pgrs for irrigated barley and wheat productiondemofarm.ca/2016 irrigated crop production update/1120...

25
PGRs for Irrigated Barley and Wheat Production Irrigated Crop Production Update 2016 Laurel Perrott [email protected] MSc. Candidate, University of Alberta Sheri Strydhorst [email protected] Research Scientist, Alberta Agriculture & Forestry

Upload: phunghanh

Post on 06-Sep-2018

221 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

PGRs for Irrigated Barley and Wheat ProductionIrrigated Crop Production Update 2016

Laurel [email protected]

MSc. Candidate, University of Alberta

Sheri [email protected]

Research Scientist, Alberta Agriculture & Forestry

https://seminolecropnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/dsc3648.jpg

Lodging is a problem, especially under irrigation

•Yield losses

•Lower grades

•Difficult and slow to harvest

http://bugwoodcloud.org/images/768x512/1572064.jpg

Tools we currently have to manage lodging

•Genetics

•Fertility

•PGRs ??

What are PGRs?

• Synthetic compounds that mimic, modify, or

inhibit endogenous plant hormones

• Allow us to influence plant growth & development

• Effective at low concentrations & break-down

rapidly

•Reduce stem length

•Uppermost internodes and peduncle are

shortened (Berry et al 2000)

• Inconsistent reports of PGRs altering stem

diameter

ethylene

http://www.flowerbulbs.cornell.edu/forcing/lily_cultivars/Fangio.htm

gibberellic acid

http://samohigarden.blogspot.ca/2011/06/ethylene-gas-and-its-effects-on-fruit.html

Two Main PGR Groups

• Ethylene releasing compounds• i.e. Ethephon (also blocks auxin transport)

• GA biosynthesis inhibitors• i.e. Chlormequat-Chloride & Trinexapac-Ethyl

Rademacher, 2000. Growth retardants: Effects on gibberellin biosynthesis and other metabolic pathways. Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 51:501-31.

GA Biosynthesis Pathway

New PGR Registrations in Western Canada

• Manipulator (chlormequat chloride) was recently registered for wheat *not

registered on barley

• A 2nd PGR in the process of registration (for wheat)

• These PGRs produce shorter (2-15cm), thicker & stronger stems which

reduce lodging in intensive management systems (Syngenta, 2013; Taminco,

2013).

• The primary use of PGRs is as a harvest management aid

Syngenta. 2013. Palisade2EC Label. Accessed November 27, 2013. Available online at: http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/Labels/p-1197/Palisade_2EC

Taminco. 2013. Manipulator Technical Data Sheet. Accessed November 27, 2013. Available online at: http://www.taminco.com/

When to apply GA inhibitors?

GS 30-31

BBCH 30: Beginning of stem elongation: first internode begins to elongate (top of

inflorescence at least 1cm above tillering node).

BBCH 31: First node at least 1cm above tillering nodePhotos: Sheri Strydhorst

Advanced Agronomic Management Trials (2014-2016)

Part I “Stacked experiments”

• Feed Barley: Testing Manipulator* on Amisk feed barley yield, height and lodging

• Wheat: Testing Manipulator and a 2nd PGR on AC Foremost wheat yield, height and lodging

Part II “Genetics X Management”

• Do varieties respond differently to PGRs in both barley and wheat?

*Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

When?

• 3 year study (2014-2016)

Where?• Lethbridge (irrigated)

• Lethbridge dryland

• Killam

• Bon Accord

• Falher

The Trials

Product Rates and Timing

Input Rate(s) Timing

UAN (28-0-0) 30 lbs N/ac

60 lbs N/ac

30 lbs N/ac + Agrotain

Just prior to GS 30 (just before elongation).

PGR – Manipulator (Barley*)

PGR – Manipulator (Wheat)

PGR – PGR B (Wheat)

0.93 L/ac

0.73 L/ac

2.0 L/ac

GS 30-31

1st Foliar Fungicide

Twinline202 mL/ac GS 39 Flag leaf fully unrolled

2nd Foliar Fungicide

Prosaro320 mL/ac ~ 2 weeks later

*Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

Barley PGR results were averaged over all treatments

Barley Results: Response of Amisk to Manipulator*

*Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

• Consistent but small yield increases (1 - 6%) in 6 of 9 site

years

• Height decrease in only 3 of 9 site years (2-4cm)

• No effect on lodging

4.2*

2.6*1.6*

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

LethIrrigated

LethDryland

Killam BonAccord

Falher LethIrrigated

LethDryland

BonAccord

Falher

Pla

nt

He

igh

t (c

m)

Site Year

Amisk Barley Height in 2014 and 2015 with Control vs. Manipulator Treatment

Control

Manipulator

Height decrease at 3 of 9

site years (did not occur

under irrigated conditions)

Where lodging occurred,

Manipulator did not

reduce lodging at any site

Photo: Sheri Strydhorst

Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

Barley Genetics X ManagementComparing 10 feed varieties under

advanced and standard management

• Investigate if different cultivars respond

differently to advanced management

(which includes Manipulator application)

*Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

Barley Genetics x Management Treatments

• Comparing 10 feed barley varieties to standard and advanced management

• Standard management had no UAN, PGR, or fungicide applications

Advanced Agronomic Management

Input Rate Timing

UAN (28-0-0) 30 lbs N/ac Just prior to GS 30 (just before elongation).

PGR – Manipulator 0.93 L/ac GS 30-31

1st Foliar Fungicide

Twinline202 mL/ac GS 39 Flag leaf fully unrolled

2nd Foliar Fungicide

Prosaro320 mL/ac ~ 2 weeks later

*Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

Barley Genetics x Management: comparing 10 feed varieties

under advanced and standard management

• Lodging was reported at 4 of 9 sites

• Lodging differed between cultivars:

– Best standability: Amisk, Vivar, and CDC

Coalition

– Worst standability: Gadsby, Breton, Xena

• Lodging response to advanced mngt:

– No response at 3 of 4 sites where lodging was

reported

– Lodging increased with advanced management at

1 of 4 sites

Cultivar selection is a better tool than

agronomic management to determine

plant height and lodging *Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

Gadsby: showing similar lodging under Adv and Std

Lethbridge Irrigated: August 4th 2015

Standard Management Advanced Management

Photos: Sheri Strydhorst

What about wheat???

Wheat Results: Response of AC Foremost to Manipulator and PGR B

• Very few statistically significant yield responses for either PGR

• Protein reductions observed:

– Manipulator in 2 of 5 site years

– PGR B in 1 of 5 site years

– Safened with fungicide application

• Height reductions observed:

– Manipulator decreased height in 7 of 8 site years (by -1 to -8cm)

– PGR B decreased height in 5 of 8 site years (+2 to -5cm)

Wheat Genetics x Management: comparing 12 wheat varieties

under advanced and standard management

Photo: Sheri Strydhorst

Height Response to PGRs – Wheat GxM Summary

• PGRs reduced plant height in most cultivars, but to varying degrees– Height reduction ranged from (+1 cm to -27cm); avg -8.9cm

– Averaged over 8 site years, the following cultivars had height reductions > 10cm:• Belvoir (-14 cm), Sparrow (-10 cm), Coleman (-13cm), Harvest (-11 cm) and CDC Stanley (-11 cm)

– Averaged over 8 site years, the following cultivars had height reductions ≤ 6cm:• 5700PR (-5 cm) and AC Andrew (-6 cm)

• Height reduction was not specific to a certain class of wheat• Height reduction was not correlated with plant height

22/01/2016

• Lodging was reported at 4 of 8 sites

• Lodging differed between cultivars:

– Best standability: AAC Penhold, Belvoir, Sparrow

– Worst standability: Coleman and Thorsby

– Intermediate standability: Harvest, CDC Stanley, CDC Go

• PGR standability Response (advanced management):

– Harvest, CDC Stanley and CDC Go tended to have 100% standability with PGR use

– Coleman and Thorsby tended to have improvements in standability, but lodging was

still noted

22/01/2016

Lodging Response to PGRs – Wheat GxM Summary

Lethbridge Irrigated 2015 – Changes in Height and Lodging Ratings

Class Cultivar

-----------Height (cm)----------- Standard MngtLodging Index

(0 = no Lodging; 100 = Flat)

Advanced MngtLodging Index (0 = no Lodging;

100 = Flat)

Standard Mngt

Advanced Mngt Reduction

5700PR 87 81 -6 0 0

CPS AC Foremost 83 75 -8 2 0

AAC Penhold 83 75 -8 1 0

GP Belvoir 88 73 -15 0 0

Sparrow 93 80 -12 0 0

SWS AC Andrew 90 84 -6 0 0

CDC Go 91 86 -5 4 0

HRS Thorsby 105 98 -7 38 26

Coleman 113 102 -11 67 30

Stettler 98 90 -8 5 1

CDC Stanley 105 92 -13 13 0

AC Harvest 103 89 -14 39 0

- Large Height

Reduction

- No increase

in Standability

-Height Reduction

~50%

Improvement in

Standabiltiy

-Height Reduction

- 100%

Improvement in

Standabiltiy

Take Home Messages

• Manipulator modestly decreased height

in Amisk barley in 3 of 9 site years – did

not decrease lodging

• Small but consistent yield increases

using Manipulator on Amisk barley

• Variety selection remains a better tool

than GA inhibiting PGRs to manage

lodging in barley

• More tools are needed for producers to

manage lodging in feed barley!

• Some protein decreases observed in AC

Foremost wheat – fungicide safened

• PGRs, overall, reduced height in most

cultivars – to differing degrees (no

correlation to class or plant height)

• Lodging differed between cultivars –

cultivar selection is an important tool

• Harvest, Stanley, and CDC Go had the

most lodging reduction in response to

PGR application

Barley Wheat

*Manipulator is not registered for use in barley

Five additional site years of data will be compiled to give

producers more tools for agronomic decision making

Advanced Agronomic Practices in Wheat, Barley

and Pea to Maximize Yield and Harvestability

Anderson Seed Growers Ltd.

Beamish Seed Farms Ltd.

Galloway Seeds Ltd.

Canterra Seeds

Field Crop Development Centre

KL Nelson and KWS – UK

Kittle Farms Ltd.

Lefsrud Seed & Processors Ltd.

McNelly Seed Farms Ltd.

N. Jonk Seed Farms

Don Schmermund

Stony Plain Seed Cleaning Plant

Trueblood Farms Ltd.

University of Alberta

Westlock Seed Cleaning Co-op Ltd.

Financial Support of this Research is Provided By:

In-Kind Support of this Research is Provided By:

Thank You for Your Time!

Questions?

Sheri Strydhorst, PhD

Research Scientist – Agronomy

[email protected]

Laurel Perrott, BSc. Ag

MSc Candidate – U of A

[email protected]