History of Predicting Yield Potential TEAM VRT Oklahoma State University TEAM VRT Oklahoma State...

History of Predicting Yield PotentialHistory of Predicting Yield Potential

TEAM VRTOklahoma State UniversityTEAM VRTOklahoma State University

OutlineOutline Yield Goals and Potential Yield Soil Test vs. Sensor Based Sufficiency: Mobile vs. Immobile Nutrients Bray’s mobility concept How to generate nutrient recommendations What should we learn from soil testing Subsoil nutrient availability Soil Testing: Correlation/Calibration/Recommendation Models for Interpretation of Response Interfering agronomic factors

Yield Goals and Potential Yield Soil Test vs. Sensor Based Sufficiency: Mobile vs. Immobile Nutrients Bray’s mobility concept How to generate nutrient recommendations What should we learn from soil testing Subsoil nutrient availability Soil Testing: Correlation/Calibration/Recommendation Models for Interpretation of Response Interfering agronomic factors

Yield Goal/Potential YieldYield Goal/Potential Yield

Yield Goal: yield per acre you hope to grow (Dahnke et al., 1988)

Potential yield: highest possible yield obtainable with ideal management, FOR specific soil and weather conditions

Maximum Yield: grain yield achievable when all manageable growth factors (nutrients, insects, disease, and weeds) are nonlimiting and the environment is ideal

Yield Goal: yield per acre you hope to grow (Dahnke et al., 1988)

Potential yield: highest possible yield obtainable with ideal management, FOR specific soil and weather conditions

Maximum Yield: grain yield achievable when all manageable growth factors (nutrients, insects, disease, and weeds) are nonlimiting and the environment is ideal

Yield Goals in the LiteratureYield Goals in the LiteratureYield per acre you hope to grow (Dahnke et al. (1988).Highest yield attained in the last 4-5 years and that is

usually 30-33% higher than avg. yield (J. Goos, 1998).Aim for a 10-20% increase over the recent average (Rehm

and Schmitt, 1989).Yield goal should be based on how much water is available

(stored soil water to 1.5m, Black and Bauer, 1988).When Yield Goals are used it explicitly places the risk of

predicting the environment (good or bad) on the producer.

Yield per acre you hope to grow (Dahnke et al. (1988).Highest yield attained in the last 4-5 years and that is

usually 30-33% higher than avg. yield (J. Goos, 1998).Aim for a 10-20% increase over the recent average (Rehm

and Schmitt, 1989).Yield goal should be based on how much water is available

(stored soil water to 1.5m, Black and Bauer, 1988).When Yield Goals are used it explicitly places the risk of

predicting the environment (good or bad) on the producer.

Value of Using Yield GoalsValue of Using Yield GoalsValue of Using Yield GoalsValue of Using Yield Goals

Nutrient removal can be reliably estimated for a given yield level in specific crops.

Selected Yield Goal defines the risk the producer is willing to take. Yield Goal can define the limits in terms

of economic inputs when considering herbicides, insecticides, etc.

Nutrient removal can be reliably estimated for a given yield level in specific crops.

Selected Yield Goal defines the risk the producer is willing to take. Yield Goal can define the limits in terms

of economic inputs when considering herbicides, insecticides, etc.

Importance of Predicting Importance of Predicting Potential YieldPotential YieldImportance of Predicting Importance of Predicting Potential YieldPotential Yield

Seasonal N need directly related to observed yield.

NUE decreases with increasing N rate. Known Potential Yield = Known N Input =

Highest NUE.

Seasonal N need directly related to observed yield.

NUE decreases with increasing N rate. Known Potential Yield = Known N Input =

Highest NUE.

Max Yield Max Yield

YPYPMAXMAX

Max Yield Max Yield

YPYPMAXMAX

Ave

rag

e Y

ield

Ave

rag

e Y

ield

+30%+30%

Yie

ld G

oal

Yie

ld G

oal

YieldYield GoalGoalYieldYield GoalGoalPotentialPotential

YieldYieldYPYP00

PotentialPotentialYieldYieldYPYP00

Potential Potential Yield with Yield with

N, N, YPYPNN

Potential Potential Yield with Yield with

N, N, YPYPNN

Bound by Environment and ManagementBound by Environment and Management

Gra

in y

ield

Gra

in y

ield

Predicting N NeedsPredicting N NeedsPredicting N NeedsPredicting N Needs

Use of Yield Goals. Based on past season yields. May take into account current-year preplant

conditions of available moisture and residual N. Seldom is adjusted for midseason conditions to

alter N inputs. Use of Potential Yield.

Reliability of predicting final yield (and N requirement) from existing soil and crop conditions should increase as harvest approaches.

Use of Yield Goals. Based on past season yields. May take into account current-year preplant

conditions of available moisture and residual N. Seldom is adjusted for midseason conditions to

alter N inputs. Use of Potential Yield.

Reliability of predicting final yield (and N requirement) from existing soil and crop conditions should increase as harvest approaches.

Significant soil variability at distances less than 30 m apart (Lengnick, 1997)

In order to describe the variability encountered in field experiments, soil, plant and indirect measures should be made at the 1m or submeter resolution

Significant differences in soil test P, organic C, and pH were found at distances <0.30m (OSU)

Significant soil variability at distances less than 30 m apart (Lengnick, 1997)

In order to describe the variability encountered in field experiments, soil, plant and indirect measures should be made at the 1m or submeter resolution

Significant differences in soil test P, organic C, and pH were found at distances <0.30m (OSU)

Spatial Variability and Yield Spatial Variability and Yield PotentialPotentialSpatial Variability and Yield Spatial Variability and Yield PotentialPotential

Crop Response/Models to Crop Response/Models to Predict Yield (N need)Predict Yield (N need)Crop Response/Models to Crop Response/Models to Predict Yield (N need)Predict Yield (N need)

CERES (Crop-Environment Resource Synthesis) crop response model was not useful in predicting wheat grain yield (Moulin and Beckie, 1993) Complicated.

Total N uptake at Feekes growth stage 5 was found to be a good predictor of yield (Reeves et al., 1993) Worked some, but not all years.

CERES (Crop-Environment Resource Synthesis) crop response model was not useful in predicting wheat grain yield (Moulin and Beckie, 1993) Complicated.

Total N uptake at Feekes growth stage 5 was found to be a good predictor of yield (Reeves et al., 1993) Worked some, but not all years.

1. SF45 = (NDVI4 + NDVI5)/days from F4 to F5 INSEY (in-season-estimated-yield) GDD = (Tmin + Tmax)/2 – 4.4°C

2. EY = (NDVI4 + NDVI5)/GDD from F4 to F5 3. INSEY = (NDVI)/days from planting to

sensing 4. INSEY = (NDVI)/days from planting to

sensing where (GDD>0)

1. SF45 = (NDVI4 + NDVI5)/days from F4 to F5 INSEY (in-season-estimated-yield) GDD = (Tmin + Tmax)/2 – 4.4°C

2. EY = (NDVI4 + NDVI5)/GDD from F4 to F5 3. INSEY = (NDVI)/days from planting to

sensing 4. INSEY = (NDVI)/days from planting to

sensing where (GDD>0)

History of Predicting Potential History of Predicting Potential YieldYieldHistory of Predicting Potential History of Predicting Potential YieldYield

October February June0 120 240 days


50 lb N /ac

100 lb N/ac

75 lb N/ac75 lb N/ac

N u

pta

ke, l

b/a

cN

upt

ake

, lb

/ac

INSEY: Rate of N uptake over 120 days, > ½ of the total growing days

and should be a good predictor of grain yield



45 bu/ac, 2.5% N in the grain

days with GDD>0?

October 1Benchmark Planting DateOctober 1Benchmark Planting Date

Planting DatePlanting Date

F4 DateF4 Date F5 DateF5 Date

20 143 185

6 116 145

Perkins

Tipton

42

29

Adj. Index

42+20=62

29+6=35

Adj. Index

42+20=62

29+6=35

Adjusting Yield PotentialAdjusting Yield PotentialAdjusting Yield PotentialAdjusting Yield Potential

Feekes growth stageFeekes growth stage

F4 F5 Maturity

growth

growth

ND

VI

ND

VI

NDVI min

SF45 = (NDVI4 + NDVI5)/days from F4 to F5SF45 = (NDVI4 + NDVI5)/days from F4 to F5

YIE

LD

PO

TE

NT

IAL

YIE

LD

PO

TE

NT

IAL

Feekes 4 Feekes 5 Grain YieldFeekes 4 Feekes 5 Grain Yield

40 20 50 50

Total N UptakeTotal N Uptake

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07

NDVI F4+NDVI F5/days from F4 to F5NDVI F4+NDVI F5/days from F4 to F5

Gra

in Y

ield

Gra

in Y

ield

Perkins, N*P

Perkins, S*N

Tipton, S*N

y = 1E+06x2 - 12974x + 951.24R2 = 0.89

0 500 1000 1500 2000 25000 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Ab

ov

e g

rou

nd

dry

w

eig

ht

Ab

ov

e g

rou

nd

dry

w

eig

ht

Cumulative growing degree daysCumulative growing degree days

NDVIT1 T2 NDVIT1 T2

Rickman, R.W., Sue E. Waldman and Betty Klepper. 1996. MODWht3: A development-driven wheat growth simulation. Agron J. 88:176 -185.

Rickman, R.W., Sue E. Waldman and Betty Klepper. 1996. MODWht3: A development-driven wheat growth simulation. Agron J. 88:176 -185.

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

INSEY = (NDVIT1 + NDVIT2)/GDD T1 to T2INSEY = (NDVIT1 + NDVIT2)/GDD T1 to T2

GDDGDD

y = 962 exp 92.6x

r2 = 0.50

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018

Estimated Yield (EY)

Mea

sure

d gr

ain

yiel

d, k

g ha

-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999

Experiment 222, 1999


Efaw AA, 1999



9 experiments (NDVI F4 + NDVI F5/GDD from F4 to F59 experiments (NDVI F4 + NDVI F5/GDD from F4 to F5

y=572 exp150.2x

r2 = 0.83

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018

Estimated Yield (EY)

Mea

sure

d gr

ain

yiel

d, k

g ha

-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998




6 experiments (NDVI F4 + NDVI F5/GDD from F4 to F56 experiments (NDVI F4 + NDVI F5/GDD from F4 to F5

Field Experiments, 1998-2000._____________________________________________________________________________________________Experiment Location Year Date Planting Harvest Variety Planting to

Sensed date date sensing,D/M/Y D/M/Y D/M/Y days

S*N§ Perkins, OK 1998 6/4/98 21/10/97 15/6/98 Tonkawa 167S*N§ Tipton, OK 1998 26/2/98 7/10/97 3/6/98 Tonkawa 142N*P¶ Perkins, OK 1998 2/4/98 21/10/97 15/6/98 Tonkawa 163N*P¶ Perkins, OK 1999 4/3/99 12/10/98 9/6/99 Tonkawa 143Experiment 222 Stillwater, OK 1999 24/2/99 13/10/98 15/6/99 Tonkawa 134Experiment 301 Efaw, OK 1999 24/3/99 15/10/98 15/6/99 Tonkawa 160Efaw AA Efaw, OK 1999 24/3/99 9/11/98 15/6/99 Tonkawa 135Experiment 502 Lahoma, OK 1999 5/3/99 9/10/98 30/6/99 Tonkawa 147Experiment 801 Haskell, OK 1999 23/3/99 16/10/98 6/7/99 2163 158N*P Perkins, OK 2000 8/2/00 8/10/99 30/5/00 Custer 123Experiment 222 Stillwater, OK 2000 6/3/00 7/10/99 6/7/00 Custer 151Experiment 301 Efaw, OK 2000 6/3/00 7/10/99 2/6/00 Custer 151Efaw AA Efaw, OK 2000 6/3/00 7/10/99 7/7/00 Custer 151Experiment 801 Haskell, OK 2000 14/3/00 8/10/99 2/6/00 2137 158Experiment 502 Lahoma, OK 2000 13/3/00 12/10/99 13/6/00 Custer 153Hennessey AA Hennessey, OK 2000 13/3/00 7/10/99 7/6/00 Custer 158

Field Experiments, 1998-2000._____________________________________________________________________________________________Experiment Location Year Date Planting Harvest Variety Planting to

Sensed date date sensing,D/M/Y D/M/Y D/M/Y days

S*N§ Perkins, OK 1998 6/4/98 21/10/97 15/6/98 Tonkawa 167S*N§ Tipton, OK 1998 26/2/98 7/10/97 3/6/98 Tonkawa 142N*P¶ Perkins, OK 1998 2/4/98 21/10/97 15/6/98 Tonkawa 163N*P¶ Perkins, OK 1999 4/3/99 12/10/98 9/6/99 Tonkawa 143Experiment 222 Stillwater, OK 1999 24/2/99 13/10/98 15/6/99 Tonkawa 134Experiment 301 Efaw, OK 1999 24/3/99 15/10/98 15/6/99 Tonkawa 160Efaw AA Efaw, OK 1999 24/3/99 9/11/98 15/6/99 Tonkawa 135Experiment 502 Lahoma, OK 1999 5/3/99 9/10/98 30/6/99 Tonkawa 147Experiment 801 Haskell, OK 1999 23/3/99 16/10/98 6/7/99 2163 158N*P Perkins, OK 2000 8/2/00 8/10/99 30/5/00 Custer 123Experiment 222 Stillwater, OK 2000 6/3/00 7/10/99 6/7/00 Custer 151Experiment 301 Efaw, OK 2000 6/3/00 7/10/99 2/6/00 Custer 151Efaw AA Efaw, OK 2000 6/3/00 7/10/99 7/7/00 Custer 151Experiment 801 Haskell, OK 2000 14/3/00 8/10/99 2/6/00 2137 158Experiment 502 Lahoma, OK 2000 13/3/00 12/10/99 13/6/00 Custer 153Hennessey AA Hennessey, OK 2000 13/3/00 7/10/99 7/6/00 Custer 158

Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI)

= NIR ref – red ref / NIR ref + red ref


= NIR ref – red ref / NIR ref + red ref

(up – down)(up – down)

excellent predictor of plant N uptakeexcellent predictor of plant N uptake

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

NDVI, Feekes 4-6

Ea

rly-

sea

son

pla

nt N

up

take

, kg

ha-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

transect Stillw ater, 1999

transect Perkins, 1999

transect Efaw , 2000, Jan

transect Perkins, 2000 Jan

transect Efaw , 2000 Mar

transect Perkins, 2000 Mar

y = 1019.5x3 - 1507.5x2 + 811.5x - 130.32R2 = 0.78

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

NDVI, Feekes 4-6

Ea

rly-

sea

son

pla

nt N

up

take

, kg

ha-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

transect Stillw ater, 1999

transect Perkins, 1999

transect Efaw , 2000, Jan

transect Perkins, 2000 Jan

transect Efaw , 2000 Mar

transect Perkins, 2000 Mar

y = 1019.5x3 - 1507.5x2 + 811.5x - 130.32R2 = 0.78

Units:

N uptake, kg ha-1

Units:

N uptake, kg ha-1



50 lb N /ac

100 lb N/ac

75 lb N/ac75 lb N/ac

N u

pta

ke, l

b/a

cN

upt

ake

, lb

/ac





45 bu/ac, 2.5% N in the grain

days with GDD>0?

y = 4.2419x3 - 2.8688x2 + 3.3405x

R2 = 0.53

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

NDVI, Feekes 4-6

Gra

in Y

ield

, Mg

kg

ha

-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999



Efaw AA, 1999



N*P Perkins, 2000



Efaw AA, 2000



Hennessey, AA, 2000


Reasonably good predictor of final grain yield


Reasonably good predictor of final grain yield

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007

EY

Gra

in y

ield

, M

g h

a-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999



Efaw AA, 1999



N*P Perkins, 2000



Efaw AA, 2000



Hennessey, AA, 2000

T1T1

GDD from T1 to T2GDD from T1 to T2

NDVIT2NDVIT2NDVINDVIEstimatedYield (EY) EstimatedYield (EY)

+Good predictor of final grain yield- Requires two sensor readings +GDD+Good predictor of final grain yield- Requires two sensor readings +GDD

y = 0.4554e344.12x

R2 = 0.62

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007

INSEY

Gra

in Y

ield

, Mg

ha

-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999



Efaw AA, 1999



N*P Perkins, 2000



Efaw AA, 2000



Hennessey, AA, 2000

y = 4E+07x3 - 296260x2 + 970.66x

R2 = 0.64

NDVI at F5 NDVI at F5 In-SeasonEstimatedYield (INSEY)1

In-SeasonEstimatedYield (INSEY)1

days from planting to F5 days from planting to F5

+Good predictor of final grain yield+Requires only one sensor reading+Good predictor of final grain yield+Requires only one sensor reading

Units:

N uptake, kg ha-1 day-1

Units:

N uptake, kg ha-1 day-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008

INSEY (NDVI Feekes 4-6/days from planting to Feekes 4-6)

Gra

in Y

ield

, M

g h

a

-1

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999



Efaw AA, 1999



N*P Perkins, 2000



Efaw AA, 2000



Hennessey, AA, 2000

VIRGINIA (7 Loc's)



days from planting to F5 days from planting to F5

Hard Red Winter Wheat (Oklahoma)Soft White Winter Wheat (Virginia)Hard Red Winter Wheat (Oklahoma)Soft White Winter Wheat (Virginia)



days from planting to F5, GDD>0 days from planting to F5, GDD>0

+Good predictor of final grain yield+Requires only one sensor reading+Appears to work over different regions

+Good predictor of final grain yield+Requires only one sensor reading+Appears to work over different regions

Units:

N uptake, kg ha-1 day-1 where GDD>0

Units:

N uptake, kg ha-1 day-1 where GDD>0

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009 0.01

INSEY=NDVI5/Days(GDD>0)

Yie

ld (

Mg

/ha

)

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999



Efaw AA, 1999



N*P Perkins, 2000



Efaw AA, 2000



Hennessey, AA, 2000



days from planting to F5, GDD>0 days from planting to F5, GDD>0

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012

INSEY=NDVI5/Days(GDD>0)

Yie

ld (

Mg

/ha

)

N*P Perkins, 1998

S*N Perkins, 1998

S*N Tipton, 1998

N*P Perkins, 1999



Efaw AA, 1999



N*P Perkins, 2000



Efaw AA, 2000



Hennessey, AA, 2000

Virginia

Hard Red Winter Wheat (Oklahoma)Soft White Winter Wheat (Virginia)Hard Red Winter Wheat (Oklahoma)Soft White Winter Wheat (Virginia)

y = 0.5643e279.42x

R2 = 0.6476

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008

INSEY=NDVI/days from planting, GDD>0

Gra

in y

ield

, M

g/h

a Soft White Winter Wheat7 locations in Virginia, 2001

Soft White Winter Wheat7 locations in Virginia, 2001

Spring Wheat 2001-2004

0123456789

10

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02

INSEY

Me

as

ure

d Y

ld, M

g/h

a

Measured Yield

Avg Yld = 0.7418 e^(130.65 INSEY) R2=0.6403

Avg Yld +1 Std Dev= 0.9897e^(130.65 INSEY)

Spring Wheat 2001-2004

0123456789

10

0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02

INSEY

Me

as

ure

d Y

ld, M

g/h

aMeasured Yield

Avg Yld = 0.7418 e^(130.65 INSEY) R2=0.6403

Avg Yld +1 Std Dev= 0.9897e^(130.65 INSEY)

Can We Predict Yield with No Additional N Applied?

YP0

Can We Predict The Yield Increase If We Apply N in a Given Year?

YPN

Can We Predict if Harvested Yield will be Less than Predicted Yield?

YP?

Can We Predict Yield with No Additional N Applied?

YP0

Can We Predict The Yield Increase If We Apply N in a Given Year?

YPN

Can We Predict if Harvested Yield will be Less than Predicted Yield?

YP?

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Abo

ve g

roun

d dr

y w

eigh

tA

bove

gro

und

dry

wei

ght


Harvest

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018

INSEY

Obs

erve

d gr

ain

yiel

d, k

g/ha

Post-maturity yield lossPost-maturity yield loss

R-NH2R-NH2

NO3- + 2e (nitrate reductase) NO2

- + 6e (nitrite reductase) NH4+NO3

- + 2e (nitrate reductase) NO2- + 6e (nitrite reductase) NH4

+

NH3NH3

R-NH2

NO3

NH4

R-NH2

NO3

NH4

REPRODUCTIVEREPRODUCTIVEVEGETATIVEVEGETATIVE

moistureheatmoistureheat

Total NTotal N

Total N

aminoaminoacidsacidsNHNH 33

nitrite reductasenitrite reductasenitrate reductasenitrate reductase

NO 2NO 3

SafetyvalveSafetyvalve

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Ab

ove

gro

und

dry

we

igh

tA

bov

e g

rou

nd d

ry w

eig

ht


Harvest

RainfallDiseaseFrost

RainfallDiseaseFrost

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018

INSEY

Ob

serv

ed

gra

in y

ield

, kg

/ha

October February JuneOctober February June

N u

pta

ke, l

b/a

cN

upt

ake

, lb

/ac

40 N

0 N

Predicting the Increase in Yield due to Applied N

NEXT Section…… ????

History of Predicting Yield Potential TEAM VRT Oklahoma State University TEAM VRT Oklahoma State...

Documents

Transcript of History of Predicting Yield Potential TEAM VRT Oklahoma State University TEAM VRT Oklahoma State...