|
SE IL and SW IN | I am with Loran but am open to differing opinions and evidence that this is incorrect. I would go further and say that anhydrous ammonia is my preferred N source as it is knifed below the area of prime biolobical activity, thus less disruption of the biological process which occurs mostly in the top inch of soil. I also use 28% N at planting in a 2X2 band, again concentrated and below the surface.
An observation I made a few years ago makes me think that the most disruptive fertilizer application would be liquid 28 sprayed on the stalks and lightly tilled. That is the perfect environment for bacteria bloom, burning up the residue releasing N and CO2 at a time when the soil cannot store the additional N. Because bacteria can reproduce so quickly the other fauna , even those that use bacteria as a food source, are starved out of the system. So, the carbon is gone in the form of CO2, soil cannot store the N mineralized from the residue, allowing it to escape , residue needed to provide that storage basin is gone, so the soil is depleted that much more. AMS will also do the trick, just not as fast. Again this is just an unproven theory of mine, but I cannot find anyone whose name ends with PHD to explain where in goes wrong.
Applied granular P,K, and traces are so slow to enter the system that I cannot believe that they will greatly affect the biology, one way or the other. In a really active soil, there is several times more organic P&K cycled annually than is applied in a normal application.
Edited by tntfarm 11/14/2012 22:50
| |
|
Kris Nichols at Indiana Soil Health Symposium
