Determining the optimal nitrogen (N) rate in corn remains a critical issue, mainly due to unaccounted spatial (e.g., soil properties) and temporal (e.g., weather) variability. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) equipped with multispectral sensors may provide opportunities to improve N management by the timely informing of spatially variable, in-season N applications. Here, we developed a practical decision support system (DSS) to translate spatial field characteristics and normalized difference red edge (NDRE) values into an in-season N application recommendation. On-farm strip-trials were established at three sites over two years to compare farmer’s traditional N management to a split-application N management guided by our UAV sensor-based DSS. The proposed systems increased nitrogen use efficiency 18.3 ± 6.1 kg grain kg N⁻¹ by reducing N rates by 31 ± 6.3 kg N ha⁻¹ with no yield differences compared to the farmers’ traditional management. We identify five avenues for further improvement of the proposed DSS: definition of the initial base N rate, estimation of inputs for sensor algorithms, management zone delineation, high-resolution image normalization approach, and the threshold for triggering N application. Two virtual reference (VR) methods were compared with the high N (HN) reference strip method for normalizing high-resolution sensor data. The VR methods resulted in significantly lower sufficiency index values than those generated by the HN reference, resulting in N fertilization recommendations that were 31.4 ± 10.3 kg ha⁻¹ higher than the HN reference N fertilization recommendation. The use of small HN reference blocks in contrasting management zones may be more appropriate to translate field-scale, high-resolution imagery into in-season N recommendations. In view of a growing interest in using UAVs in commercial fields and the need to improve crop NUE, further work is needed to refine approaches for translating imagery into in-season N recommendations.

On‐farm research is a method for transferring technology to farmers, validating small plot research, generating new discovery, and evaluating field‐scale, site‐specific management techniques. Little has been done to understand what motivates farmers to participate in on‐farm research and what the impact of their participation is on their decision making and farm profitability. This study evaluated the University of Nebraska‐Lincoln's over 25 yr‐old on‐farm research program using a semi‐structured, in‐depth interview tool to complete interviews with a stratified sample of 40 of the 140 past‐participants. The focus of this qualitative study was obtaining rich descriptions of farmer participants to better understand motivation for involvement in an on‐farm research program, participant research experiences, and the economic impacts of an on‐farm research program. Quantitative statistical analyses of the qualitative data are included for informational purposes; however, our conclusions focus on the qualitative analysis. Farmers participated in an on‐farm research program for a variety of reasons, most commonly for economic gain. Positive experiences were largely credited to the interactions with university faculty and other farmers. The participating farmers’ perception regarding whether or not the project took too much time was unrelated to whether weigh wagons or yield monitors were used. Farmers were interested in many aspects of research, including project ideation, experimental design, and statistical analysis. Participating farmers’ satisfaction in their experience and implementation of research results was not dependent on the farmers independently generating their research topic. The most impassioned suggestion from the farmer research participants was to develop innovative research projects.Core Ideas In‐depth interviews with participants in an on‐farm research program generated insights into motivation for participation and program impact. Farmers participated in the program for a variety of reasons including economic gain, seeking answers to a specific questions, general curiosity, and a desire for reliable and unbiased research results. Positive experiences in the on‐farm research program were largely credited to interactions with university faculty and other farmers. The origin of the research topic or idea did not influence participant satisfaction in their experience or implementation of the results. Seventy‐five percent of interviewees had put their research results into practice in their farm operation, either by making a change based on results or by not making a change as the research confirmed their current practice.

On‐farm research has emerged in recent years as a unique approach to involve farmers and other agricultural stakeholders as active participants in knowledge development and as an effective method of technology and innovation transfer across farms. This study assessed the perspective and knowledge of US farmers regarding on‐farm research via the implementation of a 24‐question survey distributed across most of the US Midwest and South‐Central regions. We found that farmers generally are willing to engage with universities to conduct on‐farm research and were 40% more likely to adopt practices supported by on‐farm research findings than research not conducted on‐farm. Notably, a shift toward conservation practices was made, with cover crops and no‐till at the forefront. Insights of this nature have implications for fostering collaborations, addressing constraints, and maximizing the impact of on‐farm research, offering guidance for sustainable agriculture progress in the United States and beyond. Results from this research survey could be used to initiate much‐needed policies to promote on‐farm research. Further, information on the benefits and drawbacks of on‐farm research could be used in the development of studies that benefit both farmers and researchers.