Soybean and Field PeaSoybean and Field PeaProduction

K t M KKent McKayArea Extension Agronomist

C CNCR EC, Minot

Field PeaField PeaCool-season grain legumeCool season grain legumeEfficient water user (fallow replacement)

75% of the root biomass is contained in the75% of the root biomass is contained in the top two feet of the soil surface

“Nitrogen fixer”gMaturity: Grain types; 80 to 95 days from plantingp gAdapted to all areas of the state

Field PeaField PeaAdapted statewideAdapted statewide

Part of the new farm programLDP/loan issues finally resolvedLDP/loan issues finally resolved

Lower cost of production than other pulsesEasier to manage less risk (disease)Easier to manage, less risk (disease)Excellent fit in tight rotations with other broadleavesother broadleaves

low sclerotinia threat

Acreage of field pea in North Dakota(FSA), 1991-2003

Acreage

160000180000

Acreage

100000120000140000

res

400006000080000A

c

020000

1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003

SoybeanSoybeanWarm-season grain legume, “Nitrogen fixer”g g gAcres moving north and westEarly maturing Roundup Ready varieties now widely availableavailableEasier to manage, less risk (disease)than other broadleaves

Excellent fit in tight rotations with other broadleaves

low sclerotinia threatlow sclerotinia threat

ND soybean acreage (FSA)ND soybean acreage (FSA)

35004000

1990

20002500

3000

x100

0)

1990199520002001

500

10001500

2000

Acr

es( 2001

200220032004(projected)

0500 (p j )

North Central*, NDField Pea and Soybean Acreage (FSA)

60000

70000

40000

50000 19921997

20000

3000020022003

0

10000

Field Pea SoybeanField Pea Soybean

* Bottineau, Renville, Ward, McHenry, Pierce Counties

1993 - 2003 Field Pea and Soybean Yields North Central Research Extension Center

70

Field Peas SoybeansYield bu/acre

405060

102030

0

1993*199419951996199719981999200020012002**2003**

* Soybean trial lost due to cool August/early frost** Soybean variety trial planted on Fallow

10 year (93-02) average Field Pea and Soybean Yields. NCREC, Minot, ND

50

4130354045

bu/a

cre

211015202530

Yie

ld b

05

10

10 yr ave.

Field Peas Soybeans

Field Pea ProductionField Pea Production

Food Grade vs FeedFood Grade vs Feed

Food Grade vs FeedFood Grade vs Feed

Starts with high quality seedStarts with high quality seedGreen or yellow

Contrasting classes is a major issue for human g jfood grade peas (Beware of bin run seed quality)

% Germination very important85-90% considered goodVigor issues becomes important with seed below 75 – 80%75 80%

PVP list important to know

Current PVP Listings for Field Pea(as of 01/1/2004)

Green Peas:EspaceMajoretToledoCrusierA i lArielSW ParadeStratusStratusNitouche

www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/pvplist.pl

Current PVP Listings for Field Pea(as of 01/1/2004)

Yellow Peas:SwingCarnevalGrandeHighlightIntegraIntegraSW CircusSW CapriCebeco EclipseDS-Admiral

www.ars-grin.gov/cgi-bin/npgs/html/pvplist.pl

Field Pea Variety SelectionField Pea Variety Selection

Field pea PVP list changes frequentlyp g q yExample: Nitouche green pea

Late 1990’s through 2002 not protected could have been sold as common (bin run) seedbeen sold as common (bin run) seedAs 2003 PVP now applied for; can not be sold as a common class of seed anymore

Human food market or feed peaContact potential buyer(s) if the variety meets humanContact potential buyer(s) if the variety meets human food grade specs

Field Pea Selection Criteria:Field Pea Selection Criteria:

Harvest Ease:straw strength/standabililty very important consideration for straight combining E CDC M t hi h i ldi h t i hEx. CDC Mozart: high yielding pea, short vine; however, susceptible to lodging

Powdery Mildew Resistance:- has the potential of being the most serious disease

in field pea (planting date issue)in field pea (planting date issue)Yellow pea: resistant varieties availableGreen pea: no” true” resistant varieties yet

Food Grade vs FeedFood Grade vs Feed

Harvest: most critical factorHarvest: most critical factorOn time (Malt barley?)Acres per combine?Acres per combine?Green vs yellow:

Food Grade vs FeedFood Grade vs Feed

Harvest needs to be on time for qualityHarvest needs to be on time for qualityHarvest issues come up:

Malt barley or peas?y pPeas should be combined at 16% moisture,18% the high endOnce dry: below 13% splitting can occur

handling issues to avoid cracking (augers, etc.)

Food Grade vs FeedFood Grade vs Feed

Green peas need timely harvest to avoid theGreen peas need timely harvest to avoid the potential of bleach

“Green peas can be compared to raising durum” p p gMore quality issues

‘Yellow peas are like raising spring wheat”What to grow? Green or yellow

Most processors will say raise one type to avoid contamination“Yellow” the best choice if raising considerable amount of malt barley

Food Grade vs FeedFood Grade vs Feed

Powdery Mildew:Powdery Mildew:- 2003: more of a harvest issue than a yield

loss issueShould not affect seed quality or germination

S d T t t C id tiSeed Treatment Considerations:

2002/2003: Isolated seed rot issuesCold, wet May: delayed emergenceTight rotation: peas on canola

Fusarium, Rhizoctonia, and Pythium caused isolated problems and reduced pea standsisolated problems and reduced pea stands

Seed Treatment Options:NDSU Extension Service circular PP622

North Dakota Field Crop Fungicide GuideApron, Allegiance: pythiumApron/Max: pythium, fusarium, rhizoc

Field Pea Seeding Date TrialsgCarrington 96-98, Minot 97-98, Langdon 98

50

60CarringtonMinot

30

40

acre

Langdon

20

30

Bu/

a

0

10

Early May Mid May Late May E-M June

Rolling PeasRolling Peas

Should one roll right after planting or afterShould one roll right after planting or after crop emergenceDepends on tillage systemDepends on tillage system

No-till; anytimeConventional; after emergencePeas 1 - 2 inch height

S il tSoil type:Heavy soil

best to wait after emergencebest to wait after emergence

S di R /O i S dSeeding Rate/Optimum Stand

S f 300 000 S/Seeding rate of 300,000 PLS/acreEquates to 7 plants/square foot

Minimum stand: 3 to 4 plants sq/ftMinimum stand: 3 to 4 plants sq/ftWill lead to increased weed pressure, unevenmaturity and lodging issues

Impact of N Fertility Strategy on Field Pea Seed Yieldon Field Pea Seed YieldCarrington Research Extension Center Studies, 1995-97.

N Fertility Strategy Seed YieldBu/Acre

0 Inoculant + 0 N Fertilizer 50.3

I l ti (D ) 63 8Inoculation (Dry) 63.8

Inoculation + 45# N 59.8

Nitrogen Fertilizer (90#N) 61.5

F ili R d iFertility Recommendations

Soil test of >30 lbs N: Inoculate and go!!Seed is sensitive to fertilizer saltsLack of response to phosphorus and starter fertilizer

No pea yield response to phosphorus across 9 sites years on very low testing phosphorus soils in NDphosphorus soils in ND

Fi ld P DiField Pea DiseasesSclerotinia:Sclerotinia:

Not as susceptible as sunflower, canola or dry beancanola or dry beanSemi-leafless field pea similar t l b tt t l thtolerance or even better tolerance than soybeanC b f ll d ith thCan be successfully used with other broadleaf crops in “stacked” rotations

Fi ld P DiField Pea Diseases

Powdery Mildew:Powdery Mildew:Most significant disease in peaC hit “ d ” t lCauses white “powdery” spots on leavesWet, heavy dews help spread the disease to the podsthe podsInfected plants will not mature normallyCan result in harvest problems seed sizeCan result in harvest problems, seed size issues and yield loss

Fi ld P DiField Pea DiseasesPowdery Mildew:Powdery Mildew:

Most often a problem with late plantings(mid-May or later)(mid May or later)Infection typically occurs late in the season (late July-August )( y g )Yield loss typically doesn’t occur unless infection occurs prior to pod set Resistant varieties becoming availableQuadris fungicide labeled for control

2004 research trials planned Mohall/Minot

New DevelopmentsNew Developments

US Pulse Breeding Program: USDA-ARS, WSUg g ,Kevin McPhee, Fred Muehlbauer

NDSU is now an active part of their programs

NDSU cooperating in joint releases with USDA ARS; WSU; IDAESUSDA-ARS; WSU; IDAES

2003 Green Pea Release: ‘Stirling‘Breeders seed increased in 2003Breeders seed increased in 2003Foundation seed will be planted at REC’s in 20042005 Foundation seed available

Soybeans

V i t S l tiVariety Selection

Most crucial decisionMaturity GroupSeed sizeHerbicide tolerant vs conventionalHerbicide tolerant vs conventional

Maturity GroupsMaturity Groups

(Early) 000

(Mid-early) 00.0 00.5 00.9

(Mid) 0.0 0.5 0.9

(Late) 1

Note: For each decimal pointNote: For each decimal point consider 0.75 day later maturity!!

Soybean Performance in Central, North and Western North Dakota

Location 1997 1998 1999 2000 AVE.

Carring 49 8 53 9 40 0 46 6 47 5 buCarring. 49.8 53.9 40.0 46.6 47.5 bu.

Minot 11.6 22.6 16.7 19.3 17.6 bu.

Langdon 48.0 49.0 37.5 37.2 42.9 bu

Williston 14 0 11 0 11 0 12 5 12 1 buWilliston 14.0 11.0 11.0 12.5 12.1 bu.

Hetting. 11.6 ---- Frosted 26.1 12.6 bu.(No-Till)

2001-2003 Soybean PerformanceNCREC Mi NDNCREC, Minot, ND

2001 2002* 2003*34 bu/A24

53 bu./A9 t diti l

26 bu/A10 t diti l

3 yr. Ave.38 b /A

2001 2002* 2003*

24 var. 9 traditional 35 RR var.

10 traditional55 RR var.

38 bu/A

* Planted on fallow

A g st rainfall MinotAugust rainfall, Minot

3.5

2 93.5

4.0

2 0 2.0 2 0

2.9

2.5

3.0

es

average1997199819992.0

1.5

2.0 2.0

1.5

2.0

Inch

e 19992000200120020.6 0.7

0 0

0.5

1.0 20022003

0.0

Water Needs of SoybeansWater Needs of Soybeans60% of soybeans water needs occur f yfrom flowering through pod fill

Soybean water use scheduling for irrigationTotal water needs: 14.1 inches

8.0

9.0

8.5

6.0

7.0

Inch

es

5.6

3 0

4.0

5.0

I

3.0

First 8 weeks: May 20 - July 20 (40%)Next 6 weeks (Flower - Pod fill): July 20 - Sept 1 (60%)

The Mandan ARS Lab has measured crop water use by alternative crops from 1995 to 1997. The results of this study are drawn out below.

Average Yearly Water Use By Crop

14.4Sunflower

14.1

13.3Soybean

Safflower

10.6Dry Bean

10.5

9.8Crambe

Dry Pea

9.0Canola

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

Total Water Used (inches)Source: Mandan USDA-ARS 1995-1997

No-Till Soybeans

Soybean yield with tillage systems, NCREC, 1998-99.

2830

15

1921

20

25

acre

Tillage system

15

10

15

bush

els/

a

ConvNo-till

0

5

b

0Minot Washburn

Soybean yield with tillage systems, NCREC 1998 2002NCREC, 1998-2002

3136

313540

19 19

31

24

31

2126

253035

s/ac

re

13

1917

19

101520

bush

els

05

1998 1999 2000 2001 4 Year Avg1998 1999 2000 2001 4 Year Avg

Conv-Till No-Till

Tillage system: Seed yield, Hettinger, 2000-01 and Minot, 1999-2001.

25.030

19.020

25

acre

)

10

15

eld

(bu/

a

0

5

Yie

0No-till Conventional

24% yield advantage with no-till

iliFertilityInoculate new fields of soybean.y

Have seen poor N-fixation with dry July conditions in north central, ND.May benefit from 2X labeled rates of inoculum.May benefit from 2X labeled rates of inoculum.

Inoculate as routine procedure on all fields

S b /S b t tiSoybean/Soybean rotation

F iliFertility (continued)

Apply 20 to 40 lbs of N if soil levels are less than 40 lbs. per Acre.

Can’t rely solely on N-fixation (as with pea) forCan t rely solely on N-fixation (as with pea) for soybeans in low N testing soils, especially in western ND

Limited N fertilizer with the seed

Row spacing impact on soybean yield, Carrington, Hettinger, and Minot, 1999-2001.

35 30.028.0 27.0

25

30

35

e)

15

20

25

(bu/

acre

5

10

15

Yie

ld (

0

5

6-7" 18-21" 30"

10% yield advantage with narrow vs. wide rows

Narrow row spacing comparison for impact on soybean yield, Carrington and Minot, 2002.

48.043.050

30

40

u/ac

re)

20

Yie

ld (

bu

0

10Y

6 7" 12 14"6-7" 12-14"

10% yield advantage with solid-seeded

Planting rate effect on soybean yield, Carrington, H tti d Mi t 1999 2001Hettinger, and Minot, 1999-2001.

31.0 29.026.030

35

26.0

20

25

u/ac

re)

10

15

Yie

ld (

b

0

5

Y

200,000 150,000 100,00000,000 50,000 00,000PLS/Acre

Seeding Rate of Early SoybeanSeeding Rate of Early Soybean

Seeding rate Yieldseeds/acre bu/A

---------------------------------------------150,000 39.5200,000 43.8250,000 44.9,

Ave. 4 Varieties-6 sites, 1998 &1999