Making No-Till Wheat Production Profitable:  On-Farm Testing

No-Tillage Wheat

No-Tillage Wheat - Long-Term Effects

Yield of Winter Wheat in a Long-Term Continuous No-Tillage Rotation of Corn, Wheat & Double-Crop Soybean

Comparative Performance of Wheat Varieties in No-Till and Conventional-Till Trials

Residue Placement to Improve Yields of No-Tillage Winter Wheat Following Corn

Residue Management for No-Till Wheat

Nitrogen Management for No-Tillage Wheat Following Corn or Full-Season Soybean

Tillage and the Nitrogen Requirement of Wheat Following Full-Season Soybean

Tillage and Nitrogen Management for Wheat Planted at Different Dates

Wheat Seeding Rate Study

Fusarium Head Blight Survey 1998-99

Greenhouse and Field Evaluation of Resistance to Fusarium Head Blight in Soft Red Winter Wheat

1998-99 National Fusarium Head Blight Uniform Fungicide Test

1998-99 Wheat Seed Treatment Test

Can Aphid Control Reduce Barley Yellow Dwarf Incidence in Wheat?  A Case Study (Caldwell Co., Ky 1998-99)

The Affect of Insecticide Application Timing for Controlling Aphid Vectors on Barley Yellow Dwarf Incidence on Wheat Grown in Henderson Co., Ky

Managing Annual Italian Ryegrass with Preharvest Applications

Impact of Wheat Herbicides on Double-Cropped Soybeans

1999 Nutrient Survey of Wheat

In 1997, the KySGGA established the goal of having 75% of the state's wheat acreage managed using no-till methods by the year 2005. Before that dramatic change can occur, producers must be convinced that they will not have to sacrifice short-term economic viability in order to gain the long-term benefits of topsoil conservation attainable using no-till methods. Hence, this project's goal was to compare some tillage (ST) and no-tillage (NT) wheat production systems, both under intensive management, for profitability.

Table 1 compares the two tillage systems. Yields, on average across the 7 tests, were 3.0 bushels/A higher for ST, resulting in $8.60 greater value per acre. Tillage and stalk chopping cost an average of $25/A for ST, while extra seed, herbicide, and N fertility cost an average of $14.80/A for NT. On the whole, this resulted in a slight economic advantage ($1.60/A) for NT methods.

The attached footnotes for Table 1 discuss some assumptions made in this analysis. Most importantly, no dollar benefit was assigned to the topsoil saved by NT methods. Of course, another year's data could dramatically change the above profit comparison. Market price changes could help to some extent; for example, if the market price had been $4.00/bu across the 1998 and 1999 seasons, the comparison would have shown a $1.80 advantage for ST.

We plan to repeat this study at 4 locations in the 1999-2000 growing season, in order to assess this tillage comparison under different environmental conditions. To this point, our results appear to provide some incentive for growers to consider moving toward a no-till system. However, we do note this caution: The previously funded on-farm tillage comparisons in the 1996-97 growing season resulted in an average of 65 bushels/A for ST and 58 bushels/A for NT. These grower-managed tests produced 12% less grain under NT management, while our 1997-99 consultant (or researcher) managed tests only produced 4% less grain under NT management. It appears that no-till may respond to more careful management than some growers have been willing to implement.

Based on our work to this point, it looks like the slight yield loss for NT wheat production is more than covered by the savings producers would have in tillage costs. We are planning to continue this work for the 1999-2000 wheat production season.
 

TABLE 1. ECONOMIC SUMMARY OF ON-FARM TILLAGE COMPARISONS FUNDED BY KySGGA/KySGPB IN 1997 THROUGH 1999
		ST advantage		Additional ST costs		Additional NT costs
Test	Managed by:	Yield	Value	Residue Mgmt	Tillage	Seed	Herbicide	Nitrogen	Net ST Benefit
		(Bu/ac)		------------------------------------$/Acre--------------------------------
'98 Daviess	OC	+0.2	+0.6	6	22	0.9	15	0	-11.5
'98 Fayette	UK	+4.9	+14.2	0	22	9.1	0	5.6	+6.9
'98 Logan	WT	+6.1	+17.7	0	22	10.7	0	0	+6.4
'99 Caldwell	UK	+5.6	+15.7	6	25	4.4	0	3.2	-7.7
'99 Daviess	OC	-3.7	-10.4	6	22	5.8	15	0	-17.6
'99 Fayette	UK	+1.5	+4.2	0	22	7.1	2.2	4.2	-4.3
'99 Logan	WT	+6.4	+17.9	0	22	12.4	7.9	0	+16.2
Means	UK/OC/WT	+3.0	+8.6	2.6	22.4	7.2	5.7	1.9	-1.6

1. Abbreviations: ST, some tillage; NT, no-tillage; OC, Miles Opti-Crop; UK, University of Kentucky; and WT, Wheat Tech.

2. Expenses which were in common were not considered in this analysis, as the goal of the project was to compare economic advantages of the two tillage systems.

3. No economic credit was given for the long-term economic advantage likely to result from use of no-tillage methods (through the conservation of topsoil).

4. No economic credit was given for the potential benefits of no-tillage methods to rotated corn and soybean crops.

5. We assumed that neither test weight nor harvest moisture were influenced by tillage system.

6. Both ST and NT were managed to optimize their profitability rather than to obtain the highest possible yields.

7. Specific practices employed (i.e., the type and number of tillage passes) are shown in detail in the attached summaries of individual test locations.

8. Each location included two varieties and two replications. Calculated yield differences between tillage systems are assumed to represent real differences.

9. In five of the above tests, the later maturing variety produced higher yields than did the earlier maturing variety (within a given location). Rather than picking the better variety to paint this economic collage, we averaged across the two (to make our conclusions more supportable).

10. This data should be interpreted with some caution, as environmental conditions in coming seasons could clearly affect the outcomes of the two tillage systems. (However, some management considerations may have already helped buffer NT wheat from winterkill; for example, none of these 7 tests were planted in early October, and that may have helped account for the similar survival of most NT tillers in the face of a severe spring freeze in early March, 1998.)

11. In 1998, we used a market price of $2.90/bushel. The income deficiency payment for 1999 tests brought the value of the 1999 crop to $2.80/bushel.

12. No adjustments were made for differing speed of operations; for example, ST was not penalized for slightly slower combining, nor was NT penalized for slower speeds while drilling the crop.

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this experiment is to see if high yields can be produced by no-till wheat and to see if no-till wheat is an economical alternative to conventionally planted wheat on a long-term basis. The experiment includes different tillage methods, nitrogen rates and herbicides.

METHODS:

The experiment is at Princeton, Ky on a Pembroke silt loam soil that is moderately well drained. Pioneer 2540 was planted on Oct. 12 at 35 seeds/sq. Ft. Conventional plots were chisel plowed and disked twice. The plots were 10 ft. x 30 ft. The soil test was pH 6.0, P-39, and K-247 and 0-60-30 lb/ac. As N-P₂O₅-K₂O was applied before planting. Warrior insecticide was sprayed at 3 oz/ac and Tilt was sprayed at 4 oz/ac at heading.

RESULTS:

There were no differences between the yields of no-tillage and conventional planted wheat. The highest yielding treatment was no-tillage wheat with 120 lbs/ac of N. However, the average of all conventional planted treatments was 2 bu/ac higher than the same no-tillage treatments.

The seven-year average is 5.0 bu/ac greater with conventional tillage planting.
 

YIELDS ACCORDING TO TILLAGE
Treatment	1999 Yields (bu/ac)	Yields ('93-'99)
Conventional	89.3 a	92.7
No-Till	87.3 a	87.7

Nitrogen was managed for intensive production with 1/3 of the N applied at Feekes 3 and the remainder at Feekes 5. Conventionally planted wheat yields were not effected by the nitrogen rate. However, the 120 lb/ac of N rate was necessary for highest yields with no-tillage planting.

The above normal temperatures for most of the winter and spray may have resulted in more fertilizer N being immobilized in the surface residue. This is the third year of seven that the highest N rate resulted in a significantly higher yield with no-till wheat.
 

YIELDS ACCORDING TO NITROGEN RATE
Treatment (lb/ac)	Yields (bu/ac)	Yields ('93-'99)
No-till 90	83.0 b	85.6
No-till 120	91.6 a	88.3
Conv. 90	88.4 a	91.1
Conv. 120	90.3 a	93.3

In 1996, a split N application of 60-60 in February and March was a better combination than the 40-80 split. To look at this nitrogen timing in more detail, several treatments with different timings were added.

The 0-60-60 (Fall-Feb.-March) treatment has been similar to all the other treatments the last two years. In fact, there was no difference between any of the treatments in 1999.

The fall application of N has never been an advantage in any of the four years. The 0-0-120 (Fall-Feb.-March) treatment yields were as good as any. The warm fall and winter encouraged tillering so early N was not necessary this year for this variety.
 

YIELDS ACCORDING TO TIME AND PLACEMENT OF NITROGEN APPLICATION
Treatment (lb/ac)			Yields (bu/ac)	Yields ('97-'99)
Fall	February	March
0	40	80	93.8 a	88.6
0	60	60	88.7 a	86.2
30	30	60	94.1 a	85.4
30	45	45	83.6 a	84.9
0	0	120	87.1 a

On April 20, 1999 weed control was evaluated based on the percent ground cover occupied by weeds in the row middles. Henbit and common chickweed were the dominant weeds observed. Other species noted in the spring included annual bluegrass, curly dock, field pepper weed, hairy bittercress, hairy chess, shepherd's-purse, star-of-Bethlehem, wild carrot, catchweed bedstraw, and speedwell.

The overall weed control observed in conventional-till wheat with spring Harmony Extra was essentially equal to that found in no-till wheat with fall applied Gramoxone Extra followed by spring applied Harmony Extra. Weed control with Harmony Extra was substantially better when applied in the fall compared to when it was applied in the spring. Plots treated in the fall with Sencor at 4 oz/A had very little henbit or chickweed, but did have other weeds, particularly wild carrot.

Wheat yields for all weed management practices exceeded 90 bu/ac in 1999. The yields of plots receiving a herbicide treatment were similar and were at least 5.5 bu/ac greater than the yield of no-till wheat where no herbicide was used. The seven-year averages for wheat yield tended to be less with Harmony Extra applied in the spring compared to other weed management practices, however, this trend was not observed in 1999.
 

EFFECT OF WEED MANAGEMENT ON THE PRESENCE OF WEEDS  AND WHEAT YIELDS
Weed Management	1999 Weed Cover (%)1			Wheat Yield (bu/ac)
	Henbit	Chickweed	Total Weeds	1999	'93-'99
Conventional Till Spring Harmony Extra	11 ab	4 bc	20 de	90.3 a
No-till Fall Harmony Extra	4 b	0 c	10 e	92.4 a	89.7
No-till Spring Harmony Extra	27 a	15 ab	52 b	90.4 a	88.2
No-till Fall Sencor	4 b	2 c	37 c	92.7 a	.....
No-till Fall Gramoxone Extra Spring Harmony Extra	17 ab	4 bc	27 cd	91.6 a	90.1
No-till No Herbicides	28 a	18 a	76 a	84.8 b	76.6
1Gramoxone Extra at 1.5 pt/A was applied on Oct. 12, 1998. Fall Harmony Extra at 0.5 oz/A & Sencor at 4 oz/A were applied Nov. 18, 1998. Spring Harmony Extra at 0.5 oz/A was applied March 29, 1999. 2Weed Control was evaluated on April 20, 1999 based on a visual rating of percent ground cover occupied by weeds in the row middles.

Fungicide applications were managed for intensive production on all treatments and there were no differences observed in disease among the treatments.

Insect pests were not a significant factor on this test this year. Plots were monitored weekly for the presence of insect pests including aphids, cereal leaf beetle and armyworm. However, no populations of any importance developed. To prevent Barley Yellow Dwarf, Warrior was sprayed 30 and 60 days after planting.

The fall stand counts over a six-year average show about 10% less plants in the no-till plots as compared to the conventional plots when planted at the same rate. This year, stand counts were high in both tillage methods, but no-till was 13% less than the tilled method of planting.
 
 

WHEAT STANDS (Plants/Sq. Ft.)
Treatment	Fall - 1999	Fall - 6-years avg.
No-till	30.2	26.4
Conventional	34.8 a	28.8

Head counts made at maturity were significantly higher for the no-till planting. The number of heads/ft² were in the range where high yields might be expected for both tillage treatments. It appears that the wheat plant with no-tillage tillered more than the conventional wheat since fall stands were lower with no-tillage.
 

Treatment	Head Counts Heads/ft2	1993-99 Average
No-till	70.8 a	63.3
Conventional	66.2 b	65.2

OBJECTIVE:

The objective of this experiment was to verify the effects of no-till wheat and tilled wheat on the subsequent yield of soybeans and corn planted after wheat in a wheat, double-cropped soybean and corn rotation and measure differences in fertility and physical effects on the soil on a long-term basis.

METHODS:

The experiment is at Princeton, Ky on a Pembroke silt loam soil that is moderately well drained. Wheat was planted no-tilled and with tillage and the tillage plots were chisel plowed and disked twice. The plots were 10 ft x 30 ft. The soil test was pH - 6.0, P - 39, and K - 247 and 0-60-30 lbs/ac of N-P₂O₅-K₂O was applied before planting. Soybeans are planted no-till immediately after wheat harvest and no-till corn is planted the following year and wheat (tilled and no-tilled) is again planted after corn harvest.

RESULTS:

The data (below) indicates that both no-till corn and no-till soybeans tend to yield more (3.8% for soybeans and 6.3% for corn) where the wheat is planted no-till. However, the differences are not always statistically significant, but the trend has remained consistent since the second year of the experiment.

The data indicates that changes in the system which have taken place in the two systems is more favorable for these crops when planted after no-till wheat. The reason for the difference is not clear at this time, but might include residue cover, soil moisture, soil physical changes, or others.

The soil density and the soil strength have been measured each year and both of these measures show very similar readings with little or no differences between the two systems indicating that compaction is not a problem in either system.

The amount of soil organic matter found in the two systems was very similar. There is also no difference in the soil test pH, phosphorus or potassium between the two systems. The total no-tillage system 0.24% more organic matter in the top 3 inches of the soil than the one with tilled wheat.

Temperature loggers were placed at different heights and depths within the soil and wheat canopy to develop a temperature profile that might help answer questions concerning the differences between tilled and no-tilled wheat on growth vigor and winterkill.

In 1998-99, there was no difference in the vegetative growth between the two tillage systems and there was also little difference in temperatures most of the time. The temperatures in both tillage systems declined in December at the same rate and began rising in late January at the same rate.
 

EFFECT OF WHEAT TILLAGE SYSTEMS ON THE YIELD OF SUCCEEDING CROPS
Year	Wheat Tillage System
	No-Till	Conventional
Soybeans (bu/ac)
1999	14.9	15.4 N.S.*
1998	16.5	15.8 N.S.
1997	45.1	42.7 N.S.
1996	54.5	50.8 N.S.
1995	24.4	22.2 N.S.
1994	49.5	51.6 **
Average	34.2	33.1
Corn (bu/ac)
1999	196.0	165.7 **
1998	203.7	190.2 **
1997	211.9	199.3 **
1996	--- Harvest Data Lost ---
1995	186.0	191.0 N.S.
1994	206.0	178.0 **
Average	200.7	184.8
* N.S. means no significantly statistical differences. ** Statistically different at the 0.1% level.

CONCLUSIONS:

No-tillage wheat seems to have a favorable effect on the yields of the subsequent crops (corn and soybeans) planted in the rotation. Yields of these two crops are increased about 4 to 6% on the average when planted after no-till wheat. The reason of this is unclear at this time. The temperature extremes are greater under the no-tillage wheat planting which can increase the changes of freeze damage.
 

 

YIELD OF WINTER WHEAT IN A LONG-TERM CONTINUOUS
NO-TILLAGE ROTATION OF CORN, WHEAT AND DOUBLE-CROP SOYBEAN

OBJECTIVE:

Determine the economic contribution of wheat to the long-term productivity of the 3 crops/2years rotation.

METHODS:

Location: Fayette County/Spindletop
Soil Type and Drainage: Maury silt loam - well drained
Previous Crop: Corn
Tillage: No-Tillage (Lilliston 9680)
Cultivar: Pioneer 2552
Planting Date & Rate: Nov. 5, 1998; 26.5 seed/sq.ft.
Harvest Date: June 21, 1999
Fertilizer: Nitrogen - 40 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 12/15/98
                                40 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 3/2/99
                                80 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 4/5/99
Herbicides: Gramoxone Extra - 1 qt/ac on 10/23/98
Harmony Extra - 0.7oz/ac on 4/7/99
Brominal ME4 - 0.75 pt/ac on 4/7/99
Fungicides: Tilt 3.2EC - 4 fl oz/ac on 5/15/99
Results: Average of 4 replications - 39.0 bu/acre

CONCLUSIONS:

Yields were poor, primarily because later planting caused crop development to be more greatly influenced by the drought. Both vegetative growth and kernel size were below expectations. Historically, the yield of no-tilllage wheat in these plots has been negatively related to the yield of the previous corn crop. Average yield losses appear to be about 1 bu/ac of wheat for every 10 bu/ac in the preceding corn crop, with annual corn yields ranging between 90 and 190 bu/ac and annual wheat yields averaging between 40 and 80 bu/ac. The poor wheat yields observed in 1990 and 1999 were excluded from the relationship. This negative relationship probably exists because greater corn yields result in greater corn residue levels, which hinder wheat stand establishment and may reduce/delay wheat tillering.
 

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether wheat varieties that are superior under conventional tillage are also superior under no-tillage.
 

METHODS:
 

Location	Logan Co.	Caldwell Co.	Shelby Co.
Harvest Year	1998	1999	1998-99
Cooperator	W. G. Farms	Gilkey Farms	Ellis Farms
Previous Crop	Corn	Corn	Corn
Conventional Tillage	Disk-ripper, Disk, Cultipacker	Disk-ripper, Disk, Cultipacker	Chisel Plow, Disk
Stubble Condition (no-till)	Flail-mowed	Flail-mowed	Standing
Planting Date	10/8/97	10/9/98	10/1/97; 10/12/98

Entries consisted of 46 commercial and public soft red winter wheat varieties in 1998 and 43 in 1999. Twenty-eight varieties were common to both years. Each variety was replicated 4 times at each location in both years. Conventional tests were planted with a 6-row cone seeder with double-disk openers in 7 " rows. Plot area was 60 square feet. No-till plots were seeded with a 7-row cone seeder equipped with John Deere 750 openers in a row spacing of 7.5 ". Plot area was 240 square feet. Seeding rates were approximately 325 seeds/sq. yd. for conventional tillage and 365 seeds/sq. yd. for no-till. Inputs such as fertilizer and pesticides were similar to those used by the cooperating farmers on their commercial wheat fields.

RESULTS:

Variety yield means are presented in the following three tables.

CONCLUSIONS:

There was very good agreement between no-till and conventional-till performance in terms of variety mean yield. For example, the correlation between no-till and conventional-till performance over two years in Shelby Co. was 0.85 (Table 1). Perfect agreement would have yielded a correlation coefficient of 1.0. When comparing no-till vs. conventional-till performance in Logan Co. in 1998 and Caldwell Co. in 1999, the correlation was 0.74 (Table 2). When data from all three locations in both years were considered, the correlation was 0.88 (Table 3). The take home message at present is that, in general, superior varieties will perform well under either tillage system. However, we will continue to test wheat varieties under conventional and no-till management in the foreseeable future.
 

TABLE 1. SHELBY COUNTY NO-TILL AND CONVENTIONAL VARIETY TRIAL, 1998-99
	CONV: YIELD (BU/A)			NO-TILL: YIELD (BU/A)
VARIETY	1999	1998	MEAN	1999	1998	MEAN
2540	87.2	61.6	74.4	82.9	63.5	73.2
2552	98.3	65.1	81.7	100.4	64.2	82.3
2568	90.6	51.9	71.3	89.9	55.7	72.8
25R26	88.4	57.4	72.9	89.3	56.0	72.7
AG FOSTER & GAUCHO	81.0	43.5	62.3	77.6	50.7	64.2
AGRIPRO ELKHART	78.6	45.8	62.2	87.6	44.5	66.1
AGRIPRO FOSTER	79.4	43.2	61.3	72.7	46.7	59.7
AGRIPRO MASON	86.5	53.1	69.8	84.0	49.6	66.8
AGRIPRO PATTON	94.9	62.3	78.6	99.5	59.0	79.3
BECK 103	73.3	46.6	60.0	81.4	45.7	63.6
BECKER	66.8	41.9	54.4	79.2	46.2	62.7
CALDWELL	61.2	34.1	47.7	54.1	29.7	41.9
CLARK	76.1	48.5	62.3	82.1	40.6	61.4
COKER 9474	70.0	40.5	55.3	79.6	41.1	60.4
COKER 9663	83.0	52.2	67.6	93.7	57.4	75.6
FFR 522	75.8	45.8	60.8	75.2	42.1	58.7
FFR 555	80.6	42.1	61.4	83.0	47.9	65.5
FFR 558	75.2	44.6	59.9	79.7	50.0	64.9
GLORY	87.3	57.2	72.3	86.3	60.5	73.4
HYTEST W9850	80.5	53.4	67.0	79.3	57.9	68.6
JACKSON	84.1	40.7	62.4	87.2	42.6	64.9
KAS JUSTICE	66.5	45.2	55.9	75.7	49.5	62.6
KAS PATRIOT	66.2	45.9	56.1	81.4	41.7	61.6
KY 86C-61-8	84.0	48.8	66.4	85.3	50.6	68.0
MADISON	78.9	47.8	63.4	90.1	54.3	72.2
PATTERSON	75.4	48.4	61.9	83.1	45.7	64.4
POCAHONTAS	78.3	37.4	57.9	92.8	35.1	64.0
TERRA SR 204	81.2	48.4	64.8	79.2	46.2	62.7
MEAN	79.6	48.3	64.0	83.3	49.1	66.2
Correlation of Conventional, No-Till, 1998-99: 0.85

 

TABLE 2. LOGAN COUNTY (1998) AND CALDWELL CO. (1999) NO-TILL AND CONVENTIONAL VARIETY TRIAL
	CONV: YIELD (BU/A)			NO-TILL: YIELD (BU/A)
VARIETY	1999	1998	MEAN	1999	1998	MEAN
2540	81.8	58.9	70.4	74.3	46.5	60.4
2552	95.3	41.2	68.3	96.8	41.8	69.3
2568	89.0	45.8	67.4	76.5	34.5	55.5
25R26	91.8	40.3	66.1	78.8	29.3	54.1
AG FOSTER & GAUCHO	83.0	41.1	62.1	100.3	29.7	65.0
AGRIPRO ELKHART	90.5	42.6	66.6	84.5	34.5	59.5
AGRIPRO FOSTER	84.3	36.4	60.4	81.8	26.2	54.0
AGRIPRO MASON	88.0	44.2	66.1	79.8	40.0	59.9
AGRIPRO PATTON	88.5	53.1	70.8	80.8	35.8	58.3
BECK 103	86.3	43.8	65.1	96.8	36.3	66.6
BECKER	80.5	31.2	55.9	79.0	15.6	47.3
CALDWELL	71.5	40.6	56.1	67.8	25.1	46.5
CLARK	67.5	35.8	51.7	60.5	25.4	43.0
COKER 9474	81.5	43.8	62.7	74.5	39.4	57.0
COKER 9663	103.8	48.1	76.0	87.0	46.5	66.8
FFR 522	85.0	35.7	60.4	74.0	32.6	53.3
FFR 555	87.0	26.5	56.8	89.3	21.6	55.5
FFR 558	86.5	43.3	64.9	76.5	28.3	52.4
GLORY	83.3	47.8	65.6	77.8	29.5	53.7
HYTEST W9850	86.3	52.7	69.5	82.3	41.0	61.7
JACKSON	100.3	33.7	67.0	89.8	30.7	60.3
KAS JUSTICE	79.8	56.3	68.1	71.5	38.3	54.9
KAS PATRIOT	93.8	40.0	66.9	89.5	30.3	59.9
KY 86C-61-8	87.0	32.7	59.9	80.3	25.3	52.8
MADISON	90.3	34.1	62.2	78.3	31.2	54.8
PATTERSON	77.8	44.2	61.0	70.0	29.1	49.6
POCAHONTAS	75.3	32.4	53.9	84.3	23.3	53.8
TERRA SR 204	76.3	35.3	55.8	72.0	28.7	50.4
MEAN	85.4	41.5	63.5	80.5	32.0	56.3
Correlation of Conventional, No-Till, 1998-99: 0.74

TABLE 3. CONVENTIONAL VS. NO-TILL, 1998-1999*
VARIETY	1998-99 CONV. YIELD (BU/A)	1998-99  NO-TILL YIELD (BU/AC)
2540	72.4	66.8
2552	75.0	75.8
2568	69.3	64.2
25R26	69.5	63.4
AG FOSTER & GAUCHO	62.2	64.6
AGRIPRO ELKHART	64.4	62.8
AGRIPRO FOSTER	60.8	56.9
AGRIPRO MASON	68.0	63.4
AGRIPRO PATTON	74.7	68.8
BECK 103	62.5	65.1
BECKER	55.1	55.0
CALDWELL	51.9	44.2
CLARK	57.0	52.2
COKER 9474	59.0	58.7
COKER 9663	71.8	71.2
FFR 522	60.6	56.0
FFR 555	59.1	60.5
FFR 558	62.4	58.6
GLORY	68.9	63.5
HYTEST W9850	68.2	65.1
JACKSON	64.7	62.6
KAS JUSTICE	62.0	58.8
KAS PATRIOT	61.5	60.7
KY 86C-61-8	63.1	60.4
MADISON	62.8	63.5
PATTERSON	61.5	57.0
POCAHONTAS	55.9	58.9
TERRA SR 204	60.3	56.5
MEAN	63.7	61.2
Correlation of Conventional, No-Till, 1998-99: 0.88 *1998: Logan and Shelby Co. 1999: Caldwell and Shelby Co.

OBJECTIVE:

Determine whether redistribution of corn residues, relative to the planted wheat row, will improve wheat yields.

METHODS:

Location: Fayette County/Spindletop
Soil Type and Drainage :Maury silt loam - well drained
Previous Crop: Corn
Tillage: No-Tillage (Lilliston 9680)
Cultivar: Pioneer 2552
Planting Date & Rate: Nov. 5, 1998; 26.5 seed/sq.ft.
Harvest Date: June 21, 1999
Fertilizer: Nitrogen - 40 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 12/15/98
                                40 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 3/2/99
                                80 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 4/5/99
Herbicides: Gramoxone Extra - 1 qt/ac on 10/23/98
                    Harmony Extra - 0.7oz/ac on 4/7/99
                    Brominal ME4 - 0.75 pt/ac on 4/7/99
Fungicides:    Tilt 3.2EC - 4 fl oz/ac on 5/15/99
Results: Average of 4 replications - see Table 1, below.
 

CONCLUSIONS:

We removed corn residues prior to seeding wheat and then returned residues inside long "residue bags" at two set-back distances from the row. We had one treatment where we tried to maximize the insulation effect of residue without the chemical alleopathy of compounds leaching from the decomposing residues. We also had several kinds of check treatments (bare, random coverage over the plot without the bag, empty bags placed between the rows). The row spacing was 7 inches.

Yields were among the lowest for treatments where residues were randomly distributed over the wheat rows and placed near the wheat row. The treatment where the residue bag was maintained at some distance from the row during dry weather, and removed during most rainfall events, was among the best treatments. The results suggest that previous crop residues may be both beneficial and detrimental to wheat growth and development.
 
 

TABLE 1. EFFECT OF CORN RESIDUE PLACEMENT ON NO-TILLAGE WHEAT GRAIN YIELD
Residue Placement Treatment	Grain Yield (bu/ac)
Random coverage	46.0 b
Residue bags moved 0.25 inches away	44.9 b
Residue bags moved 1.25 inches away	54.0 ab
Residue bags moved 1.25 inches away & removed before rainfall	61.5 a
Empty residue bag between rows	55.3 ab
Bare (no residue)	53.4 ab

OBJECTIVE:

This study will compliment other studies investigating practices that would best allow for no-till planting of wheat into corn residue. This study continues the comparison of different methods and timing of mechanical shredding of corn stalks of different corn maturities against no shredding and no corn residue.

METHODS:

Corn was planted at the rate of 26,000 seeds/ac using an early season variety (Pioneer 33Y18) and a late variety (Pioneer 3167). The average yields of the corn was bu/ac for the late season and bu/ac for the early season. Both varieties were harvested at 19% moisture and harvest dates were 8-26-98 and 9-8-98 for the early and late corn.

All mechanical shredding was completed immediately after harvest of each corn variety, except for Treatment 9 which was flailed immediately after wheat planting. All residue was removed from Treatment 1, but the plots were not tilled.

Wheat (Pioneer 2540) was planted no-till at the rate of 35 seeds/sq ft. with a 7 inch row spacing. Gramoxone was applied after planting and a total of 120 lbs/ac of N was applied with ½ on Feb. 10 and ½ on March 18. Harmony Extra was applied on March 29 and Tilt on May 3 and Warrior insecticide on Nov. 12 and Dec. 16

TREATMENTS:

1.    Remove all corn residue and plant into clean residue conditions (full season corn).
2.    Plant at an angle into standing harvesting corn stalks (full season corn).
3.    Plant direclty into standing corn residue, not angled (full season corn).
4.    Plant directly into standing corn residue, not angled (full season corn).
5.    Increased wheat seeding rate (15%).
6.    Plant directly into standing corn residue, not angled (early season corn).
7.    Rotary mow corn residue after harvest and plant into mowed residue (full season corn).
8.    Flail mow corn residue after harvest and plant into mowed residue (full season corn).
9.    Flail mow corn residue after harvest and plant into mowed residue (early season corn).
10.  Plant directly into standing harvested corn and flail mow after planting (full season corn).
        Spray UAN on residue at 40 lbs/ac N immediately after harvest.
11.  Flail mow corn residue after harvest and plant into mowed residue (full season corn).
        Apply solid Ammonium Nitrate at 40 lb/ac N after wheat planting.

RESULTS:

The amount of residue cover after planting is shown in Table 1. Only 7% of area was covered when the residue was removed. When the residue was not removed, two treatments resulted in less residue after planting than the other treatments. Planting directly into standing stalks of early maturing corn and spraying 40 lb/ac of N as UAN on full season corn stalks both resulted in less residue after wheat planting. This was probably due to a more decomposition of the corn stalks prior to planting.
 
 

TABLE 1. EFFECT OF RESIDUE MANAGEMENT ON PERCENT OF SOIL COVER AFTER PLANTING WHEAT
Treatment	Corn Maturity	Soil Cover (%)
1. Removed all corn residue	Full	7 a
2. Residue behind combine (as is) diagonally planted	Full	96 c
3. Residue behind combine (as is)	Full	96 c
4. Residue behind combine (as is) 15% increased seed rate	Full	95 c
5. Residue behind combine (as is)	Early	83 b
6. Rotary mowed after harvest	Full	93 bc
7. Flail mowed after harvest	Full	96 c
8. Flail mowed after harvest	Early	97 c
9. Flail mowed after wheat planting	Full	99 c
10. Flail mowed after harvest N sprayed on corn stalks	Full	82 b
11. Flail mowed after harvest N on wheat after planting	Full	95 c

Stands of wheat in the fall are seen in Table 2. The highest stands were in the treatment with a 15% increase in seeding rate and the treatment with all residue removed. The treatment with UAN sprayed on residue after corn harvest resulted in one of the higher wheat stand counts and lowest corn residue covers.

There was no difference between any of the other treatments. So, shredding or not shredding was not an issue as well as early or late maturing corn.

In 1998, flail shredding stands were better than the rotary mowed or planting into standing corn treatments. There was no difference in 1999 and some of this may have been due to excellent stand establishment weather conditions.
 
 
 

TABLE 2. EFFECT OF RESIDUE MANAGEMENT ON WHEAT STAND IN NOVEMBER
Treatment	Corn Maturity	Wheat Stand Plants/sq ft.
1. Removed all corn residue	Full	35.2 ab
2. Residue behind combine (as is) diagonally planted	Full	32.9 bcd
3. Residue behind combine (as is)	Full	34.1 bcd
4. Residue behind combine (as is) 15% increased seed rate	Full	37.8 a
5. Residue behind combine (as is)	Early	31.2 d
6. Rotary mowed after harvest	Full	31.9 bcd
7. Flail mowed after harvest	Full	32.1 bcd
8. Flail mowed after harvest	Full	32.2 bcd
9. Flail mowed after wheat planting	Full	32.6 bcd
10. Flail mowed after harvest N sprayed on corn stalks	Full	34.7 abc
11. Flail mowed after harvest N on wheat after planting	Full	31.3 cd

The warm winter and early spring encouraged high tillering and high amounts of growth on all plots. Unlike last year, there were no visual differences in the treatments during the season. The only exception was where nitrogen was applied in the fall which caused these treatments to have more growth and lodging during the season.
 
 

The yields are found in Table 3 and are very high this year due to favorable weather conditions. Head counts were high in all the treatments due to the warm winter so there was very little correlation between stands and yields. In fact, the treatment where all the residue was removed had one of the highest stand counts but the lowest yield.

The highest yield occurred where the residue was left standing and the wheat was planted at an angle (diagonally) to the old corn rows. Flail mowing treatments also had some of the higher yielding treatments.

Basically, there was little difference between yield. It appears that fall application of nitrogen, as well as removing of the residue, before wheat planting were not helpful.
 

TABLE 3. EFFECT OF RESIDUE MANAGEMENT ON WHEAT YIELDS
Treatment	Corn Maturity	Yield (13.5% H20) (bu/ac)
1. Removed all corn residue	Full	104.6 b
2. Residue behind combine (as is) diagonally planted	Full	118.6 a
3. Residue behind combine (as is)	Full	106.7 ab
4. Residue behind combine (as is) 15% increased seed rate	Full	111.2 ab
5. Residue behind	Early	101.6 b
6. Rotary mowed after harvest	Full	107.9 ab
7. Flail mowed after harvest	Full	112.3 ab
8. Flail mowed after harvest	Early	107.9 ab
9. Flail mowed after wheat planting	Full	112.5 ab
10. Flail mowed after harvest N sprayed on corn stalks	Full	110.7 ab
11. Flail mowed after harvest N on wheat after planting	Full	105.2 b

Doubled-cropped soybeans planted after wheat harvest (Table 4) give some interesting results. All stands were adequate for maximum soybean yields and the differences were relatively small. Planting wheat diagonally across old corn rows resulted in best soybean stands in 1998 but was among the lowest in 1999. Soybean stands behind rotary mowed corn stalks before planting of wheat was low both years so this may not be the best practice concerning double-cropped planting.

The 15% increase in seeding rate also resulted in less double-cropped soybean stands. This practice may increase the planting problems with soybeans.

All other treatments resulted in excellent stands showing little differences over the two years.
 
 

TABLE 4.   EFFECT OF RESIDUE MANAGEMENT ON SOYBEAN STANDS PLANTED AFTER WHEAT HARVEST
Treatment	Corn Maturity	Soybean Stands Plants/Row Ft.
1. Removed all corn residue	Fall	7.35 a
2. Residue behind combine (as is) diagonally planted	Full	6.45 bc
3. Residue behind combine (as is)	Full	7.25 ab
4. Residue behind combine (as is) 15% increased rate	Full	6.45 bc
5. Residue behind combine as is)	Early	6.70 abc
6. Rotary moved after harvest	Full	5.95 c
7. Flail mowed after harvest	Full	6.80 abc
8. Flail mowed after harvest	Early	7.40 a
9. Flail mowed after wheat planting	Full	7.30 ab
10. Flail mowed after harvest, N sprayed on corn stalks	Full	6.55 abc
11. Flail mowed after harvest, N on wheat after planting	Full	7.15 ab

CONCLUSIONS:

There were little differences in stand counts or yields for any of the treatments. Excellent stands were achieved by all methods used. The 15% increased seeding rate treatment and the removing of all of the corn residue gave slightly higher stands but the increase was small and did not result in higher yields.

The favorable winter and spring conditions resulted in excellent tillering and high yields on all treatments in 1999.

The conditions in 1998 were not as favorable and flail shredding of corn was a favored treatment. The experiment results in more helpful information during unfavorable years.

OBJECTIVE:

Determine whether the optimal N fertilizer rate for no-tillage wheat will differ among with N source management or previous crop.

METHODS:

Location: Fayette County/Spindletop
Soil Type and Drainage: Loradale silt loam - well drained
Previous Crops:  Corn or Soybean
Tillage:  No-Tillage (Lilliston 9680)
Cultivar: Pioneer 2540
Planting Date/Rate:  Oct. 25, 1998; 40.3 seed/sq. ft
Harvest Date:   June 30, 1999
Fertilizer: Four Nitrogen Source-Management Schemes
            -urea (46-0-0);
            -ammonium nitrate (34-0-0);
            -urea-ammonium nitrate solution (28-0-0);
                        33% of all N rates on 3/12/99
                        67% of all N rates on 4/12/99

Herbicide: Gramoxone Extra - 1 qt/ac on 10/23/98
Fungicide: Tilt 3.2EC - 4 fl oz/ac on 5/15/99
Results: Average of 4 replications - see Table 1, below.
 

CONCLUSIONS:

Yield was positively influenced by fertilizer N addition and soybean, as opposed to corn, as a previous crop (Table 1). Wheat following soybean averaged 11 bu/ac greater yield than wheat following corn in this study. Averaged across all N rates, and regardless of previous crop, little difference due to N source management was observed. The optimal N rate was little affected by N source management, but was strongly related to the previous crop. The optimal fertilizer N rate was about 27 lb N/ac for wheat following soybean and 81 lb N/ac for wheat following corn. UAN solution application management, whether broadcast or streamjet, had little effect on the yield results for wheat grown in the two rotations.
 
 
 

TABLE 1.   EFFECT OF PREVIOUS CROP, N SOURCE MANAGEMENT, AND N RATE ON YIELD OF NO-TILLAGE WHEAT
		Wheat Yield - by N Source Management
Previous Crop	Fertilizer N Rate lb N/ac	UAN streamjet	Urea broadcast	AN broadcast	UAN broadcast	N Source Average
		--------------------------- bu/ac ---------------------------
Corn	0	49.2	47.6	56.2	46.0	49.8
	30	55.8	60.9	53.0	60.4	57.5
	60	62.1	66.8	57.0	58.7	61.2
	90	60.3	67.2	65.1	64.4	64.3
	120	65.9	60.7	55.5	58.5	60.1
	150	61.1	56.3	63.2	57.3	59.5
	Avg.	59.1	59.9	58.4	57.5	58.7
Soybean	0	66.6	65.6	65.3	65.8	65.8
	30	72.7	73.0	67.3	69.2	70.6
	60	72.9	67.4	68.0	75.8	71.0
	90	71.9	73.7	67.5	72.3	71.4
	120	72.7	71.8	68.9	72.1	71.4
	150	73.3	66.8	68.4	67.4	69.0
	Avg.	71.7	69.7	67.6	70.4	69.9

OBJECTIVE:

Determine whether the soil management system (no-tillage vs. chisel plowing) will influence the fertilizer nitrogen requirement of wheat following full-season soybean.

METHODS:

Location:  Fayette County/Spindletop
Soil Type and Drainage:  Maury silt loam - well drained
Previous Crop:  Soybean
Tillage:  No-Tillage (Lilliston 9680)
            Chisel Plow + Secondary Discing
Cultivar:  Pioneer 25R26
Planting Date/Rate:  Oct. 24, 1998; 40.3 seed/sq ft
Harvest Date:  June 23, 1999
Fertilizer:  Nitrogen - 20% of all N rates on 12/16/98
                                20% of all N rates on 3/2/99
                                60% of all N rates on 4/5/99
Herbicides: Gramoxone Extra - 1 qt/ac on 10/23/98
                    Harmony Extra - 0.7oz/ac on 4/7/99
                    Brominal ME4 - 0.75 pt/ac on 4/7/99
Fungicides: Bayleton 50WP - 4 oz/ac on 5/8/99
                    Tilt 3.2EC - 4 fl oz/ac on 5/15/99
Results: Average of 4 replications - see Table 1, below.
 
 

TABLE 1. EFFECT OF TILLAGE AND FERTILIZER NITROGEN ON WHEAT YIELDS
Fertilizer N Rate (lb N/ac)				Grain Yield (bu/ac)
Fall	Spring	Total		Chisel	No-Tillage
0	0	0		66.5c	67.9c
10	40	50		80.6a	82.8a
20	80	100		79.8a	79.1a
30	120	150		81.3a	73.0b

CONCLUSIONS:

In this, the second year of this experiment, wheat following chisel plowed soybean residues averaged 77.1 bu/ac, while no-till wheat was not significantly different, averaging 75.7 bu/ac. There was a good response (+13.5 bu/ac) to fertilizer nitrogen, with yields increasing with greater fertilizer N rate, up to a total N rate of 50 lb N/ac (40 lb N/ac in the spring). Tillage had little influence on the observed pattern in wheat yield response to fertilizer N. There was some decline in no-tillage wheat yields at the highest N rate, for which no cause was observed.

OBJECTIVE:

Determine whether no-tillage wheat following corn requires an earlier planting date and greater attention to early N nutrition than wheat planted in a tilled seedbed.

METHODS:

Location:  Fayette County/Spindletop
Soil Type and Drainage:  Donerail silt loam - well drained
Previous Crop:  Corn
Tillage:    No-Tillage (Lilliston 9680)
               Chisel Plow + Secondary Disking
Cultivar:  Pioneer 2568
Planting Dates:  Oct. 23, Nov. 5, and Nov. 23, 1998
Seeding Rate:  40.2 seed/sq ft
Harvest Date:  June 30, 1999
Fertilizer:  Nitrogen - 0 and 40 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 12/16/98
                                 0 and 40 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 3/1/99
                                 80 and 120 lb N/ac as 34-0-0 on 4/7/99
Herbicides:  Gramoxone Extra - 1 qt/ac on 10/23/98
                    Harmony Extra - 0.7 oz/ac on 4/7/99
                    Brominal ME4 - 0.75 pt/ac 4/7/99
Fungicides:    Bayleton 50WP - 4 oz/ac on 5/8/99
                    Tilt 3.2 EC - 4 ft oz/ac on 5/15/99
Results:        Average of 4 replications - see Table 1, below.
 

CONCLUSIONS:

Stand establishment was excellent at the first two planting dates, but was weaker at the last date (data not shown). There was a planting date by tillage interaction, with no-till wheat yielding less than chisel plow wheat at the first planting date, but there was no difference between tillage systems at the later two dates (Table 1). Again, no-till wheat was not inferior with later planting.

Nitrogen timing treatments did not interact with planting date or tillage treatments. Fall application of N slightly improved yields (+4 bu/ac), while none of the spring N management alternatives affected yield.
 
 

TABLE 1. EFFECT OF PLANTING DATE, TILLAGE AND N TIMING ON WHEAT GRAIN YIELDS
Planting Date	Tillage System	Fall N Rate	Early Spring N lb N/ac	Late Spring N	Grain Yield bu/ac
PLANTING DATE BY TILLAGE INTERACTION
Oct. 23	NT	-	-	-	73.5
	CH	-	-	-	80.6
Nov. 5	NT	-	-	-	67.0
	CH	-	-	-	69.1
Nov. 23	NT	-	-	-	48.1
	CH	-	-	-	48.0
MAIN EFFECT OF FALL N RATE
-	-	0	-	-	66.2
-	-	40	-	-	62.5
MAIN EFFECT OF EARLY SPRING N RATE
-	-	-	0	-	64.1
-	-	-	40	-	64.7
MAIN EFFECT OF LATE SPRING N RATE
-	-	-	-	80	64.3
-	-	-	-