C.O.R.N. Newsletter: 2016-04
-
Status of Palmer amaranth in Ohio
Palmer amaranth has to date been found in about 11 Ohio counties. Infestations within a county can range from one or more fields or other areas with just a few plants or patches of plants, to the presence of one or more fields with dense populations. There isn’t any real pattern to the distribution of counties where Palmer has been found. Palmer seed has entered the state via contaminated CREP or wildlife seed that comes from farther west, and via the cotton feed products that are shipped from the south and used in animal operations. The latter has been the source of our most recent and most severe infestations that occurred in 2015 in northeastern Ohio. While some animal operations are aware of this problem and have stopped using these types of feed products, it’s likely that many other operations or feed dealers have not received information about this issue or modified their practices. The current Palmer amaranth situation is summarized in a brief video and presentation that can be found on the OSU weed science website – http://u.osu.edu/osuweeds. We have also posted several fact sheets there that summarize the Palmer problem and current distribution, and provide tools for pigweed identification.
-
Digital Weed Identification Resources from OSU
OSU has developed several digital books that are available for multiple platforms, via iTunes or GooglePlay. Descriptions and links follow – all are currently less than $10. The links can also be found under the “Weed ID” tab on our website – u.osu.edu/osuweeds/.
The Ohio State University Guide to Weed Identification
This identification guide provides information on the basics of weed identification presented in a considerably updated fashion. It describes 29 families and 83 species of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plants. Plant descriptions include key identification characteristics, pictures of the various species at different stages of maturity, and 360-degree movies for most species. This book includes a number of the most common Midwestern U.S. weeds and basic intellectual tools that are necessary to successfully identify plants.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/ohio-state-guide-to-weed-identification...
Principles of Weed Ecology and Management
This book, used as a lab manual for the weed science course at OSU, provides information on the basic principles of weed science. It describes 46 families and 100 species of monocotyledonous and dicotyledonous plants. Plant descriptions include key identification characteristics, pictures of the various species at different stages of maturity, and 360-degree movies for most species. This book includes a number of the most common Midwestern U.S. weeds and basic intellectual tools that are necessary to successfully identify plants. Furthermore it provides an introduction or “first exposure” to some basic weed control measures along with offering a basic scientific explanation of how and why various control measures work.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/principles-weed-ecology- management/id953632085?mt=11
Identifying Noxious Weeds of Ohio
This identification guide provides technical descriptions and photos for Ohio’s 21 invasive and noxious weed species. These descriptions include information on habitat, life cycle, key plant characteristics, and a summary of problematic features. Photos included in this guide present the weed species at different stages of maturity for optimal identification aid. This book also provides information on Ohio’s noxious seed law, extension guides to weed control, and a quick guide to weed regulations in Ohio law.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/identifying-noxious- weeds/id1018434281?ls=1&mt=13
-
Keep the sugar for your coffee and your cookies
While we are interested in improving yield of Ohio crops, we also are reluctant to recommend practices that cost time and money and are not likely to be of assistance. From several on-farm trials conducted by OSU Extension professionals over the years, we see no value in applying sugar to our Ohio row crops.
· In a 2013 Crawford County trial with 3 lb of sugar per acre to soybean – found no yield difference from the check: https://agcrops.osu.edu/sites/agcrops/files/ofr_reports/Sugar-on-MRI-Soybeans.pdf
· In two trials in Clark County in 2013:
o For corn, two sugar sources at 4 lb/A; sucrose and dextrose – no yield difference from the check
o For soybean – sucrose at 4 lb/A – no yield difference from the check
https://agcrops.osu.edu/sites/agcrops/files/ofr_reports/Sugar-Applications-for-Corn-and-Soybean.pdf
In a 2014 soybean trial conducted at two locations – in Clark Country and in Wood County. Table 1, shows no yield advantage for sugar applied to soybean.
Table 1. Soybean yield after 4lb/A application of sugar at two locations.
Clark County
Wood County
Treatment
Average Yield bu/A
Average Yield bu/A
Check
79.4
53.8
Sugar
81.2
53.9
Fungicide
80.6
55.2
Lsd 0.10
NSD
NSD
In a previous newsletter article written by Shawn Conley, Soybean Specialist at the University of Wisconsin, comparing granulated cane sugar, high fructose corn syrup, molasses and blackstrap molasses to a check treatment; he found no yield affect across four locations: https://agcrops.osu.edu/newsletters/2011/19#4. His comment on trying foliar sugar applications, “other management strategies to improve soybean yield should take precedence over applying sugar”.
Focus on the Basics First. We suggest focusing on the basics of crop production first. With funding from Ohio Soybean Council, we’ve investigated yield limiting factors in Ohio soybean production. There are many factors that influence soybean yield (i.e., variety selection, planting date, soybean cyst nematode, weed control, etc); however, one factor that has really risen to the top is soil fertility.
From over 550 soil samples collected throughout Ohio between 2013-2015,
· 35% were below the critical level for soil phosphorus (< 15 ppm Bray P1) and
· 21% were below the critical level for potassium.
Additionally, we looked at soybean yield from these fields. On average, fields with low soil phosphorus yielded 7 bu/acre less than fields with adequate soil phosphorus. Fields with low soil potassium yielded 4 bu/acre less than fields with adequate soil potassium. Before considering untested or unproven inputs, consider inputs that are most likely to improve your bottom line.
-
Wheel Traffic Effect on Alfalfa Yield – Soil Compaction or Crown/Shoot Damage?
Wheel traffic is a necessity for the production of alfalfa. Regardless of the harvest method (green chopped or dry bales) producers must make decisions of when and how to drive equipment on alfalfa fields. Early studies demonstrated that as much as 70% of the field area could be driven upon for each cutting/harvest performed. Over time, the size of equipment to cut, rake, bale and remove hay from the field has change dramatically. As well, the green chop equipment for baleage, silage or alfalfa mills has also changed. Generally, equipment is larger today and thus carrying a greater gross axle weight both while empty and at harvest load capacities.
Soil compaction is a common concern for alfalfa producers and can be linked to increased disease incidence contributing to plant damage and yield reduction. However, the wheel traffic itself can also cause physical damage to the alfalfa crown or regrowth shoot. Traffic during cutting does not have the same harmful effect of later traffic from the baling and bale removal. Compaction due to the multiple trips is a factor, but breaking shoots that may have started to regrow after cutting, has a depleting effect on stored root carbohydrates (Sheesley et. al., 1982).
The reduction in alfalfa plant populations and the resulting decrease in yield and hay quality is a major reason for growers to decide to remove an alfalfa field from production. Heavy wheel traffic in which plants are trafficked multiple times per cutting can increase crown damage (leading to entry points for pathogens) and decrease shoot and root growth. Repeated damage to new shoots from multiple traffic passes can be attributed to a change in carbohydrate partitioning in which greater root reserves are needed for plant recovery (Rachel, 1984).
The amount of wheel traffic yield reduction is likely going to vary from field to field and cutting to cutting depending on plant and soil conditions. Yield loss to the next cutting is greater as the traffic occurs later after mowing. The yield loss has generally been 4 to 6% per day after mowing (e.g. traffic 5 days after mowing creates a yield loss of about 22%) (Undersander, 2010).
Dan Undersander, University of Wisconsin, offers ways to reduce alfalfa yield and stand losses.
1. Plant alfalfa varieties more tolerant to wheel traffic
2. Use small tractors when possible (to reduce soil compaction).
3. Drive over the field as soon after cutting as possible
a. Raking at 24 hours causes less damage than raking at 48 hours after cutting
b. Merge swaths into large windrows so harvesting equipment has less driving on the field
c. Making haylage at 1 to 2 days after cutting causes less yield loss than making hay at 3 to 5 days after cutting.
4. Avoid unnecessary trips across the field when harvesting
a. Get full wagons/trucks off the field with as little driving as possible
b. If bales are dropped and collected – can this be done with less driving?
c. Do not drive on alfalfa field when harvesting crop of adjacent field.
5. Consider using larger harvesting equipment (there is some question about this because while less area is affected by wheel traffic, the affected area has greater weight applied to it). This could be another benefit of contract harvesting
6. Using duals on harvesting machinery is not recommended unless necessary to avoid ruts.
References:
Sheesley, W.R., D.W. Grimes, W.D. McClellan, C.G. Summers, V.Marble. 1982. The Influence on Wheel Traffic on Yield and Stand Longevity in Alfalfa. P. 42-46. 1982 California Alfalfa Symposium Proceedings, UC Cooperative Extension, university of California, Davis CA 95616.
Undersander, D. 2010. Effect of Wheel Traffic on Alfalfa Yield. University of Wisconsin-Extension Cooperative Extension. http://www.uwex.edu/ces/forage/articles.htm Madison, WI 53706.
-
The Big Data Confusion: Answering Your Questions about Digital Agriculture
Digital Agriculture includes large collections of farm data being used by farmers, companies, and government agencies to aid in decision making related to crop production and farm management. It can also be used as a way to better predict nutrient availability, which in turns helps farmers make better agronomic decisions. By using farm data to drive input management and other farm decisions, producers can identify and quantify which productivity variables are limiting agronomic growth. With agriculture becoming digital, it is important to understand how that data is being collected, interpreted, and then utilized. This digital agriculture concept can be overwhelming, and this series aims to make sense of the Big Data presence within the agricultural community.
In early 2015, a group of 34 organizations representing commodity groups, Ag Technology Providers, seed companies, and other agribusinesses joined together to support 13 principles that address farmer’s challenges and concerns surrounding Big Data and digital agriculture. This policy was drafted by the American Farm Bureau Federation and titled Privacy and Security Principles for Farm Data. In the following weeks, this series will serve to break down those principles so that producers can make educated choices about how their data is handled. In addition to discussing AFBF’s Privacy Policy, this series will also explain enterprise agriculture, precision agriculture, and prescriptive agriculture.
Now more than ever, growers need to be aware of how their data is being used. As a grower, ask questions! It is in your best interest to ask and learn all there is to know about something you don’t understand. Knowing about digital agriculture is the first step towards being a good data steward and making better agronomic decisions.
-
American Farm Bureau Conducting Big Data Survey
The agriculture technology sector continues to be troubled with “big data” being of interest to many in and out of agriculture. A recent report indicated that 2015 agriculture technology investment doubled from the $2.36B (billion dollars) that was observed in 2014. Big data can provide opportunities for farmers and other in agriculture but uncertainty, mostly expressed as skepticism and mistrust, remains at the grassroots level. Big data may significantly affect many aspects of the agricultural industry, but the full extent and nature of its eventual impacts remain uncertain. To help gather farmers’ understanding and concerns related to Big Data, the American Farm Bureau is conducting a survey:
Survey link: http://fbbigdata2016.questionpro.com
Ohio Farmers are encouraged to take time and complete this online survey. It is important to hear from you on this topic as it remains a significant interest as observed in 2014 and 2015 investments. Find more information at http://fabe.osu.edu/programs/precision-ag/big-data.
-
Conservation Tillage Conference Provides Answers
Looking for ways to reduce costs, but keep profit margins steady? Have you thought about how you might increase soybean yields without paying for additional inputs? Can precision fertility work for your farm to increase production while at the same time protect the environment? So when can I apply fertilizer and haul manure? How can cover crops improve the soil health and recycle the nutrients in my field?
These are all questions you might have asked yourself, but have struggled to find an answer. This year’s Conservation Tillage Conference has the answers to these questions and many more. The McIntosh Center at Ohio Northern University will once again be the location were about 60 presenters, several agribusiness exhibitors, and approximately 900 participants will come together March 2nd and 3rd in Ada, Ohio.
A general session, Corn University, cover crops and manure, precision fertility, along with a policy discussion on soil health as it relates to water control and filtering are the sessions that make up day one. On the second day, conference participants will be able to choose from Soybean School, advanced cover crops, nutrient management, in addition to technology and equipment as choices to gain new insights in production agriculture.
Find out what experts from OSU Extension, OARDC, USDA, and SWCD are learning from the latest research about the most timely topics that affect today’s farmers, crop consultants, and agribusiness professionals who are out in the field working together to produce crops in an efficient and environmentally responsible manner. Visit http://ctc.osu.edu and make plans to attend this year’s Conservation Tillage Conference by February 26 to take advantage of pre-registration rates.
-
The Process of Harvesting Miscanthus in Northeast Ohio
Even though it is wintertime in Northeast Ohio, there is still plenty of action going on in our county’s agriculture industry. Over the past two weeks, miscanthus harvest has begun in Northeast, Ohio. Early reports are that nearly 350 acres (or almost 10%) of the area’s harvest has been completed thus far. Due to the milder winter, the 2016 harvest of miscanthus is nearly five weeks ahead of last year’s harvest. Since miscanthus is the newest agronomic crops grown in Northeast Ohio and Northwest Pennsylvania, there have been numerous questions about how miscanthus is harvest. This article will provide some insight into harvest. What is miscanthus?
Giant miscanthus (Miscanthus x giganteus) is a sterile hybrid perennial warm-season grass that grows relatively fast on less-than-ideal soils and can be used either as a biofuel or to make bio-based products. This grass, as with many grasses, grows very well in Ashtabula County. Currently Aloterra Energy (http://www.aloterrallc.com/) is the major grower of miscanthus in the United States and has nearly 4,000 acres growing under contract with landowners in Northeast Ohio and Northwest Pennsylvania. The planting of this acreage was spurred on by NE OH/NW PA being chosen by the United States Department of Agriculture as a BCAP (Biomass Crop Assistance Program) project area in the summer 2011 to encourage the planting of renewable biomass crops. The BCAP was re-authorized in the summer of 2015.
When is miscanthus harvested?Unlike, traditional agronomic crops which are harvested in the fall, miscanthus must be harvested in winter during its dormancy period which ranges from after a hard-killing frost in the fall (could be in late November) and before the emergence of the new shoots in the spring (which is typically in early May). The plant needs to have had time to send nutrients down to the root system in the fall to spur the next year’s growth. Harvesting in the winter, especially in snow-belt, conditions can prove to be a challenge.
So, how is miscanthus harvested?
One of the challenges for harvest is that it must be accomplished during the wet, cold, damp winter. Work must be accomplished around winter storms. In the first few years, the miscanthus was cut into windrows, raked and then baled into large bales of miscanthus (see picture of bale to the right). This process was conducted much like traditional hay harvested is completed during the summer months. However, this approach led to a few issues. Besides the major issue waiting for favorable weather (which can change hour by hour), a major obstacle arose as the miscanthus was picking up too much moisture while laying on the ground waiting to be baled. This excessing moisture led to delays on baling as baling the miscanthus with to much moisture leads to storage losses. The target moisture percentage for the harvesting of miscanthus is 15%.In 2015, Aloterra Energy made major in-roads to the successful harvest of miscanthus by switching from baling the miscanthus to chopping the miscanthus like livestock farmers harvest haylage or corn silage. The miscanthus is being harvested with a CLAAS chopper which cuts, chops and blows the miscanthus into silage wagons which are driven along-side the chopper. An average of 5 tons of miscanthus can be loaded on each wagon.
In order to negotiate the wet soils prevalent in winter and to reduce compaction, all of the harvest equipment has been placed on tracks.
After it is loaded on the silage wagons, the miscanthus is handled in two main ways. The first way is to directly off-load the miscanthus to semi-truck which then is taken directly to one of the storage & processing sites in Andover or Ashtabula, Ohio. About 14 tons of the chopped miscanthus will fit in astandard semi-trailer.
If the miscanthus is not immediately trucked to one of the processing facilities, it is placed in silage bags for storage. The bags are left on the perimeter of the field until it is needed by one of the processing plants.
What happens to the miscanthus after harvest?There are two main products being produced from the miscanthus. Aloterra, in cooperation with foodservice ware innovator, World Centric, have developed a new line of certified compostable foodservice ware made from Miscanthus plant fiber. The line is designed to displace similar products made from foam and plastic, which create millions of tons of waste each year. This product is made in the Ashtabula Township plant.
The second product being made by Aloterra is MxG Natural Absorbents™ which has a wide range applications including spill management of water, hydrocarbons, and automotive fluids and even sludge solidification applications. The product is safe, clean, and will dissolve back into the soil within days of application or may be landfilled or incinerated in accordance with federal, state, and local requirements. Note: the compostable foodservice ware and absorbent pictures are courtesy of Aloterra Energy.
More Information:More information about Aloterra Energy can be obtained at:
More information about Miscanthus can be obtained at:
NEWBio Energy Crop Profile: Giant Miscanthus- http://www.newbio.psu.edu/Extension/miscanthus.pdf
Miscanthus Budget for Biomass Production- http://extension.psu.edu/publications/ee0081
Note: The compostable foodservice ware and absorbent pictures are courtesy of Aloterra Energy.
All other pictures were taken by David Marrison, OSU Extension
Crop Observation and Recommendation Network
C.O.R.N. Newsletter is a summary of crop observations, related information, and appropriate recommendations for Ohio crop producers and industry. C.O.R.N. Newsletter is produced by the Ohio State University Extension Agronomy Team, state specialists at The Ohio State University and the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (OARDC). C.O.R.N. Newsletter questions are directed to Extension and OARDC state specialists and associates at Ohio State.
Contributors
Disclaimer
The information presented here, along with any trade names used, is supplied with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement is made by Ohio State University Extension is implied. Although every attempt is made to produce information that is complete, timely, and accurate, the pesticide user bears responsibility of consulting the pesticide label and adhering to those directions.
CFAES provides research and related educational programs to clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis. For more information, visit cfaesdiversity.osu.edu. For an accessible format of this publication, visit cfaes.osu.edu/accessibility.