Effects of Introduction of Feed Grains into Mid South Soybean Production

Systems

Bobby R. GoldenDelta Research and Extension Center

479-409-6191bgolden@drec.msstate.edu

Mississippi-crops.com

Participants

• Jeremy Ross – U of A, State Soybean Specialist • Josh Lofton – LSU AgCenter, Agronomist • Gene Stevens – Mizzou Delta Center,

Agronomist• Clark Neely – TAMU, State Wheat Specialist• Ronnie Schnell – TAMU, Cropping Systems Spec.• Trent Irby – MSU, State Soybean Specialist• Larry Falconer – MSU, Extension Economist• Bobby Golden – MSU, Delta Agronomist/Soil

Fertility

Graduate Students

• Melanie Fuhrman – U of A, Masters • Richard Turner – MSU, Masters

• Potential Post Doc, or Associate yet to be filled, will be housed at the DREC at MSU– Have spoken with one potential

candidate

Other Cooperation

• Pioneer Hybrid – Will provide the corn Hybrid (P1637), Soybean (49T97R) and Grain Sorghum (83P17) for the duration of the project. – Consultation with Pioneer Representatives

suggested that varieties will be available until project termination.

• Soil analysis conducted by LSU AgCenter

• Nematode Analysis conducted by U of A

Rational

• The dramatic increase in corn acreage in the Mid-South and the resulting agronomic and economic impact of incorporating corn into Mid-South soybean production systems.

• The unique problems and management issues that may result from a rotational system of soybean and grain crops, and the incorporation of wheat in a double-cropping production scheme.

Why are we interested in Residue Management?

• How we handle corn stubble may influence our overall soil quality.

• Residue management may have a distinct effect on soil test sulfur.

• Corn residue management may impact soybean yield

Nutrients loss by burning

• Wheat and Oat– 90% loss of N and C– 75% Loss of Sulfur– 24% Loss of

phosphate– 35% Loss of Potash

• Corn Residue– 81% loss of N– 55% loss of S– 11% loss of

phosphate– 18% loss of Potash

Heard et al., (2006) Better crops with plant food 90:3

Kruse (2011) LA Newsletter

Nutrient Removal

Soybean

Nutrient Total Uptake

Removal in Harvested

Portion- - - -(lb nutr./ac)- - - -

N 277 188

P2O5 56 40

K2O 148 74

S 35 23

Based on 50 bu soybean crop

Corn

Source: Osmond and Kang, 2008. www.soil.ncsu.edu/publications/Soilfacts/ag-439-16W.pdf and IPNI (Nutrients removed in Harvested portion of crops)

Nutrient Total Uptake

Removal in Harvested

Portion

- - - -(lb nutr./ac)- - - -

N 235 135

P2O5 101 66

K2O 185 40

S 24 10

Based on 150 bu Corn crop

Outputs

• Soil Testing– Total N&C, Mehlich-3 Extractable

Nutrients, Soil pH, Nematode analysis

• BMP Approach– Fertilization level based on State

Recommendations.

• Commodity Tracking for Economics– Determine economic optimum rotation

Year 1 Update

Project Planting Dates

Crop Planting Date

Mississippi Arkansas Texas Louisiana Missouri

Stoneville BrooksvillePine Tree

NewportCollege Station

St. Joseph Portageville

Corn 03-26 05-13 04-11 05-7 03-7 05-7

Soybean 04-19 05-13 05-24 05-7 03-27 05-12

Grain Sorghum 05-1 05-13 05-24 05-7 03-27 05-12

Year 1 Update - Mississippi

• Two locations – Brooksville and Stoneville– Because of an overabundance of rainfall,

Dryland and Irrigated treatments are showing little difference.

– Plots are looking good– Not much difference in dry land vs irrigated– 2 irrigation events– Beans starting to turn, Corn ranging from 20

to 28%– Grain Sorghum is done

Year 1 Update - Arkansas

• Pine Tree Location• As of current the field conditions are very wet from

the persistent rain events over the last few weeks. The soybeans have slight deer damage that has caused a slight stunting in a few plots.

•  • Newport Location:• Due to persistent wet conditions, all crops at the

Newport location were seeded on May 7.All crops are being the Pine Tree Location. There is slight stunting in a replicate due to prolonged standing water.

Year 1 Update - Louisiana

• Due to inclement weather, all crops (soybeans, corn, and grain sorghum) were established on the same day. While not ideal, corn was planted later than the current recommended timeframe but grain sorghum and soybeans were planted within normal ranges.

• The field had very intense field preparations to aid in improved water efficiency prior to this long-term trial, weed pressures have been higher than typical.

• Due to this increased grass pressure in this field and surrounding fields, fields have had increased army worm pressure; however, an initial pesticide application has diminished previous populations.

Year 1 Update - Texas

• Until May 15, College Station had received only 40% of normal rainfall for the year. However, we received 9” of rainfall for the month of May alone, which brings us within 2.5” of normal for the year. Due to the dry conditions, plots were irrigated on April 17 (1.2”).

• Soybean seed was not inoculated, but inoculated soybeans were grown the previous year in the same field and sufficient nodulation did occur.

• During Mid June slight to moderate herbicide injury due to drift from neighboring plots/fields occured.

Year 1 Production Issues Greater Midsouth

Year 1 Production Issues – Greater MidSouth

Year 1 Production Issues - Texas

Four Bean Pods

It Takes a Team

Questions ?