Pesticides

Soybean Gall Midge Emerges As Top-Tier Threat

Mon, 11 May 2026 20:19:27 GMT

Soybean gall midge is no longer just a curiosity or annoyance for many Midwest farmers. The pest is chewing into yield and profitability for soybean growers across parts of at least seven states – Kansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota.

Iowa State University Entomologist Erin Hodgson reports the pest’s footprint is significant, present in at least 42% of the 45.4 million acres of soybeans farmers harvested across the seven states in 2025.

“At least 19 million soybean acres are potentially impacted by this pest,” Hodgson says, noting that the pest continues to spread. Eight new counties were confirmed in 2025, with five of those being in Iowa .

According to a recent farmer survey led by University of Nebraska Entomologist Doug Golick, the pest has become a major threat in parts of Nebraska. “In the last year or two, soybean gall midge is approaching as near high of concern as herbicide-resistant weeds for survey respondents,” Golick says.

Since 2018, the soybean gall midge has spread to 185 total counties in seven states, including five new counties in Iowa this past year, according to Erin Hodgson, Iowa State University Extension entomologist and professor.

(Erin Hodgson)

Look For Small Orange Or White Larvae

Damage from the insect starts at the base of the soybean plants, largely out of sight. Adult midges emerge from the ground in May and June, then seek out tiny fissures in young soybean plants near the soil line to lay eggs, according to Thales Rodrigues da Silva, a master’s student at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln.

The larvae cause severe, localized yield losses from 20% to 100% loss along field edges and 17% to 50% reductions in entire fields average under heavy infestation, according to University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) Extension. The larvae – small, orange worm-like pests – feed inside the base of the stem, causing plants to wither, die, and lodge (break), with damages sometimes extending 100+ feet into fields. Scouting for the pest should occur after the second trifoliate (V2) growth stage, according to the Crop Protection Network.

This damage in a soybean plant at the soil level shows the result of soybean gall midge larvae feeding.

(University of Nebraska-Lincoln Extension)

Because the pest often feeds along field edges, the damage in affected plants is often mistaken for issues caused by compaction or herbicide injury, according to Stine Seed Company .

To confirm the pest’s presence, Stine agronomists recommend digging up compromised soybean plants and splitting open the stem. If white or orange larvae are found feeding within the inner layers, growers should check the Soybean Gall Midge Alert Network tracking system to determine whether the pest has been reported in their area. Next, they should contact their local Extension specialist to help confirm the diagnosis and report the finding if their county is not yet documented in their area.

Cultural Practices Show Promise

Unfortunately, there are few strategies to manage and control soybean gall midge, according to Tony Lenz, Stine technical agronomist.
With no labeled, consistently effective in-season insecticide program and no established treatment threshold, researchers are testing cultural and mechanical tactics that might give farmers at least partial relief.

Tillage ahead of planting — a tough sell in no-till systems — shows some promise in reducing early infestations in current-year soybean fields.

“Turns out that disking alone, at least in (our) study… did reduce infestation,” says Justin McMechan an entomologist and associate professor at UNL.

“There’s a significant reduction as we move from no-till to that… where it’s just disked and planted into, and then disking and hilling (a practice used in growing potatoes), which really is effective, because you’re covering up the infestation site,” McMechan adds.

He notes that even subtle changes in seedbed shape may help by covering fissures or altering microclimates at the stem base.

On planters running row cleaners, McMechan says adjustments at field edges might be one of the more accessible tools.

“There are not huge differences, but they are statistically significant,” he adds.

Field edge management has been another area of experimentation, including mowing or managing dense vegetation next to infested fields. Results are mixed, but McMechan says there are situations where mowing modestly cuts pressure.

“Nebraska saw on occasion where mowing would reduce infestation and lead to marginal yield benefit… we’re talking like 6-bushel differences,” he says, adding that weather and nearby corn canopy can override those gains.

There are no insecticides currently available to control soybean gall midge. A combination of cultural practices and mechanical efforts is likely the best option, for now, to stop or slow the pest.

(Justin McMechan)

Scientists Evaluate ‘Out-Of-The-Box’ Practices

Other work by researchers is pushing even further outside the box to find control measures. At UNL, graduate research assistant Kristin Heinrichs Stark is testing whether a biodegradable surface barrier called BioWrap can physically trap larvae in the soil and prevent emergence.

The work is early-stage and raises reasonable questions about cost and field-scale application rates, but it points to the kind of layered, non-chemical tactics Extension researchers say will likely be needed to address the pest.

Even as these cultural and physical strategies are developed, Hodgson reminds farmers that the ag industry still lacks any clear control option once larvae are inside the soybean stem.

“We really don’t have a treatment threshold, or a rescue treatment option at this time,” she says. “We know that the soybean gall midge certainly can cause yield losses, plant death, and that directly relates to yield. But we don’t really have great answers on like, how many plants does it take? How many larvae per plant (causes yield loss)?”

For now, farmers dealing with soybean gall midge are being asked to combine careful field scouting, crop rotation, and targeted cultural tactics to address the pest as the research community races to find answers and close those gaps.

Specialists from three Midwest universities provided the latest updates on soybean gall midge (SGM) this spring in a webinar, available at the link below:

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.

'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:

From Compliance to Liability: How Court Decisions Threaten America’s Agricultural Supply Chain

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 14:34:26 GMT

By Daren Coppock, Agricultural Retailers Association President & CEO

Pesticide labels are not suggestions. Under federal law, they are binding rules.

For decades, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) has governed the review, labeling, and use of pesticides in the United States. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) develops and approves pesticide labels. Once approved, those labels dictate how products may be sold, handled, and applied nationwide. Deviating from them is illegal, and the Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA) strongly supports following labeling requirements.

A case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, Monsanto v. Durnell, threatens to unravel that system. If state tort claims are allowed to impose additional warning requirements beyond those approved by EPA, businesses that comply fully with federal law could still be held liable under state law. The result would be immediate disruption across the agricultural supply chain—higher costs, reduced access to vital tools, and increased uncertainty for the farmers who depend on them.

Why Uniform Labels Matter

FIFRA does not just regulate manufacturers; it imposes strict legal requirements throughout the supply chain. Agricultural retailers are prohibited from altering or supplementing pesticide labels, and professional applicators must apply products exactly as directed by the label. Any violation can bring substantial civil penalties.

Uniform labeling makes compliance possible; without it, federal law becomes a guessing game.

National uniformity is needed because retailers serve customers across multiple states. Insurers underwrite coverage based on predictable compliance rules, and farmers rely on timely access to lawfully labeled products during narrow planting and pest-control windows.

An Impossible Legal Conflict

State-law “failure to warn” claims argue that an EPA-approved label should have included additional warnings. But this contradicts FIFRA, which states that pesticide labels cannot be changed unilaterally.

Allowing state tort claims to impose different warning requirements creates an impossible bind: obey federal law and face state liability, or attempt to satisfy state law by breaking federal law. Congress did not intend for compliance itself to become grounds for punishment.

If national uniformity were to end, insurance premiums could increase, coverage could become harder to secure, and products farmers need could be pulled from shelves, even though they remain fully approved by the EPA. Costs would likely increase as service capacity decreased, and that pressure would flow directly down the supply chain to the farm gate.

Science Versus Jury Verdicts

FIFRA assigns responsibility for evaluating pesticide safety to the EPA, not to state courts. The agency makes those determinations through scientific review, public input, and a weighing of risks and benefits.

Tort litigation bypasses that process and asks juries to second-guess EPA’s scientific judgments years later, without access to the full regulatory record and without the agency itself as a party. If those verdicts can override FIFRA and federal approval, the result is a patchwork system in which legal obligations vary by state and evolve retroactively—requirements that retailers and applicators cannot comply with without violating federal law.

Why Glyphosate Matters Beyond One Case

The Supreme Court case centers on glyphosate, one of the most widely used and reviewed herbicides in American agriculture. EPA has repeatedly concluded that glyphosate is not likely to be carcinogenic when used as directed and has approved its labeling accordingly.

Glyphosate is affordable, effective, and integral to modern farming practices that reduce soil erosion, conserve fuel, and maintain yields. Retailers, applicators, and farmers rely on EPA’s determinations for every pesticide they sell, apply, or use.

If a product that has cleared decades of federal review can still be deemed unlawfully labeled under state law, no product is truly secure.

What’s at Stake

Congress designed FIFRA so pesticide safety decisions would be made prospectively, scientifically, and consistently. Undermining that framework turns compliance into liability—and jeopardizes farmer access to lawful, essential tools.

The Supreme Court’s decision may very well determine whether pesticide regulation remains grounded in science and federal law, or becomes a moving target shaped by courtroom verdicts. For American agriculture, the consequences would be immediate and real.

Preserving uniform federal labeling protects everyone who depends on the food system—and that means all of us.

Boost Your Bottom Line By Keeping Your Soils In Place

Wed, 01 Apr 2026 20:21:09 GMT

Not every cost on the farm shows up on an invoice. In the view of Eric Beckett, some of the most expensive losses corn and soybean growers face this spring will be invisible — soil carried away by winds moving across their fields.

Beckett, an agronomist with Sunrise FS, says a combination of windier springs, tighter margins and volatile fertilizer prices is forcing a reckoning with long-standing tillage and nutrient application habits. The goal for farmers, he contends, shouldn’t be just agronomic performance this season but risk management, as well.

“Anytime we drag a piece of tillage equipment across the field, we are essentially breaking down that soil aggregate into smaller aggregates,” Beckett says. “That makes soil more susceptible to loss.”

While Beckett isn’t calling for an end to tillage, he is urging farmers in Illinois and beyond to consider the “ramifications coming down the road” before making multiple passes to clean up winter annuals or level tile lines.

A Growing Storm in the Midwest

Beckett’s concerns are grounded in shifting weather patterns. Meteorologists like Victor Gensini at Northern Illinois University have noted a rise in the frequency of convective storms and damaging straight-line winds across the Midwest and Southeast.

Likewise, Nutrien principal atmospheric scientist Eric Snodgrass reports that the Midwest is in a rapid transition from La Niña to ENSO-neutral conditions. While this “swift exit” can open planting windows, it also creates erratic atmospheric patterns. High-velocity winds are expected to surge through the Mississippi and Missouri River valleys through early April.

Beckett offers a concerned reminder for farmers tempted to push through windy conditions: “You’ve paid good money for that fertilizer. Why would we go out there when it’s windy and we have no idea where that fertilizer is going to end up, especially if it’s a variable-rate application where we know specific areas of a field need those nutrients?”

Calculating the True Cost of a Pass

Beyond the risk of blowing nutrients, Beckett suggests farmers “crunch the numbers” on the physical cost of every pass. With diesel prices hovering around $5 a gallon currently and tractor leases reaching $300 to $400 per hour, the overhead of extra tillage adds up quickly.

Beyond hard costs, tillage in what are currently dry soils will create additional costs. Beckett describes the ground in his area as “dry as a bone” six to eight feet down.

According to the U.S. Drought Monitor, this isn’t just an east-central Illinois issue: 41% of the U.S. corn-producing area and 42% of soybean acreage are currently experiencing some degree of drought. In droughty conditions, every unnecessary tillage pass further dries out the seedbed and can impact topsoil.

Navigating the Label and the Law

Wind doesn’t just steal nutrients; it creates significant legal liability. Most herbicide labels cap applications at 10 mph—a limit that is a legally binding mandate for many products, not a suggestion.

“If you are applying outside those windows and something goes wrong, you can be held liable,” Beckett cautions. To navigate these tighter windows, he suggests focusing on three tactical areas:

Carrier Volume: Increasing from 5 or 10 gallons per acre to 15 or 20 gallons can improve coverage and reduce the risk of fine, drift-prone droplets.
The Dust Factor: Even if winds are within legal limits, fine soil particles can “tie up” product and carry it off-target before it even hits the ground.
Drift-Reduction Tools: While not a license to spray in a gale, modern spray tips and drift-reduction agents are underutilized tools that can significantly improve stewardship.

The New Era Of Documentation

As new requirements tied to the Endangered Species Act take hold, Beckett says the burden of proof for compliance falls squarely on the applicator—whether that is the farmer or a custom applicator.

“Each field has got to have its own documentation,” he says. “Even if it’s just a manila folder... fill out what your mitigation practices are, what your setbacks are. Have that established in a file so the applicator can add to it as the season progresses.”

This level of detail is necessary because the industry is “under the microscope.” In an era where every passerby has a smartphone camera, Beckett says an application in a dusty field can end up on social media in minutes.

Ultimately, Beckett is asking farmers to make a deliberate pause to question habits and routine applications.

“I’m not standing here saying that everybody’s got to put cover crops on and turn every field green,” he says. “But if, collectively, everybody took it a little bit more upon themselves, I think we’d be in a lot better shape.”

Beckett addresses the topic of managing tillage and spray applications in unpredictable weather conditions during a recent episode of the Illinois Field Advisor podcast. You can watch the complete podcast here .

Are You Planting Second-Year Soybeans And Skipping Corn?

Fri, 20 Mar 2026 20:26:56 GMT

As input prices and markets fluctuate, many U.S. farmers are considering a shift from corn to soybeans this season. For some, like northwest Missouri farmer Todd Gibson, continuous soybeans aren’t just a one-year pivot—they are a long-term strategy to capture ROI on challenging soils.

Gibson, based near Norborne — a farming community that proudly bills itself as the “Soybean Capital of the World” — keeps a traditional corn-soybean rotation on his Missouri River bottom ground. But most of his fields with tougher, gumbo-type soils haven’t seen a corn planter in two decades.

“Growing corn on some of this heavy ground just doesn’t pay,” Gibson explains. “I’ve got some fields that have been in continuous soybeans for 20-plus years now.”

More Second-Year Soybeans In U.S. Farmers’ Plans

Gibson says he will grow more soybeans this season and on his better ground. “I’m going to cut my corn acres maybe in half. I’ll have more beans on the better dirt this year, mainly because of input prices,” he says.

Other U.S. farmers – many without Gibson’s experience – are looking to grow second-year soybeans. The Allendale Report released March 18 says private acreage estimates point to a shift toward more soybeans this season, notes Rich Nelson, chief analyst. He estimates U.S. corn planted area at 93.678 million acres, down about 5.1 million acres from 2025, while soybean acres are pegged at 85.659 million acres, up roughly 4.4 million acres over last year.

In southern Illinois, farmer and broker Sherman Newlin says the conversations he has with farmers these days are dominated by input costs and fertilizer availability concerns. While some tell him they’re sticking to their corn-bean rotations, others are considering a 100% shift to soybeans. Newlin is keeping his options open.

“I’m not planning on switching, but we’ll see,” he says. “We’ve still got a few weeks to go where we can swap out seed if we need to.”

Iowa Soybean Association Agronomist Lucas DeBruin says the farmers he works with in the state are sticking with their regular rotation and planting corn if that’s what the original plan was for this season.

“We use a lot of fall anhydrous here, so most guys are pretty locked into growing corn,” DeBruin says. “A lot of them also need the corn for livestock feed. Sometimes you can still squeeze a little bit more margin out of corn than the soybeans,” he adds, “and guys like growing corn more than soybeans. It’s more fun to pick corn.”

Look Before You Leap: The Ferrie Checklist

For farmers looking to change their seed order, Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie suggests taking a hard look at your balance sheet and your fields first. Here are some of his key recommendations:

Consider What You’ve Invested To Date: If you’ve already applied fall anhydrous or dry fertilizer for a corn crop, the “switch to beans” math doesn’t work. “You can’t afford to go to beans, because you’ve already spent the money,” Ferrie contends.

Account for the Yield Penalty: In a beans-after-beans scenario, Ferrie tells growers to expect a 5-to-7-bushel yield drag due to more stress from potential disease, insect and weed pressure. His question: “If you take 7 bushels off your bean yield, does it still cash flow against your corn APH?”

The Management “Claw Back": You can potentially mitigate some of the yield penalty in second-year soybeans by moving your planting date up from May to April, Ferrie says. Early planting helps the crop get an earlier and longer flowering period which can help recover some of the lost potential.

One morning this past week, Ferrie noted that the market was leaning back toward corn and that the see-saw between crops could continue this spring — another factor to keep in mind.

“Looking at the markets this morning, I think a lot of guys would prefer growing corn at $4.90 than beans at $11.10,” he contends.

The Continuous Soybean Playbook

For Gibson, success with continuous soybeans works based on a disciplined management system he relies on every year:

Fertility is Foundational. Even if you shift from corn to soybeans, Gibson says be aware that the beans could require more nutrients. He monitors his soil fertility closely, noting that continuous beans often require extra sulfur, phosphorus and potassium. He also keeps a close eye on micronutrients to ensure the crop won’t hit a hidden yield ceiling.

Non-Negotiable Seed Treatments: In continuous soybeans, the soil is more likely to become a reservoir for pathogens. Gibson hasn’t put a bare seed in the ground in 20 years. “Seed treatment guarantees me 100% replant,” he says. “It lets you sleep better at night knowing that if you get a heavy rain, you have that insurance to fall back on.”

Row Spacing and Canopy: Gibson plants in 15-inch rows at a rate of roughly 130,000 seeds per acre. The goals are quick emergence and a quick canopy. He believes a fast-closing row is your best defense against weeds and helps preserve soil moisture in the heavy gumbo. Seed treatment use and regular scouting help him feel confident in using narrow rows.

Keep Your Boots In The Field: In a corn-bean rotation, the “break” in the cycle helps farmers manage various diseases, insects and weeds. In continuous soybeans, you lose that advantage.

Gibson compensates by routine scouting and being prepared to address problems. “If you hear your neighbors have bug pressure, assume you will, too,” he says. “Don’t have the attitude that you can ‘get by,’ because you probably won’t.”

He has similar thoughts regarding weed pressure – “be proactive.” His program typically starts with a pre-emergence/burndown or early post application, with residual herbicides used to hold back weeds. If weeds break through, he is prepared to return with a post pass.

“We kind of wish sometimes we didn’t have to worry about weeds so much,” he says. “But if you don’t, then next thing you know, you think, ‘Oh, I wish we would have sprayed.’”

The Genetic Advantage: The final piece of the puzzle for Gibson is the advancement in soybean technology. He recalls the days when he says Williams 82 was his only real option for continuous soybeans. Today, advanced traits have made managing weeds and disease in continuous systems much more manageable, he notes.

On his continuous soybean acres, Gibson consistently sees yields average in the 50-to-60-bushel range. When he factors in the lower input costs compared to growing corn on heavy gumbo ground, he believes the decision to go with continuous soybeans is a good one. For Gibson, it’s not about following a trend— it’s about knowing what his land does best and having the management practices in place to succeed.

Elevated Corn Rootworm Pressure Projected For The Midwest

Wed, 18 Mar 2026 19:53:22 GMT

The “billion-dollar bug” is sharpening its teeth for 2026. Bayer CropScience reports corn rootworm pressure could be significant this year across major corn growing areas.

Based on 2025 beetle capture data from 555 monitored fields, the company projects medium to high rootworm pressure for the upcoming growing season in much of the Midwest:

31% of the corn fields sampled in 2025 had counts exceeding the economic threshold of 2 beetles/trap/day, which was 2% higher than 2024 fields (29%), 22% less than 2023 and 2022 fields (53%), and 7% less than 2021 fields (38%).
46% of the continuous corn fields sampled in 2025 were above the economic threshold, which was up 3% from 2024 (43%), down 25% from 2023 (71%), down 28% from 2022 (74%), and down 6% from 2021 (52%).
17% of the first-year corn fields in 2025 were above the economic threshold, which was 1% higher than 2024 (16%), 3% higher than 2023 (14%), up 7% from 2022 (10%), and equal to 2021 (17%).

On a broad scale, Bayer reports that rootworm larval populations — and consequently the risk potential from all CRW species this season — are likely to be elevated in fields in northern Illinois, south central Illinois, western Iowa, eastern, southeastern, and southwestern Nebraska, eastern and southeastern Wisconsin, and northern Colorado. Read the full report here .

Rootworm larvae feeding on corn roots compromise the plants’ structural integrity and can slice yields in affected fields by as much as 45%.

2026 corn rootworm pressure forecast based on 2025 beetle capture in 555 fields in CO, IA, IL, IN, KS, MI, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD, WI, and PA.

(Maps: Bayer, Beetle Monitoring Project from 2024 and 2025)

How Two CRW Variants Beat The Corn-Soybean Rotation

“CRW beetles are very, very adaptable to many of the things that we throw at them,” says Ashley Dean, Iowa State University Extension field crop entomologist.

She says CRW is forcing many row-crop growers to rewrite their management playbooks to address the pest better, especially variant populations.

Dean reports that the “variant” label describes two distinct genetic adaptations of corn rootworm:

Northern Corn Rootworm (Extended Diapause): These small green beetles have learned to hit the “snooze” button. Instead of hatching the following spring, their eggs remain dormant in the soil for two or more years—sometimes up to five. This allows larvae to emerge exactly when a field rotates back to corn.
Western Corn Rootworm (The Soybean Variant): These yellow-and-black striped beetles have developed a behavioral shift. Instead of staying in cornfields to lay eggs, females migrate to soybean fields to deposit them. When that field is planted to corn the next season, the larvae are already waiting in the soil. “These variants have essentially lost their fidelity to corn when they’re laying eggs,” Dean notes in a webinar.

These maps give approximate locations for western and northern corn rootworm variants.

(Iowa State University Extension)

A Multi-Pronged Management Strategy

Addressing corn rootworm effectively requires farmers use a localized, field-by-field strategy, says Jim Robinson, chief technology officer for Rob-See-Co. Because geography, soil, and history vary, growers should work with agronomists to tailor traits and stewardship practices to their specific acres rather than relying solely on regional forecasts, he advises.

Here are four additional recommendations Extension and industry advise farmers use in areas with expected high populations of CRW this season:

Make Root Scouting Non-Negotiable: Dig and rate roots in every field—continuous or rotated—to understand your baseline pressure. For assessing damage, use the interactive node-injury scale from Iowa State available here .
Consider Longer Rotations: In areas with heavy Northern corn rootworm extended diapause, adding a third crop like oats can break the cycle, Dean says.
Strategic Use of Bt and Insecticides: While Western corn rootworm has shown resistance to all four Bt traits in some areas, these tools still have a place. However, Iowa State suggests choosing either a Bt hybrid or a soil-applied insecticide rather than using both as “insurance” unless pressure is extreme.

To help farmers make informed decisions, Chris DiFonzo, professor & field crops entomologist at Michigan State University, provides the Handy Bt Trait Table for U.S. Corn Production , a valuable resource that outlines available Bt traits, their targets, and other key information.

Leave a Check Strip: When testing a new transgenic hybrid or insecticide in first-year corn, leave an untreated strip. This is the only way to verify if the treatment provided a return on investment.

Making the Invisible Seen: How Artificial Intelligence is Unmasking Soybean Nematodes

Thu, 12 Mar 2026 18:21:03 GMT

Nematodes are nearly impossible to see with the naked eye, but their impact on soybean yields is about to come into clear focus. Thanks to a new digital tool from Syngenta called Nema Digital, the invisible is becoming visible.

The technology uses satellite imagery and artificial intelligence (AI) to scan soybean fields for crop stress that mimics nematode damage. According to Kirt L. Durand, PhD, Syngenta digital ag solutions R&D manager, the goal is to bridge the gap between what a farmer sees and what is actually happening in crops beneath the soil surface.

“Farmers might not even know that they’re losing yield due to this microscopic pest, and that’s what this technology is really all about – providing awareness,” he says.

How the Algorithm “Thinks”

Nema Digital is a satellite-based algorithm trained to distinguish nematode pressure from other common crop-production headaches like nutrient deficiencies, soil compaction, or simple field anomalies. By analyzing multiple years of historical satellite data, the system searches for specific patterns that match known nematode behavior and damage.

For farmers and retailers, the process is designed to be hands-off. Syngenta only needs basic information—field boundaries and crop history—much of which is already automated for those using the Syngenta Cropwise platform.

“Really, most of this is very automated at this point, very little input required from the farmer,” Durand says.

Once the data is incorporated, the AI filters out any visual noise.

“When we get done, it narrows it down and says, with high accuracy 90% of the time, this is going to be a problem caused by nematodes,” Durand says.

The Limits of the Soil Probe

While traditional soil sampling has been the standard tool to check for nematodes, Durand notes research shows how easy for a sample to miss them.

He points to research from Iowa State University nematologist Greg Tylka, which shows that nematode egg counts can vary wildly just a few feet apart. You could pull a core sample that looks clean, while two feet away, thousands of eggs are feeding on your profits.

“You can imagine that if you’ve been looking for nematodes simply by soil sampling, it’s not accurate enough,” Durand says.

Protecting the Bottom Line

The financial stakes of nematode pressure are high. Research from The SCN Coalition indicates that nematodes commonly cause a 25% yield loss in infected soybean fields, but in severe cases—or when multiple species like root-knot and soybean cyst nematode (SCN) team up—that loss can skyrocket past 70%.

“When you have multiple species of nematode present, the impact on soybeans tends to be even more severe than just SCN alone,” Durand says.

One way Durand says farmers and retailers will be able visualize that impact is to pair Nema Digital results with yield maps. By overlaying the nematode output on harvested yield, Durand says growers and retailers often can see a clear connection between areas flagged for nematode pressure and zones of lower yield.

“You can actually see in the field where we identify that you have a nematode problem, and if you put a yield map on it, we’ve seen that those areas tend to have lower yields versus the average yield for that entire field,” he says.

Commercial Launch In 2027

While Nema Digital is being piloted through select retail partners and their farmer customers in 2026, Syngenta expects a broad commercial launch next year.

For soybean growers wondering about the return on investment for the technology, Durand stops short of assigning a specific dollar figure. But he stresses that identifying nematode pressure is the first step to protecting yield with available tools, including Syngenta’s new broad-spectrum nematicide seed treatment, Victrato.

Ultimately, Durand’s message to growers is simple: don’t confuse “invisible” with “absent.”

“The issue is out there,” he says. “We want to help farmers be aware of it and what they’re losing.”

4 Biocontrol Strategies To Shrink Your Weed Seed Bank

Wed, 04 Feb 2026 16:28:04 GMT

Mother Nature has a way of balancing the scales, and for farmers looking to manage persistent weed pressure, biological control—or biocontrol—is one testament to that.

Unlike making a traditional herbicide pass with your sprayer, biocontrol isn’t about fast or even total eradication. Instead, it’s usually a long-term strategy designed to tip the scales in your favor, using living organisms to keep weed populations at a “manageable level,” according to William Curran, Penn State emeritus weed scientist.

While biocontrol methods are common in rangelands and perennial systems, Curran notes they can require more effort to adopt in row-crop settings where tillage and rotations can disrupt the very organisms farmers are trying to put to work.

Curran says if you’re interested in using biocontrol measures as part of a comprehensive weed-control program, there are four primary categories to consider, including:

The Classical Approach: This involves introducing a specific natural enemy into a weed-infested area. The goal is for that organism to establish a permanent home, feeding on the target weeds year after year to naturally suppress their growth and seed development. An example of this would be the use of a Canada thistle rust pathogen .
The Augmentative or Inundative Method: Bio-herbicides are one example of inundative methods. The intent is to overwhelm the weed population quickly. This practice often requires multiple applications to be effective.
Conservation Management: Sometimes, the best helpers are already in your fields. By adjusting your cropping system to be more “predator-friendly,” you can boost the populations of native organisms, like ground beetles, that naturally snack on weed seeds.
Grazing: One of the oldest tools in the shed is still one of the most effective. Utilizing cattle, sheep, or goats to graze down weed-heavy areas can significantly reduce seed banks and keep invasive species in check.

For more information on biocontrol weed control practices, check out a newly updated webpage , authored by Curran and released by the GROW network.

Is Zero Tolerance For Weed Escapes The New Standard?

Tue, 03 Feb 2026 21:08:35 GMT

Across the country, Extension weed scientists are rewriting the rules of acceptable weed pressure in corn and soybeans. For many, tolerance for a few late-season escapes of tough weeds—like Palmer amaranth and waterhemp—is a thing of the past. Increasingly, the Extension community is encouraging farmers to draw some harder lines. One of those is for zero tolerance for weed seed production.

“We have really kind of shifted to this idea largely because of herbicide resistance. That is a huge threat for our crop production systems,” explains Sarah Lancaster, Kansas State University weed management Extension specialist and assistant professor.

Lancaster emphasizes that effective weed control is no longer about picking one or two individual tools to address weeds and prevent seed dispersal. Instead, it is about stacking as many tools as feasible into a single season.

“If you think about this as a multiple-choice answer, it’s not about using A, B, or C. The right answer is D—use all of the above,” she says.
Herbicides, cultural practices, strategic tillage, cover crops, rotations, and sanitation all play a role in stopping weeds.

During a recent episode of The Crop Science Podcast Show, available here , Lancaster addressed specific tools and practices to help farmers work toward the “zero tolerance” goal this season. Here are five for consideration:

1. Herbicides Will Still Be A Core Tool For Weed Control.

Despite the push for diversification, Lancaster believes herbicides remain the central tool for row-crop farmers.

“In our conventional broad-acre ag systems, herbicides are still going to be the most efficient, most economical way to [control weeds]—I’m going to say for the rest of my career,” she says.

However, decisions about product selection, rates, application timing, and application quality are increasingly critical—even more so under stress conditions like heat and drought. In western Kansas, Lancaster sees farmers adjusting their practices to meet these challenges.

“When it gets hot and dry, our farmers are really good at modifying their herbicide applications to make sure they’re still going to be efficacious in those very difficult conditions,” she explains. “They know that if they skimp on the water, they’re wasting their time, so they do a good job of accounting for that, modifying their adjuvants, and knowing when to adjust.”

2. Use Cultural Practices To Make The Crop Competitive.

Lancaster stresses that managing the crop can be just as important as managing the weeds.

“Other things that we talk about would be cultural control practices, looking at planting dates and row spacings,” she says. “How do we manipulate that crop to make it as competitive as possible and maybe support our herbicides a little bit better, so that we have fewer weeds to control?”

For growers, this means considering narrower rows, if suitable for the cropping system, and using optimal planting dates to favor the crop over the weeds.

These tactics don’t replace herbicides, Lancaster adds, but they make every herbicide dollar go further.

3. Consider Using Strategic Tillage In No-Till Systems.

In Kansas, no-till is widely adopted to conserve soil and water, but Lancaster points out that it can reshape the weed spectrum and the tools required to manage it.

“Here in Kansas, no-till is a very important soil conservation practice, but it brings its own set of weed management challenges,” she notes. “The number one reason that tillage is a good thing is to kill weeds. When you remove that, you’re 100% reliant on herbicides.”

She believes there are scenarios in no-till where strategic or occasional tillage has a place. One example is the return of perennial warm-season grasses in long-term no-till fields, such as tumble windmill grass.

“That’s an example of a situation where strategic or occasional tillage is becoming a more accepted, more common idea for managing some of these key weeds,” Lancaster says.

Her bottom-line message is to use tillage strategically whenever tough weeds require it.

4. Technology Can Help Improve Control, Reduce Rates, Cut Costs.

Lancaster sees real promise in camera- or sensor-based systems that spray only where weeds are present, such as “See & Spray” or “Weed-It” systems. She finds the technology is especially beneficial on fallow ground or in stubble.

She notes that in some cases, these tools are what make no-till financially viable. Referencing one farmer she works with, Lancaster sayss they used this technology to stay aggressive on weed control while actually reducing input costs.

“They’ve looked at the economic numbers, and now they know that they can kill the weeds with herbicide applications and drop that herbicide cost below the cost of running a sweep plow,” she says. “It’s allowed them to gain those benefits of conserving moisture.”

5. Prioritize Prevention and Sanitation.

Lancaster urges farmers to lean into prevention and sanitation—two tools she believes are often undervalued. In Kansas, where many farmers also raise cattle, she sees clear risks in how feed and manure are handled.

“Livestock manure is very valuable, but if it’s not been composted well, or if that animal has had a diet that’s full of weed seeds, that’s going to introduce a whole other set of problems,” she warns.

People, vehicles, and animals are potential vectors for weed seeds. Lancaster advises farmers to be intentional about cleaning all equipment—including combines—to prevent spreading seeds from one field to another.

She extends this advice to anyone moving between multiple farms, especially.

“I remind students that if they’re a field scout in the summer, they need to be careful to not make their four-wheeler or their work boots a weed seed dispersal instrument,” she says. “It only takes one instance of seed introduction to have a serious problem for a long time.”

Put More Spray Where It Pays

Thu, 29 Jan 2026 17:01:56 GMT

When you pull the sprayer into fields each spring, you’re banking that the product coming out of the nozzles will land where you need it to work. That’s where drift reduction adjuvants (DRAs) can become one of the most profitable—and protective—ingredients in your tank.

Consider what happens when you spray a crop protection product. Each nozzle throws out a spectrum of droplet sizes, from big “marbles” that fall quickly to tiny “dust” droplets that hang in the air, explained Greg Dahl, director of adjuvant education for the Council of Producers & Distributors of Agrotechnology (CPDA), during a recent Agricultural Retailers Association webinar.

Those tiny droplets, called driftable fines, are the troublemakers. They lose energy fast, ride the wind and can move well beyond your field. That’s not the case for larger droplets.

“Big droplets have to land. They are going to land, and they’re going to land close to where you spray,” Dahl says. “Small droplets, they probably are not going to land. They will lose their speed, and then they’ll just float in the air and go wherever the air goes.”

By design, DRAs shift more of your spray volume into larger, heavier droplets that are still effective but far less likely to drift. Across a wide range of nozzles, Dahl says industry research shows that adding a DRA can reduce the spray volume made up of driftable fines.

“Going across the whole system of nozzles, we get about a 50% reduction in the amount of spray volume that is made up of driftable fines,” he reports.

In practical terms, that means less product left hanging in the air and able to drift toward your neighbor’s crops, garden or yard.

There are at least four benefits to adding a good quality DRA in the tank.

(WinField United)

Drift Control Is Only Part Of The Benefit From DRAs

Many farmers are concerned that bigger droplets going out of the nozzles will automatically result in poorer coverage, particularly in post-emergence applications. In some cases — especially with ultra-coarse sprays — that’s true, Dahl says. Coverage can suffer, and penetration into the crop canopy can be weak. The right DRA, though, has been shown to increase droplets’ speed as they leave the nozzle, which improves penetration into the crop canopy.

“If we look where we have added in a DRA, it has actually increased the amount of speed of those droplets, so they’re going to go farther before they run out of energy, and we’re going to get better penetration of the canopy, better deposition farther down,” Dahl says.

Side-by-side comparisons in corn and soybeans using fluorescent dye tell the story more completely (see below). Without a DRA, Dahl’s slides illustrate that coverage is good on the top leaves of the crop but falls off quickly as the product moves down into the plant. With a deposition-type DRA, coverage is more balanced from the top to below the ear leaf in corn and throughout the soybean canopy.

A good quality DRA helps provide good product coverage all the way through the crop canopy, as noted in the plant on the right.

(Greg Dahl)

The ROI Of Improved Product Applications

Better coverage does show up in yield results, Dahl reports. Across hundreds of corn fungicide trials, for instance, he says adding a DRA to the tank delivered an average yield increase of about 5.7 bushels per acre compared to fungicide use alone.

In wheat, similar work showed nearly a 4‑bu.-per-acre advantage.

There’s also an economic advantage in terms of product retention. When you reduce the number of driftable fines, more of the active ingredient you paid for actually lands and stays in your field instead of drifting away.

Dahl says not all DRAs and nozzle combinations are created equal. Some thicker, polymer-type products can narrow the spray angle or even increase driftable fines with the wrong nozzle used, especially Venturi designs. That’s why choosing proven products matters. He says oil-emulsion DRAs, in particular, have shown they can cut driftable fines without creating an overly thick spray or sacrificing pattern quality.

“There’s almost 500 labels that recommend using CPDA-certified adjuvants, and there’s over 200 products that are CPDA-certified adjuvants,” Dahl says, referencing the website CPDA.com . “We think that’s where you should go for information, and we thank you for that,” he adds.

HERMON Offers Farmers Fresh Hope In The War On Weeds

Wed, 14 Jan 2026 19:31:10 GMT

Herbicide-resistant weeds aren’t just a here-and-there nuisance in the Midwest anymore. From herbicide-resistant waterhemp to Palmer amaranth (pigweed), ragweed and ryegrass, more farmers are seeing them and finding they can shrug off nearly anything sprayed to control them. That’s the reality the new HERMON project is built around.

HERMON stands for Herbicide Resistance Monitoring Network. It’s a multi-state effort funded by a United Soybean Board grant and led by Eric Patterson, Michigan State University weed geneticist.

The idea is to connect farmers, university weed scientists, and diagnostic labs in a way that finds herbicide resistance in weeds sooner, figures out what’s contributing to it, and turns those insights into useful recommendations to help farmers address the problem in their fields before it gets totally out of hand.

Moving Beyond The Gold Standard

Patterson says that until now, the way resistance was confirmed has been slow and clunky. It usually starts when a farmer spots a patch of weed escapes and suspects something more than a sprayer skip.

“You’re looking at plants coming [into a lab] in the fall, getting screened all winter long, and growers not having the results until the spring,” Patterson says. “Growers [are] already putting out pres when they’re learning about what resistance they have in their field.”

Patterson calls that traditional “whole-plant greenhouse work” the gold standard for the industry, and he’s not looking to throw it out. But HERMON is providing faster testing methods and results in addition to that, so farmers aren’t always waiting months for answers.

One of the big tools weed scientists are leaning on is DNA testing. Any time a weed evolves resistance, there’s some sort of change in its DNA. If researchers know what mutation to look for, they can test for that directly.

“If we can do enough research and know what all of those mutations are, we could technically just screen for those mutations and use that as a proxy or as a marker that that plant is likely to be resistant,” Patterson explains.

The DNA testing already works well for certain types of resistance, he adds, like for Group 2 ALS (acetolactate synthase) inhibitors and a lot of glyphosate-resistant waterhemp and Palmer amaranth.

“We know that target site for pretty much every major weed, so we can just sequence up that gene and it either comes back ‘yes or no,’” Patterson says.

However, DNA tests aren’t a perfect solution.

“We can usually confirm that something would be resistant, but we cannot confirm that it would be susceptible,” he says.

There can always be a new mutation or a different mechanism, especially with more complicated metabolic resistance. Still, DNA-based tests can often get an answer back in three or four weeks.

HERMON researchers are also working on other practical lab tests. One promising approach is called a leaf-disk assay.

“You take a little bit of a leaf [called a disk] and soak it in a herbicide, and then you can kind of monitor the health of that leaf, and you can compare that to a leaf disk that was not put in the herbicide,” Patterson says. Researchers use a camera or scanner to measure how green the disks stay. For contact herbicides like glufosinate and many PPOs, this can give a good read on whether a specific weed population is resistant.

“This is kind of the intermediate between going fully into DNA, but still being able to do something in the lab that helps you monitor things quickly,” Patterson says.

Breaking Down The Walls

HERMON bridges 10 land-grant universities across states like Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Arkansas, and Mississippi. The goal is a transparent exchange of data and weed populations.

“We’re trying to share those resources with each other and not hoard them or sit on them,” Patterson notes. “I think there’s been many, many walls between different groups that if we can reduce those barriers, we can have better monitoring.”

Joe Ikley, North Dakota State University Extension weed specialist, has already seen the value of collaboration. By working with industry partners like BASF on a rapid test for PPO-resistant kochia, his team identified many resistant populations in a fraction of the time it might have taken before now.

“If we’d had to do this the old-fashioned way to find the mutation two years ago, we might be talking only 10 populations we know of versus a couple hundred,” Ikley says.

Proactive Management for the Future

Looking ahead, Patterson sees HERMON as a starting point for something that could be used across the U.S. “I kind of see HERMON as a test balloon to see if there is interest in a fully nationalized project where resistance monitoring becomes kind of an established thing that every state and every land-grant university contributes to,” he notes.

Sarah Lancaster says the opportunity to have a platform where weed specialists can share information across a state or area about resistant weed populations and their location could be a game changer for farmers.

As she puts it, if a Kansas farmer in one county knows there’s confirmed resistance just a county or two away, “[they’re] going to be more vigilant and more proactive” with herbicide selection, trait choices, and overall weed management, says Lancaster, Extension weed scientist at Kansas State University.

While HERMON offers hope that resistance can be addressed better and faster in the future, no one involved in the project is expecting to develop a miracle product that resets weed control. As Ikley jokes, “Silver bullets are for werewolves, not for weeds.” Instead, the goal is to tighten the loop between what farmers see in the field and what scientists can confirm in the lab, so growers get earlier warnings and better information to protect the herbicides they still have available.

Patterson notes that in corn, there are still several chemistries for farmers to move between. But soybeans don’t have that luxury.

Growers end up “putting a lot more pressure on PPO inhibitors, as well as some of the new traits that are coming out,” Patterson says. The scary question he and other researchers ask is, “What happens when there are no viable herbicides left, and how do you manage that?”

With help from HERMON, researchers hope to not have to answer that question anytime soon.

For additional insights on HERMON, check out the War Against Weeds podcast, featuring Patterson and hosts Sarah Lancaster and Joe Ikley. The podcast was promoted by GROW (Getting Rid of Weeds), a scientist-led network coordinating research to help farmers across the U.S. fight herbicide resistance.

Farmers Face Budget Squeeze And Balance Sheet Challenges—Echoes Of A Decade Ago

Tue, 30 Dec 2025 21:13:24 GMT

If heading into 2026 feels a little like déjà vu, you’re picking up the same vibes Chris Barron, president and CEO of Iowa-based Ag View Solutions, is experiencing. He believes the next couple of years will echo the last big downturn farmers weathered a decade ago.

“It’s kind of scary that 2025, ’26 and ’27 look essentially like a repeat of 2015, ’16 and ’17,” Barron says. “If you remember that time frame and made it through, buckle down because I think we’re going there again.”

He says one of the clearest signals farmers are about to experience a repeat of a decade ago is based on the 2026 cost-of-production data from Ag View Solutions’ clients, who are based in 23 U.S. states and three Canadian provinces:

Soybeans: About $11.87 per bushel based on a 65-bu. average yield
Corn: About $4.69 per bushel (before basis) on a 223-bu. average, with many growers needing at least $4.85.

Some growers raising non-GMO seed beans or getting premium contracts can still make soybeans compete. But for many farms, soybeans are the weak link in the current economic cycle.

Right now, Ag View Solutions clients are expected to plant roughly 62% of their acres to corn and 38% to soybeans for 2026 — essentially the same as 2025. Barron says he doesn’t expect many acres to shift away from this mix to more soybeans “unless something really changes.”

Given current price relationships and crop insurance guarantees, Ag View Solutions data shows about a $50-per-acre advantage to corn over soybeans for the year ahead. Even if the dollars trend lower, he says corn often pencils out better because of gross revenue and risk management tools.

More Cost Pressures Heading Into 2026

It’s no secret production costs are increasing heading into the next season. Some of the key factors include:

Overhead costs (what Barron calls ‘”return to management”) for family and employee expenses, including phones, fuel and business-paid personal expenses, are up nearly 5%. After the past year or two of what Barron describes as hard belt-tightening, he says deferred spending is “snapping back” at higher levels.

Land rents are holding mostly steady, supported by higher property taxes and outside investor demand.

Interest expense is climbing as operating lines grow.

Fertilizer costs are a mixed bag. On corn, fertilizer costs are up about 7%, even though Barron believes most farms are staying with removal-rate applications. On soybeans, he says fertility costs will be lower, mainly because growers are putting less fertilizer on their bean acres and leaning harder on corn nutrients.

Machinery and equipment costs are also inching higher for the year ahead.

This Is Not A Repeat Of The 1980s

Despite the “red” many farmers will see on their spreadsheets in the year ahead, Barron says the current period is not a repeat of the 1980s farm crisis, for two key reasons:

Farmer equity is strong. Debt-to-asset ratios remain healthy for many U.S. growers, even if cash is tight.
Many farmer exits are voluntary. Today, many farmers are choosing to retire or scale back in order to protect equity.

Barron offers a recent example: “I got a call the other day on 7,000 acres, a 45-year-old farmer saying, ‘I’m not going to do this anymore. I’ve got a $5 million equity position, and I’m not going to go for a couple more years and chew away another million dollars. I’m just going to be done.’”

Strategies for the Current Climate

To survive — and potentially thrive — in this “repeat” cycle, Barron suggests focusing on these four areas in the year ahead:

Do the high-dollar work. Barron says the “$500-an-hour” work is crunching numbers in the farm office. “Know your true costs, stress-test budgets, analyze each profit center. A few hours spent with good numbers can be worth far more than another round in the tractor,” he says.
Protect yield. He advises against cutting seed, chemistry or other inputs that protect or enhance yield “just to save a few cents per bushel.”
Right-size your operation. Barron says some of the most successful turnarounds he’s seen with operations lately have come when farmers “right-sizes” — they’re doing less, but doing it better — instead of trying to be everything to everyone.
Use collaborative models. Barron says he is seeing more farmers share equipment and labor with their neighbors to spread fixed costs without extra capital.

Opportunity Will Still Knock

During a Top Producer podcast, Barron told Host Paul Neiffer that the tight times ahead will create new land-rent opportunities for some farmers who want to expand. What commonly happens when margins get tight is some farmers pull back, and that’s when expansion possibilities open up for others.

“We’ve had numerous clients call us about opportunities to rent land and not like in small amounts. When times are tight and when things aren’t good, that’s when these opportunities present themselves,” he says.

Barron’s message for those farmers in expansion mode: have your numbers, working capital and lender relationships in order now, so if the right block of ground comes available, you can move quickly and confidently on it.

If you’re interested in the ROI spreadsheet Barron’s team uses to analyze market trends, email cbarron@agviewsolutions.com .

Hear the complete discussion between Barron and Flory on Farm Journal TV . Also, you can listen to the Top Producer podcast discussion between Barron and Neiffer at the link below:

Four Strategies To Save Money On Herbicides Without Sacrificing Weed Control

Wed, 17 Dec 2025 18:20:35 GMT

If the 2025 season felt like the “same old, same old” for your weed control program — it shouldn’t. When farmers have the mindset that every year is just like the last, it’s easy to fall into the decision paralysis of: “It worked OK last year, so I’ll just do the same thing again.” That approach can leave money on the table and weeds in the field, reports Meaghan Anderson, Iowa State University Extension field agronomist.

She says the ongoing battle with broadleaf weeds and grasses should encourage farmers to re‑evaluate their control program for next season, especially in fields that ended up weedier than expected.

Start With Your Weediest Field
Anderson says a useful exercise right now is to ask yourself: What was my weediest field this year—and why?

“Most corn and soybean growers can point to at least one field that stood out,” she tells Farm Journal. “In many cases, the same herbicide program was used across multiple fields, but it failed in that one.”

Anderson says that’s a clear signal something needs to change in that field for next year—whether that’s:

Using a stiffer preemergence program
Spiking a premix with more active ingredient effective on key weed escapes
Adjusting your application timing or adding layered residuals

“Dollars invested in a strong preemergent herbicide, especially in known problem fields, is almost always an investment that pays for itself,” she adds.

Other key considerations for the 2026 season: If grass weeds were a problem this year, consider whether you could benefit from using products more targeted to specific species. Also, plan to monitor fields ahead of post applications to catch weed escapes early.

Three Specific Issues To Look For Next Season
1. Expect more volunteer corn. Some fields in Iowa and other Midwest states were “carpeted” with dropped ears of corn by harvest time this fall, Anderson says.

Two questions she says farmers who had a lot of ear loss can benefit thinking through are: How much corn hit the ground but didn’t germinate this fall? How much will survive this winter and emerge next spring?

“We’ve seen this movie before — volunteer corn can quickly become a major issue if it’s not addressed,” Anderson says.

2. Winter annuals are prevalent. Anderson notes that winter annuals like henbit, marestail, and pennycress had an excellent start in soybean stubble this fall. Where fields looked green late into the fall, farmers can expect to see them show up again next spring and will want to be proactive early with control measures:

Aim for late March to early April burndown applications (spray even earlier if it’s an unusually warm spring).
Wait until plants are green and actively photosynthesizing, with day and night temperatures warm enough for good herbicide activity.

Timing control measures can be a bit tricky. “By the time winter annuals are flowering in the spring, it’s usually too late for effective control,” Anderson notes.

3. Look for herbicide-resistant weeds. Cross-resistant and multiple-resistant Palmer amaranth, waterhemp, Italian ryegrass, barnyardgrass, and others are on the rise in row crops, researchers report.

Just this month, dicamba-resistant waterhemp was confirmed in Missouri, according to Kevin Bradley, University of Missouri Extension weed scientist.

Where To Spend Money If Margins Are Tight
With the outlook for high input costs and lower commodity prices, the impulse for farmers is to cut their herbicide spend across the board.
Anderson says a better strategy would be to shift investment from products to planning and scouting. She offers four recommendations that can help improve your weed-control ROI next season:

Spend more time scouting and truly understanding which fields are your problem acres.
Do the math on herbicide programs, compare prices, and tailor rates and products to field history and weed spectrum.
Consider using a full residual + strong post program on your worst fields.
Pull back some where fields are consistently clean and not building a weed seed bank.

This approach doesn’t necessarily slash costs per acre dramatically, but it can chip away at your total herbicide program costs without sacrificing control—or future profitability, Anderson says.

She adds that “thoughtful analysis, targeted programs, and timely applications are the real ‘new chemistry’ most farms need” going into the 2026 season.

New Seed Treatments Available For Soybeans, Cotton & Cereals

Mon, 10 Nov 2025 17:01:05 GMT

Farmers looking to address plant-parasitic nematodes and diseases in soybeans and cotton now have access to a new seed treatment from Syngenta. The product, branded as Victrato, has been registered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Syngenta reports Victrato features a new active ingredient, Tymirium, and will be “available in 2025 in preparation for the 2026 planting season, subject to state approvals.”

In soybeans, Victrato addresses Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS) and a broad spectrum of nematodes, including soybean cyst nematode, root knot, reniform, lance and lesion.

“I’ve worked with this compound under field evaluation over the last 10 years, and I am thrilled for soybean growers to experience this never-before-seen level of protection,” says Dale Ireland, Syngenta Seedcare technical lead, in a prepared statement.

“Victrato preserves more yield than any other molecule available, and it protects against all life stages of nematodes: eggs, juveniles and adults. This stops in-season feeding and limits future populations, giving growers the most robust solution available,” Ireland says.

Victrato is also the first federally labeled seed treatment management tool for Red Crown Rot, according to Syngenta. In addition, the product “will fortify soybean plants through early-season suppression of important foliar diseases such as Septoria brown spot, frogeye leaf spot and target spot.”

Targeted Issues In Cotton
For cotton, Victrato addresses cotton root rot and nematodes, including root knot, reniform, lance and sting.

Syngenta reports root knot and reniform nematodes led U.S. cotton yield losses in 2023-2024, while Cotton Root Rot can cost Western growers up to $100 million annually in lost yield, fiber quality and harvest efficiency.

New Premix For Cereals
For the 2026 season, Syngenta will be offering CruiserMaxx Vibrance Elite, a fungicide and insecticide seed treatment premix. The product has been registered by EPA for use in the upcoming growing season.

The premix, positioned by the company as an upgraded formulation of CruiserMaxx Vibrance Cereals, provides protection from a broad spectrum of early-season seedborne and soilborne diseases and insect pests. In addition, the product will help cereal crops emerge “evenly with strong stand establishment and root mass and help maximize plant populations.”

CruiserMaxx Vibrance Elite includes two modes of action on Rhizoctonia, Fusarium and Pythium, including mefeboxam- and ethaboxam-resistant isolates.

“The mixture of trusted ingredients helps cereal crops emerge evenly with strong stand establishment and root mass, helping to maximize plant populations,” says Bryn Hightower, product lead for Syngenta Seedcare, in a prepared statement. “Compared with other seed treatments available on the market, we’ve observed an average of 18% greater plant stand and a 3.3 bushels per acre yield increase in Pythium-inoculated winter wheat,” Hightower adds.

Your next read: Nutrien Says Quality and Resilience Are Its Fertilizer Focus, Will Review Options for Its Phosphate Business

AgZen, Corteva Team up on AI-Powered, Retrofit Sprayer Tech

Wed, 22 Oct 2025 15:08:47 GMT

AgZen announces an agreement with Corteva to further “explore the commercial potential” of AgZen’s AI-powered crop spraying optimization technology, RealCoverage.

The news comes on the heels of Corteva’s big announcement on Oct. 1 , detailing the crop protection multinational’s plan to split its crop protection and seeds businesses.

AgZen, a tech startup spun out of MIT, is making a name for itself by pioneering feedback optimization for spray applications — a new approach the company thinks has potential to improve farmer outcomes and reduce crop input costs.

(AgZen)

AgZen’s first product, RealCoverage, is a retrofit kit that can be bolted onto any sprayer to measure and optimize the number of drops of agrochemicals applied to crops. The system features a boom-mounted sensor that analyzes the coverage and quality of spray applications in real-time, displaying actionable data to a tablet mounted in the cab. Farmers can use the data to optimize the physical settings on spray rigs, both self-propelled and pull-behind, to increase coverage.

The startup says its system works by leveraging AI and cutting-edge computer vision, and customers have used RealCoverage to save 30% to 50% on input costs.

Farmer Feedback

(AgZen)

Northwest Indiana farmer Bryan Brost slapped a RealCoverage system onto his Hagie STS 16 high-clearance sprayer to use on his waxy corn and soybean crops. He says it has helped boost his spray program efficiency overall by reducing application rates while maintaining optimal coverage throughout his 12,000-acre operation.

“The payback came in the first year,” he tells Farm Journal via text message. “We have increased our acres [covered] per day with less hours on the machine, the operator and the nurse tanks supplying product [to the sprayer].”

Corey McIntosh set the technology loose across his 4,000 acre spread in Missouri Valley, Iowa. He is looking forward to using the data to improve his application efficiency across the board. He’s also letting his neighbors and local retailer in on the secret.

“I was getting a chem shuttle refilled at [the] co-op, these guys have always been complimentary of our weed control, I asked them: ‘What percentage of leaf surface area do you think you are covering with your sprayers?’ One of their best operators said he thought 50% coverage. The salesman next to him said it would definitely be more than 60%,” McIntosh says.

“They were shocked when I told them we were at 9% to 10%, but nobody has had ever had a way to quantify this before,” he adds. “We are really looking forward to making improvements.”

Since launching on the market in 2024, AgZen says it covered more than 970,000 commercial acres of application across the U.S. on row crops and specialty crops.

Your Next Read: Breakthrough Fungicide Delivers White Mold Disease Control in Key Crops

New Seed Treatment Offers A Solution to Soybean Cyst Nematode

Mon, 06 Oct 2025 15:36:40 GMT

As farmers and retailers battle soybean cyst nematode (SCN), the emphasis continues to be on using an integrated strategy including resistant soybean varieties, crop rotation with non-host crops, and maintaining good soil fertility.

Now, farmers and retailers have a new tool available for use next spring: biotrinsic Nemora FP, an EPA-registered soybean bionematicide seed treatment from Indigo Ag, Inc.

Jon Giebel, vice president North America Commercial-Biologicals at the company, reports the product contains a naturally occurring Pseudomonas oryzihabitans bacterium that colonizes roots and shoots. After only a few weeks, the microbes coating each seed multiply into the millions around the roots and begin supporting the crop. The microbes also colonize SCN eggs, reducing the number of juveniles that will hatch and injure plants.

“In trials, [Nemora] delivered improved plant health metrics and compelling yield potential while offering growers a biological option that can benefit soil health in the process,” Giebel says in a prepared statement.

SCN is the most costly pest in U.S. soybeans today, routinely reducing yields in affected fields by 5 bushels or more per acre, according to the Crop Protection Network.

This photo shows a Rhizobium nodule (blue arrow) and several white SCN females (red arrows) on neighboring roots. Note the size difference and that SCN are much smaller than nodules. This pest is the number one yield-limiting biotic agent of soybeans in North America, estimated to cause U.S. producers $1.5 billion a year. The reason this pest is so insidious is because SCN can cause up to 30% yield loss with no significant aboveground symptoms.

(Kyle Broderick)

October Is SCN Action Month
Indigo Ag announced its new product on Monday, which marks the third National Nematode Day .

The month of October is designated SCN Action Month. For the fifth year, BASF Agricultural Solutions and The SCN Coalition are partnering to provide farmers with the latest insights, tools and resources to effectively manage SCN and protect soybean yield potential heading into the 2026 growing season.

BASF and The SCN Coalition recommend farmers proactively sample fields post-harvest for soybean cyst nematode symptoms to safeguard crop health and maximize their yields, in preparation for next year.

“The most sustainable management approach to minimize SCN yield loss is a multi-faceted plan that can include growing nonhost crops in rotation with SCN-resistant soybean varieties and use of nematode-protectant seed treatments on the soybeans,” says Greg Tylka, Morrill professor, Department of Plant Pathology and Microbiology at Iowa State University, in a statement.

New Seed Treatment Option Available For 2026
Giebel says Nemora is a microbial seed treatment in flowable powder (FP) format for soybeans and is available for planter-box treatment or through Indigo’s CLIPS delivery system. It contains a naturally occurring Pseudomonas oryzihabitans bacterium that colonizes roots and shoots.

How Nemora works:

It stimulates Induced Systemic Resistance (ISR) and forms a biofilm that supports robust root colonization.
The biological colony prevents eggs on the roots from hatching, slowing the soybean cyst nematode lifecycle without disrupting beneficial nematodes in the soil.
Once in the soil, the Pseudomonas active in Nemora recruits a diverse and specialized community of plant growth-promoting bacteria to aid in plant development.

What soybean growers can expect:

Direct impact on SCN lifecycle: Average 68% reduction in egg hatch.
Longer tap roots, more root biomass, and whiter roots.
Thicker plant shoots and improved emergence.
No interference with nodulation.
No phytotoxicity or halo effect.
Nemora can provide the same yield advantage as products like chemical solutions available on the market.

Corteva's Bold Move: What Splitting Crop Protection and Seed Businesses Means for the Future

Wed, 01 Oct 2025 17:55:42 GMT

Global agriculture technology company Corteva announced plans on Wednesday to separate into two independent, publicly traded entities: “new” Corteva, which will continue to sell crop protection products – herbicides, fungicides, insecticides and biologicals – and SpinCo, which will focus on the seed genetics business.

SpinCo will include Pioneer, the company’s legacy seed brand established in 1926, as well as Brevant and regional seed brands, including Dairyland Seed.

Upon separation of the companies, Greg Page, current Corteva chairman, will lead new Corteva, while Chuck Magro, current Corteva CEO, will become CEO of SpinCo.

In announcing the decision by Corteva, Magro said the farmer-centric organization appreciates that its customers want and need choice across their input decisions.

“The best way, maybe I can even say, the only way for this company to preserve and expand that choice and keep putting innovative, effective, sustainable solutions into the hands of farmers around the world is to give both businesses the freedom to operate without having to look out for the other,” said Magro, during an online presentation primarily focused on company investors.

He added that the separation of the company into two entities will allow both businesses to maximize long-term value for farmers, customers, employees and shareholders.

Magro described SpinCo – with expected net sales of $9.9 billion in 2025 (56% of current Corteva sales) – as “a classic growth compounder” that will pursue opportunities in out-licensing, hybrid wheat, biofuels and gene editing.

“The continued success of our SpinCo business will be predicated upon sustained investment in advanced genetics and further capitalizing on our unique route to market,” Magro said.

As a pure-play crop genetics company, Magro predicts SpinCo could go beyond its corn and soybean core into other row crops, even expanding into other areas like fruits and vegetables.

“Spinco will also look to expand on new opportunities in wheat, cotton, rice and other products, where genetics can play a transformative role,” he said. “In other words, we could see SpinCo playing in a vastly expanded addressable market.”

Corteva Crop Protection Business Is Future-Focused

For new Corteva, Magro characterized the crop protection industry as competitive and tough, but that company leaders anticipate the market will return to growth in the near future.

“At new Corteva, success will be built upon an optimized supply chain, a new level of operational excellence and the ability to invest in the next generation of sustainable, differentiated innovation, including biologicals and other nature-based products,” he said.

Magro said as company leaders weighed the pros and cons of separating the two companies, they made the decision with the future in mind.

“This is not about today, and it’s not certainly about the last six years. This is about what we see coming,” he said. “We’re in a market that we need to look out 10-years plus. That’s just the research and development and the timeline it takes to bring technology into the marketplace. So this is a long-term decision that we are making.”

Corteva’s 2025 net sales for its crop protection business are estimated to be $7.8 billion (44% of the current company’s total).

During Magro’s remarks, he gave no indication of where the two companies will be based. Corteva’s global headquarters is currently based in Indianapolis, Ind., while Johnston, Iowa, is home to its seed business.

The transaction separating Corteva and SpinCo is expected to be completed in the second half of 2026.

Corteva was formed in 2018 as the agriculture-focused subsidiary of DowDuPont, following the merger of the two companies. Corteva was spun-off as its own entity in 2019.

Your next read: Fertilizer Decisions: Balance Costs, Yields and Sustainability

Navigate 2026 Input Costs with A Proactive Strategy

Thu, 25 Sep 2025 19:06:10 GMT

While Brent Judisch is in the midst of combining his 2025 corn and soybeans, he’s also thinking about how to plan for next year’s crops and inputs specifically.

“Fertilizer prices will kind of mirror your corn prices usually, but right now they’re going opposite directions. That’s not something we can handle going forward on the farm, with the costs going up and income going down,” says Judisch, who farms in Black Hawk County, Iowa.

Price Trends For N, P And K This Year

Mark Tully, senior manager, global market research for Nutrien, tells Farm Journal wholesale nitrogen (N) fertilizer prices are up between 25% and 45%, depending on the product.

The increases are due to unexpected global supply constraints in 2025. “This trend is being driven by conflict in Europe, Middle East, and trade restrictions from China, which have all impacted production and export availability,” Tully says.

Phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) have also trended up this year. Tully reports wholesale phosphate fertilizer prices are up between 20% and 40% depending on the product, while wholesale potash prices are up about 15% from 2024 levels.

National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) projections indicate fertilizer expenditures alone could account for 36% of a corn grower’s operating costs in 2025, with little to no relief expected for 2026.

“Looking ahead to next year, [input costs] look to be going a little higher,” predicts Krista Swanson, chief economist for the NCGA. She says inputs for corn have totaled about $900 an acre annually for the past four years.

Trusted Advisers Can Help With Input Decisions

As farmers grapple with input decisions, Ken Ferrie encourages farmers to lean on their agronomists and other trusted advisers to help think through the process of where to allocate resources while still maintaining targeted yield outcomes.

For example, at current input prices, Ferrie says a corn grower might save $85 an acre by managing nitrogen more efficiently ($35), varying population according to soil type ($20) and switching to a non-GMO hybrid ($30).

“But you have to do your homework before you make these kinds of decisions or yields could potentially fall off a cliff, leaving your balance sheet in worse shape than if you’d made no change,” he cautions.

Judisch is looking to address higher input costs next year by trimming rates where soil fertility levels will allow him to pull back.

“I think we’ll probably trim back our phosphate usage [for corn] a little bit, but we’ll still go forward with potash, and you’ve got to have nitrogen. You really can’t cut there,” Judisch says.

Evaluate Purchasing Options Early For The Best Terms

Josh Linville, vice president of fertilizer for StoneX has been encouraging farmers planning to make fall anhydrous ammonia (NH3) applications to contact their suppliers now to lock in product.

While there is a good supply of NH3 in the pipeline currently, Linville is concerned the expected high demand could deplete its ready availability and lead to increased costs.

“I do think the prices will hold to push higher,” he says.

The best time for growers to contact suppliers to discuss 2026 availability and pricing of fertilizer, seed and other inputs is now, according to Jordan Howe, area manager for Nutrien Financial.

“Have an open conversation with your input providers, and explore options of early buying habits that could put you in a better position or help you capture a discount that maybe you haven’t in the past,” he says.

Howe encourages farmers to not shy away from asking questions of loan officers or financing institutions and read the fine print on any written agreement. Two key questions he recommends asking:

1. What is the price of the input if I want to pay for it in cash versus financing it?

2. If I opt to finance, what type of interest rate am I being offered – is it a fixed rate or a floating rate?

“I am seeing a lot ofunique financing opportunities out there where it might be a low, good rate early, but then it matures and turns into a much higher rate. You’ll want to consider whether you would be able to pay that off before it goes to the higher rate,” Howe says

He adds that being able to pay cash for some portion of your input needs can help you leverage your buying power to get the most competitive financing offers for the balance.

Don’t Forget To Consider Your Tax Implications

In the process of purchasing inputs for next season, keep in mind the potential taxes on products, recommends Jonathan LaPorte, Michigan State University farm business management educator.

“As you plan purchases, remember to maintain flexibility to maximize tax savings this year and next. Don’t overspend this year to save on inputs only to pay more income taxes next year,” he advises.

LaPorte offers an online Input Purchasing Plan Template in Word and Microsoft Excel to help farmers run different scenarios on input purchases based on their cropping plan for the year ahead. The template is available here .

Your next read: 26 Ideas To Cut Fertilizer Costs In 2026

Southern Rust Has Infected Iowa Corn in ‘Likely Every County’

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 20:53:56 GMT

Alison Robertson says she has been at Iowa State University (ISU) for 21 years, and she’s never seen as widespread a problem southern rust is in Iowa this season. She believes the disease is present in every one of the state’s 99 counties.

She reports the disease moved into Iowa early, right at the beginning of grain fill.

“I’ve never seen this before…we’re just going to have to see how bad it gets,” Robertson, an ISU Extension field crops pathologist, told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory.

Corn yield losses from the disease can reach 30% and even more, depending on infection severity.

Karen Braun, chief market analyst at Zaner Ag Hedge and a Pro Farmer Crop Tour scout, says one of the fields she’s watching in western Iowa is “in pretty bad shape, disease-wise.”

“It’s really hard to get a feel for how widespread [southern rust] is, but I know a lot of people are talking about it, especially with how much moisture they’ve gotten out in the western belt,” she told Flory on AgriTalk.

Southern rust has infected corn in at least 18 states as of Monday, according to the Crop Protection Network (CPN). Along with Iowa, the CPN has confirmed the disease in other Midwest states, including Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska and a “probable” finding in Michigan.

(Crop Protection Network)

“Southern rust loves wet, and the fact that we saw it early and we’ve been wet means the disease is really ramping up,” Robertson says.

What The Disease Looks Like On Plants
Southern corn rust, caused by the fungus Puccinia polysora, creates round, light brown to orange spots scattered mainly on the upper leaf surface. They might also appear on husks, stalks, lower leaf surface and ear shanks.

“We’re getting all these spots, pustules on those leaves that are producing spores,” Robertson says. “When the spores are produced, they burst through the leaf epidermis, and so because of that, those leaves are probably losing a little bit more moisture than they would do with something like Northern corn leaf blight, or gray leaf spot, or even tar spot.”

Tissue damaged by the disease is not able to photosynthesize. Corn kernels are then unable to fill with starch and build a heavy test weight.

“The plants are under a lot of stress trying to fill that grain, so that can lead to premature senescence and just death of those plants,” Robertson says.

Southern rust can be difficult to distinguish from common rust .

Many Farmers Still Have Time To Treat The Disease
Foliar fungicides can help farmers manage southern rust, but timing is critical. Research shows fungicide applications ideally go on the crop from tasseling through the milk stage (R3).

“And if you have a severe infection into dough, then a fungicide application could still be helpful. But once you get to R5, once that corn is denting, it’s too late, you can’t do anything,” Robertson notes.

The Crop Protection Network, a multi-state Extension resource, offers a new mapping tool called Crop Lookout farmers can reference to identify various diseases and their locations.

“If you just click on that, there’s a couple of hot links on that map for tar spot and southern rust. When we find new spots of disease, it’s updated in real time,” notes Daren Mueller, an ISU Extension pathologist.

Robertson has posted an article online with more information on Southern rust continues to develop across Iowa.

Fast Facts About Southern Rust
· Southern rust spores can travel miles on air currents.
· Once infected, symptoms can be observed within three to four days if the weather is favorable.
· Within seven to 10 days, spores are produced and can travel to other plants.
· Favorable southern rust conditions include hot temperatures and at least four hours of consecutive leaf wetness.
· Research shows southern rust can continue even with temperatures around 110°F.

The AgriTalk Segments with Robertson and Braun are available here:

Artificial Intelligence Joins The Fight Against Weeds, Insects And Disease

Thu, 07 Aug 2025 19:45:30 GMT

The crop protection industry needs a reboot, according to Tony Klemm.

As CEO of Enko, a crop-protection startup, he says the company is taking a different approach to solving one of agriculture’s biggest problems – developing safe, effective and sustainable crop protection products that can be brought to the marketplace faster and more economically.

Traditional discovery pipelines for herbicides, fungicides, insecticides are not keeping pace with real challenges farmers face, such as resistance issues, he told Chip Flory, host of AgriTalk on Thursday.

A 2024 study funded by Crop Life International reports the costs associated with bringing a new active ingredient to major U.S. and European markets now top $300 million. In addition, the survey says the average lead time between the first synthesis of a new crop protection molecule and its subsequent commercial introduction is now over 12 years.

Part of the long development time required is related to regulatory hurdles. “There’s just increasing demand for meeting environmental safety needs, rightfully so,” Klemm says.

A Paradigm Shift
Enko, based in Mystic, Conn., is using artificial intelligence (AI) and a machine learning discovery platform to guide the company’s research and development efforts. Klemm describes the strategy as a paradigm shift from the current industry practices for how small molecule crop protection discovery has been done.

“We use DNA-encoded libraries, and these libraries allow our scientists to explore this massive, diverse chemical space in a very targeted, automated and expansive way,” he says.

The technology allows Enko scientists to look at billions of molecules and screen them for safety and efficacy and, in the process, develop them faster and more economically.

“We still have to take the regulatory journey that, right now, no one’s figured out a way to expedite,” he notes. “But getting to that regulatory queue faster and better on the front side is really what’s bringing us that cost savings, that efficacy and is going to allow for more products to be put into the regulatory queue in a faster manner.”

Progress To Date
So far, Klemm says Enko has delivered about 50 active programs that cover all facets of weeds, insects and disease. Many use novel or new modes of action that Klemm believes will help farmers fight resistance issues, such as herbicide resistance in Palmer amaranth and pigweed.

“We’re really working on how we can bring new modes of action to farmers, give them fresh tools to win that fight. And our chemistries work using fewer active ingredients, from perspective of the load on the acre, so we’re designing safer chemistry for the future,” he says.

Specifically, Klemm says Enko recently announced a new grass herbicide is in the pipeline for the European cereals market for control of black grass. The company also has conducted field trials for corn and soybean products in the U.S. that he anticipates are five to 10 years away from market launch, depending on how long they take to move through regulatory channels.

Your next read: Bayer Affirms Support of Glyphosate, Optimistic for a Future with Over the Top Dicamba Labels

Fusing The Best of Regenerative Ag and Smart Farming: Senator Marshall’s Take on MAHA

Fri, 25 Jul 2025 14:22:11 GMT

Having grown up as a Kansas fifth generation farm kid and spending many years as a physician, U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, R-Kan., views the Trump administration’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) agenda through a different lens than many of his Beltway colleagues.

“I delivered a baby every day for some 25 years in my hometown,” Marshall says. “And certainly, diet and nutrition are so, so, so important. When I came to Congress, this was one of the things I wanted to address. And I want to start by saying there’s no MAHA without American agriculture leadership.”

RELATED: MAHA Report’s Surprising Stance on Glyphosate, Atrazine Explained

While much of the recent reporting around MAHA focuses on unpacking the movement’s outwardly anti-pesticide bent , Marshall has fashioned his own, more conventional ag-friendly version covering four distinct pillars:

Increase American agricultural efficiency
Grow healthier, nutrient rich food
Unlock affordable health care access for millions of Americans
Focus on health care resources to combat the mental health epidemic

“I believe soil health leads to healthy food, which leads to healthy people,” Marshall says. “I hear the MAHA group and I hear the ag folks. I have a foot in each of those worlds, and I am trying to bring them together. Because guess what? American agriculture wants healthy children just as much as anybody.”

RELATED: Decode MAHA’s Potential Effect on the Agriculture Sector

Marshall believes MAHA can achieve that goal by embracing some – but not all – of the regenerative ag principles Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., espoused on the campaign trail. American farmers are already reducing chemical use with tools like selective spraying systems and mechanical weeding implements, but the senator knows there’s still meat on that bone. He views it less as a return to “40 acres and a mule” and more as a combination of pieces and parts from the regenerative ag playbook with precision ag technology generously sprinkled into the mix.

“Regenerative ag should be centered around precision ag and growing more with less,” he says. “We’re already using 60% less fertilizers and less pesticides. I think we must continue to decrease the amount of fertilizers and pesticides, so there’s less residue on that loaf of bread in the grocery store.”

Marshall is currently rallying Congressional support for the bipartisan Plant Biostimulant Act. This yet-to-be-ratified farm policy would streamline the FDA approval process under FIFRA for new, novel and natural modes of action. But the senator emphasizes the program must remain voluntary.

“About 5% of the farm bill is conservation practices,” he says. “So, I would streamline the FDA process and allow these biostimulants to be one of the options. It’s not a subsidy, though. I just want to make the regulatory process easier. And that’s going to make it more affordable, as well.”

More MAHA: 250-Plus Ag Groups Ask Trump Administration To ‘Correct’ MAHA Commission’s ‘Activities’

Another goal is for the American producer to embrace best-in-class crop production and sustainability practices. The Kansas senator points to one example from his home state as the creative and nimble thinking he wants to see American farmers embrace.

“We have a group of sorghum growers that have their own mill,” Marshall says. “And they’re selling that flour directly to the infant formula (companies) as well as to European markets. The EU has higher standards, so to speak, than America does, and so be it. I don’t know if they’re necessary, but I don’t make the rules. These Kansas farmers have cracked the code and they’re getting a premium for their sorghum right now, and all it takes is a little extra effort.”

Your Next Read: Can Pulse Crops Double Acreage by 2030? The Push to Include More Pulses in the MAHA Movement

Illinois Legislature Passes Bill to Improve Pesticide Applicator Process

Wed, 04 Jun 2025 13:39:05 GMT

Illinois lawmakers have passed a bill to amend the pesticide applicator licensing process. In what’s expected to be in place by 2027, the current exam renewal required every three years will be replaced instead with continuing education requirements.

“It’s finally good to be on offense down at the Illinois State Capitol rather than being on defense,” says Kevin Johnson, president of the Illinois Fertilizer and Chemical Association, the organization which initiated the legislation.

The bill passed the Illinois Senate 50-4 and the state house 116-0.

“That’s not usual. Many ag bills in the state of Illinois don’t get those kind of kind of numbers, so we’re proud of that,” Johnson says. Now, it’s on to Gov. Pritzker’s desk for consideration to be signed into law; he has 90 days to act.

There are more than 36,000 registered pesticide applicators in Illinois — of which 11,000 are farmers.

In the potential new process, for the initial license issued by the state’s department of agriculture, a first-time applicant would need to pass the 100-question exam. Then, going forward, they could renew their status via the continuing education requirement.

“We have been an outlier for quite a few years. A lot of states have done this for 20 years,” Johnson says. “Our applicators are specifically asking for this, and so this has been a thing that we’ve worked on many years.”

Assuming the governor signs the bill, Johnson says it will go into effect Jan. 1, 2026, but industry stakeholders should expect about a year for the entire process to be developed with the official availability in 2027.

Not only will the new structure provide an in-demand change by pesticide applicators, but it will also give the department of agriculture an opportunity to provide timely, ongoing training for industry professionals.

“The continuing education will focus on the general standards, but it does give us the opportunity to update some topics every year,” Johnson says. “So, for example, it could be about the herbicide and insecticide strategies for the Endangered Species Act, so in coming years more about tank clean out.”

ARA Says MAHA Commission’s Policy Recommendations Need Input From Agriculture

Wed, 28 May 2025 20:58:19 GMT

Nearly a week after the public release of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Report, many members of the agricultural community say the document was more moderate than anticipated – most likely owing to engagement and concerns voiced by various agricultural groups, USDA and Congress.

But that doesn’t mean there aren’t flaws that need to be addressed in the 68-page document Making Our Children Healthy Again, according to the Ag Retailers Association (ARA).

“I think that [ag’s efforts] helped moderate the report, but there’s lots of concerns and contradictory statements in there related to pesticides, and that’s a major concern for our members and the industry,” says Richard Gupton, senior vice president for public policy and counsel at the ARA.

Conflicting, Unreliable Science Cited
Among ARA’s concerns, Gupton says, the report references studies EPA had previously deemed as being based on unreliable science, conflicting stances that create unnecessary anxiety about food safety among U.S. consumers.

“It undermines the public confidence in our regulatory system when they mention studies that have been rejected by EPA,” Gupton told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Tuesday. “The EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs is the gold standard for evaluating pesticide safety. So a concern, from our perspective, is [the commission is] including things in there that that aren’t held up by our own federal agency, and it causes concern with the general public on the safety of their food supply.”

Hear more of Gupton’s perspective regarding flaws in the commission’s report on AgriTalk.

Gupton’s concerns were similarly voiced by Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith , R-Mississippi. She had expressed concerns before the MAHA report was unveiled and then again the day of its release, last Thursday.

“There is enough in the report to cause plenty of worry about how key crop protection tools will be regulated in the future,” Hyde-Smith said in a statement. “I remain concerned about this report may be used to set the stage for a new regimen of standards based on fringe theories that could upend the sound farming practices that have made American farmers the most productive in history.”

Gupton says ARA also takes issue with language in the report that seems to recommend taking the U.S. regulatory system beyond science-based, risk-based standards and adopting a different kind of a system, more in line with European regulatory systems.

“The commission tries to imply other regulatory systems might be better than the U.S. system, but the European Union’s own actions contradict this notion, as glyphosate is currently approved in the EU through 2033,” Gupton says.

Another concern Gupton voiced was the lack of transparency in the development of the MAHA report. No farmers or farm groups had a seat at the table in the formal development process. ARA wants that misstep corrected now, as the commission begins to develop policy recommendations based on the report. Those are due to President Trump in approximately 80 days.

Your next read: MAHA Report’s Surprising Stance on Glyphosate, Atrazine Explained

Decode MAHA's Potential Effect on the Agriculture Sector

Mon, 19 May 2025 19:36:44 GMT

Three months ago, President Donald Trump signed an executive order establishing the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission. Later this week, the group’s first report is scheduled to be released.

Farmers were directly mentioned in the president’s February order , “agencies shall work with farmers to ensure that United States food is the healthiest, most abundant, and most affordable in the world.”

Members of the commission include Human Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins, and many more.

Among its tasks, the commission is to “assess the threat that potential over-utilization of medication, certain food ingredients, certain chemicals, and certain other exposures pose to children with respect to chronic inflammation or other established mechanisms of disease, using rigorous and transparent data, including international comparisons.”

So what should agriculture be watching for?

In brief, industry analysts are watching two fronts for activity from MAHA initiatives:

Commodity grain and oilseeds
Pesticide use

“Secretary Kennedy so far has been very focused on processed foods, that’s one part of it,” says Richard Gupton, senior vice president of policy at the Agricultural Retailers Association. “Pesticides have really been a focus of Secretary Kennedy for well before he was in this current role. He was actually was part of the first litigations related to glyphosate.”

There have been reports that the MAHA report will specifically call out pesticides including glyphosate and atrazine.

Gupton highlights the statistics showing how from the mid 1900s to now, American agriculture has increased its output three-fold.

Gupton continues, “We represent ag retailers that are working with farmers, making sure they have the all the modern ag tools right to produce a crop, not only in a sustainable way, but an economical way. Products like glyphosate that have been registered and safely used since 1974, have really revolutionized modern production agriculture.”

Crop Life America is hosting a website for grassroots outreach to law makers and the Trump administration, farmervoicesmatter.org.

“People are making decisions about what tools farmers are going to get access to, and farmers need to be heard,” says Alex Dunn, president of CEO of Crop Life America.
“The pesticides are subject to extensive review by the U.S. EPA, under a very strict law that actually is the envy of many other countries,” Dunn says. “I actually served at the EPA in the last Trump administration. I oversaw the pesticide program for two years, and I got to see the scientists in action. And let me tell you, they don’t let anything go if they think there’s any concern. They are required under the law to assess for any environmental risk, to look at risk to the farm workers, to human health and especially to children. There’s a special requirement in the law that the EPA has to look at risk to children and put a 10 times additional factor of safety for childrens’ exposures. So we have a wonderful system.”

Which agencies have regulatory authority over what?

While this first report coming this week will unveil the overall direction and focus for the commission’s work, its policy and regulatory recommendations will be revealed Aug. 12 when the “Make our Children Healthy Again Strategy” will be submitted to the president.

Health and Human Services houses the Food and Drug Administration, which oversees the trace pesticide testing on food products. However those tolerances are set by EPA.

“The commission’s recommendations could be within Health and Human Services, could be what FDA does, could be related to recommendations at EPA and to FIFRA and how products are registered within that agency,” Gupton says. “All of those things could potentially make it more difficult for farmers to have access to these necessary pesticide tools and cause an increase in the cost of food for American families.”

Rollins told Farm Journal’s Chip Flory on May 16, interagency talks were ongoing for the report’s content. She said her focus was to make sure the perspective of U.S. farmers is included. Recently, she helped organized Kennedy’s visit to a Texas farm.

Regarding Zeldin’s and Rollins’ seat on the commission, Gupton says its key for them to voice the jurisdiction of their agency.

“If they do their jobs and speak up and represent their agencies, and EPA stands behind their science, that’s all we’re asking them to do. And for Secretary Rollins that she’s there promoting and supporting America’s farmers,” Gupton says.

He continues, “If they want to talk about the review process and whether that needs to be updated, then that’s another conversation. They shouldn’t attack the products that have been effective and used by modern agriculture for decades to the benefit of the United States, our farmers and the globe.”

Could Government Efficiency Efforts Break the Dam in EPA’s Pesticide Approval Backlog?

Mon, 12 May 2025 16:09:43 GMT

Earlier this month, EPA administrator Lee Zeldin announced the next phase of organizational improvements for the agency. For agriculture, the focus went to 130 science positions that were being reallocated.

With EPA’s authority over reviewing the science of pesticides, and a current backlog of 504 new chemicals in review plus 12,000 pesticide reviews that are overdue compared to their expected timelines, the industry has been watching a ballooning backlog.

“We’ve been trying to get more resources to help to reduce the backlog, and we’ve been advocating for Administrator Zeldin to provide additional resources,” says Terry Kippley, president and CEO of the Council of Producers and Distributors of Agrotechnology. “And so we’re still waiting on some details, but they have announced that there’s 130 scientists that could be moving over into the chemicals division and the chemicals division is the division that growers care about and agribusiness cares about because it includes the Office of Pesticide Programs [OPP], and they’re responsible for getting the tools out into the field.”

Two core causes of the backlog:

There have been two key factors adding up to the slowdown and now backlog of pesticide processing, regulations and approval.

1. Underfunding and interagency performance.

Specific to the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Congress has underfunded its activities. Registrants agreed to a fee structure helping pay for the services provided by EPA, known as PRIA 5, which increased industry fees by 30%.

Congress has continually funded the EPA at low levels, and the OPP significantly below the $166 million asked for in appropriation.

“For many reasons every year they’ve only been giving approximately 80% of that number,” Kippley says. “From the farmer perspective, if you have a deal with a local co-op, and you say I’m going to give you 30% more money. But then you find out that you’re only getting about 80% of that agreed upon number. That’s a problem.”

Kippley says right now, for OPP, it adds up to being short about $32 million.

“We’d like to have them allocate that additional $32 million dollars, so that in the end OPP has the resources to consistently deliver and execute these timelines, so that everybody has certainty.”

2. The COVID-19 pandemic brought an unexpected workload

During the COVID-19 pandemic, disruptions added up in addition to EPA being responsible for testing and approving hand sanitizer products.

“I’ve had nearly a 30-year career dealing with regulated products, and I can say we’ve had certainty out of EPA in the past,” Kippley says. “Maybe wasn’t always perfect, but until COVID it was really operating in a way that we could do business, and they have just received so much more work with so many fewer resources. It’s really a difficult situation to manage.”

Will DOGE be the answer to the two issues that have amassed this backlog?

It has yet to be seen. One retiree from EPA is skeptical that even with an influx of 130 scientists transferred into the OPP, any benefits in terms of approvals won’t be seen for 18 months.

“If they allocate all of the transfers to new registrations — and ignore the FIFRA renewals — and if they are creative, by the time the Trump administration is over, things could be caught up,” they say.

One reason is the recent wave of early retirements, which currently employs 550 total scientists and 100 of those taking the early out package, which went into effect on May 5.

Clarity For Ag Retailers: ESA Workplan Resource Revealed

Mon, 24 Mar 2025 18:11:13 GMT

The Agricultural Retailers Association (ARA), CropLife America (CLA), and the Council of Producers and Distributors of Agrotechnology (CPDA) are pleased to announce the release of a new resource designed to assist farmers and agricultural retailers in navigating the forthcoming changes to pesticide labels under the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Endangered Species Act (ESA) Workplan.

To support our stakeholders, we have developed a decision guide that will facilitate the understanding and implementation of the updated label requirements. This tool aims to provide clarity on new label language so that farmers and retailers can effectively comply with the new regulations while maintaining a focus on both environmental sustainability and agricultural productivity.

“These label changes will bring challenges, but they also present an opportunity for us to demonstrate our commitment to responsible pesticide use and environmental protection,” said Daren Coppock, president and CEO of ARA. “We are excited to collaborate with our industry partners to help farmers and retailers access the support they need.”

“Farmers and retailers play a crucial role in helping ensure pesticide products are used responsibly and effectively. By our associations coming together to create resources, we aim to meet a need that helps stakeholders feel confident in navigating new regulations,” said Alexandra Dunn, president and CEO of CLA.

“CPDA is committed to supporting our members and the agricultural community in adapting to evolving regulatory landscapes and providing ESA mitigation tools such as Drift Reduction Agents (DRA’s) to reduce the need for No Spray Buffer zones where possible,” said Terry Kippley, president and CEO of CPDA. “We believe that this crucial industry collaboration to create resources will empower our industry to meet the needs of both environmental stewardship and agricultural productivity.”

We encourage all industry participants to utilize this resource as we collectively uphold our commitment to responsible and effective pesticide use. Visit the ESA page on the CLA website for more information and other helpful resources.