University of wisconsin soybean variety trials

A summary of the transgenic traits tested in is shown in Table 3. A summary of seed treatment performance in is shown in Table 4. In the back of the report, hybrids previously tested over the past three years are listed in Table At most locations, trials were divided into early and late maturity trials based on the hybrid relative maturities provided by the companies.

The specific relative maturities separating early and late trials are listed in the tables. Seasonal precipitation and temperature at the trial sites are shown in Table 5. The growing season at most sites was warmer compared to the year normal.

Growing season precipitation compared to the year normal was drier for southern Wisconsin and average for northern Wisconsin. Most trial plots were established by early May. Stand establishment was good to excellent at all locations.

A late spring frost event on May 30 reduced some plant stands in commercial production fields. In southern Wisconsin, precipitation was lower than normal prior to pollination and during early grain-filling. However, there was just enough precipitation to carry plants along and little stress was observed visually. Ear size was larger than normal. Tar spot, Phyllachora maydis , was significant in southern Wisconsin and disease ratings were obtained at Arlington.

Isolated incidents of Anthracnose, Colletotrichum graminicola , was observed in northern Wisconsin. Both diseases showed up late in the growing season and likely did not affect silage yield. Good growing conditions continued into late-fall with a killing frost occurring in late October. Silage and grain moisture was lower than normal. Little plant lodging occurred at most trial sites.

Little disease and insect pressure were observed within most trials. The seedbed at each location was prepared by either conventional or conservation tillage methods. Seed treatments of hybrids entered into the trials are described in Table 4. Fertilizer was applied as recommended by soil tests.

Herbicides were applied for weed control and supplemented with cultivation when necessary. Corn rootworm insecticide was applied to plots in all trials, except at Spooner. Information for each location is summarized in Table 6. A precision vacuum corn planter using GIS technology was used at all locations, except Spooner. Two-row plots, twenty-five foot long, were planted at all locations.

Plot were not hand-thinned. Each hybrid was grown in at least three separate plots replicates at each location to account for field variability. Grain: Two-row plots were harvested with a self-propelled corn combine. Test weight was measured on each plot. Silage: Whole-plant silage plots were harvested using a tractor driven, three-point mounted one-row chopper.

One row was analyzed for whole plant yield and quality. A sub-sample was collected and analyzed using near infra-red spectroscopy. References to transgenic traits in this publication are for your convenience and are not an endorsement or criticism of one trait over other similar traits.

Every attempt was made to ensure accuracy of traits in the hybrids tested. You are responsible for using traits according to the current label directions of seed companies.

Follow directions exactly to protect the environment and people from misuse. Failure to do so violates the law. Yield results for individual location trials and for multi-location averages are listed in Tables 7 through Within each trial, hybrids are ranked by moisture, averaged over all trials conducted in that zone during Yield data for both and are provided if the hybrid was entered previously in the trials. Starting in , a nearest neighbor analysis of variance for all trials as described by Yang et al.

A hybrid index Table 2 lists relative maturity ratings, specialty traits, seed treatments and production zones tested for each hybrid. Seed companies use different methods and standards to classify or rate the maturity of corn hybrids. To provide corn producers a "standard" maturity comparison for the hybrids evaluated, the average grain or silage moisture of all hybrids rated by the company relative maturity rating system are shown in each table as shaded rows.

In these Wisconsin results tables, hybrids with lower moisture than a particular relative maturity average are likely to be earlier than that relative maturity, while those with higher grain moisture are most likely later in relative maturity.

Company relative maturity ratings are rounded to 5-day increments. The Wisconsin Relative Maturity rating system for grain GRM and silage SRM compares harvest moisture of a grain or silage hybrid to the average moisture of company ratings using linear regression.

Each hybrid is rated within the trial and averaged over all trials in a zone. Three factors-yield, moisture, and standability-are of primary importance in evaluating and selecting corn hybrids.

A performance index P. This performance index evaluates yield, moisture, and lodged stalks at a 50 yield : 35 moisture : 15 lodged stalks ratio. The performance index was computed by converting the yield, moisture dry matter , and upright stalk values of each hybrid to a percentage of the test average.

Then the performance index for each hybrid that appears in the tables was calculated as follows:. Performance Index P. Corn silage quality was analyzed using near infra-red spectroscopy equations derived from previous work. Four categories of trials will be conducted in trials may be combined, depending on number of entries :.

In addition to type of trial and maturity zone, the web form includes dropdown menus to enter the following information for each variety:. Please note the correct address for seed and payment depending on method of deliver y:. Paul, MN Crop Research, Room St. Click on the link below to enter varieties in the trial. Be sure to print a copy of your form before submitting.

All entry forms and fees are due by March Deadline for seed is April Complete the variety trial entry form. All rights reserved. The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. Home Crop production Soybean Soybean variety selection. Variety selection. Open all Close all. How to select varieties for your farm Choose the best soybean varieties for your field How to inventory your field, to find a yield-maximizing variety A guide to seed quality, maturity and other key factors.

Buying tips: How many varieties to purchase, traits to ignore and more. Aphid-resistant soybean varieties for Minnesota fields List of resistant soybean varieties available in Minnesota.

Overview of resistance genes, called Rag genes Rag1, Rag2, etc. Research on yield: How aphid-resistant varieties compare to aphid-susceptible varieties.

MN adapted private soybean varieties with Peking resistance Private varieties with Peking resistance to soybean cyst nematode SCN compiled from seed catalogues Includes company, variety name, maturity and herbicide trait s Few were screened for level of SCN resistance at the University of Minnesota, but for those that have, see soybean variety trials.

Variety trials Statewide trials Soybean field crop variety trials Each year the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station scientists conduct performance tests of appropriately adapted public and private soybean entries.

Variety trials entry form Instructions for soybean performance checks Entry letter The University of Minnesota will be conducting soybean performance tests again in Please note the following: There is NO limit to the number of entries per company.

If a variety has been entered before, please provide its "previous I.