Investigator: David R. S. Rourke. General Trial Information



Similar documents
SULFUR AND MICRONUTRIENT RESPONSES ON CORN AND SOYBEANS George Rehm Department of Soil, Water, and Climate, University of Minnesota, St.

Irrigation Scheduling on Small Grains using AZSCHED for Windows - Safford Agricultural Center, 2003

Goldmine Report : pg132aventisharvestaid. Cotton Harvest Aid Demonstration Chris Bubenik, 2001

Evaluation of Foliar Fungicides for the Control of Stripe Rust (Puccinia striiformis) in SRWW in the Northern Texas Blacklands

Sulfur Fertilization of Corn. Jeff Vetsch Univ. of Minnesota Southern Research and Outreach Center December 2013

GRAIN SORGHUM PERFORMANCE TRIALS IN OKLAHOMA, 2011

TEA IN TURKEY Hamit Vanli

for Tomato Joe Masabni UKREC Princeton, KY Joe Masabni

Hybrid Rye for Biogas Trial Results 2012/13 KWS UK

2014 Flax Weed Control Trial

Maize is a major cereal grown and consumed in Uganda and in the countries of Kenya, Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda

PESTICIDE RATE AND DOSAGE CALCULATIONS

for Sweet Corn Joe Masabni UKREC Princeton, KY Joe Masabni

Drip Irrigation for the Yard and Garden

Control of Phytophthora infestans with low copper amounts in potatoes in 2010

ROCKY MOUNTAIN CERTIFIED CROP ADVISER. Local Performance Objectives For Exams and Continuing Education Programs

To evaluate novel & existing fungicide seed tuber treatments applied just prior to planting for the control of skin spot

IHARF Box 156 Indian Head, SK. S0G 2K0 Ph: (306)

Using Web-based Software for Irrigation and Nitrogen Management in Onion Production: our Research Plan for 2013

Required Trial Management Software Features. Gylling Data Management, Inc.

2001 Canola and Crambe Fungicide Trials in Minnesota and North Dakota

Soybean roulette: improving the odds for maximizing soybean yields

USDA IR- MBA Field Trials in CA and FL StRAWBERES M.D.S.R.S. pesticide Preparation

Adapt-N Guided Hands-on Exercise

EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE-GENERAL FOR HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 1

EFFECT OF AVAIL ON CORN PRODUCTION IN MINNESOTA

Organic Gardening Certificate Program Quiz Week 3 Answer Key

The farm: Placed in the middle of Sealand 250 hektar 5000 pigs kg produced Soiltype: JB 6

Required Trial Management Software Features. Gylling Data Management, Inc.

Basic Climatological Station Metadata Current status. Metadata compiled: 30 JAN Synoptic Network, Reference Climate Stations

Comparison of Herbicide Options for IPT Mesquite Control

Nitrogen uptake in cotton+greengram intercropping system as influenced by integrated nutrient management

NCWCD IRRIGATION SCHEDULING PROGRAM - CONVERTING TO A WEB-BASED ACCESSIBLE PROGRAM. James E. Draper 1 ABSTRACT

Purpose: To determine the dew and point and relative humidity in the classroom, and find the current relative humidity outside.

NITROGEN MANAGEMENT WITH DRIP AND SPRINKLER IRRIGATION

RESULTS FROM THE USDA IR-4 MBA FIELD TRIALS IN CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRIES

Vernonia oilseed production in the mid-atlantic region of the United States

MICRONUTRIENTS AS STARTER AND FOLIAR APPLICATION FOR CORN AND SOYBEAN

WEED MANAGEMENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Chemigation Calibration for Center Pivot Irrigation Systems

COTTON WATER RELATIONS

Sequential cropping of Vertisols in the Ethiopian highlands using a broadbed-and-furrow system

Chapter D9. Irrigation scheduling

AT&T Global Network Client for Windows Product Support Matrix January 29, 2015

Apr 17, 2000 LAB MANUAL PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS OF SOILS AASHTO Designation T 88 (Mn/DOT Modified)

The Climate of Oregon Climate Zone 2 Willamette Valley

Onderzoeksopdracht Beste landbouwpraktijken van teelten in combinatie met nateelten/vanggewassen

Grain Sorghum Hybrid Tests in Tennessee

Evaluation of Combination Phosphorus Sulfur Fertilizer Products for Corn Production

NO-TILL AND NITROGEN FIXING INOCULANTS

Irrigation Scheduling for Corn Why and How

My client has purchased a disc seeder...

Appendix C: Conversions and Calculations

BENEFITS OF USING IPM

Soybean Marketing & Production College, Minneapolis, MN. isafarmnet.com

FIELD MANAGEMENT PRACTICES

N-P-K FERTILIZERS. by M.L. Vitosh Extension Specialist, Crop and Soil Sciences

How do I measure the amount of water vapor in the air?

Phosphorus use efficiency, grain yield, and quality of triticale and durum wheat under irrigated conditions

Harvesting Dry Bean John Nowatzki, NDSU Extension Agricultural Machine Systems Specialist

How can information technology play a role in primary industries climate resilience?

I. RECOMMENDED PRACTICES BASED ON GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (GAP) AND GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES (GMP)

BioDrill for many. Calibration takes a few minutes. The test bag is pushed up under the Fenix housing through a springloaded

FOR DISTRIBUTION AND USE ONLY WITHIN THE STATE OF OHIO. Dual MAGNUM. EPA Reg EPA SLN No. OH

Climatography of the United States No

MS DATA ANALYSIS EXAM INSTRUCTIONS

Soil Sampling for Nutrient Management

Climatography of the United States No

Evaluation of Biofertilizer and Manure Effects on Quantitative Yield of Nigella Sativa L.

EXAMPLE OF THE USE OF CROPWAT 8.0

Climatography of the United States No

CORN IS GROWN ON MORE ACRES OF IOWA LAND THAN ANY OTHER CROP.

Comparison of Weed Management Strategies with Roundup Ready Corn. J. A. Ferrell and W. W. Witt

EARLY OUTBREAK OF POTATO LATE BLIGHT IN DENMARK 2011

CUSTOMISING DRIP IRRIGATION FOR PROFITABLE VEGETABLE PRODUCTION

Is Lower Priced Urea a Bargain?

COMPARISON OF FIXED & VARIABLE RATES (25 YEARS) CHARTERED BANK ADMINISTERED INTEREST RATES - PRIME BUSINESS*

COMPARISON OF FIXED & VARIABLE RATES (25 YEARS) CHARTERED BANK ADMINISTERED INTEREST RATES - PRIME BUSINESS*

Lamport drill comparison

Summary: Objective: Materials and Methods:

Precision Farming in Practice

APES Math Review. For each problem show every step of your work, and indicate the cancellation of all units No Calculators!!

WEED CONTROL IN FLUE-CURED TOBACCO Charles S. Johnson, Extension Plant Pathologist, Tobacco

Overall Planning for Developing a New Vineyard: Site Selection and Assessment. Ed Hellman Viticulture Extension Specialist

BIOENERGIA DE NUEVO LÉON, S.A. DE C.V.

AERIAL PLANT PROTECTION WORK IN AGRICULTURE IN HUNGARY (Sent to OECD as national proposal to make best practice for pesticide aerial application)

Modern Soil Fumigation Research and Education for Michigan Potato Production

How Much Does Acid Rain Hinder the Growth Height of Brassica rapa Plants Without Other Environmental Stressors?

GROWTH AND,QUALITY OF FOUR SUGARCANE VARIETIES INFLUENCED AGE AND SEASON

COMPOST AND PLANT GROWTH EXPERIMENTS

SOYBEAN PRODUCTION SYSTEMS

Preliminary Examination of the Population Dynamics and Control of the Lettuce Aphid on Romaine

College of Agriculture, P.O. Box Tucson, Arizona

USING HUMIC COMPOUNDS TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF FERTILISER NITROGEN

Bijlagen. Bijlage F. Slagschaduw

Copyright Advanced Viticulture, Inc.

Coffee prices fall but Brazilian production estimated lower

NordFoU: External Influences on Spray Patterns (EPAS) Report 16: Wind exposure on the test road at Bygholm

System competence Farm management crop cultivation

Corn and Soybean Production Calendar

Transcription:

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Site Description Page 1 of 9 Trial ID: PR151-MWA Location: ELM CREEK, MB Protocol ID: Study Director: Trent Knight Investigator: David R. S. Rourke General Trial Information Study Director: Trent Knight Affiliation: PowerRich Corporation Postal Code: R2X 2V9 E-mail: powerrich@mts.net Investigator: Mike Wall Title: Research Associate Affiliation: Ag-Quest, Inc. Postal Code: R0K 1M0 E-mail: Mike.Wall@Agquest.com Trial Location City: Elm Creek Trial Status: ONE- YEAR/FINAL State/Prov.: MB Postal Code: R0G0N0 Initiation Date: 14 Jun 2011 Country: CAN Directions: 1 mile south and 1.25 miles west of junction of hwy's #2 and #13. Cooperator/Landowner Cooperator: Ag-Quest, Inc. (Elm Creek) Country: CAN Phone No: 204-436-3080 Address 1: P.O. Box 193 Fax No: 204-436-3082 City: Elm Creek State/Prov: MB Postal Code: R0G0N0 E-mail: Mike.Wall@Agquest.com Crop Description Crop 1: SOLTU Solanum tuberosum Potato Variety: Ivory Crisp BBCH Scale: BPOT Planting Date: 14 Jun 2011 Planting Method: SEEDED Rate, Unit: 1350 KG/HA Depth, Unit: 10 CM Row Spacing, Unit: 96 CM Spacing Within Row, Unit: 40 CM Seed Bed: MEDIUM Soil Moisture: SLIGHTLY WET Harvest Date: 06 Oct 2011 Harvest Equipment: HAND HARVESTED Weighing Equipment: ELECTRONIC BALANCE Site and Design Plot Width, Unit: 2 M Site Type: FIELD Plot Length, Unit: 7.5 M Tillage Type: CONVENTIONAL-TILL Replications: 4 Study Design: Randomized Complete Block Soil Drainage: G Good Trial Initiation Comments: Granular fertilzer was broadcast and incorporated using deep cultivation prior to planting.

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Site Description Page 2 of 9 Previous Crops Previous Pesticides Year 1. Wheat Puma 2010 2. Fallow Glyphosate 2009 3. Millet Pardner 2008 Maintenance Maintenance Form Form Form Rate Tank No. Date Treatment Name Conc Unit Type Rate Unit Mix 1. 30 Jun 2011 Sencor 75 %AW/W WG 375 G/HA N 2. 14 Jul 2011 Select 240 GA/L EC 370 ML/HA N 3. 21 Jul 2011 Admire 240 240 GA/L F 200 ML/HA N 4. 04 Aug 2011 Admire 240 240 GA/L F 250 ML/HA N Soil Description Description Name: Range 1 (SE 23-8-5W) 0-10cm % Sand: 76 % OM: 2.1 Texture: SANDY LOAM % Silt: 13 ph: 7.8 Soil Name: Almassippi % Clay: 11 CEC: 10 Fert. Level: FAIR Analyzed By: ALS Labs Element Quantity Unit N 150 KG/HA P 60 KG/HA K 140 KG/HA S 10 KG/HA Additional Measured Elements

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Site Description Page 3 of 9 Application Description A B C D Application Date: 01 Aug 2011 09 Aug 2011 15 Aug 2011 22 Aug 2011 Time of Day: 10:45 12:45 9:45 8:30 Application Method: SPRAY SPRAY SPRAY SPRAY Application Timing: POSPOS POSPOS POSPOS POSPOS Application Placement: FOLIAR FOLIAR FOLIAR FOLIAR Applied By: MW MW MW MW Air Temperature, Unit: 28 C 22.8 C 24 C 22 C % Relative Humidity: 67 60 69 Wind Velocity, Unit: 8 KPH 7 KPH 3 KPH 3 KPH Wind Direction: S NNW ESE SW Dew Presence (Y/N): N N N Y Water Hardness: 121 mg/l 121 mg/l 121 mg/l 121 mg/l Soil Temperature, Unit: 22 C 21.5 C 21.9 C 18.7 C Soil Moisture: INADEQUATE INADEQUATE INADEQUATE INADEQUATE % Cloud Cover: 80 50 5 0 Next Rain Occurred On: 04 Aug 2011 28 Aug 2011 28 Aug 2011 28 Aug 2011 E Application Date: 02 Sep 2011 Time of Day: 11:00 Application Method: SPRAY Application Timing: POSPOS Application Placement: FOLIAR Applied By: MW Air Temperature, Unit: 21.2 C % Relative Humidity: 57 Wind Velocity, Unit: 2 KPH Wind Direction: SSE Dew Presence (Y/N): Y Water Hardness: 121 mg/l Soil Temperature, Unit: 18.8 c Soil Moisture: INADEQUATE % Cloud Cover: 5 Next Rain Occurred On: 03 Sep 2011 Crop Stage At Each Application A B C D E Crop 1 Code, BBCH Scale: SOLTU BPOT SOLTU BPOT SOLTU BPOT SOLTU BPOT SOLTU BPOT

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Site Description Page 4 of 9 Application Equipment A B C Appl. Equipment: 2M BACKPACK 2M BACKPACK 2M BACKPACK Operating Pressure, Unit: 276 KPA 276 KPA 276 KPA Nozzle Type: FLAT FAN FLAT FAN FLAT FAN Nozzle Size: AI 110015 AI 110015 AI 110015 Nozzle Spacing, Unit: 50 CM 50 CM 50 CM Nozzle Calibration, Unit: 585 ML/MIN 585 ML/MIN 585 ML/MIN Boom Length, Unit: 2 M 2 M 2 M Boom Height, Unit: 45 CM 45 CM 45 CM Ground Speed, Unit: 7 KPH 7 KPH 7 KPH Carrier: WATER WATER WATER Spray Volume, Unit: 100 L/HA 100 L/HA 100 L/HA Mix Size, Unit: 1 Liters 1 Liters 1 Liters Propellant: CO2 CO2 CO2 Tank Mix (Y/N): N N N D E Appl. Equipment: 2M BACKPACK 2M BACKPACK Operating Pressure, Unit: 276 KPA 276 KPA Nozzle Type: FLAT FAN FLAT FAN Nozzle Size: AI 110015 AI 110015 Nozzle Spacing, Unit: 50 CM 50 CM Nozzle Calibration, Unit: 585 ML/MIN 585 ML/MIN Boom Length, Unit: 2 M 2 M Boom Height, Unit: 45 CM 45 CM Ground Speed, Unit: 7 KPH 7 KPH Carrier: WATER WATER Spray Volume, Unit: 100 L/HA 100 L/HA Mix Size, Unit: 1 Liters 1 Liters Propellant: CO2 CO2 Tank Mix (Y/N): N N

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Plot Data Summary Page 5 of 9 Trial ID: PR151-MWA Location: ELM CREEK, MB Protocol ID: Study Director: Trent Knight Investigator: David R. S. Rourke Crop Code SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU BBCH Scale BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT Crop Name Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Part Rated PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C Rating Date 09 Aug 2011 09 Aug 2011 15 Aug 2011 15 Aug 2011 22 Aug 2011 22 Aug 2011 Rating Data Type PHYGEN VIGOR PHYGEN VIGOR PHYGEN VIGOR Rating Unit % 0-9 % 0-9 % 0-9 Assessed By MW MW MW MW MW MW Days After First/Last Applic. 8 0 8 0 14 0 14 0 21 0 21 0 Trt-Eval Interval 8 DA-A 8 DA-A 14 DA-A 14 DA-A 21 DA-A 21 DA-A Plant-Eval Interval 56 DP-1 56 DP-1 62 DP-1 62 DP-1 69 DP-1 69 DP-1 ARM Action Codes Number of Decimals Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Rate Unit Plot 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 101 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 202 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 301 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 402 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 Mean = 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 2 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 102 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 201 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 302 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 401 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 Mean = 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 8.0

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Plot Data Summary Page 6 of 9 Crop Code SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU BBCH Scale BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT Crop Name Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Part Rated PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C TUBER C TUBER C TUBER C Rating Date 02 Sep 2011 02 Sep 2011 21 Sep 2011 06 Oct 2011 06 Oct 2011 06 Oct 2011 Rating Data Type PHYGEN VIGOR HEIGHT YIELD YIELD YIELD Rating Unit % 0-9 CM kg/ha ton/ac cwt/ac Assessed By MW MW MW MW MW MW Days After First/Last Applic. 32 0 32 0 51 19 66 34 66 34 66 34 Trt-Eval Interval 32 DA-A 32 DA-A Plant-Eval Interval 80 DP-1 80 DP-1 99 DP-1 114 DP-1 114 DP-1 114 DP-1 ARM Action Codes T1 T2 Number of Decimals 0 0 0 Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Rate Unit Plot 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 101 0.0 8.0 43.40 24521 11 219 202 0.0 8.0 41.60 42693 19 381 301 0.0 8.0 35.00 25999 12 232 402 0.0 8.0 39.00 35468 16 316 Mean = 0.0 8.0 39.75 32170 14 287 2 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 102 0.0 8.0 45.40 36782 16 328 201 0.0 8.0 42.60 44882 20 400 302 0.0 8.0 42.60 42419 19 378 401 0.0 8.0 42.80 40941 18 365 ARM Action Codes T1 = ([10]*2.20462*.4047)/2000 T2 = [10]*2.2046*.4047/100 Mean = 0.0 8.0 43.35 41256 18 368

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) AOV Means Table Page 7 of 9 Trial ID: PR151-MWA Location: ELM CREEK, MB Protocol ID: Study Director: Trent Knight Investigator: David R. S. Rourke Crop Code SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU BBCH Scale BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT Crop Name Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Part Rated PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C Rating Date 09 Aug 2011 09 Aug 2011 15 Aug 2011 15 Aug 2011 22 Aug 2011 22 Aug 2011 Rating Data Type PHYGEN VIGOR PHYGEN VIGOR PHYGEN VIGOR Rating Unit % 0-9 % 0-9 % 0-9 Assessed By MW MW MW MW MW MW Days After First/Last Applic. 8 0 8 0 14 0 14 0 21 0 21 0 Trt-Eval Interval 8 DA-A 8 DA-A 14 DA-A 14 DA-A 21 DA-A 21 DA-A Plant-Eval Interval 56 DP-1 56 DP-1 62 DP-1 62 DP-1 69 DP-1 69 DP-1 ARM Action Codes Number of Decimals Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Rate Unit 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 0.0 a 8.0 a 0.0 a 8.0 a 0.0 a 8.0 a 2 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 0.0 a 8.0 a 0.0 a 8.0 a 0.0 a 8.0 a LSD (P=.05) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 CV 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Bartlett's X2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 P(Bartlett's X2)...... Replicate F 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Replicate Prob(F) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Treatment F 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Treatment Prob(F) 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P=.05, Duncan's New MRT)

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) AOV Means Table Page 8 of 9 Crop Code SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU SOLTU BBCH Scale BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT BPOT Crop Name Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Potato Part Rated PLANT C PLANT C PLANT C TUBER C TUBER C TUBER C Rating Date 02 Sep 2011 02 Sep 2011 21 Sep 2011 06 Oct 2011 06 Oct 2011 06 Oct 2011 Rating Data Type PHYGEN VIGOR HEIGHT YIELD YIELD YIELD Rating Unit % 0-9 CM kg/ha ton/ac cwt/ac Assessed By MW MW MW MW MW MW Days After First/Last Applic. 32 0 32 0 51 19 66 34 66 34 66 34 Trt-Eval Interval 32 DA-A 32 DA-A Plant-Eval Interval 80 DP-1 80 DP-1 99 DP-1 114 DP-1 114 DP-1 114 DP-1 ARM Action Codes T1 T2 Number of Decimals 0 0 0 Trt Treatment Rate No. Name Rate Unit 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 0.0 a 8.0 a 39.75 a 32170 a 14 a 287 a 2 Headline EC 667 ml/ha 0.0 a 8.0 a 43.35 a 41256 a 18 a 368 a LSD (P=.05) 0.00 0.00 4.625 10248.6 4.6 91.4 Standard Deviation 0.00 0.00 2.056 4554.9 2.0 40.6 CV 0.0 0.0 4.95 12.41 12.41 12.41 Bartlett's X2 0.0 0.0 2.314 2.075 2.075 2.075 P(Bartlett's X2).. 0.128 0.15 0.15 0.15 Replicate F 0.000 0.000 2.589 3.062 3.062 3.062 Replicate Prob(F) 1.0000 1.0000 0.2277 0.1913 0.1913 0.1913 Treatment F 0.000 0.000 6.134 7.958 7.958 7.958 Treatment Prob(F) 1.0000 1.0000 0.0895 0.0667 0.0667 0.0667 Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P=.05, Duncan's New MRT) ARM Action Codes T1 = ([10]*2.20462*.4047)/2000 T2 = [10]*2.2046*.4047/100 MATERIAL AND METHODS: Trial Comments Certified Ivory Crisp potato was planted on 14 Jun 2011. Spray applications of fungicide and test fertilizer were made on Aug 01, Aug 09, Aug 15, Aug 22, and Sep 02 at 276kPa and at a volume of 100 L/ha. A 2-12-13 liquid PowerRich formulation was used. Crop injury and visual vigour ratings were taken at 8, 14, 21, and 32 DAA (Days After Application A). Plant heights were measured on Sep 21. The trial was harvested on Oct 06. WEATHER SUMMARY DATA Month Degree difference from normal temp Max. Min. % normal precipitation May -4.1 +0.3 196.6% June -1.3 +1.6 99.8%

02 Nov 2011 (PowerRich Potato 2011 EC) Trial Comments Page 9 of 9 July +1.4 +2.2 23.5% August +1.8 +1.4 21.3% September +2.7 +1.0 123.2% RESULTS: 1. Crop Injury and Vigour: No symptoms of crop injury were visible for either treatment and both treatments showed equal vigour. 2. Plant Heights: Treatment 2 (fungicide+powerrich treatment) produced a slight increase in crop height over treatment 1 but the increase was not statistically significant at the 5% level of significance. 2. Yields: Treatment 2 (fungicide+ treatment) yielded more than treatment 1 (fungicide alone), though yields were not statistically significant at the 5% level. At the 10% level of significance, the increase in yield was significant. The yield average for treatment 2 was 41256 kg/ha and for treatment 1 was 32170 kg/ha. CONCLUSION: The addition of to fungicide applications increased yields by slightly more than 9000 kg/ha (4 ton/ac or 80 cwt/ac) over the fungicides alone. Crop safety was excellent. The increase in yields was not significant at the 5% level but was becomes statistically significant at the 10% level of significance.