Crop Emergence Analysis (CEA)
 MISS maintains that the planter is the most important
piece of equipment the farmer owns. Planting
errors are not correctable within that growing season. Pioneer, Syngenta, John Deere, Case IH, the Farm Journal and other agronomic
sources have done extensive research on the cost of improper planting
resulting in erratic plant emergence. MISS believes that out of all the
layers of data needed for a complete agronomic management analysis, the
layer that few agronomists and farmers take into consideration is plant
emergence. Poor plant emergence can be as costly as any other improper
agronomic practice.
The CEA was derived from factoring the above referenced research with MISS’
extensive field experience. The justification, or thought process behind the
rationale for the point deductions can be obtained by e-mailing or calling
our office.
Ranking System for Ideal
Emergence
- Target population, should be
at least 30,000 plants per acre
planted
- 1500 plant per acre variance
is allowed from target
- Uniformity of spacing between
plants
- Planted 1 1/2" to 1 3/4" into
settled soil
- Same day emergence
The field counts and analysis are taken via a geo-referenced grid system to
avoid bias in the counts. The counts are taken from different rows of
the planter since all planter units may not be operating the same.
The point system is not intended to
show a percentage of yield loss, such as an 80 score would not indicate 120
bushel corn when other parts of the field yielded 160 bushels on the 100
score. Any of the five ranked factors (variance, emergence from ideal,
skips & doubles, deviation from ideal planting depth and emergence
uniformity) will have more or less effect on yield depending on the greatest
variable, weather conditions. The system is intended to show where the
greatest type of error occurs and where the field ranks against the norm.
Below is an example and
its corresponding worksheet.
| Field Map |
|
 |
| Grid |
Coefficient of Variance (C.V.) |
Emergence from Ideal |
Skips & Doubles |
Planting Depth from Ideal |
Uniformity of Emergence |
Total |
| 1 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
92 |
| 2 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
87 |
| 3 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
92 |
| 4 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
6 |
84 |
| 5 |
7 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
4 |
87 |
| 6 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
93 |
| 7 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
84 |
| 8 |
8 |
6 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
77 |
| Average |
5.2 |
2.7 |
1.1 |
1.5 |
2.3 |
87 |
|
Coefficient of Variation (C.V.)
The more uniform a plant canopy, the less interplant competition for
light, moisture and fertility. For each 10% of C.V. from zero will
result in point deduction.
Emergence from Ideal
Lower than intended plant populations result in lower yield potential across
the field. Higher than intended populations result in higher seed cost
and increased competition than originally intended. The first thousand
plants per acre +/- from intended will not impose a deduction of points.
Deviation beyond this will incur point deduction.
Skips & Doubles
Skips are not able to compensate for missing plants, doubles increase the
seed cost beyond the yield recovered.
Seed Depth
Divergence from intended "ideal" depth results in delayed emergence and/or
poorer seedling vigor. Therefore, a point deduction given based on
amount of deviation from ideal.
Uniformity of Emergence
Amount of difference in leaf growth of individual plants against the
majority of the growing crop is measured and given specific point deductions
based on lag of the plants measured.
|
|
