FARMERS UNION GIN CO. AND WAREHOUSE, INC. MANAGER STEVE HARRIS 203 Hwy. C. • Senath, MO
738-2621
SERVING AREA COTTON FARMERS FOR OVER
100 YEARS
2
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
60 Annual Field Day August 31, 2021 th
Christopher R. Daubert
Vice-Chancellor & Dean College of Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources
Shibu Jose
Associate Dean for Research and Director, Missouri Agriculture Experiment Stations
Grover Shannon
Interim Superintendent of Fisher Delta Research Center
4
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Welcome to Your Center
On behalf of the University of Missouri, The College of Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources, and the Fisher Delta Research Center, welcome to the 60th annual Field Day. We are fortunate to have one of the brightest and hardest working teams in agricultural research at the FDRC. We look forward to sharing our research with you on subjects involving cotton, soybeans, corn, rice, peanuts, industrial hemp, irrigation management, and weed control. The researchers and staff of the FDRC spend their year focused on the challenge of creating and improving the technology necessary to provide a growing world with food and fiber, and the challenges faced by production agriculture. The Center has been the beneficiary of support from the entire agricultural community, the state of Missouri, and a broad network of ag and commodity organizations. We appreciate that support and will continue to work hard to justify your confidence and provide the information you need to become even more effective producers of food and fiber. This is your research center and we’re glad you’re here. Thank you for your support! We’re proud of our team and look forward to presenting useful information from outstanding speakers involving four field tours highlighting research in various crops of our region. Sincerely,
Grover Shannon
T ABLE 8 10
OF
C ONTENTS
About Us Cotton Crop Response to Glufosinate with Plant Growth Regulator and/or Insecticide Tank Mixes Mr. Jim Heiser
12
Industrial Hemp to Fiber Production
17
Soil Water Sensors - Managing Soil Water
20
Soil Health - Developments in Soil Health Assessment and Interpretation
Mr. Anthony Ohmes and Dr. Ivan Cuvaca Dr. Earl Vories
Dr. Kristen Veum
22
Corn Production: Looking Forward
25
Soybean Breeding Updates and New Releases
27
Natural Tolerance to Off-Targert Dicamba in Non-Xtend Soybeans
Dr. Lori Abendroth Dr. Pengyin Chen
Mr. Caio Canella Vieira
30
Managing Soybean Disease with Fungicide
33
Drone Applications in Agriculture
37
Rice Variety Selection
40
Best Management Practices for Row Rice
42
Club of 1000 Members
Dr. Kaitlyn Bissonnette Dr. Jing Zhou Dr. Jarrod Hardke Dr. Justin Chlapecka
6
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Fisher Delta Research Center
FIELD DAY 2021 Tuesday, August 31 2021 • 7am to 1pm
Tour I: Cotton Weed Control, Peanuts and Industrial Hemp • Mr. Jim Heiser, University of Missouri - Sr. Research Associate/Cotton Inc. Projects: Cotton Crop Response to Glufosinate with Plant Growth Regulator and/or Insecticide Tank Mixes • Mr. Tommy Jumper, CEO and Managing Member of Delta Peanut, LLC - Peanuts: Peanut Production Outlook for Southeast Missouri • Mr. Anthony Ohmes and Dr. Ivan Cuvaca, University of Missouri Extension Field Specialist in Agronmy/Hemp: Industrial Hemp to Fiber Production Tour II: USDA-ARS Research at the Delta Center • Dr. Earl Vories, USDA-ARS Agricultural Engineer/Soil Water Sensors: Managing Soil Water • Dr. Kristen Veum, USDA-ARS Soil Scientist/Soil Health: Developments in Soil Health Assessment and Interpretation • Dr. Lori Abendroth, USDA-ARS Agronomist/Corn, Corn Production: Looking Forward Tour III: Soybean Breeding, Non-GMO Tolerance to Dicamba, Managing Soybean Diseases • Dr. Pengyin Chen, University of Missouri Professor and David Haggard Endowed, Soybean: Soybean Breeding Updates and New Releases • Mr. Caio Canella Vieira, University of Missouri Doctoral Student, Soybean: Natural Tolerance to Off-Target Dicamba in Non-Xtend Soybeans • Dr. Kaitlyn Bissonnette, University of Missouri State Field Crop Plant Pathologist, Soybean: Managing Soybean Disease with Fungicide • Dr. Jung Zhou, University of Missouri Post Doctoral Fellow: Drone Applications in Agriculture Tour IV: Rice Variety Update, Best Practices for Row Rice • Dr. Jarod Hardke, Professor and Arkansas State Extension Rice Specialist: Rice Variety Selection • Dr. Justin Chlapecka, University of Missouri Rice Research and Extension Specialist: Best Management Practices for Row Rice
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
About Us The University of Missouri (MU) Agriculture Experiment Station operates a system of 16 off-campus agricultural centers, farms, and forests around the state, to meet the regional research and demonstration needs of agricultural producers and natural resource managers.
Marsh Farm
The Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station is responsible for conducting problem- solving research that helps the state’s citizens make the most effective use possible of the Missouri’s natural resource base, including its people resources, in competing in an increasingly global economy and meeting our obligations as global citizens.
South Dunklin Research Farm
8
Rhodes Farm
Like all of the centers and other facilities within the network, Fisher Delta Research Center exists to support and facilitate the total research program of the Missouri Agricultural Experiment Station. As such, they are an integral part of the station and unique contributors to MU’s comprehensive land grant responsibility. Recognizing that the process of a great public institution depends upon the good will of elected public officials, the Fisher Delta Research Center Advisory Committee shall conduct its business in a non-partisan manner.
Lee Farm
We have a common goal of conducting high quality research that will (a) respond to the needs of Missouri citizens, (b) maintain and enhance our natural resource base, (c) support a vital food and fiber system, and (d) help keep Missouri producers competitive. We will work with the MU Extension Service, state and federal agencies, and Missouri agribusiness, to undergird a reliable, safe supply of quality food that is delivered in a sustainable, profitable manner.
Center offers web-based teaching facilities and instructional television classes toward college degrees at Three Rivers College, the University of Missouri at Columbia and the University of Missouri at St. Louis. There is also an emergency preparedness heliport located at the headquarter offices. Other Center locations include the Lee Farm in Pemiscott County, the Rhodes Farm in Dunklin County, and the Cavanaugh Farm in New Madrid County.
The Fisher Delta Research Center is comprised of four locations in a 12-county area that forms the Missouri Bootheel. Scientists at these facilities have gained recognition for developing improved soybean varieties. The Center also maintains regional soil and plant testing laboratories, a cotton micro gin, greenhouses, a drought simulator, foundation seed building, and a soybean feed library. The Center is headquartered at the Marsh Farm in New Madrid and Pemiscot Counties. The facility includes offices, conference rooms and several auditoriums. In addition, the Colonel Clyde Southern Telecommunication Resource
Our Center includes numerous spaces that are ideal for meetings, conferences, training sessions, conference calls. Some individuals and businesses use our facility and our video conference capabilities to link to distant locations or headquarters and have face-to-face video calls, therefore minimizing travel time and costs. We have meeting spaces that range from our 12-person Library conference room to seating 600 for a meal or 1,000 persons seated for a conference at Rone Hall. We also rent the facilities for numerous weddings, class reunions, Christmas parties, proms, business anniversary celebrations and even concerts.
The Fisher Delta Research Center staff give special thanks to Vice-Chancellor & Dean Christopher R. Daubert, Associate Dean for Research & Director Shibu Jose, and the entire Advisory Board for their constant support and guidance.
Tour 1 Cotton Response to Glufosinate with Plant Growth Regulator and/or Insecticide Tank Mixes Jim Heiser - Fisher Delta Research Center Weed Science
The post-emergence herbicide active ingredient Glufosinate (Liberty) can be used to selectively control weeds in LibertyLink, Enlist, and Xtend cotton varieties. Tank mixes with glyphosate for a broader spectrum of control are possible when applied to Enlist and Xtend varieties, as well as with insecticides and growth regulators to reduce application costs, and make timely applications. However, varying levels of phytotoxic response have been noted by producers and applicators following applications containing glufosinate with other crop protection products, but no trend has been identified as to which product combinations cause the most severe injury. The herbicidal activity of glufosinate has been shown to be dependent on environmental factors including humidity and temperature (Coetzer et al., 2002), time of day (Montgomery et al., 2017), among others. One environmental factor that has not been thoroughly investigated is the effect of cloudy weather for sustained peri10
ods prior to application. One study was found which investigated the difJim Heiser ferences in potential cotton crop injury in LibertyLink cotton varieties versus original Widestrike cotton varieties when applications were made at different growth stages. These Widestrike varieties had low tolerance to Glufosinate. This level of tolerance was used as a selective marker to confirm successful insertion of the insect resistance trait (Norsworthy et al., 2016). Due to the incomplete resistance in the Widestrike varieties, enhanced injury was likely to occur with any environmental stress the plants may have encountered (Culpepper et al., 2009). Another contact herbicide, Carfentrazone-ethyl, was shown to have significantly higher activity and crop response when low light intensity occurred prior to herbicide treatment (Thompson and Nissen, 2002). Under these low light con-
Fisher Delta Research Center
Weed Control
ditions, several factors could influence crop response: chlorophyll production, herbicide metabolism, slowing of processes at the herbicide site of action or herbicide absorption. Plant leaf cuticle (waxy, protective layer) thickness may be reduced during periods of lower light intensity. A thin cuticle could allow for increased absorption of pesticides and cause temporary crop response/injury. This reduction in light intensity could cause increased chlorophyll production to capture more sunlight. Could varying intervals of cloudy weather prior to tank mix applications, no matter what the combination, be the reason for sometimes seeing injury? This study aims to determine if intervals of cloudy conditions can affect the amount of crop response observed when Glufosinate is applied alone or tank mixed with either a plant growth regulator (PGR), an insecticide, or both. Treatments applied to cotton plants include a non-treated check, Liberty only, Liberty + Compact PGR, Liberty + Centric 40WG, and Liberty + Compact + Centric - all at labeled rates. Cloudiness will be simulated by placing 50% light penetration shade cloth over a portion of the plot area at 7, 5, 3, and 1 day prior to tank mix applications. Temperature and light intensity data will be collected from the placement of the first shade
cloth through treatment applications. Plant chlorophyll and cuticle measurements will be made at the time of application. Leaf samples from shaded and non-shaded portions of each plot will be sampled and amount of leaf cuticle per unit area determined. Correlation between low cuticle measurements and high crop response would suggest that increased herbicide absorption may be responsible. A SPAD 502 Chlorophyll meter will be used to estimate chlorophyll concentration in cotton plant leaves. Additionally, crop response assessments in the form of chlorosis, necrosis and/or stunting, and maturity delay will be collected, as well as cotton fiber quality and ginning information. • Checking & Savings • IRA’s & CD’s • Personal & Auto Loans • Mortgage Loans • Agriculture Loans • Business Loans • Online/Mobile Banking • Online Bill Pay • Card Valet® • Popmoney®
To Us, People Matter CORNING, AR 870-857-3086
Jerry Sollis, Rhonda Sollis & Michael Sollis 908 N. Missouri Ave. • Corning, AR 72422 Office 870-857-3086 • Fax 870-857-3318 Cell 870-323-0353 Jerry • Cell 870-926-1188 Rhonda Cell 870-216-1846 Michael
Kennett, MO 573-717-7177
Malden, MO 573-276-2257
Dexter, MO 573-624-8383
Leachville, AR 870-539-6001
Fisher Delta Research Center
Industrial Hemp Industrial Hemp for Fiber Production
Anthony Ohmes and Dr. Ivan Cuvaca - University of Missouri Extension Field Specialist in Agronomy antHony oHmes
Dr. ivan CuvaCa
and is considered a short-day plant. In general, hemp has separate male and female plants; however, there are also some plants with separate male and female flowers on the same plant. Male plants typically flower and senesce earlier than female plants. This is important in fiber production since harvest timing is based on male plant flowering. Industrial hemp fiber is comprised of the outer vascular cambium called bast fiber and the inner core called the hurd which is used in various industries such as textile, construction, automotive, and agriculture. Fiber production is the primary research focus of MU research trials, with some investigation of dual purpose for grain production. With seed size variability, concerns over vigor and emergence, planting depth for fiber hemp is recommended at an average of 0.25 inch with good soil to seed contact. Avoiding poorly drained fields, identifying fields that have a low weed seed bank, and starting weed free prior to planting are critical. Soil testing is recommended. Drilling hemp seed for fiber at 7.5” spacing is recIntroduction Industrial hemp is a summer annual that re- ommended to encourage internode elongation sponds to productive soils with a soil pH range to increase height for yield, while maintaining of 6.0 to 6.5. Flowering is triggered by day-length a small diameter stem for harvest and providIndustrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) has a history of fiber production in Missouri, with peak production from the mid- to late-19th century. Following the Controlled Substance Act of the 1970’s, all Cannabis was illegal to produce. With the 2014 and 2018 federal Farm Bills and Missouri legislation, Missouri saw commercial production of industrial hemp in the 2020 planting season. With commercial production, there are agronomic production questions that arise where research and research-based education can help producers within Missouri make informed decisions when considering growing or actively growing industrial hemp. University of Missouri did plant fiber and grain trials at research stations in 2019 and 2020. The trials evaluated grain and biomass yield of industrial hemp cultivars in different row spacings in Missouri. Additional research was initiated in 2021 to evaluate crop tolerance to herbicides, weed control options, and nitrogen management at MU research stations across the state.
12
Fisher Delta Research Center
Industrial Hemp
ing competition for weed control. Seeding rate range is 40 to 60 pounds per acre. Seeds per acre as a potential standard such as other crops to account for seed size variability needs to be considered for future research. In general, May is a recommended planting month. However, planting date research is another area to help identify ideal timing for maximum fiber production. Planting too early can stagger or delay germination which can increase the potential for seedling disease. Planting too late can reduce growth and overall yield. Research out of Kentucky has shown variability in germination, ranging from 60 to 96%. Hemp germination research at Virginia Tech evaluated seven cultivars originating from Canada, northern Europe and southern Europe. The data suggested an interaction between origin of seed and soil temperature. Germination percentages of 80 percent or greater ranged between 55 degrees Fahrenheit and 80 degrees Fahrenheit with optimal soil temperatures for northern latitude cultivars between 60- and 68-degrees F and up to 77 degrees F for southern cultivars. Harvest can be with traditional forage baling equipment. Harvest timing is when 20% of male plants are flowering. To help with the separation of the bast fiber and hurd a field process of retting where cut plants lay on 4-to-6-inch stubble for up to a month is required prior to baling. Research Dr. Kelley Nelson, Professor in the department of Plant Sciences with University of Missouri, is researching and coordinating efforts with MU Experiment Stations and MU Extension faculty and staff for MU fiber hemp trials. Seven research locations in 2019 and 2020, to evaluate grain and biomass yield of industrial hemp cultivars in dif-
ferent row spacings in Missouri. Plots were taken to yield at Greenley (2019 & 2020), Hudley-Whaley (2019) and Graves-Chapple (2020). Late June planted industrial hemp in 2019 had seed yields that ranged from 160 to 560 lbs/acre while early June planted industrial hemp in 2020 yielded 600 to 1600 lbs/acre. Biomass in 2019 was 230 to 680 lbs/acre while in 2020 biomass was 1,100 to 4,200 lbs/acre. Narrow row hemp produced higher yields than wide rows when planting dates were delayed. Currently there are no labeled conventional herbicides to use in hemp. The EPA labeled and Missouri Department of Agriculture approved bio-pesticides available for industrial hemp in Missouri target disease and insects/mites. Ivan Cuvaca, Field Specialist in Agronomy with MU Extension, when he was with University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) evaluated PRE and POST herbicide tolerance of hemp. UNL data from one year indicated variable tolerances ranging from 0% injury to >50% and plant death from PRE and POST herbicides commonly used in corn and soybean. Links provided below on that work by Ivan and others and UNL. In 2021, research on industrial hemp tolerance to conventional herbicides used in corn, soybean and cotton was initiated at the Fisher Delta Research Center. The following treatments were evaluated: five residual herbicides (flumioxazin, metolachlor, pyroxasulfone, linuron, and fluridone) applied both PRE and Delayed PRE; pendimethalin applied Delayed PRE; and acifluorfen and fomesafen applied POST. Crop injury and weed control preliminary data will be collected and presented at field day. These treatments were applied for research purposes. Again, there are no currently labeled herbicides in Missouri for industrial hemp.
Fisher Delta Research Center
Industrial Hemp
Thank You We want to thank Fisher Delta Research Center and Grover Shannon, Interim Superintendent for providing land for this experiment. Thanks also goes to Jim Heiser and Cory Cross for expending time and resources for planting and management of plots and Dr. Kelly Nelson for providing industrial hemp research information from research stations around the state. Lastly, we also Summary want to thank Midwest Natural Fiber for supplyAltogether, hemp in Missouri is a promising al- ing the seed and funding the 2021 herbicide reternative crop with potential to increase acres as search at the Fisher Delta research station. the industry continues to find innovative ways to use the versatile crop. There are some hur- Other Resources dles, some challenges, and some opportunities University of Missouri Extension to growing this crop. MU will continue working https://extension.missouri.edu/programs/induswith a new and developing industry to provide trial-hemp research-based education to best manage this University of Nebraska-Lincoln crop. What is needed is more research and find- https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2020/industriing ways to fund research to develop systems for al-hemp-tolerance-soil-applied-herbicides Missouri to address concerns such as pest man- https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2020/industriagement, especially weeds. The development of al-hemp-varieties-exhibit-same-tolerance-levuniform standards and procedures as we see in el-pre-herbicides other row crops for quality control will be need- https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2020/industried across the industry. Cultivar selection, weed al-hemp-tolerance-early-post-herbicides management, drainage water management, and https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2020/industrieconomics are important to keep in mind when al-hemp-tolerance-late-post-herbicides producing this alternative crop. It is also import- University of Kentucky ant to have a plan, budget and market outlet for https://hemp.ca.uky.edu/ your crop and know the regulatory requirements http://www2.ca.uky.edu/agcomm/pubs/ID/ before planting. ID250/ID250.pdf University of Missouri Extension did summarize the labeled bio-pesticides in MU guide 4705 titled, “Industrial Hemp Pesticides in Missouri.” The guide can be found on MU Extension’s Industrial Hemp webpage or directly at: https://extension. missouri.edu/g4705. Read and follow all label restrictions and any off-label use of pesticides is illegal.
14
BERNIE 573-293-6567 1496 St. Hwy. 25
CHARLESTON 573-683-6115 205 West Commercial
COOTER 573-695-2127 Lynn Circle
PORTAGEVILLE 573-379-5674 Hwy. 61
SENATH 573-738-2616 500 North Main
SENATH 573-738-2771 207 Hwy. C
SIKESTON 573-481-9416 Hwy. 61
Michael Tipton mtipton@arkmowell.com
Mid-Valley Irrigation Pivot Sales and Service Kennett, MO 573-888-1465
Charleston, MO 573-683-6041
16
Tour 2 Soil Water Sensors – Managing Soil Water Dr. Earl Vories, Agricultural Engineer, USDA-Agricultural Research Service
Although soil water sensors have been around design and wireless for quite a while, recent improvements in sensor networking have made them much easier for farmers Dr. earl vories Figure 1 to use to help manage irrigation of their crops. However, there are several things to understand to optimize their accuracy. While there are many different sensors from several manufacturers, there are primarily two kinds of soil water measurements. Soil water pressure or tension (negative pressure) sensors are calibrated to measure how tightly the water is held by the soil, which indicates how hard it will be for the plants to remove water for evapotranspiration. Soil water content sensors are calibrated to measure how much water the soil contains. The two values are related by a soil water characteristic curve and the curves differ based on soil texture. One of the first challenges for efficient use of soil water sensors is knowing the soil texture. Soil tex-
Fisher Delta Research Center
USDA-ARS Soil Water
ture for fields in the Missouri bootheel are generally quite variable and often, the only spatial data available is the NRCS County Soil Survey, but those data are generally not precise. Figure 1 shows the soil texture of one of the Delta Center fields based on the County Soil Survey, together with the estimated sand content in the upper 21 inches. Most of the field was mapped as a Tiptonville silt loam; however, while the soil textural triangle classifies silt loam as having ≤50% sand, the estimates based on our measurements suggested that about ¾ of the field contained >50% sand. Figure 2 shows soil water tension and soil water content readings from the same cotton plot in the field in Figure 1. The values are from July 13, when the field first began to get dry, until September 30, just before harvest. The irrigations on July 23 (0.87”) and 28 (0.75”) had a small but detectable effect on the 6” water content and very little impact on the deeper water content or the tension. The final irrigation on August 1 (0.25”) did not have an obvious impact on any of the sensors. Although the water content at each depth decreased until the August 6 rainfall, the 6” sensor had the largest response to the rain. The tension sensors at 6”and 12”showed the most drying before the rain, with very little change in the deeper sensors. By the time of the next major rain on August 31, even the tension at 30” had increased, indicating that the cotton roots were extracting water from that depth. Less change was observed in the water content sensor readings, but it is important to note that while the sensors were all in the same plot and therefore received the same rainfall and irrigation, Figure 1 shows how the soil texture can change quite a lot over a short distance. The most common questions producers ask regarding soil water sensors are: what kind should
Figure 2
I get, how many do I need in a field, and what depth(s) should they be placed? Of course, the answer is, it depends. Unless you plan on reading them manually a couple of times a week or more, the wireless network that collects the data and stores it on the internet is going to be a key component. Since most of us aren’t experienced at installing and maintaining wireless networks, it generally comes down to the company providing the service. Since the tension sensors are inexpensive, they are a popular choice. As far as how many are needed in a field and at what depths, it depends on the uniformity of the field. A uniform field could be monitored closely by
18
Fisher Delta Research Center
USDA-ARS Soil Water
sensors at a couple of sites and a couple of depths. Since the tension sensors are inexpensive, there are commonly three or more sensors combined in a single probe. However, in a field like the one in Figure 1, the question is much harder. While the variability in two dimensions is obvious, the sand content by depth is also quite variable. We’ve installed sensors at five locations for 4 years, with four depths at each location, and still haven’t gotten the detailed understanding we want for our variable rate irrigation research. This research is continuing, to better understand the relationship between soil water and texture.
Fisher Delta Research Center
USDA-ARS Soil Health
Developments in Soil Health Assessment and Interpretation Dr. Kristen Veum - USDA-ARS Soil Scientist
Soil Health Assessment Protocol and Evaluation (SHAPE) It is widely recognized that a robust, continental-scale soil health assessment tool is needed to promote adoption of soil health practices for improved environmental outcomes and more sustainable agroecosystems. Therefore, a team of scientists from USDA-ARS, USDA-NRCS, Cornell University, and the University of Missouri are developing a new soil health interpretation tool called the Soil Health Assessment Protocol and Evaluation (SHAPE). This tool is a flexible, robust, and user-friendly framework grounded in the principles of soil science (Nunes et al. 2021). The broad objectives of this project include: • Development of a flexible tool for soil health interpretation at the continental scale. • Evaluation of practices implemented by producers in soil health demonstration trials. • Evaluation of soil health laboratory data in the conservation management database. • Identification of the most effective management practices to improve soil health in different regions of the U.S. • More efficient targeting of soil health programming efforts across the U.S. • Facilitation of adoption of soil health testing by public and private labs and improved accessibility and availability of soil health testing for landowners. • Improved soil health by increased adoption of 20
soil health management systems. How SHAPE Works Dr. Kristen veum The Bayesian SHAPE tool was initially developed for soil organic carbon (SOC) using a dataset of ~14,600 SOC measurements from across the continental U.S. This tool is based on the principles of soil science as well as cutting-edge statistical methodology that handles the complex interaction of climate and inherent soil conditions with soil health indicators. SHAPE scoring curves for SOC provide the user with a score ranging from 0-100% based on how the measured SOC value compares with SOC values from its peer group, defined by a unique combination of climate and soil conditions. Estimates of uncertainty are also provided. Many climate and soil variables were considered for inclusion in SHAPE, and variables were selected based on model performance as well as accessibility of data. The final SHAPE peer groups are defined by soil texture class and soil suborder then adjusted for climate (mean annual temperature and precipitation). Figure 1 demonstrates how SHAPE accounts for climate and soil factors and Figure 2 illustrates how management impacts SHAPE scores at the USDA-ARS Long-Term Agroecosystem Research Site in Centralia, MO. This approach is the first step in providing scientifically motivated guidance to producers on
Fisher Delta Research Center
USDA-ARS Soil Health
how land management affects soil health. Thus far, scoring curves for SOC, active carbon, soil respiration, and total protein have been developed. In addition, the team has created a publicly accessible, user-friendly R Shiny app interface as well as a GitHub repository for scoring soil health indicator data: https://paparker.shinyapps.io/shape_app/ https://github.com/paparker/SHAPE Figure 2. Illustration of the sensitivity of SHAPE soil organic carbon (SOC) scores to management practices at a single site after accounting for the local soil and climate characteristics. This example is from the USDA-ARS Long-Term Agroecosystem Research site in Columbia, MO and shows that reduced tillage, cover crops, and perennialization increased SOC and improved SHAPE scores. Figure 1. Illustration of how SHAPE accounts for the influence of climate (Texas versus Iowa) and soil texture class (silt loam versus sandy loam) on soil organic carbon (SOC) scores. In this example, SOC = 2.0% for all samples. For the same soil texture group, soils from a warmer climate with less precipitation (Texas) score higher than soils from a cooler climate with higher precipitation (Iowa). The influence of soil texture class is also evident: coarse textured sandy soils are not expected to retain as much soil carbon as finer textured silt loam soils, so they score higher when the SOC content is equal.
What’s Next? • A spatially explicit model already developed by team members will provide a more refined, regionally specific interpretation. • Scoring curves for additional soil health indicators and laboratory protocols. • Refined interpretation based on cropping system categories. References Nunes, M. R., Veum, K. S., Parker, P. A., Holan, S. H., Wills, S., Seybold, C. A., Van Es, H. M., Amsili, J., Karlen, D., & Moorman, T. B. (2021). The Soil Health Assessment Protocol and Evaluation (SHAPE) applied to soil organic C. Soil Science Society of America Journal, https://doi.org/10.1002/ saj2.20244.
Fisher Delta Research Center
USDA-ARS Corn
Corn Production: Looking Forward Dr. Lori Abendroth - Agronomist, USDA-ARS
At the Fisher Delta Research Center, research has begun to examine different corn hybrid maturities and how periods of environmental stress impact the grain fill period. In addition, next year, we will begin examining cropping systems that utilize multiple crops within- and across-years and reduced tillage to maximize productivity. The frost-free period in this region is nearly 220 calendar days which is 4300 Growing Degree Days (GDD). This length of growing season provides a number of opportunities to explore crop-
(Figure 2). Figure 1. Hybrid maturity shown as the amount of GDD necessary to reach
Dr. lori abenDrotH
Figure 2
Figure 1
maturity. Figure 2. Percent of frost-free GDD used to grow the corn maturities selected by farmers. We will discuss temperature and precipitation patterns (Figure 3) and how these affect the plausibility of adding a third crop across two-years, ping systems beyond our traditional approaches. shortening maturities to avoid stress periods, and The corn hybrids currently grown in the region adding in a cover crop. have an average relative maturity (RM) of ~115 RM which require 2800 GDD (Figure 1) to reach maturity. This means that often only 65% of the available heat is being used to grow a cash crop 22
Fisher Delta Research Center
USDA-ARS Corn Figure 3
Figure 3. Monthly precipitation during the frostfree period for New Madrid county. Since 2000, the last spring frost date on average has been March 28 and the first fall frost date on Nov 1. 1Data from Pioneer brand hybrid sales from 20002016. Reference: Abendroth et al., 2021. Global Change Biology.
Wilson Trucking Company
Hwy. H & J Hwy. Campbell • 573-276-4304
LEGACY LEADS with Precision Ag Solutions.
If you're looking to improve your planting, spraying, or harvest, we have the solution for you! Legacy Equipment has a highly trained team of Precision Ag Specialists who will help you maximize your harvest yields and your profits.
NEW MADRID
CORNING
KENNETT
LegacyEquipment.com Corning, AR (870) 857-6682 | Paragould, AR (870) 236-7777 | Piggott, AR (870) 598-2221 Hayti, MO (573) 359-0141 | Kennett, MO (573) 888-5857 New Madrid, MO (573) 748-2571 | Portageville, MO (573) 379-5426
24
PORTAGEVILLE PORT TAGEVILLE PIGGOTT
PARAGOULD PARAGOULD
HAYTI HAYTI
Tour 3
Breeder: Dr. Pengyin Chen Former Breeder & Interim Director: Dr. Grover Shannon Research Scientist: Dr. Liakat Ali Research Associates: Melissa Crisel, Scotty Smothers
Research Specialists: Michael Clubb, Stewart Selves, Caio Canella Vieira, Jamie Manuel, Destiny Ayers & Brenton Carter PhD Students: Caio Canella Vieira, Dongho Lee Research Technicians: Chris Davis, McKayla Burris, Billy Becker and Landon Kersey Dr. Pengyin CHen
Our soybean breeding program focuses on variety development and germplasm enhancement. The overall goal is to provide a steady flow of new and improved conventional and herbicide-tolerant varieties adapted to Southeast Missouri and the Mid-South. Herbicide tolerance traits include RRI, R2Y, LibertyLink, Enlist E3 and R2Y Xtend. Emphasis is placed on developing maturity groups IV and V varieties with high yield potential, broad adaptation, multiple disease resistance, environmental stress tolerance, and improved seed quality traits. Desired seed traits include high protein, high oil, high sucrose, low stachyose, high oleic, high stearic, low linolenic and soy food attributes. Efforts are also made in selecting superior lines with resistance to stem canker, sudden death syndrome, frogeye leaf spot, phytophthora root rot, charcoal rot, cyst nematode, root-knot nematode, and reniform nematode. In addition the team develops lines with tolerance to off-target dicamba damage, drought, flood and salt stress. We use off-season nursery, laboratory, greenhouse and field to develop and evaluate breeding materials. Breeding lines are extensively tested in Missouri and other Southern states, and superior lines are released as varieties for commercial production or as germplasm to be used for research and breeding by other public and private breeding programs. Our breeding program is supported by the check-off funds through the United Soybean Board, Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council, Mid-south Soybean Board and North Central Soybean Research Program.
Fisher Delta Research Center
Soybean Breeding
26
Fisher Delta Research Center
Soybean Breeding
Natural Tolerance to Off-Target Dicamba in Non-Xtend Soybeans Caio Canella Vieira - University of Missouri Doctoral Student
The development and commercialization of genetically modified dicamba-tolerant (Xtend) soybean were followed by massive off-target damage reports across the United States. In 2017, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported 2,708 official dicamba-related injury investigations in soybean, damaging over 3.5 mil-
lion soybean acres in the U.S. Recently, the herbicide has been re-registered Caio Canella vieira for over-the-top applications until 2025. Although soybeans are naturally susceptible to
Your CommunitY FoCuSED Bank Our team of experts guarantees local decisions and a solid bank. And with people you know and trust, you can always count on the service you deserve!
Kennett Trust Bank
Soybean Breeding dicamba, genotypes may respond differently to off-target damage. Once damaged, the most prominent symptoms are abnormal leaf development known as cupping and plant stunting. The severity of the symptoms and yield penalty differ based on the growth stage, dosage, frequency and duration of exposure, and potentially genetic background. This project is designed to identify and confirm natural tolerance to off-target dicamba damage and characterize the genetic basis of such tolerance. With the threat of a substantial yield penalty resulting from the exposure to off-target dicamba, deployment of tolerant non-Xtend soybean varieties (Conventional, RR, LL, and E3) is critical to secure commercial production of all types of non-Xtend soybeans and the growing niche market of conventional soybeans in the United States as well as export for food applications.
GRIFFIN OIL & PROPANE
Kennett Trust Bank www.KennettTrustBank.com 805 First Street | 1004 First Street Kennett, MO 63857
573-888-9051
Now serving Hornersville area residents
PORTAGEVILLE 573-379-3668 KENNETT 573-888-9844 DEERING 573-757-6621 Bulk Diesel - Bulk Gasoline Propane - Oil - Kerosene
28
Fisher Delta Research Center
Soybean Breeding
Genetic Basis of the Natural Tolerance We developed three mapping populations where one parent showed superior tolerance to off-target dicamba damage and the other susceptibility (Figure 2A). We collected two years of visual injury data (1-5 scale), and the segregation within the population will be used to map the regions of the genome controlling the differential response to
dicamba. We also performed a time-series study on exotic soybean lines for off-target dicamba tolerance throughout the growing season and identified differential responses to the injury among them (Figure 2B). The genes and markers identified in this study will be used in breeding for dicamba tolerance.
Fisher Delta Research Center
Soybean Breeding
Managing Soybean Disease With Fungicide Dr. Kaitlyn Bissonnette - University of Missouri State Field Crop Plant Pathologist
Fungicide applications can be an integral part of an integrated management plan if timed and applied appropriately. The question of whether fungicide applications provide added value to current crop production practices is of exceeding importance. Developing an integrated disease management plan for soybean can be a balanc-
30
ing act of selecting resistant varieties and fungicides appropriate to the roDr. Kaitlynn bissonnette tation and cultural practices used. Disease levels can vary greatly from year to year and field to field. In addition, in season disease scouting can provide valuable information to improve future disease management strategies. The most unpredictable factor affecting soybean disease development is the environment. In years when disease potential is high, foliar fungicide applications for disease control have the potential to provide benefit to soybean producers in addition to resistant varieties. As part of the MU Strip Trial program, foliar fungicide application trials were implemented at more than 30 locations from 2018 – 2020 across the state of Missouri. In these trials, paired strips were tested comparing the application of a farmer’s choice foliar fungicide as compared to no-fungicide control strips. Fields were scouted for disease prior to and following a fungicide application. When compared, a fungicide application provided control of disease in some but not trials as compared to no fungicide application. The addition of a fungicide also provided a median 1.7 bushels per acre increase in soybean yield over all sites. Importantly, differences among sites were noted with some sites noting no increase
Fisher Delta Research Center
Soybean Breeding
in yield and others noting a significant advantage with the application of a fungicide. This presentation will focus on details of the MU Strip Trial fungicide strip trial results and how scouting and fungicide type can impact overall soybean yield. More information can be found at striptrial.missouri.edu.
Figure 1. Locations of MU Strip Trial fungicide trials from 2018-2020.
Your CommunitY FoCuSED Bank Our team of experts guarantees local decisions and a solid bank. And with people you know and trust, you can always count on the service you deserve!
Kennett Trust Bank
Kennett Trust Bank
502 N Main St. Senath, MO 63876
(573) 738-2648
4s
www.KennettTrustBank.com 805 First Street | 1004 First Street Kennett, MO 63857
573-888-9051
32
Fisher Delta Research Center
Soybean Breeding
Drone Applications in Agriculture Dr. Jing Zhou University of Missouri, Post Doctoral Fellow
Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), also known as drones have been developed for near-ground remote sensing to monitor plant growth and analyze the influence of genotypes and environment on plant growth. A UAV system for agricultural applications usually include an aircraft platform to complete an assigned flight task, sensors to obtain useful information, and a flight control platform to manage flight parameters (e.g., height, speed, and paths) and monitor flight conditions. UAV systems sometimes need to coordinate with ground devices to deliver precise measurements, such as GPS stations and ground control points, etc. UAV systems equipped with different sensors can quickly and non-destructively obtain plants information in field conditions, together with technologies in image processing, computer vision, and machine/deep learning. The PAAL lab has been developing drone-based imaging technologies for field applications in cotton, corn, and soybean. The applications include measuring plant height, detecting emergence rates of corn and cotton plants, estimating the maturity status of soybeans, predicting the yield of cotton and soybean, and assisting breeders to select superior breeding materials. We developed imaging technologies to measure plant height in field conditions with a minimum error (2.9 cm for objects 99 cm tall and 3.6 cm for soybean crops 35-75 cm tall). We mount-
ed a low-cost digital camera (GoPro Hero 5 Black) to a UAV platform (DJI Dr. Jing ZHou Matrice 600 Pro) and use them to take crop images at 15 m above ground. The 2D images were processed to extract 3D information of crop canopy and build 3D models for crops (Fig. 2b). From the 3D model, we developed object detection algorithms to identify crop rows and used only depth information of crop canopies to generate a plant map (Fig. 1c). Crop emergence is an important agronomic factor for making field management decisions. However, evaluating crop emergence is time-sensitive (need to be made at very early stages) and time-consuming for visual observations. We developed a UAV imaging system to capture high-resolution RGB images of cotton and corns at the seedlings stage. The images were successfully used to count seedling stands and evaluate canopy size (Fig. 3a and b). Determining physiological maturity date is critical in soybean breeding and farming. We tested 326 different soybean varieties in field conditions and used the UAV system with a multispectral camera to take soybean images. We obtained spectral reflectance values from those images and build a machine learning model to predict maturity dates of the soybean plants. The results showed that when soybean started entering the maturity
TOP AGRICULTURE LENDER The Bank of Missouri is proud to be a trusted partner for farmers and ranchers for nearly 130 years. As a community bank, we work with our borrowers to understand their needs, helping them Live Well, Bank Well.
stages, our image could give estimated maturity dates with an error of fewer than two days. In our other applications, we used UAV images and modern deep learning models to estimate yield for soybean and cotton plants (Fig. 3c). The image-based estimation highly agreed with combine-obtained values. We also develop a method to assist soybean breeders to select superior breeding varieties using UAV multispectral images. The method could provide references to breeders before harvest seasons, and it is mostly beneficial for progeny rows that combine-obtained yield is not usually available. Our model correctly identified over 70% of the breeder’s selection the model’s selections had higher yield than the breeder’s selection regarding yield in the following year’s trials.
BANKOFMISSOURI.COM
34
Delta Center Field Day kennett irrigation 15844 St. Hwy. A • Kennett
888-5468
Mark Gibbins Broker
Buy from an Independent Broker
An Independent Broker works for you, not an insurance company. Our sole purpose is to shop on your behalf with financially strong, quality insurers to lower your insurance cost. The savings can be substantial. That’s why we’ve been around since 1906. Saving money never goes out of style.
200 E. Main Street, Portageville, MO 63873
573-379-5401 • 866-222-1851 www.ellingtoninsurance.com
2353 North State Highway D Hayti, MO 63851 Phone:
573-333-4125 Fax:
573-333-4216
Keenan Carlisle General Manager
(573) 748-0302
PO Box 173, Marston, MO 63866
36
Tour 4
Rice Cultivar Selection and Management Dr. Jarrod Hardke - Professor and Arkansas State Extension Specialist
Rice cultivar selection seems to get more difficult each year. Every new year continues to bring an increasing number of offerings for growers to choose from. Having options is always a good thing but having plenty of options can cause difficulty in decision-making. In Arkansas in 2001, Wells (30%), Cocodrie (30%), and Bengal (9%) easily made up the majority of acreage with no other cultivar reaching 5% of acres. In contrast in 2020, RT Gemini 214 CL (21%), RT XP753 (18.8%), Diamond (11.4%), RT 7521 FP (11.2%), and RT 7301 (6.4%) made up the majority of acres with several others around 5%. The situation appears to be evolving further again with the continued rapid release of new cultivars from private companies and public breeding programs. In 2021, we are again seeing a rapid change to new hybrids and varieties with new herbicide technologies and improved disease resistance traits. Over 50% of rice acres planted in Arkansas in 2021 are comprised of cultivars that
were not even commercially available in 2019. At this stage, hybrid Dr. JarroD HarDKe cultivars make up the majority of rice acres in the Mid-South. FullPage hybrids, such as RT 7321 FP and RT 7521 FP (tolerant to Preface and Postscript herbicides), and conventional hybrids, such as RT XP753 and RT 7301, are the most widely planted cultivars. New offerings of these hybrid types are expected for the 2022 season. In addition, MaxAce hybrids and varieties (tolerant to Highcard herbicide) are expected in 2022. Overall disease packages and performance appears to be stable or trending upward compared to hybrid offerings of the past. Several new Clearfield varieties, such as CLL15, CLL16, and CLL17 (tolerant to Newpath and Beyond herbicides) have recently been released and all possess blast resistance genes, though they are not completely tolerant to the disease.
These new varieties generally represent improvements in yield and agronomics compared to previous CL varieties. Provisia varieties, such as PVL02 and PVL03 (tolerant to Provisia herbicide) are the newest commercially available trait technology. While Provisia varieties have so far largely been targeted toward acres in most need of the herbicide technology, PVL03 and expected new offerings appear to have more consistent yields and improved disease packages to make them more competitive overall. Conventional long-grain variety offerings are evolving as well. Diamond has been the most widely planted for the past several years, but Jewel, ProGold1, and ProGold2 have been released recently which are competitive with it. However, DG263L is a new variety that appears to have excellent yield potential and behaves somewhere between a hybrid and a variety. Should this variety perform well in its limited release in 2021, it is expected that acreage will increase dramatically in 2022. Again, there are several new cultivars
Campbell, MO
573-246-2535 Custom Ginning Buyers of All Grains Seed, Chemical, and Fertilizer Sales Precision Fertilizer Application
which are expected to be released from different sources in the next two years which may dramatically change the preferred cultivars yet again. Medium grain options are currently still limited to varieties, with Jupiter, Titan, and CLM04 occupying most acres. Jupiter has been our most dependable option but has performed less consistently the past couple of years. Titan, meanwhile, with its earlier maturity, requires more timely management. CLM04 has been very competitive as a Clearfield medium-grain option, but generally does not outyield Jupiter and Titan. Lynx is a recent release that appears to outyield other medium-grain options but is still awaiting full market approval. Many factors go into our cultivar selection criteria, from seed cost to herbicide technology, to field management conditions. Hybrids in general are better at performing under more stressful situations (furrow-irrigated rice, blast pressure, etc.) making them safer options where management may prove difficult. More recent variety releases appear better in some ways, but physiological differences will continue to make them more susceptible to environmental stresses compared to hybrids. So, it is still preferred to place varieties in fields where they can be more optimally managed. Now that we have multiple herbicide tolerant rice options, that further complicates the decision based on technology needed. Balance your need for herbicide technology with the need to manage seed costs. Choose multiple cultivars to avoid putting all of your risk in a limited basket. Try new offerings on limited acreage until they prove they are equal to or greater than what you currently grow. It’s also best to avoid kneejerk reactions to an odd performance year – don’t throw out a proven cultivar on your farm due to an odd year but do start looking at alternatives in case a change is needed. In the last 10 years our yield stability in rice has been remarkable largely due to the consistency of cultivars offered, so trying new offerings is going to be required to keep gradually climbing the yield ladder.
“Our Family Serving Your Family, Since 1967”
38
Quality Ginning Since 1928
Josh McGowan, Manager josh.mcgowan@greenpointag.com Thomas Scales, Sales Agronomist J P McCord, Sales Agronomist
888-5361 19303 State Hwy 25 Kennett, MO
Barry L. richardson President Phone 573-643-2921
richardson Gin, inc. 112 West Main Street Marston, Missouri 63866
Fisher Delta Research Center
Rice
Best Management Practices for Row rice Dr. Justin Chlapecka Missouri Rice Research and Extension Specialist
Furrow-irrigated rice, or row rice, has gained a large increase in attention in the Mid-South over the past five years. It’s estimated that at least 30% of rice acres in Missouri utilize furrow irrigation. As a result of the regional increase in production, I was part of a team that conducted research with the University of Arkansas from 2018-2020 focused on developing some best management practices for furrow-irrigated rice production. Included were studies on fertility, water management, and cultivar selection. Trials evaluating weed control have also been conducted over the past several years. Fertilizer management in row rice should differ because of the difference in behavior of nutrients in anaerobic (flooded) and aerobic (non-flooded) conditions. One of the major advantages to maintaining a flood in rice production is the stabilization of nitrogen (N) in a plant available form that is not easily lost. Without that luxury in row rice, N applications should generally be split into at least three applications for maximal yield potential. On clay soils, a 75-75-46 split has consistently been the top performer just to our south, in Mississippi County, AR (Figure 1). This split consists of 75 units of N per acre prior to the initial irrigation, followed by 75 units two weeks later, followed by another 46 units one week to 10 days after the second application. On lighter soils, more options have looked favorable including three weekly applications of 46 units (100 lbs urea). It is also recom40
mended that all N applications in row rice include a urease inhibitor (NBPT). It Dr. Justin CHlaPeCKa is also more likely to see phosphorus and potassium deficiency in the non-flooded areas of a row rice field between mid-season and heading. Irrigation intervals were tested in large trials on both clay and silt loam soils in 2018 and 2019. Using Watermark sensors installed at a 4” depth in the upper third of the field, irrigation could be delayed until at least -45 kPa without a grain or milling yield penalty. This resulted in significant water savings of about 33% compared to a conventional flood and corresponded to around a 5 day irrigation interval in the absence of significant rainfall. Hybrids are generally recommended in furrow-irrigated rice due to their blast resistance and greater root structure. The root structure of a hybrid allows increased drought tolerance and N uptake capability compared to inbred varieties. If a variety is desirable, care should be taken to avoid blast susceptible varieties and other scenarios that could increase blast incidence, such as areas with east facing tree lines. Fungicide application(s) should also be budgeted for when growing a variety. Weed control may prove tougher in a row rice scenario and relies heavily on residuals. Research in Arkansas shows that three weeks between
residual applications may actually be too long in row rice. Aside from the usual grass problems in rice, heavy Palmer amaranth (pigweed) pressured areas should generally be avoided for row rice production. However, Loyant herbicide has proven to be a tremendous tool to control pigweeds in row rice. The full 16 oz rate has caused crop damage in certain instances, but an 8 oz rate has done a great job of controlling pigweeds in
row rice. As a new Assistant Research Professor and State Extension Rice Specialist as of August 1, I am looking forward to serving the Missouri rice industry for years to come. I really look forward to meeting everyone and speaking on these topics at the Delta Center Field Day on August 31.
Figure 1. Rice grain yield for selected nitrogen (N) programs averaged from 2018-2020. Nitrogen applied is in units of N (lb ac-1) applied in weekly intervals (Week 1- Week 2- Week 3- Week 4).
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Club of 1000 Membership
Adams, Arvil V. Allen, Orville Duane & Alice Geraldine, Neelyville FFA Alta Pete, Inc. Anand, Sam and Susie Arington, Bill and Randy Associated Electric Coop, New Madrid Atwell, in Honor of Sam and Fran Bank of Hayti Bailey, John R. Baker, In Memory of Charles B. Baker, David E. Barks, Glenn and Donna BASF Bean, Representative Otto Bean, Barry & Vickie Bean, Claire Elizabeth Bean, Jason Bean, Otto James Bell, Richard E. and Christina L. Berry Gin Co. Black, Joe G. and Ellen Blakemore, David and Carolyn Blytheville Sheet Metal (Dwight Wren) BNSF Railway (Jeffrey N. Davis) Bootheel Resource Conservation and Development Bracey, Hilton (Wolf Bayou Farms) Branum, Alisa Branum, Kristen Branum, Gary, Becky and Elizabeth Branum, Greg and Jeannie Branum, Janice Brooks, Eddie Brown, Mr. and Mrs. T. A., Jr. Bullington, Earl Burton, In Memory of Geneva Girvin Carter, Randy Chen, Pengyin and Ping Zhao Choate, Wendell Choi, Mun and Suzanne Citizens Bank of Charleston Chippendale, Michael and Ene Collins, Michael and Linda
Combs Farming Co. Combs Land Co. Combs Realty Co. Combs, Hayden Paul Combs, Merideth Ann Combs, Mr. and Mrs. Paul T. Combs, Mr. and Mrs. Jerry Paul Cook, Robert and Ann Cromwell, Charles F. and Ruth Cronan, Doyle, Kyle and Robert Richardson Crysler Co, W.M. (Bill, Chris and Greg) Cunningham, E.R. Dalton, Hall John and Marianne Dalton, In Memory of John and Geraldine Davis, Caleb III and Brenda DePriest, Delbert Delouri Farms Dement, Edward and Kaye Dolphin Land Company Dorroh, Lee M. DowElanco (Horton W. Miller) Droke, Pete and Betty Droke, In Memory of Mr. and Mrs. O.R. Droke Donor Mr. and Mrs. Peter Droke Duff, Charlie Duncan, Arthur Earnest, Charles and Judith Edgington, Richard Edmonston Gin Company Ellington, In Memory of John and Mary Girvin Elrod, Joe and Joyce Farm Credit Southeast Missouri Farmer’s Bank of Portageville Farmer’s Union Gin Co. Farris, John and Jeanne Faulkner, Parker and Susie Fields, Alex L First Financial Bank of Southeast Missouri First State Bank and Trust, Inc Caruthersville First State Community Bank, Portageville
Fisher, Jake and Shelly Fisher, In Memory of Landon Fletcher, Mr. and Mrs. James L. Fletcher Fletcher’s Gin Company Floyd, Dr. Elson S. FMC Foundation Forsee, Gary and Sherry Gardner, John and Julie Gee, E.B. Jr. Geske, Mike Gill, Robert G. (Glen) and Marie M. Girvin, In Memory of John L. and Georgia and family Glass, In Memory of Lonnie W., Jr. Green, Thomas M., IV and Van Strickland Haggard, David and Judith Haggard, T. A.” Doc” and Frances Haggard, Graham Haggard, Stella Victoria Haggard, Tami Haggard, Trent Harris, Austin Harris, Britton Paul Harris, George Paul and Becky Harris, Greg and Missy Harris, In Memory of Ira “Slick” Harris, J.D. Harris, Kayton C. Harris, Paul Harris, Payte Harris, Steve and Sherri Harris, Tyler Heath, Mrs. Kenneth and family Heckemeyer, Anthony Joseph Hilburn, Anna K. Hilburn, Charles Richard III Hilburn, Hadley Rebecca Howell, Jean Stokes Hulshof, In Memory of Henry and Emma Hutchison, J.R., Jr. Hux, Jeff Hux, John and Ann Jackson, Bill Jean, Keith Jennings Bros., Inc.
Johnson, Nan and Bud Johnson, Jim and Suzy Johnson, Jimmy D. Keaster, Dr. Armon J. and Family Kellams Farms, Wallace and Linda Kendig, Dr. John H. and Phyllis L. Kennett Trust Bank Kersey, Landon and Stacey Kesler,Gary and Rebecca Kinder, Lt. Governor Peter D. Kingree, Elvin and Jane Klipfel, Mr. and Mrs. Ron Klopfenstein, In Memory of David and Mary Knorr, Steve Kruse, In Honor of Ben (By Mo. Farm Bureau) Kruse, In Memory of Ben Kruse, Charles and Pam Lankheit, Martha Ellen Lankheit, Stephen and Family Lasley, Ray and Susan Laster, In Memory of Walter and Naomi Lawson, Bill and Teresa Lawson, Ray Lee, In Memory of Ruth Limbaugh, Frieda P. Lindell, Everett and Evelyn Linit, Marc and Sue Hollingsworth Louis Dreyfus Corporation Ludwig, Dale R. and Rhonda M & A Electric Power Cooperative Madison, David P. Mansfield, Wade and Cara Marshall, E. Louise Marshall, Gary D. Martin, Bruce Jr. Massey, Lloyd Massey Farms Matthews, Mr. and Mrs. Scott McCrate, In Memory of Denis McDaniel and Clark Farms, Inc McDonald, Perry and Fern MFA, Inc. McHaney, Flake
42
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Club of 1000 Membership McHaney, Patrick and Heather McRoberts Farms Inc. (Jim McRoberts) Medlin, Roger Merideth, Baughn and Jana Michie, Duane and Sue Mid-Valley Irrigation Inc. Miller, Horton W. (DowElanco) Minton, Davis Missouri Agriculture Industries Council Missouri Corn Merchandising Council MO-COT Farm Service MO Seed Improvement Assoc. Moody Farms (J.T. Moody) Moore, Max Ray Moreton, Jim and John Mount Level Farms Co., Inc. Mowrer, J. Michael and Jean Moxley, Fred M. MRM Ag Service/MRM Farms Myers, Representative Peter and Mary Myracle, In Memory of Clyde and Gladys Rone Nabors, Ray and Jane Nelson Tractor and Equipment (Michael and Richard Nelson) Nguyen, Dr. Henry T Owen, Monte and Cyril Parker, Charles and Phyllis Parks, Opal and Barbara Busby
Pattengill, Mr. & Mrs. Lee Payne, Dr. Tom Peach Orchard Gin Pemiscot County Farm Bureau Pemiscot -Dunklin Electric Cooperative Poehlmann, John and Linda Portageville Parts, Inc. Preyer, Melvin and Jennifer Priggel, In Memory of E.A. and Jane Prost, Donald Raines, John and Buffy Riceland Foods, Inc. Rone, C.E. Rone, Don and Bethal Rone, Don Jr. and Myra Rone, G.W. “Son” Rone, Herbert and Juanita Rone, In Memory of Dora Klopfenstein Rone, In Memory of George W. and Nancy Jane Fisher Rone, In Memory of Mattie Lee Fisher Rone, John R. Rone, Justin and Lesley Rone, Lewis and Martha Rone, Mr. and Mrs. Mike Ross, In Memory of Charles G. (Educator) Roth, Charles B. Roth, James A.
Roth, James R. Roth, Jennie Lind Roth, Victor L. Rowland, J. Allen Russell, Jim Sanders, John L. Sappenfield, Dr. and Mrs. W.P. SBC Foundation Scott, In Memory of Joe H. Security Bank of Pemiscot Co. Shannon, Grover and Lynda Sharp, Van and Rebecca Shawan, Jeff and Christy Simcoke, In Memory of Richard P. Simpson, Johnnie and Gean Rone Sleper, David A. and Elaine Smith, Robert and Briley Snider, Jim Southern, Gordon Clyde Spitler, Charles Stacey, Dr. Gary Steele, Paul W. Still Gin and Grain, Inc. Kevin Still, Mitchell Fisher, and Hans Green Story, Sam E. Stout, Bettye Girvin Streete, Ted Streeter, Elsie Strobel, Larry and Kay Swims, Tom and Pam Swindle, Larry D. and Nancy
Swinger, Representative Terry M. Thornbrough, Mark and Sue Thomas, Russell and Dorothy Thomason, Larry Tindall, Dr. Kelly Tipton, Jackson H. Tweedy, In Memory of Elbert “Buddy” Tweedy, James R. Underwood, Donald F. Sr. University of Missouri System VanAusdall, Rogers and Ginny Vories, Earl and Cindy Ward, Bobby and Jimmie Nell Ward, In Memory of R.W. Sr. and Alice Rone Waters, Wade D. and Wallace E. (ELW Farm) Watkins, Mr. and Mrs. Lee E. Watkins, Stephen Wells, Darcy Wenneker, Robin R. White, Dean Wielbold, Bill Williams, Mr. and Mrs. Maxwell Windham, Gene Sr. and Linda Wolf Island Farms (John D. Story) Womble, Aaron (Valent) Wrather, Aubra and Annie Laurie Wrather, Brenda and Allen
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Fisher Delta Research Center Personnel OPERATIONS Grover Shannon...........................................................Interim Superintendent Keith Birmingham....................................Interim Assistant Superintendent Tina Clark..................................................................Office Support Assistant IV Pam Swims (P.T.) ....................................................Office Support Assistant IV Charles Provance ..........................................................................Farm Manager Larry Hill................................................................................................. MTS Welder Greg Portwood.............................................................................. Farm Worker III Jeff Woods ........................................................................................ Farm Worker I Cory Hoxworth ............................................................................... Farm Worker I Ricky Laster (P.T.) ............................................................................ Farm Worker I Melanie Gray (P.T.) ............................................................Temporary Technical PLANT SCIENCES Dr. Pengyin Chen, Professor.............................................. Soybean Breeding MD Liakat Ali, Research Scientist..................................... Soybean Breeding Justin Chlapecka, Extension Specialist....................................Rice Research Jim Heiser, Sr. Research Associate............................................ Weed Science Caio Canella Vieira, Doctoral Student ........................... Soybean Breeding Melissa Crisel, Sr. Research Associate............................. Soybean Breeding Scotty Smothers, Sr. Research Associate....................... Soybean Breeding Mike Clubb, Sr. Research Specialist................................. Soybean Breeding Stewart Selves, Sr. Research Specialist........................... Soybean Breeding
Destiny Ayers, Research Specialist I................................ Soybean Breeding Jamie Manuel, Research Specialist I............................... Soybean Breeding Brenton Carter, Research Specialist I.............................. Soybean Breeding Cory Cross, Research Specialist I............................................... Weed Science Mckayla Burris, Sr. Research Lab Technician................... Soybean Breeing Chris Davis, Sr. Research Lab Technician...................... Soybean Breeding Landon Kersey, Sr Research Lab Technician................ Soybean Breeding Billy Becker, Research Lab Technician (P.T.).................. Soybeen Breeding Dongho Lee, Graduate Research Assistant (P.T.)........ Soybean Breeding Angelica Moore, Temporary Technical (P.T.).......................... Weed Science Paige Towery, Temporary Technical (P.T.)............................... Weed Science ARS-USDA Dr. Earl Vories, Agricultural Engineer.............................................. USDA-ARS Carly Moore, Agricultural Science Research Technician.......... USDA-ARS Bobby Tanner, Research Lab Technician II (P.T.).......................... USDA-ARS EXTENSION Sarah Denkler........................................................................... Regional Director P.T. – Part Time
44
22355 County Road 102 Malden, MO
573-276-6406
Amanda Brooks
104 East South Street Advance, MO 63730 • 573-321-8199
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Notes:
46
Fisher Delta Research Center University of Missouri
Notes:
Your Ag Lender KENNETT Matthew • Nathan • Amy Tracy • Pam • Emma 573-888-6624 SIKESTON Heather • Cooper • Kati Lindsey • Sandi • Tiffiny 573-471-0511
PORTAGEVILLE Mark • Jay Cheryl • Ashley 573-379-3461
MISSISSIPPI COUNTY Dawn • Mindi Tiffiny 573-649-4110
POPLAR BLUFF Blaine • Jamie • Kim Melissa • Pam • Shannon 573-686-1446