A recent drive from Madison to Baldwin via I-94 revealed that no more than 10% of the cropland visible from the Interstate had received fall tillage. Reasons may be numerous and include later harvest due to slower maturity in 2008, the early onset of winter, or a reluctance of growers to invest in tillage when diesel fuel prices were $4 per gallon.  Many growers are now faced with the decision of tillage or no-tillage; or if tillage will be done how much will be needed. This decision is likely very specific to a particular farming operation and factors such as whether manure has or will be applied, crop rotation, soil type, and if the planter can function in high residue will need to be considered. The final decision should be based on past experience and the expectation that return can be maximized by lowering the cost of production per bushel.

Historically no-till is practiced on less than 15 % of Wisconsin’s corn acres and this practice presents the greatest challenge to producers.   A planter that is designed to work in heavy residue is a must and the operator must recognize that slower ground speed is necessary, along with more down pressure to obtain a uniform stand and seeding depth. Growers that would like to increase the chance of success with a reduced tillage system and lower their cost of production might start by no-till planting corn into fragile residue situations found following soybean or alfalfa. Also no-till seeding of soybean into corn stubble has been shown to be very successful and is practiced on 40 % of soybean acres nation-wide according to the Conservation Technology Information Center.

A recent summary of a ten year tillage/rotation research study at the Arlington Agricultural Research Station that included fall chisel, fall strip-tillage, and no-till offered the following observations. Compared to chisel plowing the cost of production per bushel in continuous corn was lower 7 of 10 years in strip-tillage and 5 of 10 years in no-till. The similar comparison for first-year corn after soybean was 9 of 10 years for strip-tillage and 7 of 10 years for no-till. Where soybean was grown after corn the comparison was favorable 7 of 10 years for strip-tillage and 8 of 10 years for no-till when compared to chisel. More information on this evaluation is available in a Wisconsin Crop Management Conference Proceedings paper prepared by the authors, which can be downloaded from www.soils.wisc.edu/extension/wcmc/.

In summary, growers should carefully consider the need to perform full-width tillage in 2009. Some might want to use the opportunity to make a comparison between standard tillage and alternative practices. Start with situations, such as first-year corn, where the opportunity to succeed with no-till or another reduced tillage system is the greatest and refine tillage management over time.

The 2008 Midwest Strip-tillage Expo was held at the University of Wisconsin, Arlington Agricultural Research Station on August 12. The format for the day was similar to the strip-tillage expos held in Iowa and Minnesota in 2006 and 2007. The program consisted of concurrent in-field demonstrations and indoor educational sessions held in the morning and afternoon, a noon farmer panel, and indoor commercial exhibits.

Seven companies demonstrated their strip-tillage tools, including Dawn, Remlinger, John Deere, Case IH, Hiniker, Environmental Tillage Systems, and Blu-Jet. Educational speakers were Tony Vyn of Purdue University, Joe Lauer of the University of Wisconsin, Jodi DeJong-Hughes of the University of Minnesota, and Nyle Wollenhaupt of AGCO. Exhibitors included Sunco, Ag Leader, Crop IMS, Farm Tech, Red Ball/Wilrich, Contree, Montag Mfg., the Wisconsin Farmers Union, the Wisconsin Corn Growers, and the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection.

Participants were asked to fill out a registration/survey card upon arrival. A total of 315 attendees completed the card, however it was estimated that the total attendance was at least 100 individuals higher, as many of the exhibitors did not complete a card and several attendees arrived after 9:30 when the registration desk was closed. A total of 213 participants identified themselves as full or part-time farmers, representing over 450,000 acres. Other represented categories included industry (49), government (25), student (6), university (13), and other (9).

Attendees were asked to indicate current tillage practices for continuous corn (CC), soybean after corn (C Sb), corn after soybean (Sb C), and wheat (W). The results of this survey are shown in the accompanying graph. Farmers showed equal favoritism for no-till and chisel in continuous corn, but no-till was the most popular selection for the other crop rotations. Strip-tillage was already being practiced by 10 – 20 % of the attendees. Deep tillage was practiced 5 – 15 % of the time and most popular in continuous corn. Other reported tillage practices included field cultivation, mini-moldboard, and Aerway.

Attendees were also asked to indicate how they first learned about the 2008 Midwest Strip-tillage Expo. The Expo was promoted in several ways. Ads were purchased in leading agriculture newspapers in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois. It was also known that other agriculture publications ran unsolicited features about strip-tillage and printed the date and location of the Expo. The Expo was featured prominently on the UW Department of Soil Science Extension Web site, where people could download a flier and directions to Arlington. Fliers were distributed to the NRCS and county conservation offices in Wisconsin. Extension promotion included placing the flier in the weekly Wisconsin Crop Manager and the distribution of a press release to county agents, Certified Crop Advisors, and other contacts in the state. Local agents included details of the Expo in their local updates. Information about the Expo was also sent to Extension Specialists in adjacent states who were asked to promote with their clientele. Several Wisconsin agriculture radio programs promoted the Expo as a public service. Information about the Expo was sent to southern Wisconsin farm equipment dealers.

The chart below shows the distribution of the attendee’s response to how they learned about the Expo. These data are relatively qualitative since it is expected that there was likely some overlap in response between categories. For example, a governmental agency contact may have learned about the Expo at work after seeing the flier in the Wisconsin Crop Manager. These data emphasize the importance of running print ads, which was assumed to be especially important for out-of-state attendees. It also clearly shows that attendees still explore various methods of Extension publicity to learn about upcoming events.

Rainfall totals over the past week (June 4 to 10) in the southern half of Wisconsin range from 3 to 12 plus inches. Many soils are saturated and some fields have had or still have standing water in all or part of the field. The million dollar question is: How much nitrogen (N) loss should I expect from denitrification or leaching and what should I do about it? I’ll discuss how to evaluate the potential for N loss and corrective measures that may be taken.

Denitrification
Denitrification is the process whereby nitrate is converted to the gases dinitrogen or nitrous oxide and subsequently released to the atmosphere. This conversion is carried out by soil bacteria. Denitrification can be a significant mechanism for N loss on medium- and fine-textured soil. It is generally not an issue on coarse-textured soils because they do not remain saturated for any length of time. There are several environmental factors that determine if denitrification occurs and to what extent.

1. Nitrate. Nitrate must be present for denitrification to occur. If nitrate is not present or is in low concentrations, denitrifiaction losses will be minimal.
2. Soil water content and aeration. Denitrification occurs in wet soils with low oxygen concentrations. Denitrification increase with the length of time the soil is saturated. Standing water may result in a greater percentage of nitrate being denitrified.
3. Temperature. Denitrification proceeds faster on warmer soils, particularly when soil temperature is greater than 75°F.
4. Organic matter. Denitrification occurs because soil bacteria are breaking down organic matter under low oxygen conditions and the bacteria use nitrate in a biochemical process. Soils with low soluble organic carbon will have less potential for denitrification than soils with high soluble organic carbon. Thus, nitrate that resides deeper in the soil profile (eg. below 12 inches) where there is less organic matter will have a greatly reduced or minimal probability of being denitrified.
5. Soil pH. Denitrification is negligible in soils with a pH < 5.0. Thus, pH likely doesn’t limit denitrification on most of our cropland in Wisconsin.

Table 1 shows the combined effect of soil temperature and days of saturated soil on N loss. Current soil temperatures vary throughout the state but have been in the 75 to 80°F range at many locations over the past few days. Thus, there is the possibility for significant N loss if soils remain saturated for more than three days.

Table 1. Estimated N losses from denitrification as influenced by soil temperature and number of days the soil is saturated. (From Shapiro, University of Nebraska)

It is important to keep in mind that nitrate must be present for denitrification to occur. So N losses will depend on the form of N that was applied and the time between application and saturated soil conditions. Table 2 provides estimates of the time it takes for various N fertilizer materials to transform to nitrate. Conversion of ammonium based fertilizers to nitrate takes 1 to 2 weeks. Urea must first be hydrolyzed to ammonium before it is converted to nitrate. If a urease inhibitor was used with urea, then the length of time that it takes for urea to convert to ammonium may be extended 10 to 14 days depending upon the rate of inhibitor used. Injection of anhydrous ammonia increases the soil pH for several weeks, which in turn limits the amount of ammonium that is converted to nitrate. If a nitrification inhibitor was used, it will also extend the time it takes for ammonium to convert to nitrate.

Table 2. Approximate time until fertilizer N is in the nitrate form.

Here’s an example of how to estimate the amount of nitrate that might have been lost. If 120 lb N/a as UAN was applied after planting corn and four days before saturated soil conditions existed and the soil remained saturated for five days, you might expect 20-25 lb N/a to have been denitrified. 120 lb N/a x 25% = 30 lb N/a in the nitrate form, assuming minimal conversion of ammonium and urea to nitrate (Table 2). 30 lb N/a as nitrate x 75% of nitrate denitrified over 5 days = 22.5 lb N/a lost. Please note that these are estimates of N loss, and should not be considered exact.

Another method that could be used to assess the N status of your fields is to use the pre-sidedress nitrate test (PSNT). If the concentration of N in this one foot soil sample is greater than 21 ppm, then there should be adequate N for the crop. There are a couple caveats when using the PSNT in this manner. First, it will work best if N was broadcast rather than band applied. Soil samples collected from fields where N was banded, may not accurately represent the N status of the field. Second, even in medium- and fine-textured soil, nitrate may have moved into the second foot of soil. In this case, the PSNT won’t measure all of the N that is in the root zone and available for the crop.

If all or most of your N for corn is coming from an organic N source (manure and/or forage legume), then the PSNT can still be used to estimate N credits that are subtracted from your selected maximum return to N (MRTN) N rate. Note: when average May-June soil temperatures are more than 1°F below the long-term average, the N credit is often underestimated. For more details on how to use the PSNT see UWEX Publication A2809 Nutrient application guidelines for field, vegetable, and fruit crops in Wisconsin (http://www.soils.wisc.edu/extension/).

If all of the N was applied prior to the heavy rainfall, try to determine how much N loss may have occurred using one or a combination of the methods just described. The next step is to decide whether or not you need or want to apply supplemental N fertilizer to your corn crop. When making this decision, compare the amount of N loss (in lb N/a) that you think may have occurred to MRTN rate and profitable range of N rates for your N:corn price ratio. For example let’s say that corn follows soybean on a high yield potential soil and you applied 130 lb N/a preplant and now estimate that you lost 25 lb N/a. If your N:corn price ratio is 0.10, then the profitable range of N rates is 100 to 130 lb N/a. Thus, even with some N loss, you might still be within the profitable range of N rates. For more information on the MRTN, see UWEX Publication A2809 Nutrient application guidelines for field, vegetable, and fruit crops in Wisconsin (http://www.soils.wisc.edu/extension/).

Yield loss from under application or loss of N is real. When looking at N rate research at 35 sites across Wisconsin in 2006 and 2007, we found that using the MRTN rate for the 0.15 N:corn price ratio resulted in yield losses ranging from 6 to 11% at 20% of the sites. By comparison, 48% of the sites experienced 0 to 1% yield loss at the MRTN rate for the 0.15 N:corn price ratio. Note that these yield losses do not take into consideration the cost of N, so they should not be confused with a loss in profitability. If you are uncertain how much N may have been lost and the corn is clearly deficient in N, then application of 50 lb N/a should result in profitable yield increases.

If you are not yet comfortable using the MRTN approach to selecting N rates, remember the greatest yield increase comes from the first 50 lb N/a applied to the crop. Thus, if you estimate that 100 lb N/a or more may have been lost then apply supplemental N at a rate equal to about 50% of the amount of N lost.

Where the entire crop N requirement has not yet been applied, sidedress or other postemergence applications should contain the balance of the crop N requirement plus 25 to 50% of the fertilizer N that was already applied.

Options for applying supplemental N when it is needed include traditional sidedressing with anhydrous ammonia or N solutions. UAN solutions can also be applied as a surface band or as a broadcast spray over the growing crop. Dry N fertilizers (urea, ammonium sulfate, or ammonium nitrate) can also be broadcast applied to the crop. Leaf burning from solution or dry broadcast applications should be expected. Appling the dry materials when foliage is dry will help minimize burning. Broadcast N rates should be limited to 90 lb N/a for corn with 4 to 5 leaves and to 60 lb N/a for corn at the 8-leaf stage. Under N deficient conditions, corn will respond to supplemental N applications through the tassel stage of development if the N can be applied.

Leaching
Nitrate is the form of N that can be leached when precipitation (or irrigation) exceeds the soil’s ability to hold water in the crop root zone. Leaching is a much bigger issue on sandy soils that typically hold 1 inch of water per foot of soil compared to medium- and fine-textured soils that hold 2.5 to 3 inches of water per foot of soil. Rainfall totals over the past week likely caused nitrate leaching out of the root zone for potato (18 to 24 inch root zone) and perhaps also corn (~36 inch root zone) grown on sandy soils. To determine if nitrate could leach out of the root zone, compare the rainfall totals in your area to the number of inches of water that your soil can hold in the crop root zone.

The amount of N loss from leaching is dependent not only on rainfall, but also on the amount of N in the nitrate form. Using the information in Table 2, it is possible to estimate how much nitrate may have been leached. For example, if 75 lb N/a as ammonium sulfate was applied when potatoes were planted four weeks prior to the rainfall, and 125 lb N/a as ammonium nitrate was applied three days before the rainfall, then 135 to 140 lb N/a may have leached. The 75 lb N/a as ammonium sulfate at planting would have already been converted to nitrate plus 50% of the 125 lb N/a as ammonium nitrate is in the nitrate form = 137.5 lb N/a. The potato crop will have used some of the N that was applied at planting, thus leaching losses will be less than 135 lb N/a Urea is highly water soluble. If the leaching rainfall occurred before urea had time to hydrolyze (2 to 4 days), then urea may have leached. However, if there were more than 4 days between urea application and the leaching rainfall, then it is likely that all of the N would have converted to ammonium and remains within the root zone.

Nitrogen best management practices for corn on sandy soils is to sidedress or split apply N. If sidedress N applications have not yet occurred, then growers should proceed as planned. If split N applications have occurred, supplemental N should be applied and should equal the approximate amount of nitrate that may have leached out of the root zone. Corn grown on irrigated sandy soils are highly responsive to N fertilization. On non-irrigated sandy soils, water (usually too little) limits crop yield more than N. Under N deficient conditions, corn will respond to supplemental N applications through the tassel stage of development if the N can be applied.

Many potato fields may have already received their last application of N fertilizer and are quickly nearing the maximum rate of N uptake for the crop. Thus it is imperative to make sure that there is adequate N for the crop. Nitrogen can be applied up to 60 days after emergence; later applications may not improve yield or quality. Supplemental N application rates could be in the range of the amount of nitrate that was leached from all N applications applied after planting. Monitor the crop’s N status using the petiole nitrate test to determine if later N applications may be needed. For more information on the petiole nitrate test, see UWEX Publication A2809 Nutrient application guidelines for field, vegetable, and fruit crops in Wisconsin.

For irrigated corn or potato fields, N solutions can be injected into the irrigation water (fertigation). Water application rates should not exceed the infiltration rate of the soil and should not exceed the soil’s ability to hold the water in the root zone of the crop. Thus, if the soil profile is full of water, you may need to wait a few days before fertigating. The key is to manage the water so that the N fertilizer that is being applied is not leached.

Fertilizer Price Overview

Fertilizer prices have increased significantly over the past six months and are at record levels. The Fertilizer Institute (www.tfi.org) has described the reasons behind the high fertilizer prices. I will briefly summarize The Fertilizer Institute’s information. First, fertilizer is a world commodity and global demand for nitrogen, phosphate, and potash are up 14, 13, and 19 % respectively from 2001 to 2006, because of increased demand from China, India, and Brazil. Second, U.S. corn acres increased from 78.3 million in 2006 to 93.6 million in 2007 largely because of ethanol production. More corn acres mean more fertilizer is used, in particular nitrogen. Third, all transportation costs have increased. Fourth, a weak U.S. dollar increases the cost of imported goods to the U.S. consumer. The U.S. imports more than 50% of its nitrogen and over 90% of its potash, but is the largest exporter of phosphate. Fifth, high natural gas prices have driven up the cost of producing ammonia, which results in higher prices for all nitrogen and ammoniated phosphate fertilizer materials. Read the entire article here (PDF)