Crop Management

• Home • What We Recommend • Research • Publications • Training • People •

 

 

 

     

 

        

Crop Management Research    

Variable Hybrid Selection in Corn

Tawainga W. Katsvairo, William J. Cox, Michael Glos, Harold M. Glos and Dill Otis

Dept. of Crop & Soil Sciences

 Corn yields often show significant spatial variability, which may provide an opportunity to select hybrids according to the yield potential for distinct regions within a field. Very few studies have evaluated this potential. We conducted field-scale research  at two sites on a dairy farm, in Onondaga county, and three sites on two cash crop farms,  in Seneca county, to determine the feasibility of variable hybrid selection in 1999, 2000 and 2001. The fields ranged in size from 14 acres to 24 acres. We chose Pioneer 3752 and 37M81, because the two hybrids had shown yield differences between sites. We used a split-planter approach where alternating strips of each hybrid were planted, and yields were measured using combine with yield monitors and differential GPS. Detailed information on the management of the field trials were reported previously (Vol.12, No.5, p. 1-5).

 Corn yield showed spatial variability at 12 of 15 site-year comparisons with significant spatial variability at all sites in 1999 and 2001, the dry years (Vol.12, No.5, p.1-5). Corn  also yielded differently at the Onondaga and Seneca sites in 1999 and 2001 (Table 1). 37M81 vs. 3752 had greater yields at the Onondaga sites, while 3752 had greater yields at the Seneca sites.  Weather conditions and management practices were mostly the same across sites, so different soil types and fertility levels from manure application presumably contributed to corn yielding differently at the Onondaga and Seneca sites.  Corn yield, however, had field location x hybrid interactions in only four of 15 site-year comparisons, which indicates that the hybrids had similar relative yield differences throughout most fields. Corn thus yielded differently at the Onondaga and Seneca sites, presumably because of different soil conditions across sites, but few field location x hybrid interactions, despite spatial variability for corn yield at most sites.

  Corn yield did have field location x hybrid interactions at the Onondaga 1 site in 1999 and 2001, which suggests that variable hybrid selection would be attractive within this field.  Also, the spatial relationship of corn yields had high temporal stability (r = 0.88) in dry years, with yields above 145 bu/acre in western and northeastern regions and yields below 95 bu/acre in southeastern regions in 1999 and 2000 (Fig.1).  In 1999, 3752 compared with 37M81 yielded the same or greater in the northeastern region, while 37M81 yielded greater or the same in the central portion of the field (Fig.1).  In 2001, 37M81 compared with 3752 yielded greater in the southern central region of the field and the same in the remaining areas of the field.  Although there was a field location x hybrid interaction at the Onondaga 1 site in the dry years, variable hybrid selection would not be the appropriate management practice because 37M81 vs. 3752 yielded the same or greater in most areas of the field.

Conclusion

Hybrids responded differently for the Onondaga (manured) vs. Seneca (non-manured) fields. The yield advantages was in some cases quite high and would greatly affect the bottom line. Yield monitors and split-planter trials therefore provide very valuable information on local hybrid performance, which will readily play for investment in the technology. We do not see much justification for the use of site-specific hybrid planting within fields, as yield advantages of one hybrid over another tend to be consistent in a field.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Publications

  • Katsvairo, T, W.J. Cox, H.M. van Es, and M.A. Glos. 2003 Spatial yield responses of two corn hybrids to two N levels. Agronomy Journal (accepted for publication). (view)
  • Katsvairo, T, W.J. Cox, and H.M. van Es. 2003. Spatial growth and soil responses of two corn hybrids to two N levels. Agronomy Journal (accepted for publication).
  • Katsvairo T.W., W.J. Cox and H.M van Es. 2002. Tillage and rotation effects on soil physical characteristics. Agron. J. 94: 299-304.. (view)
  • Karunatilake, U., H.M. van Es, and R.R. Schindelbeck. 2000. Soil and crop response to plow and no-tillage after alfalfa-maize conversion on a clay loam soil. Soil and Tillage Res. 55/1-2:31-42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Contact hmv1@cornell.edu with questions or comments
This page was last modified on 03/27/2003