The University of Maryland Extension Agriculture and Food Systems and Environment and Natural Resources
Focus Teams proudly present this publication for commercial agronomic field crops and livestock industries.
Volume 6 Issue 7 “Special Research Edition”
Evaluating Benefits and Non-Target
Impacts of Repeated Use of
Neonicotinoid Treated Seed in
Grain Crop Rotations
By Aditi Dubey, Kelly Hamby, and Galen Dively
Department of Entomology, University of Maryland
Neonicotinoids are a class of systemic, broad-spectrum
insecticides that are applied as foliar sprays as well as
soil or seed treatments. The latter treatments are one of
the most convenient and economical ways to protect a
variety of crops from insect damage. Compared to older
classes of insecticides, neonicotinoids have low toxicity
to fish and mammals, and have become the most widely
used classes of pesticides in the US, since their
introduction in the 90s. Seed treatments are a safer and
less invasive way to apply pesticides, minimizing off-site
drift of the active ingredient. They play an important role
in grain crops, as they are used to control soil and
seedling pests on the majority of corn and about half the
soybean grown in the country. They can also be used on
wheat (Figure 1). This is not as common, but usage is
growing. In the mid-Atlantic regions, these grain crops
are typically grown in a crop rotation.
Figure 1. Wheat seeds that have been treated
with Cruiser and fungicide.
Previous research on the effects of neonicotinoids has
shown that seed treatments may improve yield under
high pest pressure; however, treatment decisions are
made before target pest populations are known.
October 23, 2015
Therefore, treatment may not
improve yield over untreated
seed. Repeated exposure to
neonicotinoids could also lead
to insect pests developing
resistance against them.
Additionally, research has
found some negative impacts
of neonicotinoids on beneficial
insects. When neonicotinoids
are used as seed treatments,
the majority of the insecticide
active ingredient leaches into
the soil. Because
neonicotinoids are slow to
degrade, using treated seeds
year after year as part of a
Figure 2. Plot Map. Blue
crop rotation system could lead
is untreated seed, green
to an accumulation of
is fungicide treated seed,
red is Gaucho +
neonicotinoid residues within
fungicide treated seed,
the soil. This could impact the
and purple is Cruiser +
soil microorganism community,
fungicide seed.
which provides valuable
ecosystem services such as improving fertility by
increasing the quantity of nitrogen in the soil. Therefore,
we are conducting a three-year study to better
understand both the benefits and risks of using two
neonicotinoid seed treatments, Cruiser ® 5FS
(Syngenta) and Gaucho 600 Flowable (Bayer)
(thiamethoxam and imidacloprid, respectively) in a 3year grain crop rotation.
The study is being conducted at the Central Maryland
Research and Education Center in Beltsville, MD, and at
the Wye Research and Education Center in Queenstown,
MD. At each site, we are planting four replicate plots of
each treatment using no-tillage practices. Treatments
include: Cruiser and fungicide treated seed, Gaucho and
fungicide treated seed, fungicide treated seed, and
untreated seed (Figure 2). The same active ingredients
will be planted into the same physical location for each
grain in the rotation in each plot every year. Standard
mid-Atlantic seeding rates, varieties, irrigation, and
fertilizer programs are used to achieve plots that best
Local Governments • U.S. Department of Agriculture
It is the policy of the University of Maryland, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station, and University of
Maryland Extension that all persons have equal opportunity and access to programs and facilities without regard to race, color, gender, religion, national origin,
sexual orientation, age, marital or parental status, or disability.
represent mid-Atlantic grain production. We planted full
season soybeans this last growing season and will soon
be planting wheat. We will plant double cropped
soybean in 2016 and corn in 2017.
Figure 4. Pitfall trap set up in soybean field to
capture ground-dwelling arthropods such as
beetles.
Neonicotinoid seed treatments play an important role
in grain crop systems and can be very beneficial.
Although they provide a convenient and economical
ways to protect crops, long-term use of these pesticides
could have undesirable effects. This study looks at the
effects of neonicotinoids in two novel ways. First, we are
not studying the use of seed treatments in a single crop
but are addressing potential cumulative effects over a
back-to-back three-year rotation. Second, this is one of
the first studies to consider the effects of neonicotinoid
seed treatment not on a few select species or a single
type of organism, but on a wide range of organisms,
including soil and plant dwelling arthropods, soil
microbes and winter annual plants. Through this study,
we plan to investigate both the positive and negative
effects of using neonicotinoid seed treatments over
several consecutive years. We hope that the information
we collect will help producers make the best use of
neonicotinoid seed treatments and make informed
management decisions about protecting seeds and
seedlings in a sustainable and cost-effective way.
Figure 3. Sticky card and pitfall trap (with a cover to prevent
entry of water) to capture arthropods in a soybean field.
At each site, the abundance and diversity of
invertebrate communities on plants and in the soil are
determined throughout the season using various
sampling methods, such as sweep-net samples, sticky
cards (Figure 3), pitfall traps (Figure 3, 4), litter
samples, and visual counts (Figure 5). This allows us to
measure both pest and beneficial communities present
in the field. We are also sampling the soil for
earthworms and measuring soil microbial activity to
determine whether neonicotinoid residues in the soil
impacts soil fauna. To see if seed treatments increase
yield by reducing pest damage or increasing plant
growth and establishment, we will measure grain yield
and stand density. The neonicotinoid residue from the
soil may also be taken up by weedy plants, and be
present in pollen and nectar, representing a potential
route of neonicotinoid exposure to pollinators. In winter
wheat, we will analyse for the presence of
neonicotinoids in winter annual flowers, such as
chickweed, which serves as an early spring source of
pollen and nectar for beneficial pollinators. Physical
properties of the soil like carbon, available nitrogen,
mineralized nitrogen, and pH were measured at the
beginning of the study and will be measured again at
the end.
First year funding for this study was provided by the Maryland
Grain Producers Utilization Board and the Maryland Soybean
Board. We would like to thank Maggie Lewis, Terry Patton,
Emily Zobel, and the many undergraduate students who have
helped with sampling this year.
Figure 5. Visual inspection of soybean trifoliate leaf
for insect pests such as thrips and beneficial insects
such as minute pirate bugs.
2
Farm Bill Commodity Elections
Lessons Learned in Choosing
Disease Resistant Corn Varieties
By Howard Leathers, Associate Professor
Agricultural & Resource Economics
&
Paul Goeringer, Research Associate and
Extension Legal Specialist
By Dave Myers
Principal Agent, UME
Lessons learned are sometimes quite accidental.
While working with a local farmer in Anne Arundel
County, it was evident that a particular corn variety was
not performing when it was inadvertently placed in two
row units to finish planting a corn field. Notice the two
rows of poor corn in the picture (Fig. 1). A sample of the
poor performer was sent to the University of Maryland
Diagnostics Lab. The results were conclusive and
reinforce the necessity of choosing the best disease
resistant corn packages, especially when planting
successive corn crops in reduced tillage or no-tillage
systems. The neighboring corn was disease free.
The USDA Farm Service Agency has released results of
the 2014 Farm Bill signups for the three program
options: Price Loss Coverage (PLC), county Agricultural
Risk Coverage (ARC-CO), and individual Agricultural Risk
Coverage (ARC-IC). Information is available here:
http://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-andservices/arcplc_program/index.
State of Maryland results include corn and soybeans
heavily enrolled into ARC-CO, based on the expectation
that high historical yields in those crops might fall back
in future years. Barley went heavily into PLC, based on
the expectation (and USDA projection) that barley prices
would be quite low in future years. Wheat was about
evenly split between PLC and ARC-CO probably based on
county differences in the expected payouts of the ARCCO for that crop.
“Two stalk rot diseases,
anthracnose stalk rot and
Gibberella stalk rot were
confirmed on the "bad" sample.
In addition, there were red
lesions on the roots of this
sample that are suggestive of
pink root rot, which is a
common secondary fungal
pathogen in our area. The
single ear of the bad sample
showed incomplete pollination
near the tip of the ear, but I
saw no evidence of ear rot.”
Excerpted from Dr. Karen
Rane’s Diagnostics Report.
Participation in ARC-IC was very low. It appears that
14 farms in the state opted for ARC-IC; those farms
primarily had base acres in corn, wheat, and soybeans.
FSA publishes the data for calculating benchmark
revenue for each crop in each county on their website
at: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-andservices/arcplc_program/arcplc-program-data/index.
Using county data and national statistics the following
estimations for ARC-CO payments for 2014 are:
− For corn, 5 of the 21 counties with data show
positive estimated payments; the other 16
counties show a zero payment.
− For wheat, none of the counties shows a
positive payment.
− For barley, 1 of the 7 counties estimated shows
a positive payment.
− For soybeans, 4 of the 24 counties estimated
show a positive payment.
For the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program, the
projected payments are zero for wheat, barley, and
soybeans, and 5 cents per bushel for corn. To get a “per
acre” number for corn PLC comparable to the ARC-CO f
multiply the program yield for corn base acres on your
farm by .05 (five cents). So if the program yield on your
farm for corn base acres is 120 bushels per acre, the
PLC payment per acre for your corn base acres would be
120 x .05 = $6 per acre.
Fig 1. Arrow depicts two rows of a susceptible corn variety to
stalk rot diseases, Anthracnose and Gibberella.
Charts and more explanation of calculations are available
at: http://www.arec.umd.edu/extension/cropinsurance/2014-farm-bill.
3
Identifying Palmer
Amaranth
complete control of Palmer amaranth plants also in offfield areas, cleaning of harvest equipment from Palmer
amaranth seeds and if possible collect seed heads prior
to seed set to remove the potential of increasing weed
seeds in infested fields.
By Burkhard Schulz,
Weed Science, University of
Maryland,
bschulz1@umd.edu
The first and often critical step in dealing with Palmer
amaranth is to identify the plants at the seedling stage.
Next would be to design an effective herbicide program
that includes pre-emergence residual herbicide(s) that
can be applied as close to planting as possible.
Palmer amaranth is an aggressive weed of the
“pigweed” family (Amaranthus spp.) that invades more
and more counties in Maryland and poses a significant
threat to our regional cropping systems as it can
overwhelm soybean and corn fields in just a few years.
Already well known as the most troublesome weed in
cropping systems in Midwestern and Southern states,
Palmer amaranth has become established in Maryland
and the Delmarva region. This weed deserves to be met
with a “zero-tolerance” attitude concerning its control, as
it is able to grow and spread with so far unseen speed
and vigor. Seedling growth can exceed 2 inches per day
and a female plant can produce up to a million seeds per
growing season.
Palmer amaranth belongs to the pigweed family
(Amaranthus) and shares a number of characteristics
with other species of this group of weeds. Pigweeds are
annual plants, which grow in open fields with full sun.
They produce a great number of very small seeds
(10,000 to 1,000,000) (Fig. 1), which usually do not go
into long periods of dormancy. They thrive in no-till
cropping systems as their small seeds germinate at the
soil surface. Within the pigweeds we find either species
which have separate male and female flowers on the
same plant (monoecious) or have separate male and
female plants (diecious). Palmer amaranth belongs to
the latter group together with tall waterhemp (A.
tuberculatus) and common waterhemp (A. rudis). This
characteristic can be used as the first hint for the
identification of mature plants. If you find male and
female plants within a pigweed population it is likely that
these plants are either Palmer amaranth or waterhemp.
Both weeds have also smooth and hairless stems and
petioles (short stems that connect leaves with the main
stem). Palmer amaranth and waterhemp share this
feature with spiny amaranth (A. spinosus). All other
pigweeds have hairs on stems and petioles (Fig. 2).
Figure1. Five hundred Palmer amaranth seeds. A female plant
can produce up to one million very small seeds per year.
Figure 2. Hairless stems of Palmer amaranth. Stems of Palmer
amaranth are hairless (left), stems of smooth and redroot
pigweed are covered with hairs (right).
Plants can reach more than 6 feet tall in one season.
Flowering time is from June to September. Growers in
Maryland cannot rely on established weed control tools
as nearly all Palmer amaranth in our region shows
multiple-resistance to glyphosate (Roundup, mechanism
of action group 9) and ALS inhibitor herbicides
(mechanism of action group 2). Especially in soybean
cropping systems the control of Palmer amaranth has to
include coordinated herbicide programs with the
integration of non-herbicide weed control strategies.
Long-lasting control will require a multi-year strategy of
integrated weed management, which includes scouting
and monitoring of fields before and after planting and
spraying, coordinated application of burn-down and
residual herbicides in a timely manner (before Palmer
amaranth seedlings exceed 3-4 in. in height), rotation of
crops and rotation of mechanisms of herbicide action,
The first developed seed leaves (cotyledons) are oarshaped with shorter petioles than waterhemp. Palmer
amaranth has longer, wider seed leaves with a longer
petiole. A very striking identification characteristic of
older plants is the petiole length of mature leaves.
Palmer amaranth has very long petioles that are as long
or longer than the leaf blade. In most cases if one bends
the petiole over the leaf blade it will be longer or at least
as long as the leaf blade. Waterhemp and other pigweed
4
Figure 5. Hair formation on leaf tip in Palmer amaranth. Many
Palmer amaranth plants show a hair on the tip of the leaf.
plants have much shorter petioles than leaf blades (Fig.
3). The shape of the mature leaves is diamond-shape in
Palmer amaranth and oblong lancet-shaped in
waterhemp. Waterhemp plants often exhibit a glossy
surface on leaves and stems as if covered with a thin
layer of oil.
Figure 3. Petiole length of Palmer amaranth. The length of the
petiole of mature Palmer amaranth leaves surpasses the
length of the leaf blades in most cases. This is not true for
most other pigweeds. Palmer amaranth petioles (upper panel)
are longer than the leaf blade, petiole of smooth pigweed
(lower panel) are about half the length of the leaf blade.
Young Palmer amaranth plants show a poinsettia-like
rosette shape with symmetrical leaf arrangement when
viewed from above (Fig. 6). This plant shape symmetry
is not found in other Amaranthus species.
Figure 6. Poinsettia-shaped rosette of younger Palmer
amaranth plant.
Palmer amaranth plants often show a v-shaped white
“watermark” on the leaves. Similar “watermarks”,
however, can also be found in some cases in spiny
amaranth (Fig. 4). However, spiny amaranth has sharp
spines and can be eliminated from consideration based
on that feature. Another characteristic of Palmer
amaranth is a hair formed at the leaf tip (Fig. 5). Again,
this is a feature that is not exclusively found in Palmer
amaranth but has also been observed in some
populations of waterhemp in Nebraska.
Flower structures and seed heads of Palmer amaranth
can be a long as 3 feet and have a diameter of more
than 1⁄2 inch. Some branching occurs in both male and
female flower structures (Fig. 7). Waterhemp will have
somewhat shorter seed heads that are more slender and
branched. All other Amaranthus species have much
shorter and often more compact flower and seed heads.
Female Palmer amaranth flower and seed heads feel
prickly to the touch, whereas male flower structures feel
soft (Fig. 8). Female as well as male waterhemp flower
heads do not have spines and are smooth when
touched.
Figure 4. “Watermarks” on Palmer amaranth leaves. Two
Palmer amaranth plants are shown in a soybean field with
(left) and without (right) the typical chevron-shaped
“watermark” discoloration on the leaf surface.
Figure 7. Flower heads of Palmer amaranth. Palmer amaranth
has male and female flowers on separate plants. The flower
heads of Palmer amaranth are the longest found within the
pigweed family (left panel). Flower heads of other pigweed
species such as smooth pigweed are often more compact and
shorter than in Palmer amaranth (right panel).
5
Figure 8. Female flowers are spiny and feel prickly to the
touch (right), male flower heads are smooth (left).
Researchers identify potential alternative
to CRISPR-Cas genome editing tools
An international team of CRISPR-Cas
researchers has identified three new
naturally-occurring systems that show
potential for genome editing. The discovery
and characterization of these systems is
expected to further expand the genome
editing toolbox, opening new avenues for
biomedical research. The research,
published today in the journal Molecular Cell,
was supported in part by the National
Institutes of Health….
Summary of Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus
palmeri) identification criteria:




Petiole (leaf stem): as long or longer as leaf blade
(bending over test)
Leaves often with chevron-shaped watermarks
Leaves with hair at the tip
Male and female plants separated
Read More at:
http://www.nih.gov/news/health/oct2015/nlm-22.htm
EPA Proposes Changes to Private
Applicator Rule Comment Period
Open Until November 23, 2015
The EPA is proposing to change rules for certification of
private applicators. You can read about it here:
http://www.epa.gov/oppfead1/cb/csb_page/updates/20
15/ct-proposal.html
Agricultural Law Education Initiative
http://umaglaw.org
They have proposed changes to standardize rules across
state borders. This includes:
• Stricter standards
• All applicators being at least 18 years old.
• A CEU being 50 minutes long (it is currently 30).
• Private applicators would need 5 hours of
education every three years.
Read all of the proposed changes in bold here:
http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201508/documents/certification_rule_detailed_comparison_ch
art.pdf
CDMS: Pesticide Labels and MSDS On-Line at:
Comment on the proposed changes at
http://www.regulations.gov in docket number EPA-HQOPP-2011-0183. EPA is accepting comments on the
proposal until November 23, 2015.
http://www.cdms.net/
6
Meet the researchers that authored
your favorite articles in
Agronomy News at the
Fall & Winter Meetings
Mark your calendars now and plan to be
a part of the fall and winter meetings .
See the Attachments!
Southern Maryland Crops Conference
December 1, 2015… 4:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.
Baden Fire Hall, Baden, Maryland.
Register at St Mary’s Extension Office 301 475-4484.
1) 2015 Wheat & Barley Trial
Results
2) Charcoal Rot of Soybean
3) Stagonospora Leaf and Glume
Blotch of Wheat
The 2015 Lambing & Kidding School
December 5, 2015
North Harford High School Pylesville, Maryland.
Agenda and registration form at:
www.sheepandgoat.com
Online registration at:
http://2015lambkidschool.eventbrite.com
Agronomy News
Northern Maryland Field Crops Day
December 10, 2015 … 8:45 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Friendly Farm, Foreston Rd. in Upperco, Maryland.
Register by calling UM Extension Baltimore County Office
at 410-887-8090 or visit our webpage:
http://extension.umd.edu/baltimore-county
A timely publication for commercial agronomic field
crops and livestock industries available electronically in
2015 from April through October. Archived online at:
https://extension.umd.edu/anne-arundel-county/agriculturenatural-resources/agronomy-news
Published by the University of Maryland
Extension Focus Teams 1) Agriculture and Food
Systems; and 2) Environment and Natural
Resources.
2015 Agricultural Outlook and Policy Conference
December 16, 2015 … 8:45 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
Double Tree Hotel, Annapolis, Maryland.
Event registration can be found here:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/the-2015-agriculturaloutlook-and-policy-conference-tickets-18977517265
Submit Articles to:
Editor,
R. David Myers, Extension Educator
Agriculture and Natural Resources
97 Dairy Lane
Gambrills, MD 21054
410 222-3906
Wheat Quality and Marketing Conference
January 13, 2016… 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
DE State Fairgrounds, Harrington, Delaware.
Cecil County Winter Agronomy Meeting
January 27, 2016 … 8:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Calvert Grange, Rising Sun, Maryland.
Contact Doris Behnke at: dbehnke@umd.edu
or 410-996-5280.
myersrd@umd.edu
The University of Maryland Extension programs are open to all
and will not discriminate against anyone because of race, age,
sex, color, sexual orientation, physical or mental disability,
religion, ancestry, national origin, marital status, genetic
information, political affiliation, and gender identity or
expression.
Note: Registered Trade Mark® Products, Manufacturers, or Companies
mentioned within this newsletter are not to be considered as sole
endorsements. The information has been provided for educational
purposes only.
7
Maryland State Wheat Trials 2014-15 Yield Summary Table
Wye
Yield
Entry
USG 3523
Beltsville
Test Wt
Yield
Clarksville
Test Wt
Yield
bu ac-1 lbs bu-1 bu ac-1 lbs bu-1 bu ac-1
80.9 *
55.4
68.5 *
54.9
70.4
Keedysville
-1
lbs bu-1 bu ac-1
lbs bu-1 bu ac
56.0 57.8 *
51.8 69.4 *
SC 1325TM
USG 3895
USG EXP 3756
MAS #49
VA10W-21
9233
SS EXP 8513
Jamestown
Hilliard
MD07W64-13-4
MD04W249-11-7
SY547
SW550
LCS 3211
FSX 866
FSX 860
MAS #46
USG 3404
MAS #37
FSX 867
FSX 862
9522
Shirley
SS 8415
LCS 2564
MD04W249-11-12
FS 850
MDC07026-F2-19-13-4
MAS #51
FSX 869
Newport
USG 3251
USG 3013
EXP 1510
FSX 868
MBX 11-V-258
TN 1201
79.5 *
77.9 *
75.8 *
75.1 *
71.4
74.0 *
74.5 *
77.1 *
73.6
66.9
73.1
69.7
72.2
79.6 *
77.1 *
76.4 *
75.9 *
71.3
71.1
75.5 *
76.4 *
78.4 *
74.0 *
65.6
68.3
77.5 *
66.6
68.3
74.5 *
71.3
77.8 *
72.8
77.5 *
72.3
77.1 *
56.7
76.8 *
53.5
53.6
55.8
55.6
57.9
55.2
54.5
57.0
56.4
56.1
56.9
54.5
55.0
56.4
55.4
55.2
54.2
54.0
56.0
53.3
55.9
54.9
55.4
55.7
57.0
58.1
56.5
57.7
54.0
54.2
51.8
54.1
55.6
55.4
53.8
56.6
54.5
60.6 *
60.5 *
67.2 *
59.4 *
63.9 *
61.6 *
66.3 *
57.4
59.6 *
62.4 *
61.9 *
68.9 *
65.9 *
62.3 *
59.6 *
60.2 *
63.6 *
56.7
58.7 *
63.7 *
57.6
64.1 *
69.5 *
64.8 *
62.0 *
62.6 *
53.7
62.3 *
57.1
59.4 *
58.8 *
61.5 *
61.1 *
54.1
55.7
65.6 *
58.0
52.9
52.9
53.5
52.6
55.4
54.1
54.6
56.3
54.9
54.9
56.2
55.6
54.3
54.9
52.7
53.6
52.4
53.6
53.9
53.2
54.6
52.7
53.6
54.3
55.8
56.2
54.4
55.9
54.5
52.9
53.5
54.1
54.5
54.3
53.9
55.0
53.4
68.1
79.1 *
74.8 *
65.1
69.6
63.0
76.2 *
63.3
69.7
63.6
70.1
71.5
70.7
69.1
na
63.5
68.1
76.2 *
71.5
67.2
66.7
66.8
52.4
74.1 *
70.6
70.6
71.4
65.9
70.6
69.1
71.2
67.0
60.1
70.4
57.7
72.3 *
61.1
55.5
57.2
56.0
55.9
57.1
57.5
57.0
58.6
57.0
56.4
57.3
57.4
57.6
55.8
na
54.9
56.7
57.9
56.3
56.1
56.5
57.9
56.9
57.0
57.2
57.6
56.9
58.8
57.7
56.2
55.0
56.9
57.4
56.6
55.3
57.5
56.4
na
57.3
50.9
na
60.3
na
44.0
61.5
54.9
na
51.1
45.8
47.0
43.8
53.5
52.3
44.9
47.5
50.1
44.8
50.4
41.4
53.5
44.6
48.2
38.1
56.8
51.7
45.4
47.6
39.3
45.8
48.3
50.0
55.6
50.8
49.4
SC 1315TM
MAS #59
GA04417-12E33
MAS #32
MBX 14-S-210
USG 3201
MAS #6
MAS #35
LCS NEWS 13EF171
FS 854
FSX 863
69.4
71.2
72.2
76.2 *
72.0
72.1
75.2 *
76.0 *
69.7
76.2 *
75.9 *
57.6
55.7
58.6
54.6
56.7
58.3
52.5
55.1
58.1
53.7
55.2
54.1
54.8
60.8 *
59.7 *
61.6 *
58.0
60.7 *
67.0 *
56.5
56.0
62.3 *
53.2
54.2
56.0
53.0
54.6
55.7
52.2
54.4
53.9
54.2
55.6
68.7
71.2
58.7
na
66.8
na
56.6
62.0
63.7
67.9
na
55.7
56.8
58.6
na
54.9
na
54.9
56.5
59.1
57.2
na
SC 1342TM
SS EXP 8530
MAS #42S
MAS #45
FS 888
WX 14611
SS 8360
LCS 2141
MAS #53
9552
Featherstone 73 (VA09W-73)
SW 52
SY483
GA03564-12E6
SY474
MAS # 7
VA 11W-106
MBX 15-E-229
Laurel
WX 15733
MERL
USG 3315
GA04434-12LE28
FS 820
MBX 14-K-297
MAS #47
MBX 12-V-251
SS 8340
FSX 861
SS 5205
MD09W272-8-4-13-3
EXP 1502
SY007
Mean
Coefficient of Variation (%)
LSD05‡
75.9 *
76.2 *
75.0 *
77.0 *
72.6
71.2
71.0
71.5
64.1
78.1 *
63.8
68.0
66.2
71.5
65.8
70.7
68.7
67.5
76.9 *
71.2
72.6
72.6
63.9
77.4 *
69.4
68.4
62.0
81.9 *
73.0
65.0
62.7
67.1
69.2
72.3
8.9
54.4
53.6
55.8
55.5
57.2
54.7
55.2
55.6
58.4
55.4
56.7
57.1
54.4
57.5
56.5
55.2
55.3
53.8
53.0
52.5
55.9
57.4
53.8
58.0
55.2
53.7
54.2
55.9
55.0
56.4
58.4
54.6
57.5
55.5
3.4
62.9 *
63.9 *
58.4 *
48.9
54.2
60.3 *
57.0
60.5 *
56.5
59.3 *
59.7 *
56.7
69.9 *
55.4
61.3 *
66.0 *
65.8 *
59.5 *
60.6 *
59.4 *
62.2 *
64.2 *
59.6 *
59.7 *
60.1 *
55.7
60.0 *
69.3 *
57.2
63.2 *
49.7
57.6
52.8
60.4
11.6
53.5
52.9
54.3
54.6
55.6
54.8
54.8
53.2
56.8
53.4
54.9
55.5
53.3
56.5
56.1
53.1
54.4
53.8
53.8
51.1
56.8
54.1
56.1
56.2
55.1
53.0
54.8
56.1
55.2
54.9
55.3
53.6
53.7
54.3
2.9
63.8
64.6
67.4
72.2
68.5
63.9
75.0 *
64.8
67.3
64.3
68.0
73.0 *
62.0
62.5
61.6
51.5
56.1
64.7
43.3
63.7
50.6
51.5
57.2
45.5
56.2
57.8
67.2
36.3
45.1
54.9
53.8
50.9
52.5
63.6
14.0
8.0
2.1
2.4
6.8
†
10.4
Statewide
Test Wt Yield†
Test Wt Yield
Test Wt†
lbs bu-1
52.9
na
52.6
54.2
na
54.4
na
51.1
52.1
54.3
na
56.3
55.8
52.9
50.2
53.4
54.2
51.7
50.8
52.9
49.2
48.9
54.8
54.1
54.9
53.5
52.8
50.9
56.6
52.6
50.9
50.8
50.0
52.5
52.4
54.0
54.9
53.1
69.4 *
68.7 *
67.2 *
66.5 *
66.3 *
66.2 *
65.3 *
64.8 *
64.4 *
64.3 *
64.0 *
64.0 *
63.9 *
63.7 *
63.4 *
63.1 *
63.1 *
62.9 *
62.9 *
62.8 *
62.8 *
62.7 *
62.3 *
62.3 *
62.3 *
62.2 *
62.1 *
62.1 *
61.9 *
61.9 *
61.8 *
61.8 *
61.8 *
61.7 *
61.5 *
61.4 *
61.3 *
52.8
52.8
53.3
53.3
54.4
55.6
53.0
54.4
54.0
54.4
55.0
54.2
53.4
52.6
52.6
53.1
52.5
52.7
52.5
50.5
52.2
55.1
53.5
53.8
54.4
54.1
54.7
54.9
52.0
52.2
51.8
51.6
53.3
54.7
52.3
53.2
53.4
52.8
47.7
52.5
47.3
43.2
52.6
50.9
38.3
53.1
42.8
43.8
52.5
52.9
56.7
53.6
52.9
52.8
53.5
52.5
56.1
53.0
53.6
61.3 *
61.2 *
61.1 *
61.0
60.9
60.9
60.9
60.8
60.7
60.7
60.7
53.3
53.3
55.7
52.7
53.2
54.3
52.2
53.3
55.0
52.9
53.6
56.1
55.0
56.6
56.4
57.3
55.9
56.9
56.1
59.6
57.4
55.9
58.0
56.7
57.1
55.0
55.2
58.4
56.1
56.5
53.8
59.0
58.8
57.6
58.0
57.8
55.9
56.7
58.2
54.6
57.3
59.3
56.8
56.3
56.8
2.3
39.0
36.1
39.8
41.8
43.8
43.6
35.7
41.7
50.4
35.7
45.4
39.3
38.8
45.5
46.0
46.1
43.5
42.0
52.4
37.2
45.7
41.9
48.8
45.4
39.2
42.1
34.7
35.9
47.1
38.1
52.0
38.3
37.8
46.1
16.1
51.6
54.5
54.1
52.2
54.0
49.7
49.4
49.6
53.0
52.3
54.4
53.6
51.2
57.4
55.4
53.4
54.2
50.1
51.8
51.1
52.7
52.0
53.4
54.3
51.0
55.7
53.4
49.5
50.8
53.7
57.7
51.5
50.0
52.8
4.5
60.4
60.2
60.2
60.0
59.8
59.7
59.7
59.6
59.6
59.3
59.2
59.2
59.2
58.7
58.7
58.6
58.5
58.4
58.3
57.9
57.8
57.6
57.4
57.0
56.2
56.0
56.0
55.9
55.6
55.3
54.6
53.5
53.1
60.8
16.4
52.3
52.7
53.5
53.3
54.3
52.6
52.3
52.1
54.2
54.6
55.5
54.5
52.5
54.1
54.0
52.6
54.0
52.3
52.3
51.2
54.5
53.7
53.8
56.6
51.9
53.1
53.5
53.4
52.7
54.1
56.0
54.1
51.7
53.4
4.1
1.3
7.0
3.6
8.0
1.9
All yields and test weights are reported at a 13.5% grain moisture content.
‡
Values followed by * are not significantly different from the leading entry.
*
*
*
*
*
*
Management and Results Notes:
An extraordinarily cold and wet planting and harvest season reduced tillering and raised variability in the
test sites. This increased our coefficients of variance to higher than normal, but the Fishers’LSD05, which
is the test used to separate which means are significantly different from each other, are acceptable.
However, Poplar Hill data were not published, because these data are not representative, due to values
being low and highly variable.
It is notable that as harvest dates progressed from Late June and into the first week of July, variability
increased. There were many rains throughout the state, which tends to and decrease grain test weight
and increase variability. The data exhibiting the lowest variability were those sites harvested earliest,
from the Wye and Beltsville locations, and as such may be considered more representative and with the
greatest ability to detect differences between entries.
Generally, it is recommended for producers to select entries that perform consistently as well as the top
entry across the majority of testing locations. These entries include, but are not limited to: USG 3523, SC
1325TM, MAS # 49, VA10W21, SS EXP 8513, and Hilliard. Choosing these varieties is not a guarantee of
yield, and many other entries could perform similarly to those previously stated under a given
environment and management system. Further, it is recommended for producers planting a new variety
to do so utilizing a relatively small acreage.
Management Summary:
Plant Date
Harvest Date
Tillage
20-Oct
25-Jun
Mi ni mum
9-Oct
1-Jul
Mi ni mum
Fertilization
100 l bs March
45l bs Mar., 45l bs Apr.10l bs Sept, 65 l bs Apr. 50 l bs Mar., 40 l bs Apr.
Weed Control
Harmony
Harmony Extra
9-Oct
2-Jul
Mi ni mum
Harmony SG
6-Oct
7-Jul
Conventi onal
Vol ta Extra
Maryland State Barley Trials 2014-15 Yield Summary Table
Statewide
Wye
Yield†
Test Wt†
Yield
bu ac-1
lbs bu-1 bu ac-1
AMAZE 10 (VA07H-31WS)
67.5 *
56.5
82.3
Atlantic
73.5 *
47.6
99.0 *
FS 501
70.2 *
44.6
88.8 *
FS 950
77.2 *
46.1
103.3 *
Nomini
72.2 *
44.4
94.7 *
Secretariat (VA08B-85)
74.7 *
47.7
96.7 *
Thoroughbred
67.6 *
47.2
84.2
Mean
71.8
47.7
92.7
Coefficient of Variation (%)
31.8
8.5
11.3
LSD05‡
8.4
0.7
16.6
† All yields and test weights are reported at a 13.5% grain moisture content.
‡ Values followed by * are not significantly different from the leading entry.
Plant Date
20-Oct
Harvest Date
25-Jun
Clarksville
Test Wt
lbs bu-1
58.1
48.8
46.1
47.6
45.1
48.2
48.9
49.0
8.3
0.9
Yield
bu ac-1
52.6 *
48.1 *
51.6 *
51.0 *
49.6 *
52.6 *
51.0 *
50.9
12.4
11.2
Test Wt
lbs bu-1
54.8
46.4
43.1
44.5
43.8
47.2
45.4
46.5
8.0
1.0
9-Oct
2-Jul
Tillage
Mi ni mum
Mi ni mum
Fertilization
80 l bs Ma rch
10l bs Sept, 55 l bs Apr.
Weed Control
Ha rmony
Ha rmony SG
More information can be found online at:
https://www.psla.umd.edu/extension/extension-project-pages/small-grains-maryland
Produced by:
Dr. Jason P. Wight, Field Trials Coordinator
Dr. Angus Murphy, Plant Science & Landscape Architecture Department Chair
Mr. Dave Myers, Principal Agent & Program Leader Agriculture, Maryland Extension
Mr. Aaron Cooper, Technician
Mr. Andy Bauer, Undergraduate Research Assistant
Ms. Alyssa Mills, Undergraduate Research Assistant
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance and experience of the personnel of the University of Maryland Research and
Experiment Centers.
Maryland Crop Improvement
Association, Inc.
P.O. Box 581
Preston, MD 21655
Serving Maryland Agriculture Since 1908
Maryland Grain Producers Utilization Board
Charcoal Rot of Soybean
Date Published: 10/16/2015
Author(s): Andrew Kness, M.Sc.
Extension Research Assistant
Nathan Kleczewski, Ph.D.
Extension Plant Pathologist
Charcoal rot of soybean can be a major yield-robber
of drought-stressed soybeans in Delaware. The
disease is caused by Macrophomina phaseolina, a
common soil-borne fungal pathogen that inhabits
much of Delaware’s agricultural soils. This article will
explain how to properly identify the disease, review its
disease cycle, and outline management options.
Disease Identification
Signs and symptoms typically manifest late in the
year when soybeans have reached reproductive
maturity and symptoms usually do not appear unless
plants are heat or drought stressed. Symptomatic
plants generally appear in spots of the field that are
moisture limited, such as high spots or compacted
headlands. Plants may be stunted, wilted, bearing
abnormally small leaves that turn chlorotic and
necrotic but remain attached to the plant. Roots and
stems near the soil surface of infected plants will
appear gray with tiny black specks or dots
(resembling charcoal dust) on the tissue surface or
just inside the stem (figure 1). The presence of black
lines/zones within the stem may or may not occur.
Disease Cycle
M. Chilvers
S. Markell
Figure 1. Internal (top) and external
colonization of M. phaseolina on a
soybean stem. Notice the small, black
specks, which are microsclerotia, a
diagnostic sign of the pathogen. Image
used with permission from University of
Wisconsin Extension [3].
M. phaseolina persists in the soil as tiny black
survival structures called microsclerotia. These
structures are recalcitrant and can survive in dry soil
for over 2 years, but only for a couple of months in
saturated soil [1]. Microsclerotia will germinate in the
spring in the presence of a host. The pathogen colonizes young soybean roots,
typically within the first few weeks after planting. The fungus remains in the plant
throughout the growing season, during which time the pathogen will remain latent and
soybeans will not likely show signs of infection. As the soybeans reach reproductive
stages and soil moisture becomes low and plants become heat and drought stressed,
the fungus starts to grow more rapidly and colonizes the water-conducting tissues of the
plant. This causes wilting, stunting, necrosis, and premature death of entire plants. The
pathogen then overwinters as microsclerotia in the soil or in infected plant debris.
Management
Managing charcoal rot can be difficult due to the fact that M. phaseolina has a host
range of over 500 plant species, many of which are weeds and common agronomic
crops [2]. In addition, foliar fungicides and seed treatments are ineffective at managing
the disease. A combination of good management practices should be utilized that
reduce plant stress and promote healthy soybean growth.
Crop Rotation
Crop rotation has a modest impact on managing this disease because of its survivability
and large host range, which includes most major agronomic and vegetable crops
commonly grown in Delaware (see table 1). Rotating away from soybean for at least
one year may help. Cereal grains are good crops to plant in rotation for managing this
disease, as well as corn and sorghum, as they are relatively poor hosts under normal
growing conditions. Avoid growing soybean or other bean crops back-to-back in
problematic fields.
Table 1. List of common agronomic and vegetable hosts for M. phaseolina.
Common Name
Genus
Mustard
Pepper
Watermelon
Cucumber, muskmelon, and cantaloupe
Gourd, squash, zucchini, and pumpkin
Strawberry
Soybean
Sunflower
Alfalfa
Bean (including snap and lima)
Pea
Tomato, potato, and eggplant
Sorghum and sudangrass
Clover
Vetch
Corn
Brassica
Capsicum
Citrullus
Cucumis
Cucurbita
Fragaria
Glycine
Helianthus
Medicago
Phaseolus
Pisum
Solanum
Sorghum
Trifolium
Vicia
Zea
Irrigation
Charcoal rot has a severe impact when plants become heat and drought stressed.
Therefore, use irrigation if it is available, especially if plants begin to show signs of water
and heat stress during flowering and pod development.
Soil Fertility and General Plant Health
It is important to keep soybeans healthy and reduce the amount of stress as much as
possible. Ensure your fertility levels are optimum, but avoid over-fertilization and high
plant populations, as these conditions will stress plants.
Variety Selection and Planting
There are no soybean varieties that have complete resistance to the pathogen;
however, planting dates and maturity groups can be used in your favor. Early maturing
full-season soybeans (groups II, III, and some IV) are generally more severely affected
by charcoal rot because they are planted earlier and tend to set pods during the driest
part of the summer. Double cropped soybeans flower later and generally avoid the hot,
dry summer weather and thus avoid drought stress that brings on severe charcoal rot
symptoms. Microsclerotia can survive in small cracks on seed, so be sure to plant
certified seed.
Tillage
Tillage practices will have a small impact on this disease, but a no-till or reduced tillage
cropping system can increase soil moisture and reduce drought stress. Be aware that
plowing can bring microsclerotia buried deep in the soil to the surface, which can serve
as inoculum. Compacted soils will exacerbate drought conditions and amplify yield loss
caused by charcoal rot, so consider sub-soiling or other management options to
alleviate or reduce soil compaction.
References
1.
Smith, D., Chilvers, M., Dorrance, A., Hughes, T., Mueller, D., Niblack, T., Wise,
K. 2015. Charcoal rot. Soybean Disease Management. Crop Production Network.
2.
Sinclair, J. 1984. Compendium of soybean diseases, 2nd edn. American
Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, Minn.
3.
Smith, D., Chilvers, M., Dorrance, A., Hughes, T., Mueller, D., Niblack, T., Wise,
K. 2014. Charcoal rot management in the north central region. University of
Wisconsin Extension.
Stagonospora leaf and glume blotch of wheat
Date Published: 10/15
Author(s): Nathan Kleczewski, Ph.D.
Extension Plant Pathologist
Introduction
Stagonospora nodorum blotch occurs frequently throughout the Mid-Atlantic and other
regions where wheat is grown. The disease has the potential to significantly reduce
yields, particularly if the environment favors their development before or during grain fill.
The incidence and severity of Stagonospora blotch has been increasing in many areas
where wheat is grown in a no-till system. Under optimal conditions the disease can
result in losses upwards of 30%. Infection of the head can cause grain to shrivel. This
fact sheet describes how to identify Stagonospora lead and glume blotch in wheat, the
pathogen disease cycle, and management recommendations.
Disease Identification
Wheat plants are susceptible to Stagonospora
nodorum blotch at any time during development.
Often the disease is first detected in the lower
canopy, typically after canopy closure. Over
time, given a proper environment, the disease
may spread to the upper canopy and heads.
Foliage infected with Stagonospora nodorum will
develop light brown lesions surrounded by a
smooth, thin yellow boarder. Lesions start as
small black flecks which expand to oval or, “cat
eyed” lesions (Figure 1). Over time a dark
Figure 1. A typical cats eye lesion
brown or black structure may be visible at the
indicative of S. nodorum. Photo
center of the lesion. Initial symptoms of head
obtained from bugwood image archive
infection start with small gray, purple, or brown
(www.bugwood.org).
spots on the chaff, which often are found on the
upper ½ of the glume. Significant losses may occur If leaves and glumes are affected
before grain fill is complete.
Disease Cycle
Several sources can be responsible for initial infections of tissues by Stagonospora
nodorum. The most common source of the pathogen in Delaware and Maryland is from
infected wheat residue, which serves as an overwintering site for the pathogen. S.
nodorum can survive on wheat residue up to three years. Spores are locally
disseminated by rain or dispersed into the atmosphere, where they may spread several
miles. In addition infested seed lots can be a source of primary inoculum.
Once established, the pathogen produces spores which are dispersed upwards
in the canopy. As a result, the disease often progresses vertically from the lower
canopy to the upper canopy and eventually the heads. Infection requires at least 12
hours of continuous moisture; optimal infection and disease occurs between 68 and
81°F. After infecting a leaf 10 and 20 days are required before spores are produced
from that lesion. Disease progress, lesion development, and spore production stops
during dry periods. Although symptoms can develop throughout the growing season,
older wheat, particularly plants near heading, tend to be more susceptible to the
disease.
Disease Management
Cultural
Tillage to bury crop residue will reduce the amount of inoculum available to produce
spores during the growing and facilitate residue decomposition. Rotation to non-host
crops such as soybean, corn, or vegetables for 2-3 years will help further reduce
inoculum. Avoid planting at excessive populations and applying excessive nutrients as
this promotes a dense canopy and increases the potential for disease development.
Avoid excessive overhead irrigation, particularly if the disease has been detected in the
canopy. Irrigation after flower is not recommended and may facilitate glume infection.
Resistant wheat varieties
In fields with a history of glume blotch, plant varieties with excellent glume blotch
resistance ratings. Resistance to glume blotch is not complete, meaning that it is not a
yes or no resistance reaction. Instead, lesion development may be slower or
sporulation reduced compared to susceptible varieties, resulting in lower overall
disease. Investment in a highly resistant variety with good yield potential can save
growers additional input costs associated with pesticide application.
Chemical controls
Fungicides applied to protect the head and flag
leaf can significantly reduce the effects of glume
blotch (Figure 2). In Delaware, S. nodorum
typically starts to develop later in the season.
Consequently, applications made between feekes
growth stages 8-10.5.1 have been shown to be the
most efficacious. Fungicide profitability is likely to
occur under high yield potential environments (>75
bu/A), in no-till environments, and when wheat is
exposed to persistent rain or irrigation. Several
fungicides belonging to the DMI (Group 3; triazole)
QoI (Group 11- strobilurin) and group 7 (SDHI) are
very effective for managing this disease if applied
preventatively. See the University of Delaware
factsheet on Wehat Fungicide Reccomedations for
Small grains for more information.
Figure 2. Fungicides can significantly
reduce glume blotch. Left, no fungicide,
Right, fungicide applied at heading.
Photo: N Kleczewski