Canola
Same across treatments:
Emergence
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Oat
Same across treatments:
Emergence
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Barley
Same across treatments:
Emergence
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Pea
Same across treatments:
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Emergence
Control plots had 13% more individuals than the other treatments
Results for our research came with a few shortcomings this season. Biomass samples sent for plant analysis were futile because samples did not survive the trip to the laboratory facilities in Ontario despite our efforts to preserve its entirety.
Allelopathy is the direct or indirect impact on plant individuals, whether they belong or not to the same species. Established as substances composed of secondary metabolites, allelopathy can a) affect growth and yield of another plant and b) develop autotoxicity, where plant individuals’ secrete chemicals that prevent propagation and development of seedlings of same species growth.
Allelopathy can be used as a strategic tool to mitigate chemical weed management. Residues of allelopathic cover crops not only provide benefits to the soil but also help to reduce weed populations during their growth and likely for the cash crops seeded in the season thereafter.
Lupin was grown at the NPARA as a variety trial with three yellow pea varieties for comparison. There were some incidences of sclerotinia in the blue lupin varieties. These was ameliorated with Bravo (Chlorothalonil) fungicide. Moreover, there was also incidences of stink bugs on the trial on both blue and lupin varieties numbers of individual insects were very low and little damage was reported. Despite fungicide control and low numbers of stink bugs found it is possible both effects may have impacted yield and test weight. Emergence was monitored on June 10, June 24 and July 5 in lupin and yellow pea stands. In general, there were more emergent stands in blue lupin varieties of Lunabor and Boregine (P<0.0001) compared to white lupin varieties of Volos, Figaro, and Frieda. Probor blue lupin had the same emergent numbers as all yellow pea varieties (CDC Amarillo, AC Carver, and CDC Lewochko). Indeed, Blue lupin stand number was 34% greater than yellow pea varieties (P<0.0001) and 47% greater than white lupin varieties (P<0.0001); yellow pea emergent stands were 41% greater than white lupin varieties (P<0.0001).
Yield did not vary among varieties but among plant species. Yellow pea varieties were yielding more compared to blue and white lupin (P<0.0001). As such, yield from yellow pea was 90% greater than blue lupin yield (P<0.0001), and 23% greater than white lupin (P<0.0001). Blue lupin combined yields on the other hand, was 32% more than white lupin yields (P<0.0001). Yellow pea test weight was greater by 1% than both blue (P<0.0001) and white lupin (P<0.0001). Test weight was greater in blue lupin by 3% compared to that of white lupin (P<0.0001).
Nodulation was conducted through visual assessments. Growth and vigour, nodule colour as well as position were assessed through a point system (one through five, zero through five and one to three for each respectively). Statistical analysis was run for each of these parameters as well as total number of visual assessment points. Growth and vigour (P=0.2855), position (P=0.7592) and total point number (P=0.7592) were statistically the same among all varieties of lupin and yellow pea. Nodule colour ratings (P=0.0074) varied across varieties and plant species. As such, overall yellow pea varieties were 4 points higher in rating than blue lupin varieties (P=0.0057) and 1 point higher than white lupin varieties (0.0007). Pink in nodules denote presence of lehemoglobin, which is necessary for nitrogen fixation. The stronger this color shows more nitrogen fixation from legume individuals compared to white, green or brown which are not regarded as effective.
In conclusion, has strong emergence once the season starts but yield was poor despite proper weed and pathogen management strategies. It is possible that a stricter plan of weed management may encourage more yield.
Soil samples are sent to two different places, one is a standard lab which will provide you with a soil analysis and fertility recommendations and the other is WARD labs in Kearney Nebraska, which provides you with the same but, unlike the former, it shows you N content through a different method (thus concludes on fertility recommendations based on the N content measured from such method). This method is called Haney test, developed by Rick Haney of United States Department of Agriculture and Agricultural Research Service in Temple, Texas. Moreover, WARD labs gives you results for a phospholipid fatty acid test, which is used to profile different phylla of bacteria and fungi in the soil. Since both tests can recommend you how much N is required in the soil to seed the next crop for the upcoming season, it bears to ask the question, which one is better?
Over the last three years, canola, pea and wheat have been rotated in the same trial and treated under different fertilization rates. Fertilization treatments were set as follows. A) 0% (Control) – N recommendations from standard lab. 100% of the recommended N will be applied. B) N recommendations from the standard lab will be 30%. Then it will be topped up with that recommended by the WARD Haney analysis to equate the total recommended by Haney. C) N recommendations from WARD lab. 100% of the N recommended from the Haney soil test will be added.
The objective of this experiment is to observe which fertilizer recommendation (either one provided by an A&L Laboratories soil chemical analysis or one provided by a WARD Laboratories Haney soil test) is best for crops such as wheat, canola and pea.
Field pea is a poor competitor crop. As a temporal solution to control faster growing weeds and alleviate competition, fields are sprayed with Group 2 herbicides which have shown to cause herbicide weed resistance. It is hypothesized that if the seeding rate is increased, yield will be compensated despite weed competition. In addition, if field pea is intersown with cover crops, there is greater weed suppression. This is an economic advantage as it removes the necessity for herbicide application and inclusion of cover crops supply additional organic matter to the soil. This two-year split block experiment consisted of a Group 2 herbicide (in this case REFINE SG) application to spring wheat. Plots were either sprayed with the herbicide at 12 g ac-1 or left untreated. The following year, field pea was sown at three different seeding rates (90, 180 and 270 lb ac-1). Each of these rates were either sown alone or intersown with either annual rye, barley, oat and rye at 5, 35, 35, and 17 lb ac-1. Weeds were counted using 25 cm quadrats every two weeks and grouped as either broadleaf or grass.
Most of the soil organic matter is composed of humic substances (Nardi et al. 2002). Humic substances nurture plant cell membrane functions and encourage nutrient uptake. In the past ten years, there has been a growing body of evidence supporting the use of bio-stimulants in agriculture for both horticultural and field crop production systems, where they have been shown to increase root growth, enhanced nutrient uptake, and increase stress tolerance. du Jardin (2015) defined plant bio-stimulants in five categories: 1) microbial inoculants, 2) humic acids, 3) fulvic acids, 4) protein hydrolysates, and 5) amino acids, and seaweed extracts.
Fulvic acid, is of particular interest, as it is a natural chelator and thus helps facilitate migration of metal ions and nutrients across tissue membranes (Sun et al, 2012). It also retains many properties that make it ideal for foliar tank mixes, such as: (a) high solubility under different pH conditions (b) high cation exchange capacity, and (c) recorded absence of antagonistic effects with nutrients or pesticides. Owing to its low molecular weight (a few hundred Daltons), it can easily cross plant tissue membranes, and remains in solution even at high salt concentrations. All of which are considered ideal for foliar nutrient applications.
At the North Peace Applied Research Association, an experiment was designed to determine if foliar applications of Nitrogen with or without additions of fulvic acid have an effect on yield and leaf nitrogen content in canola, field pea and wheat. For field pea, only one treatment was conducted where foliar application of fulvic acid at 0.65 L ac-1 was applied at the 6th node and at the 12th node stage. This treatment was compared against a control where peas were sown in furrow with 13-33-0-15S at 120 lb ac-1. Above ground biomass was collected one week after foliar applications on each crop. For canola and wheat, the experiment was designed as a complete randomized block design with four treatments: (1) Dry urea at 150-175 lb ac-1 treated with fulvic acid at 0.3 L ac-1 applied at seeding, (2) Dry urea at seeding at 80-105 lb ac-1 followed by two foliar applications of liquid urea at 20 L ac-1, (3) Dry urea at 80-105 lb ac-1 treated with fulvic acid at 0.3 L ac-1 at seeding and two foliar applications of liquid urea with fulvic acid at 20 L ac-1 and 0.65 L ac-1, respectively and (4) seeding application of dry urea at 80-105 lb ac-1 treated with fulvic acid at 0.3 L ac-1 followed by two foliar applications of fulvic acid with a nitrogen, calcium and magnesium supplement (Nitro 18) at 0.65 L ac-1 and 20 L ac-1, respectively. In addition, a control treatment was included consisting of a sole application of dry urea at seeding at 150-175 lb ac-1.
Percentage of moisture content was greater in the Fabelle faba bean variety compared to that found in Snowbird (P=0.0010). There was no difference in number of emergent plants per squared foot (P=0.4491) and yield (P=0.3564). From all results it can be suggested that all varieties will provide similar yield and there is no statistical difference in its productivity.
Knowing the levels of nitrogen in your soil provides a base in which one can confidently decide on the amount of fertilizer that must be applied to achieve a desired yield. Similarly, being conscious of carbon levels in soil provides an indication of amendments required, such as manure or green manure (cover crops). To know how much N is available to the plant, a standard soil chemical test exposes soil samples from the field to a salt solution. The cations from the salt solution compete with cations on clay mineral surface exchange sites, thereby releasing N ions in solution. Extraction of nitrogen and/or carbon can also be achieved by combustion, where the soil samples are burned, and the emanating smoke is tested for C and N content. Soil chemical analyses will provide results for C as percentage of organic matter (%OM) and N as either ammonium (NH4+) and/or nitrate (NO3-) ions. The Haney soil analysis test, developed by Rick Haney at United States Department of Agriculture research station in Temple, Texas, is an alternative test to the standard soil chemical analyses for carbon and nitrogen. The Haney soil test replaces a salt solution with water as the extraction medium.
This project investigates methods to lower input costs and maximize profit, not necessarily yield. The rate of fertilizer applied to a crop should influence its growth and the amount of C and N readily available for the season. Cash crops such as canola, pea, and wheat were selected and sown under three different fertility levels (no fertilizer, 30%, and a 100% of the nitrogen rates recommended by the Haney soil test). This experiment was treated as a randomized complete block design and replicated four times. This trial will be conducted again in 2021.
Canola
There was no significant difference in canola yield when subject to either 0%, 30%, or 100% of the Haney soil test recommended fertilization levels (P=0.13). Applying 0% of the recommended nitrogen led to the lowest yield of 6.8 bu/ac; applying 100% led to the highest, 8.3 bu/ac. The C.V. is 54.8, too high for results to be accepted as reliable. As with other experiments, this is likely due to weather-induced stress.
Field Pea
Treatment yields all fell within the range of 6-9 bu/acre. There was no significant difference in pea yields when subject to either 0%, 30%, or 100% of the Haney soil test nitrogen recommendations (P=0.4). As with canola, the coefficient of variation coinciding with the pea yield analysis was high at 28.4. Consequently, the results are unlikely to be indicative of true treatment effects.
Spring Wheat
The mean weight yields from each of the three treatments spanned two bushels/acre (50 bu/ac to 52 bu/acre). Similarly, test weight values for each treatment were nearly the same, 63-64 lb/bu. There was no significant difference in wheat yield regardless of the level of nitrogen applied (P=0.98). Likewise, test weight values were not significantly different (P=0.47), nor were protein contents (P=0.85).
Six of the eight intercrops were shown to yield more as an intercrop than as monocrops sown separately across an equivalent area of land. These mixes included faba bean and wheat, barley and peas, oats and peas, oats and crimson clover, wheat and red clover, and barley and red lentils. As seen from the yield graph below, peas did not emerge in this year’s intercrop trial, nor did canola due to excess moisture. The C.V. value corresponding with the yield analysis is 60.3, thus results should not be considered reliable.
This year’s faba bean trial consisted of seven varieties. Unlike peas, this pulse crop was relatively resilient to the high moisture environment that defined the 2020 growing season.
Though production ranged from 40 bu/acre to a high of nearly 64 bu/acre, the analysis could not define a significant difference between the output yields (P=0.05). The lack of statistical confidence in this experiment is due to a high C.V. value of 20.5, which indicates there was a large amount of variability in the experiment.
