Strategies for Improving Winter Survival in U.S. Southern Great

Plains Winter Canola

Michael Stamm, Yared Assefa, Ignacio Ciampitti, Gary Cramer, John Holman, Kraig Roozeboom,

and Baylee Showalter

Canola Area Planted (1,000 hectares)

State 2014 2015

Idaho 14.2 8.9

Minnesota 5.7 7.7

Montana 25.5 24.3

North Dakota 485.6 497.8

Oklahoma 109.3 60.7

Oregon 4.5 2.0

Washington 20.6 13.0

Other States 28.3 21.9

United States 693.7 636.3

USDA-NASS, Acreage, 2015 Other States: Kansas, Colorado

Southern Great Plains Canola

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15*

Hect

ares

Oklahoma Kansas Other (CO & TX)

Low Temperature Stress

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

1-Sep 1-Oct 1-Nov 1-Dec 1-Jan 1-Feb 1-Mar 1-Apr 1-May

Tem

pera

ture

(C)

Hutchinson, KS

2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 Normal

Oct-30-2014 Dec-04-2014

Jan-16-2015 Jan-16-2015

Winter Survival Improvement • Performance = Genetics x Environment x

Management • Genetic component

– Over 20 years of breeding for improved survival at Kansas State University

• Improved production practices – Residue removal in the seed-row (no tillage) – Seeding rate – Seeding date

Genetic Improvement • Source of parent material • Recurrent selection • Limitation: Differential winterkill does not occur

each year – Testing in locations outside the range of normal

adaptation

• Plant morphology – Prostrate growth habit – Semi-dwarf growth habit – Increased vernalization requirement

Plant Morphology Traits Conventional Hybrid KSU Experimental Semi-dwarf Hybrid

Belleville, KS National Winter Canola Variety Trial

10-Apr-2014 KS4549

Belleville, KS National Winter Canola Variety Trial

5-May-2014

KS4549

Comparisons for winter survival (%) and yield (Mg/ha) of KS4549 and check cultivars across Kansas NWCVT sites, 2013-2015.

Entry Source Winter Survival Yield

KS4549 K-State 67.7 1.22 DKW46-15 DEKALB 56.3 0.73 Mercedes Rubisco 50.0 1.01 Wichita K-State 36.3 0.83 Safran Rubisco 37.0 0.99 46W94 DuPont Pioneer 22.5 0.31 P-value <.0001 <.0001

LSD (0.05) 8.1 0.30

Winter survival and residue management

No-till 1x residue

No-till 2x residue

• Winter survival has been a major challenge for producers using no tillage (Holman et al., 2009; Holman et al., 2011; Assefa et al., 2014)

• Crop residue in the seed row can elevate the rosette to an unprotected position above the soil surface, making it more vulnerable to freezing temperatures (Godsey et al., 2011)

No-till/burn

Tillage

Procedures • Comparison of best producer practices vs.

AGCO novel residue management system • Six locations in central and western Kansas • Row widths (m)

– AGCO: 0.5, 0.76 – Producer preference: 0.25, 0.38, 0.76

• Seeding rates (seeds/ha) – AGCO: 247k, 371k, 494k – Producer preference: 300k-1,100k

• Hybrid cultivars used

Andale, KS – Fall Stands

0100200300400500600700800900

247k 371k 494k 247k 371k 494k 415k 464k 538k

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76

AGCO AGCO AGCO AGCO AGCO AGCO Farmer Farmer Farmer

plan

ts/h

ecta

re (

1000

) Equipment P < 0.01 Row space(equipment) P < 0.01 Seeding rate(equipment) P < 0.01 Seeding rate x row space(equipment) P = 0.4418

Andale, KS – Winter Survival

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

247k 371k 494k 247k 371k 494k 415k 464k 538k

0.5 0.5 0.5 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76

AGCO AGCO AGCO AGCO AGCO AGCO Farmer Farmer Farmer

Surv

ival

(%)

Equipment P < 0.01 Row space(equipment) P < 0.01 Seeding rate(equipment) P < 0.01 Seeding rate x row space(equipment) P = 0.0191

Planting date x tillage effects Mean winter survival (%) as affected by planting date and tillage in Manhattan, KS.

Year Treatment 8/131 9/1 9/18 10/2

2010 No-till 66 bc 74 b 75 b 47 d

Tillage 94 a 71 b 75 b 52 cd

8/23 8/30 9/13 9/20

2011 No-till 64 b 65 b 94 a 89 a

Tillage 72 b 62 b 93 a 91 a

8/31 9/9 9/22 10/3

2012 No-till 69 ab 76 a 67 ab 54 b

Tillage 71 ab 75 a 80 a 67 ab Means followed by the same letter within a year are not statistically significant at P < 0.05. 1Planting dates for a given year.

Assefa et al., 2014

Conclusions • Genetic improvement in winter survival has

been achieved in the southern Great Plains • Narrower row spacing and reduced seeding

rates in high residue no-till are beneficial for winter survival if residue can be adequately removed from the seed row

• No-till reduced winter survival only at the earliest planting date in 2010 and the latest planting dates in 2012, but planting date affected winter survival in all years

Mike Stamm Associate Agronomist / Canola Breeder

Department of Agronomy Kansas State University

mjstamm@ksu.edu Follow @ksucanola on Twitter

Follow @KStateAgron on Twitter

This research was supported by the USDA-NIFA Supplemental and Alternative Crops Competitive Grants Program, proposal no.

2011-03808, and AGCO Corporation.