Extension Update from Jenny Rees

Jenny’s REESources – December 11, 2016

UPCOMING EVENTS:  

Dec. 14:  UBBNRD CropTip, 9:30 a.m.-2:30 p.m., Holthus Convention Center, York
Dec. 14:  Farmers/Ranchers College:  Dr. David Kohl, 1-4 p.m., Bruning Opera House, Bruning, RSVP  (402) 759-3712
Dec. 15:  Nebraska Soybean Day and Machinery Expo, 8:30-2:15, Fairgrounds in Wahoo,http://ardc.unl.edu/2016SoyExpoFlyer-Final.pdf
Jan. 6:  Crop Production Clinic, Holthus Convention Center in York, http://agronomy.unl.edu/cpc
Jan. 9:  Estate Planning Workshop, York County Club, RSVP jrees2@unl.edu or 402-362-5508
Jan. 10-11:  Precision Ag Data Management Workshop, Lincoln, http://agronomy.unl.edu/precisionag
Jan. 11:  Crop Production Clinic, Adams County Fairgrounds in Hastings, http://agronomy.unl.edu/cpc
Jan. 11-12:  York Ag Expo, Holthus Convention Center in York
Jan. 12-13:  Precision Ag Data Management Workshop, 4-H Building York, http://agronomy.unl.edu/precisionag
Jan. 18:  LBNRD Nitrogen Mgmt Training, 9 a.m., Hastings, 402-364-2145
Jan. 18:  UBBNRD Nitrogen Mgmt Training, 1:30 p.m., Aurora Leadership Center, 402-362-6601
Jan. 19-20:  NEW 2-day Crop Production Clinic, Younes Convention Center in Kearney,http://agronomy.unl.edu/cpc
Jan. 23:  Pesticide Training, 9am, York Fairgrounds, jrees2@unl.edu or 402-362-5508
Jan. 23:  Pesticide Training, 6:30pm, Harvest Hall at Seward Fairgrounds, jrees2@unl.edu
Jan. 24:  Pesticide Training, 9am, American Legion in Sutton, jrees2@unl.edu or 402-762-3644
Jan. 24:  Pesticide Training, 2pm, Davenport Community Center, jrees2@unl.edu
Jan. 25:  Land Application Training, York Extension Office.  RSVP to jrees2@unl.edu or 402-362-5508
Jan. 26:  Nebraska Grain Sorghum Symposium, Grand Island
Jan. 31:  Farmers/Ranchers Cow-Calf College, 10 a.m.-3:30 p.m., USMARC near Clay Center, RSVP  (402) 759-3712
Feb. 1-2:  Nebraska Ag Technologies Association (NeATA), Nebraska Innovation Campus
Feb. 6:  Pesticide Training, 9am, Hebron Activity Center (downtown), jrees2@unl.edu
Feb. 6:  Pesticide Training, 2pm, Nelson, jrees2@unl.edu
Feb. 7:  Pesticide Training, 9am, 4-H Building in York, jrees2@unl.edu 402-362-5508
Feb. 7:  Pesticide Training, 2pm, 4-H Building in York, jrees2@unl.edu 402-362-5508
Feb. 8:  LBNRD Nitrogen Training, 9am, Hebron Community Center, 402-364-2145
Feb. 8:  UBBNRD Nitrogen Training, 1:30 p.m., Holthus Convention Center, 402-362-6601
Feb. 13:  Pesticide Training, 9am, Nelson jrees2@unl.edu
Feb. 13:  Pesticide Training, 6:30pm, Fairgrounds in Clay Center, jrees2@unl.edu 402-762-3644
Feb. 15:  Pesticide Training, 9am, Harvest Hall Fairgrounds Seward, jrees2@unl.edu
Feb. 15:  Pesticide Training, 2pm, Harvest Hall Fairgrounds Seward, jrees2@unl.edu
Feb. 16:  LBNRD Nitrogen Training, 1:30 p.m., Fairgrounds in Clay Center 402-364-2145
Feb. 20:  Nebraska On-Farm Research Update, ARDC near Mead, http://cropwatch.unl.edu/farmresearch
Feb. 22:  Farmers/Ranchers College:  Managing for Difficult Times, 9:30 a.m.-3:00 p.m., Fairgrounds in Geneva, RSVP  (402) 759-3712
Feb. 23-24:  Women in Agriculture Conference, Holiday Inn Kearney, http://wia.unl.edu
Feb. 27:  Nebraska On-Farm Research Update, Hall Co. Extension Office, Grand Island,http://cropwatch.unl.edu/farmresearch
Feb. 27:  Farmers/Ranchers College:  Tips and Tricks for Women in Ag, 6:00 p.m., Lazy Horse Winery in Ohiowa, RSVP  (402) 759-3712
Feb. 28:  LBNRD Nitrogen Training, 9am, Shickley Community Center 402-364-2145
Mar. 6:  Pesticide Training, 2pm, Harvest Hall Fairgrounds Seward, jrees2@unl.edu
Mar. 6:  Pesticide Training, 6:30pm, 4-H Building Fairgrounds York, jrees2@unl.edu 402-362-5508

Master Gardener Training:  Tuesday evenings 6-9 p.m. from February 7-March21 at York and Clay County Extension Offices.  Please RSVP to jrees2@unl.edu or 402-362-5508 for attending in York or Deanna Peshek at 402-762-3644 to attend in Clay.

Farm Finance Clinic Sites and Dates To sign up for a clinic or to get more information, call Michelle at the Nebraska Farm Hotline at 1-800-464-0258.

Residue Removal Impacts on Yield:  Corn residue can be looked at from many perspectives…from being a source of feed for cattle grazing, roughage when co-fed with distiller’s grains, protection of the soil surface for wind/water erosion and evaporative losses, cellulosic biofuel production, made into pelleted feeds for livestock, food for microbes resulting in nutrient source for future crops, and considered a challenge in achieving uniform emergence and plant stands particularly in no-till continuous corn situations.  Being a system’s person, I like to look at how everything works together including crops, livestock, and biofuels.  This article will focus on residue removal via baling and yield impacts sharing data from numerous research studies.

First, how does one estimate the total residue produced by a corn crop?  Grain yield is related to residue production.  For every 40 bu/ac of corn produced (56 lbs at 15.5% moisture), 1 ton of residue (at 10% moisture) is produced.  For example, a 240 bu/ac field will produce approximately 6 tons of residue while a 120 bu/ac field will produce approximately 3 tons of residue. 

Like anything, residue removal has both positive and negative effects.   Positive effects include reducing disease pressure from residue-borne pathogens, increased soil temperature leading to increased microbial activity and reduced nitrogen immobilization, increased germination and uniform plant emergence due to warmer soil temperatures.  Negative effects of residue removal include increasing the potential for wind erosion, water loss to evaporation (2.5-5”/year in North Platte study), soil loss through heavy rain events in the spring on sloping fields, increasing the raindrop impact reducing soil water infiltration rates leading to more water runoff, increasing the potential for weed pressure, and nutrient removal from the field.      

Usually greater than 30% residue is left after baling with many striving to leave at least 50% residue in place.  Research has shown a minimum of 2.4 tons/acre of residue is necessary to maintain soil organic carbon in no-till systems.  A study conducted in eastern Colorado found that in a no-till, continuous corn system with 66% residue removal and adequate nitrogen applied for crop needs, soil organic carbon decreased over the 7 years of the study compared to its increase in the check where no residue was removed.  Residue removal did result in yield increases in the study (mostly within the first 3-4 years) with the researchers recommending residue removal every other year to every third year in this type of system to negate losses in soil carbon while potentially increasing yields. 

A non-irrigated study in no-till continuous corn receiving treatments of 0 or 50% residue removal with 54, 107, and 160 lb/ac nitrogen application to the successive crop was conducted for 10 years at the Ag Research Development Center near Mead, NE.  Results found corn yield reduction of 1.9 bu/ac when residue was removed over the 10 year period vs. when residue was retained.  It was speculated the yield reduction was due to evaporative losses of water in the non-irrigated environment.  Yields were significantly less with only 54 lb/ac of nitrogen applied to the corn crop and there were no significant yield differences with 107 or 160 lb/ac nitrogen applications.

An irrigated study in both no-till and conventional till continuous corn with 0, 40%, and 80% residue removal was also conducted for 10 years at the ARDC near Mead, NE with 180 lb/ac of nitrogen applied to all treatments.  Soil samples were also collected at 1 foot increments to a total of five feet to measure any changes in soil carbon.  Results showed grain yields were greater in the disk till compared to no-till study regardless of percent residue removed.  A 40% residue removal resulted in a 5.8 bu/ac average yield increase in disk-till and 15 bu/ac yield increase in no-till.  However, soil organic carbon over the 10 years of study in the top foot of soil decreased significantly for all treatments except for the no-till, no residue removal.  It remained similar for all treatments in all depths below the top foot.

Authors in another study analyzed 239 site-years across 36 research studies mostly in the U.S. Corn Belt finding on average a 3% yield increase with residue removal vs. no residue removed.  They also found a 20% yield increase across these studies in tillage vs. no-till systems where no residue was removed.  There was no tillage effect on grain yield with moderate and high residue removal.  Thus the suggestion that incorporating some residue removal into a cropping system could aid application of reduced tillage systems across more acres in environments where water deficits are not limiting to crop productivity.   

A continuing Sustainable Ag Research and Education (SARE) study conducted at four Nebraska locations is looking at grazing vs. baling to determine impacts on yield and soil properties.  Preliminary results show similar increase in yields with grazing and baling compared to the check. 

A soil erosion study was conducted in a field near York, NE from 2006-2009 where portions of the field contained 8% slopes.  Treatments included strips with 0 and 53% residue removal following grain harvest.  Within these treatments were subplots where cobs were retained and removed.  Simulated rainfall of 1.7” in 30 minutes was then applied to these plots under a known soil moisture content and then applied again the following day under saturated moisture conditions.  Runoff from the simulated irrigation occurred within 196 seconds where residue was removed compared to 240 seconds where it was not.  Sediment loss was 30% greater when residue was removed and cob removal had no effect on runoff or sediment loss.

To summarize, these and other studies show that where moisture is not limited, residue removal can result in no yield reduction to yield increases.  Most often it was speculated or correlated to warmer soil temperatures allowing for more uniform seed germination, emergence and plant stands.  Residue removal doesn’t come without cost, though, as continuous removal beyond three years has shown negative impacts on soil carbon.  Sediment loss has also been shown to occur on sloping soils.  Considerations should include residue removal on fields with minimal slope.  Also consider reducing impacts on the soil by planting cover crops, reducing tillage practices, and incorporating manure on fields where residue has been removed.  Studies are ongoing regarding these management practices.  Next week I’ll discuss the research regarding the nutrient value of corn residue. 

Keep Live Christmas Trees Watered:   If your Christmas tree stand runs out of water, how long does it take for the trunk to seal so it will no longer take up water?   If the water drops below the base of the cut trunk, a seal of dried sap will form over the stump in four to six hours.  This seal will prevent the tree from absorbing water, even if the tree stand is refilled; leading to tree drying and an increased fire risk.  For safety, start with a fresh Christmas tree and don’t let the basin run out of water.  Use at least a one gallon capacity tree stand and check the stand daily for adding water. A fresh tree whose trunk has not sealed will take up water quickly. If a seal does form, the tree can be taken out of the stand and a fresh cut made; or one-half inch deep holes drilled into the trunk one-half inch apart; which might allow the tree to begin absorbing water again. This is not very feasible; so be diligent and don’t let tree stands dry out.