Effectiveness of in-furrow pelletized lime for winter wheat grown in low soil pH

The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service periodically issues revisions to its publications. The most current edition is made available. For access to an earlier edition, if available for this title, please contact the Oklahoma State University Library Archives by email at [email protected] or by phone at 405-744-6311

Chloride Fertilization’s Impacts on Kansas Winter Wheat Grain Yield During 2021-2022

Previous work suggests that wheat can respond to chloride fertility in Kansas and other regions, but this response depends on Cl availability and the wheat variety. In this study, we aimed to identify and quantify the effects of chloride fertilizer application in different areas and winter wheat varieties across Kansas. Sixteen field experiments were conducted during the 2021–2022 growing season. All experiments were conducted in a split-plot design with Cl fertility levels as whole plot (0 or 20 lb Cl/a) and wheat variety as subplots, with either three or four replicates. One protocol evaluated 24 winter wheat varieties in three locations, while the second protocol evaluated two winter wheat varieties in 13 locations. Chloride fertilization occurred using ammonium chloride and the remaining N rate was applied as urea so that it was not limiting for grain yield. Fertilizer applications occurred in the spring, at the end of the tillering stage (Feekes 4). At all experiments, two fungicide applications (Feekes 7 and 10.5) ensured that diseases were not a confounding factor. Across experiments and treatments, total available Cl ranged from 13 to 63 lb/a, and grain yield ranged from 35 to 92 bushels per acre. The results of these 16 experiments predominantly suggested that the wheat variety × location interaction determined wheat yield, only with trends of Cl fertilization effect (P\u3c0.08). Chloride available between soil supply and fertilizer applied was associated positively with chloride concentration in the wheat biomass tissue at anthesis, and had an exponential rise to maximum relationship with relative grain yield. These results are constrained to a single growing season, but showed a limited potential benefit of Cl fertilization under the studied soil and weather conditions. Expanding the study to locations with less available Cl at sowing, or greater precipitation amounts, could likely increase the chances of finding positive results for Cl fertilization

Wheat Grain Yield and Grain Protein Concentration Response to Nitrogen Rate During the 2018–2019 Growing Season in Kansas

The objective of this project was to evaluate winter wheat grain yield and grain protein concentration responses to nitrogen (N) rate in the state of Kansas during the 2018–2019 growing season. Experiments evaluating the response of the wheat variety Zenda to four nitrogen rates (0, 50, 100, and 150 lb N/a) were established at four locations. In-season measurements included flag leaf N concentration, grain yield, yield components, and grain protein concentration. Flag leaf N concentration ranged from 2.4 to 4.1% across all environments and treatments, and increases in N rates increased flag leaf N concentration linearly. Grain yield ranged from 36.3 to 94.4 bu/a and increased with increases in N rate usually following quadratic relationships at all locations except for Belleville, where no response was observed, likely due to the high organic matter levels. Grain protein concentration ranged from 11 to 15% across all locations and treatments and increases in N rates increased grain protein concentration following a usually linear relationship; however, the quadratic yield response to N rate, coupled to the linear protein response to N rate, indicated that greater N rates might be needed to maximize protein as compared to maximizing yields. Both relative grain yield and relative grain protein concentration variables calculated relative to the maximum in each respective environment, were related to flag leaf N concentration in a linear-plateau way, suggesting that flag leaf N concentration could be used as a diagnostic tool for crop N status

Wheat Grain Yield and Protein Concentration Response to Nitrogen and Sulfur Rates

Winter wheat is often double-cropped after soybeans in no-tillage systems. The soybean crop removes large quantities of sulfur (S), which might cause S deficiency for the following wheat crop. Our objective was to evaluate the responses of three wheat varieties to three nitrogen (N) and four S fertilizer rates representing a range of N:S ratios. The experiment was conducted near Ashland Bottoms and Hutchinson, KS. Treatments were arranged as a complete factorial structure with a split-split-plot design. Variety was the whole-plot, N was the sub-plot, and S was the sub-sub plot. Nitrogen rates were 50, 100, and 150% of the university recommendations for a 60 bushel per acre yield, and S rates were 0, 10, 20, and 40 pounds of S per acre. Wheat varieties evaluated were Zenda, SY Monument, and LCS Mint. Increasing the N rate increased grain yield at both locations. Sulfur increased grain yield at Ashland Bottoms but not at Hutchinson. Nitrogen by S interaction occurred for protein concentration at both locations. At Hutchinson, N rates of 50, 100, and 150% N resulted in grain yield of 62, 73, and 78 bu/a. For the 50% and 100% N rate, protein concentration was 10.8% and 11.3%; however, the 150% N rate with 20 or 40 lb S/a increased protein concentration to 11.8% as compared to 11.5% observed in the 0 or 10 lb S/a treatments. At Ashland Bottoms, N rates of 50, 100, and 150% resulted in grain yield of 56, 69, and 74 bu/a across S treatments. For the 0 pounds of S per acre treatment, though, these N rates resulted in grain yields of 36, 42, and 40 bu/a. The 150% N rate with 20 and 40 lb S/a increased grain yield by 5 bu/a as compared to the 10 lb S/a treatment. At the 50% N rate, protein concentration was 9.7% with an application of S as compared to 10.3% for the 0 lb S/a, which is due to a dilution effect from the increased grain yield. As S application increased, protein concentration decreased at the 100% N rate. However, at the 150% N rate, protein concentrations were 12.2, 11.5, 11.8, and 11.9% for the 0, 10, 20, and 40 lb S/a, respectively. Our results suggest that a balanced fertilization of N and S are essential for improving yield and protein concentration in no-till systems following soybeans, and that initial S in the profile and soil organic matter (OM) play a crucial role in determining the crop’s response to the added fertilizers

Nitrogen and Phosphorus Rates’ Impact on Different Varieties of Alfalfa in Central Kansas

The United States is the largest producer of alfalfa (Medicago sativaL.) in the world, with a vast area grown under rainfed conditions. Under these conditions, and especially in a transition state such as Kansas, the alfalfa crop often suffers from water deficit stress. Environments under water-limited conditions promote a decrease in crop yield when inadequate water leads to an nitrogen deficiency and reduces crop biomass. This research aimed to investigate the production of different alfalfa varieties under different nitrogen and phosphorus rates in a rainfed environment. Three nitrogen application rates (0 lb/a; 200 lb/a; 400 lb/a) and three phosphorus application rates (0 lb/a; 100 lb/a; and 200 lb/a) provided nine combinations of application rates to four alfalfa varieties (54HVX41, Pioneer 54VR10, LOL 356HQRR, and DKA43-22RR). Five harvests were executed at 10% of flowering, and the whole plant biomass was collected to determine the dry matter in ton/a. Despite the statistically significant results of treatment interaction, there was no pattern in the average values of alfalfa production among different treatments and seasons. The collected weather data provided empirical evidence to support that precipitation and evapotranspiration (specifically under water stress) influenced alfalfa yield. The four genotypes used in this field study tended to be stable in their yield in response to fertilization

Alfalfa water productivity and yield gaps in the U.S. central Great Plains

Context: Yield gap (Yg) analyses using farmer-reported yield and management data have been performed for a number of annual grain crops, but it lacks for perennial forages. The U.S. accounts for 21 % of the global alfalfa production with a large rainfed area located in the central Great Plains, serving as an interesting case-study for Yg in perennial forages. Most existing alfalfa Yg analyses quantified the magnitude of the Yg but failed to identify associated management practices to reduce it. Challenging this analysis, a systematic benchmark for alfalfa water productivity [WP, kg dry matter per mm evapotranspiration (ETc)] that allows for the quantification of Yg in farmer fields does not exist. Objectives: Our objectives were to (i) benchmark alfalfa WP, (ii) quantify Yg in alfalfa farmer fields, and (iii) identify management opportunities to improve alfalfa yield. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of literature and compiled a database on alfalfa yield and ETc (n = 68 papers and 1027 treatment means) from which a WP boundary function was derived. We collected management and yield data from 394 commercial rainfed alfalfa fields during 2016–2019 in central Kansas. We then used satellite imagery to define the growing season (and corresponding water supply) for each field. The boundary function was then used to calculate Yg of each field, and conditional inference trees (CIT) explored the impact of management practices associated with increased yield. Results: Our boundary function suggested an alfalfa WP of 34 kg ha-1 mm-1. Farmer-reported yield ranged from 0.9 to 19.0 Mg ha-1, averaging 7.6 Mg ha-1. Alfalfa water-limited yield potential (Yw) ranged from 11.1 to 23.2 Mg ha-1, resulting in an average yield gap of 54–60 % of Yw. Row spacing, seeding rates, and management of phosphorus fertilizer were major agronomic practices explaining alfalfa yields in farmer fields, followed by surrogate variables as sowing season, stand age, and soil pH. Conclusions: Our study provided the first systematic analysis estimating attainable alfalfa WP as function of ETc, suggesting that large alfalfa Yg exist in the U.S. central Great Plains. We also identified key agronomic practices associated with increased alfalfa yield. Significance: The WP here derived can be used for future studies aiming at quantifying alfalfa Yg across the globe. This was an initial step in quantifying Yg and its associated causes at farmer fields, and we highlight limitations and future directions for perennial forages yield gap analyses

Dual-purpose wheat: Management for forage and grain production

The Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service periodically issues revisions to its publications. The most current edition is made available. For access to an earlier edition, if available for this title, please contact the Oklahoma State University Library Archives by email at [email protected] or by phone at 405-744-6311

Temperature-Driven Developmental Modulation of Yield Response to Nitrogen in Wheat and Maize

Nitrogen management is central to the economic and environmental dimensions of agricultural sustainability. Yield response to nitrogen fertilisation results from multiple interacting factors. Theoretical frameworks are lagging for the interaction between nitrogen and air temperature, the focus of this study. We analyse the relation between yield response to nitrogen fertiliser and air temperature in the critical period of yield formation for spring wheat in Australia, winter wheat in the US, and maize in both the US and Argentina. Our framework assumes (i) yield response to nitrogen fertiliser is primarily related to grain number per m2, (ii) grain number is a function of three traits: the duration of the critical period, growth rate during the critical period, and reproductive allocation, and (iii) all three traits vary non-linearly with temperature. We show that “high” nitrogen supply may be positive, neutral, or negative for yield under “high” temperature, depending on the part of the response curve captured experimentally. The relationship between yield response to nitrogen and mean temperature in the critical period was strong in wheat and weak in maize. Negative associations for both spring wheat in Australia and winter wheat with low initial soil nitrogen ( 120 kg N ha-1) that favoured grain number and compromised grain fill, the relation between yield response to nitrogen and temperature was positive for winter wheat. The framework is particularly insightful where data did not match predictions; a non-linear function integrating development, carbon assimilation and reproductive partitioning bounded the pooled data for maize in the US and Argentina, where water regime, previous crop, and soil nitrogen overrode the effect of temperature on yield response to nitrogen fertilisation.Fil: Sadras, Victor O.. University of Adelaide; Australia. South Australian Research And Development Institute; AustraliaFil: Giordano, Nicolas. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Correndo, Adrian. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Cossani, C. Mariano. University of Adelaide; Australia. South Australian Research And Development Institute; AustraliaFil: Ferreyra, Juan M.. No especifíca;Fil: Caviglia, Octavio Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos; ArgentinaFil: Coulter, Jeffrey A.. University of Minnesota; Estados UnidosFil: Ciampitti, Ignacio Antonio. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Lollato, Romulo P.. Kansas State University; Estados Unido

Winter Wheat Yield Response to Plant Density as a Function of Yield Environment and Tillering Potential: A Review and Field Studies

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain yield response to plant density is inconsistent, and the mechanisms driving this response are unclear. A better understanding of the factors governing this relationship could improve plant density recommendations according to specific environmental and genetics characteristics. Therefore, the aims of this paper were to: i) execute a synthesis-analysis of existing literature related to yield-plant density relationship to provide an indication of the need for different agronomic optimum plant density (AOPD) in different yield environments (YEs), and ii) explore a data set of field research studies conducted in Kansas (USA) on yield response to plant density to determine the AOPD at different YEs, evaluate the effect of tillering potential (TP) on the AOPD, and explain changes in AOPD via variations in wheat yield components. Major findings of this study are: i) the synthesis-analysis portrayed new insights of differences in AOPD at varying YEs, reducing the AOPD as the attainable yield increases (with AOPD moving from 397 pl m-2 for the low YE to 191 pl m-2 for the high YE); ii) the field dataset confirmed the trend observed in the synthesis-analysis but expanded on the physiological mechanisms underpinning the yield response to plant density for wheat, mainly highlighting the following points: a) high TP reduces the AOPD mainly in high and low YEs, b) at canopy-scale, both final number of heads and kernels per square meter were the main factors improving yield response to plant density under high TP, c) under varying YEs, at per-plant-scale, a compensation between heads per plant and kernels per head was the main factor contributing to yield with different TP.Fil: Bastos, Leonardo M.. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Carciochi, Walter Daniel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata; Argentina. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Lollato, Romulo P.. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Jaenisch, Brent R.. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Rezende, Caio R.. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Schwalbert, Rai. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Vara Prasad, P.V.. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Zhang, Guorong. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Fritz, Allan K.. Kansas State University; Estados UnidosFil: Foster, Chris. John Deer; Estados UnidosFil: Wright, Yancy. John Deer; Estados UnidosFil: Young, Steven. John Deer; Estados UnidosFil: Bradley, Pauley. John Deer; Estados UnidosFil: Ciampitti, Ignacio Antonio. Kansas State University; Estados Unido