Nicole Fiorellino, Extension Agronomist
University of Maryland, College Park
Results of the 2022 University of Maryland corn hybrid trials are available to view by clicking the link below, or you may visit: https://psla.umd.edu/extension/md-crops. Questions may be directed to Nicole Fiorellino (nfiorell@umd.edu).
For more information about how to interpret variety trial results, view this UMD Extension fact sheet.
Andrew Kness, Agriculture Agent | akness@umd.edu
University of Maryland Extension, Harford County
Combines will be rolling very soon to harvest wheat, soon followed by the planter to get double-crop soybeans in the ground. As you know, for both wheat and soybeans, time is of the essence to maximize yields. This article is intended to be a reminder of how important timely harvest and rapid planting are for a double-crop system.
For wheat, there is a growing body of data pointing to the importance of timely harvest. While wheat needs to be at about 12% moisture for storage, waiting to field-dry and harvest wheat at 12-14% will likely cost you a considerable loss in yield due to reduced test weight. Several studies in the Mid-Atlantic region over the past few years demonstrate that harvesting wheat at 18-20% moisture can maximize yields; and for every day after 18% moisture, wheat yields decrease approximately 0.5-2.5%. Furthermore, research shows that if wheat experiences cycles of wetting and drying prior to harvest, vomitoxin levels in the grain can increase by nearly 1 ppm. This is more reason to harvest around 18-20% moisture, especially if you observe head blight symptoms in your fields. Of course, harvesting wheat at 18-20% does require you to have the ability to immediately dry the grain to 12%, or have a buyer willing to take high-moisture wheat and dry it (hopefully for a reasonable cost).
The second piece to the double-crop system is getting the soybeans in the ground as soon as possible. This can be tricky, especially if you are baling the straw. Ideally, the planters should be running the combines out of the field. For every day planting is delayed after mid-June, soybean yields decrease by roughly 1/2 bushel per day; and for every day after the end of June, expect about a 1-2 bushel per acre yield loss per day.
Amanda Grev, Pasture and Forage Specialist
University of Maryland Extension
As new forage varieties continue to be developed and released, the efficacy and performance of these varieties needs to be evaluated. Similarly, as forage and livestock producers are making decisions on which forage species and variety to establish, it is helpful to compare performance data from a number of available varieties. To this end, the University of Maryland Extension Forage Team is in the process of establishing a series of forage variety trials.
In September 2019, an orchardgrass variety trial was established at the Western Maryland Research and Education Center (WMREC) in Keedysville, MD in order to evaluate select orchardgrass varieties based on forage production and quality. Plots were arranged in a randomized complete block design with each individual entry replicated four times. All varieties were planted at a rate of 25 pounds per acre; seed was broadcast and then cultipacked to establish good seed-to-soil contact. The varieties planted included: Alpine, Bounty II, Extend, HLR Blend, Inavale, Olathe, Pennlate, and Rushmore II.
Data collection began when the majority of forage varieties reached the boot stage of development (prior to seed head emergence). The first cutting occurred on May 18, 2020; this was followed by a second cutting on August 3, 2020 and a third and final cutting on September 28, 2020. At each cutting, forage biomass was collected along a 3 ft. by 20 ft. strip from the center of each plot using a forage harvester set to a cutting height of 4 inches. Collected biomass was weighed, dried in a forced air oven, and weighed again for dry matter and forage yield determination. Sub-samples were also taken from each plot and sent to a commercial laboratory for forage quality analysis.
Seasonal cumulative yield for all orchardgrass varieties ranged from 3.6 to 3.8 tons per acre (Figure 1). Statistical analysis indicates no significant difference in forage yield among any of the varieties for the 2020 growing season. Forage quality analysis is underway; forage quality results will be shared once the analysis is complete.
A big thank you to Jeff Semler and the entire WMREC crew for their assistance in getting this trial started and their help with harvest and data collection. Seed for this study was donated by DLF Pickseed, Seedway, and Kings Agriseeds. These plots will continue to be evaluated for yield, quality, and additional performance parameters in the coming years. We hope to expand the trial to include multiple locations, as well as additional forage species and varieties.
Nicole Fiorellino, Extension Agronomist
University of Maryland, College Park
Dairy farmers are constantly looking for sources of forage to meet their feed needs. One source that many of our region’s dairy farmers utilize is the fall planting of cereal grains that are green-chop harvested the following spring. Among the cereal species used for this purpose are rye, triticale, barley, and wheat. Per the Maryland Cover Crop Program guidelines, cereal grains planted as a cover crop prior to November 5 and suppressed via green-chop in the spring are eligible for the grant payment for participation in the Cover Crop Program. In addition, per the Nutrient Management Regulations, a fall application of dairy manure is allowed to a field planted to a cereal cover crop.
Planting a cereal cover crop that will be green chop harvested fits well into the crop rotation used by many dairy farmers. The scenario that many follow is to plant the cereal cover crop following harvest of corn silage. Prior to planting the cover crop, an application of manure is made to the field. The subsequent planting of the cover crop provides incorporation of the manure into the soil. The fall and spring growth of the cover crop is supplied nutrients from the manure. At the same time, the cover crop provides protection to the soil from loss of nutrients via leaching and/or erosion. The objective of this study was to evaluate select varieties of cereal species for cover crop performance and forage production and quality.
Cereal varieties (21) representing four species (rye, triticale, wheat, barley) were evaluated at Central Maryland Research and Education Center – Clarksville Facility. Three replications for each entry were planted using a randomized complete block experimental design. Planting date was October 11, 2019. The 3’ X 18’ plots were planted with a small plot planter with 6-inch spacing between each of the 7 rows. The germination percentage for each entry was used to calculate the seeding rate needed to establish 1.5 million seedlings. Good stands were established in most plots by late fall.
Our goal each year is to time spring biomass harvest with when entries reach late boot to early heading stage of development. With the cool spring this year, plant growth and development slowed, with heading delayed until mid-May for most entries (Table 2) and harvest dates varying among the entries (listed in Table 1). Each harvest sample was collected by cutting the plants just above ground-level from three center rows of each plot from an area 2.5 feet in length and from two areas within the plot. The samples were placed into cloth bags and dried using a forced air dryer set at 60o C where they remained until sample water content was zero. Each sample was weighed and is reported as pounds of dry matter production per acre (Table 1). Each of the dried samples was ground through a 20-mesh screen using a large plant grinder and the ground biomass samples were sent to Cumberland Valley Analytical Laboratory for standard forage quality analysis.
Cover crop performance is measured by amount of biomass produced and the concentration of nitrogen (N) in the biomass. These two factors were used to estimate N uptake (Table 2). The cool weather this spring delayed harvest of this study, likely contributing to the higher biomass and N uptake observed this year compared to last year’s trials. There was no significant difference in nitrogen uptake among the varieties tested. A number of forage quality characteristics for these cereals was measured (Table 2). The descriptions of the various quality characteristic are described here and in the footnotes at the bottom of Table 2. Crude protein (CP) is the N content of the forage, with higher protein representing better feed quality. This value was used to calculate nitrogen uptake of each variety (Nitrogen content = % CP/6.25). Both rye varieties and the barley check variety had significantly greater CP than the overall mean, with a number of triticale varieties having significantly less CP content than the overall mean. One rye and the barley variety also had rumen degradable protein (RDP) content significantly greater than the overall mean.
Neutral and acid detergent fiber (NDF, ADF) are measures of feed value and represent the less digestible components of the plant, with NDF representing total fiber and ADF representing the least digestible plant components. Low NDF and ADF values representing increased digestibility; ideally NDF values should be <50% and ADF values should be <35%. Values of both traits were above the ideal this year, as the late harvest resulted in more mature plants. Despite this, four triticale varieties (TriCal EXP 20T02, BCT 15509, BCT 18001, bCT 19005) had significantly lower NDF and ADF values than the overall mean, representing a digestible triticale varieties. This same variety also had significantly higher total digestible nutrients (TDN), net energy for lactation (NEL), relative feed value (RFV), and non-fiber carbohydrates (NFC), indicating good performing varieties.
The characteristic that best captures the overall forage quality performance is Relative Feed Value (RFV). A RFV of 100 is defined as the forage value that full bloom alfalfa would have. In addition to the triticale varieties mentioned previously, one additional triticale variety (TriCal Gainer 154) and the barley and wheat check varieties had RFV values significantly greater than the overall mean.
Though, none of these green-chop cereal forages are considered to be adequate as a stand-alone feed for a dairy operation, they can supply a source of forage used in a total mixed ration at the time of year when feed supply may be running short. When this forage benefit is added to the environmental benefit that is gained, planting winter cereal cover crops on a dairy farm can be a win-win decision.
Download a PDF copy of this report by clicking here
Acknowledgements
This work could not be accomplished without the assistance and oversight of all field operations by Mr. Louis Thorne and Mr. Joseph Crank. We acknowledge the assistance of the undergraduate students who work with Dr. Jason Wight (Shana Burke and Deonna Cousins) for their assistance with seed packaging.
Table 1. Average harvest date for cereal species evaluated in Clarksville, MD in 2019-2020.
| Variety | Species | Average harvest date |
| TriCal Exp 19R01 | Rye | May 11 |
| Rye VNS (check) | Rye | May 4 |
| Mercer Brand Tri-Cow 814 | Triticale | May 4 |
| TriCal Gainer 154 | Triticale | May 4 |
| TriCal Flex 719 | Triticale | May 13 |
| TriCal Surge | Triticale | May 11 |
| TriCal Merlin Max | Triticale | May 13 |
| TriCal Thor | Triticale | May 13 |
| TriCal Exp 20T02 | Triticale | May 13 |
| TriCal Exp 20T03 | Triticale | May 13 |
| TriCal Exp 20T04 | Triticale | May 27 |
| BCT 15509 | Triticale | May 11 |
| BCT 15513 | Triticale | May 27 |
| BCT 18001 | Triticale | May 13 |
| BCT 18002 | Triticale | May 13 |
| BCT 19003 | Triticale | May 27 |
| BCT 19004 | Triticale | May 13 |
| BCT 19005 | Triticale | May 13 |
| BCT 19006 | Triticale | May 13 |
| Nomini (check) | Barley | April 14 |
| P25R25 (check) | Wheat | May 27 |
Table 2. Forage and cover crop performance of cereal species evaluated in Clarksville, MD during 2019-2020 growing season.
| Variety | Species | Biomass Yield
lb DM/a |
Head
Date |
1Nitrogen
Uptake lb N/a |
2Crude
Protein % |
3Soluble Protein
% DM |
4RDP
% DM |
5ADF
% DM |
6NDF
% DM |
7Ash
% DM |
8Total
Digestible Nutrients % DM |
9Net
Energy Lactation (Mcal/lb) |
10RFV | 11Non Fiber
Carb. % DM |
| TriCal Exp 19R01 | Rye | 20655 | April 17 | 395 | 11.9* | 6.7* | 9.3 | 41.8 | 64.0 | 7.4 | 56.5# | 0.57# | 82.0 | 15.2# |
| Rye VNS (check) | Rye | 20490 | May 3 | 351 | 10.7* | 4.4 | 7.6* | 42.5 | 65.6 | 7.4 | 57.2 | 0.58 | 79.2# | 14.4# |
| Rye Mean | 20573 | April 25 | 373 | 11.3* | 5.6 | 8.4 | 42.2 | 64.8 | 7.4 | 56.9 | 0.58 | 80.6 | 14.8 | |
| Mercer Brand Tri-Cow 814 | Triticale | 23096 | April 23 | 344 | 9.4 | 3.9 | 6.6 | 39.3 | 62.4 | 7.0 | 59.1 | 0.60 | 87.0 | 19.5 |
| TriCal Gainer 154 | Triticale | 22925 | May 4 | 260 | 9.5 | 3.9 | 6.7 | 37.4 | 59.5 | 6.6 | 60.3 | 0.61 | 96.5* | 22.7 |
| TriCal Flex 719 | Triticale | 24363 | May 13 | 296 | 7.6# | 2.8# | 5.2# | 42.7* | 64.6 | 7.2 | 57.3 | 0.58 | 80.0# | 19.2 |
| TriCal Surge | Triticale | 22601 | May 13 | 312 | 8.5 | 3.0 | 5.8 | 40.8 | 62.0 | 7.7 | 58.2 | 0.59 | 85.5 | 20.1 |
| TriCal Merlin Max | Triticale | 22618 | May 13 | 295 | 8.1 | 3.1# | 5.6# | 41.1 | 63.4 | 8.0 | 57.3 | 0.58 | 83.5 | 19.0 |
| TriCal Thor | Triticale | 27172 | May 14 | 357 | 8.2 | 3.6 | 5.9 | 44.7* | 65.3 | 7.8 | 55.7# | 0.56# | 78.0# | 17.4 |
| TriCal Exp 20T02 | Triticale | 23820 | May 12 | 290 | 7.6# | 2.5# | 5.1# | 34.5# | 54.5# | 7.0 | 62.9* | 0.64* | 106.0* | 29.0* |
| TriCal Exp 20T03 | Triticale | 24867 | May 13 | 341 | 8.6 | 3.0# | 5.8 | 41.6 | 61.5 | 8.5* | 57.9 | 0.59 | 85.3 | 19.8 |
| TriCal Exp 20T04 | Triticale | 28459* | May 15 | 343 | 7.6# | 4.0 | 5.8 | 48.7* | 72.6* | 7.4 | 52.7# | 0.53# | 65.3# | 11.3# |
| BCT 15509 | Triticale | 22927 | May 14 | 318 | 8.6 | 3.8 | 6.2 | 35.3# | 56.9# | 6.9 | 62.1* | 0.63* | 100.5* | 25.7* |
| BCT 15513 | Triticale | 28316* | May 16 | 358 | 7.8# | 5.0* | 6.3 | 42.6 | 64.7 | 6.4 | 57.1 | 0.58 | 80.5# | 19.8 |
| BCT 18001 | Triticale | 25363 | May 11 | 347 | 8.6 | 3.4 | 6.0 | 37.1# | 56.7# | 7.7 | 61.4* | 0.63* | 98.3* | 25.1* |
| BCT 18002 | Triticale | 25654 | May 12 | 318 | 7.8# | 3.1# | 5.4# | 41.6 | 63.2 | 6.5 | 58.4 | 0.60 | 84.0 | 21.1 |
| BCT 19003 | Triticale | 28526* | May 16 | 329 | 7.2# | 3.8 | 5.5# | 47.4* | 70.2* | 5.7# | 64.2* | 0.55# | 69.0 | 15.9# |
| BCT 19004 | Triticale | 28740* | May 13 | 366 | 7.9# | 2.8# | 5.4# | 41.3 | 62.2 | 7.0 | 58.2 | 0.59 | 85.0 | 21.3 |
| BCT 19005 | Triticale | 24173 | May 13 | 332 | 8.6 | 3.0# | 5.8 | 36.6# | 57.7# | 7.1 | 61.4* | 0.63* | 97.5* | 24.7* |
| BCT 19006 | Triticale | 27915 | May 12 | 330 | 8.5 | 3.1# | 5.8 | 36.7# | 58.6 | 7.2 | 60.7 | 0.62 | 95.5 | 23.9 |
| Triticale Mean | 25358 | May 12 | 329 | 8.3 | 3.4 | 5.8 | 40.3 | 61.8 | 7.2 | 58.7 | 0.60 | 87.5 | 21.1 | |
| Nomini (check) | Barley | 15044# | April 23 | 341 | 14.2* | 6.6* | 10.5* | 34.4# | 55.6 | 9.0* | 61.7* | 0.63* | 104.2* | 19.2 |
| P25R25 (check) | Wheat | 25376 | May 16 | 189 | 7.3# | 3.7 | 5.5# | 34. 4# | 53.7 | 5.3# | 62.7* | 0.64* | 107.7* | 32.4* |
| Overall Mean | 24269 | May 10 | 329 | 8.9 | 3.8 | 6.4 | 39.9 | 61.5 | 7.2 | 58.8 | 0.60 | 88.5 | 20.8 | |
| LSD0.1 | 3816 | 2 days | – | 0.9 | 0.6 | 0.7 | 2.7 | 3.4 | 0.8 | 2.1 | 0.02 | 7.5 | 3.4 | |
Table 3. Brands and companies in the 2019-2020 Maryland cereal forage trials.
| Brand | Address |
| Eddie Mercer Agri-Services, Inc. | 6900 Linganore Road
Frederick, Maryland 21701 www.eddiemerceragri-services.com |
| Seed-Link Inc. | 208 St. David Street
Lindsay, Ontario (Canada) K9V-4Z4 www.seed-link.ca |
| TriCal Superior Forage | 12167 Highway 70S
Vernon, Texas 76384 tricalforage.com |
Nicole Fiorellino, Assistant Professor & Extension Agronomist
University of Maryland, Dept. of Plant Science and Landscape Architecture
The conditions this growing season have been a major improvement over the conditions we experienced during the 2018 growing season. Generally, the spring weather was favorable for timely planting of corn on the upper and mid-shore, southern Maryland, and northern Maryland regions, with other regions not lagging far behind. The 2019 growing season has generally been good to us, there was early optimism in the monthly crop reports, but by the end of June, warm and dry weather began around the state. Some areas may have received some spotty thunderstorms throughout July, but the July crop reports indicated droughty conditions throughout the state. As we enter into a new month with minimal precipitation thus far, farmers are concerned about the effects from the prolonged dry and warm conditions on corn yield.
Warm temperatures and low rainfall cause stress to growing crops and this weather stress can be a major problem prior to pollination, as stress during this stage will impact the potential number of kernels per row. Warm temperatures, specifically, can cause corn plants to utilize more energy to carry out normal functions. Low rainfall can cause corn ear tips to lose kernels. Poor root development, from poor planting conditions and soil compaction early in the season, can amplify the effects of weather stress observed later in the season. But generally, the potential impact on corn yield from warm, dry weather will depend on the maturity of the corn crop when it experiences the weather stress.
Corn is particularly sensitive to weather stress during the late vegetative growth stages when the number of kernels is determined. Four days of weather stress between V12 and V14 could reduce yields 5 to 10%. Even into tassel emergence, total number of kernels can be affected, with yield reduction from 10 to 25% with four days of weather stress at this stage. Silk emergence and pollination is a critical period of moisture use in corn, with weather stress affecting pollination and leading to kernel abortion – four days of stress during silking could reduce yields up to 50%. Generally after pollination, reduced kernel fill can be expected during weather stress, with four days of weather stress post-pollination possibly reducing yields 30 to 40%. During blister and milk stages, kernel abortion is a concern during weather stress, while shallow or unfilled kernels can occur with stress during the dough stage, and reduced kernel weight is a concern during dent.
In summary, there is potential for reduction in corn yield due to the hot, dry weather but the impacts differ based on the maturity of the corn when it experiences the stress. Weather stress during silking and pollination can have the most severe impact on yield potential, with impacts from weather stress decreasing as corn moves further into reproductive maturity.
The 2018 growing season was a record year in terms of precipitation and is one we would all like to soon forget. However, a soggy fall made it very difficult to seed the 2019 wheat crop and may have lingering effects. Persistent rains delayed planting or forced growers to plant into less-than-ideal field conditions, which may have affected seed establishment and/or plant emergence. As wheat begins to green up and as we approach planting season, it may be a good idea to consider evaluating your wheat stands to help you determine if you should keep the crop for grain vs. a cover crop, consider alternate uses, or terminate it to replant a different crop.
In order to accurately determine wheat stand you will need a yard stick (or any three-foot long stick) and a calculator. Place the stick along a row and count the number of plants in that three-foot section. Record this number and repeat this several times at random locations across the field that are representative of the field as a whole. I would recommend doing this at 15-20 locations to get an accurate average. Take your average and multiply it by four. Divide this number by your row width (in inches). The equation looks like this:
Example:
Plants/ 3 ft. of row: (48+41+38+36+28+51+42+39+48+43+18+29+56+49+45)/15 = 40.7
Alternatively, if your wheat is broadcast or flown on, you can calculate the number of plants per square foot by counting the number of plants in a 1 ft. x 1 ft. square or any other standardized form of measurement as long as you’re consistent (for example, you could use a hula hoop; just calculate it’s area).
To achieve maximum yield potential, stands should be at least 22 plants/sq. ft. You may want to consider alternatives for stands fewer than 12-14 plants per square foot.
*information from the Penn State Agronomy Guide
Kelly Nichols, Agriculture Agent Associate
University of Maryland Extension, Frederick County
Corn
Estimating corn yield can be done in a few simple steps. You’ll need a measuring tape, pencil, and a notepad, or the worksheet below. In order to get the best estimate, it is recommended to take several samples from representative areas of the field.
Step 1. Measure 1/1000th of an acre. If you have 30-inch rows, you will need to measure 17.4 feet. If your row spacing is different, take 43.56 sq. ft./A divided by the row spacing in feet. For example, a 20-inch row spacing is 1.67 feet. 43.56 ÷ 1.67 = 26.1 feet, so you’ll need to measure 26.1 feet of the row.
Step 2. Count the total number of ears in the measured section of the row.
Write the number of ears here: ________________ (A)
Step 3. On three different ears, count the number of rows per ear, as well as the number of kernels per row. Do not count aborted or damaged kernels, as they will not contribute to yield. Next, calculate the total and the average. The picture below shows the direction to count in for each measurement.
Step 4. Calculate the number of kernels per ear. To do this, multiply the average number of rows per ear (B) by the number of kernels per row (C) from Step 3.
___________ rows per ear (B) X _______________ kernels per ear (C) = __________ kernels per ear (D).
Step 5. Calculate the number of kernels per acre. Multiply the number of kernels per ear (D) by the number of ears (A) by 1,000.
___________ kernels per ear (D) X ________ number of ears (A) X 1,000 = ________ kernels per acre (E).
Step 6. Estimate yield at 15.5% moisture. Divide the number of kernels per acre (E) by 90,000 kernels/bu.
________ kernels per acre (E) ÷ 90,000 = ________ estimated bu/A.
Step 7. If you would like to estimate silage yield, Penn State Extension suggests dividing the estimated grain yield by a factor of 6.5 to 7.5. This will provide an estimate of wet tons at 35% dry matter.
Soybean
Just a few notes on estimating soybean yield. In order to reduce variability of soybean yield estimates, sample more than five areas in a field. (However, this can be time-consuming.) Also, wait until the soybeans have reach at least the R6 growth stage; at this growth stage, the soybeans have green pods with seeds that fill the pod. This will provide a more realistic yield estimate.
Estimating soybean yield involves counting the number of pods in a specified area of the field. You will also need the number of seeds per pod (2.5 can be used as a conservative estimate), as well as the seed size factor. There are two excellent resources which explain the steps of estimating soybean yield:
1) Estimating Soybean Yields – Simplified: a fact sheet by Dr. Shaun Casteel, Purdue Soybean Extension Specialist.
2) Estimating Soybean Yields: a video by Dr. Liz Bosak, Penn State Extension Field & Forage Crops Educator.