Looking back on the year’s activities in the field

In MARK we are entering a relatively quiet period with regard to field work. Emptying of the suctions cells is in full swing but otherwise the fieldwork consists mostly of taking soil samples and a bit of harvesting of biomass crops such as willow, poplar and miscanthus. In the semi-field and greenhouses it is also pretty quiet. In the dry matter laboratory we are busy grinding samples and so on. 

Now is the time to sum up the year’s results and start planning for next year. It is also time to discuss if we should be doing some things differently or better. 

Annual MARK theme day

As mentioned by one of our ”users” at the MARK theme day for technicians in October at Askov Research Station, it is almost impossible to overestimate how important the field trials are to AGRO’s efforts. The results are the basis for scientific articles, policy support, lectures, and advice to and collaboration with the industry.    

The main topic at the theme day was quality assurance of our trials, which is a subject that we will never stop looking at. One way in which we believe we can improve ourselves and ensure future field trial quality is to prepare common guidelines and procedures for trials. 

Procedures should be reviewed and refreshed

One of the results of the theme day was the establishment of a series of experience exchange groups, partly to exchange experience across units, and partly to prepare guidelines and procedures for the areas that lack them. We have common procedures for many tasks but we must also admit that we can still see that historically we come from several different places.   

There are still many procedures that originate from a research station or a research group that has been closed for a long time. This does not mean to say that the procedures are wrong, just that they could sometimes be improved upon. 

Fortunately, we sometimes get new colleagues who question the way we have been doing things for many years. Sometimes, our answer can be that this is the only right way to do things (if it is actually the case), while other times their questions get us thinking about whether we should reevaluate the procedure. 

New technology – exciting and challenging

Introduction of new technology also means that we need to change some procedures. A concrete example is our use of GPS and assisted steering. This means that we now use completely different methods to establish trials in the field plots. The plots are not different, but the way we do things is easier and more precise. 

On the other hand, the new technology means that we can conduct new types of studies that were not possible previously. We are currently seeing many new possibilities in the form of robots, drones, cameras and other sensors that will certainly provide us with more data and more precise data in the future. 

From MARK we have a silent prayer. We would really like to help introduce the new technology. We also think it is exciting to have new possibilities. However, we would appreciate not having to include too much new technology in ”regular” trials until we are 100 percent sure that the new technology works as expected. 

We know it is tempting to test new technology in a trial that is already funded, and I am sure that some people even think it is a great idea, but I think that it is best for us to test these things in a corner of a trial where we can live with possible ”missing data”. Preferably in independent non-scientific trials, where we can proceed by trial and error. 

Investments in field equipment

Henning Thomsen from Askov, Thomas Jensen from Flakkebjerg and I took part in a trip to Germany November 20-21, 2018, where the companies Haldrup and Zürn had an open house event. There are approximately 20 km between the two companies that both manufacture research equipment. As you can see in the photos, we took a thorough look at the machinery.  

For the past many years, there has been a certain restraint in our investments in new field trial equipment. We have the challenge that much of our equipment is only used for a few hours at a time and therefore has a long life. Research machinery is expensive in the same way as laboratory equipment, so there is good reason for restraint. 

However, we must be aware that our machines, just like machines on commercial farms, become technologically outdated and we must take care that we do not accumulate too much old machinery that suddenly needs to be renewed. This is particularly true when we have financial challenges, as we have currently. 

The past year – how did it go?

We can always talk about the weather. This is not without reason this year, because it was without doubt the factor that had the greatest influence on our trials in 2018. 

When we talk about ”in the memory of man” with regard to the weather, we normally mean about three weeks, but I bet most people can still remember the summer of 2018. Those of us who work with crops in the field can certainly remember it clearly, and the difference from 2017 was significant.       

The illustrations show drought index maps from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) for August 4 in 2018 and 2017. In 2018, this was approximately one week after is started to rain. The week before that, pretty much all of Denmark was red. This meant that we – like many farmers in Denmark – had to use all our irrigation equipment. 

This clearly goes to show that we have some challenges. Irrigation equipment that is 25-30 years old is not best suited for research purposes. 

At Foulumgaard we saw it very clearly. In the 2018 season we bought an almost new irrigation traveller with accompanying new irrigation boom for use in our wheat and potato trials on the JB1 soil at Havris. The difference from the old irrigation machine was significant. Steering and precision were both better. Not only because the old machine was worn, but also because of the developments that have taken place in the past 30 years. 

The upside of the heat and drought in 2018 was that our irrigation trials gave significant differences. The downside was, of course, that some of our trials were affected by the drought even though we irrigated as much as we could. Even though rain came in August, we have had some challenges with regard to germination in some of our catch crop trials.   

All in all, we can look back on yet another growing season that was not a normal year (which is probably only theoretical anyway). Now we are preparing things for 2019, and can only guess what it will bring. 

I would like to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year from  all of us in MARK.