Purdue-Indiana Seed Industry Purdue-Indiana Seed Industry Forum: Crop ProductionForum: Crop Production

Shawn P. ConleyShawn P. Conley

Research and Extension PI’s and Staff

• 7 Faculty• Shawn P. Conley• Bob Nielsen• Tony Vyn• Sylvie Brouder• Brad Joern• Dev Niyogi• Jim Camberato

• 3 technicians• 13 graduate students

Application Technology and Application Technology and Plant Health PromotionPlant Health Promotion

Spray Canopy Penetration

Growth stage at application

Height in canopy (in.)

R1 R3 R5

-------------Spray coverage (%)-------------

0 8.5 2.0 1.1

12 62.4 2.5 1.0

24 90.9 21.0 4.4

35 - 59.6 49.9

47 - - 70.4

LSD (0.05) 9.8 3.3 4.1

Row spacing by wheel track damage

Row spacing (inches)

Non wheel track

Wheel track

Non wheel vs. wheel

--------Yield(bu/ac)-------- P-Value

7.5 70.2 64.6 P < 0.0001

15 70.5 66.0 P < 0.0001

30 65.6 64.1 P ≥ 0.05

LSD (0.05) 2.3 2.3 -

Yield loss by boom width

Boom width Yield loss

30 3.6%

45 2.4%

60 1.8%

75 1.4%

90 1.1%

Application timing by wheel track damage

Timing Non wheel track

Wheel track

Non wheel vs. wheel

-------Yield (bu/ac)------- P-value

R1 67.9 65.8 P ≥ 0.05

R3 70.5 65.5 P < 0.0001

R5 68.0 63.1 P < 0.0001

R3+R5 69.8 63.1 P < 0.0001

R1+R3+R5 69.0 65.4 P < 0.005

Control 67.4 66.9 P ≥ 0.61

LSD (0.05) 3.3 3.3 -

Implications of Aerial ApplicationImplications of Aerial Application

Seed Quality and Composition Data

• Seed size and percent oil and protein• Uniformity

• Seed vigor/viability

• Disease considerations (FLS)

• Late glyphosate tank-mix applications

• Crop Phenology and ClimatologyCrop Phenology and Climatology

• High Yield Soybean SystemsHigh Yield Soybean Systems

• Micro-Nutrient ApplicationsMicro-Nutrient Applications

Revisit Current Recommendations

• Seeding rate issues• Cost• Herbicide technology• Equipment – row spacing

• Seed applied technology

• Validation of soybean yield estimate tables

Cropping Systems Research: Some Examples

Tony J. Vyn, with assistance from farmers, graduate students, technicians, and colleagues

Corn Yield Response to Tillage and Rotation, Clay Loam, West Lafayette, IN, 1975-2004.

TillageYield Gain

for Rotation

bu/ac% of plow

yield bu/ac% of plow

yield

Plow 178.0 - - - 170.0 - - - 5%

Chisel 178.0 100% 165.0 97% 8%

Ridge-till* 183.0 103% 168.0 99% 9%

No-till 174.0 98% 147.0 86% 18%

* Since 1980

Corn/Soybean Con't. Corn

Long-term Tillage Effects on Soil Organic Matter (1975-2003, West Lafayette, IN)

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

30 - 40"

20 - 30"

12 to 20"

6 to 12"

2 to 6"

0 to 2"

No-till

Plow

So

il D

ep

th (

in)

Organic Matter (%)

0

800

1600

2400

Co

nc

en

tra

tio

ns

(μ

g g -

1 )

Daidzein Glycitein Genistein Total

Isoflavones

>2.50

2.50-3.00

3.00-3.50

>3.50

Yield levels

(Mg ha-1)

c b a a

b b a a

c b a a

c b a a

Isoflavone concentrations at different seed yield levels.†

Plant to Plant Variability in Corn

Accepted Accepted Hypothesis:Hypothesis:

Delayed Seedling Emergence Delayed Seedling Emergence

Shorter PlantsShorter Plants

Delayed Delayed MaturityMaturity

Smaller ears at Smaller ears at harvestharvest

Delayed Silk Delayed Silk EmergenceEmergence

Uniform Ear Size in High Yield Corn

Emergence date

Silking Date & Plant Height

-

+Individu

al Plant Yield

Tentative Conclusions:Tentative Conclusions:

Effect

For consistent individual ear weightsand high yields we need to make sure“No Plant Left Behind!”

Large Plot Corn Research Examples

Effect of uneven plant spacing and ear size characteristics on grain yield and replant decisions

Interaction between corn seeding rates and nitrogen application rates

Evaluating the consequences of one-time yield monitor calibrations on estimated grain flow rates throughout the harvest season

QuestionsQuestions