4.2 Article

Evaluation of on-farm crop management decisions on canola productivity

Journal

CANADIAN JOURNAL OF PLANT SCIENCE
Volume 94, Issue 1, Pages 131-139

Publisher

CANADIAN SCIENCE PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.4141/CJPS2013-121

Keywords

Brassica napus; seeding depth; row spacing; no-till; preceding crops; water stress

Funding

  1. Saskatchewan Canola Development Commission
  2. Canola Council of Canada
  3. Agri-Science Clusters Initiative of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study determined key factors affecting canola productivity in western Canada and evaluated the differences among soil-climatic zones in canola crops responding to the key agronomic factors. A total of 68 canola farm fields were randomly selected in western Canada, and multiple correspondence analysis, coupled with multivariate predictive model with partial least squares projection and regressions, was used to analyze the data set. Canola produced in Alberta averaged 2500 kg ha(-1), and was 23% greater than canola produced in southern Saskatchewan, 10% greater than canola produced in northern Saskatchewan, and 59% greater than canola produced in Manitoba. Canola produced on chem-fallow averaged 2557 kg ha(-1), and was 17% greater than canola grown on cereal stubble, or 43% greater than canola grown on pea/lentil, corn stubble. Canola grown on canola stubble produced 54% of the seed yield as canola grown on cereal stubble, or 46% of the seed yield as canola grown on chem-fallow. Shallow and earlier seeding with narrow row spacing increased canola seed yields consistently. Canola receiving K fertilizer increased seed yield by an average of 25% compared with those receiving no K fertilizer. Straight combine resulted in 500 kg ha(-1) or 24% more seed yield than conventional swath-combine method. Those key factors may serve as the first-hand information in the development of sound guidelines for less experienced canola producers in western Canada.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available