Curious if the chart at 5:50 showing increasing population tolerance of hybrids, due to selecting for that feature alone, has reduced other important variables like nutrients and protein in the corn? .. Seems like I've seen "the great pursuit of yield" has lost most of the protein, as low as 3-5% protein remains from what started as 9% protein in source yellow heirloom corn (such as Reids Yellow Dent). I started growing red and blue heirlooms that run 12-15% protein. Impact is real, a pig farmer I know found a 20% increase in litter sizes after he switched to high protein heirloom corn. I found heirloom varieties do best at lower population rates like 22-24k, but the yield loss from fewer plants is more than balanced out by the increased bacon! Last winter's drop in egg production rates noted by many homesteaders revolved around too-low of protein in the common retail brand of chicken feed to lay eggs, such as a batch of low protein corn substituted in the recipe, because when homesteaders switched feed brands their egg production returned. Perhaps there is a future research project in high protein/nutrient corn? Quality vs Quantity?
Excellent point you raise, however I doubt that modern hybrids' tolerance to population is the CAUSE of lower protein in and of itself. It's long been recognized that there is a negative relationship between grain yield and protein in corn, but the physiological cause/effect for this relationship is not well understood. So, for now, all I can say is that the yield improvement that's occurred over the decades has simply unintentionally resulted in lower protein content.
I forgot where I heard it but by taking protein out of the Corn you get a lot more kernels with the same amount of nitrogen. But like you said the colonels are just empty
I am in a very yield limited environment in East Central Minnesota. Did a lot of population studies with Pioneer. We had a 24, 30, 36 and a 42k population across four hybrids each year. And every year the higher population made the most yields. But the 36,000 consistently made better money. 32 or 34 is the common upper end and there's still a lot of areas that 27 and 29 are the best bang for the buck
![ผัวเถื่อน - ยูริ โตเกียวมิวสิค [ OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/P08ORRVDGl8/mqdefault.jpg)
Curious if the chart at 5:50 showing increasing population tolerance of hybrids, due to selecting for that feature alone, has reduced other important variables like nutrients and protein in the corn? .. Seems like I've seen "the great pursuit of yield" has lost most of the protein, as low as 3-5% protein remains from what started as 9% protein in source yellow heirloom corn (such as Reids Yellow Dent). I started growing red and blue heirlooms that run 12-15% protein. Impact is real, a pig farmer I know found a 20% increase in litter sizes after he switched to high protein heirloom corn. I found heirloom varieties do best at lower population rates like 22-24k, but the yield loss from fewer plants is more than balanced out by the increased bacon! Last winter's drop in egg production rates noted by many homesteaders revolved around too-low of protein in the common retail brand of chicken feed to lay eggs, such as a batch of low protein corn substituted in the recipe, because when homesteaders switched feed brands their egg production returned. Perhaps there is a future research project in high protein/nutrient corn? Quality vs Quantity?
Excellent point you raise, however I doubt that modern hybrids' tolerance to population is the CAUSE of lower protein in and of itself. It's long been recognized that there is a negative relationship between grain yield and protein in corn, but the physiological cause/effect for this relationship is not well understood. So, for now, all I can say is that the yield improvement that's occurred over the decades has simply unintentionally resulted in lower protein content.
I forgot where I heard it but by taking protein out of the Corn you get a lot more kernels with the same amount of nitrogen. But like you said the colonels are just empty
I am in a very yield limited environment in East Central Minnesota. Did a lot of population studies with Pioneer. We had a 24, 30, 36 and a 42k population across four hybrids each year. And every year the higher population made the most yields. But the 36,000 consistently made better money. 32 or 34 is the common upper end and there's still a lot of areas that 27 and 29 are the best bang for the buck
Very useful information. Our local seed salesmen are always pushing higher populations, despite this being a stress prone area.
We've upped our total farm yield by dropping plant pop by 4k...