Corn

Don’t Rush The Replant: Field Conditions And ROI Outweigh The Calendar

Thu, 14 May 2026 20:34:56 GMT

Corn and soybean growers facing slow emergence, shrinking planting windows and cool soils shouldn’t reach for the replant button too quickly, say University of Wisconsin’s Harkirat Kaur and Shawn Conley. They emphasize that field conditions, stand uniformity and return on investment matter more than the date on the calendar.

When damage occurs in corn, the first step is to diagnose what happened to cause the loss, advises Harkirat Kaur, Extension corn specialist at the university.

“Are you seeing stand loss because of seedling issues? Was the hybrid vigor not there? Is there waterlogging? Those things are important to understand, because replanting a field which is damaged is still an extra cost that we incur,” Kaur says.

She believes stand uniformity often matters more than the plant population for corn.

“A uniform stand at a low population is better than having a stand which is at a higher population but has quite a few gaps in it,” she says. “No. 1, it will impact your overall nutrient uptake for the entire field. Secondly, it will also impact your overall operations as you move further into the season.”

Calendar date, surviving stand quality and hybrid maturity all have to be weighed together in the decision.

“If you are looking at a surviving stand which is less than 70% of what your original target was, then you might want to go for a replant,” Kaur says. “But is that replant going to be this soon? It depends if the field is clearly showing no signs of recovery, showing a complete loss of uniformity across the field.”

In many cases, she recommends patience – especially when a frost or hail event enters the picture.

“It is always good to give the crop some time to recover,” she advises, particularly when hail strikes while the growing point is still below ground. “Most of the corn plants in May or early June have their growing point still under the ground (in Wisconsin), and those plants often have the ability to recover from these stresses.”

Running The Corn Replant Math

To frame the replant decision, Kaur walks through a replant return-on-investment scenario for a southern Wisconsin field that was planted May 5 with a full-season 113-day hybrid.

Extension corn specialist Harkirat Kaur shared this example of when replanting would deliver more ROI than sticking with the existing crop. The decision to replant would make sense, depending on how many acres would be able to deliver this financial advantage.

(Harkirat Kaur)

In her example, a stress event drops the stand from a target of 34,000 plants to around 18,000 — roughly 60% to 65% of the original population. That moves expected yield from about 215 bushels per acre to a range of 130 to 160 bushels, or roughly $602 per acre in gross income at current price assumptions.

Replanting later in May means giving up some yield potential to fewer heat units, but it may still pencil out.

“With replanting, the yield potential comes down to about 80% to 85%, which brings the number to approximately around 180 bushels per acre,” she says. “Then we need to account for the replant cost — the cost for new seed, the cost for your fuel, and the time that you’re spending.”

In her example, even after those expenses, the net return on replanting comes out ahead.

“That would bring us to a net of around $675 per acre,” Kaur says. “We are having anywhere around a net advantage of replanting of about $70 to $72 per acre, which could be a bigger number when we are looking at hundreds of acres.”

Still, she frames replant as a decision of last resort.

“Replanting only when the ROI is likely to be positive is critical,” she says. “Keeping ROI over all the operation in mind is the No. 1 thing.”

Nitrogen, Natural Gas And Timing

Kaur also links replant timing to nitrogen management and volatile natural gas markets.

“Natural gas is very critical for agricultural production, because it drives the production of our nitrogen fertilizers,” she says. “When we are looking at overall gas price instability, it reflects in our agricultural cost anywhere between two to eight weeks when it is happening at the global scale.”

Before deciding to replant, she urges farmers to know where they stand on nitrogen availability.

“We need to ensure how much nitrogen is already in the ground and how much nitrogen is still available to be used for the crops,” she says. “Doing another soil analysis might be of use. It might help save the cost of applying more nitrogen, or also putting in hours of applying that fertilizer.”

Kaur says split nitrogen application strategies become more valuable in a tough economic year like this.

“Protecting existing nitrogen investment is critical,” she says. “If you (can), plan for a sidedress. Then replanting before the sidedress is something that can help you save some of your time and also some of your money.”

For Soybeans, ‘Don’t Change Anything’ — Except Row Width

On the soybean side, Shawn Conley, Extension soybean and small grains specialist at the University of Wisconsin, offers his take on next steps at this point in the season.

“In short, basically, don’t change anything except maybe narrow your soybean rows up if you can,” he says. “

Most of his university research plots across Wisconsin are already planted, though some beans are still sitting in dry soil waiting on a rain.

Conley adds that he expects Wisconsin farmers to plant roughly a half-million more soybean acres in 2026 than they did in 2025, based on current projections and spring conditions.

Prioritize Corn Now, Finish Beans After

For growers juggling both crops, Conley says the yield penalty curve has flipped solidly in favor of corn.

“At this time of the growing season, where we are sitting in May, we’re really in this significant decline in yield penalty for delayed planting in corn versus where we are with soybean,” he explains.

“We’re obviously losing yield by delaying soybean planting, too, but not to the extent that we are with corn,” he adds. “It pains me to say, and I tweeted this out last week — it’s time to prioritize corn planting, if possible, if the ground is fit.”

His message to farmers: get corn wrapped up, then come back and finish soybeans.

Seeding Rate And Replant Thresholds

Conley does not see a need to bump soybean seeding rates for now, even with cooler conditions.

His economic analysis shows little payoff to cutting rates aggressively at this point, once seed cost and yield are both considered.

Optimal seeding rate for planting would be 100,000 seeds per acre, even in mid-May, according to Shawn Conley. “But, that really doesn’t take into effect delayed canopy and management of waterhemp,” he notes. For replanting considerations, Conley says he tells farmers that unless they have under 60,000 plants per acre and actively growing, his advice is “don’t do anything.”

(Shawn Conley)

“Optimal seeding rate would be 100,000 seeds per acre, even in this May 13 timeframe,” he notes. “But, that really doesn’t take into effect delayed canopy and management of waterhemp.”

In high weed pressure, Conley says most farmers should stay with about 140,000 seeds per acre unless they have a “very strong weed management plan on the waterhemp.”

On replant decisions, his threshold is clear.

“Generally, what we tell farmers is that unless you have under 60,000 plants per acre and actively growing, don’t do anything,” Conley says. “Don’t even touch that crop.”

If stands fall below that mark, he recommends what he calls a repair plant, not a full reset.

“If it is under 60,000, just do a repair plant, which means you don’t start over from scratch,” he says. “You just go into that field, set the planter at an angle so as not to run over or disturb any of those existing growing plants, and then just plant into your existing stand.”

“The population that’s in the field right now has a higher yield potential than anything you’d be putting in the ground today,” he adds.

Consider Row Spacing

Row spacing is the one area where Conley does advise a change for mid-May and later planting — when farmers have the equipment to do it.

“As our yields have increased due to earlier planting, the yield difference between wide rows and narrow rows shrank,” he says. “However, as we get into lower yield potential — i.e., later planting — then we see those yield differences still remain.”

That shows up particularly in 30-inch rows planted in mid-May and later.

“The longer it takes from planting date to when those soybeans hit R3, the smaller the yield difference between row spacings,” he explains. “Because we’re delayed planting, the number of days between when you plant today and when you get to R3 is going to be in that 50- to 60-day range. You’re going to see a yield penalty if you stick with the 30-inch rows.”

“If you have the capacity — you still have a 15-inch row planter and you maybe haven’t been utilizing that — I think you need to be able to break that out and use that for finishing off your soybean planting,” he says.

American Soybean Association Clears Up E15 Stance as Senate Debate Intensifies

Thu, 14 May 2026 19:09:57 GMT

The House vote to expand year-round E15 on Wednesday should have been a clean policy victory lap for ethanol supporters. Instead, it’s become a multi-layered debate involving competing economic models, social media confusion, and an increasingly complicated Senate runway that may determine whether the win in the House actually translates into law.

The House narrowly passed legislation Wednesday allowing year-round sales of E15, 218 to 203, marking a major win for ethanol advocates and corn growers. But that bill also included reallocation of Small Refinery Exemptions (SREs), which some groups say made the bill more complicated than just a straight bill that would clear the way for year-round sales E15.

But even as supporters celebrate, the conversation around what’s actually in the bill, and who benefits most, has only intensified.

And according to the American Soybean Association, much of the online backlash in recent days is rooted in a misunderstanding of the legislation itself.

“We Support Year-Round E15. 100%.”

ASA CEO Stephen Censky told Farm Journal the organization is not opposed to year-round E15.

“Absolutely. We have always supported year-round E15. We think it’s positive,” Censky says.

But Censky argues the social media controversy stems not from the ethanol provision itself, but from additional language in the House bill that deals with Small Refinery Exemptions (SREs) under the Renewable Fuel Standard.

“It’s those other provisions that provide exemptions to small refineries that undermine that positivity,” he says, also noting that multiple independent analyses suggest those provisions could shift the broader farm economy in less favorable ways.

ASA Statement on House Passage of Year-Round E15 Legislation: pic.twitter.com/bbewbGSF6c
— American Soybean Association (@ASA_Soybeans) May 13, 2026

FAPRI Study Adds Fuel Ahead of Vote

One of those studies came from the University of Missouri’s Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI). Just ahead of the House vote, new modeling from FAPRI added fresh insight into the debate show that when you add in the reallocation of SREs, the House bill is a net negative for agriculture.

The analysis found that year-round E15 alone is relatively modest in its near-term market impact, largely shifting demand between corn and soybeans. But when paired with changes to Small Refinery Exemptions, the economic picture becomes more complicated.

“It takes what is really a trade-off between corn and beans and makes it an overall negative for both what the government spends and for the farm income for the sector,” says Seth Meyer, director of FAPRI.

NCGA Disputes Modeling Assumptions

After the report was released on Tuesday, groups like the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) pushed back on the recent economic analysis by both FAPRI and the CBO.

NCGA Chief Economist Krista Swanson argued that key assumptions in the studies underestimate both policy strength and adoption speed.

“Year-round E15 saves drivers money at the pump, supports America’s corn farmers and improves energy security for our country,” she says, adding that the group’s own modeling shows stronger outcomes for farm income.

ASA Pushes Back on “Corn vs. Soy” Narrative

Even though controversy swirled on social media, claiming ASA’s lack of support for the House version of the bill shows a split between corn and soybean groups, Censky rejects the idea.

“No, I mean, again, I think that comes from a misunderstanding or maybe too simplistic of looking at things,” he says. “We support year-round E15, so does NCGA.”

He points to shared support from the NCGA, while emphasizing that the disagreement centers on refinery exemption language, not ethanol blending policy itself.

“It’s those other provisions (SREs) that were attached to that bill that we have the problems with,” he says,.

Senate Outlook: A Far More Complicated Road Ahead

If the House vote represented momentum, the Senate introduces a much higher degree of uncertainty .

Washington analyst Jim Wiesemeyer says the House approval was still a meaningful breakthrough for ethanol supporters, but the path forward now runs into procedural hurdles, committee jurisdiction battles and a Senate math problem that doesn’t easily resolve.

“Senate passage remains uncertain,” Wiesemeyer notes, pointing to the fact that Clean Air Act authority tied to E15 summer sales rests largely with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, not the Senate Ag Committee.

Wiesemeyer reports while Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has expressed support for including year-round E15 in a broader farm bill effort, the jurisdiction split complicates the path forward. EPW Chair Shelley Moore Capito has supported compromise language similar to the House bill, but without the more controversial SRE-related reforms. Ranking Member Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), meanwhile, is expected to oppose expansion efforts tied to ethanol policy under Clean Air Act authority.

That leaves Senate Ag Chairman John Boozman (R-Ark.) in a key position, but without full control over the underlying regulatory levers.

But even Boozman was clear after the Senate vote that the House version could face resitance in teh Senate. Boozman, who akso serves as Chairman of the House Ag Committee, telling Politico the House version may not have enough support to make it through the upper chamber, saying after the vote, “I think we have a good chance to pass an E15 bill. I don’t know if it will be that one.”

Senate Ag Chair John Boozman tells @politico the House-passed E15 bill doesn’t seem likely to survive the Senate:

“I think we have a good chance to pass an E15 bill. I don't know if it will be that one.”

Reiterates he and other Rs have small and medium size refinery issues https://t.co/4suzybfgrr
— Meredith Lee Hill (@meredithllee) May 13, 2026

Even if a path emerges through committee, Wiesemeyer notes that a stand-alone bill would still need 60 votes for cloture on the Senate floor, an uphill climb given opposition from refining-state senators and lawmakers concerned about emissions, fuel volatility, and air-quality standards.

That bipartisan resistance could force supporters to consider alternative strategies.

One option, according to Wiesemeyer, is something increasingly discussed in Washington: attaching year-round E15 to a must-pass legislative vehicle later this year, such as a broader energy package, government funding bill, or end-of-year omnibus-style agreement, where controversial policy riders are often resolved in larger negotiations.

For now, Wiesemeyer’s bottom line mirrors the broader tone emerging from both the economic analysis and the policy debate: the House delivered a meaningful win for ethanol supporters, but in the Senate, the path forward is anything but settled, and the final outcome is still very much in play.

Where the Uncertainty Really Sits

Much of the debate now centers on variables that remain unresolved: how quickly E15 is adopted, how EPA interprets Renewable Fuel Standard obligations, and how aggressively Small Refinery Exemptions are implemented in practice.

Those unknowns, analysts say, will ultimately determine whether the legislation is a modest reshuffling of crop demand or a more meaningful shift in long-term farm income trends.

‘We Need Rain’: Dry Fields Stall Corn Planting

Thu, 14 May 2026 15:06:23 GMT

Planting season sounds different across central Kansas this year. By mid-May, planters usually run full tilt, pushing long days and short nights as growers race to get corn, soybeans, and grain sorghum into the ground. Instead, silence hangs over many fields. Drought-stressed soils, soaring fertilizer costs, and mounting economic pressures have kept many farmers from even starting, according to Matt Splitter.

“We’ve had 1.2 to 1.5 inches of rain this year during a window where we should be at 28 inches,” says Splitter, who farms in the I-35 corridor between Kansas City and Wichita. “It is dry. I can’t even find the right words for how dry it is.”

The data backs up his frustration. Approximately 65% of topsoil moisture in Kansas is currently rated as “short” or “very short,” according to the May 11 Crop Progress & Condition Report.

#DroughtMonitor 5/12: Drought worsened in large parts of the Northwest and Plains. Also the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic.

Improvements in AZ, CO, and the Southeast.

Mixed for WY, S. Plains, South, Northeast.#Drought2026’s Footprint: 51.3% of the USAhttps://t.co/mljsjQE3B9 @NOAA pic.twitter.com/ONOWe9IEfP
— NIDIS Drought.gov (@NOAADrought) May 14, 2026

On a recent school run, Splitter looked across empty fields that would typically be full of machinery.

“I took the kids to school and didn’t see one machine in a field — no tillage, no applications, no planting,” he told Chip Flory, host of AgriTalk. “Planting progress here is non-existent.”

Personally, Splitter gambled early on planting his corn, hoping the scant moisture near the soil surface would be enough to get a stand.

“We went early, thinking we were probably making the wrong decision,” he says. “We had just enough moisture for germination. The corn is up, but it can’t hang in there much longer.”

The National Picture

Corn planting in central Kansas, other parts of the High Plains and in the Southeast has been slow-going this spring. However, some states are surging ahead. Nationwide, 57% of the 2026 corn crop is in the ground, outpacing the five-year average of 52%.

The Crop Progress Report indicates the national average is being buoyed by high-efficiency corn planting in parts of the mid-South and Midwest:

The Early Birds: Tennessee and Kentucky are nearly finished, reporting 92% and 87% completion.
Midwest Movers: Iowa leads the I-states at 72% planted, while Illinois sits at 54%. Minnesota is at nearly 70% completion.
Emergence: Nationally, 23% of the crop has emerged — trailing last year’s 26% due to cooler, drier soils across the Central Plains.

Farming From A Desk in Kentucky

In central Kentucky, millennial farmer Quint Pottinger is planting corn from behind a desk, watching his fully autonomous tractor crawl across his fields, thanks to a computer screen. Pottinger says technology is his primary weapon against the brutal economic environment U.S. farmers are dealing with.

High expenses led him to equip a 100‑hp tractor with a Sabanto retrofit kit, sell his big-frame 8,000‑series tractors and 40‑foot planters, and move to a smaller 20‑foot planter. The result: he’s running a lot slower, but cheaper.

“We sold two large tractors, two big planters. That was the only way we knew how to cut costs in this economic environment we’re in, and we had no idea if it would work,” Pottinger says.

The trade-off is speed, but the gain is efficiency. “I can slow this planter down to 2.5 miles an hour to get the right depth as the soil dries out,” he adds.

Despite a smoother start than the flood-plagued springs of the last two years, weather remains a hurdle. A sudden frost during pollination “dinged” his wheat crop, causing a 20% loss in some areas.

The one bright spot? His rye grown for the whiskey industry is looking good. “It just grinds through this weather and keeps going. It’s a whole different animal,” Pottinger says.

The Fertilizer Squeeze

For both farmers, the drought collides with a second crisis: fertilizer prices. In Kansas, Splitter is trimming his nitrogen rates by 25% to 30%.

“We’re so dry that even if you apply fertilizer, the risk of volatilization is just too high,” Splitter explains. “We’re not spending as much money, because it wouldn’t do any good anyway. But there’s no truly ‘good’ decision here — it’s a perfect storm of bad options.”

Moisture outlook for farmers in Nebraska and Kansas is DEPRESSING. Opportunities this weekend are isolated in nature, and anyone who gets a drink probably deals with severe weather impacts. Another opportunity in late May, early June.

30-day outlook from EPS weeklies: pic.twitter.com/a36c7FuXWQ
— Andrew Pritchard (@skydrama) May 14, 2026

In Kentucky, Pottinger’s attempt to lock in prices failed when global political shocks in the Strait of Hormuz voided his deferred pricing contracts. He was forced to buy at market price — when he could find supply at all. He worries the fallout will last years, especially if natural gas production for nitrogen doesn’t fully recover.

“This should be a problem for 2027, not 2026,” Pottinger says. “I fear farmers will get taken advantage of in both seasons, potentially stretching into 2028.”

Searching For Optimism

Despite the stalled planters and market anxiety, both men are looking for reasons to stay positive — be it through cost-saving technology or policy shifts like higher ethanol blends that could drive demand.

“In tough times like this, everybody’s trying to find something to be optimistic about,” Splitter says. “We should be that way as an industry as a whole. We shouldn’t be pitting one guy against the other. That’s not what American agriculture is about.”

For now, optimism for Splitter and Pottinger depends on a simple, old‑fashioned variable neither farmer can control.

“We need rain,” Pottinger says. “We need rain now.”

Hear the full planting discussion and more on AgriTalk at the link below:

Why High GDUs Aren’t Guaranteeing Quick Emergence This Year

Tue, 12 May 2026 20:35:28 GMT

While farmers keep a close eye on the thermometer and their favorite weather app during planting season, Phil Long says the most important metric right now might be the one they can’t see: the temperature beneath the soil surface.

Long, a regional agronomist with Liqui-Grow, says growers in north-central Iowa are reporting sluggish emergence for corn and soybeans. That’s despite the fact the region accumulated roughly 197 Growing Degree Units (GDUs) from April 10 to May 1, outpacing the 30-year average of 121 GDUs.

“It takes about 130 or so GDUs to get corn or beans out of the ground,” says Iowa-based Long. “So why aren’t more crops emerged?”

The discrepancy, he contends, lies in the difference between air GDUs and soil GDUs. While air temperatures are important, seed reacts almost totally to the heat of the soil surrounding it. For a seed to germinate and push through the soil surface, it requires consistent warmth that hasn’t materialized during recent chilly conditions in some areas.

“What’s most important to the corn and beans out there in the ground is soil GDUs,” Long says. “Even corn up to V6 is regulated primarily off the heat in the ground.”

Why Some Crops Have ‘Just Sat There’

The formula for calculating GDUs relies on a base temperature of 50 degrees Fahrenheit and a ceiling of 86 degrees. When nighttime temperatures dip into the 30s, as they have recently in Iowa and parts of the Eastern Corn Belt, the soil temperature can linger in the 40s and 50s. At those levels, the “heat engine” for the seed essentially stalls.

“We’re not getting that soil temperature up there very far,” Long explains. “That does not stack up GDUs very quickly.”

Long notes that along with the chilly weather conditions, two additional factors can act as “buffers” against soil warming: crop residue and cloud cover.

While heavy residue is often a benefit in the heat of July, it can act as an insulator in the spring, preventing the sun from reaching the soil. In some cases, high-residue fields can see a 50% reduction in GDU accumulation compared to conventionally tilled ground, Long notes.

Furthermore, a stretch of overcast days will rob the soil of solar radiation.

“If there’s heavy cloud cover, that can reduce solar radiation by 80%,” Long says. He explains that even on a cool 55-degree day, direct sunlight can push soil temperatures much higher. But persistent clouds have kept the ground locked in a cool cycle.

As planting continues into the heart of May, Long advises farmers to look beyond the air temperature and keep in mind the micro-climate of the seedbed as they plant.

“Although we’re ahead in terms of air temperature GDUs for this year compared to the ‘average’ year, we’re probably behind in terms of those seeds sitting in the ground,” Long says. “That soil GDU is a big factor when it comes to getting crops out of the ground.”

Are Your Fields A Green Light? Use the Three-Factor System To Guide Planting Decisions

Fri, 08 May 2026 16:52:22 GMT

Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie is urging farmers to pay close attention to soil conditions and local weather forecasts as planting accelerates across the Midwest.

Ferrie and his team at Crop-Tech Consulting recommend using a “red-yellow-green light” system to guide planting decisions. The practice is based on three factors: soil moisture, seed chilling risks and the 10-day emergence forecast.

The information on the green-yellow-red color system for planting is pretty self-explanatory, says Ken Ferrie. Once you know the light color, you can see the meaning and the action he recommends taking.

(Crop-Tech Consulting)

Regional Forecast And Recommendation

Despite ongoing weather struggles from cold and rain in some parts of the country, planting progress continues across much of the upper Midwest.

For central Illinois, Ferrie says there is a green light for Monday, with some areas getting a yellow or red light for Tuesday. The U.S. National Weather Service says a weak cold front will bring the next chance for storms later on Tuesday, some of which could be severe. Temperatures will turn cooler for midweek.

Ferrie warns that the first 12 to 24 hours seed corn is in the ground are the most critical. During this window of time, the seed absorbs 30% of its weight in water. If that water is below 50 degrees Fahrenheit, the cells lose elasticity and tear. Chilled seed corn can easily result in a 10% stand loss.

“You can literally tell the difference between fields that were planted in the morning compared to in an afternoon that’s going into a cool night,” Ferrie says. “That is why you’ll see our lights change at noon some days, trying to get enough water absorbed before the soil temperature drops.”

You can get more information from Ferrie on the perils of seed corn chilling in this brief video:

Ferrie says if corn takes longer than 11 days to emerge, those kernels that were planted “spike down” will struggle to compete.

“The spike-down plants can be a week or two weeks behind the spike-up plants,” Ferrie explains. “At that point, they will be more than a collar behind and not produce a regular-sized ear.”

Listen to Ferrie’s complete recommendations in his Boots In The Field podcast:

A Frustrating Spring: Spotty Spring Rains Push Southwest Iowa Planting Slightly Behind

Wed, 06 May 2026 18:33:19 GMT

USDA’s latest Crop Progress Report showed as of Sunday, 22 percent of Iowa’s corn crop is planted, which is right in line with the five-year average. Soybean planting sits at 11 percent, which is just slightly behind. But those statewide numbers don’t tell the whole planting story this year. In southern Iowa, spotty spring showers are creating a far more uneven planting picture for farmers trying to make progress in the field.

In the far southwestern corner of Iowa, farmer Pat Sheldon is finally back in the field and relieved to see planters rolling again after a stop-and-start spring.

“We’ll be 25 or 30 percent done with the beans by the end of the day,” says Pat Sheldon, a farmer from Percival, Iowa.

While Sheldon prefers to be wrapped up planting by now, this season is running just a bit behind his typical pace.

“Usually we like to try to have almost everything done by now. We’re shooting for the end of April, but we usually don’t make it. So we’re a little behind where we normally are,” Sheldon says.“For no sooner than we started, we’ve come right along.”

About 80 percent of his corn is already planted, but some acres remain too saturated to finish, especially on his heavier ground.

After being out of the field for much of the past week due to wet conditions, Sheldon says the moisture hasn’t been as severe as in other parts of the region, but still enough to delay progress.

“We’re not as wet as it’s been east and south, but just enough to keep you out,” Sheldon says.

Even so, he is confident that progress will accelerate quickly if the forecast holds.

“The forecast looks good for here anyway, dry weather for a week or so, and I can get a lot done on the bottom when it’s dry,” Sheldon says.“ Just need dry weather and sunshine and let us work. It won’t take long. It’ll go in fast once it stays dry like this for a few days.”

Input costs have been a concern across agriculture, but Sheldon says his operation avoided the worst of recent fertilizer price spikes by planning ahead.

“We had all of our dry on last fall and over half of our anhydrous before it got too nasty for us to keep going, and we finished it up this spring,” Sheldon says. “We had it all pre-bought before all the prices went crazy, so we were fortunate on that aspect.

With planting back up and running this week, Sheldon says their operation is “in good shape,” and it’s that sense of stability is a stark contrast to conditions just seven years ago.

Sheldon’s family farm is situated next to the Missouri River. It’s fertile ground that’s been in his family for generations. But in 2019, Sheldon’s farm was devastated by flooding along the Missouri River, with water levels reaching several feet high in areas that are now being planted.

“There was probably three feet of water where we’re standing. Nothing got planted in the bottom ground. There was some stuff in the hills, but that was about it,” says Sheldon.

The floodwaters lingered for months, leaving lasting reminders still visible today.

“The water was here about 100 days. It was late June, I think, when they closed the breach,” Sheldon says.

And he says for the water lines still stained on the rain bins, it’s a constant reminder of what the Missouri River can take away, often without warning.

“You have a reminder every day,” says Sheldon. “You see it every day.”

Farming along the Missouri River means managing both risk and resilience. Despite the challenges, Sheldon says recent years have brought more favorable growing conditions, and he’s hopeful this year is shaping up to be the same.

“Are you optimistic about this growing season,” we asked.

“Very, very, as far as raising a crop,” Sheldon says of his outlook for 2026. “We’ve got decent moisture, probably better than we had going in last year. We’ve been lucky the last two or three years—timely rains, not a lot of rain, but at the right time—and we’ve raised really good crops. We’re hoping for more of the same.”

Metabolic Weed Resistance Crisis Builds Across The Heartland

Wed, 06 May 2026 16:51:05 GMT

Waterhemp, Palmer amaranth and some other tough broadleaf weeds and grasses are no longer slipping past just single herbicides. Across the Corn Belt and beyond, they are tolerating entire herbicide programs. Weed scientists say that pattern points to a critical issue more farmers are facing: metabolic resistance.

Unlike traditional target-site resistance, which is often specific to a single herbicide class, metabolic resistance is even worse because it can confer cross-resistance to multiple, unrelated herbicide groups .

Aaron Hager, University of Illinois Extension weed scientist often warns that when a tough weed like waterhemp learns to metabolize one herbicide, it becomes easier for it to “learn” to detoxify others. That ability has helped lead to the 7-way resistance with waterhemp seen in some Illinois counties, according to weed scientist Patrick Tranel, one of Hager’s colleagues.

At least 13 states have reported having some degree of “highly suspected” or confirmed cases of metabolic weed resistance. Here are three of the broadleaf weeds demonstrating metabolic resistance and states where they’re located:

Along with these broadleaf weeds, some common and giant ragweed, marestail/horseweed, annual (Italian) ryegrass and barnyardgrass populations have also demonstrated metabolic resistance.

(Weed Science Society of America, GROW, BASF, Syngenta)

Target-site resistance can be identified through DNA tests. But metabolic resistance is a “guessing game” involving potentially dozens to hundreds of genes working in tandem, making it difficult for scientists and farmers to know which products will still work in their specific fields.

Tommy Butts sees the trend for metabolic resistance taking root in Indiana. He says HPPD resistance in waterhemp is “getting widespread,” and the failures are expanding to other chemistries as well.

“We had more complaints last year about things like mesotrione or Callisto starting to fail, which is really scary in the corn acres,” says Butts, Purdue University Extension weed scientist. “Corn is supposed to be our easy year to control waterhemp, and now, all of a sudden, we start losing Callisto.” He addresses this in detail in the latest Purdue Crop Chat .

The bad news does not stop there.

“You start talking auxins and glufosinate, and we have confirmed resistance in the state to those,” he says. “I wouldn’t say that’s as widespread, but it’s definitely popping up.”

With metabolic resistance chipping away at PPOs, HPPDs, atrazine partners, auxins and glufosinate, the old playbook of “just switch products” no longer works well.

Glufosinate alone 😀⁰Mesotrione alone 😕⁰Glufosinate + mesotrione 🔥😎

That’s the power of effective herbicide tank mixtures.

Deploying synergistic tank mixes with multiple effective sites of action is critical for improving weed control and helping delay herbicide resistance… pic.twitter.com/FggZJrQQ1Q
— Rodrigo Werle (@WiscWeeds) May 6, 2026

“Hammer With Residuals” And Build Effective Combinations

Butts’ first message to corn and soybean farmers is straightforward: no more solo herbicide passes in the field.

“We have to hammer weeds with effective residuals and then mix up our posts as much as possible,” he says.

In his view, that means at least two things for row-crop growers. First, use layered residual programs that keep fields clean as long as possible and reduce the number of emerged weeds that ever see a post pass. Second, use post-emerge applications that combine multiple, truly effective modes of action at full labeled rates.

Cutting rates, he warns, is exactly how growers “train” metabolism-based resistance to take root.

With soybean trait systems, he pushes hard against relying on a single flagship product.

“If we’re growing Enlist soybeans, don’t just rely on Enlist and don’t just rely on Liberty,” Butts advises. “Do the tank mix. The tank mix trumps everything.”

This field shows the result of waterhemp seeds that were spread during harvest by a combine.

(Aaron Hager, University of Illinois)

Pay More Up Front To Avoid Making Expensive “Revenge Sprays”

Metabolic resistance can thrive when weeds are hit with chemistry they can partially tolerate. That is why Butts keeps coming back to strong, early, soil-applied programs.

He hears pushback from farmers every year on using multiple products in the tank.

“A lot of people tell me, ‘Well, it costs way too much up front with $20 for a pre. Corn gets even more expensive,’” he acknowledges.
However, Butts points to work by Purdue University Extension and other states showing those dollars pay off when the entire season is measured.

“If you can get a strong residual program out and get it activated, the whole-season economics of it makes sense,” Butts says. “It’s consistently shown that if you have that strong pre up front, you don’t have what I like to call the revenge sprays in August, where we’re going across the field three different times trying to kill waist-high waterhemp.”

Check out this tool from GROW on how to address waterhemp specifically.

Protect Herbicide Tools To Extend Their Use

As more herbicide modes of action come under pressure, Butts singles out metribuzin as an example of a product that still pulls its weight in soybeans.

“Metribuzin is a big one in soybeans, because we don’t have a lot of resistance to that,” he says.

“I will also put in the plug for AMS in general, across the board,” Butts says. “That always helps with some of those products… when we start getting later in the season, we get more stressed weeds. AMS even tends to help there.”

Butts does caution farmers that AMS is not allowed in dicamba tank mixes for XtendFlex soybeans.

Underlying all of it is a blunt warning about what happens if growers decide to skimp on their weed control efforts.

“If you let it go even one year, now you’ve made yourself a mess for the next five to 10 years,” he says. “You’ve got to try and stay on top of weeds as much as possible.”

5 Practical Recommendations To Address Metabolic Resistance

Because metabolic resistance is so unpredictable, weed scientists have shifted their advice away from “rotating chemicals” toward a “zero-threshold” approach to control. The following metabolic resistance management recommendations have been presented by Aaron Hager, University of Illinois Weed Scientist, and Beck’s agronomists:

1. The primary focus of metabolic resistance management should be on decreasing the weed seed bank. This means that weeds must be eliminated before they ever go to seed.

2. A robust residual herbicide program should be used, not because residuals represent a different herbicide family but because they eliminate weeds at the earliest growth stages – slashing contributions to the weed seed bank.

3. Physically cutting weeds out of the crop must be included in the management plan, because physical elimination of weed escapes further slashes contributions to the weed seed bank.

4. Post-herbicide programs should shift from calendar-based timing to scouting-based timing. Once weeds break through a pre-emerge residual program, they must be eliminated. Such early targeting further slashes contributions to the weed seed bank.

5. Mechanical techniques, field cultivators, etc., should be used where possible to further the cause of decreased seed production.

Build A High-Yield Powerhouse From The Bottom Up

Tue, 05 May 2026 17:40:53 GMT

The planter monitor in your tractor cab insists the seed corn is tucked away at a 2.5-inch planting depth, but Randy Dowdy says to question that placement. The high-yield row-crop grower explains there is often a difference between what the planter monitor says and what the soil shows — and the gap between the two can rob farmers of yield potential before the crop ever breaks the soil surface.

“You have to distinguish between the planting depth and what we call the germination depth. It’s a potential problem we talk about all the time with our farmers in Total Acre ,” says Dowdy of his agronomic business he co-owns with David Hula, world champion corn grower.

Iowa State Extension defines planting depth as the placement of the seed corn in the soil, while germination depth (emergence) is where the corn nodal roots will form, regardless of the planting depth.

The discrepancy that can occur between the planting depth and germination depth often happens at the moment the seed trench is closed or shortly thereafter. The planter might place the seed at 2.5 inches, but the closing system can shift seed upward — especially in dry, loose soils. As the dirt settles the seed can end up germinating at a significantly shallower depth than the grower intended.

“When we check seed placement in an open furrow, there’s no doubt about it, we were planting at 2.5 inches,” Dowdy notes in a recent video. But as he moves behind the machine to inspect the closed row, the reality changes. In Dowdy’s field demonstration, the shift is dramatic, showing the seed is now sitting much closer to the soil surface.

“When we dig into that closed trench, we find that the seed is now sitting in the ground at about 1.5 inches to 1.75 inches, and that’s not what you want,” Dowdy says. Watch the video on Farm Journal TV .

The result of that shallow germination depth is a fundamental threat to corn, Iowa State Extension reports. Shallow germination can impact early root development and contribute to rootless corn syndrome, susceptibility to herbicide injury, poor drought tolerance and other issues that can impact growth and development throughout the season and, ultimately, reduce yield.

(Farm Journal TV)

To combat this, Dowdy’s philosophy is simple: trust what you learn using a shovel to dig behind the planter to locate the seed; don’t depend only on what the planter monitor in the tractor cab shows.

Dowdy and Hula advocate for establishing a consistent germination depth for seed corn across the field, ensuring that plants have the strong foundation they need to thrive.

“For proper root development, we like to maintain a consistent two-inch germination depth,” advises Dowdy, who’s based near Valdosta, Ga.

Dan Quinn, Purdue University Extension corn specialist, says the “most common seeding depths recommended for corn range between 1.5 and 2 inches deep, and these planting depths can work very well within most conditions, however, certain soil moisture conditions at planting may warrant further examination/change in seeding depth.”

This year, with dry soil conditions in the Southeast, farmers have had difficulty achieving a 2-inch planting depth consistently for good emergence. Dowdy’s directive to growers in dry ground is to account for the “settle” in soils at planting by adjusting planter settings to go a bit deeper with planting.

Iowa State Extension agrees, noting that a 3-inch depth is usually OK in drier soils. While deeper planting can take slightly longer to emerge, it can lead to more uniform stands compared to shallow planting.

“My advice in these (dry) conditions is to plant a bit deeper, knowing the ground will settle, and you’ll get better root development,” Dowdy says.

By prioritizing the physical reality of the seedbed over the digital feedback in the cab, Dowdy believes farmers can unlock better performance without any additional overhead. By doing so, growers “will do a better job, and you’ll have proper root development and help you on your yields for free,” he says.

You can hear more about how this season is shaping up for Dowdy and Hula on their latest edition of Breaking Barriers With R&D podcast with Chip Flory on AgriTalk. Listen at the link below:

Corteva Brands Seed And Genetics Business With New Name

Mon, 04 May 2026 21:50:06 GMT

Corteva announced on Monday that its advanced seed and genetics business, formerly operating under the placeholder “SpinCo,” will be branded as Vylor, Inc. The spin-off remains on track to become an independent company no later than the fourth quarter of 2026.

Corteva will continue to sell crop protection products – herbicides, fungicides, insecticides and biologicals.

For farmers who have spent decades planting Pioneer, Brevant and Hogemeyer branded seed products, the changes mark a massive consolidation of research and development power. Vylor will launch with a significant intellectual property portfolio, including more than 4,000 germplasm patents and 2,000 biotechnology patents, according to a Corteva press release.

Heritage Meets High-Tech

The branding is a deliberate nod to the past and the future of the American farm. The name “Vylor” is derived from valor, a tribute to the grit of U.S. farmers and workers who have helped “feed the world.”

Even the new logo carries a hidden meaning: the stylized “l” represents the shape of a single chromosome—the building block of the company’s genetics-first mission.

The company’s visual identity also honors its roots, using a color palette of green, maroon, and blue to pay homage to the Pioneer, Brevant, Hogemeyer and Corteva legacies.

A New Pipeline for the Field

Vylor isn’t just rebranding existing products, according to future Vylor CEO Chuck Magro. He says it is positioning itself to lead the next generation of “gamechanger” technologies. According to the announcement, farmers can expect a pipeline focused on:

Proprietary Hybrid Wheat: A long-sought breakthrough in wheat productivity.
Gene Editing Leadership: Faster development of traits to combat evolving pests and weather patterns.
Multi-Disease Resistance Corn: Reducing the reliance on over-the-top pesticide applications.
Next-Generation Biofuels: Expanding the profit potential of row crops beyond the food supply chain.

“Vylor traces its roots back a century, to a single idea: that innovation could transform agriculture,” Magro notes. “From food security to energy security... Vylor will be uniquely positioned to help solve some of the world’s toughest challenges.”

Global Footprint

Vylor enters the market from a position of dominance, boasting the largest seed production network in the world, Corteva reports. The brands under its umbrella already hold No. 1 and No. 2 market share positions in nearly every global region they serve, backed by a history of world-record yields in corn and soybeans.

While the corporate structure is changing, Corteva says Vylor’s “north star” remains the same: leveraging scientific expertise to help farmers feed and fuel a growing population. As the separation nears its 2026 finish line, Vylor signals an aggressive intent to “vye” for new opportunities in row crops and beyond.

Watch this video to learn more about Vylor.

EPA Opens Public Comment Period On Draft Fungicide Strategy

Mon, 04 May 2026 16:20:14 GMT

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is offering the U.S. public an opportunity to help shape the future of agricultural safety, unveiling a draft Fungicide Strategy designed to balance the needs of American farmers with the protection of the nation’s most vulnerable wildlife.

The proposal marks a significant step in the agency’s effort to meet its dual mandates under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). By creating a more efficient and transparent framework for pesticide registration, the EPA says it aims to “safeguard more than 1,000 federally endangered and threatened species” while ensuring growers maintain the tools necessary to protect the nation’s food supply.

A New Framework for Modern Farming

The draft strategy focuses on conventional agricultural fungicides across the lower 48 states — an area covering approximately 41 million treated acres annually. Rather than a one-size-fits-all mandate, the proposal introduces a three-step framework:

Identify Impacts: Assessing potential population-level effects on listed species.
Mitigation Planning: Pinpointing specific measures to reduce those risks.
Targeted Application: Determining exactly where these protections are most needed based on where endangered and threatened species live and how fungicides move through the environment.

The agency emphasizes that while this strategy guides future regulatory actions, it does not impose immediate requirements. Instead, the strategy serves as a roadmap for upcoming registration reviews, with the EPA promising public input on every specific action before it is finalized.

Balancing Innovation and Conservation

Saying that it recognizes farmers are the backbone of the U.S. economy, the EPA’s draft includes several updates to provide greater flexibility. Notably, the plan expands options for reducing spray drift buffer distances and introduces new mitigation tools, such as the use of “guar gum” as a spray adjuvant.

"[American farmers] need a diverse toolbox of innovative agricultural technologies to manage crop disease, prevent resistance, and produce the affordable, nutritious food that feeds our country,” the EPA says, in a press release. “The draft Fungicide Strategy is designed to ensure those innovative tools remain available and that they are used in ways that protect the environment and endangered species.

How to Get Involved

In a push for transparency, the EPA has opened a 60-day public comment period to gather feedback from scientists, conservationists, Tribal partners and the agricultural community.

Public Comment: Stakeholders can review the strategy and submit formal feedback via (Docket: EPA-HQ-OPP-2026-2973) through June 29, 2026.
Informational Webinar: The agency will host a public webinar on May 20, 2026, at 2 p.m. ET to walk through the proposal and answer questions. Register here .

The EPA expects to review all public input and finalize the Fungicide Strategy by November 2026.

Beyond the Rate: 4 Ways to Sync Corn Nutrient Timing

Fri, 01 May 2026 13:40:47 GMT

Beyond “How much do I apply?” growers need to ask “When can my corn actually use it?” says Connor Sible, a crop physiologist at the University of Illinois. Sible and Fred Below’s research shows dialing in the timing and placement of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) applications can be the difference between a 160-bu. crop and a 230-bu. or even 300-bu. one.

“The key is peak uptake. Your crop doesn’t need the same amount of nutrients every day. There’s a short window when demand spikes, and that’s what really drives yield,” Sible noted during the 2026 Crop Management Conference.

Here are four ways Sible and Below say corn growers can use that insight in the field this season.

(Chart Source: Illinois Crop Physiology)

1. Build A Plan to Meet Peak Demand.

High-yield corn doesn’t consume nutrients at a steady, linear pace, according to Below. His research indicates that a 230-bu. crop can pull more than 2 lb. of P₂O₅ per acre per day during peak demand. N demand is even more intense, reaching 5 lb. to 9 lb. per acre per day.

He encourages high-yield farmers to shift their mindset from total seasonal pounds to daily availability. For example, growers hitting the 230-bu. mark typically:

Use realistic yield goals and removal charts to calculate total needs.
Overlay uptake curves provided by agronomists or seedsmen to identify the exact window of peak demand for specific hybrids.
Target the window and build fertilizer plans to meet that two- to three-week peak demand period.

(Chart Source: Illinois Crop Physiology)

2. Place Phosphorus Where Roots Can Reach It.

Phosphorus is notoriously immobile in the soil, relying on root interception to be absorbed. This makes placement a critical timing tool.

To support peak demand, Sible and Below suggest banding P under the row. The goal is to create a vertical column of phosphorus that corn roots naturally penetrate exactly when demand spikes. This results in the nutrient being in the path of the growing plant rather than scattered throughout the soil profile.

(Chart Source: Illinois Crop Physiology)

3. Use Split Nitrogen Applications to Cover the Surge.

To ensure N is present and accessible during the midseason surge, high-yield growers are increasingly moving toward split applications.

Sible notes a common successful strategy includes a preplant base followed by a sidedress application between V5 and V8. This can be achieved via knife, coulter or injection, often supplemented by Y-drops or high-clearance applications near tassel in some cases.

This strategy serves three purposes:

Reduces the time N sits in the field before the crop needs it.
Replenishes the root zone as demand ramps up.
Maintains the necessary 5 lb. to 9 lb. of daily available N during the fastest growth stages.

(Chart Source: Illinois Crop Physiology)

4. Protect Uptake With Soil Health And Residue Management.

Corn growers aiming for high yields can support peak nutrient uptake in corn by fostering soils that mineralize nutrients naturally. Sible points out that while fertilizer covers the shortfalls, the soil provides the baseline.

“High-yield growers keep residue managed, via strip-till or strategic tillage, so microbes can break it down and release N, P and S over time,” Sible says. “They also maintain or build organic matter, which feeds the mineralization engine that kicks in as soils warm into early summer.”

This “mineralization engine” provides a steady background flow of nutrients, Sible adds, allowing supplemental fertilizer and precision placement to push the crop through its highest-demand hurdles.

Cold Snap, Wet Soils Put Corn on Hold, but Beans Still Get Green Light

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 21:26:22 GMT

A soaking rain has pulled much of the Midwest out of drought, but it’s also put the brakes on corn planting just as a cold snap settles in, says Ken Ferrie, Farm Journal Field Agronomist.

Ferrie explains that recent storms dropped anywhere from a half inch to 4” of rain across farmers’ fields and, with it, erased lingering drought stress and filled ponds that “will probably stick around a while.” The moisture, however, has saturated soils to the point that most of his planting “signal lights” for corn are now red.

“Due to wet conditions, most everyone is red at this point, and that doesn’t change until the soil is fit,” says Ferrie, who’s based in central Illinois. “We don’t mud in corn.”

Cold Spell Drives Conservative Corn Strategy

Ferrie bases his current recommendations on the close agreement between the Global Forecast System (GFS) and European weather models through May 9, both of which point to a stretch of cold conditions unfavorable for corn establishment.

“When they’re close together, the accuracy is usually higher and they both indicate a cold spell,” he says.

With that outlook, he’s cautioning growers across multiple regions to be conservative on planting corn especially until temperatures and soils improve. He emphasizes that while model divergence after May 9 could change the picture, he’s focusing on the 10-day window where the models agree to set planting guidance.

“Three days is a long time in weather forecasting, but they do seem to hit the temperatures closer than the rainfall amounts,” Ferrie says. “So, we’ll reevaluate on Monday to see how this forecast changes.”

Regional “Signal Lights” For Planting Corn

Ferrie uses a green-yellow-red “signal light” system to simplify planting decisions:

In areas around Jacksonville, Ill., and further south, conditions shift to a green light for corn starting Sunday noon, May 3, before turning more cautious midweek.
Along the U.S. Highway 136 corridor, he calls for a yellow light on May 3, switching to red by next Wednesday noon, May 6, likely holding through May 9.
In northern Illinois and around Iowa City, Ferrie highlights there will be rapid swings in planting opportunities as forecasts point to a seed-chilling event moving in.
In northeast Iowa (Cresco area), Rochester, Minn., and across much of Wisconsin, the guidance is straightforward: “It’s going to be a red light until May 9,” he says.

Across all these regions, Ferrie’s advice centers on patience with corn until soils are ready and the coldest temperatures pass.

The map released today shows the Midwest with only a handful of dry areas, unlike in the West and Southeast where farmers are seeing extreme drought to the degree that some have parked their planters for lack of rainfall.

(U.S. Drought Monitor)

Beans Offer Opportunity—If Ground Is Fit

Even as he urges caution on planting corn, Ferrie says the forecast still allows room for farmers to progress on soybeans where field conditions permit.

“We still have a green light on beans if the ground is fit,” he says.

He urges farmers to pay close attention to seed quality and stand establishment, especially where soybeans are untreated.

“Watch your percentage germ on your tag, especially if the beans aren’t treated,” Ferrie says. “You may need to bump those populations up a little for weed control.”

Most of the “frosted off” early beans in Illinois have already been replanted or patched, he notes, but some drowned-out ponded areas will likely need follow-up patching once water levels recede.

Manage Corn Risk In The “Yellow Windows”

For growers who have not yet put any corn in the ground, Ferrie recommends using upcoming yellow-light windows to strategically manage risk — without forcing corn into marginal conditions.

“If you haven’t planted any corn yet with the planter, and to mitigate some risk, you may want to get some corn planted in these yellow windows so you’re sure that you can put the hammer down when this cold snap passes through,” he says.

That approach, he explains, helps spread risk across planting dates, while still respecting soil fitness and seedbed quality. The goal is to avoid having all corn acres exposed to the same stress event, whether it’s chilling, crusting or prolonged saturation.

Ferrie encourages growers to stay tuned for updates as the forecast evolves, noting that temperature forecasts tend to be more reliable than rainfall projections in the short term. He directs farmers to ongoing updates and deeper discussion via his team’s online and audio channels.

To stay up to date, check out Ferrie’s website at croptechinc.com and subscribe to his podcast, Boots In The Field. You can listen to it at the link below:

How Robotic Dogs are Guarding Ag Assets

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 23:32:40 GMT

According to the National Equipment Register, $300 million to $1 billion in heavy equipment is stolen every year. Other threats such as feral hogs can rob the ag industry of $1.6 billion in a single year as well, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation. However, a new four-legged, robotic companion could help solve these issues.

Taking the form of a dog, the Asylon DroneDog , a robotic and autonomous security system, is stepping up to the plate.

“They do the dull, dangerous, dirty tasks that humans don’t like to do and don’t do as well when they get mundane and repetitive,” says Dennis Crowley , chief growth officer for Asylon Robotics .

Monitoring Farms and Fields from the Palm of Your Hand

Instead of owning the robots, farmers purchase Asylon Robotics services. To put into action, the company will manually patrol a route. Once the route is established, the robot dog will autonomously monitor the area. It can also be controlled from a remote location.

Farmers have live access to whatever the dog is seeing and detecting, such as intruders, a wild animal and even damage to fences via a phone or other device. Asylon’s command center receives the same view.

“DroneDog takes advantage of the things that a traditional human can do and adds to that the capabilities of a machine,” Crowley explains. “It still requires a human in the loop on the back end who is monitoring, working and getting the information to have situational awareness and make a good decision.”

Apart from security, Crowley says the technology could potentially be used for other areas in agriculture in the future. Collaborating with farmers, he sees potential for equipment and pressure gauge inspections.

Why the Four-Legged Design Conquers Tough Terrain

Crowley explains constructing the robot in the shape of the four-legged animal has plenty of advantages. It can handle various terrain and ground materials with stability. With legs instead of wheels, it can go places where the latter cannot.

“If it does fall over, it’s able to right itself and get back up. It doesn’t need anyone to go out and help it,” he explains.

He also adds that aerial drones might not be able to get you into tight corners and spaces like the DroneDog.

How Bayer Uses DroneDog for Security Detail

Bayer Global has used DroneDogs for about two years to guard seed corn fields and equipment in Hawaii and California from human, animal and natural threats, including thieves, vandals, feral hogs, deer, flooding and wildfires.

Matthew Paschoal, corporate security lead for the western U.S. and the Pacific regions of Bayer, says the technology has been a “game-changer” as he tries to stay ahead of the curve when it comes to security.

“These dogs checked all the boxes,” he says.

One of Bayer’s sites spans 387 acres, and the DroneDog and humans split the security detail.

“It’s not a replacement; I look at it as a supplementation. It’s a force multiplier for our teams,” Paschoal explains.

This extra reinforcement allows the company to raise its patrol frequency and footprint. The DroneDog takes the graveyard shift patrolling fields in Kihei, Hawaii, after the day shift goes home, and can work 16-hour days.

Security staff can be difficult to keep because of the schedule and work itself, Paschoal shares. However, with this new technology the company does not have to worry as much when they are down employees.

“We’re able to gain efficiency by not having to rehire anybody because we have the dog,” Paschoal explains.

Analysts Fear 2027 Could Be The Toughest Year Yet For Farm Margins

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 21:27:02 GMT

The most important tool on many U.S. farms this spring isn’t a tractor or a high-speed planter — it’s a pencil. Faced with climbing fertilizer costs, some growers are still hunched over spreadsheets and notepads as April shifts to May, trying to determine if corn or soybeans can pencil out.

Market analysts Naomi Blohm of Total Farm Marketing and Matt Bennett of AgMarket.net say they believe the current planting season remains in a state of flux as farmers’ input budgets are tightened to the breaking point.

According to a recent American Farm Bureau Federation survey, 48% of Midwest farmers say they cannot afford their full fertilizer needs for this season.

“Farmers who haven’t paid for fertilizer, are running behind, or are stuck out of the field due to weather are having to factor that into their decision-making,” Bennett says.

Blohm is seeing this reality play out in real-time with her clients. “Two of them openly shared this [past] week that they booked some fertilizer early and went with corn on those acres,” she reports. “But for the remaining acres, they had to stop and think it through and ultimately decided to switch to soybeans.”

Bennett notes that while soybean futures aren’t necessarily “explosive,” they could be a safer bet for cash-strapped operations. “If I’m a grower, and I’m sitting here trying to figure out whether I can make money putting $1,000, $1,100 [of nitrogen an acre] into this corn crop, I look over on the board on beans, and you’re looking at a price a lot of growers can make work just with average yields,” he says.

Blohm adds that what farmers decide to plant will be much clearer by USDA’s June 30 acreage report.

A Three-Year Financial Drain

The current financial stress isn’t happening in a vacuum. Bennett points out that consecutive years of financial pressure have taken their toll across the Midwest.

“The liquidity drain over the last three years has made it really tough for people, and we are even seeing an equity drain for some,” Bennett says. “When cash is this tight, it highlights why you might plant soybeans if you don’t have your anhydrous or urea on yet.”

The fertilizer crisis is fueled by global energy markets and geopolitical instability. Blohm points to India’s recent, aggressive moves to secure supply as a sign of things to come.

“I saw that India this week booked what they needed for fertilizer at double the cost,” she says. “But they don’t have a choice really, based on the amount of wheat that they grow in the world. They have to have a good wheat crop there, and they need that fertilizer.”

Bennett adds the issue isn’t just price — it’s access. “India bought 2.5 million tons of urea to front-run a potentially problematic situation,” he notes. “Disrupted natural gas facilities create a cascade effect that impacts anhydrous and urea production globally.”

2027: “It Scares the Daylights Out of Me”

While 2026 is beyond difficult, analysts are sounding the alarm for 2027. During an afternoon AgriTalk segment , host Michelle Rook asked if 2027 will be even worse.

“It scares the daylights out of me,” Bennett replied. “Projected cash flows and breakevens for 2027 don’t look good at all. Even if someone talks about $5 corn, you have to look at what you’ll have invested in it.”

Blohm agrees that the uncertainty is unprecedented. “Producers have to stay on their toes,” she says. “We don’t know if this shock will be a springboard for higher prices or if it will simply compress margins further.”

The Rotation Debate: Markets vs. Agronomics

How will crop rotations look by 2027? Farm Journal regularly reaches out to a vetted list of 80 ag economists from across the industry. Providing directional insights, the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor shows almost half of the respondents (seven of 16) to the April survey expect soybeans to gain more acres due to renewable diesel demand.

Northeast Iowa farmer Tim Recker sees some potential for a shift. “Renewable diesel demand underpins my local market,” he says. “I see value in policies that turn surplus crops into fuel, but we have to remember that Brazil is still eating our lunch in the global market.”

Central Illinois grain producer and hog producer Chad Lehman has a more cautious outlook.

“Pigs need corn,” Lehman says. “There are real risks with bean-on-bean rotations, including yield penalties and agronomic challenges. Even with more crush capacity, soybean meal prices remain strong, which reinforces the need for steady corn production.”

University of Missouri Agricultural Economist Ben Brown suggests that while “swing acres” might lean toward soybeans next season, many farmers will stick with their rotations.

“I believe 85% of acreage is determined by rotation,” Brown says. “That leaves only 15% to be adjusted based on outside influences.”

Long-Term Risks Of Changing Rotations

Shifting rotations in 2027 can’t be a financial decision only; it carries long-term agronomic consequences. Connor Sible, associate professor and row-crop field researcher at the University of Illinois, cautions that fertilizer cuts made this season could contribute to nutrient depletion in soils.

“If we pull back on nutrients now, those minerals are going to have to come from somewhere — likely the soil supply,” Sible says. “We want to maintain a healthy system over time, so we can’t go too far with input pullbacks.”

For those farmers already eyeing a move to soybeans in 2027, Sible recommends starting the planning process now.

“Think about what herbicide programs you are putting out this summer,” he advises. “You need to account for potential carryover effects if you switch the rotation in a field that was planned for corn to go with soybeans.”

You can hear more from farmers Chad Lehman and Tim Recker and their thoughts on the year ahead in this discussion on AgriTalk, available at the link below:

Can Biologicals Fill The Gap From Reduced Fertilizer Use?

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 20:04:34 GMT

As thin margins and high fertilizer costs squeeze budgets, many corn and soybean growers are asking a hard question this spring: can biological products help out and pay their way in the field?

The answer depends on the goal, according to Connor Sible, University of Illinois field researcher and associate professor.

“Is the goal to get more out of what we’re already doing, enhance the yield in an already pretty intensive, progressive system?” he asks. “Or, are we trying to reduce inputs and then make up for that by maintaining yields with a biological?”

Sible studies high-yield corn and soybean systems and has spent years looking at how biologicals fit into real-world management. He says profitability hinges on getting a biological and a farming system to match. He offers two trains of thought on reaching a return-on-investment (ROI).

1. The Yield Response: Achieving a direct yield increase to offset the product cost.
2. The Efficiency Response: Improving nutrient uptake to maintain yields while reducing traditional inputs.

That framework for biological use underpinned the discussion during an Illinois Soybean Growers webinar on Tuesday: “Stretching Every Pound: Using Biologicals to Maximize Fertility During Input Shortages.” The program was hosted by the University of Illinois and Valent Biosciences.

Drew Harmon, Valent technical agronomist, provided an overview of row-crop farmers’ persistent struggles with accessing and covering the cost of fertilizer going into the 2026 season. He referenced recent American Farm Bureau and Bushel surveys showing the struggle underway across the Corn Belt and how the strain on farmers is changing their behavior.

(AFBF)

Nearly one-third of farmers Bushel surveyed said they will be doing more to manage costs and inputs this season.

(Bushel, Valent BioSciences)

“A lot of people are considering cutting their fertilizer by about 25%,” Harmon says. He reports that on his own farm, where soil tests are “on the higher end of a maintenance plan,” he and his tenant “decided to cut back our P and K by about a third this year.”

Cutting back fertilizer raises a practical question: how do crops still access enough nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) to perform and meet yield expectations?

One potential answer, Harmon and Sible say, is to use arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi, or AMF, especially where phosphorus rates are being reduced.

Harmon explains that mycorrhizal fungi are essentially a beneficial relationship that the fungi have with a host crop such as corn or soybeans. The root system supplies carbon through root exudates and, “in return for that carbon, the mycorrhizal fungi exchange nutrients and water.”

Applied as a seed treatment or in-furrow, AMF spores germinate in response to root exudates and colonize roots, then spread out as fine hyphae – branching, thread-like filaments – through the soil. That network effectively enlarges the rooting zone.

“Utilizing the mycorrhizal hyphae can expand the amount of surface area that [the crop] has to interact with, and it can expand that area by upwards of 50%,” Harmon says. “What that does is increase the opportunities for P and K uptake through diffusion, and it also allows greater access to soil water.”

In fields with lighter soils or facing recurring drought stress, that extended reach can be important. Even as much of the Midwest moves out of formal drought classification, according to the most recent U.S. Drought Monitor, Harmon notes that “we still can get those stretches of heat stress or stretches of flash drought… where we can see strain on our plants for needing water.”

Harmon also lays out an economic example for a typical two-year corn–soybean rotation under a biennial maintenance plan for phosphorus and potassium.

Using removal rates, yield estimates and recent DAP and potash prices, he calculates that a 25% reduction in P and K could offer “savings of mid-$40-ish per acre over a two-year period.”

The cost of using AMF in that scenario, he says, is about $6 per crop or just under $13 per acre over two years.

Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi are essentially a beneficial relationship that the fungi have with a host crop such as corn or soybeans. The root system supplies carbon through root exudates and, “in return for that carbon, the mycorrhizal fungi exchange nutrients and water,” according to Drew Harmon, technical services representative for Valent Biosciences.

(Valent)

“AMF can be a potentially economical tool that could help increase nutrient uptake efficiency for the P and K that we’re reducing,” Harmon says, “while still protecting yield and preserving the majority of the fertilizer savings that you were looking to do.”

Harmon and Sible emphasize, however, that biologicals are not replacements for good agronomy—or for basic fertility.

“I don’t know a biological today that will fix a pH,” Sible says, as a for instance. “If we have a pH issue in the system, we probably need to resolve that before we go looking at new practices.”

A similar principle applies to nitrogen. Sible says nitrogen-fixing products can be useful as “a third source” of N, but they do not remove the need for a sound base rate.

“We often see an early-season biomass bump and higher kernel number potential [resulting from the biological product],” he says.

But to turn that into yield, the corn plant must have the nutrient resources to fill ears, which means adequate nitrogen and in-season management such as late fungicide use and/or supplemental nutrients.

For many farmers, another option this season for consideration is organic acids. Such products are positioned as biostimulants that support nutrient use efficiency, improve stress tolerance, and contribute to early growth.

Across both AMF and organic acids, Sible reminds growers that many biologicals are living tools, whether bacteria or fungi, and must be managed that way.

“A happy plant probably indicates happy microbes. Just like we need good conditions for plant growth, we need good conditions for microbial growth,” he says. “Plants need water, microbes need water. Plants need nutrients, microbes need nutrients.”
Harmon offers a similar caution on having the right set of expectations for using a biological.

“These products are not silver bullets,” he says. “They’re not fertilizer. They’re not going to [deliver] crazy amounts of yields. The majority of time you’re seeing it [improve] somewhere around 5% to 7% if you do see a biological response.”

From 60 to 600 Bu. Per Acre: Is 1,000-Bushel-Corn Next?

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 12:23:14 GMT

Across parts of the South, farmers are sitting on the sidelines this spring, not not because fields are too wet, but because they’re too dry to plant. With dust blowing and soil moisture in short supply, planters are parked as growers wait for rain, a stark reversal of the delays they’re more accustomed to and a reminder that in agriculture, timing is everything.

“We’ve been dry all season so far and we actually stopped planting because we’ve been so dry. Can’t just get the planter in the ground,” says David Hula, a farmer in Charles City, Virginia.

After six weeks of high winds and little to no rainfall, Hula says the conditions are unlike anything he’s experienced.

“I talked to my cousin who’s a decade older than I am, and this is the driest he’s ever seen. And I’ve talked to my agronomist, he says we’re the third or fourth driest on record since 1875 for this time of year. So this is uncharted territory for me right now,” he says.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by U.S. Farm Report (@usfarmreport)

While part of his crop remains unplanted, Hula is encouraged by what’s already in the ground.

“Everything that we’ve planted so far, I feel really good. Emergence has been spot on. Even their soybeans came up good,” Hula says. “We waited till things warmed up, you know, I’m very diligent and patient about that. And all that corn has come up awesome.”

Waiting Without Sacrificing Yield

With roughly 40 percent of his crop planted, Hula is now watching the skies and waiting for moisture before continuing.

“So the portion that you’re waiting on moisture to be able to plant at this point, you don’t feel like you’re sacrificing yield by waiting. You feel like you’re protecting yield,” we asked Hula.

“Oftentimes growers think, well, it’s too wet to plant or it’s been too cold. So they’re the things that you want to wait for. Well, we still, because we’re not late yet, we still want to make sure we get uniform emergence. That’s the key, that’s the first box every grower needs to be paying attention to,” Hula says.

He says with sporadic pockets of moisture within the dry soils, he says conditions are conducive for poor or uneven emergency when planting into drought conditions, and it’s a risk he’s not willing to take.

Hula’s World Corn Yield Record

That focus on emergence has paid off. Hula holds the world record for corn yield, producing more than 623 bu. per acre , a benchmark that underscores his disciplined approach. He says the year he grew that new record yield was in 2023, and it was a crop that wasn’t planted early.

“That was towards the end of May. I mean end of April, first part of May, but it seems like our highest yield stuff comes when we plant later,” Hula says. “And that is again, we’re checking that box of the crop coming up uniformly. And that’s the one thing I don’t know that growers really understand the importance of that. And once they do it and see it, they’ll say, you know, it might have been worth holding off for one week.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by U.S. Farm Report (@usfarmreport)

A Seed Legacy That Dates Back a Century

The hybrid behind that record yield — Pioneer P14830VYHR — carries a legacy that stretches back a century.

“One of the wonderful stories of Pioneer is actually the introduction of Raymond Baker,” says Dean Podlich, who leads R&D digital solutions at Corteva Agriscience, during Pioneer’s 100th anniversary celebration last week. “Raymond Baker was a college student. In 1926, he met Henry Wallace at an event at Iowa State. He was very interested in hybrid corn, and he said, I would like to get involved with hybrid corn to Henry Wallace. Together, they actually put an entry into the Iowa corn yield test, and they actually won that contest in 1927. This is actually a certificate from 1927. We actually have the ribbon.”

Podlich says that early success helped launch hybrid corn into mainstream agriculture.

“Raymond Baker actually quit college in 1928, he joined the company as a farm hand, and he would go on to lead the breeding organization for more than 40 years, especially after Henry Wallace went to Washington. And so there’s a huge amount of history that is the start of our research engine,” he says.

100 Years of Yield: 60 to 600 Bu. Per Acre

One of the inbreds behind modern hybrids, known as Baker’s Inbred or B164, still plays a role today.

“What’s fascinating is that David Hula had a world record with 623 bushels a couple of years ago. We can trace the family tree of the genetics behind that hybrid all the way back to Baker’s Inbred itself,” Podlich says.

Two kernels, 100 years apart: One yielded 60 bushels per acre in 1927; the other topped 623. They look nearly identical on the outside, but a century of genetic innovation separates them under the hood.

(Tyne Morgan)

To the eye, seeds from then and now look nearly identical. But the difference in performance tells a much larger story, from the seed yielding roughly 60 bushels per acre a century ago to more Hula’s record yield of more than 600 bu. per acre today.

“The thing that’s very striking as you look at these two sets of seeds is how similar they are. It’s really hard to see any difference, but under the hood these things are really, really different,” Podlich says. “You have 100 years of selection, 100 years of breeding, 100 years of improved agronomics, improved drought tolerance, and higher genetic potential. This one also has biotech traits in it that help increase yield, protect that yield from insects, and provide herbicide tolerance. So this is what’s so remarkable.”

Is 1,000 Bu. Per Acre Yield Next?

Even with record-setting yields already achieved, Hula believes the ceiling is still far off.

“My late granddad was the first one to break a hundred in the area. My dad, a couple hundred bushels, and we got three, four or five, and where we are now. And that has been a really steep incline. So I’m excited about where things are in the future. I have no clue what the yield potential is,” Hula says.

“Somebody was asking me what the yield potential is today. When you open up the bag, I would say it’s in excess of a thousand bushels. If that’s the case, we’re poor farmers. You know, here the country’s only averaging 180-some bushels, and if the potential is truly that, we’ve got a long way to go. But then can you imagine what price corn would be,” he says.

During Pioneer’s 100th anniversary last week, Sam Eathington, the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) for Pioneer, gave remarks to those in attendance. In his address, he not only looked at the past, but also gave a glimpse into the future. He says in 50 years when Pioneer is celebrating it’s 150th anniversary, he think it’s possible agriculture will have national average corn yield of 300 bu. per acre and record yields reaching 1,000 bu. per acre.

For Hula, he thinks that’s a very reasonable reality even less than 50 years from now.

“Within 50 years, yeah, I do think so. That’s almost doubling where we are. But think about where we have come. And then also think about the technology that’s coming about,” Hula says.

As advancements in seed technology continue and farmers gain deeper insight into soil health through biological tools, Hula says the future of yield remains wide open.

“But as they start figuring out how to allow the plant to be more efficient with what it can find in the soil, I’m excited about that,” he says. “And then the one key that nobody can duplicate is sunlight. As they start figuring out how to make plants more efficient with the sunlight that we have and the moisture, either lack or more, the sky’s the limit.”

Related Story: The Technology Poised to Revolutionize Corn Yields — Just as Biotech Did in the 1980s

'Losing Glyphosate Would Be A Disastrous Blow For Farmers'

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 17:29:49 GMT

Farmers warn that access to cornerstone herbicides like glyphosate is not just a policy debate but a make-or-break factor for conservation, food prices and the future of U.S. agriculture.

On a media call hosted by the Modern Ag Alliance on Friday, three veteran Midwest farmers say they are farming through some of the tightest margins of their careers while shouldering growing uncertainty over crop-protection tools. They argue that science-based regulation, consistent labeling and a predictable legal environment are essential if they are to keep adopting conservation practices and stay competitive globally.

“We depend on crop-protection tools every single day that we’re raising a crop,” says northwest Missouri farmer Blake Hurst, who grows corn and soybeans. “Losing access to crop protection chemicals like glyphosate would be a terrible blow, a disastrous blow for farmers, as we’re facing these tough times.”

The discussion on Friday morning came about as the U.S. Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in the Monsanto v. Durnell case scheduled for Monday, April 27. At the same time, Congress continues work on the farm bill, which contains provisions that could shape how crop-protection products are regulated.

Modern Ag Alliance Executive Director Elizabeth Burns-Thompson says the organization sees the Supreme Court case and farm bill development as landmarks.

“At the end of the day, I think the crux of the question is, if we cannot get the clarity or consistency around labeling, what does that mean big picture?” Burns-Thompson says.

She argues that without clear, uniform federal rules on what constitutes a sufficient label, companies may pull back on manufacturing or innovation, particularly inside the United States.

The Economic Reality Of Crop Protection

Hurst says farmers already operate on “margins that are negative,” forcing them to stretch machinery life, cut back on inputs and take on more debt just to stay in business. If a widely used and relatively affordable herbicide like glyphosate becomes unavailable or more difficult to access, he says the resulting cost increases will ripple from the farm field to the supermarket.

“That eventually shows up on food prices and grocery store shelves,” Hurst says. “We don’t have the margins to absorb major increases in costs, so we will pass those costs along eventually.”

Mark Jackson, who farms with his son southeast of Des Moines, says glyphosate is tightly linked to the conservation systems he has spent decades building. Jackson, a fifth-generation Iowa grower describes a lifetime of watching soil erosion give way to the use of more sustainable practices.

He says his farm has been in no-till for at least 25 years, a shift he also sees is taking root across much of Iowa.

“Roughly 40% or better of Iowa is in no-till conservation status, which is a tremendous mindset and a cultural mindset,” Jackson says. “When you talk about glyphosate leading the charge in conservation, I think we also need to remind people that we don’t use chemicals just willy-nilly.”

Relying On Science-Based Regulation

Jackson points to multiple federal agencies involved in approving and reviewing pesticides as evidence that farmers are using tools vetted by science and regulation.

“They have been approved by the EPA, the FDA, the USDA — you might say all the A’s in the government have gone through the pipelines to allow these chemicals to be used, and then they are reviewed at regular intervals,” he says. “So, I think we need to have confidence in what our government is there for, which is to maintain quality. We still do have the best and most consistent food supply in the world.”

Jackson also cites long-running health research involving farmers as pesticide applicators. Referring to a large North American study that monitored tens of thousands of farmers, including on his own farm, he says the findings in the study do not match public fears about glyphosate.

“Let’s not let emotion drive the conversation, but let’s follow the science,” he says.

Current Agronomic Tools Are Invaluable

For Bill Couser, a central Iowa corn and cattle producer who is “very heavily involved” in the ethanol industry, access to reliable herbicides is part of a larger system that includes livestock feed and low-carbon fuel markets. He says any disruption in tool availability quickly translates into higher input costs and lost opportunity.

“When I grow the feed, I have to make sure I have the lowest cost feedstuffs I can going into my farming operation, and also the safest feedstuffs that we can,” Couser says.

He ties herbicide use to carbon intensity scores that increasingly shape ethanol markets. No-till practices and efficient weed control, he says, help farmers lower carbon intensity levels, which in turn benefits both farmers and ethanol plants.

“When you look at just the state of Iowa and the 43 [ethanol] plants here, why, the way we bring this to our plants and to our livestock operations is huge,” Couser says.

Couser, who serves on an EPA Farm, Ranch and Rural Communities advisory committee, says having farmers at the table with regulators is essential.

“It gives the farmer a seat at the table, and we’re not on the menu,” he says. “We have to make sure that we sit with these industry leaders and make sure that we help them understand and educate them about the science and the products that we need to be able to use to be able to stay profitable in this industry.”

Stifling Innovation And The Path Forward

The farmers on the call said they accept that some older products have been removed from the market for safety reasons. Much of their concern now is that litigation and regulatory uncertainty could chill innovation and push companies to avoid introducing new technologies in the U.S. altogether.

“If we get a negative ruling [on Monday], that is going to make it easier to sue over not only glyphosate, but the other products we use, that means we won’t have new products introduced, because what company will take that risk?” Hurst says, referencing billions of dollars in legal costs tied to glyphosate litigation.

What worries him, he adds, is not just losing glyphosate, but the outlook for future products and continued innovation.

“The question that has to be asked and never is, is what next?” Hurst says. “We’re not going to go back to farming like we did in 1990. We don’t have the labor, we don’t have the diesel, we don’t have the people, and people won’t want to pay what food costs will be if we don’t have these products. So, what next? We’re going to use other chemicals that are more expensive, increasing feed costs, that are more dangerous.”

The farmers describe a common expectation of federal oversight and a shared belief that existing science supports continued use of glyphosate under current labels. Burns-Thompson says that is exactly why the Alliance is pushing for national clarity on labeling standards.

“By having shades of gray state-by-state, as to how that is ultimately satisfied, [it] creates a patchwork of confusion,” she says. “At the end of the day, the product doesn’t change from state-to-state. So neither should the safety warnings.”

For these farmers, what they say they want from policymakers and courts is not a free pass, but a stable, science-led framework that lets them plan years ahead — and keep farming with the next generation.

“We know this thing is changing again,” Couser says, noting that his sons are now the fifth generation on the family operation. “How do we make sure we continue that legacy to make sure they can farm in the future?”

Farmers Emphasize Demand, Not Payments, Is The ‘Bridge To Better Times' For Agriculture

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 22:26:14 GMT

Two Midwest farmers are pinning their hopes for the future on stronger demand for corn and soybeans — especially the latter — as they navigate tight margins, high input costs, and an uncertain price outlook.

Northern Illinois farmer Steve Pitstick and south-central Iowa farmer Dennis Bogaards say they have exhausted most cost-cutting options for this season. They believe future profitability now rests on whether demand for both crops — particularly from domestic soybean crush and fuel markets — expands enough to support higher prices.

One silver lining currently, Pitstick says, is his relatively strong position on fertilizer heading into the 2026 planting season.

“We will do pretty much the dry spread program we always do,” he says. “We cut the rates a little bit on the phosphates just because of price. We booked our 32% in September, something we traditionally do. We have all the nitrogen bought, so I feel good about 2026 from that aspect.”

While he believes additional fertilizer is available, he notes it will likely be priced at a premium.

“I believe I can get more if I need it. I may not like the price, but I can get more,” he told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory during the weekly Farmer Forum segment.

Little To No Expansion On The Horizon

As the season begins, both farmers emphasize that the coming years will have farmers focusing on survival and strategic adjustments rather than acreage expansion.

One adjustment Bogaards is making is front-loading some of his nitrogen needs this season while leaving a portion open in case prices break.

“We booked anhydrous early on for this year, back in early fall, and got an OK price,” Bogaards says. “I have a little bit of sidedress that we do. We book about half of that, and I sit open on the rest of it. I’ll wait and see where it goes.”

Bogaards remains committed to sidedressing as long as product is available and prices do not continue ratcheting up. “If I can get it, I’ll put it on, unless it is a crazy, crazy price,” he says.

Like many U.S. growers, both Bogaards and Pitstick say there is virtually no room left to cut fertilizer use without risking yields.

“There is no place to cut back. We are being as efficient as we can be,” Pitstick says.

Bogaards agrees, noting that nitrogen is not the place to skimp. “Maybe a year or so, you can cut back on the P and K a little bit, but you do not want to get caught in three or four years of that.”

He also remains reluctant to drop fungicides. “Fungicides really pay off,” he says. “In the past, we did not use them, but the last few years they really paid, and I would hate to not spray them.”

Uncertainty About The 2027 Crop Mix

While the 2026 crop is largely “business as usual,” both farmers told Flory that 2027 brings real uncertainty—especially regarding nitrogen supplies. Pitstick is concerned about how global demand could impact costs for U.S. producers.

“I am worried about the price of the nitrogen,” he says. “It may not be an issue in the United States from a supply standpoint, but the rest of the world… could export our product because of opportunity cost, and that drives the price up. It is a total wait and see.”

Flory underscored how global trade flows directly shape what American farmers pay, noting that some fertilizer shipments originally destined for the U.S. were recently rerouted.

“Some boats are diverted from the U.S. to other countries,” Flory says. “If you want your share, you have to beat the next guy in line with the price.”

If nitrogen prices soar while corn prices stagnate, Pitstick says his rotation could shift. “That might change how we do things in 2027. We may have to go to more soybeans,” he says.

Bogaards also expects to alter his corn–soybean mix, given the potential demand from domestic crush and renewable fuels.

“In the past, we were probably 60% to 65% corn,” he says. “We have been backing off of that. I still do a little bit of corn-on-corn, but I might try to go to a 50–50 rotation.”

Flory believes this shift could help rebalance supplies and improve price prospects. “If we can pull some acres away from corn and get this thing rebalanced, maybe that is our bridge to a better time,” Flory says. “Our bridge to a better time is more demand across the board and crops competing for acres — not another payment.”

Bogaards says the shifting economics are already evident. “A couple of years ago, people said soybeans are a drag on our financial statements. It looks like almost the opposite right now.”

Even so, Bogaards is cautious about making long-term decisions based on short-term signals. “I can change acres right now, but by next fall, it might be the worst decision. I think you have to go with your rotation and stick with it.”

Pitstick links his long-term outlook to fuel sector growth, noting that both corn and soybeans increasingly function as energy crops.

“Some of the most profitable years of my career were when we had high fuel prices because we were also a fuel crop,” he says. “I have some optimism that these high fuel prices will cause some demand and increase our crop prices.”

For now, both farmers say their immediate job is to manage through 2026 while keeping their options open. With high costs for fertilizer, fuel, and machinery, they see expanded demand as the only realistic path forward.

“It is just survival at this point,” Bogaards says. “We just have to make sure we can survive and keep plugging through it.”

You can listen to the complete discussion between Bogaards, Pitstick and Flory on AgriTalk at the link below:

Illinois Farmers Sidelined by Rain and Storms, as Southern Farmers Plant at Record Rates

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 15:21:30 GMT

While many Southern farmers are shattering speed records for the 2026 planting season, planters are sidelined for many farmers in the Midwest who are facing wet conditions. For the father-and-son duo of Dave and Chris Harrell, the 2026 season is off to a slow start. However, the corn and soybean farmers in Hancock County think the slight setback could be a setup for a successful season later.

Chris and Dave Harrell test the planter in Carthage, Ill.

(Haley Bickelhaupt)

“[There’s] little to nothing going on at all this week,” Chris Harrell said April 17.

“I know we’ve had roughly five-and-a-half inches in the last in the last two weeks,” he adds. The Harrells received 2 more inches of rain and storms last weekend.

The nation’s corn crop is currently 11% planted, sitting 2 points ahead of the five-year average. Much of that momentum is coming from Illinois and Indiana, which both had a big week in the field. Illinois is now 13% planted, and Indiana follows closely at 14%. However, the western Corn Belt is seeing a different pace. Iowa is off to a slow start, with just 2% of its corn crop in the ground as of this week.

Soybean planting is moving even faster relative to historical norms. Nationally, soybean planting is 7 points ahead of the five-year average at 12% of the soybean crop planted.

Harrell says farmers south of his family’s farm in Carthage, Ill., are further along planting. The Harrells planted one field of beans March 30 before rain paused their efforts. With 40 years of experience under his belt, Dave Harrell thinks the rain won’t set them back too far and that it will helpful in the weeks to come.

“We’ve got ample time,“ Dave says. “You know, it’s still middle of April, so we’ll be fine.”

Shown is the Harrells’ bean field as of April 17, 2026.

(Haley Bickelhaupt)

Navigating the Bottom Line: Diesel and Inputs

While the rain may eventually prove to be a blessing in disguise for yields, input costs, specifically fuel, are weighing heavily on the books. According to AAA, the average diesel price in Illinois this week is approximately $1.80 higher than it was this time last year.

“The diesel prices, I think, is No. 1 top of mind subject right now,“ Chris explains. “I mean, the price of corn’s gone up with it, but I think a lot of farmers would say it’s not gone up enough to offset some of it.”

To combat these rising costs, Dave is utilizing strip-till practices. He also relies on early contracts to lock in fuel prices.

“We lucked out and had some contracted to kind of cover our spring needs, so we’ll be OK through the spring,” he says.

(AAA)

Finding Opportunity in Non-GMO Premiums

In addition to conventional corn and soybeans, the Harrells also plant non-GMO corn from Wyffels. While the process requires more management, Dave said the financial upside makes it a win-win situation.

“It’s a little extra work on segregation and storage and clean out,” Chris says. “You just kind of have to have a little checklist and get through it all, but the premiums are nice, especially in a tougher environment like this.”

Four generations of the Harrell family stand for a photo. Dave’s dad still helps out on the farm today at 95 years old.

(Chris Harrell)

Looking Ahead

As the fields in Carthage begin to dry out, a new challenge has emerged: High winds are currently preventing spraying operations. However, the Harrells are rolling with the punches, expecting farmers in their area to potentially move back into full-scale fieldwork by Wednesday.

Chris Harrell works on the planter while waiting for fields to dry out.

(Haley Bickelhaupt)

This barn on the Harrells’ farm was built in the early 1900s. It’s been through storms and been given updates. Today, it serves as a shop for the family.

(Mike Byers)

Historic Gains in the Corn Belt South

According to latest USDA reports, corn planting in Kentucky and Tennessee is moving at its fastest rate since 2012. The numbers tell a story of an efficient window:

Tennessee — Farmers have 64% of the corn crop in the ground, which is a massive 40-point jump ahead of the five-year average and 42 points ahead of last year.
Kentucky — Growers are nearly halfway finished, sitting roughly 30 points ahead of the normal pace.

Soybeans See Record-Setting Pace

The speed isn’t limited to corn. Soybean planting is also rewriting the record books in the Deep South:

Louisiana — Leading the pack at 58% planted, which is 26 points ahead of average and the fastest pace in USDA history.
Mississippi — Currently at 55% planted, running 32 points ahead of the usual pace, another record.
Tennessee — Soybean planting has hit the 50% mark, 41 points ahead of the historical average.

The ‘Dry’ Reality: Farmers Forced to Wait

While the dry weather allowed for uninterrupted field time early on, the lack of moisture is now a major hurdle. David Hula says for growers in the Southeast, the dust has become too much.

“We’ve been dry all season so far, and we actually stopped planting because we’ve been so dry,” Hula says. “Can’t just get the planter in the ground, but it’s the first top, the first planting window. We waited till things warmed up, you know; I’m very diligent and patient about that, and all that corn has come up awesome.”

He says they stopped planting last Thursday, and there’s no measurable rain in the forecast.

“I don’t know when we’re gonna get started back,” Hula says.

Pocket of Extreme Drought

The topsoil moisture maps highlight a stark reality for the region. In a corridor stretching from Virginia to Georgia, topsoil rated “short to very short” in ranges from 83% to a staggering 97%. It has become one of the driest pockets in the country, creating a sharp contrast to the Midwest.

Canadian Farmers Look For A Fresh Start After The Driest Year In Decades

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:47:51 GMT

The way Tim Webster tells it, his 2025 cropping season was nearly a disaster. Summer delivered the lowest July–August rainfall his area had seen in 50 years. That lack and abnormally high temperatures pushed corn and soybeans to their limits.

“We had just enough moisture to get to the finish line,” recalls Webster, a sixth-generation farmer based just west of Lindsay, Ontario, Canada. The end result: corn and soybean yields came in at about half of normal.

Webster and fellow farmer Steve Crothers, who farms on the north shore of Lake Ontario about 50 miles east of Toronto, recently sat down with Illinois-based Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie to talk about how they’re adjusting cropping plans for 2026 after last year’s drought.

Drought Reshapes Farmer Expectations

For Webster, last season was a stark reminder of how quickly yield potential can evaporate. Ultimately, Webster’s bottom line took a hit.

“We’re hoping that doesn’t repeat again,” he told Ferrie.

Crothers’ experience, though slightly better, was still defined by drought. Growing corn, soybeans, wheat and edible beans along Lake Ontario, he says it was the driest of his 40-plus years in farming.

“We had a couple half-inch rains, so we kind of ended up with three-quarters of our long-term average yield. So, we fared a little bit better,” Crothers says.

Still, the season left him and Webster concerned about their cropping plans and finances for this year.

Crop Insurance As A Lifeline

Ferrie drew a comparison between Canadian and American safety nets as he listened to Crothers and Webster describe their experiences. In the U.S., Ferrie notes farmers often lean on multiple levels of crop insurance to blunt losses in a bad production year. He asked whether similar options exist for Canadian farmers.

Webster replied that growers there do have a provincial crop insurance program, but participation and coverage levels vary.
“I think we all felt after last year, maybe we should have been insured a little higher. But we were very happy to have what we had to help pay the bills, that’s for sure,” Webster notes.

Crothers says specialty crops, including edible white beans and adzuki beans, come under similar insurance frameworks as corn and soybeans, though they have higher premiums because of their higher value.

Most of the white beans grown in his part of Ontario head to the United Kingdom, while the adzuki beans (also called mung beans) are shipped to Japan, Crothers notes. Those export markets add another layer of risk to already weather-sensitive crops, making insurance an important backstop when weather or markets turn against them.

Fertilizer Sticker Shock Hits Canadian Growers

If drought defined 2025, fertilizer prices loom large over this season for Canadian farmers, much like they do for U.S. farmers.

“For 2026 our biggest thing is hope — hope for typical average rainfalls after last year’s drought,” Crothers says. “And then, of course, the economic challenges with the fertilizer situation are obviously troubling to everybody.”

He tells Ferrie most fertilizer in his part of Ontario is not prepaid “The fellows using 28% are usually prepaid, because it’s been hard to get the last few years. But generally, not near as much fertilizer is prepaid as what, in a perfect world, would have been.” Crothers reports.

That leaves many Canadian farmers more exposed to potential sticker shock as they head into spring planting.

Webster says he pre-bought some of his nitrogen (N) in February and is now leaning hard into a strategy of splitting applications and dialing back on more expensive, slow-release N options where he can.

This year, for his wheat topdress program, fertility costs didn’t pencil out, forcing a change in his plans.

“It’s $32 more [per acre] to go with the time-release product versus straight urea,” Webster notes. “So, I think on our wheat this year we’re going to do a lot of split applications.”

With diesel, fertilizer and other costs trending higher, he says, “anything you can do to save small increments adds up … for the whole operation.”

Cropping Plans: Adjust Or Stay The Course?

Both farmers describe their region as an area where crop rotations remain fairly consistent: corn, soybeans and wheat typically share the mix. Asked whether high input prices and drought fears would drive large acreage shifts this season, Webster says his own operation plans to stay the course with its rotation, helped by a marketing strategy that spreads grain sales out over time to manage risk and meet mortgage payments.

Still, he’s aware some of his neighbors are recalibrating their cropping plans.

“I know some guys are going to go less corn, more beans — just less dollars to put it in,” Webster notes. “Maybe the profits aren’t as high, but there’s less risk involved.”

Ferrie notes that, similar to Ontario, many U.S. growers also appear to be largely holding to their established crop plans, as their major fertilizer and seed commitments were already made before input costs soared.

In a region still feeling the effects of the driest season in decades, both Webster and Crothers are essentially betting on a return to something closer to normal this season — average rains, manageable input costs and no repeat of last year’s extremes.

“If we get good yields, then we can deal with those [costs],” Crothers says. “But another weather year like last year would definitely be a struggle for a lot of people.”

Crothers and Webster spoke with Ferrie during a meeting hosted by the Durham Soil and Crop Association, a grassroots group that works under Ontario’s agricultural umbrella to bring new ideas, funding opportunities and conservation programs to farmers in the region.

You can catch the entire conversation between Ferrie, Crothers and Webster on this week’s Boots In The Field podcast, available below.

Survey Says Farmers Cut Corn Acres Since the War Started

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:15:51 GMT

Surging input costs and questions about fertilizer prices and availability have some farmers reconsidering their planting intentions.

A private survey conducted by grain merchandiser Farmer’s Keeper shows a sizable cut in corn acres since USDA’s March Prospective Planting report . Remember, the USDA survey was fielded in early March before the full impact of the war in Iran was felt. Since then the fertilizer supply crunch and price spike might have forced some farmers to move away from corn last minute.

Farmer’s Keeper asked nearly 4,000 of its customers in 27 states the following question: “Since fertilizer prices have risen, how have your corn acres changed?”

The results show:

No Change - 76%
Decrease - 20.3%
Increase - 3.7%

(Farmer’s Keeper )

“We just saw in March a surprisingly high to many of us corn acreage number from USDA and a relatively lower soybean number,” says Nick Tsiolis, CEO, Farmer’s Keeper. “What that tells us is potentially we might start to see those numbers converge with corn acres coming down and soybean acres coming up.”

Acreage Shifts Tied to Fertilizer Prices and Supplies

Tsiolis says the fertilizer supply crunch is one factor causing last-minute shifts.

“What we’re hearing from the co-ops is many farmers are not even going to be able to get the fertilizer they want,” he explains. “Even if they wanted to increase their corn acres, they wouldn’t be able to do that.”

The near-record high prices, especially for urea, are also playing a role in the decision, according to Tsiolis.

“When you get a price spike in fertilizer, with already a challenged ag economy out there, it’s going to lead the farmer to say, ‘Man, I’m spending several hundred dollars an acre more to put in this corn crop for relatively less profitability when I could put in some bean acres and almost know that at least at today’s current prices, I’m going to break even or a little bit better.’”

A fertilizer study conducted by the American Farm Bureau Federation shows 67% of Midwest farmers pre-booked fertilizer. Where are the shifts likely to come from?

“I think if we’re going to see any kind of big movement from the March intentions for corn and soybeans, it’s probably going to come from the fringe area,” says Brian Grete, CommStock Investments. “I will include [that area] up into the Plains and the northern Plains and down through the South and Southeast. Those are the areas where we could see the biggest shift.”

There probably won’t be many acreage changes in the central Corn Belt, he says, so the crops most at risk are peanuts, cotton and others specific to the South.

The 20-Bushel Wake-Up Call One Farmer Is Using To Boost Soybean Yields

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 16:42:59 GMT

For years, Stephen Butz watched his corn yields climb while his soybeans stalled. The numbers didn’t lie: corn was steadily improving, while soybeans were “average at best,” he recalls, running hot and cold from year to year with no clear pattern.

“Our soybeans were just plateauing,” says Butz, who farms near Kankakee, Ill.

The turning point for Butz came several years ago on a 120-acre field split between two soybean varieties — 80 acres on the north side and 40 acres on the south. Everything matched: planting date, field conditions, management. The only difference was the variety planted.

At harvest, the 40-acre section of the field was 18 to 19 bushels per acre better.

A talk with Butz’s seedsman revealed the answer: the higher-yielding soybeans carried the Peking source of resistance to soybean cyst nematode (SCN). That single difference explained nearly 20-bushels-per-acre the farm had been losing to SCN for years.

“Honestly, it was just one of those deals where our seed guy had said, ‘Hey, this is a good number.’ So we’d planted the variety kind of naively,” Butz says. “But lo and behold, it was a huge benefit for us and showed us a problem we had on this farm and other farms, too.”

With the initial finding of SCN, Butz started soil testing to identify how significant the problem was across his farm. Surprisingly, soil tests revealed SCN populations ranging from the low hundreds to as high as 5,000 per sample.

“We’ve got a good amount of farms in that 3,000 to 5,000 count, which is an extremely high amount that I need to address,” says Butz, who samples fields ahead of planting.

Spring 2026: Going 100% Peking

After splitting acres for several years between non-GMO and Enlist soybeans, Butz made a decisive shift to the latter for 2026 as the non-GMO soybeans do not carry resistance to SCN.

“This spring, we are going with 100% Peking,” he says

For Butz, the move is less about chasing bonus bushels of soybeans and more about stopping the hidden losses SCN has been causing. He’s certain he’s left a lot of yield potential on the table in previous seasons.

“We’re not so much adding bushels (with the Peking) as we expect to relieve the stress that’s been taking bushels away,” he says.

Going all-Peking this season is only part of his management plan. The other piece is rotating more between corn and soybeans and, over time, between different SCN technologies, including Peking and PI 88788.

Butz’s cropping pattern follows a rough structure of thirds in any given year: about a third of his total acres in corn or soybeans and another third in continuous corn. That same structure drives his soil sampling schedule and will, in the future, he says, guide how he rotates SCN resistance traits across the landscape.

He also hopes to bring new technology into the mix, including the new SCN solution on the way from BASF Agricultural Solutions, called Nemasphere. It is the first-ever biotech trait designed specifically to address SCN.

Unlike traditional native resistance found in PI 88788 and Peking, Nemasphere is based on a transgenic trait — a Cry14 protein engineered directly into the soybean — explains Hugo Borsari, BASF vice president of business management for seeds in North America.

Beyond Yield: Logistics And Longevity

For Butz, the case for more soybeans, and especially better-protected soybeans, isn’t just agronomic. It’s logistical and financial.
Soybeans help spread out workload during planting and harvest, he explains, easing the strain of managing continuous corn acres. They also inject rotation into fields that might otherwise lean too heavily to continuous corn.

“Years of continuous corn in some spots is fine, but rotation is obviously better,” he said during a recent panel discussion hosted by BASF.

Like he found out by accident, Butz says he believes many other growers might be losing significant yield to SCN without realizing it.

“You might live in an area that you raise 75-bushel beans all the time, or 80-bushel beans, and that’s amazing. But what if the potential is 90 or 100 bushels?“ Butz asks. “There’s plenty of people out there that might be losing 10, 15 bushels off the top, and that adds up fast. You’re freaking losing $100 an acre pretty quick that would help a lot with your bottom line.”

Maryland Farmer Turns Stringent Fertilizer Restrictions Into An Opportunity To Innovate

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 19:15:34 GMT

On the Delmarva Peninsula, where every pound of fertilizer applied is regulated, Maryland farmer Temple Rhodes is rebuilding his corn production system from the ground up — literally.

“We are in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, so all eyes are on us,” Rhodes says. “I am 50 miles from Baltimore, 50 miles from D.C., 67 miles from Philadelphia. We are in a hotbed of regulation.”

For the past 25-plus years, Chestnut Manor Farms has operated under a state-mandated nutrient management plan that caps how much nitrogen and phosphorus can be applied. Rhodes says participating in the program is not voluntary.

“It is forced on us with no incentive. You just have to do it,” he says. “So, we have to reinvent ourselves. We have to start looking at other ways to do things.”

Rhodes grows corn, soybeans and wheat, along with a few acres of grain sorghum. He also runs a cow-calf operation and backgrounds a couple hundred head of steers each winter on cover crops. The diversity helps, but the real transformation is happening in how he feeds his 1,700-acre corn crop.

From Front-Loading To Spoon-Feeding

For years, the standard practice was to front-load fertilizer before planting and hope enough stayed in place through the growing season. Under tighter rules and scrutiny, Rhodes says that approach no longer works.

“We used to put 100% of our nitrogen up front, then plant a crop on it and expect it to be there all along,” he says. “That is where we find out we are making a mistake. We are limited in how much fertility we can put on, so we better get it on at the right time, in the right place, or we are going to run out.”

Today, Chestnut Manor relies on what Rhodes describes as a systematic, layered approach that can include planter-applied fertilizer (in-furrow and 2x2 programs), split in-season applications of nitrogen, extensive cover crops and biologicals.

“When you take a systematic approach to all these things, it becomes a different animal,” Rhodes says.

Most of his corn is grown using a strip-till system with strips built in the spring. State rules prevent him from applying fertilizer in the fall, so he must work ahead of the planter using modest rates of nitrogen and then follow up with in-season applications.

“My end goal is to grow 225 bushels per acre,” he says. “I am going to put about 0.7 pounds of nitrogen per bushel on my crop. I can get away with that if I spoon-feed it correctly. If I put it all down up front, I am going to need about 1.25 pounds. I’m saving a lot of fertility by doing it this way.”

Rhodes says Maryland’s regulatory framework ensures he stays within strict application limits. The state’s phosphorus usage tool combines soil samples, yield history, location and soil type into an algorithm that dictates what farmers can apply.

“You put your soil samples in, you put your yield goal in, and it spits out what you can put on,” Rhodes says. “If you say your yield goal is 250 bushels but your APH is only 180, that is not how it works. Your APH and your yield goal have to be very similar, or you are not going to get to put on what you want. They are going to tell you what you can put on. Period.”

A New Technology Takes Root

Working under those constraints, Rhodes has become aggressive about testing new technologies that promise better nutrient efficiency and stronger root systems. Not one to be painted into a corner, Rhodes stays open to all ideas of what could work within the state’s mandated parameters. One of those is a biostimuant from NewLeaf Symbiotics.

The product is a non-GMO, naturally occurring bacteria known as PPFMs (Pink-Pigmented Facultative Methylotrophs), often called “M-trophs”. The PPFM-powered biostimulant is designed to improve crop yield, nutrient uptake, and stress tolerance, according to NewLeaf.

In the process of trialing the product, Rhodes shared the technology with XtremeAg, a group of seven farmers across the country who rigorously test new technologies in different environments.

“If we can test a product at multiple locations — a guy from Iowa, a guy from Maryland, a guy down South — and it works across everybody, that is big,” Rhodes says. “It is huge, because what works for me might not work for the guy in the Midwest. It all goes back to soil type and environment.”

Rhodes says what he was looking for from the biostimulant was stress mitigation and nutrient scavenging that can improve his current foundation for the future.

“I need a massive root system that can go out and get more nutrients, because I am limited on how many nutrients I can put on,” he says. “If I build a plant that scavenges more, that is a home run for us.”

Cutting Irrigation And Boosting Biomass

Rhodes farms a mix of acres, with about 25% irrigated and 75% dryland. After the first year of trialing the NewLeaf technology he found he didn’t need to run his irrigation system as frequently.

“The root system and the plant that it makes, I do not have anywhere near the stress,” he says. “When it’s hot and dry we would normally run the irrigation system, but I found I do not need to put on as much water.”

With irrigation costing about $125 per acre, every pass he eliminates adds up to a significant savings.

“If I make 12 passes a year, I can save $10 an acre just by not turning it on one time,” he says.

Beyond water savings, Rhodes estimates he is getting 30% more biomass in the plants.

“We actually cut corn stalks off at the ground and weighed them. We did not even measure the roots — just the plant itself. Thirty percent more biomass than my grower standard practice,” he says.

The biomass offers a payoff for grain production and nutrients for his cattle operation.

“I chop silage, so if I can add 30% more, that is 30% fewer acres I need to chop,” he reports. “It costs me by the acre, so 30% less is massive. And the nutrients in that plant are higher than in my grower standard practice. It all follows each other.”

Learning Curve And Next Steps

While the product delivers more biomass and higher yields, it did create new management challenges. Rhodes discovered the downside of building a much bigger plant on a tight nitrogen budget.

“In my system, I put about 30% of my nitrogen needs down with my strip till. I plant on top of it, everything looks great, it makes this massive system — and then I end up running out of nitrogen later in the season,” he recalls.

He spotted the problem at harvest, with many ears showing considerable tip-back of an inch or two. Rhodes figures the crop just “outran” his nitrogen program. Even so, the fields containing the experimental treatment still out-yielded his standard fields by an average of 11 bushels per acre.

The experience pushed him to rethink nitrogen application timing and total rate.

“I’m pulling some of the front-end nitrogen out and putting it into reproduction, so I do not run out at the end,” he says. “Instead of 0.7 pounds per bushel, maybe I can go to 0.8 or 0.9, maybe even one-to-one, and still be efficient because of what this product is doing.”

The results from the past two years of field testing are strong enough that Rhodes is no longer treating the technology as a small trial.
“We plant about 1,700 acres of corn, so it’s going on every acre of corn,” he says.

On a tightly regulated farm in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, Rhodes is betting that bigger roots, smarter fertilizer use and careful experimentation with nutrients will keep his operation profitable — all while staying within the rules.

Why Your Herbicide Can Fail Even if You Follow the Label

Thu, 16 Apr 2026 18:37:11 GMT

When weeds break through your herbicide, it’s easy to blame the product, rate or application timing. However, weed-control experts Greg Dahl and Joe Ikley suggest the real culprits might be something else altogether: the water in the tank and the adjuvant — or lack thereof — mixed into it.

Dahl, a retired research manager at WinField United, says hard data tells the story best. After reviewing thousands of university trials, he found
that skipping the herbicide’s required adjuvant is an invitation for weed-control failure.

“We saw a 30% to 90% reduction in weed control when the adjuvant was left out,” Dahl says. “That’s a pretty big sting.”

But simply using an adjuvant isn’t enough. The trials showed that using the wrong class of adjuvant in the tank can slash performance by up to 50%. Even settling for a “good enough” product over a premium version can result in a 25% drop in efficacy. Notes Dahl: In the world of weed control, “close enough” often isn’t.

(Council of Producers & Distributors of Agrotechnology)

Solutions That Work

Hard water in the spray tank is often a contributor to poor weed control. When spray water is loaded with calcium and magnesium cations, that can create a hostile environment for weak-acid herbicides like glyphosate. These minerals physically bind to the herbicide, forming particles the plant cannot absorb.

“Plants don’t eat rocks,” says Ikley, a weed specialist at North Dakota State University Extension.

To counter this, he and Dahl recommend using ammonium sulfate (AMS) as a dedicated water conditioner. Dahl’s research indicates that in cases of extreme hardness, adding at least 8.5 lbs. of AMS per 100 gallons is necessary to fully neutralize the water and restore herbicide efficacy.

However, the battle isn’t just in the tank; it’s often on weed leaves. Ikley points out that certain weeds, like velvetleaf, actually secrete their own calcium crystals onto their leaf surfaces.

“Several of our weed species actually need higher AMS rates because of the crystals on the surface of that leaf,” Ikley explains. “We have to account for that interaction on the weed surface, not just in the water.”

While “all-in-one” adjuvant blends offer convenience, Ikley and Dahl urge caution. To hit a specific price point or fit multiple ingredients into the jug, manufacturers sometimes compromise on the water-conditioning component. University trials consistently show that very few “convenience” products can outperform the gold-standard combination of AMS plus a nonionic surfactant, Ikley and Dahl say.

Conditioners Aren’t All Created Equal

Dahl and Ikley both note that water conditioners and “all-in-one” adjuvants vary widely in performance. To get everything into a gallon and hit a certain price point, they say manufacturers sometimes compromise and come up short on one of the functions, often the one for water conditioning.

Ikley says university trials show only a handful of conditioners outperform the standard combination of AMS plus a nonionic surfactant.

“A few of the water conditioners do quite well,” he reports. “The rest don’t perform as well as AMS plus surfactant.”

Before they select or change the adjuvant used, Dahl and Ikley tell farmers to test their water, and ask the laboratory to report the results to them in parts per million.

“Some labs report in grains, and then you’ve got to do more math,” Dahl says.

Ikley adds a practical tip: always run the water for a few minutes before taking a sample to ensure you aren’t testing stagnant residue from the lines.

Ultimately, adjuvants are a valuable safety net for herbicide performance and weed control. As Dahl puts it, “You can raise herbicide rates until you can’t anymore. When you need help, the adjuvants can help.”

Cut Through The Biological Noise To Find Real ROI

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 21:05:02 GMT

Biologicals are booming across the agricultural landscape, propelled by a surge of new products and high-octane promises. Yet, when the invoice arrives, farmers are often left with this nagging question: Did I actually need that?

University of Illinois field researcher and assistant professor Connor Sible is on a mission to provide clarity. Drawing on a decade-plus of in-field study in corn and soybean systems, Sible offers a farmer-first filter to cut through the marketing noise. His research is helping growers determine where these tools offer a reliable return on investment — and where they fall flat.

“Start with your agronomy, then decide if a biological adds value on top,” he advises. “They’re not a shortcut around good fundamentals.”

One of the key reasons why farmers struggle to cut through the noise and identify which biological products will work for them results from the shear number of biological products in the marketplace. Another challenge is what this class of products is called. Academia and regulators use the term biostimulants. Ag media, companies and most farmers increasingly use the broader term biologicals.

The 2025 crop biostimulant list was capped at 450 companies. Sible notes that most companies offer multiple products, so if the chart were redrawn by product labels instead of company logos, it would “get out of control pretty quickly.” In his own review of just row-crop (corn, wheat, soy) products, he examined 155 products and found 139 unique microbial species used as active ingredients.

(Connor Sible Presentation)

The Baseline: Deliver on Fundamentals

For all the excitement surrounding biologicals, Sible encourages farmers to focus on unglamorous agronomic foundations first. He describes biologicals as next-step inputs; they can sharpen a high-performing cropping system, but they will not rescue one built on outdated practices.

“I do not know of a biostimulant or biological today that will fix your pH,” Sible says. “If you’ve got a soil pH issue, fix that first. Same with drainage, and same with using the same hybrid you’ve used for six years just because it’s still available.”

The Logistics: Is it Dead or Alive?

Once the fundamentals are solid, Sible says a practical next step is to consider whether a product is living or non-living.

Beneficial microbes — such as nitrogen-fixers, phosphorus-solubilizers, residue degraders, and many seed-applied inoculants — are alive. Many biostimulants — including humic and fulvic acids, certain enzymes, and kelp- or marine-based formulations — are not.

That distinction isn’t just academic; it determines whether a product has any chance of working by the time it reaches your field.

“If you’re buying something living, you’re buying a responsibility,” Sible says. “You have to keep it alive from delivery to application.”

He urges farmers to evaluate their shop conditions: Can you provide temperature stability? Is the product sitting against an uninsulated exterior wall? If the logistics of babysitting a living organism do not fit your management style, Sible suggests using only non-living biostimulants.

Nutrient Efficiency: Boosting Nitrogen

Few biological categories have generated as much buzz as nitrogen fixers. Sible’s work suggests they can play a role — but not the one many farmers might first imagine.

For a typical corn crop, about half the nitrogen comes from applied fertilizer and about half from soil organic matter and mineralization.

Biological N fixers are best thought of as a third source of nitrogen, he says, helping to cover shortfalls when fertilizer is lost or tied up, or soil mineralization doesn’t keep pace with crop demand.

From his data on a 230-bushel corn crop, the key number is 7 pounds of nitrogen per acre per day. That’s how much the plant must take up every day for about three weeks at peak demand. At 300 bushels, that jumps to around 9 pounds per acre per day. One of the questions farmers need to ask their retailer on a nitrogen-fixing biological they’re considering is, how much will it help provide during the key periods of demand?

Corn requires significant amounts of nitrogen during key growth stages to deliver a 230-bushel corn crop. The demand makes it hugely challenging for a biological to deliver sufficient N as a standalone product.

(Connor Sible)

Sible makes two critical points:

Don’t cut N and expect a biological to fully replace it.
When growers drop early-season nitrogen in hopes that microbes will fill the gap, his team often sees corn respond by reducing kernel set. The yield ceiling falls before the biological has time to colonize and contribute.
Placement and mode of action matter.
Products marketed as N fixers don’t all work the same way. Some colonize roots externally, some live inside the plant as endophytes, and some may enhance N assimilation rather than truly fixing atmospheric N. That affects:
- Whether they’re best applied in-furrow, on-seed or foliar.
- What they can be tank-mixed with.
- When they’ll begin supplying nitrogen.

Farmers trialing N-fixing products this season should treat them as insurance or a supplement and not a license to slash N rates across the board, Sible advises.

Phosphorus-Solubilizing Microbes

Soils often hold a high volume of total phosphorus, but much of it is locked in forms plants cannot access. Certain microbes can free up this nutrient by secreting weak organic acids that chelate soil cations away from phosphate.

In field trials, the most consistent benefits occurred when microbes were supplied in-furrow or very near the roots and applied alongside phosphorus fertilizer. Using “difference methods” to track uptake, Sible reports that baseline efficiencies often sat between 4% and 7%. With a P-solubilizing product, that jumped to the 7% to 11% range in some environments.

“It’s still not great, but it nearly doubled our efficiency in some environments,” he says. However, he cautions that cutting fertilizer back significantly and expecting microbes to “mine” the difference is not a reliable strategy.

The Carbon Battle: Residue Management

Residue degradation is where Sible sees some of the strongest opportunities for biologicals, especially in high-yield or no-till systems.

Every 10 bushels of corn adds about 440 pounds of residue; over a decade, a yield gain of 25 bushels can mean an extra half-ton of residue per acre.

The challenge is the high carbon-to-sulfur ratio in corn stalks, which ties up nutrients. Sible’s research has found that biological degraders are inconsistent on their own but show significant synergy when paired with nitrogen and sulfur.

“If you’re going to use these, understand they’re fighting an uphill battle against carbon,” Sible says.

He also stresses application timing: “Spray on cloudy days or in the evening to take advantage of overnight dew. You have to set the product up to succeed.”

Carbon and Humic Products

When evaluating humic acids and molasses-type products (sugar), Sible notes a clear divide between crops. In soybeans, results have been largely inconsistent. In corn, however, in-furrow carbon and humic products produced small but consistent yield gains that held up under economic analysis.

Sible attributes this to crop physiology. Corn makes major yield decisions twice: during early vegetative stages (kernel potential) and at pollination (kernel retention). Supporting the plant during these specific windows has offered a measurable response.

Soybeans, by contrast, adjust yield daily from flowering through seed fill, making them a much harder target for a single application of a biostimulant.

Stress-Mitigating Products

Sible sees value in some stress-mitigating products — often kelp or marine extracts — that claim to help crops tolerate drought, heat or other abiotic stress. He notes these materials are often rich in metabolites that help plants survive extreme fluctuations in temperature, moisture and salinity.

When applied to crop leaves, these materials can trigger stress-defense pathways.But they only work if they’re applied before the stress hits.

“You have to be proactive, not reactive,” Sible says. “If the corn is already curled or the soybean leaves are flipped over, it’s too late for these products to do much.”

He tells farmers to watch their 7- to 10-day forecasts and time applications ahead of expected heat waves or dry spells, adding that these products are ineffective as rescue treatments.

From Products to Purpose

Across all categories of biological products, Sible’s advice remains the same: define your “why.” If a product doesn’t clearly fit a specific goal — such as improving N efficiency at peak uptake or accelerating residue breakdown — it may not be worth the investment.

“There are some really exciting tools out there,” Sible says. “But the value comes when you use them precisely, not when you expect them to fix everything.”

As farmers evaluate biological products, Sible notes there are about 10 frequently used types of “active ingredients” that are better-understood, likely credible and worth evaluating. They include:

Bacillus amyloliquefaciens
Bacillus subtilis
Bradyrhizobium spp. (classic soybean inoculant – “the original biological”)
Azospirillum spp.
Trichoderma spp.
Azotobacter spp.
Several other Bacillus and related species are in the top-10 list, as well.

Sible’s framing of these for farmers’ consideration:
If a new product contains one or more of these top 10 species, it “fits the larger narrative of this market.”
If it has something totally different, it might be:
— a random/unproven one-off, or
— truly novel and promising – but in that case he suggests being more cautious and asking more questions.

Treat Soil Moisture Like A Checkbook To Sharpen Irrigation Decisions

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 21:07:09 GMT

As irrigation costs climb and weather grows more erratic, farmers are under pressure to make every inch of water count. One of the simplest, most practical tools they can use this season won’t require new hardware on the pivot — just a different way of thinking about soil moisture.

North Dakota State University associate professor and irrigation engineer Dean Steele encourages farmers to manage soil water like their checkbook: track deposits and withdrawals, and don’t let the account get overdrawn. That mindset, he says, is the foundation of better irrigation timing and improved efficiency.

“The soil is our bank account. We’ve got withdrawals and deposits,” he notes. “Your deposits are the rain and irrigation. Your withdrawals are the crop water use and things like the deep percolation and maybe some runoff.”

The soil profile starts each growing season with a certain balance of water. Every day, evapotranspiration (ET) — the combined effect of evaporation from the soil and transpiration from the crop — pulls moisture out. Rain and irrigation add it back in.

Just as with a financial account, it’s not enough to know how much “money” moves in and out over a year. What also matters is when it moves — especially during critical periods like tasseling or grain fill, Steele says.

Why Seasonal Totals Can Mislead

Steele uses a favorite classroom trick question to show why irrigation timing is so important.

He asks students: If a crop needs 18 inches of ET over a season and the farm receives 12 inches of rain, how much irrigation is required?

The obvious answer is six inches. But that is incorrect.

“If all the rain of that 12 inches comes on May 1, and you get nothing the rest of the season, then you still need 18 inches,” Steele explains.

In that scenario, early-season rain may fill the soil profile, but if it’s not replenished as the crop draws water in July and August, the soil account will be overdrawn exactly when the plant is most sensitive to stress.

The lesson, Steele says, is that seasonal totals hide risk. Farmers need to track the running balance in the soil, not just the sum of rainfall and irrigation on a yearly chart.

Build A Simple Water-Balance Ledger

Steele says growers can implement a practical water-balance approach with tools many already have: a rain gauge, basic ET information and records of irrigation events, often available in their spreadsheet.

A basic checkbook-style water balance would include these four elements:

1. Starting balance: Estimate available water in the rooting zone at planting (for example, after pre-watering or spring recharge).

2. Daily withdrawals: Use ET estimates (from local weather networks, Extension tools or ET calculators) to subtract crop water use.

3. Daily deposits:
- Add effective rainfall (total rain minus runoff or obvious losses).
- Add irrigation applied (inches per pass or per revolution).

4. Running balance: Track how much water remains in the effective root zone relative to field capacity and a chosen depletion limit.

Steele compares ET and side losses to an unavoidable set of expenses — “groceries… housing and taxes” — that must be paid out of the account every day. If those outflows consistently exceed deposits, the crop will eventually experience stress long before the calendar suggests it should.

Adapting The Method To Different Climates

The same accounting framework applies whether you farm in the upper Midwest or the High Plains, but the numbers in the ledger will look very different.

In North Dakota, Steele notes, seasonal ET is relatively modest and summer rainfall sometimes helps “catch up,” meaning there can be more opportunities to pause or reduce irrigation when rainstorms arrive.

In the central and southern High Plains the withdrawals are much larger, according to Brian Arnall, a precision nutrient management Extension specialist at Oklahoma State University.

“Our max ETs can easily hit three‑quarters of an inch a day; our normal ET is half an inch,” Arnall says.

With 100-degree days, 30% humidity and rapidly growing corn, the soil account in the High Plains empties fast. That’s why, in many of those systems, pivots rarely shut off once they’re started, notes Arnall.

“By the end of our cropping season, we’ll probably be right at neutral, if not negative, as far as total ET and application,” he says.

For growers in Arnall’s area, the checkbook model confirms that almost constant deposits are required just to keep pace — and it can help reveal when small interruptions in irrigation might tip the balance into stress.

Match Irrigation To Crop Root Depth And Soil Type

Steele emphasizes that the size of a farmer’s “bank account” also depends on crop rooting depth and soil characteristics. Deep‑rooted corn on heavier soils can draw from a larger reservoir; potatoes on sandy ground with shallow roots cannot, he notes.

“With a corn crop… two‑thirds of an inch, that’s not a lot of water,” Steele says. In potato ground, by contrast, “if you’re managing 12 inches or 18 inches of root zone depth, that’s maybe what you’ve got to work with, so you’ve got to be around the circle more frequently.”

For farmers, that means:

In deep profiles with good water-holding capacity, the starting moisture balance is higher, and the system can tolerate larger withdrawals between irrigations.
In shallow or sandy profiles, the usable balance is small, so even modest daily ET can rapidly overdraw the account unless irrigations are more frequent.

Using The Ledger To Time Irrigation

Once a farmer has a running soil water balance, the irrigation decision can become a more disciplined approach. Steele advises growers to:

1. Irrigate when the projected balance approaches a chosen depletion threshold, not just when the soil surface looks dry.

2. Adjust application depth so that deposits match likely withdrawals over the next several days, considering forecast ET and possible rainfall.

3. Plan ahead for long pivot runs or “wipers,” where the time needed to complete a pass can allow the far end of the field to spend down its account before the irrigation system returns to that point in the field.

Steele says that on complex systems like windshield‑wiper pivots, he would pay special attention to water balance at both the starting and ending points.

“If I had a windshield wiper, I’d want to keep track of the starting and ending points and see how I’m doing, to make sure… you get back to that starting point in time,” he explains.

In practice, this might mean increasing application depth on certain passes, slowing the pivot at critical growth stages or strategically skipping lower‑risk areas where the account is still healthy.

Adding Sensors And ET Tools To The Checkbook

While Steele’s checkbook analogy can be implemented with simple records, it also provides a framework for using more advanced tech tools. Soil moisture sensors can serve as “bank statements,” verifying that the modeled balance matches reality. ET models and remote sensing can sharpen estimates of daily withdrawals, especially as researchers develop radar‑ and satellite‑based crop water use tools.

“There are people using satellite imagery as part of developing an integrated irrigation management system ... they’re keeping track of weather and soils and doing some estimation of crop water needs, and trying to estimate when the crop is going to need water, and then actually run the irrigation system,” Steele says.

In addition, local irrigation dealers and irrigation equipment manufacturers have apps and tools for managing water in the field, including variable rate irrigation. These tools are typically integrated into phone or desktop apps linked to the control panel of the irrigation system.

He suggests all of these technologies should feed into answering the same core questions: What is my soil water balance today, and what will it be if I do — or don’t — irrigate?

Manage Water Like Money

Behind the math and models, Steele’s message is that farmers who manage soil water like their money are better positioned to use irrigation when it delivers the highest return.

By tracking deposits and withdrawals, recognizing that “when” matters as much as “how much,” and understanding how soil and climate shape their account size, growers can head into this season with a clearer picture of where every inch of water is going — and whether it’s truly helping their crop.

Listen to more of Steele and Arnall’s recommendations on The Crop Podcast Show here .

Corteva Unveils Executive Team Lineup For Its Two-Way Company Split

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 14:58:35 GMT

Corteva Inc. has reached a pivotal milestone in its corporate restructuring, announcing the executive leadership teams that will guide its transition into two independent, publicly traded entities.

The separation, which will result in the formation of New Corteva and SpinCo, is expected to be finalized in the fourth quarter of 2026.

New Corteva: A Focus on Crop Protection

Luther “Luke” Kissam has been appointed as the future chief executive officer of New Corteva, the entity that will retain the company’s crop protection portfolio. Kissam is scheduled to join the firm on June 1 as CEO.

Corteva’s Greg Page says the company board of directors selected Kissam following a global search, citing his ability to drive growth through innovation. Page notes that Kissam’s history of leading public companies and delivering market-focused solutions will benefit farmers and shareholders alike, according to a company press release.

Kissam brings a background in both agriculture and specialty chemicals to the new role. He previously served as the chairman and CEO of Albemarle Corporation and held legal and executive positions at Monsanto and Merisant Company.

Joining Kissam at New Corteva in key leadership roles will be:

Jeff Rudolph, chief financial officer
Brook Cunningham, chief commercial officer
Ralph Ford, chief integrated operations officer
Reza Rasoulpour, chief technology officer
Jim Alcombright, chief digital and information officer

SpinCo: Advancing Seed and Genetics

The second entity, provisionally named SpinCo, will operate as a standalone seed and genetics company. This business will focus on elite germplasm and cutting-edge biotechnologies, including gene editing and molecular breeding for row crops.

Current Corteva CEO Chuck Magro will transition to the role of SpinCo CEO at the time of formal separation. Magro says SpinCo’s success will be built on technological investments that allow farmers to increase yields in row crops and potentially new markets.

Along with Magro, the leadership team for SpinCo will include:

David Johnson, chief financial officer
Judd O’Connor, chief commercial and operations officer
Sam Eathington, chief technology officer
Audrey Grimm, chief people officer
Brian Lutz, chief digital and information officer
Jennifer Johnson, chief legal officer

Trump Warns Fertilizer Giants Against "Price Gouging" as Costs Soar 40%

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 15:46:55 GMT

Fertilizer market volatility is once again taking center stage as geopolitical tensions disrupt global supply lines and push input costs sharply higher. New analysis shows the increase in fertilizer prices may not be over, even if the Strait of Hormuz reopens soon.

Even with the situation in Iran pushing prices even higher, the sharp increase in fertilizer prices from 2020 to now is catching attention in Washington. Not only did President Donald Trump take to social media to warn of ‘price gouging,’ but Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also posted on X Monday, specifically expressing frustration over Mosaic’s response to farmers.

While Rollins and USDA Under Secretary Stephen Vaden have raised concerns over fertilizer prices this year, the president posted on Truth Social over the weekend that he is closely monitoring fertilizer prices and pledged support for American farmers.

Trump said Saturday on his Truth Social platform he is “watching fertilizer prices CLOSELY” during what he described as the US “FIGHT FOR FREEDOM in Iran”, adding that the administration “will not accept PRICE GOUGING from the fertilizer monopoly”.

On Monday, Rollins posted on X, saying she was “So disappointed in this response” from Mosaic, “especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market.”

So disappointed in this response, @MosaicCompany, especially as you decide to idle two fertilizer production facilities, removing 1 MMT of supply from the world market. 🚨

Our Great President and this Administration have our farmers' backs. 💪🌾

Any sleight of hand will not be… https://t.co/GTCxcBQNgi
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) April 13, 2026

Mosaic announced last week the decision to shut down major phosphate operations in Brazil, a move the that will cut production, reduce jobs, and signal a *strategic shift in how the fertilizer giant deploys its capital.

Mosaic Company announced Thursday it will idle two phosphate facilities in Brazil as part of a broader effort to cut costs and shift capital. Mosaic expects idling of the facilities to reduce annual phosphate production by approximately 1 million tonnes. CEO Bruce Bodine says the decision reflects what he calls a disciplined focus on long-term returns.

.@MosaicCompany, you’re right that U.S. farmers are facing a difficult economic situation, only made worse by the extra $6.9 BILLION they have had to spend on fertilizer since you petitioned the government to place duties on imported phosphorus. This has played a major role in… https://t.co/UuOqjE0jBu
— National Corn (NCGA) (@NationalCorn) April 13, 2026

Mosaic and Simplot have also been in the cross hairs of the push to remove countervailing duties on Moroccan phosphate . Groups like the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) claim the CVDs are costing U.S. agriculture $1 billion each year.

The CVDs on Moroccan phosphate were put into place by the International Trade Commission (ITC) in 2021. As the sunset review begins, more than 50 state grower groups including the Texas Corn Producers Association, sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Commerce and the ITC to revoke the countervailing duties on imported phosphate fertilizers from Morocco and Russia.

In separate filings by Mosaic and Simplot to the ITC and the Department of Commerce, both companies said the continuation is necessary to maintain a “level playing field.”

In a written response to Farm Journal, Mosaic said:

“American farmers depend on a strong domestic fertilizer industry, which in turn depends on strong enforcement of U.S. trade laws that ensure a level playing field. Mosaic is proud to support U.S. agriculture with high-quality, reliable products produced here at home.”

Iran War’s Current Impact on Fertilizer Prices

The message from the Trump adminstration comes as tensions escalate in the Strait of Hormuz, where the United States is weighing a potential full naval blockade. Ship traffic through the critical waterway has already dropped from roughly 135 vessels per day to the single digits. A complete shutdown could halt flows entirely, further increasing fertilizer prices.

The stakes are high as roughly one-third of global fertilizer shipments move through the strait, and the disruption is already sending prices higher, up more than 40% compared to a year ago.

It is the 6-week anniversary of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Fert price comparisons:

NOLA urea - +$230 or 49%
NOLA UAN - +$145 or 38%
Midwest NH3 - +$245 or 32%
NOLA DAP - +$130 or 21%
NOLA potash - +$10 or 3%

...corn - 2-cents or 0.5% higher#sickeningforfarmers
— Josh Linville (@JLinvilleFert) April 10, 2026

Market data shows the impact Iran is having on already high fertilizer prices. According to StoneX analyst Josh Linville says in the six weeks since the war started:

Urea prices have surged by $230 per ton, a 49% increase
UAN is up $145 per ton, or 38%
Anhydrous ammonia has climbed $245 per ton, a 32% jump.
In contrast, corn prices have barely responded, rising just two cents, or about half a percent. The divergence is putting additional pressure on farm margins.

DOJ Probe Into Fertilizer Costs Seeks Input From Farmers

The Trump administration is asking farmers to help provide information as part of an ongoing U.S. Department of Justice investigation into elevated costs for fertilizer, machinery and other key agricultural inputs, according to reporting from Bloomberg.

Bloomberg reported the effort is aimed at gathering more on-the-ground data as regulators examine whether fertilizer producers may have coordinated to raise prices. The DOJ investigation was first reported in early March, when Bloomberg said federal officials had begun looking into whether fertilizer companies engaged in price coordination.

According to the Bloomberg report, Vaden said he has already met with officials at both the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission to discuss potential lines of inquiry. He also noted that farmers could play a key role in the process.

Vaden said farmers “have a lot of information that might be relevant to these investigations.”

Bloomberg previously reported in early March that the Department of Justice is investigating whether fertilizer producers colluded to increase prices.

Speaking at the North American Agricultural Journalists’ annual conference in Washington on Monday, Vaden encouraged farmer participation in the probe, emphasizing confidentiality protections.

“We need farmers to help provide us with that information on a confidential basis, so that that can help inform the investigations that are ongoing,” Vaden said, according to Bloomberg. “I think we will have a mechanism in order to help encourage that exchange of information.”

NCGA Surveys Show Not All Farmers Have Fertilizer Secured for 2026

Against that backdrop, along with fertilizer prices climbing even higher in the six weeks after the conflict started with Iran, new surveys results from NCGA highlight how those market pressures are translating to on-farm realities.

Krista Swanson, chief economist for NCGA, says the organization conducted the survey to better understand fertilizer availability from the farmer perspective. Ag Secretary Rollins has told mainstream media that 80% of farmers have fertilizer locked in for 2026, but NCGA data contradicts that figure.

“We’re hearing that number being thrown around too, which is why we really wanted to find out directly from farmers what the status is for them,” Swanson says.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

A Significant Gap in Fertilizer Readiness

The surveys show that only 60% of farmers report having their nitrogen fully purchased or secured for the 2026 growing season, while 64% say the same for phosphate. That leaves a sizable portion of producers still working to lock in supplies.

“When you think about over 500,000 corn farmers in the U.S., this isn’t a small number,” Swanson says. “Our survey results indicate that over 200,000 farmers still need at least some fertilizer for this year.”

Nitrogen remains a critical input for corn production and is closely tied to yield potential. Any shortfall, whether driven by availability or cost, can directly affect productivity and profitability.

NCGA Grower Surveys

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

Younger Farmers Feeling the Pressure Most

The survey also points to uneven impacts across the farm sector, with younger farmers facing greater challenges in securing fertilizer.

Swanson says younger producers reported having more nitrogen left to purchase compared to older farmers.

“You think about younger farmers that have less capital already built up in their business, maybe tighter cash flow needs because of their equity position,” she says. “This does seem to have a disproportional impact on younger farmers.”

That dynamic raises concerns about financial strain among newer operations in a high-cost environment.

Corn Acres Likely Stable, But With Reduced Inputs

Despite the challenges, most farmers are not planning to reduce corn acreage. The survey found that 80% of respondents expect to maintain their planned acres.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

At the same time, fertilizer application rates may fall short. Half of the farmers surveyed say they do not expect to apply their full amount of fertilizer.

“Pairing these two together, it seems to me like we are still going to see a lot of corn acres get planted,” Swanson says. “But those corn acres will have less fertilizer than maybe what they would have otherwise had.”

That combination could limit yield potential if input reductions become widespread.

Growing Concern Shifts to 2027

While fertilizer availability remains a concern for 2026, attention is already turning to the next crop year. Fertilizer purchasing follows a rolling cycle, and planning for 2027 will begin soon.

Survey responses show that for every one farmer more concerned about fertilizer price and availability for 2026, nearly two are more concerned about 2027.

NCGA Grower Survey

(National Corn Growers Association (NCGA))

“So farmers are concerned as we look ahead to next year,” Swanson says.

The shift reflects uncertainty about how long supply disruptions and elevated prices will persist.

Supply Chain Recovery May Take Time

Even if geopolitical tensions ease, relief may not come quickly. Swanson notes that the fertilizer market is still dealing with production disruptions and supply chain backlogs.

“A short-term ceasefire has limited immediate impact on this ongoing fertilizer crisis for farmers,” she says. “Even when a permanent end to the situation is reached, we’re still looking at recovery from supply chain backlogs and halted production that could take a long time to recover from.”

Damage to key inputs such as liquid natural gas and sulfur production could take years to repair, keeping pressure on supply.

A Tightening Outlook

The NCGA survey underscores a challenging environment for corn producers. Most acres are expected to be planted this year, but not all will receive optimal fertilizer applications. At the same time, concern is building for 2027 as farmers look ahead to the next purchasing cycle.

For many producers, the issue is no longer just securing fertilizer for this season. It is navigating a period of sustained uncertainty that could shape production decisions, costs, and risk management strategies across the U.S. corn sector.

Longstanding Concerns Over Market Concentration

In September 2025, USDA and the U.S. Department of Justice signed a Memorandum of Understanding, committing both agencies to jointly examine high and volatile input costs, which included fertilizer, by scrutinizing competitive conditions in agricultural markets and enforcing antitrust laws, particularly around price setting and market concentration.

While geopolitical tensions are the latest driver of volatility, many farm groups argue the root of the problem runs deeper. Matt Perdue, president of the North Dakota Farmers Union, says ongoing federal investigations into fertilizer pricing must lead to meaningful action.

“We appreciate the administration’s investigations into input costs,” Perdue says. “But investigations don’t do anything if they’re not followed by enforcement, and they don’t do anything if we don’t learn what came out of those investigations.”

Groups like the Texas Corn Producers Association have been raising concerns about fertilizer market concentration for years. Texas farmer Dee Vaughan says the organization began studying the issue in 2020, working with the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M to examine pricing trends.

“We’ve been very concerned about all of our input costs, but specifically fertilizer, because it’s the one that just keeps going up almost exponentially,” Vaughan says.

He adds those studies found a shift in how fertilizer prices are determined . Historically tied closely to natural gas costs, the study found nitrogen fertilizer pricing began tracking corn prices more closely after 2010, a change Vaughan says reflects deeper structural issues.

According to Vaughan, the small number of firms controlling the market have the data and market awareness to price inputs based on farmers’ revenue potential, rather than production costs.

“They all have economists on staff,” Vaughan says. “They know exactly what our costs are, what our income is, and they’re able to extract value based on what they see as the gross income of a farmer. It’s not based on cost of production any longer.”