The Integrated Farm/Livestock Management (IFLM)Demonstration Program was created in 2000 aspart of the Iowa Water Quality Initiative. Thisstatewide program, administered by the IowaDepartment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship,Division of Soil Conservation, concentrates onefficient management techniques in livestock andcrop production systems in a demonstration/education setting. It provides a valuable linkbetween sound research and actual in-fieldapplication.

Working in cooperation with soil and waterconservation districts, Agribusiness Association ofIowa, community colleges, Iowa Department ofNatural Resources, Iowa Soybean Association,Iowa State University, and USDA National Soil TilthLaboratory and Natural Resources ConservationService, IFLM has formed a unique partnership withthe realization that we achieve much more workingtogether toward our common goals. These uniquepartnerships expand the financial and educationalresources available to Iowa producers to addressincreasing environmental concerns.

Integrated Farm/LivestockManagement Demonstration Program

IFLM Program OverviewThrough Crop Year 2003, 27 projects have beenfunded through the IFLM program to demonstratethe effectiveness and adaptability of emergingagricultural systems for nutrient and pesticidemanagement, water quality protection and soilconservation. Their ultimate goal is changingfarming practices in Iowa, resulting in sustainablefarm input management and environmentalbenefits.

The efforts of participating producers are beingdemonstrated to a widespread audience, throughregional field days and tours and statewide forums.Information gained is being widely disseminatedto producers, agribusiness, educators,researchers, and private and governmentagencies.

In Crop Year 2004, 10 IFLM projects are fundeddemonstrating tillage management, manurenutrient utilization, nitrogen and phosphorusmanagement, composting of manure, andalternative cropping systems. (See page 12.)

1

Crop Year 2003 Executive Summary

More than 400 producers in these locations haveparticipated in the IFLM Program.

Uniquepartnershipsexpand the financialand educationalresources availableto Iowa producersto addressincreasingenvironmentalconcerns.

Division of SoilConservation

Tel: 515-281-0531Fax: 515-281-6170

www.agriculture.state.ia.us

January 2004Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Wallace State Office BuildingDes Moines, IA 50319

Baseline Cooperator FeedbackIowa State University

2

.

Contact: Steve Padgitt, 303 East Halll, Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-1122, scpadgitt@iastate.edu, andPaul Lasley, 304 East Hall, Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-0937, plasley@iastate.edu

During 2002, two data collection initiatives wereconducted to generate information supporting theIntegrated Farm and Livestock Management(IFLM) Demonstration Program.

In one of these, Iowa State University (ISU)interviewers gathered information from corngrowers participating in IFLM projects. In a seriesof open-ended directed conversations and closed-ended questions, information was gathered on arange of experiences with the project and currentmanagement practices. In total, 91 projectcooperators were interviewed: 68 On-FarmNitrogen Network cooperators and 23 "Hub andSpokes cooperators and Nitrogen and CarbonManagement cooperators.

The Crop Year 2002 Executive Summaryaggregated the responses to several componentsof this project.

The other initiative was in conjunction with the2002 Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll, whichcontained special sections on the use of and

January 2004

IFLM providessynergy of thefarmers'equipment andresources and thecoordinators'knowledge andtechnology.

Reasons Cited for Changing Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates Farm Poll ISA Cooperators ISU CooperatorsReducing costs 75% 92% 94%Concern for groundwater pollution 54% 53% 56%New knowledge/understanding 63% 66% 61%On-farm tests 34% 66% 50%Supplier/dealer recommendation 26% 13% 11%Taking credits (manure/legumes) 43% 45% 56%Health safety concerns 18% 13% 22%Crop consultant recommendation 17% 28% 6%Increase yield 24% 17% 22%

attitudes toward nitrogen use. Findings from theFarm Poll give an estimate on a broader scale ofproduction practices prior to more widedistribution and adoption of practices potentiallyresulting from the IFLM project.

In 2003, the data gathered from the 91 IFLMcooperators was further analyzed and merged withdata from the 2002 Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll.Telephone interviews with the initial set ofcooperators, as well as additional cooperators inthe On-Farm Nitrogen and Phosphorous Networkprojects, were conducted in 2004.

The table below lists the reasons cited forchanging nitrogen fertilizer rates. When askedto elaborate on changes they hade made, otherthan changes in rates, the dominanet themes inrespondents' comments were:

· Changing from fall to spring application.· Changing timing of application to whenplants would best use the nutrient.· Using split applications, including side-dressing.· Sampling manure for nutrients and not usingcommercial fertilizer on fields where manurewas applied.· Giving greater attention to rates andapplying "optimum" rates.· Making no changes, but waiting foradditional research data.

More detailed findings from the IFLM projectcooperators, as well as the findings from the Farmand Rural Life Poll, are included in thecomprehensive report, which can be viewed onthe IDALS website: www.agriculture.state.ia.us

In Field 1, the spring nitrate tests show thatavailable nitrogen was below recommendedlevels.

In Field 2, the spring nitrate tests show thatavailable nitrogen was more than adequate.

Condition of the corn crop was good for bothfields, but moisture was deficient in July. Thefields were harvested with yield monitoringequipment to determine if yield was decreased,maintained, or improved.

Field 1 yield results show an overall increase inyield for the producers. In an evaluation, theproducers felt satisfied with the results. Thisprogram helped them save some nitrogenfertilizer from being applied.

Field 2 yield results show good yields throughoutthe field. There was a decrease in the lowerproducing, more sloping soils. This was the firstyear of production on this farm for the producers,seeing how this field produced providedinformation for their future crop years.

Educational efforts for this program included onefield day that was held to examine the conditionof the fields. There were 15 people in attendance.At the conclusion of the harvest season, onereview meeting was held with 18 people inattendance. Available information was publishedin the watershed newsletter.

The Madison Soil and Water Conservation District(SWCD) hoped to see a correlation betweennitrogen testing data and the yield results withthis program. The collected information from thisprogram did not show a clear result as to whetherthis program would accomplish the watershed’sgoal of reducing nitrogen per field whilemaintaining the producers' expected yields.

The local farming community has shown interestin using nutrient management systems to reducethe impact of nitrogen. Many have commentedthat there are numerous programs using VRNtechnology and those options should beconsidered further. The local producers and theMadison SWCD are interested in continuingparticipation with future VRN programs.

The local farmingcommunity hasshown interest inusing nutrientmanagementsystems toreduce the impactof nitrogen.

Cedar Lake, drinking water source for Winterset,Iowa, was targeted for a watershed project. Thegoal of the project was to reduce the impacts ofnitrate (NO3

-) from agricultural sources, fertilizersand tile line water. To help landowners and cropproducers reduce fertilizer loss due to leachingof nitrate, a variable rate nitrogen (VRN) programwas selected.

The purpose of this demonstration was toexamine the feasibility of a VRN program. CargillCrop Nutrition developed a patent pendingprogram, InSite VRN™, which prescribednitrogen recommendations. The program gavenitrogen credits for soil organic matter, residualnitrate levels, and any manure that has beenapplied to the field. The program looked atincreasing the yield of the better producing soilsand reducing fertilization of less fertile soils, notconcentrating as much on the lower producingareas and applying the nitrogen accordingly. Theprogram was applied in the Cedar LakeWatershed using the global position system(GPS) and variable rate equipment.

Field 1: A 125-acre field received a 130-poundflat rate application of nitrogen in 3 flat rate teststrips.

Field 2: A 211-acre field received a 150-poundflat rate application of nitrogen with 4 flat ratetest strips.

Observations were made during the growingseason including nitrogen levels of the soil usingspring nitrate soil tests and fall stalk tests.

Late Spring Nitrate Tests for Test Fields

Cedar Lake Watershed Variable Rate Nitrogen DemonstrationMadison Soil and Water Conservation District

January 20043

0.00

20.00

40.00

60.00

80.00

100.00

120.00

140.00

160.00

Am

ount

of N

itrog

en

Other Fields Tested 2 1

ppm of Nitrogen Lbs of Nitrogen

4

By addressingtillage and manuremanagementusing anintegratedapproach, nitrogenutilization can bemore efficient.

Hub and Spokes Model of Nutrient ManagementIowa State University

January 2004

Tillage and manure management is a significantissue in Iowa. The interactions between tillageand manure management and their impacts onsoil erosion have a significant impact on surfacewater quality due to sediment, phosphorous, andother chemical transport to our lakes and rivers.Soil erosion is highly influenced by soil andresidue management.

In order to meet the designated criteria set by theTotal Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) rules for over187 impaired water bodies in the state of Iowa,tillage and manure management must play asignificant role in soil erosion control and residuemanagement.

A tillage survey, sponsored by the Iowa ResourceManagement Partnership (IRMP) committee in1999 and published in 2000, indicated the needfor improvement in adopting conservationpractices. The survey shows no increase inconservation tillage practice (i.e., no-till) for theperiod of 1997-1999.

The major goal of this project is to demonstratean integrated approach of tillage and manuremanagement strategies on field-scaledemonstrations utilizing the concept of the “Huband Spokes” model.

At the Northeast Research Farm (Hub),evaluations of liquid swine manure and commercialfertilizer have been established over three tillagesystems consisting of no-tillage, conventionaltillage, and fall strip-tillage. Manure andcommercial nitrogen fertilizer rates (0, 75, 150,and 225 lbs N/acre) were applied over each tillagesystem. The tillage and nitrogen rates werereplicated three times.

Contact: Dr. Mahdi Al-Kaisi, 2104 Agronomy Hall, Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-1923, malkaisi@iastate.edu

Eleven cooperators established 12 on-farmdemonstration sites (Spokes) to evaluate theeffects of liquid swine manure rates on cornproduction, cost, and soil nutrient analysis. Foreach demonstration site, manure applicators werecalibrated to determine or check the applicationrates. Four rates of manure (0, ½ agronomic,full agronomic, and 1½ times the agronomicnitrogen rate pounds per acre) were applied ateach demonstration site in three replications.

The results from both the on-farm demonstrationsand the research farm show similar trends. Initialsoil and manure analyses show significantvariability within each site and between all sites.Late spring nitrate and fall stalk nitrate tests showa high dependence on manure management andapplication rates. Yield response to additionalnitrogen and nitrogen source was affected by thesite-specific history.

The outcome of this approach is very encouraging.Over 1050 producers and agriculture professionalsparticipated in the educational programs of threefield days, Crop Advantage Series, CCA training,Crop Diagnostic Clinics, Soil Management Clinic,Agriculture Chemical Dealer Updates, and severallocal, regional, and national conferences during2003.

By addressing tillage and manure managementusing an integrated approach, nitrogen utilizationcan be more efficient. An integrated approachthat utilizes large scale field demonstrations andresearch size plots is essential in addressingmanure and tillage management challenges. Theability to obtain consistent results from on-farmdemonstrations and research plots will enableus to couple both concepts together to providequality educational programs to producers andthe agribusiness industry.

Current and usablesoils data must beavailable to enableland users toimprove their inputmanagement.

Iowa Soil Properties and Interpretation DatabaseIowa State University

5 January 2004

Current and usable soils data must be availableto enable land users to improve their inputmanagement. The Iowa Soil Properties andInterpretation Database (ISPAID) makes this dataavailable to IFLM project coordinators,agricultural producers and service providers, andothers in the public and private sectors.

During 2003, a major effort has been allocated toreviewing, refining, and updating the ISPAIDdatabase and ISPAID Manual. ISPAID 7.0 andthe ISPAID 7.0 Manual were released on January30, 2004. ISPAID 7.0 will be delivered on CD tothe Division of Soil Conservation, IowaDepartment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship(DSC-IDALS) and the other cooperating agenciesof the Iowa Cooperative Soil Survey in March 2004.The previous version of ISPAID, ISPAID 6.0, hasbeen available to users since July 1996.

Through the IFLM project in Crop Year 2003:

Ø Responsibility for maintenance, qualitycontrol and assurance of the database wastransferred to the computer system supportspecialist located in my office. This position issupported by the IFLM Demonstration Program.

Ø ISPAID information is now available for all 99counties.

Ø A thorough review and reorganization of thedatabase has taken place:

§ The size of the database has been reducedfrom 11.4 MB to 5.2 MB

§ Over 71,000 records have been updatedand/or corrected as a result of the integrity check,an automated process developed to verify theaccuracy of the information in the database.

Ø Reviewed and updated the ISPAID manualto conform to the reorganized database. Addedweb links and a linked table of contents.

Ø Developed system for archiving current dataas future county revisions become available.

Ø Outlined future plans for ISPAID.

The educational outreach of this project includes:

Ø ISPAID 7.0 will be available on CD toIFLM project coordinators, agricultural producersand service providers, and others in the publicand private sectors through our office.

Ø ISPAID 7.0 will also be available on the IowaCooperative Soil Survey web site: http://icss.agron.iastate.edu/

Ø The computer system support specialist willcoordinate the release of ISPAID 7.0 on this website with the Natural Resources ConservationService (NRCS).

Ø The ISPAID 7.0 Manual is available on theweb at: http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/soils/soilsurv.html

Ø The computer system support specialistemployed by this project regularly providesdatabase information, extracts from the database,selected fi les and analyses for IFLMdemonstration and education projectcoordinators, producers, and service providers ina format they can readily use.

ISPAID 7.0 development was coordinated withthe NRCS Global Information System (GIS)Analyst. The GIS Analyst assists in thedistribution of information about the database toNRCS and soil and water conservation district(SWCD) offices.

Contact: Dr. Gerald A. Miller, 132 Curtiss Hall, Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-4333, soil@iastate.edu

This project hashelped northwestIowa producersimprove theirmanuremanagement andprotect theenvironment.

Manure Management for the 21st CenturyIowa State University

Contact: Dr. Kris Kohl, 824 Flint Dr., Box 820, Storm Lake, IA 50588, Tel: 712-732-5056, kkohl@iastate.edu

6January 2004

The project goals were to improve manuremanagement through manure sample testing,manure spreader calibration and education oflivestock producers in northwest Iowa. Theproject involved sampling 39 manure samplesfrom swine, cattle, dairy cattle, turkeys andcomposted poultry manure. Liquid swine manurefrom finishing buildings made up the largest partof the sample data with a total of 28 completedata sets. The project provided 50% cost-sharefor producers to participate.

The mean nutrient content was 50.6 lbs. N 26.4lbs. P205 and 30 lbs. K20 per 1000 gallons ofmanure. The nitrogen and potassium values arevery close to the book values while thephosphorus value was 37% below the bookvalues. Changes in feeding phytase have madea significant reduction in phosphorus levels inswine manure. While the overall change innitrogen content in finishing manure was small,many samples showed lower nutrient contentsdue to feeding dried distiller’s grains from theemerging ethanol industry in the area.

Nine manure spreaders were calibrated duringthe project. The average spreader held about91% of what the producers thought the capacitywould be. Knowing the real application rate hashelped producers meet the requirements of theirmanure management plans.

Two manure application field days were held with32 participants. The project will share theknowledge gained with producers statewidethrough the manure certification program.

This project has helped northwest Iowa producersimprove their manure management and protectthe environment.

The conclusions of this project are:

1. Livestock producers are willing to increasetheir manure application skills with moderntechnology.

2. Swine manure tested in 2003 had lowernutrient content due to more efficient use of feedadditives.

3. Phosphorus had the largest reduction fromstandard table values with a 41% reduction forstandard finishing values.

4. Liquid manure spreaders held an averageof 91% of the expected capacity.

This projectenables growersto improve Nmanagement byevaluating theircurrent practicewith an alternativemanagementpractice.

On-Farm Nitrogen NetworkIowa Soybean Association

Contact: Dr. Tracy Blackmer, 4554 NW 114th St., Urbandale, IA 50322, Tel: 515-251-8640, tblackmer@iasoybeans.com

7 January 2004

Iowa agriculture is increasingly identified as aprimary source of pollution, particularly losses ofnitrogen (N) from row crop fields and associatedimpacts upon local and regional water quality.The form, timing and application rate of Nfertilizers are management aspects that farmershave the ability to control. Effective managementof these aspects may minimize negativeenvironmental impacts and increase managementefficiency, providing farmers an economic return.Recognizing the need to improve environmentalperformance, while improving the profitability offarmers, the Iowa Soybean Association, withsupport from the Iowa Department of Agricultureand Land Stewardship, crop consultants, farmercoops, community colleges, Iowa State Universityresearchers, John Deere, United Agri-Products,GeoVantage and the Iowa Soybean PromotionBoard, are empowering a network of over 100Iowa farmers to evaluate, validate anddemonstrate performance of on-farm nitrogenmanagement.

The purpose of the Iowa On-Farm N Network isto enable growers to improve nitrogenmanagement by evaluating their current practicewith an alternative or modified managementpractice. Historic efforts to improve Nmanagement have often focused on “telling” and“showing” farmers prescriptions of bettermanagement practices (BMPs) and thenconvincing or offering an incentive for them toadopt the “BMPs”. The vision of the Iowa On-Farm Network is to enable farmers to “do”evaluation of alternative practices themselves ontheir own farms, across entire fields (not smallplots), where performance data and informationthey receive is real world and directly applicableto their situations. Results indicate the potentialfor growers to improve N management is great.Many of the common BMPs advocated byuniversities and agencies are generally broadenedfor simplicity sake and wide-range adoption.

Growers doing their own evaluations can furtherrefine their management so the room for localimprovement is real. By sharing data frommultiple growers in an area, the impact of thesedemonstrations becomes much more valuableand, therefore, more effective. Because of thevarying effect of weather, the need to evaluateover several years becomes more important.After completing a second year of evaluation,many growers developed confidence to changetheir management practice.

Despite operating within the current BMPsavailable, the growers identified an opportunityfor additional improvement by adopting a self-evaluation process on their farm. From the growermeetings that have occurred, the following pointshave emerged:

1. The second year of evaluation addstremendous credibility to past findings. In twogroups all the growers had changed theirmanagement based upon the results of thedemonstrations from their group.

2. A number of growers question why yield goalbased recommendations are still considered thefoundation for determining N rates.

3. As growers learned more about thecomplexities of N management and the potentialprofit associated, there was a desire to set upmore demonstrations to further fine-tune certainmanagement aspects.

4. For sites that did show differences in yielddue to N, it was usually not the highest yieldingareas that needed higher rates of N. Growerscould often identify patterns of yield responsewithin a field to organic matter. Usually the higheryielding areas had the most organic matter, thehighest yield, and the lowest N fertilizerrequirement.

5. The heavy rains around planting time resultedin significant losses for sites using liquid N priorto the rain.

8 January 2004

Iowa agriculture is increasingly identified as aprimary source of pollution, particularly losses ofphosphorus (P) and sediment carrying P from rowcrop fields and associated impacts upon local andregional water quality. The rate, timing and typeof tillage are three management aspects thatfarmers have the ability to control. Effectivemanagement of these aspects may minimizenegative environmental impacts and increasemanagement efficiency, providing farmers aneconomic return. Recognizing the need to improveenvironmental performance, while improving theprofitability of farmers, the Iowa SoybeanAssociation, with support from the IowaDepartment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship,crop consultants, farmer coops, communitycolleges, Iowa State University researchers, JohnDeere, Geovantage and the Iowa SoybeanPromotion Board, are empowering a network ofIowa farmers to evaluate, validate and demonstrateperformance of on-farm P and tillage management.

The purpose of the Iowa On-Farm Network is toenable growers to improve management byevaluating their current practice with an alternativeor modified management practice. Historic effortsto improve management have often focused on“telling” and “showing” farmers prescriptions ofbetter management practices (BMPs) and thenconvincing or offering an incentive for them to adoptthe “BMPs”. The vision of the Iowa On-FarmNetwork is to enable farmers to “do” evaluation ofalternative practices themselves on their ownfarms, across entire fields (not small plots), whereperformance data and information they receive isreal world and directly applicable to theirsituations. Results indicate the potential forgrowers to improve management is great. Manyof the common BMPs advocated by universitiesand agencies are generally broadened for

On-Farm Phosphorus NetworkIowa Soybean Association

simplicity sake and wide-range adoption.Growers doing their own evaluations can furtherrefine their management so the room for localimprovement is real. By sharing data frommultiple growers in an area, the impact of thesedemonstrations becomes much more valuableand therefore more effective. Because of thevarying effect of weather, the need to evaluateover several years becomes more important.After completing a second year of evaluation,many growers develop confidence to changetheir management practice.

The types of trials implemented were added Pto soils testing high or above for soil test P, deepripping of soybean stubble, or injection of P inthe form of manure. Each of these practices iscommon in Iowa and each of these practicescould be changed to reduce P pollution.

This is the first year and trials are onlypreliminary, but the data supports that all threeof these practices were not justified economicallyin the environments tested and environmentalrisk could be reduced by changing from thesepractices.

At the time of preparing this report, the analysisis only partially completed. The majority of thesereports show growers did not benefit from deepripping, adding extra P to soils testing abovemedium for soil test P, or by adding manure tosoybeans.

Below is a table with the results of the deepripping trials with the reports analyzed to date.The average across all the trials was only 2.4bu/a. The custom rate ranges from $11-15/a.

Corn Grain Yield Advantage from Deep Ripping for 33 Locations

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

Site Number

Yie

ld D

iffer

ence

(bu

/a)

Contact: Dr. Tracy Blackmer, 4554 NW 114th St., Urbandale, IA 50322, Tel: 515-251-8640, tblackmer@iasoybeans.com

By sharing datafrom multiplegrowers in anarea, the impactof thesedemonstrationsbecomes muchmore valuableand effective.

Tillage represents one of the critical componentsin a farming system; and producers view tillageas a necessary process to prepare a seedbed,incorporate nutrients and pesticides, or controlweeds. Reduction in tillage reduces erosionbecause of greater protection of the soil surfacefrom the effects of wind and water; however,producers often view reduced tillage as increasingrisk in crop yield due to pests, nutrientavailability, or compaction. This study comparesfour tillage systems on producer fields acrossIowa to demonstrate that reduced tillage will notincrease risk of lower corn and soybean yield.The four tillage systems selected in consultationwith the cooperating producers were: fall-chisel,fall-strip, spring tillage, and spring strip tillageat planting. Both corn and soybean were plantedon the tillage systems within the same field inorder to provide a direct comparison of the rotationeffect of the crops under the same tillage systemwithin the same year.

The objectives of this study are to: 1. Quantify the effect of four tillage practiceson changes in soil properties. 2. Quantify the effect of four tillage practiceson crop performance and economic return. 3. Quantify the response of local producersin each region to the study results. 4. Evaluate the potential behavioral changein producers in each region in terms ofchanging tillage practices that will increaseprofit and improve environmental quality.

Sites were established in Boone, Buena Vista,Carroll, Greene, Kossuth, Louisa, Story, andTaylor counties and observations commencedin 2002 and will continue through 2004.Cooperation with the local FFA chapters at eachsite helps to provide assistance with datacollection.

Implementation of the tillage study on corn andsoybean production at producer fields throughoutIowa has provided a unique opportunity toevaluate the impact of tillage on corn andsoybean production and economic return. Thisstudy is in the second year and it is apparentthat the variation in precipitation timing andamounts among the years is a major factoraffecting yield. The effect of precipitationoutweighs the temperature effect on early seasoncrop growth. The responses observed in thesecond year showed that as we transition fromone tillage system these changes affect cropgrowth and yield. This information providesproducers with a better understanding of whererisk may be introduced into the soil managementsystem and the changes necessary to reducethe level of risk. As the study continues we willbe able to provide a clearer picture of thesechanges and the potential economic impact ofthe changes. The input cost comparisons across

the tillage systems showed the spring strip andfall strip systems were the least cost andproduced a higher profit. The assembly of theinput costs and labor requirements for each tillagesystem provides producers with information theycan use to assess the different tillage systems.

Grain yield coupled with grain quality offers aperspective on crop response to til lagemanagement that may provide information forfuture soil management systems. There is nota premium for protein or oil at the present timebut development of an information base thatbegins to quantify these interactions will beuseful in the future. The detailed analysis of thechanges that occur within the soil volume as aresult of the changes in tillage will help provideproducers understand the changes that willoccur as a result of soil management and howto transition with a reduction in risk. Conduct ofthis type of study provides new insights intoagronomic systems for the next decade that willenhance crop production efficiency.

Observations to be collected in the 2004 growingseason expand from the agronomic evaluationand the cost and labor analysis for decision-making on changing tillage systems. Detailedanalyses of the changes in the soil propertiesunder the different systems will be conductedduring 2004 along with measurements ofinfiltration and surface runoff across the tillagepractices. Producers are interested in thesestudies and there is interest in establishing sitesin areas of Iowa that are not represented by thecurrent demonstration sites.

Producer-Oriented Tillage DemonstrationUSDA-ARS National Soil Tilth Laboratory

Contact: Dr. J. L. Hatfield, 2150 Pammel Dr., Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-5723, hatfield@nstl.gov

Comparing fourtillage systemsdemonstrates thatreduced tillage willnot increase riskof lower corn andsoybean yield.

9January 2004

Total Inputs per Acre for Corn 2003

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Fall Strip Fall Till Spring Strip Spring Till

$

Story Buena Vista Carroll Boone

Total Inputs per Acre For Soybeans 2003

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Fall Strip Fall Till Spring Strip Spring Till

$

Story Buena Vista Carroll Boone

Here

Demonstration sitesencompass a rangeof soilcharacteristics,tillage systems, cropproductivity and Napplication histories.

Contact: Dr. John E. Sawyer, 2104 Agronomy Hall, Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-1923, jsawyer@iastate.edu

1 0 January 2004

Soil Nitrogen and Carbon ManagementIowa State UniversityManaging soil nitrogen (N) and carbon (C) isimportant for economical corn production andenvironmental issues of nitrate movement to waterbodies, C sequestration in soil, and carbondioxide release to the atmosphere. Through on-farm demonstrations this project explores the tiebetween soil organic N and C, and incorporatesthat relationship into study of corn Nrequirements, soil N supply, and impacts of Napplication and soil management on soil Cdynamics.

The objectives of this project are: 1) demonstratethe importance of soil N supply for corn Nfertilization needs and the short- and long-termsoil N–C relationships across diverse soils,productivity, and crop management systems; and2) demonstrate the potential of a new soil N test,the Illinois N Soil Test as a predictor of soil Nsupply, corn response to applied N, andadjustments to corn N fertilization.

The strategy for this project is to conduct on-farm demonstrations at sites that encompass arange of soil characteristics, tillage system, cropproductivity, and N application histories. Fourteensites were identified for the project in 2001, 11new sites in 2002, and 13 new sites in 2003. Inaddition, seven sites were used each year andspecifically targeted for multi-year soil and cropresidue C sampling, and three sites targeted forcarbon dioxide flux measurements. A history ofN application, manure use, tillage system, croprotation, and yield for each site was obtainedfrom the cooperating producers. The field siteswere chosen based on criteria of corn aftersoybean, no manure or primary fertilizer N appliedin the fall or spring preceding the project cropyear, and a conservation tillage or no-tillagesystem. Cooperators did not apply N or manureto the area designated for the demonstration site,but the cooperators completed other normal cropmanagement practices. Replicated rates of N

(0 to 200 lb N/acre in 40 lb increments) wereapplied shortly after corn planting to thedemonstration area.

In 2003 corn yield level and yield increase fromapplied N varied between sites. Optimumeconomic N rate ranged from zero to 182 lb N/acre, and was not greater with highest yields.Overall productivity was high (average maximumyield of 190 bu/acre), with the yield producedwith no applied N quite large (average of 141 bu/acre). The measured range in siteresponsiveness was hoped for the project as thisprovides a good evaluation of soil N supply, andfor this demonstration project evaluation of thenew soil N test.

Results of profile soil sampling indicate the largeamount of total C and N in soils, and the variationacross the state with different soils and farmingpractices. The results also show that total Cand total N decreases with depth regardless ofpast history. The release of carbon dioxide wasmeasured at the soil surface to monitor theimpact of N rate on microbial activity and as anindicator of organic matter decomposition.Fertilizer N application rates resulted in slightlydifferent measured carbon dioxide flux, whichindicates that N management may impact short-term C loss and influence the dynamic soil Csystem.

Overall the project exceeded expectations.There were more demonstration sites thananticipated; site cooperators and other projectpartners were excellent to work with; and therewas a good range in soils, geographic location,productivity, and tillage systems for meeting thegoals of the project. In 2003, project resultswere shared at 19 outreach activities held atproject sites or meetings in conjunction withproject partners or other education programs.The 2003 crop year was the last year for fieldactivities.

This projectdocuments liquidswine manure N andP availability to cropsand compares yieldwith manure andwith commercialfertilizer.

Contact: Dr. John E. Sawyer, 2104 Agronomy Hall, Ames, IA 50011, Tel: 515-294-1923, jsawyer@iastate.edu

1 1January 2004

Swine Manure Nutrient UtilizationIowa State UniversityThe goal of this project is to expand knowledgeabout liquid swine manure nitrogen (N) andphosphorus (P) availability for corn and soybeanproduction in Iowa and to cause change in manuremanagement practices by crop and livestockfarmers.

The objectives of this project are: 1) work directlywith swine producers and custom manureapplicators to implement field demonstrationsand to calibrate manure application equipmentor demonstrate state-of-the-art applicationequipment – to document current applicationrates and calibration procedures and share withproducers appropriate manure application ratesbased on their manure analysis, calibration, andtractor speed; 2) document crop productivitybased on manure N and P nutrients and compareyield and soil test P responses to fertilizersources; and 3) provide information transfer toadditional producers and custom applicators viaon-farm demonstrations, field signage, educationprograms, and field days.

The strategy for this project is to conduct on-farm field demonstrations across Iowa withconcurrent data collection to document liquidswine manure N and P availability to crops andcompare crop yield with manure to yield withcommercial fertilizer. In four years of the project,46 demonstration sites were established in 13counties. Eight sites were identified for theproject in 2000, 15 sites each in 2001 and 2002,and eight sites in 2003. Swine manure wasapplied before corn at 21 sites and soybeans at8 sites; and at 17 sites second-year residualmanure nutrient response was monitored in theyear following manure application to corn orsoybean. Three field-length manure applicationstrips (strip width matching a multiple of thecooperator’s combine header width) wererandomized and replicated three times: check

– no manure, fertilizer N, or fertilizer P; low –manure applied at a rate to supply approximatelyhalf corn N need or soybean grain N removal (75lb or 100 lb total N/acre, respectively); and high– manure applied at a rate to supplyapproximately full corn N need or soybean grainN removal (150 lb or 200 lb total N/acre,respectively). Four fertilizer application rates ofN and P fertilizer were evaluated in separate,replicated small plots superimposed within eachmanure application strip. All other field activitieswere completed as normal by the cooperator,including grain harvest of the application strips.Four years of corn yield data suggest thatsupplementing swine manure with additionalfertilizer N is only necessary when the manure-N rate is inadequate to meet specific corn needsor losses reduce N supply. A statisticallysignificant soybean yield response to manureapplication occurred at only one of eight sites.These results are similar to results from otherstudies in Iowa and other states that showinconsistent, unpredictable, and usually smallsoybean yield increases from liquid swinemanure applied before soybean. Results frompost-harvest soil testing suggest strongcorrelations between performance of five soil Ptests; increases in soil test P resulting from fullmanure application rates highlight the high cropavailability of P in liquid swine manure.

Overall the project achieved its objectives andexceeded expectations. Field signs indicatingthe project name, program, and cooperatingorganizations were located at many sites in 2001,2002, and 2003. In cooperation with the sitecooperator, IDALS personnel, and ISUExtension, an outreach field day attended by30 agency personnel and area producers wasconducted at the Scott County demonstrationsite. The 2003 crop year was the last year forfield activities.

Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project2000 – 2003 Sites

46 Sites16 Cooperators

Ten projects havebeen funded forCrop Year 2003,includingdemonstrationsin over one-half ofIowa's counties.

January 20041 2

IFLM Program Crop Year 2004

Contact: Ed Beaman, 900 Des Moines St., Des Moines, IA 50309, Tel: 515-262-8323, ebeaman@agribix.org

In Fiscal Year 2004, $850,000 was appropriatefor the IFLM program. The following 10 projectshave been funded for Crop Year 2004, includingmore than 130 cooperators in demonstrationsin over one-half of Iowa's counties.

Composted Swine Hoop Manure Utilization:Four swine producers will demonstrate to othersin Henry, Iowa, Johnson and WashingtonCounties how to effectively utilize compostedswine manure and bedding from hoop structuresand to reduce nutrient losses. Contact: TerrySteinhart and Greg Brennenman, Iowa StateUniversity Extension, Sigourney, (641) 622-2680

Conservation Tillage Management :Demonstrations at five sites will consist of striptillage, no-till, and conventional tillage systemson a corn/soybean rotation. Following eachnatural runoff from rain events, water sampleswill be collected and analyzed for runoff quantity,sediment concentration, and sediment loss.Contact: Richard M. Cruse, Iowa StateUniversity Extension, Ames, (515) 294-3163

Hub & Spokes Tillage/Manure Model:In this project, the Northeast Iowa AgriculturalAssociation of Nashua serves as the "hub" fromdemonstration and provides support tocooperator field sites "spokes". Cooperator sitesin 10-15 counties in northeast and central Iowainclude utilization of manure from cattle, hogsand sheep in their cropping systems. Contact:Mahdi Al-Kaisi, Iowa State University Extension,Ames, (515) 294-1923

In-Season N Management:Ten sites will demonstrate the use of emergingin-season N application strategies through cornplant N status monitoring as a timing approachto allow for integration of seasonal N suppliesdifferences into N rate recommendations.Contact: John E. Sawyer, Iowa State UniversityExtension, Ames, (515) 294-1923

Living Mulch Systems:Six sites will be established in northeast Iowato compare a kura clover living mulch system toa traditional production system. The project willdocument reduced runoff and N availability tocrops in living mulch, and will evaluateenvironmental and economic benefits of thisalternative system. Contact: Palle Pedersen,Iowa State University Extension, Ames, (515)294-9905

Manure P Management:Approximately 20 northeast Iowa dairy, swineand poultry producers will demonstrate theimpact of manure applied at N-based and P-based rates on corn yield, soil test P andresidual plant-available N. Contact: Gerald A.Miller, Iowa State University Extension, Ames,(515) 294-4333

N & P Content in Poultry Manure:Four or five Iowa crop and poultry producerswill demonstrate manure sampling, assessmentof N and P content based on chemicalanalyses, availability of N and P for crops, theimportance of proper applicator calibration, andthe effectve of manure application on nutrientlevels in soils and also on potential N and Plosses with surface runoff. Contact: AntonioP. Mallarino, Iowa State University Extension,Ames, (515) 294-9865

On-Farm Network:Approximately 70 cooperators throughout thestate will demonstrate input managementalternatives utilizing new tools that affectnutrient, manure and tillage impacts on theenvironment while quantifying the costs andbenefits. Contact: Doug Lindgren, IowaSoybean Association, Urbandale, (515) 251-8640

Producer-Oriented Tillage:Demonstrations at eight sites compare tillagemethods to determine the effect of fall-strip,spring-strip, fall-chisel or spring tillage on cornand soybean production and changes in soilproperties. Contact: Jerry L. Hatfield and TomJ. Sauer, USDA-ARS, National Soil TilthLaboratory, Ames, (515) 294-5723

Strip Till to Enhance No-Till:This project demonstrates the use of fall-striptillage as a practice to enhance the acceptanceof no-till for corn production in cold, wet soilsand will show the benefits of no-till corn for theenvironment and for profitability to the producer.Contact: Jerry Crew, Clay Soil and WaterConservation District, Spencer, (712) 262-3432