Extension

Grain Sorghum Harvest Aids

Josh Bushong, Area Extension Agronomist 

 

Occasionally there can be a need to use a harvest aid on grain sorghum. The crop usually is left to terminate and senesce naturally from either the plant maturing out or by a killing freeze. The main purpose of using a harvest aid would be to improve harvest timing. Delayed harvest after the grain becomes mature can potentially reduce grain yields. An exposed crop can experience losses due to pest pressures like bird damage, as well as environmental losses like severe storms with strong winds or hail.

Many factors can delay harvest. Some newer genetics may exhibit characteristics like “stay green” where the plants stay green longer. At harvest, the higher moisture content of the plant can potentially spike grain moisture if combines are not set correctly. If fields have excessive weed infestations, the same concerns of spiking grain moisture can delay harvest. If stands are on the thin side and growing conditions improve later in the season, the addition of late tillers can become problematic. Unevenness in maturity of a field can also delay harvest.

Preparing the crop for harvest is achieved when harvest aids are applied correctly. Harvest aids in grain sorghum fall into two groups, herbicides and desiccants. The products available have very little influence on the grain itself but work more in the vegetative biomass of the plant. Therefore, these products have very little to no direct impact on grain moisture when applied according to the labels. Glyphosate (ie Roundup), carfentrazone (ie Aim), and sodium chloride (ie Defol 5) are currently the only three products labeled for use in grain sorghum.

Sodium chloride is a true desiccant and may not kill the crop but can rapidly dry-down any plant material that it contacts. If not harvested in a timely fashion, plant lodging or regrowth can occur. Glyphosate and carfentrazone are herbicides that, when used as directed, can terminate the crop or weeds. Glyphosate is more widely used but generally takes longer to shut down the plants. Glyphosate also has a longer pre-harvest interval at seven days, while carfentrazone is only three days. Carfentrazone is a good option to assist with broadleaf weed desiccation and is a great option to tankmix with glyphosate if there is concern of herbicide resistance.

If a producer chooses to have a harvest aid applied, applying the product correctly will greatly affect any potential economic gains. The first component of applying these products correctly involves application timing. A harvest aid should not be applied any earlier than physiological maturity, often referred to as black layer. Appling too early can reduce grain fill which will directly reduce grain yields.

To check for black layer, inspect the base of seeds on multiple plants, tillers of each plant, and locations within each panicle. Delayed plant emergence and late tiller additions will likely be farther behind. Typically, panicles mature from the top down. Maturity can widely range, so understanding how far along the majority of the crop is will improve proper application timing. Applying too late will not reduce grain yield, but delaying harvest due to labeled pre-harvest timing intervals may lead to losses.

 

In addition to proper application timing, adequate spray coverage is also an important part in a successful harvest aid application. Apply these products in a minimum of 10 gallons of water per acre when ground applied or a minimum of 5 gallons of water per acre when aerially applied. Under certain conditions, like thick canopy of sorghum or weeds, increasing carrier volume up to 15 or 20 gallons of water per acre can increase efficacy of these products.

Harvest aids usually have no impact on grain yield potential in sorghum. Since these applications are made after physiological maturity, total yield potential has been set and crop dry-down is the only aspect remaining. Just like other crop protection products, harvest aids can only protect yield potential. A two-year study recently done by Oklahoma State University found yields for sorghum not treated with harvest aids resulted in an average reduction of around 7 bushels per acre in north-central Oklahoma and just over 5 bushels per acre in the panhandle.

Grazing sorghum stover after grain is harvested is a great way to get more value out of the crop. Refer to product labels for grazing restrictions. Defol 5 doesn’t provide any specific grazing restrictions for sorghum but lists 14 days for similar crops such as corn. When Aim is applied alone, grazing and hay operations may proceed with no restrictions. Roundup PowerMax states there should be at least 7 days before feeding of vegetation with a Post-harvest application but doesn’t mention any grazing restrictions when applied pre-harvest.

While it might be tempting to graze the stover soon after grain harvest, waiting might be a safer option. Waiting 5-7 days after a killing freeze greatly reduces the risk of prussic acid issues. New regrowth can also be a higher risk for nitrate toxicity. As far as a ‘rule-of-thumb’ for stocking rates, it is roughly estimated by assuming 8-12 pounds of palatable forage per bushel of grain produced. So for example, a grain yield of 80 bushels per acre might produce 640-960 pounds of forage.

More information can be found in the OSU factsheets “PSS-2183, Using Harvest Aids in Grain Sorghum Production” or “PSS-2607, The Potential of Grazing Grain Sorghum Residue Following Harvest” and by visiting with your local OSU Extension office.

---

Trace Minerals Can Help Improve Hoof Health

Dana Zook, NW OK Area Livestock Specialist

 

Hoof health has always been important in cattle production. When foot ailments occur, production suffers. Hoof problems are puzzling, and when foot rot or other foot issues occur, producers wonder about the cause. Are they caused by weather, genetics or nutrition? While each of these factors contribute to the issue, mineral nutrition specifically plays a BIG role in hoof health. In this column, I would like to provide a better understanding of how trace minerals play a role in hoof health.

Before we dive into minerals, let’s break down hoof development and its structure. Hoof structure, or hoof horn, is created as a protective layer for the interior parts of the foot. Keratin proteins provide the structure of the hoof horn and its protective function against the environment. Keratinization is the process by which the hoof horn is produced from skin sells near the foot.

The integrity or strength of the hoof structure depends on the keratinization process. Without proper nutrients for keratinization, hoof material is produced that is inferior quality and is susceptible to damage from the environment. Excessive moisture can affect the keratinization process, but on its own, it can lead to injury that allows bacteria to breach the protective keratin layer. Unfortunately, we have little control over the weather. So, what can we do?

 

First of all, prevent cattle from standing in areas that allow the foot to remain damp (ponds, mud holes, etc.). I know this is easier said than done but it’s a start. In damp conditions, try not to move cattle over sharp rocks or vegetation that could damage a damp, soft hoof. Finally, the proper supply of trace minerals can provide the tools needed to develop a strong hoof structure and provide protection in damp conditions. Here are a few trace minerals that are important in this process.

• Zinc. Zinc has a very important role in the formation of structural proteins during keratinization. Zinc works with copper to facilitate the use of calcium in keratinization and maintain healthy hoof tissue. Not all forms of zinc are created equal. For mature cows, look for mineral mixes with approximately 3,000 ppm zinc. The best zinc sources will be zinc sulfates, zinc hydroxy chloride, and zinc amino acid complexes (Ex & gt; zinc methionine).
• Copper. As mentioned previously, copper works with zinc to maintain healthy hoof horn tissue. Insufficient copper may lead to heel cracks and foot rot due to increased fragility of the cells making up the horn tissue. Copper is less available to animals when sulfur, iron and molybdenum are in excess. Several areas in Oklahoma have the issue of high sulfur (S) in water and iron (Fe) forage content is well above the maintenance requirements of a cow. For this reason, an “available” form of copper, such as copper carbonate, copper sulfate and organic forms of copper, should be considered in mineral supplements. For mature cows, find a mineral with copper levels around 1,000 ppm.
• Manganese. Manganese plays an indirect yet important role in keratinization, but it also is essential for the development of normal cartilage and bone. Animals deficient in manganese will exhibit skeletal abnormalities, crooked legs and shortening of tendons that are exhibited as knuckling over of feet. For mature cows, find a mineral with manganese levels around 2,500 ppm.
• Look for manganese sulfate or manganese oxide on mineral tags with the sulfate form being more available for the animal.

Organic forms of minerals I have mentioned are always more available, but they come with a high price. These forms may be labeled as “organic,” “proteinate,” “polysaccharide complex” or “chelate” on a mineral tag. If cost is a limiting factor, target high quality trace mineral supplementation prior to and following calving.

How much mineral should they eat? Keeping track of mineral consumption is important. Simply put, record the date each time a new bag of mineral is fed. When you have time, calculate the consumption rate based on the number of animals you are feeding.

Labeled consumption rates will vary so always read the label.

---

“The One Big Beautiful Bill” What’s New for Producers

Alberto Amador, Area Ag Economics Specialist | W. Area Ag Economics Specialist

 

After a long negotiation period, the congress passed the famous “One Big Beautiful Bill” budget reconciliation package last week. The Senate voted approved it by a narrow 51-50 vote, and the House followed with a 218-214 margin. On July 4, the President signed it into a law. Although this reconciliation legislation extends well beyond agriculture, it includes multiple aspects that are expected to reshape agricultural assistance and production. On this occasion, I’ll summarize key changes to programs affecting agriculture and rural communities.

According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the new Farm Bill, over the fiscal period 2025-2031, will decrease $120.25 billion in outlays due to cuts in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program ($185.9 billion) and $7.7 billion in combined reduction from conservations programs, interaction effects and sequestration. However, these cuts are partially offset by increased spending in assistance and payments for farmers, Price Loss Coverage payments, are the most significant growth ($50.6 billion), the Agriculture Risk Coverage payments ($3.6 billion), while the projection shows an increase as well for costs of Crop Insurance ($6.7 billion), trade promotion ($2.2 billion) among others.

The new law allows the USDA to expand 30 million additional base acres within the ARC/PLC framework, increasing the total from 274 million acres to approximately 304 million acres. This expansion is limited to eligible farms that produced covered commodities between 2019 to 2023. Producers on qualifying farms may choose whether to accept the new base acreage allocation and must notify the USDA within 90 days of receiving notice. The additional changes per program are the following:

 

Agriculture Risk Coverage

• The guaranteed revenue under the county level (ARC-CO) increases from 86% to 90%.
• The maximum payment rate rises from 10% to 12% of benchmark revenue.

 

Price Loss Coverage

The primary change for the LPC is the increase in the statutory reference price for covered commodities. The Effective Reference Price (ERP) is now capped at 113% of the new statutory reference prices. Starting with the 2032 crop year, the statutory reference price will increase by 0.5% annually. In addition, the maximum payment limit increases from $125,000 to $155,000. After 2025 crop year, this limit may be adjusted for inflation. The tale shows the old and current reference prices.

These updates create safety conditions for beneficiaries of both programs, higher reference prices (PLC) and higher guarantee benchmarks (ARC) increase the likelihood and potential size of payments when the market prices fall. For the crop year 2025 only, producers will receive the higher of ARC or PLC payments. For the following years, producers must choose between the two programs based on their conditions

---

Access Farm Management Resources Whenever You Need Them

The e-Farm Management page has resources for producers seeking to strengthen their farm financial management skills. This site includes videos, publications, and software tools for farmers and ranchers. Producers will find resources on many financial, production, marketing, and risk management topics.

In the Crop Insurance Basics video, viewers learn questions to ask to help identify their crop insurance needs. The video explains the steps to determine crop insurance coverage requirements for a producer’s individual situation. Lastly, the video shows different types of crop insurance coverages and options.

 

To view this video and find additional information on crop insurance, visit the Farm Management and Finance website.