ricultural
Experiment Station
Technical Report
Ag
College of Agricultural Sciences Department of Soil & Crop Sciences Extension
Making Better
Decisions
2014 Colorado Sunfl ower
Variety Performance Trials
3 For the fastest access to up-to-date variety information and results visit us at:
www.csucrops.com
Research conducted by Colorado State University Crops Testing Program Department of Soil and Crop Sciences
Colorado State University Extension Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station
Disclaimer
**Mention of a trademark or proprietary product does not constitute endorsement by the Colorado Agricultural Experiment Station.**
Colorado State University is an equal opportunity/affirmative action institution and complies with all Federal and Colorado State laws, regulations, and executive orders regarding
affirmative action requirements in all programs. The Office of Equal Opportunity is located in 101 Student Services. In order to assist Colorado State University in meeting its affirmative action responsibilities, ethnic minorities, women, and other protected class members are encouraged to apply and to so identify themselves.
4
Table of Contents
Authors...5
Acknowledgments...5
Summary of the 2014 Colorado Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trials...6
2014 Limited-Irrigation Oil Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Burlington...8
2014 Limited-Irrigation Confection Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Burlington...9
2014 Limited-Irrigation Oil Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Prospect Valley...10
2014 Dryland Oil Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Akron...11
2014 Dryland Confection Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Akron...12
2014 Dryland Oil Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trial at Towner...13
5
Authors
Dr. Jerry Johnson - Associate Professor and Extension Specialist - Crop Production, Colorado State University, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Phone: 970-491-1454, E-mail: jerry.johnson@ colostate.edu.
Jim Hain - Research Associate - Crops Testing Program, Colorado State University, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, 40335 CR GG, Akron, CO 80720, Phone: 970-554-0980.
Sally Sauer - Research Associate - Crops Testing Program, Colorado State University, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Phone: 970-491-1914, E-mail: sally.sauer@colostate.edu.
Ron Meyer – Extension Agronomist – Golden Plains Area, Colorado State University, 817 15th St., Burlington, CO 80807, Phone: 970-346-5571 ext. 302, E-mail: rf.meyer@colostate.edu.
Kierra Jewell - Administrative Assistant III, Colorado State University, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Phone: 970-491-6201, E-mail: kierra.jewell@colostate.edu.
The authors wish to express their gratitude to the collaborating Colorado farmers who
voluntarily and generously contributed the use of their land, equipment, and time to facilitate the 2014 sunflower hybrid performance trials: Sean Harkness at Towner, Gerhard Heintges
at Burlington, and David Rupple at Prospect Valley. We thank DOW AgroSciences for
doing the sunflower seed oil content analysis and Red River Commodities, Inc. for doing the confection sunflower seed-sizing analyses.
6
Summary of the 2014 Colorado Sunflower Hybrid Performance Trials
Jerry Johnson and Ron Meyer
Colorado State University conducts hybrid oil and confection sunflower performance trials to provide unbiased and reliable information to Colorado sunflower producers so they can select the best hybrids for their farms. Variable climatic conditions, innovations from plant breeding and biotechnology, acquisitions and mergers of seed companies, and rapid development of new hybrid lines means crop performance information is increasingly important to Colorado sunflower producers. The sunflower hybrid performance trial is made possible by funding received from company entry fees, the Colorado Sunflower Administrative Committee, and Colorado State University.
Colorado sunflower producers are expected to harvest 52 million pounds of seed in 2014, which is 112% of last year’s total from 30% fewer acres than last season according to the USDA National Ag. Statistics Service. Above average rainfall and new hybrids contributed to the increase. Advances in weed control with a broader range of herbicides such as imidazolinone, Express, Clearfield, and Clearfield Plus have benefited our sunflower producers. The 2014 sunflower growing season was cooler and wetter than in 2013. The cooler weather affected the dry down rate and delayed and extended harvest activities. Harvest began 3 weeks later than normal. Yields of both oil and confection types were 500 pounds per acre higher than 2013 yields. Oil content and confection seed size were also better than observed in 2013.
Figure 1 shows that the acreage of both oil and confection sunflowers in Colorado has been highly variable (especially the oil type) over the past 20 years. The oil type has ranged from 45,000 planted acres in 1996 up to 175,000 acres in 1999, and only 35,000 acres planted in 2014. The planted acres of confection sunflowers have generally decreased since 1999. The variability of sunflower acreage could be due to several factors, including sunflower commodity prices, the availability of contracts, soil water at the time of planting, crop insurance requirements, and adoption of cropping
rotations that do not include sunflower. Dryland sunflowers may have fallen out of favor in recent years due to the increasing popularity of dryland corn, especially with the new drought tolerant hybrids coming onto the market. On the other hand, herbicide tolerant sunflowers and new oil traits could lead to an increase of sunflower acreage in coming years.
Colorado State University evaluated commercial and experimental oil and confection sunflower hybrids in eastern Colorado at two limited irrigation and two dryland locations in 2014. The irrigated trial locations were Burlington and Prospect Valley. The two dryland trials were located at Towner (southeast) and Akron (northeast). We lost one trial this year (Prospect Valley confections) due to a hailstorm that defoliated plants by 80%. While the confection trial was lost, the top two oilseed hybrids in the trial at Prospect Valley still yielded more than 2000 pounds per acre. Even with the hail damage,
Figure 1: Confection and Oilseed Sunflower Acres Planted in Colorado from 1995-2014 0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 140,000 160,000 180,000 200,000 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 A cr es Year
Confection and Oilseed Sunflower Acres Planted in Colorado from 1995-2014
Non-Oil Oil
7 oil types from this trial averaged 1800 pounds per acre, indicating good adaptability to our conditions. Results tables for the trials are presented in the following pages. Thirty-seven hybrids with diverse origins and maturities were tested across different irrigated and dryland trial locations. Plot sizes were
approximately 150 ft2 at Burlington and Akron, and 300 ft2 at Prospect Valley and Towner. Seed yields
for all trial varieties are reported in the tables. Yields and oil content (for oil trials) are adjusted to 10% seed moisture content.
8
2014 Limited-Irrigation Oil Sunflower
Hybrid Performance
Trial at Burlington
Br an d H yb rid O il Typ e a H er bi ci de Te ch nol ogy T ra it b 2014 Yield c 2-Y ear A vg. Y ie ld M ois tu re Te st W ei gh t Pla nt H ei gh t Popu la tion Lod gi ng O il C ont ent lb /a c per cen t lb/ bu in pl an ts /a c per cen t per cen t C ropl an 14-572 HO C lear fiel d 3226 -6.9 30. 6 77 16, 655 5.0 37. 7 C ropl an 559 C L NS C lear fiel d 3066 2546 6.9 30. 4 73 22, 554 9.0 39. 5 C ropl an 545 C L NS C lear fiel d 3017 -7.3 31. 7 78 21, 216 2.8 39. 5 M yc oge n 8H 449C LD M HO C lear fiel d 3015 2516 6.5 31. 8 67 22, 004 7.6 41. 3 N us eed A m er icas In c. H or ne t HO C lear fiel d 2970 2513 6.8 29. 9 79 22, 458 5.2 39. 9 C ropl an 432 E NS Expr es sS un 2910 2162 7.1 29. 8 65 21, 714 7.6 37. 0 C ropl an 13-652 C L HO C lear fiel d 2894 2710 7.2 29. 3 66 19, 914 10. 6 39. 3 N us eed A m er icas In c. C am ar o II NS C lear fiel d 2863 2275 6.5 32. 2 68 22, 324 4.4 39. 1 M yc oge n 8H 859C L HO C lear fiel d 2857 -7.3 30. 0 74 22, 845 7.2 39. 7 Sy ng ent a 3732 N S NS N /A 2831 -6.6 30. 1 61 20, 690 9.5 39. 7 Sy ng ent a 3845 H O HO N /A 2715 2500 6.4 30. 1 63 20, 988 11. 4 41. 1 M yc oge n 8N 668S NS N /A 2427 2310 7.6 29. 2 56 19, 281 10. 1 40. 6 N us eed A m er icas In c. Fal co n NS Expr es sS un 2392 2099 8.4 30. 3 62 19, 638 5.7 39. 1 Sy ng ent a 7717 H O /C L/ D M HO C lear fiel d 2185 -6.3 29. 9 67 20, 956 6.4 38. 8 C ropl an 13-08 E HO Expr es sS un 2118 1953 7.1 30. 4 53 20, 535 13. 2 39. 5 M yc oge n 8H 570C L HO C lear fiel d 1467 -6.7 30. 7 51 22, 942 12. 0 38. 8 A vera ge 2685 2358 7.0 30. 4 66 21, 045 8.0 39. 4 d LS D (P <0. 30) 365 a O il ty pe d es ig na tio ns : H O =H ig h ol eic ; N S= N uS un /M id -o le ic . c Yiel ds w er e co rr ect ed to 1 0% m oi st ur e. Pl ot si ze : 5 ' x 3 0' Si te Inf or ma tio n C ol la bor at or : G er har d H ei nt ges Pl an tin g D ate : 6/ 16/ 2014 H ar ves t D at e: 10/ 22/ 2014 Fe rtil iz er : N itr og en at 100 lb /a c and pho sp ho rus a t 40 lb /a c In sect ici de: W ar rior a ppl ie d at 1 .9 2 oz /a c du rin g bl oom st age Irr ig atio n: Pr e-pl an t: 3 in ch es ap pl ied Po st -em er gen ce: 2 in ch es ap pl ied Soi l T ype : Si lt-lo am d If th e di ffer en ce bet w een tw o hy br id y iel ds eq ual s o r ex ceed s t he LS D v al ue, th er e is a 70 % ch an ce th e di ffer en ce is st at is tical ly si gn ifi can t. 20 14 L im ited -I rri ga tio n Oi l S un flo w er Hy bri d Perf orm an ce T ri al a t B url in gt on b H er bi ci de tech no lo gy tr ai t d es ig nat io ns : C lear fiel d= To ler an t t o B ey on d her bi ci de; E xp res sS un =T ol er an t t o Ex pr es s h er bi ci de; N /A =N o her bi ci de trai ts .9
2014 Limited-Irrigation Confection Sunflower
Hybrid Performance
Trial at Burlington
Br an d Hy bri d H er bic id e Te chnol og y Tr ai t a 2014 Yield b 2-Y ear A vg . Y iel d M ois tu re Te st We ig ht Pla nt H ei gh t Popul at ion Lodg ing Ov er 24/ 64 Ov er 22/ 64 Ov er 20/ 64 Ov er 16/ 64 lb /a c lb /a c per ce nt lb /b u in pla nts /a c per ce nt CH S Ro ya l H yb rid 12E X P01 Ex pr essS un 3363 -10. 3 19. 8 75 19, 457 3.5 12. 4 41. 6 78. 8 99. 0 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. X 4334 IM I 3338 2607 12. 8 18. 7 72 16, 712 9.4 6.2 28. 4 67. 6 99. 0 CH S Ro ya l H yb rid 14E X P02 Cle ar fie ld 3330 -9.7 20. 0 78 20, 540 5.2 8.6 26. 0 55. 4 99. 0 Re d Riv er Co m m od itie s 2215 N /A 3308 2749 9.1 20. 7 70 19, 667 7.4 8.8 23. 8 58. 0 99. 2 Re d Riv er Co m m od itie s 2215 C L Cle ar fie ld 3292 2742 10. 3 21. 2 73 19, 097 6.2 3.2 17. 4 48. 2 99. 8 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. X 4237 IM I 3291 -14. 3 20. 1 83 16, 648 4.8 0.2 0.4 2.6 71. 4 CH S Ro ya l H yb rid 14E X P01 N /A 3286 -10. 2 21. 6 79 18, 198 2.7 23. 2 56. 8 82. 8 99. 2 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N SK 12M 018 IM I 3169 -12. 7 19. 1 82 18, 213 4.4 3.8 10. 0 24. 8 95. 6 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N H W 11909 N /A 3036 -10. 2 19. 2 77 18, 200 10. 6 9.8 32. 6 67. 6 98. 6 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N H W 12984 N /A 3035 -19. 4 18. 5 77 9, 741 4.9 12. 0 32. 8 70. 2 98. 4 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. X 5334 IM I 3024 -13. 0 17. 1 75 17, 908 4.3 6.0 29. 2 67. 2 98. 6 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N H W 12983 N /A 2848 -13. 2 19. 7 79 18, 806 2.1 1.6 10. 6 30. 2 97. 8 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. X 5323 IM I 2770 -11. 3 19. 0 74 16, 138 3.9 31. 4 57. 0 80. 2 99. 4 Re d Riv er Co m m od itie s 8015 N /A 2725 2376 10. 4 18. 4 66 16, 531 6.2 6.0 26. 4 63. 2 99. 4 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. X 5326 IM I 2698 -9.9 21. 1 81 18, 879 5.8 7.6 30. 4 69. 0 99. 0 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. X 98578 N /A 2673 2306 9.9 19. 0 76 19, 365 5.1 6.6 27. 8 57. 4 97. 8 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N SK 13M 333 IM I 2619 -10. 4 20. 7 65 19, 288 3.0 7.0 17. 0 37. 2 97. 6 SunO pt a EXO2 45 Cle ar fie ld 2613 -11. 4 19. 8 79 18, 607 6.4 15. 2 53. 8 81. 4 99. 4 Re d Riv er Co m m od itie s 2217 C P Cle ar fie ld P lu s 2506 2276 9.3 19. 7 71 21, 147 4.1 1.4 14. 0 44. 6 99. 4 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N H W 12985 N /A 2406 -9.4 18. 2 79 18, 786 7.8 23. 4 47. 6 72. 8 98. 6 N us ee d A m er ic as In c. N H W 12759 N /A 1985 -10. 2 17. 7 65 19, 281 8.5 20. 6 47. 0 77. 2 99. 6 A ve rage 2920 2509 11. 3 19. 5 75 18, 153 5.5 10. 2 30. 0 58. 9 97. 4 c LS D (P <0. 30) 314 b Y ie ld s w er e co rr ect ed to 1 0% m oi st ur e. Si te In for m at ion Co lla bo ra to r: Ge rh ard He in tg es Pla ntin g D ate : 6/ 16/ 2014 H ar ve st D ate : 10/ 23/ 2014 Fe rtiliz er : N itr og en at 100 lb/ ac a nd ph os phor us a t 40 lb/ ac In se ctic id e: W ar rior a ppl ie d at 1. 92 oz /a c dur ing bl oom st ag e Ir rig atio n: Pr e-pl ant : 3 inc he s a ppl ie d Po st -e m er gen ce: 2 in ch es ap pl ied So il Ty pe : Silt-lo am Seed R et ai ned O ver S cr ee n per cen t 20 14 Lim ited -I rri ga tio n C on fect io n Su nf lo w er H yb ri d Perf orm an ce Tria l a t Bu rl in gt on a Her bi ci de te chnol og y tra it de si gna tions : C le ar fie ld= Tol er ant to B ey ond he rbi ci de ; C le ar fie ld Pl us =T ol er ant to B ey ond he rbi ci de ; E xpr es sS un= Tol er ant to Ex pr es s he rb ic id e; IM I= To le ra nt to Be yo nd h er bic id e (im id az olin on e ch em is try c la ss ); N /A =N o he rb ic id e tra its . c If th e d iff er en ce b et w ee n t w o h yb rid y ie ld s eq ua ls o r ex cee ds th e L SD v al ue, t he re i s a 7 0% c han ce th e d iff er en ce i s s ta tis tica lly si gn ifi ca nt .10
2014 Limited-Irrigation Oil Sunflower
Hybrid Performance
Trial at Pr
ospect
Valley
Br an d H yb rid Oi l T yp e a H er bic id e Te ch nol ogy T ra it b Y ie ld c M ois tu re Tes t W ei gh t Pla nt H ei gh tPop ul at ion Lod gi ng O il C ont ent lb /a c per cen t lb/ bu in pl an ts/a c per cen t per cen t M yc oge n 8H 449C LD M HO C le ar fie ld 2152 5. 5 26. 6 66 23, 499 0. 6 39. 2 Nu Se ed Am er ic as In c. H or net HO C le ar fie ld 2006 5. 2 25. 4 74 26, 852 3. 5 38. 0 Nu Se ed Am er ic as In c. C am ar o II NS C le ar fie ld 1979 5. 1 27. 1 71 28, 050 0. 9 38. 4 M yc oge n 8H 570C L HO C le ar fie ld 1857 5. 3 28. 4 51 25, 772 2. 0 37. 9 M yc oge n 8N 668S NS N /A 1823 7. 0 27. 8 50 23, 358 1. 4 41. 2 M yc oge n 8H 859C L HO C le ar fie ld 1800 6. 0 28. 9 69 25, 350 1. 3 39. 9 Nu Se ed Am er ic as In c. Fal co n NS Expr es sS un 1695 5. 7 30. 5 59 22, 033 1. 2 39. 4 Sy ng ent a 3732 N S NS N /A 1690 5. 3 24. 6 61 26, 420 0. 8 35. 9 Sy ng ent a 7717 H O /C L/ D M HO C le ar fie ld 1652 5. 1 23. 4 60 25, 910 0. 3 35. 2 Sy ng ent a 3845 H O HO N /a 1572 5. 2 24. 3 56 23, 279 0. 6 37. 4 A ve rage 1822 5. 6 26. 7 62 25, 052 1. 3 38. 2 d LS D (P <0. 30) 123 a Oil ty pe d es ig na tio ns : H O =H ig h ol eic ; N S=N uS un /M id -o le ic . c Yie ld s w er e co rr ec te d to 1 0% mo istu re . Pl ot si ze : 10' x 30' Si te In for m at ion C olla bo ra to r: D av id R uppl e Pl an tin g D ate : 6/ 6/ 2014 H ar ves t D at e: 10/ 20/ 2014 Fe rtil iz er : Po ul try m anur e appl ie d at 4 to ns /a c H er bic id e: So nal an In se ctic id e: W arri or an d Lo rs ba n20
14
L
im
ited
-I
rri
ga
tio
n O
il S
un
flo
w
er H
yb
ri
d P
erf
orm
an
ce T
ri
al
a
t P
ro
sp
ect
V
al
ley
b H er bi ci de te chno lo gy tr ai t de si gna tio ns : C le ar fie ld= To le ra nt to B ey ond he rbi ci de ; E xpr es sS un= To le ra nt to E xpr es s he rbi ci de ; N /A =N o he rbi ci de tra its . d If the di ff er enc e be tw ee n tw o hy br id yi el ds e qua ls or e xc ee ds the L SD v al ue , t he re is a 70% c ha nc e the di ff er enc e is st at is tic al ly si gni fic ant .11
2014 Dryland Oil Sunflower
Hybrid Performance
Trial at
Akr
on
Br an d H yb rid O il Typ e a H er bi ci de Te chnol ogy T ra it b Y ie ld c M ois tu re Te st W ei ght Pla nt H ei ght Popul at ion Lodgi ng O il C ont ent lb /a c per cen t lb /b u in pla nts /a c per cen t per cen t Sy nge nt a 3845 H O HO N /A 2239 5. 9 31. 0 49 7, 192 9. 5 39. 9 M yco gen 8H 570C L HO C le ar fie ld 2214 5. 6 28. 5 39 9, 616 5. 0 40. 3 C ropl an 13-652 C L HO C le ar fie ld 2184 5. 6 28. 1 48 7, 676 7. 6 38. 1 M yco gen 8N 668S NS N /A 2116 6. 8 29. 9 43 9, 371 15. 7 38. 8 C ropl an 545 C L NS C le ar fie ld 1960 6. 9 28. 3 55 7, 877 16. 7 38. 1 M yco gen 8H 449C LD M HO C le ar fie ld 1860 6. 5 30. 8 51 9, 701 12. 9 40. 7 Sy nge nt a 3732 N S NS N /A 1749 5. 7 28. 4 48 8, 543 22. 9 39. 2 M yco gen 8H 859C L HO C le ar fie ld 1742 7. 3 28. 2 57 8, 650 12. 4 38. 3 Sy nge nt a 7717 H O /C L/ D M HO C le ar fie ld 1624 5. 8 29. 9 53 8, 515 12. 1 36. 4 C ropl an 432 E NS Expr es sS un 1590 5. 9 28. 4 50 8, 591 22. 0 36. 2 C ropl an 14-572 HO C le ar fie ld 1511 6. 4 27. 0 59 5, 703 25. 9 37. 1 C ropl an 559 C L NS C le ar fie ld 1398 5. 6 29. 2 60 9, 002 31. 2 38. 6 A ve rage 1849 6. 1 29. 0 51 8, 370 16. 2 38. 5 d LS D (P <0. 30) 264 a O il ty pe d es ig na tio ns : H O =H ig h ole ic ; N S= N uS un /M id -o le ic . c Y iel ds w er e co rr ect ed to 1 0% m oi st ur e. Pl ot si ze : 5' x 30' Si te I nf orm at io n C olla bo ra to r: C en tral G re at Pl ai ns R es ear ch C en te r Pla ntin g D ate : 6/ 12/ 2014 H ar ve st D ate : 10/ 24/ 2014 H er bi ci de:2014
D
ryl
an
d
O
il
Su
nf
low
er
H
yb
ri
d
Pe
rf
or
m
an
ce
T
ri
al
at
A
kr
on
(N
or
th
eas
t)
b H er bi ci de te chnol ogy tr ai t de si gna tions : C le ar fie ld=T ol er ant to B ey ond he rbi ci de ; E xpr es sS un=T ol er ant to Expr es s he rbi ci de ; N /A =N o he rb ic id e tra its . d If t he d iff er en ce b et w ee n t w o h yb rid y ie ld s e qu al s o r e xc ee ds th e L SD v al ue , t he re is a 7 0% c han ce th e d iff er en ce is st at is tic al ly sig nif ic an t. R oundup, A im , a nd Spa rta n appl ie d w ith hoode d spr ay er12
2014 Dryland Confection Sunflower
Hybrid Performance
Trial at
Akr
on
Brand Hy brid Herbicide Technolog y Trait b Yield c Moisture Test Weig ht Plant Heig ht Population Lodg ing Ov er 24/64 Ov er 22/64 Ov er 20/64 Ov er 16/64 lb/ac percent lb/bu in plants/ac percent Red Riv er Com m odities 2215 N/A 2048 8. 6 20. 7 60 6, 100 14. 5 6. 2 37. 0 72. 0 99. 0 Red Riv er Com m odities 8015 N/A 1964 8. 7 17. 5 57 5, 520 26. 0 18. 0 46. 8 75. 8 99. 2 Red Riv er Com m odities 2217 CP Clearf ield Plus 1929 9. 8 18. 7 56 6, 623 11. 1 11. 4 34. 6 59. 4 99. 0 Red Riv er Com m odities 2215 CL Clearf ield 1839 9. 0 19. 4 63 5, 104 10. 6 11. 0 43. 0 72. 2 99. 0 Average 1945 9. 0 19. 1 59 5, 837 15. 6 11. 7 40. 4 69. 9 99. 1 d LSD (P <0. 30) NS a Oil ty pe desig nations: HO= Hig h oleic; NS =NuSun/Mid-oleic. c Yields w ere corrected to 10% m oisture. Plot size: 5' x 30' Site In form ation Collaborator: Central Great Plains Research Center Planting Date: 6/12/2014 Harv est Date: 10/24/2014 Herbicide: Roundup, Aim , and Spartan applied w ith hooded spray er d NS= the yield results w ere not sig nif icantly dif ferent from each other. percent Seed Retained Ov er Screen2014 D
ry
lan
d C
on
fe
cti
on
S
un
flow
er
H
yb
ri
d P
er
for
m
an
ce
Tr
ial
at A
kr
on
(N
or
th
eas
t)
b Herbicide technolog y trait desig nations: Clearf ield= Tolerant to Bey ond herbicide; Ex pressS un= Tolerant to Ex press herbicide; N/A= No herbicide traits.13
2014 Dryland Oil Sunflower
Hybrid Performance
Trial at
Towner
Br an d H yb rid O il Typ e a H er bi ci de Te ch nol ogy T ra it b Yi el d c M ois tu re Te st We ig ht Pla nt He ig ht Po pu la tio n Lod gi ng O il C ont ent lb /a c per cen t lb /b u in pla nts /a c per cen t per cen t M yc oge n 8H 859C L HO C lear fiel d 467 6.1 25. 2 48 6, 788 19. 3 33. 8 M yc oge n 8N 668S NS N/ A 452 5.9 25. 5 38 5, 917 35. 9 33. 6 Sy ng en ta 3732 N S NS N/ A 445 6.0 25. 6 41 6, 873 28. 4 32. 3 C rop la n 432 E NS Ex pr essS un 420 6.0 24. 1 44 7, 659 21. 8 32. 1 M yc oge n 8H 449C LD M HO C lear fiel d 381 5.9 25. 1 45 7, 696 21. 8 33. 6 C rop la n 545 C L NS C lear fiel d 370 5.9 24. 9 48 7, 115 45. 5 32. 7 C rop la n 13-652 C L HO C lear fiel d 360 5.9 25. 2 46 9, 874 13. 7 33. 2 Sy ng en ta 7717 H O /C L/ D M HO C lear fiel d 351 5.9 24. 9 46 6, 824 31. 3 33. 2 M yc oge n 8H 570C L HO C lear fiel d 340 5.8 25. 5 32 8, 373 19. 9 33. 8 Sy ng en ta 3845 H O HO N/ A 326 5.9 24. 5 37 9, 438 12. 5 32. 9 C rop la n 14-572 HO C lear fiel d 321 5.9 24. 4 50 7, 841 14. 9 33. 1 C rop la n 559 C L NS C lear fiel d 280 5.9 24. 7 48 10, 261 20. 2 33. 8 Av era ge 376 5.9 25. 0 43 7, 888 23. 8 33. 2 a Oil ty pe d es ig na tio ns : H O =H ig h ole ic ; N S= N uSu n/M id -o le ic . c Yi el ds wer e co rrect ed to 1 0% m oi st ur e. Pl ot si ze : 1 0' x 3 0' Sit e Inf or m at io n C ol la bor at or : Sean H ar kn es s Pl an tin g Dat e: 6/ 17/ 2014 H ar ves t Dat e: 10/ 21/ 2014 C omme nt s: Fe rtiliz er : H er bi ci de: In sect ici de: M us ta ng M ax x at 4 oz /a c and W hi rlw ind at 6 oz /a c on 8/ 15/ 14. Pr ow l H 20 a t 3 2 o z/ ac , S pa rta n C ha rg e a t 1 .5 o z/ ac o n 6 /6 /1 4. R ou nd U p R T 3 a t 4 0 o z/ ac , C la ss A ct a t 3 2 o z/ ac , a nd Spa rta n C ha rg e at 1 oz /a c on 6/ 18/ 14. H ot an d dr y co nd iti on s wer e ex per ien ced d ur in g th e flo wer in g an d gr ai n fil l s tag es , wh ich res ul ted in lo wer y iel ds .20
14
D
ry
la
nd
Oi
l S
un
flo
w
er
Hy
bri
d
Perf
orm
an
ce
Tri
al
a
t To
w
ner
(S
outhea
st)
Y ie ld tri al da ta c oul d no t be int er pr et ed due to the hi gh de gr ee o f f ie ld va ria bi lit y. T he y ie ld re sul ts sho ul d no t be us ed by fa rm er s f or se le ct ing supe rio r hy br ids fo r pl ant ing . b H er bic id e te ch no lo gy tr ait de sig na tio ns : C le ar fie ld =T ole ra nt to B ey on d he rb ic id e; Ex pr es sSu n= To le ra nt to E xp re ss h er bic id e; N /A =N o he rb ic id e tra its . Prep la nt : N itr og en a t 4 .5 lb /a c, p ho sp ho ru s a t 1 1 l b/ ac , p ot as si um a t 2 .5 l b/ ac , s ul fu r a t 2 .5 lb /a c, a nd z in c a t 0 .5 lb /a c14
