Christmas trees
Field crops
Fruit
Home and yard
Nursery and landscape
Turfgrass
Vegetable
Diagnostic Services
Soil/Plant Nutrient Lab
Enviro-weather
Regional IPM Center
Pesticide safety
Organic: New Ag Network
Invasive species
Sustainable ag & food systems
MSU ANR departments
MSU Extension
Site index
Contacts/permissions
| Field Crop Advisory Team Alert newsletter | |
 |
|
| Vol. 23, No. 2, April 3, 2008 |
|
| In this issue Insects to watch in 2008 - Part I - Winter cutworm New soybean aphid research update features MSU host plant resistance work Improving weed control in no-till Roundup Ready soybean Mark your calendars: MSU Weed Tour and Crop Diagnostic Day dates are set Weed control challenges for sugar beets in 2008 Roundup Ready alfalfa update Adapting to the new corn nitrogen recommendations Fungicides for wheat diseases in 2008: Balancing risk and return Threat of ice sheeting to winter wheat Commodity market situation Department of Homeland Security plans I-9 audits in 2008 Regional reports Weather Next issue April 17 |
|
|
|
| Insects to watch in 2008 - Part I - Winter cutworm Last season was exciting (for an entomologist) because of the discovery of three new potential field crop insect pests in Michigan. This week, I will cover one of these pests, winter cutworm. In the future spring issues, I will discuss the remaining new potential pests, Asiatic garden beetle and western bean cutworm, and talk about some of the other insects that could be found in high numbers in 2008. Last fall, northern Michigan experienced an outbreak of Noctua pronuba, the greater yellow underwing moth. Noctua pronuba caterpillars (Howard Russell from MSU Diagnostic Services calls them “winter cutworms”) remain active well into the fall. In 2007, they fed on alfalfa, winter wheat, and lawns, moved en-masse across roads and into homes, and sickened pets. These caterpillars made it through the winter and may feed again this spring. |
|
| Noctua pronuba is one of the most common Noctuid moths in Europe, where it is a frequent garden pest. It is related to the pest cutworms we find in field crops. The first N. pronuba moths in North America were found in Nova Scotia in 1979. How it got into North America, we don’t know. But adults are strong night fliers and the larval (caterpillar) host range is broad, including strawberry, tomato, potato, carrot, cabbage, beet, lettuce, grape and grasses. Thus this insect spread rapidly across Canada, into the eastern United States. In Michigan, the first adult moths were collected in 1998. Moths are now common around lights in the evening between June and October. Literature says there is one generation per year, although based on the extended adult flight, the single generation is not well-synchronized or perhaps there are two generations. Although N. pronuba moths are somewhat common, a N. pronuba larval outbreak was not something we anticipated in 2007. Prior to that time, homeowners typically reported caterpillars to the MSU Diagnostic Clinic or MSU Extension offices as a curiosity. This is because of N. pronuba’s unusual ability to remain active under very cold conditions, even crawling on the snow in winter (thus Howard’s name “winter cutworm”). In early October 2007, Norm Myers, an MSU Extension county director from Oceana County, sent in the first email about large numbers of caterpillars to MSU Diagnostic Services. After that, things got crazy. In October and November 2007, commercial fields of alfalfa, winter wheat and rye cover crop were heavily damaged in northern Michigan counties of Alpena, Lake, Oceana, Osceola, and Wexford. As far as we know, this was the first reported economic injury to field crops by this cutworm in North America. Caterpillars moved as a wave between fields, leaving a path of destruction as they crawled. In mid-October, Jerry Lindquist, Osceola County MSUE, reported massive numbers of caterpillars in fields: “The farmer noticed them after he picked up some recently cut third cutting round-baled hay and saw the larvae dropping out of the bales… Once the field was cut he noticed them moving in mass across the road and he said the tractor tires were actually starting to spin because of the slippery larvae covered pavement.” In November, a grower from Posen clocked the cutworms at eight inches per minute crossing his road. Some alfalfa and small grain fields were treated, using armyworm thresholds as a guide. Caterpillars also consumed lawns and crawled around homes in large numbers. On October 23, a distraught homeowner emailed Howard: “… my home, garage and pole barn are being invaded by caterpillars. They are in the grass by the thousands. I feel like I'm in a "B" movie.” Things took a strange turn when reports of sick pets came in the following month. On November 12, Mary Dunckel, MSUE Alpena County, reported “I was in the veterinarian's office Friday and while at the counter paying, a woman came running in with a bag. She was completely frantic, as her dog had just vomited up the contents of the bag. Yup, you guessed it.... 40-50 Noctua pronuba!” Mary’s observations were confirmed by a few days later by Jerry Lindquist: “A black lab in the Midland area was vomiting blood, went off of feed, and after a week was passing whole cutworms in her stool. The veterinarian diagnosed it as a potential parasite problem, sent a stool sample to Cornell's Parasite Diagnostic Lab and they identified it as armyworm. The dog owner called me after a TV news spot on cutworms and I am quite sure cutworms are what the dog ate.” Reports of cutworm infestation and feeding continued into December. Even in January and February, caterpillars emerged on warm days on the snow. Will this outbreak carry over into this spring? We aren’t sure. Thus far, Howard and I have not received calls about waves of caterpillars marching across fields, but it’s still early. As the temperature warms and alfalfa, wheat and lawns green up, I expect to see increased activity in northern Michigan. The caterpillars themselves will be obvious on warm days, since they are 1-3 inches in length and active. On cooler days, they may hide at the base of plants. Signs of early feeding may appear as fields not greening up as expected. As far as management, since this is the first widespread report of economic crop damage in the United States due to winter cutworm, there aren’t thresholds or guidelines specifically for this insect. However, this insect acts like armyworm, so a good bet is to use armyworm thresholds as a guide: alfalfa = 4 or more per foot of row; winter wheat and hay = 4 or more per sq. foot. Last fall, caterpillars were reported crawling on warm afternoons and also coming out on warm evening. Thus treating in mid-afternoon on a warm day would increase the chance that caterpillars will crawl across freshly-treated foliage. Growers and homeowners sprayed with various pyrethroids as well as Sevin last fall, and reported good control with all products. Based on what we know about the life cycle, I am making an educated guess that caterpillars will pupate in early May, so that corn and soybean planted in northern counties will not be at risk of damage. However, observations on caterpillar numbers, movement and damage are welcome to myself or Howard to increase our understanding of this insect. Chris DiFonzo: difonzo@msu.edu Howard Russell: bugman@msu.edu Howard and I wish to thank MSU Extension educators Ben Bartlett, Jim Breinling, Mary Dunckel, Duke Elsner, Jerry Lindquist, Norm Myers, Jill O’Donnel and Sheri Pollington who kept track of winter cutworm last fall and sent us such entertaining reading material. Here are some additional resources on winter cutworm and caterpillar identification Winter cutworm, Noctua pronuba: First report of economic damage in Michigan. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| New soybean aphid research update features MSU host plant resistance work The North Central Soybean Research Program (NCSRP) recently produced a new Soybean Aphid Research Update. The update was created based on interviews with soybean entomologists and plant breeders from across the Midwest and highlights NCSRP-funded projects on aphid suction trapping, biocontrol and host plant resistance. Dr. Dechun Wang’s work on aphid resistant soybean is featured prominently in the update. Hard copes of the bulletin were provided as an insert in the latest Corn & Soybean Digest. On-line, you can find it at: http://www.planthealth.info/pdf_docs/sba_update08.pdf |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
Improving weed control in no-till Roundup Ready soybean
Residual herbicides can improve early-season and postemergence weed control Though postemergence application timings for glyphosate are generally flexible in terms of weed height, making the application when weeds are an appropriate size remains a major factor for ensuring satisfactory control. Beyond starting the growing season with a clean field, including a herbicide with residual activity with your burndown application will reduce in-season weed growth and extend early-season weed control. Residual herbicides can improve control and reduce the growth of problematic weeds, such as horseweed (marestail), common ragweed, giant ragweed and common lambsquarters. As a result of reduced weed growth, the time needed between a burndown herbicide application and a postemergence glyphosate treatment may be extended. This is especially important when weather conditions may prevent timely postemergence applications. There are several different residual herbicides that can be included with a burndown application. For a complete listing of soybean herbicides with residual weed control, consult Table 2F in the MSU Extension publication E-0434 “Weed Control Guide for Field Crops.” Residual herbicides can pay for themselves There is no added application expense when a residual herbicide is included in a burndown herbicide application. Depending on market prices, weed pressure and herbicide cost the extra expense of adding a residual herbicide to a burndown application may pay for itself with as little as a 1 bushel per acre increase in yield. In fact, the economic returns from the addition of any of six different residual herbicides that we examined over two years at three locations were not different from a burndown application of glyphosate + 2,4-D ester alone. This was true regardless of soybean commodity prices from $5 to $15 per bushel. When choosing residual herbicides, the decision should be based on the types of weeds that are in the field and weed pressures to maximize economic return. A pro-active approach to glyphosate-resistant weeds One of the most important benefits of including a residual herbicide in a weed control program is the opportunity to use herbicides with additional modes of action besides glyphosate. While glyphosate continues to provide excellent control of most weeds, the spread of glyphosate-resistant weeds throughout Michigan and the Midwest is becoming an increasing concern. In 2007, the first population of glyphosate-resistant horseweed in Michigan was confirmed in Mason County. As glyphosate-resistant weeds become more widespread, use of residual herbicides will give growers another option for weed control in no-till soybean production to improve the stewardship of glyphosate and glyphosate-resistant cropping systems. 1 2,4-D ester at 1 pt/A must be applied at least seven days prior to planting soybean. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Mark your calendars: MSU Weed Tour and Crop Diagnostic Day dates are set Before you schedule your vacation this summer make sure to get these two dates on your calendar. The 2008 MSU Weed Tour will be held on Wednesday, July 2 and the sixth annual MSU Crop Diagnostic School will be held on Friday, July 18. These field days offer you the latest information in weed management and other crop protection and crop management strategies. Stay tuned to future CAT Alerts for details and registration forms for each of these events. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
Weed control challenges for sugar beets in 2008
Current recommendations in Roundup Ready sugar beets
|
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Roundup Ready alfalfa update As most of you know, in late 2006 the Center for Food Safety and others filed a suit against the USDA claiming deficiencies in the environmental assessment process used by USDA/APHIS for deregulating Roundup Ready alfalfa. This lead to a ruling that the USDA environmental assessment should have included a “hard look” at the potential impact of Roundup Ready alfalfa on the development of glyphosate resistant weeds and on the economic environment, including potential economic impact on organic alfalfa producers. The ruling required USDA/APHIS to conduct an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and stopped any new sale or planting of Roundup Ready alfalfa after April 1, 2007, pending the completion of the EIS and a new deregulation decision by the agency. The food/feed safety of Roundup Ready Alfalfa was not questioned by the judge and the continued harvest of existing Roundup Ready alfalfa hay and seed has been allowed. Following the issuance of the permanent injunction and a July 12, 2008, USDA/APHIS administrative order, the National Alfalfa & Forage Alliance (NAFA) submitted a Petition for Reconsideration to APHIS to request additional options and greater flexibility in its interpretation of the Court’s requirement for the handling of Roundup Ready alfalfa. This lead to an USDA/APHIS issued supplemental Administrative Order on Roundup Ready Alfalfa on December 18, 2007, that enabled labeling by lot, rather than by bale. USDA/APHIS stewardship requirements for harvest, labeling and movement of Roundup Ready alfalfa hay and seed can be found at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/alfalfa.shtml. During their preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), USDA/APHIS solicited feedback from alfalfa producers with a 30-day public comment period on the Notice of Intent to conduct an EIS announced January 7, 2007. The notice identifies potential issues and alternatives that will be studied in the EIS. The public comment period is up and the agency will be considering all comments received before the deadline of February 6, 2008. Please click here to view public comments and to view supporting and related materials available electronically. Roundup Ready alfalfa cannot be planted until APHIS completes the EIS, which is projected to be in 18-24 months, or mid-late 2009. Additionally, Roundup Ready alfalfa seed cannot be purchased or sold until the EIS is completed, and any planting under permit will be limited to support pending research and development needs necessary prior to any anticipated re-launch. According to www.roundupreadyalfalfa.com, if APHIS deregulates Roundup Ready alfalfa, seed will be available for Roundup Ready alfalfa varieties sold prior to the injunction.
|
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Adapting to the new corn nitrogen recommendations The change from recommending nitrogen (N) based on expected yield to recommending N based on economic return is quite significant. To adapt to this change will take time and some on-farm N rate evaluation by farmers to become comfortable with these new recommendations. In making this change, farmers may want to use the higher recommended amount in the “Maximum Return to N (MRTN)” range in Table 1. For example, if the five-year running average year is 170 bushels per acre, the previous crop was corn and the N:corn price ratio is near 0.10 ($0.50/ lb N and $5.00/ bu corn), then the recommended N rate is 150 lbs N/acre. The upper range value is 165 lb N/acre. If soybean is the previous crop, the upper range value is 130 lb N/acre.
To determine the MRTN rate from Table 1, you need to know: 1) the productive capacity of the soil, 2) the previous crop, and 3) the N:corn price ratio. The N:corn price ratio is the cost of N ($/lb) divided by the expected corn selling price ($/bu). For example, if the price of N is $0.50/lb ($820/ton anhydrous ammonia) and corn is $5.00/bu the N:corn price ratio is 0.10 (0.50/5). If the price of N is $0.65/lb ($600/ton urea) and corn is $5.00/bu, then the N:corn price ratio is 0.13 (0.65/5). If the previous crop is something other than corn or soybean, use the recommendations associated with soybeans. Any crop other than corn as the previous crop will usually result in some N benefit similar to soybean. When the previous crop is alfalfa or clover, then some additional N credit can be taken based on percent stand. For established alfalfa the additional N credit will be approximately equal to percent stand. For clovers, the additional N credit will be about 0.5 x percent stand. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Fungicides for wheat diseases in 2008: Balancing risk and return The difference between what will potentially be paid for food grade wheat versus wheat that can only be used for feed is much higher this year than in past years, prompting growers to look at ways that they can maximize both quality and yield, including the use of fungicides.Wheat growers need to pay particular attention to grain quality this year.Because of strong grain prices, grain grading will likely be stricter and discount schedules are likely to be much more severe. Higher discounts could potentially preclude growers receiving top dollar for their grain and the intensified scrutiny in grading may threaten a grower's ability to meet the standards stated in his forward contract. Additionally, growers who contracted wheat at a lower price than the current market are having some concerns about how to produce enough food grade wheat to fill contracts without having to invest more money than necessary. Higher yields would be welcome to offset lower prices received for the portion of wheat that was contracted. It becomes tempting to look at fungicides as a magic bullet to accomplish these aims, but it’s important to remember that fungicides can only protect the yield potential that is there, and that there will be much more of a yield and quality response if disease is present. Data collected from 10 years of university-based Uniform Fungicide Trials were analyzed to rate the overall and relative efficacy of several triazole-based fungicides against FHB and DON2. Based on percent control, all fungicides led to a reduction in FHB and DON relative to the untreated check. The study can be found in the proceedings of the 2007 National Fusarium Head Blight Forum: http://www.scabusa.org/pdfs/forum07_proc_mgmt.pdf In the analysis, the most effective product currently registered in Michigan (prothioconazole, Proline) provided an average 42 percent reduction in DON levels and an average 48 percent reduction in FHB index across both spring and winter wheat. Winter wheat showed a lower response in reduction of FHB field symptoms and reduction of DON than spring wheat. Whether a fungicide application is economical depends on several factors. At the national U.S. Wheat and Barley Scab Initiative (USWBSI) meeting I attended last fall, one of the featured speakers, economist Felicia Wu (University of Pittsburgh), put it in perspective1. The points she made addressed head scab, but many of her points also apply to the economics of using fungicides to control foliar diseases. Comments in italics are my own. Some of her points are listed here. Fungicides can result in an inadequate return to growers:
Applying a fungicide in a “scab year” is cost effective:
In the next edition of the Field CAT Alert, we will look at partial budgets for fungicide use in wheat to control head scab and progress made on models for predicting scab and DON levels.
|
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Threat of ice sheeting to winter wheat Throughout much of the state, there has been concern over the layer of ice (ice sheeting) that blanketed some of this year’s wheat crop, particularly during early March. Ice sheeting can threaten wheat’s survival by limiting oxygen and, therefore, limiting respiration. It causes the build up of potentially toxic levels of carbon dioxide, ethylene and methanol. Flooding also limits oxygen, so the adverse affect of flooding and ice sheeting can be cumulative. Despite the significant threat, the resiliency of wheat is often underestimated. This year’s crop probably can survive a few weeks under ice as most fields of wheat went into the winter in good condition. In addition, the crop had the advantage of being in a deep dormancy during early March. Another factor that can provide relief is old crop residue that interrupts the ice sheet. Also, any fractures or porosity within the ice may allow sufficient gas exchange. For this reason, attempts to mechanically break up the ice sheets can sometimes be helpful. As with other causes of winter injury, there is no easy way to accurately predict the extent of crop damage. However, it is possible to gain an indication by collecting whole plant samples from suspected damaged areas. After being indoors for several days, healthy plants should exhibit signs of new shoot and root growth emanating from the crown. By the time this newsletter is published, green-up of wheat will presumably be underway and evidence of winterkill may begin to become apparent. However, a full and reasonably accurate assessment is usually not possible until there is significant new spring growth. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Commodity market situation 2008 has already shown significant volatility in the commodity markets. A fallout of this market has been the hesitance or inability of grain merchandisers to continue to forward contract grains. Rapidly advancing markets in January and February have forced many grain purchasers to continually shell out large sums of dollars to meet margin demands on their brokerage accounts servicing forward contracted grains at the CBOT. This means that many producers who want to lock in grain prices will have to work with brokerage firms directly. This may be out of the comfort zone for many producers. Hedging is the purchase or sale of a futures contract as a temporary substitute for a cash market transaction to be made at a later date. Usually it involves opposite positions in the cash grain market and futures market at the same time. The cash market position refers to the farm’s commitment to deliver grain to the market during the contract month. As long as producers are working with a true hedge situation, producing a crop to offset their position in the futures market, the cost of marketing their grain this way should be limited to brokerage fees and potentially the interest cost of borrowing money to maintain the required balance of margin money on their accounts. On a corn contract, you can expect to have $2,000 on deposit when you open an account. The standard grain futures contract is for 5,000 bushels. Mini-sized contracts that cover 1,000 bushels are available for smaller producers. Keep in mind that it may cost nearly as much in brokerage fees to work with mini-contracts as it does to work with the traditional contract. Margin calls are sometimes hard to understand for producers not involved in the futures market. The margin refers to the amount of “earnest money” that is required to be on deposit for the trading account. This is usually 10 percent of the value of the contract. With the price of commodities rapidly increasing, producers or elevators that hedged or positioned themselves with sold futures contracts at well below the current market value must post enough money in their accounts to meet the increase in value, or the exchange will be obligated to close your position and require payment in full for the contract. Margin accounts must maintain the correct balance at the end of each trading session, so having adequate money at the brokerage to service this requirement is of the utmost importance. This may mean that producers may have to obtain a line of credit to service these requirements in order to hedge their crop. In order to use the futures market to provide a true hedge, you have to be able to produce the amount of grain that is contracted in the futures market. The value of the grain, (board price plus basis [usually negative] at your deliver point) is the offset to futures position. The same kind of production risk that you would have with a forward contract will be in place with your futures contract. This tool can be used to lock in the futures position for a portion of the crop, but should not be used to market all of your expected production. In addition, the basis portion of the crop price is still at risk because you do not know for sure what basis will be at the time of delivery. Some elevators will allow you to lock in the basis. With the sold future position and a locked in basis, you have the same net result as a forward contract except that you need to have the cash available to handle the margin account. You may end up having income or expenses from your margin account. Limiting sales to 40-50 percent of your average crop can help make sure that you can meet your financial obligations. Crop insurance or irrigation can help mitigate some of these risks. Southwest region farm management educator Roger Betz reminds us that the key ingredient in making good marketing decisions is to have an understanding of your needed revenues per acre to meet cash flow demands and to maintain financial net worth. At today’s prices, most producers can meet the economic cost of production. However, it is important to recognize that cost of production, cash flow and maintaining net worth are three very different values. With knowledge and understanding of these values for your farm, good marketing decisions can be made in this volatile pricing situation. Hedging with a futures contract is not the only tool available for helping to price grains. MSU southeast regional farm management educator Dennis Stein suggests some producers may want to consider the use of a PUT option. By using a PUT option to insure a minimum price, you can set a floor price for a given number of bushels of grain. An option is a contract between two parties that conveys to the buyer the right, but not the obligation, to buy (in the case of a call) or sell (in the case of a PUT) a specific commodity at a specific price within a specific time period for a premium. The premium, which is the cost, is made up of a combination of the market’s price movement risk and a time value. When you buy a PUT option, you pay the premium (like car insurance) with every hope that you will never need to collect on the policy, in this case, that the price of the grain stays above the PUT options strike price. The premium cost is a fixed amount that you invest to have your position in the market and to cover the price risk. If you have not used this marketing tool in the past now may be the time to learn more about this market risk management tool. As a rule of thumb, options are best used in times where you are not able to determine the direction that the commodity market is taking and wish to protect against a major negative move in the market. Options tend to be a poor choice if prices do not change much. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Department of Homeland Security plans I-9 audits in 2008 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has posted a revised I-9 form on its website for employers to use with new employees (http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/I-9.pdf). To order forms, call toll-free at 1-800-870-3676. For forms and information on immigration laws, regulations and procedures, call the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-375-5283. In 2008, industries targeted for random audits are agriculture, restaurants, and janitorial/cleaning services. Ways to be included on the audit list include having been complained about on the national hotline, having been referred by another auditing agency, such as the Department of Labor (DOL), or having been audited before by Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Audits can take a number of different forms and be done by mail or in person. For a mail audit, employers will need to send in their I-9 forms to the ICE office. Certified mail and return receipt requests are the recommended way to mail original I-9 forms. Employers should also make copies of the original I-9 forms to keep on file for the duration of the audit. During the audit, each employee for whom an I-9 form is submitted will be subjected to a full background check and each form is carefully evaluated. Civil monetary penalties are $375 to $3,200 for the first violation; $3,200 to $11,000 for the second violation; and $4,300 to $16,000 for subsequent violations on a per-alien basis. Fraudulent I-9 forms constitute a felony and are likely to be prosecuted. When the need arises to correct an I-9 form, employers should use a single line strikethrough, initial it, if necessary attach an explanation, and also attach an additional I-9 form with the correct data. White-out and similar alterations to I-9 forms are strongly discouraged. Different from a random audit, the typical worksite enforcement targets specific individuals, e.g., fugitives or criminal aliens, or looks for evidence in a crime, and is based on prior information. A common reason for worksite enforcement in Michigan is identity theft. Providing access to the individual in question is likely to be less disruptive than a search of the farm premises. If ICE officers take I-9 forms during a search, the employer should make copies and request the officer to certify the copies. If the original I-9 forms are evidence in a crime, they will not be returned to the employer. When the Immigration Reform and Control Act was created in 1986 a concern for resulting unfair employment practices led to founding the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) as part of the U.S. Department of Justice. In a 1990 report, widespread employment discrimination against citizens and legal workers, against persons who appear foreign, and against persons with a foreign accent were indeed found. With increased enforcement, an increase in discriminatory practices is expected. The OSC operates a hotline for employers, which may be contacted, even anonymously, at 1-800-255-8155. This article serves educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For more information go to www.msu.edu/user/bitsch, under “News” click on “Department of Homeland Security Plans I-9 Audits 2008” or click on “Agricultural Labor Issues in Michigan” for a list of available newsletters. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Regional reports 1 – Southeast Weather We have finally had some spring-like temperatures. We have had record snowfall amounts this winter and also above normal rainfall amounts. It will take several days of nice, sunny days to dry things out for general field work, though the forecast seems to call for rain just about every other day. Ten years ago, we were planting corn and soybeans on March 31. Soil temperatures have not yet reached 40 degrees, though the forecast of warmer days ahead should see soil temperature rise. Crop reports Alfalfa has just started greening up. There was a lot of heaving this winter here and on the roads. Corn acreage is expected to be down in this area partly because of the high fertilizer and seed prices. Some farmers contracted fertilizer last year and some dealers are not quoting prices at this time because of uncertain supplies. Those with on-farm fertilizer storage have a real advantage. Soybeans are still in the bag and acreage should be higher this year. We are not forecast to have soybean aphid problems this summer. Oat and barley interest is up slightly. Wheat is just greening up and there are scattered fields in which top dressing nitrogen has been applied. Most fields went into winter with very good stands. There are many fields where water has been ponding, so there may be some fields torn up and put into corn or soybeans. The Nabisco Flour Mill in Toledo wants farmers to raise more soft white wheat than red, so this will be a major shift. Miscellaneous Farmers have had early spring weather for the past several years in which to get started planting. This year both the Tigers and the farmers here are off to a much slower start. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| 2 – Southwest
Weather Late season snowfall (some totals over 13 inches) over Easter weekend, March 21-23 and late last week has kept fieldwork on hold in most of the southwest region. A quick look at soil temperatures at the Mendon MAWN Station this morning show that they ranged from 41ºF (on April 1) down to 32 ºF (pre-dawn on April 2). If there is a silver lining to these cold temperatures it may be that winter annual weed growth has been remarkably low at this point. Soil moisture and surface water resource levels look very good this spring, so we should be starting out the season with very favorable subsoil moisture reserves throughout the southwest region. Crop report Wheat is greening up despite the late start and recent cold weather. The plants, although not quite as green as we might normally see, are looking healthy with good evidence of tiller development. Alfalfa fields, although they look brown, are beginning to break dormancy in the Centreville area. We should begin to see greening up of many alfalfa fields with the expected mild conditions over the upcoming weekend. For those producers who were planning on applying a dormant weed control treatment to alfalfa, I would encourage you to look carefully at the plants’ crowns before applying these herbicides. Asiatic garden beetles in commercial corn Asiatic garden beetles, a new invasive species pest discovered causing damage to corn in Southwest Michigan and Northern Indiana last summer, continues to be a concern in St. Joseph County. The pest, which is similar in life cycle and damage potential to that of Japanese beetles, caused significant damage on commercial corn fields in the central part of the county in 2007. Stand losses ranging from 20-60 percent were found in several fields last year. The damaging life stage of this pest to corn is the larvae, which are a white grub. We suggest that producers in St. Joseph, eastern Cass, southern Kalamazoo and western Branch counties be on the lookout for white grubs in their fields during tillage and preparation for planting. Producers in these areas should consider using a soil-applied insecticide to protect their commercial corn if high numbers of white grubs are observed. There is no rescue treatment for white grubs, so detection or preventative treatments are important. MSUE will be conducting research on the efficacy of soil-applied insecticides and seed insecticide treatments for controlling this pest in research trials in St. Joseph County this summer funded by Project GREEEN. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| 3 – West Central
Welcome to spring? Very minimal activity so far this spring. Wheat is still dormant as is alfalfa. Soil temperatures are rising but are still averaging 40ºF or less. The 1.5 to 2 inches of rain we have received this week has kept field work nearly impossible. Everybody is waiting on drier soils and a little warm-up before charging ahead. Crop acreage and mix is still being debated, increased costs of everything has farmers concerned. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| 4 – Central Weather The region received over an inch of rain early in the week. The rain and warmer weather has melted all the snow left in fields and woodlots. We have been fortunate that the large amounts of snow that fell this winter melted slowly. Due to the limited amounts of frost in fields most water soaked in to replenish groundwater supplies. The cold overnight temperatures over the last few weeks have allowed nitrogen applications to wheat fields. Commodity report At this point in the growing season, almost everything is still dormant. It appears that the winter wheat has come through winter in good shape. Some fields are just starting to green up. We will be scouting fields as the weather warms up for any potential problems. Current activities include getting equipment ready for spring planting. Now would be a good time to get the sprayer out and give it a tune up. This is an often neglected piece of equipment that if not properly calibrated and tuned up can cost farmers huge amounts of money. Losses can occur because of poor pest control and over application of pesticides. Input costs are high. Having planters, drills, fertilizer spreaders and sprayers properly set will insure precision planting and applications. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
||||||||
| Weather news An upper air troughing pattern across the central and eastern United States has been persistent for much of the past winter, leading to a very active storm track from the southern Great Plains through the Ohio Valley and to a very long and snowy winter season in Michigan. Forecast guidance for the upcoming week suggests that we will experience more of this pattern, but with some moderation of temperatures to near or even slightly above normal levels. In the short term, an area of low pressure is forecast to move across the Ohio Valley late Thursday, April 3, into early Friday, bringing the likelihood of rainfall to southern sections of the Lower Peninsula. Precipitation amounts will generally fall in the 0.10-0.25 inch range south of I-96, with little or no precipitation expected north of that line. A slow-moving cold frontal boundary will approach the state by early Saturday, bringing a chance for rain or snow to mainly western sections of Upper Michigan persisting into Sunday. The remainder of the state should remain dry through Sunday afternoon. The frontal boundary will move through the Lower Peninsula Monday, bringing the chance for rainfall to most areas of the state. Drier weather is expected Tuesday and Wednesday of next week, followed by another weather system and more precipitation by late in the work week. Temperatures will moderate to near to slightly above normal levels during the next few days, with highs ranging from the low 40's far north to the upper 50's south and lows generally falling into the mid-to-upper 20's north to the low-or-mid 30'south. Current medium‑range forecast guidance suggests more mid-continent troughing for the first two weeks of April, with a continued active storm track through the Midwest. The official NOAA 6-10 day and 8-14 day outlooks covering April 8-12 and 10-18 call for above normal precipitation totals. Mean temperatures during the 6-10 day period are forecast to range from near normal in the Upper Peninsula to above normal across the Lower Peninsula. Temperatures are expected to fall back to below average levels state- and region-wide during the 8-14 day period. As of the first week of April, seasonal growing degree day totals (since March 1) are lagging at least one calendar week behind the climatological normals, which is not a surprise given the recent cooler than normal weather pattern. Long lead outlooks Forecast guidance for the next few weeks suggests more of the same upper air pattern across the Midwest, which would lead to normal to below normal mean temperatures and normal to above normal precipitation totals in Michigan. With the stronger sun of the season, the majority of any precipitation that occurs will likely be the form of rain. An active storm track across the Midwest would also suggest the potential for severe weather outbreaks, most of which will remain in areas to our south, but could reach into southern portion of the Great Lakes region. In the longer term, outlooks are largely dependent on the longevity of a La Nina event currently in place across the equatorial Pacific region. For the April through June period, mean temperatures and precipitation totals in Michigan are forecast to remain in the “climatology scenario” with near equal odds of below, near and above normal values. However, milder and drier than normal conditions are forecast across much of the central United States for the upcoming summer months including portions of Michigan. This outlook is associated with expectations that the current La Nina event will persist into the summer season, as La Nina events are statistically linked to drier than normal conditions in the Midwestern United States. On the other hand, drought was a serious problem across many sections of Michigan during the 2007 growing season, and back to back growing season droughts in Michigan are very rare. At the least, the 2008 growing season will begin with a rooting zone at near field capacity in terms of soil moisture, which reduces the risk of running out of moisture later in the season. |
||||||||
| Back to top |
