Integrated cover crop innovations for biologically based no-till

Milestone 1 - Project staff will identify seven farms for potential collaboration. Selected farmers will be interviewed about their crop management practices, interest in research and willingness to share information and experiences with other agriculture professionals. Three farmers will be confirmed as collaborators for on-farm research, demonstrations and field days on acres in grain production in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and New York.

After an initial interview process, farmer collaborators were identified in 2006. Rodale Institute, the Penn State On-Farm Research Coordinator, graduate student, and faculty members visited Kirby Reichert’s (PA) farm in May 2007, Bill Mason (MD) late May, September and mid-October, and Peter Shuster (NY) early June and at the end of August. These three farmers have been our collaborators for this project. In the summer of 2007, we identified a fourth participant, Klaus Martens (NY), who worked on establishing field planted cover crops with the expectation of rolling and planting cash crops in the spring of 2008.

In 2008, Ruth (Mick) Mischler completed her graduate studies at PSU to satisfy her requirements for a Masters Degree.

Milestone 2 - Researchers will initiate projects at the Rodale Institute Experimental Farm, Penn State’s research farm, and the three collaborator farms. Project participants will implement detailed monitoring plans to collect relevant agronomic data.

As noted in the Materials and Methods section, trials were installed in three Pennsylvania research locations for two years to investigate no-till organic corn production with hairy vetch as cover crop. The vetch was rolled/crimped at different times of flowering (early flowering-pod set). Data on crop growth and yield, weed populations, and soil parameters were followed through corn harvest each year.

Trials were also installed in two Pennsylvania locations for two years to study the possibility of using rolled/crimped rye cover crops to provide weed control in no-till soybeans, thus forestalling the need for post-emergence herbicide application. Data on crop growth and yield, weed populations, and soil parameters were followed through soybean harvest each year.

On-Station Research Results
Hairy Vetch
In the trials in which hairy vetch was rolled/crimped for no-till organic corn production at Rock Springs, Landisville, and Rodale, the vetch was established at recommended dates in late summer (end of Aug) and was rolled/crimped at four different dates in the spring, from early flowering to pod set, to determine how well the vetch could be killed with the crimper/roller.

Although vetch-kill was sometimes possible to achieve earlier, consistent kill was obtained only after pods were detected on the vetch. This stage was reached in early-mid June. Corn was planted immediately into the rolled/crimped vetch cover, either in the same pass, or on the same day. Vetch cover helped control weeds without any additional weed control such as herbicide application or in-season tillage; though annual weeds were better controlled than perennial weeds. Average weed density was reduced at least 50% by the vetch, and greater vetch biomass accumulation at later crimping/rolling dates improved weed control. No nitrogen fertilizer was applied in the organic no-till corn treatments.

The generally recommended corn planting date in the trial region is on or before May 15, suggesting that corn yield potential of this system was likely reduced when compared with timely-planted corn. Corn yields in the organic no-till system varied from 1.1 Mg/ha to 9.6 Mg/ha. Major reasons for reduced yields included: 1) hairy vetch re-growth competed with corn; 2) weed control was not sufficient (primarily due to poor vetch stand); 3) corn plant population was reduced due to poor planter performance in heavy vetch; 4) nitrogen needs of corn may not have been met; and 5) in certain locations black cutworms decimated corn stand at individual planting dates. Because there were many reasons for variable yields, it was not possible to formulate solid recommendation for this system at this time.

One clear requirement for success was high vetch biomass accumulation prior to rolling/crimping. In some cases vetch stands were poor – for example, in Landisville in 2008, a trial was abandoned due to a poor vetch stand. A light hairy vetch stand does not provide a good mulch cover for weed control and does not provide sufficient nitrogen for the corn to produce high yields. For rolled vetch systems to succeed, the planter needs to be in excellent working condition and properly adjusted to function well in these high residue situations, and guidelines to improve no-till planter performance are urgently needed. Further development of earlier maturing winter hardy vetch varieties will also greatly benefit overall system performance. More research needs to be done to control perennial weeds that may proliferate when producing corn organically with the rolled cover crop system over moldboard plow tillage systems to incorporate the vetch, or killing it with an herbicide. Currently, tillage at some other stage in the organic rolled cover crop rotation can be effective in controlling the perennial weeds, but efforts to find other means of management, such as well-timed high residue surface cultivation or changes in soil nutrient balance, need further exploration.

Rye
In the trials that were laid out at Rock Springs and Landisville for two years to study the ability of rolled rye cover crops to eliminate post-emergence herbicide application in no-till soybeans, rye cover crop was established in the fall (Sept/Oct), and terminated early (late April) and late (Mid-May) in the spring with glyphosate. Soybeans were planted into the rye after it had been rolled with the crimper/roller. The crimper/roller was only used to place the crop residue flat on the soil surface in one direction (not to kill the rye). The cover crop was rolled perpendicular to the direction it was drilled in to provide maximum soil cover from the rye. The soybeans were then planted into this mat in the direction of rolling to improve seed placement. Soybeans were also planted at the same dates without the cover crop at these locations.

Rye biomass reached almost 9000 kg/ha at late termination. These high biomass quantities were measured when the rye was planted relatively early (mid-Sept) and terminated late (mid-May), and the rye cover crop reduced weed density and biomass, irrespective of whether it was killed early or late in the spring. In the first year of the trial, crop yields did not vary between treatments in either location. In the second year, rolled rye cover produced the same crop yields as post-emergence herbicide application in Rock Springs, but in Landisville, the highest yields were obtained with post emergence herbicide application. In one location, the soybean stand was poor in the late-killed rye due to the inability of the planter to place the seed through heavy residue, and/or the seedlings inability to break through the residue. Research shows that rye can perform post-emergence weed control and suggests that late-April termination can be as effective as mid-May termination, when herbicides are utilized. For better crop yields, planting success through thick crop residue cover needs to be improved, which means planters and drills need to be designed specifically to plant into these conditions.

On-Farm Research

The experiences and results obtained at the three farms selected in New York, Pennsylvania, and Maryland were mixed. The team struggled with two different grain farmers in the Finger Lakes region of NY, and data of limited utility were collected there. However, with the very committed help of farmer Bill Mason of Queen Anne County, MD, the team conducted two very successful trials during each of two years. Likewise, the interaction with farmer Kirby Reichert in Lebanon County, PA was also very productive and some valuable data were generated on his farm.

New York trials: Though the NY famers had an adequate understanding of the structure and the rigor of on-farm research (OFR), work on their farms did not yield data that increased knowledge of how to better use cover crops and the roller/crimper in those locations. However, the work did reinforce the importance and value the research team must place on developing and communicating a clear OFR protocol and adhering to that plan.

A well-conceptualized four-treatment project was proposed in late summer 2006, a field was selected, and a rye cover crop was planted in late September. The plan was to establish soybeans in this field via various field operations the following June. The host farmer also expressed a strong interest in all four treatments and offered to use his own subsoiler (vertical tillage tool) and no-till corn planter to partially or completely initiate three of those treatments at the time of cover crop rolling and soybean planting. However, in reality, this farmer wasn’t equipped to conduct those operations. The OFR team learned on the day of rolling/planting that the no-till planter was incapable of no-till planting due to the fact that it had no down-pressure springs or linkages to transfer planter frame weight onto the planter units, a necessity when cutting through the heavy mulch that is created with the roller.

An attempt was made to salvage the effort with a simple two-treatment test in which the entire field was no-till drilled to soybean to compare herbicide treated with non-herbicide plots for their effects on weed competition and soybean yield. This also ended in failure when the farmer did not follow protocol and omitted the herbicide application.

A second NY farmer, an organic grain farmer and extensive user of cover crops, was identified during 2007 and agreed to take a look at the use of the roller/crimper on several fields. When the OFR coordinator transported a roller and a no-till drill to the farm during early June 2008, it was clear that a dry spring had limited the biomass production of cereal grain (barley) and legume (Austrian winter pea (AWP)) cover crops. Some limited rolling and drilling of soybean was conducted. Although the grain growing season was not excessively dry, the rolled cover crops provided marginal weed control due to limited biomass. The inadequate weed control so early in the season, coupled with mediocre soybean growing conditions, prevented development of the dense soybean canopy necessary to provide adequate competition with emerging weeds.

Maryland trials: The cooperative effort with Bill. Mason of Mason’s Heritage Farm was outstanding. This farmer’s strong interest in reducing tillage, field operations, time spent in the field, and fuel required to produce a crop enabled the OFR team to complete two projects in each of two years. In the fall of 2006 and 2007, two sites were selected for planting fall cover crops. Each year, as soybeans were maturing, or soon after soybean harvest, legume/cereal grain mixtures were planted in preparation for a following corn crop. Likewise, after corn had been harvested, the corn stover was lightly disked to enable improved drilling of the cereal grain cover crops, which soon followed. Soybean was planted following spring. Hand sampling of above-ground biomass was conducted just prior to rolling of the cover crops, and then the plots were combine-harvested and weighed on pad scales or in weigh carts when grain had dried to harvest-appropriate moisture.

Cover crops containing legumes ahead of corn

Aerial seeding of cover crops into standing grains generated extensive interest in 2006. The first experiment that followed legume cover crops with corn included two treatments that were intended to simulate “flying on” cover crop seed into standing soybeans. Crimson clover alone and crimson clover with wheat was spun onto the soybeans with a shoulder-mounted spinner spreader on September 11, 2006. Several weeks later, on October 22, after soybean harvest, two additional treatments were drilled at the same rates into adjacent plots in a replicated complete block with four replicates. The seeding rate of crimson clover was always 25 lbs per acre and wheat was seeded at 60 lbs per acre. The following spring, the entire plot area and the field outside the plots received an application of poultry manure at about 2.5 tons per acre. The area outside the research field was moldboard plowed several weeks before the cover crop was sampled and rolled.

The stands of the aerially seeded treatments were observed to be slightly less uniform than were those that were drilled. Above-ground cover crop biomass was sampled during late May, and the biomass treatment means were not significantly different, ranging from 5042 to 5330 lbs per acre. The cover crops were rolled and corn was planted about 1 week after the surrounding field had been planted into tilled soil. While seed was dropped at approximately 30,000 per acre, the resultant stands were variable. The mat of rolled biomass quickly proved to be insufficient to provide satisfactory weed control for the corn crop. Some of the stand variability was likely due to weed competition, but some corn plant loss was also suspected to be due to cutworm damage. Where weed control was poor, the incidence of small ears or barren plants was high. Grain yields were disappointing, with treatment means ranging from 34 to 51 bu/acre (not significantly different). In contrast, corn plant counts in the surrounding tilled and cultivated field approached 28,000 per acre and weed control with row cultivation was very good, resulting in grain yields that approached 150 bu per acre.

For political reasons, aerial seeding was not of great interest in the fall of 2007. The State of Maryland had implemented a cover crop cost-sharing program that included barley either alone or in mixtures with other species. As such, the 2007 planting included drilled plots of barley (40 lbs/acre) with either crimson clover (15 lbs/acre) or with AWP (80 lbs/acre). A second set of crimson clover plus barley plots, to be moldboard plowed in the spring, were located within the two rolled cover crop treatments in the second year’s experiment.

Spring biomass of the crimson plus barley treatment was 5848 lbs/ac, while the AWP plus barley produced 4669 lbs/ac of biomass (no significant difference). Similar to observations the year before, considerable weed pressure was noted in both rolled cover crop treatments (averaging 11,000 lbs/ac fresh weed weight in mid-October just prior to corn harvest), especially when compared to the crimson clover plus barley treatment that incorporated the cover crops with the moldboard plow, followed by in-row cultivation for weed control (5000 lbs/ac fresh weed weight). The grain yields for the plowed treatment (138.5 bu/ac) were far superior to the rolled crimson clover plus barley (22.5 bu/ac) or the rolled AWP plus barley treatment (61.5 bu/ac). These data clearly indicate that the amount of biomass necessary to provide adequate weed control in a corn crop planted into 30-inch wide rows must be greater than 6000 lb/ac at the time of rolling and should include some vegetation that does not degrade easily once it has been rolled. Striking the right balance of legume and grasses in a cover crop mix is challenging but vital to maximize the valuable N-fixation of the legume component with the physical recalcitrance of the grasses, generating a C:N ratio that is highly favorable to the soil microbes responsible for that organic matter decomposition.

Cereal cover crops ahead of soybean

The MD cereal cover crop trials were simpler than the legume trials. The first trial was planted during October 2006, consisting of four replications of two varieties of rye (Aroostock and Wheeler) and one triticale (Trical 815), seeded at a high rate of 3 bu/ac. Spring biomass yields were not significantly different; the Trical 815, Aroostock rye, and Wheeler rye produced 6443, 5511, and 5034 lbs/ac respectively. Weed control was good in all three treatments with a few summer annuals growing as tall as or taller than the soybeans by late summer. Soybean yields were statistically different between the Trical 815 (55.5 bu/ac) and Aroostock rye (51.1 bu/ac). while the Wheeler rye generated intermediate soybean yields of 53.1 bu/ac. These yields were very respectable and are considered acceptable by farmers in the region.

The second cereal trial produced less favorable results. In fall 2007, Aroostock and Wheeler rye were compared with Alzo triticale. Planting rates fell between 2.1 and 2.4 bu/ac for the three treatments. Site soils clearly did not carry over much nitrogen from the previous corn crop; fall tillering of the cereals was poor and plant color was paler than the typical medium to dark green associated with adequate N supplies. While May 2008 plant height of Aroostock approached five feet, the stand was somewhat sparse and the leaves were small. The crop rolled down well and, due to the presence of corn stover that remained on the field surface, weed pressure was not as great as anticipated. Limited soil N appeared to affect weed growth, reducing weed height and biomass similar to the lack of growth noted in the cereal cover crops. Soybean yields were statistically similar between treatments, ranging from 44.8 to 46.6 bu/ac.

Pennsylvania trials: OFR trials in Pennsylvania began well, followed protocol, and generated some viable grain crop data.

Three years of no-till research at Kirby Reichert’s farm produced several failures before finally achieving successful corn yields in 2008. Problems arose from equipment in one year and poor cover crop stands in another.

The 2006 trial was plagued with planter issues. Mr. Reichert had two White no-till planters. The older planter was initially used to roll vetch and plant corn for a short trial pass, and it worked well. However, one of the sprockets then broke on the older planter so the rest of the field was planted with the newer model, which was lighter in weight and sported a different closer wheel design. As a result the seed was not as effectively placed into the soil and covered; the resulting corn stands were not satisfactory for the system. Support was provided to modify the newer no-till planter for the following year, however during a field day demonstration of the planter, the tractor axle broke, requiring a welding repair preventing an adequate demonstration.

In the fall of 2006, randomized replicated plots were established at two Reichert farm site locations, and cover crop biomass data was collected in spring of 2007. In general, dry conditions in the spring of 2007 led to poor cover crop stands. For example, oats mixed with vetch from Oregon, Minnesota, or Nebraska yielded 3734, 4819, or 5073 lbs/ac dry matter respectively, while oats mixed with crimson clover yielded 6065 lbs/ac dry matter. Similarly, Aroostoook, Kreider, and bin (VNS) ryes yielded 4604, 3484, and 2894 lbs/acre dry matter, while the triticale yielded 3680 lbs/ac.

Poor stands of hairy vetch resulted in incomplete soil cover, weak weed suppression, and low corn yields. The crimson clover performed better than the hairy vetch in that very dry year, but overall, only a few of the legume plots produced adequate biomass to successfully roll for corn planting. As such, production constraints demanded that the few good plots be sacrificed and the field was then plowed for clean tillage production. Identical issues with cereal grain cover crops to be rolled for soybean production yielded the same result: sacrificed research plots for clean tillage production. As such, the research design was modified in the following year to establish strip trials in lieu of replicated random plots.

The final trial conducted at Mr. Reichert’s farm consisted of four replications of two legume cover crop treatments. The legume cover crops, established into tilled soil with a conventional grain drill in late August 2008, included hairy vetch (HV) drilled at approximately 25 lbs/ac, and a mixture of AWP (40 lbs/ac) and crimson clover (10 lbs/ac). After cover crop biomass was sampled, all plots were rolled in early June and corn was planted on June 6, 2009. Biomass yields from the two treatments were not statistically different: The HV produced 4616 lbs/ac and the mixture of AWP plus crimson clover yielded 5359 lbs/ac. Although weed biomass data were not collected, weed pressure was high and appeared to negatively affect corn plant growth and production. Surprisingly, corn grain yields were better than anticipated with the HV alone and the legume mixture producing 76.4 and 75.1 bu/ac, respectively. The slightly cool and damp growing season may have contributed to the respectable yields.

Milestone 3 - Results from the on-farm research will be shared among project collaborators and prepared for dissemination to farmers and agriculture professionals.

Throughout this project, farmers were inspired by the simplicity of the rolled/crimped no-till cover crop system and its ability to manage weeds without the use of primary tillage. To this end, our outreach efforts have expanded far beyond those first envisioned, as seen in the extensive list of presentations on the subject of the project.

Over the course of this grant, over 80 presentations were made directly to farmers, agricultural professionals, students, and policy agents as noted below; reaching thousands. For example, a cover crop summit was held in June 2007 at Rock Springs, PA, attended by about100 individuals including 25 county extension educators, 15 organic and 18 conventional producers. Knowledge gain was considerable, and 34 individuals indicated they were very or moderately likely to make a change in their farm operations due to the event.

Several field day activities took place: Two on-farm field day events took place in Maryland at the farm of collaborator Bill Mason, and two field day events were hosted at Rodale Institute.

In 2008, using funds from an NRCS conservation innovation grant, Jeff Moyer wrote a book on use of roller/crimper technology to support cover crop-based no-till systems, as covered in this report. The book is expected to be published in 2010 and will contain information generated from work covered by this grant, as we seek to outreach the information to as many farmers as possible.

Information obtained from these and previous years’ trials concerning cover-cropping practices, weed management and organic no-till was outreached by Jeff Moyer, Paul Hepperly, Dave Wilson and/or Tim LaSalle at many events, included in the attached events table.

Milestone 4 - Two field days will be attended by 160 farmers who will learn the new concepts and techniques through lectures, workshops, and farm demonstrations. At least 120 farmers will respond to baseline surveys to gauge their interest in the new techniques. At least 80 farmers will respond to evaluation follow-up surveys to assess rates of adoption of the techniques.

Each of our field day events brought together farmers, researchers and policy folks in an educational environment to transfer the knowledge gained to date on the specific activities funded by this grant. Following each event, participants were surveyed to determine what impacts the event and the technology might have on changes to their farm operations. A sample of a survey and the responses is included as an appendix.

On July 18th 2008, Rodale Institute hosted an on-site field day event specifically focused on cover crops and the roller technology as a management tool to eliminate the need for tillage as a weed management tool during specific cropping years. The day was attended by 120 farmers, educators, and policy folks. In assessing the impact of the field day in advancing knowledge, it is impressive to find that a sizeable 70% (44 respondents) indicate that they learned a new sustainable practice at the field day. What is even more impressive is that 68% (43 respondents) indicate that they would definitely make a change in their practice in the next 2 years as a results of attending the field day. Finally, 100% of respondents made suggestions for future topics and/or activities for Rodale Institute educational events. Combined, these findings clearly show interest, potential for measurable impact in the adoption of the roller/crimper technology and other new techniques, and the need for more information and training in the future. The complete results from the field day survey are included in Attachment #10.

Project collaborators were also fortunate to be able to host two extremely successful field day events on the farm of Mr. Bill Mason on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. The first event was held on May 22nd , 2008, when the roller/crimper was demonstrated and soybeans were planted. Then the second event took place on October 23rd , 2008 when farmers (many who attended the May field day event) were invited back to see the end result of the growing season as the soybeans were harvested. This two-part field day format was well received by the farmers, as it allowed them to be able to experience the entire crop production process, and see the system performance results at the end of the season.

Penn State also held field day events at the Landisville research facility in Lancaster County. This event also brought in farmers from across the region, exposing them to this technology.

Milestone 5 - At least 25 farmers will enroll in a collaborative program to try one of several rollers on their farms during the project period. Project staff will provide technical assistance and monitor progress and adoption of the new techniques.

Attempts to track workshop and field day attendees proved to be challenging as farmer contact information was self-limited and information collected from the few attendees who permitted follow up contact was extremely difficult to categorize. As such, the decision was made to look at roller/crimper purchases as a better metric of whether famers adopted the technology. See the information below in Milestone 6.

Milestone 6 - Eight users will fully incorporate the techniques into their cropping plans on 1,500 acres.

Tracking production-based equipment purchases, rather than farmer technology adoption interview methodology, may have missed capturing some producers who may have chosen to build their own roller or borrowed one from another producer. However, it is likely that this metric errs on the side of under-estimating rather than over estimating the success of the project work.

Over the life span of this grant funded work, twenty one roller/crimpers were sold to farmers and two were sold to researchers at Pennsylvania State University by I&J Manufacturing who is the main builder and seller of this tool in the Northeast region. This outcome has far exceeded the milestone of encouraging eight producers to adopt the technology onto their farms, and it is a testament to the adaptability of the system and the usefulness of the allocated funds. Other roller/crimper builders may exist that are unknown to project collaborators, and farmers may also have built their own since the plans for building the roller/crimper are available for free on the New Farm web site. Several of the farmers who purchased roller/crimpers and are using the technology also loaned their equipment to neighbors to try the system on their farms. Of those sold to farmers, the size range is from 5 feet to 20 feet in length indicating that the roller/crimper is being applied to a diversity of crops and at scales of use from large acreage of grain to vegetable size operations.

The names and contact information for each of producers who purchased the equipment are maintained at the Rodale Institute and are not supplied with the public version of this report to protect their privacy.

Milestone 7 - Research results with case studies will be published in The Rodale Institute’s online magazine New Farm and on Penn State websites. Over 100,000 visitors (world wide) will learn about the project and the new techniques. Over 150 farmers and 50 Extension specialists from around the country will request more information from project staff.

Tracking performed by Webtrends and Google Analytics indicate that the goal of 100,000 world wide visitors to the New Farm website has been far surpassed. In fact, these tracking software systems have counted 308,590 visitors to the New Farm, web site where four new stories appeared on the no-till projects over the life of the grant. Through the grant-support period, over 67,000 of those visitors specifically went into the No-Till Forum section of the website for more detailed information on the subject. A newly-launched frequently asked questions (FAQ) section also allowed farmers direct access to other information needed to move their own field projects forward. Activity also continues on the downloadable drawings of the roller/crimper, made available on Rodale Institute’s website, by more farmers wishing to build their own rollers.

• Attachment 13-Events Table.pdf
• Attachment 10-Field Day Survey and Results.pdf
• Attachment 9-Rodale Institute Field Day Event Flyer.pdf
• Attachment 12-Bill Mason Field Day.pdf
• Attachment 11-Rodale Field Day.pdf