[Title will be auto-generated]

CORN SEPTEMBER 2013

SET THE DIAL FOR 300 BUSHELS GERRY GREENFIELD

PUSHES BIG YIELDS

N FIXATION GETS REAL IN CANADIAN CORN ARE SOIL TESTS KEEPING UP WITH YIELDS? SHAW SAYS: WATCH MARKET DEMAND NUMBERS

ONE Bag Field Solutions

Maturity range

genuity® Vt Double PrO® riB Complete®

genuity® Vt triple PrO® riB Complete®

CONTENTS

a4408g2 riB a4631g2 riB a4881g2 riB a4939g2 riB a5004g2 riB a4914g2 riB

a4177g3 riB

a5120g2 riB a5151g2 riB a5909g2 riB a6010g2 riB

a5113g3 riB a5433g3 riB

2800-2975

a6030g8 riB a6272g8 riB a6535g8 riB a6757g8 riB

a6060g2 riB a6419g2 riB a6509g2 riB a6840g2 riB

a6020g3 riB

3000 +

a7188g8 riB a7270g8 riB a7311g8 riB a7880g8 riB

a7160g2 riB a7330g2 riB a8220g2 riB

a8169g3 riB

HerBiCiDe tOleranCe

rOunDuP reaDy® COrn 2 + liBertylink®

Simple solutions for maximum yield potential and automatic refuge compliance.

2200-2500

2525-2750

Simplicity.

ONE Bag Field Solutions for Higher Yields.

Simplicity.

ONE Bag Field Solutions for Automatic Refuge Compliance.

Simplicity.

ONE Bag Field Solutions with Multiple Modes of Insect Protection.

genuity® SmartStax® riB Complete®

refuge

5% riB

rOunDuP reaDy® COrn 2

5% riB

rOunDuP reaDy® COrn 2

10% riB

1.800.265.5280 @PRIDESEEDS

PRIDE is a registered trademark of Limagrain Genetics Inc. used under license. P & Design are registered trademarks of AgReliant Genetics Inc. LibertyLink is a trademark of Bayer.

Genuity®, RIB Complete and Design®, RIB Complete®, SmartStax®, VT Double PRO® and VT Triple PRO® are registered trademarks of Monsanto Technology LLC, Monsanto Canada, Inc. licensee Always follow grain marketing and all other stewardship practices and pesticide label directions. Details of these requirements can be found in the Trait Stewardship Responsibilities Notice to Farmers printed in this publication.

Excellence Through Stewardship® is a registered trademark of Excellence Through Stewardship.

ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Roundup Ready® crops contain genes that confer tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides. Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides will kill crops that are not tolerant to glyphosate.

Genuity and Design®, Genuity Icons, Genuity®, RIB Complete and Design® are trademarks of Monsanto Technology LLC, Monsanto Canada, Inc. licensee.

3 6 8 10

Money from soil Soil test quandary Today’s split N The road to 300-bushel corn 14 Watch those demand numbers 16 Free nitrogen 19 Stopped at the border 22 #PestPatrol CORNGUIDE

One Company.

Experience the Advantage.

prideseed.com

SEPTEMBER 2013

ALL EYES ON FUTURE As market analyst Philip Shaw writes on page 14, there’s no surprise that the bears are finding their way back to Chicago this fall.

Also as he writes, however, the bull may be taking a breather, but it hasn’t given up.

Corn is too valuable in today’s world.

Will we test $8 again in 2013, or even in 2014? That’s impossible to say, but Shaw is confident — and we are too — that such prices will return at some point. With strong demand, and uncertain production, it’s hardly a wild hope.

Prices, however, are only half the story. As production editor Ralph Pearce writes, corn yields have passed the merely unbelievable and now are on the verge of the truly astronomic.

Is a yield of 300 bushels too big to chase?

Not a chance. The hunt is on.

Tom Button, CG Editor, tom.button@fbcpublishing.com

Cornguide

It makes sense to pay farmers to lock carbon in their soils.

But getting there is going to take a leap

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

Money from soil I f Don McCabe and others who share his vision have their way, the next specialized farm product for Ontario growers may be carbon, with farmers getting paid to sequester that increasingly valuable commodity in their soils.

Late in 2012, McCabe was part of a special roundtable discussion organized and hosted by Gord Miller, the environmental commissioner of Ontario. The overall platform for the one-day forum was to explore the relationship between soil health, water pollution, the depletion of resources and the impacts of climate change.

The meeting’s final report is a useful primer on why carbon is such a hot topic in political and scientific circles. Called Investing in Soils for a Sustainable Future, it’s available at www.eco.on.ca.

The science is still incomplete. Some of the sessions attempted to link soil carbon to modern farming practices, partic-

”The public is ready,“says Gord Miller, Ontario environment commissioner. ”Show us that you‘re establishing long-term, high-quality farmland.”

ularly with respect to cover crops and longer rotations. The University of Guelph presentation highlighted the links between climate change, soil health and agricultural productivity, with carbon at the centre of all three, and one contributor argued that conservation tillage, although important for other agronomic reasons, does not sequester carbon.

Other presentations made a case for establishing markets or financial vehicles for soil carbon sequestration as an incentive to farmers. Ian Campbell of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) noted the variability in pricing for carbon, from a low of $7 per tonne in New Zealand to about $30 per tonne in British Columbia.

There were also questions of how to establish a market or an incentive; is it through a cap-and-trade mechanism, or via offsets or some type of carbon or consumer tax?

Not a new issue From McCabe’s perspective, more needs to be done to entice farmers to be part of the solution, especially since it’s their land that is likely to become central to this process. During the roundtable discussion, he disagreed with the final report’s contention that conservation tillage does not sequester carbon, and he Continued on page 4

Corn Guide, September 2013

3

Continued from page 3

stated that “Ontario can either choose to lead or choose to delay another 10 years.”

Farmers can sequester carbon, McCabe believes, but they require a market value and the right policies in place to succeed.

Carbon sequestration has been a hot topic for the better part of a decade. Yet it isn’t an easy topic for farmers to grapple with.

Farmers are used to pricing real, tangible commodities that you truck away from the farm, like corn or beef.

So how do you build a market for something less tangible, like soil carbon?

According to McCabe, it starts with recognizing a key fact. Some farm practices simply aren’t sustainable, especially practices that reduce soil health.

“The biggest issue for our soils is the loss of organic matter, worldwide,” says McCabe, who farms near Inwood, Ont. and is also vice-president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture. “If agriculture is to rebuild, retool or re-establish itself, it needs to have a much better understanding of what it’s doing to its own resources.

The issue then is, how do I get organic matter back into these soils to build soil health, to build soil resiliency, and to build a stronger resource for the future?”

Good news comes on two fronts. First, there’s a growing interest in the relatively new bioeconomy. Sarnia, Ont., once known as the Petro-chemical Valley, is now attracting investment as the Biochemical Valley. There’s growing interest in plant-based plastics, composites and resins. Second, there’s a shift in demographics, says McCabe. Younger farmers are coming to the industry, and by and large, they are more technologically savvy than their parents and grandparents.

“But it still means we need to look at farming in much more of a systems approach,” McCabe says. “The issue is one of ensuring that the soil surface is never left bare. It should always be growing something.”

That also coincides with a renewed interest in cover crops, which was already occurring prior to the drought of 2012 but was certainly bolstered following that event. Yet cover crops are still just one element of an overall carbon plan. And while “doing what’s right” is a nice inducement, as McCabe is quick to note, a market means more.

“The world is now in a global race for where to locate things (such as bio-based refining and processing plants), and we 4

“There‘s no way I want issues such as sustainability to be determined by the government,” McCabe says.

“Nobody understands your farm like you do.” have to be able to illustrate that we are in the best position to be able to do this,” McCabe says, adding that the best way to drive farmers to a cause is to show there’s a market opportunity. A government program may not even be necessary. “There’s no way that I want issues such as sustainability to be determined by the government. Nobody understands your farm like you do, and nobody else in this province farms exactly like anybody else does.

And that’s because everybody who’s out there knows their farms, knows what their current actions are and what their abilities are to maximize their own opportunities.”

It may seem a tall order to ask governments to fund the creation of a carbon sequestration model and then stand aside while the market takes shape. But essentially, that’s what McCabe is advocating.

“You have to start somewhere, and the voluntary markets that were sought have helped influence the other things we’re doing now,” says McCabe, referring to the eventual failure of those platforms. “What happened to the voluntary market in Chicago (which was linked through the CBOT) and what happened to the voluntary market in Europe will have an influence.”

Farming is 10 per cent of the problem, McCabe says But it’s also 20 per cent of the solution.

That means Canada can emerge a carbon winner as a direct result of having one of the most inexpensive and productive food systems in the world.

No question of popularity To Gord Miller, the environmental commissioner of Ontario, the time is right for agriculture to act on what has already been taking shape on several fronts, and take advantage of a societal desire for clean air, clean water and more productive farmland.

One barrier, however, is agriculture’s current focus on commodity-based production. Most of the cropland in Ontario is dedicated to corn, soybeans, wheat and forages, states Miller, and in that environment, government support is likely necessary.

Miller points out that there are two dis-

tinct paradigms in agriculture today: There’s the true “Steward of the Land,” a grower who’s not only focused on the financial aspect of producing food, fibre and fuel but on soil health and diversity.

They are also concerned with public perception that they are doing what’s right to and for the land.

Then there are the large-scale land buyers, some of whom are farmers but some of whom are developers.

“There’s a whole school of thought out there that sees the land as only their private property and they’ll maximize the return and do what they want to do to it,” says Miller. “Show us that you’re establishing long-term, high-quality farmland with good organic matter, and in exchange for that, we’ll make sure that you’re compensated for that.”

As for concerns from the farmer’s side that there’s an urgency to develop a framework against the spectre of some government authority that will otherwise impose its own standards, Miller isn’t convinced of that, either. He’d like to see farming take that “first step,” but the end product will be a new market opportunity.

“In the end, there’s going to be a carbon market, so you have to work with everybody else, you have to work within the terms of the market that’s been laid out,” Miller says, pointing to similar conditions taking shape in Europe and Australia.

Miller also echoes McCabe’s statement from the roundtable, that Ontario can be welcomed as a leader in the development of a carbon market. Despite the establishment of a voluntary market, the U.S. and its anti-climate change political structure is effectively spinning its collective wheels on establishing any form of incentive for improving carbon soil levels, be it through cap-and-trade or a carbon tax.

“It’s wide open,” says Miller. “We can bring to market a salable carbon sequestration product, if we define it properly and stand by it and put in the necessary testing, and we can do that and we can compete with that, because nobody else has done that in our portion of the world.”

Says Miller, “The public is ready to support such things.” CG Corn Guide, September 2013

MORE YIELD, MORE WAYS. GENUITY HAS A REFUGE IN THE BAG SOLUTION THAT’S RIGHT FOR YOUR FARM. ®

THREE GREAT RIB COMPLETE PRODUCTS, FOR SIMPLICITY AND PROTECTION YOUR WAY. ®

Above Ground Protection

BROADEST SPECTRUM

Below Ground Protection

BROADEST SPECTRUM

Refuge Herbicide Tolerance

5% IN THE BAG

5% IN THE BAG

10% IN THE BAG

ROUNDUP READY 2 TECHNOLOGY + LIBERTYLINK®

ROUNDUP READY® 2 TECHNOLOGY

ROUNDUP READY® 2 TECHNOLOGY

®

GENUITY® BECAUSE EVERY KERNEL MATTERS. VISIT YOUR SEED REP OR GENUITYTRAITS.CA ALWAYS FOLLOW IRM, GRAIN MARKETING AND ALL OTHER STEWARDSHIP AND PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Details of these requirements can be found in the Trait Stewardship Responsibilities Notice to Farmers printed in this publication. ©2013 Monsanto Company

CGE LCA00399 4003 GENVT3.indd 1

7/3/13 10:47 AM

Cornguide

Soil test quandary Have soil test standards dropped too far behind today’s yields?

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

I

n the face of increasing yields, particularly in corn, there’s growing debate about soil test standards across Canada. The question continues to pop up at trade shows, conferences, annual meetings and breakfast gatherings. Are our soil test recommendations too old, given today’s yield expectations?

The question often gets asked in the hopes of receiving a simple answer. But just like finding the balance between soil health and high yields, there’s nothing simple about this subject. Nor does this surprise anyone with a farm background. Ask 100 different growers, researchers, advisers or extension personnel and you’re likely to hear 100 different responses.

Some of the complications depend on cropping practices, some hinge on whether there’s a livestock operation involved and others turn on rotations, tillage or weather.

Still, more experts are taking a fresh cr ack at tr y ing to sor t out some answers.

The root of the issue is simple: increasing yield. The popular logic is that since yield is generally on the rise across the board, then farmers should be applying higher levels of phosphorus (P) and potassium (K).

Yet in this case, perception doesn’t always equal reality. Again, the “it depends” phrase creeps into the discussion.

For Dale Cowan, the concern isn’t that methodologies or soil test levels are somehow outdated or ineffective, it’s that soil test levels themselves are declining, and they’re declining in two ways — yield and rates.

“Fertilizer rates have not been keeping pace with where the yields have been,” says Cowan, senior agronomist with Southern Crop Services in Chatham, Ont. “The rates have not been keeping pace… so we’re going to have soil test declines, and when they decline, the soil’s supplying power also declines. So when you get the chance to tack on an extra 20 or 30 bushels of corn due to 6

the environment, you run out of nutrients.

In an average year, we’re average, but in an above-average year, maybe we’re missing the top 20 bushels, so we could have had 260 when we had 240, or 180 when we had 160.”

As simple as that might sound, however, there’s more to boosting yields than just applying more P and K, or rejigging the test levels. Cowan notes just two properties — depth of topsoil and drainage — as factors that will affect the ability of the soil to produce those higher yields, but not as a reflection of anything the grower does directly.

“You could be a farmer and say, ‘I’d like to get 200 bushels (of corn), so I’m going to set a yield goal for 200 and I’m going to put my N, P and K on for 200,’” says Cowan. “But you may be farming 160-bushel corn ground because it’s a shallow topsoil or because it’s randomly drained. So we also need to be realistic about our expectations.”

Even so, should most farmers be adjusting their fertility rates, since the soil test levels of the 1950s and ’60s were based on corn crops of 120 bu./ac.?

Cowan says it’s a good controversial topic that needs to be discussed. “We have higher crop removal rates, so should we be looking at a program that takes into account where the soil test levels should be?” poses Cowan. “That is, setting a “build” consideration, then adding in the crop so that we have a build and maintenance approach to fertility instead of a sufficiency approach, which may or may not get you top yield in high-yield environments because you might be nutrient limiting?”

Another school of thought begins by trying to identify which one of a possible three questions is actually being asked: • Should growers be applying fertilizer at higher soil test levels than are currently recommended, simply because high-yielding crops need more nutrients in the soil?

• Or, should growers be applying more

fertilizer at a given soil test level, because the soil can’t provide nutrients to a highyielding crop fast enough?

• Or should growers be applying more fertilizer because high-yielding crops are removing more than farmers are applying, eventually leading to declining soil test levels?

They’re closely related questions, yet one school of thought suggests those who claim the standards are outdated don’t realize there are three separate scenarios.

And then there were two For Greg Stewart, it can be helpful to think of the following two examples.

Farmer A likes to follow the deficiency approach of the Ministry of Agriculture and Foods (OMAF), putting on fertilizer at rates that do not necessarily take into account yield or the notion of trying to build the soil test levels. So this farmer runs modest soil test levels, but applies P and K as required.

Farmer B has been piling on P and K for years (likely because he has a livestock operation on his farm or has access to manure), and has very elevated soil test levels.

Do those two side-by-side farms actually have much difference in their yield potential?

“I pose that question at our industry Corn Guide, September 2013

fact that if we’re talking a corn-wheatsoybean rotation, I might be able to preach a pretty good story about modest soil tests and soil bands,” Stewart says.

“But it might not relate nearly as well to the next two crops in the rotation.”

meeting, where there are some fertilizer industry representatives and farmers, and I guarantee that the overwhelming response is that big yields can only come from elevated soil tests,” says Stewart, the corn specialist for OMAF. He readily acknowledges that yields have increased, but that doesn’t mean test levels have to jump as a result. “Of course, farmers such as Francis Childs have promoted the idea that soil tests have to be through the roof if you’re going to have big yields. If you ratchet that down a little to just two growers where one has a 13 soiltest P and the other has a 38 soil test P, the grower with 13 is applying 50 or 75 pounds of MAP (mono ammonium phosphate) and his neighbour with a 38, despite an OMAF recommendation for zero, he’s still running 6-24-6 and broadcasting in the fall. So is he at a whole different plateau? That’s a question that we have just a marginal ability to answer.”

Another front on which people have criticized the OMAF recommendations is, how low does the soil test number need to get before the recommendations are applying what the crop is removing? If the soil test shows 18 ppm of P and 110 ppm of K, those are fairly high levels and the recommendations reflect that [a soil test of 18 ppm of P warrants a recommendation of 20 kg/ha of P205 (or 18 lbs. per Corn Guide, September 2013

acre) while 110 ppm of K calls for 30 kg per hectare of K20 (or 27 lbs. per acre)].

“We’re struggling with that, and yet there are lots of trials where the OMAF recommended rate is pretty much in the game in terms of that particular year’s optimum net return,” says Stewart. “If you keep the argument relatively simple, and I would suggest that simple in most cases means asking ‘are the soil tests outdated for yields that are double what they were when these recommendations were put down?’ I think you can keep things simple by just talking about yield.”

So Stewart stays with the two-farmer scenario — one who’s on a program to pound P and K on to his field to elevate his soil test levels because he believes that’s the key to high yield. And the farmer beside him, who’s quite happy to live with moderate soil tests but is willing to apply starter bands as needed.

Another factor that Stewart says doesn’t get much consideration is the timing and application options for P and K in a threecrop rotation. He notes there’s a wider application window for P and K on corn ground compared to wheat and soybean fields where the row widths are seven-anda-half inches and soybean planters or wheat drills are not equipped for banding any sort of fertilizer.

“You wouldn’t want to lose sight of the

A little of both Like Cowan and Stewart, John Lauzon acknowledges the increases in yields that have occurred in the past 20 years, and he says that as crop yield and nitrogen uptake increase, so does the fertilizer requirement for corn.

Lauzon, professor in the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of Guelph, points out that phosphorus, relative to nitrogen, is not a fast mover in the rooting zone, migrating only one or two millimetres in the soil during a growing season.

“With the rooting system of corn occupying one per cent or less of the soil volume, even where the roots are thickest in the top 20 centimetres (eight inches) of soil, the total amount of P that’s within range of a root to be used is small,” sayss Lauzon. “As crop yield increases, so does rooting density and as such, the plant can make use of more of the P that’s there and/or applied.”

Lauzon worked on a study published in 1997 by Murray Miller of the University of Guelph and Ken Stevenson with Ridgetown College of Agricultural Technology, as it was known then. Keith Reid, then with OMAF, was also part of the team. The study evaluated phosphorus and potassium soil testing and fertilizer recommendations in Ontario (www.

omafra.gov.on.ca/english/crops/ facts/97-005.htm). According to Lauzon,

the results showed that recommendations based on a soil test from past results actually continued to work with new higheryielding hybrids and varieties.

“The results indicated that for nearly all of the sites evaluated, the recommendation based on the soil test level was adequate, and in most cases, exceeded the most economic rate of application,” says Lauzon. The higher yield will result in more crop P removal but the soil test can account for that, potentially resulting in greater application rates in the soil test decreased. “Long story short" Lauzon says, "just because yields have gone up does not mean the old soil test calibration is incorrect.” CG 7

Cornguide

Today’s split N This grower is intent on using the Y-Drop unit — and making it better

Y

esterday’s hopes for a one-pass applicamachine, and come back and put the rest of tion that would solve all your problems the nitrogen on with the Y-Drop.” with a single pass across the field are Strang comes from a background of side rapidly fading away, especially on farms that dressing anhydrous. For as long as he can are driving higher yields. With herbicide resisremember, his dad and his uncle always side tance in more weed species, the days of the dressed. But once he started farming, he single-pass, single-formulation weed managefound it caused too much soil disturbance ment system have practically vanished. And in a minimum-till system, and it was diffithe same thing is beginning to happen, howcult to vary or cut rates in the field. ever slowly, with nitrogen.

“The other thing that happened in dry Last year saw the introduction of the years is that we’re putting this band of nitroY-Drop application unit in Ontario, and gen right between the corn rows. We’re 15 Good Crop Services, near New Hamburg, inches away from the corn, and we’ve seen in Ont., and The Farm Office, based in dry years where we get the nitrogen in but we Tavistock were two of the dealers involved. don’t get any rain and the nitrogen doesn’t Buyers included corn grower Mike Strang, move,” says Strang. “And we’d see nitrogen who farms 1,500 acres just north of Exeter, deficiency in corn until we got a shot of rain.

Ont. In the past few years, Strang has invested The idea of using the Y-Drop and putting the in a strip till unit called a SoilWarrior, plus an nitrogen really close to the base of the stems RTK GPS unit for auto steer. seemed like a better approach.

Now, Strang is learning more about how to “We’d love to be able to throw the nitrogen use the Y-Drop while wearing two hats — one on and be done with it,” says Strang. “But if as a farmer, and the other as a service provider. you were to take the adviser’s hat off and not The Y-Drop is arriving at the same time have to worry about the logistics and just look that interest is growing around split nitroat pure agronomics, then late-season side gen applications. There’s plenty of chatter at dressing has to be the way to go.” farm shows, but according to Strang, there’s There are days when he says he’s tempted been little happening in the field, partly by the allure of doing other things in the because of the lack of suitable hardware. middle of summer rather than splitting his Now with the Y-Drop applying nitrogen nitrogen applications. But he knows the to the base of the corn plants – and espeadvantages of doing things the way they cially when the Y-Drop is used in conjuncshould be done versus the easy way. tion with the available GreenSeeker To say it’s been an easy process to adapt technology — that hurdle may be being the Y-Drop isn’t quite true. The applicator cleared, and a trend may be taking shape. works very well on flat ground, but Strang “The idea of late-season nitrogen goes found on his rolling hills there was a little hand in hand with GreenSeeker technology too much bounce in the arm. His sprayer very nicely because the GreenSeeker works “Late season side dressing has to be the hydraulics also strained to lift the unit. much better when you have more biomass way to go,” says grower Mike Strang.

Fortunately, Mike’s brother Geoff, an there,” says Strang. “So if you can leave the engineer by trade, has returned to the corn to grow later, it gets nice and big and tall, and you can get a farm, adding metal tubing at the end of the hoses to weigh them better reading for late-season nitrogen.” down and prevent them from swaying or swinging in the rows.

For Strang, one of the drivers for using a Y-Drop is his goal, Geoff also added some rubber hosing, as a sleeve at the top of wherever possible, of getting multiple uses from each piece of the unit where it connects to the boom, again, to limit any machinery. So he has a sprayer, which he says consists of a tank, a bouncing of the unit. And together, they’ve added a second pump and a rate control. And from his perspective, a side-dress hydraulic unit, to ensure there’s enough lift. applicator is mainly a tank, a pump and a rate controller, so he set “We are changing the things we do,” Strang says. “It’s first of all about attaching Y-Drop booms to his sprayer to see how best to get an economic thing, but it’s also an environmental thing, too. I his nitrogen on the ground. don’t want to be putting nitrogen out there that’s going to end up “This late-season nitrogen is based on a lot of things, but one of in the waterways. So if we can find a way to increase the efficiency them for me is planting efficiency,” says Strang, who strip tills his of the plant using it, then that’s where the variable rate comes in corn. “We’ve taken fertilizer off the planter other than a little bit of and where spoon feeding comes in and late season. It’s all about liquid starter, and then we put a dry starter on with the strip-till increasing the efficiency.” CG

8

Corn Guide, September 2013

ADVANCING MODERN FARMING. •••••• IT STARTS BY PROTECTING WHAT’S IMPORTANT.

Resistant and hard-to-control weeds impact the way you farm, your yields, your bottom line.

They impact your future.

Introducing Enlist™ — a new weed control system featuring Enlist Duo™ herbicide plus innovative traits that provide tolerance in Enlist corn and soybeans. It’s a highly effective solution to modern weed control challenges.

Only Enlist Duo™ herbicide, featuring Colex-D™ Technology, includes glyphosate and 2,4-D choline for exceptional performance on hard-to-control weeds plus two modes of action for superior resistance management.

It’s protection of what’s important – plus advanced flexibility, convenience and drift control.

To learn more, call the Solutions Centre at 1-800-667-3852. Dowagro.ca

Solutions for the Growing World ™Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow. Regulatory approvals are pending in other geographies for the Enlist™ herbicide solution and crops containing Enlist herbicide tolerance traits. The information presented here is not an offer for sale. Always read and follow label directions. ©2013 Dow AgroSciences LLC.

®

05/13-20021-02 CGE

Cornguide

No one says it’s going to be easy, but growers like Gerry Greenfield already have their sights set

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

10

N

ow that it seems a safe bet every year that corn somewhere in Ontario will top 200 bushels per acre, more eyes are turning to the next milestone.

If 200 bushels seemed a dream just a decade ago, why should 300 bushels seem beyond our reach now?

Maybe it isn’t.

Yet while plant breeders and agronomists have done an outstanding job of advancing recent corn yields, they may also have created a perception that we can pin our hopes on genetics and some quick-fix practices for continuous, astronomic yield hikes.

Gerry Greenfield is just one grower who believes it’s going to take a co-ordinated approach to break today’s yield barriers. Greenfield, who farms some 750

acres with a standard corn-wheat-soybean rotation just west of Hagersville, Ont. believes 300 bushels per acre is something he’ll see in his lifetime.

At 52, Greenfield remembers that as a child, yield hopes in his area hovered around 100 bushels. “Then I went to Ridgetown College, and it was 150,” says Greenfield, who farms with his parents and his son Steve, the fourth generation on the farm. “Now 150-bushel corn for us is a pretty decent crop, one we’ve been hitting pretty consistently.”

So, what about 300? “It’s reachable,” Greenfield says, adding a qualifier, “maybe not consistently in Haldimand County.”

Greenfield is very much a farmer’s farmer: he believes in taking care of the land and making incremental enhancements from year to year. His ground Corn Guide, September 2013

Photo credit: DEW Imagery

The road to 300-bushel corn

includes some clay soils, and some clay loams as well, so his yield strategy is focused first and foremost on taking care of the soil, and when he gets a chance, he does a little more tiling of his fields.

“We don’t rent very much land, so instead of buying another farm at a higher cost, it’s just better to tile what you have and stay closer to home,” says Greenfield, who refuses to go up and down county roads in search of land. “Just keep your costs down because the price of rent and land are unbelievable.”

When asked if he thinks 300-bushel corn is more a matter of genetics or management, Greenfield calls it a draw.

“Genetics is probably 50 per cent of it, and the rest is the farm and the weather, nutrition, drainage… and luck?” he says.

“We can compete with anybody on soybeans now,” Greenfield adds. “Corn, maybe not so much with the better soils in Ontario, but we’ve had 200-bushel corn.”

In 2012, most of Haldimand had 35 consecutive days of droug ht, yet Greenfield still saw farms in his area with 50-bushel soybean yields. His corn crop, on the other hand, ranged from a low of 130 bushels to his best field which yielded 180. The field with 130 bu./ac. was planted June 8 in 2012 because he’d tiled it before planting.

In 2013, Greenfield is working again with tillage radish, the fourth year he’s been using it as an all-purpose cover crop and supplementary drainage source.

“The fields that we had radish in last year had more consistent corn in the nontiled fields compared to the tiled fields, and the suppression of the weeds was much different — hardly any weeds in it,” Greenfield says. “With the radish in it, I think it helps aerate the soil and lets the water get away. So to get 300-bushel corn, cover crops are going to have to be part of the equation.”

Cover crops, he adds, can also help with nematode suppression and assist with long-term soil health and drainage, and they also help store nitrogen. Add to that the fact that Greenfield can supplement more of his soil’s nitrogen by applying his own chicken manure, and he’s seeing some substantial savings on nitrogen costs alone.

Greenfield also believes cover crops will be a big part of the future for many more corn growers. “They’re going to become very important in the next 10 or 15 years, just like fungicides were 20 or 25 years ago in wheat,” says Greenfield.

A systems approach

B

y 1982, Huron County farmer Don Lobb had been a co-operator in countless farm trials on his operation, and he wanted to come with a visual depiction of the complexities he had

learned that were involved in farming.

“I always liked working with the researchers,” says Lobb. “I learned more from a lot of the grad students doing projects on my farm than I would any other way.”

That’s when he came up with the ‘Adopt-a-System’ approach (Figure 1). Lobb’s initial design was composed of 11 “spokes.” But there’s a rule that had to go with it: each component carries equal weight or impact.

Or make that two rules. Because each spoke is also connected to every other spoke. If you change one, one way or another you change everything.

If you shorten the rotation, for instance, it could affect weeds or diseases, fertility or pests.

“If you’re pushing for a 300-bushel corn crop,” says Lobb, “you’d better spend a lot of time analyzing how your crop system works.”

The Best Management Practices manual on Field Crop Production used a modified form of Lobb’s, and also offered some different scenarios in which changes were introduced to the system and the impacts on different aspects were suggested.

“I guess a lot of people tried to copy it and add their own interpretations,” says Lobb. “But it’s really something I intended as a framework... Crop production is complex and if you want the most out of it, you’d better consider all of the complexities.”

No Till: The Basics, which was published in the 1980s as part of the Soil and Water and Environmental Enhance Program (SWEEP), also uses a version of the Lobb diagram, along with insights from other farmers of the day, and is actually quite interesting to read, given its date of publication. (http://agrienvarchive.ca/download/no-till_basics.pdf.)

This may not be new research yielding innovative ideas. Maybe it doesn’t need to be. More than 30 years of experience are showing that soil health, drainage, fertility and cover crops are just as important as hybrid selection, weed management and tillage. As Shawn McRae, a dedicated no-till farmer from Bainsville, Ont. likes to put it, “Genetics is the horse we’re going to ride to get to 300 bushels per acre in corn, but we need to follow the right path to get there.”

Continued on page 12

Corn Guide, September 2013

11

Continued from page 11

But Greenfield believes as well that there won’t be a simple recipe for always achieving the very best yields. “Every field is different, so what you might try this year might not work next year. You have to roll with the punches and some of it’s luck,” he says, and then adds, “but a lot of it is management.”

Within the next five years, Greenfield says he can see hitting 200 bu./ac. on a consistent basis. Beyond that, he reiterates that 300 bushels is also doable in his lifetime. He’s using the best genetics, he’s a proponent of foliar fertilizers, and he also does a lot more scouting and tweaking of his management practices.

Almost a religion Shawn McRae, who farms a five-crop rotation on 450 acres near Bainsville, Ont., is as quick as Greenfield to give the seed and trait companies plenty of credit in the race to provide the best genetics to growers. And just like Greenfield, he believes that reaching 300 will require a careful balance between the genetics and the management practices put in place by the grower.

In the early 1980s, McRae accompanied his parents and grandparents on a trip to Illinois to visit Herman Warsaw’s farm. In 1985, Warsaw would set a record with a corn yield of 369 bu./ac., a feat that remained unmatched until Francis Childs pushed his yield to 393 bu./ac. some 14 years later.

Meeting Warsaw left an impression on McRae, who saw Warsaw as a generous and humble individual who never sought fame or notoriety but followed his own natural scientific curiosity.

McRae also values the lessons taught to him by his father as he chases his own 300 mark. His father was also interested in attaining 300 bushels with his corn, and worked a system in the late 1960s and into the ’70s that favoured continuous corn. He plowed in the fall, tilled in the spring, incorporated atrazine and provided a total crop supply of nitrogen via anhydrous ammonia. Then he’d plant the field, go back to work as a tile drainage contractor, and forget about the crop for five months.

McRae calls it a simple recipe that worked for a while. Over time, however, too much tillage and too much reliance on one herbicide forced his father to adapt.

“Unfortunately in a lot of cases, it takes a long time to come back from that, once you get lulled into a straightforward recipe,” says McRae, who acknowledges that at least his father and grandfather were open to change and willing to adjust.

McRae points out many farmers’ sons have returned from Guelph or Ridgetown, saying, “Dad, this is what the best science says we should be doing,” only to be rebuffed or rejected for the familiar or what’s easier.

Pushing corn yields to 300 will require more focused management, McRae says.

With a growing interest in cover crops, and more farmers expressing their determination to stick with their rotations, it’s possible that we’ve seen a peak in continuous corn. Part of that is the realization that in order to make a practice such as continuous corn work and drive yields consistently higher, there’s an even larger commitment to monitoring diseases in year three, four and beyond, or increasing plant populations. Generally speaking, it requires more tweaking and twisting than working with a standard rotation.

“What you’re after is that complexity,” poses McRae. “Every farmer has different

MOVING AT THE SPEED Of TEcHNOlOGy 1-800-265-7403 www.hylandseeds.com

Getting to 300 bushels will take a systems approach and years of effort, says Shawn McRae. But it’s worth pursuing.

fertilizers and pesticides, deep tillage and high plant densities.”

In his travels and sharing what he knows, McRae has become familiar with the quick fix or silver bullet mentality that many farmers seem to be looking for. He’s become a student of soil health, building earthworm populations, balancing nutrient levels and garnering a better understanding of phenomenon such as mycorrhizae fungi. Yet he’s had questions about fast-tracking or purchasing a supplement that would help speed the establishment of such fungi, when no such shortcut exists.

“I believe the proper path is that which is much less attractive,” McRae says. It will takes years of wrestling with soils, rotations and cover crops.

He believes he must also keep his eye on total farm health. “If I thought that achieving 300-bushel corn would necessitate a system that would require me to transgress my oath and make my farm more prone to soil erosion, nutrient leaching and debt risk, I’d take a pass.” But he’s convinced that he won’t be asked to make that trade-off. Says McRae: “The one is the proper path to the other.” CG

HylandTM and the Hyland Seeds logo are trademarks of Dow AgroSciences LLC. 09/13-20278-01 CGE

ideas of what’s important when it comes to driving productivity. One might be big on bulk spreading P and K in the fall, getting cover crops established or trying to trap and cycle nutrients. Another might be into RTK and banding it so that he can tap into it for a couple of consecutive crops. And then you get another grower who believes corn is the big money-maker because there’s an advantage with volume or the drying end of the business, so in his mind, continuous corn is the way to go because the cash flow is bigger.”

Yet McRae believes there’s another valuable lesson to be learned from the likes of U.S. farmers Ray Rawson and Francis Childs. They didn’t make it to their recordbreaking yields in one year or two.

“Those star farmers will tell you, ‘This is the result of 30 years of dedicated system development; don’t expect a miracle because you’ve copied and pasted part of the puzzle,’” says McRae. “To achieve extraordinary yields in their day, these farmers had to be adept students of their game and gradually implement extraordinary measures, including vigilant study of cause and effect, excessive nutrient applications, repetitive foliar applications of

Cornguide

Watch those demand numbers Corn producers need to adjust to the long road ahead. But be ready.

Some year, somehow, we’ll get back to last year’s highs

By Philip Shaw

14

F

or corn producers, it is so different from a year ago. With the world’s largest supplier of corn suffering a devastating drought, corn markets went through the roof in 2012, with futures prices reaching $8.49 a bushel as heat sizzled throughout the American Midwest.

One year later, the weather has been much more benign, and American farmers are set to harvest one of the largest corn crops in U.S. history. Corn prices to Canadian producers are less than half what they were a year ago.

This is a major challenge to Canadian corn producers as they look ahead to 2014. New-crop Canadian cash prices have approached the cost of production for many corn producers, and this will certainly weigh on planting intentions in 2014 as many farmers may decide the higher cost of planting corn may sway them toward other crops.

Let’s remember, though, that we got here with our eyes wide open.

We knew $8 corn has its pitfalls. With many Ontario farmers having a huge crop in 2012, selling it for close to $7.70 a bushel “off the combine” was a great economic payoff. Unfortunately, not everybody else felt that way.

The common refrain last year was,

how high would prices need to go to ration demand? Over the period of the last 18 months, corn demand has dropped about 1.3 billion bushels as endusers avoided paying those high prices.

The refrain now is, how low do prices have to sink to get that demand back?

Destroying demand happens much faster than building it up, and corn producers need to adjust to the long road ahead.

The August 2013 USDA report gave us the latest indication of U.S. crop size. In this report the market had been leaning on the bearish side as U.S. crop weather in 2013 has been cooler with much more rainfall in production areas.

New-crop prices had dropped over the last few months in step with that sentiment.

Earlier in March, the USDA had pegged U.S. corn planted acreage at 97.4 million acres with harvested acreage at 89.1 million bushels. This was in comparison to last year where 97.2 million acres were planted and 87.4 million acres were harvested.

In the August 2013 report, USDA pegged total U.S. corn production at 13.763 billion bushels with a yield of 154.4 bushels per acre. This compares to the drought-ravaged year last year of 10.780 billion bushels with a yield of 123.4 bushels/acre.

Corn Guide, September 2013

It is quite a difference from a year ago on the supply side. Going into autumn, the Americans look set to produce a huge corn crop. It might not be as big as earlier expected, but it still is one of the biggest of all time. Price expectations have dropped with the USDA expecting average cash prices to be in the upper-$4 range.

Demand surely will hold the key to higher prices in the futures market. Once we had a demand-driven market in corn, where we needed supplies to satisfy that demand. It has now come to an end.

Not only have American farmers rebounded by producing more feed grains, but so have farmers around the world. South America as well as the Black Sea region have increased their production of corn and taken much of the slack in the global export market once filled by the Americans. Price will become the lowest common denominator to clear out that supply and build demand back again.

Canadian cash prices are much lower, reflecting our own particular market structure of too much corn and too few end-users. In Ontario, corn acres are approximately 2.15 million acres, about the same as in 2012. Ontario production levels have been increasing over the last few years. If we assume a top provincial yield of 160 bushels per acre, that puts approximately 344 million bushels of corn on the ground this fall.

It is not unusual with this much production to export this corn into the United States. The only way to do that is to reduce basis levels, driving cash prices lower. Aside from a September frost Corn Guide, September 2013

changing the entire scenario, corn producers should suffer from very low cash prices this fall in order to get into the U.S. market, because farmers in border states are also harvesting a very good crop.

This does not bode well for Canadian cash corn prices.

It definitely is a new day for the corn market for those who are recent entries into agriculture. Supplies have risen to satisfy demand, but now we are there. The American drought of 2012 accentuated that shift, but now we must deal with the fallout.

What does the future hold?

Key questions about future demand for corn have to do with the ethanol mandate in the United States and competition from foreign suppliers. Ethanol pricing is always dependent on gasoline and oil demand. Lately, this has been fairly buoyant, putting a bottom under ethanol prices. However, the ethanol mandate in the U.S. is always a political football.

Any change in that mandate that lessens the requirement for ethanol in U.S. gasoline will reduce corn demand.

Currently, ethanol producers there are facing the “blend wall,� almost at capacity for the ethanol required for U.S. gasoline demand. These concerns are paramount for corn producers looking forward.

The question is, what should corn producers do in this current price environment? Is it simply back to the future, where we cut costs and switch over to soybeans?

Do we use new technology to produce corn even more efficiently than we have before? Are there marketing options available to us to reduce carrying costs to cap-

ture price rallies on unexpected market moves? Or, will corn hybrids themselves bail us all out with increased productivity?

The good news is that last point. Corn hybrids have been increasing in yield at almost an exponential rate in Ontario. As price has retreated, corn productivity has increased. All farmers, like myself, like to see higher prices. However, increased productivity per acre can translate into higher profits even with lower cash prices.

The great marketing outlier with regard to corn prices will be the value of the Canadian dollar. While soybean prices are much more sensitive to Canadian dollar movement than Canadian corn prices, it still makes quite a difference. While the Canadian dollar has spent much time over the last two years near par with the U.S. dollar, it has slinked back to 96 cents U.S. as of mid-August 2013. This has been helpful to Canadian cash prices.

If the loonie continues to retreat, it will always be helpful to Canadian cash prices as well as export markets. When hedging grain, the value of the Canadian dollar always needs to be considered. It has the potential to be the lightning rod for Canadian cash corn prices into the future.

The challenge for Canadian corn producers is to adapt to the new corn market of greater supply and building demand.

Bringing these two economic components together at a price level to satisfy everyone will surely be the test. It will be a long and winding road. However, someday, that $8.49-bushel record for corn will be broken. We need to be positioned to see it coming. CG 15

Cornguide

Free nitrogen Nitrogen-fixing corn is a matter of ‘when,’ not ‘if,’ and the when may be as early as 2015

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

S

oybeans long ago figured out how to feed themselves with nitrogen pulled right out of thin air. So how great would it be if corn plants could fix their own N too?

It’s been a dream for generations. Now it may be on the verge of becoming true.

Science has already broken other impossible barriers. North American breeders have produced corn hybrids that manufacture their own built-in pesticides. Even drought tolerance is making inroads in the marketplace.

But N fixation has always seemed a bridge too far.

Now, enter Azotic Technologies.

Within the next two years, the U.K.-based company is poised to introduce a biological seed treatment that will enable corn plants to fix their own nitrogen, in much the same manner as soybeans and other legumes. Company representatives have been frequent visitors to Guelph, Ont. in the past year, with designs on establishing a North American manufacturing and distribution centre for its N-Fix technology.

Last April, David Dent, Azotic Technologies’ technical director, made a presentation to the annual meeting of Ontario Agri-Food Technologies, unveiling the goals and directions for N-Fix. Then this past May, a trial plot was planted near Guelph with corn seed treated with the technology. And since that time, Peter Blezard, chief executive of Azotic Technologies, has been back to speak with investors and other potential participants.

Much of the history of nitrogen fixation in corn dates back to 1960, when Edward Cocking at the University of Nottingham, developed an enzymatic process to use cellulases to break down plant-cell walls. Such “wall-less” plant cells could then be examined with the goal of determining how they might be colonized by bacteria or other micro-organisms.

It may seem a long way from any practical result, but it opened a door.

Then in 1988, scientists learned sugar cane contains about 500 bacterial strains in its phloem, and among that group there is a particularly exciting non-nodulating, non-rhizobial bacterium called Gluconacetobacter diazotrophicus (or G.d., for short).

G.d. thrives in the intercellular environment of the sugar cane plant, and more importantly, it showed it could supply up to 50 per cent of the plant’s nitrogen requirement.

“The bacterium loves sucrose and it can live inside the plant,” says Azotic’s Blezard. “It can’t live outside the plant, hence it has never migrated to more crops, but when they tested it, they realized that this bacterium was giving nitrogen back to the crop.”

The sugar cane bacterium is intercellular, meaning it lives outside the cells of the sugar cane plant. Now, however, researchers have succeeded in using technology so the bacterium can nibble its way through a cell wall, so it can fix nitrogen from the inside.

16

A game changer The process is a little more complicated, but the implications for this technology are massive, and Blezard is quick to point out the obvious cost savings, particularly in terms of reducing the amount of nitrogen currently applied on corn.

Studies on such applications have set the nitrogen loss to the environment as low as 30 per cent and as high as 70, either through volatilization or leaching into the soil. Then there are the almost annual reports of excessive use of nitrogen in the U.S. Corn Belt, and a corresponding “dead zone” in the Gulf of Mexico at the mouth of the Mississippi River.

Blame for this has long been assigned to modern farming practices (including corn-soybean rotations, lack of cover crops and heavy tillage) and some projections for the N-Fix technology cite reductions in nitrogen losses of up to 50 per cent.

Blezard also refers to California among other jurisdictions where class-action lawsuits have been brought against various authorities and individuals for allowing nitrogen contamination of groundwater and other watercourses. So there’s also the potential for farming as an industry to regain some of its lustre as protectors of the environment or stewards of the land.

“We have proven categorically that the technology works in grass — we have been growing grass for more than seven months now with no nitrogen applied, in a sterile environment,” says Blezard. “That’s a world first, and we are in the fields now (midsummer, 2013) demonstrating that the grass is richer in chlorophyll with our technology, and it’s definitely got the G.d inside it and it’s working.”

The focus was first on grass because it’s the fastest road to the N-Fix Nitrogen Fixation Rhizobia

Rhizobium inoculated seed

N-Fix

Rhizobium bacteria fix nitrogen only in Nitrogen the root nodules fixation from the atmosphere

Provides every cell with ability to fix its own nitrogen

N-Fix (Nitrogenfixing bacteria) coated seed

Continued on page 18

Corn Guide, September 2013

A LEADER IN BREEDING. Results matter. That’s why we individually analyze 13 million corn seeds annually, to isolate the one with the perfect DNA signature to perform in your fields.

That’s business as usual for us, because every kernel matters to you. Fly with a Leader.

Talk to your DEKALB dealer today, or visit DEKALB.ca ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW PESTICIDE LABEL DIRECTIONS. Details of these requirements can be found in the Trait Stewardship Responsibilities Notice to Farmers printed in this publication ©2013 Monsanto Canada, Inc.

Continued from page 16

market. Azotic has been working with the world’s largest grass seed company, and its representatives have told Azotic that if they can prove the technology works on grass, they can get it into the market quickly, particularly with such heavy use of grass for golf courses, parks, roadways and sports fields.

Blezard is optimisitc, saying the effects of N-Fix on grass are visually apparent, with more tillers and lush growth.

From an agricultural perspective, Blezard notes grass is also the world’s largest crop, accounting for 30 per cent of the agri-food sector. China, for instance, is growing more grass for livestock in order to feed its rapidly expanding middle-income sector, so the potential is large, and getting larger.

How it works N-Fix with G.d. is applied as a seed treatment, but the challenge is very different from rhizobium inoculation in legumes.

Blezard says N-Fix is a highly specific bacterial formulation and that the key to its success is ensuring there are fewer than 50 bacteria per seed. Rhizobia in soybeans and other legumes have bacterial counts into the hundreds of thousands but the N-Fix technology has been precisely formulated. If there are fewer than five or more than 50 bacteria per seed, it won’t work.

“As they’re on the seed, they’re motile — they’re ‘talking to the seed,’” says Blezard, referring to the bacteria and the way they employ a form of signalling technology that Azotic is also researching. “The bacteria move to the root and go through the root wall and then into the cell. And then the cell goes through what’s called invagination — it circles the bacterium as though it’s come to kill it because it’s a foreign body. But it realizes the bacterium is ‘friendly,’ it keeps it, vaginates (surrounds), and then the bacterium is giving nitrogen for sugar.

“It’s a true enabling technology,” says Blezard. “We’re mainly focused on grass but we’re also working on wheat and corn in Canada and canola — and they’re all in trials.”

It’s a complicated and technologically advanced process to grasp, but it comes down to a shift in fundamentals. Early patented research on the N-Fix, some of which was conducted in Guelph, focused on an intercellular process. But the intracellular Gd Elongating root

Meristematic cell Plasma Membrane

Epidermal cells

Vesicle G. diazotrophicus cells G. diazotrophicus cells

Root cap

Epidermal layer

Representation of the interaction of G. diazotrophicus (G.d.) with roots: (a) Meristematic zone of the elongating root (b) G.d. penetrates the epidermal cell wall by secretion of the cellulose enzymes (c) the plasma membrane pinched off via endocytosis forms a membrane surrounding vesicles containing G.d. (d) vesicles with G.d. are surrounded by a membrane analogous to the symbiosome membrane of rhizobia

18

work was the real game changer and has shown the most benefit in terms of the bacteria’s ability to colonize the plant cells and fix nitrogen. That shift has made all the difference.

In addition to providing substantial savings in nitrogen costs, the N-Fix technology is also based on this naturally occurring bacterium, which is a non-GMO, food-grade development. And the market for this — and the intent of Azotic Technologies — has a worldwide potential, not just for North American corn production.

“It will help farmers in the developed world because it will help them lower their nitrogen costs,” says Blezard, adding that farmers will still have to apply some supplemental nitrogen: N-Fix can’t do it all. “We’re claiming up to 50 per cent, and why do we say that?

Because in the natural environment, nitrogen fixation in sugar cane is about 60 per cent.”

For 2013, the field trials near Guelph offer a glimpse of the potential for N-Fix, although Blezard is quick to point out that this is still a one-year trial. Even so, it is getting noticed, and it has also garnered the attention — and so-called “seed money” — from Canadian interests, including Engage Agro and Ontario Agri-Food Technologies, both based in Guelph.

“There are no registration issues worldwide, and every other country has promised to fast-track this, because it is a very safe bacteria,” says Blezard. “Canada is probably one of the most stringent and it could take up to two years because it could be considered a new species for the country. But we have full technology and backup data going back 10 to 12 years, and we’ve built a technological dossier, and the regulatory staff at Engage Agro have told us that the work we’ve done will help expedite registration.”

Ray Chyc, president of Engage Agro believes in the N-Fix process to the extent that the company has invested in research to help determine its viability. If he didn’t believe it to be a sound proposition, Chyc says, he wouldn’t be putting that money forward.

“My logic is that sugar cane has been grown for years without nitrogen fertilizer to any significant degree,” Chyc explains. “I did my due diligence on the bacteria and the benefits, and they all seem to be there.”

Chyc’s focus now is on commercialization. Can N-Fix be made in large quantities, and can it be delivered to the farm, either on the seed or in a form that can be applied on farm? The answers to those questions, Chyc says, are what will determine its success.

“In all of the trials and all of the crops that I’ve seen, the N-Fix has provided around a 50 per cent savings (in nitrogen applications),” says Chyc. “Ideally, the best benefit you’re going to get is from the start of the plant itself. As soon as that root comes out, it’s somewhat similar to rhizobia in pulses, but with some significant differences — it gets right into the plant, except that it gets into every cell in the plant, up and down as the plant grows, and you’re drawing in nitrogen from the air right away. As new tissue grows, it almost ‘self-infects’ with the G.d, and the ability for N fixation within the plant grows as the plant grows.”

Another positive selling point, at least where the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA) are concerned, is that N-Fix is classified as a biological. And Chyc notes, from a food perspective, its food-grade property is a positive as well.

From his company’s standpoint, the plan is to take this one trial this year (2013), then “blow it up” from a production perspective for 2014 and conduct further testing in U.S. and Canadian trials. Early commercial sales could be available in the U.S. in 2014.

For Canadian growers, Chyc believes 2015 is an aggressive but hopeful target date. CG Corn Guide, September 2013

Cornguide

Stopped at the border L

The aflatoxin fungus needs the heat and drought it finds

in the U.S., not here. But watch imported crop

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

Corn Guide, September 2013

iving next door to the world’s most intensive corn producer as we do, it often seems a safe bet that any weed, pest or disease that threatens growers in the U.S. is inevitably going to threaten Canadian growers too.

In the case of aflatoxin in corn, it just isn’t happening.

Indeed, aflatoxin seems to be bucking the trend. We’re hearing more about herbicide resistance, for instance, as well as the spread of Palmer amaranth across the border and the return of zone till.

But it appears there are diseases, as well as weeds and pests, which are not an issue in Canada — east or west. And aflatoxin in corn is one of these.

Late last year, reports from various sources in the U.S. cited heightened fears of aflatoxin, a mould that develops in hot,

dry conditions and that can grow to worrisome levels before or even after harvest.

Given the severity of drought in the U.S. Midwest and across to the Great Plains, it came as little surprise that aflatoxin was a problem in some states. In fact, Iowa, Illinois and Nebraska, the top three corn-producing states, were granted a temporary measure to allow the blending of corn containing aflatoxin to other grains to be fed to livestock.

Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, aflatoxin levels must be 20 parts per billion (ppb) or less for feeding to immature or dairy animals. Food bound for human consumption must also contain less than 20 ppb, with milk required to contain less than 0.5 ppb.

Continued on page 20

19

Cornguide Continued from page 19

The Reuters news agency helped to fan the flames, circulating several reports of aflatoxin in corn, with some pertaining to pet food, others coming from the European Union, and one warning of a continuation of the disease in 2013. A U.S.-based news story linked one company’s hybrids together with a brand-name biocontrol agent as an effective tandem in reducing the aflatoxin levels.

But according to Art Schaafsma, professor of field crop pest management with the University of Guelph’s Ridgetown Campus, the point that has to be made — emphatically — is that growers in Ontario don’t need to worry about aflatoxin in corn grown in the province. Schaafsma says this is just one more misunderstanding about a disease that affects corn in parts of North America, but not Canada.

“Aflatoxin is not and has never been a problem in corn originating from Ontario,” says Schaafsma, stressing the point. “It’s simply not hot and droughty enough. Aflatoxin occurs mainly in the Gulf States in corn, moving up as far north as southern Indiana and Illinois last year because of the extreme heat and drought.”

What’s also confusing is the way in which many people, including some of Schaafsma’s students, interchange the term “mycotoxin” with “aflatoxin.”

Aflatoxin is a mycotoxin, Schaafsma points out, but not all mycotoxins are aflatoxin, in much the same way that all soybeans are legumes but not all legumes are soybeans.

A vulture of a disease The aflatoxin that’s a problem in corn is caused primarily by Aspergillus flavus, which isn’t actually a disease-causing pathogen. Instead, it’s a saprophyte, meaning it lives off dead or decayed organic matter. There are 13 species of fungi that can produce aflatoxin, but 11 of those have nothing to do with agriculture.

The Aspergillus flavus fungus was identified as the cause of aflatoxicosis in domestic animals as far back as the 1960s, and has become the largest issue in terms of corn contaminants. Another species, Aspergillus parasiticus, is the primary cause of aflatoxin in peanuts, although there were isolated cases where it infected corn in the Midwest in the early 2000s.

“Somehow, aflatoxin keeps getting coverage in the context of Ontario corn,” says Schaafsma, adding that he’d be cautious 20

“This is another case of a major agricultural woe that‘s happening in the U.S. that doesn’t exist in Canada.”

— Art Schaafsma about importing old-crop corn from the U.S. Midwest. He suggests the corn trade will be trying to dump a lot of contaminated corn in advance of the U.S. harvest.

“This is another case of a major agricultural woe that’s happening in the U.S. that doesn’t exist in Canada,” Schaafsma says. “It creates confusion. It was a huge problem in the U.S. central Corn Belt last year, but absolutely not in corn from the Great Lakes region, despite the drought.”

That’s not to downplay the seriousness of aflatoxin. It is by far the worst and most difficult mycotoxin to deal with. It’s just that aflatoxin isn’t an issue in Ontario, regardless of how dry it might have been last year. That’s the message that Schaafsma is anxious to share with growers in Canada, and Albert Tenuta echoes it, as well.

No concern here “Based on the environmental conditions that we generally get in Ontario, and the lack of buildup of inoculum, it’s not an issue that we are concerned about,” says Tenuta, field crops pathologist with Ontario’s Ministry of Agriculture and Food.

“Aspergillus fungi are pretty ubiquitous — they’re out there — but we don’t get the proper environmental conditions in most cases for it to develop and flourish. The base isn’t there to start with, as you would have in the mid- to southern U.S. In Ontario, we have gibberella, fusarium, and diplodia that are already established and taking up the space, based on inoculum load.”

Just as weeds compete with each other and with the crops in the field, fungi —

whether they’re pathogenic or saprophytic — compete with each other for space and nutrients. Tenuta says different fungi can compartmentalize or adjust their development to conform to certain factors, be it temperature or moisture levels or overall plant health.

These fungi will adapt and become microscopic opportunists, always trying to outcompete other soil fungi. In the case of Aspergillus flavus, it’s almost a case of it being displaced by the other infectious agents. If the specific conditions for infection ever arise (which they seldom or never do), there’s no place for the fungus to develop and flourish.

“There’s only so much space for these organisms to colonize,” says Tenuta. “So whether they’re going to colonize or cause a disease pathogenically or just be there saprophytically, there’s always competition, directly or indirectly.”

The bottom line The research conclusion is that there is no aflatoxin in Ontario corn.

Tenuta also echoes Schaafsma’s comments about the confusion that comes out of monitoring conditions and diseases in the U.S. He also sees aflatoxinfree corn from Ontario as a definite advantage from a marketing perspective.

“We always concentrate on where we find things or on worse-case scenarios,” says Tenuta. “But sometimes it’s good to know that we don’t have something, especially when it comes to markets and marketability, and ultimately the bottom line for producers.” CG Corn Guide, September 2013

My Mycogen

®

Mycogen is the clear leader in Canadian brown midrib corn hybrids.

Our Mycogen team knows BMR and dairy farming like no one else in the business.

We use only the bm3 gene mutation, which is lower in lignin and higher in digestibility than other BMR mutations. That means you can use higher forage rations for healthier cows, and you get more milk in your tank at a better return over feed.

Put our BMR silage to work on your farm and you’ll see why Mycogen BMR corn is the best in the barn.

Your Prosperity is Our Priority.

My BMR

“

Over the last five years, we’ve switched to 100 per cent BMR. This year we’ll put up almost 300 acres of BMR corn. We’ve been able to change our forage to concentrate ratio to increase the forage side of it, which makes for a cheaper ration and healthier cows.

Carl Loewith, Summitholm Holsteins, Lynden, Ontario

TM

Go to www.mycogen.ca to see the video (related links).

® TM

Trademark of Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow.

®

”

MY830_BMR_Ad_CGe.indd 1

Ben & Carl Loewith

Chad Garrod B.Sc. Agr., CCA-ON

Summitholm Holsteins, Lynden, Ontario

Territory Sales Representative Mycogen Seeds

2013-08-07 4:39 PM

Cornguide

#PestPatrol with Mike Cowbrough, OMAFRA

Is it actually lamb’s quarters?

1

By Michelle Arsenault

I 2

3

n a survey of Ontario crop input retailers, lamb’s quarters has been identified as one of the most troublesome weeds affecting corn and soybean crops. This is due to its abundance in the province, but also because herbicide control has sometimes been less than acceptable. What are the reasons for this poor herbicide performance? Could the cause be herbicide resistance, weed size, or lessthan-optimal environmental conditions?

All are plausible, but it could also be that the weed isn’t actually lamb’s quarters. It could be a close relative instead.

Let’s compare lamb’s quarter to these look-alikes.

The plant shape and powdery leaves of lamb’s quarters are similar to those of spreading atriplex and fig-leaved goosefoot. These are all members of the goosefoot family. The key to identifying each species is the leaf shape.

Lamb’s quarters leaves vary from being broadly triangular to triangular oval. The width tapers to the pointed tip.

The perimeter of the leaf has irregular, wavy teeth. (Photos 1 and 2)

Spreading atriplex leaves are elongated triangular, being narrower than lamb’s quarters. At the base of the leaf, two large teeth extend prominently outward on each side. The perimeter of the leaf may have irregular, small teeth.

(Photo 3) Fig-leaved goosefoot leaves are elongated. The leaf base is wide, but a prominent lobe on each side indents the leaf, after which the shape is narrow to the tip. The perimeter of the leaf has irregular teeth. (Photo 4) The next time you scout your fields before and after spraying, pay attention to the plant characteristics to be certain that what you have is lamb’s quarters. CG Michelle Arsenault is an undergraduate student at the University of Guelph and works with Dr. Francois Tardif and Mike Cowbrough as part of the undergraduate experiential learning program through the Ontario Agricultural College and the Agricultural Development Branch of OMAF and MRA.

Have a question you want answered? Hashtag #PestPatrol on twitter.com to @cowbrough or email Mike at mike.cowbrough@ontario.ca

4

22

Corn Guide, September 2013

S:7”

The most important protection you can give your soybean seeds

New Stress Shield® 600 seed treatment insecticide With this new and innovative seed treatment insecticide, you know your soybeans are protected during critical early development.

• Systemic and contact activity protects roots and early season growth

• Provides targeted control of insects such as wireworms, bean leaf beetles, and seed corn maggots • Can also be used on field peas, beans, wheat, barley and oats

Combine Stress Shield 600 with EverGol Energy™ seed treatment fungicide for complete insect and disease protection.

FIT

FAST

FIRST

= Healthier Plant

= Quicker Emergence

= Higher Yields

For more information, visit BayerCropScience.ca, call 1 888-263-6847, or contact your Bayer CropScience representative.

Always read and follow label directions. Stress Shield® and EverGol Energy ™ are trademarks of the Bayer Group. Bayer CropScience is a member of CropLife Canada.

S:10”

• Longer residual protection against aphids than other seed treatments

SOME REPS STAND BY THEIR PRODUCTS. WE PREFER TO GET WAIST-DEEP IN THEM.

You’ll never find a Pioneer sales rep with their feet up in an office somewhere. More often than not they’re the person standing right next to you discussing the weather, your soil conditions and your challenges – because, after all, they’re

living with them too. This dedication and unique level of expertise helps our reps recommend the right product for each of your acres every year.

Talk to your local Pioneer sales rep or visit pioneer.com for more information.

Our experts are grown locally

S:10”

All purchases are subject to the terms of labeling and purchase documents.

The DuPont Oval Logo is a registered trademark of DuPont. ®, TM, SM Trademarks and service marks licensed to Pioneer Hi-Bred Limited. ©2013, PHL.

S:7”