Categories How Well Does APSIM Hit the Yearly EONR Extremes?

Impact of Nitrogen Application Timing on Corn Production John E. Sawyer Daniel W. Barker John P. Lundvall Department of Agronomy Iowa State University

Nitrogen Application Timing Studies Nine studies in 2004-2016 Seventy one site-years Nitrogen application timings Fall, spring preplant, at planting, split/sidedress, mid-vegetative, late-vegetative Question? Nutrient reduction strategy and 4R management 4% yield increase fall to spring preplant 0% yield increase spring preplant to sidedress

2004-2015 High Precipitation Period

Anhydrous Ammonia Timing Study Late fall (< 50 F), spring preplant (mid-april to mid-may) & split/sidedress (V2-V4 corn stage, early-mid June) Five N rates No nitrification inhibitor Corn following soybean Three years (2007-2009) Ames

Preplant and Split/Sidedress Anhydrous Ammonia Sawyer, Barker, Hanna, 2009

Springtime Timing Studies Spring preplant or at-planting & split/sidedress Sidedress at V4 V9 corn growth stage Six to eight N rates UAN, urea, ammonium nitrate Corn following soybean Three years (2014-2016) Fourteen site-years across Iowa

Preplant or At-Planting and Split/Sidedress Sawyer, Lundvall, Hall, Barker 2014-2016.

Preplant or At-Planting and Split/Sidedress Mean EONR Mean YEONR Category Sites Pre Split Pre Split Split EONR at least 10 lb N/acre lower than Preplant Preplant EONR at least 10 lb N/acre lower than Split Preplant and Split EONR within 10 lb N/acre --lb N/acre -- --bu/acre -- 4 167 138 202 201 3 108 126 203 206 7 151 147 221 221 Overall Mean 14 146 140 212 212 Chariton (2015) 1 250* 250* 134 129 Based on N response equations and 0.10 N:corn price ratio. Sawyer, Lundvall, Hall, and Barker, 2014-2016.

In-Season Sensor-Based Project Spring preplant or early sidedress (Pre-N) In-season mid- to late-vegetative SPAD meterbased high clearance (Post-sensing N) Four Pre-N rates plus sensor-based N UAN Post-sensing N product Corn following soybean Three years (2004-2006) Thirty on-farm sites across Iowa with fieldlength strips

N Applied Pre and Post-Sensing Number of Sites N Application Mean with Post-Sensing Relative Mean Treatment Total N Applied N Applied CM Value Yield lb N/acre n bu/acre 0 0 -- 0.82 141d 60 60 -- 0.93 177c 60+ 115 28 --- 185b 120 120 -- 0.97 192a 120+ 131 9 --- 193a 240 240 -- 1.00 197a Sum of Pre-N and Post-sensing N rate, averaged across all 30 SC sites. Mean yields are not significantly different when followed by the same letter (P < 0.10). Hawkins, Lundvall, Sawyer, 2006 EONR(0.10) for Pre-N rates = 132 lb N/acre

Mid-Vegetative Sensor-Based Timing Study Spring preplant urea (PP-N) Mid-vegetative (V10 stage) active canopy sensor-based application (PP+S-N) Seven PP-N rates plus sensor-based N UAN Post-sensing N product Corn following soybean Two years (2009-2010) Central Iowa, new site each year

N Applied Preplant and Mid-Vegetative Based on Canopy Sensing

Mid-Vegetative Sensor-Based Demonstration Preplant N Rate (PP-N) Farmer rate and product (Fall, Sp, Split, NH 3, NS, UAN) Preplant + In-Season Fixed Rate (PP+F-N) Farmer rate + 100 lb urea/acre (46 lb N) Preplant + In-Season Sensor Rate (PP+S-N) Farmer rate + 3 potential sensor-based rates Un-calibrated NDVI (no relative index) 1) 0.85 no N; 2) 0.85-0.50 100 lb urea/acre (46 lb N); 3) <0.50 150 lb urea/acre (70 lb N) Sensor-based N applied June 28 30, 2011 Multiple fields

Sensor-Based Demonstration SC Application 1 2 3 4 5 6 ------------------bu/acre------------------ PP-N 218 213 211 212 212 198 PP+F-N 217 214 199 194 223 193 PP+S-N 219 206 209 222 205 198 Sign. (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS -----------------lb N/acre ----------------- PP-N 159 161 160 160 160 160 PP+F-N 205 206 205 205 205 205 PP+S-N 209 212 208 209 206 210 NDVI 0.699 0.674 0.691 0.693 0.703 0.682 Barker and Sawyer, 2011

Time of Nitrogen Application Summary Fall anhydrous ammonia less efficient than spring or split/sidedress Generally, little difference in corn yield or EONR between springtime N application timing; preplant, split/sidedress, or mid-vegetative If a springtime timing difference, not consistent between preplant and sidedress Even in extremely wet and N responsive conditions, similar corn yield and EONR Split applications are okay / application options

Why Little Spring Timing Difference? Not sandy (coarse textured) soils Soil organic matter mineralization Soil inorganic-n loss in wet springs makes sites more N responsive Applied N (fertilizer) loss if applied preplant, at-planting, or sidedress Late spring or summer wet periods Less corn response to late applied N Corn N uptake timing has not changed

Why No Spring Timing Difference? Era Hybrid Comparison Study (2007-2008)

Why No Spring Timing Difference? Era Hybrid Comparison Study (2007-2008) Era 1960 2000 GY (bu/acre) 134b 224a Total N uptake at R6 (lb/acre) 159b 190a Grain N (lb/acre) 113b 138a Grain (bu/lb N) 1.03b 1.42a Grain N Concentration (%) 1.61a 1.23b