scholarly journals Hybrid Selection and Agronomic Management to Lessen the Continuous Corn Yield Penalty

Agronomy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Vogel ◽  
Frederick Below
Keyword(s):  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Nitrogen Availability ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Intensive Management ◽  
Continuous Corn ◽  
Agronomic Management ◽  
Hybrid Selection ◽  
Yield Penalty

Yield reductions occur when corn (Zea mays L.) is continuously grown compared to when it is rotated with soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]; primarily due to soil nitrogen availability, corn residue accumulation, and the weather. This study was conducted to determine if a combination of agronomic practices could help overcome these causative factors of the continuous corn yield penalty (CCYP) to obtain increased corn yields. Field experiments conducted during 2014 and 2015 at Champaign, IL, U.S.A. assessed the yield penalty associated with continuous corn verses long-term corn following soybean. Agronomic management was assessed at a standard level receiving only a base rate of nitrogen fertilizer, and compared to an intensive level, which consisted of additional N, P, K, S, Zn, and B fertility at planting, sidedressed nitrogen fertilizer, and a foliar fungicide application. Two levels of plant population (79,000 verses 111,000 plants ha−1) and eight different commercially-available hybrids were evaluated each year. Across all treatments, the CCYP was 1.53 and 2.72 Mg ha−1 in 2014 and 2015, respectively. Intensive agronomic management improved grain yield across rotations (2.17 Mg ha−1 in 2014 and 2.28 Mg ha−1 in 2015), and there was a 40 to 60% greater yield response to intensive management in continuous corn verses the corn-soybean rotation, suggesting intensified management as a method to mitigate the CCYP. With select hybrids, intensive management reduced the CCYP by 30 to 80%. Agronomic management and hybrid selection helped alleviate the CCYP demonstrating continuous corn can be managed for better productivity.

scholarly journals Residue and Agronomic Management to Reduce the Continuous Corn Yield Penalty

Agronomy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 567
Author(s):  
Vogel ◽  
Below
Keyword(s):  
Management System ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Residue Management ◽  
Yield Potential ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Continuous Corn ◽  
Standard Management ◽  
Yield Penalty

Accelerated residue degradation and nutrient cycling will be necessary to maximize yield potential in corn (Zea mays L.) grown continuously and in other high-volume residue situations. This study aimed to test if residue management and agronomic inputs could lessen the continuous corn yield penalty (CCYP) compared to a corn following soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] rotation. Field experiments conducted during 2017 and 2018 at Champaign, IL, USA compared plots of 15th year continuous corn to long-term corn-soybean rotation plots. The previous year’s corn crop residue was either downsized (chopped) or harvested with standard knife rollers, with further chemical management of either a biocatalyst or ammonium sulfate, or it was left untreated. A standard management system of 79,000 plants ha−1 and a base rate of nitrogen fertilizer was compared to an intensive management system of 111,000 plants ha−1 with additional fertilizer and a foliar fungicide. Although continuous corn cropping stress was not detected until R2 (kernel blister stage), the CCYP was 1.30 Mg ha−1. Sizing residue enhanced overwinter residue decomposition and increased yield by 0.31 Mg ha−1 regardless of rotation and by 0.53 Mg ha−1 in continuous corn. Intensive inputs in combination with residue sizing increased grain yield of continuous corn by 1.15 Mg ha−1 over standard-management rotated yields. Therefore, combining mechanical and agronomic managements can reduce corn residue and the CCYP for more sustainable crop production.

Corn Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer Timing and Deficiency Level

2002 ◽  
Vol 94 (3) ◽  
pp. 435-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Scharf ◽  
William J. Wiebold ◽  
John A. Lory
Keyword(s):  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Corn Yield

scholarly journals Variability in Corn Yield Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer in Eastern Canada

2017 ◽  
Vol 109 (5) ◽  
pp. 2231-2242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucie A. Kablan ◽  
Valérie Chabot ◽  
Alexandre Mailloux ◽  
Marie-Ève Bouchard ◽  
Daniel Fontaine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Corn Yield ◽  
Eastern Canada

Nitrogen requirements of sugar beet in relation to harvesting date

1976 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. R. J. Holmes ◽  
J. R. Devine ◽  
F. W. Dunnett
Keyword(s):  
Sugar Beet ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Sugar Content ◽  
Sugar Yield ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Nitrogen Rate ◽  
Nitrogen Response ◽  
Oolitic Limestone ◽  
Early Harvest

SummarySeven field experiments were made on the effect of two harvesting dates on the nitrogen requirements of sugar beet. All were on Rauceby series soils overlying oolitic limestone in Lincolnshire.Nitrogen fertilizer increased sugar yield in all experiments, and yield was considerably higher at the mid-December harvest than in early October. On average, the sugar-yield response to nitrogen was greater at the late harvest, and the requirement for nitrogen was about 45 kg/ha higher then than at the early harvest. Sugar content was depressed less at the late harvest than at the early by increasing nitrogen rate.These results suggest that farmers should apply more nitrogen to fields that they plan to harvest late than to early-harvested fields; they also have implications for the conduct and interpretation of nitrogen response experiments on sugar beet.

Nitrogen fertilizer and wheat in a semi-arid environment. 4. Empirical yield response models and economic factors

1968 ◽  
Vol 8 (35) ◽  
pp. 736 ◽  
Author(s):  
JS Russell
Keyword(s):  
Grain Yield ◽  
Nitrogen Fertilizer ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
Response Surfaces ◽  
Maximum Temperature ◽  
Yield Response ◽  
Nitrate Content ◽  
Economic Factors ◽  
Late Application ◽  
Applied Nitrogen

The difficulties in predicting grain yield response to applied nitrogen under conditions of low and variable rainfall are discussed. Three models of grain yield response to applied nitrogen fertilizer for each of two strategies are proposed, based on data from field experiments carried out in the wheat growing areas of South Australia. In the first strategy (nitrogen applied at sowing) the parameters are May-August rainfall, October mean maximum temperature and one of three alternative site criteria, initial soil nitrate content (0-6 inches sampled shortly before sowing), 15-atmospheres soil moisture percentage (0-6 inches), or estimated nitrogen status. In the second strategy (nitrogen applied in late winter) the parameters are similar, except that May-July rainfall replaced May-August rainfall and a statistical relationship between yield response due to late application as compared with application at sowing was used. The response surfaces were examined using a calculated most profitable rate of application with a range of grain : fertilizer price ratios from 2 to 8. These calculations emphasize the importance of economic factors in affecting fertilizer use in areas where responses are small and variable. The limitations of the models and problems associated with the use of predicted climatic criteria are discussed. There is a need for further studies to iteratively test and modify these empirical models and ultimately to develop mechanistic models. Further study is also suggested on field aspects of late application and the possible role of both plant analysis and the single ion nitrate electrode for site characterization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document