Precision Agriculture, Grower Profitability, and Resource Conservation

Ryan Heiniger

Director of Agriculture & Conservation Innovations

@FarmrHuntr

26 June 2018

Outline

1) Pheasants Forever / Quail Forever Background

2) Defining Sustainability

3) Precision Ag for Precision Conservation

4) Opportunities to Partner

• Text

A Grassroots Habitat Organization

United States140,000 Members750 Chapters

Our Mission. Pheasants Forever is dedicated to the conservation of pheasants, quail and other wildlife through habitat improvements, public awareness, education, and land management policies and programs

First Project c. 1983 Kandiyohi Co. MN

What We’re Known For

What We Actually Do - Habitat

Father of Soil Conservation“With stripping off of the natural vegetation we have lost both the soil itself and the wildlife that found food and refuge in the vegetation. If that be so, then it is perfectly logical that the only real, permanent cure for erosion is a coordinated plan of land treatment, with heavy reliance on vegetation, and that the proper handling of vegetation for the control of erosion will in a large degree restore conditions suitable for wildlife.”

- Hugh Hammond Bennett, 1938

Defining Sustainability - USDAThe core concept of sustainability is that lasting success (and avoiding crises) requires an integrated approach to producing food and other products; farm profitability; quality of life for farmers, workers, and communities; and stewardship of natural resources.

Defining Sustainability - ASA

One approach to sustainable agriculture is the practice of precision agriculture: an information technology-based management system that uses data obtained from GPS, and integrates the data into GIS. These new spatial tools are used with yield, rate, and other information to better manage the timing and application of fertilizers—thereby reducing the impact on the environment and increasing the cost-effectiveness for farmers.

Defining Sustainability - Political

“It is hard to be green when you’re in the red”

-Paul Torkelson, Farmer & MN State Representative

“Production agriculture is a business. You have to make enough money to farm again next year. The hard truth is that farmers don’t care about soil health or water quality if they can’t afford to farm again the next season. So true sustainability means that you are making a profit.”

-AJ Blair, 2016 IA Cattlemen Environmental Stewardship Award Recipient

Defining Sustainability - Grower

Sustainability utilizes the best technology and a

collaborative approach to continuously improve

soil, water, wildlife habitat and hunting

traditions for future generations while striving

for landowner profitability on each acre.

Defining Sustainability – PF/QF

Bad agronomy + precision ag = bad agronomy applied precisely

- Author unknown

Defining UnSustainability

Definition of insanity is doing same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Defining UnSustainability

Then for each acre of a field consider:

Input Expenses $100/acre > Breakeven Commodity Price ≥ 2 years = Unsustainable

The Case for Precision Conservation

2.5 Million Acres in 2013!

Source: Brandes etal. Subfield profitability analysis reveals an economic case for cropland Diversification. Environmental Research Letters, 2016.

Our Precision Principles

• Subfield Profitability/ROI Focused

• Farmer Directed

• 100% Voluntary

• Customized Crop Budgets

• Entire Enterprise

• Working Lands

Precision Ag Optimal Workflow

Farmer

NRCS/Private Land Wildlife

Biologist/Farm Bill Biologist

Agronomist

PF/QF Precision Ag

& Conservation

Specialist

Conservation Cover Options Presented to

Landowner

Conservation Planning

Revenue Negative

Acres

Increased ROI & profitability

ROI Based Analysis

Solutions to Grow ROI on Every Acre

• State/Federal Conservation Programs

• Small grains

• Forage Production

• Pasture Restoration

• Pollinator Habitat

• Emerging Market (Kernza?)

• Cover Crop Seed Production

Harrison County, IACorn/Soybean rotation

Harrison County, IACRP-CP23

Iowa – CRP/Wetlands

Field Level Performance

LaMoure County, ND (Profit Map)Corn/Soybean Rotation

LaMoure County, NDCorn/Soybean Rotation + Forage Barley for Saline Soil remediation + hay production

North Dakota – Salinity

SW Corner, looking South May 16, 2018

Before: Soybean After: Forage Barley in Saline areas

Field Level Performance

Minnesota – Cover Crop Seed

Douglas County, MN (ROI Map)Corn/SB Rotation

Douglas County, MN (ROI Map)Corn/SB/Oat CC Seed Rotation

Field Level Performance

Chisago County, MN (ROI Map)Corn/SB Rotation

Chisago County, MN (ROI Map)Corn/SB Rotation with RCPP Pollinator Habitat

Minnesota – Pollinator Habitat

Field Level Performance

Wisconsin – Deer Food Plot

Dunn County, WI (Profit Map)Corn/Soybean Rotation

Dunn County, WI (Profit Map)Corn/Soybean Rotation + Sunflower and Field Border

Field Level Performance

Before & After

2018 PF Precision Farmer of the Year“We do everything we can to make a living and let wildlife make a living too. It makes me real proud to be managing our land this way. The generations before usalways took care of the land. But with precision agriculture, you can do so much more.

-Jeff Lake Boyceville WI

Twitter Survey Says…

Opportunities to Partner

PF/QF Professional Technical Staff

Summary

Sub-field planning is key

Innovation requires challenging convention practices

Data analyses and alternatives take time

Consider wildlife along with soil & water

We are ready to listen, partner & assist

Acknowledgements

Ecologically Based Weed Management

Matt Liebman

Iowa State University

26 June 2018

FarmsResources

Pollutantemissions

Food and beverage companies, consumers

Product distributionResource use

Payment

Agricultural sustainability requires:(1) regeneration or replacement of key resources, (2) reduction of pollution to levels that can be

assimilated or detoxified

Source: http://farmprogress.com/story-avoid-hit-run-soybean-spraying-9-59824

Agriculture currently relies heavily on herbicidesAnnual application of active ingredients:U.S. – 678 million lb. Worldwide – 2.85 billion lb.

Source: US EPA (2017)

Herbicide resistant weeds are a critical challenge

• Weed resistance to herbicides has been documented for populations of at least 254 weed species worldwide.

• Weeds have evolved resistance to 23 of the 26 known herbicide sites of action and to 163 different herbicides.

• Herbicide resistant weeds have been reported in 92 crops in 70 countries.

Source: Ian Heap, WeedScience.org, 2018

Source: Owen (2017)

HG2 (ALS): imazethapyrHG5: atrazineHG9: glyphosateHG14 (PPO): lactofenHG27 (HPPD): mesotrione

Source: Westwood et al. (2018), doi:10.1017/wsc.2017.78

Herbicide-resistant weed biotypes are increasing, but few new herbicide sites of action are expected

“The increase in evolved herbicide resistance, coupled with the lack of new mechanisms of action, threatens to make almost all existing herbicides unusable by 2050.”

“Resource” depletion

Westwood et al. (2018), doi:10.1017/wsc.2017.78

Off-site movement of herbicides and their toxic effects on non-target organisms constitute significant pollution problems.

Source: https://ipm.missouri.edu/IPCM/2017/10/final_report_dicamba_injured_soybean/

Total: ~3.6 million acres

Estimates of dicamba-injured soybean acreage as reported by state extension weed scientists, 2017

Stone et al. (2014), Environ. Sci. Tech., doi:10.1021/es5025367

Herbicides and insecticides detected in U.S. streams and rivers (1992-2011)

EBWM weaves together multiple management tactics. It does not exclude the use of herbicides, but emphasizes ecological processes that suppress weeds at many life stages.

By spreading the burden of crop protection across multiple tactics, EBWM reduces risks of failure and crop loss.

By minimizing reliance on herbicides, EBWM can reduce selection for resistance and better protect environmental quality.

Diverse cropping systems that maximize stress and mortality factors acting on weeds form the core of EBWM strategies.

Ecologically Based Weed Management

Seed bank Seeds

AdultsSeedlings

Seedling

recruitment

Seedling

survival

Seed

production

Seed

survival

Annual Weed

Life Cycle

Precision cultivation with System Cameleon, SwedenCamera + computer for real-time lateral adjustment during seeding, fertilizing, cultivating, intercropping

(Source: E. Gallandt)

Photo courtesy of John Millhouse

A seed “destructor” in Australia grinding weed seeds in crop chaff passing through the combine

Seed Predation

Harpalus rufipes consuming barnyardgrass seeds

Cropping system effects on wild oat after 18 years, Scott, SK

Type of cropping system

Crop sequence

Wild oat panicle density

(no./m2)

Wild oat resistance to

ACC-inhibiting herbicides (%)

All annualcanola-rye-pea-barley-flax-wheat

6.8 a 42.3 a

Annual-perennial

barley-alfalfa-alfalfa-alfalfa-canola-wheat

0.7 b 2.7 b

Source: Beckie et al. (2014), doi:10.4141/CJPS2013-361

Using data and models to develop better weed management strategies

University of Illinois Extension photo/Lyle Paul

Giant ragweedAmbrosia trifida

Regnier et al. (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1614/WS-D-15-00116.1

Giant Ragweed Populations Resistant to ALS-inhibitors and/or Glyphosate

But giant ragweed has several vulnerabilities….

• High rates of seed consumption by predators (e.g., rodents, invertebrates, and birds)

• Short lifetime of seeds in and on the soil (i.e., it has a transient seedbank rather than a persistent seedbank)

• Relatively low rates of seed production (1,000s rather than 10,000s or 100,000s)

• Late summer/fall maturation

(1) Row crops (e.g., corn, soy) can be cultivated or sprayed, but weed control is less than 100% effective.

(2) Solid seeded crops that are harvested in mid-summer (e.g., forages, winter cereals)can prevent reproduction by giant ragweed, without being cultivated or sprayed.

Model assumptions

(1) Diversifying corn-soybean rotations with winter cereals and forages should reduce the level of weed control required to prevent an increase in giant ragweed population density. (2) Higher control efficacy in diversified systems should give better results than in simpler systems.

Rotation lengthControl efficacy

needed in row crops

2-year: Row-Row

99.0%

4-year:Solid-Solid-Row-Row

90.7%

Model results

Field testing: how does cropping system diversification affect weeds, yields, profits, and environmental quality in the central Corn Belt?

2-year rotation: corn-soybean 4-year rotation: corn-soybean-oat/alfalfa-alfalfa

Plots are 60’ x 275’ each, all phases of each rotation present every year2001 and 2002: base-line sampling / 2003-2005: start-up period

2006-present: mature period

ISU Marsden Farm, Boone Co., IA

Mean annual herbicide use, 2008-2017

Herbicide use

Crop and herbicide groups used

2-year rotation

4-year rotation

lb a.i./acre

Corn (2, 15, 27) 1.06 1.06

Soybean (9, 14) 1.59 1.59

Oat -- 0

Alfalfa -- 0

Rotation average 1.32 0.66

Reduction -50%

Mean yields, 2008-2017Sources: Hunt et al. (2017) and unpublished data,doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04086

Rotation Corn Soybean Oat Alfalfa

Yield bu/acre bu/acre bu/acre tons/acre

2-year 191 b 48 b --- ---

4-year 200 a 59 a 95 4.3

low in corn and soybean phases of both systems, greater in oat and alfalfa

Within columns, means followed by the same letter do not differ significantly.

Weed biomass, lb/acre

Rotation Corn Soybean Oat Alfalfa

2-year 1.7 a 1.0 a --- ---

4-year 1.8 a 0.3 a 101 78

Weed biomass, 2008-2017:

Sources: Hunt et al. (2017) and unpublished data,doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04086

Cropping system diversification led to equivalent profitability and less herbicide ecotoxicity

Rotation

2-year 4-year

Annual net returns to land and management, 2008-2017 ($/acre, whole rotation)

331 a 349 a

Annual freshwater toxicity load of herbicides, 2008-2015 (CTUe/acre, whole rotation)

1914 a 957 b

Sources: Hunt et al. (2017) and unpublished data,doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b04086

Additional environmental effectsof cropping system diversification

• less soil compaction• greater soil water content during drought • more earthworms• more microbial biomass

Ecologically based weed management strategies can protect productivity and profitability and improve environmental performance. They are thus key components of sustainable farming systems.

Factors limiting sustainable soybean production

Matt O’Neal

Iowa State University

26 June 2018

What is sustainable agriculture?

1990 Farm Bill-https://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/sustainable-agriculture-definitions-and-terms

“…sustainable agriculture means an integrated system of plant and animal production practices…that…

• Satisfy human food and fiber needs,• Enhance environmental quality and the natural resource base…,• Make the most efficient use of nonrenewable resources and

integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls,

• Sustain economic viability of farm operations and,• Enhance the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.

Midwest soybean pests -Before 2000

• Few soybean insect pests.

1996 ~ 0 soybean acres treated with insecticides (USDA estimate).

Midwest soybean pests -After 2000

Changes in environmental impacts of major crops in the US.

Yi and Suh 2015.

”As a result [of the soybean aphid’s invasion of the US], the total quantity of insecticides applied to soybean quadrupled between 2001 and 2012."

130-fold increase in insecticide use to soybean since the soybean aphid arrived in the US.

Ragsdale et al. 2011

Resistance: A consequence of increased insecticide use

https://www.ag.ndsu.edu/publications/crops/management-of-insecticide-resistant-soybean-aphids

Figure 2. Counties with reported failures of pyrethroids for control of soybean aphid. Red-shaded counties indicate those from which Extension entomologists received reports of failures. (Maps courtesy of B. Potter, University of Minnesota)

Resistance to Insecticides

Global Pesticide Resistance in Arthropods, 2008, Ed. Whalon, Mota-Sanchez, and Hollingworth

How to fight resistance and grow soybeans more sustainably?

1. Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM)

2. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

3. Use multiple tactics.

1. Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM)

• Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC)

• http://www.irac-online.org/

• A technical group of CropLife with a mission to:• Facilitate communication and education on insecticide

and traits resistance.

• Promote insecticide resistance management (IRM) strategies to maintain efficacy and support sustainable agriculture and improved public health.

10

IRM and IRAC continued

• “Rotation of insecticides for the purposes of resistance management should be based entirely on difference in mode of action.” IRAC

• 29 different modes of action (MOA) organized by the physiological functions affected:

• Nerve & Muscle, Growth, Respiration, Midgut, Unknown

• Only three MOAs for soybean aphids.

• Avoid prophylactic/preventative use of insecticides.

11

How to fight resistance and grow soybeans more sustainably?

1. Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM)

2. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

3. Use multiple tactics.

“Probability of cost effective management of soybean aphid”*

4 methods compared in 3 states over 3 years:

• untreated control = no insecticides.

• Prophylactic = insecticide & fungicide applied to foliage when soybeans flower.

• Seed-treatment = Cruiser, seed-treatment only.

• Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approach = fields scouted and insecticide applied as needed.

*Johnson et al. 2009. Journal of Economic Entomology 102: 2101-2108.

SBA is a highly variable pest (especially in Iowa)

14

economic threshold

economic injury level

Type & application of insecticides

(Photo by R. C. Kemerait, Jr.)

Treatment Insecticide Time of Application

Control None NAPreventative Pyrethroid + Fungicide R1-R2Soybean aphid IPM Pyrethroid 250 aphids per plantSeed treatment Neonicotinoid before planting

Experimental locations

Mea

n yi

eld

bu p

er a

cre

(+SE

M)

Yields by treatment: all years & locations

Control Prophylactic IPM45

50

55

60

65

70

Seed treatment

A AA

B

Significant difference among treatments.

Probability of cost effective management of soybean aphid*

*Johnson et al. 2009. Journal of Economic Entomology 102: 2101-2108.

High-input management systems effect on soybean seed yield, yield components, and economic break-even probabilities. Orlowski et al. 2016

“In each site-year both individual inputs and combination high-input (SOYA) management systems were tested.”

Orlowski et al.2016

A single application of an insecticide exceeded the gain threshold from 37%-93% across a range of increasing values.

How to fight resistance and grow soybeans more sustainably?

1. Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM)

2. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)

3. Use multiple tactics.• Biological control

• Host Plant Resistance

“Make the most efficient use of nonrenewable resources and integrate, where appropriate, natural biological cycles and controls”

USDA released

Aphelinusglycinis in the US in

2016.

Aphid mummies now

commonly found in

Michigan, Ontario Canada.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend

Which is the aphid-resistant soybean?

-8

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2Susceptible Rag1 Rag2

Yie

ld, b

ush

els

pe

r ac

re (

±SEM

)

NS

Aphid resistance protects soybean yield

Rag1+2

McCarville et al. 2014

(Un

tre

ate

d –

Ap

hid

Fre

e)

* = Significant loss without insecticide

**

*

Summary: how to fight resistance (and grow soybeans more sustainably)?

1. Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM)• Visit IRAC (Insecticide Resistance Action Committee)

2. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)• Avoid prophylactic use of insecticides.

3. Use multiple tactics.• Demand aphid-resistant varieties from your seed

supplier.

• If you spray for SBA and suspect performance issues, please let Erin Hodgson know! (ewh@iastate.edu)

• We want to assess more SBA populations for resistance in 2018 and beyond.

But what, there’s more.

Thank you.

Changes in environmental impacts of major crops in the US. Yi and Suh 2015.

”As a result [of the soybean aphid’s invasion of the US], the total quantity of insecticides applied to soybean quadrupled between 2001 and 2012."

Nerve and muscle

Growth and development

Respiration Midgut Unknown

1) Acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (carbamates andorganophosphates)

2) Gaba-gated chloride channel blockers (cyclodieneorganochlorines and fiproles)

3) Sodium channel modulators (pyrethroids, DDT)

4) Nicotinic acetylchloline receptor competitive modulators (neonicotinoids, sulfoximines)

5) Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor allosteric modulators (spinosyns)

6) Glutamate-gated chloride channel allosteric modulators (avermectins)

9) Chordotonal organ TRPV channel modulators (pyridine azomethinederivatives)

14) Nicotinic acetylchloline receptor channel blocker

19) Octopaminereceptor agonists (amitraz)

22) Voltage-dependentsodium channel blockers

28) Ryanodine receptor modulators (diamides)

29) Chordotonal organ modulators- undefined target site

7) Juvenile hormone mimics (fenoxycarb, pyripoxyfen)

10) Mite growthinhibitors (clofentezine, etoxazole)

15) Inhibitors of chitin biosynthesis, type 0 (benzaylureas)

16) Inhibitors of chitin biosynthesis, type 1 (buprofezin)

17) Moulting disruptor, dipteran (cyromazine)

18) Ecdysone receptoragonists (diacylhydrazines)

23) Inhibitors of acetyl COA carboxylase (tetronic and tetramicacid derivatives)

12) Inhibitors of mitochondrial ATP synthase

13) Uncouplers of oxidative phosphorylation via disruption of the proton gradient

20) Mitochondrialcomplex III electron transport inhibitors

21) Mitochondrial complex I electron transport inhibitors

24) Mitochrondrialcomplex IV electron transport inhibitors

25) Mitochrondrialcomplex II electron transport inhibitors

11) Microbial disruptorsof insects midgutmembranes (Bt)

8) Misc. non-specific (multi-site) inhibitors

Unknown compounds, uncertain MOA

http://www.irac-online.org/modes-of-action/

http://www.irac-online.org/documents/moa-classification/

Group Common name Active ingredients Formulated mixtures

1A methomyl Lannate

1B

acephate Acephate

chlorpyrifosLorsban Advanced, Chlorpyrifos, Govern, Hatchet, Nufos, Vulcan, Warhawk, Whirlwind, Yuma

Tundra Supreme, Cobalt, Cobalt Advanced, Stallion, Match-Up

dimethoate Dimethoate

3A

alpha-cypermethrin Fastac

beta-cyflufthrin Baythroid Leverage

bifenthrin Tundra, Sniper, Fanfare, Discipline, Brigade, Bifenture, RevealJustice, Match-Up, Tundra Supreme, Brigadier, Swagger, Skyraider, Hero, Steed, Triple Crown

cyfluthrin Tombstone

deltamethrin Delta Gold, Batallion

esfenvalerate Asana XL, Adjourn

gamma-cyhalothrin Declare, Proaxis, Cobalt

lambda-cyhalothrinWarrior II, Grizzly Z, LambdaStar, Lambda-Cy, Lamcap, Province, Silencer VC, Taiga Z

Besiege, Cobalt Advanced, Double Take, Endigo, Seeker

permethrin Arctic

zeta-cypermethrin Mustang Maxx, Respect Hero, Steed, Stallion, Triple Crown

4A

acetamiprid Justice

chlothianadin Belay

imidacloprid Prey, Admire Pro, ADAMA Alias, Wrangler, Nuprid, Sherpa, Leverage, Brigadier, Swagger, Skyraider, Triple Crown

thiamethoxam Endigo

4C sulfoxaflor Transform Seeker

Insecticides targeting soybean aphids

Can sustainable management be cost effective?

32

USDA-NASS-ERS, 2016

“Probability of cost effective management of soybean aphid”*

• 4 Treatments in a Randomized Complete Block Design

• 6 replications of each treatment at each location

• 3 Years (2005, 2006, and 2007) • 3 States (Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota)

• 2 locations per state

*Johnson et al. 2009. Journal of Economic Entomology 102: 2101-2108.

Experimental locations

Acknowledgements

Viking Seed, Dupont Pioneer (for now),

ISU Soybean breeders Walter Fehr and Danny Singh

Soybean aphid populationsStory Co. Iowa

6-Jun 20-Jun 4-Jul 18-Jul 1-Aug 15-Aug 29-Aug0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

2005

2006

2007

Mea

n ap

hids

per

pla

nt +

SEM

Mea

n yi

eld

bu p

er a

cre

( ±SE

M)

2005- Story County, Iowa

Control Prophylactic IPM45

50

55

60

65

70 No significant difference among treatments

Mea

n yi

eld

bu p

er a

cre

(+SE

M)

2006- Story County, Iowa

Control Prophylactic IPM Seed treatment45

50

55

60

65

70No significant difference among treatments

Mea

n yi

eld

bu p

er a

cre

(+SE

M)

2007-Story County, Iowa

Control Prophylactic IPM Seed treatment45

50

55

60

65

70

A

A

B

C

Significant difference among treatments.