1 / 30

Ot h e r C o n t r i b u t o r s :

E v a lu a t io n o f C or n a n d Gr a i n S or g h u m P l a n t in g Geo m e t rie s a n d S eedin g R a t e s. L u c a s Haa g , G r aduat e Re s e a r c h A ss i s tan t A l a n S c h l e g e l , P r o fe ss o r a n d A g r on o m i s t - i n - C ha r g e

jean
Download Presentation

Ot h e r C o n t r i b u t o r s :

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EvaluationofCornand GrainSorghum PlantingGeometriesandSeedingRates Lucas Haag,GraduateResearchAssistant AlanSchlegel, ProfessorandAgronomist-in-Charge SouthwestResearch-ExtensionCenter–Tribune,Kansas Other Contributors: R.AikenandK.Pidaran,K-StateNWREC-Colby K.Roozeboom,K-State Agronomy

  2. Somebriefworksummaries • Somepreliminaryresearchresults fromSWREC-Tribune3yearstudy (HaagandSchlegel) • On-Farm ResearchTrials (HaagwithKARTAcooperators) • RobAikenandKalaiyarasiPidaran • KraigRoozeboom (withAiken,Schlegel,andHaag)

  3. Geometries Conventional Clump P1S1 P2S2 Cluster or SkipwithinRow (SwinR)

  4. SWREC-Tribune MaterialsandMethods • Fiveplanting geometries • Conventional • Clump • Plant2Skip2 • Plant1Skip1 • SkipwithintheRow • Seeding Rates • Corn:12, 16, and20,000plants ac-1 • GrainSorghum:35,000plants ac-1 • AdaptedHybrids,33B54and86G32andadequatefertility • Plots measured8rows (20’)x 40’

  5. TribuneCorn2009-2011 ANOVAP>F Kernels Plant-1 Kernel Weight Biomass Yield HI Geometry Population GeometryxPopulation <0.0001 <0.0001 0.079 <0.0001 0.376 0.0016 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0414 0.0008 <0.0001 0.0087 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.1705

  6. Corn- Biomass Biomass(lbac-1) Geometry Population

  7. Corn- GrainYield GeometryandPopulationEffects onCornGrainYield SWREC-Tribune, 2009-2011 Lettersrepresent differencesatLSD (0.05) 140 a 120 ab a abc abc bcd cd de 100 def def def ef ef ef f Yield(buac-1) 80 12k 16k 20k 60 40 20 0 Clump Conv P2S2 SwinR P1S1 Geometry/SeedingRate

  8. Corn- GrainYield GrainYield (buac-1) Geometry SwinRClumpConvP1S1P2S2 111.4 a 108.9 a 94.0 b 95.4 b 86.4 c LSD(0.05) 6.55 Population

  9. Corn- Harvest Index GeometryandPopulationEffects onHarvestIndex SWREC-Tribune, 2009-2011 Lettersrepresent differencesatLSD (0.05) 0.539 0.496 0.543 0.539 0.531 0.70 0.60 a a ab ab ab ab abc bcde bcd cde de cde de ef 0.50 f HarvestIndex 0.40 12k 16k 20k 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Clump Conv P2S2 SwinR P1S1 Geometry/SeedingRate

  10. Corn- Kernels Plant-1 Kernels Plant-1 Geometry Clump SwinR Conv P1S1 P2S2 627.2 a 594.2 ab 589.2 b 584.0 b 527.7 c LSD (0.05) 34.2 Population 12 16 20 699.9 a 579.9 b 473.5 c LSD (0.05) 26.5

  11. Corn KernelsPlant-1 Geometry andPopulationEffects onKernels Plant-1 SWREC-Tribune, 2009-2011 Lettersrepresent differencesatLSD (0.05) a a 800 ab abc 700 bc cd de de 600 ef efg fgh fgh gh 500 hi KernelsPlant-1 i 12k 16k 20k 400 300 200 100 0 Clump Conv P2S2 SwinR P1S1 Geometry/SeedingRate

  12. KernelWeight Geometry andPopulationEffects onKernel Weight SWREC-Tribune, 2009-2011 Lettersrepresent differencesatLSD (0.05) 232.92 231.83 300 242.38 245.94 237.24 a a a a a a 250 b b b bc bc bcd cde de e Kernel Weight(g1000seed-1) 200 12k 16k 20k 150 100 50 0 Clump Conv P2S2 SwinR P1S1 Geometry/SeedingRate

  13. On-Farm Research2010RedWillowCounty YieldDifferenceMap- Conventionalvs.ClumpCorn

  14. RedWillowCounty,2010ClumpCorn CornGrainYield Conventional Clump 72.1b 77.3a Drylandcornoncorn,108dayprovendrylandflexearedhybrid

  15. Sorghum

  16. TillersPlant-1asaffectedbyMainCulmsinClumpSWREC-TribuneandStantonCounty, KansasProductionField 6 n=251 5 4 Tillers Plant-1 3 2 1 0 0 1 2 4 5 6 3 MainCulmsClump-1

  17. SWREC-Tribune MaterialsandMethods • Fiveplanting geometries • Conventional • Clump • Plant2Skip2 • Plant1Skip1 • SkipwithintheRow • Seeding Rates • GrainSorghum:35,000plants ac-1 • AdaptedHybrid, 86G32andadequatefertility • Plots measured8rows (20’)x 40’

  18. Sorghum,Tribune2009-2011 ) <0.0001 0.0009 0.0010 0.0016 P>F 0.0001 <0.0001 0.0044 †Letterswithin a column represent differencesat LSD(0.05)

  19. CenterforSorghum ImprovementStudy KraigRoozeboom, RobAiken,AlanSchlegel, JohnHolman,Lucas Haag • 2Hybrids –Short(DKS36-06)andFull(DKS44-20) • 5SeedingRates –10,30,50,and80kseeds ac-1 • 2Geometries –Conventional30”Rows andClump • 3Locations –Colby,Tribune,andGardenCity

  20. Clumpvs. Conventional Sorghum 2009 Tribune -CSISorghumProject 100 Meansacross2hybrids,DKS33 16(med-short)andDKS44-20 a 95 ab (med-full) bc bc 90 abc 85 cd d GrainYield(bu ac-1) 80 75 70 65 e 60 55 Conventional Lettersrepresentdifferencesat LSD =0.05 Clump 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 SeedingRate(1000ac-1)

  21. Clumpvs. Conventional Sorghum 2010 Tribune -CSISorghumProject 120 Meansacross2hybrids,DKS33-16(med- short)andDKS44-20(med-full), andacross geometry,clumpandconventional a 110 a ab GrainYield(bu ac-1) 90 b 80 70 60 Series2 Lettersrepresentdifferencesat LSD =0.05 0 10 20 30 60 70 80 90 40 50 SeedingRate(1000ac-1)

  22. Clumpvs. Conventional Sorghum 2009-2010 Tribune -CSI SorghumProject 110 Meansacross2hybrids,DKS33 16(med-short)andDKS44-20 (med-full) a ab 100 a a ab a 90 GrainYield(bu ac-1) b 80 70 c 60 Conventional Lettersrepresentdifferencesat LSD =0.05 Clump 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 SeedingRate(1000ac-1)

  23. Yield advantage of clumped planting geometry over uniformplanting geometry Yield advantage of clumped planting geometry over uniformplanting geometry T:Tribune, B: Bushland, fromBandaruet al.,2006;Source: K. Pidaran

  24. e K·STATE ResearchandExtension

  25. 2009 ModeledYieldDifference

  26. Source:K. Pidaran

  27. ResearchQuestions • Genotypeinteractions(leaf angle,rootingpattern) • Whereisthetradeoff betweenleaves shadingthegroundandreducingE vs.wastedT • Criticallevelof surfaceresidueforsystemtobepreferabletoconventionalplanting? • Mechanisms atplay?

  28. Questions/Discussion? SouthwestResearch-Extension Center–Tribune,Kans. Photo byLucasHaag –Summer2009

More Related