“But then I don't actually see any difference in yields,” he says. In some of his strips, he says the yellow striping has been very apparent – dark green where sulfur is applied and pale yellow in the control strips. My perception is that sulfur is not an expensive thing to add.” “I know that one year is not enough to draw conclusions, so I'm going to stay at it and see if I can learn more. He's tried it on multiple fields over a couple of years without response. “Maybe a little, but not as much as I expected,” Lindsay says. But after reviewing his yield maps, he cannot see a response. When he heard they were doing sulfur tests, he wanted to participate because he had seen the telltale yellow striping of sulfur deficiency. Sulfur is just one of them.”ĭennis Lindsaym Masonville, Iowa, is a big fan of the On-Farm Network and how it helps farmers scientifically conduct replicated strip tests in fields. “There are so many things going on out there that we don't know about and how they interact. “I'm still at the curious stage,” says Rhonda. The Birchmiers will try some different approaches to sulfur in 2012, including broadcast sulfur on all types of soils and sulfur in the starter fertilizer on lighter soils. His field showed a very noticeable difference in the color and thriftiness of the treated areas before the wind damage. One of her seed customers gives her reason to want to try for a sulfur response again. “I have seen the classic sulfur yellow striping sporadically, and it's been more common lately,” says Rhonda, who is a Pioneer seed dealer. Still, the Birchmiers are intrigued enough to try the sulfur experiments again in 2012, with a better growing season, they hope. But it was such an uneven harvest stand and so difficult to actually follow rows that any yield response to sulfur was undetectable. Many of the stalks goosenecked back up, some as far as 30 inches, and yielded 160 bushels and higher. The 100-mph straight-line winds ruined the sulfur experiment. They got hit with a devastating windstorm on July 11. It was a disaster – but not for anything to do with her and husband David's soil fertility program. Rhonda Birchmier, Maxwell, Iowa, tried sulfur fertilizer on corn last year for the first time. If I could go back to the product I used three years ago, I might try it again.” “At this point, I'm not very concerned that my fields need sulfur. “I would have to say my results are mixed, and even when I got a response it was not very large,” he says. Other people in his area said the same thing, there was little response in 2011. Last year, his fertilizer dealer changed suppliers, and he got no response to a generic sulfur. “I did get some response to sulfur for two years, not a lot, but a couple of bushels an acre, and it more than paid for the sulfur,” he says. Three years ago, after hearing much talk about sulfur, he decided to try it on those fields with a fertilizer from Mosaic containing both sulfur and zinc. “However, I've got some fields that are farther away from the hog barns where I don't spread manure,” says Friest. Soils with high organic matter and routine manure applications are generally at less risk of sulfur deficiency. In this dry broadcast form, it's fairly easy for me to work with.”ĭenny Friest, Radcliffe, Iowa, says he was never too concerned about sulfur deficiency because most of his acres get routine manure from his hog barns. I'll get the soil tests, and if it calls for it, I'll use it. “I'll use it again, particularly on my lighter soils. “It was an economic advantage to sulfur,” he says. The sulfur cost Gerholdt about $28 an acre. With a higher yield and a 6% advantage, it would have been even more bushels advantage, I think.” “That field is very light soil, and it didn't have enough rain,” says Gerholdt. The yield data showed a 7.8-bushel advantage for the sulfur, or about 6%. The treated strips were dark green the untreated were yellow right up to harvest.” “Everything was the same as for tillage and fertilizer, except for the SuperCal product. “You could easily see the strips all through the growing season,” says Gerholdt. (For more information, see sidebar on the next page.) He worked with the On-Farm Network, which helps farmers use appropriate research protocol with replicated treated and untreated strips. It was a product called SuperCal SO4, a high-grade form of gypsum that is 17% sulfur, applied at about 300 pounds per acre, or about 50 pounds of actual sulfur. When that field went back to corn in 2011, he put sulfur on the field as a dry broadcast on the day of planting. “I think it was too little, too late,” he says. In 2009, he tried a foliar sulfur applied to that field just ahead of tasseling, including untreated test strips, and he saw no response at harvest. “I was sure what I was seeing wasn't nitrogen,” says Gerholdt. Markets Analysis Back to Markets Analysis.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |