- Location
- Suffolk
Is anyone seeing the benefits of variable rate drilling? Everyone seems to have a different opinion on this and I am yet to decide if we are doing the right thing?!
Variable rate drilling
- Thread starter farmerfred86
- Start date
If your doing it have you done plant counts in the spring to see if it did even up populations ?
Surely this is the way to quantify if its working
- Location
- Suffolk
Not yet... We're due to start this autumn though. Was just wondering if anyone is already doing it and seeing results!?
I'm going to have a play with it on one block that I have had EC scanned to see if there is anythng in it, must admit the EC scan did do a very good job of zoning soil types, much better than I thought it would
I'm pretty sceptical to be honest but have the tech already and enjoy messing with these things - open minded and will maybe post results here next year
- Location
- Suffolk
That's interesting as we're in exactly the same position! We're trying it as we already have the kit...
That's one of my concerns - we are doing it because we can, not because it's necessary. I'm hoping to post findings too but it will be next harvest before we have anything to show...
That's one of my concerns - we are doing it because we can, not because it's necessary. I'm hoping to post findings too but it will be next harvest before we have anything to show...
I think most precision farming is done more because it can be than that it actually adds much (if anything)
Keeps the job interesting though !
General-Lee
Member
- Location
- Devon
Don't say those words you'll just fuel the fire for our resident white stick man!!
I have done it, for example a 24 acre field was zoned to three areas, I would have drilled it at 130 kg/ha but we zoned it into 90, 110 and 135. Seed saving alone would have paid for the sampling over three years.
We did ear counts before harvest and it was close to 600 in all of the zones. Yield was more than I expected and more even.
To complicate matters we also used the n sensor and it applied different rates to each zone as well.
Hope to do a bit more with it this autumn, if I can work out how to import EC maps to gatekeeper and produce target grids.
Oh have also tried it with rape but the people writing the shape files would not be radical enough to make a significant difference.
We did ear counts before harvest and it was close to 600 in all of the zones. Yield was more than I expected and more even.
To complicate matters we also used the n sensor and it applied different rates to each zone as well.
Hope to do a bit more with it this autumn, if I can work out how to import EC maps to gatekeeper and produce target grids.
Oh have also tried it with rape but the people writing the shape files would not be radical enough to make a significant difference.
Import of EC to gatekeeper is easy enough as is creation of application maps based upon them - if you get stuck give me a shout
Don't say those words you'll just fuel the fire for our resident white stick man!!
Pf can defiantly drive straighter than I can and yield maps are useful
N sensors and vra p&k etc are a bit more for the fun of it however imo !
One day it might all return more than it costs however so let's remain open minded and keep up with it all !
Steevo
Member
- Location
- Gloucestershire
Question is, did the low seed tiller more because there were less plants and more light, and the high seed tiller less because of the opposite reasons. But....would you want to risk 90kg/ha every year?
Also, N-sensor as you say may well have compensated for it - would be interesting to see the n-sensor application maps vs. seed maps.
Every trial needs a control strip of "standard farm practice" as a comparison, and only change one factor per trial e.g. seed rate, or N.
Stoxs
Member
- Location
- Andover , Hampshire
Looking into VR seeding, very interesting comments here.
Personally i would rather get VR N application going first then look into plant population.
I can see greater benifits from N application on our ground with quiet large variations. If this workrs then vari seed rate would be the next step.
keep the info coming
worth hearing the benifits and draw backs.
Personally i would rather get VR N application going first then look into plant population.
I can see greater benifits from N application on our ground with quiet large variations. If this workrs then vari seed rate would be the next step.
keep the info coming
worth hearing the benifits and draw backs.
- Location
- South Northants
I would have thought that if you are applying N variably to even up the crop, some of that variation could have been smoothed out by drilling variably first. If the crop was more uniform to start with, there should be less variation in the N applications.
Stoxs
Member
- Location
- Andover , Hampshire
Trouble is there are many things that cause variation,
Do you plant more on the good ground and less on the poor ground then use Vari rate N to even it up?
I dont know , to be honest i dont think anyone really knows.
I will sit here and gather info and try to make sense of it im my head LOL
I am trialling it to see if I can bring the average yield up. The nightmare has been failures of hardware & software that prevented me drilling anything variably last autumn & this spring.
Results last year did show much more even ear counts but no yield per field gain.
Clive - can you import the % establishment maps to create the shape flies within Gatekeeper?
Results last year did show much more even ear counts but no yield per field gain.
Clive - can you import the % establishment maps to create the shape flies within Gatekeeper?
- Location
- South Northants
You would need to be careful not to limit yield on the best bits by trying to create a uniform crop. Ideally it should be used to increase the potential of the poor areas. We have found establishment % on worst areas can be down to 60 %, which then lets blackgrass compete and makes a bad patch even worse. These tend to be the areas that are coldest and wettest in the spring and never tiller as well, therefore justifying the higher seed rate.
This has got to be true, you are playing catch up on poor areas with low plant counts. On a few on our fields with some clay caps seed rates IMO need to be double that of the better bits which is difficult when you are driving in and out of the areas. So you are wasting a lot of seed to get some parts correct. On occasions I double drill some of the clay caps as I know the areas quite well. I think variable seed rate would be my first port of call with precision farming and probably reasonably easy as only need to do once and repeat. Justifying cost vs savings on 400ac another matter though...
Yes, easy and easy to create your own application maps based on them
The time to judge the benefit is at stem extension of the plant, following that you can gain or lose tillers according to climate. if the crop is even at GS31 then the technology has worked and fine tune with the N sensor for fungicide/growth reg and N application. trouble is, try as you might you will never be able to prove a financial benefit as there are too many other environmental factors influencing yield. I use these systems as I believe it is important to apply inputs as accurately as possible and even then there is a lot of guess work in finding the correct variation, cost wise not much more expensive than an application of trace element and you cant isolate or prove the yield benefit of that either?
Perhaps, but I need to see a benefit above the cost & hassle value against a control field next door drilled at flat rate. That benefit needs to be financial i.e. higher average yield & quality or why bother? I would only be buying extra work for an even tiller count at GS31.
The payback on trace elements is tricky too - many deficiencies are transient & may not ultimately reduce yield. Manganese is a perfect example - either it recovers or it dies so there is a degree of prophylatic application especially where you have a history of symptoms showing up.