Grain Sorghum Fertility Management Lucas Haag Ph.D., Asst. Professor/Northwest Area Agronomist K-State Northwest Research-Extension Center, Colby

Similar documents
Economics of Soil Fertility Management

Number 209 September 11, 2009

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

Institute of Ag Professionals

SULFUR AND NITROGEN FOR PROTEIN BUILDING

Soil Test Interpretations and Fertilizer Recommendations

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

FERTILITY RECOMMENDATIONS

Soil Quality, Nutrient Cycling and Soil Fertility. Ray Ward Ward Laboratories, Inc Kearney, NE

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

Fertility Management of Soybeans

Soil Fertility Management

FUTURE OF TRI-STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS

Clain Jones

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

Soil Fertility Management Under Tight Crop Production Margins. John Sawyer Antonio Mallarino Department of Agronomy Iowa State University

Central Region Ag Agent Update Choteau, April 4, 2017

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

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

Fertilizing Corn in Minnesota

Nutrient Management for Hay Production and Quality

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

Institute of Ag Professionals

Do not oven-dry the soil

Timing of Foliar Applications

Fertilizer and Nutrient Management of Timothy Hay

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

Nitrogen Management Guidelines for Corn in Indiana

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

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

CROP NUTRIENTS FOR EVER-INCREASING YIELDS ARE CURRENT FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS ADEQUATE?

Variable Rate Starter Fertilization Based on Soil Attributes

Irrigated Spring Wheat

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

OSU Soil Test Interpretations

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

LIMITED IRRIGATION OF FOUR SUMMER CROPS IN WESTERN KANSAS. Alan Schlegel, Loyd Stone, and Troy Dumler Kansas State University SUMMARY

For over 40 years, soil testing has been a recommended means

USE OF STRIP-TILLAGE FOR CORN PRODUCTION IN KANSAS

2016 Southern Consultants Meeting High Yield Soybean Production

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

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

OSU Soil Test Interpretations

FERTILIZING SUGARBEET

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

Soil Sampling and Nutrient Recommendations. Kent Martin SW Agronomy Agent Update 12/1/2009

CURRENT NITROGEN RATE RESEARCH FOR: OATS, WINTER WHEAT, Matt Ruark Dept. of Soil Science AND SWEET CORN

BEST PRACTICES FOR MANAGING NITROGEN IN NO-TILL

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

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

Organic Row Cropping Systems, Cover Crops, and Soil Health

Phosphorus Update. Addy Elliott Colorado State University Department of Soil and Crop Sciences

Variable Rate Starter Fertilization Based on Soil Attributes

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

Enhanced Efficiency Fertilizers

N and P Placement and Timing of Dryland Winter Wheat Varieties K. J. Larson and L. Herron 1

Background for KSU-NPI_CropBudgets.xls

Successful 4R Nutrient Stewardship Extension Techniques: Fertilizer Rate, Source and Placement

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

On-Farm Corn and Soybean Fertilizer Demonstration Trials

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

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

Soil Test Laboratory Analysis and Fertilizer Recommendations

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

UPDATING TRI STATE FERTILIZER RECOMMENDATIONS

Cropping System Nutrient Management

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

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT WHAT S DOABLE. John E. Sawyer Associate Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Department of Agronomy Iowa State University

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

Soil fertility levels

North Dakota Fertilizer Recommendation Tables and Equations

High-Yielding Soybean: Genetic Gain Fertilizer Nitrogen Interaction

Multi- Nutrient Variable Application. Much like a Ladder. One Step at a Time. In-Season Cues Secondary & Micros N & S P & K.

December 2002 Issue # PHOSPHORUS MANAGEMENT ON HIGH PHOSPHORUS SOILS. Angela Ebeling, Keith Kelling, and Larry Bundy 1/ Introduction

Evaluation of Mosaic MicroEssentials Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production

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

Keeping the Grass Greener on Your Side of the Fence Understanding Pasture Fertility

Common and Not So Common Fertility Issues in the Region for Soybean and Wheat

Effectiveness of Using Low Rates of Plant

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

Best Management Practices for Nitrogen Use in SOUTH-CENTRAL MINNESOTA

Kansas Fertilizer Research Report of Progress Kansas State University Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service

A NEW METHOD FOR INFLUENCING PHOSPHATE AVAILABILITY TO PLANTS A NEW METHOD FOR INFLUENCING PHOSPHATE AVAILABILITY TO PLANTS

Update to Iowa phosphorus, potassium, and lime recommendations

Protecting Your Water and Air Resources

Optimizing Fertilizer Applications on Sugar Beet. Jay Norton Soil Fertility Specialist University of Wyoming

PASTURE AND HAY FIELDS: SOIL FERTILITY MANAGEMENT. Sanders County April 8, Clain Jones

Nutrient Management on Dairy Farms. Ev Thomas William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Chazy, N.Y.

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

Growing Season ET. This presentation posted at The Importance of Winter Wheat to Cropping Systems

Nitrogen Management in Direct Seeding Operations

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

Corn and soybean grain yield, phosphorus removal, and soil-test responses to long-term phosphorus fertilization strategies

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

NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE CONSERVATION PRACTICE STANDARD NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT. (Acre) CODE 590

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

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

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

Soil Fertility: Current Topic June 19, 2010

Value of Manure as a Fertilizer. What s so good about manure? Typical Nutrient Concentration

Transcription:

Grain Sorghum Fertility Management Lucas Haag Ph.D., Asst. Professor/Northwest Area Agronomist K-State Northwest Research-Extension Center, Colby With Cooperation Of: Dorivar Ruiz Diaz, Associate Professor, Soil Fertility Management K-State Department of Agronomy, Manhattan Augustine Obour, Ph.D., Asst. Professor, Soil Science K-State Agricultural Research Center, Hays Alan Schlegel, Professor and Agronomist-in-Charge K-State Southwest Research-Extension Center, Tribune 12.00 Corn:Nutrient Price Ratio lbs of corn to buy one lb of nutreint Monthly Kansas NASS Price Received and Urea/DAP FOB Gulf December 1985 October 2017 Corn:P Corn:N L. Haag, K-State NWREC 10.00 8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00-1

Soil Fertility Essentials In Nutrient Management, the Primary Objectives of Soil Testing are: Determine the fertility and ph status of an area, field or farm, with the goal of removing fertility as a yield limitation Predict where fertilizer responses will or will not occur Increase the return on our fertilizer investment Increase the efficiency of fertilizer use Reduce the potential for environmental injury 2

Consider the accuracy and reliability of individual soil tests What constitutes a good soil test Good relationship between soil test level and yield Accurately predicts nutrient needs Simple Inexpensive Precise Reproducible Useful soil tests in Kansas Profile Nitrate-N Bray P-1 Extractable P Olsen Extractable P Mehlich III Exractable P Exchangeable K DTPA Extractable Zn Chloride Sulfur/Sulfate Soil ph Lime Requirement / Buffer ph Soil Organic Matter 3

Phosphorus Soil Test Methods Bray P1 roughly equivalent to Mehlich III, use for soil ph < 7.0 Bray P2 NOT USEFUL!, Developed for rock phosphate applications in Indiana Olsen Bicarbonite Developed at CSU for high ph soils especially > 7.0 Mehlich III, equivalent to Bray P1, but valid over a wider range of soil ph Economics of Soil Testing Does it pay? 4

4 7 10 13 16 5

Data Quality The proceeding economics are based on having good data, as good of a representation of truth as we can reasonably obtain. Good decisions require good data Good soil test data comes from good procedures in the field Number of Cores to Make a Good Sample Soils vary across very short distances in nutrient supply due to many factors including: Position on the landscape Past erosion Parent material of the soil We also induce variability on the soil Band applications Livestock grazing To account for this variation you should take 10-20 cores per sample 6

(9) CONFIDENCE INTERVAL (+- ppm P) 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 EXAMPLE OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NUMBER OF SOIL CORES PER COMPOSITE SAMPLE AND ERROR MEAN SOIL P = 19ppm (4.5) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 NUMBER OF CORES PER SAMPLE Economics of Accuracy 7

Sampling Depths for Mobile Nutrients While P and K are relatively immobile in soils and accumulate in the surface few inches, Nitrate-N, Sulfur (S) and Chloride (Cl) are mobile and move through the soil profile. We recommend a 24 Profile Soil Sample to test for mobile nutrients such as nitrate-n in the soil. 10-15 cores are still needed to give a high quality sample When to Take Soil Samples P, K, Zn and ph always the same time. Focus on times when soil conditions are good, long enough before planting to really use the information. Be consistent. Late fall, winter and early spring-november through March are good. 8

When to Take Soil Samples For N, S and Cl Summer crops: after harvest in the fall, but before the soil warms in the spring. Fall crops: before planting in the fall. Spring or winter samples to predict topdress N needs don t work real well. Grain Sorghum N, P, K, and dry matter accumulation 58 days to Mid-Bloom 9

Nitrogen Management Nitrogen Uptake 10

K-State Grain Sorghum Nrec Nrec = YG * 1.6 (% OM x 20) Profile - Other Consider your crop rotation, use of cover crops, etc. Source % Carbon % Nitrogen C:N Ratio Alfalfa 40 3.0 13:1 Soybean Residue -- -- 15:1 Cornstalks 40 0.7 60:1 Small grain straw 40 0.5 80:1 Microorganisms 50 6.2 8:1 Soil O.M. 52 5.0 10:1 Grain Sorghum 40 0.5 80:1 Manure -- -- <20:1 Wood Chips 40 0.1 200:1 11

Corn and Sorghum Trials Established 1961 Fully Irrigated N rates: 0, 40, 80, 120, 160, and 200 lb/a P 2 O 5 rates: 0 and 40 lb/a 80 lb/a on corn since 1992 12

Long-term Sorghum Fertility 200 150 1961-2017 40 P 100 50 0 P 0 Long-term sorghum fertility, Tribune, KS 2017 0 40 80 120 160 200 N rate, lb/a Long-term Sorghum Fertility 200 150 2008-2017 40 P 100 0 P 50 0 Long-term sorghum fertility, Tribune, KS 2017 0 40 80 120 160 200 N rate, lb/a 13

Long-term Grain Sorghum Fertility Depth, ft 0 2 4 6 8 10 80 N 120 N 0 N 0 lb P/a 0 5 10 15 20 25 Long-term sorghum fertility, Tribune, KS 2010 Nitrate-N, ppm Long-term Grain Sorghum Fertility Depth, ft 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 N 120 N 80 N 40 lb P/a 0 10 20 30 40 Long-term sorghum fertility, Tribune, KS 2010 Nitrate-N, ppm 14

Long-term Sorghum Fertility 3 2.5 2 1.5 40 P After 50 years 0 P 1 0.5 0 Average of w/ and w/0 K, 0-6 Tribune, KS 2010 0 40 80 120 160 200 N Rate, lb/a Long-term Sorghum Fertility 8 After 50 years 7 6 No effect from P 5 0-6 without blocks 1 & 2, Tribune, KS 2010 0 40 80 120 160 200 N Rate, lb/a 15

Long-term Sorghum Fertility 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 P 40 P After 50 years 0 0-6 Tribune, KS 2010 0 40 80 120 160 200 N Rate, lb/a Summary Grain Sorghum ph decreased ~ 1.2 unit by N SOM increased ~ 0.5% by N & P Soil test P increased with 40 P NO 3 increased by N, particularly when N rates above optimal 16

Sorghum P Study 100 80 0-6 inch 60 40 20 0 2011 2008 2005 0 40 80 120 P Rate Sorghum P Study, Tribune, KS 2004-2011 Sensors for Nitrogen management in sorghum 17

Nitrogen Uptake Sensor based vs soil test based N recommendations Location Actual Yield Soil Test Rec. Sensor Rec. Actual N Resp. Soil Test Diff. Sensor Diff. Belleville 96 40 0 0 40 0 Manhattan 155 60 33 33 27 0 Partridge 32 42 57 55-13 2 Tribune 128 30 24 15 15 9 Manhattan 109 130 98 105 25-7 Partridge 70 40 15 20 20-5 Tribune 79 54 0 0 54 0 Manhattan 128 77 45 45 32 0 Ottawa 64 56 55 60-4 -5 Partridge 123 41 30 15 26 15 Mengel, 2008 18

K-State sorghum N rate calculator Farmer Inputs NDVI Reference Strip 0.6 NDVI Farmer Practice 0.55 Max Yield for Area bu/ac 150 Days from planting to sensing where avg. temp > 63 F 35 Grain Price, $/Bu 5.8 Nitrogen Price, $/lb actual N 0.6 Application Cost, $/Ac 6 Expected Nitrogen Efficiency, % Recovery 50 Outputs Expected Response Index of Grain Yield 1.44 Yield Potential of Reference Strip bu/ac 100.1 Yield Potential without N bu/ac 69.7 N Rec. lbs N/Ac unadjusted for G:N price ratio 57.8 N rec. lbs N/Ac adjusted for G:N price ratio 63.5 Gross Return (no Nitrogen) $/ac 404.35 Gross Return (using N Rec) $/ac 554.21 Mengel, 2013 Handheld versions- low cost http://hollandscientific.com/ http://www.trimble.com 19

Nitrogen management factors Timing as close to utilization as possible Rate determine accurate application rates Placement apply below the soil surface if possible Fertilizer source AA, UAN, Urea Specialty fertilizers and additives ESN Agrotain urease inhibitor N-Serve nitrification inhibitor Super U urease and nitrification inhibitor Phosphorus Management 20

Phosphorus Uptake P Example P2O5 Recommendation (lb/a) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 20 40 Soil Test P (ppm) 21

Soil test P and application method Common generalized depiction of broadcast vs. band Phosphorus removal values Crop Unit P 2 O 5 (lb) Corn bushel 0.33 Grain Sorghum bushel 0.40 Wheat bushel 0.50 Sunflowers pound 0.02 Oats bushel 0.25 Soybeans bushel 0.80 22

Crop Removal the next step Calculate crop removal Depending on over/under applications after crop removal, soil test levels will change. 18 lbs P 2 O 5 is required to change STP one ppm. One cycle of a W-S-F rotation (using field averages) Wheat yield = 60 bu/a, Sorghum yield = 110 bu/ac STP = 22 ppm, P 2 O 5 applied during seeding = 30 lb/a Wheat Removal = 60 *.50 = 30 lbs P 2 O 5 removed Sorghum Removal = 110 *.40 = 44 lbs P 2 O 5 removed Total Crop Removal = 30+44 = 74 lbs P 2 O 5 removed STP change = [30-74]/18 = 2.4 ppm drop Final STP = 22 2.4 = 19.6 ppm Just perform this process at every point in the field Crop Removal the next step Perform crop removal and STP calculations at a site-specific scale for the field Potential Decision Rules Land ownership/tenancy makes a difference Decisions based on STP IF STP > 30 then apply 0 or very minimal amount (intentional mining) IF STP is >20 and <30 then apply removal rates IF STP is <20 then apply removal + build (build rate?) VRT apply P to meet management goals 23

Keys to P management Soil Test regularly, every 2-4 years Use P placement to enhance availability at low ST (<20ppm). For low application rates (maintenance), band application is preferred. Consider crop removal in the rotation, removal sound be replaced or ST levels will drop. Choice of fertilizer product depends on preference and equipment. Phosphorus and N starter fertilizer 1200 Dry matter at V-6 (lbs/acre) 1100 1000 900 800 Sorghum grain yield (bu/acre) 120 110 100 90 700 0 10 20 30 40 50 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 Nitrogen (lbs/acre) + 30 lbs P 2 O 5 Nitrogen (lbs/acre) + 30 lbs P 2 O 5 Liquid surface dribble Gordon, 2001 24

Pop-up and surface dribble Adapted to economically adapting planters Most commonly utilizes fluid fertilizers Pop-up: o Limited to low rates because of potential germination/stand establishment issues Surface dribble: o Refers to dribbling liquid fertilizer in a coarse stream on the soil surface beside or above the closed seed furrow at planting time In-furrow starter: Reduce injury Limit to 10 lb N + K 2 O/ acre Avoid high salt carriers No urea, UAN Use caution on sandy or dry soils 25

Micros Secondary and micronutrients for sorghum The most common issues in Kansas are iron, zinc and sulfur. Research have shown response to chloride in low testing soils. Zn, S, and Cl have good reliable soil tests that translate well into anticipated yield response. 26

Yield (bu/ac) 2/12/2018 Sorghum iron chlorosis 60 50 40 a None a Iron/Manure b a 30 20 10 0 Manure Seed/In-furrow Treatment Ruiz Diaz, 2013 Sorghum iron chlorosis 70 60 60 64 62 64 Grain yield (bu/acre) 50 40 30 0 Check Fe w/seed Zn w/seed Manure 15 t/a Treatment Ruiz Diaz, 2013 27

Sorghum iron chlorosis Manure application show some benefit. In furrow chelated Fe fertilizer also contribute with yield increase. Previous studies evaluating foliar Fe application show limited response. Hybrid selection can help (limited information on iron chlorosis ratings). Field Studies Three locations: KSU SWREC in Garden City and Tribune, and a producer s field near Garden City Treatments: Four chelate rates (0, 3, 6 and 6 lb split) Five sorghum hybrids (Pioneer 86G32, 87P06, 85Y40; Golden Acres 5613, and Sorghum Partners NK5418) A. Obour, 2015 28

Producer s field (60-days after planting NK5418-Check 87P06-Check 86G32-Check 85Y40-check A. Obour, 2015 Chelate application reduced IDC in susceptible hybrids NK5418-Check Pictures at 60-days after planting NK5418-6lb split A. Obour, 2015 29

Iron chelate application and grain sorghum hybrid effects on IDC in grain sorghum A. Obour, 2015 Grain yield of sorghum hybrids at SWREC and a producer s field in Garden City, KS A. Obour, 2015 30

Sorghum grain yield as affected by iron chelate application (two-dryland locations in Garden City, KS) A. Obour, 2015 Results-Tribune under irrigation NK5418-Check 87P06-check 86G32-check 85Y40-Check 87P06-Check 85Y40-check A. Obour, 2015 31

Grain yield of sorghum hybrids (Tribune) A. Obour, 2015 Chelate effects (Tribune) 85Y40-check 85Y40-3 lb product A. Obour, 2015 32

Chelate effects (Tribune) 87P06-Check 87P06-3 lb product A. Obour, 2015 Chelate by hybrid effect on grain yield (Tribune) A. Obour, 2015 33

Chelate effect on yield-average across hybrids A. Obour, 2015 Chloride for sorghum 0.6 0.6 0.5 b a a 0.5 Early tissue Cl (%) 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 c Flag leaf tissue Cl (%) 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 c b a a 0.0 0 10 20 30 Cl rate (lbs/acre) 0.0 0 10 20 30 Cl rate (lbs/acre) Ruiz Diaz, 2014. 8 sites 34

100 Chloride for sorghum 5 of 8 sites had profile soil test Cl < 6 ppm 98 b a a a Grain yield (bu/acre) 96 94 92 90 0 Ruiz Diaz, 2014. 8 sites 0 10 20 30 Cl rate (lbs/acre) Chloride for sorghum profile soil test Category Soil chloride lbs/acre ppm Cl recommended lbs/acre Low < 30 < 4 20 Medium 30-45 4-5 10 High > 45 > 6 0 35

Summary Nitrogen and P are generally the most limiting nutrients. Iron, Cl and S in some cases for sorghum. Fertility requirements are best determined by soil testing, estimated crop removal and experience. Cover Your Acres Conference January 16 th and 17, Oberlin 36

Questions? lhaag@ksu.edu, 785.462.6281 www.northwest.ksu.edu/agronomy Clump planted sorghum study Stanton County, KS 2009 37