We’ve Got More Than Enough Corn

, director, Food & Environment Program | July 8, 2015, 10:39 am EDT
Bookmark and Share

Nowhere is the power and prowess of agricultural science so evident as in the Midwestern Corn Belt. More of this nation’s economic success and global dominance is due to the corn plant than most Americans realize. In fact, the reason most of us can be oblivious to that very fact—as we busily flit about our non-agricultural lives—owes to the crop’s exceptional productivity and its congenial malleability to our purposes. Since the 19th century, when people of European descent settled the area that is now the Corn Belt (currently extending from western Ohio to eastern Nebraska), yields of the crop have more than quintupled per unit of land, and increased by more than 8 times per unit of labor. Visualize this compound advancement by imagining a farmer prior to 1930 laboring 25 hours per acre to produce 30 bushel baskets of 56 pounds of grain each—if lucky, compared with his counterpart today investing less than 3 hours to produce 170 bushels on that same acre. This is the result of scientific research and the entrepreneurial application of technology by farmers. The nation’s industrial development was enabled in large measure by this transformation, including the industrialization of the corn crop itself.

Pushing the accelerator on corn production

Most of this technological improvement accelerated with the introduction of corn hybrids in the 1930s, a scientific project by then half a century in the making. Mechanization followed, as did fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides, each investment in additional technology justified by the productive response of corn, the featured crop around which Midwestern agriculture specialized. Today the wave of technological development continues, with the adoption of packages of bespoke biotech seeds and herbicides, computerized field mapping, self-guided equipment and variable rate applicators that take their electronic directions from those maps coordinated with satellite positioning systems, and drones that facilitate field scouting. Add to this climate models that assess the risks and rewards of investment on the basis of meteorological records combined with weather forecasts and crop prices. Whereas agricultural extension agents worked over a decade to persuade farmers of the 1930s to adopt hybrid seeds, today’s industrial farmers know that it can be costly, if not inimical to their survival, to delay adopting new tech. At the core of this industrial system—by now an intertwined global network of equipment, seed and chemical purveyors, technical advisors, farm managers, chemical applicators, grain traders and processors—is the corn crop, steadily and dependably gaining 2 bushels per acre per year of productivity, with no sign of exhausting its productive potential.

In fact, that yield potential is still at least 3 times greater than the current national yield average, as attested by the 503.8 bushel per acre world record yield attained last year in Valdosta, GA by farmer Randy Dowdy. There is only one other crop plant that can compare: sugarcane—like corn, a giant grass plant. But—unlike corn, which has been made most productive in the globe’s temperate zones—sugarcane is a perennial thereby restricted to tropical and subtropical zones. I wanted to know the secrets of corn’s productivity when I went to graduate school at Iowa State University 35 years ago to study with the renowned researcher Brent Pearce. Dr. Pearce was leading an interesting field of research wherein physiologists would specify to breeders what traits they should select to improve crop performance. He and a colleague, Jim Mock, had published the specification of an ideal corn plant to optimize yield, an “ideotype” in the parlance of crop physiologists (agricultural scientists specialized in understanding how crops—communities of individual plants, as opposed to individual plants—function.) If you drive through the Corn Belt today, you will see that ideotype realized, 40 decades later, and flourishing across the landscape.

Corn: the ultimate designer crop

The agronomic objective for any crop is to bathe it in light, top to bottom, because it is light energy—through photosynthesis—that drives crop productivity. Because the energy content of sunlight is so high relative to the amount leaves can use to drive photosynthesis (even though corn is unusually adept at this too) it isn’t very productive to intercept most light at the top of a crop canopy and shade the remainder. The modern corn plant is 10 feet tall, with up to 20 leaves when fully grown. That height enables an architecture that separates leaves vertically, at successive levels in a deep canopy. Those leaves display nearly a square yard of area per plant. To intercept as much light as possible per unit of land area, up to 40,000 of these tall, slim plants are crammed onto an acre. This is how a typical corn stand can display about 6.5 acres of leaf area on a single acre of land. You would think this crowding would result in competition, shading and diminished productivity. After all, each additional plant on an acre signifies fewer resources—water and soil nutrients—for all individual plants in the stand, in effect creating drought and soil infertility. Having selected for maize plants that can tolerate these conditions, breeders have forged burly, hardy plants that are drought resistant and efficient users of nutrients. The whole crop stand is crowned by a small tassel, or male flower, which is so prolific in producing pollen that Mock and Pearce accurately predicted it could be shrunk considerably, thereby shading the crop stand less than the giant tassels of the past—while still adequately pollinating the crop.

Photo credit: a corn stand southwest of Ames, Iowa. Summer 2014. R. Salvador

A modern designer corn crop, outside Ames, Iowa. Photo: R. Salvador

These improvements have collectively added up to a devastatingly productive crop, which establishes earlier and grows faster than its predecessors. When I arrived in Iowa in August 1980, there was a folksy saying to track progress of the corn crop, which even then was becoming dated. The crop was supposed to be on schedule if it reached “knee high by the fourth of July.” Today’s turbocharged corn crop is more like shoulder high, 5 feet, by the fourth of July. In fact Midwestern farmers, and those of us who are madly in love with the crop, know that in the coming two weeks we will see one of the most amazing displays of its might. In this period of time it will double its height, and unfurl about 8 new leaves beyond the 12 already on display.

This is possible because, like all grasses, corn is modular. Each module, stacked upon another and called a phytomer, features an internode, a branch bud and a leaf. When the young corn plant is manufactured, the genetic program that directs the process specifies: make node, make branch, make leaf, make internode, rotate 180 degrees, repeat 20 times. This all happens very early, and is complete by the time that five leaves are displayed. The miniature parts of the entire vegetative structure are all in place in that young seedling. You’d hardly notice the corn crop at that stage in what would look like a still empty field as you whizzed by it in your car. Thereafter, all internodes elongate simultaneously, limited only by the amount of sunlight, carbon dioxide, water and nutrients the plant can invest in the process. The more it grows, the more leaf and root tissue it develops, the faster the process occurs. And now, in early July, we’ll see explosive growth, because 20 internodes are expanding simultaneously, culminating with flowering—the emergence of male and female flowers, tassels and silks, respectively—around mid-July.

Photo Credit: “How a Corn Plant Grows.” Iowa State University, Steve Ritchie and Garren Benson.

Exploded view of corn phytomers and components on the verge of tasseling stage. Photo: “How a Corn Plant Grows.” Iowa State University, Steve Ritchie and Garren Benson.

Unless we fix an error, corn will take over the world!

I’ll pick up this story again around that time, in a couple of weeks, and periodically through harvest time. But amid all this talk of productivity I should insert my sobering destination. During my final phases of study at Iowa State I encountered a technical difficulty. I was programming everything I knew about corn to create a simulation to predict yield. I was relying on data from the venerable Don Duvick, long-term vice-president of hybrid development at Pioneer Hi-Bred International. The numbers I needed were quite arcane, and no one had followed up on exacting research Dr. Duvick had conducted for his doctoral research in the 1950s, wherein he determined the patterns of cell division in corn kernels. As it happened, he had made an error in the way he reported his results, and this error threw my calculations. We were only 30 miles apart from each other, yet I was a lowly graduate student and he a member of the National Academy of Sciences, one of the eminences of our field, and I didn’t have the courage to contact him. When I met him a few years later, I realized I should have just phoned the gracious gentleman, and I would have spared myself many weeks of frustration. He was, incidentally, tickled that after 30 years I had been the first and only person to catch a technical error in his dissertation that he had become aware of too late, and which he’d long forgotten. But this is where initially accepting his erroneous figures led me: corn kernels theoretically would grow exponentially, without bound. As one of my professors told me when he reviewed my model: “Corn will take over the world!”

It is time to rethink the Midwestern corn production machine

And, actually, this is where we are. We have produced enough corn. And we cannot afford to ignore that fact and to rethink the Midwest’s corn production system. In tandem with the many benefits I’ve alluded here, many serious problems attend the overproduction of this crop. In itself, the crop is noble, the crop is historical; it is economically significant and life-giving, but it is also at the core of the most significant issues we must resolve in agriculture as well as as a society. These problems, it turns out, are the problems of industrialization: labor exploitation, economic inequality, extraction, pollution, overconsumption and the inertia that flows from needing to preserve and protect investment in infrastructure.

This production season, about 8 million acres of corn have not been planted due to weather. This might signify lower supply at season’s end and thereby higher prices for those corn farmers who were able to plant on time. But there is too much corn. There are many other overproducing corn belts around the planet, and weather and growing conditions there have been good thus far, leading instead to the prospect of lower prices, potentially below the cost of production. In the U.S., if that happens, we will take care of these corn farmers through government programs, keeping them in business to again attempt to overproduce a crop whose major purpose is to find a purpose (in the Midwest, the problem of what to do with all that corn is euphemistically referred to as the endless quest to “develop new markets.”)

As I continue to trace the continuing progress of the corn crop this production season, I’ll explore what it means to advocate for less corn production but not necessarily fewer farmers. The guide star in pursuit of these questions should be: “What do we need to do?” And not how to continue doing what we know to do so well, whether needed or not.

Posted in: Food and Agriculture Tags: , ,

Support from UCS members make work like this possible. Will you join us? Help UCS advance independent science for a healthy environment and a safer world.

Show Comments


Comment Policy

UCS welcomes comments that foster civil conversation and debate. To help maintain a healthy, respectful discussion, please focus comments on the issues, topics, and facts at hand, and refrain from personal attacks. Posts that are commercial, self-promotional, obscene, rude, or disruptive will be removed.

Please note that comments are open for two weeks following each blog post. UCS respects your privacy and will not display, lend, or sell your email address for any reason.

  • Troy Ott

    What you describe about the technological innovation associated with corn production could just as easily be said about health care, communications, transportation and a myriad of other human endeavors that have benefited greatly from the adoption of technological advances. The problems you allude to, but do not detail, towards the end are not unique to corn, nor are they inevitable outcomes of the application of technology.

  • Jerry Leverenz

    Nice and interesting bit of research history.
    I really appreciate the mention of earlier growth for the corn crops because by 21 June (summer solstice) half of the solar energy for the year is over and is wasted if it only hits bare ground. (Bare ground is also bad for nutrient losses, wind and water erosion.) Capturing this early sunshine must be important.
    I may be wrong but I think corn grains can not grow exponentially without limits. For a corn plant to function it has to have leaves, roots, and a stem so there is an upper limit on the “harvest index” that is the amount of plant that is in the harvestable part (the grains).
    What about optimising productivity per unit of fossil fuel input? Surely this must be an important topic these days? There must be researchers working on this as opposed to maximising productivity per hectare or per man hour?

    Farming is done by many independent actors and this leads to nearly perfect competition between them and the price of the product in general will be pushed to be close to the costs of production. For this reason farmers need to be protected, develop cooperatives etc so they have more bargaining power against the big players, the large food companies, the large seed producers. Climate change and the draining of fossil water resources with subsequent loss of productivity may put an end to the competition problem for the farmers who remain.
    Personally if possible I buy everything I don’t grow myself directly from local farmers. They earn more and are protected from the big players. Unfortunately, these days its impossible to find a local dairy to buy milk from: only the big conglomerates have survived.

  • Bounusposs

    <❶❷❸.%@^@^@??????????????. +ucsusa +Part-time working I looked at the draft which said $9958@mk6 < Read more info here='' ……..''

    <║████║░░║████║████║░░║████║████║░░║████║

    16

  • Ms Myriad

    The Monoculture model needs to die, or perhaps be terminated with extreme prejudice. None of those farmers should be growing ONLY corn. No farmer should be growing ONLY one crop. The Three Sisters is a great place to start: gourd plants to shade the roots which reduces water evaporation and sun-starves weed before they can get established, climbing pea/bean plants which fix nitrogen in the soil, and corn (ideally multiple varieties) which provides the nitrogen fixers with a convenient stalk so they can climb above the gourd’s shade to get sun. It was a brilliant model used by the native peoples of the Americas and I see no reason why it should not be revisited today as we realize the shortcomings of using a new “miracle” chemical or “labor-saving” machine to solve every problem.

    • Janice Rickert Mueller

      How big is your farm and does it support you?

      • JoeFarmer

        And you’ll never get an answer…

  • Richard Solomon

    What has happened with the mass production of corn is a good example of the law of unintended consequences. Or, be careful what you ask for because you might get it!

    I look forward to more posts to see what Ricardo suggests as a way out of this situation. Convincing companies like Monsanto to make these kinds of changes will be a daunting challenge, to be sure.

  • CaseyAAvera

    High Quality performance ucsusa.r…. <…. Find Here

  • gnomeoffender

    Wouldn’t be the first time where a good idea over time became a rotten one.
    Ford’s assembly line provided jobs and built cities raised the middle class and just as quickly and efficiently spun out of control into major sinkhole.
    Our inability to control the efficiencies of industrialization and accompanying fungai that attach themselves to exploit labor and political structures will ever be with us.