Embed
Email

VIRGINIA

Document Sample

Shared by: ajizai
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
1
posted:
12/20/2011
language:
pages:
13
VIRGINIA

SOYBEAN VARIETY

EVALUATION TESTS

2002







Virginia Cooperative Extension

Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station

Tidewater Agricultural Research & Extension Center

Information Series No. 454

January 2003

VIRGINIA

SOYBEAN VARIETY

EVALUATION TESTS

2002



David L. Holshouser, Soybean Specialist, Virginia Tech

Nathan Carr, Research Specialist, Virginia Tech

Linda Byrd-Masters, Research Specialist, Virginia Tech









Tidewater Agricultural Research and Extension Center

6321 Holland Rd.

Suffolk, Virginia 23437

(757) 657 – 6450

dholshou@vt.edu

clcarr@vt.edu

http://www.vaes.vt.edu/tidewater/soybean/









Trade and brand names are used only for the purpose of information and the sponsors do

not guarantee nor warrant the standards of the product, nor do they imply approval of the

product to the exclusion of others that may also be suitable.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO.



Acknowledgments................................................................................................................................................ 2



Introduction to Variety Tests ............................................................................................................................... 3



Methods and Definitions ...................................................................................................................................... 4



Production Information ........................................................................................................................................ 5



Monthly Precipitation .......................................................................................................................................... 7



Suppliers of Soybean Varieties ............................................................................................................................ 8





TABLES OF DATA:

TABLE 1a-f. Yield Summaries and Average Relative Yield Full Season Entries…….10-15



TABLE 2a-e. Yield Summaries and Average Relative Yield Double Crop Entries..… 15-19



TABLE 3a-d. Performance of Maturity Group III Full Season Entries ......................... 20-21



TABLE 4a-c. Performance of Maturity Group III Double crop Entries ...................... 21-22



TABLE 5a-e. Performance of Early Maturity Group IV Full Season Entries ............... 22-24



TABLE 6a-d. Performance of Early Maturity Group IV Double crop Entries .............. 25-26



TABLE 7a-e. Performance of Late Maturity Group IV Full Season Entries ................. 27-29



TABLE 8a-d. Performance of Late Maturity Group IV Double Crop Entries…………29-31



TABLE 9a-e. Performance of Early Maturity Group V Full Season Entries ................. 31-34



TABLE 10a-c. Performance of Early Maturity Group V Double crop Entries.............. 35-36



TABLE 11a-e. Performance of Maturity Late Group V Full Season Entries ................ 36-38



TABLE 12a-c. Performance of Maturity Late Group V Double Crop Entries .............. 39-40



TABLE 13a-c. Performance of Maturity Group VI Full Season Entries ....................... 40-41

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS



Sincere thanks are given to the many cooperators and contributors who have made the Soybean Variety

Evaluation Tests possible.



The cooperation and support offered by commercial seed companies, state crop improvement

associations, and several experiment stations in supplying seed and information on varieties is gratefully

acknowledged.



Special thanks is given to the following cooperators for supplying land and technical assistance while

conducting these tests:



Bobby Ashburn, Tidewater Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Suffolk

Lin Barrack, Eastern Virginia Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Warsaw

Glenn Buss, Department of Crop and Soil Environmental Sciences, VPI & SU, Blacksburg

Tommy Custis Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Painter,

Denton Dixon, Northern Piedmont Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Orange

Rodney Foster, Producer, City of Chesapeake

Ted Haberland, Producer, Madison County

Lyle Pugh, Producer, City of Chesapeake

Billy Wilkinson, Southern Piedmont Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Blackstone



A special note of appreciation is also extended to the Unit Extension Faculty who does an excellent job

of disseminating the information.



The authors would also like to express appreciation to Patsy Lewis, Patty Turner, and Mason Lawrence

for their technical assistance. Their assistance in the collection of data and preparation of this report is

gratefully acknowledged.



Financial assistance from the Virginia Soybean Board to help fund a portion of these tests is gratefully

acknowledged.









2

INTRODUCTION TO VARIETY TESTS

The purpose of this publication is to provide performance data of the many soybean varieties offered for

sale in Virginia. These data should be of benefit to producers and agribusinesses in making selections of

varieties for their use. It is realized that not all varieties that are offered for sale in Virginia are included in

these tests. There is no implication that varieties not included are inferior in any way, but only that they have

not been tested. The private varieties that have been evaluated in these tests were submitted for testing by

commercial seed companies.

Variety evaluations were conducted under full-season and double cop conditions at Blackstone,

Chesapeake, Orange, Painter, Suffolk, and/or Warsaw. All double-crop tests were no-till planted following

small grains. Due to the number of entries, it was necessary to separate the varieties by maturity in all

locations.

Virginia experienced one of the worst seasons on record. Drought plagued most of the state during the

growing season and rainfall was nearly continuous during harvest season. The dry summer and wet fall led

to low yields and poor seed quality. Even so, yields at two of our variety test locations averaged over 50

bushels due to good soils and timely rains. Phomopsis seed decay (represented by seed quality (SQ)

ratings) and purple seed stain (PSS) were much higher than normal and is reflected in tables 3-13. Due to

very low yields and data variability, the Blackstone full-season and double-crop tests, the Orange double-

crop maturity group 3 test, and the Chesapeake double-crop test will not be published. However, data for

these locations can be obtained from the authors upon request.



INTERPRETING THE RESULTS

Tables 1 and 2 are yield summaries over all locations. Past analysis of test data indicated that variety

selection should be made from multiple years and sites. More locations result in more reliable information.

However, average yields over locations should not be used to select the highest yielding variety unless all

varieties are tested in all locations because data will be skewed to those varieties that are tested in the

highest yielding locations. Therefore, relative yield is a better method of comparing varieties over

locations. Relative yield is calculated by dividing the yield of a variety by the average yield of all varieties

within the same maturity group at that location. A variety with a relative yield of 105 was 5% above the

average of all varieties at that location. Relative yield is not an actual yield, but a value that is relative to

all other yield values at that location. Varieties are ranked by relative yield in descending order.

Tables 3 through 13 contain detailed yield and other information from each location. The highest

average yielding varieties are listed first in each table. It is not statistically correct to compare varieties

from different maturity groups. However, it is recommended that producers select two to three of the

highest yielding varieties from each maturity group adapted to his region in order to spread out harvesting

time and yield risks associated with timing of summer rainfall patterns. Because of year-to-year variability

in variety performance it is suggested that data for varieties with less than three locations or years testing

be considered preliminary. The average performance of a variety over multiple environments is more

reliable than its performance in one test. Multiple-year data can be obtained from the authors. Many of the

new varieties, which do not have two-year averages, are excellent and will probably earn a share of the

Virginia soybean acreage. Other traits are also shown in the tables (maturity, lodging, height, seed quality,

purple stain, seed size) because each producer emphasizes certain of these traits or a combination of them

when selecting varieties for his farm. After examining these results, the producer may want to plant

limited quantities of several new better performing varieties to observe how they perform on his farm and

under his management conditions.

Within maturity groups at each location, an LSD (least significant difference) was calculated. The

LSD is a statistical test calculated at the 10% probability level to aid the reader in comparing the yield

differences among varieties within a particular maturity group. When two entries are compared and the

difference between them is greater than the calculated LSD value, the varieties are considered to be

significantly different. The "NS" designation indicates that there were no significant differences for yield

among the varieties within that maturity group. The coefficient of variation (CV) is a relative measure of

variation and is an indicator of the degree of precision associated with the test. For soybean variety

evaluation tests, CV values less than 15% indicates that the precision of the test was good in distinguishing

3

differences between varieties.









4

METHODS AND DEFINITIONS



The variety test was evaluated in a randomized complete block design and replicated three times. All

tests were maintained weed free with herbicides and hand weeding. Row widths, number of rows planted

and harvested, and length of row harvested are shown on the production information page. Harvest was

conduction as near to the date of first harvest maturity as work schedules and weather would permit.

Fertilizer was applied according to VPI & SU soil test recommendations.



Seeding Rates (seeds/acre):

Maturity Group Full Season Double-Crop



III 180,000 240,000



IV 180,000 240,000



V 180,000 240,000



VI 180,000 --





Maturity was taken at the date when 95% of the pods turned brown (R8). Detailed maturity date

information was not taken at the Blackstone and Painter due to greater travel distance from the

TAREC. Full-season maturity ratings were not taken on a regular basis at the Orange double-crop

location. Therefore, data at these locations should not be used to compare varieties within a test.



Lodging notes are recorded on a scale of 1 to 5 according to the following criteria:

1.0 - almost all plants erect

2.0 - either all plants leaning slightly, or a few plants down

3.0 - either all plants leaning moderately (45o angle), or 25 to 50% down

4.0 - either all plants leaning considerably, or 50 to 80% down

5.0 - all plants down



Plant Height is determined as the average length of plants in a plot from the ground to the

uppermost node of the plant at maturity.



Purple Seed Stain (PSS) is the percentage of seed from a 100-seed sample that are affected with

that disease.



Seed Quality (SQ) is rated from 1 to 5 according to the following scale:

1.0 = very good; 2.0 = good; 3.0 = fair; 4.0 = poor; 5.0 = very poor.

Seed quality ratings are a good representation of Phomopsis seed decay.



Seed Size (SS) is obtained from the weight of a 100-seed sample and is transformed to number of

seed per pound.



Yields were collected with a small-plot combine equipped with scales and moisture tester. Yields

were adjusted to 13% moisture. A bushel weight of 60 pounds (at 13% moisture) was used to

determine bushel-per-acre (BU/AC) yield.









5

PRODUCTION INFORMATION



Tillage Number of Rows Length of

Planting System Date Row Row

Location Date Herbicides Applied Insecticides Soil Type Width Planted Harvested Harvested



Blackstone-FS 5 3 17'

5/16 Conv. Dual Mag./Authority 5/16 None Applinz 15"









Chesapeake-FS 6/10 No-Till Dual Mag, Canopy 5/17 None Ridge Land 15" 5 3 17'

XL









Orange-FS 5/06 Conv. Dual Mag. (incorp.) 5/10 None Dyke & Starr 15" 5 3 17’

Storm, Pinnacle 7/17









Painter-FS 5/21 Conv. Dual Mag, 6/21 None Bojac SL 15" 5 3 17'

Lorox DF







Suffolk-FS 5/13 No-Till Dual Mag, Canopy 5/15 None Lynchburg FSL 15" 5 3 17'

XL

Roundup Ultramax 6/28

Poast Plus



Warsaw-FS 5/22 Conv. Python, Dual Mag. 5/7 Warrior Kempsville L 30" 4 2 12'

Larvin









6

Production Info. -

Continued

Number of Rows Length of

Planting Tillage Date Row Row

Location Date System Herbicides Applied Insecticides Soil Type Width Planted Harvested Harvested



Blackstone-DC 7/02 No-Till Roundup Ultra 7/2 None Helena SL 15" 5 3 17’

Storm, Poast Plus 7/11









Chesapeake-DC 7/01 No-Till Roundup Ultra, Dual 6/20 Acredale 15" 5 3 17’

None

Mag., Canopy XL

Blazer, Poast Plus 7/10



Orange-DC 6/19 No-Till Storm, Poast Plus 8/7 None Davidson 15" 5 3 17’







Painter-DC 7/23 No-Till Dual II Mag., 7/12 None Bojac SL 15" 5 3 17'

Command EC,

Roundup Ultramax

Sencor DF

Suffolk-DC 6/24 No-Till Dual Mag, Canopy Karate Lynchburg FSL 15" 5 3 17'

XL Roundup Ultra 6/22

Poast Plus, Storm 8/8





Warsaw-DC 6/21 No-Till Roundup Ultra 6/17 Larvin Kempsville L 24" 4 2 12’

Dual Mag.





*FS = Full-Season, DC = Double-crop









7

MONTHLY PRECIPITATION (INCHES) AND AVERAGE RAINFALL

DURING MAY THROUGH OCTOBER

AT VARIETY TEST LOCATIONS.







Location May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Total

Blackstone 2002 3.00 1.68 2.82 3.98 2.08 6.89 20.45

50-yr Avg. 3.74 3.87 4.63 4.06 3.75 3.35 23.40



Chesapeake 2002 7.60 2.40 6.20 5.90 4.60 8.00 34.70

35-yr Avg. 4.29 3.59 5.49 5.57 4.14 3.76 26.84



Orange 2002 1.94 2.84 5.19 2.70 2.49 5.62 22.21

61-yr. Avg. 3.81 3.75 4.52 3.92 3.65 3.41 23.06

Painter 2002 2.25 2.15 5.72 2.73 2.10 5.96 20.91

62-yr Avg. 3.40 3.39 4.49 4.15 3.55 3.32 22.30

Suffolk 2002 3.98 1.66 5.71 2.22 2.96 4.89 21.42

70-yr. Avg. 3.93 4.21 5.80 5.78 4.08 3.40 27.28

Warsaw 2002 3.28 3.07 1.33 3.01 2.01 6.36 19.06

38-yr Avg. 4.31 3.76 4.20 4.14 4.12 3.20 23.73









8

SUPPLIERS OF SOYBEAN VARIETIES TESTED IN 2002



SUPPLIER BRAND VARIETY

Agway Farm Seed Agway APK432NRR

569 Markham Hollow Rd.

Tully, NY 13159

Delta & Pine Land Co. DPL DP4344RR, DP4690RR, SG498RR,

7265 Hwy 9 South DP4748S, DPX4527RR, DPX4431RR,

Centre, AL 35960 DPX4727RR, DPX4824RR, DPX4933RR,

DP5414RR, DP5644RR, DP5806RR,

DP5915RR, DP5110S, DPX5734RR,

DPX5520S, DPX4527RR

Featherstone Farm Delta King DK4763RR, DK4868RR, DK5465RR,

13941 Genito Rd. DK5961RR, DK5366RR

Amelia, VA 23002

Garst Seed Co. Garst D472RR/N, D484RR/N, 4512RR/N,

4850 W 350 N

Danville, IN 46122



Hytest Seeds Hytest HTS4915RR, HTS4320RR, HTS4025RR,

P.O.Box 3147 HTS4725RR

454 Railroad Ave.

Shiremanstown, PA 17011



University of Maryland Public Manokin

Room 1112 HJP Hall

College Park, MD 20742-5821



Missouri Foundation Seed Public Anand, Delsoy 5500

3600 New Haven Road

Columbia, MO 65201

Monsanto Company Dekalb DKB44-51, DKB45-51, DKB46-51

3100 Sycamore Rd. Asgrow AG4201, AG4403, AG4603, AG4902,

Dekalb, IL 60115 Hartz AG5301, AG5603, AG5903, AG6202,

H6255RR

Montague Farms Montague MGS-553, MFS-591, Aoba, MFL-159

Rt. 2, Box 6

Center Cross, VA 22437

N.C. Foundation Seed, Inc. Public NC Roy, Prolina, Satelite, Soyola

4025 Beryl Road

Raleigh, NC 27606

Ohio State University Public Stressland

Soybean Breeding Program

Wooster, OH 44691

Pioneer, A Dupont Co. Pioneer 94B54, 94B73, 95B32, 95B42, 95B96

6767 Old Madison Pike, Ste 110

Huntsville, AL 35806



Royster-Clark, Inc. Vigoro V442NRR, V462NRS, V47N3RR, V503RR,

70 N. Market St. V52N3RR, V543NRR, V562NRR,

Mt. Sterling, OH 43143



9

SUPPLIER BRAND VARIETY

Southern States Coop Southern RT3502, RT3702, RT3799N, RT3802N,

P.O. Box 26234 States RT3475, 381-STS, RT4098, RT446N,

Richmond, VA 23260 RT4502N, RT4980, RT4810N, RT4702N,

RT5001N, 5200-STS, RT5302N, RT540N,

RT557N, RT5602N, RT5999N



Stine Seed Company Stine S4102-4, S4442-4, S4882-4

2225 Laredo Trail

Adel, Iowa 500003

Syngenta Seeds, Inc. NK S40-R9(X140R), S57-A4, S39-K6(X138R),

P.O. Box 1240 S46-W8, S52-U3, S56-D7

Winterville, NC 28590

UniSouth Genetics, Inc. USG 7440NRR, 7459RR, 7489RR, 7522NRR,

2640-C Nolensville Rd. 540NRR, 5601T, 550NSTS, 570NRR,

Nashville, TN 37211 7582NRR, 620NRR, 7562NRR, 7449NRR,

510NRR, 7547RR

Virginia Foundation Seed Public Hutcheson, Accomac

9124 Atlee Station Road

Mechanicsville, VA 23166



Virginia Polytechnic Institute & Virginia Tech 99VPI-17, 99VPI-67, 99VPI-120

State University Breeding Lines

Soybean Breeding Program

Dept. Crop & Soil Environ. Sci.

Blacksburg, VA 24061









10

Virginia Cooperative Extension programs and employment are open to all, regardless of race, color, religion, sex, age, veteran

status, national origin, disability, or political affiliation. An equal opportunity/affirmative action employer. Issued in furtherance

of Cooperative Extension work, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia State University, and the U. S.

Department of Agriculture cooperating. Dave Barrett, Director, Virginia Cooperative Extension, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg;

Lorenza W. Lyons, Administrator, 1890 Extension Programs, Virginia State, Petersburg



Related docs
Other docs by ajizai
Resume 1.docx _20K_ - Student of Fortune
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
msg00000
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Pre-Tax Return Calculator 2010-2011
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Excel file - The GEO-3 Data Compendium
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Cooperators Tests - ARS
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
2010101473142104
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
AJHL - Shawn Stewart Sales
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
OBLATES_ BROTHER CADFAEL AND ROME
Views: 1  |  Downloads: 0
DuaneChipKeeler_CV-Resume
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
AIT-2009-291-SC
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!