Performing a Corn Stalk Nitrate Test

Q. What is the corn stalk nitrate test?
The corn stalk nitrate test (CSNT) is conducted late in the season and can be a reliable end-of-season indicator of crop nitrogen (N) status. The test reflects N availability during the growing season and provides a tool to help growers determine if their N management practices were adequate. The CSNT provides an assessment of whether the crop had the right amount of N, too much N, or was N limited.

Q. When should you collect samples for the CSNT?
Sampling can be done anytime between ¼ milk line up to about 3 weeks after black layer formation, before grain harvest. If used for silage corn, sample at the time of harvest or within 24 hours after harvest, as long as there is no rainfall between the time of harvest and sampling. The stubble height needs to be at 14-inch (35.5 cm) for an accurate test.

Q. How should CSNT samples be taken?
• Starting at least 6 inches up to 14 inches (15 cm to 35.5 cm) above the soil line, cut an 8-inch (20 cm) long section of corn stalks, removing any leaf sheaths. Pruning shears can work well for taking samples.
• A sample should include 15 stalk sections from randomly selected representative plants throughout the field. Selected plants should be healthy, and stalks severely damaged by insects or disease should not be used. The sample should not represent more than 20 acres (8 hectares).
• If soil characteristics or past management practices vary across the field, separate samples should be collected for each area.

Q. How do you prepare the samples and what should you do with them?
• Cut stalk sections into 1- to 2-inch (2.5 to 5 cm) long segments or split the stalks to facilitate drying.
• Samples should be placed in paper bags (not plastic) and sent to a laboratory for analysis.
• Samples should be refrigerated (not frozen) if they are to be stored for more than one day before shipping.
• Most soil-testing laboratories will conduct the CSNT. Contact your laboratory to confirm that they will run the test and to find out about any procedures or paperwork they require.

Q. What will the lab results tell you?
The CSNT is based on the concentration of nitrate-N in the lower corn stalk when the plant is near or at maturity. Lab results will indicate the following:

• A low nitrate level reading indicates that not enough N was available for the plant to reach full yield potential.
• An optimal nitrate level reading indicates that the N was adequate for optimum economic yields in the field or sample area.
• An excessive nitrate level reading indicates that excess N was applied that could reduce profitability and result in N losses to the environment.

Q. What are the limitations of the CSNT?
The CSNT can be greatly influenced by weather, soil productivity, and management practices. The following factors can complicate interpretation of the test results:
• The test identifies optimal and excessive nitrate levels more accurately on medium yield potential soils compared to high yield potential soils.
• The test can incorrectly indicate excessive nitrate levels on fields with manure applications within the past two years and/or alfalfa in the rotation, particularly on high yield potential soils. The test should not be used for first-year corn following sod.
• Test levels can be high in extremely dry years and low in extremely wet years. Drought conditions can result in elevated nitrate levels in the lower stalk.

The test does not provide an indication of the amount of N that was over- or undersupplied. Test result readings of high concentrations (>2000 ppm nitrate) are more definitive and provide greater confidence that there is excess N available to the plant. Less confidence can be placed on low nitrate level interpretations or in specific N-rate adjustments.

Q. What can you learn and how can you use information from the CSNT?
The CSNT can be used as a long-term approach to evaluate your N management and to help guide future N applications toward economically optimal rates. The test will tell how you did, not what you need to do. The test will not tell you what management practices to change but instead provides information about how your N management is performing. Decisions can be made to adjust the fertility program for subsequent years based on the results of the CSNT.

CSNT results are most useful when evaluated over a period of several years on the same field. Basing future N rate decisions solely on one year’s CSNT values could result in poor management decisions. CSNT data collected over several years coupled with fertilizer and manure application history, growing season weather conditions, soil type and productivity, and general crop management history information can be used to determine if N fertilizer rates should be reduced to improve profitability.

The test is best suited to understanding when N applications are greater than the crop need. If the CSNT shows high nitrate levels for several seasons, then it becomes evident that N applications are too high and should be adjusted to more moderate rates. Continued monitoring of CSNT results will show if stalk nitrate levels decrease into the optimal range after adjusting N-application rates. Using the CSNT can result in greater N use efficiency and thus profitability, and helps to reduce the potential for negative environmental impacts from N that is not being utilized by the crop.

Article Link

Sources
Kaiser, D. and Fernandez, F. 2020. How to take and interpret the basal stalk nitrate test. University of Minnesota. https://blog-crop-news.extension.umn. edu/2020/09/how-to-take-and-interpret-basal-stalk. html
Laboski, C. 2016. Considerations when using the end-of-season corn stalk nitrate test. University of Wisconsin Integrated Pest and Crop Management. https://ipcm.wisc.edu/blog/2016/09/considerations-when-using-the-end-of-season-corn-stalk-nitrate-test/
Milander, J., Iqbal, J., Mamo, M., and Timmerman, A. 2022.-Using a Cornstalk Nitrate Test to Evaluate Nitrogen Management Decisions. University of Nebraska. https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2022/using-cornstalk-nitrate-test-evaluate-nitrogen-management-decisions
Zebarth, B.J., Drury, C.F., Tremblay, N., and Cambouris, A.N. 2009. Opportunities for improved fertilizer nitrogen management in production of arable crops in eastern Canada: A review. Canadian Journal of Soil Science. 89: 113-132. https://doi.org/10.4141/CJSS07102
Legal Statements
ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Performance may vary, from location to location and from year to year, as local growing, soil and weather conditions may vary. Growers should evaluate data from multiple locations and years whenever possible and should consider the impacts of these conditions on the grower’s fields. Bayer and Bayer Cross are registered trademarks of Bayer Group. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. ©2023 Bayer Group. All rights reserved. 1213_134529

Prep for Fall Nitrogen Applications

*This content was previously published by Corteva Agriscience.

Anhydrous Application Prep

First, Andrew Luzum, Nurtient Maximizer Strategic Account Manager, Corteva Agriscience, recommends looking over every piece of equipment very carefully. Look for signs of wear and tear and replace anything that looks broken or worn. Pay special attention to three smaller components — gaskets, hoses and valves — as these can wear out easily. “Sunlight, kinks and cuts can shorten hose life and create soft spots that could break under pressure and put your safety at risk during application,” Luzum says. “Anhydrous ammonia can be a dangerous product when not handled correctly. By taking preventative measures, you can avoid safety issues and save time at application.” He recommends making sure you have all necessary personal protective equipment (PPE) in place before anhydrous applications so that you’re ready for applications when conditions are right. Additionally, Luzum advises calibrating your anhydrous application equipment. “I always recommend calibration with the first tank of the year. Anhydrous ammonia is a fairly costly input in today’s market; the last thing we want to do is unintentionally misapply.”

Liquid Manure Application Prep

When it comes to liquid manure applications — as with anhydrous ammonia — Luzum recommends taking out your application equipment, looking it over for any worn or broken parts, and calibrating it for proper application rates. Making these repairs now will save you headaches when it’s time to apply.

Wait For The Right Time

Once you have your nitrogen application equipment prepped, it’s just a matter of waiting until the soil is fit to apply.

“Application of liquid manure and anhydrous ammonia should wait until soil temperatures are 50° F and trending downward,” Luzum says. “That usually occurs in late October into early November. Warmer soils will drive nitrogen conversion and increase the risk of nitrogen loss. You also want to apply before the ground freezes so the nitrogen can get into the soil.”

Take steps to prepare ahead, wait for the right time to apply and plan to protect your nitrogen with a proven stabilizer to get the best possible return on your investment — and help keep excess nitrogen out of the environment.

The Value Of Nitrogen Stabilizers

Nitrogen is one of the most expensive inputs each year, regardless of what is going on in the fertilizer market. Nitrogen stabilizers can help protect your customers’ fertilizer investment.

Anhydrous applications can be protected with N-Serve® nitrogen stabilizer. N-Serve is powered by Optinyte® technology, which is shown to reduce nitrogen leaching and denitrification — and increase yield potential by an average of 7% when used with fall applications.1

Liquid manure can be protected with a proven nitrogen stabilizer this fall too. Instinct NXTGEN® nitrogen stabilizer is also powered by Optinyte technology and brings the same powerful protection to liquid manure that N-Serve brings to anhydrous ammonia.

Article Link

1 Wolt, J.D. 2004. A meta-evaluation of nitrapyrin agronomic and environmental effectiveness with emphasis on corn production in the Midwest. Numbers cited are average results comparing nitrogen applications applied with Optinyte® technology vs. non-stabilized applications. Results may vary.
®™Trademarks of Corteva Agriscience and its affiliated companies. Do not fall-apply anhydrous ammonia south of Highway 16 in the state of Illinois. Instinct NXTGEN® is not registered for sale or use in all states. Optinyte® is a registered active ingredient. Contact your state pesticide regulatory agency to determine if a product is registered for sale or use in your state. Always read and follow label directions. ©2024 Corteva. 022661 LC (08/24)

Tips for Summer Corn Scouting

*This content was previously published by Corteva Agriscience.

No matter when your customers were able to get into the field for planting this spring, regular scouting can help set the stage for a successful corn yield come harvest.

Getting into the field on a regular basis after planting will improve the timing on important crop protection decisions. Is there a new flush of weeds that needs to be managed? Will postemergence herbicides need to be applied sooner than anticipated? Are there any nutrient deficiencies? Are there any new insect or disease pressures? All these questions can be answered and addressed with regular scouting.

Scouting should occur multiple times throughout the growing season, but there are times when it’s more critical, says Joe Bolte, Market Development Specialist, Corteva Agriscience.

 

Pests to watch this year

With lengthy emergence periods, waterhemp and Palmer amaranth present an annual challenge — calling for a herbicide program approach that includes multiple modes of action for effective control. Bolte says, “Depending on your geography and planting date, waterhemp or Palmer amaranth may need to be controlled in every herbicide pass — not just the postemergence application.”

On the flip side, your customers in areas with heavy rainfall may not have had a chance to get their preemergence herbicides down in time. If this is the case, they may consider reallocating those preemergence herbicide dollars to create a more powerful postemergence pass.

Bolte also says that tar spot should be on everyone’s radar. Scouting the corn plant’s canopy will help determine if a fungicide application is warranted.

 

Scouting resources available

There are several free resources available to help customers with in-field corn scouting. “Many universities will put together scouting guides or calendars for common pests. Use these to determine when weeds, disease and insects are most likely to emerge in your geography,” Bolte says.

You also can contact your local Corteva Agriscience representative and download our Corn & Soybean Disease ID Guide and Corn Weed Scouting Checklist for more detailed information.

 

Key corn scouting timing

 


Corn & Soybean Disease ID Guide

 


Corn Weed Scouting Checklist

Article Link

™ ® Trademarks of Corteva Agriscience and its affiliated companies.
© 2024 Corteva. Groundwork – June 2024

Do I Need To Apply An Insecticide To Manage Early-Season Corn Insects?

Some insects that injure corn seed or seedlings can be difficult to manage due to the absence of developed sampling programs and/or rescue treatments to respond to economic damage. And often is the case with these pests, plant injury is the only clue of the presence of the pest. Acceleron® Seed Applied Solutions offers an advanced portfolio of products for corn that protect against early-season insects that feed directly on the seed or seedling, such as seed corn maggot, seed corn beetle, and southern corn rootworm. Including insecticide protection is particularly beneficial to control these insects as they do not currently have sampling programs or rescue treatments available.

What insect pests can attack corn seed in my area?
While it is difficult to predict which, if any, early-season insect pests may cause economic injury, there are some situations where the risk of injury is increased. For example, fields coming out of sod or grass-alfalfa mixtures have a higher risk of injury by white grubs, billbugs, sugarcane borer, Japanese beetle grubs, and wireworm. Fields high in organic matter (manure applied or cover cropped) and tilled close to planting have a higher risk of injury by seed corn maggot and seed corn beetle. Black cutworm moths can migrate from southern Texas and Mexico on winds associated with storms. Females seek fields with winter annual weeds to deposit eggs; therefore, fields with these weeds would be at higher risk.

While field history is not always a predictor of future insect injury, if a field or specific area on the farm has a history of economic injury by a particular pest, it should be considered in the decision-making process as risk is assessed.

Can planting timing influence the type of insect pest and the pest levels?
Yes. Planting timing can impact the insect species as well as the population density. For example, early planting may decrease the risk of injury by black cutworm, billbugs, and chinch bugs but increase the risk of injury by seed corn beetles and wireworms from delayed seedling emergence at a time when temperatures are cooler.

What other factors can contribute to higher risk of early-season injury?
Soil type and weather conditions can impact insect injury risk. Sandy or course-textured soils are associated with a higher risk of injury by lesser corn stalk borer, particularly under dry conditions and when corn is planted late. Corn produced in reduced tillage systems has a higher risk of injury by stink bug and corn flea beetle, but a lower risk from lesser corn stalk borer, seed corn beetle, and seed corn maggot.

What should I look for when scouting for some of these pests?
Often with seed or seedling insect pests, the first clue is a reduced stand or reduced seedling vigor. Black cutworms hide under clods of dirt or just beneath the soil surface, so gently looking under clods or using a hand rake to “till” the soil can help find larvae. A pocketknife can remove soil near the base of the seedling to look for injury to the stem. On very hot days, stink bugs seek cooler conditions in soil cracks and under debris, making detection difficult.

Is there a rescue treatment that can be used for early-season pests?
For some insect pests that attack the seedling, such as black cutworm, billbugs, and stink bugs, sampling programs and thresholds are available through local extension recommendations. However, there are many early-season pests that currently do not have sampling programs and treatment threshold recommendations. Table 1 provides a summary of the major early-season corn insect pests in the southern states.

Article Link

Sources:
1 Reay-Jones, F.P. 2023. Corn insect control. 2023. South Carolina Pest Management Handbook for Field Crops. Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service. https://www.clemson.edu/extension/.
2 Brown, S. 2023. Corn insect guide. The University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture.
https://guide.utcrops.com/corn/corn-insect-guide/.
3 Reisig, D. 2014. Stink bugs in corn. North Carolina State University Extension.
https://entomology.ces.ncsu.edu/2014/07/stink-bugs-in-corn/.

 

Spray Timely and Early for More Effective Weed Control

*This content was previously published by Corteva Agriscience

When looking at a weed, its overall height can be deceptively short. How is that possible? Because, to a herbicide, the weed’s height is not a linear measurement from the ground to the top of the plant. When a herbicide is fighting a weed, that fight takes into account every inch of the weed. It includes every point of growth that is on the plant, coming out of the main stem.

Corteva Agriscience Herbicide Trait Specialist Steve Snyder illustrates this in a video on application practices. (Use the QR code to check it out.)

In the video, Snyder measures off a single 8” waterhemp weed and pulls it from the ground. He then breaks off each branch growing from the main stem of the plant and lays them end to end on the ground and measures the length of all the sections of the plant as a whole. The total length comes out to 33″. Snyder explains how, to the herbicide, this is a 33″ weed, not an 8″ weed. He says that this is one reason why it is so important to apply herbicide early and in a timely manner. The herbicide has a much greater chance of being effective when the plant is 6” tall or less, because the weed has far fewer growth points than a larger, more mature weed.

Snyder’s demonstration makes a good point. Weeds that are left to grow taller than 6” make the job of the herbicide just that much tougher. Catching weeds early is an important aspect of good weed control and helps ensure the treatment is as effective as possible.

Article Link

® Trademarks of Corteva Agriscience and its affiliated companies. © 2024 Corteva.

Optimize Weed Control by Avoiding Tank-Mix Mistakes

*This content was previously published by Corteva Agriscience.

While tank-mixing can bring you and your customers improved weed control, convenience and efficiencies, each product added to the tank also increases the potential for negative interactions. Physical incompatibilities can clump or gel an entire tank, and chemical incompatibilities often can result in reduced efficacy or crop injury.

Joe Bolte, Market Development Specialist, Corteva Agriscience, says incorrect product order, moving through steps too quickly and failure to agitate the mixture are all common mistakes that lead to incompatibilities and reduced product efficacy. The good news is that each of these mistakes can be avoided.

5 ways to avoid common tank-mix mistakes

  1. Do your research. Because there are so many types of herbicide formulations, knowing when to add each product to the tank can be confusing. Make sure you’re set up for success by reading all label directions and formulation information available. Many labels will tell you about the order in which you should tank-mix with other products, the agitation requirements and any product restrictions.
  2. Perform a jar test with your proposed tank-mix. Don’t waste time and money by going straight to mixing products in the tank. “Jar tests are a great way to test compatibility issues before heading out into the field,” Bolte says.
  3. Begin with a half-full tank of water carrier. Using low water volumes and high rates of crop protection products increases risk of incompatibility.
  4. Agitate chemical containers before each use. When liquid herbicides sit for long periods of time, they begin to separate. Therefore, it is important to shake the chemical jugs before use. This will help ensure the proper ratio of actives is getting mixed into the sprayer. Also, agitate the mixture itself throughout the process to keep things from settling.
  5. Take your time. Allow time for proper agitation, time for water conditioning and time between each new product added. If ammonium sulfate (AMS) is required, make sure the water conditioner has had enough time to circulate before adding any liquid herbicides. “Since many liquid herbicides can be tied up by hard water, we want to make sure the AMS has enough time to condition the water,” Bolte explains. “Failing to condition the water can reduce herbicide performance.”

The bottom line

There are many benefits to combining crop protection products, but a successful tank-mix requires research, testing and attention to detail. Work with your Corteva Agriscience representative to find products that offer tank-mix compatibility to fit your crop protection needs.

Article Link

™ ® Trademarks of Corteva Agriscience and its affiliated companies. © 2024 Corteva.

Corn Growth Stage and Herbicide Application Postemergence

Key Points

 

Importance of Identifying the Corn Growth Stage

When selecting a POST herbicide or tank mix combination, the weed species present, weed heights, and corn growth stage should be known. Taller corn is generally more sensitive to potential herbicide injury, particularly when nozzles apply directly into the whorl of the plant. Potential injury can be reduced and weed coverage is increased by using drop nozzles in taller corn (generally 24 inches or more).

Growth stages on herbicide product labels are usually indicated as a corn leaf stage or plant height, and sometimes both are listed. The growth stage that is most restrictive should be followed when both corn leaf stage and height are listed on the label. When using a tank mixture, follow the recommendations for the most restrictive label language of the products being used in the tank mix.

 


Figure 1. Corn plants in the V3 growth stage showing 3 visible leaf collars and a plant height of 6 inches measured from the soil surface.

 

Corn leaf stage is determined by counting leaf collars after emerging from the whorl (Figure 1). Leaves that are just emerging from the whorl will not have a visible collar and are not counted. Leaf stages are designated using a “V” (vegetative) to represent each leaf during vegetative development. The first true leaf (coleoptile leaf) on corn is the short, rounded leaf near the soil surface, which is counted as V1. Each successive, visible leaf collar is counted as V2, V3, and all the way to V18, which emerges prior to tasseling. As corn plants grow, the lower leaves can die or tear away, making it difficult to accurately count the collars. Corn generally loses its coleoptile leaf by the time it reaches the V5 growth stage.
To stage older plants, dig up the plant and split the stalk down into the root ball. Find the triangular “woody” base of the stalk and locate the first internode above the base. The woody, horizontal node is the point of attachment for the fifth leaf or collar. For example, if you can count 5 visible leaf collars above this point, the corn plant is in the V10 growth stage.

Plant height is determined by measuring from the soil surface to the arch of the uppermost leaf that is more than 50% emerged (Figure 1). Plant height may not be an accurate determination of growth stage, because adverse environmental conditions can result in corn plants that are physiologically older than their height suggests.

Herbicide product labels provide directions for over-the-top broadcast and directed drop nozzle applications in corn. Labels provide a maximum corn growth stage for broadcast applications, and after which applications should not be made (Table 1). In corn with Roundup Ready® 2 Technology, a broadcast herbicide application of Roundup® brand glyphosate-only agricultural herbicides can be applied up to the V8 growth stage or 30-inch-tall corn, whichever comes first. Drop nozzles should be used for optimum spray coverage and weed control when corn is 24 to 30 inches tall. When corn is 30 to 48 inches tall, only use drop nozzles and avoid spraying into the whorls of the corn plants.

Some labels indicate the minimum corn growth stage before POST applications should be made. For example, Capreno® herbicide can be applied POST when corn reaches the V1 stage up through V7 or 20-inch-tall corn, whichever comes first. Broadcast applications of Capreno® herbicide in corn grown for seed are recommended from the V1 to V5 growth stages.

 

Table 1. Application restrictions for selected herbicides applied postemergence in corn.
Herbicide Product Maximum corn heights and/or growth stages*
Roundup® brand glyphosate-only agricultural herbicides (glyphosate-tolerant corn) V8 or 30 inches over-the-top broadcast 30-48 inches with drop nozzles
Liberty® Herbicide (glufosinate-tolerant corn) V7 or 24 inches over-the-top broadcast

24-36 inches with drop nozzles

Atrazine herbicide 12 inches
2,4-D herbicide 8 inches (use drop nozzles if over 8 inches)
Banvel®/Clarity® Herbicides (dicamba) 8 inches or 5-leaf using 16 oz/acre rate use 8 oz/acre rate at 8-36 inches
Harness® Herbicide, Harness® MAX Herbicide, Harness® Xtra Herbicide, Harness® Xtra 5.6L Herbicide, and Degree Xtra® Herbicide 11 inches
Warrant® Herbicide 30 inches
TripleFLEX® II Herbicide 11 inches
Balance® Flexx Herbicide V2
Corvus® Herbicide V2
Capreno® Herbicide V1-V7 or 20 inches (V1-V5 in seed corn)
Laudis® Herbicide Up to V8 in field or popcorn, up to V7 for sweet corn. Up to V9 in field or popcorn.
DiFlexx® Herbicide V10 or 36 inches, whichever comes first
DiFlexx® DUO Herbicide Directed application when corn is from V7-V10 stages up to 36-inches tall or up to 15 days prior to tassel. Direct sprays should be used if corn leaves prevent proper spray coverage, sensitive crops are grown nearby or when tank mixing with 2,4-D.
Accent® Herbicide V6 or 20 inches, 20-36 inches using drop nozzles
Acuron® Herbicide 12 inches
Acuron® Flexi Herbicide 30 inches
Aim® Herbicide, Shark® Herbicide V8, V8-V14 using drop nozzles
Basis® Herbicide V2 (do not apply to >6 inches tall corn)
Buctril® Herbicide 12 inches
Callisto® Herbicide V8 or 30 inches
Distinct® Herbicide 4-10 inches using 6 oz/acre rate
10-24 inches using 4 oz/acre rate
24-36 inches using 4 oz/acre rate and drop nozzles
Hornet® Herbicide V6 or 20 inches, 20-36 inches using drop nozzles
IMPACT® Herbicide Up to 45 days of corn/silage harvest
Marksman® Herbicide 8 inches
Option® Herbicide V1-V6, V6-V8 using drop nozzles
Permit® Herbicide and Yukon® Herbicide 36 inches
Python® Herbicide V6 or 20 inches
Resicore® Herbicide 11 inches
Resource® Herbicide V2-V10
Resolve® Herbicide V6 or 12 inches
Revulin® Q Herbicide V6 or 20 inches
Status® Herbicide V2 or 4 inches – V10 or 36 inches
Stinger® Herbicide 24 inches
*Where both height and leaf or growth stage are provided, use the most restrictive classification. ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW LABEL DIRECTIONS FOR THE HERBICIDE PRODUCT.

 

POST Application Considerations

Article Link

Sources
Jhala, A. 2017. Consider corn growth stage when applying postemergence herbicides. University of Nebraska. CropWatch. https://cropwatch.unl.edu.
Hager, A. 2018. Corn growth stage and postemergence herbicides. University of Illinois. Pest Management Bulletin. http://bulletin.ipm.illinois.edu.
Bell, J. 2018. Corn growth stages and post emergent herbicide timing. Texas A&M University. AgriLife. https://agrilife.org.
Lingenfelter, D. 2019. Corn herbicide application timings and restrictions. Penn State University Extension. https://extension.psu.edu.
Legal Statements
ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Performance may vary, from location to location and from year to year, as local growing, soil and environmental conditions may vary. Growers should evaluate data from multiple locations and years whenever possible and should consider the impacts of these conditions on their growing environment. The recommendations in this material are based upon trial observations and feedback received from a limited number of growers and growing environments. These recommendations should be considered as one reference point and should not be substituted for the professional opinion of agronomists, entomologists or other relevant experts evaluating specific conditions. Balance® Flexx, Corvus®, Degree Xtra®, Harness® Xtra 5.6L Herbicide and Harness® Xtra Herbicide are restricted use pesticides. Not all products are registered for use in all states and may be subject to use restrictions. The distribution, sale, or use of an unregistered pesticide is a violation of federal and/or state law and is strictly prohibited. Check with your local dealer or representative for the product registration status in your state. Tank mixtures: The applicable labeling for each product must be in the possession of the user at the time of application. Follow applicable use instructions, including application rates, precautions and restrictions of each product used in the tank mixture. Not all tank mix product formulations have been tested for compatibility or performance other than specifically listed by brand name. Always predetermine the compatibility of tank mixtures by mixing small propor-tional quantities in advance. Permit® is a registered trademark of, and used under license from, Nissan Chemical Industries, Ltd. Balance®, Bayer, Bayer Cross, Capreno®, Corvus®, Degree Xtra®, DiFlexx®, Harness®, Laudis®, Roundup and Design®, Roundup Ready 2 Technology and Design®, TripleFLEX® and Warrant® are registered trademarks of Bayer Group. Liberty® is a trademark of BASF Corporation. IMPACT® is a registered trademark of Amvac Chemical Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. For additional product information call toll-free 1-866-99-BAYER (1-866-992-2937) or visit our website at www.BayerCropScience.us. Bayer CropScience LP, 800 North Lindbergh Boulevard, St. Louis, MO 63167. ©2024 Bayer Group. All rights reserved. 1223_122240

Effects of Corn Stover Removal on Nutrient Management

KEY POINTS Harvested corn stover can be used for:

 

Introduction

The harvesting of cornstalk residue (corn stover) after grain harvest has long been used for bedding, cellulosic ethanol, and as an additional forage source for livestock, especially in years when forage production has been short due to drought. Removing stover to reduce residue levels is emerging as another reason after continuous, high yielding corn production situations. The amount of corn stover produced is greatly proportional to the amount of grain produced. For every 40 bu/acre of corn produced, one ton of residue
is produced. For example, a 240 bu/acre field produces about six tons of residue while an 80 bu/acre field produces about two tons of residue.

 


Figure 1. Corn Stover Bale. Photo courtesy of Jennifer Rees, Extension Educator, University of Nebraska.

 

The percentage of stover harvested depends on several factors including the amount of grain harvested, soil organic matter, climate, soil type, slope of the field, crop rotation, and the tillage used before the next crop in planted. When comparing stover to silage harvesting, there are several differences. Stover removal is often much less than the 90 to 95% of the above ground plant harvested for silage, depending on silage cutting height. The nutrients removed with silage harvest is well documented, while understanding the nutrients removed with harvesting stover is more complicated due to a later harvest and the amount of biomass removed. However, in many silage production operations, manure from the livestock operation can be applied to the harvested fields. This can allow for the replacement of nutrients lost from the corn crop harvested as silage. When comparing grain harvest plus some stover harvest to a silage harvest system, less biomass carbon (C) and less total plant nutrients are removed.

One of the most important issues associated with stover used for cellulosic ethanol production is that it must have low soil contamination. This is why energy companies often recommend a partial stover harvest of 20 to 60 percent.

The removal of corn stover is also being considered as a viable and sustainable management option in high yield, minimum or no till, continuous corn environments. This is a situation that is more likely to occur in irrigated western corn growing regions where high corn yields can occur year after year. These are production systems where high grain yields produce high levels of residue and are in environments where residue breakdown by biological processing is slow due to low levels of moisture in the winter and spring. This high level of residue production and build up is multiplied when there is no or very limited tillage to help with residue breakdown. The major problems caused by high levels of corn residue, still on the soil surface at planting time, are plugged planters, emergence issues due to poor soil to seed contact, and lower soil temperatures.

These situations have shown an increased yield response to stover removal but do not require all the stover to be removed every year. 50 to 60 percent stover removal each year is often enough to greatly reduce the issues at planting time while helping to prevent most wind and water erosion concerns on fields with limited slope of no more than two to three percent along with maintaining good soil tilth.

Stover Nutrient Content

When considering the impact of nutrients removed in harvested stover, it is important to know how the interactions of crop rotations, corn yield levels, and the amount of plant matter removed can impact long-term soil health. The removal of nutrients directly affects the recycling of nutrients which affects the amount of fertilizer needed to grow the following crops. Determining the amount of nutrients in corn stover is complicated because nutrients, especially potassium (K), can be leached out of plant tissue from maturity through grain harvest, and continue until the stover is harvested and removed from the field. This means that nutrient concentrations per ton of stover removed, can vary considerably depending on the rainfall amount and pattern from plant maturity through time of grain harvest and until the stover is harvested.

There are numerous resources to help estimate the nutrient removal associated with stover harvest. One good resource is the Corn Nutrient Composition at Plant Maturity by Plant Part (Table 1). These averages help a farmer understand the differences and similarities of the nutrient composition by plant part at maturity, which is important when comparing removal by harvest type. The vegetative plant parts column which includes stalks, leaves, tassels, ear shanks, and husks and when combined with the cobs estimates the pounds of nutrients removed per ton of harvested stover on a dry matter basis.

Carbon (C) will be removed with a grain harvest, but when returned to the soil is important to maintain soil organic matter. Carbon levels are nearly the same when comparing nutrients removed by each plant part on a pounds per ton /dry matter basis. However, the total amount of C removed by grain harvesting is about the same amount as the vegetative and cob amount combined (100% stover harvest). Yearly C removal levels do not include C in the root system which is not affected by any type of corn harvest.

Nitrogen (N) is the next nutrient to be considered when stover is removed. Since most of the N is removed with the grain harvest, the N in the vegetative tissue and cob need to be considered with a different approach. Much of the N is tied up in high C:N ratio tissues that need to be broken down by soil organisms before it becomes available for the next crop. In the short term, this nutrient tie-up can result in N being unavailable for the next crop, especially in high yield corn production environments. In recent years, there has been an increased focus placed on C and N removal because of their influence on the sustainability of the soil resource and water quality in all types of production systems.

The last nutrient of importance is potassium (K). Potassium can have a high nutrient per ton concentration in the vegetative tissues that are removed with a stover harvest. Potassium is soluble in mature plant parts; therefore, in environments with high rainfall after plant maturity and before the stover is harvested, much of the K can potentially leach out before stover harvest. This is why there can be a high level of variation in the amount of K removed when stover is harvested. This depends greatly on the timing and the amount of rainfall after plant maturity and should be managed accordingly.

Finally, phosphorus (P), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), sulfur (S) and micronutrients (zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), copper (Cu), boron (B), iron (Fe)) are in low levels and are often not a concern when considering a stover harvest option.

 

Table 1. Corn nutrient composition at plant maturity by plant part.
Nutrient Grain Vegetation Cob
lb/ton (DM)
C 795 840 797
N 24 12 10
P (P2O5) 12 3
K (K2O) 8 22
Ca 2 9
Mg 2 6
S 2 1
Zn 0.030 0.031
Mn 0.006 0.069
Cu 0.004 0.015
B 0.009 0.015
Fe 0.047 0.281
*Corn nutrient composition at plant maturity by plant part. Sawyer, J.W. and Mallarino, A.

 

Change in Nutrient Content with Time

Concentrations of P and K contained in corn stover decrease after maturity. Most of this decrease occurs after black layer formation through maturity.2
After grain harvest, K declines consistently in stover left in the field overwinter; however, the loss can be accelerated by rainfall anytime from maturity until the next crop is planted in the spring. Concentrations of P in the stover stay about the same in the fall and then decreases only slightly during the winter. The potential for large change in stover K concentration from harvest until early spring makes estimates of K removal with stover harvest complicated.

 

Corn N, P, and K Fertilization after Stover Harvest

Knowing how much P and K is removed with any type of corn harvest is important to help maintain desirable soil-test values and is included in P and K fertilizer recommendations for corn grain production. Although N removed with corn grain production is not used to determine the N fertilizer rate for the next crop, it is reflected in traditional Corn Belt N rate recommendations. In many western corn production areas, fertility recommendations for the following corn crop are made using a winter soil fertility test along with yield goals. Corn nutrient removal estimates are not used for the recommendations. This type of fertility recommendation reflects less nutrient recycling due to less organic matter in the soil.

Most N response trials have not included harvested stover in the trials; therefore, studies with and without stover should be reviewed to help determine the short and long-term effects of stover removal on maximum economic corn yield potential. One study from Iowa, looked at two sites where continuous corn rotations were evaluated for the long-term effect of both partial stover removal and full stover removal on the fertility recommendation needed to reach maximum economic yield in the next-year corn crop. This study determined that the economic optimum N rate for partial removal (about 30 to 40% stover harvest) was 20 lb N/acre less than when all the corn residue was returned to the soil. This same study determined that economic optimum N rate for full stover removal (about 90% stover harvest) was 40 lb N/acre less than when all the corn residue was returned to the soil.

These numbers seem backward as more N is being removed with the higher levels of stover harvest so it would be expected more applied N would be needed to grow the next corn crop. This type of response can be expected when high levels of high C:N ratio plant matter is added back to a soil. This response is caused by the inability of soil microbes (bacteria, fungi, protozoa and actinomycetes) to process (recycle) residue back into plant nutrients fast enough to meet the nutrient needs of that crop during the next growing season. Along with the fact that these same organisms are tying up soil N is why a higher N application is needed to maximize corn yield potential when stover is added back into the soil.

Another source shows estimates for the average nutrient concentrations being removed per dry ton of corn stover removal:

Nutrient amount (lbs/ton) x fertilizer price ($/lb) = Value of Nutrients in Stover ($/ton).

Using the values above, this equation can be used to calculate the value of each nutrient lost in lbs/ton of stover harvested by using the current fertilizer price for each nutrient.

 

Conclusions

When considering if harvesting corn stover is right for your production system, several factors that influence soil quality should be considered. This decision may be a field-by-field decision due to the amount of stover produced, field slope, soil type, organic matter, tillage type, and crop rotation. These factors can affect the potential for wind and water erosion along with the nutrient recycling capacity of each field. Corn stover left on the soil surface can help reduce the potential for wind and water erosion by creating a protecting layer. This is a factor that is affected by the amount and type of tillage used after harvest that can decrease the protective stover layer by incorporating it into the soil. No-till or limited till production systems allow for more stover to be harvested as it conserves the stover left on the soil surface. Cover crops can be used with a stover harvest system to help protect the soil surface

Soil organic matter (O.M.) and nutrient recycling are important soil quality considerations that need to be addressed before deciding if stover harvest is
an option for your operation. While soil O.M. is very important for productive soils, it is in a constant state of flux. By harvesting the corn stover there is less C available for the soil to convert back into new O.M. However, it appears that new O.M., that is created over time by many forms of decomposing dead plant matter is driven by living and decomposing roots.3 The C source associated with the roots, which is needed to sustain soil O.M., is not affected by stover harvest. By using minimum tillage along with limiting the amount of stover harvested to around 30 to 50% can often keep the C levels in most soil high enough to help sustain the O.M. needed for healthy soils. Higher corn grain producing fields produce higher stover amounts which can allow for higher stover removal levels while keeping enough to help protect the soil from erosion. When it comes to nutrient recycling, it is difficult for soils to recycle large amounts of high C:N ratio stover, especially in corn-on-corn rotations, rapidly enough for use by the following corn crop. This can cause a reduction in corn yield due to N that is tied up in the decomposing stover and not available for the next corn crop.

In many situations it comes down to economics, which varies annually by field depending on the many variables used to determine stover removal feasibility and value. Can the return from a stover crop create enough income to cover harvest costs, including the cost to deliver the stover to the end user, and storage along with replacing the nutrients lost by stover harvest. Most costs, which need to be included in a stover harvest economic analysis, are variable year to year, include fuel, equipment, labor, and fertilizer costs. While the value of stover used as a forage feed source, more in times of drought conditions, may be a very valuable resource for cattle feed on or off the farm.

Many corn production operations can successfully harvest stover when balanced with frequent soil testing and a good fertility program to monitor the affects to the soil over time. Like most production systems there are advantages and disadvantages for each system. Only when a farmer understands these limits and variables can an educated decision be made to decide if stover harvest is right for their operation.

 

Article Link

Source:
Rees, J., Schmer, M., and Wortmann, C. 2017. Corn stover removal: nutrient value of stover and impacts on soil properties. CROPWATCH. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources. https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2017/corn-stover-removal-nutrient-value-stover-and-impacts-soil-properties
Sawyer, J. E., and Mallarino, A. P. 2014. Nutrient considerations with corn stover harvest. PM 3052C. Iowa State University Extension and Outreach.
https://store.extension.iastate.edu/Product/Nutrient-Considerations-with-Corn-Stover-Harvest
Ertl, D. 2013. Sustainable corn stover harvest. Corn Stover research. Iowa Corn Promotion Board.
https://www.iowacorn.org/corn-production/research-and-patents/corn-stover
Legal Statements:
Performance may vary, from location to location and from year to year, as local growing, soil and environmental conditions may vary. Growers should evaluate data from multiple locations and years whenever possible and should consider the impacts of these conditions on their growing environment. The recommendations in this material are based upon trial observations and feedback received from a limited number of growers and growing environments. These recommendations should be consid-ered as one reference point and should not be substituted for the professional opinion of agronomists, entomologists or other relevant experts evaluating specific conditions. Bayer and Bayer Cross are registered trademarks of Bayer Group. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. ©2024 Bayer Group. All rights reserved. 1213_72706.

Herbicide Carryover and Crop Rotation to Corn

Herbicide Persistence

Persistence is the length of time a residual herbicide remains active in the soil. Residual herbicides can extend the duration of weed control, but persistence of the herbicide in the soil can potentially injure subsequent crops that may be sensitive to that herbicide. The major factors affecting persistence can be grouped into three categories: soil characteristics, climatic conditions, and the chemical properties of the herbicide product. Understanding how these variables interact to influence herbicide persistence can help growers to reduce the risk of potential crop injury due to herbicide carryover.

 

Factors Contributing to Herbicide Persistence and Potential Carryover

The length of time that herbicides can persist in the soil and pose potential risks of injury to rotational crops depends on a wide range of factors. Each factor or combination of factors listed below can potentially contribute to herbicide carryover.

 

Soil Characteristics

Soils that are high in organic matter (OM) and clay generally have a greater potential for herbicide persistence, or carryover, due to the high number of binding sites. Herbicides can be adsorbed (bound) to the surface of OM and clay particles, making them temporarily unavailable for plant uptake, for leaching through the soil, or for degradation. Adsorption is greatest in medium- to fine-textured soils with a high percentage (>50%) of clay particles and an OM content of 3% or higher. Soil moisture also influences adsorption. Dry soil has higher adsorption capacity compared to wet soils since water competes with the herbicide for the binding sites.

Soil pH can be a major factor affecting herbicide availability and persistence. Triazine and sulfonylurea herbicides are highly influenced by soil pH, becoming more available for plant uptake and persisting longer in soil with a pH of 7.0 or higher, due to reduced binding of the herbicide to soil particles. Imidazolinone and dinitroaniline herbicides are somewhat affected by pH and can become more persistent with a soil pH of 6.0 or lower. For other herbicide chemical families, soil pH may play a role in breakdown but is not considered to be the most important influence on persistence.

 

Table 1. Corn following soybean rotational restrictions.
Group Herbicide Site of Action Active Ingredient Planting of Field Corn (months after application)
1 Lipid Synthesis Inhibitors clethodim
fluazifop
quizalofop
1
2
4
2 ALS Inhibitors flumetsulam
thiencarbazone-methyl
imazethapyr
chloransulam
chlorimuron
0
0
8.5
9
9
3 Microtubule Inhibitors pendimethalin
trifluralin
0
12
4 Auxin Inhibitors 2, 4-D
dicamba
clopyralid
0
0
0
5 PSII Inhibitors atrazine
metribuzin
0
0
9 EPSPS Inhibitor glyphosate 0
10 GS Inhibitor glufosinate 0
14 PPO Inhibitors flumiclor0
lactofen
saflufenacil
flumioxazin
fomesafen
sulfentrazone
fluthiacet
0
0
0
.5 (14 days) to 9*
10**
4,10*
0
15 Fatty Acid Inhibitors acetochlor
metolachlor
pyroxasulfone
flufenacet
Dimethenamid-P
0
0
0
0
0
19 Auxin Transport Inhibitor diflufenzopyr 0.25 (7 days)
22 PSI Inhibitor paraquat 0
27 HPPD Inhibitors isoxaflutole
mesotrione
tembotrione
topramezone
0
0
0
0
*rate dependent, consult product label;
** consult product label for geographic restrictions

 

Climatic Conditions

Soil microbes and soil water each play a key role in breaking down herbicides. Therefore, weather is usually one of the driving components of herbicide carryover to susceptible crops, as weather can directly impact both microbial activity and soil moisture. The rate of herbicide degradation generally increases as soil moisture and temperature increase. The majority of herbicide degradation resulting from microbial activity occurs during the summer and early fall after the herbicide is applied. Microbes are most active when soil moisture is between 50% to 100% of field capacity. In low rainfall situations, the rate of herbicide degradation by soil microbes can be slow enough to allow herbicides (e.g., imidazolinone herbicides) to persist into the next season. Since microbial activity essentially ceases at soil temperatures below 40° F, any moisture received during the winter probably will not affect microbial activity. Microbes become more active as the soil warms in the spring, but this warming period may not allow enough time prior to planting to impact herbicide degradation to a large degree. Late spring or summer herbicide applications combined with dry fall weather and a cold extended winter can provide the conditions that may lead to carryover problems.

 

Herbicide Chemistry

Herbicide half-life is the time it takes for 50% of the herbicide to break down. Half-life, volatility, and several other characteristics of herbicides are influenced by their specific chemistry. Herbicide chemistry and the rate of application can impact the persistence of phytotoxic herbicide residues in the soil. Herbicide families with persistent active ingredients include triazines (atrazine), sulfonylureas (chlorimuron, chloransulam), imidazolinones (imazethapyr), dinitroanilines (trifluralin), and diphenylethers (fomesafen). Most of the herbicides that may carry over to the next season have re-cropping intervals of 9-10 months or longer
(Table 1). Of the persistent herbicides mentioned, corn is tolerant to atrazine and can be planted as a rotational crop without any concerns of injury from atrazine exposure.

 

Interactions

Soil characteristics, climatic conditions, and herbicide chemistry can also interact to directly affect herbicide persistence. Herbicide products vary in water solubility and leaching potential, two chemical traits which can interact with soil texture and rainfall to influence herbicide persistence. Additionally, the chemical volatility of several herbicide active ingredients (e.g., trifluralin, pendimethalin) can interact with sunlight exposure to influence the rate of degradation and the herbicide persistence.

 

Corn Injuries from Herbicide Carryover

n corn, injury from fomesafen carryover can cause chlorotic stripes between the leaf veins (Figure 1). Fomesafen herbicide products are used with soybean to help manage tough-to-control weeds such as waterhemp and Palmer amaranth, potentially resulting in multiple herbicide applications and late-season applications. Fomesafen is relatively persistent, and when less than average late-season rainfall is received following application, the product can carry over into the following corn crop. Dry and chilly weather during the fall and winter can reduce herbicide dissipation and contribute to increased carryover problems.

 


Figure 1. Corn injury from carryover of fomesafen. The primary symptom is striped leaves due to chlorotic or necrotic veins on the leaves.

 

The application of sulfonylurea herbicide products containing chlorimuron to soybean can also lead to potential carryover problems in corn (Figure 2). Many herbicides containing sulfonylurea chemistry are labeled for use on both corn and soybeans. Products in this family may persist in the soil, particularly if soil pH is above 7.0 and low rainfall is received after the herbicide application. Although they have the same general chemistry, different sulfonylurea herbicides are used in corn and soybeans, and injury to corn may develop in the season following sulfonylurea herbicide application to soybean fields.

Dinitroaniline herbicide products such as trifluralin function by inhibiting root and shoot growth. Injury to corn can occur due to carryover from an application made the previous season (Figure 3).

 


Figure 2. Corn injury from carryover of chlorimuron. Chlorimuron corn injury typically appears as reduced root systems, often described as “bottle-brush” roots. Roots might turn brown and grow flat or parallel to the soil surface. Early season symptoms can include purple stems and midribs, stunted internodes below the whorl, or a dead growing point. Mid– to late-season symptoms include shortened internodes, malformed leaves, poor root systems, and pinched ears. Injury from herbicides containing an imidazolinone product may exhibit similar symptoms.

 


Figure 3. Corn injury from carryover of trifluralin. Stunting and purplish discoloration may occur above ground due to pruned and clubbed seedling roots.

 

How to Minimize the Chance of Herbicide Carryover

 

Article Link

 

Sources
Curran, W.S. 1999. Persistence of herbicides in soil. Penn State Extension. https://extension.psu.edu/persistence-of-herbicides-in-soil
Manuchehri, M. and Arnall, B. 2018. How does soil pH impact herbicides? Oklahoma State
University Extension. https://extension.okstate.edu/fact-sheets/how-does-soil-ph-impact-herbicides. html#:~:text=There%20are%20many%20factors%20that%20influence%20the%20persistence,neutral%20 or%20near%20neutral%20pHs%20%286.0%20to%207.0%29.
Colquhoun, J. 2006. Herbicide persistence and carryover (A3819). University of Wisconsin Extension.
http://corn.agronomy.wisc.edu/Management/pdfs/A3819.pdf
Shaffer, G. 2019. Herbicide rotation restrictions. South Dakota State University Extension.
https://extension.sdstate.edu/sites/default/files/2019-08/P-00124.pdf
Clay, S.A. 2016. Chapter 42: Herbicide injury to corn. In Clay, D.E. et al. (Eds.) iGrow Corn: Best management practices. South Dakota State University Extension. https://extension.sdstate.edu/sites/default/files/2019-09/S-0003-42-Corn.pdf#:~:text=If%20applied%20to%20corn%20before%20emergence%2C%20corn%20 may,and%20the%20base%20will%20be%20brown%20and%20mushy.
Barber, T., Norsworthy, J., and Scott, B. 2015. Row crop plant-back intervals for common herbicides. University of Arkansas.
https://www.mssoy.org/uploads/2015/05/HERBICIDE-PLANT-BACK-RESTRICTIONS-UA-MP519.pdf
Legal Statements ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Performance may vary, from location to location and from year to year, as local growing, soil and weather condi-tions may vary. Growers should evaluate data from multiple locations and years whenever possible and should consider the impacts of these conditions on the grower’s fields. Bayer and Bayer Cross are registered trademarks of Bayer Group. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. ©2023 Bayer Group. All rights reserved. 1223_52451.