Skip‐Row and Equidistant‐Row Barley with Nitrogen Placement: Yield, Nitrogen Uptake, and Root Density

Sharratt, Brenton; Cochran, V. L.

doi:10.2134/agronj1993.00021962008500020016x

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3). This depth corresponds closely to the maximum depth of rooting of barley in interior Alaska (Sharratt and Cochran, 1992) and to the depth of outwash sand and gravel. Failure to detect Br below 50 cm may then be due to depletion of Br as a result of plant uptake or rapid leaching through sand and gravel.…”

Section: Bromidesupporting

confidence: 54%

Dissipation of Bromide and Metribuzin Affected by Tillage and Crop Residue Management in Subarctic Alaska

Sharratt¹,

Knight²

2010

ARCTIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Prudent use of agricultural fertilizers and herbicides is paramount for sustaining or improving surface and ground water quality in Subarctic regions, but little information is available that documents the loss of chemicals from agricultural lands in the Subarctic. This study aimed to ascertain more clearly how time of application and land management practices affect the loss of bromide and metribuzin in a Subarctic soil. Potassium bromide (KBr), a surrogate for nitrate, and metribuzin, commonly used to control broadleaf weeds, were applied in the autumn of 1996 and the spring of 1997 to a silt loam that had been subjected to conventional tillage (CT), minimum tillage (disk once [DO]), and no tillage (NT) since 1983. Superimposed on the tillage treatments were the removal or retention of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) stubble and loose straw. Loss of these chemicals was ascertained by sampling the soil profile at the time of heading of barley, before freeze-up of the soil in autumn, and after spring thaw until September 1998. Tillage and residue treatments did not influence the recovery of autumn-applied or spring-applied Br. However, recovery of Br diminished with time: about 30% of the Br applied in autumn and 45% of that applied in spring remained in the soil profile by September 1998. Tillage, but not residue, treatments influenced the recovery of metribuzin. Recovery of metribuzin at the termination of this study was 6% or more in NT soil and 2% or less in CT and DO soil; greater recovery in NT soil was presumably a result of slower degradation in NT than in CT and DO. This study suggests that bromide (and thus nitrate) and metribuzin are more prone to leaching when applied in autumn and that tillage practices affect retention of metribuzin, but not nitrate, in the soil of Subarctic Alaska.Key words: herbicide, retention, leaching, solute, nitrate RÉSUMÉ. Une utilisation prudente des engrais et des herbicides est cruciale au maintien ou à l'amélioration de la qualité de l'eau de surface et de l'eau souterraine dans les régions subarctiques, mais il existe peu de documentation sur la déperdition des produits chimiques dans le sol des terres agricoles du Subarctique. Cette étude vise à établir avec plus de précision la façon dont le moment de l'application et les pratiques de gestion des terres affectent la déperdition du bromure et de la métribuzine dans un sol subarctique. Le bromure de potassium (KBr), un substitut du nitrate, et la métribuzine, couramment utilisée pour lutter contre les dicotylédones, ont été appliqués en automne 1996 et au printemps 1997 sur un loam limoneux qui avait subi un travail du sol classique (TC), un travail minimum (un seul passage du cultivateur à disque [TM]) et aucun travail (AT) depuis 1983. On a ajouté au travail du sol le déchaumage de l'orge (Hordeum vulgare L.) ou le maintien du chaume et de la paille. On a vérifié la déperdition de ces produits chimiques jusqu'en septembre 1998 en analysant le profil pédologique au moment de l'épiaison de l'orge, avant que le so...

show abstract

Section: Bromidesupporting

confidence: 54%

Dissipation of Bromide and Metribuzin Affected by Tillage and Crop Residue Management in Subarctic Alaska

Sharratt¹,

Knight²

2010

ARCTIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To avoid these negative effects, farmers in various parts of the world are using N‐management techniques such as surface banding, or sub‐surface techniques like knifed‐in banding and spoke‐wheel point‐injection, to place granular or liquid N‐fertilizers (Page 1975, Roberts et al. 1992, Sharratt and Cochran 1992, Stecker et al. 1993, Baker and Timmons 1994, Sowers et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Yield Formation and Plant Metabolism of Spring Barley in Response to Locally Injected Ammonium

Schittenhelm¹,

Menge-Hartmann²

2006

J Agronomy Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to elucidate the crop physiological basis for yield differences frequently observed in experiments comparing top-dressing of N fertilizers with injection of ammonium or ammonium/urea solutions into the soil. The effects of diammonium phosphate injected at the two-leaf stage, calcium nitrate (NO 3 -N) broadcasted and incorporated before sowing, and a control without N fertilization (-N) were assessed from measurements of growth, N-uptake and N-partitioning, light interception, gas exchange, leaf anatomy and the activity of key enzymes of N-metabolism. The experiment was performed with spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) grown in 80-l containers in a vegetation hall in Braunschweig, Germany. The plants in the NH 4 -N treatment produced a 20 % higher grain yield than those in the NO 3 -N treatment. The grain yield superiority of the NH 4 -N plants was attributable to a higher number of ears per plant (+13 %) and more grains per ear (+6 %). The NH 4 -N plants exhibited lower concentrations of inorganic cations than plants supplied with NO 3 -N. In the NH 4 -N treatment, the light penetrated more deeply into the crop canopy and the NH 4 -N plants exhibited a higher leaf carbon exchange rate at the different leaf layers than the NO 3 -N plants. It is concluded that as opposed to predominantly nitrate nutrition, provision of a persistent source of ammonium enables plants to take advantage of the positive yield effect of mixed N nutrition.

show abstract

“…Dryland winter wheat grown in Texas with skip-row planting resulted in lower yields than equidistant -row planting (Winter and Welch, 1987). The same result was obtained with barley {Hordeum vulgare L.) by Sharratt and Cochran (1983) (Chan et al, 1980;McBroom et al, 1981b;Beuerlein and LaFever, 19 89). Competition is usually more intense for a given resource where that resource is limited and competition for all resources is more intense where density or biomass is greatest (Goldberg, 1990).…”

Section: Yield Compensationsupporting

confidence: 65%

Wheat-soybean relay intercropping: Temporal and spatial effects

Flesch

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relay intercropping soybean into wheat has great potential in Iowa by allowing two harvests on the same land area in the same year. Wheat is planted in September and soybean is interseeded into the standing wheat in May. This system can be important for Iowa by diversifying production, increasing farm productivity, and reducing soil erosion. A three year experiment was conducted near Boone, lA, to determine the effect of soybean planting dates and spatial arrangements on wheat and soybean in a relay intercropping system, and its relative agronomic efficiency. The experimental design was a split-plot with the main plots (planting dates) arranged in randomized complete blocks with three replications of each treatment. The soybean planting dates were: pre-heading=PDl, heading=PD2, and post-heading=PD3. Five spatial arrangements (sub-plots) were used: 1W:1S (one wheat row alternated with one soybean row), 2W:1S, 2W:2S, 3W:2S, and 4W:3S. Wheat yield was reduced on average by 33% with soybean interplanting, and was proportionally lower than the reduction of wheat plant population during implementation of the skiprow pattern (33 to 50%). Relay intercropped soybean produced 73% of the sole crop soybean, indicating skip-row patterns are a good alternative for higher soybean yield. Soybean planting at wheat pre-heading or at heading was the best alternative X for this system. Arrangements producing the best soybean yields were not good wheat producers and vice-versa, suggesting that improvements in the yield of one crop will negatively affect the yield of the companion crop in a wheatsoybean relay intercropping system. For soybean oriented producers, 2W:2S, 3W:2S and 4W:3S are good choices due to the high soybean grain yield. Arrangement IW:IS was intermediate for soybean and wheat yields. A land equivalent ratio (LER) of 1.46, on average, demonstrated the agronomic efficiency of relay intercropping over sole cropping.

show abstract

Skip‐Row and Equidistant‐Row Barley with Nitrogen Placement: Yield, Nitrogen Uptake, and Root Density

Cited by 14 publications

References 19 publications

Dissipation of Bromide and Metribuzin Affected by Tillage and Crop Residue Management in Subarctic Alaska

Dissipation of Bromide and Metribuzin Affected by Tillage and Crop Residue Management in Subarctic Alaska

Yield Formation and Plant Metabolism of Spring Barley in Response to Locally Injected Ammonium

Wheat-soybean relay intercropping: Temporal and spatial effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About