Spencer
Member
- Location
- North West
if it’s made from ground up badgers I’ll take 20 IBCs.., need them to keep up production..!
Bitersaltz vs liquid Magnesium ?
- Thread starter Clive
- Start date
if it’s made from ground up badgers I’ll take 20 IBCs.., need them to keep up production..!
- Location
- Bury St Edmunds
I think Clive has been getting his Sulphates(SO3) mixed up with his Nitrates (NO3) different products...different prices !
Bogweevil
Member
Plants use quite a lot of magnesium and very little manganese. It is hard to provide adequate levels of major nutrients, which includes Mg of course, by foliar application.
Foliar feeding magnesium is useful to treat deficiency (natural or induced by over application of K, drought, poor drainage, compaction etc) although several applications might be needed to counter symptoms, but usually soil treatment with kieserite or magnesium limestone best to provide magnesium.
AHDB speak thus:
Cereals may show visual, and often transient symptoms of magnesium deficiency but seldom give a yield response to magnesium applications, unless soil reserves of Mg are very low. The latter situation is most likely to occur in sandy soils where sugar beet or potatoes are not grown in the rotation. This deficiency can, however, be induced on a wide range of soils under conditions of crop stress caused by poor soil structure, restricted rooting and/or drought. Treatment is very rarely necessary, unless symptoms persist, in which case a foliar Mg spray should be applied. The soil magnesium status should be maintained above Index 0 in arable rotations to avoid any risk of Mg deficiency limiting cereal yields. Magnesium application is very unlikely to improve grain quality on non-deficient soils.
Foliar feeding magnesium is useful to treat deficiency (natural or induced by over application of K, drought, poor drainage, compaction etc) although several applications might be needed to counter symptoms, but usually soil treatment with kieserite or magnesium limestone best to provide magnesium.
AHDB speak thus:
Cereals may show visual, and often transient symptoms of magnesium deficiency but seldom give a yield response to magnesium applications, unless soil reserves of Mg are very low. The latter situation is most likely to occur in sandy soils where sugar beet or potatoes are not grown in the rotation. This deficiency can, however, be induced on a wide range of soils under conditions of crop stress caused by poor soil structure, restricted rooting and/or drought. Treatment is very rarely necessary, unless symptoms persist, in which case a foliar Mg spray should be applied. The soil magnesium status should be maintained above Index 0 in arable rotations to avoid any risk of Mg deficiency limiting cereal yields. Magnesium application is very unlikely to improve grain quality on non-deficient soils.
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I have been applying my sulphate in the form of Magnesium Sulphate (kieserite) through the spreader, 80 kg per ha which should give me 40 kg SO3. It dissolves slowly in the soil which is good and bad. Some fields are a bit low in Magnesium so I’m hoping the 20 kg pa magnesium won’t overdo it either.
So maybe I won’t need bittersalz foliar except during times of stress. Not sure we should need that much foliar Mn either. An old lecturer used to say you don’t helping somebody who is starving by bathing them in porridge.
davidroberts30
Member
- Location
- pembrokeshire
so if my soil test comes back index 3 for magnesium would you apply foliar suppliment?
- Location
- Lincolnshire
If the plant can’t enough via its roots due to drought then yes, I’d give it some foliar. We used to whack it on anyway at grain fill as they reckoned you couldn’t get enough back then, but that idea seemed to fade recently.
Crops like beet go through transient shortages till they get established so it can be helpful on the leaf at times. I have to say I have never seen concrete evidence of the efficiency of foliar sprays. Often I reckon the plant meggers up anyway as it warms up and people say “oh that spray did some good”
Only with 250,000 l/ha water volume!
- Location
- northumberland
How many times have you filled a sprayer
our Mg indices are ok as are our K’s. but often find deficiencies especially when conditions turn droughty so we apply both as foliar applications, they are cheap and when we have tranline trialed there has always been response especially on the lighter soils
we had Rye showing phosphate deficiency a month ago on index 3 soils - foliar application fixed it in a week (we left a half tramline to confirm) soil index really doesn’t mean the nutrition is plant available
better return getting foliar nutrition right than spending on fancy fungicides imo - for us that’s mag, mang and potash based on historical testing
try a tissue test to guide, soil index means not a lot imo
There's a difference between potential supply, availability and usage. You'd think that a good healthy soil and moisture would mean that this should not be an issue. Is a tissue test by a lab previously owned by a fertiliser company really that valid?
What did you used to chide me for when talking about seed dressings? Insurance, I believe!
Just to contradict myself, I'll post this image again...
There's a difference between potential supply, availability and usage. You'd think that a good healthy soil and moisture would mean that this should not be an issue. Is a tissue test by a lab previously owned by a fertiliser company really that valid?
What did you used to chide me for when talking about seed dressings? Insurance, I believe!
Just to contradict myself, I'll post this image again...
View attachment 954809
i subscribe to the idea its easier to change nutrition in the plant than the soil -especially the micro nutrition
application based on testing - i would still dress seed if a test dictated it worthwhile
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I would hope a tissue test done by a fertiliser company with a very good reputation for technical competence is very validThere's a difference between potential supply, availability and usage. You'd think that a good healthy soil and moisture would mean that this should not be an issue. Is a tissue test by a lab previously owned by a fertiliser company really that valid?
What did you used to chide me for when talking about seed dressings? Insurance, I believe!
Just to contradict myself, I'll post this image again...
View attachment 954809
I would hope a tissue test done by a fertiliser company with a very good reputation for technical competence is very valid
do you have any experience of the Omex “bespoke” tissue test and matched product system ?
seem a logical approach but I guess it’s probably expensive ?
- Location
- Lincolnshire
I have no experience of SAP testing, however I agree a very logical approach, so many times I get calls following tissue testing questioning whether or not worth applying deficient nutrients........I always respond with "why bother then" if you plug a car into a fault code reader you then fix the faults or why bother
certainly tailoring nutrition is key IMO for better nutrient use efficiency, often answer is "chuck more nitrogen on" but this is not the case. whether agree with YEN or not there are some key findings for the higher yields and not all cost £180 / ha
I suppose it is back to basics, amount of soil tests I get shown and asked "what fert would you recommend" erm 300 ton of lime would be a good start
- Location
- the brecks norfolk
I use SAP analysis and often it will show what you don't need. So often a response to a poor crop is chuck a bit more N on but from what I've seen N is never the limiting factor and neither are the other majors it's usually one of the micros that needs to be balanced up.
- Location
- Aberdeenshire
I did the yen nutrition package this year for the first time. I found it really interesting and will be repeating it this year. One of the biggest things I learnt was the lack of meaningful data on what is appropriate levels of trace elements elements within cereals be it grain or tissue analysis. Hopefully something like yen long term will provide a useful data set.
Sprog
Member
- Location
- South Shropshire
You are almost right, I would say try a tissue test to guide, soil index means not a lot on it’s own.
Tissue tests here confirm soil analysis results of low copper and boron which are not expensive to put right but adequate levels of mg and k from soil analysis are only shown to come through in tissue tests up to gs32. Once cereals start to go quickly through growth stages 32-39 tissue samples show the plant to be deficient in mg and k and like yourself we use bittersaltz and SOP.
Wheatseeker
Member
I think it already has produced a useful data set. Unfortunately the YEN business model doesn’t appear to be one of giving this information back to it’s (paying) contributors.
- Location
- Cambs Essex
Put on about 8 l/ha of opti mag on rape this week following tissue test done by customer glad they had ibc, I could pump out of rather than bags of bitter salts. Also put on 5 l/ha of feeder k which I have never come across before