Sensor-Based Approaches for Cotton Nitrogen Management.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Do In and Post-Season Plant-Based Measurements Predict Corn Performance and/ or Residual Soil Nitrate? Patrick J. Forrestal, R. Kratochvil, J.J Meisinger.
Advertisements

Use of sensor based nitrogen rates to improve maize nitrogen use efficiency in the Northern Argentinean Pampas. Ricardo Melchiori 1, Octavio Caviglia 1,
Climate Data and Crop Modeling Joel Paz, Gerrit Hoogenboom, Axel Garcia y Garcia, Larry Guerra, Clyde Fraisse and James W. Jones The University of Georgia.
Crop Canopy Sensors for High Throughput Phenomic Systems
FIELD-SCALE N APPLICATION USING CROP REFLECTANCE SENSORS Ken Sudduth and Newell Kitchen USDA-ARS Translating Missouri USDA-ARS Research and Technology.
EVALUATION OF GREENSEEKER FOR NITROGEN FETILIZATION IN COTTON ALABAMA REPORT 1 Evaluation of Green Seeker for Nitrogen Fertilization in Cotton – Preliminary.
Sensor Orientation to maize canopy row and estimating biomass and Nitrogen Status Paul Hodgen, Fernando Solari, Jim Schepers, John Shanahan, Dennis Francis.
Use of Active Optical Sensor in North Dakota Dave Franzen and Lakesh Sharma, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.
Sensor research and algorithm development for corn in ND L.K. Sharma, D.W. Franzen, H. Bu, R. Ashley, G. Endres and J. Teboh North Dakota State University,
The Nitrogen Requirement and Use Efficiency of Sweet Sorghum Produced in Central Oklahoma. D. Brian Arnall, Chad B. Godsey, Danielle Bellmer, Ray Huhnke.
Comparison of Active Optical Sensors
1 CANOPY REFLECTANCE (HRWW AND HRSW) IN SOUTH DAKOTA ECONOMIC OPTIMUM NITROGEN RATE FOR HRSW IN SOUTH DAKOTA Nitrogen Use Efficiency Meeting Cheryl Reese*,
Precision Agriculture in Europe Olga S. Walsh BIOEN/SOIL 4213 Spring 2007.
Outline Introduction – Importance for SE Mississippi State – Sensor Comparison – Wavelength/Index Analysis University of Arkansas – Active detection of.
Comparison of Commercial Crop Canopy Sensors Ken Sudduth Newell Kitchen Scott Drummond USDA-ARS, Columbia, Missouri.
NUE Workshop: Improving NUE using Crop Sensing, Waseca, MN
Nitrogen Use Efficiency Workshop Canopy Reflectance Signatures: Developing a Crop Need-Based Indicator for Sidedress Application of N Fertilizer to Canola.
Cotton. Leading Countries 1.China 1.China 2.USA 2.USA 3.India 3.India 4.Pakistan 4.Pakistan 5.Uzbekistan 5.Uzbekistan.
New Technology and Strategies for Nitrogen Management.
Challenges to sensor- based N-Management for Cotton E.M. Barnes 1, T. Sharp 2, J. Wilkerson 3, Randy Taylor 2, Stacy Worley 3 1 Cotton Incorporated, Cary.
Cotton Research Oklahoma State University. Exp. 439, Altus OK
GreenSeeker® Handheld Crop Sensor
Determining the Most Effective Growth Stage in Corn Production for Spectral Prediction of Grain Yield and Nitrogen Response Department of Plant and Soil.
Use of By-Plot CV’s for Refining Mid-Season Fertilizer N Rates Daryl Brian Arnall Plant and Soil Sciences Department Oklahoma State University.
Use of Alternative Concepts for Determining Preplant and Mid-Season N rates.
Reverse N lookup, sensor based N rates using Weather improved INSEY Nicole Remondet Rationale Weather is an aspect of agricultural sciences that cannot.
The Use of Red and Green Reflectance in the Calculation of NDVI for Wheat, Bermudagrass, and Corn Robert W. Mullen SOIL 4213 Robert W. Mullen SOIL 4213.
Optimizing Nitrogen and Irrigation Timing for Corn Fertigation Applications Using Remote Sensing Ray Asebedo, David Mengel, and Randall Nelson Kansas State.
UTILIZATION OF CROP SENSORS TO DETECT COTTON GROWTH AND N NUTRITION
2013 NUE Conference Des Moines, Iowa August 5-7 Jacob T. Bushong.
Active-Crop Sensor Calibration Using the Virtual-Reference Concept K. H. Holland (Holland Scientific) J. S. Schepers (USDA-ARS, retired) 8 th ECPA Conference.
Development of a SBNRC Calculator for Cotton D. Brian Arnall Oklahoma State University W. Raun, J. Solie, M. Stone, R. Taylor, O. Walsh, D. Edmonds, C.
Variable-Rate N Fertilization of Wheat and Corn in the Mid-Atlantic Variable-Rate N Fertilization of Wheat and Corn in the Mid-Atlantic Wade Thomason,
Automated Calibration Stamp Technology for Improved In-Season Nitrogen Fertilization K. Freeman, R. Teal, C. Mack, K. Martin, B. Arnall, K. Desta, J. Solie,
Development of Vegetation Indices as Economic Thresholds for Control of Defoliating Insects of Soybean James BoardVijay MakaRandy PriceDina KnightMatthew.
Spectral Reflectance-based Nitrogen Management for Subsurface Drip Irrigated Cotton Raj Yabaji, Kevin Bronson, Cary Green, Eduardo Segarra, and Adi Malapati.
Generalized Algorithm for Variable Rate Nitrogen Application on Cereal Grains John B. Solie, Regents Professor Biosystems and Agri. Engineering Dept. William.
Moving Beyond NDVI for Active Sensing in Cotton
N Fertilization in Colorado Raj Khosla Colorado State University May 19 th & 20 th Oklahoma State University Raj Khosla Colorado State University May 19.
Sensor Based Technologies in Mexico CIMMYT (Dr. Ivan Ortiz-Monasterio ) Oklahoma State University (Yumiko Kanke)
Three Alternative Nitrogen Management Strategies for Cereal Grain Production Brian Arnall Brian Arnall Plant and Soil Sciences Department Oklahoma State.
Generalized Algorithm for Variable Rate Nitrogen Application on Cereal Grains John B. Solie, Regents Professor Biosystems and Agri. Engineering Dept. William.
NFOA for Wheat and Corn. Yield Potential Definitions INSEYIn Season Estimated Yield = NDVI (Feekes 4 to 6)/days from planting to sensing (days.
Expression of Spatial Variability in Corn (Zea mays L.) as Influenced by Growth Stage Using Optical Sensor Measurements By-Plant Prediction of Corn (Zea.
Theory of Predicting Crop Response to Non-Limiting Nitrogen.
Active and Passive Reflectance Sensor Comparison in Cotton Kevin F. Bronson Texas A & M Univ. – Texas Agric. Exp. Stn., Lubbock, TX.
Drew Tucker and Dave Mengel KSU Agronomy An update on Kansas sensor based N recommendations.
Exploratory Research in Corn
Conservation Tillage in Cotton: A Mississippi Delta Perspective
Evaluation of early drought tolerant maize genotypes under low nitrogen conditions Nyasha E. Goredema1, Ms Nakai Goredema2, Ezekia Svotwa1, Gabriel Soropa1,
Developing Sidedress N Recommendations for Corn in Central PA
NDVI Active Sensors in Sugarbeet Production for In-Season and Whole Rotation Nitrogen Management.
Evolution of OSU Optical Sensor Based Variable Rate Applicator
Evaluation of the Yield Potential Based NFOA for Cotton
Topsoil Depth at the Centralia Site
Cotton Sensor Research Update
Crop-based Approach for In-season N Application
How High Should NUE Be, and Can Knowing Soil N Help Us Get There
G. V. Johnson and W. R. Raun Dept. Plant & Soil Sciences
E.V. Lukina, K.W. Freeman,K.J. Wynn, W.E. Thomason, G.V. Johnson,
Development of Cotton N Fertilization Algorithms, Southern USA
Dave Franzen – North Dakota State University
History of Predicting Yield Potential
Utilizing Indicator crop N-rich strips for anticipating pre plant and side dress Nitrogen rates for maize. Rationale Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) in cereal.
Landscape Position Zones and Reference Strips
Annual ASA Meeting, Indianapolis
UNL Algorithm for N in Corn
Late-Season Prediction of Wheat Grain Yield and Protein
K. Freeman, B. Raun, K. Martin, R.Teal, D. Arnall, M. Stone, J. Solie
Tastes Great. Less Filling
Presentation transcript:

Sensor-Based Approaches for Cotton Nitrogen Management

Introduction 2008 Sensor Projects Sensor-based approaches to manage nitrogen Core data collection

USDA, NASS

Perennial plant managed as annual Indeterminate flowering pattern 50 lbs N – per lint bale (1 bale = 480 lbs) Over-application of N: Energy partition to vegetative vs. reproductive development Large plants prevent efficient harvest Growth regulators applied to control vegetative development

2008 Sensor Projects StateInvestigatorsInputs Managed Based on Modulated Active Light Sensors PGRDefoliantNitrogenInsecticidePlant MapIrrigation AlabamaS. Norwood, A. Winstead, J. Fulton K. Balkcom ArizonaT. Clarke, D. Hunsaker ArkansasM. Mozaffarri GeorgiaG. Vellidis, C. Perry H. Schomberg LouisianaR. Leonard B. Tubana, D. Boquet, E. Clawson MississippiJ. Varco MissouriG. Stevens, P. Scharf, E. Vories New MexicoT. Carrillo, J. Ellington North CarolinaG. Robinson OklahomaR. Taylor, T. Sharp, S. Osborne, J. Banks, B. Arnall, B. Raun South CarolinaM. Jones, P. Bauer A. Khalilian, W. Henderson TennesseeJ. Wilkerson O. Gwathmey J. Larson (Economics) TexasK. Bronson D. Martin A. Thomasson, R. Sui custom sensor + other sensor + other sensor + other sensor + other sensor

Sensor-Based Approaches Relate yield potential with sensor readings and a well fertilized nitrogen plot Relate yield potential with sensor readings and a well fertilized nitrogen plot Direct regression relationship between sensor reading compared to a reference nitrogen plot Direct regression relationship between sensor reading compared to a reference nitrogen plot A growth stage specific relationship between the sensor reading and N rate A growth stage specific relationship between the sensor reading and N rate Relationship between historic yield, soil type and the sensor reading Relationship between historic yield, soil type and the sensor reading

Variables that determine crop N requirements Estimation Procedures Crop yield level Yield goal; history (Yield potential predictive equation) Available soil N organic matter mineralization organic matter mineralization residual N residual N atmospheric deposition atmospheric deposition legumes credit legumes credit nitrate in irrigation water nitrate in irrigation water manure manure Soil and tissue analyses (Estimates of increase in yield due to N using early-season canopy reflectance- response index)

SBNRC Algorithm OSU – Arnall et al. N Rate = (YP0 * RI – YP0) * %N / NUE N Rate = (YP0 * RI – YP0) * %N / NUE potential cotton lint yield, kg/ha = e * INSEY potential cotton lint yield, kg/ha = e * INSEY cotton lint yield, kg/ha = e * INSEY cotton lint yield, kg/ha = e * INSEY Where: Where: Yield Prediction Model: YP0 = e * INSEY Yield Prediction Model: YP0 = e * INSEY Response Index: RI = * RINDVI – Response Index: RI = * RINDVI – %N = 0.09 %N = 0.09 Nitrogen Use Efficiency: NUE = 0.50 Nitrogen Use Efficiency: NUE = 0.50

SBNRC Algorithm OSU – Arnall et al.

Initiated in 2008, 3 sites in North Louisiana Growth stage: two weeks after early bloom INSEY is defined as NDVI divided by the number of days from planting to sensing

This study also consider the impact of PGR (applied at early bloom) on the yield relationship.

Soil specific yield by INSEY relationships (soil electrical conductivity categories) Coastal plain soils of South Carolina INSEY was calculated as days from emergence to date of sensing.

Best-band-ratio predictor of economically optimal nitrogen rate

Calculating N rate based on NDVI and refNDVI: Calculating N rate based on NDVI and refNDVI: Crop Circle 210: N rate (lb/ac) = [549 x (NDVI/refNDVI)] Crop Circle 210: N rate (lb/ac) = [549 x (NDVI/refNDVI)] GreenSeeker: N rate (lb/ac) = [732 x (NDVI/refNDVI)] GreenSeeker: N rate (lb/ac) = [732 x (NDVI/refNDVI)] Cropscan: N rate (lb/ac) = [673 x (NDVI/refNDVI)] Cropscan: N rate (lb/ac) = [673 x (NDVI/refNDVI)] Ceilings on total N rate are use: Ceilings on total N rate are use: 200 lbs N/ac for heavy soils (clay, clay loam) 200 lbs N/ac for heavy soils (clay, clay loam) 150 for other soils 150 for other soils Farmers decide on lowest and highest N rates for the system (within the ceiling) Farmers decide on lowest and highest N rates for the system (within the ceiling)

Relationship between GNDVI or NDVI at a specific stage of growth and fertilizer N rate Leaf N approach (graph): Utilize N rates to that produce leaf N values at various physiological stages

Example of established relationship at the third week of squaring (experimental data): Example of established relationship at the third week of squaring (experimental data): Fertilizer N rate equivalence (FNRE) = (GNDVI or NDVI on-the-go value) Variable N rate = FNRE (experimental data) – target rate Variable N rate = FNRE (experimental data) – target rate Ceilings on total N rate (cutoff values) Ceilings on total N rate (cutoff values)

Bracket the response of real-time nitrogen prescription algorithms Bracket the response of real-time nitrogen prescription algorithms Incorporate a map of historic information: identify areas within a field as historically low or high yielding and increment/decrement the N prescription accordingly Incorporate a map of historic information: identify areas within a field as historically low or high yielding and increment/decrement the N prescription accordingly Additional agronomic data to determine the size of increment or decrement in response to yield potential is needed. Additional agronomic data to determine the size of increment or decrement in response to yield potential is needed. Historic Yield Potential NDVILowAverageHigh R--R-R AverageR-RR+ LowRR+R++ Where: R is the average recommended rate, R+ and R++ are positively incremented, and R- and R- - are decremented from the recommended rate.

Canopy chlorophyll content index (CCCI) – relative estimate of the chlorophyll content in a crop canopy Canopy chlorophyll content index (CCCI) – relative estimate of the chlorophyll content in a crop canopy CCCI accounts for variation in canopy density and less likely to give false indications of low chlorophyll content (vs. simple ratio or NDVI) CCCI accounts for variation in canopy density and less likely to give false indications of low chlorophyll content (vs. simple ratio or NDVI) Well-suited for the three-band sensor (Crop Circle) Well-suited for the three-band sensor (Crop Circle)

Develop a simplified yield potential nitrogen rate estimate – under discussion. Producer usable approach

Core Data Collection Growth stages for plant data collection: Growth stages for plant data collection: Early squaring: 3 to 7 squares Early squaring: 3 to 7 squares Early bloom: 2 to 3 blooms Early bloom: 2 to 3 blooms Mid bloom Mid bloom Peak bloom Peak bloom Nitrogen rates: 0, 90, and 120 lb N/ac Nitrogen rates: 0, 90, and 120 lb N/ac

Core Data Collection Soils data set (Mehlich-3 P & K, soil NO 3 ) Soils data set (Mehlich-3 P & K, soil NO 3 ) Preplant samples Preplant samples Post-harvest samples Post-harvest samples

Core Data Collection Within season plant information: Within season plant information: Sensor readings Sensor readings Within season plant information: Within season plant information: Sensor readings Sensor readings

Core Data Collection Within season plant information: Within season plant information: SPAD readings and plant height SPAD readings and plant height Tissue samples for leaf N Tissue samples for leaf N

Hand harvest – 13.3 ft of row Machine – 40 feet of 2 rows Determine seed cotton and lint weight Seed N content Hand harvest – 13.3 ft of row Machine – 40 feet of 2 rows Determine seed cotton and lint weight Seed N content Yield Data Collection

Other Record Keeping Varieties Varieties Planting and harvest dates Planting and harvest dates Nitrogen rates, timing, application methods and N sources Nitrogen rates, timing, application methods and N sources PIX rates and dates (if applicable) PIX rates and dates (if applicable) Irrigation amounts (indicate in furrow, pivot, drip) Irrigation amounts (indicate in furrow, pivot, drip) Rainfall Rainfall

One or more of these approaches should be ready for extended on-farm evaluation in Will this end with one concept: analysis of core data: correction procedures (thermal time, days from planting to sensing etc.) components (yield potential, response index, simple ratio)