HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rehm, G. W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Rehm, G. W. Agricola Articles by Rehm, G. W. Related Collections Nutrient Management Industrial Waste

Nutrient Management & Soil & Plant Analysis

Sulfur Management for Corn Growth with Conservation Tillage

Dep. of Soil, Water, and Climate, 439 Borlaug Hall, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108-6028

^* Corresponding author (rehmx001{at}umn.edu)

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES

 
Reduction in soil disturbance associated with conservation tillage planting systems suggests that it is important to evaluate management practices for use of S for corn (Zea mays L.) grown in these planting situations. Evaluation of source, placement, and rate of S applied has not been the focus of past research. In this study, two S fertilizers [21-0-0-24 (ammonium sulfate), 12-0-0-26 (ammonium thiosulfate)] were applied at rates to supply 0, 6.7, 13.4, and 20.1 kg S ha^–1 either in contact with the seed at planting or in a band near the seed at planting. Soil texture varied from loamy fine sand to silty clay loam at the experimental sites. Corn emergence was reduced when 12-0-0-26 was placed in contact with the seed at sites with a loamy fine sand and sandy loam texture and soil was dry at time of planting. Stand reduction was most severe when 12-0-0-26 fluid material was used at rates to supply 13.4 and 20.1 kg S ha^–1. Placement maintaining soil between seed and fertilizer had no negative effect on emergence. When placed in a band near the seed, both S sources had an equal effect on yield. Reduction in emergence due to 12-0-0-26 in contact with the seed had a negative effect on grain yield. Application of fertilizer S increased yield at all sites except where the texture was a silty clay loam. Optimum rate of fertilizer S was either 6.7 or 13.4 kg S ha^–1 and varied with site. The response to fertilizer S on the silt loam soil suggests that inadequate S is released from soil organic matter via mineralization in conservation tillage planting systems.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES

 
THE IMPORTANCE OF S for corn production has been recognized for some time. The rates needed in a fertilizer program for optimum production have been defined. Sulfur responses for corn have been documented in the northern and western Corn Belt. Yield responses reported by Daigger and Fox (1971), Fox et al. (1964), and O'Leary and Rehm (1990) are typical of results from other studies. The response of corn grown on Atlantic Coastal Plain soils has been described by Kline et al. (1989) and Reneau (1983). This research provided the basis for the conclusions that S should be a component of a fertilizer program when corn is grown on sandy soils having a low organic matter content. These research efforts also demonstrated that a broadcast application of 28 kg S ha^–1 was adequate for optimum yield.

Selection of a source of S for a fertilizer program is also a management decision faced by growers who grow corn on sandy soils. However, sources of S that can be used in a fertilizer program have not been evaluated in diverse growing conditions. In comparisons that have been reported, corn yields resulting from broadcast application of elemental S have been equal to those resulting from broadcast sulfate sources supplying S in the sulfate form (Rehm, 1984). A search of the literature revealed that there have not been any comparisons of fluid and dry sources of S. In addition, there have not been any comparisons of S sources applied either in a band near the seed at planting or in contact with the seed.

While sandy soils with a low organic matter content have been identified as being responsive to fertilizer S, research to date has not established a consistent or predictable yield response to S fertilization for non-sandy soils (Hoeft et al., 1985; Hoeft and Fox, 1986).

The major portion of total S found in soils is present in the soil organic matter (Ribiero et al., 2001). Freney (1986) has described the various factors that affect formation of SO₄–S from soil organic matter. The accumulation of SO₄–S via mineralization from a variety of soils was reported by O'Leary and Rehm (1991) where production of SO₄–S was measured under near optimum moisture and temperature conditions. Soil temperatures are usually lower in conservation tillage systems (Hill, 2000). Therefore, formation of SO₄–S via mineralization could possibly be reduced with these planting systems thereby increasing the probability of a yield response to S in a fertilizer program.

Recognizing the needs cited above, this study was conducted to determine the effect of rate, source, and placement of S fertilizers on emerged stand, growth, and yield of corn grown in conservation tillage production systems.

	MATERIALS AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES

 
This study was conducted in 1999–2001. Two locations were used each year. The experimental sites were in central, south-central, and southeastern Minnesota. The site identification and corresponding soil taxonomic descriptions are listed in Table 1. The ridge-till planting system was used at all sites in 1999 and 2000, and at the SIL-01 site in 2001. A disk and plant tillage system was used at the SAL-01 site. Both ridge-till and disk and plant are considered to be conservation tillage production systems in Minnesota.

A John Deere Maxi-Emerge planter (John Deere Co., Moline, IL) equipped with a positive displacement pump and ground speed driven cones was used to plant and apply either the fluid or dry fertilizer. Planting speed was approximately 0.9 m s^–1. High yielding varieties with a maturity rating to match the region were used at each location. Corn was planted in late April each year. Preemergence herbicides were applied in a 30-cm band over the row following planting. Corn was planted at a population of approximately 79000 plants ha^–1.

Dry fertilizer applied at a rate to supply 22 kg N ha^–1, 9.9 kg P ha^–1, and 37.2 kg K ha^–1 was placed in a band at a depth of 10 to 12 cm below the existing row in the fall preceding the corn year. This banded placement of N, P, and K was used at all sites where the ridge-till planting system was used, but not at the SAL-01 location. Additional N, as urea (46-0-0) was supplied as a sidedress treatment at a rate appropriate for expected yields and incorporated with cultivation. This amount of N combined with the banded N (150–180 kg ha^–1 and varied with site) was judged to be more than adequate for optimum corn production.

Plant population was measured at the V3 to V4 (Ritchie et al., 1993) stage of development by counting the number of plants in 6 m of row. Whole plants (4 plot^–1) were also collected at this time. These samples were dried, weighed, ground, and analyzed for total S by a dry combustion method involving collection and measurement of SO₂ by a LECO model 132 sulfur analyzer (LECO Corp., St. Joseph, MI).

Grain yields were measured by hand harvesting two rows, each 6 m in length in mid to late October. Moisture samples were taken from each plot so that yields could be corrected to 145 g 100 g^–1. Data were analyzed with analysis of variance procedures.

	RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES

 
Plant Population
Impact of fertilizer placed either near, or in contact with, the seed at planting on corn emergence is a concern. Plant populations measured in this study are reported as a percentage of the control (no S applied) and are shown in Fig. 1, 2, and 3 for 1999, 2000, and 2001, respectively.

View larger version (50K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Plant density in 1999 at sites having a (A) loamy fine sand and (B) silty clay loam texture as affected by source, rate, and placement of S fertilizers.

View larger version (49K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Plant density in 2000 at sites having a (A) loamy fine sand and (B) loam texture as affected by source, rate, and placement of S fertilizers.

View larger version (47K): [in this window] [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Plant density in 2001 at sites having a (A) sandy loam and (B) silt loam texture as affected by source rate and placement of S fertilizers.

In 2000, emerged stand at the LSF-00 site was significantly affected by source, placement and rate of applied S (Fig. 2). Emerged stand was not significantly affected by treatment at the L-00 site in the same year (Fig. 2). When the texture was a loamy fine sand, plant population was not significantly affected by either rate or placement of 21-0-0-24. However, there were substantial differences in emerged stand at this site when 12-0-0-26 was used as the S source. Stand density was not affected when this material was placed in a band near the seed. There were, however, substantial reductions in stand density when this material was placed in contact with the seed. The reduction in stand density increased as the rate of S applied as 12-0-0-26 increased (Fig. 2).

The effect of treatment on emerged stand also varied with soil texture in 2001. Source, placement and rate of applied S had no significant effect (P < 0.05) on emerged stand at the site with the silt loam texture (Fig. 3). At the site with the sandy loam texture, emerged stand was affected by S source and placement. Considering the use of 21-0-0-24, emerged stand was reduced when this material was placed in contact with the seed rather than applied in a band near the seed. For this material, rate of applied S had no significant effect on emerged stand. Compared with the control, 12-0-0-26, regardless of placement, reduced emerged stand. When this material was placed in contact with the seed, at a rate to supply 20.1 kg S ha^–1 emerged stand was further reduced.

The variability in emerged stand associated with seed placed 12-0-0-26 measured in this study is attributed to differences in soil moisture at time of planting. Even though conservation tillage was used at all sites, the soil at planting depth was very dry at the LFS-00 and SAL-01 locations. Moisture at planting depth was judged to be adequate at all other sites.

A search of the literature revealed no reports of the effect of source, placement, and rate of fertilizer S on corn emergence. The data collected from the six site years in this study lead to the conclusion that a reduction in emerged stand should not be a concern if either source of S is applied in a band 2.5 cm to the side of and 5.0 cm below the seed at planting.

The emerged stand data also show that negative effects can be expected if 12-0-0-26 is applied in contact with the seed and soils are dry at planting. This is especially true for soils having a loamy fine sand or sandy loam texture. Since soil moisture content of soils having these textures can change rapidly in a short period of time, this reduction in corn emergence is a risk that cannot be ignored. The data suggest that there is considerably less risk associated with 21-0-0-24 instead of 12-0-0-26 placed with the seed.

Sulfur Uptake by Young Plants
The impact of study variables on S uptake by young corn plants was also of interest. Sulfur uptake was computed as a product of plant dry weight and S concentration data. Stage of development at time of sampling varied with year and location. All samples were collected at either the V3 or V4 stage of development.

Results of the analysis of variance of S uptake data from all sites are summarized in Table 3. When averaged over rate and placement, S uptake at all sites was significantly greater when the S was supplied as 21-0-0-24 as compared with 12-0-0-26 (Tables 4, 5, 6). The increase varied from 10% at the SAL-01 site to 30 to 40% at the other sites.

Sulfur uptake was significantly affected by placement at the LFS-99, LFS-00, L-00, and SAL-01 sites (Table 3). The source by placement interaction was significant at only one site (L-00). The rate x placement interaction was not significant and the source x rate x placement interaction was significant at only one of six sites (Table 3).

When averaged over the three rates of applied S, uptake of S by young corn plants was greater when S sources were applied in a band near the seed rather than in contact with the seed at planting. For sites with sandy textures (LFS-99, LFS-00, L-00, SAL-01), this increase was 15, 17, and 29% for 1999, 2000, and 2001, respectively. These uptake measurements indicate that, when soils are sandy, there could be some restrictions in root growth when the S fertilizers studied are placed in contact with the seed.

Sulfur uptake increased with rate of applied S at the SCL-99, L-00, and SAL-01 sites (Table 3). Rate of application (control excluded) had no significant effect on S uptake at the other locations.

A t test was used to compare S uptake from the control treatment to uptake from treatments where the S rate was 6.7 kg ha^–1. Application of 6.7 kg S ha^–1 produced a significant increase in uptake at five of six experimental sites. The increase was significant at the 0.10 level for the SIL-01 site, and significant at the 0.01 confidence level at all other sites. Measured uptake values are provided in Tables 4, 5, and 6 for 1999, 2000, and 2001, respectively.

Grain Yield
Since plant population at harvest was significantly affected by treatment at some sites, the area selected for harvest at all sites was predetermined rather than chosen at random. Hand harvest of the two center rows was initiated at 3 m from the beginning of the plot. The CV for each site was relatively low (Table 7). Therefore, significant differences in grain yield can be attributed to the treatments applied.

When averaged across rate of applied S and placement, S source, when considered as a main effect, had no significant effect on yield in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Table 7). However, there was a significant interaction between S source and placement at the LFS-99 and LFS-00 sites. At these two sites, grain yields were significantly reduced when the 12-0-0-26 was placed with the seed in 1999 (Table 9) and 2000 (Table 10). For the LFS-99 site, this reduction in yield was measured when 12-0-0-26 was applied with the seed at a rate to supply 20.1 kg S ha^–1 (Table 9). At the LFS-00 site, yields were reduced when the 12-0-0-26 was placed in contact with the seed to supply 13.4 and 20.1 kg S ha^–1 (Table 10). The interaction between S source and rate of applied S was not significant for the SAL-01 and SIL-01 sites (Tables 7 and 11).

The response of corn grown on sandy soils to application of fertilizer S is consistent with responses reported in previous research where soils were sandy (Daigger and Fox, 1971; Fox et al., 1964; Kline et al., 1989; O'Leary and Rehm, 1990; Reneau, 1983). However, the response measured at the SIL-01 site is not consistent with conclusions reached by Hoeft and Fox (1986), Hoeft et al. (1985), and Stecker et al. (1995).

In past research, the effect of fertilizer S on corn production was measured when the crop was planted with conventional tillage practices. In the literature, there are no reports from the Corn Belt where fertilizer S applied to anything but a sandy soil increased yield. The results from this study, however, show that application of fertilizer S may be important when conservations tillage is used for low organic matter non-sandy soils (<20 g 100 g^–1). Response measured when conservation tillage was used is attributed to a reduction of mineralized S. Reduction in mineralization is attributed to reduced soil disturbance associated with conservation tillage.

The results of this research also document the risk associated with placement of 12-0-0-26 in contact with the seed. Since soil moisture content at planting cannot be predicted, use of 12-0-0-26 in contact with the seed should be avoided. It is also important to note that placement of this material in a band near the seed at planting had no negative effect on either plant density or grain yield.

A comparison of fluid and dry sources of fertilizer S placed either in contact with the seed or in a band near the seed at planting has not previously been reported. In this study, both sources had an equal effect on plant density and yield if contact with the seed was avoided.

	SUMMARY

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES

 
There is ample documentation in the literature that addition of S in a fertilizer program will usually increase the yield of corn grown on sandy soils when conventional tillage systems that produce considerable soil disturbance are used. In this study, banded fertilizer S increased corn yields at sites having a loamy fine sand texture. This response would be expected. Optimum rate of fertilizer S varied with site and year. A response to banded S was also measured at sites having sandy loam and silt loam textures where corn was planted with conservation tillage systems. When conservation tillage was used, a rate of 6.7 kg S ha^–1 was associated with optimum yield. The results of this study indicate that application of fertilizer S in a band near the seed at planting should be considered as a routine management practice for corn grown on low organic matter soils (<20 g 100 g^–1) where conservation tillage is used.

When placed in a band near the seed at planting, both the dry (21-0-0-24) and the fluid (12-0-0-26) sources of S had an equal effect on yield. When these materials were placed in contact with the seed, the 12-0-0-26 had a negative effect on plant density and subsequent yield, while placement of 21-0-0-24 with the seed had no significant effect on these parameters. The impact of 12-0-0-26 placed in contact with the seed was most severe when the soil was dry at planting. Since soil moisture at planting cannot be predicted, application of 12-0-0-26 in this way should be avoided.

Received for publication April 28, 2004.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION SUMMARY REFERENCES

 

• Combs, S.M., J.L. Denning, and K. Frank. 1998. Sulfite-Sulfur. p. 35–40. In J.R. Brown et al (ed.) Recommended chemical soil test procedures for the North Central region. North Central Regional Res. Publ. 221 (Revised). Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn. SB 1001. Columbia.
• Combs, S.M., and M.V. Nathan. 1998. Soil organic matter. p. 53–58. In J.R. Brown et al (ed.) Recommended chemical soil test procedures for the North Central region. North Central Regional Res. Publ. 221 (Revised). Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn. SB 1001. Columbia.
• Daigger, L.A., and R.L. Fox. 1971. Nitrogen and sulfur nutrition of sweet corn in relation to fertilization and water composition. Agron. J. 63:729–730.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Fox, R.L., R.A. Olson, and H.F. Rhoades. 1964. Evaluating the sulfur status of soils by plant and soil tests. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 28: 243–256.
• Frank, K., D. Beegle, and J. Denring. 1998. Phosphorus. p. 21–29. In J.R. Brown et al (ed.) Recommended soil test procedures for the North Central region. North Central Regional Res. Publ. 221 (Revised). Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn. SB 1001. Columbia.
• Freney, J.R. 1986. Forms and reactions of organic sulfur compounds in soils. p. 207–226. In M.A. Tabatabai (ed.) Sulfur in agriculture. Agron. Monogr. No. 27. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA. Madison, WI.
• Goos, R.J., and B.E. Johnson. 2001. Thiosulfate oxidation in three soils as influenced by temperature. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 32:2841–2849.[CrossRef]
• Hill, P. 2000. Crop response to tillage systems. p. 47–60. In R. Reeder (ed.) Conservation tillage systems and management. Midwest Plan Service Publ. 45. Iowa State University, Ames.
• Hoeft, R.G., and R.H. Fox. 1986. Plant response to sulfur in the Midwest and Northeastern United States, p. 345–356. In M.A. Tabatobai (ed.) Sulfur in Agriculture. Agronomy Monogr. 27. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI.
• Hoeft, R.G., J.E. Sawyer, R.M. Vanden Heuvel, M.A. Schmitt, and G.S. Brinkman. 1985. Corn response to sulfur in Illinois soils. J. Fert. Issues 2:95–104.
• Kline, J.S., J.T. Sims, and K.L. Schitke–Gartley. 1989. Response of irrigated corn to sulfur fertilization in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 53:1101–1108.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• O'Leary, M.J., and G.W. Rehm. 1990. Nitrogen and sulfur effects on the yield and quality of corn grown for grain and silage. J. Prod. Agric. 3:135–140.
• O'Leary, M.J., and G.W. Rehm. 1991. Evaluation of some soil and plant analysis procedures as predictors of the need for sulfur for corn production. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 22:87–98.
• Rehm, G.W. 1984. Source and rate of sulfur for corn production. J. Fert. Issues 3:99–103.
• Reneau, R.B., Jr. 1983. Crop response to sulfur application in Coastal Plain soils. Agron. J. 75:1036–1040.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Ritchie, S.W., J.J. Hanway, and G.O. Benson. 1993. How a corn plant develops. Spec. Rep. 48. Iowa State Univ. Coop. Ext. Sev., Ames, IA.
• Ribiero, E.S., Jr., L.E. Dias, V.H. Alvarez, J.W. Mello, and W.L. Daniels. 2001. Dynamics of sulfur fractions in Brazilian soils submitted to consecutive harvests of sorghum. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 65:787–795.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Stecker, J.A., D.D. Buchholz, and P.W. Tracy. 1995. Fertilizer sulfur effects on corn yield and plant sulfur. J. Prod. Agric. 8:61–65.
• Warncke, D., and J.R. Brown. 1998. Potassium and other basic cations. p. 31–33. In J.R. Brown et al (ed.) Recommended chemical soil test procedures for the North Central region. North Central Regional Res. Publ. 221 (Revised). Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn. SB 1001. Columbia.
• Watson, M.E., and J.R. Brown. 1998. pH and lime requirement. p. 13–16. In J.R. Brown et al (ed.) Recommended chemical soil test procedures for the North Central region. North Central Regional Res. Publ. 221 (Revised). Missouri Agric. Exp. Stn. SB 1001. Columbia.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Chen, D. Kost, and W. A. Dick Flue Gas Desulfurization Products as Sulfur Sources for Corn Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., August 20, 2008; 72(5): 1464 - 1470. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. D. Zheljazkov, T. Astatkie, C. D. Caldwell, J. MacLeod, and M. Grimmett Compost, Manure, and Gypsum Application to Timothy/Red Clover Forage J. Environ. Qual., October 27, 2006; 35(6): 2410 - 2418. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. S. Wortmann, S. A. Xerinda, M. Mamo, and C. A. Shapiro No-Till Row Crop Response to Starter Fertilizer in Eastern Nebraska: I. Irrigated and Rainfed Corn Agron. J., January 5, 2006; 98(1): 156 - 162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Figures Only Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Rehm, G. W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Rehm, G. W. Agricola Articles by Rehm, G. W. Related Collections Nutrient Management Industrial Waste