C.O.R.N. Newsletter: 2023-05
-
Weather Update: Transitioning to Spring: Will Spring-like Weather Continue?
Summary
Not to be outdone by January, February temperatures have been much above normal as well. Figure 1 shows that much of the state will end the month with temperatures about 5-10°F above the long-term average (1991-2020). Locations such as Dayton and Columbus experienced daily high temperatures of at least 70°F on three different days in February, a first for both locations. Despite the continued presence, although weakening La Niña, it was a drier than normal month for much of the state. The exception to this was northwest Ohio, where many counties picked up 125-200% of normal precipitation. The warm temperatures have certianly advanced the accumulation of growing degree days, with numerous signs of spring. For a detailed look at growing degree days and to see what might bloom next in your area, check out the The Ohio State Phenology Calendar.
Forecast
An active weather pattern will continue this week as temperatures remain mostly above average. A few scattered rain showers are possible Tuesday through Thursday, but no widespread rain is expected until Friday when another moisture-laden storm will move in from the southwest. Daily temperatures will vary quite a bit from the mid 40s to low 60s (north to south, and day to day). In the wake of Friday’s system, temperatures will generally cool down into the 30s and 40s for highs with sub-freezing overnight lows. There could be a little snow on the backside of the system for Saturday across the north. Watch local media outlets throughout the week for any changes to the forecast. Overall, the Weather Prediction Center is currently forecasting 1-2” statewide over the next 7 days, with locally higher amounts possible.
The 8-14 day outlook from the Climate Prediction Center and the 16-Day Rainfall Outlook from NOAA/NWS/Ohio River Forecast Center show temperatures leaning toward cooler than average with near to slightly above average precipitation. Climate averages include a high-temperature range of 43-49°F, a low-temperature range of 24-30°F, and average weekly total precipitation of 0.65-0.95 inches.
-
Battle for the Belt: Which crop should be planted first, corn or soybean?
- Which crop has the smallest yield penalty for delayed planting?
- Can we adjust management practices to mitigate losses due to late planting?
- How are insects, diseases, weeds, and other factors affected by planting date?
We will address these questions (and more!) weekly during the growing season with a series of short videos. Watch Episode 1 here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0U2vPdtEVc
To stay up-to-date on this project, make sure to subscribe to the CORN newsletter (https://lists.osu.edu/mailman/listinfo/corn-out), subscribe to our YouTube channel (https://www.youtube.com/@OSUAgronomicCrops), or follow us on Twitter (@stepupsoy, @OrtezCornCrops).
For both soybean and corn, earlier planting is promoted to maximize yield. However, Ohio has a trend toward a lower number of suitable fieldwork days. With non-favorable weather, the planting date window is often short and disconnected. Farmers often ‘debate’ which crop should be planted first- corn or soybean. The ‘Battle for the Belt’ project is a field research and extension effort to help address the question, what crop should be planted first- corn or soybean?This research project will include field experiments at three locations in 2023: Clark County, Wood County, and Wayne County and five planting date windows, 1) Ultra early = late March to early April; 2) Early = mid to late April; 3) Normal = early to mid-May; 4) Late = late May-first week of June; and 5) Very late = mid to late June. Additionally, management decisions will be adjusted to mitigate potential losses due to delayed planting. For soybean, varying seeding rates between 100,000 seeds/Ac and 210,000 seeds/Ac. For corn, varying hybrid relative maturities between 100-day to 115-day RM.
Stay tuned for videos, updates, and results during 2023 and 2024!
-
Please Participate! Using Data-Driven Knowledge For Profitable Soybean Management Systems
Help us help you grow more profitable soybeans through the power of data science. Soybean agronomists are developing an app to help you make decisions in real time. The more data we collect, the more accurate the tool will be. (And…the more data we have from Ohio, the more applicable the tool will be to our state!) The app will allow growers to drop a pin in a field, enter input variables, and receive crop management decision help directly and through online scouting tools such as Sporecaster and Tarspotter.
This is what we are asking from you:
- Provide field management and yield information from two or more of your soybean fields from 2022 via online survey: link here
- A paper copy of the survey is here: https://stepupsoy.osu.edu/sites/hcs-soy/files/2023_NCSRP_Survey.pdf Feel free to use the paper copy and email to lindsey.233@osu.edu or send in the mail (Laura Lindsey, 2021 Coffey Rd., Columbus, OH 43210).
This project is funded by the North Central Soybean Research Program and led by Dr. Shawn Conley at University of Wisconsin- Madison and Dr. Paul Esker at Penn State University. All data we receive will be treated with confidentiality.
-
Drones for Spraying Pesticides
Traditionally, aerial spraying of pesticides has been done using conventional fixed-wing aircraft or helicopters with a pilot onboard. However, this is changing. Small, remotely piloted aircraft are being used to apply pesticides around the world, especially in Southeast Asia. For example, about 30% of all agricultural spraying in South Korea, and about 40% of Japan’s rice crop, is sprayed using drones. In contrast, drone spraying is in its infancy in the United States, but interest in this technology from pesticide applicators is steadily increasing.
A variety of names and the acronyms are associated with remotely piloted aircraft. Most used ones are: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and Unmanned Aerial System (UAS). However, the name used most commonly by the general public is “drone”. Drones entered the agriculture scene initially for non-spraying applications, such as crop and field-condition data collection to increase profitability in crop production. Drones successfully and effectively monitor plant growth by collecting and delivering real-time data from the moment of plant emergence to harvest. With the help of fast and accurate GPS or GNNS technology, a high-resolution camera, and variable flying speeds and altitudes, drones can provide a wealth of information on the condition of every half square inch of crop or soil.
Using drones for spraying pesticides is becoming attractive mainly for four reasons: 1) The topography or soil conditions do not allow the use of traditional ground sprayers or conventional agricultural aircraft, 2) when airplanes and helicopters are not available or are too expensive to use, 3) drones more efficiently spray small, irregular-shaped fields, 4) drones significantly reduce the risk of applicators being contaminated by the pesticides. There are also emerging problems, such as tar spot on corn, which may increase the need for aerial pesticide application by drones.
Although they are small, drone sprayers have all the components of large ground sprayers and conventional aerial sprayers. In addition, all drone sprayers are also equipped with a GPS or GNNS receiver and multiple sensors for collision avoidance. All drones also have wireless remote control for manual operation. Some drones can be operated on autopilot.
Types of spray drones
Spraying with a drone is not new. First used in Japan in 1997, the Yamaha RMax drone looks like a small helicopter (shown below).
Source: yamahaprecisionagriculture.com
It has a single rotor with a diameter of about 10 feet, weighs 220 pounds, and has over 4 gallons of spray tank capacity. It is gasoline powered, can run for 1 hour before refueling, can be retrofitted with three or four nozzles, and was FAA-approved for use in California in 2015. The manufacturer does not sell the aircraft, rather they service it and provide a trained team (usually two to three people) to operate the aircraft.
A rapid proliferation of lighter, easy-to-operate drones for spraying pesticides is currently underway. They are lightweight but powerful enough to lift a 10–15-gallon tank. Most commercial spray drones today are the multi-rotor type shown below:
Photo: E. Ozkan, The Ohio State University
The drones’ propellers create turbulence in the canopy, which significantly improves droplet penetration into lower parts of the canopy compared to traditional ground sprayers that are not air-assisted. Multi-rotor drones have similar components but can differ in many ways: number of rotors, rotor positions, nozzle locations and configurations, type and number of nozzles, distance between nozzles, vertical distance between the rotors and the nozzles under them. For example, most drones have nozzles located on the end of hoses descending a few inches below the rotors (shown above). A smaller percentage of drones have nozzles mounted on a boom (shown below). Drones with a boom, and especially those with booms extending beyond the rotors (photo below on the right) usually are not preferred. These drones are likely to become obsolete because of relatively poor spray coverage compared to the boomless spray drones. They also have a higher drift potential influenced by vortices that may appear near both ends of the boom. Having a larger number of nozzles on the boom, and having a boom that does not extend too far outside the rotors may help avoid this problem, resulting in much better penetration of spray droplets into the target plant canopy and a better coverage of the target surface with droplets.
One recent drone type has four rotor arms with two rotors on each arm powering a pair of relatively larger impellers that are stacked one on top of the other (shown below). This dual rotor configuration provides a more powerful lifting capacity and better flight dynamics. Another unique aspect of this drone is how the spray is discharged from the drone. It uses rotary atomizers positioned under the propellers. The spray droplets are produced by the rotational speed of a cup, which allows the spray mixture to be emitted using very low pressure. This design produces relatively uniform droplets as opposed to the wide range of droplet sizes produced by conventional flat-fan nozzles.
Source: DJI.com
Operating Characteristics of Multi-rotor Spray Drones
The application rate of spray drones in row crops is usually 1.5 to 2 gallons per acre. The rate depends on many factors, but is mainly a function of the spray tank capacity, flying speed, spray swath width, number of nozzles or rotary atomizers on the drone, and the flow rate (volume sprayed per minute). For example, a 5-gallon tank may take 2–3 minutes to empty. Some drones have a tank sensor to indicate the liquid level. This sensor can also be programmed to pause spraying and return the drone to home base when the tank needs a refill. Once replenished, the drone flies back to continue spraying where it stopped. The maximum flying speed of multi-rotor drones varies between 10–30 miles per hour. They are usually flown 7–12 feet above the ground or crop canopy. Forestry applications may require the drone to fly at least 30 feet above the ground to avoid obstacles. All current models of drones have a terrain sensor that maintains the optimum flight height to spray uneven and hilly terrain and automatically navigate hills and slopes. Most spray drone models are compatible with Real Time Kinematics (RTK), which provides centimeter-level, locational precision during flight.
This article covered only the types of drones used for spraying pesticides. Additional information on this topic and other topics such as drone sprayer performance, best spraying practices using drones, limitations of spray drones and obstacles for their adoption, regulations related to using drones to spray pesticides, and resources for obtaining certificates to apply pesticides using drones, and future of spray drones are discussed in a new Ohio State University Extension Publication FABE-540 entitled “Drones for Spraying Pesticides— Opportunities and Challenges. The links to access this publication is: https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/fabe-540. The PDF version of the publication is also available at: https://pested.osu.edu/sites/pested/files/imce/FABE-540.pdf
-
Reminder: Conservation Tillage & Technology Conference March 14-15 in Ada
The Conservation Tillage & Technology Conference (CTC) will be held in- person March 14-15 at Ohio Northern University in Ada. The first day of this year’s conference will feature David Hula, four-time winner of the National Corn Growers Association Yield Contest and current record holder at 616 bushels per acre – all accomplished with no-till and strip-till. His presentation has been made possible by sponsors Brandt Professional Agriculture, Calmer Corn Heads, Pioneer Seeds, and Meristem Crop Performance.
Connect with other farmers and CCAs, experience new ideas, and increase your net income. Historically over 800 individuals will attend each day of this two-day conference, making it the largest agricultural meeting in northwestern Ohio.
The meeting and program have been developed by The Ohio State University Extension Specialists along with Agriculture and Natural Resources Educators in local counties with assistance from local Soil and Water Conservation Districts, Ohio Department of Agriculture, and United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service.
Farmers, consultants, industry representatives, and government officials will meet each day to listen to university specialists, industry representatives, and producers discuss new products and ideas for agriculture.
Tuesday sessions will include Soil Health, Cover Crops and No-till; Nutrient Management; Agronomic Crop Management; and Precision Ag Technology. Wednesday sessions will include Soil Health, Cover Crops and No-till; Agronomic Crop Management; Water Quality and Conservation Practices; and Climate and Carbon.
Registration is a flat rate of $100 (after March 1, registration is $150). This registration is available online at https://www.allenswcd.com/cttc/ and includes exclusive access to all presentations online for 30 days following the conference. For Crop Consultants, the QR code will be active for that month. (Crop Consultants must register individually to receive CCA credits.) Take advantage of the opportunity to discuss one-on-one with speakers, exhibitors, sponsors, and other participants by attending this year’s Conservation Tillage & Technology Conference.
Additional information is available here: https://fabe.osu.edu/CTCon/
-
Time to stock up on nozzles now! But do you know which one to buy?
This is the time of the year you must complete shopping for nozzles because the spraying season is just around the corner. Although nozzles are some of the least expensive components of a sprayer, they hold a high value in their ability to influence sprayer performance. Nozzles meter the amount of liquid sprayed per unit area, controlling application rate, as well as variability of spray over the width of the sprayer boom. Nozzles also influence droplet size, affecting both target coverage and spray drift risk. Nozzles come in a wide variety of types and sizes. The best nozzle for a given application will maximize efficacy, minimize spray drift, and allow compliance with label requirements such as application rate (gallons per acre) and spray droplet size. Selecting the best nozzle requires careful consideration of many important factors including: sprayer operation parameters (such as application rate, spray pressure, travel speed); type of chemical sprayed (herbicides, insecticides, fungicides); mode of action of chemicals (systemic, contact); application type (broadcast, band, directed, air assisted); target crop (field crops, vegetables, vineyard, shrubs and trees, etc.); and spray drift risk.
Which nozzle type is best for the Job?
There is a large type of nozzles to choose from. Each nozzle type is designed for a specific type of target and application. For example, a nozzle designed for broadcast spraying is not good for spraying pesticides over a narrow band. While one nozzle may be best for a given situation, it may be worst choice for another. For example, we at Ohio State University have conducted field experiments to determine which nozzles to choose for two different application situations: soybean diseases such as rust and white mold, and wheat diseases such as head scab and stem rust. We included 6-8 different nozzles in the experiments. We found out that while a twin-fan pattern nozzle was best for controlling wheat head scab, the same nozzle turned out to be the worst choice to protect soybeans against diseases like rust and white mold, and insects like aphids when the soybean canopy is tall and dense.
So, before buying the nozzles and putting them on the boom, check the nozzle manufacturers’ catalogs or websites which have charts showing which nozzle type will be best for a specific job.
Keep several types of nozzles on the boom
Example I gave above is just to show you that one specific type of nozzle will not be best for all applications. For this reason, it is best to have several types and sizes of nozzles on the boom so that you can switch to the “best” nozzle choice for a given spraying job. As shown in the pictures below, there are various types of sprayer components and setups you can buy to configure your boom so the new set up allows you to easily switch from one nozzle to another instantly.
Keep spray drift in mind when selecting nozzles
One of the major problems challenging pesticide applicators is spray drift, which is defined as movement of pesticides by wind from the application site to an off- target site. Drift is influenced by many factors which are discussed in detail in OSU Extension publication FABE-525 which is available online: https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/fabe-525
Equipment, especially the nozzles, used to spray pesticides play a significant role in generating as well as reducing spray drift. In nozzle catalogs, you can see a number of different nozzles of the same type, in terms of spray pattern. For example, one can find nozzles within the same “flat-fan” category classified as “low-drift.” Research conducted at Ohio State and elsewhere clearly indicate that nozzles labeled as “low-drift” significantly reduce spray drift. If drift is, or becomes a concern, it may be best to switch from a conventional flat-fan nozzle to a “low-drift” flat-fan nozzle with the same flow rate. Therefore, it is best to have more than one type of a “flat-fan” pattern nozzle on the boom.
Nozzle size matters!
Once you determine the type of a nozzle you need to buy, you also must buy the right size of that nozzle which will satisfy the application rate (gallons per acre or gpa) you wish to use as you do your spraying at different travel speeds. Nozzle catalogs are filled with tables and charts showing application rates, given a nozzle’s flow rate (gallons per minute or gpm) delivered at various pressures (psi) and travel speeds (mph). These tables are useful tools for selecting the appropriate nozzles, pressure and speed to spray chemicals at application rates prescribed by product labels. However, the charts are only for a limited number of travel speed and nozzle spacing situations. There may be situations where the charts will not provide information associated with your sprayer setup (nozzle spacing) and operating conditions (travel speed and spray pressure). The Apps developed by most of the major nozzle manufacturers can provide you the exact nozzle flow rate required for any given set of application parameters, and identify a specific set of nozzle recommendations for the given application parameters. To find these Apps, simply visit the App Store in your smart phone or tablet and do a search under “Spray Nozzle Calculator”, or some other key words related to nozzle size selection. You may also want to do a search under the name of the nozzle company from which you are interested in buying the nozzles. However, some Apps are not user friendly and sometimes they do not take into account the droplet size requirements when recommending nozzles. Although the Apps and tables in catalogs may expedite the nozzle size selection process, it is best to understand the procedure and the math nozzle manufacturers use to generate the values listed in tables and to recommend nozzles in their Apps. The procedure used by the nozzle manufacturers to generate numbers in tables and in their Apps is explained in OSU Extension Publication FABE-528, Selecting the Best Nozzle for the Job”. It is available online at: https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/fabe-525.
Some final thoughts
Nozzles are typically the least costly items on a sprayer, but they play a key role in the final outcome from a spraying job: achieving maximum efficacy from the pesticide applied while reducing the off-target (drift) movement of pesticides to minimum. Pesticides work well if the rates on labels are achieved during application. This can be achieved only if the right nozzle type and the proper size of the nozzles are on the sprayer, and the sprayer is operated properly. Hopefully the pointers I provided in this article will help you choose the right nozzle type required for the job on hand. Remember, one nozzle will not be best for all spraying situations. So, make sure multiple types and sizes of nozzles available to you when you need them. Don’t delay making decisions on which nozzles to get. Spring is just around the corner.
-
2023 Corn College and Soybean School Recordings Available
Did you miss our Corn College and Soybean School webinar? We have you covered! Check out the AgCrops Team YouTube channel for all the recordings: go.osu.edu/cornsoy You can also find a pdf of the presentation slides on the AgCrops Team website (https://agcrops.osu.edu/resources).
Recordings include:
- Corn Management for 2023. Dr. Osler Ortez provides an overview of corn growth and development and information on abiotic stress, including imbibitional chilling, soil crusting, lodging, and flooding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0GWKTt8GIs&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=1&t=1703s
- Soybean Management for 2023. Dr. Laura Lindsey discusses soybean planting date and cover crop interactions and profitability of double crop and relay-intercrop production systems. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRWlnBLdouI&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=2&t=1130s
- Soil Fertility Management for 2023. Dr. Kurt Steinke from Michigan State University discusses the use of starter fertilizer on soybean and response of corn and soybean to sulfur fertilizer application. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtDQVzuvQDU&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=4
- Waterhemp Management. Dr. Alyssa Essman discusses waterhemp management, including the use of cover crops as part of a comprehensive weed management program. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dYlrg50ZaO8&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=5&t=4s
- Slug Management. Dr. Kelley Tilmon discusses the slug life cycle, scouting, and management. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ-XB5HMCJ0&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=6
- Corn Insect Management for 2023. Dr. Andy Michel gives an overview of Asiatic garden beetle and caterpillar management in corn and provides Bt resistance updates. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcjkEoNEe3I&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=7
- Soybean Disease Management for 2023. Dr. Horacio Lopez-Nicora discusses soybean cyst nematode damage and management, soilborne pathogens and use of seed treatments, and foliar fungicide trials. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUxe6iQwU-g&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=8
- Corn Disease Management for 2023. Dr. Pierce Paul discusses corn disease management with an emphasis on tar spot, Gibberella ear rot, and vomitoxin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8wiR-h4IbU&list=PLYlh_BdeqniLC0ND3DkF7uTo5NLQFs4Vo&index=9
-
Double Crop Sunflower in Ohio, is it an Option?
In addition to double cropping with forages and double cropping with wheat and soybean, other alternatives may become feasible within the crop system. In 2022, three field experiments were established to study sunflowers’ viability as a double crop after wheat or barley harvest in Ohio. The study had three Perdue commercial high oleic sunflower varieties:
- Ultra-early maturity (N4H161 CL)
- Early maturity (N4H302 E)
- Mid-early maturity (CP 455 E)
These varieties were studied across three seeding rates: 17,000 seeds per Acre, 22,000 seeds per Acre, and 27,000 seeds per Acre.
All sites were harvested using a small plot combine with corn head; yield results are presented in Table 1. Harvest was delayed at the Wooster site due to equipment availability and weather conditions. At Northwest, 90 lbs of nitrogen per Acre were applied using Urea on August 2nd. At Western Station, 75 lbs of nitrogen per Acre were applied as side dress of 28-0-0 on August 1st — no nitrogen application at the Wooster site. Weeds were managed with pre and post-emergence applications as needed.Table 1. Study locations, planting dates, harvest dates, and double crop sunflower yields expressed in pounds per Acre (lbs/Ac) at 10% moisture.
Location
Planting Date
Harvest Date
Min. Yield
Average Yield
Max. Yield
Northwest,
Wood County6/29/2022
11/18/2022
1,296 lbs/Ac
1,867 lbs/Ac
2,599 lbs/Ac
Western,
Clark County7/11/2022
11/10/2022
1,012 lbs/Ac
1,967 lbs/Ac
2,740 lbs/Ac
Wooster,
Wayne County7/15/2022
12/21/2022
1,003 lbs/Ac
1,464 Lbs/Ac
1,897 Lbs/Ac
Preliminary results showed that stand establishment varied across the three varieties and sites; low germination percentages led to lower stand counts and possibly limited crop yields. Other challenges included equipment availability (especially for harvest), harvest losses (due to shattering), bird damage (estimated 10 to 50% in one of the sites), and plant lodging in some plots. Additionally, there was evidence of a “head rot” disease at the Western location. Preliminary work to identify the pathogen suggests it is a fungus in the Alternaria genus known to infect sunflowers in other states.Future work should address the consistency of results across sites/years as a double crop, variety selection and seeding rates as a full-season crop, low germination concerns, fertility management, bird control, seed/oil quality, pest/disease management, economics, and marketing. The team plans to repeat this project in 2023; stay tuned for more results. If there are questions and/or suggestions, please contact any team member on the project.
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.