Notes
2005 VARIETY TESTING
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
FAIRFIELD SOFT WHITE/CLUB SPRING WHEAT NURSERY
  5 YEAR 3 YEAR 2 YEAR 2005 2005 2005
VARIETY NAME AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE YIELD TEST WT. PROTEIN
  (BU/A) (BU/A) (BU/A) (BU/A) (LBS/BU) (%)
 
WAWAWAI 72.5 ( 1) 58.8 ( 4) 65.5 ( 4) 58.1 ( 4) 60.3 10.9
ALPOWA 71.8 ( 2) 58.0 ( 5) 63.4 ( 5) 51.2 ( 6) 59.5 10.1
NICK 70.5 ( 3) 61.1 ( 2) 67.7 ( 2) 61.6 ( 2) 58.3 11.6
EDEN 69.9 ( 4) 55.0 ( 6) 56.6 (10) 40.3 (12) 59.4 10.3
ALTURAS 68.2 ( 5) 52.8 ( 8) 58.1 ( 6) 40.0 (13) 56.9 12.0
ZAK 66.1 ( 6) 52.9 ( 7) 57.1 ( 9) 44.7 ( 7) 56.2 10.1
EDWALL 55.4 ( 7) 39.6 ( 9) 41.4 (12) 24.5 (19) 48.5 12.4
PENAWAWA 54.3 ( 8) 39.3 (10) 42.3 (11) 26.6 (18) 53.5 12.2
FIELDER 50.8 ( 9) 33.2 (11) 30.4 (13) 13.5 (20) 51.4 11.7
LOUISE --- 61.8 ( 1) 67.1 ( 3) 59.1 ( 3) 59.3 10.4
WAKANZ --- 60.4 ( 3) 69.0 ( 1) 70.1 ( 1) 57.7 11.3
WA7952 --- --- 57.1 ( 7) 41.2 (10) 59.8 9.3
WA7964 --- --- 57.1 ( 8) 39.7 (14) 54.7 11.7
WA7983 --- --- --- 55.4 ( 5) 56.6 11.4
WA7963 --- --- --- 44.4 ( 8) 56.5 10.8
WA7987 --- --- --- 43.0 ( 9) 58.5 11.8
WA7960 --- --- --- 40.8 (11) 58.9 10.2
ID632 --- --- --- 38.3 (15) 59.1 9.8
WA7986 --- --- --- 36.9 (16) 59.0 11.4
WQL7PENWX-2 --- --- --- 28.1 (17) 54.4 11.1
             
 
NURSERY MEAN 64.4 52.1 56.4 42.9 56.9 11.0
CV % 7.4 9.3 9.1 12.5 3.5 12.8
LSD @ .10 2.9 3.8 5.0 7.4 2.8 1.9
2005 VARIETY TESTING
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
FAIRFIELD HARD WHITE SPRING WHEAT NURSERY
  5 YEAR 3 YEAR 2 YEAR 2005 2005 2005
VARIETY NAME AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE YIELD TEST WT. PROTEIN
  (BU/A) (BU/A) (BU/A) (BU/A) (LBS/BU) (%)
 
LOLO 71.2 ( 1) 54.3 ( 3) 59.5 ( 5) 46.8 ( 7) 60.7 12.2
MACON 70.7 ( 2) 57.8 ( 2) 66.2 ( 3) 55.7 ( 5) 59.0 10.7
ID377S 69.0 ( 3) 50.8 ( 5) 54.1 ( 6) 35.7 ( 9) 59.3 12.4
OTIS --- 61.5 ( 1) 70.7 ( 1) 64.9 ( 1) 59.9 11.3
BLANCA GRANDE --- 53.6 ( 4) 59.5 ( 4) 39.8 ( 8) 61.4 12.7
ID597 --- --- 67.4 ( 2) 63.6 ( 2) 59.9 11.5
BZ98-447W --- --- --- 63.0 ( 3) 60.0 11.7
WA7957 --- --- --- 59.4 ( 4) 60.7 11.3
WA7991 --- --- --- 47.6 ( 6) 60.5 12.0
WINSOME --- --- --- 31.1 (10) 57.2 10.3
             
 
NURSERY MEAN 70.3 55.6 62.9 50.8 59.9 11.6
CV % 8.5 9.6 9.2 13.3 1.5 7.3
LSD @ .10 3.8 4.3 5.7 9.6 1.2 1.2
2005 VARIETY TESTING
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY
FAIRFIELD HARD RED SPRING WHEAT NURSERY
  5 YEAR 3 YEAR 2 YEAR 2005 2005 2005
VARIETY NAME AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE YIELD TEST WT. PROTEIN
  (BU/A) (BU/A) (BU/A) (BU/A) (LBS/BU) (%)
 
HANK 74.6 ( 1) 63.6 ( 2) 76.4 ( 2) 64.2 ( 2) 60.0 11.6
WESTBRED 926 73.7 ( 2) 66.8 ( 1) 77.1 ( 1) 64.2 ( 3) 59.6 13.0
JEFFERSON 72.6 ( 3) 62.3 ( 5) 72.7 ( 4) 61.6 ( 6) 60.0 11.9
TARA 2002 71.8 ( 4) 62.9 ( 4) 72.1 ( 5) 61.2 ( 7) 60.1 12.7
SCARLET 69.7 ( 5) 56.1 ( 7) 59.9 ( 9) 43.8 (15) 57.3 12.2
HOLLIS 69.0 ( 6) 59.6 ( 6) 68.7 ( 7) 64.1 ( 4) 59.6 13.7
JEROME --- 63.5 ( 3) 73.6 ( 3) 69.3 ( 1) 60.4 11.2
GMG BUCK PRONTO --- --- 69.6 ( 6) 58.1 ( 9) 60.1 14.9
ID593 --- --- 67.9 ( 8) 53.3 (12) 59.7 11.2
WA7997 --- --- --- 62.7 ( 5) 59.9 12.2
WA7998 --- --- --- 60.5 ( 8) 59.4 12.0
BZ999-339 --- --- --- 58.1 (10) 59.8 13.4
SX1504B --- --- --- 57.2 (11) 59.7 12.5
WA7994 --- --- --- 52.8 (13) 57.5 14.2
WA7995 --- --- --- 47.9 (14) 58.6 13.3
BZ999-592 --- --- --- 42.4 (16) 60.6 13.2
             
 
NURSERY MEAN 71.9 62.1 70.9 57.6 59.5 12.7
CV % 8.3 9.5 10.1 13.0 1.2 5.7
LSD @ .10 3.7 4.7 7.0 10.4 1.0 1.0


FAIRFIELD SPRING WHEAT – 2005 WSU VARIETY TESTING DATA 

  1. 2005 Spring Wheat data from the WSU Variety Testing nursery at the Fairfield location averaged 42.9, 50.8, and 57.6 bu/ac for soft white spring, hard white spring and hard red spring wheat, respectively.  The 2005 spring wheat average yields were lower by 37.3%, 30.6% and 20.6% for soft white spring, hard white spring and hard red spring wheat, respectively, compared to the historical 3-year average.  This nursery was planted re-crop following a 2004 lentil crop.
  2. STRIPE RUST infections were present in this nursery; however the impact of stripe rust was negligible.
  3. HESSIAN FLY infestations were heavy in this nursery and caused substantial yield reductions in susceptible varieties.  Hessian ratings were taken on 10 Aug 2005.  The ratings were visual estimates of spring wheat tillers that exhibited stunted/deformed development caused by early spring Hessian fly infections.  The Fairfield nursery typically experiences Hessian fly infestations and it appears an early infection at fairly high levels occurred during the spring 2005.  It is worth noting that Hessian fly infection symptoms were measured at times in resistant varieties.  This is probably a function of Hessian fly larvae feeding on tillers of resistant varieties before being killed or repelled by the Hessian fly resistance mechanism in a particular variety. There was a strong relationship to yield and percent Hessian fly damage. Most notable were susceptible varieties such as Fielder, Winsome and Scarlet that exhibited substantial yield reductions. Other varieties and experimental lines also showed high susceptibility to Hessian fly.
  4. Overall TEST WEIGHT values were low, probably influenced by late season dry soil conditions coupled with fairly shallow root distribution caused by seasonal May/June 2005 precipitation patterns that allowed roots to survive on surface moisture and limited development to deeper soil depths.  The shallow root development was most detrimental during grain fill when roots were sitting in dry soil.
  5. In general, variety YIELD RANKINGS were similar to 3-year historical yield rankings excluding the impact of Hessian fly on susceptible varieties in 2005.