OKLAHOMA |
Perkins,
Payne County |
Agronomy Research Station |
Rainfed, Sown September 1999 |
|
|
2002 |
2001 |
2000 |
3-Yr. |
Entry
(Generation) |
5/21 |
6/26 |
10/3 |
Total |
Total |
Total |
Total |
NN* |
|
|
|
Tons Dry Matter/Acre |
Reward
(Syn 3) |
2.25 |
2.36 |
1.54 |
6.15 |
6.39 |
6.21 |
18.75 |
18.50 |
OK 201
(Syn 3) |
2.12 |
2.23 |
1.53 |
5.87 |
6.17 |
5.65 |
17.68 |
18.08 |
OK 169
(Syn 3) |
2.12 |
2.23 |
1.49 |
5.84 |
6.13 |
5.90 |
17.87 |
17.95 |
|
|
OK
49 (C) |
2.08 |
2.18 |
1.42 |
5.68 |
6.26 |
5.92 |
17.87 |
17.88 |
630 (C) |
2.07 |
2.25 |
1.47 |
5.79 |
6.01 |
5.81 |
17.61 |
17.76 |
OK 200
(Syn 3) |
2.05 |
2.26 |
1.48 |
5.79 |
6.17 |
5.94 |
17.90 |
17.74 |
|
|
Magnum
IV (Syn 3) |
2.13 |
2.26 |
1.46 |
5.86 |
6.29 |
5.91 |
18.05 |
17.72 |
Buffalo (C) |
2.03 |
2.30 |
1.65 |
5.99 |
6.02 |
5.19 |
17.21 |
17.63 |
ABT
400SCL |
2.06 |
2.31 |
1.29 |
5.66 |
6.12 |
5.85 |
17.64 |
17.63 |
|
|
WL 327 |
2.14 |
2.20 |
1.30 |
5.63 |
6.11 |
6.00 |
17.74 |
17.44 |
Cimarron
SR (Syn 3) |
2.11 |
2.25 |
1.28 |
5.65 |
5.97 |
5.90 |
17.51 |
17.22 |
OK 161
(Syn 2) |
1.99 |
2.21 |
1.32 |
5.52 |
6.01 |
5.78 |
17.30 |
17.20 |
|
|
Abilene+Z
(Syn 2) |
2.01 |
2.06 |
1.30 |
5.37 |
5.67 |
5.81 |
16.85 |
17.17 |
Pawnee
(Syn 3) |
1.99 |
2.14 |
1.27 |
5.40 |
5.81 |
5.88 |
17.09 |
17.13 |
ABT 350
(Syn 3) |
2.03 |
2.19 |
1.26 |
5.48 |
5.85 |
5.76 |
17.10 |
17.12 |
Cimarron
4 (Syn 2) |
2.03 |
2.16 |
1.21 |
5.40 |
5.76 |
5.89 |
17.05 |
17.03 |
|
|
Mean |
2.08 |
2.23 |
1.39 |
5.69 |
6.05 |
5.84 |
17.58 |
|
5% LSD |
0.11 |
0.15 |
0.16 |
0.34 |
0.48ns |
0.37 |
1.04ns |
|
CV (%) |
4.7 |
5.7 |
9.9 |
5.2 |
6.9 |
5.6 |
5.2 |
|
MCV (%) |
5.4 |
6.6 |
11.4 |
6.0 |
0.8 |
6.4 |
5.9 |
|
LSR (%) |
43.1 |
49.8 |
35.7 |
43.6 |
65.9 |
36.8 |
55.0 |
|
|
|
|
Generation = (C) = from commercial bags |
|
MCV = LSD/Mean x 100 |
ns = F value is not significant at p = 0.05 |
|
LSR = LSD/Range x 100 |
Design: Randomized Complete Block |
|
Plot Size: 1x5m
planted |
No. of Reps: 6 |
|
Plot Size: 1x5m
harvested |
Experiment: 921 |
|
*NN Total = Means adjusted by nearest neighbor analysis |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|