By: Tony Stirling · 2017-04-13 · Proc mixed type 3 ANOVA procedure used in SAS LS mean was...

By: Tony Stirling

Grew up on a 1200 acre corn and soybean farm in East Central IL that my father and brother currently operate

Married my wife Leah

June 28th, 2014!

Graduated from Illinois State University in 2008 Double major in:

Agriculture Business

Ag Industry Management-Agronomy

6 years in Corn Research AgReliant Genetics

2.5 years in Lebanon, IN

DuPont Pioneer 3.5 years in Princeton, IL

Began MS in Agronomy in August 2011

Compaction is a long standing issue that continues to effect the industry

Causes

Wheel tracks of heavy equipment

Tillage

Repeated traffic passes

Animals

Compaction occurs when soil particles are pushed together

Reduces water infiltration

Reduces air movement

Constricts root growth

Effects of compaction on pore space.

Image adapted from: University of Minnesota, Extension. 2001. “Soil Compaction: Causes, Effects, and Control.” Retrieved June10, 2013 (http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/cropsystems/components/3115s01.html)

Proprietary root assay is used to evaluate hybrids in a controlled environment

Weed pressure is hard to control with a one time pass so we needed to know if we could take a sprayer across after planting

Compaction treatments occurred in extreme conditions in order to get the most compaction possible

Investigate the effects of compaction in a simulated root lodging experiment

Determine the ability for a sprayer to run through the root assay project after planting without adversely affecting the results

Experiment conducted in two different years 2013 and 2014

6 hybrids from 108-111 RM 3 susceptible to root lodging

3 above average ability to withstand root lodging

4 treatments used

2013 Control, tractor, sprayer empty, sprayer full

2014 Control, sprayer empty (dry), sprayer empty (wet), sprayer

full (wet)

Conventional tillage

Fall at 10 inches

Spring at 4 inches

Sable Silty Clay Loam

0-2 percent slope

Pattern tile

Field planted in 4 row plots

30 inch row

35,000 seeds per acre

Data collected in middle two rows

Conducted after 1.5 inches of rain at V2

Control No additional passes

after planting

John Deere 6140R Tractor Widened wheel base

Hagie STS10 Sprayer empty

Hagie STS10 Sprayer with 1000 gal water

Weights of Implements in 2013

Treatment Description Weight (lbs.)

1 Control - No Compaction 0

2 John Deere 6140R 13,580

3 Hagie STS10 empty 22,500

4 Hagie STS10 full of water 30,300

Control No additional equipment

passes after planting

Hagie STS10 sprayer empty Dry soil conditions

Wet conducted after a half an inch of rain at V5 Hagie STS10 sprayer

empty Wet soil conditions

Hagie STS10 sprayer full 950 gallons of water

driven with wet soil conditions

Weights of Implements in 2014

Treatment DescriptionWeight (lbs.)

1 Control - No Compaction 0

2 Hagie STS10 empty (dry) 22,500

3 Hagie STS10 empty (wet) 22,500

4Hagie STS10 w/ 950 gal of

water (wet)30,100

Lay out lay flat around field Closed circuit

Pull drip tape through field by hand

Drip tape irrigation Emitters every 8 inches .67 gal/min/100 ft

Push drip tape against row

Start continuous watering 1 week ahead Get the field to complete

saturation

Wind machine

Modified Hagiesprayer with blowers

Set desired RPM’s for fan speed Based on calibration

strip

Meant to simulate a typical thunderstorm Can go as high as 60-70

mph wind speed

Field saturation

Wind machine blows one row of data per pass

Row 2 is blown in the first wind event

Row 3 is blown in the second wind event

plot 1 2row 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I

Early Early Late Late Early Early Late Late

First simulated blow was conducted in late June right before brace root development

Second simulated blow was conducted shortly after pollination

Fan speed/RPM’s increased for second wind event of year

Simulated wind was not performed in 2014

Natural thunderstorm that produced high winds occurred three days before first scheduled simulated wind event

Wind gusts as high as 36 mph

Second simulated wind event did not occur

2013

Completely randomized split block design

Probability level of .05 was used to determine treatment significance

Treatment Key

Yellow Control

Blue Tractor

Red Hagie Empty

Green Hagie Full

3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2014

Randomized complete block design with nesting groups

Probability level of .05 was used to determine treatment significance

Treatment Key

Blue Empty (dry)

Green Control

Orange Empty (wet)

Red Full (wet)

Stand counts

Plot scores

Subjective score that is given to determine the quality of the plots

Plots scored 1-9

1-3 poor

4-6 average

7-9 excellent

Plant height (2013)

Plant height taken before simulated wind event for both events

Average of the plot from the upper extension of leaf for first event

Average of the plot from the tip of the tassel for second event

Root lodging counts

Crew counted number of plants that are lodged after the wind event

Lodged plants are 30 degrees past vertical

Counts are then calculated as a percent not lodged based off of original stand counts

Proc mixed type 3 ANOVA procedure used in SAS

LS mean was analyzed and then converted to letter groupings using PDmix800 (Saxton, 1998)

Fixed effects: Treatment, Hybrid, Hybrid x Treatment interaction

Random effects: Rep (2014)

Saxton, A.M. (1998). A macro for converting mean separation output to letter groupings in Proc Mixed. Proc. 23rd SAS Users Group Intl., SAS Institute, Cary, NC, pp 1243-1246.

Early root lodging- 2013 & 2014

Early plant height- 2013

Late root lodging- 2013

Late plant height- 2013

Early simulated root lodging

Treatment and hybrid terms both statistically significant

Type 3 Analysis of Variance

Source DFSum of Squares

Mean Square

F Value Pr > F

treatment 3 9107.854 3035.951 6.07 0.0005

hybrid 5 165917 33183 66.3 <.0001

treatment*hybrid 15 9965.827 664.3884 1.33 0.184

residual 301 150654 500.5115 . .

Early simulated root lodging LS Means

Tractor pass and full sprayer pass statistically different from empty sprayer

Effect=Treatment Method=LSD(P<.01)

Treatment EstimateStandard

ErrorLetterGroup

EmptySprayer

56.509 2.441 A

Control 47.7135 2.5111 AB

Tractor 44.0704 2.441 B

FullSprayer

43.2637 2.5532 B

Early plant height

Treatment and hybrid are statistically significant



Mean Square

F Value Pr > F

treatment 3 5506.986 1835.662 24.8 <.0001

hybrid 5 3281.507 656.3014 8.87 <.0001


residual 312 23094 74.01805 . .

Early plant height LS Means

Control and full sprayer statistically different from tractor and empty sprayer



ErrorLetterGroup

Control 153.76 0.9387 A

Full Sprayer 151.86 0.9387 A

Tractor 146.6 0.9387 B

EmptySprayer

143.61 0.9387 B

Late simulated root lodging

Treatments, hybrids, and hybrid by treatment interaction statistically significant



Mean Square

F Value Pr > F

treatment 3 19093 6364.383 18.8 <.0001

hybrid 5 58780 11756 34.72 <.0001

treatment*hybrid 15 10961 730.7622 2.16 0.0077

residual 311 105291 338.5564 . .

Late simulated root lodging LS Means

All three treatments are statistically different from control



ErrorLetterGroup

EmptySprayer

83.6925 2.0076 A

FullSprayer

81.6497 2.0076 A

Tractor 79.3562 2.0076 A

Control 64.4398 2.0204 B

Late Plant Height

Hybrid is the only term that is statistically significant



Mean Square

F Value Pr > F

treatment 3 42.96429 14.32143 1.38 0.25

hybrid 5 8040.107 1608.021 154.54 <.0001


residual 312 3246.429 10.40522 . .

Natural early root lodging

Treatment, hybrid, and rep are all statistically significant



Mean Square

F Value Pr > F

treatment 3 3530.238 1176.746 5.2 0.0017

hybrid 5 323645 64729 285.96 <.0001


rep 11 8293.176 753.9251 3.33 0.0003

residual 253 57267 226.3537 . .

Natural early root lodging LS Means

Hagie STS10 in dry conditions was statistically different from the control



ErrorLetterGroup

Empty Sprayer (Dry)

64.7281 2.2741 A

Empty Sprayer (Wet)

60.8451 2.279 AB

Full Sprayer (Wet)

59.7968 2.2635 AB

Control 54.7566 2.2704 B

Running equipment through the field after planting has an effect on the root assay project

Experimental design could have played a factor in results – Treatment and column effect are confounded

Decided to run the experiment again with different experimental design

Better experimental design allows for differentiation of treatments

Treatment applications of both dry and wet helped get a full perspective of how the compaction affected the roots

Natural winds were collected instead of simulated winds so that could have played a factor in the results

Running equipment through the root assay does have significant impact on the data

Post-planting equipment passes will not be recommended for future experiments

Dr. Cruse

Pioneer Staff

Andy Dye

Isaac Vohland

Eric Speakes

Aaron Moodie

Jeff Johnson

Deanne Wright-stats

My wife Leah

By: Tony Stirling · 2017-04-13 · Proc mixed type 3 ANOVA procedure used in SAS LS mean was...

Documents

Transcript of By: Tony Stirling · 2017-04-13 · Proc mixed type 3 ANOVA procedure used in SAS LS mean was...