By: Tony Stirling
Grew up on a 1200 acre corn and soybean farm in East Central IL that my father and brother currently operate
Married my wife Leah
June 28th, 2014!
Graduated from Illinois State University in 2008 Double major in:
Agriculture Business
Ag Industry Management-Agronomy
6 years in Corn Research AgReliant Genetics
2.5 years in Lebanon, IN
DuPont Pioneer 3.5 years in Princeton, IL
Began MS in Agronomy in August 2011
Compaction is a long standing issue that continues to effect the industry
Causes
Wheel tracks of heavy equipment
Tillage
Repeated traffic passes
Animals
Compaction occurs when soil particles are pushed together
Reduces water infiltration
Reduces air movement
Constricts root growth
Effects of compaction on pore space.
Image adapted from: University of Minnesota, Extension. 2001. “Soil Compaction: Causes, Effects, and Control.” Retrieved June10, 2013 (http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/cropsystems/components/3115s01.html)
Proprietary root assay is used to evaluate hybrids in a controlled environment
Weed pressure is hard to control with a one time pass so we needed to know if we could take a sprayer across after planting
Compaction treatments occurred in extreme conditions in order to get the most compaction possible
Investigate the effects of compaction in a simulated root lodging experiment
Determine the ability for a sprayer to run through the root assay project after planting without adversely affecting the results
Experiment conducted in two different years 2013 and 2014
6 hybrids from 108-111 RM 3 susceptible to root lodging
3 above average ability to withstand root lodging
4 treatments used
2013 Control, tractor, sprayer empty, sprayer full
2014 Control, sprayer empty (dry), sprayer empty (wet), sprayer
full (wet)
Conventional tillage
Fall at 10 inches
Spring at 4 inches
Sable Silty Clay Loam
0-2 percent slope
Pattern tile
Field planted in 4 row plots
30 inch row
35,000 seeds per acre
Data collected in middle two rows
Conducted after 1.5 inches of rain at V2
Control No additional passes
after planting
John Deere 6140R Tractor Widened wheel base
Hagie STS10 Sprayer empty
Hagie STS10 Sprayer with 1000 gal water
Weights of Implements in 2013
Treatment Description Weight (lbs.)
1 Control - No Compaction 0
2 John Deere 6140R 13,580
3 Hagie STS10 empty 22,500
4 Hagie STS10 full of water 30,300
Control No additional equipment
passes after planting
Hagie STS10 sprayer empty Dry soil conditions
Wet conducted after a half an inch of rain at V5 Hagie STS10 sprayer
empty Wet soil conditions
Hagie STS10 sprayer full 950 gallons of water
driven with wet soil conditions
Weights of Implements in 2014
Treatment DescriptionWeight (lbs.)
1 Control - No Compaction 0
2 Hagie STS10 empty (dry) 22,500
3 Hagie STS10 empty (wet) 22,500
4Hagie STS10 w/ 950 gal of
water (wet)30,100
Lay out lay flat around field Closed circuit
Pull drip tape through field by hand
Drip tape irrigation Emitters every 8 inches .67 gal/min/100 ft
Push drip tape against row
Start continuous watering 1 week ahead Get the field to complete
saturation
Wind machine
Modified Hagiesprayer with blowers
Set desired RPM’s for fan speed Based on calibration
strip
Meant to simulate a typical thunderstorm Can go as high as 60-70
mph wind speed
Field saturation
Wind machine blows one row of data per pass
Row 2 is blown in the first wind event
Row 3 is blown in the second wind event
plot 1 2row 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
Early Early Late Late Early Early Late Late
First simulated blow was conducted in late June right before brace root development
Second simulated blow was conducted shortly after pollination
Fan speed/RPM’s increased for second wind event of year
Simulated wind was not performed in 2014
Natural thunderstorm that produced high winds occurred three days before first scheduled simulated wind event
Wind gusts as high as 36 mph
Second simulated wind event did not occur
2013
Completely randomized split block design
Probability level of .05 was used to determine treatment significance
Treatment Key
Yellow Control
Blue Tractor
Red Hagie Empty
Green Hagie Full
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2014
Randomized complete block design with nesting groups
Probability level of .05 was used to determine treatment significance
Treatment Key
Blue Empty (dry)
Green Control
Orange Empty (wet)
Red Full (wet)
Stand counts
Plot scores
Subjective score that is given to determine the quality of the plots
Plots scored 1-9
1-3 poor
4-6 average
7-9 excellent
Plant height (2013)
Plant height taken before simulated wind event for both events
Average of the plot from the upper extension of leaf for first event
Average of the plot from the tip of the tassel for second event
Root lodging counts
Crew counted number of plants that are lodged after the wind event
Lodged plants are 30 degrees past vertical
Counts are then calculated as a percent not lodged based off of original stand counts
Proc mixed type 3 ANOVA procedure used in SAS
LS mean was analyzed and then converted to letter groupings using PDmix800 (Saxton, 1998)
Fixed effects: Treatment, Hybrid, Hybrid x Treatment interaction
Random effects: Rep (2014)
Saxton, A.M. (1998). A macro for converting mean separation output to letter groupings in Proc Mixed. Proc. 23rd SAS Users Group Intl., SAS Institute, Cary, NC, pp 1243-1246.
Early root lodging- 2013 & 2014
Early plant height- 2013
Late root lodging- 2013
Late plant height- 2013
Early simulated root lodging
Treatment and hybrid terms both statistically significant
Type 3 Analysis of Variance
Source DFSum of Squares
Mean Square
F Value Pr > F
treatment 3 9107.854 3035.951 6.07 0.0005
hybrid 5 165917 33183 66.3 <.0001
treatment*hybrid 15 9965.827 664.3884 1.33 0.184
residual 301 150654 500.5115 . .
Early simulated root lodging LS Means
Tractor pass and full sprayer pass statistically different from empty sprayer
Effect=Treatment Method=LSD(P<.01)
Treatment EstimateStandard
ErrorLetterGroup
EmptySprayer
56.509 2.441 A
Control 47.7135 2.5111 AB
Tractor 44.0704 2.441 B
FullSprayer
43.2637 2.5532 B
Early plant height
Treatment and hybrid are statistically significant
Type 3 Analysis of Variance
Source DFSum of Squares
Mean Square
F Value Pr > F
treatment 3 5506.986 1835.662 24.8 <.0001
hybrid 5 3281.507 656.3014 8.87 <.0001
treatment*hybrid 15 971.0601 64.73734 0.87 0.5933
residual 312 23094 74.01805 . .
Early plant height LS Means
Control and full sprayer statistically different from tractor and empty sprayer
Effect=Treatment Method=LSD(P<.01)
Treatment EstimateStandard
ErrorLetterGroup
Control 153.76 0.9387 A
Full Sprayer 151.86 0.9387 A
Tractor 146.6 0.9387 B
EmptySprayer
143.61 0.9387 B
Late simulated root lodging
Treatments, hybrids, and hybrid by treatment interaction statistically significant
Type 3 Analysis of Variance
Source DFSum of Squares
Mean Square
F Value Pr > F
treatment 3 19093 6364.383 18.8 <.0001
hybrid 5 58780 11756 34.72 <.0001
treatment*hybrid 15 10961 730.7622 2.16 0.0077
residual 311 105291 338.5564 . .
Late simulated root lodging LS Means
All three treatments are statistically different from control
Effect=Treatment Method=LSD(P<.01)
Treatment EstimateStandard
ErrorLetterGroup
EmptySprayer
83.6925 2.0076 A
FullSprayer
81.6497 2.0076 A
Tractor 79.3562 2.0076 A
Control 64.4398 2.0204 B
Late Plant Height
Hybrid is the only term that is statistically significant
Type 3 Analysis of Variance
Source DFSum of Squares
Mean Square
F Value Pr > F
treatment 3 42.96429 14.32143 1.38 0.25
hybrid 5 8040.107 1608.021 154.54 <.0001
treatment*hybrid 15 61.82143 4.121429 0.4 0.9796
residual 312 3246.429 10.40522 . .
Natural early root lodging
Treatment, hybrid, and rep are all statistically significant
Type 3 Analysis of Variance
Source DFSum of Squares
Mean Square
F Value Pr > F
treatment 3 3530.238 1176.746 5.2 0.0017
hybrid 5 323645 64729 285.96 <.0001
treatment*hybrid 15 4947.241 329.8161 1.46 0.1217
rep 11 8293.176 753.9251 3.33 0.0003
residual 253 57267 226.3537 . .
Natural early root lodging LS Means
Hagie STS10 in dry conditions was statistically different from the control
Effect=Treatment Method=LSD(P<.01)
Treatment EstimateStandard
ErrorLetterGroup
Empty Sprayer (Dry)
64.7281 2.2741 A
Empty Sprayer (Wet)
60.8451 2.279 AB
Full Sprayer (Wet)
59.7968 2.2635 AB
Control 54.7566 2.2704 B
Running equipment through the field after planting has an effect on the root assay project
Experimental design could have played a factor in results – Treatment and column effect are confounded
Decided to run the experiment again with different experimental design
Better experimental design allows for differentiation of treatments
Treatment applications of both dry and wet helped get a full perspective of how the compaction affected the roots
Natural winds were collected instead of simulated winds so that could have played a factor in the results
Running equipment through the root assay does have significant impact on the data
Post-planting equipment passes will not be recommended for future experiments
Dr. Cruse
Pioneer Staff
Andy Dye
Isaac Vohland
Eric Speakes
Aaron Moodie
Jeff Johnson
Deanne Wright-stats
My wife Leah