Searching for Something Positive About Wheat......Anything...

By Jason Hanson, Certified Crop Advisor
jlhanson@agriliance.com

After coming off of the 2003 and especially the good 2004 crop, there was fairly good expectations for the 2005 crop.  All things pointed toward at least a chance for making some money in the now weak spot in the rotation. You don’t need me to tell you that overall, row crops were the diamonds in the rough, and wheat was the coal in the stockings. Still, there were flashes of promise for wheat here and there, and like always, harvest results here and there which prove that management does make a difference. Some observations from 2005:

Variety Selection
I would say that this had the largest influence (outside of weather) on how either spring wheat or winter wheat performed this past year. The planting season got off to a great start across the region and stands appeared to be very good. But with a year like 2004 when it was cool almost throughout the year and ideal for wheat development, 2005 put some stresses on the plant. Those stresses also came at some critical times. So when there are factors such as excess rainfall, very strong winds, and disease infection, the right or wrong variety made a world of difference.

Talk to most farmers, and you will hear a couple of things: the crop wasn’t too bad where it didn’t drown out. Most of the good growing conditions conducive for yield played into our favor early on – relatively cool, not much stress and good stand.

But later on the rains came and so did the disease potential. So some varieties had to have early and mid-season fungicides to ease the disease pressure. This is where some fields took their beating, as high temps invaded the area along with high humidities, and either shortened up the flowering period or infected heads with scab. Varieties grown for its stand ability, yield, or protein that didn’t have some sort of scab tolerance got hammered in most cases. Except if you were in the western one-third of North Dakota, where the rain was welcomed and produced a very good crop in most cases. The fusarium head blight pressure was so great this year that even those wheats that are fairly tolerant should have been sprayed with a fungicide at flowering this year.

Fertility management
Those people that planned and fulfilled their fertility plans generally saw a good return on their investment. With some lower levels of residual nitrogen from 2004, if you figured a realistic yield goal and fertilized to that plan, plant food was a good investment.

There were a few things that I did observe about a couple of critical nutrients though. In certain areas of the state, sulfur is getting to be one of the major nutrients to be looking at when it comes to wheat production. What might look like nitrogen deficiency symptoms might be sulfur. Top-dressing some sulfate sulfur showed a very good economic return.

The other is the use of seed placed phosphate. With early cool environmental conditions, the value of phosphate became very apparent when it is not applied to parts of the field. Reduced plant vigor, tillers and root development make for a shorter, less productive plant. I would not plan on cutting back for 2006 on phosphate at all.

The verdict is still out on some data with seed applied zinc. Initial plant vigor and color look good with doing this, but I have not seen the results yet.

What about post application of N to either increase the yield potential or boost protein levels?  Generally I can’t see where this paid off, as the first wheat that came off was good protein and the premium that was there before harvest vanished very quickly. I have had very few calls this fall stating that this was a good thing to do. There was a lot of flag leaf application and the increases seemed to be very minimal for protein. There was also yield loss around heading time due to very warm temperatures, allowing for increased protein levels.

Whatever the case may be, the concern now isn’t for what happened last year, it’s about fertilizer costs for 2006. One thing to keep in mind for next season was the amount of volunteer grain growth with the last season frost. This “cover crop” is going to affect the amount of residual nitrogen for next year, as the volunteer cereal consumed a healthy portion of the soil nitrogen.

Weed control
Every field and weed spectrum is different, but there seemed to be very good weed control both early and later. Growing conditions were very good to control weeds, either grass or broadleaf weeds. There still are some weed issues, like increased wild buckwheat and pigweed, more acres having cheat or brome species troubles, and more acres having ACC-ase resistance to popular wild oat products.

One thing that was noticeable was the fact that pre-harvest glyphosate applications got a very long time to work as the humidity during harvest was high and didn’t allow for much dry down. This made for some fields that weren’t harvested for two weeks or more after application, instead of 8-10 days like normal. So while drydown might have been delayed, the longer systemic glyphosate activity allowed for better perennial weed control for next year’s crop.

Fungicide use
This again can go back to the environmental conditions and the variety chosen. There was a good amount of fungicide used early and well justified. Tan spots and Septoria were prevalent early and control was pretty good. But most people will remember whether they did or did not spray for head scab. There are a couple of things that left a sour taste in some producer’s mouths, and here are a couple things I talked through with folks this summer:

1. This was the year that even Alsen would have seen a good yield response to Folicur due to the head scab pressure. This variety does see a yield boost, but not as much as some under ideal conditions for scab. Some fields had good weed control, sound fertility, early season fungicide, but passed on head scab and it was the major deciding factor in yield reduction.
2. The overall moisture situation made for good scab spore production, even before heading. Then the heat set in and I think some people felt that with no rain and high temperatures, even with high humidity, there shouldn’t be much for scab. That was not the case.
3. The high temperatures really pushed the wheat flowering development quickly, much faster than we like to see. That reduced yield potential, and also made the decision to spray a fungicide that much more critical. Instead of having a four-seven day window, it went down to three-four. By that time, it was too late for scab. You still got decent leaf disease control, but when scab pressure was heavy, the damage was already done.
4. Don’t use Quinone-outside-inhibitor fungicides, like Headline or Quilt, at heading or flowering. It can increase the amount of DON levels in wheat.

So what to do for 2006?
I would try to stick to my rotation if possible. The things that are going to deter that are the current grain market, fuel and plant food expense. Most of the research done will show that even with current fertilizer costs, cutting back or reducing yield goal to make the cost side of the equation work should expect lower yields. Good seed, timely weed control, the use of needed fungicides are all part of the plan for next year also.

Hopefully you have a current soil test and have pre-paid some fertilizer for next season. It is going to be tough and I expect the overall wheat acres in the area to be down. But plan on taking care of the wheat that you will have.

When I was at a recent meeting, I asked the group of growers present “what one thing can you give me that is positive for wheat next season?” I mostly got some laughs and shakes of the head, until one farmer said, “There will be plenty of seed available for next year.” Well, then let’s start there and look over those varieties that have the best fit, and plan accordingly.

Hanson is a certified crop advisor near Devils Lake, N.D.