2018
Continued support for weed control in non-GMO soybean
Contributor/Checkoff:
Category:
Sustainable Production
Keywords:
AgricultureCrop protectionHerbicide
Parent Project:
This is the first year of this project.
Lead Principal Investigator:
Christy Sprague, Michigan State University
Co-Principal Investigators:
Project Code:
18-11
Contributing Organization (Checkoff):
Institution Funded:
Brief Project Summary:

Growing non-GMO soybeans continues to be a good source of revenue for many Michigan farmers. Premiums on non-GMO and other specialty non-transgenic soybeans often exceed $1.25 per bushel. However, good weed control can be one of the greatest challenges that non-GMO soybean growers encounter. Starting with a clean seed bed, including residual herbicides in weed control programs, making timely postemergence herbicide applications, and understanding that there are several weeds that have evolved resistance to different herbicides are all key principles that need to be incorporated into an effective non-GMO soybean weed control program. Using these principles and information to develop effective,...

Unique Keywords:
#weed control
Information And Results
Project Deliverables

Weed control, soybean injury, yield and economic returns are used to rank the various weed control strategies available for use in non-GMO soybean. We are currently working on the economic analysis from the 2017 growing season to determine the most cost-effective of these programs. Premiums are included in the economic analysis. As mentioned earlier these trials are good discussion points for growers at the MSU weed control tour, as well as for the 40+ non-GMO soybean growers that have attended the afternoon tours highlighting weed control in non-GMO soybean. The web-based fact sheets developed from this information are housed at the www.msuweeds.com website and on the MSPC website if applicable. This information is also used at winter meetings that focus on weed control in non-GMO soybean.

Final Project Results

Results and observations:
• The weed populations at the MSU Agronomy Farm were annual grasses (mainly giant foxtail, barnyardgrass, and large crabgrass), common lambsquarters, Powell amaranth, common ragweed, velvetleaf, and common purslane.
• Within two weeks of planting and PRE herbicide application there was <0.75-inch of precipitation. This rainfall provided some incorporation of the PRE herbicides, to help manage some of the smaller seeded broadleaf weeds. There were some initial differences between the PRE treatments based on precipitation.
• Soybean injury ranged from the PRE herbicides was <10% at the 21 and 34 DAP evaluation.
• Weeds that escaped control from the PRE treatments was predominately common ragweed, and some annual grasses, common lambsquarters, velvetleaf, and common purslane.
• Out of the 20 PRE herbicide treatments, five treatments provided excellent control at the time of the POST, so no POST was applied. These treatments were Surveil + Metribuzin (3.5 + 6 oz), Fierce MTZ (16 fl oz), Valor XLT (3 oz), Zidua PRO (6 fl oz), and Trivence (8 oz). These treatments all provided >90% weed control at harvest.
• The POST herbicides provided varying levels of soybean injury and weed control.
• Soybean injury from POST treatments ranged from 10-34%, 7 DAT and by 28 DAT only one treatment Harmony + Flexstar + SelectMax + NIS+ AMS still exhibited significant injury (8%). This was mostly in the form of stunted soybeans.
• By 28 days after the POST treatments, all but three treatments provided greater than 90% control of all weed species. In most cases common ragweed was the escape, but control was still greater than 85%.
• Common ragweed control was the species that was the least consistently controlled >90% with the PRE treatments. The fact that the common ragweed population was Group 2 (ALS)-resistant was the most challenging issue with some of the POST treatments. Additionally, Flexstar, Cobra, and Ultra Blazer were used to clean up common ragweed escapes.
• Overall soybean yield for the different herbicide programs was fairly close, ranging from 60.8 to 70 bu/A. Nine of the 20 of these herbicide programs ranked amongst the highest yielding. All of the higher yielding programs, with the exception of one provided greater than 90% weed control. In some cases the programs that did not rank amongst the highest yielding had higher soybean injury from the POST herbicide treatments. Normally this is not a factor but with the later planting and drier conditions throughout July, soybean may not have had the opportunity to fully recover from the POST herbicide applications.
• This year the highest yielding program was also the program with the highest economic returns. All of the higher yielding programs, with the exception of one, were amongst the programs with the highest or 2nd highest economic returns.
• Yield was more of a factor for economic returns than herbicide program costs, with the exception of one program that was the most expensive herbicide program.
• Even though we had a couple of one pass programs that ranked amongst the highest yielding and economic returns, our recommendation when growing non-GMO soybean is to still plan on a two-pass program (PRE fb. POST). These programs have consistently provided better weed control, yield, and economic returns, even with the added herbicide and application cost.
• This research was highlighted at the MSU Weed Control Tour held on June 27 at the MSU Agronomy farm. Over 200 growers, agronomists, sales representatives and extension educators attended this field tour. Additionally a specific non-GMO soybean tour was held that afternoon with over 30 growers of non-GMO soybean in attendance.

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.