No-Till Wheat and Grain Sorghum Rotations Presented by Gary Strickland Extension Educator, Agriculture Jackson County

Why Residue Management is Important in Dryland Crop Production - Agronomically Soil Erosion Prevention Increased Soil Water Storage Capacity Increased Water Infiltration Rates Decreased Soil Evaporation Rates Increase of In-Season Precipitation Use Efficiency Increased Organic Matter Pool Increased Cation Exchange Complex (CEC) Increased Anion Exchange Complex (AEC) Decrease in Soil Compaction in the Long Term

Some Previous Research Thoughts on Grain Sorghum and Wheat Crop residues increased in season precipitation use efficiency Over a 58 year time period, yield increases were related 46% to improved hybrids and 93% to improved soil water at planting This study showed that Grain Sorghum and Wheat Yields were greater in rotation sequences than in mono-crop situations

Research Thoughts Continued However, another study: “Deep Tillage and Crop Rotation Effects on Cotton, Soybean, and Grain Sorghum on Clayey Soils”, (Wesley, et al., 2001), showed yields were increased but not net returns due to the low value of the grain sorghum component With wheat, soil water at planting was increased with corn and grain sorghum rotations but not with sunflower or soybean. Wheat grain fill and number of heads were better with corn and grain sorghum rotations. Study showed that high mineral N in the one inch seed zone area indicated that starter-band or side-dress applications were not necessary for optimum economic return to N fertilization.

Research Thoughts Continued Soil organic matter increased by 35% in the 0-5 cm range in the NT system when compared to the CT system Potentially mineralizable N increased in this same soil depth range by 54% in the NT system However when looking at the 0-15 cm soil depth range there were no tillage differences

Current Work in Jackson County Tillage and Cropping Systems Study to Increase Dryland Crop Production Tillage Systems: (NT) No Tillage; (CT) Conventional Tillage Cropping Systems: (C-W-GS) Cotton-Wheat-Grain Sorghum; (C-W) Cotton-Wheat; (C-GS) Cotton-Grain Sorghum; (W-DCGS-C) Wheat-Double Crop Grain Sorghum-Cotton; (C) Cotton; (W) Wheat; (GS) Grain Sorghum

Soil Organic Matter Results

Tillage by Rotations System OM Comparisons (2002-2006) TS C-W-GS C-W C-GS W-DCGS-C C W GS NT 1.92(2) 1.53(6) 2.02(2) 1.51(6) 1.67(2) 1.84(6) 2.15(2) 1.67(6) 1.89(2) 1.74(6) 1.94(2) 1.62(6) 2.09(2) 1.80(6) CT 1.69(2) 1.70(6) 1.66(2) 1.78(6) 1.61(2) 1.68(6) 1.78(2) 1.92(6) 1.63(2) 1.91(2) 1.72(6) 1.71(6)

Crop by Cropping System Comparisons

2003 Grain Sorghum Production Economics Treatments Yield – Lbs./A Returns - $/A W-DCGS-C(NT) 1023 $1.05 GS(NT) Lost Crop $-32.03 W-DCGS-C(CT) 1092 $3.73 GS(CT) $-39.63

2004 Grain Sorghum Production Economics Treatments Yield – Lbs./A Returns - $/A C-GS(NT) 3108 $37.76 GS(NT) 2955 $31.84 C-GS(CT) 3774 $46.78 GS(CT) 2627 $5.46

2005 Grain Sorghum Production Economics Treatments Yield – Lbs./A Returns - $/A GS(NT) 4963 $60.10 GS(CT) 4827 $51.82

2006 Grain Sorghum Production Economics Treatments Yield – Lbs./A Returns - $/A C-W-GS 2274(NT) Lost Crop (CT) $20.38(NT) $-103.53(CT) C-GS 3709(NT) $76.32 $-103.53 W-DCGS-C Lost Crop (NT) $-49.69 GS 2864 (NT) $43.39

2007 Grain Sorghum Production Economics Treatments Yield – Lbs./A Returns - $/A GS(NT) 4441 $182.00 GS(CT) 2415 $14.82

2002/2003 Wheat Production Economics Trts. Gr. Yield-Bu./A Returns - $/A For. Yield – Lbs./A Beef Gain - $/A W-DCGS-C(NT) 15 $-4.97 N/A W(NT) 23 $19.00 W-DCGS-C(CT_ 20 $-9.76 1060 $90.60 W(CT) 22 $-4.32 1221 $103.79

2003/2004 Wheat Production Economics Treatments Grain Yield – Bu./A Returns - $/A W(NT) 68 $164.00 W(CT) 57 $115.00

2004/2005 Wheat Production Economics Trts. Gr. Yield-Bu./A Returns-$/A For.Yield-Lbs./A Beef Gain $/A CWGS (NT) 73.6 $159.20 1553 $155.30 CW (NT) 61.3 $119.40 1979 $197.90 W (NT) 51.1 $86.30 1265 $126.50 CWGS (CT) 64.2 $124.60 2073 $207.30 CW (CT) 68.2 $137.60 1624 $162.40 W (CT) 55.5 $96.15 849 $84.86

2005/2006 Wheat Production Economics Trts. Gr. Yield-Bu./A Returns - $/A W-DCGS-C(NT) Lost Crop $-21.86 W(NT) W-DCGS-C(CT) 53 $106.54 W(CT) 21 $6.75

2006/2007 Wheat Production Economics Trts. Gr. Yield-Bu./A Returns - $/A For. Yield – Lbs./A Beef Gain - $/A W(NT) 49 $287.00 1055 $105.00 W(CT) $266.00 1047

Rotation System Comparisons

CS Average Crop-Year Returns above Production Inputs ($/A) Potential Beef Gain Returns ($/A) C-W-GS 111.67(NT) 109.08(CT) 117.98(NT) 96.01(CT) C-W 133.87(NT) 82.45(CT) 197.86(NT) 77.28(CT) C-GS 136.80(NT) 75.87(CT) ---(NT) -34.02(CT) W-DCGS-C 81.92(NT) 60.79(CT) 32.61(NT) 11.55(CT) C 134.69(NT) 109.70(CT) 27.64(NT) -23.01(CT) W 110.24(NT) 95.94(CT) 116.04(NT) 96.35(CT) GS 79.29(NT) -10.33(CT) (35.04) --- (NT) -29.03(CT)

No Till Grain Sorghum Production - Some Practical Points Plant Management – Plant Populations, Soil Temperatures, Planting Dates and Times, Varieties, Soil to Seed Contact Fertilizer – Economics, Product Characteristics, Application Method Herbicides – Know Your Weeds, Application Timing, Coverage, Crop Rotation Concerns, Economics

Some Grain Sorghum Herbicide Options Roundup (preplant or preemergence) Dual Magnum (pre-emergence app., safened seed only) Lasso (pre-emergence, safened seed only) Atrazine (post-emergence app., crop rotation concerns with cotton and wheat) Bicep (Dual + Atrazine, pre, heavier soils only) Aim (postemergence) Phenoxy Herb. (2,4-D or Banvel) Buctril (postemergence) Peak (postemergence) Basagran

No-Till Wheat – Some Practical Points Plant Management – Wheat after Wheat or Rotation System, Planting Rates, Variety Selection, Seed Treatment Fertilizer - Economics, Product Characteristics, Application Method Herbicides – Know Your Weeds, Application Timing, Coverage, Crop Rotation Concerns, Economics

Grass Herbicides (In Season) Wild Oat Control Puma Osprey Olympus Flex Hoelon Finesse G&B Axial Beyond (Clearfield Wheat Only) Bromegrass Control Maverick Olympus Olympus Flex Finesse G&B

Broadleaf Weed Herb. (In Season) Glean Finesse Maverick Peak Ally Amber Harmony Extra MCPA and 2,4-D Banvel Beyond (Clearfield Wheat Only) Area Broadleaf Weeds Henbit Pepperweed Cutleaf Evening Primrose Field Pennycress Sheperdspurse Tansey Mustard Flixweed Prickley Lettuce

Conclusions – To Present Study, in general, showing a trend of higher yields with the NT System treatments. In terms of returns above production inputs the NT systems are showing clear advantage. The wheat only NT treatments are still performing as good as the CT treatments with a slight advantage in returns. Finally, with only a few exceptions the crop rotations have indicated a trend for higher yields and returns in the year comparisons. However, when averaged across years the C and W only systems (especially in the CT system) are currently doing as good if not better than some of the crop rotations in terms of return dollars.