On-Farm Network Reports

Home > On-Farm Network > On-Farm Network Reports

The On-Farm Network is growing, and so is access to trial results! Single site research reports have been organized in the database below, providing detailed information at the farm level, packaged in an easy-to-read document.

Important information for interpreting statistics

There are two statistical tests that are used to analyze On-Farm Network data:

  • Paired t-tests
  • Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

Coefficient of Variation (CV)

This is the statistical measure of random variation in a trial.  The lower the value, the less variable the data.

Confidence Level

For our trials, we use a 95% confidence level. In statistics, the confidence level indicates how certain we are of the outcome of our statistical analysis.

P-value

While a confidence level tells us how certain we are of the results we get from statistical analysis, the P-value indicates if the results are statistically significant. The P-value is a probability that is calculated through the statistical analysis process. A P-value less than 0.05 indicates a statistically significant result, but a P-value greater than 0.05 indicates the results are not significant.

Interpreting Significance

So, if our statistical analysis indicates a significant yield difference, what does that actually mean? A significant yield response (where the P-value is < 0.05) means that we are 95% sure the yield difference resulted from the treatment. Alternatively, if our statistical analysis indicates there is no significant yield difference (where the P-value is > 0.05), then we are 95% certain that the treatment had no effect on yield.

Why are statistics important? Why does significance matter?

Why can’t we just look at differences in yield between treated and untreated strips to determine the effect of a treatment?

Variability in yield is expected from strip to strip across an on-farm trial due to the variability that occurs across a field. So, when we get yields from each of our trial strips at the end of the season, the question is whether those yield differences are simply a result of variability in the field, or, if the yield difference is a result of the treatment/management practice investigated in the trial. We can answer that question using statistics. If the results are statistically significant, we can say that the yield difference between treatments or management practices tested in the trial was caused by the treatment or management practice. If the result is not significant, then any yield difference is likely a result of variability within the field and not a result of the treatment or management practice.

Interpreting Results – An Example

In a soybean double inoculant trial, we test the effect of double vs. single inoculant on soybean yield. Let’s say, for example, the average yield difference between double and single inoculated soybeans for one trial was 1.5 bu/ac. This yield difference will be indicated as significant or not significant. If the yield difference is statistically significant, we can say we are 95% certain that the 1.5 bu/ac increase in yield is a result of the double inoculant treatment. But, if the 1.5 bu/ac yield difference is not significant, then the double inoculant had no effect on yield compared to single inoculant and the 1.5 bu/ac yield difference simply resulted from natural variability across the trial area.

MPSG does not endorse the use of products tested in the On-Farm Network. Although trials are conducted at multiple sites under varying conditions, your individual results may vary.  

Contents of these research publications can only be reproduced with the permission of MPSG.

Filter Reports

Filter the reports in the database table below by clicking the desired Crop, Year, Trial Type, and/or Major Region.  Within the database table, click on any column header to sort the table.  To view a single site report, select the Trial ID to open the single site research report in a new tab.

In the database table below, trials with significant yield differences are highlighted green in the yield difference column. On each single site report, significance is indicated by a ‘yes/no’ in the overall yield results table.

A trial that does not meet the trial requirements, eg. field history, is not included in the overall average for yield difference.

Filter by crop

Filter by Year

Filter by term

Filter by Trial type

Filter by Significance

Filter by Major Region

Filter by Locations

This is hidden do not delete

Year Region Municipality Crop Trial Type Treatments Yield +/- Unit Trial Report
2023 Central Louise Pea Seed Treatment Rancona Trio vs Untreated 0.27 bu/ac 2023-PST02
2023 Northwest Roblin Pea Seed Treatment Rancona Trio vs Rancona Trio + Imidacloprid Insecticide vs Trilex Evergol vs Untreated bu/ac 2023-PST01
2020 Northwest Dauphin Soybean Seed Treatment Evergol+SS vs. Evergol+SS+Allegiance FL -0.6 bu/ac 2020-SST01
2019 Central Westlake-Gladstone Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated -0.5 bu/ac 2019-SST06
2019 Northwest Dauphin Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated 0.1 bu/ac 2019-SST07
2019 Eastern De Salaberry Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.0 bu/ac 2019-SST05
2019 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 1.2 bu/ac 2019-SST04
2019 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 1.9 bu/ac 2019-SST03
2019 Northwest Dauphin Soybean Seed Treatment Evergol, 1x Evergol Energy + Stress Shield, 1x Evergol Energy + Stress Shield + Headsup bu/ac 2019-SST02
2018 Interlake St. Clements Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.3 bu/ac 2018-SST05
2018 Central Grey Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated -0.1 bu/ac 2018-SST01
2018 Eastern Hanover Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 0.4 bu/ac 2018-SST02
2018 Eastern De Salaberry Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated -0.2 bu/ac 2018-SST03
2018 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated -1.6 bu/ac 2018-SST04
2018 Central Grey Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated -0.2 bu/ac 2018-SST06
2018 Northwest Gilbert Plains Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 0.6 bu/ac 2018-SST07
2018 Northwest Ste. Rose Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 0.5 bu/ac 2018-SST09
2017 Southwest Oakland-Wawanesa Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.3 bu/ac 2017-SST09
2017 Eastern Brokenhead Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.3 bu/ac 2017-SST08
2017 Central Macdonald Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.1 bu/ac 2017-SST07
2017 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance vs. Untreated -0.3 bu/ac 2017-SST06
2017 Interlake St. Andrews Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated -0.7 bu/ac 2017-SST05
2017 Southwest Woodlands Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance vs. Untreated 0.4 bu/ac 2017-SST04
2017 Central Cartwright-Roblin Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance vs. Untreated -0.8 bu/ac 2017-SST03
2017 Eastern Brokenhead Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol vs. Untreated 0.6 bu/ac 2017-SST02
2017 Central Glenella-Landsowne Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated 0.8 bu/ac 2017-SST01
2016 Eastern Springfield Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 2.7 bu/ac 2016-SST07
2016 Central Louise Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 0.9 bu/ac 2016-SST02
2016 Interlake St. Clements Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated -0.4 bu/ac 2016-SST03
2016 Interlake St. Andrews Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated 0.2 bu/ac 2016-SST04
2016 Central Portage la Prairie Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated -0.8 bu/ac 2016-SST05
2016 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.6 bu/ac 2016-SST06
2016 Interlake Woodlands Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. EverGol Energy vs. Untreated bu/ac 2016-SST08
2016 Eastern Lac du Bonnet Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 2.6 bu/ac 2016-SST09
2016 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 2.3 bu/ac 2016-SST10
2016 Eastern Ste. Anne Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy vs. Untreated 0.0 bu/ac 2016-SST01
2015 Central Dufferin Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated -1.0 bu/ac 2015-SST08
2015 Central Dufferin Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 1.9 bu/ac 2015-SST01
2015 Interlake St. Andrews Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated 2.0 bu/ac 2015-SST02
2015 Eastern Lac du Bonnet Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 1.7 bu/ac 2015-SST03
2015 Interlake St. Clements Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated 5.3 bu/ac 2015-SST04
2015 Central Morris Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated -1.4 bu/ac 2015-SST05
2015 Eastern Taché Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated -0.6 bu/ac 2015-SST06
2015 Eastern De Salaberry Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated -0.2 bu/ac 2015-SST07
2015 Interlake St. Andrews Soybean Seed Treatment Cruiser Maxx Vibrance Beans vs. Untreated 2.6 bu/ac 2015-SST10
2015 Eastern De Salaberry Soybean Seed Treatment EverGol Energy + Stress Shield vs. Untreated -0.1 bu/ac 2015-SST09