816-Lancaster Farming, Saturday, May 26,2001
2000 Pennsylvania
Soybean Performance Report
Soybean tests are conducted annually to provide interested persons with information regarding the performance of
soybeans grown m Pennsylvania This report summarizes performance results for 2000
The shorter season varieties (Group I, 11. and early III) were tested at the Russell E Larson Agricultural
Research Center at Rock Springs in Centre C ounty The longer maturing varieties (Groups 111 and IV) were tested
at the Southeast Agricultural Research and Extension Center situated in Lancaster County A trial planted after small
grains harvest was also conducted m Lancaster County
Herbicide tolerant varieties (glyphosalc RR and sulfonylurea STS) were tested in separate Inals
Procedures The private seed company entries m this test were those chosen by the companies for testing The
public varieties were chosen based upon previous tests results
The plots in Centre County had 5 rows, each 12 feet long Rows were spaced 7 inches apart Each plot was
trimmed to 9 feet, and all 5 rows were harvested Ihe Centre County trials were planted on May 31
(n Lancaster County, the full-season and double-crop trial plots had four rows with 15-inch-row spacing, and
each was 20 feet long Plots were trimmed to 18 feet and two center rows were harvested The Lancaster Count)
full-season trials were planted on June 2 All double crop Inals were seeded on July 5
The double-crop trials were irrigated the end of July with I acre inch of water
Seeding rates of the Centre and Lancaster county full season trials were adjusted to obtain approximately
150,000 plants per acre Each cultivar was replicated four times in all Inals In the double-crop trial, the seeding rate
was adjusted to obtain approximately 200,000 plants per acre
The following observations were made for some or all of the tests (Tables 1-6)
Yield was calculated after all the seed weights were adjusted to 13 percent moisture
Matuntv is the date when approximately 95 percent of pods were ripe
Height is the average length of plants from the ground to the tip of the mam stem
Lodging was rated in all tests as follows
1 = almost all plants erect
2 = all plants leaning slightly or a few plants down
3 = all plants leaning moderately, or 25-50 percent of the plants down
4 = all plants leaning considerably, or 50-80 percent of the plants down
5 = almost all plants down
Seed quality was rated according to the following scale
1 = very good
2 = good
3 = fair
4 = poor
5 = very poor
Seed size gives the approximate number of seeds in one pound
Interpretation of results
Variety performance differences arc caused partially by genetic differences and partially by soil variation and other
environmental variations which cannot be adequately controlled Thus, small differences in performance may have
no significance Multiple-year averages are a more valid indication of the performance of a specific vai icty than arc
data for a single year Statistical procedures have been used for the most important characteristics to allow
meaningful comparisons of variety averages at a particular location A standard least significant difference (LSD)
value is provided for comparing varieties Any difference between two variety averages that exceeds the LSD value
-is considered significant and not simply a result of uncontrolled environmental variation
The value of coefficient of variation (C V) is a measure of relative variation useful in evaluating the precision
achieved in an experiment In gram and forage (rials, for example, (he CV value for yield is often between 5 and 15
percent Confidence in the reliability of the experimental results declines as the CV value increases Uncontrollable
or unmeasurable variations in soil fertility, soil drainage, and other environmental factors contribute to increased CV
values
Growing conditions
Conditions during the 2000 growing season were charactci izcd by below normal temperatures Only June in
Lancaster County had temperatures above normal The rest of the giowmg months in Lancaster and all of the
months in Centre County had below normal temperatures Despite the cool growing season, soybean were mature
enough in all tnals before a killing frost occurred Rainfall was below normal May and July in Centre County and
July and August at the Lancaster site
Prepared by John Yocum, senior research associate, and Elwood Hatley, professor of agronomy
Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension, University Park, Pennsylvania
Where trade names appear, no discrimination is intended, and no endorsement by Penn Slate Cooperative Extension
is implied
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of Congress May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation
with the U S Department of Agriculture and The Pennsylvania Legislature T R Alter, Director of the Cooperative
Extension Service The Pennsylvania State University
The Pennsylvania State University, in compliance with fcdcial and state laws, is committed to the policy that all
persons shall have equal access to programs, admission, and employment without regard to race, religion, sex,
national origin, handicap, age, or status as a disabled or Vietnam era veteran Direct all affirmative action inquiries
to the Affirmative Action Office, The Pennsylvania State Umvcisity, 201 Willard Building, University Park, PA
16802, (814)863-0471
File No IVC4a-2
I his research was supported in part by funds supplied by The Pennsylvania Soybean Checkoff Board
liihli' I. Soybean unu’l\ pa fin millin’ m l.niuiislci Cinilin, 2000.
Vicld, lleij’lit,
bu/A Matunty Indies
Brand
Fntn
Public
Public
Public
VVilkcn
Public
VVilkcn
Public
Clicmgro
C Mrs I
Public
Wilken
Lud.i
LN92-7369
Resnik
3447
Darby
3442
Probsl
3888
D 385
General
WEB 72
3305
MA3420
WEBSB
4I99STS
542-H1
3468
4005
APK 364
APK 392
3494
3369 N
S3B-T8
APK 182
3467 N
Williams 82
MA3555
Slressland
MA3901
4034
403 IN
Dynagro
Mid-Altantic
Wilken
Clicingro
NK
Wilken
Rolirer
Agway
Agway
Wilken
Dynagro
NK
Agway
Wilken
Public
Mid Atlantic
Public
Mid-Allantic
Wilken
Wilken
Mean
LSD ( 05)
4M291
70 0
08 6
Seed Si/c,
Lodging quality Secds/lb
Table 2. RRSothcun vanel) petformance m Unuaner County, 2000.
Brand Entry
DKB3S-51
DKB36-51
D37ORR
DeKalb
DeKalb
Garst
Wilken
D> nagro
NK
3464 RR
1370 RR
NKXO39R
3500 RR
3399 RR
APK 374 RR
DKB3B-51
MA4OOIRR
AG3702
3498 RR
D399RR/N
MA3444RR
WE67ORR
MA422ORR
AP4OO4RR/N
APK 404 RR
3497 RR
Chemgro
Dynagro
Agway
DeKalb
Mid-Atlantic
Asgrow
Wilken
Garst
Mid-Altantic
Wilken
Mid-Atlantic
Agnpro
Agway
Wilken
APK397RR
542-M1
MA372ORR
3700 RR
AG3901
3388 RR
DKB44-51
APK 398 RR
3394 RR
AG4403
3900 RR
MA42IIRR
CX444cRR
AP43I9RR/N
D437RR/N
Agway
NK
Mid-Atlantic
Chemgro
Asgrow
Dynagro
DeKalb
Agway
Dynagro
Asgrow
Chemgro
Mid-AtlantiL
DeKalb
Agnpro
Garsl
Mean
LSD (05)
CV%
Table 3. STS Sothean tanclypeifmmance in l,nnca\tei County, 2000.
Yield, Height,
Brand Entry Bu/A Maturity inches
Chemgro 4I99STS
Mid-Atlantic MA4OIOSTS
Dynagro 3402STS
Wilken 4019STS
NK S4O-CI
Wilken 4012STS
Agway APK.4I4STS
Mean
LSD (05)
CV %
Table 4. Soybean varie i
Brand Entry 2000 1998 1997 98-00 97,98,00
APK364
APK.392
4I99STS
3395
Resnik
Probst
Agway
Agway
Chenigro
Dynagro
Public
Public
Public
Public
Public
General
Williams 82
Slressland
4005
3468
3494
403 IN
4034
Rolirer
Wilken
Wilken
Wilken
Wilken
Table 5. STS Soybean variety performance in Lancaster County, 2000, 1998.
Brand I ntry
Agway APK4I4STS
Chenigro 4I99STS
Wilken 40I9STS
Table 6. Soybean *Ol wty pa fin mam r 111 Centre County, 2000.
Yield, Height'
bu/A Maturity inches Lod
Brand
Entiy
Public
Garsl
Loda
D3OB
A 2804
LN92-7369
Asgrow
Public
Public
Darby
AP3525
Piobst
3447
Resnik
3418
D 358
General
3442
3472
34445 TS
3336
3468
APK.392
APK.364
MA3420
3395
WEBSB
MA3555
Williams 82
S3B-T8
WHB72
3476 N
3369 N
3494
APK.I94
Slressiand
Agnpro
Public
W ilkcn
Public
Wilken
Garst
Public
Wilken
Wilken
Cheingro
Dynagro
Wilken
Agway
Agway
Mid-Atlantic
Dynagro
Wilken
Mid-Allanlic
Public
NK
Wilken
Wilken
Dynagro
Wilken
Agway
Public
Mean
LSD (05)
CV%
Yield, Height, Seed Sire,
bu/A Maturity inches Lodging quality Sceds/lb
69 7
NS
104
10-20
10-20
10-20
10-20
10-20
10-20
10-23
79 2
09 4
109
formance in Lancaster County, 2000,1998, 1997.
2000
83 1
88 0
77 2
61 0
06 5
08 7
2 0 2402
2 0 2752
2 0 2340
2 0 2365
2 0 2441
2 0 2073
2 0 2802
2 0 2565
2 0 2352
2 0 2702
2 0 2855
2 0 2377
2 0 2467
2 0 2441
2 0 2522
2 0 2377
2 0 2495
2 0 2536
2 0 2441
2 0 2377
2 0 2536
2 0 2415
2 0 2768
20 2415
2 0 2508
2 0 2415
2 0 2624
2 0 2428
2 0 2402
2 0 2624
2 0 2415
2 0 2768
2 0 2428
2 0 2293
2 0 2248
Seed Size,
Lodging quulitj Sccds/lb
Yield. bu/A
2-j r a vg. 3-yr avg.
52 1
54 6
2-yr avg
98-00
1998
61 4
57 9
59 1
72 2
73 0
68 2
Seed Si/c,
qualil) Sccds/ll>
2 0 2248
2 0 2671
2 0 2702
2 0 2609
2 0 2802
2 0 2719
2 0 2580
2 0 2702
2 0 2752
2 0 2785
2 0 2340
2 0 3290
2 0 2686
2 0 2768
2 0 2735
2 0 2855
2 0 2735
2 0 3175
2 0 2735
2 0 2655
2 0 2640
2 0 2609
2 0 2948
2 0 2671
2 0 2624
2 0 3047
2 0 3197
2 0 3088
2 0 2580
2 0 2910
2 0 2352
'y
2293
2172
2270
2293
2225
2121
2248
60 3
62 4