What is in this article?:
To hedge against weather risks, plant multiple wheat varieties from more than one maturity group. Start by planting the later maturing varieties, and finish with the earlier ones. Difference between hard and soft wheats should be weighed.
We have more good SRWW wheat varieties to choose from than ever. Below is a list of the relative maturities of selected varieties.
Early—USG 3120 and AGS 2035;Medium early— Terral LA 841;Medium— USG 3555, USG 3201, USG 3295, Syngenta Coker 9553, USG 3409, Syngenta Magnolia;Medium Late— Syngenta Oakes, Terral TV 8525; Late— Pioneer 25R30, Pioneer 25R40, Terral TV 8861, USG 3251, Syngenta Harrison.
To hedge against weather risks, it would be advisable to plant multiple varieties from more than one maturity group. Start by planting the later maturing varieties, and finish with the earlier ones. The later maturing varieties are less likely to experience freeze damage in March, but are more subject to hot, dry conditions during the grain filling period. The medium early varieties are at more risk from a late freeze, but will likely experience more favorable weather conditions during the grain filling period.
Our research over the past 29 years has shown the optimum planting date in Northeast Texas to be the last few days in October through the first week in November. Planting prior to October 25 is not advisable as it exposes the crop to more potential damage to the Hessian fly, foliar plant diseases, and freeze injury in the spring.
Early maturing varieties are a good fit for late planting (after November 15), but are more likely to suffer freeze injury when planted at the normal time. Earlier maturing varieties are better forage producers than later maturing ones, and can be planted earlier if they are grazed. An effective grazing program will delay their maturity.
Below is a summary of average yields of selected hard and soft red winter wheat varieties in Bailey and Howe, Texas, for 2013:
Armour (HRWW),(average yield for both locations) 83.9 average bushel weight both locations, 58.1; USG 3555 (SRWW), 83.3, 54.2; USG 3120 (SRWW), 83.3, 58.1; AGS 2035 (SRWW), 80.9, 57.4; Syngenta Coker 9553 (SRWW), 80.0, 58.6; Cedar (HRWW), 78.7, 57.5; Gallagher (HRWW), 75.3, 58.8; TAM 305 (HRWW), 71.3, 59.1; Shocker (HRWW), 70.6, 59.1; Terral TV8525 (SRWW), 69.5, 55.1; Syngenta Harrison (SRWW), 68.1, 51.2; Billings (HRWW), 67.5, 59.2; Pioneer 25R40 (SRWW), 67.1, 53.4; Pioneer 25R30 (SRWW), 66.3, 54.9; Terral TV8861 (SRWW), 59.1, 53.6; USG 3251 (SRWW), 58.4, 53.1.
HRWW vs. SRWW Highlight Summary
- The Bailey location was planted on October 30 and harvested on June 13. Ninety five percent of the wheat did not emerge until mid-January following a general rain on December 25. The Howe location was planted on October 23 and harvested on June 14; over 75 percent of the wheat did not emerge until mid-January, following the December 25 rain. The Royse City location was severely damaged by a freeze in March and the data is not reported in this paper.
- USG 3120 and AGS 2035 are very early maturing varieties, and showed some freeze damage following the March freezes. We suggest these varieties not be planted before mid to late November.
- Leaf rust infection levels were heavy across the region, and many of the varieties sustained damage from this pathogen. Stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis) infection pressure was very low in 2013.
- Bushel weights were low in this study, likely due to a late season leaf rust infection.
- The HRWWs produced an average of three more bushels per acre than the SRWWs. We suspect this is because, overall, the HRWWs tested displayed better leaf rust resistance than the SRWWs. Parallel studies showed yield increases ranging from 16 percent to 66 percent where SRWWs were sprayed with a fungicide (tebuconazole).
- HRWW bushel weights averaged 3.6 pounds heavier than SRWWs
- Straw strength in SRWWs was significantly better than HRWWs in both locations. Lodging issues continue to be the major limitation to the adoption of HRWWs in this region.
This work was made possible with funding provided by the Texas Wheat Producers Board, Cereal Crops Research Incorporated (CCRI), and the Agribusiness Industry.