l crops newsletter cotton, corn, soybeans, sorghum

Volume 3 , Issue 11 March 2013

Ins ide this issue:

Soybean Date of Planting

Study 1

The battle within the bat-

tle: Glyphosate Resistant

Palmer

1

Soybean Varieties for Louisi-

ana and Their Reactions to

the Major Nematodes

3

Early Season Thrips Con-

trol in Cotton 8

Influence of Hybrid, Plant Popula-

tion, Fertilizer Nitrogen Rate, and

Nitrogen Timing on Corn Yield Per-

formance on Mississippi River Alluvi-

al Clay

10

Upcoming Calendar of 15

Contact Information 16

LOUISIANA CROPS NEWSLETTER

Cotton, Corn, Soybeans, Sorghum

Issue Contr ibutors

Dr. Ronnie Levy

Dr. Donnie Miller

Dr. Daniel Stephenson

Dr. Charles Overstreet

Sebe Brown

Dr. David Kerns

Dr. Rick Mascagni

Soybean Date of Planting Trial

First soybean planting date on

March 14th at Dean Lee

Research and Extension

Center. The second planting

date is planned for April 1.

The battle within the battle: Glyphosate Resistant Palmer amaranth

Donnie Miller and Daniel Stephenson

LSU AgCenter

Each year producers in Louisiana fight a constant battle against weed species bent

on robbing yields and shrinking profit margins. Due to the widespread adaptation of

the Roundup Ready technology and subsequent overuse of only glyphosate for

weed management, confirmation of weed resistance to glyphosate takes the battle

to an entirely different level. For several years, producers in Louisiana were fortu-

nate to watch glyphosate resistance issues with Palmer amaranth played out in arti-

cles of Delta Farm Press regarding neighbors to the north in Mississippi, Tennessee,

and Arkansas. The old adage “Mother Nature Always Wins” has unfortunately prov-

en true again and resistance cases have been confirmed to glyphosate here in Loui-

siana. The majority of parishes in Northeast and Northwest Louisiana boarding the

Mississippi and Red Rivers, as well as St. Landry Parish, now have documented cas-

es of glyphosate resistant Palmer amaranth. Seed from resistant populations in

neighboring states is carried along these main waterways and distributed in adja-

cent fields with back water flooding and seep water in spring. Three characteristics

that make glyphosate resistance in Palmer amaranth such a problem are a very ag-

gressive growth habit, tremendous seed producing capability, and a 73% germina-

tion rate. In our perfect growing conditions in mid to late summer, it is not uncom-

mon to see Palmer amaranth plants put on 8 to 10 inches of growth in a week’s

period and produce viable seed. Studies in Arkansas have shown that female

plants are capable of producing up to 1.77 million seed. At that rate, managing the

weed becomes a numbers game. Take for instance an area with 50 female plants

that each produce 500,000 seed. Let’s say that 90% of those seed are lost to pre-

dation or rot or other means. Also, let’s say a producer implements a management

strategy that provides 99% control. He/she is still left with 4.975 million seed. With

a 73% germination rate, that means there is a potential to have 3.63 million plants,

each capable of producing 1.77 million seed!!!

The main recommendation for preventing introduction of or managing an established population of

glyphosate resistant Palmer amaranth is to start clean with a planned rotation of herbicides that are ef-

fective on the weed species and offer a completely different mode of action, or means of controlling the

weed, than glyphosate. Switching from Roundup Powermax to Touchdown or Glyfos Xtra does no good as

all are glyphosate products. In corn, products like Callisto, Laudis, or products that contain atrazine are

effective on Palmer amaranth and offer a differing mode of action that is not available in soybean or cot-

ton. In soybean, a number of products are effective soil applied on Palmer including Prefix, Boundary,

Authority MTZ, Valor SX, Envive, Valor XLT among others. In cotton, programs including preplant applica-

tions of Valor SX, Reflex, or Direx coupled with at planting application of Cotoran, Caparol, or Prowl have

been proven effective on Palmer amaranth. A number of postemergence options are also available within

each crop. Effective options for control of Palmer and other pigweed species are listed in the Louisiana

Suggested Chemical Weed Control Guide which can be accessed at http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/

communications/publications/management_guides/Louisianas+Suggested+Chemical+Weed+Control+Guide.htm.

An effective strategy for management of this weed is to overlay residual herbicides to never let the weed

off the mat. This includes application of residual herbicides preplant, at planting, in early season over-the

-top applications, and at layby. You always want an effective material present at peak strength when an-

other is playing out. This will ensure season long control of the weed. Liberty 280 SL herbicide, used

within the Liberty Link system and offering a different mode of action to glyphosate, is effective on pig-

weed species, including Palmer, if applied to very small weeds 1 inch or less. Control of pigweed 2 to 4

inches can be somewhat erratic. Addition of residual herbicides mentioned before at planting or included

with Liberty in early over-the-top applications (Dual Magnum, Staple LX etc.) are needed for season long

control. Since Palmer amaranth has a light requirement for germination, burial of the seed utilizing deep

tillage can prove effective in its management. Germination and soil life are drastically reduced with seed

burial of depths 2 inches are greater. Re-hipping of row following deep tillage, however, negates this ad-

vantage by bringing seed up to light exposure and subsequent germination. Prevention of seed produc-

tion after removal of the crop is also essential to prevent replenishment of the seed bank. Utilize whatev-

er means necessary, be it hand rouging, tillage, or herbicides to prevent plants from producing seed. Also

remember that Palmer amaranth seed can be carried by equipment between fields so make sure it is

thoroughly clean prior to entering/exiting fields, especially if custom harvesting is being utilized.

Another area to manage Palmer amaranth is on field turn-rows and ditch banks surrounding fields. Allow-

ing Palmer amaranth to grow on turn-rows and ditch banks and produce seed is an excellent way to infest

the field. Therefore, if Palmer amaranth is present on a turn-row prior to planting, the turn-row needs to

be either tilled or paraquat should be applied to control it. For best management, a soil-applied residual

herbicide, such as the one a farmer will be applying to the field for Palmer amaranth management,

should be tank-mixed with the paraquat. Palmer amaranth management on a ditch bank is not as easy

because of aquatic restrictions for many herbicides that are effective for Palmer amaranth control. Herbi-

cides that can be applied in aquatic situations, such as diuron and diquat, are alternatives for manage-

ment of Palmer amaranth on ditch banks. However, be sure to read the label to verify that a herbicide is

labeled for use on in these situations.

Devastating effects of glyphosate resistant Palmer amaranth are many and include loss in value of the

technology on your farm, possible decreased land value, outright field abandonment, and increased pro-

duction costs due to incorporation of additional herbicides and tillage needed for successful manage-

ment of the weed. In other words, all of the benefits associated with the Roundup Ready technology such

as reduced herbicide use, reduced tillage, faster applications, are no longer realized. Therefore, use all

available tools to prevent this problem from causing you to have to fight the battle within the battle.

http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/communications/publications/management_guides/Louisianas+Suggested+Chemical+Weed+Control+Guide.htm

http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/communications/publications/management_guides/Louisianas+Suggested+Chemical+Weed+Control+Guide.htm

Louis iana Crops Newslet ter

Soybean Varieties for Louisiana and Their Reactions to the Major Nematodes

Charles Overstreet, Extension Nematologist

Table 1 - Group III and Early Group IV Soybean Varieties

Soybean Variety Root-knot Reniform Soybean Cyst R3

Soybean Cyst R14

Armor 44-R08 S S MS MS

Armor X1303 S S MS MS

Dyna-Gro S44RS93 S S MS S

MorSoy R2 44X82 S S MS MS

Pioneer 94Y23 S S MS S

Progeny 4211RY S - MS MS

S08-X14117 S S MS MS

S44-D5 Brand S - MR MR

S39-U2 Brand S S MS MS

S42-W9 Brand S - MR MR

Table 2 - Late Group IV Soybean Varie-ties


Soybean Cyst R14

Aggrow AG4633 S S MS MS

Armor DK 4744 S S MS S



Armor X1306 S S MS S





Asgrow 4933 S S MS S

Asgrow AG4632R2Y S - MS S

Asgrow AG4732 S S MS S

Asgrow AG4832 S - MS S

Asgrow AG4932 S - MS S

DeltaGrow 4670R2Y S S MS S

DeltaGrow 4755R2Y S S MS MS

DeltaGrow 4765R2Y/sts S S MS MR

DeltaGrow 4815R2Y S S MS MR

DeltaGrow 4825R2Y/sts S S MS MR


DeltaGrow 4880RR S - MS MR

Table 2 - Late Group IV Soybean Varieties (continued)


Soybean Cyst R14


DeltaGrow 4967LL S S MS S

DeltaGrow 4970RR S S MS S

DeltaGrow 4990LL S S MS S

Dyna-Gro 31RY45 S - MS S

Dyna-Gro 33G48 S - MR S

Dyna-Gro 33RY47 S - MS MS

Dyna-Gro 37RY47 S - S S

Dyna-Gro S48RS53 S S MS MS

GoSoy 4411 LL S - MS S

GoSoy 4812 LL S S MS MR

GoSoy 4912 LL S S MS MS

Halo 4:94 S - MS S

Halo 4:95 S - MR -

Halo 5:01 S - MS -

Halo X456 S S MS MS

Halo X478 S S MS MR

HBK 4924 S - S MS

HBK RY 4620 S - S S

MorSoy R2 47X31 S - MS MR

MorSoy R2 46X29 S - MS S

MorSoy R2 47X12 S S MS MR

MorSoy R2 48X00 S - MS S


Pioneer 94Y82 S - MS MS

Progeny 4510RY S - MS S


Progeny 4710RY S - S S

Progeny 4747RY S S MR R

Progeny 4814RY S S MS MS

Progeny 4819LL S MS MS

Progeny 4900RY S S MS MR

Progeny 4920RY S - MS MR

Progeny 4928LL S - S S

R2C4541 - - R MR

R2C4801 - - R MR


Table 2 - Late Group IV Soybean Varieties (continued)


Soybean Cyst R14

REV@47R53TM S - S S

REV@48R10TM S - MS MR

REV@48R22TM S - MS MS


REV@49R10TM S - MS S

REV@49R11TM S - MR MS

S08-X2499 S S MR MR

S48-P4 Brand S - R MR

Schillinger 458.RCS S - MS MS

Schillinger 478.RCS S - MR MS

Schillinger 4990.RC - R R MR

Table 3 - Group V Soybean Varieties


Soybean Cyst R14

AGS 5911 LL S - MS S

AGS 597 RR S - MS MS

Armor 53-R88 S - MS S

Armor 55-R22 MS S MS MS




Armor X1315 S S MS MR


Asgrow AG5332 S - MS MS

Asgrow AG5533 S S MS MR

Asgrow AG5633 S S MS MS


DeltaGrow 5300RR/STS S - MR MR

DeltaGrow 5461LL - S MS S



DeltaGrow 5555RR R - R R

DeltaGrow 5556RR S S S MS

DeltaGrow 5565RR2 R - R MR

Table 3 - Group V Soybean Varieties (continued)


Soybean Cyst R14

DeltaGrow5625R2Y MS S MS MS

Dyna-Gro 32RY55 S - S S

Dyna-Gro 35RY51 S S MS MR

Dyna-Gro 39RY57 MR S MS MS

Dyna-Gro S53RY23 S S MR MS

Dyna-Gro S54RY43 S S MS MR

GoSoy 5010 LL S S MS S

GoSoy 5111 LL S S S S

GoSoy 5410 LL S S MS S

GoSoy 5911 LL S S S S

Halo 5:01 S - MS -

Halo 5:26 MR - MR -

Halo X5:25 S - S S

Halo X55 S S S S

HBK RY5221 S - S S

HBK RY5421 S - S S

HBK RY5521 S - MS MS

MorSoy R2 51X52 S S S MR


MorSoy R2 54X41 MS - S MS

MorSoy RT 5429 MS S MS S

Osage S - MS S

Ozark S - S S

Pioneer 95Y61 R - R MS

Pioneer 95Y80 R - R MS

Progeny 5160LL S - MS S

Progeny 5210RY S - MS MS

Progeny 5412RY S S MS MR

Progeny 5460LL S - MS S

Progeny 5610 RY S S MS S


Progeny 5711RY MS - MS S

Progeny 5811RY S - S S

Progeny 5960LL S - S S

R02-3065 MS S MS MS

R2C5081 - - R S


REV@54R84TM S S MS MS

REV@55R53TM S S S MR


Letter designations for nematode reaction are: S = susceptible, MS= moderately susceptible, MR=

moderately resistant, R= Resistant, and -= no information available. All information in this table was

provided by the seed companies or the University of Arkansas variety testing program at http://www.arkansasvarietytesting.com/crop/data/5.

The soybean cyst nematode (SCN) is considered to be a minor nematode in Louisiana at this time. There appears to be very little need to select varieties that have resistance against this nematode. Root-knot and reniform nematode appear to be the major nematode pests in soybean. Root-knot nematode is common in coarse-textured soils such as sandy loams, loams, and silt loams. Reniform nematode prefers finer-textured soils and occurs in the highest populations in the silt loams and silty clay loams. Unfortunately, there are very few varieties on our recommended list that have either root-knot or reniform resistance. Peanut and grain sorghum are recommended resistant crops to rotate to help manage root-knot nematode. Corn, grain sorghum, and peanuts are good rotational crops to manage reniform nematode.

Table 3 - Group V Soybean Varieties (continued)


Soybean Cyst R14

REV@55R83TM S R S MS

REV@56R63TM S - MS S

REV@57R21TM S - S S

REV@59R13TM S S S S

S08-X6399 S S S S

S08-X7279 S S MS MR

S51-H9 Brand MS - R MR

Schillinger 5220.RC S - MR MS

UA-5612 S S S S

http://www.arkansasvarietytesting.com/crop/data/5

http://www.arkansasvarietytesting.com/crop/data/5

Early Season Thrips Control in Cotton

Sebe Brown

Extension Entomologist

Dr. David Kerns

Research and Extension Entomologist

Thrips are annual pests of cotton in Louisiana. Damage by these pests can cause stunted growth,

delayed plant maturity and plant death under heavy infestations. Cotton is most susceptible to thrips

from emergence to the 3-4 leaf stage. Once cotton has reached the 3-4 leaf stage, terminal bud growth is

accelerated and plants become less susceptible to injury. The most common thrips found in Louisiana

cotton are tobacco thrips, eastern flower thrips, onion thrips and western flower thrips. These insects

overwinter on a variety of weed hosts and having clean ground when planting can help reduce the severi-

ty of early season thrips infestations. Planting seasons with windy conditions can have considerable in-

fluence on the severity of thrips populations in early cotton. Cotton fields planted in cooler, adverse

growing conditions may also be more susceptible to cotton planted in warmer, optimum conditions. Ad-

ditionally, preplant, pre-emergence, and early-post herbicide applications that may stunt plant growth and

may also exasperate thrips injury.

With the loss of Temik, insecticide seed treatments (ISTs) and over-sprays will be important for

controlling thrips in seedling cotton. Cotton seed comes with a variety of seed treatment options that may

either be purchased through a seed company or applied by a dealer downstream. Outlined below are a

few options with regards to insecticide seed treatment packages in cotton.

Dow’s Phytogen seed comes with a base package of thiamethoxam (Cruiser), with Avicta Com-

plete Cotton available upon request. Avicta Complete Cotton comes with Cruiser for the IST, multiple

fungicides and abamectin for nematode control.

Monsanto’s Deltapine cotton seed comes with a base package of imidacloprid (Gaucho) and sev-

eral fungicides that fall under the Acceleron treatment umbrella. Producers also have the option of up-

grading to Avicta Duo Cotton with Cruiser for insect control, several fungicides for disease control and

abamectin for nematodes.

Bayer’s Stoneville/Fibermax cotton seed comes with a base package that includes Gaucho for in-

sect control and thiodicarb for nematodes that falls under the Aeris treatment umbrella. Producers also

have the option to upgrade to Poncho/Votivo with clothianidin (Poncho) for insects and Bacillus firmus

(Votivo) for nematodes.

Another option is to purchase base-treated seed and have a dealer treat the seed downstream.

Insecticide seed treatments offer some early season protection from thrips, however, these treatments will

only offer 2 to 3 weeks of control. Control failures can occur with at-plant treatments and cotton should

be frequently scouted for thrips until the four leaf stage. Don’t wait for the evidence of damage to initiate

foliar sprays, but look for the appearance of immature

thrips as an indicator of seed treatment failure. Look closely through the terminal leaves, while also

unfolding the small leaves; alternatively, pull plants and shake them vigorously in a plastic Solo cup and look

for dislodged thrips.

Immature thrips appear as small light yellow cigars shaped insects

Last year, western flower thrips were a problem in fields around the state. Western flower thrips are

typically amber, yellowish-brown to dark brown in color. Seed treatments may fail sooner when western

flower thrips are prevalent and foliar treatments are generally less effective. Last year’s data suggests that

when western flower thrips are present, Acephate at 8 oz provided the best control followed closely by Radi-

ant at 1.5 oz + a surfactant and Bidrin at 3.2 fl-oz. Keep in mind that early applications of acephate may flare

mites and aphids. Additionally, these treatments will only provide 4-7 days of control so follow-up sprays

may be required.

For more information concerning insect pest management, contact your local LSU AgCenter parish

agent or LSU AgCenter specialist.

Influence of Hybrid, Plant Population, Fertilizer Nitrogen Rate, and Nitrogen Timing on

Corn Yield Performance on Mississippi River Alluvial Clay

H.J. “Rick” Mascagni, Jr.

Introduction

The cost of producing corn has increased dramatically over the last few years. Much of this in-

creased cost has been associated with higher fertilizer nitrogen (N) and seed costs. Optimum N and

seeding rate depends on many factors including hybrid, yield potential, soil type, and soil moisture sta-

tus. Higher seeding rates and N rates are generally needed at higher yield potentials. Supplemental N

applied late in the growing season may be required some years, depending on growing conditions. Anoth-

er important factor is hybrid genetics. Seed companies are developing hybrids with higher and higher

yield potential that may require more N and higher seeding rates. To maximize yield potential and profita-

bility, more information is needed on N requirements and optimum seeding rate for the commercial hy-

brids currently being marketed.

Procedures

Field experiments were conducted in 2012 on Sharkey clay at the Northeast Research Station

near St. Joseph to evaluate the influence of plant population and N rate on two corn hybrids. Supple-

mental N rates at early silk were also evaluated. Two hybrids, five plant populations, four early-season N

(ESN), and two late N rates were evaluated. Hybrids evaluated were Dekalb DKC64-69 and

REV®28HR20™. Seeding rates were 26,400, 30,800, 35,200, 39,600, and 44,000 seed/acre with tar-

geted plant populations of 24,000, 28,000, 32,000, 36,000 and 40,000 plants/acre. Seeding rates

were increased approximately 10% greater than the targeted population. Seeding rate treatments were

planted with a John Deere 1700 precision planter. Additionally, the 26,400 seeding rate treatment was

planted with a cone planter for evaluating the influence of spacing on corn yield. ESN rates evaluated

were 180, 210, 240, and 270 lb/acre. Nitrogen was knifed in using 30-0-0-2 solution at approximately

the 2-leaf growth stage. Late N rates of 0 and 60 lb/acre were broadcast applied using granular 33-0-0-

11 at early silk. The trial was furrow irrigated, including an irrigation after applying the late N. The trial

was planted April 9. Cultural practices as recommended by the LSU AgCenter were followed.

Experimental design was a randomized complete block with a split-split plot arrangement of treat-

ments and four replications. Main plot was late N, split plot hybrid, and split-split plot seeding rate. Meas-

urements included grain yield (machine harvested two center rows of four-row plots), which is reported at

15.5% moisture, and yield components, ears/acre, seed weight, and kernels/ear. NDVI readings were

collected with a Greenseeker May 8 (seven-leaf growth stage). Seed nutrient analyses (N, P, K, S, and Zn)

were conducted by the SPESS lab. Seed nutrient uptake was calculated by multiplying seed nutrient con-

centration by yield. Plant population was determined just prior to harvest. Statistical analyses were per-

formed using the GLM procedure of SAS at probability level of 0.10.

Results and Discussion

Rainfall was below normal in April through June (Table 1), resulting in five furrow-irrigations in May and June. Even

though planting date was relatively late (April 9), yields were excellent with all but one seeding rate treatment averaging over

200 bu/acre (Table 2).

Except for the lowest seeding rate of 26,400, harvested plants/acre were close to the targeted plant population

(Table 2). Maximum yield occurred at the lowest plant population, 28,400 plants/acre. Optimum plant population may have

been even lower for the two hybrids evaluated, since both have the flex-ear developmental trait. The largest yield difference

occurred for the 26,400 seeding rate planted with the precision planter, John Deere 1700, and the cone planter (213 versus

199.2 bu/acre). The lower yield for the cone planter treatment was probably due to increased variability in plant spacing.

Measurements evaluating plant spacing were not taken, but NDVI readings at the seven-leaf growth stage suggested that

there was a difference in the uniformity of plant spacing (Table 3).

The influence of ESN and late N rates on corn yield averaged across seeding rates is presented in Table 4. There was

a significant yield response to late N for each ESN rate and hybrid. Yield response to late N (red numbers in parentheses) de-

creased as ESN rate increased, as evidenced by a significant ESN x late N interaction for yield. Although the hybrid x ESN x

late N rate for yield was not significant, REV 28HR20 tended to respond more to late N than did DKC 64-69. Optimum N rate

(total N) was about 270 lb/acre for DKC 64-69 and 300 lb/acre for REV 28HR20.

In Table 5, both the concentration and total uptake of seed N, P, K, S, and Zn are presented. ESN and late N consist-

ently increased seed N concentration and uptake in both hybrids. ESN and late N also affected the concentration and uptake

of other nutrients evaluated.

Table 1. Rainfall in St. Joseph, 2012.

Month Rainfall

inches

April 2.7

May 1.2

June 2.3

July 4.9

August 7.8

Table 2. Influence of seeding rate, averaged across hybrid, early-season N (ESN) and late N rates, on yield and yield components on Sharkey clay,

2012.

1In parentheses is the targeted plant population.

2Since there was about one ear per plant, plants/acre and ears/acre are equivalent.

Table 3. Influence of seeding rate and early-season N (ESN), on NDVI readings at the seven-leaf growth stage for two corn hybrids on

Sharkey clay, 2012.

Seeding rate1 Yield Plants2 Seed wt Kernels

seed/acre bu/acre plants/acre g/100 no/ear

26,400 (24,000) 213.0 28,400 37.6 507

30,800 (28,000) 211.6 30,820 36.1 481

35,200 (32,000) 219.3 34,970 35.3 449

39,600 (36,000) 213.6 37,600 34.7 417

44,000 (40,000) 216.6 43,020 33.7 375

26,400 (24,000-cone) 199.2 27,870 36.8 498

LSD (0.10): 5.6 700 0.7 14

ESN rate, lb/acre

Seeding rate1 180 210 240 270 Average

seed/acre --------------------------NDVI readings--------------------

DKC 64-69

26,400 (24,000) 0.716 0.731 0.731 0.735 0.728

30,800 (28,000) 0.733 0.758 0.741 0.740 0.743

35,200 (32,000) 0.725 0.739 0.765 0.722 0.738

39,600 (36,000) 0.777 0.791 0.761 0.782 0.778

44,000 (40,000) 0.774 0.775 0.781 0.765 0.774

26,400 (24,000-cone) 0.703 0.654 0.687 0.709 0.688

Average 0.738 0.741 0.744 0.742

REV 28HR20

26,400 (24,000) 0.703 0.692 0.717 0.712 0.706

30,800 (28,000) 0.718 0.706 0.720 0.684 0.707

35,200 (32,000) 0.715 0.725 0.748 0.711 0.725

39,600 (36,000) 0.697 0.733 0.678 0.747 0.714

44,000 (40,000) 0.780 0.719 0.768 0.755 0.756

26,400 (24,000-cone) 0.697 0.646 0.666 0.681 0.673

Average 0.718 0.704 0.716 0.715

LSD (0.10): Hyb NS2

SR 19

ESN NS

1In parentheses is the targeted plant population.

2NS=Non-significant at the 0.10 probability level.

Table 4. Influence of early-season N (ESN) and late N rates (LN), averaged across seeding rates, on corn yield for tow corn hybrids on

Sharkey clay, 2012.

Early-season

N

Late N

Total N

Hybrid1

DKC 64-69 REV 28HR20 Average

lb/acre lb/acre lb/acre ----------------------bu/acre-------------------------------

180 0 180 186.6 (32.2) 167.7 (47.5) 177.6 (39.4)

60 240 218.8 215.2 217.0

210 0 210 205.0 (23.8) 183.0 (36.3) 193.7 (30.4)

60 270 228.8 219.3 224.1

240 0 240 214.1 (13.0) 203.6 (28.6) 209.2 (20.6)

60 300 227.1 232.2 229.8

270 0 270 219.7 (11.5) 210.9 (16.9) 215.3 (14.2)

60 330 231.2 227.8 229.5

LSD (0.10):

ESN x LN 6.5

H x ESN x LN NS2

1Red number in parentheses is the yield response to late N.

2NS = Non-significant at the 0.10 probability level.

Table 5. Influence of early-season N (ESN) and late N (LN) rates, averaged across seeding rates, on seed nutrient concentration and uptake

for two corn hybrids on Sharkey clay, 2012.

Total Seed nutrients1

ESN LN N N P K S Zn

lb/a lb/a lb/a % lb/a % lb/a % lb/a % lb/a ppm lb/a

DKS 64-69

180 0 180 1.03 125.1 0.27 32.5 0.31 37.6 0.07 9.1 18.1 22.2

60 240 1.08 129.1 0.25 30.3 0.30 35.7 0.08 9.0 19.6 23.6

210 0 210 1.03 117.1 0.25 27.7 0.29 32.4 0.07 8.3 17.2 19.4

60 270 1.14 155.1 0.27 37.3 0.30 41.5 0.08 10.9 18.7 25.5

240 0 240 1.09 142.3 0.27 35.7 0.31 40.3 0.08 9.8 18.5 24.1

60 300 1.15 154.3 0.28 36.9 0.32 42.3 0.08 10.5 21.0 28.5

270 0 270 1.13 144.1 0.26 32.9 0.29 37.3 0.08 9.7 18.0 23.0

60 330 1.16 148.7 0.28 35.8 0.32 40.5 0.08 10.4 20.0 25.8

Avg 1.10 139.5 0.27 33.6 0.31 38.5 0.08 9.7 18.9 24.0

REV 28HR20

180 0 180 1.03 105.8 0.29 28.7 0.37 36.9 0.07 7.5 19.4 19.2

60 240 1.13 134.7 0.28 32.8 0.34 40.5 0.08 9.7 17.9 21.1

210 0 210 1.07 107.1 0.28 28.1 0.34 34.3 0.08 7.6 18.4 18.4

60 270 1.21 150.3 0.27 33.5 0.32 39.6 0.08 10.5 17.1 21.3

240 0 240 1.07 138.4 0.30 37.3 0.37 45.5 0.08 9.8 19.0 23.9

60 300 1.21 170.4 0.26 36.1 0.31 44.1 0.08 11.4 16.3 22.9

270 0 270 1.12 137.6 0.30 36.2 0.36 44.0 0.08 9.6 19.2 23.4

60 330 1.20 152.0 0.31 39.5 0.38 47.4 0.09 10.8 21.8 28.8

Avg 1.13 137.0 0.29 34.0 0.35 41.5 0.08 9.6 18.6 22.4

LSD (0.10):

Hyb NS2 NS 0.01 NS 0.01 NS NS NS NS NS

ESN 0.03 8.8 0.01 2.3 0.01 2.5 0.01 0.6 NS 2.3

LN 0.02 6.9 NS 2.7 NS NS 0.01 0.7 NS 2.8

Hyb x LN 0.03 8.8 0.01 NS 0.01 NS NS 0.6 1.3 NS

Hyb x ESN NS NS 0.02 NS 0.02 NS NS NS NS NS

ESN x LN NS 12.5 0.02 3.3 0.02 NS NS 0.9 NS NS


Upcoming Calendar of Events

LSU AgCenter Macon Ridge Research Station

Wheat and Oat Field Day

Wednesday April 17, 2013

Registration (coffee & doughnuts) at 8:30 am, Welcome & Indoor presentations at 9:00 am followed by field tour

212A Macon Ridge Rd, Winnsboro, LA 71295

Contact Stephen Harrison at 225-578-1308 or [email protected] or Donnie Miller at 318-435-2157 or [email protected] for more information concerning the field day.

Red River Research Station

Northeast Beef and Forage Day

April 16, 2013

Program 9:00—12:00 noon

Location: ,

262 Research Station Drive · Bossier City, LA

Lunch will be provided, courtesy of local businesses

Please pre-register with the Red River Research Station by April 9th: 318-741-7430 Ext. 1107

June 27-30, 2013 - Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation Annual Meeting, New Orleans Marriott, New Orleans, Louisiana

For additional calendar information on LSU AgCenter Parish and Statewide events, visit our

website at www.lsuagcenter.com/calendar

P AR I S H C O N TAC T I N F O R M AT I O N

Parish County Agent Phone Email Acadia Barrett Courville 337-788-8821 [email protected]

Allen Randall Bellon 337-639-4376 [email protected]

Ascension Al Orgeron 225-562-2320 [email protected]

Avoyelles Silas Cecil 318-964-2249 [email protected]

Beauregard Keith Hawkins 337-463-7006 [email protected]

Bossier Ricky Kilpatrick 318-965-2326 [email protected]

Caddo John Terrell 318-226-6805 [email protected]

Calcasieu James Meaux 337-475-8812 [email protected]

Caldwell Jim McCann 318-649-2663 [email protected]

Cameron James Meaux 337-475-8812 [email protected]

Catahoula Josh Price 318-744-5442 [email protected]

Concordia Sebe Brown [email protected]

Desoto Chuck Griffin 318-872-0533 [email protected]

East Carroll Donna Lee 318-282-1292 [email protected]

Evangeline Keith Fontenot 337-363-5646 [email protected]

Franklin Carol Pinnell-Alison 318-267-6713 [email protected]

Grant Donna Morgan 318-627-3675 [email protected]

Iberia Blair Hebert 337-369-4441 [email protected]

Iberville Jeff Davis Frances Bellard 337-824-1773 [email protected]

Lafayette Stan Dutile 337-291-7090 [email protected]

LaSalle 318-992-2205

Madison R.L. Frasier 318-267-6714 [email protected]

Morehouse Terry Erwin 318-282-3615 [email protected]

Natchitoches Stephen Roberts 318-332-7274 [email protected]

Ouachita Richard Letlow 318-282-2181 [email protected]

Pointe Coupee Miles Brashier 225-281-9469 [email protected]

Rapides Matt Martin 318-473-6605 [email protected]

Red River Robert Berry 318-932-4342 [email protected]

Richland Keith Collins 318-355-0703 [email protected]

St. Charles Rene’ Schmit 985-785-4473 [email protected]

St. John Mariah Bock 985-497-3261 [email protected]

St. Landry Vincent Deshotel 337-831-1635 [email protected]

St. Martin Stuart Gauthier 337-332-2181 [email protected]

St. Mary Jimmy Flanagan 337-828-4100 [email protected]

Tensas Dennis Burns 318-267-6709 [email protected]

Vermilion Andrew Granger 337-898-4335 [email protected]

Washington 985-839-7855

West Baton Rouge Stephen Borel 225-281-9474 [email protected]

West Carroll Myrl Sistrunk 318-267-6712 [email protected]

West Feliciana Andre’ Brock 225-635-3614 [email protected]


Specialists

Specialty Responsibilities Name Phone Email

Soybean Soybeans, Corn Ron Levy 318-542-8857 (cell) [email protected]

Cotton Cotton, David Kerns 806-438-6672 (cell) [email protected]

Weeds Corn, Grain Sorghum, Cotton. Soybeans

Daniel Stephenson 318-308-7225 (cell) [email protected]

Asst. Integrated Pest Management, Northeast

Cotton, Corn, Soybean, Grain Sorghum

Sebe Brown 318-498-1283 [email protected]

Entomology Cotton, Corn, Soybean, Grain Sorghum

David Kerns 806-438-6672 (cell) [email protected]

Nematodes All agronomic crops Charlie Overstreet 225-578-2186 [email protected]

Pathology Soybean, Corn, Grain Sorghum

Boyd Padgett 318-308-9391(cell) [email protected]

Pathology Soybean, Corn, Grain Sorghum

Clayton Hollier 225-578-1464 [email protected]

Economics Cotton Kurt Guidry 225-578-3282 [email protected]

Ag Economics and

Agribusiness

Soybean and Feed Grain

marketing Kurt Guidry 225-578-3282 [email protected]

Fertility All agronomic crops J. Stevens 318-308-0754 (cell) [email protected]

Louisiana Crops Newsletter created and distributed by:

Dr. Ronnie Levy

Dean Lee Research Station

8105 Tom Bowman Drive

Alexandria, LA 71302

Phone: 318-473-6522

Fax:318-473-6503

We’re on the Web. www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops_livestock/crops

http://louisianacrops.com

Louisiana State University Center Agricultural Center, William B Richardson, Chancellor

Louisiana Agricultural Experiment Station, John Russin, Vice-Chancellor and Director

Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service, Paul Coreil, Vice Chancellor and Director

Issued in furtherance of the Cooperative Extension work, Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture.

The Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service provides equal opportunities in programs and employment

l crops newsletter cotton, corn, soybeans, sorghum

Documents