In Fairfield County during the spring of 1993, the county Extension agent (J. Skeeles) cooperating with a local grower (D. Brandt) with support of a grant from the Piketon Center set up an on-farm experiment to demonstrate the efficacy of two row cleaner systems (Dawn and Yetter) plus a number of coulters on corn planted no-till into three habitats, namely corn stubble, soybean stubble, and hairy vetch. Although the experiment was not conducted in a randomized replicated manner, the repeated field length employment of the mechanical devices did enable replicated comparison of the implements on parallel rows. Subsequent evaluation of the impact of the row cleaner devices on stand loss due to slug injury was conducted by OSU/IPM Program personnel assisted by the Fairfield County project technician (D. Sweeny).
The corn was planted May 11th with a John Deer Maximerge no-till six row planter. A Dawn row cleaner employed on 1st row and Yetter row cleaners were employed on the 5th and 6th rows. No row cleaners were used on the 3rd and 4th rows. As a result, the final row pattern repeated across a portion of each field included two rows cleaned by Dawn row cleaners, two rows without row cleaning, and four rows cleaned by Yetter row cleaners. To evaluate the effect of stand establishment, row #1 cleaned by the Dawn units was compared to the parallel row #2 without cleaners, and row #4 cleaned by the Yetter unit was compared to the parallel row #3 without cleaners. In the comparisons, stand counts were taken on June 7 and June 10 on 50 meter row samples from five sets of parallel rows. Observations were also taken on 10 randomly selected plants per row sampled in the corn stubble and soybean stubble sites to determine the level of stand exhibiting foliar slug injury. Since planter performance per rows could possibly be a variable, stand counts were taken on four sets of rows of corn planted in adjacent soybean stubble (which exhibited minimal slug injury) without cleaners to determine the potential baseline of stand establishment and potential differences among the four planter units.
Parallel results of stand counts were subjected to a matched pair T-test to determine significant differences between Treatments. Data on Dawn and Yetter units was pooled and subjected to regression analysis to evaluate the relationship between stand counts of row samples cleaned and not cleaned in relation to different levels of stand loss.
In the field where corn was planted in corn stubble, the use of row cleaners reduced estimated stand loss from 18.2% to 7.5% when compared to the baseline of corn stand achieved in corn planted into an adjacent portion of the field planted into soybean stubble (see Table 2.1.1). A similar reduction of stand loss was observed in the corn planted into hairy vetch (see Table 2.1.2). Although the data suggests that the Dawn cleaners may have been more effective than the Yetter cleaners, analysis of the data indicated that stand loss reduction increased as stand loss increased in the parallel rows not cleaned, and the difference in loss protection observed between the two types of row cleaners was due to the fact that the Dawn plots had heavier initial slug activity.
In summary, this evaluation of row cleaners in fields having significant slug activity demonstrated that row cleaners may reduce stand losses in no-till corn due to slug feeding activity.
Table 1: Stand counts of corn planted into corn stubble without tillage with and without two types of row cleaners.
| Plants per 50 | Plants per Acre | % Plants Slug | % Reduction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | Meters of Row | Equivalent | Inj. | from Baseline |
| Dawn Cleaner Used | 214.6 a | 22,799 | 74 | 9.4 |
| Parallel Rows Not Cleaned | 179.4 b | 19,059 | 88 | 24.3 |
| Yetter Cleaner Used | 223.6 a | 23,755 | 76 | 5.6 |
| Parallel Rows Not Cleaned | 208.0 a | 22,098 | 90 | 12.2 |
| Cleaner Used (Dawn & Yetter) | 219.1 a | 23,277 | 75 | 7.5 |
| Parallel rows Not Cleaned | 193.7 b | 20,579 | 89 | 18.2 |
Difference in alpha character following means of paired data sets represents significant statistical difference at p = 0.05.
Table 2: Stand counts of corn planted into hairy vetch without tillage with and without two types of row cleaners.
| Treatment | Plants per 50 Meters of Row | Plants per Acre Equivalent |
|---|---|---|
| Dawn Cleaner Used | 209.0 a | 22,204 |
| Parallel Rows Not Cleaned | 189.8 b | 20,159 |
| Yetter Cleaner Used | 210.8 a | 22,390 |
| Parallel Rows Not Cleaned | 197.5 b | 20,982 |
| Cleaner Used (Dawn & Yetter) | 209.9 a | 22,297 |
| Parallel Rows Not Cleaned | 193.6 b | 20,570 |
Return to Ohio IPM Home Page.