Prairie cereal growers are producing well below the biological yield potential of their crops, but researchers say closing that gap requires balancing agronomy with economics rather than simply chasing maximum yields.
Speaking at the Manitoba Agronomists Conference, Brian Beres, senior research scientist in agronomy with Agriculture Canada, said that while his discussion focused on wheat, the yield gap isn’t limited to cereals.
“Most cropping systems operate well below what’s biologically possible,” he said.
Read Also
Billions in food waste could be feeding Canadian cattle, researcher says
A University of Lethbridge microbiologist presented findings on alternative feed ingredients at the Alberta Beef Producers research showcase.
WHY IT MATTERS: Understanding the difference between yield potential and profitable yield can help farmers make better decisions about inputs, variety selection and management.
Yield gaps across Prairie crops
Research comparing potential yields with average farm yields suggests the gap remains substantial across several major crops.
For wheat, potential yields can reach about 75 bushels per acre under ideal conditions, while average Prairie farm yields are closer to 48 bu.per acre.
Those differences reflect the interaction of what agronomists describe as genotype, environment and management, often abbreviated as GxExM. Genetics and weather establish the biological ceiling for yield, but management determines how close farmers come to reaching it.
However, Beres said maximizing yield is not always the right target.
Balancing yield potential and profitability
Research suggests farmers should aim to achieve roughly 70 to 80 per cent of a crop’s theoretical yield potential. That range generally represents the point where strong yields can be achieved without the sharply rising input costs required to chase the final portion of theoretical yield.
That balance between agronomy and profitability was also a theme in a presentation at the same conference by Jochum Wiersma, a small grains extension specialist with the University of Minnesota, who examined how management intensity affects wheat yield, protein levels and economic returns.
In field trials comparing different management systems, increasing inputs generally produced higher yields and higher grain protein levels. High-yielding wheat varieties responded most strongly to additional inputs, while lower-yielding varieties showed smaller gains.
Protein levels also rose with higher nitrogen rates, although the economic benefits eventually plateau.
“Quality increases up to about 15 per cent protein,” Wiersma said.
Beyond that level, additional protein provides little additional market return.
Modelling risk and management decisions
Wiersma’s work also explored the economic implications of different management systems. Traditional economic comparisons often assume fixed grain prices and input costs, which can make lower-input systems appear more profitable.
However, farming rarely operates under such predictable conditions.
To better reflect real-world uncertainty, Wiersma used simulations that generate a range of possible outcomes by incorporating variability in grain prices, nitrogen costs, yields and protein discounts.
When that variability was included, more intensive management systems consistently produced stronger expected financial returns than low-input approaches.
The analysis also examined which factors had the greatest influence on profitability. Variety choice and grain price had the largest impact, while management decisions affected returns primarily through their effect on yield.
For Beres, the key is translating research into practical on-farm management strategies, and he says the GxExM framework provides the answer.
“Genetics really do set the ceiling, but management unlocks that potential. If we can do that properly, I really do see this as a frontier, and I think the Canadian Prairies could lead the way.”
Brian Beres
Senior research scientist in agronomy
Agriculture Canada
