Annual/Termination Reports:

[03/24/2023]

Report Information

Participants

1. Sylvie Brouder (virtually) (Purdue University)
2. Francis Casey (NSDU; liaison)
3. Jason Clark (SDSU)
4. Dave Franzen (NDSU)
5. Dan Kaiser (University of Minnesota)
6. Sunjeong Park (The Ohio State University)
7. Bijesh Maharjan (University of Nebraska)
8. Antonio Mallarino (Iowa State University)
9. Andrew Margenot (University of Illinois)
10. Manjula Nathan (University of Missouri)
11. Andrew Stammer (Wisconsin)

Brief Summary of Minutes

Accomplishments

<p>&nbsp;The NCERA-13 committee&nbsp;recommendations and its&nbsp;publication&nbsp;'Recommended Chemical Soil Test Procedures for the North Central Region' continues to be used by most private soil and plant analysis laboratories in the region.&nbsp;</p><br /> <p>The committee met February 22, 2023, and the committee organized and sponsored the Soil and Plant Analyst's Workshop February 22-23, 2023 in Coralville, IA. The workshop was attended by 40 participants, with 4 industry sponsors. The conference program is provided in the minutes included in this report.</p><br /> <p>Committee members and their colleagues continue to work to refine and improve crop nutrient recommendations based on a solid soil and plant analysis foundation. Different test methods are constantly being examined and reevaluated to their relevance to crop yield and quality prediction.</p><br /> <p>Soil health testing procedures are being compared with crop yield to determine their relationship if any. Committee members continue to communicate to farmers and the public the value of soil testing and the use of proper soil/plant analysis methods, and their interpretation. There is a continuous struggle between University nutrient recommendations and private entity recommendations, which tend to recommend greater rates than University recommendations for a variety of reasons.</p><br /> <p>Specific accomplishments are listed below:</p><br /> <p>Michigan-&nbsp;</p><br /> <p>30 extension presentations, 11 national presentations at scientific meetings, 4 videos or podcasts, and 16 extension publications regarding soil fertility.</p><br /> <p>A joint Indiana (Purdue) and Michigan (Michigan State University) sulfur publication on &ldquo;Sulfur deficiency in corn, soybean, wheat, and alfalfa was released and can be found at: <a href="https://www.canr.msu.edu/soilfertility/Files/Bulletins/Sulfur%20Deficiency%20in%20Corn,%20Soybean,%20Wheat,%20and%20Alfalfa.pdf">https://www.canr.msu.edu/soilfertility/Files/Bulletins/Sulfur%20Deficiency%20in%20Corn,%20Soybean,%20Wheat,%20and%20Alfalfa.pdf</a></p><br /> <p>A complete production guide for soft winter wheat including nutrient management strategies &ldquo;Michigan Wheat 101&rdquo; can be found at: <a href="https://www.canr.msu.edu/soilfertility/Files/Bulletins/Wheat-101%20MSU%202021.pdf">https://www.canr.msu.edu/soilfertility/Files/Bulletins/Wheat-101%20MSU%202021.pdf</a></p><br /> <p>Nebraska-</p><br /> <p>Nutrient recommendations for crops such as winter wheat and sugar beet have scope for revision. Correlation-calibration experiments for nitrogen management are underway to improve the nitrogen recommendation for these crops in the state. There is good support for commodity groups in this regard.</p><br /> <p>South Dakota-</p><br /> <p>10 presentations given regarding soil fertility to approximately 857 individuals.</p><br /> <p>Two extension research reports and two radio interviews regarding phosphorus and potassium response predictions</p><br /> <p>North Dakota-</p><br /> <p>&nbsp; Nitrogen recommendations for 2-row malting barley were developed, including a N calculator for use as an app and web-based. The recommendations include consideration of soil test nitrate-N from soil samples 2 feet in depth.&nbsp;</p><br /> <p>&nbsp;</p>

Publications

Impact Statements

1. Unbiased, science-based research and extension information that promotes crop production and soil fertility through university evaluations of a multitude of products and nutrient management strategies to generate needed data for grower on-farm decision making. Growers learn from university scientists and data and in turn university scientists learn the grower’s perspective, viewpoint, or strategy towards a specific product or amendment.

Back to top