AGN_Variety Testing_120321

VARIET VARI ETY Y TESTING

2021 Corn and Soybean Test Results in Illinois SPECIAL SECTION

PerformanCe information provided by University of Illinois PerformanC College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences Department of Crop Sciences http://vt.cropsci.illinois.edu

2 Friday, December 3, 2021

| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | www.agrinews-pubs.com

2021 Corn Hybrid Test Results in Illinois Selection of entries: Each year, producers of corn hybrids in Illinois and surrounding states are invited to enter hybrids in the Illinois performance trials.

Financing is provided through entry fees. Entrants are required to enter their corn hybrids regionally at a fee of $280 for each corn hybrid entered in a region or $94 per hybrid for the corn following corn tests. Most of these hybrids are commer-

cially available, although a few experimental hybrids are also entered.

Number and location of tests: In 2021, hybrid corn entrants were required to enter hybrid(s) in at least one of four regions each consisting of three locations with a total of 12 locations in the state.

These sites represent the major soil and climatic areas of the state.

Hybrids: There were 194 corn

hybrids from 20 companies tested in 2021. Field-plot design.

Three replications of an alpha lattice design or randomized complete block were used to give each corn hybrid an equal chance to show its merits.

Planting methods: All trials were planted by a modern fourrow planter modified for small plot work. A soil insecticide (Force) was applied in furrow at planting for all corn trials. Corn

Measuring performance in trials It is impossible to measure performance exactly in any test of plant material. Harvesting efficiency may vary, soils may not be uniform, and many other conditions may produce variability.

Results of repeated tests, like those reported here, are more reliable than those of a single-year or a single-strip test. When one hybrid or variety consistently out yields another at several test locations and over several years of testing, the chances are good that this difference is real and should be a consideration in choosing a hybrid or variety.

When comparing yields, however, grain moisture content, percentage of erect plants, and plant population must also be considered in corn. In soybeans, you should also consider maturity, lodging and plant height.

A number of statistical tests are available for comparing hybrids or varieties within a single trial. One of these tests, the least significant difference (L.S.D.), when used in the manner suggested by Carmer and Swanson*, is quite simple to apply and is more appropriate than most other tests. When two hybrids or two varieties are compared and the difference between them is greater than the tabulated L.S.D. value, the hybrids or varieties are judged “significantly different.”

The L.S.D. is a number expressed in bushels per acre and presented following the average yield for each location. An L.S.D. level of 25% is shown. Find the

Corn is checked in an Illinois field. highest yielding hybrid or variety within the regional table or single location table of interest, subtract the 25% L.S.D. value from the highest yielding hybrid or variety; every hybrid or variety with a greater yield than the resulting number is ‘statistically the same’ as the highest yielding hybrid or varierty. Consider the merits of the hybrids or varieties in this group when making hybrid and variety selections.

In a study of the frequencies of occurrence of three types of statistical errors and their relative seriousness, Carmer** found strong arguments for an optimal significance level in the range a = 0.20 to 0.40, where a is the Type I statistical error rate

for comparisons between means that are really equal. Herein, a value of a = 0.25 is used in computing the L.S.D. 25- percent level shown in the tables.

To make the best use of the information presented in this section and to avoid any misunderstanding or misrepresentation of it, the reader should consider an additional caution about comparing hybrids and varieties. Readers who compare hybrids or varieties in different trials should be extremely careful, because no statistical tests are presented for that purpose.

Readers should note that the difference between a single hybrid’s or variety’s performance at one location and its performance at another is caused primarily by environmental effects and random variability.

Furthermore, the difference between the performance of hybrid A or variety A in one trial and that of hybrid B or variety B in another is the result not only of environmental effects and random variability, but of genetic effects, as well.

plots were planted to stand and later counted to confirm population. Each plot was four rows wide and 23 feet long. The center two rows of each plot were harvested to determine yields.

Fertilization: All test fields were at a high level of fertility. Additional fertilizer was plowed down or side dressed as needed to ensure top yields. Method of harvest. All corn plots were harvested with a custom-built, self-propelled, corn

plot combine. Grain collected from each plot was weighed, and tested for moisture content. An electronic moisture monitor was used in the combine for all moisture readings. No allowance was made for grain that might have been lost in harvest.

Corn Hybrid Test Results were prepared by D. K. Joos, Principal Research Specialist. Phone 217333-1194, email joos@illinois.edu.

Performance data Grain yield: Grain weight and moisture was converted to bushels per acre of No. 2 shelled corn (15.5% moisture).

Moisture content: Occasionally, hybrids too late in maturity for a given area are entered in these tests. These hybrids are often high in yield, but their moisture content may make them poor choices for farm use unless proper drying or storage facilities are available.

Lodging: A rating from 0 (no plants lodged) to 9 (all plants lodged). The number of lodged

plants in each plot of a hybrid was determined at harvest time. Any plant leaning at an angle of more than 45 degrees or broken below the ear was considered lodged. Plants broken above the ear were considered erect.

Population: Corn plots were planted to population and later counted to confirm population. Stand differences may be caused by failure to germinate or by damage from diseases, insects, cultivation, or rodents.

*Carmer, S.G. and M.R. Swanson. “An Evaluation of Ten Pairwise Multiple Comparison Procedures by Monte Carlo Methods.” Journal of American Statistical Association 68:66-74. 1973. **Carmer, S.G. “Optimal Significance Levels for Application of the Least Significant Difference in Crop Performance Trials.” Crop Science 16:95-99, 1976.

Corn is harvested in central Illinois.

AGRINEWS PHOTO/TOM C. DORAN

www.agrinews-pubs.com | UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | Friday, December 3, 2021

*Freeport was not harvested due to a herbicide application error.

*Freeport was not harvested due to a herbicide application error.

Freeport

DeKalb

Fenton

3

4 Friday, December 3, 2021

| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | www.agrinews-pubs.com

*The Perry location was not included in the table due to widespread damage caused by a wind event on July 9.

*The Perry location was not included in the table due to widespread damage caused by a wind event on July 9.

1

Monmouth

Perry

New Berlin

Seed sources for 2021 corn trials

Abbreviation key for corn charts Insecticide Seed Treatment L = Low Rate M = Medium Rate H = High Rate

Genetic Traits C = Corn Borer R = Root Worm L = Other Lepidoptera Letter followed by number indicates how many genes of the trait are present 2

Herbicide Traits G = Glyphosate U = Glufosinate B = Both 4 Lodging 0= none, 9= all 3

AgVenture, Wehmeyer Seed, www.agventure.com Axis, Axis Seed Direct, www. axisseed.com Beck’s, Beck’s Superior Hybrids, www.beckshybrids.com Burrus, Burrus Seed, www. burrusseed.com Cappel, Cappel Certified Seeds, www.cappelseeds.com Channel, Channel, www. channel.com Cornelius, Cornelius Seed, www.corneliusseed.com

Dairyland, Dairyland Seed, www.dairylandseed.com DeKalb, Bayer Crop Sciences, www.asgrowanddekalb. com Hi Fidelity, Hi Fidelity Genetics, www.hifidelitygenetics.com NuTech Seed, NuTech Seed, LLC www.nutechseed.com Pioneer, Corteva, www.pioneer.com Power Plus, Burrus Seeds, www.burrusseed.com Prairie, Prairie Hybrids, www.

prairiehybrids.com Renk, Renk Seed Co., www. renkseed.com Stone Seed, Stone Seed Group, www.stoneseed.com Sun Prairie Seeds, Sun Prairie Seeds, www.sunprairiehybrids.com Viking, Albert Lea Seed, www.alseed.com Whisnand, Whisnand Hybrids, 217-268-3714 Wyffels, Wyffels Hybrids, www.wyffels.com

www.agrinews-pubs.com | UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | Friday, December 3, 2021

5

High costs spotlight nitrogen quandary

By Tom C. Doran

AGRINEWS PUBLICATIONS

BLOOMINGTON, Ill. — Nitrogen provides the fuel to feed the corn plant’s engine and meeting that need efficiently is at the forefront, particularly this year with price spikes and supply concerns.

Nitrogen application timing, rate and source during the current cost and supply challenges were among the topics covered by Emerson Nafziger, University of Illinois professor emeritus, in an Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association-hosted webinar.

Here’s what the crop production specialist had to say about nitrogen management.

ON MRTN A maximum return to nitrogen calculator is available on the IFCA website, www.ifca.com. The current price for natural gas — primary feed stock for ammonia production — is about twice what it was a year ago.

Supply chain issues are making prices and availability more uncertain than usual. The 2022 corn price is currently projected at $5 per bushel, down from the $5.25 average for all of 2021.

We do know that the MRTN calculator value that we use is not perfect. Perfect would mean when you put that amount on you’re absolutely certain that it’s exactly the right amount for that field.

The conundrum we’re in with MRTN is anything that’s based on previous data is never going to be perfect because every field would have to act just like this field or that field. It’s tough to predict the nitrogen need of the crop and we can predict the soil N supply.

No two N rate trials are exactly alike, so having the MRTN based on data from previous trials means that it can’t give a perfect prediction for a given field in a given year.

It is, though, the best guess we have.

And I would put that statement up against anybody that wants to come up with a better way to do it.

Our approach is let’s get a bunch of trials together and see what they say we would have needed, knowing at the time that it’s never going to be a perfect prediction.

Emerson Nafziger (left), University of Illinois professor emeritus, and Dan Schaefer, Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association director of nutrient stewardship, check a nitrogen rate trial in Monmouth, Illinois.

ent stewardship, did 17 trials comparing fall and spring applied anhydrous at the same set of rates. The timings were sideby-side and rates were the main plot and here are his findings: • Yields at the optimum rate were identical — 237.7 bushels per acre for fall applied and 237.8 bushels per acre for spring-applied N. • The optimum N rate was 211 pounds per acre for fall-applied and 194 pounds per acre for spring-applied N. • The difference — 17 pounds of N — is in the vicinity of what has been found in tile-drainage comparisons; more loss from fall- than spring-applied. We think much of 17 pounds is probably accounted for by what came out the tile lines from fall application compared to spring.

So, it’s a good source, obviously, we can get yields from fall-applied nitrogen, it probably is going to take more nitrogen to get that, not very much more, but still don’t get wild and put on 40 more pounds on in the fall.

There are going to be years when the difON FALL VERSUS SPRING ference is larger and there will probably be The uncertainty about prices is a real years when it’s smaller, depending on how issue, but those uncertainties are not the fall, winter and early spring go. going to develop next spring. They’re already here.

See NITROGEN, Page 6 Dan Schaefer, IFCA director of nutri-

6 Friday, December 3, 2021

| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | www.agrinews-pubs.com

Dwight

NITROGEN FROM PAGE 5

ON FALL N APPLICATION There is anhydrous available, but the consistency of supply as applications gets underway is not known. Anhydrous prices continue to rise, which

Goodfield

should decrease the application rate some.

Appl icat ions shou ld be done under drier conditions. Mudding-in anhydrous in the fall is not advised.

Soil temperatures need to get to 50 degrees and headed down at the time of application to keep most of the N in ammonium form

Urbana

through early spring.

It is recommended to use a nitrification inhibitor when nitrogen is applied in the fall.

If anhydrous ammonia cannot be applied this fall, applying next spring remains a viable option, but that may mean more uncertainty in nitrogen supply and price.

We got almost no anhydrous put on in the fall of 2009. We don’t like that. Suppliers don’t like that. Nobody likes that. It’s a problem logistically in the spring, but we can get it done.

carries extra costs — applications, labeled rates of nitrification inhibitor.

It might be a reasonable option for a partial application of N, if done properly, if there’s supply this fall, but not for sure — time, ON PARTIAL RATES IN FALL amount or form — next Applying half or so of the spring. If we can put 100 full rate in the fall is a way pounds on the fall should to limit potential loss, but we do that? I think if the

opportunity exists and we signed up for nitrogen at a reasonable price.

A fall application does more or less commit the field to grow corn for next spring.

Tom C. Doran can be reached at 815-410-2256 or tdoran@shawmedia.com.

Follow him on Twitter at: @AgNews_Doran.

www.agrinews-pubs.com | UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | Friday, December 3, 2021

7

2021 Illinois Soybean Performance The University of Illinois commercial soybean testing program was started in 1969 as a result of requests by seedsmen that their private varieties be tested. The 2021 trials consisted of 247 varieties from 27 companies with the following herbicide trait packages: 50 — none (conventional) 3 — conventional and STS 9 — glufosinate 98 — 2,4-D, glufosinate and glyphosate 5 — 2,4-D, glufosinate, glyphosate and S aTS 1 — glyphosate 65 — dicamba, glufosinate and glyphosate 5 — dicamba, glufosinate, glyphosate and STS 10 — dicamba and glyphosate 1 — dicamba, glyphosate and STS The purpose of this commercial soybean testing program is to provide unbiased, objective, and accurate testing of all varieties entered. The tests are con-

ducted on as uniform a soil as is available in the testing area.

Small plots are used to reduce the chance of soil and climatic variations occurring between one variety plot and another.

The results of these tests should help you judge the merits of varieties in comparison with other private and public varieties. Because your soils and management may differ from those of the test location, you may wish to plant variety strips of the higher-performing varieties on your farm. The results printed in this section should help you decide which varieties to try.

TEST PROGRAM Selection of entries: Seed companies in Illinois and surrounding states were invited to enter soybean varieties, brands, or blends in the 2021 Illinois soybean performance trials. Entrants were required to enter all nonirrigated, 30-inch-row-width trials on a regional basis. To finance the test-

Soybeans await harvest in an Illinois field.

ing program, a fee of $93 per location was charged for each variety entered by the seed company.

Most of these varieties, brands, or blends are commercially available, but some experimental varieties were also entered.

Number and location of tests: In 2021, tests were conducted at 13 locations in the state. These sites represent the major soil and maturity zones of the state. Non-irrigated, 30-inch-row-width trials were conducted on a regional basis. The regions are as follows: Region 1: Fenton, Freeport and DeKalb Region 2: Monmouth, Goodfield and Dwight Region 3: Perry, New Berlin and Urbana Region 4: St. Peter and Belleville Region 5: Elkville and Harrisburg Field plot design: Entries of each test were replicated three times in a randomized complete block or alpha lattice design. The

30-inch-row trial plots consisted of four rows, each 21 feet long.

The center two rows of each plot were harvested to measure yield.

Fertility and weed control: All test locations were at a high level of fertility. Herbicides were used when necessary for weed control.

Weed control for all locations consisted of a pre-emergence foundation herbicide followed by conventional postemergence herbicide application. Plots were also weeded by hand if needed.

Method of planting and harvesting: Plots were planted in 30-inch-row spacing using a modified bean planter at 166,000 ppa. Harvesting was done with a small-plot combine. No allowances were made for soybeans that may have been lost as a result of combining or shattering.

PERFORMANCE DATA Yield: Soybean yield was measured in bushels (60 pounds) per acre at a moisture content of 13%. An electronic moisture

monitor was used on the combine for all moisture readings.

Maturity: Maturity was stated as the date when approximately 95 percent of the pods were ripe.

Lodging: The amount of lodging was rated at harvest time. The following scale was used: 0 — No Plants leaning or lodged 9 — Almost all plants leaning or down Height: Height was measured at harvest as the average length of plants from the ground to the tip of the main stem.

Shattering: The percentage of open pods was estimated at harvest time. The following scale was used: 0 — No shattering 9 — 100% of pods open Shattering was not significant at any location.

Soybean Test Results were prepared by D.K. Joos, Principal Research Specialist. Phone 217333-1194, email joos@illinois.edu.

Seed sources for 2021 soybean trials Agventure, Wehmeyer Seed, www.agventure.com Asgrow, Bayer Crop Science, www.aganytime.com Baird Seed, Baird Seed, www. baridseed.com Beck’s, Beck’s Hybrids, www. beckshybrids.com Burrus, Burrus Seed, www. burrusseed.com Channel, Channel Seed, www. channel.com Cornelius, Cornelius Seed, www.corneliusseed.com Dairyland, Dairyland Seed, www.dairylandseed.com DeRaedt, DeRaedt Seed Corp., 847-514-8844 DONMARIO, GDM Seeds, www.gdmseeds.com Dyna-Gro, Nutrien Ag Solutions, www.dynagroseed.com Genesis, Renk Seed, www. renkseed.com Golden Harvest, Golden Harvest, www.goldenharvestseeds. com Hoffman, Hoffman Seed Inc.,

www.hoffmanseed.com Lakeview Farms, Lakeview Farms, www.lakevieworganicgrain.com Martin, Martin Seeds, 765986-2030 Missouri, University of Missouri, 573-379-5431 Monier, Monier Seed & Service, www.monierseed.com NuTech Seed, NuTech Seed, LLC www.nutechseed.com P3, Cornelius Seed, www.corneliusseed.com Pioneer, Corteva, www.pioneer.com Public, Univ. Of Illinois, https://cropsciences.illinois.edu Renk, Renk Seed, www.renkseed.com Stone, Stone Seed Group, www.stoneseed.com Sun Prairie Seeds, Champaign Co. Seed. www.sunprairieseeds. com Viking Seed, Albert Lea Seed House, www.alseed.com Xitavo, BASF, www.BASF.com

8 Friday, December 3, 2021

| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | www.agrinews-pubs.com

Region 1 locations

Region 2 locations

Region 3 locations

Region 4 locations

Abbreviation key for soybean charts

Region 5 locations

Insecticide Seed Treatment U = Untreated F = Fungicide Fe = Fungicide + IIevo B = Fungicide + Insecticide Be = Fungicide + Insecticide +Ilevo Bs = Fungicide + Insecticide + Saltro 1

Herbicide Traits CV = no traits EN = 2,4-D, glufosinate and glyphosate LL = glufosinate RF = dicamba, glufosinate and glyphosate RX = dicamba, glyphosate ST = STS Lodging 0= none, 9= all 2

www.agrinews-pubs.com | UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | Friday, December 3, 2021

9

10 Friday, December 3, 2021

| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | www.agrinews-pubs.com

www.agrinews-pubs.com | UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | Friday, December 3, 2021

11

Managing fall Pand K fertilizer application strategies with. What are the risks of doing that?

Corn takes out about 0.37 of BLOOMINGTON, Ill. — High a pound P2O5 per bushel and fertilizer prices, supply shortabout 0.24 of K2O per bushel. ages and the weather converged Soybeans is 0.75 of a pound this fall as farmers turn their of P2O5 per bushels and 1.17 focus toward nutrient managepounds per bushels of K2O. ment plans for the 2022 crop.

These are all lower than the Emerson Nafziger, University values that we used for the last of Illinois professor emeritus, ex- decades. amined fall fertilizer application Using those figures, 200 strategies in a recent webinar bushels of corn removes 74 hosted by the Illinois Fertilizer pounds of P and 48 pounds of and Chemical Association.

K, and 65 bushels of soybeans Here are Nafziger’s comments remove 49 pounds of P and 76 on fall phosphorous and potaspounds of K. sium management.

I just pulled those numbers out as kind of typical numbers ON P AND K and if you put those numbers toThere a legitimate ways to do gether we get almost identical P phosphorous and potassium that and K removed over the previous we can postpone it, but my mestwo crops. sage is going to be at some point So, if you took 200-bushel corn we have put P and K back in the off in 2020 and 65 bushels of soysoil that we took it out of with beans off this year you would the recent crops. have removed 123 pounds of P Most of our Illinois soils in and 124 pounds of K over two have the ability to go a year, in years based on these numbers. some soils even more than that, ON DELAY OR NOT DELAY without fear of yield loss. But If the soil tests levels in mepostponing the decision or the expenditure to put P and K back dium to heavy-textured soils currently exceed 25 to 30 parts into the soil is the thing that per million of P and 150 to 175 we are all going to have to deal

By Tom C. Doran

AGRINEWS PUBLICATIONS

ppm of K, applying none for the 2022 crop carries little risk of yield loss.

One caution, based on what we have seen, root-restricted Nafziger conditions — no-till, dry soils — next season may result in K deficiency symptoms even if soil test levels are adequate.

P and K removed by crops will need to be replaced eventually, maybe not fully if soil tests levels are high, and future supplies and prices are uncertain. That additional P and K that’s there, if soil test levels are high, is almost certainly not contributing to higher yields, but it’s a bigger cushion.

ON PLACEMENT Subsurface, or deep-banding, application of P is being promoted by some. Some equipment companies are making applicators that do that. The main reason is we can get some movement on sloping soils off the soil surface.

Most research has now shown

a yield advantage to doing subsurface application. It does help decrease runoff of P and K on sloping soils. It also disturbs the soil and may increase soil erosion. It’s more costly and time-consuming than broadcast.

All considered, broadcasting P and K in the fall or spring is fast, inexpensive, and effective in most fields.

Planter-applied P and K help provide nutrients early, but this seldom boosts yield if soil test levels are adequate. Planter-applied, or liquid, forms are more expensive per pound of nutrient.

ON TIMING Fall broadcast application is usually OK, but the loss of P from slopes is possible if it rains a lot after application, nitrification of nitrogen from MAP/DAP is more likely with earlier application in the fall on warm soils and a loss is possible.

We do know from our research that if you put DAP on when the soils are cooled around the first of November we were able to find we got pretty much full value of that nitrogen comparing it to spring UAN. Spring broadcast applications

works well. More of the nitrogen from MAP/DAP is likely to remain for the crop. Runoff may be less likely, and unlikely if tilled after application. Logistics may be an issue, especially if the spring is wet.

Applying P and K after planting is complicated, particularly the phosphorous. If we have a pretty low soil test and we really need P and K to prevent yield loss for the crop that we just planted, it’s probably not particularly effective to put on the surface.

We can’t really guarantee with any certain that P and K are going to get down where they’re needed if soil test levels are low. If soil tests are pretty good it’ll probably work in enough.

Planter-applied P and K provide nutrients to plants early, but seldom boost yields if soil test levels are adequate, and planter-applied, or liquid, forms are more expensive per pound of nutrient.

Tom C. Doran can be reached at 815-410-2256 or tdoran@ shawmedia.com. Follow him on Twitter at: @AgNews_Doran.

12 Friday, December 3, 2021

| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS CORN & SOYBEAN TRIALS | www.agrinews-pubs.com

Illinois Regenerative Agriculture Initiative awards first grants

By Tom C. Doran

AGRINEWS PUBLICATIONS

URBANA, Ill. — The Illinois Regenerative Agriculture Initiative at the University of Illinois has unveiled the initial teams to receive up to $50,000 in seed funding for their projects.

Funding with grant support from Chicago-based Fresh Taste was awarded for the following studies: • U.S. Chestnut Cultivar Exploration — Integrated Bioprocessing and Quantity, led

by Food Science and Human Nutrition Professor Keith Cadwallader; Savanna Institute Tree Crop Commercialization Program Manager William Davison; Integrated Bioprocessing Research Laboratory Pilot Plant Operations Assistant Manager Brian Jacobson; and IBRL Assistant Director of Business Development Bethany

Conerty.

• Prototyping an Autonomous Robotic Harvester for Enabling Large-Scale Chestnuts Farming in the United States, led by EarthSense Inc. Co-founder and CEO Chinmay Soman; Davison; and Agricultural and Biological Engineering and Computer Science Associate Professor Girish Chowdhary.

• Regenerative Agriculture and the Human Health Nexus in the Age of Climate Change, led by Basil’s Harvest Executive Director and Chef/Registered Dietitian Erin Meyer; Gastroenterologist and Associate Professor of Medicine Dave Ramkumar; Internist and Associate Professor of Medicine Japhia Ramkumar; Basil’s Harvest Agroecology Solutions and Soil Microbiologist Carl Rosier; Illinois Water Resources Center Director Yu-Feng Forrest Lin; and FSHN Associate Professor

Pratik Banerjee.

“Two of those projects are related to a new potential crop in the Midwest — chestnuts — part of an agroforestry approach to diversifying corn and soybean systems,” Emily Heaton, IRAI director, said in an Illinois Nutrient Loss Reduction podcast.

“That’s also amenable to diversified cropping systems beyond corn and soybeans, including corn and soybean, and also including animal agriculture. So, you can do a lot of different things with agroforestry set-ups.

“We have one that’s based on small grains and the way we farm them and what it means for our health. That one is conducted in part with faculty and staff from the university’s College of Medicine, as well as with local stakeholders.

“Broadly, I would say the

portfolio in this first year pushes scientific boundaries.

We have questions around robotics, around plant genetics, around micro-biomes. But it also really starts to create stakeholder/university partnerships that are small right now, but growing and have space to grow and have resources to grow, and we expect them to leverage into new projects in the future.”

IRAI plans a second call for proposals in spring 2022.

“We are hoping for even more engagement and opportunities as we fill the regenerative agriculture ‘Big Tent’ with folks from many disciplines,” said Anya Knecht, IRAI assistant director of operations.

“The funding for the Regenerative Ag Initiative at this time comes primarily from Fresh Taste, which is an orga-

nization based in Chicago, but represents foundations from around the state and the region who want to see the same kind of improved outcomes,” Heaton noted.

“They recognized that one of the best resources the University of Illinois has to work with is of course our students and our faculty and staff. That’s the resource that makes it special.

So, we thought about what we could do to harness and leverage that resource and we came up with seed grants that we make available on an annual basis to any faculty or staff from the university who partner with a local stakeholder to do something related to regenerative ag that has an impact.”

Tom C. Doran can be reached at 815-410-2256 or tdoran@ shawmedia.com. Follow him on Twitter at: @AgNews_Doran.

Baird Seed Co. and Illini Brand Soybeans

are our Non-GMO soybean seed source.

We Now Have High Protein, Clear Hilum Soybeans.

Bart Morgan • Marshall, IL Dealer/Grower SM-LA1934357

Get to know Baird, the unparalleled leader in Non-GMO soybean seed.

Jared Greuel, CCA • Mattoon, IL Dealer/Grower

309-639-2249 • www.bairdseedcompany.com • Facebook: Baird Seed Company