Ronnie W. Heiniger

In-Season Optimization and Site-Specific Nitrogen Management for Soft Red Winter Wheat

application up to 70% without a reduction in grain yield compared to a grower’s practice. Site-specific N management based on an in-season assessment of Stone et al. (1996) used an on-the-go sensor measurcrop N status may offer producers increased grain yield, profitability, ing plant N spectral index to create submeter siteand spring N fertilizer use efficiency (SNUE). The goal of this study specific N management units based on an estimate of was to determine the distinct contributions of (i) in-season N rate optimization and (ii) site-specific N management. Our objective was in-season crop N status in wheat. This site-specific N to compare site-specific and field-specific N management with typical management system reduced N fertilizer by 32 and 57 growers’ practices to determine if site-specific N management (i) kg N ha 1 at two of three sites without a reduction in increased soft red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain yield, grain yield compared with a typical grower’s practice. (ii) reduced N inputs, (iii) increased SNUE, and (iv) reduced withinThey also reported that the site-specific N application field grain yield variability. Research was conducted at eight sites in reduced spatial variation in wheat forage and grain yield 2000, 2001, and 2002. A randomized complete block design with two compared with the grower’s practice. or five N management systems was used at two and six sites, respecSimilarly, Raun et al. (2002) used a multispectral optitively. Site-specific management did not improve grain yield compared cal sensor to create 1-m2 site-specific N management with field-specific management when based on the same in-season units in wheat. A N fertilizer optimization algorithm estimation of optimum N rates. At sites where site-specific or field(NFOA) that estimates in-season crop N status and specific systems were compared with typical growers’ practices, grain potential grain yield was used to adjust N rates. They yield benefits of in-season N optimization (up to 2267 kg ha 1) were reported that by using NFOA, it might be possible to apparent. For grain yield, in-season optimization of N rate was more important than site-specific management. A large reduction in N inset more efficient and profitable fertilization levels and puts (up to 48.6%) was also attributed to in-season N rate optimizaincrease N use efficiency compared with typical growtion. After incorporating in-season optimization, a further reduction ers’ practices. in N inputs (up to 19.6%) was possible through site-specific applicaMulla et al. (1992), Bhatti et al. (1998), Stone et al. tion. Site-specific N application maximized SNUE compared with (1996), and Raun et al. (2002) compared site-specific N either field-specific or typical growers’ practices at all sites and reduced management based on either a preor in-season estiwithin-field grain yield variance at four sites. mate of the crop’s N requirement to a typical grower’s practice. Consequently, the reduction in N rates compared with growers’ practices might not have been the S N management is the adjusting of withinresult of site-specific application but could instead be field N fertilizer rates based on spatially variable due to using a preor in-season estimation of the crop’s factors that affect optimum N rate (Sawyer, 1994). This N requirement. practice may offer producers the ability to increase grain In the southeastern USA, Scharf and Alley (1993), yield, profitability, and N fertilizer efficiency by applyAlley et al. (1994), Weisz and Heiniger (2000), and ing N only where required for optimum plant growth. Weisz et al. (2001) developed a field-specific N manageSite-specific management may also be environmentally ment system for soft red winter wheat based on an inbeneficial to producers. season evaluation of the crop’s N requirement (Fig. 1). Mulla et al. (1992) created site-specific management This system first determines the whole-field tiller density units (18.3 m by 564–655 m) based on preseason soil N at Zadoks’ Growth Stage (GS) 25 (Zadoks et al., 1974). (nitrate N and ammonium N) tests and available soil When GS-25 tiller density is below a critical threshold water content. Similarly, Bhatti et al. (1998) created (540 tillers m 2), a GS-25 N application is made to insite-specific N management units based on crop produccrease tiller development (Ayoub, 1974; Power and tivity. In both cases, site-specific N reduced N fertilizer Alessi, 1978; Lutcher and Mahler, 1988; Scharf and Alley, 1993; Weisz et al., 2001). A GS-25 N application can stimulate tiller development in southeastern areas M. Flowers, USDA-ARS, Air Quality–Plant Growth and Dev. Res. because winter wheat does not enter a dormant state Unit, 3908 Inwood Rd., Raleigh, NC 27603; R. Weisz, Dep. of Crop in these southern latitudes. If GS-25 tiller density is Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620; above the threshold, a GS-25 N application is not necesR. Heiniger, Dep. of Crop Sci, North Carolina State Univ., Vernon James Res. and Ext. Cent., 207 Research Rd., Plymouth, NC 27692; sary. At GS 30, a field-averaged tissue test is used to D. Osmond, Dep. of Soil Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Box 7619, optimize N application rates (Alley et al., 1994). This Raleigh, NC 27695-7619; and C. Crozier, Dep. of Soil Sci., North system resulted in an increase in estimated profit of

Weed Control and Corn (Zea mays) Response to Planting Pattern and Herbicide Program with High Seeding Rates in North Carolina

73 Carolina State Univ., Vernon James Res. and Ext. Cent., 207 Research ha 1 across 20 site-years (Scharf and Alley, 1993). Rd., Plymouth, NC 27692. Received 5 Dec. 2002. *Corresponding author (mike_flowers@ncsu.edu). While this system (Fig. 1) has been tested and adopted Published in Agron. J. 96:124–134 (2004).  American Society of Agronomy Abbreviations: GS, growth stage; SNUE, spring nitrogen fertilizer use efficiency. 677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA

Grain Sorghum and Palmer Amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) Response to Herbicide Programs and Agronomic Practices

Effective weed control in corn (Zea mays L.) is important to optimize yield. Concern over environmental impact of atrazine and selection for glyphosate resistance has increased the need to develop alternative strategies that use herbicides other than atrazine and glyphosate and appropriate cultural practices to control weeds. Research was conducted during 2011 and 2012 to determine weed and corn response to herbicide programs containing dicamba, glufosinate, and glyphosate applied postemergence alone or with atrazine in single- and twin-row planting patterns. Planting pattern had no effect on common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.) and Texas panicum (Panicum texanum L.) population and did not interact with herbicide program. Effective weed control hastened maturity in some but not all instances. Under weed-free conditions, corn grain yield was higher in 5 of 7 trials when planted in twin rows versus single rows at equivalent corn populations (141,000 plants ha−1). These results suggest that while planting pattern may not impact weed control dramatically, planting corn in twin rows may be an effective alternative to single-row planting patterns because of increased yield under high corn populations.

Rate and Timing Effects of Growth Regulating Herbicides Applications on Grain Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) Growth and Yield

Weed control remains a major challenge for economically viable grain sorghum production in the southeastern United States due to crop sensitivity to weed competition during early growth stages. Field experiments were conducted in 2012 and 2013 to determine the effects of grain sorghum row spacing, population density, and herbicide programs on Palmer amaranth control, crop growth, and grain yield. Treatments included row spacings of 19, 38, and 76 cm; grain sorghum population densities of 99,000, 198,000, 297,000, and 396,000 plants ha-1; and three herbicide programs: (1) a nontreated control, (2) S-metolachlor at 1,410 g ai ha-1 plus atrazine at 1,820 g ha-1 PRE, and (3) S-metolachlor at 1,070 g ha-1 plus atrazine at 1,380 g ha-1 PRE followed by 2,4 D at 330 g ha-1 POST. Palmer amaranth control benefited from the addition of a POST herbicide and from crop density≥297,000 plants ha-1. Under weedy conditions, Palmer amaranth density was not affected by narrower row spacing or increased crop density, whereas its dry biomass was reduced by 33% with 19 and 38 compared to 76 cm rows, and by 43% with≥297,000 vs 99,000 plants ha-1. Row spacing had no effect on light interception by the crop canopy. However, crop density influenced canopy closure with maximum light interception occurring one and a half weeks earlier for density ≥297,000 plants ha-1. Yield increased by 18% for 19 vs 38 and 76 cm rows, whereas grain crop density had no effect. Overall, these results indicate that the combination of row spacing ≤30 cm and crop density ≥297,000 plants ha-1 provided at least 97% Palmer amaranth control in the absence of POST application and reduced its biomass by 32% in nontreated plots compared to 76 cm row spacing and crop density≤198,000 plants ha-1. Nomenclature: Atrazine; S-metolachlor; 2,4-D; Palmer amaranth; Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats.; sorghum, Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench ssp. bicolor.

Aerial Color Infrared Photography for Determining Early In-Season Nitrogen Requirements in Corn

Dicamba and 2,4-D are among the most common and inexpensive herbicides used to control broadleaf weeds. However, different studies have pointed the risk of crop injury and grain sorghum yield reduction with postemergence applications of 2,4-D. No research data on grain sorghum response to 2,4-D or dicamba exists in the Southeastern United States. Consequently, a study was conducted to investigate crop growth and yield response to 2,4-D (100, 220, and 330 g acid equivalent ha−1) and dicamba (280 g acid equivalent ha−1) applied on 20 to 65 cm tall sorghum. Greater stunting resulted from 2,4-D applied at 330 g acid equivalent ha−1 or below 45 cm tall sorghum whereas lodging prevailed with 2,4-D at 330 g acid equivalent ha−1 and dicamba applied beyond 35 cm tall crop. Regardless of local environmental conditions, 2,4-D applied up to 35 cm tall did not negatively impact grain yield. There was a trend for yields to be somewhat lower when 2,4-D was applied on 45 or 55 cm tall sorghum whereas application on 65 cm tall sorghum systematically decreased yields. More caution should be taken with dicamba since yield reduction has been reported as early as applications made on 35 cm tall sorghum for a potentially dicamba sensitive cultivar.