1999 RCC - Wisconsin Corn Agronomy

1999 Regional Corn Conferences

Grain Hybrid TrialsRisk ManagementWisconsin CRMWisconsin CRM

Reducing Production Inputs

J LJoe LauerCorn Agronomist

Lauer University of Wisconsin - Madison

Corn Yields (Bu/a) in Wisconsin Since 1866Corn Yields (Bu/a) in Wisconsin Since 1866200

Yield Change per Year

160

1866 to 1929 = 0.0%1930 to 1959 = 1.3%1960 to 1997 = 1.4%1974 to 1998 = 1.6% (HT)

120

40

80

0

40


01860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Years of Record Corn Yield and the Percent Increase Over the Previous Record Year

20200%bu/A Yield Percent change

15

20

150

200

10

15

100

150

5

10

50

100

00


University of WisconsinUniversity of WisconsinCorn Agronomy ProgramAshland

Spooner

Chippewa FallsWhite Lake

Marshfield Seymour

ValdersHancock

Galesville

Fond du Lac

Arlington


JanesvilleLancaster

Wisconsin Corn Performance Trials Grain SummaryWisconsin Corn Performance Trials - Grain Summary1988-1997 1998 Percent

Location N Yield N Yield ChangegArlington 1724 175 169 248 +42Janesville 1724 171 169 208 +22Lancaster 1724 155 169 224 +46

Fond du Lac 1532 151 145 195 +29Galesville 1532 153 145 199 +30Hancock 1532 176 144 221 +26

Chippewa Falls 1117 154 159 94 -39Marshfield 957 129 159 159 +23Seymour 889 144 159 157 +9Valders 1241 138 159 192 +39Valders 1241 138 159 192 +39

Ashland 110 127 19 139 +9Spooner 1807 118 210 145 +23W hit L k 570 83 70 113 36


W hite Lake 570 83 70 113 +36Note: Seymour average includes New London 1988-1992.

Picking Top Corn Hybrids Using Wisconsin Results g p y g1977 to 1995

100

Frequency (%) Above trial average Below trial average

70 71 73

85

72

100

50

70 71

4950 5150

2830 29 27

15

0R d l L ti t Z t L ti d Z t (2 ) A B tt 10%


Randomly selected

Location star Zone star Location and zone star

Zone star (2yrs) Average Bottom 10%

The Economic Consequences of Corn Hybrid q ySelection Schemes (1977 to 1995)

Selection Hybrids Grain yield Relative Grower returnscheme

yselected

ydifference yield difference

bu/A percent $/A

One location Top 10% 6 4 14

Z & 3L Top 10% 11 7 24

Z & 3L: 2 yrs Top 10% 13 8 31

One location Average 0 0 -1

One location Bottom 10% -9 -7 -21

Grower return difference = grower return of selected hybrids - trial average


Grower Return Over Time for Corn Hybrid Selection ySchemes (1977 to 1995)

S l ti H b idPrevious Selected

F tSelection Hybrids years year Future years

scheme selected -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

dollars per acre differencedollars per acre difference

One location Top 10% 23 20 52 14 10 10 6

Z & 3L Top 10% 38 37 51 24 23 14 18Z & 3L Top 10% 38 37 51 24 23 14 18

Z & 3L: 2 yrs Top 10% 44 48 50 31 25 15 21

One location Average 11 9 0 -1 -2 -3 -4One location Average 11 9 0 1 2 3 4

One location Bottom 10% -5 -9 -60 -21 -20 -23 -23

Dollars per acre difference = grower return of selected hybrids - trial average


p g y g

A program forA program for choosing crop varieties

http://corn.agronomy.wisc.eduupdated on 31 December 1998


updated on 31 December 1998

Yield of “IMI” Hybrids in Relation to the Average of y gAll Hybrids in a Wisconsin Trial

Above trial average Below trial averageFrequency (%)

100n = 119

5050

0


1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

Yield of “BT” Hybrids in Relation to the Average of y gAll Hybrids in a Wisconsin Trial

100Above trial average Below trial averageFrequency (%)

92100n = 202

57 60

4350 43 4050

8

0


1996 1997 1998

Bt corn registrations as of December 1998Bt corn registrations as of December, 1998

Company Event Protein Brand 1st ECB 2nd ECB Refugia

Novartis 176 CryIA(b) Knockout /Maximizer

Yes No Suggested

Mycogen 176 CryIA(b) NatureGard Yes No Suggested

Monsanto Bt11 CryIA(b) YieldGard Yes Yes Suggested

Monsanto MON810 CryIA(b) YieldGard * Yes Yes Agreement5% acres

DeKalb DBT418 CryIA(c) Bt-Xtra Yes Limited 5% acresDeKalb DBT418 CryIA(c) Bt Xtra Yes Limited 5% acres

PGS/AgrEvo CBH351 Cry9(c) StarLink Yes Yes 5% acres

* Supplemental distributors: Cargill, DeKalb, Golden Harvest, ICI/Garst,


Supplemental distributors: Cargill, DeKalb, Golden Harvest, ICI/Garst,Pioneer

Yield of “SR” Hybrids in Relation to the Average of y gAll Hybrids in a Wisconsin Trial


100n = 44

5050

0


1996 1997 1998

Yield of “Liberty Link” Hybrids in Relation to the y yAverage of All Hybrids in a Wisconsin Trial


100n = 21

5050

0


1997 1998

Yield of “Round-up Ready” Hybrids in Relation to the p y yAverage of All Hybrids in a Wisconsin Trial


100n = 20

5050

0


1998

Yield of “Gene Stacked” - (Bt,LL) Hybrids in Relation ( ) yto the Average of All Hybrids in a Wisconsin Trial


100n = 11

5050

0


1998

Yield of Specialty Hybrids in Relation to the Average p y y gof All Hybrids in the 1998 Wisconsin Hybrid Trials

100Above trial average Below trial averageFrequency (%)

68 67

100

5060

5055

4550

40

68

50

67

4555

5033 33

40

0Normal Bt IMI SR LL RR Bt,LL


dent

Using Wisconsin Corn Hybrid Performanceg yTrial Results

Use multi-environment average dataBegin with trials in zone(s) nearest youCompare hybrids with similar maturitiesUse many years and locations

Evaluate consistency of performanceCheck performance in other zones and locationsCheck other reliable unbiased trialsBe wary of inconsistent performance.

SELECT t htt // i dSELECT at http://corn.agronomy.wisc.edu

You are taking a tremendous gamble if basing your hybrid l i d i i 1 2 l l l


selection decisions on 1 or 2 local test plots

Hybrid Maturity Risk Management


Materials and MethodsMaterials and Methods

Data setAll hybrid trials conducted between 1973 and 1997 (25 years)Used only hybrids that had been tested in MN Relative Maturity rating programOptimum management: field selection, planting date, harvest

Corn Price: $2.00, 2.50, and 3.00

Three corn production systems (drying costs)Livestock feeding system (HMC) = $0.00On-Farm drying system = $0.015 per point bushelCommercial elevator drying system = $0.03 per point bushel

G t (Yi ld * P i ) D i tLauer University of Wisconsin - Madison

Grower return = (Yield * Price) - Drying costs

Relationship Between Corn Grain Yield and pMinnesota Relative Maturity Rating (1995-1997)

225Janesville

200

175

n Yi

eld

(bu/

A)

125

150

Gra

in

10075 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115


75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115MN Relative Maturity

Relationship Between Corn Grower Return and pMinnesota Relative Maturity Rating (1995-1997)

Janesville

500

($/A

)

400

er R

etur

n

300

Gro

w

20075 85 95 105 115


MN Relative Maturity

Relationship Between Corn Grain Yield and pMinnesota Relative Maturity Rating (1995-1997)

225Lancaster Janesville Arlington Hancock Fond du Lac

200

5

A)

150

175

Yiel

d (b

u/A

100

125

Gra

in

7575 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115




550Lancaster Janesville Arlington Hancock Fond du Lac

450

500

550

$/A

)

350

400

50

r Ret

urn

($

250

300

350

Gro

wer

200

50

75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115




Arlington

3 0

400

$/A

)

300

350

r Ret

urn

($

200

250

Gro

wer

15075 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115



Optimum corn hybrid MN Relative Maturity (days) for p y y ( y )corn production systems in Wisconsin.

1973 1997 Li estock On Farm Commercial1973-1997 Livestocksystem

On-Farmdrying

Commercialelevator

Region 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00g

Southern 120 120 120 111 114 116 99 103 107

South central 112 112 112 105 106 107 100 102 104

North central 103 103 103 95 96 97 89 91 93

North 89 89 89 87 88 88 85 86 87


Grower return ($/A) of optimum maturity corn ( ) p yhybrids for corn production systems in WI

1973 1997 Livestock On Farm Commercial1973-1997 Livestocksystem

On-Farmdrying

Commercialelevator

Region 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00g

Southern 385 482 578 337 432 528 299 392 485

South central 321 401 481 291 370 450 266 344 423

North central 300 375 450 278 352 427 261 334 408

North 268 335 402 244 311 378 221 287 354


Grower risk (+ $/A) of optimum maturity corn hybrids ( ) p y yfor corn production systems in Wisconsin

1973-1997 Livestock On-Farm Commercial1973 1997 Livestocksystem

On-Farmdrying

Commercialelevator

Region 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00

Southern 56 70 84 45 58 72 35 48 62

S th t l 64 80 96 60 75 91 58 73 88South central 64 80 96 60 75 91 58 73 88

North central 57 71 86 55 69 83 54 68 81

North 61 76 91 61 76 91 63 78 92


Expected Profit by LocaitonExpected Profit by Locaiton


Corn relative maturity effect on profitability and risk y p yfor corn production systems in southern WI.

1973-1997 Livestock On-Farm Commercialsystem drying elevator

2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00

Optimum RM (days) 120 120 120 111 114 116 99 103 107

Profit ($/A) 385 482 578 337 432 528 299 392 485

Risk (+ $/A) 56 70 84 45 58 72 35 48 62

RM Range (days) 21 21 21 23 24 24 21 21 22g ( y )

RM Range is the difference between optimum RM and RM at 95% yield.


Corn relative maturity effect on profitability and risk y p yfor corn production systems in south central WI.


2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00

Optimum RM (days) 112 112 112 105 107 107 100 102 104

Profit ($/A) 321 401 481 291 370 450 266 344 423( )

Risk (+ $/A) 64 80 96 60 75 91 58 73 88

RM Range (days) 15 15 15 13 14 14 12 13 13RM Range (days) 15 15 15 13 14 14 12 13 13



Corn relative maturity effect on profitability and risk y p yfor corn production systems in north central WI.


2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00

Optimum RM (days) 103 103 103 95 96 97 89 91 93

Profit ($/A) 300 375 450 278 352 427 261 334 408( )

Risk (+ $/A) 57 71 86 55 69 83 54 68 81




Corn relative maturity effect on profitability and risk y p yfor corn production systems in northern WI.


2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00 2.00 2.50 3.00

Optimum RM (days) 89 89 89 87 88 88 85 86 87

Profit ($/A) 268 335 402 244 311 378 221 287 354( )

Risk (+ $/A) 61 76 91 61 76 91 63 78 92




Method for determining Wisconsin comparative g prelative maturity - WI CRM (n=92)

ys)

turit

y (d

ayel

ativ

e M

atm

pany

Re

Com Arlington - Late, 1998


Grain moisture (%)

Examples of hybrid CRM ratings (based on MN RM) p y g ( )using WI Corn Hybrid Performance Trial data

Pioneer Nk Brand J ngGoldenHar est Dekalb

YearPioneer

3751Nk Brand

N4242Jung2496

HarvestH2441

DekalbDK493

1989 97 981990 97 1011991 99 99 1001992 100 101 101 1041992 100 101 101 1041993 99 99 100 105 991994 99 99 105 991995 101 100 107 1001995 101 100 107 1001996 99 105 1011997 99 105 1011998 97 98


1998 97 98

ManagementManagement


Corn Yield Response Following Five Years of p gSoybean and in a Soybean Rotation

160Lamberton and Waseca, MN and Arlington, WI

144141

140acre

)

Lamberton and Waseca, MN and Arlington, WI

128 126 126 126 125

140

Yiel

d (b

u/a

a(15%) a

(13%)

b120

Cor

n Y

b(1%)

b(3%) bb

(1%)b

(1%)

1001st-yr 2nd-yr 3rd-yr 4th-yr 5th-yr Cont C-SB


1st yr 2nd yr 3rd yr 4th yr 5th yr Cont. C SB Cropping Sequence

Relationship Between Rotated Corn Yield and

60Lamberton and Waseca MN and Arlington WI 1985 -

pContinuous Corn Yield Environments

40

50

ge (%

)

Lamberton and Waseca, MN and Arlington, WI 1985 -

20

30

Adv

anta

g

0

10

Yiel

d A

-1040 60 80 100 120 140 160 180


Continuous Corn Yield (bu/acre)

Corn Grain Yield (bu/A) Response to Row Spacing in ( ) p p gWisconsin

* ** ** ** ** ** ** **

225Narrower 30 inches

175

125

75


Corn Silage Yield (T/A) Response to Row Spacing in g ( ) p p gWisconsin

Narrower 30 inches

10

12

Narrower 30 inches

** * *** *

8

10

6

4


Input costs for Wisconsin and Illinois farmsInput costs for Wisconsin and Illinois farms …

Fertility Pesticides Seed Drying Machinery

576070

4436 3334 3640

5060

per a

cre

24 2733

201320

30

Cos

t p

010

PEPS - Cash Corn Northern Illinois


PEPS Cash Corn Northern IllinoisSource: AE-4566, Univ. of Illinois

Documents

1999 RCC - Wisconsin Corn Agronomy