INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS OF POOR SUGARBEET AREAS. D.W. Franzen, D.H. Hopkins, and Mohamed Khan North Dakota State University INTRODUCTION

Similar documents
Survey of Insecticide Use in Sugarbeet in Eastern North Dakota and Minnesota Sugarbeet Research and Extension Reports.

Using Tissue and Soil Tests Together Helps Make Better Decisions. John Lee Soil Scientist AGVISE Northwood, ND

Soybean Soil Fertility

USE OF OCEANGROWN PRODUCTS TO INCREASE CROP YIELD AND ESSENTIAL NUTRIENT CONTENT. Dave Franzen, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND

Interpreting Soils Report. Beyond N P K

In mid-october, all plots were again soil sampled to determine residual nutrients.

Understanding a Soil Report

Plant Food. Nitrogen (N)

Interpretation of Soil Tests for Environmental Considerations

Nutrient Recommendations Agronomic Crops Last Updated 12/1/16. Grain Corn. Crop Highlights Target ph: 6.0

Raymond C. Ward Ward Laboratories, Inc Kearney, NE

2009 Elba Muck Soil Nutrient Survey Results Summary, Part III: Calcium, Magnesium and Micronutrients

AGVISE Laboratories Established 1976

Dry Bean Fertility Dave Franzen NDSU Soil Science Specialist

Objectives: 1. Determine the effect of nitrogen and potassium applications on sugar beet root yield and quality.

Interpreting Plant Tissue and Soil Sample Analysis

Potassium and Phosphorus as Plant Nutrients. Secondary Nutrients and Micronutrients. Potassium is required in large amounts by many crops

Managing Micronutrients with Soil (Plant) Testing and Fertilizer

Soil Fertility and Nutrient Management. Hailin Zhang. Department of Plant and Soil Sciences

Fertility management in soybean

What s new with micronutrients in our part of the world?

Supplying Nutrients to Crops

12. ZINC - The Major Minor

in Cotton Dr. Steve Phillips Director, Southeast USA

1101 S Winchester Blvd., Ste. G 173 San Jose, CA (408) (408) fax Page 1 of 2

FACT SHEET. Understanding Cation Exchange Capacity and % Base Saturation

SOIL TEST INTERPRETATION JIM FASCHING Technical Field Representative

Limitations to Plant Analysis. John Peters & Carrie Laboski Department of Soil Science University of Wisconsin-Madison

BOTANY AND PLANT GROWTH Lesson 9: PLANT NUTRITION. MACRONUTRIENTS Found in air and water carbon C oxygen hydrogen

Understanding Your Soil Report. Michael Cook 2018

Fertilizer. Fertilizers. (FAO press release, April 1990): Nutrient Depletion. Nutrient Depletion 4/16/2012

FERTILIZATION. Roland D. Meyer, Daniel B. Marcum, and Steve B. Orloff ESSENTIAL PLANT NUTRIENTS

A & L GREAT LAKES LABORATORIES, INC.

INTERPRETATION GUIDE TO SOIL TEST REPORTS

REMEMBER as we go through this exercise: Science is the art of making simple things complicated!

Barley and Sugarbeet Symposium

Use of Soil and Tissue Testing for Sustainable Crop Nutrient Programs

Variability in Tissue Testing What Does It Mean For Nutrient Recommendations?

MICRO NUTRIENTS AND SECONDARY NUTRIENTS

Mineral Nutrition of Fruit & Nut Trees. Fruit & Nut Tree Nutrition 3/1/2013. Johnson - Nutrition 1

How to Develop a Balanced Program for Pecan and Chili. Robert R Smith

Soil Testing Options in High Tunnels. Bruce Hoskins University of Maine anlab.umesci.maine.edu

Micronutrient Management. Dorivar Ruiz Diaz Soil Fertility and Nutrient Management

DAFFODILS ARE WHAT THEY EAT: NUTRITIONAL ASPECTS OF SOILS

May 2008 AG/Soils/ pr Understanding Your Soil Test Report Grant E. Cardon Jan Kotuby-Amacher Pam Hole Rich Koenig General Information

Fluid Sources for Micronutrients Starters for No-Tillage Corn and Soybean in Argentina. Ricardo Melgar

Corn and soybean yield responses to micronutrients fertilization

Lime Fertilizer Interactions Affecting Vegetable Crop Production' Delbert D. Hemphill, Jr., and T. L. ABSTRACT

Multi-K. Potassium Nitrate Products For Healthy Crops

Soil Composition. Air

Preventing, diagnosing and understanding nutrient deficiencies in plants

1) Yellow Corn in 2014 Compared to 2013 and ) Time of Day Plant Tissue Project

The 1 th International and The 4 th National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran

Biosolids Nutrien Management an Soil Testing. Craig Cogger, Soil Scientis WSU Puyallup

UNDERSTANDING MICRONUTRIENT FERTILIZATION IN ALFALFA. Roland D. Meyer, Daniel B Marcum and Steve B. Orloff 1 ABSTRACT

Citrus Fertilization for Cold-Tolerant Varieties. Tom Obreza

Plants, soil, and nutrients. Created in partnership with Alex Lindsey, Ph.D., The Ohio State University

YaraVita PROCOTE. The colors of yield.

Nutrient level (EC) in a pot is like a bank

Potash Phosphate Nitrogen

Nutrient Management. Ontario Certified Crop Adviser Pre-Exam Workshop Woodstock, Ontario 20 January 2014

Nutrients & Diagnosing Nutrient Needs. Carrie Laboski Dept. of Soil Science UW-Madison

1. Zinc as a plant nutrient 1 2. Preparing for a prescribed burn 2 3. Fertilizing cotton 4

Protein and Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer and Variation of Plant Tissue Analysis in Wheat

Animal, Plant & Soil Science. D3-7 Characteristics and Sources of Secondary Nutrients and Micronutrients

Quick Tips for Nutrient Management in Washington Berry Crops. Lisa Wasko DeVetter Assistant Professor, Small Fruit Horticulture March 16, 2016

Soil 4234 Guest Lecture

MEASURE AND MANAGE. Zinc. By Dale Cowan Agri-Food Laboratories CCA.On

Nutrient Deficiencies and Application Injuries in Field Crops

Nutrient Management for Texas High Plains Cotton Production

Welcome. Greg Patterson C.C.A. President A&L Canada Laboratories

PISTACHIO MICRONUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

Research Report Forage Sorghum Hybrid Yield and Quality at Maricopa, AZ, 2015

SOILS AND PLANT NUTRITION

MANAGING THE NUTRITION OF HIGHBUSH BLUEBERRIES

Introduction to Wolf Trax

3.0 Supplying Nutrients to Crops

Soil Texture Discussion. Soils, Nutrients and Fertilizers Level 2. An Ideal Soil yes, soil, not dirt

AgriCal by. Healthier Soils Stronger Plants Higher Yields

Unit B: Seed Germination, Growth, and Development. Lesson 4: Determining Nutrient Functions and Utilization

Soil Testing and Interpretation

Chapter 1: Overview of soil fertility, plant nutrition, and nutrient management

Roses with Vitazyme application

Greenhouse Horticulture

Plant Nutrients in Mineral Soils

Enclosed are the tissue analysis results for the samples from the greens at Golf Club.

MICRONUTRIENT PRINCIPLES

Nutrient Management for Texas High Plains Cotton Production

Potato, Tobacco, and Turf Trial Findings

Soils and Soil Fertility Management

INFLUENCE OF DAIRY MANURE APPLICATIONS ON CORN NUTRIENT UPTAKE

Gerald Brust IPM Vegetable Specialist. Vegetable Fertility

Common Salt Ions. Salinity. Soil permeability reflects sodicity problems from sodium concentrations 1/15/2008

Soil Conditions Favoring Micronutrient Deficiencies and Responses in 2001

Project: TopCal for sodium management during leaching at Mission Viejo Country Club

Vineyard Nutrition. Grape Camp Michael Cook

Evaluation of Manganese Fertility of Upland Cotton in the Lower Colorado Valley

ANIMAL, PLANT & SOIL SCIENCE D3-6 CHARACTERISTICS AND SOURCES OF PHOSPHORUS AND POTASSIUM

LECTURE 12 NUTRIENT DEFICIENCY AND TOXICITY. Causes and Symptoms. Nitrogen

Apples and Pears. Above 2.7. Above 2.4

Transcription:

INITIAL INVESTIGATIONS OF POOR SUGARBEET AREAS D.W. Franzen, D.H. Hopkins, and Mohamed Khan North Dakota State University INTRODUCTION There have recently been grower concerns over certain poor-growing areas of sugarbeet in the Red River Valley (Figure 1). These areas grow good crops of small grains, corn or soybeans, but when planted to sugarbeets, marked differences in growth are observed from shortly following emergence through to harvest. Seedling leaves are usually curled more prominently than normal inward, with a purple rim are the leaf edge (Figure 2). Later in the season, the curling and purpling become less pronounced. Sugarbeet seedlings, though at the same leaf growth stage as normal growing beets, are shorter in height and lower in seedling weight. Although the rows may eventually fill in, final yields are lower at harvest than normal growing areas. Grower investigations using additional N and surveying for herbicide carryover or phytotoxicity in these areas have not been successful in determining the reason for the poor growth. The objective of this first year of investigation was to determine likely causes of this poor growth as a step towards means of correcting the problem through means of soil amendments if possible. Figure 1. View of Downer field, 6-leaf stage. Poor beets in foreground.

Submitted to the Education Reports, and Education Dakota. 2000 Sugarbeet Research and Vol. 31, Sugarbeet Research Board of Minnesota and North Figure 2. Stunted seedling, 6-leaf stage, Downer field. METHODS Two sites were selected. The first site was located 3 miles north of Downer, MN. This site

contained an area with about 20 affected acres. Prior to planting, three sampling transects were established, with 13 points within each transect, and each transect point was 30 feet apart. The transects were designed to begin in the middle of the affected zone, and end with three points approximately into the more normal growing beets. The end points of the transects were georeferenced. Cores were extracted from each sampling point to 4 feet. Core increments of 0-6 inch, 6-12 inch, 12-18 inch, 18-24 inch, and 24-48 inch were taken for analysis. Nitrate-N and organic matter was analyzed on all depths. Texture was estimated on all depths at sampling. Nitrate-N, salts (EC), sulfate-s and chloride were analyzed on a separate 6-24 inch core depth. Nitrate-N, P, K, ph, EC, organic matter, sulfate-s, Zn, Mn, Cu, Fe, Ca, Mg, and chloride were analyzed on the 0-6 inch core. The second site was located about 2 miles southwest of Galchut, ND. Although an estimate of the gradient from poor to normal growing beets was estimated in marking off and sampling the transects prior to planting, the result was that the transects ended up parallel to the gradient rather than perpendicular to it as at Downer. Therefore the south transect was in the poorest beets and the north transect was placed in poor, but better growing beets. Transects were also placed and sampled in two fields going to sugarbeets in 2001. These transects were also georeferenced, so that approximate areas could be used for treatments in 2001. Whole plant samples were taken at the 6-leaf stage and analyzed for N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu, S, Na and B. Twenty plants were taken to represent each transect location. Twenty plants were cut at ground level and stored in a cooler. They were weighed following drying prior to grinding in preparation for analysis. In addition to the transect samples, 0-6 inch soil samples and plant samples were also taken from another sugarbeet field west of Galchutt 3 miles. Three pairs of samples were taken from normal beets next to poor beets. These samples were subjected to the same analysis as the transect samples. Results Out of all of the comparisons, plant and soil magnesium content (Mg) is most consistently related to plant dry weight, yield and recoverable sugar per acre (Figure 1). Table 1. Correlation of plant and soil factors with 6-leaf dry weight and yield. (** indicates significance at 5%, * indicates significance at 1 %.) Factor Downer Galchutt P* N * Dry wt. Yield % sugar RSA Dry wt. Yield % sugar RSA P P * * P K P S * P Ca * * * * P Mg * * * * P Na * P Zn *

P Fe * * P Mn * ** P Cu * * * * ** P B * * S* N * * * S P * * S K * * * S ph * * S EC * * * S OM * * * * S S * * S Zn * S Fe S Mn * S Cu * S Ca * S Mg * * * * ** ** The magnitude of the difference between low dry weight/yield sugarbeets and higher dry weight/yield sugarbeets is also in favor of Mg levels in plant and soil (Table 2). Although some nutrient levels such as N, Ca and Cu were sometimes correlated with dry weight, the magnitude of the difference between beet types is small compared to the difference in Mg content at each location. Table 2.Comparison of transect plant nutrient concentrations at each site between transect points with lower than mean dry weight and above mean dry weights. Plant content Galchutt < 4.6 g dry wt.* > 4.6 g dry wt. Downer < 4 g dry wt. > 4 g dry wt. %N 3.2 3.6 3.2 3.4 %P 0.21 0.29.22 0.25 %K 0.54 5.0.54 0.52 %S 0.29 0.36.3 0.33 %Ca 2.01 1.46 2.04 1.66 %Mg 0.7 2.03 0.66 1.49

%Na 1.34 1.42 1.31 1.41 ppm Zn 9.6 13.5 10 11.4 ppm Fe 459 78.6 465 641 ppm Mn 45 60.7 46 53.1 ppm Cu 2.3 3.6 2.2 3.1 ppm B 19.9 23.4 19.9 21.9 * weight of ten plants at 6-leaf stage. The soil in which the poor beets appear is different in texture at both sites compared to normal beets. The texture is coarser, and organic matter is lower. It appears especially at the Downer site that significant wind erosion has resulted in a thin organic matter horizon near the surface. Both sites also have limiting layers underneath the sandy topsoil. At Downer, the limiting layer appears to be a paleosol of heavier texture and slightly darker color than the horizon directly above. At Galchutt, the limiting layer is heavier textured lacustrine material. Both situations lend themselves to a leached environment. Nitrogen and sulfur test levels tended to be lower in these poor-growing areas, probably due to the history of leaching and lower organic matter levels. However, the appearance of the sugarbeets, the lack of major differences in plant content between poor and normal beets of these two nutrients and grower experiences in the past suggest that these lower soil levels play only a minor role at best in causing the severe growth reductions observed. The Galchutt site is lower in ph in the poor growing areas and it is easier to understand that Mg might be a problem there than at Downer where the ph is over 7. However, there is evidence in the literature that higher Ca levels in the soil may result in preferential replacement of Mg with Ca on soil exchange sites, causing increased leaching and depletion of that element. SUMMARY In an investigation of the possible causes of poor sugarbeet growth in certain coarsetextured, low organic matter areas, lack of available magnesium appears to be a likely factor. Subsequent research will apply a variety of treatments containing magnesium, including sugarbeet waste lime, in order to determine if magnesium amendments will help to solve this problem. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Thanks to Norm Cattanach and Dr. Joe Giles for their help with plant sampling. Also thanks to the Minnesota and North Dakota Sugarbeet Research and Education Board for their funding of the project.