North Dakota State University
NDSU Extension Service


Water Spouts

No. 201, April 2003
http://www.ext.nodak.edu/extnews/snouts


Welcome to the Beginning of a New Growing Season
Nitrogen Management in Potatoes -- If We Only Knew . . .
Winter Injury/Kill in Alfalfa
Take Care When Starting Your Irrigation System



Welcome to the Beginning of a New Growing Season

As we enter the 31st year for this irrigation newsletter, we are beginning to see a change in the climate of this region. Over the past 10 years, many people in different areas of North Dakota have had to live with excess water and periodic flooding. No area of the state has been excluded. However, that began to change last season as the southern third of North Dakota experienced a severe drought. At the same time, the northeast part of the state was still dealing with too much rain. Below normal precipitation last fall and almost no snow this winter have left many areas with inadequate soil moisture. If drought conditions persist, irrigation water management is going to be vitally important. Not only will individual irrigators need to pay more attention to water management, but access to water in entire aquifer systems could be affected.

The NDSU Irrigation Task Force, which I chair, selects the topics for articles in Water Spouts. We try to select topics to help better manage your irrigation systems and water resources. This year, we will watch for drought conditions and keep you updated on methods to help you do a good job of irrigating. The task force is comprised of the following individuals:

Tom Scherer, Extension Agricultural Engineer
Aung Hla
, Extension Area Irrigation Specialist
Duane Berglund, Extension Agronomist
Dwain Meyer, Professor, Forage Management
Bob Henson, Assistant Agronomist, Carrington Research Extension Center
Blaine Schatz, Director, Carrington Research Extension Center
Paul Hendrickson, Research Specialist - Irrigation, Carrington Research Extension Center
Harlene Hatterman-Valenti
, Assistant Professor, Plant Sciences
Gary Secor
, Professor, Plant Pathology
Richard Greenland, Supervisor, Oakes Irrigation Research Site
Dean Steele, Associate Professor, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering
Dave Kirkpatrick, Research Specialist, Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering
Dwight Aakre, Extension Agricultural Economist
Dave Franzen, Extension Soils Specialist
Bruce Seelig, Extension Water Quality Specialist
Kevin Sedivec, Extension Rangeland Management Specialist
Rudy Radke, Extension Area Agriculture Diversification Specialist
Frank Casey, Assistant Professor, Soil Science Department
Chet Hill, Extension Area Value-Added Specialist, Williston Research Extension Center
Jim Staricka
, Soil Scientist, Williston Research Extension Center
Larry Cihacek, Associate Professor, Soil Science Department
Craig Kleven, Extension Agent, Kidder County

At the end of each Water Spouts article, the author's name, telephone number and e-mail address (if the author has one) are listed. If you have any questions about any article, please contact the author by whatever means is convenient. If you prefer, contact me for help. If you want to look at past issues of Water Spouts, they are available on the Internet at the address shown at the top of this newsletter (under the pumps).

Tom Scherer, (701) 231-7239
Extension Agricultural Engineer
tscherer@ndsuext.nodak.edu 




Nitrogen Management in Potatoes -- If We Only Knew . . .

Planting time is just around the corner, especially when it comes to potatoes. Some extremely mild days along with the lack of snow cover has many farmers thinking this spring will be early. As growers consider the various inputs needed for a successful potato crop, nitrogen rate and application timing probably enter into everyone's mind. How much should I apply? Should I split that into two, three or more applications? What are the consequences of applying too much or too little nitrogen? The list of questions could go on and on, and the answers to each question would vary with each grower, but there are some general recommendations that everyone should follow. First of all, consider your yield goal. Table 1 was developed by Dr. Carl Rosen, a soil fertility specialist at the University of Minnesota for potatoes grown on irrigated mineral soils.

Table 1. Nitrogen recommendation for irrigated potatoes on mineral soils.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Previous Crop
               ----------------------------------------------------
                Corn, small grains,               Alfalfa, clover, 
 Yield goal     sugarbeets, potatoes   Soybeans    black fallow
-------------------------------------------------------------------
   (cwt/A)     - - - - - - - - - N to apply (lb/A) - - - - - - - - 
Less than 200           75                50             50
  201 - 300            100                80             50
  301 - 400            150               130             90
  401 - 500            200               180            140
  500 +                250               230            190
-------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------



As you can see, this table takes into consideration the previous crop and the nitrogen credit from this crop. The generalization that all cultivars grown on irrigated land in North Dakota respond similarly to nitrogen may be a bit simplistic; however, with the general short growing season and the inconsistent weather during bulking, the nitrogen requirements for a late maturing and an earlier maturing processing potato (i.e. Russet Burbank and Shepody) may be comparable or differ by less than 30 lb. N/acre. Dr. Jim Lorenzen and others conducted a series of nitrogen trials from 1993 through 1997 on four cultivars (Goldrush, Shepody, Ranger Russet and Russet Burbank) that varied in vine maturity from medium-early to medium late/late. They used four nitrogen rates (75, 150, 225 and 300 lb. per acre) and split this into at least three application timings. Results indicated that even though the earlier maturing cultivars were more responsive to nitrogen (Table 2), the highest total yield and greatest percentage of 6- to 16-oz. tubers was between 150 to 225 lb. N/acre. Only once did the highest overall total yield occur with the highest nitrogen rate, which was the 300 lb. N/acre treatment (Table 3). In fact, the highest yields for Ranger Russet and Russet Burbank were at 150 lb. N/acre three out of five years with rates above 150 lb. N/acre causing reduced yields (Table 2). Specific gravity generally decreased as the nitrogen rate increased (Table 3) and average fry color was darker with the higher nitrogen rates especially with Goldrush and Shepody (data not shown).

Table 2. Cultivar response to nitrogen from 1993 through 1997 at Oakes, N.D.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Total Yield          6 oz. or Greater Tubers            Specific Gravity 
               ------------------------  -------------------------  -----------------------------------
                93   94   95   96   97    93   94   95   96   97       93     94     95     96     97 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               - - - - cwt/A - - - - -   - - - - - - % - - - - - -
75 lb. N/A
   Goldrush    246  401  332  171  210    72   60   64   62   69     1.088  1.082  1.076  1.077  1.074
   R. Russet   273  367  307  118  177    72   64   77   56   68     1.101  1.097  1.086  1.081  1.089
   R. Burbank  273  402  291  150  251    58   41   60   50   56     1.095  1.087  1.077  1.077  1.080
   Shepody     265  321  292  157  161    80   63   84   73   73     1.090  1.087  1.076  1.083  1.079
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
150 lb. N/A
   Goldrush    328  428  305  223  288    75   75   72   78   73     1.081  1.079  1.069  1.076  1.076
   R. Russet   328  440  313  163  259    74   71   75   72   70     1.098  1.093  1.084  1.079  1.089
   R. Burbank  323  432  235  264  346    63   48   52   53   68     1.092  1.086  1.070  1.080  1.083
   Shepody     322  387  340  267  316    76   77   77   78   85     1.088  1.084  1.075  1.081  1.084
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
225 lb. N/A
   Goldrush    326  490  319  342  325    82   77   76   79   71     1.078  1.077  1.067  1.075  1.070
   R. Russet   334  407  302  176  249    74   66   76   57   76     1.094  1.089  1.085  1.081  1.089
   R. Burbank  346  404  231  283  305    68   58   56   60   71     1.089  1.085  1.068  1.079  1.081
   Shepody     380  483  258  307  334    86   87   77   82   87     1.080  1.083  1.069  1.078  1.081 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
300 lb. N/A
   Goldrush    327  467  252  276  301    72   85   73   77   63     1.073  1.074  1.066  1.071  1.066
   R. Russet   293  428  248  191  264    75   57   68   67   74     1.095  1.088  1.081  1.081  1.087
   R. Burbank  317  385  133  260  295    76   58   41   53   65     1.089  1.082  1.067  1.080  1.079
   Shepody     342  528  253  361  321    89   85   82   82   83     1.080  1.078  1.070  1.085  1.080 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Table 3. Nitrogen effect on potato yield and dry matter content from 1993 through 1997 at Oakes, N.D.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Total Yield          6 oz. or Greater Tubers            Specific Gravity 
               ------------------------  -------------------------  -----------------------------------
                93   94   95   96   97    93   94   95   96   97       93     94     95     96     97 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               - - - - cwt/A - - - - -   - - - - - - % - - - - - -
75 lb. N/A     267  372  306  149  200    70   58   71   60   67     1.094  1.088  1.079  1.079  1.080
150 lb. N/A    326  422  299  229  302    74   65   69   67   75     1.089  1.085  1.074  1.079  1.083
225 lb. N/A    343  446  277  277  303    78   66   71   70   76     1.085  1.083  1.072  1.078  1.080
300 lb. N/A    320  452  222  253  295    70   66   66   69   71     1.084  1.080  1.071  1.079  1.078
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goldrush       308  446  302  253  281    78   66   71   74   70     1.080  1.078  1.069  1.074  1.071
R. Russet      303  410  292  162  237    73   69   74   60   73     1.097  1.092  1.084  1.080  1.089
R. Burbank     322  406  223  239  299    67   46   52   54   65     1.091  1.085  1.071  1.079  1.081
Shepody        322  430  286  273  283    75   75   80   79   83     1.084  1.083  1.072  1.082  1.081
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Knowing how much nitrogen we're going to apply, we now need to address application timing. Nitrogen applied early in the season can easily leach beyond the potato root zone with heavy rainfall or excess irrigation and may increase the potential to increase groundwater contamination. Too much nitrogen before or at tuberization can delay tuber initiation, reduce yields, increase sugar-ends and decrease specific gravity. However, the nitrogen supply early in the season must also be adequate for vegetative growth. Research at Wisconsin (Kelling and Speth, 1998) looked at the timing of nitrogen application on irrigated potatoes from 1991 through 1996. Researchers applied a total of 120 lb. N/acre in 1991-1993 or 100 lb. N/acre in 1994-1996 in an attempt to not overshadow timing response with extra nitrogen. Each year, a blanket 30 lb. N/acre was applied at planting followed by either:

  1. all at emergence (E)
  2. all at tuberization (T)
  3. all at 10 days after tuberization (T+10)
  4. half at E and T
  5. a third at E, T, T+10
  6. a third at E, T+10, T+30
  7. a fifth at E, T, T+10, T+20, T+30
  8. a third at E, two-thirds at T
  9. a third at E, two-thirds at T+10
  10. half at T and T+10

The results indicated that during a low leaching year (1991 and 1995), a split application was not better than a single application (Table 4). Delaying the nitrogen application past emergence tended to improve size but also hurt quality (data not shown). During leaching years, (1992, 1993, 1994 and 1996) splitting was better. However, in 1992 and 1994 applications after hilling resulted in somewhat lower yield and size. This was attributed to the heavy rain events in early July compared to leaching events in late July and August during 1993 and 1996. Researchers summarized by suggesting that approximately one-third of the supplemental nitrogen (50-70 lb. N/acre) should be applied by emergence and that the remainder (100 to 140 lb. N/acre for Russet Burbank) be applied at early to mid-tuberization. Reserachers recommended continued petiole nitrate-N monitoring and that if leaching occurs prior to 65 days after emergence, apply an additional 30-50 lb. N/acre.

Other researchers have also looked at nitrogen management for potatoes under irrigation. Results have shown that excessive applications during tuber initiation can cause excessive vine growth and delay tuber growth up to 10 days. Excessive nitrogen during tuber bulking can promote late season vegetative growth and delay maturity (Ojala et al., 1990). In Minnesota, Dr. Rosen showed that nitrogen uptake significantly preceded dry matter accumulation (Rosen, 1994). Total N uptake reached near maximum level approximately 70 days after emergence even though less than 60 percent tuber growth had occurred. Unfortunately, no research has been published on the effect of periodically applying small amounts of nitrogen after hilling through irrigation (spoon feeding).

Preliminary research at NDSU during 2001 examined two cultivars (Shepody, Russet Burbank), five nitrogen rates (0, 60, 120, 180, 240 lb. N/acre) and three application timings (33 percent at planting, hilling and hilling+21 days; 16.7 percent at planting, hilling and four, 14-day intervals till the end of July; and 16.7 percent at planting, hilling, hilling+14 days and six, 8.3 percent applications at approximately 10 day intervals until the third week in August). Results indicated that with Russet Burbank there was an increase in the total and number one yield with spoon-fed treatments (Table 5). The highest nitrogen rate (240 lb./acre) caused a yield decrease and specific gravity decreased as the nitrogen rate increased. With Shepody, the highest total and number one yield was with 120 lb. N/acre (Table 5). Nitrogen application timing had no effect on yield or specific gravity. Nitrogen rates above 120 lb./acre caused a yield decrease and specific gravity decreased as the nitrogen rate increased. Therefore, there may be benefit to the spoon-feeding approach for nitrogen management with Russet Burbank.

Table 4. Effect of N timing on Russet Burbank yield and quality at Hancock, WI, 1991-1996.

--------------------------------------------------------------
N treatments               1991  1992  1993  1994  1995  1996
--------------------------------------------------------------
                          - - - - Total Yield (cwt/A) - - - -
Emergence (E)               495   345   319   380   403   331 
Tuberization (T)            550   311   343   367   412   341 
T+10                        516   270   299   358   226   402 
50% E and T                 514   351   342   401   438   313 
33% E, T, T+10              526   312   338   359   432   356 
33% E, T+10, T+30           536   319   328   358   392   341 
20% E, T, T+10, T+20, T+30  555   323   372   338   403   336 
33% E, 66% T                543   371   335   391   400   360 
33% E, 66% T+10             528   325   308   330   455   411 
50% T, T+10                 ---   308   346   351   437   371 
--------------------------------------------------------------
                          - - - - - - Grade A (%) - - - - - -
Emergence (E)                79    54    60    83    61    63
Tuberization (T)             72    59    65    79    47    70
T+10                         76    62    58    80    40    70
50% E and T                  75    60    61    79    55    59
33% E, T, T+10               80    51    63    79     5    73
33% E, T+10, T+30            76    55    62    78    57    65
20% E, T, T+10, T+20 T+30    77    56    64    78    56    66 
33% E, 66% T                 78    62    58    77    55    67
33% E, 66% T+10              77    59    55    78    58    74
50% T, T+10                 ---    63    66    80    53    71
--------------------------------------------------------------
                          - - - US #1, 6-13 oz (cwt/A) - - - 
Emergence (E)               218    55    14    81   111    21 
Tuberization (T)            220    82    24    70    87    41 
T+10                        186    77     9    99    85    50
50% E and T                 176    74    20    76   107    25
33% E, T, T+10              208    37     9    69   110    32
33% E, T+10, T+30           215    50    18    54    91    17
20% E, T, T+10, T+20 T+30   223    54    19    72   110    21 
33% E, 66% T                202    84    12    81    84    29
33% E, 66% T+10             198    60    10    48   106    48
50% T, T+10                 ---    89    27    80   105    48
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------



Table 5. Effect of N rate and timing on potato yield and quality at Dawson, N.D., 2001.

------------------------------------------------------------
                            Application Timings
               --------------------------------------------
N Rate (lb/A)   No splits   3 splits   6 splits   9 splits
------------------------------------------------------------
 R. Burbank    - - - - - -  Total Yield (cwt/A) - - - - - -
      0            346
     90                        350        338        399
    120                        361        349        393
    180                        337        394        389
    240                        314        310        369
  Shepody
      0            269
     90                        354        335        375
    120                        396        378        382
    180                        325        372        307
    240                        297        311        293
 R. Burbank     - - - - - - - - US #1 (cwt/A) - - - - - - -
      0            309
     90                        319        313        364
    120                        314        319        359
    180                        299        361        351
    240                        282        282        331
  Shepody
      0            255
     90                        343        320        356
    120                        361        362        359
    180                        300        345        287
    240                        250        257        259
 R. Burbank     - - - - - - - Specific Gravity  - - - - - -
      0           1.082
     90                       1.082      1.077      1.082
    120                       1.083      1.082      1.079
    180                       1.078      1.081      1.076
    240                       1.075      1.074      1.079
  Shepody
      0           1.083
     90                       1.083      1.079      1.084
    120                       1.074      1.082      1.077
    180                       1.081      1.077      1.076
    240                       1.07       1.066      1.079
------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------



In summary, nitrogen management is extremely difficult due to the mobility of the compound and Mother Nature. If we knew what weather conditions (air temperature and rainfall) we were going to face this season, we would know how much nitrogen to apply and when to make those applications. The problem is that we can't predict such factors. Therefore, we need to make environmentally conscious decisions when it comes to nitrogen management. We need to give proper nitrogen credit for the previous crop. We need to apply reasonable amounts of supplemental nitrogen which research has shown to be around 180 lb./acre when there is approximately 40 lb./acre residual nitrogen. We need to make split applications given the possibility of leaching rain events and we need to monitor nitrogen uptake by the plants, making sure that we don't apply nitrogen too late in the season when plant uptake and use in tuber bulking is unlikely.

Harlene Hatterman-Valenti (701) 231-8536
Assistant Professor, High Value Crops Research
h.hatterman-valenti@ndsu.nodak.edu




Winter Injury/Kill in Alfalfa

The 2002-2003 winter will go down in the record books as relatively mild with a cold latter part in February and March. One might think that perennials like alfalfa should have little problem surviving the winter. However, I am very concerned that North Dakota may experience significant winter injury or winter kill in alfalfa as a result of less-than-average snowfall. Actually, total snowfall isn't as important as the distribution of snow relative to outbreaks of sub-zero temperatures. Very cold temperatures with a lack of snow cover cause the soil temperature to decrease markedly compared to snow-covered areas.

Alfalfa crowns can survive two-inch soil temperatures in the range of 12 to 15o F, very similar to the killing temperature of winter wheat except the crown is much shallower in wheat than alfalfa. Dr. John Enz, the NDSU climatologist, reports that NDAWN had 12 sites in North Dakota that recorded soil temperatures at the two-inch depth. Remember that these sites are under turf grass cover and would be warmer than an alfalfa field.

Searching the records, eight sites were found with two-inch soil temperatures less than 15o F this past winter. The Langdon area has the most concern with three, 60-plus hour periods with soil temperature less than 15o F and a minimum soil temperature of 7o F. Minot and Williston are the other areas of concern with soil temperatures below 15o F for 60-plus hours and minimum soil temperatures in the 8 to 10o F range. These areas will likely experience winterkill on older stands and winter injury on new stands. The Fargo area may also have some winter injury or kill, with several incidences of soil temperature less than 15o F, but the duration has been much less. Areas near Grand Forks, Harvey and Dickinson have had no temperatures less than 15o F, while Carrington, Streeter, Bottineau and Hettinger have had one or two dates with less than 15o F for short time periods.

Sites that have been exposed to less than 15o F soil temperatures for short durations will likely show marked effects of management on winter kill or winter injury. Producers in these areas that have old stands, took a fall harvest, are under four-cut management, have nutrient deficiency(s), have less persistent varieties or a combination of these will experience more winter kill or injury than producers that have new stands, took no fall harvest, are under three-cut management, have good soil fertility or have persistent varieties.

Producers located in the Langdon, Minot and Williston areas should dig plants from a few representative areas as soon as the frost goes out of the soil. Split the roots. If the root is soft, yellowish in color and somewhat stringy in nature, the plant is most likely dead and the stand should be terminated. If the root is firm and white, the plant is probably alive. If the center of the root is black, but the outside is white, the plant has Fusarium root rot probably caused by a previous year's winter injury. If the root has no black in the interior, is somewhat yellow on the interior and the outside is white and firm, the plant has had serious winter injury but may survive.

The best method to determine if a winter-injured stand is still productive is to count the number of stems per square foot. If you have 50 plus stems per square foot, the stand will be fully productive. If you have 30 to 40 stems per square foot, the first-harvest yield will be less than normal but I would delay the first harvest until 25 percent bloom on uninjured plants and wait to see how many stems occur in the next harvest. Alfalfa has the ability to repair some winter injury and regain some of its productivity. If you have less than 20 new stems per square foot, consider terminating the stand and seeding a new one.

Unfortunately, winter injury and/or winterkill will be a factor this year in many alfalfa fields. Keep a close eye on your fields this spring so a decision can be made early whether to rotate to another crop if necessary. One should not attempt to thicken up the stand by over seeding following winter kill or reseeding the stand on the same field without an intervening crop since autotoxicity could be a major problem.

Dwain W. Meyer (701) 231-8154
NDSU Extension Specialist, Forages
Dwain.meyer@ndsu.nodak.edu 




Take Care When Starting Your Irrigation System

If we have a dry spring, many irrigation systems are going to be started earlier than normal. If you have electric powered irrigation pumps and/or systems, please be careful when starting them the first time.

The most common problem is rodents getting into electric control boxes during the winter and causing damage. The damage may result from rodents chewing on wires and control switches or corrosion caused by urine. If you don't look for this type of damage before turning on the system, some components could explode. You could be hurt if standing in front of the electric control box.

As a precaution, before turning on any electric equipment, open all electric control panels (this includes pivot control panels and tower boxes) and look for any evidence of rodent damage. Also, check electric motors and phase converters. If there is damage, look for the point of entry and plug it. I have seen several electric control boxes with mouse nests in them, and the point of entry was through the conduit from the motor. The screens on the electric motor had been removed and the mice entered the motor and followed the conduit into the control box. From the mouse's point of view, this was a perfect nesting situation.

Filling pipelines can be another major problem when irrigation pumps are turned on for the first time in the spring. Pipelines, especially those that go through low areas and swamps, should be filled very slowly. This means setting the valve at the pump site so it is about one-quarter open. Filling the pipeline slowly allows air to escape easily and prevents damage due to water hammer. It is not uncommon for irrigation dealers to be called in the spring to repair a ruptured pipeline because it was filled too fast and residual ice left in the pipe caused a blockage.

Spring is always a busy time of the year, and sometimes it is easy to forget about getting the irrigation system ready. Here is a checklist to help get your irrigation system up and running smoothly:

Tom Scherer (701) 231-7239
NDSU Extension Agricultural Engineer
tscherer@ndsuext.nodak.edu

 


Water Spouts, No. 201, April 2003


NDSU Extension Service, North Dakota State University of Agriculture and Applied Science, and U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating. Sharon D. Anderson, Director, Fargo, North Dakota. Distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. We offer our programs and facilities to all persons regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, Vietnam era veterans status, or sexual orientation; and are an equal opportunity employer. This publication will be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities upon request, 701/231-7881.


North Dakota State University
NDSU Extension Service