HGCA Agronomy Norfolk. Easton & Otley College, Norfolk Thursday 19 February 2015

Transcription

1 HGCA Agronomy Norfolk Easton & Otley College, Norfolk Thursday 19 February 2015

2 Chair s Welcome Tim Isaac HGCA Regional Manager (East)

3 Fungicide Performance in Wheat, Barley and Oilseed rape Philip Bounds ADAS Research Scientist

4 Fungicide Performance in Wheat 2014

5 Yield t/ha Yield response by season HGCA RL data (average of all varieties in each year) fungicide untreated Average yield response to fungicides =1.93t/ha (12 year mean) yield response =3.91t/ha

6 Winter and spring rainfall 2013/14

7 Morley Norfolk, HGCA RL 2014 Yields and yield responses group 1 and 2 Varieties

8 Morley Norfolk, HGCA RL 2014 Yields and yield responses group 3 varieties

9 Morley Norfolk, HGCA RL 2014 Yields and yield responses group 4 varieties

10 10 Wheat Trials Summary 2014 Target Disease Site (Variety) Organisation Disease data Other Septoria tritici (T1 and T2 trials) Septoria tritici (T1 and T2 trials) Septoria tritici (Leaf 2, timing trial) Septoria tritici (Leaf 2 trial) Yellow rust (T1 trial) Brown rust (T2 trial, inoculated in April) Powdery mildew Fife, Scotland (Consort) SRUC Septoria tritici Yield Spec Weight Sutton Scotney, Hants NIAB Septoria tritici Yield (KWS Sterling) Spec Weight Rosemaund, Hereford ADAS Septoria tritici Yield (Consort) Spec Weight Carlow, Ireland TEAGASC Septoria tritici Yield Spec Weight Kings Lynn, Norfolk ADAS Yellow rust Yield (Oakley) Spec Weight Cambridge NIAB Brown rust No significant (Warrior) differences Fife, Scotland SRUC No mildew Yield (Claire) (Septoria tritici) Spec Weight

11 Wheat Septoria Trial Treatments Product Active(s) Full Dose (l/ha) Untreated Azoles and multisites Ignite / Opus Max epoxiconazole 1.5 Proline* 275 / 250 prothioconazole 0.72 / 0.8 Phoenix* folpet 1.5 Bravo chlorothalonil 1.0 l/ha (half dose) only Solo SDHI s Imtrex fluxapyroxad 2.0 Vertisan penthiopyrad 1.5 SDHI / Azole mixtures Aviator 235 / 225 Xpro bixafen + prothioconazole 1.25 Adexar epoxiconazole + fluxapyroxad 2.0 Vertisan + Ignite* penthiopyrad + epoxiconazole (* products included at 5 of the 6 trial sites, means balanced by REML)

12 Septoria: protectant (6 trial mean 2014)

13 % Septoria tritici Septoria: protectant (over year 2012/13/14) Aviator235/225Xpro Adexar Seguris Vertisan + Ignite Proline275/250 Imtrex Phoenix Vertisan Ignite / Opus Max Bravo % 50% 100% 150% 200% % of full label rate 0 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% % of full label rate

14 Septoria: eradicant (4 trial mean 2014)

15 Yield Summary: all 2014 Septoria trials (7)

16 % control Septoria tritici Trend in azole protectant activity over time 100 Half dose 100 Full dose Variance accounted for = 62.0% 40 Variance accounted for = 43.2% Proline Opus / Ignite

17 % control Septoria tritici Trend in azole eradicant activity over time 100 Half dose 100 Full dose Variance accounted for = 54.5% 10 Proline Opus / Ignite Variance accounted for = 62.4%

18 Wheat: Yellow and Brown Rust Trial Treatments Products tested Untreated Active(s) Full Dose (l/ha) Ignite epoxiconazole 1.5 Comet 200 pyraclostrobin 1.25 Phoenix folpet 1.5 Imtrex fluxapyroxad 2.0 Vertisan penthiopyrad 1.5 Aviator 235 Xpro bixafen + prothioconazole 1.25 Adexar epoxiconazole + fluxapyroxad 2.0 Seguris epoxiconazole + isopyrazam 1.0 Vertisan + Ignite penthiopyrad + epoxiconazole

19 Brown Rust (Cambridge 2014)

20 Yellow Rust (Kings Lynn 2014)

21 Yellow rust (over year 2012/13/14)

22 Conclusions: Septoria High disease pressure in 2014 giving good protectant and eradicant data, and yield responses Differences between Proline and Ignite seen only in protectant activity. Considered unlikely to represent shift in relative efficacy Solo SDHI s Vertisan and Imtrex highly active on Septoria tritici But ALWAYS use SDHI s in mix with effective partner(s) SDHI /azole mixtures Adexar, Aviator & Vertisan + Ignite closely matched for septoria control, and superior to solo SDHI s Multisites Bravo and Phoenix remain valuable as protectants

23 Conclusions: Rusts Vertisan and Imtrex showed activity on both rusts, but more effective on Brown rust Phoenix had no effect on Brown rust but low level of activity on Yellow rust (neither disease is currently on the label) Comet remains highly effective against Brown rust, and Ignite most effective against Yellow rust SDHI/azole mixtures more robust than solo SDHI s across yield and overall disease

24 Wheat disease control strategies Timings For Septoria For Yellow Rust * T0 - GS30-31 (Multisite) (Azole or Strobilurin) T1 GS32 / Leaf 3 emerged T2 - GS39 / Flag Leaf emerged Azole + Multisite (+ SDHI) Azole + SDHI (+ Multisite) (+ Strobilurin) (+ Strobilurin) T3 - GS63-65 Early / Mid Flowering Azole (+ Strobilurin) for rusts and ear diseases, *Note additional timings may be required to control yellow rust on susceptible varieties where disease pressure is high.

25 Fungicide Performance in Barley 2014

26 Barley Trials Summary 2014 Target Disease Site (Variety) Organisation Disease data Other data Rhynchosporium (Winter Barley) Rhynchosporium (Winter Barley) Rhynchosporium (Winter Barley) Net Blotch (Winter Barley) Net Blotch (Winter Barley) Brown rust (Winter Barley) Powdery mildew (Winter Barley) Ramularia (Spring Barley) Lanark (Saffron) Cardigan (Cassia) Carlow (Saffron) High Mowthorpe (Cassata) Morley, Norfolk (Cassata) Caythorpe, Lincs (Escadre) Bush Midlothian (Cassata) Bush Midlothian (Prestige) SRUC Rhynchosporium Yield (Mildew) ADAS Rhynchosporium Yield TEAGASC Rhynchosporium Yield ADAS Net blotch (Brown rust) Yield Spec Weight NIAB Net blotch Yield (Brown rust) Brackling NIAB Brown rust Yield, Spec Wt, Brackling SRUC Mildew (L4) Yield SRUC No ramularia (B rust, Rhyncho) Yield

27 Barley Trial Treatments Product Active(s) Full Dose (l/ha) Rhyncho Trials Net Blotch Trials Brown Rust Trial Untreated Proline 275/250 prothioconazole 0.72/ Comet 200 pyraclostrobin Phoenix folpet Imtrex fluxapyroxad Zulu isopyrazam Vertisan penthiopyrad 1.5 +* + Siltra Xpro bixafen + prothioconazole Adexar epoxiconazole + fluxapyroxad Vertisan + Proline 275 * TEAGASC trial only penthiopyrad + prothioconazole

28 Rhynchosporium (%) Rhynchosporium: protectant (over-year 2012/13/14) Proline Imtrex Phoenix Zulu % 50% 100% 150% 200% % of full label rate

29 Rhynchosporium: eradicant (over-year 2012/13/14)

30 Net blotch: eradicant (over-year 2012/14)

31 Brown rust (Lincs 2014)

32 Yield: Lincs 2014 (b rust + n blotch)

33 Brackling: Lincs 2014 (b rust + n blotch)

34 Barley Mildew Trial Treatments Product Active(s) Full Dose (l/ha) Mildew Trial Untreated + Proline 275 prothioconazole Cyflamid cyflufenamid Flexity metrafenone Talius proquinazid Torch spiroxamine Vertisan penthiopyrad Zulu isopyrazam Siltra Xpro bixafen + prothioconazole 1.0 +

35 Mildew: Leaf 4 (Scotland 2014)

36 Conclusions More differentiation between SDHI actives: Imtrex performed well, especially on Rhyncho and net blotch Zulu effective on net blotch and brown rust but less active on Rhyncho Vertisan less active on net blotch than Imtrex Proline still a consistently good, broad spectrum azole Siltra Xpro highly effective, similar activity from Adexar Comet less effective on net blotch, still good against brown rust Phoenix has limited activity on Rhynchosporium. Avoid over-reliance on SDHI + azole: other mixtures are available

37 Oilseed Rape Fungicide Performance

38 Oilseed Rape Trials Summary Target Disease Site (Variety) Organisation Phoma (2-spray*) Light Leaf Spot (2-spray**) Sclerotinia Stem Rot (single spray) Boxworth, Cambs ( cv. Catana) Terrington, Norfolk ( cv. Catana) Malton, North Yorks ( cv. PR46W21) Edinburgh ( cv. Castille) Herefordshire ( low disease) Kent / Berkshire ( low disease) ADAS ADAS ADAS SRUC ADAS ADAS *10-20% plants affected followed by 4-10 weeks when similar level of re-infection evident ** Autumn (November) followed by pre or early stem extension (February / March) 38

39 Phoma and Light Leaf Spot Treatments Product Active(s) Full Dose (l/ha) Phoma Light Leaf Spot Untreated + + Proline 275 prothioconazole Prosaro prothioconazole + tebuconazole Orius 20EW tebuconazole Orius P prochloraz + tebuconazole Sunorg Pro metconazole Refinzar*** penthiopyrad + picoxystrobin *** Refinzar tested as a 2-spray programme in common with other phoma treatments BUT the label restricts use to one application per season (at full dose)

40 Phoma Leaf Spot and Stem Canker

41 Canker index (0-100) Phoma: Canker Index (Boxworth, Cambs 2014: curative situation) Canker index Untreated Half rate Full Rate Untreated Orius 20EW Refinzar Proline Prosaro Sunorg Pro LSD between products/rates 13.8 (canker) Pale bars not significantly different from untreated

42 Effective Programmes for Phoma Good control can be achieved with two sprays at half rate Early epidemics most damaging to yield (0.5 t/ha yield at risk). Late epidemics damaging if plants small in late autumn / winter All triazoles offer protection when applied prior to infection. Product choice influenced by requirement for curative activity SDHI + strobilurin co-form (Refinzar) now available, but label restriction of one application per season at full rate (1.0 l/ha)

43 Light Leaf Spot

44 Historic trends in light leaf spot incidence

45 LLS severity (%) Light Leaf Spot: Severity at T2 + 6 weeks (North Yorks 2014 ) Untreated Half rate Full rate Untreated Prosaro Proline Orius 20EW Orius P LSD between products/rates 2.7% (LLS severity)

46 LLS severity (%) Yield (t/ha) Light Leaf Spot: Severity and Yield (North Yorks 2014 ) Untreated Prosaro Proline Orius 20EW Orius P LSD between products/rates 2.7% (LLS severity), 0.38 t/ha (yield) Pale points not significantly different from untreated Untreated Half rate Full rate Untreated yield Half rate yield Full rate yield

47 Effective Programmes for Light Leaf Spot Assess farm risk: Previous OSR crops: did they have stem/pod symptoms preharvest (crop debris) Varietal resistance - All but one variety (SY Harnas) on E/W list have RL ratings below 7 Monitor in autumn / winter and apply fungicide when LLS found At stem extension 15% plants affected equates to 5% yield loss Some differences between products. Increasing number of applications more effective than increasing dose to improve control.

48 Sclerotinia

49 Sclerotinia Treatments Product Active(s) Full Dose (l/ha) Untreated Amistar azoxystrobin 1.0 Compass iprodione + thiophanate-methyl 3.0 Filan boscalid 0.5 kg/ha Folicur tebuconazole 1.0 Galileo picoxystrobin 1.0 Pictor boscalid + dimoxystrobin 0.5 Priori Xtra azoxystrobin + cyproconazole 1.0 Proline 275 prothioconazole 0.63 Prosaro prothioconazole + tebuconazole 1.0 Propulse fluopyram + prothioconazole 1.0 Tectura boscalid + metconazole 1.0 Topsin thiophanate-methyl 0.71

50 Sclerotinia incidence (%) 10 th July Yield (t/ha) High Sclerotinia Pressure: only late infection controlled (Herefordshire 2012) Half rate Full rate Half rate yield Full rate yield Untreated yield Background sclerotinia level LSD disease 15.5, LSD yield 0.27

51 Sclerotinia (Kent and Herefordshire )

52 Effective Programmes for Sclerotinia Evaluate risk: previous monitoring, cropping history, weather / microclimate Spray timing is critical: Only protectant, with activity for 3 weeks Where risk is high consider using: Higher application rates more than one application Pictor new to the market in 2015

53 Fungicide Performance 2015: What s New? New partner: Oilseed rape, wheat and barley now form a single project Wheat: inoculated brown rust trial and inoculated fusarium trial Barley: no brown rust trial Oilseed rape: additional light leaf spot trial (south-west location)

54 What variety disease ratings mean for your control programme Simon Oxley HGCA

55 Outline 1. How are HGCA Recommended List disease ratings calculated? 2. How can disease ratings be used as part of an integrated approach? 3. New HGCA on-line tools

56 How are disease ratings calculated? Untreated trials 1. Disease Observation Plots (1 replicate, unyielded) 2. Untreated trials (3 replicates, yielded) 3. Inoculated trials (2-4 replicates, unyielded) Spore suspension spray Spreader rows and transplants Affected stubble

57 How are disease ratings calculated? Field observations Yellow rust 5%

58 % S. tritici How are disease ratings calculated? Field observations 100 Septoria disease progression Hampshire 2014 x x More than 1 valid disease assessment may be accepted per trial 0 31-Mar 20-Apr 10-May 30-May 19-Jun Susceptible variety (Septoria tritici rating of 4)

59 How are disease ratings calculated? Field data validation and analysis Validation: Does the data show differences between varieties? Are disease levels too low or too high? What is the best assessment date(s)? Are the results what we expect? Analysis: For each disease, 3-5 years of data is used and log transformed Data from previous seasons is revalidated High value placed on inoculated data Predicted means calculated for each variety

60 Mean disease severity (log+1) How are disease ratings calculated? Calculations 3 Septoria tritici 2 1 High/low disease fixed points 0 Calculated ratings for individual varieties WW S. tritici disease rating

61 How are disease ratings calculated? Calculations

62 % leaf area affected Using disease ratings A disease rating is an indicator of risk 100 Below minimum standard RL 3-5 RL 6-7 RL Jun 25-Jun 09-Jul Yellow rust development, Banbury, 2013

63 Benefit of treatment ( /ha) Using disease ratings To guide spray priorities Economic benefit of treating for Septoria tritici: pairs of RL treated and untreated trials Septoria the only disease present in the untreated trials Based on an average wheat price of 178/t and treatment programme cost of 81/ha RL S. tritici rating Error bars show standard error of the mean

64 Yield (t/ha) Using disease ratings What if chemistry is lost? Yield penalty to some resistances 12 Untreated yield Treated yield benefit BUT if chemistry is lost these resistances become very important RL Septoria rating Comparison between yields of 5 pairs of RL treated and untreated trials where septoria the only disease present Error bars show standard error of the mean

65 Yield (t/ha) RL yellow rust rating Using disease ratings Race changes The effect of the Warrior yellow rust race, first detected in 2011, on wheat yields Treated Untreated RL YR rating Warrior Error bars show standard error of the mean

66 How can you help? UKCPVS monitors changes in cereal rust and mildew populations across the UK Provides information on race changes to the industry at the earliest possible opportunity Results underpin the RL disease ratings The survey relies on samples sent in by growers, agronomists, plant breeders and trial operators

67 New Tools HGCA disease monitoring Weekly disease monitoring (April July)

68 HGCA Variety selection tool National Regional District

69 2015/16 RL disease ratings Now available on-line The 2015/16 RL booklet will be available from mid February

70 Summary There are bigger differences in levels of disease between low disease ratings than between higher ratings The ratings give an indication of disease risk Use ratings to guide spray prioritisation There is a yield penalty associated with Septoria tritici resistance If chemistry is lost, varietal resistance will become of increased importance Monitoring activities are essential to identify new races

71 Pest thresholds and sprays: Getting the timing right Caroline Nicholls HGCA

72 Crystal ball gazing Fewer actives More expensive actives Threat of resistance Environmental concerns

73 The art of doing nothing Most difficult decision you can make Do you need to treat? Requires 100% confidence in information at your disposal

74 Why should you only spray when absolutely necessary? Economics Lack of new actives Environment Resistance Legislation

75 Too many pests to monitor! Online monitoring tools Incidence surveys e-newsletters Trapping

76 What is a threshold?

77 Risk assessment and thresholds HGCA Research Review No. 73 A review of invertebrate pest thresholds Ellis, SA, Berry P & Walters KW 2009 Thresholds valuable in defining need to treat Lack of confidence in current thresholds? Improved knowledge of crop physiology Use crop tolerance to assess pest risk Under SUD thresholds will become pivotal component of IPM

78 Pollen beetle

79 Percentage larval parasitism of pollen beetle in EU ( )

80 Pollen beetle predictor forecast tool Tried and tested through HGCA-funded research Adopted by Bayer Start of migration % migration New migration

81 Mean beetles/plant Pollen beetle numbers Old thresholds Winter rape threshold Backward rape threshold Source: Fera survey data

82 % of total OSR area treated for pollen beetle % sprays when pollen beetle is target Area of oilseed rape treated against pollen beetle

83 Changes in the pyrethroid susceptibility of pollen beetle populations This bar chart is reproduced with the kind permission of IRAC

84 Pollen beetle: the story so far Rape spray thresholds rarely exceeded Around 20% rape area sprayed against pollen beetles (2012 PUS) Impact on natural enemies and insecticide resistance Are current thresholds out of date in relation to modern varieties/or being used? Rape is inherently tolerant of pest attack Could the thresholds be re-evaluated in relation to crop tolerance?

85 Threshold components Excess flowers Number of beetles Flowers eaten per beetle

86 Semi-field study

87 Pollen beetles introduced at green bud

88 Pods lost/beetle A single beetle can destroy nine buds (On average) y = e x R 2 = Inoculated beetles

89 Excess flower number is dependent on variety in winter rape Variety Excess flowers/m / /10 Castille (OP) Excalibur (Hybrid) PR54D03 (Semi dwarf hybrid) Mean

90 Seeds per pod Pod number for maximum yield seeds/m pods/m 2 0

91 Excess flowers per plant Excess flower number is inversely related to plant number Castille 2009 Excalibur 2009 PR45D Castille 2010 Excalibur 2010 PR45D Plants/m 2

92 WOSR: Threshold calculation Assuming crop with 40 plants/m 2 Excess flower number would be on average about 200 /plant Single beetle can destroy about 9 buds Need about 22 beetles/plant to destroy all excess flowers

93 Pollen beetle threshold per plant Pollen beetle threshold varies with plant number Winter OSR Spring OSR Plants/m 2

94 Pollen beetle control thresholds Plants in lower plant populations produce more branches and, therefore, more flowers Plants/m 2 can be estimated by counting the number of plants within a square foot and multiplying by 11

95 Cabbage stem flea beetle (CSFB)

96 CSFB resistance to pyrethroids Knock-down resistance (KDR) and enhanced metabolism No. of samples No. beetles Resistant beetles (%) Hertfordshire Essex Cambridgeshire Suffolk Norfolk Yorkshire Total

97 CSFB control thresholds Adult beetles >25% leaf area eaten at the cotyledon 2 true leaf growth stage >50% the leaf area eaten at the 3 4 true leaf stage The crop is growing more slowly than it is being destroyed Larvae >35 beetles/water trap in total over the monitoring period (emergence end Oct) >2 larvae/plant or 50% petioles damaged

98 Tolerance of OSR to loss of leaf area

99 Creating cabbage stem flea beetle adult damage Treatment Both cotyledons Leaf 1 Leaf 2 1 None N/A N/A 2 Slight N/A N/A 3 Moderate N/A N/A 4 Severe N/A N/A 5 Moderate Slight N/A 6 Moderate Moderate N/A 7 Moderate Severe N/A 8 Moderate Slight Slight 9 Moderate Slight Moderate 10 Moderate Slight Severe 11 Moderate Moderate Slight 12 Moderate Moderate Moderate 13 Moderate Moderate Severe 14 Moderate Severe Slight 15 Moderate Severe Moderate 16 Moderate Severe Severe

100 Tolerance of OSR to loss of leaf area Green leaf area (Bars = LSD P<0.05)

101 How will thresholds evolve? User friendly Inexpensive to use Based on sound science Take account of crop tolerance Combine pests in feeding groups

102 Aphids

103 Aphid migration

104 Aphid migration data

105 AHDB Aphid News Weekly reports Suction traps: Winged aphids Yellow water traps: Winged aphids

106 AHDB Resistance (Peach potato aphid) % samples containing resistant aphids Year MACE kdr super-kdr ne

107 HGCA e-newsletters Useful for monitoring why? Remind you to monitor Remind you of thresholds Remind you of legislation Warn you of outbreaks Warn you of new issues

108 Pest-specific information

109 Pest monitoring and control Information on just about every cereal and oilseed pest

110 Rotation, rotation, rotation: the increasing economic rationale Session facilitated by Tim Isaac, HGCA

111 Overview Brief market summary The economic rationale for rethinking rotations CAP reform Power shift in the rotation OSR economics (risk versus reward) The cash and yield cost of a specific pest, disease or weed Appreciating local markets when making rotational decisions Take-home messages

112 Grain market UK ex-farm prices (Eastern) Two largely bearish seasons as the world has built feed grain stocks. But we are only one weather event away from volatility as we head into the 2015 weather market. This season, prices are capped by supply (esp. UK), but supported by geopolitics Russia. Source: AHDB/HGCA

113 Oilseed market Erith delivered OSR Big soyabean crops in North and South America have quenched concerns over supply in recent seasons. But demand growth remains and so does weather. For the UK, a strong Pound versus Euro is impacting OSR the most. Crude oil concerning? Source: AHDB/HGCA

114 Forecast gross margin returns relative to first feed wheat This graph looks at generic forecast gross margin returns ahead of planting. Due to lower prices, OSR has lost some of its economic appeal. Spring bean success requires yield (good agronomy), quality (good agronomy) and protection of the premium (use of contracts). Source: Agro Business Consultants

115 Impact of black grass any yield loss likely to undermine the viability of second wheat At current grain prices, second feed wheat looks uncompetitive against spring barley if yield loss is expected. At higher grain prices, some yield loss could be tolerable from a relative gross margin perspective. Does the use of more spring cropping create more exposure to the spring weather risk? Source: Agro Business Consultants, AHDB/HGCA

116 Is barley falling out of favour with the world s arable farmers? opportunity for UK exports? Unlike wheat and maize, which continue to set new global production records, barley is at best stagnant. The crop has become uncompetitive for key producers, such as Canada. The likely cause stronger yield growth in maize, soyabean and OSR. This could well be creating a barley niche for the UK. Source: USDA

117 Appreciating local markets when making rotational decisions

118 Take-home messages The economic rationale of rotations is changing But are we becoming increasingly exposed to a dry / late spring risk? Focus on the profitability of the whole rotation rather than individual crops The indirect economic benefits of rotational options need to be better understood What are the following worth on your farm? Residual nitrogen from pulses Improved soil due to cover crops Wider cultivating and harvesting windows Increasingly, formulaic rotations need to be replaced by more responsive rotations which can flex in response to agronomic and economic challenges probably at an individual field level Assess the local market to ensure there is sufficient demand for the crops you grow

119 Attention to agronomic detail: Herbicide resistant weeds Stephen Moss, Oilseed rape consultant HGCA Recommended Lists Oilseeds Committee No Problems Just Solutions

120 The four As of oilseed rape productivity Oilseed rape yields LEVELS Absolute CONSTRAINTS Genetic potential Attainable Environment Affordable Economics Actual Pests; Diseases; Other hazards Philip S. Marr Consultants

121 Why the variation of yields in 2014? Factors 1. Weather 2. Variety 3. Plant population 4. Disease Light leaf spot, verticillium wilt, sclerotinia, clubroot 5. Nutrients and availability 6. Pests Turnip yellows virus 7. Rotation Soils Philip S. Marr Consultants

122 1 Weather

123 Time 1 Weather The Time Temperature Window High Temperatures < 28⁰ Lower Respiration HigherTranspiration Harvest Harvest 2014 Dormantt Oilseed rape Growth and development Planting Growing degree-days Philip S. Marr Consultants

124 2 Variety Early Maturity RL Yield Early Flowering Maturity Late Maturity RL Yield Early Flowering Maturity Excalibur DK Expower Avatar Rhino Harper Charger Popular SY Harnas Campus V316 OL Philip S. Marr Consultants

125 Farmers Weekly (14 November 2014) Use the grid to organise your presentation. Keep main slide content within the green dotted area.

126 2 Variety Philip S. Marr Consultants

127 2 Variety The bigger the plant, the more water required to keep it full, and also the greater the leaf area for water loss from the plant by transpiration Compare size of variety like DK Excellium, PR46W21 against Excalibur or Quartz on light, sandy soils Water Requirements 1.Seed contains 8% moisture at time of planting soon swells to water content 50% less than 2 litres required 2.Depth of 1.5 inches needs litres for seed emergence 3.Depth of 4 inches needs litres 4.Requirement of good seed to soil contact!!! Philip S. Marr Consultants

128 2 Variety HGCA Recommended List Hybrids drilled at 70 seeds Conventionals drilled at 100 seeds

129 2 Variety HGCA yield variation across RL Sites Hybrids drilled at 70 seeds Conventionals drilled at 100 seeds

130 3 Plant population Philip S. Marr Consultants

131 4 Diseases (particularly light leaf spot)

132 4 Diseases (particularly light leaf spot)

133 HGCA Recommended List

134 V316 OL ~ Popular SY Harnas Campus Harper Trinity PT211 DK Cabernet DK Expower YIELD, QUALIT Y, AGRONOM Y AND DISEASE RESIST ANCE NEW NEW NEW NEW C * Variety type RH RH RH Conv RH Conv RH Conv RH Scope of recommendation UK E/W UK UK E/W E/W UK E/W UK Gross output (yie ld a djuste d for oil conte nt) a s % control Fungicide treated (5.3 t/ha) Se e d yie ld a s % control Fungicide treated (5.0 t/ha) Agronomic fe a ture s Resistance to lodging Stem stiffness Shortness of stem Earliness of flowering Earliness of maturity Se e d qua lity (a t 9% moisture ) Oil content, fungicide treated (%) Glucosinolate (µmoles/g of seed) Dise a se re sista nce Light leaf spot Stem canker Sta tus in RL syste m Year first listed RL status P1 P1 P1 P1 P2 P2 - - *

135 4 Diseases (particularly light leaf spot) Relationship between yield loss and disease rating Based on the difference between treated and untreated yield in 5 RL trials where light leaf spot was assumed to be the cause of yield loss ( )

136 4 Diseases (particularly light leaf spot) Scotland has it covered

137 5 Nutrients and availability

138 5 Nutrients and availability 2.5 Nutrient demand throughout the growing season Phosphate Magnesium Boron Nitrogen A S O N D J F M A M J J

139 Yield t/ha at 9% m.c. Margin ( /ha) 5 Nutrients and availability 0.4 Tmt Ref T 1 Aut 6-7 Lvs T 2 Early Stem Ex Spr 1 B Spr 2 B + Mg Spr 3 R&P + B + Mg Aut + Spr 1 Nutr + R&P R&P + B + Mg Aut + Spr 2 Nutr + R&P + Mg R&P + B + Mg Yield 30 Margin Over Input Cost Spr 1 Spr 2 Spr 3 Aut + Spr 1 Aut + Spr 2 0 Spr 1 Spr 2 Spr 3 Aut + Spr 1 Aut + Spr 2

140 6 Pests Turnip yellows virus (TuYV) The Vector The Peach-Potato Aphid Myzus persicae Upto 72% of winged Myzus persicae carry TuYV

141 6 Pests Turnip yellows virus (TuYV) TuYV Infection? BYDV Infection?

142 6 Pests Turnip yellows virus (TuYV)

143 Production

144 7 Rotation UK National Figures

145 7 Rotation Yield data from plots within different rotations of OSR (in rotation with wheat), from the fourth year of the field trial

146 7 Rotation soil organisms

147 7 Rotation soil organisms Seed yield components of Brassica oleracea plants grown in a soilless substrate for four months after inoculation with zoospores (zs) of Olpid brassicae

148 7 Rotation soil organisms B. oleracea root displaying a root lesion after inoculation with Pyrenochaeta sp. Hilton S, Bennett AJ, Keane G, Bending GD, et al. (2013) Impact of Shortened Crop Rotation of Oilseed Rape on Soil and Rhizosphere Microbial Diversity in Relation to Yield Decline. PLoS ONE 8(4): e doi: /journal.pone

149 7 Rotation soil organisms Seed yield components of Brassica oleracea plants grown in a soilless substrate for four months containing Pyrenochaeta sp. mycelium

150 Summary With all the factors that influence yield ASK YOURSELF IS IT Attainable? Or Affordable? Only YOU Know The Actual

151 Event close