Syngenta Thrive

by

Commonly grown pulse crops are susceptible to destructive foliar disease like Ascochyta blight, a fungus that can be very damaging to crops if left untreated. Entire growing seasons can be threatened if crops are left untreated, so it’s important to plan ahead to protect crops against this and other foliar diseases every growing season.

Ascochyta blight is caused by Ascochyta rabiei, a fungal pathogen that can be seed-borne and occur on infested crop residues. For Ascochyta infections to develop, it needs a combination of moisture and temperatures ranging from 41-86°F. Once the disease is established on one plant, it can spread in splashing water and windy conditions. Spores spread most quickly in cool, wet conditions.

Ascochyta may not become visible until 4-5 days after infection. As the disease progresses, lesions will appear on the leaves and stem which can lead to stem girdling. If left untreated, the disease can penetrate pods and infect seeds, reducing marketability and quality as a food item.

It is important to treat Ascochyta blight as it has been known to wipe out entire yields and affect yield quality. Foliar fungicide management requirements vary by crop variety and weather conditions.

Chickpeas

Using Miravis® Top fungicide can help prevent foliar diseases such as Ascochyta blight in chickpeas. Applications should be proactive and made prior to disease development.

Dry Field Peas

Miravis Top on dry field peas provides protection against numerous yield-robbing foliar diseases including Ascochyta blight. Miravis Top also targets other diseases like white mold, Alternaria blight, rust and powdery mildew. The first application of Miravis Top should be at R2 or full bloom.

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

by

Strawberry growers know that gray mold, also known as Botrytis rot, can decrease marketable yield and destroy profit potential. It can affect all areas of strawberry production, causing challenges not only in the field, but also during storage, transport and marketing of strawberry fruit.

What Causes Gray Mold in Strawberries?

The disease gets its name from the visible, fuzzy, gray-colored mold that appears in masses that infects all parts of the strawberry plant. The most damage to potential profit occurs when flowers and fruit are affected. According to the University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, gray mold can result in yield losses greater than 50%.

A combination of high temperatures and wet conditions is optimal for gray mold development in strawberry fields. Recent weather conditions and hurricanes in the Southeast region may be cause for concern for strawberry growers in these areas.

Precautions must be taken sooner rather than later to prevent this disease from affecting your strawberry yield potential this season.

Gray Mold Management Tips

The University of Florida recommends cultural and chemical practices for gray mold management, including the removal of diseased fruit from under the plant canopy to reduce the spread of infection. You should also consider preventive applications of an effective fungicide spray to control gray mold infections in your strawberries.

Under intense gray mold pressure, Miravis® Prime fungicide can recharge your spray programs and help produce more marketable strawberries. Miravis Prime is powered by one of the highest-performing succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) molecules available — ADEPIDYN® technology (FRAC group 7) and fludioxonil (FRAC group 12). In a trial testing strawberry disease sensitivity to botrytis (gray mold), strawberries treated with Miravis Prime fungicide produced fewer infected fruit than competitors.

LSD test used to indicate the statistical significance and differences.
LSD test used to indicate the statistical significance and differences. Variety: Florida radiance. University of Florida – Gulf Coast Research & Education Center; 2018-2019.

In addition to gray mold, Miravis Prime can also help control powdery mildew and anthracnose in strawberries. It remains stable on the leaf surface for even distribution and disease protection throughout the growing season and post-harvest transit.

Learn more about how Miravis Prime can help you manage and prevent the spread of damaging diseases in your strawberry fields today. For additional information, reach out to your Syngenta representative.

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

by

Potatoes are susceptible to a variety of diseases throughout the growing season, including Rhizoctonia, Verticillium wilt, early blight, white mold and late blight. These pathogens don’t always make their presence known right away, and letting these diseases go untreated can cause stunted growth, weakened roots and decreased crop yield.

Rhizoctonia

Rhizoctonia developing on tuber.

When potato crops are infected with the soilborne pathogen Rhizoctonia solani, the most noticeable indicator is the appearance of hard, black growths on tubers, a symptom of a disease known as black scurf. This disease overwinters in soil and infects potato seedlings early in the season when weather is still cold and wet. Additional symptoms include reddish-brown or brown sunken lesions on sprouts, stolons and young stems which can then lead to the black, hardened masses on tubers, resembling dirt that doesn’t wash off.

Verticillium Wilt

Verticillium wilt.

Verticillium wilt is caused by two soilborne fungi, V. dahlia and V. albo-atrum, and is a key component in a complex of pests that causes potato early die (PED). Distinguishing Verticillium wilt from normal plant senescence can be difficult. Early symptoms may be limited to uneven chlorosis of older leaves on plants throughout the field. More identifiable symptoms include wilting leaflets, yellowing of leaves and chlorosis progressing upwards. The University of Maine reports that wilting leaflets on one side of a petiole is an excellent diagnostic characteristic. Symptoms can also appear in tubers as brown or black discoloration.

Early Blight

Early blight in potatoes.

Initially, early blight in potato crops can be identified by small dark spots that can grow up to .5” in diameter. These spots form on older foliage near the ground and have a round and brown appearance. The University of Idaho reports that as these spots continue to grow, they develop target-like concentric rings, and the tissue surrounding the diseased area turns yellow. If left untreated, severely infected leaves turn brown and fall off, whereas dead, dried leaves may cling to the stem.

White Mold

White mold in potatoes.

Sclerotinia stem rot, also known as white mold, thrives in high moisture areas and moderate temperatures. If this fungus begins to grow on healthy potato stems or leaves, water-soaked white, cottony lesions can grow and quickly spread. At first, these lesions can be found at the intersections of stems and branches or where stems and branches meet the soil. In plants that are severely infected, hard, black, irregularly shaped masses (about 0.25-0.5” in diameter) develop inside dying potato stems.

Late Blight

Late blight in potatoes.

Late blight can first be seen on the younger leaves of potato plants. This disease leaves large, dark brown lesions with a green-gray edge. During cool, moist weather, these lesions can rapidly expand into dark brown or black spots. According to Michigan State University, infections that appear in tubers are irregularly shaped, slightly depressed, brown to purplish areas on the skin, which can be difficult to spot on russet and red-skinned potatoes. Under the potato skin, a dry, granular rot that is tan to reddish-brown in color can be found in the discolored area. This rot can extend up to .5” into the tuber.

Scouting regularly for disease symptoms coupled with planting potato varieties with disease resistance are two ways to fight off these difficult to control diseases. An additional preventive measure that you can take is to plant seeds that are treated with CruiserMaxx® Vibrance® potato seed treatment. An in-furrow application of Elatus® fungicide may also help control Rhizoctonia and suppress verticillium wilt. During the growing season, an application of Miravis® Prime fungicide can help control these quick-spreading pathogens.

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

by

As commodity prices fluctuate, applying partial rates of herbicides for corn and soybeans may seem like a viable cost-cutting strategy. However, using herbicide applications at less than full rate can significantly reduce your return on investment.

Using less than the full, labeled rate may also lead to:

  • More weed seeds and weed outbreaks
  • Competition for nutrients
  • Lower yields
  • Less residual control
  • Reduced control of resistant weeds

To avoid these challenges and get the most out of your herbicide program, make pre- and post-emergence applications at full rates — and at the recommended growth stage indicated on the product labels. If you use partial rates, you’ll only get partial control.

Study Shows Clear Yield Advantage with Early-Post Applications

Timing is critical when using a post-emergence herbicide with long-lasting residual control to help you manage weeds when they are most vulnerable. In 2020, one-pass studies across six locations demonstrated an over seven bu/A yield advantage for early-post applications at the full rate.

Resistance Management Tips

Weeds depend on routine to survive. That’s why you need to build diversity into your weed management programs to prevent further development of herbicide-resistant weeds. Weed management programs that rely on one active ingredient increase the potential for resistant weeds to develop — and make these products ineffective.

Scouting early and using multiple modes of action in your post-emergence herbicide program can prevent weeds from overtaking your corn fields. Acuron® GT post-emergence corn herbicide delivers enhanced control of yield-robbing weeds and long-lasting residual because it is the first and only glyphosate premix that contains the unique ingredient bicyclopyrone (BIR).

The powerful combination of four active ingredients and three sites of action in Acuron GT also helps manage difficult weeds longer into the season, which helps fully protect yield potential and minimize the weed seed bank for next year’s crop.

by

If your wheat has ever been infected by Fusarium head blight, also known as head scab, you know how costly it can be to yields and grain quality. In fact, it has become one of the most economically destructive wheat diseases in the U.S.

The combination of infection timing and non-uniform crop development makes head scab control exceptionally challenging. Plus, protecting yield potential and grain quality usually means choosing to protect the main heads that have flowered, leaving secondary tillers at risk. However, those secondary tillers can play a primary role in increasing your potential yield and ROI.

As you begin making your disease management plan, keep these tips in mind:

From left to right: Untreated, Prosaro® 421 SC, Miravis® Ace. Lenexa, Virginia; 2017.
  • Plan ahead to protect yield potential. If you practice tillage, be sure to bury residue after growing small grains or corn to help reduce the potential of infecting wheat in the following season. If possible, rotate crops away from small grains and corn. You can also choose wheat varieties with some level of head scab resistance.
  • Assess head scab risk. Specialists recommend using the U.S. Wheat & Barley Scab Initiative’s Fusarium Risk Tool for updates about head scab risk. Warm, wet weather and high humidity during the flowering and early grain formation stages help head scab thrive. If conditions are right for head scab development or your fields have a history of head scab, consider applying a preventive fungicide to protect your wheat.
  • Choose a fungicide with longer-lasting disease control. Choosing a fungicide like Miravis® Ace can make a tremendous difference on your yield monitor. Powered by the most potent SDHI available, ADEPIDYN® technology, Miravis Ace helps protect the main heads and tillers long after you spray for better potential yield and grain quality.

See how Miravis Ace, applied at 13.7 fl oz/A, performs in Fusarium head scab trials:

FAD150A3-2018US; Results are based on average yield responses across 13 Fusarium head scab trials.

Ready to ace your yield? Check out other trial results from your area at BoostYourBushels.com.

by

How can growers get the most out of their crop protection inputs? It starts with investing in the right products—and that means avoiding restrictive bundle offerings. The Better Yield is the Better Deal™ platform offers more flexibility so you can choose complementary products that can better protect your return on investment.

Read on to discover three reasons why Better Yield is the Better Deal.

Infographic with corn and soybeans drawings and facts about the Better Yield Better Deal platform with details about increased choice, flexibility and yield.

by

Growers choose crop protection inputs with one goal: to protect their investment. When generic inputs fail to reduce weed pressure, prevent disease or deter pests, growers are left with decreased yield potential and questions about what went wrong. Often, the blame is directed toward the generic product’s active ingredients, but they are not the sole indicators of an effective product. Other ingredients play a critical role in the form of branded crop protection inputs, and they set branded products apart from generic ones.

According to Jeremy Fowler, Ph.D., group leader of formulation development at Syngenta, two significant differentiators between Syngenta products and generics often are the complexity of formulations with carefully balanced inert ingredients and the investments in research to back them up.

Active Ingredients Are Not Alone

Syngenta products contain a precise blend of active ingredients and additional components that may give Syngenta products an edge. “The number of formulation ingredients besides the active ingredients gives a more sophisticated formulation package that’s designed to not only give you robustness in the final product itself, but stability over a wide range of conditions,” Fowler says.

These components contain anything from stabilizers for solid particles, emulsifiers for oily droplets and pH buffering systems to more mundane ingredients like antifoam and antifreeze. The addition of the components and their specific ratios depends on the individual active ingredients in each product. The precise blends that result provide the reliability, efficacy and flexibility traits growers have come to expect from Syngenta products. The complex formulations also address many of the complaints growers have about generic products, from problems with spray application to flow rate and beyond.

“All of these ingredients have a particular role to play, depending on where they’re introduced,” says Fowler. “The tricky part, and where generics may not have the time investment or the scientific staff to ensure robustness, is to make sure that across all of those ingredients, they’re all compatible in the formulated product.” After all, he adds, growers can’t afford surprises.

''

All of these ingredients have a particular role to play, depending on where they’re introduced. The tricky part, and where generics may not have the time investment or the scientific staff to ensure robustness, is to make sure that across all of those ingredients, they’re all compatible in the formulated product.

Jeremy Fowler, Ph.D. Group Leader of Formulation Development at Syngenta

Research-Backed Formulations Deliver Results

Finding the perfect balance for these complex formulations takes an unmatched investment in time and scientific staffing. Generics typically go to market faster with less complex formulations. In contrast, the average timeline for a Syngenta product is extended to allow plenty of time for development, evaluation and optimization by a global team of scientists.

“We’ll spend a minimum of about two years making sure that we want to continue progressing each product,” says Fowler. “The longer timeline for development allows us to spend more time doing more experiments, refining stability criteria and checking a wide range of different conditions over an extended period of time.”

The additional time spent optimizing products takes the guesswork out of application and ensures product performance meets a high standard. The entire Syngenta network of agronomists and scientists is confident in the science behind the products. When growers choose a Syngenta product, they know exactly what to expect.

When it comes to generic products, not only is there often a lack of comparable supportive research, but growers also typically may be on their own when problems arise. Syngenta customers, on the other hand, have a global team of industry leaders to turn to.

“We can pull global expertise and respond directly to suppliers and distributors, all the way to the grower level to ensure that their experience is the best they can get,” says Fowler. In addition to the formulations and additional components themselves, this level of support is the key differentiator between Syngenta products and generics.

Trust the Experts

Growers who don’t have a firm grasp of the role of other product ingredients may be tempted to choose generic products or even try to mix their own. Fowler warns that playing the role of a chemist can have severe unforeseen consequences.

“If you’re killing weeds or a fungal infection in your field, the active ingredients are really powerful,” he says. “They have to be introduced at the right time under the right conditions. We have the expertise to ensure that it goes well. When you start doing the chemistry part on your own, you can deviate into crop injury and other impacts that we would hope everyone could avoid.”

Getting the interactions between chemicals wrong might mean damaging crops to the point that their value is diminished or gone for the season. Even partial crop injury can cause a reduction in yield and, therefore, in profit — leaving growers in a worse position overall.

All companies provide label information to mitigate these risks, but crop injury and subpar results can still happen. One challenge occurs when similar products adopt comparable language despite discrepancies in the formulation technology. There might be assumptions built into the language of generic products that overstate the performance and predictability of the formulations. For that reason, Fowler explains, growers need to seriously examine the reliability of the information provided by the manufacturer in addition to the products themselves.

It comes back to the research investment that Syngenta makes in each of its products. “We invest the time to make sure that the recommendation we’re providing has been validated over and over at numerous levels,” he says. “If another company is not investing that time, your odds start to go up that they’ve missed something.”

The most reliable sources of product information are companies with transparent trial data. Growers can learn more about product formulations by checking out trial data and Syngenta Grow More™ Experience sites.

“We have agronomy experts to talk with customers about exactly what we did and what conditions we did it in,” Fowler explains. “You can see a real plot where it’s applied; and to me, that’s irrefutable.”

Chemicals for Purpose, Not Filler

It is vitally important for growers to realize that the additional components in branded products are not simply fillers. It’s easy to take certain ingredients, like antifreeze, for granted until a problem occurs and growers realize the importance of predictable freezing and thawing behavior too late. Other components like surfactants might be unrecognizable to many growers; but to Syngenta scientists, they represent the result of a complex selection process to maintain microstructure and stability.

Ultimately, for Fowler, the proof that the brand matters is present in the marketplace as well as in the lab. “Growers have relied on many of our products for years,” he says. “That just shows that attention to detail upfront gives you something with a lot of longevity at the end.”

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

by

Q. What are carbon credits and why are they important?

A. Jason Neff, Ph.D., soil and climate innovation principal scientist at Syngenta Group: Carbon credits were created as a way to mitigate climate change by encouraging activities that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and storing it for tens to hundreds of years in other forms. Carbon credits can also be generated from practices that avoid the emission of greenhouse gases in the first place. The idea of a carbon credit is that it can be bought and sold to incentivize actions that can help slow climate change. Once a grower generates a carbon credit, then it can be purchased, usually by a company or individuals. These transactions typically take place in voluntary carbon markets made up of the buyers and sellers of carbon credits. In these types of markets, the carbon credits are often called ‘offsets’ because they are used to offset emissions from other sources. For example, when you buy an airplane ticket, you might have an option to ‘offset’ your emissions and it is possible that a farmer somewhere is getting some portion of the revenue for a soil carbon credit.

In agriculture, most carbon storage options are in soils where carbon dioxide is stored as soil organic matter. There are many other sources of greenhouse gases in agriculture, including the energy-intensive production of fertilizers and from the release of nitrous oxide from agricultural soils after fertilization or methane from rice fields or ruminant animals like cattle. Both nitrous oxide and methane are very potent greenhouse gases and reductions in emissions of these gases are also possible sources of carbon credits.

B. Liz Hunt, head, sustainable & responsible business at Syngenta: Carbon credits are important because they may provide a market mechanism for encouraging the adoption of climate-smart agriculture practices such as cover crops or no-till. They may provide an additional revenue stream for growers who decide participation makes sense for their operation.

Additionally, carbon markets are demonstrating that agriculture can be a contributor to positively impacting climate change by reducing or avoiding emissions in production.

Q. What practices do growers need to engage in to earn carbon credits?

A. Neff: The most common practices that generate carbon credits include changes in tillage practices or the addition of cover crops. When a grower transitions from intensive tillage to low or reduced tillage, more carbon is typically held in the soil because the tillage process encourages the breakdown or decomposition of stored soil carbon. Cover crops can help store additional carbon in the soil by increasing the flow of carbon from carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to soil organic matter. These crops also help protect fields from carbon loss from erosion. Beyond these practices, efforts to reduce the use of chemical fertilizers or methane emissions from rice or cattle may also qualify for carbon credits. The current carbon credit space is complicated and varies from country to country and even across some states in the U.S., which often means that growers need to rely on external advice to navigate the current carbon credit system.

B. Hunt: Beyond the cultural production practices that growers can adopt to earn carbon credits, growers need to adopt strong record keeping and, in some cases, robust soil sampling protocols on their operation. Carbon credit generation depends on different levels of data, but for the most part, it will require several years of historical data along with annual in-field practice adoption documentation. Most credits will need to be verified, so keeping records in a credible farm management software that can easily be transferred into the carbon market’s required measuring, monitoring, reporting and verification (MMRV) platform is key.

Q. How do carbon credits programs impact sustainability?

A. Neff: In general, the practices that generate carbon credits also have many other benefits for growers and for the environmental profile of agriculture. For example, by storing more organic matter in soils, growers increase the natural levels of nitrogen and other nutrients, potentially making fields more resilient to climate impacts like drought and less reliant on chemical fertilizers. Reductions in tillage and the addition of cover crops can reduce erosion which has many positive benefits, including maintaining or improving soil fertility and reducing the potential impacts of farming on water quality in nearby waterways.

B. Hunt: Economics are an important component of farm sustainability as well. The additional revenue stream may help to offset some of the costs of new practice adoption or accelerate the addition of more practices. There is a long-term potential to also generate additional ecosystem credits like water quality or quantity and biodiversity as those protocols develop.

Q. Will growers already engaging in these practices still benefit from carbon credit programs?

A. Neff: One of the common concerns for growers considering carbon credit programs is whether they meet the sometimes-complicated rules about what qualifies for a carbon credit. One of the rules involves the concept of ‘additionality’ which means that a carbon credit must be generated from a new activity rather than something that has been going on for a long time. In agriculture, this means that some growers who implemented sustainable practices in the past may not qualify for carbon credits.

B. Hunt: Growers who have already adopted new practices may not be eligible to generate credits — although, I would still encourage them to seek advice from trusted advisors to see if there are other practices or technologies that might be right for them that could continue to be incorporated.

Early adopters of practices can also be great mentors and leaders in this space to share their experiences with other farmers, or to give feedback to companies asking for these practices to be adopted — there are a lot of people out there who don’t know the realities of practice adoption and sharing your knowledge is valuable as well.

''

Sustainability is all about continuous improvement; I think the voluntary carbon markets are no different. The programs and protocols will continue to improve and hopefully make room for more farmers to participate and generate value for their operation while delivering positive impacts for the environment and society.

Liz Hunt Head, Sustainable & Responsible Business at Syngenta

Q. What does the future of carbon credits programs look like?

A. Neff: The carbon markets have had many ups and downs in recent years. At present, the price of carbon is relatively low on these markets, but it could rise again in the future. As with many major changes in agriculture and markets, we will likely have to be patient to see what the future holds.

Outside the formal carbon markets, we are seeing opportunities to work directly with food and beverage companies to reduce the overall carbon intensity of agricultural production. These efforts align with the goals of some food companies to reduce emissions as part of their corporate climate commitments. This is important because the rules for these types of changes may be friendlier to growers who are already engaged in a range of sustainable and regenerative practices.

B. Hunt: Sustainability is all about continuous improvement; I think the voluntary carbon markets are no different. The programs and protocols will continue to improve and hopefully make room for more farmers to participate and generate value for their operation while delivering positive impacts for the environment and society.

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

by

Growers are at the forefront of sustainability. When it comes to greenhouse gas emissions, farmers have the potential to play a critical role.

So how do carbon credits work? Carbon credits encourage activities that reduce emissions or store carbon in the soil. Once they’re generated, companies can buy and sell the credits, incentivizing climate-smart practices by providing an additional potential revenue stream to qualified growers. Read on to explore the agricultural practices that are making a difference and learn how carbon credits can work for you.

An infographic with illustrations, data, and facts about decoding carbon credits for farmers

by

A survey found that 40% of growers struggle to control Palmer amaranth and waterhemp with current preemergence corn herbicides.1 These weeds aren’t just occasional problems. Year after year, they hurt corn yields, making it harder for growers to profit and do their jobs well.

Chris Munsterman, a Syngenta agronomy service representative based in York, Nebraska, sheds light on this long-standing issue. “Small grain weeds first showed resistance to acetolactate synthase (ALS) herbicides roughly 25 years ago,” he says. “Over time, our biggest concerns shifted toward the Amaranthus species, notably waterhemp and Palmer pigweed.”

Growers continually seek strategies to manage weed resistance. Storen® corn herbicide is specifically designed with these challenges in mind. Storen targets problematic weeds like Palmer amaranth and waterhemp, offering growers a solution to combat the resistance problems they’ve battled for years. Its combination of four residual active ingredients keeps rows clean up to three weeks longer than other leading herbicides.2

“The extended control from Storen gives growers a better chance to reapply their overlapping residual herbicides,” Munsterman says. “With many farms expanding and consolidating, there are growers and retailers who manage fields up to 40 miles from their home base. Getting back to those fields in time for a reapplication isn’t always easy. Storen could be the helping hand they need. As farming evolves, having that extra time can make all the difference.”

The introduction of Storen to the corn herbicide market signified a strategic step against persistent resistant weeds. Its specialized formulation, with ingredients bicyclopyrone, mesotrione, S-metolachlor and pyroxasulfone plus the crop safener benoxacor, makes Storen a top contender in weed management. Beyond handling barnyardgrass and foxtail species, its proven effectiveness against challenging amaranthus species like waterhemp and Palmer pigweed reinforces its value in today’s agronomic practices.

Storen was named Agri Marketing’s 2024 Product of the Year. This award recognizes outstanding technology introduced to North American agriculture to help crop and livestock producers become more efficient and profitable.

1 Storen length-of-control advantage based on 2022 Syngenta and university-replicated trials comparing Storen to Resicore® and TriVolt®.

2 Syngenta market research, 2022. n=302.

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES