Introduction. Materials and Methods

Transcription

1 Effectiveness of Seed Treatments in Various Tillage Systems Research Project for the Ontario Seed Growers Association D. S. Young and C. Gillard, Ridgetown College, University of Guelph Introduction Seed treatments are routinely recommended for soybean and white pea bean seed in Ontario. C. Gillard and Dr. A. W. Schaafsma, in other work, have screened several new seed treatments for soybeans and white pea beans. This experiment was set up to utilize the most promising new seed treatments for soybeans and white pea beans and compare those seed treatments with untreated seed in various tillage systems. Materials and Methods The experiment was conducted at the research farm of Ridgetown College, University of Guelph in Ridgetown, Ontario, 42 o 27' N latitude, 81 o 54' W longitude and 213 m elevation. The experiment was on a Brookston clay loam soil with between 35 and 40% clay. The site was tiled in the fall of The tile run perpendicular to the crop rows and are at a 9.15 m spacing. 40 Figure 1. Daily Maximum and Minimum Temperatures Apr. 1 - Oct. 31, Temperature (oc) Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct-01

2 Weather Figure Precipitation April 1 - October 31, Rainfall (mm) Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct-01 The 2001 growing season was warmer than normal and had a significant dry spell lasting from late June until mid September. CHU accumulation from May 11, 2001 to October 9, 2001 was 3157, which is lower than the 30 year average, however, there were many days that the temperature exceeded 30 o C which would decrease the number of CHU s accumulated. Figure 1 shows the daily maximum and minimum temperatures from April 1, 2001 to October 31, Monthly and total precipitation for the 2001 growing season is shown in Table 1. Figure 2 shows the rainfall pattern for the April 1 to October 31, 2001 time period. Soils were wet after soybean planting until the middle of June. After the middle of June soils dried out and the main part of the growing season was very dry. Agronomy Soybeans (variety Renwick (Roundup Ready)) were planted on May 18, 2001 using a John Deere 7000 double frame planter with 76 cm (30 inch) row spacing. The soil was fertilized with 200 kg/ha fertilizer banded with the planter. The plants were sprayed with Roundup shortly after plant emergence. Plants were then sprayed with Excel Super (0.67 l/ha), Basagran (2.0 l/ha) and Assist (2.0 l/ha) post-emerge on July 10. Plots were kept weed free for the remainder of the season utilizing hand weeding when necessary. White pea beans (cv.stingray) were planted on June 15, 2001 using the same planter as described above for soybeans. Rate and type of fertilizer for white pea beans was the same as

3 Table 1. Monthly and Total Precipitation for April 1- October 31, Ridgetown College Month Precipitation % average Precipitation April May June July August September October Total average that used for soybeans. Plants were sprayed with Excel Super (0.67 l/ha), Basagran (2.0 l/ha) and Assist (2.0 l/ha) post-emerge on July 10, 2001 to control weeds. All plots were then hand weeded for the remainder of the season. Table 2. Main plots Tillage treatments used for both corn and soybeans and Seed treatments used with soybeans, Ridgetown College, Split plots 1. Conventional fall moldboard plow with spring secondary tillage (conventional) 2. Fall chisel plow with spring secondary tillage (chisel) 1. Untreated check 2. Apron Maxx 328 ml/100 kg seed 3. Ridge tillage (ridge) 3. Vitaflo 260 ml/100kg seed 4. Zone tillage with two wavy coulters per row (zone till) 4. Apron Maxx RTA ml/100 kg seed 5. No till using trash wheels only (no-till) The experiment was a randomized complete block with a split design. The main plots were tillage plots which were established in 1990 and have been operated continuously in a cornsoybean rotation since. The split plots were seed treatments. Seed treatments were applied the seed prior to planting and were planted in one row in each tillage plot. Table 2 outlines the various tillage treatments used with both soybeans and white pea beans. Seed treatments used with soybeans are also found in Table 2. Table 3 outlines the seed treatments used with white pea beans.

4 Plant counts were made on a 3.05 m section of each harvest row. Harvest rows were 4.57 m long. All plots were hand pulled and bagged on November 1, The bags were dried and the beans threshed and weighed to get a plot yield. All data was analyzed using the SAS proc GLM procedure. Table 3. Seed treatments used with white pea beans, Ridgetown College, 2001 Seed Treatment 1. Untreated check 2. Apron Maxx 328 ml/100 kg seed 3. Vitaflo 260 ml/100kg seed 4. Apron Maxx RTA ml/100 kg seed Results and Discussion Yield and stand data for soybeans are shown in Table 3. Soybean yields were approximately 15-20% below normal due to the exceptionally dry conditions at Ridgetown in There were no significant differences in soybean yields among tillage systems or seed treatments. There were significant differences in the plant stand among tillage systems, seed treatments and with the interaction between the two. The ridge tillage treatment had significantly lower (p=0.10) plant stands than rest of the tillage treatments studied. There were also differences in plant stands among seed treatments. The Apron Maxx and Maxx Cruiser treatments both had significantly lower (p=0.05) plant stands than the check or Vitaflo 280 treatments. The Vitaflo 280 treatment had significantly higher (p=0.05) plant stands than the check treatment. The interaction between tillage and seed treatment was significant for soybean plant stands at the 5% level. The two seed treatments with the highest soybean stands, the check and the Vitaflo 280, were significantly higher (p=0.05) than the Apron Maxx and Maxx Cruiser treatments for all tillage treatments. The Vitaflo 280 treatment was higher than the check in the conventional tillage, ridge tillage and no-till treatments. The check treatment had higher plant stands than the Vitaflo 280 treatment for the fall chisel plow and zone tillage treatment. The Apron Maxx and Maxx Cruiser treatments also changed in rank. The Apron Maxx treatment had higher plant stands in the fall chisel and no-till treatments than the Maxx Cruiser treatment. The Maxx Cruiser treatment had higher plant stands than the Apron Maxx treatment in the fall moldboard plow, zone tillage and ridge tillage treatments. There were no differences in the date of emergence of the various tillage or seed treatments. All soybeans emerged uniformly and on the same day (data not shown).

5 Table 3. Soybean Yield and Stand counts for tillage and seed treatment, Ridgetown, 2001 Treatment Yield (kg/ha) Stand (plants/3.05 m row) Tillage Fall Moldboard Plow 2147 a* 77.1 a Fall Chisel Plow 2176 a 77.9 a Ridge Till 2145 a 72.0 b Zone Till 2272 a 75.8 a No-till 2310 a 76.5 a LSD for Tillage NS 3.28 ** Seed Treatment Check 2125 a 82.2 b Apron Maxx 2329 a 66.9 c Vitaflo a 85.7 a Maxx Cruiser 2118 a 68.6 c LSD for Seed Treatment NS 3.4 Interaction NS Sig. At 0.05 level *, **Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to LSD at p=0.05 and p=0.10 respectively. White pea bean yields and stand counts are shown in Table 4. There were no significant differences among tillage systems for either white pea bean yield or stand counts in There were significant (p=0.05) among seed treatment for both stand counts and yield. The check treatment had significantly higher stand counts than any of the seed treatments studied. It was observed that the white pea bean seeds did not flow as easily through the planter because the seeds were slightly sticky after treatment. The seed treatments did not dry completely on the seed before planting, even though they were in a breathable cotton bag for approximately six weeks after treatment. This may have affected the number of seeds dropped into the seed trench and the population of seed. Another possible explanation is the length of time that elapsed between treating the seed and planting the seed. Six weeks elapsed between seed treatment and planting. This length of time may have affected the germination of the seed. Since a germination test was not done at planting, and date of emergence was not affected among the seed treatments, we cannot conclude reduced germination of the seed. The most likely explanation is the stickiness of the seed reducing the planting rate of the seeds with treatment on them.

6 There were no differences in time of emergence observed for the various treatments (data not shown). Yields were low for the white pea beans in This was likely the result of the dry growing conditions experienced throughout the growing season until the beans were mature. The Maxx Cruiser and untreated check treatments had significantly (p=0.05) lower yields than the Apron Maxx and the DCT treatments in Table 4. White pea bean Yield and Stand counts for Various tillage systems and seed treatments at Ridgetown, 2001 Treatment Yield (kg/ha) Stand (plants/3.05 m row) Tillage Fall Moldboard Plow 633 a* 46.3 a Fall Chisel Plow 829 a 45.3 a Ridge Till 731 a 44.3 a Zone Till 831 a 45.6 a No-till 656 a 47.9 a LSD for Tillage NS NS Seed Treatment Check 705 b 50.2 a DCT 801 a 45.6 b Apron Maxx 801 a 43.4 b Maxx Cruiser 636 b 44.3 b LSD for Seed Treatment Interaction NS NS * Numbers followed by the same letter are not significantly different according to LSD at p=0.05. Conclusions Growing conditions in 2001 were extremely dry. The white pea beans, which were planted in mid-june, were affected more than the soybeans by the dry conditions. There were no differences in soybean yield among the various tillage systems or seed treatments. Yields of white pea beans were improved with DCT and Apron Maxx when compared with the check treatment and Maxx Cruiser. Tillage system did not affect white pea bean yields.