1999 Ohio Wheat Performance Test

Ohio State University Extension
Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
The Ohio State University

Horticulture and Crop Science Series 228
July 1999

D.M. Jordan and R.J. Minyo, Jr.

Supervisor and Research Assistant, Ohio Wheat Performance Test, Department of Horticulture and Crop Science, The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio, 44691.

• Table 1. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio, 1999.
  • Table 1a. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio, 1999.
  • Table 1b. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio - Yields Only, 1999.
  • Table 1c. Characteristics of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio, 1999.
  • Table 1d. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio - Northwest, 1999.
  • Table 1e. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio - Bucyrus, 1999.
  • Table 1f. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio - Wooster, 1999.
  • Table 1g. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio - Greenville, 1999.
  • Table 1h. Performance of Wheat Cultivars in Ohio - Circleville, 1999.
• Table 2. Two Year Averages.
• Table 3. Three Year Averages.
• Table 4. Seed Source.

Disease rating performed by P.E. Lipps, Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, OARDC.

Flour and softness ratings performed by USDA, ARS Soft Wheat Quality Laboratory, P. Finney, Director.

Results of the Ohio Wheat Performance Test are published to provide a source of objective information from various locations in Ohio on the relative performance of wheat cultivars currently available to Ohio farmers. The information should benefit farmers in selecting varieties or blends for farm use. Cultivars differ in yield potential, winter hardiness, maturity, standability, disease and insect resistance, and other agronomic characteristics. Selection should be based on proven performance.

EVALUATION PROCEDURES

Producers of soft red winter wheat seed available to Ohio farmers for planting entered varieties or blends in the testing program. All cultivars were entered at five sites in Ohio. Each cultivar was replicated three or four times per site in a randomized complete block design. Plots consisted of 7 rows, 7 inches apart and approximately 50 feet long. Producers selected a seeding rate for each of their cultivars. Cultivars are ranked in order of increasing heading date.

MEASUREMENTS AND RECORDS

YIELD. Plots were harvested with a self propelled plot harvester. Yields were calculated to reflect bushels per acre at 13.5 percent moisture.

TEST WEIGHT (TW). Test weights were measured at the Northwest Branch using harvest grain moisture.

FLOUR (%). Flour is the percent flour yield of milled whole grain from samples collected at the Circleville site.

SOFTNESS (%). Softness is the percent of fine granularity milled flour from samples collected at the Circleville site. Values higher than approximately 50 indicate kernel textures that are appropriate for soft wheat. Generally, high values are better for milling and baking qualities.

PLANT HEIGHT (HT). The plant height was determined by recording the average distance in inches from ground level to the top of the head.

HEADING DATE (HEAD). The heading date is the calendar day of the year in which 50 percent of the heads were completely emerged above the flag leaf.

POWDERY MILDEW (PM). Powdery mildew was evaluated at Bucyrus on a 0-10 scale (0=trace, 10=flag leaf with 15% or more of the flag leaf area infected.

GROWING CONDITIONS

Field conditions were favorable for timely planting. Fall growth was excellent. Due to a favorable winter, there was only slight winterkill. Much of Ohio experienced very dry conditions in early summer. Disease level was moderate.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

To many farmers, the most important factor in seed wheat selection is comparing the grain yield of available cultivars. When comparing two entries, a yield difference greater than the Least Significant Difference (LSD) at P=.05 indicates that the odds are 19:1 that this is a real difference between the entries which is not due to chance variation (such as soil variation, etc.). Variable performance of a cultivar in different regions of Ohio is indicative of its reaction to different environments. Entries are arranged in order of increasing heading date. The presentation of data does not imply endorsement of any variety or blend by The Ohio State University.