Thirty-second ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT 1998 NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE CENTER AT FARMINGTON PO BOX 1018 FARMINGTON, NEW MEXICO 87499 M.M. West, B.S., M.A., Editor - 2013 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
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
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 1966. 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 1999. 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 1989. Joe was responsible for receiving over $600,000.00 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
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 1-3-42119... 23 Physical Plant, Utilities, Maintenance, and Repairs... 23 Adaptive Field Crop Research in Northwestern New Mexico... 24 Pest Control in Crops Grown in Northwestern New Mexico... 52 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Spring-Seeded Alfalfa with Postemergence Applications of AC-299-263 Alone or in Combination... 54 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Preemergence/Postemergence, and Postemergence Herbicides.... 59 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Cultivation and Postemergence Herbicide; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM. 1998.... 63 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 299-263 or Imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 67 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides.... 71 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence Herbicides... 75 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.... 84 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Roundup Ready Field Corn... 89 Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Russet Norkota Potato.... 93 Irrigation and Fertilizer Studies - 1998... 97 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
Stockhausen, Inc., McMahon BioConsulting, Inc., Morningstar Corp. and BioFlora International.... 97 Sprinkler-Line-Source Experimental Plots... 97 Biomass Yield and Forage Quality of Pasture Grasses as Related to Irrigation, Year 3.... 99 Potential Water-Conservation through Turfgrass Selection and Irrigation Scheduling.... 108 Effect of N fertilizer source (with or without Ca) and rate on the yield, quality and storability of potatoes.... 120 Effect of Volcanic Ash Fertilizer on the Yield and Yield Components of Chile Peppers, Corn and Potatoes.... 131 Use of Organic Fertilizer (BioFlora) on Alfalfa, Chile Peppers, Corn and Potatoes.... 138 V
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 1998.... 3 Thirty year average monthly conditions; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 4 Frost dates and number of frost-free days, 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 5 Monthly precipitation in inches recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 6 Summary of monthly average of the mean temperature* recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 7 Summary of monthly average maximum temperature recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 8 Summary of monthly average of the minimum temperature recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 9 Highest temperatures recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 10 Lowest temperatures recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 11 Number of days 32 F or below and 0 F or below in critical months for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 12 Number of days 100 F or above and number of days 95 F or above in critical months for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 13 Average evaporation (inches per day) for 1972-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 14 Monthly evaporation (inches per month) for 1972-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 15 Wind movement at two heights for 1980-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 16 Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for 1976-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 17 Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for 1976-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 18 Soil temperature extremes, four inches below surface for 1976-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 19 Average daily solar radiation (Langley s) for 1977-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 21 Thirty year total monthly Growing Degree Days* (May through September and first fall frost) for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 21 Procedures for the 1994-Planted Alfalfa Variety Trail (Fee Trial); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 25 Table 21. Yield of Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998... 26 VI
Table 22. Table 23. Three Year Average Yields of Alfalfa Varieties for 1996 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998... 27 Procedures for Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 28 Table 24. Yield of the Alfalfa Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 29 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. 1998.... 30 Procedure for Dry Bean Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 31 Yield of Cooperative Dry Bean Nursery and Varieties; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 32 Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Forage); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 33 Corn (forage): Yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 33 Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Early Season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 34 Corn (Early season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 35 Corn (Early Season) two and three year average yields for 1996-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 36 Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Full season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 36 Corn (Full season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 37 Corn (Full season) two and three year average yields for 1996-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 38 Procedure for Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 38 Yield and other characteristics of the Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 39 Procedure for Western Regional Potato Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 40 Western Regional Potato Nursery, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 41 Procedure for Small Grains forage and Grain Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 42 Small grain forage yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 43 Winter Wheat harvested for forage and grain and grain only, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 45 Procedure for New Mexico Winter Wheat Varieties and Hybrids; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 46 VII
Table 44. Table 45. Table 46. Table 47. New Mexico Winter Wheat test yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 47 Winter Wheat varieties of three and four year yield for 1995-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 48 Procedure for Southern Regional Performance Nursery Winter Wheat; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 48 Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 49 Table 48. Two Year Average of the Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery 1997-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 51 Table 49. Index of herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 53 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-299-263 alone or in combination; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM. 1998.... 55 Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen Alfalfa, July 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 56 Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, August 10; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 57 Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, September 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 58 Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 60 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. 1998.... 61 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. 1998.... 62 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. 1998.... 64 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. 1998.... 65 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. 1998.... 66 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 299-263 or imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 68 VIII
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. 1998.... 69 Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, cultivation, postemergence herbicides on August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 70 Procedure for Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998... 72 Annual grass and broadleaf weed control with preemergence and postemergence herbicides on June 9 and June 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 73 Annual grass and broadleaf weed control with preemergence and postemergence herbicides on July 8 and July 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 74 Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with preemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 76 Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence herbicides in field corn on June 9, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 77 Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence herbicides in field corn on July 9, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 78 Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with postemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 80 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. 1998.... 81 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. 1998.... 82 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. 1998... 85 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. 1998.... 86 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. 1998.... 87 Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in roundup ready field corn; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998... 90 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. 1998.... 91 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. 1998.... 92 Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in Russet Korkotah potato; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998... 94 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. 1998.... 95 IX
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. 1998.... 96 Methods and materials for pasture grass forage yield and quality as related to irrigation, year 3; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 100 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. 1998.103 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. 1998.... 104 Total 1998 dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses at seven levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 105 Methods and materials for the turfgrass irrigation study, Year 1; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 108 Post-plant fertilizer summary for warm and cool-season turfgrasses; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 110 Dates and amounts irrigation and precipitation applied to warm-season turf grasses at five irrigation levels; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 113 Dates and amounts irrigation and precipitation applied to cool-season turf grass at five irrigation levels; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM 1998.... 115 Methods and materials for potato fertilizer (N and Ca) study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 121 Pre-treatment soil nutrient content in the top foot of soil in the potato study area; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 123 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. 1998.... 125 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. 1998.... 126 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. 1998.... 127 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. 1998.... 128 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. 1998.... 129 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. 1998.... 129 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. 1998.... 129 X
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. 1998.... 130 Nutrient content of volcanic ash applied to the chile, corn and potato plots; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 131 Table 100. Methods and materials for volcanic ash study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 132 Table 101. Yield and yield components of chile (v. Agco Hot) fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 135 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. 1998.... 135 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. 1998.... 136 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. 1998.... 136 Table 105. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) fertilized with Three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 136 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. 1998.... 137 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. 1998.... 137 Table 108. Methods and materials for the BioFlora Study on alfalfa, chile, corn, and potatoes; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 138 Table 109. Ingredients of the fertilizers used in the BioFlora study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 141 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. 1998.... 141 Table 111. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with BioFlora as compared to the control (Cut 2); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 142 Table 112. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 142 Table 113. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 4); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 143 Table 114. Yield and yield components of chile peppers grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998... 144 Table 115. Nutrient analysis of chile leaves sampled at harvest from plants grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 144 Table 116. Yield and number of ears/plant of corn treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 145 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. 1998.... 145 Table 118. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 146 XI
Table 119. Nutrient analysis of potato leaves sampled on 07/14/98 from plants treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998.... 146 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. 1998.... 147 XII
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. 1998.... 99 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. 1998.101 Total dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses as related to irrigation, (Year 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 106 Protein content and relative food value of eight pasture grasses at three levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 107 Diagram of the sprinkler line-source plots used to evaluate turfgrass water requirements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM 1998.... 111 Average daily reference evapotranspiration (ET o ) from March 1 to October 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998.... 117 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. 1998.... 118 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. 1998.... 118 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. 1998.... 119 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. 1998.... 122 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. 1998.... 128 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. 1998.... 133 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. 1998.... 140 XIII
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
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 1966. 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 1999. 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
Climatological Data Author: Curtis Owen, B.S. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A. 2013 Digitized version Table 1. Climatological Data; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. January through December 1998. 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 44.8 22.3 33.6 56 12 0.12 58.6 100.4 ---- Feb 46.0 24.5 35.3 62 15 0.61 74.9 133.4 ---- Mar 56.5 28.1 42.3 77 13 0.65 82.6 144.5 ---- Apr 62.3 32.9 47.6 80 25 0.73 80.6 143.5 0.242 May 77.8 44.5 61.2 87 31 0.03 65.5 111.7 0.367 Jun 85.2 48.4 66.8 99 40 0.02 72.3 120.4 0.471 Jul 91.9 62.0 77.0 100 59 1.38 69.6 111.2 0.420 Aug 89.8 58.7 74.3 95 52 1.48 65.6 100.4 0.366 Sep 85.8 53.9 69.9 90 46 0.68 62.0 105.1 0.334 Oct 68.1 39.6 53.9 85 27 2.07 77.6 131.3 0.189 Nov 55.8 28.8 42.3 67 16 1.27 65.6 110.7 ---- Dec 45.4 18.7 32.1 60 3 0.06 58.5 106.0 ---- Sum 809.4 462.4 636.3 958 339 9.10 833.4 1418.6 2.389 Ave. 67.5 38.5 53.0 79.8 28.3 0.76 69.5 118.2 0.341 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
Table 2. Thirty year average monthly conditions; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 0.51 40 19 64 1986-18 1971 February 0.43 48 24 70 1986-14 1989 March 0.69 56 29 81 1989 6 1971 April 0.59 65 36 86 1992 16 1979 May 0.53 75 44 93 1974,1984 23 1975 June 0.28 86 53 100 1981,1990,1994 36 1979,1980 1981,1983 July 0.84 91 60 103 1989,1990 43 1969 Aug 1.05 88 59 99 1969,1970,1983 41 1980 September 1.11 80 51 97 1995 28 1974 October 0.95 67 39 85 1989, 1998 15 1989 November 0.74 52 28 74 1977 1 1976 December 0.44 42 20 65 1973-16 1990 Total 8.19 Average 0.68 66.0 38.5 4
Table 3. Frost dates and number of frost-free days, 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 32 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 05 161 Apr 26 Oct 06 163 1970 May 02 Oct 08 159 May 01 Oct 09 161 1971 May 09 Sep 18* 132 Apr 27 Sep 18* 144* 1972 May 02 Oct 30 181 Apr 27 Oct 31 187 1973 May 02 Oct 11 162 May 02 Oct 27 178 1974 May 21 Oct 30 162 May 20 Nov 4 168 1975 May 08 Oct 14 159 May 07 Oct 14 160 1976 Apr 27 Oct 07 164 Apr 27 Oct 19 175 1977 Apr 21 Oct 31 193** Apr 05 Nov 02 211 1978 May 06 Oct 26 173 May 06 Nov 13 191 1979 May 12 Oct 21 162 Apr 20 Oct 22 185 1980 May 26** Oct 16 143 May 25** Oct 17 145 1981 May 09 Oct 16 160 Apr 05 Oct 17 194 1982 May 06 Oct 06 153 Apr 21 Oct 10 172 1983 May 19 Sep 21 125* May 17 Nov 09 176 1984 May 08 Oct 15 160 May 08 Oct 16 161 1985 May 14 Sep 30 139 Apr 01 Nov 01 214 1986 Apr 27 Oct 12 168 Apr 27 Oct 13 169 1987 Apr 21 Oct 19 181 Apr 21 Nov 11 204 1988 May 07 Nov 12** 189 Apr 11 Nov 16** 219** 1989 Apr 30 Oct 18 171 Mar 21* Oct 27 219 1990 Apr 10* Oct 09 181 Mar 31 Oct 21 204 1991 May 05 Oct 28 176 Mar 29 Oct 29 214 1992 Apr 21 Oct 08 170 Mar 19 Oct 08 203 1993 May 09 Oct 19 163 Apr 20 Oct 27 190 1994 Apr 30 Oct 17 170 Apr 08 Oct 31 206 1995 Apr 25 Oct 06 164 Apr 18 Oct 06 171 1996 Apr 30 Sep 19 142 Apr 29 Oct 18 172 1997 May 02 Oct 13 163 May 02 Oct 13 163 1998 May 15 Oct 06 144 Apr 19 Oct 06 170 Average May 04 Oct 14 162.34 Apr 22 Oct 22 182.97 *Earliest date of 30 years **Latest date of 30 years 5
Table 4. Monthly precipitation in inches recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total 1969 0.85 0.31 0.21 0.30 1.13 1.00 0.69 0.47 2.07 2.88 0.38 0.29 10.58 1970 0.06 0.03 0.49 0.60 0.11 0.81 0.68 0.02 2.48 0.48 0.46 0.20 6.42 1971 0.18 0.09 0.05 0.11 0.41 0.00 0.31 1.72 1.06 1.15 0.77 0.16 6.01 1972 0.03 Trace 0.03 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.04 1.34 0.57 1.51 0.19 0.93 6.86 1973 0.28 0.17 1.82 1.54 0.65 0.95 0.27 0.61 1.49 0.35 0.30 0.37 8.80 1974 1.10 0.13 0.01 0.20 0.02 0.09 1.48 0.12 0.37 2.39 0.48 0.38 6.77 1975 0.11 0.61 1.52 0.78 0.35 0.13 0.84 0.24 0.80 0.14 0.22 0.20 5.94 1976 0.06 0.16 0.00 0.10 0.41 0.09 0.62 0.80 1.31 0.01 0.01 Trace 3.57 1977 0.42 Trace 0.00 0.01 0.29 0.04 1.01 1.41 0.38 0.30 0.62 0.63 5.15 1978 0.90 0.64 1.27 0.71 0.96 0.00 0.07 0.18 1.55 1.46 2.24 0.59 10.57 1979 0.88 0.19 0.46 0.28 0.58 0.43 1.40 0.49 0.08 1.37 0.97 0.73 7.86 1980 1.45 0.70 0.63 0.25 0.25 0.07 0.08 0.89 1.05 0.84 0.02 Trace 6.23 1981 Trace 0.30 1.76 0.21 1.05 0.16 1.34 0.35 0.69 0.89 0.36 0.03 7.14 1982 0.32 0.77 1.18 0.67 0.82 0.00 1.27 2.78 1.50 0.16 0.92 0.76 11.15 1983 0.94 0.69 1.84 0.31 0.13 0.35 1.67 0.72 0.53 0.52 0.91 0.67 9.28 1984 Trace 0.12 0.54 1.00 Trace 0.67 0.62 1.64 0.45 1.13 0.23 0.87 7.27 1985 0.39 0.13 1.74 1.76 0.29 0.01 1.38 0.43 1.31 1.21 0.52 0.22 9.39 1986 0.11 0.77 0.51 0.97 0.13 0.81 4.10 0.93 2.18 0.65 2.73 0.76 14.65 1987 0.10 1.75 0.66 Trace 0.68 0.02 0.28 1.17 0.27 1.07 1.65 0.59 8.24 1988 0.63 0.82 0.02 0.72 1.11 0.33 0.58 2.34 0.27 0.22 0.78 0.19 8.01 1989 1.19 0.56 0.06 0.00 Trace Trace 1.24 1.62 0.14 0.51 0.00 Trace 5.32 1990 0.53 0.53 0.74 0.85 1.07 0.07 0.35 1.32 1.97 1.12 0.78 0.59 9.92 1991 0.59 0.26 0.67 0.01 0.27 0.69 0.35 0.58 1.38 0.38 2.07 1.01 8.26 1992 0.15 0.18 0.74 0.25 1.75 0.05 0.98 1.25 0.85 0.42 0.31 0.63 7.56 1993 2.05 0.82 0.93 0.28 0.38 0.04 0.03 2.06 0.84 1.25 0.47 0.15 9.30 1994 0.09 0.48 0.24 0.57 1.32 0.07 0.20 0.66 1.37 1.18 0.96 0.64 7.78 1995 0.57 0.14 1.45 1.28 0.90 0.03 0.23 1.88 2.04 0.10 0.14 0.39 9.15 1996 0.09 0.43 0.28 0.17 0.00 0.64 0.24 1.07 0.63 2.21 0.72 0.22 6.70 1997 1.03 0.48 0.03 2.88 0.82 0.62 1.28 1.12 2.68 0.43 0.67 0.80 12.84 1998 0.12 0.61 0.65 0.73 0.03 0.02 1.38 1.48 0.68 2.07 1.27 0.06 9.10 Avg. 0.51 0.43 0.69 0.59 0.53 0.28 0.84 1.05 1.11 0.95 0.74 0.44 8.19 Average 1969-1977 (9 years) 6.67* Average 1978-1998 (21 years) 8.84* * Sprinkler irrigation started around the science center in 1978. 6
Table 5. Summary of monthly average of the mean temperature* recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. 1969 34 35 37 52 63 67 76 76 69 50 40 34 53 1970 31 40 39 44 60 68 76 76 64 50 42 33 52 1971 30 34 43 50 58 71 77 74 64 52 40 30 52 1972 30 38 48 53 60 70 78 74 66 54 36 26 53 1973 22 35 39 45 59 68 75 75 63 55 44 30 51 1974 24 28 48 48 63 74 75 74 65 55 40 48 54 1975 26 34 40 46 56 66 74 72 64 54 38 30 50 1976 28 41 40 52 60 70 77 74 66 51 40 32 53 1977 25 37 39 54 59 74 76 75 68 56 43 36 54 1978 33 34 46 52 56 69 76 71 65 56 42 24 52 1979 24 32 40 50 58 67 74 72 69 56 35 32 51 1980 33 39 40 48 57 71 76 73 65 52 41 37 53 1981 30 37 41 55 59 71 74 72 65 51 44 34 53 1982 30 31 42 49 57 67 73 72 65 50 40 32 51 1983 31 36 42 45 56 66 74 75 68 54 41 34 52 1984 28 34 41 47 64 69 76 74 66 47 42 35 52 1985 30 32 41 53 61 71 76 74 62 54 40 31 52 1986 40 39 47 51 60 70 72 74 62 52 40 33 53 1987 29 36 39 53 59 70 73 71 65 56 39 29 52 1988 24 36 41 51 59 72 76 74 64 58 41 31 52 1989 27 35 49 57 63 70 78 72 69 55 41 31 54 1990 29 36 46 54 59 75 76 73 69 54 42 24 53 1991 25 37 41 49 59 68 75 74 66 56 38 29 51 1992 28 39 45 56 62 68 72 73 66 56 35 26 52 1993 35 38 44 51 61 69 74 71 64 52 38 32 52 1994 33 35 46 52 61 73 77 76 66 53 38 35 54 1995 33 44 44 48 57 67 74 76 67 53 44 35 54 1996 32 41 43 51 64 71 76 73 61 52 40 32 53 1997 29 36 46 47 61 70 74 73 68 52 41 31 52 1998 34 35 42 48 61 67 77 74 70 54 42 32 53 Avg. 29 36 43 50 59 70 75 74 66 53 40 32 52.2 *The mean temperatures are the average of maximum and minimum average temperatures for the month. 7
Table 6. Summary of monthly average maximum temperature recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. 1969 42 46 50 69 78 81 91 90 83 62 51 45 65.1 1970 42 54 52 60 78 84 91 91 78 63 55 44 66.0 1971 43 48 59 66 74 87 93 87 80 65 51 39 66.0 1972 43 54 66 70 78 86 93 87 80 63 46 37 66.9 1973 32 42 50 59 74 84 90 90 79 70 57 42 64.1 1974 34 40 62 64 80 91 89 88 80 66 52 39 65.4 1975 37 44 52 60 71 85 89 88 79 70 53 42 64.2 1976 41 54 56 68 76 87 92 88 79 65 53 45 67.0 1977 34 51 53 69 74 90 90 89 81 71 54 47 66.9 1978 41 44 58 65 70 85 90 86 78 70 51 33 64.1 1979 31 42 52 65 72 84 90 86 84 71 46 43 63.8 1980 41 50 53 64 72 89 93 88 80 66 55 51 66.8 1981 49 51 53 70 74 88 90 88 80 65 58 46 67.7 1982 41 41 54 63 72 84 89 85 78 65 51 41 63.7 1983 40 46 53 59 72 82 90 89 83 68 52 43 64.8 1984 41 48 56 61 80 84 91 87 80 60 55 45 65.7 1985 41 44 55 67 75 88 91 89 76 67 51 43 66.0 1986 49 51 61 64 75 84 86 89 75 65 50 44 66.0 1987 40 47 52 68 74 87 90 86 80 71 51 40 65.5 1988 35 47 57 65 75 87 92 87 80 73 53 43 66.2 1989 38 45 63 73 79 86 93 87 84 69 56 45 68.2 1990 41 47 58 67 73 90 90 87 82 68 54 36 65.9 1991 35 49 53 65 75 84 90 88 80 71 49 37 64.7 1992 38 50 58 71 76 84 86 87 81 72 48 36 65.5 1993 44 48 59 67 76 86 91 85 79 66 50 43 66.2 1994 46 46 61 66 76 90 93 91 81 66 50 46 67.7 1995 42 58 58 61 71 83 91 90 81 69 59 47 67.5 1996 45 54 58 68 82 87 91 89 76 66 53 43 67.7 1997 39 48 63 61 77 86 90 87 82 67 54 42 66.4 1998 45 46 57 62 78 85 92 90 86 68 56 45 67.5 Avg. 40 48 56 65 75 86 91 88 80 67 52 42 66.0 8
Table 7. Summary of monthly average of the minimum temperature recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total 1969 25 24 24 35 48 51 61 62 55 39 30 22 39.7 1970 20 27 26 29 43 53 62 62 49 36 30 22 38.3 1971 16 20 26 33 42 54 61 60 48 38 28 21 37.3 1972 18 22 31 36 43 55 62 60 53 45 27 15 38.9 1973 12 26 29 32 44 52 60 60 48 40 31 19 37.8 1974 14 17 33 33 46 57 61 59 50 44 28 17 38.3 1975 14 23 28 31 40 48 60 57 50 39 24 19 36.1 1976 16 28 25 36 45 53 62 59 54 37 26 17 38.2 1977 15 22 25 39 44 59 62 61 55 42 31 26 40.1 1978 25 25 33 38 43 53 61 57 52 43 33 15 39.8 1979 16 22 28 34 44 50 58 57 53 40 25 20 37.3 1980 26 28 27 33 41 52 59 58 50 35 27 24 38.3 1981 20 23 29 39 44 54 58 56 50 37 30 22 38.5 1982 18 21 30 34 43 51 58 60 52 35 29 22 37.8 1983 21 26 31 31 41 51 58 61 52 41 29 24 38.8 1984 16 20 27 33 48 53 61 60 52 36 30 25 38.4 1985 20 19 32 38 46 54 61 59 48 41 29 19 38.8 1986 23 26 33 39 44 55 59 60 50 40 29 22 39.8 1987 18 25 26 39 45 53 57 57 49 40 28 19 37.0 1988 13 24 25 36 44 56 61 60 48 43 29 19 38.2 1989 16 24 34 40 47 54 63 58 54 40 26 16 39.3 1990 18 25 35 41 45 59 63 60 56 40 30 11 40.2 1991 16 25 30 34 44 53 59 59 51 40 27 21 38.3 1992 18 27 32 40 48 52 57 58 50 40 22 16 38.4 1993 26 28 30 36 45 52 57 58 48 38 25 20 38.4 1994 19 24 31 38 46 56 60 61 50 39 27 24 39.6 1995 24 29 31 35 43 50 58 61 52 37 29 23 39.3 1996 19 28 29 34 47 54 60 58 47 38 28 21 38.6 1997 19 24 28 32 46 54 59 59 54 37 28 20 38.2 1998 22 25 28 33 45 48 62 59 54 40 29 19 38.5 1969-1998 Avg. 19 24 29 36 44 53 60 59 51 39 28 20 38.5 9
Table 8. Highest temperatures recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1969 57 61 74 82 89 96 96 99 95 78 63 56 1970 56 65 65 72 86 98 98 99 90 76 64 61 1971 60 64 77 77 84 97 101 91 90 67 70 57 1972 61 66 76 78 86 94 100 98 89 82 57 52 1973 47 61 63 76 85 98 99 97 88 81 73 65 1974 45 60 72 75 93 99 95 94 93 83 64 56 1975 61 58 65 77 85 96 95 95 89 84 73 57 1976 54 68 71 77 86 96 100 93 94 78 70 55 1977 46 65 69 81 91 98 97 98 93 82 74 63 1978 53 59 79 77 88 95 95 94 90 83 67 47 1979 46 60 62 78 82 96 97 96 94 83 60 54 1980 55 64 67 81 86 99 97 97 88 84 73 63 1981 60 67 71 82 84 100 97 96 85 78 68 56 1982 60 64 64 75 75 93 97 95 91 79 64 53 1983 53 68 68 83 89 92 96 99 93 74 70 50 1984 51 60 68 79 93 94 95 93 89 75 68 54 1985 50 60 70 79 85 95 100 95 93 75 68 51 1986 64 70 75 79 85 94 96 96 88 75 63 55 1987 56 61 69 80 82 93 98 93 89 83 66 58 1988 49 62 77 78 87 99 96 93 93 83 70 56 1989 50 67 81 85 90 98 103 92 91 85 67 53 1990 56 64 74 80 86 100 103 94 93 79 69 55 1991 44 58 67 79 85 94 97 93 91 82 67 46 1992 52 58 67 86 85 92 95 95 89 83 61 49 1993 54 61 72 81 86 96 96 96 88 84 61 56 1994 58 63 74 81 90 100 98 97 89 80 70 55 1995 53 68 74 77 82 92 101 97 97 83 68 64 1996 56 65 71 82 90 93 96 96 90 83 66 57 1997 58 60 75 76 88 93 98 92 91 84 68 54 1998 56 62 77 80 87 99 100 95 90 85 67 60 Highest During 30 Year Period Temp. 64 70 81 86 93 100 103 99 97 85 74 65 Year 1986 1986 1989 1992 1974 1981 1989 1969 1995 1989 1977 1973 1984 1990 1990 1970 1998 1994 1983 1969-1998 Avg. 54.0 63.0 71.1 79.1 86.3 96.0 97.7 95.3 90.8 80.4 67.0 55.6 10
Table 9. Lowest temperatures recorded for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1969 09 12 13 27 37 44 43 52 46 26 14 07 1970 00 15 11 20 27 39 53 54 34 21 18 14 1971-18 05 06 17 31 38 54 54 28 18 17 04 1972 02 02 14 24 30 47 56 54 37 22 15 02 1973 01 10 20 18 28 41 52 49 37 26 14 09 1974-11 01 20 18 28 38 53 52 33 30 14 01 1975-02 09 09 19 23 38 55 49 40 20 07 06 1976-04 12 11 23 34 38 54 52 42 22 01 09 1977-02 13 12 21 33 51 57 54 46 32 20 10 1978 12 00 20 26 31 45 51 46 32 31 18-09 1979-08 05 17 16 29 36 51 51 42 23 06 09 1980 14 18 13 18 27 36 53 41 37 17 12 11 1981 10 11 21 19 32 36 44 49 42 21 13 04 1982-01 -03 19 22 30 38 47 54 38 21 17 06 1983 09 20 22 20 27 36 61 55 30 35 11 10 1984 02 11 14 18 27 40 53 54 39 23 15 13 1985 06-01 13 28 29 39 53 51 31 31 08 08 1986 08 08 19 23 33 42 53 52 40 28 16 08 1987 02 08 09 24 35 43 50 47 40 32 14 01 1988-02 16 09 21 30 38 54 54 33 36 12 01 1989 04-14 14 29 36 41 55 48 36 15 09 03 1990 00 04 19 30 39 47 55 52 45 26 16-16 1991-03 12 17 24 30 39 53 54 39 20 11 03 1992 10 17 20 30 40 41 47 48 37 28 07-02 1993 10 18 18 24 32 39 49 52 38 17 08 08 1994 07 04 12 26 35 46 50 57 39 26 08 11 1995 12 21 18 24 34 38 45 55 36 24 13 09 1996 06 12 16 20 39 41 54 52 29 16 19 03 1997-01 13 13 19 26 46 51 53 43 19 17 08 1998 12 15 13 25 31 40 59 52 46 27 16 03 Lowest During 30 Year Period Temp. -18-14 06 16 23 36 43 41 28 15 01-16 Year 1971 1989 1971 1979 1975 1979 1969 1980 1971 1989 1976 1990 1980 1981 1983 1969-1998 Avg. 2.8 9.1 15.6 22.5 31.5 40.7 51.8 51.5 37.9 24.5 12.8 5.1 11
Table 10. Number of days 32 F or below and 0 F or below in critical months for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 1969 22 26 25 7 0 0 7 22 29 138 0 0 0 0 1970 29 25 26 23 2 0 12 23 30 170 1 0 0 1 1971 29 27 22 13 1 2 8 26 27 155 4 0 0 4 1972 31 27 19 10 2 0 2 24 31 146 0 0 0 0 1973 31 26 25 17 1 0 5 16 28 149 0 0 0 0 1974 30 28 14 14 2 0 2 24 30 144 2 0 0 2 1975 29 27 24 15 3 0 6 25 30 159 2 0 0 2 1976 31 22 24 8 0 0 10 22 31 148 2 0 0 2 1977 31 28 26 8 0 0 1 20 30 144 3 0 0 3 1978 28 21 12 6 2 0 1 14 29 113 0 1 5 6 1979 29 27 25 11 3 0 5 24 31 155 3 1 0 4 1980 23 21 25 15 2 0 12 18 28 144 0 0 0 0 1981 29 26 24 3 1 0 11 19 31 144 0 0 0 0 1982 29 25 18 12 1 0 12 22 29 148 1 2 0 3 1983 31 25 18 15 6 1 0 18 26 140 0 0 0 0 1984 31 29 24 15 1 0 12 18 29 159 0 0 0 0 1985 31 25 16 5 1 1 2 19 30 130 0 1 0 1 1986 28 21 20 6 0 0 6 18 29 128 0 0 0 0 1987 28 25 24 10 0 0 3 22 31 143 0 0 0 0 1988 31 25 27 9 2 0 0 16 29 139 2 0 0 2 1989 31 24 13 5 0 0 6 27 31 137 0 2 0 2 1990 30 21 14 3 0 0 6 19 28 121 2 0 7 9 1991 31 22 20 11 2 0 4 23 31 144 2 0 0 2 1992 31 23 15 3 0 0 2 28 29 131 0 0 1 1 1993 28 22 24 11 3 0 9 25 31 153 0 0 0 0 1994 30 24 14 8 0 0 4 22 28 130 0 0 0 0 1995 28 18 15 15 0 0 7 23 28 134 0 0 0 0 1996 31 23 21 11 0 2 9 24 28 149 0 0 0 0 1997 29 27 23 16 1 0 11 22 31 160 1 0 0 1 1998 31 23 20 17 1 0 4 22 30 148 0 0 0 0 Total 881 733 617 322 37 6 179 645 884 4304 25 7 13 45 Avg. 29.4 24.4 20.6 10.7 1.2 0.2 6.0 21.5 29.5 143.5 0.83 0.23 0.43 1.50 12
Table 11. Number of days 100 F or above and number of days 95 F or above in critical months for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Number of Days Number of Days 95 or Above 100 or Above Year Jun Jul Aug Sept Total Jun Jul Total 1969 1 3 5 1 10 0 0 0 1970 5 13 5 0 23 0 0 0 1971 5 11 0 0 16 0 2 2 1972 0 13 4 0 17 0 1 1 1973 5 6 6 0 17 0 0 0 1974 17 1 0 0 18 0 0 0 1975 1 1 3 0 5 0 0 0 1976 3 11 0 0 14 0 1 1 1977 3 6 3 0 12 0 0 0 1978 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 1979 1 9 3 0 13 0 0 0 1980 6 11 5 0 22 0 0 0 1981 5 5 1 0 11 0 0 0 1982 0 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 1983 0 3 1 0 4 0 0 0 1984 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 1985 3 12 1 0 16 0 0 0 1986 0 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 1987 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1988 5 7 0 0 12 0 0 0 1989 2 16 0 0 18 0 5 5 1990 8 3 0 0 11 2 1 3 1991 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 1992 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 1993 4 3 2 0 9 0 0 0 1994 6 11 5 0 22 1 0 1 1995 0 12 6 1 19 0 3 3 1996 0 6 4 0 10 0 0 0 1997 0 4 0 0 4 0 0 0 1998 3 16 1 0 20 0 2 2 Total 84 201 59 2 346 3 15 18 Avg. 2.8 6.7 1.97 0.06 11.53 0.1 0.5 0.6 13
Table 12. Average evaporation (inches per day) for 1972-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov 1972 ---- ---- ---- 0.477 0.478 0.381 0.319 0.142 ---- 1973 ---- ---- 0.347 0.370 0.372 0.344 0.319 ---- ---- 1974 ---- ---- 0.419 0.512 0.415 0.415 0.395 0.311 ---- 1975 ---- 0.206 0.299 0.401 0.396 0.403 0.270 0.242 ---- 1976 ---- 0.309 0.380 0.515 0.444 0.423 0.302 0.190 ---- 1977 0.226 0.304 0.396 0.498 0.423 0.394 0.317 0.213 ---- 1978 ---- 0.310 0.311 0.427 0.469 0.422 0.321 0.257 ---- 1979 ---- 0.278 0.278 0.362 0.354 0.342 0.317 0.229 ---- 1980 ---- 0.258 0.322 0.489 0.452 0.406 0.272 0.280 ---- 1981 ---- 0.254 0.297 0.470 0.388 0.363 0.255 0.165 ---- 1982 ---- 0.245 0.323 0.427 0.392 0.314 0.193 0.260 ---- 1983 ---- ---- 0.328 0.384 0.404 0.357 0.291 0.203 ---- 1984 ---- 0.245 0.391 0.389 0.379 0.334 0.261 0.106 ---- 1985 ---- 0.212 0.282 0.409 0.409 0.374 0.233 0.141 0.155 1986 ---- 0.245 0.317 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.225 0.242 0.155 1987 ---- ---- 0.277 0.383 0.393 0.335 0.274 0.101 ---- 1988 ---- 0.234 0.373 0.369 0.421 0.314 0.285 0.198 0.151 1989 ---- 0.330 0.393 0.418 0.446 0.356 0.312 0.219 ---- 1990 ---- 0.255 0.373 0.516 0.411 0.366 0.294 0.186 ---- 1991 ---- 0.299 0.377 0.366 0.411 0.358 0.284 0.238 ---- 1992 ---- 0.277 0.280 0.405 0.383 0.348 0.272 0.211 ---- 1993 ---- 0.322 0.339 0.465 0.477 0.328 0.304 0.180 ---- 1994 ---- 0.278 0.383 0.501 0.504 0.402 0.309 0.246 ---- 1995 ---- 0.249 0.315 0.424 0.445 0.375 0.324 0.241 ---- 1996 ---- 0.303 0.435 0.424 0.451 0.358 0.236 0.182 ---- 1997 ---- 0.246 0.301 0.395 0.399 0.309 0.259 0.187 ---- 1998 ---- 0.242 0.367 0.471 0.420 0.366 0.334 0.189 ---- Avg. 0.226 0.269 0.342 0.423 0.418 0.365 0.285 0.199 0.154 # Years 1 22 26 27 27 27 27 26 3 14
Table 13. Monthly evaporation (inches per month) for 1972-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Total Year Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct (in/yr) 1972 ---- ---- 14.31 14.82 11.81 9.57 4.40 54.91 1973 ---- 10.76 11.10 11.53 10.66 9.57 ---- 53.62 1974 ---- 12.99 15.36 12.87 12.25 9.33 4.59 67.39 1975 6.18 9.27 12.03 12.28 12.49 8.10 7.50 67.85 1976 9.27 11.78 15.45 13.76 13.11 9.06 5.89 78.32 1977 9.12 12.28 14.94 13.11 12.21 9.51 6.60 77.77 1978 9.30 9.64 12.81 14.54 13.08 9.63 7.97 76.97 1979 8.34 8.62 10.89 10.97 10.60 9.51 7.10 66.00 1980 7.74 9.98 14.67 14.01 12.59 8.16 8.68 75.83 1981 7.62 9.21 14.10 12.03 11.25 7.65 5.12 66.98 1982 7.35 10.01 12.81 12.14 9.73 7.28 8.06 67.38 1983 ---- 8.85 11.51 12.51 11.06 8.72 6.35 59.00 1984 6.37 12.15 11.66 11.74 10.43 7.84 3.29 63.48 1985 6.35 8.74 12.27 12.68 11.61 6.99 4.44 63.08 1986 7.36 9.82 10.97 11.34 11.34 6.75 ---- 57.58 1987 ---- 6.64 11.47 12.19 10.39 8.23 3.12 52.04 1988 ---- 11.55 11.06 13.05 9.74 8.55 6.16 60.11 1989 ---- 12.18 12.54 13.83 11.04 9.37 ---- 58.96 1990 7.65 11.56 15.48 12.74 11.35 8.82 5.77 73.37 1991 8.68 11.68 10.99 12.77 11.11 8.53 ---- 63.76 1992 7.76 8.67 12.15 11.89 10.80 8.19 6.53 65.99 1993 9.66 10.52 13.94 14.78 10.17 9.11 5.57 73.75 1994 8.35 11.90 15.04 15.63 12.46 9.28 7.38 80.04 1995 7.48 9.78 12.72 13.81 11.63 9.74 7.48 72.64 1996 9.10 13.50 12.72 13.99 11.10 7.08 5.66 73.15 1997 7.37 9.33 11.84 12.36 9.59 7.78 5.80 64.07 1998 7.27 11.37 14.12 13.03 11.36 10.03 5.85 73.03 Avg. 7.92 10.49 12.92 12.98 11.29 8.61 6.06 70.27 15
Table 14. Wind movement at two heights for 1980-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. (Miles/Day) Six Inches Above Evaporation Pan 1980 64 66 100 97 80 57 44 41 27 30 23 14 53.6 1981 50 80 94 85 71 64 58 60 20 55 56 52 62.1 1982 69 36 63 89 78 42 59 75 77 86 77 89 70.0 1983 82 101 107 101 108 98 76 70 62 73 94 98 89.2 1984 63 101 104 114 78 94 66 61 70 71 99 67 82.3 1985 49 87 128 98 76 66 70 76 70 72 148 55 82.9 1986 53 61 72 95 78 64 52 66 60 45 50 45 61.8 1987 60 41 50 50 31 22 25 19 21 48 71 79 43.1 1988 76 73 99 88 99 81 75 71 75 64 82 82 80.4 1989 84 75 96 86 69 73 78 72 73 68 68 59 75.1 1990 78 97 90 91 91 84 82 82 76 72 71 83 83.1 1991 61 73 106 98 99 75 79 67 72 57 59 47 74.4 1992 64 66 80 76 72 74 66 70 62 58 68 66 68.5 1993 103 86 105 107 91 81 71 75 74 65 82 79 84.9 1994 81 96 83 94 71 61 72 72 63 58 84 59 74.5 1995 76 65 83 81 80 61 63 59 52 64 58 49 65.9 1996 92 79 88 93 72 73 72 60 44 51 53 71 70.7 1997 43 79 78 73 70 62 55 48 50 48 39 35 56.8 1998 59 75 83 81 66 72 70 66 62 78 66 59 69.5 Avg. 68.8 75.6 90.0 89.3 77.9 68.6 64.9 63.6 58.4 61.2 70.9 62.5 71.0 Avg. MPH 2.89 3.15 3.75 3.72 3.25 2.86 2.70 2.65 2.43 2.55 2.95 2.60 2.96 Two Meters 1980 ---- ---- ---- ---- 134 132 116 96 82 78 80 84 100.3 1981 112 124 141 124 102 81 62 82 71 81 76 58 92.8 1982 88 63 97 127 100 122 103 91 99 95 86 99 97.5 1983 111 139 147 154 141 120 116 102 113 107 130 136 126.3 1984 64 115 93 136 88 96 52 46 49 44 136 110 85.7 1985 95 127 183 155 142 136 136 133 125 127 72 117 129.0 1986 113 129 145 179 154 139 128 134 128 118 116 99 131.9 1987 139 131 143 158 139 126 122 119 132 108 123 117 129.7 1988 121 122 163 148 166 138 132 126 120 91 98 98 126.8 1989 97 133 151 147 132 123 126 120 125 115 112 104 123.8 1990 125 152 146 170 165 154 141 136 127 135 127 130 142.2 1991 101 120 190 191 167 138 140 119 129 111 109 85 133.4 1992 117 119 137 142 133 137 118 118 111 110 113 106 121.6 16
Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. (Miles/Day) Two Meters 1993 164 139 153 171 144 86 57 80 103 87 92 ---- 115.8 1994 130 156 144 166 135 130 136 127 120 119 154 115 136.0 1995 137 129 147 176 185 137 128 118 115 137 129 110 136.5 1996 171 145 161 182 149 140 127 119 112 134 119 147 142.3 1997 106 149 146 153 137 113 112 101 105 115 118 110 122.1 1998 100 133 145 144 112 120 111 100 105 131 111 106 118.2 Avg. 116.0 129.1 146.1 156.8 138.1 124.5 113.8 108.8 109.1 107.5 110.6 106.6 121.7 Avg. MPH 4.83 5.38 6.09 6.53 5.75 5.19 4.74 4.53 4.55 4.48 4.61 4.44 5.07 Table 15. Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for 1976-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month September 1976 to December 1998 Average High Average Low Mean* Average Extreme High Average Extreme Low Jan 35.7 31.5 33.6 41.7 25.5 Feb 43.3 35.1 39.2 54.1 30.0 Mar 54.7 41.1 47.9 64.0 34.8 Apr 66.1 49.5 57.8 77.6 40.2 May 78.4 59.4 68.9 88.5 48.5 Jun 89.7 70.0 79.9 97.3 61.4 Jul 95.7 75.3 85.5 101.5 68.0 Aug 93.5 73.5 83.5 100.0 65.8 Sep 84.4 65.5 75.0 94.4 56.2 Oct 67.7 51.6 59.7 79.4 41.3 Nov 49.6 39.3 44.5 60.1 32.6 Dec 37.4 32.5 35.0 46.0 27.3 *Average between high and low. 17
Table 16. Average soil temperatures four inches below surface for 1976-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Average High Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. 1976 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 88.9 69.2 56.8 38.8 1977 31.8 49.8 56.2 79.1 88.3 106.6 109.7 102.9 92.6 74.1 53.3 42.6 73.9 1978 37.0 42.8 53.7 75.5 82.0 100.7 106.0 102.2 91.2 73.3 53.9 36.3 71.2 1979 35.7 40.8 53.9 68.4 81.6 92.2 99.2 98.4 93.4 75.0 49.8 38.9 68.9 1980 46.2 52.5 59.8 68.4 80.8 94.2 102.6 96.8 85.3 70.0 54.8 49.0 71.7 1981 47.6 49.9 57.6 73.9 79.3 88.5 92.8 89.7 81.2 65.6 52.0 38.1 68.0 1982 33.9 38.9 51.0 62.7 78.5 89.4 96.0 94.0 82.8 67.7 50.1 39.6 65.4 1983 34.9 44.8 51.4 59.8 73.8 81.4 90.5 92.7 82.6 66.0 47.4 37.1 63.5 1984 32.5 38.5 52.4 59.3 77.0 84.7 92.6 94.7 85.6 59.6 51.1 38.7 63.9 1985 35.5 39.9 54.1 65.2 81.4 93.3 100.4 96.2 83.3 69.5 49.6 37.0 67.1 1986 41.6 47.1 58.6 64.3 77.9 88.9 92.4 95.9 78.9 63.1 45.9 37.0 66.0 1987 32.2 41.9 47.1 62.4 77.0 88.6 93.7 91.5 82.4 70.9 50.9 40.9 65.0 1988 34.6 42.7 57.1 66.3 77.3 89.2 94.0 92.5 82.6 71.0 50.2 34.4 66.0 1989 31.1 38.7 57.2 67.8 77.3 86.6 94.6 90.6 82.3 67.8 49.7 37.0 65.1 1990 34.5 39.5 55.5 65.8 75.4 87.1 91.3 88.6 83.0 67.5 49.8 34.8 64.4 1991 33.5 42.1 51.9 66.1 76.6 86.4 95.3 95.3 85.6 70.1 46.4 37.6 65.6 1992 34.8 43.8 55.3 68.5 77.5 86.1 90.4 90.9 83.3 70.9 44.4 31.4 64.8 1993 36.8 42.4 53.7 66.0 78.9 85.9 94.8 88.4 80.2 64.2 42.5 33.7 64.0 1994 34.7 38.3 57.4 65.8 76.6 89.7 94.5 94.1 84.3 63.2 42.5 33.9 64.6 1995 34.5 48.9 55.9 60.9 69.5 83.7 91.0 92.3 ---- 63.9 51.7 39.9 64.7 1996 36.1 46.9 56.6 68.3 83.5 89.4 94.6 86.4 78.5 64.3 53.1 34.9 61.9 1997 33.6 41.3 54.8 58.3 73.0 ---- ---- 91.0 83.8 65.5 47.4 32.6 63.9 1998 33.6 40.6 51.1 62.2 80.4 89.2 95.6 92.0 85.3 65.0 46.5 34.8 64.7 Avg. 35.7 43.3 54.7 66.1 78.4 89.7 95.7 93.5 84.4 67.7 49.6 37.4 66.4 Average Low Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. 1976 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- A ---- ---- 66.5 51.1 39.9 23.6 1977 21.6 30.0 35.8 52.1 59.8 78.4 80.2 78.2 70.8 53.4 39.4 32.0 52.6 1978 33.7 36.1 10.2 55.3 60.0 75.2 81.3 77.8 68.7 57.7 45.1 33.8 55.4 1979 33.7 5.9 12.5 52.0 62.0 72.1 78.6 77.7 72.7 54.4 41.2 35.6 54.9 1980 39.9 42.4 44.2 52.1 61.1 72.1 77.5 76.1 67.3 5..9 43.7 39.1 55.8 1981 37.0 37.0 42.6 54.6 59.8 70.5 75.3 75.2 67.1 53.4 42.7 33.0 54.0 1982 29.6 33.6 40.0 48.0 60.1 72.5 78.2 74.5 67.6 51.4 41.6 36.6 52.8 1983 32.7 37.9 42.4 47.1 57.6 65.6 71.2 73.6 67.6 51.5 40.3 34.0 51.8 1984 31.1 33.3 37.7 43.8 59.6 66.7 74.7 71.0 64.7 44.4 38.2 33.6 49.9 1985 32.1 31.2 40.9 48.1 56.0 68.4 72.3 70.4 58.9 47.9 37.1 31.2 49.5 1986 33.5 36.4 42.7 47.8 57.8 67.1 37.7 71.6 57.8 47.1 38.2 34.6 50.2 18
Average Low Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Avg. 1987 31.2 35.1 37.0 48.4 61.7 72.9 74.2 75.0 68.3 56.8 42.7 38.5 53.7 1988 33.8 37.8 43.3 49.6 56.9 67.7 75.6 70.5 64.1 55.1 40.4 32.1 52.2 1989 27.4 34.1 43.8 53.7 61.8 68.7 74.2 71.7 66.9 52.9 38.3 28.9 51.9 1990 27.9 31.7 40.9 50.7 56.9 71.2 76.3 71.4 66.6 50.8 41.4 33.2 51.6 1991 30.6 35.2 40.7 49.4 59.4 67.7 76.4 75.6 65.9 57.1 39.5 36.4 52.8 1992 33.3 37.6 45.0 55.2 63.2 69.5 73.7 74.6 64.8 57.1 35.5 29.7 53.3 1993 33.8 36.1 40.7 47.0 59.7 68.6 74.2 68.7 57.7 46.7 32.6 28.5 49.5 1994 28.5 30.7 40.3 48.1 57.3 70.5 74.5 74.6 60.3 47.0 35.1 31.0 49.8 1995 31.8 35.4 41.4 45.2 52.2 66.6 73.5 74.9 ---- 48.7 39.2 31.5 50.5 1996 28.2 36.5 40.4 49.4 63.4 67.7 74.1 64.9 60.5 48.7 37.4 32.0 50.3 1997 31.3 34.8 42.4 46.6 59.8 ---- ---- 73.4 66.1 49.7 36.7 28.9 47.0 1998 30.6 33.4 37.5 45.1 61.5 69.7 76.3 73.8 69.1 51.7 37.4 30.9 51.4 Avg. 31.5 35.1 41.1 49.5 59.4 70.0 75.3 73.5 65.5 51.6 39.3 32.5 52.0 Table 17. Soil temperature extremes, four inches below surface for 1976-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Extreme High Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1976 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 107 80 64 46 1977 44 57 68 95 106 117 117 112 103 90 67 53 1978 45 51 60 88 95 108 112 110 105 86 68 45 1979 40 53 64 80 91 101 107 107 100 89 63 44 1980 38 62 65 79 89 104 106 106 92 84 65 55 1981 52 61 69 86 88 95 98 95 88 76 58 45 1982 44 53 57 78 88 99 102 99 94 78 56 47 1983 39 53 60 71 88 91 97 97 92 74 64 43 1984 37 45 62 68 91 92 97 102 94 76 61 47 1985 45 54 63 76 90 100 108 101 103 77 66 49 1986 50 59 70 78 86 97 101 102 96 72 54 44 1987 37 54 56 77 87 93 99 97 96 80 63 49 1988 36 57 68 75 88 99 98 97 91 79 66 43 1989 35 57 69 76 85 94 100 98 90 80 59 44 1990 44 55 66 75 84 95 97 94 92 78 61 45 1991 37 50 61 76 86 94 100 99 95 85 60 42 1992 38 53 60 79 85 95 96 98 88 82 53 37 1993 42 52 67 77 89 92 99 100 88 77 53 42 1994 45 52 65 80 86 95 98 99 92 75 57 43 1995 41 60 65 72 79 90 98 99 70 60 50 1996 42 55 65 77 91 96 100 92 91 78 54 48 19
Extreme High Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1997 45 49 64 69 84 95 91 81 57 47 1998 39 48 64 74 90 98 102 96 90 79 54 49 Avg. 41.7 54.1 64.0 77.6 88.5 97.3 101.5 100.0 94.4 79.4 60.1 46.0 Extreme Low Temperature Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1976 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 53 39 36 18 1977 6 22 24 32 52 73 70 73 62 43 31 20 1978 31 34 37 49 44 68 75 70 52 44 38 27 1979 19 30 38 39 49 62 70 69 68 44 32 31 1980 36 38 40 40 54 63 72 68 61 41 37 35 1981 33 31 39 40 52 56 67 71 62 43 36 28 1982 22 29 35 43 47 63 72 68 57 40 37 30 1983 26 34 38 39 47 60 64 65 58 49 33 30 1984 23 32 32 38 42 56 69 65 53 34 30 30 1985 29 22 35 37 45 60 66 64 47 41 31 24 1986 29 29 35 37 49 62 60 62 48 37 31 33 1987 28 32 31 36 41 65 75 71 61 50 38 37 1988 32 34 38 44 45 53 68 66 56 49 31 26 1989 20 33 35 45 53 65 63 65 60 38 30 24 1990 23 26 33 43 47 59 71 63 55 42 35 28 1991 23 25 37 43 50 56 71 68 58 40 35 34 1992 28 35 40 46 54 62 66 62 59 50 27 26 1993 30 34 36 39 45 63 71 57 49 34 26 22 1994 24 20 33 38 51 64 70 65 53 37 26 26 1995 28 29 34 38 45 59 62 66 ---- 42 31 20 1996 22 26 32 41 54 58 58 57 44 37 35 31 1997 27 33 34 38 46 ---- ---- 68 57 35 32 22 1998 22 31 24 37 54 64 68 65 63 41 33 24 Avg. 25.2 30.0 34.8 40.2 48.5 61.4 68.0 65.8 56.2 41.3 32.6 27.3 20
Table 18. Average daily solar radiation (Langley s) for 1977-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total Avg. 1977 204 305 386 552 438 530 501 464 396 360 ---- ---- 4,136 413.6 1978 157 168 334 459 490 586 641 491 401 292 185 166 4,370 364.2 1979 166 261 302 423 445 527 489 477 459 267 165 155 4,136 344.7 1980 141 192 300 429 459 529 595 501 436 342 280 145 4,349 362.4 1981 190 296 292 473 499 607 550 489 422 314 248 200 4,580 381.7 1982 129 207 369 536 594 707 651 565 470 393 227 208 5,052 421.0 1983 188 294 345 518 654 734 793 725 583 332 230 176 5,575 464.6 1984 250 345 486 540 688 494 736 744 595 317 226 188 5,606 467.2 1985 242 ---- ---- 499 618 816 843 801 557 410 256 184 6,274 522.8 1986 243 304 505 584 837 736 1,028 1,223 918 513 282 205 7,381 615.1 1987 229 289 506 566 551 665 638 542 483 352 246 197 5,264 438.7 1988 220 305 474 496 626 623 621 555 486 470 251 216 5,344 445.3 1989 224 280 419 550 628 633 619 570 498 361 277 219 5,278 439.8 1990 222 282 316 479 593 662 620 541 462 361 234 203 4,975 414.6 1991 212 309 356 554 651 556 613 537 450 340 249 146 4,973 414.4 1992 189 268 358 509 530 616 560 501 451 324 238 167 4,711 392.6 1993 160 230 374 514 532 599 614 464 456 331 240 187 4,702 391.8 1994 223 262 371 439 482 564 555 496 411 300 225 178 4,506 375.5 1995 189 288 358 438 481 552 520 459 373 324 212 157 4,351 362.6 1996 240 309 463 580 651 609 676 604 458 357 250 226 5,423 451.9 1997 215 314 516 513 613 657 640 567 491 390 267 220 5,403 450.3 1998 236 260 443 563 661 725 604 565 506 331 266 244 5,404 450.3 Avg. 203.3 274.5 393.2 509.7 578.1 624.0 641.2 585.5 489.2 353.7 240.4 189.6 426.7 Table 19. Thirty year total monthly Growing Degree Days* (May through September and first fall frost) for 1969-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Month Total to Date of Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep Sep 1 st Frost (32 F) 1 st Frost (32 F) 1969 434 510 729 744 570 2,987 3,017 Oct 05 1970 434 555 744 744 420 2,897 2,949 Oct 08 1971 372 600 729 713 450 2,864 2,684 Sep18 1972 434 615 744 713 495 3,001 3,201 Oct 30 1973 372 640 713 713 435 2,873 2,990 Oct 11 1974 465 645 729 698 450 2,987 3,227 Oct 30 1975 326 525 713 667 435 2,666 2,806 Oct 14 1976 403 585 744 698 495 2,925 2,978 Oct 07 1977 372 675 744 729 540 3,060 3,386 Oct 31 21
Month Total to Date of Year May Jun Jul Aug Sep Sep 1 st Frost (32 F) 1 st Frost (32 F) 1978 310 570 729 667 450 2,726 2,576 Sep 20 1979 341 510 682 667 555 2,755 2,986 Oct 22 1980 341 570 698 682 450 2,741 2,869 Oct 16 1981 372 600 682 651 450 2,755 2,875 Oct 16 1982 341 525 682 698 450 2,696 2,741 Oct 06 1983 341 495 682 729 525 2,772 2,615 Sep 21 1984 465 555 729 713 480 2,942 3,017 Oct 15 1985 397 600 710 692 416 2,815 2,926 Sep 30 1986 377 574 661 693 395 2,700 2,790 Oct 12 1987 366 592 674 646 473 2,751 2,873 Oct 19 1988 396 607 722 697 476 2,898 2,981 Nov 12 1989 468 565 731 670 540 2,974 3,131 Oct 18 1990 378 635 729 673 532 2,947 3,029 Oct 09 1991 409 557 704 701 471 2,842 3,153 Oct 28 1992 385 536 630 639 484 2,674 2,763 Oct 08 1993 416 538 652 615 454 2,675 2,854 Oct 19 1994 426 628 729 746 495 3,024 3,169 Oct 17 1995 330 516 676 739 494 2,745 2,782 Oct 06 1996 477 612 730 695 410 2,924 2,785 Sep 19 1997 441 563 685 670 568 2,927 3,081 Oct 13 1998 417 499 746 716 560 2,938 2,984 Oct 06 Avg. 394 573 708 694 481 2,850 2,941 Oct 14 Accum. 394 967 1,675 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
State Station Project 1-3-42119 Physical Plant, Utilities, Maintenance, and Repairs Author: E.J. Gregory, Ph.D. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A. 2013 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
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. 2013 Digitized version Funding State Station Project 1-3-42254 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
Table 20. Procedures for the 1994-Planted Alfalfa Variety Trail (Fee Trial); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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, 1998. Fertilization Herbicide Insecticide Soil Type Irrigation Results and Discussion Preplant Fertilizer; 440 lbs. of 11-52-0 or 48 lbs. N, 229 lbs. P 2 O 5 per acre Postplant Fertilizer applied on 03-27-98: 200 lbs. 6-26-30 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
Table 21. Yield of Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 330 2.06 1.92 1.46 1.11 6.55 Cal/West C/W 3576 1.91 1.79 1.39 1.03 6.12 Arkansas Valley 6J9S (Evergreen) 1.83 1.71 1.33 1.09 6.01 Cal/West C/W3568 1.77 1.85 1.35 1.01 5.97 Cargill 4J12 1.95 1.72 1.27 0.99 5.93 Waterman Loomis W 252HQ 1.85 1.67 1.35 1.00 5.88 Waterman Loomis WL 323 1.85 1.60 1.36 1.02 5.84 Great Plains Research Cimarron VR 1.87 1.61 1.32 1.02 5.82 Great Plains Research Key 1.79 1.60 1.28 1.04 5.71 Cal/West C/W 3567 ZX 9345B Wm. Lohse Mill LM 459 ZX 9345A Total & Z 1.76 1.71 1.62 1.57 1.76 1.74 1.57 1.69 1.62 1.47 1.30 1.30 1.37 1.28 1.16 0.91 1.00 0.88 0.87 0.88 5.70 5.57 5.55 5.35 5.27 NMSU Dona Ana 1.68 1.55 1.14 0.88 5.25 Average 1.80 1.67 1.31 0.98 5.76 LSD 0.05 (Variety) 0.26 0.20 0.12 0.12 0.36 LSD 0.05 (Cutting) 0.41 Interaction Variety x Cutting CV% 10.0 8.5 6.7 8.5 9.0 ns 26
Table 22. Three Year Average Yields of Alfalfa Varieties for 1996 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998 Yield Company Variety 1996 1997 1998 3 Yr. Avg. ton/acre Union Seed Union 330 8.89 7.85 6.55 7.76 Cal/West C/W 3568 9.08 7.81 5.97 7.62 Cal/West C/W 3576 8.83 7.94 6.12 7.62 Arkansas Valley 6J9S (Evergreen) 9.19 7.61 6.01 7.60 Waterman Loomis WL 323 8.36 7.85 5.84 7.35 Cargill 4J12 8.42 7.29 5.93 7.21 Great Plains Research Cimarron VR 8.41 7.36 5.82 7.20 Waterman Loomis WL 252HQ 8.45 7.20 5.88 7.18 Cal/West C/W 3567 8.32 7.19 5.70 7.07 ZX 9345B 8.28 7.24 5.57 7.03 Great Plains Research Key 8.04 7.28 5.71 7.01 Total & Z 8.07 6.84 5.27 6.73 Lohse Mill LM 459 7.51 7.08 5.55 6.71 NMSU Dona Ana 8.00 6.74 5.25 6.66 ZX 9345A 7.62 6.95 5.35 6.64 Average 8.36 7.32 5.76 7.15 27
Table 23. Procedures for Alfalfa Variety Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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, 1998. Fertilization Preplant fertilizer, 200 lbs. 11-52-0 or 22 lbs. N, 104 lbs. P 2 O 5 per acre. Postplant fertilizer applied on 03/27/98; 200 lbs. 6-26-30 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 25. 28
Table 24. Yield of the Alfalfa Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 330 2.18 1.87 1.43 0.82 6.31 Forage Genetics Rushmore 2.19 1.84 1.29 0.93 6.24 Arkansas Valley Legend 2.04 1.85 1.30 1.01 6.20 Arkansas Valley Benchmark 1.91 1.69 1.30 0.99 5.88 Dekalb Genetic Corp. DK 127 1.82 1.82 1.25 0.94 5.82 Waterman Loomis Research WL 324 1.85 1.83 1.22 0.92 5.81 Check Rio 1.89 1.74 1.24 0.88 5.76 Arkansas Valley Evergreen 1.71 1.80 1.24 0.95 5.70 Cal West CW 4693 1.79 1.76 1.13 0.95 5.64 Union Seed Champ 1.83 1.67 1.17 0.88 5.55 Forage Genetics UN 44 2.01 1.65 1.05 0.75 5.46 Cal West CW 4599 1.72 1.63 1.17 0.91 5.42 Southwest Seed Archer 1.53 1.62 1.25 0.87 5.27 Waterman Loomis Research WL 325 HQ 1.49 1.79 1.24 0.75 5.27 Forage Genetics 3L171 1.83 1.40 1.07 0.91 5.22 Southwest Seed Vernema 1.65 1.58 1.11 0.83 5.17 Union Seed Ranger 1.63 1.50 1.10 0.73 4.96 Union Seed Parade 1.47 1.36 0.98 0.83 4.64 Average 1.81 1.69 1.20 0.88 5.58 LSD 0.05 (Variety) 0.35 0.27 0.21 0.21 0.52 LSD 0.05 (Cutting) 0.63 Interaction: Cutting x Variety CV% 13.4 11.3 12.6 16.8 13.4 ns 29
Table 25. Two Year Average Yield of the Alfalfa Variety Trial for 1977 & 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Company Selection Yield or or 1997 1988 2 Yr. Avg. Brand Name Variety ton/acre Arkansas Valley Legend 6.16 6.20 6.18 Check Rio 6.41 5.76 6.09 Dekalb Genetic Corp. DK 127 6.01 5.82 5.92 Arkansas Valley Evergreen 6.07 5.70 5.89 Forage Genetics Rushmore 5.54 6.24 5.89 Union Seed 330 5.23 6.31 5.77 Arkansas Valley Benchmark 5.54 5.88 5.71 Cal West CW 4693 5.62 5.64 5.63 Waterman Loomis Research WL 324 5.39 5.81 5.60 Forage Genetics UN 44 5.70 5.46 5.58 Union Seed Champ 5.43 5.55 5.49 Cal West CW 4599 5.54 5.42 5.48 Southwest Seed Archer 5.66 5.27 5.47 Forage Genetics 3L171 5.63 5.22 5.43 Waterman Loomis Research WL 325 HQ 5.51 5.27 5.39 Southwest Seed Vernema 5.38 5.17 5.28 Union Seed Parade 5.05 4.64 4.85 Union Seed Ranger 4.64 4.96 4.80 Average 5.58 [5.57] 5.58 30
Table 26. Procedure for Dry Bean Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 27. 31
Table 27. Yield of Cooperative Dry Bean Nursery and Varieties; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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. 27.0 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. 13.9 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 23.3 2242 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. 13.3 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. 17.7 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. 31.6 Black Kodiak Michigan State Univ. 30.7 Shiny Crow Colorado State Univ. 33.0 Burke USDA-Prosser 30.6 Midnight Check 24.0 Average 32.5 Average 28.5 Great Northern Glacier Michigan State Univ. 38.7 US 1140 Check 32.6 Grand Average 25.2 WM3-94-9 University Nebraska 32.2 USWA-12 USDA Prosser 31.4 LSD 0.05 8.1 UI 465 University Idaho 26.5 Average 32.3 CV% 22.5 32
Table 28. Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Forage); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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. 1998. Yield Dry Plant Ear Plant Company Hybrid Green Dry Matter Height Height Population (ton/acre) (%) (in.) (in.) (per acre) Germains HT 76221 39.1 10.2 25.5 129 57 25,752 Germains HT 4138 37.8 10.3 27.2 116 50 27,289 Germains HT. 75046 37.4 10.0 26.7 122 53 24,599 Germains GC 4333 34.4 9.3 27.0 119 53 26,520 Average 37.2 9.9 26.6 121 53 26,040 LSD 0.05 ns ns ns ns ns ns CV % 14.3 16.7 5.2 7.6 7.7 20.6 33
Table 30. Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Early Season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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
Table 31. Corn (Early season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 1264 239.5 56.0 17.0 100 40.5 32,190 0 Grand Valley GVX 4616 223.2 56.5 17.9 106 44.3 30,076 0 Pioneer 36A43 221.0 57.0 14.8 114 51.8 32,382 0 Pioneer 3568 215.9 55.8 15.3 118 50.3 31,709 0 Mycogen 2500 213.2 56.3 14.8 96 36.0 30,940 0 DeKalb DK477 212.9 55.5 14.3 106 42.0 32,574 0 Grand Valley GVX 7236 211.2 54.3 14.6 107 43.5 32,574 0 DeKalb DK 512 209.7 54.8 14.6 110 48.0 32,766 0 Grand Valley GVX 7219 208.4 56.0 14.7 106 45.0 30,460 0 Germain's BH 4602 207.8 55.0 16.3 110 43.5 24,599 0 Pioneer 3730 202.9 57.0 14.8 105 42.8 32,574 0 Mycogen 2595 202.8 55.8 15.4 98 42.0 30,940 0 DeKalb DK 493 201.1 55.5 13.9 103 48.0 31,901 0 Grand Valley GVX 7297 199.7 55.3 15.2 105 45.0 29,115 0 Germain's HT 4199 184.8 57.0 13.7 104 45.8 25,944 0 Pioneer 37M81 184.1 56.0 13.8 102 45.8 32,190 0 Mycogen 2569 183.3 55.0 15.2 101 40.5 29,306 0 Grand Valley GVX 0946 176.6 55.8 14.4 105 43.5 29,403 0 Germain's HT 4185 173.3 55.8 13.4 99 41.3 24,695 0 Grand Valley GVX 4776 169.5 54.0 14.5 100 42.8 27,001 0 Average 202.2 55.7 14.9 105 44.1 30,167 0 LSD 0.05 30.0 0.9 0.6 5 4.3 2,890 CV% 10.5 1.1 2.8 3.4 6.9 6.8 *Yields adjusted to 15.1% moisture and a 56 lb. bushel. 35
Table 32. Corn (Early Season) two and three year average yields for 1996-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Company or Brand name Hybrid 1996 1997 1998 97-98 2 Yr. Avg. 96-98 3 Yr. Avg. (bu/acre) DeKalb DK 493 222.0 234.8 201.1 218.0 219.3 DeKalb DK 512 213.6 221.3 209.7 215.5 214.9 Pioneer 3568 178.0 222.1 215.9 219.0 205.3 Mycogen 2500 213.0 213.2 213.1 DeKalb DK 477 206.0 212.9 209.5 Table 33. Procedure for Corn Hybrids (Full season); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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
Table 34. Corn (Full season) grain yield and other measurements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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) 228.1 56.5 18.4 121.0 49.5 28,826 0 Mycogen 2725 222.8 53.3 17.4 105.0 44.3 25,175 0 Grand Valley SX 1300 222.6 53.8 18.2 106.0 45.0 26,809 0 Grand Valley GVX 8258 219.8 52.5 17.4 103.0 40.5 26,905 0 Agri Pro AP 9616 218.0 49.8 18.7 115.0 51.8 27,385 0 Pioneer 33H67 212.2 55.0 20.2 122.0 53.3 27,962 0 Pioneer 34K77 210.4 55.3 16.9 113.0 47.3 29,499 0 Agri Pro HY 9646 204.4 50.3 20.2 122.0 61.5 30,748 0 Grand Valley GVX 7268 200.1 55.5 16.1 111.0 48.0 25,271 0 DeKalb DK 626 199.4 52.8 19.4 117.0 48.0 25,175 0 Germain's HT 4612 194.8 52.8 18.7 107.0 43.5 22,292 0 Grand Valley GVX 0268 192.4 54.0 17.3 109.0 46.5 26,616 0 Germain's HT 4138 192.2 51.5 18.9 118.0 53.3 26,040 0 DeKalb DK 595 190.5 54.5 17.1 109.0 41.3 21,428 0 Agri Pro AP 9707 178.1 51.3 20.9 112.0 48.8 28,538 0 Mycogen 7250 175.9 53.0 18.5 116.0 44.3 22,773 0 Pioneer 3489 174.5 54.8 17.5 113.0 37.5 24,214 0 Germain's BH 4622 167.5 48.8 19.3 115.0 45.0 23,349 0 Germain's GC 4333 162.4 52.8 18.5 115.0 51.0 22,869 0 Germain's HT 75046 154.8 48.5 21.0 122.0 51.0 20,947 0 Average 190.0 52.8 18.5 113.0 47.6 25,641 LSD 0.05 43.7 1.4 1.2 5.0 5.1 4,821 CV% 15.7 1.9 4.4 2.9 7.6 13.3 *Yields adjusted to 15.5% moisture and a 56 lb. bushel. 37
Table 35. Corn (Full season) two and three year average yields for 1996-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Company or Brand name Hybrid 1996 1997 1998 97-98 2 Yr. Avg. 96-98 3 Yr. Avg. bu/acre) Mycogen 2725 262.7 222.8 242.8 Agri Pro AP 9616 244.0 218.0 231.0 DeKalb DK 595 255.3 190.5 222.9 DeKalb DK 626 239.1 199.4 219.3 Pioneer 34K77 221.2 210.4 215.8 Pioneer 3489 211.7 255.8 174.5 215.2 214.0 Agri Pro AP 9707 228.1 178.1 203.1 Table 36. Procedure for Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 38. 38
Table 37. Yield and other characteristics of the Northwestern States Oats Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. CI, PI or OT No. Entry Parentage Yield* Moisture Bushel Weight Plant Height Lodging (bu/a) (%) (lb/a) (in.) (%) 95Ab12743 86Ab1867/87Ab5597 166.9 8.1 27.0 45.0 53 87Ab4983 Ogle/Border 161.5 8.4 28.3 53.5 13 Whitestone Porter/ND 821742 145.7 8.2 28.0 51.0 10 (ND 870258) Prairie 142.4 8.6 28.5 52.8 55 CDC Pacer 141.9 8.3 27.0 54.5 45 ABSP 19-9 83Ab3083/Monida 136.3 8.6 28.3 52.8 46 Celsia 134.1 7.9 27.5 55.8 24 483126 Monida 133.4 8.0 27.8 54.3 48 82Ab248 Cayuse/Monida 132.8 8.8 28.0 54.3 16 9401 Ogle 130.0 8.4 29.3 50.8 55 Rio Grande 74Ab2608/Cayuse 129.4 8.6 28.5 53.0 29 (81Ab5792) 1A H61-3-3 Grlnd/8433//Hldn/3/ 129.2 8.3 27.8 49.5 23 ND 910569 P832RS1-100-1/ 125.7 8.4 30.0 47.3 19 W83101 AbSP 9-2 83Ab3119/Monida 125.2 10.2 27.5 51.0 34 Derby 124.5 8.1 27.3 50.3 34 91Ab406 81Ab5792/82Ab248 121.6 7.8 26.5 50.5 40 84Ab825 Ogle/Border 120.4 8.5 28.3 49.5 36 8263 Cayuse 118.2 8.6 28.5 53.3 53 87Ab5125 Ogle/75Ab861 116.9 7.6 27.3 53.5 33 86Ab664 Ogle/75Ab861 115.1 8.1 27.8 52.8 30 90Ab1322 80Ab988/Monida 112.3 7.7 27.3 52.5 31 CDC Boyer 109.4 8.5 27.3 54.5 43 86Ab4582 Monida Reselection 108.9 8.6 27.0 50.0 50 Ajay 74Ab1952/74Ab2608 107.6 8.0 26.0 50.3 55 (82Ab1142) Powell Cayuse/Monida 104.1 8.3 27.5 53.0 70 (83Ab3250) 89Ab4088 75Ab861/IL 75-3402 103.8 8.5 29.5 51.0 40 ND 860416 Otana/Valley 102.8 7.9 26.8 57.5 63 ND930122 IL 81-2570/ 97.1 8.0 29.3 46.5 69 ND 811386 9252 Otana 94.0 8.3 28.0 51.3 48 Average 123.9 8.3 27.8 51.7 40 LSD 0.05 32.8 ns 1.4 4.7 CV% 18.8 11.3 3.7 6.5 *Yield adjusted to 14% moisture and 32 pound bushel. 39
Table 38. Procedure for Western Regional Potato Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 39. 40
Table 39. Western Regional Potato Nursery, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Yield Variety Source Total Jumbo >3 #1>1 7/8 to <3 Culls <1 7/8 Specific Gravity (cwt/acre) TX1385-12RU TX 410.7 88.1 268.3 54.3 1.087 AC88165-3 CO 402.3 8.5 309.3 84.5 1.094 Ranger Russet Check 385.6 27.2 305.9 52.5 1.097 AO87277-6 OR 342.6 8.7 270.8 63.1 1.089 Avalanche CO 330.8 46.4 238.8 45.6 1.089 A88338-1 ID 329.5 25.4 268.3 35.8 1.084 CORN-3 CO 323.6 16.7 250.6 56.3 1.082 AC88042-1 CO 282.9 3.6 197.0 82.3 1.085 NDD840-1 CA 268.0 6.1 216.0 45.9 1.086 AO89128-4 OR 256.0 0.0 120.7 135.3 1.090 Russet Burbank Check 255.2 2.1 153.7 99.4 1.078 Russet Norkotah Check 225.7 0.0 132.5 93.2 1.081 TXNS223 TX 188.3 3.8 126.1 58.4 1.075 TXNS278 TX 180.1 3.6 128.9 47.6 1.078 TXNS112 TX 175.3 4.9 106.6 63.8 1.079 CORN-8 CO 146.1 0.0 100.4 45.7 1.078 AC87084-3 CO 139.1 24.3 86.1 28.7 1.091 Average 273.1 15.8 192.9 64.3 1.085 LSD 0.05 118.1 18.6 99.2 0.003 CV% 30.4 82.5 36.1 22.0 41
Table 40. Procedure for Small Grains forage and Grain Trial; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 42. 42
Table 41. Small grain forage yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Cut 4-28-98 Entry Source Green Weight Dry Weight Dry Matter Plant Height (T/A) (T/A) (%) (in.) Wintermore Seed Resources, Inc. 10.72 2.88 26.9 35.8 Wintermore 95 Seed Resources, Inc. 9.64 2.47 25.6 35.8 Wintermore 96 Seed Resources, Inc. 10.41 2.76 26.5 37.3 TRT 2000 Seed Resources, Inc. 8.42 2.15 25.7 33.0 Scout 66 Curtis & Curtis 5.61 1.33 24.5 19.5 Wintri Triticale Curtis & Curtis 5.02 1.44 27.9 17.0 Master Blend Curtis & Curtis 4.39 1.14 25.9 18.3 Average 7.75 2.02 26.1 28.1 LSD 0.05 1.00 0.24 2.5 2.5 CV% 8.7 8.0 6.3 5.9 Cut 6-2-98 Entry Source Green Weight Dry Weight Dry Matter Plant Height (T/A) (T/A) (%) (in.) Wintermore Seed Resources, Inc. 9.55 2.14 22.4 46.0 Wintermore 95 Seed Resources, Inc. 10.17 2.32 22.5 44.7 Wintermore 96 Seed Resources, Inc. 9.35 1.88 20.2 45.0 TRT 2000 Seed Resources, Inc. 10.40 2.43 23.5 47.0 Scout 66 Curtis & Curtis 14.30 2.71 19.0 35.3 Wintri Triticale Curtis & Curtis 8.94 2.12 23.6 30.0 Master Blend Curtis & Curtis 11.95 2.36 19.7 34.3 Average 10.67 2.28 21.96 40.3 LSD 0.05 1.96 0.58 3.4 2.9 CV% 10.3 14.2 8.8 4.0 Entry Source Total Green Weight (T/A) Dry Weight (T/A) Wintermore Seed Resources, Inc. 20 3 5.02 Wintermore 95 Seed Resources, Inc. 19.8 4.79 Wintermore 96 Seed Resources, Inc. 19.8 4.64 TRT 2000 Seed Resources, Inc. 18.8 4.58 Scout 66 Curtis & Curtis 19.9 4.04 Wintri Triticale Curtis & Curtis 14.0 3.56 Master Blend Curtis & Curtis 16.3 3.50 Average 18.4 4.30 LSD 0.05 4.4 0.6 CV% 9.9 11.3 43
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
Table 42. Winter Wheat harvested for forage and grain and grain only, yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Forage Cut 4-28-98 Variety Source Green Weight Dry Weight Dry Matter Plant Height (T/A) (T/A) (%) (in.) TRT 2000 Seed Resource, Inc. 9.05 2.30 25.7 33.0 Wintermore Seed Resource, Inc. 10.58 2.75 26.1 35.8 Wintermore 96 Seed Resource, Inc. 10.24 2.81 27.6 36.5 Wintermore 95 Seed Resource, Inc. 10.14 2.67 26.4 35.8 Average 10.00 2.63 26.4 35.3 LDS 0.05 1.4 0.31 1.5 2.4 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. 92.03 53.3 86.0 50.7 Wintermore Seed Resource, Inc. 68.4 50.8 63.0 53.8 Wintermore 96 Seed Resource, Inc. 63.9 50.3 69.0 53.0 Wintermore 95 Seed Resource, Inc. 62.2 48.8 55.0 52.0 Average 71.6 50.8 68.3 52.4 LDS 0.05 Var. 10.3 ns 10.3 ns Management ns ns CV% 14.1 4.3 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
Table 43. Procedure for New Mexico Winter Wheat Varieties and Hybrids; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 44. 46
Table 44. New Mexico Winter Wheat test yield and other characteristics; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Bushel Plant Heading Variety or Hybrid Yield Weight Moisture Height Dates (bu/a) (lb/bu) (%) (in.) (Mo/Day) 7406 (HybriTech) 147.9 62.5 9.7 33.3 May 10 AP-7501 (HybriTech) 136.9 62.5 9.6 30.5 May 11 TAM 200 127.2 62.8 9.3 32.8 May 10 AP 7510 (HybriTech) 123.8 63.3 8.8 33.0 May 13 Longhorn 122.1 61.0 9.0 32.0 May 15 WX94-3504 118.7 61.8 9.1 33.5 May 11 TAM 107 118.4 62.8 9.3 33.8 May 16 Tomahawk 114.9 61.3 8.9 35.5 May 11 TAM 109 114.5 62.0 9.9 33.5 May 13 Ogallala 114.5 62.3 9.3 31.3 May 10 Hickok 110.2 61.8 9.1 33.0 May 10 Mesa 110.0 62.9 9.2 34.5 May 10 Karl 92 109.3 62.0 9.3 31.0 May 12 Scout 66 105.4 61.5 9.2 31.3 May 11 Ike 105.2 60.5 9.3 30.8 May 10 TAM 202 96.2 62.8 9.7 32.0 May 11 TAM 105 95.6 61.8 8.9 33.5 May 10 Thunderbird 89.9 60.8 9.2 32.8 May 10 Average 114.5 62.0 9.2 32.7 May 11 LSD 0.05 15.4 1.0 5.2 2.2 CV% 9.5 1.2 0.7 4.6 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 04/07/1998 47
Table 45. Winter Wheat varieties of three and four year yield for 1995-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Yield 4 Yr. 3 Yr. 3 Yr. Percent Variety (bu/a) Average Average Average of Scout 1995 1996 1997 1998 1995-98 1995,97,98 1996-98 Same Years TAM 200 109.8 99.0 103.4 127.2 109.9 113.5 109.9 110 Longhorn 110.6 95.1 107.5 122.1 108.8 113.4 108.2 109 TAM 107 105.1 102.1 103.5 118.4 107.3 109.0 108.0 108 Tomahawk 96.8 99.8 108.7 114.9 105.1 106.8 107.8 106 Ogallala 93.7 105.9 90.8 114.5 101.2 99.6 103.7 102 Mesa 95.7 90.6 102.6 110.0 99.7 102.8 101.1 100 Scout 66 98.5 86.6 107.5 105.4 99.5 103.8 99.8 100 Thunderbird 105.2 89.2 87.0 89.9 92.8 94.0 88.7 93 TAM 105 106.6 108.6 95.6 103.6 100 TAM 109 93.3 101.1 114.5 103.0 103 Ike 79.2 108.9 105.2 97.8 98 Hickok 93.7 89.2 110.2 97.7 98 Karl 92 93.8 87.9 109.3 97.0 97 TAM 202 88.5 103.4 96.2 96.0 96 Table 46. Procedure for Southern Regional Performance Nursery Winter Wheat; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 47. 48
Table 47. Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 149.6 9.1 61.5 33.5 May 20 0 selection Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1881 Hybritech 148.9 9.2 61.8 36.3 May 18 0 PI220350/KS87H57/ KS95H176-1 KS, Hays 135.5 8.9 62.0 38.5 May 20 3 /TAM-200/ KS87H66/3/KS87H325 Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1875 Hybritech 133.8 8.8 62.8 34.0 May 17 0 Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1872 Hybritech 133.6 9.2 62.5 33.5 May 12 0 OK87W663/Mesa//2180 OK95571 OK 132.1 8.8 63.0 34.5 May 12 0 Kavkaz/TX86D1308/ TX91D6856 TX, Dallas 127.8 9.2 62.3 34.0 May 19 0 /Sturdy/TAM-300 T702/Karl T102 Trio 127.0 9.1 62.3 35.0 May 15 0 Oelson/Hamra/ /Australia 215/3/Karl 92 TAM-200/Abilene/6/Era/ Tobari 66//Lovrin 11/3/ Oligoculm/4/ Archer/5/ W81-171 Sut/*5AG/Max//CIMMYT Line/3/ Abilene G14264 Goertzen 126.9 8.9 62.0 34.0 May 12 0 W94-244- 132 Agripro 126.0 9.0 62.3 32.3 May 10 0 G15011 Goertzen 124.4 9.2 62.0 35.8 May 15 0 PI220350/KS87H57/ KS95H167-3 KS, Hays 124.3 8.9 62.0 37.3 May 16 0 /TAM-200/ KS87H66/3/KS87H325 Vona/W76-1141/ W95-221 Agripro 123.6 9.0 62.5 34.3 May 14 0 /N84-0758/3/Arlin Cebeco/Lilifen/ G15048 Goertzen 122.0 9.0 62.0 33.0 May 17 0 /Hail/3/Karl92/4/C02643/ /Can/Era KX8010-72/KS811252 KS90175-3 KS, 120.3 8.9 61.5 36.3 May 19 0 Manhattan KS87H325/Rio Blanco KS95HW62- KS, Hays 119.9 9.0 62.3 35.0 May 18 8 6 Random mating population G15458 Goertzen 119.3 8.8 62.5 35.8 May 17 0 KS8010-73/KS8010-1-4-2/ /107349/KS811252/Karl KS82W428/Vee'S'/ /VIC/Bow/3/PVI124-79 KS891808-2-1 KS91W009-6-1 KS, Manhattan KS, Manhattan 119.2 8.8 60.5 32.3 May 19 0 119.1 8.7 61.0 35.3 May 17 0 Quantum Hybrid Wheat WX94-3504 Hybritech 116.5 8.8 62.0 35.3 May 12 0 2180/Karl//2163 KS97W0935- KS, 114.4 8.9 60.8 35.5 May 17 0 29-15 Manhattan 5630 sib//vona/talent T101 Trio 113.4 8.8 61.5 31.0 May 14 0 Yuma R21 CO940700 CO 113.3 8.9 62.8 33.3 May 18 0 49
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 112.8 8.7 61.5 37.3 May 19 0 TXGH12588/TX86D1317 TX91D6825 TX, Dallas 112.7 9.1 61.3 36.0 May 19 13 TAM-107 Pl495594 Check 112.4 8.9 62.3 32.3 May 09 0 TX85V1326/Karl TX94V2130 TX 111.7 9.2 62.0 31.5 May 15 0 T67*2/Karl T100 Trio 110.7 9.2 61.3 38.3 May 17 0 W84-179/1181-171/3/Sturdy/ W95-210 Agripro 107.0 8.7 62.8 33.8 May 14 0 Hawk//Vona/W76-1141 NE83407/3/FLN/ACC//ANA TX94V2327 TX 106.5 8.9 60.8 35.0 May 12 55 Rio Blanco/Bai Quan #3039 TX95V4926 TX 105.8 8.8 60.5 32.3 May 17 0 HBY756A/Sxl//2180 OK94P549 OK 105.2 9.6 61.8 35.3 May 17 0 HBA142A/HBZ621A//Abilene KS97P0630-4-5 KS, Manhattan 104.3 9.1 61.3 34.3 May 18 0 NE83407/TX88V4834 TX95V4933 TX 103.8 8.8 60.5 33.0 May 19 0 NE85707/Thunderbird NE93496 NE 103.3 8.9 61.3 38.3 May 17 0 OK86216/Crr sib//2180 OK95548 OK 102.7 8.8 63.0 32.8 May 15 0 TX88V4914/NE83407 TX95V5332 TX 100.0 8.9 61.0 33.0 May 17 0 KS831936-3//Colt/Cody N95L158 NE, ARS 99.9 9.3 61.0 31.0 May 13 0 Rio Blanco/TAM-200 OK95G701 OK 99.9 8.8 63.0 34.0 May 15 0 Abilene/KS90WGRC10 W95-188 Agripro 97.0 9.3 61.8 35.5 May 16 0 KS85W663-2-4/3/Vona/ W95-301 Agripro 92.5 8.7 61.0 32.0 May 10 0 W76-1141//Thunderbird Scout 66 Cl13996 Check 88.8 8.9 61.8 38.8 May 08 8 Mesa/OK88701 OK95593 OK 86.9 8.7 61.5 32.3 May 11 0 Abilene/Norkan//Rawhlde NE94632 NE 86.4 8.9 61.5 34.3 May 12 0 Kharkof Cl1442 Check 76.2 8.9 60.8 45.0 May 20 23 Average 113.7 8.9 61.8 34.7 May 16 2.4 LSD 0.05 19.9 0.8 1.1 2.6 CV% 12.5 6.8 1.3 5.3 50
Table 48. Two Year Average of the Winter Wheat Southern Regional Performance Nursery 1997-1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Yield* Variety or Pedigree Serial Number Source 1997 1998 Average (bu/a) Quantum Hybrid Wheat XH1881 Hybritech 113.8 148.9 131.4 Kavkaz/TX86D1308/ TX91D6856 TX, Dallas 95.7 127.8 111.8 /Sturdy/TAM 300 Quantum Hybrid Wheat WX94-3504 Hybritech 103.8 116.5 110.3 TAM-107 PI495594 Check 98.4 112.4 105.4 HBY756A/Sxl//2180 OK94P549 OK 102.8 105.2 104.0 TXGH12588/TX860D1317 TX91D6825 TX, Dallas 89.7 112.7 101.2 NE85707/Thunderbird NE93496 NE 98.5 103.3 100.9 TX85V1326/Karl TX94V2130 TX 89.6 111.7 100.7 KS831936-3//Colt/Cody N95L158 NE, ARS 101.4 99.9 100.7 Yuma-R21 CO940700 CO 80.1 113.3 96.7 Rio Blanco/Bai Quan #3039 TX95V4926 TX 83.8 105.8 94.8 NE83407/TX88V4834 TX95V4933 TX 85.4 103.8 94.6 NE83407/3/FLN/ACC//ANA TX94V2327 TX 62.7 106.5 84.6 TX88V4914/NE83407 TX95V5332 TX 69.0 100.0 84.5 Abilene/Norkan//Rawhide NE94632 NE 80.4 86.4 83.4 Scout 66 CI13996 Check 73.9 88.8 81.4 Kharkof CI 1442 Check 63.8 76.2 70.0 *Yields adjusted to 14% moisture and a 60 lb. bushel. 51
Pest Control in Crops Grown in Northwestern New Mexico State Station Project 1-3-42532 Pest Control Management Grant Fund 1-5-28718 Author: Richard N. Arnold, B.S., M.S. Editor: Margaret M. West, B.S., M.A. 2013 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
Table 49. Index of herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. Common Name Trade Name AC 299-263 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 200 53
Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Spring-Seeded Alfalfa with Postemergence Applications of AC-299-263 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-299-263 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=0.05 54
Table 50. Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 299-263 applied at 0.048 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
Table 51. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen Alfalfa, July 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Crop Crop Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Height Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb/a) (%) (in.) (%) AC 299-263 3 0.024 0 8 100 100 96 95 95 AC 299-263 3 0.032 1 8 100 100 100 97 95 AC 299-263 3 0.040 2 8 100 100 100 98 98 AC 299-263 3 0.048 6 6 100 100 100 98 98 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.024+0.25 2 8 100 100 100 97 96 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.024+0.5 0 8 100 100 100 98 100 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.032+0.25 0 7 100 100 100 98 98 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.032+0.5 0 8 100 100 100 98 99 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.04+0.25 0 8 100 100 100 97 97 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.04+0.5 0 8 100 100 100 98 99 imazethapyr 3 0.063 0 9 100 100 100 96 98 imazethapyr 3 0.047 0 9 100 100 95 96 95 sethoxydim + 2,4-DB 4 0.19+0.5 0 10 100 100 100 100 100 AC 299-263 + sethoxydim 4 0.024+0.19 0 9 100 100 98 100 100 sethoxydim + bentazon 4 0.19+0.25 0 8 89 92 85 100 100 check 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 17 37 15 15 LSD 0.05 1 1 2 1 3 2 2 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
Table 52. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, August 10; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Weed Contol 1,2 Protein Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield Content (lb/a) (%) (T/A) (%) AC 299-263 3 0.024 98 98 93 93 93 1.4 20.2 AC 299-263 3 0.032 100 100 99 94 95 1.6 21.2 AC 299-263 3 0.040 100 100 100 97 97 1.3 22.2 AC 299-263 3 0.048 100 100 100 97 97 1.4 23.0 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.024+0.25 97 98 99 92 93 1.5 20.1 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.024+0.5 100 100 99 98 98 1.4 21.7 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.032+0.25 100 100 100 97 97 1.6 23.1 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.032+0.5 98 100 100 97 97 1.5 20.8 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.04+0.25 100 100 100 96 97 1.6 20.8 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.04+0.5 100 100 100 98 97 1.7 20.2 imazethapyr 3 0.063 98 98 100 95 95 1.5 20.7 imazethapyr 3 0.047 97 98 100 94 93 1.7 19.6 sethoxydim + 2,4-DB 4 0.19+0.5 18 25 36 100 100 1.7 18.4 AC 299-263 + sethoxydim 4 0.024+0.19 98 98 100 100 100 1.8 23.1 sethoxydim + bentazon 4 0.19+0.25 18 32 35 100 100 1.6 17.1 check 0 0 0 0 0 2.2 16.2 av weeds/m 2 17 15 39 15 13 LSD 0.05 3 3 3 2 2 0.4 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
Table 53. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination in spring-seeded Evergreen alfalfa, September 9; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb/a) (%) (T/A) AC 299-263 3 0.024 100 100 100 100 100 1.6 AC 299-263 3 0.032 100 100 100 100 100 1.6 AC 299-263 3 0.040 100 100 100 100 100 1.6 AC 299-263 3 0.048 100 100 100 100 100 1.6 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.024+0.25 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.024+0.5 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.032+0.25 100 100 100 100 100 1.6 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.032+0.5 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 0.04+0.25 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 AC 299-263 + 2,4-DB 3 0.04+0.5 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 imazethapyr 3 0.063 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 imazethapyr 3 0.047 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 sethoxydim + 2,4-DB 4 0.19+0.5 95 100 100 100 100 1.6 AC 299-26 3 + sethoxydim 4 0.024+0.19 100 100 100 100 100 1.5 sethoxydim + bentazon 4 0.19+0.25 92 100 100 100 100 1.5 check 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 av weeds/m 2 8 2 4 3 3 LSD 0.05 1 1 1 1 1 0.2 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
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=0.05. 59
Table 54. Procedures for the annual grass and broadleaf weed control in spring seeded alfalfa with postemergence applications of AC-299-263 alone or in combination; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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
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. 1998. Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (no.) (%) AC 299-263 3,4 0.016 42 100 100 96 97 97 AC 299-263 3,4 0.024 42 100 100 97 100 99 AC 299-263 3,4 0.032 42 100 100 100 100 100 AC 299-263 3,5 0.016 43 100 100 100 96 96 AC 299-263 3,5 0.024 42 100 100 100 100 100 AC 299-263 3,5 0.032 43 100 100 100 100 100 AC 299-263 3,6 0.024 42 100 100 100 100 100 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3,7 0.032+0.38 42 100 99 100 98 98 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3,5 0.032+0.5 42 100 100 100 100 100 imazethapyr 3,5 0.032 43 100 100 100 100 100 imazethapyr + bentazon 3,5 0.032+0.5 42 100 100 100 96 100 dimethenamid + pendimethalin 8 1.0+1.0 42 100 100 98 100 100 BAS 656 + pendimethalin 8 0.55+1.0 41 100 100 97 100 100 dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 9,5 1.0/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 98 98 BAS 656/AC 299-263 + bentazon 9,5 0.55/0.023+0.5 42 100 100 100 100 100 check 41 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 18 18 42 17 14 LSD 0.05 ns 1 1 2 2 1 1. Based on visual scale from 0-100 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 19. 4. A surfactant was applied at 0.25% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on July 23. 5. A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution was applied at 0.25% v/v and 1% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on July 23. 6. Sunit II was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on July 23. 7. A COC was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on July 23. 8. Treatments applied preemergence and evaluated on June 19. 9. 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 23. 61
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. 1998. Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (lb/a) AC 299-263 3,4 0.016 94 98 92 96 96 1844 AC 299-263 3,4 0.024 100 100 95 99 98 2613 AC 299-263 3,4 0.032 100 100 99 100 99 2767 AC 299-263 3,5 0.016 94 98 96 94 95 2152 AC 299-263 3,5 0.024 100 100 98 99 100 3074 AC 299-263 3,5 0.032 100 100 100 99 99 3228 AC 299-263 3,6 0.024 97 100 100 98 99 3228 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3,7 0.032+0.38 98 99 100 96 96 3535 AC 299-263 + bentazon 3,5 0.032+0.5 98 100 100 98 99 3535 imazethapyr 3,5 0.032 97 100 100 99 100 3074 imazethapyr + bentazon 3,5 0.032+0.5 99 100 100 95 99 3381 dimethenamid + pendimethalin 8 1.0+1.0 97 100 98 100 100 2767 BAS 656 + pendimethalin 8 0.55+1.0 98 99 98 100 100 2613 dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 9,5 1.0/0.032+0.5 98 100 100 98 98 3381 BAS 656/AC 299-263 + bentazon 9,5 0.55/0.023+0.5 98 100 100 100 100 3535 check 0 0 0 0 0 461 av weeds/m 2 18 17 42 17 17 LSD 0.05 2 1 2 2 2 277 1. Based on visual scale from 0-100 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 19. 4. A surfactant was applied at 0.25% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on August 24. 5. A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution was applied at 0.25% v/v and 1% v/v with postemergence treatments and evaluated on August 24. 6. Sunit II was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on August 24. 7. A COC was applied at 1% v/v with postemergence treatment and evaluated on August 24. 8. Treatments applied preemergence and evaluated on July 20. 9. 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 24. 62
Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Dry Edible Beans with Preemergence, Cultivation and Postemergence Herbicide; NMSU ASC Farmington, NM. 1998. 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=0.05. 63
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. 1998. 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 299-263 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
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. 1998. Crop Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatment 1 Rate Injury Count Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) dimethenamid 1.0 0 43 100 100 95 100 100 BAS 656 0.55 0 42 100 100 98 100 100 metolachlor II Mag 1.1 0 42 100 100 95 100 100 dimethenamid/dimethenamid 4 0.75/0.5 0 42 100 100 95 100 100 BAS 656/BAS 656 4 0.41/0.27 0 43 100 100 98 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag 4 0.83/0.5 0 42 100 100 87 100 100 dimethenamid/ac 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.75/0.032+0.5 0 44 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.41/0.032+0.5 0 42 100 100 100 96 95 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.83/0.032+0.5 0 42 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid/dimethenamid + AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.75/0.5+ 0.032+0.5 0 43 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/BAS 656 + AC 299-263 +bentazon 4,5 0.41/ 0.27+0.032+0.5 0 42 100 100 100 98 100 metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag + AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.83/0.5+0.032+0.5 6 43 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid 2.0 9 43 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656 1.1 6 42 100 99 99 99 99 metolachlor II Mag 2.2 3 42 99 100 94 100 100 check 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds /m 2 16 18 37 20 14 LSD 0.05 2 ns 1 1 2 1 1 1. Preemergence treatments including the check were followed by a cultivation on June 23. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment and evaluated on June 23. 5. A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution applied at 0.25% and 1% v/v were added to the postemergence treatment 65
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. 1998. Weed Control 2,3 Treatment 1 Rate Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (lb/a) dimethenamid 1.0 70 83 58 89 86 1537 BAS 656 0.55 71 85 58 88 85 1383 metolachlor II Mag 1.1 60 82 53 91 86 1537 dimethenamid/dimethenamid 4 0.75/0.5 98 98 84 100 99 1998 BAS 656/BAS 656 4 0.41/0.27 99 98 83 100 98 2152 metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag 4 0.83/0.5 99 98 78 100 98 AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.75/0.032+0.5 100 100 96 99 99 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.41/0.032+0.5 100 99 86 95 94 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.83/0.032+0.5 100 98 90 98 98 dimethenamid/dimethenamid+ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.75/0.5+ 0.032+0.5 99 100 98 100 100 BAS 656/BAS 656 + AC 299-263 +bentazon 4,5 0.41/ 0.27+0.032+0.5 100 99 97 98 100 metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag + AC 299-263 + bentazon 4,5 0.83/0.5+0.032+0.5 99 100 98 99 100 3381 dimethenamid 2.0 76 84 74 98 98 1844 BAS 656 1.1 74 82 68 97 98 1844 metolachlor II Mag 2.2 78 82 64 99 99 1844 check 0 0 0 0 0 461 av weeds /m 2 15 18 43 20 18 LSD 0.05 5 4 6 2 2 430 1. Preemergence treatments including the check were followed by a cultivation on June 23. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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. First treatment applied preemergence followed by a postemergence treatment and evaluated on August 24. 5. A surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution applied at 0.25% and 1% v/v were added to the postemergence treatment. 66
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 299-263 or Imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. 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=0.05. 67
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 299-263 or imazethapyr; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. 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
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. 1998. Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (no.) (%) dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 1.0/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 +bentazon 3 0.55/0.032+0.5 44 100 100 98 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 1.1/0.032+0.5 43 100 99 99 100 100 dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4 1.0/0.032+0.5 44 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4 0.55/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4 1.1/0.032+0.5 44 100 100 98 100 100 dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.0/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/ imazethapyr +bentazon 4 0.55/0.032+0.5 44 100 100 100 98 99 metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.1/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 +bentazon 5 1.0/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 +bentazon 5 0.55/0.032+0.5 42 100 100 100 97 98 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 5 1.1/0.032+0.5 42 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.0/0.032+0.5 44 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 0.55/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.1/0.032+0.5 43 100 100 98 100 100 check 42 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 19 16 39 18 14 LSD 0.05 ns 1 1 1 1 1 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
Table 62. Control of annual grass and broadleaf weeds with preemergence, cultivation, postemergence herbicides on August 24, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (lb/a) dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 1.0/0.032+0.5 98 98 98 98 99 2920 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 +bentazon 0.55/0.032+0.5 99 100 96 98 98 2920 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 3 1.1/0.032+0.5 99 96 95 98 99 2767 dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4 1.0/0.032+0.5 100 100 98 96 98 3228 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4 0.55/0.032+0.5 98 100 99 96 98 3228 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 4 1.1/0.032+0.5 98 100 98 98 100 3074 dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.0/0.032+0.5 100 99 96 98 100 3074 BAS 656/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 0.55/0.032+0.5 99 98 99 96 98 3228 metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 4 1.1/0.032+0.5 98 99 99 98 98 3381 dimethenamid/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 5 1.0/0.032+0.5 98 100 100 96 94 2920 BAS 656/ AC 299-263 +bentazon 5 0.55/0.032+0.5 100 100 100 95 93 2920 metolachlor II Mag/ AC 299-263 + bentazon 5 1.1/0.032+0.5 100 99 98 97 95 3381 dimethenamid/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.0/0.032+0.5 100 99 98 94 96 2920 BAS 656/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 0.55/0.032+0.5 99 99 99 94 96 2920 metolachlor II Mag/ imazethapyr + bentazon 5 1.1/0.032+0.5 100 99 99 96 95 3074 check 0 0 0 0 0 307 av weeds/m 2 18 17 43 20 15 LSD 0.05 1 1 2 3 2 769 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
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=0.05. 71
Table 63. Procedure for Annual Grass and Broadleaf Weed Control in Field Corn with Preemergence and Postemergence Herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. 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 0.096 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 0.096 plus 0.25 lb ai/a. Crop Yields Yields are given in Table 65. Flumetsulam plus cloransulam- methyl applied at 0.096 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 0.096 plus 0.25 lb ai/a) as compared to the Check. 72
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. 1998. Crop Stand Weed control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Injury Count Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) 0.55 14 16 100 100 92 100 100 metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) 0.425 8 20 100 100 92 100 100 metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) 0.2975 0 21 100 100 50 100 100 metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + atrazine 0.17+0.8 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + atrazine 0.255+0.8 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + isoxaflutole 0.17+0.03 1 20 100 100 100 100 100 metribuzin + fluthiamide (pm) + isoxaflutole 0.255+0.03 4 19 100 100 100 100 100 isoxaflutole 0.03 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 isoxaflutole 0.05 3 20 100 100 100 100 100 isoxaflutole 0.07 11 20 100 100 100 100 100 isoxaflutole + dimethenamid 0.05+0.66 1 20 100 100 100 100 100 isoxaflutole + atrazine 0.05+0.8 3 18 100 100 100 100 100 clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 4 0.21 1 18 100 99 91 0 0 flumetsulam + cloransulam-methyl 0.096+0.25 95 18 100 100 100 100 100 clopyralid + flumetsulam + 2,4-D (pm) 4 0.21 5 18 98 98 85 0 0 check 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 16 18 39 16 15 LSD 0.05 1 2 1 1 5 1 1 1. 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
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. 1998. Weed control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.55 100 100 92 100 100 174 (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.425 100 100 92 100 100 173 (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.2975 100 100 50 100 100 165 (pm) metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.17+0.8 100 100 100 100 100 179 (pm) + atrazine metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.255+0.8 100 100 100 100 100 204 (pm) + atrazine metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.17+0.03 100 100 100 100 100 185 (pm) + isoxaflutole metribuzin + fluthiamide 0.255+0.03 100 100 100 100 100 189 (pm) + isoxaflutole isoxaflutole 0.03 100 100 100 100 100 210 isoxaflutole 0.05 100 100 100 100 100 193 isoxaflutole 0.07 100 100 100 100 100 194 isoxaflutole + 0.05+0.66 100 100 100 100 100 221 dimethenamid isoxaflutole + atrazine 0.05+0.8 100 100 100 100 100 197 clopyralid + flumetsulam 0.21 100 99 91 0 0 191 (pm) 4 flumetsulam + 0.096+0.25 100 100 100 100 100 5 cloransulam-methyl clopyralid + flumetsulam 0.21 98 98 85 0 0 165 + 2,4-D (pm) 4 check 0 0 0 0 0 80 av weeds/m 2 16 17 39 15 15 LSD 0.05 1 1 5 1 1 28 1. 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
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=0.05. 75
Table 66. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with preemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. 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
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. 1998. Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (no.) (%) acetochlor + 2.5 18 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine (pm) acetochlor + 2.7 18 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine (pm) acetochlor + 2.0 18 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine (pm) acetochlor 2.2 18 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656 0.55 19 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656 0.66 18 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II 1.5 19 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid 1.0 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag 1.0 18 100 100 100 100 100 acetochlor 1.2 19 100 100 100 100 100 acetochlor 1.6 18 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid + 2.0 18 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine (pm) BAS 656 + atrazine 0.47+0.75 18 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid 1.2 19 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine 1.5 18 100 100 100 100 100 check 18 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 19 16 40 15 15 LSD 0.05 ns 1 1 1 1 1 1. pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
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. 1998. Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) acetochlor + 2.5 99 99 97 95 95 213 atrazine (pm) acetochlor + 2.7 100 100 97 96 96 209 atrazine (pm) acetochlor + 2.0 98 98 96 98 96 209 atrazine (pm) acetochlor 2.2 99 99 94 99 100 205 BAS 656 0.55 98 99 91 98 98 190 BAS 656 0.66 98 100 92 100 99 181 metolachlor II 1.5 98 99 81 99 99 205 dimethenamid 1.0 99 100 89 99 97 201 metolachlor II Mag 1.0 98 100 84 100 99 199 acetochlor 1.2 99 98 85 95 94 216 acetochlor 1.6 100 100 85 99 99 199 dimethenamid + 2.0 100 100 98 98 98 205 atrazine (pm) BAS 656 + atrazine 0.47+0.75 98 100 97 99 98 200 dimethenamid 1.2 100 100 97 100 100 209 atrazine 1.5 97 100 97 91 91 214 check 0 0 0 0 0 68 av weeds/m 2 18 15 39 18 16 LSD 0.05 12 1 2 1 1 30 1. pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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
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=0.05. 79
Table 69. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in field corn with postemergence herbicides; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. 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 0.009 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
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. 1998. 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 1.6/0.79 0 18 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pro) + clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 4 1.6/0.023+0.125 2 18 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm) 5 1.6 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron +atrazine (pm) 6 0.79 1 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine 6 0.79+0.25 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine 6 0.79+0.5 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pro) + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 6 0.79+0.009 12 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + atrazine 6 0.031+1.0 0 18 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pm) clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 6 0.023+0.125 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + dicamba 7 0.031+0.262 3 18 100 100 100 97 97 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pro) + dicamba 7 0.79+0.125 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + BAS 662 7 0.79+0.175 4 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + BAS 662 7 0.031+0.263 4 18 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + BAS 662 7 0.016+0.263 4 18 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + BAS 662 7 0.031+0.175 4 18 100 100 100 100 100 check 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 81
Crop Stand Weed Control 2,3 Treatments 1 Rate Injury 2 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) av weeds/m2 17 15 37 17 14 LSD 0.05 1 ns 1 1 1 1 1 1. pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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 29. 5. Treatment applied preemergence and evaluated on June 9. 6. Treatments applied postemergence with a COC at 1% v/v and evaluated on June 29. 7. 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. 1998. 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 1.6/0.79 100 100 100 100 100 208 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pm) + clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 4 1. 6/0.023+0.125 100 100 100 100 100 195 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm) 5 1.6 99 99 99 100 100 225 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) 6 0.79 98 99 98 97 97 205 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine 6 0.79+0.25 100 100 100 100 100 206 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + atrazine 6 0.79+0.5 100 100 100 100 100 217 82
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) 6 0.79+0.009 100 99 99 98 98 202 nicosulfuron + atrazine 6 0.031+1.0 100 100 98 100 100 218 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron (pm) clopyralid + flumetsulam (pm) 6 0.023+0.125 98 99 98 96 95 217 nicosulfuron + dicamba 7 0.031+0.262 98 99 98 95 96 211 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + dicamba 7 0.79+0.125 100 100 99 98 98 219 nicosulfuron + rimsulfuron + atrazine (pm) + BAS 662 7 0.79+0.175 100 100 100 98 97 214 nicosulfuron + BAS 662 7 0.031+0.263 100 100 100 100 99 224 nicosulfuron + BAS 662 7 0.016+0.263 100 100 99 95 96 224 nicosulfuron + BAS 662 7 0.031+0.175 100 100 100 100 99 219 check 0 0 0 0 0 91 av weeds/m 2 18 17 39 16 14 LSD 0.05 1 1 2 1 2 21 1. pm = packaged mix. 2. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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 29. 5. Treatment applied preemergence and evaluated on July 9. 6. Treatments applied postemergence with a COC at 1% v/v and evaluated on July 29. 7. Treatments applied postemergence with a surfactant and 32% nitrogen solution at 0.25% and 1% v/v and evaluated on July 29. 83
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=0.05. 84
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. 1998. 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 0.015 plus 0.036 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
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. 1998. Crop Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) metolachlor II Mag 3 1.19 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) 3 1.37 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine II (pm) 3 2.2 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag 4 0.83/0.5 0 19 100 100 97 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4 1.37/0.036 0 20 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4 1.19/0.036 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + dicamba 4 1.19/0.036 + 0.125 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.37/0.036 3 20 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.19/0.036 4 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) dicamba 4,6 1.19/0.036 + 0.125 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag 4 0.83/0.036+0.5 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag 4,6 0.083/0.036+0.5 4 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ primisulfuron + metolachlor II Mag 4 0.083/0.047+0.5 4 19 100 100 100 100 100 nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 5 0.015+0.036 5 20 100 100 97 100 100 86
Crop Stand Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Injury 1 Count Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi (lb ai/a) (%) (no.) (%) nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 5,6 0.015+0.036 5 19 100 100 97 100 100 check 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 19 17 37 15 13 LDS 0.05 1 ns 1 1 1 1 1 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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 29. 5. Treatments applied postemergence with sprayable ammonium sulfate and a COC at 1 % v/v and rated on June 29. 6. 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. 1998. Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amare Amabl Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) metolachlor II Mag 3 1.19 98 98 95 100 100 134 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) 3 1.37 99 99 96 100 100 217 metolachlor + atrazine II (pm) 3 2.2 100 100 100 100 100 217 metolachlor II Mag/ metolachlor II Mag 4 0.83/0.5 97 98 90 100 100 138 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4 1.37/0.036 100 100 97 100 100 196 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4 1.19/0.036 100 99 97 100 100 192 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + dicamba 4 1.19/0.036 + 0.125 100 100 100 100 100 187 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.37/0.036 99 99 99 100 100 203 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 4,6 1.19/0.036 99 97 96 100 100 198 87
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 1.19/0.036 + 0.125 100 100 100 100 100 192 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag 4 0.83/0.036+0.5 100 100 99 100 100 211 metolachlor II Mag/ prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) + metolachlor II Mag 4,6 0.083/0.036+0.5 100 100 100 100 100 173 metolachlor II Mag/ primisulfuron + metolachlor II Mag 4 0.083/0.047+0.5 100 100 100 100 100 183 nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 5 0.015+0.036 98 97 96 100 100 198 nicosulfuron + prosulfuron + primisulfuron (pm) 5,6 0.015+0.036 97 96 93 100 100 170 check 0 0 0 0 0 41 av weeds/m 2 19 17 40 17 15 LDS 0.05 2 1 2 1 1 29 1. Based on a visual scale from 0-100 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 29. 5. Treatments applied postemergence with sprayable ammonium sulfate and a COC at 1% v/v and rated on July 29. 6. Packaged mix is registered under Norvartis Crop Protection and is Spirit. 88
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=0.05. 89
Table 75. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in roundup ready field corn; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. 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
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. 1998. 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 1.3/1.0 0 19 100 98 100 98 100 acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 2.0/1.0 0 19 100 97 100 100 100 acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 2.7/1.0 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine/glyphosate 3 1.5/1.0 0 19 100 97 100 100 100 metolachlor II Mag/ nicosulfuron 3 1.19/0.031 1 19 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron 3 1.6/0.031 1 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag 4 (pm) 1.37 0 21 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/ glyphosate 3 1.37+1.0 0 19 100 100 100 100 100 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) + glyphosate 5,7 1.37+1.0 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 glyphosate/ glyphosate 6 1.0/0.75 4 19 100 100 97 100 100 acetochlor + atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5,7 1.3+1.0 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5,7 2. 0+1.0 2 19 100 100 100 100 100 Mon 8411 + glyphosate + atrazine 5,7 1.75+1.0+1.0 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 1.6/1.0 0 19 100 99 100 100 100 glyphosate 5 1.0 3 19 100 100 100 100 100 check 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 av weeds/m 2 17 17 33 15 13 LDS 0.05 1 ns 1 1 1 1 1 1. 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 23. 4. 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 2. 6. Treatments applied with sprayable ammonium sulfate at 2% v/v. 91
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. 1998. Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Amabl Amare Solni Echcg Setvi Yield (lb ai/a) (%) (bu/a) acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 1.3/1.0 99 97 97 100 98 201 acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 2.0/1.0 100 95 97 99 99 189 acetochlor + atrazine (pm)/ glyphosate 3 2.7/1.0 100 99 100 99 100 189 atrazine/glyphosate 3 1.5/1.0 99 96 100 100 100 197 metolachlor II Mag/ nicosulfuron 3 1.19/0.031 100 95 99 100 99 199 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/ nicosulfuron 3 1.6/0.031 99 98 99 100 100 194 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag 4 (pm) 1.37 100 100 100 100 100 204 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm)/glyphosate 3 1.37+1.0 99 99 100 99 100 225 metolachlor + atrazine lite II Mag (pm) + glyphosate 5,7 1.37+1.0 100 96 100 100 100 207 glyphosate/glyphosate 6 1.0/0.75 100 98 100 100 100 197 acetochlor + atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5,7 1.3+1.0 100 98 100 100 100 203 acetochlor + atrazine (pm) + glyphosate 5,7 2. 0+1.0 100 100 100 100 100 211 Mon 8411 + glyphosate + atrazine 5,7 1.75+1.0+1.0 100 100 100 98 100 209 dimethenamid + atrazine (pm)/glyphosate 3 1.6/1.0 100 99 99 100 100 207 glyphosate 5 1.0 100 97 100 97 100 194 check 0 0 0 0 0 91 av weeds/m 2 18 19 40 18 15 LDS 0.05 1 2 1 1 1 22 1. 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 24. 4. 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 3. 6. Treatments applied with sprayable ammonium sulfate at 2% v/v. 92
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=0.05. 93
Table 78. Procedure for annual grass and broadleaf weed control in Russet Korkotah potato; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. Operation Procedure Test Location NMSU s Agricultural Science Center at Farmington Test Year 1998 Crop Russet Norkotah Planting Date April 23, 1998 Planting Rate 3.000 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 1998. 94
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. 1998. Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Setvi Echcg Solni Amabl Amare (lb ai/a) (%) metribuzin 0.3 100 100 100 100 100 metribuzin + dimethenamid 0.3+1.17 100 100 100 100 100 metribuzin + BAS 656 0.3+0.64 100 100 100 100 100 metribuzin + rimsulfuron 0.3+0.156 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid 1.17 100 100 97 97 97 dimethenamid + rimsulfuron 1.17+0.0156 100 100 99 99 99 BAS 656 0.64 100 100 95 94 96 BAS 656 + rimsulfuron 0.64+0.0156 100 100 100 100 100 rimsulfuron 0.0156 100 100 94 100 100 metribuzin/rimsulfuron 3 0.3/0.0156 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid/ rimsulfuron 3 1.17/0.0156 100 100 100 100 100 BAS 656/rimsulfuron 3 0.64/0.0156 100 100 100 100 100 rimsulfuron 4 0.0156 100 100 100 100 100 dimethenamid 2.3 100 100 97 100 100 BAS 656 1.3 100 100 97 100 100 check 0 0 0 0 0 weeds/m 2 15 13 38 17 19 LSD 0.05 1 1 1 1 1 1. 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 2. 4. Treatment applied postemergence with a surfactant at 0.25% and evaluated on July 2. 95
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. 1998..Weed Control 1,2 Treatments Rate Setvi Echcg Solni Amabl Amare (lb ai/a) (%) metribuzin 0.3 100 100 97 98 98 metribuzin + dimethenamid 0.3+1.17 100 100 98 99 99 metribuzin + BAS 656 0.3+0.64 100 100 98 99 99 metribuzin + rimsulfuron 0.3+0.156 100 100 97 97 98 dimethenamid 1.17 100 100 96 95 96 dimethenamid + rimsulfuron 1.17+0. 0156 100 100 97 98 97 BAS 656 0.64 100 100 93 92 96 BAS 656 + rimsulfuron 0.64+0.0156 100 100 98 98 99 rimsulfuron 0.0156 100 100 90 95 98 metribuzin/rimsulfuron 3 0.3/0.0156 99 99 98 98 98 dimethenamid/ rimsulfuron 3 1.17/0.0156 99 99 98 98 98 BAS 656/rimsulfuron 3 0.64/0.0156 98 99 97 98 97 rimsulfuron 4 0.0156 96 97 92 97 97 dimethenamid 2.3 100 100 95 100 100 BAS 656 1.3 100 100 95 100 100 check 0 0 0 0 0 weeds/m 2 14 15 40 19 19 LSD 0.05 1 1 2 2 2 1. 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 3. 4. Treatment applied postemergence with a surfactant at 0.25% and evaluated on August 3. 96
Irrigation and Fertilizer Studies - 1998 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. 2013 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 40-45 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
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 (45795-5536 x 30 + 2l3.3 x 30 2-2.49 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
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. 1998. 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
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. 1998. 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: 20-0-0 Rate: 40 lb N/acre plus 48 lb S/acre Product: 11-52-0 Rate: 38 lb N/acre plus 177 lb P 2 O 5 /acre Date: 06/17/98 Product: 20-0-0 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
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. 1998. 101
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
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. 1998. Irrigation Date Irrigation Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Growth Period 1 (inches of irrigation water applied) 04/21 1.24 1.09 0.97 0.79 0.72 0.59 0.52 04/23 0.95 0.86 0.78 0.64 0.54 0.43 0.35 04/30 1.29 1.31 1.20 1.05 0.86 0.59 0.45 05/07 1.75 1.48 1.33 1.13 0.97 0.77 0.71 Total Growth Period 1 5.23 4.74 4.28 3.61 3.09 2.38 2.03 Growth Period 2 (inches of irrigation water applied) 05/15 1.16 1.05 0.88 0.76 0.61 0.52 0.44 05/21 1.02 0.85 0.66 0.57 0.49 0.43 0.30 05/22 1.49 1.38 1.16 0.92 0.82 0.70 0.58 05/28 1.39 1.30 1.14 0.93 0.83 0.65 0.52 06/01 1.25 1.11 0.96 0.74 0.69 0.59 0.50 06/08 1.25 1.12 0.83 0.77 0.68 0.54 0.48 06/11 0.96 0.89 0.83 0.70 0.60 0.45 0.39 Total Growth Period 2 8.52 7.70 6.46 5.39 4.72 3.88 3.21 Growth Period 3 (inches of irrigation water applied) 06/18 1.54 1.35 1.18 0.89 0.79 0.64 0.44 06/23 1.20 1.09 0.89 0.73 0.63 0.56 0.45 06/25 1.03 0.92 0.79 0.67 0.56 0.48 0.44 06/29 1.39 1.29 1.14 0.96 0.87 0.70 0.73 07/02 1.46 1.30 1.14 0.94 0.81 0.68 0.60 07/06 1.11 0.92 0.82 0.69 0.56 0.50 0.41 07/10 1.11 1.18 1.12 0.94 0.82 0.68 0.64 07/14 0.70 0.65 0.57 0.50 0.43 0.37 0.37 07/17 1.43 1.28 1.12 0.94 0.81 0.66 0.58 Total Growth Period 3 10.96 9.98 8.77 7.26 6.28 5.27 4.66 Growth Period 4 (inches of irrigation water applied) 07/22 1.16 1.04 0.93 0.81 0.71 0.63 0.57 07/29 0.68 0.60 0.52 0.48 0.40 0.38 0.37 07/31 0.73 0.68 0.63 0.52 0.46 0.37 0.31 103
Irrigation Date Irrigation Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Growth Period 4 (inches of irrigation water applied) 08/03 1.28 1.19 1.06 0.94 0.79 0.66 0.54 08/07 0.77 0.66 0.66 0.55 0.45 0.35 0.30 08/13 0.93 0.84 0.74 0.63 0.53 0.47 0.42 08/19 1.16 1.06 0.96 0.79 0.72 0.64 0.59 08/26 0.70 0.63 0.54 0.47 0.41 0.36 0.32 08/31 0.89 0.85 0.75 0.63 0.54 0.48 0.45 09/08 0.53 0.48 0.35 0.31 0.26 0.21 0.21 09/11 0.94 0.84 0.73 0.69 0.59 0.49 0.50 Total Growth Period 4 9.77 8.87 7.87 6.82 5.86 5.04 4.58 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. 1998. 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 6.6 2593 1201 1791 2378 574 2366 1477 2010 1799 6.1 2593 2087 1647 2063 268 2485 1434 1563 1769 5.7 1935 1591 844 1336 217 1463 953 816 1144 5.0 974 785 370 675 147 759 645 500 607 4.5 473 607 193 336 145 325 407 329 352 3.8 138 262 83 137 159 139 133 147 150 3.4 78 156 29 107 59 206 36 98 96 Mean 1255 956 708 1005 224 1106 726 780 845 Harvest 2 (06/15/98) 8.5 783 915 955 760 539 1193 1895 1524 1071 7.7 1019 599 1095 867 617 1522 1827 1478 1128 6.5 994 444 1157 596 569 1103 1662 1334 982 5.4 703 417 1118 358 438 726 1407 1074 780 4.7 391 357 708 229 294 436 886 716 502 3.9 213 281 329 100 242 281 493 395 292 3.2 152 173 290 59 49 158 283 307 184 Mean 608 455 807 424 393 774 1208 975 706 Harvest 3 (07/20/98) 11.4 1844 500 771 1250 311 1760 286 522 906 10.4 2166 644 952 1283 495 2136 469 521 1083 9.2 1682 548 880 988 316 1215 560 582 846 Mean 104
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 7.6 648 400 311 556 235 531 531 502 464 6.7 205 375 88 147 146 185 311 587 256 5.7 152 235 43 163 224 135 223 315 186 5.1 100 76 27 88 41 46 147 70 74 Mean 971 397 439 639 253 858 361 443 545 Harvest 4 (09/15/98) 12.8 1023 802 489 1301 598 1243 897 1052 926 11.9 857 790 623 1168 931 1305 1064 1161 987 10.9 876 705 512 1054 503 1195 996 1039 860 9.8 675 581 528 609 500 736 644 895 646 8.8 645 475 367 429 297 373 589 659 479 8.0 91 0 0 0 0 170 0 0 33 7.6 104 0 0 0 0 112 0 0 27 Mean 610 479 360 652 404 733 599 687 565 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. 1998. 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) 39.3 6243 3418 4006 5689 2022 6562 4555 5108 4700 36.1 6635 4120 4317 5381 2311 7448 4794 4723 4966 32.3 5487 3288 3393 3974 1605 4976 4171 3771 3833 27.8 3000 2183 2327 2198 1320 2752 3227 2971 2497 24.7 1714 1814 1356 1141 882 1319 2193 2291 1589 21.4 594 778 455 400 625 725 849 857 660 19.3 434 405 346 254 149 522 466 475 381 Mean 3444 2287 2314 2720 1273 3472 2894 2885 2661 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
Figure 3. Total dry matter yield of eight pasture grasses as related to irrigation, (Year 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 = 45795 5536w + 213.3w 2 2.49w 3, r 2 = 1.0 Hycrest Crested Wheat: Y = -2787 + 176.8w, r 2 = 0.90 Smooth Brome: Y = -3835 + 214.2w, r 2 = 0.95 Fawn Tall Fescue: Y = 27520 3303w + 125.1w 2 1.40w 3, r 2 = 1.0 Linn Perennial Rye: Y = -1578 + 99.3w, r 2 = 0.93 Regar Meadow Brome: Y = -7094 + 368.2w, r 2 = 0.94 Oahe Intermediate Wheat Y = -12357 + 862w 10.9w 2, r 2 = 0.99 Luna Pubescent Wheat: Y = -8237 + 551w 5.37w 2, r 2 = 0.99 106
Figure 4. Protein content and relative food value of eight pasture grasses at three levels of irrigation; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 107
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: 01-5-28419 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. 1998. 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 9.8 108
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: 11-52-0, Rate: 0.4 N, 1.7 P 2 O 5 lb/1000 ft 2 Product 0-0-60, Rate: 1.6 K 2 O lb/1000 ft 2 Product 34-0-0, Rate: 1.4 N lb/1000 ft 2 Total N = 1.8 lb/1000 ft 2 Cool season grass: Date: 09/03/97 Product: 11-52-0, Rate: 0.4 N lb/1000 ft 2 Product: 0-0-54, Rate: 2.1 K 2 O lb/1000 ft 2 Product: 34-0-0, 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
Table 86. Post-plant fertilizer summary for warm and cool-season turfgrasses; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Warm-season grasses Rate (lb/1000 ft 2 ) Date Product N P 2 O 5 K 2 O 05/08/98 16-16-8 0.83 0.83 0.41 05/29/98 16-16-8 0.48 0.48 0.23 06/17/98 32-0-0 0.20 - - 07/13/98 16-16-8 0.80 0.80 0.40 08/11/98 16-16-8 1.50 1.50 0.75 Totals 3.80 3.61 1.79 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 10/06/97 11-52-0 1.03 5.17-02/12/98 16-16-8 0.96 0.96 0.48 04/28/98 16-16-8 0.39 0.39 0.20 06/17/98 32-0-0 0.20 - - 08/11/98 16-16-8 0.48 0.48 0.23 08/31/98 21-0-0 0.80 - - 09/22/98 32-0-0 0.20 - - Totals 4.06 7.00 0.91 Other: 06/17/98 - Microplex at a rate of - 0.02 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
Figure 5. Diagram of the sprinkler line-source plots used to evaluate turfgrass water requirements; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM 1998. 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
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
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. 1998. Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) 41.1 32.6 24.1 15.6 7.1 Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 04/28 0.54 0.50 0.54 0.58 0.63 04/26 0.37 05/05 0.43 0.45 0.44 0.45 0.45 05/13 0.01 05/08 0.45 0.37 0.45 0.52 0.58 05/20 0.02 05/14 0.33 0.36 0.32 0.35 0.35 06/04 0.01 05/18 0.86 0.76 0.74 0.84 0.99 06/16 0.01 05/22 0.81 0.69 0.68 0.74 0.88 07/05 0.01 05/26 1.84 1.71 1.61 1.74 1.78 07/06 0.16 05/29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.28 0.27 07/07 0.03 06/02 0.21 0.31 0.47 0.66 0.76 07/09 0.19 06/05 0.67 0.56 0.56 0.65 0.79 07/16 0.02 06/10 0.05 0.11 0.20 0.28 0.32 07/23 0.03 06/15 0.48 0.38 0.42 0.50 0.67 07/24 0.53 06/17 0.70 0.83 0.81 0.80 0.75 07/26 0.25 06/19 0.23 0.34 0.51 0.71 0.87 07/27 0.13 06/22 0.12 0.14 0.21 0.36 0.48 07/28 0.03 06/23 0.19 0.28 0.41 0.53 0.63 07/31 0.01 06/25 0.14 0.20 0.28 0.38 0.49 08/01 0.02 06/26 0.12 0.18 0.26 0.33 0.52 08/04 0.12 06/29 0.16 0.25 0.35 0.46 0.58 08/18 0.07 07/01 0.03 0.22 0.41 0.67 0.79 08/20 1.10 07/02 0.08 0.14 0.19 0.26 0.31 08/21 0.92 07/05 0.09 0.14 0.23 0.35 0.43 08/23 0.04 07/09 0.09 0.12 0.22 0.30 0.42 08/25 0.04 07/14 0.37 0.51 0.46 0.65 0.77 08/30 0.06 07/15 0.08 0.15 1.24 1.25 1.39 08/31 0.10 07/17 0.18 0.30 0.45 0.44 0.68 09/01 0.01 07/21 0.21 0.32 0.42 0.56 0.63 09/11 0.03 07/22 0.34 0.55 0.79 1.07 1.31 09/12 0.42 07/30 0.19 0.42 0.65 1.88 1.00 09/29 0.12 07/31 0.32 0.59 0.86 1.21 1.47 10/03 0.12 08/04 0.46 0.81 1.18 1.60 1.91 Total 4.08 08/06 0.50 0.83 1.13 1.56 1.84 08/10 0.53 0.94 1.35 1.75 2.05 113
Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) 41.1 32.6 24.1 15.6 7.1 Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 08/12 0.99 1.05 1.06 1.05 0.99 08/18 0.46 0.67 0.92 1.22 1.46 08/25 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.23 08/28 0.08 0.15 0.24 0.32 0.39 08/31 0.09 0.16 0.24 0.30 0.38 09/02 0.10 0.17 0.24 0.31 0.35 09/06 0.48 0.46 0.49 0.56 0.74 09/10 0.04 0.16 0.31 0.47 0.50 09/11 0.12 0.20 0.29 0.39 0.49 09/16 0.09 0.17 0.24 0.32 0.39 09/18 0.14 0.21 0.25 0.33 0.36 09/22 0.14 0.19 0.24 0.29 0.34 09/25 0.07 0.12 0.16 0.22 0.29 09/28 0.12 1.17 1.22 1.29 1.33 10/02 0.17 0.27 0.34 0.46 0.54 10/06 0.11 0.19 0.25 0.37 0.43 10/09 0.04 0.11 0.15 0.22 0.27 10/14 0.19 0.28 0.37 0.49 0.55 Total 15.80 19.70 24.40 31.60 35.80 114
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 1998. Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) 41.1 32.6 24.1 15.6 7.1 Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 04/13 0.61 0.62 0.58 0.62 0.72 03/08 0.09 04/20 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.55 0.55 03/17 0.09 04/24 0.39 0.30 0.35 0.39 0.39 03/26 0.29 04/28 0.34 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.36 03/27 0.01 05/01 0.28 0.41 0.38 0.41 0.46 03/28 0.16 05/04 0.84 0.79 0.83 0.83 0.83 03/30 0.01 05/08 0.73 0.73 0.72 0.68 0.67 04/01 0.10 05/13 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.19 04/06 0.03 05/18 1.02 0.85 0.94 1.04 1.22 04/07 0.08 05/21 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.57 0.45 04/12 0.09 05/22 0.77 0.78 0.74 0.81 0.86 04/15 0.01 05/26 1.69 1.79 1.69 1.76 1.56 04/16 0.04 05/29 0.56 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.60 04/17 0.01 06/02 0.17 0.30 0.39 0.56 0.60 04/26 0.37 06/05 0.67 0.62 0.64 0.68 0.81 05/13 0.01 06/08 0.61 0.64 0.62 0.63 0.58 05/20 0.02 06/11 0.50 0.51 0.48 0.48 0.49 06/04 0.01 06/15 0.44 0.35 0.44 0.46 0.67 06/16 0.01 06/17 0.73 0.83 0.79 0.74 0.71 07/05 0.01 06/19 0.20 0.31 0.44 0.65 0.79 07/06 0.16 06/22 0.54 0.44 0.44 0.53 0.62 07/07 0.03 06/25 0.84 0.85 0.85 0.86 0.88 07/09 0.19 06/26 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.62 0.65 07/16 0.02 06/29 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54 07/23 0.03 07/01 0.04 0.27 0.52 0.69 0.81 07/24 0.53 07/02 0.09 0.13 0.18 0.25 0.29 07/26 0.25 07/05 0.10 0.16 0.23 0.32 0.40 07/27 0.13 07/06 0.08 0.15 0.23 0.30 0.35 07/28 0.03 07/08 0.29 0.42 0.48 0.69 0.75 07/31 0.01 07/14 0.16 0.26 0.36 0.51 0.66 08/01 0.02 07/15 0.12 0.17 0.22 0.30 0.35 08/04 0.12 07/17 0.12 0.22 0.31 0.41 0.50 08/18 0.07 07/20 0.17 0.28 0.39 0.56 0.67 08/20 1.10 07/22 0.08 0.15 0.22 0.29 0.35 08/21 0.02 07/24 0.57 0.84 1.10 1.34 1.63 08/23 0.04 07/30 0.21 0.42 0.59 0.81 0.92 08/25 0.04 07/31 0.35 0.59 0.81 1.13 1.36 08/30 0.06 08/03 0.66 0.95 1.17 1.49 1.67 08/31 0.10 08/05 0.34 0.60 0.83 1.16 1.40 09/01 0.01 115
Irrigation Levels Precipitation Distance from line-source (feet) 41.1 32.6 24.1 15.6 7.1 Date Amount (mo/day) (in) (mo/day) (in) 08/07 0.32 0.48 0.64 0.88 1.00 09/11 0.03 08/10 0.48 0.85 1.30 1.63 1.84 09/12 0.42 08/12 1.85 1.95 1.91 1.89 1.82 09/29 0.12 08/17 0.50 0.78 1.04 1.38 1.59 10/03 0.12 08/25 0.34 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.32 10/16 0.11 08/28 0.18 0.31 0.44 0.60 0.72 10/19 0.14 08/31 0.34 0.38 0.42 0.49 0.56 10/20 0.05 09/02 0.13 0.20 0.27 0.36 0.41 10/21 0.21 09/06 0.62 0.54 0.54 0.64 0.81 10/22 0.09 09/10 0.07 0.27 0.51 0.71 0.79 10/25 0.78 09/11 0.07 0.11 0.15 0.23 0.27 10/26 0.12 09/16 0.11 0.17 0.23 0.28 0.36 10/27 0.27 09/18 0.17 0.23 0.29 0.36 0.42 Total 6.90 09/22 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.49 0.56 09/25 0.11 0.17 0.23 0.31 0.39 09/28 0.13 0.17 0.23 0.29 0.34 10/02 0.17 0.24 0.31 0.39 0.48 10/06 0.13 0.23 0.31 0.42 0.54 10/09 0.12 0.20 0.29 0.40 0.46 10/14 0.17 0.29 0.39 0.48 0.54 Total 25.10 29.30 33.50 39.30 43.50 116
Figure 6. Average daily reference evapotranspiration (ET o ) from March 1 to October 29, 1998; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 117
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. 1998. 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. 1998. 118
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. 1998. 119
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 1-5-286-58 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
Table 89. Methods and materials for potato fertilizer (N and Ca) study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Operation Procedure Plot design Triple Line-source replicated (Figure 10) Treatments: Main Plot - Fertilizer Source (n = 2) UAN-32 (UAN): 32-0-0 Calcium Nitrate (CAN): 15.5-0-0-19 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 11-52-0, Rate: 41 lb N and 197 lb P 2 O 5 /acre Product 0-0-60, Rate: 155 lb K 2 O Date: 03/23/98 Product 34-0-0, 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
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. 1998. 122
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. 1998. Soil Nutrient NO 3 -N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu Ca Mg Na (lb/acre foot)* 35.5 60.0 715 3.2 17.6 8.0 5.6 11535 977 75 *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 32-0-0) 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
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
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. 1998. Irrigation Precipitation Date Water Applied Date Amount (mo/day (in) (mo/day) (in) 05/01 1.0 04/26 0.37 05/08 0.8 05/13 0.01 05/20 0.8 05/20 0.02 05/29 0.8 06/04 0.01 06/02 1.0 06/16 0.01 06/05 0.3 07/05 0.01 06/08 0.4 07/06 0.16 06/11 0.6* 07/07 0.03 06/18 1.2* 07/09 0.19 06/22 1.0 07/16 0.02 06/24 1.0* 07/23 0.03 06/26 0.8 07/24 0.53 06/29 0.6 07/26 0.25 07/01 1.3 07/27 0.13 07/02 1.3* 07/28 0.03 07/05 0.8 07/31 0.01 07/07 1.0* 08/01 0.02 07/10 0.5 08/04 0.12 07/13 0.9 08/18 0.07 07/15 0.4 08/20 1.10 07/16 1.0* 08/21 0.02 07/20 0.8 08/23 0.04 07/23 1.2* 08/25 0.04 07/27 0.3 Total 3.20 07/29 0.9* 07/31 1.2 08/03 1.0 08/06 1.5* 08/10 0.8 08/11 1.0* 08/14 0.6 08/18 0.8 08/20 0.8 08/25 1.0 Total 29.4 *Fertigations. Injected so that subplots (treatments) closest to the center line received about 20 lbs N/acre with each fertigation. 125
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. 1998. 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 (15.5-0-0-19 Ca) 246 197 293 202 494 91 0.31 124.3 1.093 13.4 232 190 269 179 448 93 0.32 110.6 1.094 15.0 186 152 233 193 426 93 0.32 100.2 1.094 11.7 129 111 209 175 384 92 0.33 89.0 1.095 10.0 71 64 258 186 444 93 0.32 108.7 1.094 11.7 Mean 252 187 439 92.4 0.32 106.6 1.094 12.3 Fertigation with UAN32 (32-0-0) 0 230 252 141 393 90 0.30 102.9 1.095 5.0 0 203 241 178 419 93 0.32 102.2 1.093 3.4 0 166 278 178 456 94 0.33 110.3 1.093 13.3 0 120 239 160 399 91 0.33 95.1 1.096 23.3 0 84 237 189 426 92 0.32 99.9 1.097 16.7 Mean 249 169 418 92 0.32 102.1 1.095 12.3 NOVA N rate Significance NS NS NS NS NS ** NS NS LSD (0.05) -- -- -- -- -- 10580 -- -- *Calcium applied does not include Ca in irrigation water (210 lb/ac) 126
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. 1998. 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 (15.5-0-0-19 Ca) 246 197 454 13.1 467 89 0.46 84.9 1.082 0.0 232 190 435 12.6 447 90 0.49 92.5 1.081 1.7 186 152 417 4.0 421 87 0.48 87.6 1.081 0.0 129 111 431 7.3 438 87 0.47 91.1 1.082 1.7 71 64 380 14.3 395 87 0.46 100.2 1.081 1.7 Mean 423 10.3 434 88 0.47 91.3 1.081 b 1.0 Fertigation with UAN (32-0-0) 0 230 362 6.5 369 89 0.48 75.7 1.081 3.4 0 203 409 3.1 412 88 0.44 91.2 1.083 0.0 0 166 374 0.0 374 86 0.45 82.1 1.084 0.0 0 120 430 6.1 437 87 0.46 94.8 1.083 0.0 0 84 419 10.0 429 89 0.44 95.3 1.083 0.0 Mean 399 5.2 404 88 0.46 87.9 1.083 a 0.7 NOVA Product Significance NS NS NS NS NS NS ** NS LSD (0.05) -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.001 -- *Calcium applied does not include Ca in irrigation water (210 lb/ac) 127
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. 1998. 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. 1998. Fertilizer Mean Nitrogen Fertilization CAN UAN Level NO 3 -N Ca NO 3 -N Ca (lb/acre N) (lb/acre) (lb/acre) 214 27.2 11,988 42.8 12,712 197 25.6 11,960 39.2 12,696 159 29.2 12,144 48.4 12,760 116 24.4 12,000 42.8 12,456 74 24.8 11,552 28.8 12,460 Mean 26.8 11,928 40.4 12,616 128
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. 1998. Cumulative N fertilizer rate Petiole NO 3 -N Leaf Total N (lb/acre) (ppm) (%) 64.1 27213a 6.41 51.6 25725ab 6.35ab 24.5 24488b 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. 1998. 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. 1998. 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) 149 5.48 4.09 4.78 5.64 4.53 5.08 5.56 4.31 4.93a 111 5.26 4.01 4.63 5.38 4.71 5.04 5.32 4.36 4.84a 52 4.86 3.59 4.22 5.05 4.09 4.57 4.95 3.84 4.39b Mean 5.20 3.89 4.54b 5.35 4.44 4.90a 5.27a 4.17b ANOVA (Tissue N) Factor Significance LDS (0.05) N Rate *** 0.234 Cultivar *** 0.191 N Product ** 0.191 129
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. 1998. 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) 149 1.77 2.26 2.01 1.77 2.07 1.92 1.77 2.16 1.97b 111 1.89 2.76 2.33 1.86 2.11 1.98 1.88 2.43 2.15b 52 2.20 2.93 2.56 2.04 2.40 2.22 2.12 2.67. 2.39a Mean 1.95 2.65 2.30a 1.89 2.19 2.04b 1.92b 2.42a ANOVA (Tissue N) Factor Significance LDS (0.05) N Rate ** 0.193 Cultivar *** 0.158 N Product ** 0.158 130
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. 1998. Nutrient N P K Mg Ca Fe Zn Cu B Mn (%) (ppm) -- 0.24 0.56 6.43 4.74 3.62 85 103.0 36.3 874 131
Table 100. Methods and materials for volcanic ash study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. 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 34-0-0 65 N (preplant) 06/01/98 Chile 34-0-0 36 N (preplant) 06/22/98 All 32-0-0 20 N (foliar) 06/30/98 All 32-0-0 36 N (foliar) 07/09/98 All 34-0-0 34 N (broadcast) 07/16/98 All 34-0-0 30 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
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. 1998. 133
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
Table 101. Yield and yield components of chile (v. Agco Hot) fertilized with three rates of volcanic ash; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. Fertilizer Rate Marketable Yield Number of Fruit/plant Average Weight per pod Red Pods (lb/100 ft 2 ) (ton/acre) (grams) (%) 0 24.2 28.0 36.9 20.6 10 26.2 26.0 42.9 12.2 20 22.1 26.8 34.8 16.8 Mean 24.2 26.9 38.2 16.5 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. 1998. Nutrient Rate N P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (lb/100ft 2 ) (%) (ppm) 0 4.33 0.30 3.28 1.10 2.86 11.7 61.5 60.1 11.3 47.0 10 4.00 0.30 3.39 0.99 3.06 10.4 64.2 82.0 9.6 48.0 20 4.08 0.26 3.12 1.06 2.93 14.2 65.9 72.9 12.0 45.9 Mean 4.14 0.28 3.27 1.05 2.95 12.1 63.9 71.7 11.0 47.0 ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 135
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. 1998. Fertilizer Rate Grain Yield Number Ears per Plant (lb/100ft 2 ) (lb/acre) 0 11177 1.50 10 11556 1.42 16 11381 1.34 Mean 11371 1.42 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. 1998. Nutrient Rate N P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (lb/100ft 2 ) (%) (ppm) 0 2.46 0.31 2.12 0.17 0.40 7.75 73.9 86.7 10.1 14.5 10 2.36 0.29 2.08 0.16 0.39 8.04 74.4 89.9 10.0 14.9 16 2.48 0.29 2.14 0.17 0.41 7.52 74.3 91.3 10.4 15.3 Mean 2.41 0.30 2.11 0.17 0.40 7.77 74.2 89.3 10.2 14.9 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. 1998. Fertilizer Rate Marketable Yield Market Yield Average Weight per tuber Number of tubers (lb/100 ft 2 ) (lb/acre) (% of total) (lb) (per acre) 0 31257 85 0.359 87440 10 28922 86 0.341 85518 16 28240 87 0.360 78215 Mean 29473 86 0.353 83724 ANOVA Significance NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- 136
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. 1998. Nutrient Rate N P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (lb/100ft 2 ) (%) (ppm) 0 6.33 0.43 3.93 0.98 2.10 15.8 107.1 66.3 15.3 33.1 10 6.39 0.41 4.03 0.98 2.10 9.6 109.7 60.3 14.1 33.2 16 6.38 0.40 3.78 0.93 1.94 10.0 112.7 54.7 13.4 31.7 Mean 6.37 0.42 3.91 0.97 2.04 11.8 109.8 60.4 14.3 32.6 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. 1998. Soil Nutrient NO 3 -N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu Ca Mg Na (lb/acre foot*) 35.5 60.0 715 3.2 17.6 8.0 5.6 11535 977 75 *(lb/acre) content based on an estimated soil weight of 4 million pounds per acre foot. 137
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. 1998. 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 06/2/98 1. 4 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 07/9/98 1. 45 gal. Lot 803 2. 8 oz. Trigger 07/23/98 1. 2 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 07/7/98 1. 60 lb. N plus 6.5 gal Humega 2. 60 lb. N only 138
Operation Cultivars Procedure Crop Date Treatment Corn 07/23/98 1. 53 lb. N plus 5 gal Humega 2. 53 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 05/06/98 1. 15 gal 3-18-18-1, 5 gal. Lot 427 3 gal. MegaCal, plus 10 gal 32-0-0 (applied with seed pieces at planting) 2. Control (water only) 05/20/98 1. 10 gal Humega plus 10 gal Blue-green algae 2. Control (water only) 06/10/98 1. 2 gal. Humega 06/22/98 1. 4.5 gal Humega plus 80 lb. N 2. 80 lb. N only 06/30/98 1. 3 gal. Humega plus 17 lb. N 2. 17 lb. N only 07/7/98 1. 3 gal Humega plus 20 lb. N 2. 20 lb. N 07/15/98 1. 2 qt Hooter, 1 qt. NitroBooster, plus 1 qt. Mega Cal 07/23/98 1. 2 qts. Hooter, 1 qt. NitroBooster, 1 qt. MegaCal, plus 2 gals. Humega plus 20 lb N 2. 20 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 34-0-0 65 N (preplant) 06/1/98 Chile 34-0-0 36 N (preplant) 07/08/98 Chile 34-0-0 34 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
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. 1998. 140
Table 109. Ingredients of the fertilizers used in the BioFlora study; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Fertilizer Ingredients or Analysis Hooter: 4-9-4 + 1% Humic Acid + Ca, S, Mg, Fe, Mn, Cu, Zn, B, Co, Mo Humega: 6% Humic Acid MegaCal: 8-0-0-8 Ca Nitro Booster:? Blue Green? Compost tea:? Lot 427:? Lot 803: 4.4% ThiSul (12-0-0-26 S), 6.7% Nitro Booster, 11.1% KeMin (?), 11.1% Blue-Green algae, 11.1%Fish 0 Mega (4-2-2) Lot 804: 50% 9-19-9, 25% Compost tea, 25% Lot 427 Lot 806A: 33% 3-18-18-1, 33% Compost tea, 33% Humega Lot 806B: 14% Hooter, 57% MegaCal, 29% Nitro Booster UAN32: 32-0-0 (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. 1998. 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) 64.9 95.3 79.2 0.048 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
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. 1998. Nutrient Protein S P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B ------------------------------------(%)----------------------------- ---------------------(ppm)-------------------- Fertilized 22.7a 0.28a 0.29a 1.70 0.35 1.78 13.1 74.6 29.3a 8.54 40.6 Control 21.2b 0.26b 0.27b 1.65 0.33 1.68 11.4 68.1 25.3b 7.76 39.9 Mean 21.9 0.27 0.28 1.67 0.34 1.73 12.3 71.4 27.3 8.15 40.2 ANOVA Sig. * * ** NS NS NS NS NS ** NS NS LSD (0.05) 1.38 0.023 0.012 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 2.22 --- ---- Table 112. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 3); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Protein P K Mg Ca (%) Fert. 22.3 0.27 2.17 0.34a 1.62 Control 23.1 0.26 1.92 0.32b 1.73 Mean 22.7 0.26 2.04 0.33 1.68 ANOVA Sig. NS NS NS ** NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- ---- 0.01 ---- Zn Fe Mn Cu B (ppm) Fert. 11.8 66.4 30.8 8.31 35.7 Control 13.6 67.0 32.8 8.80 36.9 Mean 12.7 66.7 31.8 8.55 36.3 ANOVA Sig. NS NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ADF NDF (%) Fert. 34.0 38.6 Control 31.6 36.3 Mean 32.8 37.5 ANOVA Sig. NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- 142
Table 113. Forage analysis of alfalfa fertilized with Bioflora as compared to the control (Cut 4); NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Protein P K Mg Ca (%) Fert. 25.2 0.31 2.33 0.36 1.86 Control 24.8 0.31 2.16 0.36 1.82 Mean 25.0 0.31 2.24 0.36 1.84 ANOVA Sig. NS NS NS ** NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- ---- ---- Zn Fe Mn Cu B (ppm) Fert. 13.8b 81.4 43.1 8.84 45.9 Control 15.5a 91.9 41.8 9.51 45.1 Mean 14.6 86.7 42.4 9.18 45.5 ANOVA Sig. * NS NS NS NS LSD (0.05) 1.51 ---- ---- ---- ---- ADF NDF (%) Fert. 30.5 32.8 Control 31.0 33.3 Mean 30.8 33.0 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
Table 114. Yield and yield components of chile peppers grown with and without supplemental fertilization; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington. 1998. Treatment Yield No. of fruit per plant Average weight per fruit Red fruit % of total (ton/acre) (no.) (grams) (%) Control 27.9 27.5 42.7 19.0 Micros 23.8 21.3 47.3 26.7 Bioflora 25.5 24.0 44.8 31.3 Mean 25.7 24.3 44.9 25.7 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. 1998. Treatment N S P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Control 4.20 0.32ab 0.31 3.40 1.07 3.15 9.22 61.5b 54.2 9.49 46.5 Micros 4.10 0.31b 0.30 3.17 1.07 3.09 9.05 62.0b 58.8 9.77 43.9 Bioflora 4.41 0.35a 0.31 3.14 1.03 3.10 8.57 69.9a 59.7 9.32 45 8 Mean 4.23 0.33 0.30 3.24 1.06 3.12 8.95 64.5 57.6 9.53 45.4 ANOVA Significance NS * NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- 0.023 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 5.56 ---- ---- ---- 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
Table 116. Yield and number of ears/plant of corn treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Fertilizer Grain Yield No. ears per plant (lb/acre) Bioflora 9936 1.15 N only 9096 1.14 Control 9613 1.27 Mean 9548 1.19 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. 1998. Treatment N S P K MG Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Bioflora 2.07 0.20 0.42 2.05 0.24 0.50 6.12 65.2 104.5a 7.83 9.92 N only 2.05 0.19 0.54 2.05 0.21 0.47 5.79 64.7 95.9ab 7.83 10.40 Control 1.98 0.18 0.45 2.11 0.22 0.46 6.28 65.5 86.8b 8.07 9.44 Mean 2.03 0.19 0.44 2.07 0.22 0.48 6.06 65.2 95.7 7.91 9.91 ANOVA Significance NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 11.45 ---- ---- Potatoes Fertilizer treatment had no significant effect on marketable yield, weight per tuber or tuber number of potatoes (Table 118.). 145
Table 118. Yield and yield components of potatoes (v. Sangre) treated with different fertilizers; NMSU Agricultural Science Center at Farmington, NM. 1998. Treatment Marketable Yield Market yield % of total Weight per tuber Tubers per acre (lb/acre) (%) (grams) (no.) Bioflora plus N 27673 83.3 0.329 84365 N only 33794 86.1 0.350 96664 Control 30498 84.0 0.338 91091 Mean 30655 84.5 0.339 90707 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. 1998. Treatment N S P K Mg Ca Zn Fe Mn Cu B (%) (ppm) Bioflora plus N 6.42 0.35 0.63 4.04 0.76ab 1.46 13.8 99.5a 78.3a 12.0 27.2 N only 6.15 0.32 0.61 4.25 0.70b 1.54 11.2 103.3a 69.8b 11.3 28.8 Control 5.88 0.35 0.49 3.89 0.86a 1.63 14.0 92.5b 67.7b 12.9 28.3 Mean 6.15 0.34 0.58 4.06 0.77 1.55 13.0 98.4 71.9 12.1 28.1 ANOVA Significance NS * NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS NS LSD (0.05) ---- ---- ---- 0.108 ---- ---- 5.42 3.11 ---- ---- 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
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. 1998. Soil Nutrient N0 3 -N P K Zn Fe Mn Cu Ca Mg Na (lb/acre foot) * 35.5 60.0 715 3.2 17.6 8.0 5.6 11535 977 75 *(lb/acre) content based on an estimated soil weight of 4 million pounds per acre foot. 147