xt7prr1phr8j https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7prr1phr8j/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1963 journals 136 English Lexington : Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.136 text Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.136 1963 2014 true xt7prr1phr8j section xt7prr1phr8j RESULTS OF THE KENTUCKY
HYBRID POPCORN PERFORMANCE TRIALS
1.963
F. A. Loeffel and D., E., Thvrnciale
PROGRESS REPORT 136
M M (Filing Code I)
UNIVERSITY OF 1 °L'~ .r standing ability. it was superior to P&06A in standing ability although
lower vielding than P410, P2l3, P605 and PQ06A. The yellow experimental hybrids
S30: and 13172 appeared promising on the basis of lodging resistance.

 ‘ EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Field Design
Each hybrid was planted in four plots at each of the two locations, with
individual plots being two hills wide and five hills long. These plots were
located in different parts of the testing field to minimize cultural and soil
differences.
Yield
The corn from each plot was harvested and weighed individually. The yield
of the hybrids was determined and is reported on the basis of pounds of ear corn
per acre with a moisture content of l3.5 percent. Adjustments were made also for
missing hills but not for other variation in stand. Therefore, the yields at each
location reported in this report constituted an average yield of the four plots
after all adjustments were made.
Moisture
The moisture content at harvest is the best measure of relative maturity of
hybrids. One hybrid may be considered to be earlier than a second hybrid if its
‘ moisture content at harvest is consistently lower. Maturity thus determined is
not absolute but is relative to the hybrids being compared.
The moisture content of the grain of individual hybrids was determined at
harvest by removing two rows of kernels from each of eight ears selected at
random from each of the first three replications. The grain from the 24 ears
was thoroughly mixed, and the moisture content of a l50~gram sample was determined
with 2 Eteinlite moisture meter.
ESR'.?  
?;suts which leaned from the base at an angle of more than 30 degrees from
the »;r#icei were considered to be root—lodged. This character was expressed as
a percentage which was obtained by counting the number of root—lodged plants and
dividing ty the nrnter of rlants present.
Stalk k~i;‘1g
A plant was considered to me stalk·lodged when the stalk was broken between
the ter bearing dede and gram -·». 1 level. This attribute was computed in a mannei
sim lar it that indicated for vznt lodging.
Ear height
Har height {distance from the base of the plant to the point of attachment
of the upper ear) was measured visually, using a scale with one—foot intervals.
Visual ra;fn@c were mode nn four plots of each hybrid at each location.
item
All tests were planted at the rate of 5 kernels per hill and the resulting
plants thinned to 3 per hill. The stand percentage was computed on the basis of
the total plants present divided by the number of plants which would have been
present if all had survived.

 Table 1. Three-year summary of agronomic data recorded on popcorn performance trials
grown at Murray and Hopkinsville, Kentucky in 1961-63. 1/
 1‘*""" "" 'T'”_  _""..._;.-*"=*._._..».—-";'“` ";'Z'.';T K
Acre Moist. Lodging Ear , l
yield at Root Stalk Dropped ht. Stand
Pedigree Color lbs. harv.% Z Z ears Z ft. Z
P303 W 2958 13.1 7.8 25.0 0.1 3.6 96.2
Purdue 9318W W 3270 13.3 12.8 11.4 3.4 97.7
White Average 3114 13.2 10.3 18.2 0.1 3.5 97.0
P32 Y 3749 14.2 17.9 16.6 4.1 97.4 9
P406A Y 4316 13.9 15.4 21.6 0.1 4.1 99.3
P4l0 Y 4291 13.6 8.0 25.5 4.0 96.3
P632 Y 3331 13.8 6.6 28.5 0.1 3.9 95.5
Yellow Average 3922 13.9 12.0 23.1 0.1 4.0 97.1
Overall Average 3653 13.7 11.4 21.4 0.1 3.5 97.1 _
1/ Murray data not included for 1961.

 Table 2. Two—year summary of agronomic data recorded on popcorn performance trials
grown at Murray and Hopkinsville, Kentucky in 1962-63.
Acre Moist. Lodging Ear
yield at Root Stalk ht. Stand
Pedigree Color lbs. harv.Z Z Z ft. Z
“ P303 W 2723 12.9 10.1 26.6 3.5 95.5
Purdue 9312W W 2938 12.4 18.9 15.5 3.4 100.1
Purdue 9318 W 2777 12.5 15.1 10.3 3.3 97.3
White Average 2813 12.6 14.7 17.5 3.4 97.6
P32 Y 3355 13.9 22.8 19.4 4.0 96.6
P213 Y 3975 13.5 2.9 44.7 3.9 97.8
P406A Y 3918 13.4 20.5 23.7 4.2 100.2
P410 Y 3838 13.0 10.3 28.2 3.9 96.0
P605 Y 3729 13.2 9.6 30.6 4.2 95.3
P632 Y 3465 13.8 8.1 27.3 4.2 94.1
Purdue 0368 Y 3534 13.0 4.0 29.4 4.0 98.2
Yellow Average 3688 13.4 11.2 29.0 4.1 96.9
_ Overall Average 3425 13.2 12.2 25.6 3.9 97.1

 Table 3. Average of agronomic data recorded on popcorn performance trials grown at
Hopkinsville and Murray, Kentucky compared in Experiments 24-25 in 1963.
 
Acre Moist. Lodging Ear
Entry yield at Root Stalk ht. Stand
No. Pedigree Color 1bQ- harv.Z Z Z ft. Z l
O1 P303 W 3002 11.6 10.3 8.9 3.3 96.9
03 Purdue 9312W W 3110 10.6 10.5 5.3 3.4 97.9
02 Purdue 9318W W 2932 11.1 5.3 8.7 3.3 92.1
White Average 3014 11.1 8.7 7.6 3.3 95.6
11 P32 Y 3867 12.5 22.0 15.2 4.0 93.5
08 P202 Y 3106 11.7 9.9 14.6 3.2 90.6
09 P213 Y 4306 11.7 3.0 20.2 3.9 96.2
05 P406A Y 4104 12.2 24.9 11.6 3.8 99.0
04 P4l0 Y 4339 11.5 10.2 9.0 3.9 96.5
06 P605 Y 4155 11.8 12.8 13.3 3.9 92.7
07 P632 Y 3968 12.1 8.3 16.4 4.0 92.8
10 Purdue 0368 Y 3659 .11.5 3.2 18.3 3.8 97.9
15 Purdue Exp. 2391 Y 3737 11.7 2.2 10.7 3.9 97.2
14 Purdue Exp. 2393 Y 4027 12.1 10.0 11.2 3.6 95.8
16 Purdue Exp. 12250 Y 3440 11.5 15.0 10.2 3.3 84.4 _ '
13 Purdue Exp. 13172 Y 3796 11.4 6.0 12.1 3.9 92.4
12 Purdue Exp. 13175 Y 3640 11.3 5.2 16.8 3.8 86.8 ·
Yellow Average 3857 11.8 10.2 13.8 3.8 93.5 1
Overall Average 3699 11.6 9.9 12.7 3.7 93.9
 

 Table 4. Average agronomic data recorded on popcorn performance trials compared in
Experiment 24 grown near Hopkinsville, Kentucky in 1963.
Acre Moist. Lodging Ear
Entry yield at Root Stalk ht. Stand
No. Pedigree Color lb$· harv.Z Z Z ft. Z
01 P303 W 3048 11.8 1.4 14.0 3.0 99.3
03 Purdue 9312W W 3187 10.7 1.4 6.3 3.3 100.0
P 02 Purdue 9318W W 3276 11.3 12.8 3.0 92.4
White Average 3170 11.3 0.9 11.0 3.1 97.2
11 P32 Y 4248 12.8 5.2 27.4 4.0 93.8
08 P202 Y 3324 11.9 19.4 3.0 96.5
09 P213 Y 4886 11.8 32.9 3.8 99.3
05 P406A Y 4451 12.5 5.6 23.2 3.5 98.6
04 P410 Y 4843 11.5 1.4 12.1 3.8 97.9
06 P605 Y 5004 .12.2 10.2 19.7 4.0 95.1
07 P632 Y 4437 12.2 7.4 25.2 4.0 93.8
10 Purdue 0368 Y 3983 12.1 3.5 24.3 3.5 100.0
15 Purdue Exp. 2391 Y 4226 11.6 13.9 3.8 100.0
14 Purdue Exp. 2393 Y 4570 12.3 16.4 3.3 97.2
16 Purdue Exp. 12250 Y 3792 11.7 0.7 17.4 3.0 100.0
13 Purdue Exp. 13172 Y 4497 11.4 17.9 4.0 97.2
- 12 Purdue Exp. 13175 Y 4326 11.6 0.7 24.3 3.8 95.1
Yellow Average 4353 12.0 2.7 21.1 3.7 97.3
Overall Average 4131 11.8 2.3 19.2 3.6 97.3
Source of variation D/F Net sum of squares Mean square F value 5Z 1Z
Reps 3 13.41 4.47 2.06
Varieties (unadj.) 15 154.70 10.31 4.75 1.90 2.48
Error 45 97.67 2.17
Total 63 265.78
Difference necessary for significance at 5Z level 836 pounds
C.V. = 14.3Z

 Table 5. Average agronomic data recorded on popcorn performance trials compared in A
Experiment 25 grown near Murray, Kentucky in 1963.
  A
Acre Moist. Lodging Ear
Entry yield at Root Stalk ht. Stand _
No. Pedigree Color lbs. harv.Z Z Z ft. Z
l
O1 P303 W 2955 11.3 19.1 3.7 3.5 94.4
O3 Purdue 9312W W 3032 10.5 19.6 4.3 3.5 95.8
O2 Purdue 9318W W 2587 10.8 10.6 4.5 3.5 91.7
White Average 2858 10.9 16.4 4.2 3.5 94.0
11 P32 Y 3485 12.1 38.8 3.0 4.0 93.1
O8 P202 Y 2888 11.5 19.7 9.8 3.3 84.7
09 P213 Y 3726 11.6 6.0 7.5 4.0 93.1
05 P406A Y 3757 11.8 44.1 0.0 4.0 99.3
O4 P410 Y 3834 11.4 19.0 5.8 4.0 95.1
06 P605 Y 3306 11.3 15.4 6.9 3.8 90.3
07 P632 Y 3499 12.0 9.1 7.6 4.0 91.7
10 Purdue 0368 Y 3335 10.8 2.9 12.3 4.0 95.8
15 Purdue Exp. 2391 Y 3248 11.8 4.4 7.4 4.0 94.4
14 Purdue Exp. 2393 Y 3484 11.9 19.9 5.9 3.8 94.4
16 Purdue Exp. 12250 Y 3088 11.2 29.3 3.0 3.5 68.8 ‘
13 Purdue Exp. 13172 Y 3095 11.3 11.9 6.3 3.8 87.5 ·
12 Purdue Exp. 13175 Y 2954 11.0 9.7 8.8 3.8 78.5
Yellow Average 3361 11.5 17.7 6.5 3.8 89.7 l
Overall Average 3267 11.4 17.5 6.1 3.8 90.5
""""*'...;—_.;—-—·—'“; "'LH *"""‘-........1?$."‘...";.TL.'*"'*""‘....;.-.. ;i'2'“"'......-L` E2..".’lI.":‘"""'  '*""""""""' ""' 'T.
Source of variation D/F Net sum of squares Mean square F value 5Z 1Z
Reps 3 20.93 6.98
Varieties (unadj.) 15 48.44 3.23 1.37 1.90 2.48
Error 45 105.38 2.36
Total 63 175.35
Difference necessary for significance at 5Z level 880 pounds
C.V. = 18.9Z
2M-1-64