HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Meis, S. J. Articles by Milliken, G. A. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Meis, S. J. Articles by Milliken, G. A. Agricola Articles by Meis, S. J. Articles by Milliken, G. A. Related Collections Soybean Experiment Design

CROP BREEDING, GENETICS & CYTOLOGY

Relative Performance of Soybean in End-Trimmed and Plant-to-Length Plots

^a Dep. of Agronomy, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506
^b Dep. of Statistics, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506

* Corresponding author (scha0035{at}ksu.edu)

A common method to reduce or eliminate potential end-row effects in yield trials is to remove a portion of the plants from the end of the row prior to harvest. Consistent evidence supporting or rejecting the need to end-trim field plots is not available. This study was conducted to determine if plots planted to harvest length and not end-trimmed could be substituted for end-trimmed plots without affecting adversely the relative yield performance of entries in a trial. During 1997 and 1998, separate trials of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] genotypes in maturity groups III, IV, and V were evaluated in four-row plots at three locations with three replications per location. In each trial, 20 entries were evaluated using three plot treatments: (i) a plot planted to a harvest length of 4.6 m, (ii) a 4.6 m plot end-trimmed to a harvest length of 3.8 m during early vegetative development, and (iii) a 4.6-m plot end-trimmed to a harvest length of 3.8 m following maturity. Seed yield and row length were determined for each plot. Seed yields were significantly different among entries for all three trials. The interactions of plot treatment by entry within year and of plot treatment by entry by location within year were not significant for seed yield in all three trials. Plots planted to harvest length provided an unbiased estimate of the relative performance of yield in soybean.