Ivo Brants_Tillage_Prague_June2011

Roundup Ready® Maized till tiand tillage practices

Prague June 2011Prague , June 2011

Ivo BrantsRegulatory Sciences Lead, EMEA

Controlling weeds has been a challenge throughout the history of agriculturehistory of agriculture

• Prior to chemical herbicides, tillage and other mechanical methods were the primary weed control tools

• Extensive tillage was a contributing factor to the Dust Bowl in the 1930’s which led to1930 s which led to the formation of NRCS and the move towards conservation tillagetillage

1930’s 1940’s 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s 2000’s

Photo courtesy of USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service2

Technological advances have increased the number of tools available for controlling weedstools available for controlling weeds

• The invention of synthetic chemical herbicides in the 1950’s and 1960’s offered 1950 s and 1960 s offered growers a new set of tools for controlling weeds

• Roundup and other broad spectrum herbicides offered farmers a new burndown tool

1930’s 1940’s 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s 2000’s

Photos courtesy of USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service3

Biotechnology has provided growers with additional tools in their quest to control weedstoo s t e quest to co t o eeds

Growers have adopted these crops broadly due to several

key benefits to their weed

Herbicide tolerant crops have enabled growers to use broad spectrum herbicides in crop key benefits to their weed

control systemsp pfor greater weed control

EfficacyEfficacy

Convenience Cost

1930’s 1940’s 1950’s 1960’s 1970’s 1980’s 1990’s 2000’s

4

Adoption of Herbicide Tolerant traits(% surface cultivated, source USDA)

100

(% surface cultivated, source USDA)

708090 Soja (31 M ha)

Cotton (3 M ha)

Maíze (32 M ha)

405060 Sugar Beet (0,45 M ha)

10203040

010

Role of Maize in the EU 27 Crop Rotationp

Member State Maize area(1 000 ha)

% area corn after corn(1.000 ha) corn after corn

France 3127.6 31%Romania 2819.6 41%Germany 1738.9 19%It l 1411 7 43%Italy 1411.7 43%Hungary 1308.5 14%Poland 656.7 30%Spain 507.4 29%B l i 380 9 35%Bulgaria 380.9 35%Czech Rep. 281.3 11%Austria 252.5 21%Netherlands 249.1 66%Sl ki 245 1 11%Slovakia 245.1 11%Belgium 215.0 32%Greece 200.0 29%Portugal 162.0 29%

Analysis of the economic, social and environmental impacts of options for the longterm EU strategy against Diabrotica virgifera (Western Corn Rootworm), a regulated harmful organism ofmaize, to support the drafting of the Commission Impact Assessment. (Final report). European Commission, DG SANCO, Rue de la Loi 200, 1049 Brussels, 04.06.2009

Major Weeds in European Maize Production(Bi)Annual dicots Annual grasses Perennial dicots Perennial grasses

Amaranthus retroflexus Alopecurus myosuroides Cirsium arvense Agropyron repens

Capsella bursa-pastoris Digitaria sp. Convolvulus arvensis Cynodon dactylon

Chenopodium album Echinochloa crus-galli Cyperus rotundus

Datura stramonium Poa annua Sorghum halepenseg p

Galium aparine Setaria sp.

Lamium sp.

M t i iMajor weed control strategies in European maize production:

Matricaria sp.

Polygonum sp.

Solanum nigrum

• Around 50 maize selective active substances on Annex 1 of EU Directive91/414. General trend goes to less compounds in the future.

• Between 14 and 33 active substances registered per member state

Stellaria media

Veronica sp.

Xanthium sp.

• Herbicides are usually mixed to control the local weed flora

• 1 or 2 (seldom 3) herbicide applications per maize crop

• Application timings differ widely. There is a tendency towards pre-li ti i S th E d t d tXanthium sp.

Geranium sp.

emergence applications in Southern Europe and towards post-emergence treatments in Northern Europe.

Weeds represent a significant threat to agricultural productivity and cause losses even with control efforts

• Potential crop losses from weeds have been estimated to be 30-

Potential and Actual Production Losses from Weeds for Corn, Soybeans and Cotton Globally

100%n

40% of total productivity for corn, soybeans and cotton

60%70%80%90%

100%

Prod

uctio

n

• 8-10% of productivity is lost using current weed control practices20%

30%40%50%

f Atta

inab

le

0%10%

Cor

n

oybe

ans

Cot

ton

Cor

n

oybe

ans

Cot

ton

Perc

ent o

f

So

So

Potential Loss from Weeds Actual Loss from Weeds

Loss from Weeds Production Potential Net of Loss to Weeds

Source: Adapted from E.-C. Oerke Rhienische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitaet Bonn, Crop losses to pests, 2006, J. of Agricultural Science8

Loss from Weeds Production Potential Net of Loss to Weeds

Roundup Ready® Maize Weed Control Concept 1Roundup Ready® Maize Weed Control Concept 1

1. residual herbicide

2. Roundup(max. 1080 g ae)

3 6 8 corn leaf stage

pre-emergence

g

1. Apply any registered residual maize herbicide at reduced rate before emergence of corn

weed sensitive period

corn

2. Control later emerging weeds with Roundup (max 1080 g ae) by respecting

a) weed height: less than 10 cm

9

) gb) corn growth stage: latest at 3 leaf stage

Weed control in Roundup Ready® Maize in Southern Europecomparison of pre-emergence and post program (3 trials, Spain 2009)comparison of pre emergence and post program (3 trials, Spain 2009)

% c

ontr

ol

t /h

a

Trials with RR-maize in Malpica (Toledo), Spain. June 4th, 2006

37 DAT Harness GTZ 4,5 l/ha 10 DAT Roundup 3 l/ha

Roundup Ready® Maize Weed Control Concept 2

2 R d


1. tank mix Roundup (max. 1080

g ae) and residual herbicide

2. Roundup (max. 1080 g ae)

only if neccessary


1 Apply a tank mix of Roundup and a compatible residual maize herbicide (at reduced


2. In case of high weed pressure apply Roundup again

1. Apply a tank mix of Roundup and a compatible residual maize herbicide (at reduced rate) at 3 leaf stage of corn

12

In both cases the application timing is triggered like in concept 1 by weed height (less than 10 cm) and crop growth stage

Weed control in Roundup Ready® Maize in Northern Europecomparison of pre-emergence versus full post program (5 trials, CZ 2009)comparison of pre emergence versus full post program (5 trials, CZ 2009)

% c

ontr

ol

t /h

a

Roundup Ready® Maize Weed Control Concept 3Roundup Ready® Maize Weed Control Concept 3

2 Roundup1. Roundup(max. 1080 g ae)

2. Roundup(max. 1080 g ae)


1 Apply Roundup at 3 leaf stage of corn


2. Depending on weed pressure apply Roundup a second time latest at 8 leaf stage of corn

1. Apply Roundup at 3 leaf stage of corn

In both cases the application timing is triggered by weed height (less than 10 cm) and

14

In both cases the application timing is triggered by weed height (less than 10 cm) and crop growth stage

(the pure Roundup concept is a prerequisite to register Roundup over the top in Roundup Ready maize)


Roundup


Roundup(max. 1440 g ae)

Especially in warmer climates the late control of perennial weeds like Convolvulus arvensis is

8 corn leaf stage


Especially in warmer climates the late control of perennial weeds like Convolvulus arvensis isa major concern in maize production

The Roundup Ready system in maize offers a new solution for this problem

Start with concept 1 to 3 at max 720 g ae of Roundup at the 1st application

15

Start with concept 1 to 3 at max 720 g ae of Roundup at the 1st applicationApply 1440 g ae of Roundup latest at 8 leaf stage of corn when perennial weeds havesufficient leaf area for take up of glyphosate

Potential Partner Herbicides forPotential Partner Herbicides for Roundup Ready® maize in Europe

Brand name(s) Active ingredient HRAC / Herbicide class Company

Harness, Guardian Acetochlor K3 / Chloroacetamides Monsanto / Dow

Dual Gold s‐Metolachlor K3 / Chloroacetamides Syngenta

Spectrum, Frontier Dimethenamid‐p K3 / Chloroacetamides BASF

Successor Pethoxamid K3 / Chloroacetamides Staehler Int./

Click, Chac,…. Terbuthylazine C1 / PS II Inhibitor several

Clio Topramezone F2 / Inh. of 4‐HPPD BASF

/ /Merlin / Emerode Isoxaflutol F2 / Inh. of 4‐HPPD Bayer

Banvel Dicamba O / Benzoic acid Syngenta

Stomp SC Pendimethalin K1 / Dinitroaniline BASF

16

The Positive impacts of no-till system ‐ 90% less soil erosion.‐ 40% less fuel use.‐Maintenance or improvement of the soil organic matter.‐ Increase in soil fertility /biodiversity (chemical, physical and biological).Higher water use efficiency‐ Higher water use efficiency.

‐ Lower production costs.‐ Higher production stability and yield potential.

TANGIBLE BENEFITS FOR THE FARMER

‐ Better soils, higher capability to produce food and energy.‐ Less competition for drinkable water (strategic resource).p ( g )‐ Higher water quality (lower erosion and contamination risk).‐ GHG emissions reduction, positive impact on climate change.‐ Less pressure on HCV and fragile areas (by production increase).Possibility of producing in degraded and/or fragile lands without the known risks of‐ Possibility of producing in degraded and/or fragile lands without the known risks of

conventional tillage.

BENEFITS TANGIBLE FOR THE SOCIETY

CertifiedAgriculture

The evolution of NT

Roundup® and Roundup Read® crops have enabled the broad expansion of conservation tillage

H bi id U D t d C ti Till Ad ti i U S • Conservation tillage

acres in corn, soybeans and cotton

Herbicide Use Data and Conservation Tillage Adoption in U.S. Corn, Soybeans and Cotton – 1990-2008

have grown by 40M acres between 1990 and 2008 while herbicide use remained flat

• This has dramatically shifted the face ofshifted the face of agriculture with fewer passes in the field, less fuel usage, and reduced erosionreduced erosion

18Sources: GfK, Conservation Technology Information Center (CTIC)

Tillage Practices Before and After Adopting Roundup Ready Crops by Cropping System1

After Roundup Ready% of Growers

16

Before Roundup Ready% of Growers

5437 43

32 4011

43

2916

2920 25

No-Till

26

3542

504773

2844

4351 Reduced

20 2815 18 13

4327

3724 Conv.

*Conventional crop was generally corn or rice1Roundup Ready Crops: Corn, Cotton, Soybean, Source: 2005/2006 Grower Survey

Evolution of Conservation Tillage in Brazil70% of crops in Bra il se the s stem70% of crops in Brazil use the system.50% of the ~1.1 million hectares of cotton use the system today30% of the 13 million ha of maize use the system80% of the 20 million ha of soy use the system

25,500 25,50023,600

21,90020 200

+17%

GMO

20,20018,700

17,400

14,30013,400

11 3005,500

11,300

8,800

5,500

575

85/86 95/96 05/06 96/97 97/9895/96 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06

(in thousand hectares)

20

Source: FEBRADP - Brazilian Federation of No-till Farmers(in thousand hectares)

Evolution Direct Drilling in Argentina 1990/91-2008/09

30Million of ha

20

25

GMO

10

15

GMO

5

10

0

Source : Aapresid

Introduction and adoption of technologies in agriculture in Argentina (1980-2000)

100Adoption of GM varieties

in agriculture in Argentina (1980 2000)

80

rea

(%)

GM varieties

Agro-chemical

40

60

lant

ed a

r guse

No-tillage

20

P

Precision

01990 199519851980 2000

Precision Agriculture

1990 199519851980 2000

Source: Viglizzo, 2006; adapted from Satorre, 2005

Roundup Ready® Maize in Argentina

‐ Adopted by small (< 500 ha), medium, and large farmers (> 5000 ha), since 2004.

‐ 70% of the crops in Argentina are under no‐till.‐ 47% of the corn is RR (mainly NK‐603, and the rest is GA‐21),

offered by around 10 seed companies.y p

Roundup Ready corn weed control program Argentina

FALLOW PLANTING DEVELOPMENT HARVEST

V4-V5

Glyphosate

Residual herbicide

(atrazine, acetochlor)

CertifiedAgriculture

The evolution of NT

GAP 1: No Tillage (residue cover)GAP 1: No Tillage (residue cover)

GAP 2: Crop rotationGAP 2: Crop rotation::

Good Agricultural Practices (GAP)

Why?Why?Because there are scientific fundamentals that GAP 2: Crop rotationGAP 2: Crop rotation::

Diversity and intensityDiversity and intensity correlate soil health indicator values with agronomical practices

GAP GAP 3: Balanced crop nutrition3: Balanced crop nutrition

Nitrogen + Ph h

Control

Phosphor + Sulphur GAP GAP 4:4: Integrated pest

management.

GAP 5: Efficient and responsiblemanagement of agrochemicals

Courtesy Agustín BianchiniAapresid

A Sustainability Indexy

Environmental IndexTopsoil/outputWater use/output

C diA recent survey of Canadian farmers planting herbicide-tolerant canola using conservation tillage

i f d h 86 hpractices found that 86 per cent have reduced soil erosion and 83 per cent indicated greater soil moisture.

26

Source : Smyth et al 2011, Agricultural Systems 104 (2011) 403–410

A Sustainability Index

Environmental IndexTopsoil/outputWater use/outputInputs use/outputLand use/outputEnergy use/outputBiodiversityy

Overall acres converted to/from productionGrower economic indexGrower economic indexAbility to meet global demand

27

Our Vision: Monsanto is the farmer’s leading provider of the most effective, EfficacyEfficacy

affordable, convenient, and sustainable solutions for weed control in Monsanto’s seed & trait systems. Convenience CostConvenience Cost

Sustainable

28

Thank you !Thank you !