2015
Effective soybean disease management with fungicides, nematicides and soybean disease education for South Dakota
Home
Contributor/Checkoff:
South Dakota Soybean Research and Promotion Council
Category:
Sustainable Production
Keywords:
Crop protectionDiseaseField management
Parent Project:
Effective soybean disease management practices and soybean disease education for South Dakota
Lead Principal Investigator:
Emmanuel Byamukama, South Dakota State University
Co-Principal Investigators:
Robert Fanning, South Dakota State University
Kay Ruden, South Dakota State University
Connie Strunk, South Dakota State University
+2 More
Project Code:
Contributing Organization (Checkoff):
South Dakota Soybean Research and Promotion Council
(n/a)
Institution Funded:
South Dakota State University
(n/a)
Brief Project Summary:

Plant protection products are a major component of soybean disease management. Because new products are on the market annually, growers need to have unbiased research-based information on the product effectiveness. The goal of this project is to implement research and outreach activities that will assist soybean growers to manage diseases in an effective, sustainable, and profitable manner. Researchers will test new and upcoming foliar fungicides, seed fungicide, and nematicides for their efficacy; update crop protection guides and publish information on new products in all available formats; develop and deliver an educational program on soybean disease detection, identification, and management.

Key Benefactors:
farmers, agronomists, extension specialists, ag retailers

Information And Results
Project Deliverables

Final Project Results

Update:

View uploaded report PDF file

The most common fungal disease observed at all sites was brown spot. Downy mildew, white mold, and Cercospora blight were observed at very low incidence. Due to low disease pressure, all fungicides had no significant difference for grain yield between treated and non-treated plots at all locations (Tables 1&2). Lack of statistical difference indicates that the difference between treated and non-treated was not consistent among the four replications and was due to random chance. Based on these data, it was not profitable to apply foliar fungicides to soybean, i.e. there was not consistent yield gain as a result of fungicide application to offset the fungicide and application cost. Nematicide seed treatments Initial SCN population density was comparable within all plots at both Beresford and Hurley locations. Final SCN population at the end of the season was, however, higher at the Hurley location than at the Beresford location. Nematicide seed treatments had no significant effect on yield for both the susceptible and resistant cultivars at the two locations (Tables 3&4). This was in comparison to the standard non-treated check or fungicide only seed treatment check. However, there was a consistent four bushel or higher yield gain for the resistant cultivar across the treatments especially at the Hurley location where SCN numbers were much higher than at Beresford.

The United Soybean Research Retention policy will display final reports with the project once completed but working files will be purged after three years. And financial information after seven years. All pertinent information is in the final report or if you want more information, please contact the project lead at your state soybean organization or principal investigator listed on the project.