Winter Wheat Cropping System Response to Seed Treatments, Seed Size, and Sowing Density
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poor stand establishment resulting in lower yield is a major constraint to expanding winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) across western Canada. To address this issue, we conducted a study totaling 26 site‐years over three growing seasons (2011–2013) to observe crop responses to system manipulations involving seeding rate (200 and 400 seeds m −2 ), seed size as a proxy for plant vigor (light/thin, moderate, heavy/plump), and a dual fungicide/insecticide seed treatment, on crop establishment, yield, and seed quality. Fall and spring plant density was about 10 plants m −2 greater for heavy seed vs. light seed. Seed treatment improved fall and spring plant density slightly more than 10 plants m −2 . The dual seed treatment improved yield and test weight for thin seed size. Hypothesized weakest agronomic systems (low seeding rate and untreated, light seed) that often included the 200 seeds m −2 seeding rate were the poorest performing (suboptimal responses and highly variable) systems; however, a favorable response to seed treatments allowed for partial compensation and grain yield comparable to systems with high seeding rates. Greater instability was generally observed in weak systems irrespective of seed treatment. The economic advantage of the seed treatment was more apparent with thinner winter wheat stands as it resulted in greater gross (CAN+$31 ha −1 ) and net (+$22 ha −1 ) returns. This study reaffirms the importance of a strong and integrated agronomic system and indicates seed treatments can help offset weak systems comprised of poor stand establishment and lower yield performance. Core Ideas Poor stand establishment resulting in lower yield is a major constraint to expanding winter wheat acreage across western Canada. Hypothesized weakest agronomic systems (low seeding rate and untreated, light seed) that often included the 200 seeds m −2 seeding rate were the poorest performing (sub‐optimal responses and highly variable) systems; however, a favorable response to seed treatments allowed for partial compensation and grain yield comparable to systems with high seeding rates. Winter wheat crop establishment and grain yield results indicated that producers that intentionally use low seeding rate should use a dual fungicide/insecticidal seed treatment; however, the inherent variability is not entirely overcome with seed treatment. Inclusion of a dual fungicide/insecticide seed treatment provided the highest gross returns for both levels of sowing density; however, the added input cost of the seed treatment relative to the magnitude of change for grain yield reduced overall net returns at the 400 seeds m −2 seeding rate compared to the check (–$11 ha −1 ). This study reaffirms the importance of a strong and integrated agronomic system and indicates seed treatments can help offset weak systems that tend to have poor stand establishment and lower yield performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".