Spraying

[Jay-mo]

Ag-guy, what about when we spray fungicides, the crop stays green so long we either have to swath on the green side or dessicate to get the cereals to dry down. Could this be somewhat self-defeating?
I know its all in the name of pushing yields to the max. Gotta wonder sometimes.

[ado089]

Beleive it or not a healthy "green" plant will mature alot more rapidly than a sick diseased plant, it just doesn't look, that way because of all the leaf damage on an unhealthy plant. A healthy plant also responds alot better to glyphosate for pre-harvest.

[ado089]

Those studies are based on in-crop surface banding. Surface banding is discusting misallocation of resources and I would expect poor results unsless under irrigation. Alot, if not all, of the public research for some reason seems to be focused on in-crop banding as opposed to folliar applied wich perplexs me a little bit. Even though it's trickier to time and safe rates are quite low and vague, the efficiency of folliar nutrition is very alluring. It would be nice to see some genuine local research showing what is needed for base load soil nutrition and what a response curve would be in-crop.

[AG_guy]

healthy soils and healthy plants don't require fungicides. Soils have natural diease fighting oranisims in the soil. You kill the soil you kill them you have sick plants. There are nematode killing fungi in the soil and even penicillum living in soil if it's healthy. Kill the life and pay the price.

I know i can't stay out but i'm trying

[furrowtickler]

That's why we do not use nh3.

[ado089]

I like stirring the pot so I'm going to throw this one out there for s&g's...NH3 has a kill zone of about 2.5" in diameter around the injection site. However studies show that soils microbe actualy "bounce back" to 150-200% of the original levels before stabalizing again. Sorry I don't have the reference for this one, it's just some old westco propoganda I remember from several years ago.

[AG_guy]

westco sells fertilizer. And if you get withing 2.5 cm your dead and you don't bounce back. There is actauly a microbe test that you can send you soil to i belive i may be wrong and it likely aint up here in canada. In a one acre and 6 in depth there should be over 16 thousand pound of life. Nh3 3 does damage sure some may come back but your soil like you plant has to be in balance. If they all don't come back then it's still out of balance.

[mhartman]

“please do NOT bore me with facts from unknown sources. If you talk it back it.”

You express a very strong opinion so you must have a good base of scientific reports.

Like you, I also tend to challenge statements when they are not backed by published research. I prefer not to rely heavily on one or two research reports as scientists occasionally don’t account for unknown influences (confounding effects) or interpret their observations properly. I also don’t pay much attention to testimonials (either farmer based or agricultural chemical company marketing information). Lastly, I favour research done under western Canadian conditions rather than extrapolating from other crops / regions of the world.

You must have noticed in the vast compilation of foliar fertilizer research the limitations of many of the methods used. Here’s what I have noticed. I will keep my focus on N foliar absorption since that was the main target of your attack on my reply in this thread. There are micronutrients that have very good efficacy with foliar application.

Too many research reports conclude that foliar absorption occurred but did not design treatments that prevented the subsequent movement from leaves to soil by rain, dew and irrigation and then root uptake. Obviously with field research this would be difficult other than trickle irrigation with rain shelters.

From your extensive literature search on N foliar fertilization what did you think of the following reports (just a few and non-fertilizer company source):

Alkier, A.C., Racz., G.J. and Soper, R.J. 1972. Effects of foliar- and soil-applied nitrogen and soil nitrate-nitrogen level of the protein content of Neepawa wheat. Can. J. Soil Sci. 52: 301-309.

In that greenhouse study (University of Manitoba), only 1% of the N15-labelled foliar urea N was recovered in the grain versus 37-51% when it was broadcast on the soil surface. They prevented the foliar fertilizer from reaching the soil surface using covers.

Rawluk, C.D.L., Racz, G.J. and Grant. C.A. 2000. Uptake of foliar or soil application of 15N-labelled urea solution at anthesis and its affect on wheat grain yield and protein. Can. J. Plant Sci. 80:331-334.

In these growth chamber trials (Ag Canada Brandon), the plots were isolated during spraying to avoid cross contamination, and the soil surface was covered to prevent foliar fertilizer entering into the soil. The pots were watered at the soil surface only to prevent washing foliar fertilizer down the leaves, stems into the soil. 15N recovery in the grain was 7% and 16% in trials 1 and 2 respectively with foliar application compared to 44% and 67% with surface applied urea at the same stage. Adding surfactant to the foliar N did raise it to 27% recovery in the grain.

Altman, D.W., McCuistion, W.L. and Kronstad W.E. 1983. Grain protein percentage, kernel hardness and grain yield of winter wheat with foliar applied urea. Agron. J. 75:87-91.

In the experiment 3 of their paper, a greenhouse experiment at Oregon State University used N15 labelled urea with surfactant and brush painted on the spike and upper leaves at anthesis. They didn’t have a surface applied treatment and they didn’t specify how the pots were watered (did watering method prevent washing of the foliar urea off the leaves into the soil?). They reported 44% N15 recovery into the grain from the foliar urea.


An example of a field study:
Ma, B.L., Subedi, K.D. and Dwyer, L.M. 2006. Timing and method of 15Nitrogen-labeled fertilizer application on grain protein and nitrogen use efficiency of spring wheat. J. Plant Nutr. 29:469-483.

In this field trial (Ag Canada, Ottawa) 15N labeled fertilizer was used to compare 3 treatments: N1 - 100 kg/ha soil applied ammonium nitrate; N2 - 60kg soil ammonium nitrate 40 kg foliar urea at the boot stage; and N3 - 90 kg soil 10 kg urea at boot stage. The soil surface was not covered to prevent foliar N from washing off into the soil. Soil samples were not taken to detect if foliar 15N had been washed down into the soil. The method of application had no effect on grain yield over 2 years (one dry, one wet). In the dry year, 12% and 20% of the foliar applied N was recovered in the whole plant at maturity under N2 and N3, compared to 35% of the soil applied N in N1. In the wet year, the 15N recoveries were 59, 28 and 35% for N1, N2 and N3 respectively.

These research examples suggest to me that foliar absorption of N is not very significant and is less effective than soil applied N fertilizer. Trials showing a benefit of foliar N fertilization are probably related more to the timing than the placement and specific weather conditions (that’s why there is a large number of conflicting results).

If you want to pursue further the scientific evidence around foliar fertilization, I would suggest that you get in touch with the following experienced, well-qualified soil researchers with public institutions: Cynthia Grant, Ag Canada Brandon; Ross McKenzie, Alberta Agriculture, Lethbridge.

[ado089]

You two should play nice...I've noticed a bit of trend in some of the "marketing data" suggesting that foliar applied N i absorbed better when applied with ohter nutrients and is greatly dependant on the timming. For example in europe it is common practice to apply urea on canola at the end of flowering for a 9-30bu/ac yield bump. However it wasn't until they added some Moly, Mg, S, Cu, M, Zn and some other trace elements that they started to achieve higher uptake and these types of yield response. Any comments?

[AG_guy]

top dressing UAN is also big. two frineds of mine are in the states and were from england. One guy and his family grew over 200 bushel winter wheat. These guys know intesive wheat managment. They have also done work with uan and a split appliction on canola with good results.

[AG_guy]

Here is were i stand. If foliars do not work then how can farmers all across north america use these products with outstanding results. How do they grow just as good as crop with less inputs ? How ? If you do not like foliars, back foliars, or will try them that is up to you and you can farm how ever you like that is your right. But it's as if people try and hold back the guys that want to try new things a better way, a more sensible way. And some of these companies have been in business for over 40 years so if they don't work why are they in business today ? It seems there are just to many people trying to hold farmers back why ??? You do what you want in your business or farm and let the other guys do what they want. Large companies like keep things complicated it's a way of selling there products. try this trick in the world of business and you wouldn't last long. I have had many conversations with guys on the phone and email and i'll tell you there alot of guy questioning this throw all you money in the ground in the spring and see what happens concept.

If you don't like foliars then stand up to the plate and tell these guys and myself another way of putting more money in the bank. tell us something we don't know. take us to the next level of production. I'm trying to help farmers not hold them back. maybe playing nice got some of these guys in the mess there in and it's time to stop playing nice.

I'm looking for answers and solutions and new products and a new and better ways of crop production a way to save money and make money. Teaching guys about new things giving them the ability to question the advise they are getting now and making sure it really is in there best interest. I have an open mind and here to help. I rack my brain out everyday thinking of this stuff and I DO NOT MAKE A CENT doing it. I get up at 4:30 every morning and leave for work at 5:25 and i still email guys back before i go to work. I email guys back when i get home i talk on the phone tell 10:00 at night all for nothing for free and no profit what so ever and i'll keep doing it when ever somebody wants to talk.

So now people against foliars what do you do for agriculture ????????

[Jay-mo]

You can argue whether foliar fertilizer is absorbed or not. What I do know is that 28-0-0 with compatible herbicides allows me to cut rates, somtimes by up to 40% with excellent results.

[GOODRUM]

Jay-mo How do I find more details about the chemicals which are compatibe ,How much fert is required?

[Jay-mo]

Some herbicides will mention on the label if they can be used with a fertilizer blend.
28-0-0 is very compatible with most glyphosates except Weathermax. If you were to do a jar test with some 28-0-0 and weathermax you will notice large white globs forming in the jar. You can guess what this would do to your sprayer.
As far as any extensive resource which would help you, I dont know of any.
28-0-0 rates would max out at 2-4L/acre on cereals and half that on canola. (do your own testing, dont take my word for it)It also depends on your water rates. The more water the more 28 you can apply without burn.
Other products out there like N-pact are 26-0-0 but are triazone based which has a very low salt index and can be used at much higher rates with no worry of leaf burn. Of course, its alot more $$ as well.
UAP carries quite a nice line of foliar products.
Alpine also has foliar products which are very compatible with many herbicides.
If you dig around you will find theres info out there, you just may not get it from your local chem/fert dealer. They want you to put Xamount of nitrogen in the ground six months before you even seed. Then just stress out and wait for timely rains to use the 150lbs/acre you put on your canola as it freezes or wilts.
Foliar feeding gives you the ability to feed your crop when (if) it needs it.
Yes, you still need your base fertility coming from the soil.

[Jay-mo]

If you are looking strictly at using some 28-0-0 to boost your herbicides, 1 L/acre will provide 25% rate cut with glyphosate. (not a recomendation, just my experience)
Do some trial strips of your own to find what works on your farm.