Content uploaded by Bram Hanse
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Bram Hanse on Mar 04, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Research on Stemphylium spp. the causal agent of
the yellow leaf spot disease in sugar beet in 2012
13P01
1
Research on Stemphylium spp. the causal agent of the
yellow leaf spot disease in sugar beet in 2012
Bram Hanse
Stichting IRS
Postbus 32
4600 AA Bergen op Zoom
Telefoon: +31 (0)164 - 27 44 00
Fax: +31 (0)164 - 25 09 62
E-mail: irs@irs.nl
Internet: http://www.irs.nl
Niets uit deze uitgave mag worden verveelvoudigd en/of openbaar gemaakt door middel van druk, fotokopie, microfilm
of op welke wijze ook zonder voorafgaande schriftelijke toestemming van de uitgever.
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by print, photoprint, microfilm or any other means without
written permission from the publisher.
Het IRS stelt zich niet aansprakelijk voor eventuele schadelijke gevolgen die kunnen ontstaan bij gebruikmaking van
de gegevens uit deze uitgave.
©IRS 2013 Project 12-14
2
CONTENT
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................3
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS ......................................................................................6
2.1 CLIMATE ROOM TRIAL ..........................................................................................................6
2.2 FIELD TRIAL FOR THE EFFICACY OF FUNGICIDES ...................................................................7
2.3 SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE NETHERLANDS ..........................................................................7
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................................8
3.1 CLIMATE ROOM TRIAL ..........................................................................................................8
3.2 FUNGICIDE FIELD TRIALS 2012 ...........................................................................................10
3.3 SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE NETHERLANDS ........................................................................13
4. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..............................................................................15
5. SAMENVATTING EN CONCLUSIES ........................................................................16
6. LITERATURE .................................................................................................................17
ANNEX A GEP CERTIFICATE ..........................................................................................18
ANNEX B FUNGICIDE FIELD TRIAL EERSTE EXLOËRMOND 2012 .....................19
ANNEX C FUNGICIDE FIELD TRIAL NIEUW BUINEN 2012 .....................................26
3
1. Introduction
In the summer of 2007 yellow spots were observed for the first time in sugar beet in the
Netherlands. Since then, every year infestation of fields is reported and samples were sent to
the diagnostic service of the IRS. In the beginning (2007) yellow spots were only reported from
the North Eastern sandy soils. In the following year they were also reported from all other
regions in the Netherlands (figure 1).
The above mentioned infestation appears in July-August on the leaves of sugar beet. The first
infestation is characterised by small, irregular, yellow spots on the leaves. Subsequently the
yellow spots necrotise from inside out into a brownish tissue. The spots spread over the leaves
and infest the whole plant (figure 2). Heavily infested leaves die and on the newly formed
leaves new yellow spots appear. Due to the loss of leaves the canopy opens and the soil
becomes visible in August-September, in case of a severe infestation. Often, the infestation
starts in patches on a field and spreads over the whole field (figures 3 and 4).
As described in a previous report the spots are not caused by nutrient deficiency, but there is a
fungal cause, since some fungicides had a good efficacy [1]. From the spots Stemphylium spp.
and Alternaria alternata were isolated. A climate room trial with isolates of both stemphylium
and alternaria, isolated from the yellow spots, revealed that the stemphylium isolates were
capable of infecting sugar beet [2].
The results of the independent replicate of the climate room trial, the results of two field trials
and a survey of Suiker Unie on the spread of stemphylium, all conducted in 2012, are described
in this report.
Figure 1. Spread of stemphylium in the Netherlands. Spots
indicate infested fields on which the occurrence of
stemphylium was confirmed by the Diagnostic Service
of the IRS. Samples received in the period 2007-2012.
4
Figure 2. Heavily infested sugar beet leaves by stemphylium. The yellow spots are small
and irregular in shape. Spots necrotise from inside out and form large (1-3 cm)
brown necrotic spots. In a later stage, parts of and whole leaves necrotise.
Figure 3. Often an infestation of stemphylium in a field starts patchwise.
5
Figure 4. By stemphylium infested leaves start to necrotise, while new leaves are formed by
the sugar beet plants. Those get infested too by stemphylium. Subsequently, the
canopy falls open and the soil becomes visible (Photo: 21 September 2007).
6
2. Materials and methods
2.1 Climate room trial
In a climate room (23°C at day (16 hours; 20.000 lux) and 16°C at night) a trial with artificial
inoculation was conducted. Sugar beet plants (cultivar ‘Coyote’; SESVanderHave) were grown
in a peat 10% (v/v) - sand mixture. Ten weeks after sowing plants were sprayed with 5 ml
water or a spore suspension of alternaria or stemphylium. Fungal isolates were grown on
WACM (Water Agar Chloramphenicol Metalaxyl) and transferred to PDA (Potato Dextrose
Agar) for spore production. Spores were produced at 18oC, twelve hours in dark and twelve
hours with UV-light. Spores were harvested after two weeks in sterile demineralised water and
counted.
Per object ten plants were inoculated. Two stemphylium isolates (GV 10-140a1 and GV 11-
265a) and two alternaria isolates (GV 10-187 and GV 10-234b1) were used. Isolates were
derived from different fields infested with yellow spots. Next to healthy growing plants (pH-
KCl = 6.2), plants were infected with Heterodera schachtii (1,860 larvae per plant) or were
grown on a low pH (pH-KCl = 4.2). Of all those factors described above, there were two
objects: one had damaged leaves and the other one undamaged (Table 1). Damaging of the
leaves was done by rubbing them lightly with a scourer, three times prior to inoculation.
Directly after inoculation plants were covered with a plastic bag and transferred to the climate
room. Four days after inoculation the plants were scored on symptom development.
Table 1. Objects in the climate room trial.
object
foliage
Heterodera
schachtii
(larvae/plant)
pH-
KCl
fungus
isolate
spores
(*104/plant)
1
undamaged
0
6.2
water
control (water)
0.0
2
undamaged
0
6.2
stemphylium
GV 10-140a1
2.8
3
undamaged
0
6.2
stemphylium
GV 11-265a
2.8
4
undamaged
0
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-187 1
3.3
5
undamaged
0
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-234b1
3.5
6
undamaged
1860
6.2
stemphylium
GV 10-140a1
2.8
7
undamaged
1860
6.2
stemphylium
GV 11-265a
2.8
8
undamaged
1860
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-187 1
3.3
9
undamaged
1860
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-234b1
3.5
10
undamaged
0
4.2
stemphylium
GV 10-140a1
2.8
11
undamaged
0
4.2
stemphylium
GV 11-265a
2.8
12
undamaged
0
4.2
alternaria
GV 10-187 1
3.3
13
undamaged
0
4.2
alternaria
GV 10-234b1
3.5
14
damaged
0
6.2
water
control (water)
0.0
15
damaged
0
6.2
stemphylium
GV 10-140a1
2.8
16
damaged
0
6.2
stemphylium
GV11-265a
2.8
17
damaged
0
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-187 1
3.3
18
damaged
0
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-234b1
3.5
19
damaged
1860
6.2
stemphylium
GV 10-140a1
2.8
20
damaged
1860
6.2
stemphylium
GV 11-265a
2.8
21
damaged
1860
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-187 1
3.3
22
damaged
1860
6.2
alternaria
GV 10-234b1
3.5
23
damaged
0
4.2
stemphylium
GV 10-140a1
2.8
24
damaged
0
4.2
stemphylium
GV 11-265a
2.8
25
damaged
0
4.2
alternaria
GV 10-187 1
3.3
26
damaged
0
4.2
alternaria
GV 10-234b1
3.5
7
2.2 Field trial for the efficacy of fungicides
In 2012 two field trials were conducted under the GEP Certificate (annex A) to test the efficacy
of different fungicides against stemphylium. Field trials were located in Eerste Exloërmond and
Nieuw Buinen and were conducted on fields naturally infested with stemphylium. Infection
was prior to start of the field trials confirmed by the Diagnostic Service of the IRS. Trials were
started at the moment the first leaf spots appeared in the fields. On both fields the cultivar
‘Rhino’ (SESvanderHave) was grown. The location and layout of the field trials can be found
in annexes B1 and C1. On both field trials the objects were the same: untreated (control), Opus
Team (1.0 l/ha), Sphere SC (0.25 l/ha), Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha), Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha) + Trips-Flo
(0.1 l/ha), IRS 694 (1.33 l/ha), IRS 700 (1.0 l/ha), IRS 704 (0.7 l/ha), IRS 704 (1.0 l/ha), IRS
705 (0.8 l/ha), IRS 706 (1.2 l/ha) and IRS 707 (1.0 l/ha). All products used were fungicides.
Fungicides not registered for Dutch sugar beet growing are named under IRS-code.
The field trials were sprayed for the first time on 23 July 2012. The second and third
application were conducted on 15 August and 10 September 2012. Gross plot size was 14.5
meter × 3 meter (six rows of sugar beet) and nett size was 12.5 meter × 3 meter. On each of the
field trials, the infestation per plot was assessed for four times (15 August, 7 September, 28
September and 2 November 2012).
Field trials were mechanically harvested on 8 November 2012. Gross weight was determined
and 3 subsamples of circa 20 kg were taken from each plot. Subsamples were analysed for
sugar beet quality in the tare house of the IRS.
The field trials had four replicates in a random design. The field trial design is shown in the
annexes B2 and C2. The assessments and yields are analysed with ANOVA using the statistical
package Genstat (15th Edition).
2.3 Spread throughout the Netherlands
The employees of the Agricultural Department of Suiker Unie located in the different sugar
beet growing areas have estimated the amount of fields infested with stemphylium leaf spot,
and the percentage of the acreage where yield loss by stemphylium occurred.
8
3. Results and discussion
3.1 Climate room trial
The results of the climate room trial are the same as those from the climate room trial in 2011
[2,3]. Both isolates of stemphylium were able to cause uncountable spots on the leaves of all
objects with stemphylium (figure 5). Three days after inoculation the spots were already
present on the leaves. One week after the first symptoms heavily infested, yellow leaves started
to die (figure 6).
Both alternaria-isolates were not able to produce symptoms on undamaged leaves. Only on
damaged leaves, alternaria isolates were able to infect, but did not cause spots, but rather black
edges around the cuts of the scourer. The control treatment (water) was free of leaf spots for
both undamaged and damaged leaves (figure 7).
Stemphylium was able to cause the ‘yellow spot’ symptoms on healthy plants as well as on
plants with the additional stress levels (low pH, beet cyst nematodes and damaged leaves). The
fact that the results are the same as in the initial trial in 2011, proves that the ‘yellow leaf spot
disease’ in Dutch sugar beet growing is caused by stemphylium. A more detailed identification
of the specie(s) is in progress. From the spots in the climate room trial, stemphylium was re-
isolated.
Figure 5. Leaves inoculated with stemphylium isolates showed leaf spots.
9
Figure 6. Leaves inoculated with stemphylium
isolates. One week after the first symptoms
heavily infested, yellow leaves started to
die.
Figure 7. Leaves inoculated with water or alternaria
showed no leaf spots.
10
3.2 Fungicide field trials 2012
Both trial fields were homogeneous infested with stemphylium. The disease pressure on both
field trials was high. Therefore, a third application with the fungicides was carried out. From
the start of the field trials onwards, the infestation on the field trial in Eerste Exloërmond was
higher compared to the field trial in Nieuw Buinen. The data of the infestation assessments is
shown in the annexes B3, B4, C3 and C4. The infestation of other foliar fungi was very low on
both field trials. In the untreated control of Eerste Exloërmond, a few spots of Cercospora
beticola and Ramularia beticola were found and no infestation of other fungi than
stemphylium in the plots of the other objects. In the untreated control of Nieuw Buinen, spots
of Cercospora beticola and Ramularia beticola were found. Also in the plots A4, D4, A10 and
D10 a few spots of Cercospora beticola and Ramularia beticola were found, but not in the
other plots of the field trial. So, the infestation of Cercospora beticola and Ramularia beticola
was too low for a reliable assessment of the efficacy against cercospora and ramularia of the
fungicides used. Thus both field trials provide clear information on the efficacy against
stemphylium of the fungicides tested.
The results of the efficacy of the different fungicides used, assessed on 2 November 2012, are
shown in figure 8. The results on both field trials were in line with each other. No interaction of
fungicide with location was found (data not shown). Based on the results, the fungicides could
be classified in three groups: 1) no efficacy, equal to the untreated control (Opus Team and IRS
704 1.0 l/ha in Nieuw Buinen); 2) little or some efficacy (Sphere SC, Spyrale EC, Spyrale EC
+ Trips-Flo, IRS 700 and IRS 704 (both dosages in Eerste Exloërmond and 0.7 l/ha in Nieuw
Buinen)) and 3) good efficacy (IRS 705, IRS 706, IRS 707 and IRS 694). Within these classes
the fungicides did not differ from each other.
Because no interaction between location of the trial field and fungicide efficacy was found, the
data of both trial fields can be averaged. This data is shown in figure 9. From this averaged
data can be concluded that the separation of fungicides into groups becomes more distinct: 1)
no efficacy, equal to the untreated control (Opus Team); 2) little or some efficacy (Sphere SC,
Spyrale EC, Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo, IRS 700 and IRS 704 (both dosages)) and 3) good
efficacy (IRS 705, IRS 706, IRS 707 and IRS 694). The fungicide IRS 694 had a significantly
better efficacy compared to IRS 707 in the last group.
11
Figure 8. Disease severity (1 = very high, plant dead - 10 = none, plant healthy) on
2 November 2012. Different letters (Nieuw Buinen lower case; Eerste
Exloërmond capitals) indicate significant differences. Data from the field
trials in Nieuw Buinen (p1<0.001; LSD2 5% = 1.43) and Eerste Exloërmond
(p1<0.001; LSD2 5% = 1.32).
Figure 9. Average disease severity (1 = very high, plant dead - 10 = none, plant
healthy) on 2 November 2012 from both field trials in 2012, Nieuw Buinen
and Eerste Exloërmond. Different letters indicate significant differences
(p1 <0.001; LSD2 5% = 1.02).
1 p = probability >0.05 = not significant, <0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
2 LSD = least significant difference.
Sugar yields for the untreated control were on the field trials in Eerste Exloërmond and Nieuw
Buinen respectively 11.2 and 14.5 ton per sugar hectare (annex B5, B6, C5 and C6). The
financial yields of both field trials are shown in figure 10. The classification into three groups
(like for the assessment of fungicide efficacy) can also be applied to the financial yields, with
only minor differences. In Nieuw Buinen the fungicide IRS 705, which had a good efficacy
12
based on symptoms, does not have a significant higher yield compared to Sphere SC, IRS 700
and IRS 704 (both dosages), which are in the group with little or some efficacy and does not
differ from IRS 707 (1.0 l/ha) either, which had a good efficacy based on symptoms. In Eerste
Exloërmond the financial yield of fungicide IRS 705 did not differ significantly from the
financial yields of the fungicides IRS 706 and IRS 707, which both had a good efficacy. In
Eerste Exloërmond the treatment with Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo did not give a significantly
higher yield compared to the untreated control and Opus Team. On both field trials the highest
financial yield was obtained by the fungicide IRS 694. On the field trial in Nieuw Buinen the
fungicide IRS 706 was statistically equal to IRS 694 concerning the financial yield. On average
for both field trials, this fungicide had a 32% higher sugar yield compared to the untreated
control (figure 11). Due to the higher infestation on the field trial in Eerste Exloërmond, the
damage of stemphylium to sugar yield was bigger (4.7 t/ha; 42%) compared to the field trial in
Nieuw Buinen (3.2 t/ha; 22%). The financial yield under stemphylium infestation of the
fungicide with the best efficacy was in Eerste Exloërmond 1,319 Euro (51%) and in Nieuw
Buinen 920 Euro per hectare (26%) higher. The registered fungicides Spyrale EC en Sphere SC
did not differ significantly from each other and gave a 14% higher sugar yield and a 17%
higher financial yield compared to untreated.
These results clearly show that the in sugar beet registered fungicide Opus Team has no
efficacy against stemphylium and that the two registered fungicides Spyrale EC and Sphere SC
have some efficacy against stemphylium. Despite some efficacy the (currently) only permitted
fungicides to control stemphylium still impose financial losses, due to incomplete control. On
average the difference between Spyrale EC and Sphere SC towards, the best fungicide tested is
618 Euro per hectare. This underlines the urgent need for the registration in sugar beets of
fungicides with good efficacy.
One object was the addition of Trips-Flo to Spyrale EC. Trips-Flo is a formulation that should
cause a better distribution and attachment of the sprayed solution to the leaves. On both
individual trial fields (and average data thereof) the addition of Trips-Flo did not cause an
improvement of the efficacy of the fungicide.
Figure 10. Financial yield as the result of the efficacy of different fungicides. Different
letters (Nieuw Buinen capitals; Eerste Exloërmond lower case) indicate
significant differences. Data from the field trials in Nieuw Buinen (p1<0.001;
LSD2 5% = 141) and Eerste Exloërmond (p1<0.001; LSD25% = 288).
1 p = probability > 0.05 = not significant, < 0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
2 LSD = least significant difference.
13
Figure 11. Relative sugar yield as the result of the efficacy of different fungicides,
average date from two trial fields (Nieuw Buinen and Eerste Exloërmond)
in 2012. Different letters indicate significant differences. Data from the
field trials in Nieuw Buinen (p1<0.001; LSD2 5% = 7.8).
1 p = probability > 0.05 = not significant, < 0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
2 LSD = least significant difference.
3.3 Spread throughout the Netherlands
The results of the inventarisation of the Agricultural Department of Suiker Unie are shown in
figures 12 and 13. On 32% (23,286 ha) of the sugar beet fields symptoms of a stemphylium
infestation were found in 2012. This figure shows that stemphylium is wide spread, especially
in the Central, North, North Eastern and Eastern part of the Netherlands. In these regions most
of the acreage with yield loss due to stemphylium infestation could be found. On average, yield
loss due to stemphylium infestation occurred on 20% (14,390 ha) of the Dutch sugar beet
fields.
14
Figure 12. Spread of stemphylium (yellow leaf spot disease) in the Netherlands
in 2012. Colours on the map show the relative amount of fields
infested with stemphylium (32% = 23,286 ha). Data from the
inventarisation of the Agricultural Department of Suiker Unie. From
Oost-Brabant and Limburg no data was received (ND).
Figure 13. Acreage (20% = 14,390 ha) with yield loss by stemphylium (yellow leaf
spot disease) infestation in the Netherlands in 2012. Colours on the map
show the relative amount of fields infested with stemphylium where
yield loss due to this infestation occurred. Data from the inventarisation
of the Agricultural Department of Suiker Unie. From Oost-Brabant and
Limburg no data was received (ND).
15
4. Summary and conclusions
The yellow leaf spot disease in Dutch sugar beet growing is caused by Stemphylium spp.
Alternaria-isolates were not able to cause spots on undamaged leaves in the climate room trials,
while both stemphylium isolates did.
On two field trials the efficacy of different fungicides was tested. The addition of Trips-Flo did
not cause an improvement of the fungicide’s efficacy.
There were clear differences in efficacy found between the different fungicides. There was no
interaction between fungicide efficacy and location. Based on the efficacy assessment on two
trial fields’ average, the fungicides could be classified in three groups: 1) no efficacy, equal to
the untreated control (Opus Team); 2) little or some efficacy (Sphere SC, Spyrale EC, Spyrale
EC + Trips-Flo, IRS 700 and IRS 704 (both dosages tested)) and 3) good efficacy (IRS 694,
IRS 705, IRS 706 and IRS 707). Within the last class the fungicide IRS 694 was significantly
better compared to IRS 707.
The fungicide with the highest efficacy resulted in a 32% higher sugar yield.
The financial loss due to stemphylium infestation was in Eerste Exloërmond 1.319 Euro per
hectare (51%) and in Nieuw Buinen 920 Euro per hectare (26%). The registered fungicides
Spyrale EC and Sphere SC did not differ significantly from each other and gave a 14% higher
sugar yield and a 17% higher financial yield compared to untreated.
The results clearly show that the in sugar beet registered fungicide Opus Team has no efficacy
against stemphylium leaf spot and that the two registered fungicides Spyrale EC and Sphere SC
have some efficacy against stemphylium leaf spot in sugar beet. The difference of Spyrale EC
and Sphere SC with the best fungicide tested was 618 Euro per hectare. This underlines in
sugar beets the urgent need for the registration of fungicides with good efficacy.
In 2012 stemphylium infestation could be found on 32% of the total acreage of Dutch sugar
beet growing. On 20% (14,390 ha) yield loss due to this infestation occurred.
16
5. Samenvatting en conclusies
De gele vlekjes in de Nederlandse suikerbietenteelt worden veroorzaakt door Stemphylium spp.
Alternaria-isolaten waren niet in staat om bladvlekken te veroorzaken op onbeschadigd blad.
Dit konden beide stemphyliumisolaten wel.
Op twee veldproeven is de effectiviteit van verschillende fungiciden getest. Toevoeging van
Trips-Flo (hechter uitvloeier) had geen effect op de effectiviteit van de fungicide.
Tussen de verschillende fungiciden was een duidelijk verschil in effectiviteit. Er was geen
interactie tussen fungicide-effectiviteit en locatie. Op basis van het resultaat van de gemiddelde
effectiviteitsbeoordeling op twee proefvelden kunnen de fungiciden in drie groepen worden
onderverdeeld: 1) geen werking, effectiviteit gelijk aan onbehandeld (Opus Team); 2) weinig
tot enige werking (Sphere SC, Spyrale EC, Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo, IRS 700 en IRS 704 (beide
geteste doseringen)) en 3) goede werking (IRS 694, IRS 705, IRS 706 en IRS 707). Binnen
deze laatste klasse was het fungicide IRS 694 significant beter in vergelijking met IRS 707.
Het fungicide met de beste effectiviteit, had een 32% hogere suikeropbrengst.
De financiële schade door de stemphylium-aantasting was in Eerste Exloërmond 1.319 euro per
hectare (51%) en in Nieuw Buinen 920 euro per hectare (26%). De in de suikerbietenteelt
toegelaten fungiciden Spyrale EC en Sphere SC verschilden niet significant van elkaar en
gaven respectievelijk 14% hogere suikeropbrengsten en 17% hogere financiële opbrengsten ten
opzichte van onbehandeld. De resultaten laten duidelijk zien dat het voor bladschimmels toege-
laten fungicide Opus Team geen werking heeft tegen stemphyliumbladvlekken in suikerbieten.
Het verschil van 618 euro per hectare tussen het best werkende fungicide (IRS 694) en het
gemiddelde van Spyrale EC en Sphere SC onderstreept de noodzaak voor toelating in suiker-
bieten van fungiciden met een goede werking tegen stemphylium.
In 2012 is een aantasting door stemphylium gevonden op 32% van de Nederlandse suikerbieten
percelen. Op 20% van het suikerbietenareaal (14.390 ha) is schade opgetreden door infectie
met stemphylium.
17
6. Literature
1. Hanse, A.C. en Raaijmakers, E.E.M. (2011)
Verslag onderzoeken aan 'gele vlekjes' van 2007-2010.
IRS-rapport 11R04. IRS, Bergen op Zoom.
2. Hanse, A.C. (2012)
Stemphylium: de veroorzaker van de gele vlekjes. Resultaten klimaatkamer en
veldproeven in 2011.
IRS-rapport 12R01. IRS, Bergen op Zoom.
3. IRS Jaarverslag 2011 (2012)
Project No. 12-14: Onderzoek naar gele vlekjes in suikerbieten. IRS, Bergen op Zoom.
18
Annex A GEP CERTIFICATE
19
Annex B Fungicide field trial Eerste Exloërmond 2012
Annex B1 Field trial location
nr.82
nr.95
12-12-14.01
12-12-14.01 Fungicidenbespuiting tegen gele vlekjes Eerste Exloërmond
Field trial number and name:
20
Annex B2 Field trial design and objects Eerste Exloërmond
Field trial:
12-12-14.01
Fungicidenbespuiting tegen gele vlekjes Eerste
Exlöermond
Replicates: 4
Plots per replicate: 12
Plot nett size:12.5×3 meter
Plot gross size:14.5×3 meter
OBJECT NUMBERS
D
10
11
1
7
8
9
2
5
12
3
6
4
7
2
5
9
11
8
1
6
3
10
4
12
9
1
11
8
7
5
3
10
4
12
2
6
12
4
2
6
10
1
8
3
7
5
9
11
A
21
object
description
1
untreated control
2
Opus Team (1.0 l/ha)
3
Sphere SC (0.25 l/ha)
4
IRS 694 (1.33 l/ha)
5
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha)
6
IRS 700 (1.0 l/ha)
7
IRS 704 (0.7 l/ha)
8
IRS 704 (1.0 l/ha)
9
IRS 705 (0.8 l/ha)
10
IRS 706 (1.2 l/ha)
11
IRS 707 (1.0 l/ha)
12
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha) + Trips-Flo (0.1 l/ha)
22
Annex B3 Stemphylium assessments Eerste Exloërmond
nr
object
replicate
stemphylium infestation
(1 = very high, plant dead - 10 = none, plant healthy)
15-8-2012
7-9-2012
28-9-2012
2-11-2012
1
untreated control
A
5.5
5.0
4.0
4.0
1
untreated control
B
4.0
4.5
3.0
3.0
1
untreated control
C
4.5
4.0
3.0
2.0
1
untreated control
D
6.0
5.0
5.0
4.0
2
Opus Team
A
5.5
5.0
4.0
4.5
2
Opus Team
B
3.5
4.0
3.0
2.0
2
Opus Team
C
6.0
4.5
3.5
3.0
2
Opus Team
D
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
3
Sphere SC
A
7.0
6.5
5.0
6.0
3
Sphere SC
B
5.0
4.5
4.5
4.0
3
Sphere SC
C
4.0
6.0
5.0
7.0
3
Sphere SC
D
5.0
5.5
7.0
5.0
4
IRS 694
A
7.5
9.0
9.5
9.0
4
IRS 694
B
7.5
8.5
8.5
9.0
4
IRS 694
C
7.0
8.5
8.0
8.5
4
IRS 694
D
7.5
8.5
9.0
9.0
5
Spyrale EC
A
7.0
7.0
7.0
7.0
5
Spyrale EC
B
7.5
7.0
6.0
7.0
5
Spyrale EC
C
6.5
6.5
7.0
6.0
5
Spyrale EC
D
6.5
7.0
6.0
6.0
6
IRS 700
A
6.5
6.0
4.5
5.0
6
IRS 700
B
7.5
7.0
5.0
6.0
6
IRS 700
C
6.0
5.0
5.0
6.0
6
IRS 700
D
6.0
6.5
5.0
5.0
7
IRS 704
A
7.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
7
IRS 704
B
6.5
5.5
5.0
5.0
7
IRS 704
C
5.5
5.0
4.5
5.0
7
IRS 704
D
5.0
4.5
6.0
6.0
8
IRS 704
A
7.5
7.5
6.5
7.0
8
IRS 704
B
6.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
8
IRS 704
C
7.5
6.5
6.0
6.5
8
IRS 704
D
7.0
5.5
5.0
6.0
9
IRS 705
A
7.0
7.5
6.5
8.0
9
IRS 705
B
6.5
7.5
6.5
6.5
9
IRS 705
C
7.5
6.5
8.5
8.0
9
IRS 705
D
8.0
7.5
8.5
8.0
10
IRS 706
A
7.0
7.5
7.5
8.5
10
IRS 706
B
7.0
7.5
7.0
7.5
10
IRS 706
C
7.5
8.5
8.5
9.0
10
IRS 706
D
8.0
8.5
8.0
8.0
11
IRS 707
A
7.5
8.0
6.5
7.5
11
IRS 707
B
7.0
7.0
6.5
7.5
11
IRS 707
C
7.0
6.0
7.5
7.5
11
IRS 707
D
8.0
8.0
8.0
8.0
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
A
7.5
7.5
6.5
7.5
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
B
4.0
4.5
3.0
2.0
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
C
7.5
7.0
6.0
6.0
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
D
6.0
6.0
5.5
6.0
23
Annex B4 Summarised assessments of stemphylium infestation Eerste Exloërmond
object
description
15-8-20121
7-9-20121
28-9-20121
2-11-20121
1
untreated control
5.0
a
4.6
a
3.8
a
3.3
a
2
Opus Team (1.0 l/ha)
5.3
ab
4.6
a
3.6
a
3.1
a
3
Sphere SC (0.25 l/ha)
5.3
ab
5.6
ab
5.4
b
5.5
b
4
IRS 694 (1.33 l/ha)
7.4
d
8.6
f
8.8
f
8.9
d
5
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha)
6.9
cd
6.9
cd
6.5
cd
6.5
bc
6
IRS 700 (1.0 l/ha)
6.5
cd
6.1
bc
4.9
b
5.5
b
7
IRS 704 (0.7 l/ha)
6.0
abc
5.5
ab
5.4
b
5.8
b
8
IRS 704 (1.0 l/ha)
7.0
cd
6.4
bcd
5.6
bc
5.9
b
9
IRS 705 (0.8 l/ha)
7.3
d
7.2
de
7.5
de
7.6
cd
10
IRS 706 (1.2 l/ha)
7.4
d
8.0
ef
7.8
ef
8.2
d
11
IRS 707 (1.0 l/ha)
7.4
d
7.2
de
7.1
de
7.6
cd
12
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha) +
Trips-Flo (0.1 l/ha)
6.3
bcd
6.2
bcd
5.2
b
5.4
b
probability2
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
LSD3 5%
1.22
1.01
1.07
1.32
1 Date of assessment of stemphylium infestation (1 = very high, plant dead - 10 = none, plant healthy).
2 probability: >0.05 = not significant, < 0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
3 LSD = least significant difference.
24
Annex B5 Yield and sugar beet quality Eerste Exloërmond
object
description
replicate
root
yield
sugar-
content
sugar
yield
soil
tare
K
Na
AmN
glucose
WIN
(t/ha)
(%)
(t/ha)
(%)
(mmol/kg)
1
untreated
A
63.0
16.29
10.3
4.3
33.9
7.1
21.3
1.9
89.5
1
untreated
B
67.0
16.46
11.0
3.6
31.6
5.2
12.5
2.2
91.1
1
untreated
C
68.6
16.41
11.2
4.0
36.0
5.0
15.9
1.9
90.2
1
untreated
D
72.7
17.01
12.4
4.5
34.7
4.7
18.5
2.1
90.4
2
Opus Team
A
71.3
16.71
11.9
3.3
33.6
4.2
13.2
2.0
91.0
2
Opus Team
B
61.6
15.75
9.7
2.7
29.8
4.8
14.7
1.7
90.6
2
Opus Team
C
72.9
16.77
12.2
3.3
35.3
4.7
16.1
1.9
90.5
2
Opus Team
D
72.8
16.74
12.2
3.6
38.5
4.8
17.5
2.0
90.0
3
Sphere SC
A
77.2
18.04
13.9
3.0
35.1
4.1
9.5
2.1
92.0
3
Sphere SC
B
66.4
17.52
11.6
3.2
32.2
3.7
9.6
2.2
92.0
3
Sphere SC
C
74.9
17.68
13.2
4.8
33.8
3.6
11.7
2.4
91.7
3
Sphere SC
D
75.9
17.39
13.2
3.2
33.5
3.3
13.9
2.0
91.4
4
IRS 694
A
85.0
18.22
15.5
3.3
37.5
3.5
11.0
2.1
91.8
4
IRS 694
B
82.7
18.09
15.0
3.4
32.4
3.1
7.3
2.7
92.5
4
IRS 694
C
87.7
18.48
16.2
2.0
35.8
3.2
8.9
2.2
92.3
4
IRS 694
D
94.0
18.22
17.1
3.5
35.7
4.3
10.7
1.9
91.9
5
Spyrale EC
A
74.5
17.01
12.7
4.5
31.4
3.4
12.7
2.2
91.5
5
Spyrale EC
B
75.1
17.11
12.8
5.8
33.5
6.5
18.5
2.0
90.4
5
Spyrale EC
C
79.0
17.38
13.7
5.0
33.8
4.0
13.6
2.2
91.3
5
Spyrale EC
D
78.4
17.59
13.8
3.8
36.5
4.4
13.1
2.1
91.2
6
IRS 700
A
66.3
17.51
11.6
4.2
30.0
3.2
11.3
2.0
92.0
6
IRS 700
B
72.1
17.68
12.8
3.9
32.8
4.8
14.5
1.9
91.4
6
IRS 700
C
77.3
17.67
13.7
2.4
36.0
4.2
10.8
2.5
91.6
6
IRS 700
D
82.7
17.89
14.8
4.2
34.5
3.6
11.4
2.1
91.8
7
IRS 704
A
80.2
17.46
14.0
3.8
35.8
4.1
11.6
2.0
91.4
7
IRS 704
B
73.9
17.18
12.7
4.2
33.0
4.2
13.5
1.9
91.3
7
IRS 704
C
76.8
17.53
13.5
3.8
37.3
4.4
11.6
2.1
91.3
7
IRS 704
D
74.9
16.82
12.6
4.1
31.5
3.7
13.8
2.1
91.2
8
IRS 704
A
81.8
17.76
14.5
3.2
36.2
4.1
10.5
1.8
91.7
8
IRS 704
B
74.5
17.11
12.7
4.7
31.6
3.2
13.3
2.0
91.5
8
IRS 704
C
80.0
17.94
14.3
3.8
35.6
4.3
13.4
2.1
91.4
8
IRS 704
D
80.6
17.23
13.9
3.1
33.4
3.8
12.3
2.0
91.4
9
IRS 705
A
78.2
17.45
13.6
3.6
31.2
4.5
11.5
2.3
91.8
9
IRS 705
B
73.7
17.82
13.1
3.9
32.2
4.1
9.2
2.2
92.1
9
IRS 705
C
79.5
17.82
14.2
4.8
33.5
2.9
13.3
2.1
91.7
9
IRS 705
D
87.5
17.65
15.4
2.8
34.9
4.8
13.6
1.9
91.3
10
IRS 706
A
72.3
17.85
12.9
3.4
30.9
3.5
10.0
2.1
92.2
10
IRS 706
B
77.3
18.31
14.2
3.1
32.0
3.4
7.2
2.4
92.6
10
IRS 706
C
81.1
18.09
14.7
5.1
34.3
2.5
11.9
2.2
91.9
10
IRS 706
D
84.3
18.25
15.4
2.1
37.9
3.7
10.7
2.2
91.8
11
IRS 707
A
81.0
18.22
14.8
3.4
32.3
4.1
10.3
1.9
92.2
11
IRS 707
B
77.8
17.62
13.7
4.3
30.9
3.4
9.7
2.3
92.2
11
IRS 707
C
82.7
18.25
15.1
2.3
33.2
3.0
9.2
2.4
92.3
11
IRS 707
D
85.3
18.23
15.5
2.4
35.5
4.3
10.7
2.2
91.9
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
A
72.9
17.17
12.5
4.7
35.3
4.5
13.3
2.0
91.1
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
B
57.5
16.13
9.3
3.6
29.5
3.9
13.4
2.1
91.1
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
C
77.1
17.49
13.5
4.5
36.3
4.9
13.9
1.9
91.1
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
D
77.0
16.90
13.0
4.9
35.8
4.1
16.5
2.1
90.6
25
Annex B6 Summarised yield parameters Eerste Exloërmond
object
root
yield
sugar
content
sugar
yield
soil
tare
K
Na
AmN
glucose
WIN
financial
yield
(t/ha)
(%)
(t/ha)
(%)
(mmol/kg)
(€/ha)
1
67.8
16.54
11.2
4.1
34.1
5.5
17.1
2.0
90.3
2570
2
69.7
16.49
11.5
3.2
34.3
4.7
15.3
1.9
90.5
2649
3
73.6
17.66
13.0
3.6
33.7
3.6
11.2
2.2
91.8
3114
4
87.3
18.25
15.9
3.0
35.3
3.5
9.5
2.2
92.1
3888
5
76.7
17.27
13.3
4.8
33.8
4.6
14.5
2.1
91.1
3113
6
74.6
17.69
13.2
3.7
33.3
3.9
12.0
2.1
91.7
3164
7
76.5
17.25
13.2
4.0
34.4
4.1
12.6
2.0
91.3
3115
8
79.2
17.51
13.9
3.7
34.2
3.8
12.4
2.0
91.5
3305
9
79.7
17.68
14.1
3.8
32.9
4.1
11.9
2.1
91.7
3377
10
78.7
18.13
14.3
3.4
33.8
3.3
9.9
2.2
92.1
3471
11
81.7
18.08
14.8
3.1
33.0
3.7
10.0
2.2
92.1
3598
12
71.1
16.92
12.1
4.4
34.2
4.3
14.3
2.0
90.9
2813
probability1
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.10
0.89
0.01
<0.001
0.07
<0.001
<0.001
LSD2 5%
5.3
0.43
1.1
1.1
2.8
1.0
2.8
0.2
0.5
288
1 probability: >0.05 = not significant, <0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
2 LSD = least significant difference.
26
Annex C Fungicide field trial Nieuw Buinen 2012
Annex C1 Field trial location
D
A
12-12-14.02
12-12-14.02 Fungicidenbespuiting tegen gele vlekjes Nieuw Buinen
Field trial number and name:
27
Bijlage C2 Field trial design and objects Nieuw Buinen
Field trial:
12-12-14.02
Fungicidenbespuiting tegen gele vlekjes Nieuw Buinen
Replicates: 4
Plots per replicate: 12
Plot nett size:12.5×3 meter
Plot gross size:14.5×3 meter
OBJECT NUMBERS
D
11
2
5
8
6
4
3
9
12
7
1
10
12
10
1
3
8
7
9
11
6
4
2
5
2
4
11
12
7
3
8
1
9
10
5
6
6
7
3
11
4
1
10
8
2
5
12
9
A
28
object
description
1
untreated control
2
Opus Team (1.0 l/ha)
3
Sphere SC (0.25 l/ha)
4
IRS 694 (1.33 l/ha)
5
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha)
6
IRS 700 (1.0 l/ha)
7
IRS 704 (0.7 l/ha)
8
IRS 704 (1.0 l/ha)
9
IRS 705 (0.8 l/ha)
10
IRS 706 (1.2 l/ha)
11
IRS 707 (1.0 l/ha)
12
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha) + Trips-Flo (0.1 l/ha)
29
Bijlage C3 Stemphylium assessment Nieuw Buinen
nr
object
replicate
stemphylium infestation
(1 = very high, plant dead - 10 = none, plant healthy)
15-8-2012
7-9-2012
28-9-2012
2-11-2012
1
untreated control
A
7.5
6.0
7.0
7.0
1
untreated control
B
7.0
6.5
5.0
5.5
1
untreated control
C
6.5
6.0
5.0
4.0
1
untreated control
D
6.5
5.0
4.0
3.0
2
Opus Team
A
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.0
2
Opus Team
B
7.5
6.5
5.5
5.0
2
Opus Team
C
6.5
5.5
4.0
3.5
2
Opus Team
D
7.0
6.0
5.0
5.0
3
Sphere SC
A
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
3
Sphere SC
B
8.0
7.5
7.0
8.0
3
Sphere SC
C
7.5
7.0
6.0
6.0
3
Sphere SC
D
6.5
7.5
6.5
7.0
4
IRS 694
A
8.0
9.0
9.0
8.5
4
IRS 694
B
8.5
9.0
9.5
9.5
4
IRS 694
C
7.5
8.0
9.0
8.5
4
IRS 694
D
8.5
9.0
9.0
9.0
5
Spyrale EC
A
7.0
7.0
7.0
5.5
5
Spyrale EC
B
6.0
7.0
6.0
5.0
5
Spyrale EC
C
7.5
7.5
8.0
8.0
5
Spyrale EC
D
7.5
7.0
7.0
7.0
6
IRS 700
A
7.8
8.5
7.0
6.0
6
IRS 700
B
8.0
8.0
7.0
7.0
6
IRS 700
C
8.0
8.0
7.5
7.0
6
IRS 700
D
7.5
7.5
5.5
5.5
7
IRS 704
A
7.5
7.5
6.5
6.0
7
IRS 704
B
7.5
7.0
5.5
5.5
7
IRS 704
C
7.5
7.5
7.5
8.0
7
IRS 704
D
7.5
7.5
7.0
6.0
8
IRS 704
A
7.5
7.5
7.5
7.0
8
IRS 704
B
7.5
7.5
7.0
6.0
8
IRS 704
C
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.5
8
IRS 704
D
7.5
7.0
6.0
6.5
9
IRS 705
A
8.0
8.5
8.5
8.5
9
IRS 705
B
8.0
9.0
8.0
8.0
9
IRS 705
C
8.0
8.5
8.5
7.0
9
IRS 705
D
8.5
9.0
9.0
9.0
10
IRS 706
A
8.0
9.0
9.0
8.5
10
IRS 706
B
7.5
8.0
8.5
7.5
10
IRS 706
C
8.5
9.0
9.0
9.0
10
IRS 706
D
8.0
9.0
9.0
9.0
11
IRS 707
A
8.5
8.5
8.0
8.0
11
IRS 707
B
8.0
8.5
8.5
8.0
11
IRS 707
C
8.0
8.5
9.0
8.0
11
IRS 707
D
8.0
8.0
8.0
7.5
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
A
6.5
6.5
6.5
5.5
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
B
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
C
8.0
7.5
6.0
6.5
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
D
8.0
7.5
7.0
7.5
30
Annex C4 Summarised assessments of stemphylium infestation Nieuw Buinen
object
description
15-8-20121
7-9-20121
28-9-20121
2-11-20121
1
untreated control
6.9
a
5.9
a
5.2
a
4.9
ab
2
Opus Team (1.0 l/ha)
7.0
a
6.1
a
5.1
a
4.6
a
3
Sphere SC (0.25 l/ha)
7.4
ab
7.2
b
6.5
b
6.8
cd
4
IRS 694 (1.33 l/ha)
8.1
b
8.8
d
9.1
c
8.9
e
5
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha)
7.0
a
7.1
b
7.0
b
6.4
c
6
IRS 700 (1.0 l/ha)
7.8
b
8.0
c
6.8
b
6.4
c
7
IRS 704 (0.7 l/ha)
7.5
ab
7.4
bc
6.6
b
6.4
c
8
IRS 704 (1.0 l/ha)
7.4
ab
7.1
b
6.6
b
6.2
bc
9
IRS 705 (0.8 l/ha)
8.1
b
8.8
d
8.5
c
8.1
de
10
IRS 706 (1.2 l/ha)
8.0
b
8.8
d
8.9
c
8.5
e
11
IRS 707 (1.0 l/ha)
8.1
b
8.4
cd
8.4
c
7.9
de
12
Spyrale EC (1.0 l/ha) +
Trips-Flo (0.1 l/ha)
7.5
ab
7.1
b
6.5
b
6.4
c
probability2
0.001
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
LSD3 5%
0.68
0.62
1.01
1.43
1 Date of assessment of stemphylium infestation (1 = very high, plant dead - 10 = none, plant healthy).
2 probability: >0.05 = not significant, <0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
3 LSD = least significant difference.
31
Annex C5 Yield and sugar beet quality Nieuw Buinen
object
description
replicate
root
yield
sugar-
content
sugar
yield
soil
tare
K
Na
AmN
glucose
WIN
(t/ha)
(%)
(t/ha)
(%)
(mmol/kg)
1
untreated control
A
87.1
17.65
15.4
4.8
31.1
2.8
13.0
2.2
91.8
1
untreated control
B
80.4
17.89
14.4
2.8
36.1
3.7
13.2
2.0
91.5
1
untreated control
C
80.6
17.76
14.3
3.4
32.1
3.6
12.8
2.0
91.8
1
untreated control
D
78.9
17.70
14.0
3.1
30.8
3.3
11.2
2.5
92.0
2
Opus Team
A
85.5
18.08
15.5
2.6
33.5
2.9
11.1
2.2
92.0
2
Opus Team
B
81.9
17.96
14.7
2.7
36.6
3.3
14.0
2.0
91.4
2
Opus Team
C
84.1
18.35
15.4
2.8
30.7
2.7
8.6
2.2
92.7
2
Opus Team
D
79.9
18.23
14.6
2.2
30.5
3.2
9.4
2.3
92.5
3
Sphere SC
A
90.8
18.51
16.8
2.7
34.7
3.0
9.1
2.2
92.3
3
Sphere SC
B
87.4
18.16
15.9
2.6
31.2
2.7
11.3
2.2
92.2
3
Sphere SC
C
88.1
18.70
16.5
2.3
32.1
3.0
10.2
2.3
92.5
3
Sphere SC
D
86.3
18.37
15.9
1.9
37.1
3.1
10.8
2.0
91.9
4
IRS 694
A
91.2
19.19
17.5
2.1
31.8
2.4
7.3
2.6
93.1
4
IRS 694
B
93.6
18.61
17.4
1.9
35.4
2.8
8.8
2.1
92.4
4
IRS 694
C
93.4
19.06
17.8
2.4
31.2
2.7
6.9
2.4
93.1
4
IRS 694
D
96.8
18.55
18.0
3.5
33.4
2.3
9.1
2.2
92.5
5
Spyrale EC
A
86.2
18.73
16.2
1.8
30.9
2.9
9.0
2.3
92.7
5
Spyrale EC
B
84.1
18.56
15.6
3.8
30.7
2.8
7.9
2.4
92.8
5
Spyrale EC
C
90.4
17.74
16.0
4.3
32.8
2.9
12.0
2.5
91.8
5
Spyrale EC
D
83.7
18.59
15.6
2.6
30.1
2.9
7.5
2.5
92.9
6
IRS 700
A
89.1
18.70
16.7
2.2
34.1
2.7
9.5
2.4
92.4
6
IRS 700
B
92.3
17.90
16.5
3.8
30.8
2.4
12.7
2.2
92.0
6
IRS 700
C
89.8
18.66
16.8
3.0
31.8
2.9
10.8
2.0
92.5
6
IRS 700
D
87.9
18.82
16.5
2.1
31.6
2.7
7.4
2.5
92.9
7
IRS 704
A
85.9
18.63
16.0
2.1
35.1
2.9
9.2
2.2
92.4
7
IRS 704
B
84.7
18.53
15.7
2.3
29.4
2.9
7.6
2.4
92.9
7
IRS 704
C
93.4
18.19
17.0
2.6
32.6
2.5
13.1
2.3
92.0
7
IRS 704
D
86.6
18.98
16.4
2.2
30.5
2.7
7.8
2.4
93.0
8
IRS 704
A
88.0
18.78
16.5
2.7
35.5
2.9
9.7
2.2
92.3
8
IRS 704
B
87.8
18.66
16.4
3.7
35.1
2.9
11.7
2.0
92.1
8
IRS 704
C
88.0
18.60
16.4
2.9
32.2
2.9
8.6
2.3
92.6
8
IRS 704
D
86.1
18.78
16.2
2.5
31.2
3.2
8.9
2.6
92.7
9
IRS 705
A
97.9
18.27
17.9
4.1
31.6
2.4
11.6
2.4
92.3
9
IRS 705
B
90.1
18.28
16.5
2.4
34.9
3.4
10.6
2.2
92.0
9
IRS 705
C
89.1
18.32
16.3
2.6
35.1
3.5
11.2
2.3
92.0
9
IRS 705
D
87.3
18.63
16.3
2.2
32.4
3.2
8.9
2.1
92.6
10
IRS 706
A
93.2
18.98
17.7
2.1
34.1
2.8
8.5
2.3
92.7
10
IRS 706
B
90.4
18.85
17.0
2.0
31.7
2.6
8.1
2.2
92.8
10
IRS 706
C
94.8
18.85
17.9
2.3
34.3
2.8
8.1
2.3
92.6
10
IRS 706
D
94.1
18.26
17.2
5.6
32.5
2.3
11.1
2.2
92.2
11
IRS 707
A
90.5
18.75
17.0
2.5
31.4
2.8
8.0
2.2
92.8
11
IRS 707
B
89.6
18.76
16.8
2.4
32.3
2.8
9.7
2.0
92.6
11
IRS 707
C
87.4
18.88
16.5
2.7
33.2
2.8
10.2
2.1
92.5
11
IRS 707
D
87.1
18.94
16.5
2.2
32.1
2.7
7.8
2.5
92.9
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
A
90.5
18.58
16.8
2.9
31.8
2.9
8.1
2.4
92.7
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
B
85.5
18.47
15.8
3.2
29.9
3.0
9.6
2.2
92.6
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
C
83.9
18.15
15.2
2.3
34.3
3.1
11.3
2.1
92.0
12
Spyrale EC + Trips-Flo
D
84.1
18.55
15.6
3.2
31.0
2.9
11.0
2.3
92.4
32
Annex C6 Summarised yield parameters Nieuw Buinen
object
root
yield
sugar
content
sugar
yield
soil
tare
K
Na
AmN
Glu
WIN
financial
yield
(t/ha)
(%)
(t/ha)
(%)
(mmol/kg)
(€/ha)
1
81.7
17.75
14.5
3.5
32.5
3.3
12.6
2.2
91.8
3,485
2
82.8
18.15
15.0
2.6
32.8
3.0
10.8
2.2
92.2
3,672
3
88.1
18.43
16.3
2.4
33.8
3.0
10.4
2.2
92.2
3,993
4
93.7
18.85
17.7
2.5
32.9
2.5
8.0
2.3
92.8
4,405
5
86.1
18.40
15.8
3.1
31.1
2.9
9.1
2.4
92.6
3,896
6
89.8
18.52
16.6
2.8
32.1
2.7
10.1
2.3
92.5
4,098
7
87.7
18.58
16.3
2.3
31.9
2.8
9.4
2.3
92.6
4,028
8
87.5
18.71
16.4
2.9
33.5
2.9
9.7
2.2
92.5
4,044
9
91.1
18.38
16.7
2.9
33.5
3.1
10.6
2.3
92.2
4,100
10
93.1
18.74
17.4
3.0
33.2
2.6
8.9
2.2
92.6
4,319
11
88.7
18.83
16.7
2.5
32.3
2.8
8.9
2.2
92.7
4,151
12
86.0
18.44
15.9
2.9
31.8
3.0
10.0
2.2
92.4
3,901
LSD1 5%
3.7
0.38
0.6
1.2
2.9
0.4
2.3
0.2
0.5
141
probability2
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.76
0.78
<0.001
0.05
0.57
0.02
<0.001
1 LSD = least significant difference.
2 probability: >0.05 = not significant, <0.05 and >0.001 = significant, <0.001 = very significant.
