Hildebrand, E.

Schoenau, J.J.

English

eCommons@USASK

Relationships among crop yield, protein, soil properties, and response to nitrogen fertilizer application in an undulating landscape in south central Saskatchewan

University of Saskatchewan Research Archive

Relationships Among Crop Yield, Protein, Soil Properties and Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer Application in an Undulating Landscape in South Central SaskatchewanSoils and Crops March 11, 2014Elliott HildebrandDept. Soil ScienceUniversity of SaskatchewanContextContext Precision Agriculture Variable Rate (VR) N Fertilizer Application Does it work? 4 R’s N ManagmentContext In practice: Most farmers apply the same fertilizer rate across a whole field regardless of variability in yield potential Why? Efficient means are needed to create a variable application map Cost to ID, sample and predict crop response in separate zones Uncertainty surrounding benefits to be achieved Challenge: ID efficient reliable mechanisms to make VR mapResearch Question Will protein concentration of crops help delineate fertilizer management zones?Research QuestionYield Can establish how much N it takes to produce a target yieldProtein Reflects balance of N to other yield limitationsTypical Yield vs Protein Curve(Engel et al., 1999)Spring WheatStudy Objectives Summer 2012 Typical southern Saskatchewan hummocky farm field Determine relationships between: Crop yield Crop protein  Soil landscape properties Salinity Organic matter pH Soil nutrientsStudy Objectives Summer 2013 Use these relationships to: 1) develop variable nitrogen rate prescription 2) compare performance to constant rate Side by side comparisonCENTRAL BUTTESW 31-20-03 W3                (2012)PEASCANOLA WHEATRelationships with WheatSoil Property Yield ProteinR2 p-value R2 p-valueOC 0-30cm (%) 0.74 0.001**OC 30-60cm (%) -0.53 0.04*pH 0-30cmpH 30-60cm 0.51 0.05*EC 0-30cm (µS cm-1) -0.53 0.03* -0.56 0.02*EC 30-60cm  (µS cm-1)Yield Protein(kg/ha) (bu/ac) (%)Mean 1851 28 13.2Min 882 13 10.5Max 2554 39 14.4Relationships with CanolaSoil Property Yield ProteinR2 p-value R2 p-valueOC 0-30cm (%) 0.65 0.007**OC 30-60cm (%)pH 0-30cmpH 30-60cmEC 0-30cm (µS cm-1)EC 30-60cm  (µS cm-1)Yield Protein(kg/ha) (bu/ac) (%)Mean 1847 37 16.8Min 1143 23 14.2Max 2342 47 20.6Relationships with PeasSoil Property Yield ProteinR2 p-value R2 p-valueOC 0-30cm (%)OC 30-60cm (%)pH 0-30cmpH 30-60cmEC 0-30cm (µS cm-1) -0.68 0.004**EC 30-60cm  (µS cm-1) -0.51 0.04*Yield Protein(kg/ha) (bu/ac) (%)Mean 2198 33 16.5Min 839 23 14.5Max 3122 47 17.7Field Season Two             WHEATCANOLAWHEATSW 31-20-03 W3                (2013)Canola on Wheat N Rates 4 Varied N Rates (kg/ha actual) 44 (2) 51 (7) 76 (6) 84 (1) Control 60Wheat on Canola N Rates 4 Varied N Rates (kg/ha actual) 0   (3) 40 (4) 60 (5) 70 (4) Control 50Wheat on Pea N Rates 3 Varied N Rates (kg/ha actual) 40 (7) 60 (6) 70 (3) Control 50Control N Rate Varied N RatesWheat on Pea Stubble Transect 1NJuly 3/2013Harvest 2013 ResultsControl N Rate Varied N RatesWheat on Pea Stubble Transect 1NAugust 23/20132789266230530103015302030253030303530Varied ControlYield (kg/ha)Canola on Wheat Yield (kg/ha)n=16 p-value = 0.49Not significant at p<0.05(57 bu/ac)(54 bu/ac)26613012050010001500200025003000350040004500Varied ControlYield (kg/ha)Wheat on Canola Yield (kg/ha)n=16 p-value = 0.12Not significant at p<0.05(40 bu/ac)(45 bu/ac)341031800500100015002000250030003500400045005000Varied ControlYield (kg/ha)Wheat on Pea Yield (kg/ha)n=16 p-value = 0.39Not significant at p<0.05(51 bu/ac)(47 bu/ac)Season 2 Conclusions to Date Average yield in varied N rate and constant N rate were similar.  Since similar total amounts of N fertilizer were used in each, no difference in economic return. Same results for each crop Prescription approach needs refining? What can be improved? Does VR N Application work? Not quite yet!Acknowledgements Supervisor: Dr Jeff Schoenau Committee members Ross Welford- Ag Engineering- U of S Software 5C21 Lab GroupThank You!Questions?References Engel, R., Long, D., Carlson, G., and Meier, C.  1999.  Method for precision   nitrogen management in spring wheat: I.  Fundamental relationships.  Precision Agriculture. 1.  327-338.   Ayres, K.W., D.F. Acton, J.G. Ellis.  The soils of the Swift Current Map Area 72J.  Saskatchewan Institute of Pedology.  1985. Extension Division, University of Saskatchewan.  Extension Publication 481.  

https://harvest.usask.ca/bitstream/10388/8922/1/E.%20Hildebrand%20and%20J.J.%20Schoenau%2c%202014.pdf

Relationships among crop yield, protein, soil properties, and response to nitrogen fertilizer application in an undulating landscape in south central Saskatchewan

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

eCommons@USASK

University of Saskatchewan Research Archive