2002
Progress Report
Fall Strip Tillage and Fertilizer Placement
by Greg Stewart, OMAF Corn Specialist
| Summary
Table A. Relative Grain Corn Yields from Field Scale Tillage Sites in 2002. Yield values from sites that included fertilizer options reflect tillage treatments averaged across the various fertilizer treatments. At all sites the conventional full-width tillage option was set as the reference, i.e., yield index = 100. |
||||||
| Co-operator (Location) |
Strip
|
Conventional
|
None
|
|||
| Previous Crop: |
Fall
Strip Till
|
Spring
Strip Till
|
Disc
Ripper
|
Plow
|
Chisel
Plow
|
No-Till
|
| Winter Wheat |
Yield
Index
|
|||||
| Blythe Brae (Oxford) |
107
|
106
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
101
|
| JR Johnson (Elgin) |
100
|
101
|
100
|
-
|
-
|
89
|
| Peter Johnson (Middlesex) |
-
|
103
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
| McLagan (Perth) |
96
|
96
|
100
|
-
|
-
|
94
|
| Perth Demo Farm (Perth) |
95
|
94
|
100
|
-
|
-
|
95
|
| Weber (Huron) |
99
|
99
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
91
|
| Winger (Wellington) |
99
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
| Coultard (Perth) |
99
|
100
|
-
|
100
|
-
|
102
|
| Nairn (Perth) |
97
|
89
|
-
|
100
|
-
|
97
|
| Martin (Wellington) |
85
|
97
|
-
|
100
|
-
|
87
|
| Previous Crop: Soybean | ||||||
| Broadhagen (Perth) |
93
|
88
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
-
|
| Comley (Niagara) |
96
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
89
|
| Eastep (Wellington) |
97
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
97
|
|
| Previous Crop: Alfalfa | ||||||
| McLagan (Perth) |
100
|
-
|
100
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
| 2002 Index Averages |
97
|
-
|
-
|
100
|
-
|
96
|
| 2002 Bu/Acre Averages |
146
|
-
|
-
|
150
|
-
|
144
|
| 2002 Index Averages |
97
|
97
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
| 2002 Bu/Acre Averages |
146
|
146
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2002
Results Summary
Strip Tillage Equipment
This research project has allowed us to continue our exploration and critique
of fall strip tillage equipment and practices. Significantly greater confidence
now exists in our ability to create uniform, elevated strips in the fall with
the equipment available to Ontario growers with, in some cases, minor adjustments
or additions. The enhanced performance of the strip
tillage equipment in the fall continues to be reflected in superior spring seedbed
conditions. A greater number of sites in the 2002 season included a spring strip
tillage option where no previous tillage had been done. The two units we used
(Yetter and Trans-till) were modified so the shanks ran shallower and with less
soil disturbance than in the fall. In addition, disc-hillers were removed and
in the case of the Yetter unit, were replaced with coulters. In nearly all cases,
seedbed preparation by the spring strip tillage operation exceeded the expectation
of the project participants.
Seed
Zone Soil Moisture
A significant motivating factor behind this project and the strip tillage concept
in general is the delay in planting that is often associated with no-till systems,
particularly
on the medium to fine textured soils. Our research on the field sites this year
continued to demonstrate massive support for the idea that a properly formed
berm or strip in the fall can significantly improve soil dry-down and hence
planting timeliness. Figure 1 outlines soil moistures taken in the pre-planting
period and shows the significant gains over no-till in terms of having soil
that is fit for planting.
Corn Yield Response to Tillage
Yields from selected treatments at all field scale sites are reported in Table
A. There were greater differences between tillage treatments at more sites in
2002 than in previous years.
1) Strip tillage showed lower yield risk than no-till in 2002 but was not as
stable in yield as full-width conventional tillage.
2) There appeared to be no difference in corn yield between spring strips and
fall strips.
3) Strip tillage significantly improved yields over no-till at 4 sites.
4) Full width conventional tillage improved yields over strip tillage
at 5.
It is important for growers to note that all of these plots were planted on
the same day and this was generally when all plots including no-till were fit
for planting. From a systems perspective, one could argue that these plots should
be planted when each one is ready. We have concluded that the advantage to strip
tillage over no-till is at least as great as shown in Summary Table A, but may
be significantly more in some years if planting dates were significantly earlier
for strip tillage than for no-till.
Corn
Yield Response to Fertilizer Placement
As in previous years, there was little response to fall P and K when banded
during the fall strip tillage operation.
Interestingly, P and K applied through the corn planter was by far the most
effective technique for enhancing corn yield.
This fertilizer response could not be reproduced within the strip tillage system
even when higher rates of P and K were placed in a shallow band in the fall
during the strip tillage operation. Growers interested in using the strip tillage
unit as a multi-task tool bar would be better advised at present to consider
its possibilities as a UAN sidedresser instead of a dry fertilizer applicator
during fall tillage operations.
Acknowledgements
Gratitude is expressed to the following companies and individuals for their
contributions to this project:
2002 farm co-operators as listed in this report
Monsanto Canada
Ontario Soil and Crop Improvement Association
Heartland Regional Soil and Crop Improvement Association
Ontario Corn Producers’ Association
Logan Farm Equipment
Cargill Ltd
Agri-Food Laboratories
Dr. Bill Deen, Cropping Systems, University of Guelph
OMAF Field Crop Technology Staff
The complete report for this project can be found at www.gocorn.net.
|
6
|
Ontario
Corn Producer April 2003
|
1