The New Agriculture Network: Farmers, researchers and educators teaming up for sustainable and organic solutions in the Great Lakes region New Ag Network home
New Ag sidebar

The New Agriculture Network's on-line newsletter with seasonal advice for field crop and vegetable growers interested in organic agriculture.

Vol. 4, No. 10 - October 10, 2007

In this issue
Agricultural research site in transition to organic prodcution: notes from the "home stretch"
Economic returns per acre from an experimental organic farm in West-Central Illinois
Perennial wheat: a new crop for Michigan?
Soil organic matter in a continuous corn cropping system
Is nitrogen a moving target? Lessons from a 15-year corn rotation trial
Michigan field research sites needed for study on biological control of soybean aphid
New soil ecologist at Michigan State
One-day training for new CSA growers offered in Michigan
Michigan organic apple field day includes integrated hog project
Tri-State Organic IP Video session 5: Introduction to Organic Markets and Certification
Reports from organic growers



Next issue will be posted in April 2008.
Click here to sign up for email notification when we post a new issue of the New Ag Network. You can read previous issues through our calendar of issues.




Agricultural research site in transition to organic production:  notes from the “home stretch”
Cathy Eastman and Edmond Zaborski (Illinois Natural History Survey); Michelle Wander, Darin Eastburn, John Masiunas, Leslie Cooperband, Deborah Cavanaugh-Grant, Dan Anderson, Carmen Ugarte, Shin-Yi Lee, and Isabel Rosa, (University of Illinois); Jonathan Lundgren (USDA Northern Grain Research Laboratory, Brookings, South Dakota)


It is a lazy, somewhat hazy morning, with the crystal blue wash of color that so delightfully signifies fall beginning to deepen in the cloudless sky.  Rain overnight has rinsed the dust from the air.  The rise and fall of cricket melodies accompany the rustling of the breeze through dry soybean leaves.  If you listen very carefully, you can hear one other sound:  the crunch, crunch, CRUNCH of millions of numbers being analyzed from the reams of data sets collected from the organic transition project. 

Three farming-system treatments with different cropping intensities (levels of soil disturbance)—representing viable options for Midwest growers to choose from in deciding how to transition their land for organic certification—were established in 2003 in research plots in Champaign:  intensive vegetable production, intermediate-intensity organic cash-grain, and low-intensity perennial pasture mix.  Within these major treatments were three sub-treatments differing in organic matter and fertility management:  cover crop inputs alone, cover crop inputs plus compost, or cover crops inputs plus manure.  These farming-system treatments were maintained as separate systems through the 2005 field season.  In 2006 (end of transition), the same crops (paste tomatoes and peppers) were planted across all farming systems treatment plots.  For the fifth (and final) growing season, soybeans were planted this summer in treatment plots across all three systems. 

Our goal has been to document changes in variables such as soil organic matter and nutrient availability, soil invertebrates, weeds, insect pests and beneficial species, and plant pathogens since initiation of transition in 2003.  Our work now is to pull it all together and to share our results with organic growers, educators and research scientists who will continue the work on organic farming systems.  The lion’s share of our results will come from the hard work of three graduate students from the University of Illinois who have labored mightily on behalf of this project:  Carmen Ugarte, Shin-Yi Lee Marzano and Isabel Rosa.  We will be hearing a great deal from them in the coming months as they complete their writing.

We can already share one major result from the project: the huge educational experience this has been for all of us.  Many of us on the project were working on organic systems for the first time.  We all have a greater appreciation for how daunting it is to tackle transition without having farmed organically before—the great learning curve about organic farming, gathering materials and equipment that can be dedicated to organic farming, etc.  Our project in particular was hampered by the loss of our farm manager in year two of the project.  We also realize how difficult it is to make plot-based research relevant to producers even when we are trying very hard to design the research to answer their questions.  There is a wealth of information available to organic growers, but there is still a shortage of research-based information.  In particular, our research experience has brought home to us the interrelatedness of individual factors within organic systems that emphasize how necessary it is to do research on organic systems, not systems that are merely pesticide-free.  We are struck by the resiliency of organic systems.  We have also gained a lasting awareness and, frankly, awe about how intimately organic growers truly KNOW their fields.  We carry this knowledge with us as we seek to prepare our results for discussion with our own organic advisory board.  Stay tuned…

Acknowledgments:
  Funding for this project is provided primarily by grant number 2003-51106-02086 from the Organic Transitions program of the USDA’s Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service. 
back to top
 
Economic returns per acre from an experimental organic farm in West-Central Illinois
Gerald Vigue, Professor Emeritus
Joel Gruver, Assistant Professor
Andrew Clayton, Research Assistant
Department of Agriculture, Western Illinois University
Richard Hirshi, Chair
Department of Economics, Brigham Young University, Idaho

Since 1990, Western Illinois University (WIU) Agriculture Department in Macomb, Illinois has been conducting research on a pesticide-free farm near WIU. In 1989, the WIU Department of Agriculture, under the direction of Dr. Gerald Carlson, identified a historically pesticide-free, limited fertilizer farm in Warren County, Illinois. operated since 1953 by Mr. and Mrs. Allison.

Since 1995, we have been renting the land to conduct field studies. Our strategies are to keep it pesticide-free, find ways to control weeds, evaluate cropping and tillage practices, and determine the economic feasibility of organic crops in west-central Illinois. We have involved local farmers and members of the agricultural industry in identifying research needs, planning, conducting and supporting this research. Organic farming is one of the fastest growing segments in agriculture, with markets for organic foods expanding. Premiums offered for organic products can increase returns per acre. However, organic methods expose growers to added risks in regard to obtaining adequate yields and meeting fertility needs. We are working to develop and demonstrate practical methods for producing marketable organic field crops. Experiments involve weed control, crop rotations, fertilizer methods and tillage. Over the years, we have kept records analyzing the economic returns per acre obtained under various organic cropping systems. This report focuses on several sample years that illustrate some basic trends that have occurred in organic production during the past 12 years in our region.

The research site is the 80-acre Allison Farm, where many aspects of pesticide-free and organic farming are being studied in short-term and long-term rotations. Economic considerations include inputs from commercial and non-commercial organic and pesticide-free sources. Field sizes for treatments used in this study ranged from 5 to 20 acres. Analyses include the cost of labor, tillage, fertilizers, and all operations used in organic systems. We have companion fields that are farmed using the same methods as the organic fields with the exception that they are fertilized with conventional fertilizers to determine if the organic fertility methods are causing yield loss. The bases of our economic analyses are the returns generated from crop sales minus the costs of production operations as determined using the Iowa Farm Custom Rate Survey. Land costs are not included in these analyses. While the conventional corn prices from several years ago that are used in these illustrations may seem ridiculously low compared to today’s ethanol stimulated corn prices, one has to consider that the present government subsidies for corn-based ethanol may not continue indefinitely.
     
We illustrate our methods from the data presented in Tables 1 and 2. These tables present the results from fields of organic corn grown on the Allison Farm in 2003 and 2004 by a neighboring grower, Mark Anderson, who was farming a portion of the Allison Farm at that time.

Table 1: 2003 Allison Farm organic corn income
Field 1 is in a corn/soybean/wheat rotation. Corn was planted in 30-inch rows and fertilized with hog manure supplemented with K2SO4 fertilizer; the soil is a poorly drained Muscatine silt loam. One economic surprise was the net income per acre that Mark Anderson made with his organic, waxy corn—Pioneer Hybrid 33J58—in 2003 (Table 1). He sold his corn for $4.71/bu ($4.65/bu + $0.06/bu LDP) and he achieved 170 bu/acre. This was a gross income, with the government payment, of $838 per acre. When one subtracts his expenses for seed, manure, grain hauling, harvest/combining and field operations, he had a net income per acre of $570/acre. Table 1 contains a right-hand column where the cost of manure application is included, which reduces the net income to $539/acre; conversely, if one considers the manure as free, i.e., just something to get rid of in a hog operation, the net income increases by $54/acre to $624/acre.

Table 1

Field

1

Management

Conv. Till

Conv. Till

Corn yield

170 bu/acre

170 bu/acre

Revenue

 

 

Crop sales

$801/acre

$801/acre

        Govt. payment

     $37/acre

     $37/acre

        Total revenue

$838/acre

$838/acre

 

 

 

Expenses

 

 

       Corn seed

$38/acre

$ 38/acre

       Hog manure

$54/acre

$54/acre

Manure application

----

$31/acre

       P, K & lime

$15/acre

      $15/acre

       Field operations

$61/acre

$61/acre

      Grain hauling

$66/acre

$66/acre

      Grain storage/drying

$34/acre

$34/acre

Total expenses

$268 /acre

$299/acre

 

 

 

Net income

$570/acre

$539/acre

Table 2 below analyzes the 2004 data expenses and incomes for organic and conventional farming based on the data from Mark Anderson’s organic corn, our pesticide-free corn from an adjacent field, and a hypothetical conventional corn yield based on the economic data provided by a neighboring conventional grower.

Field 2 is in a corn/soybean/wheat rotation. Corn was planted in 30-inch rows and fertilized with hog manure supplemented with K2SO4 fertilizer; the soil is a poorly drained Sable silty clay loam. It wasfertilized with hog manure plus K2SO4 Fertilizer.

Field 3 is pesticide-free land on the Allison Farm in a corn/soybean/wheat rotation. Corn was planted in 30-inch rows and fertilized with conventional N-P and K fertilizers. The soil is a poorly drained Sable silty clay loam.

Field hypothetical:
Economic returns are based on data from a neighboring farm using minimum tillage, herbicides and conventional fertilizers on a Sable silty clay loam soil.

Table 2

 

Organic

Pesticide-free

Conventional

 

(Hay/30-inch rowed corn)

30-inch rowed corn

30-inch rowed corn

Field

2

3

Hypothetical

Management

Conv. till

Conv. till

Min. till

Hay yield
(spring cut only)

0.6 round bales/acre

 

 

Corn yield

150 bu/acre

135 bu/acre

190 bu/acre

Price/bu w LDP

$4.79/bu

$2.12/bu

$2.12/bu

Revenue

 

 

 

        Hay sales

$21/acre

 

 

        Corn sales

$ 740/acre

$286

$403

        Govt. payment

$10 /acre

$10

$10

        Total revenue

$750/acre

$296

$413

 

 

 

 

Expenses

 

 

 

       Corn seed

$38/acre

$38/acre

$38/acre

       Hog manure

$55/acre

 

 

       N application

----

$29/acre

$36/acre

       P, K & lime

$ 15/acre

$15/acre

$15/acre

       Hay operations

$16/acre

 

 

       Field operations    

$75/acre

$75/acre

$70/acre

       Grain hauling

$24/acre

$13/acre

$19/acre

       Grain store & dry

$15/acre

$13/acre

$36/acre

Total expenses

$238 /acre

$183

$214

 

 

 

 

Net income

$512/acre

$113/acre

$199/acre

One can easily understand the reason why some growers with smaller farms are interested in organic production. The net income per acre for 150 bu/ac organic corn on the Allison Farm was $512/acre, which is significantly more than a comparable conventional farm in the region which was hypothetically yielding 190/Bu acre at that time. The big difference, of course, is the premiums offered for organic corn. In 2004, the pesticide-free and organic yields were hurt by Western corn rootworm beetles. Also, the hybrid (Pioneer 34B97) grown in Field 3 was harvested late and lodged. Much of this corn was flat on the ground, and sampling estimates revealed a 5 to 10 bu/acre loss in this pesticide-free field. Further, with no premiums added for pesticide-free production, and no real savings in production costs, there is no economic incentive to produce pesticide-free crops. In 2004 an LDP of $0.29/bu was available for corn. In 2003, corn prices were higher, and the corn LDP was only $0.06/Bu. When conventional corn prices are low, it benefits the organic farmer, because he gets a good LDP based on poor corn prices, and still receives a premium for his organic crop.

Table 3:  The estimated costs and incomes from a hypothetical conventional, non-organic, farm in west-central Illinois. Yields are based on local elevator data from farms in the region with Sable soils similar to those on the Allison Farm, and revenues are based on prices received at that time.   
   

 

Non- Organic Farming
Estimated Costs and Returns

 

1998
Year 1
Corn

1999
Year 2
Soybeans

Price $/acre

$2.58

$6.31

Yield bu/acre

136

42

Total revenue                    

$351

$265

Total costs 

$258

$164

Net income

$93

$101

Average annual income/acre: $97


Table 4:  
The costs and returns for organic production based on yields and prices obtained from crops grown on the Allison Farm in 1998-2000. Conventional tillage was plow, disc, field cultivate and plant. Fields were fertilized with hog manure.
 

 

Organic Production
Conventional Tillage

 

1998
Year 1
Corn

1999
Year 2
Soybeans

2000
Year 3
Oats

Price $/acre

$3.40

$13.07

$2.00

Yield bu/acre

107

42

109

Total revenue                    

$364

$549

$218

Total costs 

$247

$256

$139

Net income per acre

$117

$293

$79

Average annual income/acre: $163


Looking back to when we first began our studies, the outlook for organic farming in our region was not very encouraging. Economic data from the 1998-2000 growing seasons are presented in Tables 3-5. Table 3 presents the economic returns from non-organic conventional farming for our region at that time. Table 4 presents economic data for organic production using conventional tillage (i.e., plow, disc, field cultivate and plant), and Table 5 presents economic data for organic production using ridge-till.

Table 5:  The costs and returns for organic production based on yields and prices obtained from crops grown on the Allison Farm in 1998-2000. Row crops were managed by ridge-till, and all corn was fertilized with hog manure.

 

Organic Production
Ridge-Till

 

1998
Year 1
Corn

1999
Year 2
Soybeans

2000
Year 3
Oats

Price $/acre

$3.40

$13.07

$2.00

Yield bu/acre

104

43

109

Total revenue                    

$354

$562

$218

Total costs 

$232

$235

$139

Net income

$122

$327

$79

Average annual income/acre: $176

As the data from Table 3 illustrates, the estimated average annual income per acre for conventional farming in 1998-1999 for a corn/soybean rotation was only $97. The incomes for organic corn and soybeans were greater, but an organic crop rotation requires a cover crop, and the income per acre for oats was only $79. Thus, the average annual income/acre for this organic field for the three growing seasons, 1998-2000, was only $163. The premium for organic corn brought its sale price to $3.40/bu, and the organic soybeans sold for $13.07/bu in 1999, providing incomes of $117 and $293 per acre for corn and soybeans, respectively. Table 4 gives results of conventional tillage, i.e., plow, disc, field cultivate and plant. Table 5 contains the results of organic production using ridge-till. The annual income for corn was $5 more per acre for corn in ridge-till versus conventional till, but $34 more per acre for soybeans in ridge-till. It cost an average of $18 less per acre for ridge-till due to fewer trips over the field for seedbed preparation. Weed control was significantly better with ridge-till, but yield increases did not occur in ridge-till. Ridge-till is technically difficult and required 36-inch rows in our soils; consequently, we were forced to abandon it.

Table 6 contains the economic data from the 2006 growing season and presents the data from several fields on the farm. A lot has changed since the late 1990s. For one, The National Organic Program in the early 2000s established widely accepted national organic standards. Consequently, demand for organic foods has escalated dramatically. We now have organic contracts for soybeans, corn and for soft red winter wheat. Winter wheat provides the environment for establishing red clover by frost seeding in the early spring. The red clover comes on strong after wheat harvest to fix nitrogen and build soil structure. Soybean income was slightly higher in 2006 than in 1999, because the seed for planting was provided by the elevator offering the contract. In the late 1990s, organic soybeans were the only crop where we could make a good profit. With the increased offerings for organic corn and organic wheat contracts, our average annual income for 2006 was $369/acre for the Allison Farm. This represents an increase of $206/acre, or an increase of 126 percent over the income/acre we received during the 1998-2000 period.

Table 6:  The costs and returns for organic corn, soybeans and soft red winter wheat for the 2006 growing season at the Allison Farm. All three were sold for organic premiums and the fields were prepared by conventional tillage.

 

Organic
Corn

Organic
Soybeans

Organic
Soft red winter wheat

Price $/acre

4.50

13.58

6.30

Yield bu/acre

131

34

  66

Govt. payment  $/acre

  32                

32

32

Total revenue  $/acre                     

622

   494                             

448

Total costs  $/acre

218

148

   90

Net income

404

   346

358

Average annual income/acre: $369


These results are just a sampling of the data collected on field size experiments conducted on organic farming at the Allison Farm over the past 12 years. If you are interested in more details about these or other experiments conducted at the Allison Farm, contact Joel Gruver or Andrew Clayton at the Department of Agriculture, Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL, 61455.
back to top
 
Perennial wheat: a new crop for Michigan?
Brook Wilke (wilkebro@msu.edu) and Sieg Snapp (snapp@msu.edu)
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences & W.K. Kellogg Biological Station
Michigan State University


Imagine planting a field of winter wheat that wouldn’t die, but would continue to grow and produce grain every year for five years in a row! No longer are you each year prepping fields and drilling on a Sunday afternoon because it’s the only dry stretch in October. You have more time for that weekend family picnic or football game. Instead of fighting ragweed and foxtail after summer harvest, you’re finding wheat re-growth as a valuable grazing crop. This is the vision for perennial wheat.

Perennial wheat is a cross between annual wheat (Triticum aestivum) and intermediate wheatgrass (Thinopyrum intermedium). The history of perennial wheat goes back to the mid-20th century when Soviet Union scientists flirted with the idea, but all seed from this program was lost. University of California at Davis scientists worked with perennial wheat in the 1970s, but abandoned the program when yields only reached 70 percent of annual wheat yields. Recently, scientists at Washington State University and The Land Institute in Kansas have revitalized perennial wheat breeding, and have made rapid progress.

The goal for perennial wheat is to produce substantial grain quantity and quality for multiple years, not by re-seeding but by re-growing. When planted in the fall, each plant produces grain the following summer, develops a large root system and produces new leaves in the fall after grain harvest. During the second year of growth, these same plants send up new flowering shoots and produce grain again. This cycle can continue for many years assuming the plants continue to re-grow each fall and survive each winter.

In Washington, current populations of perennial wheat produce first year grain yields that average 35 percent lower than annual wheat, but vary from 5 to 70 percent lower than annual wheat. In Michigan, these populations are beginning to be evaluated, where we planted them for the first time in the fall of 2006 at the Kellogg Biological Station in southwest Michigan. They grew well and produced seed, which was harvested this summer. The big question was, “Would they regrow after being harvested?” Preliminary data suggest that first year yields in unfertilized plots were highly variable, but at a similar level to annual wheat. It is remarkable to see that the lines have started to regrow vigorously so they seem to be adapted to Michigan climate (Photo 1). We do not know how well the lines will survive a second winter, and we will be making careful measurements and observations. Farmers are welcome to visit the Kellogg Biological Station at any time; just contact us to make arrangements ahead of time. Email Brook Wilke at wilkebro@msu.edu or Sieg Snapp snapp@msu.edu for more information.

A wheat crop must meet quality standards as well as yield goals. Much progress is yet to be made in developing this crop for Upper Midwest farmers. However, the potential is tremendous: perennial plants require less maintenance time and energy, as well as protecting the soil. Reduced input costs may make up for potential loss of yield and gross profit. Perennial plants mean fewer trips across the field for tillage and planting as well as lower seed costs. Continuous growth patterns provide year-long competition against weeds. Fall re-growth has the potential to add value as a grazing crop, if winter survival after grazing turns out to be feasible. The research is in an early stage, but we are excited about the long-term potential of offering a new crop type to farmers.

Subsidies and payments for conservation practices may also add value to perennial wheat. It is produced with little to no tillage, which is the topic of several conservation programs. Perennial plants reduce erosion and sequester more carbon in the soil than annual cropping systems. Carbon sequestration may provide options for payments via developing carbon markets, designed to offset rising carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere. In addition, carbon is the main component of soil organic matter, which enhances soil cation exchange capacity as well as nutrient and water retention. Perennial plants are excellent scavengers for nutrients, allowing relatively small amounts of nitrogen to escape the soil into the atmosphere or groundwater.

Bottom-line, we know that there are many challenges to successful perennial wheat integration into cropping systems:
  • First, we know little about long-term survival and grain production. We’re currently investigating how long plants can produce grain, and how to maintain grain yields at high levels for multiple years. Perhaps a perennial legume intercrop such as alfalfa, white clover or Illinois bundleflower will help to maintain soil fertility over multiple years, which should translate into high grain yields.
  • Second, are weeds a problem in perennial wheat fields and how do we manage them?
  • Third, current populations exhibit a wide range of reproductive phenology, meaning they mature at different times. Selection is needed to narrow the range of maturation to ease the harvest process.
  • Fourth, perennial wheat does not thresh as easily as annual wheat, but we believe that selection over time can increase threshability.
  • Finally, how does the nutritional quality and usability compare to annual wheat? Can we substitute perennial wheat grain for annual wheat grain as bread flour?
Over the next few years, we hope to answer most of these questions, and to make progress toward improving perennial wheat populations for agronomic capacity and nutritional quality. Initial integration of perennial wheat into cropping systems may work best in marginal lands or on farms with livestock that can graze perennial wheat in later years when grain yields may decline.

Perennial wheat field
Perennial wheat growing in rows at the W.K. Kellogg Biological Station in Southwest Michigan are shown re-growing in September after the first year of grain harvest. Seeds were planted in the fall of 2006, grain harvested in the summer of 2007 and plants are being evaluated for second year winter survival and grain production.
back to top
 
Soil organic matter in a continuous corn cropping system
Lowell E. Gentry and Sieglinde S. Snapp
Crop & Soil Sciences and
Kellogg Biological Station


Soil organic matter (SOM) plays a critical role in fertility, water holding capacity, aggregate stability, tilth, and overall soil quality.  It has been estimated that 50 percent of the SOM of most soils was lost in the first 100 years after the agricultural conversion of prairies and savannahs. A major goal of the USDA/NRCS has been to decrease soil erosion through practices such as reduced tillage, contour farming, grassed waterways, and buffer strips. These techniques have been instrumental in saving billions of tons of topsoil and have helped conserve SOM levels across the U.S., especially on vulnerable lands.

Recently, the predominant cropping system in the Midwest (a corn-soybean rotation) has been under scrutiny in regard to the potential mining of SOM and has been questioned for its overall sustainability. The argument has been made that continuous corn, because of its large volume of stover return, can build SOM. As corn acres increase in response to market demands, the question arises “How will this influence SOM?"

Surprisingly, results from a long term rotation experiment initiated in 1993 at the Kellogg Biological Station (KBS) indicate that SOM has not increased under a continuous corn cropping system during the past 15 years, but rather has increased for a four year rotation of corn-corn-soybean-wheat (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Soil organic matter levels in a continuous corn cropping system versus a 4 yr
rotation during the past 15 years.

Soil organic matter

In 1993, this sandy loam soil had 1.5% organic matter. After 15 years, SOM has remained the same for the continuous corn cropping system; however, there is a significant increase in SOM due to crop rotation; and a trend for increased SOM for soil receiving cover crop inputs.

Here we explore several possible explanations for this observation:
A) Microorganisms in low organic matter soils (1.5% SOM) may be carbon limited and have a greater propensity to degrade corn residues;
B) Diversity and quality of biomass inputs may contribute to carbon sequestration;
C) Greater living cover exists in the rotation (especially when using cover crops) compared with continuous corn (see Figure 2); and
D) Corn grown in northern latitudes become source limited and partition more dry matter to grain.

Figure 2. Months of continuous living cover during a four year period.
Moths of living cover

In regard to explanation C, a corn crop only has living roots in the soil for about 5 months per year, or 20 months over a 4 year period.  A corn-corn-soybean-wheat rotation has living cover for about 33 months, and adding cover crops such as interseeding crimson clover into corn and frost-seeding red clover into wheat provides living roots for a total of 40 months. We believe that continuous living cover likely plays a role in building SOM over time.

In regard to explanation D, source limitations (sunlight) lead to a physiological response of corn where more kernels are set than can be filled, and in an attempt to fill those kernels the plant is forced to cannabolize dry matter from the leaves and stalks to make grain. In 2006, the continuous corn plots at KBS produced 159 bu/A of corn with 135 lbs of N/A. The harvest index of this crop, which is the ratio of the amount of grain divided by the entire above ground plant biomass, was 59% (many working agricultural models use a value of 50% for harvest index). A high harvest index directly reflects the increased partitioning of dry matter from the leaves and stalks to the grain. Therefore due to light limitations in northern states, continuous corn cropping systems return less stover than is generally expected and this may be part of the reason why SOM has not increased in the continuous corn plots over the past 15 years.

Today, with the high price of organic corn, there may be some temptation to grow second year corn. However, we need to remember the benefits of crop rotation, such as improved soil fertility, reduced soil erosion, breaking pest cycles (weed, disease, and insect problem), and spreading the workload. These results from the Living field laboratory demonstrate the need for long-term research studies to quantify the accumulative benefits of both crop rotation and the use of cover crops on SOM. For more information about our long-term research site go to (www.kbs.msu.edu) and search for Sieglinde Snapp and/or the Living Field Laboratory.
back to top
 
Is nitrogen a moving target? Lessons from a 15-year corn rotation trial
Sieg Snapp and Lowell Gentry
Crop & Soil Sciences


Drought and hail storms have inflicted low and variable corn yields on farmers throughout Michigan. This brings up the perennial question, what happens to nitrogen after corn is harvested? Significant amounts of nitrogen may remain behind in a low production situation. Understanding the fate of nitrogen from fertilizer, manure, crop residues and from the soil is challenging. The complexity of the nitrogen cycle is an active area of research where new lessons are being learned all the time and added to proven knowledge.

Research findings are highlighted here from a 15 year corn-based rotation trial located at MSU’s Kellogg Biological Station, in southwest Michigan. The bottom line from this long-term trial is that nitrogen is a moving target. Nitrogen credits need to be adjusted over time, depending on proven yields, on management objectives, and on the history of organic matter amendments such as cover crops, manure and crop residues.

Loss pathways
Nitrogen remaining in the soil after a crop is harvested can be lost or captured. The primary loss pathway is by leaching, although denitrification and volatilization are sizeable loss pathways in specific situations.

Leaching
happens when excess rainfall or irrigation causes rapid movement of water below the rooting zone. Nitrate is the main inorganic form of nitrogen that moves with water and is leached. The ammonium ion is quite different than the negative ion nitrate; it is a positively charged form of nitrogen that it is held tightly in soil by negatively charged organic matter and clay particles. This tightly held nitrogen, in the form of ammonium, is much less likely to be leached than nitrate. It is important to bear in mind that nitrogen is readily transformed from ammonium to nitrate by soil microorganisms through the nitrification pathway.

Denitrification
is the process by which nitrate ions are transformed into gaseous forms of nitrogen by anaerobic microorganisms. This occurs generally under waterlogged soil conditions, and the gaseous forms of nitrogen produced are subsequently lost to the atmosphere. In specific sites in the soil, such as within the center of soil aggregates, denitrification can also occur even when the soil is not flooded. For substantial losses to occur, however, nitrogen application must be in excess of plant demand. If excess nitrate is in the soil, it is vulnerable to being denitrified whenever the conditions are right. Matching soil supply and plant demand for nitrogen, by using the proven yield for a given field to evaluate the amount of nitrogen to apply, is the foundation to reducing losses from denitrification and leaching.

Volatilization of ammonia is another pathway of gaseous loss of nitrogen from the soil, often when manure or urea-containing fertilizers are left on the surface and not incorporated. To minimize volatilization and loss of nitrogen from this pathway, fertilizer applied as urea or as manure should be incorporated into the soil.

Improving nitrogen efficiency
Limiting the amount of inorganic nitrogen that is available to “leak” from the system is the key to limiting losses from leaching or denitrification. This poses a challenge, as nitrogen availability must also be sufficient to support optimum yields. A slow release source of nitrogen is an ideal way to improve both yields and limit losses. Slow release fertilizers are available, but can be quite expensive. Cover crops and manure can act as a form of slow release fertilizer, and have the advantage of improving the soil’s capacity to release nitrogen in a “just in time” fashion over time. Results from a long-term trial at Kellogg Biological Station are being used to reevaluate nitrogen credits for cover crops and composted dairy manure. Current recommendations are to use a nitrogen credit of 30 to 50 percent of the nitrogen applied in an organic form; yet our findings indicate this may be a significant underestimate of the nitrogen that is available over the long-term, particularly from manure applied in combination with cover crops. Improving our ability to estimate nitrogen contributions from organic inputs is our goal. This will help improve nitrogen efficiency while maintaining profitable yields.

Recycle nitrogen. Growing a cover crop or a forage crop is another way to improve nitrogen efficiency. The nitrogen remaining in the soil after harvest, especially following a poor growing season, is susceptible to leaching during the next winter and spring, however, it can be recycled. A winter cover crop can capture and release this nitrogen, thereby reducing the rate of nitrogen fertilizer needed on that field next year. Note: it is important to manage this recycled nitrogen so that residues are incorporated or killed with an herbicide, so that the residues decompose completely before a crop is grown. Residues provide a mineralizable, slow release nitrogen form, supported by microorganisms activity, to make nitrogen available, and support growth of the next crop.

Check your variety and your soil. There is some evidence that new crop genetics may have changed nitrogen efficiency compared to some historic varieties. In the past, some varieties may not have been able to use nitrogen as effectively to produce grain, compared to today’s high yielding hybrids. The take home message is that both plant nitrogen demand, and soil sources of nitrogen, are moving targets and require careful consideration in this time of increasing fertilizer costs. A presidedress soil nitrate test PSNT measurement is one of the best ways to evaluate your soil nitrogen supply capacity, which may be changing over time. Check with the MSU Soil and Plant Nutrient Laboratory to learn more about PSNT, see: http://www.css.msu.edu/SoilTesting.cfm
back to top
 
Michigan field research sites needed for study on biological control of soybean aphid

Natural enemies such as lady beetles decrease soybean aphid populations.  Native Michigan wildflowers and grasses could attract and support natural enemies and help them to control soybean aphids. In order to test this, we need sites with adjacent fields that will be in a corn-soybean rotation for the next 5 years, where we can plant a native wildflower strip between these fields.  Other soybean rotations are acceptable, as long as soybeans will be next to the wildflower strip on one side or the other for 5 years. 

Wildflower strip
Field plot.

Research activities

At each selected farm, we want to establish a 600 x 12 ft native wildflower strip at the junction of the corn and soybean fields. We will plant the native plant strip in either fall 2007 or spring 2008. Planting will be done by MSU personnel using plants that we know are attractive to pollinating insects and to natural enemies of soybean pests. The wildflowers that we will use are not weedy in crop fields and are not attractive to pest insects.

During 2008-2011 we will measure the number of soybean aphids and their natural enemies in fields near the native wildflower strips, and in cages placed over selected soybean plants in the field. Potted plants will be placed in field edges for a few days each summer to measure pollination and bee populations.

If you are interested in participating, or know of others who fit our criteria, please contact Julianna Tuell or Megan Woltz in the Department of Entomology at MSU. Phone: (517) 432-9554. E-mail tuelljul@msu.edu  or  woltz@msu.edu

Wildflowers
Wildflowers.
back to top
 
New soil ecologist at Michigan State
Stuart Grandy
Crop & Soil Sciences and
Kellogg Biological Station

Michigan State University

I would like to introduce myself as the new soil ecologist at Michigan State University.   I come to Michigan State from the University of Colorado, where I was a USDA NRI postdoctoral fellow studying the effects on N enrichment on enzyme activities and C chemistry in forest systems.  Before that, I did my Ph.D. at the MSU W.K. Kellogg Biological Station Long-Term Ecological Research Project, studying how crop rotations, plant diversity, and tillage influence soil organisms and organic matter dynamics.  My M.S. was at the University of Maine.  While in Maine, I studied soil quality responses to organic amendments in potato systems.  Organic matter has always been a focus of my work and this will remain true in my new position at Michigan State.  I am particularly interested in relating soil ecological processes to soil organic matter quality and ecosystem functions, including N cycling, C sequestration, and structural stability.  Other areas that interest me include biological approaches to nutrient use efficiency, soil food webs, and the links between soil management, organic matter chemistry and soil diseases. 

There is increasing recognition by researchers and agricultural producers that the quality of C inputs may be as important as the quantity: many soil processes seem to respond in striking ways to specific kinds of C inputs but not others.  For example, my own and other’s work have shown that crop rotations that include legume green manures, even if grown for only a short window of time before being incorporated into the soil, help build soil aggregation and reduce bulk density.  Interestingly, this cannot be attributed to the quantity of C inputs as other non-leguminous green manures produce more residues but may not have the same effect on aggregation.  Similar effects have been observed for  suppression of soil diseases where different residues may have a very different effect on the activity of plant pathogens. 

The reasons for these variable effects of C inputs are likely related to the  response of the soil communities to different, chemically complex C substrates but specific mechanisms and their management remain uncertain.  I would like to work with other researchers and producers to better understand the relationships between soil C inputs, ecological processes, and soil productivity and functions.  Once we have a better understanding of these relationships – specifically the links between C chemistry and soil biology – new opportunities will arise for managing crop rotations and organic amendments.  Many producers in the Midwest are very interested in building soil quality by altering their cropping systems and soil management.  I look forward to working with many of these producers and other researchers to better understand how these practices influence soils. 
back to top
 
One-day training for new CSA growers offered in Michigan

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) basics will be the topic of intensive day-long mini-schools, intended for the prospective or new CSA grower.

January 19 - Kettunen Center, Tustin, Michigan.
February 23 - Kalamazoo Public Library, Kalamazoo Michigan.
A third session yet to be determined.

Cost: $50 per person with another person from the same farm, half price. Lunch included.
Contact:  CSA-MI, 3480 Potter Rd.,  Bear Lake, MI 49614.
Phone 231-889-3216 (toll free 877-526-1441). Email anotherfarmer@hotmail.com or visit http://www.csafarms.org/csaresources.asp

CSA is one of the most innovative developments in agriculture today. As local food is becoming more popular, many growers view a CSA as a way to enter farming in an exciting way, or to keep their small farm alive and thriving in an era of failing family farms. But many growers go into CSA without adequate preparation, or underestimate the complexity of the CSA model.

To help new or prospective CSA growers succeed, CSA-MI, with some support from a Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) grant, is offering a series of day-long intensive mini-schools on Community Supported Agriculture.

“The training will be geared to those who hope to start a CSA, or those with little CSA experience, perhaps a season or two,” according to Jo Meller, who will represent Five Springs Farm CSA on the panel of instructors.

“We will cover topics that are specific to CSA,” added Jim Sluyter, who is helping to put the curriculum together. “The CSA grower is confronted with issues that other market growers do not have to consider, or with complexities beyond those of many other market farms.”

Beginning growers are particularly vulnerable. One experienced grower has referred to CSA as “graduate school for growers,” with complicated cropping plans for a steady harvest, the need to know and understand dozens of different crops and the social aspects of growing for a pre-paid group of farm members. Distribution, pricing, integrating the CSA into the farm’s other marketing and much more will be covered in the training.

The mini-schools will be patterned after the successful session offered at the CSA Conference in Michigan last fall. A panel of experienced CSA growers will give individual presentations and offer insights into the topic areas.

“We will build on that success, incorporating what we learned from that process into these sessions,” said Meller. “Much of the content will be driven by the needs and interests of the participants,” she added.

CSA farms tend to be very individual and can vary greatly. “Our goal is to offer the perspectives of a variety of farm models – different sizes, structures, distribution strategies and so on – in order that participants can learn the many options open to them in developing their own CSA project,” said Jim Sluyter, also of CSA-MI.

Attendance will be limited. Please register early!
back to top
 
Michigan organic apple field day includes integrated hog project
David Epstein
MSU IPM/Entomology
Michigan State University

There will be a field day at Jim Koan's AlMar Orchards on Friday, November 2 to report on MSU organic tree fruit research projects conducted in 2007. This includes the integrated pork and apple research (see Jim Koan’s report in recent issue of MOSES newsletter “Just Picked”). The program will begin at 9:00 AM. Lunch will be provided.

AlMar Orchards is located at 1431 Duffield Rd., Flushing, MI 48433, 1 street east of M-13 off of Beecher Rd, approximately 5 miles north of I-69. (Note: please do not confuse AlMar with Koan's Orchard owned by Jim's cousin on Beecher.)  View pdf of agenda

Pigs in orchard
Grazing hogs in apple orchard.
back to top
 
Tri-State Organic IP Video session 5:
Introduction to Organic Markets and Certification
November 15, 2007, 6:00 – 8:30 p.m. EST/5 – 7:30 p.m. CST

What are organic farmers producing in the Great Lakes region? What do we know about the economics of organic production in this region? What does it take to get certified? Speakers from USDA, Purdue, MOSES and region farms will address these questions at the fifth session of the Tri-State Organic IP Video Program titled Introduction to Organic Markets and Certification. The two-and-one-half hour program will begin at 6:00 PM EST. Participants can view the program from sites in Indiana, Illinois, Michigan and Ohio.

To sign up for the location nearest you, contact:
-Indiana: www.ocec.purdue.edu/   and follow the link to “Upcoming Programs” and search for “Tri-State.”  Contact: Jerry Nelson, 812-886-9582 (jnelson@purdue.edu)
-Illinois: http://web.extension.uiuc.edu/smallfarm/events.cfm    Contact: Deborah Cavanaugh Grant, 217-968-5512 (cvnghgrn@uiuc.edu).
-Michigan: Contact Vicki Morrone, 517-353-3542 (sorrone@msu.edu).
-Ohio: Contact Alan Sundermeier, 419-354-9050 (sundermeier.5@osu.edu).

back to top
 
Reports from organic growers

Indiana

South Central Indiana, Brown County—Dale Rhoads
It has been hot and dry with some record-setting heat. This has meant keeping up with the watering of the salad greens, kale and other leafy greens. What a strange year it has been weather-wise. The frost killed fruit blossoms and we had cool start with too much rain. Then no rain in May, little rain for the rest of the year, tomatoes went in a hurry because of the hot, dry weather and late sweet corn didn’t do much.

Currently, we have been doing a lot of weeding of salad greens and just about have that caught up. We have started in the fall greens harvest season and things are looking good. We have germinated weeds in the greenhouses to do a weed kill.

In the next two weeks, we will plant the greenhouses to spinach and some late baby lettuces. Basil looks to be killed or blackened and probably ready to cut it out. We are putting cover crops in all bare areas. As the weather gets colder, we will put in some row covers, go as long as we can and put it into cover crops to sleep during the winter.

Illinois
Northern Illinois, Kane County – David Campbell of Lily Lake Organic Farm
Only one-half inch of rain has fallen since our last conference call four weeks ago. Conventional corn harvest is three weeks ahead of schedule this fall. Bean harvest is right on schedule. We put up much hay in the past month with excellent drying weather. Re-growth of alfalfa is excellent due to plenty of subsoil moisture, while grass re-growth is not as strong, due to very little moisture in the topsoil and very warm temperatures.

I've been servicing equipment lately. It is much easier to do this now than during the winter months.

I plan to start harvesting corn late next week, hopefully. Moisture levels were down to 20.5 percent on my earlier corn a couple of days ago.

West Central Illinois, Fulton County—Anne Patterson of Living Earth Farm
It was a record 92 degrees on Sunday, Oct. 7, for my Autumn Fest. I know some people woke up that day and decided there waw no way they were they heading to a farm to take a tour, eat outside and listen to live music. However, those who came enjoyed the afternoon. Finally, today there is a reprieve from the heat. We were fortunate to receive about one inch of rain last Tuesday, which really helped fall crops emerge and grow. However today, although much cooler, there is a strong wind and it is sucking the life out of everything. We need more rain.

Currently, I am harvesting fall salad mix, arugula, head lettuce, pole beans, leeks, herbs, peppers, eggplant, Japanese white turnips, Swiss chard and carrots. Plus, we are selling picked crops, i.e., potatoes, winter squash, onions and garlic to Friends of Living Earth Farm E-customers and three restaurants. A limited amount of produce goes to the Midwest Organic Farmers Cooperative, Direct Delivery Project to Chicago.

We will transplant a few more head lettuces into the field, which will be covered by low hoops and 3 mil plastic sheeting once it turns cold. This will take us through November. We will transplant our last head lettuces into cold frames in a month, which will be our last head lettuces to go out; they will be harvested in March. We weeded yesterday in the greens, pac choi and lettuces.

Over the next two weeks we plan to set up a new field for chickens, hull hazelnuts, sort cloves of garlic and plant, dry chili peppers to sell later in season, trim mow areas to reduce scrub tree growth, mow and fertilize asparagus after first freeze, set-up low hoops over winter crops, research spouting and try sprouting various seeds to sell to E-customers, finish mulching aisles in plots with raised beds, take soil samples of each field and build more raised beds.

Northern Illinois, Lake County—Prairie Crossing Learning Farm
(Editor’s note: Brittany Futterman submitted this report a project she coordinates at Prairie Crossing.)

The Learning Farm leads an afterschool program called the Great Pumpkin Gang in which students grow pumpkins, corn and other crops from seed to table. This past summer (2007) we grew carving pumpkins, eating pumpkins, decorative gourds and popcorn on 4,000 square feet. We planted buckwheat in between the rows of pumpkins to help control cucumber beetles and provide habitat for beneficial insects.

Although we had a number of cucumber beetles, they didn’t seem to affect production. We harvested approximately 350 pumpkins, 60 gourds, and 10 pounds of popcorn. We used cheesecloth to cover the silks of the corn plants to prevent them from being chewed by beetles (which had been a problem in past years, resulting in low to no pollination). This worked extremely well to help ensure proper pollination and was practical for the small scale on which we’re growing. I expect that this method would be too time consuming on a large scale.

Most of our crop loss was due to rot caused by extremely wet soils and heavy rains in August. We placed a layer of straw underneath some of the pumpkins which may have helped. Overall, we suspect that the high levels of rain throughout the summer helped the crops stay more resistant to pests and disease.

Iowa

Northwest Iowa, O’Brien County—Paul Mugge
We have received a lot of rain over the past two weeks (almost four inches last week), and it has been unseasonably warm. The rain has slowed the soybean harvest down some, especially because the very high humidity has resulted in tough straw and it’s hard to not get any dirt on the soybeans in the combine.

I hope to finish combining soybeans tomorrow. The yields are quite good—about 55 bu/acre of tofu beans and the quality is good too, I think. I am also trying to seed fall triticale as soon as the beans are off, so it’s busy around here.

As soon as I’ve finished with the beans, I have to haul some liquid swine manure as my pits are full. I will start on corn harvest as soon as I can get to it. Most conventional guys are already going and I think the corn is quite dry. I am not optimistic about corn yields. The organic corn was planted fairly late and the drought in July hit it pretty hard. There seems to be a lot of insect damage also. Almost every ear has had something (ear worms, corn borers, western bean cutworms) chewing on it and there are a lot of resulting moldy kernels. I hope I can blow the mold out with the combine. I will be very happy with 150 bu/acre. After corn harvest, I have several mountains of compost to spread before winter.

Michigan
East Michigan, Lapeer County—John Simmons
Rains have become scarce again—along with above normal temperatures, soils are becoming dry. The high temperatures are very beneficial for putting a “good finish” on late planted crops.

Corn harvest has not yet begun. Mature fields are drying; immature fields are using the
”extended summer” to good advantage. Sunflower harvest is starting—in some fields, it has become a race with the red-wing blackbirds. Moisture ranges from 16 to 20 percent. Soybeans are nearly ready for harvest to begin. Leaves are hanging on stubbornly. No frost/freeze yet to desiccate weeds or soybeans. Third cut hay was better than second cut by three- to five-fold!  Good conditions for harvest; fine-textured hay. Wheat, spelt and rye plantings are proceeding in summer-fallowed fields. Farmers are itching to get soybeans out of the way for wheat/spelt/rye in those fields. No insect problems have been identified lately.

Buckwheat is setting and drying/maturing seeds. Vegetation is starting to desiccate.
Clover seed harvest is two-thirds complete. Yields range in the one to two bushel/acre area.

In the next two weeks I’ll plant spelt/rye, prepare fields for fall spelt/wheat planting and harvest buckwheat, sunflower and clover seed.
back to top
Information about permission to reprint or post our articles.
Funding to initiate this network was provided by the American Farmland Trust
and EPA Region 5.
Web site hosted by the MSU IPM Program.
Contact webmaster.
MSU Integrated Pest Management Program
New Ag Network web site.