The Combine Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Liquid or dry phos with the seed? We are considering changing drills and can go either way - liquid phos with the seed and dry N/S banded or dry phos with the seed and liquid N/S. The tip will likely be a BTT paired row on 10" spacing. Soils are high Ph of 8.0 to 8.7 and soil samples show moderate to low levels of phos. Thoughts? I cannot find any discussion on differences between liquid or dry phos with the seed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
268 Posts
guys are always splittin hairs with this stuff, to me comes down purely to logistics. nice part about dry is easy on farm storage which helps make pricing decisions. not that you cannot store on farm with liquid but definitely more difficult. dont think in the end agronomically you'll gain from one or the other, although someone will dispute that. my vote is for dry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,500 Posts
Why does one of the fert blends have to be liquid at all? I'd vote dry for both, but as mentioned, I think logistics is the biggest factor - transporting, storing (prebuy, leftover, etc).

If you are definite with one being liquid, I'd vote for the phos. If you spec your liquid system properly, you'll have a steady stream of phos in the furrow instead of granules spread apart. That "should" equate to better availability. However, you will get more N in the row with 10-34 than with 11-52. (Assuming you are targeting the same lb/ac of P of course.)

Andrew
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
543 Posts
My vote is Liquid N, and then do dry P + K, and S whatever works. Again, it comes down to logistics tho and filling efficiencies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Andrew, Good question on why has to be liquid. Reason being is logistics. We currently stream liquid with the sprayer so we have a set up currently in place. We can also store both liquid and dry. Being split between both allows us some flexibility if prices of one gets a bit out of hand...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Liquid P is many times more efficient for utilization for the plant. The biggest P use time is the first 8 weeks or so of the plants life, root development being the most important aspect. If you have to wait for the dry P to dissolve, then break down and convert to usable form in the soil, depending on the year you could be shorting the P availability for the plant. The other huge benefit is compatibility and mixing with other products, take Zinc for example. Now by mixing the two liquid products you form a homogeneous solution with an even distribution of Zinc throughout the fertilizer band, as opposed to separate granuals of zinc distributed randomly in that band.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,228 Posts
Liquid P is many times more efficient for utilization for the plant.
That is absolutely wrong and I have trials to prove it!

mtremraf dry will be your cheapest option, by far over some of the snake-oil liquids out there. A pound...is a pound...is a pound. Dry is very seed safe and for the price of the liquid micro's you can buy 10 times as much granular. So that is my recommendation. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
SWMan, Same thoughts here. For what we pay for 3 gallons of liquid 3-20-3, which gives us just over 6 pounds of P, we can buy over 20 pounds (I don't have a current 11-52 price but have the early summer one) of dry P.

Another question, what is your thoughts on narrow or wider (say 4 inch paired row) tips? We were going down the road of wider and have went back to narrower (3/4 inch) side band. If narrower, how wide of packer?

Any thoughts on twin band?

A few more questions came to mind. I have appreciated your posts on other topics so I figured I should ask these.

Thank you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,723 Posts
mtremraf dry will be your cheapest option, by far over some of the snake-oil liquids out there. A pound...is a pound...is a pound. Dry is very seed safe and for the price of the liquid micro's you can buy 10 times as much granular. So that is my recommendation. ;)
X2, SWMan.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,228 Posts
SWMan, Same thoughts here. For what we pay for 3 gallons of liquid 3-20-3, which gives us just over 6 pounds of P, we can buy over 20 pounds (I don't have a current 11-52 price but have the early summer one) of dry P.

Another question, what is your thoughts on narrow or wider (say 4 inch paired row) tips? We were going down the road of wider and have went back to narrower (3/4 inch) side band. If narrower, how wide of packer?

Any thoughts on twin band?

A few more questions came to mind. I have appreciated your posts on other topics so I figured I should ask these.

Thank you.
As you are aware the economics of dry are very good. For the farmer that is in things for the long-haul it is all about replacing and even building nutrient levels, that is good management.:)

I am not sure exactly what you mean by twin-band but in general on openers I feel the one that gives you the best job and ultimately emergence is preferred. The consistency of emergence affects all subsequent field operations and is KEY! I use a 1" opener with a V-packer wheel on 10" spacing. I used to have spread tips and they were not as good at depth control. As I try to push yields even further narrower spacings are likely needed to get more SBU(seed bed utilization) but hoe style independant drills are somewhat speed limited as they throw dirt on other rows. This has me looking at disc drills on 7.5" spacings, depth would be very good on a disc drill too.

I have been mid-row or fall banding my N and K, those don't belong anywhere near the seed. 11-52 and Tiger 90 are totally seed safe and those typically have been put in the seed row, you definitely want your 11-52 in the seed row.;)

Thanks for the kind words and you're welcome.:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
guys are always splittin hairs with this stuff, to me comes down purely to logistics. nice part about dry is easy on farm storage which helps make pricing decisions. not that you cannot store on farm with liquid but definitely more difficult. dont think in the end agronomically you'll gain from one or the other, although someone will dispute that. my vote is for dry
I agree..
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
682 Posts
From a price standpoint over time NH3 will always be the least cost source of N (unless idiot regulators make it otherwise), dry will be next and liquid has to be the most expensive. Liquid vendors have to tell you a story to justify the price and there are no doubt some placement and efficiency benefits. On farm storage is an advantage for both dry and liquid over ammonia.

Having said all that I've seen guys make money with all the nutrient forms so its ultimately more about your management than it is about the raw ingredients. Personally I would use a dry seed blend and ammonia for my nitrogen if I could trust my supplier to always be in the field at the right time. If I couldn't trust him to do that I'd prefer an all dry program. Despite that preference I believe that an emerging crop that has been fertilized with liquid P looks more vigorous - it will have a blue-green hue that just looks better. I don't believe that translates to yield but it sure looks pretty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,799 Posts
Liquid P is many times more efficient for utilization for the plant. The biggest P use time is the first 8 weeks or so of the plants life, root development being the most important aspect. If you have to wait for the dry P to dissolve, then break down and convert to usable form in the soil, depending on the year you could be shorting the P availability for the plant. The other huge benefit is compatibility and mixing with other products, take Zinc for example. Now by mixing the two liquid products you form a homogeneous solution with an even distribution of Zinc throughout the fertilizer band, as opposed to separate granuals of zinc distributed randomly in that band.
Who ever told you that liquid is more available than dry should never be trusted again. What a load of cr$p.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
91 Posts
The uptake of p is complex. In aus with dry soils and high ph , germination with dry phosphate can be up tw weeks later
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,723 Posts
The uptake of p is complex. In aus with dry soils and high ph , germination with dry phosphate can be up tw weeks later
So are you saying that putting liquid P with the seed germinates the seed a lot quicker?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
The uptake of p is complex. In aus with dry soils and high ph , germination with dry phosphate can be up tw weeks later
Versus none? -- pop-up (seed-furrow placement) has long been known to slightly delay germination, but 2 wks is extreme -- sounds like the soils were dry enough that there shouldn't have been any fertilizer placed with the seed at all if you wanted the germination to go right away. (If truly dusting in a wheat crop, I'd still run the normal rate of pop-up -- doesn't seem to bother anything -- it's like it's in a jar.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,723 Posts
Surely P has nothing to do with germination of a seed. Moisture germinates seed. After the seed has germinated, then P comes into play. If there is enough moisture to germinate the seed then generally there is enough moisture to release some P from a fertilizer granule.
Concerning liquid fertilizer, I would be very surprised if there was enough moisture applied with the seed in a bone dry soil to germinate a seed, especially considering liquid is normally placed slightly away from the seed. However, I would consider that burning/ damage to the seed coat is a real possibility in a dry soil, if the liquid fertilizer is touching the seed.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
552 Posts
That is absolutely wrong and I have trials to prove it!

mtremraf dry will be your cheapest option, by far over some of the snake-oil liquids out there. A pound...is a pound...is a pound. Dry is very seed safe and for the price of the liquid micro's you can buy 10 times as much granular. So that is my recommendation. ;)
Agreed on the snake oil micros, but I can assure you that a pound of P in the form of DAP, behaves completely differently to a pound of P in the form of phosphoric acid, and there are plenty of trial to prove that. The results are spectacular in high pH, calcareous soils on the west coast of EP, where the calcium ties up a large portion of the P, making it unavailable to the plant. Even in mildly alkaline soils, liquid P outyields granular P, but it doesn't always outperform it on a gross margin. The volatile price of phosphoric acid is the main reason there is less uptake of it. APP is safer, but is still very pricey.

There are guys around here that have been using liquid P, but went granular last year purely because of the price.

To the original poster, soils of pH 8.0 - 8.7 could give a yield response to liquid P in the form of phosphoric acid, but I don't know your soils, and I don't know the form of liquid P you have available. Sounds like you have the perfect scenario for some trials :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
SW Man, when you say dry (11-52) is very seed safe. How many lbs of product would you be comfortable using? We are currently using a 3320 with 3/4" knives. Plan on using 35lbs of actual P, is that too much with the seed? Or should some of that go in the MRB? Thanks for the information
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top