FCN Logo College of Agricultural Sciences Penn State

November 19, 1999 Vol. 99.12

IN THIS ISSUE:

Index of 1999 Articles

Mark Your Calendar

Production

Pest Management

Agents Corner

INDEX OF 1999 ARTICLES

Vol. 99:1 - March 5

Vol. 99:2 - April 9

Vol. 99:3 - May 7

Vol. 99:4 - May 21

Vol. 99:5 - June 4

Vol. 99:6 - June 18

Vol. 99:7 - July 2

Vol. 99:8 - July 16

Vol. 99:9 - August 6

Vol. 99:10 - September 3

Vol. 99:11 - October 8

Vol. 99:12 - November 19

DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY - FY2000 EXTENSION EDUCATIONAL MEETING SCHEDULE



DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY - FY2000 EXTENSION EDUCATIONAL MEETING SCHEDULE - For specific information about a meeting, contact the local county extension office where the meeting is to be held.
Date County Specialists
Dec. 15 Fayette Hall
Jan. 10, 11, 12 Clarion Beegle
Jan. 17 Elk Lingenfelter
Jan. 20 Lebanon Yocum
Jan. 21 Lycoming Yocum & Curran
Jan. 25 Bucks Yocum
Jan. 25 Montgomery Hall
Jan. 26-28 Berks, Lehigh/Northampton, Chester Hall or Beegle
Feb. 1 Decision 2000 - Allentown Roth
Feb. 1, 2, 3 Beaver, Butler, Lawrence Curran & Hall
Feb. 3 Lebanon Hatley & Yocum
Feb. 8 PA Corn and Soybean Conference- Grantville Roth
Feb. 9 or 16 Columbia Curran or Lingenfelter
Feb. 11 Franklin Hall
Feb. 15 York Roth or Yocum
Feb. 15 (day) Clarion Curran and Hall
Feb. 15 (evening) Armstrong Curran and Hall
Feb. 16 Indiana Curran and Hall
Feb. 17 (day) Westmoreland Curran and Hall
Feb. 17 (evening) Venango Curran or Lingenfelter & Hall
Feb. 18 Mercer Curran or Lingenfelter & Hall
Feb. 22 Lebanon - Weed School Curran
Feb. 23 Franklin - Weed School Curran
Feb. 23 Susquehanna Roth
Feb. 24 Bradford Roth
Feb. 25 Juniata - Weed School Curran
Feb. 28 Northwest Grazing Conference - Clarion Hall
Feb. 28 Perry Roth
Feb. 29 Tri County Agronomy School - Gratz Roth
Feb. 29 Tillage Conference - Lawrence Curran
March 1 & 2 Grazing & Forage Conference - Grantville Hall
March 2 Bedford - Weed School Curran
March 6 Bedford Beegle
March 7 or 9 Berks or Lehigh Horse School Hall
March 9 Schuylkill Co. Crops Clinic Roth
March 13, 14, 15 Tioga, Bradford, Sullivan Hall and Lingenfelter
March 23 Fulton Lingenfelter, Roth & Calvin

Production:

CROP INSURANCE EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Many of us really never thought that much about crop insurance. But this year's drought and the devastating financial impact on some of our grain producers was a wake up call for producers and suppliers about the need for crop insurance. Traditionally, for a number of reasons, Pennsylvania producers have not been heavy users of crop insurance. In many of the Midwest states over 80% of the eligible acres are insured annually- here in Pennsylvania in 1998 it was about 20%. Industry experts estimate that if we would have been insured at Iowa levels last year, it would have meant an additional 180 million dollars in our ag economy. Much of these benefits likely would have gone to pay for input costs on drought stunted crops.

This summer, The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture formed a Task Force to study this problem and propose changes in crop insurance programs to make them more attractive to Pennsylvania producers. I was asked to serve on the Task Force and found that there are legitimate reasons for low enrollment in our state, but there are also many opportunities for using crop insurance as part of financing or grain marketing that many producers are unaware of. The Task Force, with the help of Secretary Hayes, was able to get several important changes made to existing crop insurance programs for next year. We also are initiating an educational program to make everyone aware of the potential of new and existing crop insurance programs.

There is a satellite downlink on crop insurance from PSU scheduled for 12/9/99. The title is: "PA Crop Insurance: What's New For The Year 2000". This program will be on air from 7:00 pm - 9:30 pm. Call your county office to see if they will be offering the program or Ag Information at 814-865-6309 for information on the program. Tapes of the program will be available after the event and should be a good resource also.

Also at the Corn and Soybean Conference on Feb. 8 in Camp Hill, we will be featuring Gene Gantz of Ag Risk Strategies. Gene is an expert in crop insurance and has much experience in making it work effectively for grain producers. He has also played a key role in the Task Force.

I encourage you to make producers aware of these events and encourage them and you to attend.

CORN INTERNET TIDBITS

The 1999 Hybrid Corn Performance Reports should be online soon. We anticipate the zone 4 and 3 reports will be online during the week of November 22 at our web site at http://cropsoil.psu.edu/extension/extension.cfm. Many have asked about the performance of Bt, IMI and RR hybrids this year. Several of those hybrids are included in this years reports. Other zones and hard copies will follow soon. Adobe versions of the reports will be available later on our College fact sheet website (see below).

Our College of Agricultural Sciences has developed a Publications web page with all college extension publications, including all of our Agronomy Fact sheets in pdf. format. There you will be able to print all fact sheets and variety test reports using Adobe Acrobat Reader 3.0 or later. You can find the agronomy publications at: http://http://pubs.cas.psu.edu/.

Greg Roth
Agronomy, Corn Management

Pest Management:

HERBICIDE CARRYOVER - A CONCERN IN 2000?

A number of questions have been asked recently concerning the potential for herbicide carryover in 2000 from 1999 applications. Certainly, the dry weather will increase the chance of problems with some products. It may be too late for fall seeded small grains (keep your fingers crossed), but for spring planting, a number of precautions should be followed. Check the herbicide label for specific recrop information, but here are some general questions and answers about carryover injury.

Questions to ask!

What products did you use in 1999, how long do they persist, and what crops are sensitive to the soil residues? Also, how does weather, soil type, and management impact carryover? See the following tables and comments for some general guidelines.

Bill Curran, Agronomy

Table 1.Herbicides of concern and susceptible crops.
Corn Sensitive crops Other
Atrazine products Small grains, forage legumes and grasses, vegetables Use caution: rates of 1.0 to 1.25 lb/acre can still cause problems. Check soil pH.
Exceed Forage legumes, soybeans, sorghum, vegetables High soil pH and dry weather are potential problem areas.
Lightning Non-IMI corn, forage legumes, soybeans, sorghum, vegetables Dry weather causes potential problems.
Simazine (Princep) Small grains, forage legumes and grasses, vegetables Use caution: rates of 1.0 to 1.25 lb/acre can still cause problems. Check soil pH.
Spirit Forage legumes, soybeans, sorghum, vegetables High soil pH and dry weather are potential problem areas.
Soybeans    
Canopy or Canopy XL Corn, sorghum, forage legumes and grasses, vegetables High soil pH is the problem.
Classic Corn, sorghum, forage legumes and grasses, vegetables High soil pH is the problem.
Command Corn, sorghum, forage legumes and grasses, small grains, vegetables Dry weather and heavy soil causes potential problems.
Pursuit (imazethapyr products) Corn, forage legumes and grasses, sorghum, vegetables Dry weather causes potential problems.
Reflex (fomesafen products) Forage legumes, sorghum, vegetables Dry weather and heavy soil causes potential problems.
Scepter (imazaquin products) Corn, forage legumes and grasses, sorghum, vegetables Dry weather causes potential problems.
Synchrony Corn, forage legumes and grasses, sorghum, vegetables High soil pH is the problem


Table 2. Soil and climatic conditions that increase the persistence of selected herbicides (ranked in order of importance; 1= most, 3 = least). Higher clay and organic matter soils would generally be silty clay loams or clay loams (i.e. greater than 3% OM).
Importance Command
(clomazone)		 Atrazine Scepter,
Pursuit,
Lightning		 Canopy,
Classic,
Exceed,
Synchrony, etc.
1 Low rainfall High soil pH Low rainfall high pH
2 high clay/OM Low rainfall High clay/OM High clay/OM
3 High or low soil pH High clay/OM Low soil pH Low rainfall
OM = soil organic matter

Bill Curran, Agronomy, Weed Science

MANAGING WEEDS IN ROUNDUP READY CORN: STUDY RESULTS

With the recent introduction of Roundup Ready corn, some questions have been raised regarding the best herbicide programs and application timing for Roundup Ultra to obtain effective weed control and prevent crop yield loss. This past summer, several county agents conducted a field trial at six locations (Lawrence, Crawford, Juniata, York, Lebanon, and Wayne counties) in Pennsylvania to help answer these questions. The herbicides included several standard treatments and Roundup Ultra applied at different timings (see Table 3).

Although weed species and severity differed across locations, giant foxtail, common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, smooth pigweed, common ragweed, Pennsylvania smartweed, and yellow nutsedge were most often present. The York County site was dominated by johnsongrass. Weeds and corn grain yield were collected at the end of season.

In Lawrence, Wayne, Lebanon, and Juniata counties, application timing was not statistically significant so the data from these locations were combined. At these locations, all herbicide treatments effectively controlled the weeds, while weed dry matter in the untreated plot averaged 2219 lb/acre (Table 3). At Crawford County, the late-postemergence application of Roundup Ultra was ineffective probably due to the larger weeds and poor spray coverage because of large corn, as well as more plentiful rainfall (Table 3). At York County, Bicep II Magnum plus Prowl was the only treatment not different from the untreated control; this was primarily due poor control of johnsongrass (Table 3).

Corn yield ranged from an average low of 40 bu/acre in Wayne County to a high of 160 bu/acre in Lawrence County. Across locations corn yield in the untreated plots averaged 47 bu/acre while the herbicide treatments ranged from 86 to 97 bu/acre.

In summary, a single post application of Roundup Ultra effectively controlled the weeds and prevented corn yield loss at four of six locations in 1999. This was likely because of the dry weather and the weed species present at those locations. In other research over the past two years in Pennsylvania and across the corn belt, the performance of one application of Roundup or other similar programs (e.g., Liberty) varied and in many situations one application will not provide acceptable control. Opportunity certainly exists for single pass post applications, but more information on specific weed species, severity, soil moisture conditions, planting date, and climatic forecasting is necessary.

Table 3. Weed dry matter (lb/A) and corn yields (bu/A) from Roundup Ready corn studies in six Pa. counties.
  Rate Combined* Crawford York
Herbicide Treatment   -----Weed dry weight (lb/A)-----
Untreated   2219 2660 2041
Bicep II Magnum + Prowl (pre) 1.6 qt/A + 3.0 pt/A 180 68 2518
HarnessXtr (pre) fb** Roundup Ultra (post) 2.0 qt/A fb 1 qt/A 43 4 201
Roundup Ultra (early post) 1 qt/A 124 107 321
Roundup Ultra + atrazine (early post) 1 qt/A + 1 lb/A 94 23 625
Roundup Ultra (early post) fb Roundup Ultra (late post) 1 qt/A fb 1.5 pt/A 80 22 135
Roundup Ultra (post) 1 qt/A 63 133 368
Roundup Ultra (late post) 1 qt/A 88 1557 226
  LSD 221 1305 598
Herbicide Treatment   --------Corn yield (bu/A)--------
Untreated   52 28 45
Bicep II Magnum + Prowl (pre) 1.6 qt/A + 3.0 pt/A 94 103 55
HarnessXtr (pre) fb** Roundup Ultra (post) 2.0 qt/A fb 1 qt/A 96 111 74
Roundup Ultra (early post) 1 qt/A 100 113 71
Roundup Ultra + atrazine (early post) 1 qt/A + 1 lb/A 91 126 90
Roundup Ultra (early post) fb Roundup Ultra (late post) 1 qt/A fb 1.5 pt/A 95 110 92
Roundup Ultra (post) 1 qt/A 91 96 68
Roundup Ultra (late post) 1 qt/A 94 78 63
  LSD 16 31 21
*Combined data for Lawrence, Wayne, Lebanon, and Juniata counties
**fb = followed by

Dwight Lingenfelter, Bill Curran, Ryan Hockensmith, Greg Hostetter, Joel Hunter, Dave Messersmith, John Rowehl, Del Voight, and Tom Zundel - Agronomy

Agents Corner:

CRAWFORD/ERIE COUNTIES

Greetings from Northwestern PA. I have been working this season with several members of the "Erie County Producers' Group" who wanted to put out some machine-harvestable corn silage plots to make some on-farm comparisons of various corn varieties of their own choosing. These producers each selected the varieties they were interested in and planted paired "long" rows, roughly from 750 to 1750 feet long. On each farm, the plots were all harvested the same day by chopping the two rows of a particular variety over a measured distance into either a mixer wagon with scales or a wagon that was then weighed with portable scales. For each variety, a sample was taken for later quality analysis and an immediate moisture determination.

A total of thirty-four plots from five farms were harvested. Silage yields at 65% moisture have averaged 19.5 tons per acre with a low of 10.9 tons per acre and a high of 27.4 tons per acre. Eighteen of the plots (over 50%) had yields of 20 tons per acre or more. Moisture content at harvest averaged 64% as harvested with a low of 49% and a high of 74%. Three of the five farms' harvesters had kernel processors.

There are several comments and/or interpretations I'd like to make about these silage yield determinations so far. First, there were some excellent yields! Such outstanding production was striking in light of the limited amount of rainfall received this season. My best explanation for this has to do with the fact that soil temperatures hit the "magic" 50 degree F mark late in April and only went up from there. The warm soil temperatures early along with the drier than normal soils during the early season probably forced roots to go deep. If this actually occurred, it may have played a critical role with later season moisture limitations. Also, what little rain we had, seemed to be just enough at just the right time. However, there were also some large differences in yield, even within a given farm. On one farm with nine plots, although five of the varieties yielded over 20 tons per acre, there was also a variety that tied for the low yield of 10.9 tons per acre. This wide variability would seem to indicate a real need to look for hybrids that are well adapted to a particular farm, soils, and/or conditions.

Fresh chopped samples were frozen the day of harvest. All of the samples were submitted for analyses including lignin and 30-hour in vitro digestibility. We are eagerly awaiting the results of the analyses. Preliminary reports indicate a considerable range in digestibility. This winter, we hope to collectively study the yield, analytical results, and seed costs to get some insights into silage hybrid selection.

I'd like to thank the cooperators for their interest and effort at conducting some on-farm trials. I think it's well worth the effort. I hope to do a little educational programming this winter on conducting on-farm plots. With just a little more effort and planning to include some replication and randomization, such efforts could produce some statistically valid data that could be very useful and much more significant.

Joel M. Hunter, CCA
Agronomy, Crawford & Erie Counties

DAUPHIN COUNTY

As of November 14 the fall harvest period is rapidly coming to a close. Grain harvest was slow to get started but ideal fall weather and low crop yields has lead to a rapid pace. Yields of corn range from 15 to 135 bu/acre. Beans yields are from 10 to 40 bu/acre.

Forage harvest has been occurring since mid October. Many grass stands were harvested in early November and more than a few were harvested as small hand bales. One hay marketer cut a stand of barley planted in August and harvested approximately 1 ton of dry matter per acre of a stand that had reached nearly low calf (on your leg) height.

Winter small grains, established in mid to late October do not appear to be developing as rapidly as would be expected. Dry soil conditions have provided good opportunities for field work but may be limiting small grain development. The drought may be over in the press, but the small streams and creeks are remaining at below seasonal levels.

Paul Craig
Dauphin County

NORTH CENTRAL SUSQUEHANNA REGION

It's been the craziest of years --the worst of droughts, but in quite a few fields, the best of crops. It all came down to whether you got the few isolated showers that went through this summer. The corn crop is 75% harvested and ranging in yield from 35 to 218 bu/acre in Lycoming Co. Moisture content of the grain at harvest was in the very low twenties to mid teens with some under 15%. Test weight on much of the crop is good or better. Corn borer and rootworm damage is mixed with some areas hit hard and other areas with little to no damage. In areas of heavy rootworm pressure, even first year fields have significant damage. Bt. hybrids are looking good for growers that have them and more are indicating the switch to them next year with their only reservation being the attention currently given to GMO crops. Soybean yields are also variable in the area but are generally stronger then corn. Many fields are 40 bu/acre or better in spite of the dry summer. Our experience has been that beans are not hit nearly as hard as corn during a drought. Podding seemed to be lower to the ground which made harvest slower. Several fields I checked ran in the mid-60's. Roundup Ready beans were by far the nicest with good weed control, but they are also the most popular locally which is the trend nationwide. As with the Bt. corn mentioned before, more growers will be going this direction in the spring.

Reports of mills not taking biotech grains have not been true locally, with producers main concern now being the low commodity prices overall. The only positive aspects on marketing the crop has been the strong local basis and the benefit of the LDP that growers are locking in for their fall grain crop.

Late forage crops are coming off the field due to the later than normal growing season for some and the good fall harvest weather. Due to the shortage of forage, many growers are taking all they can harvest to make up for early season shortfalls. Most are following the hay markets and have little interest at having to purchase hay at current or anticipated auction prices. Pasture growth has come to a standstill and rotational graziers are about the only ones with animals still gaining while on pasture. Winter small grains are looking real nice due to ample soil moisture and timeliness of planting.

Tom Murphy
Lycoming County

WAYNE COUNTY

A cold northwesterly wind is bringing a dusting of snow to Wayne County as I write this column, marking an end to the 1999 cropping year. The corn silage harvest has long been completed with only an occasional field left here and there for "picking corn." Silage yields were better than we expected, although yields were still 30% to 40% lower than normal - whatever normal is. More than a few corn silage fields were chopped either too wet or too dry so I expect to see some feeding and nutrition related problems this winter as a result.

Some producers were out as late as mid November chopping or wrapping the last of the ample fall forage growth knowing every ton is going to be needed this year. As we head into winter, hay stocks are less than adequate on many farms with any surpluses already spoken for. A lot of producers have purchased hay from New York, Wisconsin, South Dakota, and Nebraska at prices that are competitive with locally grown hay. Still, prices are high especially for producers that don't typically have to buy hay. Combine tight forage supplies with falling milk prices and we are looking at a long winter ahead. The one bright spot for our dairymen is the relatively cheap price of corn and soybeans projected to hold through spring.

Dave Messersmith
Wayne County

William S. Curran
Associate Professor Weed Science
email: wsc2@psu.edu

Back to:

Website Address: http://fcn.agronomy.psu.edu/