Technical Report TR08-05 January 2008

ricultural Ag Experiment Station

College of

Agricultural Sciences Department of

Soil and Crop Sciences Plainsman

Research Center Extension

Plainsman Research Center 2007 Research Reports

Kevin Larson, Superintendent/Research Scientist

Plainsman Research Center

Box 477

42790 Hwy 160

Walsh, CO 81090

(719) 324-5643

Funded by the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station

in cooperation with the Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation

• **Mention of a trademark or proprietary product does not constitute endorsement by the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station.**

Colorado State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action institution and complies with all Federal and Colorado State laws, regulations, and executive orders regarding affirmative action requirements in all programs. The Office of Equal Opportunity is located in 101 Student Services. In order to assist Colorado State University in meeting its affirmative action responsibilities, ethnic minorities, women, and other protected class members are encouraged to apply and to so identify themselves.

Plainsman Research Center, 2007 Research Reports

Content Page Wheat Studies Winter wheat variety performance trials 1 Pairwise wheat variety regressions 9 Dryland wheat strips for forage and grain yield 11 Dryland wheat planting date and seeding rate study 14 Long term residual P on dryland wheat study 19 Crop Rotation Studies Dryland millet and wheat Rotations 22 Long-term N effects on Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow rotation 28 Long-term N effects on irrigated Sunflower-Corn rotations 32 Crop rotation sequencing study 35 Dryland crop rotation study 45 Sorghum Hybrid Performance Studies Sorghum hybrid performance trials introduction 50 Early maturing irrigated grain sorghum hybrid performance trial at Walsh 55 Dryland grain sorghum hybrid performance trial at Walsh 59 Irrigated grain sorghum hybrid performance trial at Walsh 63 Limited sprinkler irrigated grain sorghum hybrid trial at Walsh 67 Dryland forage sorghum hybrid performance trial at Walsh 71 Irrigated forage sorghum hybrid performance trail at Walsh 76 Sorghum Ethanol Studies Expanding bio-based energy crop options for dryland systems 81 Maximizing sugar extraction from sweet sorghum stocks 90 Sorghum Production Studies Dryland grain sorghum planting date and maturation study 94 Long-term, low rate, seedrow P on dryland grain sorghum 98 Corn Studies Skip row planting and seeding rate for dryland corn and grain sorghum 101 Limited sprinkler irrigated corn hybrid performance at Walsh 107 Corn Borer resistant and nonresistant hybrid comparison 110 Alternative Crops Irrigated mid and high oleic sunflower hybrid performance trial 112 Dryland safflower variety trial 114 Winter canola variety performance trials 116 Planting date for cotton under dryland and irrigated conditions 121

2007 Climatological SummaryPlainsman Research Center

Temperature Greatest GreatestMax. Min. Day of Snow- Snow Evapor-

Month Max. Min. Mean Mean Mean Precip.Precip- Fall Depth ationF F F F F In. atation In. In. In.

Jan. 43 -7 29.1 10.3 19.7 0.52 0.25 4.60 28.00

Feb. 57 -7 35.5 17.3 26.4 0.12 0.10 2.00 9.00

Mar. 84 12 61.5 33.4 47.5 2.16 2.02 0.50 0.50

Apr. 83 21 61.2 35.7 48.5 2.98 1.56 9.50 8.00 3.45

May 87 36 76.8 47.4 62.1 0.73 0.43 0.00 0.00 9.02

Jun. 98 38 84.6 55.4 70.0 1.26 0.76 0.00 0.00 9.73

Jul. 100 55 92.7 61.0 76.9 1.59 0.66 0.00 0.00 13.10

Aug. 103 55 94.4 64.0 79.2 0.97 0.36 0.00 0.00 12.85

Sept. 100 41 86.1 54.3 70.2 0.91 0.57 0.00 0.00 11.03

Oct. 91 27 74.4 40.4 57.4 0.07 0.07 0.00 0.00 5.23

Nov. 80 8 60.1 27.1 43.6 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00

Dec. 74 -3 41.5 16.8 29.2 1.18 0.50 9.50 5.00

Total Annual 66.49 38.59 52.54 12.51 26.10

*** NOTE: Evaporation read mid April through October 15th.Wind velocity is recorded at two feet above ground level.Total evaporation from a four foot diameter pan for the period indicated.

2007 2006 Highest Temperatur 103 degrees on Aug. 21 104 degrees on June 21Lowest Temperature -7 degrees on Jan 15, Feb. 15 -5 degrees on Feb. 18Last freeze in spr 32 degrees on Apr. 26 27 degrees on Apr. 26First freeze in fa 31 degrees on Oct. 19 28 degrees on Oct. 192007 frost free se 176 frost free days 176 frost free daysAvg. for 24 years: Avg for 24 years 19.82 inches Avg for 23 years 20.14 inches

Maximum Wind:Jan. 35 mph on 31st July. 34 mph on 13th, 20thFeb. 63 mph on 25th Aug. 40 mph on 11thMar. 42 mph on 29th Sept. 40 mph on 30thApr. 52 mph on 25th Oct. 47 mph on 1stMay 44 mph on 24th Nov. 38 mph on 30thJun. 50 mph on 7th Dec. 46 mph on 22nd

2007 Plainsman Research Center Staff and Personnel with Projects Kevin Larson Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, (719) 324-5643 Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado State University. Dennis Thompson Technician III, Plainsman Research Center, (719) 324-5643 Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado State University. Deborah Harn Research Associate, RWA Project, Plainsman Research (719) 324-5643 Center, Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado State University. Calvin Thompson Farm Coordinator, Plainsman Research Center, (719) 324-5643 Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado State University. Thia Walker Area Entomologist, RWA Project, Plainsman Research (719) 336-7734 Center, Agricultural Experiment Station, Colorado State University. Jerry Johnson Extension Crop Specialist, Crop Testing Program Leader, (970) 491-1454 Soil and Crop Sciences Department, Colorado State University. Scott Haley Professor, Soil and Crop Sciences Department (970) 491-6483 Wheat Breeder, Colorado State University. Gary Peterson Professor and Head, Soil and Crop Sciences Department, (970) 491-6501 Colorado State University. Dwayne Westfall Professor, Sustainable Dryland Agroecosystem Manage- (970) 491-6149 ment Project Leader, Soil and Crop Sciences Department, Colorado State University. Neil Hansen Associate Professor, Sustainable Dryland Agroecosystem (970) 491-6804 Management Project Leader, Soil and Crop Sciences Department, Colorado State University. Mark Brick Professor, Bean Breeder, Soil and Crop Sciences (970) 491-6551 Department, Colorado State University. Scott Brase Cropping System Specialist, Cooperative Extension (719) 336-7734 Southeast Area, Colorado State University.

PLAINSMAN AGRI-SEARCH FOUNDATION BOARD 2007 2008 Paul Hinds (Vice President) Norman Smith 12785 Road 34 21715 Road 51 Campo, CO 81029 Walsh, CO 81090 James Hume Bill Brooks 21491 Road 55 37701 Road V Walsh, CO 81090 Walsh, CO 81090 Tom Jacobs Troy Bishop 27300 Road 25 5/10 27351 Road 25 5/10 Springfield, CO 81073 Springfield, CO 81073 Don Wood (President) Calvin Melcher 36663 Road UU 300 N. Main Two Buttes, CO 81084 Holly, CO 81047 Lyndell Herron Max Smith Box 64 48940 Road X Manter, KS 67862 Walsh, CO 81090 Truman Wright Todd Randolph 19625 Road 50 53766 Road GG Walsh, CO 81090 Walsh, CO 81090 2009 Dean Sides 49681 Road X Walsh, CO 81090 Don Lohrey Box 279 Walsh, CO 81090 Jack Walker (Secretary/Treasurer) 30780 Road 51 Walsh, CO 81090 Ron Batterton 1550 Hwy 89 Holly, CO 81047 Robert Wood 721 Barkley Springfield, CO 81073 Douglas Melcher 12845 Hwy 89

Holly, CO 81047

4

2007 Colorado Winter Wheat VarietyPerformance Trial Results

Jerry Johnson and Scott Haley (July 2007)

2007 Dryland and Irrigated Performance Trial Locations

2007 Performance Trial Information

Colorado State University provides unbiased and reliable information toColorado wheat producers to help them make better wheat varietydecisions. Colorado State University provides excellent research facultyand staff, a focused breeding program, graduate and undergraduatestudents, and dedicated agricultural extension specialists. However, wheatimprovement in Colorado would not be possible without the support andcooperation of the entire Colorado wheat industry. On-going and strongsupport for a public breeding program is critical because varietydevelopment and testing is a long process, especially under the highlyvariable climatic conditions in Colorado.

Our wheat variety performance trials, and collaborative on-farm testing,represent the final stages of a wheat breeding program where promisingexperimental lines are tested under an increasingly broad range ofenvironmental conditions. Variation in precipitation, as well as variablefall, winter, and spring temperature regimes, hail and spring freeze events,interact with disease and insect pests and variety maturity to affect wheatyields. As a consequence of large environmental variation, Colorado StateUniversity annually conducts a large number of performance trials, whichserve to guide producer variety decisions and to assist our breedingprogram to more reliably select and advance the most promising linestoward release as new varieties.

There were 40 different entries in the dryland performance trials (UVPT)and 32 entries in the irrigated performance trials (IVPT). All trials includea combination of public and private varieties and experimental lines fromColorado and surrounding states. Trials were planted in a randomizedcomplete block design with four replicates in the dryland trials and threereplicates in the irrigated trials. Plot size was approximately 160 ft2 and allvarieties were planted at 600,000 viable seeds per acre for dryland trialsand 1.2 million viable seeds per acre for irrigated trials (viable seed isdetermined by a germination test prior to planting). Yields are corrected to13% moisture. All eleven dryland and three irrigated variety performancetrials were harvested. Test weight information was obtained from cleanedgrain samples from three replicates at Walsh, Burlington, Akron, Julesburg,and Fort Collins. For the remaining dryland and irrigated locations, testweight for each plot was estimated from single replicate, cleaned grainsamples correlated to our Harvest Master combine test weight data.

In this report, individual trial summary performance tables are intended toprovide all of the critical information necessary for producers to compareperformance and select superior varieties. Complete performance resultsfor all entries (including experimental lines) as well as additional varietyinformation, including test weight, grain moisture, height, lodginginformation, and disease scores can be found on the following websites:

http://www.csucrops.com the CSU Crops Testing website for all Coloradocrop performance results.http://wheat.colostate.edu/vpt.html Colorado Variety PerformanceDatabase (CSU Wheat Breeding Program). http://www.coloradowheat.org Colorado Wheat AdministrativeCommittee, CAWG, and CWRF website.

1

5

2006/2007 Crop Growth Conditions

Generally favorable planting and emergence conditions, resulting fromfavorable summer precipitation, led to good stands and tillering wheatplants before winter. Among the eleven dryland trial locations, plantstands were variable in our Bennett and Genoa trials where emergencecontinued into the spring.

Winter 2007 brought heavy snow to most of eastern Colorado after manyyears of insufficient winter precipitation. Insufficient snow catchoccurred at Burlington where the dryland trial suffered from significantdrought stress.

Favorable fall, winter, and early spring temperatures, in combination with

above average precipitation in most locations and well-developed plants,led to heavy tillering.

Stripe rust and leaf rust appeared relatively early in the growing seasonand eventually reduced yields in some locations, especially insoutheastern Colorado (Lamar, Sheridan Lake, Arapahoe) where it is rareto have such early and heavy rust infestations.

Some trial locations did not receive enough late spring precipitation tosustain the lush growth created by favorable fall and winter conditionswhich led to reduced plant heights, fewer tillers reaching maturity, andlower trial yields.

2

11

Dryland Winter Wheat Variety Selection in Colorado for Fall 2007 Choosing a variety is a personal decision made by every farmer for everyfield before planting every year. This report is intended to provideinformation to producers so they can weigh alternative variety advantagesand disadvantages and choose the variety that best fits their farm. However,we are asked to synthesize the results annually and to suggest varieties thathave been proven worthy of consideration by producers. The followingcomments are the result of our general analysis and reflection on the 2007results as well as the results from the past three years.

Our first suggestion is to plant more than one variety in order tospread your risk. The suggested varieties below focus on yield as theprimary criterion for variety selection. Additional information is provided(test weight, disease resistance, or different maturity), not becauseadditional criteria are of equal importance as yield but rather becauseadditional criteria can provide a basis for selecting a second or third varietythat spreads your risk in a rational manner.

Secondly, with the variability among trial locations in 2007, as well asvariability among locations across years, producers should considermultiple-year summary yield results instead of single-location, or single-year results to make better variety decisions. All varieties are compared forperformance over three years, including the two drought years in 2005 and2006, so high average yield performance is also an indicator of yieldstability. Test weight comparisons are made differently in this report thanin other reports. Instead of reporting long term average test weightperformance, we have computed the probability of obtaining or surpassing60 lb/bu test weight. This provides a method of combining average testweight information for each variety together with the variability of testweight for each variety over trials into a comparison at a meaningful testweight benchmark (60 lb/bu). Probabilities were computed using testweight data of cleaned grain samples from a single replicate at each of theeleven UVPT trials in 2007 only. All varieties are susceptible to prevalentraces of RWA and thus this does not figure into variety selection strategies.

Hatcher – highest yield over years, in 2007 UVPT, and in 2007 COFT trials. Test weight better than Ripper but lower than Keota and Jagalene in 2007.Better resistance to stripe rust than Ripper, similar to Jagalene and Keota. Ripper – second highest yield over years albeit lower yielding than Hatcher and Keota in 2007 UVPT trials. Keota – high yield over years and second to Hatcher in 2007. Similar test weight to Jagalene and better than Hatcher and Ripper in 2007. High proteincontent. Good stripe rust resistance.Jagalene – the single most planted variety in Colorado this year. Jagalene has shown average yields over years and in 2007 was lower than Hatcher,Ripper, and Keota. Jagalene has the highest test weight among the four HRW varieties and good resistance to stripe rust. Has a tendency to shatter.

Danby - had significantly higher yields in 2007 though average yields over years are similar. Test weight is better than Avalanche in 2007 and as goodas the highest HRW varieties. Danby distinguishes itself due to good sprout tolerance and has considerably better stripe rust resistance thanAvalanche.Avalanche - yield has been stable over years albeit significantly lower than Danby in 2007. Test weight is average to good. Susceptible to stripe rust. NuDakota - a new Agripro hard white wheat (HWW) variety to keep your eye on. Excellent yield performance for two years but low test weight.Excellent resistance to both leaf and stripe rust. Better sprouting tolerance than many HWW, except Danby and Avalanche. We are waiting to see howit will perform in another year before making it a variety to consider for planting.

Hard red wheat varieties to compare for planting in fall 2007: redisnocotseiteiravWRH

rehctaH Ripper Keota JagaleneUVPT 3yr Average Yield 41.2 40.4 39.2 37.2

UVPT 07 Average Yield 61.3 54.6 57.0 53.9

COFT 07 Average Yield 46.6 42.9

Probability of 60+ Test Weight 31.9% 20.7% 49.2% 49.9%

H

Hard white wheat varieties to compare:

HWW varieties to consider

Danby AvalancheUVPT 3yr Average Yield 37.0 36.7

UVPT 07 Average Yield 55.0 50.8

COFT 07 Average Yield 43.2 39.8

Probability of 60+ Test Weight 44.5% 37.2%

3

Walsh 2007 Uniform Variety Performance TrialOrigin Release Year Variety Yield

Grain Moisture

Test Weight

Plant Height

bu/ac % lb/bu in

AP 2006 Hawken 64.2 9.5 56.4 31AP 1995 Postrock 63.9 10.5 57.7 31SD 2006 Alice 63.0 10.8 59.2 31KSU 1994 Jagger 62.6 10.2 56.9 32CSU Exp CO03W239 61.7 10.4 57.2 33CSU 2004 Hatcher 61.5 10.1 57.5 31CSU Exp CO01385-A1 60.6 11.1 57.8 31CSU Exp CO02W214 59.8 10.5 57.7 33OK 2004 Endurance 59.8 9.4 56.1 33TX 2002 TAM 111 59.4 10.1 56.1 32TX 2005 TAM 112 59.1 10.6 57.1 33AP 2005 NuDakota 58.7 7.9 54.1 30CSU 1991 Yuma 58.7 9.5 55.7 31AP 2005 NuGrain 58.4 9.6 58.8 29WB 2005 Keota 58.4 11.6 58.6 35CSU-TX 2007 Above 58.1 9.0 56.3 33CSU 2002 Ankor 57.4 9.5 56.0 33NE 2006 Overland 56.7 10.8 56.6 33CSU Exp CO03W269 56.7 7.7 55.3 32KSU 2006 RonL 56.5 9.9 57.1 29CSU Exp CO03W238 56.3 8.6 55.8 31KSU 1999 Trego 55.9 8.9 57.8 31WB 2006 Smoky Hill 55.6 9.0 55.4 33KSU 2005 Danby 55.5 9.7 58.1 33CSU 2006 Ripper 55.2 8.6 54.6 32CSU 1998 Prairie Red 55.2 7.6 55.7 32CSU 1994 Akron 54.8 10.2 56.7 33CSU Exp CO02W237 54.8 11.1 57.5 34OK 2006 Duster 54.4 10.3 56.8 34OK 2006 OK Bullet 54.2 9.7 56.6 34NE 2004 Infinity CL 54.2 9.7 55.4 35CSU 2004 Bond CL 54.2 8.5 54.4 34AP 2001 Jagalene 53.5 9.0 58.0 29KSU 2006 Fuller 53.3 8.6 54.5 33CSU 2001 Avalanche 53.2 10.1 58.4 32CSU Exp CO02W280 52.3 10.9 56.6 34NE 1993 Alliance 51.4 9.5 54.9 35AP 2000 NuFrontier 50.0 10.0 56.5 34NE 2002 Goodstreak 47.5 11.1 58.0 41CSU 1999 Prowers 99 47.0 10.6 57.2 38

Average 56.6 9.7 56.7 33 LSD(0.30) 3.1 0.7

Cooperator: Plainsman Research CenterDate of Planting: 09/20/07Date of Harvest: 07/02/07

4

Lamar 2007 Uniform Variety Performance TrialO gRelease Year Variety Yield

Grain Moisture

Test Weight

Plant Height

Stripe Rust

Leaf Rust

bu/ac % lb/bu in 1-9 1-9

AP 2006 Hawken 86.9 10.9 59.1 34 1 3KSU 2006 Fuller 81.0 10.8 58.9 36 1 1AP 2005 NuDakota 80.0 10.2 57.0 33 1 3TX 2002 TAM 111 77.4 11.3 59.2 39 1 9CSU 2004 Hatcher 76.7 10.7 57.3 36 4 8AP 1995 Postrock 76.7 10.7 59.4 36 1 1WB 2006 Smoky Hill 76.1 10.5 57.1 35 1 3AP 2001 Jagalene 74.7 10.8 58.9 38 2 9WB 2005 Keota 74.3 11.0 59.8 39 1 9OK 2006 OK Bullet 73.5 10.8 59.5 40 2SD 2006 Alice 72.7 10.4 57.8 36 5CSU Exp CO02W280 72.4 11.3 58.6 41 3 7OK 2006 Duster 72.1 10.8 58.1 36 7 1CSU Exp CO03W238 71.6 10.3 56.8 36 3 9CSU 1991 Yuma 71.3 10.5 57.4 34 5 4CSU Exp CO02W237 70.3 10.8 57.5 36 4CSU Exp CO03W239 70.3 10.2 55.9 37 3 3KSU 1994 Jagger 68.8 10.2 56.5 36 1 9KSU 2005 Danby 68.3 11.1 58.4 38 1 8NE 2004 Infinity CL 67.4 10.6 57.4 39 3 9NE 2006 Overland 67.0 10.7 56.8 40 3CSU Exp CO02W214 66.1 10.9 58.3 38 2 9CSU 2004 Bond CL 65.8 10.2 56.5 40 7CSU Exp CO01385-A1 65.5 10.5 56.6 35 3 1CSU Exp CO03W269 65.2 10.5 58.9 41 3AP 2005 NuGrain 64.9 10.3 58.3 34 5 8NE 2002 Goodstreak 63.5 10.9 58.1 45 4 3KSU 2006 RonL 63.4 10.2 53.9 37 4OK 2004 Endurance 62.3 10.6 56.7 36 6AP 2000 NuFrontier 60.2 10.6 58.0 38 2 9CSU-TX 2007 Above 58.5 9.8 53.0 37 8CSU 1999 Prowers 99 58.1 10.4 57.9 43 4CSU 2001 Avalanche 57.4 10.0 56.3 37 8NE 1993 Alliance 57.2 9.8 53.4 38 6KSU 1999 Trego 56.1 9.9 54.7 37 8CSU 1994 Akron 53.6 9.7 51.9 40 7CSY 1998 Prairie Red 49.9 9.6 51.8 36 8CSU 2002 Ankor 48.5 9.8 52.6 38 8TX 2005 TAM 112 48.3 9.5 52.3 36 8CSU 2006 Ripper 48.2 9.3 51.5 37 9

Averag 66.6 10.4 56.7 38 4 6 LSD(0.30 3.3 0.9

Cooperator: John and Jeremy StulpDate of Planting: 09/19/06Date of Harvest: 07/05/07

5

Sheridan Lake 2007 Uniform Variety Performance TrialgRelease Year Variety Yield

Grain Moisture

Test Weight

Height

bu/ac % lb/bu in

CSU 2006 Ripper 75.6 10.6 59.5 30CSU 2004 Hatcher 74.7 11.4 60.5 28WB 2006 Smoky Hill 74.4 11.3 61.0 32CSU 1994 Akron 70.5 12.2 61.0 32CSU Exp CO01385-A1 70.5 12.4 61.6 30AP 2006 Hawken 69.0 11.6 61.7 28KSU 2006 Fuller 68.4 11.7 61.0 32CSU 2004 Bond CL 68.1 11.6 61.0 32CSU 2002 Ankor 67.8 12.1 60.7 31AP 2005 NuDakota 67.7 11.4 60.5 28TX 2005 TAM 112 67.1 12.2 61.9 31NE 1993 Alliance 66.5 11.6 60.1 33OK 2004 Endurance 66.4 11.7 60.6 33NE 2006 Overland 66.4 11.9 59.8 35CSU 2001 Avalanche 66.3 12.4 62.5 34KSU 2005 Danby 65.2 12.7 63.8 29CSU Exp CO02W237 64.9 12.2 60.5 30OK 2006 Duster 64.5 12.0 60.9 30NE 2004 Infinity CL 64.4 12.0 60.9 32WB 2005 Keota 64.3 12.0 61.6 32TX 2002 TAM 111 64.2 12.7 62.4 30CSU Exp CO03W239 64.1 11.6 61.2 30CSU-TX 2007 Above 62.8 11.2 61.1 30CSU Exp CO03W269 62.2 10.9 61.0 31CSU Exp CO02W280 62.1 12.2 61.6 32CSU 1991 Yuma 61.6 11.3 60.7 28OK 2006 OK Bullet 61.5 11.8 62.5 32AP 2001 Jagalene 61.1 12.1 62.0 32KSU 1994 Jagger 60.5 12.0 61.1 30KSU 1999 Trego 60.4 12.2 62.8 29CSU Exp CO02W214 59.9 11.9 60.8 31CSU 1998 Prairie Red 59.5 10.0 60.1 29AP 2000 NuFrontier 58.8 11.9 61.4 30KSU 2006 RonL 58.4 12.4 62.3 27NE 2002 Goodstreak 58.3 12.6 61.9 38AP 2005 NuGrain 57.6 12.5 63.3 27CSU Exp CO03W238 56.8 10.4 60.4 28AP 1995 Postrock 56.3 12.0 61.6 28SD 2006 Alice 56.1 12.0 60.7 30CSU 1999 Prowers 99 51.6 12.5 62.6 34

Average 63.9 11.8 61.3 31 LSD (0.30) 4.3 0.3

Cooperator: Burl ScherlerDate of Planting: 09/20/06Date of Harvest: 07/04/07

6

Arapahoe 2007 Uniform Variety Performance TrialOrigin Release Year Variety Yield

Grain Moisture

Test Weight

Plant Height

bu/ac % lb/bu in

CSU 2004 Hatcher 60.7 9.3 62.4 28TX 2002 TAM 111 55.0 9.3 61.4 30TX 2005 TAM 112 52.6 9.6 61.9 29CSU Exp CO01385-A1 51.3 9.9 62.4 28CSU Exp CO03W239 50.8 8.7 61.3 30KSU 2006 RonL 49.7 9.3 61.2 26AP 2005 NuDakota 49.5 8.4 60.6 28NE 2006 Overland 49.5 8.9 61.3 32KSU 2006 Fuller 49.4 8.5 60.6 28CSU Exp CO02W237 49.2 9.0 62.0 29WB 2006 Smoky Hill 48.8 8.7 61.2 27KSU 1999 Trego 48.2 8.8 61.0 25OK 2006 Duster 48.1 9.4 61.7 28NE 2004 Infinity CL 47.4 8.7 60.8 30AP 2006 Hawken 46.9 8.6 60.8 28CSU 2002 Ankor 46.8 9.1 61.2 29CSU 1991 Yuma 46.8 8.9 61.5 26CSU 2006 Ripper 46.4 8.5 59.7 28KSU 2005 Danby 46.0 9.9 62.9 27OK 2004 Endurance 46.0 9.3 61.8 28CSU Exp CO03W238 45.6 8.1 60.0 27CSU 2004 Bond CL 45.6 8.9 61.5 29AP 1995 Postrock 44.7 9.1 62.0 28CSU 2001 Avalanche 44.7 9.7 62.7 28AP 2005 NuGrain 44.5 9.3 62.3 26OK 2006 OK Bullet 44.4 8.6 60.6 30CSU 1994 Akron 44.2 9.4 60.7 29NE 2002 Goodstreak 44.2 9.1 61.7 33CSU-TX 2007 Above 44.1 8.5 60.4 27NE 1993 Alliance 43.6 9.1 60.8 30CSU 1998 Prairie Red 43.5 8.6 60.2 26KSU 1994 Jagger 43.5 8.6 60.6 29CSU 1999 Prowers 99 43.5 8.9 61.3 31CSU Exp CO02W280 43.4 9.5 61.8 30WB 2005 Keota 42.6 9.6 61.9 29CSU Exp CO03W269 42.3 8.7 61.0 30SD 2006 Alice 42.2 9.2 61.9 26CSU Exp CO02W214 41.7 9.0 61.1 29AP 2000 NuFrontier 40.5 9.1 61.6 29AP 2001 Jagalene 39.4 9.2 62.1 27

Average 46.4 9.0 61.4 28 LSD(0.30) 3.5 0.5

Cooperator: Dennis and Matt CampbellDate of Planting: 09/19/06Date of Harvest: 07/05/07

7

2007 Irrigated Wheat Variety Performance Trial, Rocky FordOrigin Release Year Variety Yield

Grain Moisture

Test Weight

Plant Height Lodging

bu/ac % lb/bu in 1-9

TX 2005 TAM 112 104.8 12.4 61.6 37 5AP 2005 NuDakota 101.3 11.1 59.3 36 5AP 2001 Jagalene 101.2 12.3 60.7 38 4CSU Exp CO01385-A1 101.1 12.8 60.8 37 3WB 2006 Aspen 100.2 11.3 59.9 36 1CSU Exp CO03W239 98.2 11.9 59.9 37 3CSU 1991 Yuma 98.2 11.4 58.9 38 4CSU 2004 Hatcher 97.6 12.5 60.8 37 6TX 2002 TAM 111 97.1 13.1 61.7 37 3CSU 2004 Bond CL 96.6 11.2 59.8 39 3CSU Exp CO03W054 96.3 11.9 60.3 39 3CSU Exp CO03W238 94.5 10.4 59.3 36 5CSU 2002 Ankor 94.3 12.8 61.1 39 4CSU Exp CO03W139 93.5 12.1 59.8 37 4AP 2006 Hawken 91.8 11.9 61.1 36 3CSU Exp CO03W108 91.5 12.5 61.8 39 4AP 2005 Postrock 90.8 12.3 61.9 37 2CSU Exp CO02W280 89.9 13.0 62.4 40 5CSU Exp CO03443 89.5 12.3 61.5 40 4CSU Exp CO03W033 89.3 12.9 62.4 38 4CSU Exp CO03064 88.9 12.1 60.9 39 6CSU 1998 Prairie Red 88.5 11.4 60.9 37 2CSU Exp CO02W237 88.5 12.8 61.2 38 6CSU Exp CO03W043 88.1 11.4 60.2 37 7AP 2005 NuGrain 87.8 12.9 62.2 36 2CSU Exp CO03W269 87.5 11.1 60.3 37 4WB 2005 Keota 87.2 12.1 60.8 40 5CSU Exp CO03W146 86.7 12.8 61.3 38 7KSU 2005 Danby 85.6 11.9 62.0 38 3CSU Exp CO03W127 85.4 12.0 60.0 37 5AP 1995 Platte 84.2 13.2 63.0 33 1CSU Exp CO02W214 84.2 12.5 60.4 37 4

Average 92.5 12.1 60.9 37 4 LSD(0.30) 7.6 1.0

Cooperator: Arkansas Valley Research StationDate of Planting: 09/28/06Date of Harvest: 07/05/07Varieties are ranked according to average yield performance in 20Lodging score: 1=no lodging, 9=completely lodged.Variety origin code: CSU=Colorado State University CSU Exp=Colorado State University Experimental Line WB=WestBred, LLC AP=AgriPro® COKER® KSU=Kansas State University TX=Texas A&M University

8

Dryland Yield Response ComparisonHatcher vs. Bill Brown (32 locations)

y = 0.9528x + 5.8924R2 = 0.8866

y = 1.1583x - 1.6873R2 = 0.9394

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Location Mean Yield

Entr

y M

ean

Yiel

d

Bill BrownHatcherLinear (Bill Brown)Linear (Hatcher)

Hatcher

Bill Brown

9

Dryland Yield Response ComparisonRipper vs. Bill Brown (32 locations)

y = 0.9528x + 5.8924R2 = 0.8866

y = 0.8547x + 8.6691R2 = 0.8536

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Location Mean Yield

Entr

y M

ean

Yiel

d

Bill BrownRipperLinear (Bill Brown)Linear (Ripper)

Ripper

Bill Brown

10

Dryland Wheat Strips for Forage and Grain Yield at Walsh, 2007 K. Larson, D. Thompson, D. Harn, and C. Thompson

PURPOSE: To determine which wheat varieties are best suited for dual-purpose forage and grain production in Southeastern Colorado. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen wheat varieties were planted on September 27, 2006 at 45 lb seed/a in 20 ft. by 800 ft. strips with two replications. We applied 50 lb N/a with a sweep and seedrow applied 5 gal/a of 10-34-0 (20 lb P2O5, 6 lb N/a). Ally 0.1 oz/a and 2,4-D 0.38 lb/a was sprayed for weed control. Two 2 ft. by 2.5 ft. forage samples were taken at jointing (April 2) and at boot (May 7). We measure the forage for fresh weight, oven-dried the samples, and recorded dry weight at 15% moisture content. Except for herbicides, no other pesticides were applied because insects (e.g., RWA) and diseases (e.g., Stripe Rust) were not a serious problem. This year, we noticed some areas of Snow Mold from the extended snow cover; however, we made no attempt to control this disease. We harvested the plots on June 26 and 27 with a self-propelled combine and weighed them in a digital weigh cart. Grain yields were adjusted to 12% seed moisture content. RESULTS: Grain yields were very good, averaging 46 bu/a. TAM 112 produced the highest dry forage yield at jointing and Hatcher produced the highest dry forage yield at boot. The jointing forage yield of TAM 112 was significantly higher than Hatcher and Keota, the two highest grain producing varieties. Six varieties had higher three-year grain yield averages than TAM 107. The variety with the highest three-year average yield was TAM 111. TAM 111 produced 117% of TAM 107 yield. DISCUSSION: My choice for the best overall dual-purpose wheat variety is TAM 111. TAM 111 was not the highest producing variety for forage nor grain; however, it produced consistently high yields for forage at jointing and boot, as well as producing one of the highest grain yields. Last year, it was very dry and TAM 107 produced the highest grain yield in this study. This year with higher moisture conditions, all varieties produced as high or higher grain yields than TAM 107. In this study, we continue to use TAM 107 as the standard of performance. In the past, surpassing the grain yield of TAM 107 was a difficult challenge. Recently a new trend has developed. Under more favorable growing conditions, most new variety releases that we have tested can produce higher grain yields than TAM 107. However under dry conditions, TAM 107 is still hard to beat.

11

Table .Dryland Wheat Strips, Forage and Grain Yield at Walsh, 2007.__________________________________________________________________________Variety Jointing Boot Plant Test Grain

Fresh Wt. Dry Wt. Fresh Wt. Dry Wt. Height Residue Weight Yield__________________________________________________________________________

------------------------lb/a------------------------ in lb/a lb/bu bu/a

Hatcher 5580 1266 26918 6495 31 3347 62 51Keota 4652 1170 20676 5618 36 3864 62 51TAM 111 5704 1360 24344 6209 36 3569 62 49Protection 5649 1324 24383 5896 34 3275 60 49Bond CL 5192 1242 26409 6204 34 3453 60 48

Danby 5438 1167 25602 6425 35 3612 62 48Above 5417 1260 24440 6350 31 3031 61 47Ankor 5916 1364 25151 5851 34 3601 61 47TAM 112 7155 1691 22529 5845 32 3386 62 46Jagalene 6217 1522 23970 5959 32 3285 62 46

Prairie Red 4125 1018 20724 5254 30 2656 60 43TAM 110 5216 1207 24489 5896 33 2991 60 43Ripper 5546 1265 24748 5806 29 2497 60 42Avalanche 5303 1291 22539 5326 36 3616 62 41TAM 107 4249 1034 20177 5319 30 2824 61 41__________________________________________________________________________Average 5424 1279 23807 5897 33 3267 61 46LSD 0.05 1378.7 337.5 3426.9 762.7 697.8 3.3__________________________________________________________________________Planted: September 27, 2006; 45 lb seed/a; 5 gal/a 10-34-0.Jointing sample taken April 2, 2007.Boot sample taken May 7, 2007.Grain Harvested: June 26 and 27, 2007.Wet Weight is reported at field moisture.Dry Weight is adjusted to 15% moisture content.Grain Yield is adjusted to 12% seed moisture content.

12

Table .--Summary: Dryland Wheat Strips Variety Performance Tests at Walsh, 2005-2007._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grain Yield Yield as % of TAM 107 Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Firm Variety 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

---------------------bu/a------------------------ -------------------------%-------------------------

Agseco TAM 111 50 16 49 33 38 152 80 120 100 117Agseco TAM 110 38 17 43 30 33 115 85 105 95 102

AgriPro Jagalene 43 18 46 32 36 130 90 112 101 111

Colorado State Hatcher 48 14 51 33 38 145 70 124 97 113Colorado State Prowers 99 42 14 -- 28 -- 127 70 -- 99 --Colorado State Prairie Red 35 -- 43 39 -- 106 -- 105 105 --Colorado State Above 36 16 47 32 33 109 80 115 97 101Colorado State Avalanche 35 -- 41 38 -- 106 -- 100 103 --Colorado State Ankor 35 17 47 32 33 106 85 115 100 102Colorado State Bond CL -- 16 48 32 -- -- 80 117 99 --

Kansas State Jagger 47 15 -- 31 -- 142 75 -- 109 --Kansas State 2137 28 13 -- 21 -- 85 65 -- 75 --Kansas State Trego 29 17 -- 23 -- 88 85 -- 86 --

Texas A & M TAM 107 33 20 41 31 31 100 100 100 100 100

Trio T 81 47 14 -- 31 -- 142 70 -- 106 --_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 39 16 46 31 34_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Grain Yields were adjusted to 12.0 % seed moisture content.

13

Winter Wheat Planting Date and Seeding Rate Study for Southeastern Colorado Kevin Larson, Dennis Thompson, and Deborah Harn

Currently there is a winter wheat planting date controversy about the deadline for

winter wheat planting and government program compliance. The wheat planting date compliance cutoff for Southeastern Colorado was recently extended from October 5 to October 15. This date appears to be arbitrarily selected and not based on scientific research. Our neighboring states of Kansas and Oklahoma have much later winter wheat planting date compliance deadlines. The deadline for the Panhandle of Oklahoma is November 15, a full month later than Colorado, and the deadline for Southwestern Kansas is October 20. Our winter wheat planting date and seeding rate study will ascertain the optimum planting date and seeding rate window for winter wheat production. Materials and Methods

For our planting date and seeding rate study, we used the winter wheat variety Hatcher. We planted five planting dates: PD1, September 15; PD2, September 29; PD3, October 13; PD4, October 27; and PD5, November 10. We tested four seeding rates: 30, 60, 90, and 120 lb/a (0.40, 0.80, 1.20, and 1.60 million seeds/a). The experimental design for our study was a split-plot design (planting date as main plots, and seeding rates as subplots) with four replications. We applied N fertilizer at 50 lb/a to the site with a sweep plow with an anhydrous attachment. For weed control, we applied Express, 0.33 oz/a and 2,4-D, 0.38 lb/a in early spring. We bedded the field in order to furrow irrigate the site for stand establishment. We measured Russian Wheat Aphid (RWA) infestation by sampling 25 tillers per treatment. The percentage of tillers infested with RWA was the sum of tillers with aphids and tillers damaged from RWA. Forage samples (2.0 ft by 2.5 ft) were harvested at jointing: PD1, March 26; PD2, April 2; PD3, April 10; PD4, April 18; and PD5, April 24. Forage samples were harvested at boot: PD1 and PD2, May 2; PD3, April 10; PD4, April 18, and PD5, April 24. We weighed the forage samples, dried them in an oven at 100 C until no more weight loss occurred, and reweighed them. Forage yields were adjusted to 15% moisture. We harvested grain from the 10 ft. by 44 ft. plots on July 1 with a self-propelled combine equipped with a digital scale. Grain yields were adjusted to 12% seed moisture content. Results Forage yields for four of five planting dates had significant linear responses to increasing seeding rates at jointing. The first planting date had a curvilinear response to increasing seeding with a maximum forage yield corresponding to 90 lb seed/a. The earliest planting date, September 15, produced the highest forage yields at jointing. Less max forage yield was produced with each subsequent planting date at jointing: PD1, 2862 lb/a; PD2, 2130 lb/a; PD3, 1828 lb/a; PD4, 1304 lb/a; and PD5, 612 lb/a. PD1 at the lowest seeding rate produced more forage than PD4 at the highest planting date at jointing with 1359 lb/a for PD1 and 1304 lb/a for PD4.

PD2 had the highest grain yield of 57 bu/a at the 30 lb/a seeding rate. The grain yield response of PD1 to increasing seeding rate was a relatively flat curve. The optimum seeding rate for PD1 was 60 lb/a. The last three planting dates had strong

14

linear grain yield increases with increasing seeding rate. The largest grain yield response to increasing seeding rate was 10.5 bu/a for PD4.

Russian Wheat Aphid infestation ranged from low to high, depending on planting date, seeding rate, and sampling date. RWA infestation tended to increase with later planting dates, lower seeding rates, and later sampling dates. The worst RWA infestations, 32% to 36% infested tillers, occurred with the latest planting dates (PD4, October 27 and PD5, November 10), at the lowest seeding rates (30 lb/a and 60 lb/a), and at the last sampling date (May 17). Discussion

The first three planting dates, September 15, September 29, and October 13 produced substantially higher grain yields than the last two planting dates, October 27 and November 10. The high yield of the first three planting dates suggests that the current wheat planting date deadline of October 15 is a good planting date cutoff for high wheat yields. Nonetheless, relatively high wheat yields are still obtainable by planting two weeks past the October 15 deadline, if high, 120 lb seed/a, seeding rates are used. Last year was the only time that the mid-October planting date did not produce sufficient grain yield to be considered a viable planting date. The first two planting dates, September 14 and September 29, produced their highest grain yields at low seeding rates, 30 to 60 lb/a. For the three later planting dates, October 13, October 27 and November 10, highest grain yields were achieved at the highest seeding rate of 120 lb/a. To achieve high grain yields when planting late, growers should consider seeding at higher rates.

The RWA results are typical of the RWA results from most of our previous wheat planting date studies. It is common for us to find high RWA infestation with later planting dates and lower seeding rates. It appears that less developed wheat is more susceptible to RWA or that RWA is more attracted to less developed wheat.

Forage grazing can be extended from early April to late April by manipulating planting date and seeding rate, but early planting with high seeding rate produced more four times more than late planting. The forage production drop with late planting dates is too large to compensate for the three weeks extension in grazing. Forage production from each planting date increase with higher seeding rates. To produce high wheat forage yields, we recommend planting early with high seeding rates (90 to 120 lb/a).

15

Dryland Wheat Planting Date and Seeding RateForage Yield at Jointing, Walsh, 2007

y = -0.4x2 + 66.2x - 363R2 = 0.940PD 1

y = 12.6x + 658.5R2 = 0.961*PD 2

y = 13.4x + 269.5R2 = 0.991*PD 3

y = 11.9x - 195R2 = 0.960*PD 4

y = 4.9x - 64R2 = 0.826PD 5

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

30 60 90 120Seeding Rate (Lb/A)

Forage Yield (Lb/A @ 15%

MC)

PD 1

PD 2

PD 3

PD 4

PD 5

Fig. Forage yields at jointing from planting dates and seeding rates for dryland wheat at Walsh. Planting dates were PD 1, September 15; PD 2, September 29; PD 3, October 13; PD 4, October 27; and PD 5, November 10, 2006. Seeding rates were 30, 60, 90, and 120 Lb/A, corresponding to 400,000, 800,000, 1,200,000, and 1,600,000 seeds/A. Jointing dates: PD 1, March 26; PD 2, April 2; PD 3, April 10; PD 4, April 18; and PD 5, April 24. The wheat variety was Hatcher.

16

Wheat Planting Date and Seeding RatesGrain Yield, Walsh, 2007

PD 5y = 0.078x + 27R2 = 0.881

PD 4y = 0.12x + 32R2 = 0.942*

PD 3y = 0.049x + 43.9R2 = 0.887

y = -0.06x + 58.9R2 = 0.971*PD 2

PD 1y = -0.0009x2 + 0.1x + 51.2R2 = 0.867

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

30 60 90 120Seeding Rate (lb/a)

Grain Yield(bu/a @ 12%)

PD 2PD 1PD 3

PD 4

PD 5

Fig. Grain yield from planting dates and seeding rates for dryland wheat at Walsh. Planting dates were PD 1, September 15; PD 2, September 29; PD 3, October 13; PD 4, October 27; and PD 5, November 10, 2006. Seeding rates were 30, 60, 90, and 120 lb/a, corresponding to 400,000, 800,000, 1,200,000, and 1,600,000 seeds/a. The wheat variety was Hatcher.

17

Table .Dryland Wheat Planting Date and Seeding Rate, Russian Wheat Aphid Infestations, Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________________

Planting Date Seeding Rate ___________________________________ ____________________________

Sample PD 1 PD 2 PD 3 PD 4 PD 5 SR 30 SR 60 SR 90 SR 120Date Sept. 15 Sept. 29 Oct. 13 Oct. 27 Nov. 10 30 lb/a 60 lb/a 90 lb/a 120 lb/a_________________________________________________________________________________

----------------------------------% Tillers Infested with RWA------------------------------------

April 30 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

May 17 1 1 2 32 36 15 25 9 6

RWA Average 1 1 1 16 18 8 13 5 4_________________________________________________________________________________RWA infestation recorded from 25 tillers sampled per treatment.

18

Residual P on Dryland Wheat, Long Term Study at Manter, 2007 Kevin Larson and Lyndell Herron

PURPOSE: To determine the long-term effects from a one-time application of P rates on dryland wheat yields and incomes. RESULTS: The highest producing P treatment was 46 lb P2O5/a, yielding 43 bu/a. The response to increasing P rate was nearly flat. With the price of wheat at $5.75/bu and 10-34-0 expense already paid, the 46 lb P2O5/a treatment made an additional $14.38/a this year. After three wheat crops, all P treatments are producing positive variable net incomes compared to the no P fertilizer check with the exception of the 23 lb P2O5/a treatment, which has remained flat. DISCUSSION: This is the third wheat crop after we applied the one-time P fertilizer rates. This wheat crop is the fourth crop after P fertilization. There was an intervening grain sorghum crop before the first wheat crop, but no yields were measured. This year, only the 46 and 92 lb P2O5/a fertilizer treatments produced higher yields than the no P check. For the first wheat crop following the P rates, the yield response from the 46 lb P2O5/a rate more than paid for itself ($17.24/a return from $31.50/a yield increase minus $14.26/a P cost). After two wheat crops, all of the P fertilizer treatments had paid or more than paid for the P fertilizer expense. The additional yield advantage obtained this year for the 46 and 92 lb P2O5/a fertilizer treatments provided positive net incomes compared to the no P check. This year, the one-time 23 lb P2O5/a treatment did not increase yields compared to the no P check. This lack of P fertilizer response suggests that the low P rate has utilized all of its applied P. It was believed that the low P rate would be available for only one season and there would be no residual P effect because our high pH soils would bind it. However, it appears that the low P rate was available for two cropping seasons. If yields continue to response to residual P from these P rates, a heavy one-time application of P may be more profitable than smaller annual P applications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lyndell Herron chiseled on 60 lb N/a (as NH3) with six phosphate fertilizer treatments: 0, 5.7, 11.4, 17.2, and 22.9 gal/a of 10-34-0 (0, 23, 46, 69, and 92 lb P2O5/a), using a 30 ft. dual placement N and P chisel applicator with 18 in. spaced shanks on July 31, 2000. Each treatment was replicated twice. Herron planted Trego in the 60 ft. by 600 ft. plots late-September 2006 at 35 lb seed/a. He applied 50 lb N/a last fall for the wheat crop this year. We harvested the plots on June 22, 2007 with a self-propelled combine and weighed them in a digital grain cart. Seed yields were adjusted to 12% seed moisture.

19

Residual P Effect on Dryland Wheat YieldThird Wheat Harvest after P Application

Manter, KS 2007

y = 0.019x + 40.1R2 = 0.138

30

32

34

36

38

40

42

44

46

48

50

0 23 46 69 92P2O5 Rate, lb P2O5/a

Grain Yield(bu/a)

Fig. .Yield of long term P on dryland wheat, third wheat crop after P application, at

Manter. P treatment are 0, 23, 46, 69, and 92 lb P2O5/a applied with a chisel with shanks 18 in. apart to a 6 in. depth on July 31, 2000. Grain yields were adjusted to 12% seed moisture content.

20

Residual P on Dryland Wheat, Manter KSNet Return from One Time P Application, 2003, 2005,

and 2007

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

0 23 46 69 92

P Rate (Lb P2O5/A)

Net Return ($/A)

Crops 1 & 2

Crop 1

Crops 1, 2 & 3

Fig. . Net return of long term P on dryland wheat, second wheat crop after P application, at Manter. P treatment are 0,23, 46, 69, and 92 lb P2O5/a applied with a chisel with shanks 18 in. apart to a 6 in. depth on July 31, 2000. Total net return: Crop1, year 2003, Crop 2, year 2005, and Crop 3, year 2007.

21

Dryland Millet and Wheat Rotation Study Kevin Larson and Dennis Thompson

This is the first year of harvest for our dryland millet and wheat rotation study.

We established these rotations to identify which millet and wheat and fallow rotation sequence produces the highest net income. Each rotation represents a different degree of fallow period. We began this new dryland rotation study with these six rotations in 2006: 1) Wheat-Fallow (15-month fallow period), 2) Wheat-Wheat (3-month fallow period), 3) Millet-Millet (8-month fallow period), 4) Wheat-Millet-Fallow (23-month fallow period, 11 months between wheat harvest and millet planting, and 12 months between millet harvest and wheat planting), 5) Millet/Wheat-Fallow, (no fallow between millet harvest and wheat planting and 11 months between wheat harvest and millet planting), and 6) Wheat/Millet-Fallow (no fallow between wheat harvest and millet planting and 11 months between millet harvest and wheat planting). Materials and Methods This is our first harvest-year in testing the following rotations: Wheat-Fallow (W-F), Wheat-Wheat (W-W), Millet-Millet (M-M), Wheat-Millet-Fallow (W-M-F), Millet/Wheat-Fallow (M/W-F), and Wheat/Millet-Fallow (W/M-F). We planted wheat, Hatcher, at 50 lb/a on September 26, 2006, and Proso millet, Huntsman, at 20 lb/a on June 13, 2007. We applied 50 lb N/a to the study site. Before planting we sprayed two applications of Glystar Plus at 24 oz/a and LoVol at 0.5 lb/a. For in-season weed control, we chose short-residual herbicides that should not interfere with crop rotations: wheat, Express 0.33 oz/a, LoVol 0.38 lb/a, and Penetrant II 8 oz/a; millet (except W/M-F) Banvel 4 oz/a and amine 10 oz/a; and fallow, Glystar Plus 20 oz/a, Banvel 4 oz/a and amine 0.5 lb/a two times. For the millet in the W/M-Fallow rotation, we applied Glystar 24 oz/a and Atrazine 0.75 lb/a. We harvested the crops with a self-propelled combine equipped with a digital scale: wheat, June 28 and millet, September 4; the millet in the W/M-F rotation never developed a stand and therefore was not harvested. We recorded cost of production and yields in order to determine rotation revenues. Results and Discussion

The W-M-F rotation produced the highest variable net income of $286.58/a, and the second highest total crop production of 3813 lb/a for 2007. The M/W-F rotation had the second highest variable net income, $282.06/a, and the highest total crop production, 3850 lb/a. The W/M-F rotation had the lowest variable net income with $190.71/a, because the millet immediately following wheat harvest failed to make a stand and was not harvested. When we project these rotations over a six-year cycle, the W-W rotation provides the highest total variable net income of $1158.84/a. However, since this is the establishment year for these rotations, the rotational effects are just beginning and 6-year projections have little meaning.

We are still in the establishment phase with these rotations and we already have had crop failures, therefore rotational affects are, at best, difficult to generalize and quantify. Abundant winter moisture last year produced good yields for most crops this year, despite the very dry summer conditions. It was too dry for the millet planted immediately after wheat harvest (millet in the W/M-F) to establish a stand. Winter wheat

22

has performed better than millet in both yield and income. This is primarily due to more favorable moisture during the wheat-growing season.

23

Table .-Dryland Millet and Wheat Rotations, First Year, Walsh, 2007.________________________________________________________

6-YearMillet Wheat 2007 ProjectedTest Millet Test Wheat Total Total

Rotation Weight Yield Weight Yield Production Producton________________________________________________________

lb/bu lb/a lb/bu lb/a lb/a lb/a

W-F 59 2640 2640 7920W-W 59 2190 2190 13140M-M 54 1478 1478 8868W-M-F 54 1641 60 2172 3813 7626M/W-F 54 1282 60 2568 3850 11550W/M-F 0 60 2532 2532 7596________________________________________________________Average 54 1100 60 2420 2751 9450LSD 0.20 468.7 160.8________________________________________________________Rotations: W, wheat; M, millet; F, fallow. M/W-F, wheat planted sameyear as millet was harvested; W/M-F, millet planted same year aswheat was harvested.Planted: Wheat, Hatcher at 50 lb/a on September 26, 2006.Harvested: Wheat on June 28, 2007.Planted: Millet, Huntsman at 20 lb/a on June 13, 2007; Planted millet in W/M-F on July 7, 2007, replanted W/M-F on August 1, 2007. Millet inW/M-F failed to produce a stand and was not harvested.Harvested: Millet on September 4, 2007.Yields were adjusted to 12.0% seed moisture for both wheat and millet.

24

Table .-Dryland Millet and Wheat Rotation Study, Walsh, 2007.__________________________________________________________________________________

Weed VariableCrop Seeding Seed Control Crop Gross Net Rotation Density Cost Cost Yield Price Income Income__________________________________________________________________________________

lb/a $/a $/a bu/a $/a $/a $/a

Wheat 50 6.04 12.52 40.3 5.80 233.97 215.41W-F 50 6.04 12.52 44.0 5.80 255.20 236.64W-W 50 6.04 12.52 36.5 5.80 211.70 193.14W-M-F 50 6.04 12.52 36.2 5.80 209.96 191.40M/W-F 50 6.04 12.52 42.8 5.80 248.24 229.68W/M-F 50 6.04 12.52 42.2 5.80 244.76 226.20

Millet 20 2.68 7.34 18.75 4.28 80.25 70.23M-M 20 2.68 7.34 26.4 4.28 112.99 102.97W-M-F 20 2.68 7.34 29.3 4.28 125.40 115.38M/W-F 20 2.68 7.34 19.3 4.28 82.60 72.58W/M-F 20 x 2 5.36 9.93 0 4.28 0.00 -15.29

Fallow --- --- 20.20 --- --- 0.00 -20.20__________________________________________________________________________________Average 26.92 361.02 88.48__________________________________________________________________________________Planted: Millet, Huntsman at 20 lb/a on June 13; Wheat, Hatcher at 50 lb/a on September 26, 2006. Harvested: Millet on September, 2007; Wheat on June 28, 2007. Wheat herbicides: Express 0.33 oz/a, 2,4-D, 0.38 lb/a; Wheat hericide cost: $7.52/a.Millet herbicides: Banvel 4 oz/a, 2,4-D amine 10 oz/a: Millet herbicide cost: $2.34/aFallow herbicides: Gylstar Plus 20 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a, Banvel 4 oz/a;Fallow herbicide cost: $10.20/a (two application, $5.10/a per application)Millet in W/M-F herbicides: Glystar 24 oz/a, Atrazine 0.75 lb/a; W/M-F herbicide cost: $4.93/a.Weed control cost is herbicide cost and $5/A application cost for each application.

25

Table .-Dryland Millet and Wheat Rotation Study, Variable Net Income Summary 2007._______________________________________________

2007 ---------2007 Crop--------- Total

RotationRotation Wheat Millet Fallow Production

------------------------$/a------------------------

W-F 236.64 -20.20 216.44W-W 193.14 193.14M-M 102.97 102.97W-M-F 191.40 115.38 -20.20 286.58M/W-F 229.68 72.58 -20.20 282.06W/M-F 226.20 -15.29 -20.20 190.71_______________________________________________Average 359.02 275.64 -20.20 211.98LSD 0.20 14.31 31.35_______________________________________________Variable Net Income is gross income minus seed costand weed control cost.

26

Table .-Dryland Millet and Wheat Rotation Study, Variable Net Income 2007 and 6-Year Projection Summary._________________________________________________

Year 1 6-YearTotal Variable

Variable Net Income Rotation Net --------2007 Crop------- Variable Income

Net RotationRotation Year Wheat Millet Fallow Income Projection

---------------------$/a---------------------

W-F Avg 236.64 -20.20 216.44 649.322007 236.64 -20.20 216.44 649.32

W-W Avg 193.14 193.14 1158.842007 193.14 193.14 1158.84

M-M Avg 102.97 102.97 617.822007 102.97 102.97 617.82

W-M-F Avg 191.40 115.38 -20.20 286.58 573.162007 191.40 115.38 -20.20 286.58 573.16

M/W-F Avg 229.68 72.58 -20.20 282.06 846.182007 229.68 72.58 -20.20 282.06 846.18

W/M-F Avg 226.20 -15.29 -20.20 190.71 572.132007 226.20 -15.29 -20.20 190.71 572.13

_________________________________________________Average 207.06 51.49 -20.20 199.78 749.79_________________________________________________Millet in W/M-F did not make a stand and was not harvested.Variable Net Income is gross income minus seed cost and weed control cost.

27

Long-Term N Effects on Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow Rotation, Walsh, 2007 K. Larson, D. Thompson, D. Harn, and C. Thompson

Purpose: To study the long-term N fertilizer effects on a wheat-sunflower-fallow rotation where N is applied to the same treatment site for multiple years. Materials and Methods: We planted wheat, Hatcher, at 50 lb seed/a on October 12, 2006, and sunflower on June 20, 2007 at 17,000 seeds/a using MYCOGEN 8N419CL. We banded liquid N (28-0-0 or 32-0-0) at 0, 30, 60, and 90 lb N/a to the treatment plots with two replications to both N and N residual sides on March 28, 2007 for wheat and to only the N side July 31, 2007 for sunflower. The N fertilizer treatments were applied to both sides of the wheat plots and only one side of the sunflower plots to test the response of sunflower to residual N left by the wheat. We seedrow applied 20 lb P2O5/a at planting to the wheat but not the sunflowers. For weed control in the wheat, we applied pre-emergence Glystar Plus 24 oz/a and 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a and postemergence Express, 0.33 oz/a and 2,4-D, 0.38 lb/a. For weed control in the sunflower, we applied pre-emergence Glystar Plus 24 oz/a, Spartan 2 oz/a, and Prowl H2O 40 oz/a. We harvested two replications of the 20 ft. by 1100 ft. plots on June 30 for wheat and November 20 for sunflower with a self-propelled combine and weighed them in a digital weigh cart. Yields were adjusted to 12.0% for wheat and 10% for sunflower. Results: The optimum N rate for wheat was between 30 to 45 lb N/a. Although, only 3 bu/a separated the lowest and highest wheat yields. Wheat yields were very good, ranging from 51 bu/a to 54 bu/a. The optimum N rate for sunflower was also between 30 to 45 lb N/a for both applied and residual N rates. Sunflower yields were poor, ranging from 430 lb/a to 530 lb/a. The percent oil in the sunflower seeds increased with increasing N rate. Both wheat and sunflower responded similarly to applied N. Discussion: This is the seventh year of this long-term N on wheat-sunflower-fallow rotation study. We started this study to test reports of no yield response from applied N on dryland sunflower (Vigil and Bowman, 1998). This is the first time in seven years that the dryland wheat responded to applied N. There was only a 3 bu/a difference between no N applied and 30 lb N/a. At the 30 lb N/a rate, the 3 bu/a yield response was not enough to justify the application and N cost (N cost, $0.5/lb; application cost, $5/a; wheat price, $6/bu). The non-response of wheat yields to increasing N rates for the previous six years can be explained by sufficient residual N for the first year and low yields for the subsequent years. This year, there was sufficient winter moisture to produce very good wheat yields. Generally, however, moisture has been the primary yield-limiting factor for this study, not N. This year the sunflower yields were poor; however, sunflower yields did respond to applied N. Sunflower yields responded to both residual and applied N with an optimum N rate between 30 to 45 lb N/a. At the 30 lb N/a rate, the 100 lb/a sunflower yield was not enough to justify the application and N cost (N cost, $0.5/lb; application cost, $5/a; sunflower price, $19.50/cwt). With the exception of this year, we have reported no wheat yield response to N rate since establishing this wheat-sunflower-fallow rotation study. For the previous six

28

years, wheat yields in this rotation were very low to fair, 6 to 26 Bu/A. The low to fair wheat yields can be attributed to the lack of moisture remaining after sunflower extracted all available soil water and little soil water replenishment due to dry conditions during fallow. For wheat production in this wheat-sunflower-fallow rotation, moisture was probably the limiting factor, not N. This year, the wheat did respond to applied N; however, the yield response to applied N was insufficient to justify the N application. This year like most years, sunflower yields increased with increasing N rates; however the yield response failed to offset the cost of the N fertilizer. The no N fertilizer treatment produced the highest income every year of sunflower production (there was no sunflower crop in 2002 because of drought). This year, the 30 lb N/a fertilizer treatment produced the highest sunflower yield, but the yield response was not enough to pay for the N fertilizer application. This lack of N response suggests that N fertilizer is not needed for dryland sunflower production if the expected yield is 1200 lb/a or less.

Seed oil content tends to decrease with increasing N rates. This year there was slight increase in oil content with increasing N rate: 33.9%, 34.1%, 34.4%, and 34.6% for 0, 30, 60, and 90 lb N/a, respectively. In previous years, we observed no response or a decline in oil content with increasing N rate. This negative correlation of oil content with N rate has been previously reported (Vigil and Bowman, 1998). Literature Cited Vigil, M.F., R.A. Bowman. 1998. Nitrogen response and residue management of sunflowers in a dryland rotation. 1998 Annual Report, Central Great Plains Research Station. ARS, USDA.

29

Long Term N Rate on Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow StudyWheat, 2007

y = -0.0011x2 + 0.076x + 52.63R2 = 0.998*

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

0 30 60 90N Rate (N lb/a)

Grain Yield (bu/a @ 12%)

Fig. . N rate on dryland wheat in Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow rotation at Walsh. The N rates were 0, 30, 60, and 90 lb N/a as 28-0-0. The wheat variety was Hatcher sown at 50 lb/a.

30

Long Term N Rate on Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow StudySunflower, Walsh, 2007

400

420

440

460

480

500

520

540

0 30 60 90N Rate (N lb/a)

Seed Yield (lb/a)

33.4

33.6

33.8

34.0

34.2

34.4

34.6

34.8

Oil (%)

Residual N

Applied N

% Oil

Fig. . N rate on dryland sunflower in Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow rotation at Walsh. The N rates were 0, 30, 60, and 90 Lb N/A as 32-0-0. Applied N is N applied to the sunflowers in the current season. Residual N is N applied to the wheat the previous season. The sunflower hybrid was MYCOGEN 8N419CL planted at 17,000 seeds/a.

31

Long-Term N Effects on Irrigated Sunflower-Corn Rotation, Walsh, 2007 K. Larson, D. Thompson, D. Harn, and C. Thompson

Purpose: To study the long-term N fertilizer effects on irrigated Sunflower-Corn and Corn-Corn (continuous corn) rotations where N rate are applied to the same treatment site for multiple years. Materials and Methods: We planted corn, Mycogen 2T801, on May 2 at 24,000 seeds/a, and sunflower, Mycogen 8N462DM on June 19 at 26,000 seeds/a. We injected 100 lb N/a to the entire site. To make our treatments total 100, 150, and 200 lb N/a, we banded liquid N (32-0-0) at 0, 50, or 100 lb N/a with two replications. We seedrow applied 20 lb P2O5/A and 0.25 lb Zn/a at planting to the corn but not the sunflowers. For weed control, we applied pre-emergence Glystar Plus 24 oz/a and 0.5 lb/a of 2,4-D to both the corn and sunflower plots. For Postemergence weed control in the corn, we applied two applications of Roundup Weather Max at 24 oz/a. For weed control in the sunflower, we applied pre-emergence Spartan 2 oz/a and Prowl H2O 40 oz/a. The sites were subsurface drip irrigated. The corn received approximately 14 in./a of irrigation and the sunflower received approximately 10 in./a of irrigation (we used approximations because we had well problems). Other than herbicides, no other pesticides were applied to the corn, but we did apply Warrior on the sunflowers to control head moth. We harvested two replications of the 20 ft. by 650 ft. plots on October 24 for corn and November 19 for sunflower with a self-propelled combine and weighed them in a digital weigh cart. Yields were adjusted to 15.5% for corn and 10% for sunflower. Results and Discussion: Corn for both rotations had their highest yields at 150 lb N/a. The corn in the Sunflower-Corn rotation was more responsive to the 150 lb N/a rate than the corn in the continuous corn rotation. The sunflower yield had an inverse response compared to the corn: the lowest yield for sunflower in the Sunflower-Corn rotation occurred with the 150 lb N/a rate. Compared to last year, sunflower had a similar response to increasing N rates: 100 lb N/a produced the highest yield, 150 lb N/a produced the lowest yield, and 200 lb/a produced a medium yield. After reviewing the soil test recommendation, it is not surprising that the 100 lb N/a rate produced the highest sunflower yield. The recommended N fertilizer rates for our yield goals were 100 lb N/a for sunflower and 210 lb/a for corn. Yield levels for both corn and sunflowers were lower than expected. Our yield goal for the corn was 200 bu/a, our actual average grain yield was 136 bu/a, and the yield goal for the sunflowers was 2500 lb/a, our actual average seed yield was 1924 lb/a or 866 lb/a oil yield. We did not observe the typical percent oil decrease with increasing N. The oil percentages were: 45.3, 44.6, and 45.1, respectively for 100, 150, and 200 lb N/a.

32

Table .-Soil Analysis. __________________________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu

mmhos/cm % --------------------------ppm------------------------- __________________________________________________________________ 0-8” 7.5 0.4 2.0 11 3.1 427 0.6 7.0 11.4 4.9 8-24” 8 __________________________________________________________________

This is the second year of this long-term N on Sunflower-Corn rotation study. This year, we added continuous corn rotation in this long-term N rate study. The continuous corn rotation was included as a typical rotation check. We started this study because of the lack of N response for dryland sunflower in our long-term N on Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow study, the role of N in reducing oil yield, and growers reports that irrigated corn following sunflower often producing their highest yields. Under dryland conditions, following sunflower in a rotation typically reduces the subsequent crop yield. The yield reduction in the crop following sunflower is due to the deep and thorough extraction of the available water in the soil profile, leaving the subsequent crop with little soil water profile base. With irrigation, the dry soil profile left by sunflower is not a detriment since the soil profile can be refilled by irrigation. Moreover, we speculate that the reason irrigated corn is reported to yield well following sunflower is that the deep water extraction of sunflower loosens the soil and provides better root penetration by the corn.

33

N Rate on Corn-Corn and Corn-Sunflower RotationsDrip Irrigated, Walsh, 2007

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

100 150 200N Rate (lb/a)

Corn Yield (bu/a)

820

830

840

850

860

870

880

890

900

910

Sunflower Oil Yield

(lb/a)

Corn-SunCorn-CornSunflower

Fig. . N rate on drip irrigated sunflower and corn in Sunflower-Corn rotations at Walsh. The N rates were 100, 150, and 200 Lb N/a as 32-0-0. The sunflower hybrid was MYCOGEN 8N462DM planted at 26,000 seeds/a. The corn hybrid was MYCOGEN 2T801 planted at 24,000 seeds/a.

34

Crop Rotation Sequencing Kevin Larson and Dennis Thompson

Crops differ in their utilization of water and nutrients. Some crops, such as sunflower, are believed to mine nearly all available soil water and nutrients and leave little for subsequent crops. Whereas, other crops, such as millet, use only a portion of the available water and nutrients, leaving residual water and nutrients for subsequent crops. There are other advantages from crop rotation, including abatement of weeds, insects and diseases. The purpose of this study is to determine the crop rotation sequences that produce highest yields and incomes. Materials and Methods We tested fallow and five spring crops: sunflower, grain sorghum, corn, millet, and mung bean. Annually, each crop follows itself and every other crop. We planted corn (Mycogen 2E762 Bt/RR) on May 10 at 12,500 seed/a, sunflower (Mycogen 8H419CL) on June 20 at 17,000 seed/a, grain sorghum (Triumph TR 438) on June 7 at 40,000 seed/a, mung bean (Berkins) on June 6 at 17 lb/a, and proso millet (Huntsman) on June 22 at 20 lb/a. Before planting we sprayed two applications of Glystar Plus at 24 oz/a and LoVol at 0.5 lb/a. For in-season weed control, we chose short-residual herbicides that should not interfere with crop rotations: millet and grain sorghum, Banvel 4 oz/a and 2,4-D amine 10 oz/a; corn, Roundup Weather Max 20 oz/a (two applications); mung bean, Beyond 4 oz/a and Penetrant II 4 oz/a; sunflower, Prowl H2O 40 oz/a and Spartan 2 oz/a; and fallow, Glystar Plus 20 oz/a, Banvel 4 oz/a and amine 0.5 lb/a (two applications). We harvested the crops with a self-propelled combine equipped with a digital scale: millet, September 4; grain sorghum, November 7; corn, October 12; mung bean, September 24; and sunflower, November 20. Results and Discussion This is the fifth year of this dryland crop rotation sequencing study. In 2003, the first year the rotations were started, all crops were planted in fallow. The second year, 2004, the crops were planted into the five crop stubbles and fallow. In 2005, we decided to change the rotations, based on the 2004 results, to obtain the highest potential yield and income, and still have all five crops and fallow represented. We planted the 2005 crops in the different locations where the 2003 crops were originally planted: 2005 grain sorghum in 2003 millet, 2005 millet in 2003 mung bean, 2005 corn in 2003 fallow, 2005 mung bean in 2003 corn, 2005 sunflower in 2003 grain sorghum, and 2005 fallow in 2003 sunflower. In 2006 and 2007, we went back to the original rotations where all crops followed themselves and every other crop.

The two-year rotation sequence with the highest variable net income was Fallow-Sorghum with $137.85/a; whereas, its reciprocal Sorghum-Fallow rotation only made $53.48/a. The rotation that had the highest variable net income for the previous two years was Millet-Sorghum. This year the Millet-Sorghum rotation had the second highest variable net income and its reciprocal Sorghum-Millet together produced the highest average income of $113.47/a. Only sunflower and fallow produced negative net income averages for 2007 when following all the crops and fallow. The best three-year crop sequence for the past three years was Sorghum-Fallow-Sorghum with a three-year

35

total variable net income of $192.57/a. Millet-Sorghum-Millet-Sorghum produced the highest four-year income of $310.30/a, while its reciprocal Sorghum-Millet-Sorghum-Millet made the fourth most with $220.61/a. The best four-year rotation and reciprocal rotation combination was $284.22/a for continuous millet. Not surprisingly, the worst four-year rotation was continuous fallow. Continuous sunflower produced one of the lowest four-year rotations with -$18.47/a. Currently, millet has the highest overall variable net income and sunflower the lowest variable net income of the five crops and fallow tested in our dryland rotation sequencing study.

36

Table .-Crop Rotation Sequence Study, Yield Summary 2007._____________________________________________________________________________

2007 Crop 2007______________________________________________________ Average

Grain Mung Total Previous Crop Sorghum Millet Corn Bean Sunflower Fallow Production_____________________________________________________________________________

------------------------------------------lb/a---------------------------------------------

Fallow 2514 1826 1954 747 293 0 1467Millet 1854 1394 1809 793 293 0 1229Grain Sorghum 1708 1473 1932 827 172 0 1222Sunflower 1826 1495 1462 746 201 0 1146Corn 1378 1618 1635 754 149 0 1107Mung Bean 974 1198 1406 550 253 0 876_____________________________________________________________________________Average 1709 1501 1700 736 227 0 1174LSD 0.20 908.3 277.8 352.7 238.9 85.6_____________________________________________________________________________

Table .-Two-Year Crop Rotation Sequence, Variable Net Income Summary for 2006 and 2007._____________________________________________________________________________

Total Variable Net Income for 2006 and 2007 Crops Average2-Year

------------------------2007 Crop (2005 Stubble)--------------------- VariableGrain Mung Net

2006 Crop Millet Sorghum Corn Bean Sunflower Fallow Income ------------------------------------------$/a---------------------------------------------

Millet 99.66 124.32 86.79 75.42 19.02 23.29 71.42Grain Sorghum 102.62 105.80 85.89 51.87 20.03 53.48 69.95Fallow 111.27 137.85 69.17 25.55 -22.64 -38.44 47.13Sunflower 74.54 80.61 22.49 13.97 -39.77 -49.92 16.99Corn 73.75 38.90 20.14 2.47 -29.27 -49.62 9.40Mung Bean 68.33 36.65 23.42 -2.20 -38.13 -38.99 8.18_____________________________________________________________________________Average 88.36 87.36 51.32 27.85 -15.13 -16.70 37.18_____________________________________________________________________________Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control Cost.The highest two-year variable net income of $137.85 was the Fallow-Sorghum rotation.

37

Table .-Three-Year Crop Rotation Sequence, Variable Net Income Summary for 2005, 2006, and 2007._____________________________________________________________________________

Total Variable Net Income for 2005, 2006 and 2007 Crops Average3-Year

------------------------2005 and 2007 Crops--------------------- Variable2006 Crop Grain Mung Net(2004 Stubble) Millet Sorghum Bean Corn Sunflower Fallow Income

------------------------------------------$/a---------------------------------------------

Millet 136.50 135.70 76.31 37.56 52.08 2.78 73.49Grain Sorghum 159.62 123.09 47.06 36.98 40.23 32.97 73.33Fallow 171.63 192.57 37.04 25.79 17.50 -58.95 64.26Sunflower 91.22 72.29 2.06 -27.04 -45.49 -70.43 3.77Mung Bean 111.89 42.12 -23.61 -25.81 -41.46 -59.50 0.61Corn 100.51 36.49 -11.34 -29.17 -23.41 -70.13 0.49_____________________________________________________________________________Average 128.56 100.38 21.25 3.05 -0.09 -37.21 35.99_____________________________________________________________________________Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control Cost.The highest three-year variable net income of $192.57 was the GS-Fallow-GS rotation.

Table .-Four-Year Crop Rotation Sequence, Variable Net Income Summary for 2004, 2005, 2006, and 2007._____________________________________________________________________________

Total Variable Net Income for 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007 Crops Average4-Year

------------------------2005 and 2007 Crops--------------------- Variable2004 and Grain Mung Net2006 Crops Millet Sorghum Bean Corn Fallow Sunflower Income

------------------------------------------$/a---------------------------------------------

Millet 284.22 310.30 234.11 181.92 157.22 179.64 224.57Grain Sorghum 220.61 213.78 98.15 76.19 107.82 45.78 127.06Sunflower 183.28 203.95 110.32 69.82 56.91 -18.47 100.97Fallow 151.81 172.75 17.22 5.97 -78.77 -2.32 44.44Mung Bean 131.78 95.21 -11.52 -1.32 -27.21 -30.37 26.10Corn 114.39 84.93 -6.10 -19.61 -10.89 -44.09 19.77_____________________________________________________________________________Average 181.02 180.15 73.70 52.16 34.18 21.70 90.48_____________________________________________________________________________Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control Cost.The highest four-year variable net income of $310.30 was the Millet-GS-Millet-GS rotation.

38

Table .-Millet: Crop Rotation Sequencing Study, Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________

2007 2006 2005 3-Year2007 2007 Millet Millet Millet AverageMillet Millet Variable Variable Variable Variable

Previous Grain Gross Net Net Net NetCrop Yield Income Income Income Income Income_________________________________________________________________________

bu/a $/a $/a $/a $/a $/a

Fallow 33 139.53 129.51 43.49 60.36 77.79Grain Sorghum 26 112.56 102.54 12.13 57.00 57.22Corn 29 123.69 113.67 9.78 26.76 50.07Millet 25 106.57 96.55 3.11 36.84 45.50Sunflower 27 114.28 104.26 5.47 16.68 42.13Mung Bean 21 91.59 81.57 27.03 43.56 50.72_________________________________________________________________________Average 27 114.70 104.68 16.83 40.20 53.91LSD 0.20 5.0 21.40 19.53 7.21 11.79_________________________________________________________________________Planted: Millet (Huntsman) on June 13, 2007 at 20 lb/a. Millet Seed Cost: $2.68/a ($7.50/bu).Harvested: Millet on September 4, 2007.Millet Market Price $4.28/bu.Weed Control: Banvel, 4 oz; 2,4-D amine, 10 oz. Chemical Cost: $2.34/a; Application Cost $5/a.Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control.

39

Table .-Grain Sorghum: Crop Rotation Sequencing Study, Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________

2007 2006 20052007 2007 Grain Grain Grain 3-YearGrain Grain Sorghum Sorghum Sorghum Average

Sorghum Sorghum Variable Variable Variable VariablePrevious Seed Gross Net Net Net NetCrop Yield Income Income Income Income Income_________________________________________________________________________

bu/a $/a $/a $/a $/a $/a

Fallow 45 167.03 156.09 73.68 54.72 94.83Grain Sorghum 31 113.46 102.52 3.28 17.29 41.03Corn 25 91.51 80.57 0.08 -2.41 26.08Millet 33 123.13 112.19 0.08 11.38 41.22Sunflower 33 121.27 110.33 0.08 -8.32 34.03Mung Bean 17 64.73 53.79 6.48 5.47 21.91_________________________________________________________________________Average 31 113.52 102.58 13.95 13.02 43.18LSD 0.20 16.2 60.26 54.45 7.97 8.80_________________________________________________________________________Planted: Grain Sorghum (Triumph TR 438) on June 7, 2007 at 40,000 seed/a. Grain Sorghum Seed Cost: $3.60/a ($1.21/lb).Harvested: Grain Sorghum November 7, 2007.Grain Sorghum Market Price $3.72/bu.Weed Control: Banvel, 4 oz; 2,4-D amine, 10 oz. Chemical Cost: $2.34/a; Application Cost $5/a.Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control.

40

Table .-Sunflower: Crop Rotation Sequencing Study, Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________

2007 2006 2005 3-Year2007 2007 Sunflower Sunflower Sunflower Average

Sunflower Sunflower Variable Variable Variable VariablePrevious Seed Gross Net Net Net NetCrop Yield Income Income Income Income Income_________________________________________________________________________

bu/a $/a $/a $/a $/a $/a

Fallow 201 39.20 -4.40 -29.72 40.14 2.01Grain Sorghum 293 57.14 13.55 -29.72 20.20 1.34Corn 253 49.34 5.75 -29.72 5.86 -6.04Millet 293 57.14 13.55 -29.72 33.06 5.63Sunflower 172 33.54 -10.05 -29.72 -5.72 -15.16Mung Bean 149 29.06 -14.54 -29.72 -3.33 -15.86_________________________________________________________________________Average 561 44.23 0.64 -29.72 15.04 -4.68LSD 0.20 85.6 16.69 10.39 37.77_________________________________________________________________________Planted: Sunflower (Mycogen 8H419CL) on June 20, 2007 at 17,000 seed/a. Sunflower Seed Cost: $20.57/a ($1.21/1000 seeds).Harvested: November 20, 2007.Sunflower Market Price $0.19.50/lb.Weed Control: Prowl H2O, 40 oz; Spartan, 2 oz. Chemical Cost: $18.02/a; Application Cost $5/a.Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control.

41

Table .-Mung Bean: Crop Rotation Sequencing Study, Walsh, 2007.________________________________________________________________________________

2007 2006 2005 3-Year2007 2007 Mung Bean Mung Bean Mung Bean Average

Mung Bean Mung Bean Variable Variable Variable VariablePrevious Seed Gross Net Net Net NetCrop Yield Income Income Income Income Income________________________________________________________________________________

lb/a $/a $/a $/a $/a $/a

Fallow 747 74.70 43.79 -18.79 11.49 12.16Grain Sorghum 827 82.70 51.79 -17.14 -4.81 9.95Corn 754 75.40 44.49 -24.79 -13.81 1.96Millet 793 79.30 48.39 -13.24 0.89 12.01Sunflower 746 74.60 43.69 -23.59 -11.91 2.73Mung Bean 550 55.00 24.09 -26.29 -21.41 -7.87________________________________________________________________________________Average 736 73.62 42.71 -20.64 -6.59 5.16LSD 0.20 238.9 23.89 13.86 -14.54 2.67________________________________________________________________________________Planted: Mung Bean (Berkins) on June 6, 2007 at 17 lb/a. Mung Bean Seed Cost: $6.80/a ($40/cwt).Harvested: Mung Bean on September 24, 2007.Millet Market Price $0.10/lb.Weed Control: Raptor, 4 oz; Penetrant II, 4 oz. Chemical Cost: $19.11/a; Application Cost $5/a.Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control.

42

Table .-Corn: Crop Rotation Sequencing Study, Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________

2007 2006 2005 3-Year2007 2007 Corn Corn Corn AverageCorn Corn Variable Variable Variable Variable

Previous Seed Gross Net Net Net NetCrop Yield Income Income Income Income Income_________________________________________________________________________

bu/a $/a $/a $/a $/a $/a

Fallow 35 139.60 87.41 -29.42 -43.38 4.87Grain Sorghum 35 138.00 85.81 -41.67 -48.91 -1.59Corn 29 116.80 64.61 -44.47 -49.31 -9.72Millet 32 129.20 77.01 -39.92 -49.23 -4.05Sunflower 26 104.40 52.21 -35.02 -49.53 -10.78Mung Bean 25 100.40 48.21 -42.02 -49.23 -14.35_________________________________________________________________________Average 30 121.40 69.21 -38.75 -48.26 -5.94LSD 0.20 6.3 25.20 14.37 -34.44 -8.36_________________________________________________________________________Planted: Corn (Mycogen 2E762 Bt/RR) on May 10, 2007 at 12,500 seed/a. Corn Seed Cost: $28.13/a ($2.25/1000 seeds).Harvested: Corn on October 12, 2007.Corn Market Price $4.00/bu.Weed Control: Roundup Weather Max, 20 oz/a (two applications). Chemical Cost: $14.06/a; Application Cost $10/a.Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control.

43

Table .-Fallow: Crop Rotation Sequencing Study, Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________

2007 2006 2005 3-YearFallow Fallow Fallow Average

Variable Variable Variable VariablePrevious Seed Gross Net Net Net NetCrop Yield Income Income Income Income Income_________________________________________________________________________

Bu/A $/A $/A $/A $/A $/A

Fallow 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65Grain Sorghum 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65Millet 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65Mung Bean 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65Corn 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65Sunflower 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65_________________________________________________________________________Average 0 0.00 -20.20 -18.24 -20.51 -19.65LSD 0.20_________________________________________________________________________Weed Control: Glystar 20 oz; 2,4-D amine 0.5 lb, Banvel 4 oz/a (two applications). Chemical Cost: $10.20/a; Application Cost $10/a.Variable Net Income: Gross Income - Seed Cost - Weed Control.

44

Dryland Crop Rotation Study Kevin Larson and Dennis Thompson

This is the third year for our dryland rotation study. We established these

rotations because of results from our dryland rotation sequencing study and growers’ desire to include winter wheat in the rotations. The dryland rotation sequencing study was designed for spring crops and the inclusion of winter wheat with its fall planting and early summer harvesting times would not fit into the design pattern of the sequencing study. To include winter wheat into a dryland rotation study, we began a new dryland rotation study with these three rotations in 2005: 1) Wheat-Sorghum-Fallow, 2) Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow, and 3) Sorghum-Millet. In 2006, we added a fourth rotation, Millet-Wheat, to this rotation study. Materials and Methods This is our third year in testing the following rotations: Wheat-Grain Sorghum-Fallow (W-S-F), Wheat-Sunflower-Fallow (W-Sun-F), and Sorghum-Millet (S-M). We added a fourth rotation of Millet-Wheat (M-W) last year. We planted wheat, Hatcher, at 50 lb/a on September 26, 2006; Proso millet, Huntsman, at 20 lb/a on June 13, 2007; grain sorghum, Triumph TR 438, at 40,000 seeds/a on June 7, 2007; and sunflower, Mycogen 8H419CL, at 17,000 seeds/a on June 20, 2007. We applied 50 lb N/a to the study site. Before planting we sprayed two applications of Glystar Plus at 24 oz/a and LoVol at 0.5 lb/a. For in-season weed control, we chose short-residual herbicides that should not interfere with crop rotations: wheat, Express 0.33 oz/a, LoVol 0.38 lb/a, and Penetrant II 8 oz/a; millet and grain sorghum, Banvel 4 oz/a and amine 10 oz/a; sunflower, Prowl H2O 40 oz/a and Spartan 2 oz/a; and fallow, Glystar Plus 20 oz/a, Banvel 4 oz/a and amine 0.5 lb/a two times. We harvested the crops with a self-propelled combine equipped with a digital scale: wheat, July 2; millet, September 4; grain sorghum, November 7; and sunflower, November 20. We recorded cost of production and yields in order to determine rotation revenues. Results and Discussion

The W-S-F rotation produced the highest total crop production, 4943 lb/a, and the highest variable net income, $361.40/a, for 2007. The W-Sun-F rotation was second highest in variable net income with $309.20/a, but it ranked third in total crop production. The S-M rotation produced the second highest total crop production at 3752 lb/a, but because the crops in its rotation were less valuable, it had the lowest income of $236.36/a. Last year, the W-Sun-F rotation produced the least variable net income of $24.02/a because the sunflower crop was a failure. When we project these rotations over a six-year cycle, the M-W rotation provides the highest total variable net income of $912.03/a. The reason M-W has a higher total income for a projected six-year period compared the second highest rotation, W-S-F, is because M-W has six crops (three complete rotational cycles) and W-S-F has only four crops (two complete rotational cycles) in six years. Less fallow, more crops, more income.

We are still in the establishment phase with these rotations and we already have had crop failures, therefore rotational affects are, at best, difficult to generalize and quantify. Abundant winter moisture last year produced good yields for most crops this

45

year despite the very dry summer conditions. Sunflower yields were low this year. Last year we even failed altogether to get a sunflower stand. Since we failed to establish a sunflower stand last year, the wheat planted in 2007 for the W-Sun-F rotation was actually double summer fallow. Winter wheat has performed better than the spring crops in both yield and income. This is primarily due to more favorable moisture during the wheat growing season. The higher wheat yield suggests that having a winter grain in the rotation spreads the cropping risk and increases crop rotation revenue.

46

Table .-Dryland Crop Rotation Study, Crop Production Summary 2007.________________________________________________________________

Crop Production2007

--------------------------2007 Crop--------------------------- TotalGrain Rotation

Rotation Wheat Sorghum Millet Sunflower Fallow Production________________________________________________________________

-------------------------------------lb/a----------------------------------

W-S-F 2832 2111 0 4943W-Sun-F 3054 494 0 3548M-W 2700 2700S-M 2654 1098 3752________________________________________________________________Average 2862 2383 1098 494 0 3736LSD 0.20 268.2 94.6________________________________________________________________

Table .-Dryland Crop Rotation Study, Variable Net Income Summary 2007.________________________________________________________________

2007 -------------------------2007 Crop--------------------------- Total

Grain RotationRotation Wheat Sorghum Millet Sunflower Fallow Production

-------------------------------------------$/a-----------------------------------

W-S-F 255.20 126.40 -20.20 361.40M-W 242.44 242.44S-M 162.49 73.87 236.36W-Sun-F 276.66 52.74 -20.20 309.20________________________________________________________________Average 258.10 144.45 73.87 52.74 -20.20 287.35LSD 0.20 24.16 5.74________________________________________________________________Variable Net Income is gross income minus seed cost and weed control cost.

47

Table .-Dryland Crop Rotation Study, Walsh, 2007.__________________________________________________________________________________

Weed VariableCrop Seeding Seed Control Crop Gross Net Rotation Density Cost Cost Yield Price Income Income__________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------------------------$/a-------------------------------------------

Wheat 50 lb 6.04 12.52 47.7 bu 5.80/bu 276.66 258.10M-W 45.0 5.80 261.00 242.44W-Sun-F 50.9 5.80 295.22 276.66W-S-F 47.2 5.80 273.76 255.20

Millet 20 lb 2.68 7.34 19.6 bu 4.28/bu 83.89 73.87S-M 19.6 4.28 83.89 73.87

Grain Sorghum 40,000 seeds 3.60 10.24 42.6 bu 3.72/bu 158.47 144.63S-M 47.4 3.72 176.33 162.49W-S-F 37.7 3.72 140.24 126.40

Sunflower 17,000 seeds 20.57 23.02 494 lb 0.195/lb 96.33 52.74W-Sun-F 494 0.195 96.33 52.74

Fallow --- --- 20.20 --- --- 0.00 -20.20__________________________________________________________________________________Average 14.66 388.42 101.83__________________________________________________________________________________Planted: Grain Sorghum Truimph TR 438 at 40,000 Seeds/A on June 7; Millet, Huntsman at 20 Lb/A on June 13; and Sunflower Mycogen 8H419CL at 17,000 Seeds/A on June 20;Wheat, Hatcher at 50 Lb/A on September 26, 2006.Harvested: Millet, September 4; Sunflower, November 20; and Grain Sorghum, November 7;Wheat, July 2, 2007.Weed control cost is herbicide cost and $5/A application cost for each application.

48

Table .-Dryland Crop Rotation Study, Variable Net Income Summary 2007.___________________________________________________________________

2-Year 6-YearTotal Variable

Variable Net Income Rotation Net --------------2006 and 2007 Crops--------------- Variable Income

Grain Net RotationRotation Year Wheat Sorghum Millet Sunflower Fallow Income Projection

-------------------------------------$/a------------------------------------------

W-S-F Avg 166.09 88.74 -19.22 235.61 471.212006 76.97 51.28 -18.24 110.01 220.022007 255.20 126.20 -20.20 361.20 722.40

M-W Avg 242.44 61.57 304.01 912.032006 61.57 61.57 184.712007 242.44 242.44 727.32

S-M Avg 80.97 49.91 130.88 392.642006 -0.55 25.95 25.40 76.202007 162.49 73.87 236.36 709.08

W-Sun-F Avg 174.32 11.51 -19.22 166.61 333.222006 71.98 -29.72 -18.24 24.02 48.042007 276.66 52.74 -20.20 309.20 618.40

___________________________________________________________________Average 194.28 84.86 55.74 11.51 -19.22 209.28 527.28___________________________________________________________________The M-W rotation was started in 2006, therefore, there was no wheatplanted in 2005 for the M-W.The sunflowers were not harvested in 2006 because of chemical damage.Variable Net Income is gross income minus seed cost and weed control cost.

49

SORGHUM HYBRID PERFORMANCE TRIALS IN COLORADO, 2007 K.J. Larson and D.L. Thompson \1

The 2007 Colorado grain sorghum crop was estimated at 5.55 million bushels, well above the 2006 sorghum crop of 3.36 million bushels. For Colorado, the 5.55 million bushels is the highest in 5 years. The increase in sorghum production this year was due to a much higher average yield per acre compared to the last 5 years. The 2006 average yield was 37 bu/a, 11 bu/a more than the average yield for 2006, and 10 bu/a more than the 5-year average. There was a 27% decrease in planted acres in 2007 compared to 2006 from 280,000 acres in 2006 to 220,000 acres in 2007. The 2007 sorghum silage crop produced 360,000 tons from 20,000 acres yielding 18 ton/a. The sorghum silage crop this year is the highest total production in five years (National Agricultural Statistics Service, Colorado Field Office, 2007). This publication is a progress report of the sorghum variety trials conducted by the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences at Colorado State University, Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station, and Cooperative Extension. The sorghum trials were conducted at the Plainsman Research Center at Walsh in Southeastern Colorado: a dryland grain sorghum trial was conducted at Walsh; irrigated grain sorghum trials at Walsh; a dryland forage sorghum trial at Walsh; and irrigated forage sorghum trial at Walsh. Trials are partially funded by entry fees paid by commercial firms. Commercial seed representatives interested in entering sorghum hybrids in any of the trials should contact Kevin Larson, Plainsman Research Center, Box 477, Walsh, Colorado 81090, or phone (719) 324-5643, or email Kevin.Larson@colostate.edu for further details. Names and addresses of firms submitting entries in 2007 are shown in Table 1. Each firm selected entries for testing and furnished seed for the trials. The Agricultural Experiment Station selected open-pedigree hybrids as a standard of comparison. A closed-pedigree corn hybrid was also included in the forage sorghum trials as a comparative standard and was sponsored by the Colorado State Agricultural Experiment Station. Summary tables for weather data (on-site portable weather stations and NOAA, 2007), soil analysis, fertilization (Soil Testing Laboratory, Colorado State University), and available soil water graphs derived from gypsum block readings are provided for each trial location. Other information, where available, was included: site description, emergence date, irrigation, pest control, field history, and pertinent comments. \1 Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh; Technician III, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh.

50

Table 1.--Entrants in the 2007 Colorado Sorghum Performance Trials. _____________________________________________________________________ Brand Entered by ASGROW Monsanto, 7159 N. 247th W., P.O. Box 7, Mt. Hope, KS

67108 DEKALB Monsanto, 7159 N. 247th W., P.O. Box 7, Mt. Hope, KS

67108 FOUR STAR SEED Four Star Seed, 2929 335th St., Logan, IA 51546 GARST Garst Seed Co., 403 W. Illinois, Greensburg, KS 67054 MYCOGEN Mycogen Seeds, 9330 Zionville Road, Indianapolis, IN

46268 PIONEER Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., 1616 S. Kentucky, Suite

C-350, Amarillo, TX 79102 SORGHUM PARTNERS Sorghum Partners, Inc., P.O. Box 189, New Deal, TX 79350 TRIUMPH Triumph Seed Co., Inc., P.O. Box 1050, Hwy. 62 Bypass,

Ralls, TX 79357 Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station entered the following as checks: grain sorghum, TXms399 X TXR2737 (399 X 2737); forage sorghum, NB 305F; corn hybrid, MYCOGEN 2T801.

51

Growing Degree Days for sorghum were calculated from planting through first freeze using a maximum of 111oF and a minimum of 50oF for threshold temperatures (Peacock and Heinrich, 1984). They are calculated by averaging daily high and low temperatures and subtracting the base temperature of 50oF from the average. When daily temperatures are less than 50oF, 50oF is used, when temperatures are above 111oF a maximum temperature of 111oF is used:

(Daily Minimum Temp. + Daily Maximum Temp.) - 50oF 2

Experimental Methods and Evaluations

Trials were planted with a four-row cone planter and harvested with a modified, self-propelled John Deere 4420 combine equipped with a four-row row-crop head to enhance harvest of lodged tillers. Sorghum forage was cut and chopped with a single row John Deere 8 silage cutter. Days to Emergence. Seedling emergence was determined as the number of days after planting until approximately half of the seedlings become visible down a planted row. 50% Bloom. Number of days after planting until half of the main heads had pollinating florets. Number of days to half bloom provides a good measure of relative maturity between hybrids. 50% Maturity. Number of days after planting until half of the kernels in half of the main heads reached physiological maturity, i.e., the black layer becomes visible at the base of the kernel. Plant Height. Plant height was measured in inches from the soil to the tip of the main head. Lodging. The percentage of tillers with broken basal stems or broken peduncles or were leaning more than a 45 degree angle were considered lodged. Since the combine was equipped with a row crop head, most of the leaning tillers were harvested. Harvest Density. Plant population in plants per acre was counted prior to harvest. Test Weight. Test weight was determined using a hand-held bushel weight tester. A low test weight indicates that a hybrid did not fully mature prior to the first freeze or that it suffered environmental stress, such as a water deficiency. Grain Yield. The grain yield in bushels per acre was adjusted to 14 percent moisture content.

52

Yield as a % of Test Average. Yield as a percentage of test average provides a comparison between yields within a trial and allows easy comparisons among years, irrespective of annual growing conditions. Forage Dry Matter Analysis. Whole plant samples were taken at boot for each hybrid and sent to Ward Laboratories, Inc., Kearney, Nebraska for NIR analysis. Forage Yield. Forage yield in tons per acre was adjusted to 70% moisture content. A representative sample of fresh silage was oven-dried at 167oF (75oC) until there was no more weight loss, and then yields were adjusted to 70% moisture content. Stem Sugar. The sugar content, expressed as a percent, in the stem of forage sorghums at harvest was measured with a hand refractometer.

Available Soil Water Available soil water was measured by placing gypsum blocks at 6, 18, 30, and 42 inches below the soil surface. Electrical resistance readings were made weekly. Resistance readings vary with the amount of soil water present. Using resistance readings, available soil water was determined by extrapolating from soil water depletion curves for each particular soil.

Statistical Method Tests were planted in a randomized complete block design with four replications. No less than three replications were harvested. Analysis of variance was applied to the results and the least significant difference (LSD) was computed at alpha = 0.20. Analysis of variance and regression were performed with CoStat Statistical Software a product of Cohort Software, Berkeley, California.

53

References National Agricultural Statistics Service, Colorado Field Office. November 27, 2007. Ag Update, vol. 27, no. 22. NASS, CDA, USDA. 4p. National Agricultural Statistics Service, Colorado Field Office. 2007. Colorado agricultural statistics 2007. NASS, CDA, USDA. 132p. NOAA, May-October, 2007. Climatological data, Colorado. vol. 112, no.5-10. NOAA, Dept. of Commerce, NWS, NESDIS, NCDC. Peacock, J.M. and G.M. Heinrich. 1984. Light and temperature response in sorghum. pp. 143-158. In: Agrometeorology of Sorghum and Millet in the Semi-Tropics: Proceedings of the International Symposium. November 15-20, 1982. India, ICRISAT, WMO.

54

Early Maturing Irrigated Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007 COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids, when planted late in the season (June 25), under dryland conditions with 2900 sorghum heat units in Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, 50’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 87,100 seed/a. PLANTED: June 25. HARVESTED: November 9. EMERGENCE DATE: 6 days after planting. SOIL TEMP: 78 F. IRRIGATION: Drip irrigated for 15 weeks with approximately 11 a-in./a. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphosate 24 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: Banvel 4 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.38 lb/a. CULTIVATION: None. INSECTICIDES: None.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------no. of days-------- June 0.00 115 2 0 5 July 1.59 919 22 2 36 August 0.97 909 26 10 67 September 0.91 621 14 1 97 October 0.07 306 2 0 119 Total 3.54 2870 66 13 119 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 25 (planting) to October 22 (first freeze, 30 F). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Sunflower. FIELD PREPARATION: Disc. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was very good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. No greenbug infestation. None of the hybrids lodged. Late freeze date. Yields were good. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 85 40 2 0 Applied 150 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 125 bu/a. Actual Yield: 101 bu/a.

Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 7.5 0.4 2.0 11 3.1 427 0.6 7.0 8”-24” 8 Comment Alka VLo Hi Mod VLo VHi Lo Adeq _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

55

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������� �������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

����������������������������

���������������������

��������������

��������������

���������������������

����������������������������

����������������������������

����������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������

��������������

��������������

�������������� �������

�������������� �������

Available Soil Water Irrigated Grain Sorghum, Early Maturing, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

������������������������

Flowering

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. 1. Available soil water in irrigated grain sorghum at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from

planting to first freeze was 3.54 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks not attributed to applied irrigation is from rain.

56

Table 2.--Irrigated Grain Sorghum Early Maturing Hybrid Performance Test at Walsh, 2007. \1__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yield %Days to 50% Bloom 50% Mature Plant Harvest Lodged Test Grain of Test

Brand Hybrid Emerge DAP GDD DAP Group Ht. Density Plants Wt. Yield Average__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In Plants/A % Lb/Bu Bu/A %(1000 X)

NC+ NC+ 5B89 7 58 102 E 43 47.6 0 57 108 108DEKALB DKS29-28 7 55 99 E 37 52.3 0 58 103 102NC+ NC+ 5C35 6 54 94 E 39 56.9 0 57 101 101SORGHUM PARTNERS KS310 6 59 103 E 41 55.4 0 58 101 100SORGHUM PARTNERS X303 6 56 101 E 40 51.1 0 58 84 84SORGHUM PARTNERS 251 6 53 93 E 36 51.9 0 59 79 78

NC+ NC+ 6B50 6 63 112 ME/M 46 52.7 0 56 112 112ASGROW Pulsar 7 59 108 ME/E 46 49.2 0 57 109 108DEKALB DKS37-07 6 61 112 ME 47 49.6 0 58 108 107__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 6 58 0 103 E 42 51.9 0 58 101LSD 0.20 5.1__________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted: June 25; Harvested: November 9, 2007.Yields are corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.DAP: Days After Planting or maturation of seed at first freeze (30 F, October 22).Seed Maturation: PM, pre-milk; EM, early milk; MM, mid-milk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough;DAP, mature.GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum.Maturity Group: E, early; ME, medium early; M, medium; ML, medium late; L, late.

57

Table 3.--Summary: Grain Sorghum Early Maturing Hybrid Performance Tests, 2005-2007.__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grain Yield Yield as % of Test Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Brand Hybrid 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

----------------------bu/a------------------------ -------------------------%-------------------------

ASGROW Reward 70 79 -- 75 -- 112 123 -- 118 --DEKALB DK-28E 74 87 -- 81 -- 119 136 -- 128 --DEKALB DKS 29-28 69 76 103 90 83 110 118 102 110 110

NC+ NC+ 5B89 -- 54 108 81 -- -- 84 108 96 --(Check) 399 X 2737 47 22 -- 35 -- 75 75 -- 75 --__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 62 62 101 82 75__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Grain Yields were adjusted to 14.0 % seed moisture content.Irrigated at Walsh for 2006 and 2007, dryland for 2005.

58

Dryland Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007 COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids under dryland conditions with 3300 sorghum heat units in a Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, 50’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 43,600 seed/a. PLANTED: June 5. HARVESTED: October 29.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------no. of days-------- June 0.19 535 11 0 25 July 1.59 919 22 2 56 August 0.97 909 26 10 87 September 0.91 621 14 1 117 October 0.07 306 2 0 139 Total 3.73 3290 75 13 139 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 5 (planting) to October 22 (first freeze, 30 F). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

EMERGENCE DATE: 8 days after planting. SOIL TEMP: 71 F. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphosate, 24 oz/a; 2,4-D, 0.5 lb/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: Banvel 4.0 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.38 lb/a. CULTIVATION: None. INSECTICIDES: None. FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Wheat. FIELD PREPARATION: No-till. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. No greenbug infestation. None of the hybrids lodged. Late freeze date. Yields and test weights were very good despite the dry conditions. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis.

Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 6.8 0.5 1.9 10 6.2 473 0.8 3.8 8”-24” 7 Comment Neut VLo Hi Mod Lo VHi Lo Marg _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 0 20 2 0 Applied 50 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 45 bu/a. Actual Yield: 59 bu/a.

59

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������

�������������� ������� ������ ������� ������ ������� ������� ������ ������� ������� ������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�����������������������������������

��������������

������������ ������� �������

������� ������ ������� ������ ������� ������� ������ ������� ������� ������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������� �������

��������������

��������������

������ �������������� ������� ������

�������������������� ������ ������� ������� ������ ������� ������� ������

������������������������������������������������� �������

�������

�������

�������

������������ �������

������� ������ ������� ������������

��������������

��������������

������������

��������������

��������������

������������

Available Soil WaterDryland Grain Sorghum, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

������������������

Flowering

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. 2. Available soil water in dryland grain sorghum at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from planting to first freeze was 3.73 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks is from rain.

60

Table 4.--Dryland Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Test at Walsh, 2007. \1__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yield %Days to 50% Bloom 50% Mature Plant Harvest Plants Test Grain of Test

Brand Hybrid Emerge DAP GDD DAP Group Ht. Density Lodged Wt. Yield Average__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

in plants/a % lb/bu bu/a %(1000 X)

ASGROW Pulsar 9 64 1683 105 E 41 24.4 0 61 63 108NC+ NC+ 5B89 8 65 1712 103 E 41 27.1 0 62 62 105DEKALB DKS29-28 9 62 1624 100 E 38 27.9 0 61 61 104NC+ NC+ 5C35 7 61 1592 98 E 38 22.5 0 60 55 93SORGHUM PARTNERS KS310 7 66 1743 104 E 39 29.0 0 61 54 92SORGHUM PARTNERS X303 8 61 1592 99 E 39 27.5 0 62 50 86SORGHUM PARTNERS 251 8 54 1401 92 E 35 30.2 0 60 50 86

SORGHUM PARTNERS NK5418 8 69 1845 107 ME/M 38 26.3 0 61 72 123NC+ NC+ 7C22 8 70 1879 109 ME 43 29.4 0 62 66 112DEKALB DKS37-07 9 72 1944 112 ME 41 24.4 0 62 62 105DEKALB DK44 8 71 1914 111 ME/M 40 21.7 0 61 61 104SORGHUM PARTNERS NK4420 9 72 1944 112 ME 38 27.9 0 62 61 103NC+ NC+ Y363 8 69 1845 107 ME 42 25.2 0 61 60 103DEKALB DKS36-16 8 68 1810 107 ME 40 30.2 0 62 60 102

NC+ NC+ 6B50 9 80 2191 122 M 42 27.9 0 60 61 104

(Check) 399 X 2737 8 83 2267 126 ML 38 25.9 0 59 42 71__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 8 68 1812 107 ME 40 26.7 0 61 59LSD 0.20 4.1__________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted: June 5; Harvested: October 29, 2007.Yields are corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.DAP: Days After Planting or maturation of seed at first freeze.Seed Maturation: EM, early milk; MM, mid milk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough; mature (DAP).GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum.Maturity Group: E, early; ME, medium early; M, medium; ML, medium late; L, late.

61

Table 5.--Summary: Dryland Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Tests at Walsh, 2005-2007.__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grain Yield Yield as % of Test Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Brand Hybrid 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

------------------bu/a--------------------- ----------------------%----------------------

ASGROW Seneca 56 5 -- 31 -- 97 87 -- 92 --ASGROW Pulsar 60 10 63 37 44 104 163 108 136 125DEKALB DK-44 61 6 61 34 43 105 93 104 99 101DEKALB DKS 37-07 68 5 62 34 45 117 78 105 92 100

NC+ NC+ 5B89 -- 7 62 35 -- -- 117 105 111 --NC+ NC+ 5C35 -- 17 55 36 -- -- 290 93 192 --NC+ NC+ Y363 -- 5 60 33 -- -- 82 103 93 --NC+ NC+ 6B50 -- 3 61 32 -- -- 55 104 80 --(Check) 399 X 2737 44 2 42 22 29 76 40 71 56 62__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 58 5 59 32 41__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Grain Yields were corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.

62

Irrigated Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007

COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids under irrigated conditions with 3300 sorghum heat units in a Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, 50’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 87,100 seed/a. PLANTED: June 5. HARVESTED: November 12.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------no. of days-------- June 0.19 535 11 0 25 July 1.59 919 22 2 56 August 0.97 909 26 10 87 September 0.91 621 14 1 117 October 0.07 306 2 0 139 Total 3.73 3290 75 13 139 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 5 (planting) to October 22 (first freeze, 30 F). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

EMERGENCE DATE: 8 days after planting. SOIL TEMP: 71 F. IRRIGATION: Drip irrigated for 18 weeks with approximately 13 a-in./a. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphosate 24 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: Banvel 4 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.38 lb/a. CULTIVATION: Once. INSECTICIDES: None.

FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Sunflower. FIELD PREPARATION: Disc. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. Late freeze date. No greenbug infestation. None of the hybrids lodged. Grain yields were good. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis.

Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 7.5 0.4 2.0 11 3.1 427 0.6 7.0 8”-24” 8 Comment Alka VLo Hi Mod VLo VHi Lo Adeq _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 85 40 2 0 Applied 150 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 125 bu/a. Actual Yield: 118 bu/a.

63

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

�����������������������������������

������������

������������ ������

������������

������������

������������

��������������

������������

������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

��������������

������������ ������ ������

������

������������

������������������

������������������

����������������������������

������������������

������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������

������������������

������������������������

��������������

������������ ������

������������������

������������������

������������������������������

������������������������

�����������������������������������

������������������������������������

������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������

������������

������������ ������

������������

��������������

������������ ������

������

������ ������������

��������������

������������

������

Available Soil WaterIrrigated Grain Sorghum, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

������������������������

Flowering

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. 3. Available soil water in irrigated grain sorghum at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from planting to first freeze was 3.73 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks not attributed to applied irrigation is from rain.

64

Table 6.--Irrigated Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Test at Walsh, 2007. \1___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yield %Days to 50% Bloom 50% Mature Plant Harvest Lodged Test Grain of Test

Brand Hybrid Emerge DAP GDD DAP Group Ht. Density Plants Wt. Yield Average___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

in plants/a % lb/bu bu/a %(1000 X)

NC+ NC+ 5B89 8 65 1712 104 E 46 55.0 0 62 126 107NC+ NC+ 5C35 8 59 1534 99 E 43 60.4 0 59 97 83SORGHUM PARTNERS X303 8 59 1534 100 E 41 47.2 0 61 93 79SORGHUM PARTNERS 251 8 56 1454 96 E 37 46.5 0 61 84 72

DEKALB DKS42-20 8 71 1914 110 ME/M 48 53.1 0 60 132 112DEKALB DKS37-07 9 73 1973 112 ME 45 53.4 0 60 126 107NC+ NC+ 7C22 9 72 1944 112 ME 48 48.8 0 61 124 106SORGHUM PARTNERS NK5418 9 71 1914 110 ME/M 41 48.4 0 60 120 102SORGHUM PARTNERS NK4420 8 70 1879 108 ME 46 50.7 0 61 119 101NC+ NC+ Y363 9 72 1944 113 ME/M 47 54.6 0 61 118 100DEKALB DK44 9 73 1973 112 ME/M 46 45.7 0 60 116 99DEKALB DKS36-16 9 72 1944 110 ME 41 53.8 0 61 116 99SORGHUM PARTNERS KS310 8 68 1810 106 ME/E 43 49.6 0 61 110 94

DEKALB DKS53-67 8 75 2032 115 M/ML 50 51.1 0 61 138 117NC+ NC+ 6B50 8 76 2064 121 M 48 58.1 0 59 123 105DEKALB DKS54-00 8 78 2133 123 ML 48 50.7 0 59 131 111ASGROW A571 8 81 2207 129 ML 50 53.8 0 59 126 108(Check) 399 X 2737 8 80 2191 128 ML 45 44.5 0 59 117 100__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 8 71 1898 112 M 45 51.4 0 60 118LSD 0.20 5.2__________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted June 5; Harvested: November 12, 2007.Yields are corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.DAP: Days After Planting or maturation of seed at first freeze.Seed Maturation: LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough; mature (DAP).GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum.Maturity Group: E, early; ME, medium early; M, medium; ML, medium late; L, late.

65

Table 7.--Summary: Irrigated Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Tests at Walsh, 2005-2007.__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grain Yield Yield as % of Test Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Brand Hybrid 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------bu/a--------------------- ----------------------%----------------------

ASGROW A 567 117 90 -- 104 -- 103 108 -- 106 --ASGROW A 571 117 64 126 95 102 103 77 108 93 96DEKALB DKS 54-00 128 84 131 108 114 112 102 111 107 108DEKALB DKS 53-11 113 76 -- 95 -- 100 91 -- 96 --NC+ NC+ 7C22 -- 88 124 106 -- -- 106 106 106 --NC+ NC+ 6B50 -- 101 123 112 -- -- 122 105 114 --(Check) 399 X 2737 102 73 117 95 97 90 87 100 94 92__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 115 83 83 118 94__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Grain Yields were corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.

66

Limited Sprinkler Irrigated Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007

COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids under limited sprinkler irrigated conditions with 3300 sorghum heat units in a Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, at least 1000’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 80,000 seed/a. PLANTED: June 6. HARVESTED: November 13.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------no. of days-------- June 0.19 518 11 0 24 July 1.59 919 22 2 55 August 0.97 909 26 10 86 September 0.91 621 14 1 116 October 0.07 306 2 0 138 Total 3.73 3273 75 13 138 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 6 (planting) to October 22 (first freeze, 30 F). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

IRRIGATION: Sprinkler irrigated with 9.0 a-in./a, applied with six rotations. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphosate 24 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: Banvel 8 oz/a. CULTIVATION: Once. INSECTICIDES: None. FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Corn. FIELD PREPARATION: Sweep plow. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. Late freeze date. No greenbug infestation. Lodging was minor and not consistent. Grain yields were good. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis.

Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 7.6 0.4 2.2 10 3.1 451 0.6 3.9 8”-24” 9 Comment Alka VLo Hi Mod VLo VHi Lo Marg _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 0 40 2 0 Applied 125 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 100 bu/a. Actual Yield: 87 bu/a.

67

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������

������������

������������

������������

������������

������������

������������

������������

������������

������������

��������������

������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������

������������

������ ������ ������ ������ ������ ������ ������ ������ ������ ������� ������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������

������������

������������������ ������ ������ ������ ������ ������

������������

������������

������������ ������� ������

������������������������������������

������������

������������������������

������������

������������

������������

������ ������������

������������ ������

������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������ ������ �������

�������������������

Available Soil WaterLimited Sprinkler Irrigation Grain Sorghum, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

������������������������������

Flowering & IrrigationIrrigation

Irrigation

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. 4. Available soil water in irrigated grain sorghum at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from planting to first freeze was 3.73 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks not attributed to applied irrigation is from rain.

68

Table 8.Limited Sprinkler Irrigation Grain Sorghum, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, 2007._______________________________________________________________________________________________

Seed Yield % 50% Bloom 50% Mature Plant Plant Moisture Test Grain of Test

Brand Hybrid DAP GDD DAP Group Ht. Density Content Wt. Yield Average_______________________________________________________________________________________________

in plants/a % lb/bu bu/a %(1000X)

FOUR STAR SEED XP-222 71 1919 111 M 50 48.0 10.9 61 106 122FOUR STAR SEED 4STAR-207 62 1629 98 E 39 55.6 9.9 60 94 108MYCOGEN M3838 69 1854 108 ME 42 50.0 10.5 61 93 107PIONEER 86G08 62 1629 98 E 49 53.6 10.1 60 93 107TRIUMPH TRX02783 66 1751 102 ME 48 48.0 10.5 60 93 107

GARST 5750 69 1854 109 ME 46 49.2 10.5 61 90 104TRIUMPH TR 442 69 1948 110 ME 49 53.2 10.6 60 86 99FOUR STAR SEED XP-619 67 1785 104 ME 47 50.0 9.8 61 86 99GARST 5631Y 68 1820 107 ME 43 52.0 10.1 61 82 95TRIUMPH TR 438 63 1658 99 ME 47 51.2 9.7 60 82 94

GARST 5624 68 1820 107 ME 48 54.8 10.5 60 81 93FOUR STAR SEED 4STAR-275 57 1487 94 E 40 53.6 10.0 59 80 91PIONEER 87G57 59 1536 96 E 45 51.6 9.8 61 78 90MYCOGEN IG600 74 2007 113 M 48 54.0 10.2 61 78 90_______________________________________________________________________________________________Average 66 1764 104 46 51.8 10.2 60 87LSD 0.20 7.2_______________________________________________________________________________________________Planted: June 6; Harvested: November 13.50% Flowering Date: minimum date on which a hybrid flowers on half of its population.50% Maturity Date: minimum date on which a hybrid had mature seed on half of its population.The limited sprinkler irrigation grain sorghum received 9.0 acre-in of applied water.Yields are adjusted to 14.0% seed moisture content.

69

Table 9.--Summary: Limited Irrigation Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Tests at Walsh, 2005-2007.__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grain Yield Yield as % of Test Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Brand Hybrid 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

------------------bu/a--------------------- ----------------------%----------------------

FONTANELLE GE4532 62 54 -- 58 39 105 103 -- 104 --MYCOGEN M3838 52 44 93 69 63 87 85 107 96 93PIONEER 87G57 -- 52 78 65 -- -- 100 90 95 --TRIUMPH TRX0X783 -- 57 93 75 -- -- 110 107 109 --TRIUMPH TR 438 -- 57 82 70 -- -- 110 94 102 --TRIUMPH TR 442 73 60 86 73 73 124 114 99 107 112__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 59 52 87 70 66__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Grain Yields were corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.

70

Dryland Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007 COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids under dryland conditions with 3000 sorghum heat units in a Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, 50’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 69,700 seed/a. PLANTED: June 5. HARVESTED: October 2.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------no. of days-------- June 0.19 535 11 0 25 July 1.59 919 22 2 56 August 0.97 909 26 10 87 September 0.91 621 14 1 117 October 0.00 33 0 0 119 Total 3.66 3017 73 13 119 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 5 (planting) to October 2 (harvest). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

EMERGENCE DATE: 8 days after planting. SOIL TEMP: 71 F. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphsate 24 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: Banvel 4 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.38 lb/a. CULTIVATION: None. INSECTICIDES: None. FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Wheat. FIELD PREPARATION: No-till. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. No greenbug infestation. Lodging was mild. Forage yields were very good. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis.

Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 6.8 0.5 1.9 10 6.2 473 0.8 3.8 8”-24” 7 Comment Neut VLo Hi Mod Lo VHi Lo Marg _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 0 20 2 0 Applied 50 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 10 ton/a. Actual Yield: 11.5 ton/a @ 70% MC.

71

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

����������������������������

�������������� ������� ������� ������� ������� ������� ������� �������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������

��������������

��������������

������� ������� ������� ������� ������� ������� �������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

���������������������

��������������

��������������

��������������������� ������� ������� ������� ������� ������� �������

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

��������������

��������������

��������������

�������

��������������

�������������� ������� ������� ������� ������� �������

Available Soil WaterDryland Forage Sorghum, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

������������������������

Flowering

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. 5. Available soil water in dryland forage sorghum at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from planting to harvest was 3.66 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks is from rain.

72

Table 10.--Dryland Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007. \1_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Days Days Stage \3 Yield %Forage to to 50% Harvest Plant at Stem Plant Forage of Test

Brand Hybrid Type \2 Emerg Bloom Density Ht. Harvest Sugar Lodg Yield Avg._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Plants/A In. % % Tons/A %(1000 X)

(Check) NB 305F FS 9 80 33.3 85 SD 15 0 14.0 122SORGHUM PARTNERS NK300 FS 7 80 39.9 51 SD 7 0 13.1 114SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II FS 8 74 46.5 81 HD 9 2 12.5 109MISS. STATE UNIV. M81-E FS 8 Veg 37.6 76 Veg 10 4 12.4 108MISS. STATE UNIV. Topper 76-6 FS 9 Veg 41.8 109 BT 14 3 12.3 107MISS. STATE UNIV. Dale FS 9 111 42.2 81 FL 18 0 11.4 99MISS. STATE UNIV. Theis FS 9 107 34.9 100 PM 15 3 9.7 85

SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 SS 8 73 36.8 91 MT 10 4 11.2 98

MYCOGEN 2T801 Corn 6 68 29.0 78 HD 15 0 6.7 58_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average FS 8 84 38.0 84 LM 13 2 11.5LSD 0.20 1.16_________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted: June 5; Harvested: October 2.\2 Forage Type: FS, Forage Sorghum; SS, Sorghum Sudangrass.\3 Harvest Stage: Veg, vegetative; BT, boot; FL, flowering; PM, premilk; EM, early milk; MM, midmilk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough; MT, mature.Forage Yield adjusted to 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.

73

Table 11.--Summary: Dryland Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Tests at Walsh, 2004, 2006, and 2007._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Forage Yield Yield as % of Test Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Brand Hybrid 2004 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2004 2006 2007 Avg Avg_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

-------------------tons/a------------------- ----------------------%---------------------

SORGHUM PARTNERS NK 300 12.1 4.4 13.1 8.8 9.9 125 80 112 96 106SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II -- 6.5 12.5 9.5 -- -- 118 107 113 --SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 9.6 7.3 11.2 9.3 9.4 99 133 96 115 109

(Check) NB 305F 9.5 4.7 14.0 9.4 9.4 98 85 120 103 101(Check) Corn 8.5 4.5 6.7 5.6 6.6 87 82 57 70 75_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 9.7 5.5 11.7 8.6 9.0_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Forage Yields were adjusted to 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.There was no dryland forage sorghum trial in 2005.

74

Table 12.--Dryland Forage Sorghum Hybrid Dry Matter Analysis at Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Days BootForage to Plant Net Energy

Brand Hybrid Type \1 Boot Ht CP ADF NDF NDFD TDN RFV Main. Gain Lact._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In ---------------%------------------- -----MCal/lb-----

MISS. STATE UNIV. Topper 76-6 FS 109 66 5.8 32.4 52.0 79 65.7 114 0.68 0.41 0.68MISS. STATE UNIV. Theis FS 98 97 7.4 33.6 52.5 72 64.3 111 0.66 0.39 0.66MISS. STATE UNIV. Dale FS 101 84 5.4 32.2 55.3 73 65.8 107 0.68 0.41 0.68SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II FS 65 64 9.1 34.8 54.9 69 62.8 105 0.64 0.37 0.65MISS. STATE UNIV. M81-E FS Veg 73 5.8 32.3 56.6 70 65.7 105 0.68 0.41 0.68SORGHUM PARTNERS NK300 FS 73 45 8.4 34.7 55.9 65 63.0 103 0.64 0.38 0.65(Check) NB 305F FS 71 66 8.6 36.6 58.1 65 60.8 97 0.61 0.35 0.62

SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 SS 64 68 9.3 36.3 58.0 63 61.1 97 0.61 0.35 0.63

MYCOGEN 2T801 Corn 62 73 10.6 34.5 56.2 60 63.3 103 0.64 0.38 0.65_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Sorghum Average FS 79 71 7.8 34.2 55.5 68 63.6 105 0.65 0.38 0.66_________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Forage Type: FS, Forage Sorghum; SS, Sorghum Sudangrass.Infrared analysis performed on whole plant samples taken at boot.CP, Crude Protein; ADF, Acid Detergent Fiber; NDF, Neutral Detergent Fiber; TDN, Total Digestible Nutrients;NDFD, Digestibility of NDF; RFV, Relative Feed Value; Net Energy: Maintenance, Gain, Lactation..

75

Irrigated Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007 COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids under irrigated conditions with 2900 sorghum heat units in a Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, 50’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 113,250 seed/a. PLANTED: June 5. HARVESTED: September 26. EMERGENCE DATE: 8 days after planting. SOIL TEMP: 71 F. IRRIGATION: Two furrow irrigations: July 2 and August 7, total applied 12 a-in./a. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphosate 24 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.5 lb/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: Banvel 4 oz/a, 2,4-D 0.38 lb/a. CULTIVATION: None. INSECTICIDES: None.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------no. of days-------- June 0.19 535 11 0 25 July 1.59 919 22 2 56 August 0.97 909 26 10 87 September 0.34 547 14 1 113 Total 3.09 2910 73 13 113 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 5 (planting) to September 26 (harvest). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Wheat. FIELD PREPARATION: No-till. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. No greenbug infestation. Two hybrids had 10% or more lodging. Forage yields were very good. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis. Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 6.8 0.6 1.6 12 4.3 399 1.0 3.6 8”-24” 7 Comment Neut VLo Hi Mod Lo VHi Lo Marg _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 45 20 1 0 Applied 150 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 18 ton/a. Actual Yield: 23.7 ton/a @ 70% MC.

76

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

�����������������������������������

����������������

���������������� ������� ��������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������ �������

��������������

���������������� �������� �������

�����������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������������� ��������

����������������

��������������

���������������� ��������

�������� ������� ��������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������

����������������

��������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������

����������������

�������

����������������

������� ��������

Available Soil WaterIrrigated Forage Sorghum, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

������������������������

Flowering

Irrigation

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. 6. Available soil water in irrigated forage sorghum at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from planting to harvest was 3.09 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks not attributed to applied irrigation is from rain.

77

Table 13.--Irrigated Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007. \1_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Days Days Stage \3 Yield %Forage to to 50% Harvest Plant at Stem Plant Forage of Test

Brand Hybrid Type \2 Emerg Bloom Density Ht. Harvest Sugar Lodg Yield Avg._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Plants/A In. % % Tons/A %(1000 X)

MISS. STATE UNIV. M81-E FS 9 107 51.1 125 PM 15 0 27.9 118MISS. STATE UNIV. Topper 76-6 FS 9 105 48.4 101 PM 18 1 26.5 112(Check) NB 305F FS 9 81 50.7 109 SD 14 3 25.6 108SORGHUM PARTNERS NK300 FS 7 83 68.5 79 SD 7 0 24.8 104MISS. STATE UNIV. Dale FS 9 99 59.6 124 EM 18 12 24.4 103MISS. STATE UNIV. Theis FS 9 102 36.8 131 EM 14 5 22.1 93SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II FS 8 75 65.8 122 HD 11 18 21.8 92PIONEER Pioneer Brand 849F FS 8 79 54.9 107 SD 6 2 21.3 90

SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 SS 8 74 77.1 126 MT 10 4 21.5 91

MYCOGEN 2T801 Corn 6 68 34.9 90 HD 11 0 21.1 89_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average FS 8 87 54.8 111 LM 12 5 23.7LSD 0.20 3.02_________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted: June 5; Harvested: September 26.\2 Forage Type: FS, Forage Sorghum; SS, Sorghum Sudangrass.\3 Seed Maturation: PM, premilk; EM, early milk; MM, midmilk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough; MT, mature.Forage Yield adjusted to 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.

78

Table 14.--Summary: Irrigated Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Tests at Walsh, 2005-2007.________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Forage Yield Yield as % of Test Average 2-Year 3-Year 2-Year 3-Year

Brand Hybrid 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg 2005 2006 2007 Avg Avg________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

-----------------tons/a------------------- ----------------------%---------------------

DEKALB FS-5 21.5 20.1 -- 20.8 -- 123 130 -- 127 --DEKALB FS-25E 22.0 13.9 -- 18.0 -- 125 89 -- 107 --DEKALB DKS 59-09 17.8 13.6 -- 15.7 -- 102 88 -- 95 --

RICHARDSON SEEDS Dairy Master BMR 17.9 13.5 -- 15.7 -- 102 87 -- 95 --RICHARDSON SEEDS Sweeter 'N Honey II 18.3 16.6 -- 17.5 -- 104 107 -- 106 --RICHARDSON SEEDS Sweeter 'N Honey BMR 16.0 13.5 -- 14.8 -- 91 87 -- 89 --

SORGHUM PARTNERS NK 300 -- 19.3 24.8 22.1 -- -- 125 104 115 --SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II -- 12.8 21.8 17.3 -- -- 82 92 87 --SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 -- 18.8 24.8 21.8 -- -- 121 104 113 --

(Check) NB 305F 15.9 10.2 25.6 17.9 17.2 91 66 108 87 88(Check) Corn 21.9 16.5 21.1 18.8 19.8 125 107 89 98 107________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 17.5 15.5 23.7 19.6 18.9________________________________________________________________________________________________________________Forage Yields were corrected to 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.

79

Table 15.--Irrigated Forage Sorghum Hybrid Dry Matter Analysis at Walsh, 2007._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Days BootForage to Plant Net Energy

Brand Hybrid Type \1 Boot Ht CP ADF NDF NDFD TDN RFV Main. Gain Lact._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In ---------------%------------------- -----MCal/lb-----

SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II FS 65 72 9.5 36.6 56.3 70 60.8 100 0.61 0.35 0.62MISS. STATE UNIV. Theis FS 92 119 3.2 39.2 57.3 70 57.9 95 0.56 0.31 0.59MISS. STATE UNIV. Topper 76-6 FS 94 100 2.7 38.5 57.6 73 58.7 95 0.58 0.32 0.60MISS. STATE UNIV. M81-E FS 96 114 2.7 41.4 61.3 66 55.3 86 0.52 0.27 0.56MISS. STATE UNIV. Dale FS 90 107 4.5 42.9 60.8 71 53.6 85 0.50 0.25 0.54PIONEER Pioneer Brand 849F FS 69 83 9.8 40.7 62.8 58 56.2 85 0.54 0.28 0.57SORGHUM PARTNERS NK300 FS 77 57 6.9 41.3 63.4 62 55.4 83 0.53 0.27 0.56(Check) NB 305F FS 73 86 6.7 41.9 63.6 65 54.7 82 0.52 0.26 0.56

SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 SS 64 85 2.9 38.4 56.5 73 58.7 97 0.58 0.32 0.60

MYCOGEN 2T801 Corn 62 81 9.4 40.1 61.4 61 56.8 87 0.55 0.29 0.58_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Sorghum Average FS 78 90 5.8 40.1 60.1 67 56.8 90 0.55 0.29 0.58_________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Forage Type: FS, Forage Sorghum; SS, Sorghum Sudangrass.Infrared analysis performed on whole plant samples taken at boot.CP, Crude Protein; ADF, Acid Detergent Fiber; NDF, Neutral Detergent Fiber; TDN, Total Digestible Nutrients;NDFD, Digestibility of NDF; RFV, Relative Feed Value; Net Energy: Maintenance, Gain, Lactation..

80

Expanding Bio-Based Energy Crop Options for Dryland Systems Kevin Larson

Semi-Annual Report, December 2007 Evaluation of Forage and Sweet Sorghums First Cropping Year Procedure: Sweet Sorghum

Four sweet sorghum varieties and four forage sorghum hybrids and corn were planted into a dryland no-till system on June 5, 2007. Early in the season, notes were taken at emergence and plant densities were measured. Gypsum block were install and soil moisture readings were recorded every week. To derive a formula to estimate in situ ethanol yield of these sweet and forage sorghums, we made forage yield estimates and stock sugar content readings. For the forage yield estimates, we measured plant density, plant height, total nodes, and plant weight. To determine the internode that corresponds to percent sugar of entire stock, we measured the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th internodes for stock diameter with a digital caliper and percent sugar with a hand refractometer at boot, flowering, early milk, and late milk. Plants were milled with a manual cane press to extract total stock juice. This juice was weighed, volume determined, and refractometer readings taken for each hybrid/variety at all four developmental stages. When the seed of the forage sorghums reached early dough, plants were counted and harvested from 21.75 ft of one row and total stock juice was hand milled from the plants. Plant density, plant weight, percent sugar, juice volume and weight were recorded. The same forage harvest was performed on the sweet sorghums; however, none of the sweet sorghum reached early dough development. Forage harvest for stock juice extraction was performed on the sweet sorghums just before the site was harvested for silage. This entire dryland forage study was harvested with a silage chopper on October 2, 2007. The silage from each plot was weighed and a representative sample of each hybrid/variety was oven dried for moisture content and silage yields recorded at 70% moisture content.

To determine the ethanol production of the stock juice milled at early dough (or just before silage harvest for sweet sorghums), the juice was lowered to pH 4.8, yeast added and fermented for 5 days in an air locked container. (The proceeding step has not been performed). After the stock sugar in these musts are completely fermented and converted to ethanol, these wines are distilled to extract the ethanol. The ethanol is weighed, and volume and proof are recorded. Results and Discussion: Forage and Sweet Sorghums

Refractometer readings of stock juice were taken at the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th internodes at boot, flowering, early milk, and late milk to determine which internode readings most closely corresponded to the percent sugar of the total stock juice. The percent sugar for total stock juice for forage and sweet sorghums were best represented by the refractometer readings from the 6th and 8th internodes at all four developmental stages (Table 1). Although no measurements were taken from the 7th internode, linear analysis suggests that readings of the 7th internode may provide the best representation of percent sugar for the whole stock (Fig. 1).

81

The extraction of the stock juice was inadequate and labor intensive with the manual cane press. Our average extraction rate was only 17% of the theoretical total stock juice (Table 2). If we are going to continue with whole stock juice extraction, a motorized hydraulic press will be needed. This may be necessary if we are simulating field juice extraction by swather crimping. Because of our low stock juice extractions, we will not be fermenting and distilling these stock juice samples for ethanol production. This year we will report potential ethanol production and not actual ethanol production (Tables 2 and 3). Next year with improved extraction methods and equipment, we will ferment and distill these stock juice samples for actual ethanol production. The parameters we used to measure forage yield estimates were: 1) stock diameter of the 6th internode (in.), 2) stock count from 11ft. of one row (2.5ft. x 11ft.), and 3) plant height (in.) (Table 4). To derive a constant for estimated silage yields based on these parameters, we used the parameter product divided by the measured silage yield for each hybrid at final silage yield (Table 5) and specific developmental stages (boot, flowering, early milk, and late milk). We found that sorghum class (SS, Sorghum x Sudan; FS, Forage Sorghum, and SW, Sweet Sorghum) differentiated more than developmental stages. The constants we derived for the sorghum classes from boot through late milk were 0.007838 for SS, 0.01054 for FS, and 0.006231 for SW. These constants times the parameter products provided good estimates of silage yields (F = 0.8529, P = 0.8063). Since the milled stock juice yields were so low, we did not derive the second part of the formula to estimate stock juice yield and ethanol yield. Evaluation of High Starch and Conventional Starch Grain Sorghum First Cropping Year Procedure: Grain Sorghum

We planted five high starch and eleven conventional starch grain sorghums into a dryland no-till system on June 5, 2007. Early in the season, notes were taken at emergence and plant densities were measured. Gypsum block were install and soil moisture readings were recorded every week. For each hybrid, we recorded the date when 50% of the stocks flowered and the date when 50% of the stock had mature seeds. At grain harvest (October 29, 2007), we measured plant height, plant lodging, and grain yield. We took grain samples from each hybrid and measured grain moisture and test weight. Grain yields are adjusted to 14% seed moisture content. (The proceeding steps have not been performed). From these grain samples we will determine ethanol yield by milling the grain, adding water and enzymes and heating the mash to convert the starch into sugar, pitching in the yeast and fermenting the mash, and distilling the mash (beer), and measuring the volume, weight and proof of the distill ethanol. Results and Discussion: Grain Sorghum The five high starch grain sorghums are designated by their NC+ brand (Table 6). Only one of the high starch grain sorghums did not produce above the average grain yield for the trial. There appears to be no yield depression caused by having higher starch content. If ethanol production is actually higher for the high starch grain sorghums and remains consistent with grain yield ranking, then next year for our field scale comparison we will choose either NC+ 5B89, if the conditions are dry and we plant late, or NC+ 7C22, if planting conditions are moisture and we plant early.

82

Table 1.-Internode Brix Reading Compared to Whole Stock Juice Brix Reading, Walsh, 2007._____________________________________________________________________________

-------------Internode------------ Whole ------------internode------------Hybrid 2 4 6 8 Stock 2 4 6 8_____________________________________________________________________________

--------------------%sugar-------------------- -----difference from actual-----BootSordan 79 7.6 8.0 6.4 7.8 8.0 -0.4 0.0 -1.6 -0.2HiKane II 7.2 7.6 6.0 6.2 7.2 0.0 0.4 -1.2 -1.0NB 305F 5.2 6.6 7.8 9.0 10.2 -5.0 -3.6 -2.4 -1.2NK 300 8.0 8.8 9.8 10.6 11.0 -3.0 -2.2 -1.2 -0.4Average 7.0 7.8 7.5 8.4 9.1 -2.1 -1.4 -1.6 -0.7

FloweringSordan 79 8.8 10.0 10.0 12.0 11.6 -2.8 -1.6 -1.6 0.4HiKane II 9.8 10.2 10.6 12.4 11.6 -1.8 -1.4 -1.0 0.8NB 305F 10.2 11.0 13.4 13.6 11.8 -1.6 -0.8 1.6 1.8NK 300 9.8 11.0 11.4 13.2 12.2 -2.4 -1.2 -0.8 1.0Average 7.2 7.8 8.5 9.5 8.8 -1.6 -1.0 -0.3 0.8

Early MilkSordan 79 10.8 10.8 12.6 14.2 13.0 -2.2 -2.2 -0.4 1.2HiKane II 12.6 11.8 12.0 13.0 13.0 -0.4 -1.2 -1.0 0.0NB 305F 16.4 15.6 19.2 20.8 19.2 -2.8 -3.6 0.0 1.6NK 300 12.2 12.6 15.2 15.0 15.8 -3.6 -3.2 -0.6 -0.8Average 13.0 12.7 14.8 15.8 15.3 -2.3 -2.6 -0.5 0.5

Late MilkSordan 79 9.2 10.4 11.8 16.4 13.8 -4.6 -3.4 -2.0 2.6HiKane II 8.6 9.0 11.8 12.2 11.8 -3.2 -2.8 0.0 0.4NB 305F 7.0 7.4 10.0 10.4 10.2 -3.2 -2.8 -0.2 0.2NK 300 12.8 13.4 15.2 15.4 15.4 -2.6 -2.0 -0.2 0.0Average 9.4 10.1 12.2 13.6 12.8 -3.4 -2.8 -0.6 0.8

BootTheis 11.2 11.2 11.8 14.8 13.0 -1.8 -1.8 -1.2 1.8Dale 11.4 13.8 16.8 17.2 15.0 -3.6 -1.2 1.8 2.2Topper 76 16.8 19.0 19.2 15.0 18.4 -1.6 0.6 0.8 -3.4M81E 13.8 14.8 15.0 15.2 16.2 -2.4 -1.4 -1.2 -1.0Average 13.3 14.7 15.7 15.6 15.7 -2.4 -0.9 0.0 -0.1

FloweringTheis 11.8 13.2 15.0 17.0 15.0 -3.2 -1.8 0.0 2.0Dale 14.4 17.6 20.8 20.4 19.0 -4.6 -1.4 1.8 1.4Average 13.1 15.4 17.9 18.7 17.0 -3.9 -1.6 0.9 1.7

Early MilkTheis 12.8 14.2 15.4 17.2 15.8 -3.0 -1.6 -0.4 1.4_____________________________________________________________________________Average 10.8 11.8 13.1 14.1 13.5 -2.7 -1.7 -0.4 0.6_____________________________________________________________________________

83

Forage and Sweet Sorghum Internode Stock Sugar Determination

y = 1.12x + 9.65R2 = 0.997

10

11

12

13

14

15

2 4 6 8Internode

% Sugar (Brix

Refractometer Reading)

Whole Stock Juice Reading

Fig. 1. Forage and sweet sorghum internode stock sugar determination. Average Brix readings (% sugar) of stock juice from four forage and four sweet sorghum hybrids were taken from boot to late milk at 2, 4, 6, and 8 internodes and compared to whole stock juice readings.

84

Table 2.-Dryland Forage and Sweet Sorghums, Single Plant Stock Juice Yield, Walsh, 2007.____________________________________________________________________________________

Single Theor.Plant Stock Potential Stock Theoretical

Hybrid/ Plant Stock Stock Juice Ethanol Juice EthanolBrand Variety Stage Density Juice Sugar Yield Yield Yield Yield____________________________________________________________________________________

plants/a ml % gal/a gal/a gal/a gal/aX1000

CornMycogen 2T801 Tassel 28.5 13 11 98 5.9 1178 71.3

Forage SorghumSorghum Partners Sordan 79 Boot 74.5 15 8 295 13.0 1696 74.6Sorghum Partners HiKane II Boot 74.5 23 7.2 453 17.9 1396 55.3(Check) NB 305F Boot 60.2 29 10.2 462 25.9 3065 172.0Sorghum Partners NK300 Boot 63.4 16 11 268 16.2 2629 159.1

Sweet SorghumMiss. State Univ. Theis Boot 44.4 60 13 704 50.3 3294 235.5Miss. State Univ. Dale Boot 57.0 81 15 1222 100.8 4603 379.8Miss. State Univ. Topper 76-6 Boot 50.7 44 18.4 590 59.7 4228 427.9Miss. State Univ. M81-E Pre Boot 44.4 31 16.2 364 32.4 3718 331.3

CornMycogen 2T801 Silk 31.7 19 11 159 9.6 2693 162.9

Forage SorghumSorghum Partners Sordan 79 Flower 61.8 15 11.6 245 15.6 1435 91.5Sorghum Partners HiKane II Flower 58.6 19 11.6 295 18.8 1918 122.4(Check) NB 305F Flower 55.4 66 11.8 968 62.8 3428 222.5Sorghum Partners NK300 Flower 64.9 39 12.2 670 45.0 3739 250.9

Sweet SorghumMiss. State Univ. Theis Flower 44.4 65 15 763 62.9 3529 291.2Miss. State Univ. Dale Flower 53.9 63 19 898 93.8 4557 476.2

CornMycogen 2T801 Early Milk 25.3 19 12.2 127 8.6 2147 144.1

Sorghum Partners Sordan 79 Early Milk 57.0 19 13 287 20.5 1505 107.6Sorghum Partners HiKane II Early Milk 53.9 32 13 456 35.6 2447 174.9(Check) NB 305F Early Milk 47.5 63 19.2 792 83.6 3221 340.2Sorghum Partners NK300 Early Milk 50.7 18 15.8 241 21.0 2083 181.0

Sweet SorghumMiss. State Univ. Theis Early Milk 41.2 55 15.8 599 52.1 4276 371.6

CornMycogen 2T801 Late Milk 23.8 33 11.2 207 12.8 2695 166.0

Forage SorghumSorghum Partners Sordan 79 Late Milk 50.7 18 13.8 241 18.3 1240 94.1Sorghum Partners HiKane II Late Milk 53.9 24 11.8 342 22.2 2532 164.3(Check) NB 305F Late Milk 55.4 41 10.2 601 33.7 2936 164.7Sorghum Partners NK300 Late Milk 53.9 24 15.4 342 29.0 3179 269.3____________________________________________________________________________________Average 51.2 35 13 470 35.9 2791 211.2

85

Table 3.-Dryland Forage and Sweet Sorghums, Silage and Stock Juice Yield, Walsh, 2007.__________________________________________________________________________________

Theor.Stock Potential Stock Theoretical

Hybrid/ Plant Stock Silage Juice Ethanol Juice EthanolBrand Variety Stage Density Sugar Yield Yield Yield Yield Yield__________________________________________________________________________________

plants/a % ton/a gal/a gal/a gal/a gal/aX1000

Forage SorghumSorghum Partners Sordan 79 ED 54.9 12.9 15.1 154 10.9 1935 137.3Sorghum Partners HiKane II ED 54.9 14.0 18.8 349 26.9 2119 163.2(Check) NB 305F ED 50.5 15.7 20.9 365 31.5 1912 165.1Sorghum Partners NK300 ED 48.1 14.0 16.0 122 9.4 1464 112.7

Sweet SorghumMiss. State Univ. Theis EM 41.3 16.0 17.2 290 25.5 2432 214.0Miss. State Univ. Dale FL 48.9 17.3 19.2 372 35.3 1995 189.8Miss. State Univ. Topper 76-6 BT 47.7 20.8 16.4 167 19.1 1865 213.3Miss. State Univ. M81-E Pre BT 47.3 15.2 16.9 173 14.5 2358 197.1

__________________________________________________________________________________Average 49.2 15.7 17.6 249 21.6 2010 174.1LSD 0.20 0.84 2.82 66.4 5.73 333.1 28.76__________________________________________________________________________________Planted: June 5 at 69.7 seeds/a x 1000. Harvest Area: 21.75 ft. x 2.5 ft.Stage: Pre BT, pre boot; BT, boot; FL, flowering; EM, early milk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough.Silage Yield was adjusted to 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.

86

Table 4.-Dryland Forage and Sweet Sorghums, Parameters and Constants for Silage Estimate, 2007.___________________________________________________________________________________

Measured Measured Developmental Measured EstimatedSorghum Developmental Parameters Silage Stage Parameters Class Silage

Class Stage Product Yield Constant Product Constant Yield___________________________________________________________________________________

tons/a tons/a

SS Boot 1427.3 11.74 0.008225 1427.3 0.007838 11.19SS Flower 1676.1 10.08 0.006014 1676.1 0.007838 13.14SS Early Milk 1297.6 10.88 0.008385 1297.6 0.007838 10.17SS Late Milk 1261.6 11.01 0.008727 1261.6 0.007838 9.89

Average SS 1415.7 10.93 0.007838 1415.7 0.007838 11.10

FS Boot 1187.4 11.86 0.01042 1187.4 0.01057 12.55FS Flower 1475.9 14.09 0.00967 1475.9 0.01057 15.6FS Early Milk 1310.7 13.66 0.01042 1310.7 0.01057 13.85FS Late Milk 1341.2 15.63 0.01178 1341.2 0.01057 14.18

Average FS 1328.8 13.81 0.01057 1328.8 0.01057 14.05

SW Boot 1663.4 11.49 0.007013 1663.4 0.006231 10.37SW Flower 1883.5 10.6 0.005611 1883.5 0.006231 11.74SW Early Milk 2061.4 12.51 0.006069 2061.4 0.006231 12.84

Average SW 1869.4 11.53 0.006231 1869.4 0.006231 11.65___________________________________________________________________________________Sorghum Class: SS, Sorghum X Sudan Grass; FS, Forage Sorghum; SW, Sweet Sorghum.Measured Parameters: sixth internode diameter (in.) x stock count (11ft of one row, 2.5ft. x 11ft.); xplant height (in.).Silage Yield: tons/a at 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.

87

Table 5.--Dryland Forage Sorghum Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007. \1_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Days Days Stage \3 Yield %Forage to to 50% Harvest Plant at Stem Plant Forage of Test

Brand Hybrid Type \2 Emerg Bloom Density Ht. Harvest Sugar Lodg Yield Avg._________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Plants/A In. % % Tons/A %(1000 X)

(Check) NB 305F FS 9 80 33.3 85 SD 15 0 14.0 120PIONEER Pioneer Brand 849F FS 8 79 36.0 81 SD 6 0 13.6 116SORGHUM PARTNERS NK300 FS 7 80 39.9 51 SD 7 0 13.1 112SORGHUM PARTNERS HIKANE II FS 8 74 46.5 81 HD 9 2 12.5 107MISS. STATE UNIV. M81-E FS 8 Veg 37.6 76 Veg 10 4 12.4 106MISS. STATE UNIV. Topper 76-6 FS 9 Veg 41.8 109 BT 14 3 12.3 105MISS. STATE UNIV. Dale FS 9 111 42.2 81 FL 18 0 11.4 98MISS. STATE UNIV. Theis FS 9 107 34.9 100 PM 15 3 9.7 83

SORGHUM PARTNERS Sordan 79 SS 8 73 36.8 91 MT 10 4 11.2 96

MYCOGEN 2T801 Corn 6 68 29.0 78 HD 15 0 6.7 57_________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average FS 8 84 37.8 83 LM 12 2 11.7LSD 0.20 1.16_________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted: June 5; Harvested: October 2.\2 Forage Type: FS, Forage Sorghum; SS, Sorghum Sudangrass.\3 Harvest Stage: Veg, vegetative; BT, boot; FL, flowering; PM, premilk; EM, early milk; MM, midmilk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough; MT, mature.Forage Yield adjusted to 70% moisture content based on oven-dried sample.

88

Table 6.--Dryland Grain Sorghum Hybrid Performance Test at Walsh, 2007. \1__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Yield %Days to 50% Bloom 50% Mature Plant Harvest Plants Test Grain of Test

Brand Hybrid Emerge DAP GDD DAP Group Ht. Density Lodged Wt. Yield Average__________________________________________________________________________________________________________

in plants/a % lb/bu bu/a %(1000 X)

ASGROW Pulsar 9 64 1683 105 E 41 24.4 0 61 63 108NC+ NC+ 5B89 8 65 1712 103 E 41 27.1 0 62 62 105DEKALB DKS29-28 9 62 1624 100 E 38 27.9 0 61 61 104NC+ NC+ 5C35 7 61 1592 98 E 38 22.5 0 60 55 93SORGHUM PARTNERS KS310 7 66 1743 104 E 39 29.0 0 61 54 92SORGHUM PARTNERS X303 8 61 1592 99 E 39 27.5 0 62 50 86SORGHUM PARTNERS 251 8 54 1401 92 E 35 30.2 0 60 50 86

SORGHUM PARTNERS NK5418 8 69 1845 107 ME/M 38 26.3 0 61 72 123NC+ NC+ 7C22 8 70 1879 109 ME 43 29.4 0 62 66 112DEKALB DKS37-07 9 72 1944 112 ME 41 24.4 0 62 62 105DEKALB DK44 8 71 1914 111 ME/M 40 21.7 0 61 61 104SORGHUM PARTNERS NK4420 9 72 1944 112 ME 38 27.9 0 62 61 103NC+ NC+ Y363 8 69 1845 107 ME 42 25.2 0 61 60 103DEKALB DKS36-16 8 68 1810 107 ME 40 30.2 0 62 60 102

NC+ NC+ 6B50 9 80 2191 122 M 42 27.9 0 60 61 104

(Check) 399 X 2737 8 83 2267 126 ML 38 25.9 0 59 42 71__________________________________________________________________________________________________________Average 8 68 1812 107 ME 40 26.7 0 61 59LSD 0.20 4.1__________________________________________________________________________________________________________\1 Planted: June 5; Harvested: October 29, 2007.Yields are corrected to 14.0% seed moisture content.DAP: Days After Planting or maturation of seed at first freeze.Seed Maturation: EM, early milk; MM, mid milk; LM, late milk; ED, early dough; SD, soft dough; HD, hard dough; mature (DAP).GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum.Maturity Group: E, early; ME, medium early; M, medium; ML, medium late; L, late.

89

Maximizing Sugar Extraction from Sweet Sorghum Stocks Neil Larson

Maximizing sugar extraction from sweet sorghum stocks is the first step in determining the efficacy of ethanol production from the stock juice of sweet sorghums. On an experimental scale, we have attempted to extract stock juice with a manual cane press. This method proved to be labor intensive and low yielding. Less than 17% of the theoretical stock juice was extracted with this hand-milling method. The purpose of this study was to identify a simple, yet thorough, small-scale stock sugar extraction method. Materials and Methods We hand harvested about 20 plants of the sweet sorghum variety Theis at the flowering stage. After stripping the leaves and topping the heads, the stocks were first chopped then shredder in a portable chipper/shredder. We hand-stirred the chopped stock to make it a uniform mixture. For each treatment, we weighed 1000 g of chopped stocks to which we added 2000 ml of water. The four treatments we used to extract the sugar were: 1) water, 2) water at pH 3, 3) water heated to 80 oC, and 4) water at pH 3 and heated to 80 oC. N-phuric acid was used to lower the water and chopped stock mixtures to pH 3. All treatments were held at their respected states for 30 min., then the samples were poured into a fruit press and the juice was expelled with 479 Pa (10 lb/ft.2) of torque. After pressing the chopped stocks, another 2000 ml of water was added and the treatments were repeated for two more runs. All treatments and runs were repeated two times. For each treatment run, the pressed juice was weighed, volume measured, and a % sugar reading was taken with a hand-held Brix refractometer. Total available stock sugar (theoretical sugar extraction) is all the sugar in the juice in the stock. The juice in the stock is comprised of water and sugar. To determine the % sugar in the stock, we hand milled a whole stock with a cane press and took a % sugar reading of the milled juice with a hand-held Brix refractometer. To determine total water in the stock, we weighed two fresh plants, stripped the leaves and removed the heads, and weighed the leaves, heads, and stocks separately. We oven-dried the leaves, heads, and stocks at 100 oC for three days. We weighed the oven-dried samples to determine dry weighs. The total amount of water in the stock is the fresh weight minus the dry weight. The total stock sugar is the total water weight multiplied by the % sugar of the stock juice. Results The water at pH 3 and heated to 80 oC combination treatment produced the highest amount of sugar extracted from 1000 g of chopped sweet sorghum stocks, 163.6 g of sugar after three runs (Table 1). After three runs, the water only treatment was the only treatment that did not surpass the theoretical sugar extraction level (Fig. 1). More than 95% of the theoretical sugar extraction and over 80% of the maximum sugar extraction were obtained on the first run by heating the water and chopped stocks to 80 oC for 30 min. These sugar extraction rates increase to over 94% of the maximum sugar extraction when fresh water is added to the chopped stocks and heated to 80 oC again. There was a 2 to 4% sugar extraction increase by lowering the water and

90

chopped stocks to pH 3. Sugar extracted from the third run for all the treatments ranged from 3.6 to 7.1% of the maximum sugar extraction. Discussion All the stock sugar extraction treatments we tested far exceeded the rates obtained by milling whole stocks with a manual cane press. The average juice extraction with a manual cane press was only about 17% of the theoretical juice extraction rate. Since over 94% of the maximum sugar was extracted after two runs of heating the water and chopped stocks, this treatment would be a good choice for sugar extraction on a small scale. We do not believe that it was worth the time, trouble, and expense for the slight sugar extraction gained by lowering the water and chopped stocks to pH 3. Acknowledgement I would like to thank my father, Kevin Larson, for his guidance and assistance on this project.

91

Table 1.-Sugar Extraction from Chopped Stocks of Sweet Sorghum var. Theis._______________________________________________________________

Rep. 1 Rep. 2 AverageSugar Sugar Sugar Sugar Sugar SugarExtraction Extraction from 1.0kg from 1.0kg from 1.0kg % ofTreatment Run of Stocks of Stocks of Stocks Maximum_______________________________________________________________

g g g %

Water First 105.9 96.3 101.1 61.80Water Second 18.7 30.2 24.4 14.93Water Third 3.9 11.8 7.8 4.80Total 128.5 138.3 133.4 81.53

Water pH 3 First 108.2 97.8 103.0 62.95Water pH 3 Second 27.1 31.0 29.1 17.77Water pH 3 Third 8.0 15.3 11.7 7.13Total 143.3 144.1 143.7 87.85

Water 80oC First 140.4 124.5 132.5 80.97Water 80oC Second 20.9 22.7 21.8 13.31Water 80oC Third 1.8 10.1 5.9 3.62Total 163.1 157.2 160.2 97.90

Water 80oC & pH 3 First 139.8 122.3 131.0 80.11Water 80oC & pH 3 Second 20.7 29.3 25.0 15.27Water 80oC & pH 3 Third 1.7 13.4 7.6 4.62Total 162.3 164.9 163.6 100.00

Theoretical Sugar Extraction 140.2 135.2 137.7 84.17_______________________________________________________________Stocks (without leaves and heads) of sweet sorghum var. Theis were first chopped then shredded with a with a portable shredder/chopper.The first treatment runs started with 1.0kg of chopped stocks and 2.0L of cleanwater, held for 30 min., and pressed with a fruit press.All subsequent runs for a treatment were repeated with the same choppedstocks and 2.0L of clean water.Juice extractions (sugar) were read with a handheld refractometer.Theoretical Sugar Extraction is stock moisture (from an oven-dried freshweight sample) plus sugar content (from refractometer reading of stock juicemilled by a cane press.)

92

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

���������������������������������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

����������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������

���������������������������������������������

Sugar Extraction from Sweet Sorghum Stocks

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

160.0

180.0

Water Water pH 3 Water 80C Water 80C& pH3

Sugar Extraction Treatment

Sugar Extraction(g of sugar

from 1.0kg of stocks)

����������������

Theoretical Sugar Extraction

Run 3Run 2Run 1

Fig. 1 .Sugar extraction from sweet sorghum stocks. The sweet sorghum hybrid was Theis, which was hand-harvested at flowering. Stocks, without leaves and heads, were chopped then shredded. Two liters of water was added to each 1000g sample of shredded stocks. Each treatment run was held for 30 min. and then juice was removed with a fruit press. Theoretical Sugar Extraction was determined by adding total stock water weight (fresh weight – oven-dried weight) and total stock sugar (total stock water weight x % stock sugar from Brix reading of hand-press stocks).

93

Dryland Grain Sorghum Planting Date and Maturation Study, 2007 Kevin Larson and Dennis Thompson

Each growing season grain sorghum producers are confronted with the same planting management decision: what is the best maturity class to use for my date of planting? An incorrect decision can be costly. Choosing the wrong maturity class for your planting date can result in poor yields and low test weights. In this study, we tested the effects of six planting dates on four grain sorghum hybrids representing four maturity classes. The results of this study should help sorghum growers with their planting dilemma, when to switch to a different maturity class and what maturity class to use. Materials and Methods We chose four grain sorghum hybrids to represent four maturity classes: Pioneer 87G57 for early (E), Asgrow Pulsar for medium early/early (ME/E), Sorghum Partners NK 5418 for medium early (ME), and Triumph TR 442 for medium early medium (ME/M). We planted all four hybrids at 40,000 seeds/a weekly throughout the prime sorghum planting window. The six planting dates were: PD1, May 25; PD2, June 1; PD3, June 8; PD4, June 15; PD5, June 22; and PD6, June 29. The study site was planted no-till into wheat stubble. For pre-emergence weed control, we applied Glystar 24 oz/a, 2,4-D LoVol 0.5 lb/a and Atrazine 1.0 lb/a. For post emergence weed control, we applied Banvel 4 oz/a and 2,4-D amine 10 oz/a. The entire site was fertilized with 50 lb N/a. The study was harvested on November 2 with a self-propelled combine equipped with a digital scale. Results and Discussion The June 15 planting date produced the highest average yield of 64 bu/a. Yields remained relatively high for the first four planting dates, and then plummeted precipitously for the last two planting dates. The yield order of the planting dates was June 15 > June 8 = June 1 = May 25 >> June 22 >> June 29. There average yield difference of 18 bu/a between June 15 and June 22 planting dates suggests that the optimum sorghum-planting window is narrower than expected. Switching from ME to ME/E reduces this yield drop, but the yield reduction is still quite large.

The medium early hybrid, Sorghum Partners NK 5418, had the highest yield for five out of six planting dates. This ME hybrid performed better than expected throughout the planting window. We expected the E and ME/E hybrids to be the top yielding hybrids with the later planting dates, and at PD5 the ME/E hybrid did edge out the ME hybrid for highest yield; nonetheless, we were surprised by the performance of the ME hybrid at the later planting dates. One maturity class, ME, one hybrid, Sorghum Partners NK 5418, dominated throughout our sorghum-planting window. This year, choosing the correct maturity class to maximize yields throughout our sorghum-planting window was simple, the medium early hybrid.

94

Table .Dryland Grain Sorghum Planting Date and Maturation Study, 2007.___________________________________________________________

Planting Maturity Flowering Maturity Test GrainDate Class Date Date Weight Yield

___________________________________________________________lb/bu bu/a

May 25 ME 6-Aug 13-Sep 61 63ME/E 1-Aug 12-Sep 61 58

E 28-Jul 5-Sep 60 57ME/M 12-Aug 20-Sep 61 52

June 1 ME 8-Aug 16-Sep 61 69ME/M 16-Aug 23-Sep 60 58ME/E 4-Aug 15-Sep 62 57

E 1-Aug 8-Sep 61 56

June 8 ME 12-Aug 21-Sep 60 68ME/E 8-Aug 22-Sep 61 64

E 5-Aug 12-Sep 61 59ME/M 20-Aug 23-Sep 60 54

June 15 ME 16-Aug 27-Sep 61 71E 10-Aug 15-Sep 60 64

ME/E 12-Aug 28-Sep 61 64ME/M 25-Aug 3-Oct 60 59

June 22 ME/E 18-Aug 30-Sep 61 51ME 21-Aug 1-Oct 60 48E 15-Aug 20-Sep 60 43

ME/M 30-Aug 8-Oct 58 40

June 29 ME 30-Aug 13-Oct 56 43E 24-Aug 1-Oct 58 38

ME/E 27-Aug 14-Oct 56 35ME/M 6-Sep 17-Oct 54 35

___________________________________________________________Average 14-Aug 24-Sep 60 54LSD 0.20 7.2___________________________________________________________Planted: 30 in. row spacing, 40,000 seeds/a; Harvested: November 2, 2007.Maturity Class: E, early (Pioneer 87G57); ME/E, medium early/early(Asgrow Pulsar); ME, medium early (Sorghum Partners NK 5418); ME/M,medium early/medium (Triumph TR 442).

95

Dryland Grain Sorghum, Planting Date and MaturationWalsh, 2007

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

25-May 1-Jun 8-Jun 15-Jun 22-Jun 2Planting Date

Grain Yield (bu/a @ 14.0%)

9-Jun

EME/EMEME/M

Fig. . Dryland grain sorghum planting date and maturation study at Walsh. The six planting dates were: May 25, June 1, June 8, June 15, June 22, and June 29. Maturity groups and hybrids used were: E, early (Pioneer 87G57); ME/E, medium early/early (Asgrow Pulsar); ME, medium early (Sorghum Partners NK 5418); and ME/M, medium early medium (Triumph TR 442).

96

Table .Dryland Grain Sorghum Planting Date and Maturation Summary, 2007._____________________________________________________________

Flowering Maturity Flowering Test GrainDate Date to Maturity Weight Yield

_____________________________________________________________lb/bu bu/a

Planting Date June 15 16-Aug 26-Sep 41 61 64 June 8 11-Aug 20-Sep 40 61 61 June 1 7-Aug 16-Sep 40 61 60 May 25 4-Aug 13-Sep 40 61 58 June 22 21-Aug 30-Sep 40 60 46 June 29 30-Aug 11-Oct 42 56 38

Planting Date Average 41 60 54LSD 0.20 3.6

Maturity ClassME 16-Aug 25-Sep 40 60 60ME/E 12-Aug 25-Sep 44 60 55E 8-Aug 15-Sep 38 60 53ME/M 23-Aug 1-Oct 39 59 50

Maturity Class Average 40 60 54LSD 0.20 3.4_____________________________________________________________Planted: 30 in. rows, 40,000 seeds/a; Harvested: November 2, 2007.Maturity Class: E, early ( Pioneer 87G57); ME/E, medium early/early(Asgrow Pulsar); ME, medium early (Sorghum Partners NK 5418);ME/M, medium early/medium (Triumph TR 442).

97

Long-Term, Low-Rate, Seedrow P on Dryland Grain Sorghum Kevin Larson, Dennis Thompson and Calvin Thompson

Banding P fertilizer with the seed at planting (seedrow placement) has proven to be a very effective P fertilizing method for dryland grain sorghum in the high lime, high alkaline soils of Southeastern Colorado. For these alkaline soils, the P fertilizer of choice for seedrow placement is liquid 10-34-0. The most common seedrow P rate for dryland grain sorghum is 5 gal/a of 10-34-0, which contains 20 lb P2O5 and 6 lb N/a. High rates of seedrow N are reported to cause N salt toxicity, which lowers germination (Mortvedt, 1976). Seedrow N rates higher than 6 lb N/a (the amount found in 5 gal 10-34-0/A) on 30 in. row spacing grain sorghum decreases stand and yield; however, a low, nontoxic level of seedrow N increases yields (Larson, Schweissing, and Thompson, 2000). This is the fourth crop year of our long-term study testing low seedrow P rates to determine if low rates applied on the same site for multiple years will maintain high grain sorghum yields. Materials and Methods

We tested four rates of poly ammoniated phosphate (10-34-0) fertilizer banded with the grain sorghum seed (seedrow applied) on 30 in. row spacing in an alkaline Silty Loam soil. The four rates were 0, 1.25, 2.5, and 5.0 gallons of 10-34-0/a, corresponding to 0, 5, 10, and 20 lb P2O5/a (5 gal. of 10-34-0/a is the highest seedrow applied rate recommended for grain sorghum on 30 in. row spacing). The fertilizer was applied with a squeeze pump at 5 gal/A and all fertilizer rates were diluted with water to their appropriate levels. These seedrow P treatments were applied to the same plot site for all four years of the study. The study was design as a continuous grain sorghum rotation; however, dry weather prevented planting during 2002, 2004, and 2006. Therefore, the study resembled a sorghum-fallow rotation because of the dry years. The first year of this study we sampled the soil at six random locations at 0 to 8 in. (surface) and 8 to 24 in. (subsurface) depths. The soil was sent to Colorado State University Soil Testing Lab for analysis. The soil P level using AB-DTPA test was 0.9 ppm with 1.2% organic matter and a pH of 8.0. For the first year, the grain sorghum hybrid was CARGILL 627 planted at 40,000 seed/a on June 7, 2001. For the second year and third years, the grain sorghum hybrid was MYCOGEN 1482 planted at 40,000 seed/a on June 17, 2003 or June 15, 2005. For the four cropping year, we planted PIONEER 86G08 at 40,000 seed/a on June 8, 2007. We harvested the 10 ft. by 500 ft. plots from early October to mid November with a self-propelled combine with a four-row crop header, and we weighed the grain in a digital scale cart. Grain yields were adjusted to 14% seed moisture content. Results and Discussion In a previous study, we found that 10-34-0 when seedrow applied at rates higher than 5 gal/a to 30 in. row grain sorghum lowered plant stands and grain yields (Larson, Schweissing, and Thompson, 2000). The first year of our long-term, low-rate seedrow P study (2001) there was no yield increase to increasing seedrow P rates. The check, without seedrow applied P fertilizer, produced the highest yield. There was even a slight trend of reduced yields with increasing seedrow P rates (r2 = 0.561). The low

98

coefficient of determination (r2) indicates a random yield response to seedrow applied P. For the second crop year (2003), all seedrow P treatments produced higher yields than the no P check. There was a significant trend toward an optimum seedrow P rate of around 10 lb P2O5/a (P > 0.10). For the third crop year (2005), there was a linear trend of increasing yield with increasing seedrow P rates (P > 0.10). For the third crop year, the highest yield occurred at the highest P rate, 20 lb P2O5/a. For the fourth crop year, the yield response was quite flat with a slight trend toward a low optimum P rate of 5 lb P2O5/a. Results from this study suggest that applying the same P rates to the same plots provides high grain sorghum yields for two crop years with applied P rates less than 10 lb P2O5/a. We found that the first crop year no seedrow P was needed, the second crop year the optimum rate was around 10 lb P2O5/a, the third crop year the highest seedrow rate tested, 20 lb P2O5/a, produced the highest grain sorghum yields, and the fourth crop was unresponsive to increasing P rate. For the first three crop years of this study, there was an increase in yield response to applied P rates. The lack of response to P rates this year did not contribute to our understanding of the effects of long-term, low-rate P rates on grain sorghum yield. One of the objectives of this study was to determine how long low rates of seedrow P could maintain high grain sorghum yields. We were able to maintain high sorghum crop yields for two crop years with seedrow P rates less than 10 lb P2O5/a. For the third crop year, the yields increased with P rates with the highest P rate, 20 lb P2O5/a, producing the highest yield. The lack of response for the fourth crop year did not clarify if low P rates could maintain high yields. The response this year was undecided. The efficacy of low P seedrow rates obtained from the first two crop years indicates that low P rates are effective, at least in the short term. More P is removed with grain than is added from rates below 20 lb P2O5/a level: a 40 bu/a sorghum grain crop removes about 18 lb P2O5/a (extrapolated from Leonard and Martin, 1963). Since more P is removed with grain than is added using these low P rates, after three crop years it required the highest P rate tested, 20 lb P2O5/a, to produce the highest yield. We will continue this study to see if low P rates will maintain high yields, or if yields will increase with the highest seedrow P rate tested. Literature Cited Larson, K.J., F.C. Schweissing, D.L. Thompson. 2000. Sorghum hybrid performance tests in Colorado, 1999. Technical Report TR00-1. AES, Dept. of Soil and Crop Sciences, CSU. 47p. Leonard, W. H. and J. H. Martin. 1963. Cereal Crops. MacMillan Publishing Co., New York, New York. pp. 789-791. Mortvedt, J. J. 1976. Band fertilizer placement - how much and how close? Fert. Solns. 20(6): 90-96.

99

Long Term Seedrow P Rates on Grain SorghumFirst, Second, Third, and Forth Crops

2001, 2003, 2005, and 2007

y = -1.01x + 75.7R2 = 0.5612001

2003y = -2.18x2 + 11.89x + 53.98R2 = 0.836

2005y = 0.81x + 49.4R2 = 0.909

2007y = -0.65x2 + 2.75x + 54.5R2 = 0.290

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

0 5 10 20P Rate (lb P2O5/a)

Grain Yield (bu/a @ 14% MC)

2001

2003

2005

2007

Fig. . Grain yield from three crop years of long term, low seedrow P rates on a dryland

grain sorghum-fallow rotation at Walsh. The P rates were applied to the same plots all four crop years: 2001, 2003, 2005, and 2007.

100

Skip-Row Planting and Seeding Rate Comparison for Dryland Corn and Grain Sorghum Production

Kevin Larson and Dennis Thompson Skip-row planting is an old idea that is being revitalized for dryland row crop production in the drier areas of the High Plains. The two main advantages of skip-row planting compared to solid planting are reported to be late-season water availability from water stored in the skip-row (Klein et al., 2005) and less input costs (Jost and Brown, 2001). Another approach for increasing late-season water availability is planting density manipulation. Adjusting the seeding rate to the moisture conditions may be as effective as skip-row planting for increasing late-season water availability. In this study, we compared skip-row planting to seeding rate to see which approach is most effective for increasing grain yield under dry conditions. Materials and Methods All sites were planted no-till into wheat stubble. Our four skip-row pattern treatments were: 1) all rows planted (sorghum, 23,600 plants/a; corn, 14,400 plants/a), 2) skip row/plant row (sorghum, pattern not used; corn, 7,200 plants/a low rate and 16,800 plants/a high rate), 3) skip row/plant two rows (sorghum, 17,200 plants/a low rate and 24,500 plants/a high rate; corn, 9,000 plants/a low rate and 15,500 plants/a high rate), and 4) skip two/plant two (sorghum, 12,400 plants/a low rate and 23,300 plants/a high rate; corn, 7,200 plants/a low rate and 11,600 plants/a high rate). We planted the skip-row corn study with an eight-row vacuum planter, and we use a four-row cone planter (spinner-distributor planter) to plant the grain sorghum. Adjacent to the skip-row corn study, we planted a corn seeding rate study with a four-row cone planter. The corn seeding rates were: 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 seeds/a x 1000. We planted the corn hybrid, Mycogen 2E762, on May 10 and the grain sorghum hybrid, Pioneer 86G08, on June 12. We applied N at 50 lb/a and we seedrow applied P at 20 lb P2O5/a and 0.25 lb Zn/a to the grain sorghum and corn studies. For preplant weed control, we sprayed Glystar Plus at 24 oz/a, 2,4-D at 0.5 lb/a, and Atrazine 1.0 lb/a to both the corn and grain sorghum sites, and for post emergence control we applied Roundup Weather Max at 24 oz/a to the corn site, and Banvel 4 oz/a and 2,4-D amine 8 oz/a for post emergence control on the grain sorghum site. We harvested the grain sorghum on November 7 and the corn on October 15 with a self-propelled combine equipped with a digital scale. Grain yields were adjusted to 14% seed moisture for grain sorghum and 15.5% seed moisture for corn. Results and Discussion

The yields of the corn and grain sorghum skip-row studies were very good with the corn averaging 49 bu/a and the sorghum averaging 65 bu/a. There was no benefit from skip row planting for grain sorghum: the all rows planted treatment produced significantly more than any of the skip row patterns. Furthermore, the skip row patterns allowed weeds to flourish in the skipped areas of the grain sorghum, negating the water stored in these fallow areas. Until there are herbicides available to control weeds in the skip row areas, planting grain sorghum in skip row patterns is not recommended.

101

The corn skip one row/plant two rows pattern at the low seeding rate of 9,000 plants/a produced the highest yield, although it was only significantly higher than two other treatments: the skip one/plant two rows pattern at the high seeding rate (15,500 plants/a) and the skip two/plant two pattern at the low seeding rate (7,200 plants/a). The results of the corn study can partially be explained by the results from the seeding rate study. Overall, the seeding rate study produced a higher average yield than the skip row study. The optimum plant density for the seeding rate study was 11,800 plants/a, which produced nearly 70 bu/a. If the skip row patterns had planting densities closer to the optimum, the yields of the top two patterns would potentially increase. Increasing the plant density of the skip one/plant two rows treatment by 2,800 plants/a, and decreasing the all planted rows by 2,600 plants/a may potentially increase their yields by 12.7 bu/a and 11.4 bu/a, respectively. The nonsignificant difference between the skip one/plant two rows pattern and the plant all rows pattern suggests that using skip row planting patterns will not increase yields, especially when optimum plant densities are used.

The yield difference between the skip row study and the seeding rate study was not due entirely to treatment differences, the planter used contributed some of the yield difference because of the uniformity of seed placement. The vacuum planter, used for the skip-row study, provided uniform placement of seeds; whereas, the cone planter, used for the seeding rate study, had varying seed spacing. The non-uniform seed spacing from the cone planter was especially evident at low seeding densities. The effect of seed spacing uniformity on grain yield is apparent when comparing all rows planted at the same seeding rate for both the vacuum and cone planters. Ideally, since these are the same treatment using only different planters, they should have very similar yields. This is not the case. The cone planter with its non-uniform seed spacing produced higher yield than the vacuum planter with uniform seed spacing. The higher yields with non-uniform spacing suggest that clustering or clumping of seeds may be beneficial under dryland conditions. Recent studies reported that clumping of seeds under dry, low yielding conditions produced higher yield than uniform seed spacing (Steward, 2006).

Skip-row planting is not a new idea. For many years, cotton growers in Texas have used skip-row to take advantage of government programs. The skip-row area was considered set-aside acres and only the cotton in the planted rows was counted as production acres. This has caused a potential insurance problem with skip-row plantings for other row crops because only 20 inches on each side of the planted row is considered planted area (Little, 2002). Only the crop area that is considered planted is insurable; therefore, insurance coverage is dependent on growers’ skip-row planting patterns. With an alternate skip row pattern on 40 in. rows, only 50% of the field is considered planted and insurable. Recent rulings may change the insurability of skip-row plantings; therefore, before planting row crops in a skip-row pattern, we recommend that growers consult with their FSA office for further details on this issue. Literature Cited Jost, P.H. and S.M. Brown. March 2001. Skip row cotton – a cost savings concept. Georgia Cotton Newsletter, March 28, 2001. http://www.griffin.peachnet.edu/caes/cotton/cnl32801.pdf.

102

Klein, R.N., J.A. Golus, D. Baltensperger, R. Elmore, S. Knezevic, D. Lyon, S. Mason, L. Nelson, A. Pavlista, A.J. Schlegel, C. Shapiro, and M. Vigil. November 9, 2005. Skip-row corn for improved drought tolerance in rainfed corn. (Presentation and handout) Presented at the ASA-CSSA-SSSA International Annual Meetings (Noverber 6-10, 2005), Salt Lake City, Utah. http://crops.confex.com/crops/2005am/techprogram/P3948.htm. Little, J. (Signed). December, 2002. Skip row and strip crops. EPA Federal Register, December, 2002. www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2002/December/Day-03/i30702.htm. Steward, B.A. June, 2006. Growing dryland crops in clumps: what are the benefits? Presented at the Southern Conservation Systems Conference, Amarillo, TX, June 26-28, 2006. http://www.ag.auburn.edu/aux/nsdl/sctcsa/Proceedings/2006/steward.pdf.

103

Table .-Dryland Grain Sorghum, Skip Row Patterns and Seeding Rates, 2007._____________________________________________________________Skip Row Seeding Plant Plants to Test Seed GrainPattern Rate Density Seed Ratio Weight Moisture Yield_____________________________________________________________

-plant seeds/a plants/A lb/bu % bu/aX-skip x1000 x1000

36 23.6 0.656 61 9.4 81

X 36 24.5 0.681 61 11.5 75

X 27 17.2 0.637 61 11.5 61

X X 36 23.3 0.647 60 11.3 54

X X 18 12.4 0.689 61 11.9 53

Average 31 20.2 0.662 61 11.1 65LSD 0.05 4.3_____________________________________________________________Planted: June 12, Pioneer 86G08; Harvested: November 7, 2007.

104

Table .Dryland Corn, Skip Row and Plant DensityStudy, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, 2007._______________________________________

Skip Row Plant Test Grain Pattern Density Weight Yield

_______________________________________ - plant plants/a lb/bu bu/a

X - skip X 1000

x X X 9.0 58 53.6

14.4 57 51.9

XX XX 11.6 58 51.6

X X X X 7.2 58 49.3

X X X X 16.8 57 48.5

x X X 15.5 56 45.5

XX XX 7.2 59 40.5_______________________________________Average 11.7 58 48.7LSD 0.20 7.75_______________________________________Planted: May 10, Mycogen 2E762 on 30 in. rows.Harvested: October 15, 2007.Grain Yield adjusted to 15.5% moisture content.

105

Dryland Corn Seeding DensityWalsh, 2007

y = -0.47x2 + 11.47x - 0.53R2 = 0.938** (Plant Density)

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

6(5.3)

8(6.7)

10(8.4)

12(10.9)

14(11.8)

16(13.0)

18(14.7)

20(15.7)

Seeding Density, seed/a X 1000 (Plant Density, seed/a X 1000)

Grain Yield (bu/a @ 15.5%)

Fig. .Dryland corn seeding rate at Walsh. The eight seeding rates were 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 Seeds/A X 1000. The corn hybrid was Mycogen 2E762 planted on May 16.

106

Limited Sprinkler Irrigation Corn Study at Walsh, 2007 COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation; K. Larson, D. Thompson, D. Harn, C. Thompson, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify corn hybrids that produce highest yields given sprinkler limited irrigation. RESULTS: Of the 20 hybrids tested, Four Star Seed 6573RRYGPL and NK Brand NX7186 were the highest yielding hybrids with 174 bu/a. For this limited irrigation trial, we applied 21 in./a of water, 11 in./a more than our normal limited irrigation corn study, because we received less than half of our average growing season moisture. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, at least 600’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 26,000 Seeds/A. PLANTED: May 3. HARVESTED: October 22. IRRIGATION: Fourteen sprinkler rotations applied 21.0 a-in/a of total water. PEST CONTROL: Pre Herbicides: Balance 2.0 oz/a, Atrazine 1.0 lb/a, Glystar Plus 24 oz/a, LoVol 0.5 lb/a; Post Herbicides: Banvel 8 oz/a, Accent 0.67 oz/a. CULTIVATION: None. INSECTICIDE: None. FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Grain Sorghum. FIELD PREPARATION: Sweep plow.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------No. of Days-------- May 0.73 405 0 0 28 June 1.26 609 11 0 58 July 1.59 919 22 2 89 August 0.97 909 26 10 120 September 0.91 621 14 1 150 October 0.07 306 2 0 172 Total 5.53 3769 75 13 172 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from May 3 (planting) to October 22 (first freeze, 30 F). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

COMMENTS: Planted in good moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, less than half of average seasonal moisture. The nonresistant corn borer hybrid had relatively high amounts of stock holes and lodging from second-generation corn borer larvae. Grain yields were very good, despite the dry season. SOIL: Silty Clay Loam for 0-8” and Silty Clay Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis. Summary: Soil Analysis from Sprinkler Site. ____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe ____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------PPM---------------- 0-8” 7.6 0.4 2.2 10 3.1 451 0.6 3.9 8”-24” 9 Comment Alka VLo Hi Mod VLo VHi Lo Marg ____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization for Sprinkler Site. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------Lb/A------------------ Recommended 85 40 2.0 0 Applied 150 20 0.3 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 145 bu/a. Actual Yield: 164 bu/a.

107

�������������������������������������������������

�������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������ ������� ������� ������ ������ ������ ������� ������� ������ ������ ������ �������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

������������

�������������� ������� ������ ������ ������ ������� ������� ������ ������ ������ �������

��������������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

������������������������

������������������������������

������������

������� ��������������

������������ ������ ������ ������� ������� ������ ������ ������ �������

�������������������������������������������������

��������������������������������������������������������

������

������������������������������������������������

������������������������������������������

�������

������������������������������������������������� ������ ������

������������������

�������������������������������������������������

��������������

������������

������������

������������

��������������

Available Soil WaterLimited Sprinkler Irrigated Corn, Walsh, 2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22Weeks After Planting

Available Soil Water

(in. of water/4 ft. soil depth)

��������������������

Silking &Irrigation

Irrigation Irrigation

Depth 1 ft.Depth 2 ft.Depth 3 ft.Depth 4 ft.

Fig. . Available soil water in limited sprinkler irrigation corn at Walsh. Gypsum block measurements taken to 4 ft. with 1 ft. increments. Total rainfall at Walsh from planting to first freeze was 5.53 in. Any increase in available soil water between weeks not attributed to applied irrigation is from rain.

108

Table .Limited Sprinkler Irrigation Corn, Plainsman Research Center, 2007.____________________________________________________________________

50%Silking Plant Seed Test Grain

Firm Hybrid Date Density Moisture Weight Yield____________________________________________________________________

plants/ac % lb/bu bu/ac(X 1000)

FOUR STAR SEED 6573RRYGPL 19-Jul 23.8 12.2 60 174NK BRAND NX7186 18-Jul 25.0 11.2 58 174GARST 8377 YG1/RR 20-Jul 25.8 11.6 57 172MYCOGEN 2T801 19-Jul 24.4 11.7 60 168TRIUMPH 1203VT3 20-Jul 25.0 11.7 57 168NK BRAND N67-D6 19-Jul 23.8 11.4 57 168GARST 8389 CB/LL/RW 20-Jul 25.2 11.8 59 168

NK BRAND N68-B8 19-Jul 23.2 11.3 57 167PIONEER 33M16 21-Jul 23.6 11.8 57 167TRIUMPH 1608 CbRR 18-Jul 23.2 11.7 58 166MYCOGEN 2E762 19-Jul 23.8 11.7 57 166FOUR STAR SEED 6881VT3 19-Jul 25.2 11.5 59 166GARST 8478 CB/LL/GT 18-Jul 26.0 11.7 57 166FOUR STAR SEED 6861VT3 20-Jul 23.6 11.1 60 166

PIONEER 33B54 19-Jul 24.0 12.1 58 160MYCOGEN 2T777 (Non Bt) 20-Jul 24.2 11.2 58 157TRIUMPH 1109PL 18-Jul 23.6 11.7 57 154FOUR STAR SEED 6880VT3 19-Jul 25.4 11.7 57 153FOUR STAR SEED Ex9744RRBT 21-Jul 23.4 11.6 57 152FOUR STAR SEED Ex9762RRYBPL 21-Jul 22.4 11.6 60 146____________________________________________________________________Average 21-Jul 24.2 11.6 58 164LSD 0.20 9.1____________________________________________________________________Planted: May 3; Harvested: October 22, 2007.Grain Yield adjusted to 15.5% moisture content.Fourteen sprinkler rotations applied a total of 21.0 acre-in./acre of water.

109

Corn Borer Resistant and Nonresistant Hybrid Comparisons, Walsh, 2007 K. Larson, D. Thompson, D. Harn, C. Thompson

PURPOSE: To evaluate corn borer resistant hybrids (Bt gene insertion) and nonresistant hybrids under limited sprinkler irrigation. RESULTS: Only the nonresistant corn borer hybrids displayed any first generation corn borer damage and this shot hole damage was very minor. Compared to damage recorded in last year, the nonresistant corn borer hybrid had fewer stock holes and lodging damage caused by the second-generation corn borer larvae. Grain yields were very good, but we also applied more irrigation than we normally apply.

DISCUSSION: All 19 Bt hybrids tested showed excellent resistance to corn borer compared to the nonresistant hybrid. The nonresistant corn borer hybrid had stock holes on 35% of its plants and 13% of plants lodged due to corn borer damage This level of corn borer lodging is only half as much as last year, but it is similar to the damage level record since Bt corn hybrids became widely accepted. Corn borer resistant Bt hybrids continue to be a very effective tool against corn borer damage. Therefore, to keep Bt hybrids effective in controlling corn borer, always remember to plant nonresistant hybrids as a mating refuge to help delay corn borer resistance to the Bt events. We define limited sprinkler corn as receiving 10 inches or less of irrigation above normal precipitation. This year we applied 21 inches of irrigation. The extra 11 inches of irrigation was, in part, to offset the lack of summer precipitation. This year, the limited sprinkler corn trial averaged 164 bu/a, 50 bu/a more than last year. We attribute the higher yields to both increased irrigation amount and better irrigation timing compared to last year. Last year, we had to shut down the sprinkler during silking to lay some new irrigation lines. This year, we were able to irrigate the corn during the critical water-use period surrounding silking.

110

Table .Limited Sprinkler Irrigated Corn, Corn Borer Ratings, Plainsman Research Center, 2007.____________________________________________________________________________________

50% 1st Gen 2nd Gen 2nd GenSilking Plant Shot Stock Plant Test Grain

Firm Hybrid Date Density Holes Holes Lodging Weight Yield____________________________________________________________________________________

plants/a lb/bu bu/a(X 1000)

FOUR STAR SEED 6573RRYGPL 19-Jul 23.8 0 0 0 60 174NK BRAND NX7186 18-Jul 25.0 0 3 0 58 174GARST 8377 YG1/RR 20-Jul 25.8 0 0 0 57 172MYCOGEN 2T801 19-Jul 24.4 0 0 0 60 168TRIUMPH 1203VT3 20-Jul 25.0 0 0 0 57 168NK BRAND N67-D6 19-Jul 23.8 0 0 0 57 168GARST 8389 CB/LL/RW 20-Jul 25.2 0 3 3 59 168

NK BRAND N68-B8 19-Jul 23.2 0 0 0 57 167PIONEER 33M16 21-Jul 23.6 0 3 3 57 167TRIUMPH 1608 CbRR 18-Jul 23.2 0 0 0 58 166MYCOGEN 2E762 19-Jul 23.8 0 0 0 57 166FOUR STAR SEED 6881VT3 19-Jul 25.2 0 3 0 59 166GARST 8478 CB/LL/GT 18-Jul 26.0 0 0 0 57 166FOUR STAR SEED 6861VT3 20-Jul 23.6 0 0 0 60 166

PIONEER 33B54 19-Jul 24.0 0 0 0 58 160MYCOGEN 2T777 (Non Bt) 20-Jul 24.2 10 35 13 58 157TRIUMPH 1109PL 18-Jul 23.6 0 0 0 57 154FOUR STAR SEED 6880VT3 19-Jul 25.4 0 0 0 57 153FOUR STAR SEED Ex9744RRBT 21-Jul 23.4 0 0 0 57 152FOUR STAR SEED Ex9762RRYBPL 21-Jul 22.4 0 0 0 60 146____________________________________________________________________________________Average 21-Jul 24.2 1 2 1 58 164LSD 0.05 6.9 2.3 9.1____________________________________________________________________________________Planted: May 3; Harvested: October 22, 2007.Grain Yield adjusted to 15.5% moisture content.Fourteen sprinkler rotations applied a total of 21.0 acre-in./a of water.

111

Irrigated Mid and High Oleic Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Walsh, 2007 COOPERATORS: Plainsman Agri-Search Foundation, and Kevin Larson, Superintendent, Plainsman Research Center, Walsh, Colorado. PURPOSE: To identify high yielding hybrids under irrigated conditions with 3000 sorghum heat units in a Silty Loam soil. PLOT: Four rows with 30” row spacing, 650’ long. SEEDING DENSITY: 26,000 Seed/A. PLANTED: June 19. HARVESTED: November 19.

Summary: Growing Season Precipitation and Temperature \1 Walsh, Baca County. __________________________________________________ Month Rainfall GDD \2 >90 F >100 F DAP \3 __________________________________________________ In --------No. of Days-------- June 0.00 265 8 0 11 July 1.59 919 22 2 42 August 0.97 909 26 10 73 September 0.91 621 14 1 103 October 0.07 306 2 0 122 Total 3.54 3020 72 13 122 _________________________________________________ \1 Growing season from June 19 (planting) to October 22 (first freeze, 30 F). \2 GDD: Growing Degree Days for sorghum. \3 DAP: Days After Planting.

IRRIGATION: Subsurface Drip Irrigated: total water applied approximately 10 a-in./a. PEST CONTROL: Preemergence Herbicides: Glyphosate 24 oz/a, Spartan 2.0 oz/a, Prowl H2O 40 oz/a. Post Emergence Herbicides: None. CULTIVATION: Once. INSECTICIDES: None. FIELD HISTORY: Last Crop: Grain sorghum. FIELD PREPARATION: Disc. COMMENTS: Planted in good soil moisture. Weed control was good. Very dry growing season, only 40% of average seasonal moisture. No insecticides were applied to control head moth because of the late planting date. Seed yields were good. SOIL: Silty Loam for 0-8” and Silty Loam 8”-24” depths from soil analysis. Summary: Soil Analysis. _____________________________________________________ Depth pH Salts OM N P K Zn Fe _____________________________________________________ mmhos/cm % ----------------ppm---------------- 0-8” 7.5 0.4 2.0 11 3.1 427 0.6 7.0 8”-24” 8 Comment Alka VLo Hi Mod VLo VHi Lo Adeq _____________________________________________________ Manganese and Copper levels were adequate.

Summary: Fertilization. ____________________________________________ Fertilizer N P2O5 Zn Fe ____________________________________________ --------------------lb/a------------------ Recommended 100 40 0 0 Applied 150 0 0 0 ____________________________________________ Yield Goal: 2500 lb/a. Actual Yield: 1922 lb/a.

112

Table .Drip Irrigated Sunflower, Mid and High Oleic Variety Trial, PRC, Walsh, 2007.___________________________________________________________________

Mid orHigh 50% Plant Plant Test Seed Oil

Firm Hybrid Oleic Flower Density Ht. Wt. Oil Yield Yield___________________________________________________________________

date plants/a in lb/bu % lb/a lb/a(X1000)

TRIUMPH s678 mid 8/17 19.2 50 35 40.8 2280 930MYCOGEN 8N510 mid 8/13 20.0 55 32 38.8 1943 753GARST XF07NS75 mid 8/12 16.0 58 34 38.5 1667 642TRIUMPH 859HOCL high 8/16 22.4 65 34 38.9 2075 807GARST 4596HO high 8/13 15.8 58 33 38.1 1574 599MYCOGEN 8H419CL high 8/14 18.8 61 31 40.7 1971 803GARST 4420NS mid 8/16 23.4 66 31 40.1 1830 734TRIUMPH 845HO high 8/16 21.4 60 30 44.2 1875 830MYCOGEN 8N462DM mid 8/15 20.4 61 33 41.9 2080 870___________________________________________________________________Average 8/14 19.7 59 33 40 1922 774LSD 0.20 243.7___________________________________________________________________Planted: June 19; Harvested: November 19, 2007.Seed Yield adjusted to 10% seed moisture content.Total water applied with subsurface drip irrigation was approximately 10 in./a

113

Dryland Safflower Variety Trial, Walsh, 2007 Kevin Larson and Jerry Johnson

PURPOSE: To identify high yielding safflower varieties that are adapted to our dryland conditions. MATERIALS and METHODS: We planted five safflower varieties no-till into wheat stubble. For our plot design, we used a RCBD with four replications. We fertilized the site with 50 lb N/a as 32-0-0. We planted the safflower on April 24 at 240,000 seeds/a in 30 in. rows in order to cultivate. For weed control, we applied Sonalan 40 oz/a, which was incorporated by 0.6 in. of rain the same day, and we cultivated once. We harvested the plots on August 27 with a row crop head and weighed the seed with the digital scale in the combine. RESULTS and DISCUSSION: The safflower seed yields were very low, ranging from 148 to 250 lb/a. Planting the safflower in wide rows made it possible to cultivate, but it may have contributed to the low yields. On 30 in. row spacing, these safflower varieties were not able to fill their canopies, which reduce their ability to compete against weeds, making cultivation necessary. Planting safflower in narrow row spacing would provide better weed competition, which would reduce the need for cultivation, but it would also eliminate the ability to cultivate. More importantly, narrow row spacing would produce more harvestable heads and higher potential yields than wide row spacing. Next year, we will test our narrow row theory by planting this safflower trial in narrow rows.

114

Dryland Safflower Variety Trial, Walsh, 2007. _____________________________________

Plant Moisture SeedVariety Height Content Yield_____________________________________

in % lb/acre

Finch 21 7.8 171M2003 20 8.0 250M2000 18 8.2 232NutraSaff 20 7.8 226S-541 21 8.1 148S-541 w/myc 21 8.6 222_____________________________________Average 20 8.1 208LSD 0.05 110.3_____________________________________Planted: April 24, 2007, 240,000 seeds/acre in30 in. rows.Harvested: August 27, 2007.

115

National Winter Canola Variety Performance and Great Plains Trials, Walsh 2007 Kevin Larson, Mike Stamm, and Dennis Thompson

Purpose: To identify the best adapted, highest yielding varieties of winter canola. Results and Discussion

All of the plants of winter canola varieties survived the winter. The 100% winter survival is indicative of a mild winter and sufficient soil moisture. Severe winter can cause large stand losses. Typically, selecting winter canola varieties with high winter survival is a wise choice for our environment.

Canola would be a good candidate as a limited irrigated crop. We furrow irrigated the study with an irrigation in the fall. This year, we had marginal soil moisture at planting. The lack of soil moisture at planting is a common scenario. Because we frequently have dry conditions at planting, and recommend maximum planting depth for canola is only 1.5 in., irrigating after planting is a good way to assure a stand.

Flowering dates are an important consideration because they reflect timeliness of harvest and flower sensitive freeze dates. The earlier flowering varieties are ready for harvest before the later flowering varieties. This could be important because the timing of wheat and canola harvests could clash. Remember, canola is one of the worst crops for shattering; do not delay harvest when it is ready for harvest. Varieties that flower early risk late-season frost damage. The earliness of some canola varieties may help avoid harvesting conflicts with wheat, but costly freeze damage on early flowering varieties may negate the harvest scheduling benefit.

We had abundant winter moisture that filled our soil water profile. Since we began the spring with a full water profile, we did not irrigate the crop in the spring. Even without the spring irrigation, we recorded our highest average yield to date, 2,120 lb/a. One variety, DSV06201, even averaged over 3,000 lb/a, also a new high for this study. In fact, all six of the DSV varieties were ranked in the top ten for highest producing varieties.

It may be time to reconsider winter canola as an oil crop option. Canola has a couple of advantages over sunflower: 1) less expensive seed cost and 2) less expensive and more effective weed control. There are three disadvantages of winter canola compared to sunflower: 1) it has a very narrow planting window (late-August to mid-September), 2) it shatters its seed (you can’t delay harvest) and 3) it is a winter annual (like winter wheat, a fallow period may be needed for your rotation). Canola performs quite well as a limited irrigated crop. In fact, since winter wheat and winter canola have similar water and fertilizer requirements, the irrigation timing for canola will spread your irrigation more effectively compared to irrigating only spring crops. Materials and Methods

We planted 57 winter canola varieties and lines for the National Winter Canola Trial and 42 winter canola varieties and lines for the High Plains Winter Canola Trial on September 14, 2006. The trial was planted at 5 lb seed/a with a 12 in. row-spaced drill to a depth of 1.5 inches in marginal soil moisture. We furrow irrigated the site on 5 ft. beds until the moisture soaked across the beds. We fertilized the site with 75 lb N/a using a sweep plow prior to bed shaping and planting. No other fertilizers were applied.

116

The soil test was: N, 31 ppm; P, 4.9 ppm; and K, 469 ppm. For weed control, we applied Treflan 24 oz/a prior to planting. The 6 to 8 in/a of pre-irrigation in the fall was the only irrigation we applied. We harvested the winter canola trials on July 4 and 5. We harvested using a small grain head attached to a self-propelled combine (direct harvest) equipped with a digital scale.

117

National Canola Variety Trial: Walsh, Colorado, 2007._____________________________________________________

Winter Flowering Plant SeedVariety Stand Survival Date Height Yield_____________________________________________________(Line) (0-10) (0-10) in. lb/acre

DSV06201 7.2 10 28-Apr 54 3026DSV05101 7.7 10 27-Apr 56 2778DSV06200 8.2 10 25-Apr 55 2763DSV05102 8.0 10 28-Apr 55 2696X02W534C 7.5 10 26-Apr 50 2572Kalif 8.8 10 28-Apr 51 2515ARC97019 7.7 10 26-Apr 55 2461X01W522C 9.1 10 26-Apr 51 2448DSV05100 6.8 10 28-Apr 56 2434DSV06202 5.7 10 26-Apr 52 2421X01W692C 6.8 10 26-Apr 51 2421KS3077 8.8 10 27-Apr 51 2374Kronos 8.3 10 27-Apr 56 2367KS3074 8.8 10 27-Apr 58 2361Kadore 7.0 10 29-Apr 51 2351Hybristar 8.0 10 24-Apr 48 2320TCI.06.M1 8.3 10 27-Apr 55 2320KS3254 8.9 10 29-Apr 59 2300Ovation 8.3 10 29-Apr 55 2286TCI.06.M4 8.8 10 22-Apr 47 2286Ceres 9.2 10 29-Apr 57 2246TCI.06.M3 8.5 10 23-Apr 49 2219TCI.06.M2 8.5 10 27-Apr 52 2212EXP3269 7.2 10 28-Apr 55 2209Taurus 8.7 10 26-Apr 54 2206NPZ0591RR 7.7 10 28-Apr 54 2199Falstaff 8.2 10 28-Apr 53 2199SLM0402 7.2 10 25-Apr 54 2152KDW13-86 8.2 10 28-Apr 55 2139Jetton 8.2 10 26-Apr 53 2132NPZ0404 7.8 10 26-Apr 48 2132KS7436 8.0 10 28-Apr 58 2112NPZ0391RR 9.0 10 28-Apr 55 2078Satori 8.0 10 28-Apr 55 2071Baldur 7.8 10 26-Apr 56 2071Trabant 8.7 10 25-Apr 54 2038KS9135 8.7 10 28-Apr 58 2017KS3018 7.8 10 27-Apr 53 1990KS3132 7.8 10 28-Apr 54 1984Rasmus 7.0 10 25-Apr 49 1957Wichita 7.8 10 27-Apr 49 1916KS4085 8.7 10 27-Apr 60 1910KS3302 8.0 10 25-Apr 52 1836Virginia 5.8 10 26-Apr 50 1816ARC97018 6.7 10 26-Apr 56 1802

118

ARC2180-1 7.5 10 26-Apr 55 1795MN 604001 5.3 10 28-Apr 54 1786ARC98015 8.0 10 29-Apr 58 1756Gospel 7.7 10 28-Apr 49 1715KS4022 5.2 10 29-Apr 52 1685Sumner 7.8 10 25-Apr 48 1641Plainsman 7.3 10 1-May 49 1628ARC98007 6.5 10 29-Apr 57 1587KDW13-62 8.0 10 1-May 59 1567Viking 7.9 10 27-Apr 49 1567Abilene 5.5 10 29-Apr 50 1483Baros 6.8 10 27-Apr 48 1483_____________________________________________________Mean 1.5 10 4-Aug 11 345LSD 0.05 2.02 2.2 541.5_____________________________________________________Planted: September 16, 2006; Harvested: July 4 and 5, 2007There was only minor nonconsistant shattering and no lodging.

119

Great Plains Canola Variety Trial, Walsh, Colorado, 2007.Winter Flowering Plant Seed

Variety Stand Survival Date Height Yield(Line) (0-10) (0-10) in. lb/acre

Jetton 8.5 10 27-Apr 52 2468KS4158 8.7 10 25-Apr 49 2239KS4035 8.2 10 28-Apr 48 2233KS4138 7.8 10 28-Apr 43 2105KS4083 7.8 10 27-Apr 53 2085KS4038 8.0 10 29-Apr 49 2071KS4033 8.2 10 28-Apr 52 2064KS4191 8.2 10 27-Apr 50 2031KS4323 8.7 10 26-Apr 55 1977KS42320 8.2 10 26-Apr 52 1970KS4082 8.2 10 24-Apr 50 1957KS4031 8.0 10 28-Apr 51 1943KS4040 7.8 10 28-Apr 53 1899KS4018 8.5 10 29-Apr 55 1883KS4036 7.7 10 28-Apr 54 1863KS4024 7.5 10 28-Apr 52 1849KS4313 7.5 10 27-Apr 53 1846KS4125 7.7 10 28-Apr 53 1843KS4023 8.3 10 27-Apr 47 1829KS4112 7.8 10 29-Apr 53 1829KS4280 8.2 10 28-Apr 53 1829KS4183 8.5 10 27-Apr 56 1816KS4192 8.7 10 29-Apr 51 1768KS4155 7.3 10 26-Apr 45 1766KS4122 8.0 10 29-Apr 52 1735KS4134 7.7 10 27-Apr 48 1721KS4198 7.5 10 28-Apr 53 1715DKW13-86 8.5 10 28-Apr 51 1695Wichita 7.8 10 28-Apr 50 1688KS4145 7.0 10 29-Apr 54 1675KS4132 7.7 10 28-Apr 53 1641KS4120 7.7 10 28-Apr 54 1594KS4127 7.5 10 29-Apr 53 1553Plainsman 4.8 10 1-May 53 1453KS4171 7.8 10 30-Apr 52 1446KS4106 7.7 10 27-Apr 52 1439KS4124 7.3 10 29-Apr 52 1433KS4143 7.3 10 29-Apr 55 1433KS4070 7.0 10 28-Apr 52 1318KS4151 8.0 10 30-Apr 51 1318KS4193 7.8 10 28-Apr 47 1304KS4061 7.7 10 30-Apr 52 1244

Mean 7.8 10 27-Apr 52 1775LSD 0.05 1.36 1.4 534.9Planted: September 16, 2006; Harvested: July 4 and 5, 2007There was only minor nonconsistant shattering and no lodging.

120

Planting Date for Dryland and Irrigated Cotton Production in Southeastern Colorado Kevin Larson

Cotton production has spread northward from Texas into Oklahoma and Kansas in recent years. In 2002, there was even a cotton gin built in Western Kansas near Moscow to serve this cotton expansion. Some of the reasons that cotton is being grown in Oklahoma and Kansas are its lower production costs compared to irrigated corn (Dumler and Duncan, 2004) and new recommendations for minimum planting temperatures, which expanded the growing season enough to produce good quality lint when using early maturing stripper varieties. This is our second attempt at growing cotton at the Plainsman Research Center and with our 4000 ft. elevation we marginally meet the 1750 heat units needed for early maturing stripper cotton production most years. Material and Methods We planted Paymaster PM 2280 BG/RR at 50,000 seeds/a on 30 in. row spacing on two planting dates: PD 1, April 30 (62 F soil temperature) and PD 2, May 9 (64 F, soil temperature). We used two irrigation treatments, furrow irrigation and dryland. For furrow irrigation, we applied 5 acre-in/a at the onset of flowering. For pre-emergence weed control, we applied Prowl H2O at 40 oz/a and for post emergence weed control we applied Roundup Ultra Max at 24 oz/a. Both furrow and drip irrigated sites were fertilized with 75 lb N/a. We hand-harvested the raw cotton from 10 ft by 2.5 ft areas on November 27 and used a lint conversion factor (0.625 x) for lint yield. Results and Discussion This year we did not applied 2,4-D in the vicinity of the cotton site; therefore, we were able to avoid 2,4-D damage that lowered yields last year. Our dryland lint yield was nearly as high as our irrigated yield. The dryland treatment averaged 559 lb/a, only 37 lb/a less than the average irrigated yield. Reports of better than two-fold increases in lint yield have been reported for irrigated compared to dryland under deficit irrigation (Howell, et al., 2004). The first planting date (April 30) produced significantly more yield than the second planting date (May 9) (LSD 0.20). The soil temperature typically reaches 60 F in extreme Southeastern Colorado by May 1 (as recorded at the Plainsman Office near Walsh). Planting on or slightly before May 1 is critical, because planting just 10 days later significantly lower lint yield.

Cotton production has expanded into Oklahoma and Kansas because of its reduced irrigation requirements (one-third to one-half as much as irrigated corn) and fertilizer use (half as much as irrigated corn). According to previous cotton planting recommendations that required minimum soil temperatures of 65 to 70 F, the growing season for Southeastern Colorado was too short to produce quality stripper cotton. The new cotton planting minimum soil temperature was dropped to 60 F. By lowering the minimum soil temperature to 60 F, extreme Southeastern Colorado should have sufficient heat units to production quality cotton most years when using the earliest maturing stripper cotton varieties.

121

Literature Cited Dumler, Troy J. and Stewart R. Duncan. 2004. Cotton in Kansas. KSU, CE, AES. http://www.agmanager.info/crops/prodecon/production/Cotton.pdf. Accessed January 4, 2007. Howell, T., E. Steven, J. Tolk, and A. Schneider. 2004. Evapotranspiration of full-, deficit-irrigated and dryland cotton on the Northern Texas High Plains. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering. 130(4):277-285.

122

Table .Cotton, Planting Date and Irrigation Effects, Walsh, 2007.____________________________________________________

RawPlanting Irrigation Irrigation Irrigation Cotton Lint

Date Method Timing Amount Yield Yield____________________________________________________

in/a lb/a lb/a

April 30 Furrow Flowering 5 1058 661 May 9 Furrow Flowering 5 847 530

April 30 Dryland None 0 1002 626 May 9 Dryland None 0 786 491

Average 923 577

April 30 1030 644 May 9 817 511PD LSD 0.20 129.7 81.1

Furrow 953 596Dryland 894 559

IRRIGATION LSD 0.20 129.7 81.1____________________________________________________Planted Paymaster PM 2280 BG/RR at 50,000 seeds/a.Hand Harvested: November 27, 10 ft. x 2.5 ft.Raw Cotton to Lint Yield conversion x 0.625.

123