university of delaware variety trial results
UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE
VARIETY TRIAL RESULTS
Ed Kee and Emmalea Ernest _________ University of Delaware Carvel Research and Education Center 16483 County Seat Highway Georgetown, DE 19947
2006
Table of Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 2 Materials and Methods................................................................................................................. 2 Discussion of Trial Results ........................................................................................................... 3 Trial Results .................................................................................................................................. 4 Table 1. Stand Counts for Sugary Enhanced Varieties 27 DAP........................................... 4 Table 2. Stand Counts for Supersweet Varieties 28 DAP ..................................................... 4 Table 3. Harvest Data for Sugary Enhanced Varieties ......................................................... 5 Table 4. Harvest Data for Supersweet Varieties .................................................................... 5 Table 5. Ear Characteristics for Sugary Enhanced Varieties............................................... 6 Table 6. Ear Characteristics for Supersweet Varieties ......................................................... 6 Table 7. Plant Characteristics Sugary Enhanced Varieties .................................................. 7 Table 8. Plant Characteristics of Supersweet Varieties ........................................................ 7 Appendix A: Photos of 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Trial Entries.......................................... 8 Sugary Enhanced Varieties...................................................................................................... 8 Supersweet Varieties............................................................................................................... 10 Appendix B: Weather Summary for the 2006 Growing Season............................................. 12
i
Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the following people and companies for their support, interest and guidance of the 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Variety Trials. Participating Seed Companies Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Crookham Co. Syngenta Seeds – Rogers Brand Our thanks to Victor Green and the staff at the University of Delaware Research & Education Center, Georgetown, for their assistance in planting, spraying, and irrigating the trials. We also thank S.E.W. Friel for the use of their cutter and moisture analyzer during the harvest of the trials. Finally, we thank the following students for their assistance during the harvest: Morgan Ellis, Akela Marsh, Ryan Pepper, and Ashley Vent.
1
2006 University of Delaware Processing Sweet Corn Variety Trial Ed Kee and Emmalea Ernest University of Delaware, Elbert N. and Ann V. Carvel Research & Education Center 16483 County Seat Highway Georgetown, Delaware 19947 (302) 856-7303 [email protected]; [email protected]
Introduction The 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Variety trial was conducted at the University of Delaware Research and Education Center in Georgetown, DE. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate new sugary enhanced and supersweet, yellow, processing sweet corn varieties for yield and quality factors under Delaware growing conditions. Similar trials were conducted in Delaware in 1999, 2000, and 2002. The sugary enhanced varieties were planted in a separate field from the supersweet varieties to meet isolation requirements. Consequently, se varieties were only statistically compared with the other se varieties and supersweet varieties compared with other supersweet varieties. Results are reported as two separate trials.
Materials and Methods Planting and Crop Management Six varieties were planted in the sugary enhanced trial and eight in the supersweet trial. Planting Date: Sugary Enhanced Trial – April 26, 2006 Supersweet Trial – April 25, 2006 Fertilizer:
Applied 200 lbs/A of 0-0-60 prior to planting. Applied 19-18.5-0-3 (N-P-K-S) starter fertilizer 2x2 at 12.5 gallons/A at planting. Sidedressed with 37 gallons/A of 30% UAN.
Weed Control: Applied Bicep II Magnum at 1.6 quarts/A pre-emergence. Plots were cultivated twice. Planting:
Trials were planted using a Monosem 4-row planter. Rows were spaced 30 inches apart and seeds in the row were spaced 8 inches apart.
Plot Design:
4-row plots, 75 feet in length were arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications.
Irrigation:
Sugary Enhanced Trial – stationary gun – 1 to 1.5 inches/week as needed Supersweet Trial – overhead sprinkler irrigation – 1 to 1.5 inches/week as needed
Insecticide:
Applied Force 3G at 5.5 lbs/A in the furrow at planting. Applied Warrior at 3.84 fl. oz./A on July 1, 5, 8, 12, 15, 19, and 22.
2
Varieties Entered in the 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Variety Trial Variety GH8267 6223 6462 Bonus (check) Tamarack CSUYP2-28 ACX 725Y Protégé ACX 1262 ACX 1138 ACcentuate SS Jubilee Plus (check) Overland Magnum II (GSS-2718)
Company Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Crookham Co. Crookham Co. Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Syngenta - Rogers Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers
Isolation Group Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet
Harvest Procedure Before harvest a thirty-foot section in one of the two center rows of the plot was flagged and designated for harvest. On July 10th (75 or 76 DAP) the plants in the harvest section were counted and plant height and height to the first ear was determined for ten plants in each plot. Harvest began on July 18th (83 or 84 DAP) and was completed on July 28th (93 or 94 DAP). Ears were hand harvested from the thirty-foot harvest section. Ears were counted and weighed in-husk and husked. The corn was cut from the ears using a commercial cutter and the percent moisture was measured using a CEM Smart System microwave moisture analyzer. The ear length, ear diameter, row number and kernel depth was determined for a sample of five ears from each plot.
Discussion of Trial Results Plants emerged well and there were no significant differences in stand between the varieties (Tables 1 and 2). Harvest and yield data for the varieties are given in Tables 3 and 4. Varieties are ordered according to the weight of cut corn. Tables 5 and 6 present ear characteristic data based on a 15 ear sample (5 ears from each replication). Tables 7 and 8 present data on plant height and the height of the first ear from the ground. Photographs of each variety are in Appendix A. A weather summary for the 2006 growing season is found in Appendix B. The growing season began very dry with less than 1.2 inches of rain recorded from April 25th to June 1st. Two major rain events occurred in June. On June 2 the research farm received 3.96 inches of rain and on June 25, 5.26 inches. The June 25 rainfall was followed by >2 additional inches of rain over the next three days. The excessive rainfall of late June flooded the third replication of the sugary enhanced trial plot and delayed maturity in that area of the field. Consequently, the third 3
replications of most of the varieties in the sugary enhanced trial were harvested three to four days after the first two replications were harvested. The highest yielding sugary enhanced varieties were Tamarack, Bonus, and CSUYP2-28. However the percent moisture at harvest for the se varieties was not as consistent as would be desirable for good comparison (range of 67.5% to 76.5%) due to the differing rates of maturity between replications. Percent moisture at harvest was much more consistent in the supersweet trial, with a range of 75.0 % to 77.7%. The highest yielding supersweet varieties were Overland, SS Jubilee Plus, and Magnum II.
Trial Results Table 1. Stand Counts for Sugary Enhanced Varieties 27 DAP Variety Bonus 6462 CSUYP2-28 GH8267 6223 Tamarack LSD p-value
Plants/20 ft. of Row 31.7 a 31.5 a 30.7 a 30.0 a 29.8 a 28.5 a NS 0.0950
In-Row Spacing (inches) 8 8 8 8 8 8
Plants/A 26135 26135 26135 26135 26135 26135
Table 2. Stand Counts for Supersweet Varieties 28 DAP Variety ACcentuate Overland ACX 1262 Magnum II Protégé ACX 725Y SS Jubilee Plus ACX 1138 LSD p-value
Plants/20 ft. of Row 32.3 a 31.5 a 30.0 a 29.8 a 29.2 a 28.8 a 27.5 a 27.2 a NS 0.0665
In-Row Spacing (inches) 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9
Plants/A 29868 26135 26135 26135 26135 26135 23231 23231
4
Table 3. Harvest Data for Sugary Enhanced Varieties Days to Harvest 87 90 86 85 87 84
Variety Tamarack Bonus CSUYP2-28 6223 6462 GH8267 LSD p-value
Weight Unhusked Ears/A (tons) 9.833 a 8.692 ab 8.402 ab 7.547 b 5.369 c 5.469 c 1.895 0.0018
Weight Husked Ears/A (tons) 6.356 a 6.100 ab 5.345 ab 4.954 bc 3.715 cd 3.338 d 1.296 0.0019
Weight Cut Corn/A (lbs) 6854 a 6400 a 5777 a 5376 a 3814 b 2973 b 1484.8 0.0011
Weight Husked Ears/A (tons) 6.652 a 5.726 ab 5.541 ab 4.585 bc 4.106 c 4.207 c 4.220 c 4.691 bc 1.2683 0.0063
Weight Cut Corn/A (lbs) 7438 a 6683 a 6017 ab 4852 bc 4840 bc 4801 bc 4705 bc 4313 c 1634.2 0.0095
% Recovery
% Moisture
35.1 37.0 34.5 35.2 35.6 27.5 4.66 0.0138
68.6 67.5 72.9 74.6 73.5 76.5 3.62 0.0016
a a a a a b
b b a a a a
# Ears/A 24394 25362 24200 23232 17617 20522 NS 0.2602
a a a a a a
Ears/Plant 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.96 0.70 0.78 NS 0.3578
a a a a a a
Table 4. Harvest Data for Supersweet Varieties Variety Overland SS Jubilee Plus Magnum II (GSS-2718) ACX 1138 ACX 1262 ACX 725Y Protégé ACcentuate LSD p-value
Days to Harvest 94 91 91 86 90 84 90 86
Weight Unhusked Ears/A (tons) 8.456 a 8.108 a 8.164 a 6.211 b 5.769 b 6.147 b 5.618 b 7.161 ab 1.8857 0.0218
% Recovery
% Moisture
43.9 41.7 36.8 39.1 42.4 38.9 41.6 29.9 4.12 0.0001
76.2 76.0 77.4 77.3 75.0 75.0 77.3 77.7 1.2831 0.0013
a ab c bc ab bc ab d
bc c ab ab c c ab a
# Ears/A 24200 23038 19941 23232 18586 23038 20328 23038 NS 0.4302
a a a a a a a a
Ears/Plant 0.82 0.89 0.84 1.00 0.70 0.95 0.90 0.91 NS 0.2153
a a a a a a a a
5
Table 5. Ear Characteristics for Sugary Enhanced Varieties Variety
Ear Weight (lbs)
Tamarack Bonus CSUYP2-28 6462 6223 GH8267 LSD p-value
0.52 0.48 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.33 0.090 0.0154
a ab ab ab b c
Ear Length (cm) 20.9 18.8 19.1 19.9 19.9 19.2 0.997 0.0007
a c bc bc bc bc
Ear Diameter (cm) 4.6 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.0 0.2354
VARIETY TRIAL RESULTS
Ed Kee and Emmalea Ernest _________ University of Delaware Carvel Research and Education Center 16483 County Seat Highway Georgetown, DE 19947
2006
Table of Contents Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................... 2 Materials and Methods................................................................................................................. 2 Discussion of Trial Results ........................................................................................................... 3 Trial Results .................................................................................................................................. 4 Table 1. Stand Counts for Sugary Enhanced Varieties 27 DAP........................................... 4 Table 2. Stand Counts for Supersweet Varieties 28 DAP ..................................................... 4 Table 3. Harvest Data for Sugary Enhanced Varieties ......................................................... 5 Table 4. Harvest Data for Supersweet Varieties .................................................................... 5 Table 5. Ear Characteristics for Sugary Enhanced Varieties............................................... 6 Table 6. Ear Characteristics for Supersweet Varieties ......................................................... 6 Table 7. Plant Characteristics Sugary Enhanced Varieties .................................................. 7 Table 8. Plant Characteristics of Supersweet Varieties ........................................................ 7 Appendix A: Photos of 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Trial Entries.......................................... 8 Sugary Enhanced Varieties...................................................................................................... 8 Supersweet Varieties............................................................................................................... 10 Appendix B: Weather Summary for the 2006 Growing Season............................................. 12
i
Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank the following people and companies for their support, interest and guidance of the 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Variety Trials. Participating Seed Companies Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Crookham Co. Syngenta Seeds – Rogers Brand Our thanks to Victor Green and the staff at the University of Delaware Research & Education Center, Georgetown, for their assistance in planting, spraying, and irrigating the trials. We also thank S.E.W. Friel for the use of their cutter and moisture analyzer during the harvest of the trials. Finally, we thank the following students for their assistance during the harvest: Morgan Ellis, Akela Marsh, Ryan Pepper, and Ashley Vent.
1
2006 University of Delaware Processing Sweet Corn Variety Trial Ed Kee and Emmalea Ernest University of Delaware, Elbert N. and Ann V. Carvel Research & Education Center 16483 County Seat Highway Georgetown, Delaware 19947 (302) 856-7303 [email protected]; [email protected]
Introduction The 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Variety trial was conducted at the University of Delaware Research and Education Center in Georgetown, DE. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate new sugary enhanced and supersweet, yellow, processing sweet corn varieties for yield and quality factors under Delaware growing conditions. Similar trials were conducted in Delaware in 1999, 2000, and 2002. The sugary enhanced varieties were planted in a separate field from the supersweet varieties to meet isolation requirements. Consequently, se varieties were only statistically compared with the other se varieties and supersweet varieties compared with other supersweet varieties. Results are reported as two separate trials.
Materials and Methods Planting and Crop Management Six varieties were planted in the sugary enhanced trial and eight in the supersweet trial. Planting Date: Sugary Enhanced Trial – April 26, 2006 Supersweet Trial – April 25, 2006 Fertilizer:
Applied 200 lbs/A of 0-0-60 prior to planting. Applied 19-18.5-0-3 (N-P-K-S) starter fertilizer 2x2 at 12.5 gallons/A at planting. Sidedressed with 37 gallons/A of 30% UAN.
Weed Control: Applied Bicep II Magnum at 1.6 quarts/A pre-emergence. Plots were cultivated twice. Planting:
Trials were planted using a Monosem 4-row planter. Rows were spaced 30 inches apart and seeds in the row were spaced 8 inches apart.
Plot Design:
4-row plots, 75 feet in length were arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications.
Irrigation:
Sugary Enhanced Trial – stationary gun – 1 to 1.5 inches/week as needed Supersweet Trial – overhead sprinkler irrigation – 1 to 1.5 inches/week as needed
Insecticide:
Applied Force 3G at 5.5 lbs/A in the furrow at planting. Applied Warrior at 3.84 fl. oz./A on July 1, 5, 8, 12, 15, 19, and 22.
2
Varieties Entered in the 2006 Processing Sweet Corn Variety Trial Variety GH8267 6223 6462 Bonus (check) Tamarack CSUYP2-28 ACX 725Y Protégé ACX 1262 ACX 1138 ACcentuate SS Jubilee Plus (check) Overland Magnum II (GSS-2718)
Company Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Crookham Co. Crookham Co. Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Syngenta - Rogers Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Abbott & Cobb, Inc. Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers Syngenta - Rogers
Isolation Group Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Sugary Enhanced Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet Supersweet
Harvest Procedure Before harvest a thirty-foot section in one of the two center rows of the plot was flagged and designated for harvest. On July 10th (75 or 76 DAP) the plants in the harvest section were counted and plant height and height to the first ear was determined for ten plants in each plot. Harvest began on July 18th (83 or 84 DAP) and was completed on July 28th (93 or 94 DAP). Ears were hand harvested from the thirty-foot harvest section. Ears were counted and weighed in-husk and husked. The corn was cut from the ears using a commercial cutter and the percent moisture was measured using a CEM Smart System microwave moisture analyzer. The ear length, ear diameter, row number and kernel depth was determined for a sample of five ears from each plot.
Discussion of Trial Results Plants emerged well and there were no significant differences in stand between the varieties (Tables 1 and 2). Harvest and yield data for the varieties are given in Tables 3 and 4. Varieties are ordered according to the weight of cut corn. Tables 5 and 6 present ear characteristic data based on a 15 ear sample (5 ears from each replication). Tables 7 and 8 present data on plant height and the height of the first ear from the ground. Photographs of each variety are in Appendix A. A weather summary for the 2006 growing season is found in Appendix B. The growing season began very dry with less than 1.2 inches of rain recorded from April 25th to June 1st. Two major rain events occurred in June. On June 2 the research farm received 3.96 inches of rain and on June 25, 5.26 inches. The June 25 rainfall was followed by >2 additional inches of rain over the next three days. The excessive rainfall of late June flooded the third replication of the sugary enhanced trial plot and delayed maturity in that area of the field. Consequently, the third 3
replications of most of the varieties in the sugary enhanced trial were harvested three to four days after the first two replications were harvested. The highest yielding sugary enhanced varieties were Tamarack, Bonus, and CSUYP2-28. However the percent moisture at harvest for the se varieties was not as consistent as would be desirable for good comparison (range of 67.5% to 76.5%) due to the differing rates of maturity between replications. Percent moisture at harvest was much more consistent in the supersweet trial, with a range of 75.0 % to 77.7%. The highest yielding supersweet varieties were Overland, SS Jubilee Plus, and Magnum II.
Trial Results Table 1. Stand Counts for Sugary Enhanced Varieties 27 DAP Variety Bonus 6462 CSUYP2-28 GH8267 6223 Tamarack LSD p-value
Plants/20 ft. of Row 31.7 a 31.5 a 30.7 a 30.0 a 29.8 a 28.5 a NS 0.0950
In-Row Spacing (inches) 8 8 8 8 8 8
Plants/A 26135 26135 26135 26135 26135 26135
Table 2. Stand Counts for Supersweet Varieties 28 DAP Variety ACcentuate Overland ACX 1262 Magnum II Protégé ACX 725Y SS Jubilee Plus ACX 1138 LSD p-value
Plants/20 ft. of Row 32.3 a 31.5 a 30.0 a 29.8 a 29.2 a 28.8 a 27.5 a 27.2 a NS 0.0665
In-Row Spacing (inches) 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9
Plants/A 29868 26135 26135 26135 26135 26135 23231 23231
4
Table 3. Harvest Data for Sugary Enhanced Varieties Days to Harvest 87 90 86 85 87 84
Variety Tamarack Bonus CSUYP2-28 6223 6462 GH8267 LSD p-value
Weight Unhusked Ears/A (tons) 9.833 a 8.692 ab 8.402 ab 7.547 b 5.369 c 5.469 c 1.895 0.0018
Weight Husked Ears/A (tons) 6.356 a 6.100 ab 5.345 ab 4.954 bc 3.715 cd 3.338 d 1.296 0.0019
Weight Cut Corn/A (lbs) 6854 a 6400 a 5777 a 5376 a 3814 b 2973 b 1484.8 0.0011
Weight Husked Ears/A (tons) 6.652 a 5.726 ab 5.541 ab 4.585 bc 4.106 c 4.207 c 4.220 c 4.691 bc 1.2683 0.0063
Weight Cut Corn/A (lbs) 7438 a 6683 a 6017 ab 4852 bc 4840 bc 4801 bc 4705 bc 4313 c 1634.2 0.0095
% Recovery
% Moisture
35.1 37.0 34.5 35.2 35.6 27.5 4.66 0.0138
68.6 67.5 72.9 74.6 73.5 76.5 3.62 0.0016
a a a a a b
b b a a a a
# Ears/A 24394 25362 24200 23232 17617 20522 NS 0.2602
a a a a a a
Ears/Plant 0.92 0.80 0.92 0.96 0.70 0.78 NS 0.3578
a a a a a a
Table 4. Harvest Data for Supersweet Varieties Variety Overland SS Jubilee Plus Magnum II (GSS-2718) ACX 1138 ACX 1262 ACX 725Y Protégé ACcentuate LSD p-value
Days to Harvest 94 91 91 86 90 84 90 86
Weight Unhusked Ears/A (tons) 8.456 a 8.108 a 8.164 a 6.211 b 5.769 b 6.147 b 5.618 b 7.161 ab 1.8857 0.0218
% Recovery
% Moisture
43.9 41.7 36.8 39.1 42.4 38.9 41.6 29.9 4.12 0.0001
76.2 76.0 77.4 77.3 75.0 75.0 77.3 77.7 1.2831 0.0013
a ab c bc ab bc ab d
bc c ab ab c c ab a
# Ears/A 24200 23038 19941 23232 18586 23038 20328 23038 NS 0.4302
a a a a a a a a
Ears/Plant 0.82 0.89 0.84 1.00 0.70 0.95 0.90 0.91 NS 0.2153
a a a a a a a a
5
Table 5. Ear Characteristics for Sugary Enhanced Varieties Variety
Ear Weight (lbs)
Tamarack Bonus CSUYP2-28 6462 6223 GH8267 LSD p-value
0.52 0.48 0.44 0.43 0.42 0.33 0.090 0.0154
a ab ab ab b c
Ear Length (cm) 20.9 18.8 19.1 19.9 19.9 19.2 0.997 0.0007
a c bc bc bc bc
Ear Diameter (cm) 4.6 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.3 4.0 0.2354
