Finalists for the 2015 WI Soybean Yield Contest are Announced

The 2015 growing season proved to be a unique challenge for many WI soybean growers.  Given these widespread challenges however, we again experienced great interest in the 2015 WSA/WSMB Soybean Yield Contest.  The top two entries in each division (in no particular order) were:

Division 4: 

• Jon Riley, Darlington (planted Asgrow AG2433)
• Dale and Kevin Bahr, Belmont (planted Asgrow AG2535)

Division 3:

• David Wilkens, Random Lake (planted NK S20-T6 Brand)
• Derek Yanke, Loganville (planted NK S20-T6 Brand)  

Division 2:

• Jim Salentine, Luxemburg (planted Steyer 1140L) 
• Craig Oehmichen, Abbotsford (planted Asgrow AG1431) 

Division 1: 

• David Lundgren, Amery (planted Cropland R2C1494) 
• Jerry Koser, Almena (planted DuPont Pioneer 91M10)

The final ranking and awards will be presented at the 2016 Corn Soy Expo to be held at the Kalahari Convention Center, Wisconsin Dells on Thursday February 4^th during the WSA/WSMB annual meeting.

The contest is sponsored by the WI Soybean Program and organized to encourage the development of new and innovative management practices and to show the importance of using sound cultural practices in WI soybean production.

For more information please contact Shawn Conley, WI State Soybean Specialist at 608-262-7975 or spconley@wisc.edu

Start Managing for Fusarium Head Blight Now Before You Plant the 2015/16 Crop

By Shawn P. Conley and Damon Smith

The 2014 and 2015 WI winter wheat crops both endured significant Fusarium head blight (FHB or scab) incidence as well as mycotoxin (vomitoxin) dockage and outright rejections. Here are a few considerations for managing FHB before the 2015/16 crop even goes into the ground.

1.      Crop rotation matters. Data from our long-term rotation studies indicate that wheat following soybean provides the greatest yields. The next best options are wheat following corn silage (6.5% less) then corn for grain (21% less). Wheat following alfalfa or another leguminous crop are also good options, though the N credits following alfalfa may best be served going to corn. Furthermore, background fungal pressure (residue on and in soil) from the FHB fungus will be greater following corn then soybean or another legume, however know that spores that infect your wheat crop can arrive from  outside the field. Please click to see more information on the Top 8 Recommendations for Winter Wheat Establishment in2015.  

2.      Variety selection matters. Data from our 2015 WI Winter Wheat Performance Test shows variable yield and disease performance among the varieties listed. Select those varieties that have both good to excellent FHB resistance and high yield. When evaluating FHB resistance, low numbers for both FHB incidence and severity can be helpful, but the major focus should be placed on FHB incidence (measure of the number of FHB-symptomatic plants in a stand).

3.      Application timing matters. One of the biggest challenges year in and year out is improper fungicide application timing. Our data suggests that on susceptible (Hopewell) or moderately susceptible varieties (Kaskaskia) equal efficacy of the fungicide Prosaro at a rate of 6.5 fl oz/acre can be achieved when applied between Feekes 10.5.1 (anthesis) and 5 days after anthesis. Given the variability of head emergence and anthesis across a landscape it may prove best to wait a few days until the whole field is flowering than to apply too soon.  If the extruded anthers have turned from yellow to white across the whole field then you are likely too late. Remember it roughly takes a wheat head 7 days to completely self-pollinate.

Fusarium head blight incidence ratings for four soft red winter wheat varieties treated with Prosaro SC fungicide at 6.5 fl oz/a at anthesis (Feekes 10.5.1), five days after anthesis, or not treated in Wisconsin in 2015.
	Hopewell (Susceptible)	Kaskaskia (Moderately Susceptible)	Pro 200 (Moderately Resistant)	Sunburst (Moderately Resistant)
Prosaro SC @ 6.5 fl oz/a (Feekes 10.5.1)	9.5b	2b	0.5	4
Prosaro SC @ 6.5 fl oz/a (5 days after Feekes 10.5.1)	7.5b	5.25b	2.75	2.75
Non-treated control	31.25a	17.5a	3	1.5
Pr>F	0.01	0.01	ns	ns
LSD	6.44	6.44	ns	ns

4.      Choose the right fungicide class. Make sure you use the appropriate fungicide product and class to manage FHB. The label for products containing strobilurin active ingredients (FRAC group 11) ends prior to flowering. Late application can actually lead to increased mycotoxin levels. Triazole containing products (FRAC group 3) are recommended for FHB control. For a list of products and efficacy ratings, visit the Field Crops Fungicide Information Page. 

5.      Harvest timing and flash drying. The word on the street is that in 2016 elevators will push growers to harvest early (18% moisture or higher) and subsequently dry grain to mitigate mycotoxin levels. While drying grain to 13% or less moisture is a good storage practice, know this process may kill the pathogen but any mycotoxin levels already in the grain will not dissipate. Vomitoxin is a very stable molecule and IS NOT degraded by heat, freezing, or drying.     

The Nebulous of Non-Nodulating Soybean in 2015 and Again in 2016 and Again in 2017

I have received a deluge (pun intended) of questions regarding the overall lack of soybean nodulation and general pale green coloration of the crop. As a doctor....well Ph.D....I prescribe less rain, sunshine, and call me in two weeks if the problem still exits... Outside of this obvious issue here are the four most common questions I have received and my responses for your consideration.

1. Why is nodulation such a problem this year? Abiotic stress such as low pH (≤ 6.0), saturated or droughty soils and cool soil temperatures can negatively impact nodulation (Valentine et al. 2011). Duzan et al. (2004) reported that root hair deformations (a physiological precursor to rhizobia infection and nodulation) was 64 and 82% of the control when rhizosphere (root zone) temperatures were 59 and 63 degree F when compared to 77 degrees F. This suggests that the cool soil temperatures we have been experiencing have likely limited the infection sites available for nodulation to occur. This effect has likely been exacerbated in no-till or compacted conditions. In short less nodulation sites on the roots means increased likelihood for less nodules.  
2.  I double inoculated my soybeans on virgin ground and my nodule count is really low? First, please refer to #1 above regarding abiotic stress on soybean nodulation. Secondly remember to read and follow the application, compatibility, and planting timing of inoculants. In reading through various inoculant labels today, I saw everything from ‘not tested’ to ‘not compatible to plant within hours to weeks to months of application’. Lastly remember there is a poor correlation between nodule number and N2 fixation, so don't get overly concerned about nodule count; it is nodule efficiency that matters and you can’t measure that by counting. In short, read the labels and make sure everything is compatible and your application and planting window is adequate prior to purchasing the product.
3. How long will soybeans continue to put on new nodules? Dr. Purcell indicated that they can measure very active N2 fixation almost until the end of seedfill (personal communication). Given the normal life span of an active nodule is 4-5 weeks, this would suggest that soybean will continue to put on new nodules (if the environment is conducive and rhizobia are present) until R6 soybean (late pod fill).   
4. Should I apply nitrogen to these poorly nodulating soybeans, and if so, how much? My general answer is no and none. First of all, the application of nitrogen to soybean beyond a "starter" rate (≤~30 pounds) will lead to a rapid and dramatic inhibition of N fixation (Sinclair, 2004). Though it does not appear that the applied nitrogen is directly damaging to the N fixation machinery (nodules), it will reduce or stop fixation. If the soil NO3 levels drop, then N fixation can resume in about a week (Sinclair, 2004). Over-application of N will shut down whatever rhizobia is actively working. Furthermore, our 2014 and 2015 data shows that a soybean plant takes up 3.75 pounds of N in above-ground tissue per bushel of grain. So a 80 bu/a crop removed 302 pounds of N/a. This does not account for below-ground uptake or nitrogen loss and efficiency from the applied nitrogen. In short, that is tough math to get a positive ROI on. 

Literature cited:


Gaspar, A., C. Laboski, S. Naeve, and S.P. Conley. 2017. Dry Matter and Nitrogen Uptake, Partitioning, and Removal across a Wide Range of Soybean Seed Yield Levels. Crop Sci. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2016.05.0322 

Dr. Larry Purcell (personal communication 7/16/15)

H. M. Duzan, X. Zhou, A. Souleimanov and D. L. Smith*. 2004.Perception of Bradyrhizobium japonicum Nod factor by soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] root hairs under abiotic stress conditions. Journal of Experimental Botany, Vol. 55, No. 408, pp. 2641–2646, December 2004 doi:10.1093/jxb/erh26

Sinclair, 2004. Improved Carbon and Nitrogen Assimilation. "In: Soybeans: Improvement, Production, and Uses." Third Edition. Agronomy No.16. Edited by H.R. Boerma and J.E. Specht. 

Valentine, A., V. Benidito, and Y Kang. 2011. Legume Nitrogen Fixation and Soil Abiotic Stress: From Physiological to Genomics and Beyond. Annual Plant Reviews. 42:207-248.

Soybean Flowers, Glyphosate Label, and Wheel Track Damage...Oh My!

We saw the first soybean flowers of the year yesterday at the Arlington Ag Research Station. As we enter the soybean reproductive growth phase there are a few things to keep in mind. The first is that soybean will produce flowers for ~3 to five weeks, depending upon planting date and environment. During that time soybean will abort anywhere from 20 to 80% of the flowers that they produce. Generally it is the first and last flush of flowers produced that are most likely to be aborted.

R1 soybean growth stage

Next, the timing window for glyphosate applications in our early planted soybean is quickly closing. Glyphosate labels indicate that applications can be made through R2 or full flower. The R3 growth stage begins when one of the four top nodes with a fully developed leaf has a 3/16 inch long pod. Applications made after the R3 stage begins are off-label applications. On average it takes ~ 4 days to move from R1 (beginning flower) to R2 (full flower) and ~10 days from R2 to the start of R3 (beginning pod).

Last but not least, wheel track damage made from ground applications may start to reduce yield. Sprayer wheel traffic from first flower (R1) through harvest can damage soybean plants and reduce yield (Hanna et al. 2008). Our research suggests that an adequate soybean stand (more than 100,000 plants per acre) planted in late April though mid-May can compensate for wheel tracks made when a field is sprayed at R1. Yield loss can occur, however, when wheel tracks are made at R1 or later in thin soybean stands (less than 100,000 plants per acre) or late planted soybeans. Regardless of stand, plants could not compensate for wheel tracks made at R3 (early pod development) or R5 (early seed development). The average yield loss per acre is based on sprayer boom width (distance between wheel track passes). In our trials yield losses averaged 2.5, 1.9, and 1.3% when sprayer boom widths measured 60, 90, and 120 foot, respectively. Multiple trips along the same wheel tracks did not increase yield loss over the first trip.

Spraying soybean at the R1 crop growth stage

Wheel track damage to drilled soybean at R1

Hanna, S., Conley, S. P., Shaner, G., and Santini, J.  2008.  Fungicide application timing and row spacing effect on soybean canopy penetration and grain yield.  Agronomy Journal: 100:1488-1492.

A Tank Full of Sugar Helps the Profits Go Down

While in attendance at the 2015 Commodity Classic I was a bit dismayed at the number of featured speakers expounding upon the incredible in-season benefits of applying sugar to field crops. I have been sitting on this article for a few months now waiting for the right time to relaunch the below article originally entitled "Do Foliar Applications of Sugar Improve Soybean Yield".  I waited a bit too long as my colleagues at the University of Nebraska beat me to the punch with their articles linked here "Sugar Applications to Crops - Nebraska On-Farm Research Network Results" and "Research Results: Sugar Applications to Crops". I guess I shouldn't feel too bad though as this is the first time the Corn Huskers have beat the Badgers in anything for a long time....  

***UNL article spoiler alert*** In short the University of Nebraska team did not find a consistent yield increase in corn or sorghum and averaged 0.8 bu per acre in soybean (FYI: average cost of ground application in $7.55 and aerial is $10.60; 2015 Iowa Farm Custom Rate Survey and the average yield loss caused by sprayer wheel track damage in soybean in rows less than 20 inches is 1.9 or 1.3% with a 90 or 120 foot boom, respectively).

I also want to give credit to my colleague Chad Lee also wrote a nice article entitled "Could Sugar Help Drought Stressed Corn?" that discusses sugar rates, biological activity and actual costs of product. 

I am certain this article will stir up severe indignation, however when the local cash bids are averaging $8.88 ROI is more important than ever.   

Do Foliar Applications of Sugar Improve Soybean Yield (Originally published: June 14th, 2011)

High commodity prices have led growers to consider many novel soybean inputs. One input that has garnered considerable attention is the foliar application of sugar products to increase soybean yield. The objective of this research was to evaluate soybean yield in response to various sources of foliar-applied sugar across four states in the Midwest. Field research studies were conducted at Arlington, Wisconsin; Urbana, Illinois; St. Paul, Minnesota; and West Lafayette, Indiana in 2010.The four sources of sugar evaluated in this study were:

1.     granulated cane sugar

2.     high fructose corn syrup

3.     molasses

4.     blackstrap molasses.

All treatments were applied at the equivalent rate of 3 lb sugar a^-1 and applied at 15 to 20 gal a^-1. The treatments consisted of an untreated check, all four sources of sugar applied at V4, granulated cane sugar and blackstrap molasses applied at R1, granulated cane sugar applied at V4 and R1, and blackstrap molasses applied at V4 and R1.

No positive or negative (phytotoxic) effects were visually observed on the soybean foliage at any location within 10 days following foliar applications (data not shown). Furthermore, sugar did not increase soybean yield within location (data no shown) or across locations [P = 0.60 (Figure 1)], regardless of source. While this study cannot conclusively prove foliar applications of sugar will not increase soybean yield, the authors conclude that other management strategies to improve soybean yield should take precedence over applying sugar.

 

The source of this data is:

Furseth, B. J., Davis, V., Naeve, S., Casteel, S., and Conley, S. P. 2011. Soybean Seed Yield Was Not Influenced by Foliar Applications of Sugar. Crop Management. Accepted: 6/1/11.  

Please visit: http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/sub/cm/brief/2011/sugar/ to view the entire manuscript.