NMSU Agricultural Science Center - Farmington. Thirty-second ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT

Transcription

1

2 Thirty-second ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT 1998 NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE CENTER AT FARMINGTON PO BOX 1018 FARMINGTON, NEW MEXICO M.M. West, B.S., M.A., Editor Digital Version E. J. Gregory Professor of Agronomy Emeritus Richard N. Arnold Pest Management Specialist and Acting-Superintendent Daniel Smeal Agriculture Specialist Tom Jim Farm/Ranch Superintendent Gloria F. Mitchell Administrative Secretary I Janice F. Tomko Technician III Curtis K. Owen Research Assistant William Hastings Farm/Ranch Laborer II Kenneth D. Kohler Farm/ Ranch Laborer ill Lenora D. Peter Project Aide I I

3 NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS REPORT This report has been prepared as an aid to the Branch Station Staff in analyzing the results of the various research during the past year and for recording pertinent data for future reference. This is not a formal Agricultural Experiment Station Report of research results. Information in this report represents results from only one year's research. The reader is cautioned against drawing conclusions or making recommendations as a result of data in this report. In many instances, data in this report represents only one of several years of research results that will constitute the final formal report. It should be pointed out, however, that staff members have made every effort to check the accuracy of the data presented. This report was not as a formal release; therefore, none of the data or information herein is authorized for release or publication without the written approval of the New Mexico Agricultural Experiment station. Mention of a proprietary pesticide does not imply registration under FIFRA as amended or endorsement by New Mexico State University. Digital Project The 2013 digital version of the 1998 Annual Progress Report has been modified and edited for errors. The full report and figures within the Irrigation Studies section have been regenerated using updated software for clarity of reading for researchers and end-users. All the original table data and text has been transferred from scanned documents using OCR (optical character recognition) and proof read for accuracy. The original manuscript of the 1998 Annual Progress Report is located at the New Mexico State University s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. Acknowledgement Margaret M. West, M.A., Editor would like to thank contributors of the Digital Project from ASC Farmington: Richard N. Arnold, M.S. ASC Farmington Interim Superintendent, Weed Scientist Daniel Smeal, M.S. College Professor, Irrigation Management Curtis Owen, B.S. Research Assistant, Agronomy Samuel C. Allen, Ph.D. Ag. Research Scientist, AgroForestry James K. Hooper - Research Technician, Irrigation Management and special thank you to Thomasina Stevenson, Project Clerical Assistant from Navajo Workforce Development. II

4 Dedication This 1998 Annual Progress Report is fondly dedicated to our friend and colleague: E.J. GREGORY Eddie Joe Gregory, or as we all know him and like to call him, "Joe" first came to the NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington in September Joe was well suited for the job, as he had grown up on a dry land wheat farm near Grady, New Mexico. He obtained his B.S. Degree in 1959 from New Mexico State University and in 1962, obtained his M.S. degree from the University of Nevada, Reno. Prior to starting work for NMSU, he was a research assistant for the University of Nevada, Reno and served as Farm Advisor for the University of California in Fresno County. Joe moved his family, the former Eva Kay Shook, of Forrest, N.M. and their four children, Rodney, Russ, Rick, and René to Farmington, NM to accept the position at the Agricultural Science Center. In 1966, the Agricultural Science Center was known as the "San Juan Branch Experiment Station", but there was nothing but sand, prairie grass and weeds, and an occasional sheepherder. Joe helped to start this station from the very ground up to what it is now in An office building, a dwelling house, a shop building, machinery sheds, and a chemical storage building were all built during the years while Joe worked here. Native grasses and trees were planted here to make a very attractive lawn and also to control the blowing sand. For 32 years, Joe worked and conducted research at the experiment station. His research centered around variety performance trials of agronomic crops. He planted everything from licorice to sugar beets to corn and potatoes. During his tenure at the Science Center, he was an Assistant Professor of Agronomy, then an Associate Professor of Agronomy, and later became the Center's superintendent in 1979 and was promoted to Professor of Agronomy in Joe was responsible for receiving over $600, in grant funds during his employment. He also has over 200 single and cooperative publications to his credit. From the very beginning of the center, Joe was instrumental in the planning and development of all aspects of the center. He watched, worked, and was a part of the developing farm from the early times when winds created sand storms across the farm to the now controlled fields and roads which are easily accessible to the center. Through the education of local farmers, he was instrumental in improving crop yields and economic return to the local community. Over the years, Joe has become a friend and mentor to each of the staff of the Agricultural Science Center. The staff fondly wishes him many enjoyable retirement years to come. We will certainly miss his knowledge and quiet nature when problems arise or just to have an enjoyable conversation. His vast knowledge and experience is indispensable to the entire staff and community. Upon his retirement in July 1998, he was justly honored by receiving the Fabian Garcia Award from New Mexico State University. III

5 Table of Contents Table of Contents... iv Table of Tables... vi Table of Figures... xiii Introduction... 1 The Agricultural Science Center at Farmington... 1 Climatological Data... 3 State Station Project Physical Plant, Utilities, Maintenance, and Repairs Adaptive Field Crop Research in Northwestern New Mexico Pest Control in Crops Grown in Northwestern New Mexico Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Spring-Seeded Alfalfa with Postemergence Applications of AC Alone or in Combination Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Preemergence/Postemergence, and Postemergence Herbicides Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Cultivation and Postemergence Herbicide; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence applications of Dimethenamid, BAS 656, and Metolachlor II Mag, Cultivation and Postemergence Applications of Bentazon in Combination with Either AC or Imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence Herbicides Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Postemergence Herbicides. 79 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence, Preemergence Followed by Postemmergence, and Postemergence Herbicides Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Roundup Ready Field Corn Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Russet Norkota Potato Irrigation and Fertilizer Studies Funding and resources provided by NAPI Plant & Soils Laboratory, Southwest Seed, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, NM State Engineers Office, Hydro Agri North America, Inc., IV

6 Stockhausen, Inc., McMahon BioConsulting, Inc., Morningstar Corp. and BioFlora International Sprinkler-Line-Source Experimental Plots Biomass Yield and Forage Quality of Pasture Grasses as Related to Irrigation, Year Potential Water-Conservation through Turfgrass Selection and Irrigation Scheduling Effect of N fertilizer source (with or without Ca) and rate on the yield, quality and storability of potatoes Effect of Volcanic Ash Fertilizer on the Yield and Yield Components of Chile Peppers, Corn and Potatoes Use of Organic Fertilizer (BioFlora) on Alfalfa, Chile Peppers, Corn and Potatoes V

7 Table of Tables Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Table 9. Table 10. Table 11. Table 12. Table 13. Table 14. Table 15. Table 16. Table 17. Table 18. Table 19. Table 20. Climatological Data; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. January through December Thirty year average monthly conditions; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Frost dates and number of frost-free days, ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Monthly precipitation in inches recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Summary of monthly average of the mean temperature* recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Summary of monthly average maximum temperature recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Summary of monthly average of the minimum temperature recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Highest temperatures recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Lowest temperatures recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Number of days 32 F or below and 0 F or below in critical months for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Number of days 100 F or above and number of days 95 F or above in critical months for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Average evaporation (inches per day) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Monthly evaporation (inches per month) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Wind movement at two heights for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Soil temperature extremes, four inches below surface for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Average daily solar radiation (Langley s) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Thirty year total monthly Growing Degree Days* (May through September and first fall frost) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedures for the 1994-Planted Alfalfa Variety Trail (Fee Trial); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 21. Yield of Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM VI

8 Table 22. Table 23. Three Year Average Yields of Alfalfa Varieties for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedures for Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 24. Yield of the Alfalfa Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 25. Table 26. Table 27. Table 28. Table 29. Table 30. Table 31. Table 32. Table 33. Table 34. Table 35. Table 36. Table 37. Table 38. Table 39. Table 40. Table 41. Table 42. Table 43. Two Year Average Yield of the Alfalfa Variety Trial for 1977 & 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Dry Bean Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield of Cooperative Dry Bean Nursery and Varieties; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Forage); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Corn (forage): Yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Early Season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Corn (Early season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Corn (Early Season) two and three year average yields for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Full season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Corn (Full season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Corn (Full season) two and three year average yields for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield and other characteristics of the Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Western Regional Potato Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Western Regional Potato Nursery, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Small Grains forage and Grain Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Small grain forage yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Winter Wheat harvested for forage and grain and grain only, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for New Mexico Winter Wheat Varieties and Hybrids; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM VII

9 Table 44. Table 45. Table 46. Table 47. New Mexico Winter Wheat test yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Winter Wheat varieties of three and four year yield for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for Southern Regional Performance Nursery Winter Wheat; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 48. Two Year Average of the Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 49. Index of herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 50. Table 51. Table 52. Table 53. Table 54. Table 55. Table 56. Table 57. Table 58. Table 59. Table 60. Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen Alfalfa, July 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, August 10; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, September 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, preemergence/postemergence and postemergence herbicides on June 19 and July 23; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, premergence/postemergence and postemergence herbicides on July 20 and August 24; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedures for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry beans with preemergence, cultivation and postemergence herbicides on July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry beans with preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides on July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry beans with preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides on August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry edible beans with preemergence applications of dimethenamid, BAS 656, and Metolachlor II Mag, cultivation and postemergence applications of Bentazon in combination with either AC or imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington VIII

10 Table 61. Table 62. Table 63. Table 64. Table 65. Table 66. Table 67. Table 68. Table 69. Table 70. Table 71. Table 72. Table 73. Table 74. Table 75. Table 76. Table 77. Table 78. Table 79. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides on July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, cultivation, postemergence herbicides on August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Procedure for Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Annual grass and broadleaf weed control with preemergence and postemergence herbicides on June 9 and June 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Annual grass and broadleaf weed control with preemergence and postemergence herbicides on July 8 and July 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with preemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence herbicides in field corn on June 9, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence herbicides in field corn on July 9, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with postemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence herbicides in field corn on June 9 and June 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence herbicides in field corn on July 9 and July 29; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with preemergence, preemergence followed by postemergence, and postemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, preemergence followed by postemmergence and postemergence herbicides on Jun 8 and June 29; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, preemergence followed by postemergence, and postemergence herbicides on July 8 and July 29; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in roundup ready field corn; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with selected herbicides in roundup ready field corn on June 8, July 2, and July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with selected herbicides in roundup ready field corn on July 8, August 3, and August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in Russet Korkotah potato; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in Russet Norkotah potato with prememergence herbicides on June 18 and July 2, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington IX

11 Table 80. Table 81. Table 82. Table 83. Table 84. Table 85. Table 86. Table 87. Table 88. Table 89. Table 90. Table 91. Table 92. Table 93. Table 94. Table 95. Table 96. Table 97. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in Russet Norkotah potato with preemergence herbicides on July 20 and August 3, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Methods and materials for pasture grass forage yield and quality as related to irrigation, year 3; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Dates and amounts of irrigation water applied to pasture grass during four growing periods at each of seven different irrigation treatments as provided by the line-source. Values represent the Mean of four replications; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses as related to applied water from four harvests during the 1998 growing season; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Total 1998 dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses at seven levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Methods and materials for the turfgrass irrigation study, Year 1; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Post-plant fertilizer summary for warm and cool-season turfgrasses; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Dates and amounts irrigation and precipitation applied to warm-season turf grasses at five irrigation levels; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Dates and amounts irrigation and precipitation applied to cool-season turf grass at five irrigation levels; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Methods and materials for potato fertilizer (N and Ca) study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of soil in the potato study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Dates and amounts of irrigation and precipitation applied to potato plots between planting (04/23/98) and skin set (08/30/98); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield and yield components of Atlantic potatoes at five rate of nitrogen fertilization as provided by two N sources, UAN and CAN; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield and yield components of Russet Norkotah potatoes at five rates of nitrogen fertilization as provided by two N sources: UAN and CAN; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Residual soil NO 3 -N and Ca content in the top foot of profile after applying five N fertigation treatment levels with CAN and UAN fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Petiole NO 3 -N and leaf total N content of potatoes fertilized at three rates of N fertilization averaged over two cultivars (Atlantic and Norkotah) and two fertilizers (CAN and UAN) on 06/29/98; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Leaf Ca content of two potato cultivars fertilized with either CAN or UAN averaged over three N fertilization rates and both N sources; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Total N (TN) content (%) of potato leaf tissue sampled on 08/11/98 of two cultivars fertilized at three N rates with two fertilizer products; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM X

12 Table 98. Table 99. Total Ca content (%) of potato leaf tissue sampled on 08/11/98 of two cultivars fertilized at three N rates with two fertilizer products; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Nutrient content of volcanic ash applied to the chile, corn and potato plots; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 100. Methods and materials for volcanic ash study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 101. Yield and yield components of chile (v. Agco Hot) fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 102. Nutrient content of chile plant leaves sampled on 09/14/98 from plots fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 103. Yield and average number of ears produced per corn plant fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 104. Nutrient content of corn leaves sampled on 08/24/98 from plots fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 105. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) fertilized with Three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 106. Nutrient content of potato (v. Sangre) leaves sampled on 07/14/98 from plots fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 107. Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of profile in the Volcanic Ash fertilizer study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 108. Methods and materials for the BioFlora Study on alfalfa, chile, corn, and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 109. Ingredients of the fertilizers used in the BioFlora study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 110. Dry matter yield of alfalfa fertilized with BioFlora as compared to an unfertilized control, three cuts, and total; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 111. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with BioFlora as compared to the control (Cut 2); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 112. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 113. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 4); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 114. Yield and yield components of chile peppers grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 115. Nutrient analysis of chile leaves sampled at harvest from plants grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 116. Yield and number of ears/plant of corn treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 117. Nutrient analysis of corn leaves sampled on 08/25/98 from plants treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 118. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM XI

13 Table 119. Nutrient analysis of potato leaves sampled on 07/14/98 from plants treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Table 120. Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of profile in the Bioflora fertilizer study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM XII

14 Table of Figures Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 3. Figure 4. Figure 5. Figure 6. Figure 7. Figure 8. Figure 9. General schematic of the single sprinkler-line source design used to evaluate crop response to irrigation (top), and the expected water distribution pattern under no-wind conditions (bottom); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Diagram of the duplicated line-source design used to evaluate yield response of eight pasture grasses to variable irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Total dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses as related to irrigation, (Year 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Protein content and relative food value of eight pasture grasses at three levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Diagram of the sprinkler line-source plots used to evaluate turfgrass water requirements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Average daily reference evapotranspiration (ET o ) from March 1 to October 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Crop coefficient (ET/Reference ET) for various irrigation depths in warm-season turfgrass including ET/ET o at plots with lowest irrigation level exhibiting acceptable quality by judges. Note: Crop curve in late July and early August not corrected for excessive drainage due to accidental over-irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Crop coefficient (ET/Reference ET) for various irrigation depths in cool-season turfgrass including ET/ET o at plots with lowest irrigation level exhibiting acceptable quality by judges. Note: Crop curve in late July and early August not corrected for excessive drainage due to accidental over-irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Daily water-use (ET) of various turfgrasses at lowest seasonal irrigation depths (in parentheses - inches) exhibiting acceptable quality turf. Establishment year corrected for drainage; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Figure 10. Diagram of the replicated triple line-source sprinkler used to provide fertigation gradients of CAN and UAN to two potato varieties; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Figure 11. Marketable yield of potatoes (Atlantic and Russet Norkotah combined) at different rates of N fertilization as provided by UAN and CAN fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Figure 12. Diagrams of the randomized complete blocks used in evaluation of volcanic ash fertilization on chile, corn and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Figure 13. Diagrams of the randomized complete blocks used in evaluations of BioFlora fertilizations on alfalfa, chile, corn and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM XIII

15 Introduction This Annual Report for 1998 details research on the several research projects in progress at the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. In addition to the research projects, there are other activities associated with the Science Center that have become part of the 'life of the Center'. The Center's weather station is in its 20 th year, after being designated as an 'official' weather station. Instrumentation in the weather station includes: 1. Maximum-Minimum thermometers 2. Non-recording rain gauge 3. Recording rain gauge 4. Soil temperature measurement at 4 inch depth 5. Star pyrometer set at 2 meters height 6. Anemometer with cups set at 6" to 8" above top edge of evaporation pan 7. Anemometer with cups set at 2 meters height 8. U.S.W.B. class A evaporation pan (used during non-freezing months) The Agricultural Science Center at Farmington The mission of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington is to do agricultural research for northwestern New Mexico. The major irrigated crop land in this area is in San Juan County. However, small acreages also are found in the two adjoining counties, McKinley and Rio Arriba. The three county area has about 1,800 farms and just over 198,000 acres of irrigated land and a small acreage of dry land farming (less than 10,000 acres). More than 99.5% of the irrigation water is surface water with the majority being in San Juan County and comes from three major rivers; San Juan, Animas, and La Plata. The Farmington Agricultural Science Center is the only agricultural research facility in the state of New Mexico that is on the western side of the Continental Divide. River drainage is west into the Colorado River which proceeds west and south to the Saltan Sea and Pacific Ocean. Over one-third of the total surface water in the state of New Mexico runs through the northwest comer of New Mexico (San Juan County). Irrigated acreage in San Juan County is increasing and when all projects being planned are complete, acreage will climb from 150,000 to about 240,000 acres. Cash receipts from crop and livestock production in the three county area is about $90,000,000 annually of which about 50 percent is from livestock sales and 50 percent from crops. The Agricultural Science Center is located about seven miles southwest of the city of Farmington on high mesa land of the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP). The NIIP 1

16 land comprises about 50 percent of the irrigated land in San Juan County (75,000 acres). Farming of the NIIP is done by the Navajo Agricultural Products Industry (NAPI) and is managed as one farm. The Science Center is 253 acres in size of which only about 170 acres are under cultivation. Over 100 crops have been grown on the center since its inception in Many crops produce well in northwestern New Mexico that are not grown here because of market prices at the time of harvest, high transportation costs to a suitable market, personnel unfamiliar with production practices, etc. Research at the present time is being conducted on alfalfa, com, dry beans, potatoes, onions, chile, pasture grass, winter wheat, winter barley, spring oats, and other minor acreage crops, such as carrots, carrot seed, etc. Major emphasis at the present time is on variety and other adaptive or production types of research, weed control, crop fertility, irrigation and consumptive-use, herbicide persistence and leaching, and other varied areas of research. Buildings on the Center are a three bedroom residence with attached garage, an office and laboratory building with six offices, a laboratory and a tissue culture laboratory, conference room, head house, and attached greenhouse partitioned into two bays. There are four metal buildings. The first building is 100' x 40' with a shop, small office, and restroom in a 40' x 40' section on the south end and a 60' x 40' area on the north end for machinery storage. The second building is 60' x 20' and is partitioned to form three small rooms. It is used for seed, fertilizer, and small equipment storage. The third building is a 20' x 60' open front machinery storage shed. The fourth building is a 20' x 30' chemical storage and hazardous waste disposal unit. Most of the machinery and equipment needed to carry out field, laboratory, and greenhouse research is available at the Center. Office, laboratory, greenhouse, and irrigated field plot is available to the technical personnel. Research personnel include; an agronomist, an entomologist/agronomist, and an agronomy plant biologist. The Center has two full-time research assistants, a full-time secretary, a farm foreman, and two full-time irrigator/tractor drivers. Since the beginning of the science center, which was in the mid 60's, average county yields of alfalfa have increased from 3 to more than 5 tons per acre, corn has gone from 55 to 140 bushels per acre, wheat from 35 to 90 bushels per acre. Two multimillion dollar crops (potatoes and dry beans) have been started and are now the two primary money producing crops in the area. Potato production could double in the next three years, as it appears a potato French fry plant will be built in 1998 to With new acreage being put into production each year, new research initiatives are needed primarily in the areas of high value crops and soils. 2

17 Climatological Data Author: Curtis Owen, B.S. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A Digitized version Table 1. Climatological Data; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. January through December Air Temperature Extreme Temp. Precipi tation Average. Wind (miles/24hrs) Avg. Evap. Langley Sunshine Month Max. Min. Mean Max. Min. (in.) (18 in. ht.) (2 m. ht.) (in/24hr) (24 hr.) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Sum Ave Frost-Free Period Last Spring reading or 32 F or below: May 15 (31 F) First Fall reading of 32 F or below: October 06 (27 F) Number of frost-free days: 144 Killing Frost-Free Period Last Spring reading of 28 F or below: April 19 (27 F) First Fall reading killing frost-free or below: October 06 (27 F) Number of killing frost-free day (28 F) 170 3

18 Table 2. Thirty year average monthly conditions; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Extreme Maximum Extreme Minimum Avg. Avg. Avg. Max. Min. Year Year Month Precip. Temp. Temp. Temp. Recorded Temp. Recorded (in.) (⁰F) (⁰F) (⁰F) (⁰F) January February March April May , June ,1990, , ,1983 July , Aug ,1970, September October , November December Total 8.19 Average

19 Table 3. Frost dates and number of frost-free days, ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM F or Less 28 F or Less (Killing Frost) Number of Date of Date of Number of Year Date Last Date First Frost-free Last Spring First Fall Frost Free Spring frost Fall frost Days Killing frost Killing frost Days 1969 Apr 27 Oct Apr 26 Oct May 02 Oct May 01 Oct May 09 Sep 18* 132 Apr 27 Sep 18* 144* 1972 May 02 Oct Apr 27 Oct May 02 Oct May 02 Oct May 21 Oct May 20 Nov May 08 Oct May 07 Oct Apr 27 Oct Apr 27 Oct Apr 21 Oct ** Apr 05 Nov May 06 Oct May 06 Nov May 12 Oct Apr 20 Oct May 26** Oct May 25** Oct May 09 Oct Apr 05 Oct May 06 Oct Apr 21 Oct May 19 Sep * May 17 Nov May 08 Oct May 08 Oct May 14 Sep Apr 01 Nov Apr 27 Oct Apr 27 Oct Apr 21 Oct Apr 21 Nov May 07 Nov 12** 189 Apr 11 Nov 16** 219** 1989 Apr 30 Oct Mar 21* Oct Apr 10* Oct Mar 31 Oct May 05 Oct Mar 29 Oct Apr 21 Oct Mar 19 Oct May 09 Oct Apr 20 Oct Apr 30 Oct Apr 08 Oct Apr 25 Oct Apr 18 Oct Apr 30 Sep Apr 29 Oct May 02 Oct May 02 Oct May 15 Oct Apr 19 Oct Average May 04 Oct Apr 22 Oct *Earliest date of 30 years **Latest date of 30 years 5

20 Table 4. Monthly precipitation in inches recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Avg Average (9 years) 6.67* Average (21 years) 8.84* * Sprinkler irrigation started around the science center in

21 Table 5. Summary of monthly average of the mean temperature* recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Avg *The mean temperatures are the average of maximum and minimum average temperatures for the month. 7

22 Table 6. Summary of monthly average maximum temperature recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Avg

23 Table 7. Summary of monthly average of the minimum temperature recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Avg

24 Table 8. Highest temperatures recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Highest During 30 Year Period Temp Year Avg

25 Table 9. Lowest temperatures recorded for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Lowest During 30 Year Period Temp Year Avg

26 Table 10. Number of days 32 F or below and 0 F or below in critical months for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Number of Days 0 F 32 F or Below or Below Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Jan Feb Dec Total Total Avg

27 Table 11. Number of days 100 F or above and number of days 95 F or above in critical months for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Number of Days Number of Days 95 or Above 100 or Above Year Jun Jul Aug Sept Total Jun Jul Total Total Avg

28 Table 12. Average evaporation (inches per day) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Avg # Years

29 Table 13. Monthly evaporation (inches per month) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Total Year Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct (in/yr) Avg

30 Table 14. Wind movement at two heights for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. (Miles/Day) Six Inches Above Evaporation Pan Avg Avg. MPH Two Meters

31 Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. (Miles/Day) Two Meters Avg Avg. MPH Table 15. Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month September 1976 to December 1998 Average High Average Low Mean* Average Extreme High Average Extreme Low Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec *Average between high and low. 17

32 Table 16. Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Average High Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Avg Average Low Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg A

33 Average Low Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Avg Table 17. Soil temperature extremes, four inches below surface for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Extreme High Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

34 Extreme High Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg Extreme Low Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg

35 Table 18. Average daily solar radiation (Langley s) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Avg , , , , , , , , , ,028 1, , , , , , , , , , , , , , Avg Table 19. Thirty year total monthly Growing Degree Days* (May through September and first fall frost) for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Month Total to Date of Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep Sep 1 st Frost (32 F) 1 st Frost (32 F) ,987 3,017 Oct ,897 2,949 Oct ,864 2,684 Sep ,001 3,201 Oct ,873 2,990 Oct ,987 3,227 Oct ,666 2,806 Oct ,925 2,978 Oct ,060 3,386 Oct 31 21

36 Month Total to Date of Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep Sep 1 st Frost (32 F) 1 st Frost (32 F) ,726 2,576 Sep ,755 2,986 Oct ,741 2,869 Oct ,755 2,875 Oct ,696 2,741 Oct ,772 2,615 Sep ,942 3,017 Oct ,815 2,926 Sep ,700 2,790 Oct ,751 2,873 Oct ,898 2,981 Nov ,974 3,131 Oct ,947 3,029 Oct ,842 3,153 Oct ,674 2,763 Oct ,675 2,854 Oct ,024 3,169 Oct ,745 2,782 Oct ,924 2,785 Sep ,927 3,081 Oct ,938 2,984 Oct 06 Avg ,850 2,941 Oct 14 Accum ,675 2,369 2,850 *Growing Degree Days = Max. Temp. (86) + min. temp. (50)/2 base temp. (50) growth. Above 86 F and below 50 F very little growth. Temperatures above 86 F counted as 86 F. Temperatures below 50 F counted as 50 F. 22

37 State Station Project Physical Plant, Utilities, Maintenance, and Repairs Author: E.J. Gregory, Ph.D. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A Digitized version Objectives Furnish the overhead cost of operating and maintaining the physical plant at the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington and the cost of providing certain facilities for research work. Furnish the cost of various farm operations required on the Agricultural Science Center which cannot reasonably be charged against a given research project. This project is funded to take care of the maintenance and operation of all facilities of the science center in direct support of the research program. This includes the physical plant and all buildings on the research facility. It provides funds for repairs and maintenance of farm machinery and vehicles, certain farming operations, and related activities which are clearly not research, but are necessary to keep the research facility operational. 23

38 Adaptive Field Crop Research in Northwestern New Mexico Authors: E.J. Gregory, Ph.D. and Curtis Owen, B.S. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A Digitized version Funding State Station Project Objectives Evaluate varieties and hybrids of field crops for production and quality in northwestern New Mexico. Evaluate and research problems associated with planting and growing field crops under high residue conditions (minimum and no-till) in northwestern New Mexico. Evaluate crop rotation schemes needed when planting in minimum tilled areas. Procedure Cultivar and new crop trials were conducted on the following crops in 1998: 1. Alfalfa - Variety Fee Trial 2. Alfalfa - Variety Trial 3. Beans - Dry Bean Nursery 4. Com Hybrids - Forage or Silage Hybrids 5. Com Hybrids - Early Season Hybrids 6. Com Hybrids - Full Season Hybrids 7. Oats - Northwestern States Nursery 8. Potatoes - Western Regional Potato Nursery 9. Small Grains - Forage and Grain Trial 10. Wheat - New Mexico Winter Wheat Variety and Hybrids 11. Wheat - Southern Regional Performance Nursery Winter Wheat 24

39 Table 20. Procedures for the 1994-Planted Alfalfa Variety Trail (Fee Trial); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Number of Entries Fifteen Planting Date August 16, 1994 Planting Rate 20 lb/acre Plot Design: Co-variance design with four replications and Archer as a check Plot Size Harvest Date Six - 8 inch rows, 16 feet long Four harvest dates: June 4, July 10, August 12, and September 24, Fertilization Herbicide Insecticide Soil Type Irrigation Results and Discussion Preplant Fertilizer; 440 lbs. of or 48 lbs. N, 229 lbs. P 2 O 5 per acre Postplant Fertilizer applied on : 200 lbs or 12 lbs. N., 52 lbs. P 2 O 5, and 60 lbs. K 2 O per acre None None Doak fine sandy loam Solid set pipe, watered as needed Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 21 and Table 22. Data is computed comparing varieties without using the check, (complete random block) 25

40 Table 21. Yield of Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company Selection Yield/cut Total or or Jun 04 Jul 10 Aug 12 Sep 24 Seasonal Brand Name Variety Cut 1 Cut 2 Cut 3 Cut 4 Yield ton/acre Union Seed Union Cal/West C/W Arkansas Valley 6J9S (Evergreen) Cal/West C/W Cargill 4J Waterman Loomis W 252HQ Waterman Loomis WL Great Plains Research Cimarron VR Great Plains Research Key Cal/West C/W 3567 ZX 9345B Wm. Lohse Mill LM 459 ZX 9345A Total & Z NMSU Dona Ana Average LSD 0.05 (Variety) LSD 0.05 (Cutting) 0.41 Interaction Variety x Cutting CV% ns 26

41 Table 22. Three Year Average Yields of Alfalfa Varieties for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield Company Variety Yr. Avg. ton/acre Union Seed Union Cal/West C/W Cal/West C/W Arkansas Valley 6J9S (Evergreen) Waterman Loomis WL Cargill 4J Great Plains Research Cimarron VR Waterman Loomis WL 252HQ Cal/West C/W ZX 9345B Great Plains Research Key Total & Z Lohse Mill LM NMSU Dona Ana ZX 9345A Average

42 Table 23. Procedures for Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Number of Entries Procedure Eighteen Planting Date August 26, 1996 Planting Rate Plot Design Plot Size 20 lb/acre Complete randomized block with four replications Six 8 inch rows, 16 feet long Harvest Date: Four harvest dates: June 4, July10, August 12, September 23, Fertilization Preplant fertilizer, 200 lbs or 22 lbs. N, 104 lbs. P 2 O 5 per acre. Postplant fertilizer applied on 03/27/98; 200 lbs or 12 lbs. N., 52 lbs. P 2 O5, 60 lbs. K 2 O per acre. Herbicide Insecticide Soil type Irrigation Results and discussion None None Doak fine sandy loam Solid set pipe, watered as needed Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 24 and Table

43 Table 24. Yield of the Alfalfa Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company Selection Yield per Cut or or Jun 04 Jul 10 Aug 12 Sep 23 Seasonal Brand Name Variety Cut 1 Cut 2 Cut 3 Cut 4 Yield ton/acre Union Seed Forage Genetics Rushmore Arkansas Valley Legend Arkansas Valley Benchmark Dekalb Genetic Corp. DK Waterman Loomis Research WL Check Rio Arkansas Valley Evergreen Cal West CW Union Seed Champ Forage Genetics UN Cal West CW Southwest Seed Archer Waterman Loomis Research WL 325 HQ Forage Genetics 3L Southwest Seed Vernema Union Seed Ranger Union Seed Parade Average LSD 0.05 (Variety) LSD 0.05 (Cutting) 0.63 Interaction: Cutting x Variety CV% ns 29

44 Table 25. Two Year Average Yield of the Alfalfa Variety Trial for 1977 & 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company Selection Yield or or Yr. Avg. Brand Name Variety ton/acre Arkansas Valley Legend Check Rio Dekalb Genetic Corp. DK Arkansas Valley Evergreen Forage Genetics Rushmore Union Seed Arkansas Valley Benchmark Cal West CW Waterman Loomis Research WL Forage Genetics UN Union Seed Champ Cal West CW Southwest Seed Archer Forage Genetics 3L Waterman Loomis Research WL 325 HQ Southwest Seed Vernema Union Seed Parade Union Seed Ranger Average 5.58 [5.57]

45 Table 26. Procedure for Dry Bean Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Number of Entries Procedure Thirty six Planting Date May 29, 1998 Planting Rate Plot Design Plot Size 92,244 seeds per acre (one seed every two inches) Randomized block with four replications Two - 34 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: Vines were cut September 18 and thrashed October 2 through October 7 Fertilization 34 lbs. N., 52 lbs. P 2 O 5, 60 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide 1.2 pounds per acre of Frontier was applied on June 2; 60 ml. of Pursuit and 1 pint of Basagran per acre were applied on June 30; Insecticide None Soil type Doak fine sandy loam Irrigation Solid set pipe, watered as needed, generally three times per week for 3 hours Results and discussion Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table

46 Table 27. Yield of Cooperative Dry Bean Nursery and Varieties; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Entry Source Yield Entry Source Yield (cwt/acre) (cwt/acre) Navy & Small White Light Red Kidney Vista Check 30.2 USWA-33 USDA-Prosser 22.1 Mackinac Michigan State Univ Cal Early Check 19.4 AC Skipper AgCanada-Lethbridge 22.3 RedKanner Cornell University 18.3 OAC Thunder University Guelph 21.7 Chinook 2000 Michigan State Univ ISB 1814 Idaho Seed Bean 21.5 Average 18.4 AC Compass AgCanada-Harrow 20.5 OAC Laser University Guelph 13.0 Dark Red Kidney Average 22.3 AC Calmont AgCanada-Harrow ACI California 21.4 Small Red USWA-39 USDA-Processer 21.2 UI 259 University Idaho 37.8 Montcalm Check 13.5 NW 63 Check 30.2 Redhawk Michigan State Univ USRM-11 USDA-Prosser 29.0 Average 18.5 Average 32.3 White Kidney Pinto Lassen Check 19.3 Chase Check 34.9 Beluga Michigan State Univ AC Pintoba AgCanada-Harrow 33.8 USWA-70 USDA-Prosser 17.1 UI 320 University Idaho 33.1 Average 18.0 USPT-73 USDA-Prosser 32.7 Frontier N Dakota State Univ Black Kodiak Michigan State Univ Shiny Crow Colorado State Univ Burke USDA-Prosser 30.6 Midnight Check 24.0 Average 32.5 Average 28.5 Great Northern Glacier Michigan State Univ US 1140 Check 32.6 Grand Average 25.2 WM University Nebraska 32.2 USWA-12 USDA Prosser 31.4 LSD UI 465 University Idaho 26.5 Average 32.3 CV%

47 Table 28. Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Forage); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Number of Entries Procedure Four Planting Date May 13, 1998 Planting Rate Plot Design Plot Size 35,000 seeds per acre (46 seeds per 20 foot row) Randomized block with four replications Four - 34 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: September 14, 1998 Fertilization Herbicide Insecticide Soil type Irrigation Results and discussion 230 lbs. N., 104 lbs. P 2 O 5,120 lbs. K 2 O per acre 0.2 pints of Banvel and 2.25 pints of Guardsman per acre were applied on May 18 None Doak fine sandy loam Center pivot, watered as needed Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 29. Table 29. Corn (forage): Yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield Dry Plant Ear Plant Company Hybrid Green Dry Matter Height Height Population (ton/acre) (%) (in.) (in.) (per acre) Germains HT ,752 Germains HT ,289 Germains HT ,599 Germains GC ,520 Average ,040 LSD 0.05 ns ns ns ns ns ns CV %

48 Table 30. Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Early Season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Number of Entries Twenty Planting Date May 13, 1998 Planting Rate Plot Design 35,000 seeds per acre (46 seeds per 20 row) on all varieties except the Germain varieties which were planted at 29,000 (40 seeds per 20 row) upon request Randomized block with four replications Plot Size Four - 34 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: November 19, 1998 Fertilization Herbicide Insecticide Soil type Irrigation Results and discussion 235 lbs. N., 104 lbs. P 2 O 5, 120 lbs. K 2 O per acre 0.2 pints of Banvel and 2.25 pints of Guardsman per acre were applied on May 18 None Doak fine sandy loam Center pivot, watered as needed Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 31 and Table 32. Stand counts were lower than desired due to high prairie dog populations. 34

49 Table 31. Corn (Early season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company or Bushel* Plant Ear Plant Brand Name Hybrid Yield* Weight Moisture Height Height Density Lodging (bu/a) (lb/bu) (%) (in.) (in.) (plant/a) (%) Grand Valley SX ,190 0 Grand Valley GVX ,076 0 Pioneer 36A ,382 0 Pioneer ,709 0 Mycogen ,940 0 DeKalb DK ,574 0 Grand Valley GVX ,574 0 DeKalb DK ,766 0 Grand Valley GVX ,460 0 Germain's BH ,599 0 Pioneer ,574 0 Mycogen ,940 0 DeKalb DK ,901 0 Grand Valley GVX ,115 0 Germain's HT ,944 0 Pioneer 37M ,190 0 Mycogen ,306 0 Grand Valley GVX ,403 0 Germain's HT ,695 0 Grand Valley GVX ,001 0 Average ,167 0 LSD ,890 CV% *Yields adjusted to 15.1% moisture and a 56 lb. bushel. 35

50 Table 32. Corn (Early Season) two and three year average yields for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company or Brand name Hybrid Yr. Avg Yr. Avg. (bu/acre) DeKalb DK DeKalb DK Pioneer Mycogen DeKalb DK Table 33. Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Full season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Number of Entries Twenty Planting Date May 13, 1998 Planting Rate 35,000 seeds per acre (46 seeds per 20 row) except the Germain s varieties which were planted at a lower rate by request. Plot Design Randomized block with four replications Plot Size Four - 34 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: November 20, 1998 Fertilization 235 lbs. N., 104 lbs. P 2 O 5, 120 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide 0.2 pints of Banvel and 2.25 pints of Guardsman per acre were applied on May 18. Insecticide None Soil type Doak fine sandy loam Irrigation Center pivot, watered as needed Results and discussion Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 34 and Table 35. Stand counts were lower than desired due to high prairie dog populations. 36

51 Table 34. Corn (Full season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company or Brand Name Hybrid Yield* Bushel* Weight Moisture Plant Height Ear Height Plant Density Lodging (bu/a) (lb/bu) (%) (in.) (in.) (plants/a) (%) Pioneer 34P93 (White) ,826 0 Mycogen ,175 0 Grand Valley SX ,809 0 Grand Valley GVX ,905 0 Agri Pro AP ,385 0 Pioneer 33H ,962 0 Pioneer 34K ,499 0 Agri Pro HY ,748 0 Grand Valley GVX ,271 0 DeKalb DK ,175 0 Germain's HT ,292 0 Grand Valley GVX ,616 0 Germain's HT ,040 0 DeKalb DK ,428 0 Agri Pro AP ,538 0 Mycogen ,773 0 Pioneer ,214 0 Germain's BH ,349 0 Germain's GC ,869 0 Germain's HT ,947 0 Average ,641 LSD ,821 CV% *Yields adjusted to 15.5% moisture and a 56 lb. bushel. 37

52 Table 35. Corn (Full season) two and three year average yields for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Company or Brand name Hybrid Yr. Avg Yr. Avg. bu/acre) Mycogen Agri Pro AP DeKalb DK DeKalb DK Pioneer 34K Pioneer Agri Pro AP Table 36. Procedure for Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Number of Entries Thirty Planting Date April 10, 1998 Planting Rate 100 pounds per acre Plot Design Randomized block with four replications Plot Size Six - 10 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: August 6, 1998 Fertilization 130 lbs. N, 54 lbs. P 2 O 5, 62 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide 0.5 pints of 2-4, D per acre applied on May 7, 1998 Insecticide None Soil type Doak fine sandy loam Irrigation Center pivot, watered as needed Results and discussion Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 37 and Table

53 Table 37. Yield and other characteristics of the Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM CI, PI or OT No. Entry Parentage Yield* Moisture Bushel Weight Plant Height Lodging (bu/a) (%) (lb/a) (in.) (%) 95Ab Ab1867/87Ab Ab4983 Ogle/Border Whitestone Porter/ND (ND ) Prairie CDC Pacer ABSP Ab3083/Monida Celsia Monida Ab248 Cayuse/Monida Ogle Rio Grande 74Ab2608/Cayuse (81Ab5792) 1A H Grlnd/8433//Hldn/3/ ND P832RS / W83101 AbSP Ab3119/Monida Derby Ab406 81Ab5792/82Ab Ab825 Ogle/Border Cayuse Ab5125 Ogle/75Ab Ab664 Ogle/75Ab Ab Ab988/Monida CDC Boyer Ab4582 Monida Reselection Ajay 74Ab1952/74Ab (82Ab1142) Powell Cayuse/Monida (83Ab3250) 89Ab Ab861/IL ND Otana/Valley ND IL / ND Otana Average LSD ns CV% *Yield adjusted to 14% moisture and 32 pound bushel. 39

54 Table 38. Procedure for Western Regional Potato Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Number of Entries Procedure Seventeen Planting Date April 24, 1998 Planting Rate Plot Design Plot Size 30 seed pieces per 15 foot row (6 inch spacing) Randomized block with four replications One 34 inch row, 15 feet long Harvest Date: September 15, 1998 Fertilization 240 lbs. N,104 lbs. P 2 O 5, 120 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide Sprayed 2.5 pints per acre of Turbo on May 19 (pre-emergence) Insecticide None Soil type Irrigation Doak fine sandy loam Solid set irrigation watered as needed, generally, three times per week for 3 to 4 hours Results and discussion Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table

55 Table 39. Western Regional Potato Nursery, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield Variety Source Total Jumbo >3 #1>1 7/8 to <3 Culls <1 7/8 Specific Gravity (cwt/acre) TX RU TX AC CO Ranger Russet Check AO OR Avalanche CO A ID CORN-3 CO AC CO NDD840-1 CA AO OR Russet Burbank Check Russet Norkotah Check TXNS223 TX TXNS278 TX TXNS112 TX CORN-8 CO AC CO Average LSD CV%

56 Table 40. Procedure for Small Grains forage and Grain Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Number of Entries Procedure Planting Date September 24, 1997 Planting Rate Plot Design Plot Size Seven for forage and four for forage and grain 100 pounds per acre Split plot with four replications Six 8 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: Forage: April 28, and June, 2, 1998 Grain: July 16, 1998 Fertilization 250 lbs. N, 26 lbs. P 2 O 5, 30 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide None Insecticide Soil type Irrigation Results and discussion None Doak fine sandy loam Center pivot, watered as needed Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table 41 and Table

57 Table 41. Small grain forage yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Cut Entry Source Green Weight Dry Weight Dry Matter Plant Height (T/A) (T/A) (%) (in.) Wintermore Seed Resources, Inc Wintermore 95 Seed Resources, Inc Wintermore 96 Seed Resources, Inc TRT 2000 Seed Resources, Inc Scout 66 Curtis & Curtis Wintri Triticale Curtis & Curtis Master Blend Curtis & Curtis Average LSD CV% Cut Entry Source Green Weight Dry Weight Dry Matter Plant Height (T/A) (T/A) (%) (in.) Wintermore Seed Resources, Inc Wintermore 95 Seed Resources, Inc Wintermore 96 Seed Resources, Inc TRT 2000 Seed Resources, Inc Scout 66 Curtis & Curtis Wintri Triticale Curtis & Curtis Master Blend Curtis & Curtis Average LSD CV% Entry Source Total Green Weight (T/A) Dry Weight (T/A) Wintermore Seed Resources, Inc Wintermore 95 Seed Resources, Inc Wintermore 96 Seed Resources, Inc TRT 2000 Seed Resources, Inc Scout 66 Curtis & Curtis Wintri Triticale Curtis & Curtis Master Blend Curtis & Curtis Average LSD CV%

58 Entry Source Total Green Weight (T/A) Dry Weight (T/A) Interaction Variety x Cut ** ** Cutting ** ** Plot size: Six, 10 inch rows, 20 feet long Planting Date: 09/24/1997 Harvest Dates: 04/24/1998 and 06/02/1998 Fertilizer: 250 lbs. N, 26 lbs. P 2 O 5, 30 lbs. K 2 O per acre at maturity. Irrigation: Center Pivot as needed Herbicide: None 44

59 Table 42. Winter Wheat harvested for forage and grain and grain only, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Forage Cut Variety Source Green Weight Dry Weight Dry Matter Plant Height (T/A) (T/A) (%) (in.) TRT 2000 Seed Resource, Inc Wintermore Seed Resource, Inc Wintermore 96 Seed Resource, Inc Wintermore 95 Seed Resource, Inc Average LDS Grain After Forage Cut Grain Yield Only Variety Source Yield Bushel Wt. Yield Bushel Wt. (bu/a) (lb/bu) (bu/a) (lb/bu) TRT 2000 Seed Resource, Inc Wintermore Seed Resource, Inc Wintermore 96 Seed Resource, Inc Wintermore 95 Seed Resource, Inc Average LDS 0.05 Var ns 10.3 ns Management ns ns CV% Interaction Var. x Management ns * Plot Size: Six, 10 inch rows, 20 feet long Planting Date: 09/24/1997 Harvest Date: Forage April 2 and Grain July 16, 1998 Fertilizer: 250 lbs. N, 26 lbs. P 2 O 5, 30 lbs. K 2 O per acre at maturity. Irrigation: Center Pivot as Needed Herbicide: None 45

60 Table 43. Procedure for New Mexico Winter Wheat Varieties and Hybrids; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Number of Entries Eighteen Planting Date September 24, 1997 Planting Rate 100 pounds per acre Plot Design Randomized block with four replications Plot Size Six 10 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: July 16, 1998 Fertilization 215 lbs. N, 54 lbs. P 2 O 5, 62 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide ½ pint 2-4, D applied on April 7, 1998 Insecticide None Soil type Doak fine sandy loam Irrigation Center pivot, watered as needed Results and discussion Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table

61 Table 44. New Mexico Winter Wheat test yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Bushel Plant Heading Variety or Hybrid Yield Weight Moisture Height Dates (bu/a) (lb/bu) (%) (in.) (Mo/Day) 7406 (HybriTech) May 10 AP-7501 (HybriTech) May 11 TAM May 10 AP 7510 (HybriTech) May 13 Longhorn May 15 WX May 11 TAM May 16 Tomahawk May 11 TAM May 13 Ogallala May 10 Hickok May 10 Mesa May 10 Karl May 12 Scout May 11 Ike May 10 TAM May 11 TAM May 10 Thunderbird May 10 Average May 11 LSD CV% Plot Size: Six, 10 inch rows, 20 feet long Planting Date: 09/24/1997 Harvest Date: 07/17/1998 Fertilizer: 250 lbs. N, 26 lbs. P 2 O 5, 30 lbs. K 2 O per acre. Irrigation: Center Pivot as Needed Herbicide: ½ pint 2-4, D applied 04/07/

62 Table 45. Winter Wheat varieties of three and four year yield for ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield 4 Yr. 3 Yr. 3 Yr. Percent Variety (bu/a) Average Average Average of Scout ,97, Same Years TAM Longhorn TAM Tomahawk Ogallala Mesa Scout Thunderbird TAM TAM Ike Hickok Karl TAM Table 46. Procedure for Southern Regional Performance Nursery Winter Wheat; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Number of Entries Forty-five Planting Date September 22, 1997 Planting Rate 100 pounds per acre Plot Design Randomized block with four replications Plot Size Six 8 inch rows, 20 feet long Harvest Date: July 17, 1998 Fertilization 215 lbs. N, 54 lbs. P 2 O 5, 62 lbs. K 2 O per acre Herbicide ½ pint 2-4, D applied on April 7, 1998 Insecticide None Soil type Doak fine sandy loam Irrigation Center pivot, watered as needed Results and discussion Yield and other characteristics are presented in Table

63 Table 47. Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Bushel Plant Date Variety or Pedigree Serial No. Source Yield* Moisture Weight Height Headed Lodging (bu/a) (%) (lb/bu) (in.) (date) (%) Russian Population G15111 Goertzen May 20 0 selection Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1881 Hybritech May 18 0 PI220350/KS87H57/ KS95H176-1 KS, Hays May 20 3 /TAM-200/ KS87H66/3/KS87H325 Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1875 Hybritech May 17 0 Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1872 Hybritech May 12 0 OK87W663/Mesa//2180 OK95571 OK May 12 0 Kavkaz/TX86D1308/ TX91D6856 TX, Dallas May 19 0 /Sturdy/TAM-300 T702/Karl T102 Trio May 15 0 Oelson/Hamra/ /Australia 215/3/Karl 92 TAM-200/Abilene/6/Era/ Tobari 66//Lovrin 11/3/ Oligoculm/4/ Archer/5/ W Sut/*5AG/Max//CIMMYT Line/3/ Abilene G14264 Goertzen May 12 0 W Agripro May 10 0 G15011 Goertzen May 15 0 PI220350/KS87H57/ KS95H167-3 KS, Hays May 16 0 /TAM-200/ KS87H66/3/KS87H325 Vona/W / W Agripro May 14 0 /N /3/Arlin Cebeco/Lilifen/ G15048 Goertzen May 17 0 /Hail/3/Karl92/4/C02643/ /Can/Era KX /KS KS KS, May 19 0 Manhattan KS87H325/Rio Blanco KS95HW62- KS, Hays May Random mating population G15458 Goertzen May 17 0 KS /KS / /107349/KS811252/Karl KS82W428/Vee'S'/ /VIC/Bow/3/PVI KS KS91W KS, Manhattan KS, Manhattan May May 17 0 Quantum Hybrid Wheat WX Hybritech May /Karl//2163 KS97W0935- KS, May Manhattan 5630 sib//vona/talent T101 Trio May 14 0 Yuma R21 CO CO May

64 Bushel Plant Date Variety or Pedigree Serial No. Source Yield* Moisture Weight Height Headed Lodging (bu/a) (%) (lb/bu) (in.) (date) (%) T67*2/T80 T99 Trio May 19 0 TXGH12588/TX86D1317 TX91D6825 TX, Dallas May TAM-107 Pl Check May 09 0 TX85V1326/Karl TX94V2130 TX May 15 0 T67*2/Karl T100 Trio May 17 0 W84-179/ /3/Sturdy/ W Agripro May 14 0 Hawk//Vona/W NE83407/3/FLN/ACC//ANA TX94V2327 TX May Rio Blanco/Bai Quan #3039 TX95V4926 TX May 17 0 HBY756A/Sxl//2180 OK94P549 OK May 17 0 HBA142A/HBZ621A//Abilene KS97P KS, Manhattan May 18 0 NE83407/TX88V4834 TX95V4933 TX May 19 0 NE85707/Thunderbird NE93496 NE May 17 0 OK86216/Crr sib//2180 OK95548 OK May 15 0 TX88V4914/NE83407 TX95V5332 TX May 17 0 KS //Colt/Cody N95L158 NE, ARS May 13 0 Rio Blanco/TAM-200 OK95G701 OK May 15 0 Abilene/KS90WGRC10 W Agripro May 16 0 KS85W /3/Vona/ W Agripro May 10 0 W //Thunderbird Scout 66 Cl13996 Check May 08 8 Mesa/OK88701 OK95593 OK May 11 0 Abilene/Norkan//Rawhlde NE94632 NE May 12 0 Kharkof Cl1442 Check May Average May LSD CV%

65 Table 48. Two Year Average of the Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery ; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Yield* Variety or Pedigree Serial Number Source Average (bu/a) Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1881 Hybritech Kavkaz/TX86D1308/ TX91D6856 TX, Dallas /Sturdy/TAM 300 Quantum Hybrid Wheat WX Hybritech TAM-107 PI Check HBY756A/Sxl//2180 OK94P549 OK TXGH12588/TX860D1317 TX91D6825 TX, Dallas NE85707/Thunderbird NE93496 NE TX85V1326/Karl TX94V2130 TX KS //Colt/Cody N95L158 NE, ARS Yuma-R21 CO CO Rio Blanco/Bai Quan #3039 TX95V4926 TX NE83407/TX88V4834 TX95V4933 TX NE83407/3/FLN/ACC//ANA TX94V2327 TX TX88V4914/NE83407 TX95V5332 TX Abilene/Norkan//Rawhide NE94632 NE Scout 66 CI13996 Check Kharkof CI 1442 Check *Yields adjusted to 14% moisture and a 60 lb. bushel. 51

66 Pest Control in Crops Grown in Northwestern New Mexico State Station Project Pest Control Management Grant Fund Author: Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A Digitized version Introduction The authors wish to express their sincere appreciation to the following companies for providing technical assistance, products, and/or financial assistance: American Cyanamid BASF Bayer DowElanco E.I. Dupont Monsanto Navajo Agricultural Products Industry Norvartis Crop Protection Rhone-Poulenc Zeneca 52

67 Table 49. Index of herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Common Name Trade Name AC none acetochlor Surpass acetochlor + atrazine Surpass 100/Fultime atrazine AAtrex atrazine + dicamba Marksman atrazine + metolachlor II Bicep Lite II atrazine + metolachlor II Magnum Bicep Lite II Magnum BAS 656 none BAS 662 none bentazon Basagran dicamba BanvelfClarity dimethenamid Frontier dimethenamid + atrazine Guardsman flumetsulam + cloransulam-methyl Front Row flumetsulam + clopyralid Hornet flumetsulam + clopyralid + 2,4-D Scorpion III fluthiamide + metribuzin Axiom glyphosate Roundup imazethapyr Pursuit isoxaflutole Balance metolachlor II Dual II metolachlor II Magnum Dual II Magnum metribuzin Lexone/Sencor nicosulfuron Accent pendimethalin Prowl primisulfuron Beacon prosulfuron + primisulfuron Exceed, Spirit rimsulfuron Matrix rimsulfuron + nicosulfuron + atrazine Basis Gold rimsulfuron + nicosulfuron Accent Gold sethoxydim Poast 2,4-DB Butyrac

68 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Spring-Seeded Alfalfa with Postemergence Applications of AC Alone or in Combination Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy for control of annual grasses and broadleaf weeds in spring-seeded alfalfa Determine alfalfa tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 on a Wall sandy loam (less than 1 percent organic matter) at Farmington, New Mexico, to evaluate the response of springseeded alfalfa and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination. The experimental design wasa randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 10 ft. wide by 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Alfalfa (var. Evergreen) was planted at 20 lb/a with a Massey Ferguson grain drill on May 14. Postemergence treatments were applied on June 10, when alfalfa was in the second trifoliolate leaf stage and weeds were small. Black nightshade infestations were heavy, and prostrate and redroot pigweed, barnyardgrass, and green foxtail infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Crop injury and crop height evaluations were made on July 9. Weed control evaluations were made on July 9, August 10, and September 9. Alfalfa was harvested with an Almaco self-propelled plot harvester on August 11 and September 29. A grab sample was taken from one replication after harvest to determine protein content. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

69 Table 50. Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Evergreen Fertilizer 90-P205 Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and Discussion Crop Injury and Weed Control Ratings Results of crop injury are given in Table 51 and weed control are given in Table 51, Table 52, and Table 53. AC applied at lb/a had the highest injury rating of 6 and the shortest crop height of 6. On July 9, all treatments gave good to excellent control of broadleaf weeds except sethoxydim plus bentazon applied at 0.19 plus 0.25 lb/a and the check. On August 10, sethoxydim applied at 0.19 in combination with either 2,4-DB or bentazon gave poor control of broadleaf weeds. During both rating periods annual grass control were good to excellent with all treatments except the check. On September 9, all treatments gave good to excellent control of both annual grass and broadleaf weeds. Yield and Protein Content Results of protein are given in Table 52 and yield are given in Table 52 and Table 53. All treatments had a higher protein content than the check. The check yielded significantly higher T/A than any other treatment. This is possibly attributed to the high weed content when harvested. Plots harvested on September 29 showed no significant differences in yield. 55

70 Table 51. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen Alfalfa, July 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Crop Crop Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Height Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb/a) (%) (in.) (%) AC AC AC AC AC bentazon AC ,4-DB AC bentazon AC ,4-DB AC bentazon AC ,4-DB imazethapyr imazethapyr sethoxydim + 2,4-DB AC sethoxydim sethoxydim + bentazon check av weeds/m LSD Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Treatments applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25 and 1% v/v. 4. Treatments applied with a COC and 32% nitrogen solution at 1% v/v. 56

71 Table 52. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, August 10; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Weed Contol 1,2 Protein Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield Content (lb/a) (%) (T/A) (%) AC AC AC AC AC bentazon AC ,4-DB AC bentazon AC ,4-DB AC bentazon AC ,4-DB imazethapyr imazethapyr sethoxydim + 2,4-DB AC sethoxydim sethoxydim + bentazon check av weeds/m LSD Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Treatments applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25 and 1% v/v. 4. Treatments applied with a COC and 32% nitrogen solution at 1% v/v. 57

72 Table 53. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, September 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb/a) (%) (T/A) AC AC AC AC AC bentazon AC ,4-DB AC bentazon AC ,4-DB AC bentazon AC ,4-DB imazethapyr imazethapyr sethoxydim + 2,4-DB AC sethoxydim sethoxydim + bentazon check av weeds/m LSD Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Treatments applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25 and 1% v/v. 4. Treatments applied with a COC and 32% nitrogen solution at 1% v/v. 58

73 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Preemergence/Postemergence, and Postemergence Herbicides. Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine annual grass and broadleaf weed control to applied selected herbicides. Determine dry edible bean tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of dry edible beans (var. Flint) to preemergence, preemergence/ postemergence and postemergence herbicides. Dry edible beans were planted at 80 lb/a with flexi-planters equipped with disk openers on May 18. Soil type as a Wall sandy loam with a ph of 7.8 and organic matter content less than 1 percent. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Preemergence treatments were applied May 19 and immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied June 23, when beans were in the fourth trifoliolate leaf stag and weeds were small. Black nightshade infestations were heavy, and redroot and prostrate pigweed, green foxtail and barnyardgrass infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were June 19, July 23, July 20, and August 24. Stand counts were made on June 19 and July 23 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Dry beans were cut and left in the field one week before thrashing. Dry beans were harvested on September 8 by combining the two center rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

74 Table 54. Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC alone or in combination; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Dry edible beans Planting Date May 18, 1998 Planting Rate 80 lb/a Fertilizer 75-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49. Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and Discussion Weed Control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings, and stand counts for June 19, July 23, July 20, and August 24 are given in Table 55 and Table 56. No crop injury was observed in any of the treatments. All treatments gave good to excellent control of all weed species except the check in all rating periods Crop Yields Crop yields are given in Table 56. Yields were 1383 to 3070 lb/a higher in the herbicide treated plots as compare to the Check. 60

75 Table 55. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, preemergence/postemergence and postemergence herbicides on June 19 and July 23; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (no.) (%) AC , AC , AC , AC , AC , AC , AC , AC bentazon 3, AC bentazon 3, imazethapyr 3, imazethapyr + bentazon 3, dimethenamid + pendimethalin BAS pendimethalin dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 9,5 1.0/ BAS 656/AC bentazon 9,5 0.55/ check av weeds/m LSD 0.05 ns Based on visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Sonli = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Dimethenamid was applied preemergence to these treatments on May A surfactant was applied at 0.25% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on July A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution was applied at 0.25% v/v and 1% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on July Sunit II was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on July A COC was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on July Treatments applied preemergence and evaluated on June First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v and evaluated on July

76 Table 56. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, premergence/postemergence and postemergence herbicides on July 20 and August 24; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (lb/a) AC , AC , AC , AC , AC , AC , AC , AC bentazon 3, AC bentazon 3, imazethapyr 3, imazethapyr + bentazon 3, dimethenamid + pendimethalin BAS pendimethalin dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 9,5 1.0/ BAS 656/AC bentazon 9,5 0.55/ check av weeds/m LSD Based on visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Dimethenamid was applied preemergence to these treatments on May A surfactant was applied at 0.25% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on August A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution was applied at 0.25% v/v and 1% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on August Sunit II was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on August A COC was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on August Treatments applied preemergence and evaluated on July First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v and evaluated on August

77 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Cultivation and Postemergence Herbicide; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine annual grass and broadleaf weed control to applied selected herbicides. Determine dry beans tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of dry beans, (Flint) and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to preemergence, cultivation and postemergence herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Dry beans were planted at 80 lb/a with flexi-planters equipped with disk openers on May 18. Preemergence treatments were applied on May 19 and were immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Treatments were cultivated on June 23. Postemergence treatments were then applied on June 23 when dry beans were in the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage. Black nightshade infestations were heavy and redroot and prostrate pigweed, barnyardgrass, and green foxtail infestations were moderate throughout the experiment area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were made on July 23 and August 24. Stand counts were made on July 23 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Dry beans were cut and left in the field one week before thrashing. Dry beans were harvested on September 8 by combining the two center rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

78 Table 57. Procedures for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry beans with preemergence, cultivation and postemergence herbicides on July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Dry edible beans Planting Date May 18, 1998 Planting Rate 80 lb/a Fertilizer 75-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49. Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and Discussion Weed Control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings and stand counts are given in Table 58 and Table 59. Dimethenamid applied preemergence at 2.0 lb ai/a had the highest injury rating of 9. All treatments except the Check gave good to excellent control of all weeds Table 58. Preemergence treatments followed by cultivation gave poor control of broadleaf weeds. Annual grass control was 10% better at the higher rates of dimethenamid, metolachlor II Mag and BAS 656 than lower rates. Black nightshade control improved 30 to 40% when AC and bentazon were applied postemergence over preemergence cultivation plots Table 59. Crop Yield Yields are given in Table 59. Yields were 922 to 3074 lb/a in the herbicide treated plots as compared to the Check. 64

79 Table 58. Annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry beans with preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides on July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Crop Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatment 1 Rate Injury Count Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) dimethenamid BAS metolachlor II Mag dimethenamid/dimethenamid / BAS 656/BAS / metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag / dimethenamid/ac bentazon 4,5 0.75/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon 4,5 0.41/ metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 4,5 0.83/ dimethenamid/dimethenamid + AC bentazon 4,5 0.75/ BAS 656/BAS AC bentazon 4,5 0.41/ metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag + AC bentazon 4,5 0.83/ dimethenamid BAS metolachlor II Mag check av weeds /m LSD ns Preemergence treatments including the check were followed by a cultivation on June Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. AMABL = prostrate pigweed, Amare = redroot pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment and evaluated on June A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution applied at 0.25% and 1% v/v were added to the postemergence treatment 65

80 Table 59. Annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry beans with preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides on August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Weed Control 2,3 Treatment 1 Rate Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (lb/a) dimethenamid BAS metolachlor II Mag dimethenamid/dimethenamid / BAS 656/BAS / metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag / AC bentazon 4,5 0.75/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon 4,5 0.41/ metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 4,5 0.83/ dimethenamid/dimethenamid+ AC bentazon 4,5 0.75/ BAS 656/BAS AC bentazon 4,5 0.41/ metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag + AC bentazon 4,5 0.83/ dimethenamid BAS metolachlor II Mag check av weeds /m LSD Preemergence treatments including the check were followed by a cultivation on June Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Amare = redroot pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment and evaluated on August A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution applied at 0.25% and 1% v/v were added to the postemergence treatment. 66

81 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence applications of Dimethenamid, BAS 656, and Metolachlor II Mag, Cultivation and Postemergence Applications of Bentazon in Combination with Either AC or Imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine annual grass and broadleaf weed control to applied selected herbicides. Determine dry edible bean tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of dry edible beans (var. Flint) to preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides. Drybeans were planted with flexi-planters equipped with disk openers on May 19. Soil type was a Wall sandy loam with a ph of 7.8 and organic matter content less than 1 percent. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Early preemergence treatments were applied May 14. Preemergence and preemergence band (15 in.) treatments were applied May 19 and May 20. All preemergence treatments were then incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied June 24, when beans were in the fourth trifoliolate leaf stage. All treatments were cultivated on June 23. Black nightshade infestations were heavy and redroot and prostrate pigweed, green foxtail and barnyardgrass infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury, and weed control were made July 23 and August 24. Stand counts were made on July 23 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Dry beans were cut and left in the field one week before thrashing. Dry beans were harvested on September 8 by combining the two center rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

82 Table 60. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in dry edible beans with preemergence applications of dimethenamid, BAS 656, and Metolachlor II Mag, cultivation and postemergence applications of Bentazon in combination with either AC or imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Dry edible beans Planting Date May 19, 1998 Planting Rate 80 lb/a Fertilizer 75-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and Discussion Weed Control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings and stand counts are given in Table 61 and Table 62. None of the treatments caused any noticeable crop injury. All treatments except the Check gave good to excellent control of all weed species during ll rating periods. Crop Yields Crop yields are given in Table 62. Yields were 2613 to 3074 lb/a higher in the herbicide treated plots as compare to Check. 68

83 Table 61. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, cultivation, and postemergence herbicides on July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (no.) (%) dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 3 1.0/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 3 1.1/ dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 4 1.0/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 4 1.1/ dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.0/ BAS 656/ imazethapyr +bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.1/ dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 5 1.0/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 5 1.1/ dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.0/ BAS 656/ imazethapyr + bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.1/ check av weeds/m LSD 0.05 ns Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no injury or weed control and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. First treatment applied early preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v. 5. First treatment applied preemergence band followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v. 69

84 Table 62. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, cultivation, postemergence herbicides on August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (lb/a) dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 3 1.0/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon 0.55/ metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 3 1.1/ dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 4 1.0/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 4 1.1/ dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.0/ BAS 656/ imazethapyr + bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.1/ dimethenamid/ AC bentazon 5 1.0/ BAS 656/ AC bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ AC bentazon 5 1.1/ dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.0/ BAS 656/ imazethapyr + bentazon / metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.1/ check av weeds/m LSD Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no injury or weed control and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. First treatment applied early preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v. 5. First treatment applied preemergence band followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v. 70

85 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides. Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy of selected herbicides for control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in field corn. Determine corn tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of field corn (Pioneer 3525) and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to preemergence and postemergence herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Field corn was planted at 22 lb/a with flexi-planters equipped with disk openers on May 4. Preemergence treatments were applied May 5 and were immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Three postemergence treatments were applied on May 28 when corn was in the fifth leaf stage and weeds were small. Black nightshade infestations were heavy and redroot and prostrate pigweed, barnyardgrass and green foxtail infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were made June 8 and June 29 and July 8 and July 29. Stand counts were made on June 8 and June 29 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Field corn was harvested on November 16 by combining the center two rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

86 Table 63. Procedure for Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Test Location Test Year 1998 Procedure Crop Pioneer 3525 Planting Date May 4, 1998 Planting Rate Fertilizer Insecticide NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington 22 lb/a 225-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Soil Characteristics Target Species Solid Set Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and discussion Weed Control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings, crop injury, and stand counts are presented in Table 64 and Table 65. Flumetsulam plus cloransulam-methyl applied at plus 0.25 lb ai/a caused the highest injury rating of 95. Redroot and prostrate pigweed control was excellent with all treatments except the Check during both rating periods. Black nightshade control was good to excellent with all treatments except clopyralid plus flumetsulam plus 2,4-D applied at 0.21 lb ai/a when rated on July 29 and the Check. Annual grass control was poor with clopyralid plus flumetsulam, flumetsulam plus cloransulam-methyl, and clopyralid plus flumetsulam plus 2,4-D applied at 0.21 and plus 0.25 lb ai/a. Crop Yields Yields are given in Table 65. Flumetsulam plus cloransulam- methyl applied at plus 0.25 lb ai/a injured corn severely, yielding only 5 bu/a. Yields were 85 to 141 bu/a higher in herbicide treated plots, (except for flumetsulam plus cloransulammethyl applied at plus 0.25 lb ai/a) as compared to the Check. 72

87 Table 64. Annual grass and broadleaf weed control with preemergence and postemergence herbicides on June 9 and June 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Crop Stand Weed control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Injury Count Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + atrazine metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + atrazine metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + isoxaflutole metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + isoxaflutole isoxaflutole isoxaflutole isoxaflutole isoxaflutole + dimethenamid isoxaflutole + atrazine clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) flumetsulam + cloransulam-methyl clopyralid + flumetsulam + 2,4-D (pm) check av weeds/m LSD pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0 to 100 where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Amare = redroot pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass and Setvi = green foxtail. 4. Treatments applied postemergence with a COC at 1% v/v and rated on June 29. All other treatments were applied preemergence and rated on June 8. 73

88 Table 65. Annual grass and broadleaf weed control with preemergence and postemergence herbicides on July 8 and July 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + atrazine metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + atrazine metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + isoxaflutole metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + isoxaflutole isoxaflutole isoxaflutole isoxaflutole isoxaflutole dimethenamid isoxaflutole + atrazine clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 4 flumetsulam cloransulam-methyl clopyralid + flumetsulam ,4-D (pm) 4 check av weeds/m LSD pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0 to 100 where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Amare = redroot pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass and Setvi = green foxtail. 4. Treatments applied postemergence with a COC at 1% v/v and rated on July 29. All other treatments were applied preemergence and rated on July 8. 74

89 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence Herbicides. Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy of selected herbicides for control of broadleaf weeds in field corn. Determine corn tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and Methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of field corn (Pioneer 3525) and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to preemergence herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Field corn was planted with flexi-planters equipped with disk openers on May 4. Treatments were applied on May 5, and immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Black nightshade infestations were heavy, prostrate and redroot pigweed, barnyardgrass, and green foxtail infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were made June 9, and July 9. Stand counts were made on June 9 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Field corn was harvested on November 16, by combining the center two rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

90 Table 66. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with preemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Pioneer 3525 Planting Date May 4, 1998 Planting Rate 22 lb/a Fertilizer 225-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and Discussion Weed Control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings and stand counts are given in Table 67 and Table 68. No injury was observed in any of the treatments. All treatments gave excellent control of all weed species, except the check (Table 67). Redroot and prostrate pigweed, barnyardgrass, and green foxtail control were good to excellent with all treatments, except the check (Table 68). Metolachlor II, metolachlor II Mag, dimethenamid, and acetochlor applied at 1.5, 1.0, 1.0, 1.2 and 1.6 lb ai/a gave poor control of black nightshade (Table 68). Crop Yields Yields are given in Table 68. Yields were 113 to 148 bu/a higher in the herbicide treated plots as compared to the Check. 76

91 Table 67. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence herbicides in field corn on June 9, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (no.) (%) acetochlor atrazine (pm) acetochlor atrazine (pm) acetochlor atrazine (pm) acetochlor BAS BAS metolachlor II dimethenamid metolachlor II Mag acetochlor acetochlor dimethenamid atrazine (pm) BAS atrazine dimethenamid atrazine check av weeds/m LSD 0.05 ns pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass and Setvi = green foxtail. 77

92 Table 68. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence herbicides in field corn on July 9, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) acetochlor atrazine (pm) acetochlor atrazine (pm) acetochlor atrazine (pm) acetochlor BAS BAS metolachlor II dimethenamid metolachlor II Mag acetochlor acetochlor dimethenamid atrazine (pm) BAS atrazine dimethenamid atrazine check av weeds/m LSD pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass and Setvi = green foxtail. 78

93 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Postemergence Herbicides. Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold, of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy of selected herbicides for control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in field corn. Determine corn tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of field corn (Pioneer 3525) and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to postemergence herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Field corn was planted at 22 lb/a with flexiplanters equipped with disk openers on May 4. Preemergence treatments were applied May 5 and immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied May 28 when corn was in the fifth leaf stage and weeds were small. Black nightshade infestations were heavy, redroot and prostrate pigweed, barnyardgrass, and green foxtail infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were made on June 29 and July 29. The preemergence treatment was rated on June 9 and July 9. Stand counts were made on June 9 and June 29 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Field corn was harvested on November 16 by combining the center two rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

94 Table 69. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with postemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Pioneer 3525 Planting Date May 4, 1998 Planting Rate 22 lb/a Fertilizer 225-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Results and discussion Weed control and injury evaluations Weed control ratings, crop injury, and stand count for June 9, June 29, July 9, and July 29 are given in Table 70 and Table 71. Nicosulfuron plus rimsulfuron plus atrazine (pm) plus prosulfuron plus primisulfuron (pm) applied postemergence at 0.79 plus lb ai/a caused the highest injury rating of 12. All treatments gave good to excellent control of all weeds except the check during all rating periods. Crop yield Yields are given in Table 71. Yields were 104 to 134 bu/a higher in the herbicide treated plots as compared to the Check. 80

95 Table 70. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence herbicides in field corn on June 9 and June 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Crop Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Injury 2 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) 4 1.6/ dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pro) + clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 4 1.6/ dimethenamid + atrazine (pm) nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron +atrazine (pm) nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pro) + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) nicosulfuron + atrazine nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pm) clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) nicosulfuron + dicamba nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pro) + dicamba nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + BAS nicosulfuron + BAS nicosulfuron + BAS nicosulfuron + BAS check

96 Crop Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Injury 2 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) av weeds/m LSD ns pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass and Setvi = green foxtail. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment with a COC at 1% v/v and evaluated on June Treatment applied preemergence and evaluated on June Treatments applied postemergence with a COC at 1% v/v and evaluated on June Treatments applied postemergence with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v and evaluated on June 29. Table 71. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence herbicides in field corn on July 9 and July 29; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) 4 1.6/ dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pm) + clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) / dimethenamid + atrazine (pm) nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine

97 Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) nicosulfuron + atrazine nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pm) clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) nicosulfuron + dicamba nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + dicamba nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + BAS nicosulfuron + BAS nicosulfuron + BAS nicosulfuron + BAS check av weeds/m LSD pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 3. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass and Setvi = green foxtail. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment with a COC at 1% v/v and evaluated on July Treatment applied preemergence and evaluated on July Treatments applied postemergence with a COC at 1% v/v and evaluated on July Treatments applied postemergence with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v and evaluated on July

98 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence, Preemergence Followed by Postemmergence, and Postemergence Herbicides. Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy of selected herbicides for control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in field corn. Determine corn tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of field corn (Pioneer 3525) and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to preemergence, preemergence followed by postemergence, and postemergence herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Field corn was planted at 22 lb/a with flexiplanters equipped with disk openers on May 4. Preemergence treatments were applied May 5 and immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied May 28 when corn was in the fifth leaf stage and weeds were small. Black nightshade infestations were heavy, barnyardgrass, green foxtail, redroot and prostrate pigweed infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were made June 8, June 29, July 8, and July 29. Stand counts were made on June 8 and June 29 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Field corn was harvested on November 17 by combining the center two rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

99 Table 72. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with preemergence, preemergence followed by postemergence, and postemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Test Location Test Year 1998 Procedure Crop Pioneer 3525 Planting Date May 4, 1998 Planting Rate Fertilizer Insecticide NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington 22 lb/a 225-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Soil Characteristics Target Species Solid Set Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and discussion Weed control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings crop injury, and stand count for June 8, June 29, and July 8 and July 29 are given in Table 73 and Table 74 Nicosulfuron plus prosulfuron plus primisulfuron (Spirit or Exceed) applied postemergence at plus lb ai/a gave the highest injuring rating of 5. All treatments gave good to excellent control of all weeds except the Check during all rating periods. Crop yields Yields are given in Table 74. Yields were 93 to 176 bu/a higher in herbicide treated plots as compared to the Check. Yields were lower in some plots due to Russian thistle and lambquarters infestations. 85

100 Table 73. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, preemergence followed by postemmergence and postemergence herbicides on Jun 8 and June 29; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Crop Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) metolachlor II Mag metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) metolachlor + atrazine II (pm) metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag / metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) / metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) / metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + dicamba / metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.37/ metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.19/ metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) dicamba 4,6 1.19/ metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag / metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag 4, / metolachlor II Mag/ primisulfuron + metolachlor II Mag / nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm)

101 Crop Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 5, check av weeds/m LDS ns Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no weed control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Treatments applied preemergence and rated on June 8 and pm = packaged mix. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a COC at 1% v/v and rated on June Treatments applied postemergence with sprayable ammonium sulfate and a COC at 1 % v/v and rated on June Packaged mix is registered under Norvartis Crop Protection and is Spirit. Table 74. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, preemergence followed by postemergence, and postemergence herbicides on July 8 and July 29; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) metolachlor II Mag metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) metolachlor + atrazine II (pm) metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag / metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) / metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) / metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + dicamba / metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.37/ metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.19/

102 Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) dicamba 4,6 1.19/ metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag / metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag 4, / metolachlor II Mag/ primisulfuron + metolachlor II Mag / nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 5, check av weeds/m LDS Based on a visual scale from where 0 = no weed control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amare = redroot pigweed, Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. Treatments applied preemergence and rated on July 8 and pm = packaged mix. 4. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a COC at 1% v/v and rated on July Treatments applied postemergence with sprayable ammonium sulfate and a COC at 1% v/v and rated on July Packaged mix is registered under Norvartis Crop Protection and is Spirit. 88

103 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Roundup Ready Field Corn Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy of selected herbicides for control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in roundup ready field corn. Determine corn tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and methods A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of roundup ready field corn (Dekalb 512RR} and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to selected herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Field corn was planted at 22 lb/a with flexi-planters equipped with disk openers on May 4. Preemergence treatments were applied on May 6 and immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied June 2 to corn 12 inches tall and June 23 to corn 24 inches tall. Black nightshade infestations were heavy and redroot and prostrate pigweed, green foxtail and barnyardgrass infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations of crop injury and weed control were made July 2 and August 3 to corn 12 inches tall, and July 23 and August 24 to corn 24 inches tall. The preemergence treatment was evaluated on June 8 and July 8. Stand counts were made on June 8, July 2 and July 23 by counting individual plants per 10 ft. of the third row of each plot. Field corn was harvested on November 16 by combining the center two rows of each plot using a John Deere 3300 combine equipped with a load cell. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

104 Table 75. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in roundup ready field corn; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Dekalb 512RR Planting Date May 4, 1998 Planting Rate 22 lb/a Fertilizer 225-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and discussion Weed control and injury evaluations Weed control ratings, crop injury, and stand count for June 8, July 2, July 8, July 23, August 3, and August 24, are given in Table 76 and Table 77. Glyphosate applied postemergence at 1.0 lb ai/a to corn 12 inches tall, followed by a sequential treatment at 0.75 lb ai/a to corn 24 inches tall had the highest injury rating of 4. All treatments gave good to excellent control of all weeds except the check during all rating periods. Crop yields Yields are given in Table 77. Yields were 98 to 134 bu/a higher in the herbicide treated plots as compared to the Check. 90

105 Table 76. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with selected herbicides in roundup ready field corn on June 8, July 2, and July 23, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Crop Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 1.3/ acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 2.0/ acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 2.7/ atrazine/glyphosate 3 1.5/ metolachlor II Mag/ nicosulfuron / dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron 3 1.6/ metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag 4 (pm) metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ glyphosate metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) + glyphosate 5, glyphosate/ glyphosate 6 1.0/ acetochlor + atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5, atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5, Mon glyphosate + atrazine 5, dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 1.6/ glyphosate check av weeds/m LDS ns Based on a visual scale from 0 to 100 where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Amare = redroot pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied to corn 24 inches tall and evaluated on July Treatment applied preemergence and evaluated on June 8 and pm = package mix. 5. Treatments applied with postemergence to corn 12 inches tall and evaluated on July Treatments applied with sprayable ammonium sulfate at 2% v/v. 91

106 Table 77. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with selected herbicides in roundup ready field corn on July 8, August 3, and August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 1.3/ acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 2.0/ acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 2.7/ atrazine/glyphosate 3 1.5/ metolachlor II Mag/ nicosulfuron / dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron 3 1.6/ metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag 4 (pm) metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/glyphosate metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) + glyphosate 5, glyphosate/glyphosate 6 1.0/ acetochlor + atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5, acetochlor + atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5, Mon glyphosate + atrazine 5, dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 1.6/ glyphosate check av weeds/m LDS Based on a visual scale from 0 to 100 where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Amabl = prostrate pigweed, Amare = redroot pigweed, Solni = black nightshade, Echcg = barnyardgrass, and Setvi = green foxtail. 3. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied to corn 24 inches tall and evaluated on August Treatment applied preemergence and evaluated on July 8 and pm = package mix. 5. Treatments applied with postemergence to corn 12 inches tall and evaluated on August Treatments applied with sprayable ammonium sulfate at 2% v/v. 92

107 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Russet Norkota Potato. Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Introduction This test was conducted by Mr. R.N. Arnold of the Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, Farmington, New Mexico. Objectives Determine herbicide efficacy of selected herbicides for control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in field potato. Determine potato tolerance and yield to applied selected herbicides. Materials and discussion A field experiment was conducted in 1998 at Farmington, New Mexico to evaluate the response of Russet Norkotah potato and annual grass and broadleaf weeds to herbicides. Soils were fertilized according to New Mexico State University recommendations based on soil tests. The experimental design was randomized complete block with three replications. Individual plots were 4, 34 in. rows 30 ft. long. Treatments were applied with a compressed air backpack sprayer calibrated to deliver 30 gal/a at 30 psi. Potatoes were planted on April 20. Preemergence treatments were applied after drag-off on May 18 and were immediately incorporated with 0.75 in. of sprinkler applied water. Postemergence treatments were applied on June 2 when potatoes were 3 to 4 inches in height and weeds were small. Black nightshade, infestations were heavy and prostrate and redroot pigweed, barnyardgrass, green foxtail infestations were moderate throughout the experimental area. Visual evaluations for crop injury and weed control were made June 18, July 2, July 20 and August 3. Potatoes were not harvested due to diseased seed pieces and reduced yields. Results obtained were subjected to analysis of variance at P=

108 Table 78. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in Russet Korkotah potato; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Russet Norkotah Planting Date April 23, 1998 Planting Rate lb/a Fertilizer 250-N, 50-P 2 O 5, 50-K 2 O Insecticide None Herbicide See Table 49 Irrigation Solid Set Soil Characteristics Soil type: Wall sandy loam Soil ph: 7.9 Soil Organic Matter: Less than 1 percent Cation Exchange Capacity: 8 Target Species Prostrate pigweed (Amaranthus blitoides S.Wats. Redroot pigweed (Amaranthus retroflexus (L.) Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum (L.) Barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli (L.) Beauv.) Green foxtail (Setaria viridis (L.)Beauv.) Results and discussion Weed control and Injury Evaluations Weed control ratings are given in Table 79 and Table 80 No injury was observed from any of the treatments. All treatments gave good to excellent control of all weed species except the Check during all rating Crop Yields No yields were taken in

109 Table 79. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in Russet Norkotah potato with prememergence herbicides on June 18 and July 2, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Setvi Echcg Solni Amabl Amare (lb ai/a) (%) metribuzin metribuzin + dimethenamid metribuzin + BAS metribuzin + rimsulfuron dimethenamid dimethenamid + rimsulfuron BAS BAS rimsulfuron rimsulfuron metribuzin/rimsulfuron 3 0.3/ dimethenamid/ rimsulfuron / BAS 656/rimsulfuron / rimsulfuron dimethenamid BAS check weeds/m LSD Based on a visual scale from 0 to 100 where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Setvi = green foxtail, Echcg = barnyardgrass, Solni = black nightshade, Amabl prostrate pigweed, and Amare = redroot pigweed. 3. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant at 0.25% v/v and evaluated on July Treatment applied postemergence with a surfactant at 0.25% and evaluated on July 2. 95

110 Table 80. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds in Russet Norkotah potato with preemergence herbicides on July 20 and August 3, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Setvi Echcg Solni Amabl Amare (lb ai/a) (%) metribuzin metribuzin + dimethenamid metribuzin + BAS metribuzin + rimsulfuron dimethenamid dimethenamid + rimsulfuron BAS BAS rimsulfuron rimsulfuron metribuzin/rimsulfuron 3 0.3/ dimethenamid/ rimsulfuron / BAS 656/rimsulfuron / rimsulfuron dimethenamid BAS check weeds/m LSD Based on a visual scale from 0 to 100 where 0 = no control or crop injury and 100 = dead plants. 2. Setvi = green foxtail, Echcg = barnyardgrass, Solni = black nightshade, Amabl prostrate pigweed, and Amare = redroot pigweed. 3. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment applied with a surfactant at 0.25% v/v and evaluated on August Treatment applied postemergence with a surfactant at 0.25% and evaluated on August 3. 96

111 Irrigation and Fertilizer Studies Funding and resources provided by NAPI Plant & Soils Laboratory, Southwest Seed, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, NM State Engineers Office, Hydro Agri North America, Inc., Stockhausen, Inc., McMahon BioConsulting, Inc., Morningstar Corp. and BioFlora International. Authors: Daniel Smeal, B.S., M.S. and Janice F. Tomko, B.S. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S, M.A Revision Authors acknowledge three students for their valuable assistance: Rachel Boyles, Andy Lake, and Trenton Roberts Sprinkler-Line-Source Experimental Plots Introduction Studies were conducted on the Agricultural Science Center situated 6 miles southwest of Farmington, New Mexico. The science center is located on the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project (NIIP). The elevation is 5,640 feet above sea level, annual average precipitation is 8.1 inches and winds prevail from the west. Description of Line-Source Plot design A single sprinkler line-source concept was used to provide varying irrigation or fertigation levels to crops in the experiments described in the following three sections of this report. The general plot configuration consists of a single sprinkler line that provides a continuous decreasing application gradient of water away from, and on each side of, the sprinkler line when operated during non-windy conditions (Figure 1). Irrigation treatments (subplots) are situated parallel to the line and are of a width and length that will reasonably represent crop yield on a per acre basis. With crops planted in widely-spaced rows (i.e. potatoes), subplot width is normally represented by a single row, while subplot width in grasses (i.e. turf) is usually adjusted to accommodate the available harvesting equipment. Catch-cans, to capture irrigation water for measurement, and neutron probe access tubes, to facilitate soil-water measurements with a neutron probe, are placed in selected subplots. The sprinkler-line is composed of 3-inch diameter, 20-foot long aluminum pipe joints with Rainbird model 30H sprinklers placed on risers to extend above the crop canopy. Irrigations are applied during non-windy periods at an operating pressure of psi. The total plot area created by the overlapping water pattern is 100 ft. wide and ranges in length from about 80 ft. to 120 ft. depending on the number of joints used. Additional lines are usually set up and operated at the beginning of the season to provide uniform irrigation for plant establishment and uniform fertilization during nitrogations. In fertigation studies, these additional lines are operated throughout the entire season but fertilizer is injected into the center line only. This provides a fertilization gradient within an area of uniform irrigation. All of our experiments were planted into a sandy loam soil and irrigations were scheduled to maintain soil moisture in plots next to the line-source at a level between field 97

112 capacity (about 15% by volume) and 50% of total available water content in the estimated root zone. Total evapotranspiration (ET) for a given time period was calculated at each neutron probe access tube location by use of the water balance equation: ET = I + P + CSW Where... I = Irrigation water applied. P = Precipitation. CSW = Change in soil water (- or +). Statistical regression, correlation and analysis of variance techniques were used to evaluate treatment effects on yield, and yield/water relationships. Brief Explanation of the Regression Equations Data from results of the studies in this section are presented in both tables and graphs. The graphs allow the reader to quickly identify how each crop variety responded to treatment. The points on each graph (when shown) represent actual measured data. The lines shown on the graphs represent the average response of the crop to treatment (i.e. yield to water application). These lines are formulated using the actual data points and are referred to as best line fits of the data. The equations used to define the lines are shown with each graph and allow for calculation of an average value of Y (dependent variable shown on the vertical axis, i.e. yield) with any given value of x (independent variable of the horizontal axis, i.e. water applied) within the range of treatment values shown. For example, referring to Figure 3: Pasture grass yield as related to irrigation.., the average dry matter yield of Crown orchard grass at a seasonal irrigation level of 30 inches was 4455 lb/acre ( x l3.3 x x 30 3 ). The r 2 value The coefficient of determination (r 2 ) accompanying each regression equation indicates the accuracy of that equation, or how well the line shown fits the actual data. Basically, the r 2 represents the proportion of variability in Y that can be described by treatment variability (x). For example, the equation for Hycrest crested wheatgrass (Figure 3) indicates that 90% of yield variability could be attributed to irrigation level. 98

113 Figure 1. General schematic of the single sprinkler-line source design used to evaluate crop response to irrigation (top), and the expected water distribution pattern under no-wind conditions (bottom); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Biomass Yield and Forage Quality of Pasture Grasses as Related to Irrigation, Year 3. Objective Evaluate the effects of irrigation on the forage yield and feed quality of eight pasture grasses. Procedure A duplicated single sprinkler line-source design (Figure 2) was used to provide irrigation treatments to eight different pasture grasses in northwestern New Mexico. 99

114 Table 81. Methods and materials for pasture grass forage yield and quality as related to irrigation, year 3; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Plot design Duplicated Line-source or Split-plot (Figure 2) Treatments: Main Plot Grass Variety (n=8) Sub-plot Irrigation Level (n=7) Replications: 4 Cultivars Grass Planting Rate (lb seed/acre) (Recommended by supplier) Crown Orchard 4.0 Hycrest Crested Wheat 10.0 Smooth Brome 13.0 Fawn Tall Fescue 8.0 Linn Perennial Rye 8.0 Regar Meadow Brome 17.0 Oahe Intermediate Wheat 15.0 Luna Pubescent Wheat 14.0 Planting date September 06, 1995 (cone seeder) (field rototilled and harrowed on 08/30/95) Fertilization Date: 02/13/98 Product: Rate: 40 lb N/acre plus 48 lb S/acre Product: Rate: 38 lb N/acre plus 177 lb P 2 O 5 /acre Date: 06/17/98 Product: Rate: 60 lb N/acre plus 72 lb S/acre Total: 138 lb N, 177 lb P 2 O 5, 120 lb S/acre Herbicides Date: 02/13/98 Product: LX-2G Rate: 200 lb product/acre Date: 06/22/98 Product: 2,4-D and Banvel Rate: 0.25 pt. product/acre Insecticides Date: 06/22/98 Product: Sevin Rate: 1 lb product/acre Irrigation Variable by design. (Table 82) Harvest Dates 05/14/98, 06/15/98, 07/20/98, 09/15/98 Harvest Methodology Plots (5 feet x 18 feet) were harvested with a forage harvester when at least some of the grasses were beginning to form heads. 100

115 Figure 2. Diagram of the duplicated line-source design used to evaluate yield response of eight pasture grasses to variable irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

116 Results The pasture grass plots were harvested four times during the 1998 growing season (Table 81). Thirty-one irrigations were applied to the crop during the growing season and total average irrigation depth ranged from about 14 inches at plots farthest from the line-source to 34 inches at plots next to the line-source (Table 82). An additional 5 inches of rainfall occurred during the active growing season. Total seasonal yield of all grasses increased with increasing irrigation (Table 83, Table 84, and Figure 3) up to a water application depth of about 36 inches (rainfall included). Above an irrigation depth of 36 inches, only Fawn tall fescue and Luna pubescent wheatgrass provided increased yields. Total yields ranged from less than 525 lb/acre dry-matter at the lowest irrigation treatment to more than 3 ton/acre (Crown orchard and Regar meadow brome) at the high irrigation treatment. While the wheatgrasses, provided slightly higher yields than the other grasses at irrigation depths less than 27 inches, Crown orchard and Regar meadow brome provided the greatest yields at irrigation treatments greater than 30 inches (Figure 3). Linn perennial ryegrass, even though providing good ground cover, was short in stature and provided lower forage yields than the other grasses at nearly all irrigation depths. Generally, grass protein content varied more between irrigation depths within a given grass than between grasses. Further, irrigation had an inverse effect on protein content in all grasses, i.e. mean protein content was higher (18.6%) at low irrigation depths than at high irrigation depths (12.7%) when averaged over all four harvests (Figure 4, top). With the exception of smooth brome and Linn perennial rye-grass, relative food value (RFV) of the forage also decreased with increased irrigation depth (Figure 4, bottom). There was more variability in RFV between species than there was with protein. Generally, Crown orchard and Regar meadow brome produced higher quality forage than the other grasses at the low irrigation level, while at the high irrigation level Linn perennial ryegrass produced the highest quality forage. 102

117 Table 82. Dates and amounts of irrigation water applied to pasture grass during four growing periods at each of seven different irrigation treatments as provided by the line-source. Values represent the Mean of four replications; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Irrigation Date Irrigation Treatment Growth Period 1 (inches of irrigation water applied) 04/ / / / Total Growth Period Growth Period 2 (inches of irrigation water applied) 05/ / / / / / / Total Growth Period Growth Period 3 (inches of irrigation water applied) 06/ / / / / / / / / Total Growth Period Growth Period 4 (inches of irrigation water applied) 07/ / /

118 Irrigation Date Irrigation Treatment Growth Period 4 (inches of irrigation water applied) 08/ / / / / / / / Total Growth Period Table 83. Dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses as related to applied water from four harvests during the 1998 growing season; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Water Applied (in) Crown Orchard Hycrest Crested Wheat Smooth Brome Fawn Tall Fescue Linn Perennial Rye (dry lb/acre) Harvest 1 (05/14/98) Regar Meadow Brome Oahe Inter. Wheat Luna Pubesc. Wheat Mean Harvest 2 (06/15/98) Mean Harvest 3 (07/20/98) Mean 104

119 Water Applied (in) Crown Orchard Hycrest Crested Wheat Smooth Brome Fawn Tall Fescue Linn Perennial Rye (dry lb/acre) Regar Meadow Brome Oahe Inter. Wheat Luna Pubesc. Wheat Mean Harvest 4 (09/15/98) Mean Applied water includes 1.40, 0.03, 0.43, and 3.02 inches of precipitation for harvest 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. Yield and water applied values shown represent the mean of four replications. Mean Table 84. Total 1998 dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses at seven levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Water Applied Crown Orchard Hycrest Crested Wheat Smooth Brome Fawn Tall Fescue Linn Perennial Rye Regar Meadow Brome Oahe Inter. Wheat Luna Pubesc. Wheat Mean (in) (dry lb/acre ) (Total Yield 1998) Mean Applied water includes 4.90 inches of precipitation Yield and water applied values shown represent the mean of four replications and the sum from four harvests. 105

120 Figure 3. Total dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses as related to irrigation, (Year 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Regression equations describing the relationship between dry-matter yield and irrigation for eight pasture grasses as depicted by the best-fit lines show in Figure 3, where Y = dry matter yield (lbs/ac) and w = water applied (in.): Crown Orchard: Y = w w w 3, r 2 = 1.0 Hycrest Crested Wheat: Y = w, r 2 = 0.90 Smooth Brome: Y = w, r 2 = 0.95 Fawn Tall Fescue: Y = w w w 3, r 2 = 1.0 Linn Perennial Rye: Y = w, r 2 = 0.93 Regar Meadow Brome: Y = w, r 2 = 0.94 Oahe Intermediate Wheat Y = w 10.9w 2, r 2 = 0.99 Luna Pubescent Wheat: Y = w 5.37w 2, r 2 =

121 Figure 4. Protein content and relative food value of eight pasture grasses at three levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

122 Potential Water-Conservation through Turfgrass Selection and Irrigation Scheduling. Funding provided by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and New Mexico State Engineers Office. Grant Project: Objectives Evaluate growth characteristics and water-use efficiencies of various turfgrass cultivars. Evaluate irrigation scheduling techniques that may be used for efficient water management in turfgrass maintenance. Develop crop-coefficients to formulate efficient irrigation scheduling programs for turfgrasses in northern New Mexico. Procedure A sprinkler-line source design (Figure 5) was used to provide irrigation treatments to each of seven cultivars of both warm-season and cool-season turf grasses. Applied water and soil moisture was monitored at each of five duplicated irrigation levels in each plot during the growing season. Independent judges provided acceptability ratings to each turfgrass at each irrigation level. Table 85. Methods and materials for the turfgrass irrigation study, Year 1; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Plot design Sprinkler line-source 2 plots (Figure 5) Treatments: Main Plot Grass Variety (n = 7 in each plot) Sub-plot Irrigation level (n = 5 in each plot) Replications 2 (1 on each side of line) Cultivars Warm Season Turf Planting rate (lb seed/1000 ft 2 ) Bison Buffalograss 5.1 Tatanka Buffalograss 5.3 Texoka Buffalograss 5.4 Guymon Bermudagrass 2.8 N.M. Sahara Bermudagrass 1.5 Lovington Blue Gramagrass 2.3 Mix: Grama & Texoka 5.0 Cool Season Turf Adelphi Bluegrass 3.7 Ascot Bluegrass 3.3 Coventry Bluegrass 3.8 Goldrush Bluegrass 3.6 Park Bluegrass 3.5 Seville Perennial Ryegrass 10.5 Shenandoah Tall Fescue

123 Operation Procedure Planting date July 7-11, 1997: Warm-season grasses September 9, 1997: Cool-season grasses Preplant Fertilization 1997 (broadcast and rototilled) Warm-season grass: Date: 06/30/97 Product: , Rate: 0.4 N, 1.7 P 2 O 5 lb/1000 ft 2 Product , Rate: 1.6 K 2 O lb/1000 ft 2 Product , Rate: 1.4 N lb/1000 ft 2 Total N = 1.8 lb/1000 ft 2 Cool season grass: Date: 09/03/97 Product: , Rate: 0.4 N lb/1000 ft 2 Product: , Rate: 2.1 K 2 O lb/1000 ft 2 Product: , Rate: 2.6 N lb/1000 ft 2 Total N = 3.0 lb/1000 ft 2 Note: For post-plant fertilizations see Table 86. Herbicides Warm-season: Date: 04/07/98 Product: 2,4-D, Rate 0.25 pt/acre Product: Banvel, Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Date: 05/29/98 Product: 2,4-D, Rate 0.25 pt/acre Product: Banvel, Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Date: 08/12/98 Product: 2,4-D, Rate 0.25 pt/acre Product: Banvel, Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Cool-season: Date: 03/05/98 Product: 2,4-D (LV6), Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Date: 05/29/98 Product: 2,4-D (LV-6), Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Product: Banvel, Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Date: 08/12/98 Product: 2,4-D (LV-6), Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Product: Banvel, Rate: 0.25 pt/acre Insecticides Warm-season: None required Cool-season: Date: 05/13/98 Product: Dylox (Control of cutworms. Injected into irrigation), Rate: 1.7 pt/acre Irrigation Variable by design.(figure 1) 109

124 Table 86. Post-plant fertilizer summary for warm and cool-season turfgrasses; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Warm-season grasses Rate (lb/1000 ft 2 ) Date Product N P 2 O 5 K 2 O 05/08/ /29/ /17/ /13/ /11/ Totals Other: 06/17/98 Microplex at rate of 0.02 lb/1000 ft 2 (0.5% B, 0.05% Co, 1.5% Cu, 4.0% Fe, 5.43% Mg, 4.0%, Mn, 0.1% Mo, 1.5% Zn) 08/25/98 Ironite at rate of 4.4 lb/1000 ft 2 (1.5% N, 4.5% S, 1.75% Fe, 0.1% Zn) Cool-season grasses Rate (lb/1000 ft 2 ) Date Product N P 2 O 5 K 2 O 10/06/ /12/ /28/ /17/ /11/ /31/ /22/ Totals Other: 06/17/98 - Microplex at a rate of lb/1000 ft 2 (see above) 06/29/98 - Trigger at a rate of 0.32 pt/1000 ft 2 (0.5% Mg, 0.03% B, 0.1% Fe, 0.05% Mn, 0.1% Mo, 0.05% Zn) 08/25/98 - Ironite at a rate of 2.8 lb/1000 ft 2 (see above) 110

125 Figure 5. Diagram of the sprinkler line-source plots used to evaluate turfgrass water requirements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Results The cool-season turfgrasses began greening up in late February to early March. However, the initial irrigation was not applied until April 13, 1998 when water became available. Between April 13 and October 14, 1998 the cool-season plots were irrigated 59 times (Table 88). The warm-season grasses did not break dormancy until about April 28 when the initial irrigation was applied. Between April 28 and October 14, 51 irrigations were applied to the warm-season plots (Table 87). Total irrigation depths ranged from 15.8 to 35.8 inches in the warm-season turf and from 25.1 to 43.5 inches in the cool-season turf from the farthest to nearest subplots away from the line-source, respectively. An additional 4.1 and 6.9 inches of precipitation fell on the warm and cool season plots, respectively, during the active growth season. Reference evapotranspiration (ET o ), as calculated with a revised Penman method, averaged 0.35 inches/day during June and July but exceeded 0.4 inches on some days (Figure 6). Reference ET is an estimate of the water used by a healthy, uniform grass cover that completely shades the ground and is never short of water. It is dependent upon weather conditions including temperature, humidity, sunlight intensity and wind. The data shown in Figure 6 represent average daily ET o for 7-day periods during the 1998 growing season as calculated with these weather parameters. The high ET o (greater than 0.4 inches/day) in late June (Figure 6) occurred during a period of high maximum daily temperatures, low humidities, and clear skies while the lower ET o (0.26 inches/day) in the second week of July was due to cooler temperatures, high humidities and cloudy skies. The ratios of actual measured ET of the turf at various irrigation levels (based on measured irrigation, precipitation and changes in soil moisture) to ET o are shown in Figure 7 (warm-season grasses) and Figure 8 (cool-season grasses). The ET/ ET o ratio is 111

126 commonly referred to as the crop-coefficient (K C ) and can be useful in scheduling irrigations (refer to next paragraph). Independent judges evaluated all grasses at the various irrigation depths twice during the summer. The ET/ ET o ratios of subplots within each grass having the lowest irrigation depth that still received an acceptable rating are also shown in Figure 7 and Figure 8. In some cases, this acceptable level occurred at a plot precisely where soil moisture measurements were taken (Figure 8, Adelphi and Park bluegrass). In other cases, the acceptable grass was growing at an irrigation level in between neutron probe tubes and ET was interpolated (Figure 7, Bison and Texoka buffalograss). By over-irrigating some plots and under-irrigating others with the linesource, we were able to accurately identify the water needs of each grass. Figure 9 summarizes the measurements over the season for each grass at the acceptable level. Note that N.M. Sahara bermudagrass had lower water requirements (peak of 0.16 inches/day and 22-inch total) than all other grasses. However, it also broke spring dormancy later, and went into fall dormancy sooner, than the other warmseason grasses. Generally, the bluegrasses and perennial ryegrass had the greatest irrigation requirements (total seasonal of 43 inches and daily peak of 0.26 inches). Overall, the warm-season grasses maintained an acceptable appearance with about 60% of the irrigation required to produce acceptable qualities in the cool-season grasses. Other findings Due to the darker green color, most judges preferred the appearance of the cool season grasses over the buffalo and grama grasses. However, the bermudagrasses were rated equally with some of the bluegrasses. Within the cool-season grasses, the perennial ryegrass was rated slightly higher than the other cool-season grasses because of its fine leaf texture, good uniform stand and dark green color on judging days. However, due to its high water requirements it appeared to turn a gray-green color during hot, dry periods. The Adelphi bluegrass, based on stand uniformity and leaf texture, was rated highest among all bluegrasses. It also had lower water requirements to maintain a quality appearance. The Park and Ascot bluegrasses were rated lower than the other bluegrasses due to a lighter green appearance. The tall fescue, while rating high due to its dark green color, was rated lower than the other cool-season grasses because of the coarser, wider leaf texture. Among all grasses, only the grama and grama/buffalograss mix were rated unacceptable as turfs by a majority of judges. This was due to the light green color, poor texture and poor density when mowed of the grama. While its water requirements were low, it grew very fast under irrigation and became patchy looking when mowed. The Bermuda grasses were rated equal in color and stand density to the cool-season grasses. However, they broke dormancy later in spring, and entered dormancy earlier in the fall, than the cool-season grasses. The NM Sahara in particular, which was developed in southern New Mexico, did not begin turning green until about 112

127 mid-may. Because of this, weed invasion became problem. Additionally, it appears NM Sahara might be subject to winter-kill in a severe winter in our area. The water-requirements of the buffalo grasses were low and they required infrequent mowing. However, the lighter green color and finer leaf texture caused them to be rated lower than the cool-season grasses and bermudas. Table 87. Dates and amounts irrigation and precipitation applied to warm-season turf grasses at five irrigation levels; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 04/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Total / /

128 Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 08/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Total

129 Table 88. Dates and amounts irrigation and precipitation applied to cool-season turf grass at five irrigation levels; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 04/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /

130 Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 08/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / Total / / / / / / / Total

131 Figure 6. Average daily reference evapotranspiration (ET o ) from March 1 to October 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

132 Figure 7. Crop coefficient (ET/Reference ET) for various irrigation depths in warmseason turfgrass including ET/ET o at plots with lowest irrigation level exhibiting acceptable quality by judges. Note: Crop curve in late July and early August not corrected for excessive drainage due to accidental overirrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Figure 8. Crop coefficient (ET/Reference ET) for various irrigation depths in coolseason turfgrass including ET/ET o at plots with lowest irrigation level exhibiting acceptable quality by judges. Note: Crop curve in late July and early August not corrected for excessive drainage due to accidental overirrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

133 Figure 9. Daily water-use (ET) of various turfgrasses at lowest seasonal irrigation depths (in parentheses - inches) exhibiting acceptable quality turf. Establishment year corrected for drainage; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

134 Effect of N fertilizer source (with or without Ca) and rate on the yield, quality and storability of potatoes. Funding provided by Hydro Agri North America, Inc. Grant Project Objectives Compare the effects of variable rates of two nitrogen-containing fertilizers (one containing calcium and one not) on potato yield, grade, quality and storability. Specifically: Identify potential benefits derived from fertigating potatoes with calcium-nitrate (CAN) rather than UAN-32 (UAN) on the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project. Procedure A triple sprinkler-line-source concept was used to provide fertilizer application gradients to two potato cultivars (Figure 10). Refer to the entitled Description of Line- Source Plot Design (and Figure 1) for a description of the concept. In the triple linesource system, three sprinkler lines spaced about 50 feet apart are used to apply a uniform irrigation to the plot between the two outer lines during irrigations. Solutions (i.e. fertilizer dissolved in water), however, which are injected into the center line only, are applied to the plot in a decreasing, linear fashion away from, and on each side of, this center line so each row of the crop receives a different level of the solution. 120

135 Table 89. Methods and materials for potato fertilizer (N and Ca) study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Plot design Triple Line-source replicated (Figure 10) Treatments: Main Plot - Fertilizer Source (n = 2) UAN-32 (UAN): Calcium Nitrate (CAN): Ca Sub-plot - N rate (n = 5) Replications 4 Cultivars Atlantic and Russet Norkotah Planting date April 20-12, 1998 Atlantic (single-drop G4) April 22-23, 1998 Russet Norkotah (single-drop and halves G2) Planting rate Tubers planted 6-inch spacing on raised beds spaced 34 inches apart ( approx. 2.3 ton/acre) Emergence (>50%) 05/18/98 Atlantic 05/22/98 Russet Norkotah Fertilization Pre-plant: Date: 03/20/98 Product , Rate: 41 lb N and 197 lb P 2 O 5 /acre Product , Rate: 155 lb K 2 O Date: 03/23/98 Product , Rate: 65 lb N/acre Total pre-plant N: 106 lb/acre Other: Refer to Table 90 for pre-plant soil residual nutrients, Table 91 for dates of nitrogations (applied so closest subplot to injection line received 20 lbs N/acre), and Table 92 and Table 93 for total N applied during the season. Herbicide Date: 05/15/98 (Atlantic) Date: Product Turbo 8EC, Rate: 1.9 pt/acre 05/18/98 (Norkotah) Product Turbo 8EC, Rate: 2.1 pt/acre Insecticide Date: 07/27/98 Product Sevin 80WSP, Rate: 0.7 lb/acre (Control of whiteflies and leafhoppers) Irrigation Total water applied with precipitation = 32 inches (Table 91) Harvest Dates 10/06-07/98 Harvest Methodology Three, ten-foot long by 1-row (34 in) subplots were picked up by hand from each treatment after being dug with a two-row potato digger. Harvest occurred approximately 5 weeks after beginning of vine desiccations and skin set (about 30 August). 121

136 Figure 10. Diagram of the replicated triple line-source sprinkler used to provide fertigation gradients of CAN and UAN to two potato varieties; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

137 Table 90. Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of soil in the potato study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Soil Nutrient NO 3 -N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu Ca Mg Na (lb/acre foot)* *lb/acre foot content based on an estimated soil weight of 4 million pounds per acre foot. Results No statistically significant difference was found between marketable yields, tuber weights, specific gravities or incidence of disease at different levels of fertilizer rates using either UAN or CAN in either the Atlantic (Table 92) or Russet Norkotah (Table 93) potatoes when cultivars were analyzed individually. However, when replications for marketable yields of both cultivars were combined, there was a distinct trend of increasing yield with increased N fertilization using the CAN fertilizer but not the UAN fertilizer (Figure 11). At the two highest N fertilizer rates, marketable yields were greater in the plots treated with CAN than with UAN in both cultivars (Table 92 and Table 93). Possible explanations for lack of response 1. Lack of response to Ca: The irrigation water had a mean calcium concentration of 31.6 ppm and hence provided 210 lbs of calcium per acre to all plots (including those fertilized with only ) based on the seasonal irrigation depth of 29.4 inches. Also, residual soil calcium prior to any fertilization averaged 11,535 lb/acre foot (top foot) across the plot area (Table 90). This did not change significantly after fertilization with CAN (Table 94). 2. Lack of response to N: Prior to planting, the entire plot area was fertilized at a rate of 106 lbs N/acre. Coupled with a residual soil N0 3 -N content in the top foot of the profile prior to fertilization of 35.5 lb/acre (Table 90), about 140 lbs of N per acre (top foot) may have been available to the crop and may have satisfied the crop s N requirements. Other findings 1. Petiole nitrate-n and total leaf N concentrations on June 29 (after 3 fertigations) were higher with increasing N fertilization (Table 95) but they did not differ with the fertilizer used or cultivar at equal N rates. 2. Leaf Ca concentrations on June 29 did not differ between fertilizer rate or product but were significantly different between cultivars (Table 96) being greater in Russet Norkotah (2.0%) than in Atlantic (1.5%). 123

138 3. Total potato leaf N concentrations on August 11 differed between N rate, fertilizer product used and cultivar (Table 97). Leaf N decreased with lower N rate (4.93% at 149 lb N/acre to 4.39% at 52 lb N/acre), was greater in plants fertilized with UAN (mean = 4.9%) than with CAN (mean = 4.54%), and was greater in Atlantic (mean = 5.27%) than Russet Norkotah (mean = 4.17%). 4. There was a consistent inverse relationship between N fertilizer rate and Ca content of the leaves on August 11 (Table 98) even when the N was provided by CAN. However, when averaged over all cultivars and rates, leaf Ca was higher in plants fertilized with CAN (mean = 2.3%) than with UAN (mean = 2.04%). Additionally, Russet Norkotah leaves were higher in Ca (mean = 2.42%) than they were in Atlantic (mean = 1.92%). 124

139 Table 91. Dates and amounts of irrigation and precipitation applied to potato plots between planting (04/23/98) and skin set (08/30/98); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Irrigation Precipitation Date Water Applied Date Amount (mo/day (in) (mo/day) (in) 05/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / /11 0.6* 07/ /18 1.2* 07/ / / /24 1.0* 07/ / / / / / / /02 1.3* 07/ / / /07 1.0* 08/ / / / / / / /16 1.0* 08/ / / /23 1.2* 08/ / Total /29 0.9* 07/ / /06 1.5* 08/ /11 1.0* 08/ / / / Total 29.4 *Fertigations. Injected so that subplots (treatments) closest to the center line received about 20 lbs N/acre with each fertigation. 125

140 Table 92. Yield and yield components of Atlantic potatoes at five rate of nitrogen fertilization as provided by two N sources, UAN and CAN; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Applied Yield Ca* N #1 Jumbo Mkt Market of Total Yield Weight per Tuber No. Tuber per acre Specific Gravity Diseased (lb/acre) (cwt/acre) (%) (lb) (x1000) (%) Fertigation with Calcium Nitrate ( Ca) Mean Fertigation with UAN32 (32-0-0) Mean NOVA N rate Significance NS NS NS NS NS ** NS NS LSD (0.05) *Calcium applied does not include Ca in irrigation water (210 lb/ac) 126

141 Table 93. Yield and yield components of Russet Norkotah potatoes at five rates of nitrogen fertilization as provided by two N sources: UAN and CAN; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Applied Yield Ca* N #1 Jumbo Mkt Market of Total Yield Weight per Tuber No. Tuber per acre Specific Gravity Diseased (lb/acre) (cwt/acre) (%) (lb) (x1000) (%) Fertigation with CAN ( Ca) Mean b 1.0 Fertigation with UAN (32-0-0) Mean a 0.7 NOVA Product Significance NS NS NS NS NS NS ** NS LSD (0.05) *Calcium applied does not include Ca in irrigation water (210 lb/ac) 127

142 Figure 11. Marketable yield of potatoes (Atlantic and Russet Norkotah combined) at different rates of N fertilization as provided by UAN and CAN fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Table 94. Residual soil NO 3 -N and Ca content in the top foot of profile after applying five N fertigation treatment levels with CAN and UAN fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Mean Nitrogen Fertilization CAN UAN Level NO 3 -N Ca NO 3 -N Ca (lb/acre N) (lb/acre) (lb/acre) , , , , , , , , , ,460 Mean , ,

143 Table 95. Petiole NO 3 -N and leaf total N content of potatoes fertilized at three rates of N fertilization averaged over two cultivars (Atlantic and Norkotah) and two fertilizers (CAN and UAN) on 06/29/98; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Cumulative N fertilizer rate Petiole NO 3 -N Leaf Total N (lb/acre) (ppm) (%) a ab 6.35ab b 6.17b Values within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different than each other at 0.05 probability. Table 96. Leaf Ca content of two potato cultivars fertilized with either CAN or UAN averaged over three N fertilization rates and both N sources; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Cultivar Leaf Ca (%) Atlantic 1.49a Norkotah 2.00b Values followed by same letter within a column are not significantly different than each other at 0.05 probability. Table 97. Total N (TN) content (%) of potato leaf tissue sampled on 08/11/98 of two cultivars fertilized at three N rates with two fertilizer products; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Rate to Date Fertilizer Product CAN UAN Means (across products) Cultivar Cultivar Cultivar Atlantic Norkotah Mean Atlantic Norkotah Mean Atlantic Norkotah Mean (lb N/ac) (% N) a a b Mean b a 5.27a 4.17b ANOVA (Tissue N) Factor Significance LDS (0.05) N Rate *** Cultivar *** N Product **

144 Table 98. Total Ca content (%) of potato leaf tissue sampled on 08/11/98 of two cultivars fertilized at three N rates with two fertilizer products; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Product CAN UAN Means (across products) Fertilizer Rate to Cultivar Cultivar Cultivar Date Atlantic Norkotah Mean Atlantic Norkotah Mean Atlantic Norkotah Mean (lb N/ac) (% Ca) b b a Mean a b 1.92b 2.42a ANOVA (Tissue N) Factor Significance LDS (0.05) N Rate ** Cultivar *** N Product **

145 Effect of Volcanic Ash Fertilizer on the Yield and Yield Components of Chile Peppers, Corn and Potatoes. Objectives Evaluate the effects of a volcanic ash fertilizer material on the growth and yield of chile peppers, grain corn and potatoes. Procedure Randomized complete block designs (Figure 12) with three volcanic ash treatments (control included) replicated four times in chile peppers and five times in corn and potatoes were used in the study. Volcanic ash was applied twice, once at the beginning of the growing season and again on 07/09/98 in all crops. The nutrient content of the ash is shown in Table 99. More details on methods and materials are provided in Table 100. Table 99. Nutrient content of volcanic ash applied to the chile, corn and potato plots; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Nutrient N P K Mg Ca Fe Zn Cu B Mn (%) (ppm)

146 Table 100. Methods and materials for volcanic ash study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Plot design Randomized Complete Blocks (Figure 12) Treatments: Chile Peppers - 0, 10 & 20 lb ash/l00 ft 2 Corn - 0, 10 & 16 lb ash/100 ft 2 Potatoes - 0, 10 & 16 lb ash/100 ft 2 Cultivars Chile - Agco Hot Corn - Pioneer 3525 Potatoes - Sangre Treatment date Chile: 6/5/98 (half of total - raked in) 7/9/98 (half of total - raked in) Corn: 5/19/98 (half - rototilled, preplant) 7/9/98 (half - raked in) Potatoes: 5/5/98 (half - rototilled, preplant) 7/9/98 (half - raked in) Planting dates and rates Chile (transplants) 6/2/98 (12 inch by 24 inch) Corn: 5/22/98 (35,000 seeds/acre, 34 inch rows) Potatoes: 5/6/98 (6 inch spacing, 34 inch rows) Fertilization Date Crop Product Rate (lb/acre) 03/23/98 Corn/Potatoes N (preplant) 06/01/98 Chile N (preplant) 06/22/98 All N (foliar) 06/30/98 All N (foliar) 07/09/98 All N (broadcast) 07/16/98 All N (broadcast) Total N Corn/Potatoes 185 lb/acre Chile 156 lb/acre Herbicides Date Crop Product Rate 06/01/98 Potatoes Turbo 8E 2 pt/acre Irrigation Harvest Dates and Methodology Other 06/22/98 Corn Marksman 1 qt/acre Atrazine 0.5 lb/acre As required. Crop Date Harvest Method Chile 09/14/98 Handpicked 4 plants/plot Corn 11/01/98 Handpicked 2 rows, 10ft each/plot Potatoes 11/16/98 Dug with 2-row digger, handpicked - 2 rows, 10ft each/plot Leaf samples were taken on 07/14/98 (potatoes), 08/24/98 (corn) 09/14/98 (chile) for analysis of nutrient content. 132

147 Figure 12. Diagrams of the randomized complete blocks used in evaluation of volcanic ash fertilization on chile, corn and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

148 Results Chile peppers No statistically significant difference was found between marketable yields, number of chile pods per plant, weight per pod or percentage of red fruit produced at different levels of fertilization with volcanic ash (VA) fertilizer (Table 101.). The average marketable yield of 24.2 tons of chile per acre is an exceptionally good yield for the Farmington area. However, fertilization with VA had no apparent effect on this yield. Although chile plant leaf levels of iron (Fe) and manganese (Mn) may have been slightly elevated by the addition of VA, fertilization with the material had no statistically significant effect on the nutrient content of chile leaves sampled at harvest (Table 102.). Corn Volcanic ash fertilization had no significant effect on corn yield or the number of ears produced per plant (Table 103.). The nutrient contents of corn leaves sampled on 08/24/98 were also not affected by fertilization with VA (Table 104.). Potatoes As in chile and corn, marketable yield and other components of potato yield were not affected by VA fertilization (Table 105). The nutrient contents of potato leaves sampled on 07/14/98 were not affected by VA fertilization (Table 106.). Conclusions/Recommendations Soil fertilization with VA at rates up to 20 lb/100 ft 2 on chile and up to 16 lb/100 ft 2 on corn and potato had no significant effect on marketable yields or tissue nutrient content of these crops grown under controlled conditions at the New Mexico State University Agricultural Science Center, Farmington. Based on soil analyses prior to fertilization (Table 107.) soil micronutrient content (with the possible exception of Fe and Zn) was sufficient to provide each crop s needs. Since the soil tested slightly deficient in Zn and Fe (Table 107.), plant tissue levels of these elements should have been increased by fertilization with volcanic ash (3.6% Fe and 85 ppm Zn) if these elements were in an available form. There was a trend of increasing tissue Fe with increased VA fertilization in all crops (Table 102., Table 104., and Table 106.) but plant uptake of Zn was unaffected. Although VA did not affect plant growth or yield in our study, it may be valuable in providing micronutrients, resulting in increased yields, to plants grown in soils deficient in the elements it provides. 134

149 Table 101. Yield and yield components of chile (v. Agco Hot) fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Fertilizer Rate Marketable Yield Number of Fruit/plant Average Weight per pod Red Pods (lb/100 ft 2 ) (ton/acre) (grams) (%) Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- Table 102. Nutrient content of chile plant leaves sampled on 09/14/98 from plots fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Nutrient Rate N P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (lb/100ft 2 ) (%) (ppm) Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05)

150 Table 103. Yield and average number of ears produced per corn plant fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Fertilizer Rate Grain Yield Number Ears per Plant (lb/100ft 2 ) (lb/acre) Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS LDS (0.05) Table 104. Nutrient content of corn leaves sampled on 08/24/98 from plots fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Nutrient Rate N P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (lb/100ft 2 ) (%) (ppm) Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) Table 105. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) fertilized with Three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Rate Marketable Yield Market Yield Average Weight per tuber Number of tubers (lb/100 ft 2 ) (lb/acre) (% of total) (lb) (per acre) Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05)

151 Table 106. Nutrient content of potato (v. Sangre) leaves sampled on 07/14/98 from plots fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Nutrient Rate N P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (lb/100ft 2 ) (%) (ppm) Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) Table 107. Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of profile in the Volcanic Ash fertilizer study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Soil Nutrient NO 3 -N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu Ca Mg Na (lb/acre foot*) *(lb/acre) content based on an estimated soil weight of 4 million pounds per acre foot. 137

152 Use of Organic Fertilizer (BioFlora) on Alfalfa, Chile Peppers, Corn and Potatoes. Objective Evaluate the effects of supplemental organic fertilizer on the growth and yield of alfalfa, chile peppers, corn and potatoes. Procedure Randomized block designs were used in the evaluations. Refer to Methods and Materials summary for details. (Table 108.) Table 108. Methods and materials for the BioFlora Study on alfalfa, chile, corn, and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Operation Procedure Plot design Randomized complete blocks (Figure 13) Treatments Crop Date Treatments (per acre rates) Alfalfa 06/10/98 15 gal. 806A plus 5 gal. 806B (sprayed on after first cut) 07/14/98 25 gal. 806A plus 9 gal. 806B (sprayed on after 2nd. cut) 08/19/98 10 gal. Humega, 2 gal. Hooter plus 1 gal. Mega Cal (sprayed after cut All dates Control (water only at same rates as solutions above) Chile Peppers 06/2/ oz. Lot 803 in 5 gal. water - one cup of solution/transplant 2. 4 oz. Trigger micronutrient in 5 gal. water - one cup/plant 3. Water only - 1 cup/transplant 07/9/ gal. Lot oz. Trigger 07/23/ qts. Hooter, 1 qt. NitroBooster, 1 qt. MegaCal 2. 8 oz. Trigger 07/27/98 same as 07/23/98 08/4/98 same as 07/23/98 08/10/98 same as 07/23/98 08/19/98 same as 07/23/98 07/9-8/19 Control (water only) *Trigger consists of: 0.5% Mg, 0.03% B, 0.1% Fe, 0.05% Mn, 1%, Mo, and 0.05% Zn Corn 05/20/98 20 gal. Lot 804 (preplant/rototilled) 06/10/98 10 gal. Humega + 10 gal. bluegreen 07/7/ lb. N plus 6.5 gal Humega lb. N only 138

153 Operation Cultivars Procedure Crop Date Treatment Corn 07/23/ lb. N plus 5 gal Humega lb. N only 07/27/98 same as 7/23 08/4/98 same as 7/23 08/10/98 same as 7/23 All dates Control (water only) Potatoes Alfalfa - Benchmark Chile - Sandia Corn - Pioneer 3525 Potatoes - Sangre 05/06/ gal , 5 gal. Lot gal. MegaCal, plus 10 gal (applied with seed pieces at planting) 2. Control (water only) 05/20/ gal Humega plus 10 gal Blue-green algae 2. Control (water only) 06/10/ gal. Humega 06/22/ gal Humega plus 80 lb. N lb. N only 06/30/ gal. Humega plus 17 lb. N lb. N only 07/7/ gal Humega plus 20 lb. N lb. N 07/15/ qt Hooter, 1 qt. NitroBooster, plus 1 qt. Mega Cal 07/23/ qts. Hooter, 1 qt. NitroBooster, 1 qt. MegaCal, plus 2 gals. Humega plus 20 lb N lb N only Planting dates & rates Alfalfa - planted in fall of 1996 Chile (transplants) - 6/2/98 (12 by 24 ) Corn - 5/22/98 (35,000 seeds/acre, 34 inch rows) Potatoes - 5/6/98 (6 inch spacing, 34 inch rows) Fertilization (other than treatments) Date Crop Product Rate (lb/acre) 03/23/98 Corn/Potato N (preplant) 06/1/98 Chile N (preplant) 07/08/98 Chile N (broadcast) Total N Corn/Potato 65 lb/acre Chile 70 lb/acre Herbicides Date Crop Product Rate 06/01/98 Potato Turbo 8E 2 pt/acre 06/22/98 Corn Marksman 1 qt/acre Atrazine 0.5 lb/acre Irrigation As required 139

154 Operation Procedure Harvest Alfalfa: 7/6/98 (cut 2), 8/11/98 (cut 3), 9/15/98 (cut 4) (forage harvester, plots = 5ft by 30ft) Chile Peppers: 9/14/98 (handpicked - 4 plants/plot) Corn: 11/1/98 (handpicked - 2 rows, 15 each/plot) Potatoes: 11/16/98 (dug with 2-row digger, handpicked - 2 rows, 10ft each/plot) Other Leaf samples were taken at each alfalfa harvest, and on 07/14 (potatoes), 08/24 (corn) and 09/14 (chile) for nutrient analyses. Figure 13. Diagrams of the randomized complete blocks used in evaluations of BioFlora fertilizations on alfalfa, chile, corn and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM

155 Table 109. Ingredients of the fertilizers used in the BioFlora study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Ingredients or Analysis Hooter: % Humic Acid + Ca, S, Mg, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, B, Co, Mo Humega: 6% Humic Acid MegaCal: Ca Nitro Booster:? Blue Green? Compost tea:? Lot 427:? Lot 803: 4.4% ThiSul ( S), 6.7% Nitro Booster, 11.1% KeMin (?), 11.1% Blue-Green algae, 11.1%Fish 0 Mega (4-2-2) Lot 804: 50% , 25% Compost tea, 25% Lot 427 Lot 806A: 33% , 33% Compost tea, 33% Humega Lot 806B: 14% Hooter, 57% MegaCal, 29% Nitro Booster UAN32: (used in N only and BF plus N plots in Figure 13. Trigger 0.5% Mg, 0.03% B, 0.1% Fe, 0.05% Mn, 0.1% Mo, 0.05% Zn (designated with M in chile in Figure 13) Results Alfalfa Cut 2 and Cut 3 alfalfa yields were significantly lower in the plots treated with BioFlora (Lots 806A and 806B) than in the unfertilized control plots (Table 110.). Cut 4 yields were also lower in the same plots when fertilized with Humega, Hooter and MegaCal (Table 110.). Table 110. Dry matter yield of alfalfa fertilized with BioFlora as compared to an unfertilized control, three cuts, and total; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Treatment Cut 2 Cut 3 Cut 4 (lb/acre) Total (3 cuts) (ton/acre) Fertilized 3914b 2787b 2087b 4.40b Unfertilized (control) 4128a 2932a 2166a 4.61a ANOVA Significance *** * * *** LSD (0.05) The concentration of 11 plant essential elements was higher in Cut 2 alfalfa forage fertilized with BioFlora than it was in the unfertilized control (Table 111). However, 141

156 only in N (protein), S, P and Mn were these differences in concentration statistically significant. In Cut 3 forage, only Mg concentrations were significantly higher in the fertilized plots than the control plots (Table 112), while in Cut 4, Zn content in the forage from control plots was significantly higher than in the fertilized plots (Table 113.). Table 111. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with BioFlora as compared to the control (Cut 2); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Nutrient Protein S P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Fertilized 22.7a 0.28a 0.29a a Control 21.2b 0.26b 0.27b b Mean ANOVA Sig. * * ** NS NS NS NS NS ** NS NS LSD (0.05) Table 112. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Protein P K Mg Ca (%) Fert a 1.62 Control b 1.73 Mean ANOVA Sig. NS NS NS ** NS LSD (0.05) Zn Fe Mn Cu B (ppm) Fert Control Mean ANOVA Sig. NS NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ADF NDF (%) Fert Control Mean ANOVA Sig. NS NS LSD (0.05)

157 Table 113. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 4); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Protein P K Mg Ca (%) Fert Control Mean ANOVA Sig. NS NS NS ** NS LSD (0.05) Zn Fe Mn Cu B (ppm) Fert. 13.8b Control 15.5a Mean ANOVA Sig. * NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ADF NDF (%) Fert Control Mean ANOVA Sig. NS NS LSD (0.05) Chile Peppers No statistically significant difference was found between marketable yields, fruit per plant, weight per fruit, or red chile production at different fertilizer treatments (Table 114.). In fact, plots receiving no additional fertilizer (control) provided slightly higher yields than those plots fertilized with micronutrients (i.e. Trigger) or BioFlora (Hooter, NitroBooster and Megacal). 143

158 Table 114. Yield and yield components of chile peppers grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Treatment Yield No. of fruit per plant Average weight per fruit Red fruit % of total (ton/acre) (no.) (grams) (%) Control Micros Bioflora Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) Sulphur and iron concentrations of chile leaves analyzed at harvest were significantly higher in the plots fertilized with BioFlora than in the unfertilized plots or plots treated with Trigger micronutrient solution (Table 115.). Table 115. Nutrient analysis of chile leaves sampled at harvest from plants grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Treatment N S P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Control ab b Micros b b Bioflora a a Mean ANOVA Significance NS * NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS LSD (0.05) Corn There was no significant difference between corn yields or number of ears produced per plant at different fertilizer treatments, which included BioFlora alone, BioFlora plus N and zero additional fertilizer (Table 116.). 144

159 Table 116. Yield and number of ears/plant of corn treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Fertilizer Grain Yield No. ears per plant (lb/acre) Bioflora N only Control Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS LDS (0.05) With regard to nutrient concentration in corn leaves sampled on 08/24/98, only Mn showed a significant response to treatment (Table 117.) being greatest (105 ppm) in the plots fertilized with BioFlora and lowest (87 ppm) in the control plots. Table 117. Nutrient analysis of corn leaves sampled on 08/25/98 from plants treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Treatment N S P K MG Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Bioflora a N only ab Control b Mean ANOVA Significance NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS LSD (0.05) Potatoes Fertilizer treatment had no significant effect on marketable yield, weight per tuber or tuber number of potatoes (Table 118.). 145

160 Table 118. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Treatment Marketable Yield Market yield % of total Weight per tuber Tubers per acre (lb/acre) (%) (grams) (no.) Bioflora plus N N only Control Mean ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) Potato leaf nutrient concentrations varied between treatments. Manganese levels were significantly greater in the plots fertilized with BioFiora plus N than in those treated with N only or the control (Table 119.). However, Fe levels were highest in the N only plots while Mg concentrations were higher in the control plots than either of the fertilized plots. Table 119. Nutrient analysis of potato leaves sampled on 07/14/98 from plants treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Treatment N S P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Bioflora plus N ab a 78.3a N only b a 69.8b Control a b 67.7b Mean ANOVA Significance NS * NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS LSD (0.05) Conclusions/Recommendations Supplemental fertilization with organic fertilizers provided by BioFlora had no significant effect on the growth and yield of chile peppers, corn or potatoes grown under controlled conditions at the Agricultural Science Center, Farmington. Supplemental foliar applications of N did not affect yields of corn or potatoes nor did additional micronutrients (i.e. Trigger) affect chile yields under these same conditions. Apparently, preplant N fertilizer (65 lb N/acre on corn and potatoes and 70 lb N/acre on chile), coupled with soil residual levels (36 lb N/acre in top foot) were sufficient to provide plant N needs. Additionally, despite low soil concentrations of Zn 146

161 and Fe (Table 120.), foliar applications of micronutrients did not affect yields or concentrations of these elements in plant tissue. Foliar applications of BioFlora (Lots 806A and 806B) significantly reduced yields of alfalfa but appeared to increase concentrations of nutrients in the plant tissue, at least in the first cut after initial BioFlora applications. Although we did not observe beneficial effects of supplemental fertilization on the growth of crops grown under the conditions of this study, benefits might be derived from similar treatments on different soils, crops, years, etc. Table 120. Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of profile in the Bioflora fertilizer study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM Soil Nutrient N0 3 -N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu Ca Mg Na (lb/acre foot) * *(lb/acre) content based on an estimated soil weight of 4 million pounds per acre foot. 147