Curbing Seed Rot CONTINUED FROM PAGE 18
2009 season on a statewide basis.” One research site on the eastern side of the state in
Starkville, received six weeks of rain that delayed nor- mal harvest timing and regardless of either insecti- cide, fungicide or tank mix sustained excessive seed damage. One location in central Mississippi sustained
50 percent loss regardless of application active ingre- dients; and one on the western side of the state, re- ceived limited damage because plots were harvested on time and not exposed to extended inclement weather. “The most interesting piece of information from
2009 was our results suggest fungicides tended to de- crease observable seed rot especially in central and
east Mississippi, the two sites with measureable seed rot. However, if the environment remained conducive for an extended period of time and seed rot contin- ued, the fungicide could only prevent so much rot,” Allen said. The project continued in 2010 and 2011 but neither
year provided insight into seed rot because the envi- ronmental conditions at the end of the season were not conducive for seed rot to occur. Following three years of re-
search, the scientists feel that preventing seed rot is a moving target and almost completely depends on environment. “We still have a lot of work to
do to completely understand soybean seed rot,” Allen con- cluded. “More often than not all soybean seed rot is blamed on Phomopsis seed decay, but it is possible other organisms may be involved. However, that’s all going to depend on the envi- ronment. From a plant disease standpoint, the environment comprises more than 95 per- cent of whether or not a seed rotting issue will likely occur. The environment means timing a fungicide and/or insecticide application is the most impor- tant part to consider. But, as we all know, predicting the en- vironment is almost an impos- sible endeavor.” Allen expects that some
breeding lines may be able to handle weathering a bit better in the future. “We definitely know there are
varieties that have more of a weathering issue associated with them,” he said. “As a whole, maturity Group IV soy- bean varieties don’t weather as well as maturity Group V. Ad- ditionally, grey pubescent soy- bean varieties don’t weather near as well as red pubescent. However, pinning down the specifics with regards to the reason why there are differ- ences between grey and red va- rieties is a completely different project at this point. Some va- rieties may just have a greater susceptibility to pod rotting or- ganisms, or a nutritional com- ponent could influence the situation.” BETTY
∆ VALLE GEGG-
NAEGER: Senior Staff Writer, MidAmerica Farmer Grower
MidAmerica Farmer Grower
573-547-2244
www.mafg.net
March 2, 2012 / MidAmerica Farmer Grower • 29
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36