Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Business Meeting

Nov 17, 2022, Holiday Inn, Des Moines, IA

Administrator Report

Carl Rosen gave the administrative report.

The group was renewed this year.

Carl emailed the following information regarding the state report requirements.

1. Report is due 60 days after the Nov. 17 meeting
2. Report should focus on state collaborations
3. No detailed state report unless it is of a collaborative nature
4. Here is an example to follow:
5. https://www.ncra-saes.org/_files/ugd/4081a5_18226943c6564ef594a002c44a32266e.pdf
6. They are most interested in the impacts.

Rotation update

2023-2024: Dorivar Ruiz Diaz (KSU), Chair, and Edwin Ritchey (UKY), Secretary

Old business

• Compendium website: It has been moved to the AWS server with the help of PAQInteractive (www.ncera103.org).
• Fund pledged to cover the cost of website shuffle and maintenance (Bijesh will arrange for invoices accordingly)

Dave Franzen, Dan Kaiser ($1000 each)

Edwin Ritchey, Jim Camberato, Kurt Steinke, John Grove, Edwin Lentz and Mark Licht ($500 each)

New Business

Bijesh will continue working with PAQInteractive to install features for new submissions to the compendium webpage. It was discussed and decided that the state reps would review the submissions from their respective states.

N fixing products: Dave Franzen solicits data to pool them together for a publication. Please send materials, methods, and data (irrespective of the number of years, and site) by Dec 15. The target date for publication of a circular is mid-Feb.

State reports

Given by each member. Detailed written reports are included below. The state reports constitute most of the meeting time, which involves recaps of current product trials, identification of new products on the market and their potential effectiveness, and extension publications and programming in the area of non-conventional products.

Adjourn

General Comments, Accomplishments, and Impacts

Dan Kaiser – University of Minnesota

The primary questions that Minnesota crop producers have come to me to ask are about biologicals. The bulk of my questions has been related to ProveN by Pivot Bio, with a few questions on Utrisha and Envita. Pivot Bio did not continue funding work with Daniel Kaiser’s research program in 2022. Six locations have been conducted to date, with only one location showing any benefit for ProveN decreasing the nitrogen requirement for corn. A few other researchers from the U of M have tested products, Drs. Lindsay Pease and Paulo Pagilari studied a root inoculant for supplying N, but the results were mixed. Growers are interested in research related to biostimulants. In speaking to several consultants at fall meetings, most have not seen any benefit to biostimulants in corn production. Several projects are underway testing inhibitors and N extenders for urea.

My podcast episodes on the topic typically get around 2500 downloads each.

Extension Presentations

1. Management of urea and urea sources for sugarbeet – Fargo, ND Jan 2022 – 200 in attendance
2. What's new with fertilizer guidelines in northwestern Minnesota? – Crookston, MN Jan 2022 – I presented some of my ProveN data to 50 attendees
3. Management of urea and urea sources for sugarbeet – Willmar, MN Jan 2022 – presented N extender and inhibitor data to 100 in attendance.

*I promoted the Compendium of non-traditional products at all three meetings

David Franzen – North Dakota State University

North Dakota crop growers were presented with many products having biological activity. Some of the most prominent and newer mode of action products were those containing free-living N-fixing organisms. A group of four NDSU researchers conducted N-rate trials comparing N fertilizer rates with those including N-fixation organisms with rates and application methods as recommended on their label. These results have been shared with other NCERA-103 members and will be included in the group compilation to be published in February 2023. NDSU will lead the compilation effort for the N-fixation product research publication.

Edwin Lentz – The Ohio State University

General Comments:

More marketing push on biostimulants. Farmers continue to ask questions about starter fertilizers, sulfur, and micronutrients in Ohio. Information was requested on the efficacy of nitrogen biologicals and enhancers.

Accomplishments:

Nitrogen rate and timing studies for corn and wheat. Investigated Instinct II and Radiant as N Enhancers. Both products reduced yields when added to UAN at planting and had no effect when added as a side-dress treatment at Growth Stage V4. In cooperating with other North Central States, investigated N biological products such as Utrisha N. No benefit from adding Utrisha. 

15 presentations were given on reducing P and N losses from fields in the Lake Erie watershed. One national presentation was given on N management for wheat.

Impact Statements:

Completed research on non-traditional products has assisted Ohio growers in determining the efficacy potential of these products for their production systems and assisted them in their purchasing decisions for these products.

Producers have reduced their total fertilizer rates and reduced nutrient losses from fields based on the 4R Principles by participating in one of the 15 soil fertility programs given in Ohio.

Producers have confidence in university recommendations on N programs because of multistate research.

Edwin Ritchey – University of Kentucky

1. The University of Kentucky has officially participated in the NCERA 103 since 2011. The office of the Associate Dean for Research supports participation and covers travel expenses associated with this meeting. The Compendium is utilized and referenced multiple times throughout the year regarding questions associated with non-traditional products. The majority of the questions come from county extension agents and agricultural producers in the state.
2. The University of Kentucky Research and Education Center at Princeton, Kentucky was devastated by an EF-4 tornado on December 10, 2021. Equipment and facility upgrades are constant due to a total loss of many research items. We are fortunate that most items are being replaced with the most current models currently on the market.
3. A statewide research project was conducted to test the effectiveness of a “liquid calcium” product (Advance-Cal, Agri-Tek International, LLC) with claims to neutralize acidity with a use rate of 2-5 gallons of product per acre. Further, they claimed to be cheaper and more effective than traditional ag lime. There were 15 county agricultural extension agents/producers/ag experiment station sites that participated in the study. There was also a laboratory incubation study to supplement the findings of the field research. The field study and laboratory incubation study supported fundamental chemistry foundations – neither calcium or chloride is responsible for neutralizing soil acidity.
4. The above study and associated newsletters/publications were posted, reposted, and viewed in multiple states. Responses and questions were received from Texas, Delaware, Tennessee, and South Carolina. A movement, started in South Carolina, was initiated to have these products pulled from the shelf based on false claims. This is an ongoing process.
5. An interested individual contacted UK authors (Ritchey and Grove) of a newsletter describing the outcomes of the multicounty research involving liquid calcium, requesting information on a proper means to have products being removed from the shelves. We directed him to the Director of Fertilizer and Seed Programs at the University of Kentucky Regulatory Services. He is currently addressing the issue. Unfortunately, they have no jurisdiction over internet sales of any product, which is the primary source of sales in Kentucky and for this company. This individual from South Carolina is pursuing the same course in other states to interfere with the sale of their liquid calcium (calcium chloride) products which have no liming ability.
6. A USDA NACA project was developed to evaluate the sulfur and micronutrient status of alfalfa across Kentucky, Wisconsin and Oregon. This project was based on the premise that producers think micronutrient and sulfur deficiencies may be limiting alfalfa yield across the nation.

Multiple extension presentations (a few highlighted ones hereunder)

Agricultural and Natural Resources Update East. Presentation title, Lime, Liming, Products that Work and Products that Don’t. This presentation was for Agricultural and Natural Resource Extension Agents (ANR), Horticultural Agents, and appropriate extension staff and administrators. Attendees were predominately from the eastern part of the state. Kentucky has 120 county extension offices, and attendance at these updates is mandatory. I was invited to present the findings of the liquid calcium study by program organizers and extension administration at this meeting. Approximately 110 participants were present.

Agricultural and Natural Resources Update West. Presentation title, Lime, Liming, Products that Work and Products that Don’t. This presentation was for Agricultural and Natural Resource Extension Agents (ANR), predominately from the western part of the state. Kentucky has 120 county extension offices, and attendance at these updates is mandatory. I was invited to present the findings of the liquid calcium study by program organizers and extension administration at this meeting. Approximately 80 participants were present.

Fertilizer Academy – Soil pH, Lime, and Liming. This was a multicounty evening workshop with 7 counties participating with in-person viewing and over 30 participating via zoom. Approximately 50 participants were present.

Kentucky Young Farmers (Warren County) – Liming, Why and How. Approximately 10 producers with less than 10 years of operating a farm.

Giovani Preza Fontes – University of Illinois

Collaborative work:

The approach known as the Maximum Return to Nitrogen (MRTN) approach is used in seven North Central states to convert recent N response data from each state into N rate recommendations based on economic optimization. Committee members from cooperating states maintain the database for that state, including adding new data and dropping older data. The calculator that makes use of the data is located at http://cnrc.agron.iastate.edu/. Cooperating members are working on upgrading the calculator, and migrating it to a non-university hosting site.

Several committee members presented an update on this approach at the North Central Soil Fertility Conference in Des Moines, IA on November 17, 2021. This presentation resulted in a publication in Crops & Soils (citation below.) Efforts to upgrade the database in various states are ongoing.

Jason Clark – South Dakota State University

Activities:

Conducted research regarding nitrification inhibitors and slow-release fertilizers on 5 farmer cooperator fields and 2 university research farms.

Outputs:

Twenty-one presentations were given regarding soil fertility (in-person, radio, and magazine),

Impact Statements:

Nitrification inhibitors worked best on sandy soils to increase corn yield. On medium and fine-textured fields, the effects of nitrification inhibitors were neutral.

Jim Camberato – Purdue University

Most questions of me from farmers and their advisors this past year were related to substituting biologicals and biostimulants (non-traditional products) for fertilizer to save money or increase crop yield. Products that claim endophytic nitrogen fixation were the topic of greatest interest. When available I utilized published and unpublished data from my own research and that of colleagues across the Corn Belt, usually members of this committee, to advise them. When data from unbiased sources are unavailable, I do my best to explain the potential benefits and detriments of what they are considering so that they can make a more informed decision than before our conversation.

Kelly Nelson – University of Missouri

Impact Statements:

Can Soil Health Measurements Help with Soil Fertility Recommendations?  Integrating soil health (SH) biological properties with soil fertility (SF) evaluations offers a unique opportunity to potentially refine fertilizer recommendations. The objectives of this research included: (a) evaluating the current University of Missouri P and K fertilizer recommendations for corn and (b) assessing whether SH biological indicators are effective predictors of yield response to P and K fertilization.  Results showed that corn grain yield increased with P and K fertilization at 42 and 34% of sites below recommended soil test levels. Importantly, integrating soil health with soil fertility tests did not improve fertilizer recommendation accuracy. We concluded that current soil test P and K methods remain the most effective indicators of fertilizer requirements.

Improving Corn Nitrogen Fertilizer Management.  Applying nitrogen (N) fertilizer at a rate sufficient for crop N needs, but not more, can improve farmers’ profits and help reduce loss of N off agricultural fields. However, it is difficult to know the right N rate for any year or field because of weather and soil variation. Research conducted evaluated different ways to improve tools for making N fertilizer recommendations by exploring numerous soil and weather properties within the framework of USDA’s soil hydrologic classifications. Generally, soil organic matter, clay content, and growing-season rainfall evenness were most important for better predicting economically optimal N rates for corn in the U.S. Midwest—especially for fields that needed less than 100 lbs N fertilizer/acre. The result of this research is the development of technologies and tools that include site-specific plant, soil, and weather information for improved N fertilization decisions for corn crop N needs.

Corn Nitrogen Use Efficiency is Very Low Near-Optimal Yield.  For corn, nitrogen (N) fertilizer use is often summarized from field to global scales using average N use efficiency (NUE). But expressing NUE as averages is misleading because grain increase to added N diminishes near optimal yield. This research used datasets of corn grain yield response to N fertilizer to create and interpret “incremental NUE,” or the change in NUE with a change in N fertilization. We found that for those last units of N applied to reach the economic optimal N rate, NUE for N removed with the grain is only about 6%. Results also showed incremental NUE was higher for medium-textured soils than fine-textured soils, attributable to fine-textured soils being more predisposed to denitrification and/or lower mineralization. The analysis also showed how conditions with too much rainfall and/or uneven rainfall produced low incremental NUE. Producers realize this from experience, and it is this uncertain weather that likely drives insurance fertilizer additions. This research creates unique perspectives and ideas for how to improve N fertilizer management tools, educational programs, and public policies and regulations.

Kurt Steinke – Michigan State University

General Comments:

Michigan growers across both field crops and specialty crops have been presented with many marketing materials regarding several categories of biological products with special focus on free-living N-fixing organisms. MSU participated in a multi-state NCERA-103 trial looking at Pivot-Bio, Utrisha, and Envita. Results have been shared with NDSU who will compile reports across states for upcoming research publication.

Activities:

Other biological research involving biologicals impregnated on fertilizer and seed treatments was conducted. Interest continues regarding the use of micronutrients and foliar pathogen activity on sugarbeet, with results soon to be published. Low pH starter fertilizer solutions and alternative low solubility P fertilizers, both to enhance P availability, were completed across the state. The impacts of soil fertility programs on soybean N fixation and nodulation and indirectly biological health continue with forthcoming publication. The influence of soil fertility and fungicide interactions across cropping systems continues in corn and wheat.

Impact Statements:

Unbiased, science-based research and extension information that promotes crop production and efficiency through university evaluations of a multitude of products and nutrient management strategies generates needed data for grower on-farm decision-making. Growers learn from university scientists and data, and in turn, university scientists learn the grower’s perspective, viewpoint, or strategy towards a specific product or amendment. 

Bijesh Maharjan – University of Nebraska-Lincoln

General Comments:

Like anywhere else, there is a general push on biologicals. More questions on sulfur, micronutrients, and nitrogen stabilizers.

Accomplishments:

Nebraska has an on-farm research program that had several on-farm trials on various products this year. The final report is being drafted and is planned to be submitted to the Compendium.

There were a few plot-scale field evaluations of a number of biological products from Mosaic, AquaYield, and Nutrien.

Impact Statements:

University evaluation of biological products is generated much-need research-based data to inform growers in their decisions pertaining to non-traditional products. Particularly, on-farm trials on non-traditional products involve growers directly and, therefore, provide them with first-hand knowledge of products.

Mark Licht – Iowa State University

Non-traditional products continue to be of interest to Iowa farmers and are becoming more available. In 2022, I had two trials, investigating the use of bacteria to enhance N mineralization and N uptake (both were non-commercial products). We did not find these products to have consistent responses. We had one trial with a poultry hydrolysis product that was high in amino acids. Again, we did not find consistent responses. And we participated in a national collaborative project that evaluated nine microbial soybean seed treatments (data analysis not complete yet). There also is continued interest on the use of N and S for soybean production; in 2022, I had two trials (2 locations) with ammonium sulfate, urea, and/or gypsum. One trial was designed to determine if N and S applications would impede or enhance N fixation. The other trial is designed to determine if S applications (timing and rate) are beneficial for soybean production.

Matt Ruark – University of Wisconsin-Madison

Dr. Shawn Conley conducted research on biological seed treatments in soybean. The report can be found here: https://coolbean.info/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/12/2022_BST_Advisor_Final.pdf

The NCERA-103 publication ‘Nitrogen Extenders and Additives’ in 2017 was reviewed and republished with a 2022 date. All state representatives collaborated in this publication. There are numerous publications across the participating states listed below. Some of them are colloborative projects among two or more participating states.

Michigan

A joint Indiana (Purdue) and Michigan (Michigan State University) sulfur publication on “Sulfur deficiency in corn, soybean, wheat, and alfalfa was released and can be found at: https://www.canr.msu.edu/soilfertility/Files/Bulletins/Sulfur%20Deficiency%20in%20Corn,%20Soybean,%20Wheat,%20and%20Alfalfa.pdf

A complete production guide for soft winter wheat including nutrient management strategies “Michigan Wheat 101” can be found at: https://www.canr.msu.edu/soilfertility/Files/Bulletins/Wheat-101%20MSU%202021.pdf

Metiva, M., E. Bunting, K. Steinke, and Z. Hayden. Topdress strategies and remote sensing for nitrogen management in processing carrots. Agron. J. (Accepted Oct. 2022). https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21257

Purucker, S., and K. Steinke. Sugarbeet response to plant population, nitrogen rate, row spacing, and starter fertilizer strategies. J. of Sugarbeet Res. (Accepted Aug. 2022). DOI: 10.5274/jsbr.59.1.23

Breunig, M., M. Nagelkirk, A. Byrne, J. Wilbur, K. Steinke, and M. Chilvers. 2022. Meta-analysis of yield response to applications of fungicides made at different crop growth stages in Michigan winter wheat. Plant Health Prog. 23:300-307. doi.org/10.1094/PHP-09-21-0118-RS.

Rutan, J., N. Rosenzweig, and K. Steinke. 2022. Soil bacterical community composition following cover crops and corn nitrogen management. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 86:51-64. doi: 10.1002/saj2.20336.

Minnesota

Spring urea causing sugar beet stand loss: What you need to know (https://blog-crop-news.extension.umn.edu/2021/02/spring-urea-causing-sugar-beet-stand.html)

University of MN Nutrient Management Podcast: Fall fertilizer outlook: What to know about prices, inhibitors, biologicals & more (https://blog-crop-news.extension.umn.edu/2022/07/annual-fall-fertilizer-outlook.html)

University of MN Nutrient Management Podcast: What's new on the topic of biostimulants? (https://blog-crop-news.extension.umn.edu/2022/12/whats-new-on-topic-of-biostimulants.html

Ohio

Fleuridor, L., Fulford, A., Lindsey, L.E., Lentz  E., Watters, H., Dorrance, A., Minyo, R.,  Richer, E., Chaganti, V., Kumaran, S.,  & Culman, S.W. 2022. Ohio Grain Crop Response to Sulfur Fertilization. Agronomy Journal (In Review)

Kentucky

Ritchey, E.L., C.D. Teutsch, J.H. Grove, and J.M. McGrath. 2022. Calcium or Lime? Which Raises Soil pH?. University of Kentucky Corn and Soybean Newsletter Issue 4 Volume 2:4-6.

Ritchey, E.L. C.D. Teutsch, and J.H. Grove. 2022. Calcium or Lime? Which Raises Soil pH? A Follow Up. University of Kentucky Corn and Soybean Newsletter Issue 4 Volume 10:1-3. 

Illinois

Nafziger, E, J Sawyer, C Laboski, & D Franzen (2022) The MRTN approach to making nitrogen recommendations: background and implementation. Crops & Soils 55 (2):4-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/crso.20180

Missouri

Bean, G. M., Ransom, C. J., Kitchen, N. R., Scharf, P. C., Veum, K. S., Camberato, J. J., Ferguson, R. B., Fernandez, F. G., Franzen, D. W., Laboski, C. A. M., Nafziger, E. D., Sawyer, J. E., & Nielsen, R. L. 2021. Soil hydrologic grouping guide which soil and weather properties best estimate corn nitrogen need. Agronomy Journal. 113: 5541– 5555. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20888  

Belknap, R.A., K.A. Nelson, and G. Singh 2022.  Long-term reduced tillage and no-till cropping systems affect claypan soil properties and soybean cyst nematode. Agron. J. 114:2947-2955. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21140.

Dhakal, D., Z.L. Erwin, and K.A. Nelson. 2022. Grazing cover crops in a no-till corn and soybean rotation. Agron. J. 114:1255-1268. doi: 10.1002/agj2.20999.

Li, D., Miao, Y., Ransom, C.J., Bean, G.M., Kitchen, N.R., Fernandez, F.G., Sawyer, J.E., Camberato, J.J., Carter, P., Ferguson, R.B., Franzen, D.W., Laboski, C.A., Nafziger, E.D., Shanahan, J. 2022. Corn nitrogen nutrition index prediction improved by integrating genetic, environmental, and management factors with active canopy sensing using machine learning. Remote Sensing. 14(2):394. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14020394

Kitchen, N.R., Ransom, C.J., Schepers, J.S., Hatfield, J.L., Massey, R., & Drummond, S.T. 2022. A new perspective when examining maize fertilizer nitrogen use efficiency, incrementally. PLoS ONE 17(5): e0267215.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267215  

Nelson, K.A., R.A. Belknap, D. Brake, and G. Singh.  2022.  Broadcast overseed timing of ryegrass and cereal rye in soybean affects rotational crops in upstate Missouri. Crop, Forage, & Turfgrass Manage. 8, e20184. https://doi.org10.1002/cft2.20184.

Ransom, C.J., Clark, J., Bean, G.M., Bandura, C., Schafer, M., Kitchen, N.R., Camberato, J.J., Ferguson, R.B., Fernandez, F.G., Franzen, D.W. 2021. Data from a public–industry partnership for enhancing corn nitrogen research. Agronomy Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20812  

Svedin, J., Kitchen, N. R., Ransom, C. J., Veum, K. S., & Myers, R. L. 2022. A tale of two fields: Management legacy, soil health, and productivity. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 7, e20090. https://doi.org/10.1002/ael2.20090

Svedin, J. D., Kitchen, N. R, Ransom, C. J., Veum, K. S., & Anderson, S. H. 2022. Can soil biology tests improve phosphorus and potassium corn fertilizer recommendations? Agronomy Journal, 114, 3457– 3472. https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21180