MN Barley

Kevin Smith, John Wiersma, Ruth Dill-Macky, Jochum Wiersma, Brian Steffenson, Char Hollingsworth, and Ed Schiefelbein

Yield averages for barley in Minnesota were 70 Bu/A compared to 75 Bu/A last year resulting in production of about 8 million bushels.  Robust remains the dominant barley variety grown in Minnesota occupying 52.4% of the acreage.  Lacey acreage increased to 39.5% followed by Royal (1.8%), Legacy (1.5%), and Excel (1.2%).

Growing conditions were very good in general across the five test locations for barley variety trials in Minnesota with adequate moisture through grain fill.  The average yields were higher in 2004 in the north (Roseau) and west central (Morris) regions (Table 6).

Fusarium head blight (FHB) continues to be a major problem in the region and the weather patterns this summer were conducive for disease and accumulation of the toxin deoxynivalenol (DON) in grain, particularly for later planted fields.  None of the current malting varieties differ in reaction to FHB, however, Stander is slightly more susceptible and MNBrite slightly less susceptible than the others.

Agronomic and Yield Performance Data:  The yield data in Table 8 were collected from advanced yield trials that contain the important varieties for the region planted in five locations in the state. Yield data is presented as percent of the mean of the varieties listed in the table. The mean of the varieties is presented in Bu/A.  Excel, Tradition, and Lacey were the highest yielding varieties based on three year averages (Table 8).  Drummond is the most lodging resistant of the group, while Legacy is the latest to head (Table 9).  All of the recently released varieties (Lacey, Drummond, Legacy and Tradition) are shorter than Robust.

Disease Reaction Data: We have included a table this year describing reaction of the currently grown varieties to the five major diseases in the region.  Disease reaction is based on at least three years of data and scored from 1 – 9 where 1 is most resistant and 9 is most susceptible (Table 10). While there are some numerical differences among the varieties for resistance to these diseases, these differences are small and should not be a basis for selection among the different varieties.

Industry Brewing Quality Evaluation: There are some important differences among the recently released malting varieties that have been approved by the American Malting Barley Association (AMBA). Lacey (Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station) has been rated acceptable by Miller Brewing Co. Anheuser Busch (AB) has completed its testing of Lacey and rated it unacceptable.  Legacy and Tradition (Busch-Agricultural Resources Inc.) have been rated acceptable by AB, but are still being evaluated by Miller. Drummond (North Dakota State University) has been rated acceptable by both AB and Miller. 

Growers should keep this information in mind when making plans for planting this spring and marketing grain next fall. The variety utilization picture could change as industry continues evaluations and makes decisions about how to use these new varieties. AMBA provides periodic updates on the status of new varieties and regularly publishes their list of recommended varieties.  These updates can be found on AMBA’s website (www.ambainc.org ). 

Table 9. Agronomic characteristics of barley varieties in Minnesota in multiple year comparisons (2000-2004).

Variety	Use/Type	Days to Heading1 -- days --	Plant Height - inches -	Lodging	Plump --- % ---	Protein --- % ---
Environments		15	15	9	14	11
Lacey	Malt	57	33	strong	83	12.7
Drummond	Malt	57	34	v. strong	80	12.9
Robust	Malt	58	36	med.	83	12.9
Excel2	Malt	58	34	med.	77	12.2
Stander	Feed	58	33	strong	85	12.3
MNBrite2	Feed	58	36	med.	82	13.4
Tradition3	Malt	58	34	med.	-	-
Legacy	Malt	59	35	med.	75	12.5

¹  Days after planting
² Only three years of plump and protein data, 2002–2004
³ Only four years of data, 2001-2004.

Table 10. Disease reaction¹ of barley varieties in Minnesota in multiple year comparisons (2001-2004).

Variety	FHB	Net Blotch	Septoria Speckled Leaf Blotch	Spot Blotch	Stem Rust
Lacey	8	8	9	2	1
Drummond	8	7	9	2	1
Robust	8	8	9	2	1
Excel	8	8	9	2	1
Stander	9	8	9	2	1
MNBrite	6	6	9	1	1
Tradition	8	7	9	2	1
Legacy	7	5	9	2	1

¹ Most Resistant = 1, Most Susceptible = 9.

Table 8. Relative grain yield of barley varieties at several locations in Minnesota in single year (2004) and multiple year comparisons (2002-2004).

Variety		Crookston			Morris			Stephen			St. Paul			Roseau			State			On-Farm
		1 yr	3 yr		1 yr	3 yr		1 yr	3 yr		1 yr	2 yr1		1 yr	2 yr2		1 yr	3 yr		1 yr	3 yr
		-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- % of Mean --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lacey		100	99		120	113		102	97		102	106		105	104		106	104		114.8	106.4
Drummond		91	105		86	93		96	95		108	106		100	95		95	100		101.6	96.5
Robust		81	86		96	89		88	92		100	96		88	94		91	91		93.8	94.7
Excel		116	106		108	106		102	100		102	106		113	101		106	105		-	-
Stander		97	101		105	103		94	96		93	95		98	113		101	101		-	-
MNBrite		93	92		96	98		99	100		91	94		91	71		90	95		-	-
Tradition		114	113		99	105		109	119		96	93		100	108		105	105		96.6	-
Legacy		108	98		91	95		110	100		107	104		96	120		107	100		104.0	103.4
Mean (bu/A)		112	955		138	99		104	90		116	85		128	76		109	94		102.2	100.3
LSD (0.05)		20	111		15	10		15	9		15	12		20	29		10	5		10.1	6.1

¹ Only two years of data, 2002 and 2004.
²  Only two years of data, 2003 and 2004.