Developing Profitable and
Sustainable Cropping Systems for North
Investigator(s)
Dr. Stephen Machado (PI), Dryland Cropping Systems Agronomist, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
Dr. Steve Petrie (Co-PI),
Soil Scientist, and Superintendent, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
Dr. Dan Ball (Co-PI),
Weed Scientist, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
Dr. Richard Smiley (Co-PI), Plant Pathologist, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
Dr. Don Wysocki (Co-PI),
Extension Soil Scientist, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
University Cooperators
Christopher Humphreys,
Faculty Research Assistant, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
Erling Jacosen,
Karl Rhinhart, Farm
Manager, OSU, CBARC, Pendleton
Sandy MacNab, Extention
Specialist, OSU,
Brain Tuck, Extention
Specialist, OSU,
Dr. William Schillinger,
Dryland Systems Agronomist, WSU, Lind
USDA-ARS Cooperators
Dr. Stephan Albrecht, Soil Microbiologist, USDA-ARS, CPCRC, Pendleton
Dr. Hero Gollany, Soil Scientist, USDA-ARS, CPCRC, Pendleton
Dr. John Williams, Hydrologist, USDA-ARS, CPCRC, Pendleton
Dr. Stewart Wuest, Soil Scientist, USDA-ARS, CPCRC, Pendleton
Grower Advisory Group and
Cooperators
Ernie
Moore, Producer, Chairman of the Sherman Station Liaison Committee, and
Research and Production co-chair of the Oregon Wheat Growers League,
Chris
Kaseberg, Producer, Member of the
Tom McCoy, Producer, former President, Oregon Wheat Growers League,
Walter Powell, Producer,
John Hilderbrand, Producer,
David Brewer, Producer,
Agronomic zone of
interest
Research will be targeted
for Agronomic Zones 4 and 5 in north-central
Statement of problem to
be addressed
Wheat/fallow rotation is used on 4.5 million acres in
north-central
Justification
Despite concerns
of decline in soil resources and sustainability, most farmers in low rainfall
regions of the PNW remain skeptical about alternative production systems. This
is primarily because there is no long-term information on the biological and
economic sustainability of alternative cropping systems, particularly intensive
cropping and direct seed cropping systems in this region. Long-term research
that was conducted at the Sherman Experiment Station in the 40s and 50s and
concluded in the early 60s indicated that occasional crop failures occur under
continuous cropping systems (Hall, 1955; 1960; 1963). Recent commercial
experiences with these systems have shown the predictions to be accurate. With
the advent of new varieties and agronomic practices such as direct seeding,
research is needed to enhance benefits and reduce risks for annual cropping.
Possible research avenues include the use of varieties more tolerant to
drought, low temperature, and pests and conservation tillage systems that can
ensure good stands and economical weed and disease control. The transition from
the traditional fallow to more intensive cropping and less tillage presents a
great challenge. Growers need to know how new cropping systems will affect
other farm operations, how to control diseases and weeds, how to handle
residues, and whether some of their farming equipment can be modified
effectively to operate under the new systems. At a recent Oregon Wheat Growers
League Annual Meeting (September 5, 2001) held at the Dalles, Oregon, there was
a strong call for establishing long-term experiments at the Sherman Experiment
Station to address grower concerns. A subsequent meeting between scientists and
growers at Moro Fairgrounds on
Although
direct seeding research is underway at Ralston and Jarava sites, similar
long-term experiments are needed at Moro, which represents a region with a
unique climate. The winters are mild with little likelihood of winter-kill. The
soils are relatively fine-textured (
Grower Advisory Committee
A
grower advisory committee was established in 2002. The committee members are Ernie Moore (
Site
Characterization
The
site for the experiment was selected at the CBARC, Sherman Experiment Station
in Moro. The 28-acre site was characterized in the spring of 2002 to establish
base-line data. Soil was sampled at one-foot intervals to a depth of 5ft or to
restricting layer at 126 geo-referenced locations on a 100 ft grid. The samples
were sent to Kuo Testing labs, Inc.,
Total soil N in soil profile was fairly uniform with most of the site under 45 lb/a N (Figure 3). The average soil test for sulfur in the top 2 ft was above 2 ppm, the critical soil test level below which additions are needed (Figure 4). Phosphorus was below 10 ppm only in the shallow, south-western part of the site (Figure 5). Organic matter was generally high in the north-facing slope (Figure 6). Soil pH was high in the south-western part of the site (Figure 7).
After soil sampling the site was solid seeded with spring wheat in March to homogenize the soil. At maturity, the crop was harvested at each grid location to determine how uniform the site was. Twenty by five foot plots were harvested by a Hege plot combine at each location and the spatial distribution of the grain yield was determined. The grain yields were generally higher in the east than in the shallow western end (Figure 8).
Information obtained from site characterization is useful in deciding where to locate plots. If uniform conditions are required for this experiment, then the western one third should not be used. This western one-third could, however, be used to determine the effects of depth on the proposed cropping systems. This area could be blocked and considered as a replication.
Objectives:
The overall focus of this project is to develop profitable
and sustainable cropping systems for north-central
The specific objective of this experiment is, therefore, to establish a long-term experiment that will compare the effects of a conventional wheat/fallow system with potential alternative and intensive crop systems and crop management practices such as direct seeding.
Procedures:
The experiments will be established at the Sherman Experiment Station in Moro in the fall of 2003. A 28-acre site was selected at the Sherman Experiment Station in Moro. The site has areas that are more than 5 ft deep and other areas that are less than one foot deep (Figure 2). The effects of aspect, slope (up to 5%), and depth on crop productivity under different cropping systems can be captured at this site. The Station receives an average of 11.5 inches of annual precipitation. Rainfall and soils at station are representative of the average conditions in the target area.
Treatments
After a series of meetings between scientists and growers, 8 core treatments were chosen. The rotations will include:
- Winter wheat- conventional fallow (2 strips in rotation)
- Winter wheat- chem. fallow (2 strips)
- Continuous winter wheat (1 strip)
- Continuous spring wheat (1 strip)
- Continuous spring barley (1 strip)
- Winter wheat – spring cereal (barley) – chem. fallow (3 strips)
- Winter wheat – legume (2 strips)
- Flex crop (2 strips)
Each phase of each rotation will appear every year (Table 1).
Table 1. Long-term treatments.
|
Rotation#. |
Treatment# |
†Year 1 |
†Year 2 |
†Year 3 |
†Year 4 |
|
1A |
1 |
WW-Conv |
Fallow-Conv |
WW-Conv |
Fallow-Conv |
|
1B |
2 |
Fallow-Conv |
WW-Conv |
Fallow-Conv |
WW-Conv |
|
2A |
3 |
WW-DS |
Fallow-Chem |
WW-DS |
Fallow-Chem |
|
2B |
4 |
Fallow-Chem |
WW-DS |
Fallow-Chem |
WW-DS |
|
3 |
5 |
WW-DS |
WW-DS |
WW-DS |
WW-DS |
|
4 |
6 |
SW-DS |
SW-DS |
SW-DS |
SW-DS |
|
5 |
7 |
SB-DS |
SB-DS |
SB-DS |
SB-DS |
|
6A |
8 |
WW-DS |
SB-DS |
Fallow-Chem |
WW-DS |
|
6B |
9 |
SB-DS |
Fallow-Chem |
WW-DS |
SB-DS |
|
6C |
10 |
Fallow-Chem |
WW-DS |
SB-DS |
Fallow-Chem |
|
7A |
11 |
WW-DS |
WP-DS |
WW-DS |
WP-DS |
|
7B |
12 |
WP-DS |
WW-DS |
WP-DS |
WW-DS |
|
8A |
13 |
Flex-crop |
Flex-crop |
Flex-crop |
Flex-crop |
|
8B |
14 |
Flex-crop |
Flex-crop |
Flex-crop |
Flex-crop |
†DS-direct seed; Chem-chemical; Conv-conventional
tillage; Flex-crop-cropping system decided based on prevailing soil moisture
conditions and grain price; SB-spring barley; SW-Spring wheat; WP-winter pea;
WW-winter wheat.
The treatments will be replicated 3 times. There will be 14 plots per replication and the minimum plot size will be 48 ft x 350 ft bringing the minimum total experimental area to 13.88 acres. Plot layout is shown in figure 9. Agronomic practices (planting date, planting rate, and fertilizer, herbicides, seed-treatment fungicide, and insecticide application) will be based on the treatment in question (see appendix for details). Direct seeding will be done using the FabroŇ Drill purchased with assistance from the Sherman Station Liaison Committee.
Treatment
procedures
1. Winter Wheat/Fallow
Traditional “trashy” summer fallow practiced in this region.
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest wheat |
|
August to September |
Post harvest stubble management as needed |
|
September to mid-April |
Uncultivated wheat stuble, glyphosate as needed, |
|
April to May |
Primary tillage-spring chisel or sweep, rod weed |
|
May to October |
Secondary tillage-rod weeding, fertilize using shank applicators |
|
September to November |
Plant wheat at 22 seeds/ft2 |
|
Late September to late June |
Wheat growth, broad leaf weed control |
2. Winter Wheat-Chemical
Fallow
Herbicides used to control weeds during fallow.
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest wheat (if after wheat), |
|
August to September |
No tillage, post harvest stubble management as needed, glyphosate as needed |
|
September to next year’s October |
No tillage, glyphosate or LandmasterŇ as needed |
|
September to November |
Plant wheat (25 seeds/ft2) and fertilize with drill (one pass system) |
|
Late September to late June |
Wheat growth, broad leaf weed control |
3. Continuous Winter
Wheat-Direct Seeding
This system can be made
possible by a combination of “
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest wheat (if after wheat), |
|
August to September |
Post harvest stubble management as needed, |
|
October to November |
Glyphosate as needed, and plant (25 seeds/ft2) and fertilize with a drill (one pass system) |
|
October to late June |
Wheat growth, broad leaf and grass weed control |
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest wheat |
|
August to September |
Post harvest stubble management as needed |
|
October to March |
Glyphosate as needed |
|
February to March |
Plant wheat (29 seeds/ft2) and fertilize with drill (one pass system) |
|
March to Late June |
Wheat growth, broad leaf weed control |
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest wheat |
|
August to September |
Post harvest stubble management as needed |
|
October to March |
Glyphosate as needed |
|
February to March |
Plant barley (29 seeds/ft2) and fertilize with drill (one pass system) |
|
March to Late June |
Barley growth, broad leaf weed control |
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest spring barley or wheat |
|
August to September |
Post harvest stubble management as needed |
|
October to October |
Glyphosate or LandmasterŇ as needed to control weeds. |
|
September to October |
Plant wheat (25 seeds/ft2)and fertilize with drill (one pass) |
|
October to Late June |
Wheat growth, broad leaf weed control |
|
Time |
Field operations |
|
July |
Harvest wheat, post-harvest residue management |
|
August to September |
Post harvest stubble management as needed |
|
October to November |
Glyphosate as needed to control cheatgrass and volunteer weeds |
|
October to November |
Plant winter pea (7 seeds/ft2 )and apply starter fertilizer, and pre-emergence broadleaf herbicide (Prowl or Treflon or Sonalon pre-plant drill incorporated) |
|
November to March |
Pea growth, weed control (AssureŇ), decide on green manure or seed |
|
March to June |
Pea growth for seed |
|
May to June |
Harvest seed |
Data collection
12’ 24’ 12’
Data will be collected from 12 ft x 350 ft areas on either
side of the plot leaving 24 ft x 350 ft in the center for harvest.
Soil sampling
A representative soil sample will be collected at 12-inch intervals to 60 inches or to restricting layer using a GiddingsŇ probe at 5 locations in each plot every 5 years and analyzed for pH, OM, P, K, NO3, NH4, SO4, Zn, Mn, Fe, Cu, Cl, Soluble salts, in the 0 to 12 inch samples, NO3 and SO4 in the 12 to 24 inch samples, and NO3 in the 24 to 60 inch samples. Part of the samples will be analyzed for soil texture using the hydrometer method only in the first year. In other years the soil will be analyzed for NO3, NH4, and SO4 in the first 12 inches and NO3 in the 12 to 48 ft samples to determine fertilizer recommendations.
S. Machado, S. Petrie, D. Wysocki
Agronomical and
phonological data
Basic data on the timing of agronomic practices, dates of plant emergence, plant counts, anthesis, and maturity, biomass, yield, diseases, weeds, insect pests, soil moisture, erosion, will be collected every year. Plants will be considered emerged when >50% of the plot has emerged plants. Plants will be counted 10 to 14 days after emergence in at least 6 -3 ft quadrats in the sampling areas (one quadrat in the center of every 50 ft section of each plot). The plot will be considered to have flowered or matured when >50% of the plants have flowered or matured. Total plant biomass from at least 6-3 ft quadrats will be collected from the sampling areas for the determination of harvest index. The rest of the plot area will be harvested by commercial size combine to obtain grain yield. Grain weight will be measured using a weigh wagon.
S. Machado
Pests
Diseases will be monitored at least twice annually in each planted plot. All procedures are routinely performed in on-going disease-management research with wheat and rotational crops (Smiley et al., 1996). Planted plots will be sampled for disease assessments during early winter (late November or early December) and late spring (May), and whiteheads, if present, will be quantified during mid- to late-June. Winter and spring samples involves removing 20 to 40 plants per plot, washing soil from roots, and scoring each plant individually for presence and severity of diseases such as Fusarium foot rot, take-all, Rhizoctonia root rot, strawbreaker foot rot, or Cephalosporium stripe. If present, the incidence and/or damage by insect pests is also quantified.
S. Smiley, S. Machado
Evaluations will be made on changes in density
and species composition of weed populations.
Emphasis will be placed on downy brome and jointed goatgrass, two weeds
of primary importance in this agronomic zone.
Weed density and species composition estimates will be made twice during
the growing season. One count will be
made in late January before crop canopy closure by counting all weeds in 5
randomly placed 0.5 m2 quadrats per plot. A second count will be made in mid April
after application of appropriate herbicide treatments. Weed counts will be made in three large 3 m
by 5 m quadrats suspended above the crop canopy to assess mid-season weed
populations after herbicide treatment.
D. Ball, S. Machado
Soil moisture, water infiltration and erosion and soil physical properties
Soil moisture and erosion will be determined annually. Soil moisture will be measured by neutron attenuation methods (3 access tubes/plot) and water infiltration by the double ring infiltrometer. Erosion will be measured by a rill meter (McCool et al., 1976). Earthworm populations, bulk density, water infiltration and aggregate stability will be measured at the start of the experiments and every 5 years thereafter.
S. Machado, S. Wuest, H.
Gollany, J. Williams
Soil microbial assays
Microbial community structure is crucial to
major ecosystem processes, including the maintenance of fertile soils and the
control of nutrient cycles. Soils from
the different treatments will be analyzed for functional diversity, i.e.,
community-level-physiological profiles (CLPP) using the commercially available
BIOLOG system to measure profiles of carbon-source utilization by mixed
microbial communities extracted directly from soil (Garland
and A. Mills, 1991; Boyle and Albrecht, 2002). The BIOLOG system
simultaneously measures the ability of the community to metabolize any of 95
different carbon sources representing several groups of substrates (e.g.
carbohydrates, amino acids, fatty acids).
Data are analyzed using Principal Component Analysis to determine
similarities or differences in the patterns of substrate utilization.
S. Albrecht, S. Machado
Production economics
The inputs and outputs of each cropping system will be tracked and recorded for economic analyses to determine the most economic system. We will enlist the collaboration of an agricultural economist from OSU, WSU, UI or from the growers to carry out the economic analysis.
S. Machado,
Weather data
Data on precipitation, soil temperature, and air temperature will be collected.
Funding
This proposal has been funded for three years. Funds to continue these studies and to sustain experimentation for years to come will be solicited from funding organizations such as STEEP, WSARE, NRI, and from the Sherman Liaison Committee.
Expected outcomes and anticipated impacts for research and extension:
We expect to establish and manage the first three years of treatments of the long-term plots from which initial information on sustainable cropping systems will be derived. It will, however, take at least six years before meaningful comparisons among treatments can be made. Funding to continue this work will be sought through other proposals. Information obtained from this experiment will provide the necessary information growers need to make decisions on adopting sustainable cropping practices. Furthermore this work will provide sound references to policy makers as they formulate farm programs and environmental protection policies.
Duff, B, P. E. Rasmussen, and R. W. Smiley. 1995.
Wheat/Fallow Systems in Semi-arid Regions of the Pacific NW
Hall, W. E.
1955. Report of the
Hall, W. E.
1960. Annual Report of the
Hall,W. E. 1963. Annual Report of the
Leggett, G. E, R. E. Ramig, L. C. Johnson, and T. W. Masse.
1974. Summer fallow in the Northwest. p. 110-135. In
Summer Fallow in the
McCool, D. K., M. G. Dossett, and S. J. Yecha. 1976.
A portable rill meter for measuring soil loss. 8 pp. IN: Trans. Summer Meeting American
Society of Agricultural Engineers,
Rasmussen, P.E., and W.J. Parton. 1994. Long-term effects of
residue management in wheat/fallow. I. Inputs, yield, soil organic matter. Soil
Science Society of
Smiley, R.W., H.P. Collins, and P.E. Rasmussen. 1996.
Diseases of wheat in long-term agronomic experiments at
Budget (2003-2006)
N
Figure 1. Elevation of the experiment
site at the CBARC, Sherman Experiment Station in Moro
N
Figure 2. Depth to restricting layer or bedrock of the experiment site at the CBARC, Sherman Experiment Station in Moro
N
N
N
N
N
N
