Row spacing effects on soybean production in North Carolina

IF 0.8 Q3 AGRONOMY
D. R. Stokes, R. A. Vann, J. L. Heitman, G. D. Collins, K. D. Stowe
{"title":"Row spacing effects on soybean production in North Carolina","authors":"D. R. Stokes,&nbsp;R. A. Vann,&nbsp;J. L. Heitman,&nbsp;G. D. Collins,&nbsp;K. D. Stowe","doi":"10.1002/cft2.70036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>North Carolina soybean [<i>Glycine max</i> (L.) Merr.] growers use a diverse range of row spacings, commonly between 7.5 and 38 inches. Research findings regarding the effect of row spacing on soybean yield have been inconsistent and influenced by factors such as planting date and environmental conditions. Although small-plot data from North Carolina often indicates that narrower row spacings lead to higher yields, growers have raised concerns about the potential benefits of wide rows when ripping is employed in environments exhibiting symptoms of subsurface compaction. Research was conducted over 2 years (2021–2022) in the Coastal Plain region to evaluate the effects of wide row ripped spacing (36 or 38 inches) compared to un-ripped narrower spacing (15 inches) on plant population, canopy cover, soil compaction, and yield across four environments. One of the environments included an additional treatment with an un-ripped drilled row spacing of 7.5 inches. Although seeding rates were calibrated similarly, the ripped wide-row spacing treatments led to lower achieved plant population, predominantly due to adverse seed bed conditions resulting in lower germination caused by the inline ripper. The un-ripped narrow row spacings (7.5 and 15 inches) consistently demonstrated 7–25% greater canopy cover than ripped wider spacings (36 and 38 inches) by the flowering stage (R1). Soil penetration resistance varied by row spacing in only two environments, with differences generally lacking agronomic significance (i.e., penetration resistance &lt;2 MPa). Yield results indicated no significant effect of row spacing in three out of four environments; in the fourth environment, the un-ripped 15-inch row spacing yielded significantly more than both the un-ripped drilled and ripped wide-row soybeans. In the environments in this study, wide-row ripped treatments offered no agronomical advantage over narrow row un-ripped treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":10931,"journal":{"name":"Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cft2.70036","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cft2.70036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

North Carolina soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] growers use a diverse range of row spacings, commonly between 7.5 and 38 inches. Research findings regarding the effect of row spacing on soybean yield have been inconsistent and influenced by factors such as planting date and environmental conditions. Although small-plot data from North Carolina often indicates that narrower row spacings lead to higher yields, growers have raised concerns about the potential benefits of wide rows when ripping is employed in environments exhibiting symptoms of subsurface compaction. Research was conducted over 2 years (2021–2022) in the Coastal Plain region to evaluate the effects of wide row ripped spacing (36 or 38 inches) compared to un-ripped narrower spacing (15 inches) on plant population, canopy cover, soil compaction, and yield across four environments. One of the environments included an additional treatment with an un-ripped drilled row spacing of 7.5 inches. Although seeding rates were calibrated similarly, the ripped wide-row spacing treatments led to lower achieved plant population, predominantly due to adverse seed bed conditions resulting in lower germination caused by the inline ripper. The un-ripped narrow row spacings (7.5 and 15 inches) consistently demonstrated 7–25% greater canopy cover than ripped wider spacings (36 and 38 inches) by the flowering stage (R1). Soil penetration resistance varied by row spacing in only two environments, with differences generally lacking agronomic significance (i.e., penetration resistance <2 MPa). Yield results indicated no significant effect of row spacing in three out of four environments; in the fourth environment, the un-ripped 15-inch row spacing yielded significantly more than both the un-ripped drilled and ripped wide-row soybeans. In the environments in this study, wide-row ripped treatments offered no agronomical advantage over narrow row un-ripped treatments.

Abstract Image

行距对北卡罗来纳州大豆产量的影响
北卡罗来纳大豆[甘氨酸max (L.)]稳定。种植者使用不同的行距,通常在7.5到38英寸之间。行距对大豆产量影响的研究结果不一致,且受种植日期和环境条件等因素的影响。尽管来自北卡罗莱纳的小块数据经常表明,较窄的行间距导致更高的产量,但种植者对在表现出地下压实症状的环境中进行撕裂时,宽行可能带来的好处表示担忧。在沿海平原地区进行了为期2年(2021-2022)的研究,以评估宽行撕开间距(36或38英寸)与未撕开的窄行间距(15英寸)在四种环境下对植物种群、冠层覆盖、土壤压实和产量的影响。其中一种环境包括额外的处理,未撕裂的行间距为7.5英寸。尽管播种率的校准方法相似,但宽行距撕裂处理导致了较低的植物种群数量,主要是由于不利的种子床条件导致了内联撕裂器导致的发芽率降低。在开花期(R1),未撕开的窄行距(7.5和15英寸)比撕开的宽行距(36和38英寸)的冠层盖度高7-25%。仅在两种环境下,土壤穿透阻力随行距的变化而变化,其差异通常缺乏农艺意义(即穿透阻力<;2 MPa)。结果表明,四种环境中有三种环境行距对产量无显著影响;在第四种环境中,未撕开15英寸行距的大豆产量明显高于未撕开的钻行大豆和撕开的宽行大豆。在本研究的环境中,宽行撕裂处理与窄行未撕裂处理相比没有农艺优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management
Crop, Forage and Turfgrass Management Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agronomy and Crop Science
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
49
期刊介绍: Crop, Forage & Turfgrass Management is a peer-reviewed, international, electronic journal covering all aspects of applied crop, forage and grazinglands, and turfgrass management. The journal serves the professions related to the management of crops, forages and grazinglands, and turfgrass by publishing research, briefs, reviews, perspectives, and diagnostic and management guides that are beneficial to researchers, practitioners, educators, and industry representatives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信