Evaluating Wheat Seeding Speed Through the Research on the Farm Program

Andrew Enns on May 15, 2026

Faster speeds let you cover more acres per hour, but does this come at the expense of poor emergence or lower yield? How does it impact fuel use?

As a part of our Research on the Farm program, Manitoba Crop Alliance is addressing these questions by running a new trial to look at the impacts of seeding speed in spring wheat. Initial fuel use data from several trials has already been received. At most sites three seedings speeds were used: 4.5 mph, 6 mph, and 7.5 mph. Fuel use was tracked based on readouts from the tractor. Some preliminary results are already coming in. Higher speeds considerably reduce the time needed to seed a field as expected, but fuel use also appears to decrease slightly with higher speeds (Table 1).

Table 1.  Averages from six on-farm trials. Fuel costs assume diesel = $1.75/L.

Seeding speed Time needed to seed 160 acres Diesel use per 160 acres Fuel costs per 160 acres
4.5 mph 5.41 h 79.09 gal $524.34
6 mph 4.13 h 74.74 gal $495.55
7.5 mph 3.3 h 72.49 gal $480.64

 

Fuel usage was highly variable between trials ranging from 47 to 106 gal/160 acres, but the trend of higher speeds lowering fuel use was largely consistent (Figure 1).

Fuel use to seed 160 acres generally decreased as wheat seeding speed increased from 4.5 to 7.5 mph across multiple on-farm trial sites.

Figure 1. Fuel use at three seeding speeds across six on-farm trials. Grey lines represent individual trial sites and the red line shows the average at each speed.

Later in the growing season, plant stands, stand uniformity, and yield will be collected to assess if higher seeding speeds have any negative impact. Look out for updates on this project later this year.

I’m switching my wheat variety; do I need to change my seeding rate?

Andrew Hector on May 5, 2026

The short answer is yes; you will most likely need to change your seeding rate, but this is not just because you are planting a different wheat variety. Rather, seeding rates should be adjusted annually to reflect seed source characteristics (germination, thousand kernel weight [TKW]) and the environment the seed is being planted into, to ensure you can achieve your target plant population.  

Let’s dig into why this is. For spring wheat, provincial target plant population recommendations are between 23-28 pl/ft2, with many producers targeting the upper end of this recommendation. Achieving your target plant stands sets your crops up for success, as crop uniformity is improved, weed pressure is combatted and resources are optimized.  Seeding rates should be calculated to achieve your target plant stand, which means accounting for germination percentage, expected mortality and, importantly, your TKW. TKW changes year-to-year and from variety to variety.

Let’s consider an example to illustrate the relationship between kernel weight and seeding rate. For this example, let’s call our two varieties variety one and variety two. When comparing these two varieties we need to consider:

  • TKW: The weight (g) of 1,000 kernels of wheat from a specific seed lot.
  • Germination: If using bin-run seed, a seed test is needed to determine germination percentage. If purchasing certified seed, then your seed provider will be able to provide you with this information.
  • Expected mortality: The percent of seed/seedlings that won’t produce a plant due to unfavourable conditions or biotic stress.
  • Expected seed survival: Germination – Expected Mortality.

Example #1:

Variety

TKW

Germ (%)

Expected mortality (%)

Expected seed survival

Target plant density (pl/ft2)

1

42

97

6

91

27

2

33

97

6

91

27

Using the formula provided by Manitoba Agriculture (below) we can see the difference in seeding rates and therefore seed costs.

Seeding by plant population formula:

Seeding rate (lb/ac) = Target Plant Population (pl/ft2) x TKW (g)

                                              Expected Seed Survival (decimal) x 10

 Variety 1:

Seeding rate (lb/ac) = Target Plant Population (pl/ft2) x TKW (g)

                                              Expected Seed Survival (decimal) x 10                                          

                                                         = 27 (pl/ft2) x 42 (g)

                                                                     0.91 x 10

                                                         = 125 lb/ac

Variety 2:

Seeding rate (lb/ac) = Target Plant Population (pl/ft2) x TKW (g)

                                              Expected Seed Survival (decimal)

                                                         = 27 (pl/ft2) x 34 (g)

                                                                     0.91 x 10

                                                          = 101 lb/ac

This example shows that there is roughly a 24 lb/ac difference between the two seeding rates to achieve the same desired plant population. If you seeded variety 2 at the same rate as variety 1, then you would have over seeded, which could result in a thicker canopy, bringing challenges like an increased lodging and disease development risk.

Also, over seeding would have cost you money. Using a standard seed cost of 0.27 ¢/lb of seed (Manitoba Cost of Production Guide), then variety 2 at your normal rate would cost an additional $6.5/ac of seed that is probably not needed to reach your desired plant population.

Now, if the weather, disease, insects and equipment co-operate, you’ll achieve your target plant population. But it’s always best practice to do plant counts to get an understanding of the crop establishment and uniformity of emergence. More information on plant stand counts can be found here: Plant Stand Counts in Spring Cereals | Manitoba Crop Alliance.

Should I be looking at biologicals to offset high fertilizer costs?

Ashley Ammeter on May 5, 2026

First, let’s clarify what we mean when we’re talking about biological products. This is a broad group that includes both naturally occurring substances (such as humic or fulvic acids, seaweed extracts and enzymes) as well as beneficial microbes (such as nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphorus-solubilizing microbes, plant growth promoting rhizobacteria and mycorrhizal fungi). These products aren’t fertilizers themselves, but often claim to increase nutrient availability, improve nutrient uptake, improve stress tolerance or support plant growth.

Since high fertilizer prices have prompted some renewed interest in these products, I’ll focus mainly on nitrogen-fixing biologicals.

A quick note on regulation (and why it matters)

In Canada, most of these products are regulated under the Fertilizers Act. That means they must be properly labelled and prove that they are safe, but they do not need to prove efficacy before being sold. This makes replicated, independent research particularly important to test whether a product increases yield or can replace fertilizer under Manitoba conditions.

What has local research found?

Through our Research on the Farm program, MCA has tested a nitrogen-fixing biological product (Envita®) in several replicated, field-scale strip trials. In the eight corn and two spring wheat trials, we did not find a statistically significant yield increase when the nitrogen-fixing biological product was used.

Through their On-Farm Network, our colleagues with Manitoba Pulse and Soybean Growers (MPSG) have also tested many biological products. In 46 trials evaluating a range of microbial and non-microbial products, no statistically significant yield increases have been observed.

That doesn’t mean these products can never work. It does mean that predictable ROI has been hard to find under Manitoba conditions.

Does small‑plot research tell a different story?

Not really.

University and independent research in Western Canada and the North Central United States to date has largely lined up with what MCA and MPSG have found in on-farm trials. There are occasional positive responses, but they’re sporadic and can be hard to predict. For example:

Why are results so inconsistent? Formulation challenges, competition with the native microbial population and environmental differences all influence whether a product will find success. For those interested in learning more on this topic, Andrew McGuire with Washington State University has an interesting article.

So, should you use biologicals to offset high fertilizer costs?

Biologicals are an active area of research, and some products may eventually find a fit in our cropping systems. But based on local on‑farm and small-plot research to date, they are unfortunately not a silver bullet for high fertilizer prices.

If you do want to try a biological product, think about what problem you’re trying to solve. Is it a nutrient deficiency? Are you hoping to mitigate environmental stress? Are you trying to improve your long-term soil health? Consider the product claims, what the active ingredient is and how the product claims to work. Finally, if you do decide to try a product on your farm, I encourage you to consider conducting a replicated strip trial. Replicated strip trials let you test a product on your own farm, with your own management, and give statistically valid results. If you want to learn more about conducting on-farm trials, reach out to us for more information on the MCA Research on the Farm program.

The bottom line: For now, I recommend approaching biologicals with curiosity, caution and solid, on‑farm testing. To ensure you’re making efficient use of your fertilizers, use the 4Rs of nutrient stewardship (the Right Source @ the Right Rate, Right Time, and Right Place®) to guide your decision making, and check out this helpful factsheet on stretching fertilizer dollars and supplies from Manitoba Agriculture.

How much 10-34-0 can be applied with my corn seed?

Morgan Cott on May 5, 2026

Oddly, I have had this conversation more this winter/spring than ever before. On paper, there is a finite answer. Anecdotally, there are a few different options and it is all dependent on soil type and soil conditions, moisture, etc.

First of all, side-banding any type of fertilizer is much safer than placing it with the seed. Some fertilizers are safe in certain quantities with the seed, but very few. Side-banding is much safer and provides quick access to the roots. Midrow banding is the safest method, but roots take that much longer to access the fertilizer row, which negates the “starter” effect. The other factor that indicates the level of safety is soil moisture; the drier the soil, the more risky it is to place any fertilizer with or near the seed.

I’m guilty of thinking that fertilizer toxicity to the seed is mainly due to the nitrogen content and a result of ammonia burn. Salt injury is actually more common and affects germination and early season growth, so applying fertilizers that have a low salt index in closer proximity to the seed is best, if any has to be close to the seed at all. Bonus points if there is good soil moisture at the time of fertilization.

As I mentioned, on paper there are defined rates of 10-34-0 that can safely be applied in-furrow with corn on 30” rows. This table shows those rates and placement that will help to avoid salt injury to the corn crop.

Table: Amount of 10-34-0 (gal/acre) to help avoid salt injury to corn grown in 30” rows.

After having some discussions with Manitoba corn farmers on various soil types, I did get some reasonable responses explaining increasing rates in heavier, wetter soils. But more importantly, decreasing the above rates in dry and/or lighter soils. These were purely anecdotal and not research-based.

I recommend being very conservative in 10-34-0 rates if you are new to trying this method of application, and especially if you are planting in dry conditions and/or coarse soil textures. Start small and have many conversations with your peers on their experiences with various rates of 10-34-0 in-furrow. Use that information to make a conservative decision of your own.

Remember, start your season with success and make smart choices. Do not make decisions that could get your crop off to a bad start. We live in Manitoba – Mother Nature is hard enough on us in spring.

CDC Triffid Testing Protocols Terminated

Morgan Cott on May 4, 2026

Manitoba Crop Alliance (MCA) works closely with industry partners to build relationships and collaborative opportunities. Through these industry relationships and discussions with farmer members, MCA has prioritized the importance of eliminating the CDC Triffid testing protocol on Canadian flax being exported into the EU, which has been in place since 2009. It has been over 13 years since CDC Triffid has been identified in any Canadian shipments destined for the EU. The termination of the testing protocol is great news for Canadian flax farmers and exporters and will hopefully lead to improved international trade of Canadian flax.

Read Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s full news release here: Removal of non-tariff trade barrier for flaxseed to the EU reflects confidence in Canada’s agricultural exports.

We’re Hiring: Research Program Manager – Special Crops

Coles Ag on April 27, 2026

We are seeking a full-time Research Manager – Special Crops for a one-year term beginning mid-July 2026 to join our dynamic team and execute MCA’s corn, flax, sunflower and whole farm research program.

The Research Program Manager – Special Crops is responsible for executing MCA’s corn, flax, sunflower and whole farm research program, ensuring integration of research investments with MCA’s strategic plan, under the supervision of the Chief Operating Officer.

The individual who joins the MCA team needs to have a passion for agriculture and will work with our growing research program to develop a strategy for research investment that is consistent with our strategic goals for the organization. We want a self-starter, highly motivated person with a positive and team-oriented attitude.

Click here to view the full job posting, including duties and responsibilities, desired qualifications and experience, and working conditions of the position.

To apply, please forward a resume and letter of interest by email to darcelle@mbcropalliance.ca. The application deadline for this position is 4:30 p.m. CDT on June 8, 2026.

We thank all applicants for their interest. Only those selected for an interview will be contacted.

Amanda Ellis, flax crop committee

Coles Ag on April 20, 2026

WEB_Amanda-Ellis-2

Amanda Ellis farms near Wawanesa, MB, with her husband Simon and his family at Ellis Seeds. The Ellis family has farmed the homestead where Amanda and Simon now live since 1919, and the operation continues to run with support from both sides of the family and close friends. They grow wheat, oats, soybeans, peas, flax and canola.

What motivated you to get into farming?

I fell into farming with my husband’s family to fill a need. I came from a business and finance background and started by taking on some casual bookkeeping for the farm. I enjoyed being part of the farming work and, over time, became more involved in the day-to-day operations.

I’ve always enjoyed working with numbers, being outdoors and being part of something that contributes to our communities. This role allows me to do all those things. One of my favourite parts of farming is the constant learning.

What motivated you to get involved with Manitoba Crop Alliance (MCA)?

I wanted to better understand the research, market development and advocacy work that supports our industry. I was encouraged by a previous delegate to get involved, and there’s a great opportunity to learn from the people you work with on the committees.

What does your role on the flax crop committee involve?

We review research priorities, explore challenges and opportunities facing the flax sector, and help recommend how funding is invested to support farmers.

How has being a delegate benefited you?

Being a delegate has given me a broader perspective on the industry. I’ve learned more about the challenges and opportunities facing farmers through the people involved, including both farmers and staff. One of the best parts is working with other farmers and industry representatives who are passionate about agriculture.

Is there a project or area of work you’re especially proud of being part of as a delegate?

I enjoyed attending the 2025 Flax Forum, where stakeholders from across the flax industry gathered to discuss opportunities, challenges and the sector’s economic impact on the Canadian economy.

Is there anything you’d like farmer members to know about the work MCA is doing?

From my perspective, MCA has created real value for individual farmers and the industry. It has been a strong advocate, pushing for research and market development that directly benefit farmers. For individual farmers, that means better resources, learning opportunities and a stronger voice. For the industry, it helps keep us competitive and innovative.

Why do you think other people should get involved with MCA?

Getting involved is a great way to contribute to the future of agriculture, learn more about the industry and ensure farmers’ perspectives are represented in decision-making.

What are you most excited about when it comes to the future of your farm?

I’m excited about how the farm brings our team together and about watching the business continue to evolve.

Do you have any hobbies outside of farming?

I like hiking, paddleboarding, kayaking, camping, gardening, cross-country skiing, curling, knitting, reading and playing games with my family: cards, board games, video games, you name it.

What is a good piece of advice you’ve received that’s stuck with you?

Be present whenever possible and tell yourself every morning, “I will make today a good day.” The day might not go as planned, but you tried.

If you weren’t farming, what do you think you’d be doing?

I’d likely still be in the finance industry, with a focus on ag finance and merging the two fields. That’s a world I enjoy, listening to people’s dreams for their future and coming up with a plan to help make that a reality.

Who or what inspires you?

There have been many people throughout my life who have inspired me. A college teacher with a broad range of experience and knowledge who was clearly teaching because he genuinely loved it. My manager in lending at the credit union, who showed me what leadership with compassion and trust looks like. My husband and his ability to see everything as a challenge with a solution, to work tirelessly when needed and to recognize when it’s time to rest. My kids, who see the world through a lens of curiosity and creativity. My parents, who devoted themselves to their community and family and showed me the value of giving time to others. And the people I meet in the ag industry, who are pushing through challenges to make things happen every day. 

Learn more about Amanda or connect with her at ellisseeds.com.

Strengthening Collaboration for Manitoba Farmers

Coles Ag on April 15, 2026

WEB_Image-1

On Apr. 14, leaders from Manitoba Crop Alliance (MCA), Manitoba Canola Growers Association (MCGA) and Manitoba Pulse & Soybean Growers (MPSG) came together for a joint meeting focused on collaboration and strategic alignment. The session provided an opportunity to strengthen relationships and explore how our organizations can better work together in support of our farmer members and Manitoba’s agriculture industry.

A common thread throughout the day was the importance of clear, consistent communication between organizations, with government and, most importantly, with farmers. Discussions explored shared priorities in research, innovation and extension, emphasizing the need to communicate results in ways that are practical and accessible.

Participants also reflected on how communication shapes each organization’s value proposition and impact, particularly as expectations around return on investment continue to evolve. Advocacy alignment further reinforced the power of co-ordinated messaging and engagement.

This meeting reflects a shared commitment to ongoing dialogue and collaboration among all three organizations. By strengthening communication and working together with intention, MCA, MCGA and MPSG are better positioned to deliver meaningful outcomes and support Manitoba farmers well into the future.

Making Every Pound Count: Nutrient Management in Corn

Morgan Cott on April 8, 2026

Fertility starts with the soil and the variables that make nutrients available to a growing crop.

Know Your Soil Texture

  • Clay – very fine, soils with >50% clay
  • Silt – rock & mineral particles that are larger than clay and smaller than sand. Soils with >87% silt
  • Sand – very coarse, soils with >70% sand
  • Loam – a balanced mixture of clay, silt and sand (approximately 20-40-40)

 

Soil Texture Triangle
Soil Texture Triangle

Soil texture determines a soil’s water holding capacity. Sand has low capacity to hold water and low water content at permanent wilting point (~10-15% v/v). Clay loam has a higher capacity to hold water, therefore has a higher water content at permanent wilting point (~15-20% v/v).

Relationship Between Soil Texture and Water Availability
Relationship Between Soil Texture and Water Availability

Nutrient Balance

Nutrient balance is vital to soil fertility and crop production. Nitrogen is most commonly the first and most limiting nutrient for non-legume crops, but without an adequate fertility blend with other nutrients, nitrogen use efficiency is not “maxed out” and suffers.

A poorly fertilized corn crop uses just a little less soil water over the season than an adequately fertilized crop, and yet fewer bushels of corn are produced per inch of water used. The properly fertilized crop is able to be much more efficient in water usage to produce more grain per inch of water used.

Nutrient Uptake

 Nutrient movement in the soil and uptake by plant roots is important to understand because it dictates where fertilizer placement best facilitates root uptake. Nitrogen and sulfur are very mobile in the soil and move via mass flow. This essentially means that they move with the soil water. As a plant transpires water, the roots are required to draw in more nutrient-rich soil water and they do this by creating tension that draws the soil water to the roots. The rate of transpiration is related to environmental conditions, so poor soil moisture or cold temperatures,  for example, will decrease the rate of transpiration, therefore decrease uptake of soil water (and nutrients) via mass flow. Phosphorus and potassium move in the soil via diffusion, meaning that with the help of soil moisture, the nutrients move from areas of high P or K concentration to areas of lower P or K concentration. As the nutrients are absorbed by plant roots and moved up into the plant, the roots become an area of low concentration, thereby drawing nutrients towards the roots from a higher concentration zone.

Nutrient Mass Flow & Diffusion
Nutrient Mass Flow & Diffusion

Nitrogen

 Exact nitrogen rates in corn are still hard to identify and perfect. Modern corn hybrids have improved in nitrogen use efficiency, but more than that is required to optimize nitrogen uptake. We have already discussed how nutrient balance in the soil optimizes nutrient uptake, but soil conditions and the environment above and below the ground play major roles in this as well.

In 2016-17, John Heard, former Manitoba Agriculture Soil Fertility Specialist, performed a nitrogen use and uptake project in corn to identify whether nitrogen recommendations needed to be updated. Following this project, Dr. Don Flaten’s graduate student, Lanny Gardiner, then began his Master’s research, in 2018, on a similar study, “Optimum Nitrogen Fertilizer Management Strategies for Modern Corn Hybrids in Manitoba”. The two studies complemented each other with similar findings, which were the following:

Nitrogen requirement to achieve the economically optimum yield for higher and lower potential yields. John Heard, 2022 – Profitable Nitrogen Rates.

 

A site that has a “lower” potential yield would be one that could be considered to have poor productivity. This may include variables like drainage issues, salinity, soil productivity, or poor crop management choices like delayed seeding, compaction issues, or delayed weed control, for example.

Dry sites in 2018-19 needed more nitrogen to achieve similar yields because dry soils have less mineralization of soil organic matter and decreased mass flow movement of nitrate-N to the plant root.

Phosphorus

Phosphorus is required for plant growth and seed development, therefore should be placed at least in a sideband for availability in early growth. It is not very mobile in the soil and will not get leached in spring conditions like we know nitrogen will in high moisture.

The general recommendation for phosphorus requirements in corn is +0.6 lbs of P per bushel of yield. Uptake is equivalent to 0.6 lbs P/bu and removal is 0.36 lbs P/bu, so it is very important to consider what your preferred level of phosphorus in the soil is following a corn crop.

Applying phosphorus at planting is the best practice for availability. The safest placement is in a 2×2 band but proceed with caution if applying P in a sideband with other nutrients. P is used throughout the season and some farmers choose to apply additional P in-crop, which can be a good practice but not studied thoroughly in Manitoba to come to an economical conclusion.

Potassium

Corn requires 1.28 lbs K per bushel, but will only remove 0.21 lbs K/bu. In a 150 bushel crop, uptake will be about 192 lbs of potassium and removal will be 32 lbs of potassium because so much of the nutrient stays in the vegetative tissues. Manitoba soils are generally high in potassium, but it is important to monitor and fertilize to maintain K supply in the soil. 

To support a corn crop, ensure there is greater than 200 ppm of K in the soil. When levels start appearing in the 100’s, farmers may see benefits from adding K at this time. Livestock farmers may find a significant benefit from applying manure in this situation.

If potassium becomes deficient, the plant will pull the nutrient from older leaves to feed the younger leaves, developing grain, etc., just like nitrogen, and that is when deficiency symptoms appear.

Sulfur

Sulfur is not needed in high quantities like our other three macros, but it is required for corn development and chlorophyll production, therefore photosynthesis. 

Corn does not necessarily respond to additional sulfur fertilizer, unless soils are already deficient, whereby a yield response will occur with fertilization. Farmers should be aware of sulfur levels in the soil and be prepared to apply sulfur when levels decline. Sulphate sources are typically available to the crop immediately, so timing of application can be flexible. If deficiency symptoms appear (interveinal striping), rescue applications can be effectively made. 

Additional Resources on Corn Fertilization:

Introducing Year Three of MCA’s Strategic Plan

Coles Ag on April 2, 2026

The third and final year of MCA’s 2024-27 strategic plan has begun! New Step Goals have been developed and strategy execution is ongoing. MCA directors and staff worked collaboratively to make the updated strategic plan. Below is the breakdown of year three.

Big Goal Tweaks

There was one tweak to the wording of Big Goal #3. The wording change aligns better with the intent of the Big Goal and leaves space for the Big Goal to be robust and meet organizational needs. 

  • Big Goal #3: Inspire areas for bold investment that facilitate historic initiatives.

New Step Goals

  • Nine new Step Goals were developed spanning all Big Goals. Many of the new Step Goals build on the outcomes from year two of the plan.
  • All the Step Goals were developed to complete the Big Goals and ensure MCA continues its positive impact as an organization.

Below is MCA’s strategic plan for 2026-27. Stay tuned for more information regarding MCA’s strategic plan on our website and in our publications!

 

Top