Canola
Same across treatments:
Emergence
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Oat
Same across treatments:
Emergence
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Barley
Same across treatments:
Emergence
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Pea
Same across treatments:
Stand count
Test weight
Yield
Emergence
Control plots had 13% more individuals than the other treatments
Same in all treatments:
Yield
Protein content
Test weight
Emergence
Stands
Survivorship
Height was greater treatments where dehydrated compost was added at the full rate of application.
Results for our research came with a few shortcomings this season. Biomass samples sent for plant analysis were futile because samples did not survive the trip to the laboratory facilities in Ontario despite our efforts to preserve its entirety.
Allelopathy is the direct or indirect impact on plant individuals, whether they belong or not to the same species. Established as substances composed of secondary metabolites, allelopathy can a) affect growth and yield of another plant and b) develop autotoxicity, where plant individuals’ secrete chemicals that prevent propagation and development of seedlings of same species growth.
Allelopathy can be used as a strategic tool to mitigate chemical weed management. Residues of allelopathic cover crops not only provide benefits to the soil but also help to reduce weed populations during their growth and likely for the cash crops seeded in the season thereafter.
The following perennial forage trials are ongoing at the NPARA Research Farm:
The annual forage trials are performed every year to report yield and forage quality of several varieties at each trial type (alternative, oat varieties, and mixes such as spring and cereal and pulse and cereal). This is a project performed with sister associations such as Battle River Research Group (BRRG), Chinook Applied Research Association (CARA), Gateway Research Organization (GRO), Lakeland Agricultural Research Association (LARA), Mackenzie Agricultural Research Association (MARA), Peace Country Beef and Forage Association (PCBFA), and West Central Forage Association (WCFA).
There were 14 Camelina varieties that were sown as a new trial at the North Peace Applied Research Farm. Since it is a relatively new crop alternative there is few choices for weed management. In the beginning of the trial weed grasses were promptly reduced with applications of Assure II (Quizalofop-p-ethyl) on June 2 and 15. There is still no registrations for broadleaf weed herbivoryicides, thus it was found that weed pressure in the camelina trial was very high which impacted camelina stand number and yield. Emergent values (P=0.0002) percentage of biomass ground cover (P<0.0001) and visual ratings assessing vigour (P=0.0200) differed across camelina varieties. Variety DH33 had the greatest number of individual stands and the greatest percentage cover compared to DHBC4-1/2 which produced the least amount of stands and similarly occupied less ground cover. Moreover, varieties such as WTCA, DH12, DHBC1 and WT43 stand counts as great as those found in DH33. Percentage cover statistically like DH33 was also found in DHB4-3/4, DHBC8, DHBC1, WT43, WT46-2, and WTCA varieties. None of these parameters translated into yield and instead there was no difference in overall pounds per acre (P=0.7256) and test weight (P=0.4370). In contrast camelina stands exhibiting more vigour were those from DHBC4-1/2 compared to WT46-2 and DH33 which were seen as weaker. Varieties like DH26, DH14, DH12 WTSU WTOM-1 looked as vigorous as DHBC4-1/2.This trial showed that more varieties need to be sown to see their development and consequent yielding to be considered a crop alternative in the Northern Peace region. This crop is in dire need to have approved registrations for broadleaf herbivoryicides, thus once this occurs it is possible camelina could be adopted by growers in the region.
CWRS wheat
Emergence between AAC Brandon and CDC Silas was the same (P=0.0015). The other varieties had more emergence compared to the last mentioned but they were the same between each other. Yield (P=0.0641), test weight (P=0.7729), protein (P=0.7756) was the same across all treatments. Overall, differences among wheat varieties had no influence in yield, test weight or protein content.
CRS wheat
Emergence (P=0.0687), test weight (P=0.5102) and protein content (P=0.8404) were the same across all CPS varieties. Yield from AAC Foray UVB, AAC Goodwin, CS Accelerate and AAC Crossfield surpassed AAC Penhold by 44, 29, 41 and 37% respectively (P=0.0139). It can be argued that these varieties do provide superior yield, through there is no difference in yield between each other.
Emergence (P=0.1341) and test weight (P=0.4265) were the same across treatments. Yield on the other hand varied according to variety (P=0.0214). CDC Fraser was the highest yielding variety. Varieties with same yield were CDC Copeland and CDC Churchill. In contrast AAC Connect was the lowest yielding. This growing season was an excellent year for barley as it grew quickly and matured pretty fast at the end of the growing season. It can be concluded that to choose a high yielding variety there is no doubt CDC Fraser is the best choice, although CDC Copeland and CDC Churchill could also provide as much great yields.
Lupin was grown at the NPARA as a variety trial with three yellow pea varieties for comparison. There were some incidences of sclerotinia in the blue lupin varieties. These was ameliorated with Bravo (Chlorothalonil) fungicide. Moreover, there was also incidences of stink bugs on the trial on both blue and lupin varieties numbers of individual insects were very low and little damage was reported. Despite fungicide control and low numbers of stink bugs found it is possible both effects may have impacted yield and test weight. Emergence was monitored on June 10, June 24 and July 5 in lupin and yellow pea stands. In general, there were more emergent stands in blue lupin varieties of Lunabor and Boregine (P<0.0001) compared to white lupin varieties of Volos, Figaro, and Frieda. Probor blue lupin had the same emergent numbers as all yellow pea varieties (CDC Amarillo, AC Carver, and CDC Lewochko). Indeed, Blue lupin stand number was 34% greater than yellow pea varieties (P<0.0001) and 47% greater than white lupin varieties (P<0.0001); yellow pea emergent stands were 41% greater than white lupin varieties (P<0.0001).
Yield did not vary among varieties but among plant species. Yellow pea varieties were yielding more compared to blue and white lupin (P<0.0001). As such, yield from yellow pea was 90% greater than blue lupin yield (P<0.0001), and 23% greater than white lupin (P<0.0001). Blue lupin combined yields on the other hand, was 32% more than white lupin yields (P<0.0001). Yellow pea test weight was greater by 1% than both blue (P<0.0001) and white lupin (P<0.0001). Test weight was greater in blue lupin by 3% compared to that of white lupin (P<0.0001).
Nodulation was conducted through visual assessments. Growth and vigour, nodule colour as well as position were assessed through a point system (one through five, zero through five and one to three for each respectively). Statistical analysis was run for each of these parameters as well as total number of visual assessment points. Growth and vigour (P=0.2855), position (P=0.7592) and total point number (P=0.7592) were statistically the same among all varieties of lupin and yellow pea. Nodule colour ratings (P=0.0074) varied across varieties and plant species. As such, overall yellow pea varieties were 4 points higher in rating than blue lupin varieties (P=0.0057) and 1 point higher than white lupin varieties (0.0007). Pink in nodules denote presence of lehemoglobin, which is necessary for nitrogen fixation. The stronger this color shows more nitrogen fixation from legume individuals compared to white, green or brown which are not regarded as effective.
In conclusion, has strong emergence once the season starts but yield was poor despite proper weed and pathogen management strategies. It is possible that a stricter plan of weed management may encourage more yield.
This is the second consecutive year where hemp grew and successfully produced yield at the North Peace Applied Research Station. Biomass (P=0.8217) and yield (P=0.4195) were the same across all varieties. Canda and Joey varieties seemed to produce less yield but more biomass, whereas CFX-1 seemed to be more yielding than fibre producing. Macronutrients were not significant across varieties except Calcium (P=0.0454). There was more calcium content in the X59 variety compared to CRS-1 were less Ca was found. This is our last year in researching if hemp could be an alternative for crop rotation. In Alberta hemp can produce between 750 to 890 lb acre-1 of average seed yield and average fibre production from dual varieties is 2009 to 4018 lb acre-1. In terms of seed yield varieties close to this range are CFX-1 and X59 and in terms of fibre none of the varieties grown are close to the aforementioned range. Thus hemp would be a difficult plant to grow especially for fibre production in this area as varieties have struggled for three years to even get off the ground. Hope is standing for new varieties able to withstand the weather conditions here in the North Peace.
The Canola Council of Canada advises that canola should be sown with high seeding densities and preferably using larger seed size (up to 2.2mm). Moreover, seeding later in the season should be considered rather than seeding on earlier dates. Briefly, greater plant densities produced by high seeding rates compensate for flea beetle leaf damage. More tolerant seedlings to flea beetles have been observed to be affected by seed size and canola sown mid-May to early-June. Late sown less affected by flea beetle damage than canola seeded in late-April to early-May. Currently, there is limited research showing how all these recommendations, acting in conjunction, affect canola production. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the impact of seeding rate, seed size, and seeding date on flea beetle damage and populations. Furthermore, a split-plot factor analysis will also allow us to examine interaction effects between seeding rate, seed size and seeding date. Further insight on interactions effects will allow us to measure the true flea beetle response to these recommendations, and provide new recommendations based on these possible interactions.
The objective is to evaluate the impact on flea beetle leaf damage and flea beetle population of seeding date (late-April to early-May and second to third week of May), seed size (small, large and unsorted), and seeding rate (112,56 and 168 plant m-2). The seeding date for all these trials had to be pushed further due to weather constraints. Therefore, “early seeding dates correspond to canola sown from the second to the third week of May and “Late” dates correspond to canola sown from the fourth week of May to the first week of June.
PO Box 750 | 116 4th Avenue
Manning, Alberta T0H 2M0
