P4 .. q ~JL~ OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH In this i ssue IT HAS BEEN ESTIMATED Page 8 that, dui ing the 20th Century alone, the world's human population and its demand tor space, commodities, and amenities New Uses for Broiler Litter___________3 from global ecosystems have increased more than five-fold. Clearly, state Agricultural ExperiEconomic and Environmental ment Stations and Cooperative Extension Evaluations of Peanut Rotations with Services must critically re-examine and Switchgrass and Cotton____________ 4 modeinize their land grant v ision if they are to etfectively deal wxith a broadening science and education agenda that Municipal Waste Becomes includes relationships among agriculture, Asset to Farm Land ___________ 8 natural resources, and the environment. including the broader global ecosystems and human communities to which agroe\dding Hay to Litter-Based 10 cosystems are inextricably linked. Beef Cattle Diets Improves Gains To begin with, greater coimiunication is necessary among scientists and specialists with disciplinary backgrounds New Peanut Herbicide Gives in ecology and those currently conducting 12 Growers Economic Options research and extension programs Next, moving trom indiv idual fields to whole farms to basins and landEstablishment Cost and Productivity 14 scapes creates a need to employ news ot [orare Planted for White-tailed Deer methodologies for acquiring and analyzing data at these higher lev els of or'5 anizaOn-Farm Com~posting Feasible lion, including measurements and analyti18 cal techniques for deter mining the impact for Disposal of Sw inc Carcassesof agricultural practices at the agroecosys[em level. Also. cooperative etforts are needed to develop contemporaiy extension and academic program educational ON THE COVER: Irrigation is just one management tool materials to more eftectively communiavailable to peanut growsers. Sec related articles on pages Sand cate concepts and issues dealing with agri12. culture in an ecological framework. r' i n Cy 1 99 6 V o I ut m e 4 3 N it m b e r A Q1iART[RI.) R [[Ri OIi RESLEARCHFI'LBLISHLO BY THE AA B A~tsAGRICUSLTURAL ExPERINIENT STATION. AL$L RN UstscFRstY. EDITORIAL COMIittEE: Lowsell Frobish: Ar t Chappelka, Associate Protessor of Forestry: Dan Collins, A ssocilate Ptrotessor of P1lantt Pathology:.Joe Eakes, Associate Ptrofessor of Horticulture. Robert Nelson. Associate Professor of Agictultura Eco1rtnomics and Rural Sociology: Roger Lien, Assistant Pr otessoi ot Poultry Science: Ait Avery. Protessor, Schoot of Human Sciences: Das id Stingfeellow . Associtate Protessor of Animatl Health Research: Beth Guernal. Assistat Professor of Agtonomy and Soils, Geotfrey Zehnder Associate Ptrofessor ot Entomology : and Roy Roberson. EDITOR'S NOt t NMentioin ott trade names does not indicate entdtrsementt by the Alabama Agric L utral Exspet iment Statiuon oii Auburti Universty of tine biandt ioser antothe. Any se ofi ptsticide rates tn excess of labeled amounts in research repoted does nut ctmnsitute r ecommitendaion of such rate. Such use is stimply patrt of the scientific ins esig ation niecessary to ev al uate variOUS ms01ate iatls. No chIemitcal should he used at rtes ahos e those pet mitted by the label. Inftornmationt containect beretin is .ataiable toll petsions siithout i egard to race. c olor. sex. ort ntitonal origin. LOWELLT. FROBISH DAVID H. TEEM ......... .. ... . .Dir ector Associate Director Associate Director .Assistant Directori .Assistant Director Associate Editor Assciate Editor ... At Designer RU SSELL B. MUNTIFERING PATIGREEN............. ROY ROBERSON .... KATtE SMITH ROBYN HEARN ..... .... TERESA RODRIGUEZ... Alabama Agricultural Exsperiment Stationt Highiligts otAgriculturcil Resecarch Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring 1996 .- -c- /I/ h/n ''S 2 vsk' K. .'4 V 4N, 4 _IiI ~14 2 P'i : _s I qrr NEW USES FOR 13ROILER LITTER Research Shows Broiler Litter Enhances Potting Soil Media Elizabrh A. Gutertal, Bridget K. Behe, Joe M. Kenmble, arnd David G. Himelrick s Alabama's poultry industry grows and expands, so does the industry's need for environmentally sound ways to dispose of its by-products. AAES research is exploring new uses for broiler litter, and results of a recent study suggest that broiler litter can be suc- cessfully added to potting soil media used for growing vegetable transplants. Broiler litter is a mixture of manure and bedding material (sawdust, peanut hulls, etc.) that is removed from poultry houses after the birds have been raised. While this by-product can be applied to agricultural fields and pastures as a source of nutrients and organic matter, continued longterm application or applying too much litter to land may result in an overload of nutrients that can contaminate surface and ground water. Additional options for broiler litter use can provide new markets tor this agricultural by-product and help avoid contamination problems. Research conducted by the AAES. the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). and Bonnie Plant Farm explored the possibilities of using composted poultry litter as a vegetable transplant potting material. The objective of this study was to utilize composted. ground poultry litter material (supplied by TVA) in a largescale transplant production system and to determine it the addition ot broiler litter to these media would alter plant growth or final crop yields. The study was conducted in one cropping year with three fall crops (Cillard. hrocoli. and cahhaIC) .[nd Broiler Litter, continued on page 4 3 Alabama A g'ricuiltural Eperimnt Station Highlighrts ofAgricultnral Research Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring 1996 Broiler Litter, continued from page 3 three varieties of one spring crop (tomato). All transplants were pro- duced by Bonnie Plant Farm, a vegetable and bedding plant production facility located in Union Springs. All transplants were grown in "six-pack" plastic trays, the type commonly used for selling vegetable transplants to home gardeners. Selected crop varieties were Packman broccoli; Vates collards: Bonnie cabbage; and Rutgers, Bonnie, and Big Boy tomatoes. Plastic trays were filled with either a standard peat-based Fafard potting media or a 50/50 mixture of Fafard and composted poultry litter. All flats were maintained under standard growing conditions used by Bonnie Plant Farm. Each week after planting, nine six-packs of each crop ineach potting mix were randomly selected from the greenhouse, and the aboveground portion of each seedling was clipped, weighed, and analyzed for total nitrogen (N) content. Sampling of fall crops continued for five weeks and spring tomatoes were sampled once. When the plants were of appropriate size, they were moved from the greenhouse to the field and planted. Fall cool season brassica (collards, cabbage, and broccoli) crop production was located at the E.V. Smith Horticultural Research Unit in Shorter, and spring tomato production was located at the Chilton Area Horticulture Substation in Clanton. All crops were grown on raised planting beds covered with black plastic (fall) or white plastic (spring), with drip irrigation installed under the plastic. Fall crops were harvested once and spring tomatoes were harvested eight times throughout the growing season. When the fall crops were sampled in the greenhouse there were size differences due to potting mix during the first weeks of sampling. Cabbage, collards, and broccoli grown in 50/50 mix were often smaller than those grown in 100% Fafard. However, such differences disappeared by the fourth week of sampling. By the time a homeowner would have purchased these transplants (five weeks after planting) there were no size differences due to type of potting mix. For tomatoes, the single greenhouse sampling date showed no differences in wet or dry weight due to type of potting mix. Final yields of harvested cabbage, collards, and broccoli were not affected by type of potting mix. Total yields of harvested tomatoes were usually not affected by type of potting mix, except that there were more tomatoes classed as "nonmarketable" harvested from the 50/50 poultry litter/Fafard potting mix. Fruit classified as nonmarketable may be insect or disease damaged or too small for fresh-market sale by a commercial tomato grower. These results suggest that composted poultry litter is a suitable amendment for greenhouse potting mixes used for vegetable transplant production. If the cost of processing and shipping the composted poultry litter is less than the cost of using 100% peat mixes, such as Fafard, amended potting mixes may become a production benefit for greenhouse transplant growers and the state's poultry producers. Guertal is an Assistant Professor of Agronomy and Soils; is Associate Behe an Professor, Kemble is an Assistant Professor, and Himelrick is Professor of a Horticulture. ECONOM ( labama, Georgia, and Florida produce about 65% of the nation's peanuts. Uncertainty about government price support and increasingly stringent environmental regulations place many of these growers in double jeopardy. Recent AAES research indicates threeyear rotations that include switchgrass in the rotation may provide more environmental benefits, while cotton-peanut rotations provide greater economic gains. Alahaina Agr icultral Er xperimient Station Highights alAgricultrrlal Researnch Vo. 43, No. 1, Spring 1996 ENVIRONMENTAL 'I. U A IONS OF PEANUT ROTATIONS WITH SWITCHGRASS AND COTTON Krishna P Paudel, Neil R. Martin, Jr:, Nacnc Kokali.s I-Brelle, and Rodrigo Rodriguez,-Kabana Pcsticidc cxpcnditures in peanuts are more than $100 per acre. The major traditional crops rotated with peanuts to reduce certain chemical applications, such as nematicides, are cotton and corn. However, these alternative crops do not alleviate the environmental concerns because they are hea\ily dependent on other chemicals. Search for an alternate crop that would require less chemical inptt has been intense by agriculturalists with the prompting of environmentalists. Advocates of sustainable agriculttre propose the incorporation of forage grasses in cropping patterns since this often results in reduced chemical tse and soil erosion, which help reduce water quality degradation. Switchgrass. a native warm season forage grass, can be found from the U.S. Canadian border to Sotth Florida and Texas. This grass has low fertilizer requirements, is widely adapted to different soil types, has soil conservation A labamao Agricultiiral L xJperimlelit Staoion properties a deep root system, and provides an excellent wildlife habitat. Switchgrass may be a good rotation crop in peanut fields to reduce the infestation of neiatodes and diseases such as sotthern stem rot and cercospora leaf spot. If switchgrass is adopted in a peanut rotation system it may create a cropping system that reduces a farmer's dependence on chemicaIs. To learn more about the environmental and economic benefits of using switchgrass. information obtained from cropping experiments conducted at the Wiregrass Substation in Headland, for three years and enterprise budgets from the Alabama Cooperative Extension Service were linked.I Florunner peanut, Alamo switchgrass, and Deltapine 90 cotton 'Budgets for major row cirops in Alabama. 1994. Alabama Coperatixe Extension Serx ice. Department of Ecoomic, and Rural Sociolog. Auburn Unive i i varieties were incorporated in diiferent experimental rotation systems. Eight cropping patterns were compared over a three-year period. The cropping systems included in this analysis were: Peanut plus Peanut plus Peanut with Teinik (PNTPNTPNT): Peanut plus Peanut plus Peanut without Temik (PNTPNTPNT), Switchgrass plus Peanut with Temnik plus Switchgrass (SGPNTSG): Switchgrass plus Peanut without Temik plus Switchgrass (SGPNTSGJ: Switchgrass plus Switchgrass plus Peanut with Temik (SGSGPNT) Switchgrass plus Switchgrass plus Peanut without Temik (SGSGPNT); Cotton plus Peantt without Temik plus Cotton (CTPNTCT): and Cotton plus Cotton plus Peanut Peanut Rotations, continued on page 6 Higihits oj"Agri4wtura Research Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring~ 1996 Peanut Rotations, continued from page 5 The amount of money spent for chemicals was measured as a proxy for determining the effect of a cropping pattern on groundwater pollution, assuming that the amount ot money spent on chemicals corielates with the amount of chemicals used. It should be noted that with some of today's lowinput chemicals this cost-use comparison would not be feasible because these low-input chemicals are more expensive even though less chemicals are used. However, in this study costs of traditional chemicals were used. The study assumed that an ideal rotation pattern was one that maximized profits while minimizing risk and chemical use. All three factors should be considered when selecting an environmentally and financially beneficial crop rotation system. Multiobjective solutions were compared for minimum level of chemical use at given levels of income and risk. The eight different combinations of enterprise rotations were analyzed for their profit potential and the extent of environmental degradation Table I. Profit, Risk, Chemical Use, and Cropping Pattern with Various P eanut Policy Provisions for aTyDical Peanut Farm in Southeast Alabama I~ Policy provision Past peanut program: Quota price ($700/ton) Add, price ($350/ton) Selection options Normal Profit $351,143 Risk $23,373 Chemicl use $211,988 Cropping patterns No. acres Agriculture. In this situation, half of a farmer's land was planted in peanuts for three consecutive years and the remainder in cotton for two years followed by one year of nonquota sup ported peanuts. Maximum profit was $351.143 with a deviaton $23.373. Chemical use was calculated to be remained the same. Risk was reduced only slightly to $22.047. A requirement that cropping patterns include at least one year of switchgrass with a peanut price of $625 per ton resulted in 78% less prof- it compared to the unrestricted solution. Risk also was reduced, but the cropping pattern and chemical use did not change trom the forced switchgrass solution at a 5700 per ton price. Analyses of cropping pattern selection, income and risk, and chemical use in the absence of the peanut program also were conducted for a peanut market price of $500 per ton. Cropping pattern and chemical use were identical to the resilts for the past peanut program and the modified program with a price of $625 per ton. Income with the $500 per ton price was approximately the same as fo the $625 price because there was no price reduction for additional peanuts in the $500 per ton analysis. However. deviation in income increased to $38.378 in the almost $212,000. To compare this with switchgrass-based rotations, the model required that rotation patterns include at least one year of switchgrass. This resulted in a reduction of profit to 28%Ce of the former level. On the other hand, in this situation the farmer sed a much lower volume of chemicals ($92.381). Risk was measured to be $ 13,354 deviation in this maximum profit level. Assuming that Congress will continue a peanut program similar to the past program with quota price reduced to $625 per ton, maximum profit tor the analytical farm would decline to $286,724 but enterprise selection and chemical application each rotation caused. The analyses were done for a peanut-based cropping system. Since Congress is currently considering substantial modification or even the elimination of the peanut quota system, the analyses were conducted based on three scenarios: (1) the existing situation (peanuts priced at $700 a ton), (2) possible future peanut quota price assumptions (peanuts priced at $625 a ton). and (3) a situation in which no peanut progran exists (peanuts priced at $500 a ton). The results of these analyses are shown in Table i. The first analysis is the present situation where farm ers can sell quota peanuts at prices that are fixed by the U.S. Department of 2 Forcing SG pattern 97,457 13,354 22,047 92,384 21 1,988 200 CTCTAP 3 PNTPNTPNT 4 200 SGPNTSG s 200 200 SGSGPNT 6 CTCTAP PNTPNTPNT SGPNTSG' SGSGPNT CTCTAP PNTPNTPNT" SGPNTSG* 200 200 200 200 200 200 400 Modified peanut program Normal 286,724 Quota price ($625/ton) Add, price ($3 10/ton) Forcing SG pattern 64,009 Complete elimination of peanut program: Peanuts priced at $500/ton Normal 285,289 11,658 38,378 92,384 21 1,988 Forcing SG pattern 66,940 18,101 92,384 I An * denotes peanuts with Temik. 2 Switchgrass. 3 Cotton followed by cotton, followed by additional peanuts. 4 Peanuts planted for three consecutive years. 5 Switchgrass followed by peanuts followed by switchgrass. 6 Switchgrass followed by switchgrass followed by peanuts. Alaaa Agr/icrlural LvI xiuma a! Station Highlights o/Af Aricultural Researchi Vol. 43, No. I, Spring /996 Peanut Rotations, continued from page 6 absence of the stability pro'vided by the past peanut program. A requirement that cropping patterns include at least one year of switchgrass with a peanut price of $500 per ton resulted in the selection of switchgrass followed by peanuts followed by switchgrass. Income was slightly higher and deviation slightly lower than the parallel solution with quota peanuts priced at $625 per ton. Chemical use was $92,384. the same as the other solution restricted to include at least one year of switchgrass. Table 2 contains additional analyses in which cropping patterns were selected to maximize profit subject to farm resource limitations plus a requirement that chemical use not exceed the level associated with Table 1 solution, which includes at least one year of switchgrass. All cropping patterns were candidates for selection with the requirement that chemical use not exceed $92,384. The highest income (lowest deviation), $179,244 ($15.036), was found under the conditions of the past peanut program. pattern for this solution The cropping \\as contintous peanuts on 149 acres. This, the maximum profit solution, left 251 acres idle in order to hold chemical application to $92,384. Obviously, the ratio of idle acreage to peanut acreage wotld facilitate a rotation of peanuts and idle land. Perhaps a peanut-idle rotation pattern would allow use of less chemicals per acre, and thus greater possible income, but this was not reflected in the experimental data and not included in this analysis. The cropping pattern in Table 2 (chemical expenses limited to $92,384) for the $625 per ton peanut price situation was a small amount of cotton followed by peanuts followed by cotton (eight acres) and 193 acres of cotton followed by cotton followed by peantts. Profit is less than the parallel result for the current program, but income deviation is increased. Maximum profit results. assuming elimination of the peanut program. a market price for peanuts of $500 per ton, and a maximum limit on chemical expenses of $92,384. provided $149,103 in income with a deviation of 8I8.967. lnteresiingl'. this is Table 2. Profit, Risk, and Cropping Pattern Subject to a Maximum Chemical Use of $92,384 Policy provision Past peanut program: Quota price ($700/ton) Add, price ($350/ton) Modified peanut pgm: Quota price ($625/ton) Add. price ($3 10/ton) Complete elimination of peanut program: Peanuts priced at $500/ton Profit $179,244 Risk $15,036 Cropping patternI PNTPNTPNT*2 No. acres 200.00 157,1 18 20,200 PNTPNTPNT* CTPNTCT 3 4 CTCTPNT PNTPNTPNT CTCTPNT 7.55 7.55 192.45 7.55 200.00 more than twice the income and only five percent more risk with the same level of chemical expense as the parallel solution in Table i, where cropping systems were required to contain at least one year of switchgrass. This is becatse PNTPNTPNT and CTCTPNT rotations in Table 2 replaced the SGPNTSG rotation in Table 1. Thus, from a standpoint of maximum profit with an analytically derived limit on chemical application, peanut rotation systems with switchgrass are not economically competitive with continuous peanuts and the peanut rotation system with cotton. From this analysis, we can conclude that peanut-switchgrass rotation has some benefit based on environnental aspects but not based on profit alone. If we do rot consider the externality created by the application of chemicals on groundwater and the environment, then we have to say that switchgrass is not beneficial in a peanut rotation system. However, its almost stable yield and low-risk incone is attractive to peanut growers who must struggle to maintain income w\\ith rinimur risk in an increasingly regulatory en.ironment. Also, switch_rass has multipur'pose benefits that 1 cliriIorage grasses do rot possess. Continuation of the experiiii; iut test used in this study will .11low for further analysis of switch_rass as a relatively new rotation alternative. The model arid approach contained in this paper will be useful in conducting such analysis. -audeiis a Graduate Research Assistant, 149,103 18,967 'artin a Professor of Agricutural conomics and Rura Socilogy Koais,curelle is a PostDoctoral Fe ow and ^dria. e Kaa s a Professor of Plant I An denotes peanuts with Temik. 2 Peanuts planted for three consecutive years. 3 Cotton followed by peanuts followed by cotton. 4 Cotton followed by cotton followed by peanuts. Alobuui Agricural LvIein . Setateio , o Hi ghllights of Agricultural Research Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring 1996 MUNICIPAL WASTE BECOMES ASSET TO FARM LAND: Proper Carbon: Nitrogen Ratio .liiii itirI. :. / Brendla H-. Wiood, Jaintes H. Ldua-ls, and C. WesleIc Wood hoppe nii hl t iii/s, re s, s~ t', ILlavs, caul groundYLii~ dl ii iping)is. The debiis iedci i(b inl/ic (lhit) to OR/ wast Li It the iLv/lum o)/ hp bii )laLced in rows /o i/compoiting (ahoiv.) Comiposingi, i/i he icnd ste redces ti volum~ie 30 to 40%~ to wa lorm Liin oicil bv-proidct that is environfhat it ca amounits'ci of largeipa solid wastes (MSW) is a major problem' for ciies and liarte industries in the United States, hut propeijv aipp/lving MSW to agriutural Ilands may prov)1ide a sate and lbeneficial way to dis~pose of these by-products. It tnay also help reduce the risk of negative eniironmnental im1pacts from the waiste ap/)licction of animtal products. cipal solid waste in the U.S. goes to landfills, 23%c is recycled, and 10%c is incinerated. Landfill disposal of MSW is expensiv e -ranging trom $8 per ton in Newx Mexico to $75 per ton in Newx Jersey (1994 figures). Disposal of MSW also is under scrutiny by the Protection Environmental U. S. Agency. wxhich has mandated a reduction in the nation's dependence on The expense and landfill disposal. problems associated wxith MSW disposal has caused many municipalities to look for alternative disposal methods for MSW. One potential method is apply ing organic MSW to agricultural lands. Continual a(Tricultural production can gradually decrease the organic matter content of soils, which can decrease soil fertility and crop yields. Applying animal wastes to farm land has been one effective way to improve the physical, chemical, and microbiological properties of soils, which ultimately results in increased crop yields. But animal wxastes also run the risk of' nitr atc contaminrationi to surface and groundwater. An AAES study was conducted to determine if organic MSW could prov ide benefits similar to animal wastes for soils and also mitMunicipal Waste, continued on page 9 Highligihts ot'Airiciiuin'cii Reseacihl Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring 1996 essential in obtaining adequate 'ellom nutsedge control. Only the Basagrantion scale lex el using enterprise budgets containing POST-applied treatments developed by the Alabama Cooperative provided adequate control when used Extension Service for nonirrigated alone. peanut production (See tables I and 2). Starfire plts Pursuit at eithe Peanut net return calculations were two or four ounces per acre applied based upon the assumption that the crop EPOST, followed by either of the herbiwould be marketed at a 3:1 ratio of quota cide-containing POST treatments proand additional peanuts and have a norvided at least 75% bristly starbur conmal grade. Value was S700 and $350 trol. The standard treatments ot Starfire per ton. respectively. plus Basagran EPOST. followed by Starfire applied EPOST was an either Starfire plus Bttyrac 200 or essential component in obtaining acceptStarfire, Butyrac 200, and Basagran able sicklepod and Florida beggarweed gave 70% and 83% control of bristly control. Control with Starfire-containstarbur respectively. ing programs provided 76% to 9017c conAn EPOST treatment of trol. Pursuit did not effectively control Starfire plus Ptrsuit followed by either sicklepod. Additionally, combinations of the two herbicide-containing POST with Butyrac 200 did not control sickletreatments generally had greater pod due to the size of the sicklepod yields. However, the standard treatwhen POST applications were made. ment used by many growers Purstit EPOST at either rate, (Starfire plus Basagran EPOST, folapplied either alone or followed by any lowed with Starfire plus Butyrac 200 POST herbicides, provided at least 74% plus Basagran POST) provided yields control of yellow nutsedge. When equivalent to systems with Pursuit as a Purisuit xx:,s not applied. Basagr an \\as component. Systems with only EPOST- or Table I. Specific Cost Related to Herbicide Application POST-applied treatfor All Years, Wiregrass Substation, Headland ments resulted in Machinery cost lower yields. Yield Herbicide Labor Variable Fixed Total application with Pursuit alone was group cost the lowest, reflecting Dol./ocre late season competition PPI $1.84 $1.32 $2.53 $5.70 trom broadleaf weeds. EPOST 1.63 1.74 2.57 5.94 POST 1.63 1.74 2.59 5.95 Peanut intjury trom Pursuit alone or Table 2. Herbicide Treatment Cost for xith Starfire was All Years,Wiregrass Substation, Headland intermediate between EPOST POST treatments that observed with Starfire alone and Starfire plus Starfire plus Stafire plus Basagran. Butyrac 200 plus Post only Butyrac 200 Basagran Injiry from EPOST Dol.e/per acre herbicide was transient Pursuit 0.5 X 1 $45.31 $62.63 $33.02 and the peanuts had Pursuit IX 65.22 82.55 52.95 Starfire 31.08 recovered by the time 48.41 21.00 Starfire+Pursuit 0.5X 51.02 68.34 38.71 POST herbicides were Starfire+Pursuit IX 70.93 88.26 58.65 applied. Injury from Starfire+Basagran 39.74 57.07 27.41 13.08 2 42.69 25.41 No EPOST anx of the POST treatI Pursuit 0.5X and IX = Pursuit applied at two and four ounces per ments was no greater icre, respectively. Basagran was applied eight ounces per acre EPOST than 8%. ind 16 ounces per acre POST. Starfire and Butyrac 200 both were Systems that ipplied at 16 ounces per acre. 2 Includes application of Prowl PPI. included both an Herbicide, continued from page 12 Alab(IJ1 Agricultral \perifewll Sotiou EPOST and POST treatment pro ided superior net returns. While this is in general agreement with yield, net returns did not necessarily parallel yield. Staifiie alone EPOST. followed by Starfire plus Bttyrac 200 plus Basagran POST provided the highest net rettrn at $933 per acre. The cost of this entire system was $66 per acre. This included $17.59 per acre application cost (Table I) and $48.41 per acre for the herbicides; PPI plus EPOST plus POST (Table 2). This was not the most expensive treatment. Systems with Starfire plus Pursuit EPOST followed by either of the two herbicide-containing POST treatments ranked among the top fotir in net returns. Programs with Pursuit alone EPOST generally provided lower net returns than the Starfire plus Purstit systems. These data show the utility of incorporating Purstit into Starfire-based weed control programs. However, in this study Purstit was not always needed for adequate weed control, maximum yield, or highest net rettrn. Pursuit was essential only for the control of yellow nutsedge. Pursuit provided little control of sicklepod or Florida beggarweed compared with systems containing only Starfire, Butyrac 200, and Basagran. Systems with Ptrsuit provided bristly starbur control comparable to that obtained with those containing Basagran. Nct ieturns aialyses showed that EPOST and POST herbicide treatments can be combined to increase profits in peanut production. Selection of herbicide materials and timing of applications can have a much larger impact on the dollar value of net retirns than on treatment cost. Thus, treatment cost should not be a sole factor in deciding which system of EPOST should be applied for weed control in Alabama peanut production. Grey is a Graduate Research Assistant, Wehtje is an Associate Professor, and Walker is a Professor of Agronomy and So Is; Martin i a Professor of Agricultura Economics and Rural Sociology Highlights ofAgricultural Research Vol. 43, No. 1, Spriug 1, I996 aI s W*" r Fu 4~"81 4*l~ ; ~; 0"-- r LABAMA HUNTING ENTHUSIASTS commonly use planted forage crops for white-tailed deer management in areas known as (reen fields. When doing so, the type of forage planted should be 1P 5U V- * & a,,,Mam chosen carefully based upon the goal of the planting because expenses associated with this practice vary widely. A recent AAES study determined the most cost-effective of nine Neil A. Waue,; H. Lee Stribling, and M. Keith Causev warm-season and 39 cool-season forage varieties. Alabana Agricultural Experilent Station Highlig,'hts of Agricultural Rese'arch Vol. 43, No. I, Spring 1996 Planting typically is done for two reasons-to facilitate deer harvest during hunting season or to provide year-round supplemental feed to wildlife. If the planting goal is to facilitate harvest, then forages should be used that are highly palatable to (preferred by) deer and also that produce well and are cost effective from early autumn through winter. If year-round supplemental feeding is the objective of a planting, then preferred forages that provide an adequate quantity of cost-effective, high-protein forage during specific time periods should be used. The study was conducted at the Piedmont Substation in Camp Hill from 1989 to 1993. Researchers measured forage production over time and calculated establishment costs b\ adding cost estimates (1994 dollars) of seed. fertilizer, lime, and use of equipment (tractor to 588.51). heat, oats, and rye are the most cost effective for attracting deer during hunting season. Establishment costs for and implements to prepare soil, spread, and cover seed). Labor costs were not included because plot managers usually donate their own time for establishing and maintaining forage plantings. Establishment costs (dollars per acre) for cool-season forages ranged from $44.08 for white dutch clover to $107.20 for alfalfa (see table). Clovers were less expensive (range $44.08 to $65) to plant than small grains (range $87.75 to $102.06) or ryegrass (range $86.76 warm-season forages ranged from $59.50 for cowpea to $108.10 for sericea lespedeza. Soybeans and peas had the lowest establishment costs (range $59.50 to $68.20). Seed cost varied by season and generally was higher for warm-season forages. expensive Fertilizer was the most component associated with establishing forages. Cost of establishing legumes generally was less expensive than White-tailed Deer, continued on page 16 Alabama AgriculturalExperiment Station Highlights ofAgricultural Research Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring /996 White-tailed Deer continued from page 15 Cost Per Ton of Forage Based on Cost of Establishment Per Acre and Production, Camp Hill, 1989-1990 Forage Total cost per acre Total Cost per ton production',2 of forage Total production SeptemberMarch' Kg/ha $37.60 35.86 34.35 39.00 62.38 104.09 120.91 53.05 27.99 18.94 186. 1I 65.14 75.34 81.44 93.29 52.40 67.26 3.48 93.59 77.83 44.83 86.27 82.40 89. 14 71.33 64.20 67.31 63.07 151.74 122.70 92.55 70.81 172.48 108.97 366.93 2,512.59 904.96 102.50 36.34 37.45 58.79 49.50 50. 10 49.06 244.1 I 29.40 69.16 79.60 394 389 424 420 599 256 319 496 243 240 40 2,024 950 1,1021 963 2,416 1,401 1,222 1,416 1,281 2,727 509 1,269 1,1861 1,158 1,173 1,268 1,187 648 812 869 427 218 601 535 85 236 1,463 721 $266.87 282.98 247.99 246.35 198.37 569.25 448.40 206.84 512.98 519.39 2,470.66 100.31 221.27 82.61 207.11 85.41 149.98 171.95 161.59 178.62 73.55 394.04 158.05 65.88 171.36 169.17 156.50 163.70 329.24 252.80 146.54 562.86 706.53 194.96 366.93 2,512.59 904.96 152.88 307.10 Cost per ton of forage SeptemberMarch Total production AprilSeptember' Kg/ha 2,402 2,681 2,636 2,233 1,306 1,144 864 1,438 4,210 809 491 1,093 1,840 1,369 1,175 1,522 1,723 2,088 1,029 1,659 1,747 1,817 1,165 1,023 1,624 1,919 1,680 1,897 757 861 507 2,967 674 475 $43.76 41.06 39.89 46.34 90.98 127.38 165.55 71.34 29.61 154.08 201.28 185.76 114.24 147.00 169.74 135.58 121.95 100.63 222.37 137.92 114.81 110.38 172.16 192.3 I1 122.19 103.41 18.11 102.54 281.83 238.4 I1 251.17 81.00 228.52 246.85 Cost per ton of forage AprilSeptember Kg/ha Cool Season Regal ladino clover Imperial Whitetail ladino clover Osceola ladino clover California ladino clover Tibbee crimson clover Mt. Barker subterranean clover Bigbee berseem clover Yuchi arrowleaf clover Redland II red clover Redired red clover White dutch clover Coker 820 oats Buck Magnet 833 oats Delhi Bob oats Florida 501 oats Wren's Abruzzi rye Gainey AFC 20-10 rye Maton rye Pioneer 2551 wheat Pioneer 2548 wheat Saluda wheat Bogard's Caldwell wheat Fuller Florida 302 wheat Dovebuster feed wheat Marshall ryegrass Smith Surrey ryegrass Rustmaster ryegrass Gulf ryegrass AU Triumph tall fescue Kentucky 31 tall fescue Cahaba white common vetch Cimarron alfalfa Maku big trefoil Austrian winter pea Purple top turnips Civastro (forage) turnips Emerald rape Triticale Phalaris Warm Season Davis soybean Quail Haven soybean Combine cowpea Catjang pea Velvetbean American jointvetch Sericea lespedeza AU Lotan lespedeza Kobe lespedeza $46.90 49.10 46.90 46.15 53.00 65.00 63.80 45.76 55.60 55.60 44.08 90.56 93.76 89.76 88.96 92.04 93.72 93.72 102.06 102.06 89.46 89.46 89.46 87.75 88.51 88.51 88.51 86.76 95.16 91.56 56.80 107.20 68.70 52.30 87.56 95.26 95.26 99.76 98.76 61.20 68.20 59.50 65.70 73.20 103.20 108.10 104.20 76.30 2,797 3,070 3,061 2,653 1,905 1,400 1,183 1,934 4,453 1,0481 531 3,1 17 2,790 2,471 2,138 3,938 3,124 3,3106 2,445 2,940 4,474 2,325 2,434 2,207 2,782 3,091 2,948 3,084 1,406 1,673 1,376 3,394 893 1,076 535 85 236 2,182 1,6241 3,664 2,601 2,695 2,940 3,345 946 1,8731 1,381 I 2,149 719 903 311.07 245.20 I Totaled over months forage was available and averaged over all seasons planted; does not include production of perennial forages after first year's growth. 2 Represents peak production of warm-season forages averaged over all seasons planted. 16 a/uabai a Agricldtura/l periment Station u Highlights ofAgricul/rural Research Vol. 43, No. 1, Spring 1996 is considerec a preferred , T , tICr costl C ceCt\ C omI lhaps ladino clot\ cr (11 plnlced on and productive forage from \ inter through early spring, cost- ing less than $200 per ton of forage from September through March. Ryegrass and crimson clover are considered preferred, productive forages from early winter to early spring. Combining these forages with small grains satisfies both the objectives of attracting deer during hunting season and supplying abundant, high-quality forage during the late autumnwinter stress period. Ryegrass, crimson clover, and possibly some ladino clovers would be very cost effective for supplying forage during hunting season and winter stress if they are planted on good soils that support reseeding and perennial growth. From spring through summer, ladino and red clovers are very cost effective, especially when planted on high-quality sites that facilitate perennial growth. These forages cost less than $50 per ton of forage from April through September. Ladino clovers generally are considered the most productive and preferred of the cool-season forages from spring to early summer. However, peak production and use of ladino clovers occurs during spring green-up when native browse is plentiful and succulent. Red clover is considered a preferred and productive forage from late spring to late summer. Red clover and per- high quality sites) continue to produce well from early to late summer. During this time native vegetation is scarce and of low quality, to that deer will use planted forages heavily. Soybeans, velvetbeans, and peas are cost-effective, warm-season forages. quality They produce abundant, throughout the summer. desirable, low-cost forage of high Cost per ton of forage of these plantings ranged from $37.45 to $58.79 (see table). Soybeans generally are considered the most productive and preferred warm-season forage, velvetbeans are intermediate in production and deer preference, and peas are productive but rate lower in deer preference vetbeans. Because there is little difference in production, nutritional quality, and deer preference among different varieties of most forages, seed availability and cost should determine choice of a forage variety. For year-round forage supplies, the less expensive small-grain, ryegrass, crimson clover, red clover, ladino clover, and soybean varieties adapted to the area are the most cost-effective forage mixtures. Waer isa Graduate Research Assistant, Stribling isan Associate Professo, and Causey isa Professor of Zoology and W ildlife Science. late spring to late summer. ctalhiimlll othle loraCIcs )ecause of lower fertilizer costs ($19 per acre for legumes versus $58.56 per acre for nonlegumes). Legumes typically require less fertilizer (200 pounds per acre of 0-20-20 often is recommended) than nonlegumes (600 pounds per acre of 13-13-13 often is recommended to maximize forage production). Cost estimates for establishing forages were based on replanting each year and did not account for reseeding ability of some forages (ryegrass, crimson clover, and subterranean clover) and the perennial growth of others (ladino clovers, fescue, trefoil, alfalfa, and red clover). Researchers found wheat, oats, and rye to be the most cost effective for attracting deer during hunting season. Some popular varieties of these forages cost less than $100 per ton of forage March from (see September through than soybean or vel- table). As a group, small grains are considered the most productive and preferred of cool-season forages during this time. Crimson clover and Alabama AgSriculru no! Experiment Station Higlhlighrs AgrIicrirulwral Research Vol. 43. No. I, Sprinig 1996 SII-aril eOii ipU.iillg redaioe for Disposal of Swine Carcasses Tom A. McCaskev, Joe A. Little, Rachel M. Krotz, Sarah P. Lino, and Todd C. Hannah OPERATIONS, it is common for a N ALL COMMERCIAL SWINE small percentage of animals to die during production. The disposal of dead pigs is a vexing task for swine producers, but AAES research has shown that swine carcasses can be composted on farms to produce a valuable fertilizer without generating offensive on-farm odors. Composting has become common on poultry farms and is widely accepted by environmental agencies as a feasible, environmentally acceptable method for disposal of chicken carcasses. However, making this technology work with swine carcasses, which are larger than poultry carcasses, and controlling any odor problems during the composting process are legitimate concerns. An AAES study was conducted to determine the best composting techniques and to learn more about the problems or benefits associated with composting dead pigs. Composting is a proiss tii tnI mnic o)anisnm can work; through which microorganisms break down organic materials into a safe, stable humus. For composting to take place, several components are required. These include: (1) The material being used for composting must be organic in nature (such as farm animal mortalities, animal manures, food wastes, etc.); (2) The materials must be blended with carbon sources to achieve at least a 15:1 carbon-to-nitrogen (C:N) ratio of the compost mixture (3) Moisture levels of the compost mixture should be adjusted to about 40%, which is favorable for microorganisms to degrade the organic material (carcasses); (4) A bulking agent, such as poultry litter or recycled compost, is recommended to be added to the mixture to make the compost degrade more quickly and also generate heat that kills pathogenic bacteria, such as Samonella and E. coli, which might be in the compost. The composting trials were Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station Highlights ofAgricultural Research Vol. 43, No. 1,Spring 1996 conducted at the Lower Coastal Plain Substation in Camden. The composting ingredients consisted of: (1) recycled compost generated from previous composting studies, which was used as a bulking agent: (2) dead pigs weighing less than 15 pounds each; (3) chopped hay as a carbon source; and (4) water. These ingredients were added in the wet weight ratio of 3:1:0.3:0.5, respectively (see Table 1). Based on this ingredient ratio, swine carcasses comprised 2 0. 8 % of the comp(< weight, and the compost mixture haL C:N ratio of 15:1. Composting was conducted in wooden bins four feet square at the base and five feet high. A six-inch layer of recycled compost was placed in the bottom of the bin, followed by a layer of swine carcasses (mortalities), a layer of chopped hay, and water was added to the top of the layers. Each time swine mortalities were added to the bin, the layers were repeated until the bin was filled, resulting in about half a ton of ingredients. Finally, a sixinch cap of recycled compost was added to the top of the bin to control odors and vermin. Temperature probes were placed in the bins to monitor the heat generated in the compost. For opti- mum composting, the compost temperature should reach at least 122 0 F and hold that temperature for five days to eliminate any enteric pathogenic bacteria. After 30 days, the compost was removed from the bins, mixed for aeration, and returned to the bins to undergo a secand 30-day compostine process. \lter the com- Table .Compost Ingredients and Quantities Ratio Lb. 625 208 63 104 1,000 Recycled compost Swine mcortalities Chopped hay Water Total 3.0 1.0 0.3 0.5 4.8 Table 2. Performance of Swine Mortality Composting Process Composting trials I 2 3 4 Average Mass Ist stage Volume Ist and 2nd stages Mass Volume Temperature (OF) of compost Max. 128 133 130 13 131 Days>122 9 9 19 16 13 Pct. decrease 14.9 9.3 11.4 19.3 13.7 21.4 14.0 17.6 13.5 16.9 Pct. decrease 23.9 14.7 23.0 24.9 19.8 29.8 21.7 17.7 22.1 21.8 Table 3. Fertilizer Value of Second Stage Swine Mortality Compost Composting trials I 2 3 4 Average N 52.1 46.2 50.7 49.1 49.5 Lb./wet ton P2 0 5 K2 0 91.8 89.7 110.7 108.8 100.3 58.3 54.0 66.2 65.7 61.1 Value/wet ton $45.10 42.10 50.07 49.11 46.60 *Fertilizer value calculated on pound basis as N = $0.29, P2 0 5 = $0.23 and K2 0 = $0.15. Swine Carcasses. continued on page 20 Alabamaonc Agricultuiral Experimlelt Stationi Higlights of'AgricultuiralResearrch Vol. 43, No. i. Spring 1996 Swine Carcasses, continued from page 19 posting process, samples were collected for N-P-K analyses. All analyses were conducted on a dry weight basis and performed in triplicate. Four composting trials were conducted, and all compost mixtures had the same ingredients in the same ratio. After first-stage composting, the weight of the compost mixture decreased an average of 13.5% and the volume decreased 16.9% (Table 2). After combined first- and secondstage composting, the weight and volume decreased a total of 22.1% and Most of the 21.8%, respectively. decrease occurred during first-stage composting, amounting to 61% for mass and 78% for volume. Weight and volume decreases are due in part to moisture loss and to volatilization of gases produced during degradation of the organic matter. When the composting process is complete, weight and volume will stabilize. Based on the compost ingredient ratio of 3:1:0.3:0.5 (recycled compost:mortalities:chopped hay:water), the recycled compost (bulking agent) made up 6 2 .5%c of the compost mixture. During two-stage, static pile composting, the compost weight decreased 22%. If the finished compost is recycled as a bulking agent, 80% of the compost weight generated in one compost bin can be used as an ingredient to compost another bin of mortalities. This leaves 20% excess compost generated during each composting cycle. The finished compost contains about 35% moisture, has no noxious odors, and contains (on a wet ton basis) about 50 of pounds N, 100 pounds of super-phosphate, and 61 pounds potash (Table 3). Based on commercial fertilizer costs, the fertilizer value of a wet ton of the swine mortality compost was determined to be $47. These results suggest that swine carcasses can be composted on farms without creating offensive odors and yields a valuable fertilizer, thus giving swine producers another way to turn a waste product into a valuable resource. McCas