Don’t let Fusarium Head Blight Keep You Down – Prepare Now to Harvest Those Scabby Wheat Fields

/in , , , /by
Damon L. Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, University of Wisconsin-Madison
Shawn P. Conley, Extension Soybean and Small Grains Agronomist, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Figure 1. FHB on some wheat heads. Note the bleached and reddened appearance of infected kernels.

Fusarium head blight (FHB) or scab has been observed at moderate to high levels in some Wisconsin winter wheat fields this season. Incidence and severity have been variable by location, susceptibility of the wheat variety, and if a fungicide was applied at or shortly after anthesis. Generally, we have observed more FHB in the southern and south-central wheat growing areas of the state, but it can be found just about everywhere we have visited this year. It is important to scout your maturing wheat crop and consider how much damage from FHB might be in a field as you prepare for harvest. While FHB can cause direct yield loss, the fungus that causes this disease can also produce deoxynivalenol (also known as DON or vomitoxin). Assessing wheat fields now can assist you in determining how much vomitoxin might be expected at harvest. However, it is possible to find high levels of vomitoxin in finished grain, even if FHB levels where low.

What does scab look like? Diseased spikelets on an infected grain head die and bleach prematurely (Fig. 2).  Healthy spikelets on the same head retain their normal green color.  Over time, premature bleaching of spikelets may progress throughout the entire grain head.  If infections occur on the stem immediately below the head, the entire head may die.  As symptoms progress, developing grains are colonized causing them to shrink and wrinkle.  Often, infected kernels have a rough, sunken appearance, and range in color from pink or soft gray, to light brown. As wheat dries down, visual inspection of heads for scab will become more difficult.

Figure 2. Fusarium head blight of winter wheat

Why is identifying scab important? Scab identification is important, not only because it reduces yield, but also because it reduces the quality and feeding value of grain.  In addition, the FHB fungus may produce mycotoxins, including DON or vomitoxin, that when ingested, can adversely affect livestock and human health.  The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has set maximum allowable levels of DON in feed for various animal systems, these are as follows: beef and feedlot cattle and poultry < 10ppm; Swine and all other animals < 5ppm. In addition, local grain elevators test for DON and discount loads of grain for unacceptable levels of the mycotoxin. Be sure to check with your local elevator about their thresholds for docking grain and discount schedule based on the level of DON detected BEFORE you bring a load for delivery.

What should I do to prepare for wheat harvest?

  1. Scout your fields now to assess risk. Wheat is maturing rapidly. As maturity progresses it will be increasingly difficult to assess the incidence and severity of the infection. Understanding a field’s risk will help growers either field blend or avoid highly infected areas so entire loads are not rejected.
  2. DO NOT spray fungicide now. Research has demonstrated that the window of opportunity to manage FHB with fungicides is at the beginning of anthesis and only lasts about 7 days. Applications later than 7 days after the start of anthesis are not effective in controlling FHB. In addition, most fungicide labels do not allow a pre-harvest interval (PHI) suitable for a late application on wheat. Any application now would be off-label.
  3. Adjust combine settings to blow out lighter seeds and chaff. Salgado et al. 2011 indicated that adjusting a combine’s fan speed between 1,375 and 1,475 rpms and shutter opening to 90 mm (3.5 inches) resulted in the lowest discounts that would have been received at the elevator due to low test weight, % damaged kernels, and level of the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol (DON; vomitoxin) present in the harvested grain.
  4. Know your elevators inspection and dockage procedure and discount schedule (each elevator can have a different procedure and discount rate).
  5. Scabby kernels does not necessarily mean high DON levels and vice versa. For example, in a 2014 fungicide evaluation very low visible levels of FHB were observed for all treatments. However, when the finished grain was tested for DON, significant levels were identified for all treatments. Be sure to test and know what levels of DON are in your grain even if you didn’t see a high level of visible disease. Also, don’t assume that because a fungicide was used, there will be no DON.
  6. DON can be present in the straw so there is concern regarding feeding or using scab infected wheat straw.  DO NOT use straw for bedding or feed from fields with high levels of scab (Bissonnette et al., 2018; Cowger and Arellano, 2013). If in doubt, have the straw tested for DON levels.
  7. Do not save seed from a scab-infected field. Fusarium graminearum can be transmitted via seed. Infected seeds will have decreased growth and tillering capacity as well as increased risk for winterkill.
  8. Do not store grain from fields with high levels of scab.  DON and other mycotoxins can continue to increase in stored grain.
  9. Harvest in a timely fashion to minimize elevator discounts and balance dockage due to FHB. Click here to read about some recent research on optimizing harvest timing in winter wheat.
  10. For more information on Fusarium head blight click here.

References

  1. Bissonnette, K.M., Kolb, F.L., Ames, K.A., and Bradley, C.A. Effect of Fusarium head blight management practices on mycotoxin accumulation of wheat straw. Plant Dis. 102:1141-1147.
  2. Cowger, C., and Arellano, C. 2013. Fusarium graminearum infection and deoxynivalenol concentrations during development of wheat spikes. Phytopathology 103:460-471.
  3. Salgado, J. D., Wallhead, M., Madden, L. V., and Paul, P. A. 2011. Grain harvesting strategies to minimize grain quality losses due to Fusarium head blight in wheat. Plant Dis. 95:1448-1457.

Wisconsin Corn Tar Spot Update – July 3, 2019

/in , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Figure 1. Tarspotter risk predictions for the state of Wisconsin on July 3, 2019.

Figure 1 shows the calculated risk from Tarspotter for July 3, 2019, for various locations in Wisconsin. Figure 2 shows the risk for locations in southern and south-central Wisconsin. As you can see, the present risk remains generally high for tar spot development in all locations examined. This is due to the fact that the weather continues to be relatively wet and humid for the past 30 days across the entire state. Tar spot is favored by persistent temperatures between 60 and 70 F and high relative humidity averaging above 75% for a 30-day period. We have been right in the zone for conducive conditions for this disease.

We have also spent the last few days scouting corn in Walworth Co., Grant Co., and Lafayette Co. Some of these fields are planted to known tar spot-susceptible hybrids and planted in fields with a history of the disease. We have been unable to find any symptoms of tar spot. Fields generally look disease free with just a bit of Anthracnose, which is common this time of year.

The Recommendation

Figure 2. Tarspotter risk predictions for southern Wisconsin on July 3, 2019.

While weather continues to be conducive for tar spot, evaluate the likelihood that tar spot might develop early in your field. Remember, if you have no history of the disease, then the likelihood of local inoculum being present is low. Saving the fungicide application for later in the season might be a better option. If you have a history and you know you have a susceptible hybrid coupled with a no-till situation, then the risk is higher and you need to evaluate the economics of doing an application of fungicide as early as V6. Remember, if you do a V6-V8 application of fungicide, conditions could stay conducive later in the season for tar spot. Those early applications will “burn out” by the time the tasseling period rolls around. So if you do put a fungicide spray on at V6, you might have to come back at VT with another application to protect plants during the reproductive phase, should we stay in favorable conditions for tar spot. Keep an eye on the weather and keep scouting!

More Tar Spot Information

  1. Tar spot Fact sheet
  2. Short Tar Spot Video
  3. Tar Spot Webinar 
  4. Corn Fungicide Efficacy Table

July in Wisconsin, Time to Think About White Mold Risk In Soybeans

/in , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Shawn Conley, Extension Soybean and Small Grains Agronomist, Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Roger Schmidt, Nutrient and Pest Management Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Paul Mitchell, Extension Economist, Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Figure 1. Apothecia, small mushroom-like structures of the white mold fungus that give rise to spores, which infect soybean flowers

In Wisconsin, the first week of July brings us a heightened awareness of white mold in soybeans, and its management. In 2017 we had one of the most epic white mold epidemics on record. While 2018 wasn’t quite as significant of a white mold-year, we did have significant pockets of the disease in Wisconsin. With the late planting and cool, wet weather we have had in 2019, are we in for a bad white mold year? Yes, I think it could be possible.

Weather in 2017 was incredibly cool for the majority of the time. This had two effects which were responsible for the extreme white mold epidemic in 2017. First, soybeans moved extremely slow through each growth stage. This meant that the flowering window went on for about twice as long as normal for many of the varieties of soybeans we grow here in Wisconsin. This extended flowering period resulted in an extended period of time that soybeans were susceptible to infection. Remember that the white mold fungus infects soybeans through open and senescing flower, by spores that are born from small mushroom-like structures called apothecia (Fig. 1). This extended bloom period meant that the window of opportunity for the fungus was also extended. Couple this with the fact that those same cool conditions were also optimal for the fungus to infect and grow. It was a double whammy in 2017.

Weather in 2018 was warmer, before and during bloom.  This pushed soybean plants through growth stages quickly, leaving them less susceptible to infection by the white mold fungus impaired to 2017. The warmer weather was also less conducive for the fungus. Thus, we saw only pockets of white mold in 2018.

This brings us to 2019. Now we might be rotated back into fields that had high white mold pressure in 2017. This means there is a lot of inoculum potential in fields where soybeans are planted this season. The wet and cool spring has delayed planting, pushing soybean growth stages back. Cooler temps will also slow soybean development. This means that soybeans may be at very susceptible growth stages, longer and later in the season. This could set us up for significant white mold, but we need to pay attention to what the weather is doing as soybeans move through the flowering growth stages.

Predicting White Mold

Figure 2. Sporecaster predictions for selected non-irrigated locations in Wisconsin for July 1, 2019.

The flowering growth stages are a critical time to manage white mold in-season. You can view a fact sheet and video on the subject. As you probably know, timing in-season fungicide sprays at the correct time during the soybean bloom period can be extremely difficult. To help solve this decision-making issue, models were developed at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in conjunction with Michigan State University and Iowa State University to identify at-risk regions which have been experiencing weather favorable for the development of white mold apothecia. These models predict when apothecia will be present in the field using combinations of 30-day averages of maximum temperature, relative humidity, and wind speed. Using virtually available weather data, predictions can be made in most soybean growing regions. To facilitate precise predictions and make the model user-friendly, we have launched the Sporecaster smartphone application for Android and iPhone.

The purpose of the smartphone app is to assist farmers in making early season management decisions for white mold in soybean. The best time to spray fungicides for white mold is during flowering (R1 and R3 growth stages) when apothecia are present on the soil surface.

Sporecaster uses university research to turn a few simple taps on a smartphone screen into an instant forecast of the risk of apothecia being present in a soybean field, which helps growers predict the best timing for white mold treatment during the flowering period.

University research has indicated that the appearance of apothecia can be predicted using weather data and a threshold of percent soybean canopy row closure in a field. Based on these predictions and crop phenology, site-specific risk values are generated for three scenarios (non-irrigated soybeans, soybeans planted on 15″ row-spacing and irrigated, or soybeans planted on 30″ row-spacing and irrigated). Though not specifically tested we would expect row-spacings of 22 inches or less to have a similar probability response to fungicide as the 15 inch row-spacing.

Figure 3. Sporecaster predictions for selected irrigated locations with soybeans planted to 30″ row-spacing in Wisconsin for July 1, 2019.

The Sclerotinia apothecial models that underlie the Sporecaster prediction tool have undergone significant validation in both small test plots and in commercial production fields. In 2017, efficacy trials were conducted at agricultural research stations in Iowa, Michigan, and Wisconsin to identify fungicide application programs and thresholds for model implementation. Additionally, apothecial scouting and disease monitoring were conducted in a total of 60 commercial farmer fields in Michigan, Nebraska, and Wisconsin between 2016 and 2017 to evaluate model accuracy across the growing region. Across all irrigated and non-irrigated locations predictions during the soybean flowering period (R1 to early R4 growth stages) were found to explain end-of-season disease observations with an accuracy of 81.8% using the established probability thresholds now programmed in the app.

Not only can users run predictions of risk during the soybean bloom period for any field, you can also set up visual maps to look at multiple sites simultaneously. An example for the state of Wisconsin can be found in figure 2, which represents risk for July 1, 2019 for non-irrigated soybeans. Figure 3 illustrates statewide risk for irrigated sites with soybeans planted to 30” row-spacing for July 1, 2019.  Currently, if soybeans are flowering, risk is moderate in the southern third of Wisconsin for non-irrigated soybeans. Risk is high in the central and northern tiers of the state. For irrigated soybeans planted to 30″ row-spacing, risk is high in the southern and central portions of the state. Areas in the far north have reasonably low risk. Fields planted to narrower row-spacing, under irrigation would be at higher risk than that represented by figure 3. Check back to this blog regularly as I will post maps like these with interpretation of risk for Wisconsin as we move through the season.

What to Spray for White Mold?

If you have decided to spray soybeans for white mold, what are the best products to use? Over the last several years we have run numerous fungicide efficacy trials in Wisconsin and in conjunction with researchers in other states. In Wisconsin, we have observed that Endura applied at 8 oz at the R1 growth stage performs well. We have also observed that the fungicide Aproach applied at 9 fl oz at R1 and again at R3 also performs comparably to the Endura treatment. Other fungicide options also include Omega and Proline. You can view results of past fungicide evaluations for Wisconsin by CLICKING HERE.If you would like to run tailored estimations of return on investment for various fungicide programs, you can use another smartphone application called Sporebuster.

What is Sporebuster?

When a fungicide application is needed to control white mold in soybeans, Sporebuster can help determine a profitable program. You enter your expected soybean price, expected yield, and treatment cost. Sporebuster instantly compares ten different treatment plans at once to determine average net gain and breakeven probability of each. You can mark, save and share by email, the best plans for your farming operation.

The purpose of Sporebuster is to assist soybean farmers in making a fungicide program decision that is profitable for their operation. Sporebuster is meant to complement Sporecaster. Once Sporecaster recommends a fungicide application, Sporebuster can be used to determine a profitable program.

Information that drives Sporebuster is based on research from 2009-2016 from across the upper Midwestern US. Statistical models were developed based on these data that included white mold pressure and yield response from fungicide for 10 common fungicide programs.

Helpful Smartphone Application Links

Sporecaster

  1. Click here to download the Android version of Sporecaster. 
  2. Click here to download the iPhone version of Sporecaster.
  3. Here is a helpful video if you would like some tips on how to use Sporecaster. If you would like some advice on how to interpret the output, we have created an additional short video on this subject.

Sporebuster

  1. Click here to download the Android version of Sporebuster.
  2. Click here to download the iPhone version of Sporebuster.
  3. Here is a video on how to use Sporebuster and interpret the output.

Other Resources

  1. To watch an in-depth video on white mold management, CLICK HERE.
  2. To find more information and download a fact sheet on white mold from the Crop Protection Network, CLICK HERE.

Scientific References

  1. Willbur, J.F., Fall, M.L., Blackwell, T., Bloomingdale, C.A., Byrne, A.M., Chapman, S.A., Holtz, D., Isard, S.A., Magarey, R.D., McCaghey, M., Mueller, B.D., Russo, J.M., Schlegel, J., Young, M., Chilvers, M.I., Mueller, D.S., and Smith, D.L. Weather-based models for assessing the risk of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum apothecial presence in soybean (Glycine max) fields. Plant Disease. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-04-17-0504-RE
  2. Willbur, J.F.,Fall, M.L., Byrne, A.M., Chapman, S.A., McCaghey, M.M., Mueller, B.D., Schmidt, R., Chilvers, M.I., Mueller, D.S., Kabbage, M., Giesler, L.J., Conley, S.P., and Smith, D.L. Validating Sclerotinia sclerotiorumapothecial models to predict Sclerotinia stem rot in soybean (Glycine max) fields. Plant Disease. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-02-18-0245-RE.
  3. Fall, M., Willbur, J., Smith, D.L., Byrne, A., and Chilvers, M. 2018. Spatiotemporal distribution pattern of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum apothecia is modulated by canopy closure and soil temperature in an irrigated soybean field. Phytopathology. https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-11-17-1821-RE.
  4. Willbur, J.F., Mitchell, P.D., Fall, M.L., Byrne, A.M., Chapman, S.A., Floyd, C.M., Bradley, C.A., Ames, K.A., Chilvers, M.I., Kleczewski, N.M., Malvick, D.K., Mueller, B.D., Mueller, D.S., Kabbage, M., Conley, S.P., and Smith, D.L. 2019. Meta-analytic and economic approaches for evaluation of pesticide impact on Sclerotinia stem rot control and soybean yield in the North Central U.S. Phytopathology. https://doi.org/10.1094/PHYTO-08-18-0289-R.

Wisconsin Winter Wheat Disease Update – June 28, 2019

/in , , , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Brian Mueller, Assistant Field Researcher, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

The Badger Crop Docs have been busy scouting production wheat fields and University of Wisconsin-Madison winter wheat variety trials and management trials around the wheat growing region of Wisconsin. Wheat heading and anthesis was very uneven this season. At several locations we visited, we could observe some varieties still in anthesis, while others had finished flowering for some time.  Even within plot, variability existed. This variability has resulted in some difficulty in managing diseases.

Fusarium Head Blight Starting to Show Up

Figure 1. Fusarium head blight of winter wheat

We are beginning to see Fusarium head blight (FHB or scab) showing up in many of the locations we have visited. More scab is apparent in the southern locations, especially in the Arlington area. As you might expect it does vary by variety, but in susceptible varieties incidence is running in the 5-10% range, with more expected to become apparent next week. The primary challenge managing scab this season, has been the uneven anthesis timing. Applications of fungicides for managing scab should begin at anthesis and continue until about 7 days after the start of anthesis. Uneven anthesis across a field can complicate the fungicide application timing, as some heads might be at the right growth stage while others might be still in the boot or already past anthesis. Multiple site-years of research in Wisconsin and the Midwest show that if fungicide is applied before anthesis or 10 days or more after anthesis, poor control of FHB will be achieved with a corresponding unacceptable reduction of vomitoxin. As we get closer to harvest, it will be important to scout your wheat for scab and determine how much damage is present. Careful harvest and cleaning will be necessary in these fields to make sure vomitoxin limits come in below thresholds where dockage and rejection occur for your elevator. Be sure you are familiar with your elevators dockage policies before hauling loads of grain. Each elevator has different rules and regulations.

What is the Situation with Rusts in Wisconsin on Winter Wheat?

Figure 2. Stripe rust on the flag leaf of winter wheat.

We have observed very low levels of both leaf rust and stripe rust. Stripe rust has been observed at extremely low levels, at less than 5% incidence in only one variety at both the Fond du Lac and Sharon uniform variety trial locations. Leaf rust has been observed at similar levels on several varieties in the Arlington uniform variety trial. The late arrival of both of these rusts in Wisconsin will likely result in little yield impact. A fungicide application IS NOT recommended at this point in the season.

Tan Spot is Present At Many Locations

Tan spot has been observed in the lower canopy of wheat at all locations we have visited. The heaviest pressure has been at the Sharon and Arlington locations, with minimal pressure at the Fond du Lac and Chilton locations. Tan spot is remaining in the lower canopy in wheat treated with a fungicide. At Arlington, wheat in several research trials not treated with fungicide have significant tan spot on the flag leaves. If tan spot has reached the flag leaf at this point, yield may be negatively affected. With that said, a fungicide is NOT recommended at this time of season.

Cephalosporium Stripe Present in Sharon and Fond du Lac

Figure 3. Cephalosporium stripe on winter wheat.

We have also observed Cephalosporium stripe in both the Sharon and Fond du Lac uniform variety trials. This is a newer disease of winter wheat in Wisconsin, but has been observed over the past 2 seasons at the Fond du Lac location. This is the first year we have observed Cephalosporium stripe at the Sharon location. At this location, pressure is uniform and significant on several varieties. We observed incidence ranging from 0 to 90% depending on the variety. We believe that pressure is higher this year due to winter heaving and cool wet conditions this spring. No in-season management is available for Cephalospyrium stripe. However, noting which fields and locations in fields that have symptoms will help for future decisions about winter wheat management in those areas. Varieties with genetic resistance are available. Also longer rotations and better grassy-weed control can help reduce the severity of Cephalospyrium stripe. For more information about Cephalospyrium stripe CLICK HERE AND SCROLL DOWN TO THE CEPHALOSPORIUM STRIPE SECTION.

 

Wisconsin Tar Spot Update – June 25, 2019

/in , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Figure 1. Tarspotter risk predictions for the state of Wisconsin on June 25, 2019.

Figure 1 shows the calculated risk from Tarspotter for June 25, 2019, for various locations in Wisconsin. Figure 2 provides a zoomed view for southern and south-central Wisconsin. As you can see, the present risk is very high for tar spot development in all locations examined. This is due to the fact that the weather continues to be relatively cool and wet for the past 30 days across the entire state. Tar spot is favored by persistent temperatures between 60 and 70 F and high relative humidity averaging above 75% for a 30-day period. We have been right in the zone for conducive conditions for this disease.

The Recommendation

Figure 2. Tarspotter risk predictions for southern Wisconsin on June 25, 2019.

While weather continues to be conducive for tar spot, evaluate the likelihood that tar spot might develop early in your field. Remember, if you have no history of the disease, then the likelihood of local inoculum being present is low. Saving the fungicide application for later in the season might be a better option. If you have a history and you know you have a susceptible hybrid coupled with a no-till situation, then the risk is higher and you need to evaluate the economics of doing an application of fungicide as early as V6. Remember, if you do a V6-V8 application of fungicide, conditions could stay conducive later in the season for tar spot. Those early applications will “burn out” by the time the tasseling period rolls around. So if you do put a fungicide spray on at V6, you might have to come back at VT with another application to protect plants during the reproductive phase, should we stay in favorable conditions for tar spot. Keep an eye on the weather and keep scouting!

More Tar Spot Information

  1. Tar spot Fact sheet
  2. Short Tar Spot Video
  3. Tar Spot Webinar 
  4. Corn Fungicide Efficacy Table

Tar Spot on My Mind

/in , , , /by

Figure 1. Tarspotter risk predictions for the state of Wisconsin on June 19, 2019.

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Tar spot seems to be on everyone’s mind now that corn planting is nearing the finish line. The challenging spring and wet weather has folks now focused on the various disease issues that might be in front of us if we stay in this cool and rainy pattern in Wisconsin. I addressed this concern in an article earlier this season, and tar spot is certainly a disease that could be significant if the weather stays wet and cool.

As many are aware, we have worked with a group of plant pathologists in the Midwest during the winter of 2019 to develop a tar spot prediction tool. The model that runs the tool is based on data from the Arlington Agricultural Research Station located in Arlington, WI and data from a single location in Michigan. Data from several fungicide trials were used to generate probability-based prediction models for tar spot epidemics. The framework of the models follows that of our previous models for soybean, which run the Sporecaster application. However, the weather information and predictor variables have been changed based on our work in corn in 2018. While the preliminary smartphone application, called Tarspotter, has been programmed it needs to be validated in replicated studies and in observational studies to determine the accuracy. Thus, Tarspotter is not publicly available and is being tested by extension and industry colleagues during the 2019 season. With that said, I will provide an outlook based on the calculated risk and my interpretation of the risk for Wisconsin during the season.

What is the Present Risk For Tar Spot Development?

Figure 2. Tarspotter risk predictions for southern Wisconsin on June 19, 2019.

Figure 1 shows the calculated risk from Tarspotter for June 19, 2019, for various locations in Wisconsin. Figure 2 provides a zoomed view for southern and south-central Wisconsin. As you can see, the present risk is very high for tar spot development in all locations examined. This is due to the fact that the weather has been extremely cool and wet for the past 30 days across the entire state. Tar spot is favored by persistent temperatures between 60 and 70 F and high relative humidity averaging above 75% for a 30-day period. We have been right in the zone for conducive conditions for this disease.

Should I Spray Fungicide Now on My Corn in Wisconsin?

The short answer is NO! While the weather has been conducive for tar spot, corn is still very young. We would not recommend spraying corn for any foliar disease any earlier than V6. In fact, I would urge folks to hold off as long as they can toward VT to make a fungicide application. Some things to consider in this decision to spray fungicide for tar spot at V6 would be the field history. Has tar spot ever been found in a field? If not, then there is presumed to be no local inoculum available for infection, even if conditions are conducive (remember that the disease triangle is important). In fields with no history of tar spot, scout regularly and monitor the risk maps and what we are recommending based on our observations. You might be able to hold off longer on that fungicide application and get it on at VT where a return on your fungicide investment is more likely. If you have had a history of tar spot and you know that you have a hybrid that is more susceptible and there is a large amount of infested residue, then you should monitor this situation closely. Remember that the first 4 or 5 leaves on a corn plant don’t contribute to yield. In fact the corn plant will soon get rid of those leaves, as the adult leaves emerge and the stalk elongates. Thus protecting leaves prior to V6 or V8 really doesn’t make a lot of economic sense (let alone biological sense for the Midwest). If you have had a history of the disease, conditions remain conducive, and the crop is V6-V8 or later, a fungicide application might make sense. Weigh the economics of this application and shop around. There are many products that have demonstrated decent efficacy toward tar spot. You can find our 2018 fungicide test summaries by CLICKING HERE and scrolling down to pages 2-7.

The Summary

While weather has been conducive for tar spot over the last month, do a little homework and evaluate the likelihood that tar spot might develop early in your field. Remember, if you have no history of the disease, then the likelihood of local inoculum being present is low. Saving the fungicide application for later in the season might be a better option. If you have a history and you know you have a susceptible hybrid coupled with a no-till situation, then the risk is higher and you need to evaluate the economics of doing an application of fungicide as early as V6. Remember, if you do a V6-V8 application of fungicide, conditions could stay conducive later in the season for tar spot. Those early applications will “burn out” but the time the tasseling period rolls around. So if you do put a fungicide spray on at V6, you might have to come back at VT with another application to protect plants during the reproductive phase, should we stay in favorable conditions for tar spot. Keep an eye on the weather and keep scouting!

More Tar Spot Information

  1. Tar spot Fact sheet
  2. Short Tar Spot Video
  3. Tar Spot Webinar 
  4. Corn Fungicide Efficacy Table

 

 

I Finally Got My Soybeans Planted and Now They Look Sick!

/in , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Shawn Conley, Soybean and Wheat Extension Specialist, Department of Agronomy, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Phytophthora stem rot of a seedling soybean. Photo Credit: Craig Grau.

The 2019 growing season has been nothing but full of challenges for Wisconsin farmers and farmers throughout the Midwest. Weather and grain markets have not improved, combined with late-planting of all crops, including soybeans. Dryer weather recently has allowed many to catch up a bit on planting, but now the weather is turning wet again. With this wet weather right after planting, we start to get concerned about several seedling and early-season diseases that can show up, and the performance of seed treatments used to protect soybeans against the pathogens that cause these diseases.

What are the Pathogens of Primary Concern?

Soybeans are susceptible to several early diseases. A detailed list of those important in Wisconsin can be found HERE. You will notice in that list that there is an array of fungi and water-molds that can affect soybeans, compromising stands. More recently we have been very interested in tracking the water-molds. These organisms include Pythium and Phytophthora. Pythium can cause diseases such as Pythium seedling blight and root rot while Phytophthora can result in Phytophthora root and stem rot of soybean. When it comes to both of these diseases, several species within each pathogen genus can affect soybeans in Wisconsin. In fact, The Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection Pest Survey Program and the Plant Industry Bureau Laboratory has tracked water-molds in soybean fields from since 2008. The latest results of this surveys can be found by CLICKING HERE. You will notice that there are actually two Phytophthora species and more than 5 Pythium species that can affect soybeans in Wisconsin. With the diversity of pathogens in the state and the wet spring we are having, it is no wonder that seedling issues are present in Wisconsin.

Will Seed Treatments Cure Poor Soybean Emergence?

The short answer is no. In the last 10 years we have seen a significant increase in the availability and use of seed treatments in soybeans. These seed treatments can be a simple single-mode-of-action fungicide or combined with multiple fungicides, insecticides, nematicides, and/or plant growth regulators. A detailed list of seed treatment products registered in Wisconsin for soybeans and other grain crops can be found on the What’s On Your Seed fact sheet. While we highly recommend the use of seed treatments to combat seed rots and seedling blights, it is important to realize that they are not perfect and can fail or under-perform for many reasons. Even if you used a seed treatment on your soybean seed in 2019, you may still notice emergence issues. There are many factors that play a role in the success of a seed treatment, including the correct choice of product against the right pathogens, weather, soil type, etc. For more information on the factors that can affect seed treatments check out the fact sheet posted HERE. If you are in a situation where you used a seed treatment and the stand is poor, check out this publication. This can give you some insight on what happened as you work through diagnosing the issue with your agronomist. There is not a one-size-fits-all seed treatment so it is important that if you have had issues with the performance of your seed treatment, you determine if a pathogen is involved and what species it might be. Knowing this information can help guide you in choosing the seed treatment most appropriate for controlling that particular pathogen in the future. If you need help diagnosing a potential seed decay or seedling disease, you can send a sample to the University of Wisconsin-Madison Plant Disease Diagnostic Clinic. Details on how to prepare and send a sample can be found on their website by clicking here.

Does Variety Resistance Help Improve Soybean Stands?

Yes! While resistance to Pythium in soybean isn’t well understood, there are resistant varieties deployed for managing Phytophthora. Both race-specific and field resistance (lower level of resistance to all races) are available in soybean varieties marketed in Wisconsin. There are often one or more race-specific Phytophthora resistance genes in commercial soybean varieties. The genes present in specific soybean varieties are listed each year in the University of Wisconsin Soybean Variety Test Results (UW-Extension publication A3654). Your seed dealer will also have this information.

Monitor the performance of the varieties you choose. When optimum disease conditions develop later in the growing season, scout those areas of the fields to look for stem rot development. If a large number of plants with Phytophthora stem rot are found, choose varieties with a different Rps gene and higher levels of partial resistance for next year. This pathogen does adapt to the Rps genes, but it is a slow process. Careful monitoring of plant performance is all that is needed. A listing of RPS genes and their relative effectiveness in Wisconsin can be found in the table below.

Race-specific Phytophthora resistance genes and their effectiveness in Wisconsin

Soybean genes Phytophthora races controlled Effectiveness in Wisconsin
Rps 1a 1, 2, 10, 11, 13-18, 24 limited effectiveness
Rps1b 1, 3-9, 13-15, 17, 18, 21, 22
Rps 1c 1-3, 6-11, 13, 15, 17, 21, 23, 24 effective in 75% of fields
Rps 1k 1-11, 13-15, 17, 18, 22, 24 effective in 99% of fields
Rps 3 1-5, 8, 9, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18, 23, 25
Rps 4 1-4, 10, 12, 16, 18-21, 25
Rps 6 1-4, 10, 12, 14-16, 18-21, 25
Rps 1k, 6 1-11, 12-22, 24, 25

Field resistance, also called field tolerance, is present at different levels in most soybean varieties marketed in Wisconsin. For example, even if a variety has a specific resistance gene that may not be effective, such as Rps 1a, against the races of Phytophthora sojae present in a field, the variety may perform better than other varieties with this gene because it has an adequate level of field resistance to Phytophthora. Field resistance can be overcome by high disease pressure especially in the seedling stage. A final note on resistance – in field where Phytophthora sansomeana is present, Rps genes may have little effect. No data currently exists on soybean variety performance against this fairly new pathogen of soybean in Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Winter Wheat Disease Update – June 4, 2019

/in , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Brian Mueller, Assistant Field Researcher, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Wheat heads are close to emergence on some earlier varieties of winter wheat in southern and south-central Wisconsin. Within the next week wheat heads will be emerging and anthesis (flowering) will be starting, with later varieties to follow. Now is the time to prepare for Fusarium head blight (FHB or scab) management. The Fusarium head blight Risk Model (http://www.wheatscab.psu.edu) is showing moderate to high levels of risk in the primary wheat growing region of the state over the next 72 hours (Figure 1). Pay close attention to the risk model and your local weather as we approach anthesis (flowering). I anticipate the risk to remain high as periods of rain and humidity persist. Fungicide products of choice to control FHB in Wisconsin include Caramba, Prosaro, and Miravis Ace. Multiple years of data in Wisconsin suggest that the best application window for any of these products begins at the start of anthesis until 5-7 days after the start of anthesis. Applying fungicide before anthesis or more than 7-10 days after anthesis will result in poor performance against vomitoxin accumulation. For information pertaining to recent fungicide studies on winter wheat in Wisconsin, CLICK HERE and scroll to page 12. Other reports can be found by CLICKING HERE.

Figure 1. Fusarium Head Blight Prediction Center 72-hour Outlook for Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Winter Wheat Disease Update – May 31, 2019

/in , , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Brian Mueller, Assistant Field Researcher, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

The University of Wisconsin-Madison Field Crops Pathology crew has spent the last several days scouting winter wheat variety trials and commercial wheat fields in south and south-central Wisconsin. Wheat at all locations observed had flag leaves fully emerged. Weather has been extremely wet and cool across the state. Despite the wet conditions, wheat was generally disease free in all locations visited.

In Sharon, WI wheat looked decent despite challenging winter and spring conditions. The stand was a bit uneven in terms of growth stage, but most varieties looked good. It won’t be a record yield year, but stands look better than anticipated at this location. Wheat at the Arlington location in central Wisconsin looked very good with strong stands combined with even growth stages across varieties. I anticipate yields to be decent. At the Fond du Lac location wheat was in okay shape, however several varieties did experience significant winterkill. Stands were like those in Sharon, with uneven growth stages within varieties.

Figure 1. Fusarium head blight prediction for May 31, 2019

While disease on wheat has been relatively non-existent in Wisconsin, weather has been extremely wet across the state. Considering these conditions, we are worried about the risk for Fusarium head blight (FHB) this year given the weather pattern we have been stuck in. Currently, the Fusarium head blight Risk Model (http://www.wheatscab.psu.edu) is showing mostly high levels of risk in the primary wheat growing region of the state (Figure 1). While no heads have emerged, heading will begin in the next 1-2 weeks. Pay close attention to the risk model and your local weather as we approach anthesis (flowering). I anticipate the risk to remain high as periods of rain and humidity persist. Fungicide products of choice to control FHB in Wisconsin include Caramba, Prosaro, and Miravis Ace. Multiple years of data in Wisconsin suggest that the best application window for any of these products begins at the start of anthesis until 5-7 days after the start of anthesis. Applying fungicide before anthesis or more than 7-10 days after anthesis will result in poor performance against vomitoxin accumulation. For information pertaining to recent fungicide studies on winter wheat in Wisconsin, CLICK HERE and scroll to page 12. Other reports can be found by CLICKING HERE. Flag leaves are out, get out and scout!

Wisconsin Winter Wheat Disease Update – May 21, 2019

/in , , /by

Damon Smith, Extension Field Crops Pathologist, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Brian Mueller, Assistant Field Researcher, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Figure 1. Septoria leaf blotch on wheat leaves

Winter wheat in Wisconsin continues to move through growth stages at a fairly even pace. Winter wheat plots in our research program located at the Arlington Agricultural Research Station, Arlington, Wisconsin are just approaching the emerging flag leaf stage. Perhaps by the weekend or early next week, flag leaves will have emerged. Interestingly, this growth stage will likely occur almost at the same date as in 2018. Last season, we applied our Feekes 8 fungicide treatments on May 25th. So while it has been cool, and wheat appears to be moving through growth stages slowly, things aren’t too far off from 2018.

Weather remains very wet. Most wheat we have scouted this week appears to be clean of disease. One concern we have is the development of Septoria leaf blotch. In 2016 we had an early epidemic of this leaf disease, that impacted yield. The cool conditions are not particularly conducive for this disease, but the high humidity and wet conditions certainly are. Weather forecasts indicate warmer conditions over the next week, thus keep your eyes peeled for the development of the disease.

Figure 2. Pycnidia in a Septoria leaf blotch lesion.

Septoria leaf blotch can be identified by necrotic lesions that develop on leaves of winter wheat (Figure 1). Small fruiting structures (pycnidia) can often be identified inside the necrotic area of the lesions, with the naked eye or a good hand lens (Figure 2). Prolonged wet/humid conditions broken by a brief dry period, followed by more wet conditions, can favor infection. Temperatures between 60 and 77 F favor disease development. Septoria leaf blotch can be managed with varietal resistance (both race-specific and partial resistance) and also fungicides. For a list of effective fungicides for Septoria leaf blotch control, CLICK HERE to download a copy of the Small Grains Fungicide Efficacy Table. For more information pertaining to Septoria leaf blotch, and other related leaf blotch diseases, CLICK HERE to download a fact sheet.

Reports from the the mid south and plains states continue to indicate stripe rust is on the move. Continue to monitor and scout wheat as your crop moves into the flag leaf stage and to heading. If stripe rust moves in, a fungicide application may be warranted. As I indicated in my previous update, we did not have a stripe rust epidemic in 2018, in Wisconsin. Thus, there was no inoculum in the state to infect fall-sown wheat. Inoculum for an epidemic to initiate in 2019 will have to come from the southern U.S. The best way to make an educated decision to spray is to scout and catch the disease in its early stages. Continue to pay attention to extension reports as we track stripe rust from the southern U.S., northward.