The New Agriculture Network's on-line newsletter with seasonal advice for field crop and vegetable growers interested in organic agriculture.

Vol. 2, No. 5 - June 23, 2005

In this issue

	Incorporating cover crops into corn system
	Cover crops overseeded into seed corn – St. Joseph County
	Weed control strategies in an organic corn system
	Frequently asked questions about organic agriculture
	Enhancing beneficial insects with native plants
	NEW June 28: Soybean aphid regional update
	Reports from organic growers

Next issue will be posted July 14. Read previous issues through our calendar of issues.

Incorporating cover crops into corn system
Dale R. Mutch and Todd E. Martin
Kellogg Biological Station
Michigan State University

Introduction
Cover crops can be successfully incorporated into various corn rotation systems. The KBS/MSUE cover crop program, through grants from the Michigan Department of Agriculture Groundwater Stewardship program has researched cultivars, timing and economics for seeding cover crops in corn.

Cultivars and timing
Cover crops can be seeded into corn at any of three different corn growth stages. A on the chart represents overseeding when the corn is at stage V-4 to V8 immediately before or after your last cultivation. The cultivars we have had the most success with are crimson clover, mammoth red clover, medium red clover, red/sweet clover mix and annual ryegrass.

B on the chart represents a seeding that requires special equipment, such as a highboy or an airplane. This seeding is most successful when the corn crop just begins drying down. At this time, sunlight begins breaking through the canopy, allowing cover crop growth. The cultivars that have been most successful for seeding at this time are oilseed radish, oats, rape/turnip, crimson clover, hairy vetch and red/sweet clover mix. Cereal rye can be seeded into standing corn successfully from the middle to late August.

Another window for seeding cover crops into corn occurs when the corn plants are drying down and/or harvested for silage (see C on the chart). For shelled corn, use a highboy or aerial seeding. Silage corn fields can be seeded with a bulk spreader followed by shallow tillage. The cover crops that have worked best at this corn stage are cereal rye, wheat (after Hessian fly-free date) and triticale.

Researchers’ success incorporating cover crops into corn can be directly correlated to environmental conditions. Adequate moisture and light are critical in establishing cover crops. The KBS/MSUE project team continues research on manipulating corn systems to provide a better habitat for cover crops. These projects include: determining the best corn plant population, corn hybrid characteristics and development and cover crop tolerance to herbicides.
back to top

Cover crops overseeded into seed corn – St. Joseph County

In our research on cover crops, we have tried overseeding several cover crops. Seed corn is a desirable crop to overseed because detasseling and male row destruction removes a lot of corn plant material reducing crop canopy and allowing sunlight to promote cover crop growth between the rows. The following article was conducted on seed corn evaluating eight cover crop cultivars and seeding timing. This is only one year’s data. For more information on cover crops, please visit our web site at http://covercrops.msu.edu

Purpose: Analyze eight cover crops overseeded into seed corn at three seeding dates
Cooperator: Henry Miller
Nearest town: Three Rivers
Seeding method: Broadcast by hand
Soil type: Spink
Previous crop: Potatoes
Corn planting date: May 20
Seeding dates: June 20, July 23, Aug. 24
Rating date: October 6

Scale
0 = none
1 = poor
2 = low
3 = medium
4 = good
5 = excellent

Results: Ratings were done visually and were rated for growth and stand for each cover crop and then combined to get the ratings above. The cover crops were not compared to other cover crops in the experiment, but rated for what was expected. Most covers did better when planted earlier. Some treatments at earlier planting dates had lower stands, but had more growth.

back to top

Weed control strategies in an organic corn system* Dale Mutch
Michigan State University

See the results of a research projected conducted at the MSU Kellogg

Biological Station in 2003 on different weed control methods in an organic corn system in pdf by clicking here.

back to top

Frequently asked questions about organic agriculture

In January 2005, Illinois held its first organic production conference. The goal of the conference was to provide practical, science-based information for any farmer interested in learning more about organic agriculture. A group of University of Illinois Extension educators (Deborah Cavanaugh-Grant, Rhonda Ferree, Sandy Mason, Ellen Phillips and John Pike) compiled a list of frequently asked questions regarding organic agriculture. Below are a few of those questions. 

1. What is involved in the certification process?
According to the National Organic Program (NOP), organic production is defined as a “production system that is managed in accordance with the Act and regulations in this part to respond to site-specific conditions by integrating cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that foster cycling of resources, promote ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity.”

Farmers and landowners interested in organic certification need to ensure that the land has been free of prohibited substances for three full years preceding harvest of the first organic crop (see NOP, 205.105 Allowed and prohibited substances, methods, and ingredients in organic production and handling). The Organic Materials Review Institute ( http://www.omri.org/) provides a list of those brand name products for organic production, processing, and handling.

The first step to organic certification is to select a certifier. In Illinois, the Illinois Department of Agriculture does not provide certification (as of February 14, 2004, only 14 states provide this service). Interested persons need to review the List of Accredited Certifying Agents at the National Organic Program website (available at http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/CertifyingAgents/Accredited.html).

Second, an application needs to be submitted. Certifying organizations will provide an application packet, including a farm plan questionnaire (there is usually a fee charged for this) and a copy of their certification standards. Recordkeeping and documentation is a critical component of the organic certification process. An excellent publication to assess farm compliance with the National Organic Program standards is the National Organic Program compliance Checklist for Producers June 2003 (available at http://www.attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/compliance.pdf)

Third, the certification organization will review the plan to ensure that it meets the National Organic Program Standards.

Fourth, is the on-site visit by an inspector who visits the farm to ensure that the producer is following their plan and is in compliance with the organic standards, inspecting fields, buildings and records. The inspector will discuss any areas that are not in compliance and then, both the producer and inspector will sign an affidavit. The inspector submits a detailed report to the certifier.

Fifth, the application and inspection report is reviewed. If the application is approved, the producer may begin selling their products as organic. If the farm receives a “notification of noncompliance,” the producer must rectify the issues before certification is granted. See the NOP website for detailed information regarding the certification process (available at http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards/CertReg.html).

The cost for certification can vary from $300 to $3000 or more among certifying agents. The fees also vary with the size and complexity of the farm operation, the costs of inspection and other factors. There is usually a fee for the application packet, as well as application and inspection fees. Farmers will need to contact each certifying organization for this information. The USDA awarded the Illinois Department of Agriculture (IDOA) $40,000 in 2003 to help defray certification costs. Producers and processors were awarded grants of up to 75 percent of the certification costs, with a maximum of $500. To date, $28,000 has been disbursed to cover cost incurred from Oct. 1, 2002 to Sept. 30, 2003. The remaining $12,000 can go to pay certification costs incurred from Oct. 1, 2003 to Sept. 30, 2004. There is hope that the USDA will make this a permanent grant, but at this time there has been no official comment on this. IDOA will issue press releases and announce any program changes on its website at www.agr.state.il.us. Any questions regarding this program should be directed to Kent McFarland, Illinois Department of Agriculture, Marketing and Promotion, 217-524-9131, kmcfarland@agr.state.il.us

2. What are the approved fertilizer and pesticide products?
The organic regulations state that no prohibited materials can be applied for at least three years to be certified as organic. Maintaining soil quality with adequate nutrient levels requires more dependence on tillage, cultivation practices, cover crops, crop rotation and the use of manure. Maintaining high levels of organic matter in the soil will help minimize the need for additional fertilizers. Supplemental fertilizer and amendments are limited to those approved according to the National Organic Standard. Some amendments such as manure may have further restrictions on their use due to environmental concerns. Communicate with the certifying agency about all fertilizers and amendments that will be used to be certain that it will not affect the certification of the field as organic.

Pest control requires creative management solutions to minimize injury by pests. Maintaining a growing environment that is stress free for the crop is the best way to minimize pest damage. Purchase seed that has disease resistance. Utilizing row covers, releasing beneficial insects, mulch, cultivation and irrigation are a few of the many management options available. If these management practices do not control the pest then an approved biological, botanical or synthetic pesticide may be used.

Resources to consider
National Organic Standards
http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/indexIE.htm
http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards.html

Organic Resources
http://extension.agron.iastate. edu/organicag/resources.html
http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/organicag/soil.html

OMRI Brand Name Products list
www.omri.org/brand_list.htm l

Organic Fertilizer and amendments suppliers
http://www.mosesorganic.org/umord/suppliers.htm

Sources of Organic Fertilizers and Amendments, ATTRA
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/orgfert.html

How to Convert an Inorganic Fertilizer Recommendation to an Organic One
http://pubs.caes.uga.edu/caespubs/pubcd/C853.htm

Cover Crops, University of Illinois
http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/asap/covercrops/index.html

Organic Matter Management
(NOTE: This page deals with soil management in general, not specifically organic production)
http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards.html

Organic Control of Pests
http://www.attra.org/organic.html#pests

3. Where do I find information regarding cultural practices to reduce the need for purchased fertilizer/pesticide/fungicides?
Information is available from several sources. First, ATTRA (Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas), a National Center for Appropriate Technology (NCAT) project funded by the USDA Rural Business - Cooperative Service, provides the most comprehensive listing of organic resources ( http://www.attra.org/organic.html). The national SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education) program also has some excellent publications ( http://www.sare.org/publications/index.htm). Third, the USDA National Agricultural Library, Alternative Farming Systems Information Center has some great resources ( http://www.nal.usda.gov/afsic/ofp/).

4. How does organic fit in with current conservation programs? Does land coming out of CRP meet organic certification standards?
This question is best left to consultants, organic inspectors and certifying agencies. USDA NRCS does not make determinations as to whether CRP lands are eligible for organic production. Generally, USDA assistance on conservation programs is geared more toward the producer, not the landowner. There are exceptions, such as those programs that enroll marginal lands, such as CRP, that usually deal with the landowner. The expectation is that producers and landowners will work together on USDA conservation programs and projects without targeting one or the other.

Yes, as along as no prohibited materials have been used for the 36 months before the first organic harvest and the renter is in charge of the current certifiable year’s inputs and management (see NOP regulations-§ 205.202 Land requirements)

5. What are the profitability scenarios for organic row crop systems?
As with any cropping system, profits for organic production are affected by a variety of environmental and marketing factors. In discussions concerning organic row cropping, premium prices are usually high enough to gain the attention of any conventional corn and soybean producer. While organic premiums are often quite attractive, it is important to note that most of the prices quoted are usually for food grade quality. Depending on location, weather conditions and management practices that occur in a given growing season, a producer may or may not be able to produce food grade quality crops so discounts might reduce the price the farmer receives.

Another factor that prospective organic row crop producers should consider is the fact that they will probably not be able to utilize the conventional corn/soybean crop rotation that they probably are accustomed to. While budgets for organic corn or soybean production alone normally show a profit advantage over conventionally produced corn and soybean crops, an organic producer must consider the implications of an entire rotation to fully explore the true profitability of going organic. Other crops in the extended organic rotation may not be as profitable or more difficult to market.

In the majority of organic crop rotations, forage crops are utilized to build the soil and break insect and disease cycles. To maximize the profitability of these crops many producers will include livestock in the farm system. Although large-scale local markets for organic livestock may not exist, direct marketing to local customers has proven to be a lucrative option when sufficient time is devoted to marketing efforts.

The following web sites provide budget and pricing information for a variety of organic row crops and livestock options.

http://web.aces.uiuc.edu/value/

http://www.aces.uiuc.edu/~asap/research/stew_farm/Apependix-rep-02.html#Production%20Buds,%20Conv

http://www.kansasruralcenter.org/publications/Organic%20cropping.pdf

http://www.aec.msu.edu/agecon/aecreports/budgets01.htm

http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~farmmgmt/ne-budgets/organic.html

http://www.ext.nodak.edu/extpubs/agecon/ecguides/2003org.pdf

http://www.newfarm.org/

http://www.dakotabeefcompany.com/about.html

http://www.nimanranch.com

6. Can organic row cropping be profitable without having livestock as a part of the operation?
Yes, however the majority of organic row crop producers do raise some livestock. Livestock can help the farmer to maximize profits on acreage where forage crops are grown and also provide an outlet for grain that does not meet food grade standards. Marketing this grain “on the hoof” as organic livestock can be a better option than selling at discount prices or on the conventional commodity market in a worse case scenario. Livestock manure is also a valuable production input to the organic system. Most experts would argue that it just makes sense to include livestock production as a part of about any organic row cropping system. Budget information for organic livestock production can be accessed through several of the websites listed in #5.

7. If forage crops are a necessary part of the organic rotation, is there a marketing option available for organic livestock other than developing direct marketing channels?
Markets other than direct marketing channels are available for organic livestock. Many times however, these markets are not in close proximity to the farm so transportation may be an issue for many producers. Marketing outlets and their standards should be identified and understood in the early stages of the planning process.

http://www.newfarm.org

http://www.dakotabeefcompany.com/about.html

http://www.nimanranch.com

8. If we are dealing with rented land, how will the organic system impact my landlord? And most importantly, how will that impact me?
The landlord is not impacted in any way, other than needing to sign a prior land use affidavit verifying the land is certifiable (three years no prohibited substances). The renter should be in charge of the management of the organic land (at least) during the year that organic certification is requested by them. As in any rental arrangement, the renter should communicate with the landlord about organic standards concerning adjacent land use, e.g., buffer strips, etc.

9. Can I farm some of my farm organic and some conventional or do I have to convert all of it?
Under the National Organic Program, you can grow both organic and non-organic on the same farm, as long as there is strict segregation and documentation that planters, tillage, fertilizer applications, sprayers, tillage, cultivation, harvest, transportation and storage equipment would not contaminate the organic land. Organic fields must have distinct boundaries. For example, if you used a planter that had previously planted treated seed, you would need to document that the seed boxes had been cleaned, how they had been cleaned etc. before you used untreated seed in them for the organic land. If the tractor or planter has tanks, these would need to be documented and be empty before that equipment is used on organic land. If you want to use a sprayer to apply organically approved substances (such as some types of fish emulsion), you would need to clean an old sprayer and then dedicate to only organic use, or buy a new sprayer.

If you plan to sell your crops overseas, you might choose to be certified to the NOP and to other international standards (IFOAM, EU—Europe, JAS—Japan). Some of these additional international standards do want the entire farm to eventually convert to 100 percent organic production. If your crops are produced, sold and consumed in the United States, there is no mandate to convert your entire farm to organic.

10. What about drift from non-organic neighbors?
The use of genetically engineered organisms or their products are prohibited in organic production. However, organic crops can become contaminated through genetically modified organism (GMO) pollen drift. GMO drift can occur from wind blown cross-pollination, volunteer plants in the field, insect cross-pollination or seed impurities. Organic producers can minimize the risk of GMO contamination in several ways.

First, familiarize yourself with the Organic regulations pertaining to GMO’s. Know your neighbors and what crops they will be planting in their fields. Sometimes coordinating with other growers on what crop will be planted in a field, planting dates or hybrid maturity can help minimize cross contamination. Establish physical barriers such as windbreaks. Verify with the seed company that the seed you are using is non-GMO.

Follow-up by having the seed tested to confirm that there is no contamination. Clean your equipment, trucks, etc. regularly and maintain records. Make certain that custom operators and hired trucks know that the field is organic and that it must also be non-GMO. Have your crop tested at harvest to verify that there was no GMO drift. Communicate with your buyers regarding their testing procedures and tolerance levels to minimize crop rejection.

Resources to consider
10 Strategies to Minimize Risks of GMO Contamination
http://newfarm.org/features/0802/strategies.shtml

Strategies for the coexistence of FMO, Non-GMO and Organic Crop Production
http://www.biotech.iastate.edu/publications/IFAFS/Walt_coexistence.html

Are individual certifiers allowed to set maximum tolerances for unintentional FMO contamination?
http://newfarm.org/certification/0803/answers.shtml

FMO Survey of Organic Farmers
http://www.newfarm.org/news/050103/0520/gmosurvey.shtml

Labs that do testing
http://www.omri.org/OMRI_GMO_labs.html

Are individual certifiers allowed by the NOP to set maximum tolerances for unintentional GMO contamination? http://newfarm.org/certification/certification_archives.shtml

Fact Sheet on Transgenic Contamination and Seeds
http://www.npsas.org/GMOFactSheet.html

back to top

Enhancing beneficial insects with native plants

For many years, entomologists have recommended conserving insect predators, parasites and pollinators around the farm or garden to help suppress pests and increase crop yields. But what can you do to promote these beneficial insects? MSU research is investigating the role that native plants may play in helping to enhance the abundance and performance of these helpful arthropods.

Many beneficial predators and parasites (AKA natural enemies) and all pollinators rely on plant nectar and pollen to help sustain them. In addition to these food sources, plants can also provide needed alternative prey and shelter from adverse environmental conditions. For example, one important parasite of the European corn borer in Michigan, the wasp Eriborus terebrans, will live for over 14 days in corn fields if provided with a nectar substitute, but only two days if sugar is denied. Further research indicated that these food resources were typically not present in Michigan cornfields but that wasps needed to travel to field edges to find them. Survival of E. terebrans was even greater if it could find flowering plants in hedgerow and woodlot edges where temperatures were moderated.

Similar observations have been repeated in various cropping systems with many different types of natural enemies. This has resulted in recommendations for habitat management that include maintaining or planting species that provide floral resources in or near crop fields, orchards and vineyards. One curious fact about these recommendations is that the plants most commonly cited for this purpose, such as buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum), sweet alyssum (Lobularia maritima), faba bean (Vicia faba), dill (Anethum graveolus) and coriander (Coriandrum sativum) are all annuals and none are native to the United States. We were interested in learning if native Michigan perennial plants could provide similar resources. Furthermore, we wanted to determine if a succession of flowering species could be found that provide floral resources over much of the growing season.

We selected 46 native Michigan plants based on their reported bloom period and ability to survive in agricultural habitats. All of the species selected historically grew in prairie or savanna habitats (scattered trees with an understory of prairie species). Native species were established as plug or 1qt size plants in the fall of 2003 and contrasted to the non-native annuals planted as seed the following spring. During the 2004 growing season, we counted the number of open flowers at each plant species weekly to determine bloom order and time of peak bloom. We also collected, counted and identified natural enemy insects at each plant species weekly during peak bloom.

Results from 2004 showed that plant bloom periods do overlap, which means that we can pick a subset of the most attractive plant species and still provide nectar and pollen to natural enemies during the entire summer. During the early season (May through mid-June), the native cow parsnip (Heracleum maximum) attracted three times more natural enemies than the next most attractive plant, the non-native sweet alyssum. Other attractive native plants blooming in May were Virginia strawberry (Fragaria virginiana) and round-leaved ragwort (Senecio obovatus). During the mid-season (July through mid-August) the non-native faba bean, buckwheat and coriander were the most attractive plants, followed by the natives yellow giant hyssop (Agastache nepetoides) and hoary vervain (Verbena stricta). During the late season (mid-August through September), the native boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum) was more attractive than any plant, followed by sweet alyssum and the natives: New England aster (Aster novae-angliae), Riddell’s goldenrod (Solidago riddellii) and smooth aster (Aster laevis). The total number of natural enemies in a sample increased dramatically throughout the growing season. During the early season, up to 12 natural enemies were collected per sample, while during the mid-season we collected up to 33 and in the late season up to 83 natural enemies per 30 second sample, respectively.

The first full growing season for these perennial plants was 2004. Already in 2005 we are seeing that many species are far more robust and are producing greater floral area than in 2004. As these species mature, it is likely that they may compare even more favorably to the non-native annuals.

While this research is just beginning, we have found several Michigan native plants that are very attractive to natural enemies and show promise for habitat management. On-farm demonstration/research has been initiated to determine if these plants can be reliably established as strips in crop fields and if this translates into improved pest management. An additional benefit of this approach is that while formerly common, many of these prairie and savanna species have almost completely disappeared from our agricultural landscapes. If proven effective, we may once again enjoy the subtle beauty of these native Michigan plants in our agricultural landscapes.

For more information

back to top

Here is another aphid update from around the region, compiled by MSU entomologist  Christina DiFonzo from emails from various states. She posted this information on June 26 through other resources.

Other infestations
Aphids are now reported in TN, Ontario & Quebec (New Ag Network editor's note: South Dakota State U's insect ecologist/soybean entomologist Kelley Tilmon reports aphids now in South Dakota. See report below.).  Add this to the list that includes: OH, NY  IN, IA, IL, MI, MN & WI.  Most states/provinces report scattered fields with aphids, some plants w/i fields with "relatively high" numbers.

South Dakota (Kelley Tilmon)
We found soybean aphid for the first time yesterday (June 22) in South Dakota in the Brookings area.  On 400 plants, we found singleton aphids on two plants and a small colony on a third.

Michigan:  (Chris DiFonzo)
An update to the June 17th updated recommendation.  Aphid populations in some fields continue to grow, while other areas still lack aphids (this is a function of buckthorn).  Also, fields within the same area may have many or no aphids, depending not so much on date of planting, but on date of emergence - there are fields planted on the same day, some heavily infested and others barely infested.  Fields that emerged in mid to late May are infested, while fields with delayed emergence apparently missed the aphid flight from buckthorn.  Thus we see conventionally planted fields next to a no-till field with a lot of residue. The conventionally planted field will be infested, while the no-till field has few aphids.  So, if pressed for time, scout fields that EMERGED first for SBA.   

However, within the next 2 weeks, expect flight of winged aphids from infested fields. I am already finding aphids with wing buds on plants with 100-200 aphids on the growing point.  I predict the largest of these aphids will be winged by the middle of next week. These aphids will then disperse across the landscape, and some will end up in fields that previously were not infested.  We have 3 suction traps going in Michigan (KBS, MSU, Bean & Beet Farm), and the samples will be processed by Dave Voegtlin at the Illinois Natural History Survey.  We should be able to track the timing of these flights.

Indiana  (Bob ONeill)
Our survey of 9 IN fields have now found SBA in 6 fields. Plants with aphids range from 5-30%.  Aphid numbers range from 1-78.  A few alates have been found. All these figures are a significant increase from last week's samples.

Ontario (Tracey Baute)
Ontario is also starting to see populations of SBA in soybean fields as of last week: very small pockets of 20-50 per plant on only a few plants in each field.  This is certainly not early for us as we have found them at the beginning of June in the past. If you are interested in keeping track of what is going on in Ontario, feel free to visit our CropPest newsletter where I put updates each week. The link is: www.omaf.gov.on.ca/croppest --Tracey Baute Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food.

Quebec (Michel Roy)
I just received a phone call from the Saint-Hyacinthe area (a town between Montreal and Quebec City), a big soybean growing area on the south shore. There were up to 25 aphids on some plants. This soybean field was seeded on May 10 and was at V3 stage.

Kentucky (Doug Johnson)
Dr. Lee Townsend has informed me that he has made a positive identification of soybean aphid on soybean from Estill Co., KY on June 22, 2005.  The aphids were in very low numbers but on about 75% of the plants. It might seem odd that our first discovery of the year would come from a county on the eastern edge of the soybean production area but there may be a very good reason for this.  You may remember that the reason that we do not have as much trouble with soybean aphid as the north central states is our lack of an overwintering host.  However, we have always know that there were small numbers of the overwintering host scattered about the state.  Perhaps this is a case where the overwintering host meets soybean production in Kentucky.

Minnesota (Dave Ragsdale)
We finished counting aphids in plots Monday morning (June 20) and will do another count on June 27.  It will be very interesting to see how soybean aphids fared on V3 soybean following a 2" rainfall in 30 minutes.  This story has been repeated throughout much of Southern MN.  Late last week (June 16) the Ragsdale lab surveyed 41 fields in 21 Southeast MN counties.  Aphids were found in 29 of the 41 fields (70%).  The highest density observed to date is 75 aphids/plant (this week in a research plot) but the mean density in these 29 infested fields was less than 1 aphid/plant. I believe the MN Dept of Ag did a survey of the same area in Southeast MN on Monday June 13 and reported only 7 of 27 fields (26%) infested. One field (in SW MN) may need treatment in a week.  Another consultant observed a field in Cottonwood County with most of the plants with aphids and a few plants with up to 150 aphids. Large numbers of alates were present.

Wisconsin (Eileen Cullen)
As of today, June 14, West Madison soybean cultivar aphid/virus experiment, nearly all are infested, range 0.20 to 36.4 per plant -as of  June 10.  Per plant high counts of 152 per plant and 160 per plant in our sample last week at West Madison (averages still below 50 per plant as of June 10).  Our sample at Arlington (June 13) was less intensely populated. 23 of 24 plots counted as infested with a range of 0.15 to 6.35 per plant. Notable commercial field reports from UWEX county agents and a couple of consultants in So./SE Wisconsin have reported field means of 20-30 per plant on V2-V3 beans. ...one plant at 150 per plant from a Jefferson Co. To date no reports of 80% field infestation at 250 aphids per plant, but there is potential for this to occur relatively soon under the right conditions in our high pockets.  Southern WI is getting rain this week, WI not under the drier conditions.

back to top

Reports from organic growers

Indiana
South Central Indiana – Dale Rhoads
Every rain this spring but one has been hard and heavy. This has caused a series of ups and downs in moisture. The past two weeks have been on the dry side. We are doing consistent, but not yet heavy, watering with everything but sweet corn. All new plantings are watered on a consistent basis to ensure germination and growth of juvenile plants. Temperatures started out very hot, highs in the 90s, then moderate—a nice cool phase of 60-80 degrees, and now starting to warm back up now. We put shade cloths over salad greens this week. Chard is starting to get leaf spots and go down in quality. I’m trying weekly applications of copper hydroxide.

Currently harvesting salad greens, cilantro, kales, chard and baby squash. Finishing up with head lettuce this week. Spinach is gone now. We have been tying up tomato plants, weeding parsley plantings, watering, mulching, tilling and preparing bed for baby lettuce succession, killing weeds in sweet corn and weeding salad greens. Some insects are starting to show on lacinado kale, curly is staying worm-free from beneficial wasps. Potatoes have been treated with pry/surround/rotenone for potato bugs successfully.

I’ll be doing much of the same in the next two weeks. Still in the wrapping-up-spring and getting-into-summer phase. Doing a little mowing around.

Fruit trees
No sign of stink bug this year yet on A. pears and so have not been keeping Surround on them, but it’s ready to go at first sign. Second generation of PC is hitting the plums this week. It is obvious that cultural practices under these plums would benefit in decreasing numbers of PC as first year fruiting trees nearby have sting free fruits. Sweet cherries for home use have been harvested with one more variety to ripen. Several varieties of plum are comparatively PC clean—that makes no sense! Apples starting to fill—currently golf ball sized. June drop occurring on all fruits.

Illinois
Northern Illinois – Dave Campbell
We’ve had only one-quarter inch of rain (that includes a few sprinkle episodes) since May 19. Every month this year since January we’ve received below normal precipitation. Crops are showing some stress, but not as much as my conventional neighbors, whose row crops were planted earlier. My last field of soybeans has not been planted due to extreme dryness, along with clods due to spring plowing of this field, which is partly clay. Baling small amounts of first cutting hay has just been completed. Most of this hay was harvested off my waterways. First cutting hay across northern Illinois has yielded well and is also of good quality. It has been ideal hay-making weather. No need to listen to the forecast. Cultivating corn for the second time, cultivating beans for the first time and hoeing thistles out of oats fields. In the next two weeks, I will hopefully plant the last field of soybeans soon (if we receive a decent rain). Otherwise, I will plant this field to buckwheat. Mowing and hand-cutting thistles around farmstead. Will cultivate corn for the third and final time and will cultivate beans for the second time. Plan to field-cultivate my Canada thistle experimental field to destroy another flush of thistles.

Question: Was wondering if others were going to take any preventative measures in regards to addressing potential Asian rust concerns in soybeans?

Iowa
Northwest Iowa – Paul Mugge
We finally got a week with no rain and hot temperatures. It allowed me to cultivate the corn for the first time and I’ve gotten most of the beans done. I will try to finish cultivating the beans today. I have waterways to mow and a little liquid manure to sidedress on the corn before it gets too big. In the next two weeks I will need to ridge the corn as it is now growing very fast since it warmed up. I also need to re-cultivate the beans. The weeds were so big that I didn’t get all of them the first time. I have to bale waterways and grass headlands. I have pigs to move and a hoop hoghouse to clean out.

Question: Is there any cover crop that I can seed after my fall triticale (harvested in mid-July) to get significant nitrogen production from in a couple months and that will start reliably in mid-summer? Does anyone know about sunn hemp (crotolaria juncea), cowpeas, black eye peas, or sesbania?

back to top