This year between January and March in 2021, the Pastures for Profit curriculum will be offered as a virtual course.
The Pastures for Profit program is a collaboration between Ohio State University Extension, Central State University, USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Ohio Federation of Soil and Water Conservation Districts, Ohio Department of Agriculture, and the Ohio Forage and Grasslands Council. One live webinar will be offered per month along with “work at your own pace” videos and exercises that accompany each webinar.
Event organizer, Christine Gelley, Ohio State extension educator in Noble County, welcomes organic participants. She sees pasture management as a naturally low-input farming system if it’s done right, relying on holistic thinking and species diversity.
Each webinar will be offered live on Zoom at 7 P.M. and feature three presentations in a 90-minute span. Attendees will be able to interact with the speakers and ask questions in real time. Once registered, attendees will be granted access to the online course including the webinars and complementary resources. Participants that attend all three webinars will have the opportunity to earn a certificate of completion. Registered participants will also receive their choice of a curriculum binder or USB drive of the traditional course by mail.
The webinar schedule and topics are as follows.
Webinar One- Core Grazing Education: Wed., January 13th at 7 p.m.
- Evaluating Resources and Goal Setting
- Getting Started Grazing
- Soil Fertility
Webinar Two- The Science of Grazing: Wed., February 3rd at 7 p.m.
- Understanding Plant Growth
- Fencing and Water Systems
- Meeting Animal Requirements on Pasture
Webinar Three- Meeting Grazing Goals: Wed., March 3rd at 7 p.m.
- Pasture Weed Control
- Economics of Grazing
- Creating and Implementing Grazing Plans
A series of additional videos that complement each webinar will be accessible to registered participants that include topics such as:
- Soil Health & Fertility
- Species Specific Tips
- Stocking Densities
- Forage Sampling and Analysis
- Winter Feeding Strategies
- Conservation Practices
- Genetic Traits of Forages
- Pasture Layouts
- Farm Economics
- Pasture Walks/Virtual Tours
These videos will focus on more specific pasture management topics at the beginner and experienced manager levels.
The Pastures for Profit course utilizes Scarlet Canvas. For best performance, Canvas should be used on the current or first previous major release of Chrome, Firefox, Edge, or Safari. Canvas runs on Windows, Mac, Linux, iOS, Android, or any other device with a modern web browser.
Cost of the course is $50, which includes the Pastures for Profit manual. Current and new members of the Ohio Forage and Grasslands Council are eligible for a $10 discount on registration. Register for the course by visiting https://afgc.org/ofgcwebinar.
Biostimulants are not exclusive to organic systems, but they are a common input for organic growers. Ohio State vegetable production specialist Matt Kleinhenz has spent many years studying microbial-based biostimulants (MBBS). Few agricultural input markets have seen the kind of explosive growth that has occurred with MBBS.
“These products are widely available, relatively inexpensive, are said to offer interesting and appealing benefits, and rarely put users at significant risk, unlike some other products,” says Kleinhenz.
Nicole Wright, program coordinator for the Vegetable Production Lab’s MBBS project, also attributes market growth to increased interest in microbiology.
“I think growers are applying them and thinking about soil and soil microbiology,” she says, “They are thinking ‘everything I hear says that having healthy soil means having lots of living things in them and if I can contribute to that, it’s a good thing.’”
With a constant stream of products entering and exiting the market, Kleinhenz and his team are less interested in testing specific products and more interested in answering the bigger questions surrounding this subset of agricultural inputs. Their research has focused on identifying which factors are important to product efficacy, such as the effect of timing and application rate.
Kleinhenz and Wright have this advice for growers interested in or already using MBBSs on their crops:
- Do background research. Just because a product is OMRI-listed does not mean it’s been found effective. Set aside time to read up on the product. Take a critical look at label instructions. What details are provided about the timing, application rate and application methods? What can the manufacturer tell you about mixing it with other products or using it in specific conditions or crops?
- Be wary of claims that seem exaggerated. Most of these products create modest, gradual, and/or inconsistent yield improvements. Growers should have realistic expectations for MBBS products.
- Product consistency can be an issue with MBBSs. If a product only works some of the time, the cause may be related to the user, the manufacturing process and product itself, or production conditions. For example, environmental factors like soil fertility, pH, or cropping history might influence the product’s effectiveness.
- Use storage and handling procedures that acknowledge these are living products. Avoid temperature extremes and chlorinated water, for example.
- Track what happens. Referrals from other users of the product are valuable. But remember that their success won’t necessarily be repeated in your farm’s unique conditions. When trying a new product or practice, maintain a similar untreated part of your field to compare. Do your own experiments with rate and timing. Keep records on what you applied, where, and take notes on any differences you see in growth, yield, quality, etc.
- Use good cultural processes to increase microbials in your soil too. Wright likens MBBS products to taking a vitamin vs. eating healthy foods. Cultural practices that favor soil biodiversity, organic matter, and good drainage are also needed to provide food and conditions that allow microbial life to thrive.
Change is coming
So far, these products are largely unregulated. For the first time, the current farm bill includes language defining a biostimulant--an important first step in creating better uniformity in the industry, says Kleinhenz. Some manufacturers are concerned about the overall image of MBBS products and are pushing for a more narrow definition along with efficacy testing.
Kleinhenz feels regulation will usher in increased product consistency and better information for consumers, but regulation may also limit the number of products available. Testing product efficacy requires time, expertise, and/or expenses that smaller manufacturers may find challenging.
He also questions if it is truly appropriate to apply the same efficacy standards used for many mainstream agricultural inputs. Based on averages and standard, proven statistical analysis, a comparison of treated and non-treated plots failed to show that inoculation (product use) significantly influenced yield. However, the Vegetable Production Systems Lab team observed many times when a MBBS did increase yield (and a few times when it lowered it).
“If you went out to your truck and it only started half of the mornings, you’d be pretty annoyed and conclude it’s unreliable, that it’s not working,” Kleinhenz says. “However, if you apply a product to your crops or soils and see measurable improvement say, 30% of the time, you might still find the application worthwhile if the costs and other risks were low. Our goal as a team is to provide growers and others with information they can use to distinguish worthwhile from unwise investments and practices.”
There are many additional practical questions to answer that could involve microbiology and decision-making. For now, Kleinhenz and his lab are enjoying the conversation and questions stimulated by this growing and changing industry.
This research is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Organic Transitions Program under award Number 2016-51106-25714 and also under award number 2016-38640-25381 through the North Central Region SARE program under subaward number LNC16-380.
It's time again for Ohio's largest sustainable food and farm conference. This year's OEFFA Conference will feature a larger trade show area, plus three days of workshop sessions and events featuring more than 70 topics and speakers.
Among this year's educational sessions, the Ohio State Vegetable Production Systems Lab will host Do's and Don'ts of Getting More From Microbe-Containing Crop Biostimulants on Friday, February 14 from 12:45-1:45pm. Session leader Matt Kleinhenz invites producers to bring along their lunch and share experiences, concerns, and questions about these commonly used, but often difficult to evaluate, products.
Kleinhenz, an Extension specialist and professor with The Ohio State University’s Department of Horticulture and Crop Science, will lead discussion on the promise and challenge of using microbe-containing crop biostimulants in organic crop production, with an emphasis on vegetable production.
While many organic growers use these types of inputs, the benefits of doing so are rarely clear. Kleinhenz will discuss major reasons for these unclear responses. He will also provide tips for selecting, using, and evaluating biostimulant products effectively. The workshop will integrate hands-on demonstrations and how-to discussions, incorporating news from farms, research stations, and product manufacturers. Participant questions and observations will be blended into discussion on product-crop and product-product compatibility, preparation, application, handling, storage, and normal product effects on crops and yields.
Kleinhenz and his lab have been working with microbe-containing biostimulants for several years, supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture USDA Organic Transitions Program and through the North Central Region SARE program. Those unable to attend the OEFFA conference session can read more about Ohio State work with Microbial-based Biostimulants (MBBS) and their Use in Commercial Vegetable Production by visiting the Vegetable Production Systems Laboratory website: https://u.osu.edu/vegprolab/research-areas/vegebiostimsferts/
Kleinhenz is one of 17 Ohio State presenters at this year's OEFFA conference. For more details about the OEFFA conference and schedule, visit www.oeffa.org/conference2020.php. Walk-in registration is available for Friday and Saturday's programming. The Exhibit Hall is open to the public on Thursday from 4:00-7:00 p.m. and Friday from 5:00-6:30. p.m.
Sales of foliar fertilizers have skyrocketed in the last several years, particularly among organic dairy farmers. Foliar products are readily available, easy to store, and many products are approved for organic use and formulated to provide humates, microbiological products, micronutrients, and other popular treatments. Advocates of these products say they offer an environmentally friendly, efficient, and cost-effective way to apply fertilizers. Yet much of the recent research done on foliar feeding has been unable to reliably document benefits to production.
Louceline Fleuridor has spent the last two years studying foliar feeding as part of her Ohio State master’s degree program. She partnered with organic dairy farmers to measure the response of forage and soils to post-cutting foliar fertilization on 19 on-farm sites. As with previous studies in Ohio, Fleuridor found no consistent evidence of benefits from using foliar feeding products.
"In foliar feeding, you apply fertilizer through the leaves, which is contrary to the traditional knowledge that plants will absorb nutrients through their roots,” says Fleuridor, explaining that leaves' primary function is thought to be photosynthesis. "It raises some questions."
On Thursday, December 19, Fleuridor met with participating farmers and Ohio State specialists for a discussion of the research trials and results.
Partnering farmers began the meeting by sharing their experiences with foliar products. Wayne county dairy farmer Jeff Miller began experimenting with foliar feeding on one of his pastures five years ago. He decided to spray half of his pasture to see what would happen and because he couldn’t afford to spray the whole field. But when he noticed how much quicker his herd began to graze in the foliar fed area, he decided he couldn’t afford not to spray the whole field. Other farmers relayed similar experience, noting increases in crop yield, forage health, palatability, and harvested hay quality that coincided with the use of foliar feeding.
Yield gets a lot of attention in studies, but quality and palatability are also important, especially on dairy farms where forage is not the end product. Past studies have noted other advantages to foliar feeds, including decreased nutrient runoff, better absorption efficiency of micro- and macronutrients, reduced instance of disease, and, in a 2000 study on wheat, increased grain protein content.
"Forage quality is where we really expected to see changes, but we didn't," said Ohio State soil fertility specialist Steve Culman, who provided technical assistance on the project.
Fleuridor's study examined a variety of forage quality measurements, including in-field measurements for sugar content (Brix), as well as lab analysis for crude protein, stem:leaf ratio, fiber content, relative forage quality, net energy of lactation, and estimated milk/ton.
In addition to sharing individual and overall test results with the participating farmers, Fleuridor also spent time explaining how researchers use randomized plots and statistics to separate actual treatment differences from differences that happen randomly or from variations in the field. Fleuridor noted that there were some differences between the treatment and control in the studies, but the results were inconsistent and didn’t reveal a cohesive pattern of increased yield, plant health, or milk production for the sites in this study.
Culman cautions farmers to inform themselves before using foliar feeds. “If you’re looking at adding these products, look at the formulation and know what you’re getting. Foliar products tend to supply only a small amount of nutrients.”
Most of the farmers in the study plan to continue using foliar feeding, feeling that these products have caused improvements on their fields. They did note mixed results with some products and a need for additional labor. Several of the participants also stressed that other soil problems need to be fixed before turning attention to foliar feeds.
As for Fleuridor, she feels there are many factors that could have contributed to the mixed results in this study, including weather and soil conditions when the products were applied. She recommended that future studies use a consistent forage composition, and suggested a focus on clover may be advisable, based on farmer feedback.
This study was sponsored by The Ohio State University Paul C. and Edna H. Warner Grants for Sustainable Agriculture, Organic Valley FAFO (Farmers Advocating for Organic), and SoilBiotics. Organic Valley FAFO is currently accepting grant proposals for on-farm research projects. The deadline is February 15, 2020. Read more: https://www.organicvalley.coop/why-organic-valley/power-of-we/farmers-advocating-organics/
|Ohio State researcher Louceline Fleuridor applied foliar feed treatments at spring green up and 10 days after each cutting. Applications were made in the mornings when temperatures were below 75 degrees F.|
The Ohio State Soil Balancing Team is concluding a five-year project examining the beliefs, practices, and effects of soil balancing. Soil balancing involves the use of high calcium amendments to manipulate the ratio of calcium, magnesium, and potassium in the soil. For decades, proponents have claimed that the right balance of these cation nutrients will improve field conditions and yields, but none of these effects have been replicated by modern university research.
Through interviews, surveys, and literature reviews, the team gained a better understanding of why and how soil balancing is used by farmers and how it had been studied by researchers. The group found that while most researchers and university educators viewed soil balancing as an ineffective fertilization program; farmers and consultants who use soil balancing view it as a holistic method for improving soil health.
With input from a farmer advisory committee, the team designed long-term field experiments situated on organic farms and university research sites. The field trials found some evidence that changes in Ca:Mg ratios were associated with changes in soil structure and weed populations. However, the team was unable to document consistent effects on these characteristics, or on soil biology, crop quality, or yield.
Based on the overall project findings, the Ohio State team recommends further investigation of how soil balancing’s effectiveness is impacted by specific site conditions such as cation exchange capacity (CEC), clay content, or management practices. Meanwhile, the team has issued the following recommendations for anyone using or considering soil balancing.
Soil test data is critical to making informed decisions about managing Ca:Mg ratios.
Watch your pH if using lime. Gypsum is a better choice to change your Ca saturation ratio without affecting pH, and it also provides sulfur.
Soils with a CEC below 10 meq/100 g may develop K deficiencies. In soils with a low holding capacity for cations, excess Ca can quickly lead to deficiencies of K, and possibly Mg. We did observe this in on-farm sites.
Consider economic factors. On soils with higher CEC, more time and amendments will be needed to increase the Ca:Mg ratio. Depending on the amount of change needed and the value of your crop, using soil balancing may be cost prohibitive.
Any time you try a new practice, monitor the results. If possible, try using the new practice on only part of your farm and compare it with a similarly managed area to see if the new technique is making a positive contribution over time.
Additional Resources and Information are available at https://offer.osu.edu/soil-balancing/resource including summary reports, articles, and presentations.
Recordings are available from the 27th Annual Conservation Tillage and Technology Conference, held in Ada, Ohio, in March 2019. This two-day event brought together speakers in a variety of subject areas – many of which will be of interest to organic farmers.
Videos are available on the conference’s You Tube Channel.
Here are some of the offerings:
Cover Crop Panel: Addressing Cover Crop Seed Issues
Sarah Noggle, OSU Extension, Paulding Co., Moderator; Jay and Ann Brandt, Walnut Creek Seeds; Don Grimes, Ohio Seed Improvement; Cody Beacom, Bird Hybrids
Protecting Identity Preserved Crops In The Field:
Managing Pollen Drift to minimize contamination of Non-GMO Corn
Dr. Peter Thomison, OSU Extension Corn Specialist
Enhancing Mycorrhizae And Metarhizium Fungus
Jim Hoorman, USDA-NRCS, Soil Health Specialist
What Management Practices Most Influence Soil Health In Corn Production?
Dr. Christine Sprunger, OSU Assistant Professor, SENR
Enhancing Beneficial Insects With Pollinators
Dr. Stephanie Frischie, Xerces Society Agronomist / Native Plant Materials Specialist, Plymouth, WI
Can Weeds Be Managed With Calcium Amendments?
Dr. Doug Doohan, OSU Professor, HCS, and Andrea Leiva Soto, OSU PhD Student, HCS
Elephant In The Room: Why Do So Many Farmers Practice 'Soil Balancing' Despite The Lack Of Scientific Evidence?
Dr. Doug Jackson-Smith, OSU Professor, SENR, and Dr. Caroline Brock, OSU Senior Research Associate, SENR
The Effects Of Manipulating Ca:Mg Ratios On Ohio Crop Yields And Soil Health
Dr. Steve Culman, OSU Assistant Professor, SENR, and Will Osterholz, USDA-ARS
Weather Pattern Effects On Conservation Practices
Dr. Aaron Wilson, OSU, Byrd Polar and Climate Research Center
Return On Investment With Using Gypsum
Dr. Subbu Kumarappan, OSU Associate Professor, ATI
Gypsum Is More Than Calcium: Summary Of Ohio Field Crop Responses To Sulfur
Louceline Fleuridor, OSU MS student, HCS
Use of compost and a mixed species hay crop are recommended.
For farmers transitioning from a conventional to an organic farming system, decisions made during the three-year transition period can influence important factors of future production, such as soil-borne pathogens, soil fertility, and soil structure. In this study, compost incorporation strongly affected physical, chemical, and biological soil health factors and, overall, the soil food web. Using a mix of perennial hay during the transition was most successful in reducing disease-causing pathogens in the soil. Highest available N and yields occurred in the plots using high tunnel vegetable production.
Materials and Methods
A three-year study was conducted in Wooster, Ohio, to evaluate four common rotational strategies used during transition from a conventional to an organic farming system. The four organic transition strategies evaluated were: 1) tilled fallow, 2) a single planting of mixed species perennial hay, 3) low intensity open field vegetable production, and 4) intensive vegetable production under a high tunnel.
Each transition strategy plot was split in half with 15,000 lbs./ac composted manure applied each year to one half.
At the year of certification, the fields were planted to tomato, with two smaller plots of soybean.
- Compost treatment increased organic matter of soils in all treatments, lowered bulk density, and increased NO3-N, and microbial biomass-N.
- The addition of compost boosted plant vigor for tomatoes for all transition strategies, but had an inconsistent effect on suppression of soil-borne diseases.
- Transition cropping strategy was the main factor influencing bacterial community structure in the soil and the rhizosphere.
- Bacterial communities involved in disease suppression were more abundant in soil previously cropped with hay compared to tilled fallow and low-intensity vegetable production. This was true for both tomato and soybean crops.
- Overall, the mixed hay was the most effective in decreasing damping-off for both tomato and soybean crops.
- Tomato yield during year four was much higher in the high tunnel plot. The hay treatment also showed better yield than the tilled fallow and open field vegetable production.
Why Researchers Think the Hay and High Tunnel Treatments Did Better
Disease suppression might happen in two ways. One involves specific action against pathogen populations. For example, brassicas (cauliflower, kale, turnip, radish, cabbage) suppress soil-borne diseases by exuding sulfur-rich substances that are toxic to many pathogenic soil organisms. And certain species of nematodes eat bacteria and fungi that cause plant diseases. Disease suppression can also occur from high competition for available resources. In both cases, the disease suppression is associated with the overall composition of the microbial community (bacteria, fungi) present in the soil and the rhizosphere.
The hay crop used in this experiment was a combination of Festulolium (a rye fescue hybrid) under-sown with alfalfa, red and white clover, timothy, chicory, orchardgrass, and plantain in equal proportions. Researchers concluded that the above-ground diversity of the hay mix supported an increase in beneficial soil organisms that compete or interfere with pathogens, thus, reducing incidence of disease in future crops.
The highest yields in this study were from the high tunnel plots. While some of the increase resulted from extending the growing season, soil analyses also found a higher level of available N in the high tunnel plots. Researchers think this was a result of maintaining the soil food web in a biologically-active state during the cold early spring months in northern Ohio. The monthly mean soil temperature inside the high tunnels was warmer by 35–41°C from January to May while from July to September it was marginally lower than the outside soil temperature. (Based on top 4 inches.)
For more information on using tunnels in vegetable production, visit the Vegetable Production Systems Laboratory’s Crop Enivronments page.
Prepared by Louceline Fleuridor and Cassandra Brown
Based on summaries of the following papers:
Benítez, MS; Baysal, F.; Rotenberg, D.; Kleinhenz, M.D.; Cardina, J.; Stinner, D.; Miller, S.A.; Gardner, B. B. 2007. Multiple statistical approaches of community fingerprint data reveal bacterial populations associated with general disease suppression arising from the application of different organic field management strategies. Soil Biology and Biochemistry Volume 39, Issue 9, September 2007, Pages 2289-2301
Briar, S.S., Miller, S.A., Stinner, D., Kleinhenz, M.D., & Grewal, P.S. 2011. Effect of different organic transition strategies for peri-urban vegetable production on soil properties, nematode community, and tomato yield. Applied Soil Ecology, 47, pgs 84-91.
Baysal, F; Benitez, MS; Kleinhenz, MD; Miller S.A.; Gardner B.B. 2008. Field management effects on damping-off and early season vigor of crops in a transitional organic cropping system. Phytopathology, Vol. 98, No. 5.