Search

Determination of barley (Hordeum vulgareL.) nutrient uptake in residue biomass is important for agronomic, economic, and environmental decisions. Improved understanding of grain yield, residue biomass, nutrient uptake, and their relationships are needed. Research determined these factors in 2018 and 2019 from trials of four barley classes (spring animal feed, human food, and malt, as well as winter malt), using three common cultivars of each, at five locations in southern Idaho. Production environment created the largest difference in residue biomass and nutrient uptake. Barley harvest index ranged from 0.46 to 0.52 Mg Mg−1across feed, food, and malt classes. Compared to previous estimates, nutrient concentrations from the combined dataset were greater than for N, less than for P, and greater than for K. Correlation of grain yields to nutrient uptake (excluding Cu and Fe) had r2ranging from 0.68 to 0.89. At current prices, economic analysis indicated that fertilizer replacement costs for total residue biomass nutrients were greater than previous estimates and could greatly exceed current sale value. These relationships and value estimates can be used to improve prediction of barley residue biomass production and nutrient uptake to guide best management practices. The decision of how to utilize these metrics (on‐farm, regional, etc.) should be considered based on known variation in measured nutrient and residue data and considered in relation to the proposed task. Limited research has focused on nutrient uptake and economic value of barley residue biomass (straw + chaff).Production environment created the largest differences in residue biomass and nutrient uptake across barley classes.Average harvest indices (HI) were 0.51, 0.47, 0.52, and 0.46 Mg Mg−1for feed, food, spring malt, and winter malt barley.N uptake combined across classes was greater than previous estimates, P was less, and K was greater.Fertilizer replacement cost of nutrients removed in residue may far exceed the sale value.

Global market demands for barley are less than cereals such as corn, rice, and wheat, but barley plays a particularly important role in cropping systems in areas of high elevation and/or latitude with short growing seasons. Estimation of residue nutrient uptake requires both a knowledge of the biomass produced, as well as the concentration of individual nutrients. These factors were evaluated in 2018 and 2019 from trials of four barley classes at five locations in southern Idaho. Earn 0.5 CEUs in Crop Management by reading the article and taking the quiz at https://web.sciencesocieties.org/Learning‐Center/Courses.

Droughts in the western United States have led to an increased and pressing need to consider how to manage crops with less water for the future sustainability of production in the region. Fertilizer nitrogen (N) recommendations in the western United States have often been determined where irrigation was a non‐limiting factor. However, when irrigation is a limiting factor, it is critical to consider the interrelationship with irrigation amounts and N applications rates as crop yield and quality can be heavily influenced in both positive and negative ways. An irrigation termination and N fertilizer rate study was conducted to investigate malt barley yield and quality response in Kimberly, ID. Earn 0.5 CEUs in Soil & Water Management by reading the article and taking the quiz at https://web.sciencesocieties.org/Learning‐Center/Courses.

Idaho is a major malt barley (Hordeum vulgareL.) producer in the United States. Production is concentrated in the semi‐arid Snake River Plain region of southern Idaho. Irrigation and fertilizer N applications are two of the most important managed factors. Research was conducted at the University of Idaho Kimberly Research & Extension Center near Kimberly, ID, to determine yield, grain quality, and malt characteristics as affected by N application rate (0, 56, 112, and 168 kg N ha−1) and final irrigation timing at Feekes 10.0 (boot; F10.0), Feekes 11.2 (soft dough; F11.2), and +7 d after Feekes 11.2 (+7F11.2). Irrigation termination at F10.0 resulted in decreased yields and unacceptable malt characteristics across N rates. Irrigation termination at F11.2 and +7F11.2 yielded 6,439 kg ha−1at a fertilizer N application of 56 kg N ha−1, similar to higher N applications. Greater predicted yields up to 6,886 kg ha−1were calculated by regression analysis with applications up to 147 kg N ha−1. Grain yield, protein, plumps, and test weights did not differ at any N rate for F11.2 or +7F11.2. Malt extract, free amino N, and diastatic power were similar for the F11.2 and +7F11.2 irrigations. Malt β‐glucan content did not differ up to 56 kg N ha−1for any treatment, but reductions of up to 30 mg kg−1were measured at higher N rates for the +7F11.2 irrigation. Results warrant further investigations into increased N applications and provide evidence of the effects of irrigation cutoff timing and N for malt barley. Irrigation termination at the F10.0 stage caused severe yield and quality issues.F11.2 and +7F11.2 yields did not differ and increased with N from 4,769 to 6,845 kg ha‐1.Grain protein was less than 130 g kg‐1at all N rates for F11.2 and +7F11.2.Irrigation past F11.2 did not generally improve or detract from quality.Malt β‐glucan decreased up to 30 mg kg‐1at higher N rates for +7F11.2.

A growing world population and increases in food and energy consumption have placed production agriculture in a difficult situation. The rapid growth in food production through specialized operations such as monoculture cropping systems has aligned to satisfy increases in demand for food and fiber. However, its adverse impacts on natural resources pose huge challenges for the sustainability of food production. The situation is direr for developing countries or rural regions of the world due to the limited resources available to farming communities in these regions. To avoid production agriculture being at the proverbial crossroads we suggest an alternate approach. One that involves the sustainable use of natural resources without adverse environmental impacts by relying less on production inputs whether it be agrochemicals or machineries. We examined the extent to which regenerative agriculture, permaculture, and smart technology have evolved in response to sustainable agricultural production, agricultural decision support system, and overall global food security. Collectively, regenerative agriculture and permaculture are semi‐closed holistic systems approach designed to reduce or eliminate dependence on external inputs (e.g., chemicals) which restores and maintains natural systems (e.g., soil quality, biodiversity, and ecosystem services). We suggest that fully embracing modern regenerative agriculture as well as integrated permaculture will improve soil health, ecosystem biodiversity, land and resource conservation, agricultural sustainability, and food security. Identifying and implementing practices towards regenerative agriculture, integrated permaculture, digital agriculture, and sustainable agricultural management utilizing modern agricultural technologies infused with data science (artificial intelligence [AI] or machine learning [ML]) is critical. Intensive agriculture can cause a loss in biodiversity and concerns for global food security.Regenerative agriculture and integrative permaculture are keys to address food security.Digital agricultural tools can aid in attaining agricultural and environmental sustainability.Precision agriculture should be implemented as an agricultural decision support system.Artificial intelligence and machine learning can guide integrated agricultural input management.

Core IdeasBray‐1, Mehlich‐3, Haney–Haney–Hossner–Arnold, and Olsen‐P were compared on primarily alkaline calcareous soils.Mehlich‐3 was correlated with the Olsen‐P extractant regardless of pH or inorganic C content. Bray‐1, Mehlich‐3, Haney–Haney–Hossner–Arnold, and Olsen‐P were compared on primarily alkaline calcareous soils. Mehlich‐3 was correlated with the Olsen‐P extractant regardless of pH or inorganic C content. Soil P testing is critical to ensure the accuracy of fertilizer recommendations and to optimize crop yield while minimizing negative environmental consequences. Olsen‐P is the most commonly used soil P test for alkaline calcareous soils found in Idaho and the western United States. The Bray‐1 test is commonly used in the Pacific Northwest on neutral to acidic soils but underestimates P in alkaline calcareous soils. Mehlich‐3 has been evaluated throughout various regions in the United States. Few data evaluating Mehlich‐3 exist for soils in the western United States. Additionally, the comparatively newly developed Haney–Haney–Hossner–Arnold (H3A) test, a component of the soil health tool, has not been widely evaluated on alkaline calcareous soils. Soil samples from the 0‐ to 30‐cm depth were collected from agricultural fields throughout Idaho and analyzed with Bray‐1, H3A, Mehlich‐3, and Olsen‐P extractants. The results indicate that Olsen‐P was correlated with Mehlich‐3, whereas Bray‐1 and H3A were not correlated with Olsen‐P. Both Bray‐1 and H3A resulted in lower values of extractable P than the Olsen‐P test, whereas Mehlich‐3 resulted in greater values. A threshold point in CaCO3(i.e., inorganic C) of 6.7 and 5.1 mg kg‐1for the Bray‐1 and H3A was obtained, respectively, which indicated that inorganic C concentrations at or above these levels resulted in a reduction in extractable soil P. Thus Mehlich‐3 could be evaluated for use in alkaline calcareous soils, whereas Bray‐1 and H3A have notable issues that would limit their applicability.

Soil phosphorus testing made great strides with multiple chemical tests proposed and implemented for crop fertilizer management programs during the previous century. In the latter part of the previous century, the environmental impact of excess nonpoint phosphorus loading from the landscape (e.g., agricultural lands) to waterbodies became an issue of increased concern, and soil phosphorus testing came to the forefront of management and monitoring. This article will provide a general overview of the usage of phosphorus testing for agronomic purposes in the United States Earn 0.5 CEUs in Nutrient Management by reading this article and taking the quiz at www.certifiedcropadviser.org/education/classroom/classes/725.