Spring is the time that many wheat producers apply herbicide and nitrogen (N) fertilizer. For many this can be accomplished in a single pass by tank mixing the herbicide and UAN. In most cases this is an effective practice which eliminates one pass over the field. There are some scenarios in which this practice is ill advised. One such scenario is high temperatures which would lead to excessive leaf burn and crop damage. The other scenario is no-till and that will be the focus of this article. Ruling out warm temperature tank mixing herbicides and nitrogen, assuming the herbicide can be tank mixed, is a good practice. No-till on the other hand can be a different issue.
![No till drill and ammonia oxide application](https://osunpk.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/20091218-4274a.jpg?w=275&h=385)
Situations with a lot of residue and smaller wheat is common during top-dress.
The problem in no-till comes from the liquid application method needed to apply herbicides, flat flan. To get a good kill with the herbicide the spray pattern needs to have good coverage, i.e a lot of small droplets to ensure maximum surface area impacted. Unfortunately there are four primary fates of UAN when applied via flat fan nozzles. The UAN could be taken directly up into the wheat plant via absorption through the leaves, the UAN could reach the soil and go into the soil solution or absorbed onto the soil itself, the UAN can be taken up by weeds, or the UAN droplet may hit dead plant tissue and be adsorbed into the residue.
![20090226-1864](https://osunpk.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/20090226-1864.jpg?w=496&h=328)
UAN applied with a flat fan will hit a growing plant, the soil, or residue.
The fourth fate of UAN presented is what can make the tank mix less efficient than a two pass system. In a no-till system any UAN that hits residue should be counted as lost, for the short term. The decision to go with a one pass or two pass system can be aided by evaluating the amount of canopy coverage. For example if the no-till field has 50% canopy coverage then one could estimate 50% of the UAN applied via a one pass system would be tied up in the residue. The cost of a second application could then be compared to the lost N. If 15 gallon of 28-0-0 was being applied then approximately 22.5 lbs of N would be tied up by the straw. At a price of $0.40 per lb on N, that is $9.00 worth of N. Conversely if the canopy coverage was 80% only 20% or 9 lbs of N would be tied up in the residue. Saving the $3.60 in nitrogen would not justify a second trip over the field. Luckily OSU recently released the Canopeo app which uses a cell phones camera to take pictures and quickly and accurately determine % canopy coverage. Canopeo is available for iOS and android http://canopeoapp.com/.
In fields with a high amount of residue or limited canopy coverage UAN should be applied with streamer nozzles. This will concentration the fertilizer into streams which will allow the UAN to have enough volume to move off the residue and into the soil.
So as the decision is being made to tank mix herbicide and UAN or make two passes take into consideration: % canopy coverage, rate of UAN (how much could be lost), cost of UAN per pound, and cost of a second trip over the field.
Below is an excerpt from the publication Best Management Practices for Nitrogen Fertilizer in Missouri; Peter C. Scharf and John A. Lory. http://plantsci.missouri.edu/nutrientmanagement/nitrogen/practices.htm
Broadcasting UAN solution (28 percent to 32 percent N) is not recommended when residue levels are high because of the potential for the N in the droplets to become tied up on the residue. Dribbling the solution in a surface band will reduce tie-up on residue, and knife or coulter injection will eliminate it. Limited research suggests that the same conclusions probably apply for grass hay or pasture. Broadcast UAN solution is also susceptible to volatile loss of N to the air in the same way as urea, but only half as much will be lost (half of the N in UAN solution is in the urea form).
[…] Please note that this is well after topdress nitrogen should be applied. For this and other reasons (see Dr. Arnall’s blog), tank mixing fungicides with nitrogen is generally not a good practice. Remember that the purpose […]
[…] One pass herbicide/topdress applications are very efficient in terms of time and input costs, but in some scenarios, it can end up costing you more money. Consider two-pass applications when dealing with no-till fields, especially when canopy coverage is below 70%. This is due to the high probability that the nitrogen will be tied up when it hits the residue and will not be available for the current wheat crop. For a more in-depth discussion on tank mixing herbicides and UAN for top-dress see https://osunpk.com/2016/02/07/herbicide-and-uan-tank-mixed-for-top-dress […]
[…] One pass herbicide/topdress applications are very efficient in terms of time and input costs, but in some scenarios, it can end up costing you more money. Consider two-pass applications when dealing with no-till fields, especially when canopy coverage is below 70%. This is due to the high probability that the nitrogen will be tied up when it hits the residue and will not be available for the current wheat crop. For a more in-depth discussion on tank mixing herbicides and UAN for top-dress seehttps://osunpk.com/2016/02/07/herbicide-and-uan-tank-mixed-for-top-dress […]