Louis Mc
Member
- Location
- Meath, Ireland
Surely there must be some real results at this stage??
I doubt they have had all the yield maps back yet. I sent mine in about a week and a half ago and I think they will likely wait until they have all data processed before publication.Surely there must be some real results at this stage??
I doubt they have had all the yield maps back yet. I sent mine in about a week and a half ago and I think they will likely wait until they have all data processed before publication.
No I don’t think so. I haven’t been asked to sign anything at all regarding the trial so as far as I’m concerned I’m still a free agent!Are you sworn to secrecy?
Your home may be at risk if you do not keep up repayments.
Sound advice in any thread
Ok, after a quick play around with the map here is my VERY SUBJECTIVE PREDICTION for yield results on my field.
Lowest yields will be from Aviator Xpro.
Next I would say is very close to call between Ascra Xpro + Bravo and Adexar + Bravo but I would guess that Adexar probably has the edge.
I would say Elatus Era + Bravo was highest yielding.
So yield wise I'm going:
4th- Aviator Xpro
3rd- Ascra Xpro + Bravo
2nd Adexar + Bravo
1st Elatus Era + Bravo
Just to put the above into perspective there may well be a danger that I am just trying to convince myself that I made the right choice for the majority of my T2 as I chose to mainly use Elatus Era.
From what I was quoted for on the chemicals when I was weighing up what I would to do for T2 the mixes would have cost me:
Aviator Xpro = £33.40/Ha
Ascra Xpro + Bravo = £47.35
Elatus Era + Bravo = £45.35
Adexar + Bravo = £44.45
At £13.95/Ha between the cheapest and the most expensive programs it looks to me like the more expensive programs will have delivered the well over the extra 110kg/ha yield to more than cover their extra cost. I think the margin results will mirror the yield results.
If Syngenta's claimed increased drought tolerance from using Elatus Era is correct (it was a major factor in me choosing to use it elsewhere) then this years growing season will have suited its strengths on this farm, this year and may go some way to explain my predicted results.
Tin hat and flack jacket on!
Disclaimer: No scientific or statistical analyses has taken place in the production of this post. All the data quoted may be subject to revision and no warranty is given as to its accuracy. Your home may be at risk if you do not keep up repayments.
Was there not a no spray control plot?
Also its needs to more than cover its cost to the tune of 3 times.
Those are not the questions this trial is trying to answer.
It is comparing 4 fungicide treatments and trying to find out which gave the highest margin.
It may have been but it wasn’t what I was asked to do. I wouldn’t have been comfortable leaving 2 full tramlines untreated and probably wouldn’t have been part of the trial if they had asked me to do that. A small spray miss in another field says I’m glad I didn’t miss out the T2 spray.A " no spray" may have been the highest margin.
I’m going to guess that’s fully untreated rather than just leaving the T2 out?not part of the real results trials but we did our own plots and untreated yielded between 30 to 48% less than treated with our normal fungicide program (average 12.5t/ha in that field)
yes fully untreated, obviously mad to do that commercially but an interesting small scale trial.
Thinking of full yield mapping. How reliable will that be to show differences between treatments?
not worried about total accuracy as we have weighbridge to do field yields or calibrate yield meter on combine.