Genetic gain × management interactions in soybean: I. Planting date

By S. Rowntree, Justin J. Suhre, Nicholas H. Weidenbenner, E. Wilson, Vince M. Davis, S. Naeve, S. Casteel, Brian W. Diers, P. Esker, J. Specht and 1 more. 2013

105 citations recorded by the source corpus.

planting date is a commonly manipulated man - agement practice in soybean ( Glycine max (L.) Merr.) production; however, the impacts of past and ongoing agronomic improvements, such as earlier planting, on genetic yield improvement and associated changes in seed protein and oil have not been evaluated. The objectives of this study were to determine if a 30-d difference in planting date affected measured rates of genetic improvement in (i) yield, (ii) seed mass, and (iii) seed protein and oil in the midwestern United States. research was conducted at Arlington, WI, Urbana, IL, and Lafayette, IN, during 2010 and 2011, using 59 Maturity Group (MG) II cul - tivars (released 1928-2008) at Wisconsin, and 57 MG III cultivars (released 1923-2007) at Illi - nois and Indiana, with targeted planting dates of 1 May and 1 June. Earlier planting provided higher yields (+3.1 kg ha −1 yr −1 ) than late planting in MG III soybean. Seed protein concentration decreased linearly over cultivar year of release at a rate of 0.191 (± 0.069) g kg −1 yr −1 for MG II, and 0.242 (± 0.063) g kg −1 yr −1 for MG III. Seed oil concentration increased over year of release at a rate of 0.142 (± 0.037) g kg −1 yr −1 for MG II, and 0.127 (± 0.039) g kg −1 yr −1 for MG III. The interaction between planting date and cultivar year of release for MG III yield suggested that the trend toward earlier planting is one agro - nomic improvement that, when coupled with genetic improvement, has provided a syner - gistic increase in on-farm soybean yields in the midwestern United States.

Subfields: Agronomy and Crop Science, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ecdc010395d300c4020efa6212b7da7651ce14df

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Agronomy and Crop Science

  1. George L. Graef
  2. J. Specht
  3. Shawn P. Conley
  4. Chad D. Lee

In Plant Science

  1. G. Jiang
  2. Brian W. Diers
  3. James R. Smith
  4. George L. Graef
  5. Felix B. Fritschi
  6. J. Gillman
  7. Vince M. Davis
  8. J. Specht

Citations in the corpus