Foliar phosphate recommendations - The Combine Forum

 4Likes
  • 3 Post By torriem
  • 1 Post By joesixpack
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 08:47 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: NW of Don about an hr - by car. West Central Alberta.
Posts: 237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Foliar phosphate recommendations

Used a planter this yr on canola and appear to have got down 2.5 imp gallons of an Alpine G22 product/a down with seed(6-22-2 analysis). Have never used a planter and/or liquid phos product. Have enough N/K/S product on to grow a 50b+ crop and has a very good start, but do wonder from some of comments on like threads where P going to come from to make this sort of yield. This is all rr stuff and am prepared to go with foliar. Guess question is which one, how much, and when.

brazil08 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 09:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: S. AB
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 427 Post(s)
In my area we put down about 40 # P/ac for a 60-70 bu/ac crop. 2.5 imperial gallons of alpine, if I'm not mistaken, works out to 7 #/ac actual phos. How much phos do you want to put down in total? You are planning to spray it on with a sprayer? Spraying it on probably limits you to just a few #/ac at a time, but I don't know as I've never done that before.

torriem is online now  
post #3 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 10:14 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: NW of Don about an hr - by car. West Central Alberta.
Posts: 237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
Normally would put down 40lb actual P/a, but that not an option going the liquid planter route - at least this one. I may be wrong, but think there liquid P concoctions that are raising bigger yields than what actual P going down would suggest. Just looking for most efficient way of getting this on.
brazil08 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 11:23 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: S. AB
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 427 Post(s)
I personally don't buy the claim that Alpine or something similar can provide all the phos needs of a crop at low rates over time. You might get away with it in the short term though. Phos is phos over the long term.

Sounds like Alpine or 10-34 would be your choices for topping it off. Liquid micro products don't contain enough phos in my opinion. Would be interesting to compare Alpine to 10-34 at the same rates of actual phos. In terms of actual phos, Alpine is about 2.3#/US gallon, and 10-34 is about 4#/US gallon.
SouthernSK, BrianTee and bradw2 like this.
torriem is online now  
post #5 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-18-2017, 11:39 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ittoqqortoormiit, Greenland
Posts: 2,048
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
X2. When you look at the phosphate removal of a 50-60 bushel canola crop the alpine/foliar looks like a dead end road.

Any of the big crop liquid guys I know are running $$$10-34.$$$$$

I'd sure like to hear about how it works out though leave a check!
bradw2 likes this.
joesixpack is offline  
post #6 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-19-2017, 12:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Central MN
Posts: 1,056
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
From the rate you mentioned I would guess the liquid was applied in furrow?


The plant still needs its P to come from somewhere. Liquid fertilizer in furrow or slightly to the side (like 2X2 placement) is accessed by the plant quicker and easier but for the most part is only intended to get the plants off to a good start. Depending on conditions may not need as much, due to some of the P not getting tied up by something else since it is in a band close to the root system, but no way could you cut the rate used by a large amount and have it work out long term.


You may see your biggest yield results from broadcasting a little lower amount of P with the other fertilizers and putting on the remainder with the planter, but some years the economics won't be favorable for that route either. The response will also depend on the P levels in your soils, if they are low then the liquid should have a high response %, otherwise if they are on the high end might not need a lot and the liquid starter might not do a whole lot. I put down 5 gal. of 10-34-0 per acre using a 2X2 fertilizer opener on the planter for corn, and the remainder was broadcast. (One highly variable field had P applied variable rate, ranged from 0 to 40+ units per acre of P, but put the liquid on every acre. Time will tell when/if I see much response.)
MNfarmer85 is offline  
post #7 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-19-2017, 12:38 AM
Senior Member
 
lanwickum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: North Central Montana
Posts: 1,239
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 173 Post(s)
I have been thinking of this same thing for some winter wheat. Put down 27lb with 11-52 last fall. Calling for at least another 11lbs. Plan for tomorrow is to put down 11-37-0 mixed with UAN 28% and adding a little humic acid. All being streamed on. 60 units of N with the UAN. I have my doubts but trying it out this year on 100 acres. Starting to have problems getting enough fert down safely.

I am wondering if it would be better to put the 2.5gal of 11-37-0 down with herbicide that we need to spray on latter? Fan it on instead of stream it on?
lanwickum is offline  
post #8 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-19-2017, 10:23 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: NW of Don about an hr - by car. West Central Alberta.
Posts: 237
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 47 Post(s)
This product all went down in-furrow. Weather permitting there should be some very interesting tests on this. I wish one of them would have been putting some cheap 11-52 down with other fert last Fall. Do have strip where banded heavy amount of p about 2 wks prior to seeding. Will be doing tissue samples(maybe in time for first rr app, but for sure in time of 2nd app) just to see what that says. Have done bit of fooling around with soil conductivity over past 3yrs and effect of different fertilizer protocol and would say that so far getting best readings by far on this canola ground post planting, however seem to be getting better, but not quite as high a results on other crop ground here this Spring as well. To be clear, I put down a lot of fertilizer every year and part of frustration/learning is that soil samples inevitably show the same thing pretty much at same time late each Fall(negligible nutrients available) - even Spring samples - even though the crop results can vary by quite a bit. Would say that variation in crop results is pretty much entirely due to environmental/equipment operator conditions, not fertility. I am sure I am only one, but have had airseeder "tests" where phos did not go down with seed and these certainly stand out - even if you go in with granular after so the start that the seed gets is very important. As with all of my tests they have to pass the financial sniff test and so far planter/liquid used is significantly cheaper than how would have seeded canola in the past(assuming you put value on seed saved the same as what paid and cost of ) so have some extra money to play with, especially since thinking fungicide will not be part of budget this yr either. I have no scientific proof, but want to believe that with such short growing season we have in this country that there is that one short point in every yr where you can almost see stuff growing and if you could feed/keep plant healthy at this time a person may not need as much "actual" nutrient as what some believe. Effectiveness of Power-rich on some crop here over past few years sort of goes along with this. Part of complication in this part of country is that there very little liquid used so choices are limited - IE not spending money to create storage facility yet. The Alpine is the closest/simplest so that is what have used so far. At the end of the day whether it fertilizer or any other input like to see financial return so will see how this ends up.
brazil08 is offline  
post #9 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-19-2017, 02:42 PM
Senior Member
 
BrianTee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Vermilion Alberta Canada
Posts: 2,487
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 972 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by brazil08 View Post
Normally would put down 40lb actual P/a, but that not an option going the liquid planter route - at least this one. I may be wrong, but think there liquid P concoctions that are raising bigger yields than what actual P going down would suggest. Just looking for most efficient way of getting this on.
When something sounds to good to be true, its......

Forget the specifics but only a couple percent can be absorbed foliar. P is also immobile and will be tied up in the surface.
BrianTee is offline  
post #10 of 10 (permalink) Old 05-20-2017, 03:18 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Gull Lake Sk
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
you might not see much negative effect from the reduced phos rate this year but you will over time. the good news about G22 is it is also used as a foliar product and at a liter or 2 an ac is cheap like borsht if bought in bulk for seeding. if its RR canola id mix some in at spraying to help keep it going. in for a penny in for a pound. double check about mixing with liberty though. that stuff isn't always compatible with additives and I haven't seen it done personally

bradw2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the The Combine Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome