Strange ...

[Guest]

We are trying the foliar for a few reasons. We run some marginal land, not a pile of dollars tied up if something goes bad (hail, 6" rain event, etc). Can always not apply it and it wont go bad for the following year. We put what we feel is a decent starter package for our land (what I want to spend and can afford without having a heart-attack). Have you guys every heard of phil needham? Some really interesting thoughts regarding growing wheat. Which I apply a little of those thoughts to other crops. I also think there is merit in having a healthy plant through stage feeding to help fight disease instead of putting a small amount of fungicide on per acre as a preventative measure (have you ever thought about how much 200-300ml per acre is). You guys are getting sucked into the whole industries BS.

[JDGreen]

Bullshit 4G ... I have some marginal land as well.. Combat that with VR at seeding. Like i said NOTHING has given the return on investment than actually setting VERY aggressive yield targets and actually putting the needed macros in. I have done all the feed it with a bloody spoon bullshit years ago. End result far less than what I'm growing now. Tissue tests are finished in early durum and no deficiencies. River time baby ..

[tweety]

If i could echo JDGreens comments i also say Bullshit. Every trial stretches and stretches the truth just to see a tiny difference.

Leaves primary functions are not to take in nutrients, that is what the root is for. Your feeding the wrong end of the plant! In the case of wheat yield is basically set by 3rd or 4th leaf determined by the fertility in the ground and growing conditions.

Even side dressing at flag leaf, there is most times not enough moisture to get the fert to even get to the plant in time to fill.

So the message topic does fit, strange. Strange that farmers can't crack open a biology of plants book and would rather drive in circles wasting diesel, burning off leaf tissue, and waste time rather then just upping the fert a bit when they seed.

Strange.

But i'm sure some do it because they see magical yield and protein gains. The same guys that add all sorts of things to roundup. Speaking of that the latest i heard is these "innovators" are adding Assure to roundup for roundup canola. Stupidest idea ever. The surfactant burns the leaves, hurts the canola, is costly, and absolutely completely unnecessary.

Strange indeed.

[Guest]

Hey guys, I understand where you are coming from but want to do my own trials with it. As far as the wearing out expensive sprayers, do you guys do any fungicide apps? If not then you got me but if you do then why not throw in some slow release fert in. I would like to hear from furrow as it seems he has done a little of both. I have a hard time believing that you just throw it down and are gone till harvest but hey, if you do good for you. We have haying to do so we are around the farm most of july anyways.

[boarderbloke]

Just wondering whether anyone is or has tried a seed placed blend, of your starter fertilizer and ESN to give the N needed at maturity to bump the protein?

[JDGreen]

4G I get your thoughts. My point would be been there done that and moved on. I have melted urea on a couple of occasions and mixed that in with my fungicide. Burnt the flag leafs. Never gained yield and protein was hardly noticeable at a 0.2 bump. I enjoy trying everything at least once or twice but have got to the point where I absolutely know with certainty where the nutrients need to be and how much needs to be there. One thing I haven't tried is outlet foliar and furrow can comment on that . Simple program here. Float roughly 1/2 the N. VR the remaining N and a blend as per soil tests. And yes I literally walk away from it and it's a done deal. Don't care how much it rains or doesn't rain. Boarder I don't understand your question??

[tweety]

Boarder, did a big replicated trial of that, was good rainfall for the year so it should have shown up. in the end 0 yield difference, 0.02 % protein gain - on the non esn.

As the sciency ones say..... no significant difference. Except the cost of ESN made it less value in the end.

[boarderbloke]

Good to know, thanks tweety.

Any rational for that method not giving a protein bump? Thought it'd be a no brainer.

[tweety]

I think it comes down to the little wheat plant not seeing sufficient nutrition in that up to 3 leaf critical part of its life. Like JD says, give it the groceries at the start, as does most research except in a tiny amount of situations, that is the thing to do.

The ESN trial was sponsored by the makers of ESN, needless to say this study was not used in their marketing brochures. They kept doing studies till they found a couple that tipped in their favour, published those instead.

[farmaholic]

Well then, If your theory is true tweety, I hope those little plants reach the mid-row band where most of the N is is my seeding operation. Last years "drought" wheat was between 15-15.5 px here. We'll see what this year brings.