Farms.com Home   News

Two Years Of Sweet Corn Evaluations

In 2012-13 we evaluated 24 cultivars of bicolor and white synergistic cultivars of sweet corn in 3 locations across Pennsylvania. This article presents our methods and results.

2013 sweet corn evalualtion site in central Pennsylvania

2013 sweet corn evalualtion site in central Pennsylvania

To provide growers with information for successful, region specific cultivar selection, in 2012-13, we evaluated 25 cultivars of bicolor and white synergistic sweet corn grown in a conventional system across the state. Evaluations were located in southwestern Pennsylvania at Schramm Farms in Harrison City, Westmoreland County, in central Pennsylvania at the Russell E. Larson Research and Education Center in Rock Springs, and in southeastern Pennsylvania at the Southeast Research and Extension Center in Landisville.

The cultivars and year(s) evaluated and company from which seed were acquired from are listed below. The standard used was ‘Temptation’.

Synergistic Sweet Corn Varieties for Statewide Trial; 2012-13

Cultivar                  Year(s) Evaluated            Seed Company

Bicolor


Allure                        2012-13                       Rupp Seeds

BC 0805                    2012-13                       SeedWay

Bicolor 1102               2012-13                     Seminis Vegetable Seeds

Cuppa Joe                 2012-13                       Rupp Seeds

Espresso                   2012-13                       Rupp Seeds

Jackie                       2012-13                       Harris Moran Seed Co.

Ka-Ching                   2012-13                      SeedWay

Kristine                     2012-13                      Seigers/Crookham Seed Co.

Montauk                    2012-13                      Harris Moran Seed Co.

Primus                       2012-13                      SeedWay

Paydirt                      2012-13                      SeedWay

Profit                        2012-13                      SeedWay

Providence                2012-13                       SeedWay

1273                        2012                            Seigers Seed Co.

1274                        2012                            Seigers Seed Co.

Synergy                    2012-13                      Seigers Seed Co.

Temptation*              2012-13                      Seigers Seed Co.

Temptation II             2012-13                      Seminis Vegetable Seeds

SV 9014                    2013                            Seminis Vegetable Seeds

White

Avalon                      2012-13                       SeedWay

Captivate                  2012-13                       Rupp Seeds

Edelweiss                  2012-13                       Harris Moran Seed Co.

Illusion                      2012-13                       Rupp Seeds

Mattapoisett              2012-13                       SeedWay

Silver Duchess            2012-13                     Seigers Seed Co.

Whiteout                   2012-13                       SeedWay

 *se heterozygous (standard)

At all locations sweet corn was direct seeded with 8-10 inches between plants in a row. In the southwestern location 38 inch spacing was used between rows and in central and southeastern locations 30 inch spacing was used. Planting took place on 6 June 2012 and 21 May 2013 in southwestern Pennsylvania, 1 June 2012 and 2013 in central Pennsylvania, and 21 May 2012 and 30 May 2013 in southeastern Pennsylvania.

At the southwestern site, in 2012, 144.5 lb/acre N, 117 lb/acre P and 87 lb/acre K were applied as follows: 57 lb N, 57 lb P and 57 lb K per acre were broadcast preplant, 30 lb N, 60 lb P and 30 lb K per acre were banded at planting and 57.5 lb/acre N was sidedressed. In 2013 200 lb of 19-19-19 per acre was applied. Plants were irrigated during periods of limited rainfall. Weeds were managed with pre-emergent herbicides: atrazine (1 Q/acre atrazine; Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Wilmington, DE) and metolachlor (1.5 Qt/acre Dual II Magnum; Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Wilmington, DE). Insects were managed with four applications of methomyl (1.5 pt/acre Lannate LV; DuPont Crop Protection, Wilmington, DE) plus lambda-cyhalothrin (1.5 oz/acre Warrior II; Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Wilmington, DE).

At the central site, in 2012, 50 lb/acre N and 45 lb/acre phosphate were broadcast preplant. Based on soil levels, K was not added. In 2013 50 lb/acre N was broadcast preplant. Weeds were managed with a preplant application of mesotrione (3 oz/acre Callisto; Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Wilmington, DE) and atrazine and metolachlor (1.5 pt/acre Bicep II Magnum; Syngenta Crop Protection LLC, Wilmington, DE).  Insect pests and diseases were left unmanaged. Supplemental water was provided through a drip irrigation (T-Tape model 508-12-450; John Deere, Moline, IL) system to reach 1-1.5 acre-inch water per week.

At the southeast site, in 2012 150 lb/acre N, 50 lb/acre P and 50 lb/acre K were broadcast preplant. In 2013 100 lb/acre N, 160 lb/acre P and 160 lb/acre K were applied preplant. Weeds were managed in both years with preplant applications of glyphosate (2 qt/acre Credit 41; Nufarm Inc., Burr Ridge, IL), metolachlor (1.2 pt/acre Dual II Magnum; Syngenta Crop Protection Inc., Greensboro, NC) and atrazine (1 qt/acre; Makhteshim Agan of North America, Inc., Raleigh, NC). Insects were controlled with weekly applications of lambda-cyhalothrin (3 oz/acre Warrior; Syngenta Crop Protection Inc., Greensboro, NC) starting at silk in both years.

Ears from 10-15 plants were harvested when all plants of an individual cultivar reached maturity. Data to estimate the work involved in hand harvest was recorded. Ears were categorized as marketable or unmarketable, counted and weighed. Ear quality from a subset of 10 ears per plot was also determined.

Husked ear appearance, unhusked ear appearance, the extent to which the husk covered the ear tip (tip cover), kernels filling the tip of the ear (tip fill), and the relative level of work involved in snapping the ear from the culm (picking ease) were rated using a 5 point scale. For husked ear appearance and unhusked ear appearance 1= poor and 5 = good; tip cover 1= exposed ear tip, 2 = husk cover less than 0.75 in past ear tip, 3 = 0.75 to 1.24 in, 4 = 1.25 to 2 in, 5 = greater than 2 in; tip fill 5 = kernels filled to tip of ear, 4 = greater than 0.5 in unfilled, 3 = 1 to 1.5 in, 2 = 1.6 to 2 in, 1 = greater than 2 inches; and picking ease 1 = difficult, 5 = easy.

All data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the GLM procedure in SAS (version 9.2; SAS Institute, Cary, NC). When P values were less than or equal to 0.05, means were separated using Duncan’s multiple comparison test.

Statewide Results

In determining whether a cultivar was suited for statewide recommendation, the criterion was that it must have produced comparable or superior yields to ‘Temptation’ in a minimum of two of the evaluation sites over both trial years.

Estimating the work involved in hand harvesting

The distance from the soil line to the base of the primary ear and picking ease were collected as an indication of the work involved in hand harvesting.

With the exception of ‘Synergy’, all cultivar met the criterion above for distance from the soil line to the primary ear. For the following cultivars picking ease rating met the criterion above: Mattapoisette, Primus, Edelweiss, Avalon, Temptation II, Montauk, Cuppa Joe, Jackie, Allure, Bicolor 1102, Illusion, Silver Duchess, Profit, Espresso, Kristine and Paydirt.

Yields

Based on marketable yield results all cultivars met the criterion above for number of ears. With the exception of ‘Paydirt’, all cultivars met the criterion above for weight of marketable ears.

Ear Quality

Ear quality is just as important as marketable yield in making profits. Consumers are first attracted to the appearance of the ear, while taste can result in repeat purchases. In most US markets, consumers prefer an 8-9 in ear with a dark green husk, long and dark green flag leaf, and 16 straight rows of small deep and sweet kernels filled to the tip of the ear (Tracy, 2001).

In terms of ear length all cultivars met the criterion. For ear diameter ‘BC 0805’, ‘Espresso’ and ‘Cuppa Joe’ did not meet the criterion while the remaining cultivars were comparable or superior to ‘Temptation’. For husked and unhusked appearance all cultivars met the criterion. All ears were completely covered by the husk; however, ‘Cuppa Joe’ and ‘Jackie’ did not meet the criterion above while all other cultivars did. Regarding tip fill, ‘Cuppa Joe’, and ‘Profit’ did not meet the criterion above while all other cultivars did.

The number of rows was only evaluated in more than one location in one year of the study. Based on the criterion of producing comparable or superior results to ‘Temptation’ in a minimum of two evaluation sites, the number of rows for all cultivars except ‘Paydirt’ and ‘Illusion’ were not different or superior to ‘Temptation’.

Brix levels were only evaluated in one year of the study. Based on the criterion of producing comparable or superior results to ‘Temptation’ in a minimum of two evaluation sites, all cultivars had brix levels not different than or superior to ‘Temptation’.

Source : psu.edu


Trending Video

Why Rob Saik is Trying to Build the World’s Most Connected Agriculture Network

Video: Why Rob Saik is Trying to Build the World’s Most Connected Agriculture Network

In a recent interview at the SeedLink Conference in Brandon, Man., Rob Saik, author, speaker, and CEO of AGvisorPRO, took a trip down memory lane, reminiscing about the beginnings of his career and what the future holds.

Graduating from the University of Alberta in 1983, Saik embarked on a journey that started in Brandon, Man. “I got a job with Elanko, got a U-Haul truck, threw everything I had into it, drove to the Victoria Inn, and lived there for three months while they tried to find an apartment for me to move into. So I started my career in Brandon,” Saik shared.

Fast forward to the present, Saik has evolved into an accomplished author and speaker, traversing the globe to engage in high-level discussions about the future of agriculture and the critical role it plays in feeding the world. Yet, despite his global presence, he finds himself back in Brandon, addressing a group of seed growers. But why? Saik emphasizes the fundamental importance of seeds, stating, “It all begins with a seed, doesn’t it?”

Reflecting on his own experiences as a farmer, Saik expresses his excitement when a planted seed germinates and evolves into a thriving crop. He underscores the significance of technology and breeding in seed development, recognizing the crucial role they play in ensuring farmers can propagate seeds, grow profitable crops, and contribute to global food security.

Saik delves into the challenges faced by the agricultural community, particularly the rapid pace of technological advancements. He believes that the key lies in connecting farmers to experts swiftly, boosting farmers’ confidence in adopting new technologies, and ensuring the timely implementation of these advancements. According to Saik, this approach is crucial for steering agriculture towards sustainability and profitability.

As Saik works on his upcoming book, tentatively titled prAGmatic, he sheds light on its central theme. “The thesis would be that I want to write a book that takes what the consumer wants, challenges what the consumer believes, and positions that against what the farmers can actually do pragmatically,” he explains. The book aims to bridge the gap between consumer expectations and the realistic capabilities of farmers, promoting sustainable intensification as the necessary path to feed the planet.

Looking ahead to 2024, Saik emphasizes the need for enhanced connectivity within the seed industry. He discusses his platform, AgvisorPro, which is designed to facilitate connections between farmers, experts, and companies in a way that transcends conventional social media platforms. Saik envisions a credible, connected agricultural network that goes beyond the noise of platforms like LinkedIn or Twitter.

In a passionate vision for the future, Saik imagines a tool for teachers that allows them to pose questions from students, answered by verified farmers and ranchers. This, he believes, would provide an authentic and valuable educational resource, connecting classrooms with individuals who truly understand the intricacies of agriculture.