PNW553

A Pacific Northwest Extension PublicationWashington State University • Oregon State University • University of Idaho

In cooperation with USDA ARS and the Pacific Northwest Direct Seed Association

Report prepared by the Steering Committee of the Pacific NorthwestDirect-Seed Cropping System Coalition.

Steering Committee members are listed on page 41.

AcknowledgmentsWe thank Norm Herdrich for conducting the interviews with scientists and produc-ing the initial draft of this report. We also thank Cheryl Hagelganz and Debbie Marshfor help in preparing the manuscript, Susan Roberts for technical editing, and GeraldSteffen for layout and design. Dave Huggins, William Schillinger, Roger Veseth, andDale Wilkins provided scientific reviews.

About the CoverStarting at 1:00 o’clock and rotating clockwise: Pioneer no-till drill built by MortSwanson, Palouse, WA, (p. 19); 8-foot airseeder for plot work, build by Kevin Anderson,Andover, SD (p. 21); McGregor Co. plot drill, for use with a two-pass system (p. 18);Fabro no-till drill, used primarily for research on soil fertility and plant nutrition indirect-seed system (p. 24); no-till plot drill for variety testing, build by Palouse Weld-ing, Palouse, WA (p. 36); and no-till drill used by Nathan and Steve Riggers, Nezperce,ID (reprinted from PNW522, Riggers Farm case study). Background includes 2001alternate crops on the WSU Cunningham Agronomy Farm; left to right, spring Canola,spring peas, and spring barley (p. 13).

Partial funding provided by the Pacific Northwest Direct Seed Association

Retooling AgricultureContents

Preface .............................................................................................................................. 1

Summary .......................................................................................................................... 2

Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 4

Cropping Systems Research ............................................................................................ 5

Ralston Project ..................................................................................................... 5

Alternate Dryland Crop Rotations ...................................................................... 7

Wilke Farm Direct-Seeding Project .................................................................... 9

Columbia Plateau Projects ................................................................................ 10

Cunningham Agronomy Farm .......................................................................... 12

Palouse Conservation Field Station .................................................................. 13

Kambitsch Farm ................................................................................................ 14

Monsanto Centers of Excellence ....................................................................... 18

McGregor Company Research ........................................................................... 18

Farmer-Initiated Research ................................................................................ 19

Economics of Direct-Seed Systems .............................................................................. 21

Machinery and Crop Residue Management ................................................................. 22

Soil Biology/Quality and Fertility ................................................................................. 24

Pest Management .......................................................................................................... 27

Weed Management ............................................................................................ 27

Disease Management ........................................................................................ 29

Insect Pest Management ................................................................................... 33

Variety Development and Testing ................................................................................. 33

Cool-Season Pulse Crops ................................................................................... 33

Barley .................................................................................................................. 34

Spring Wheat ...................................................................................................... 35

Mustard, Canola, and Rapeseed ........................................................................ 35

Winter Wheat ..................................................................................................... 36

Perennial Wheat ................................................................................................. 36

On-Farm Variety Tests ........................................................................................ 37

Alternate Crops .............................................................................................................. 38

Outreach and Communication ..................................................................................... 39

Steering Committee ....................................................................................................... 41

References ...................................................................................................................... 42

The three land grant universities in Idaho,Oregon, and Washington, together with theU.S. Department of Agriculture’s AgriculturalResearch Service and Natural Resources Con-servation Service (formerly Soil ConservationService), have a long history of working togetherand with growers and agribusinesses within thePacific Northwest (PNW) to create new oppor-tunities and overcome problems faced by theregion’s agriculture. No better example existsthan the research and education effort under-way in the dryland farming areas to facilitatea change to direct-seed cropping systems. Thischange started in the 1970s, yet is still in itsinfancy. It represents the third major changein the way the land in this region is farmed.The other two changes were from mostly springwheat to predominantly winter wheat plantedinto fallow soil, dating from about 1910, andto early (August and September) seeding onfallow—before rather than after the fall rainsbegan, in the 1950s or early 1960s. New devel-opments in varieties and machinery made bothof these changes possible, and they introducednew pest pressures. The development of direct-seed systems will take many parts of the regionback to more spring cropping and late-plantingof winter wheat, through annual cropping andthe elimination of fallow.

This report describes the breadth and depthof research and extension programs on direct-seed cropping systems underway in the PNW—public and private. Funds for this report wereprovided by the federally funded STEEP project(Solutions To Environmental and EconomicProblems), which also has provided much ofthe funding and leadership that have carried

the region’s research and extension programs ondirect-seed cropping systems research to theircurrent world-class status. The term “direct-seed”is used in this report to mean, quite simply, anymethod of planting and fertilizing done withno prior tillage to prepare the soil. This includessystems that plant and fertilize directly intoundisturbed soil, as one pass, and those thatfertilize first and then plant, as two passes.

This report attempts only to summarize theresearch and extension programs with relevanceto the traditional dryland wheat-producing partof the region and does not include work on irri-gated agriculture of the Columbia Basin andSnake River Plains. Similarly, this reportaddresses the research and extension programsspecifically related to direct-seed cropping sys-tems and does not include the vast amount ofother important work that would be neededregardless of the cropping systems. For example,rust diseases are important and must be con-trolled on all classes of cereals through plantbreeding regardless of the cropping system ormethod of planting. Because of the dynamicsof research, which sees new projects continuallyadded while old projects are completed, thisreport serves mainly as a “snapshot” in time.

This report was developed as a project ofthe Steering Committee for a proposed “PacificNorthwest Direct-Seed Cropping Systems Coa-lition,” the goals of which are now assumed bythe newly formed Pacific Northwest Direct-SeedAssociation. Part of the material for this reportwas collected and organized into a preliminarydraft by Norm Herdrich as a contract writer onthe project. Members of the former CoalitionSteering Committee completed this report.

Retooling AgricultureA Report on Direct-Seed Cropping Systems

Research in the Pacific Northwest

Preface

1

The Pacific Northwest (PNW) is home toone of the largest networks of direct-seed crop-ping systems studies found anywhere in theworld. At least 12 separate but complementarymultiyear large-scale projects covering morethan 800 acres representing the low, intermedi-ate, and high precipitation zones are underwayin the three PNW states of Idaho, Oregon, andWashington. About half of these projects aremanaged by land grant university and U.S.Department of Agriculture (USDA) scientists,with grower, regulatory agency, and agribus-iness advisory committees. Half are managedby growers and agribusinesses with universityor USDA advisory committees.

Each study involves one or more compari-sons of different direct-seed cropping systemsdesigned to increase both the frequency anddiversity of crops or market-classes of crops, e.g.,of wheat, while learning how to manage weeds,diseases, insect pests, crop residue, and plantnutrients. The experimental designs includeboth standard replicated treatments in plotslarge enough to be farmed with commercial-scale equipment and whole-field treatmentsmonitored and analyzed based on site-specificGPS (Global Positioning System) measurementsover space and time. The cropping systemsare built on a foundation of research results andequipment developed over the past 10 to 15 yearsthat have led to two very important advances forsuccessful direct-seeding: timely and effectivemanagement of volunteer cereals and grassweeds (i.e., the greenbridge) and precision-place-ment of seed and fertilizer.

Cropping systems studies in the low-pre-cipitation zones (<12 inches) indicate that con-tinuous spring cereals, particularly continuousspring wheat managed for high protein (darknorthern spring), are the only current croppingsystems with potential to compete economicallywith the traditional winter wheat on fallow.Broadleaf crops such as yellow mustard andsafflower are potential rotation crops in the low-precipitation zones, but much more work isneeded on weed and disease control and other

aspects of management before these crops arelikely to produce economically or otherwise finda fit in these driest parts of the region.

Studies in the intermediate-precipitationzone (12–16 inches), on the other hand, indicatethat any number of continuous direct-seedcropping systems, including 3- and 4-year rota-tions using spring cereals, spring or winter broad-leaf crops, and winter wheat, can potentially bemore economical than the traditional winterwheat on summer fallow. Among the broadleafcrops, yellow mustard, Canola, safflower, buck-wheat, and flax all are showing potential asrotation crops in the intermediate-precipita-tion zones. Portions of this region also showpotential for warm season grasses such as cornand millet in the rotation. Cereals will continueto make up two-thirds or three-fourths of theserotations, with the alternative crops used every3rd or 4th year because of their limited marketsand inherent pest problems for which experi-ence or registered pesticides are still lacking.

Continuous cropping has long been the stan-dard practice in the high-precipitation zones(>17 inches), and therefore the direct-seed crop-ping systems research in these areas focusesprimarily on winter and spring cereals, includ-ing winter barley, in 3- and 4- year flexible rota-tions using winter and spring broadleaf crops.Whereas not enough crop residue is producedin the drier parts of the region, the major chal-lenge for the high-precipitation zones is howto manage high quantities of crop residue afterwinter wheat—sometimes approaching orexceeding 8 to 10 tons of straw per acre. Alldirect-seed cropping systems studies underwayin the region have the goal of farming withoutdepending on stubble burning. The WashingtonState University (WSU) Cunningham AgronomyFarm includes 140 acres dedicated to both direct-seed and precision farming research as a neweffort for mainly the high-precipitation area ofthe dryland PNW.

In addition to the network of direct-seedcropping systems studies, where the focus ison the system, including economics, an equally

Summary

2

large public- and private-sector research andextension effort is underway in the PNW on thedifferent components needed to make a direct-seed cropping system work. This effort includesthe testing of improved equipment such as theCross-slot opener for placement of seed andfertilizer. It also includes major research effortson the ecology and control of weeds, insect pests,and root diseases favored by direct seeding, thepotential for use and management of herbicide-resistant crops, soil-quality changes in responseto direct seeding, methods to manage crop resi-due, and development of varieties adapted tothe stresses and pest pressures encounteredin direct-seed systems.

Soil quality measurements indicate clearlythat direct seeding over many years results inslow but steady gains in soil organic mattercontent in the top few inches of soil, with thegreatest gains occurring, not surprisingly, in thehigh-precipitation areas where straw produc-tion is also greatest. These gains in soil organicmatter content result in both sequestered carbonand improved soil structure. Work is underwayto develop models that will predict the amountof carbon sequestration with different direct-seed cropping systems in the different precipi-tation zones.

Infiltration of water during rains and snowmelt is significantly more rapid in soils managedwith direct seeding than in conventionally tilledsoils, apparently because of the improved soilstructure, together with worm holes and rootchannels, that make the soil like a sponge. Thelarger soil pores created by root channels andthe greater earthworm activity also tend to off-set the higher compaction that can occur withcontinuous direct seeding.

The increase in spring cropping and increasedintensity of cropping, made possible with directseeding, helps control downy brome and jointedgoatgrass but results in higher pressures fromwild oats. These new systems also favor greaterpressures from Hessian fly and root diseases,namely take-all, Fusarium, Rhizoctonia, and

Pythium root rots. Major efforts are thereforeunderway on basic weed, root pathogen, andinsect pest ecology and biology in differentdirect-seed cropping systems. The applied workunderway on these problems includes evalua-tion of herbicides, rotation effects, managementof herbicide-resistant crops and herbicide-resis-tant weeds, and the evaluation of wheat andbarley lines for resistance to root diseases andHessian fly. In addition, efforts are underwaywithin the variety testing programs of Coopera-tive Extension to include several direct-seed sitesas part of the testing program. In general, vari-eties that are highest yielding with conventionaltillage and seeding are also the highest yieldingin direct-seed systems. Spring barley is particu-larly well suited to direct seeding, includinginto the stubble of either wheat or barley. Grow-ers interested in trying direct seeding for the firsttime on their farm should consider spring barleyseeded directly into winter wheat stubble witheffective greenbridge management.

Making the transition from conventionalto direct seeding depends on sharing of resultsand experiences between and among scientists,agribusinesses, regulatory agencies, and espe-cially, growers. Toward these ends, major effortsare underway in the PNW in education andcommunication. The most visible event is theNorthwest Direct-Seed Cropping Systems Con-ference held each January since 1998, havingattendance between 650 and 1000. Other effortsinclude PNW publications, e-mail list serverand Web site, field days and tours, and meet-ings—some initiated by growers meeting withother growers.

A great deal of communication and exchangeof experiences also occurs between growersand scientists in the PNW and with growersand scientists in Canada, Australia, and othercountries. The fact that these countries repre-sent the greatest source of market competitionwith PNW growers has not prevented theseareas from working together to solve com-mon problems.

3

IntroductionThe dryland crop production areas of the

Pacific Northwest (PNW), those areas that encom-pass eastern Washington outside of the Federalirrigation projects, as well as adjacent areas ofeastern Oregon and northern Idaho, includesome of the most productive cropland in theUnited States, and, in fact, the world. The areais especially well adapted to the production ofcool-season crops, the foremost of which arewheat and barley.

These lands receive annual rates of precipi-tation that range from more than 30 inches to lessthan 7 inches. Historically, those areas receivingless than 15 to 16 inches of annual precipitationhave been farmed using a crop–fallow rotation. Inthis system, a crop, almost always winter wheat,is produced every other year. The fallow year isto allow the land to accumulate enough moistureover a 2-year period to produce a viable crop. InWashington alone, winter wheat–fallow com-prises 60% of the wheat-production area.

While the crop–fallow rotation has allowedfarmers to produce excellent crops of winterwheat, it has some serious downsides. It is onlyabout 30% efficient in storing precipitation inthe soil during the fallow period, and it oftenleaves the land highly susceptible to the forcesof erosion, both from wind and water. It alsolimits income to every other year for any givenacre while the region’s main competitors—Australia, Argentina, and Canada—are producingcrops in every field nearly every year throughadoption of direct seeding.

Direct seeding, which includes the low dis-turbance system known as no-till, offers farmersa unique opportunity to improve the efficiencyin how the land resource is used, making it pos-sible to grow crops more frequently than everyother year. It also provides farmers the meansto reduce labor, equipment, and other inputcosts, as well as to diversify their crop program toreduce or to spread out risks. Furthermore, thegains in soil organic matter that tend to occurwith direct seeding translate into soil carbonstorage and the potential for payments fromcarbon-emitting industries seeking to purchasecarbon credits.

This document describes the direct-seedresearch and extension programs currentlyunderway in both the private and public sectorsacross all precipitation zones of the drylandfarming areas of Idaho, Oregon, and Washington.The document begins with a summary of crop-ping systems research underway in the region.Cropping systems research, the broadest andmost complex kind of research, looks at the manyinteracting factors as a system, including theend result of net profit. This section is followedby descriptions of more in-depth research anddevelopment on specific problems, includingeconomics, machinery, crop residue manage-ment, soil quality, fertility management, pestmanagement, and variety development andtesting. A breakthrough in any one of thesespecific areas can lead to a major change in thecropping system, as happened with the discov-ery of the importance of early and effective con-trol of volunteer cereals and grass weeds—the“greenbridge.” Finally, we give a brief overviewof educational programs underway to commu-nicate this new information to growers and otherusers. Because of space limitations, the descrip-tions of the many projects are necessarily brief.More details can be obtained by contactingthe respective researchers.

Cropping System Research Sites

Moro

PendletonOREGON

BickletonRowell

CunninghamFarm

Jirava

LindRalston

Wetli

Wilke

PalouseCons. FieldStation

KambitschFarm

IDAHO

Primary Sites Other Sites

0 50 100 150MILES

WASHINGTON

Figure 1.Map showing the locations of cropping systems researchsites in the dryland Pacific Northwest.

4

Cropping SystemsResearch

The dryland PNW is dotted with a networkof direct-seed cropping systems projects (Figure1). The effort underway is virtually unmatchedin any other area of the United States, or possi-bly the world. The work is being done by theregion’s three land grant universities and U.S.Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural ResearchService (USDA-ARS). The private sector is alsoheavily involved with their own on-farm projectsand in cooperation with the public-sector researchand extension effort. Of particular interest is thenumber of farmer-initiated projects that nowspan the region.

Ralston ProjectThe Ralston project encompasses eight dif-

ferent scientific disciplines that, collectively,address pest management, breeding and genet-ics, soil fertility, soil quality, soil moisture, croprotations, economics, and reduced pesticide usefor direct-seed systems. Phase I of this projectwas carried out over a 5-year period and com-pleted in 2000. Phase II, expected to involveanother 4 to 5 years, was launched in the fallof 2000.

Frank Young, USDA-ARS research agrono-mist/cropping systems specialist/weed scientiststationed at Pullman, WA, is the project leader.The study site is located about 5 miles south-west of Ralston, WA, on the farm of Curtis andErika Hennings. The 20 acres required for thisstudy have been made available by the Henningsat no charge to the project. This project is exam-ining the environmental, economic, and agro-nomic feasibility of direct-seed spring croppingsystems in lieu of the traditional winter wheat–fallow system.

Like other cropping systems research inthe region, the Ralston project is grower driven.Early in the process, it was decided not to usebroadleaf crops in any of the rotations in Phase Ibecause these crops and agronomic practiceshave not “proven” to fit in the area and arealready included in alternative crops and rota-

tion studies being evaluated elsewhere in thePNW (see next topic). Four rotations were set upinitially. These were 1) traditional winter wheat–fallow, 2) continuous direct-seeded hard redspring wheat, 3) direct-seeded hard red springwheat–spring barley rotation, and 4) direct-seeded spring wheat–chemical fallow.

The advantage of the spring wheat–chemi-cal fallow rotation was in providing an 18-monthwindow to eliminate winter-annual grasses(downy brome and jointed goatgrass) as wellas volunteer cereal rye. However, this rotationproved to be unprofitable. Furthermore, winderosion could be a problem during the 18-monthfallow period, and water use efficiency was low.

The most profitable of these rotations waswinter wheat–fallow using conservation tillage.The researchers were able to eliminate all butone or two of the rod weedings by using a spring

Aerial view of the 20-acre direct-seed cropping systemsproject carried on two (a and b) neighboring andcomplementary 10-acre sites on the Curtis and ErikaHennings farm near Ralston, WA. The area was largeenough to include replicates of each crop (or fallow) ofeach rotation each year, alternated between the two 10-acre sites. After 5 years, this project moved into Phase II,comparing the economic and agronomic performance ofcontinuous hard red spring wheat, hard white springwheat alternated with a broadleaf crop, winter wheatafter fallow—where the number of rodweeding operationsare reduced with the aid of herbicides—and tests withherbicide-resistant crops. Photos by Frank Young.

a

b

5

application of glyphosate (Roundup) before ini-tiating spring tillage. This lowered the need formechanical weed control later in the season.

The second most profitable rotation wasthe continuous direct-seeded hard red springwheat. The first 2 years of the study were spentdetermining a fertilizer program that would pro-duce 14% grain protein. This was accomplishedusing a split application, applying some of thenitrogen in the fall so it would move down intothe root zone and be available to the wheat plantswhen their nitrogen need is the greatest. Theother application was as starter fertilizer appliedat seeding time below or below and to one sideof the seed row to get the plants off to a fast startand to support their growth until they reachedthe deeper nitrogen.

Direct-seeded hard red spring wheat yieldeda 5-year average of 40 bu/A in a rotation withdirect-seeded spring barley. In 1998 and 1999, thehard red spring wheat made 14% protein in boththe continuous hard red spring wheat and thehard red spring wheat–spring barley rotations.

Pests and diseases that are or have been aproblem include Hessian fly in the continuoushard red spring wheat system, Rhizoctonia rootrot in the spring cereals, downy brome in winterwheat, and Russian thistle in spring cereals.

Hessian fly infestations in the continuoushard red spring wheat (a susceptible variety) pro-gressed from trace amounts in 1997 (2nd year)to 25% infested tillers in 1999, and then 40%infested tillers in 2000 (5th year). In contrast, theHessian fly-resistant Tara, grown in plots in the5th year in this same system, had no economicdamage from this pest. Further, because Baron-esse barley is resistant to Hessian fly, much lessdamage occurred on spring wheat rotated withspring barley. Prior to the 4th year of the project,Russian thistle did not require a postharvestherbicide application. For downy brome man-agement in winter wheat, fields were normallydisked lightly after harvest to initiate fall-springweed germination, followed in early spring byapplication of herbicides before starting thetillage operations.

At the end of Phase I of the project, thecontinuous direct-seeded spring croppingsystems were performing well agronomically,especially taking into account that Hessian fly

can be controlled by use of a resistant varietyof spring wheat. Either hard red or hard whitespring wheats with high grain-protein contentsthat command premium prices would be a logi-cal choice for direct-seed systems to maximizethe profitability of direct-seed spring wheatproduction. However, the winter wheat–fallowrotation under minimum tillage appears to bethe most economically viable system in thisprecipitation zone.

Phase II of the Ralston Project will includerefining and improving direct-seed spring cerealcropping systems. It also will include investigat-ing new technology such as herbicide-resistantcereals and oilseeds and ways to manage weedswith these crops in the rotation. This phase willalso focus more on soil quality changes, includ-ing carbon storage in soil. Other aspects of thework will include perennial wheat, one-pass till-age systems for wheat, hard white and facultativespring wheats, spring-fall triticales, and winterlegumes. Another project would measure theimpact the Ralston Project has had on farmers’attitudes towards direct-seed systems, bothpositive and negative.

Ralston Project research findings are relevant tothe low and intermediate rainfall zones, whichrange from a low of 9 to 11 inches up to 16 inches.

Late-seeding winter wheat directly into spring barleystubble with Curtis Hennings’ John Deere 750 drill as partof the cooperative direct-seed cropping systems project nearRalston, WA. Continuous cropping with hard red springwheat was the only treatment found to compete economi-cally with the winter wheat–fallow rotation, dependingon the premium paid for high protein. This test withlate-seeded recropped winter wheat was introducedbased on available moisture in the fall of 2000. Photo byFrank Young.

6

Alternate Dryland Crop RotationsBill Schillinger is leading long-term on-farm

cropping systems research in Adams, Benton,and Douglas counties, WA, as well as at Wash-ington State University’s Dryland ResearchStation at Lind. Among the growers formerly orcurrently involved are Ron Jirava near Ritzville,Brad Wetli near Mansfield, and Doug Rowell inthe Horse Heaven Hills. Several WSU and USDA-ARS researchers and staff are involved in theproject, as well as agronomist Chad Sheltonwhile employed with Western Farm Services.

The objective of this work is to determinethe feasibility of diverse, direct-seeded annualspring-cropping systems for low-rainfall drylandareas of the PNW. The Ritzville and Mansfield(now discontinued) studies focused mainly ondocumenting the effects that broadleaf cropshave on water use, residue production, root dis-eases, and grain yield of subsequent wheat andbarley crops. The study on the Doug Rowellfarm in the Horse Heaven Hills compared annualdirect-seeded dark northern spring wheat witha winter wheat–fallow rotation in an area thatreceives an average of 6.5 inches annual precipi-tation and where wind erosion is a problem. TheHorse Heaven Hills site receives less precipita-tion than any other nonirrigated cereal produc-tion region in the world. Since 1997, annual hardred spring wheat yields have averaged 10.4 bu/A

William Schillinger, Washington State University drylandresearch agronomist at Lind, WA, describes differences inwater use by alternative crops in a continuous direct-seedcropping systems study during a 1999 Field Day at the WSUDryland Research Center at Lind. Photo by Roger Veseth.

compared with 24 bu/A for winter wheat afterfallow. Economic analysis showed a slight netprofit for winter wheat after fallow, whereasannual dark northern spring wheat had a nega-tive net return of $40/acre.

On the Jirava farm, Schillinger, Cook, andother scientists are studying crop responses toa 4-year rotation of back-to-back broadleafcrops (safflower followed by yellow mustard)followed by back-to-back spring wheat com-pared with a spring wheat–spring barley rota-tion and with continuous spring wheat. Weedpopulations have increased with broadleafcrops but are effectively controlled when therotation reverts back to cereals.

Rhizoctonia root rot can be devastating tocereals. Researchers anticipated that back-to-back broadleaf crops in the rotation would helpcontrol this disease in continuous, low-distur-bance, direct-seed systems. However, in both1999 and 2000, years 3 and 4 of the 6-year study,Rhizoctonia root rot occurred on the broad-leaf and the cereal crops in the rotation. It wasequally severe on wheat and barley in all rota-tions, including wheat after the two consecu-tive broadleaf crops. Greenhouse studies indi-cate that virtually all crops grown commerciallyor experimentally in the dryland PNW are sus-ceptible to this disease. Yields of spring wheatin year 4 of the study were actually 5-6 bu/Ahigher in the continuous wheat and wheat–bar-ley rotations compared with spring wheat afterthe two broadleaf crops. The broadleaf cropsused more water, thereby leaving the soil profiledrier when the sequence reverted to springwheat. Yields of spring wheat in the continuouscereal sequences at the Jirava site averaged28 bu/A in 1999 and 43 bu/A in 2000, in spiteof 5% to 10% of the plot area being stunted byRhizoctonia root rot in each of these years.

The Jirava study was modified in year 5 (2001)to include two 4-year crop rotations. These are1) winter wheat–winter wheat–spring wheat–spring wheat, and 2) winter wheat–spring bar-ley–spring wheat–broadleaf. The study retainsthe original continuous spring wheat and springwheat–spring barley rotations and includes anew continuous hard white spring wheat aswell as a hard white spring wheat–spring barleyrotation. The large field size of the original

7

experiment (each plot was 500 ft x 60 ft) made itpossible to increase the number of treatmentswithout reducing the number of replications.Thus, statistical precision of the Jirava experimenthas increased, not decreased by these changes.

Direct-seeded spring wheat and spring bar-ley also produced respectable yields at the Wetlisite near Mansfield, where the level of Rhizocto-

nia root rot was low each year. In contrast, yieldsof safflower and yellow mustard, the other twocrops in the rotation, were poor at this location.The climate is apparently too cold for thesecrops, and the weeds overran them.

Companion studies to this research includea long-term direct-seed project on the WSU Dry-land Research Station at Lind, where a Cross-slot research drill is used to annually plant wheat,barley, oats, and safflower as spring crops andwhere Schillinger is evaluating a 2-year winterwheat-spring wheat rotation and continuousspring wheat. Another study measured soil wateruse and dry matter production of 11 crops grownduring 1998 and 1999 at the Lind Research Sta-tion, at the Donald and Doug Wellsandt farmnear Ritzville, and at the Karl Kupers farm nearHarrington, WA. The crops were sunflower, saf-flower, millet, corn, Linola, yellow mustard,Canola, spring wheat, barley, lentils, and peas.Safflower uses more water than any of the otherspring crops, and therefore, the crop followingsafflower has tended to show symptoms ofsevere water stress, especially at Lind.

These research projects are relevant to the lowand intermediate precipitation zones.

In addition to these studies, Schillinger hasinitiated a long-term project at the Lind stationaimed at finding a direct-seed cropping systemthat can compete economically and agronomi-cally with continuous irrigated winter wheat ascurrently grown in parts of Adams and Lincolncounties, WA. Several acres have been devotedto comparison of a 3-year winter Canola–winterwheat–spring barley rotation, using three meth-ods of wheat stubble management, with continu-ous winter wheat where the stubble is burnedand the land moldboard plowed each fall priorto planting. The three methods of wheat stubblemanagement in the 3-year rotation includestubble left standing, straw removed, and strawburned. The plots are large enough to be man-aged with commercial-scale equipment. USDA-ARS plant pathologist Tim Paulitz and his student,Kurt Schroeder, are following the developmentof root diseases on these crops. The study wasstarted in 2000.

Map developed by GPS, of the size and distribution ofRhizoctonia bare patch caused by Rhizoctonia solani AG8in 2001. This was the 4th year of a direct-seed croppingsystems study on the Ron Jirava farm west of Ritzville, WA,that compared continuous spring wheat with a 2-yearspring wheat-spring barley rotation and a 4-year safflower-yellow mustard-spring wheat-spring wheat rotation. Eachplot was 60 feet wide and 500 feet long and was farmedusing commercial scale equipment. The size and frequencyof patches were the same in all rotations and crops. Dataof William Schillinger and R. J. Cook.

Rhizoctonia bare patch of spring barley being mappedusing GPS by Washington State University techniciansHarry Schafer and Steve Schofstoll in a direct-seed croppingsystems study on the Ron Jirava farm west of Ritzville,WA. Photo by William Schillinger.

8

Wilke Farm Direct-Seeding ProjectThis project, located on the WSU-owned

Wilke Farm at Davenport, WA, is a community-and farmer-driven demonstration and researchproject for developing and adapting direct-seedsystems with annual diverse crop rotations forthe intermediate precipitation zone of Washing-ton State. The project is being carried out by theAg Horizons team of WSU Cooperative Extension.Dennis Tonks joined the team in 2000 and nowleads the project, following the able leadershipof WSU Spokane Extension agronomist DianaRoberts.

The research involves commercial-scale plots(small fields) in 3- and 4-year rotations of cerealsand broadleaf crops. The 4-year rotation includesa spring cereal–winter cereal–warm seasongrass–broadleaf following a concept developedby Dwayne Beck at the Dakota Lakes ResearchFarm near Pierre, SD. The 3-year rotation includesa winter cereal–spring cereal–broadleaf crop (nowarm season grass). The spring cereals may beeither spring wheat, barley, or oats. The warmseason grass may be either corn or millet. Thebroadleaf crop may be safflower, peas, sunflower,buckwheat, Canola, or yellow mustard. The win-ter cereal could be either barley or wheat. Allare direct-seeded.

In addition to three replications of each of3- and 4-year rotations on the Wilke Farm car-ried out by local grower Dale Dietrich, six grow-ers have participated in the project by growingone replicate of either a 3- or 4-year rotation on

their farm managed with their own equipment.The six cooperators are or were B. Dregger, HalJohnson, Karl Kupers, Chis Laney, Doug Rein-bold, and Tom Zwainz. The research includeseconomic analyses of the various rotations overa 4-year cycle to determine their overall profit-ability, while also measuring factors such asresidue accumulation, water infiltration, andweed, insect pest, and disease pressures.

Growers in the intermediate precipitationzone traditionally have grown two cereal cropsin 3 years, fallowing each field every 3rd year.Direct seeding makes it possible to crop everyfield every year, eliminating the fallow. Elimina-

Field day in 1998 at the Washington StateUniversity Wilke Farm near Davenport, WA.The Wilke Farm project is comparing 3- and4-year crop rotations of direct-seeded cerealsand broadleaf crops following a conceptdeveloped by Dwayne Beck at the SouthDakota State University Dakota LakesResearch Farm near Pierre, SD. The crops inthe background include yellow mustard andsafflower as broadleaf crops, millet as awarm season grass, and wheat. All field trialsare done by a local grower, Dale Dietrich,using his own machinery. Photo by DianaRoberts.

Dale Dietrich in an experimental planting of sunflowerson the Washington State University Wilke Farm nearDavenport, WA. Karl Kupers, one of the cooperators in theWilke Farm direct-seed cropping systems project, hassuccessfully grown sunflowers on field scale on his farmnear Harrington, WA, as part of his direct-seed croprotation. Photo by Diana Roberts.

9

tion of conventional (tilled) fallow also eliminatesair quality problems associated with particulatematter less than 10 and 2.5 microns diameter (PM10and PM2.5) that can occur with tilled fallow.

The uniqueness of the Wilke Farm direct-seeding project is its grassroots development,its public-private partnership, and the diversityof the groups involved. Partners in the projectinclude local farmers, WSU Cooperative Exten-sion, the WSU Center for Sustaining Agricultureand Natural Resources, EPA Region 10 ColumbiaPlateau Agricultural Initiative, local and multi-national agribusinesses, U.S. Department ofAgriculture’s Natural Resource ConservationService (USDA-NRCS), local conservation dis-tricts, and the Washington State Departmentof Fish and Wildlife. Lincoln County, where theWilke Project is centered, is commonly the sec-ond or third largest wheat-producing county inthe United States.

This research project is relevant primarily to theintermediate precipitation zones.

Columbia Plateau ProjectsDale Wilkins, USDA-ARS agricultural engi-

neer at the Columbia Plateau ConservationResearch Center, Pendleton, OR, is the researchleader for a series of cropping systems projectsin northeast Oregon. Two of these projects aredirect-seed cropping systems projects: “Plantand Soil Management Strategies for SustainingDryland Agroecosystems” and “Dryland Agricul-tural Systems for Erosion Control and EnhancedWater Quality.”

Other USDA-ARS researchers involved inthe work are Steve Albrecht, microbiologist;Amos Bechtel, economist; Clyde Douglas, Jr.,soil scientist; Ron Rickman, soil scientist; MarkSiemens, agricultural engineer; and StewartWuest, soil scientist.

Like the low and intermediate precipitationareas of eastern Washington, the primary farm-ing system in northeast Oregon uses wheat–fallow, which has depleted soil organic matterby 40% or more in many fields and has been amajor contributor to high rates of soil erosion.Development of farming systems and knowl-edge about the interactions of these systemswith the unique weather and landscape of theColumbia Plateau are needed to conserve soiland soil organic matter.

This research is important to all precipitationzones, but is especially pertinent to intermediateand low precipitation zones.

One of the discoveries made by the USDA-ARS team at Pendleton is the influence of long-term direct seeding on the rate of water infiltra-tion into soil. Plots direct-seeded for 15 yearstook in water at the rate of about 5 inches perhour, whereas adjacent plots managed in a tra-ditional wheat–fallow rotation with mulch till-age during the summer months took in waterat only a few hundredths of an inch per hour.Infiltration rates began to improve even afterthe first year of direct seeding.

The reason(s) for the improved rates of infil-tration are not fully understood, but are thoughtto result from the increase in earthworm activ-ity, root channels, and improved soil aggrega-tion because of more soil organic matter and

Sign at the entrance to the Washington State UniversityWilke Farm near Davenport, WA, showing the broad-basedsupport and public-private cooperation for the ongoingdirect-seed cropping systems project on this farm. Photoby Diana Roberts.

10

increased activity of soil microorganisms.Regardless of the explanations, the benefitsare obvious since increased water infiltrationmeans more water in the soil for the crop andless runoff that causes soil erosion.

One long-term project carried out by thegroup at Pendleton is the development of a“carbon sequestration model,” designed andunder refinement to estimate or predict theamount of carbon stored in soil under differentmanagement systems.

Ron Rickman, Steve Albrecht, and ClydeDouglas have developed this carbon storagemodel, refered to as “CQESTR,” which describescarbon storage in, or loss from, the soil as influ-enced by crop rotations and tillage practices.It was developed in a “Windows” computerformat in response to a request from USDA-NRCS for a field-level model that would pre-dict annual carbon sequestration rates overtime with a known precision using readilyavailable sources of data.

The model is sensitive to climate, soil, andagronomic practices, including cropping history,cover crops, tillage, fertilization, and amend-ments, as well as initial soil carbon content andsoil erosion. CQESTR includes all of these fac-tors either directly or indirectly. Decompositionof fresh crop residues, soil amendments andorganic matter is predicted by relationshipsdeveloped in another model, the residue decom-position model or “D3R.” D3R was created atPendleton and has been validated from Alaskato the humid southeastern U.S. Cropping andtillage input to CQESTR are drawn from the

Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE)c-factor data files. These files provide tempera-ture, crop rotation, above- and below-groundcrop residue input, amendments, tillage prac-tices, and the timing of tillage. CQESTR pro-vides short-term (daily to monthly) trends inresidue decomposition and soil cover and long-term (yearly to multiple decade) trends in soilorganic matter by soil layer. The model is appli-cable throughout the U.S. and could be appliedinternationally.

As another aspect of the Pendleton workon carbon storage, John Williams, USDA-ARShydrologist, is leading a team in cooperative on-farm research with the local Soil ConservationDistrict using paired watersheds to evaluatecarbon storage in soil under alternative direct-seed cropping systems. The focus of this workwill be on the impact of cropping systems onstable soil organic matter. It is important to areafarmers because it will provide knowledge onimproving the soil through the system of farm-ing. It is also related to global climate change,carbon storage, and the potential for carboncredits.

This research will help define the changesin soil water availability, crop production, andchanges in the soil resources at a production-unit scale. By quantifying differences in variousdirect-seed cropping systems, farmers will beprovided with a range of information that canbe applied to their specific farms.

This research is pertinent to all precipitationzones.

Dale Wilkins, agricultural engineer and researchleader of the USDA-ARS program at the OregonState University Columbia Plateau ConservationResearch Center near Pendleton, OR, explainsthe procedure and research tools for measuringsoil strength in the field during a grower fieldday in 1998. The poster in the backgroundillustrates how soil strength first increased withdirect seeding, then declined after 15 years to alevel similar to the soil loosened by conventionaltillage in their long-term tillage systems trial.Photo by Roger Veseth.

11

Cunningham Agronomy Farm

The 140 acres of WSU-owned croplandreferred to as the “Cunningham Agronomy Farm”was made available to the Department of Cropand Soil Sciences in 1998. The land is now dedi-cated to direct-seed cropping systems and pre-cision agriculture research carried out by a teamof 20 to 25 WSU and USDA-ARS scientists. JimCook; Dave Huggins, USDA-ARS soil scientist;and Joe Yenish, WSU Extension weed specialist,are responsible for overall management andday-to-day decisions for the farm. Ryan Davisis responsible for the farm work. The new WSUCenter for Precision Agriculture Research,directed by Fran Pierce, is also a participantin this research project.

This cropping systems project is unique inseveral respects. It may well represent the firstlarge-scale direct-seed cropping systems studyinitiated in the United States if not the worldon steep, highly erodible land. While some landis used in small-scale plots, the main thrust ofthe project involves a “whole farm” researchapproach, with each factor under study consid-ered for the farm as a whole. As another uniformfeature, rather than replications, the experimen-tal methods involve multiple measurementsand maps of the factors of interest on a land-scape basis using GPS.

As “start-up” funds to help launch thisproject, the Washington Wheat Commission(WWC) provided roughly $40,000 for each of1998, 1999, and 2000. Equipment was purchasedwith funds from the College of Agriculture andHome Economics, the Cook Endowed Chair,and the WWC, including a used grain truck andnew grain auger, 40-foot sprayer, pump for fer-tilizer solution and water, and a weather station.Great Plains Inc. provided a new 15-foot proto-type drill equipped to place fertilizer withineach row below the seed at the time of planting.Funds and donations were also obtained fromthe Washington Barley Commission, the USAPea and Lentil Council, and Curt Hennings tobuild a small drill for no-till for variety plots.

Physical maps developed for the entire 140acres include a digital elevation map with lessthan 1 M resolution. In addition, baseline datawere obtained on 90 of the 140 acres to docu-

ment variability in soil properties, residual soil-profile nitrogen, weed seed bank, populationsof soilborne pathogens, and other measure-ments, all site-referenced by GPS. These 90 acresare undoubtedly the most intensively charac-terized acres in eastern Washington.

About 15 acres of this farm were set asideat the outset for weed research. The remainderwas direct seeded in 1999 to a hard red springwheat (WPB 926R). Site-specific yields and grainprotein together with site-specific nitrogenavailability were measured on a landscape-basisover the 90-acre portion of the farm. The fieldwas planted to Baronesse spring barley in 2000while characterization of soil, weed, and diseaseaspects of the site were continued. Starting inthe fall of 2000, the 90-acre portion of the farmwas divided into three roughly equal blocks asthe first step in the initiation of up to six croprotations, where each includes 2/3 wheat and1/3 an alternate crop. The alternate crops willinclude winter and spring barley, winter andspring Canola, and winter and spring peas.The block with the multiple crops will then beplanted uniformly to spring wheat in 2002 andto winter wheat in the fall of 2002. The six alter-nate crops will always follow the winter wheatstarting in the fall of 2000. The areas in each ofthese rotations are large enough to accommo-date separate replicated studies of residue, fer-tilizer, or pest management, as examples.

Digital elevation map of the 140-acre Washington StateUniversity Cunningham Agronomy Farm, site of a large-scale, direct-seed and precision agriculture croppingsystems study. Resolution of contour lines approximately1 M in elevation. Photo by David Huggins.

12

The WSU Cunningham Agronomy FarmAdvisory Committee serves as the primary sourceof advice for all aspects of planning, implemen-tation, and operation of the direct-seed croppingsystems studies carried out on this farm. Theresponsibilities of this committee range frommaking decisions on long-term strategic plan-ning to providing seasonal advice on actualfarming practices.

Current members of the committee include:John Aeschliman, farmer, Colfax, WA; DavidBarton, Latah Co. Cooperative Extension, Mos-cow, ID; John Burns, WSU Extension agrono-mist, Pullman, WA; Joe Damon, Monsanto Co.,Rockford, WA; David Harlow, farmer, Pullman;Sam and Chris Fleener, farmers, Pullman;Sandy Halstead, EPA Region 10, IAREC, Prosser,WA; Steve Reinertsen, McGregor Co., Colfax;Dennis Roe, USDA-NRCS, Washington StateUniversity, Pullman; Art Schultheis, farmer,Colton, WA; and Roger Veseth, WSU/UI Coop-erative Extension.

This research is most relevant to the interme-diate and high precipitation zones.

Palouse Conservation Field StationThe Palouse Conservation Field Station (PCFS)

on the Albion road near Pullman includes some240 acres dedicated to conservation farmingresearch, managed by the USDA-ARS Land Man-agement and Water Conservation Unit, Pullman.

Aerial view of the WSU Cunningham Agronomy Farmnear Pullman, WA, during the 2001 growing season,showing the eight crops used in six direct-seed croprotations. The narrow fields are approximately 5 acreseach and were planted (left to right) to winter barley,winter peas, winter Canola, spring Canola (RoundupReady), spring peas, and spring barley. The two 30-acrefields in the center and at right were planted, respectively,to hard red spring wheat and soft white winter wheat.For 2002, the spring wheat will be planted uniformlyacross the six fields of alternative crops; hard red winterwheat will be planted after spring wheat; and the sixalternative crops will be direct seeded into the winterwheat stubble. The same order of crops will be repeatedthrough at least two complete cycles. Photo by BruceFrazier and Richard Rupp.

Dave Huggins, USDA-ARS soil scientist in thisunit is responsible for the day-to-day and sea-sonal decisions for the bulk acres (not in smallresearch plots). Jeff Smith, USDA-ARS soil sci-entist in the unit, is leading the work on mea-surements of soil organic matter buildup andcarbon storage on the farm.

Starting in September, 1995, the acres usedfor bulk cropping were divided into eightapproximately 8-acre fields. Each field was thenconverted from conventional (minimum) till-age seeding to direct seeding using a one-passdrill for placement of seed and fertilizer. Threecrop rotations were chosen: 1) winter wheat–spring barley–spring legume, 2) winter wheat–spring legume, and 3) winter wheat–spring bar-ley–spring wheat. Ten principles were adoptedfor the project: 1) no soil disturbance exceptwhat occurs with the drill at planting and place-ment of fertilizer, 2) no burning of crop or weedresidue, 3) only commercially available field-scale equipment will be used, 4) minimum fieldsize will be 8 acres, 5) fertilizer rates will be basedon a soil test and realistic yield goals, 6) nitrogenwill be deep banded at planting, 7) the latestavailable technologies (varieties, seed treat-ments) will be used, 8) precision farming tech-nologies will be used, 9) economics will be thecritical factor in judging relative success, and10) a farmer advisory group will provide inputto the equipment and farming practices.

A main objective of this project has beento help researchers gain experience with directseeding on a scale larger than conventional smallplot work. The project also provides diverse

13

sites with known cropping histories for use byresearchers, and has been closely coordinatedwith research on the Cunningham AgronomyFarm. The two research farms are only 5 milesapart and share equipment.

In addition to converting the bulk acres ofthis farm to continuous direct seeding, severalprojects initiated in 1998 focus on rotation designsfor direct-seed cropping systems suited to annualcropping. The team doing this work includesDave Huggins as the lead scientist, along withRoger Veseth, Claudio Stockle, crop modeler inBiosystems Engineering, Joe Yenish and gradu-ate students Javier Marcos and Derek Appel.

Stockle’s CropSyst model is being used inthese studies to both characterize and predictthe growth of several spring crops based onweather, soil, and plant growth data. The cropsinclude Canola, yellow mustard, hard red springwheat, peas, corn, proso millet, safflower, andLinola, each seeded directly into stubble of win-ter wheat in plots 30 x 50 feet with all fertilizerapplied under the seed at the time of planting.The model uses measurements of availablewater, temperature, light, and crop growth anddevelopment to predict total crop biomass pro-duction, which is then validated against actualbiomass production. By knowing total biomassand the portion of aboveground biomass repre-

sented as harvested grain, it then becomes pos-sible to estimate yield of any given crop basedon the measurement of a few key and readilyavailable parameters. In addition to modelingthe eight spring crops grown on the PCFS, themodel has been tested using actual field soilwater measurements at Harrington, Lind, andRitzville for different spring crops grown at thesethree locations. Working with regional soil andhistoric weather data and CropSyst modeling ofthe eight spring crops, the team has simulatedand mapped yield, yield stability, water-use effi-ciency, and thermal time requirements for thesecrops in the dryland regions of Idaho, Oregon,and Washington (Table 1).

Jim Cook has a 1-acre plot on this farm thathas been in a direct-seed system for 20 years asof 2001, during which time the plot was plantedto winter or spring wheat 17 times, spring barleyonce (1993), spring peas once (1994), and chemi-cal fallowed once (1987). Yields that once werepoor because of root diseases have since stabi-lized (Table 2) following the onset of take-alldecline together with less Rhizoctonia root rotbecause of effective and timely managementof the greenbridge. The plot is currently alter-nated between winter and spring wheat to avoidbuildup of cheat grass and jointed goatgrass.

Kambitsch FarmThe University of Idaho (UI) Kambitsch

Farm near Genesee, ID, includes direct-seedcropping systems research using both farm-scale and plot-scale equipment. A recent multi-disciplinary research project was led by StephenGuy, UI Extension crop management specialist,together with Donn Thill, UI weed scientist,Roger Veseth, WSU/UI Extension conservationtillage specialist, John Hammel, UI soil scientist,Tim Fiez, WSU soil fertility specialist, and JoeYenish, WSU Extension weed scientist. The UI/WSU project focused on integrated manage-ment systems that compared conventional orminimum tillage and direct seeding of peas andlentils after spring cereals—cropping systemsdesigned to retain adequate surface residueand water infiltration/storage potential to con-trol surface runoff and soil erosion during both

Aerial photograph of the Palouse Conservation FieldStation near Pullman, WA. The fields on this station wereconverted to continuous direct-seed cropping systemsstarting in 1995. A wide range of studies involving ARSand Washington State University scientists is currentlyunderway. Photo courtesy of David Huggins.

14

Table 1.(A) Predicted average probability of crop completion, planting dates and days from emergence to maturity of theindicated crops in six climatic zones (B) defined on the basis of annual temperature and precipitation limits in thedryland Pacific Northwest. Data of Javier Marcos, Claudio Stockle, and Dave Huggins.

Probability of Yellow Spring Spring Springcrop completion mustard Canola pea Safflower Linola wheat Millet Corn

zone 1 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.97 0.91 0.81zone 2 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.90 0.74zone 3 0.95 0.96 0.96 0.75 0.96 0.95 0.60 0.29zone 4 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.97 0.96zone 5 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.96 0.94 0.96 0.97 0.95zone 6 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.97 0.96

Planting date

zone 1 5–April 8–April 25–April 23–April 7–April 28–Mar. 30–May 26–Aprilzone 2 6–April 10–April 26–April 25–April 9–April 29–Mar. 1–June 27–Aprilzone 3 8–April 13–April 1–May 29–April 11–April 1–April 8–June 2–Mayzone 4 18–Mar. 23–Mar. 12–April 10–April 22–Mar. 9–Mar. 17–May 13–Aprilzone 5 19–Mar. 26–Mar. 13–April 12–April 24–Mar. 9–Mar. 21–May 15–Aprilzone 6 14–Mar. 21–Mar. 11–April 10–April 19–Mar. 5–Mar. 18–May 12–April

Days fromemergence tomaturity

zone 1 87 87 75 109 87 97 85 131zone 2 86 87 76 111 87 98 87 135zone 3 90 90 79 126 92 102 99 145zone 4 88 87 74 100 87 99 74 113zone 5 89 88 76 104 89 103 76 118zone 6 91 89 76 113 90 104 93 122

A

Annual temperature Annual precipitationdegrees C mm

Zone 1 (cool-dry) <9 <330

Zone 2 (cool-intermediate) <9 330 to 430

Zone 3 (cool-wet) <9 >430

Zone 4 (warm-dry) >9 <330

Zone 5 (warm-intermediate) >9 330 to 430

Zone 6 (warm-wet) >9 >430

B

15

the grain legume crop and in the following win-ter wheat crop.

Two of the project’s large-scale studies onthe Kambitsch Farm compared different optionsfor producing and retaining crop residue ofspring crops for control of soil erosion. Onestudy examined the retention of pea and lentilresidue in a 3-year spring cereal–legume–winterwheat rotation in response to four winter wheatplanting systems: 1) one-pass direct-seed; 2) two-pass shank-fertilize direct-seed; 3) fertilize,cultivate once, seed; 4) same as 3), but two cul-tivations. The grain legume crops for purposesof this study were planted using conventionaltillage, although growers switching to direct-seed systems will require the means to direct-seed all and not just some of the crops in therotation.

As expected, the greater the number of passesbefore seeding winter wheat (none, shank-fertil-ize only, and shank-fertilize plus one or two culti-vations), the lower the amount of pea or lentilresidue cover following planting the winter

wheat. Peas produced more residue than lentils,and residue-production differences occurredamong varieties. However, after planting thewinter wheat with the one-pass direct-seedsystem, researchers found the amount of resi-due cover was about the same regardless of theplanting system. In two separate repeats of thestudy, conducted in 1997–1998 and 1998–1999,respectively, the yields of winter wheat did notdiffer significantly regardless of the number ofpasses used to prepare the soil, fertilize, andplant the wheat.

The other large-scale project in the samerotation compared direct-seed and three kindsof tillage (plow, chisel, and Paratill) after thespring cereals to evaluate the effects on springcereal residue retention through the pea andfollowing winter wheat crops, as well as yieldsof both crops. The study was conducted for twocomplete cycles carried out during 1996–1998and 1997–1999, with the peas as the legume cropseeded either directly into undisturbed stubbleor into tilled soil followed by a uniform direct

Year Season

1–5 1981–86 Continuous direct-seeded winter wheat; yield data not available6 1986–87 Chemical Fallow

Variety Check w/Apron +PCNB or Fumigated(bu/A) Apron +Dividend (bu/A) (bu/A)

7 1987–88 Daws 128 — 1248 1988–89 Hill-81 57 57 729 1989–90 Penawawa 49 57 76

10 1990–91 Penawawa 65 — 8611 1991–92 Penawawa 55 — 5712 1992–93 Steptoe Barley (~3.0t/A) — —13 1993–94 Peas — — —14 1994–95 Penawawa 99 101 Discontinued15 1995–96 Madsen 87 101 —16 1996–97 Alpowa 69 75 —17 1997–98 Madsen 82 82 —18 1998–99 Alpowa 64 67 —19 1999–00 Alpowa 52 — —20 2000–01 Madsen 83 — —

Table 2.Long-term yield trends in a continuous direct-seed winter wheat–spring cereal cropping system at Pullman,WA (Palouse Conservation Field Station). Data of R. J. Cook.

16

seeding of winter wheat. In all cases after thespring cereals, there was more ground cover indirect seeding than in Paratill, which had morethan the chiseled plots, with the least amountof ground cover in the moldboard plowed plots.This relationship held though the year of peas,showing that retention of cereal stubble achievedwith direct seeding can provide protectionagainst soil erosion through the pea crop andwell into the period when the field is plantedto winter wheat. Yields of peas were lower withdirect seeding compared with the three tillagetreatments in 1997, because of problems withseed opener penetration in hard dry soil condi-tions at planting. However, in 1998, with bettersoil moisture conditions and a better drill, direct-seed pea yields were among the highest inthe trial. The yields of the following winterwheat were the same in both studies whetheror not tillage was used prior to planting thegrain legumes.

In addition to large-scale studies on theKambitsch Farm, an on-farm testing componentof the team project was led by Roger Veseth incooperation with six growers in northern Idahoand eastern Washington. Growers involved in theon-farm trials included: Wayne Jensen, Genesee,ID; Nathan and Steve Riggers near Nezperce,ID; Randy and Larry Keatts, Lewiston, ID; ArtSchultheis, Colton, WA; Larry Cochran, Colfax,WA; and Bob Garrett, Endicott, WA. Each of the

large-scale, replicated on-farm trials was con-ducted using the growers’ machinery to prepare,plant and harvest the plots. The trials focusedon the effects on spring pea and winter wheatyields of direct-seed versus more intensive till-age-residue management options and on sur-face residue retention for soil erosion controlin a cereal–pea–winter wheat rotation.

As with the study on the Kambitsch Farm,spring direct seeding of peas into cereal residuein these on-farm trials resulted in higher amountsof surface residue through both the pea andsubsequent winter wheat crops than with anyof the treatments that used some form of falltillage before planting peas. Pea stand estab-lishment and yield with direct seeding wereeither not significantly different or were greaterthan with fall tillage. Also, as with the studieson the Kambitsch Farm, yields of winter wheatdirect-seeded after peas were not significantlydifferent regardless of tillage systems used forpea establishment.

A new multidisciplinary research projectwas initiated in 2000 at the Kambitsch Farm tocompare the effects of direct seeding with con-ventional tillage in a 3-year rotation of winterwheat–spring grain–spring grain legume. Theproject is lead by Stephen Guy with a team ofUI scientists including: Nilsa Bosque-Perez andSanford Eigenbrode, entomologists; Jodi John-son-Maynard, soil scientist; and Louise-MarieDandurand, plant pathologist.

Grower field tour of large-scale plots in a STEEP-fundeddirect-seed versus tillage study of dry peas on the RandyKeatts farm south of Lewiston, ID, in 1998. Yield of direct-seed peas was not significantly different than in fourmore intensive tillage systems in the comparison. Photoby Roger Veseth.

Stephen Guy, University of Idaho Extension crop manage-ment specialist at Moscow, ID, (left) discusses large-scaleplots in a STEEP-funded direct-seed versus tillage study ofdry peas with Nathan Riggers (middle), cooperatinggrower near Nezperce, ID, in 1997. Yield of direct-seedpeas was significantly higher than the conventional till-age comparison, which began with moldboard plowingthe previous fall. Photo by Roger Veseth.

17

Monsanto Centers of ExcellenceEastern Washington is home to one of Mon-

santo’s Centers of Excellence (COE) research anddemonstration sites, designed to help growersaddress questions about direct seeding. This COEis on the farm of Dan and Steve Moore, 5 mileswest of Dusty, WA. It is in a 13- to 15-inch rainfallzone characterized by a wheat–fallow rotationand considered to be marginal for annual crop-ping. The research is spearheaded by SheldonBlank, a Monsanto research agronomist, andJoe Dahmen, Monsanto sales representative.

The objectives of this COE site are to dem-onstrate the agronomic and economic feasibil-ity of annual cropping with direct seeding, andto evaluate the potential for crop intensificationand diversification in a traditional wheat–fallowregion through utilization of direct-seedingtechniques. Thirty acres were leased with indi-vidual plots being 1.65 acres in size to facilitateplanting, spraying, and harvesting with thecooperator’s equipment. Five crop rotationsare represented at this COE site: 1) continuoushard red spring wheat; 2) winter wheat–springbarley–fallow (chemical fallow); 3) winter wheat–spring wheat–mustard; 4) spring wheat–winterwheat–corn–dry peas; and 5) winter wheat–fallow (traditional rotation for the region, butchemical fallow).

Each component of each rotation is repre-sented each year, resulting in thirteen, 1.65-acreplots. All plots, except corn, have been direct-seeded with a John Deere 750 off-set disk drill,which deep-bands fertilizer at planting. Starterfertilizer also has been applied with the seed atplanting.

When the project was started in the springof 1997, spring wheat was seeded in plots wherewinter wheat should have been seeded in the fallof 1996. The site received approximately 21 inchesof precipitation (6 to 7 inches above normal) dur-ing the 1996–1997 season, and about 14 inches(near normal) during the 1997–1998 season.The spring seasons of 1997 and 1998 were bothrelatively wet and ideal for spring cropping.

The inclusion of fallow in a 2- or 3-yearrotation substantially reduced the profitabilityof these rotations. Both annual cropping ofspring wheat–mustard–winter wheat or con-

tinuous dark northern spring wheat providedgreater net income per acre than rotations withfallow. The dark northern spring wheat did notmake protein in either cropping year.

Growing dryland corn presented formidableagronomic challenges in both 1997 and 1998and a sizable loss in potential income for thiscrop. Dry peas in this annual cropping rotationalso reduced profitability, and it appears peasmay have a marginal fit in this transitional zone.

The information to date suggests that direct-seeded, annual cropping may be sufficientlyprofitable and sustainable to reduce or elimi-nate the need for fallow in this transitional 13-to 15-inch precipitation zone.

McGregor Company ResearchThe McGregor Company, headquartered

at Mockonema, WA, southwest of Colfax, has along-term commitment to research dating backto 1952. As both a farm operation and a primarysupplier of agricultural chemicals, fertilizers,and services, the company’s work over the yearshas focused on development and evaluation ofcropping systems for both profit and environ-mental sustainability. Steve Reinertsen is the

18

The direct-seed system developed by the McGregorCompany, Colfax, WA, is a two-pass system, used here byBruce Palmer of McGregor Research and Technology forplot work on the company’s research farm near theirheadquarters. The first pass used their Straw Boss fertilizerapplicator to deep-band fertilizer directly into theundisturbed soil and standing stubble. The second passuses a double-disk drill to seed and apply starter fertilizerin the seed row.

director of the company’s research and develop-ment effort. He and associate Bruce Palmerhave test plots throughout the three-state regionevaluating weed and disease control materials,soil fertility products, and methods of applica-tion, new varieties, both public and private, allas part of a system. Their work and observationsplayed a major role in the discovery and evalua-tion of chloride deficiency to account for thephysiological leaf spot problem on certain vari-eties of wheat that has mystified scientists andfield technicians for more than 30 years.

The company made a commitment to theuse of direct-seed cropping systems in the early1990s. This included the development of theMcGregor Ripper-Shooter and Straw Boss fertil-izer applicators that place fertilizer 5 to 6 inchesdeep as one pass followed by direct-seeding withstarter fertilizer as a second pass. For direct-seededspring cereals, the fertilizer pass can either bein the fall or spring. They have tested many makesof no-till drills and have discovered that somedo not place the fertilizer deep enough into moistsoil to be available when the plants need it. TheMcGregor two-pass direct-seed system wasdeveloped to avoid this problem.

In 1998, the company acquired a farm neartheir headquarters that is now being used forits primary research station. This site includes330 acres, most of which are being farmed com-mercially by a tenant farmer who is convertingto direct-seed systems with the McGregorCompany’s help.

Farmer-Initiated ResearchFarmers have been involved in the region’s

direct-seed research and development from thevery beginning. One of the pioneers in this effortwas the late Mort Swanson, who farmed in Whit-man County between Palouse and Colfax, WA.His work and leadership in the no-till movementare legendary. He and son Guy Swanson builta series of no-till drills for their own use and tohelp others get started. Most farmers who madethe switch to direct seeding starting about 20years ago, and who are now permanently intodirect seeding, got their start with the Yielderdrill, developed, built, and marketed by GuySwanson. Mort’s farm is now farmed by Frank

Comfort King was the first locally built, commerciallyavailable no-till drill in eastern Washington. The protypedrill was built by Mort Swanson, Palouse, WA, after which,Mike Johnson of Palouse built several more of thesedrills. The drill in this photo was in use by Don and JimDruffel, Colton, WA. Photo by R. J. Cook, 1976.

After building the first Comfort King drill, Mort Swansonbuilt the first Pioneer no-till in his shop near Palouse,WA. Palouse Welding of Palouse, WA, also built one ormore of these drills before Guy Swanson began to buildthem in Spokane, WA, under the name Yielder. Photo byR. J. Cook, 1980.

Lang and has been under no-till managementfor more than 30 years.

The Northwest Crops Project is a coopera-tive effort between seven growers, the Palouse-Rock Lake and Whitman Conservation Districts,the USDA-NRCS, and both WSU and UI research-ers. The project is led by St. John, WA, growerTracy Erickson, with USDA-NRCS agronomistDennis Roe and WSU/UI Extension conserva-tion tillage specialist Roger Veseth leading thetechnical support. Growers participating in theproject in addition to Erickson are Steve Swan-

19

nack, Lamont, WA; Dan and Steve Moore, Dusty,WA; John and Cory Aeschliman, Colfax, WA;Randy Repp, Dusty; David and Paul Ruark,Pomeroy, WA; and Leroy Druffel, Uniontown,WA. All sites are in a 15- to 17-inch annualprecipitation zone with Athena silt loam.

Started in 1998, the Northwest Crops Projectis evaluating the economic and agronomicfeasibility of direct seeding in a 3-year winterwheat–spring cereal–broadleaf crop or fallowrotation compared with a 4-year rotation withwinter wheat–corn–grain legume–spring cereal.All field work is done by the participating grow-ers with their own equipment or with sharedequipment. Initial measurements were madeof soil quality to have base data to comparewith soil quality after at least one rotation cycle.Earthworm counts are taken annually by WSUsoil microbiologist Dave Bezdicek and techni-cian Mary Fauci to determine how differentcrops affect them.

Steve Matsen near Bickleton, WA, is leadinga direct-seed cropping systems project withsupport from the East Klickitat ConservationDistrict. While on a much smaller scale than theNorthwest Crops Project, the goals are similarin trying to fit one or more broadleaf crops intoa crop rotation that does not use fallow. Jim Cookand technician Ron Sloot provide scientific andtechnical assistance to the project, along withEast Klickitat Conservation District employee

Dave Clayton. The project includes sites on theMatsen farm 5 miles east of Bickleton with anaverage 12 to 13 inches of precipitation annually,and also on the Gordon King farm about mid-way between Mabton and Bickleton in an 8- to10-inch precipitation zone. All plots are seededwith an 8-foot airseeder built for and donatedto WSU by Kevin Andersen of Andover, SD.

The plots on the King farm are 64 feet wide(8 passes) and 200 feet long and compare 3-yearrotations with continuous cereals. For the 3-yearrotations, three replicate plots are seeded eachyear to four broadleaf crops (yellow mustard,safflower, peas, and Canola), each as two passesin the same 64-foot-wide plots, followed thenext year by a solid seeding to winter wheat andthen spring wheat. This simple design actuallyprovides four 3-year rotations that differ onlyin the broadleaf crop every 3rd year. For onesequence of continuous cereals, three replicate64-foot-wide plots are split one year into halfspring wheat and half spring barley followedthe next year by solid winter wheat. Anothersequence of continuous cereals uses three repli-cates of continuous hard red spring wheat. Of thefour broadleaf crops, only safflower and yellowmustard showed promise in this study, but evenso yields were poor in all 3 years of the study.Because of the poor performance of the broad-leaf crops, this project will be redesigned begin-ning in 2002 to focus entirely on different cereals.

Several growers also have investigatedalternate crops and rotations on a large-scale orwhole-farm basis. One of these is Karl Kupers,who farms west of Harrington in Lincoln County.Kupers has now converted his entire farm todirect seeding as part of a project identified asAnnual Cropping, Intense Rotation, Direct Seed-ing—or the ACIRDS system. Jim Hirst of WesternFarm Services in Harrington provides technicalsupport along with agronomic services for thisproject, and Diana Roberts of WSU CooperativeExtension leads the educational aspects of theproject.

The crops produced by Kupers in 2000include safflower, sunflower, buckwheat, anddurum. In the past, he has grown corn and chick-peas, as well as Canola, mustard, hard red springwheat, and several others. The crops are selectedfor their ability either to root deep for water and

John Aeschliman (left foreground), near Colfax, WA,evaluates soil properties in one of his direct-seeded fieldsincluded in the Northwest Crops Project, with Jim Cook(right foreground), during a field tour in 1998. Photo byRoger Veseth.

20

nitrogen left unused by a previous crop, or shal-low when following a deep-rooted crop. His goalis that each cycle of a rotation, if not each cropin the rotation, use all the water and nutrientsavailable in the soil for that cycle or year. Annualcropping with direct-seeded spring crops giveshim the flexibility to look at all available alter-native crops and then choose those he thinkswill be the most profitable given available mois-ture, market opportunities, and a variety of otherfactors. A case in point is the use of durum inthe rotation rather than hard red spring wheatin 2000. This is because the profit potential hasbeen higher for durum in the current marketfor cereals.

In Washington’s Columbia County, growersbeginning to use direct-seed systems were frus-trated by heavy crop residue. They found throughtheir own on-farm research that burning theresidue allowed more annual and spring plant-ing with direct seeding, and that soil erosion wasno greater than from fields treated with approvedand recognized best management practices forcontrol of soil erosion. The stubble on the fieldswas left standing over winter and then burnedin the spring before planting. While burning isnot considered the long-term solution to dealwith heavy residue, at times it may be the onlypractice to allow planting a spring crop in atimely manner. Roland Schirman, county exten-sion agent for Columbia County, has played amajor leadership and advisory role in helpingthe growers of southeast Washington, and espe-cially in Columbia County, make the conversionfrom conventional to direct seeding.

Economics ofDirect-Seed Systems

The decades of research on conservationfarming systems conducted by land grant uni-versities and the USDA-ARS have been justifiedas a public investment based on the need toprotect our soil and water resources, followingthe “Dust Bowl.” Most of the early adopters weremotivated to shift toward first less and then notillage because of concern for soil erosion. How-ever, the major driver of change towards directseeding is economics. The means to seed and fer-tilize in a single pass following one or two passeswith a weed sprayer has the potential to bothcut variable costs, e.g., fuel, time, and equip-ment maintenance needed to farm convention-ally, and to increase yields in dryland farmingsystems due to more water saved for the crop. Noother emerging technology for wheat farmingcan claim to simultaneously cut costs and raiseyields. On the other hand, many questionsremain, including: whether the cost of herbi-cides is greater, less, or about the same withdirect seeding compared with conventional till-age and seeding; whether the high capital invest-ments in sprayers and no-till drills can be justi-fied; whether alternate crops needed for therotations typically required when switching fromconventional to direct seeding are profitable; andwhether cost-sharing between tenant and land-lord should remain the same or change when thefarming system changes to a direct-seed system.

The first no-till airseeder available atWashington State University for plotwork. The drill was built and donatedto WSU by Kevin Anderson, Andover, SD.The drill, equipped with eight Andersonopeners on 12-inch spacings, is used totest varieties and advanced lines inreplicated drill strips. Photo taken onthe Steve Matsen farm by R. J. Cook,1999.

21

Oumou Camara, Douglas Young, and HerbertHinman of the Department of Agricultural Eco-nomics at WSU used data from personal inter-views with four direct-seed farmers in the 8- to13-inch precipitation area1 and six direct-seedfarmers in the 19- to 22-inch precipitation area2,all done between October, 1997, and July, 1998,to estimate the profitability of direct-seed sys-tems relative to conventional systems. They usedthe latest (e.g., 1999) WSU Cooperative Exten-sion conventional tillage budgets for these twoareas as standards of comparison for variable,fixed, and total costs of production for winterand spring cereals in the drier area and winterand spring cereals plus lentils and peas in thewetter area. In both areas, the costs of produc-tion were slightly lower for direct-seed systemscompared with the corresponding Extensionconventional tillage budgets.

For example, the break-even price for totalcosts of production in the higher precipitationarea averaged $2.64/bu for direct seeding com-pared with $2.95/bu for the Extension conven-tional tillage budget. The corresponding break-even values for total cost of production of winterwheat after fallow in the low-precipitation areawas $2.82/bu for direct seeding and $2.98/bufor the Extension conventional tillage budget.Break-even values for spring wheat were $3.34/bu for direct seeding compared with $4.39/bufor the Extension conventional tillage budgetin the 19- to 22-inch precipitation area and$4.23/bu for direct seeding (hard red springwheat; based on only two direct-seed farmers)compared with $3.27/bu for the Extensionconventional tillage budget in the 8- to 13-inchprecipitation area. The break-even values forspring barley were $97.18/ton for direct seedingcompared with the $119.59/ton for the Exten-sion conventional tillage budget in the 19- to22-inch precipitation area and $67.02/ton fordirect seeding compared with $118.30/ton forthe Extension conventional tillage budget inthe 8- to 13-inch precipitation area.

The authors of this study point out that, while“these results cannot be generalized to the no-tilland conventional systems of all farmers withinthe PNW, they do provide a useful insight intowhat is economically possible with no-till.” Itshould also be pointed out that conventional

tillage and seeding systems are the product ofdecades of fine tuning toward ever greater effi-ciencies, whereas direct seeding is relativelynew and can still expect to undergo enormousimprovements through innovation and lessonslearned through years of experience.

In addition to their independent studies,Doug Young and Holly Wang, also in the WSUDepartment of Agricultural Economics, areinvolved as team members with both the Ralstonand Cunningham Agronomy Farm croppingsystems projects. Jon Newkirk, WSU Extensioneconomist at Davenport, WA, is similarly involvedas a member of the AgHorizons team workingon the Wilke Farm project. As economists, theyplay lead roles in economic analyses for thedifferent cropping systems under study in theseprojects as the data become available.

Machinery and CropResidue Management

Research on direct-seeded wheat becamepossible in the PNW only with the developmentof experimental no-till drills. In the early 1970sRoland Schirman, then a USDA-ARS weed sci-entist, developed the first no-till drill for plotwork. It became known as USDA I. About thissame time, USDA-ARS soil scientist Robert Pap-

Plot drill developed by the Yielder Mfg, Spokane, WA, forthe USDA-ARS at Pullman, WA. The original drill, labeledUSDA III, was 8 feet wide, with openers arranged to plantrows in pairs 5 inches apart, with 15 inches between thepaired rows. This drill was later rebuilt and widened to 12feet by John Rae, Touchet, WA. Photo courtesy of DavidHuggins.

22

endick began his early work on the agronomicsof direct-seeding, and USDA-ARS plant patholo-gist Jim Cook began his work on the influence ofdirect seeding on root diseases of wheat and bar-ley. Papendick and Cook both used Schirman’sUSDA I and his improved USDA II no-till drills.The latest plot drill fabricated by USDA-ARSengineer Keith Saxton and equipped with Cross-slot openers has the label USDA V.

Saxton co-developed the Cross-slot openerwith John Baker, a scientist in New Zealand.The Cross-slot opener, mounted on both USDAdrills IV and V, uses a single specially designednotched coulter equipped to place seed on oneside and fertilizer slightly lower and on the otherside of a slice made in the soil by the coulter. Thisopener is now being used on a WSU plot drill atPullman by the breeding programs (see coverand page 36) and a WSU drill at Lind used byBill Schillinger. A few growers in eastern Wash-ington also use drills with this opener. It is par-ticularly noted for its low soil disturbance andits ability to handle heavy residue, even on steepslopes. Drills with the Cross-slot opener are notyet available from a commercial manufactureralthough the openers are available.

One of the reasons for limited adoption ofdirect seeding in the PNW is the difficulty ofplanting into the extremely heavy residues. MarkC. Siemens, USDA-ARS researcher at the Colum-bia Plateau Conservation Research Center, isinvolved in research focused on residue man-

agement for direct-seed systems. Part of thiswork was done on Clint Reeder’s farm nearAdams, OR. This research examines differentmethods of handling residue during and afterharvest, as well as different drill configurationsfor planting into residue. His work shows thatchopping the residue into fine pieces providesthe best conditions for direct seeding, and con-firms it is critical to spread and distribute resi-due evenly at the time of harvest.

Mark Siemens also has led the developmentand testing of an attachment for no-till drillsthat substantially reduces drill plugging in heavycrop residue conditions and also helps reducethe number and size of crop residue piles thatform behind the drill. Use of this flexible residuemanagement wheel increased stand counts infall-seeded Canola by approximately 50% andin fall-seeded winter wheat by 18% comparedwith not using the residue wheel. A U.S. PatentApplication was filed for this device on June 15,2000. Two farmers have mounted this device ontheir no-till drills and are evaluating its perfor-mance under large-scale farming conditions.

This research is most pertinent to the intermedi-ate and high precepitation zones where yieldsare greater than 60 to 65 bu/A.

Cross-slot opener for direct seeding, developed by BakerMfg., Christchurch, New Zealand, in cooperation withKeith Saxton, ARS engineer, Pullman, WA. Photo courtesyof David Huggins.

The Residue Management Wheel, developed by MarkSiemens, USDA-ARS, Pendleton, OR, for use on no-till drillsto move residue and help prevent plugging. Photo by MarkSiemens.

23

Saxton developed the “slot mulch” machine,designed to get rid of straw by inserting it into aslot in the soil. Rather than spreading it behindthe combine, the machine deposits the straw inthe field as a standard windrow. The machinesimultaneously creates a furrowlike slot, picksup a windrow of straw, and inserts the straw intothe slot at a density about half that of baled straw.The slots filled with straw also serve to catchwater that otherwise might run off the field dur-ing rains or snow melt. Saxton calls this a “con-cept machine,” waiting for a company to buildand sell it.

In other research, Saxton worked with resi-due management on several projects, both indryland areas and the irrigated Columbia Basin.He co-led the USDA-funded Columbia PlateauWind Erosion PM-10 project with Bill Schillinger,WSU dryland research agronomist at Lind.

The great majority of research and develop-ment on machinery is done by the private sector.This includes the Yielder drill mentioned above,which was developed specifically for the hills andheavy crop residue unique to the PNW.

In the mid-1980s, the McGregor Companyat Colfax developed and manufactured a drillfor one-pass direct-seeding that uses their Rip-per Shooter shanks mounted on the front of adrill with commercially available double-diskopeners for seed placement, all on 12-inchspacing. Based on this same configuration, EricLarson of the McGregor Company designed aplot drill for Cook and Tim Murray, WSU plantpathologist, equipped with a cone distributionsystem so they could plant different varietiesand treatments in small plots on the go. While

this drill is functional in precision placementof fertilizer and seed in tilled soil, Cook has usedit for virtually all of his direct-seed plot worksince 1987. The McGregor Company also hasdeveloped and built sprayers and fertilizerapplicators for direct-seed systems.

Don and the late Bob Zimmerman at Almira,WA, developed a unique opener suited for bothdeep-furrow seeding into summer fallow anddirect-seeding into standing stubble. Fertilizeris applied through separate shanks mounted infront of the openers on 15-inch spacings. BobZimmerman developed the now-famous HZopener used since the early 1960s, which revo-lutionized deep-furrow seeding of winter wheatinto summer fallow.

Soil Biology/Qualityand Fertility

Growers who have been direct seeding forseveral years commonly refer to the “transition,”meaning the top few inches of soil becomingmore mellow, porous, and black with humus, tomention some of the most obvious changes. Oneof the signs of this transition is that the drill canbe pulled in a higher gear compared with whatwas possible during the first few years with thesame drill and tractor in the same field. Anothersign of the transition is the residue of the previ-ous crop or crops is less likely to plug the drill.These and other desired physical changes

No-till plot drill developed by Fabro Inc. ofCanada, for Tim Fiez, former WashingtonState University Cooperative Extensionsoil fertility specialist. Greg Schwab, WSUCooperative Extension soil fertility special-ist, now uses the drill for soil fertility trialsunder direct-seed conditions. Photo byRoger Veseth.

24

reflect improvements in soil quality and structureand trace back to changes in soil biology andpossibly the speed of crop residue decomposi-tion on the soil surface. In addition to the greaterearthworm activity, it seems likely that leavingcrop residue on the soil surface will graduallyfavor the buildup of populations of decomposingmicroorganisms adapted to conditions on the soilsurface. Always burying the crop residue, as donefor decades, favors decomposing microorganismsadapted to conditions below the soil surface.

Several PNW land grant university andUSDA-ARS soil microbiologists are conductingresearch to better understand these changes. Theimprovements in soil structure and quality withyears of direct seeding are the result of increasesin soil organic matter, which those working oncarbon sequestration refer to as carbon storagein soil—a win-win situation, but one that is notyet well understood.

David Bezdicek and Mary Fauci, with WSUCrop and Soil Sciences Department, and Den-nis Roe, USDA-NRCS agronomist, are compar-ing the effects of direct seeding with conven-tional tillage and seeding on soil quality. Thisresearch is being conducted at seven locationsin eastern Washington and northern Idaho rep-resenting the low, intermediate, and high pre-cipitation zones. Soil physical, chemical, andbiological properties for fields of five cooperat-ing growers and one research plot, each direct-seeded for at least 10 years, were compared withadjacent fields managed with conventional till-age and seeding. Some of the results from thisresearch include:

• Soil organic matter, microbial activity, releaseof soil N and soil-test P and K tend to be higherat all sites under direct seeding comparedwith conventional tillage and seeding.

• Microbial activity is generally higher whereorganic matter accumulates at the soil sur-face in the direct-seeded systems.

• Soil pH tends to be less in the 2- to 4-inchzone at some direct-seeded sites, especiallythose direct-seeded for 15 to 20 years.

• There is net sequestration of soil carbon inthe higher precipitation zone. The greatest

increase in soil organic matter (50%) in thetop few inches was noted in a field on the MortSwanson farm near Palouse under direct seed-ing for 27 years. Little or no difference insoil organic matter content has been notedat the drier sites.

• Continuous direct seeding builds soil organicmatter, especially the sand-sized particulateorganic matter fraction that stores and releasesnutrients on a seasonal basis.

• Soil under direct seeding is more compactedfrom heavy equipment, with higher bulk den-sities and greater penetration resistance, butwater infiltration has generally increased withdirect seeding compared with conventionaltillage and seeding owing to the greater poros-ity of the soil surface.

• It seems likely a change in soil pore size dis-tribution has occurred after years of directseeding, resulting in larger soil pores fromold root channels and earthworm channels—effects that offset the higher compaction.

• Potential for increased storage of water insoil with direct seeding is greater, and water-use efficiency is greater for direct-seededwinter wheat in the high precipitation zones.This can help explain why yields, disappoint-ingly low during the early years of directseeding, tend to increase steadily after thetransition.

• Maintaining surface cover with annual crop-ping and eliminating fallow are key reasonsfor the improved water-use efficiency andbetter economic return.

As years of direct-seeding increase, carbonaccumulates at the surface and decreases inconcentration at lower depths in the soil profile.With conventional tillage and seeding, surfaceresidues are mixed into the soil, distributing thecarbon more evenly with depth. As soil organicmatter (and soil carbon) increases in a direct-seed system, a sand-sized organic matter fractioncalled “particulate organic matter” also increases.This fraction serves as a pool of available soilnutrients that build up under direct seeding, but

25

is easily destroyed by tillage. Both field andlaboratory measurements suggest that morecarbon is maintained under direct-seed systemsthan under conventional tillage and seeding.Direct-seed systems tend to resemble perma-nent pasture in some of the carbon fractions.

This work is relevant to all precipitation zones.

Steve Albrecht, a USDA-ARS microbiologist,is involved in a study at both Pendleton and inthe Horse Heaven Hills on soil quality changes,including soil carbon changes associated withthe transition from conventional to direct-seedsystems. It can take years, especially in the lowrainfall areas, to observe changes in soil carbonafter switching from conventional to directseeding. Albrecht is investigating the ecology ofsoil microorganisms in relation to a transitionfrom conventional tillage to direct seeding.

Near Pendleton, this work is in the 15- to 17-inchprecipitation zone, while the work in the HorseHeaven Hills is in the 6- to 8-inch annual pre-cipitation zone.

Ann Kennedy, soil microbiologist with theUSDA-ARS Land Management and Water Con-servation Research Unit at Pullman, is involvedin research on soil quality assessments in thetransition period at sites near Pullman, Colfax,Lind, Ralston, and Ritzville. The goal of herresearch is to develop appropriate soil and cropresidue management strategies for the transi-tion years to direct-seed cropping systems. Herwork with former graduate student Tami Stubbsalso involves determining residue decomposi-tion rates for various cereal cultivars and alter-native crops.

Kennedy, Schillinger, and graduate studentGhana Giri have teamed up to investigate soilproperties after 8 to 15 years of direct seedingcompared with nearby fields still farmed con-ventionally. In addition to detailed studies ofsoil quality and biological differences in the topsoil, access tubes used for neutron-probe moni-toring soil water storage and use have been in-serted to a depth of 7 feet at the sites selected

for the comparisons. The data generated fromthis research should reveal the magnitude ofany differences in water availability during thecrop year and the role of soil quality and struc-ture in determining whether water enters orruns off the soil surface.

Over time, soil pH will decrease with addi-tions of most forms of nitrogen fertilizer. How-ever, there are questions whether direct-seedsystems accelerate this process. Tillage redis-tributes soil throughout the surface layer, thusdiluting the acidity. Liming is the most commonmethod used to raise soil pH, but is still doneonly rarely in the dryland regions of the PNW.In a cooperative study, Bezdicek, Fauci, Roe,and Albrecht are looking at surface liming of along-term direct-seeded field and its effects onyields of cereals and cool-season pulse crops,nodulation of the pulse crops, and earthworms.They established plots with 0, 1, 2, and 4 tons oflime broadcasted per acre at this site. While thepH increased from lime application by approxi-mately 1 pH unit in the top 2 inches, 1 year later,there was still no pH change in the 2- to 4-inchzone. Liming increased the yield of barley in1999, and lentil yields were checked in 2000.Earthworm populations were also enhanced byliming. Additionally, this research will explorethe effects of placing lime in the seed row withstarter fertilizer since this may be an option toget the lime where it is needed with direct-seedsystems. Greg Schwab, WSU Extension special-ist for soil fertility and soil quality was fundedby STEEP starting in 2001 to further investigatesoil pH changes in long-term direct-seed sys-tems and to test the potential for applying limein the seed row at planting.

Juan Pablo Fuentes, a graduate student atWSU, assessed the water-use and nitrogen-useefficiency at two sites in the wheat–fallow andannual-cropping areas. His research shows thatwater-use efficiency—precipitation during thegrowing cycle divided by grain yield—is gener-ally higher with annual cropping than withwheat–fallow. Direct seeding captures andretains more precipitation.

This research is pertinent to all precipitationzones in the PNW.

26

Pest ManagementWeed Management

Weed management is possibly the singlegreatest challenge for growers making the switchfrom conventional to direct seeding, especiallyduring the initial 3- to 5-year transition period.Five university and USDA-ARS weed scientistshave projects on weed management in direct-seed systems in the PNW. These are Donn Thill,UI; Dan Ball, Oregon State University, Pendleton.Joe Yenish and Robert Gallagher, WSU, and FrankYoung, USDA-ARS, Pullman. Eric Zakarison,National Jointed Goatgrass Extension Coordi-nator, is also at WSU and works as part of thePNW weed management team. Dennis Tonksbrings his professional training as a weed scien-tist to the Wilke Farm. In addition, the Researchand Development program of McGregor Co.,Colfax, includes a major research effort on weedmanagement for direct-seeding led by SteveReinertsen and Bruce Palmer.

Thill and UI graduate student Curtis Rain-bolt are working to develop management strat-egies for controlling volunteer from herbicideresistant crops under direct seeding. Timelyand effective greenbridge management is keyto successful direct-seed systems, but willrequire a different strategy than the currentuse of Roundup if the volunteer is resistantto Roundup.

Thill is also working on Kentucky bluegrassseed field renovation with glyphosate (Roundup)and direct-seeded spring crops. Glyphosate is

applied in the spring to established, older blue-grass stands to suppress bluegrass growth. Fol-lowing this treatment, lentils, peas, oats, or springwheat are direct-seeded into the bluegrass sod.The annual crop, planted into the bluegrasssod, is then harvested. The bluegrass is thenallowed to regrow for seed production the fol-lowing year. This treatment allows the renovatedbluegrass stand to be productive for 2 more yearswithout having to establish a new stand. Theend result is reduced erosion, improved waterquality, and the potential for economic gain.

Thill’s work on bluegrass renovation is appli-cable to the high rainfall zones. His and Rain-bolt’s work on weed and volunteer managementin cropping systems with herbicide-resistantcrops is pertinent to all zones.

Dan Ball is working to quantify the impactsof crop production practices on grass weeds inwinter wheat production systems in the drylandregions of the PNW, with particular emphasison management of winter annual grass weedsin intensive dryland crop rotations using directseeding. This includes work on N fertilizer place-ment and timing and seeding practices to makewinter wheat more competitive with these weeds.He is also working on both alternative croprotations and new herbicides to improve weedmanagement and environmental suitability ofthe weed management for eastern Oregon dry-land crops.

As part of another project, Ball is develop-ing models to predict seed formation by downybrome, jointed goatgrass, and feral rye, based

Frank Young (left foreground), USDA-ARSweed scientist in Pullman, WA, describesweed management in his large-scale direct-seed field trial during a 1998 field day atthe Ralston Research Project south of Ritz-ville, WA. This 20-acre long-term direct-seedproject on integrated spring crop manage-ment was initiated in 1995 and is now intoPhase II. Photo by Roger Veseth.

27

on identification and characterization of theclimatic and phenological factors that controltiming of seed set in these species in drylandcropping systems. He is also working to charac-terize a recently identified downy brome withresistance to ALS-inhibitor herbicides, and todevelop management strategies to slow thespread of this resistance in winter-annual grassweeds in dryland wheat.

This work is pertinent to all precipitation zones.

As part of an interdisciplinary direct-seedproject on the Cunningham Agronomy Farmnear Pullman, Eric Gallandt, former WSU weedscientist now at the University of Maine, wasdeveloping weed management systems basedon key ecological processes that affect weeddynamics. These processes included dispersaland immigration patterns, seedbank persis-tence, and establishment or seedling survivalfactors.

As part of the project started by Gallandtand carried out by technician Stuart Higgins,weed seed populations were assessed from 369georeferenced (by GPS) locations on the Cun-ningham Agronomy Farm using soil collectedfrom the top approximate 4 inches of the soilsurface. The number and species of emergentweed germlings (germinated seeds) were thendetermined in greenhouse assays of these soilsamples. A cluster analysis of the data indicatesthat the weed species can be grouped on thebasis of the effects of their interactions withother weeds as well as soil and position on thelandscape. Henbit seeds are distributed inde-pendently of all other species, whereas ryegrassand mayweed seed tend to occur at sites wherelambsquarter seeds are not present. Wild oatseed are distributed throughout the study areaat the Cunningham Agronomy Farm, where someof the highest densities are found in the centralparts of the field, and in the lower and middleelevation positions on the landscape. When con-sidered alone, wild oat seeds are about as likelyon steep as on gentle slopes, whereas mayweedseeds appear more toward the lower positionson the landscape, having the highest densitieslocated near the field borders and on the toe-slopes. Within the landscape of the Cunningham

Agronomy Farm study area, the distribution ofwild oat seeds is independent of aspect, whereasmayweed seeds occur more often on north fac-ing than on south facing slopes.

Another part of Gallandt’s research investi-gated the decay of annual grass weed seedscaused by microbial action in the soil. Otherresearchers involved in this work include AnnKennedy and Pat Fuerst, a researcher in theWSU Department of Crop and Soil Sciences.The project is studying seedbank persistencein long-term no-till and tilled soils.

The researchers hypothesized that improve-ments in soil quality associated with no-till willenhance microbial deterioration of weed seeds.However, they obtained no evidence that thesoil surface environment of a direct-seededsite enhances microbially mediated seed decay.The contribution of mortality to disappearanceof weed seeds overall was low, averaging 17%and 33% in two separate experiments. Based ontreatment of the weed seeds with a fungicide,or treatment of the soil with a fumigant (bothas experimental treatments), the contributionof soil microorganisms to this mortality was low.In one experiment, mortality of fungicide-treatedseeds, and of seeds sown in fumigated soil, wasnot different from the mortality of control seeds(seeds in natural soil with no treatment). Inanother experiment, mortality of control seedswas 39%, whereas mortality of the fungicide-treated seeds was 32%.

The increased use of spring cropping indirect-seed systems helps control jointed goat-grass infestations that build up in response tointensive cropping to winter wheat. Graduatestudent Shane Early, together with Gallandt,Dave Huggins, Joe Yenish, and Frank Young,conducted a field study to determine whetherthe growing conditions created at or near thesoil surface by direct seeding have an additionalfavorable or unfavorable effect on jointed goat-grass infestations. Working on the Palouse Con-servation Field Station, they counted the num-ber of jointed goatgrass plants that establishedand survived to produce seed in response to a)a high-disturbance drill (Yielder) compared witha low-disturbance drill (Cross-slot), b) a highcrop residue (winter wheat) compared with lowcrop residue (pea), and c) adjacent sites consid-

28

ered long-term no-till (7 years) and short-termno-till (1 year), in all combinations. Goatgrassseed was planted uniformly over the plots in thefall to eliminate the initial seed bank as a vari-able. Across all treatments, 50% fewer jointedgoatgrass plants established in the long-termno-till site compared with the number in theshort-term no-till site. The shift in surface con-ditions in response to long-term no-till man-agement lowers the probability of establish-ment of jointed goatgrass with years of no-till.This may be due to the accumulation of duffat the soil surface with long-term no-till sincefewer jointed goatgrass plants appeared afterhigh-residue treatments than after the low-resi-due treatments in both long-term and short-term no-till. This effect may also relate to thedecrease in growing degree days available forgrowth of this weed where the amount of resi-due was high. Where the crop residue was low,and hence most favorable to establishment ofjointed goatgrass, e.g., treatments with pea resi-due, the low-disturbance drill resulted in thelowest number of jointed goatgrass plants.

Graduate student Mark Thorne, togetherwith Gallandt, Huggins, and Yenish may haveuncovered some of the reasons why pricklylettuce increases in response to direct seeding.This including in rotations that alternate wheatwith chemical fallow. Also working on thePalouse Conservation Field Station, they com-pared the establishment and survival of pricklylettuce plants in plots following a winter wheatcrop where the stubble was either left undis-turbed (no tillage) or moldboard plowed andthen harrowed to simulate conventional tillage.

Within each of the no-till and tilled treat-ments, they established four levels of surfaceresidue by removing or adding residue as fol-lows: 8756 lbs/A for heavy residue and no lightpenetration; 3202 lbs/A for low to moderateresidue and 33% light penetration; 1810 lbs/Afor low residue and 67% light penetration; andno residue for 100% light penetration. Approxi-mately 400 prickly lettuce seeds were sprinkledover each of four separate 1-yard-square areaswithin each of the no-till and tilled treatmentsin late October. Emerging and surviving plantswere counted through the end of Decemberand again in March of the following year.

Two patterns emerged from the prickly let-tuce plant counts. First, emergence of the pricklylettuce seedlings was best under low residuetreatments. Apparently, light favors establish-ment of this weed. This could explain why thisweed thrives in chemical fallow; over time,decomposition of the residue presumably allowsmore light to reach the soil surface. Possiblymore relevant to why direct-seeding favors thisweed—the survival of plants through Decemberand into March was distinctly better in the no-till plots compared with the tilled plots across alllevels of wheat residue. The suitability of soilmoisture and temperature for this weed overtime, described by a formula for “hydrothermaltime” based on laboratory measurements, wasconsistently better in no-till compared with theconventionally tilled plots. Plants in the conven-tionally tilled plots died over the winter months,apparently in response to the greater freezingand heaving of the tilled soil compared with thatof the no-till soil, including no-till where thewheat residue was physically removed.

Disease ManagementVirtually all PNW research on management

of cereal diseases favored by direct seedingfocuses on take-all, Rhizoctonia root rot, Pythiumroot rot, and Fusarium root and crown rot. Theregion is too dry for the leaf blights that plaguedirect seeding in humid climates such as Kan-sas and the southern U.S. Cereal rusts, alwaysa threat, regardless of the cropping system, havelong been targets of PNW researchers.

Cephalosporium stripe and Pseudocerco-sporella foot rot, two diseases unique to winterwheat, also are long-standing targets of PNWresearch; not known to be specifically favoredby direct seeding, they can be controlled byrotations that use spring crops, as happens whengrowers shift to direct seeding. Other than withthe cool-season pulses, the experience withbroadleaf crops being used or tested in direct-seed systems is too limited to even know whichdiseases are important or likely to becomeimportant with direct seeding.

Richard Smiley, OSU professor of plant path-ology, stationed at the Columbia Plateau Conser-vation Research Center, at Pendleton, together

29

with Jim Cook and retired USDA-ARS weed sci-entist Alex Ogg, provided the first major break-through for root disease management in direct-seed cropping systems with their demonstrationof the importance of timely and effective man-agement of volunteer and grass weeds beforeplanting. Every farmer today attempting to makedirect seeding work knows the value of earlyand effective greenbridge control.

This discovery applies to all precipitation zones.

Smiley is currently involved in a study of rootdiseases of annual spring cereal crops as partof the Ralston Project. He also has a project atPendleton where he screens wheat germplasmfor resistance to Fusarium root and crown rot,also known as dryland foot rot. While knownmainly as a problem for winter wheat sown earlyon fallow (the traditional winter wheat–fallowsystem), severe outbreaks of Fusarium root andcrown rot caused by Fusarium pseudogramin-earum have occurred on direct-seeded hard redspring wheats. Smiley is comparing the range ofgenetic resistance currently available in the PNWto the known spectrum of resistance identified

in breeding programs in Australia. The Austra-lian wheats cover the spectrum from full suscep-tibility to useful levels of resistance. If deemedpotentially useful, the Australian sources forresistance could be crossed into winter andspring wheats adapted to this area.

In Australia, resistance to Fusarium crownrot is linked to deep crown formation, which isa genetically determined trait. Initial tests at Pen-dleton show crown depths among PNW germ-plasm vary by as much as an inch. Whether or notthis variability in crown depth will be importantfor this or other diseases, or for crop productiv-ity in direct-seed systems, remains to be shown.Resistance to Fusarium crown rot also has beenlinked in the past to ability of the wheat to avoidor tolerate water stress. This trait could accountfor less disease in soft white than in hard redspring wheat, which is managed to promotestress and hence produce high protein.

This work will be applicable to all precipitationzones in the Pacific Northwest.

Smiley also is involved in a study of rootlesion nematode damage in cereals. High popu-lations of the nematode are occasionally identi-fied in some fields. Dan Ball directed a 6-yearSTEEP study near Pilot Rock, OR, that includedseven crop rotations. During the final year ofthat study, in 1999, all rotations were planteduniformly to wheat. Smiley found in the finalyear of that study that the nematode populationwas inversely proportional to wheat yield in theseven rotations. No root lesion nematodes werefound in soil from the cropping system studyon the Ron Jirava farm west of Ritzville, WA.

This research is pertinent to the 11- to 14-inchprecipitation zone.

Smiley’s projects are components of thePNW Cereal Root Disease Research Initiativefunded by Congress through a $1 million increaseto the USDA-ARS Root Disease and BiologicalControl Research unit under the research lead-ership of David Weller, Pullman. Other research-ers include USDA-ARS scientists Linda Thomas-how, Tim Paulitz, and Patricia Okubara, also withthe Root Disease and Biological Control Research

Spring barley seeded directly into stubble of spring barleywhere volunteer was sprayed with Roundup in November,1987 (top of photo), soon after greenup, compared with 3days before planting in March, 1988, when the volunteerwas dense and quite large (bottom of photo). This test, onthe Washington State University Dryland Research Unit atLind, WA, was part of a region-wide study by R. W. Smiley,Alex Ogg, and R. J. Cook that demonstrated the criticalimportance of timely and effective management of thegreenbridge, especially when direct-seeding spring cereals.Photo by R. J. Cook.

30

Unit, Cook with WSU, at Pullman, and RobertForster, Extension plant pathologist, at Kim-berly, ID.

Forster is just starting his part of the PNWCereal Root Disease Management Project. He willwork with barley and wheat breeders at Aber-deen, ID, to screen germplasm for resistance toroot diseases of cereals, with particular emphasison Rhizoctonia root rot. He also will work on cul-tural practices to help offset the effects of the rootdiseases on wheat and barley. An essential part ofthis work will be finding ways to understand thevariabilities found within the pathogens, espe-cially within Rhizoctonia.

This work will be pertinent to all precipitationzones.

Cook has just completed a series of fieldstudies that looked at the influence of row spac-ing and fertilizer placement on root diseaseseverity. Wheat or barley planted directly intocereal stubble as paired rows (7/17-inch spacing)results in less root disease and higher yieldsthan when wheat or barley rows are spaceduniformly at 12-inches apart. He attributes theadvantage of paired-row spacing to microenvi-ronmental changes associated with keeping thecrop canopy open longer into the growing sea-

son. This allows more drying and warming ofthe top few inches of soil, where root pathogensare most active. The benefits of paired-rowspacing disappeared where the surface residuewas burned before planting, and also whereplots were fumigated to experimentally reduceor eliminate root diseases. His work also showsthe effects of root disease damage, especially onspring cereals, can be greatly reduced by placingfertilizer directly beneath or no farther than aninch or two to one side of the seed at planting,so even diseased roots can access the nutrients.

Cook has just completed a 7-year study(1993–1999) of the benefits of commerciallyavailable seed treatments on winter and springwheat and spring barley, all direct-seeded intostanding stubble as replicated in on-farm testsat Bickleton, Dusty, Colfax, and Pullman, WA,and Troy, ID. Since no one product was testedat each site each year, he created a single largedata set for the treatments across all locationsand years. Hao Zhang and Dan Vakoch of WSUStatistical Services then analyzed the data setusing a test comparing the performance of eachtreatment with the corresponding untreatedseed within each replicate, location, and year.This provided as many as 35 observations forsome treatments and as few as 15 to 20 obser-vations for other treatments. Soil fumigationwas used as a standard to indicate the full yieldpotential at each site and year with root dis-eases reduced to the lowest possible level.

Dividend + Apron, Raxil-thiram, and Raxil XT(includes Apron) each produced yield increasesof 3 to 4 bu/A, which amounted to 4%–7% overthe untreated and nonfumigated checks (Table3). The responses were similar for spring andwinter wheat. Preliminary results indicate thatsimilar responses occur with spring barley, butthis analysis is not yet completed.

While the yields obtained in these tests withtreated seed were excellent and well within oreven superior to the proven average yields onthese farms during their years of conventionaltillage, the average response to soil fumigationused as an experimental check was about 13bu/A or 24%, and15 bu/A or 35% higher for win-ter and spring wheat, respectively, comparedwith yields obtained using no seed treatment andnatural soil. The yields in these systems, while

Richard Smiley, taking samples from a Rhizoctonia patchin a field of wheat in Morrow County, OR. SevereRhizoctonia root rot caused by Rhizoctonia solani AG8typically occurs as patches of stunted plants and affectsall cereal and broadleaf crops grown in the dryland PacificNorthwest. Photo by Julie Biddle.

31

respectable, are still only 75%–80% of the poten-tial obtained with complete root disease control.

Research by the USDA-ARS at WSU hasrevealed for the first time why take-all, the rootdisease caused by Gaeumannomyces graminisvar. tritici, disappears (declines) after two or moreoutbreaks of the disease and continuous crop-ping to wheat or barley. This phenomenon, firstdocumented scientifically in the 1960s in TheNetherlands, has gone unexplained for some40 years, other than the many lines of evidencethat it results from a natural biological control.Weller, Thomashow, and Jos Raiijmakers (fromThe Netherlands) have shown that the declinein take-all results from a buildup of a uniquepopulation of root-associated bacteria havingthe ability both to compete effectively in thisroot zone and to produce an antibiotic knownby the chemical name of 2,4-diacetylphloro-glucinol. The take-all pathogen is highly sensitiveto this antibiotic and declines as the populationof the antibiotic-producing bacteria increasesin response to long-term wheat monoculture.Take-all decline occurs in both direct-seedand conventional till-seed systems.

This team is now developing and testing aseed innoculant based on one of the more effec-tive strains of bacteria for use in the wheat indus-try. Although it is only effective against take-all

at the present time, ARS researchers are work-ing to genetically add activity against Pythiumto their best root-colonizing strains. While anactual product is still not available, many PNWfarmers have already taken advantage of take-alldecline by growing wheat or barley continuously.

Smiley documented a decline in Rhizoctoniaroot rot with continuous cereals on the Pendle-ton Station. A similar decline has since beenreported in Australia. Schillinger and Cook arenow monitoring the appearance, expansion, andpossible disappearance of Rhizoctonia patchesin the study on the Jirava farm west of Ritzvilleto determine the role, if any, of disease declinewith continuous cereals.

Nathan Ramsey, a graduate student withCook, conducted a survey for take-all in each ofthe crop years 1998, 1999, and 2000. He carriedout the 1998 survey as a Monsanto intern sta-tioned at Walla Walla, WA, and the 1999 and 2000surveys after becoming a WSU graduate student.Approximately 90 wheat fields representing high-risk (wheat after wheat) or medium risk (wheatevery other year) were sampled each year overan area stretching from northern Lincoln Countyin Washington to the Camas Prairie in Idaho.Using a standardized indexing system, take-allwas found at an index sufficient to affect yieldin 75% of the fields sampled in all 3 years. The

Spring Wheat Winter WheatTreatment %a> (No)b> bu/Ac> P valued> %a> (No)b> bu/Ac> P valued>

Fumigation 32 35 15.6 <0.01 24 39 13.5 <0.01

Dividend + Apron 8.1 20 3.9 0.03 3.1 32 2.8 0.10

Dividend XL -0.8 16 -0.4 0.91 4.0 26 2.3 0.10

Raxil-thiram 4.6 21 4.0 0.31 6.6 12 4.5 0.16

Raxil XT 5.7 16 2.5 0.32 9.5 3 3.3 0.13

a> Percentage change in grain yield from nontreated checkb> Number of paired comparisonsc> Actual change in grain yield compared to nontreated checkd> P value based on a t-test that compared the treated seed with the corresponding untreated check for each year,

location, and replicate.

Table 3.Yield changes (+/-) from a nontreated check in response to soil fumigation and seed treatments for spring andwinter wheats at five locations (Bickleton, Dusty, Colfax, Pullman, and Troy) over the years 1993–1996.

32

severity was the same for conventional anddirect seeding, but increased with irrigation.As much take-all occurred in the moderate-riskfields as in the high-risk fields, which includedwinter wheat after fallow.

Insect Pest ManagementSanford Eigenbrode and Nilsa Bosque-Perez,

entomologists in the UI Department of Plant,Soil, and Entomological Sciences, are interestedin how direct seeding, especially the transitionperiod, affects populations of soil-dwelling ben-eficial arthropods. Some of these are predatorsof insect pests. Others are potentially importantas weed seed predators. Very little is known ofthe ecological role of beneficial insects in soilsof the dryland PNW.

Eigenbrode and Bosque-Perez also haveworked on identification of biotypes of Hessianfly on a regional basis in the PNW. They haveconcentrated on sources of resistance to thispest, for which direct seeding provides a favor-able habitat.

Steve Clement, USDA-ARS entomologist withthe Plant Introduction Station at Pullman, alsois involved in the work on Hessian fly as part ofthe Ralston project. His work shows that Hessianfly has increased as a pest problem specificallyin the continuous spring wheat (dark northernspring) cropping system. After years 1 and 2,when economic damage was insignificant, hefound roughly 10% infested tillers in year 3, 20%in year 4, and 40% in year 5 (2000) of the study.In contrast, this pest caused significantly less

damage on the susceptible dark northern springwheat when alternated with Baronesse springbarley in a 2-year rotation. Baronesse is resis-tant to Hessian fly.

The new variety, Tara, from Kim Kidwell’sprogram carries the H3 gene for resistance toHessian fly. It had only about 1% infested tillersin year 5 of the study alongside susceptible vari-eties with 40% infestation. Continued breedingand screening spring cereals for resistance willbe critical to the control of this pest if growersare to successfully increase cropping intensitywith spring cereals and direct seeding.

Variety Developmentand Testing

The shift from conventional to direct-seed-ing will be enhanced with new varieties andpossibly even new crops specifically adapted todirect-seed systems. New management alwaysintroduces new stresses that must be overcome,if not through breeding, then through changesin use of pesticides, planting date, or rotation.

Cool-Season Pulse CropsFred Muehlbauer and Kevin McPhee, USDA-

ARS plant breeders working on peas, lentils, andchickpeas at Pullman, are developing varietiesof each of these crops more suited to direct-seed

Linda Thomashow and David Weller in a plot onthe Palouse Conservation Field Station, then in the15th year of direct seeding. During this time theplot had been planted to wheat 12 times, and thesoil had become naturally suppressive to the rootdisease take-all caused by Gaeumannomycesgraminis var. tritici. Weller and Thomashowdiscovered the natural disappearance of the take-all root disease of wheat in response to long-termmonoculture of wheat (“take-all decline”) resultsfrom an increase in populations of a certainunique group of soil bacteria with ability toproduce an antibiotic inhibitory to the wheattake-all pathogen. Photo by R. J. Cook in 1996.

33

systems. This includes the development of bothwinter peas and winter lentils with the agronomicand quality attributes equivalent to the morepopular spring types, to give growers more flex-ibility with their crop rotations. The more uprightsemi-leafless or afila pea from this program hasalready proven useful for direct seeding intostanding cereal stubble. Muehlbauer and WalterKaiser, retired USDA-ARS plant pathologist, alsodeveloped varieties of chickpeas with resistanceto Ascochyta blight, a disease highly favored byleaving chickpea residue on the soil surface.

BarleySteve Ullrich, WSU barley breeder, has evalu-

ated the adaptability of various barley varietiesfor use in direct-seed systems. His researchindicates the varieties that do best with directseeding at a given location are the same varietiesthat do best under conventional tillage and seed-ing. However, yields in his direct-seed experi-ments have been lower than with his conven-tional systems.

The lower yields in direct-seeded barley plotsmay be the result of soil pathogens favored bydirect-seeding. Rhizoctonia root rot is a one such

disease. Ullrich and Cook are collaborating on aproject to find useful resistance to this diseasein barley. In addition, Cook and Diter vonWett-stein, the Robert A. Nilan Distinguished Pro-fessor, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences atWSU, are collaborating to develop barley lineswith resistance to Rhizoctonia root rot using agene from a fungus, Trichoderma harzianum,a natural enemy of Rhizoctonia in the soil. Thegene codes for production of an enzyme thatdigests the cell walls of Rhizoctonia. This workis being done by graduate student YongchunWu and is still in the early stages.

Ullrich has compared some newer Nordicbarley varieties, as well as some varieties devel-oped in Alaska, with varieties commonly grownin the PNW. The Nordic varieties emerged morequickly and established better stands early in thecrop cycle. However, by harvesttime, the differ-ences between the Nordic and PNW varietiesdisappeared.

While the Nordic varieties are not adaptedto PNW growing conditions, they may have use-ful traits when transferred into barley varietiesadapted to PNW growing conditions, includingdirect-seed systems. Graduate student CarolynKruger, working with Ullrich and Cook, has beenevaluating the Nordic and Alaska lines for emer-gence and seedling vigor in a growth chambertest designed to increase Pythium pressure onthe emerging seedlings. The test allows side-by-side measurements of emergence, length of thefirst true leaf (Pythium infections result in fail-ure of this leaf to grow normally) and heightof the seedlings. Conditions include 1) naturalPythium-infested soil with fragments of freshwheat straw mixed in, and 2) the same soil pre-treated with moist heat (120°F for 30 min) toeliminate Pythium, with sterile wheat strawmixed in. The test is conducted at 50°F to 55°F.Soils are kept wet to provide a cool, wet trashyseedbed, favorable to Pythium, or the sameenvironment without Pythium.

While seeding of varieties such as Baronesseand Steptoe in the natural soil were only one-half to two-thirds the height of those in pasteur-ized soils, at least two Alaska lines producedessentially indistinguishable seedlings in bothsoils. This indicates these lines have useful resis-tance or tolerance to the Pythium complex

Fred Muehlbauer, plant breeder with the USDA-ARS GrainLegume, Genetics and Physiology Research Unit atPullman, at a tour of the Spillman Agronomy Farm wherehe develops varieties of peas, lentils, and chickpeas asrotation crops with cereals for the dryland PacificNorthwest. In addition to disease resistance and qualitytraits, Muehlbauer and his team are developing peavarieties for direct-seed systems, and winter peas and len-tils as a means to diversify area rotations. Photo by RogerVeseth.

34

responsible for low seedling vigor in cool, buttrashy seedbeds typify no-till in the spring.

At OSU, Corvallis, Pat Hays is developingboth winter and spring barley varieties for thePNW. Winter barley has considerable potentialfor direct-seed systems where survival duringperiods of severe cold is enhanced by standingstubble of the previous crop.

Spring WheatKim Kidwell, WSU spring wheat breeder,

is working to develop wheat lines that will do wellwhen used in direct-seed systems. Each newvariety she has released in recent years does wellwhen direct-seeded into cereal stubble. Theseinclude Scarlet and Tara, both hard red springwheats, and Zak, a soft white common wheat.She also has initiated a program to breed springwheats for resistance to Rhizoctonia root rot.Much of this work has been done by graduatestudent Jaya Smith, who screened a wide rangeof wheat and wheat relatives for resistance toR. solani AG8. While no useful resistance wasfound among wheat or its close relatives, 86%of the accessions of a more distant relative(Dasypyrum villosum) were resistant and 14%were moderately susceptible. This work is nowcontinuing with the goal of transferring theresistance into wheat.

Ed Souza, UI spring wheat breeder at Aber-deen, and Kidwell are screening their germplasmand advanced lines for resistance to Hessian fly,

one of the major pests of direct-seeded springwheat in the PNW.

Kidwell’s program, as well as Ullrich’s andthe WSU variety testing program, received amajor boost in 2000 with the availability of thefirst low-disturbance drill for direct-seeding smallplots of cereal grains, where fertilizer and seedare placed just as done by the more advancedno-till growers. In addition, a 2-acre site wasestablished on Spillman farm in 2000 for screen-ing spring wheat and barley lines for resistanceor tolerance to Rhizoctonia root rot under fieldconditions. This site is maintained by Cook andprovides side-by-side comparisons of each vari-ety at two levels of disease—severe and mild.

Mustard, Canola, and RapeseedJack Brown, UI plant breeder at Moscow,

breeds new varieties of mustard, Canola andrapeseed. He has found that although winterCanola has the potential for annual cropping,it has not worked well as a direct-seeded cropbecause survival to harvest is not as good asfor spring Canola. This may be due to poor seed-to-soil contact when planting into stubble inlate summer or early fall. Moisture conditionsthen are marginal at best. He is working todevelop winter Canola varieties more suitedto late September and early October seeding.

In contrast to winter Canola, spring Canolaand mustard are finding wide use as rotationcrops in direct-seed cropping systems, although

Kim Kidwell, Washington State Universityspring wheat breeder, describes somenew varieties of spring wheat during theWSU Spillman Agronomy Farm FieldDay in 1999. Dr. Kidwell has increasedthe emphasis of direct seeding trials inthe breeding program and addressesspecific pest challenges to direct-seededspring wheat, particularly Hessian flyresistance. Photo by Roger Veseth.

35

they have a lower yield potential compared withwinter Canola. Brown is developing mustardsthat produce edible oil with the same characteris-tics as Canola oil. He is also working on springmustard varieties that produce oil with the sameindustrial characteristics as rapeseed oil. Mus-tard plant types require few, if any, treatmentsfor insect pests, whereas the Canola can beseverely damaged by a flea beetle.

Winter WheatThe land grant universities in Idaho, Oregon,

and Washington, as well as the USDA-ARS, eachhave a long tradition of breeding winter wheatsfor the PNW, dating back to the beginning or nearthe beginning of the last century. Currently, thesewinter wheat breeding programs are headed byRobert Zemetra, UI, Moscow; James Peterson, OSU,Corvallis; Stephen Jones, WSU, Pullman; andKimberly Campbell, USDA-ARS, Pullman. Inaddition, several private-sector programs, includ-ing Western Plant Breeders, have developed orare developing winter (and spring) wheat variet-ies for the PNW. Like the spring wheat and barleybreeding programs in the region, to be successfulthe winter wheat breeding programs must inte-grate a wide range of quality, disease resistance,and agronomic traits into each variety for useacross a wide range of management systems.While none of these programs are developingvarieties specifically for direct-seed systems, the

advanced lines in these programs have beenincreasingly tested under direct-seed conditionsat several locations prior to their release. More-over, because varieties that yield best under con-ventional tillage tend also to yield best in direct-seed systems, virtually any new variety adaptedto this area and with resistance to the diseasesof this area should fit into direct-seed systems.

Perennial WheatStephen Jones, WSU winter wheat breeder,

and Tim Murray, WSU plant pathologist, areinvolved in the development of perennial wheats.The program currently has more than 1,000 peren-nial lines in the greenhouse and field. These arebeing screened for disease resistance and agro-nomic traits on a WSU research site and at severallocations across the state. The goal is to releaseperennial wheats as routine varieties along withthe traditional types of winter and spring wheats.

Jones believes that, at first, perennial wheatwill be most valuable for problem areas withinfields, especially on marginal soils and areas mostprone to erosion. He thinks perennial wheat willoffer a way to control input costs while main-

The first no-till drill available at Washington StateUniversity for use by plant breeders and the ExtensionVariety Testing Program. The drill is equipped with fiveCross-slot openers on 10-inch spacings. It plants rows asshort as 10 feet in length. Using this drill, researchers canconduct tests with very small amounts of seed, typical ofbreeding and advanced lines in the breeding program.The drill was designed by Keith Saxton and custom-builtby Palouse Welding. Funds or parts were provided by theWashington Barley Commission, the USA Pea and LentilCouncil, Curt and Erika Hennings, and the WSUAgricultural Research Center. Photo by John Burns.

Jack Brown, University of Idaho plant breeder at Moscow,ID, describes his direct-seeded trial of Canola and mustardat the Washington State University Dryland ResearchCenter near Lind, WA, during the 1998 Field Day. Photo byRoger Veseth.

36

taining productivity on fragile soils. He seesperennial wheat as the ultimate form of no-till.This crop can be planted every 3 to 5 years andproduces yields of up to 70% of traditional wheats.By planting perennial wheat on a wind-blownhilltop or in a washed-out draw, a grower will beable to save these areas from further erosion bywind or water and still harvest a profitable cropfrom marginal ground. Perennial wheat also mayserve as buffer strips and borders to help man-age weeds and other environmental problems.

Perennial wheat would be applicable to allclimatic zones.

On-Farm Variety TestsVariety testing in on-farm trials by Coopera-

tive Extension has been an integral part of thevariety development and approval process inthe PNW for decades. Typically, the trials areplanted in grower’s fields, depending as muchas possible on the grower’s management. Yieldsobtained and reported then represent whatgrowers can expect from these varieties in theirrainfall zone and with their management. Untilrecently, all variety testing was done in tilledfields for two reasons: this represented the“conventional” for the region, and enough seedwas available for 15 to 20 locations within a state.Equipment available for direct-seeded plots,although patterned after commercial drills, hasstill required larger amounts of seed than breed-ers can provide of their advanced lines for plant-ing. This situation is now changing rapidly, bothbecause many of the growers cooperating inthese trials have switched to direct seeding, andbecause the equipment needed to fertilize andplant small amounts of seed directly into undis-turbed soil as a single pass is now available.

John Burns and Pat Reisenauer, with WSUCooperative Extension at Pullman, are respon-sible for variety testing in Washington State,including spring and winter wheat and barleyand the cool-season pulse crops. Six of the 18variety tests with spring cereals were direct-seeded in 2001 where none had been planted upto 1999. One winter wheat variety test was direct-seeded in the fall of 2000. Plans are to increasethe proportion of trials that are direct-seeded.

Roland Schirman has been conducting vari-ety tests in Columbia County for the past severalyears using locally available equipment andlimiting the tests to commercially availablevarieties so seed supply is not an issue.

Stephen Guy, UI Extension crop manage-ment specialist, has been comparing the perfor-mance of 15 to 16 varieties each of spring wheatand spring barley on the Kambitsch Farm nearGenesee in side-by-side tests with no-till andconventional till. This work is part of the largercropping systems project on the farm describedearlier.

Don Wysocki, OSU Extension soil scientistat the Columbia Basin Agricultural ResearchCenter at Pendleton, is involved in three sepa-rate research projects related to varietal selec-tion and management for direct-seed systems.The first of these, done in cooperation withJack Brown, UI, involves the evaluation of late-planted varieties of winter Canola. The secondproject evaluates fertility management strategiesfor sulfur and phosphorus. The third projectinvestigates quality management strategies forwinter durum.

Part of Jim Cook’s program for the past 5years has included tests with up to 15 varietiesand advanced lines of spring wheats in coop-eration with Kim Kidwell; equal numbers of

Aaron Esser, WSU on-farm testing coordinator at Ritzville,WA, describes a trial of direct-seeded lentils at the WSUWilke Research Farm near Davenport, WA, during the 1999Field Day. Photo by Roger Veseth.

37

winter wheats in cooperation with Steve Jonesand Kim Campbell, USDA-ARS club wheatbreeder; and as many as 30 to 35 varieties andadvanced lines of spring barley in cooperationwith Steve Ullrich. Each of these tests has beendirect-seeded into standing cereal stubble incommercial fields at two or three locations ineastern Washington. All plots are replicated withfertilizer placed directly below the seed as one-pass. These tests are unique in that each site hasalready been in no-till for several years andis thought to have undergone the transition.In general, the highest yielding varieties underconventional seeding are also the highest yield-ing varieties with direct seeding.

Alternate CropsChad Shelton, while division agronomist

for Western Farm Services, Spokane, investi-gated potential alternative crops for the drylandwheat-producing area at 20 sites spread acrossIdaho, Oregon, and Washington. Of these 20 sites,involving more than 25 crops, 50% were direct-seeded. The objective of this work was to helpgrowers evaluate both agronomic variabilityand viability, as well as the economic impact ofalternate crops in a rotation, to provide growers

additional facts to help them make informeddecisions when considering alternate crops.The WSU Wilke Farm near Davenport served asone of the direct-seeded sites for this program,along with the Extension trials, with alternatecrops on this farm.

This work relates to all precipitation zones.

Shawn O’Connell, crop consultant forColumbia Grain International., Inc., at Lewis-ton ID, has investigated the potential of Linola asan alternate crop for the PNW. Linola is a trade-mark name that identifies a new high qualityoilseed developed in Australia and Canada. Itis basically flax that produces a high-qualityedible oil.

The single most important factor to a suc-cessful field of Linola (or flax) is stand establish-ment. The three keys to stand establishment aregood seed-to-soil contact, consistent seedingdepth, ideally 1/2 inch, and a firm seedbed,which results in both improved seed-to-soilcontact and a more uniform seeding depth.

Because of the need for a firm seedbed,direct seeding has proven a valuable tool for suc-cessful production of Linola. However, intensemanagement and monitoring is still requiredwhen direct-seeding Linola or flax.

Flax straw is used to make fine paper prod-ucts, because of the high content of quality fiberin the straw. However, this property makes strawmanagement very important for direct seedinginto flax or Linola stubble. The best practice hasbeen to seed directly into standing stubble sinceany attempt at working the stubble can resultin tangled bunches likely to plug the drill. RonJirava near Ritzville and Tom Swaintz near Rear-don are each experimenting with commercialplantings of flax direct-seeded on their farms.Bronate provides reasonable broadleaf weedcontrol in this crop.

William Payne, formerly OSU agronomistat the Columbia Basin Agricultural ResearchCenter at Pendleton (now at Texas A & M Uni-versity), evaluated alternate crops for their suit-ability for annual cropping with winter wheat.He assessed a wide range of factors for eachspecies, including market viability and wateruse by the crop. Furthermore, he obtained the

Test plots of varieties and advanced lines of winter andspring wheat and spring barley direct-seeded on the SteveMatsen farm. The tests are part of a larger ongoing coop-erative project involving Steve Jones, Kim Kidwell, KimCampbell, Steve Ullrich, R. J. Cook, and Ron Sloot to gainexperience with different varieties direct seeded at differentlocations in eastern Washington. Photo by R. J. Cook, 1998.

38

active collaboration of a leading plant breederfor each species under consideration. The cropspecies that he evaluated included white andnarrow-leafed lupins, corn, sorghum, pearl mil-let, teff, pigeon peas, and soybeans.

In general, for crops other than narrow-leafed lupins, yields ranged from disappointingto disastrous. At least in some cases, yields prob-ably were hampered more by unfamiliarity withthe crop under these growing conditions thanby poor suitability of the crop.

Of the crops tested, only sorghum and corncame close to achieving agronomically viableyields. For these crops, water-use efficiency datafrom the literature were used to estimate howclose yields in the experimental plots were to thegenetic potential of the crop, and how geneticsand agronomy might contribute to closing thegaps for PNW environments. For example, aglobally accepted value for water-use efficiencyof grain sorghum is 340 lbs per acre-inch ofwater used. Thus, for 16 inches of water used,the yield should be 5,440 lbs/acre. The fact thata much lower yield was produced at Pendletondemonstrates that the wrong combination ofgenotype and agronomic package (e.g., seedingrate and date, fertilizer amount and application,tillage system) were used for these growing con-ditions. Lack of heat units was another contrib-uting factor to the low yields. The OSU scientistsconducted research under different tillage sys-tems and planting dates with 50 sorghum vari-eties, including many from Nebraska and Texasselected for cold as well as drought tolerance.However, until the accepted standard for water-use efficiency can be approached, it is doubtfulthat sorghum will be commercially viable.

Pigeon pea produced uncharacteristicallysmall seeds and poor ground cover, and the vari-ety grown exhibited an apparent photoperiodresponse suggesting it was unsuited to PNWconditions. Nonetheless, the crop continued toflower and its leaves remained turgid through-out the hot season, providing hope for geneticimprovement, at least for the Pendleton area.

Teff and pearl millet did particularly poorlyat both Pendleton and Moro. Given the coolnights and poorly drained soils (relative to soilsin Africa and India where these crops are nor-mally grown), this did seem surprising, at least

in the case of pearl millet. For teff, much of theproblem may have been due to unfamiliaritywith the crop. The extremely small seeds madesowing and threshing very difficult.

Yields were disastrously low for white lupinsat both Pendleton and Moro, OR. Although plantsflowered regularly, pod set was very poor, perhapsdue to hot temperatures. However, the narrow-leafed lupin yields were more encouraging.

Outreach andCommunication

Virtually every extension program on crop,soil, and weed management, and conservationtillage at the three PNW land grant universitiesincludes a significant effort on direct-seed sys-tems. This includes the extension programs ofStephen Guy, UI Extension crop managementspecialist at Moscow, Russ Karow, OSU Exten-sion agronomist at Corvallis, OR, Bill Schill-inger, WSU dryland research agronomist atLind, Joe Yenish, WSU Extension weed scientist,Greg Schwab, WSU Extension soil scientist, andJohn Burns, WSU Extension agronomist, all atPullman. In addition, Roger Veseth, Extensionconservation tillage specialist for both the UIand WSU, and Don Wysocki, OSU soil scientistat Pendleton, each have full-time extensionprograms on conservation farming systemsthat include major emphases on direct-seedsystems.

Veseth and Wysocki lead a team of PNWExtension specialists for the PNW STEEPresearch. Veseth is also leading the growertechnology access efforts of the ColumbiaPlateau Wind Erosion/Air Quality Project. Inaddition to their leadership roles in numerouson-farm and experiment station tours andfield days, the team produces The Pacific North-west Conservation Tillage Handbook Seriesthrough UI, OSU, and WSU Extension, whichincludes more than 165 publications. This serieshas become the single-most comprehensivesource of published information on direct-seedtechnology and practices for the PNW.

39

New handbook series titles are distributedthrough the PNW Conservation Tillage UpdateNewsletter, coordinated by Veseth and Wysockiin conjunction with the team of PNW Extensionspecialists above. The entire handbook, UpdateNewsletters, and a wealth of other technologyresources and communications links are avail-able on the Web <http://pnwsteep.wsu.edu>developed and maintained by Veseth in coop-eration with the PNW Extension specialiststeam. One of the most significant developmentsin “outreach and communication” has been theinitiation of an annual Northwest Direct SeedCropping Systems Conference in January startingin 1998. Veseth chaired the organizing commit-tees for the 1998 (Pasco), 1999 (Spokane) and 2001(Spokane) conferences and Wysocki chairedthe organizing committee for the 2000 confer-ence (Pendleton). The 2002 conference, likethe 2001 conference, will be teamed up withthe Spokane Ag Expo and PNW Farm Forum,under Veseth’s leadership.

At least two e-mail sites have been estab-lished to facilitate communication between andamong PNW scientists, growers, and supportcompanies and agencies. One is the “PNW DirectSeed List Server,” <pnw_directseed@lyris.cahe.wsu.edu> (also accessible on the PNW STEEP

Web site above), established and coordinatedby Veseth. The other is <pnwcereals@mail.orst.edu>, established and coordinated by Karow.

Growers also have established networks forexchange of information and experiences withdirect-seed cropping systems. One such group,which selected the name “Clear Water DirectSeeders,” involves a monthly breakfast meetingof northern Idaho and southeastern Washing-ton farmers. Coordination for this group is pro-vided by Dave Barton, Latah County Coopera-tive Extension agent. These meetings are heldduring the winter months at a restaurant inLewiston.

Growers trying to make direct seeding workon their farms have a great deal to offer othergrowers and researchers on understanding andovercoming the technical limits to direct seed-ing. To capture and share these experiences, 16PNW Direct Seed Case Studies were publishedas PNW Extension bulletins. This project, com-pleted in 2001, focused on 16 different familyfarm operations in Idaho, Oregon, and Wash-ington. Funding was provided by grants fromSARE and STEEP. These publications are avail-able at any of the UI, OSU, or WSU ExtensionBulletins offices and on the Web site <http://pnwsteep.wsu.edu> and <http:/pubs.wsu.edu>

Russ Zenner (right),direct-seed grower nearGenesee, ID (and firstpresident of the newPacific Northwest Direct-Seed Association), pro-vides an overview ofhis direct-seed systemsduring a grower tour ofhis farm and a direct-seed pea variety trialconducted by StephenGuy, UI Extension cropmanagement specialistat Moscow (second fromright). Photo by RogerVeseth.

40

Steering Committeeresponsible for this report:

R. James Cook, ChairEndowed Chair in Wheat ResearchWashington State UniversityPullman, WA 99164-6430509-335-3722 (voice)509-335-7674 (fax)rjcook@wsu.edu

Ed AdamsWashington Cooperative Extension,

Agriculture and Natural ResourcesProgram Director

WSU SpokaneSpokane, WA 99202

Stephen GuyExtension Cropping Systems Specialist,Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological

SciencesUniversity of IdahoMoscow, ID 83844-2339

Dave HugginsSoil ScientistUSDA-ARS, Washington State UniversityPullman, WA 99164

Ann KennedySoil MicrobiologistUSDA-ARS, Washington State UniversityPullman, WA 99164

Dave RuarkGrower representing barley commodityPomeroy, WA 99347

Richard SmileyPlant PathologistColumbia Basin Agricultural Research CenterOregon State UniversityPendleton, OR 97801-0370

Donn ThillProfessor of Weed Science,Department of Plant, Soil, and Entomological

SciencesUniversity of IdahoMoscow, ID 83844-2339

Roger VesethUI and WSU Extension Conservation Tillage

Specialist, Department of Plant, Soil, andEntomological Sciences

University of IdahoMoscow, ID 83844-2339

Dale WilkinsAgricultural Engineer and Research LeaderUSDA-ARSColumbia Basin Agricultural Research CenterOregon State UniversityPendleton, OR 97801-0370

Don WysockiExtension Soil ScientistColumbia Basin Agricultural Research CenterOregon State UniversityPendleton, OR 97801-0370

Eric ZakarisonExtension CoordinatorNational Jointed Goatgrass Research

ProgramWashington State UniversityPullman, WA 99164-6420

Russ ZennerGrower and PresidentPacific Northwest Direct Seed AssociationRoute 1, Box 31Genesee, ID 83832

41

42

References1 O.M. Camara, D.L. Young, and H.R. Hinman.

1999. Economic Case Studies of EasternWashington No-Till Farmers Growing Wheatand Barley in the 8- to 13-inch PrecipitationZone. Department of Agricultural Econom-ics, WSU Cooperative Extension EB1885.http://farm.mngt.wsu.edu/PDFDocuments/EB1865.pdf

2 O.M. Camara, D.L. Young, and H.R. Hinman.1999. Economic Case Studies of EasternWashington and Northern Idaho No-TillFarmers Growing Wheat, Barley, Lentils,and Peas in the 19- to 22-inch PrecipitationZone. Department of Agricultural Econom-ics, WSU Cooperative Extension EB1886.http://farm.mngt.wsu.edu/PDFDocuments/EB1886.pdf

Pacific Northwest Extension publications are jointly produced by the three Pacific Northweststates—Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. Similar crops, climate, and topography create a natu-ral geographic unit that crosses state lines. Since 1949, the PNW program has published morethan 500 titles. Joint writing, editing, and production prevent duplication of effort, broadenthe availability of faculty specialists, and substantially reduce costs for the participating states.

Pacific Northwest Extension Publications contain material written and produced for publicdistribution. You may reprint written material, provided you do not use it to endorse a com-mercial product. Please reference by title and credit Pacific Northwest Extension Publications.Copyright 1999 Washington State University.

A list of WSU publications is available online <http://pubs.wsu.edu> or order through theBulletin office 1-800-723-1763.

Issued by Washington State University Cooperative Extension, Oregon State University Exten-sion Service, University of Idaho Cooperative Extension System, and the U. S. Department ofAgriculture in furtherance of the Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914. Cooperative Extension pro-grams and policies comply with federal and state laws and regulations on nondiscriminationregarding race, sex, religion, age, color, creed, national or ethnic origin; physical, mental, orsensory disability; marital status, sexual orientation, and status as a Vietnam-era or disabledveteran. Evidence of noncompliance may be reported through your local Cooperative Exten-sion office. Trade names have been used to simplify information; no endorsement is intended.Published December 2001. Free. PNW553.