Regional Pulse Workshop Feb. 5, 2015, Regina, Saskatchewan

Transcription

1

2 Laryssa Grenkow, Western Applied Research Corporation Eric Johnson, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Stewart Brandt, Northeast Agricultural Research Foundation Chris Holzapfel, Indian Head Agricultural Research Foundation Bryan Nybo, Wheatlands Conservation Area Anne Kirk, University of Manitoba Sherrilyn Phelps, Saskatchewan Pulse Growers 2

3 Melfort, SK (High-Yielding Site) Scott, SK (High-Yielding Site) Indian Head, SK (Low-Yielding Site) Swift Current, SK (Low-Yielding Site) Minto, MB (High-Yielding Site) "Palliser's Triangle map". Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons - 3

4 Inputs Empty Input Package Full Input Package Seeding rate (SR) 60 seeds/m seeds/m 2 Seed treatment (ST) None Apron Maxx RTA Inoculant type (GI) Liquid Cell-Tech Granular Cell-Tech Starter N fertilizer (Fz) Foliar Fungicide (Fn) None None 34 kg N ha -1 (30 lbs/acre) (granular side-banded) 1 st - Headline EC 2 nd - Priaxor DS 4

5 To Determine: 1. Which individual agronomic practices contribute most to field pea seed yield 2. How inputs interact and which combination produces the highest yields and economic returns 5

6 Full Input Package Empty Input Package 6

7 *** = P<0.0001, ** = P<0.01 7

8 8

9 9

10 10

11 11

12 12

13 13

14 High Yield/Low Variability High Yield/High Variability High Yield/Low Variability High Yield/High Variability Low Yield/Low Variability Low Yield/High Variability Low Yield/Low Variability Low Yield/High Variability 14

15

16

17 CDC Meadow Seed = $10.50/bu Headline EC = $15.27/ac Priaxor DS = $19.67/ac $0.48/lb N, 30 lbs N/ac Granular Cell-Tech = $72/25lb bag Liquid Cell-Tech = $55/3L bag Apron Maxx RTA = $460/10L TKW = 220g/1000seeds 60 lbs/bu 2 applications (@ $5/pass) = $10/ac 3.3lbs inoculant/ac for 10 row spacing 1089 kg seed treated/bag 235mL/100kg seed Pea Grain $7/bu *Costs of production & price for peas from 2014 Crop Planning Guide from Saskatchewan Ministry of Agriculture 17

18 Input $/ac Low Seeding Rate High Seeding Rate Foliar Fungicide Starter N Fertilizer Liquid Inoculant (@ Low Seeding Rate) 2.70 Liquid Inoculant (@ High Seeding Rate) 5.40 Granular Inoculant 9.50 Seed Treatment (@ Low Seeding Rate) 5.77 Seed Treatment (@ High Seeding Rate)

19 Treatment Ranking Gain $/ac SR+GI+Fn 72 SR+GI 53 SR+Fn 50 GI+Fn 45 GI 37 SR 37 Full 31 Fn 10 Empty 0 Treatment Gain/Loss Ranking $/ac SR 44 SR+GI 5 GI 1 Empty 0 SR+GI+Fn -8 GI+Fn -24 Full -25 Fn -25 SR+Fn

20 Under Good growing conditions: SR, Fn and GI were the inputs that most consistently increased yields and economic return, especially when applied all in combination Generally, yield increased and yield variability decreased when inputs were combined Fn alone was much less economical than when combined with SR, GI or both Fn protects yield does not build it 20

21 Under Poor growing conditions: Something was limiting yield potential Yield was more variable and input interactions were generally not additive Overall response to SR and Fn was significant; however, the high cost of the Fn resulted in those treatments having the lowest economic return SR applied alone maximized yield and economic return 21

22 Kg ha-1 Foliar fungicide

23 Table 14. General summary of all field-scale fungicide trials conducted by IHARF ( ) near Indian Head, Saskatchewan. Crop Type # of years Response Frequency Z Check Yield Treated Yield Yield Increase % kg/ha Y % Spring Wheat X Barley V Oat V Canaryseed Field Pea Canola U, V Z Significant check versus rest contrast (P 0.05), percentage of years where a response observed Y Averaged across years and products X Does not include data from Twinline trial in 2013 due to lack of a true untreated check V Weighted averages used to avoid counting multiple trials within the same year twice U Products / application timings targeting sclerotinia stem rot only 23

24 Yield (bu/ac) ns CHECK HEADLINE ns not significant; * P 0.10; ** P 0.05; *** P ns ns * ** *** *** +11% AVG Year ns 24

25 Seed Yield (bu/ac) % +19% +18% A B B C CHECK HEADLINE ACAPELA PRIAXOR DS 25

26 26

27 To determine the effects of different rotational crops (including legumes) on yield of hybrid canola and yield (and protein) of malting barley grown after canola One year and two year effects

28 Cynthia Grant for her leadership in this project. John O Donovan for willingness to share the results and provide information for this presentation Funding for this project was obtained under Agriculture & Agri- Food Canada s Canola/Flax Cluster and Barley DIAP. Industry partners: Canola Council of Canada, Alberta Canola Producers Commission, Saskatchewan Canola Development Commission, Manitoba Canola Growers Association, Alberta Barley Commission, RAHR Malting, and the Barley Malting and Brewing Research Institute.

29 60º N Lat. Fort Vermillion Alberta Saskatchewan Manitoba Canadian Shield Beaverlodge Lacombe Vegreville Scott Gray Dark Gray Black 49º N Lat. Lethbridge Swift Current Indian Head Brandon Dark Brown Brown

30 Canola Barley N (urea) rates (kg/ha) Wheat Canola Fababean (GM) Fababean (seed) Pea Lentil

31 Crop residue (C) N rate (R) C x R Crop Variable p-values Canola (2010) Barley (2011) Yield <0.001 < Oil <0.001 < Yield <0.001 < Protein <

32 Crop residue Canola yield (bu acre -1 ) Wheat 41 Canola 37 (-8%)* Faba bean (GM) 52 (27%)* Faba bean (seed) 42 (NS) Pea 45 (10%)* Lentil 45 (10%)* *Indicates significantly different from wheat residue (p < 0.05) NS indicates not significantly different from wheat residue (p > 0.05)

33 Crop residue Barley yield (bu acre -1 ) Wheat 79 Canola 82 (NS) Faba bean (GM) 90 (14%)* Faba bean (seed) 83 (NS) Pea 84 (6%)* Lentil 85 (7%)* *Indicates significantly different from wheat residue (p < 0.05) NS indicates not significantly different from wheat residue (p > 0.05)

34 90 kg ha -1 N with Lentil or pea residue = 120 kg ha -1 N with Wheat residue Significant effect of N rate and residue (P<0.001)

35 (3%)* (3%)* Significant effect of N rate and residue (P<0.001)

36 Preceding Crops 2009 Canola yield 2010 Barley yield 2011 (bu/ac) Annual Net Return ($/acre) Faba bean (GM) Faba bean Field pea Lentils Wheat Canola *Means reflect data averaged over 5 N rates and 7 western Canada locations O Donovan et al Agron. J. 106: , Khakbazan et al Agron. J. 106:

37 Rotation effects: Pea and lentil - 10% increase in hybrid canola yield (2010- Year 1) and 6-7% increase in barley yield (2011-Year 2) compared to wheat stubble Faba bean (seed) NS increase in canola or barley yields over those on wheat stubble Faba bean (green manure) 27% increase in canola yield (2010) and 14 % increase in barley yield (2011) compared to wheat stubble Canola on canola lowest canola yields at -8% of canola grown on wheat no disease pressure evident

38 N Management Basing N management on a target yield, 25% less fertilizer N was required to maintain a given canola or barley yield when following field pea or lentil rather than wheat Economics Annual net revenue was greatest with pulses (seed) in the three year rotation Faba bean green manure was highest in individual years of canola and barley but was lowest in 3 year average

39

40

41 Soybean Yield (bu/ac) NSC Reston NSC Vito NSC Anola Early Mid Late AVG 0 Canola Pea Faba Soybean 41

42 Chris Holzapfel, MSc Pag Research Manager, IHARF Phone; Website: Crop Management Field Day July 21, 2015