[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-292890-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":73,"doc-detail-292890-en":122},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":66,"head_meta":68,"extra_data":70,"updated_unix":72},105,"en","2016-minnesota-oat-field-crop-trials-results","2016 Minnesota Oat Field Crop Trials Results","","2016 Oat Field Crop Trials Results summarize variety performance evaluations conducted across 10 Minnesota locations, including Waseca, Le Center, St. Paul, Lamberton, Kimball, Morris, Fergus Falls, Crookston, Stephen, and Roseau. Lodging was the primary challenge and influenced yield, quality, and harvestability. Trials used fungicide at Feekes 9 and convert maturity, plant height, and lodging resistance to a 1–9 scale. Yield comparisons are reported against 2015 and a three-year average, alongside test weight, groat percentage, and disease ratings.",{"@graph":14,"@context":65},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/","Exam",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/2016-minnesota-oat-field-crop-trials-results/292890/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/2016-minnesota-oat-field-crop-trials-results/292890.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Mack Lee","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-04","2026-09-17",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",5,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"How are maturity, plant height, and lodging resistance presented in the tables?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"They are converted to a 1–9 scale based on days to heading, plant height, and resistance to lodging to make the data easier to interpret.","Answer","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":67,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":69,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":71,"site_id":7},292890,1790948928,{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":75},"success",[76,80,84,87,91,96,101,106,111,114,118],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":77,"show_sort_weight":78,"slug":79},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":81,"show_sort_weight":82,"slug":83},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},70,"exam",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":92,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":109,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":113},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":115,"slug":117},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":119,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":121},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":74,"data":123},{"doc_id":71,"user_id":124,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":125,"doc_module":4,"category_id":33,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":126,"file_id":127,"file_url":128,"file_type":129,"file_size":130,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":30,"language":131,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":132,"faqs":133,"seo_title":134,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":135,"read_time":102},1236954509970,"https://us-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","2016 Oat Field Crop Trials Results  \n0LQQHVRWD $JULFXOWXUDO ([SHULPHQW 6WDWLRQ DQG WKH &ROOHJH RI )RRG􀀏 $JULFXOWXUDO DQG 1DWXUDO 5HVRXUFH 6FLHQFHV  \nProper selection of oat varieties requires consideration of the anticipated growing conditions, the pests WKDW PLJKW EH HQFRXQWHUHG LQ D VSHFLÀF production situation, the purpose for growing the crop and its eventual usDJH􀀑 6SHFLÀF JURZLQJ VLWXDWLRQV ZLOO dictate the priority and emphasis given to each trait included in the tables.  \nThe results of the variety performance evaluations are summarized in Tables 1 through 4. The oat performance trials were grown in 10 locations in Min-  \nnesota including Waseca, Le Center, St. Paul, Lamberton, Kimball, Morris, Fergus Falls, Crookston, Stephen and Roseau in 2016. The greatest challenge in both the oat performance evaluations and commercial production this past growing season was lodging. As a result, the trials in St. Paul, Fergus Falls, Morris and Roseau DUH QRW LQFOXGHG LQ WKH ÀQDO UHVXOWV􀀑 The performance evaluations were WUHDWHG ZLWK D IXQJLFLGH ZKHQ WKH ÁDJ leaf was fully extended (Feekes 9) . The average yield across the testing  \nLocations of 2016 oat trials.  \n7DEOH 􀀔􀀑 2ULJLQ DQG DJURQRPLF FKDUDFWHULVWLFV RI RDW YDULHWLHV LQ VLQJOH􀀐\\HDU 􀀋􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙􀀌 DQG PXOWLSOH􀀐\\HDU FRPSDULVRQV 􀀋􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀗􀀐􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙􀀌􀀑  \n\n| (QWU\\ | 2ULJLQ | \u003CHDU RI 5HOHDVH | 393 6WDWXV | 6HHG\u003Cbr>&RORU | 0DWXULW\\􀀔 | 3ODQW +HLJKW􀀕 | |  | /RGJLQJ􀀖 |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n|  |  |  |  |  | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙 􀀕􀀐\u003CHDU 􀀖􀀐\u003CHDU | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙 􀀕􀀐\u003CHDU 􀀖􀀐\u003CHDU | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙 􀀕􀀐\u003CHDU 􀀖􀀐\u003CHDU |  |  |\n| %DGJHU %HWD*HQH &ROW | 8 RI :LVFRQVLQ\u003Cbr>8 RI :LVFRQVLQ 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀓\u003Cbr>􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀘\u003Cbr>􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀓 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 3HQGLQJ 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | \u003CHOORZ\u003Cbr>\u003CHOORZ\u003Cbr>:KLWH | 􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐 􀀋􀀔􀀐􀀜􀀌 􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐\u003Cbr>􀀔 􀀔 􀀔\u003Cbr>􀀗 􀀘 􀀘\u003Cbr>􀀔 􀀔 􀀔 | 􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐 􀀋􀀔􀀐􀀜􀀌 􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐\u003Cbr>􀀕 􀀕 􀀔\u003Cbr>􀀖 􀀖 􀀖\u003Cbr>􀀖 􀀖 􀀕 | 􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐 􀀋􀀔􀀐􀀜􀀌 􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐􀀐\u003Cbr>􀀘 􀀙 􀀘\u003Cbr>􀀘 􀀙 􀀘\u003Cbr>􀀗 􀀘 􀀘 |  |  |\n| &6 &DPGHQ | 0HULGLDQ 6HHGV | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀖 | 3HQGLQJ | :KLWH | 􀀛 { { | 􀀗 { { | 􀀖 { { |  |  |\n| 'HRQ | 8 RI 0LQQHVRWD | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀗 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | \u003CHOORZ | 􀀛 􀀜 􀀜 | 􀀙 􀀘 􀀘 | 􀀗 􀀗 􀀗 |  |  |\n| (VNHU | 8 RI :LVFRQVLQ | 􀀕􀀓􀀓􀀙 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | \u003CHOORZ | 􀀕 􀀖 􀀕 | 􀀗 􀀗 􀀕 | 􀀗 􀀘 􀀗 |  |  |\n| *ROLDWK | 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀖 | 3HQGLQJ | :KLWH | 􀀛 􀀜 􀀜 | 􀀜 􀀜 􀀜 | 􀀙 􀀚 􀀙 |  |  |\n| +D\\GHQ | 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀘 | 3HQGLQJ | :KLWH | 􀀙 􀀚 􀀙 | 􀀘 􀀘 􀀘 | 􀀘 􀀘 􀀘 |  |  |\n| +RUVHSRZHU | 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀕 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | :KLWH | 􀀖 􀀖 􀀖 | 􀀕 􀀕 􀀔 | 􀀘 􀀙 􀀘 |  |  |\n| -XU\\ | 1'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀕 | 3HQGLQJ | :KLWH | 􀀙 􀀙 􀀚 | 􀀚 􀀚 􀀚 | 􀀙 􀀚 􀀚 |  |  |\n| 1DWW\\ | 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀘 | 3HQGLQJ | :KLWH | 􀀕 􀀕 􀀖 | 􀀙 􀀙 􀀙 | 􀀗 􀀘 􀀘 |  |  |\n| 1HZEXUJ | 1'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀔 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | :KLWH | 􀀙 􀀚 􀀚 | 􀀚 􀀚 􀀚 | 􀀙 􀀚 􀀙 |  |  |\n| 5HLQV 5RFNIRUG 5RQ | 8 RI ,OOLQRLV | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙 | 3HQGLQJ | 7DQ | 􀀕 􀀕 { | 􀀔 􀀔 { | 􀀖 􀀖 { |  |  |\n|  | 1'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀓􀀛 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | :KLWH | 􀀚 􀀜 􀀜 | 􀀙 􀀙 􀀙 | 􀀗 􀀘 􀀘 |  |  |\n|  | 8 RI :LVFRQVLQ | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀗 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | :KLWH | 􀀙 􀀙 􀀙 | 􀀘 􀀘 􀀗 | 􀀘 􀀙 􀀘 |  |  |\n| 6DEHU | 8 RI ,OOLQRLV | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀓 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | :KLWH | 􀀔 􀀕 􀀔 | 􀀕 􀀕 􀀔 | 􀀗 􀀘 􀀗 |  |  |\n| 6KHOE\\ 􀀗􀀕􀀚 | 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀔 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | :KLWH | 􀀔 􀀔 􀀕 | 􀀗 􀀘 􀀗 | 􀀘 􀀙 􀀘 |  |  |\n| 6RXULV | 1'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀓􀀛 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | 7DQ | 􀀙 􀀚 􀀚 | 􀀗 􀀗 􀀖 | 􀀗 􀀘 􀀘 |  |  |\n| 6WUHDNHU | 6'68 | 􀀕􀀓􀀔􀀙 | 393􀀋􀀜􀀗􀀌 | +XOOHVV | 􀀕 { { | 􀀘 { { | 􀀙 { { |  |  |\n| /6' 􀀋􀀓􀀑􀀔􀀓􀀌 |  |  |  |  | 􀀔 􀀔 􀀔 | 􀀔 􀀔 􀀔 | | 􀀔 􀀔 􀀔 |  |\n\n􀀔 􀀔 HDUOLHVW DQG 􀀜 ODWHVW􀀑  \n􀀕 􀀔 VKRUWHVW DQG 􀀜 WDOOHVW􀀑  \n􀀖 􀀔 OHDVW SURQH DQG 􀀜 PRVW SURQH􀀑  \nlocations was 132 bushels per acre in 2016. This compares to an average of 151 bushels per acre in 2015 and a three-year average of 144 bushels per acre. While Hayden, the 2015 release from SDSU, surpassed Deon for yield in 2016, Deon remained the top yielding variety across the state in the multi-year comparisons (Table 4) .  \nRelative maturity, as measured by the number of days to heading, plant height and resistance to lodging have been converted to a 1-9 scale to allow for easier interpretation of the data (Table 1) . Differences for all three characteristics are generally much less in the southern half of the state or when seeding is delayed. In the northern half of the state the gap ","cbCaioHQpHdmOOHo","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaioHQpHdmOOHo","pdf",217651,"English","# Variety Performance Evaluations\n## Trial locations and lodging impact\n## Yield and maturity comparisons (Tables 1-4)\n## Quality traits and disease ratings (Tables 2-3)","[{\"question\":\"How are maturity, plant height, and lodging resistance presented in the tables?\",\"answer\":\"They are converted to a 1–9 scale based on days to heading, plant height, and resistance to lodging to make the data easier to interpret.\"}]","2016 Minnesota Oat Field Crop Trials Results | PDF",1789657135]