Low forage yields from old alfalfa stands are often a result of poor management practices. Appropriate agronomic amendments such as potassium (K) fertilization and harvest time can help revive the yielding potentials of old alfalfa stands. A study was conducted on a 13-yr old alfalfa stand at UW SAREC, Lingle in 2019 to determine K × harvest time interaction effect on yield response of old alfalfa stands. Six K rates (0, 56, 112, 168, 224, and 280 kg K₂O ha^-1) were applied to alfalfa. Alfalfa was harvested at two harvest times (early harvest, late bud to early [10%] bloom; late harvest, 7 days after early harvest). Treatments were organized in a randomized complete block design with four replications. The 224 kg K₂O ha^-1produced the highest total forage yield (8.0 Mg ha^-1) at early harvest, while 168 kg K₂O ha^-1produced the highest total forage yield (8.6 Mg ha^-1) at late harvest. Differences in plant growth at both harvest times might have influenced the amount of K required to improve yield. There was a quadratic relationship (P= 0.01, R²= 0.39) between forage yield and relative water content of alfalfa. This suggests that the moisture content in alfalfa in conjunction with K and harvest management plays an important role in alfalfa for yield potential. Overall, preliminary results of the study indicate that applying K to old stands of alfalfa based on when to harvest could be a viable option to improve forage production of declining old alfalfa stands.

Smart agriculture (SA) is an innovative concept gaining popularity with an expected market value of $33 billion by 2027. Machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) have significant potential to transform agriculture by analyzing Big Data to provide valuable insights and data-driven decision support systems (DSSs). Large scale production systems capitalize on SA technologies to improve production efficiency while preserving valuable fossil waters and minimizing fertilizer, chemical, and labor inputs. Small and mid-scale production systems (SMSPSs) account for 42.6% of the US agriculture production value compared to 43.8% for large scale systems. Implementing SA technologies in SMSPSs can be inefficient and cost prohibitive. This presentation addresses challenges and solutions for establishing “smart co-ops” to harness the full potential of SA to optimize production efficiency, sustainability, and profitability in SMSPSs. Producers need low-cost DSSs that integrate local climate data with soil moisture sensors and multispectral imaging to identify and proactively manage crop stresses. Rural and economically distressed communities often lack the resources and infrastructure to support internet of things (IoT) connectivity. Therefore, establishing a network of smart ag co-ops capable of data collection and management for secure, anonymous data sharing is paramount for enhancing the contribution of S-MPSSs to global food security. Smart co-ops could better distribute equipment costs and ML computational requirements among its members. To train the future workforce, bridging the communication gap among current and future producers, agronomists, and computer scientists is vital for maintaining sustainable production systems and food security into the future.

Corn (Zea mays L.) is a versatile crop, ranked third in acerage within Mississippi (MS). Nonetheless, current stagnant yield, inefficient nitrogen (N) recovery, and fertilizer cost fluctuations are inflicting economic losses and contributing to environmental degradation. Failure to seek a new strategy poses a risk to meeting the global food demand, creating uncertainty in food supply. The utilization of biostimulants in agricultural practices has garnered significant interest due to their potential to enhance crop productivity and reduce environmental impact. Thus, a field study was carried out in 2022 and 2023 at two locations in MS. A split plot design was implemented, with four N rates as main plot including 0 (control), 90, 180, 224 kg N ha^-1 at Starkville and an additional 270 kg N ha^-1 at Stoneville. Subplot factor was six microbial biostimulants (Source^®, Envita^®, iNvigorate^®, Blue N^®, Micro AZ^TM, and Bio level phosN^®) applied as both foliar and in-furrow at V4-V5 growth stages, alongwith a no biostimulant check. R statistical software was used to analyze the data. Nitrogen rates significantly influenced grain yield at all site years, whereas biostimulants showed no effect on yield. Specifically, in Starkville 2023 the yield varied from 3.77 Mg ha^-1 in control to 12.15 Mg ha^-1 at 180 kg N ha^-1. In Stoneville (2022 & 2023) the yield ranged from 6.55 to 14.20 Mg ha^-1. Overall, microbial biostimulants had no impact on corn yield and further research on diverse biostimulant categories is warranted to reveal their potential benefits for productivity and environmental sustainability.

Urea based nitrogen (N) fertilizers commonly used in TN hay production systems are susceptible to ammonia volatilization during urea hydrolysis. Under hot, humid conditions the potential for volatilization increases. To minimize volatilization losses, producers will apply N stabilizer products, such as Agrotain or Nutrisphere. Enhanced efficiency fertilizers, such as Environmentally Smart Nitrogen (ESN), may offer better protection against N loss and extend N availability throughout the growing season. This research aims to evaluate the influence of stabilized and enhanced efficiency fertilizers on dry matter yield (DMY) in TN hay production systems. In 2023, 2 m x 3 m plots were established in a mixed species hay field at Cookeville, TN. The experiment was conducted as a randomized complete block design with three replications. Treatments were a control (zero N), untreated urea, urea treated with either Agrotain, Altera, or Nutrisphere, and ESN. Treatments were applied at 56 kg ha^-1. After 30 d, plots were harvested and analyzed for DMY using PROC GLM (α=0.05) (SAS v9.4). Yields ranged between 800 kg ha^-1 (Nutrisphere) and 1020 kg ha^-1 (ESN). Compared to the control (859 kg ha^-1), there were no differences among treatments. Rainfall was received 48 h after fertilizer application and was well distributed throughout the growing season likely minimizing the potential for N loss. Producers could apply ESN to maximize DMY. However, research under more controlled conditions is necessary.

Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] grown in midsouthern USA production systems are experiencing increased potassium deficiency even when granular potassium fertilizer is applied according to soil test recommendations. This study was conducted to determine soybean response to foliar potassium fertilizer applications at varying rates of soil applied potassium fertilizer. The effects of foliar potassium fertilizer application at various soybean growth stages (V5, R3, R5) in combination with three levels of soil applied granular potassium fertilizer (0, 101, 135 kg/ha K₂O) at planting were investigated at Mississippi State University’s Delta Research and Extension Center on a commerce very fine sandy loam (fine-silty, mixed, superactive, nonacid, thermic Fluvaquentic Endoaquept). Results to include soybean physiological traits (plant height, number of nodes, number of pods) and soybean grain yield will be discussed at length.

Farmers apply organic manure in conventionally tilled fields to enhance the soil's organic matter and plant-available nutrients. Manure differs in nutrient composition between animal species. Nutrients and sediments in runoff water are also influenced by the soil management practices and timing of rainfall. We hypothesize that runoff volume, sediment, and nutrient concentrations of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in runoff water will differ with application rates on conventionally tilled soil during a rainfall event. Hence, an artificial rainfall simulation was conducted in a conventionally tilled soil to evaluate how application rates (poultry litter: 1-, 2-, 3-, and 4-ton acre^-1: swine manure: 5k -, 10k -, 15k -, and 20k - gallons acre^-1) and rainfall timing (1, 2, and 3 weeks past manure application) affect runoff volume, and sediments and various species of N and P in runoff water during a one-inch rainfall event. The soil was collected in pans (21×12×2.5, in³) from a conventionally tilled field in Town Creek, Alabama. These pans were placed under a rainfall simulator to simulate one acre-inch of rainfall. Runoff water samples were collected and analyzed for total suspended solids and IN, DRP, TP, PP, TDP, and TOP using the standard protocols. Results will be presented.

SM (Swine manure), PL (Poultry litter), dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP), inorganic nitrogen (NO₃-N + NH₄-N), TP (Total Phosphorous), PP (Particulate Phosphorous), TDP ( Total Dissolved Phosphorous), TOP ( Total Organic Phosphorous)

Over the past few years peanut fields in parts of North Florida have shown moderate to severe symptoms of peanut decline late in the season. Many soils and plant nutrient, nematode, and disease diagnostic tests have been completed without reaching a conclusion. Many plant tissue test results have shown low potassium levels early in the season and continued to decrease on tests as the season progressed. Potassium is an essential nutrient for peanut health and is needed for many basic plant functions such as protein synthesis and pod development. Peanuts with potassium deficiencies show overall stunting, marginal leaf chlorosis, and poorly developed root systems. The appropriate dose of potassium to be applied to the soil may be affected by climatic conditions, genotype and the crop production and/or rotation system adopted. In the Suwannee Valley region with its sandy soil type, leaching of nutrients is a major problem especially when applied at the beginning of planting or when split applied (at planting and at bloom) which is the common practice followed by most farmers. Potassium, being highly leachable, is not available to peanuts in the later stages of its life cycle if applied at planting due to heavy/excessive rainfall events common in Florida. Controlled Release Fertilizer (CRF) releases small amounts of fertilizer components over time when the plant needs it. These polymer-coated fertilizers are designed to release nutrients at a predetermined rate over a specific time period. The release rate is aligned with the plant growth curve for specific crops and the release is guided by temperature for the region where the CRF will be used. This results in decreased nutrient losses and enhanced nutrient-use efficiency and use of controlled release potassium was investigated for peanut yield and grade.

In the United States, modified crops are regulated under the Coordinated Framework, with responsibility shared between USDA, EPA, and FDA. No new laws were passed, and regulatory authority is based on pre-existing statutes. The USDA biotechnology regulations are based on plant pest authority. In May 2020, USDA published revised regulations, the first full revision since 1987. Regulatory focus shifted to the level of the Plant Trait Mechanism-of-Action (PTMOA) combination, moving beyond the commonly used event-by-event approach. Unfortunately, this new regulation was vacated by court order in December 2024, and USDA has returned to implementing the 1987 legacy regulations. The revised rule included several progressive concepts. The definition of genetic engineering was updated to capture all genome edited products. All previously reviewed PTMOA were exempt from the regulation, and exemptions were provided for some genome edited products. Developers could request a Regulatory Status Review (RSR) to determine if a modified plant was subject to the regulations. During this period, USDA completed 84 RSRs and confirmed 99 exemptions. Half of the RSRs and over 80% of the confirmations were for genome edited plants. In 2025, the USDA returned to issuing responses to Am I Regulated (AIR) inquiries and reviewing petitions for determination of nonregulated status. To date this year, 43 AIR responses have been completed and four petitions posted for public comment. Modified plants expressing pesticidal properties are regulated by the EPA under pesticide safety authority. Plant Incorporated Protectants (PIPs), such as Bt proteins, are regulated as bio-pesticides. Since 1995, EPA has registered 47 PIPs, all transgenic. FDA regulates modified plants under food additive authority. Following a completed New Plant Variety Consultation, FDA issues a letter of “no further questions”. FDA has completed over 200 consultations, with only 2 for genome edited plants. Food safety is the responsibility of the food manufacturer.