Winter Canola Survival and Yield Response to Nitrogen and Fall Phosphorus

Conley, Shawn P.; Bordovsky, D. G.; Rife, C. L.; Wiebold, William J.

doi:10.1094/cm-2004-0901-01-rs

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, our comparison of the genotypes in the Manhattan experiment indicated no significant difference in winter survival in most cases. This agrees with the conclusion of Conley et al (2004) that in the last decade, stand establishment and winter survival of canola varieties have substantially improved in the United States. Planting date significantly impacted winter survival in our analysis, suggesting early planting can assure sufficient canola plant growth to survive the winter (Darby et al, 2013Holman et al, 2011, but planting too early also can have negative results.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Major determinants of winter canola survival and yield have not been well characterized. Stand establishment and winter survival have been suggested as among the main limitations to canola production (Conley et al, 2004;Holman et al, 2011). Planting date and crop management practices such as tillage, planting density, nitrogen fertilizer rate, and cultivar selection have received attention to improve survival and yield of canola (Christmas, 1996;Conley et al, 2004;Holman et al, 2011;Song and Copeland, 1995).…”

Section: Winter Canola Yield and Survival As A Function Of Environmenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Winter Canola Yield and Survival as a Function of Environment, Genetics, and Management

Assefa¹,

Roozeboom²,

Stamm³

2014

Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful winter canola (Brassica napus L.) production creates diversity and provides crop rotation alternatives for producers. Stand establishment and winter survival are among the main determinants of success in winter canola production. The objective of this research was to investigate the impact of environment, crop management, genetics and their interactions on canola stand establishment, survival, yield, and oil and protein content. Two datasets were analyzed: results from the National Winter Canola Variety Trials conducted from 2003 to 2012 and data from experiments conducted for 3 yr (2010–2012) in Manhattan, KS, to assess the impact of planting date, tillage, and cultivar on canola yield and survival. Canola has the potential to yield up to 7 Mg ha–1; however, actual yields were usually in the range of 0 to 4 Mg ha–1. The average oil content of canola seeds was 40%, but the potential extended to 47%. Environment, defined as a combination of year and location, was responsible for the majority of variation in yield, oil content, stand establishment, and survival of winter canola. Planting in mid to late August and early September benefited yield most of the time compared with planting late in September or October in the Great Plains and Midwestern United States. Only with extremely early or late planting did tillage improve winter survival and yield compared with no‐till. Crown height of canola was greater in no‐till treatments compared with conventional tillage treatments, but a significant relationship was not observed between crown height and winter survival or yield. Cultivars differed significantly in yield, survival, and crown height, but no cultivars were consistently superior in no‐till conditions or with plantings outside of the recommended time frame.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Winter Canola Yield and Survival As A Function Of Environmenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winter Canola Yield and Survival as a Function of Environment, Genetics, and Management

Assefa¹,

Roozeboom²,

Stamm³

2014

Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, seed establishment and winter survival are indicators of successful canola production (Conley et al, 2004; Holman et al, 2011; Assefa et al, 2014). If canola seedlings are not well established and/or winter survival is significantly low, it is intuitive to expect a yield well below attainable yields, even if resources and climate are not limiting later in the season.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Major Management Factors Determining Spring and Winter Canola Yield in North America

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canola (Brassica napus L. cv. ‘Canola’) production has both economic and agronomic advantages. The objectives of this review were to summarize the key management factors determining crop productivity and to propose plausible pathways to narrow the gap between actual and potential yield. A synthesis study was conducted on data available from performance trials and by reviewing >100 reports in peer‐reviewed journals, extension publications, and websites. The main outcomes obtained from this synthesis suggested that canola attainable yield could be 4 Mg ha−1 with a potential maximum yield of 7 Mg ha−1. However, actual average yields in North America region were ∼1.7 Mg ha−1 for the period 2000 to 2014. Available in‐season water, water distribution at critical stages, and nutrient supply (soil plus fertilizer) all contribute to a significant portion of canola yield. Other management factors such as seeding rate, rotation, and cultivar selection substantially affect plant performance. Tillage might have an economic and environmental effect, but overall, the outcome of the meta‐analysis did not show significant effect on yield. The review suggests that water supply, balanced nutrition, early planting (for both winter and spring types) in shallow depth (10–19 mm), high seeding rate (6 kg ha−1), and diverse rotation (canola every 3 or 4 yr) are among the best management practices to increase yields. Future lines of research should focus on improving planting operations that diminish early‐season heterogeneity, fine‐tuning optimal seeding rates based on modern varieties at varying yield environments, and searching for compatible hybrids to replant without heterogeneity at harvest.

show abstract

“…Crop diversity is largely lacking in the iPNW and fallow periods remain common in the low and intermediate precipitation cropping systems, and a decrease in species richness has also been reported along the diminishing mean annual precipitation gradient in other Mediterranean-like, semi-arid regions (Koocheki et al, 2008). The lack of crop diversity may be contrasted with other major wheat belts, such as the dryland systems of Canada and Australia (Cook et al, 2002;Zentner et al, 2002b;Conley et al, 2004;Kirkegaard et al, 2008). For instance, in the semi-arid region of Canada, the prevalence of fallow has decreased from 50 to 15% since the 1970s, coinciding with the development of chemical weed management and the adoption of direct seeding practices (Zentner et al, 2002a).…”

Section: Winter Wheat Productivity Under Alternative Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of Climate Change Adaptation Strategies on Winter Wheat and Cropping System Performance across Precipitation Gradients in the Inland Pacific Northwest, USA

Maaz

Schillinger

Machado

et al. 2017

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological instability and low resource use efficiencies are concerns for the long-term productivity of conventional cereal monoculture systems, particularly those threatened by projected climate change. Crop intensification, diversification, reduced tillage, and variable N management are among strategies proposed to mitigate and adapt to climate shifts in the inland Pacific Northwest (iPNW). Our objectives were to assess these strategies across iPNW agroecological zones and time for their impacts on (1) winter wheat (WW) (Triticum aestivum L.) productivity, (2) crop sequence productivity, and (3) N fertilizer use efficiency. Region-wide analysis indicated that WW yields increased with increasing annual precipitation, prior to maximizing at 520 mm yr −1 and subsequently declining when annual precipitation was not adjusted for available soil water holding capacity. While fallow periods were effective at mitigating low nitrogen (N) fertilization efficiencies under low precipitation, efficiencies declined as annual precipitation exceeded 500 mm yr −1 . Variability in the response of WW yields to annual precipitation and N fertilization among locations and within sites supports precision N management implementation across the region. In years receiving <350 mm precipitation yr −1 , WW yields declined when preceded by crops rather than summer fallow. Nevertheless, WW yields were greater when preceded by pulses and oilseeds rather than wheat across a range of yield potentials, and when under conservation tillage practices at low yield potentials. Despite the yield penalty associated with eliminating fallow prior to WW, cropping system level productivity was not affected by intensification, diversification, or conservation tillage. However, increased fertilizer N inputs, lower fertilizer N use efficiencies, and more yield variance may offset and limit the economic feasibility of intensified and diversified cropping systems.

show abstract

Winter Canola Survival and Yield Response to Nitrogen and Fall Phosphorus

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

Winter Canola Yield and Survival as a Function of Environment, Genetics, and Management

Winter Canola Yield and Survival as a Function of Environment, Genetics, and Management

Major Management Factors Determining Spring and Winter Canola Yield in North America

Impact of Climate Change Adaptation Strategies on Winter Wheat and Cropping System Performance across Precipitation Gradients in the Inland Pacific Northwest, USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About