Soil test results! Wow you fert dealers won't be screwing us in 2013!

[SASKFARMER3]

Wow what a pleasant surprise. Years of putting
down lots of product and having Mother Nature
take it away by to much rain. Very nice dry August
till freeze up.
We do a soil zone type soil testing procedure,
GPS for ten years. Basically three to four zones in
each field.
Well except for the new land I purchased three
years ago all soil tests came back with a very nice
carry over of nutrients.
Simply 120 lbs of n will be 60 to 80 in 2013 on
canola. Hrs instead of 90 to 100 lbs (actual) will
be 50 to 70. Phos will keep the same and same
with sulfur.
Basically nitrogen use will be down about 40
percent.
Our organic matter after 26 plus years of direct
seeding 5.9 to 7.8. It has been getting better each
year.
Others in our area are finding similar results.
Remember this is in fields that haven't had rec
tillage for years. Our worst is in the new land that
was 1/2 1/2 for 100 years. No fert ever.
What are others finding?

[wakopa]

my soil tests are the opposite,it will
cost me close to 100 dollars an acre for
2013, we had good crops. my fert for 2012
was what yours is going to be for 2013.

[Daylate]

So are them the rates you will go with then sf3. We
seem to travel the same circle and i got similar
results, not sure why i soil tested cause i will
probably stick to 100-105 on canola and 95 ish
wheat. Seems like the cheapest return on
investment, in most years. Not sure if anyone saw
the independant trial done 4 years running now, i
think it was in the top soil magazine( not 2012 crop)
but they compared everything from seeding rates in
canola (over 5 and under) to jumpstart to foliar
fungicide, extra P and extra S. I forget what other
comparisions there were but in the end, the best
return was another $20 of N over recomendations.

[SASKFARMER3]

Probably might stick with what works, but when I
look at what's available it is tempting. Or I can
have fun with viterra or Blair's reps. Ha ha.

[Daylate]

So are them the rates you will go with then sf3. We
seem to travel the same circle and i got similar
results, not sure why i soil tested cause i will
probably stick to 100-105 on canola and 95 ish
wheat. Seems like the cheapest return on
investment, in most years. Not sure if anyone saw
the independant trial done 4 years running now, i
think it was in the top soil magazine( not 2012 crop)
but they compared everything from seeding rates in
canola (over 5 and under) to jumpstart to foliar
fungicide, extra P and extra S. I forget what other
comparisions there were but in the end, the best
return was another $20 of N over recomendations.

[bobofthenorth]

Nitrate is nitrate. If you don't trust the test why bother poking the holes?

If you're really worried do a few fields in the spring to confirm the fall results. If you really want to spend some extra money invest in extra P (maybe K - depending on your levels). At least that way you'll get it back over the coming years.

[wd9]

SF3, what was your soil temp? Sounds like
the classic sampled too early and the bugs
were gettin busy down under.

[SASKFARMER3]

Last week minus 10

[bobofthenorth]

>>SF3, what was your soil temp?
>>Sounds like the classic sampled
>>too early and the bugs were gettin
>>busy down under.

Care to explain what you mean by this?

The real reason that you want to sample late is exactly so "the bugs down under" can get busy and convert organic N to inorganic. So if the OP had actually sampled too early we would expect to see LESS not more N in his samples.

The sampling error that could lead to erroneous high N tests is wet samples stored too long in a warm environment. 20 years ago we used to dry samples before submitting them because drying them stopped microbial activity. The labs realized that drying was a major PITA and therefore an impediment to their profitability so they announced that drying was no longer necessary. If you want to skew a sample to show high available N just take a wet sample and leave the bag in a warm room for a week before you submit it.

As an aside, if you want to understand the difference in N-supply potential between different fields, the warm/wet routine will give you a good proxy. Only about 1/3 of the N in any given crop comes from applied N in that particular year. The soil supplies the balance through microbial breakdown. Some fields are better at supplying that portion of N than others. Those of you who have recently taken on new land that has been mis-farmed will understand that not all fields are created equal. Equal inputs equal climate doesn't necessarily return equal yields.

[bgmb]

Bob, you seem to know your stuff on fertilizer.

A couple questions if you don't mind

Our soil was quite dry and hard this fall enough so that fall nh3 guys were holding off even when ground temps were low enough because the ground was too lumpy and chisel plows wouldn't stay in the ground.

We received some moisture and guys were applying anhydrous when the ground was still fairly lumpy and humidity was high but the ground was still relatively dry at a depth of 2-3 inches.

1) with Nh3's affinity for water would you not have terribly high losses applying when the soil surface is wet and the ground underneath is dryer?

2) how deep do you have to be with nh3 to avoid high losses (more than 5-10%) under normal conditions?

[ado089]

Lets also not forget that the same
conditions needed for a bumper crop are
the same conditions that are going to
result in something along the line of
20-30 lbs/ac more N release from organic
matter on soils with 5% OM. That can
get even higher if the previous year had unfavorable conditions for your soil
bugs and nutrient cycling was impeded.
I bet your agronomist and retailer don't
tell you that.

In the good old days of 50-75 lbs/ac N
application applying the same rate every
year somewhat regulated it's self with
the ups and down in the weather. With
higher rates being applied if you're not
sampling and trusting the results and if
you're not doing some mental math on
release rates compared to last years
crop you are either wasting money or
setting yourself up for a lodged, late
crop.

As for the NH3 question, I would worry
far less about loss during application,
it takes very little moisture to fix
NH3. Most losses come from the two weeks
of saturated soil we normally see
following thaw and snow-melt. Standing
water is far worse for N loss than
leaching, this becomes even more aggravated in high pH soils.

[Jay-mo]

Soil tests have historically showed high sulfur.This year again. I have been putting down around 10lb/a. every year anyway just to be safe. However I'm wondering if anyone sees any yield bump applying sulfur even when soil tests are adequate to high? Thinking I may not put any down next year.

[makar]

Even the soil testing experts will tell you sulfer is a poor test. My land tests high in sulfer, put none no canola.

[SASKFARMER3]

Ours says o to 10 well it will get 10 to 15. Crops
love sulphur.

[HappyFarmer]

Jaymo
It's common to have high sulfur readings after a
wet summer, and then a long hot dry spell in
August/September. What happens is as the
ground drys up, you sulfur that has leached with
the rain will attract to you soluble salts in your
subsoil, and be carried to the surface, hence
showing large amounts on you soil test. Problem
is its not plant available. I would say that if you
had a wet summer, dry aug,sept. probably should
keep putting sulfur on.