Paper · 2012 · Agronomy Journal

Net Return Risk for Malting Barley Production in Western Canada as Influenced by Production Strategies

E. G. Smith; J. T. O'Donovan; W. J. Henderson; et al.

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
12
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of agronomic practices on net return (NR) risk for malting barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) production. This study used data from two field experiments conducted from 2005 to 2008 at eight rainfed locations in western Canada. The first part of this study included 30 production strategies of barley type, seeding rate, and N rate for four regions. The second part of this study included 10 production strategies of seeding date and seeding rate for four regions. A stochastic simulation model was specified to compute the NR. Yield, protein, plumpness, and price were random in the model, drawn from multivariate distributions based on field data and historical price data. The malting cultivar CDC Copeland had higher NR than AC Metcalfe or feed barley. Seeding early at a rate of 200 to 300 seeds m −2 had higher NR than late seeding or higher seeding rates. A fertilizer rate of 60 to 90 kg N ha −1 had higher NR. A producer with high risk aversion preferred strategies that were less risky including: less N fertilizer, growing feed barley in regions that have high protein and smaller price premiums for malting, and seeding later.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The malting cultivar CDC Copeland had higher net return than AC Metcalfe or feed barley.

Taxon
Hordeum vulgareHordeum vulgaree0
Material
CDC Copelande1
Treatment
malting cultivare1
Outcome
NRe1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
AC Metcalfe or feed barleye1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“The malting cultivar CDC Copeland had higher NR than AC Metcalfe or feed barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 725–804 · show in text ↑
e0

“malting barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 106–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Early seeding at 200 to 300 seeds m-2 had higher net return than late seeding or higher seeding rates.

Taxon
Hordeum vulgareHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
Seeding early at a rate of 200 to 300 seeds m −2e1
Outcome
NRe1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
late seeding or higher seeding ratese1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Seeding early at a rate of 200 to 300 seeds m −2 had higher NR than late seeding or higher seeding rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 806–910 · show in text ↑
e0

“malting barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 106–142 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

A fertilizer rate of 60 to 90 kg N ha-1 had higher net return.

Taxon
Hordeum vulgareHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
A fertilizer rate of 60 to 90 kg N ha −1e1
Outcome
NRe1
Direction
highere1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A fertilizer rate of 60 to 90 kg N ha −1 had higher NR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–966 · show in text ↑
e0

“malting barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 106–142 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Producers with high risk aversion preferred less risky strategies, including less N fertilizer, feed barley in high-protein regions with smaller malting premiums, and later seeding.

Taxon
malting barleye0
Outcome
preferred strategies that were less riskye1
Qualifier
high risk aversione1

Verbatim

e1

“A producer with high risk aversion preferred strategies that were less risky including: less N fertilizer, growing feed barley in regions that have high protein and smaller price premiums for malting, and seeding later”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 968–1186 · show in text ↑
e0

“malting barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 106–142 · show in text ↑

processing · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 7 positive, 4 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

299 papers: 252 positive, 47 negative or no effect

251 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

295 papers more in this group

See all 299 papers →

fertilization · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

550 papers: 473 positive, 77 negative or no effect

472 papers in the same direction as this paper · 66 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

546 papers more in this group

See all 550 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.