Mike Staton, SMaRT Coordinator

2014 marks the fourth season of the SMaRT research program, made possible by the checkoff investment of Michigan soybean producers. This year, 43 producers around the state conducted on-farm research trials within 15 projects. Contained in this publication you’ll find the results from 53 individual trial locations. Each specific research project was developed with grower input and as a whole, represents some of the most pertinent challenges producers face. Evaluating results on both a local and state-wide basis, you the producer can see how specific practices may fit into your operation, as well as how they may be expected to perform in years to come.

Agronomic and economic data is presented for each treatment. The projected USDA 2014-15 average soybean price of $10.00 per bushel was used to calculate gross income. Suggested retail prices for the product(s) and application costs associated with the treatments were then subtracted from the gross income to arrive at the income figures presented in this publication.

Conducting these trials would not be possible without strong partnerships. Mike Staton serves as the SMaRT project coordinator though a unique partnership between Michigan State University (MSU) Extension and the Michigan Soybean Promotion Committee (MSPC). As state soybean educator based in Allegan County, half of his salary, benefits and operating budget is supplied by the Michigan Soybean checkoff. This program is not possible without the efforts of Ned Birkey, in southeast MI, and Dan Rajzer, in southwest MI, with whom MSPC contracts with to implement SMaRT trials and are essential to this project’s success. Brian Stiles, MSPC, research technician and Loren Collison collected soil samples for Soybean Cyst nematode testing and baseline soil test levels and collected other valuable information presented in this report. We also want to thank Martin Nagelkirk and James Dedecker of MSU Extension for their efforts in making this research possible.

Dr. Tim Boring with Michigan Agri Business Association and Dr. Arnold Saxton with the University of Tennessee provided valuable input regarding experimental design and statistical analysis.

THANK YOU to the farmer cooperators for contributing their land, equipment, and time during the busy planting and harvest seasons to help improve Michigan soybean production.

For more information on participating in the 2015 SMaRT project,

contact Mike Staton at (269) 673-0370 extension 2562 or staton@msu.edu.

CONTENTSSeed Treatment vs In-Furrow Inoculation Trial........... 2Soybean Seed Inoculation Trial.................................... 3Clariva Complete Seed Treatment Trial........................ 4Broadcast Gypsum Trial................................................ 6Potassium Thiosulfate Starter Fertilizer Trial.............. 8 Potassium Thiosulfate Foliar Fertilizer Trial................. 10Ratchet Foliar Growth Promoter Trial.......................... 12Bio-Forge Trial.............................................................. 13ProAct (Harpin Protein) Trial........................................ 14Priaxor Foliar Fungicide Trial........................................ 15‘13 & ‘14 White Mold Foliar Fungicide Program Trial... 16Aproach White Mold Foliar Fungicide Trial................... 18Intensive Management Trial........................................ 20Foliar Tank Mixture Trial.............................................. 22Air-Assisted Reel Trial.................................................. 23Introduction to Experimental Design,.......................... 24Statistical Analysis, and Interpretation

Mike Staton, SMaRT Coordinator

NON-PROFITUS POSTAGE

PAIDPERMIT 244

MIDLAND, MI 48640

Michigan Soybean ProMotion coMMittee, Po box 287, FrankenMuth, Mi 48734

2014 SMaRT Research Report

2

Seed Treatment vs In-Furrow Inoculation Trial

Purpose: The vast majority of soybean inoculants used in Michigan are applied as seed treatments by local seed dealers using commercial seed treating equipment. This is an easy and efficient application method. When an extender is included, the Rhizobia bacteria will remain viable on the seed for up to 120 days. The length of time that the bacteria remain viable is significantly reduced when other seed treatments such as fungicides and insecticides are also applied to the seed. In-furrow inoculation has been recommended as the method of choice under challenging conditions such as first-year soybeans. Rhizobia bacteria populations can be significantly reduced in coarse-textured soils due to dry soil conditions and high soil temperatures that can occur in these soils. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effects of seed treatment inoculation and in-furrow inoculation on root nodulation and yield when soybeans are grown on coarse-textured soil.

Procedure: Two soybean inoculation methods were compared at one location in St. Joseph County in 2014. All of the seed planted in the trial was from the same seed lot and was treated with Allegiance®, Goucho® and EverGol™ Energy. The seed treatment inoculant applied was Pioneer PPST 120 and the in-furrow inoculant was Cell-Tech® granular. Ten consecutive plants were dug up and root nodules larger than two millimeters in diameter were counted.

Results: The seed treatment inoculation method performed better than the in-furrow inoculation method in this trial. The seed treatment inoculation method increased yield by 2.1 bushels per acre. Although, nodule counts were high in both treatments, the seed treatment inoculation also increased root nodulation by more than 30 nodules per plant. There was some difficulty experienced when calibrating the granular in-furrow application equipment in this trial. The actual application rate of Cell-Tech was about two-thirds of the manufacturer’s recommended rate. Also, white mold was prevalent, significantly reducing the yield in this trial.

We want to thank Johansen Farms LLC for applying the seed treatment, Helena Chemical for providing the Cell-Tech and Dan Rajzer for coordinating this trial.

3

Soybean Seed Inoculation Trial

Purpose: University trials have shown yield increases ranging from one to two bushels per acre from using seed applied inoculants in fields that had previously grown soybeans. In Michigan, Dr. Kurt Thelen showed that inoculation increased soybean yields by 1.3 bushels per acre. This trial was designed to evaluate the effect of a leading seed box inoculant on soybean yields.

Procedure: Cell-Tech® was applied to seed in the seed box prior to planting and compared to an untreated control at one location in Monroe County. Ten consecutive plants from each treatment in each replication were dug up and nodules larger than two millimeters were counted and recorded.

Results: The untreated control yielded slightly better than the non-inoculated treatment at this location. This outcome is surprising based on previous research. One possible explanation is that the soybean seed may have been damaged when mixing the Cell-Tech with the seed in the seed box. Stand counts and seed samples were not taken so we cannot confirm this. Due to low cost and favorable results generated in past university research, applying inoculants when planting soybeans is recommended in Michigan. However, further research is needed on this topic.

We want to thank Ned Birkey for coordinating this trial.

4

Clariva™ Complete Seed Treatment Trial

Purpose: Syngenta’s Clariva consists of naturally occurring soil bacteria (Pasturia nishizawae) having a unique, direct mode of action on soybean cyst nematodes (SCN). It was available as Clariva Complete Beans seed treatment in the U.S. in 2014. The Clariva Complete Beans seed treatment includes Clariva and Cruiser Maxx Vibrance. For optimum performance, the Clariva Complete Beans seed treatment should be applied to SCN-resistant varieties. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of the Pasturia nishizawae contained in Clariva Complete Beans on SCN populations and soybean yields in 2014.

Procedure: Two seed treatments (Clariva Complete Beans and CruiserMaxx® Vibrance™) were applied to SCN-resistant soybean seed and compared at four locations in Michigan in 2014. The seed treatments were selected to isolate the effects of Pasturia nishizawae. Each treatment was replicated six times in the Ingham trial, four times in the TARE (Thumb Agriculture Research and Extension) trials in Tuscola and Sanilac and three times in the TARE trial in St. Clair. A randomized complete block experimental design was used at each location. SCN soil samples were collected from each treatment after planting and again before harvest to determine the effect of the seed treatments on SCN populations. The number of SCN eggs and juveniles found in the pre-harvest sample (PF) was divided by the number of SCN eggs and juveniles in the post-planting sample (PI) to determine the SCN reproductive index (PF/PI) for each seed treatment.

Results: The Clariva Complete Beans seed treatment did not improve soybean yields at any of the four locations when compared to the CruiserMaxx + Vibrance seed treatment. This was not surprising for two of the TARE locations (Sandusky and St. Clair) as SCN was not detected at these sites. However, SCN was present at the TARE site in Tuscola County and in the Ingham County trials. In these two locations, the Clariva Complete Beans seed treatment did not affect soybean yields or when the two sites were combined and analyzed. The Ingham County location had the highest SCN population so the PI, PF and PF/PI are reported for this location. The Clariva Complete Bean seed treatment did not significantly affect SCN development at this location.

We want to thank Syngenta for providing the product for the Ingham County location and Bob Battel and TARE for coordinating these trials.

5

Clariva™ Complete Seed Treatment Trial

6

Broadcast Gypsum Trial

Purpose: Interest in the use of gypsum is increasing in Michigan. Gypsum is one of the oldest soil amendments and is an excellent source of calcium and sulfur, both of which are essential crop nutrients. Calcium deficiency symptoms in field crops have not been identified in Michigan. However, sulfur can be low in coarse-textured soils low in organic matter and legumes such as soybeans are the most likely crops to respond to sulfur applications. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of broadcast gypsum on soybean yields in 2014.

Procedure: Broadcast gypsum was compared to an untreated control at one location in Presque Isle County. The gypsum was applied prior to planting at a rate of one half ton per acre to a loamy sand soil. Soil samples and plant tissue samples were collected from the two treatments. The plant tissue samples were taken at early bloom.

Results: The broadcast gypsum increased soybean yields by 6.6 bushels per acre over the untreated control. The plants in the areas treated with gypsum were also taller and darker green throughout the growing season than the plants in the control strips. The yield increase and the healthier looking plants are probably due to the sulfur provided by the gypsum (180 pounds per acre of sulfur). This is supported by the plant tissue results. The sulfur levels in the untreated control were slightly deficient while the sulfur levels in the gypsum treatments were sufficient. The calcium levels in plant tissue samples collected from both treatments were sufficient. Additional research is required to determine if a lower application rate of sulfur will produce similar results on coarse-textured, low organic matter soils in Michigan.

We want to thank James Dedecker for coordinating this trial and for providing the photo on page 7.

7

Broadcast Gypsum Trial

Untreated control strip

Gypsum treated strip

8

Purpose: Past university research results and fertilizer recommendations indicate that soybeans are less likely than corn to respond to starter fertilizer. Starter fertilizer trials (2x2 and in-furrow) conducted by the SMaRT project have produced similar results with only three out of 14 trials showing a positive yield increase. However, a 2x2 starter applied in a trial conducted in 2013 increased soybean yields by six bushels per acre on a coarse-textured soil in Kent County. The starter fertilizer contained nearly 50 pounds of actual K2O per acre. The purpose of this trial was to measure the effect of a potassium thiosulfate starter fertilizer on soybean yields in 2014.

Procedure: Potassium thiosulfate (0-0-25-17) applied in a 2x2 band at planting was compared to an unfertilized control at two locations in 2014. The potassium thiosulfate was applied at three gallons per acre.

Potassium Thiosulfate Starter Fertilizer Trial

Results: The potassium thiosulfate starter fertilizer increased yields by three bushels per acre at the Bay City site compared to the unfertilized control. When both sites were combined and analyzed, the potassium thiosulfate treatment yielded 3.2 bushels per acre higher than the unfertilized control. This was true even though: soil potassium levels were very high; the fields were planted toward the end of May; and very little crop residue was present at planting. Yields at the Sanilac County site were significantly reduced due to a severe white mold infestation. At harvest, the cooperator observed that the potassium thiosulfate strips appeared to have less white mold than the unfertilized control. This practice may be more beneficial on coarse-textured soils or soils having potassium soil test levels below the critical level.

We want to thank Tessenderlo Kerley, Inc. for providing and delivering the fertilizer for this trial.

9

Potassium Thiosulfate Starter Fertilizer Trial

Potassium deficiency in soybean

10

Purpose: Soybeans require large quantities of potassium (1.4 pounds of K2O per bushel) and most of this is taken up during the reproductive growth stages. Producers are asking if broadcast potassium fertilizer is sufficient or if supplemental potassium fertilizer should be applied during the growing season. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a supplemental foliar application of potassium thiosulfate on soybean yields in 2014.

Procedure: A single foliar application of potassium thiosulfate (0-0-25-17) was compared to an unfertilized control at four locations in 2014. The potassium thiosulfate was applied at one gallon per acre at the R1 growth stage. Application rates higher than this may burn the foliage. Soil samples were collected to establish baseline soil test levels.

Potassium Thiosulfate Foliar Fertilizer Trial

Results: The potassium thiosulfate foliar fertilizer did not significantly increase soybean yields at any of the individual trial locations or when all locations were combined and analyzed. These results are consistent with university research results showing that broadcast applications are the optimum method for applying potassium fertilizer for soybean production. Also, the potassium soil test levels were above the critical levels at all of the sites. Very small yield increases are expected when additional fertilizer is applied to soils that are above the critical level for a given nutrient. Supplemental potassium fertilizer applications may be more beneficial on coarse-textured soils or soils having potassium soil test levels below the critical level.

We want to thank Tessenderlo Kerley, Inc. for providing and delivering the fertilizer and Dan Rajzer and Ned Birkey for coordinating these trials

Potassium deficiency in soybean

11

Potassium Thiosulfate Foliar Fertilizer Trial

12

Purpose: Ratchet, a commercially available foliar growth promoter marketed by Monsanto BioAg Inc., has been advertised as enhancing soybean growth and yield. Ratchet produced mixed results in the 2012 SMaRT trials and did not increase soybean yields in any of the 11 SMaRT trials conducted in 2013. To improve Ratchet’s performance in 2014, Monsanto BioAg recommended applying the product at the V3 to V4 growth stages. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate performance of Ratchet under this new recommendation in 2014.

Procedure: A single application of Ratchet was compared to an untreated control at three locations in 2014. The Ratchet was applied at 4 ounces per acre between the V3 and V4 growth stages. The sprayers were driven through the untreated control treatments to ensure that tire tracks were not a confounding factor.

Ratchet™ Foliar Growth Promoter Trial

Results: The Ratchet foliar growth promoter treatment did not produce higher soybean yields than the untreated control at any of the individual locations in 2014. Also, when all three of the 2014 locations were combined and analyzed, the yield was not significantly higher than the untreated control. After the product and application costs were subtracted, the Ratchet treatment generated less income than the untreated control. Ratchet will not be evaluated in future SMaRT trials.

We want to thank Lanny Youngson and Helena Chemical for providing the product and Dan Rajzer and Ned Birkey for coordinating these trials.

13

Bio-Forge® Trial

Purpose: Bio-Forge is advertised as a stress-reducing and yield-promoting product that can be applied in-furrow, on the seed, sidedress or as a foliar application. The foliar application increased soybean yields by 1.8 bushels per acre when compared to the seed treatment in two SMaRT trials conducted in 2012. However, a single foliar application of Bio-Forge did not increase soybean yields in seven SMaRT trials conducted in 2013. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of sequential foliar applications of Bio-Forge on soybean yield in 2014.

Procedure: StollerUSA recommends two applications of Bio-Forge to soybeans. The first application can be either applied to the seed, applied in-furrow or applied to the foliage. The second is a foliar application applied at R1. A treatment consisting of two sequential applications of Bio-Forge was compared to an untreated control at two locations in 2014. The treatments were replicated five times in the Monroe County trial and six times in the Cass County trial. The randomized complete block experimental design was used at both sites. The Bio-Forge was applied at eight ounces per acre at V3 and another eight ounces per acre was applied at the R1 growth stage. Sprayers were equipped and operated to maximize droplet deposition and leaf coverage. All sprayers were driven through the untreated control treatment to eliminate tire tracks from being a factor.

Results: The Bio-Forge increased soybean yields by three bushels per acre at the Cass County site but did not increase soybean yields at the site in Monroe County. When both locations were combined and analyzed, the yields produced by the Bio-Forge were still significantly higher than the untreated control. However, when the product and application costs were subtracted, the Bio-Forge treatment was less profitable than the untreated control treatment.

We want to express our appreciation to StollerUSA for providing Bio-Forge and to Dan Rajzer and Ned Birkey for coordinating the trials.

14

ProAct™ (Harpin Protein) Trial

Purpose: ProAct, a commercially available foliar product containing the Harpin Protein, has been advertised as increasing soybean resistance to stress and soybean cyst nematodes. ProAct was applied with Stratego YLD in two SMaRT trials in 2012 and did not increase soybean yields at either site. It was also applied alone prior to R1 at five locations in 2013 and did not increase soybean yields at any of the sites. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a late-season (R3) application of ProAct on soybean yields in 2014.

Procedure: A single foliar application of ProAct was compared to an untreated control at three locations in 2014. The ProAct was applied at one ounce per acre at the R3 growth stage. All locations were infested with soybean cyst nematodes. All of the sprayers were setup and operated to optimize leaf coverage. The sprayers were also driven through the untreated control treatments to eliminate tire tracks from being a confounding factor.

Results: A single foliar application of ProAct did not significantly increase soybean yields when compared to an untreated control at any of the three locations in 2014. This was also true when all three locations were combined and analyzed.

We want to thank Mitch Ray and Direct Enterprises for providing the ProAct and Dan Rajzer and Ned Birkey for coordinating these trials.

15

Priaxor™ Foliar Fungicide Trial

Purpose: Priaxor, a new foliar fungicide marketed by BASF, has been advertised as providing more consistent performance and advanced plant health benefits than other fungicides. Priaxor is rated as providing excellent control of Septoria brown spot, the most common soybean disease in Michigan. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a single foliar application of Priaxor on soybean yield in 2014.

Procedure: A single foliar application of Priaxor was compared to an untreated control at 13 locations in Michigan in 2014. The treatments were replicated four times in a randomized complete block experimental design at each location. The Priaxor was applied at four ounces per acre between the R2 and R4 growth stages. The sprayers were driven through the untreated control treatments to ensure that tire tracks were not a confounding factor.

Results: A single foliar application of Priaxor produced higher soybean yields than the untreated control at six of the 13 locations in 2014. When 11 of the 13 locations were combined and analyzed, the Priaxor treatment increased soybean yields by 2.7 bushels per acre compared to the untreated control. With the projected soybean price and currents product and application costs, this is just above the break even point.

We want to thank BASF for providing and delivering the product and Dan Rajzer, Ned Birkey and Loren Collison for coordinating these trials.

16

Purpose: Sclerotina Stem Rot or white mold can cause significant yield reductions in soybeans grown in Michigan. However, the incidence and severity of the disease vary tremendously by year and location. Three factors determine the incidence and severity of white mold: 1) presence and quantity of disease inoculum; 2) environmental conditions favorable to disease development; and 3) a susceptible host. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect that two white mold fungicide programs would have on soybean yields when the disease was likely to occur.

Procedure: Two white mold fungicide programs were compared to an untreated control at seven locations in 2013 and again at one site in 2014. The program recommended by Bayer CropScience consisted of Proline® 480 SC applied at R1 followed by Stratego® YLD applied at R3. The white mold program recommended by Dupont was Aproach® applied at R1 followed by a second application of Aproach at R2. Proline 480Sc was applied at three ounces per acre, Stratego YLD was applied at four ounces per acre and Aproach was applied at nine ounces per acre per application. The sprayer was equipped and operated to optimize spray droplet deposition in the canopy. Tire tracks were not present in any of the harvested strips. White mold incidence was determined by counting 100 consecutive plants and recording the number of diseased plants. All counts were taken from approximately the same location in each treatment.

2013 and 2014 White Mold Foliar Fungicide Program Trial

Results: Only the 2013 results from the Sanilac County location are presented here as this was the only site at which the same treatments were applied in 2014. White mold was prevalent in the trials each year but disease pressure was especially severe in 2014 and neither fungicide program reduced disease incidence compared to the untreated control. Consequently, yields in the fungicide program treatments were significantly reduced compared to 2013. When both years were combined, both fungicide programs reduced disease incidence and increased yield compared to the untreated control. Comparing the two programs, the Proline followed by Stratego YLD program produced a statistically significant yield increase over the sequential Aproach applications in 2013 but not in 2014. A possible reason for this is that we modified the Aproach treatments in 2014 based on input from Dupont. The second Aproach treatment was applied at R2 instead of R3 and a non-ionic surfactant was included in both applications.

We want to thank Bayer CropScience and Dupont for providing the foliar fungicides for this trial.

White mold infestation in Sanilac County

17

2013 and 2014 White Mold Foliar Fungicide Program Trial

18

Aproach® White Mold Foliar Fungicide Trial

Results: All sites had a history of white mold and with favorable environmental conditions, some degree of white mold incidence was found in all trials. Fungicide applications reduced white mold incidence at four of the five sites (table 3). Soybean yields were increased with fungicide application at three of the five locations (table 1). When four of the five locations were combined, both the single and the sequential Aproach applications increased yield compared to the untreated control. The sequential Aproach application improved soybean yields by nearly three bushels per acre when compared to the single Aproach application. Both fungicide programs reduced white mold incidence when all locations were combined and analyzed. The sequential Aproach applications reduced disease incidence by nearly 13 percent when compared to the single Aproach application.

White mold is a complex disease and foliar fungicides can be a part of a comprehensive management plan including resistant varieties, reduced planting populations, row spacing greater than 20 inches, no-tillage, irrigation water management and crop rotation. However, foliar fungicides used alone will not consistently manage white mold.

We want to thank Dupont for providing and delivering the Aproach foliar fungicide and Dan Rajzer, Ned Birkey, Loren Collison and Martin Nagelkirk for coordinating these trials.

Purpose: Sclerotina Stem Rot or white mold can cause significant yield reductions in soybeans grown in Michigan. However, the incidence and severity of the disease vary tremendously by year and location. Three factors determine the incidence and severity of white mold: 1) presence and quantity of disease inoculum; 2) environmental conditions favorable to disease development and 3) a susceptible host. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of single and sequential applications of Aproach fungicide on soybean yields when white mold was likely to occur.

Procedure: This trial consisted of three treatments: 1) Aproach fungicide applied at R1, 2) Aproach applied at R1 and again at R2 or 10 days after R1, and 3) an untreated control. The treatments were replicated four times in a randomized complete block experimental design at five locations. All sprayers were equipped and operated to optimize spray droplet deposition in the canopy. Tire tracks were either present in the harvest area for every treatment or not present any of the harvested areas depending on how individual trials were set up. White mold incidence was determined at all locations by counting 100 consecutive plants and recording the number of diseased plants. All counts were taken from approximately the same location in each treatment.

Sclerotia present on soybean stem

19

Aproach® White Mold Foliar Fungicide Trial

White mold infestation in Sanilac County

20

Intensive Management Trial

Results: The intensive management treatment increased soybean yields by 9.3 bushels per acre at one location in Sanilac County in 2014. The intensive management treatment also increased plant populations in the trial by nearly 31,000 plants per acre. Because the producer noticed the population difference early in the season, the seed treatment was probably responsible for the higher plant population in the intensive management treatment. Given the projected 2014/2015 market price and the additional costs associated with the intensive management trial, this treatment produced $26.00 per acre more income than the untreated control treatment at the site in 2014. Additional research is needed to see if this type of intensive manage will continue to be profitable across multiple locations and years.

We want to thank BASF and the Andersons Inc. for providing and delivering the products for this trial.

Purpose: Soybean producers are trying to improve soybean yields and many are willing to manage the crop more intensively to achieve this goal. University researchers have collaborated to conduct intensive management or “kitchen sink” trials in recent years. These trials are designed to determine which products and management practices contribute to higher soybean yields. Nearly all of the research has been done in small plots. The purpose of this trial was to determine the effect of an intensive management treatment (seed treatment followed by a foliar three-way tank mixture application) on soybean yields in 2014.

Procedure: An intensive management treatment (seed treatment followed by a foliar three-way tank mixture application) was compared to an untreated control treatment (no seed treatment or foliar application) at one location in 2014. The seed treatment applied in the intensive management treatment was Poncho®/VOTiVO® and Acceleron®. The Acceleron was a combination of three fungicides (pyraclostrobin, metalaxyl and fluxapyroxad). The foliar tank mixture included Priaxor™ (fungicide) from BASF, Fastac™ (insecticide) from BASF and PhosFix™ 7-4-9 (fertilizer) from the Andersons Inc. Priaxor was applied at four ounces per acre, Fastac was applied at 3.8 ounces per acre and PhoFix was applied at two pints per acre. The foliar applications were made at R3 and the sprayer was driven through the untreated control treatments to prevent tire tracks from being a factor. The trial was planted in 7.5 inch rows at 190,000 seeds per acre on May 24.

21

Intensive Management Trial

Intensive management treatment

Untreated control treatment

22

Purpose: The SMaRT project has evaluated the performance of numerous foliar products in past trials. In nearly all of these trials, a single foliar product has been compared to an untreated control. Soybean producers have requested that the SMaRT project compare a three-way tank mixture including a fungicide, an insecticide and a fertilizer to an untreated control. The producers expressed two reasons for conducting this type of trial: 1) the products may have a synergistic effect when tank-mixed and 2) foliar applications of tank mixtures are becoming more common. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a foliar application including a fungicide, an insecticide and a fertilizer on soybean yield in 2014.

Procedure: A single foliar application including a fungicide, an insecticide and a fertilizer was compared to an untreated control at 10 locations in 2014. The treatments were replicated four times at nine locations and five times at one location. The randomized complete block experimental design was used at all locations. The products included in the foliar tank mix were Priaxor™ (fungicide) from BASF, Fastac™ (insecticide) from BASF and PhosFix™ 7-4-9 (fertilizer) from the Andersons Inc. Priaxor was applied at four ounces per acre, Fastac was 3.8 ounces per acre and PhoFix was applied at two pints per acre. The foliar applications were made at R3 and all sprayers were driven through the untreated control treatments to prevent tire tracks from being a factor.

Foliar Tank Mixture Trial

Results: The foliar tank mixture increased soybean yields at six of the 10 locations. The statistically significant yield increases for each location ranged from 2.8 bushels per acre to 9.8 bushels per acre. When nine of the 10 locations were combined and analyzed, the three-way tank mixture increased soybean yields by 4.7 bushels per acre compared to the untreated control. With the projected soybean price and current product and application costs, the tank mixture produced $6.00 more income per acre than the untreated control. Further research will be needed to determine why the foliar application produced such a wide range of yield responses among the locations.

We want to thank BASF and the Andersons Inc. for providing and delivering the product, Green Valley Agricultural Inc. of Bangor and Crop Production Service of Woodbury for applying the foliar tank mix and Dan Rajzer, Ned Birkey and Loren Collison for coordinating these trials.

23

Air-Assisted Reel Trial

Purpose: Interest in air-assisted reels is increasing. The equipment uses high velocity air to move loose beans and cut plants into the auger or belt on combine heads. This technology is advertised as reducing harvest losses, providing more uniform feeding into the combine and allowing higher harvest speeds. The purpose of this trial was to evaluate the effect of air-assisted reels on soybean yield in 2014.

Procedure: Combines equipped with air-assisted reels were operated with the fans turned on for one treatment and with the fan turned off for the other treatment. Yields were collected from a complete round of the combine to prevent lodging from being a factor in the trials.

Results: There was a trend for soybean yields to be higher when the fan providing the air to the air-assisted reel was turned on at both locations. However, the yields were not statistically different between the two treatments. This was true at both locations and when the two locations were combined and analyzed. The late and wet harvest conditions occurring this fall reduced the potential for shatter losses. Air-assisted reels may have a larger impact on yields losses when the plants are short and/or the pods are dry and brittle at harvest. The effect of the air-assisted reels on improving uniform feeding and allowing faster harvest speeds was not measured in this trial. These characteristics were probably beneficial this fall due to the tough plants and wet harvest conditions we experienced.

We want to thank Ned Birkey for coordinating a trial.

Air-assisted reel on Draper head

24

Introduction to Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Interpretation

Producers will often evaluate new products or practices by comparing them side by side in two strips or by splitting a field in half. This practice may introduce a tremendous amount of experimental error and may not produce reliable information regarding the performance of the product or practice. The information generated is heavily influenced by factors other than the practice or product being evaluated. Good experimental design followed by careful statistical analysis can eliminate much of the experimental error and help determine the actual performance of the new practice, equipment, or product.

Developing and implementing a sound experimental design is the first step to generating meaningful and reliable results from on-farm research trials. One of the most common and effective designs is called the randomized complete block design (RCBD). The RCBD is also one of the easiest to lay out in the field. The RCBD reduces the experimental error by grouping or blocking all of the treatments to be compared within replications. This design improves the likelihood that all the treatments are compared under similar conditions. Blocking the treatments together and replicating the blocks across the field is a simple and effective way to account for variability in the field. Increasing the number of replications generally increases the sensitivity of the statistical analysis by reducing the experimental error. The SMaRT program encourages cooperators to use at least four replications.

Another important aspect of a good experimental design is the concept of randomization. Randomly assigning the order of the treatments within each block is critical to removing bias from treatment averages or means and reducing experimental error. Figure 1 shows the actual RCBD design that was used in previous planting population trials. It demonstrates the principles outlined above. Note how each planting population is included and randomized within the replications. All of the trials summarized in this report utilized the RCBD with four replications of each treatment unless stated otherwise in the procedure section of each trial summary.

After the trial is harvested, proven statistical methods are used to determine if the differences in yields are due to the treatments or a result of other outside factors. It is important to look at the Least Significant Difference (LSD 0.10) when you interpret the information contained in the tables and graphs in this publication.

The LSD 0.10 is a calculated figure that producers can use to determine with a confidence level of 90% that the difference between two or more treatments is due to the treatments and not other factors. We are again using an LSD 0.10 for 2014. If the yield of two treatments differs by less than the LSD listed, the difference cannot be statistically attributed to a difference in the treatments.

Letters are used in the tables and graphs in this publication to identify yields or other measurements that are, or are not statistically different. When the same letter appears next to the yield or other measurable condition of two or more treatments, the difference between them is not statistically significant.

The SMaRT program designs and analyzes field research trials enabling Michigan soybean producers to reliably evaluate the performance of new products, equipment and practices on their farms. In many cases, a given trial like the Ratchet foliar growth promoter trial will be conducted at multiple locations and over multiple years. This greatly improves the reliability of the information produced.

Figure 1. The randomized complete block design used in previous planting populations trials.