April 2000 Articles
April 2000 Articles
[Back] [Next Article]
Seven Years at the Research Farm
By Randy Simonson, Ph.D.
Technical Services Manager
The year 2000 will be the eighth season for the TSM Research Farm at Catlin. The farm has served us well in providing a place where we can bring fertilizer dealers and farmers in to discuss soil fertility and to show them what is happening in the field. The farm also has provided us with a lot of fertility data. At the TSM Winter Conferences, we presented this data to the dealers in attendance.
| Year | Total No. of Plots | Wins | Ties | Losses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. | % | No. | % | No. | % | ||
| 1992 | 19 | 16 | 84% | 1 | 5% | 2 | 11% |
| 1993 | 30 | 26 | 87% | 0 | 0% | 4 | 13% |
| 1994 | 41 | 38 | 93% | 2 | 5% | 1 | 2% |
| 1995 | 24 | 21 | 88% | 1 | 4% | 2 | 8% |
| 1996 | 39 | 34 | 87% | 0 | 0% | 5 | 13% |
| 1997 | 73 | 65 | 89% | 1 | 1% | 7 | 10% |
| 1998 | 39 | 35 | 90% | 2 | 5% | 2 | 5% |
| 1999 | 31 | 28 | 90% | 1 | 3% | 2 | 6% |
| Total | 296 | 263 | 89% | 8 | 3% | 25 | 8% |
On the farm we have two main areas with our fertility trials. One area is planted to corn and the other is planted to soybeans. Then the next year the crops are rotated. Our main treatments are three TSM budgets and the University of Illinois recommendations. The three TSM budgets are TSM A, TSM E and TSM I. TSM A is a high application of fertilizer. TSM E is what more than 75% of our growers are on and it is the budget we consider to be the most efficient program. The TSM I budget is a low budget with low fertilizer applications at a lower cost.
The soil tests show some interesting trends. The charts of phosphorus levels (Chart 1) and potassium levels (Chart 2) show all the fertilizer treatments moving in a similar fashion. The numbers on the top show the relative yields for each year. For example, in 1994, the corn and soybean yields were 13% greater than the average. In 1995, the yields were 19% less than average. From this we can see if there is any correlation between yields and the soil tests. We would expect after a high yield, like in 1994 and 1999, the soil test would go down. This is mostly true after the high 1994 yield, but after 1999, the soil tests actually went up. Another example was in 1995 and 1998, when the yields were less than average. After the 1995 low yield, most of the soil tests went up, as we would expect. However, after the low 1998 yield, the soil samples went down. Our thoughts on this are that weather and soil moisture may be making more of a difference than the crop yields.
Chart 1
Chart 2
Next we have a table with the differences between the starting soil samples and the ending soil levels (Table 1). This table is interesting because it show that the phosphorus levels and potassium levels on TSM E have gone down less than the University treatment even though more fertilizer was applied (Table 2) with the University recommendations.
| Soil Levels | TSM A | TSM E | TSM I | University |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 soil level (lbs/A) | -19 | -13 | -24 | -15 |
| K soil level (lbs/A) | -87 | -84 | -120 | -130 |
| pH | -0.2 | -0.2 | -0.2 | -0.4 |
| Products | TSM A | TSM E | TSM I | University |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DAP applied (lbs/A) | 536 | 342 | 188 | 1022 |
| Potash applied (lbs/A) | 981 | 647 | 313 | 792 |
| Pre-Mix applied (lbs/A) | 318 | 208 | 105 | - |
| Lime applied (lbs/A) | 1530 | 1615 | 1557 | 900 |
Finally, we have two tables with the corn and soybean means (Tables 3 and 4). The most interesting rows for most growers are the net profits on the bottom of the tables. In both corn and soybeans, TSM E was the treatment producing the highest profits. TSM E increased profits over the University over $3/acre in corn, and $11/acre in soybeans.
This research shows that TSM is winning on several fronts. TSM is increasing yields. It is increasing grower profits and it is even maintaining soil test levels better than the University program.
| Applications | TSM A | TSM E | TSM I | University |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 soil level (lbs/A) | 49 | 48 | 45 | 55 |
| P2O5 applied (lbs/A) | 49 | 33 | 20 | 80 |
| as DAP (lbs/A) | 107 | 72 | 42 | 174 |
| K soil level (lbs/A) | 362 | 338 | 331 | 365 |
| K2O applied (lbs/A) | 89 | 65 | 34 | 56 |
| as Potash (lbs/A) | 149 | 108 | 57 | 93 |
| Pre-Mix applied (lbs/A) | 54 | 38 | 21 | - |
| TSM Blend | 3.0 | 3.2 | 3.1 | - |
| Amount of Blend | 310 | 218 | 121 | - |
| Costs of Fert ($/A) | $46.82 | $32.88 | $18.41 | $27.38 |
| pH | 6.2 | 6.2 | 6.2 | 6.3 |
| Lime applied (lbs/A) | 192* | 179* | 191* | 143** |
| Costs of Lime ($/A) | $7.69 | $7.17 | $7.63 | $1.32 |
| Yield (bu/A) | 174 | 179 | 169 | 173 |
| Price ($/bu) | $2.51 | $2.51 | $2.51 | $2.51 |
| Gross Profit ($/A) | $436.24 | $448.78 | $423.71 | $433.74 |
| Net Profit ($/A) | $381.73 | $408.72 | $397.67 | $405.03 |
* Pelletized Lime
** Ag Lime
| Applications | TSM A | TSM E | TSM I | University |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 soil level (lbs/A) | 52 | 49 | 46 | 51 |
| P2O5 applied (lbs/A) | 21 | 11 | 5 | 55 |
| as DAP (lbs/A) | 46 | 25 | 11 | 119 |
| K soil level (lbs/A) | 349 | 336 | 326 | 345 |
| K2O applied (lbs/A) | 79 | 46 | 19 | 80 |
| as Potash (lbs/A) | 131 | 77 | 32 | 133 |
| Pre-Mix applied (lbs/A) | 37 | 22 | 9 | - |
| TSM Blend | 4.1 | 4.2 | 4.1 | - |
| Amount of Blend | 215 | 124 | 53 | - |
| Costs of Fert ($/A) | $31.03 | $17.77 | $7.58 | $23.59 |
| pH | 6.1 | 6.1 | 6.1 | 6.1 |
| Lime applied (lbs/A) | 245* | 282* | 254* | 114** |
| Costs of Lime ($/A) | $9.80 | $11.29 | $10.17 | $1.06 |
| Yield (bu/A) | 57 | 61 | 56 | 57 |
| Price ($/bu) | $6.36 | $6.36 | $6.36 | $6.36 |
| Gross Profit ($/A) | $362.76 | $388.22 | $356.40 | $362.76 |
| Net Profit ($/A) | $321.94 | $359.17 | $338.65 | $338.12 |
* Pelletized Lime
** Ag Lime
Send mail to The Wizard with
questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 2000 Total Soil Management Services, Inc.