Soybean Screening Trials for Resistance to Iron Deficiency Chlorosis, 2001
R. Jay Goos and Brian Johnson
Department of Soil Science
North Dakota State University
Fargo, North Dakota 58105
rj.goos@ndsu.nodak.edu
Introduction
Iron deficiency chlorosis of soybeans is a widespread problem on high pH soils of the Upper Midwest. High water tables, too much rainfall, salinity in the soil, calcium carbonate in the topsoil, and elevated soil nitrate levels all contribute to the problem. As a species, soybean is more sensitive to iron deficiency than other crops, such as wheat or barley. Since iron is relatively immobile in the plant, iron deficiency appears as a yellowing of the upper parts of the plant. If the youngest leaves and growing point are damaged, growth will be stunted and yields will be reduced substantially. Even a temporary yellowing reduces yield, even if the plants eventually recover and appear normal later in the growing season.
There are several available control measures to reduce the severity of iron deficiency chlorosis. The most effective is variety selection. The selection of a resistant variety can make the difference between success and failure when growing soybeans on high pH soils. From our experience, we suggest varieties with a chlorosis rating equal to or better than the variety Council when growing soybeans on soils prone to producing chlorosis. For soils with a severe chlorosis potential, obtain the most resistant varieties available.
How these studies were performed
Four field studies were performed in eastern North Dakota in 2001. The sites used had been observed for several years, and known to produce a relatively uniform chlorosis in soybeans. Soil characteristics of the four sites are shown in Table 1. 181 public and commercial varieties were grown in short (5) rows on 30-inch centers. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with four replications. At the 2-3 trifoliolate stage, 5-6 trifoliolate stage, and two weeks after the 5-6 trifoliolate stage, visual chlorosis ratings were made. A 1-5 scale was used, where 1=no chlorosis, plants were normal and green; 2=a slight yellowing of the upper leaves, there was no differentiation in color between the leaf veins and interveinal areas; 3=interveinal chlorosis of the upper leaves (veins green and interveinal areas chlorotic), but no obvious stunting of growth or death of leaf tissue (necrosis) evident; 4=interveinal chlorosis of the upper leaves, with some apparent stunting of growth or necrosis of plant tissue; 5=severe chlorosis, with stunted growth and the youngest leaves and growing point necrotic. Each plot was rated plus or minus 0.5 chlorosis unit.
To "calibrate" the chlorosis studies, four "standard" varieties were included with a known reaction to chlorosis stress. The standard varieties, from most resistant to most susceptible were Traill, Council, Glacier, and Mycogen 5072. The varieties Traill, Council, and Glacier were also entered into the trials more than once to help determine the reproducibility of the screening studies.
Results
The results are shown in Table 2, with the varieties ranked from the most resistant to the most susceptible. Iron chlorosis research is difficult to perform in the field, due to soil variability. Overall, we were very pleased with our studies in 2001. Chlorosis was uniform across all four of our sites through the 5-6 trifoliolate stage. After the 5-6 trifoliolate stage at the Galesburg site, the soybeans tended to recover in part of the trial, so the third rating was not made at this site.
We were also very pleased with the separation and reproducibility of our "standard" varieties. As expected, the chlorosis resistance of the standard varieties was ranked as expected: Traill > Council > Glacier > Mycogen 5072. The ratings of Traill, Council, and Glacier were generally within 0.1 chlorosis unit, and we were very pleased with this result. When averaged across all four sites, the ratings have an experimental error of 0.2 to 0.3 chlorosis units.
How to use these tables
There are many factors that go into the selection of a soybean variety, such as maturity, disease resistance, and yield potential. When selecting a variety for high pH soils, however, a high level of chlorosis resistance has to be added to this list. Even a temporary yellowing can cause yield loss. The extra bushel or two of yield potential of a less resistant variety is easily lost if the crop becomes chlorotic.
Finally, not every soil in North Dakota is suitable for soybean production. If soil conditions are bad enough, any soybean variety can turn chlorotic. While there are substantial differences between the most resistant and most susceptible soybean varieties, abnormally elevated salinity or prolonged waterlogging can make even the most resistant variety turn chlorotic. If a resistant variety, such as Traill, cannot be successfully grown on a field due to chlorosis, the field is probably not suitable for soybean production.
A spreadsheet file, with a more complete listing of the data, is available by e-mail. Please send any requests to Dr. Goos at the e-mail address at the beginning of this report.
This research was supported by the North Dakota Soybean Council.
Table 1. Chemical characteristics of the soils at the four field locations.
|
|
|||||
|
Soil testÝ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
pH |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EC (salinity) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
CaCO3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Org. matter |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nitrate-N |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Olsen P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avail. K |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avail. S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
EC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nitrate-N |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Avail. S |
|
|
|
|
|
Ý pH and EC of a 1:1 soil:water suspension, CaCO3 equivalent by the Williams method, organic matter by loss on ignition, available K by ammonium acetate extraction, and available S by monocalcium phosphate extraction.
Table 2. Chlorosis ratings of 181 soybean varieties at four sites in eastern North Dakota, 2001. At each site, each value is the average of three rating times and four replications, except at Galesburg, where two ratings were made.
|
|
||||||
|
Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seeds 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pioneer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top Farm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
King Grain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hyland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mycogen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaystar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wensman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gold Country |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wensman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prairie Brand Seed Co. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NorthStar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dyna-Gro |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wensman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pioneer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Garst |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peterson Farms Seed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gold Country |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mallard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brushvale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Garst |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thunder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peterson Farms Seed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest Seed Genetics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaystar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NorthStar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dekalb |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaystar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mallard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Syngenta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mustang |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stine |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seeds 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thunder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wensman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NuTech |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asgrow |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mallard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mycogen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mustang |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hyland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hyland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NorthStar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thunder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Syngenta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top Farm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brushvale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaltenberg |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seeds 2000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prograin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prograin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hyland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dairyland Seed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gold Country |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dyna-Gro |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Syngenta |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AgriPro |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thunder |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prograin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gold Country |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pioneer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asgrow |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thompson Agri |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wensman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kaystar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richland Organics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wensman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richand Organics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NDSU |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dairyland Seed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gold Country |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Golden Harvest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midwest Seed Genetics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pioneer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mallard |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Garst |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prograin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pioneer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pioneer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U. of MN |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prograin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prograin |
|
|
|
|
|
|