Michigan Soybean News Spring 2024

Soybean MICHIGAN

Spring 2024

NEWS

©

Volume 16 - Issue 1

Michigan Farmer Travels to Panama Canal Page 28

Michigan Soybean Association, 3055 W M-21, St. Johns, MI 48879

NON-PROFIT US POSTAGE PAID PERMIT 20 FRANKENMUTH, MI

A publication of the Michigan Soybean Association

Soybean MICHIGAN

IN THIS ISSUE OF: Soybean Staff

Volume 16 - Issue 1

NEWS

Ben Steyer Chief Executive Officer bsteyer@michigansoybean.org Kathy Maurer Financial Director kmaurer@michigansoybean.org Mark Seamon Research Director mseamon@michigansoybean.org Sonja Lapak, Editor Communication Director slapak@michigansoybean.org

7 MSA Celebrates 50 Years

Katlin Fusilier Outreach Specialist kfusilier@michigansoybean.org Hanna Campbell Demand Specialist hcampbell@michigansoybean.org Claire Dewey Administrative & Marketing Coordinator cdewey@michigansoybean.org Michigan Soybean Association 3055 W M-21 St. Johns, MI 48879 Phone: 989.652.3294 soyinfo@michigansoybean.org Ad Sales Sonja Lapak slapak@michigansoybean.org J.L. Farmakis Inc. - National Phone: 203.834.8832 bill@jlfarmakis.com Copyright 2023 by Michigan Soybean Association; all rights reserved.

Magazine Circulation: 18,000 Michigan Soybean News is published quarterly.

21 Elevator Appreciation Month

24 On-Farm Research Program Reflections Michigan Soybean Association Mission: To improve and advocate for the Michigan soybean industry.

Disclaimer: Advertisements within this publication contain the opinions and information of the advertisers and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the Michigan Soybean Association or affiliated groups. The United Soybean Board/soybean checkoff neither recommends nor discourages the implementation of any advice contained herein, and is not liable for the use or misuse of the information provided.

Spring 2024

3

Membership at Work Michigan Soybean Leadership Michigan Soybean Association Larry Phelps, Vicksburg Jay Williams, Waldron Tom Woelmer, Monroe Karen Warner, Yale Allison Morse, Birch Run PJ Feldpausch, St. Johns Matthew Wila, Blanchard Rob Howland, Brown City Robert Wasmiller, Burt Michigan Soybean Committee Sara Trattles, Colon Pete Crawford, Dansville Nathan McCalla, Ann Arbor Scott Wilson, Lexington John Burk, Bay City Mark Senk, Owosso Ryan Drozd, Allegan American Soybean Association Heather Feuerstein, Belding Janna Fritz, Bad Axe United Soybean Board Laurie Isley, Palmyra Dennis Gardner, Croswell Carla Schultz, Mayville North Central Soybean Research Program Steve Koeman, Hamilton US Soybean Export Council Dave Williams, Elsie Clean Fuels Alliance America Matt Stutzman, Adrian Soy Aquaculture Alliance Alan Moore, Bannister Soy Transportation Coalition Dan Rajzer, Decatur World Initiative for Soy in Human Health Doug Darling, Maybee Specialty Soya & Grains Alliance Steve Peach, Plymouth USA Poultry & Egg Export Council Mark Trowbridge, Leonidas US Meat Export Federation Brian Pridgeon, Montgomery Farm Produce Insurance Fund Jason Haag, Unionville 4

Michigan Soybean News

MSA Director Spotlight Meet Larry Phelps Tell us about yourself, your farm and your family.

Our six generation family farm is located in Kalamazoo County. My son Aaron and I raise around 750 acres of corn and soybeans, of which, 335 acres is irrigated. My wife, Dawn, and I have been married for 29 years.

We have three grown children. Andrew works at Spring Arbor University, Aaron works with me on the farm, and Adam goes to school in Arizona.

Dawn teaches sixth grade at Centreville Elementary.

Favorite MSA board experience?

My favorite MSA board experience has been meeting new people and learning about their farms. It gives me great pride in agriculture to meet and work with so many quality people. I also enjoyed going to Commodity Classic as a delegate for ASA's policy development process.

Off-farm hobbies?

I enjoy traveling with my wife, spending time at Lake Michigan beaches and reading books about U.S. history and sports, especially football.

Planting or Harvest?

It's hard to choose between planting and harvest because it takes both, but I would have to say harvest. Bringing in a successful harvest is truly one of life's great joys.

Red or Green?

We run green equipment.

Do you have a farm dog?

I do not have a farm dog, but my son has an Australian Shepherd that is at the farm a lot. Her name is Tuffy and she loves to run around and ride in the tractors and trucks.

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Staff Update

T

here are many examples of events and ideas in the world today that seem to be 180 degrees from reality. While they make interesting content for the news, political discussions and social media posts, they don’t seem to make it into real life situations such as crop production. It doesn’t matter to a soybean plant if we have wild ideas, it will respond to the realities of the environment around it and its genetic potential. The temperature, sunlight, moisture and available nutrients will determine much of its productivity. My experience is that farmers have taken a cue from the natural world which is based on the realities of hard work, perseverance and a reward for a job well done.

Even though Bertrand Russell passed away in 1970, he described the situation today in the quote “As soon as we abandon our own reason, and are content to rely upon authority, there is no end to our troubles.”

Farmers have the great responsibility to use their own reason in the endless judgment calls throughout a growing season to make the best of the situation that they have. Many decisions rely upon support from others such as agronomists, seedsmen, accountants and mechanics, but the final call is made with reason based on this support combined with experience and a healthy dose of intuition.

Of course, we all need to submit to authority in obeying laws, paying taxes and getting along with other people. But we must be vigilant to hold the line on allowing “authority” to override reason. There are so many products and practices that claim to benefit crop yields, soil quality and improve profits. Some of these examples have a believable story while others are somewhat of a stretch to believe. While the judgment of who to trust as an authority can be tough sometimes, it is important to get it right most of the time. For farmers, this can be the difference between a successful farm and a failure.

Most of the world would be wise to look to farmers in this area as a good example. The lessons will be to let reason guide decisions, don’t be mislead by those claiming to be an authority and look forward to reaping what you sow.

Mark Seamon Research Director mseamon@michigansoybean.org

Spring 2024

5

Membership at Work

2023 Michigan Soybean Yield Contest Winners

T

he winners of the 2023 Michigan Soybean Association(MSA) yield contest were announced at the end of 2023 and celebrated at the 50th MSA Annual Meeting of Members during the Great Lakes Crop Summit.

In 2023 there were over 110 entries from soybean farmers across the state of Michigan.

MSA would like to thank all of the sponsors of this year’s contest. Without their support this contest would not be possible. The 2023 contest was sponsored by the Michigan Soybean Committee, AgriGold, Asgrow, Beck’s, Channel, DF Seeds, Dyna-Gro, Golden Harvest, Pioneer, Renk, Stine, Xitavo and ZFSelect.

Additional information about the contest and harvest data can be found at www.misoy.org/ yield contest.

Details about the 2024 contest will be posted on our website, social media and will be included in upcoming issues of the Michigan Soybean News magazine.

YIELD CONTEST

2023 WINNERS

Congratulations to this year's winners and thank you to all contest participants and sponsors!

6

Category

Winner

Yield

Seed Company

Variety

Late Maturity Non-Irrigated

Dalton Goetz, Lenawee County

81.48 bu/a

Golden Harvest

GH2722XF

Late Maturity Irrigated

Jon Drozd, Allegan County

88.66 bu/a

Pioneer

P28A65E

Mid Maturity Non-Irrigated

Joe Jablonski, Allegan County

86.21 bu/a

Agrigold

G2107E3

Early Maturity

Mark Story, Gratiot County

97.54 bu/a

Pioneer

P18A73E

Non-GMO

Jim Schaendorf, Allegan County

93.98 bu/a

ZFS

ZFS 2819

Michigan Soybean News

Your Political Voice

MSA Kicks off Year of Celebration at 50th Annual Meeting of Members

F

ounded in 1974, the Michigan Soybean Association was pleased to kick off a year of celebration in honor of 50 years of advocacy work during their Annual Meeting of Members. The meeting and reception that followed were a great opportunity for members to connect, reminisce and swap stories of MSA events and accomplishments over the years.

In addition to the anniversary celebration, the director election results were also announced during the meeting, which was held at the Great Lakes Crop Summit at the end of January.

Districts 2 and 5, along with an at-large seat were up for election. Jay Williams of Waldron was elected to the District 2 seat. In District 5, Allison Morse of Birch Run was reelected for a second term. Lastly, Robert Wasmiller of Burt was elected to the at-large seat. Congratulations to Jay, Allison and Robert!

Outgoing board members were also recognized for their contributions to the association. Heather Feuerstein of Belding termed off as an at-large director after serving for nine years.

She most recently served as the president of MSA and is currently serving on the American Soybean Association board of directors. Gary Parr of Charlotte also termed off as the District 2 director. Gary served for nine years and was most recently serving as the MSA vice president. Thank you to Heather and Gary for their leadership and service!

MSA would also like to thank BASF for their partnership and support of the reception celebration. Stay tuned for more information in future issues of the Michigan Soybean News magazine on additional ways MSA plans to celebrate 50 years of membership and advocacy on behalf of the Michigan soybean industry.

Jay Williams

Allison Morse

Robert Wasmiller

Gary Parr

Heather Feuerstein Spring 2024

7

Membership at Work

MSA Hires Administrative & Marketing Coordinator Hello all, I am Claire Dewey, the newest employee of the Michigan Soybean Association(MSA). I am working part-time as the Administrative and Marketing Coordinator. In addition to my work with MSA, I run a cut flower business and work as a graphic designer for my family’s business. I have a bachelors degree from Michigan State University (Go Green!) in Agribusiness Management with a minor in Agronomy.

Currently, I live in Charlotte, just south of Lansing, with my husband Michael and son Larkin. We have a German Shepherd, named Flynn and two cats. In my spare time you will find me playing soccer, watching sports (specifically hockey and football) or reading a good book.

One fun fact about me is I have a goal of visiting all 50 states. I only have 13 left to visit! My travels have taken me across the U.S. where I have been to 14 different National Parks with plans to visit several more.

I love talking about my travels and must-see places.

I'm looking forward to working with many of you in my new role!

THANK YOU TO THE MICHIGAN SOYBEAN ASSOCIATION SPONSORS GOLD

New & Renewing Members NEW MEMBERS: Clay Maxwell, Beaverton Anna Woller, Montague Maddie Brink, Hamilton

SILVER

CORPORATE QUALITY ROASTING 8

Michigan Soybean News

RENEWING MEMBERS: Joseph Peyerk III, Gagetown Tom Ziel, Pigeon Chris Rooselit, Niles Larry Phelps, Vicksburg Jake & Ryan Drozd, Allegan

Morgan Beattie, Marshall Steve Lott, Mason William Kirk, Oscoda Ryan Wojtowicz, Standish Charles Arver, Centreville Richard Kalisek, Corunna Mike Jasper, Sawyer Steven & Wayne Schlagel, Turner Paul Taylor, Ottawa Lake

Your Political Voice

MEMBERSHIP APPLICATION First Name:_____________________________

Date of Birth:__________________

Last Name:_____________________________

Number of Soybean Acres:_______

Address:_______________________________

Total Farm Acres:______________

City/State/Zip:___________________________

Occupation (circle one):

Phone:_________________________________

Farmer

Cell Phone:_____________________________

•

Email:_________________________________ 1-yr: $75

Young Farmer (18-24): $20

3-yr: $190

•

Non-Farmer Individual: $100

Retired

Other

Dues are not tax deductible as a charitable contribution for federal tax purposes, but may be deductible as a business expense.

18% of member dues are allocated to lobbying activities and are not deductible.

Mail application with payment to: Michigan Soybean Association

Payment Amount & Method:

3055 W M-21, St. Johns, MI 48879

Check (Payable to MSA) or Credit Card

Join online:

Credit Card Type:_____ Expiration Date:______ Credit Card #:_________________ CVV:______ Signature:_______________________________

Paying the soybean checkoff does not make you an MSA member. Checkoff dollars cannot be used for lobbying. Your membership is critical to our efforts on behalf of Michigan soybean farmers!

For more information on member benefits, visit www.misoy.org/member-benefits/.

Member benefits include: • • • •

Scholarship opportunities for your children and grandchildren Preferred vehicle pricing opportunities Cabela’s gift card purchase discount Discounted registration to Commodity Classic

• •

Annual $75 seed coupon for renewing members to use with our partnering seed companies The MOST IMPORTANT MSA member benefit: Having a voice in Lansing and Washington, D.C.!

Spring 2024

9

Membership at Work

Michigan Legislative Update Jason Wadaga, Vice-President of Government Relations, Kindsvatter, Dalling & Associates

L

ast year turned out to be a strange year in the Michigan Legislature. After the Democrats regained majority in the Michigan House of Representatives in 2022, for the first time in twelve years, two of their members ran for mayor in their respective hometowns in 2023 and won. This took the Democrats' 56-54 seat majority and made it a 54-54 split with Republicans.

As a result, the legislature adjourned in November for the year as opposed to mid or late December. Those two seats will be filled in special elections in April and it’s anticipated that they will remain Democratic seats, however it will certainly slow down activity in the House until the spring.

In 2018, Proposal 2 was passed by the voters in Michigan creating an “independent” redistricting commission. Previously, legislative district maps were drawn by the legislature and were deemed too political by voters.

The maps drawn in 2022 by the Michigan Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (MICRD) were ruled unconstitutional by a U.S. District Court in December of last year. In the decision, the court stated that the MICRD “randomly selected citizen mappers responsible for drawing the lines violated the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution which prohibits drawing districts on the basis of race when they drew the lines that run through Detroit.” This means that 13 state House district maps need to be redrawn in the coming months prior to the August primary election.

As we look ahead to the 2024 legislative calendar,

MSA has been active in supporting several legislative initiatives that could be beneficial to our membership.

We're committed to staying engaged and pushing for progress, in spite of some of the challenges and unique occurrences in the state's government this year.

Jason Wadaga

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Sen. Sam Singh has ramped up efforts to get his legislation creating a Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) tax credit moving in the Senate Energy and Environment Committee. Senate Bill 447, which would create an SAF credit in Michigan if passed, would create a $1 per gallon purchaser credit (up to $2 with additional GHG reductions) for SAF purchased in Michigan.

MSA has been in conversations with other stakeholders regarding SB 447 including Delta Airlines. We see this as another opportunity to provide cleaner energy for transportation in our state while increasing demand for soybeans.

Low Carbon Fuel Standard Back in early 2023, MSA was involved in a work group on Senate Bill 275. This legislation, also introduced by Sen. Sam Singh, would establish a clean fuel standard to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels.

It would require the Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) to use this standard to establish a market for trading carbon intensity credits. Fuel providers that produced fuels below the standard would receive credits that could be traded or sold. Fuel providers that produced fuels above the standard would have to reduce the fuels' carbon intensity below the standard or acquire credits to

10

Michigan Soybean News

Your Political Voice offset the deficit. Ultimately, by the end of 2035, the bill would require the carbon intensity of all transportation fuel produced or imported for use in the state to be reduced to at least 25 percent below a 2019 baseline level.

MSA has continued to advocate for minor tweaks to this legislation. Like the SAF legislation, SB 275 has the potential to provide cleaner energy for transportation in our state while increasing demand for soybeans.

MSA Awaiting Committee Hearing on Tax Inventive for Biodiesel As you know from prior updates, Rep. John Fitzgerald (D-Wyoming) introduced House Bill 4847 to create tax incentives for biodiesel producers and retailers in Michigan. This bill is MSA’s number one legislative priority for this legislative session.

The goal of the bill is incentivizing the production and sale of biodiesel that will reduce engine emissions for healthier air and a better environment. Fleets have easily and economically reduced their carbon footprint by replacing

petroleum-based diesel with cleaner-burning biodiesel for over 30 years.

We modeled our bill off one that was recently successful in the Missouri Legislature. Specifically, the legislation would: • Create a Retail Tax Credit • .02 cents per gallon for B5-B10 • .05 cents per gallon for B11+ • Create a Producers Tax Credit • .02 cents per gallon for every gallon produced by a Michigan biodiesel producer • Set a 6-year sunset on all incentive provisions • Cap the program at $16 million for retailers and $2 million for producers The tax credits would be evenly distributed to all that participate in the program.

House bill 4847 has been referred to the Tax Policy Committee in the Michigan House of Representatives. MSA’s government affairs team has been working diligently with the Chairwoman of that committee, Rep. Cynthia Neeley, to receive a hearing date.

Spring 2024

11

unitedsoybean.org

MAINTAINING OUR REPUTATION TO DELIVER

Whether shipping by river, road or rail, the soy checkoff is committed to ensuring America’s infrastructure is a significant advantage for U.S. soybean farmers. We’re looking inside the bean, beyond the bushel and around the world to keep preference for U.S. soy strong. And it’s helping make a valuable impact for soybean farmers like you.

See more ways the soy checkoff is maximizing profit opportunities for soybean farmers at unitedsoybean.org

Brought to you by the soy checkoff. ©2018 United Soybean Board. Our Soy Checkoff and the Our Soy Checkoff mark are trademarks of United Soybean Board. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Investing Checkoff Dollars

March is Elevator Appreciation Month!

The Michigan soybean checkoff is assessed at the rate of one-half of one percent (.005) of the net market value of soybeans sold by the producer to the first purchaser.

Checkoff assessments collected by Michigan first purchasers must be remitted to the Michigan Soybean Committee.

The funds are used for production research, market development and outreach efforts on behalf of Michigan’s 12,000+ soybean farmers.

Thank you to the first purchasers who collect the checkoff each month! Their cooperation is a critical step in helping ensure checkoff funds are utilized for the collective benefit of Michigan soybean farmers.

Acres Cooperative ADM Edible Bean Specialties, Inc. ADM Grain Co. American Soy Products Inc. Armada Grain Co. Battle Creek Farm Bureau Assn.

Bierlein Seed Inc. Caledonia Farmers Elevator Cargill Ceres Solutions Citizens, LLC Commodity Exchange Inc. Community Mills Inc. Cooperative Elevator Co. Cremer Farm Center DF Seeds, LLC Durand Feed & Grain Eaton Farm Bureau Co-Op Endeavor Ag & Energy, LLP Esper Grain, LLC Farmer's Coop Elevator Farmer's Coop Grain Co - Kinde Freeland Bean & Grain Gallagher Farms Gavilon

Great Lakes Grain and Transportation Harrington Seeds Inc. Harvest Mills Inc. Helena Agri Enterprises, LLC Hirschman Grain, LLC Hoffman Ag Service, LTD Hopkins Elevator Ida Farmer's Co-op Ionia Grain, LLC Ittner Bean & Grain Inc. JBS United Feeds, Inc. John Marion Inc. Jorgensen Farm Elevator Lapeer Grain Imlay City Leslie Farm Center Litchfield Grain Co. M&W Seeds MAC Masserant's Feed & Grain Mathews Elevator Maybee Farmers Inc. Millington Elevator & Supply Moline Coop Morning Star Grain, LLC

Musgrove Grain, LLC Nutrien Ag Solutions Ottawa Lake Coop Ovid Elevator Company Penn Acres Prattville Fertilizer & Grain, Inc. Quality Roasting, LLC Shaffer Farms Simons, E.R. Co. Springport Elevator, Inc. Star of the West Milling Co. Stop Loss Trading, LLC The Andersons Turner Bean & Grain Van Gilder Commodities, LLC Vershum R & Sons Inc. VHGC, Inc. Vita Plus Voyces Elevator Inc. Waldron Grain & Fuel Co. Westphalia Milling Co. Witt Seed Farm Zeeland Farm Service Inc. ZFS Ithaca, LLC Zmitko Farms

Spring 2024

13

Your Soybean Checkoff

Where Does Resistance Come From?

Dr. Eric Patterson, Assistant Professor & Weed Geneticist, Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences Edited by Dr. Erin Burns, Assistant Professor, Department of Plant, Soil and Microbial Sciences

W

here does herbicide resistance come from? This question is fundamental to preventing the emergence and spread of new resistance cases. Essentially there are only two options. Either resistance arises from new mutations in weeds already in the field or it is coming from outside the field from already resistant plants.

While all resistance cases start as the former, new mutations are exceedingly rare. The chance that any one field produces a novel mutation is estimated to be no lower than one in ten thousand but is probably several orders of magnitude rarer for most herbicides. Therefore, it is logical that, for the most part, resistance originates only once in a geographic area and is mostly spread from field to field. Then how can resistance spread so quickly?

We call the spread of traits from one population to another gene flow. For weeds, there are too major drivers of gene flow: seeds and pollen. These are the only two stages of a plant life cycle that are mobile.

Seed mediated gene flow (SMGF) can be driven by several factors; weed seeds can adhere or be trapped on farm equipment that is shared or sold, birds can eat weed seeds and spread them in their waste, seeds can be mixed with grain or pollinator mixes,

14

Michigan Soybean News

spread in manure, or the weeds themselves can have mechanisms of long-distance dispersal (like dandelion seeds!). All evidence to date suggests that seed dispersal is the main driver of resistance gene flow.

Another, often under looked, source of gene flow is pollen. Pollen mediated gene flow (PMGF) is when resistant pollen grains are either picked up by wind or by pollinators and delivered to receptive female flowers. These flowers then produce a resistant offspring which germinates in the following season. PMGF happens often in close physical proximity but drops off rapidly at increasing distances. In a study with waterhemp, glyphosate resistance male plants were placed in the middle of rings of glyphosate susceptible female plants at varying distances. At distances 15 feet or less, glyphosate resistance was spread to between 15-54 percent of offspring; however, at distances of 165 feet, only five to nine percent of offspring received glyphosate resistance from the male donors (Sarangi et al., 2017). By modeling this steep decline, we can extrapolate on the data and predict that longdistance dispersal is very rare (>1000ft); but with weeds it’s a numbers game. The more pollen donors,

Investing Checkoff Dollars the more receptive females, the stronger the wind, and the greater number of female flowers all mean higher odds of rare PMGF. It is incredibly difficult to measure long-distance fertilization events as it is nearly impossible to track microscopic pollen grains over miles. Pollen grains have been found at high altitudes suggesting that long distance fertilization is possible assuming the grains remain viable; however, the odds of a pollen grain landing on a receptive female are incredibly low. In a study looking at gene flow in a weedy relative of sugar beets, they were able to verify PMGF up to ~6 miles between plants, the furthest documented case of PMGF in a weedy plant. In that same study they found that for weedy beets, between 11.3 percent to 17.5 percent of successful fertilizations were in between fields through PMGF (Fenart et al., 2007). We still have very few data points to model the importance of PMGF in longdistance resistance spread, but circumstantial evidence says it is possible, although rare.

From a management perspective, what can be done to prevent the spread of herbicide resistance?

Taken together, research suggests that the most

important factor for preventing resistance spread is to prevent, as much as possible, SMGF, including thoroughly cleaning farm equipment between fields and when equipment is being bought and sold between growers. These practices will reduce a majority of the risk of novel resistance introductions. Furthermore, if a rare mutation occurs or resistance is spread through PMGF, the next most important management strategy is to quickly identify and control survivors so that they do not create a seedbank with resistance genes that will persist year-after-year.

Literature Cited Sarangi, Debalin, Andrew J. Tyre, Eric L. Patterson, Todd A. Gaines, Suat Irmak, Stevan Z. Knezevic, John L. Lindquist, and Amit J. Jhala. "Pollen-mediated gene flow from glyphosateresistant common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis Sauer): consequences for the dispersal of resistance genes." Scientific reports 7, no. 1 (2017): 44913.

Fenart, Stephane, Frederic Austerlitz, Joel Cuguen, and JEANFRANÇOIS ARNAUD. "Long distance pollen-mediated gene flow at a landscape level: the weed beet as a case study." Molecular Ecology 16, no. 18 (2007): 3801-3813.

Spring 2024

15

Your Soybean Checkoff

Grower Leaders Attend Soybean Leadership Academy

A

new year means welcoming new soybean leaders in Michigan. As we welcome new directors to both boards, it is necessary to provide education to help build the leadership skills of our involved farmers. The American Soybean Association (ASA) partners with states to provide this training as an opportunity for grower leaders to build their understanding of the soybean industry and build skills that will serve them well as they start their time on the board.

The ASA Soybean Leadership Academy offered breakout sessions and keynote speakers with the objective of providing leadership development tools for farmers. The 2024 Soybean Leadership Academy theme was “Facing Headwinds – Leading During Matthew Wila, Sara Trattles, Karen Warner, Ben Steyer Challenging Times”, which focused on factors influencing the soybean industry and how soybean leaders can maximize their strengths to address these challenges.

The general sessions included segments on “Soybeans and the World View” with Zoe Zongyuan Liu, Ph.D., Council on Foreign Relations; “The Future of Soybean Growth in Brazil “with Joana Colussi, Ph.D., Instructor and Postdoctoral Research Associate, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign; “It’s Time to Go Home, Now What” with Jones Loflin and a session on Connections with Jasmine Brett Stringer.

This year, four individuals participated from Michigan including MSA board members Karen Warner and Matthew Wila, MSC board member Sara Trattles and Michigan Soybean CEO Ben Steyer.

"My biggest takeaway was seeing the amount of people nationwide who are also focused on promoting soybeans and supporting soybean farmers. It was great to meet others from different soybean associations around the country, and share thoughts, bounce ideas off each other and discuss common challenges and successes," shared Karen Warner.

Sara Trattles noted, "I thought all of the speakers were relevant to current times and the networking with other leaders was valuable."

If you are interested in building your leadership skills, getting more involved, or want more information about the 2025 Leadership Academy, please contact Ben Steyer, at 989-652-3294 or bsteyer@michigansoybean.org.

16

Michigan Soybean News

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Great Lakes Crop Summit Celebrates 10 Years

T

he 2024 Great Lakes Crop Summit (GLCS) again had a record turnout, with over 1,100 farmers and agribusiness professionals attending the two-day conference in Mt. Pleasant, Mich. This annual conference brings together corn, soybean and wheat farmers from across the state for educational sessions, networking and a trade show featuring more than 60 agribusinesses.

The event is hosted by the Michigan Soybean Committee, Corn Marketing Program of Michigan and Michigan Wheat Program. This year, the program celebrated 10 years. As a way to give back in celebration of 10 years of GLCS, attendees brought non-perishable food items for donation to the Greater Lansing Food Bank. Over 500 items were donated to help fight hunger in Michigan.

Notable soybean breakout session topics included using data to maximize profitability, checkoff funded research efforts, crop insurance updates, reducing soil compaction and more. Speakers came from across the U.S. and Canada to share their knowledge with attendees and offer actionable information that growers can use on their farms.

Keynotes included Nathan Greuel of Case IH who shared a presentation titled "The Journey from Equipment Automation to Autonomy: Where Are We Now?" and Vance Crowe who discussed "My Grandfather's Axe: The Art of Passing Down Something You've Built".

“Each year, the Great Lakes Crop Summit looks for ways to meet the needs of soybean, corn and wheat farmers,” said MSC CEO Ben Steyer. “Continued participation from both farmers and agribusiness reiterates the value that both see in the learning and networking opportunities provided by the event.”

Spring 2024

17

Your Soybean Checkoff

Planting Soybeans Early Pros and Cons Improved crop management practices and genetics coupled with a changing environment have led some farmers to shift their soybean planting dates earlier than the traditionally recommended planting dates. The main reason for this shift is increased yield potential. While planting time varies by geographic region in the US, most soybean farmers can plant soybeans earlier without compromising yield potential by adhering to a few recommended practices.

Location

Last frost

Planting starts

Madison, SD

May-8

Apr-15

Janesville, WI

Apr-28

Apr-15

Pontiac, IL

Apr-21

Apr-12

Columbia, MO

Apr-13

May-1

Portageville, MO

Mar-30

Apr-1

Milan, TN

Apr-7

Apr-22

Dunn, NC

Apr-1

Apr-20

Rohwer, AR

Mar-14

Apr-3

Stoneville, MS

Mar-13

Apr-5

Saint Joseph, LA

Mar-13

Apr-5

Quincy, FL

Mar-10

Apr-20

Figure 1. Regional relationship between the historic last freeze date and recommended first planting date. The last freeze is defined by a 10% or lower probability of air temperatures at or below 30°F. The recommended first planting date is a compilation of research findings and extension recommendations.

Other Factors to Consider

Soil Moisture Conditions

18

Machinery/ Labor Capacity

Michigan Soybean News

Land Management

Available Workable Days

Market Prices

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Potential Benefits Increased Yield When environmental conditions are favorable for crop development, early planting increases yield by: > Increasing the amount of solar radiation accumulation which results in larger plants (more nodes & pods) > Increasing the seed filling period (more grain yield) > Increased root development for better access to soil nutrients and water.

Earlier Harvest Date > May help mitigate end-of-season risks > May save irrigation water > May reduce pesticide applications While many factors have an effect on final grain yield in soybeans, early planting is relatively easy way to increase yield potential.

Potential Risks Air temperatures below 30°F for extended periods

Plant damage or death

Wet and cold conditions

Soil-borne diseases (e.g.

Sudden Death Syndrome and Brown Stem Rot)

Soil temperatures below 50°F

Compromised germination

non-uniform stands, temporal variability, limited root and shoot growth

Poor early season weather or nonideal maturity group

Compromised vegetative development

Recommended Management Practices Associated with high yield in early planting dates > Plant a range of mid to later-maturing soybean than usual. > Use seeding rates at or above the recommended level. > Use seed treatments to protect against specific pests (i.e. SDS or phytopthora) > The effect of seed treatments on yield was found to be small and less critical compared to the planting date and maturity group

> Apply foliar fungicides as needed when disease pressure reaches threshold levels. > Use several herbicide modes of action to help mitigate the damage from herbicideresistant weeds.

For more in-depth information on soybean planting dates: soybeanresearchinfo.com

Authors: Andre Reis, University of Missouri; Shawn Conley, University of Wisconsin, Madison; Jonathan Kleinjan, South Dakota State University; Michael Plumblee, Clemson University.

For more information: go.ncsu.edu/s4s2023team

January 2024

Science for Success is funded by the United Soybean Board.

Spring 2024

19

Your Soybean Checkoff

Interpreting Agronomic Data Agronomic data reaches farmers through product advertisements, extension publications, and industry portfolios, among others. Being able to interpret complex data is necessary for assessing the validity of the information and using numbers to draw conclusions that ultimately lead to profitable management decisions.

Checklist Dataset originates from an acceptable study design

Types of Variability 1.

2.

Between-treatment variability: caused by differences between products or practices Random field variability: not caused by treatment effects, e.g., differences in soil properties

Between-treatment variability

+

Random field variability

Statistical parameters are reported Study accounts for known and unknown variability

Overall experiment variability

Science for Success is funded by the United Soybean Board.

20 Michigan Soybean News

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Example 1: The Fertilizer Experiment Example 1: The Fertilizer Experiment 1. RESULTS SUMMARIZED

1. RESULTS SUMMARIZED

Raw Data Raw80Data

80

p-value = 0.03

70 60

50 40

53.5

57.0

Control 53.5

Fert.

57.0X

30

Control

Fert. X

2. BEHIND THE SCENES

3. STATISTICS Average across replications Control = 53.5 bu/ac Average Fert. across X = 57.0replications bu/ac Control = 53.5 bu/ac Fert. X = 57.0 bu/ac Treatment difference = 3.5 bu/ac CV = 2.2% Treatment difference = 3.5 bu/ac p-value = 0.03 CV = 2.2% Significance level = 0.05 p-value = 0.03 Significance level = 0.05

50 average = 55 60 40 50 51 55 56 61 30 40 Control Fert. X Control Fert. X 51 55 56 61 30

60 50

40 30

3. STATISTICS

70 80 60 average = 55 70

p-value = 0.03

80 70

2. BEHIND THE SCENES

Rep. 1 Control Fert. X

Rep. 1 4. Interpretation

52

53

55

59

Control Fert. X

53

Control Fert. X

Rep. 2 Control Fert. X

Rep.Fert.

3 X Control

Rep.Fert.

4 X Control

Rep. 2

Rep. 3

Rep. 4

52

55

lower than significance level?

4. p-value Interpretation Yes p-value lower than significance level?

59

Conclusion Fert. X significantlyConclusion outyields Control by 3.5 bu/ac

Fert. X significantly outyields Control by 3.5 bu/ac Yes Conclusion Fert. X outyielded the Control by 3.5 bu/ac, and this difference was significant (at a significance level of Conclusion

0.05),Xindicating that yield by gain was likelyand duethis to between-treatment variability applicationlevel of fertilizer).

Fert. outyielded thethe Control 3.5 bu/ac, difference was significant (at(e.g. a significance of 0.05), indicating that the yield gain was likely due to between-treatment variability (e.g. application of fertilizer). e 1: The Fertilizer Experiment Terms to Know 3. STATISTICS 2. BEHIND THE SCENES Example Raw Data 2: The Soybean Variety Experiment Average across replications Example 2: average 80 The Soybean Variety Experiment Solely comparing differences can be misleading Control = 53.5 bu/ac

TS SUMMARIZED

> CV (coefficient of variation): a measurement of the overall experiment variability.

> CV me > CV

var me var Low or Low exp or i

> exp pthe > p-v

diff the var diff var p-v ob p-v var obs

> var Si de > Sig

sig det lev sig be lev hig ben con hig wh con tol wh

Low CV = low overall experiment variability, or individual 3. observations STATISTICSare close to the Raw Data Treatment difference = 3.5 bu/ac tole experiment average p-v 50 1. RESULTS SUMMARIZED 2. BEHIND THE SCENES 3. STATISTICS CV = 2.2% 40 Average across replications be > p-value (probability value): indicates Raw80Data p-v p-value = 0.03 56 61 52 53 55 59 X = 54.3 bu/ac 80 30 51 55 the levelVar. of confidence that treatment Significance level = 0.05 Average replications bet 70Control Fert. X Control Fert. X Control Fert. X Control Fert. X 80 Var. Zacross = 59.0 bu/ac differences a result p-value = 0.52 Var. Xare = 54.3 bu/acof between-treatment 80 Rep. 1 Rep. 2 Rep. 3 Rep. 4 70 average = 56 60 70 variability Var.and Z =not 59.0random bu/ac field variability.

3.5 57.0 Treatment difference = 4.7 bu/ac p-value = 0.52 50 average = 56 70 4. Interpretation 60 p-value of 0.03 = 97% chance that the 60 p-value lower than significance level? ntrol Fert. X CV = 16% difference = 4.7 bu/ac Conclusion Terms to Know Treatment observations are due to between-treatment As 40 50 p-value = 0.52 Fert. X significantly outyields Control by 3.5 bu/ac Yes 60 variability and not random field variability.

53 52 43 44 56 80 65 60 CV = 16% > CV (coefficient of variation): a 50 3. STATISTICS SCENES 30 (Ex A s 40 Significance level = 0.05 measurement of the overall Var.experiment X Var. Z Var. X Var. Z > Significance p-value = 0.52level: Var. X Var. Z Var. a threshold 53 52 43X Var. 44Z 56 80 65 60 50 30 variability. al (Ex 40 Average across replications Significance level = 0.05 elded the Control by 3.5 bu/ac, and this difference was significant aXsignificance level determined by the user to classify p-values as Rep.Var. 1 Z (at 2 Z 3 Z of Var. Rep. 4 Z Var. Rep. X Var. X Var. Var. X Var.Rep. Var. Control = 53.5 bu/ac Lowvariability CV = low (e.g. overall experimentofvariability, significant or not significant. The significance aadla ng that the yield 40 gain was due to application fertilizer).

59.0between-treatment Fert.54.3 Xlikely = 57.0 bu/ac Rep. 1 Rep. 2 Rep. 3 Rep. 4 30 4. Interpretation or individual observations are close to the level of 0.05 (95% confidence) is a common adv 54.3X 59.0Z Var. Var. lower than significance level?

Conclusion experiment average benchmark in agronomic research although 30 Treatment difference = 3.5 bu/ac 4. p-value Interpretation Autho CV = 2.2% highersignificantly significanceoutyield levels such Var. X Z Var. Xas 0.10 (90% Nosignificancevalue): > p-value (probability Nicole p-value lower than level? indicates Var. Z does not Conclusion e 2: The Soybean VarietyVar.Experiment p-value = 0.03 Autho 53 55 59 confidence) may be warranted in situations the level of confidence that treatment Mark L Significance level = 0.05 Var. Z does not significantly outyieldlevels Var. X can be No laring Fert. X Control Fert. X differences can be misleading Nicole average where lower confidence Conclusion differences are a result of between-treatment Emma ep. 3 Rep. 4 Mark L tolerated. variability and not random field variability.

p-value = 0.03

70

X = 57.0 bu/ac Solely1. comparing average differences can be2. Fert. misleading RESULTS SUMMARIZED BEHIND THE SCENES = 55 60 average

Var. Z outyielded Var.2. XBEHIND by 4.7 bu/ac. However, this difference S SUMMARIZED THE SCENES 3. STATISTICS was not significant (at a significance Raw Data p-value < significance level = the difference

l?

Conclusion

p-value of 0.03 = 97% chance that the not significant (at a significance levelZofoutyielded 0.05), and is likely the result of random field variability.

Var. this difference was Conclusion Var. X by 4.7 bu/ac. However,Average across replications between treatments is significant. observations are due to between-treatment 80 Var. Xvariability. = 54.3 bu/ac of 0.05), is random field Fert.level X significantly outyieldsand Control bylikely 3.5 bu/acthe result of variability and not random field variability.

Terms to Know 70 Terms to Know Var. Z = 59.0 bu/ac

p-value = 0.52

= 56 60 averageof > CV (coefficient variation): a measurement of the overalllevel experiment ce was significant (at 50 a significance of variability. (e.g. n-treatment variability application of fertilizer).

40

> Significance level: a threshold

Treatment difference = 4.7 bu/ac determined by the user to classify p-values as = 16% significant orCV not significant. The significance = 0.52 53 52 experiment 43 44 variability, 56 80 65level60of 0.05 p-value (95% confidence) is a common Low CV = 30 low overall Significance level = 0.05 Var. X Var. Z Var. X Var. Z Var. X Var. Z Var. X Var. Z benchmark in agronomic research although or individual observations are close to the Rep. 1 Rep. 2 Rep. 3 Rep. 4 experiment average higher significance levels such as 0.10 (90% ment 59.0 4.3 confidence) may be warranted in situations 4. Interpretation > p-value (probability value): indicates gr. X where lower confidence Var. Z the level of confidence that treatment p-value lower than significance level?

Conclusion levels can be tolerated. differences are a result of Var. Z does not significantly outyield Var. X Nobetween-treatment CENES 3. STATISTICS

variability and not random field variability.

p-value < significance level = the difference

p-value Average of 0.03 across = 97% chance that the replications between treatments is significant. ded Var. X by observations 4.7 bu/ac. this difference was not significant (at a significance Var.However, X = due 54.3 bu/ac are to between-treatment Var. Z = 59.0 bu/ac c, and is likely variability the result ofnot random and randomfield fieldvariability. variability.

f rtilizer).

80 65

> Significance a threshold Treatmentlevel: difference = 4.7 bu/ac determined by the user to classify p-values as CV = 16% or not significant. The significance p-value = 0.52 60significant

Key Takeaway

A small but significant yield advantage

Key Takeaway

A small but significant yield advantage (Example 1) is more meaningful than a larger but non-significant yield advantage (Example 2).

Authors: Daniela Carrijo, Penn State University; Nicole Fiorellino, University of Maryland; Mark Licht, University of Iowa; Emma Matcham, University of Florida; Manni Singh, Michigan State University.

For more information: go.ncsu.edu/s4s2023team January21 2024 Spring 2024

Manni Emma For mo Manni

For mo

Your Soybean Checkoff

Soybeans are a Slam Dunk for Michigan!

A

s part of an ongoing partnership with MSU Athletics, the Michigan Soybean Committee sponsored the Michigan State University men's basketball game on January 18, 2024 vs.

Minnesota. MSC staff and board members had an interactive exhibit on the concourse in the Breslin Center and shared lots of great soybean and agriculture information with game attendees.

Part of MSC's new strategic plan includes a larger emphasis on consumer engagement and connecting with consumers over shared values such as food and sustainability. Partnerships like this one allow MSC to connect with consumers and provide resources and information on the many ways soy impacts people's day-to-day lives. From soy tires and shoes to soy sauce and even bacon, soybeans truly touch every life every day!

MSC also had a booth in the Breslin Center for the February 24th women's basketball game vs. Rutgers.

This game was the annual 4-H game, which 4-H members and their families can attend. In addition to the game, there were booths around the arena for youth to learn about agriculture and MSU Extension opportunities available to them. MSC staff were on hand to share soybean information and had many great conversations about agriculture.

This partnership has been a rewarding and successful endeavor that MSC looks forward to continuing. Having conversations with consumers about soybeans and the farmers that grow them helps to build trust in agriculture and a better understanding of the food they eat. We're excited to continue to share ways that consumers and farmers alike can Score BIG with SOY!

22 Michigan Soybean News

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Michigan Farmer Elected Vice Chair of Soy Aquaculture Alliance Alan Moore, MSC Farmer Representative, Soy Aquaculture Alliance

S

oybeans are a crop that has an unlimited number of uses thanks to their versatile oil and protein makeup. I have been interested in the production and promotion of soybeans for my entire 50-year career in the industry. I have enjoyed being Michigan Soybean Committee’s liaison to the Soy Aquaculture Alliance (SAA) and am truly honored to be serving the SAA as Vice Chair this year.

The Soy Aquaculture Alliance is dedicated to expanding the use of U.S.-grown soybeans in domestic aquaculture diets. Soybeans and fish may seem unlikely partners, but bringing the land and sea together offers major opportunities for both. SAA supports research, promotion and collaboration that build this partnership.

Current statistics show that nearly 90 percent of the seafood consumed in the U.S. is imported. At SAA, we see great potential to increase domestic production of seafood, to not only increase domestic protein security, but also utilize more U.S. soybeans in aquaculture feed rations. We are working with researchers on environmentally-friendly production systems and focusing on economical feeds with higher inclusion rates of soy products. We are also working on a project called social licensing. Its goal is to listen to and educate influential people in an area where an aquaculture production facility is to be built before a possible conflict starts.

I am passionate about the work SAA is doing and look forward to continuing to serve soybean farmers through my time serving with this collaborative organization.

Alan and Phyllis Moore

It pays to partner!

This March, for the second straight year we’re returning $120 million in dividends to members.

GreenStone is excited to provide Patronage as a cooperative benefit and it’s just one of the many reasons It Pays to Partner!

800-444-FARM

www.greenstonefcs.com

Spring 2024 23

Your Soybean Checkoff

Reflections on the Michigan Soybean On-Farm Research Program Mike Staton, MSU Extension Soybean Educator

A

s my career with MSU Extension winds down, I want to look back at the last 13 years as these were the most rewarding.

During this time, I was fortunate to be part of the Michigan Soybean On-Farm Research Program, an efficient and productive partnership between the Michigan Soybean Committee and Michigan State University Extension. I firmly believe that this partnership accomplished more for soybean producers than the two organizations could have done by operating independently. Keith Reinholt created the soybean on-farm research program in 2009 and named it STARS (Strip Testing at Regional Sites). In 2011, Keith changed the name of the on-farm program to SMaRT (Soybean Management and Research Technology). Mark Seamon took over when Keith retired and changed the name one more time in 2018 to the Michigan Soybean On-Farm Research Program.

Despite the name changes, the goal has always remained the same. The on-farm program provides soybean producers with a simple way to evaluate the yield and income benefits of new products, management practices and equipment. Soybean producers and agribusinesses provide input into the topics evaluated in the trials each year, which ensures they are timely and relevant to producers.

Planting Rate Trial 24 Michigan Soybean News

Mike Staton We also make the trials as easy as possible to conduct while still producing reliable results.

I want to focus on some of the more meaningful results produced by the Michigan Soybean On-Farm Research program so far. The planting rate trials are at the top of the list. We conducted 67 trials over seven years and found that the highest planting rate (160,000 seeds per acre) was the least profitable and it out-yielded the 130,000 seeds per acre rate at only one of the 67 locations. The 100,000 seeds per acre rate was the most profitable even though the two highest rates (130K and 160K) produced the highest yields. In addition, two of the trials were infested with white mold and demonstrated that reducing planting rates to 100,000 seeds per acre can be an effective tactic for managing white mold.

The on-farm program also clearly demonstrated that early planting is a profitable practice. The 25 trials we conducted from 2019 to 2023 showed that early planting increased yields by an average of 3.5 bushels per acre at 10 of the locations and reduced yields at only three sites. Early planting produced an average yield increase of 1.5 bushels per acre across

Investing Checkoff Dollars all 25 locations.

The results from the row-spacing trials we conducted can also help producers make decisions regarding their next planter purchase. The results from 11 trials comparing 15” rows to 30” rows using split-row planters showed that 15” rows produced 2.8 bushels per acre more than 30” rows.

Foliar fertilizer applications were shown to rarely produce higher yields or increase profits. In fact, foliar fertilization was profitable in only 15 of the 172 trials we have conducted since 2009. Foliar applications of manganese sulfate are the exception and are recommended when deficiency symptoms are visible.

Helping soybean producers reduce their harvest losses was another significant outcome produced by the MSC/MSUE partnership. We conducted annual field days around the state showcasing new equipment and demonstrating where harvest losses occur, how to measure them and how to reduce them. The partnership also generated numerous articles and a new MSU Extension bulletin (E-3487, Reducing Soybean Harvest Losses). These materials provide specific recommendations for reducing losses under challenging conditions such as: plants with green stems, lodged plants and short plants with low pods. We also provided economic information showing that harvesting soybeans

Row Spacing Trial at 15 to 16 percent moisture is more profitable than harvesting at 11 percent, which encouraged producers to begin harvesting soybeans earlier.

I am grateful to the Michigan Soybean Committee for funding 50 percent of my position for the past 13 years and for giving me the opportunity to improve the lives of Michigan soybean producers. I am confident that my successor, Eric Anderson, will continue to explore new ways to meet the needs of Michigan soybean producers.

Spring 2024 25

unitedsoybean.org

RESEARCHING A BETTER BEAN

Whether you’re dealing with drought, flood, heat or other climate-related stress, the soy checkoff is working behind the scenes to diversify U.S. soybean genetics and increase stress tolerance.

We’re looking inside the bean, beyond the bushel and around the world to keep preference for U.S. soy strong. And it’s helping make a valuable impact for soybean farmers like you.

See more ways the soy checkoff is maximizing profit opportunities for soybean farmers at unitedsoybean.org

Brought to you by the soy checkoff. ©2018 United Soybean Board. Our Soy Checkoff and the Our Soy Checkoff mark are trademarks of United Soybean Board. All other trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Farmers Appointed to Serve on MSC Board of Directors

G

overnor Gretchen Whitmer recently announced two new appointments to the Michigan Soybean Committee board of directors.

Sara Trattles of Colon grows soybeans, as well as corn, seed corn and alfalfa on her family farm. Off the farm, Sara is employed as the Vice President of Agribusiness Lending at GreenStone Farm Credit Services. She holds a bachelor’s degree in agribusiness management from Michigan State University and a master’s of agribusiness management from Kansas State University. Sara was appointed to represent District 1 growers for a term expiring September 2026.

Nathan McCalla of Ann Arbor farms alongside his father and brother. They grow a crop rotation that includes 900 acres of soybeans, as well as corn, wheat, pumpkins, and hay on the farm dating back to 1912. He holds a bachelor’s degree in agribusiness from Michigan State University. McCalla was appointed to represent District 3 growers through September 2026.

“The Michigan Soybean Committee is led by a board of industry leaders with expertise and knowledge that benefits all Michigan soybean farmers. Sara and Nathan are great examples of strong leaders who are committed to being good stewards of soybean checkoff funds,” said MSC communication director Sonja Lapak. “We are excited for them to join the board and continue to grow as leaders in our organization."

MSC would like to congratulate Sara and Nathan on their appointments. We look forward to working with these farmers and appreciate their willingness to serve the Michigan soybean industry.

MSC would also like to recognize and thank Dan Rajzer for three years of service and Laurie Isley for nine years of service on the Michigan Soybean Committee board of directors.

Dan, who farms in Decatur, served on MSC's production, outreach and market development subcommittees and will continue to serve as MSC's national representative on the Soy Transportation Coalition.

Laurie, who farms in Palmyra served on the production, outreach, market development and administration and resources subcommittees. She also served as secretary/treasurer, vice president and president during her tenure on the board. Laurie will also continue to be involved in the soybean industry, as she was recently reappointed for a second term on the United Soybean Board.

Thank you to Dan and Laurie for their dedication and time spent serving Michigan's soybean growers.

Sara Trattles

Nathan McCalla

Dan Rajzer

Laurie Isley Spring 2024 27

Your Soybean Checkoff

Panama Canal: Challenges and Opportunities Dan Razjer, MSC Farmer Representative, Soy Transportation Coalition

L

ast December I had an opportunity to travel with my colleagues from the Soy Transportation Coalition to the country of Panama where we observed first-hand the daily workings of the Panama Canal. Each year the Soy Transportation Coalition holds one of their board meetings at a key supply chain location so that the farmer board members can see firsthand some parts of the supply chain.

As pointed out in a recent Michigan Farm News article, 32 percent of U.S. soybeans pass through the canal, making it a vital link to transporting agricultural products to Asian countries.

During our visit, we learned about some of the challenges that both the country of Panama and users of the canal face.

First, and foremost on their minds is the current drought that is affecting the country. Unlike most canals Container unloading area at Balboa Port near that use pumping stations to fill and empty the locks, the Panama City Panama Canal is all gravity fed. Between the Atlantic locks and the Pacific locks lies Gatun Lake, the source of water for the canals which sits at 85 feet above sea level. The locks were designed to use fresh water from this lake to reduce operating costs and maintain the bio-diversity of both oceans. The current drought has reduced the lake volume and reduced ship movement by almost 40 percent to just 22 ships per day. While we were there, they received rain that allowed them to increase ship movement slightly but there was no long term improvement in sight.

From an agricultural perspective, the cost of moving product through the canal will increase. It was not unusual to hear that ships were waiting for up to 14 days to enter the canal system. One could see 20-30 ships parked at each entrance waiting to enter. And unless you have scheduled use of the canal in advance (sometimes a year or more), your wait may be even longer. This is hard, especially for perishable commodities, and may create quality problems for the end user.

Liquid petroleum gas tanker making its way through the Atlantic side locks heading to the Caribbean Sea 28 Michigan Soybean News

Container ship being escorted by tugs into the locks

Automobile carrier unloading at the docks in Panama City

Investing Checkoff Dollars In spite of reduced ship movements, the Panama Canal Authority (PCA) has not seen a reduction in revenue.

PCA reported $3.3 billion in revenue for fiscal year ending September 30, 2023, an increase of $319 million over the previous year. This is good news because one of their long-term projects aims to evaluate diverting additional water into Gatun Lake from neighboring watersheds, which could reduce future drought impacts.

Aside from current issues facing the Panama Canal, the system itself is a sight to behold. It is certainly one of the most impressive engineering feats ever accomplished. Massive amounts of earth and mountains were moved to create a canal, dams were built to create a lake, and tons of cement was poured to create the locks, all during the early 20th century (1903 – 1914) when the biggest crane was a steam shovel.

One of the original locks, known as the Mirafloras Locks on the Pacific side, measured 110 feet wide by 1,000 feet long when completed in 1913. Unable to accommodate more modern ships, an additional set of locks called the Cocoli Locks were completed in 2016, with measurements of 180 feet wide and 1,400 feet long. Similar size locks were built on the Atlantic side shortly after the Pacific build. I was truly impressed with the size of ships that go through the locks with as little as a foot of clearance on each side.

And guess what? The new locks are too small to accommodate the new super carriers. Will there be another canal built to accommodate them? Stay tuned.

The Soy Transportation Coalition is a soybean checkoff funded organization comprised of 13 state soybean boards, the American Soybean Association, and the United Soybean Board. The 13 participating states encompass 85% of total U.S. soybean production. The Michigan Soybean Committee is one of the participating state soybean boards.

STC group at Balboa port Spring 2024 29

Your Soybean Checkoff

New Tool Estimates Financial Toll of Soybean Cyst Nematode

H

ave you ever taken a closer look at your spending and been shocked by how much you pay for subscription services? The soybean cyst nematode (SCN) can be a similar drain on your finances, flying under the radar and chipping away yield potential as years pass. The SCN Coalition’s new SCN Profit Checker tool works like a budget audit, laying bare just how much yield and money SCN is costing you.

New Tool is Backed by Extensive Research Data from more than 25,000 field trial plots conducted by Iowa State University with SCN-resistant soybean varieties revealed a significant direct relationship among SCN egg numbers, reproduction of SCN populations on PI 88788 resistance and yield loss.

That relationship was used to create an algorithm for estimating SCN’s economic impact by field. The algorithm is the engine behind SCN Profit Checker, a simple calculator that estimates how much SCN costs a farmer in any soybean field.

For example, if the results of the SCN Profit Checker reveal an estimated 8.3 percent yield loss, which represents a loss of $49.80 per acre based on a 50-bushel-per-acre yield expectation and $12.00-per-bushel marketing price, a farmer can take this information to their agronomist or crop advisor to work together to devise a plan to combat the pest.

SCN Profit Checker is funded by the United 30 Michigan Soybean News

Soybean Board and is available for free at scnprofitchecker.com.

Simple Inputs for the Tool To use SCN Profit Checker, a farmer, agronomist or crop advisor provides the state name and the following field-specific information: • SCN egg count • SCN female index on PI 88788 • Sand content of the soil • Soil pH

Investing Checkoff Dollars University experts have provided default female indexes on PI 88788 for most states – including Michigan – to use as a starting point if a farmer does not know that detail for the SCN population in a specific field. But ideally, a farmer would work with his or her agronomist or crop advisor to get an HG Type test that provides the female index for the SCN population in the field of interest. The more specific the information provided in the calculator, the more accurate the estimate.

The tool also takes into account sand content and pH of the soil in the field because of the direct relationship with SCN reproduction.

What is SCN Female Index?

The index indicates how well an SCN population is controlled by the PI 88788 source of resistance that is commonly used to breed soybean varieties.

When soybean varieties with SCN resistance from PI 88788 were initially used, the SCN populations were controlled well, and female indices were typically between zero and 10 percent, indicating 90 to 100 percent control.

In situations where soybean varieties with PI 88788 SCN resistance have been grown repeatedly

for numerous years, such as in Michigan, SCN populations evolved to develop high reproduction on PI 88788 resistance.

For Michigan, the default SCN female index in SCN Profit Checker is set at 40 percent, which is the midpoint of the range of female indices currently known for SCN populations in the state and indicates the nematode has overcome the common source of SCN resistance. The estimated yield loss of a field determined by the calculator will be most accurate if actual female index values are known and used. Michigan State University Plant and Pest Diagnostics is one of the few labs in the nation that conducts the female index test.

Although the calculator is built from research results in Iowa, the percent yield loss can be used for a range of geographies. Users should be aware of the effects of weather, aspects of the specific soybean varieties grown elsewhere, local soil conditions, and other factors which may also have significant effects on yield loss caused by SCN in an individual field. As a result, the output from the calculator should be considered only an estimate of possible yield loss. continued on following page...

2024

MICHIGAN SOYBEAN YIELD CONTEST WINNERS

MARK STORY and JON DROZD TM ®

Trademarks of Corteva Agriscience and its affiliated companies. © 2024 Corteva. 019521 PIO (02/24)

Spring 2024

31

Your Soybean Checkoff ...continued from previous page

Driving Change in SCN Management The dynamic tool uses information about the field along with the farmer’s yield expectation and targeted soybean price to calculate a yield and profit hit estimate from SCN. “Demonstrating to farmers the financial burden of SCN in dollars and cents makes it real. In doing so, The SCN Coalition hopes to motivate more farmers to actively manage the pest,” explains MSU Nematode Diagnostician and SCN Coalition member Angie Tenney. “They can use this information to be more strategic when developing an active SCN management plan with their trusted crop advisor.”

Active SCN Management Starts With a Soil Test The SCN Coalition has a unified message. It encourages soybean farmers to collaborate with their agronomist or crop advisor to develop a plan to actively manage SCN that includes: • Take an SCN soil test to know your number • Rotate SCN-resistant varieties • Rotate to non-host crops like corn and wheat • Consider using a nematode-protectant seed treatment

The Michigan Soybean Committee provides financial support to the SCN sampling program that is operated by Michigan State University Plant and Pest Diagnostics.

Visit www.canr.msu.edu/ pestid/forms to learn more. This information, along with state specific SCN management recommendations is available by visiting thescncoalition.com/experts.

The SCN Coalition is a public/checkoff/private partnership formed to increase the number of farmers who are actively managing SCN. Our goal is to increase soybean farmers’ profit potential and realize higher yields. Partners in The SCN Coalition include university scientists from 28 states and Ontario, grower checkoff organizations, including the North Central Soybean Research Program, United Soybean Board and several state soybean promotion boards, and corporate partners including BASF, Bayer, Growmark, Nufarm, Pioneer (Corteva), Syngenta, UPL Ltd., Valent and Winfield United. To stay up to date with the latest happenings, follow @TheSCNCoalition on X, Facebook and LinkedIn.

SERVICE IS IN OUR GENETICS. Before we offered six different genetic families of corn hybrids, we were a family of service professionals. Today, we continue to balance local service with unique genetics and the trait selection of the big guys.

That commitment is what makes us the only choice when it’s time to buy seed.

ChooseAgriGold.com

AgriGold® and Design® are trademarks of AgReliant Genetics, LLC. © 2024 AgReliant Genetics, LLC.

32 Michigan Soybean News 56042-1_2023_AgriGold_Genetics_FullPgAd_FebruaryMichigan_FA2_ps.indd 1

2/13/24 6:35 PM

Your Soybean Checkoff

2023 Market Development Highlights

Soy Excellence Centers The Michigan Soybean Committee (MSC) began a partnership with the United States Soybean Export Council's (USSEC) Soy Excellence Centers (SEC) in 2022 to help grow preference for U.S. soy internationally. The SEC program is working to turn budding soy markets into stories of economic success by building early-to-mid career protein professionals for the agriculture supply chain abroad. These centers facilitate workforce training and continuing education activities that build knowledge and skills to help participants overcome key challenges and operational hurdles in food and agribusiness operations. Training opportunities include lessons on feed manufacturing, feed mill management, soy foods and multiple livestock

sectors. SECs are located around the world with four main hubs in the Americas, Asia, Middle East/North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa.

Michigan Soybean was introduced firsthand to the USSEC's SECs when a trade team from Nigeria visited Michigan farms in the summer of 2022.

Many members of this trade team had attended professional development programs at the Nigeria SEC focusing on poultry, agronomy, aquaculture and feed mill management. SEC participant, Chidiebere Mykie-Obial, Owner of Muchi Farms in Nigeria had this to about the SEC program, “Soy Excellence Center allowed me to meet professional and experienced facilitators, and gave me hands-on experience. SEC gave me wings to fly.”

MSC was excited to continue our support of this great program in 2023 and have also renewed funding for 2024. Visit soyexcellence.org to learn more about this project and learn more about SEC stories of impact at soyexcellence.org/stories-ofimpact-from-our-sec-tomorrow-solvers/.

Original Engine Manufacturer Approval of B20 One of the largest pulls in today’s market for soybean oil is the production of renewable liquid fuels, like biodiesel. It is important to ensure continued interest in biodiesel to help spur continued growth in demand for soybean oil. In 2023, MSC partnered with Clean Fuels Alliance America on a project to increase support of biodiesel in higher blends by original engine manufacturers.

This project works cooperatively with engine manufacturers from all fuel application segments to 34 Michigan Soybean News

Investing Checkoff Dollars generate the data needed to support OEM positions and any necessary changes to existing fuel quality specifications for B20 (20 percent biodiesel) blends and for blends up to B100 (100 percent biodiesel).

The choice by PepsiCo to utilize B100 in an increasing numbers of vehicles for their nationwide fleet is having an impact on OEMs approving higher biodiesel blends in order to capture their business.

Additional OEMs are now publicizing their own carbon reduction and environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals, which is leading towards higher biodiesel approvals.

Pork Promotion in Mexico MSC is working with the U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) to promote consumption of

U.S. pork in Mexico. U.S. pork loin promotion is a strategic priority for USMEF in Mexico, where training events are achieving success in driving a growing interest in and encouraging trial purchases of the product.

In many instances, USMEF has partnered with leading pork importers to provide education and training for their end-user clients in food service and retail with a specific focus on the U.S. pork loin. These events are opportunities to explain the quality attributes of U.S. pork loin and demonstrate its versatility through the range of cuts that can be obtained from it.

USMEF deployed its mobile grill and kitchen to support Dilusa, a major U.S. meat importer and distributor working to expand its portfolio of U.S. pork products in central Mexico. Dilusa developed six new recipes with U.S. pork loin and tenderloin for the event, making them available as samples for attendees. More than 150 end-users and potential customers of Dilusa in food service and retail, as well as select social media influencers, were special guests for the masterclasses and workshops.

GROW GOLD

GOLDEN HARVEST GOLD SERIES SOYBEANS ARE BRED TO WIN

CONGRATULATIONS! DALTON GOETZ - STATE WINNER LATE MATURITY NON-IRRIGATED CLASS GOLDEN HARVEST GH2722XF - 81.48 BU/AC These are results of the 2023 Michigan Soybean Yield Contest.

Talk to your local Seed Advisor or visit GoldenHarvestSeeds.com/Gold-Series today to learn more about our new Gold Series lineup.

All photos are either the property of Syngenta or are used with permission. © 2024 Syngenta. Important: Always read and follow label and bag tag instructions; only those labeled as tolerant to glufosinate may be sprayed with glufosinate ammonium-based herbicides. LibertyLink®, Liberty® and the Water Droplet logo are registered trademarks of BASF. HERCULEX® and the HERCULEX Shield are trademarks of Corteva Agriscience LLC. HERCULEX Insect Protection technology by Corteva Agriscience LLC. Under federal and local laws, only dicamba-containing herbicides registered for use on dicamba-tolerant varieties may be applied. See product labels for details and tank mix partners. Golden Harvest® and NK® soybean varieties are protected under granted or pending U.S. variety patents and other intellectual property rights, regardless of the trait(s) within the seed. The Enlist E3® soybean, LibertyLink®, LibertyLink® GT27®, Roundup Ready 2 Xtend®, Roundup Ready 2 Yield® and XtendFlex® soybean traits may be protected under numerous United States patents. It is unlawful to save soybeans containing these traits for planting or transfer to others for use as a planting seed. Only dicamba formulations that employ VaporGrip® Technology are approved for use with Roundup Ready 2 Xtend® and XtendFlex® soybeans. Only 2,4-D choline formulations with Colex-D® Technology are approved for use with Enlist E3® soybeans. The trademarks or service marks displayed or otherwise used herein are the property of a Syngenta Group Company. ENLIST E3® soybean technology is jointly developed with Corteva Agriscience LLC and M.S. Technologies, L.L.C. The ENLIST trait and ENLIST Weed Control System are technologies owned and developed by Corteva Agriscience LLC. ENLIST® and ENLIST E3® are trademarks of Corteva Agriscience LLC. GT27® is a trademark of M.S. Technologies, L.L.C. and BASF. Roundup Ready 2 Xtend®, Roundup Ready 2 Yield®, XtendFlex® and YieldGard VT Pro® are registered trademarks used under license from the Bayer Group. All other trademarks are the property of their respective third-party owner.

Spring 2024 35

BELIEVE YOU CAN. FOR WE LIVE BY FAITH, NOT BY SIGHT. II CORINTHIANS 5 : 7