Stewart Brandt Northeast Agriculture Research Foundation Field Research Manager Demonstration and Objectives The 2013 ADOPT winter wheat demonstration was set up using a four replicate randomized complete block trial with fourteen ID: 636399
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "2013 ADOPT Winter Wheat Demonstration" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
2013 ADOPT Winter Wheat Demonstration
Stewart BrandtNortheast Agriculture Research FoundationField Research ManagerSlide2
Demonstration and Objectives
The 2013 ADOPT winter wheat demonstration was set up using a four replicate randomized complete block trial with fourteen different treatments established at seeding
Objectives:demonstrate a series of recommended and non-recommended practices used for winter wheat production in NE Saskatchewan
communicate to growers the advantages of growing winter wheat as well as risks associated with production of the cropSlide3
Benefits of Winter Wheat Production in NE Saskatchewan
Winter wheat production in NE Saskatchewan may be limited, however, the crop would potentially fit well into rotations in the areaTwo major benefits:
Workload is distributed over a longer time period with fall seeding and earlier harvestCrop uses water earlier in the spring, thus reducing risk of waterlogged soils and associated losses due to drowning of the crop and nitrogen losses due to denitrification Slide4
Treatments:1. Recommended Practice
1. Recommended Practice:Early seeding (Sept 7)0.5 – 1 inch depth into standing oat stubble
Fall banded urea (soil test rate)Winter annual weed control (
Buctril
M in fall 2-4 leaf)
Proline at flag leaf if needed for tan spot and septoria
complex
Proline
repeated at recommended stage for
fusarium
head blight and glume blotch control Slide5
Treatments: 2-10 Change One Recommended Practice
Recommended practice, except seeded late (Sept 24) Recommended practice,
except seeded 2 – 2.5 inches deep Recommended practice, but till stubble to incorporate most residues
Recommended practice,
but do not apply any fungicide
Recommended practice, but apply N as spring broadcast untreated urea
Recommended practice,
but apply N as fall sideband ESN treated urea
Recommended practice,
but apply N as spring broadcast
Agrotain
treated urea
Recommended practice,
but apply N as spring broadcast Super U treated urea
Recommended practice,
but omit fall winter annual weed control Slide6
Treatments: 11-14N
umerous changes from recommended Seed late, deep seeded on incorporated stubble, no fungicide, with spring broadcast untreated
urea, without fall weed control Seed late, deep seeded on incorporated stubble, no fungicide , with fall sideband ESN treated urea, without fall weed control
Seed late, deep seeded on incorporated stubble, no fungicide, with spring broadcast
Agrotain urea treated urea, without fall weed control
Seed late, deep seeded, on incorporated stubble, no fungicide, with spring broadcast Super U treated urea, without fall weed controlSlide7
Comparing Treatments:
Early vs Late seeded
Seeded September 7
Seeded September 24
The first seeding date of the trial was planted September 7, while the late seeding date was September 24. By October 12, the recommended practice treatments had emerged and were at the 3 leaf stage
Treatments planted September 7 either deep or on tilled soil were only at the 2 leaf stage
All late seeded treatments were just barely emerging (green spec shown by blue arrow above)Slide8
Recommended
Comparing Treatments: Early vs Late SeededSeeded 2 – 2.5” deep
On May 29, all treatments that were seeded early at 0.5 – 1 inch depth showed very good winter survival and were very vigorous
Plots seeded early at 2 – 2.5 inch depth or seeded on tilled stubble survived the winter well but were somewhat less vigorous than those seeded shallower into standing stubble (recommended)
Seeded on tilled stubbleSlide9
Comparing Treatments: Early vs
Late Seeded
Seeded Late into Standing Stubble
Seeded Late and Deep into Tilled Stubble
All treatments that were seeded late had very poor winter survival and vigor
Those seeded late and deep and on tilled stubble had even poorer winter survival and vigor than those that were just seeded lateSlide10
Comparing Treatments: N Fertilizer Application
Fall SB* Urea (Recommended)
Fall SB ESN Treated Urea
*SB means side band at seeding below and to the side of seed
Several new options have been developed to supply fertilizer nitrogen to winter wheatSlide11
Comparing Treatments: N Fertilizer Application
Fall SB Urea (Recommended)
Spring BR** Agrotain Treated Urea
**BR means surface broadcast without incorporationSlide12
Comparing Treatments: N Fertilizer Application
Fall SB Urea (Recommended)
Spring BR UreaSlide13
Comparing Treatments: N Fertilizer Application
Fall SB Urea (Recommended)
Spring BR Super U Treated UreaSlide14
Comparing Treatments: N Fertilizer Application
Fall SB Urea (Recommended)
Fall SB ESN
Treated Urea
Spring BR
Agrotain
Treated Urea
Spring BR Urea
Spring BR Super U Treated UreaSlide15
Conclusions:
In terms of winter survival and early spring vigor, seeding date had a very significant impact, while seeding depth and tillage to reduce snow trapping had smaller but discernible effectsHerbicide, fungicide, and fertilizer treatments did not appear to affect winter survival or early spring vigor
To date it is much too early to speculate on differences between fertilizer N treatments, but it would appear that their impact will be much less significant than a later seeding date