AgroLiquid Program vs Conventional for Corn (Year 3)

Experiment Info

Planted 5/7/2013
Variety: DKC53-78
Population: 4
Row Spacing: 30
Previous Crop: Soybeans
Plot Size: 15’ x 210’
Potash Fall 2012
PPI: 5/2, 5/6
Sidedress 6/18
Harvested: 10/15/13


Soil Test Values (ppm)

 pH 7
CEC 12.4
%OM 3.4
Bicarb P 17
K 111
S 5
%K 2.3
%Mg 21.4
%Ca 75.9
%H 0
% Na 0.4
Zn 1.5
Mn 4
B 0.7
Yield Goal: 175 bu
Target Fertilizer Rate: 175-30-60
[three_fourths_last style=””]


Evaluate effects of the same fertilizer programs in the same plots in a long-term corn-soybean rotation on corn yield.

AgroLiquid crop nutrition programs are based upon usable plant nutrition, and not just total pounds of nutrients applied. Due to enhanced fertilizer usability, AgroLiquid application rates are much lower than those of conventional fertilizers. The ability to produce comparable yields has been well documented, but there is always concern on the sustainability of AgroLiquid programs over time. Previous research at the NCRS showed yield and soil test sustainability over a ten year test where the same programs were run in the same plots in a corn-soybean rotation. This experiment is set up to test the same fertilizer programs applied in the same plots in a corn-soybean rotation. 2013 marked the third year of a proposed ten year duration. This will enable evaluation of sustainability. Two conventional programs, one total dry and one liquid with potash were compared to an AgroLiquid program. The conventional programs applied a 180-30-60 for N-P2O5-K2O. (Although 120 lb/A of K2O is applied to last 2 years, as explained in table below.) The AgroLiquid treatment applied only 145-8.5-3.8 of N-P2O5-K2O for comparison. Additionally, a low-rate conventional treatment that nearly matched the AgroLiquid treatment for nutrients applied was also included for comparison. The yields for the three years thus far appear in the table below.

program chart


  • Highest yielding treatment each year was with AgroLiquid which applied less than half of the total nutrients per acre compared to the conventional treatments.
  • The low-rate conventional also produced exceptionally high yields for the amount of nutrients applied. But this yield was substantially lower than that with AgorLiquid, even though nutrient application rate was the same.
  • The low-rate conventional treatment actually yielded higher than the full-rate conventional treatments in 2012. But in 2013, the yield was much lower suggesting that this ra ties not sustainable.