Phosphorus (P) fertilizer recommendations for no‐till small grain production are poorly defined. These studies were conducted to determine small grain‐P response relative to the Olsen‐P soil test and compare P‐fertilizer placements with the seed and banded below and to the side of the seed under no‐till field conditions. Phosphorus rates of 0 to 26 kg P/ha were evaluated on seven spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), 11 spring wheat, and six winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) locations in central and northcentral Montana between 1986 and 1990. Grain yield, grain protein, test weight, above‐ground crop yield, plant P concentration at maturity, and P uptake were measured. One winter wheat location had a significant yield response to P; all other locations had non‐significant yield responses. Grain protein, test weight, P concentration, and P uptake were all unaffected by P rate or P placement. Both the ANOVA and paired t‐test were used to analyze the P‐placement data and were all nonsignificant. Slopes of grain yield response (grain yield for each P rate minus the grain yield without P), P concentration, and P uptake versus P rate were analyzed with the t‐test; none of the P‐response slopes were greater than zero. The P responses by individual crop were regressed against P rate, Olsen‐P soil test, available soil water at planting, and pH. Phosphorus rate was not a significant factor in any of the equations. Significant and useful predictive equations for grain yield response could not be generated; however, equations predicting P concentration and P uptake were developed. The Cate‐Nelson graphical analysis was unsuccessful in estimating an Olsen‐P soil test critical level. All attempts failed to relate grain yield or grain yield response to the Olsen‐P soil test and/or P rate. When P soil tests are higher than 12 mg/kg, no‐till grain growers should consider applying a maintenance level of P fertilizer, about 5 to 10 kg P/ha either banded below or with the seed, to maintain soil P levels.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jackson et al. (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: