AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Radio Maria World. 2 Postazioni Transmitter locations.
Advertisements

EcoTherm Plus WGB-K 20 E 4,5 – 20 kW.
Números.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
Trend for Precision Soil Testing % Zone or Grid Samples Tested compared to Total Samples.
SKELETAL QUIZ 3.
PDAs Accept Context-Free Languages
/ /17 32/ / /
Reflection nurulquran.com.
EuroCondens SGB E.
Worksheets.
Slide 1Fig 26-CO, p.795. Slide 2Fig 26-1, p.796 Slide 3Fig 26-2, p.797.
Sequential Logic Design
Addition and Subtraction Equations
Multiplication X 1 1 x 1 = 1 2 x 1 = 2 3 x 1 = 3 4 x 1 = 4 5 x 1 = 5 6 x 1 = 6 7 x 1 = 7 8 x 1 = 8 9 x 1 = 9 10 x 1 = x 1 = x 1 = 12 X 2 1.
Division ÷ 1 1 ÷ 1 = 1 2 ÷ 1 = 2 3 ÷ 1 = 3 4 ÷ 1 = 4 5 ÷ 1 = 5 6 ÷ 1 = 6 7 ÷ 1 = 7 8 ÷ 1 = 8 9 ÷ 1 = 9 10 ÷ 1 = ÷ 1 = ÷ 1 = 12 ÷ 2 2 ÷ 2 =
1 When you see… Find the zeros You think…. 2 To find the zeros...
Western Public Lands Grazing: The Real Costs Explore, enjoy and protect the planet Forest Guardians Jonathan Proctor.
Add Governors Discretionary (1G) Grants Chapter 6.
CALENDAR.
CHAPTER 18 The Ankle and Lower Leg
Summative Math Test Algebra (28%) Geometry (29%)
2.11.
ASCII stands for American Standard Code for Information Interchange
The 5S numbers game..
突破信息检索壁垒 -SciFinder Scholar 介绍
A Fractional Order (Proportional and Derivative) Motion Controller Design for A Class of Second-order Systems Center for Self-Organizing Intelligent.
Sampling in Marketing Research
Break Time Remaining 10:00.
The basics for simulations
© 2010 Concept Systems, Inc.1 Concept Mapping Methodology: An Example.
PP Test Review Sections 6-1 to 6-6
MM4A6c: Apply the law of sines and the law of cosines.
Figure 3–1 Standard logic symbols for the inverter (ANSI/IEEE Std
TCCI Barometer March “Establishing a reliable tool for monitoring the financial, business and social activity in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki”
1 Prediction of electrical energy by photovoltaic devices in urban situations By. R.C. Ott July 2011.
TCCI Barometer March “Establishing a reliable tool for monitoring the financial, business and social activity in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki”
Copyright © 2012, Elsevier Inc. All rights Reserved. 1 Chapter 7 Modeling Structure with Blocks.
Progressive Aerobic Cardiovascular Endurance Run
Biology 2 Plant Kingdom Identification Test Review.
MaK_Full ahead loaded 1 Alarm Page Directory (F11)
TCCI Barometer September “Establishing a reliable tool for monitoring the financial, business and social activity in the Prefecture of Thessaloniki”
When you see… Find the zeros You think….
2011 WINNISQUAM COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=1021.
Before Between After.
2011 FRANKLIN COMMUNITY SURVEY YOUTH RISK BEHAVIOR GRADES 9-12 STUDENTS=332.
2.10% more children born Die 0.2 years sooner Spend 95.53% less money on health care No class divide 60.84% less electricity 84.40% less oil.
Foundation Stage Results CLL (6 or above) 79% 73.5%79.4%86.5% M (6 or above) 91%99%97%99% PSE (6 or above) 96%84%100%91.2%97.3% CLL.
Subtraction: Adding UP
: 3 00.
5 minutes.
Numeracy Resources for KS2
1 Non Deterministic Automata. 2 Alphabet = Nondeterministic Finite Accepter (NFA)
2.4 Bases de Dados Estudo de Caso. Caso: Caixa Eletrônico Caixa Eletrônico com acesso à Base de Dados; Cada cliente possui:  Um número de cliente  Uma.
Static Equilibrium; Elasticity and Fracture
ANALYTICAL GEOMETRY ONE MARK QUESTIONS PREPARED BY:
Converting a Fraction to %
Resistência dos Materiais, 5ª ed.
Clock will move after 1 minute
Lial/Hungerford/Holcomb/Mullins: Mathematics with Applications 11e Finite Mathematics with Applications 11e Copyright ©2015 Pearson Education, Inc. All.
Select a time to count down from the clock above
UNDERSTANDING THE ISSUES. 22 HILLSBOROUGH IS A REALLY BIG COUNTY.
Chart Deception Main Source: How to Lie with Charts, by Gerald E. Jones Dr. Michael R. Hyman, NMSU.
1 Non Deterministic Automata. 2 Alphabet = Nondeterministic Finite Accepter (NFA)
Introduction Embedded Universal Tools and Online Features 2.
úkol = A 77 B 72 C 67 D = A 77 B 72 C 67 D 79.
Schutzvermerk nach DIN 34 beachten 05/04/15 Seite 1 Training EPAM and CANopen Basic Solution: Password * * Level 1 Level 2 * Level 3 Password2 IP-Adr.
Presentation transcript:

AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples – Northwood laboratory 1997 - 2011 % Grid or Zone Samples Tested Compared To Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples Tested

AGVISE Laboratories %Zone or Grid Samples Tested Compared to Conventional Whole Field Composite Samples in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate following Wheat in 2011 MB Fall 2011 Samples 41 56 (lb/a 0-24” samples) 38 46 39 49 33 42 37 44 40 39 35 ND 44 48 47 40 29 42 56 MN 49 55 SD 34 45

Average Soil Nitrate following Wheat in 2011 (change from 2010 averages – More high testing fields) MB Fall 2011 Samples +3 +18 (lb/a 0-24” samples) +10 +12 +14 +7 +3 +7 +5 +13 +15 +5 +2 ND +11 +12 +15 +6 +12 +9 MN +9 +13 SD +2

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “WHEAT” in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “WHEAT” 1986-2011 107 96 81 68 Nitrate-N (0-24”) 64 59 60 61 60 56 54 53 50 48 46 46 42 44 43 41 40 38 35 35 32 29 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following Wheat For Region (1986-2011) Deep “N” (24-48” lb/a) 63 59 53 51 49 46 43 44 41 Nitrate-N (24-48” lb/a) 35 36 34 32 31 29 29 29 27 20 18 18 18 19 15 13 14 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Barley” in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “BARLEY 1986-2011 95 84 70 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a) 56 52 53 53 50 47 48 45 45 43 39 40 41 37 39 35 35 35 34 29 30 29 27 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Sunflower” in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “SUNFLOWER” 1986- 2011 101 82 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a) 70 55 50 47 49 50 48 50 50 46 47 48 43 43 44 44 40 32 34 33 30 27 25 22 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Dry Beans” 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “DRY BEANS” 1986-2011 102 100 78 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a) 72 70 65 65 66 61 61 58 57 58 53 52 53 55 51 49 46 46 44 41 38 34 35 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Sugarbeet” in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “SUGARBEET” 1986- 2011 53 48 47 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a) 30 25 25 25 25 22 23 22 22 21 20 20 21 21 21 19 18 17 16 17 16 15 13 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Fallow” in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “FALLOW” 1986-2011 149 143 128 119 102 98 93 84 85 80 79 81 79 75 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a) 67 69 66 58 60 62 59 60 55 48 50 46 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 2011

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Soybeans” in 2011

Average Soil Nitrate Following “SOYBEAN” 1995-2011 35 35 33 32 31 31 30 30 29 29 28 27 27 27 26 Nitrate-N (0-24” lb/a) 24 23 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 2010

Average Soil Nitrate following Corn in 2011 Fall 2011 samples MB (lb/a 0-24” samples) 49 46 70 55 43 33 33 ND 43 29 35 33 38 39 35 39 MN 47 42 SD 42 46 62

Average Soil Nitrate following Corn in 2011 (Change from 2010 averages) Fall 2011 samples MB (lb/a 0-24” samples) +1 +12 +22 +17 +14 +3 +4 ND -3 +2 +1 -1 -18 -13 MN -13 -8 SD -8 -5 -7

Soil Nitrate Variability Between Fields Following “Corn” in 2011

% Soil Samples with Phosphorus less than 10 ppm Fall 2011 samples MB 43% (0-6” samples) 38% (Olsen P test) 50% 53% 21% 60% 28% 34% 29% 83% 77% 77% 60% 72% 64% ND 53% 59% 65% 71% 74% 37% 66% 46% 55% MN 36% SD 29% 43% 63% 46% 36%

% Soil Samples with Phosphorus less than 10 ppm “Percentage Change from 2010” (More low testing fields) Fall 2011 samples MB (0-6” samples) (Olsen P test) -6% +20% +6% +7% +8% +4% +9% +1% +2% -3% +5% +3% -12% ND -3% +7% +2% -3% +7% +1% +2% +1% +6% MN +1% SD +4% +3% +2% -3%

% Soil Samples with Potassium less than 150 ppm MB Fall 2011 samples 29% 8% (0-6” samples) 28% 28% 20% 3% 13% 15% 23% 3% 5% 2% 15% 35% 74% ND 7% 24% 79% 6% 51% 6% 54% 1% 5% 28% MN 32% SD 40% 0% 5% 29% 43%

% Soil Samples with Zinc less than 1.0 ppm MB Fall 2011 samples 33% 55% (0-6” samples) 53% 28% 66% 48% 37% 31% 88% 74% 80% 52% 72% 49% ND 52% 22% 85% 64% 65% 72% 22% 82% 55% 64% MN 32% SD 36 72% 47% 40% 38%

% Soil Samples with Sulfur less than 15 lb/a MB Fall 2011 samples 9% 14% (0-6” samples) 18% 3% 14% 11% 26% 8% 14% 63% 25% 31% 12% 13% 40% ND 34% 53% 43% 17% 23% 66% 55% 63% 22% 32% MN 49% SD 37% 67% 22% 51% 75%

% Soil Samples with %OM less than 3.0% MB Fall 2011 samples 6% 6% (0-6” samples) 13% 8% 35% 9% 30% 22% 8% 67% 31% 37% 19% 19% 29% ND 21% 53% 82% 22% 25% 32% 31% 50% 26% 10% MN 8% SD 14% 20% 28% 8% 5%

% Soil Samples with Chloride less than 40 lb/a MB Fall 2011 Samples 59% 46% (0-24” samples) 61% 66% 21% 79% 64% 44% 43% 96% 73% 82% 47% 32% ND 78% 92% 67% 57% 94% 81% 92% 51% MN 69% 89% SD 48% 89%

% Soil Samples with Copper less than 0.5 ppm MB Fall 2011 samples 13% 2% (0-6” samples) 15% 8% 22% 3% 8% 12% 3% 2% 17% 3% 12% 27% 30% ND 7% 45% 10% 20% 17% 9% 21% 11% 7% MN 4% 5% SD 1% 4% 2% 0%

% Soil Samples with Boron less than 0.4 ppm MB Fall 2011 samples 0% (0-6” samples) 1% 4% 0% 10% 1% 2% 5% 3% 8% 5% 26% ND 3% 13% 42% 88% 4% 17% 58% 21% 19% MN 20% SD 15% 7% 30%

% Soil Samples with Salts greater than 1.0 MB Fall 2011 Samples 11% 21% (0-6” samples) 18% 19% 33% 11% 7% 21% 14% 2% 15% 7% 36% 20% 4% ND 7% 3% 0% 1% 24% 18% 1% 3% 22% MN 9% 4% SD 1% 4% 11% 1% 2%

% Soil Samples with Salts greater than 1.0 “% Change from 2010” (more high salt fields) MB Fall 2011 Samples +5% +12% (0-6” samples) +2% +9% +10% +4% +9% -1% -1% +6% 7% +10% +7% -3% ND 0% +1% 0% +1% +10% +8% 0% +3 +8% MN +3 +1% SD 1% -3% +6% 1% +1%

% Soil Samples with Soil pH greater than 7.3 MB Fall 2011 samples 74% 96% (0-6” samples) 82% 63% 80% 68% 76% 73% 75% 75% 56% 80% 96% 65% ND 38% 5% 42% 69% 82% 40% 64% 17% 23% MN 33% 58% SD 21% 25% 30% 26% 20%

% Soil Samples with Carbonate greater than 5.0% MB Fall 2011 samples 22% 35% (0-6” samples) 38% 18% 25% 8% 13% 13% 43% 9% 3% 22% 24% ND 5% 8% 25% 6% 5% 1% MN 6% 32% SD 1% 5% 10%