UAES Research Report 219 - Non-Irrigated Crop Production in Utah

1

Non-Irrigated Crop Production in Utah Prepared by Ray Cartee

Utah Agricultural Experiment Station Research Report #219April 2013 Performance period 1993 – 2013

Prepared by Ray Cartee (UAES), assistant professor in the Department of Plants, Soils and Climate, Utah State University and director of Utah Agricultural Experiment Station research farms. Statistical analysis by Donald Snyder, professor in the Department of Applied Econom-ics, Utah State University and UAES associate director.

Editor: Lynnette Harris. Designer: Elizabeth Lord. Cover and current page photographs: Gary Neuenswander. All other photographs courtesy of the author.

Mention of a trademark name or proprietary product does not constitute endorsement by USU and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may also be suitable.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Fertility TrialsBlue Creek TreatmentsBlue Creek Fertility ResultsNephi TreatmentsNephi Fertility ResultsEroded KnollsBlue Creek SafflowerTillage TrialsBlue Creek ResultsNephi Tillage ResultsBlue Creek Snow MoldBlue Creek Lucin CL Wheat TrialsDiscussionRecommendationsCitationsAbout the Author

345

16162628303436404344505151

3

Utah State University faculty members have conducted research on non-irrigated crop production since 1903 at the Nephi Research Farm in Juab County and since 1965 at the Blue Creek Research Farm in northern Box Elder County. This report will discuss

results and recommendations from fertility, crop rotation, tillage and snow removal trials at both locations. These trials were designed to increase production and profits as well as maintain and improve the soil environment. Data from these trials has been accumulated over the past 20 years.

FERTILITY TRIALSProcedure

Treatment plots at Blue Creek were 16 ft. x 300 ft. and those at Nephi were 16 ft. x 200 ft. replicated four times in a randomized block design. Plots of his size enable manage-ment of agronomic practices with conventional farm equipment. Plots were harvested by a combine with a 6 ft. header the entire length of the plots and yield data were measured by a HarvestMaster GrainGage™ attached to the combine (Figures 1 and 2). Samples taken from the center of the plots left enough plants crop each side to reduce border effect and length of plots reduced the effect of soil variability that could occur in shorter plots. The wheat varieties grown were Promontory at Blue Creek and Deloris at Nephi.

Non-Irrigated Crop Production in Utah Prepared by Ray Cartee

Figure 1. The 6-foot header on the Massy SP8 plot combine.

Figure 2. HarvestMaster® grain gage on Massy plot combine used to measure yield.

4

BLUE CREEK TREAMENTS70A+40 = 70lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus 40lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress

70A+20 = 70lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus 20lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress

70A = 70lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia

50AN+5+40 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus nitrification inhibitor (N-Serve®)* plus (5-5-5)lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed plus 40lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress

50AN+5+20 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus N-Serve plus (5-5-5)lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed plus 20lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress

50AN+5 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus N-Serve plus (5-5-5)lbs/acre as a starter

50AN+40 = 50lbs/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus N-Serve plus 40lbsN/acre spring applied top dress

50AN+20 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus N-Serve plus 20lbsN/acre spring applied top dress

50AN = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus N-Serve

50AN+40 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus 40lbsN spring applied top dress

50A+20 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus 20lbsN spring applied top dress

50A = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia

50spring = 50lbsN/acre lbsN acre spring applied top dress

Control = 0lbsN/acre

*Anhydrous ammonia applied into the soil begins the nitrification process NH3->NH4->NO3 denitrification to NO2. Plants can use both NH4 and NO3. NH4 is a cation and can bind to clay particles and organic material, while NO3 can leach with water and NO2 can escape as a gas. N-Serve contains nitrapyrin which inhibits the nitrification process, re-taining nitrogen in the NH4 form until the soil warms in the spring.

5

BLUE CREEK FERTILITY RESULTS Table 1 contains the precipitation record by month for each year at Blue Creek since the farm was established. Data in Table 2 show the effect of the fertilizer treatments on yield, percent protein (protein), net return per acre (NR/A)=(treatment gross minus control gross minus fertilizer cost) and net return per fertilizer dollar invested (NR/$) = (NR/A divided by fertilizer cost). There was a significant increase in yield, protein, NR/A and NR/$ of all fertilized treatments over the control. All of the fall treatments, with the exception of the 50A treatment, had yield increases over the 50spring. Only the 50A and 70A were not significantly higher in protein than the 50spring. The fall treatments were all significantly greater in NR/A and NR/$ than the 50spring treatment. There was no positive response to the starter fertilizer. The addition of N-Serve (50AN) was significantly greater in yield, protein NR/A and NR/$ than 50A and as good as or better than 70A at all lbs N/A levels. The 20lbsN/A spring top dress significantly increased yield in all fall treatments, however, NR/A was not sig-nificantly higher and NR/$ decreased in each top dress increase. Previous fertility trials at Blue Creek (Cartee et al. 1986A) indicated significant increases in NR/A due to spring top dress on the fall treatments using ammonium nitrate (34-0-0) which was 1.5 times more costly per lbs N than the anhydrous ammonia. Since 34-0-0 has been taken off the market, ammonium sulfate (21-0-0) is the only available option. It is 2.1 times more costly than anhydrous ammonia so although yields in the current trials increased with spring top dress application NR/A did not. The research plots were treated individually with an 8-foot Gandy (Figure 3) and two passes cover each 16-foot plot, followed by a uniform herbicide application for weed control. Commercial growers could use UAN 32% solution as the liq-uid carrier for the herbicide because they can uniformly cover an entire field at a set rate. UAN 32% solution is about 1.5 times more costly than anhydrous ammonia and a grower would make only one application for fertilizer and weed control compared to two if using 21-0-0. Therefore, to make the results more consistent with what growers’ experience, the cost of spring applications was calculated for the remainder of the fertilizer tables in this report as if UAN 32% solution was used. Table 3 is the same as Table 2 with the excep-tion of the spring applications having been calculated as if UAN 32% solution was used, resulting in lower spring fertilizer cost. The 20lbsN spring top dress treatments had sig-nificant NR/A increases over their respective fall treatments; however, the 50A+40 was the only +40 treatment to produce a significant increase in yield and NR/A over its correlated +20 treatment. The data in Table 4 are for years with 15 or more inches of recorded annual precipi-tation. The average precipitation for those years was 19.13 inches. The yield, protein, NR/A and NR/$ of the fertilized treatments were significantly greater than the control, as were the fall treatments compared to 50spring except for protein. The 50AN treatments were significantly better in yield, protein, NR/A and NR/$ than 50A treatments. They were also significantly higher in NR/A and NR$ than the 70A treatments. There were significant posi-tive responses to 20spring applications to all of the fall treatments for yield, protein and NR/A, but a decrease in NR/$. Table 5 shows changes due to increased annual precipita-tion. Average precipitation increased 4.53 inches for those years. The fertilized treatments increased 4 bushels, $30 gross $7 NR/A, $0.11 NR/$ and decreased 0.7% protein. The con-trol had a gross increase similar to the other treatments so NR/A of fertilized treatments did not increase significantly, but total income increased. Results for years when spring (April, May and June) precipitation was 6 inches or more are presented in Table 6. There were 5 years during this fertilizer trial period that received that much spring precipitation and all were in years with 15 or more inches of

6

Table 1. Blue Creek precipitation data.

YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTAL

55.63 49.10 57.89 63.39 66.96 60.09 59.55 95.89 65.96 38.96 42.39 45.54 701.64

1.14 1.00 1.18 1.29 1.37 1.23 1.22 1.96 1.35 0.80 0.87 0.93 14.32

49 YR TOTAL

49 YR AVE

1964-93

30 YR AVE

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

32.80

1.09

1.82

1.44

0.00

1.15

1.03

1.15

0.10

2.35

0.10

0.78

0.00

3.25

1.65

0.73

0.60

0.87

1.08

2.55

2.18

30.47

1.02

0.30

1.93

0.55

2.07

0.30

1.10

0.20

1.10

2.10

0.78

0.45

3.15

0.91

0.76

0.54

1.16

0.01

0.85

0.37

34.95

1.17

0.25

0.75

1.47

3.16

0.50

0.35

0.18

1.00

2.50

1.50

1.73

2.00

1.16

0.85

1.49

0.41

0.70

2.89

0.05

33.57

1.12

1.05

1.70

1.60

3.05

2.75

0.40

1.44

0.60

1.00

0.00

1.30

3.50

2.06

1.62

1.98

1.27

1.13

1.04

2.33

40.64

1.35

1.58

0.80

1.43

0.28

2.55

2.75

2.90

0.70

0.00

0.90

1.95

2.27

1.75

1.09

1.35

0.83

1.70

0.97

0.52

41.44

1.38

1.00

3.11

1.25

0.62

0.90

0.35

1.00

0.80

0.85

0.80

1.05

1.60

1.08

0.42

0.66

0.17

0.15

1.76

1.08

35.53

1.18

1.24

0.45

0.86

1.51

1.03

2.60

1.00

1.65

0.90

0.75

0.30

3.65

1.76

1.08

0.52

1.64

0.98

1.09

1.04

54.51

1.82

1.05

4.39

3.58

2.13

4.89

2.30

0.50

0.65

1.00

1.32

3.00

3.85

2.01

1.62

0.85

2.38

1.53

3.33

1.00

41.63

1.39

0.30

2.16

0.00

2.10

1.05

2.60

0.00

0.35

0.30

0.54

1.35

3.05

1.62

1.05

0.24

5.36

0.70

1.31

0.25

30.46

1.02

0.00

0.28

0.30

1.25

2.30

0.70

0.40

0.00

0.00

0.00

1.25

0.00

0.26

0.45

0.16

0.79

0.08

0.04

0.24

26.92

0.90

1.60

1.25

0.00

1.68

0.50

0.85

1.20

0.15

0.00

0.35

1.35

0.85

0.92

0.76

1.06

0.46

0.91

1.45

0.13

31.69

1.06

1.60

0.75

0.70

1.29

1.45

0.00

0.00

0.30

0.90

0.10

1.00

1.35

1.06

1.04

0.22

0.93

0.09

0.71

0.36

435.77

14.53

11.79

19.01

11.74

20.29

19.23

15.18

8.92

9.65

9.65

7.62

14.73

27.72

16.24

11.47

9.67

16.27

9.05

17.99

9.65

7

Table 2. Blue Creek fertility trial’s economic evaluation 1993–2009.

TREATMENT BUSHELSPER ACRE

PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER $ SPENT

14.6 Inches

A = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus 1 pt N-Serve +5 = pounds N, P2O5 and K2O as a starter fertilizer (16-16-16) at planting +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (21-0-0}

1.9 0.4 17 0.55

PRECIPITATION

LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

63.1

64.3

58.5

69.7

66.5

61.4

67.8

65.0

61.3

61.3

57.5

51.5

49.8

37.5

13.4

12.8

12.3

13.1

12.9

12.8

13.0

12.9

12.7

12.9

12.5

12.3

12.0

10.8

553

561

510

609

580

538

594

570

535

535

501

449

434

321

101

76

46

104

79

49

91

66

36

85

60

30

68

132

164

143

184

183

168

182

183

178

129

120

98

45

1.30

2.15

3.11

1.79

2.32

3.43

2.00

2.72

4.94

1.55

2.00

3.26

0.67

8

annual precipitation. The average spring precipitation during those 5 years was 8.6 inch-es. The 20spring applied on fall treatments increased significantly in yield, protein and NR/A relative to their respective fall only treatments, however, their NR/$ were less. There were significant yield increases in 40spring over 20spring treatments in the 50A and 50AN treatments. The 50AN treatments were significantly better than 50A treatments and better than or as good as 70A in all categories. The changes due to increased spring precipitation compared to the information in Table 4 are contained in Table 7. There was an increase of 3.58 inches of spring precipitation which resulted in a 5.6 bushel, $50 gross, $43 NR/A and 0.79NR/$ increase and 0.07 protein decrease. The control increase was 1.2 bushel and $7 gross, with a 0.2 protein decrease. Spring applications responded better to the increased spring precipitation than the fall only treatments. The information in Table 8 is from the years when annual precipitation was less than 15 inches. Average precipitation was 10.1 inches for those years. The 50AN treat-ments as in all of the previous tables were significantly greater in yield, NR/A and NR/$ than that 50A treatments and as good as or better than the 70A treatments. All fertilizer treatments were significantly higher in protein than the control, but not between each fertilizer interval. Split applications caused no significant increase in yield or protein and actually decreased NR/A and NR/$ due to precipitation of less than 4.6 inches as shown in Table 9, which contains changes due to decreased annual precipitation compared to all years of the trial, which are shown in Table 3. The average decreases for fertilized treat-ments 5.5 bushels, $47 gross, $41 NR/A and 0.67 NR/$ and a 0.6% protein increase. The control decreases were 1.1 bushel and $6 gross with a 0.3% protein increase.

Figure 3. The 8-foot Gandy fertilizer spreader used for spring top dress of dry fertilizer.

9

Table 3. Blue Creek fertility trials UAN 32% solution economic evaluation 1993–2009.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


14.6 Inches

A = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus 1 pt N-Serve +5 = pounds N, P2O5 and K2O as a starter fertilizer (16-16-16) at planting +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring too dress (32-0-0)

1.9 0.4 17 0.55

PRECIPITATION

LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

63.1

64.3

58.5

69.7

66.5

61.4

67.8

65.0

61.3

61.3

57.5

51.5

49.8

37.5

13.4

12.8

12.3

13.1

12.9

12.8

13.0

12.9

12.7

12.9

12.5

12.3

12.0

10.8

553

561

510

609

580

538

594

570

535

535

501

449

434

321

82

64

46

85

67

49

72

54

36

66

48

30

45

150

176

143

203

192

168

201

195

178

148

132

98

68

1..83

2.73

3.11

2.39

2.87

3.43

2.79

3.61

4.94

2.29

2.75

3.26

1.51

10

Table 4. Blue Creek fertility trials. Annual precipitation greater than 15 inches.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


19.13 inches

A = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus 1 pt N-Serve +5 = pounds N, P2O5 and K2O as a starter fertilizer (16-16-16) at planting +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

3.9 0.4 17 0.55

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

68.6

67.5

63.5

73.0

70.3

65.4

71.1

69.1

64.5

64.2

61.8

56.5

52.3

40.4

12.5

12.2

11.8

12.5

12.3

11.9

12.4

12.2

11.8

12.1

11.8

11.3

12.0

10.1

598

589

548

637

613

564

620

602

557

560

533

487

456

346

82

64

46

85

67

49

72

54

36

66

48

30

45

170

179

156

206

200

169

202

202

175

148

139

111

65

2.07

2.79

3.39

2.42

2.98

3.45

2.81

3.74

4.86

2.24

2.89

3.70

145

11

Table 5. Blue Creek fertility changes due to increased annual precipitation.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


0.11


1.9

4

0.4

-0.7 35 10

17

4.53 Inches

0.55

FERTILIZED AVE

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

5.5

3.2

5.0

3.3

3.8

4.0

3.3

4.1

3.2

2.9

4.3

5.0

3.3

2.9

-0.9

-0.6

-0.5

-0.6

-0.6

-0.9

-0.6

-0.7

-0.9

-0.8

-0.7

1

0.0

-0.7

45

28

38

28

33

26

26

32

22

22

32

38

22

25

20

3

13

3

8

1

1

7

-3

-3

7

13

-3

0.24

0.06

0.28

0.03

0.11

0.02

0.03

0.13

-0.08

-0.05

0.14

0.44

-0.06

12

Table 6. Blue Creek fertility economics. Spring precipitation greater than 6 inches.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


8.6 Inches


1.9 0.4 17 0.55

SPRING PRECIP

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

76.7

75.3

70.9

77.5

75.3

70.0

77.2

74.8

69.3

69.7

66.7

60.5

58.9

41.6

12.4

12.4

11.6

12.4

12.2

11.7

12.2

12.1

11.7

12.1

11.8

11.5

11.7

9.9

669

657

612

675

657

604

673

652

598

608

576

522

508

353

82

64

46

85

67

49

72

54

36

66

48

30

45

234

240

213

237

237

202

243

245

209

189

175

139

110

2.85

3.75

4.63

2.78

3.54

4.12

3.38

4.58

5.81

2.86

3.65

4.64

2.44

13

Table 7. Blue Creek fertility changes due to increased spring precipitation.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


0.79


1.9

5.8

0.4

-0.07 50 43

17

3.58 Inches

0.55

FERTILIZED AVE

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

8.1

7.8

7.4

4.5

5.0

4.6

6.1

5.7

4.8

5.5

4.9

4.0

6.6

1.2

-0.1

0.2

-0.2

-0.1

-0.1

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.1

0

0

0.2

-0.3

-0.2

71

68

64

38

44

40

53

50

41

48

43

35

52

7

64

61

57

31

37

33

46

43

34

41

36

28

45

0.78

0.96

1.24

0.36

0.56

0.67

0.57

0.84

0.95

0.62

0.76

0.94

0.99

14

Table 8. Blue Creek fertility economics. Annual precipitation less than 15 inches.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


10.6 Inches


1.9 0.04 17 0.55

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

57.8

57.2

55.6

60.0

58.8

57.2

58.1

58.4

57.3

53.6

53.1

50.3

48.0

36.4

14

13.5

13.0

13.8

13.7

13.2

13.7

13.3

13.0

13.6

13.2

12.6

12.4

11.2

510

502

488

526

516

504

510

512

502

470

466

439

419

315

82

64

46

85

67

49

72

54

36

66

48

30

45

113

123

127

126

134

140

123

143

151

89

103

94

59

1.37

1.92

2.76

1.48

2.00

2.86

1.70

2.64

4.19

1.34

2.14

3.13

1.31

15

Table 9. Blue Creek fertility changes due to decreased annual precipitation.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


-0.67

A = pounds N as anhydrous ammonia AN = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus 1 pt N-Serve +5 = pounds N, P2O5 and K2O as a starter fertilizer (16-16-16) at planting +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

1.9

-5.5

0.4

0.6 -47 -41

17

4.6 Inches

0.55

FERTILIZED AVE

PRECIPITATIONDECREASE

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

50 SPRING

CONTROL

-5.2

-7.1

-2.9

-9.7

-7.7

-4.2

-9.7

-6.6

-4.0

-7.7

-4.4

-1.2

-1.8

-1.1

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.4

0.7

0.4

0.3

0.7

0.7

0.3

0.4

0.3

-43

-59

-22

-83

-64

-34

-84

-58

-33

-68

-35

-10

-15

-6

-37

-63

-16

-77

-58

-38

-78

-52

-27

-62

-29

-4

-9

-0.46

-0.81

-0.35

-0.91

-0.87

-0.57

-1.09

-0.97

-0.75

-0.95

-0.61

-0.14

-0.20

16

NEPHI TREATMENTS The fertility treatments at Nephi included all that were at Blue Creek plus 70spring and starter fertilizer additions to another set of 70A and 50A treatments as in the following list.

70A+5+40 = 70lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus (5-5-5) lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed plus 40lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress. 70A+5+40 = 70lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus (5-5-5) lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed plus 20lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress. 70A+5 = 70lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus (5-5-5) lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed. 50A+5+40 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus (5-5-5) lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed plus 40lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress. 50A+5+20 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus (5-5-5) lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed plus 20lbsN/acre as a spring applied top dress.

50A+5 = 50lbsN/acre fall applied anhydrous ammonia plus (5-5-5) lbs/acre as a starter fertilizer at planting with the seed.

70spring = 70lbsN/acre applied as a spring top dress.

All spring applied fertilizer was calculated as (32-0-0).

NEPHI FERTILITY RESULTS Precipitation for Nephi is presented in Table 10. The data is averaged for the period 1903 through 1990 and the 1991 through 2012 period is listed by each year. Table 11 shows the effect of fertilizer on yield, protein, NR/A and NR/$. There was a significant increase in yield, protein and NR/A due to fertilizer applications compared to the control treatment. The 50AN treatments were significantly higher in yield, NR/A and NR/$ than 70spring, 50spring and all of the fall treatments without N-Serve at the corresponding levels of spring top dress. There was also a significant protein increase for 50AN treatments over the 50A. The addition of 20spring produced a significant increase in yield and protein in the 50A treatments but only protein in the 50AN and 70A treatments. There were no significant increases in NR/A or NR/$ due to spring top dress on fall treatments. The 50AN was the only treatment to have a NR/$ of at least $3. As at Blue Creek there were no positive responses to the starter fertilizer, therefore those treatments are left out of the remaining tables. Table 12 contains data for years with annual precipitation of 15 or more inches. The average annual precipitation for Nephi is 12.9 inches. There were significant increases for each treatment in yield, NR/A and NR/$ due to the increased precipitation compared to the data in Table11 which is average values for all years of the test period. Table 13 lists the changes due to the annual precipitation increase.

17

Table 10. Nephi precipitation data.

YEAR OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTAL

131.27 106.66 111.30 122.31 123.43 151.50 142.39 154.67 81.89 86.11 95.45 99.56 1406.54

1.20 0.98 1.02 1.12 1.13 1.39 1.31 1.42 0.75 0.79 0.88 0.91 12.90

109 YR TOTAL

109 YR AVE

1903-90

87 YRAVE

1990-91

1991-92

1992-93

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-2000

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

100.75

1.16

1.34

1.20

1.30

1.46

2.75

0.04

1.94

1.17

3.00

0.14

2.53

0.80

1.75

0.08

3.36

1.15

0.51

1.53

1.30

86.28

0.99

0.5

0.66

0.95

0.78

0.90

0.15

2.20

1.39

1.05

0.13

0.79

1.99

1.00

1.18

1.17

0.64

0.53

0.00

1.45

87.95

1.01

0.91

0.25

0.77

0.92

0.95

1.08

1.16

0.68

0.68

0.96

0.78

1.21

1.06

1.76

0.80

0.81

1.60

2.30

0.71

94.10

1.08

0.58

0.49

2.28

0.68

1.75

0.95

3.59

1.59

1.39

2.14

0.53

0.43

1.35

0.63

2.68

1.44

1.13

0.53

1.44

95.25

1.09

0.43

0.85

0.62

2.07

0.95

2.20

1.40

2.33

1.12

3.07

0.82

0.37

1.60

2.04

1.26

1.22

0.76

0.91

0.66

123.53

1.42

1.04

2.34

3.54

0.42

1.47

2.03

0.14

1.73

0.48

1.62

1.70

1.36

1.65

0.32

2.16

0.76

0.79

0.60

0.41

107.23

1.23

1.82

0.16

0.50

1.76

2.51

0.75

2.41

1.39

3.67

1.19

2.15

1.85

1.80

1.96

1.82

1.23

0.96

0.68

2.50

118.45

1.36

2.44

1.21

1.47

0.38

4.47

1.00

1.57

1.06

2.55

1.17

0.14

0.44

1.63

0.69

3.46

1.41

1.13

2.88

1.56

74.35

0.85

0.29

0.84

0.28

0.13

0.74

0.70

0.57

1.53

1.06

0.00

0.63

0.42

0.50

0.35

0.12

0.18

0.32

0.65

0.65

30.46

1.02

0.00

0.28

0.30

1.25

2.30

0.70

0.40

0.00

0.00

0.00

1.25

0.00

0.26

0.45

0.16

0.79

0.08

0.04

0.24

81.59

0.94

0.66

0.26

1.69

0.95

0.50

0.33

1.73

0.98

0.99

1.36

0.22

0.08

0.42

0.42

0.45

0.64

0.63

0.21

0.07

80.24

0.92

0.90

0.44

0.64

1.95

0.73

0.54

2.05

0.81

0.49

1.59

0.18

1.93

1.25

0.29

1.44

0.74

0.94

1.31

0.25

1110.52

12.76

11.85

8.90

14.87

11.89

19.15

9.82

19.87

18.70

17.43

13.89

10.06

10.49

15.01

10.73

19.55

11.35

9.93

12.77

13.48

18

Table 11. Nephi fertility trials economic evaluation 1994 through 2008.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


14.04 Inches

A = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus 1 pt N-Serve +5 = pounds N,P2o5,K20 as a starter fertilizer (16-16-16) at planting +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

2.3 0.4 20 0.66

PRECIPITATION

LSD

70A+5+40

70A+5+20

70A+5

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+5+40

50AN+5+20

50AN+5

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+5+40

50A++5+20

50A+5

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

44.0

44.2

42.4

44.7

44.5

43.4

49.3

48.3

47.5

49.5

49.9

47.8

44.5

44.1

40.0

42.8

42.9

39.4

43.0

39.8

31.0

13.8

13.6

13.2

13.7

13.6

13.0

13.5

13.4

13.0

13.5

13.4

13.0

12.3

12.7

12.5

13.4

13.0

12.5

13.4

12.5

10.0

388

388

372

392

390

381

432

424

417

434

438

419

388

385

349

375

376

344

377

349

265

95

77

59

82

64

46

85

67

49

72

54

36

79

61

43

66

48

30

63

45

28

46

48

45

61

70

82

92

103

97

119

118

44

59

41

44

63

49

49

39

0.29

0.60

0.80

0.54

0.95

1.54

0.93

1.37

2.09

1.35

2.20

3.28

0.56

0.97

0.95

0.67

1.31

1.63

0.78

0.87

19

Table 12. Nephi fertility economics. Annual precipitation greater than 15 inches.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


18.28 Inches

A = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus I pt N-Serve +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

2.3 0.4 20 0.66

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

55.6

55.2

53.5

61.9

61.8

58.3

54.3

52.8

48.8

53.9

50.8

36.8

13.5

13.5

12.8

13.1

13.1

12.6

12.8

12.6

11.8

12.4

11.8

9.9

488

484

467

543

542

508

473

460

421

470

438

312

82

64

46

72

54

36

66

48

30

63

45

94

108

109

159

176

160

95

100

79

95

81

1.14

1.69

2.37

2.21

3.26

4.45

1.44

2.08

2.63

1.50

1.8

20

Table 13. Nephi fertility changes due to increased annual precipitation.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


0.86


2.3

10.8

0.4

-0.4 93 46

20

4.24 Inches

0.66

FERTILIZED AVE

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

10.9

10.7

10.1

12.4

11.9

10.5

11.5

9.9

9.4

10.9

11.0

5.8

-0.2

-0.1

-0.2

0.4

0.3

-0.4

-0.6

-0.4

-0.7

-0.4

-0.7

-0.1

96

94

86

109

104

89

98

84

77

93

89

47

49

47

38

62

57

42

51

37

30

46

42

0.6

0.74

0.82

0.86

1.06

1.17

0.77

0.77

1.0

0.72

0.93

21

The effect of increased annual precipitation for the fertilized plots was an increase of 10.8 bushels and $93 income and 5.8 bushels and $47 income for the control which resulted in a $46 NR/A and 0.86 NR/$ increase for the fertilized treatments. The 50AN treat-ments were significantly higher in yield, protein, NR/A and NR/$ than all other fertilized treatments. There were significant increases in yield, protein and NR/A when 20spring was applied to the 50AN and 50A fall treatments, but a decrease in NR/$. There were no positive responses to the 40spring treatments. The results for years which received at least 6 inches of spring precipitation (April, May and June) are presented in Table 14. There were 6 such years in this group and all but one occurred in years with at least 15 inches of annual precipitation. The average spring precipitation for this group was 6.7 inches, but only 4.36 inches for the period 1994 through 2008. Table 15 contains the changes due to increased spring precipitation. There were significant increases in yield, NR/A and NR/$ due to the increased spring precipi-tation in all of the fertilized treatments. The 20spring applied to the fall treatments had significantly higher increases in yield, NR/A and NR/$ due to the increased spring precipi-tation than the respective fall only treatments. The effects of increased spring precipitation for the fertilized treatments were increased average yield of 5 bushels and $43 income and 0.7 bushel and $9 income for the control. The 50AN treatments were significantly higher in yield, protein, NR/A and NR/$ than all other treatments except for protein compared to the 70A treatments. There were no significant responses to 40spring treatment over 20spring treatment applied to the fall treatments. The information in Table 16 is for years with less than 15 inches annual precipita-tion. Average annual precipitation during this period was 11.21 inches. All of the fertil-ized treatments were significantly higher in yield and protein than the control. The 50AN was significantly higher in yield, NR/A and NR/$ than all other treatments except yield compared to 70spring.There were no significant positive responses to spring top dress on any fall treatments. Table 17 contains changes for the years with decreased annual precip-itation. There were significant decreases in yield, NR/A and NR/$ at all fertilizer levels due to decreased annual precipitation compared to the data in Table 11 which is the average from all the years of the study. The average decreases due to dry years were 10.1 bushels and $88 income for the fertilized plots and 5.7 bushels and $44income for the control. The 50AN was the only treatment to approach a 2:1 return for fertilizer investment.

22

Table 14. Nephi fertility economics. Spring precipitation greater than 6 inches.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


6.7 Inches

A = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = Pounds N per acre as Anhydrous Ammonia plus I pt N-Serve +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

2.3 0.4 20 0.66

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

61.2

60.6

57.6

69.1

68.5

62.8

60.0

57.5

51.8

57.3

55.1

37.5

13.4

13.4

12.3

13.0

13.0

12.6

12.8

12.4

11.6

12.6

11.7

10.1

534

531

502

606

601

548

523

501

447

500

476

321

82

64

46

72

54

36

66

48

30

63

45

131

146

135

213

226

191

136

132

96

116

110

1.6

2.28

2.94

2.95

4.19

5.31

2.06

2.75

3.26

1.84

2.44

23

Table 15. Nephi fertility changes due to increased spring precipitation.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


0.64


2.3

5.0

0.4

-0.2 43 34

20

2.34 Inches

0.66

FERTILIZED AVE

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

5.6

5.4

4.1

7.2

6.7

4.5

5.7

4.7

3

3.4

4.3

0.7

-0.1

-0.1

-0.5

-0.1

-0.1

0

0

-0.2

-0.2

-0.2

-0.1

0.2

46

47

35

63

59

40

50

41

26

30

38

9

37

38

27

54

50

31

41

32

17

21

29

0.46

0.59

0.57

0.74

0.93

0.86

0.62

0.67

0.6

0.34

0.64

24

Table 16. Nephi fertility economics for precipitation less than 15 inches.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


11.21 Inches

A = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus I pt N-Serve +40 or +20 = Pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

2.3 0.4 20 0.66

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

33.7

33.7

33.3

36.8

37.6

37.3

31.4

32.9

30.0

36.1

33.7

25.3

13.9

13.7

13.4

13.8

13.7

13.5

13.6

13.4

13.1

13.3

13.1

12.0

296

296

292

322

330

327

275

288

263

317

296

221

82

64

46

72

54

36

66

48

30

63

45

-7

11

25

29

55

70

-12

19

12

33

30

-0.08

0.17

0.54

0.4

1.02

1.94

-0.18

0.4

0.40

0.52

0.67

25

Table 17. Nephi fertility changes due to decreased annual precipitation.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


-0.84

A = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia AN = Pounds N per acre as anhydrous ammonia plus 1 pt N-Serve +40 or +20 = pounds N per acre as a spring top dress (32-0-0)

2.3

-10.1

0.4

0.3 -88 -43

20

2.83 Inches

0.66

FERTILIZED AVE

PRECIPITATION

OVERALL LSD

70A+40

70A+20

70A

50AN+40

50AN+20

50AN

50A+40

50A+20

50A

70 SPRING

50 SPRING

CONTROL

-11

-10.8

-10.1

-12.8

-12.3

-10.5

11.4

-10

-9.4

-6.9

-6.1

-5.7

0.1

0.2

0.4

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.2

0.4

0.6

-0.1

0.6

2.0

-92

-94

-89

-112

-108

-92

-100

-48

-81

-60

-53

-44

-52

-50

-45

-68

-64

-48

-32

-44

-37

-16

-9

-0.62

-0.78

-1.0

-0.98

-1.18

-1.34

-0.85

-0.91

-1.2

-0.26

-0.2

26

ERODED KNOLLS Demonstration studies were established on eroded knolls at four growers’ farms on the west side of Cache Valley (Figure 4). The exposed, white knolls are of the Salt Lake Formation containing high amounts of calcium which could tie up what phosphorus is in the soil. The objective of the study was to increase crop production at those sites to near the production levels of the surrounding area. Three fertilizer treatments were applied 50lbsN/A, 40lbsP2O5/A, 50lbsN/A plus 40lbsP2O5/A and a control (0 fertilizer) replicated three times. The yield data from this study is in Table 18. There were significant increases in yield related to 50lbsN/A application at sites A, B and D but not C compared to the con-trol. Application of 40lbsP2O5/A significantly increased yield over the control at all sites. There were significant yield increases when both fertilizers were applied compared to each of the single fertilizer treatments. The effect of the treatments on economics aver-aged for the four sites are contained in Table 19. All of the treatments were significantly higher in NR/A than the control. The 50lbsN plus 40lbsP2O5 treatment was significantly higher in NR/A than each of the other fertilized treatments and was the only treatment to approach $2 in NR/$.

Figure 4. The low-phosphorous, white knolls on the west side of Cache Valley, UT.

27

Table 18. Wheat fertility on eroded knolls.

SITE SOIL TESTPPM-P

CONTROL 50 LBS N 40 LBS P205 50 LBS N +40 LBS P205

136

50N = 50 lbsN per acre as anhydrous ammonia applied in the fall 40P2O5 = 40lbsP2O5 per acre as triple super phosphate (0-45-0) applied in the fall

44 54

13.511.413.09.5

% INCREASE

AVE, PROTEIN

A

B

C

D

AVERAGE

1.6

3.4

4.1

2.3

15 BU/A

11 BU/A

14 BU/A

14 BU/A

13.5 BU/A

22 BU/A

24 BU/A

14 BU/A

18 BU/A

19.5 BU/A

26 BU/A

17 BU/A

19 BU/A

21 BU/A

20.8 BU/A

32 BU/A

28 BU/A

32 BU/A

33 BU/A

31.3 BU/A

Table 19. Wheat fertility on eroded knolls economics.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZERPER ACRE

NET REVENUEPER ACRE


50N = 50 LBSN per acre as anhydrous ammonia applied in the fall 40P2O5 = 40lbsP2O5 per acre as triple super phosphate (0-45-0) applied in the fall

2.85 0.5 25 0.56OVERALL LSD

50N+ 40P2O5

40P2O5

50N

CONTROL

31.3

20.8

19.5

13.5

13.5

11.4

13.0

9.5

276

180

172

108

58

28

30

110

44

34

1.90

1.57

1.13

28

BLUE CREEK SAFFLOWER Fertility Treatments

70A = 70 pounds nitrogen per acre as anhydrous ammonia spring applied prior to planting. 60A = 60 pounds nitrogen per acre as anhydrous ammonia spring applied prior to planting. 50A = 50 pounds nitrogen per acre as anhydrous ammonia spring applied prior to planting.

40A = 40 pounds nitrogen per acre as anhydrous ammonia spring applied prior to planting.

Control = 0 pounds nitrogen

Results of the safflower fertility trials are in Table 20. All of the fertilized treatments were significantly higher in yield and NR/A than the control. The significant yield increases were 40A over control, 50A over 40A, 60A over 50A, but 70A was not significantly higher than 60A. The 60A treatment was significantly higher in NR/A and NR/$ than the 50A and 40A treatments, but only slightly more than 70A.

Safflower Wheat Rotation

A wheat-safflower rotation was established in 1994 to determine if there were advantages compared to the common practice of wheat-fallow rotations. The study was designed to cover a 6-year period and rotations were as follows.

Year Wheat-Fallow Wheat-Safflower 1 Fallow Fallow 2 Wheat Wheat 3 Fallow Safflower 4 Wheat Fallow 5 Fallow Wheat 6 Wheat Safflower

The 1994 through 1999 fallow years were managed with conventional tillage. Wheat plots were sprayed with Ally® and 2,4-D amine for broad leaf weeds and the safflower plots with Treflan® pre-emergent for annual grasses and broadleaf weeds. The results from this study are in Table 21. The wheat-safflower rotation produced four crops in the 6 years of the trials while the wheat-fallow rotation produced three crops during that period. The four crops produced $224 more net return per acre than the three wheat-fallow rotation crops during that same period. The site of this study had a low infestation of annual grasses, however, it was observed at the end of the 6 years the saf-flower plots were basically free of annual grasses, whereas in the wheat plots there was some infestation of annual grasses. Therefore, the study was repeated at another site that had a high rate of jointed goatgrass (Aeqllops Cylindrica Host) infestation to determine the effects of the rotation on annual grass control as well as economics. The same rota-

29

Table 20. Blue Creek safflower fertility economics 1997–2002.

TREATMENT POUNDSPER ACRE

GROSS $PER ACRE

FERTILIZER$ PER ACRE

NET REVENUE$ PER ACRE


$0.34

All fertilizer was anhydrous ammonia

52 $17 LSD

70 POUNDS N

60 POUNDS N

50 POUNDS N

40 POUNDS

0 POUNDS N

1085

1082

1011

955

771

$347

$346

$324

$306

$247

$42

$36

$30

$24

0

$58

$63

$47

$35

0

$1.26

$1.75

$1.57

$1.10

0

Table 21. Blue Creek wheat safflower rotation 1994–1999, 6 year study.

WHEATFALLOW

TREAT-MENT

TREAT-MENT

1994FALLOW

1994FALLOW

1995WHEAT

1998FALLOW

1995WHEAT

1998WHEAT

1996FALLOW

1999WHEAT

1996SAFFLOWER

1999SAFFLOWER

1997WHEAT

1997FALLOW

6-YEAR NET

6-YEAR NETWHEATSAFFLOWERFALLOW

NET ADVANTAGE FOR WHEAT SAFFLOWER ROTATION

YIELD

GROSS

EXPENSE

NET

YIELD

GROSS

EXPENSE

NET

$17

($17)

$17

($17)

89 bu/A

$470

$70

$400

$22

($22)

89 bu/A

$470

$70

$400

117 bu/A

$363

$77

$286

$17

($17)

68 bu/A

$211

$75

$136

1165 lbs/A

$175

$66

$109

960 lbs/A

$144

$66

$78

66 bu/A

$205

$70

$135

$17

($17)

$615

$839

$224

30

tion sequence and management practices were used as in the previous study. Sonolan® was used instead of Treflan on the safflower and Bison® in place of 2,4-D on the wheat. Table 22 contains the yield and economic data from this study. The four crops of the wheat-safflower rotation produced $336 more net return per acre than the three wheat crops for the 6-year period. The annual grass, mainly jointed goatgrass control information is in Table 23. The grass plant counts were taken in the first wheat crop and in each of the succeeding crops at the same site. The annual grass infestation decreased with each saf-flower crop but increased dramatically with each wheat crop during the 6-year period as shown in Table 23.

TILLAGE TRIALS The objectives of the tillage trials at Blue Creek and Nephi were to determine an optimum combination of tillage and chemical fallow for weed control, yield, economic benefit, water and residue management. The treatments of the trials are as follows.

NO-TILL CHEM FALLOW = No tillage operations, 32 oz. Roundup® or 64 oz. Landmaster® BW during the fallow period as needed for weed control. RIP CONVENTIONAL = Fall ripped stubble after harvest, tilled as needed during fallow period for weed control.

CHISEL CONVENTIONAL = Chiseled stubble after harvest, tilled as needed during fallow period for weed control. RIP SP TLL CHEM FALLOW = Ripped stubble after harvest, semi-smooth seedbed prepared early spring and 32 oz. Roundup or 64 oz. Landmaster BW as needed during fallow period for weed control.

CHISEL SP TILL CHEM FALLOW = Chiseled stubble after harvest, semi-smooth seedbed prepared early spring and 32 oz. Roundup or 64 oz. Landmaster BW as needed during fallow period for weed control.

RIP CHEM FALLOW = Ripped stubble after harvest, 32 oz. Roundup or 64 oz. Landmaster BW as needed during fallow period for weed control.

CHISEL CHEM FALLOW = Chiseled stubble after harvest, 32 oz. Roundup or 64 oz. Land-master BW as needed during fallow period for weed control.

CHISEL FALL TILL CONVENTIONAL = Chiseled stubble after harvest, semi-smooth seed-bed prepared in the fall and conventionally tilled as needed during fallow for weed control.

31

Table 22. Blue Creek wheat safflower rotation 2000–2005, 6 year study.

WHEATFALLOW

TREAT-MENT

TREAT-MENT

2000FALLOW

2000FALLOW

2001WHEAT

2004FALLOW

2001WHEAT

2004WHEAT

2002FALLOW

2005WHEAT

2002SAFFLOWER

2005SAFFLOWER

2003WHEAT

2003FALLOW

6-YEAR NET

6-YEAR NETWHEATSAFFLOWERFALLOW

NET ADVANTAGE FOR WHEAT SAFFLOWER ROTATION

YIELD

GROSS

EXPENSE

NET

YIELD

GROSS

EXPENSE

NET

$29

($29)

$29

($29)

58 bu/A

$506

$98

$408

$29

($29)

58 bu/A

$506

$98

$408

80.9 bu/A

$705

$98

$607

$29

($29)

56.3 bu/A

$491

$98

$393

1037 lbs/A

$332

$105

$227

904 lbs/A

$289

$105

$184

47.7 bu/A

$416

$98

$318

$29

($29)

$1,032

$1,368

$336

Table 23. Blue Creek wheat safflower rotation 2000–2005, 6 year goatgrass control study.

YEAR

WHEAT – FALLOW

WHEAT – SAFFLOWER – FALLOW

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

FALLOW

WHEAT

FALLOW

WHEAT

FALLOW

WHEAT

125

167

312

FALLOW

WHEAT

SAFFLOWER

FALLOW

WHEAT

SAFFLOWER

125

24

42

0

Treatment TreatmentPlants/ 18 sq ft Plants/ 18 sq ft

32

Figure 5. Subsoiler with parabolic shanks 24 inches apart for deep ripping.

Figure 6. Chisel plow with 2-inch shovels 12 inches apart for medium-depth tillage.

Ripping was accomplished with a subsoiler with parabolic shanks, spaced at 24 inches at a depth of 22 inches (Figure 5). A chisel plow (Figure 6) with 2-inch shovels spaced at 12 inches at 10 inches deep was used for the chiseled treatments. Conventional fallow was accomplished with a chisel plow with a 12-inch sweeps rod weeder combi-nation (Figure 7) and a skew-treader with rotary hoe gangs (Figure 8) was used for the semi-smooth seedbed.

33

Figure 7. Chisel plow with 12-inch sweeps and trailing rod weeder.

Figure 8. Skew treader used for seedbed preparation.

34

BLUE CREEK RESULTS Table 24 contains the yield and economic results for the Blue Creek tillage trials. All of the tilled treatments were significantly higher in yield, protein and NR/A than the no-till chem fallow treatment. The rip conventional treatment was significantly higher in yield and NR/A than the rip chem fallow and chisel chem fallow treatments but not the other tilled treatments. There were no other significant differences between treatments. The results of the effect of tillage on water harvest and retention are shown in Table 25. All of the tillage treatments harvested a significantly greater amount of October through March precipitation than the no-till chem fallow treatment. Most of this precipita-tion occurs as snow and melts in March. The fall ripped treatments’ harvest amounts were significantly higher than the respective chisel treatments for the October through March period. The chem fallow treatments were significantly higher in soil moisture increase for the fallow period as compared to the conventional fallow treatments. All of the tilled treat-ments were significantly higher in total soil water at planting time than the no-till chem fallow treatment. The jointed goatgrass count at the end of the final crop year of the Blue Creek tillage trials is presented in Table 26. The no-till chem fallow plots’ grass infestation increased by a factor of 6:1 over the rip chem fallow plots’ and as much as 20:1 infesta-tion increase over the chisel fall till conventional, rip spring till fallow and chisel spring till chem fallow treatments.

Table 24. Blue Creek tillage economic evaluation 1992–2000.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSSREVENUE

TILLAGECOST

SPRAYCOST


* Additional fertilizer cost, UAN 32% solution instead of anhydrous ammonia

3.2 0.6 27LSD

RIP CONVENTIOAL

CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP SP TILL CHEM FALLOW

CHISEL SP TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP CHEM FALLOW

CHISEL CHEM FALLOW

CHISEL FALL TILL CONVENTIONAL

52.7

50.7

40.8

51.2

50.8

49.5

47.9

50.2

12.7

12.7

11.8

12.6

12.5

12.5

12.7

12.8

459

442

352

446

443

432

418

438

34

32

14*

19

13

13

7

32

0

0

31

16

16

27

22

0

425

410

307

411

414

392

389

406

35

Table 25. Blue Creek tillage trials effect of treatments on inches of soil water increase, 1991 & 1992.

TREATMENT OCT–MAR

%INCREASE

FALLOW % INCREASE

% INCREASE

WATER YEAR

YIELDBUSHELSPER ACRE

0.38 0.38 0.38 3.2LSD @0.05

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

FALL RIP CONVENTIONAL

FALL CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

FALL RIP SPRING TILL CHEM FALLOW

FALL CHISEL SPRING TILL CHEM FALLOW

FALL RIP CHEM FALLOW

FALL CHISEL CHEM FALLOW

FALL CHISEL FALL TILL CONVENTIONAL

PRECIPITATION

1.69

4.11

3.73

4.09

3.7

4.19

3.69

3.58

5.11

33

81

73

80

72

82

72

70

2.9

2.44

2.36

2.82

2.77

2.96

2.98

2.32

4.82

60

51

49

59

57

61

62

48

46

66

61

70

65

72

67

60

4.59

6.55

6.09

6.91

6.47

7.15

6.67

5.9

9.93

35.5

37.8

40.2

40.2

41.7

37.7

39.4

38.6

Table 26. Blue Creek tillage trials jointed goat grass control 2000.

TILLAGE TREATMENT

PLANTS/SQ FT

% CONTROL BUSHEL/ACRE

3.2LSD

RIP CONVENTIONAL

CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP SPRING TILLCHEM FALLOW

CHISEL SPRING TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP CHEMFALLOW

CHISEL CHEM FALLOW

CHISELL FALL TILL CONVENTIONAL

28

25

305

16

18

51

31

15

91

92

0

95

94

83

90

95

52.7

50.7

40.8

51.2

50.8

49.5

47.9

50.2

36

NEPHI TILLAGE RESULTS The results of the Nephi tillage trials 1992 through 1998 are listed in Table 27. All of the tilled treatments were significantly higher in yield and NR/A than the no-till chem fallow treatments. Rip conventional, chisel conventional and chisel spring till chem fallow treatments were significantly higher in protein than then no-till chem fallow treatment. Rip spring till chem fallow, chisel spring till chem fallow and rip chem fallow treatments were significantly higher in yield and NR/A than the other tilled treatments. There were no significant differences between those three treatments however. The results of Nephi Trials 1999 through 2005 with no ripped treatments are shown in Table 28. Again, all of the tilled treatments were significantly greater in yield and NR/A than the no-till treatment. The chisel fall till conventional treatment was significantly greater in yield and NR/A than the chisel spring till chem fallow and the chisel chem fallow. The chisel conventional treat-ment produced greater yield than the chisel chem fallow.

Table 27. Nephi tillage economic evaluation 1992–1998.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSSREVENUE

TILLAGECOST

SPRAYCOST


*Additional fertilizer cost, UAN 32% solution instead of anhydrous ammonia

2.6 0.5 22LSD

RIP CONVENTIONAL

CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP SP TILL CHEM FALLOW


RIP CHEM FALLOW

50.5

50.5

46.9

54.1

53.2

55.4

12.7

12.5

12.0

12.3

12.5

12.2

440.00

440.00

409

472

464

483

31

29

14*

19

13

13

0

0

31

13

13

24

400

411

364

439

438

446

37

Table 28. Nephi tillage economic evaluation 1999–2005.


PERCENTPROTEIN

GROSSREVENUE

TILLAGECOST

SPRAYCOST


* Additional fertilizer cost, UAN 32% soution instead of anhydrous ammonia

2.8 0.5 27LSD

CHISEL FALL TILL CONVENTIONAL

CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

CHISELFALL TILL CHEM FALLOW


CHISEL CHEM FALLOW

42.3

41.8

30.2

39.7

39.4

37.5

14.4

14.2

14

14.3

14.4

14.3

373.00

369.00

266.00

350.00

348.00

331.00

29

29

14*

13

13

7

0

0

31

22

22

19

344

340

221

315

313

305

38

Table 29. Nephi tillage trials effect of treatments on inches of soil water increase for 1989–1992.

TREATMENT OCT–MAR

%INCREASE

FALLOW % INCREASE

% INCREASE

WATER YEAR

YIELDBUSHELSPER ACRE

0.34 0.34 0.34 2.8LSD @0.05

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

FALL RIP CONVENTIONAL

FALL CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

FALL RIP SPRING TILL CHEM FALLOW

FALL CHISEL SPRING TILL CHEM FALLOW

FALL RIP CHEM FALLOW

PRECIPITATION

1.89

4.73

4.18

4.7

4.25

4.69

5.92

32

80

71

79

72

79

2.74

2.33

2.27

2.71

2.69

2.8

4.54

60

51

49

60

59

62

44

67

61

71

66

72

4.63

7.06

6.4

7.41

6.92

7.48

10.46

34.6

37.9

39.8

39.4

39.2

37.8

Table 29 shows results of the effect of tillage on water harvest and retention for the Nephi tillage trials averaged from 1989 through 1992. All of the tilled treatments harvested significantly greater amounts of water than the no-till treatment for the October through March period. This precipitation is mostly from snow which melts in late February through March. All of the ripped treatments water harvest amounts were significantly greater than the corresponding chisel treatments. The soil moisture in all of the chem fallow treatments increased significantly more than the conventional fallow treatments during the fallow period. All of the tilled treatments had significantly greater total soil water at planting time than the no-till treatment. The ripped treatments had significantly greater total water than the corresponding chisel treatments at planting time. The annual grass infestation counts at the end of the final crop year of the Nephi tillage trials are presented in Table 30. The no-till chem fallow treatments grass infesta-tion increased by a factor of 5.7:1 over the rip chem fallow treatments and as much as 16:1 over the rip spring till chem fallow and the chisel spring till chem fallow treatments. The factors of increase for the other treatments are between these levels.

39

Table 30. Blue Creek tillage trials jointed goat grass control 1998.

TILLAGE TREATMENT

PLANTS/SQ FT

% CONTROL BUSHEL/ACRE

2.6LSD

RIP CONVENTIONAL

CHISEL CONVENTIONAL

NO TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP SPRING TILLCHEM FALLOW

CHISEL SPRING TILL CHEM FALLOW

RIP CHEMFALLOW

24

21

243

15

17

42

90

91

0

94

93

83

72.6

73.4

61.7

82.7

81.2

83.2

40 Figure 9. Sled-mounted grass seeder applying ash for snow removal.

BLUE CREEK SNOW MOLD The majority of the snow mold trials at Blue Creek were conducted from 1975 through 1985 and results from those years have been previously published (Cartee et al, 1986 B). Trials since then were conducted only in 1993 and 1998 as snow depth and time of occurrence in the other years were such that snow mold was not a problem. Snow mold occurs when snow cover over the wheat is deep enough (1 foot or more) and remains for 70 days or longer. The deep snow insulates the crop and soil from freezing temperatures and residual heat from the soil starts the plant growth process and creates a warm, moist tunnel of air around the plants; an ideal environment for the mold organisms. A darkening agent was applied to the snow so that solar radiation would be absorbed rather than reflected as it is from white snow. The absorbed energy melts the snow even when the air temperature may be below freezing, thus collapsing snow and ice around the plants, halting the molding process and completely uncovering plants much earlier in the year than when snowmelt is unaided. Furnace ash from coal-fired heating plants and coal-fired power plants was used as the darkening agent originally spread by a grass seeder mounted on a sled which was pulled by a snowmobile (Figure 9). Later, ash was spread by a fertilizer or sand spreader mounted on a snow cat (Figure 10) at a rate of 200lb per acre. Next, ash or graphite was mixed into a nitrogen solution (which has a low freezing point) and applied by a spray rig mounted on a snow cat (Figure 11). Both the dry and liquid material can be applied by aircraft (Figure 12). An effective solution mix is 5 gallons of UAN and water with 18lb darkening agent per acre. The darkening agent used in 1993 was 100lb per acre of granulated fertilizer treated with graphite and in 1998 100lb per acre of dry humic acid was used.

41Figure 12. Aircraft spreading darkening agent.

Figure 10. Snow cat spreading darkening agent on snow.

Figure 11. Spray rig mounted on a snow cat applying darkening agent mixed with nitro-gen solution.

42

The earlier trials and the 1993 and 1998 trials are summarized in Table 31. Each of the trial periods shows a significant increase in wheat yield and income per acre for the darkening agent treatments over the untreated treatments. The average increases for 1975 through 1979 were 13.9 bushels per acre and $53 per acre. The next 2 years, 1980 and 1981, were not treated as snow depth was not reached until mid-January, thus snow mold did not become a problem. The increases for 1982 through 1985 were 22.5 bushels per acre and $92 per acre. The 1993 application resulted in a 18.2 bushels per acre and $71 per acre increase. The final year, 1998, was a marginal decision as snow depth was reached somewhat later than normal. However, snow was still 18-inches deep in mid-March so it was treated. Application of humic acid did increase yield 9.4 bushels per acre and $30 income per acre. The average increases attributed to applying the darkening agent for all of the years were 16.1 bushels per acre and $61 income per acre.

Table 31. Blue Creek snow mold trials.

YEAR

UNTREATED TREATED TREATMENT INCREASE

1975–76

1982–85

1993

1998

AVERAGE

35.6

31.7

29.9

79.4

44.1

49.5

54.3

48.1

88.4

60.1

13.9

22.6

18.2

9.4

16.1

$158

$141

$133

$353

$196

$220

$242

$214

$393

$267

$9

$9

$10

$12

$10

$53

$92

$71

$30

$61

BU/A BU/A BU/A

LSD 2.7 $12

INCOME/A INCOME/A APP COST INCOME/A

43

BLUE CREEK LUCIN CL WHEAT TRIALS Lucin wheat is tolerant to the herbicide Beyond® (an effective annual grass herbicide) and may be an option for annual grass control in wheat specifically if not in a safflower rotation or for no-till systems. Therefore a variety trial including Lucin, Deloris and Promontory was established at Blue Creek in 2012. The results are included in Table 32. This was an exploratory study to determine if Lucin could compete with two of the major varieties grown in the area. The varieties were planted in a sequence rather than randomized so statistics were not taken. Annual grasses were not a problem so Beyond was not used. Lucin did compete well with Deloris and Promontory in this study. Lucin was slightly higher in yield and about the same protein which certainly warrants future, more-detailed comparisons in performance and grass control.

Table 32. Blue Creek Lucin CL wheat trials.

VARIETY

YIELD BUSHEL PER ACRE PERCENT PROTEIN

LUCIN

DELORIS

PROMONTORY

48.4

45.6

44.2

12.8

13.0

13.2

48.4

44.8

45.2

12.9

13.2

13.0

49.6

47.2

45.6

12.7

12.9

13.1

48.8

45.9

45.0

12.8

13.0

13.1

REP 1 REP 1REP 2 REP 2REP 3 REP 3AVERAGE AVERAGE

44

DISCUSSION The fertility trials at Blue Creek and Nephi demonstrate that fall application of anhydrous ammonia to winter wheat in all precipitation regimes is an economically sound practice. The fall application of 50lbsN as anhydrous ammonia with N-Serve is even bet-ter as this treatment produced higher yields, protein, NR/A and NR/$ than all of the other single application fertilizer treatments in all of the precipitation regimes. Research per-formed in conjunction with these trials (Shi and Norton 2000) confirmed that N-Serve did reduce conversion of nitrogen to nitrates which leach with water infiltration. There was more ammonium in the root zone in the spring of the crop year in N-Serve treated plots than in all other treatments. When leaching of nitrogen into underground water is imped-ed, pollution of the subsoil water environment is reduced. The 50AN yielded an average of 9.8 bushels and $80 NR/A more than the 50A treatment and 2.8 bushels and $35 NR/A more than the 70A treatment over the past 17 years at Blue Creek. At Nephi, the 50AN treatment yielded an average of 8.4 bushels and $69 NR/A more than the 50A treatment

Figure 13. Stubble fall tilled with a chisel plow.

45

and 4.4 bushels and $48 NR/A more than the 70A treatment. Spring additions of 20lbsN to the fall treatments, except in years with less than 15 inches precipitation, were beneficial for yield, protein and NR/A compared to the fall only treatments at both Blue Creek and Nephi. However, because of increased costs of the top dress fertilizer the NR/$ were not as good. The 50AN plus 20lbsN spring had the highest NR/A of all treatments, and a NR/$ over $3 in all but the years with less than 15 inches of precipitation. Thus, less return on money spent for fertilizer as for the 50AN treatment, but it yielded more total net return. The starter fertilizer produced no positive response in any of the treatments. The 40lbsN spring applications over 50A and 50AN treatments did produce significant increases in yield compared to 50A plus 20 and 50AN plus 20 in years with greater than 15 inches annual and the 6 inches spring precipitation at Blue Creek and years with greater than 6 inches of spring precipitation at Nephi but not NR/A. The increase in annual precipitation’s effects on revenue were $35 for fertilized plots and $25 for the control at Blue Creek and $46 for fertilized and $47 for the control at Nephi. Increased spring precipitation produced revenue increases from $43 on the fertilized plots to $7 for the control at Blue Creek and $43 for fertilized and $9 for control at Nephi. All of the spring top dressed plots at both Blue Creek and Nephi responded favorably to the increased spring precipitation. All fer-tilizer treatments in the eroded knoll study produced increased yield, protein and NR/A, but the combination of nitrogen and phosphorus were the most effective. That treatment would probably have been more effective if proper amounts of P2O5 had been applied. Soil samples were taken the same day fertilizer was applied as growers wanted to plant, so soil test data was not available. Phosphorus should have been applied at 70 to 100 Lb-sP2O5 per acre to achieve optimum yield. The Blue Creek safflower fertility treatments increased yield and NR/A. The 60A treatment was the most profitable, but did not produce a great NR/$. Rotating wheat-safflower-fallow appears to be a good agronomic practice as the rotation increased revenue over each year of the study period by $224 and $336. The wheat-safflower rota-tion’s greatest advantage may be the greater annual grass control compared to wheat-fallow rotations. Weeds and grasses germinated early in the spring can be destroyed and a then pre-emergent herbicide incorporated to control weeds and annual grasses during the safflower growing season. Weeds and grasses can be destroyed in the fall and then controlled during the fallow period. The tillage trials at both Blue Creek and Nephi indicate some fairly deep tillage of stubble (Figure 13) is needed in the fall to aid water infiltration from snowmelt and to cover weed and annual grass seed with soil to induce germination so the grass plants can be destroyed in the spring (Donald 1984). Some light tillage in early spring also appears to germinate more weed and grass seed to be destroyed during the summer fallow which improves grass control (Donald and Ogg Jr. 1991). The summer chem fallow treatment retains more precipitation for that period than the conventional fallow treatments. A com-bination of fall tillage, light spring tillage, and summer chem fallow appear to produce better yield, NR/A and annual grass control.

46 Figure 14. Stubble deep-ripped in the fall with a subsoiler.

Deep ripping in the fall (Figure 14) appears to be best for water infiltration from snowmelt as the soil is fractured and rough which enhances water infiltration. However, deep ripping without any spring tillage results in a poor seedbed for many drills, reducing stands and thus reducing yields and NR/A. Ripping was discontinued because too many rocks were being pulled to the surface. All Blue Creek treatments were planted with a deep furrow drill (Figure 15). The Nephi tillage treatments were planted with a conventional disk drill and the no-till treatments with a TYE no-till drill (Figure 16). No-till treatments are at a fertilizer disadvantage as a more expensive fertilizer is used and is not placed into the soil. These treatments also make it very difficult to control annual grasses.

47

Figure 15. John Deere deep-furrow drill used at Blue Creek.

Figure 16. Tye no-till drill used at Nephi.

48 Figure 17. Chem-fallow plot tilled in the fall with a light, early spring tillage.

The fall tillage operation left about 85 percent of the stubble standing to hold snow in place, and light spring tillage left a nice residue mulch (Figure 17), which the summer chem fallow did not disturb, so summer precipitation was retained. Maximum econom-ic wheat yields are needed to produce higher crop residue which suppresses erosion, captures winter precipitation and enhances organic matter. Simply put, 100% of not much is still not much. The snow mold treatments in 1993 and 1998 confirmed the previous studies’ (Cartee et al 1986 B) findings of the value of applying a darkening agent to accelerate snowmelt on wheat when conditions favor snow mold (at least 1 foot of snow over unfro-zen soil). A darkening agent caused approximately 7 inches of snow to melt on a clear day, thus removing the snow much earlier than in untreated areas (Figure 18). Figure 19 shows the results of not removing snow when the previously described conditions exist. Lucin wheat, which is tolerant to the herbicide Beyond, an annual weed and grass killer, may be a good variety in areas infested with annual grasses and no-till or reduced tillage systems.

49

Figure 18. Snow melt-treated plots compared to untreated plots.

Figure 19. Snow mold in an untreated field.

50

RECOMMENDATIONS Results of these research trials indicate that the following management practices should optimize profits and maintain or improve the soil environment.

1. Apply the basic nitrogen requirements (anhydrous ammonia [50 lbs N/A plus 1 pt/A N-serve] or [50 lbs N/A as UAN plus 1 pt/A N-serve] in the fall. Soil test for at least every second crop. Phosphorus can be applied separately at recommended rates to eroded knolls that are low in phosphorus and the entire area covered with the nitrogen treatment.

2. If annual precipitation is predicted to be above normal or spring precipitation to be 6 inches or more with good wheat stands, 20 lbs N as a top dress in the spring should be applied as soon as possible. If both precipitation events occur and wheat brokers are pay-ing a protein premium it would be advisable to apply 40 lbs N in the spring.

3. If an infestation of annual grasses is present and the price ratio is safflower $3/cwt to wheat $1/bu, a wheat-safflower-fallow rotation would be beneficial.

4. In order to harvest and retain precipitation, control wheat and grasses, maintain a prop-er amount of residue and produce yields that are most profitable, the following tillage practices are recommended: Rip (if rocks are not a problem) or chisel the stubble in the fall, lightly till early in the spring, and chem fallow through the summer. However, on a steep slope it may be best to eliminate the light spring tillage to leave a rough and pock-eted soil surface which allows water to remain in the pockets and reduces runoff.

5. When early, heavy snow occurs (1 foot or more) and remains into mid-February there will probably be a snow mold problem. Prepare to apply a darkening agent to remove the snow. A period of 5 to 7 days with clear skies is needed to melt the snow.

6. For weed control check with a Utah State University (USU) Extension weed specialist, county Extension agent, or chemical company specialist to determine the correct herbi-cide. Follow the label instructions. Use the proper of amount of additive, and rotate herbi-cides every second crop and fallow year to prevent weed escapes.

51

ABOUT THE AUTHOR Raymond L. Cartee is an assistant professor in the Department of Plant, Soils and Climate at USU. He is the director of research farms for the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station and has been the principle investigator on non-irrigated agronomic management practices for the past 40 years. He was a self-employed farmer from 1957 through 1967 in Southwestern Idaho.

REFERENCES Cartee, R.L., Nielson, R.F. and Rasmussen, V.P. (1986 A). Split applications of nitrogen fertilizers to dryland wheat can increase profits. Utah Science 47 (2):56-62.

Cartee, R.L., Nielson, R.F. and Tindall, T.A. (1986 B). Controlling snow mold in dryland wheat. Utah Science 47 (4): 124-132.

Donald, W.W. (1984). Vernalization requirements for flowering of jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica). Weed Sci 32: 631-637.

Donald, W.W. and Ogg Jr., A.G. (1991). Biology and control of jointed goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrica): A Review. Weed Technology 5:3-17.

Shi, W. and Norton, J.M. (2000). Effect of long-term, biennial, fall-applied anhydrous ammonia and Nitropyrin on soil nitrification. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64: 228-234

UAES Research Report 219 - Non-Irrigated Crop Production in Utah

Documents

Transcript of UAES Research Report 219 - Non-Irrigated Crop Production in Utah