John Lee

5 Things You Should Know About Calcium

in , , , , /by

1. Calcium (Ca) is abundant in soils of the upper Midwest, northern Great Plains, and Canadian Prairies; calcium deficiency in agronomic crops is rare

Calcium makes up about 3.6% of the Earth’s crust, and it is relatively abundant in agricultural soils across the region. In soils with pH greater than 6.0, Ca is the dominant cation (positively charged ion) on the cation exchange capacity (CEC). Since most soils in the region have a pH of 6.0 or above, calcium is very abundant and soils with low soil test Ca (less than 500 ppm) are rare (Figure 1).

Soil samples with soil test calcium below 500 ppm in 2020

Figure 1. AGVISE regional soil test summary. AGVISE has created regional summaries for the past 40 years. You can find more soil test summary data, including Montana and Canada, here.

Potential calcium deficiencies are most common on sandy soils with strongly acidic pH (pH less than 5.0). Luckily, the fix for low soil pH also fixes potential Ca deficiencies. To correct soil pH, agricultural limestone is applied to raise soil pH to 6.0 or 6.5, if growing sensitive crops like alfalfa or clover. When limestone (calcium carbonate) is applied in tons per acre, more than enough calcium is also applied and sufficiently increases soil test Ca, providing ample calcium for optimal crop growth and development. Throughout the region, soils with low soil pH are more common in the higher rainfall areas to the east and south (Figure 2), and liming is a standard practice to correct soil pH and provide calcium.

Soil samples with soil pH below 6.0 in 2020, for 5 things you should know article

Figure 2. Soil samples with pH below 6.0 in 2020, where lime application may be required. The number of fields with low pH has increased over time and will continue to do so because soil acidification is a natural process. Keep watch for low soil pH, especially in western North Dakota and South Dakota. You can find more soil test summary data, including Montana and Canada, here.

2. Multiple calcium fertilizer sources exist; some increase pH, others do not

Agricultural limestone is the most common lime source and is available in two flavors: calcitic (calcium carbonate, <5% magnesium) or dolomitic (calcium-magnesium carbonate, >5% magnesium). Limestone quarries exist in southern Minnesota and Iowa, but the northern Great Plains is virtually devoid of mineable limestone. Industrial waste lime (spent lime) is another good lime source and available from sugar beet processing plants and water treatment plants throughout the region. Any of these liming materials will supply enough calcium to increase soil test Ca if soil pH is increased above pH 6.0.

Gypsum (calcium sulfate) is another calcium source, but it does not change soil pH. Gypsum is sometimes used to increase soil test Ca if the producer does not want to increase soil pH with lime application. This situation is common in irrigated potato production where increased soil pH may increase soil-borne diseases like common scab of potato. Gypsum is not a lime source, so it will not increase soil pH.

3. There is no “ideal” base cation saturation range or ratio for calcium

Suggestions that Ca and other base cations (magnesium, potassium) are required in a certain percentage or ratio in soil are not supported by modern science. Recent research done at several universities shows a wide range of base cation ratios in soil will support normal crop growth (see links below). What is important is that a sufficient soil test amount of each base cation (Ca Mg, K) is present in soil to support plant growth and development.

4. Soils with pH greater than 7.3 will have falsely inflated soil test Ca and cation exchange capacity (CEC) results

Soils with pH greater than 7.3 will contain some amount of naturally occurring calcium carbonate (CaCO3), shown on the soil test report as carbonate (CCE). The calcium soil test method will extract Ca on cation exchange sites and some Ca from calcium carbonate minerals, resulting in an inflated soil test Ca result. Starting with inflated soil test Ca, the routine cation exchange capacity (CEC) calculation is also inflated. For example, a soil with pH 7.8 and 3.0% CCE may report CEC at 60 meq/100 g, but the correct CEC is only 27 meq/100 g. To obtain accurate CEC results on soil with pH greater than 7.3, a special displacement CEC laboratory method is required. For soils with pH less than 7.3, the routine CEC calculation method will provide accurate soil test Ca and CEC results. High soil salinity (soluble salts, EC) can also inflate CEC results.

5. Calcium is not an environmental risk to surface or ground water

Calcium is one of the major dissolved substances found in surface and ground waters, especially in the northern Great Plains and Canadian Prairies. In fact, water hardness is determined from the amount of dissolved calcium and magnesium in water. There is already so much calcium found in natural waters in the region that calcium fertilizer additions to soil are negligible. Water hardness does affect the effectiveness of some herbicides and may cause tank-mixing issues, but is not an environmental concern.

Bonus: Just because your tomatoes have had blossom-end rot does NOT mean your soil is Ca deficient!

If you are a backyard tomato grower, you may have experienced blossom-end rot before, where the blossom-end of developing fruits turn brown and mushy while still on the plant. Yes, the problem is caused by low calcium in the tomato plant, but not necessarily because the soil has low soil test Ca. Blossom-end rot is primarily caused by inconsistent soil moisture. Adequate soil moisture is required to maintain a consistent supply of calcium moving to the plant root, which might run short if watering is inconsistent. To keep blossom-end rot away from your garden, just try to be more consistent with watering, especially during dry periods.

Resources on Base Cation Saturation Ratios

Cation Exchange: A Review, IPNI

Soil Cation Ratios for Crop Production, UMN

A Review of the Use of the Basic Cation Saturation Ratio and the “Ideal” Soil, SSSA Journal

John Breker

Soybean Iron Deficiency Chlorosis: Symptoms, Causes, and Management

in , /by

 

Figure 1. Soybean plants with iron deficiency chlorosis symptoms. Note the newest leaves are yellow with indistinct green veins.

If soybean turns yellow during an early growth stage, you may have a case of soybean iron deficiency chlorosis (IDC). The distinctive yellow symptoms of soybean IDC often appear as soybean enters the first- to third-trifoliate leaf stage. Soybean IDC is characterized by distinct interveinal chlorosis (yellow leaf with green leaf veins) in the newest leaves and may result in substantial yield loss (Figure 1). Soybean IDC is not caused by low soil iron but instead caused by soil conditions that decrease iron uptake by soybean roots.

Soybean IDC risk and severity are primarily related to soil carbonate content (calcium carbonate equivalent, CCE) and worsened by salinity (electrical conductivity, EC) (Table 1). Soybean IDC is common in soybean-growing regions of the upper Midwest, northern Great Plains, and Canadian Prairies, where soils frequently have high carbonate and/or salinity (Figure 2). Within a field, IDC symptoms are usually confined to soybean IDC hotspots with high carbonate and salinity; however, symptoms may appear across a field if high carbonate and salinity are present throughout the field. Soybean IDC severity is made worse in cool, wet soils and soils with high residual nitrate-nitrogen. Soil pH is not a good indicator of soybean IDC risk because some high pH soils lack high carbonate and salinity, which are the two principal risk factors.

Table 1. Soybean iron deficiency chlorosis risk (IDC) risk potential based on soil carbonate content and salinity.
Calcium carbonate equivalent (CCE)
Salinity (EC 1:1), dS/m less than 2.5% 2.6 – 5.0% greater than 5%
less than 0.25 low low moderate
0.26 – 0.50 low moderate high
0.51 – 1.00 moderate high very high
greater than 1.00 very high very high extreme

Figure 2. Soil samples with high risk of soybean iron deficiency chlorosis (IDC) in the northern Great Plains and upper Midwest.

Unlike a nitrogen or sulfur deficiency, soybean IDC is not correctable with an in-season fertilizer application. Foliar application of iron fertilizers, including FeEDDHA, may have short-term cosmetic effects, but foliar iron applications have not consistently increased soybean yield on IDC-affected plants. Chlorosis symptoms often alleviate naturally as environmental conditions improve (e.g. drier, warmer weather), but severe cases can persist and cause yield loss. North Dakota State University research has shown that IDC persisting into the fifth- and sixth-trifoliate leaf stage will significantly reduce soybean yield. For fields with historical soybean IDC problems, you should delineate soybean IDC hotspots for selective management using aerial or satellite imagery.

Guidelines for managing soybean IDC

  1. Soil test each field, zone, or grid for soil carbonate and salinity to evaluate soybean IDC risk potential (Table 1). This may require soil sampling prior to soybean (possibly outside of your usual soil sampling rotation) or consulting previous soil sampling records.
  2. Plant soybean in fields with low carbonate and salinity (principal soybean IDC risk factors).
  3. Choose an IDC tolerant soybean variety on fields with moderate to low carbonate and salinity.
  4. Plant soybean in wider rows. Soybean IDC tends to be less severe in wide-row spacings (plants are closer together) than narrow-row spacings or solid-seeded spacings.
  5. Apply chelated iron fertilizer (e.g., high quality FeEDDHA) in-furrow at planting. In-furrow FeEDDHA application may not be enough to help an IDC susceptible variety in high IDC risk soils (Figure 3).
  6. Avoid planting soybean on soils with very high IDC risk.

Figure 3. Soybean iron deficiency chlorosis (IDC) severity is reduced with iron fertilization. However, IDC-tolerant soybean varieties are more effective. Research from Dr. R. Jay Goos, NDSU, 2000.

Jodi Boe

Fallow Syndrome: Preventing Phosphorus Problems

in , , , , , , /by

Some crops that do not support mycorrhizal fungi (left to right: sugar beet, canola, radish).

Producers in the northern Great Plains and upper Midwest need to consider the risk of fallow syndrome in their crop nutrition plans. You are probably asking, what is “fallow syndrome” and why should I care? After all, summer fallow is not that common anymore! But the greater number of Prevented Planting acres in 2019 and 2020 meant that we have had many unintended fallow fields, making fallow syndrome a serious and widespread concern for the next year.

Fallow syndrome is an induced phosphorus deficiency caused by a lack of mycorrhizal fungi in soil. Some plant species, like corn and wheat, rely heavily on mycorrhizae to colonize the plant root system and help acquire important nutrients like phosphorus and zinc. If soil is lacking sufficient mycorrhizae to colonize plant roots, a case of fallow syndrome will increase phosphorus fertilizer needs and even cost crop yield potential.

Understanding mycorrhizae

Mycorrhizae fungi occur naturally in soils and readily colonize plant roots. Upon root colonization, mycorrhizae fungal filaments act as extensions of the root system and increase the soil volume available for plant water and nutrient uptake. The combined root-mycorrhizae surface area can be up to 10-fold greater than roots without mycorrhizae. Mycorrhizae depend on living plant roots to support stable mycorrhizae populations. However, not all plant species host and support mycorrhizae growth. Some common field crops are non-host species and their planting results in rapid drops in mycorrhizae populations.

Summer fallow or unplanted cropland, such as Prevented Planting in 2020, is a classic example of providing no or few living plant roots in soil to maintain mycorrhizae populations. In addition, some crop species do not support mycorrhizae, such as those in the goosefoot family (sugar beet) and mustard family (canola, radish, turnip). Following a classic case of summer fallow or a non-mycorrhizae supporting crop, the mycorrhizae population in soil will quickly drop. A cover crop mix that included a grass species (e.g. barley, rye) should still support mycorrhizae and prevent fallow syndrome concerns.

Preventing fallow syndrome

The easiest prevention strategy after fallow is planting a crop species without fallow syndrome risk like soybean, canola, or sugar beet. Avoid planting susceptible crops like corn and wheat. These crops are highly dependent on mycorrhizae to acquire phosphorus, and extra starter phosphorus will be required if fallow syndrome risk is present.

To reduce fallow syndrome risk in corn or wheat, extra phosphorus fertilizer must be placed with or near the seed. Applying more broadcast phosphorus or relying on high soil test P will not prevent fallow syndrome. The starter phosphorus rate should be 20 to 40 lb/acre P2O5. In some university research trials, up to 60 lb/acre P2O5 with 2×2-band placement near the seed was needed to prevent corn yield loss to fallow syndrome.

For wheat, these phosphorus rates are typically seed safe with monoammonium phosphate (MAP, 11-52-0). Most corn planters can safely apply 20 lb/acre P2O5 (5 gal/acre ammonium polyphosphate, APP, 10-34-0) in the furrow. For medium/fine-textured soils with good soil moisture at planting, you can generally apply up to 10 gal/acre 10-34-0 (40 lb/acre P2O5) safely in the furrow at 30-inch row spacing. Higher 10-34-0 rates may exceed seed safety limits on dry soils or coarse-textured soils and require 2×2-band placement to maintain seed safety.

Complete liquid fertilizers, such as 6-24-6 or 9-18-9, are not suggested for preventing fallow syndrome. Compared to 10-34-0, the products have lower P concentration that result in less applied phosphorus, even if used at maximum seed safe rates. The extra N + K2O in “complete” liquid fertilizers increases the salt index and lowers the seed safe rate.

John Lee

High Soil Nitrogen following Drought: How to manage next year

in , , , /by

From time to time, moderate to severe droughts hit the Great Plains. Such is life in semi-arid climates. When a drought occurs, it is normal to find higher residual soil nitrate-nitrogen after harvest. Since the widespread adoption of soil testing in the 1970s, we have seen this phenomenon in all major drought years: 1988, 2002, 2006, 2012, 2017 (Figure 1). The lack of precipitation and exhausted stored soil water reduces crop growth and yield, meaning much of the applied nitrogen fertilizer remains unused, showing up in the residual soil nitrate-nitrogen test. In 2017, very high residual soil nitrate-nitrogen was observed across wide geographies of western North Dakota and South Dakota (Figure 2).

Figure 1. Residual soil nitrate-nitrogen following wheat on the northern Great Plains.

 

 

Figure 2. Residual soil nitrate-nitrogen following wheat on the northern Great Plains in 2017.

 

Following a drought, we often get the question, “Can I count on all the soil nitrate in my soil test for next year’s crop?” The simple answer is yes; you can count on the amount of soil nitrate-nitrogen in the soil test, but you must consider additional factors. Even in drought, some parts of each field will produce higher crop yield than other parts because the better soils have higher water holding capacity (e.g. higher clay content, higher organic matter). In the high yielding zones, there is less residual soil nitrate remaining in the soil profile. Drought will create more variability in crop yield and residual soil nitrate, mostly driven by topography and soil texture.

Let’s imagine you had a wheat crop severely affected by drought, but some parts of the field still had 50% normal yield (maybe lower landscape positions, greater water holding capacity). Following harvest, the whole-field composite soil test showed 140 lb/acre nitrate-N (0-24 inch). You were skeptical about that very high residual soil nitrate level, so the crop consultant resampled the parts with better crop yield, which then had 80 lb/acre nitrate-N (0-24 inch). Using the whole-field composite soil test result of 140 lb/acre nitrate-N (0-24 inch), you would only need to apply some starter nitrogen fertilizer for next year’s crop. However, if you only applied starter nitrogen, the high yielding parts of the field with only 80 lb/acre nitrate-N (0-24 inch) would be under-fertilized, costing crop yield and profit next year, on the best soils in the field.

If you only have a whole-field composite soil test result, you must consider spatial variability in residual soil nitrate across the field. You will want to apply a base nitrogen fertilizer rate to cover the parts with lower residual soil nitrate than the field average. The base nitrogen fertilizer rate may range between 30 to 60 lb/acre N, depending on spatial variability and risk tolerance. If you do zone soil sampling, you have a much better idea of spatial variability and nitrogen fertilizer needs in all parts of your fields. Through productivity zone soil sampling, you know the residual soil nitrate level in each management zone, and you can choose different nitrogen fertilizer rates across the field.

If you only soil sample the surface soil depth (0-6 inch), you are missing 75% of the plant-available nitrate-nitrogen pie. To make good nitrogen decisions, you should collect 0-24 inch soil samples for soil nitrate-nitrogen analysis. In drought, plant roots explore deep for stored soil water and uptake whatever nitrate is found along the way. There is no way to model how much soil nitrate remains in the soil profile after drought. Following drought, the best strategy is 24-inch soil sampling and breaking fields into several management zones to determine the proper amount of nitrogen fertilizer required.