Retail Management

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

Thu, 14 May 2026 20:34:56 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Running The Corn Replant Math

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

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

(Harkirat Kaur)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nitrogen, Natural Gas And Timing

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prioritize Corn Now, Finish Beans After

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

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

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

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

Seeding Rate And Replant Thresholds

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

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

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

(Shawn Conley)

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

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

On replant decisions, his threshold is clear.

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

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

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

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

Consider Row Spacing

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

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

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

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

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

‘We Need Rain’: Dry Fields Stall Corn Planting

Thu, 14 May 2026 15:06:23 GMT

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

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

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

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

Improvements in AZ, CO, and the Southeast.

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

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

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

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

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

The National Picture

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

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

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

Farming From A Desk in Kentucky

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Fertilizer Squeeze

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

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

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

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

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

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

Searching For Optimism

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

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

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

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

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

Rethink Your Herbicide Strategy In High-Residue Systems

Wed, 13 May 2026 17:24:45 GMT

Waterhemp and other tough weeds are forcing farmers to rethink how they use herbicides in high-residue cropping systems, from heavy corn stalks to thick cereal rye covers.

Extension weed scientists say they increasingly hear from growers who did “everything right” with applying their preemergence products yet still see waterhemp push through and survive. Increasingly, one of the challenges is those fields carry a lot more residue than they used to.

“Every year, we have some situations where we get less than expected control of weeds for various reasons, and I’ve come around to appreciate the impact that residue can have on our success,” says Tom Peters, Extension agronomist and weed control specialist for North Dakota State University and the University of Minnesota.

Oftentimes, the assumption has been that rainfall will wash herbicides off the residue and down into the soil, where they can do their job. Peters says that belief does not hold up in reality.

“I would argue that some of our performance challenges have been related to those herbicides sticking to the residues,” contends Peters, who made his comments during the 2026 Field Notes program.

That problem is on the increase as farmers are dialing back their tillage passes, planting into more corn and soybean residue and seeding more cover crops.

Reduction In Control Assessed

During graduate work with the University of Minnesota, Eric Yu, now a regional crops Extension educator, measured just how much product residue can intercept herbicides. In cover crop plots, he and his colleagues placed water-sensitive cards below cereal rye crops, applied a preemergence herbicide and then evaluated the results.

“We were seeing about a 50% reduction in the amount of product that reaches the soil compared to our control plots,” Yu says. “Yet despite that 50% reduction, we were seeing still significant weed control, specifically waterhemp control.”

The message, Yu says, is not that residue makes the use of pre products pointless. It is that farmers need to account for residue when they design their weed-control programs — and still keep a strong preemergence herbicide in the plan.

Peters agrees. Even when residue cuts the amount of product reaching the soil, pres are still the foundation of a good program, especially as waterhemp increases in resistance to postemergence herbicides.

“Start the season with pre products, observe your results and then decide what the best postemergence program is,” he advises.

For farmers managing crops in high-residue systems, Peters and Yu point to several practical steps:

Prioritize Soil Contact: Ensure herbicides are actually reaching the soil surface. In cases of extreme residue, it may be necessary to manage or move stalks and straw ahead of planting.
Adjust Product and Rate: Work with agronomists to select products and rates that can withstand some interception while still delivering enough active ingredient to the soil to be effective. Using full labeled rates is increasingly a best-practice solution for control and to reduce selection pressure for further herbicide resistance.
Tighten the Timing Window: Because residue can blunt the effectiveness of a pre product, escapes are more likely. Small waterhemp is much easier to control; once the weed reaches the 4- to 5-inch range, control becomes significantly more difficult.

Researchers Evaluate 21 Herbicides

A group of University of Wisconsin-Madison scientists recently studied which herbicides make it to the ground and provide residual waterhemp control in high-residue farming systems. The controlled-environment study evaluated 21 single-active-ingredient corn and/or soybean herbicides compatible with high-biomass cereal rye. Here are the results, courtesy of GROW/Take Action :

Corn herbicides identified as effective for waterhemp control and compatible with high-biomass cereal rye in this study included:

Acetochlor (Harness – Group 15)
Dimethenamid-P (Outlook – Group 15)
Pyroxasulfone (Zidua – Group 15)
S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum – Group 15)
Atrazine (Group 5)*
Isoxaflutole (Balance Flexx – Group 27)
Mesotrione (Callisto – Group 27)

*waterhemp population used in this study is still susceptible to atrazine applied preemergence.

Soybean herbicides identified as effective for waterhemp control and compatible with high-biomass cereal rye in this study included:

Dimethenamid-P (Outlook – Group 15)
Pyroxasulfone (Zidua – Group 15)
S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum – Group 15)
Flumioxazin (Valor – Group 14)
Fomesafen (Flexstar – Group 14)
Metribuzin (Group 5)

The Wisconsin researchers say soybean growers should pay close attention to application timing restrictions. Flumioxazin-containing products for instance must be applied within three days of soybean planting, while metribuzin must be applied prior to soybean emergence. The remaining soybean herbicides listed above can be applied preemergence or early postemergence, offering flexibility for growers who plant early and delay cereal rye termination until after soybean emergence.

A standard program in planting green systems where the cereal rye is terminated after soybean emergence may include glyphosate for cereal rye termination, combined with soil residual herbicides fomesafen plus a Group 15 herbicide (e.g., pyroxasulfone, S-metolachlor, or dimethenamid-P) and a Group 2 herbicide such as imazethapyr (Pursuit), cloransulam (FirstRate), or chlorimuron (Classic) for broad spectrum weed control.

Corteva Launches New Fungicide For Sugarbeets

Wed, 13 May 2026 13:31:03 GMT

Corteva Agriscience announced Wednesday the U.S. launch of Verpixo fungicide, a new tool designed to combat Cercospora leaf spot (CLS) in sugarbeets.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has registered the product for the 2026 growing season. Verpixo features Adavelt active, which the EPA has designated as a reduced-risk chemistry.

New Mode of Action

Verpixo introduces a Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC) Group 21 mode of action to the sugarbeet market. Derived from a naturally occurring compound in soil bacteria, the fungicide offers broad-spectrum control and provides growers with increased application flexibility.

Cercospora leaf spot is considered the most economically damaging fungal disease for the U.S. sugarbeet industry. According to the Beet Sugar Development Foundation, the disease could have caused more than $900 million in economic losses during the 2024 production year if left unmanaged.

“Extensive lab and in-field testing confirm the efficacy of Verpixo fungicide with Adavelt active against CLS, which can cause up to 30% annual yield loss,” says Colleen Kent, specialty crops portfolio marketing lead with Corteva, in a press release.

Combating Resistance

The disease is characterized by brown spots on leaves that inhibit a plant’s ability to photosynthesize, directly reducing sugar content and root weight. Because CLS is polycyclic—meaning it can produce spores multiple times in a single season—ongoing management is required.

Current fungicides and some genetic traits have seen a decline in efficacy due to resistance. Verpixo uses translaminar movement to protect both the top and bottom of leaf surfaces.

“Verpixo fungicide with Adavelt active has no known resistance, making it ideally suited for resistance management programs,” Kent reports.

Environmental Impact

Corteva stated that the product’s natural origin and environmental profile are compatible with Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs, allowing beneficial insects to thrive while controlling the fungal pathogen.

The fungicide is now available for use in the 2026 season and is compatible with standard tank-mix practices.

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:

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

Fri, 08 May 2026 16:52:22 GMT

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

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

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

(Crop-Tech Consulting)

Regional Forecast And Recommendation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Metabolic Weed Resistance Crisis Builds Across The Heartland

Wed, 06 May 2026 16:51:05 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The bad news does not stop there.

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

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

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

That’s the power of effective herbicide tank mixtures.

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

“Hammer With Residuals” And Build Effective Combinations

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Aaron Hager, University of Illinois)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Protect Herbicide Tools To Extend Their Use

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

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

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

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

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

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

5 Practical Recommendations To Address Metabolic Resistance

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

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

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

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

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

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

Build A High-Yield Powerhouse From The Bottom Up

Tue, 05 May 2026 17:40:53 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Farm Journal TV)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 21:27:02 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Three-Year Financial Drain

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

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

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

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

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

2027: “It Scares the Daylights Out of Me”

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

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

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

The Rotation Debate: Markets vs. Agronomics

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

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

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

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

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

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

Long-Term Risks Of Changing Rotations

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

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

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

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

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

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:

Assess Soybean Frost Damage: Ken Ferrie Urges Patience, Replanting Discipline After Hard Freeze

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 15:53:31 GMT

Earlier this week after a series of storms and subfreezing temperatures swept through central Illinois, agronomist Ken Ferrie walked his March-planted soybean test plots south of the Bloomington area and didn’t like what he found.

“We had a substantial frost, reports of temperatures from 29 to 32 degrees, with the frost hanging around three hours or more,” Ferrie says. “Things are kind of crunchy in the grass this morning.”

That crunch underfoot translates into real damage in soybeans. Some plants, Ferrie says, are not going to make it.

“The worst hit are soybeans in the unifoliate stage or more and that were planted in our low ground,” he notes.

Illinois wasn’t the only state where soybeans were hit by frost. Weather reports from Monday and Tuesday indicate a late-season cold snap brought frost and freezing temperatures to at least four additional key soybean-producing states, impacting parts of Iowa, Indiana, Michigan and Ohio.

According to the USDA Crop Progress report released on April 20, roughly 12% of the national soybean crop had been planted. States like Illinois and Indiana were slightly ahead of their five-year averages, making crops there more vulnerable to this specific frost event.

Don’t Rush To Replant, Be Disciplined In Your Approach

Ferrie describes a clear set of visual cues growers can use to evaluate frost damage in their crop.

“Look for unifoliate leaves that are dark and deflated, and the cotyledons have a dark color,” he says. “The biggest telltale is the stem has no turgor pressure right below the cotyledons.”

He notes that those beans with discolored cotyledons and limited turgor pressure will require more time to see if they will refire at the cotyledon node.

Ferrie urges growers to take a systematic approach to evaluating frost-damaged soybeans with these four steps:

Check bean growth stage and field position (low ground vs. higher areas).
Inspect unifoliate leaves and cotyledons for dark, deflated tissue.
Pinch stems just below the cotyledons to feel for turgor.
Flag concerning areas and return in a couple of days to reevaluate survival and stand uniformity.

This bean is at the VC growth stage. While leaves look nipped and are discolored, what matters even more is what’s happening just below the cotyledons. Ferrie says there is no turgor pressure in the stem underneath the cotyledons. Turgor pressure serves soybeans a number of ways, including support for the movement of nutrients and water. “This plant is going to dry up and die on us and not make it,” Ferrie says.

(Crop-Tech Consulting Video)

This plant shows some leaf damage and possible stem damage just below the upper leaves. However, turgor pressure lower in the plant looks good. This plant is likely to survive, but Ferrie says farmers would want to reassess plants like this a few days following a frost to make sure.

(Crop-Tech Consulting Video)

Young soybeans, like this one, handle frost better than plants at VC and older because they are closer to the ground, allowing them to benefit from soil warmth, and they have thicker, waxy cotyledons. This plant is going to do fine.

(Crop-Tech Consulting)

Once you’ve assessed damage, the questions then are, how many beans survived, and how uniform a stand remains?

Replant decisions, Ferrie emphasizes, should be based on surviving plant counts and uniformity, not on first impressions the morning after a frost. That will take a few days to assess.

Why Risk Planting Soybeans In March?

Ferrie addressed the broader strategy that put March-planted beans at risk in the first place — and why many growers benefit from planting early.

“Guys ask me why plant beans in March, when you can plant them April 15,” Ferrie says. “If you can plant them April 15, not much is gained. But if you get rained out at May 1 or later, you could definitely miss the early flowering window.”

That early flowering window, he notes, remains a key driver of soybean yield potential. The risk of frost is the tradeoff.

“So that risk of early planting and dealing with frost and the need to help them up with a hoe and things like that, that always needs to be weighed against missing the early flowering window,” he says.

Go Time For Planting More Soybeans

Ferrie says the next few days are a green light for planting soybeans in central Illinois.

“If you don’t have your full-season beans planted by April 24, you may want to switch to your shorter-season beans, giving them a better chance at early flowering. Our early flowering window is closing for these full-season beans,” he adds.

The freeze may claim some of the earliest soybeans, but Ferrie insists growers still have tools to protect yield — from switching maturities as key dates approach to making informed replant calls based on stand counts and plant response.

Younger soybeans typically handle the cold and frost better.

“Population is, here at the campus, the last emerging beans, still in the cotyledon stage, are in good shape,” he says. “And the beans that we plant in the covers are protected well.”

Ferrie’s message to farmers this week is clear: get out and assess your crop, but don’t rush to replant. “By the end of the week, we’ll know how rough this frost damage is, and we’ll reassess replanting decisions after that,” he says.

You can watch Ferrie’s brief video on how to assess soybean damage here .

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

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:47:51 GMT

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

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

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

Drought Reshapes Farmer Expectations

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

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

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

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

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

Crop Insurance As A Lifeline

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

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

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

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

Fertilizer Sticker Shock Hits Canadian Growers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cropping Plans: Adjust Or Stay The Course?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cut Through The Biological Noise To Find Real ROI

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 21:05:02 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

(Connor Sible Presentation)

The Baseline: Deliver on Fundamentals

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

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

The Logistics: Is it Dead or Alive?

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

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

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

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

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

Nutrient Efficiency: Boosting Nitrogen

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

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

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

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

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

(Connor Sible)

Sible makes two critical points:

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

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

Phosphorus-Solubilizing Microbes

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

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

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

The Carbon Battle: Residue Management

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

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

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

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

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

Carbon and Humic Products

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

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

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

Stress-Mitigating Products

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

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

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

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

From Products to Purpose

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

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

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

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

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

Treat Soil Moisture Like A Checkbook To Sharpen Irrigation Decisions

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 21:07:09 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

Why Seasonal Totals Can Mislead

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

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

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

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

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

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

Build A Simple Water-Balance Ledger

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Adapting The Method To Different Climates

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Match Irrigation To Crop Root Depth And Soil Type

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

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

For farmers, that means:

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

Using The Ledger To Time Irrigation

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Adding Sensors And ET Tools To The Checkbook

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

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

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

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

Manage Water Like Money

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

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

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

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

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 14:58:35 GMT

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

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

New Corteva: A Focus on Crop Protection

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

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

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

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

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

SpinCo: Advancing Seed and Genetics

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

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

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

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

Defend Every Bushel With A Proactive Disease Plan

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 17:36:22 GMT

Addressing corn disease pressure in-season is rarely a matter of “if” and more likely “when.” Coming off heavy disease pressure from 2025, now is the time to put your plan together for how you’ll address challenges like northern corn leaf blight, tar spot and others this season. Plan your moves with these five recommendations, so you are ready to take action when disease pressure hits:

1. Use A Proactive Scouting Plan.

Success begins with staying ahead of disease, according to high-yield corn grower David Hula. “You have to stay proactive with your scouting and willing to go with earlier fungicide or even multiple applications, depending on what shows up,” he says.

While planning, consider the following:

1. Know your potential threats. Depending on the disease, some pathogens survive the winter on previously infected crop residue (e.g., northern corn leaf blight, tar spot). Other diseases move into northern growing areas on winds from southern locations (e.g., southern corn rust). For a suitable environment, many foliar diseases need warm, humid, and wet conditions to propagate.

2. Have your budget in place. Be ready for at least one in-season fungicide application. Use tools like the Newly Designed Fungicide ROI Calculators to guide your investment in products and applications. By inputting costs, market prices, and disease severity, these calculators provide research-based estimates of net benefits and breakeven probabilities, helping you make a more informed decision.

3. Delegate the scouting job, if necessary. If you cannot scout personally, assign the task to a family member, employee, or employ a professional service.

“Lots of great pest managers work in retail,” says Ken Ferrie, Farm Journal Field Agronomist. “Their success depends on you being successful also.”

2. Leverage Friends, Neighbors And Industry Expertise.

Don’t monitor disease pressure in a vacuum. Stay informed about what’s moving into your neighbors’ fields; track regional pressure by tapping into local agronomists and organizations like the Crop Protection Network.

Randy Dowdy, Hula’s partner in Total Acre, notes that in the Southeast, farmers are constantly receiving feedback from Extension and industry experts regarding southern rust.

Similarly, Elliott Henderson, who farms in Buchanan County, Iowa, has a group of farmers there that he connects with on a regular basis during the growing season.

“It’s a network of dozens of us farmers that call each other, bounce ideas off each other,” he says. “The things we’re talking about are often time-sensitive. It can be a daily thing.”

3. Select The Right Chemistry.

Applying the wrong product in the heat of battle with disease pressure is a common mistake. For aggressive diseases like tar spot or southern rust, Farm Journal Field Agronomist Missy Bauer recommends using “Cadillac” type chemistries — newer technologies that feature multiple modes of action.

To ensure you are using the right tool:

Consult Your Experts. Use the Crop Protection Network’s Fungicide Efficacy tables to see which products perform best against specific diseases.
Match Product to Problem. Ensure the product is labeled for your specific issue and is capable of handling high-pressure scenarios.

4. Optimize Applications for Maximum ROI.

If you need to apply a fungicide, make sure it delivers the results you need.

“It’s all about coverage,” Dowdy says. “Drone applications can be fine, but no matter what you do, if a guy is spraying two to three gallons, and you compare it to a ground rig spraying 15 to 25 gallons, I mean, there’s just no comparison in that coverage.”

Another aspect of coverage, Hula adds, is making sure the fungicide gets into the plant canopy far enough to have the desired effect. That becomes even more critical as the season advances.

“Fungicides have a tendency to work from the leaf they’ve come in contact with and move up,” Hula says. “So, if you’re trying to protect at least that ear leaf – and I like to protect the leaf opposite and below the ear – you’ve got to get penetration with that product.”

Hula says growers might have to spend a couple extra dollars to get sufficient volume for the product to get down below the canopy, if using a drone for application.

“If that’s what needs to be done, let’s do it,” he encourages. “If I’m spending $30 or more an acre, then I want to at least have the success that I’m paying for.”

5. Commit To Protecting Corn Through The Entire Season.

Modern corn genetics have significant “back-end” potential, enabling them to add yield through kernel fill late into the season. Hula and Dowdy advise against walking away from the crop early. They say evaluating fungicide applications during later reproductive stages can often yield a high return on investment.

D hybrids are of particular concern late-season, Ferrie says. These are hybrids that have kernel depth changes, positive or negative, based on populations and environmental conditions during the last 30 days of grain fill.

Missy Bauer, Farm Journal Field Agronomist in Michigan, zeros in on corn growth stage to guide uber-late-season fungicide applications.

“If I had a field that has no fungicide at all on it, and I had fairly heavy disease pressure from something like southern rust or tar spot, and I’m at early R4, I would still apply the fungicide,” she recommends.

The New Survival Skill: Build Like a Polymath, Lead Like a CEO

Wed, 08 Apr 2026 13:14:35 GMT

Have you been concerned about jobs being eliminated because of artificial intelligence (AI)? My exhortation is that, now more than ever, if you want to protect your position in the market, your company and your role, you must become more innovative and entrepreneurial with and through AI.

To lead, not just survive but thrive, you must become an AI-driven entrepreneurial polymath.

Some entrepreneurs dedicate their lives to building and scaling a single enterprise, but the most impactful among them — entrepreneurial polymaths (or serial entrepreneurs) — never stop creating. They build multiple ventures, innovate across disciplines and contribute to both industry and society.

Polymath comes from the Greek “polymathēs” — “having learned much.” Historically, polymaths like Leonardo da Vinci and Benjamin Franklin applied mastery across multiple fields. In an entrepreneurial context, a polymath entrepreneur blends adaptability and insatiable curiosity with the commercial instincts to turn knowledge and innovation into enterprises.

Where the typical entrepreneur may invest all energy into one idea, the polymath entrepreneur has a restless drive to solve problems repeatedly. With AI, this isn’t just easier; it has become essential for survival.

The question for you is: Are you a maintainer, a one-venture wonder, or do you have the capacity for ongoing leadership and innovation across multiple pursuits?

Leverage for Leaders

Over my career I have interacted with thousands of CEOs, hundreds of whom have been clients and many who have become friends. The most fascinating and fruitful among them have always been the polymath entrepreneurs.

Whether they wear the title of CEO, founder or simply manager, they are the true engines of progress. They see opportunities others overlook, and in an age of technological disruption and AI, they often find it easy to reinvent industries.

But vision and creativity alone are not enough. As Peter Drucker reminds us, “Entrepreneurship is neither a science nor an art. It is a practice.”

Entrepreneurs often have blind spots in the disciplines of management, strategy, innovation management, implementation, culture, resource allocation, productivity and sustainable value creation. Without these, even a polymath’s brilliance can stall.

One shortcut is leverage: Partner with external strategists who’ve implemented AI-driven innovations across many businesses, so you’re not learning everything the expensive way, through delays, misfires and internal politics.

When partnered with strong functional leadership, however, the polymath entrepreneur becomes nearly unstoppable. Their power multiplies when aligned with:

Operations leadership (chief operating officer/VP of operations) to translate vision into scalable systems.
Financial leadership (chief financial officer) to ensure disciplined capital allocation and risk management.
Specialized expertise (e.g., internal full-time or external consulting or fractional chief marketing officer, chief information officer or chief strategy officer) to deepen customer, technology or domain execution.

As Michael Porter taught: “The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do.” The polymath thrives because they can choose across domains, letting go of the old to seize the new. And as Joseph Schumpeter argued in “Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy,” the entrepreneur is the true agent of “creative destruction.” The polymath entrepreneur embodies this, not just once, but repeatedly, breaking down old models and building new ones.

Unlike the myth that entrepreneurship is a product of personality or charisma, whether Steve Jobs at Apple, Richard Branson at Virgin or Elon Musk with his many ventures, Drucker insisted that entrepreneurship is a discipline. It can be studied, replicated and managed. What separates polymath entrepreneurs is their repeated ability to master this discipline across domains.

Bottom line: The most successful will be those who will be applying the fast-evolving tools of AI to not just innovate and add new value through the optimization of your organization but also to create new solutions for your customer/market that innovate your industry — and often will create a new sustainable business faster and more value-creating than ever before.

Mark Faust (513-621-8000, mark@em1990.com) works with owners, CEOs and sales managers who want to grow their businesses. You can schedule a free profit improvement session with Mark by visiting calendly.com/markfaust . Read more ideas from him here .

Total Seed Production Celebrates Significant Growth Milestone With Acquisition

Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:00:17 GMT

Total Seed Production (TSP) announces it has officially finalized the acquisition of a soybean facility in Windfall, Ind., formerly owned by Bayer. The strategic move significantly increases TSP’s operational footprint and capacity within the region.

Located just 14 miles from TSP’s headquarters in Tipton, Ind., the new site is expected to significantly boost the company’s production capabilities. With the new addition, TSP will now operate four independent conditioning lines and five packaging lines across its two locations.

“The TSP family is excited for the endless flexibilities and opportunities this expansion will offer to all the brands we service, which will help drive their growth,” says Aaron Conaway, Total Seed Production president, in a statement when the decision was first announced.

The expansion is set to enable a fourfold increase in TSP’s soybean conditioning capacity. Furthermore, by shifting soybean operations, the company can open up existing capacity at the Tipton location to focus more on its seed corn services.

“This expansion will serve as our generation’s most significant milestone to date,” says Ryan Campbell, vice president. “We will be adding exponential flexibility to our true bulk capabilities and have the opportunity to work with more area growers to strategically expand our soybean business.”

For Bayer, the decision to divest the Windfall facility is part of a broader effort to optimize its Crop Science business. A Bayer spokesperson told AgWeb that while the decision was difficult, it positions the company for future success and improved operational efficiencies.

“We’ve been working hard to adapt our strategies across our Crop Science business to better serve our customers and support our business,” a Bayer spokesman says. “As part of that effort, we’ve explored ways to optimize our soybean seed production to match market demand and improve operational efficiencies. We remain committed to delivering high-quality soybean seed and service to our customers across the U.S.”

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.

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.”

Smart Strategies for Topdressing Dry Fertilizer

Mon, 23 Feb 2026 20:12:17 GMT

If you’re topdressing corn acres this spring with dry fertilizer, keep in mind how that product is managed in a high-residue system will determine whether the fertilizer feeds your crop or disappears into thin air.

Ken Ferrie notes that farmers in his area, central Illinois, commonly use ammonium sulfate, urea and potash for topdressing. He says every hour untreated urea sits on the field surface is a chance for the nitrogen (N) in the fertilizer to gas off and disappear.

“The ammonium sulfate is stable, but the urea has potential to get away when it breaks down,” explains Ferrie, Farm Journal Field Agronomist.

That “getting away” is nitrogen loss caused through volatilization—when N escapes as ammonia gas instead of being captured in the soil as ammonium. In a corn-on-corn rotation, with a lot of stalks and leaves on the field surface for instance, the risk for volatilization is even higher.

Residue Can Supercharge Urease

The problem starts with a naturally occurring soil enzyme called urease. It’s what kicks off the breakdown of urea into ammonia and then ammonium. In a corn-on-corn field with lots of residue, the urease is supercharged.

“The thing about urease enzyme here in the surface with all this residue, it is 10 times higher than it would be in the soil,” he says.
The enzyme goes to work quickly, converting urea to ammonia at the soil–air interface, and that ammonia can simply drift off into the atmosphere. The more time it spends on the surface, the higher the odds of loss.

That’s why timing and management of dry fertilizer applications are critical.

“We sometimes say you need to keep the pin in the grenade – keep the urease enzyme at bay until we can get it worked in or rained in,” Ferrie says.

Evaluate Your Risk Potential

If tillage is in the plan, your solution to prevent volatilization is simple. Apply the fertilizer, then work it into the soil as soon as field conditions allow. When urea is incorporated, even lightly, any ammonia that forms is far more likely to be captured in the soil and converted to ammonium, where the crop can use it.

“There’s probably not a lot of worry in that scenario,” he says. “You’re going to incorporate this urea, and when it gasses, it’ll be in the soil, it’ll be captured.”

But not every system or scenario involves immediate tillage. In many no-till or strip-till fields, or when soil conditions are too wet for equipment, growers end up spreading fertilizer and then waiting on the weather to do the incorporation work. In those situations,
Ferrie warns, the risk of volatilization can increase quickly.

“If it’s going to lay out here and depend on rain [for incorporation], depending on how long that’s going to be, we’re going to need a urease inhibitor to give us time to get it rained in,” he says.

Urease inhibitors can temporarily slow or stop enzyme activity, giving farmers a bigger window before significant nitrogen loss occurs. For fields with a lot of residue, that extra time can make a big difference—especially when the forecast is uncertain.

Alongside conventional urea plus a urease inhibitor, Ferrie points to another option – using ESN, a polymer-coated, encapsulated urea.

“The ESN basically keeps the urea protected,” he says. “In that situation, if we lay it on the surface, you’re going to have about 60 days of protection. If you incorporate it, in our studies, [it] would show about 30 days of protection.”

ESN uses a physical coating to regulate how quickly water gets in and dissolves the urea. For growers who want extended protection or are looking to match nitrogen release more closely with crop uptake, that can be a useful tool. Still, Ferrie’s quick to point out that this isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution.

“It’s quite a bit more expensive,” he notes, underscoring the need to weigh costs against potential risks. For some high-yield, intensively managed corn-on-corn systems, the extra investment might pencil out. For others, a urease inhibitor on regular urea, combined with smart timing and placement, might be the more economical choice.

In addition, farmers need to think through when and how the urea in a fertilizer blend will get treated, Ferrie says If a urease inhibitor is added after everything is mixed together, you end up paying to “treat” nutrients that don’t actually need it.

“Treat the urea before you add the ammonium sulfate and the potash, or you’re going to end up treating all of the product, otherwise,” he cautions.

Don’t Cut the Backstop: Dowdy And Hula Weigh In on Crop Insurance, Budgets

Tue, 17 Feb 2026 21:47:49 GMT

When Randy Dowdy picks up the phone to call his crop insurance agent this time of year, it’s not to see if he can shave premiums — it’s to make sure one tough season can’t threaten the future of his farm. He and fellow national yield champion David Hula want more farmers thinking that same way. They are optimistic that with some attention to the details, growers can put their operations on stronger footing.

Dowdy and Hula hold to a simple, practical blueprint: run the farm with the same financial discipline as any other serious business. That starts with a written budget and continues with a crop insurance plan that’s built around each of their farms’ true risk—not just what feels comfortable when the premium bill arrives.

Dowdy farms in Georgia, where tropical systems are a fact of life, not a rarity.

“For us, it’s not a matter if we’re going to get a hurricane or tropical storm, it’s how many we’re going to get and will we be on the edge or will we be Bullseye central,” he says. “I can’t sleep at night knowing I’ve got $800,000-plus at risk and not have some kind of backstop on it.”

That backstop for both growers is crop insurance. Hula is concerned by how often it’s still treated as a soft target when growers start trimming expenses.

“Growers, if they’re doing budgets—which I know most growers don’t do a budget, unfortunately—but they need to do a budget,” he says. “The sheer cost of production is so high and the risk is there. We all got to service debt. We cannot afford to cut out crop insurance.”

A Working Budget, Not a Guess

Both Dowdy and Hula believe that most operations are simply too big and too leveraged to rely on “gut feel” budgeting. When total corn production costs push into the $600 to $1,000 per acre range, they say every line item needs to be accounted for and challenged.

Hula encourages farmers to use this time of year – winter meeting season – as a springboard to upgrade their financial discipline.

“Growers need to try to capture at least three things when they go to these winter meetings,” he says —whether it’s “something new to try or somewhere to help fine‑tune their budgets.”

For him, that starts with knowing where dollars actually move the needle: fertility, seed, planter performance and risk management. A written budget that ties realistic yield expectations to actual costs per acre then becomes the framework for his every decision – from which hybrids to plant to what coverage levels to buy.

Crop Insurance as a Strategy

Dowdy and Hula say crop insurance should be viewed as the core of a risk management strategy designed around each operation’s exposure.

Dowdy explains how he has traditionally built his coverage and how that thinking is evolving.

“In a normal year we do enterprise [coverage], and normal insurance gets us to that 75% or we buy up 80%,” he says.

After talking with his crop insurance agent, Dowdy is now also considering the benefits of Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) and Enhanced Coverage Option (ECO).

“He’s talking about the SCO version of it, getting coverage to 86% and then you can go with the ECO version to get it up into that 90‑plus‑percent range. And it’s affordable,” Dowdy says.

For Dowdy, the insurance structure matters too. While enterprise units can help manage premium costs, he believes his farming geography demands a more granular approach.

“We may farm ground 60 miles apart,” he says. “I’ll buy optional units just to keep individual farms’ coverage because of the proximity. I go ahead and spend that $75 to $80 an acre, and it helps me sleep at night knowing I got that coverage.”

His takeaway: Don’t stop at the base policy without taking a deeper look. Sit down with your agent and run the numbers on unit structure, SCO and ECO to find a package that realistically protects your cost of production, not just your comfort level with the premium.

Managing Quality and Catastrophic Risk

The risk picture doesn’t end with yield outcomes. Dowdy stresses that in his environment, a lack of crop quality can be just as damaging as outright yield loss.

With his full‑season beans often ready for harvest in late August or early September—smack in the middle of hurricane season—the window for disaster is wide open.

“If it’s 90 degrees outside and it’s hot and wet, those beans will rot right before your eyes,” Dowdy explains. “It’s a quality issue as much as it is just a wind issue.”

Corn brings its own headaches when storms hit hard late in the season.

“If corn goes down, you aren’t going to get it all,” Dowdy says. “Now, there’s some manufacturers that say, ‘you can use our head, we’ll get it all.’ I call BS on that. I don’t want to have to deal with the process of trying to pick it up and harvest it anyhow.”

Dowdy and Hula’s recommendation: build quality risk directly into your budgeting and insurance conversations. Know how your policies treat quality issues and lodging, and be realistic about what you can—and can’t—salvage when a storm hits.

Population and Fertility: Trimming Where It Makes Sense

While Dowdy and Hula believe crop insurance is the wrong place to cut, they both say there are smart, numbers‑driven opportunities to manage input costs—especially in seed and fertility.

“For me, the take‑home that I’ve seen is in fertility management—let’s fine‑tune that,” Hula says. That doesn’t mean making across‑the‑board cuts; it means using precision.

“Use soil tests, yield maps and response history to put fertility where it pays and pull it back where it doesn’t,” he adds.

On seed, Hula thinks 2026 could be a year to rethink planting high populations.

“A lot of times we think we’re going to push our crop a little bit more, and maybe plant a little bit thicker,” he says. “This might be the year just to dial it back a bit… just dial it back 2,000 plants per acre. You’re not going to see a big change in harvestability, you’re not going to see a big change in the end result of yield, but you can see a little reduction in cost.”

Dowdy agrees with the direction—but wants growers to test populations boldly enough to get clear answers.

“I’m going to take it one step further,” he says. “When you do 2,000, I just can’t see enough response. I’m going to go to at least 4,000 less plants so I can say, ‘did I move the needle, yes or no?’”

Dowdy uses a simple benchmark to judge whether the population used is delivering ROI.

“What needs to drive people is, are you making 10 bushels a thousand?” he says. “If you’re not making 10 bushels a thousand based off your planting population, we need to consider, are we planting it too thick? Are we just doing that much of a poor job on getting simultaneous emergence? Why not fix that piece first, and then consider the reduction in population.”

The Planter: One Chance to Get It Right

Hula reminds growers that an expensive mistake is a poorly maintained planter. He believe economic pressure should drive you to the shop, not away from it.

This time of year, Hula is disassembling, inspecting and rebuilding his planter, replacing blades and wear parts and checking every row unit. The goal is simple: give every seed the best chance at uniform emergence and early vigor.

“It seems like we talk about the planter and planting a lot, but that’s what gets everything started,” he says. “You can only do that right one time.”

Dowdy and Hula share more recommendations on their podcast Breaking Barriers With R&D and in their discussion on AgriTalk. Catch their conversation at the link below:

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.”

Western Corn Rootworm: How To Stay Ahead Of The Billion‑Dollar Bug

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 22:24:27 GMT

By the time you see corn plants falling over in late summer, it’s too late to change the outcome if it’s the result of below-ground feeding by western corn rootworm (CRW) larvae.

CRW larvae target developing corn nodal roots, pruning them as they grow. In severe cases, they can destroy entire nodes, reports Aaron Gassmann, Iowa State University entomologist and professor.

“They’ll feed on the actively growing node and prune it, or basically stop those roots from growing,” says Gassmann. “Sometimes they’ll actually prune it all the way back to the base of the plant. There can be complete nodes that are simply absent.”

The impact on corn yield can be severe. Research from the University of Illinois and the University of Wisconsin indicates that each missing node can reduce yield by 15% to 17%.

Moving Beyond ‘Plant It and Forget It’

While Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) technology has historically helped farmers control CRW, the pest has evolved. After over a decade of research, Gassmann warns that the “plant Bt and forget it” era is over. Effective management today requires a diversified strategy, particularly in continuous corn fields where the problem is most common.

Gassmann recommends using rotation, varied traits, and in-season scouting to break the cycle. His advice depends heavily on whether Bt resistance is already present in your fields. Here are the two scenarios he recommends:

Scenario A: You Likely Do Not Have Resistance Present

Don’t rely on Bt alone: Keep it in the toolbox, but diversify.
Rotate to soybeans: This remains the single best method to address the pest.
Stay vigilant: Follow refuge requirements and scout routinely.
Switch it up: Avoid long-term continuous corn with the same trait package.

Scenario B: You Suspect (or Have Confirmed) Resistance

Rotate immediately: Rotating out of corn is the necessary first step.
Change the plan for future corn: Consider non-Bt hybrids paired with insecticide, or carefully selected new traits (e.g., RNAi).
Be selective with sprays: Use adult beetle sprays only when scouting confirms they are well-timed and justified.
Don’t repeat mistakes: Assume that planting the same Bt hybrid again will only worsen the problem.

Why Bt Alone Is Struggling

Farmers often ask Gassmann why Bt has worked so well against European corn borer but has not been as effective with CRW. The difference lies in the “dose” of toxin, he says.

Bt traits provide a “high dose” of toxin for corn borers. However, Bt traits generally provide a lower dose of toxin for CRW. This allows CRW insects with even a single copy of a resistance gene to survive, mate with other survivors in the same field, and pass that resistance on to the next generation.

Gassmann and his colleagues have documented field-evolved resistance to all four Bt toxins used against rootworm (the three Cry3-based traits and the Gpp34/Tpp35 trait).

A Note on Soil-Applied Insecticides

While combining soil insecticides with Bt can improve standability and protect corn roots in the short term, Gassmann notes it is not a perfect cure:

It rarely reduces adult emergence significantly.
It continues to select for resistance (survivors are still Bt-resistant).
It adds input costs that may not pencil out for farmers’ bottom line.

In many cases, if Bt is clearly failing in your fields, it may make more sense to switch to non‑Bt hybrids plus insecticide, or better yet, rotate out of corn, rather than stack more cost on a compromised trait, he adds.

The complete podcast featuring Aaron Gassmann is available via the Crop Protection Network here .

To help farmers make informed decisions about their seed choices, 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.

Why Soybeans Don't Need A Perfect Stand To Deliver High Yields

Tue, 27 Jan 2026 20:00:40 GMT

Soybeans are built to “improvise, adapt and overcome,” says Purdue Extension soybean specialist Shaun Casteel. But whether they can actually do that in your fields early in the season depends heavily on a few management decisions you control.

Here are three takeaways from Casteel’s recent presentation at the 2026 Illinois Soybean Field Advisor Forum that focus on his planting and replanting recommendations.

1. Before You Plant, Check The Forecast For The Following 24 Hours

Many farmers aim for the “50°F soil temp” rule when heading to fields to plant and, while that’s on track, Casteel thinks that’s only half right.

“Soybeans can germinate at [temperatures] as low as 36 to 43 degrees,” he said. “But it’s not necessarily soil temperature [we’re concerned about], even though that’s what we’re measuring, it’s the water temperature.”

A soybean seed must absorb (imbibe) approximately 50% of its own dry weight in moisture for germination to start. But if it absorbs cold water, the seed can be injured, resulting in damaged cell membranes, reduced germination, and dead or weak seedlings.

Casteel’s recommendation: if a cold front with rain is headed your way and likely to occur in the next 12 to 24 hours, hold off on planting, even if the soil temperature looks OK or you feel the calendar is pushing you to plant.

He adds that the time to soybean germination and emergence is related to heat unit accumulation (GDDs), noting there “is >50% emergence after 140 to 160 air GDDs.”

2. Aim for 1.5" Planting Depth and Good Seed-to-Soil Contact
Planting depth is important for soybeans’ ability to emerge well, and it also plays a big role in setting up root hair growth, nodulation and the plants’ access to nutrients.

“If you don’t have good root hair development, guess what? You don’t have good nodulation, you don’t have a good nitrogen supply. Kiss those high yields goodbye,” Casteel says.

As a rule of thumb for planting, he recommends farmers place soybean seed at 1.5” deep with a variance of between 1.25” to 1.75” depending on soil moisture and residue.

He advises against chasing moisture too deep, like you might if planting corn, as soybeans don’t handle deeper planting well. What happens if you plant too deep? Casteel says there are commonly three results:

1) The hypocotyl has to pull cotyledons farther to reach the surface. 2) That extra distance costs time and energy, so emergence is slower and less uniform. 3) In cool or crust-prone soils, deep-planted beans are more likely to stall or die before they break through the soil surface.

3. Don’t Be In A Hurry To Replant Soybeans. Evaluate Your Stand Thoroughly First.

Casteel urges farmers to be more cautious about replanting soybeans. His own line in the sand is around 70,000 plants per acre. At or above that level, with healthy, evenly distributed plants, his data shows soybeans usually deliver about 95% of full yield potential, making a replant hard to justify. He also notes that stands in the 66,000 to 100,000 range often end up with very similar yield results.

The reason is soybeans will compensate. In delayed-emergence and overseeding studies, Casteel says he found that when part of the stand emerged late, the original plants simply “branched more and produced a larger share of the yield.”

In one scenario he evaluated, the original plants contributed 60% of the yield and the late-emerging plants 40%, yet the total yield matched a uniform stand. In a V2-type “replant” timing, roughly 95% of yield still came from the original soybean plants and only 5% from the later ones.

Because of that, Casteel says most soybean replants at V2 are “just making us feel good rather than making us more money.” Once plants are established and starting to branch, overseeding or tearing them up rarely changes the final bushels much, but it does add cost and risk.

Where he says a “full reset” is likely needed is when stands are around 50,000 to 60,000 plants per acre and it’s still roughly the first week of May—before the original plants have much node development or branching. Outside of that scenario, his research and experience say the better decision is usually to leave the stand alone and let soybeans compensate.

If you can manage that, Casteel contends soybeans will usually do what they’re designed to do: “They can improvise, adapt and overcome. It’s our job not to get in the way,” he says.

Hear Casteel’s complete presentation at the Field Advisor Forum on YouTube here . Be sure to check out what he says about managing corn residue after the 2026 harvest, so it doesn’t negatively impact your soybean crop the following year.

Control the Controllables To Capture More Bushels

Fri, 16 Jan 2026 19:37:13 GMT

A solid game plan addressing key fundamentals could be the most powerful risk-management tool farmers have going into the 2026 season, according to Randy Dowdy and David Hula. Here are four they encourage farmers to review and work on this winter:

Fuel The Crop Adequately

Hula stresses that even in low-margin years, you can’t cut corners on fundamental crop needs. He emphasizes using soil tests to manage N, P and K, looking at soil pH and applying lime where needed.

“When you think about where you’re spending dollars, you can’t waiver from that,” he says. “We have to cover the basics… there’s nothing that’s sexy about farming right now, [everyone’s] just trying to survive.”

Why Your Planter Is the Lowest Hanging Fruit for Yield

Randy Dowdy says the planter represents the “lowest hanging fruit” for yield improvement on 90% of U.S. farms.

“The planter is just not performing at the levels to reach the maximum potential that most farmers need to support and service debt,” Dowdy says.

He encourages growers to spend time in the shop, ensuring that every row unit is capable of delivering “picket fence” seed placement and performance. For Dowdy, this means every seed is placed at a consistent depth and spacing, emerging within a tight window of 10 to 12 Growing Degree Units (GDUs) of one another

“Does every seed have the same standard deviation between them, the placement from one seed to the next? Are they all singulated, and are they all coming up at the same time? If that’s not happening, that’s a big deal,” Dowdy says.

Consider Seed Size Along With Good Genetics

While every farmer is tuned into genetics, Dowdy and Hula say they can benefit from taking seed size into consideration, too.

One of the questions Hula says he often gets is, “What’s the best seed size to plant?”

After years of analyzing small rounds versus large flats, his philosophy has evolved into a practical rule of thumb.

“My answer now is simple: whatever your planter plants the best, that’s the seed you want to plant,” he says.

But that only works if you’ve done your homework on the meters—cleaning them, replacing worn parts, and calibrating them with actual seed to determine the vacuum and speed settings. Taking these steps can eliminate guesswork that leads to skips and doubles.

Generally, Dowdy observes that “Deere likes rounds, Precision likes flats.”

Both Dowdy and Hula caution against the temptation of buying plateless (mixed-size) seed just because it carries a lower price tag. Their take: if you use it, run side‑by‑side strips with good, graded seed so you can see the real yield cost.

“I’d really challenge [anyone using plateless seed] to plant some graded seed next to it… just so you could know what it’s costing you. It’s costing you money,” says Hula.

Take Only Calculated Risks, ‘Miss Small’

Dowdy says this is the year to “control the controllables” and stick with practices you know consistently pay. He warns that farmers can’t afford big mistakes in this economy. While he’s not afraid of trying new practices, he is afraid of not being profitable and not being able to service debt, so due diligence and ROI have to come first.

“If we’re going to have a fail, we don’t need to fail in a big way. We need to miss small in an economy like this,” Dowdy says. “I’ll put my big toe in the water, but it won’t be my whole foot and a bunch of acres.”

A Checklist For Reference This Winter

Here are additional highlights of recommendations Dowdy and Hula listed during their most recent Breaking Barriers With R&D podcast. These are not all-inclusive, but rather a starting point for farmers preparing for spring:

1. Soil and Fertility Basics

Lime and pH: Check pH by zone or grid. Apply lime only where pH is low. Avoid wasting inputs on ground at 6.5 or higher.
Manganese Alert: Watch for potential deficiencies in high pH spots (above 6.8).
P and K Strategy: Use recent soil tests to determine if Phosphorus can be reduced. Keep Potash a priority where base saturation justifies the spend.

2. The Planter Bar and Row Units

Parallel Arms: Inspect for “oblong” wear or side play. Replace any arms that aren’t tight.
Double-Disc Openers: Use a jig to check run-out. Only use blades that meet tight tolerances for a clean V-trench.
Gauge Wheels: Lift by hand. If they feel loose or drop instantly, adjust or replace the bushings and arms.
Alignment: Use a tape measure to verify every row is exactly on target (e.g., 30 inches). Ensure the toolbar is perfectly level front-to-back at operating height.

3. Seed Trench and Closing System

Centering: Run the planter across concrete. Ensure closing wheel marks are perfectly centered over the seed path.
Row Cleaners: Adjust “trash whippers” to move residue without gouging a deep furrow that could lead to erosion or crusting.

4. Seed and Meter Calibration

Match Seed to Meter: Generally, John Deere/ExactEmerge systems prefer rounds, while Precision Planting systems prefer flats.
The Meter Test: Replace worn belts and brushes. Calibrate meters annually on a test stand using your actual seed to determine the exact vacuum and speed settings.
The “Plateless” Warning: Avoid the temptation of cheap, mixed-size seed. If you use it, run a side-by-side strip against graded seed to measure the true cost of lost bushels.

5. Management Mindset

Miss Small: This is the year for calculated risks. Put your “big toe” in the water with new tech, but don’t commit the whole farm until you see a proven ROI on your own soil.
Check Strips: Always leave a clean, untreated check strip when trying new products for evaluation.

Hear the latest Breaking Barriers With R&D to learn more about Hula and Dowdy’s recommendations at Farm Journal TV and the YouTube link below.

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.

Master Your Emotions To Drive More Profitable Crop Decisions

Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:57:05 GMT

As plans for the coming season take shape, many corn and soybean growers continue looking for places to cut expenses. That’s understandable, but if those cuts are driven by emotion instead of hard numbers, they can create expensive mistakes.

“I truly believe that to improve on what we are going to do, we need to evaluate what we have already done,” says Ken Ferrie, Farm Journal Field Agronomist. “Then, a good evaluation of our existing plan can involve actual numbers and less emotion.”

Ferrie likes to start the evaluation process with information from calibrated yield monitors and a disciplined, field‑by‑field review from the previous season.

“[It’s important to] sit down with your farm crew to evaluate each field, seeing how last year’s plan worked out, looking for answers to both the success and the disappointments of the past year,” he says.

Consider What You Had Control Over

A central theme to consider in the process is learning to separate what factors were under your control from those that weren’t. “Be sure to separate Mother Nature’s effect on yield from your management decisions,” he stresses.

Soybean crop performance is a good example of how weather impacted performance and was out of farmers’ control in parts of Illinois. Ferrie explains that in recent years, many growers have used a spread of maturities to manage risk, from roughly 2.6 to 4.2 group beans. That strategy experienced a hiccup when weather turned against full‑season beans this past summer.

“In areas where we saw little to no rain in August and early September locally, these full-season beans lacked the moisture needed to give us big beans,” Ferrie says. “What we saw is that the 3.5 to 4.2 group had kind of lackluster yield compared to the 2.5 to the 3.3 beans.”

The danger, he says, is if farmers react to this single year as if it provides a rule to follow. “If we don’t rely on past yield history and don’t plug in this last season’s weather conditions, we can make an emotional decision that late maturity beans don’t work for me, that I need to cut them from my lineup,” he explains.

But the whole point of using a wide maturity range is risk management. “When you plant a wide range of maturities to mitigate risk, you shouldn’t plan on hitting it out of the ballpark with all of them, because that seldom happens,” Ferrie says. “We don’t know what lies ahead for [2026] weather. We might have a drought. We might not.”

Corn tells a similar story. Weather during pollination—like the “days that we had the heavy fog during pollination” — are showing up clearly on yield maps. Good scouting records are critical for interpreting those maps correctly.

“Good scouting records from the pest team can help sort out pollination issues caused by weather,” he says. “When you combine your past data with this year’s scouting records and weather data, we make better decisions, what worked, what didn’t and why.”

Is Soil Insecticide On Your Cutting Block?

With budget tightening well underway, another recurring question Ferrie has been fielding from farmers is whether to cut soil insecticide on the planter. The answer, at least in Illinois, is to consider how much damage your corn crop is incurring from rootworm.

Field scouting this past season underscored how uneven rootworm pressure can be, according to Ferrie. One consideration is watching root feeding and beetle traps and beetle activity, because many times you can see the problem advancing toward your fields. But he cautions against knee-jerk reactions. For instance, he says to avoid making a decision to eliminate soil insecticide on the planter just because your neighbor is cutting it.

On the other hand, field data can support some risk‑taking where rootworm pressure truly is low. “If we’ve dug and done root washes that show very little rootworm feeding, and we put in some insecticide plots, and I’m seeing little to no response, it’s a lot easier to take the insecticide off the planter,” Ferrie says. But he adds a firm warning: “There’s no rescue for rootworm damage. Once the corn goes down, we can’t make it stand up.”

Assign A Pest Boss For Your Farm

Ferrie frequently addresses the importance and value a pest boss can deliver for your crops. He says to make sure and involve them in your planning meetings for the upcoming season.

“We talk about the importance of a good pest team and a pest boss… they can save your operation a lot of money and/or hassle,” he notes. “The insights they can provide during your winter meetings can help you create a successful and more cost-effective input use and management plan for the upcoming season.”

Reviewing calibrated yield data, scouting records, and using an honest assessment of weather and pest pressure by field are the tools that separate smart cuts from costly ones, Ferrie adds.

Here more about Ferrie’s instructions on making smart cuts for 2026 in his latest Boots In The Field podcast: