Assessing the utility of the growth regulator trinexapac-ethyl and fungicides in mid-Atlantic soft red winter wheat production systems

Kleczewski, Nathan M.; Whaley, Cory M.

doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2017.10.011

Cited by 6 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In Michigan, TE applications decreased lodging 50 to 83% and increased grain yield by 5%, suggesting TE may be a beneficial risk management tool for high yielding, intensively managed wheat (Swoish and Steinke, 2017). In contrast, Kleczewski and Whaley (2018) observed no significant yield response to TE application due to the absence of lodging. Recent literature suggests wheat response to PGR application may be dependent on lodging occurrence, environmental conditions, and varietal characteristics including plant height and stem strength (Brinkman et al, 2014;Knott et al, 2016;Kleczewski and Whaley, 2018).…”

Section: Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Responsementioning

confidence: 92%

“…Greater than recommended N fertilizer rates (often associated with intensive management) combined with high wind speeds and frequency from spring weather volatility can increase the incidence of plant lodging prior to harvest (Brinkman et al, 2014;Knott et al, 2016;Swoish and Steinke, 2017;Kleczewski and Whaley, 2018). Plant lodging can interfere with plant water and nutrient uptake, increase mechanical harvest difficulties, and reduce grain fill and yield.…”

Section: Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Response to Input‐Intensive Management

Quinn

Steinke

2019

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Record grain yields and increased awareness of climate variability have more producers considering intensive (i.e., high-input) wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) management. This study investigated soft winter wheat response to several agronomic inputs across intensive and traditional (i.e., low-input) management systems. A four site-year trial was established at Richville and Lansing, MI during 2015 and 2016 to evaluate the following inputs: increased rates of nitrogen (N) fertilizer, urease inhibitor (UI), nitrification inhibitor (NI), fungicide, plant growth regulator (PGR), and foliar micronutrients. Across four site-years, intensive management did not increase yield compared to traditional management. In addition, traditional management increased average economic net return by $221 ha -1 . At the reduced N rate, Richville 2016 yield decreased 0.94 Mg ha -1 within the intensive system suggesting greater N demand with intensive management. Due to significant stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici) occurrence, at 2016 Lansing, yield increased 0.75 Mg ha -1 when fungicide was added to the traditional system. Lansing 2017 yield decreased 0.52 Mg ha -1 when UI was removed from the intensive system, yet decreased 0.51 Mg ha -1 when UI was added to the traditional system. Heavy rainfall, lack of urea hydrolysis, and N rate likely contributed to the inconsistent UI response. The 2016 and 2017 growing seasons produced an overall absence of adverse environmental conditions which influenced negligible input responses. Although yield increases were observed, no single input increased net return. Results suggest intensive management benefits are unlikely at current wheat prices and without the presence of yield-limiting factors.

show abstract

Section: Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Responsementioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Responsementioning

confidence: 99%

Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Response to Input‐Intensive Management

Quinn

Steinke

2019

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It reduces plant height in cereals by shortening the first, second, and third internodes and improves the stem strength and diameter (Matysiak, 2006;Wiersma et al 2011;Zagonel et al 2002). For example, Kleczewski and Whaley (2018) observed that TE reduced plant height by 7 cm in soft red winter wheat, and enhanced hard red spring wheat straw strength by 13%. The responses to TE are influenced by environment and management.…”

Section: Crop Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…ha -1 reduces the third internode length by 16.3-22.4%. The reduction of internode length in plants treated with TE could be the inhibition of GA biosynthesis, as insufficient GA limits the elongation activities in plants (Kleczewski & Whaley, 2018).…”

Section: Stem Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Winter cereal responses to dose and application timing of trinexapac‐ethyl

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trinexapac-ethyl (TE) is a plant growth regulator commonly used in cereal production systems. It retards plant growth by inhibiting gibberellin (GA) biosynthesis, thereby reducing the risk of stem lodging. Lodging at the latter stages of crop development can compromise grain yield and quality. Thus, application of TE may protect yield and quality in winter cereals. A field study was conducted from 2014 to 2017 across the Canadian Prairies to determine the effects of TE dose and application timings on lodging, canopy architecture, grain yield, and quality of winter cereals. Trinexapac-ethyl treatments consisted of 0.6× (60 g a.i. ha −1 ) and 1× (100 g a.i. ha −1 ), which were applied to two winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars, 'Flourish' and 'Moats', and a fall rye (Secale cereale L.) cultivar 'Hazlet', at Feekes 5 and 7 growth stages. Compared with the control, TE application increased grain yield by 3-8%, reduced plant height by 5-10%, and shortened internode length. Plant height reductions were most notable when TE was applied at the 1× rate at Feekes 7. The most responsive crop was fall rye, which could be expected given its tall stature relative to the wheat cultivars. Most of the tested environments, including irrigation, did not induce heavy stem lodging; therefore, observations of positive yield responses in the absence of lodging were unexpected. Our findings suggest that there is a role for TE in winter cereal production systems, provided the magnitude of crop responses justifies the added input costs.

show abstract

“…Therefore, farmers who continue to grow winter wheat have a desire to mitigate yield losses and boost yields through a wide range of management tactics, if they are economical. Many different management tactics have been studied for their effects on wheat grain yield, including applications of N and P fertilizers (Knapp & Harms, 1988;Liu, Varsa, Kapusta, & Mburu, 1984;Nielsen & Halvorson, 1991;Mohammed, Chen, & Jensen, 2016;Russell, Guzman, & Mohammadi, 2020;Thapa, Chatterjee, Awale, McGranahan, & Daigh, 2016), seeding rates (Dai et al, 2013;Joseph, Alley, Brann, & Gravelle, 1985;Lloveras, Manent, Viudas, López, & Santiveri, 2004), plant growth regulators (Kleczewski & Whaley, 2018;Knapp, Harms, & Volenec, 1987;Knott, Van Sanford, Ritchey, & Swiggart, 2016;Swoish & Steinke, 2017;), micronutrient applications (Lu et al, 2012;Wang et al, 2015), and a combination of approaches (Jaenisch, de Oliveira Silva, DeWolf, Ruiz-Diaz, & Lollato, 2019;Quinn & Stienke, 2019;de Oliviera Silva et al, 2020). Nitrogen is often a limiting nutrient for wheat production, and exogenous application of N can increase tillering and grain yields in soft red and soft white winter wheat (de Oliveira Silva, Slafer, Fritz, & Lollato, 2020;Mohamed, Steiner, Wright, Bhangoo, & Millhouse, 1990;Quinn & Steinke, 2019;Russell et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wheat grain and straw yield, grain quality, and disease benefits associated with increased management intensity

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is the third‐most cultivated field crop in the United States and a very important source of nutrition globally. The economic value of wheat motivates farmers to optimize yield and grain quality, which can be obtained with additional inputs that are often expensive. This study investigated three management intensity levels on grain yield, straw yield, grain test weight, and disease on winter wheat in Wisconsin across 4 yr and 20 varieties. All management practices included a pre‐emergence herbicide and N application, with a mid‐level management strategy adding another N application and a single fungicide application to the current strategy, and a high‐level management intensity strategy adding a growth regulator, two micronutrient applications, and another fungicide application to the mid‐level strategy. Our study revealed that increasing management intensity from current strategies to mid‐ or high levels significantly increased grain yields by 0.81–1.22 kg ha−1, straw yields by 1.2–1.2 t ha−1, and grain test weights by 2.6–3.2 kg hl−1, respectively (P < .05). In addition, the high‐level management intensity led to significant reductions in stripe rust incidence and severity, whereas both mid‐ and high‐level management intensity reduced Fusarium head blight incidence and severity, and mycotoxin contamination (P < .001). The economic considerations of intensified management were also examined, and the mid‐ and high‐level management practices resulted in US$306 and US$242 ha−1 greater profit than current management, respectively, as a result of the improved disease protection and yields.

show abstract

Assessing the utility of the growth regulator trinexapac-ethyl and fungicides in mid-Atlantic soft red winter wheat production systems

Cited by 6 publications

References 14 publications

Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Response to Input‐Intensive Management

Soft Red and White Winter Wheat Response to Input‐Intensive Management

Winter cereal responses to dose and application timing of trinexapac‐ethyl

Wheat grain and straw yield, grain quality, and disease benefits associated with increased management intensity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About