Meadowlark Extension District Agronomy Blog

Author: David Hallauer

Soybean Seed Treatments and Sudden Death Syndrome

It started a couple of weeks back on social media, but weather this week will increase the conversations even more: why wouldn’t I go ahead and put some beans in the ground?

Arguments can be made for and against early planting (another post for another day…), but what does seem consistent on both sides of the argument is: A soybean that emerges and begins to grow quickly generally tolerates disease/insect pressure better than one in cold, damp soils (if it survives – will it thrive?). Seed treatments are often used to help weather those cooler, damper conditions and while they do a great job, they have limitations. One is the active ingredient(s) in the treatment and what they will control. Another is the length of time they can provide some level of protection (approximately three weeks after planting give or take…)

One handy resource is Fungicide Efficacy for Control of Soybean Seedling Diseases from the Crop Protection Network. It provides some excellent information on various seedling diseases.

It also has some excellent information on seed treatments for a disease that infects the soybean plant early, but doesn’t show up until much later: Sudden Death Syndrome or SDS.

Increasingly an issue for NEK soybean growers over the past decade, SDS has shown the ability to survive not only soybean residue and in soil, but on corn residue as well. It survives our traditional rotations quite well and takes advantage of infection opportunities – most often when seedling development is slowed by cool/wet soil conditions. This graphic from K-State Extension Plant Pathologist Dr. Rodrigo Onofre illustrates some of those optimum infection windows:

 

While early planting does give us a better opportunity for SDS infection (that is when it’s typically cool and damp after all…), note that we often need a wet period later to trigger the infection symptoms. Its one of the features that makes SDS management difficult because we never know what we’re going to get from a weather standpoint – from infection all the way to visible symptomology.

Since we don’t know for sure what weather might throw at us, we often have to manage SDS in other ways. Start with the seed. Check varieties for SDS tolerance and use high germination seed when possible.

Good planting practices are also key. Research from the Kansas River Valley Experiment Field showed increased frequency of SDS foliar symptomology in narrow row spacings as compared to wider spacings.

Source: Dr. Rodrigo Onofre, K-State Extension Row Crops Pathologist

Because it’s a fungus, fungicide seed treatments have become popular as well. According to the previously referenced fungicide efficacy publication, there are multiple products labeled for SDS control. Unfortunately, many of the ones we might utilize for other diseases are rated poor for Sudden Death Syndrome – if they’re labeled at all. In fact, only two active ingredients – fluopyram and pydiflumetofen – are rated as very good for SDS control. Fluopyram is the active ingredient in ILEVO. Pydiflumetofen is the active ingredient in Saltro.

In 2023, K-State Extension Plant Pathologist Dr. Rodrigo Onofre tested both products in side-by-side comparisons with other seed treatments comparing all to an untreated check. While all seed treatments provide some positive yield difference, ILEVO and Saltro showed the strongest response.

Further evaluation by Onofre confirmed positive reductions in SDS root rot as well, either with Saltro by itself or ILEVO plus Ceramax, a biological seed treatment being tested with hopes of reducing the variability sometimes associated with seed treatments against SDS.

Soybean Sudden Death Syndrome isn’t a problem for every grower every year, tending to be a greater issue in well-managed soybean fields with a high yield potential, particularly when they have a history of SDS. In some cases, variety selection and planting management will keep SDS from being an issue, but if early planting or if planting conditions are favorable for SDS development, seed treatments could be an option to consider.

For more information on SDS management or K-State trials, contact me. Fungicide Efficacy for Control of Soybean Seedling Diseases are available upon request as well.

Alfalfa (and more!) Insect Management: March 6th

Alfalfa weevil growing degree days are accumulating fast! Come hear from KSU Field Crops Entomologist Dr. Jeff Whitworth as we discuss what to expect from some warm weather this winter plus hear results from product efficacy trials and application best management practices.

We’ll conclude the morning with a Q & A session open to questions about insects in any of our field crops.

RSVP is due March 4th. Hope you can make it!

Farm & Ranch Transition Conference – March 8th!

This graphic from an Oklahoma State publication paints a good picture of the challenges a small business has when it comes to making transitions.

Agricultural enterprise transitions aren’t exactly the same as small businesses, but with statistics (Purdue) suggesting only 55 percent of farms have a written succession plan, it’s not difficult to see how successful transitions could be a challenge.

If you’re looking at a Farm Transition, check out the Farm and Ranch Transitions Conference March 8th in Manhattan. It will be a great day to learn more about farm transition planning from one of the best in the business: Dr. Shannon Ferrell, Ag Law Specialist at Oklahoma State University.

Registration closes March 1. Get signed up today!

Conducting a Prescribed Burn – Are You Planning for Success?

Tis the season for prescribed burns – but there are a lot of questions we should probably be asking first!

  • Is weather right? Do we have enough wind to carry a fire, but not so much its dangerous? Optimum conditions usually occur when wind speeds are between 5 and 15 miles per hour with relative humidities in the 50-60% range and temperatures from 50 – 80. What does YOUR fire weather look like? Check conditions at www.mesonet.ksu.edu/fire/rh .

Here’s an example of the conditions for Friday afternoon, February 23, 2024:

Continue reading “Conducting a Prescribed Burn – Are You Planning for Success?”

Cool Season Grass N Sources/ARC & PLC Resources/KSU Community Visit

Cool Season Grass N Sources

A conversation earlier this week caused me to research brome nitrogen sources. Two things came from that research:

  1. Research suggests surprisingly little difference in brome production from year to year between urea and ammonium nitrate if applied at equivalent rates, but…
  2. …Big differences can occur if we don’t understand and plan for extenuating circumstances!

It’s by no means an exhaustive review (that may come in time…) but here’s a few thoughts if you are comparing between those two sources: https://www.meadowlark.k-state.edu/news/agent_weekly_columns.html

 

ARC/PLC Resources UPDATED!

KSU Economists Robin Reid and Jenny Ifft held a webinar earlier today providing some great information on the upcoming ARC/PLC election process. It expands on what I shared here last week to include additional information on the Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) program available if PLC is your election choice.

Video and handouts can be found at: https://www.agmanager.info/news/recent-videos/managing-risk-arc-plc-and-sco-webinar-slides-and-recording

 

KSU President Richard Linton’s Regional Community Visit – Holton

Next Tuesday evening, Kansas State University President Richard Linton will be in Holton for the next stop of his Regional Community Visits. They’re an opportunity for he and others to share a little about what’s happening on campus while soliciting feedback from the local community about how Kansas State University might enhance the way it delivers on the land grant mission we are charged with. It will be a time for dialogue surrounding university and community connections with a focus on enhancing partnerships in our region.

The visit is Tuesday, February 6th, 5:30-7:00 p.m. at the Courtyard Event Center (426 Pennsylvania). If you can make it, please RSVP (by Sunday, February 4th) at https://kstate.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1zTfD98K78IKPTo  . Additional information can be found at: https://www.k-state.edu/president/initiatives/regional-community-visits/schedule/jackson-county/ .

 

ARC/PLC Decisions – 2024-2025 Marketing Year

Without completion of a new Farm Bill, extension of the 2018 Bill means evaluation of the Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) programs at least one more time. March 15th is the election deadline for 2024 harvested crops (payments would be made in late 2025).

The basic program concepts haven’t changed. ARC is a revenue-based program, combining five years of both marketing year average prices and county level yields multiplied by a factor to determine a revenue guarantee. Payments are made if the revenue guarantee isn’t achieved and capped at 10 percent of the benchmark revenue.

The PLC program is more price-based. When marketing year average prices fall below a reference price, payments are triggered. New for this next year is an increase in selected effective reference prices based on marketing year average price triggers set forth in the original bill.

When evaluating your decision, check out the resources available through the KSU Department of Agricultural Economics. The first is a general program overview sharing reference price changes and statewide program election numbers since the inception of the Farm Bill. It’s a great read to get the evaluation process started and includes links to additional resources as well. Check it out at https://www.agmanager.info/arc-and-plc-selections-2024 .

Two of those links will help you take a deeper dive into program options. One is the tradeoff spreadsheet (example below). This Excel based program graphically illustrates where ARC and PLC will tend to pay and when they won’t so you can see differences in each commodity at a county level.

The second is a series of two papers providing marketing year average price outlooks. One provides predictions from KSU economists and explains in greater detail the background on the predictions. The other has predictions from multiple other sources for comparison purposes.

All of the above can be found on the KSU Ag Economics Farm Bill webpage at: https://www.agmanager.info/ag-policy/2018-farm-bill . Want to hear from KSU Economists about some of what to consider? Check out the Managing Risk with ARC, PLC and SCO: 2024 Tradeoffs and Tools webinar Friday, February 2nd with economists Jenny Ifft and Robin Reid. The 12:00 – 1:00 pm Zoom will cover how current market conditions affect these choices plus tools available to help with your decision. Recordings will be available. Register to participate at: https://www.agmanager.info/events/managing-risk-arc-plc-and-sco-2024-tradeoffs-and-tools .

Fall Armyworm Scouting Results – 2023

On August 11, 2021, an observant local agronomist found armyworm feeding injury in a brome stand in the Meadowlark Extension District. It would be the first of many calls and discussions lasting well into 2022, with damage done to some stands still discernible to this day.

That fall saw some of the heaviest feeding pressure noted in some time because of multiple factors that came together to make a bad thing a very bad thing. Drought that had been slowly spreading from the south and west across the state and reached Northeast Kansas after hay harvest. When armyworms arrived, there wasn’t a lot to feed on. Stands locally were drought stressed and struggling to put on foliage. With that tender forage one of the few things to feed on for miles to the west, combined with a heavy moth flight, stands across the area saw multiple rounds of feeding – and no weather for recovery until winter dormancy set in. Continue reading “Fall Armyworm Scouting Results – 2023”

Perennial Forage Season of Use

The success of cool season grasses in our Northeast Kansas forage systems has made it easy to be comfortable and satisfied with what we have and look no further. Why fix what isn’t broken? In some cases, however, the system might be broken, or at least in need of evaluation.

There are numerous reasons cool season grass stands may not be performing optimally. Weed increases and woody encroachment may have reduced usable acreage. A good soil fertility program takes time and money and correcting a deficient program can be a costly challenge. Some stands simply haven’t fared well after previous grazing/haying pressure, drought, armyworm damage, etc… It may make you consider other forage alternatives. Continue reading “Perennial Forage Season of Use”

Biological Soybean Seed Treatments

The number of biological soybean seed treatments are numerous. Products are typically a fungi, amino acid, bacteria, or combination thereof applied (on seed, in-furrow, or broadcast over the crop) with the hopes of eliciting a yield response. As with any researched products, results can vary significantly, as evidenced in a recent field report from the University of Wisconsin.

Shawn Conley is the University of Wisconsin State Soybean Extension Specialist and part of a multi-state team looking at biological seed treatments in soybeans. His study consisted of evaluation of nine products at 10 sites in Wisconsin during the 2023 growing season. All seeds were pretreated with a common fungicide/insecticide seed treatment with biological treatments then applied according to product label on top of the base seed treatment. Plant populations were done at the V2 growth stage and yield data was collected at harvest.

Continue reading “Biological Soybean Seed Treatments”

A First Look At Row Crop Soil Health Practices

The term ‘soil health’ gets used lots of ways, to the point it can be difficult to define. None of the uses are necessarily wrong, but they might add confusion if you are trying to take a broad look at soil health practices and whether they’re right for your farm.

If you’re trying to get a first look at different practices and how they might change soil health on your farm, consider the Soil Health Matrix Decision Tool. It’s an evaluation spreadsheet put together by 12 regional University Extension partners as part of the North Central Region Water Network (with financial support from North Central SARE) and is designed to provide a way to compare current management practices to the addition of a new or improved soil health practices on your operation. It is not designed to provide an in-depth analysis of soil health measures, but instead a baseline snapshot as to how you might be able to improve soil health with the implementation of various practices.

Continue reading “A First Look At Row Crop Soil Health Practices”

Poultry Litter Considerations

Kansas isn’t necessarily known for its commercial poultry production, but states around us are. The litter produced by those operations can be significant, with some regularly making its way into Northeast Kansas. If you’ve ever considered poultry litter as a fertilizer source, there are a few things to keep in mind as you make your decision.

First, applications are typically made based on Phosphorous (P) levels because of the high P content of most products. Doing so can help reduce surface water contamination potential.

 

Results of analysis of 213 samples of poultry manure from southeast Kansas. Source: https://eupdate.agronomy.ksu.edu/article_new/nutrient-availability-in-poultry-manure-570-2 .

Continue reading “Poultry Litter Considerations”

Woody Encroachment Continues…

The 2024 version of the KSU Chemical Weed Control Guide went live this week One of its sections I reference frequently is the one on weed and brush control options for range and pasture – and for good reason according to statistics from the Great Plains Grassland Extension Partnership. According to this multi-state collaboration, annual rangeland production lost to woody encroachment (in the Great Plains region…) is estimated at over 22 million tons, and on the increase (numbers based on monitoring using satellite imagery with 1990 as the base year).

Continue reading “Woody Encroachment Continues…”

Broomsedge Bluestem – Fertility Management Considerations

There’s a statement in a USDA Plant Fact Sheet on broomsedge bluestem stating: On infertile soils, broomsedge is a long-lived competitor. If your end of year forage management includes pricing or applying fertilizer to a cool season grass stand, keep broomsedge bluestem management in the back of your mind.

Why? Broomsedge continues to be an increasing species of interest in cool season grass stands, and fertility management plays a big role in whether it gets a foothold or not. Other factors contribute as well (harvest management comes to mind…), but because the competitive nature of cool season grasses depends heavily on fertilizer, fertility management, particularly lime and phosphorous, can be a great way to help manage broomsedge to a degree. One example comes from the results of a 2008 study at the University of Missouri evaluating the response of cool season grass (fescue) stands with broomsedge in them to fertilizer applications. Their research showed the addition of fifty pounds of phosphorous per acre plus lime increased fescue stand composition from less than 15 percent to over 35 percent, while slightly reducing the broomsedge composition of the stand. Bottom line: it’s a slow process, but fertilizer can help (Miles et. al, 2008, University of MO):

Continue reading “Broomsedge Bluestem – Fertility Management Considerations”