Corn, Sweet Sorghum, and Small Grain Silage Tests in Tennessee

Transcription

1 Corn, Sweet Sorghum, and Small Grain Silage Tests in Tennessee 2010 Fred L. Allen, Coordinator, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Richard Johnson, Research Associate, Agronomic Crop Variety Testing & Demonstrations Kara Warwick, Graduate Research Assistant Jennifer Lane, Graduate Research Assistant Virginia Sykes, Graduate Research Assistant Agronomic Crop Variety Testing and Demonstrations Department of Plant Sciences Institute of Agriculture University of Tennessee Knoxville Telephone: (865) FAX: (865) Variety test results are posted on UT s website at: and 1

2 Acknowledgments This research was funded by the Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station and UT Extension with partial funding from participating companies. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the following individuals in conducting these experiments: Department of Plant Sciences Dr. Dennis West, Professor and Grains Breeder Mr. David Kincer, Research Associate Research and Education Centers: East Tennessee, Knoxville Dr. Robert Simpson, Superintendent Mr. Bobby McKee, Sr. Farm Crew Leader Mr. Lee Ellis, Research Assistant Plateau Mr. Walt Hitch, Superintendent Mr. Greg Blaylock, Light Farm Equipment Operator Mr. Sam Simmons, Light Farm Equipment Operator Highland Rim, Springfield Dr. Barry Sims, Superintendent Mr. Brad S. Fisher, Research Associate Middle Tennessee, Spring Hill Dr. Kevin Thompson, Superintendent Mr. Frank Musgrave, Research Associate County Standard Corn Silage Tests County Producer Agent Blount Mac Pate John Wilson Washington David Saylor John Hamrick 2

3 Table of Contents Experimental Procedures 3 Interpretation of Data 4 Research and Education Center Information Corn Hybrid Yield Corn Hybrid Agronomic Data Corn Hybrid Quality Data 7 2 Year Corn Hybrid Data 9 3 Year Corn Hybrid Data 11 County Standard Tests Sweet Sorghum Silage Data 15 2 Year Sweet Sorghum Silage Data 17 3 Year Sweet Sorghum Silage Data Wheat Silage Yield & Agronomic Data Wheat Silage Quality Data Oat Silage Yield & Agronomic Data Oat Silage Quality Data 25 Corn Hybrid Characteristics 26 Seed Company Contact Information 27 CORN SILAGE YIELD TESTS Experimental Procedures 2010 Research and Education Center Tests: Nineteen corn hybrids were evaluated for silage yield and quality in The tests were conducted at the East Tennessee (Knoxville), Plateau (Crossville), Highland Rim (Springfield), and Middle Tennessee (Spring Hill), Research and Education Centers (REC). The plot size at all locations consisted of two rows 30 ft. in length and replicated three times. Yields presented were adjusted to both dry weight and 65% moisture. The plant populations as well as the planting and harvesting dates are given in Table 1. Plots were harvested by commercial silage harvesters. A sub-sample from each plot of approximately 3 lbs was taken for analysis. Fresh weight and dried weight was recorded on each sample for determination of moisture at harvest. The samples were then ground and analyzed for nutrient content. Silage quality analyses were provided by Cumberland Valley Analytical Services, Inc., Hagerstown, MD. Milk per ton and milk per acre calculations were performed using the University of Wisconsin Milk2006 program. County Standard Tests: The County Standard Corn Silage Tests were conducted in Blount and Washington counties in Tennessee. Each hybrid was evaluated in a large strip-plot at each location, thus each county test was considered as one replication of the test in calculating the overall average yield and in conducting the statistical analysis to determine significant differences. At each location, plots were planted, sprayed, fertilized, and harvested with the equipment used in the cooperating producer s farming operation. The width and length of strip-plots were different in each county; however, within a location in a county, the strips were trimmed on the ends so that the lengths were the same for each variety, or if the lengths were different then the harvested length was measured for each variety and appropriate harvested area adjustments were made to determine the yield per acre. 3

4 Growing Season: The 2010 growing season was characterized by a wet spring resulting in some flooded fields followed by hotter and dryer than normal conditions. Hot dry conditions in July and August advanced harvest slightly ahead of the normal pace. Interpretation of Data: The tables on the following pages have been prepared with the entries listed in order of performance, the highest-yielding entry being listed first. At the bottom of the tables, LSD values stand for Least Significant Difference. The mean yields of any two varieties being compared must differ by at least the amount shown to be considered different in yielding ability at the 5% level of probability of significance. For example, given that the LSD for a test is 1.3 tons/a and the mean yield of Hybrid A was 9.3 tons/a and the mean yield of Hybrid B was 8.2 tons/a, then the two hybrids are not statistically different in yield because the difference of 1.1 tons/a is less than the minimum of 1.3 tons/a required for them to be significant. Similarly, if the average yield of Hybrid C was 10.6 tons/a then it is significantly higher yielding than both Hybrid B ( = 2.4 tons/a > LSD of 1.3) and Hybrid A ( = 1.3 tons/a = LSD of 1.3). Also, the coefficient of variation (C.V.) values are shown at the bottom of each table. This value is a measure of the error variability found within each experiment. It is the percentage that the square root of error variance is of the overall test mean yield at that location. For example, a C.V. of 10% indicates that the size of the error variation is about 10% of the size of the test mean. Similarly, a C.V. of 30% indicates that the size of the error variation is nearly one-third as large as the test mean. A goal in conducting each yield test is to keep the C.V. as low as possible, preferably below 20 percent. Table 1. Location information from Research and Education Centers where the corn silage variety tests were conducted in Planting Harvest Plant Soil Research and Education Center Location Date Date Population Type East Tennessee Knoxville 4/19/10 8/12/10 31,944 Sequatchie Silt Loam Plateau Crossville 5/10/10 8/24/10 29,621 Lilly Silt Loam Middle Tennessee Spring Hill 4/26/10 8/16/10 32,815 Maury Silt Loam Highland Rim Springfield 4/15/10 8/10/10 25,555 Dickson Silt Loam 4

5 Table 2. Mean yields of 19 corn hybrids evaluated for silage at four locations in Tennessee during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield ± Std Err. ± Std Err Dry Weight Brand Hybrid (n=4) (n=4) Knoxville Crossville Spring Hill Springfield tons/a Croplan 8505VT3P 7.9 ± ± Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.7 ± ± Augusta A5337EVT3 7.6 ± ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 7.4 ± ± Merschman M (RR/CB/RW) 7.3 ± ± Augusta A6867CBLL 7.3 ± ± Augusta A5461GTCBLL 7.2 ± ± Croplan 8756VT3 7.1 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.0 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.0 ± ± Augusta A0604HXLL 6.9 ± ± Augusta A5462GT3 6.9 ± ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 6.8 ± ± Mycogen TMF2W727 (RR/LL/HX) 6.8 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 6.7 ± ± Croplan 851VT3P 6.7 ± ± Augusta A7664CB 6.6 ± ± Merschman M-1015B-15 (RR/CB/RW) 5.9 ± ± Mycogen F2F665 (RR/LL/HX) 5.9 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) all silage yields are adjusted to dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated. YGRW, RW, CRW = contians a gene for rootworm resistance YG, YGCB, Bt, HX, CB = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, RR2, R, GT, R2 = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides 5

6 Table 3. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 19 corn hybrids evaluated for silage at four locations in Tennessee during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Moisture Plant Ear ± Std Err. ± Std Err. at harvest Lodging Height Height Brand Hybrid (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=3) tons/a tons/a % % inches inches Croplan 8505VT3P 7.9 ± ± Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.7 ± ± Augusta A5337EVT3 7.6 ± ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 7.4 ± ± Merschman M (RR/CB/RW) 7.3 ± ± Augusta A6867CBLL 7.3 ± ± Augusta A5461GTCBLL 7.2 ± ± Croplan 8756VT3 7.1 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.0 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.0 ± ± Augusta A0604HXLL 6.9 ± ± Augusta A5462GT3 6.9 ± ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 6.8 ± ± Mycogen TMF2W727 (RR/LL/HX) 6.8 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 6.7 ± ± Croplan 851VT3P 6.7 ± ± Augusta A7664CB 6.6 ± ± Merschman M-1015B-15 (RR/CB/RW) 5.9 ± ± Mycogen F2F665 (RR/LL/HX) 5.9 ± ± Average all silage yields are adjusted to dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated. YGRW, RW = contians a gene for rootworm resistance YG, YGCB, CB, Bt, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, R, RR2, R2, GT = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides 6

7 Table 4. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 19 corn hybrids evaluated for silage at four locations in Tennessee during Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Croplan 8505VT3P 7.9 ± Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.7 ± Augusta A5337EVT3 7.6 ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 7.4 ± Merschman M (RR/CB/RW) 7.3 ± Augusta A6867CBLL 7.3 ± Augusta A5461GTCBLL 7.2 ± Croplan 8756VT3 7.1 ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.0 ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.0 ± Augusta A0604HXLL 6.9 ± Augusta A5462GT3 6.9 ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 6.8 ± Mycogen TMF2W727 (RR/LL/HX) 6.8 ± Augusta A008VT3 6.7 ± Croplan 851VT3P 6.7 ± Augusta A7664CB 6.6 ± Merschman M-1015B-15 (RR/CB/RW) 5.9 ± Mycogen F2F665 (RR/LL/HX) 5.9 ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis Bt, YG, YGCB, CB, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contains a gene for rootworm resistance VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, RR2 = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 7

8 Table 5. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 19 corn hybrids evaluated for silage at four locations in Tennessee during 2010, sorted by brand. Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) (n=4) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Augusta A5337EVT3 7.6 ± Augusta A6867CBLL 7.3 ± Augusta A5461GTCBLL 7.2 ± Augusta A0604HXLL 6.9 ± Augusta A5462GT3 6.9 ± Augusta A008VT3 6.7 ± Augusta A7664CB 6.6 ± Croplan 8505VT3P 7.9 ± Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.7 ± Croplan 8756VT3 7.1 ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.0 ± Croplan 851VT3P 6.7 ± Merschman M (RR/CB/RW) 7.3 ± Merschman M-1015B-15 (RR/CB/RW) 5.9 ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 7.4 ± Mycogen TMF2W727 (RR/LL/HX) 6.8 ± Mycogen F2F665 (RR/LL/HX) 5.9 ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.0 ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 6.8 ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis Bt, YG, YGCB, CB, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contains a gene for rootworm resistance VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, RR2 = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 8

9 Table 6. Mean yields of eight corn hybrids evaluated for silage in four environments for two years ( ) in Tennessee. Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield ± Std Err. ± Std Err Dry Weight Brand Hybrid (n=8) (n=8) Knoxville Crossville Spring Hill Springfield tons/a Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 8.5 ± ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 8.4 ± ± Croplan 8756VT3 8.2 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 8.1 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 8.0 ± ± Augusta A0604HXLL 8.0 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 7.9 ± ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 7.6 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) Table 7. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of eight corn hybrids evaluated for silage in four environments for two years ( ) in Tennessee. Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Moisture Plant Ear ± Std Err. ± Std Err. at harvest Lodging Height Height Brand Variety (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=7) (n=8) (n=6) tons/a tons/a % % inches inches Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 8.5 ± ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 8.4 ± ± Croplan 8756VT3 8.2 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 8.1 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 8.0 ± ± Augusta A0604HXLL 8.0 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 7.9 ± ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 7.6 ± ± all silage yields are adjusted to dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated. YG, YGCB, CB, Bt, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contians a gene for rootworm resistance RR, R, RR2, R2, GT = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides 9

10 Table 8. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of eight corn hybrids evaluated for silage at four locations for 2 years ( ) in Tennessee. Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) (n=8) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 8.5 ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 8.4 ± Croplan 8756VT3 8.2 ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 8.1 ± Croplan 8221VT3 8.0 ± Augusta A0604HXLL 8.0 ± Augusta A008VT3 7.9 ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 7.6 ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis Bt, YG, YGCB, CB, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contains a gene for rootworm resistance VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, RR2 = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 10

11 Table 9. Mean yields of five corn hybrids evaluated for silage in three environments for three years ( ) in Tennessee. Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield ± Std Err. ± Std Err Dry Weight Brand Hybrid (n=9) (n=9) Knoxville Crossville Springfield tons/a Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.9 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.9 ± ± Augusta A0604HXLL 7.7 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 7.6 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.4 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) Table 10. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of five corn hybrids evaluated for silage in three environments for three years ( ) in Tennessee. Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Moisture Plant Ear ± Std Err. ± Std Err. at harvest Lodging Height Height Brand Variety (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=8) (n=9) (n=6) tons/a tons/a % % inches inches Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.9 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.9 ± ± Augusta A0604HXLL 7.7 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 7.6 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.4 ± ± Codes: all silage yields are adjusted to dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated. YG, YGCB, CB, Bt, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contians a gene for rootworm resistance RR, R, RR2, R2, GT = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance 11

12 Table 11. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of five corn hybrids evaluated for silage at three locations for three years ( ) in Tennessee. Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) (n=9) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Croplan 9009 RH (RR/LL/HX) 7.9 ± Croplan 8221VT3 7.9 ± Augusta A0604HXLL 7.7 ± Augusta A008VT3 7.6 ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 7.4 ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis Bt, YG, YGCB, CB, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contains a gene for rootworm resistance VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, RR2 = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 12

13 COUNTY STANDARD TESTS Table 12. Mean yields of 19 corn hybrids evaluated for silage in two County Standard Tests in Tennessee during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Dry Weight Moisture Plant ± Std Err. ± Std Err. Blount Washington at harvest Height Brand Hybrid (n=2) (n=2) (n=1) (n=1) (n=2) (n=1) tons/a % inches Dyna-Gro 58V69 (RR/CB) 6.9 ± ± Augusta A5462GT3 6.0 ± ± Croplan 8756VT3 5.4 ± ± Croplan 851VT3P 5.2 ± ± Croplan 8505VT3P 5.2 ± ± DeKalb DKC67-87 (RR2/YGCB) 5.0 ± ± Merschman M (RR/CB/RW) 4.9 ± ± Mycogen TMF2W727 (RR/LL/HX) 4.9 ± ± Croplan 8221VT3 4.8 ± ± Merschman M-1015B-15 (RR/CB/RW) 4.7 ± ± Augusta A008VT3 4.6 ± ± Augusta A5337EVT3 4.6 ± ± Croplan 9009 RH 4.5 ± ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 4.4 ± ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 4.4 ± ± Augusta A5461GTCBLL 4.1 ± ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 3.7 ± ± Terral-REV Bra 28HR20 (RR2/LL/HX1) 3.6 ± ± Mycogen F2F665 (RR/LL/HX) 3.3 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) all silage yields are adjusted to dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated. Blount County: Mac Pate Dairy Farm YG, YGCB, CB, Bt, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance Planted: YGRW, CRW, RW = contians a gene for rootworm resistance Harvested: RR, R, RR2, R2, GT = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate Population: 26,263 LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate 30 inch row spacing CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance Washington County: Savland farm (David Saylor) VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance Planted: Harvested: Population: 27, inch row spacing 13

14 Table 13. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 19 corn hybrids evaluated for silage in two County Standard Tests in Tennessee during Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Dyna-Gro 58V69 (RR/CB) 6.9 ± Augusta A5462GT3 6.0 ± Croplan 8756VT3 5.4 ± Croplan 851VT3P 5.2 ± Croplan 8505VT3P 5.2 ± DeKalb DKC67-87 (RR2/YGCB) 5.0 ± Merschman M (RR/CB/RW) 4.9 ± Mycogen TMF2W727 (RR/LL/HX) 4.9 ± Croplan 8221VT3 4.8 ± Merschman M-1015B-15 (RR/CB/RW) 4.7 ± Augusta A008VT3 4.6 ± Augusta A5337EVT3 4.6 ± Croplan 9009 RH 4.5 ± Mycogen TMF2H918 (RR/LL/HX) 4.4 ± Wyffels W9121 (VT3) 4.4 ± Augusta A5461GTCBLL 4.1 ± Wyffels W8681 (VT3) 3.7 ± Terral-REV Brand 28HR20 (RR2/LL/HX1) 3.6 ± Mycogen F2F665 (RR/LL/HX) 3.3 ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis Bt, YG, YGCB, CB, HX = contains a Bacillus thuringiensis gene for insect resistance YGRW, RW = contains a gene for rootworm resistance VT3, TS = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, and glyphosate resistance VT3P = contains genes for corn borer, rootworm, earworm, armyworm and glyphosate resistance RR, RR2 = contains a gene for tolerance to glyphosate LL = contains a gene for tolerance to glufosinate CL = contains a gene for tolerance to Imidazolinone class herbicides NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 14

15 Sweet Sorghum Silage Test Eleven sweet sorghum varieties were evaluated for silage yield and quality at the East Tennessee REC. Test varieties were planted on 5/7/10 at a rate of 87,600 seed per acre. Plots consisted of four rows on 30 inch spacings, 30 ft in length. Each entry was replicated three times. Plots were harvested with a commercial silage harvester on 9/29/10. Due to equipment difficulties and lodging, only one or two rows of each plot were harvested for yield evaluation. Yields presented were adjusted to both dry weight and 65% moisture. A sub-sample from each plot was taken for analysis and determination of moisture at harvest. The samples were ground and analyzed for nutrient content by Cumberland Valley Analytical Services, Inc., Hagerstown, MD. Milk per ton and milk per acre calculations were performed using the University of Wisconsin Milk2006 program. 15

16 Table 14. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 11 sweet sorghum varieties evaluated for silage at Knoxville, Tennessee during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Plant at Brand Hybrid ± Std Err. ± Std Err. Lodging Height Harvest tons/a tons/a Score inches % Walter Moss 4 Ever Green 11.5 ± ± KN Morris 10.9 ± ± Walter Moss Mega Green 10.8 ± ± MS M81E 10.7 ± ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green BMR 10.6 ± ± Top ± ± Winfield Solutions BMR 108 Leafy 10.2 ± ± MS Dale 10.0 ± ± VA Della 8.3 ± ± MS Keller 7.6 ± ± MS Theis 7.3 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) Planted 5/7/09, seeding rate 87,600 / acre, Sequatchie Silt Loam, one and two row plots 30 ft in length, three replications of each entry, Harvested 9/29/10 Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle 45. Table 15. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 11 sweet sorghum varieties evaluated for silage at Knoxville, Tennessee during Dry Weight Avg. Yield Crude NDF 30h Brand Hybrid ± Std Err. Protein NDF IV Digest Starch Sugar ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre tons/a % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Walter Moss 4 Ever Green 11.5 ± KN Morris 10.9 ± Walter Moss Mega Green 10.8 ± MS M81E 10.7 ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green BMR 10.6 ± Top ± Winfield Solutions BMR 108 Leafy 10.2 ± MS Dale 10.0 ± VA Della 8.3 ± MS Keller 7.6 ± MS Theis 7.3 ± NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 16

17 Table 16. Mean yields of 10 sweet sorghum varieties evaluated for silage at Knoxville, Tennessee for two years ( ). Dry Weight 65% Moisture Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Plant at Brand Hybrid ± Std Err. ± Std Err. Lodging Height Harvest (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) (n=2) tons/a tons/a Score inches % Walter Moss Mega Green 11.1 ± ± KN Morris 11.0 ± ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green 10.8 ± ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green BMR 10.0 ± ± Top ± ± MS Dale 9.8 ± ± MS M81E 9.8 ± ± VA Della 8.7 ± ± MS Theis 8.1 ± ± MS Keller 8.1 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle 45. Table 17. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 10 sweet sorghum varieties evaluated for silage at Knoxville, Tennessee for two years ( ). Dry Weight Avg. Yield Crude NDF 30h Brand Hybrid ± Std Err. Protein NDF IV Digest Starch Sugar ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre tons/a % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Walter Moss Mega Green 11.1 ± KN Morris 11.0 ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green 10.8 ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green BMR 10.0 ± Top ± MS Dale 9.8 ± MS M81E 9.8 ± VA Della 8.7 ± MS Theis 8.1 ± MS Keller 8.1 ± NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber NEL = Net Energy for Lactation TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 17

18 Table 18. Mean yields of seven sweet sorghum varieties evaluated for silage at Knoxville, Tennessee for three years ( ). Dry Weight 65% Moisture Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Plant at Brand Hybrid ± Std Err. ± Std Err. Lodging Height Harvest (n=3) (n=3) (n=3) (n=3) (n=3) tons/a tons/a Score inches % Walter Moss Mega Green 12.3 ± ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green 11.6 ± ± MS Dale 10.8 ± ± MS M81E 10.3 ± ± MS Keller 8.9 ± ± VA Della 8.4 ± ± MS Theis 8.1 ± ± Avg. (tons/a) L.S.D..05 (tons/a) C.V. (%) Lodging = 1 to 5 scale; where 1 = 95% of plants erect; 2.5 = ~50% of plants leaning at angle 45 ; 5 = 95+% of plants leaning at an angle 45. Table 19. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of seven sweet sorghum varieties evaluated for silage at Knoxville, Tennessee for three years ( ). Dry Weight Avg. Yield Crude NDF 30h Brand Hybrid ± Std Err. Protein NDF IV Digest Starch Sugar ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre tons/a % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Walter Moss Mega Green 12.3 ± Walter Moss 4 Ever Green 11.6 ± MS Dale 10.8 ± MS M81E 10.3 ± MS Keller 8.9 ± VA Della 8.4 ± MS Theis 8.1 ± NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 18

19 Small Grains Silage Test Sixty-five wheat varieties and 23 fall seeded oat varieties were evaluated for silage yield and quality at the Middle Tennessee REC (Spring Hill, TN). Varieties were seeded at 26 seed per square foot. Plots were planted on 11/5/09 with a drill and consisted of 7 rows on 7 inch spacings, 30 ft in length. Each entry was replicated three times. The plots were harvested on 5/19/10 by a commercial silage harvester. Yields presented were adjusted to both dry weight and 65% moisture. A sub-sample from each plot of approximately 3 lbs was taken for analysis. Fresh weight and dried weight was recorded on each sample for determination of moisture at harvest. The samples were then ground and analyzed for nutrient content. Silage quality analyses were provided by Cumberland Valley Analytical Services, Inc., Hagerstown, MD. Milk per ton and milk per acre calculations were performed using the University of Wisconsin Milk2006 program. 19

20 Table 20. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 65 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated for silage at the Middle Tennessee Research and Education Center during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Moisture ± Std Err. ± Std Err. at harvest Lodging Height Brand Hybrid (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) tons/a tons/a % % inches Croplan Genetics ± ± VA Exp. VA05W ± ± TN Exp. TN ± ± USG ± ± AgriPro Coker W ± ± Pioneer 26R ± ± AgriPro Coker B ± ± Armor ARX ± ± USG ± ± TN Exp. TN ± ± Delta Grow ± ± Michigan Crop Improvement Red Ruby 3.4 ± ± TN Exp. TN ± ± Dyna-Gro ± ± USG ± ± Warren Seed McKay ± ± Progeny ± ± AgriPro Coker W ± ± USG ± ± Croplan Genetics ± ± USG ± ± GA Exp. GA E ± ± USG ± ± Terral LA ± ± Terral TVX ± ± Terral TV ± ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± ± Delta Grow ± ± Delta Grow ± ± MO Bess 3.1 ± ± Dyna-Gro V ± ± Pioneer 26R ± ± Progeny ± ± USG ± ± Progeny ± ± GA Exp. GA E9 3.1 ± ± Terral TV ± ± Croplan Genetics ± ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± ± Dyna-Gro V ± ± USG ± ± MO Milton 3.0 ± ± VA Merl 3.0 ± ± Dyna-Gro Shirley 3.0 ± ± USG ± ± Delta Grow ± ± Pioneer 26R ± ± USG ± ± Armor Renegade 2.9 ± ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± ±

21 (continued) Table 20. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 65 soft red winter wheat varieties evaluated for silage at the Middle Tennessee Research and Education Center during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Moisture ± Std Err. ± Std Err. at harvest Lodging Height Brand Hybrid (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) tons/a tons/a % % inches OH Malabar 2.8 ± ± AgriPro Coker Oakes 2.8 ± ± Progeny ± ± NC Exp. NC ± ± MO Truman 2.8 ± ± Dyna-Gro ± ± VA Jamestown 2.7 ± ± Pioneer 25R ± ± Croplan Genetics 554W 2.5 ± ± NC Exp. NC ± ± AgriPro Coker Branson 2.5 ± ± AgriPro Coker W ± ± Terral TVX ± ± GA Exp. GA E ± ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%)

22 Table 21. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 65 wheat varieties evaluated for silage at the Middle Tennessee Research and Education Center during Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Croplan Genetics ± VA Exp. VA05W ± TN Exp. TN ± USG ± AgriPro Coker W ± Pioneer 26R ± AgriPro Coker B ± Armor ARX ± USG ± TN Exp. TN ± Delta Grow ± Michigan Crop Improvement Red Ruby 3.4 ± TN Exp. TN ± Dyna-Gro ± USG ± Warren Seed McKay ± Progeny ± AgriPro Coker W ± USG ± Croplan Genetics ± USG ± GA Exp. GA E ± USG ± Terral LA ± Terral TVX ± Terral TV ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Delta Grow ± Delta Grow ± MO Bess 3.1 ± Dyna-Gro V ± Pioneer 26R ± Progeny ± USG ± Progeny ± GA Exp. GA E9 3.1 ±

23 (continued) Table 21. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 65 wheat varieties evaluated for silage at the Middle Tennessee Research and Education Center during Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre Terral TV ± Croplan Genetics ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± Dyna-Gro V ± USG ± MO Milton 3.0 ± VA Merl 3.0 ± Dyna-Gro Shirley 3.0 ± USG ± Delta Grow ± Pioneer 26R ± USG ± Armor Renegade 2.9 ± Cache River Valley Seed Dixie ± OH Malabar 2.8 ± AgriPro Coker Oakes 2.8 ± Progeny ± NC Exp. NC ± MO Truman 2.8 ± Dyna-Gro ± VA Jamestown 2.7 ± Pioneer 25R ± Croplan Genetics 554W 2.5 ± NC Exp. NC ± AgriPro Coker Branson 2.5 ± AgriPro Coker W ± Terral TVX ± GA Exp. GA E ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 23

24 Table 22. Mean yields and agronomic characteristics of 23 fall seeded oat lines evaluated for silage at the Middle Tennessee Research and Education Center during Dry Weight 65% Moisture Avg. Yield Avg. Yield Moisture ± Std Err. ± Std Err. at harvest Lodging Height Brand Hybrid (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) tons/a tons/a % % inches NC NC y 2.5 ± ± TX TAMO ± ± NC NC y 2.3 ± ± FL Horizon ± ± TX TX07CS ± ± FL FL04126-L4 2.1 ± ± NC NC y 2.1 ± ± FL FL03166-L7 2.1 ± ± TX TX05CS ± ± FL FL03211-L1 2.0 ± ± TX TX07CS ± ± TX TX05CS ± ± LA FL03053-S06-15-B-S1B 2.0 ± ± TX TX05CS ± ± LA LA02065SBSBSBSB ± ± NC Rodgers 2.0 ± ± TX TX07CS ± ± LA LA03063SBSBSB-S4 1.9 ± ± LA FL04155-S06-31-B-S1 1.9 ± ± FL FL0115-J2 1.8 ± ± LA LA03046SBS7-B-S1 1.8 ± ± FL LA04003S-L3 1.8 ± ± LA Horizon ± ± Average (bu/a) L.S.D..05 (bu/a) C.V. (%)

25 Table 23. Mean yields and feed quality characteristics of 23 oat varieties evaluated for silage at the Middle Tennessee Research and Education Center during Dry Weight Avg. Yield Moisture Crude NDF 30h ± Std Err. at Harvest Protein NDF IV Digest Starch ADF TDN NEL Milk/ton Milk/acre Brand Hybrid (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) (n=1) tons/a % % dm % dm % of NDF % dm % dm % dm Mcals/lb lbs/ton lbs/acre NC NC y 2.5 ± TX TAMO ± NC NC y 2.3 ± FL Horizon ± TX TX07CS ± FL FL04126-L4 2.1 ± NC NC y 2.1 ± FL FL03166-L7 2.1 ± TX TX05CS ± FL FL03211-L1 2.0 ± TX TX07CS ± TX TX05CS ± LA FL03053-S06-15-B-S1B 2.0 ± TX TX05CS ± LA LA02065SBSBSBSB ± NC Rodgers 2.0 ± TX TX07CS ± LA LA03063SBSBSB-S4 1.9 ± LA FL04155-S06-31-B-S1 1.9 ± FL FL0115-J2 1.8 ± LA LA03046SBS7-B-S1 1.8 ± FL LA04003S-L3 1.8 ± LA Horizon ± yields reported are dry weight basis unless otherwise indicated, feed analysis reported on an "dry weight" basis NDF = Neutral Detergent Fiber ADF = Acid Detergent Fiber TDN = Total Digestable Nutrients NEL = Net Energy for Lactation based on University of Wisconsin Milk2006 software program. 25