Conducting Sound On-Farm Research 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Conducting Sound On-Farm Research Dr. Pierce A. Paul The Ohio State University/OARDC Department of Plant Pathology 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Outline Designing an On-Farm Trial Experimental design CRD, RCBD, Split-plot Data Analysis Interpreting Results Case Study – Fungicide Effect on Yield Field trials Analyzing data and interpreting results Baseline yield and foliar disease effect Economic analysis 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Experimental Design and Layout 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Designing An On-Farm Trial Research Question Decide on treatments and check(s) Non-”treated” check Universal resistant/susceptible variety/hybrid Experimental design and layout Replication (n) and randomization Data Collection and analysis Interpretation of results Presentation of findings 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Experimental Design, Measurement Scale Layouts Measurement scales 1-way 2-way factorial Split plot Repeated measures Continuous Discrete (count) Binary (0, 1) Ordinal (ordered categories) The experiment design and measurement scale affect the type of analysis that can and should be done. 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Complete Randomized Design C_3 B_2 A_2 C_1 A_3 B_1 C_2 A_1 B_3 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Randomized Complete Block Design 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Randomized Complete Block Design Field 101 - Snyder Farm Wooster, Ohio Check Treated SR250 Left Side Center-left Center-right Right Side Gradient 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Randomized Complete Block Design Left Side Center-left Center-right Right Side Check Treated Field 101 - Snyder Farm Wooster, Ohio SR250 Gradient 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Randomized Complete Block Design Wooster Defiance Van Wert Columbus Check Treated Check Treated Check Treated Check Treated 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Randomized Complete Block Design Wooster 2003 Wooster 2010 Wooster 2004 Wooster 2012 Check Treated Check Treated Check Treated Check Treated 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

One-way Layout Randomized Complete Block Design What are Blocks (blocking factors)? Locations within a field Soil type, moisture gradient, Microclimate etc. Varieties/hybrids within a field Fields within a county/state/country Time - Year/Growing season Combinations of the above Uniformity/homogeneity within blocks 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

ONE BLOCK OF AN EXPERIMENT Two-way Factorial Two factors (treatments) Variety (three levels) Green, Red and Blue Fungicide (three levels) Check, horizontal, and vertical NINE treatment combinations ONE BLOCK OF AN EXPERIMENT FIELD EXPERIMENT 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

ONE BLOCK OF AN EXPERIMENT Split-plot Layout Two factors (treatments) Variety (three levels) Green, Red and Blue Fungicide (three levels) Check, horizontal, and vertical NINE treatment combinations ONE BLOCK OF AN EXPERIMENT 15 ft 65 ft 30 ft 30 ft FIELD EXPERIMENT 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Split-plot Data Analysis What if I did not realize or ignored the fact that the experiment was a split plot proc mixed data=Demo; title2 'Incorrect model specification'; class Variety Block Fungicide; model Yield = Variety Fungicide Variaty*Fungicide; run; I know that the experiment was a split plot proc mixed data=Demo; title2 'Correct model specification'; class Variety Block Fungicide; model Yield = Variety Fungicide Variaty*Fungicide; random Block(Variety); run; 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Split-plot Data Analysis What if I did not realize or ignored the fact that the experiment was a split plot Effect DF DF F Value Pr > F Variety 3 32 4.78 0.0073 Fungicide 3 32 1.73 0.1797 Variety*Fungicide 9 32 0.41 0.9178 I know that the experiment was a split plot Effect DF DF F Value Pr > F Variety 3 8 1.94 0.2015 Fungicide 3 24 3.39 0.0345 Variety*Fungicide 9 24 0.81 0.6125 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Inter-plot Interference Spray Spray How do we deal with it? Leave untreated strip (border) between plots Leave wide space between plots Remove outer rows and collect data on center rows only Adjust the spray boom? Prosaro Check Headline 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

BEFORE you conduct your experiment, not after you collect data!! SEEK HELP: BEFORE you conduct your experiment, not after you collect data!! 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Presenting and Interpreting Results 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Interpreting Graphs 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Interpreting Graphs 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Interpreting Graphs 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Interpreting Graphs 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Interpreting Graphs 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

A CASE STUDY: Corn Yield Response to Foliar Fungicides 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Evaluating Yield Response Widely Marketed Fungicides for field corn Class Common name Trade name(s) DMI (Triazole) Propiconazole Tilt, Bumper, Propimax Prothioconazole Proline Tebuconazole Folicur QoI (Strobilurin) Azoxystrobin Quadris Pyraclostrobin Headline Mixed Mode of Action Azoxystrobin + Propiconazole Quilt, Quilt Xcel Trifloxystrobin + Propiconazole Stratego Trifloxystrobin + Prothioconazole Stratego YLD Pyraclostrobin + Metconazole Headline AMP 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Introduction Cost and Benefits of using foliar fungicides Why use foliar fungicides (Benefits)? Disease control Yield increase Disease control without yield increase Yield increase with little or no disease Cost of using foliar fungicide Financial - Product and application costs Benefits do not always offset costs Fungicide resistance Loss of efficacy against diseases 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Evaluating Yield Response In 2006-2007 ~ 1.6 million acres sprayed Application Cost: $23.00 = $36,800,000.00 Corn price: $3.30/bu Breakeven: 7bu/A 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Evaluating Yield Response Concerns/Questions Increased production cost Fungicide resistance concerns Environment, health and safety concerns Yield and economic benefits of foliar fungicides Is there a positive yield response? Under what conditions is a positive response most likely? Is the response sufficient to offset application cost? 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Evaluating Yield Response Foliar fungicide trials Raw data from fungicide research and on-farm trials Data from published foliar fungicide trials Fungicide and Nematicide Tests (F&N Tests) Plant Disease Management Reports (PDMR) A total of 212 studies from 14 states (RCBD) 187 as raw data and 25 as F&N/PDMR summaries Fungicides (3-6 replicate blocks) Headline (23.6% pyraclostrobin ) Stratego (11.4% propiconazole + 11.4% trifloxystrobin) Quilt (7% azoxystrobin + 11.7% propiconazole) Quadris (22.9% azoxystrobin) 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Evaluating Yield Response Foliar fungicide trials – Average Yield 250 290 220 200 200 180 160 150 150 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Evaluating Yield Response Research Synthesis – Integrating Results A measure of fungicide effect on yield YieldDiff (D) = YieldTreated − YieldCheck Meta-analysis: Essentially a method of obtaining weighted averages of yield difference 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Variable Yield Response to Foliar Fungicides 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Mean Yield Response to Foliar Fungicides 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Why such high variability? Different Disease (pest) pressure Soil type (fertility) Weather conditions Hybrid Yield potential and Resistance Other factors 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Why such high variability? Weather Nitrogen Hybrid - Genetics Previous crop Plant Population Tillage Growth Regulator - Strobilurins From Dr. Fred Below,

Hybrid Baseline Yield Effect Baseline (actual) yield affected by: Genetics Soil and Weather conditions - fertility Pest and disease pressure Trials grouped by yield Less than 145 bu/A Between 145 and 190 bu/A Greater than 190 bu/A 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Hybrid Baseline Yield Effect 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Foliar Disease Effect Foliar Diseases Affect: Crop Growth and Development Green leaf area - photosynthesis Stalk strength Effect depends on disease level Trials grouped by Ear Leaf Disease Severity (GLS, NCLB, Rust) at R4/R5 Less than 5% Severity Greater than 5% Severity 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Foliar Disease Effect 9.67 bu 3.3 bu 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost What is the chance (probability) of the yield response being sufficient to cover the cost of fungicide application? Average yield difference Breakeven yield 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost If application cost is $25/acre and Grain price is $4/bushel Then, YLDB = 6.3 bushels When Disease < 5% D = 3.30 bu/A When Disease > 5% D = 9.67 bu/A 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost Grain price $4/bu vs. $7/bu Chance of breakeven 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost Disease < 5% vs. > 5% Chance of breakeven 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost Grain price $7/bu + Disease > 5% Chance of breakeven Grain price $4/bu + Disease < 5% 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

Chance of Recovering Fungicide and Application Cost 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

IS THERE AN APP FOR THIS STUFF? OKAY!!! IS THERE AN APP FOR THIS STUFF? 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Acknowledgements L. V. Madden, The Ohio State University/OARDC C. A. Bradley, University of Illinois A. E. Robertson, Iowa State University P. D. Esker, University of Wisconsin G. P. Munkvold, Iowa State University G. Shaner, Purdue University K. A. Wise, Purdue University D. K. Malvick, University of Minnesota T. W. Allen, Mississippi State University/DREC Grybauskas, University of Maryland P. Vincelli, University of Kentucky 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service

2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service Acknowledgements We gratefully acknowledge and appreciate the financial support for this project from: (1) USDA-NIFA Project No. 2008-34103-19449 (“Development of IPM-Based Corn Fungicide Guidelines for the North Central States”) and (2) USDA-NIFA Project No. 2009-51101-05820 (“Sustainable Disease Management on Field Corn in the U.S. Corn Belt”) We gratefully acknowledge and appreciate funding for this project from USDA-NIFA programs 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service 2013 Agronomic Crops In-Service