Malt Barley Yield and Quality Affected by Irrigation, Tillage, Crop Rotation, and Nitrogen Fertilization

Abstract

Little is known about the comparison of management practices on malt barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) yield and quality in irrigated and non‐irrigated cropping systems. We evaluated the effects of irrigation, tillage, cropping system, and N fertilization on malt barley yield and quality in a sandy loam soil from 2005 to 2011 in croplands converted from Conservation Reserve Program in western North Dakota. Treatments were two irrigation practices (irrigated vs. non‐irrigated) and five cropping systems (conventional till malt barley with nitrogen fertilizer [CTBN], conventional till malt barley without nitrogen fertilizer [CTBO], no‐till malt barley–pea [Pisum sativum L.] with nitrogen fertilizer [NTB–P], no‐till malt barley with nitrogen fertilizer [NTBN], and no‐till malt barley without nitrogen fertilizer [NTBO]). Malt barley biomass and grain yields were greater with NTB–P, CTBN, and NTBN than CTBO and NTBO in the irrigated and non‐irrigated practices. Compared with CTBO and NTBO, grain protein concentration was greater with CTBN in the irrigated practice and greater with NTB‐P in the non‐irrigated practice. Grain plumpness was greater with CTBO than CTBN in the irrigated practice and greater with CTBN than NTB–P in the non‐irrigated practice. Plant stand and test weight were greater with CTBO than CTBN in the irrigated practice and harvest index greater with NTBO than other treatments in the non‐irrigated practice. Because of similar or superior yield and quality, NTB–P may be used to sustain malt barley yield and quality compared with the traditional CTBN in the irrigated condition and during years with adequate precipitation in the non‐irrigated condition.