Oakes Irrigation Research Site
Carrington Research Extension Center * North Dakota State University
P.O. Box 531, Oakes, ND 58474-0531, Voice: (701) 742-2189, FAX: (701) 742-2700, email: rgreenla@ndsuext.nodak.edu

Research on Potato Planting Configurations

Dean Steele

Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Dept., NDSU

          A third year of research was conducted to determine whether a furrow planting configuration is more productive than the conventional hilled configuration for irrigated potatoes on well-drained soils. Experiments were conducted during the 2000, 2001, and 2002 growing seasons. Collaborators were Richard Greenland at the NDSU Oakes Irrigation Research Site and Harlene Hatterman-Valenti from the NDSU Plant Sciences Department. A similar study was conducted at Dawson, ND in 2001 and Tappen, ND in 2002, but this report is only for the Oakes Irrigation Research Site.

          The research involved small plots (each 12 ft wide by 40 ft long), the Russet Burbank variety, a row spacing of 36 inches, and a plant spacing of approximately 12 inches. All the furrow and hill planted plots were treated identically with respect to irrigation, fertilizer, herbicide, and fungicide amounts, using production practices typical of those for potatoes grown in the conventional or hilled configuration. For the 2001 and 2002 seasons, hill and furrow planting configuration treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block experimental design with six replications. Soil temperature and soil moisture tension were measured hourly at 6- and 12-inch depths in the crop row and between crop rows, and at the seed piece depth.

          The following categories were used to classify tubers from each plot: very small (tubers < 4 oz.), small (4-6 oz.), medium (6-10 oz.), large (10-16 oz.), very large (tubers > 16 oz.), US#1 (tubers > 4 oz.), marketable (tubers > 6 oz.), culls (tubers with growth cracks, excessive knobbiness, spoiled or rotten tubers, etc.), and total yield (all tubers). A tuber class of "other" consisted of total minus US#1 yield and a tuber class of "nonmarketable" consisted of total minus marketable yield. Yield summaries for the three years of research are presented in Table 58 for marketable, US#1, and total yields.

          In 2002, yields were lower than expected because of verticillium and black dot disease pressures (G. Vogt, 2002 personal communication). Yield differences were not statistically significant at the 0.05 level between furrow (F) and hill (H) planting configurations, except for the following yield classes: small (85 cwt/acre for H vs. 71 cwt/acre for F), very small (89 cwt/acre for H vs. 63 cwt/acre for F), nonmarketable (184 cwt/acre for H vs. 139 cwt/acre for F), and weight percent of very large tubers (13.4% for F vs. 7.2% for H). It is worthy to note that although the furrow configuration had total yields that were 10% lower, on average, than those for the hill planted plots, the marketable yield was 15% greater for the furrow planted plots than for the hill planted plots (Table 58).

          During hot weather in late June and early July (2002), soil temperatures at the seed piece depth in the crop rows were as much as 5 ^oC (9 ^oF) cooler for the furrow configuration than for the hill configuration (fig. 1). We attribute the cooler temperatures to faster canopy development and better shading of the soil surface for the furrow planted plots than for the hill plots.

          At harvest time in 2002, we determined drawbar power requirements for each planting configuration. We measured drawbar pulling force and vehicle ground speed for two 60-ft test strips in each planting configuration using a one-row lifter operating at a ground speed of approximately 2/3 ft/sec (0.45 mph). At Oakes, the average drawbar power requirement was 1.1 hp for the hill configuration and 1.5 hp for the furrow configuration. At Tappen, similar tests indicated an average drawbar power requirement of 1.3 hp for the hill configuration and 1.1 hp for the furrow configuration. Excavation of the soil at Tappen showed that the tubers were often very close (1 to 3 in.) to the soil surface for the furrow configuration, alleviating concerns that tubers in the furrow planted plots would be too deep to harvest without significant machine modifications. The power values are low for reasons that include the following: 1) very slow ground speeds were used, hence the low power values, since power equals drawbar force times ground speed; 2) we do not include power measurements for the tractor power take off (PTO) shaft to drive chains, gears, etc. on the lifter; 3) the lifter is small and simply lifts the tubers, conveys them horizontally, and drops them out the back end of the machine; and 4) we are considering only the power required to pull the lifter once it is in the ground, not the power to get it into or out of the ground. For these reasons, the power results should be used for relative comparisons only. A better test would be to determine how a commercial potato lifter handles furrow planted potatoes in a production-sized field.

          As in 2001, the furrow planting configuration appears to have an advantage in terms of crop development when compared with the hill configuration. For example, at Tappen in 2002, the furrow planted plots emerged two weeks after planting, while the hill planted plots emerged three weeks after planting. On 15 July 2002, we also noted that the furrow planted plots were further along in the flowering stage compared with the hill planted plots.

          The furrow production system continues to show promise compared with the hill configuration in terms of yield and tuber size. We plan to continue the research subject to funding availability. Comments and questions about the project are welcome.

Go to top of planting configuration study report

Table 58. Yield summaries for potato planting experiments.

¹ Marketable grade consists of tubers 6 oz. or larger in size; US#1 grade consists of tubers 4 oz. or larger in size; both Marketable and US#1 grades exclude those with cracks, knobs, and other defects.

² Plots in 2000 were not replicated. In other years, there were no significant differences in yields between hill and furrow treatments.

³ Yields in 2001 were lower than expected and we attribute this to a herbicide drift or chemical burn injury on 10 July 2001, which was in the flowering period.

⁴ Yields in 2002 were lower than expected and we attribute this to a combination of verticillium and black dot disease pressures (G. Vogt, 2002 personal communication).

Return to text

Go to top of planting configuration study report

Figure 1. Hourly average air and soil temperatures for the potato planting study during late June and early July 2002 at Oakes, ND.

.  Return to text

Go to top of planting configuration study report

Go to Oakes Irrigation Research Site crop index

Go to Oakes Irrigation Research Site 2002 Annual Report

Go to Oakes Irrigation Research Site home page