Download Presentation

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts
no text concepts found
Transcript
SCA Sampling Protocol
Results: 2016
Tom A. Royer
Oklahoma State University
Sorghum – Sugarcane Aphid
Research Exchange Meeting
Dallas, TX
January 3 – 4, 2017
Introduction
• Goals:
– Develop, validate and
demonstrate a user-friendly,
dynamic sampling tool based on
seasonal and spatial distribution
patterns and linked to researchbased economic thresholds for
sugarcane aphid in grain sorghum
Materials & Methods
• One sampling universe for every 80 acres
– a field of 160 acres could be made into two fields
• 48 of 54 samples per field taken from 2 fully expanded
leaves, one on lower 1/3, and one upper 1/3 of plant
• 6 plants were randomly selected for whole plant counts
• Design allows for analysis of variation within and between
plants, within and between cells, between fields, and
between states
• Fields classified into five growth stages
–
–
–
–
–
Vegetative (01)
Boot (02)
Flowering (03)
Milk (04)
Soft Dough to Maturity (05)
• For data purposes use the closest of the five stages listed
when collecting plant measure data
Materials & Methods
Data Slides
• A nested ANOVA was conducted on
data from125 fields, representing
6750 samples from TX and OK
(fields from other states have not
been included yet)
Key Learnings
• Most of the variation in sampling is
captured within plant samples or between
the two sets of within cell samples
• Sampling for SCA needs to be modified
based on location
– OK and North Texas distribution patterns
saw no substantial difference in variation;
data suggests that there is less need to
consider edge when sampling
– South Texas showed evidence of a slight
edge effect due to a higher % of accounted
variance in the “column” category when
compared to N Texas and Oklahoma.
Next Steps
• Continued field sampling for increased
robustness of data and for independent
validation of sampling protocol
• Evaluation of aphids counts on leaves
within plant for most efficient estimation of
aphid density
Collaborators
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Jessica Lindenmayer, Oklahoma State University***
Kristopher L. Giles, Oklahoma State University
N.C. Elliott, USDA-ARS
Ali Zarrabi, Oklahoma State University
Mark Payton, Oklahoma State University
Allan Knutson, Texas A&M Agrilife
Xandra Morris, Texas A&M Agrilife
Robert Bowling, Texas A&M Agrilife
Michael Brewer, Texas A&M Agrilife
Nick Seiter, University of Arkansas
Sebe Brown, Louisiana State University
Brian McCornack, Kansas State University
Discussion