|
Coldwater, Michigan | As has been stated, a pound is a pound. I will qualify that to: if you are applying a material to the soil for fertility purposes. If however, you are applying the nutrient for crop response (yield) the performance is sometimes different. Nitrogen is as good of example as any. NH3 vs a foliar nitrogen for instance. Many times the recommendations for foliar nitrogen follows a snake oil sales pitch. Never ceased to amaze me the ones who accuse me of selling snake oil, often times sell more S. O. programs than I have even dreamed about. Depends on who is telling it I suppose!!!!
The foliar nitrogen if applied enough times in the proper amounts, will out-yield the NH3 by a considerable amount with less nitrogen applied. Why? It goes directly into the plant w/o tie up. The NH3 goes into the soil, ties up with the soil, some is lost to the air at application, some later due to what ever. So in this case a pound may not be equivalent to a pound form a performance standpoint.
The foliar nitrogen carries some baggage as do all products. For this benefit of efficient utilization what do you have to give up? First of all: the "Foliar Nitrogen" most want to sell is terribly expensive, therefore a detriment to it's use. Second of all, liquid urea, which is relatively safe if applied carefully, is a whole bunch cheaper. 3rd) to get adequate amounts of the foliar product you often have to make numerous applications. So the good, and the bad.
As a plant manager for Terra International years ago, a customer would come in with the statement " I'm looking at a new planter. Should it be liquid or dry?" Standard answer was liquid more expensive, but more convenient. You have to determine which is most important to you.
After many years of doing my starter fertilizer trials, I must say that the liquid treatments almost always out-yielded the dry starter treatments. I have the info somewhere in this computer, just don't seem to be able to lay my hands on it at this moment.
That is somewhat backed up by a study done by Penn State a few years back where they did a 3 year study on different starter products. They found, particularly in a year that turned out dry by seasons end, that the liquid starters out-yielded the dry materials. Don't know why they just did, and they could not explain it, just noted it.
The place where liquids can really shine is if you are trying to accurately apply a material. Sorry, airflows and augers just are not that accurate in a small area. Properly calibrated liquid can be so much more accurate.
Edited by Bill Moyer 9/25/2008 21:36
| |
|
Liquid fertilizers???
