Winter wheat in southern Indiana and Illinois is beginning to break dormancy and enter the spring regrowth phase and, as growth rates increase, so do nutrient demands of the developing crop. While a limited number of top-dress applications have taken place in southern parts of the Great Lakes region, recent rains and wet soils are limiting the opportunities for planned field operations. This has many wheat growers considering the best time for making a top-dress application to maximize benefit to the crop.
Information published by Charles Mansfield and Stephen Hawkins with Purdue University Extension suggests that nitrogen top-dress applications should be targeted for the early green up period as wheat comes out of dormancy when making a single application. On sandy soils, a split application may be beneficial to wheat development, with the second application planned near boot stage. When conditions prevent timely operations, nitrogen can be applied as late as heading, but yield will likely be limited due to nitrogen deficiency during vegetative growth stages.
Table 1. These recommendations are for mineral soils with adequate drainage and 1 to 5% organic matter, with wheat planted within 7 days after fly-free date last fall.
Wheat nutrient uptake demands in early spring are increasing at a time when temperatures are normally low, microbial activity is suppressed, and the soil has a limited capability for supplying nitrogen, sulfur and other key nutrients. Timely plant tissue analysis can be used to monitor the status of the crop and fine tune management decisions to maximize yields.
Most progressive precision soil sampling programs are sampling fields on a 2- or 3-year cycle. Often in the course of 2 to 3 years, there have been changes in the personnel or equipment used to collect those samples. There are a few clues in your soil test results that can be examined to validate if those samples were collected consistently.
The first clue to check is the organic matter level. The organic matter has the least potential to change significantly over the course of a few years. Even under intensive management to increase organic matter, such as no till, cover crops, and residue management, it is unlikely to see the soil test level increase by more than 0.1% per year. Any drastic change in organic matter levels likely indicate inconsistent sample depth, contamination of the sample with crop residue or manure, or an inadequate number of soil cores being collected to make up the sample.
The cation exchange capacity (CEC) should remain relatively consistent from sampling event to sampling event. The CEC is a measurement of the negative charge in a soil which comes from the clay mineralogy and organic matter that make up the soil. These 2 factors do not noticeably change in just a few years. On a routine soil analysis, the CEC is calculated from the extractable levels of calcium, magnesium, potassium, and hydrogen. Calcium and magnesium are generally the greatest contributors to the CEC. Unless extremely high rates of lime or gypsum have been applied, these 2 nutrient levels generally stay consistent resulting in a consistent CEC calculation.
Surprisingly, one of the numbers on your soil test that should not drastically change from sampling one sampling event to the next is phosphorus (P). Assuming your soil test P is at an agronomically desirable level, a high yielding corn or soybean crop are not likely to lower your soil test level more than 4 or 5 ppm in a single growing season. If the soil test P level changes more than 10—15 ppm between routine sampling events, it may be the result of inconsistent soil sampling procedure.
To truly compare soil test results from one sampling to the next, it is critical to minimize the variability. To do so soil needs to be sampled to the same depth, following the same crop, at the same time of year, and consist of at least 8 cores.
If you have any questions regarding irregular soil test results, please contact your ALGL agronomist.
Have you enjoyed our customer photography calendars the past few years? Do You have photos to share? We are excited to announce that we are launching our fifth year of the customer photo calendar! We want to see pictures that illustrate what fuels your passion for agriculture and customer service. When you get that picture captured, send it to news@algreatlakes.com along with your name, address, and brief note about the picture(s). Please submit your pictures in the highest resolution possible before September 15th. We will select our favorite pictures and invite our followers on Facebook vote on their favorite to be on the cover of the 2022 calendar. Follow us on Facebook for voting details.
Photo criteria
Rules
The 2020 annual soil test summaries are available on the ALGL website at https://algreatlakes.com/pages/2020-soil-test-summaries. Your regional ALGL sales agronomist has access to regional trend graphs that show the change in soil test values from 1996 to 2020 for the Great Lakes Region, and individual states, that they can share for use in presentations and meetings as needed.
For those customers accounts that analyze more than 20 soil samples or 10 plant samples a year, soil and tissue test summaries are available for the account. Those summaries can be found on eDocs at https://docs.algreatlakes.com/login.aspx. Be sure to adjust the eDocs’s data filters to include “Summary” as the document type and the time filter to span December 31, when the reports were posted.
These same customers will also find a trend graph of these summaries over time, and a soil sampling history report that summarizes all the field that were sample in that given year. These soil sampling history reports are a great tool when routinely sampling on a 2-, 3-, or 4-year standard rotation. For example, when preparing to soil sample in 2021 on a 2-year cycle, go back to the 2019 Soil Sampling History Report for a list of fields that are due to be resampled in 2021.
December 2020 - Bloomington, Illinois - The Agriculture Laboratory Testing Association (ALTA) is an industry organization committed to ensuring the quality of data to agricultural communities through encouraging the development, use, and acceptance of proven agricultural testing methods.
As a result of continued growth over the last 30 years, the Illinois Soil Testing Association (ISTA) re-branded itself as the Agriculture Laboratory Testing Association (ALTA) in December 2020. This industry organization will be a leader in ensuring consistency, precision, and accuracy across agriculture laboratories nationally. ALTA plans to reach this goal through outreach, education, and certification programs.
"The Illinois Soil Testing Association (ISTA) has changed its name to the Agricultural Laboratory Testing Association (ALTA) to reflect the scope and territories that our membership serves. Our member laboratories offer a broad range of agricultural testing and services across the United States. ALTA's mission is to support all types of agricultural testing laboratories so they may provide the best analysis and information. We will support that mission by providing education and certification programs that help ensure quality and innovation in our industry."
Tim Smith, CropSmith, Inc., Laboratory Owner, ALTA President, Farmer City, IL
ALTA has developed two certification programs, one for soil analysis (SAC, Soil Analysis Certification) and another for plant tissue testing (PAC, Plant Analysis Certification). These programs were initially created by the Illinois Soil Testing Association and have earned respect in the region for creating a high standard for testing quality. These programs' objective is to assure soil and plant analysis provided to Ag producers nationally are within laboratory statistical norms (consistent, precise, and accurate). Based on this premise, certifications help ensure labs follow the U.S. Department of Agriculture Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS) code 590 of nutrient management guidelines for testing and recommendations.
"ALTA is a very important organization for our company because it provides validity to our test data and demonstrates to our customers that we can produce accurate results. The meetings offer members targeted education and a collective forum for the exchange of ideas focused on the agricultural laboratory."
Greg Neyman, A&L Great Lakes Laboratories, Director – Green Industries Division, Fort Wayne, IN
ALTA is positioned to lead the agriculture testing industry nationally, driving the discussion around how to ensure precision and accuracy of agriculture data moving into the next decade. Providing educational opportunities for members, engaging the public, and offering relevant certification programs are methods ALTA will help member companies grow while creating a sustainable future.
"The ALTA organization provides a forum for agronomists and testing laboratories to educate and advance Agriculture nutrient management in the United States. Through workshops and laboratory certification program for soil and plant analysis, ALTA sets a standard of professional excellence."
Robert O. Miller, Ph.D. ALP Technical Director, former Affiliate Professor Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO
In 1981 the Illinois Soil Testing Association (ISTA) was founded to help address Illinois growers' need for quality soil test information. Over time the group grew to represent the region and was re-branded in 2020 as the Agriculture Laboratory Testing Association (ALTA). ALTA's primary objective is to promote the interests of the agriculture testing industry in the United States and promote high-quality testing data that will improve farm production, profitability, and sustainability. ALTA works towards this goal by creating educational opportunities and laboratory certification programs.
Find Out More: https://www.alta.ag/
A quick count through the calendar pages reveals 100 days until April 1 and the Boy Scout motto would remind us to plan well and be prepared to handle the spring planting tasks as accurately and efficiently as possible. Much time and effort has gone into cropping plans, seed selection, soil sampling, fertilizer plans and data analysis since harvest but here are a few additional items that might pay big dividends during the heat of the battle next spring.
Create a list of the key vendors and retailers that will be involved with your operation and reserve some time to visit with each one and discuss your communication plans. Employees that you have worked with in the past may have taken other responsibilities and new employees may be filling important service rolls and will play an important role this cropping season. It is a good time to update phone contacts, email addresses and learn the preferred method of contact and the main responsibilities for key individuals.
Provide your vendors with names and contact information for your staff and their responsibilities such as field prep, fertilizer applications, herbicide management, planter operation and data management.
Discuss field maps and cropping plans with each one and point out best routes to access fields, best field entrances, preferred loading areas and best places to park equipment that is left overnight or parked during a weather delay. Remind them of safety concerns such as overhead powerlines that may interfere with applicator booms, narrow field entrances and low weight capacity bridges that may not be suitable for trucks and equipment. As much as possible, try to direct traffic away from homes, children’s play areas and light vehicle traffic. Keep heavy equipment away from underground obstacles such as water meters, septic systems, drainage systems or other utilities that may not be designed to support heavy loads.
Consider data handling and transfer for items such as variable rate maps/recommendations, planter files, hybrid and variety selections and any operating files that may be needed for herbicide applications. Consider sharing desired GPS headings, field obstacles or auto steer navigational information that will assist vendors in their work. Have a plan in place for sharing needed electronic data with the proper operators at the proper time so equipment is prepared to run when the time is right.
Please keep the lines of communication open and help everyone implement the plan as safely and efficiently as possible this spring.
In past years, the end of the calendar year for agronomists and producers has been denoted by the beginning of the winter meeting season at the conclusion of the growing season. Like many things in 2020, the meeting season is a bit different this year. The in-person meetings have been canceled or replaced with virtual experiences, so the sharing of observations and lessons learn from the 2020 growing season is very different. So, what was some of the big trends in soil testing for 2020 and did the agronomy fears at the conclusion of 2019 occur? We’re glad you asked!
The late fall of 2019 soil sampling continued uninterrupted into an early spring of 2020. Traditionally soil sampling increases at a rapid rate in late September and builds though October. The sample volume reaches a peak in mid to late October, then begins decreasing sometime late November. Sample numbers continue to slowly decline until weather conditions stops soil sampling in mid to late December. The mild 2019/2020 winter, combined with the late 2019 harvest, led to a slow ramp up in mid-November and samples continued to arrive at the lab at a steady rate all winter. The was no clear end to fall 2019 sampling, nor a defined beginning of 2020 spring sampling. The fall 2020 soil sampling season has been, and continues to be strong, following a more “normal” sampling season. Something that has not happened 3 or 4 years.
One of the main concerns from the wet fall of 2019 was the potential for soil compaction. The wet year set the stage for compaction to occur during both the 2019 planting and fall harvest. The wet fall of 2019 prevented proper fall tillage to correct compaction from 2019, let alone compaction created in 2018 or 2017. The preplant expectation was that soil compaction would negatively impact on yield in 2020, especially if the weather pattern turned dry. For some areas 2020 was dry, but the reports of soil compaction related crop issues were not as severe as expected, leading to near average yields for most growers. There are many theories as to why the impacts of soil compaction was less than expected, they mostly revolve around overall improvements in soil management leading to improved soil structure in recent years. Producers took what preventative steps they could to reduce the impact of soil compaction in 2020 and it appears to have worked. Those areas that were unable to plant in 2019 were able to perform deep or primary tillage in the late summer early fall before the wet conditions began.
Also, many growers focused on earlier maturing varieties to avoid another late fall. This was a positive management strategy as many portions of the ALGL trade region ran behind schedule on GDU accumulation in the summer of 2020. With the timely 2020 harvest allowing for well timed soil sampling and fall field work, along with growing positively in the grain markets, the overall optimism for improved farm incomes in the coming years is growing. While we may want to forget 2019 for the agronomic challenges and likewise push 2020 from our memory due to Covid 19, that may not be wise for future management.
Inconstancies in soil sampling can lead to variation in soil test values over time. Challenging weather conditions in the spring and/or fall soil sampling seasons from 2017 though the spring of 2020 may lead to slight variations in soil test results. In the future when comparing soil test data sets that include samples collected in this time frame, the challenges of these year may shed some light on soil sample variances. More frequent soil sampling can reduce the impact of these variances by adding more data points to the analysis. Repeated soil sampling provides a check and balance approach to soil fertility management.
While we all have been impacted by the Covid Pandemic, the bright point was the timely fall harvest leading to some very good conditions to complete fall soil sampling, perform fall tillage in good to near idea conditions, plant cover crops, and make timely fertilizer/lime applications. The condition of the soil samples coming into the lab were some of the best sample quality we have seen in the past 3 to 4 years. Hopefully the fall soil sampling season of 2020 will provide some stability to long terms soil fertility management.
The finalized document for the latest revision of the Tri-State Fertilizers recommendations for Indiana, Ohio and Michigan has been released. Various aspects of the revised recommendations have been released in small segments over the past 2 years. The summaries of the changes/updates to the recommendations prior to the release of the final document have noted that soil pH and liming recommendations would not change from the previous version released in 1995. Upon review of the final document, notable changes have been made to the university recommendations for soil pH management and lime application rates.
The final release the “Tri-State Fertilizer Recommendations for Corn, Soybeans, Wheat, and Alfalfa” can be found at https://extensionpubs.osu.edu/search.php?search_query=974§ion=product.
Fall weather is generally full of ups and downs. As the weather turns cooler and the wind picks up, many of you are rushing to complete last-minute soil sampling before the ground freezes. Cold and wet weather can complicate the sampling process, and can cause great frustration when samples begin to stick in the probe. However, using a lubricant can help to reduce the sticking of samples in the probe and make the process work a bit easier on the sampler.
A number of different lubricants have been evaluated over the years for their effectiveness as a sampling aid and their impact on the analysis results. Two of the most commonly recommended lubricants are either WD-40, or aerosol cooking sprays such as Pam. Either of these products act as a water dispersant, effectively creating a film on the metal that repels water and limits the sticking within the tube. From anecdotal evidence, WD-40 tends to be a bit more persistent on the probe than does cooking spray, and therefore tends to require less frequent application.
The effect of either material generally has a negligible effect on measured levels of macronutrients. There is some evidence that suggests micronutrient levels may be affected somewhat, but the effect is generally pretty minor. WD-40 tends to affect micronutrient levels less than cooking spray, so it is recommended when micronutrients are to be analyzed. This may be more significant in soils that are naturally low in micronutrients because the slight variation in levels will be a larger percentage of the total levels. However, if the use of lubricants results in better quality sample collection, the benefits of using a lubricant should greatly outweigh any potential for contamination from the lubricant itself.