2019 michigan dry bean...2.2 2.5 ex 1701 92-100 1154 2708 2548 2139 2137 2462 - 2.6 2.5 ex 1702...
TRANSCRIPT
-
1
Michigan Dry Bean Research Report
2019
MICHIGAN DRY BEAN RESEARCH REPORT
2019
2019
-
Table of Contents
2
Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….. Michigan Dry Bean Variety Trials……………………………………………. Navy………………………………………………………………….. Black………………………………………………………………….. Small Red and Pink…………………………………………………… Pinto…………………………………………………………………… Great Northern………………………………………………………… Cranberry……………………………………………………………… Light Red Kidney……………………………………………………... Dark Red Kidney……………………………………………………… White Kidney………………………………………………………….. Yellow………………………………………………………………… Sourcing Information………………………………………………...... White Mold Fungicide Trials……………………………………....................... Navy Bean Response to Nitrogen Strip Trial…………………………………..
Black Bean Response to Nitrogen, Sulfur and Plant Populations……………………………………………………………………..
Dry Bean Response to Phosphorus ……………………………………………. Dry Bean Response to Foliar Manganese……………………………………... Soil Test Information…………………………………………………………... Dr. James Kelly, MSU Dry Bean Breeding and Genetics Introduction…………………………………………………………………….. Standard Navy Bean Yield Trial……………………………………………….. Standard Black Bean Yield Trial (- Nitrogen)……………………………….… Standard Black Bean Yield Trial (+ Nitrogen)………………………………… National White Mold Yield Trial………………………………………………. Dr. Kurt Steinke, MSU Soil Fertility and Nutrient Management Specialist Response of Dry Bean to Nitrogen Application……………………………….. Response of Dry Bean to Phosphorus Application……………………………. Response of Dry Bean to Potassium Application……………………………… Response of Dry Bean to Sulfur Application………………………………….. Manganese and Zinc Application in Dry Bean………………………………… Dr. Marty Chilvers, MSU Field Crops Pathologist Rhizoctonia Root Rot on Dry Bean...………………………………………….. Dr. Christy Sprague, MSU Weed Scientist Preharvest Treatments for Dry Bean Desiccantion…………………………….. Preharvest Treatments for Common Lambsquarters Desiccation in Dry Beans.. MSU Weed Control Guide E-434 (Dry Beans Only)…………………...………
3 4 5 6 7 8 8 9 10 11 12 12 13 15 17 18 20 21 22 23 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 36 39 40 41
-
2019 Michigan Dry Bean Research Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
3
In 2019 the Michigan Bean Commission was awarded two grants from the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.
Project one titled: ‘Integration of Sustainable Management Practices Essential for the Advancement of Michigan Dry Bean Production’ was funded by specialty crop block grant program within the farm-bill. Objectives of this trial were to: (1) Development of bean cultivars and breeding lines with anthracnose resistance for disease control (site specific environmental/climate stressed conditions) within diverse production regions in Michigan. (2) Maximize yield through the optimization of harvest aid (desiccant) applications to reduce the prevalence of ‘green stem’ and to assure residue compliance at harvest. (3) Assessment of total nitrogen rates and time of application. Treatments will be designed to minimize total nitrogen applied during the pod development stage of growth (enhanced yield) thus reducing white mold infection. (4) Assessment of selected cover crops to improve soil conditions (sustainability and nutrient retention/bioavailability) and to enhance plant residue, as a means to establish a physical barrier that will reduce white mold disease spore transmission during bloom. (5) Assessment of suitable strategies for dry beans that undergo acute losses from white mold and root rot disease. Determine if a white mold prediction model will identify risk for white mold disease development and be a useful tool for Michigan dry bean growers. (6) Assessment of tile spacing and in-furrow and foliar fungicide applications on white mold and root rot control, under small and large plots. (7) Implementation of grower educational activates to communicate intervention strategies and economic options (current best management practices) used for the production of dry beans.
Project two titled: ‘Comprehensive Fertilizer Rate Recommendations for Michigan Dry Bean Growers: Strengthening Economic and Environmental Sustainability’ was funded by the MDARD- fertilizer research program. The objectives of this project were to: (1) Assess nutrient requirements of new bean varieties for the major market classes grown in Michigan. (2) Provide grower guidelines for application of macro nutrients (N, P, K) based on physiological needs of the plant with particular needs for Phosphorous containment. (3) Provide optimum nitrogen requirements important to minimize plant canopy growth to assist with white mold proliferation, particularly in narrow row systems (4) Provide grower guidelines for application of micro nutrients (Zn and Mn). (5) Establish grower education of fertilizer application rates that include knowledge of soil fertility and crop rotations and carry over management. (6) Publish fertility manage requirements and management strategies for distribution to bean growers in Michigan.
Season Summary: The 2019 planting season was less than ideal for most crops in Michigan, dry beans included. Excessive levels of soil moisture from late May into July caused significant delays in dry bean planting across the state. However, the frequency of rainfall did eventually slow down through mid-summer. Some areas in the state became droughty during flowering, including Bay and Gratiot County dry bean variety trial locations. One benefit we did experience from being on the drier side through flowering was that white mold (Sclerotinia sclerotiorum) pressure was not high across the state in 2019. To the benefit of this research however, the Sanilac County variety trial location did have significant white mold pressure, allowing for the rating of white mold infection in the absence of fungicides. As dry bean harvest began the weather had a negative impact on field work once again. Harvest was done in small windows, followed by 7 to 10 day stretches of cold, wet weather. Overall, dry bean quality held up better than expected given the conditions. Of the 8 research locations included in this report the first was harvested on September 18th in Bay County. This trial had experienced water deficits and is one of our lowest yielding locations in 2019. The final location to be harvested was an irrigated white mold fungicide trial in Midland County on October 19th.
We would like to thank all cooperators that hosted trials in 2019. Without their assistance this research would not be possible.
-
2019
Mic
higa
n D
ry B
ean
Var
iety
Tri
als
Scot
t Bal
es, M
SU D
ry B
ean
Spec
ialis
t
4 T
able
1. D
ry B
ean
varie
ty tr
ial l
ocat
ions
, coo
pera
tors
, pla
ntin
g da
te, h
arve
st d
ate,
acc
umul
ated
GD
D fr
om p
lant
ing
until
har
vest
, tot
al
prec
ipita
tion
from
pla
ntin
g un
til h
arve
st, a
nd w
hite
mol
d ev
alua
tion
on a
pre
senc
e or
abs
ence
bas
es.
Cou
nty
Coo
pera
tor
Plan
ting
Dat
e H
arve
st
Dat
e T
otal
GD
D*
Tot
al
Prec
ipita
tion
(inch
es)
Whi
te
Mol
d (y
es/n
o)
Bay
Sc
hind
ler F
arm
s 6/
8 9/
18
1756
10
.0
NO
Gratiot
Stev
e H
oard
Far
ms
6/8
10/9
21
68
18.8
N
O
Sanilac
Dav
e’s D
irt
6/9
9/24
19
18
9.5
YES
Tuscola
Bedn
arsk
i Far
ms
6/9
9/26
21
59
11.5
N
O
Montcalm
R
ader
Far
ms
6/12
10
/10
1956
16
.1 +
Irrig
atio
n Y
ES
Huron
J.A
.D.E
. Far
ms
6/22
10
/7
1806
9.
1 N
O
*Wea
ther
dat
a re
triev
ed fr
om th
e ne
ares
t Mic
higa
n A
utom
ated
Wea
ther
Net
wor
k (M
AW
N) a
nd th
e En
viro
-wea
ther
Pro
gram
stat
ion
near
est t
o th
e tri
al. A
ll w
eath
er d
ata
is fr
om th
e da
y of
pla
ntin
g to
har
vest
. Gro
win
g de
gree
day
s wer
e ca
lcul
ated
usin
g th
e fo
llow
ing
equa
tion:
Met
hods
: For
thes
e si
x dr
y be
an v
arie
ty tr
ials
bea
ns a
re se
eded
in fo
ur ro
w p
lots
(20”
row
s) th
at m
easu
re 6
.6’ w
ide
by 2
0’ lo
ng. E
ach
entry
is re
plic
ated
four
tim
es w
ithin
the
trial
. All
trial
s rec
eive
60
lb./A
of n
itrog
en b
road
cast
. Ind
ustry
stan
dard
PPI
or P
RE
herb
icid
es
are
appl
ied
by th
e co
oper
ator
. PO
ST w
eed
cont
rol c
onsi
st o
f a m
ixtu
re o
f Rap
or (4
fl o
z) +
Bas
agra
n (1
6 fl
oz) +
Ref
lex
(8 fl
oz)
+
Asa
na (4
fl o
z) +
CO
C (1
% v
/v) +
AM
S (2
.5 lb
/A).
In 2
019
Mon
tcal
m a
nd B
ay C
ount
y w
ere
not s
pray
ed P
OST
do
to e
xcep
tiona
l w
eed
cont
rol b
y PP
I app
licat
ions
. Whi
te m
old
fung
icid
es a
re n
ot a
pplie
d to
any
var
iety
tria
ls, t
his a
llow
s the
eva
luat
ion
of a
var
ietie
s na
tura
l tol
eran
ce o
r avo
idan
ce to
whi
te m
old
whe
n th
e di
seas
e is
pres
ent.
Yie
ld d
ata
is o
btai
ned
by d
irect
har
vest
for s
mal
l and
m
ediu
m se
eded
bea
ns. L
arge
seed
ed b
eans
are
pul
led
by h
and
and
then
mec
hani
cally
thra
shed
to p
reve
nt h
arve
st lo
ss. S
ampl
es a
re
wei
ghed
and
moi
stur
e is
take
n at
har
vest
, dat
a is
then
adj
uste
d to
18%
moi
stur
e an
d an
alyz
ed a
t
0.0
5. Q
uest
ions
rega
rdin
g th
e 20
19 v
arie
ty tr
ials
, or s
ugge
stio
ns fo
r 202
0 sh
ould
be
dire
cted
to S
cott
Bale
s: (9
89)-
262-
8550
; Bal
essc
o@m
su.e
du.
-
5 Ta
ble
2. N
avy
bean
var
ietie
s, av
erag
e m
atur
ity, y
ield
s at f
our c
ount
y lo
catio
ns in
201
9, a
vera
ge y
ield
s by
varie
ty fo
r Bay
, Hur
on, S
anila
c, a
nd
Tusc
ola
Cou
nty
in 2
019
(1-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
018-
2019
(2-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
017-
2019
(3-y
ear A
VG
.), w
hite
mol
d ra
ting
(1-5
) and
lodg
ing
ratin
g (1
-5).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a W
hite
mol
d ra
tings
: 1=
less
than
10%
infe
ctio
n, 5
= gr
eate
r tha
n 60
% in
fect
ion
b Lo
dgin
g Sc
ores
: 1=
very
ere
ct, 5
= po
ds a
nd st
ems o
n th
e gr
ound
V
AR
IET
Y
DA
YS
BA
Y
HU
RO
N
SAN
ILA
C
TU
SCO
LA
1-
year
AV
G.
2-ye
ar A
VG
. 3-
year
AV
G.
WM
Rat
inga
L
odgi
ngb
HM
S M
EDAL
IST
98-1
06
1834
* 29
34
3619
* 26
82
2767
27
14
2599
2.
1 2.
5 M
ERLI
N
98-1
06
1766
* 32
31
2682
21
50
2457
28
16*
2623
2.
0 2.
0 AP
EX
95-1
04
1769
* 29
11
3448
* 29
74
2776
* 28
72*
- 1.
8 2.
0 BL
IZZA
RD
94-9
9 14
76*
3176
30
64
2859
26
44
2708
25
65
2.3
1.5
IND
I 89
-96
1442
31
82
2547
24
76
2412
25
29
- 2.
0 1.
5 VI
GIL
ANT
91-9
6 20
24**
31
99
2437
28
17
2619
-
- 2.
4 2.
0 RE
XETE
R 93
-106
15
44*
3923
**
2371
31
48
2747
26
45
2540
2.
8 2.
5 N
AUTI
CA
94-1
04
1919
* 31
31
2402
28
54
2577
24
32
2497
1.
8 2.
0 M
IST
93-1
02
1748
* 32
58
2969
26
60
2659
26
45
2499
1.
5 2.
5 AR
GO
SY
92-1
00
1896
* 33
74
3173
* 29
73
2854
* 28
46*
2841
* 2.
2 2.
5 EX
170
1 92
-100
11
54
2708
25
48
2139
21
37
2462
-
2.6
2.5
EX 1
702
94-1
02
1470
* 26
48
2652
25
22
2323
26
39
- 2.
3 2.
5 EX
170
8 95
-103
85
5 30
41
1913
16
03
1853
-
- -
- EX
171
1 93
-100
13
01
2881
21
84
2461
22
07
- -
- -
VALI
ANT
92-1
00
1332
31
51
3208
* 24
30
2530
-
- -
- PR
OVI
TA 1
2039
92
-99
1828
* 30
67
3651
**
3410
* 29
89
3032
**
2912
**
2.6
2.5
HM
S BO
UN
TY
93-1
04
1441
31
64
2655
29
02
2541
29
81*
2782
* 1.
3 1.
5 PR
OVI
TA 1
2062
94
-101
16
08*
3773
* 31
09*
3236
* 29
32
2912
* 28
62*
2.8
2.5
PRO
VITA
120
63
95-1
02
1448
35
64*
2861
35
69*
2861
* 29
60*
2867
* 2.
2 1.
5 PR
OVI
TA 1
2064
96
-104
14
52*
2915
-
- -
2496
25
84
1.6
2.0
ARM
ADA
96-1
02
1541
* 35
30*
3575
* 28
21
2867
* 29
56*
2823
* 2.
0 2.
0 PR
OVI
TA 1
4068
96
-100
19
68*
2976
24
32
3087
26
16
2700
27
74*
3.0
2.0
PRO
VITA
140
80
95-1
02
1630
* 33
30
3008
28
53
2705
-
- -
- PR
OVI
TA 1
4084
97
-104
15
63*
2791
27
89
3082
25
56
2707
27
38
3.1
2.0
PRO
VITA
150
94
93-1
02
1579
* 38
60*
3537
* 29
48
2981
* 29
56*
- 2.
1 2.
5 PR
OVI
TA 1
5095
96
-104
15
18*
3312
34
90*
3892
**
3053
**
2996
* -
3.2
3.0
SV18
93G
H
97-1
06
- 27
36
1796
-
- 24
33
- 2.
0 2.
5 M
SU N
1750
6 95
-98
1622
32
90
2602
26
35
2537
23
63
- 3.
5 1.
5 M
SU N
1810
2 96
-99
1397
28
66
2765
22
59
2322
-
- -
- M
SU N
1810
9 96
-98
1649
* 31
59
2722
36
12*
2786
* -
- -
- EX
180
1 97
-98
- 32
27
- 25
62
- -
- -
- EX
180
2 94
-95
- 31
68
- 21
62
- -
- -
- EX
180
3 96
-98
- 29
66
- 15
57
- -
- -
- EX
180
4 96
-97
- 33
04
- 26
75
- -
- -
- M
EA
N:
15
78
3169
28
35
2750
26
18
2731
27
01
2.3
2.1
LSD
(0.0
5):
57
3 49
7 57
2 71
8 27
7 21
8 17
0
C
V:
30
%
13%
16
%
22%
25
%
19%
18
%
-
6 Ta
ble
3. B
lack
bea
n va
rietie
s, av
erag
e m
atur
ity, y
ield
s at f
our c
ount
y lo
catio
ns in
201
9, a
vera
ge y
ield
s by
varie
ty fo
r Bay
, Hur
on, S
anila
c, a
nd
Tusc
ola
Cou
nty
in 2
019
(1-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
018-
2019
(2-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
017-
2019
(3-y
ear A
VG
.), w
hite
mol
d ra
ting
(1-5
) and
lodg
ing
ratin
g (1
-5).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atist
ical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a W
hite
mol
d ra
tings
: 1=
less
than
10%
infe
ctio
n, 5
= gr
eate
r tha
n 60
% in
fect
ion
b Lo
dgin
g Sc
ores
: 1=
very
ere
ct, 5
= po
ds a
nd st
ems o
n th
e gr
ound
V
AR
IET
Y
DA
YS
BA
Y
HU
RO
N S
AN
ILA
C T
USC
OL
A 1
-yea
r A
VG
. 2-
year
AV
G.
3-ye
ar A
VG
. W
M R
atin
ga
Lod
ging
b ZO
RRO
93
-102
14
70
2416
31
38*
2816
24
60
2540
24
26
2.6
2.0
ZEN
ITH
93
-104
15
39
2625
* 32
82*
2506
24
88
2673
25
04
2.4
2.0
LORE
TO
94-1
04
1123
27
21*
2977
30
55
2469
26
94
2643
3.
3 2.
0 BL
ACK
CAT
92
-100
15
95
2535
27
50
2790
24
18
2618
25
52
3.3
2.0
BLAC
K B
EAR
97
-104
14
66
2657
* 32
27
3612
27
41
2672
25
39
3.0
2.0
BLAC
K T
AILS
94
-102
12
59
2609
27
88
3432
25
22
2740
26
39
3.3
2.5
BLAC
K B
EARD
96
-100
19
09*
3193
* 37
82**
31
95
3020
* 31
90*
3040
2.
4 2.
0 SP
ECTR
E 96
-104
16
25
2719
* 35
14*
3190
27
62
3122
* 30
09
1.9
2.5
BL 1
3505
92
-100
19
03*
2973
* 27
93
3047
26
79
2743
26
52
4.3
2.5
BL 1
4500
97
-106
19
79*
3060
* 35
63*
3563
30
41*
3337
**
3224
**
2.6
2.0
BL 1
5610
95
-106
15
46
2524
37
39*
3284
27
73
2749
-
2.5
2.0
BL 1
5619
93
-104
20
69*
2588
25
40
2876
25
18
2558
-
3.6
2.0
MSU
B15
447
97-1
00
1800
* 29
02*
3508
* 37
37*
2987
* -
- 3.
0 2.
0 M
SU B
1650
4 95
-100
22
29**
28
45*
3308
* 27
68
2788
31
09*
3074
2.
8 2.
0 M
SU B
1792
2 96
-100
18
02*
3102
* 29
63
3568
28
59
- -
2.5
2.0
MSU
B18
201
96-1
02
2136
* 32
82**
33
29*
4268
**
3254
**
- -
2.6
2.0
MSU
B18
204
95-1
00
1609
30
00*
2888
26
62
2540
-
- 2.
6 2.
0 M
SU B
1850
4 96
-100
16
75
3099
* 33
43*
3700
* 29
54
3068
-
2.6
2.0
GTS
B13
SR1-
1 94
-100
19
15*
2854
* 21
93
3152
25
29
- -
3.5
2.0
ADM
B20
0732
5 97
-99
- -
2837
38
16*
- -
- 3.
8 2.
5 AD
M B
3036
368
97-9
8 -
- 25
54
2516
-
- -
4.3
2.5
ADM
B30
3638
1 96
-97
- -
2546
29
35
- -
- 4.
5 3.
0 AC
E 97
-98
- -
2858
31
94
- -
- 3.
8 3.
0 EC
LIPS
E 92
-96
- -
2512
32
95
- -
- 4.
3 3.
0 M
EA
N:
17
18
2827
30
39
3207
27
26
2779
27
75
3.1
2.2
LSD
(0.0
5):
43
9 66
2 67
9 56
8 29
8 23
6 16
0
C
V:
2
1%
19%
19
%
15%
23
%
20%
17
%
-
7 Ta
ble
4. S
mal
l Red
and
Pin
k B
ean
varie
ties,
aver
age
mat
urity
, yie
lds a
t fou
r cou
nty
loca
tions
in 2
019,
ave
rage
yie
lds b
y va
riety
for
Bay,
Hur
on, S
anila
c, a
nd T
usco
la C
ount
y in
201
9 (1
-yea
r AV
G.),
201
8-20
19 (2
-yea
r AV
G.),
201
7-20
19 (3
-yea
r AV
G.),
whi
te m
old
ratin
g (1
-5) a
nd lo
dgin
g ra
ting
(1-5
).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a W
hite
mol
d ra
tings
: 1=
less
than
10%
infe
ctio
n, 5
= gr
eate
r tha
n 60
% in
fect
ion
b Lo
dgin
g Sc
ores
: 1=
very
ere
ct, 5
= po
ds a
nd st
ems o
n th
e gr
ound
V
AR
IET
Y
DA
YS
BA
Y
HU
RO
N
SAN
ILA
C T
USC
OL
A
1-ye
ar A
VG
. 2-
year
AV
G.
3-ye
ar A
VG
. W
M R
atin
ga L
odgi
ngb
VIPE
R
93-1
04
1882
* 26
10*
3608
* 38
85*
2996
**
3162
* 31
75**
3.
8 2.
5 RU
BY
92-1
04
1472
* 26
44*
2970
28
55
2485
27
10
2725
3.
8 4.
0 C
ALD
ERA
97-1
08
1578
* 22
99*
3641
**
4237
**
2939
* 30
20*
3084
* 3.
0 2.
5 C
AYEN
NE
91-1
00
1859
* 27
77*
2942
33
28
2727
* 30
97*
3032
* 2.
0 2.
5 M
SU R
1760
3 96
-104
15
94*
2880
**
3560
* 29
90
2756
* 32
07**
-
3.0
2.5
MSU
R17
604
97-1
05
1378
24
50*
3130
* 33
02
2565
-
- 2.
4 3.
5 M
SU R
1760
5 95
-104
15
37*
2453
* 30
43*
3422
26
14
- -
2.5
3.0
PRO
VITA
166
86
91-1
01
1801
* 17
02
2503
39
55*
2490
-
- 3.
9 3.
0 PR
OVI
TA 1
7835
93
-102
18
65**
24
53*
2919
27
04
2485
-
- 2.
8 3.
0 PR
OVI
TA 1
7837
90
-103
13
35
2682
* 31
67*
3177
25
90
- -
3.0
2.5
PRO
VITA
178
39
93-1
02
1294
24
61*
2982
25
28
2316
-
- 3.
4 2.
5 RO
SETT
A PI
NK
93
-105
15
42*
2561
* 20
75
2021
20
50
2561
25
28
1.9
2.0
S189
04
95-1
04
1705
* 22
56
3067
* 27
57
2446
-
- 2.
1 2.
5 M
EAN
:
1603
24
79
3047
31
66
2574
29
60
2909
2.
9 2.
8 LS
D(0
.05)
:
450
607
646
536
293
220
172
CV
:
23%
21
%
17%
14
%
25%
18
%
18%
-
8 Ta
ble
5. P
into
bea
n va
rietie
s, av
erag
e m
atur
ity, y
ield
s at f
our c
ount
y lo
catio
ns in
201
9, a
vera
ge y
ield
s by
varie
ty fo
r Bay
, Gra
tiot,
Hur
on, M
ontc
alm
, and
San
ilac
Cou
nty
in 2
019
(1-y
ear A
VG
.), w
hite
mol
d ra
ting
(1-5
) and
lodg
ing
ratin
g (1
-5).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a W
hite
mol
d ra
tings
: 1=
less
than
10%
infe
ctio
n, 5
= gr
eate
r tha
n 60
% in
fect
ion
b Lo
dgin
g Sc
ores
: 1=
very
ere
ct, 5
= po
ds a
nd st
ems o
n th
e gr
ound
Ta
ble
6. G
reat
Nor
ther
n be
an v
arie
ties,
aver
age
mat
urity
, yie
lds a
t fou
r cou
nty
loca
tions
in 2
019,
ave
rage
yie
lds b
y va
riety
for B
ay,
Gra
tiot,
Mon
tcal
m, a
nd T
usco
la C
ount
y in
201
9 (1
-yea
r AV
G.),
whi
te m
old
ratin
g (1
-5) a
nd lo
dgin
g ra
ting
(1-5
).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a W
hite
mol
d ra
tings
: 1=
less
than
10%
infe
ctio
n, 5
= gr
eate
r tha
n 60
% in
fect
ion
b Lo
dgin
g Sc
ores
: 1=
very
ere
ct, 5
= po
ds a
nd st
ems o
n th
e gr
ound
VA
RIE
TY
D
AY
S B
AY
G
RA
TIO
T
HU
RO
N
MO
NT
CA
LM
SA
NIL
AC
1-
year
A
VG
. W
M
Rat
inga
L
odgi
ngb
LA P
AZ
90-9
5 19
22*
2127
22
71*
2291
29
34**
23
09
4.6
3.0
MSU
P16
901
95-1
02
2188
* 26
71**
23
68*
2639
23
22*
2438
* 4.
4 3.
5 M
SU P
1751
0 93
-104
22
23**
22
50*
2618
**
3384
**
2792
* 26
53**
3.
1 2.
0 M
SU P
1860
2 96
-102
13
45
1862
23
16*
1394
26
61*
1916
4.
3 3.
0 W
IND
BREA
KER
87
-
- 20
71
- -
- -
- SV
6139
GR
89
-
- 24
96*
- -
- -
- SV
6533
GR
88
-
- 24
22*
- -
- -
- M
EA
N:
19
20
2228
23
66
2427
26
77
2329
4.
1 2.
9 L
SD(0
.05)
:
424
4
83
417
304
1500
31
8
C
V:
1
7%
16%
14
%
cv-5
%
43%
26
%
VA
RIE
TY
D
AY
S B
AY
G
RA
TIO
T
MO
NT
CA
LM
T
USC
OL
A
1-ye
ar A
VG
. W
M R
atin
ga
Lod
ging
b PO
WD
ERH
ORN
90
-92
883
1295
30
97*
1229
16
26
5.0
2.0
MSU
G16
351
98-1
05
2066
**
2627
* 31
42*
3204
* 27
60*
3.0
2.0
MSU
G17
410
94-1
02
2001
* 28
45**
38
18**
34
16**
30
20**
3.
0 2.
0 AR
IES
GN
90
-92
1246
15
88
3160
* 17
48
1936
5.
0 2.
0 G
N 1
3172
97
-103
15
25*
2331
27
40
3213
* 24
52
4.0
3.0
ME
AN
:
1544
21
37
3191
25
62
2359
4.
0 2.
2 L
SD(0
.05)
:
625
421
849
742
365
CV
:
37%
15
%
23%
24
%
29%
-
9 Ta
ble
7. C
ranb
erry
bea
n va
rietie
s, av
erag
e da
ys m
atur
ity, y
ield
at G
ratio
t (D
ry L
and)
and
Mon
tcal
m (I
rriga
ted)
cou
nty
loca
tions
in
2019
, ave
rage
yie
lds f
or 2
018-
2019
(2-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
017-
2019
(3-y
ear A
VG
.) fo
r Dry
Lan
d an
d Irr
igat
ed lo
catio
ns, a
nd w
hite
mol
d ra
ting
(1-5
).
***V
ine
type
**
Hig
hest
yie
ldin
g va
riety
with
in c
olum
n *Y
ield
not
stat
istic
ally
diff
eren
t tha
n th
e hi
ghes
t yie
ldin
g va
riety
with
in c
olum
n (
0
.05)
a W
hite
mol
d ra
tings
: 1=
less
than
10%
infe
ctio
n, 5
= gr
eate
r tha
n 60
% in
fect
ion
VA
RIE
TY
D
AY
S G
RA
TIO
T M
ON
TC
AL
M
Irri
gate
d 2-
year
AV
G.
Irri
gate
d 3-
year
AV
G.
Dry
Lan
d 2-
year
AV
G.
Dry
Lan
d 3-
year
AV
G.
WM
R
atin
ga
ETN
A 88
-91
707
4109
**
3512
* 33
35
1803
19
41
1.0
CH
IAN
TI**
* 96
-99
731
3780
* 36
07*
3365
19
18
2411
2.
0 BE
LLAG
IO**
* 10
2-10
4 15
85*
3405
35
68*
3336
22
63
2441
3.
0 SV
3709
GC
88
-90
1382
* 39
70*
- -
- -
1.0
VERO
88
-91
- 34
68
3276
33
68
- -
2.0
GTS
Red
Cra
n R1
72
87-9
0 17
19*
2721
-
- -
- 1.
0 C
R 15
1085
95
-102
17
73*
3601
* 39
09**
37
83**
24
60*
2674
* 3.
0 C
R 15
1093
95
-102
18
53**
32
28
3285
31
49
2704
**
2773
**
2.0
CR
1511
06
95-9
6 56
2 39
77*
3474
* 32
26
1739
20
30
1.0
CR
1676
0 90
-93
1623
* 35
66
3345
-
2506
* -
2.0
CR
1676
1 90
-92
1141
35
68
3561
* -
2141
-
2.0
CR
1676
4 88
-90
1351
31
43
2703
-
2235
-
3.0
CR
1677
5 96
-98
1153
34
83
- -
- -
1.0
ME
AN
:
1298
35
40
3424
33
66
2197
23
78
1.8
LSD
(0.0
5):
49
2 52
6 44
7 39
6 29
0 27
8
CV
:
32%
12
%
16%
17
%
16%
17
%
-
10
Tabl
e 8.
Lig
ht R
ed K
idne
y be
an v
arie
ties,
aver
age
days
mat
urity
, yie
ld a
t Gra
tiot (
Dry
Lan
d) a
nd M
ontc
alm
(Irr
igat
ed) c
ount
y lo
catio
ns in
201
9, a
vera
ge y
ield
s for
201
8-20
19 (2
-yea
r AV
G.),
201
7-20
19 (3
-yea
r AV
G.)
for D
ry L
and
and
Irrig
ated
loca
tions
, and
w
hite
mol
d ra
ting
(1-5
).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a Whi
te m
old
ratin
gs: 1
= le
ss th
an 1
0% in
fect
ion,
5=
grea
ter t
han
60%
infe
ctio
n V
AR
IETY
D
AY
S G
RA
TIO
T M
ON
TC
AL
M
Irri
gate
d
2-ye
ar A
VG
. Ir
riga
ted
3-
year
AV
G.
Dry
Lan
d
2-ye
ar A
VG
. D
ry L
and
3-
year
AV
G.
WM
Rat
inga
CA
LIF
ELR
K
88-9
2 14
93
3630
* 31
62
3288
* 18
08
2049
2.
0 C
LOU
SEA
U
92-9
5 13
80
3763
**
3581
* 36
96*
1943
21
60
2.0
INFE
RN
O
108-
109
2521
24
47
3541
* 35
46*
2853
**
2936
**
2.0
BIG
RED
88
-96
1937
31
36*
2999
33
50*
2018
22
11
2.0
RO
NN
IES
RED
10
2-10
6 26
07*
2824
36
43*
3762
**
2669
* 28
55*
3.0
RED
DA
WN
86
-91
1491
36
54*
3493
* 35
57*
1854
21
02
1.0
LRK
062
69
104-
105
2202
29
82*
3675
* 34
91*
2209
23
21
4.0
LRK
159
07
108-
109
2577
* 24
21
2952
31
06
2638
* 28
02*
3.0
LRK
159
26
106-
109
2142
24
26
3037
30
16
2312
25
21*
4.0
CO
HO
10
2-10
4 24
35*
2699
34
32*
3182
24
43
2291
3.
0 M
SU K
1770
3 10
2-10
3 19
22
3372
* 39
78**
-
2350
-
2.0
MSU
K18
501
107-
108
2642
**
2767
-
- -
- 2.
0 A
DM
L10
3232
6 10
8-10
9 -
2594
-
- -
- 3.
0 A
DM
L40
6326
2 10
9-11
0 -
2851
-
- -
- 3.
0 M
EA
N:
21
12
2969
34
08
3400
22
82
2425
2.
6 L
SD(0
.05)
:
390
80
5 63
5 47
8 32
2 27
3
CV
:
15%
22
%
22%
21
%
17%
17
%
-
11
Tabl
e 9.
Dar
k R
ed K
idne
y be
an v
arie
ties,
aver
age
days
mat
urity
, yie
ld a
t Gra
tiot (
Dry
Lan
d) a
nd M
ontc
alm
(Irri
gate
d) c
ount
y lo
catio
ns in
201
9 an
d av
erag
e yi
elds
for 2
018-
2019
(2-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
017-
2019
(3-y
ear A
VG
.) fo
r Dry
Lan
d an
d Irr
igat
ed lo
catio
ns,
and
whi
te m
old
ratin
g (1
-5).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a Whi
te m
old
ratin
gs: 1
= le
ss th
an 1
0% in
fect
ion,
5=
grea
ter t
han
60%
infe
ctio
n V
AR
IETY
D
AY
S G
RA
TIO
T M
ON
TC
AL
M
Irri
gate
d
2-ye
ar A
VG
. Ir
riga
ted
3-
year
AV
G.
Dry
Lan
d
2-ye
ar A
VG
. D
ry L
and
3-
year
AV
G.
WM
R
atin
ga
RED
HAW
K
100-
102
1877
37
08*
3745
* 35
58*
2123
-
3.0
MO
NTC
ALM
10
2-10
4 18
23
3433
* 36
85*
3504
* 19
86
- 2.
0 RE
D R
OVE
R 94
-95
1761
35
67*
3468
33
43*
2023
-
2.0
DYN
ASTY
10
6-10
7 20
17
3506
* 39
23**
36
97**
23
97*
- 2.
0 RE
D C
EDAR
98
-99
2099
26
84
3140
30
18
2263
26
73
2.0
MSU
K16
131
100-
102
1928
26
37
3219
-
2133
-
2.0
MSU
K16
136
100-
101
1950
32
77*
3575
* 36
81*
2325
-
2.0
CH
APAR
RAL
10
1-10
4 15
56
2638
35
04
3197
19
22
- 3.
0 EP
IC
103-
106
2044
31
99*
3415
33
60*
2289
32
72*
2.0
SPIR
E 10
4-10
7 20
83
2302
37
21*
3309
22
95
3407
**
2.0
RAM
PART
92
-100
16
73
2892
34
29
- 20
88
- 1.
0 D
RK 1
5978
99
-104
26
52**
21
81
3920
* 32
33
2629
**
- 3.
0 D
RK 1
5981
10
2-10
5 18
19
2099
-
- -
- 2.
0 D
RK 1
5101
1 96
-100
20
29
2496
34
83
3278
23
80
- 1.
0 AD
M D
1034
333
101
- 38
83**
-
- -
- 1.
0 AD
M D
5004
231
102
- 37
99*
- -
- -
2.0
ME
AN
:
1951
30
19
3556
33
80
2219
31
17
2.0
LSD
(0.0
5):
4
41
707
365
383
277
394
C
V:
1
9%
19%
12
%
17%
15
%
18%
-
12
Tabl
e 10
. Whi
te K
idne
y be
an v
arie
ties,
aver
age
days
mat
urity
, yie
ld a
t Gra
tiot (
Dry
Lan
d) a
nd M
ontc
alm
(Irr
igat
ed) c
ount
y lo
catio
ns
in 2
019,
ave
rage
yie
lds f
or 2
018-
2019
(2-y
ear A
VG
.), 2
017-
2019
(3-y
ear A
VG
.) fo
r Dry
Lan
d an
d Irr
igat
ed lo
catio
ns, a
nd w
hite
mol
d ra
ting
(1-5
).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a Whi
te m
old
ratin
gs: 1
= le
ss th
an 1
0% in
fect
ion,
5=
grea
ter t
han
60%
infe
ctio
n Ta
ble
11. Y
ello
w b
ean
varie
ties,
aver
age
days
mat
urity
, yie
lds a
t Gra
tiot (
Dry
Lan
d) a
nd M
ontc
alm
(Irri
gate
d) c
ount
y lo
catio
ns in
20
19, a
vera
ge y
ield
s for
201
8-20
19 (2
-yea
r AV
G.),
201
7-20
19 (3
-yea
r AV
G.)
for D
ry L
and
and
Irrig
ated
loca
tions
, and
whi
te m
old
ratin
g (1
-5).
**H
ighe
st y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
*Yie
ld n
ot st
atis
tical
ly d
iffer
ent t
han
the
high
est y
ield
ing
varie
ty w
ithin
col
umn
(
0.0
5)
a Whi
te m
old
ratin
gs: 1
= le
ss th
an 1
0% in
fect
ion,
5=
grea
ter t
han
60%
infe
ctio
n.
VAR
IETY
D
AY
S G
RA
TIO
T
MO
NT
CA
LM
Ir
riga
ted
2-
year
AV
G.
Irri
gate
d
3-ye
ar A
VG
. D
ry L
and
2-
year
AV
G.
Dry
Lan
d
3-ye
ar A
VG
. W
M R
atin
g a
BELU
GA
105-
106
2392
**
2659
30
83
2983
23
65*
- 2.
0 SN
OW
DO
N
90-9
2 14
18
4243
* 36
11*
3316
20
81*
- 1.
0 M
SU K
1692
4 94
-95
1899
* 43
17*
4034
**
3846
**
2234
* 23
48
1.0
MSU
K17
804
107-
108
2237
* 32
61
3615
*
2468
**
- 2.
0 M
SU K
1891
2 92
-94
1549
44
51**
-
-
- 2.
0 YE
TI
107-
109
1477
38
49
3820
* 36
08*
2261
* -
1.0
ME
AN
:
1829
37
97
3632
34
38
2282
-
1.5
LSD
(0.0
5):
52
9 37
4 45
6 36
1 38
9 -
C
V:
23
%
8%
15%
15
%
20%
-
VAR
IETY
D
AY
S G
RA
TIO
T
MO
NT
CA
LM
Ir
riga
ted
2-
year
AV
G.
Dry
Lan
d
2-ye
ar A
VG
. W
M R
atin
ga
MSU
Y16
503
107-
108
1546
35
19*
3154
21
77
1.0
MSU
Y16
507
96-9
9 19
15*
3914
**
- -
2.0
PRO
VITA
136
55
104-
106
1917
**
3287
-
- 2.
0 SV
S 08
63
105-
106
1840
* 33
87
- -
4.0
ME
AN
:
1805
35
27
- -
2.3
LSD
(0.0
5):
32
4 52
0 -
-
CV
:
14%
15
%
- -
-
13
Table 12. Dry bean variety sourcing information, sorted alphabetical by variety name within source and market class. Archer Daniels Midland (ADM): ProVita:
ACE (ADM B8006282) BLACK ARMADA (PROVITA 13068)
NAVY
ADM B2007325 BLACK BLIZZARD NAVY
ADM B3036368 BLACK BOUNTY (PROVITA 12047)
NAVY
ADM B3036381 BLACK PROVITA 12039 NAVY ADM L1032326 LIGHT RED KIDNEY PROVITA 12062 NAVY
ADM L4063262 LIGHT RED KIDNEY PROVITA 12063 NAVY
GN 13172 GREAT NORTHERN PROVITA 12064 NAVY VERO CRANBERRY PROVITA 14068 NAVY INDI NAVY PROVITA 14080 NAVY Canada-Hensall District Coop: PROVITA 14084 NAVY ARGOSY NAVY PROVITA 15094 NAVY MIST NAVY PROVITA 15095 NAVY
NAUTICA NAVY VALIANT (PROVITA 08077)
NAVY
REXETER NAVY VIGILANT NAVY INFERNO LIGHT RED KIDNEY
CALDERA (SR11511) S.RED/PINK
DYNASTY DARK RED KIDNEY PROVITA 16686 S.RED/PINK YETI WHITE KIDNEY PROVITA 17835 S.RED/PINK Cooperative Elevator Company: PROVITA 17837 S.RED/PINK
HMS MEDALIST (ADM) NAVY PROVITA 17839 S.RED/PINK
MERLIN (ADM) NAVY RUBY S.RED/PINK
BLACK CAT (ProVita) BLACK VIPER S.RED/PINK
LORETO (ProVita) BLACK BL 13505 BLACK Gen-Tec Seeds LTD: BL 14500 BLACK GTS B13SR1-1 BLACK BL 15610 BLACK GTS RED CRAN R172 CRANBERRY BL 15619 BLACK Michigan State University: BLACK BEAR BLACK
MSU N17506 NAVY BLACK BEARD (BL 14506) BLACK MSU N18102 NAVY BLACK TAILS BLACK MSU N18109 NAVY SPECTRE (BL 14497) BLACK CAYENNE S.RED/PINK LA PAZ PINTO MSU R17603 S.RED/PINK ARIES GN GREAT NORTHERN MSU R17604 S.RED/PINK CR 151085 CRANBERRY MSU R17605 S.RED/PINK CR 151093 CRANBERRY ROSETTA PINK S.RED/PINK CR 151106 CRANBERRY S18904 S.RED/PINK CR 16760 CRANBERRY MSU B15447 BLACK CR 16761 CRANBERRY MSU B16504 BLACK CR 16764 CRANBERRY MSU B17922 BLACK CR 16775 CRANBERRY MSU B18201 BLACK BIG RED LIGHT RED KIDNEY
-
14
Michigan State University: Cont’d ProVita: Cont’d MSU B18204 BLACK LRK 06269 LIGHT RED KIDNEY MSU B18504 BLACK LRK 15907 LIGHT RED KIDNEY ZENITH BLACK LRK 15926 LIGHT RED KIDNEY ZORRO BLACK RED DAWN (LRK 09363)
LIGHT RED KIDNEY
MSU P16901 PINTO RONNIES RED (LRK 09360) LIGHT RED KIDNEY
MSU P17510 PINTO ADM D1034333 DARK RED KIDNEY MSU P18602 PINTO ADM D5004231 DARK RED KIDNEY WINDBREAKER PINTO CHAPARRAL DARK RED KIDNEY MSU G16351 GREAT NORTHERN DRK 151011
DARK RED KIDNEY
MSU G17410 GREAT NORTHERN DRK 15978 DARK RED KIDNEY
POWDERHORN GREAT NORTHERN DRK 15981 DARK RED KIDNEY
BELLAGIO CRANBERRY EPIC (DRK 09430) DARK RED KIDNEY
COHO (MSU15601) LIGHT RED KIDNEY
RAMPART (DRK 09434)
DARK RED KIDNEY
MSU K17703 LIGHT RED KIDNEY SPIRE (DRK 09431)
DARK RED KIDNEY
MSU K18501 LIGHT RED KIDNEY PROVITA 13655 YELLOW
MONTCALM DARK RED KIDNEY Seminis Seeds:
MSU K16131 DARK RED KIDNEY SV1893GH NAVY
MSU K16136 DARK RED KIDNEY SV6139GR PINTO
RED CEDAR DARK RED KIDNEY SV6533GR PINTO
RED HAWK DARK RED KIDNEY CHIANTI CRANBERRY BELUGA WHITE KIDNEY ETNA CRANBERRY MSU K16924 WHITE KIDNEY SV3709GC CRANBERRY MSU K17804 WHITE KIDNEY CLOUSEAU LIGHT RED KIDNEY MSU K18912 WHITE KIDNEY RED ROVER DARK RED KIDNEY SNOWDON WHITE KIDNEY SVS 0863 YELLOW MSU Y16503 YELLOW Treasure Valley Seeds: MSU Y16507 YELLOW APEX NAVY FUJI TEBO EX 1701 NAVY SAMURAI TEBO EX 1702 NAVY North Dakota State University: EX 1708 NAVY ECLIPSE BLACK EX 1711 NAVY EX 1801 NAVY EX 1802 NAVY EX 1803 NAVY EX 1804 NAVY University of California:
CALIF ELRK LIGHT RED KIDNEY
-
2019 Montcalm County White Mold Fungicide Trial Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
15
Table 1. White mold fungicide treatments, application timing, disease ratings (1-9), percent infection, and dry bean yield.
*Means within the same column with different letters are not significantly different from each other ( 0.05). **Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture. Summary: This study was conducted to investigate the effects of multiple fungicides and application timings on white mold infection and dry bean yield. Table 1 is sorted in descending order by yield, with treatments of Propulse, Endura, and Omega in combination grouping towards the top. This result is not unexpected as these products have performed very well on white mold in other trials and past years. When analyzing the effects of application timing this study indicates that later applications (B) may have greater efficacy on white mold than early applications (A). The area of application timing will be the subject of future research trials in 2020.
Location: Entrican, MI (Irrigated) Treated Plot Size: 6.6’ x 20’ Planting Date: June 7 GPA: 22 Replicated: 4 times PSI: 60 Variety: Black Bear Nozzle: TP8002VS Population: 120,000 seeds/A Application A (R1): July 29 Row width: 20-inch Application B: August 12
Treatments Application Timing Disease Rating*
White Mold (% Infection) Yield**
Propulse (10.3 fl oz) fb. Endura (8 oz) A+B 2.25 a-c 16 ab 4020 a Omega (8 fl oz) fb. Endura (8 oz) A+B 2.25 a-c 10 ab 3527 ab Propulse (10.3 fl oz) B 2.75 a-d 13 ab 3378 a-c Omega (8 fl oz) AB 2.5 a-c 15 ab 3280 b-d Endura (8 oz) AB 2.25 a-c 12 ab 3233 b-e Endura (8 oz) B 2 ab 9 ab 3102 bc Propulse (fl 10.3 oz) AB 2.5 a-c 10 ab 2963 b-f Endura (8 oz) A 3.25 b-f 12 ab 2765 c-f Proline (5.7 fl oz) AB 3.25 b-f 39 c-e 2754 b-f Propulse (10.3 fl oz) A 3 a-d 20 a-d 2562 d-f Omega (8 fl oz) A 3.5 b-f 45 d-f 2551 ef Zolera (5 fl oz) AB 5.25 g 58 ef 2496 f Double Nickel (64 fl oz) AB 4.25 d-g 50 ef 2420 f Double Nickel (32 fl oz) AB 4.5 e-g 60 f 2368 f Untreated - 4.75 fg 61 f 2241 f
-
Midland County White Mold Fungicide Trials Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
16
Table 1. White mold fungicide treatments, application timing, disease ratings (1-9), percent infection, and dry bean yield.
Table 2. White mold fungicide treatments, application timing, disease ratings (1-9), percent infection, and dry bean yield.
*Means within the same column with different letters are not significantly different from each other ( 0.05). **Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture. Summary: Two fungicide trials were established in Midland County in 2019. These studies were conducted to investigate the effects of multiple fungicides and application timings on white mold infection and dry bean yield. Both trials were irrigated at a rate of 0.5” per week through flowering to encourage white mold infection. In both trials the applications of Endura, Omega, and Propulse at R1 (A) and then again (B) 12 d later provided the highest dry bean yields. In the second study (Table 2) Contans, a biological, was applied to the soil and incorporated the day of dry bean planting. Label recommendations for Contans do encourage the repeated use of this product in a rotation as its effectiveness may increase with continued use reducing soil inoculum. However, that was not the focus of this trial. Neither white mold infection, nor yield were effected by Contans in 2019 when compared to the untreated.
Location: Midland County (Irrigated) Treated Plot Size: 6.6’ x 20’ Planting Date: June 7 GPA: 22 Replicated: 4 times PSI: 60 Variety: Black Bear Nozzle: TP8002VS Population: 120,000 seeds/A Application A (R1): July 24 Row width: 20-inch Application B: August 5
Treatments Application Timing Disease Rating White Mold (% Infection) Yield Propulse (10.3 fl oz) AB 2 a 13 a 3958 a Omega (8 fl oz) AB 3 b 27 b 3818 a Endura (8 oz) AB 2 a 8 a 3760 a Proline (5.7 fl oz) AB 4 c 31 b 3432 ab Untreated - 5 d 59 c 3116 b
Treatments Application Timing Disease Rating White Mold (% Infection) Yield Endura (8 oz) AB 3 ab 80 b 4098 a Omega (8 fl oz) AB 3 ab 59 a 4000 a Propulse (10.3 fl oz) AB 2 a 79 b 3636 a Contans (2 lb) PRE 6 c 86 bc 2898 b Untreated - 4 b 95 c 2697 b
-
2019 Navy Bean Response to Nitrogen Strip Trial Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
17
Table 1. Fertilizer treatments, application timing, white mold percent infection, and dry bean yield.
**Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture.
Summary: This trial was established in 2019 to investigate navy beans response to multiple rates of nitrogen. Due to limiting factors only one replication of this study was able to be planted and harvested. However, due to very uniform soil and field conditions we believe the data still provides valuable insight into dry beans response to nitrogen. In this trial dry beans did not show a large response to nitrogen. Future nitrogen trials will more extensively review previous crop management as well as base line nitrate and ammonium concentrations in the soil. These insights may provide valuable information for dry bean management decisions. When analyzing dry beans response to nitrogen we are also interested in the potential interaction with white mold. Past research has indicated that white mold disease can be more severe with increased rates of nitrogen. In 2019 environmental conditions were not favorable in this location for white mold infection. Thus not allowing the evaluation of white mold disease under these different rates of nitrogen fertilizer. The interaction between nitrogen fertility and white mold will be the focus of future research projects.
Location: Unionville, MI Treated Plot Size: 6.5 Acres Planting Date: July 1 N Source: UAN (28-0-0) Replicated: 1 time Weed Control: July 17 Variety: Blizzard Fungicide App. A: August 12 Population: 120,000 seeds/A Fungicide App. B :August 21 Row width: 22-inch Field Average: 2898 lb./A
Treatments (lb. N/acre)
Application Timing (2x2 at planting)
White Mold (% Infection) Yield**
20 PRE - 3091 40 PRE - 3202 60 PRE - 3115 80 PRE - 2961
-
2019 Black Bean Response to Nitrogen, Sulfur, and Plant Populations
Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
18 Cont’d PG. 19
In 2019 three separate dry bean trials were planted at the Answer Plot location near Gagetown, MI. Trials included a Nitrogen Rate Response, Sulfur Rate Response, and Plant Population Trials. Trials were established as a cooperative effort between MSU Dry Bean Specialist Scott Bales and Winfield United Agronomist Jason Roth. The tables below are a summary of the trial results.
Table 1. Fertilizer treatments, nitrogen rates, sulfur rates, application timing, white mold percent infection, and dry bean yield.
*Means within the same column with different letters are not significantly different from each other ( 0.05). **Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture.
Table 2. Fertilizer treatments, nitrogen rates, sulfur rates, application timing, white mold percent infection, and dry bean yield.
*Means within the same column with different letters are not significantly different from each other ( 0.05). **Yield is in pounds per acre obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture.
Location: Gagetown, MI Treated Plot Size: 6.6’ x 20’ Planting Date: June 19 N Source: UAN (28-0-0) Replicated: 4 times* S Source: ATS (12-0-0-26) Variety: Black Bear Fertilizer app: PRE (June 24) Population: 120,000 seeds/A Fungicide app: August 2 (Propulse 10.3 fl oz) Row width: 20-inch Insecticide app: August 2 (Asana XL 9 fl oz)
Treatment Nitrogen (lb./A) Sulfur (lb./A)
Application Timing
White Mold (% Infection)* Yield**
1 0 0 PRE 32 ab 4446 ab 2 20 0 PRE 62 b 3855 b 3 40 0 PRE 42 ab 4292 ab 4 60 0 PRE 43 ab 4519 ab 5 80 0 PRE 33 a 4913 a 6 120 0 PRE 56 ab 3892 b 7 40 15 PRE 65 b 3752 b 8 60 15 PRE 45 ab 4459 ab
Treatment Nitrogen (lb./A) Sulfur (lb./A)
Application Timing Yield**
1 60 0 PRE 4644 A 2 60 10 PRE 4725 A 3 60 20 PRE 4678 A 4 60 30 PRE 4673 A 5 60 40 PRE 4218 B
-
19
Figure 1. Dry bean yield plotted against plant populations per acre.
*Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest of one row plots (25 ft2) and adjusted to 18% moisture.
Summary: Overall dry beans in this location yielded very well, more timely rains through flowering in this location kept from limiting yield potential when compared to other locations in 2019. A lack of yield response to fertilizer in both nitrogen and sulfur trials is attributed to sufficient levels of both nitrogen and sulfur in the soil prior to the establishment of these studies. An equipment error did occur at planting which caused higher populations planted by row unit number two than row unit three within the studies. However, we believe that this confounding effect did not skew dry beans response to nitrogen or sulfur in this location. Soil test taken from untreated nitrogen plots (no nitrogen applied in 2019) indicate that 20 ppm of nitrate were in the soil. This is an estimated nitrogen credit of approximately 75 lb./A, more than sufficient for optimum dry bean yield. The dry bean plant population trial in this location consisted of 41 individual one row plots. Yield was plotted against the plant population of each individual row. In this trial populations from 73,000 to 230,000 plants per acre did not create a significant trend for dry bean yield. This finding is supported by past research trials by Varner and Sprague which can be found in the 2012 research report available at Michiganbean.org. Due to the combinations of elevated base line soil fertility levels, 2019 weather patterns, and equipment errors these trials will be replicated in 2020.
R² = 0.0532
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
Yie
ld (l
b/A
)*
Population (Plants/A)
-
Dry Bean Response to Phosphorus Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
20
Table 1. Fertilizer treatments, nitrogen rates, phosphorus rates, and dry bean yield by market class.
*Means within the same column with different letters are not significantly different from each other ( 0.05). **Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture.
Summary: In 2019 a phosphorus rate response trial was established under irrigation in Midland County. Plot sizes were expanded to be four rows wide by 50 feet in length. Fertilizer treatments were blended, spread and incorporated on June 7th. Both navy and black beans planted into fertilizer treatments on June 7th. As dry beans emerged treatments with >150 lb. of phosphorus cause slight injury, consisting of marginal leaf burning on the unifoliate leaf of both bean classes. Overall, dry beans response to phosphorus was minimal or nonexistent. These results are supported by the pre-plant soil test which was is considered to be at levels within the “draw down” range of the response curve, 172 ppm (Figure 1).
Location: Midland County (Irrigated) Treated Plot Size: 6.6’ x 50’ Planting Date: June 7 P Source: MAP (11-52-0) Replicated: 4 times N Source: Urea (46-0-0) Variety: Black Bear & Merlin Fertilizer app: PPI (June 7) Population: 120,000 seeds/A Fungicide app (A): July 24 (Propulse
10.3 fl oz) Row width: 20-inch Fungicide app (B): July 24 (Omega 8
fl oz)
Treatment Nitrogen Rate Phosphorus Rate Merlin* Black Bear (lb/A) (lb/A) Yield (lb/A)** Yield (lb/A) 1 60 0 3553 A 3251 B 2 60 25 3354 AB 3235 B 3 60 50 3466 AB 3634 AB 4 60 100 3439 AB 3333 AB 5 60 150 3002 B 3659 A 6 60 200 3286 AB 3396 AB
Figure 1. Nutrient recommendation scheme for phosphorus (adopted from ‘Nutrient Recommendations for Field Crops in Michigan’ E2904)
-
Dry Bean Response to Foliar Manganese Scott Bales, MSU Dry Bean Specialist
21
Table 1. Foliar Manganese treatments, rates, pounds of manganese applied and black bean yield.
*Means within the same column with different letters are not significantly different from each other ( 0.05). **Yield is in pounds per acres obtained by direct harvest and adjusted to 18% moisture. *** ELE-MAX contains 3% nitrogen by formulation Summary: In 2019 a manganese deficiency was visually identified in Black Bear black beans and confirmed by an R1 tissue test. Dry beans were under irrigation, and irrigated 0.5” per week through flowering. The trial was sprayed for white mold one time (Omega 8 fl oz) to help manage white mold infection. Foliar manganese products were applied at R1 and not tank-mixed with any other products. Overall yield results were not statically significant. However, visual responses did occur for most applications. Through this study it is unclear if the foliar application of manganese at an R1 growth stage is beneficial to yield. Projects in 2020 will reexamine this management practice, as well as study multiple application timings and or tank-mixtures.
Location: Midland County (Irrigated) Treated Plot Size: 6.6’ x 20’ Planting Date: June 7 GPA: 22 Replicated: 4 times PSI: 60 Variety: Black Bear Nozzle: TP8002VS Population: 120,000 seeds/A Application A (R1): July 24 Row width: 20-inch GPA: 22
Treatment Product Rate Mn (lb/A) Yield*
1 Untreated - - 4526 A**
2 Axilo Mn 13% 1 Pound 0.13 4730 A
3 Axilo Mn 13% 2 Pounds 0.26 4758 A
4 Axilo Mn 13% 3 Pounds 0.39 4816 A
5 ELE-MAX Mn 27.4% 1 Pint*** 0.52 4737 A
6 ELE-MAX Mn 27.4% 2 Pint 1.04 4695 A
7 ELE-MAX Mn 27.4% 3 Pint 1.56 4402 A
-
22
Doc
umen
t 1. A
vaila
ble
soil
test
from
201
9 re
sear
ch lo
catio
ns.
Doc
umen
t 1. C
on’t
Loc
atio
n
OM
(%
) B
ray
1 (p
pm)
K
(ppm
) M
g (p
pm)
Ca
(p
pm)
pH
CE
C
%K
%
Mg
%C
a BA
Y
1.9
35
180
270
2100
8.
1 13
.2
3.5
17
79.5
G
RA
TIO
T 2.
2 30
12
1 24
5 13
00
7.7
8.9
3.5
23.1
73
.4
HU
RO
N
2.9
72
178
340
2250
7.
7 14
.5
3.1
19.5
77
.4
MO
NTC
ALM
1.
5 19
0 15
6 90
65
0 6.
7 4.
4 9.
1 17
73
.9
BLA
CK
BEA
N R
ESPO
NSE
TO
N, S
, an
d PO
PULA
TIO
N
2.2
76
206
355
1800
7.
7 12
.5
4.2
23.7
72
.1
N S
TRIP
TR
IAL
2.6
46
234
445
2200
7.
8 15
.3
3.9
24.2
71
.9
RES
PON
SE T
O P
HO
SPH
OR
US
4.6
172
125
260
2550
7.
7 15
.2
2.1
14.2
83
.7
SAN
ILA
C
3.9
43
153
205
1850
7.
5 11
.4
3.5
15.1
81
.5
TUSC
OLA
2.
3 48
19
4 30
0 20
50
7.8
13.2
3.
8 18
.9
77.4
W
HIT
E M
OLD
(Mid
land
) 3.
6 14
4 14
8 28
5 22
50
7.9
14
2.7
17
80.3
Loc
atio
n
S (p
pm)
Zn (p
pm)
Mn
(ppm
) Fe
(pp
m)
Cu
(ppm
) B
(ppm
) N
H3 (
ppm
) N
H4
(ppm
) BA
Y
8 5.
8 35
18
1.
5 1
7 1
GR
ATI
OT
8 6.
5 36
19
1.
9 0.
8 8
1 H
UR
ON
11
9.
3 26
41
4.
6 1.
5 12
1
MO
NTC
ALM
9
9.7
44
44
2.1
0.2
13
3 B
LAC
K B
EAN
RES
PON
SE
TO N
, S, a
nd P
OPU
LATI
ON
10
9.
6 48
22
1.
8 2.
1 20
2
N S
TRIP
TR
IAL
13
6.3
39
18
2.9
1.4
21
9 R
ESPO
NSE
TO
PH
OSP
HO
RU
S 15
11
.6
28
55
3.1
1.1
- -
SAN
ILA
C
13
2.8
10
72
3 1
26
1 TU
SCO
LA
9 3.
7 40
29
2.
1 1.
2 12
2
WH
ITE
MO
LD (M
idla
nd)
14
9.6
26
56
4.2
1.1
- -
-
23
2019 MSU DRY BEAN YIELD TRIALS
J.D. Kelly, E.M. Wright and A. Wiersma
Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences
Expt. 9101: Standard Navy Bean Yield Trial
This 25-entry trial included standard commercial navy bean varieties, and advanced lines from the MSU breeding program, which carry the N-prefix and new lines from Ontario. Yields ranged from 16.5 to 25.0 cwt/acre with a mean of 20.7 cwt/acre. Variability in this trial was moderate (CV= 10.1%) and the LSD needed for significance was 2.5 cwt/acre. However, only two lines significantly out-yielded the test mean and the overall yields were lower compared to those of black beans. Alpena was the top variety in the trial followed by Medalist, which has underperformed in past years at this location. Vigilant and Merlin grouped below the test mean. Two new entries from Ontario were opposites in yield, ACUG-16-6 was second in the trial, while AC Portage yielded at bottom with 16.5 cwt/acre. The yield potential in navy beans needs to be improved, as they are no longer competitive with black beans. Canning tests will be conducted on all new MSU breeding lines before being considered for advance.
Expt. 9102: Standard Black Bean Yield Trial-N
This 42-entry trial included the standard commercial black bean varieties and advanced breeding lines. The trial was planted without any additional N. Yields ranged from 10.7 to 25.3 cwt/acre with a test mean of 19.3 cwt/acre. Variability was moderate in this test, (CV=11.2%) and the LSD was 3.0 cwt/acre. Only three entries significantly outyielded the test mean and they included B16504 for the fourth consecutive year. Black Bear was the top variety at 20.8 cwt/acre, while Zenith, Zorro, and Eclipse yielded at the test mean. Black Tails was the lowest yielding variety at 16.2 cwt/acre. As expected, R99 no-nod line that does not fix N was the lowest yielding entry in the test. Despite the dry conditions during pod fill, a number of lines performed well in the absence of N suggesting they have improved N-fixation capacity. This trait will be evaluated in lab tests using N15 natural abundance method.
Expt. 9103: Standard Black Bean Yield Trial +N
This 42-entry trial included the same standard commercial black bean varieties and advanced breeding lines as test 9102. The trial was planted with normal N treatment of 46 lbs/acre (100 lbs urea broadcast). Yields ranged from 16.6 to 24.5 cwt/acre with a test mean of 21.7 cwt/acre. Variability was lower in this test, (CV=8.2%) and the LSD was 2.5 cwt/acre. Only two entries significantly outyielded the test mean and B18504 ranked third at 24.1 cwt/acre. Black Bear was the top variety at 23.0 cwt/acre, while Zenith ranked above the test mean. Zorro, Black Tails and Eclipse yielded below the test mean. R99 no-nod line that does not fix N was the lowest yielding
-
24
entry in the test, but yielded 7 cwt better than in test 9102 suggesting that N-fixation was important contributor to yield in the low N test 9102. The N-fixation capacity of all lines in this test will be evaluated in lab tests using N15 natural abundance method and directly compared to their N-fixation in the absence of N fertilizer. Canning tests will be conducted on new breeding lines to ensure only those with canning quality similar to Zenith are advanced.
Comparison of Black Bean Trials 9202 and 9103
A comparison of the two 42-entry black bean trials was designed to compare the performance of beans produced with no N fertilizer to those with standard N fertilizer applied (broadcast Urea at planting). The objective of this field trial was to identify black bean lines that perform well under low N conditions due to superior Nitrogen-fixation ability. In general, the yields of the fertilized treatment were slightly higher (21.7 cwt/acre) compared to those without fertilizer (19.3 cwt/acre). However, two black bean lines with exceptionally high seed yield, B17207 and B16504, had equivalent and higher yield potential under low N conditions (Figure 1). This suggests that through selection and breeding, we might be able to reduce the need for N fertilizer in Michigan dry bean production, which would have lasting and beneficial impacts on agro-environmental sustainability. Given environmental concerns, there exists a need to identify lines that naturally fix higher levels of N that contributes to yield as N application rates of over 50 lbs/acre produce higher plant biomass, which results in greater white mold infections and resulting lower yields. Higher plant biomass does not always translate into higher seed yields, but usually results in the need for chemical desiccation prior to harvest.
Figure 1. Comparison of average yield and % yield relative to fertilized control of 42 black bean lines tested at the Saginaw Valley Research and Extension Center, near Frankenmuth, MI.
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
110.00
120.00
10
15
20
25
R99 N
o Nod
B182
37
Black
Tails
B165
05
B182
36
B182
38
B172
98
B182
24
B170
23
B185
04
B178
44
B173
15
B182
04
B172
20
B175
22
B165
01
B175
36
B182
30
B174
31
B174
29
B172
59
B182
01
B179
22
B182
02
B182
31
B182
32
Black
Bear
B172
62Ze
nith
B165
03
B154
47
B172
69
B178
97
B178
87
B174
49
B178
32
B172
07
B174
26Zo
rro
B174
72
B165
04
Eclip
se
% yield w
ithout N fertilizer
(relative to fertilized control)Se
ed y
ield
(Cw
t/ac
re)
Black Bean Lines
Average seed yield (cwt/acre) % Yield relative to fertilized control
-
25
Expt. 9215: National White Mold Yield Trial
This 32-entry trial was conducted to evaluate a range of diverse dry bean varieties and breeding lines for reaction to white mold under natural field conditions. Genotypes included commercial navy and black bean cultivars, elite MSU lines, and new sources of white mold resistance entered as part of the National Sclerotinia Initiative (NSI) Nursery. Lines in the National trial were developed at MSU, USDA-WA, and NDSU. Entries were planted in two row plots with two rows of susceptible spreader variety Samurai between plots and were direct harvested. Plots were fertilized with 100 lbs N/ acre to promote vegetative growth and supplemental overhead irrigation was applied 19 times for a total of 11.8” to maintain adequate levels of moisture for favorable disease development at the critical flowering period. The trial was planted on original bean land previously infected with white mold. Natural white mold infection occurred, and was very severe on both spreader rows and check varieties. White mold was rated on a per plot basis on a scale of 1 to 9 based on disease incidence and severity where 9 had 90+% incidence and high severity index. White mold ranged from 22.2 to 96.3% with a mean value of 51%. The susceptible check Beryl had the highest white mold rating. The test ranged in yield from 11.1 to 44.7 cwt/acre with a mean yield of 30.0 cwt/acre. Variability was moderate (CV=15.9%), thus a high LSD value (6.5 cwt/acre) was needed for significance. Seven lines significantly out-yielded the test mean and included Cayenne, and its parental line SR9-5 from USDA-WA. It is interesting that at this location with high-input management all the medium seeded pinto, GN and small red lines significantly outperform the small seeded black and navy bean lines. Two new R17-red lines and two new P16-pinto lines fell in the top group similar to results in 2018. G16351 and P16901 ranked 8th and 10th exceeded 36 cwt/acre despite high white mold infection levels, supporting the importance of stand ability and lodging resistance in white mold avoidance. The higher N rates coupled with excessive irrigation contributes to lodging and the higher white mold scores. Similar observations were made with the two black lines. Stand ability was a key trait in avoiding white mold in this trial and new line B18504 tended to lean due to heavy pod load and contracted higher white mold levels as a result. The trade off in erectness versus yield (pod load) is a major factor in avoidance of white mold. Interestingly the two checks, G122 resistant check yielded the same as the susceptible check Beryl (12.4 cwt/acre) yet differed in white mold infection from 22% to 96%. This trial will continue to be part of the breeding effort to improve tolerance to white mold in future varieties in 2020.
-
26
-
EXPE
RIM
ENT
9102
STA
ND
ARD
BLA
CK
BEA
N Y
IELD
TR
IAL
-NPL
ANTE
D: 6
/18/
19
NAM
EPE
DIG
REE
ENTR
YYI
ELD
CW
T10
0 SE
EDD
AYS
TOD
AYS
TOLO
DG
ING
HEI
GH
TD
ES.
/AC
RE
WT.
(g)
FLO
WER
MAT
UR
ITY
(1-5
)(c
m)
SCO
RE
B165
04Ze
nith
//Alp
ena*
/B09
197
225
.318
.746
.092
.01.
049
.55.
0B1
7207
B102
44/B
1272
46
22.8
17.8
46.0
92.0
1.0
49.0
5.0
B178
97B1
4302
/B10
244
2322
.417
.846
.094
.01.
051
.56.
0B1
7472
B143
11/B
1024
421
21.4
17.6
46.0
94.0
1.0
50.5
5.5
B165
01Ze
nith
/B10
215
720
.919
.746
.093
.01.
046
.54.
5B1
8232
B154
30/B
1024
434
20.9
20.0
45.0
92.0
1.0
49.5
5.0
I175
01BL
1257
6, B
LAC
K B
EAR
3920
.818
.346
.095
.01.
051
.05.
0B1
7269
B102
44/B
1272
49
20.6
19.6
46.0
91.0
1.0
46.5
4.0
B182
31B1
5430
/B10
244
3220
.620
.047
.092
.01.
048
.55.
0B1
7220
B102
44/B
1272
427
20.4
18.8
44.0
93.0
1.0
48.0
4.0
B179
22B1
4302
/B10
244
1620
.318
.746
.091
.01.
048
.54.
5B1
7832
B143
02/B
1024
419
20.3
17.5
47.0
94.0
1.0
46.5
3.5
B185
04Ze
nith
//Alp
ena*
/B09
197
120
.018
.845
.093
.01.
050
.55.
5B1
7426
B143
11/B
1024
424
19.8
17.8
46.0
94.0
1.0
50.5
5.0
B172
59B1
0244
/B12
724
1019
.817
.947
.092
.01.
048
.54.
5B1
7887
B143
02/B
1024
414
19.8
18.5
47.0
93.0
1.0
51.5
6.0
B102
44B0
464