The drill worked well. The ADF was flawless, and new blades kept the seed depth more uniform. The scrapers would probably hold seed in the slot even better if we could figure out how to keep them from plugging with heavy surface residue. It will be better yet when we get the tool bar leveling system mounted and debugged. Currently the rear toolbar openers tend to shallow up when going over a ridge.
However, for the second year we failed to get the field drilled timely to get 100% emergence.
2015 has been unusually hot with weeks instead of days in the high 90's and low 100's. There was no measurable rain from late May until September 5th when we received a half inch. The moisture met in our chem fallow ground. Because drill parts were unavailable we didn't get started drilling until the 18th, and the seed zone moisture left. I was very surprised. With all the residue cover we have on the field I never thought we would lose seed zone moisture that fast. The above average temperatures this fall had to be the reason.
Again, the lesson here with chem fallow is, --don't miss the seed zone moisture for fall seeded wheat. We likely will take a 15-20 bushel yield hit for missing that window.
See the post of 5/3/14: "New CrossSlot Drill", for a problem discovered and the resulting fix.
I had some chemfallow for the first time this year, had .25 in of rain with the same "storm" and for the most part the moisture met, and just like you it was gone within a week or so, of course with minimal residue. Having it seeded with an Agpro drill but just now getting it drilled and it is being dusted in. Unseasonably warm and low humidity sucked the moisture out of the ground just like summertime. In hindsight I have thought about that moisture and wondered if seeding into it or prior would have been a good or bad choice. I don't know if it would have been effective to seed at that time and have the half sprouted wheat dry out or would it have survived another month (maybe more) waiting on moisture? Of course the cheat grass that came up with that rain seems to be fine. Summer fallow didn't even hold moisture well enough to seed at normal time with deep furrows on our drier ground, it will get dusted in.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your observation, and comments. This has been a very strange year. Our operation has experienced conflicting results compared to past history.
ReplyDelete--With thin residue on first time chem fallow, I'm amazed that 0.25" would meet moisture anywhere other than a wet flat this year. With the soils on our farm I consider 0.33" as minimal for meeting moisture when the fallow dries to 4", with good cover (no visible dirt), and years of direct seed history. As mentioned, a strange year, and your stated experience is just one example.
--We have learned (although 2014 and 2015 are not our best examples) not to miss seed zone moisture. Late emergence cost yield.
--Chem fallow generally crumbles creating variable sized clods that are difficult to firm (seal) to avoid moisture loss. That is why we have moved to a single disc drill with low soil disturbance characteristics.
--In 2014 we had seed swell and break germ, then go dormant until awakened by more moisture, and lived. If it had started rooting, and the moisture left faster than the root could grow, the plant would probably die.
--Cheatgrass is the bane of fallow and a two or three year rotation. Our heavy surface residue and low disturbance farming system has reduced competition with the crop, but it is still there, and we still chemically treat the infestation. Lengthening the rotation to include brassica's or pulses help by changing the growing environment of the cheatgrass, and also, different and more effective chemistry can be applied for control.
My guess is that since we have little to no residue, the rain can get to the soil that much faster without being soaked up by straw. Of course on the flip side it will evaporate that much faster with no protection. When the moisture started to leave I could flip over a dried out russian thistle and the ground was still moist at the surface underneath.
ReplyDeleteThe referenced phrase "soaked up by the straw" is a good topic to discuss. I have not noticed that moisture has been intercepted by the straw mat and lost to the environment before entering the soil. That was a concern several years ago. Logic would say that some, at least, does. My thought is, --small grain straw has a high silicone content which resists absorption. Any straw manipulation (chopping, harrowing, harvesting process) will soften and open the straw, making it more absorbent. In the 70-90's, I purposely flail chopped for that purpose, to accelerate decomposition. Now, our emphasis is the opposite, --keep the straw intact, and hold the mat as long as possible to protect the soil surface from sun and air movement. This is one reason we have the stripper header and a CrossSlot drill. These implements minimize straw destruction and the CrossSlot will drill into difficult surface environments. A recent example: --we drilled through a semi size russian thistle patch in the cover crop area that was solid, and knee high, without issue. Following the drill the patch was boot high with neat slots cut through the mat.
ReplyDeleteI never would have thought about it but it makes sense. Love the idea of the CrossSlot, have followed it for several years now and is the reason I found your site to begin with. Unfortunately it is prohibitively expensive for me and most and takes a special kind of devotion to no-till that most people don't want or have. I remember an article in Wheat Life where they were seeding straight though sage brush in CRP and handled it no problem.
ReplyDelete--Yes, devotion (commitment) to no-till is the quickest way to succeed. It's a mistake to compare and second guess whether you yield better with no-till or conventional. It just causes confusion and really slows up the maturing process to succeed with no-till, --and all the while the land continues to deteriorate.
ReplyDelete--All direct seed drills are expensive. The CrossSlot probably has a higher upfront cost, but it does offer an opportunity to reduce costs compared to other types. There is no need for smoothing fields between crops. There is no need to mow stubble or weeds to acquire a good crop stand. It minimizes residue loss. We are experiencing less weed competition, Most people don't take associated costs into account when comparing systems whether no-till or conventional. You have to be willing to live with a different esthetic look and a rougher surface. Neither has to have an effect on yield providing you develop a good stand with the proper plant count. Few people consider the cost of tillage, wind, or water erosion. These have had a devastating effect on the natural productivity of our soils. It's reported that we have lost about half the average depth of our top soil from when it was in sod.