Retail Industry

‘We Need Rain’: Dry Fields Stall Corn Planting

Wed, 13 May 2026 21:40:40 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.

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 States: 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.”

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 17:24:08 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 :

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 13:30:39 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.

Why High GDUs Aren’t Guaranteeing Quick Emergence This Year

Tue, 12 May 2026 20:35:00 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

Why Some Crops Have ‘Just Sat There’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Soybean Gall Midge Emerges As Top-Tier Threat

Mon, 11 May 2026 20:19:03 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 16:51:42 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:

Build A High-Yield Powerhouse From The Bottom Up

Tue, 05 May 2026 17:40:08 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Farm Journal TV)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Corteva Brands Seed And Genetics Business With New Name

Mon, 04 May 2026 21:34:00 GMT

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

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

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

Heritage Meets High-Tech

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

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

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

A New Pipeline for the Field

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

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

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

Global Footprint

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

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

Watch this video to learn more about Vylor.

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

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 20:09:43 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A Three-Year Financial Drain

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

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

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

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

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

2027: “It Scares the Daylights Out of Me”

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

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

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

The Rotation Debate: Markets vs. Agronomics

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

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

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

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

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

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

Long-Term Risks Of Changing Rotations

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

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

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

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

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

Can Biologicals Fill The Gap From Reduced Fertilizer Use?

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 19:55:50 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(AFBF)

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

(Bushel, Valent BioSciences)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Valent)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

'Losing Glyphosate Would Be A Disastrous Blow For Farmers'

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 17:29:17 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Economic Reality Of Crop Protection

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

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

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

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

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

Relying On Science-Based Regulation

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

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

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

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

Current Agronomic Tools Are Invaluable

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stifling Innovation And The Path Forward

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wed, 22 Apr 2026 22:25:36 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 15:47:05 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 .

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

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 14:34:27 GMT

By Daren Coppock, Agricultural Retailers Association President & CEO

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

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

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

Why Uniform Labels Matter

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

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

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

An Impossible Legal Conflict

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

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

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

Science Versus Jury Verdicts

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

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

Why Glyphosate Matters Beyond One Case

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

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

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

What’s at Stake

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

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

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

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

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 18:47:21 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.

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

Mon, 20 Apr 2026 16:42:15 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Spring 2026: Going 100% Peking

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beyond Yield: Logistics And Longevity

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

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

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

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

Maryland Farmer Turns Stringent Fertilizer Restrictions Into An Opportunity To Innovate

Fri, 17 Apr 2026 19:13:18 GMT

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

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

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

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

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

From Front-Loading To Spoon-Feeding

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A New Technology Takes Root

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cutting Irrigation And Boosting Biomass

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Learning Curve And Next Steps

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Why Your Herbicide Can Fail Even if You Follow the Label

Thu, 16 Apr 2026 18:35:29 GMT

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

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

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

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

(Council of Producers & Distributors of Agrotechnology)

Solutions That Work

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conditioners Aren’t All Created Equal

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cut Through The Biological Noise To Find Real ROI

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 21:03:28 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 21:06:30 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 14:58:00 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 17:33:53 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 $10 Tool Randy Dowdy Uses To Grow Record Corn Yields

Mon, 06 Apr 2026 19:08:35 GMT

For high-yield corn grower Randy Dowdy, a successful harvest doesn’t start with the combine; it starts with a ratchet strap and an open furrow.

While many growers rely on high-tech in-cab monitors to guide their planting process, Dowdy argues the most critical data they need is found in the dirt behind the planter. By using ratchet straps to hold closing wheels up and out of the soil, he creates an “open furrow” that allows for a level of diagnostic evaluation he believes covered seeds cannot provide.

The Depth Deception

The logic behind this unconventional start to corn planting is rooted in the physical reality of soil settling. Dowdy, based near Valdosta, Ga., notes that even when a grower sets the planter for a standard two-inch depth, the final result often differs from what they were trying to achieve.

“Whenever the farmer goes back and looks at the plant, once it’s emerged, they find the germination depth is not the same depth as they planted,” he says. “Why did they not look at it and set it appropriately in the beginning? Chances are they can read that popsicle stick and measure depth. They know how to do that. But one thing I’ve found is that ground, when it’s been worked... it just settles.”

Whether a field is under conventional tillage, strip-till or no-till, the act of moving soil creates a “fluff” factor that can deceive even experienced corn growers. To compensate for this tendency, Dowdy advocates for planting slightly deeper in tilled or loose ground so the seed remains at the desired depth after the soil settles.

Open Furrow Diagnostics

To verify seed placement depth, Dowdy likes to use an open furrow for evaluation. He says this method allows growers to see exactly how the row unit is interacting with the soil environment without guesswork.

Randy Dowdy likes to check seed placement depth in an open furrow.

(Farm Journal)

“I don’t like to stand on top of my head and scratch for seed and all that garbage,” Dowdy says. “The first thing I want to do is make sure the row cleaners are set properly. I can do that better with an open furrow. I can look at spacing that way. I’m not standing on top of my head scratching, spending all this time trying to find it.”

The open furrow provides a clear window into the planter’s performance. Beyond spacing and row cleaner settings, it allows the grower to inspect for sidewall smearing—a problem that can severely limit root development if the soil is too tacky when the opening discs pass through. The visual check of an open furrow also tells the grower whether the down pressure is sufficient to maintain a consistent planting depth.

The Centering Challenge

Once the open furrow confirms that the row cleaners, meters, and depth settings are dialed in, the focus shifts to the closing system. Dowdy warns that even the best closing wheels can fail if they aren’t perfectly aligned over the seed.

He says standard V-press wheels are known to drift off-center. If they aren’t tracking directly over the seed trench, they don’t just fail to close the furrow—they actively change the planting depth at the final stage of the process.

“It doesn’t matter whose system it is, V-press wheels just do not like to stay centered,” he contends.

When the wheels drift off-center, they often pinch the furrow, leaving a raised ribbon of soil in their wake. This misalignment can create a less than desirable environment for the seed than what the grower intended.

A Systematic Start

Dowdy’s systematic approach—checking gauge wheels, setting opening discs, inspecting the open furrow, and finally calibrating the closing wheels—is designed to eliminate the variables that lead to uneven emergence. For Dowdy, the goal is to ensure that every seed is given the exact same opportunity to start strong, leading to the “picket fence” stands required for high yields.

By starting with an open furrow and systematically lowering the closing system only after everything else is verified, he says other corn growers can eliminate the guesswork that often leads to costly mistakes at planting.

“We’re not done, but this is the process of how we get started,” Dowdy says. “Next, we’ll let the closing wheels down, close that trench and see what we got.”

Replant Or Ride It Out? How To Manage The Challenges Of Early-Planted Soybeans

Mon, 06 Apr 2026 16:32:01 GMT

A burst of early soybean planting across parts of the Corn Belt last week has some farmers feeling ahead of schedule, while others are already bracing for replant decisions and dealing with seed challenges.

Farm Journal Field Agronomist Ken Ferrie reports in central Illinois, the convergence of record early planting, heavy spring rains, and uneven seed quality is testing stand establishment. Farmers are now facing tough choices regarding which fields — and which seed lots — will make the cut.

“The past 10 days, a lot of soybeans went in the ground,” Ferrie says. “I believe this may be the most beans ever planted in March for our customer base. We planted some here at the Crop-Tech campus, and they went in very well.”

However, that promising start was quickly met with adverse weather.

Ponding, Cool Soils, And Replant Calls

In parts of Illinois, recent storms dumped 3" to 3.5" of rain in a single night, leading to widespread ponding. While many of those areas drained within 24 hours, the status of those early-planted soybeans remains uncertain.

“Only time will tell, but because soil temperatures remain cool, I expect most of the beans will survive,” Ferrie contends. “If it were saturated and hot, they would die off quickly. But in cool conditions, you’d be surprised how long they can last.”

Ferrie urges growers to stay disciplined: scout fields, evaluate stands, and avoid guessing.

“If you’re scouting ponded areas and find soft, discolored seed, we’ll obviously need to replant. The quicker we get them back in the ground, the better the yield potential. We still have time to replant and maintain an early bean advantage,” he notes.

Crusting: The Hidden Threat

While ponding areas are highly visible, Ferrie warns that soil crusting on conventionally tilled fields may pose a greater threat to late-March soybeans.

“The bigger job is monitoring conventional-till soybeans for crusting. Heavy rain can create a seal that slows or stops emergence,” he explains. While no-till soybeans typically face fewer issues, they are not immune to crusting challenges and still require monitoring.

Ferrie believes many growers underestimate the importance of timely intervention.

“We may need to help these March beans out of the ground. Get the rotary hoe ready,” he advises. “The time to break a crust is when it’s light and the bean is not yet pushing hard against it.”

Waiting too long can turn a simple pass into a stand-loss event. “If the crust hardens and the bean hypocotyls become swollen trying to push through, your chances of success drop significantly. The trick is to go early. If you wait until the beans are clearly in trouble, the rotary hoe won’t be able to save them,” Ferrie says.

Seed Quality Under the Microscope

Weather isn’t the only risk factor this spring; seed quality is also under scrutiny. Seed labs are reporting a wide range of saturated cold test results.

“Samples are coming back all over the board,” Ferrie reports. “We’ve seen saturated cold scores ranging from 95% down to 9%. I suspect the samples falling below 40% may be carryover seed from previous seasons.”

The low cold score numbers are causing ripples in the supply chain, with seed companies pulling questionable lots from the system. This has led to canceled orders or last-minute substitutions for may growers.

“While it’s frustrating to not get the exact genetics you ordered, this is good seed stewardship,” Ferrie says. “Your supplier is doing the right thing by pulling that seed before it becomes a stand disaster in your field.”

Ferrie attributes these quality issues to last season’s production challenges, including heavy disease pressure and late-season drought.

Action Plan For Next Steps

Ferrie outlines several practical steps to help farmers manage the current volatility with seed quality and planting:

Scout Aggressively: Dig for seed in ponded spots for evaluation. If the seed is mushy or discolored, make the replant call early.
Ready the Rotary Hoe: Be prepared to move as soon as a crust begins to form. Ferrie refers to this as “Hoe before you know.”
Monitor Seed Tests: Work closely with your dealer to ensure you are planting high-quality lots.
Be Flexible with Genetics: A sound, high-quality substitute is better than a preferred variety with poor vigor.
Use Rain Delays Wisely: Focus on equipment maintenance and planter calibration so you are ready to roll when conditions improve.

Hear more of Ken Ferrie’s agronomic insights in this week’s Boots In The Field podcast:

Blake Vince Shares 1.7 Million Reasons To Stop Tilling Your Soil

Thu, 02 Apr 2026 21:05:44 GMT

Blake Vince says some of the most highly-valued help on his 1,200-acre Ontario, Canada, farm never show up on a payroll sheet.

They live under his boots.

“One day I went out with a shovel, flipped over a slice of soil about 12 inches by 12 inches, and I started counting earthworms,” Vince recalls. “I counted 40 in that one square.”

He quickly estimated how many earthworms likely live in one acre of his cropland: “Multiply that 40 by 43,560 [the square feet in one acre] and you get 1,742,400. That’s a hell of a lot of earthworms out there in my soil doing the work.”

For Vince, earthworms are more than a sign of good soil — they’re central characters in how he farms, evaluates risk and stays profitable. In a production system shaped by no-till, planting green and cover crops, he sees earthworms as the quiet workforce that’s helping hold the whole thing together, he recently told farmers attending the 2026 Soil Health Conference in Aberdeen, S.D.

(Blake Vince)

From Traditional Tillage To Tiny Tillers

Vince grew up believing that aggressive tillage comes at a cost. The renowned fifth-generation farmer from Merlin — a 750-person farming community in southwest Ontario — is considered a conservation farming pioneer in the region, having used no-till for over 40 years to protect soil structure.

“(I learned early) that tillage was eroding our largest capital investment, our soil. Soil is not an infinite resource. I can’t stress that enough,” he says.

Blake’s father and his brothers started to no-till in 1983 when he was just 11 years old.

“Our motive for what we do on our farm first and foremost is to remain financially viable,” he says. “And then what’s important is the fact that we’re protecting the environment.”

Those two goals continue today on the farm, which he operates with his father, Elwin. Together, they grow commercial corn, soybeans and winter wheat, and cover crop for seed on approximately 1,200 acres.

The father-son team seeds cash crops directly into living covers such as cereal rye to suppress weeds, protect soil and extend the period of living roots. Vince says they use planting green to cut passes, reduce herbicide pressure and boost resilience in dry spells, evaluating the benefits by agronomics and economics, not appearances.

Even with its proximity to the Great Lakes (see image below), the farm’s heavy Brookston clay operates within a moisture-strapped, 16-inch rainfall zone. In such an environment, soil disturbance is critical.

Blake Vince’s farm is based just north of Lake Erie and south of Lake Huron. But despite its proximity to the Great Lakes, the farm only sees about 16 inches of rain annually.

(Blake Vince)

Vince categorizes soils as either “defensive” or “offensive.” On offensive soils, he believes aggressive tillage can continue for years with little visible impact.

“You can till it with the most aggressive tillage passes, and you can still grow a crop… So the decline is gradual,” he contends, noting he believes much of the upper Midwest has offensive soils.

His own ground is the opposite, and he refers to his soils as being defensive. As a result, the wrong tillage pass at the wrong moisture level could smear the soil profile, seal off pores and restrict roots just when crops need water the most.

“We can’t go down into the depth of the soil to bring up the much-needed moisture during that critical period of year when it’s 90 degrees Fahrenheit outside and the corn is trying to pollinate,” Vince says.

Betting On Biology Instead Of Iron

When Vince talks about earthworms, he sounds like a businessman who’s discovered an overlooked, underpaid labor force.

“When an earthworm poops, it’s pH neutral,” he says. “So it’s bringing all of those nutrients from depth, turning organic material — last year’s crop residue — into plant-available nutrients for subsequent crops that we grow.”

In other words: free nutrient cycling, free aggregation, free tillage.

A moment that cemented Vince’s faith in earthworms started with a disagreement. His independent agronomist, looking at soil test results, told him he needed to apply lime. Vince didn’t dispute that. The sticking point was how to use it.

“She suggested to me, ‘Blake, you need to add lime, which I agreed, but in order to use that lime and make it most effective, you need to till it in,’” he recalls. “And I said, ‘No. That’s where the buck stops. I am not interested in doing tillage. It costs time, it costs energy, it costs money — diesel fuel, depreciation, as we all know.’”

Vince’s answer sounded simple, almost unbelievable, even naive.

“I’ve got so many earthworms, they’ll do the work for me,” he told her.

Later, while installing tile drainage, he found the proof he’d been looking for. At the top of an earthworm midden — a vertical burrow —he saw a dusting of white on the soil surface.

“So folks, this is an earthworm midden,” he told the audience as he showed the image (see below). “You can see at the top of the picture, that’s lime that’s been broadcast on the surface. That earthworm has crawled to the surface. It’s got its body coated in lime that we’ve spread just on the surface, and now it’s bringing it down in its middens, down in its vertical burrows.”

Earthworms help move lime below the soil’s surface.

(Blake Vince)

For most farmers, incorporating lime means fuel, wear on steel and the risk of compaction or smearing. For Vince, it meant waiting on the night shift.

“If we think back to that picture where I was standing there with those earthworm casts, how much horsepower would be required to do tillage at that depth?” he asked the audience. “More than I have.”

In his view, every pass he doesn’t make is one more way he can reduce costs and protect his bottom line.

The contributions of earthworms to global food development have been assessed by the National Institutes of Health . The agency reports earthworms contribute to roughly 6.5% of global grain (maize, rice, wheat, barley) production and 2.3% of legume production, equivalent to over 140 million metric tons annually.

The Unseen Economics Underfoot

Behind Vince’s enthusiasm for earthworms and farming green lies a hard-edged focus on economics. From a brief stint in financial services, he brought one non-negotiable rule home to the farm: pay yourself first.

“The number one rule of financial planning is what? Pay yourself first,” he says. “With that mentality, I started thinking: how do I do that here? I don’t control the price of seed, chemicals, fertilizer, diesel, or machinery. But I can control how I manage my soil.”

One of his major “pay yourself first” decisions a decade ago was switching to 100% non-GMO soybeans. Growing them allows him to brown bag his own seed without worrying about patent infringement, all while securing a market premium.

“I’ve been doing this for over 10 years now,” he says. “Mathematically, I figure I’m well over a million dollars ahead in net profit, simply because of my willingness to think differently.”

That thinking applies to earthworms, too. To Vince, every earthworm burrow is a tiny cost-saving device. Every casting is a granule of fertilizer he doesn’t have to buy or risk losing to runoff. Every year he skips deep tillage is a year he avoids burning diesel and breaking shear bolts.

“Doing nothing, in all actuality, is doing something,” he told the audience. By “nothing,” he doesn’t mean neglect; he means resisting the urge to disturb the natural infrastructure the worms are building for him.

More Than A Soil Test Number

Vince doesn’t romanticize his soils. He’s pragmatic, often blunt, about what’s at stake when farmers ignore the biology just beneath the surface.

“We abuse our land because we regard it as a commodity,” he says, quoting conservationist Aldo Leopold. Then he adds his own twist. “‘Dirt’ is a four-letter word I wish everybody in agriculture would remove from their vocabulary… It’s soil. It’s a collection of living, breathing organisms, and we need to treat it with respect.”

On his farm, that respect looks like cover crops to keep the soil armored, no-till to protect structure and planting green to keep living roots feeding the underground food web as long as possible. Earthworms are both beneficiaries and drivers of that system.

“My main focus is preparing our transfer of our farm to the next generation, regardless if they’re our kids, or they’re somebody else’s kids,” Vince says. “I want [the farm] to be as productive as possible, so they can be a success.”

As long as he keeps the soils covered and the roots living, he knows his million-man workforce underground will be clocking in for their shift every single day, helping the farm thrive.

Listen to Vince’s keynote presentation during the 2026 Soil Health Conference here .

Boost Your Bottom Line By Keeping Your Soils In Place

Wed, 01 Apr 2026 20:20:39 GMT

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

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

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

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

A Growing Storm in the Midwest

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

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

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

Calculating the True Cost of a Pass

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

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

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

Navigating the Label and the Law

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

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

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

The New Era Of Documentation

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

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

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

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

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

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

How North Dakota Farmers Collaborate to Build Soil Health and Manage Cover Crops

Tue, 31 Mar 2026 19:37:09 GMT

When Tyler Zimmerman looks across his North Dakota fields, he doesn’t see just corn, soybeans and sunflowers anymore. He sees the payoff of an ongoing experiment to build soil health—one fueled by a unique partnership with his neighbor, the impact of grazing cattle, and the changing biology under his boots.

“We do just about everything on this together; it’s made this journey so much easier,” Zimmerman told a room of fellow farmers at the 2026 South Dakota Soil Health Conference, regarding his work with Chris Walberg, a fellow row-crop grower, cattle producer and friend.

Over the last decade, the two farmers have turned what could have been a daunting transition on their individual farms into a shared learning process of transitioning to no-till and the use of cover crops.

Here are some of their key recommendations and how they’ve used collaboration to succeed.

Start With Context

The farmers’ partnership is a study in contrasts. Despite living only 10 miles apart, Zimmerman’s farm features heavy clay soils that hold moisture like a sponge. Walberg’s fields lean toward light, sandy soils. Their farm differences have brought one of the most important soil health “principles” to their attention, one that rarely gets discussed: context.

While soil health principles are universal, the two farmers believe their application is hyper-local. Zimmerman and Walberg have learned that they cannot simply mirror growing each other’s cover mixes.

“You have to think about how to apply these to your specific place, your farm, your operation, to make you successful,” Walberg says.

He and Zimmerman recommend doing an audit of sorts to figure out what soil health practices and cover crops will work best. Consider your specific soil types, residue levels, typical harvest windows, and—crucially—your biggest bottlenecks, whether that’s moisture, erosion or herbicide carryover.

Evaluate Equipment Needs

To get cover crops planted and established, Zimmerman and Walberg leaned first on creativity, not new iron. They started out using an old International box drill, modifying it to run between 30- and 60-inch corn rows.

“There was virtually no improvements needed to make that work, other than pull a couple pins, pull a couple units off where the corn rows are, and we were off planting cover crops,” Zimmerman recalls.

Later, they co-built an interseeder and a 30-inch in-row crimper, sharing costs, so they could interseed corn and sunflower crops.
“I don’t know that alone I would have built that interseeder,” Walberg notes. “Being able to share the cost and the time investment, that’s been the power of partnering together.”

Independent Field Agronomist Lee Briese, who also spoke at the conference, urges farmers to take a hard look at their existing equipment resources, making a list of what they have access to for starting out.

“You need to know if you have the right piece of equipment. Do you have the right operator that has time to do the work when you need to do it? Use those things to help you build your system… Take inventory of resources, because it’s really hard right now to go and spend a lot of money on something that you don’t have.” Briese says.

Here are the seven steps Briese recommends farmers evaluate:

(Lee Briese)

Master The Seeding Window

When it comes to interseeding into corn, both farmers say timing is critical for stand establishment. They’ve found that interseeding earlier at around V2 to V3 before the canopy closes works best.

Two additional takeaways they encourage other farmers to consider:

For aerial seeding, residue and insect pressure matter; flying on before harvest so residue can help cover and protect seed may improve establishment.
Expect more variability in broadcast or aerial seedings as residue builds; be ready to adjust or change your methods over time.

Choose Herbicide Programs With Covers In Mind

Cover crops have to be able to survive your weed-control program. Both Zimmerman and Walberg emphasize planning chemistry use around cover crops—not the other way around.

“A lot of these species — rye, oats, flax, radishes — most of those will grow through almost any chemical program,” Zimmerman says. “They might be in a weakened state for a while, but… most of the time, they will work through it.”

On Walberg’s farm, he leans on a burndown product and then a light residual for weed control.

“What’s worked well for me is a non-residual burndown, like a Roundup and 2,4-D or something like that,” he says. “Then I’ll come back with, typically, Laudis. If I wait about seven days after I apply Laudis and then come back and interseed, it seems like that chemical doesn’t affect my cover crop.”

Use Crimping Strategically — Not Everywhere

Zimmerman and Walberg use two different crimpers: a 40-foot flat-roll crimper for rye; and a 30-inch in-row crimper that rolls covers between crop rows.

For them, crimping is a targeted tool to use and doesn’t fit the entire farm.

“The reason we wanted that [in-row crimper] is we’re trying to reduce our herbicide use,” Walberg notes. “It isn’t like a tool we’re using on every acre, but… when we got rye set up in these twin rows in between our corn, it works good.”

Crimped rye can give fields a powerful burst of soil life.

“Say you crimp down 100 pounds of rye and plant something into it,” Walberg said. “When you come back a month later and you pull that residue apart, you can just see that soil — it’s thriving underneath there.”

Timing matters a great deal if you want to use crimping. In their northern climate, waiting for rye to reach anthesis (flowering, pollen shed) can push soybean planting into June. Zimmerman has seen stands suffer when crimping too late over already stressed beans, and says he’s still fine-tuning termination timing.

Integrate Livestock When Possible

For Zimmerman, who owns no cattle, the payoff from good cover establishment is the ability to attract livestock — and the biology they bring.

“I have no cattle, so I’m always trying to get cattle on my land,” he says, noting that strong cover crop stands can turn your farm into a sought-after grazing resource.

Walberg often places some of his cattle on Zimmerman’s fields and pays him a stipend for feed. In return, Zimmerman gets nutrient cycling and hoof action on grain ground, some of which hasn’t seen cattle in decades.

The two farmers say grazing living or recently terminated covers may improve nutrient cycling compared with chemical-only termination.

Collaboration Makes It Sustainable — and Fun

Beyond the agronomy, both men say the biggest factor in their success with cover crops is their partnership.

“We’ve known each other since, well, forever,” Zimmerman says. “The last seven, eight, 10 years, we’re talking to each other every day, every other day… collaborating about all these things that we can do together and make things work.”

Walberg says the shift from competition to collaboration has changed how he sees farming.

“Conventional farming [can drive] a lot of neighbor competition,” he says. “Doing a lot of collaboration and working together… makes it fun.”

On the fundamentals of making a working relationship like theirs work, Walberg’s answer was simple: shared goals and honest communication.

“We share soil health goals for sure,” he says. “And I think, like anything in life… communication is key. If you can have open and honest communication, most people, as long as they’re reasonable, can work through just about anything.”

Their key takeaways on collaboration:

Find at least one like-minded neighbor to share ideas, equipment and results with.
Start small — one shared tool, one trial field, one grazing arrangement.
Treat collaboration as a long-term relationship, not a one-off deal; trust and fairness matter as much as seed choices or row spacing.

For Zimmerman, the original goal of saving a few dollars on labor has grown into a deeper philosophy. Looking at his thriving fields, he now asks a different question: “Why isn’t everybody trying to do this? We’re saving on inputs and building something for the long-term.”

His advice to any farmer looking to start is simple: start where you are, use what you have, and—most importantly—don’t go it alone.

Watch the full presentation by Walberg and Zimmerman at the 2026 South Dakota Soil Health Conference on YouTube, available here .