This item was digitized as part of the Million Books Project led by Carnegie Mellon University and supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF). Cornell University coordinated the participation of land-grant and agricultural libraries in providing historical agricultural information for the digitization project; the University of Arizona Libraries, the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, and the Office of Arid Lands Studies collaborated in the selection and provision of material for the digitization project.

This item was digitized as part of the Million Books Project led by Carnegie Mellon University and supported by grants from the National Science Foundation (NSF). Cornell University coordinated the participation of land-grant and agricultural libraries in providing historical agricultural information for the digitization project; the University of Arizona Libraries, the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, and the Office of Arid Lands Studies collaborated in the selection and provision of material for the digitization project.

Row patterns affected irrigated corn productivity when grown in the Mid-South region of the United States. Narrow (76 cm) row spacing increased grain yield 8% when compared to traditional wide (96-102 cm) row spacing. Twin rows (20-25 cm spacing) in a wide (96-102 cm) row pattern, produced similar grain yield as a traditional wide single row. At a normal plant density of 79,040 ha-1, traditional wide rows yielded 10.51 Mg ha-1, twin wide rows yielded 10.34 Mg ha-1, and the narrow rows yielded 11.33 Mg ha-1. Growing corn at various plant densities did not affect corn grain yield response to various row patterns. As a comparison the traditional wide rows and twin rows were similar in their yield, and the narrow rows performed better. Corn grain yields for the traditional 96-102 cm wide single rows were 11.20 Mg ha-1, wide 96-102 cm twin rows yielded 11.22 Mg ha-1, and narrow 76 cm rows produced 12.07 Mg ha-1. Row pattern had no effect on corn plant height, photosynthetically active radiation (PAR), leaf area index (LAI), SPAD, stalk diameter, and plant lodging in either study.

Integrating water-saving technologies with optimized nutrient management strategies provides opportunities for sustainable agriculture in the Mississippi Delta. Three studies were conducted to determine the effects of irrigation systems, row patterns, and nutrient management strategies on corn and soybeans. The first study determined the effects of irrigation, row pattern, and nitrogen (N) placement methods on corn (Zea mays L.) productivity and N use efficiency. The effects of N placement methods were only evident in 2021 when the rainfall events were more pronounced than in 2020. Regardless of the row pattern, placing N with one knife increased corn grain yield and the agronomic N use efficiency by 14.1% and 16.8%, respectively, when compared to the surface dribble method. The second study investigated the effects of irrigation systems and row patterns on grain yield, grain quality parameters, and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) on soybeans (Glycine max L.) grown on Sharkey clay. When irrigation was triggered at -80 kPa, furrow-irrigated soybeans produced 3.9% more grain yield compared to sprinkler-irrigated soybeans. The total amount of water applied by the sprinkler irrigation system represented 19-52% of the total amount applied by the furrow system. Narrow-row patterns achieved greater IWUE than single-row patterns. In the third study, we evaluated the effects of N and irrigation levels on grain quantity, quality, and plant growth on corn grown across different soil electrical conductivity (EC) levels and its implications for variable rate technology. Corn grain yields increased with the increase of N and irrigation levels but decreased as soil EC decreased. Overall, maintaining a sprinkler irrigation threshold between -40 and -70 kPa optimized corn yield. In addition, these results did not provide enough evidence to use variable rate irrigation or variable rate N application in the Mississippi Delta.