|MS||Variety||Avg. Yield† bu/a||Moist. ‡ %||Carlisle 6/23 §||Coffee 6/22||Dyer 5/10||Franklin 6/10||Gibson 5/6||Madison 5/11||Tipton 6/12||Wayne 5/6|
|BCD||Bayer CZ 5375||50||13||60||33||63||65||60||56||27||33|
† Yields have been adjusted to 13% moisture.
‡ Moisture at harvest.
- Planting date.
Each variety was evaluated in a large strip-plot at each location, thus each county test was considered as one replication of the test in calculating the
average yield and in conducting the statistical analysis to determine significant differences (MS).
Varieties denoted with an asterisks (*) or (**) etc. were in the top performing group for consecutive years.
MS= Varieties with any MS letter in common are not statistically different at the 5% level of probability.
Data provided by Ryan Blair, Ext. Area Specialist, Grain and Cotton Variety Testing, and the extension agents in the counties shown above.
Latest posts by Ryan Blair (see all)
- Table 6.Yields of six Late Maturity Group III (3.6 – 3.9) Roundup Ready soybean varieties in 8 County Standard Tests in Tennessee during 2016. - April 5, 2017
- Table 7.Overall average yields and moistures of three Maturity Group III (3.0 – 3.9) Roundup Ready soybean varieties evaluated in County Standard Tests (n=8) and REC Tests (n=5) in Tennessee during 2016. - April 5, 2017
- Table 8.Yields and disease ratings of 6Maturity Group III Roundup Ready soybean varieties in 8 County Standard Tests and in small plot trials at one Research and Education Center and one on-farm location in Tennessee during 2016 - April 5, 2017