Oat Variety Comparisons On Fields Managed Organically In Minnesota and North Dakota

Patrick M. Carr*, Herman J. Kandel, Paul M. Porter, Richard D. Horsley, and Steve F.

Zwinger

University of Minnesota

Small-grain cultivar adaptation studies typically are located in environments where synthetic fertilizers and biocides are used.

Many organic growers want cultivar adaptation studies to be located in environments managed organically.

D. Podoll, personal communication, 2005

Objectives

Identify modern oat cultivars that were adapted to growing conditions in certified organic fields.

Identify growth characteristics that were correlated to yield performance.

Materials and Methods

Cultivar Origin Year of release Plant stature MaturityBuff H SDSUI 2002 medium mediumEbeltof t NDSU 1999 tall very lateHiFi NDSU 2001 tall lateHytest SDSU 1986 tall earlyLeonard UM 2002 medium medium to lateMorton NDSU 2001 tall lateRichard UM 2000 tall mediumSesqui UM 2001 moderately tall lateWabasha UM 2001 tall mediumYoungs NDSU 2001 medium medium

I SDSU = South Dakota State University Agricultural Experiment Station (AES); NDSU = North Dakota State University AES; UM = University of Minnesota AES.

Table 1. Development and selected traits f or oat cultivars included in adaptation trials in fi elds managed organically at f our locations during both 2003 and 2004.

HHull-less or naked oat.

Plant height (PM), lodging, grain yield, test weight, and kernel weight Plant stand density, seedling vigor and height, canopy closure, and panicle density

Agronomic data collected

Cultivar 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004Plant density U U U U U -- U USeedling vigor U U U U U -- U USeedling height U U -- U U -- U UCanopy closure -- U U U -- -- U UPlant height (PM) U U U U U U U ULodging -- -- U U U U U UPanicle density U U -- U U -- -- UGrain yield U U U U U U U UGrain test weight U U U U U U U UKernel weight U U -- U -- -- U U

varieties on certifi ed organic fi elds at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations in each of two years.

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN Fullerton, ND Richardton, ND

Table 2. Vegetative and reproductive growth traits collected f or 10 spring oat

Cultivars were arranged in a randomized complete block with treatments replicated four times at each location in both yr.

Results and Discussion

Cultivar

Buff 114 abc 84 c 54 ab 68 c 19 b 52 c 50 a 47 bEbeltof t 127 ab 112 a 51 ab 127 a 40 ab 90 a 70 a 58 abHiFi 129 ab 118 a 65 ab 118 a 38 ab 84 ab 67 a 63 abHytest 97 c 90 c 52 ab 87 bc 16 ab 61 bc 53 a 52 abLeonard 138 a 128 a 49 b 116 a 42 a 74 abc 64 a 73 abMorton 139 a 96 bc 75 a 113 a 32 ab 87 a 56 a 60 abRichard 116 abc 108 ab 65 ab 112 ab 37 ab 76 abc 60 a 74 a Sesqui 136 ab 128 a 61 ab 121 a 39 ab 77 abc 61 a 75 aWabasha 124 ab 122 a 63 ab 111 ab 31 ab 78 ab 57 a 58 abYoungs 116 abc 104 abc 56 ab 109 ab 35 ab 83 ab 58 a 61 ab

Fullerton, ND

--------------------------------------------------------------- bu/ ac ---------------------------------------------------------------2003 2004 2003 20042003 2004 2003 2004

Table 3. Grain yield of 10 spring oat varieties at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations under certified organic management organic management in each of two years (diff erences between numbers in columns were detected with an LSD0.05 = 25).

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN Richardton, ND

Cultivar

Buff 114 abc 84 c 54 ab 68 c 19 b 52 c 50 a 47 bEbeltof t 127 ab 112 a 51 ab 127 a 40 ab 90 a 70 a 58 abHiFi 129 ab 118 a 65 ab 118 a 38 ab 84 ab 67 a 63 abHytest 97 c 90 c 52 ab 87 bc 16 ab 61 bc 53 a 52 abLeonard 138 a 128 a 49 b 116 a 42 a 74 abc 64 a 73 abMorton 139 a 96 bc 75 a 113 a 32 ab 87 a 56 a 60 abRichard 116 abc 108 ab 65 ab 112 ab 37 ab 76 abc 60 a 74 a Sesqui 136 ab 128 a 61 ab 121 a 39 ab 77 abc 61 a 75 aWabasha 124 ab 122 a 63 ab 111 ab 31 ab 78 ab 57 a 58 abYoungs 116 abc 104 abc 56 ab 109 ab 35 ab 83 ab 58 a 61 ab

Fullerton, ND

--------------------------------------------------------------- bu/ ac ---------------------------------------------------------------2003 2004 2003 20042003 2004 2003 2004

Table 4. Grain yield of 10 spring oat varieties at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations under certified organic management organic management in each of two years (diff erences between numbers in columns were detected with an LSD0.05 = 25).

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN Richardton, ND

Cultivar

Buff 114 abc 84 c 54 ab 68 c 19 b 52 c 50 a 47 bEbeltof t 127 ab 112 a 51 ab 127 a 40 ab 90 a 70 a 58 abHiFi 129 ab 118 a 65 ab 118 a 38 ab 84 ab 67 a 63 abHytest 97 c 90 c 52 ab 87 bc 16 ab 61 bc 53 a 52 abLeonard 138 a 128 a 49 b 116 a 42 a 74 abc 64 a 73 abMorton 139 a 96 bc 75 a 113 a 32 ab 87 a 56 a 60 abRichard 116 abc 108 ab 65 ab 112 ab 37 ab 76 abc 60 a 74 a Sesqui 136 ab 128 a 61 ab 121 a 39 ab 77 abc 61 a 75 aWabasha 124 ab 122 a 63 ab 111 ab 31 ab 78 ab 57 a 58 abYoungs 116 abc 104 abc 56 ab 109 ab 35 ab 83 ab 58 a 61 ab

2004

Table 5. Grain yield of 10 spring oat varieties at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations under certifi ed organic management organic management in each of two years (diff erences between numbers in columns were detected with an LSD0.05 = 25).

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN Richardton, NDFullerton, ND

--------------------------------------------------------------- bu/ ac ---------------------------------------------------------------2003 2004 2003 20042003 2004 2003

Cultivars with computed stability values ( ) were: Sesqui (23), HiFi (40), Leonard (56), Richard (77), Wabasha (81), Ebeltoft (86), Morton (114), Youngs (140), Hytest (428), and Buff (516).

Cultivar

Buff 47 a 48 a 41 a 42 a 33 a 33 a 46 a 40 aEbeltof t 36 d 36 d 35 b 35 b 25 b 25 cd 39 bc 34 cdHiFi 39 c 38 cd 34 bc 35 b 25 b 26 cd 39 bc 35 cdHytest 42 b 42 b 33 bc 42 a 25 b 29 b 41 b 38 abLeonard 38 cd 37 cd 30 d 31 c 23 b 23 d 38 c 36 bcMorton 40 bc 38 cd 33 bc 34 b 24 b 26 c 39 bc 33 dRichard 38 cd 38 cd 32 cd 33 bc 23 b 25 cd 38 c 34 cdSesqui 40 bc 39 c 33 bc 35 b 25 b 26 c 38 c 36 bcWabasha 38 cd 38 cd 33 bc 35 b 24 b 25 cd 39 bc 35 cdYoungs 36 d 37 cd 33 bc 33 bc 23 b 25 cd 37 c 34 cd

2003 2004 2003Richardton, NDFullerton, ND

20042003 2004 2003--------------------------------------------------------------- lb/ bu ---------------------------------------------------------------

2004

Table 6. Grain test weight of 10 spring oat varieties at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations under certifi ed organic management in each of two years (diff erences between numbers in columns were detected with an LSD0.05 = 2).

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN

Cultivar

Buff 47 a 48 a 41 a 42 a 33 a 33 a 46 a 40 aEbeltof t 36 d 36 d 35 b 35 b 25 b 25 cd 39 bc 34 cdHiFi 39 c 38 cd 34 bc 35 b 25 b 26 cd 39 bc 35 cdHytest 42 b 42 b 33 bc 42 a 25 b 29 b 41 b 38 abLeonard 38 cd 37 cd 30 d 31 c 23 b 23 d 38 c 36 bcMorton 40 bc 38 cd 33 bc 34 b 24 b 26 c 39 bc 33 dRichard 38 cd 38 cd 32 cd 33 bc 23 b 25 cd 38 c 34 cdSesqui 40 bc 39 c 33 bc 35 b 25 b 26 c 38 c 36 bcWabasha 38 cd 38 cd 33 bc 35 b 24 b 25 cd 39 bc 35 cdYoungs 36 d 37 cd 33 bc 33 bc 23 b 25 cd 37 c 34 cd

--------------------------------------------------------------- lb/ bu ---------------------------------------------------------------2004

Table 7. Grain test weight of 10 spring oat varieties at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations under certifi ed organic management in each of two years (diff erences between numbers in columns were detected with an LSD0.05 = 2).

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN2003 2004 20032003 2004 2003

Richardton, NDFullerton, ND2004

Cultivar

Buff 29,300 a 18,200 a -- 19,800 a 16,900 a 17,000 aEbeltof t 23,300 cd 13,700 cd -- 15,000 bcd 14,300 cd 12,300 cHiFi 24,800 bc 14,900 bcd -- 16,200 bc 16,300 abc 13,800 bcHytest 21,500 d 12,900 de -- 14,300 cd 14,000 d 12,900 bcLeonard 25,800 b 15,000 bcd -- 15,900 bc 15,400 abcd 13,700 bcMorton 23,200 cd 14,000 bcd -- 15,000 bcd 14,400 bcd 12,500 bcRichard 23,500 cd 13,600 cde -- 16,000 bc 14,600 bcd 12,700 bcSesqui 25,000 bc 16,000 b -- 16,000 bc 16,500 ab 14,600 b Wabasha 24,400 bc 15,300 bc -- 17,100 b 15,700 abcd 14,500 bYoungs 21,400 d 11,500 e -- 13,000 d 13,700 d 12,300 c

2003 2004--------------------------------------------------------------- kernels/ lb ---------------------------------------------------------------

2003 2004 2003 2004

Table 8. Kernel weight of 10 spring oat varieties at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations under certifi ed organic management in each of two years (diff erences between numbers in columns were detected with an LSD0.05 = 2).

Comstock, MN Fertile, MN Richardton, ND

Location - year I ndependent variables1 Cumulative R2 value

Comstock, MN - 2003 Plant density, seedling vigor, seedling height, plant 0.16

height, panicle density

Comstock, MN - 2004 Plant density, seedling vigor, seedling height, canopy 0.06

closure, plant height, panicle density

Fertile, MN - 2003 Plant density, seedling vigor, canopy closure, plant 0.24

height, lodging

Fertile, MN - 2004 Plant density, seedling vigor, seedling height, canopy 0.10, 0.40

yield in certifi ed organic fields at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations in two years.

1Variables contributing to model are bolded.

Table 9. Results of stepwise regression analyses f or selected growth traits of 10 oat cultivars f or grain

Location - year I ndependent variables1 Cumulative R2 value

Fullerton, ND - 2003 Plant density, seedling vigor, seedling height, plant 0.28

height, lodging, panicle density

Fullerton, ND - 2003 Plant height, lodging

Richardton, ND - 2003 Plant density, seedling vigor, seedling height, canopy

closure, plant height, lodging

Richardton, ND - 2004 Plant density, seedling vigor, seedling height, canopy 0.18

closure, plant height, lodging, panicle density

Table 9. Results of stepwise regression analyses f or selected growth traits of 10 oat cultivars f or grain

yield in certifi ed organic fields at two Minnesota and two North Dakota locations in two years.

1Variables contributing to model are bolded.

There was an interaction between environment and cultivar treatments for grain yield, test weight, and kernel weight.

Several cultivars ranked high consistently for grain yield, test weight, and kernel weight.

Grain yield: Sesqui, HiFi, Leonard

Grain test weight: Buff (hull-less), Hytest (hulled)

Kernel weight: Youngs

Growth traits collectively explained only as much as 40% of the variation in grain yield, and in most instances considerably less.

A majority of the variation still was unexplained.

Conclusions

Sesqui (along with HiFi and Leonard) seem to be adapted to production in certified organic fields if grain yield is an important selection criterion.

Conclusions (continued)

This investigation failed to identify plant growth and development traits that explained consistently the variation in grain yield between cultivars.

Conclusions (continued)

Beyond the scope of this investigation was responding to the belief that a need exist to develop and select cultivars in organic environments.

Conclusions (continued)

Beyond the scope of this investigation was responding to the belief that old cultivars are better adapted to organic environments than modern cultivars.

We are grateful for the NCR-SARE research and education grant program for providing the funds to support this study.