Key Considerations For Manure Application To Soybeans

During the last decade, the number and size of confined animal feeding operations has continued to increase. In the Midwest, corn is the primary recipient of liquid manure from these facilities. However, while the density of production animals has continued to increase, the corn acreage available for manure application has not. To avoid over-application of manure to corn land, producers are pursuing other crops such as soybeans as alternative crops to receive manure.

Why Consider Applying Manure To Legumes?

The justification often applied for manure use on legumes is their ability to reduce N fixation when a readily available N source such as manure is applied. In addition, crops such as soybeans can utilize the phosphorus and potassium applied with the manure, thus reducing the costs of commercial fertilizer. For example, a 60 bushel/acre soybean crop in Iowa may remove up to 228 lbs. of nitrogen, 48 lbs. of phosphorus (P2O5) and 90 lbs. of potassium (K2O) per acre.

While there may be some economic, practical and environmental reasons to apply manure to both corn and legumes such as soybeans there are also some disadvantages of such practices.

Effects Of Manure Application To Soybeans

One area of concern is related to the environmental consequences of manure application to row crops such as soybeans, and specifically concerns about nitrate losses through subsurface drainage systems. Relative to environmental considerations, it should be noted that application of manure on corn residue prior to soybeans may have some benefit compared to application of the manure prior to corn on soybean residue since sufficient soil residue cover may be maintained with injection into cornstalks. In addition, there are questions on whether there are any negative impacts of manure application on soybean yields.

Yield Impacts

Several studies have been performed in the Midwest region of the U.S. resulting in positive yield increases related to liquid swine manure application on soybeans. However, there is no single conclusion as to why an increase in yield occurs. The studies identify yield increases from manure as the potential result of in-field initial nitrate, P, K, or other nutrient deficiencies. So, manure provided the nutrients that were deficient resulting in a yield increase and offsetting costs for purchased fertilizer. However, not in all cases was the yield increase sufficient to overcome application costs.

In addition to potential environmental concerns some studies have noted rare occurrences of reductions in soybean yield when manure is applied prior to soybeans and higher occurrences of common soybean diseases. A Minnesota study recommended that application of manure be avoided on fields with a history of white mold due to potential yield suppression due to manure application. Others have noted that manure application prior to soybeans can increase certain soybean diseases, specifically Pythium and Phytophthora damping off and Phytophthora root rot.

Another precaution that has been raised relative to liquid swine manure application to soybeans is that soybean seed germination and emergence can be sensitive to salts, so that if manure is applied close to planting time, there is a potential for injury especially if the soybean is planted into the manure or very near the manure.

Environmental Impacts

There have been few studies that have documented the environmental impacts of manure application to soybeans. A Minnesota study in the 1990’s evaluated the impact of liquid swine manure application on nodulating and non-nodulating soybeans. They found that applying manure at greater nitrogen rates than needed for maximum soybean yields did not adversely affect soybean yield. However, they found that application of nitrogen from the liquid swine manure increased post harvest soil nitrate levels. They also found greater increases in soil nitrate levels early in the growing season than post harvest.

Nitrogen

Manure application rates supplying from 0 to 446 lb N/acre in 89 lb N/acre increments were used in the study. Post-harvest soil nitrate levels were on average 37.7 lb N/acre (0-48 in) when no manure was applied and increased to 39.9, 44.4, 51.0, and 60.0 lb N/acre at applied nitrogen application rates of 50, 100, 150, and 200 lb N/acre, respectively. So, at an applied nitrogen application rate of 100 lb N/acre which might be about one-half of crop removal (soybean) the post-harvest soil nitrate was increased by about 15% compared to when no manure was applied.

Two drainage water quality studies in Iowa have evaluated the impact of liquid swine manure application to both corn and soybeans within a corn-soybean rotation. For a four-year study (2001-2004) at the Gilmore City research site in Pocahontas County, applying liquid swine manure at the rate of 150 lb N/acre (total nitrogen) before both corn and soybeans did not increase either corn or soybean yields compared to a rate of 200 lb N/acre of manure applied every other year before corn. In addition, the total of 300 lbs (two years of 150 lb N/acre) versus the 200 lb N/acre two-year-rate resulted in nitrate-N concentrations in tile drainage increasing on average from 17 to 23 mg/L, a 35% increase that was statistically significant.

For a six-year study (2001-2006) at the ISU Northeast Iowa Research Farm, applying liquid swine manure at the rate of 150 lb N/acre (total nitrogen) before corn and 200 lb N/acre (total nitrogen) before soybeans increased corn and/or soybean yields slightly some years (on average 3 and 2 bu/acre for corn and soybeans, respectively) compared to 150 lb N/ac of manure applied every other year before corn. The total of 350 (one year of 150 lb N/acre and one year of 200 lb N/acre) versus the 150 lb N/acre two-year-rate resulted in nitrate-N concentrations in tile drainage increasing on average from 21 to 38 mg/L, an 81% increase.

Both of these studies applied a relatively high nitrogen rate to the soybeans, but at these rates when liquid swine manure was applied every year in a corn-soybean rotation there was an increase in nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in the subsurface drainage water. However, it is unknown what direct water quality risk there would be with lower application rates specifically at rates ranging from 100-125 lb N/acre to soybeans. While the results discussed above were for studies on tile drained soils it is expected that there would be similar risks on non-tile drained soils relative to nitrate concentrations moving below the crop root zone.

Phosphorus

The application of manure to both corn and soybean, as noted above, could increase the risk of nitrate loss. Additionally the annual application of manure could increase the buildup phosphorus which could be of concern mainly from a surface runoff perspective. Considering a 60 bu/acre soybean crop the phosphorus removal (P2O5) might be 48 lb/acre and the potassium removal (K2O) might be 90 lb/acre, and a 200 bu/acre corn crop might remove 75 lb/acre of phosphorus (P2O5) and 60 lb/acre of potassium (K2O). This might result in a two-year removal of 123 lb/acre of phosphorus (P2O5) and 150 lb/acre of potassium (K2O).

Applying liquid swine manure at a nitrogen application rate of 150 lb N/acre to corn and 100 lb N/acre to soybeans (250 lb N/acre in two year rotation) might result in an overall phosphorus application of 172 lb/acre and an overall potassium application of 194 lb/acre (using values for liquid swine manure from a grow-finish operation (wet/dry). These application rates could be a long-term concern relative to phosphorus build up since crop removal might be 123 lb/acre for phosphorus with a phosphorus application of 172 lb/acre. A phosphorus buildup could have implications relative to the phosphorus index.

Pros, Cons, And Recommendations For Manure Application To Soybeans

Pros

  • Manure can supply phosphorus (P), potassium (K) and other nutrients;
  • Manure application on cornstalks can provide greater crop residue cover and lower erosion potential when injected or incorporated into cornstalks instead of soybean stubble on erosive land;
  • Manure application to soybeans can provide flexibility in application plans; and
  • Manure application to soybeans may improve soybean yields in some case.

Cons

  • Manure application to soybeans has the risk to increase nitrate in the soil profile which may increase the risk of nitrate loss;
  • Manure application to both corn and soybeans at an N rate for both crops could lead to a buildup of phosphorus; and
  • Manure application to soybeans under certain conditions may increase the risk of soybean diseases which could negatively impact yield.

Recommendations

  • Limit manure application to soybeans to a rate that compensates for N that would not be fixed by the soybean – this may be in the range of 100 lb N /acre;
  • Possibly limit manure application to soybeans to rates that fulfill the P and/or K requirements of the soybean crop or two-year corn-soybean rotation; and
  • Avoid manure applications when there is low crop utilization (i.e., fall applications).

Source: Extension.org, Matt Helmers, Iowa State University

Leave a Reply

Crop Inputs Stories

Crop InputsLand O’Lakes Announces Minnesota Water Quality Partnership
May 25, 2016
Governor Mark Dayton and Land O’Lakes, Inc. President and CEO Chris Policinski today announced a new public-private partnership to protect Read More
Corn close up
Crop InputsArysta LifeScience Establishes Global Headquarters In RTP
May 25, 2016
Arysta LifeScience has announced plans to relocate its global headquarters from West Palm Beach, FL, to Cary, NC, over the Read More
Southern States Cooperative
glyphosate
Crop InputsWHO: Glyphosate ‘Unlikely’ To Cause Cancer
May 16, 2016
Via Reuters.com reporter Kate Kelland: The weed-killing pesticide glyphosate, made by Monsanto and widely used in agriculture and by gardeners, Read More
Trending Articles
Eric SfiligojPity The Monsanto Haters
May 23, 2016
An old saying goes thus: “Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.” Given current events, there Read More
Monsanto Luling Plant
Crop InputsReport: Bayer Eyeing Monsanto For Possible Mega-Merger
May 16, 2016
Bayer AG is exploring a potential bid for U.S. competitor Monsanto Co. in a deal that would create the world’s Read More
Aerial Drone
Precision AgA Deeper Dive Into The Future Of Precision Ag
May 9, 2016
For about two decades now, through the good and the bad times, the ups and the downs inherent in agriculture, Read More
Palmer amaranth in soybean stubble
HerbicidesWSSA: Billions In Potential Economic Losses From Uncontrolled Weeds
May 4, 2016
What losses would corn and soybean growers experience if they were forced to eliminate herbicides and other control techniques from Read More
Eric SfiligojReasons For Hope In Commodity Prices
May 2, 2016
For many months now, the doomsayers have ruled the day in agriculture. Too much supply with too little demand would Read More
Eric SfiligojMissing The Family Ties In Agriculture
April 25, 2016
By its nature, the agriculture market is cyclical. Up and down cycles come and go with a regular pattern. For Read More
Latest News
Crop InputsLand O’Lakes Announces Minnesota Water Quality Pa…
May 25, 2016
Governor Mark Dayton and Land O’Lakes, Inc. President and CEO Chris Policinski today announced a new public-private partnership to protect Read More
Soybean Plant closeup
Industry NewsMonsanto Rejects Bayer Bid; Open To More Talks
May 25, 2016
Monsanto Co, the world’s largest seed company, turned down Bayer AG’s $62 billion acquisition bid as “incomplete and financially inadequate” Read More
Corn close up
Crop InputsArysta LifeScience Establishes Global Headquarters In R…
May 25, 2016
Arysta LifeScience has announced plans to relocate its global headquarters from West Palm Beach, FL, to Cary, NC, over the Read More
fertilizer blending and storage, Top 100
BlendersCHS Dakota Expansion Features AGCO’s GSI InterSys…
May 25, 2016
The continued growth of precision agriculture has increased farmer use of customized fertilizer blends best-suited for their soil conditions. Several Read More
ManagementAgriculture 3.5: A Bumpy Road Ahead
May 24, 2016
You may have read my article a few years ago on Agriculture 3.0, which is a term I coined to Read More
Topcon’s X30 display with CropSpec sensors
EquipmentGPS Autosteer Systems: Product Updates From Precision A…
May 24, 2016
Throughout 2015 GPS Steering solutions continued to evolve from what was once an after-market add on, to today’s cab where Read More
Trimble TMX-2050 In-Cab Display
Eric SfiligojThe Precision Ag Revolution Continues
May 24, 2016
It’s funny how much “the first time” tends to mean to someone as they get older. I sometimes can’t recall Read More
Eric Wintemute, AMVAC
Precision AgAMVAC Ups The Ante With New Precision Ag Technology
May 24, 2016
A potentially industry-changing at-plant soil treatment system from American Vanguard Corp., or AMVAC, is coming soon to large growers in Read More
Dry and Liquid Plant
CropLife 100CropLife 100 Map
May 24, 2016
The new CropLife 100 map shows the locations of each of the headquarters of the 2015 CropLife 100 retailers. The interactive Read More
Southern States Cooperative
Corn Field
Industry NewsTiger-Sul Names Veteran Account Manager To Lead Central…
May 23, 2016
With the continuing growth of the sulphur bentonite and precision crop nutrient industry, global agriculture firm H.J. Baker has announced that Read More
Bayer sign
Industry NewsReuters: Bayer Defies Critics With $62 Billion Monsanto…
May 23, 2016
German drugs and crop chemicals group Bayer has offered to buy U.S. seeds company Monsanto for $62 billion in cash, Read More
Eric SfiligojPity The Monsanto Haters
May 23, 2016
An old saying goes thus: “Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.” Given current events, there Read More
Industry NewsCompass Minerals Hires Industry Veteran To Lead Plant N…
May 19, 2016
Compass Minerals has hired plant nutrition industry veteran Vatren Jurin to steer the company’s portfolio expansion into specialty liquid micronutrient Read More
ASMARK Retailers LIVE! Tour 2016 Group shot The Andersons
CropLife 100The Andersons Rejects Unsolicited Proposal From HC2
May 19, 2016
The Andersons, Inc. has announced that its Board of Directors has rejected two non-binding, highly conditional, unsolicited proposals from HC2 Read More
glyphosate
Crop InputsWHO: Glyphosate ‘Unlikely’ To Cause Cancer
May 16, 2016
Via Reuters.com reporter Kate Kelland: The weed-killing pesticide glyphosate, made by Monsanto and widely used in agriculture and by gardeners, Read More
dicamba, Roundup Ready 2 Xtend
Crop InputsASA: No Dicamba On Roundup Ready 2 Xtend In 2016
May 16, 2016
While Roundup Ready 2 Xtend (RR2X) are tolerant to dicamba and glyphosate herbicides, no dicamba herbicides will be approved for Read More
CPP, glyphosate, dicamba, atrazine,
Crop InputsReport: Congress Pressing EPA On Glyphosate Review Hand…
May 16, 2016
Via Reuters.com reporter P.J. Huffstutter: U.S. lawmakers have asked EPA to explain why it published – and then withdrew – Read More