TILLAGE AND CROPPING SYSTEMS STUDY TO INCREASE DRYLAND CROP PRODUCTION

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Managing Weeds This presentation is about the management of weeds.

Advertisements

Manure is a Resource Ron Wiederholt Nutrient Management Specialist NDSU Extension Livestock Manure Nutrient Management Series March, 2006.

Livestock/Perennial grass/Row crops-a solution? University of Florida, Auburn University, UGA, National Soil Dynamics Laboratory, National Peanut Laboratory,

Presentation by James Hartshorn Kansas State University

Priorities of Soil Management for Extreme Events and Drought Charles W. Rice University Distinguished Professor Soil Microbiology Department of Agronomy.

R.W. Heiniger Vernon G. James Center North Carolina State University.

A Valuable Tool for Willamette Valley Grass & Grain Farmers.

Livestock Manure Management – The Basics on Why and How Coordinating Manure Utilization Plans With Crop Rotations Jon Stika, Area Agronomist USDA-NRCS,

Teff Grass as a Warm Season Forage for Backgrounding Calves in the Shenandoah Valley Brian Jones – Agronomy Jason Carter – Animal Science.

CUTEC Challenge Ron Stobart, NIAB TAG. The result of the integration of TAG (The Arable Group) and NIAB (National Institute of Agricultural Botany) A.

Peanut Weed Control Update (County Extension Agents) Eric P. Prostko Professor and Extension Weed Specialist Department of Crop & Soil Sciences.

The Nitrogen Requirement and Use Efficiency of Sweet Sorghum Produced in Central Oklahoma. D. Brian Arnall, Chad B. Godsey, Danielle Bellmer, Ray Huhnke.

Increasing Feed Grain Production in North Carolina Wesley Everman Extension Weed Specialist Department of Crop Science.

Soil and water resources  Certified farms are actively involved in long-term conservation of soil and water resources.

Situation  Drought, competition, urban growth, declining ground water levels, and evolving water laws and policy are contributing to decreasing supplies.

Residue Biomass Removal and Potential Impact on Production and Environmental Quality Mahdi Al-Kaisi, Associate Professor Jose Guzman, Research Assistant.

Conservation Farming on the Texas High Plains Barry Evans Kress, Texas Barry Evans Kress, Texas.

SCC-33 National Variety Testing Meeting New Orleans – February 8-10, 2012 Rick Mascagni LSU AgCenter St. Joseph, LA.

Impact of Cover Crops on Soil Physical Properties Newell R. Kitchen Matt Volkmann Newell R. Kitchen Matt Volkmann October 21, 2009.

Relative Cost Efficiency of No-Till Farms 2008 Ag Profitability Conference: McPherson Michael Langemeier January 15, 2008.

Comparison of Conventional, Roundup Ready, and Liberty-Link Cotton Weed Management Programs in Two Tillage Systems Michael Patterson, Bob Goodman and Dale.

Precision Agriculture: The Role of Science Presented by Dr. Eduardo Segarra Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Texas Tech University.

Conducting Harvest-Aid Research in Corn E.P. Prostko and A.S. Culpepper Dept. Crop & Soil Science University of Georgia WSSA 2004.

2001 Cotton Production Workshop. Waiting until spring to control weeds glyphosate or paraquat PLUS Aim, Caparol, Clarity, Direx, Harmony Extra, Goal,

Comparing Conventional Tillage and No Till

Concluding Conference of the KASSA project February 2006, Brussels, Belgium Rolf-Alexander Düring, André Michels Institute of Landscape Ecology and.

With news reports, rampant pollution and who can forget the Gulf oil spill, we must beg the question “What’s in the water?”

Integrated Pest Management. Learning Objectives 1.Define IPM (Integrated or Insect Pest Management). 2.Describe why IPM is important. 3.Describe what.

Bill Johnson University of Missouri. A Decision Support System for Weed Management University of Nebraska and North-Central Partner States.

Organic matter contribution Improved drainage Decreased salinity and leaching Better water use in following crops The Rotational Benefits of Forages: Soil.

Tolerance of Teff (Eragrostis tef) var. “Tiffany” to Several Selective Herbicides Brian Jones Agronomy Extension Agent September 2009.

Reduce Soil Erosion Soil conservation, some methods

After completing 3 Units in this Lesson, you have learned to answer: 1.Why weed control is important in pearl millet crop? 2.When is the critical period.

Highway 56 West Adams, MN Lynn Lagerstedt.

Current N Fertilization Strategy for Corn in Missouri Newell Kitchen Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit Columbia, Missouri USDA-ARS.

LATE SEASON N APPLICATIONS FOR IRRIGATED HARD RED WHEAT PROTEIN ENHANCEMENT. S.E. Petrie*, Oregon State Univ, B.D. Brown, Univ. of Idaho. Introduction.

Soil Moisture: Managing a Limited Resource Wisely John Holman, PhD Cropping Systems Agronomist.

2007 Peanut Weed Management Update for County Agents Eric P. Prostko Extension Weed Specialist Department of Crop & Soil Sciences The University of Georgia.

Enhancing Continuous Corn Production Under High-Residue Conditions with Starter Fluid Fertilizer Combinations and Placements Gyles Randall Univ. of Minnesota,

The contribution of glyphosate to agriculture in Indonesia and implications of restrictions on its use Graham Brookes PG Economics Ltd UK ©PG Economics.

Reduced tillage and crop rotation systems with winter wheat, grain sorghum, corn and soybean. Mark M. Claassen and Kraig L. Roozeboom Kansas State University.

Silvano L. Abreu1, Chad B. Godsey1, Gary Strickland2, and Jeff T

Conservation Tillage in Cotton: A Mississippi Delta Perspective

Variable Rate Nitrogen

Economics of Cover Crops

Grain Sorghum Rotations

No-Till Wheat and Grain Sorghum Production

2008 Soybean Weed Control Update

An Agriculture Perspective

Perplexing Pigweed Problems in 2004

Fertilizer Management in No-Till Farming

No-Till Wheat and Grain Sorghum Rotations

Tillage and Cropping Systems to Increase Dryland Crop Production in Southwest Oklahoma by Gary Strickland Extension Educator – OCES Jackson County.

What are the characteristics of these two fields?

Topsoil Depth at the Centralia Site

Team Approach OSU’s IPM Program

Agronomic management and how we improve production

and No-Tillage under Various Crop Rotations.

Research & Development and Product Development Update

Strategies for Split N Applications for Corn

Weed Control in Cover Crops

Weed Control Cont. Plant Science 280 Mr. Gomes.

Yield Protecting Soybean Herbicide!

Lodging immediately after July 4, 2007 storm.

Efficient farm management has always been of prime importance to farmers. It has become even more important to the economic survival of farmers in recent.

Gyles Randall and Jeff Vetsch University of Minnesota

2018 Sweet Corn Weed Control

Eric P. Prostko Extension Weed Specialist

The Impact of Agriculture

2011 Cotton County Weed Meetings

Presentation transcript:

TILLAGE AND CROPPING SYSTEMS STUDY TO INCREASE DRYLAND CROP PRODUCTION Presented by Gary Strickland Extension Educator, Agriculture Jackson County

Why Residue Management is Important in Dryland Crop Production - Agronomically Soil Erosion Prevention Increased Soil Water Storage Capacity Increased Water Infiltration Rates Decreased Soil Evaporation Rates Increase of In-Season Precipitation Use Efficiency Increased Organic Matter Pool Increased Cation Exchange Complex (CEC) Increased Anion Exchange Complex (AEC) Decrease in Soil Compaction in the Long Term

Soil Organic Matter Results

Tillage by Rotations System OM Comparisons (2002-2008) C-W-GS C-W C-GS W-DCGS-C C W GS Mean L.S.D. (.05) NT 2.00(2) 1.49(6) 1.93(2) 1.63(6) 2.03(2) 1.84(6) 2.08(2) 1.71(6) 2.13(2) 1.94(2) 1.68(6) 2.42(2) 1.79(6) 1.69(6) NS(2) NS(6) CT 1.76(2) 1.64(6) 1.87(2) 1.83(6) 1.82(2) 1.70(6) 1.84(2) 1.72(6) 1.79(2) 1.96(2) 1.87(6) 2.06(6) 1.73(6) 0.13(6) *(.10)

Summary of Weed Population Data: Only a few significant differences have been noted to date between tillage treatments or among cropping systems In general the NT systems show higher weed populations than the CT systems Common weed species that continue to be present in the field include: common purslane, prickly lettuce, winter grasses (bromegrass species primarily), marestail, and henbit New weed species that have appeared with time include: honeyvine milkweed, morningglory, and red stem filaree To date current herbicide programs seem to be working in terms of weed population control with the exception of the No-Till Mono-Crop Grain Sorghum where significant increase in pigweed species occurred and remained after a glyphosate and two atrazine herbicide applications.

Grain Sorghum Pigweed Weed Data 2008 Tillage System C-GS GS Mean L.S.D. (.05) NT 5.8ψ 57.2 31.5 24.2 CT 0.33 0.5 0.42 NS (ψ) Weed numbers reflect thousand plants/A

Herbicide Program Options Roundup (preplant or preemergence, all crops) Dual Magnum + Roundup (cotton and sorghum) Several sulphonyl ureas (wheat and some sorghum) Atrazine (grain sorghum) Aim (postemergence in cotton and sorghum, be careful with plant growth conditions. Phenoxy Herb. (2,4-D or Banvel) (sorghum or wheat) Buctril (postemergence in grain sorghum) Peak (postemergence in grain sorghum or wheat) Basagran (grain sorghum)

Crop by Cropping System Comparisons

Cotton Production Economics 2002-2008 Cropping Systems 2003 + 04 Lint Yield Lbs./A 2005 Lint Yield Lbs./A 2006 2007 2008 Total Crop Return $/A C-W-GS 264 (NT) 250 (CT) --- 812 (NT) 722 (CT) 438.99ψ 307.08 C-W 252 (NT) 337 (CT) 598 (NT) 0.0 (CT) 292.74 24.35 C-GS 259 (NT) 235 (CT) 670 (NT) 678 (CT) 742 (NT) 759 (CT) 650.28 436.16 W-DCGS- C 445 (NT) 392 (CT) 834 (NT) 712 (CT) 521.31 328.90 C 553 (NT) 607 (CT) 617 (NT) 679 (CT) 0.0(NT) 740 (NT) 732 (CT) 275 (NT) 205 (CT) 694.36 550.27

Wheat Production Economics 2002-2008 Cropping Systems 2003 +2004 Yield Bu./A 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total Crop Return $/A C-W-GS --- 74 (NT) 64 (CT) 159 ψ 125 C-W 61 (NT) 68 (CT) 57 (NT) 58 (CT) 308 322 W-DCGS- C 15 (NT) 20 (CT) 0 (NT) 53 (CT) -20.02 96.78 W 91 (NT) 79 (CT) 51 (NT) CT) 0.0(N T) 21 (CT) 49 (NT) 49 CT) 53 (NT) 47 (CT) 708.38 607.68

Grain Sorghum Production Economics 2002-2008 Cropping Systems 2003 + 04 Yield Lbs./A 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total Crop Return $/A C-W-GS --- 2274 (NT) 0 (CT) 20.38 ψ -103.53 C-GS 3709 (NT) 1677 (NT) 1455 (CT) 93.47 -102.20 W- DCGS-C 1023 (NT) 1092 (CT) 0 (NT) 1.05 3.73 GS 2955 (NT) 2627 (CT) 4963 (NT) 4827 (CT) 2864 (NT) 4441 (NT) 2415 (CT) 919 (NT) 1725 (CT) 233.14 -103.45

Rotation System Comparisons CS Average Crop-Year Returns above Production Inputs ($/A) Potential Beef Gain Returns ($/A) C-W-GS 118.54(NT) 58.24(CT) 117.98(NT) 91.01(CT) C-W 150.17(NT) 104.87(CT) 219.83(NT) 117.00(CT) C-GS 123.89(NT) 73.03(CT) ---(NT) -34.02(CT) W-DCGS-C 122.84(NT) 91.19(CT) 32.61(NT) 11.55(CT) C 115.73(NT) 84.91(CT) 27.64(NT) -23.01(CT) W 119.67(NT) 101.31(CT) 160.54(NT) 137.68(CT) GS 51.50(NT) -12.82(CT) --- (NT) -29.03(CT)

Conclusions – To Present While not always significant, the NT crop systems have shown a consistent trend for higher return dollars beyond production inputs than the CT systems. With only a few exceptions the crop rotations have indicated a trend for higher yields and/or returns in the year by year comparisons However, when averaged across years the C and W only systems appear to be doing well(especially in the CT tillage system) are currently doing as good as all rotation crop systems with the exception of the C-W system. This is somewhat tied to the 2007 elevated crop year yields and commodity prices. If removed from data then the NT-CW and C-GS and CT-CW rotations perform significantly better. When all years are considered, all NT rotation systems are doing as good if not better than the mono-crop systems plus giving the soil environment added future benefits. The NT Wheat only system is doing as good if not better in terms of yield than the CT Wheat only system. It shows a return dollar advantage over the CT Wheat Only system.