Soybean Cyst Nematode: Seed Treatments and Other ...€¦ · on soybean yield and SCN population densities - 2011 Collaborators: George Bird, Jason Bond, Carl Bradley, Anne Dorrance,

Soybean Cyst Nematode: Seed Treatments and Other Management

Strategies!

Phillip Glogoza Extension Educator, Crops

Prairie Grains Conference December 10, 2015

How can we manage SCN? • We can manage this

– Keep your egg levels low • Look for it

– Soil Testing & in-season digging • Plant Resistance • Rotation • Seed Treatments

Soybean cyst nematode surveys

Soybean Growers NEED to begin their own SURVEILLANCE Program

Survey Outcome: • Data from

Minnesota (2012) and North Dakota (2013 - 2014) representing Incidence and Severity for SCN in the region.

Soybean cyst nematode surveys

Soybean Growers NEED to begin their own SURVEILLANCE Program

Survey Outcome: • Data from

Minnesota (2012) and North Dakota (2013 - 2014) representing Incidence and Severity for SCN in the region.

SCN egg counts from soil samples collected from wind blown soil in road ditches . . .




Current choices

Soybean cyst nematode Seed Treatments

ClarivaTM Seed Treatment

Effects of Avicta®, N-Hibit®, and Votivo® on soybean yield and SCN population densities - 2011

Collaborators: George Bird, Jason Bond, Carl Bradley, Anne Dorrance, Paul Esker, Jamal Faghihi, Loren Giesler, Buyung Hadi, Doug Jardine, Dean Malvick, Sam Markell, Terry Niblack, Laura Sweets, Albert Tenuta and Greg Tylka

In general, no consistent effect on season-long SCN reproduction (as measured by final versus initial egg population densities) were observed.


Variety sites included seed treatment evaluation • Nematicide was primary objective

2013 Soybean cyst nematode Variety Trials

2013 NW MN Seed Treatment Study for SCN Management

Treatments Yield (bu/A @ 13%) Post SCN*

Variety ** Nematicide Insecticide Fungicide W/ SCN W/O SCN AVG Eggs/100cc

S for SCN ---- ---- ---- 13.6 22.7 18.1 8,000 S for SCN ---- ---- Yes 10.7 27.4 19.1 11,375 S for SCN ---- Cruiser Yes 4.4 28.9 16.6 9,913 S for SCN Avicta Cruiser Yes 13.2 26.6 19.8 13,638

MS for SCN ---- ---- ---- 33.4 32.6 33.0 1,438 MS for SCN Votivo Poncho Yes 32.9 33.5 33.2 1,013 ** S = Susceptible; MS = Moderately Susceptible * Average for Pre season SCN: 190 eggs/100cc, sampled 2nd week of June

11 © 2014 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved.

11 11

2014 and 2015 Statewide trials on Clariva Complete

Funded by MSR&PC Seed and treatments supplied by Syngenta Crop Protection


2014 – 2015 Statewide trials on Clariva Complete

Funded by Minnesota Soybean Research & Promotion Council Seed and treatments supplied by Syngenta Crop Protection

Bruce Potter, Senyu Chen, Phillip Glogoza, Ryan Miller,

David Nicolai Seth Naeve, Dean Malvick in Cooperation with UMN Soybean Breeding Project

13 © 2015 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved. Bruce Potter 11/2014

2014 - 2015 Statewide Soybean seed treatment study locations Co-located with U of M Soybean breeding project Soil samples for soil fertility, SCN eggs, SBA, Yield


ClarivaTM Seed Treatment Target Pest: Soybean Cyst Nematode Active Ingredient: a proprietary seed treatment

nematicide based on Pasteuria nishizawae, a naturally occurring soil bacteria.

First available in the 2014 growing season Clariva™ Complete Beans

CruiserMaxx® Beans with Vibrance® insecticide/fungicide Pasteuria nishizawae, Sedaxane, Thiamethoxam, Fludioxonil, Mefenoxam



2014 STATEWIDE CLARIVA Seed Treatment: breakdown of treatments by active ingredient

Nematicide Insecticide ----------------------- Fungicide -----------------------

Untreated ---- ---- ---- ---- ----

Clariva Complete P. nishizawae (Clariva©)

thiamethoxam (Cruiser©)

mefenoxam (Apron©)

fludioxomil (Maxim©)

sedaxane (Vibrance©)

CruiserMaxx + Vibrance ---- thiamethoxam

(Cruiser©) mefenoxam

(Apron©) fludioxomil

(Maxim©) sedaxane (Vibrance©)


2015 Changes Added an addition fungicide

(Mertec) – Examine increased activity

spectrum Added iLeVo

– Proported to have SCN activity

– ONLY in SDS areas in southern MN

2015 STATEWIDE NEMATICIDE- TREATMENTS Soybean SCN Seed

Treatment Variety Resistant Treatment

Northern1 S06-H5 Y Untreated2 S06-H5 Y Clariva Complete3 S06-H5 Y Cruiser Maxx + Vibrance4 S06-H5 Y Cruiser Maxx 5 S06-H5 Y Clariva Complete + Mertec

6 S08-G1 N Untreated7 S08-G1 N Clariva Complete8 S08-G1 N Cruiser Maxx + Vibrance9 S08-G1 N Cruiser Maxx 10 S08-G1 N Clariva Complete + Mertec

Southern1 S22-S1 Y Untreated2 S22-S1 Y Clariva Complete3 S22-S1 Y Cruiser Maxx + Vibrance4 S22-S1 Y Cruiser Maxx 5 S22-S1 Y Clariva Complete + Mertec

6 S22-F8 N Untreated7 S22-F8 N Clariva Complete8 S22-F8 N Cruiser Maxx + Vibrance9 S22-F8 N Cruiser Maxx 10 S22-F8 N Clariva Complete + Mertec

11* CropPlan Y EverGol Energy + iLeVo12* CropPlan Y EverGol Energy


2014 STATEWIDE CLARIVA – PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE

Factorial ANOVASCN YIELD SCN Pf/Pi (reprod. Factor)Pi p(F) p(F) p(F) p(F) p(F) p(F)rating* Variety Seed trt Variety x Seed trt Variety Seed trt Variety x Seed trt

Becker 1 0.3768 0.1345 0.7091 0.0158 0.2218 0.1843Westbrook(Dovray) 3 0.3430 0.2339 0.7827 0.0012 0.4270 0.7789Lamberton( Non-infested) 2 0.5107 0.7320 0.9824 0.2142 0.5099 0.4031Lamberton (Infested) 3 0.0009 0.1655 0.7864 0.0001 0.1364 0.0248Fairfax 3 0.0001 0.3786 0.2412 0.0001 0.5309 0.9018Waseca (infested) 4 No yield - Hail damage 0.1569 0.9669 0.5658Rochester - Lawler 1 0.5422 0.0100 0.7442 0.4397 0.7582 0.8304High Tower -Welter 4 0.0010 0.4453 0.4851 0.0008 0.0612 0.0174Rosemount - (infested) 2 0.0385 0.8216 0.8552 0.0640 0.8436 0.7802Rosemount (non-infested) 2 0.1171 0.5029 0.4150 0.0000 0.9134 0.8585Morris 2 0.5054 0.4712 0.4350 0.0029 0.3071 0.2613Danvers 3 0.4572 0.5822 0.9901 0.5096 0.5615 0.5736Crookston 1 0.0000 0.2833 0.1257 No SCNShelley 1 0.2383 0.9867 0.3770 0.3332 0.3911 0.3911TRF 2 0.2002 0.9174 0.7573 0.0078 0.4297 0.4370Moorhead-Kragnes 1 0.0013 0.4161 0.2865 0.0732 0.9577 0.9249Gary 3 0.0004 0.0474 0.1221 0.0000 0.9738 0.8568Kent 3 No yield - Herbicide damage 0.0281 0.2502 0.3331Mahnomen 2 0.0000 0.2833 0.1257 0.0019 0.4822 0.5965Roseau 1 0.9900 0.8135 0.2162 No SCN*SCN Pi rating: 1= <50 2 = 51-250 3 = 251-2500 4 > 2501-10000 5 > 10000

Shading indicates significant statistical response at the p = 0.10

18 © 2015 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved. Bruce Potter 2015

2015 STATEWIDE CLARIVA STUDY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE - PRELIMINARY

Factorial ANOVAProbabilities SCN

Pi p(F) p(F) p(F) p(F) p(F) p(F)rating* Variety Seed trt Variety x Seed trt Variety Seed trt Variety x Seed trt

Becker 2 0.0000 0.6490 0.4111 0.0012 0.3723 0.6859Lamberton( Non-infested) 2 0.0000 0.0282 0.5358 0.0000 0.2213 0.1775Lamberton (Infested) 4 0.0220 0.4042 0.3043 0.0106 0.5998 0.5998Fairfax 3 0.0000 0.9065 0.1838 0.0000 0.3630 0.3938Waseca (Non-infested) 1 0.5831 0.6242 0.9706 0.1175 0.1908 0.1908Waseca (infested) 4 0.896 0.7345 0.7200 0.0008 0.3421 0.5414

Danvers 1 0.0130 0.2061 0.0688 0.1280 0.6393 0.4298Calloway 1 0.0917 0.1790 0.6275TRF 1 0.2469 0.2544 0.6099Gary 1 0.6707 0.1586 0.9596 0.0060 0.5739 0.5884Downer 2 0.1797 0.2926 0.1743 0.0174 0.3824 0.5885*SCN Pi rating: 1= <50 2 = 51-250 3 = 251-2500 4 > 2501-10000 5 > 10000Variety 0= SUSC 1= RESSEED TRT 0 = NONE 1= Clariva Complete 2 Cruiser Max + vibrance

3= ApronMaxx 4=Clariva Complete + Mertec

YIELD SCN eproductive factor (SCN Pf/Pi)


2015 STATEWIDE CLARIVA MULTI-SITE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE -PRELIMINARY

Yield SCN reproduction

Factorial ANOVA p(F) Pf/Pi (p(F) *SITE 0.9843 0.0000VARIETY (SCN RES.) 0.0000 0.0000SEED TRT. 0.0014 1 0.5709SITE * VARIETY (SCN RES.) 0.0000 0.0000SITE * SEED TRT. 0.7875 0.7448VARIETY (SCN RES. ) * SEED TRT. 0.0127 0.7433SITE* VARIETY (SCN RES.) * SEED TRT. 0.7219 0.7952

1 Untreated yield less than any fungide only and Clariva Complete+ Mertec for Southern variety set only


Variety (SCN resistance) had a significant effect on yield in many locations

Variety (SCN resistance) had consistent, significant effect on SCN reproduction in SCN infested locations

Seed treatments did not provide a consistent effect on yield or SCN reproduction. – Fungicide effect was observed on Southern Treatments and contributed

to statewide statistical effect.

Data suggest seed treatments should be targeted, not used as a universal prophylactic

OBSERVATIONS


Variability within field/plot area makes research on and management of SCN difficult.

RECOMMENDATIONS

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

05001000150020000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1500-2000

1000-1500

500-1000

0-500

Kent, MN Soybean Cyst Nematode -- Pre-Season SCN Egg Counts, 2012

Eggs / 100cc

23

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Soybean Cyst Nematode Seed Treatment Trial 2015 - Gary, MN

October SCN counts (# / 100cc soil)

0-5000 5000-10000 10000-15000 15000-20000 20000-25000

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Soybean Cyst Nematode Seed Treatment Trial 2015 - Gary, MN

June SCN counts (# / 100cc soil)

0-100 100-200 200-300 300-400




2013 – 4 locations with same varieties 2014 – 3 locations with same varieties 2014 – 4 locations with same varieties released varieties and experimental lines

• Conventional weed control

• Pre and Post SCN counts

• Conducted cooperatively with the UMN Soybean Variety Breeding Project

Soybean cyst nematode Variety Trials

Soybean cyst nematode Variety Trials - 2015

z.umn.edu/2015mnsoybeantrials

Soybean cyst nematode Variety Trials - 2015

z.umn.edu/2015mnsoybeantrials




Why rotate? • Prevent or Fix biological problems

– Prevent or slow economic pest population buildup • Reduce populations of persistent pests

– Delay development of economic levels of resistance • Field specific for pests with limited mobility

– Allow more effective management with plant protection chemical & host plant resistance


WHEN IS A ROTATION NOT A ROTATION? Volunteers Weedy hosts Use same crop genetics


SCN resistance is not immunity

SCN resistance is declining under single tactic approach (PI 88788)

– Shifts may not be reversible

Working with multiple genes is tough

Watch for symptoms Use rotation

EVENTUALLY, THINGS GO WRONG

CORN - SOYBEAN ROTATION

4 YEARS CORN

PI 88788 resistant soybean. Brown County, MN 2015.


Scout and soil sample fields to determine level of SCN Problem and effectiveness of Host plant resistance (HPR)

HPR works for now, for most producers. Just rotating resistance sources is not enough.

– Crop rotation is an important component of SCN management!

Data suggest a targeted approach to seed treatments, not universal prophylaxis

RECOMMENDATIONS

35

© 2014 Regents of the University of Minnesota. All rights reserved. The University of Minnesota is an equal opportunity educator and employer. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, this PowerPoint is available in alternative formats upon request. Direct requests to the Extension Store at 800-876-8636.

Bruce Potter 2/18/2014

Thanks for listening!

Questions?

Documents

Soybean Cyst Nematode: Seed Treatments and Other ...€¦ · on soybean yield and SCN population densities - 2011 Collaborators: George Bird, Jason Bond, Carl Bradley, Anne Dorrance,