I freely admit to knowing more about how to drive a tractor than how a plant grows.........so, with that in mind..........

Some place, some where, there must be a definitive dissertation about the N effect on soybeans.  The ones I have read indicate a lack of nodules, but have not directly dealt with a negative/positive affect on yields.  I have "interpreted" an attitude that too much applied N will cut yields.

For 05 planting, we put 3-5 tons of spring-applied litter on ground going to beans...........and had just really good beans in several fields............remember, the extent of weeds and our control thereof is the variable that always makes our "tests" iffy--------if we handled the weeds ok, then we can see the results of the fertilization, if we didn't, then who knows what good/damage the fertilization did..........the friggin' weeds just control the results.

This year we put on NO litter ahead of beans..........."you don't need it" "you're wasting money"......abba dabba this and abba dabba that................the only field of "really good looking" beans is a field that was planted just before the last big rain in May.........plenty of moisture.......practically out of the ground before the planter left the field..............beans flew by the weeds and canopied.........hardly a weed in that field.....................AND we put on one ton of litter last fall..........had some excess at that location, and just spread it.

Remaining fields have just struggled..............foxtail..........you want to talk about foxtail??!!  Hindsight says we should have torn up the late emerged beans and replanted, just due to the parallel growth of the weeds.

With the N shortage in the tissue tests, and the N "adequacy" in the soil tests, the N apparently did not move in the dry soil?????????     Translation--------- roots didn't grow and spread fast enough.

I'm told N directly affects the growth of the plant-------which also then says it affects the extent of the root growth.

So.........if there is plenty of N "going to the plant", merely because it is "more physically available due to location", which it would be in the case of broadcasting litter, or say knifing it in near the row, and that gets the plant going faster and larger------which translates into better root mass--------then seems to me that the plants ought to do better in droughty conditions.

What I don't comprehend is the effect on the quantity of seed-----ie the yield-------because of the overabundance of N.................ie a couple of studies I read indicate that too much N can put everything to stalk and nothing to fruit.        

BUT, if the lack of N means small plants that struggle with lack of water..........seems to me the yield is negatively affected anyway.

If the objective of NOT applying N is to merely get more N into the nodules for carryover purposes..........I would like to see a comparison of the value of the carryover vs the value of additional bushels.  From my perspective, I can afford to put on a lot of N ahead of corn if the bean yields are high.

In summary...........I would rather have your conditions-------a lot of fodder going thru the machine------if that means the yields are correspondingly greater..................ain't nuthin' wrong with a lot of trash to plow under.

If too much applied N cuts yields............ then...............

However, based on this year and the root masses of the different fields, etc etc..........I will put down 3-5 tons of litter ahead of beans next year.