PCVT trials cancelled

[gustgd]

1. Independent canola variety trials eliminated
by Allison Finnamore
The Prairie Canola Variety Trials have been cancelled this year.

According to a news release from the Alberta Canola Producers Commission, several Canadian canola seed developers have refused to enter their varieties in the program.

The PCVT are administered by the Canola Council of Canada and the data is used by various provincial seed guides. The CCC says it's the only source of independent, science-based, third-party canola variety comparison data in Canada.

"This data is the most sought-after information by canola growers in developing their annual crop plans," says Wayne Bacon, of Kinistino, Sask. and chair of SaskCanola. "To only have company-created data is unacceptable to every single grower that our organizations have ever talked to about this."

ACPC chair Kevin Bender, who farms near Bentley, Alta., says growers will miss the resource.

"Certified canola seed is a significant expense for growers," he says. "Growers need an independent source of information to help ensure their investment in canola seed is a wise one."

The PCVT are designed to compare the genetic potential of the seed using randomized, replicated small plot trials across the Prairies.

MCGA President Rob Pettinger of Elgin, Man., says some companies have raised concerns that the PCVT do not adequately represent their herbicide/seed combinations while others are unhappy with the size of the plots. He notes industry discussed these concerns over the winter and explored options, but the move was a surprise.

"We were shocked by the decision of so many participants to all pull out of the program at once," Pettinger says.

The groups say they'll work with the canola seed industry to ensure the PCVT continue in 2011. They agreed that varietal performance comparisons are essential, because making well-informed seed decisions are important to all growers.

Entry into PCVT is voluntary and the trials primarily feature commercially available varieties. The PCVT compare genetics under standard plots, a standardized protocol and the same environmental conditions.

In 2009, trials were conducted by seed companies, government researchers and independent contractors in three growing season zones across the Prairies – short, mid, and long season. Test plots were kept weed-free using conventional herbicides. Herbicide-tolerant varieties were not sprayed with their companion herbicides.

[gustgd]

My questions would be what does it cost the seed companies to do the tests? Is it only the cost of seed or
do they pay a portion of all costs related from machinery costs to administration?
If independant trials are so essential, could the Canola Council not just pay, and let the records speak for themselves, or again would the cost be so prohibitive as to shut it down?
I could just phone some buddies and ask the questions but then none of you would know.
Little help please??

[parsley]

1.It's called "downloading costs" A neat trick if you can pull it off. All testing paid for in entirelty buy farmers.


2.Glad the canola growers have common sense enough not to swallow test results they cannot inspect. Heard they made a motion to the effect they are not happy campers.

3. Start a webpage. One reliable canola farmer compiler. Send in findings to him. He will post all the negative agronomic results of each variety.

Won't be long before previous testing protocol will be restored. LOL Unless, of course, the new result sharing serves you better.
Pars

[bluefargo]

Hey I could be wrong but I don't think cost has much, if anything, to do with it.
The companies weren't happy with the way the trials were being conducted. For instance all the plots are cut at once. If you had a longer season or shorter season variety you may loose yield advantage to another variety.

While that may have played into it I think the larger reason is simply lack of control. You can fudge the results if things don't work out.
Have you ever seen any companies varieties not at the top of thier own tests? Never!

To tell you the truth I wonder how much the PCVT trial results as interpreted in the "Varieties of Grain Crops in Sask" are being used these days for canola by farmers. Companies spent big bucks pushing thier own "results"

[bluefargo]

I meant to say the seed companies can't fudge the results if things don't turn out.

[bgmb]

Just so guys know its the RR varieties that pulled out, sick of losing I guess.

I am actually thinking of canceling my RR acres just to prove a point.

I really think we as farmers need to push for more independent and scientific testing of products.

[SASKFARMER3]

So it was the RR varieties that pulled out. Hm local dealer pushes them (free trip) Yield is always lower but their getting better. Hm.

[furrowtickler]

I paid little head to PCVT trails. I look at local results that are done on farm. All seed companies are doing this - and most are done with the farmers own equipment and done with propper timeing, herbicide and fertility. These results I feel are more relevant to our area.

[ado089]

When I was in university I did some of the PCVT work in Alberta. I assure I would not want to make decissions based on my quality of work at that time. Plot work is finiky at the best of times never mind the fact that most kids doing plot work are only doing it because they didn't get a cushy sales job.

However this story wasn't a big deal until the CBC got a hold of it and spun it in to farmers being victimised by big buisness. PCVT trial aren't gone, they're being modified to be a blend of small plot, 1-10ac, side by side trials. Data will have to be consistent across all three formats before it will be published. This is a better system.

[Francksaskfarmer]

As research committee chair for SaskCanola I assure you that at this point the PCVT trials for 2010 will not take place.
I cannot totally blame the companies for pulling out. For them it is like farmers answering the Statscan survey with utmost honesty, in other words when a company is losing yield trials for over 6 years in a row while footing their part of the bill it is not in their best interest to keep entering varieties. (marketing wise)
That being said, the canola producer organisations feel that there is tremendous value in having an unbiased variety comparison including agronomic traits and environmental condition assessment. The future PCVT will more than likely have bigger plot size, be zero tilled and be herbicide specific. And hopefully seed companies will take a noble approach and decide to cooperate to the best of their ability.
It would not hurt if each one of you would put a bit of pressure on your seed rep.
FranckSaskfarmer

[Francksaskfarmer]

Furrow,
for myself I do not put much trust in Company side by side trials.
I cooperated for 3 years in side by side trials. And everytime the reported results were hand picked to their advantage. Now, I can't blame them for doing that but beware.
Also I always get a chukkle when I see the advertising from different companies, they tend to use checks that they like, like 140% of the oldest checks available (they tend to not report which check they use), makes it look good.
It is marketing and that is fine, it is just a good reason for unbiased results.

[furrowtickler]

I could never figure that one out either - no consistant check varieties it's a joke. I just rely on side by side data with new varieties. Plus we know the majority of farmers doing them and most are standing there when the plots are weighed. The last two years there has been little diff in the top varieties, systems in this area.
I would support the new PCVT setup if it was done properly, absolutely good idea - should have been done ten years ago.

[wd9]

One day the real story will come out why PCVT was cancelled.

[bgmb]

And what would that be wd9

[furrowtickler]

Yes wd, what would that be top secret?