Progress 10/01/03 to 11/20/06
Outputs
Progress Report 1. What major problem or issue is being resolved and how are you resolving it (summarize project aims and objectives)? How serious is the problem? Why does it matter? The inland Pacific Northwest is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the western US. However, winter rainfall and snowmelt on frozen soils combined with steep slopes and conventional tillage create erosion rates up to 200 tons of soil per acre, particularly on steep slopes. Consequently, all of the original topsoil has been lost from 10% of the cropland and three fourths has been lost from another 60%. Growers rely upon summer fallow to increase storage of plant available water in the soil and thus minimize the risk of crop failure. Unfortunately, the intensive tillage that is associated with summer fallow creates a loose friable soil that is very susceptible to erosion by wind and water. The resulting runoff not only erodes soil, but also decreases the amount of water
available for crops, and degrades water quality and stream habitat. Soil erosion threatens the long-term productive capacity of the region to provide for basic human needs for food and fiber, maintain ecological integrity, and promote economic viability of rural communities. Conservation tillage and intensive cropping systems promise to maintain surface residues and minimize soil erosion and runoff, and save fuel and labor costs by reducing field and equipment time. Further, precision conservation technologies are possible that will improve no-till drill performance, reduce production costs, increase yield, and add crop value. However, information is lacking on cost-benefit relationships of the conservation practices and how they may contribute to soil water holding capacity, soil aggregate stability, and soil water infiltration. Our goal is to improve the economic and biological sustainability of conservation systems for dryland wheat production in the semiarid Pacific Northwest.
To achieve this goal, we will address the following three objectives: Objective 1: Quantify soil erosion, hydrology, and crop yield of two systems, a winter wheat/fallow inversion tillage system and a no-till four-year rotation, to evaluate the systems on a landscape basis and provide databases for soil erosion model validation and decision support tool development. Objective 2: Determine the effects of quality of carbon (C) on soil aggregate stability; that in turn influences surface soil hydrology, soil erosion, and crop production. Objective 3: Improve the economic viability of conservation tillage systems by developing and evaluating new, alternative technologies for harvesting that properly sizes crop residue for optimum no-till drill performance and adds value by segregating grain by quality, and for applying cropping inputs in accordance with spatial variability in soils and landscapes to improve grain yields and grain quality. Relevance to ARS National Program Action Plan.
This research falls within National Program 207 (Integrated Agricultural Systems) and contains components that contribute to NP 201 (Water Quality: Component III.2. Excess Nutrients and Component III.5. Erosion and Sedimentation); NP 207 (Soil Resource Management: Component II. Nutrient Management, Component III. Soil Water, and Component V. Productive and Sustainable Soil Management Systems); and NP 204 (Global Climate Change: Component I: Carbon Cycle and Carbon Storage). Best management practices arising from this research are expected to benefit agriculture and the public in the following four ways: a. Enable farmers and policymakers to make informed land management decisions based on estimates of C gain/loss in the dryland PNW under annual crop, fallow/crop, or conservation systems. b. Speed adoption of conservation tillage practices as needed to reduce soil erosion, enhance air quality and atmospheric visibility, and improve stream water quality. c. Increase water quality by
reducing fertilizers, pesticides, and other agrochemicals entering the Umatilla and Columbia rivers. d. Increase farm profitability through improved cropping input efficiency that enhances grain quality and reduces production costs. 2. List by year the currently approved milestones (indicators of research progress) Year 1 (FY2004). Begin cropping systems research; establish replicated plot layout and instrument paired drainages for cropping systems evaluation (Williams). Collect grain samples for kernel separation analysis and use gravity table to segregate (Siemens). Begin spatial characterization of grain yield and grain protein levels using on-combine sensing techniques (Long). Establish C source plots, collect and analyze soil samples (Wuest, Gollany, and Albrecht). Year 2 (FY2005). Begin summarizing early hydrologic, erosion, and crop production data for presentation to stakeholders through annual reports, field day presentations, tours, and grower meetings (Long, Williams,
Siemens, Gollany). Conduct grain quality studies (Siemens and Long). Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology (Siemens). Collect soil samples from georeferenced positions and perform laboratory analysis (Gollany and Williams). Assess soil physical variability by means of electrical conductivity survey techniques and quantitative terrain modeling (Long). Year 3 (FY2006). Prepare journal articles comparing conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage in terms of hydrologic, agronomic, and economic performance (Williams, Gollany, Siemens, Albrecht, Long, and Wuest). Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology (Siemens). Conduct field-tests of alternative harvester (Siemens). Present preliminary findings at field days, crop tours (Siemens). Evaluate C sources and land management systems (Gollany). Year 4 (FY2007). Write reports and/or journal articles addressing success in eliminating impediments to adoption of a system consisting of
no-tillage and intensive cropping (Williams, Wuest, Gollany, Albrecht, Siemens, and Long) . Analyze results and prepare peer reviewed publications on one-pass system (Siemens). Present preliminary findings at field days and crop tours (Gollany). Year 5 (FY2008). Finalize peer reviewed manuscripts and publish (Williams, Siemens, Long, Gollany, Wuest, Albrecht, and collaborators). 4a List the single most significant research accomplishment during FY 2006. Effective segregation of soft white wheat by kernel density. The single most significant accomplishment was the finding that sorting grain by kernel density is an effective means of segregating soft white winter wheat by quality. Development of a cost effective way to segregate grain by quality would add value to a product that is currently marketed as a low value, bulk commodity. The study was conducted in cooperation with the Gilliam County Grain Quality Laboratory and the USDA- ARS Western Wheat Quality Laboratory on wheat
collected from fields representing three different inland Pacific Northwest cropping systems. Sorting grain by density was superior to sorting grain by landscape position not only in the magnitude of separation in quality obtained, but also in reducing the amount of quality variation within a sample. Improving grain quality and consistency will increase the demand for U.S. wheat and farm profits. This research addresses the 2nd milestone of Years 1 and 2, and is aligned with attributes 1 (system understanding), 2 (producer participation), 3 (interdisciplinary teams), 4 (interactions among components), and 6 (address problems of regional scope) under NP 207 (Integrated Agricultural Systems). 4b List other significant research accomplishment(s), if any. i. Optical sensors sufficiently accurate for on-combine mapping of grain protein. Site-specific values of grain protein and grain yield have been promoted as a means for estimating nitrogen removed by the crop and nitrogen required
per unit increase in grain protein. Growers may use this information to implement precision nitrogen management now that near infrared sensors are commercially available for measuring and mapping the protein concentration of harvested grain across farm fields. Scientists at the USDA-ARS Soil and Water Conservation Unit at Pendleton cooperated with manufacturers of on-combine optical sensors (NIR Technology Australia and DSquared Development) to evaluate this technology in dryland fields of northeast Oregon. Reference samples of soft white winter wheat, obtained by hand from the exit auger of a combine, were analyzed for protein concentration and statistically compared with sensor measurements obtained during harvest. Results show that on-combine sensing is sensitive to spatial variability in grain protein, especially when within-field variability in protein is more than twice the instrument error. The results are sufficiently promising to suggest that on-combine NIR sensing is a
potentially useful tool for mapping purposes. This research is aligned with attributes 2 (producer participation), 3 (interdisciplinary teams), and 6 (address problems of national scope) under NP 207 (Integrated Agricultural Systems). 4d Progress report. This report serves to document research conducted under a reimbursable agreement between ARS and the Binational Agricultural Research and Development (BARD) Program. Additional details can be found in the report for the parent CRIS 5356-13210-001-01D Cropping Systems and Land Management in Dryland Pacific Northwest. Ground reference data on flag leaf nitrogen, flag leaf chlorophyll, leaf area index, and canopy spectral reflectance were acquired at the heading stage of growth of hard red spring wheat as for five dryland fields situated in northeastern Oregon and northern Idaho. The SAIL-Prospect inverse modeling procedure and high resolution, digital multispectral aerial imagery were used to predict leaf area index and chlorophyll.
First year, preliminary results show image spectral reflectance to be strongly and significantly correlated with chlorophyll or leaf area index (R2 greater than or equal to 0.85) thus suggesting that remote sensing and inverse modeling are potentially useful tools for predicting mid- season wheat nitrogen status and the need for nitrogen topdressing applications. 5. Describe the major accomplishments to date and their predicted or actual impact. i. Sorting grain by density has been identified as a potentially cost effective means of segregating wheat by quality. Nearly 80 percent of a lot graded as No. 2 wheat was separated into No. 1 wheat with virtually no dockage or shrunken and broken kernels. The remaining 20 percent was graded as number 3 wheat with 0.9 percent dockage and 1.7 percent shrunken and broken kernels. Further tests are being conducted to determine if high density wheat also significantly improves baking and milling quality and therefore adds value. Improving grain
quality and consistency will increase the demand for U.S. wheat thus increasing profit opportunities for growers and suppliers of grain. This research is aligned with NP 207 attributes 1 (initial assessment to understand the system), 2 (active participation by producers), 3 (interdisciplinary teams), 4 (science of interactions among system components), and 6 (infrastructure to address problems); and addresses the 2nd milestone of the project plan for Year 1 (collect grain samples) and Year 2 (conduct grain quality studies). ii. Producers need effective crop residue management and grain quality control to meet the demands of increasing production costs and lowered yields associated with no-till technology. Scientists at the Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center invented a one-pass harvesting system to meet these needs. The new system chops standing crop residue into 6" pieces to improve no-till drill performance, and segregates harvested grain by kernel density to improve
consistency of grain quality. The ability to seed into high wheat residue levels will eliminate need for field burning thus improving air- and soil-quality, and segregating kernel density will better position the US wheat industry as a reliable, consistent supplier of high quality grain. This research is aligned with NP 207 attributes 1 (initial assessment to understand the system), 2 (active participation by producers), 3 (interdisciplinary teams), 4 (science of interactions among system components), and 6 (infrastructure to address problems); and addresses the 2nd and 3rd milestones of the project plan for Years 2 and 3 (assemble alternative harvester components) . 6. What science and/or technologies have been transferred and to whom? When is the science and/or technology likely to become available to the end- user (industry, farmer, other scientists)? What are the constraints, if known, to the adoption and durability of the technology products? We have conducted a number of field
tours and illustrated talks to producers, extension personnel, government agencies, and university scientists, providing technical information on grain quality sensing; grain segregation; alternative harvesting systems; soil quality-soil aggregate stability relationships; and tillage/cropping system effects on soil erosion, hydrology, and crop yield. Much of this information is found online at http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/site_main.htm?modecode=53-56- 00-00 and at http://eesc.orst.edu/agcomwebfile/edmat/html/ SR/SR1061/SR1061.html. Grain segregation by density is currently technologically feasible and could be implemented by industry in less than one year. One limitation is that the grain industry does not currently have the infrastructure in place to cost effectively store segregated grain and therefore the industry would need to make a major capital investment for this technology to be implemented. Another limitation is that the results obtained to date are only for Federal
Grade quality parameters which are indicators, but not true measures of end-use quality. Measurements on the segregated samples collected are in progress to address this shortcoming. A final limitation is that a new grain marketing system would need to be developed and implemented to buy and sell grain segregated by quality in order for grain handling companies to invest in segregation equipment and facilities. Preliminary testing of the alternate harvesting system has been completed; however, several more years of testing are necessary before the system is commercially viable. One limitation of the system is efficiently handling the bulky material collected. Research is underway to overcome this limitation. Segregating grain by density is currently technologically feasible and could be implemented by industry in less than one year. Research to improve grain quality using information from grain quality sensors was added to this project after it had been initiated in Year 1
(2004). Recently, this project plan was modified to include this research and also link the integrated management systems research being conducted across the two ARS locations at Pendleton and Pullman, both directed at creating economically and environmentally sustainable wheat production systems for the Pacific Northwest. Therefore, the present project plan covers a bridging period until the next NP 207 review in 2008. During this time period, ongoing research in both locations will become more integrated into a comprehensive program. 7. List your most important publications in the popular press and presentations to organizations and articles written about your work. (NOTE: List your peer reviewed publications below). Presentations to Organizations: i. 2006. On-line sensing of grain protein concentration and using this information in precision nitrogen management. ARS-WSU Conservation Station Field Day. Pullman, WA. June 22. 40 minutes. Attendance 300. ii. 2006. On-line
sensing of grain protein concentration and using this information in precision nitrogen management. Moro Station Field Day. Moro, OR. June 14. 20 minutes. Attendance 100. iii. 2006. Kernel Segregation for Improved Wheat Quality. Sherman Station Field Day. Moro, Oreg. June 14. 20 minutes. Attendance 76. iv. 2006. Kernel Segregation for Improved Wheat Quality. Pendleton Station Field Day. Pendleton, Oreg. June 13. 20 minutes. Attendance 178. v. 2006. On-line sensing of grain protein concentration and using this information in precision nitrogen management. Pendleton Station Field Day. Pendleton, OR. June 13. 20 minutes. Attendance 178. vi. 2006. Engineering Aspects of the Undercutter Sweep. 21st Annual Umatilla County Weed and Crop Tour. May 25. 20 minutes. Attendance - 51. viii. 2006. Agricultural Engineering Update on New Harvesting System. Umatilla County Soil and Water Conservation District and Oregon State University Extension Service Breakfast
Meeting. Pendleton, Oreg., Feb. 15. 10 minutes. Attendance - 22. ix. 2006. Development and Evaluation of a Residue Management Wheel for Hoe-Type No-Till Drills. ASABE Agricultural Equipment Technology Conference. Louisville, Ky. Feb. 10. 20 minutes. Attendance - 26. x. 2006. On-line sensors of grain protein. Precision Agriculture Growers Conference. Dayton, WA. January 12. 40 minutes. Attendance 100. xi. 2005. Technologies that will transform farming. Tri-state Wheat Industry Conference. 1-2 December, Coeur dAlene, ID. 60 minutes. Attendance 250. xii. 2005. Research Update. 2005 Oregon State University Extension Service Cereal Research Review. Pendleton, OR. Sept., 1. 10 minutes. Attendance - 35. xiii. 2005. Improving Wheat Quality Consistency by Density Segregation. 2005 ASAE Annual International Meeting. Tampa Bay, FL. July, 18. 15 minutes. Attendance - 28. Popular Press: None. Articles Written About Our Work: i. 2006. Going Against the Grain: A New
Take on Harvesting. L. McGinnis. Resource Engineering and Technology for a Sustainable World 13(2): 5. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASABE. ii. 2006. A Simple Way of Harvesting Grain. Implement & Tractor. January/February Issue, p. 24. http://www.implementandtractor.com. Accessed 10 March 2006. iii. 2006. End of the Combine for Small Grain Harvest. D. Hildebrant. Midwest Messenger Around the Web. http://www.ledgeronline.com/cgi- bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=9&num=4086. Accessed 26 January 2006. iv. 2006. New Way to Harvest Wheat Uses Two Machines at Lower Cost. FarmAssist US Market News. http://www.farmassist.ca/alerts/details.asp? type=USnews&alerted32685. Accessed 26 January 2006. v. 2006. Wheat Harvesting: A New Twist. B. Coffman. An AgWeb.com Farm Equipment Special. http://www.agweb.com/get_article.asp? src&pageid=123717. Accessed 26 January 2006. vi. 2006. Scientist Develops New Wheat-Harvest System. Grainnet, http://www.grainent.com/info/articles_print.html?ID=30150.
Accessed 10 January 2006. vii. 2006. Agricultural Engineers in Pendleton, OR Are Looking Back in Time for Wheat Harvesting Solutions. Robison, L. viii. 2006. Toward Lower-Cost Harvesting. L. Tokarz. Science Update, Agricultural Research. Beltsville, Md.: USDA-ARS. ix. 2006. Building a Better Combine? Engineer Designs Machine to Harvest Only Wheat Heads. S. Yates. Capital Press 79(2): 4. Salem, Oreg.: Press Publishing Co. x. 2006. Going Against the Grain: A New Take on Harvesting. L. McGinnis. Agri-Times 22(17):1, 8. xi. 2006. New Harvesting System. D. Smith. Farm Journal, February Issue. p. 36. Mexico, Mo.: Farm Journal, Inc. xii. 2005. Going Against the Grain: A New Take on Harvesting. L. McGinnis. USDA-ARS News and Events. USDA-ARS. Washington, D.C.: USDA Agricultural Research Service. Available at www.ars.usda.gov/News/docs. htm?docid=1261. Accessed 22 December 2005. xiii. 2006. Improve protein mapping with in-stream system. S. Yates. Capital Press.
Impacts
(N/A)
Publications
- Long, D.S., Baker, A.A. 2006. On-combine sensing of grain protein concentration in soft white winter wheat. Dryland Agricultural Research Annual Report. Oregon Agric. Exp. Sta. Special Report 1068.
- Long, D.S., Kozar, B.J., Wraith, J.R. 2005. Evaluating variability of soil water in hummocky glaciated landscapes of northern Montana. Agronomy Abstracts. American Society of Agronomy. Madison, WI. CDROM
- Engel, R.E., Long, D.S., Carlson, G.R. 2006. Grain protein as a post- harvest index of nitrogen status for winter wheat in the northern Great Plains. Canadian Journal of Crop Science 86(2):425-431.
- Albrecht, S.L., Long, D.S. 2005. Winter wheat responses to nitrogen fertilization in a direct-seed, summer-fallow management system. Agronomy Abstracts. Agronomy Society of America. CD ROM.
- Petrie, S., Albrecht, S.L., Long, D.S. 2005. Economic analysis of a direct seed cropping system in the pacific northwest. Agronomy Abstracts. American Society of Agronomy. Madison, WI. CDROM.
- Siemens, M.C., Hulick, D.E. 2006. Development of an alternative, reaper/flail based harvesting system for no-till farming. ASABE Paper No. 061032. 16 pp. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASABE.
- Siemens, M.C. and D.E. Wilkins. 2006. Effect of residue management methods on no-till drill performance. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 22(1):51-60.
- Siemens, M.C., and Long, D.S. 2005. Improving wheat quality consistency by density segregation. ASAE paper No. 05-1028, 1p. St. Joseph, Mich.: ASAE.
- Williams, J.D., Robertson, D.S. 2006. No-till farming practices on the Columbia Plateau; changes in field erosion and stormflow. In Proceedings of the SWCS International Environmental Management Conference, July 22-26, Keystone, CO. 2006.CDROM.
- Petrie, S., Albrecht, S.L., Long, D.S. 2006. Yield comparison and economic analysis of conventional and direct-seed cropping systems at Pendleton. Dryland Agricultural Research Annual Report. Oregon Agric. Exp. Sta. Special Report 1068.
- Geffen, B., Clifton, C., Webster, J., Williams, J.D. 2005. Total maximum daily load water quality monitoring for sediment in Wildhorse Creek, northeast Oregon. In Proceedings of the American Water Resources Association Conference, November 1-4, Seattle, WA. CDROM.
- Williams, J.D., Robertson, D.S., Geffen, B.A., Webster, J.G., Clifton, C.F. 2006. Spatial and temporal contributions to variability in sediment loads of the Umatilla River, Oregon. In Proceedings of the SWCS International Environmental Management Conference, July 22-26, Keystone, CO. 2006. CDROM.
|
Progress 10/01/04 to 09/30/05
Outputs
1. What major problem or issue is being resolved and how are you resolving it (summarize project aims and objectives)? How serious is the problem? What does it matter? The inland Pacific Northwest is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the western US. However, winter rainfall and snowmelt on frozen soils combined with steep slopes and conventional tillage create erosion rates up to 200 tons of soil per acre, particularly on steep slopes. Consequently, all of the original topsoil has been lost from 10% of the cropland and three fourths has been lost from another 60%. Growers rely upon summer fallow to increase storage of plant available water in the soil and thus minimize the risk of crop failure. Unfortunately, the intensive tillage that is associated with summer fallow creates a loose friable soil that is very susceptible to erosion by wind and water. The resulting runoff not only erodes soil, but also decreases the amount of water available for
crops, and degrades water quality and stream habitat. Soil erosion threatens the long-term productive capacity of the region to sustain societal needs for food and fiber. Clearly, resource- efficient methods are needed that provide for basic human needs, maintain ecological integrity, and promote economic viability of rural communities. Conservation tillage and intensive cropping systems promise to maintain surface residues and minimize soil erosion and runoff, and save fuel and labor costs by reducing field and equipment time. Further, precision conservation technologies are possible that will improve no-till drill performance, reduce production costs, increase yield, and add crop value. However, information is lacking on cost-benefit relationships of the conservation practices and how they may contribute to soil water holding capacity, soil aggregate stability, and soil water infiltration. Our goal is to improve the economic and biological sustainability of conservation systems
for dryland wheat production in the semiarid Pacific Northwest. To achieve this goal, we will address the following three objectives: Objective 1: Quantify soil erosion, hydrology, and crop yield of two systems, a winter wheat/fallow inversion tillage system and a no-till four-year rotation, to evaluate the systems on a landscape basis and provide databases for soil erosion model validation and decision support tool development. Objective 2: Determine the effects of quality of carbon (C) on soil aggregate stability; that in turn influences surface soil hydrology, soil erosion, and crop production. Objective 3: Improve the economic viability of conservation tillage systems by developing and evaluating new, alternative technologies for harvesting that properly sizes crop residue for optimum no-till drill performance and adds value by segregating grain by quality, and for applying cropping inputs in accordance with spatial variability in soils and landscapes to improve grain yields
and grain quality. Relevance to ARS National Program Action Plan: This research falls within National Program 207 (Integrated Agricultural Systems) and contains components that contribute to NP 201 (Water Quality: Component III.2. Excess Nutrients, and Component III.5. Erosion and Sedimentation); NP 207 (Soil Resource Management: Component II. Nutrient Management, Component III. Soil Water, and Component V. Productive and Sustainable Soil Management Systems); and NP 204 (Global Climate Change: Component I: Carbon Cycle and Carbon Storage). The best management practices arising from this research are expected to benefit agriculture and the public in the following four ways: a. Enable farmers and policymakers to make informed land management decisions based on estimates of C gain/loss in the dryland PNW under annual crop, fallow/crop, or conservation systems. b. Speed adoption of conservation tillage practices as needed to reduce soil erosion, enhance air quality and atmospheric
visibility, and improve stream water quality. c. Increase water quality by reducing fertilizers, pesticides, and other agrochemicals entering the Umatilla and Columbia rivers. d. Increase farm profitability through improved cropping input efficiency that enhances grain quality and reduces production costs. 2. List the milestones (indicators of progress) from your Project Plan. Year 1 (FY2004) Begin cropping systems research; establish replicated plot layout and instrument paired drainages for cropping systems evaluation (Williams). Collect grain samples for kernel separation analysis and use gravity table to segregate (Siemens). Begin spatial characterization of grain yield and grain protein levels using on-combine sensing techniques (Long). Establish C source plots, collect and analyze soil samples (Wuest, Gollany, and Albrecht). Year 2 (FY2005) Begin summarizing early hydrologic, erosion, and crop production data for presentation to stakeholders through annual reports, field day
presentations, tours, and grower meetings (Long, Williams, Siemens, Gollany). Conduct grain quality studies (Siemens, Long). Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology (Siemens). Collect soil samples from georeferenced positions and perform laboratory analysis (Gollany, Williams). Assess soil physical variability by means of electrical conductivity survey techniques and quantitative terrain modeling (Long). Year 3 (FY2006) Prepare journal articles comparing conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage in terms of hydrologic, agronomic, and economic performance (Williams, Gollany, Siemens, Albrecht, Long, and Wuest). Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology (Siemens). Conduct field-tests of alternative harvester (Siemens). Present preliminary findings at field days, crop tours (Siemens). Evaluate C sources and land management systems (Gollany). Year 4 (FY2007) Write reports and/or journal articles addressing success in eliminating
impediments to adoption of a system consisting of no-tillage and intensive cropping (Williams, Wuest, Gollany, Albrecht, Siemens, and Long) . Analyze results and prepare peer reviewed publications on one-pass system (Siemens). Present preliminary findings at field days and crop tours (Gollany). Year 5 (FY2008) Final peer reviewed manuscripts prepared and published (Williams, Siemens, Long, Gollany, Wuest, Albrecht, and collaborators). 3a List the milestones that were scheduled to be addressed in FY 2005. For each milestone, indicate the status: fully met, substantially met, or not met. If not met, why. 1. Begin summarizing early hydrologic, erosion, and crop production data for presentation to stakeholders through annual reports, field day presentations, tours, and grower meetings (Long, Williams, Siemens, Gollany). Milestone Substantially Met 2. Conduct grain quality studies (Siemens, Long). Milestone Fully Met 3. Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology
(Siemens). Milestone Fully Met 4. Collect soil samples from georeferenced positions and perform laboratory analysis (Gollany, Williams). Milestone Substantially Met 5. Assess soil physical variability by means of electrical conductivity survey techniques and quantitative terrain modeling (Long). Milestone Substantially Met 3b List the milestones that you expect to address over the next 3 years (FY 2006, 2007, and 2008). What do you expect to accomplish, year by year, over the next 3 years under each milestone? Year 3 (FY2006) Prepare journal articles comparing conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage in terms of hydrologic, agronomic, and economic performance. Findings will be reported to the applied scientific community on the results of small-watershed scale research (Williams) Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology and conduct field-tests of alternative harvester. We will evaluate the alternative harvesting system in terms of improvements to
no-till drill performance and grain quality (Siemens). Evaluate carbon sources and land management systems. We will evaluate the effect of each treatment (check, no addition; wood, lignin; cotton, cellulose; alfalfa pellets, high amino N; municipal biosolids, humics; sucrose; wheat straw; manure; composted wheat residue; perennial grass; winter brassica residue; and winter brassica crops) on soil aggregate stability and soil structure. This will provide process-based understanding of how the quality of different organic sources affects aggregate formation and how the plant and amendments influence soil aggregate stability that in turn influence surface soil hydrology and soil erosion. Relationships will be determined among soil organic C, soil aggregate stability, and soil erosion in conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage, at the small-watershed scale. Assuming the subsequent project plan continues along its present course, we will evaluate results and prepare for next CRIS
project cycle in year 4. Year 4 (FY2007) Write reports and peer-reviewed journal articles addressing success in eliminating impediments to adoption of a system consisting of no-tillage and intensive cropping (Long, Siemens, Williams). Analyze results and prepare peer reviewed publications on one-pass harvester system. Findings will be presented to the applied engineering community. Knowledge gained from the studies will be transferred to the scientific community by preparing manuscripts for publication in peer reviewed journals (Siemens). Present preliminary findings at field days and crop tours. Preliminary findings will be presented at field days and grower tours regarding the effect of C quality on soil aggregate stability, and relationships between soil organic C, and soil aggregate stability or soil erosion in conventional- vs. conservation-tillage. Begin review and development of next five year project plan. Long, Siemens, Williams Year 5 (FY2008) Finalize peer reviewed
publications and publish them. Long, Siemens, Williams Knowledge gained from the studies will be transferred to professional peers through publication in peer reviewed journals. 4a What was the single most significant accomplishment this past year? Sorting grain by density has been identified as a potentially cost effective means of segregating wheat by quality. Nearly 80 percent of a lot graded as number 2 wheat was separated into number 1 wheat with virtually no dockage or shrunken and broken kernels. The remaining 20 percent was graded as number 3 wheat with 0.9 percent dockage and 1.7 percent shrunken and broken kernels. Further tests are being conducted to determine if high density wheat also significantly improves baking and milling quality and therefore adds value. Improving grain quality and consistency will increase the demand for U.S. wheat and farm profits. 4b List other significant accomplishments, if any. Producers need effective crop residue management and grain
quality control to meet the demands of increasing production costs and lowered yields associated with no-till technology. M. Siemens invented a one- pass harvesting system to meet these needs. The new system chops standing crop residue into 6-in. pieces to improve no-till drill performance, and segregates harvested grain by kernel density to improve consistency of grain quality. The ability to seed into high wheat residue levels will eliminate need for field burning thus improving air- and soil-quality, and segregating kernel density will better position the US wheat industry as a reliable, consistent supplier of high quality grain. 5. Describe the major accomplishments over the life of the project, including their predicted or actual impact. A. An improved harvesting system was designed consisting of a stripper header to harvest the crop, and a flail mower to chop standing crop residue and prepare the residue for direct seeding in a single pass. Design work on assembling the major
components was completed. Preliminary field-testing of main harvesting components was completed. B. Grain samples stored from the 2002 crop year from two locations have been sorted by density and size and sent to a grain quality lab for analysis of baking and milling performance. Plans to collect additional samples from various locations during the 2003 crop year have been initiated. C. A manuscript reporting results a hydrologic evaluation of the 70-year crop residue study was accepted and published in the Journal of Soil and Tillage Research. 6. What science and/or technologies have been transferred and to whom? When is the science and/or technology likely to become available to the end- user (industry, farmer, other scientists)? What are the constraints, if known, to the adoption and durability of the technology products? A. M. Siemens invented an alternative harvesting system that harvests the crop and prepares the crop residue for direct seeding in a single pass. The new
system chops standing crop residue into 6" pieces to improve no- till drill performance, and segregates harvested grain by kernel density to improve consistency of grain quality. The invention and test results were presented at two field days with an attendance of over 260 growers, researchers, agency and agri-business personal. Preliminary testing of the harvesting system has been completed; however several more years of testing are necessary before the system is commercially viable. One limitation of the system is efficiently handling the bulky material collected. Research is underway to overcome this limitation. Segregating grain by density is currently technologically feasible and could be implemented by industry in less than one year. B. D. Long cooperated with Zeltex, Inc.(Hagerstown, MD) in testing an optical on-combine grain analyzer with hard red spring wheat during harvest. Output from the sensor gave good indication that observed protein patterns were real and could
be applied into precision agriculture applications including nitrogen placement and crop residue management. In 2005, Zeltex decided to commercially release the sensor based on the positive nature of the field results. C. We provided technical information through poster presentations, and talks at field days and producer meetings. State extension personnel, government agencies, and research scientists are finding this technology available in printed form and available online at http://pwa.ars.usda. gov/pendleton/cpcrc/index.htm; and http://eesc.orst. edu/agcomwebfile/edmat/html/SR/SR1061/SR1061.html. D. Technical information on sensing and segregation of grain by quality, and relationships among soil carbon, crop residue, soil aggregation, and soil tilth was presented to producers and agricultural-consultants during the annual joint ARS-OSU field day at the Pendleton Agric. Res. Center. 7. List your most important publications in the popular press and presentations to organizations
and articles written about your work. (NOTE: List your peer reviewed publications below). A. Newspaper and Newsletter Articles i. 2004. Research into benefits of subsoiler crosses state, national boundaries. The East Oregonian, Pendleton OR. ii. 2005. Device delivers as-you-harvest protein readings. Capital Press, Salem, OR. B. Posters i. Williams, J.D., D.S. Robertson, H.S. Oviatt. Changes in storm flow responses as a result of direct seed farming practices on the Columbia Plateau croplands. CD-Rom, in Eos Trans. AGU, 85(47), Fall Meet. Suppl., Abstract: H53A-1213. ABSTRACT & POSTER C. Presentations i. 2005. Alternative Harvesting System for Direct Seeding. Sherman Station Field Day. Moro, OR. June 8. 20 minutes. Attendance 83. ii. 2005. Alternative Harvesting System for Direct Seeding. Pendleton Station Field Day. Pendleton, OR. June 7. 20 minutes. Attendance 183. iii. 2005. Performance of Two No-Till Drills Seeding Green Peas. Pendleton Experiment Station
Brown Bag Seminar. Pendleton, OR. Feb., 9. 30 minutes. Attendance - 21. iv. 2004. Header Modifications for Reducing Garbanzo Bean Harvesting Losses. ASAE Pacific Northwest Section Meeting. Baker City, OR. Sept. 24. 20 minutes. Attendance - 14. v. 2004. McCool, D.K., Williams, J.D. Freeze/thaw effects on rill and gully erosion in the northwestern wheat and range region. International Symposium on Gully Erosion Under Global Change Proceedings. vi. 2004. Alternative Harvesting System. Whitman College Biological Science Class. Pendleton, OR. Nov. 10. 20 minutes. Attendance - 11. vii. 2004. Ag Engineering Program Update. 2004 Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center Staff Retreat. Tollgate, OR. Sept. 22. 30 minutes. Attendance - 18. viii. 2004. USDA-ARS Ag Engineering Research Update. 2004 Oregon State University Extension Service Cereal Research Review. Pendleton, OR. Sept., 9. 10 minutes. Attendance - 17. D. Invited presentations i. 2005. Direct
Seed Drill Technology. Wasco County Direct Seed Field Day. The Dalles, OR. June, 2. 10 minutes. Attendance - 63. ii. 2005. Agricultural Engineering Research at the Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center. Pendleton Chamber of Commerce Leadership Tour. Pendleton, OR. June, 1. 15 minutes. Attendance - 18. iii. 2005. On-combine sensing of grain protein with application to precision agriculture. 8th Annual Kansas Precision Agriculture Technologies Conference, Hays, KS. Jan. 20. 60 minutes. Attendance 100. iv. 2005. Performance of Two No-Till Drills Seeding Green Peas. Green Pea Industry Seminar. Milton-Freewater, OR. Feb., 3. 30 minutes. Attendance - 43. v. 2005. Residue Management for Direct Seeding. Umatilla County Soil and Water Conservation District and Oregon State University Extension Service Breakfast Meeting. ASAE Agricultural Equipment Technology Conference. Adams, OR. Jan. 25. 90 minutes. Attendance - 45.
Impacts
(N/A)
Publications
- Williams, J.D., Koplin, D.W. 2005. Current topics in agricultural hydrology and water quality: Introduction. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 41(2): 243-244.X
- Long, D.S., Engel, R.E., Carpenter, F.M. 2005. On-combine sensing and mapping of wheat protein concentration. Crop Management [on-line]. Available: http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/cm/element/cmsum2.asp? id=4841.
- Smiley, R.W., Siemens, M.C., Gohlke, T.M., Poore, J.K. 2005. Small grain acreage and management trends for eastern Oregon and Washington. In 2005 Dryland Agricultural Research Annual Report, 30-50. D.A. Long, S.E. Petrie and P.M. Frank, eds. SR 1061. Corvallis, Oreg.: Oregon State University Agric. Exp. Station in cooperation with USDA-Agric. Res. Service, Pendleton, Oreg.
- Siemens, M.C., Corp, M.K., Correa, R.F. 2004. Effects of header modifications on garbanzo bean harvesting losses. ASAE paper no. PNW04- 1012, 10 pp. St. Joseph, Mich.:ASAE
- Corp, M.K., Ball, D.A., Siemens, M.C. 2004. Wheat straw management and its effect on weed populations, stand establishment and yield in direct-seed chickpea. In Proc. 57th Western Society of Weed Science Meeting, 57:20.
|
Progress 10/01/03 to 09/30/04
Outputs
1. What major problem or issue is being resolved and how are you resolving it (summarize project aims and objectives)? How serious is the problem? What does it matter? The inland Pacific Northwest is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the western US. However, winter rainfall and snowmelt on frozen soils combined with steep slopes and conventional tillage create erosion rates up to 200 tons of soil per acre, particularly on steep slopes. Consequently, all of the original topsoil has been lost from 10% of the cropland and three fourths has been lost from another 60%. Growers rely upon summer fallow to increase storage of plant available water in the soil and thus minimize the risk of crop failure. Unfortunately, the intensive tillage that is associated with summer fallow creates a loose friable soil that is very susceptible to erosion by wind and water. The resulting runoff not only erodes soil, but also decreases the amount of water available for crops,
and degrades water quality and stream habitat. This soil erosion threatens the long-term productive capacity of the region to sustain societal needs for food and fiber. Clearly, resource- efficient methods are needed that provide for basic human needs, maintain ecological integrity, and promote economic viability of rural communities. Conservation tillage and intensive cropping systems promise to maintain surface residues and minimize soil erosion and runoff, and save fuel and labor costs by reducing field and equipment time. Further, precision conservation technologies are possible that will improve no-till drill performance, reduce production costs, increase yield, and add crop value. However, information is lacking on cost-benefit relationships of the conservation practices and how they may contribute to soil water holding capacity, soil aggregate stability, and soil water infiltration. Our goal is to improve the economic and biological sustainability of conservation systems for
dryland wheat production in the semiarid Pacific Northwest. To achieve this goal, we will address the following three objectives: Objective 1: Quantify soil erosion, hydrology, and crop yield of two systems, a winter wheat/fallow inversion tillage system and a no-till four-year rotation, to evaluate the systems on a landscape basis and provide databases for soil erosion model validation and decision support tool development. Objective 2: Determine the effects of quality of carbon (C) on soil aggregate stability; that in turn influences surface soil hydrology, soil erosion, and crop production. Objective 3: Improve the economic viability of conservation tillage systems by developing and evaluating new, alternative technologies for harvesting that properly sizes crop residue for optimum no-till drill performance and adds value by segregating grain by quality, and for applying cropping inputs in accordance with spatial variability in soils and landscapes to improve grain yields and
grain quality. Relevance to ARS National Program Action Plan: This research falls within National Program 207 - Integrated Agricultural Systems and contains components that contribute to national programs: Water Quality (201): Component III, 2. Excess Nutrients, and 5. Erosion and Sedimentation; Soil Resource Assessment and Management (202), Components: II. Nutrient Management, III. Soil Water, and V. Productive and Sustainable Soil Management Systems; and Global Change, (204) Component I: Carbon Cycle and Carbon Storage. The best management practices arising from this research are expected to benefit agriculture and the public in the following four ways: a. Enable farmers and policymakers to make informed land management decisions based on estimates of C gain/loss in the dryland PNW under annual crop, fallow/crop, or conservation systems. b. Speed adoption of conservation tillage practices as needed to reduce soil erosion, enhance air quality and atmospheric visibility, and improve
stream water quality. c. Increase water quality by reducing fertilizers, pesticides, and other agrochemicals entering the Umatilla and Columbia rivers. d. Increase farm profitability through improved cropping input efficiency that enhances grain quality and reduces production costs. 2. List the milestones (indicators of progress) from your Project Plan. Year 1 (FY2004) Begin cropping systems research; establish replicated plot layout and instrument paired drainages for cropping systems evaluation (Williams). Collect grain samples for kernel separation analysis and use gravity table to segregate (Siemens). Begin spatial characterization of grain yield and grain protein levels using on-combine sensing techniques (Long). Establish C source plots, collect and analyze soil samples (Wuest, Gollany, and Albrecht). Year 2 (FY2005) Begin summarizing early hydrologic, erosion, and crop production data for presentation to stakeholders through annual reports, field day presentations, tours, and
grower meetings (Long, Williams, Siemens, Gollany). Conduct grain quality studies (Siemens, Long). Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology (Siemens). Collect soil samples from georeferenced positions and perform laboratory analysis (Gollany, Williams). Assess soil physical variability by means of electromagnetic survey techniques and quantitative terrain modeling (Long). Year 3 (FY2006) Prepare journal articles comparing conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage in terms of hydrologic, agronomic, and economic performance (Williams, Gollany, Siemens, Albrecht, Long, and Wuest). Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology (Siemens). Conduct field-tests of alternative harvester (Siemens). Evaluate C sources and land management systems (Gollany). Year 4 (FY2007) Write reports and/or journal articles addressing success in eliminating impediments to adoption of a system consisting of no-tillage and intensive cropping (Williams, Wuest,
Gollany, Albrecht, Siemens, and Long) . Analyze results and prepare peer reviewed publications on one-pass system (Siemens). Present preliminary findings at field days and crop tours (Gollany). Year 5 (FY2008) Final peer reviewed manuscripts prepared and published (Williams, Siemens, Long, Gollany, Wuest, Albrecht, and collaborators). 3. Milestones: This CRIS project is in its first year. Therefore, the below listed milestones were scheduled for completion under Year 1. All milestones were completed. Begin cropping systems research; establish plot layout and instrument paired drainages (Williams). Collect grain samples for kernel separation analysis and segregate using gravity table methods (Siemens). Begin spatial characterization of grain yield and grain protein levels using on-combine sensing techniques (Long). Establish C source plots, collect and analyze soil samples (Wuest, Gollany, and Albrecht). B. List the milestones (from the list in Question #2) that you expect to address
over the next 3 years (FY 2005, 2006, 2007). What do you expect to accomplish, year by year, over the next 3 years under each milestone? The second, third, and forth year milestones are listed below with descriptions of the anticipated outcomes. Year 2 (FY2005) Begin reporting and presenting preliminary biological, hydrologic, and economic findings in station reports and oral presentations. Initial findings on conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage will be reported to local growers, commodity groups, agribusinesses, state and federal agencies, and other stakeholders. Conduct grain quality studies. We will determine if segregating grain by kernel density improves the consistency of grain quality at the farm gate. We will also establish the degree of spatial variability in protein concentration of soft white winter wheat as needed to identify the potential opportunity of using variable-rate fertilizer placement to improve consistency in uniformity of grain quality. Assemble
alternative harvester components from existing technology. By identifying, fabricating, and assembling appropriate components, we will be able to create new harvesting technology that promises to improve conservation tillage systems. Collect soil samples from georeferenced positions and perform laboratory analysis. This will allow us to examine the hypothesis that spatial variability in soil biochemical variables conforms with spatial patterns in crop and terrain attributes. Assess soil physical variability by means of electromagnetic survey techniques and quantitative terrain modeling. This technology will allow us to quantify how extreme soils are different in clay, salt, depth, and other water-related attributes, and determine whether these differences are sufficiently extensive to warrant variable-rate placement of farm chemicals. Terrain modeling will allow us to examine the hypothesis that topography, which controls pathways of water movement, determines spatial variability in
soils and crops. Year 3 (FY2006) Prepare journal articles comparing conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage in terms of hydrologic, agronomic, and economic performance. Findings will be reported the applied scientific community on the results of small-watershed scale research. Assemble alternative harvester components from existing technology and conduct field-tests of alternative harvester. We will evaluate the alternative harvesting system in terms of improvements to no-till drill performance and grain quality. Evaluate carbon sources and land management systems. We will evaluate the effect of each treatment (check, no addition; wood, lignin; cotton, cellulose; alfalfa pellets, high amino N; municipal biosolids, humics; sucrose; wheat straw; manure; composted wheat residue; perennial grass; winter brassica residue; and winter brassica crops) on soil aggregate stability and soil structure. This will provide process-based understanding of how the quality of different organic
sources affects aggregate formation and how the plant and amendments influence soil aggregate stability that in turn influence surface soil hydrology and soil erosion. Relationships will be determined among soil organic C, soil aggregate stability, and soil erosion in conventional tillage vs. conservation tillage, at the small-watershed scale. Assuming the subsequent project plan continues along its present course, we will evaluate results and prepare for next CRIS project cycle in year 4. Year 4 (FY2007) Write reports and peer-reviewed journal articles addressing success in eliminating impediments to adoption of a system consisting of no-tillage and intensive cropping. Analyze results and prepare peer reviewed publications on one-pass harvester system. Findings will be presented to the applied engineering community. Knowledge gained from the studies will be transferred to professional peers by preparing manuscripts for publication in peer reviewed journals. Present preliminary
findings at field days and crop tours. Preliminary findings will be presented at field days and grower tours regarding the effect of C quality on soil aggregate stability, and relationships between soil organic C, and soil aggregate stability or soil erosion in conventional- vs. conservation-tillage. 4. What were the most significant accomplishments this past year? A. Dryland wheat producers using conventional inversion tillage require tools to reduce soil erosion. Scientists at the Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center, in collaboration with Dr. W. Schillinger of Washington State University, simulated rainfall in central Washington to test the effectiveness of rotary subsoiling, the practice of creating pits to penetrate plow-pans, improve water infiltration, and reduce soil erosion. Rotary subsoiling significantly reduced runoff and soil erosion from frozen soils. Rotary subsoiling offers valuable soil and water saving benefits on steep slopes with fall planted winter wheat
following a year of fallow. B. No-till systems are not being widely adopted on the Columbia Plateau because producers are uncertain of no-till effectiveness and productivity. During the winters of 2003 and 2004, scientists at the Columbia Plateau Conservation Research Center effectively demonstrated the benefits of a no-till system for controlling soil erosion in a paired watershed study, while producing satisfactory crop yields. Runoff and substantial soil erosion from the conventionally tilled drainage occurred 13 times compared to 3 times from the no-tillage drainage with miniscule erosion. This information will aid in overcoming cultural inertia impeding adoption of no-tillage an effective practice on the Columbia Plateau and Columbia Basin. Producers need effective crop residue management and grain quality control to meet the demands of increasing production costs and lowered yields associated with no-till technology. Dr. M. Siemens of the Columbia Plateau Conservation Research
Center invented a one-pass harvesting system to meet these needs. The new system chops standing crop residue into 6" pieces to improve no-till drill performance, and segregates harvested grain by kernel density to improve consistency of grain quality. The ability to seed into high wheat residue levels will eliminate need for field burning thus improving air- and soil-quality, and segregating kernel density will better position the US wheat industry as a reliable, consistent supplier of high quality grain. C. Significant Accomplishments/Activities that Support Special Target Populations. None. D. Progress Report opportunity to submit additional programmatic information to your Area Office and NPS (optional for all in-house ("D") projects and the projects listed in Appendix A; mandatory for all other subordinate projects). None. 5. Describe the major accomplishments over the life of the project, including their predicted or actual impact. An improved harvesting system was designed
consisting of a stripper header to harvest the crop, and a flail mower to chop standing crop residue and prepare the residue for direct seeding in a single pass. Design work on assembling the major components was completed. Preliminary field-testing of main harvesting components was completed. Grain samples stored from the 2002 crop year from two locations have been sorted by density and size and sent to a grain quality lab for analysis of baking and milling performance. Plans to collect additional samples from various locations during the 2003 crop year have been initiated. A manuscript reporting results a hydrologic evaluation of the 70-year crop residue study was accepted and published in the Journal of Soil and Tillage Research. 6. What science and/or technologies have been transferred and to whom? When is the science and/or technology likely to become available to the end- user (industry, farmer, other scientists)? What are the constraints, if known, to the adoption and
durability of the technology products? We provided technical information through poster presentations, and talks at field days and producer meetings. State extension personnel, government agencies, and research scientists are finding this technology available in printed form and over the Internet (available online at http://pwa.ars.usda.gov/pendleton/cpcrc/index.htm; and http://eesc.orst. edu/agcomwebfile/edmat/html/SR/SR1054/SR1054.html). Ag engineer Mark Siemens traveled to Australia and Canada to demonstrate his residue management wheel that reduces drill plugging in heavy residue conditions, and to develop collaborative relationships that will result in the international adoption of his technology. Hydrologist John Williams and farmer-cooperator Bill Lorenzen hosted a tour of a paired watershed study for growers, and members of Oregon Wheat Growers League, Soil and Water Conservation District, Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Indian Reservation, and USDA-NRCS. New technological
developments are now available to the agricultural community. Currently, cultural inertia and risk aversion are barriers to adoption of conservation tillage practices. Technical information on relationships among soil carbon, crop residue, soil aggregation, and soil tilth was presented to producers and agri- consultants during the annual joint ARS-OSU field day at the Pendleton Agric. Res. Center. 7. List your most important publications in the popular press and presentations to organizations and articles written about your work. A. Newspaper and Newsletter Articles i. Siemens, M.C. 2003. Chopping pays off in heavy stubble - US results. Australian Farm Journal 13(10):50-51. 2003. ii. Siemens, M.C., Wilkins, D.E., Correa, R.F. 2003. Residue wheel improves crop establishment. Australian Farm Journal 13(5):37-38. iii. Williams, J.D. No-till dryland crop production and soil erosion. June issue of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Newsletter. B. Posters i. Gollany, H.T.,
S.B. Wuest, J.D. Williams, W.F., Schillinger, A.A. Baker, D.S. Robertson. 2004. Subsoiling Influence on Nutrients in Runoff Following Rainfall Simulation. Northwest Direct Seed Cropping Systems Conference and Trade Show. Pendleton, OR, 7-9 Jan. ii. Gollany, H.T., Wuest, S.B., Williams, J.D., Schillinger, B., Baker, A. , Robertson, D.A. 2003. Subsoiling Influence on Nutrients in Runoff Following Rainfall Simulation. CD-ROM, S06-gollany369186. Madison, WI. Agronomy Society of America. 2003. C. Presentations i. Siemens, M.C., Wilkins, D.E., Correa, R.F., Wuest, S.B. 2003. Residue management strategies for direct seeding. p. 18-26. In Proc. of Reduced Tillage LINKAGES Direct Seeding Advantage Workshop. Nisku, Alberta. 18-19 November. ii. Siemens, M.C., Corp, M.K., Correa, R.F. 2003. Effects of harvesting losses on garbanzo bean harvesting losses. Interim Report to the Oregon Department of Agriculture Specialty Crops Grant Program. Oregon State University Extension Service. Available
at http://extension.oregonstate. edu/umatilla/cereals/chickpea/DMHLGB03_GarbLoss_2003_01.pdf (Technical Report) iii. Williams, J.D., Wuest, S.B., Schillinger, W.F., Gollany, H.T., McCool, D.K. 2003. Rotary subsoiling effectiveness on runoff and erosion in dryland wheat, Washington. In Proceedings of the 2003 American Water Resources annual meeting, San Diego, CA, Nov. 3-6.
Impacts
(N/A)
Publications
- SIEMENS, M.C., WILKINS, D.E., CORREA, R.F. 2004. DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF A RESIDUE MANAGEMENT WHEEL FOR HOE-TYPE NO-TILL DRILLS. TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERS, 47(2):397- 404.
- SIEMENS, M.C., WILKINS, D.E., CORREA, R.F. RESIDUE MANAGEMENT WHEEL FOR HOE-TYPE NO-TILL DRILLS. ASAE PAPER NO. PNW-03-103. 6 PP. ST. JOSEPH, MICH. : ASAE. 2004.
- WILLIAMS, J.D. EFFECTS OF LONG-TERM WINTER WHEAT, SUMMER FALLOW RESIDUE AND NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT ON FIELD HYDROLOGY IN SILT LOAM, NORTH-CENTRAL OREGON, U.S.A. SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH. 75 (2004) 109-119.
|
|