Table A-3. Mean yields and agronomic data from Springfield, TN Irrigated, MG-3

Table A-3. 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 Highland Rim AgResearch and Education Center in Springfield, 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		SDS†† DI (%) 1 yr		SDS†† DS (1-9) 1 yr		SDS†† DX (DI x DS/9) 1 yr		Frogeye‡‡ (1-9) 1 yr		Seed Quality (1-5) 1 yr	Purple Stain (1-5) 1 yr
Armor A39-F73	XF	72	A	13.2	A	34	A	1.0	134	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	1.3	C
Local Seed Co. LS3908XFS	XF, STS	69	A	13.1	A	33	A	1.0	133	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	1.0	C
USG 7392XFS	XF, STS	67	A	13.9	A	35	A	1.0	133	A	1.7	A	1.7	A	0.9	A	1.0	C
Asgrow AG36XF1	XF	67	A	14.5	A	30	A	1.0	135	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	2.7	AB
Asgrow AG38XF1	XF	62	A	13.3	A	31	A	1.0	133	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	1.7	BC
Asgrow AG37XF1	XF	61	A	13.6	A	33	A	1.0	135	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	1.3	C
NK Seed NK39-A1XF	XF	60	A	12.8	A	30	A	1.0	131	B	0.0	A	0.0	A	0.0	A	3.0	A
Average		65		13.5		32		1.0	133		0.2		0.2		0.1		1.7		2.3	2.0
Standard Error		5		0.6		1		–	1		0.6		0.6		0.4		0.3		0.2	0.3
L.S.D..05		N.S.		N.S.		N.S.		–	2		N.S.		N.S.		N.S.		1.0		0.5	0.5
C.V.		10		8		7		–	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.

†† SDS was evaluated as disease incidence (percentage), disease severity (1 to 9, with 1 indicating no disease), and disease index (DI x DS/9). Evaluated in mid-September.

‡‡ Frogeye was evaluated using a 1 to 9 scale, with 1 indicating no disease. Evaluated in mid-September.