• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Historic note
 Main






Group Title: Agronomy research report - University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences ; AY-87-07
Title: Rye and soybean response to potassium and nitrogen fertilization in a no-tillage double-cropping system
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00056068/00001
 Material Information
Title: Rye and soybean response to potassium and nitrogen fertilization in a no-tillage double-cropping system
Physical Description: 14 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Ortiz Vega, Ruben Alberto, 1958-
Gallaher, Raymond N.
University of Florida -- Agronomy Dept
Publisher: Department of Agronomy, IFAS, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 1987
 Subjects
Subject: Soybean -- Fertilizers -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Rye -- Fertilizers -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Double cropping -- Florida   ( lcsh )
No-tillage -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: Ruben A. Ortiz and R.N. Gallaher.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (leaves 6-8).
General Note: Agronomy research report - University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences ; AY-87-07
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00056068
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 62523316

Table of Contents
    Historic note
        Historic note
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida







'Agronomy Research Report AY-87-07

Rye and Soybean Response to Potassium and Nitrogen
Fertilization in a No-Tillage Double-Cropping System

Ruben A. Ortiz, Univ. de Costa Rica (now Graduate Student Univ.
of Florida, Gainesville) and R.N. Gallaher Professor of Agronomy,
Agronomy Department, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences,
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, 32611.

.ABSTRACT

There are no research babed fertilizer recommendations for
double-cropping (DC) small grain and soybean (Glycine max L.
Merr.) in Florida. This research was conducted to evaluate the K
and N fertilizer application response in a 10-yr-old no-tillage
rye (Secale cereale L.)/soybean DC system. The experiment was
conducted in a Grossarenic Paleudult near Gainesvlle. Rates of N
(whole plots) were 0, 39, 78, 117, and 156 kg ha and rates of K
(split plots) were 0, 45, 90, 135, and 180 kg ha Fertilizers N
and K were applied only to the rye crop. Monocrop rye and soybean
N, P, and K fertilizer extension recommendations were also tested
in this experiment. Fertilizer had a positive effect on rye
grain, dry_ atter, percent ground cover, head weight, percent
grain head and head area index (HAI), and soybean grain in
this no-tillage DC system. The application of P fertilizer was
not necessary to obtain greater net dollar returns of rye whole
plant dry matter, rye grain, soybean seed or the combination of
rye and soybean yields as a DC system. It was not necessary to
apply fertilizer to the soybean crop when fertilizer was applied
to the previous rye crop in this rye/soybean DC system. No-
tillage DC systems-require a different fertilizer management as
compared to ith1ci4cQoocrop system of either rye or soybean.
Library
INTRODUCTION

A var rer tyo practices such as: soybean followed by rye
grain (Westberry pd.Gallaher, 1979), wheat (Triticum aestivum
L.) after .soyb'ebn'Ior-ormant summer perennial grasses (Wright,
1984), -gain-so-r-ghum- (Sorghum bicolor L.) after potatoes (Solanum
tuberosum L.) (Mateo and Gallaher, 1979) and many others
suggested by Gallaher et al. (1980) can be practiced in the year-
round warm climate of Florida. Conversely the soil fertility
management of DC systems is important. Hargrove et al. (1983)
indicated that wheat growth, N status, and grain yield are
influenced by the previous crop and are important to the
management of DC systems. Gallaher (1977) mentioned that "in
general DC systems were fertilized with less N and about equal
and slightly more P205 and K20 than the sum of what would be
recommended for the winter and summer crops if grown separately
as monocrops".

Nitrogen and K are two of the most important nutrients in
crop nutrition. Nitrogen concentration in the soil surface is







usually higher under no-tillage than under conventional-tillage
(Dick, 1983; Juo and Lal, 1979, Ferrer, Gallaher, and Volk, 1984;
Ortiz and Gallaher, 1984). Blevins et al. (1977) showed that soil
N was higher under no-tillage and increased with increased rates
of N fertilizer applied.

Triplett and Van Doren (1969), and Ferrer (1984), found that
soil K levels in the first 5.0 cm were greater for no-tillage as
compared to conventional-tillage. In contrast Hargrove et al.,
(1982) and Ortiz (1985) showed lower K concentrations in no-
tillage as compared to conventional-tillage under different
cropping-systems.

Fraiser (1983) investigated the effects of N-and K on
yields, net profits, crop growth, and the effects of N on soil pH
in two maize (Zea mays L.)/soybean no-tillage DC
systems in Florida. Maize crop growth rate (CGR) in both systems
increased linearly with K and quadraticaly with N. Also in
Florida, Post (1983) studied the the nutrient effects associated
with tillage in a no-tillage rye/soybean succession. The results
of this experiment indicated that the rye/soybean DC
system tended to maintain nutrients within the 0-30 cm soil
layer. However, a decline of total N and extractable K was
observed. The author pointed out that in general, this double-
cropping system efficiently recycles nutrients from crop to soil,
but long-term yield declines in soybean could be associated with
insufficient replenishment of K.

It has been suggested that fertilizer applied to one crop
may leave or contribute residual nutrients for a succeding crop
thus reducing input cost to the total multiple-cropping system-"
(Gallaher, 1977). Because Florida grows thousands of ha of
rye and in many cases doubled cropped with soybean the
purpose of this work was to experiment with this system in order
to learn more precisely the critical fertilizer program and plant
nutrient levels under no-tillage conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted on the Agronomy Green Acres
Research Farm west of Gainesville, Fl. This area was DC with
rye/soybean using no-tillage management for both crops during the
previous 9 yr. The plots had received no fertilizer af any kind
for the past 6 yr before this experiment was started. Nitrogen
deficiency symptoms were evident in the rye crop each year and K
deficiency symptoms were observed to varying degrees in soybean.

Beginning in November 1985 the soybean crop was chopped with
a forage chopper and the entire above ground plant was removed
from the area. A split plot experimental design was utilized with
subplots being 3.0 m by 4.0 m in size. Whole1plots consisted of
five N rates (0, 39, 78, 117, and 156 kg ha ) in a randbmized
complete block design with four replications. Within each whole
plot five split-plots of K fertilizer (0, 45, 90, 135, and
180 kg ha ) were randomized. These treatments included the









current extensi n recommendation for small grain (78 kg N ha-
and 90 kg K ha ), and soybean (90 kg K ha ), according to the
IFAS Extension Soil Testing Laboratory.

Ammonium nitrate and muriate of potash were used as sources
of N and K, respectively. All K fertilizer applications were made
at rye planting time. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied 1/3 at
planting and 2/3 at the end of February.

'Wrens Abruzzi' rye was seeded at the rate of 100 kg seed
-1
ha on November 20, 1985 and.'Centennial' soybean in mid June,
1986 in 25 cm wide rows using;a no-tillage "Tye" drill. Soybean
were seeded at the rate of 24 seed m of row. A 0.5 m by 3.0 m (1.5
m ) section from the center of each plot was used to evaluate
grain yield, dry matter, and percent gr und cover of rye, and
yield of soybean. A 1 m by 0.2 m (0.5 m ) section was also used
to evaluate grain yield, head weight, percent grain head and
head area index (HAI) of the rye crop.

A second experiment was also pursued by comparing the
following treatments: 1. 90 (N) 78 (K) 9 (P) (extension
recommendation of K and N for the corresponding crop minus P
fertilizer), 2. 90 (N) 78 (k) 0 (P) (extension recommendation
of N and K which includes P), and 3. The best value obtained for
each treatment found from the split-plot analysis for each
corresponding variable measured An additional treatment
including the fertilizer rye and soybean monocrops extension
recommendations was tested for the soybean crop yield. The P
fertilizer rate was 9 kg ha The statistical design was a
randomized complete block design with four replications.

Testing of differences among treatments was made by using
the LSD (Steel and Torrie, 1980). An economical analyses of the
data from the second experiment was conducted according to the
current fertilizer and crop prices (Dr. R.N. Gallaher, personal
communications).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Experiment # 1

Rye whole plant dry master showed a response to the
application of 45 kg K ha when averaged over all N rates (LSD,
P. _.05). Highest dry matter yield was obtained when 117 kg N
ha were applied (LSD, P. 0.05) (table 1). Yields of rye grain
(averaged over all K rates) increased linearly up to the rate of
117 kg N ha (1012 kg seed ha ) and t en decreased at the
highest N fertilizer rate (156 kg N ha ). This indicated a rye
grain yield response to 117 kg N ha (LSD, P. 0.05) (table 2).
Little response to K fertilization was observed for the rye grain
yield (1.5 m harvested area). It appears that there was an
observed slight increase in rye grain yield response to K
fertilizer from lower to higher rates of K fertilizer applied
(table 2).









-1 Percent rye ground cover responded to the rate of 39 kg N
ha (LSD, P. 0.05). It seems that there was also a response to K
fertilizer application at the 135 kg K ha fertilizer rate
(table 3).
2
There was a positive response in rye head weight (0.5 m
harvested area) to both K and N fertilizer applications at the 90
and 117 kg ha of K and N fertilizer rates, respectively (LSD,
P. 0.05) (table 4).
2
Rye grain yield (0.5 m harvested area) showed a response to
both K and N fertilizer when applied at the 90 and 117 kg ha of
K and N respectively (LSD, P. 0.05) (table 5)1 Simila results
were observed for the percent rye grain head (0.5 m harvested
area) (LSD, P. _.05) (table 6). Total grand mean for the percent
rye grain head was 33.36 which indicated that rye heads reached
only about a third of their total potential grain filling
capacity. This could be explained by the early increase in
temperatures and the subsequent freezes that occur during the
spring under the Florida subtropical climate. Thus, even though
the rye heads were fully developed, the rye grain filling process
was disrupted by the low temperatures.

SRye head area in ex responded to the application of 90 kg K
ha and 117 kg N ha (LSD, P. 0.05) (table 7). This variable
showed a similar response to that found for rye head weight
(table 4)1 Soybean yield showed a response to residual K at the
45 kg ha rate when averaged over all residual N rates (LSD, P.
0.05) (table 8).

Experiment 2

No differences between treatments were found for rye whole 2
plant dry matter (1,5 m harvested area), rye grain yield (1.5 m
harvested area), rye ground cover, HII, rye head weight, rye
grain yield, and percent grain head" (0.5 m harvested area). No
differences between treatments were found for soybean yield (LSD
P. 0.05) (tables 9 and 11). The application of 45 kg K ha to
the rye crop was sufficient for the soybean crop to produce equal
yields as compared to the other treatments which included N
and/or P and K.

Rye whole plant dry matter results showed that it was not
necessary to apply P fertilizer in order to obtain greater
yields (table 9). The application of 45 kg K ha and 117 kg N
ha showed the highest yield value for growing rye whole plant
dry matter as a monocrop. This fertilizer treatment can be used
for rye whole plant dry matter DC with soybean as compared to the
extension treatments where P (90-09-78) was included in the
fertilizer application (90-9-78) to the rye crop and K .(00-0-90)
was applied to the soybean crop. The rate of 45 kg K ha applied
only to the rye crop showed a lower rye whole plant dry matter as
compared to the other treatments (table 9). This treatment could






be used when rye is grown as a winter cover crop for soil
conservation purposes and is followed by soybean as a DC system.
Potassium fertilizer applied to the rye crop was utilized by the
soybean crop in this DC system.
Rye goss rturn-1
Rye gross return was lower when only 45 kg K ha- were
applied to the rye crop as compared to the other treatments
(table 10). The application of 45 kg K ha and 117 kg N ha
showed the highest net dollar return for monocropping of rye
whole plant dry matter. Phosphorus fertilizer was not necessary
to obtain greater yields. Also, this treatment was not different
than the extension treatments including P for the rye whole
plant dry matter followed by soybean DC system. Thus, P
fertilizer was not needed to obtain greater net returns of rye
whole plant dry matter as a monocrop or as DC system with soybean
(table 10).

Rye grain yield was lower for the treatment which included
only the application of 45 kg K ha as compared to the
other treatments (table 11). No differences were found among the
other treatments. The extension recommendation including P (78-9-
90) fertilizer applied to the rye crop was not needed in order t
obtain greater rye grain yields. The application of 117 kg N ha
to the rye crop seemed to enhance the uptake of P and K which
could be used directly from the soil by the rye crop and
throughout the rye residue decomposition and and soil return by
the soybean in this DC system. These results reinforced Post
(1983) statement which indicated that in general, DC of rye
followed by soybean efficiently recycles nutrients from crop to
soil. Lower yield was obtainlfor the combined rye/soybean DC
system when only 45 kg K ha were applied to the rye crop as
compared to the other treatments (table 11).

Lower gross dollar return were obtained for the monocrop of
rye when only 45 kg K ha were applied to the rye crop as
compared to the other treatments (table 12). Similar results were
found for the net dollar return of the monocrop of rye.

-1 The treatment which included only the application of 45 kg K
ha showed a lower gross dollar return as compared to the other
treatments for the rye/soybean DC system (table 12). However, no
differences among other treatments were found in the net dollar
return for this DC rye/soybean system.

CONCLUSIONS

Rye grain yield (1.5 m2 harvested area) did not respond to K
application but showed a positive response to the application of
117 kg N ha (1.5 m harvested area). Rye dry matter responded
to the 90 and 117 kg ha of K and N, respectively. Similar
response was observed for the head weight and HAI variables. Head
Area Index could be used as a valuable variable for predicting
rye yield.








Rye grain yield (0.5 m2 harvested area) and percent grain -
head showed a response to the application of 90 and 117 kg ha
of K and N, respectively. The total gland mean value of 33.36
found for the percent rye grain head indicated that rye heads
reached only about a third of their total potential filling
capacity. This could be due to the effect of the warm Florida
climate which showed an increase in temperature early during the
spring season followed by late freezing during the same season.
Late freezing arrival could delay or stop the grain filling of
rye1 Rye ground cover responded to the application of 45 kg K
ha and 39 kg N ha .

Soybean yield showed a response to residual K at the rate of
45 kg ha Thus, if K fertilizer is applied to the rye crop at a
rate of 45 kg K ha there is no need to apply K fertilizer to
the soybean crop in this DC system under these experimental
conditions. These results agreed to what had been suggested by
Gallaher (1977) who indicated that fertilizer applied to one crop
may leave or contribute residual nutrients for a succeding crop
reducing input cost to the total multiple-cropping system.

Results from experiment two showed that the application of
P fertilizer was not necessary to obtain greater yields or net
dollar returns for the rye and soybean as monocrops and in a DC
system. It was not necessary to apply fertilizer to the soybean
crop when fertilizer had been applied to the previous rye crop.
Fertilizer had a positive but different effect on both rye and
soybean crops in this no-tillage DC system. These data showed
that this no-tillage DC system requires different fertilizer
management as compared to the monocrop system of either rye or -
soybean.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to express their appreciation to Mr. D.
Block for his assistance with the statistical analysis and S.
Taylor for help in the field.

LITERATURE CITED

Blevins, R.L., G.W. Thomas, and P.L. Cornelius. 1977. Influence
of no-tillage and nitrogen fertilization on certain properties
after 5 years of continuous corn. Agron. J. 69:383-386.

Dick, W.A. 1983. Organic carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus
concentration in soil profiles as affected by tillage intensity.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 47:102-107.

Ferrer, M.B. 1984. Chemical and physical properties of an Alfisol
after six years of continuous corn (Zea mays L.) as affected by
conventional and no-tillage management. MSc. Thesis. Univ. of
Florida, Gainesville, FL.









Ferrer, M.B., R.N. Gallaher, and B.G. Volk. 1984. Soil
nitrogen and organic matter changes as affected by tillage after
six years of corn. p. 189-192. In J.T. Touchton and R.E.
Stevenson (ed.) Proc. of the seventh annual southeastern no-
tillage system conf., Ala, Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn University,
Auburn, Al.

Fraiser, D.M. 1983. Effects of N applied to two maize/soybean
no-tillage cropping systems on yields, profitability, growth, and
soil acidity, MSc. Thesis. University of Florida., Gainesville.
Gallaher, R.N. 1977. Soil Fertility management of double-
cropping systems. Department of Agronomy, Ga. Exp. Stn., Research
Report 248, Experiment Georgia.

Gallaher, R.N. 1977. Soil Fertility management of double-cropping
systems. Department of Agronomy, Ga. Exp. Stn., Research Report
248, Experiment Georgia.

Gallaher, R.N., D.H. Teem, W.L. Currey, and B.J. Brecke. 1980.
Tentative production management guidelines for no-tillage
systems. Circular 480. IFAS. University of Florida, Gainesville,
Fl.

Hargrove, W.L., J.T. Reid, J.T. Touchton, and R.N. Gallaher.
1982. Influence of tillage practices on the soil fertility status
of an acid soil double cropped to wheat and soybean. Agron. J.
74:684-687.

Hargrove, W.L., J.T. Touchton, and J.W. Johnson. 1983. Previous
crop influence on fertilizer nitrogen requirements for doubled-
cropped wheat. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 75:855-
859.

Juo, A.S.R. and R. Lal. 1979. Nutrient profile in a tropical
Alfisol under conventional and no-tillage systems. Soil Sci.
127:169-173.

Mateo, N., R.N. Gallaher, and D.H. Hensel.1979. Bedding and
fertility management of grain sorghum double cropped after
potatoes. Multicropping/minimum-tillage Facts. MMT 11. IFAS.
University of Florida, Gainesville, Fl.

Ortiz, R.A., and R.N. Gallaher. 1984. Organic matter and
nitrogen in an Ultisol as affected by tillage system after seven
years. p. 193-196. J.T. Touchton and R.E. Stevenson (ed.) Proc.
of the seventh annual southeastern no-tillage systems conf., Ala.
Agric. Exp. Stn., Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

Ortiz, R.A. 1985. Soil Chemical and physical properties
affected by long-term oat/soybean versus oat/grain sorghum
double-cropping and tillage systems. MSc. Thesis, University of
Florida, Gainesville, FL.







Post, J.T. 1983. Nutrients effects associated with tillage in
a former no-till rye/soybean succession. MSc. Thesis, University
of Florida, Gainesville, FL.

Steel, G.D., and J.H. Torrie. 1980. Principles and procedures
of statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Company. NY.

Triplett, G.B. Jr. and D.M. Van Doren, Jr. 1969. Nitrogen,
phosphorus, and potassium fertilization of non-tillage maize.
Agron. J. 61:637-639.

Westberry, G.O., and R.N. Gallaher. 1979. Soybean following
rye grain: influence of mulch and tillage. Multicropping Minimum-
tillage Facts. MMT 8. IFAS, University of Florida, Gainesville,
FL.

Wright, D.L. 1984. No-till wheat in residue, p. 150-153. In
J.T. Touchton and R.E. Stevenson (ed.) Proc. of the seventh
annual southeastern no-tillage systems conf., Ala. Agric. Exp.
Stn., Auburn Univ., Auburn, AL.









Table 1. Rye whole plant dry matter affected by N and K
fertilization (harvested plot area 1.5 m ).


N (kg ha-')

0 39 78 117 156 Average

K
kg ha----------------------kg a------------------
kg ha kg -ha-
0 1800 2600 4100 4300 4100 3400 B
45 1900 3200 4200 5300 4800 3900 A
90 1800 2600 4200 5600 5100 3900 A
135 1900 3600 4500 5200 6000 4200 A
180 1900 3400 4500 5500 5500 4100 A

Average 1800 Z 3100 Y 4300 X 5200 W 5100 W

LSD (N means) = 748.30 LSD (K means) = 434.20

Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD.


Table 2. Rye grain yield affected by N and K fertilization
(harvested plot area 1.5 m 15 % moisture).


N (kg ha-)

0 .39 78 117 156 Average


------------------
436 531 660
356 467 728
358 407 774
344 556 774
473 479 907


-1
kg ha-----------------
931 839 697
981 764 659
1116 1058 743
1034 1008 743
1000 963 764


Average 393 Y 488 Y 769 X 1012 W 926 WX


LSD (N means) = 217.34


LSD (K means) = 108.51


K
-1
kg ha-
0
45
90
135
180


Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD.









Table 3. Rye ground cover affected by N and K fertilization.
(0.5 m measured area).


N (kg ha-1)

0 39 78 1L7 156 Average

K
-1
K ~~-----------------'-----------
kg ha ------------()----------------
0 38 61 75 75 82 66 B
45 49 70 69 84 79 70 'AB
90 50 68 72 81 82 71 AB
135 46 76 83 83 85 74 A
180 51 59 78 90 84 72 A

Average 47 X 67 W 75 W 83 W 82 W

LSD (N means) = 16.68 LSD(K means) = 5.84


Treatment means within rows or columns followed by
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05
probability according to LSD.


the same
level of


Table 4. Rye head weight affected by N and K fertilization
(harvested area 0.5 m ).


N (kg ha-1)

0 39 78 117 156 Average

K -1 -1
kg ha -------------(kg ha ------------------
0 480 640 700 880 960 780 B
45 660 640 700 1120 900 800' AB
90 600 620 960 1200 1100 900 A
135 680- 780 900 1200 900 880 A
180 620 700 900 1260 1000 900 A

Average 600 Z 680 YZ 840 XY 1120 W 980 WX

LSD (N means) = 213.40 LSD (K means)= 130.40

Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD.











Table 5. Rye grain yield affected by N and K fertilization
(harvested area 0.5 m ).


N (kg ha-1

0 39 78 117 156 Average

K
-1 -
kg ha-----------------kg ha-------------
0 228 483 548 840 569 534 B
45 463 317 399 976 715 574 AB
90 418 479 837 1003 1006 745 A
135 496 632 611 1122 808 648 AB
180 414 540 767 1134 815 737 AB

Average 404 Y 490 Y 632 XY 1015 W 781 WX

LSD (N means) = 301.12 LSD (K means) = 171.68

Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD test.


Table 6. Percent rye grain per head2affected by N and K
fertilization (harvested area 0.5 m ).


N (kg ha1)

0 39 78 117 156 Average

-1
K -----------------------------
kg ha ---- ----------------(%).
0 34 29 33 39 42 35 A
45 28 21 24 37 34 29 B
90 26 33 37 40 39 35 A
135 32 31 29 40 38 34 AB
180 28 31 35 40 35 34 AB
Average 30 XY 29 Y 32 WXY 39 W 38 WX

LSD (N means) = 8.37 LSD (K means) = 5.92

Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD.







Table 2. Rye head area index affected by N and K fertilization.
(0.5 m harvested area).


N (kg ha-1

0 39 78 117 156 Average

K -1 -2 -2
kg ha -------- (cm m )-----------------
0 99 152 184 238 307 196 B
45 151 173 236 368 281 .242 AB
90 135 163 294 374 379 269 A
135 165 202 319 347 267 260 A
180 139 206 279 368 343 26 A

Average 138 Y 179 XY 263 WX 339 W 316 W

LSD (N means) = 90.87 LSD (K means) = 57.89

Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD.


Table 8. Soybean grain yield affected by N and K fertilization
(harvested plot area 1.5 m 15 % moisture).


N (kg ha-1)

0 39 78 117 156 Average

K------------------
kg ha-----------------kg ha -------------------
0 2241 1706 1600 1942 1549 1808 B
45 2153 2538 2017 2203 2530 2288 A
90 2300 2029 2381 2359 2113 2236 A
135 2336. 1793 2306 2873 2375 2337 A
180 2033 2818 2092 2388 2381 2342 A

Average 2213 W 2177 W 2079 W 2353 W 2190 W

LSD (N means) = 465.90 LSD (K means) = 399.40

Treatment means within rows or columns followed by the same
letter are not significantly different at the 0.05 level of
probability according to LSD test.








TABLE 9. RYE WHOLE PLANT DRY MATTER AND SOYBEAN YIELD
AFFECTED BY EXPERIMENTAL AND EXTENSION FERTILIZER COMBINATIONS.

FERTILIZER

RATE CROP MONOCROPPING DOUBLE-CROPPING
APPLIED
N-P-K TO COST RYE SOYBEAN RYE/SOYBEAN

-1 -1
----kg ha--- -$- -------- kg ha-------
078-9-90 RYE 93 '4998 a 2597 7594 a
078-0-90 RYE 81 4204 a 2380 6585 a
117-0-45 ** RYE 87 5320 a 2200 7472 a

078-9-90 + RYE 93 5231 a
000-0-90 SOYBEAN 34 -- 2451
127 7683 a

000-0-45 *** RYE 17 1862 b 1942 4062 b

LSD = 1361 NS 1361

* EXTENSION RECOMMENDATION ** BEST TREATMENT RYE GRAIN
*** BEST TREATMENT SOYBEAN YIELD


TABLE 10. ECONOMICS OF RYE WHOLE PLANT DRY MATTER AND SOYBEAN -
YIELD IN RELATION TO EXPERIMENTAL AND EXTENSION FERTILIZER
COMBINATIONS.

RETURN

FERTILIZER MONOCROPPING DOUBLE-CROPPING

RATE CROP RYE SOYBEAN RYE/SOYBEAN
APPLIED
N-P-K TO COST GROSS NET GROSS NET GROSS NET


---kg ha -- --------------- ($)---------
078-9-90 RYE 93 525 a 432 ab 520 520 1044 951 a
078-0-90 RYE 81 442 a 361 b 476 476 918 837 a
117-0-45 ** RYE 87 559 a 472 a 440 440 989 912 a

078-9-90 + RYE 93 549 a 456 ab --
000-0-90 SOYBEAN 34 -- 340 306
127 1039 901 a

000-0-45 *** RYE 17 196 b 179 c 431 431 637 610 b

LSD = 1360 101 NS NS 1360 195

* EXTENSION RECOMMENDATION, ** BEST TREATMENT RYE WHOLE PLANT DRY
MATTER, *** BEST TREATMENT SOYBEAN YIELD








TABLE 11. RYE GRAIN AND SOYBEAN YIELD AFFECTED BY EXPERIMENTAL
AND EXTENSION FERTILIZER COMBINATIONS.

FERTILIZER

RATE CROP MONOCROPPING DOUBLE-CROPPING
APPLIED
N-P-K TO COST ,RYE SOYBEAN RYE/SOYBEAN


---kg ha1--- -$- --------kg ha-1
078-9-90 RYE 93 862 a 2597 3458 a
078-0-90 RYE 81 766 a 2381 '3147 ab
117-0-00 ** RYE 70 931 a 1942 2873 ab

078-9-90 + RYE 93 948 a
000-0-90 SOYBEAN 34 -- 2456
127 3400 a

000-0-45 *** RYE 17 356 b 1942 2556 b

LSD = 284 NS 830

* EXTENSION RECOMMENDATION ** BEST TREATMENT RYE GRAIN
*** BEST TREATMENT SOYBEAN YIELD


12. ECONOMICS OF RYE GRAIN AND SOYBEAN YIELD IN RELATION
TO EXPERIMENTAL AND EXTENSION FERTILIZER COMBINATIONS.

RETURN
FERTILIZER MONOCROPPING DOUBLE-CROPPING

RATE CROP RYE SOYBEAN RYE/SOYBEAN
APPLIED
N-P-K TO COST GROSS NET GROSS NET GROSS NET

-1
--kg ha ------(--------------- )--
078-9-90 RYE 93 267 a 174 ab 520 520 786 a 694
078-0-90 RYE 81 237 a 154 ab 476 476 714 ab 631
117-0-00 ** RYE 70 289 a 219 a 389 389 677 ab 607

078-9-90 + RYE 93 294 a 201 a
000-0-90 SOYBEAN 34 -- 490 456
127 784 a 657

000-0-45 *** RYE 17 110 b 93 b 431 431 553 b 533

LSD = 284 88 NS NS 830 NS

* EXTENSION RECOMMENDATION ** BEST TREATMENT RYE GRAIN
*** BEST TREATMENT SOYBEAN YIELD




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs