Soybean nutrient management: IDC concerns, a research wrap-up, and looking ahead to 2025
Welcome back to University of Minnesota Extension's Nutrient Management Podcast. I'm Jack Wilcox in communications here at Extension. Today, we're going to discuss soybean nutrient management, highlights of some new research, what to be aware of in 2025, and lots more. Today, we have a special guest joining our panel of regulars. We have Lindsay Malone from NDSU. Could you each please introduce yourselves?
Lindsay Malone:So my name is doctor Lindsay Malone. I am an assistant professor in the School of Natural Resource Sciences. So my position title is climate smart approaches in agriculture, which encompasses a lot of things. Nutrient management in particular, done a little bit of soybean phosphorus work that I'll talk about a little bit later.
Dan Kaiser:This is Daniel Kaiser. I'm a nutrient management specialist here at the University of Minnesota. One of the areas I work is on soybean, but I work on a lot of crops across the state, looking at fertilizer guidelines for those crops and trying to use fertilizer efficiently
Lindsay Pease:This is doctor Lindsay Pease, and I am, a nutrient and water management specialist up in Crookston at the Northwest Research and Outreach Center. And, a lot of my work deals with nutrient management across rotations, then also how those nutrient management options interact with, with subsurface drainage.
Seth Naeve:And I'm Seth Naeve. I'm a soybean agronomist here based out of Saint Paul. We end up, you know, working on some, nutrient management related things in my field as well.
Jack Wilcox:Let's begin with an overview of, everyone's current research highlights. Did you see any new data or unexpected findings or just a progress report?
Lindsay Pease:Sure. Yeah. So this last year, we had we've kind of had a couple years of trials going on, involving soybeans. I think the first one, which is less related to nutrients, but, still pretty interesting, has been our planting green trial where we've been planting soybeans into a living rye cover crop. That's actually been working okay.
Lindsay Pease:I would say we've completed about 3 years of that, and what we're seeing is that rye cover, does have the potential to kind of limit the soybean yields just a little bit. So the rye cover itself is not looking necessarily like the best way to prevent erosion, in these soybean systems. Now that said, when we've been looking at no tillage, no till soybeans, those are incredibly, that's incredibly viable. That's working really, really well. So I I think, you know, I think this is a good time to kinda push people to think about maybe you can make a small change of not doing skipping fall tillage, preceding soybeans, especially when you have wheat in the rotation.
Lindsay Pease:And we are looking at some of the nutrient effects of that as well, but that's kind of gonna be a little bit down the line as far as when we have the results on that. Another one that we looked at was kind of looking, especially in the Red River Valley, at corn soybean rotations and thinking about whether you can do a 2 year application of phosphorus versus a 1 year application. This pairs really well with that no till or that reduced tillage system because if you take out that fall tillage, then you are kind of eliminating your ability to incorporate the phosphorus into the soil, which as we know is a really good way of keeping the soil keeping that phosphorus in place. And what we found is that that, you know, rotational, every 2 year application of phosphorus does seem to work, and that gave really, you know, consistent yields with our annual every year application in the Red River Valley. So, so I think these two things kind of work together to show some of the flexibility that you could have with, soil fertility when you're starting to transition into maybe a reduced tillage situation.
Jack Wilcox:Fantastic. Thank you, Lindsay. Lindsay Malone in North Dakota. How about yourself?
Lindsay Malone:Absolutely. So similarly, we have some projects that are not directly related to nutrient management. So one in particular that I'm excited about, we're looking at, the variability of a cover crop and how that might end up impacting the variability of the main crop yield. We are also looking at some planter technology to help improve no till in the Red River Valley, especially under, like, really high corn residue situations. One of the factors that's different up here is that we we're so cold and wet for so long that the corn residue tends to not break down.
Lindsay Malone:A lot of folks bail it or burn it, and so some of this planter technology might help kinda cut through that residue. We're looking at phosphorus, basically updating the phosphorus fertilizer recommendations across the state. And we'll hopefully be able to update the the recommendations in the next year or so. And we're planning on actually presenting some results at the soil and water workshop in Fargo on January 22nd in 2025. Briefly, we had 16 different site years for looking at basically the the we had 5 different rates of phosphorus on very low p fields.
Lindsay Malone:So the idea was that we have a lot of new production areas in North Dakota as well. In 2000, there was about a 1000000 acres of soybean in North Dakota, and in 2020, there were 6,000,000. So we've got a lot of areas that don't necessarily they when the fertility recommendation burst out, they weren't growing 13 there. However, with those 16 set years so we only have 8 from 2023. 2 were responsive, and it was just that lowest rate.
Lindsay Malone:So 25 pounds per acre was enough to bump up over that zero control. There wasn't necessarily a a beautiful curve or anything, and the rest were not responsive to fertilizer. Of the 4 sites that we've looked at so far, so we've looked at southeast and then kind of west central Beulah and Dickinson area, those 4 were not responsive this year as well. So we do still have the 2 that were significant in, 2023. We're in Minot and Moha Mulhall, so up quite close to Canada, central North Dakota.
Lindsay Malone:One of the exciting things with this project is that we're also using it to look at AMS populations, so our bosphatomycorrhizae fungi, and then seeing if there is oh, okay. So maybe these soybeans don't care about how much phosphorus is there. Do they have some microbial friends in the soil helping them get the phosphorus that is available? We are also using Olsen P in North Dakota as that test, and there's a possibility that that Olsen P is not actually telling us enough about the plant available phosphorus. So we're archiving the soil as well, and hopefully, another soil fertility specialist is gonna look at that in the future.
Lindsay Malone:Yeah. That's kind of a North Dakota mini update or maybe not so mini.
Seth Naeve:In my lab, we've we've really geared up. We've got a lot of stuff going on. We have projects on planting date around the state. We're really interested in, environmental effects of, you know, managing planting date in soybean from north to south, as well as we're doing we're experimenting with some double cropping work, looking at the effects of following on some of the other others that are on the call here today, talking about cover crops versus a soil crop versus even following a weed or a barley crop. And so we're looking at feasibility of this even in Minnesota.
Seth Naeve:And all of those have modeling components, and I know we're gonna try to talk later about how we connect our research and translate our research to the farmer. And modeling has a really interesting angle. I've got a lot of physiology stuff going on in soybean quality. We've got a multistate project on nitrogen fixation that's kinda wrapping up. Like Lindsay, I've I'm managing, a drainage site in southern Minnesota, and we're we've historically had, tillage as a subset of of that, of that study, but we're also doing residue removal and cover crops and and doing a bunch of other stuff, nitrogen management as well, looking at soil health measures, but also, from a carbon, intensity standpoint and and trying to evaluate the effect of of our production practices on carbon and forms of carbon and available carbon, a wide range of stuff going on.
Seth Naeve:We confirmed what I had kind of wondered about, and I'm really curious from the fertility folks on on this, on this panel today. Our findings relative to cornstalk removal, Lindsay Malone mentioned this, is that at our drainage site, we see very consistent yield penalties for no till. And it may be just a couple of bushels to maybe 3 or 4 to 5 bushels in some extreme years and no in especially where we don't have drainage. So under poor drainage, no till suffers. But what's interesting, and this is you know, we have 7 or 8 years of data from that that are pretty consistent.
Seth Naeve:Strip till, by the way, is completely equivalent to conventional tillage for us, as we we've never seen a difference in in in yields in strip tillage versus conventional till. But no till gets dinged every year. One way to negate it is actually remove the cornstalks in the previous year. So it's pretty interesting to me is that we can basically negate that no till penalty if we remove those corn stalks. So it tells me a little bit about something about what's what's delaying our soybean development and and reducing our overall yields is this residue.
Dan Kaiser:So I've got a number of projects going on, but a lot of the stuff I've got right now with soybeans are looking at rotational studies. So it's looking at what we do ahead of the soybeans, how that impacts the soybeans, somewhere in the rotation. One of the key things I've been looking at has been sulfur as of late, and I know there's some interest out there in Minnesota from some of the growers on sulfur applications. The main thing though I kind of want to stress with a lot of the work, particularly on sulfur, is it can be location specific and I think a lot of the stuff that Sean has, there's a few sites he has in Indiana that are pretty responsive to sulfur. And that's one of the things that I'm kind of interested to see now some of my data.
Dan Kaiser:Normally, it takes a few years, and that's one of the things that I found that it takes a while for it to bleed out some of the previous sulfur applications in some of these systems where it takes, you know, 1, 2 years before you start seeing differences show up. We've seen some of the treatments because of some of the even the sulfate that's in our soil that can carry over from 1 year to the next. So, you know, with soybean, it's not a given that you're gonna see a direct application in it. Talk about here in a moment in terms of what some of the growers are doing. I've just got some kind of questions about whether we're pushing too many nutrients on the soybean side where we could get away with everything in on the rotation ahead of corn, but, I've wrapped up a lot of the the phosphorus work and that's why it's kind of curious to have Lindsay on here to see her findings on some of that.
Dan Kaiser:Soybean hasn't been as responsive outside of some of our soils. You get above 5% carbonates. You know, low soil test p, we can see some impacts where some of that carryover becomes some of an issue, that we need to be looking at direct applications. But, you know, there's been a lot of flexibility in a lot of our in what I've seen within a lot of the, the data we have wherein we fertilize in the rotation. So I think there's some instances out there that there's some things to think about.
Dan Kaiser:And we've got some potassium work now looking at timing ahead of soybeans just to get at some more of this chloride issue that I've been seeing, with soybean just to see whether fall versus spring application we see any difference in, some of those higher rates and how they impact, soybean negatively. That's kind of what we've seen in particularly with high rates of potash over maybe a £100 of actual potash. And, you know, the final thing which, I think, Lindsay, you're gonna be presenting for me up at Grand Forks. We're doing some work with starter fertilizer in soybean. Every once in a while, I'll get a question on that.
Dan Kaiser:I kinda cringe when I hear growers talk about that, about putting in furrow directly on so on soybeans. I mean, if it's not soy green, typically, there's some issues, but we're looking specifically at, Precision Planting's furrow jet systems, so they've got a couple different placement options on those furrow jets. 1 is directly on the seed, then they've got a dual side band where it it's got little wings off the unit that will, deflect to an off seed placement. You know, looking at the data, at least the 1st year, we're seeing some pretty significant differences between the on seed versus the dual sideband, which we weren't seeing the stand issues with it. There weren't any positive benefits on yield, and these were kinda medium to high testing soils, which I kind of expected.
Dan Kaiser:But, last year seeing, you know, especially the on seed placement, you just do not wanna get liquid starters near the seed. You know, if it isn't soy green, soy green's fine or soy green like products are fine, but, you know, any NPK fertilizers, things can go bad pretty quickly. I didn't necessarily see the yield loss, but there was no gain and the loss stands, so I don't really know the point with it. But we'll try to repeat that again because I've just been trying to get some data to show growers. I've had some that have talked about having some pretty bad experience, particularly up in the valley, even with some of these low salt mixes that, you know, it kind of scares you into scares you straight when it comes to you thinking about starter fertilizer for soybean.
Jack Wilcox:This is going to be our last episode of 2024. Walk us into 2025. What should farmers be aware of, or what are some concerns going into the new year?
Dan Kaiser:Well, the big thing I've really got concerns in my head are what looking at some of these fertilizer prices. Now, you know, you look at potash and nitrogen, those numbers have come down. Obviously, nitrogen isn't a major, you know, thing for soybean. Potash can be, you know, a lot of growers are concerned about it. But, you know, phosphate has been the one that if you look at the prices, I mean, they've been fluctuating, but they still been high relative to the crop value.
Dan Kaiser:And that's one of the things that I'd be I'd be interested to talk to growers and consultants this winter to see what their general attitudes are on for phosphorus. You know, certainly for, you know, the Lindsay's, both their areas, you get to the west and the northwest, probably more concerns in those areas with high pH and low soil test phosphorus. But, you know, Lindsay Malone, that's what I was wondering about, kinda what you're finding there in North Dakota, because if you look at our data, pretty in tune with some of Iowa's data, and if you look at their response to phosphorus for corn and soybean, they don't see a whole lot of difference if you look at soil test values. But for some reason, you get into Minnesota, these northern climates, and even up in the North Dakota, the if you look at the soil test, if we get much above, I know, the Olsen test, it would be, you know, 8, 9, somewhere in there. We don't see much of a response.
Dan Kaiser:And, you know, Lindsay, is that kinda what you've been finding there as well?
Lindsay Malone:We even so all of our sites, the goal was to have the sites be below 7 PPM. A few of them ended up being a little bit higher than that. But even on some of these sites that had 2 to 5 PPM Olsen, we didn't see a response.
Dan Kaiser:I sometimes wonder if that's somewhat IDC. And I don't know. You know, Lindsay, did you have some comment on that?
Lindsay Malone:Corrine Kettering is who I did at Cornell's, who I did undergraduate research with, and she always says, you can't fertilize yourself out of a drought. There's always gonna be something that's limiting, and it's not always what you intended. So that is a possibility why we didn't see responses everywhere. I know we had IDC at, one of our sites in, Richland County this past summer, and there was were quite dry at a couple of other sites.
Lindsay Pease:I just wanted to jump in, and say too that even though some of our trials that we've been doing are not phosphorus rate trials, actually, Lindsay Malone, hearing you talk about your fertilizer response, it actually really, fits with what we have been just observing. You know, even outside of a phosphorus rate trial, sometimes it's really hard to get a phosphorus response out of the soybeans. So, I think that's really interesting that there kind of seems to be a pattern, especially with these Northwest Minnesota and North Dakota Red River Valley soils, definitely.
Dan Kaiser:And I think, you know, Lindsay Malone hit the point is right in the nail right in the head is there's always bigger problems that you can't fertilize your way out of. I mean, we wish we could. I mean, if we could, we'd be getting, you know, 100 bushel beans or more in some of these areas, but it's just kind of an issue with what's the most limiting factor in these these particular fields. And that's the thing that really frustrates me, you know, and I guess, Seth, you've been doing soybean research for longer than I have, but, you know, just finding some of these things that, you know, growers really want, just these little things that they can boost yields by a small amount, especially fertility wise, and I just haven't seen them consistently. I mean, yearly, the main thing is just essentially assur ensuring that nutrients aren't gonna be non limiting.
Dan Kaiser:And, you know, just at a meeting and, you know, there are some industry rep since and some, growers there, and one of the things that always comes up is micros, foliar application, you know, looking at trying to chase these small yield increases, and it it's difficult. You know, with prices are at and the cost of a lot of these different practices, I I don't see the advantage there, especially if you're foregoing some of the base fertility, especially p and k. I mean, those are the areas that I'd worry about more than anything. And, you know, the chloride issue, I think, is real, to be considered about is, a lot of times growers now, you wanna go and look at applying ahead of every crop, and there can be some issues that come into play. And, I think we've probably talked about that quite a bit in some other posts that we've been doing, but it's just one of those things.
Dan Kaiser:And, Seth, I mean, I don't know. Is there anything else? I mean, you finished some of that work on the foliar work, and I'm assuming you haven't really done anything since the last few years.
Seth Naeve:Yeah. That was a multistate project. We took an agronomist perspective of it and just said, okay. Let's assume we're regular farmers trying to maximize yields. Let's buy a bunch of products that's gonna get us the higher yields and see what works.
Seth Naeve:And basically, we found nothing that worked anywhere except there's a couple locations that had poor soil test values, and it covered up some of our sins at those locations. But that was that was it. And we you know, those are obviously ones that we should have just, you know, used regular fertilizers to correct those particular issues. You guys are hitting on something that's really kinda just clicked with me very recently is around soybean kinda yield potential and how we manage soybeans. And so we had 25 years of of really high quality data that we could separate out by yield potential in those various years.
Seth Naeve:And when we had really good yield potentials, we had, a slight decline in in yield potential over time, so earlier planting was better. But anytime we had a year that was a little bit dry, we had no yield advantage to planting before the end of May. All of the things that that you've been talking about, both you, Dan, and and Lindsay have been talking about is is these other factors that cap soybean yields, and then and then how do we manage soybeans that are capped? Generally, soybean agronomists give blanket recommendations for farmers and just say, okay, this is how you should treat all your soybean acres. And farmers like that anyway because that's how they're gonna manage their soybeans.
Seth Naeve:But the reality is, I think when we're in this situation with low prices, is that it may be reasonable for farmers to really look critically at their acres. And if they have production acres that are they have their yield monitor data. They know where they're not getting good yields. They're probably not gonna fix these, low yields with any of these biologicals or foliar fertilizers or name any of these other products that are being sold to them, to fix those problems. So maybe they could back off a little bit on those.
Seth Naeve:So we're trying to get a more objective view of that, and I think we haven't thought about it from a, necessarily from a fertility perspective, although we're in some of our field studies, we are using mid season liquid fertilizers just to ensure that we don't have a problem is basically a check for us to make sure that we didn't we weren't limited by nutrients. But I think this is kinda coming around to this idea that maybe we need to be managing some of these acres differently. And I think IDC is a really good example. Everybody knows what a yellow bean is, and they know that that soybean isn't gonna yield well. But then there's this whole other category of soybeans that just are just are chronically limited, and and a lot of times, it's probably water one way or the other.
Dan Kaiser:Being further south, you may have a little bit more advantage. I mean, that's something I don't know. Being up north, I mean, water is a big issue either. The last few years, I mean, both of you, it's probably been too dry. So, you know, I am curious too a little bit, you know, Lindsay Malone, to some of your work on the mycorrhizae too and in terms of seeing what comes out of that, how much colonization we see because, you know, given when we generally plant soybean, I mean, I would assume, you know, potentially some of these phosphorus or the lack of issues might be just from the fact that they're later planted and it's a little easier to colonize.
Lindsay Malone:Dan, I can speak a little bit to those AMF results. Initially, why we started looking at this was because we, we're so we're looking for a really low phosphorus, level fields in order to run these rate trials. Got set up in this field with generally, the whole field is is quite low, below 5 p PPM Olsen. But we set up relatively close to the road where 50 years ago, there was a farmstead in the barnyard, and it actually had really high phosphorus. And so we ended up setting up a second little rate trial, but we maintained the the initial one that we set up.
Lindsay Malone:So we had a one that was kind of over 20 PPM, and then one that was closer to that five PPM level. And I was really curious about how those native AMF populations would respond or or kind of exist across that area. We actually saw higher colonization in the high phosphorus area, which really surprised my agronomist brain, but we're working with a biologist here at NDSU, and she's like in data systems, that actually makes a lot of sense because these these symbionts, they want to grow somewhere that has high nutrient availability. Yeah. So we just looked at at the one site in 2023.
Lindsay Malone:In 2024, we looked at 4 of our 8 sites and didn't see any, major responses to that fertilizer addition, and we haven't seen a a strong connection with the spring pea either. We did have higher colonization at one site that is our true no till site, and that was in Dickinson, I believe. It might have been it might have been Beulah. But tillage does it it basically works up those hyphae in the soil, and can really have a detrimental effect on AMF populations. So that's kind of our our major theory.
Jack Wilcox:Seth, is there anything new about IDC that might be of concern to growers?
Seth Naeve:My feeling on IDC for this year is is there isn't anything really new for us to do deal with. I think the challenge is that under really good economic scenarios, farmers were able to utilize, soy green in a little bit or other iron chelates in a bit a little bit more liberal fashion. So they were either able to use higher rates in their hot spots or push the boundaries of those areas of of where they were gonna treat or maybe even treat whole fields, where they hadn't before. So I think there's gonna be some pulling back of this, total amount of product that goes out simply because when I talk to farmers there, the IDC that they have is not regular. They don't always have IDC.
Seth Naeve:Now certain areas of certain fields are always gonna get a little bit, and they can treat those. But whether they treat, you know, 10 acres in one field or one field or 10 fields, really depends on on their perspective of how much loss they've had and and looking looking at the economics. So I think there's gonna be less go out, and that's really gonna hurt us in terms of our yield potentials, I think. Because if we do have a bad IDC year, then, we just won't have some of that iron available for those those areas.
Dan Kaiser:I've got some of the same thoughts too, Seth. I mean, you know, you look at the iron key lights. They've traditionally been expensive. I mean, that was one of the reasons we didn't have products like soy green on the market because at the point in time it was tested, you know, 30, 40 years ago. It just was too expensive to make stuff where it was economically viable.
Dan Kaiser:So, I mean, really, growers, I think you look at what some of the companies have done with varieties. You know, variety selection has always been my number one line of defense. And then these other things are kind of, you know, just looking at trying to boost the yield here and there and kind of curious on the mycorrhizal side too because there was, you know, somebody pointed out where they were thinking that maybe the mycorrhizal, you know, since they do impact water uptake, I mean, theoretically, they could impact the uptake of nitrate which is, you know, one of our issues with IDC that, you know, maybe the previous crop might have some impacts. I know that was one of the consultants I've known for quite a while. His thinking was following a crop like sugar beets, that soybean may not have IDC as bad as it would from a crop like corn, which has mycorrhizal now.
Dan Kaiser:You know, sugar beet's really good at extracting nitrate. So, you know, you're looking at differences in nitrate potentially between similar rates of of nitrogen applied between corn versus sugar beet. But with the rain we had early on in many of these areas, what happens next year? Because I haven't really heard yet any reports on the residual nitrates coming into, 2025, and then I guess I'll be telling what we see in the spring with the weather conditions and if the residual nitrates are down, if things are any better in in 2025 versus some of the previous years.
Seth Naeve:We've had so many droughty falls. We've been talking about nitrates carry over quite a bit, and so I guess that is that is really a good point and and where we're at with that. Lindsay Pease did bring up the question earlier about drainage effects, and I think that's a good question. What we're gonna see going forward, and I'm I'm really curious too, is is to know the long term effects of of drained of artificial drainage in valley soils on, on IDC. And, you know, we don't have good controls for this to look at how this behaves over a long period of time in in farmer fields.
Seth Naeve:But it'd be interesting to hear from farmers and really find out what how they think that this is really affected. I know, psychologically, farmers are gonna tell me, yes. This has really helped me a lot because I spent a whole bunch of money on on this, and so I'm I believe that it's helped me. But we also need to have a a realistic view of it as well. I mean,
Dan Kaiser:as dry as it's been, you know, we do know there's probably some upward movement or wicking of water up carrying solutes back towards the surface. I've kind of wondered if that maybe is what influenced some, you know, growers saying, well, there's some areas we haven't seen IDC in years and in 2024, you know, we saw it pretty severely. So, you know, it's one of the things with water and drainage. I mean, things can happen. I mean, I'm not necessarily convinced that we can completely get rid of issues with drainage.
Dan Kaiser:I think there's some issues there that just aren't gonna go away. The thing that I will say is do not buy into any of this elemental sulfur talk where you can acidify your soil because if you look at it, you're treating the top 6 inches and there's a lot more, especially carbonate, below that top 6 inches that's just gonna replace what you're gonna get rid of with the elemental sulfur. So it's, I think, the thing about IDC, it's here to stay. So it's just, you know, seeing how best we can deal with it is really the the main thing, with with some of the options that we have.
Lindsay Pease:You know, going back to drainage, you know, as a way, you know, to I mean, drainage is gonna help move soluble salts down the soil profile, and then that includes the nitrates, you know, which, of course, is not the best for water quality, but actually can really be something that helps with the IDC in addition to any other soluble salts you have out there, you know, the, like, chloride salts. So one thing that I think is important to think about with IDC is if you have installed the subsurface drainage system and you don't see those salt symptoms improving, that's actually a signal that you have some non soluble salts out there, and that's what those products like soy green are really targeting. They're trying to exchange those salts from a chemistry perspective. They're they're doing a swap, a one to one swap, of something that is soluble with something that is non soluble to to make those salts, available to be leached. So I think that's something, you know, to be, mindful of, especially with all of this drainage going in in the valley.
Lindsay Pease:If you're like, man, you know, I put this drainage out. Of course, we have had the droughts like Dan says, and the droughts make salts wick back up. But, you know, we had 2024 early 2024 was a great time for those salts to be washed back down, and we definitely saw that, you know, on my drainage site, things kind of washing back down. So, if you're having those consistent issues, then you need to apply something, swap so that it can be leached, is, I guess, basically my big take home message.
Dan Kaiser:Well, and I think some of the salt issues in those areas too. I know Dave Franzen always talked about sulfates being a major contributor to the salt. So magnesium, calcium, sulfate, those those type of things. So as I said, it's complicated. I mean, it's not simple.
Dan Kaiser:You think you can fix it with one thing, but these systems and soil, it's it's not an easy thing to fix.
Lindsay Malone:Yeah. I know I set up the top of the call. I'm I'm still relatively new here. Well, yes, I I feel like the drought of the the end of this even is is top of mind. We were so wet in May.
Lindsay Malone:I think we had we had planting dates in late April and then planting dates in June this year. That moisture issue on both ends, at least, especially in the red kinda heart of the Red River Valley where we've got these Fargo clays is tough, and and managing that that moisture on both ends, whether that's through artificial drainage. I know there's a lot of folks trying to use cover crops to help improve traffic ability early in the season. I think we're at kind of an interesting point. I'm excited to see in 2025 and even in 2036 some of these management practices becoming more common and be able to see, yes, like Seth said, we don't have necessarily a compare a a controlled comparison, next to each other, but we've got fields across the street that could be really interesting to to look at.
Dan Kaiser:And theoretically, the cover crops, if it is a nitrate issue with IDC, I mean, if you got something out there that's growing, that's taking up the nitrate, you know, could have some benefits. I don't know if anybody's really looked at that that closely, but, it's a topic for another time.
Jack Wilcox:Seth Knave, Lindsay Malone, Dan Kiser, and Lindsay Pease, thank you so much for your expertise today.
Lindsay Malone:Thank you.
Seth Naeve:It's it's great to be here on this podcast with everybody today.
Lindsay Pease:Thanks for having me on. It's been great.
Jack Wilcox:Before we go, if you have a question or comment for one of our guests or a topic you'd like discussed in an upcoming episode, please email us at nut mgmt@umn.edu. Thanks, and we look forward to hearing from you. That about does it for this episode of the Nutrient Management Podcast. We'd like to thank the Agricultural Fertilizer Research and Education Council, or AFREC, for supporting the podcast. Thanks for listening, and we'll see you in 2025.
