cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
hardnox604008
Advisor

N loss and corn

Something I've wondered about, will begin to do some scouting to assess when fields are dry enough to enter.

 

When we began to dial down N rates as economics changed (a good thing for a lot of reasonas and we've seen some amazing efficiency) I nevertheless wondered about a year like '98.

 

In that year we had severe saturation and high temps in late june early july on an othrewise timely and good looking corn crop. Fields that didn't get supplemental N did show significant yield loss.

 

We put on 10 gal of 28 with streamers on some fileds and check strips were 30 bushels less.

 

Don't know but it is interesting. My take on the lower N rates always was that they'd probably be fine except in severe denitrification years.

 

Don't know, we'll see. best, h

0 Kudos
9 Replies
Mike M2692830
Senior Contributor

Re: N loss and corn

The should have been a year for some extra N. Had a few ears of sweetcorn last night and a couple of those had about an inch of tipback..a sign of N shortage. Nice ears but slightly short in length. Doesn't have to mean anything in the field corn but then it could....MikeM

0 Kudos
bullrider685114
Veteran Reader

Re: N loss and corn

Early planted corn, saw that potenial ws there. put 200 Lbs total N in split application with no after beans credit. Pulled sample corn at milk stage 22 round 42 long with another 3/4 ear on the stalk 32,500 pop. Scared to say what yeild at this time will be. WC Indiana.

0 Kudos
Mark, ncIA
Frequent Contributor

Re: N loss and corn

583.92 bushels per acre? 

0 Kudos
dapper7
Senior Contributor

Re: N loss and corn

way to go bull!!!!!!!!! d7

0 Kudos
bullrider685114
Veteran Reader

Re: N loss and corn

Uhh.... your assumption for the second ear yield equation plug might be off whatever that was? 

0 Kudos
timetippingpt
Honored Advisor

Re: N loss and corn

My calcs would give you 330 minus 10 percent for heat reducing the ear fill time. so, Bullrider, for whatever percent of your crop that is like your sample, you should be pushing 300. I would really doubt you have 32,500 ears of that size over much of the area, but goodness knows that some of WC IN has had simply perfect weather this year, the dirt is good, and the farmers are excellent, so I think 300 is fair for you to expect.

 

Of course, you could  drive 30 miles in most any direction and run into some yellow 130 bu corn too.

 

My question for the esteemed members here, why does anyone think the crop condition ratings are accurate, or that they are good at predicting final yield? Variations have been quite large over the years. This is a flood year for many. Average corn should be the expected and the crop ratings can never adeqautely capture flooding, denitrifiyin issues, etc. It is just not in the equation they use.

 

Rough natioanal guess puts us at average or roughly 160, just tight enough for the markets to jump around after harvest. Sounds like a great place to be.

0 Kudos
jrsiajdranch
Veteran Advisor

Re: N loss and corn

Ken I wonder the same thing.  USDA sends out the beauty pagent judges and they go hmmm, this looks good so lets say it all looks good.  Nothing more than a "swag" .  When I start chopping corn here in Kossuth county Iowa I can give you for real numbers not till then.  But hey my crop is 50 percent awsome 50% screwed up by farmer. so should come in close to 300 average. HA HA!. JR

0 Kudos
Roadpizza
Senior Reader

Re: N loss and corn

I'm surprised nobody, including tippy, hasn't addressed the question of where the N goes.  The real issue for us is how do we hold and use the N we apply.  I don't want to spend any more time or money on the crop.  I want my N to stay put and satisfy a great crop regardless of condtions.  Is that too much to ask?  Well,...maybe for now.  Southern MN looks awfully good.

0 Kudos
dapper7
Senior Contributor

Re: N loss and corn

road, look at ammonium sulfate. 200#  delivers 200 plus corn routinely for me on rotation corn. that gives you 42 # of n. keep your calcium levels up around 65 % saturation. try it on a small plot if you can find a bulk source.  its the most stable source that i am aware of. if you are in s minn you probably have high mag soils and over time this will reduce those levels but keep an eye on the cal levels. another thing you can do is sidedress with 28% with 2# of sugar to the acre if your acreage allows. dump it in while the tank is filling. this slows down the release and feeds soil microbes.  other wise to answer your original question, the n ends up in the water table, not where we need it or want it. d7

0 Kudos