Table A-2. Mean† yield and agronomic traits of 7 Maturity Group III (3.0 – 3.9) soybean varieties evaluated in small plot replicated trials with irrigation at the East Tennessee AgResearch and Education Center in Knoxville, Tennessee during 2021. All MG-3 varieties evaluated this year were new; therefore, 2 yr and 3 yr analysis are not presented.
| Variety | Herbicide Pkg† | Avg. Yield§ (bu/ac) 1 yr | Moisture at Harvest (%) 1 yr | Plant Height (in.) 1 yr | Lodging‖ (1-5) 1 yr | Maturity (DAP) 1 yr | Protein¶ (%) 1 yr | Oil¶ (%) 1 yr | Frogeye‡‡ (1-9) 1 yr | Seed Quality§§ (1-5) 1 yr | Purple Stain¶¶ (1-5) 1 yr | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| USG 7392XFS | XF, STS | 87 | A | 15.6 | A | 32 | A | 1.3 | A | 133 | B | 36.8 | A | 21.9 | E | 1.0 | B | 2.0 | BC | 2.2 | AB |
| Armor A39-F73 | XF | 83 | AB | 16.1 | A | 33 | A | 1.5 | A | 136 | A | 36.0 | B | 22.6 | C | 1.0 | B | 2.7 | A | 2.3 | A |
| Local Seed Co. LS3908XFS | XF, STS | 76 | BC | 16.0 | A | 32 | A | 1.3 | A | 131 | BC | 36.8 | A | 22.2 | DE | 1.0 | B | 1.8 | C | 1.8 | BC |
| Asgrow AG38XF1 | XF | 69 | CD | 15.8 | A | 31 | A | 1.2 | A | 136 | A | 36.1 | B | 22.5 | CD | 1.0 | B | 2.7 | A | 2.3 | A |
| Asgrow AG37XF1 | XF | 66 | D | 16.7 | A | 31 | A | 1.0 | A | 133 | B | 36.0 | B | 23.4 | B | 1.3 | B | 2.8 | A | 2.0 | AB |
| NK Seed NK39-A1XF | XF | 64 | D | 16.0 | A | 30 | A | 1.0 | A | 132 | B | 33.5 | C | 24.2 | A | 4.7 | A | 2.5 | AB | 1.8 | BC |
| Asgrow AG36XF1 | XF | 60 | D | 16.2 | A | 30 | A | 1.3 | A | 130 | C | 35.7 | B | 23.3 | B | 1.3 | B | 1.7 | C | 1.5 | C |
| Average | 72 | 16.1 | 31 | 1.2 | 133 | 35.8 | 22.9 | 1.6 | 2.3 | 2.0 | |||||||||||
| Standard Error | 4 | 0.2 | 1 | 0.1 | 1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | |||||||||||
| L.S.D..05 | 10 | N.S. | N.S. | N.S. | 2 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.5 | |||||||||||
| C.V. | 8 | 2 | 3 | – | 1 | 1 | 1 | – | – | – |
† Varieties that have any MS letter in common are not significantly different at the 5% level of probability. Values highlighted in light orange are above average for a given trait, MS letters highlighted in dark orange are in the “A group”, indicating no statistical difference from the top-performing variety, for a given trait.
* Asterisks after a name indicate the number of preceding consecutive years in the top-performing “A” group.
‡ For a full description of abbreviated biotech traits, see table 31.
§ All yields are adjusted to 13% moisture.
‖ Lodging was evaluated on a a scale of 1 (no lodging) to 5 (complete lodging).
¶ Protein and oil were measured post-harvest using NIRS and are reported on a dry weight basis.
‡‡ Frogeye was evaluated using a 1 to 9 scale, with 1 indicating no disease. Evaluated in mid-September.
§§ Seed quality was evaluated visually post-harvest using a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 indicating no shriveled or damaged seed.
¶¶ Purple stain was evaluated visually post-harvest using a 1 to 5 scale, with 1 indicating no purple stain.
Virginia Sykes vsykes@utk.edu
- Table 1. 2021 Total entry numbers - December 26, 2021
- Table A-35. Mean yields and agronomic data from Memphis, TN, MG-5 - December 23, 2021
- Table A-34. Mean yields and agronomic data from Jackson, TN, MG-5 - December 22, 2021