TECHNOLOGY

Computer-based programs boost farm profits Programs developed by IMC, Monsanto advise farmers on how to improve weed control, crop performance

Sometime this week a central Illinois farmer will watch red-orange clouds brighten and dim over his newly seeded field. As he rolls a lump of gray-black earth with his boot, he'll ask himself the inevitable questions. Did I plant the right crops? Use the best seed? Put on the correct kinds and amounts of fertilizer? Order the proper herbicides? What will fall prices be? Will I make a profit? His answer to the last question will prob­ably be: If the weather's good, I have a chance.

Trying to find ways to increase farm production and profit is as old as civili­zation. However, the emerging use of computer technology to tackle farm problems promises to boost the chances heavily in favor of the farmer —and his annual supplier, the chemical industry. Only the fickle weather re­mains far from control.

Two of the most mature computer­ized programs are International Min­erals & Chemical's weed control pro­gram for corn and soybeans, and Mon-santo's field profit analysis and field profit improvement programs. IMC's program makes herbicide recommen­dations and Monsanto's gives complete cropping information for such things as fertilizer, row spacing, insecticides, and the like. Many universities are also developing or have developed computer-based systems to give ferti­lizer recommendations from soil test data. Among them are Ohio State University, Michigan State University, and the University of Minnesota.

For the farmer, these programs offer expert agronomic advice for his indi­vidual problems. It's like having a group of agronomists visit a farm and give advice in their special areas of ex­pertise. The key element of these computer programing concepts is to make farming more profitable, not merely to produce higher yields. For the company, the computer program becomes a marketing tool used to cre­ate an image of agronomic expertise.

Monsanto's field profit analysis (FPA) and field profit improvement (FPI) programs are operated through Monsanto Agricultural Centers (MAC) in the central and southeast U.S. "The MAC manager is our face to face contact with the farmer," Mon­santo's manager of crop technology,

Dr. Earl C. Spurrier, says. The MAC manager offers the programs to inter­ested farmers. These are fee pro­grams, Dr. Spurrier points out. Al­though the fee covers only a small part of the programs' expense, it provides a program for farmers who are willing to carefully evaluate the year to year improvement in their farming practice. It is not a something-for-nothing plan. Progressive farmers are most interested in this type of program. The business­man-farmer is the one who buys large quantities of fertilizer, herbicides, and such. He's in the business to make a profit.

The FPA program is primarily a di­agnostic tool, which makes farms more

productive and profitable, while FPI aims to improve technology.

In FPA, for a sample fee, leaf and soil analyses are done in a private lab­oratory. The soil analysis consists of the standard four-point test for pH, or­ganic matter, exchangeable potash, and available phosphorus. Also, the soil is tested for four other factors. The leaf is analyzed by emission spectroscopy for 13 elements. The results of the laboratory tests, done by Monsanto procedures, are sent to the company's headquarters in St. Louis.

When the soil and leaf samples are taken, Monsanto is sent information about the field's location, soil type, cropping plans, and the like. The lab-

Out of keyed questions, the farmer

' 0) - Corn ' 1 (2^ - Soybeans ; 1 (( 3 ) I- Uncertain.con.derbo* ^ t e « * . « * « « * V - " ' " " ' '

II. Which of the ton U - , (1) :. Corn or Sorghum • , •

1 ( 2) : ; Soybeans • i 1

I (3) "" Small Grains \ I

• M ) " Food, ed or o-> • < \

ox ^ Seed for planting 4

0 ) 3 Less than 2/o 9 •, 1

• , „ e texture of the majority of so„s 1 ^ V Whatisthetexi" — 1 V- ^ " Sand and Sandy Loam Q .

" • Loam and Silt Loams ;

1 x- ;w fall-plowed? 1 1 * \ ! I V/ Was this field fall P , \

w - Y e s • „7 • • . ; • ' . \

o) a Yes ^ j I (2) D No . •

48 C&EN JUNE 17, 1968

INPUT. An IMC representative types code numbers to answers the farmer has given to a questionnaire on cropping and field conditions. IMC uses a farm-to-computer (via telephone) data transmission system for its weed control program

oratory results and field information are run through an IBM 360 computer. It is programed to correlate the data and come up with program recommen­dations for the coming year.

These agronomic interpretations produce recommendations not only for nitrogen, phosphorus, and potash, but also for micronutrients, such as zinc, magnesium, calcium, copper, and

manganese. In some cases, cropping changes are advised.

The computer print-out information is sent to the MAC manager. He ex­plains and discusses the recommenda­tions with the farmer. The farmer then evaluates the recommendations and elects to use the suggestions which best suit his needs and pocketbook. However, the farmer is free to follow

will get IMC computer's answers

' * C COMPUTE*!*,

'-•""£. - S \ : - - .0,

FIELD 3A " W , , £ * » AMOTION Ci rv °°^0 ANSWER* T A C " " GUIANA

W " 3 , M t " » " » " . . . . . u I . 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 . . . .

"«0AuCA6r APPLY

™ y «t KfcQuiaE0. 8 £ ^ E C T E O . THE

mmmmm 110 r i " * . r CULTIVATION , T * r

•STOP*

his own program using the print-out only as a guide.

The computer is programed for 72 crops with cross programs. A cross program might be a corn, soybean, corn cycle for a particular field, for ex­ample.

Although FPA is four years old, it has been computerized for only two years. Monsanto is now studying nu­trient uptake by various crops with farmers who stayed in the program and used it. "For corn," Dr. Spurrier says, "we are studying the difference in up­take by hybrids. With this type of in­formation, we can make better ferti­lizer recommendations. We aren't and won't make hybrid recommendations, though. We're not in the gain busi­ness; we leave that to those who are."

Fertilizing expertise is the present aim, he says. "It's not very profitable to apply nutrients a plant can't use. Hence, our interest is in plant uptake and utilization. Of course, we hope our sales and profits improve as we gain expertise and farmer confidence."

Monsanto's FPI program goes much further in developing technology than FPA does. Good farmers are selec­tively chosen by the MAC manager to participate. The farmers and Mon­santo sign a contract which permits long-term study and planning. Mon­santo supplies the technology—brains, laboratory analyses, and computer know-how. The farmer supplies the physical resources, labor, follows in­structions, and, in effect, turns part of his farm into an applied research lab­oratory. A yearly fee is paid by the farmer, and he supplies the fertilizer and sells the crops.

This is a farm technology improve­ment education program, where both the farmer and Monsanto participate, Dr. Spurrier says. The program is in its third year, but the attrition rate is extremely small.

The aim of FPI is to evaluate crop­ping systems, fertilizing practice, and all nutrient uptake by various hybrids. In the distant future, Monsanto hopes to be able to more accurately predict the nutrient uptake of new hybrids or varieties with improved program sug­gestions for even greater farmer profit.

Besides data processing and infor­mation storage, the computer is used for single and multiple correlation and

JUNE 17, 1968 C&EN 49

Aromatic amines

CH2CH3

• N H 2

o-Ethylaniline

CF3

m-Aminobenzotri-fluoride

r N H 2

CH3

NH2

Mesidine

CH3 CH3

CH3

CH3

N H 2

Pseudocumidine

CHs 67.79.1.5 e

IS Si Fabrique k! Suisse d'ExplosifsS. A. Division Chemical Intermediates CH-5605 Dottikon/Switzerland US-Agents: Riches-Nelson, Inc.; Meridian Building, 170 Mason Street, Greenwich, Conn. Agents in other countries: Please inquire.

regression analyses. "For example, we want to find the amount of zinc needed to get the optimum phosphorus or pot­ash uptake by various hybrids," Dr. Spurrier explains. Monsanto is closely investigating the role of micronutrients in plant vigor. Therefore, more com­plete soil and leaf analyses are done in FPI than in FPA.

"We are seeking the point of dimin­ishing returns for all fertilizers," Dr. Spurrier says. "In total, we correlate such things as nutrients, hybrids, soil moisture, soil type, pH, and the like, with how much of each nutrient the plant will remove from the soil under what conditions. We aim to find the optimum nutrient balance needed for the most profitable farm.

"The whole problem of nutrient bal­ance is just beginning to be scientifi­cally investigated. Why should a farmer pay for nutrients his hybrid can't use? Down go his profits. What size yield is most profitable in terms of costs? Why have a huge yield with little profit? It's better to have a moderate yield and greater profit. Of course, most farmers are nowhere near reaching an optimum yield. We want to develop the exper­tise to help them get there."

Each FPI farmer who is in the pro­gram works very closely with other farmers in his area. Monsanto is, in effect, performing a series of studies with them each year. The results for one year are used to devise advanced studies for the following year. Peri­odic meetings are held during the year with the farmers and Monsanto per­sonnel to discuss progress, results, and how each farmer's test field fits into the total study. These are educational sessions, Dr. Spurrier points out.

The effect of these programs may change the thinking in regard to the use of micronutrients, Monsanto thinks. This may accelerate the present trend in that direction.

Without computers these complex programs would be difficult, if not im­possible. Just the correlation of nu­trient cation exchange effect on plant uptake is extremely complex, and it is only one phase of these studies.

I Monsanto intends to extend its de­velopment of the use of computer tech­nology to problems of weed and insect control in the future.

International Minerals & Chemical has in operation a fairly sophisticated weed control program for corn and soybeans. The computer is an invalu­able tool here, also. IMC estimates that there are about 600 combinations of weed problems farmers face. And there are about 1.2 million alternate solutions to these problems.

The philosophy behind IMC's pro­gram is quite different than Mon-santo's. For one thing, IMC's weed

INTERVIEW. Monsanto's Bob Benson interviews an Ohio farmer on farming practices and conditions for use in Mon­santo's field profit analysis program

control program is free. For another, the company makes no herbicides and therefore has no ax to grind in this re­spect. The firm does market a com­plete line of herbicides, however.

Farm profit, not maximum yield, is also the goal of this program. Stu E. Ainsworth, IMC's project manager in the crop aid products department, highlights the severity of the problem with a few statistics. In 1967, the U.S. Department of Agriculture esti­mates that 88 million acres of cropland were lost to weeds and insects. That's about one fifth of the U.S.'s total avail­able cropland. Corn averaged a 10 bushel-per-acre loss, and soybeans av­eraged a 5 bushel-per-acre decrease. Also, about 25% of all production loss is due to weeds.

"This year there are about 500 fields of corn and soybeans under our weed control program," Mr. Ainsworth says. Last year, when only corn was covered, about 300 fields were in the program. At present, the program involves 12 states from New York west through the Midwest. IMC's Rainbow division ag­ricultural centers are the farmers' con­tact points.

The manager of the center provides a 35-part questionnaire to interested

50 C&EN JUNE 17, 1968

farmers. The multiple choice ques­tions deal with cropping plans, soil condition, and the amount of 23 weed and grass infestations in the field the previous year. Among these are quackgrass, Johnsongrass, foxtail, thistle, Jimsonweed, smartweed, mus­tard, and buckwheat.

The farmer obtains the information in late fall or early winter and esti­mates either none, light, moderate, or heavy infestation of each weed. The questionnaire is sent to IMC head­quarters in Skokie, 111., to be analyzed by an IBM 360 computer. The com­puter print-out gives detailed recom­mendations for time and amount of herbicide treatment. Also, mechani­cal methods of weed control, such as disking, are advised when warranted.

IMC has developed a farm-to-com­puter (via telephone) data transmis­sion system so recommendations can be given in a matter of minutes. "Our Corn-share system allows farmers to use the weed control service in the spring if necessary/' Mr. Ainsworth ex­plains. About 9(Kr of the question­naires are by mail, however. For the future, IMC is working on a soil test system to accurately determine the amount of weed infestation. A winter soil sample would be analyzed for the number and kinds of weed seeds.

The computer recommendations are returned to the agricultural center manager to be explained and discussed with the farmer. 'This is especially

useful when farmers use our program for the first time/' Mr. Ainsworth says. "About 50% of U.S. farmers have never used herbicides. There's a long way to go before weed control becomes commonplace in the U.S."

Computer input information was ob­tained from various agronomists. It is updated continuously. For example, last September, extension agronomists from seven states were flown to IMC headquarters to discuss weed control practices. The taped discussions were used as sources of information for com­puter input.

In the near future, IMC intends to expand its computer program to in­clude insecticides. Mr. Ainsworth sees in the not too distant future the day when companies will guarantee farm­ers pest- and weed-free fields while custom applying the needed herbicides and pesticides for a fixed price.

IMC's weed control program is only one step toward a fully integrated computer-based farm management in­formation system called MORE profit program. (MORE stands for mathe­matically optimized resource employ­ment for farms.) Starting this year the system includes fertilizing recommen­dations from soil analysis, cropping in­formation based on expected fall prices, and cost-effectiveness studies for each farm. For farm commodity products, IMC's marketing philosophy is to sell with service. The service be­ing sold is maximizing profits.

Monsanto's field profit analysis improved a farmer's profit in one year (corn planted every year on 300 acres)

1965 1966

Row spacing 36 Inches 28 Inches

Plant population per acre At planting 22,000 24,000 At harvest 20,000 22,500

Rainfall Average Below average

Fertilizer—Pounds per acre Nitrogen 108 208 Phosphorus 86 30 Potash 200 200

Herbicide—Pounds per acre 7 11.50

Yield—Bushels per acre 100 150

Net profit improvement $41.75 per acre

Soil analyses in 1965 showed ade- With a good nutrient balance, the quate levels of available phosphorus phosphorus application was de-and potash. However, leaf analyses creased to save costs. Narrower indicated poor uptake of these fer- row spacing was recommended to tilizers and a nitrogen deficiency. A conserve soil moisture. Excellent computer correlated the analytical weed control was reported for both data with such things as field past years. Increased cost for fertilizer history, hybrid to be planted, soil was $6.00 per acre and for herbicide type, and the like. The 100 pound- $2.25 per acre. At a $1.00 per-per-acre nitrogen increase was ad- bushel corn price in the fall of 1966, vised not only to increase the nitro- the increased gross profit was $50 gen level but also to increase up- per acre. Increased net profit per take of phosphorus and potash. acre was $41.75.

NEW low-cost carbohydrate

Masonex hemicellulose extract This is a water soluble extract from wood fibers after mild acid hydrolysis in a steam pressure vessel. Dried Masonex is currently used as a binder in refractory bricks and in livestock feed pellets . . . also as an ingredient in adhesives (adds tack). Liquid Masonex is used as an intermediate in furfuryl production and as a carbohydrate supplement in livestock rations.

POTENTIAL USES: Grouts, drilling mud, defogger, insecticide and herbicide carrier, foundry core binder, enzymatic production, low-cost emulsifier, exotic sugar source and (?) you may discover many more.

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES: With liquid Masonex viscosity is determined by solids concentration. Spray dried Masonex is normally water soluble but can be made insoluble by heating.

Typical Analysis Liquid Dried

Solids I 65% 97% Carbohydrates 55% 84% Ash 6% 4 Fiber 1 1 Protein 0.5 0.5 Fat 0.5 0.5 Calcium 0.5 0.5 Phosphorous 0.07 0.07 pH 5.5 3.7

TRY SOME We'll send you an inspection sample of Masonex at no charge. Just let us know whether you'd like the liquid or dry powder form. Available now in commercial quantities. Write: D. F. Galloway, Mgr., Wood Deriv­atives Dept., Masonite Corporation, 29 N. Wacker Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60606. ... Hn

IM-10

MASONITE C O R P O R A T I O N

Masonex hemicellulose extract

JUNE 17, 1968 C&EN 51