Farm Progress

Replication is key when minimizing the margin for error in on-farm research.

Tyler Harris, Editor

November 18, 2016

3 Min Read

Now that what seems like one of the longest, most drawn-out election cycles has finally come to a close, it's a good time to look at things farmers and ranchers can do next year to improve their bottom line. It's something you'll be hearing about much more this winter, no doubt. Winter is a time for decision-making, and that's all the more important when commodity prices are down.


This leads us to one of the key topics on farmers' radars when it comes to the planning process: on-farm research. As a number of agronomists and Nebraska Extension educators have pointed out to me, data from input suppliers is important, but when possible, it always helps to verify whether that input, or a prescribed seeding rate or nitrogen application rate, worked on your soil, your topography, your climate. That's how you ensure the dollars you're spending have the most promise for a return on investment.

Multiple small trial plots are great for generating data for the masses, and it's a great place to start down the decision-making path. However, it's always important to remember those plots aren't field-scale plots in many cases, and that leaves out certain weather and soil variables you'll run into on your own farm.

Yes, this kind of research is incredibly valuable. But as Nebraska Extension educator Strahinja Stepanovic noted to me this fall, it's important to keep in mind that no matter how many replications are made, "nothing is 100% proven in research." That is, there's always a margin for error. The only thing we can do is make that margin a little smaller with each replication. That's why replication is so important — not to mention testing in strip trials to account for different variables, while also testing on a real-world level.

On that same token, it's important to make sure the things you're monitoring have quantifiable results. As the old adage goes, "You can't manage what you don't measure." And that means monitoring things that are not only anecdotal, but quantifiable — quantifying these factors keeps research objective.

As Jeff Bradshaw, Extension entomologist in the Nebraska Panhandle has pointed out in a Panhandle Perspectives column, "Scientific consensus is never set in stone." The scientific method encourages constant questioning of what might be the scientific consensus, and that scientific consensus can only be reached after a hypothesis is tested and proves its muster through several years of replication.

The best way to understand how an input or prescription will work on your acres is to test it out on your farm — and replicate those trials to mitigate uncertainty. As a wise farmer noted to me earlier this year, the best way to overcome emotion in decision-making is through data collection and analysis.

About the Author(s)

Tyler Harris

Editor, Wallaces Farmer

Tyler Harris is the editor for Wallaces Farmer. He started at Farm Progress as a field editor, covering Missouri, Kansas and Iowa. Before joining Farm Progress, Tyler got his feet wet covering agriculture and rural issues while attending the University of Iowa, taking any chance he could to get outside the city limits and get on to the farm. This included working for Kalona News, south of Iowa City in the town of Kalona, followed by an internship at Wallaces Farmer in Des Moines after graduation.

Coming from a farm family in southwest Iowa, Tyler is largely interested in how issues impact people at the producer level. True to the reason he started reporting, he loves getting out of town and meeting with producers on the farm, which also gives him a firsthand look at how agriculture and urban interact.

Subscribe to receive top agriculture news
Be informed daily with these free e-newsletters

You May Also Like