University of FloridaSolutions for Your Life

Download PDF
Publication #SS-AGR-443

Adjusting Crop Yield to a Standard Moisture Content1

Michael J. Mulvaney and Pratap Devkota2

Introduction

Reporting crop yield at a standardized moisture content is important for proper grain storage, standardization across buying points (buyers want to purchase grain, not water), and the comparison of results across research trials. Manuscripts and papers often report yield at a standardized moisture content, but do not describe the calculation used in the methods section because it is believed to be a trivial calculation (e.g., Halvorson et al. 2011; Jani et al. 2020; Lamb et al. 2004; Mulvaney et al. 2019; Mulvaney et al. 2014). It is also common to report yield without stating if yield was standardized for moisture content (e.g., Halevy et al. 1987; Killorn and Moore 2007; Mulvaney et al. 2017; Thomason et al. 2018).

Grain moisture is simply the weight of the water divided by the wet grain weight (Kraszewski et al. 1998). Since there are different ways to report moisture (as a decimal or as a percentage), and because the calculation seems intuitive, there is some confusion among agricultural professionals about how to adjust yield to a standardized moisture content. This publication aims to clarify the concept and the math.

The Common Mistake

Adjusting yield for a given moisture content seems, at first glance, to be an easy and intuitive calculation. After all, if we know the moisture content and weight, we should be able to simply subtract out the weight of the water to find dry mass, and then add in the standardized moisture content. For example, suppose you harvested 10,000 lb corn/ac at a grain moisture content of 20% (10,000 x 0.2 = 2,000 lb water/ac). It would make sense to subtract that amount of water from the yield to get dry matter (10,000 lb/ac – 2,000 lb/ac = 8,000 lb/ac dry matter), and then multiply by the standardized moisture content (for corn, that is 15.5%) to find the amount of water that should be in the crop (8,000 lb/ac x 0.155 = 1,240 lb water/ac). Add that to your dry matter yield, and that would seem to be the yield at standardized moisture content (8,000 lb dry matter/ac + 1,240 lb water/ac = 9,240 lb corn/ac at 15.5% moisture content). The apparent simplicity of this reasoning has led many to report incorrect crop yields inadvertently.

The Correct Reasoning

The confusion stems from thinking about the amount of moisture instead of the amount of dry matter per acre. That is, instead of multiplying by a standard moisture content, one must divide by the standard dry matter content (Lauer 2002; Pask et al. 2012). In our example above, 8,000 lb dry matter/ac was incorrectly multiplied by the standard moisture content (0.155) to find the amount of moisture we needed to add back to the yield. Instead, we need to divide by the dry matter content as shown in the calculations below.

  1. In this example, the standard dry matter content is 1 – 0.155 = 0.845 (or 84.5% dry matter).

  2. Now if we take 8,000 lb dry matter/ac and divide by the standard dry matter content (8,000/0.845), we get 9,467 lb corn/ac at 15.5% moisture content.

One will note that the two methods differ by 227 lb/ac, or 4 bu/ac, or 2.4% in this example.

The Simple Math

The formula looks different depending on how moisture content is presented. That is, moisture content could be reported as a percentage (e.g., 20%) or as a decimal (e.g., 0.20). Even though these are the same number, this difference creates considerable confusion regarding how to apply the equation, even among experienced professionals.

To forego the math and use a spreadsheet that will automatically calculate yield at a standard moisture content, click here, use the QR code below, or copy and paste this link: https://wfrec.ifas.ufl.edu/media/wfrecifasufledu/docs/doc/Yield-Moisture-Adjustment.xlsx.

Using Decimal Form

The easiest formula uses the decimal form of moisture content (i.e., 0.20). In this case, the formula to determine yield at a standard moisture content is shown in Equation 1.

Figure 2. 

Continuing with the example above for shelled corn:

Given:

Harvest yield = 10,000 lb/ac

Harvest moisture = 0.20

Standard moisture = 0.155

Then:

Using Equation 1,

Using Percent Form

The only difference here is that we must convert the percent moisture into a decimal. The formula, in essence, remains the same. In this case, the equation becomes:

Figure 4. 

Given:

Harvest yield = 10,000 lb/ac

Harvest moisture = 20%

Standard moisture = 15.5%

Then:

Using Equation 2,

Standard Moisture Content and Bushel Weights

It is often useful to report yield in terms of bushels/ac. Since a bushel is a volume, not a weight, the weight per bushel varies by commodity. Standard moisture (%) and US bushel weights (in lb) for common crop commodities are shown in Table 1.

Conclusion

Do not rely on intuition when adjusting yield to a standard moisture content. Be conscientious about the differences between expressing moisture content as a decimal vs. a percentage. Although the calculation is simple, it continues to confuse laypeople and professionals alike. For a simple spreadsheet to calculate yield at a given moisture content, click here, follow the QR code provided above, or copy and paste this address: https://wfrec.ifas.ufl.edu/media/wfrecifasufledu/docs/doc/Yield-Moisture-Adjustment.xlsx.

References

Halevy, J., A. Hartzook, and T. Markovitz. 1987. “Foliar Fertilization of High-Yielding Peanuts during the Pod-Filling Period.” Fertilizer Research 14(2): 153–160.

Halvorson, A. D., S. J. Del Grosso, and C. P. Jantalia. 2011. “Nitrogen Source Effects on Soil Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Strip-Till Corn.” Journal of Environmental Quality 40(6): 1775–1786. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2011.0194

Hellevang, P. E. 1995. “Grain Moisture Content Effects and Management.” NDSU Extension Service, AE-905. https://www.ag.ndsu.edu/graindrying/documents/ae905.pdf

Jani, A. D., M. J. Mulvaney, J. E. Erickson, R. G. Leon, C. W. Wood, D. L. Rowland, and H. A. Enloe. 2020. “Peanut Nitrogen Credits to Winter Wheat Are Negligible under Conservation Tillage Management in the Southeastern USA.” Field Crops Research 249: 107739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2020.107739

Killorn, R., and J. Moore. 2007. “Comparison of ESN and Urea As Sources of Fall- and Spring-Applied N Fertilizer for Corn Production.” Iowa State Research Farm Progress Reports, 935. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/farms_reports/935

Kraszewski, A., and S. Nelson. 1993. “Moisture Content Determination in Single Peanut Kernels with a Microwave Resonator.” Peanut Science 20(1): 27–31.

Kraszewski, A., S. Trabelsi, and S. Nelson. 1998. “Simple Grain Moisture Content Determination from Microwave Measurements.” Transactions of the ASAE 41(1): 129.

Lamb, M., M. Masters, D. Rowland, R. Sorensen, H. Zhu, R. Blankenship, and C. Butts. 2004. “Impact of Sprinkler Irrigation Amount and Rotation on Peanut Yield.” Peanut Science 31(2): 108–113.

Langham, D. R., J. Riney, G. Smith, and T. Wiemers. 2008. “Sesame Grower Guide.” Sesaco. https://baylor.agrilife.org/files/2011/05/sesamegrowerguide2008.pdf

Lauer, J. 2002. “Methods for Calculating Corn Yield.” Agronomy Advice. http://128.104.50.45/AA/pdfs/A033.pdf

Mulvaney, M. J., R. G. Leon, R. Seepaul, D. L. Wright, and T. L. Hoffman. 2019. “Brassica carinata Seeding Rate and Row Spacing Effects on Morphology, Yield, and Oil.” Agronomy Journal 111(2): 528–535. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2018.05.0316

Mulvaney, M. J., N. Verhulst, J. M. Herrera, M. Mezzalama, and B. Govaerts. 2014. “Improved Wheat Performance with Seed Treatments under Dry Sowing on Permanent Raised Beds.” Field Crops Research 164(0): 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2014.04.017

Mulvaney, M. J., C. W. Wood, K. S. Balkcom, J. Kemble, and D. A. Shannon. 2017. “No-Till with High Biomass Cover Crops and Invasive Legume Mulches Increased Total Soil Carbon after Three Years of Collard Production.” Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems 41(1): 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683565.2016.1236766

Murphy, W. J. 1993. “Tables for Weights and Measurements—Crops.” University of Missouri-Columbia, G4020. http://courses.missouristate.edu/WestonWalker/AGA375_Forages/Forage%20Mgmt/References/1Guides/Equip/MUG4020TablesWeightsMeasurementsCrops.htm

National Sunflower Association. 2007. “Tips for a Successful Sunflower Harvest.” Article Archives. https://www.sunflowernsa.com/magazine/articles/default.aspx?ArticleID=3154

Pask, A. J. D., J. Pietragalla, D. M. Mullan, and M. P. Reynolds. 2012. Physiological Breeding II: A Field Guide to Wheat Phenotyping. CIMMYT. p. 100.

Thomason, K., M. A. Babar, J. E. Erickson, M. Mulvaney, C. Beecher, and G. MacDonald. 2018. “Comparative Physiological and Metabolomics Analysis of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Following Post-Anthesis Heat Stress.” PLOS ONE 13(6): e0197919. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197919

USDA. 1992. “Weights, Measures, and Conversion Factors for Agricultural Commodities and Their Products.” Economic Research Service Agricultural Handbook No. 697. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/41880/33132_ah697_002.pdf?v=0

USDA. 2013. “Canola and Rapeseed Loss Adjustment Standards Handbook.” Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, FCIC-25560 (06-2013). https://www.rma.usda.gov/-/media/RMAweb/Handbooks/Loss-Adjustment-Standards---25000/Canola-and-Rapeseed/2014-25560-Canola-and-Rapeseed.ashx

Tables

Table 1. 

Standard moisture (%) and US bushel weights for select crop commodities. Data compiled from Hellevang (1995); Kraszewski and Nelson (1993); Langham et al. (2008); Mulvaney et al. (2019); Murphy (1993); National Sunflower Association (2007); and USDA (1992, 2013).

Commodity

Standard Moisture (%)

US lb/bu at Standard Moisture

Canola

8.5

50

Carinata

8

50

Ear corn

15.5

70

Grain sorghum

13

56

Oat

13.5

32

Peanut, unshelled, Runner-type

10.5

21

Peanut, unshelled, Spanish-type

10.5

25

Peanut, unshelled, Virginia-type

10.5

17

Sesame

6

46

Shelled corn

15.5

56

Soybean

13

60

Sunflower, unshelled

10

25

Wheat

13.5

60

Footnotes

1.

This document is SS-AGR-443, one of a series of the Agronomy Department, UF/IFAS Extension. Original publication date May 2020. Visit the EDIS website at https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu for the currently supported version of this publication.

2.

Michael J. Mulvaney, assistant professor, Agronomy Department; and Pratap Devkota, assistant professor, Agronomy Department; UF/IFAS West Florida Research and Education Center, Jay, FL 32565.


The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function with non-discrimination with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. For more information on obtaining other UF/IFAS Extension publications, contact your county's UF/IFAS Extension office.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, UF/IFAS Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A & M University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Nick T. Place, dean for UF/IFAS Extension.