CMCDC 2013 ANNUAL REPORT

Transcription

1 CMCDC 13 ANNUAL REPORT Diversification Program MHPEC Inc.

2 Canada-Manitoba Crop Diversification Centre P.O. Box 309 Carberry, Manitoba R0K 0H0 Tel. (4) Fax. (4)

3 Contents Extension... 1 Staff... 2 Acronyms and Abbreviations... 3 CMCDC Sites Aerial Photos and Plot Locations... 4 Weather at CMCDC sites... 8 Research Project Reports Evaluation of cultivar growth rate and maturity under varying environmental and soil conditions in Manitoba Effects of row spacing and seeding rate on soybean in Manitoba R P Management for soybeans in the Northern Frontier: rate and placement effects on plant stand, biomass and seed yield Western Canada soybean adaptation under irrigation & dry land production Effect of fungicide timing on grain yield and quality of winter wheat varieties with different levels of resistance to fusarium head blight Forage mixtrure establishment with/without barley as nurse crop Effect of row spacing on buckwheat grain yield Buckwheat variety testing Industrial hemp variety evaluation Phosphorus ramp demonstration Narrow row edible bean variety testing Snap bean variety evaluation Multi coloured tomato variety evaluation Multi coloured pepper variety evaluation Evaluation of Manure Compost on Vegetable Production Evaluation of new fruit crops for Manitoba Adaptability of Hops in Manitoba Western Forage Testing System Adaptation of Jerusalem Artichoke to Central Plains (Carberry) region for inulin production Potato variety evaluation for starch production in Manitoba

4 Extension In addition to the information provided in the Annual Report, a number of technology transfer/outreach activities were conducted at the three CMCDC sites in 12, namely: 1. July 18 CMCDC Carberry Crop Diversification Tour 2. July 25 Portage Crop Diversification Tour (joint event held annually by CMCDC and the Crop Research Organization of Portage (CROP)) 3. Aug 1 Horticulture Diagnostic School (event hosted annually by CMCDC and coordinated by MAFRD and Assiniboine Community College (ACC)) 4. Aug 18 Carberry Soil and Water Management Workshop. 5. Aug 21 Winkler Potato Tour CMCDC also participates annually at Brandon Ag Days, co-hosting a booth display with the other Manitoba Diversification Centres Visitors are always welcome at all the CMCDC sites. Call us or drop in for more information on anything in this report, or any of our programs and activities. Contact information is provided with each of the technical reports. 1

5 Staff AAFC provided six staff positions dedicated full-time to CMCDC - the Centre Manager, Potato Agronomist/Portage Site Supervisor, Agronomist, Carberry Site Supervisor, Research Support Lead Hand, and Office Administrator. AAFC also provides four seasonal support positions, and summer students. Manitoba provides one full-time on-site position at Carberry - the Diversification Specialist, and summer students. Manitoba also dedicates portions of other Provincial Specialists time to CMCDC programs. MHPEC provides financial support for seasonal support staff, summer students, and casual labour. CMCDC Staff 13 Carberry Site Supporting Full time staff CMCDC Partner Position Brian Baron AAFC Site Supervisor Craig Linde MAFRD Diversification Specialist Alison Nelson AAFC Agronomist (Winnipeg) Sherree Strain AAFC Office Administrator Seasonal/Term staff Erin Anderson MHPEC Site Assistant Bernie Brecknell AAFC Field Research Assistant Eric Claeys AAFC Field Operations Assistant Amanda Kowalchuk MHPEC Site Assistant Dave Paluch AAFC Field Operations Assistant Summer students/casual staff Muhammad Ayoub AAFC Summer Research Assistant Sophie Gabutero AAFC Summer Research Assistant Kevin James AAFC Summer Research Assistant Bingqing (Gloria) Li AAFC Summer Research Assistant Darcy Manns MAFRD Summer Research Assistant Portage la Prairie Site Full time staff Danny Bouchard AAFC Field Research Assistant Curtis Cavers AAFC Potato Agronomist/ Site Supervisor Seasonal/Term staff Scott Jackson AAFC Field Operations Assistant Neil Jordan MHPEC Field Operations Assistant Babatunde Nuga MHPEC Site Assistant Henry Wolfe AAFC Field Research Assistant Summer students/casual staff Samantha Anderson AAFC Summer Research Assistant Jenny Fehr MAFRD Summer Research Assistant Jane Klippenstein AAFC Summer Research Assistant Janessa Mankewich MHPEC Summer Research Assistant Nathan Warthe MHPEC Summer Research Assistant 2

6 Acronyms and Abbreviations AAFC Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada ARDI Agri-Food Research and Development Inititative ASI Agriculture Sustainability Initiative CMCDC Canada-Manitoba Crop Diversification Centre CROP Crop Research Organization of Portage CV Coefficient of Variation LSD Least Significant Difference MAFRD Manitoba Agirculture, Food and Rural Development MBGA Manitoba Buckwheat Growers Association MCVET Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team MHPEC Manitoba Horticulture Productivity Enhancement Centre Inc. MPGA Manitoba Pulse Growers Association MSAPP Manitoba Sustainable Agriculture Practices Program MWS Manitoba Water Stewardship PCDF Parkland Crop Diversification Foundation PESAI Prairies East Sustainable Agricultural Initiative WADO Westman Agricultural Diversification Organization 3

7 CMCDC Sites Aerial Photos and Plot Locations 4

8 5

9 6

10 2 BASF plots 2 CMCDC Winkler Site Controlled Tile Drainage Potato Research Trial 2. AAFC (Morden) Bean Trials 3. Gaia Consulting Potato Research Trials 4. MAFRD Potato Demonstration Plots 5. AAFC National Potato Variety Trials

11 Weather at CMCDC sites April through October 13 Figure 1. Monthly temperature at CMCDC-Carberry. Figure 2. Monthly precipitation at CMCDC-Carberry. 8

12 Figure 3. Monthly temperature at CMCDC-Portage la Prairie. Figure 4. Monthly precipitation at CMCDC-Portage la Prairie. 9

13 Figure 5. Monthly temperature at CMCDC-Winkler. Figure 6. Monthly precipitation at CMCDC-Winkler. 10

14 Research Project Reports Evaluation of Soybean cultivar growth rate and maturity under varying environmental and soil conditions in Manitoba Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Ramona Mohr, AAFC Brandon Aaron Glenn, AAFC Brandon Byron Irvine, AAFC Brandon Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Paula Halabicki, PESAI Arborg Jeff Kostuik, PCDF Roblin Scott Chalmers, WADO Melita Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Year 3 of 3 Objective: Contact Information: 1. Relate different methods of thermal time to yield of soybeans across agro-manitoba. 2. Relate accumulated thermal time to growth stage observations. ramona.mohr@agr.gc.ca Introduction The development of soybean cultivars requiring fewer heat units has allowed expansion of soybean in Manitoba in recent years. Despite these advances, risks associated with delayed seeding and early-season frost continue to be considerations when growing soybean. Successful production requires an understanding of the factors influencing growth rate and maturity so that management practices can be adapted to optimize the genetic potential of the cultivars being grown in a given region. The soybean plant responds both to day length and to heat units. As such, the development of the crop is influenced not only by growing season temperature and the accumulation of heat units, but also by latitude. Crop development is further influenced by factors such as variety selection, moisture stress and management (e.g. fertilization, crop establishment practices, etc.) (McWilliams et al. 1999; Soybean Growth and Management Quick Guide. A-1174.). Efforts are currently underway to develop growth models for North Dakota (Kandel and Akyuz 12; However, information regarding the relationship between environmental conditions and soybean development and maturity is lacking for Agro-Manitoba. Methods Field experiments evaluating the phenology and agronomic performance of three early maturing soybean varieties (Table 1) were conducted at eight locations in southern Manitoba (Table 2) over the growing seasons of 11 (six sites), 12 (eight sites), and 13 (eight sites). Sites chosen for the study spanned a latitudinal gradient of approximately 2 or 222 km and an elevation gradient of more than 300 m (Table 2). Soil texture at the eight sites ranged from loamy sand (Melita), clay loam (Beausejour, Brandon, Carberry, Morden, Portage, Roblin), to clay (Arborg). The Portage, 11

15 Melita, Beausejour and Arborg sites had imperfect internal soil drainage while the remaining four sites were well drained. Table 1. Characteristics of the three soybean varieties used for the growth and maturity trials in 12. Soybean Cultivar Company Heat Maturity Group Manitoba Variety Zone Units Cultivar Short-season Cultivar Long-season Cultivar Long-season Table 2. Latitude ( North of the equator), elevation (metres above sea level), cumulative crop heat units (30-year normal for May 15 to September 15 from the nearest Environment Canada station), precipitation (30-year normal for May 15 to September 15 from the nearest Environment Canada station) and first fall frost (50% risk based on the 30-year normal) of the eight different sites used in the study. Site Latitude ( N) Elevation (m) Crop Heat Units Precipitation (mm) First Fall Frost Arborg September 11 Beausejour September 21 Brandon September 14 Carberry September 15 Melita September 14 Morden September 23 Portage la Prairie September 24 Roblin September 8 At all sites, a randomized complete block design consisting of three replicates of the three cultivars was established. Soybean was typically planted in mid-may to early-june using a standard plot seeder, and harvested from September to October using a small plot combine. Plot size and row spacing varied as a function of the equipment available at each site; however, in all site-years, soybean was planted into small plots using narrow (-30 cm) row spacing. Standard management practices for each region were employed. Details regarding each site and field operations are reported in Table A1 in the Appendix. Measurements conducted included: plant density, lodging score, height at maturity, yield, crop development periodically throughout vegetative and reproductive stages, yield, and seed quality (test weight, 1000 seed weight, percent oil and protein). Where seed moisture at harvest was measured, reported yields were adjusted to 14% moisture. At the remainder of sites, yields are reported on an air-dry basis. Oil and protein concentrations for all site-years were determined on an Infratec Grain Analyzer (Foss North America Inc., Eden Prairie, MN). Initial analysis of yield and seed quality measurements for each year demonstrated differences among locations and cultivars in almost all cases, as well as interactions between location and cultivar. Therefore, for 12

16 the purpose of this report, yield and grain quality data were analyzed by site-year using Proc Mixed in SAS, with cultivar considered a fixed effect and replicate considered a random effect. Tukey s multiple comparison procedure was employed to identify differences among cultivars within a given site-year. At three of the trial locations in 11 (Brandon, Morden and Roblin), five in 12 (Arborg, Beausejour, Carberry, Melita and Roblin) and all eight sites in 13, simple, battery-powered microclimate stations (Decagon Devices, Inc.; Figure 1) were used to monitor site-specific conditions near or above the soybean canopies in order to complement and relate to local and regional weather data obtained from weather stations operated by Environment Canada and MAFRD. The variables measured included air temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, incident solar radiation, wind speed and direction. Growing degree days (GDD) and CHU were calculated from the daily maximum and minimum temperatures recorded at each site. For the Carberry and Portage locations in 11, data obtained from local weather stations operated by Environment Canada and MAFRD were used. For the Morden, Portage, and Brandon trial locations in 12, data obtained from local weather stations operated by Environment Canada, MAFRD and AAFC, respectively, were used. According to the company heat units assigned to each of the varieties (Table 1), five of the eight sites receive enough crop heat units (CHU) on average for Cultivar 1 to mature, three of the eight sites receive enough CHU on average for Cultivar 2, and only one site (Morden) would have the thermal requirements for all three varieties grown during the trials (Table 2). Figure 1. Inter-comparison of the microclimate stations used in the soybean growth and maturity trails in 12, conducted beside the primary weather station at Brandon Research Centre prior to deployment to the different trial locations in southern Manitoba. Photograph taken April 30,

17 Results and Discussion Growing Season Length The soybean trials were planted between May 15 and June 13 during the three years of the experiment (Table 3). Soybeans should not be planted until the soil temperature has reached 10 C (ref. 1), which is usually not until around May 15 or later on average in southern Manitoba. This limit on the minimum recommended soil temperature prior to planting means that producers generally plant soybeans later than other crops in the region and the risk of exposing emerged seedlings to a spring frost is low in most locations. Most trials were planted earlier in 12 relative to the other two years of the study (Table 3), as there was less snow over the winter and an earlier spring snowmelt. Table 3. Planting dates at the different sites for the three years of the study. All three cultivars were planted on the same date for each location. The average daily soil temperature at a depth of 5 cm below a grassed surface is given for the Brandon location in parentheses. Site Arborg --- May 31 May 23 Beausejour --- May 16 May 24 Brandon May 26 (T soil = 12 C) June 1 (T soil = 13 C) May 22 (T soil = 11 C) Carberry May 26 May 16 May 22 Melita --- May 16 May 15 Morden (zero-till) May May 16 May 16 Morden (conventional May 26 n/a n/a till) Portage la Prairie June 13 May 17 June 5 Roblin May 25 May 17 May 29 The soil temperature at a depth of 5 cm beneath grass at the Brandon location was two degrees warmer at a later seeding date in 12 compared to 13 (Table 3). Seedling emergence occurred 6 days after planting (June 7) in Brandon in 12 compared to days after planting (June 10) in 13. This is a difference of almost two weeks between planting and emergence, and highlights the role that warmer soil temperatures can have on germination and emergence. Although the planting in Brandon was 10 days later in 12 compared to 13 (Table 3), the seedlings emerged earlier and therefore had more time to grow and mature prior to a normal first fall frost date (Table 2). A similar trend was observed between the two sites located at Morden in 11 between planting date and timing of seedling emergence. Although the conventional till plots were planted six days later than the zero-till plots, seedling emergence was only one day later on average, giving a similar length and timing of the growing season for the plants from both sites. The majority of site-years investigated during the study were harvested after the first killing frost in the fall (Table 4). In 11, four of the six locations had growing seasons terminated by frost, with only the two sites at Morden harvested prior (Table 4). In 12, five sites had growing seasons ended by frost, while three sites were harvested prior. In 13, six of the sites had growing seasons terminated by frost, two sites were harvested prior (Table 4). Only the Morden location was harvested prior to frost all three years of the study (Table 4), which may be expected as the only location with sufficient CHU on average (Table 2) for all varieties grown (Table 1). Of the locations in western Manitoba, only Carberry and Melita in 12 were harvested prior to frost. This finding highlights the second component of the major limitation to growing soybeans throughout agricultural Manitoba (length of the growing season), after the constraint of having minimum soil temperatures prior to planting. The occurrence of first fall frost was near- to slightly-later than normal for the locations in 11 and 12 (Table 2; Table 4), while it was later to much-later than 14

18 normal for the sites in 13 (Table 2; Table 4). Harvest was delayed in 13 due to a cooler than normal period from mid-july to mid-august across southern Manitoba, which delayed soybean maturity. Mid-August through the end of September was warmer than normal in 13 which helped the trials to mature prior to frost. Only the Brandon location experienced a frost in September 13, the remaining sites did not until October (Table 4). Despite the tendency for harvest to occur at the majority of sites post-frost during the experiment, all three varieties made it to at least physiological maturity (growth stage R7) at most sites and years, with the only exception being Cultivar 3 (Table 1) at Arborg in 12. At R7, the soybean plant is at physiological maturity and frost has little effect on seed yield (ref. 2) although seed moisture may be slightly higher and seed size and quality slightly reduced compared to pods that dry down and reach harvest maturity (growth stage R8) prior to frost (ref. 3). In 11 at Brandon, 12 at Carberry, and 12 and 13 at Roblin, Cultivar 2 and Cultivar 3 (Table 1) did not make it to R8 prior to first frost. Had frost occurred at a date closer to normal in 13, there would have been more locations where varieties failed to reach to the R7 or R8 stages. Agricultural Meteorological Conditions and Agronomic Performance There was a wide range of meteorological conditions encountered and yields obtained for the three cultivars over the three years of the experiment at the various locations (Table 5; Table 6; Table 7). Significant linear relationships between GDD and CHU were found for all locations and years studied (data not shown). It was therefore decided to only use CHU as the indication of thermal time to initially relate to yield and phenology (growth staging) to reduce redundancy and because CHU were used by seed companies in Canada for rating the suitability of soybean cultivars to different geographical regions. In 11, most sites experienced near-normal CHU over the periods from planting to first fall frost or harvest (Table 5), and only the Morden site had sufficient cumulative CHU (Table 5) for all three soybean varieties grown according to the company ratings (Table 1). The yields were similar for the three varieties grown at Morden in 11, however the conventional tillage treatment had higher yields than zero-tillage did at the site (Table 5). The Portage location would normally have sufficient CHU for all three varieties, however due to the late planting date of the trial in 11 (June 13, Table 3) the site only had enough CHU over the period from planting to frost for Cultivar 1. This was reflected in yields, with Cultivar 1 having a significantly higher yield than Cultivar 2 and Cultivar 3 in 11 at Portage (Table 5). The Brandon, Carberry, and Roblin locations did not have enough CHU for any of the varieties grown in 11 according to the company heat unit ratings (Table 1; Table 5). The Brandon and Carberry locations had over 90% of the CHU recommended for Cultivar 1, while the Roblin site had only 85% of required heat units in 11. The yields of the three cultivars at the three cooler western locations were Cultivar 1 > Cultivar 2 > Cultivar 3 (Table 5), as would be expected from the company heat unit ratings and the agroclimatology in 11. However, the Roblin site had the highest yield for Cultivar 1 across all locations in 11, and an overall soybean yield that was comparable to those achieved at Portage and the conventional tillage plots at Morden (Table 5), indicating that factors other than CHU played an important role in determining soybean yield at the sites. 15

19 Effects of row spacing and seeding rate on soybean in Manitoba Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Ramona Mohr, AAFC Brandon Aaron Glenn, AAFC Brandon Debbie McLaren, AAFC Brandon Byron Irvine, AAFC Brandon Mark Sandercock, AAFC Morden Gordon Finlay, AAFC Brandon Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Paula Halabicki, PESAI Arborg Jeff Kostuik, PCDF Roblin Scott Chalmers, WADO Melita Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Year 3 of 3 Objective: Key Message: Contact Information: Evaluate the effects of seeding rate and row spacing on soybean growth, yield and quality in Manitoba s soybean-producing regions. Narrow rows produced yields that were equivalent to or greater than wide rows in all site-years. Increasing seeding rate consistently increased plant stand, but the actual plant stand established typically ranged from 60 to 100% of the target seeding rate, demonstrating the influence of conditions at seeding and crop emergence on final crop establishment. Yield increased with increasing plant stand, then leveled off with further increases in plant stand. ramona.mohr@agr.gc.ca Introduction Manitoba s soybean industry has grown rapidly over the past decade. With the development of short-season cultivars adapted to Manitoba conditions, soybean production has expanded from traditional areas in the Red River Valley to other regions of Manitoba, contributing to a record soybean acreage of an estimated 344,000 ha in 12 (Statistics Canada 12). With the growing importance of the soybean industry in Manitoba, and expansion into nontraditional areas, agronomic information appropriate for Manitoba s climatic and soil conditions is required in order to identify those management practices that will optimize crop yield and quality. Row spacing With expansion of soybeans into non-traditional areas, soybeans have often been grown in narrow rows using conventional seeding equipment because row cropping equipment was uncommon. As soybean has become more established in Manitoba, however, questions have arisen regarding the relative benefits and disadvantages of narrow versus wide row spacing. Based on studies conducted in North Dakota, reported benefits of narrow row spacing of soybean include increased yield, increased weed competition due to earlier canopy closure, and capacity to use existing seeding and harvest equipment (Berglund and Helm 03; Endres 05; Endres and Kandel 11). Conversely, wider rows may increase air movement among plants reducing disease potential and allow the use of row-crop cultivation for weed control. It has also been suggested that wider rows may be beneficial under drier conditions to reduce moisture losses via transpiration (Berglund and Helm 03). In Manitoba, where soybean has been recognized as 16

20 a crop tolerant of wet conditions, row planting equipment may also allow earlier access to the field than an air seeder thereby reducing the risk of delayed seeding in wet years. Seeding rate Current Manitoba recommendations are to establish between 180,000 to 210,00 plants/acre or 4 plants ft2 (40 plants m-2) (Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives, 12). In studies in North Dakota comparing various seeding rates, higher plant density was shown to increase yield in some cases, although it was found that a lower planting rate might still be more economical when all costs and benefits are considered (Endres 05; Endres and Kandel 11). Interactions between row spacing and seeding rate may also occur. Maintaining the same seeding rate when changing from narrow to wide row spacing increases the number of plants per row. This may cause the plant to produce its lowest pods higher off the ground, potentially reducing the need to roll the field and allowing the lowest pods to be harvested more easily. Methods Field experiments were conducted at various locations across Manitoba from 11 through 13 inclusive, for a total of site-years (Table 1). Studies were conducted at Carberry, Melita, Morden and Portage from 11 through 13, inclusive; and at Arborg, Beausejour, Brandon and Roblin from 12 through 13, inclusive. At all sites, a randomized complete block design consisting of three replicates of a factorial combination of four seeding rates (, 30, 40 and 50 pure live seeds m-2) and two row spacings (narrow and wide) was established. Exact row spacing varied among sites as a function of the seeding equipment available, with narrow row spacing typically ranging from 8 to 12 and wide row spacing ranging from 16 to 30 (Table 1). Plot size was determined by the equipment available at each site, and ranged in area from 5 to 29 m2. Standard management practices appropriate for each region were employed. The same soybean cultivar (2475 heat units; RR1) from the same seed source was grown at each site. Soybean was typically seeded between mid-may and mid-june, and harvested in September or October, depending upon location. Detailed information regarding agronomic management is provided in Table 1. In-season measurements included: plant density, lodging score, days to maturity, height at maturity, yield, and crop development periodically throughout vegetative and reproductive stages. Yield and seed quality (test weight, seed weight, oil and protein concentration) were determined at harvest. At those sites where seed moisture at harvest was measured, reported yields were adjusted to 14% moisture. At the remainder of sites, yields are reported on an air-dry basis. Oil and protein concentration were determined on an Infratec Grain Analyzer (Foss North America, Eden Prairie, MN). For the purpose of this report, data were analyzed by site-year using Proc Mixed in SAS, with row spacing and plant density considered fixed effects and replicate considered a random effect. Contrast analysis was employed to identify linear and quadratic responses to seeding rate. Regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between plant stand and seed yield. Results and Discussion Plant density: Plant stand increased linearly with increasing seeding rate at all experimental sites except Portage in 13 where a similar numeric trend was observed (Figure 1; Figure 2a). The actual plant stand achieved in the field typically ranged between 60 and 100% of the target seeding rate (Figure 2b). Since the same seed source was used at all experimental sites, conditions at seeding and crop emergence were likely important factors influencing plant stand at individual 17

21 sites. These results suggest that verification of actual plant stands in the field is important to ensure that the plant populations achieved in the field are as expected based on the seeding rates used. Wide row spacing reduced plant stand in 9 of site-years: at Carberry and Melita in 11; Arborg, Brandon and Morden in 12; and at Beausejour, Carberry, Melita, and Portage in 13 (Figure 1). A higher concentration of plants within the row of the wide-row configuration may have led to reduced emergence and/or attrition of some plants due to increased between-plant competition. Interactions between seeding rate and row spacing rarely occurred (Morden 12; Beausejour 13), indicating that increasing seeding rate increased plant stand regardless of the row spacing used. Yield: Yield varied considerably among site-years, and was influenced both by row spacing and seeding rate (Figure 3). Interactions between row spacing and seeding rate were seldom observed (Morden and Portage in 11; Arborg in 12) and inconsistent, suggesting that row spacing and seeding rate can be considered independently of each other. In all site-years, narrow row spacing produced yields that were equal to or greater than wide row spacing. In 8 of site-years, narrow row spacing increased yield compared to wide row spacing (Arborg, Beausejour, Melita in 12 and 13; Carberry in 12; Roblin in 13). Yield increases at these sites ranged from approximately 100 to 780 kg ha-1, but were <550 kg ha-1 in most siteyears. In 6 of the 8 cases where narrow row spacing increased yield, the wide row spacing treatments were 27 (Arborg - 27 ; Beausejour 27 ; Melita 30 ). In the other two cases where row spacing affected yield, the wide row spacing treatments were 16 (Roblin 13) and 24 (Carberry 12), respectively, and the yield differences observed were comparatively smaller. Increasing seeding rate increased seed yield in 17 of site-years (Figure 3). Similar numeric trends were evident in the remaining site-years, but effects were not statistically significant. At Roblin in 12, variability at the site and a reduced number of replicates may have contributed to the lack of a significant effect while, at Portage in 13, increasing seeding rate had not increased plant stand which may have limited effects on yield. Linear increases in yield with increasing seeding rate were observed in most site-years, indicating that there were incremental increases in yield across the range of seeding rates used. In a few site-years (Carberry, Morden in 11; Beausejour in 12; Roblin 13), quadratic responses suggested that yields increased with increasing seeding rate then levelled off as seeding rate was further increased. With the exception of Morden, the 40 seed m-2 seeding rate often yielded about 95 to 100% of the 50 seed m-2 rate. Exceptions were Arborg, Carberry and Roblin in 13, where the 40 seed m-2 seeding rate yielded approximately 90% of the 50 seed m-2 rate. Other exceptions were Carberry in 11 and Portage in 13 where the 40 seed m-2 seeding rate yielded approximately 114% and 108% of the 50 seed m-2 rate, respectively. Preliminary analysis suggested that differences in actual plant stand measured in the field accounted for approximately 69% of the variability in yield (Figure 4). This analysis was based on 13 site-years of data across Manitoba. Initial analysis to assess the effect of actual plant stand on relative seed yield (i.e. yield as percentage of the highest-yielding seeding rate treatment in each site-year) showed a quadratic relationship, with yield increasing with increasing plant stand then levelling off. Based on the quadratic equation that was fit to the data, plant stands of, 30, 35, 40 and 45 plants m-2 produced an estimated 84%, 95%, 98%, 100% and 100% of optimum yield, respectively. Current Manitoba recommendations indicate a plant population of 40 plants m-2. 18

22 Economic analysis of data from the current study has not been conducted. In studies in North Dakota comparing various seeding rates, higher plant density was shown to increase yield in some cases, although the researchers noted that a lower planting rate might still be more economical when all costs and benefits are considered (Endres 05; Endres and Kandel 11). Seed quality: Seed weight, test weight, percent oil and percent protein were determined on harvested seed in all site-years, except Carberry in 11 due to significant frost damage at that site, for a total of 19 site-years of data. Often, effects of row spacing and seeding rate were relatively small when compared to variability among site-years. A lack of interactions between row spacing and seeding rate suggest that these factors acted independently of one another. Oil concentration: Row spacing and seeding rate had limited and inconsistent effects on percent oil in harvested seed. Row spacing affected percent oil in 3 of 19 site-years but effects were inconsistent, with narrow row spacing increasing percent oil at Melita in 12 and Arborg in 13, and decreasing percent oil at Arborg in 12. Contrast analysis showed that increasing seeding rate decreased percent oil at Arborg, Carberry, Melita and Roblin in 12, and increased percent oil at Portage in 11 and Arborg and Carberry in 13. A quadratic response was measured at Portage in 13, with percent oil decreasing with increasing seeding rate then increasing slightly. While these effects were statistically significant, the differences in percent oil within a given siteyear were generally small compared to the variability among site-years. Protein concentration: Row spacing had a more frequent and consistent effect on percent protein than on percent oil, with wide row spacing resulting in a higher percent protein in 7 of 19 site-years. Differences between narrow and wide row spacing typically ranged from 0.2 to 1.2% protein, with the exception of Arborg 13 where the difference averaged 3.1%. In part, markedly lower yields in the wide row spacing treatment at Arborg in 13 may have contributed to a higher percent protein at that site. Contrast analysis indicated that percent protein increased with increasing seeding rate in 7 of 19 site-years (Melita, Morden in 11; Arborg, Brandon, Roblin in 12; Beausejour, Portage in 13) and decreased with increasing seeding rate at Arborg in 13. As noted for percent oil, while statistically significant, the differences observed were generally small compared to the variability among site-years. Seed weight: Seed weight was higher for wide than narrow row spacing in 9 of 19 site-years, although this did not translate into increased seed yield in any case. Seeding rate influenced seed weight in 7 of 19 site-years, but effects were inconsistent among site-years. Increasing seeding rate increased seed weight in 3 site-years (Arborg, Portage in 12; Beausejour in 13), but decreased seed weight in the remaining 4 site-years (Roblin in 12; Arborg, Carberry, Melita in 13). Test weight: Test weight was higher for narrow than wide row spacing at Carberry and Roblin in 12 and Arborg in 13, and lower for narrow than wide row spacing at Brandon in 13. Contrast analysis showed small increases in test weight with increasing seeding weight in 6 of 19 site-years, and small decreases in two site-years. Summary Narrow rows produced yields that were equivalent to or greater than wide rows in all site-years. Narrow rows had a yield advantage in almost all cases (6 of 7 site-years) where narrow rows of 9-10 were compared against wide rows ranging from In those site-years where wide rows ranged from 16-24, yield differences between narrow and wide rows were less frequent (2 of 13 site-years). 19

23 Increasing seeding rate consistently increased plant stand, but the actual plant stand established typically ranged from 60 to 100% of the target seeding rate, demonstrating the influence of conditions at seeding and crop emergence on final crop establishment. Yield increased with increasing plant stand, then leveled off with further increases in plant stand. Based on preliminary analysis of a sub-set of 13 site-years of data, plant stand accounted for approximately 69% of yield variability. Fitting of a quadratic relationship indicated that actual plant stands of 30, 35 and 40 plants m-2 produced an estimated 95, 98% and 100% of optimum yield under the conditions of this study. Current Manitoba recommendations indicate a plant population of 40 plants m-2. Both row spacing and seeding rate influenced seed quality in some site-years. However, observed effects were generally not consistent among all site-years, and differences among treatments were often comparatively smaller than the differences observed among site-years. Additional analysis of these data will be conducted to more closely assess the effects of row spacing and seeding rate on soybean in Manitoba. References Berglund, D.R. and Helms, T.C. 03. Soybean production. A-250. North Dakota State University Extension Service, Fargo, ND. Endres, G. 05. Soybean planting trial provides production advice. NDSU Agriculture Communication. Endres, G. and Kandel, H. 11. Soybean planting rate and row spacing. North Dakota State University Extension Service, Fargo, ND. Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Initiatives. 12. Soybean Production and Management. Statistics Canada. 12. Table Estimated areas, yield, production and average farm price of principal field crops, in metric units, annual, CANSIM (database). [Accessed ]

24 Table 1. Site and management information for field experiments conducted at eight locations in Manitoba (11-13). Morden (11-13) Brandon (12-13) Portage (11-13) Melita (11-13) Roblin (12-13) Arborg (12-13) Carberry (11-13) Beausejour (12-13) Site information Legal location SW 4-3-5W SW W1 Lot 1 Plan 49 PL 109 SE W1 NE NW E South 1/ W NE E Soil texture Fine Loam-Clay Clay Loam Clay Loam Loamy Sand Clay Loam Clay Clay Loam Clay loam ph EC 0.4 na na 8.7 na na na 4.7 Soil organic matter (%) na na 6.0 na Experimental information m 2 Plot size 5 m m m m 2 m m 2 14 m m 2 Seeding equipment Zero Till plot seeder ERDA plot cone seeder Fabro plot seeder Seedhawk cone seeder Fabro plot seeder Plot cone seeder Custom plot seeder Plot cone seeder Openers Disc opener Disc openers Disc opener Dual knife opener Hoe opener Pillar Laser disc/hoe opener Narrow hoe opener Pillar Laser disc/hoe opener Row spacing (narrow/wide) 25cm/50cm 25cm/50cm 30cm/60cm 25cm/75cm cm/40cm 23cm/69cm 30cm/60cm 23cm/69cm Preceeding Management 11 spring/fall cultivation --- deep tillage, cultivation fallow fall cultivation, harrow spring/fall cultivation zero-till, barley silage deep tillage, cultivation oat stubble conventional tillage fall with spring harrow fall cultivation, harrow oat stubble, harrowed and rolled 13 spring/fall cultivation (wheat stubble) zero-till, barley silage deep tillage, cultivation oat stubble conventional tillage (corn stubble) fall cultivation, spring harrow fall cultivation, harrow oat stubble, harrowed and rolled Seeding depth 4 cm cm na 1.9cm-2.5 cm 2.5 cm 1.5 cm na 1.25 cm Harvest Equipment Wintersteiger Wintersteiger Delta Wintersteiger Hege 140 Wintersteiger Wintersteiger Wintersteiger Wintersteiger Dates of field operations Seeding Date 11 May 26, June 13, 11 June 6, May 18, 12 June 1, 12 na May 16, 12 May 30, 12 May 25, 12 June 13, 12 May 16, May 15, 13 May 22, 13 June 5, 13 May 15, 13 May 30, 13 May 23, 13 May 22, 13 May 24, 13 Harvest date 11 September 28, na October 7, September 27, na September 24, 12 na September 24, 12 September 25, 12 September 26, 12 October 1, 12 September 27, October 3, 13 October 9, 13 October 25, 13 October 15, 13 October 17, 13 October 8, 12 October 18, 13 October 3, 13 na - not available 21

25 Plant density (plants m -2 ) Plant density (plants m -2 ) Plant density (plants m -2 ) Plant density (plants m -2 ) Plant density (plants m -2 ) Plant density (plants m -2 ) a. b. 50 b * 30 * 25 narrow wide L* L* L* L* * * * 12 narrow wide L* L* L* L* L* L* L* * * * * * 13 narrow wide L* L* L* L* L* L* Figure 1. Effect of row spacing (a) and seeding rate as pure live seeds per m2 (b) on plant density of soybean at various locations across Manitoba (11-13). Data were not collected at Beausejour in 12 and Arborg in 13. (*indicates a significant effect of treatment based on analysis of variance; L indicates a linear response based on contrast analysis.) 22

26 Plant count (as % of seeding rate) Plant count (plants / m 2 ) a Seeding rate (pure live seeds/m 2 ) b Seeding rate (pure live seeds/m 2 ) Figure 2. Effect of seeding rate on actual plant counts (a) and plant counts as a percent of the seeding rate (b) for soybean for 18 site-years in Manitoba (11-13). 23

27 Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) Seed yield (kg ha -1 ) a. b b narrow 1500 wide Q* L LQ* L* * * * * 12 narrow wide L* * LQ* L* L* L* L* * L L* L* L * * * narrow wide L* L LQ* Figure 3. Effect of row spacing (a) and seeding rate as pure live seeds per m2 (b) on yield of soybean at various locations across Manitoba (11-13). (*indicates a significant effect of treatment based on analysis of variance; L indicates a linear response, and Q indicates a quadratic response, based on contrast analysis.) 24

28 Figure 4. Relationship between actual plant stand and relative yield of soybean (yield as percent of the highest-yielding treatment within each site-year) based on 13 site-years of data from various sites in Manitoba (11-13). For this analysis, the following site-years were not included: Beausejour 12 and Arborg 13 (plant count data not available), Carberry 11 (frost damage), Portage 13 (seeding rate did not have a significant effect on plant stand), and Portage 11, Carberry 12 and Roblin 13 (actual plant stand was 50% of goal stand in some or all treatments). 25

29 Oil content (%) Oil content (%) Oil content (%) Oil content (%) Oil content (%) Oil content (%) a. b. 25 b L narrow wide * * L* L L* L* narrow wide * L L Q* narrow wide Figure 5. Effect of row spacing (a) and seeding rate as pure live seeds per m2 (b) on percent oil in harvested seed of soybean at various locations across Manitoba (11-13). (*indicates a significant effect of treatment based on analysis of variance; L indicates a linear response, and Q indicates a quadratic response, based on contrast analysis.) 26

30 Protein content (%) Protein content (%) Protein content (%) Protein content (%) Protein content (%) Protein content (%) a. b * * b L L* narrow wide * L L L* * narrow wide * * * 13 * * L L* Q narrow wide Figure 6. Effect of row spacing (a) and seeding rate as pure live seeds per m2 (b) on percent protein in harvested seed of soybean at various locations across Manitoba (11-13). (*indicates a significant effect of treatment based on analysis of variance; L indicates a linear response, and Q indicates a quadratic response, based on contrast analysis.) 27

31 Seed weight (g/1000 seeds) Seed weight (g/1000 seeds) Seed weight (g/1000 seeds) Seed weight (g/1000 seeds) Seed weight (g/1000 seeds) Seed weight (g/1000 seeds) a. b. 160 b * * * narrow wide * * 12 narrow wide L* L* L* * * * * * 13 * L L* L* L narrow wide Figure 7. Effect of row spacing (a) and seeding rate as pure live seeds per m2 (b) on seed weight of harvested seed of soybean at various locations across Manitoba (11-13). (*indicates a significant effect of treatment based on analysis of variance; L indicates a linear response based on contrast analysis.) 28

32 Test weight (kg hl -1 ) Test weight (kg hl -1 ) Test weight (kg hl -1 ) Test weight (kg hl -1 ) Test weight (kg hl -1 ) Test weight (kg hl -1 ) a. b b L L narrow wide * * L* LQ L* * L* * narrow wide * * * L* narrow wide Figure 8. Effect of row spacing (a) and seeding rate as pure live seeds per m2 (b) on test weight of harvested seed of soybean at various locations across Manitoba (11-13). (*indicates a significant effect of treatment based on analysis of variance; L indicates a linear response, and Q indicates a quadratic response, based on contrast analysis.) 29

33 4R P management for soybeans in the Northern Frontier: rate and placement effects on plant stand, biomass and seed yield Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Gustavo Bardella, University of São Paulo Brazil John Heard, MAFRD Carman Dennis Lange, MAFRD Altona Yvonne Lawley, U of M Winnipeg Cynthia Grant, AAFC Brandon Don Flaten, U of M Winnipeg University of São Paulo MAFRD University of Manitoba AAFC Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Curtis Cavers, CMCDC Carberry Jeff Kostuik, PCDF Roblin Paula Halabicki, PESAI Arborg Scott Chalmers, WADO Melita Brian Hellegards, Richardson International Ste Adolphe James Richardson International Agrium AgVise Laboratories Monsanto Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Year 1 of 2 Objective: Contact Information: Assess soybean response to P fertilizer in northern environments. john.heard@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Soybeans areas are expanding northerly across the Great Plains region of North America. Over the last 15 years in Manitoba, Canada, soybean acreage has increased from 18,000 acres in 1998 to over 1 million acres in 13. This increase in soybean acreage is due to a variety of factors, including the development of new varieties that are adapted to Manitoba's relatively short ( frost-free days) and cool ( corn heat units) growing season. Although Manitoba s soybean producers are proficient at inoculating their soybeans for maximum biological fixation of N, they have many questions about P fertilization and placement under Manitoba conditions. Most Prairie Canadian crops such as wheat, barley and canola respond more to banded (seed placed and side banded) P fertilizer than to broadcast applications. However, seed placed P is known to cause stand injury with some crops, including soybeans, at high rates of application. Very little research has been conducted on P fertilization of soybeans in the Canadian Prairies and the results of that limited amount of research are inconsistent. As a result, little is known about the right source, right rate, right placement and right timing (4Rs) for P fertilization of modern soybean cultivars in this environment. 30

34 Overall growing conditions in Manitoba were better than the average for most crops, so soybean yields at most sites were greater than the 10-year provincial average yield of 28 bu/ac (Table 2a, 2b). Seedrow placement of typical agronomic rates of fertilizer P ( or 40 lb P 2 O 5 per acre) did not decrease soybean plant stands, biomass or seed yields at any site (Tables 1-3, Figures 1-8). However, an extremely high rate of seed row P (80 lb P 2 O 5 per acre) decreased plant stand and seed yield at Melita and Carberry, which are located on coarse and medium-textured soils, respectively. None of the fertilizer P rates or placements increased soybean seed or biomass yield, even at the three sites with less than 10 ppm Olsen extractable P. Table 1a. Stand Counts (thousand plants/acre) Treatment Brandon Melita Carberry Beausejour Arborg Control 179 A 250 A 97 A 165 A 186 A SP 172 A 160 A 110 A 170 A 174 A SB 199 A 172 AB 109 A 186 A 180 A BR 169 A 214 AB 112 A 190 A 1 A 40 SP 187 A 163 A 90 AB 180 A 171 A 40 SB 167 A 155 AB 93 AB 168 A 168 A 40 BR 189 A 183 AB 100 A 141 A 162 A 80 SP 189 A 73 B 60 B 178 A 142 A 80 SB 192 A 177 AB 96 A 167 A 1 A 80 BR 177 A 245 A 95 A 197 A 192 A For each site, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p= 0.05). SP = seed placed P fertilizer; SB = side-banded P fertilizer; BR = broadcast P fertilizer. Table 1b. Stand Counts (thousand plants/acre) Treatment Roblin Portage St Adolphe Control 263 A 111 A 84 A SP 253 A 107 A 74 A BR 233 A 123 A 67 A 40 SP 2 A 87 A 84 A 40 BR 263 A 122 A 91 A For each site, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p= 0.05). SP = seed placed P fertilizer; SB = side-banded P fertilizer; BR = broadcast P fertilizer. Table 2a. Seed Yield (bu/acre) Treatment Brandon Melita Carberry Beausejour Arborg Control 35 A 59 A 52 A 57 A 35 AB SP 32 A 56 A 54 A 60 A 40 AB SB 33 A 48 AB 51 A 56 A 36 AB BR 35 A 53 AB 47 AB 60 A 40 AB 40 SP 33 A 55 A 47 A 62 A 37 AB 40 SB 32 A 51 AB 49 A 59 A 36 AB 40 BR 34 A 56 A 53 A 62 A 39 AB 31

35 80 SP 27 A 38 B 37 B 64 A 36 B 80 SB 27 A 55 A 47 A 59 A 39 AB 80 BR 35 A 57 A 47 A 61 A 44 A For each site, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p= 0.05). SP = seed placed P fertilizer; SB = side-banded P fertilizer; BR = broadcast P fertilizer. Table 2b. Seed Yield (bu/acre) Treatment Roblin Portage St Adolphe Control 23 A 47 A 66 A SP 24 A 43 A 69 A BR 25 A 47 A 63 A 40 SP 23 A 45 A 72 A 40 BR 24 A 45 A 67 A For each site, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p= 0.05). SP = seed placed P fertilizer; SB = side-banded P fertilizer; BR = broadcast P fertilizer. Table 3a. Midseason (R3 stage) Biomass Dry Matter (lb/acre) Treatment Brandon Melita Carberry Beausejour Arborg Control 4955 A 6285 AB 5562 A 5002 A 4412 A SP 5721 A 5104 A 5278 A 4308 AB 4983 A SB 4752 A 4596 AB 6190 A 42 AB 4280 A BR 4062 A 5564 AB 6236 A 4183 AB 4809 A 40 SP 4783 A 5047 AB 4531 A 4878 A 4753 A 40 SB 4285 A 2968 AB 5813 A 4535 A 4739 A 40 BR 4757 A 4995 AB 5990 A 3049 B 4026 A 80 SP 4942 A 2549 B 5387 A 4059 AB 3588 A 80 SB 5041 A 4091 AB 6599 A 44 AB 4660 A 80 BR 5533 A 6164 AB 6134 A 4787 A 3823 A For each site, means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p= 0.05). SP = seed placed P fertilizer; SB = side-banded P fertilizer; BR = broadcast P fertilizer. Table 3b. Midseason (R3 stage) Biomass Dry Matter (lb/acre) Treatment Roblin Control 6371 A SP 5471 A BR 6968 A 40 SP 6350 A 40 BR 6001 A Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (p= 0.05). SP = seed placed P fertilizer; SB = side-banded P fertilizer; BR = broadcast P fertilizer. 32

36 Figure 1. Melita, Loamy Sandy 3 ppm Olsen P Figure 2. Brandon, Clay loam 5 ppm Olsen P Figure 3. Roblin, Clay Loam - 7 ppm Olsen P 33

37 Figure 4. Beausejour, Clay 8 ppm Olsen P Figure 5. Arborg, Clay 14 ppm Olsen P Figure 6. St Adolphe, Clay 23 ppm Olsen P 34

38 Figure 7. Portage, Clay Loam 34 ppm Olsen P Figure 8. Carberry, Clay Loam - 44 ppm Olsen P The lack of seed yield response to P and the high tolerance of soybeans to seedrow placed P was surprising. However, although these results are from a diverse range of field sites, they were collected over only one growing season. Therefore, as the study continues, we look forward to learning more about P fertilization for sustainable soybean production systems in Manitoba. 35

39 Western Canada soybean adaptation under irrigation & dry land production Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: MPGA MCVET Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Support: Growing Forward 2 MPGA MCVET Progress: Objective: Contact Information: Ongoing Evaluate soybean variety performance & adaptation to the Carberry and Portage la Prairie regions of the Central plains under irrigated and dry land cropping systems. craig.linde@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report The Western Canada Soybean evaluation trial is an on-going effort to examine the adaptability of new soybean varieties to the prairie provinces. In Manitoba, irrigated and dry land trials are conducted at two CMCDC locations: Carberry and Portage la Prairie. Field operations for 13 are listed in Table 1. Sites were irrigated based on tensiometer readings, which were installed at 45cm and 60cm depths. All plots were sprayed with 0.5L of glyphosate between the first and second trifoliate stage of development to control weeds. Table 1. CMCDC field operations for 13 soybean irrigated and dry land trials. Date/Rate Operation Carberry Portage la Prairie Seeding Date May 16, 13 June 11, 13 Harvest Date October 18, 13 October 28, 13 Fertility Irrigation (irrigated trials only) 03-Jul 08-Jul 10-Jul 12-Jul 02-Aug 13-Aug 16-Aug -Aug 21-Aug 23-Aug 38lbs Mid Row Banded actual Phos/acre (0-45-0) 1.0cm 1.0cm 1.0cm 1.0cm 1.0cm 1.0cm 1.5cm 1.5cm 60lbs Broadcast/incorperated actual P/ac ( ) 1.3cm 1.3cm 13 was a good year for soybeans at both CMCDC locations. This is in contrast to 12, where yields were restricted in Portage la Prairie due to the hot, dry summer, and a light frost in Carberry on Sept 14 halted further development; effecting mainly the varieties with the longest maturity requirement in the irrigated trial. 36

40 Irrigation once again delayed the onset of maturity at both locations; however, this was less pronounced in 13 than in previous years, mainly due to the generally good growing conditions. And, in contrast to the stressful conditions of 12, in 13 the delay in maturity generally had a negative impact on grain yield (Figures 1 & 2). Differences among treatments for both dry land and irrigated trials at each location were significant; however, there were no significant interactions between irrigation and variety at either location in 13, which suggests there were no particular varieties that responded differently to the application of irrigation. Figure 1. Soybean grain yield (kg/ha) in dry land and irrigated production systems at Carberry, Manitoba 13 (LSD=547 kg/ha). 37

41 Effect of fungicide application timing on grain yield and quality of winter wheat varieties with different levels of resistance to fusarium head blight Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Support: Ducks Unlimited Canada Bayer Crop Sciences Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Scott Chalmers, WADO Melita Keith Watson, PCDF Roblin Paula Halabicki, PESAI Arborg Growing Forward Ducks Unlimited Canada Bayer Crop Sciences Progress: Year 2 of 3 Objective: Contact Information: To gain understanding into the necessity of fungicides to control FHB when varieties with resistance genes to FHB are grown. k_gross@ducks.ca craig.linde@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report A winter wheat variety (Emerson) with resistance to Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) was registered in Canada in 12. Previously, winter wheat varieties were in general more susceptible to FHB as compared to spring wheat. This is the first FHB resistant winter wheat variety for the prairies. There are several fungicides on the market registered for use in winter wheat that protect against FHB and several other common leaf diseases. Since having resistance does not mean a variety is immune, it is not known how disease resistance compares to the use of fungicides for controlling FHB and whether the use of fungicides with such varieties is necessary or still advisable. The experiment was designed as a split plot design with fungicide application as the main plot and variety as the sub plot: the 4 varieties (table 1) were randomized together into blocks that then were subjected to one of four different fungicide regimes: Non-sprayed control, Folicur at flag leaf stage, Prosaro at flowering stage, Folicur at flag leaf stage & Prosaro at flowering stage. Other general agronomic practices for the trial are listed in table 2. 38

42 Table 1. Variety description of winter wheat varieties used for DU evaluation of variety and fungicide on winter wheat production (seedinteractive.ca). Variety CDC Buteo CDC Falcon Emerson Flourish Year Registered Pred 1 Yield (% of check)(lsd: 5.1 % ) Pred 1 Protein ( LSD: 0.28 % ) Fusarium head blight MR S R S Leaf rust I MR I I Stem rust I MR R I Bunt S S n/a MR Height in inches Lodging resistance rating G VG VG VG Relative Winter Hardiness rating VG F F F 1 Pred (Predicted) yield and protein values are long term Best Linear Unbiased Prediction estimates of performance generated by Mixed Model Analysis. Table 2. Agronomic practices for DU winter wheat variety by fungicide trial at Carberry, 13. Agronomic Practice Date/Rate Seeding (stubble) September 14, 12 (18 canola stubble) Fall Soil Test N: 35lbs/ac P: 32 lbs/ac K: 306ppm S: 52 lbs/ac Fall Fertility None Spring Fertility N: 115lbs actual broadcast May 15, 13 Weed Control Infinity at 0.33L/ac on June 6, 13. Midge Control None Harvest Date August 21, 13 The late spring of 13 was very difficult on winter wheat at CMCDC Carberry. Despite excellent establishment in the previous fall plant stands were greatly reduced in the spring due to seedling mortality caused by soil borne disease. Figures 1 and 2 are images of the reduction in stand experienced randomly throughout the trial. Plant counts revealed a range of densities from plants/m2 with an overall average of 67 plants/m2, far below the recommended plants/m2 for winter wheat. Figure 1. Winter Wheat Plot in Carberry, May

43 Figure 2. Winter wheat seedling mortality Carberry, May 26, 13. As a result of the stand variance among plots yield data will not be presented. Due to the large differences in plant population there were noticeable staging differences within plots, complicating exact timing of fungicide applications. Since it was impractical to spray partial plots at different times, the trial was sprayed when it was determined that the majority of plots had reached the appropriate stage. Plots were harvested and grain samples analyzed for test weight, fusarium damage and vomitoxin levels. These results are presented in table 3. The application of fungicides did not have a significant effect on either fusarium damage or vomitoxin levels, nor was there a significant interaction between variety and fungicide application in either case. Variety was significant in both instances with Emerson having the lowest fusarium damage and vomitoxin levels while Flourish had the greatest levels. This is not a surprise since Emerson has an R rating while Flourish is rated S for fusarium. Flourish had the lowest test weight and one that would have impacted its grade. Table 3. Test weight (g/0.5l), Fusarium damage and Vomitoxin (ppm) levels of winter wheat varieties in Carberry, 13. Variety Test weight (g/0.5l) Fusarium Damage (%) Vomitoxin (ppm) CDC Falcon 390.6bc 0.81ab 0.8a CDC Buteo 392.9c 1.05b 1.1b Flourish 380.2a 2.11c 2.7c Emerson 387.5b 0.57a 0.6a CV% Prob Entry <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 LSD The application of fungicide was significant for test weight (figure 3) with the application of Prosaro at flowering resulting in the lowest test weight; low enough to have grade implications since the minimum level for No1 CWRW is 386 g/0.5l. This is in contrast to many other studies and given the variable growth/maturity due to stand issues further work would need to be done to confirm any effect. 40

44 Figure 3: Effect of Fungicide application on test weight of winter wheat varieties in Carberry, 13. Overall, genetics had a significant effect on the level of fusarium damage and vomitoxin at Carberry in 13. No conclusions could be made from this study in regard to the necessity of spraying winter wheat that has a resistant rating for Fusarium Head Blight; however, it would appear from these results that investment in genetics would provide a higher probability of protection from yield/grade reduction due to fusarium than relying on fungicides alone. 41

45 Forage mixture establishment with/without a barley as a nurse crop Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Glenn Friesen, MAFRD Carman Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Scott Chalmers, WADO Melita Keith Watson, PCDF Roblin Paula Halabicki, PESAI Arborg Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Year 2 of 3 Objective: Contact Information: Demonstrate the effect of using a nurse crop to establish various forage mixtures in Manitoba. glenn.friesen@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report There are a number of factors to consider when selecting the appropriate forage mixture including soil type and environment as well as intended use. Often growers will opt to use a nurse crop while establishing forages to ensure there is some economic return in the establishment year; however, depending on the nurse crop and forage mixture used this may or may not be the best decision. This study is intended to both investigate and demonstrate the effect of using a nurse crop to establish different forage mixtures in Manitoba. Seven forage mixtures (table 1) were planted with and without a nurse crop at the Diversification Centres in 12. Forage barley was used as the nurse crop and separated into two treatments: full and half seeding rate, seeded perpendicular to forage mixtures. Treatments were replicated 3 times in a split block design. Planting at the Carberry location occurred on May 25th, 12. Due to a considerable amount of weeds no forage yield data was recorded at the Carberry location in 12. Instead a single cut was taken for the entire trial July th when barley was in milk/soft dough stage of development. Height notes were taken for alfalfa in the fall of 12 with alfalfa being significantly shorter in plots with barley planted as a nurse crop at a seeding rate of 1.75bu/ac. There was no significant difference in alfalfa height between 'no nurse crop' and barley planted as a nurse crop at 0.75bu/ac. Table 1. Forage mixtures for establishment trial. Entry Use Mixture 1 Hay Alfalfa (Tap) 2 Hay Alfalfa (Creeping) 3 Check Kentucky Bluegrass 4 Hay Alfalfa, Hybrid Brome, Timothy 5 Saline Alfalfa (creeping & tap), Slender Wheatgrass, Tall Wheatgrass, Sweet Clover, Tall Fescue 6 Pasture Alfalfa (yellowhead), Meadow Brome, Orchard Grass, Tall Fescue, Cicer Milkvetch 7 Native Big Bluestem, Wheat Grass, Slender Wheatgrass, Green Needlegrass 42

46 In 13, plots were sampled for species present and relative biomass on July 4 th (Rep 1) and July 5 th (Rep 2 & 3). Forage yields were taken once for all plots by harvesting the entire plot, weighing and adjusting for moisture. Forage yield was harvested on July 19 th. The relative biomass calculated by species from earlier plot sampling was then applied to total forage yield, and for analysis purposes grouped by legumes, grass and weed species. Overall alfalfa creeping achieved the greatest dry matter yield with Kentucky Bluegrass producing the least amount of dry matter (figure 1). Figure 1. Overall dry matter yield of forage mixtures in 13, at Carberry. LSD= 1639 kg/ha. The use of a nurse crop (or lack thereof) was not significant (p=0.06), although plots with a nurse crop had greater dry matter yields than those without a nurse crop (figure 2). There was no significant interaction between the use of a nurse crop and forage mixture, mainly due to high variability for some mixtures but Kentucky Bluegrass seemed most affected. One possible explanation was the affect of weed competition. Despite there being no significant differences among treatments with regard to grass establishment (mean 18 pl/m2), Kentucky Bluegrass was very slow to establish, not very vigorous and as a result had much greater weed pressure which is shown in figure 3 in terms of biomass partitioning and also by plant counts in figure 4. Counts in the native grass mixtures also showed a larger number of weeds but these weeds were mostly smaller in comparison to the Kentucky bluegrass treatments, as shown by the differences in biomass. In the case of Kentucky Bluegrass and other, less competitive crops it would seem a nurse crop can be valuable for reducing weed populations (and possibly the need to control weeds) not only during the establishment year, but consequently in the second year of forage production as well. 43

47 Figure 2. Second year dry matter yield of forage mixtures established with and without a nurse crop at Carberry, 13. Figure 3. Average relative biomass of forage mixtures with and without a nurse crop at Carberry,

48 Figure 4. Established plant densities and weed populations in various forage mixtures established with and without a nurse crop in Carberry,

49 Effect of row spacing on buckwheat grain yield Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: MBGA CMCDC Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Year 3 of 3 Objective: Key Message: Contact Information: To evaluate the effect of row spacing and seeding rate on buckwheat grain yield. Increasing row spacing from 30cm to 60cm and reducing seeding rate to 0.67bu per acre did not reduce grain yield. A further reduction in seeding rate may increase the risk of yield loss especially in regions where growing season is shorter or when plant stand is less than 40plants/m2. rejean.picard@gov.mb.ca craig.linde@gov.mb.ca Introduction Manitoba produces over 70% of Canada's buckwheat crop and is known as the "Buckwheat Capital of Canada". Buckwheat is generally grown for grain. About two-thirds of the Manitoban production is exported and Japan is the main importer, where the flavour and aroma of Manitoba buckwheat meets the requirements of Japanese noodle makers. Other nations who import Manitoba buckwheat include the Netherlands, United States and Austria. Buckwheat is sown late because of high susceptibility of frost. Buckwheat is a broadleaf, annual crop that reaches 2 5 ft ( cm) in height. Stems are hollow and crop grown under high nitrogen conditions is more prone to lodging. There are currently no herbicide options for buckwheat. The only herbicide registered for use in buckwheat is sethoxydim; however, an 85 day pre-harvest window often makes the use of the product unpractical. Recommended planting rate and spacing for Buckwheat from studies outside Canada is 6-7 spacing and 0.7-1bu/ac seeding rate to allow for quick establishment and canopy closure, providing sufficient competition against weeds (1). Previous work with buckwheat in Manitoba is limited; the only published work done in the late 1960s indicated no significant yield reduction when using row spacing of 15-45cm with seeding rates of 0.4-1bu/ac (2). Buckwheat was able to compensate for extra space though increased branching, suggesting that seeding rates could be lowered to 0.68bu/ac from the recommended 1bu/ac when seed was limited. More recently, work in 10 the Red River Valley (unpublished) examined buckwheat yield response to solid seeding verses 76cm row spacing at 1bu/ac and 0.67bu/ac seeding rates. Again no significant differences were found between treatments for grain yield. In this study row-spacing was examined as a means to permit inter-row cultivation as a potential weed control tool. Results from this study suggested that seeding rates for wide rows could also be lowered without yield penalty. 46

50 CMCDC continued the examination of row spacing as a viable option for weed control in By using wider rows producers would have the option of inter-row tillage if conditions are such that rotation, field selection and pre-plant burn-off were not sufficient weed control practices. Solid seeding and wide row spacing at different seeding rates were assessed for their effect on buckwheat grain yield. In 12, which was a relatively more stressful year, a reduction in seeding rate below 0.67bu/ac showed a decrease in yield (p<0.1). Barley was used as a weed to amplify stress, however no differences were detected. In 13 the experiment was repeated for a final season. Rather than using barley as a weed, natural weed populations were allowed to grow untouched and compared to weed free plots. Differences in buckwheat yield were only detected at the Carberry location. Methods Trials were conducted at Winkler and Carberry in 11, and Portage la Prairie and Carberry in 12 and 13. The buckwheat variety Horizon was used for all years. Solid seeded at 1bu/ac (30cm spacing), wide (60cm) row spacing planted at 1 and 0.67bu/ac were treatments in all years. In 11 all treatments were kept weed free. In 12 a third seeding rate, 0.33bu/ac was added and "weedy" and "weed-free treatments were introduced; using volunteer barley planted at 10 plants/m of row. In 13 weed free plots were hand weeded and weedy plots were left to natural weed populations. Seeding and swathing dates are in Table 1. Plots were seeded to 2.4m wide by 7m in length and trimmed back to 6m once emerged. Table 1. Planting and harvest dates for row spacing x seeding rate buckwheat trial Year Location Planting Date Swathing Date Replicates 11 Carberry June 8 September 13* 6 11 Winkler June 9 September 28** 3 12 Carberry June 13 September Portage la Prairie June 7 Cancelled*** 3 13 Carberry June 7 September Portage la Prairie June 7 September 25 3 *plots strait combined following killing frost. **plots strait combined at physiological maturity. ***trial destroyed by geese Weed control consisted of a general pre-seed burn-off with 1L/ac of glyphosate and then hand weeding post emergence for weed free plots. In 12 Weedy plots were hand weeded for all weeds other than volunteer barley. In 13 weed free plots in Carberry had weeds removed by inter-row cultivation and hand weeding with only hand weeding in Portage. Fertility varied by site, with amounts listed in table 2 applied according to soil test results with the exception of Carberry in 11 where due to space limitations the site had to be moved onto an area that had already been fertilized (hence the larger than recommended fertility). In Portage fertilizer was broadcast and incorporated prior to planting. In Carberry nitrogen fertilizer was broadcast. 47

51 Table 2. Fertilizer applied (broadcast/incorporated) for buckwheat row spacing trial, Year Location Actual Nitrogen (46-0-0) Actual Phosphorus ( ) Actual Potassium (0-0-60) Actual Sulfur ( ) 11 Carberry Winkler Carberry Portage la Prairie Carberry Portage la Prairie Data for individual sites were analyzed using General Linear Model in Agrobase Generation II. Combined site analyses were conducted using REML Mixed Model analysis in GenStat with year and location both set as random effects. Results and Discussion Individual Site Grain Yield Analysis Individual analysis summaries for grain yield are in table 3. Grain yield was only significant at p=0.1 & p=0.05 level at Carberry in 12 and 13, respectively. In 12 only seeding rate/row spacing was significant at Carberry; however in 13 seeding rate/row spacing, the presence of weeds and their interaction was significant at Carberry. In 11 and 12 the buckwheat at Carberry was affected by frost on September 14 th and September 22 nd, respectively. Neither Winkler nor Portage had significant differences among treatments. Portage in 12 was destroyed by geese and no harvest data was collected as a result. Table 3. Statistical parameter summary for row-spacing x seeding rate trial in Manitoba Year Location CV (%) Grand Mean (kg/ha) Weeds Significant (p=0.05) Treatment Significant 11 Carberry na Winkler na Carberry Portage la CANCELLED Prairie 13 Carberry Portage la Prairie At Carberry in 13 the narrow row spacing with 1bu/ac seeding rate had the greatest average yield; however, it was not significantly different than the wide row spacing at 1 and 0.67 bushels per acre. Overall weedy plots yielded significantly lower that weed-free; however, upon examining the interaction further only the difference between weedy and weed-free for the 0.67by/acre rate at 60cm spacing was significant although the lowest seeding rate did have the lowest yield (figure 1). Combining 12 and 13 Carberry locations resulted in no significant differences among weedy and weed-free treatments, or planting rate/row spacing treatments. 48

52 Figure 1. The effect of weed competition, row spacing and seeding rate on buckwheat grain yield at Carberry, 13. LSD=350kg/ha. One possible reason for this discrepancy in 13 was the significantly lower plant establishment at Carberry relative to Portage. Figure 2 shows the relationship of grain yield at Carbery and Portage, displayed as percent of maximum yield for each respective location, and established plants per meter square. With no significant differences among treatments at Portage and only the lowest seeding rate significantly different from the other treatments in Carberry the appearance of a relationship similar to other plastic crops such as canola. Further research would need to be conducted to confirm this relationship. Figure 2: Buckwheat grain yield at Carbery and Portage displayed as percent of maximum yield for each respective location, verses the density of established plants per meter square in

53 Combined 30cm, 60cm and 60cm at 0.67bu/ac weed-free (11-13) When combined weed-free data across all years, doubling row spacing had no effect on grain yield or test weight. As expected, a doubling of row spacing resulted in a doubling of plants per meter of row with the reduced seeding rate having a similar number of plants per meter of row as the recommended seeding rate at 12 spacing (table 4). Expanding to a plants/m2 perspective, Buckwheat was able to compensate for the additional space at the higher row spacing and lower seeding rate despite a slight deficit in plant population. Table 4. Overall effect of row spacing and plant population on established buckwheat in Manitoba, Treatment Plants/m of row (SED=8) Plants/m2 (SED=14) 12" rows - 1bu/ac " rows bu/ac " rows - 1bu/ac Effect of further reduction to 0.33bu/ac weed free (12-13). Despite the above results at Carberry in 13, when combined overall a further reduction of seeding rate under weed free conditions resulted in no significant difference in grain yield (table 5). Table 5. Grain yield of buckwheat planted at 30 & 60cm row spacing and various seeding rates in Manitoba. Treatment is not significant. Row Spacing Seeding Rate Grain Yield (kg/ha) 30cm rows - 1bu/ac cm rows - 1bu/ac cm rows bu/ac cm rows bu/ac 1341 Effect of weed competition (12-13) There was no significant effect of weed pressure despite weed counts as high as 30 plants/m2, on either grain yield or test weight. Nor was there a significant interaction between the presence of weeds and treatment. The presence of weeds did impact plant establishment slightly, on average reducing stand by 4 plants per meter of row; however, this was not enough to reduce grain yield. No difference in weed density was detecting between treatments. Weed seed yield and thus return to seed bank was not measured so it is impossible to determine from the data if lower planting rates suppressed weed growth similar to higher densities or if plants simply tolerated the weeds and were unaffected by weed presence. Nor is it possible to comment on the fitness of the weed seeds returned to the seed bank. Despite the lower planting rates being visually more dirty during the growing season, as the canopy closed later in the season this became less evident. Regardless of the weeds present (Green Foxtail, Red Root Pigweed, Hemp Nettle, Lambsquarter s, Roundleaf Mallow) the buckwheat eventually overtook the environment. Buckwheat has always been promoted as a smother crop for weed suppression in organic systems (3) so these results are not surprising in principal, but what was surprising was the fact that during the 12 & 13 growing seasons the crop remained unaffected by weeds even at low plant densities. Figures 2-6 depict weedy and weed-free plots at Portage la Prairie in

54 Figure 2. Buckwheat planted with 30cm row spacing at 1bu/ac without (left) and with (right) weed control (left). Taken July 31, 13 at Portage la Prairie. Figure 3. Buckwheat planted with 60cm row spacing at 1bu/ac without (left) and with (right) weed control (left). Taken July 31, 13 at Portage la Prairie. Figure 4. Buckwheat planted with 60cm row spacing at 0.67bu/ac without (left) and with (right) weed control (left). Taken July 31, 13 at Portage la Prairie. 51

55 Figure 5. Buckwheat planted with 60cm row spacing at 0.33bu/ac without (left) and with (right) weed control (left). Taken July 31, 13 at Portage la Prairie. Figure 6. Weedy Control. Taken July 31, 13 at Portage la Prairie. Summary Reduction of buckwheat seeding rate and doubling of row spacing from 30cm to 60cm did not significantly reduce buckwheat grain yield. A further reduction in seeding rate may reduce grain yield when the resulting plant stand is less than 40 plants/m2, or in shorter/more stressful growing seasons. Buckwheat grain yield was not significantly impacted by weed competition; verifying its historical use as a smother crop. References S. T. Ali-Khan; Effect of Row Spacing and Seeding Rate on Yield of Buckwheat. Agronomy Journal. Vol. 65 No. 6, p , C.G. Campbell & G.H. Gubbels; Growing Buckwheat. Agriculture Canada Research Branch. Technical bulletin E. 52

56 Buckwheat variety testing Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: MBGA MCVET Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Support: Growing Forward 2 MCVET Progress: Objective: Contact Information: Ongoing Evaluate newly registered buckwheat varieties for adaptation and yield performance in the Central Plains region of Manitoba. patti.cuthbert@gov.mb.ca craig.linde@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Variety trials for all of Manitoba's major crops are conducted across the crop growing regions of Manitoba every year by the Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team (MCVET). This performance data, along with variety characteristic information, is summarized in SEED MANITOBA and online at Both formats provide long term yield data as well as annual yield comparisons at various locations. The trial in Carberry was planted June 6 th, and in Portage la Prairie on June 7 th. Plots in Carberry were swathed Sept 16 th and on September 25 th in Portage la Prairie. Yield results for Carberry and Portage la Prairie are in table 1. Table 1. Buckwheat grain yield (kg/ha) in Carberry and Portage la Prairie, 13. Variety CMCDC Grain Yield (kg/ha) Carberry Grain Yield (kg/ha) Portage Grain Yield (kg/ha) Koma Koto Horizon AC Springfield Mancan AC Manitoba CV LSD Prob. Entry < <0.01 GRAND MEAN

57 Industrial hemp variety evaluation Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: National Hemp Trade Alliance Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Jeff Kostuik, PCDF Roblin Scott Chalmers, WADO Melita Paula Halabicki, PESAI Arborg Wendy Asbil, University of Guelph Kemptville, ON Hemp Genetics International Inc. Melfort, SK Terramax Corporation Qu'Appelle, SK Alberta Innovates Technology Futures Vegreville, AB Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Objective: Contact Information: Ongoing To evaluate industrial hemp varieties for fibre and grain yield. jeff.kostuik@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Industrial Hemp has been licensed to grow in Canada by Health Canada since Since that time, grain processing and market development has led the industry. Data from the annual Industrial Hemp trials from the Manitoba locations are included in 'Seed Manitoba', a publication produced each year through the collaboration of the Manitoba Seed Growers Association, Farm Business Communications, Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team, and Manitoba Agriculture, Food and Rural Development. Hemp varieties exhibit considerable differences in maturity, seed size, height, fibre yield and ease of harvest. These factors are also influenced by location, seeding date, climate, irrigation and fertility. It is recommended to seek professional advice when selecting varieties most suitable for your area and production system. Industrial hemp varieties were tested at the Manitoba Crop Diversification centers with the varieties tested at each location listed in table 1. Agronomic practices and trial set-up information is listed in table 2 and table 3. Table 1. Industrial hemp varieties evaluated in 13 at Manitoba locations. Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin Canda Canda Canda Canda CFX-2 Silesia CFX-2 CFX-2 CRS-1 X59 CRS-1 CRS-1 Finola Debbie Debbie Silesia Delores Delores X59 Joey Finola X59 Joey Silesia X59 Table 2. Industrial hemp experiment parameters at Manitoba locations,

58 Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin Treatments Replication Plot Size Seeded 11.0m² 8.4m² 16.5m² 7.0m² Plot Size Harvested 8.22m 2 6.0m m 2 5.0m² Seeding Date May 23 May 13 May 13 May 22 Seeding Rate 250 pl/m² 250 pl/m² 250 pl/m² 250 pl/m² Fibre Harvest Date Aug. 30 Aug. 15 Aug. 9 Aug. 13 Grain Harvest Date Sep. 25 Sep. 13 Aug. 28 Sep. 10 Grain Days from Seeding to Combining Table 3. Fertilizer applied to 13 industrial hemp variety trials in Manitoba. Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin Nutrients Available (Soil test) N* N/A 35 lbs/ac 21 lbs/ac 52 lbs/ac P* N/A 32 lbs/ac 2 ppm 12 ppm K* N/A 306 ppm 170 ppm 198 ppm S* N/A 52 lbs/ac 68 lbs/ac 102 lbs/ac ph N/A Nutrients Applied N* 90 lbs/ac 115 lbs/ac 90 lbs/ac 100 lbs/ac P 2 O 5 * 27 lbs/ac 25 lbs/ac 30 lbs/ac 55 lbs/ac K 2 O* 15 lbs/ac lbs/ac S* lbs/ac lbs/ac Plant establishment at each location is in table 4. Sites varied in the number of plants established; however, based on earlier work by the diversification centers all sites were still within the establishment range necessary for achieving optimal grain yield. Though Arborg was at the lower limit, which suggests that in order to reach yield potential growing conditions would need to be very good (CMCDC annual report, 12). Typically, lower plant populations will have a greater negative impact on fiber yield verses grain yield. 55

59 Table 4. Industrial hemp plant establishment at Manitoba variety trial locations, 13. Variety Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin Canda CFX CRS Debbie Delores Finola Joey Silesia X Grand Mean CV % LSD Sign Diff Yes Yes Yes Yes Overall grain yield and grain yield by location is in table 5. Carberry was among the highest yielding locations despite having the second lowest plant populations. This was not surprising given the excellent growing conditions. In contrast, Arborg was not able to compensate for its low plant populations. Varietal differences in thousand kernel weight are in table 6. Higher thousand kernel weights are favored for hemp heart production so depending on the production contract this should be one of many considerations when selecting a variety. Table 5. Grain yield (kg/ha) of industrial hemp varieties in Manitoba, 13. Variety Total N % Check Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin (kg/ha) (CRS-1) Canda CFX CRS Debbie Delores Finola Joey Silesia X Grand Total CV% LSD N/A 244 Significant Difference Yes Yes N/A Yes 56

60 Table 6. Industrial hemp thousand kernel weight from 13 Manitoba variety trials. Variety Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin Canda CFX CRS Debbie Delores Finola Joey Silesia X Grand Mean CV % LSD Sign Diff Yes Yes -- Yes Fiber yield is in table 7. Roblin had the highest fiber yield, which coincides with it also having the highest plant population. The surprise was the Arborg location, which was second in fibre production, despite being the lowest in plant establishment. Higher plant populations typically result in a reduction in crop height, but the increased number of stems per acre over compensate for this reduction. Crop height differences are shown in figure 1. Arborg grew the highest crop based on similar varieties, in some cases by as much as 95cm, which may account for it still yielding sufficient fiber despite the lower plant density. Table 7. Industrial hemp fiber yield in Manitoba variety trials, 13. Variety Total N % Check Arborg Carberry Melita Roblin kg/ha (Canda) Canda CFX CRS Debbi e Delore s Finola Joey Silesia X Grand Total CV% LSD Significant Difference Yes Yes Yes Yes 57

61 Figure 1. Height of industrial hemp in 13 Manitoba variety trials. 58

62 Phosphorus ramp demonstration Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: John Heard, MAFRD Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Jeff Kostuik, PCDF Roblin Support: Growing Forward 2 Progress: Objective: Contact Information: Ongoing Demonstrate the effect of phosphorus buildup and drawdown on crop yields in Manitoba. john.heard@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Most soils on research stations are starting at medium to high soil phosphorus levels. As a result any response to added phosphorus typically only occurs approximately 50% of the time with any visual differences being very subtle; rate of maturity, moisture at harvest. There are few long term studies looking at soil phosphorus buildup and drawdown with different fertilization strategies and because of the dynamics of soil phosphorus it is important to understand the long-term implications. This is a non-replicated demonstration that over time will provide an estimation of the rate of soil depletion with under-fertilization or the buildup rate associated with excessive rates of fertilization. At Carberry a long term site was chosen that had been in forage grass production for the previous 3 years to minimize spatial variability. The crop rotation is as follows: Potatoes (12) - Wheat (13) - Soybeans (14) - Canola (15). In 12 there were no effects of Phosphorus fertility on potato yield or Phosphorus content of tubers. Phosphorus (TSP) was applied at increasing rates for wheat from 0-100lbs/ac in the spring prior to planting by banding phosphorus at 2 depth, perpendicular to planting direction. All other nutrients and agronomic practices are held constant and according to normal recommendations for the region. Initial soil testing (tested fall 12) and fertility for 13 is in table 1 & table 2. A similar phosphorus application scheme will continue to be applied each year on each crop. Soil testing and tissue testing were conducted to document phosphorus buildup and removal from the soil. Table 1. Long term P demonstration initial soil testing and 13 fertilizer added. Nutrient (Source) Actual (lbs/ac) Soil Test (lbs/ac) Nitrogen (46-0-0) Phosphorus (TSB) See table 2 Potassium (0-0-60) 0 622* Sulfur ( ) 0 68 *ppm Soil ph Soil OM - 6.3% 59

63 Table 2. Available and Phosphorus applied in 12 and 13 on Long term P demonstration in Carberry. 12 Applied 12 Fall Soil Test 13 Applied 13 Total Available A 13 Removed B 13 Fall Soil Test C Adsorbed (A-(B+C)) Plot P (lbs/ac) P (lbs/ac) P (lbs/ac) P (lbs/ac) P (lbs/ac) P (lbs/ac) P (lbs/ac) There was general increase in both wheat grain yield and straw yield as phosphorus fertility increased in 13 (figure 1). Regression analysis confirmed a linear relationship with a slope greater than 0 for both grain yield (p=0.004) and straw yield (p=0.014). Figure 1. Effect of actual phosphorus (lbs/ac) added prior to planting on wheat grain yield (kg/ha) and straw yield (kg/ha) at Carberry,

64 Narrow Row Edible Bean Variety Testing Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: MPGA MCVET Craig Linde, CMCDC Carberry Support: Growing Forward 2 MCVET MPGA Progress: Objective: Contact Information: Ongoing Evaluate newly registered Edible Bean varieties for adaptation and yield performance in the Central Plains region of Manitoba under narrow row conditions. patti.cuthbert@gov.mb.ca craig.linde@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Variety trials for all of Manitoba's major crops are conducted across the crop growing regions of Manitoba every year by the Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team (MCVET). This performance data, along with variety characteristic information, is summarized in SEED MANITOBA and online at Both formats provide long term yield data as well as annual yield comparisons at various locations. Included on MCVET is a representative from The Manitoba Pulse Growers Association making them a strong partner and an effective collaborator for conducting pulse variety trials throughout Manitoba. The purpose of the narrow row edible bean trial is to identify varieties suitable for direct harvest in non-typical edible bean growing regions (outside the Red River Valley). The trial was planted in Carberry on May 22 nd, 13 with 60lbs of actual N mid row banded during seeding. Plots were sprayed with a 0.71L/ac rate of Bentazon on June 13, 13. Plots were harvested on October 7, 13. Grain yield results for 13 are shown in figure 1 by type. 61

65 Figure 1. Edible Bean grain yield at Carberry, 13 grown in narrow (30cm) row spacing, direct harvested. CV= 9%; LSD=475kg/ha 62

66 Snap Bean Variety Evaluation Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Tom Gonsalves, MAFRD Carman Assiniboine Community College Culinary Arts Institute CMCDC Support: Growing Forward 2 T & T Seeds Progress: Year 1 of 3 Objective: Contact Information: Evaluate snap bean varieties available to Manitoba producers. tom.gonsalves@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Consumers have historically bought locally produced snap beans when available. One variety each of green, yellow & purple beans were evaluated. In order to assess which varieties performed best under local Manitoba conditions this trial was initiated. The price for beans is usually highest for the first 7 to 10 days or so of their availability in the marketplace. In order to have beans available as early as possible producers have experimented with transplanting beans for early market instead of direct seeding. A randomized complete block irrigated snap bean variety evaluation trial was designed and planting at CMCDC Portage la Prairie. The trial was designed with 3 dates of seeding; June 10, July 4 and July 28. There was one date of transplanting included on June 8. The transplanting date was approximately 14 days later than originally planned. Some of the transplants flowered immediately after transplanting and all of the transplants matured unevenly, possibly influencing yield. The Culinary Arts Institute at Assiniboine Community College provided quality evaluations. The varieties included in the trial are in table 1. 63

67 Table 1. Snap Bean Varieties evaluated at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Variety Name Fruit Colour Days to Maturity Tendergreen Green 52 Goldrush Yellow 53 Purple Royalty Purple 53 Hand harvesting was conducted on July 31, August 12, August 19, August 27, September 9 and September. JULY 31 st HARVEST Only the transplanted plots were ready to harvest on this date with Purple Royalty producing the greatest yield of 615 kg/ha (Figure 1); however, this was not significantly different than the yield of Gold Rush. Tendergreen produced the least amount of beans. Figure 1. July 31 st harvest of snap beans from three varieties transplanted June 7 at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. LSD=496kg/ha. 64

68 AUGUST 12 th HARVEST Purple Royalty had the highest marketable yield from the transplanted plots with 2565 kg/ha. Harvest results of the June 8 seeded plots showed Tendergreen yielded the most marketable beans with 1609 kg/ha. (figure 2). Figure 2: August 12 th harvest of snap beans from three varieties planted on different dates at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Transplanted LSD=243kg/ha. Seeded June 8 LSD=578kg/ha. AUGUST 19 th HARVEST Purple Royalty had the highest marketable yield from the transplanted plots with 94 kg/ha. Harvest results of the June 8 seeded plots showed Tendergreen produced the greatest amount of marketable beans with 3498 kg/ha. (figure 3). Figure 3. August 19 th harvest of snap beans from three varieties planted on different dates at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Transplanted LSD=607kg/ha. Seeded June 8 LSD=802kg/ha. 65

69 AUGUST 27 th HARVEST Tendergreen and Purple Royalty produced significantly more marketable yield than Gold Rush from the transplanted plots; producing 1502 kg/ha and 1256 kg/ha, respectively. There were no significant differences in yield among treatments for the June 8 or July 4 planting dates. Figure 4. August 27 th harvest of snap beans from three varieties planted on different dates at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Transplanted LSD=372kg/ha. Seeded June 8 LSD=ns. Seeded July 4 LSD=ns SEPTEMBER 9 th HARVEST Again, Tendergreen and Purple Royalty produced significantly more marketable yield than Gold Rush from the transplanted plots; producing 1681 kg/ha and 1543 kg/ha, respectively. There were no significant differences in yield among treatments for the June 8 or July 4 planting dates (figure 5). Figure 5. September 9 th harvest of snap beans from three varieties planted on different dates at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Transplanted LSD=377kg/ha. Seeded June 8 LSD=ns. Seeded July 4 LSD=ns 66

70 SEPTEMBER th HARVEST There were no marketable beans to harvest from the transplanted plots. There were no significant differences in yield among treatments for the July 4 planting date. For the July 28 seeded seeding date Purple Royalty producing the greatest yield of marketable beans at 856 kg/ha. (figure 6). Figure 6. September th harvest of snap beans from three varieties planted on different dates at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Seeded July 4 LSD=ns. Seeded July 28 LSD=640 kg/ha. OVERALL RIPE YIELD The greatest overall yield was attained with the early June seeding date, overall yielding over 2.5 times more than the July 4 th seeding date and almost 4 times as much as the transplanted plots. The least yield was harvested from those plots planted late July almost 35 times less than the June 8 th planting date. Figure 7. Harvesting Snap Beans September 9 th, 13 at CMCDC Portage la Prairie. The sum of all the harvests from transplanted beans resulted in Purple Royalty having the greatest marketable bean yield at 8073 kg/ha. Total bean yield was not significantly different for seeding dates of June 8 or July 4 th. (figures 8a-c). 67

71 Figure 8a. Total marketable Snap Bean yield for various varieties partitioned by harvest date; transplanted June 7 th at CMCDC. LSD=1284 kg/ha. Figure 8b. Total marketable Snap Bean yield for various varieties partitioned by harvest date; seeded June 8 th at CMCDC. LSD=ns. Figure 8c. Total marketable Snap Bean yield for various varieties partitioned by harvest date; seeded July 4 th at CMCDC. LSD=ns. 68

72 QUALITY OBSERVATIONS Criteria used in quality evaluations included; appearance, texture, flavour and an overall rating. The beans were prepared in many ways including being preserved. Figure 9. Preserved Beans at Assiniboine Community College. Student chefs from the Culinary Arts Institute at ACC were supplied with snap beans from the trial after the Sept 9 harvest was graded. Samples were placed in boxes and stored temporarily in a cooler and delivered to ACC on Sept 10. Tendergreen and Goldrush had an overall quality rating of between average and excellent while Purple Royalty was rated as poor. When cooked, the purple pigment in Purple Royalty leach out and the cooked bean was green in colour. This, along with the texture as well as taste all contributed to it being rated as poor. 69

73 Multi-Coloured Tomato Variety Evaluation Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Tom Gonsalves, MAFRD Carman Assiniboine Community College Culinary Arts Institute CMCDC Support: Growing Forward 2 T & T Seeds Heritage Harvest Seed Progress: Year 3 of 4 Objective: Contact Information: Evaluate non-red tomato varieties available to Manitoba producers versus a common early red standard variety (Manitoba). tom.gonsalves@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Continued for another year, this trial evaluates non-red tomato varieties available to Manitoba producers versus a common early red standard variety (Manitoba). A randomized replicated and irrigated tomato variety evaluation trial was designed and planted at CMCDC Portage la Prairie. The tomatoes were started in the greenhouse on Apr 19th. The plants were transplanted by hand into the field on June 6. The varieties included in the trial are in table 1. 70

74 Table 1. Tomato Varieties evaluated at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Variety Name Growth type Fruit Colour Days to Ripe Manitoba Determinate Red 60 Carbon Indeterminate Burgundy ("black") 75 Kellogg's Breakfast Indeterminate Orange 90 Lemon Boy Determinate Yellow (low acid) 50 Morden Yellow Determinate Yellow 65 Persimmon Determinate Orange 80 White Zebra Indeterminate Yellow/Green Striped 75 Jumbo Jim Indeterminate Orange 80 Early Girl Indeterminate Red 54 Varieties were planted in 2 row plots with 3 foot spacing in the row between plants and between rows. Hand harvesting occurred six times: July 31 (55 DAT), August 14 (69 DAT), August 23 (78 DAT), September 6 (92 DAT), September 15 (101 DAT) and September 25 (111 DAT). 71

75 55 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Manitoba was the only variety with yield at 55 days after transplanting (Figure 1). Figure 1. Fruit yield as under-ripe, ripe and over-ripe tomatoes 55 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING There were no significant differences in yields of under=ripe fruit at 69 days after transplanting. Manitoba and Morden Yellow had the greatest ripe and over-ripe fruit yield (figure 2). Figure 2. Fruit yield as under-ripe, ripe and over-ripe tomatoes 69 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie

76 78 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING There were no significant differences in yield of ripe fruit. The average weight per ripe fruit of Carbon, Kellogg s Breakfast and Persimmon were the greatest; however, these varieties produced the fewest number of ripe fruit. Manitoba had a significantly lower yield of under ripe fruit compared to other varieties (figure 3) and the greatest amount of over ripe fruit, along with Carbon & Morden Yellow. Figure 3. Fruit yield as under-ripe, ripe and over-ripe tomatoes 78 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Morden Yellow had the greatest yield at 92 DAT (Figure 4) of ripe tomatoes. With Carbon having the greatest number of over-ripe tomatoes. The only variety with under-ripe tomatoes was also Morden Yellow at 27kg/ha. Figure 4. Fruit yield as under-ripe, ripe and over-ripe tomatoes 92 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie

77 101 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Jumbo Jim Morden Yellow, Carbon and Kellogg s Breakfast were not significantly different and shared the greatest ripe yield at 101 DAT. Figure 5. Fruit yield as under-ripe, ripe and over-ripe tomatoes 101 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING At the final harvest Carbon overtook Morden Yellow for greatest ripe yield, followed by Jumbo Jim and Kellogg s Breakfast (figure 6). Figure 6. Fruit yield as under-ripe, ripe and over-ripe tomatoes 111 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie

78 OVERALL RIPE YIELD Morden Yellow and Carbon had the greatest tomato yield, with Morden Yellow yield accumulating more evenly throughout the season (figure 7). The lowest yielding variety was Persimmon. Figure 7. Overall ripe tomato fruit yield for various varieties partitioned by harvest date (DAT) at CMCDC. LSD= The average weight and number of ripe tomatoes per square meter was significant with sizes reflecting the variety descriptions. Morden Yellow and Carbon produced the greatest yields in different ways; Morden Yellow produced significantly smaller tomatoes but many more of them (figure 8). Overall the numbers of unripe and overripe fruit was small relative to ripe fruit and as would be expected the variability in size of unripe and overripe fruit was high in some cases. 75

79 Multi-Coloured Pepper Variety Evaluation Principal Investigators: Co-Investigators: Tom Gonsalves, MAFRD Carman Assiniboine Community College Culinary Arts Institute CMCDC Support: Growing Forward 2 T & T Seeds Progress: Year 3 of 4 Objective: Contact Information: Evaluate non-red pepper varieties available to Manitoba producers versus a common early red standard variety (Blushing Beauty). tom.gonsalves@gov.mb.ca 13 Project Report Consumers have historically bought locally produced sweet bell type peppers when they are available. In order to assess which varieties performed best under local Manitoba conditions this trial was initiated. A sweet banana type was added to the trial as well. producers vs. a common early red standard variety (Manitoba). A randomized complete block irrigated pepper variety evaluation trial was designed and planting at CMCDC Portage la Prairie. The peppers were started in the greenhouse on April 11, 13. The plants were transplanted by hand out in the field on June 6. The varieties included in the trial are in table 1. 76

80 Table 1. Pepper varieties evaluated at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Variety Name Description Fruit Colour Days to Maturity Blushing Beauty Sweet red bell pepper. Red 67 Early Sunsation Sweet orange bell pepper. Orange 69 Fatn Sassy Sweet green bell pepper. Green na Banana Supreme Sweet Russian pepper. Yellow 65 Hand harvesting occurred six times: August 13 (68 DAT), August 22 (77 DAT), August 27 (83 DAT), September 3 (90 DAT), September 12 (99 DAT) and October 1 (118 DAT). 68 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Fat n Sassy had the highest marketable yield of 9078 kg/ha followed by Banana Supreme with 2350 kg/ha. These were the only varieties with any measurable marketable yield (Figure 1). Figure 1. Pepper yield as over-ripe and ripe 68 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Ripe LSD=28kg/ha. 77 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING 77

81 There were no yields of Blushing Beauty or Early Sunsation. Fat n Sassy s had the greatest marketable yield at 6692 kg/ha. Although this was not significantly different from Banana Supreme was with 6225 kg/ha (figure 2). Figure 2. Pepper yield as over-ripe and ripe 77 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Ripe LSD=3232kg/ha. 83 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Again there was no significant difference between Banana Supreme and Fat n Sassy, producing 5364kg/ha and 5005 kg/ha, respectively (figure 3). Figure 3. Pepper yield as over-ripe and ripe 83 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Ripe LSD=3731kg/ha. 78

82 90 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Banana Supreme had the greatest marketable yield of 6,817 kg/ha followed by Fat n Sassy with 2189 kg/ha. The first marketable peppers from Blushing Beauty and Early Sunsation were harvested. Figure 4. Pepper yield as over-ripe and ripe 90 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. Ripe LSD=2971kg/ha. 99 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING There were no significant differences among marketable (or Over-ripe) yield at 99 DAT, despite Fat n Sassy producing a marketable yield of 3,857 kg/ha (figure 5). Figure 5. Pepper yield as over-ripe and ripe 99 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. LSD=ns. 79

83 118 DAYS AFTER TRANSPLANTING Early Sunsation yielded kg/ha marketable yield followed by Blushing Beauty with kg/ha marketable yield. (figure 6). Figure 6. Pepper yield as over-ripe and ripe 99 days after transplanting at CMCDC, Portage la Prairie 13. LSD=6163 kg/ha. OVERALL RIPE YIELD The sum of the marketable yields from all harvest dates was greatest for Fat n Sassy at kg/ha. The sum of the marketable yields from all harvest dates for Banana Supreme, Early Sunsation and Blushing Beauty were not significantly different. (figure 7). Figure 7. Total marketable pepper yield for various varieties partitioned by harvest date (DAT) at CMCDC. LSD=8942 kg/ha. Banana Supreme had the significantly lowest average pepper weight of 40g (figure 8) but also the highest number of peppers harvested on average per meter square. 80

84 With the exception of 99 DAT, overall the numbers of unripe and overripe fruit was small relative to ripe fruit and as would be expected the variability in size of unripe and overripe fruit was high in some cases. Figure 8. Average weight per pepper and numbers harvested per square meter for varieties grown at Portage la Prairie in 13: Values are shown for ripe fruit only: Ripe peppers/m2 LSD = 17/m2; Ripe pepper average weight LSD = 23g. Figure 8. Average weight per tomato and numbers harvested per square meter for varieties grown at Portage la Prairie in 13: Values are shown for ripe fruit only: Ripe tomatoes/m2 LSD =.14/m2; Ripe tomato average weight LSD=40g. 81