2016 Winter Wheat & Fall Rye MCVET Data Available!

Winter Wheat MCVET 2016Since 2008, MCVET (Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team) has been publishing winter cereal yield data collected from their trials shortly after harvest to help farmers and seed growers in Manitoba make variety decisions.

In 2016, data is being released for 10 locations for 7 winter wheat varieties and 5 fall rye varieties: Fresh off the Field – 2016 MCVET Winter Cereal Yield Data

 

 

 

Submitted by: Pam de Rocquigny, Provincial Cereal Crops Specialist, Manitoba Agriculture

Manitoba Agriculture on Twitter: @MBGovAg
Manitoba Agriculture on YouTube: www.youtube.com/ManitobaAgriculture
Manitoba Agriculture website: www.manitoba.ca/agriculture

 

Respond
Have a follow-up question?

Understanding the 2015 Western Manitoba Soybean Adaptation Trial Table

The Western Manitoba Soybean Adaptation Trial table combines elements of both long term data and single site year data.

You start by using the long term data listed on the left half of the table to assemble a short list of varieties. Information includes Company Maturity Grouping, Variety Name, Yield % Check, Site Years Tested and Relative Days to Maturity +/- of Check. As you go down the table you will see that varieties are listed from earliest maturing near the top to later maturing near the bottom based on Relative Days to Maturity +/- of Check (23-10RY).  The Yield % Check and Site Years Tested should be used together when comparing the varieties.  The Site Years Tested represents the total number of locations a particular variety has been tested and the Yield % Check represents the yields of those varieties based on the number locations tested.

The right half of the table includes the 2015 Yield % of 23-10RY for five individual Western Manitoba sites and can help you refine your variety short list.  To assess real yield differences between any two varieties within a location using this table, start by looking at the LSD% at the bottom of the table. The LSD (Least Significant Difference) is the minimum difference required between any two varieties compared at the same site. For example, the LSD% for the Boissevain is 9% and yield for the check variety (23-10RY) has been set at 100%. Only varieties that yielded 109% or greater would be considered higher yielding than the check and only varieties that yielded 91% or less would be considered lower yielding than the check. Any other varieties are considered to be yielding the same as the check. We are not restricted to only comparisons with the check variety when using this single site year data.  Yield comparisons can be made between any two varieties at the same site using the LSD% for that site.  Caution should used when making variety decisions based on one year’s data. Using the long term data listed on the left half of the table will give you a better feel for how a variety performs over multiple site years.

Submitted by Dennis Lange, FPE Altona and Terry Buss, FPE Beausejour

Respond
Have a follow-up question?

Understanding the 2015 Roundup Ready Soybean Variety Evaluation Tables

It’s that time of the year when the MPSG publishes the Soybean Variety Evaluation.  This article will look at how to use the variety evaluation tables effectively when considering yield and maturity. Additional variety characteristics are also listed in these tables. The 2015 Soybean Variety Evaluation can be found at http://www.manitobapulse.ca/variety-data.  Hard copies will be available as part of Seed MB 2016 and as an insert in the December 2015 issue of the Pulse Beat.

Roundup Ready Soybeans – Variety Descriptions Table

The first table to look at is the Roundup Ready Soybeans – Variety Descriptions table. The varieties are divided into Short Season, Mid Season and Long Season Manitoba Variety Zones based on relative days to maturity, with the shortest maturing varieties at the top of the table and the longest maturing varieties at the bottom.  The Relative Days to Maturity +/- of Check, are averaged over the 3 growing seasons but some varieties may only have 1-2 years of testing. Use these parts of the table to select varieties that have similar maturity to where you farm. Your goal in using this table is to assemble a short list of varieties you might consider growing.

The Yield % Check and Site Years Tested should be used together when comparing the varieties. The Site Years Tested represents the total number of locations a particular variety has been tested at. The greater the number of sites years, the more confident you can be that the Yield % Check reported is representative of the variety.  For example, 24-10RY (check variety), has 41 sites years.  Given that there are six to seven soybean variety trial sites per season, 24-10RY has been tested for at least six growing seasons.

Using Relative Days to Maturity +/- of Check and Yield % Check, your goal is to identify varieties, with maturities suitable to your farm that give you the highest yields relative to the check.  Keep an eye open for varieties that provide satisfactory yields but are earlier maturing.  These may represent good opportunities to avoid late season frost.

Yield By Location – Roundup Ready Soybeans Table

Here the sites are listed individually and are grouped into Core Sites, Early Sites, and Late Sites.  All varieties are tested at core sites. At early sites only early to mid season varieties are tested and at the late sites only mid to long season varieties are tested.

To assess real yield differences between any two varieties within a location using this table start by looking at the LSD% at the bottom of the table. The LSD (Least Significant Difference) is the minimum difference required between any two varieties compared at the same site. For example, the LSD% for the Carman Site is 12% and yield for 24-10RY has been set at 100%.  Only varieties that yielded 112% or greater would be higher yielding than the check.  Only varieties that yielded 88% or less would be lower yielding than the check. Any other varieties are considered as yielding the same as the check. We are not restricted to only comparisons with the check variety.  Yield comparisons can be made between any two varieties at the same site using the LSD% for that site.  Caution should used when making variety decisions based on one year’s data.  Using the long term data listed in the Variety Descriptions table will give you a better feel for how a variety performs over multiple site years.

Submitted by Dennis Lange, FPE Altona and Terry Buss, FPE Beausejour

Respond
Have a follow-up question?

2015 MCVET Winter Wheat and Fall Rye Data Available!

Since 2008, MCVET (Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team) has been publishing winter cereal data collected from their trials shortly after harvest to help farmers and seed growers in Manitoba make variety decisions.

In 2015, data is being released for five locations – Boissevain, Carman, Melita, Roblin and Winnipeg – for winter wheat and fall rye.

For winter wheat and fall rye yield comparisons tables, as well as agronomic and disease information on the varieties evaluated by MCVET in 2014/15, please view the following: 2015 MCVET Winter Wheat and Fall Rye Data Available

 

Respond
Have a follow-up question?

Why Touring Variety Performance Trials is Important

Crop producers make choices about the varieties they grow based, in part, upon crop variety evaluation trials. Many such trials are conducted across the crop growing regions of Manitoba annually, known as the Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Trials (MCVET). This information is summarized and presented as long term yield and protein data and yearly site data, which is available in SEED MANITOBA (www.seedmb.ca) and on the interactive website Seed Interactive (www.seedinteractive.ca) . The information gives comparisons of interests to the producers in each region as new varieties are tested each year.

Over the next week, I will be touring the 2014/15 MCVET winter cereal sites, which include winter wheat and fall rye trials. The main goals of visiting the sites early in the season are to assess stand establishment, take notes on winterkill or reduced stands in any of the plots, and make sure weeds are properly controlled.  If there are significant issues with the site, the trial is terminated.  The spring tour is an important first step in making sure the data that producers see in SEED MANITOBA is of high quality and properly vetted.

Which varieties are being evaluated this year?

The following registered winter wheat varieties are being tested by MCVET in 2014/15:

  • CWRW:  AAC Gateway, AAC Elevate, CDC Buteo, CDC Chase, Emerson, Flourish & Moats
  • CWGP:  CDC Falcon

The following fall rye varieties are being tested:

  • Danko and Hazlet
  • hybrid fall rye varieties Guttino and Brasetto

If you would like to obtain directions and plots plans to the MCVET winter cereal sites, please don’t hesitate to contact myself at [email protected] or Patti Rothenburger, Agri-Genetics Specialist & Chair of MCVET at [email protected]

For more information on growing winter wheat or fall rye, please visit MAFRD’s website at:

Submitted by:  Pam de Rocquigny, Provincial Cereal Crops Specialist, MAFRD

 

Respond
Have a follow-up question?
,

The Relationship between Yield & Protein in MCVET Spring Wheat

There are numerous factors that impact protein content in wheat.  While environmental factors such as moisture and temperature have large effects on protein content, production practices such as variety selection, seeding date and fertility management can also influence protein content.

Influence of Genetics.  Not all wheat varieties have the same potential for grain yield and differ slightly in their ability to convert soil nitrogen to grain protein.  We typically see higher yielding varieties with lower protein content, largely due to dilution as protein is diluted by the increased carbohydrate (i.e. kernel number) production seen with higher yields.

Manitoba Data. Jochum Wiersma of the University of Minnesota created the following scatter plot for me that I included in a recent Ag Days 2015 presentation. The figure includes the long term data of varieties belonging to the CWRS & the CWGP classes tested by MCVET.   Long term yield data is from 2000 to 2014 expressed as a % of the overall grand mean (66 bu/ac), while protein data is from 2002 to 2014.

Picture1

As the figure illustrates, there is a grouping of varieties according to class based on the relationship between yield and protein content.  However, there is variation with each class and there are a few varieties with higher yield potential that still has protein content appropriate for the CWRS class.

Submitted by: Pam de Rocquigny, Provincial Cereal Crops Specialist

Respond
Have a follow-up question?

Have you tried Seed Interactive??

Seed Interactive is a collaborative effort between the Manitoba Seed Growers’ Association, Farm Business Communications, and Manitoba Agriculture, Food & Rural Development and can be accessed by clicking on: http://www.seedinteractive.ca/

Using the information found in SEED MANITOBA 2015, along with information from past yearly issues of the SEED MANITOBA guide, Seed Interactive allows you to tailor your own output, taking into consideration your agronomic and management requirements.

  • Use the variety characteristic report to familiarize yourself with overall yield performance, variety disease resistance and general agronomic attributes.
  • Use the Yield Comparison Report to select your own check variety to compare directly to a new or commonly grown variety at locations of your choice.
  • Or use the Mulit-Year Yield Summary Report to focus on a group of varieties tested together within a specific time span at the locations of your choice.

Crop types currently on Seed Interactive include spring wheat, winter wheat, barley, oats, flax, peas, soybeans and sunflowers (oil & confectionary).

I invite you to check it out.  I have often used this tool while discussing soybean varieties with growers.  I find being able to quickly compare specific varieties to each other in one location over multiple years with this online tool is a lot easier than trying to use the hard copy.

Submitted by:  Terry Buss, Farm Production Advisor – Crops, MAFRD

Respond
Have a follow-up question?

Spring Wheat Varieties Response to Fusarium Head Blight

Submitted by:  Pam de Rocquigny, Provincial Cereal Crops Specialist

The Manitoba Crop Variety Evaluation Team (MCVET) initiated a three year study in 2009 to evaluate the effect of Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) on Canada Western Red Spring (CWRS) wheat varieties with varying levels of FHB resistance.  Western Grains Research Foundation (WGRF) funded 2 more years to build upon that research as the turnover of varieties evaluated by MCVET requires on-going analysis to evaluate the responses of newly registered varieties.

Two objectives of the study were:

  1. Evaluate how CWRS varieties being tested by MCVET respond to FHB under non-misted (natural infection) over a wide geographic area; and
  2. Use mixed model analysis to calculate long term average variety means of fusarium damaged kernels (FDK) and deoxynivalenol (DON).

There were thirty-three CWRS varieties evaluated by MCVET and tested for FDK and DON over the five-year study.  All varieties were not tested in each of those years.  Mixed model analysis was used to calculate a model-based estimate of FDK and DON level means, adjusting for factors such as year, location and interactions.

Results show the effect of variety on FDK and DON levels was significant. In the figure “Levels of Fusarium Damaged Kernels (FDK) and Deoxynivalenol (DON) by CWRS Variety (2009 – 2013)“, varieties are grouped by level of resistance to FHB.  Although infection levels were generally low over the five years, a slight trend exists where the varieties rated as Moderately Susceptible (MS) or Susceptible (S) have higher levels of FDK and DON compared to the varieties rated as MR or Intermediate (I).

Analyzing FDK and DON data using mixed model analysis also allows head to head comparisons of varieties which may not have been tested together.  Use of the Least Significant Difference (LSD) value allows producers to determine if significant differences do exist between varieties.  In the table “Long Term Average Means of Fusarium Damaged Kernels (FDK) and Deoxynivalenol (DON) for CWRS Varieties Evaluated by MCVET (2009 – 2013)“, the model-based estimate of FDK and DON level means are presented, along with the LSD value and grand mean of the five year database. Individual varieties must differ by the LSD value to be considered significantly different; for FDK (%), values must differ by 0.53 while for DON (ppm) values must differ by 0.5.

Variety by location data for FDK and DON data for 2012 and 2013 for CWRS varieties evaluated by MCVET is available on-line at www.seedmb.ca at http://www.seedmb.ca/webexclusive/wheat-quality-disease.asp, as well as 2013 FDK and DON data for varieties belonging to the CPS, CWHWS, and CWGP wheat classes.

If interested in the complete report titled “Post-registration Assessment of Spring Wheat Varieties Response to Fusarium Head Blight, please contact [email protected].

 

 

Respond
Have a follow-up question?