Crop Alert 3-7-2014

This article was originally written for and distributed to farmers and other members of the agricultural industry in western New York.

A PDF file of this article is available here.

Bill Verbeten and Mike Stanyard, Regional Agronomists Cornell Cooperative Extension

Evaluating Alfalfa and Small Grains for Winter Injury

The combination of extremely cold weather and bare ground across northwestern NY has many farmers and consultants concerned about winter injury to their alfalfa (Figure 1) and small grain (Figure 2) crops. As the snow melts in the next couple of weeks it will be important to get out into the field and check on these crops. A detailed discussion of the factors that influence the chances of winter injury are available online for alfalfa and small grains.

Figure 1: Winter Damages Alfalfa

 Source: Alfalfa Management Guide, page 15.

Figure 2: Dead, Damaged, & Healthy Crowns of Winter Wheat

Source: Washington State University

Handy Bt Trait Table

Not sure about which insects your Bt trait is rated to control? Have questions about what refuge requirement is appropriate for your Bt corn variety? Wondering what herbicide tolerances are associated with different Bt hybrids? Check out the "Handy Bt Trait Table" authored by Chris DiFonzo of Michigan State University and Eileen Cullen of the University of Wisconsin.

Early Season Small Grain Nitrogen Management

Wheat Early season applications of nitrogen on small grains will begin in the coming weeks across northwestern NY. The amount of nitrogen fertilizer needed for high grain yields depend on tiller counts in wheat fields. Wheat fields with lower tiller counts will require higher nitrogen rates early in the season (Table 1), while fields with higher tiller counts should have more of their nitrogen applied later in the season just prior to the first node appearing at Feekes 5.0-6.0 Figure 3). Fields with higher levels of soil OM, manure applications, and a proceeding crop of soybeans will require less nitrogen. See Mike’s March 2014 Ag Focus article for more information on “Early Season Wheat Management Tips.”

Table 1: Early Wheat Nitrogen Using Tiller Count                

Figure 3: Winter Wheat  Stages for Second Nitrogen Application

 Source: Growth Stages of Wheat

Small Grain Silage In 2013 a large scale study of nitrogen rates

on 44 NY farm locations growing small grain (mostly winter triticale) silage found that about 1/3 of the fields did not respond to increasing levels of nitrogen fertilizer. Preliminary analyses indicate that soils with high levels of active organic matter (probably from manure) are increasing soil nitrogen supply. Small grain silage fields with recent manure histories should receive 20-30 lb./acre of nitrogen at green-up to ensure early season nitrogen availability. Just over 40% of the fields had yield responses at high nitrogen rates (~75 to 120 lb./acre) in the 2013 trial. However with the current prices of nitrogen ($0.80 to $1.20 per lb. of N) it will likely not be profitable to apply more than 50-60 lb./acre of nitrogen to small grain silage fields. In the 2013 trial, winter triticale silage crude protein by ~1% for every 18-20 lb./acre of nitrogen applied (Figure 4). Most of the fields tested in the 2013 trial had CP in the ranges depicted by the green lines in Figure 4, with the black line being the overall average. Nitrogen addition can increase crude protein levels to nearly 20% but typically high N fertilizer rates (and high fertilizer costs) are needed to achieve these levels. Agrotain-treated urea performed very well in the 2013 trial and on commercial fields, especially when applied early in the spring.

Figure 4: Response of Winter Triticale Crude Protein to Nitrogen Fertilizer

Malting Barley Apply lower rates of nitrogen (20-60 lb./acre) to malting barley fields to keep the CP ≤12% and the kernel plumpness high. Use lower rates for varieties that tend to lodge more easily (i.e. Conlon), manured fields, and crops following a legume. Apply nitrogen as early as possible. Typically early season nitrogen increases small grain yields, while later nitrogen increases small grain CP. A one-page growing malting barley fact sheet and a summary of available spring malting barley varieties are available online. For additional information see the Malting Barley page on our website.

Evaluating Alfalfa for Winter Injury

This article was originally written for and distributed to farmers and other members of the agricultural industry in western New York.

A PDF file of this article is available here.

Appropriate varietal selection, fertility, planting dates, and harvest management greatly increase the winter survival of alfalfa. The extreme cold and lack of snow cover in northwestern NY during the 2013-14 winter have put alfalfa fields at greater risk of damage this year.

Effects of Management
The risk of winterkill goes up with increasing winter-hardiness ratings. In NY alfalfa varieties should have a winter-hardiness rating of 1 or 2. Winter-hardiness ratings are different than fall dormancy ratings (how tall alfalfa grows after September 1^st). In the past a lower fall dormancy rating also meant a variety had increased winter survival. However breeders have separated out the winter-hardiness & fall dormancy traits in recent years. Having higher fall dormancy ratings will lead to increased fall and early spring growth along with faster regrowth between cuttings. Proper pH and fertility (especially potassium) are critical for alfalfa to survive the winter. Alfalfa needs at least 6 weeks of growth to develop a crown, requiring an August or early September planting date in our region. Taking a late fall cutting, leaving less than 6 inches of fall stubble, harvesting less than every 30 days in the growing season, and having an older stand all increase the chances of winterkill. A scorecard for evaluating the risk of winterkill to alfalfa is available on page 54 of the Alfalfa Management Guide available at www.nwnyteam.org.

With the shallow soils in much of northwestern NY, perennial grass species like tall fescue, orchardgrass, reed canarygrass, and timothy are often planted with alfalfa. Having these grasses in the mix reduces the risk of yield loss from winterkill because they will survive if the alfalfa is damaged. However if too much fall growth was left in the field these grasses can be damaged by snow mold similar to small grains.

Effects of Weather
The weather conditions that put small grain stands at risk for winterkill also are hard on alfalfa. Alfalfa stands without 6 inches of snow cover, prolonged temperatures below 5°-15°F, and temperature spikes over 40°F during the winter will likely have some damage. The crowns of alfalfa are shallower than small grains and are consequently more vulnerable to freezing and heaving damage. In addition to these conditions, the excessive soil moisture from the fall of 2013 makes damage from ice sheeting a greater risk this year in alfalfa fields in our region. Damage plants will resemble those on the right in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Winter Damaged Alfalfa

Source: Alfalfa Management Guide, page 15.

Evaluating Alfalfa Stands

A number of signs can indicate winter damage to alfalfa stands. Fields that remain brown longer than others are probably damaged. If the alfalfa plant only has shoots growing on one side of the crown, the buds were injured over the winter. Damage to buds can also result in uneven shoot growth in the same plant. However the best way to evaluate alfalfa is to dig up 4-6 inches of roots. If the roots have a grey water-soaked appearance, look brown and stringy, and/or can easily have water squeezed out the plants then winterkill has occurred.

Contact your crop consultant, myself, or Mike Stanyard if you have a question about alfalfa stand evaluation.

Spring Malting Barley Seed Availability 2014

This article was originally written for and distributed to farmers and other members of the agricultural industry in western New York.

A PDF file of this article is available here.

Farmers interested in purchasing spring malting barley seed in 2014 have a number of varieties available in New York. The 2013 Cornell Small Grain Variety Trial results are available here. All varieties should be drilled at about 2 bu/A (~100 lb./A) and about 1 inch deep. Planting after April 15th will result in reduced yields. See the Growing Malting Barley in NY bulletin for information about malting barley production practices. Both 6-row and 2-row malting barleys are being used in New York to make high quality beers and whiskey. The 6-row varieties generally have better agronomic traits (yield, disease resistance, resistance to lodging, etc.) than 2-row varieties under the climatic conditions of the Northeast. Historically 2-row varieties were preferred by brewers, but breeding advancements in the past 20-50 years have essentially eliminated the previous gap between 6-row and 2-row varieties for the needs of the craft brewing industry in the United States. For more discussion of 6-row vs. 2-row malting barley see these articles from Oregon State University and the Brewers' Market Guide.

Quest is a 6-row spring variety certified by the University of Minnesota and is available through Seedway representatives and their affiliates. Quest has been bred specifically to have partial resistance to Fusarium head blight. Fusarium head blight is the major disease of malting barley in New York and the source of DON (deoxynivalenol a.k.a vomitoxin) in all small grains. In the 2013 Cornell Variety Trial, Quest was ranked 3rd in yield, 3rd in malting quality, and had low lodging and disease incidence ratings. Contact your local representative or Adam Robertson by phone: (585) 435-7165 or email: arobertson@seedway.com. 

Conlon is a 2-row spring variety certified by North Dakota State University and is available through Preferred Seed representatives and their affiliates. In the 2013 Cornell Variety Trial, Conlon was ranked 12th in yield, 1st in malting quality, had low disease incidence ratings, but had moderately higher lodging ratings than other varieties. If growing this variety put on a lower amount of spring nitrogen (maximum of ~40 lb./A) compared to other varieties (maximum of ~60 lb./A). Contact your local representative or Garrett Coleman by phone: (814) 381-6809 or email: garrett@preferredseed.com.

AC Metcalfe, CDC Copeland, CDC Meredith, and Newdale are all 2-row spring varieties of certified seed from Canada and are available through FICO Farms out of Rochester, NY. In the 2013 Cornell Variety Trial, AC Metcalfe was 15th in yield, 16th in quality, and had moderately higher lodging and disease incidence ratings. CDC Copeland and CDC Meredith were not entered in the 2013 trial. Newdale was 4th in yield, 17th in malt quality, had lower lodging ratings, but higher disease incidence ratings in the 2013 trial. Contact Paul Filippetti by phone: (585) 770-4702 or email: FICOfarms@yahoo.com.

Lakeview Organics can supply organically certified spring malting barley seed out of the Midwest. For more information about seed availability contact Mary Howell-Martin by phone: (315) 531-1038 or email: sales@lakevieworganicgrain.com.

Evaluating Small Grains for Winter Injury

This article was originally written for and distributed to farmers and other members of the agricultural industry in western New York.

A PDF file of this article is available here.

The late fall planting dates combined with the extreme cold this winter have made winter injury a real possibility for a number of small grain crops grown in northwestern NY. Areas where there was little-to-no snow cover during the cold spells have the highest risk of crop loss. Good planting practices can go a long way to reduce the risk of winterkill to barley, wheat, triticale, spelt, & rye but the weather also plays a large role in the winter survival of these crops.

Figure 1: Winterkill Patches in Wheat

Source: University of Minnesota

Effects of Management

Shallow planting depths (less than 1 inch) lead to shallow crown development. These plants may literally be “thrown” out of the soil as the field freezes and thaws. Planting with a drill usually eliminates this risk. However shallower planted small grains can develop an adequate root system if planted early in the fall (usually September in our region). Some varieties and some small grain species are more susceptible to winterkill than others. Rye is the most hardy winter small grain, followed by triticale, wheat, spelt, and finally barley. Placing phosphorous fertilizer with the small grain seed, having adequate amounts of other nutrients, and the proper soil pH also increases winter hardiness and yield. Parts of the field that are lower and wetter will have poorer stands than the better drained areas. Damage from ice sheeting is also common in low, wet areas. If the small grain has 2 or more tillers and a well-developed crown root system there is a much greater chance of the crop surviving the winter with little-to-no damage. A small grain crop can also be too large going into winter. If the top growth is greater than 6-8 inches there is an increased risk of snow mold killing the small grain as it smothers itself under the snow.

Effects of Weather

When the fall temperatures quickly drop-off to the teens or lower from above 40°-50°F, small grains are at a higher risk of winter injury than years where the change in air temperatures are more gradual. Most areas in northwestern NY had a gradual change in fall temperatures, but some pockets saw the temperatures fall quickly. During the winter, snow cover and soil moisture are critical to keep the soil temperatures warm enough to protect the crowns of small grains. When temperatures are -10°F or colder and there is no snow cover winterkill risk of small grains increases. Many areas in our region, especially east of Rochester, experienced these conditions this winter. Fields that had even an inch or two of snow are at much lower risk of sustaining damage to the small grain crowns. Soil temperatures increase with deeper soil depths—fields drilled at 1-1.5 inches will have deeper crowns (at warmer temperatures) than small grain fields that were broadcasted and packed into the upper 0.5 inch of the soil. The soils in NY generally have adequate moisture in the winter to reduce the risk of injury to small grains compared to the dryer soil conditions of the Great Plains. However high winds, in combination with low temperatures and little snow cover, can also cause significant damage to small grains from drying out the plants & damaging vascular tissue despite higher soil moisture levels.

Evaluation of Small Grain Crops

An easy way to test for winter damage in small grains is to bring in a few plants from each field, place them in pots and watch them. If the plants do not green up after a week with warm temps and water, they are dead. If the small grain greens up a little, but then slowly dies back there is damage to the xylem and phloem. These tissues move the water and plant sugars through crop similar to how veins and arteries work in animals. Extremely cold temperatures, especially with high winds can fracture the crop’s vascular tissues, much like breaking a straw, which leads to a slow plant death. If the crowns are white then they are not damaged, but brown crowns will not recover, Figure 2. A more detailed method of evaluating small grain crowns for winterkill is available from the University of Nebraska.

Figure 2: Dead, Damaged, & Healthy Crowns of Winter Wheat

Source: Washington State University

Contact your crop consultant, myself, or Mike Stanyard if you have a question about small grain stand evaluation.

Mapping Management Zones with Soil Conductivity

This article was originally written for and distributed to farmers and other members of the agricultural industry in western New York.

A PDF file of this article is available here.

By measuring differences in conductivity across the field in combination with GPS data, management zones can be identified for variable rate management. Currently the NY Corn and Soybean Growers Association is in the early stages of conducting on-farm research across the state of New York using the Veris system in conjunction with variable seeding rates and fertilizer rates in corn and soybeans across many soil types. Additionally mapping soil conductivity can enable variable herbicide rates corresponding different in organic matter levels and soil types. Many consulting companies and individual farms are also exploring soil conductivity in northwestern NY.

What is Soil Conductivity?

It is a measurement of how well the soil conducts electricity.  Two types of technology are available for measuring electrical conductivity in the soil. The sensors are either contact (Veris) or non-contact (Geonics Limited and Geophex). Both types measure the ability of the soil to conduct an electrical current. The output is usually recorded as units of milliSiemens per meter (mS/m) or deciSiemens per meter (dS/m) (1 dS/m = 100 mS/m). Contact sensors have at least one coulter sending electrical current into the soil (transmitting electrode) and at least one other coulter (receiving electrode) which measures the volt­age drop between the electrodes. Veris units operate with this technology, are the mostly widely used, and a schematic is pictured in Figure 1. Often multiple sets of sensors will run at multiple depths to better examine the variation in soil composition across a field.

Figure 1: Contact Soil Conductivity Unit

Source: Veris Technologies

Non-contact sensors use elec­tromagnetic induction and do not come into contact with the soil relying on a transmitter and receiver coil mounted on a non-metallic frame. A metal frame would interfere with the elec­tromagnetic induction readings. The EM38 (Geonics Limited) and GEM-2 (Geophex) sensors utilize this technology. Often these non-contact sensors are used in smaller scale research plots, but some commercial scale equipment is available.

Incorporating Soil Conductivity Data on Your Farm

Soil electrical conductivity will vary with soil moisture, temperature, soil type, organic matter, manure application, & salinity. Soil conductivity decreases in dry soils compared to wet soil and as the soil temperature falls. While the actual soil conductivity numbers change with varying moisture and temperature conditions, the management zones that are calculated from the relative differences often are the same. Unless a field has a patch of pure sand, the soil electrical conductivity usually only varies by 5 to 10% across soil types.

 

Data can be gathered under many field conditions for these units. For more operational information on measuring soil conductivity, soil OM, and soil pH mapping equipment, check out these videos on the Precision Ag section on www.nwny.org.

Variation of conductivity across soil types is the one of the main advantages of using this technology. While the maps are often very similar to the NRCS soil maps, soil conductivity maps have a finer resolution. They can also correct the border areas between soil types that are not accurately depicted in a soil survey. Soil conductivity increases with increasing organic matter, and will make a more detailed map than grid soil sampling alone. Targeted soil samples should still be taken on a regular basis within management zones. Soil samples will still require wet chemistry analysis as in-field measurements of minerals are still in the early stages of development.

Care must be used when mapping fields after manure applications. Manure contains relatively high levels of salts compared to soils. Soil conductivity measurements will increase as the amount of manure applied increases. It is best to measure fields prior to manure application. Soils from the Great Plains often contain high salt levels and mapping salinity values for management zone creation is valuable on the high plains, but not in NY.

The information layer from soil conductivity should be used in combination with the NRCS soil layer, traditional soil test data, and multiple years of yield map data to form management zones on farms. Any one of these pieces of information in isolation is not as valuable as combining them together to plan for variable rate management of seeds, fertilizers, lime, and herbicides. 

Variable Rate Fertility Management

This article was originally written for and distributed to farmers and other members of the agricultural industry in western New York.

A PDF file of this article is available here.

Fertility is the foundation of high forage and grain yields. With the large variation in soil types in many crop fields of the Northeast, variable rate fertility management is a natural step to take to improve crop yields. Defining management zones with significant differences in fertility requirements and applying the inputs most likely to respond to variable rate management are for essential success. In northwestern NY grain and forage crops will most likely respond to applying variable rates of lime, potassium, & nitrogen. Variable phosphorous and sulfur rates also have potential for inclusion in fertility programs.

Defining Management Zones
The first step in variable rate management is identifying separate areas of each field that will receive different rates of nutrients. These management zones often use some combination of traditional soil tests (grid or zone sampling), data from a Veris unit or similar machine that measures soil conductivity (and in some cases pH and organic matter), the NRCS soil type maps, satellite or aerial images, and multiple years of yield data. Currently yield maps are easiest to generate during grain harvest, while forage yield monitoring is still in its infancy. Most farms have at least three management zones (low, medium, and high yield potentials) across their farm, though it’s possible to have many more.

In some cases there may not be enough difference between management zones to justify variable rate applications. For example if the fertilizer recommendations for potassium were 80 lb./acre, 90 lb./acre, & 100 lb./acre of K2O in three different management zones in the same field variable rate management would not be very beneficial. Another field with potassium recommendations of 50 lb./acre, 100 lb./acre, and 150 lb./acre in different management zones would probably worth the effort and added expense of variable rate management. Another factor to consider before going down the road of variable rate management is what rates are possible to apply with the equipment available. Having management zones requiring 15 lb./acre difference in fertilizer does not do a farmer any good if they can only vary their application rate by 25 lb./acre increments.

Prioritizing Variable Rate Fertility Inputs
Before any variable fertilizer is applied, variations in soil pH should be determined within each management zone. Different soil types have vastly different liming requirements in order to change soil pH. A sandy soil would only need 0.5 ton/acre of lime to raise the pH from 6.0 to 7.0, while a loamy soil would need 1.5 tons/acre and a clay soil would need 3.0 tons/acre of lime (100% effective neutralizing value). With the cost of lime and the wide range of soil types within fields, variable rate liming will be a sound investment on many farms. While variations in soil pH have traditionally been determined by grid sampling and wet chemistry analyses, on-the-go sensors now have the ability to reasonably measure soil pH directly in the field at a much finer resolution than traditional soil sampling. These in-field units also greatly reduce analysis costs, making them an attractive option for farmers. It’s important to note that in-field measurements of crop nutrients are still in the early stages of development, and targeted soil sampling within management zones will still be necessary for the foreseeable future.

While there are 16 essential plant elements for growth, the focus of fertility programs has traditionally been on the big three—nitrogen, phosphorus, & potassium. Crops remove higher amounts of potassium and nitrogen than other any other nutrient, Table 1, making them the most likely candidates for increases in yields and profits from variable rate management. Additionally the increases in nitrogen and potassium fertilizer prices in recent years have made variable rate management of these nutrients a very attractive option to farmers. Soil types vary considerably in their ability to supply potassium to crops. When growing corn a very-low testing clay only requires ~50 lb. K2O/acre, but a silt loam would need ~80 lb. K2O/acre and sand ~120 lb. K2O/acre. In addition to potassium supply differences based on soil type, crops also removed different amounts of potassium, Table 1. Alfalfa, soybean, corn silage, and possibly grass fields are great candidates for variable rate potassium management given their high demands for this nutrient.


The story is a little more complicated for nitrogen variable rate management compared to potassium. Given the dynamic nature of nitrogen, methods that include in field measurements of organic matter, NDVI, and crop biomass are being adopted to fine tune nitrogen application rates beyond simple management zone assignment. There is some debate how much nitrogen to apply to the low, medium, & high testing areas of the field. Should the low yielding areas be pushed with more fertilizer? Should the high areas be given an extra boost? According Josh McGrath of the University of Maryland when discussing variable rate nitrogen management in corn,"When we side-dress corn at V6-V8 using NDVI and reference strips (a strip with more than sufficient N applied at planting and a strip with no N applied before side-dress) we can apply based on responsiveness and yield goal, applying the lowest rate to the low yield potential areas, medium rates to the highest yielding, highly responsive areas, and the highest rates to the areas that have high yield potential, but perhaps less soil supply. This approach accounts for yield potential and N responsiveness." We will be evaluating Professor McGrath’s method during the 2014 season and are currently seeking farms to participate. Besides corn, variable  nitrogen management is a great fit in small grain fields and potentially pure grass stands. However fields with long-term manure histories may not be as responsive to variable rate nitrogen applications compared to those without manure due to the long-term build-up of nitrogen from the manure’s organic matter. However manure fields have not always received uniform levels of application, presenting another opportunity for variable rate management.

Table 1:Crop Nutrient Removal

Source: Adapted from Table 9-1, pp. 299-300 in Soil Fertility and Fertilizers 

1 Nutrients removed from corn grain (200 bu corn at 56 lb./bu corn) plus 6 tons of corn stover

Responses to variable rate management are also common for phosphorous in grain crops, but fertilizer placement is as important as the rate of phosphorus fertilizer applied. Work from Ontario has shown a larger yield response from placing MAP near the wheat seed compared to broadcasting 4 times as much MAP on the surface. Similar to nitrogen, fields with a history of manure applications may be less likely to respond to variable phosphorus rates.

Prior to the Clean Air Act, the sulfur in the acid rain across the Northeast also supplied most, it not all, of the sulfur needs of the crops in the region. Now most crops respond to sulfur applications in the 15-25 lb./acre range. While less work has been done with variable rate sulfur fertility than other crops, using soil organic matter levels to define low, medium, and high management zones is a good place to start if the field does not have long-term manure history. It may difficult to vary sulfur applications due the relatively low levels of application and the type of application equipment available. Variable rates of lime based on correcting soil pH will likely supply the variable rate calcium and magnesium needed by crops that is not already supplied by the soil. All liming materials contain very high levels of calcium (and some supply magnesium), many Northeast soils contain high amounts of calcium and magnesium, and crop removal of calcium and magnesium is relatively low compared to other nutrients for most crops, Table 1. If soil Mg tests are low, dolomitic lime should be instead of a CaCO3 (high calcium) lime to replace the Mg removed by the crops. However balancing soil for Ca:Mg:K ratios has not been demonstrated to consistently improved crop yields, quality, or other parameters in University research trials. Additionally it is difficult to document a change in soil base saturation independent of soil pH. Variable rate liming to manage soil pH with a high calcium lime or dolomitic lime (if soil Mg is low) will supply the needed calcium and magnesium needed by the crops commonly grown in NY in most, if not all, situations.

The likelihood of micro-nutrients responding to variable rate management is very low. In most cases uniform application will provide the needed nutrient across the entire field. Zinc applications are becoming more common in corn, manganese in soybeans, and boron in a variety of crops. Additionally applying very small variable rates of micro-nutrients will likely be more difficult than other nutrients applied at much higher rates. If foliar applications at variable or uniform rates of these or other micro-nutrients are attempted they should be based on tissue tests. Sandy & muck soils, soils without manure history, and soils with extreme pH levels (<6.0 or >7.0) are most likely to respond to micro-nutrients.

Making multiple applications of nitrogen and potassium will also improve fertilizer crop uptake and yield on many farms. Nitrogen losses can be greatly decreased with multiple applications to corn, wheat, and grass fields. Applying all of the nitrogen at the beginning of the season greatly increases the risk of nitrogen loss due to yearly spring rains. As potassium application rates increase on haylage fields spreading the total fertilizer application across multiple cuttings becomes necessary to keep forage K at desirable levels while allowing for more efficient use of potassium throughout the growing season.

In order to have success with variable rate fertility management zones must have differences in fertilizer and lime rates that are worth the investment of variable rate management. The application equipment also needs to be able to apply the desired rates. Money spent on variable rate fertility should be prioritized to the inputs used at the highest levels (lime, potassium, & nitrogen), followed by those with a reasonable chance of a response (phosphorus & sulfur), and only then the micro-nutrients (zinc, manganese, boron, copper, etc.).

Dairy Business East Feb 2014 Articles

Check out a couple of articles I recently authored for Dairy Business East Feb 2014. "Growing triticale silage in the Northeast" on pages 24 and 25 & "Fungicides on forage?" on pages 26 and 27, http://magazines.dairybusiness.com/dbefeb14/.