 Good morning, and thank you again for having me here at the Virtual Field Day for the Carrington Research and Extension Center. I would much rather be with you right now in a weed field so that we could talk about some of the varieties that are performing well, and I could hear feedback from how things are going from you for your season. In some ways, this virtual format does allow us to show some things that we wouldn't be able to see otherwise, and so I thought I'd share some data that's kind of the visual side of what I would be presenting if we were there in person. What you see on this screen here is a graph that's showing yield on the x-axis here. Starting from left to right, we would have low yield on this end and high yield on the right end. These numbers, this scale probably looks unfamiliar. You see we've only got from minus 0.3 to 0.5. The reason for that is that these are not actual bushels per acre yield values. What I've done here is I've calculated what's called a best linear unbiased prediction for the grain yield over the last three years at the Carrington Research and Extension Center variety trials. This is data that's specific to the trials that are maintained by the Carrington REC over the last three years. The trick is with wheat variety turnover, the way that it is in the marketplace, we can't always calculate a clean three-year balanced mean like some would like to because the turnover is simply too fast. When a new variety gets released, it's important for producers to know what that's like as soon as possible and we don't want to wait for a three-year balanced dataset. What we do here is we can make a calculation that basically allows us to estimate the yield potential of these varieties, their breeding potential, based on the data that's available. This is a technique or an approach that you might have remembered me talking about last year at the Field Day in Carrington because it comes to us from animal science. This is the same type of approach that you would get EBVs or estimated progeny differences or breeding values from cattle if you're looking at a bull catalog. This yield blup is a similar number and it just allows us to use all the data that we've got that's there now and get the best estimate for how to compare these things. Yield on the x-axis down here at the bottom, protein on the y-axis. Going from low in the bottom corner here to higher protein, the further up the chart we go. What do we see? Well, there's a rough negative relationship between yield and protein. We know that higher protein lines have lower yield, higher yielding lines tend to have lower protein. What we can also see is that there are some in the quadrant where if you go right to the middle here at 00, that's exactly the average for both of these traits. Everything this side of that line has higher than average yield and everything higher than that line going across has higher than average protein. It's a part of the graph that's pretty sparsely populated but there are some that break that trend and they do have higher yields and higher proteins. Where do we want to be on this figure? Ideally, we would be in the top right-hand corner. We want high yield and high protein. Where do we want to avoid? Down here in this quadrant is neither yield nor protein. That's a place where we would probably want to avoid. The colors of these dots correspond to the lodging scores. A more red, and you can see the legend up here in the top right-hand corner. In this case, red is high. That's stronger straw. The darker blue is poorer straw. Things like, we can see that with things like Linkert. Linkert is a very strong straw variety. TCG Climax is a strong straw variety. Those are more red. The darker blue things, Faller. LCS Trigger. These are things prosper that have had higher lodging scores over the three-year period that we're looking at here. What are some things that stand out? Well, the things that would be the furthest to the right have the higher yields. AP Murdoch, which was in the statewide trial for the first time last year. LCS Trigger, CP3530, SY Valda. These three lines in particular are things that have come up over the last few years. CP3504, Faller, LCS Canon, Dynagrobolistic. These are things that are in that more comfortable range of higher yields. Now we need to look at the protein factor. In some cases, low protein doesn't necessarily mean poor quality, but it can mean you might be looking at a discount if the yield gets too high. So for Murdoch here, which was a high yielding line in the trials last year, the protein is quite a bit lower. You get on the flip side of that, up here in this corner, in the top left, MN Washburn, lower yield potential in the trials last year with higher protein. But there are also trade-offs here. So what are the other factors we need to consider? Well, if you've heard me talk, you know that we're going to talk about end-use quality milling and baking and diseases. Bacterial leaf streak and fusarium headlight are the two that I would draw your attention to the most. For bacterial leaf streak, I want you to get out your North Dakota variety trial results and variety selection guide in 2019. And I want you to be very skeptical of anything that's got higher than a seven. In the preliminary research that we've done, we're seeing that around a seven is that tipping point where you're going to start to lose yield potential. Luckily for us, LCS Canon is one that's over here in the sort of better part of the graph. That's got a poor bacterial leaf streak score. Other than that, you're looking at most things are going to be pretty okay. With BLS, there's not a lot you can do other than to plant a variety which is resistant to the pathogen as best you can. And so look at that anything higher than a seven, which again, for our standout varieties over here in the right-hand portion of this figure, most of those are pretty safe. Fusarium headlight. If you can be less than a five, you're in really good shape on the rating scales. Anything higher than a seven is where you're really starting to get into pretty dangerous territory. Lines that may not be even controlled with a fungicide. Those fives and sixes are things that your extension plant pathologist is probably going to tell you to protect in a year where the risk is high. So things that are particularly good for FHB might survive a year with low risk. For most of the lines that are in the territory that we've been discussing over here that are kind of standouts for yield, the FHB resistance is mediocre on most of those. There's no red flags in that quadrant of those that we've talked about. And that's again, that's specific to this location. So refer to that guide that we put out every fall to tell you and help guide your decisions on the latest disease data that we've got available. End-use quality. We want to look at three specific things. If you had to only look at three other than the protein content, I would encourage you to get out that same variety trial results and selection guide. Look at the phrenograph absorption, the phrenograph stability, and the loaf volume. Phrenograph absorption measures water absorption. That's a trait that is in very high demand by international customers. Stability is a measure of dose strength. Spring wheats are expected to have high stability. And a good high loaf volume number, the higher the better, is one that the customers are really looking for as well. So if we're looking at wheats in our good high yielding, higher protein areas of the graph here, the yield data is going to vary quite a bit. CP3504, I would say overall is a little bit lower than average quality. However, CP3530, not so bad. Pretty decent actually in the testing that we've gotten so far. That's why VALDA is one that comes and goes depending on the environment. The overall, the water absorption for VALDA is not that great. The stability can be poor for VALDA. And in a lot of cases, that's in environments where we've seen really high yields and the protein can dip down a little bit low. You might be okay with VALDA, you may not be. Generally, this is a little bit below average for milling and baking quality. Our data is limited so far for AP Murdoch, but the first look at that suggests that actually, even though it's down here in the low protein high yield corner of the graph, the functional proteins in that line might be actually pretty decent. The baking quality that we've gotten so far from last year's trials show that that actually has a lot of potential as a high quality line. LCS Trigger, that's your racehorse yield line that has usually pretty very poor protein and very poor milling and baking quality overall. The stability on this is low. The low volume is extremely low. This is one that I would be cautious about that the yield figures and the disease resistance for this line make it pretty attractive. But if the entire Northern Plains were planted to a variety that had the quality profile like Trigger, we would probably see some pushback from our international export customers who are the ones purchasing our wheat. So that's one I would really encourage you to take a good strong look at. And again, there's a lot of data. There's a lot of lines here. This is just kind of the quick view of some of the things that look appealing in these three year yield averages with the data we've got available. But at the end of the day, if you've got questions, send me an email, give me a call and get that extension guide, A574, the annual variety trial results and variety selection guide, because that's going to have the latest quality data that we have available as well as the yield summaries from the three year and the single site averages and also that latest disease information. So that's kind of a look at how things are going. Hopefully we'll have some good field data for this year and some more exciting things to talk about in the winter meeting season. Thank you.