Small Grains Management Field Day

Transcription

1 Small Grains Management Field Day An Educational Program of the Integrated Field Crop, Soil, and Pest Management Program Work Team; Cornell Cooperative Extension; the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station; and Cornell University Sections of Soil and Crop Sciences, Plant Breeding and Genetics, and Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology. Robert Musgrave Research Farm Cornell University Aurora, NY June 7, 2018

2

3 Agenda 1 Sign-in, name tags, and refreshments (Leon Field Laboratory) 9:30 am **Remember to sign CCA CEU sheet prior to start of program 2 Welcome and introductions; walk to wheat plots in Field C 10:00 am Crop development and management overview, winter wheat in 10:15 am transition to organic crop rotations, Bill Cox pp New herbicide options, 10:35 am Mike Stanyard Walk to wheat and barley plots in Field E 10:45 am 5 Integrated disease management in wheat, oat, and malting barley 10:50 am Gary Bergstrom pp Small grain breeding, varieties, and availability of seed 11:05 am David Benscher and Phil Atkins pp Walk to Leon Lab 11:20 am 7 Progress on malting barley in New York, 11:25 am Various speakers pp Perennial rye for New York 11:40 am Matt Ryan, Eugene Law, Sandra Wayman pp Small grains crop insurance options 11:50 am Daniel Welch pp Updates and comments from attendees 12:00 pm Adjourn 12:20 pm

4 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 2 CLIMATE AND WHEAT YIELDS -WESTERN/CENTRAL NY: APRIL MAY JUNE YIELD TEMP. PRECIP. TEMP. PRECIP. TEMP. PRECIP. bu/acre

5 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts CLIMATE AND WHEAT YIELDS -WESTERN/CENTRAL NY: APRIL MAY JUNE YIELD TEMP. PRECIP. TEMP. PRECIP. TEMP. PRECIP. bu/acre ???

6 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 4 Crop Production Organic compared with conventional wheat once again has more rapid emergence, greater early-season plant densities, and fewer fall weeds when following soybean in no-till conditions Bill Cox 1, Eric Sandsted 1, and Jeff Stayton 2 1 Soil and Crop Sciences Section - School of Integrative Plant Science, 2 Cornell University Agriculture Experiment Station We initiated a 3-year study at the Aurora Research Farm in 2015 to compare different sequences of the corn, soybean, and wheat/red clover rotation in conventional and organic cropping systems under recommended and high input management during the 36-month transition period ( ) from conventional to an organic cropping system. This article will focus on days to emergence, early plant densities, and fall weed densities of wheat in the fall of in both organic input treatments. We also broadcast Kreher s composted manure to provide ~60 lbs. of actual N /acre (assuming 50% available N from the composted manure) in the high input treatment in the organic cropping system. In addition, we also added Sabrex, an organic seed treatment with Tricoderma strains, to the seed hopper of 25R46 in the high input treatment in the organic cropping system. Finally, we also applied Harmony Extra (~0.75 oz. /acre) to the high input conventional treatment at the early tillering stage (GS 2-October 27) for control of winter perennials (dandelion in particular). Organic wheat on the right (two 10-foot passes) was planted at 1.2 M seeds/acre, the same rate as the conventional wheat in the left. The variety is the same (P25R46) in both cropping systems but the conventional wheat on the left received a fungicide-insecticide seed treatment, whereas the organic wheat on the right received no seed treatment. Soybeans were harvested on September 26. We notilled wheat into the soybean stubble on the following day, September 27, because of the paucity of winter annual and winter perennial weeds. We used a John Deere 1590 No-Till Grain Drill to plant the treated (insecticide/fungicide seed treatment) soft red wheat variety, Pioneer 25R46, in the conventional cropping system; and the untreated 25R46 in the organic cropping system at two seeding rates, ~1.2 million seeds/acre (recommended input) and ~1.7 million seeds/acre (high input treatment). Soil conditions were dry so we planted ~2.0 inches deep to get into moisture. We applied about 200 lbs. /acre of as a starter fertilizer to conventional wheat in both input treatments. In the organic cropping system, we applied the maximum amount of Kreher s composted manure (5-4-3 analysis) that would flow through the drill, or about 100 lbs. of material/acre, as a starter fertilizer We estimated plant emergence (>50% emergence) on October 6 and 7. We estimated plant densities on October 13 by counting all the plants in the four middle rows along a 1-m long meter stick in five different regions in the 100 foot long plots. We estimated weed densities on October 28 by counting all the visible winter weeds (there were a few summer annuals but numbers were low) along the entire 100 foot plot in the immediate 8 rows (on the way up) and the more distant 8 rows (on the way back). We also noted the dominant weeds in the plots (95% or more of the winter weeds were dandelions). Organic compared to conventional wheat emerged 1.0 to 1.75 days earlier, had much better stands 2 weeks after planting, and fewer weeds 5 weeks after planting (Table 1), similar to our 2015 results ( edu/whatscroppingup/2015/11/23/wheat-emergenceearly-plant-populations-and-weed-densities-followingsoybeans-in-conventional-and-organic-croppingsystems/). The experimental site received only 1.48 inches of precipitation in August and 2.55 inches in September so soil conditions were generally dry after soybean harvest. More specific to planting time, only 0.18 inches of precipitation were recorded in the 10- day period before planting to the 10-day period after planting. Dry soil conditions, the 2-inch planting depth, and the considerable soybean stubble (55-60 bushel/ acre crop) undoubtedly contributed to the relatively long emergence time (8 to 10 days), despite warm conditions for the 8 to 10 days after planting (58.6 vs OF, average since 1980). As in 2015 wheat, we speculate that the seed treatment in the conventional What s Cropping Up? Vol. 28 No. 1 Pg. 12

7 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Crop Production Table 1. Days to emergence, wheat densities at the 1-shoot stage (GS 1-October 7), and weed densities at the early tillering stage (GS2-October 27) of treated (insecticide/fungicide) 25R46, a soft red winter wheat variety, in the conventional cropping system and untreated 25R46 in the organic cropping system, planted on September 27 at 1.2 million seeds/ acre in the recommended input treatment and 1.7 million seeds/acre in the high input treatment. In addition, 25R46 in the high input treatment in the organic cropping system was treated with Sabrex, an organic seed treatment, in the seed hopper at planting time. wheat made the seed somewhat more impermeable to soil water imbibition under the relatively dry soil conditions, resulting in delayed emergence in the conventional cropping system by 1 to 1.75 days. We also noted more rapid emergence for organic compared with conventional corn in 2016 under very dry soil conditions. It would be interesting to test if seed treatment actually delays emergence of crops under dry soil conditions because of the consistency of observations across crops and dry years at planting in our study. O r g a n i c compared to conventional wheat had greater plant densities (37%) 2 weeks after planting in part What s Cropping Up? Vol. 28 No. 1 Pg. 13

8 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 6 Crop Production because of the delayed emergence of conventional wheat (Table 1). More conventional wheat emerged after our observations but we could not do another wheat density count because the earlier emerging wheat began to initiate tillers, which made counting too problematic. Another factor that may have influenced our results is that seed size differed between the untreated 25R46 (~11,000 seeds/lb.) and the treated 25R46 (~12,000 seeds/lb.) so drill settings were not consistent between the two plantings. Organic compared with conventional wheat also had 10 to 25% greater early plant densities 2 weeks after planting in the fall of Organic and conventional wheat, however, had a similar number of spikes or heads/m 2 at harvest (~525 heads/m 2 ) in 2016 so conventional wheat compensated for the lower plant densities with increased tillering, contributing in part to its 7.5% greater yield ( whatscroppingup/2016/09/26/organic-wheat-lookedgreat-but-yielded-7-5-less-than-conventional-wheatin /). early spring, and add an additional ~50 lbs. of N/acre with Kreher s to the high input treatment at the end of tillering, as we did in the spring of The organic wheat, however, had much lower kernel N (1.66% N) compared with conventional wheat (2.03% N) at harvest in 2016, indicating that lack of available soil N in organic wheat probably contributed to the 7.5% lower yield in Wheat fertility and not stand establishment nor weed control appears to be the major challenge to successful organic wheat production under conditions in our study. Once again, organic compared with conventional wheat generally had fewer weed densities, especially in the field in which corn was the 2014 crop (Table 1). Weed densities, however, were very low so yields will probably not be compromised except in a couple of the plots in the conventional cropping system under recommended inputs (no herbicide) when corn was the 2014 crop. Dandelion was the dominant weed specie in all plots. Apparently, the last cultivation of soybean on July 20 removed existing or late-emerging dandelions, whereas the observed weeds in the conventional cropping system apparently emerged after the June 21 Roundup application. In conclusion, organic compared with conventional wheat, no-tilled into soybean stubble, once again got off to a better start in the fall of 2017, as it did in the fall of Despite the better fall start in 2015, organic wheat yielded 7.5% lower. We could only apply ~100 lbs. /acre of Kreher s compost to the organic wheat through the drill at planting in both years, due to flow problems of the composted manure, which may be a yield constraint (very little P or K applied). We will topdress the recommended input treatment with ~75 lbs. N/acre of Kreher s material at green-up time in the What s Cropping Up? Vol. 28 No. 1 Pg. 14

9 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Field Crop Production No-Till Organic Wheat Continues to Have Low Weed Densities in Early Spring (April 9) at the Tillering Stage (GS 2-3) Bill Cox and Eric Sandsted, Soil and Crop Sciences Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University We initiated a 4-year study at the Aurora Research Farm in 2015 to compare the corn-soybean-wheat/ red clover rotation in different sequences under conventional and organic cropping systems during and after the transition to an organic cropping system. This article will discuss weed densities in conventional and organic wheat. We provided the management inputs for wheat in both cropping systems under high and recommended input treatments in a previous article ( edu/whatscroppingup/2017/12/01/organic-comparedwith-conventional-wheat-once-again-has-more-rapidemergence-greater-early-season-plant-densitiesand-fewer-fall-weeds-when-following-soybean-in-notill-conditions/), but we will briefly review them. We used a John Deere 1590 No-Till Grain Drill to plant a treated (insecticide/fungicide seed treatment) Pioneer soft red wheat variety, 25R46, in the conventional cropping system; and an untreated 25R46, in the organic cropping system on September 27 at two seeding rates, ~1.2 million seeds/acre (recommended management treatment for a September planting date) and ~1.7 million seeds/acre (high input treatment). The wheat was no-tilled in both cropping systems because of the paucity of visible weeds after soybean harvest (9/23). We also applied Harmony Extra (~0.75 oz/acre on 10/27) to the high input conventional treatment at the tiller initiation stage (GS 2-October 27) for control of winter annuals (chickweed, henbit, and common mallow) and winter perennials (dandelion). We also reported in the above article that we walked along the entire wheat plot (~100 feet X 10 feet) to count all the weeds on 10/27 just prior to the Harmony Extra application to the high input conventional wheat plots. As in 2015, organic compared with conventional wheat generally had lower weed densities in the fall, especially in the field in which corn was the 2014 crop (Table 1). Weed densities, however, were very low so we speculated that yields would probably not be compromised. Dandelion was the dominant weed specie in the fall in all plots. Apparently, the last cultivation of soybean on July 20 removed existing or late-emerging dandelions, whereas the observed weeds in the conventional cropping system apparently What s Cropping Up? Vol. 28 No. 2 Pg. 36 Fig. 1. From left to right: Organic wheat with high inputs, organic wheat with recommended inputs, 10 foot border, conventional wheat with recommended inputs, and conventional wheat with high inputs. emerged after the June 21 Roundup application. Weather conditions were extremely warm in October (6 degrees above normal) so wheat (and weeds) got off to an excellent start. Ensuing weather conditions, however, were much colder than normal with November, December, January, March, and April averaging more than 2.5 degrees below normal. In fact, March 1-April 30, was the 3 rd coldest period on record at the Aurora Research Farm (34.2 average temperature) ( runclimod/cb248220aa6e4a42/10/), only eclipsed by the infamous 1975 and 1978 early springs (average temperatures of 34.1 ). Consequently, winter wheat greened up about 2 weeks later than normal in It is not clear on how the cold winter and early spring conditions affected winter annual and perennial weed development but probably it was delayed. Early spring weed densities were taken at the GS2-3 stage on 04/10, about 10 days after green-up, again by counting all the weeds along the entire length of the plots. Dominant weeds included dandelion, common mallow, and chickweed. As in the fall, weed densities were extremely low and probably would have no significant effects on yield (Table 1). There was a cropping system by input interaction in the field with corn

10 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 8 Field Crop Production as the 2014 crop because of very low weed densities in conventional wheat with high inputs (Harmony Extra application) and higher weed densities in organic wheat with high inputs (seeding rates and N rates). High input management in organic wheat did not reduce weed densities, which agrees with the 2016 data ( no-till-organic-wheat-continues-to-have-low-weeddensities-in-early-spring-march-31-at-the-tilleringstage-gs-2-3/). Some organic growers believe that wheat should be planted at a higher seeding rate to reduce weed densities, but our study does not support that speculation. Our data does support the idea that if weed densities are low in organic soybean (<2.5 weeds/ m2), organic wheat growers can no-till wheat into soybean stubble without fear of high weed densities. More research, however, should be conducted to compare no-till and conventional tillage organic wheat. In conclusion, no-till organic and conventional wheat had very low spring weed densities about 10 days after green-up. The cool conditions in April prevented rapid shading by the wheat canopy so perhaps the weeds that were present in early April may interfere with wheat yields, but impacts should be minimal because of the low densities. On April 15, organic wheat looked as good as conventional wheat (picture). It remains to be seen, however, if Kreher s composted chicken manure, the N source for organic wheat (60 lbs. /acre of actual N pre-plant +50 lbs. /acre of actual N on 3/21 in high input and the single 75 lbs. /acre of actual N as a spring application in recommended management) can provide enough available N for maximum yield in organic wheat. What s Cropping Up? Vol. 28 No. 2 Pg. 37

11 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Crop Production Organic Wheat Looked Great but Yielded 7.5% Less Than Conventional Wheat in 2015/2016 Bill Cox 1, Eric Sandsted 1, Jeff Stayton 2 and Wes Baum 2 1 Soil and Crop Sciences Section School of Integrated Plant Science, Cornell University; 2 Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station - Musgrave Research Farm on September 24, the day after soybean harvest. We applied about 200 lbs. /acre of as a starter fertilizer to wheat in both conventional treatments. We also applied Harmony Extra (~0.75 oz. /acre) to the high input conventional treatment at the GS 2 stage (November 5) for control of winter perennials (dandelion in particular). The lower leaves of wheat were senescing in mid-june, despite more N being applied to high input conventional wheat (right), because of exceedingly dry conditions at Aurora and the droughty soil of the experimental area. We initiated a 3-year study at the Aurora Research Farm in 2015 to compare the corn, soybean, and wheat/red clover rotation with different crop sequences in conventional and organic cropping systems during the 3-year transition period ( ) to an organic cropping system. Three of the many objectives of the study are to determine 1) the best entry or 1 st year crop (2015) to plant during the transition, 2) the best crop sequence during the 3-year transition (soybean-wheat/red clover-corn, corn-soybean, wheat/red clover, or plowed in red clover-cornsoybean) and 3) do corn, soybean, and wheat respond similarly to management inputs (high and recommended) in conventional and organic cropping systems? This article will compare the agronomic performance of organic wheat with conventional wheat following soybean in a soybean-wheat/red clover-corn sequence during the second year of the transition from conventional to an organic cropping system. In both organic treatments, we applied the maximum amount of Kreher s composted chicken manure (5-4-3 analysis), as a starter fertilizer, that would flow through the drill, or about 150 lbs. of material/acre. We also broadcast Kreher s composted manure to provide ~60 lbs. of actual N /acre (assuming 50% available N from the composted manure) in the high input treatment in the organic cropping system immediately after planting. In addition, we also added Sabrex, an organic seed treatment with Tricoderma strains, to the seed hopper of 25R46 in the high input treatment in the organic cropping system. We frost-seeded red clover into all the wheat treatments on March 9 to provide N to the subsequent We used a John Deere 1590 No-Till Grain Drill (7.5 inch spacing between drills) to plant the treated (insecticide/fungicide seed treatment) Pioneer soft red wheat variety, 25R46, in the conventional cropping system; and the untreated 25R46, in the organic cropping system at two seeding rates, ~1.2 million seeds/acre (recommended input) and ~1.6 million seeds/acre (high input treatment) What s Cropping Up? Vol. 26. No. 5 Pg. 80

12 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 10 Crop Production corn crop in We applied ~60 lbs. of actual N/ acre (33-0-0, ammonium nitrate) in the recommended input treatment in the conventional cropping system on March 21, about a week after green-up. In the high input conventional treatment, we applied ~45 lbs. of actual N/acre (33-0-0) on March 21 and then applied another 45 lbs. of actual N/acre on April 25 about a week before the jointing stage (GS 6). We also applied a fungicide (Prosaro) to the high input treatment on May 31. We applied Kreher s composted chicken manure to provide 75 lbs. of available N/acre in the recommended input treatment on March 21. Also, we applied an additional 55 lbs. of available N/acre to the high input treatment in the organic cropping system on March 21. All the plots were harvested with an Almaco plot combine on July 6. We collected a 500 gram from each plot to determine kernel moisture and test weight in the laboratory. We presented data on wheat emergence as well as wheat densities and weed densities in the fall ( blogs.cornell.edu/whatscroppingup/2015/11/23/ wheat-emergence-early-plant-populations-andweed-densities-following-soybeans-in-conventionaland-organic-cropping-systems/) and weed densities in the early spring ( whatscroppingup/2016/04/05/no-till-organic-wheatcontinues-to-have-low-weed-densities-in-early-springmarch-31-at-the-tillering-stage-gs-2-3/) in previous news articles. Briefly, organic wheat emerged about 1 day earlier, had ~10% more plants/acre, and fewer weeds in the fall. In the spring, organic wheat also had lower weed densities when compared with the recommended input treatment in conventional wheat (no herbicide) and the same weed density as the high input conventional wheat (received an herbicide after fall weed counts) in the spring (Table 1). Consequently, organic compared with conventional wheat had a similar or higher yield potential in early April, the beginning the active spring tillering period, based on stand and weed densities. Nevertheless, the 10% greater plant density and lower weed density in organic compared with conventional wheat, especially in the recommended input treatment, did not translate into a yield advantage. In fact, organic wheat yielded ~7.5% lower than conventional wheat (Table 2) when averaged across input treatments (no response to high input treatments in either cropping system). We suspect that the use of an organic N source may have resulted in less available N to the organic wheat crop, although visual symptoms of N deficiency were not observed. We did subsample before harvest (two 1.52 m2 areas/plot) to determine yield components. Organic compared with conventional wheat did have higher spike densities (533 to 509/m 2, respectively) probably because of its higher plant density. Organic wheat, however, had fewer kernels/spike (22.1 vs. 24.5, respectively) and lower kernel weight (311 vs.315 mg, respectively), which indicates that the organic wheat may have been short of N, similar to organic corn in 2015 ( whatscroppingup/2016/03/29/why-did-organiccompared-with-conventional-corn-yield-30-lowerduring-the-first-transition-year/). What s Cropping Up? Vol. 26. No. 5 Pg. 81

13 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Crop Production On the other hand, the recommended input (~75 lbs. of N/acre applied in late March) treatment yielded the same as the high input (~60 lbs. of N/acre in the fall followed by another ~55 lbs. /acre of N in late March) treatment in the organic cropping system. If available N were the limiting factor in organic wheat yields, then we would expect the high input treatment to yield higher because it received more total N (albeit at different timings). We will submit our wheat samples for total kernel N analysis. If total kernel N in organic and conventional wheat is similar, then total N availability may not have resulted in the 7.5% lower yields. Then we would have to explore the idea that perhaps the use of Kreher s composted chicken manure as a starter fertilizer may not have provided adequate P or K to organic wheat. In conclusion, organic wheat, despite not receiving an insecticide/fungicide seed treatment, had better stands than conventional wheat and fewer weeds in both the fall and spring. Organic wheat, however, yielded 7.5% lower than conventional wheat in the second year of the transition from conventional to an organic cropping system. We expect that net returns will also be ~7.5% lower for organic compared with the recommended input conventional treatment because the lower seed costs, associated with no insecticide/fungicide seed treatment, will be offset by the higher costs for N, associated with the cost of Kreher s composted chicken manure vs. ammonium nitrate. Many growers, however, practice high input wheat (high seeding rates, fall herbicide application, split N application, and a fungicide application), which provided no additional yield response to conventional wheat in the dry 2016 growing season. Consequently, organic wheat with recommended inputs will provide a greater return to conventional wheat with high inputs in this study in What s Cropping Up? Vol. 26. No. 5 Pg. 82

14 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 12 Efficacy of fungicides for wheat disease control based on appropriate application timing* New products in 2018 Fungicide(s) Class Active ingredient Product Rate/A (fl. oz) Powdery mildew Stagonospora leaf/glume blotch Septoria leaf blotch Tan spot Stripe rust Leaf rust Stem rust Fusarium head blight 9 Harvest Restriction picoxystrobin 22.5% Aproach SC 6, G VG VG VG E 1 VG VG NL Feekes 10.5 fuoxystrobin 40.3% Evito 480 SC 4, G VG -- VG -- NL Feekes 10.5 and 40 days pyraclostrobin 23.3% Headline SC G VG VG E E 1 E G NL Feekes 10.5 Triazole Strobi-lurin metconazole 8.6% Caramba 0.75 SL VG VG -- VG E E E G 30 days propiconazole 41.8% Tilt 3.6 EC Generics 4.0 VG VG VG VG VG VG VG P Feekes 10.5 prothioconazole 41% Proline 480 SC VG VG VG VG VG VG G 30 days prothioconazole19% tebuconazole 19% Prosaro 421 SC G VG VG VG E E E G 30 days tebuconazole 22.6% trifloxystrobin 22.6% cypraconazole 7.17% picoxystrobin 17.94% Absolute 500 SC G VG VG VG VG VG VG NL Aproach Prima SC 6, VG -- VG VG E VG VG NL 45 days 35 days propiconazole 11.7% azoxystrobin 7.0% Avaris 200 SC 14.0 VG VG VG VG E E VG NL Feekes 10.5 fluoxastrobin 14.8% flutriafol 19.3% fluapyroxad 2.8% pyraclostrobin 18.7% propiconazole 11.7% fluxapyroxad 14.3% pyraclostrobin 28.6 % propiconazole 11.7% azoxystrobin 13.5% Fortix 4, VG VG E VG -- NL Feekes 10.5 and 40 days Nexicor EC 6, G VG VG E E E VG NL Feekes 10.5 Priaxor 4, G VG VG E VG VG G NL Feekes 10.5 Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE Aframe Plus 2.2 SE VG VG VG VG E E VG NL Feekes 10.5 Mixed modes of action 5 prothioconazole 16.0% trifloxystrobin 13.7% prothioconazole 10.8% trifloxystrobin 32.3% benzovindiflupyr 2.9% propiconazole 11.9% azoxystrobin 10.5% Delaro 325 SC G VG VG VG VG VG VG NL Stratego YLD G VG VG VG VG VG VG NL Trivapro SE VG VG VG VG E E VG NL Feekes days 35 days Feekes and 14 days metconazole 7.4% pyraclostrobin 12% TwinLine 1.75 EC G VG VG E E E VG NL Feekes 10.54

15 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts * Adapted for New York by Gary C. Bergstrom from information developed by the USDA-NIFA Committee on Management of Small Grain Cereal Diseases (NCERA-184). This information is provided only as a guide. It is the responsibility of the pesticide applicator by law to read and follow all current label directions. No endorsement is intended for products listed, nor is criticism meant for products not listed. Members or participants in the NCERA-184 committee assume no liability resulting from the use of these products. Efficacy categories: NL=Not Labeled and Not Recommended; P=Poor; F=Fair; G=Good; VG=Very Good; E=Excellent. 1 Efficacy may be significantly reduced if solo strobilurin products are applied after stripe rust infection has occurred. 2 Insufficient data to make statement about efficacy of this product 3 Rates of 5.0 to 5.7 fl oz are labeled only for applications at flowering to suppress Fusarium head blight; Lower rates of fl oz are labeled for applications to control foliar and stem diseases. 4 Aerial application is not allowed in New York. 5 Products with mixed modes of action generally combine triazole and strobilurin active ingredients. Nexicor, Priaxor, and Trivapro include carboxamide active ingredients. 6 This product is not for sale, distribution, or application in Nassau or Suffolk Counties. 7 Aerial application of this product is not allowed within 100 feet of surface waters. 8 Application of this product is not allowed within 100 feet of coastal marsh. 9 Application of products containing strobilurin active ingredients may result in elevated levels of the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol (DON) in grain damaged by head scab.

16 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 14 Fungicides Registered for Control of Important Barley Diseases in New York *Compiled by Gary C. Bergstrom, Cornell University (June 2018) Fungicide(s) Class Active ingredient Product Rate/A (fl. oz) Foliar / stem diseases Powdery mildew Stagonospora blotch Net blotch Spot blotch Scald Rusts (Puccinia spp.) Suppression of Fusarium head blight 1 Rate/A (fl. oz.) picoxystrobin 22.5% Aproach SC 2, Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL fluoxystrobin Evito 480 SC Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL Latest growth stage or days to harvest restriction Aerial application in NYS? Feekes 10.5 Yes, aerial appl. 2 Feekes 10.5 and 40 days No aerial appl. Strobilurin pyraclostrobin 23.3% Headline SC Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL metconazole 8.6% Caramba 0.75 SL Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Good efficacy propiconazole 41.8% Tilt 3.6 EC Generics (early season suppression) Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Poor efficacy Feekes 10.3 Yes, aerial appl days Yes, aerial appl. 45 days Yes, aerial appl. Triazole prothioconazole 41% Proline 480 SC Ö NL Ö Ö Ö Ö Good efficacy prothioconazole19% tebuconazole 19% Prosaro 421 SC Ö NL Ö Ö Ö Ö Good efficacy metconazole 7.4% pyraclostrobin 12% TwinLine 1.75 EC Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL fluxapyroxad 14.3 % pyraclostrobin 28.6% Priaxor 2, Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL propiconazole 11.7% azoxystrobin 7.0% Avaris 200 SC Quilt 200 SC (early season suppression) Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL 32 days Yes, aerial appl. 30 days No aerial appl. Feekes 10.5 No aerial appl. Feekes 10.5 Yes, aerial appl days Yes, aerial appl. Mixed class propiconazole 11.7% azoxystrobin 13.5% benzovindiflupyr 2.9% propiconazole 11.9% azoxystrobin 10.5% Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE Aframe Plus (early season suppression) Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL Trivapro SE Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL 45 days Yes, aerial appl. 45 days No aerial appl.

17 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts prothioconazole 16.0% trifloxystrobin 13.7% Delaro 325 SC Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL 40 days No aerial appl. prothioconazole 10.8% trifloxystrobin 32.3% Stratego YLD 2.3 Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL 35 days No aerial appl. tebuconazole 22.6% trifloxystrobin 22.6% Absolute 500 SC 3.3 Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö Ö NL No aerial appl. * This information is provided as a guide for the convenience of barley producers in New York. Registrations are granted and withdrawn and labels are changed continuously. No endorsement is intended for products listed, nor is criticism meant for products not listed. It is the responsibility of the pesticide applicator by law to read and follow all current label directions and restrictions. A Ö mark indicates that control of a disease is included on the product label whereas NL indicates it is not a labeled use. 35 days 1 Statements of relative efficacy for suppression of Fusarium head blight severity and reduction of contamination of grain by the mycotoxin, deoxynivalenol, are based on consensus research observations by members of the USDA-NIFA Committee on Management of Small Grain Cereals (NCERA-184); members of NCERA-184 assume no liability resulting from use of these products. 2 Aerial application is allowed except within 100 feet of surface waters. 3 This product is not for sale, distribution, or application in Nassau or Suffolk Counties. 4 Application of this product is not allowed within 100 feet of a coastal marsh.

18 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 16 WHEAT (Triticum aestivum, Erie, Otsego, Pioneer 25R25, Pioneer 25R46 ) Fusarium head blight (scab); Fusarium graminearum Stagonospora blotch; Parastagonospora nodorum Septoria blotch; Zymoseptoria tritici Leaf rust; Puccinia triticina Stripe rust; Puccinia striiformis J.A. Cummings, K.L. Myers, G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, and P.J. Stachowski, Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of integrated methods for management of Fusarium head blight and foliar diseases of winter wheat in New York, The trial was conducted at the Musgrave Research Farm in Aurora, NY in a Lima silt loam soil planted with four soft red winter wheat varieties, Erie (moderately susceptible to Fusarium Head Blight (FHB)), Otsego (susceptible to FHB), Pioneer Brand 25R25 (moderately resistant to FHB), and Pioneer Brand 25R46 (moderately resistant to FHB), following soybean harvest on 7 Oct The experiment was set up as a completely randomized block design with a split-plot arrangement, with cultivar as the main plot and the treatments as subplots, randomized in six replicated blocks. Main plots were sown with wheat at lb/a with a 10 ft wide commercial grain drill. Subplots were ft including 15 rows with 7-in. row spacing. The plots were fertilized at planting (200 lb/a of ) and topdressed on 12 Apr (120 lb/a of urea, providing an additional 55.2 lb/a of nitrogen). The first Prosaro or Caramba application was at anthesis (Feekes growth stage, FGS ) on 7 Jun including the surfactant Induce at 0.125% v/v. After the fungicide had dried, plots were spray-inoculated with a conidial suspension of F. graminearum (40,000 conidia/ml) to augment the development of Fusarium head blight (FHB). The second Caramba application occurred seven days after anthesis on 14 Jun including the surfactant Induce at 0.125% v/v. Plots were inoculated with a conidial suspension of F. graminearum (40,000 conidia/ml) after the fungicide had dried. Fungicide treatments and F. graminearum inoculum were applied by a tractor-mounted sprayer with TJ-AI3070 nozzles, 18-in. apart, pressurized at 32 psi, and calibrated to deliver 20 gal/a. Incidence and severity (percent of symptomatic spikelets on symptomatic heads) of FHB in each plot were rated on 28 Jun and used to calculate FHB Index, where FHB index = (FHB severity * FHB incidence)/100. Foliar diseases were rated on 28 Jun as percent severity on flag leaves (average rating for whole plot). Grain was harvested from a 20 5 ft area in each subplot using an Almaco plot combine on 12 Jul. Grain moisture, plot yield, and test weight was recorded. Yield and test weight were adjusted to bu/a and lb/bu, respectively, at 13.5% moisture. Fusarium damaged kernels (FDK) were evaluated post-harvest as a percentage of kernels visibly affected by FHB out of a 100 kernel subsample from each plot. Analysis of deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration (ppm) in grain was conducted in the Mycotoxin Analysis Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN with support from the U.S. Wheat and Barley Research Initiative. Treatment means were calculated, subjected to analysis of variance, and separated by Tukey-Kramer HSD test (P = 0.05). The 2017 growing season resulted in low levels of foliar diseases, FHB and DON. When the results of all cultivars were combined, all fungicide treatments significantly reduced leaf rust and stripe rust. Leaf blotch severity was significantly greatest in the inoculum only plots. All three fungicide treatments significantly reduced FHB and DON as compared with the inoculum only treated plots, and all were below the 2 ppm threshold for acceptable DON concentrations in grain. Test weight was lowest for the inoculum only treatment, but none of the treatments had any significant effect on yield. When the results of all treatments were combined, Pioneer 25R46 had significantly greater leaf and stripe rust than the other cultivars, but also had the lowest leaf blotch. Otsego had significantly greater FHB incidence and index than the other cultivars, but there was no significant difference in DON among the cultivars. Pioneer 25R46 had the greatest test weight, but there was no differentiation of yield among the cultivars. However, when the cultivars were analyzed separately, the fungicide treatments only reduced leaf and stripe rusts for the Pioneer varieties, and leaf blotches were significantly reduced by the fungicides for Erie, Otsego and Pioneer 25R46. FHB incidence and DON was significantly reduced by all fungicide treatments for each cultivar as compared with the inoculum only treatment. Yield was not affected by any of the treatments for each cultivar. Overall, these results indicate that all of these fungicide treatments can significantly reduce foliar diseases, FHB and DON under low FHB pressure, and that Otsego is more susceptible to FHB than the other three cultivars. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF046 Page 1

19 Page 17 Leaf rust (%) z Stripe rust (%) Leaf blotch (%) FHB Incidence (%) FHB Severity (%) 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts FHB Index DON (ppm) Test weight (lb/bu) Yield (bu/a) Cultivar, treatment, and amount/a Erie non-treated, non-inoculated control b * 14.3 b 3.7 b 0.5 b 1.0 b Inoculum only a 22.3 a 5.5 a 1.2 a 1.7 a Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz and inoculated FGS b 5.3 c 2.7 b 0.1 c 0.6 bc Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated FGS b 7.3 c 2.8 b 0.2 c 0.7 bc Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl. oz and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated 7 days later b 4.7 c 2.7 b 0.1 c 0.3 c HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS CV (%) Otsego non-treated, non-inoculated control ab 31.3 a 5.2 a 1.7 ab 1.8 b 57.6 bc 59.9 Inoculum only a 39.0 a 5.8 a 2.3 a 3.0 a 57.2 c 59.1 Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz and inoculated FGS c 22.0 b 4.7 ab 1.0 b 0.7 c 58.5 ab 72.2 Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated FGS bc 10.3 c 3.2 bc 0.3 c 0.6 c 58.1 abc 55.7 Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl. oz and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated 7 days later c 8.3 c 2.5 c 0.2 c 0.5 c 58.6 a 62.2 HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS CV (%) Pioneer 25R25 non-treated, non-inoculated control 0.5 a a a 1.4 a Inoculum only 0.8 a a a 1.7 a Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz and inoculated FGS b b b 0.6 b Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated FGS b b b 0.7 b Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated 7 days later 0.1 b b b 0.3 b HSD (P=0.05) 0.41 NS NS 4.07 NS NS NS CV (%) Pioneer 25R46 non-treated, non-inoculated control 0.9 b 0.4 ab 2.3 ab 7.3 ab 1.8 ab 0.2 ab 1.1 bc 59.1 ab 61.4 Inoculum only 2.8 a 0.9 a 3.5 a 10.0 a 3.0 a 0.3 a 2.4 a 58.4 b 60.8 Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz and inoculated FGS c 0.0 b 0.9 c 5.3 bc 2.3 ab 0.1 ab 1.4 b 59.0 ab 65.6 Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated FGS bc 0.0 b 0.9 c 3.3 bc 1.0 b 0.0 b 0.7 cd 59.2 ab 66.4 Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl. oz and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated 7 days later 0.0 c 0.0 b 1.3 bc 2.3 c 1.2 b 0.0 b 0.4 d 59.7 a 70.6 HSD (P=0.05) NS CV (%) Cultivar mean Erie 0.2 b 0.0 b 2.1 ab 10.8 b 3.5 a 0.4 b b 65.7 Otsego 0.1 b 0.0 b 2.7 a 22.2 a 4.3 a 1.1 a c 64.7 Pioneer 25R b 0.0 b 2.8 a 5.1 c 2.2 b 0.1 b d 69.7 Pioneer 25R a 0.3 a 1.8 b 5.7 bc 1.9 b 0.1 b a 68.2 HSD (P=0.05) NS 0.49 NS CV (%) Treatment mean non-treated, non-inoculated control 0.5 b 0.1 ab 2.4 b 15.3 ab 3.3 ab 0.6 ab 1.3 b 58.2 ab 61.2 Inoculum only 1.0 a 0.3 a 3.8 a 19.8 a 4.3 a 1.0 a 2.2 a 57.4 b 64.8 Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz and inoculated FGS b 0.0 b 1.6 c 8.9 bc 2.9 bc 0.3 bc 0.8 c 58.3 a 70.6 Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated FGS b 0.0 b 2.0 bc 5.9 c 2.1 c 0.2 c 0.7 cd 58.0 ab 69.1 Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl. oz and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17.0 fl oz and inoculated 7 days later 0.0 b 0.0 b 1.8 bc 4.8 c 2.1 c 0.1 c 0.4 d 58.7 a 68.4 HSD (P=0.05) NS CV (%) z Column numbers followed by different letters are significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey-Kramer HSD. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF046 Page 2

20 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 18 BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare, Endeavor, KWS Scala, SY Tepee, Wintmalt ) Fusarium head blight (scab); Fusarium graminearum Spot blotch; Bipolaris sorokiniana Net blotch; Pyrenophora teres Scald; Rhynchosporium commune J.A. Cummings, K.L. Myers, G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, and P.J. Stachowski, Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of integrated methods for management of Fusarium head blight and foliar diseases of winter malting barley in New York, The trial was conducted at the Musgrave Research Farm in Aurora, NY in a Lima silt loam soil planted with four 2-row winter malting barley varieties, Endeavor, KWS Scala, SY Tepee, and Wintmalt on 13 Sep The experiment was set up as a completely randomized block design with a split-plot arrangement, with cultivar as the main plot and the fungicide treatments as subplots, randomized in five replicated blocks. Main plots were sown at 100 lb/a with a commercial grain no-till drill into a terminated hay field. Subplots were ft including 15 rows with 7.5-in. row spacing. The plots were fertilized at planting (200 lb/a of ) and topdressed on 12 Apr (60 lb/a of urea, providing an additional 27.6 lb/a of nitrogen). The Wintmalt barley heads emerged three days later than the barley heads of the other three varieties, and therefore the first fungicide application and inoculation for Wintmalt occurred three days after that of the other varieties, and the second Wintmalt applications occurred when the second round of applications occurred for the other three varieties. Fungicides were applied to Endeavor, KWS Scala and SY Tepee plots at head emergence (Feekes growth stage, FGS 10.5) on 20 May and 27 May, and to Wintmalt plots on 23 May and 27 May. Fungicide applications included the surfactant Induce at 0.125% v/v. After the fungicides had dried, plots were spray-inoculated with a conidial suspension of F. graminearum (40,000 conidia/ml) to augment the development of Fusarium head blight (FHB). Fungicide treatments and F. graminearum inoculum were applied by a tractor-mounted sprayer with TJ-AI3070 nozzles, 18-in. apart, pressurized at 32 psi, and calibrated to deliver 20 gal/a. Incidence and severity (percent of symptomatic spikelets on symptomatic heads) of FHB in each plot were rated on 7 Jun and used to calculate FHB Index, where FHB index = (FHB severity * FHB incidence)/100. Primarily spot blotch, caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana, and some net blotch, caused by Pyrenophora teres, were rated collectively as leaf blights on 7 Jun as percent disease severity on flag leaves and one leaf below the flag leaf (average rating for whole plot). Scald, caused by Rhynchosporium commune, was similarly rated on 7 Jun. Grain was harvested from a 20 5 ft area in each subplot using an Almaco plot combine on 11 Jul. Grain moisture, plot yield, and test weight was recorded from all plots. Yield and test weight were adjusted to bu/a and lb/bu, respectively, at 14.5% moisture. Deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration (ppm) in grain was analyzed at the Mycotoxin Analysis Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Treatment means were calculated, subjected to analysis of variance, and separated by Tukey-Kramer HSD test (P = 0.05). The 2017 growing season resulted in moderately low levels of foliar diseases, and moderate concentrations of DON. When the results of all cultivars were combined, all fungicide treatments significantly reduced leaf blights, but only Prosaro significantly reduced scald, as compared with the nontreated control. Prosaro resulted in the greatest test weight, but none of the treatments had any effect on yield. Prosaro was also the only treatment that resulted in significantly lower visual FHB index ratings than all other treatments, but all fungicide treatments significantly reduced DON as compared to the non-treated control. When the results of all treatments were combined, Endeavor had the most severe leaf blights, but the least severe scald. Wintmalt and KWS Scala both had significantly greater levels of scald compared to Endeavor and SY Tepee. SY Tepee had the greatest test weight and yield compared to all other cultivars. According to visual ratings, SY Tepee had the greatest FHB index, but Wintmalt had significantly greater DON than all other varieties. However, when the cultivars were analyzed separately, the FHB index was only differentiated by treatment for SY Tepee, with the Prosaro treatment resulting in significantly lower FHB index than the other treatments. DON was consistently greatest in the non-treated control for each of the individual cultivars. Yield was not affected by any of the treatments for each cultivar. Although there was no differentiation of visual FHB index for Endeavor, KWS Scala or Wintmalt, the DON was greatest for the non-treated control for each of those cultivars. The FHB index did not correlate well with DON for any of the cultivars. This may indicate that visual ratings of FHB incidence and severity for malting barley may not be adequate predictors of DON in the final grain. Overall, these results indicate that all of these fungicide treatments can significantly reduce leaf blights and DON, and that the Prosaro and/or Caramba treatments can reduce DON below the acceptable 1 ppm threshold for Endeavor, KWS Scala, and SY Tepee under moderately-low FHB pressure. These results also indicate that all of these varieties are at least moderately susceptible to FHB, but that Wintmalt is significantly more susceptible to FHB and accumulation of DON than the other varieties. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF045 Page 1

21 Page 19 Leaf blights Scald (%) z (%) FHB Index 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts DON (ppm) Test weight (lb/bu) Yield (bu/a) Cultivar, treatment, and amount/a Endeavor Non-sprayed, inoculated control a 49.3 b 58.2 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 51.2 a 82.6 Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 50.2 a 93.4 Inoculated at FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later b 50.1 a 82.6 HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS CV (%) KWS Scala Non-sprayed, inoculated control ab a Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b b Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS ab b Inoculated at FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later a b HSD (P=0.05) NS NS 1.14 NS NS CV (%) SY Tepee Non-sprayed, inoculated control a 2.6 a Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 0.7 b Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS ab 0.6 b Inoculated at FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later ab 1.0 b HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS NS CV (%) Wintmalt Non-sprayed, inoculated control 2.8 a 22.6 a a 48.5 b 59.7 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 6.7 b ab 50.7 a 80.1 Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS ab 11.0 ab b 49.6 ab 79.7 Inoculated at FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later 2.0 ab 20.4 ab b 49.3 ab 62.4 HSD (P=0.05) NS NS CV (%) Cultivar mean Endeavor 4.1 a 1.4 b 0.3 bc 1.2 b 50.2 ab 80.2 b KWS Scala 2.8 ab 14.6 a 0.7 b 1.1 b 48.6 c 82.1 ab SY Tepee 1.7 b 1.6 b 1.4 a 1.2 b 50.4 a 96.4 a Wintmalt 1.9 b 15.2 a 0.1 c 2.4 a 49.5 b 71.0 b HSD (P=0.05) CV (%) Treatment mean Non-sprayed, inoculated control 4.1 a 11.1 a 1.0 a 2.7 a 49.1 b 77.1 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 2.6 b 0.4 b 1.2 b 50.3 a 86.7 Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 6.8 ab 0.6 ab 1.0 b 49.7 ab 87.3 Inoculated at FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later 2.4 b 12.3 a 0.6 ab 0.9 b 49.7 ab 80.4 HSD (P=0.05) NS CV (%) z Column numbers followed by different letters are significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey-Kramer HSD. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF045 Page 2

22 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 20 BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare, ND Genesis, Newdale, AAC Synergy, KWS Tinka ) Fusarium head blight (scab); Fusarium graminearum Spot blotch; Bipolaris sorokiniana Net blotch; Pyrenophora teres Leaf rust; Puccinia hordei Scald; Rhynchosporium commune J.A. Cummings, K.L. Myers, G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, and P.J. Stachowski, Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of integrated methods for management of Fusarium head blight and foliar diseases of spring malting barley in New York, The trial was conducted at the Musgrave Research Farm in Aurora, NY in a Lima silt loam soil planted with four spring malting barley varieties, ND Genesis (2-row), Newdale (2-row), AAC Synergy (2-row), and KWS Tinka (2-row) on 28 Apr. The experiment was set up as a completely randomized block design with a split-plot arrangement, with cultivar as the main plot and the fungicide treatments as subplots, randomized in six replicated blocks. Main plots were sown at 100 lb/a with a commercial grain no-till drill into disked corn stubble. Subplots were ft including 15 rows with 7.5-in. row spacing. The plots were fertilized at planting (200 lb/a of ) and topdressed on 23 May (60 lb/a of urea, providing an additional 27.6 lb/a of nitrogen). The ND Genesis barley heads emerged significantly earlier than the barley heads of the other three varieties, and therefore the first fungicide application and inoculation for ND Genesis occurred 6 days before that of the other varieties, and the second ND Genesis applications occurred six days later when the first round of applications occurred for the other three varieties. Fungicides were applied to ND Genesis plots at head emergence (Feekes growth stage, FGS 10.5) on 22 Jun and 28 Jun, and to Newdale, AAC Synergy and KWS Tinka plots on 28 Jun and 5 Jul. Fungicide applications included the surfactant Induce at 0.125% v/v. After the fungicides had dried, plots were spray-inoculated with a conidial suspension of F. graminearum (40,000 conidia/ml) to augment the development of Fusarium head blight (FHB). Fungicide treatments and F. graminearum inoculum were applied by a tractor-mounted sprayer with TJ-AI3070 nozzles, 18-in. apart, pressurized at 32 psi, and calibrated to deliver 20 gal/a. Incidence and severity (percent of symptomatic spikelets on symptomatic heads) of FHB in each plot were rated on 18 Jul and used to calculate FHB Index, where FHB index = (FHB severity * FHB incidence)/100. Primarily spot blotch, caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana, and some net blotch, caused by Pyrenophora teres, were rated collectively as leaf blights on 18 Jul as percent disease severity on flag leaves and one leaf below flag leaf (average rating for whole plot). Leaf rust, caused by Puccinia hordei, and scald, caused by Rhynchosporium commune were similarly rated on 18 Jul. Grain was harvested from a 20 5 ft area in each subplot using an Almaco plot combine on 2 Aug. Grain moisture, plot yield, and test weight was recorded from each plot. Yield and test weight was adjusted to bu/a at 14.5% moisture. Deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration (ppm) in grain was analyzed at the Mycotoxin Analysis Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Treatment means were calculated, subjected to analysis of variance, and separated by Tukey-Kramer HSD test (P = 0.05). The 2017 growing season resulted in fairly low levels of foliar diseases, and moderately high concentrations of DON. When the results of all cultivars were combined, all fungicide treatments significantly reduced leaf rust, leaf blights and scald, but had no effect on yield, as compared to the non-treated control. Though only the double fungicide application of Prosaro followed by Caramba resulted in significantly lower FHB index than the non-treated control, all fungicide treatments resulted in significantly lower DON. However, all treatments resulted in grain with DON greater than the acceptable 1 ppm threshold. The single Caramba application was the only treatment that did not result in significantly greater test weight than the non-treated control. When the results of all treatments were combined, there were no significant differences among varieties for leaf rust or scald, but AAC Synergy had the lowest levels of leaf blights. According to visual ratings, ND Genesis resulted in the greatest FHB index, but KWS Tinka had significantly greater DON than all other varieties. The yield was similar for all varieties, but test weight was significantly greatest for ND Genesis. However, when the cultivars were analyzed separately, the FHB index and DON for the non-treated control was significantly greater for ND Genesis, Newdale and AAC Synergy, whereas the FHB index did not correlate well to the DON for KWS Tinka. Overall, these results indicate that any of these fungicide treatments can significantly reduce leaf rust, leaf blights, scald, and DON. These results also indicate that all of these varieties are susceptible to FHB, but that KWS Tinka is significantly more susceptible to FHB and accumulation of DON than the other varieties. The DON for each variety was above the 1 ppm threshold even with the double fungicide application of Prosaro at FGS 10.5 followed by Caramba a week later. This indicates that none of these varieties may be well adapted for production in NY in years of moderately high FHB disease pressure. Furthermore, since the DON results did not closely match the FHB index for the cultivars, visual ratings of FHB incidence and severity for malting barley may not be adequate predictors of DON in the final grain. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF044 Page 1

23 Page 21 Leaf blights (%) 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Test weight (lb/bu) Cultivar, treatment, and amount/a Leaf rust (%) z Scald (%) FHB Index DON (ppm) Yield (bu/a) ND Genesis Non-sprayed, inoculated control 0.4 a 11.0 a 4.3 a 7.4 a 4.8 a Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS ab 3.7 b 3.3 a 4.1 b 3.1 b Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 3.3 b 2.9 a 5.2 b 3.1 b Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl. oz) and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later 0.0 b 2.3 b 0.9 a 3.6 b 1.7 c HSD (P=0.05) NS NS CV (%) Newdale Non-sprayed, inoculated control 0.3 a 5.2 a 3.2 a 1.8 a 4.7 a Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS ab 2.7 b 1.3 ab 0.7 b 2.6 b Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 2.2 b 0.7 b 0.6 b 2.9 b Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl. oz) and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later 0.2 ab 1.8 b 0.7 b 0.4 b 1.6 b HSD (P=0.05) NS NS CV (%) AAC Synergy Non-sprayed, inoculated control a a 6.3 a 41.2 b 58.7 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b b 3.5 b 42.6 ab 63.7 Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b b 4.4 b 43.0 ab 67.1 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl. oz) and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later b b 1.4 c 43.5 a 62.0 HSD (P=0.05) NS 1.23 NS NS CV (%) KWS Tinka Non-sprayed, inoculated control a 6.5 a 1.4 a 11.5 a Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 1.2 b 0.4 b 8.1 b Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 1.3 b 0.5 ab 6.5 b Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl. oz) and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later b 0.5 b 0.5 ab 3.0 c HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS CV (%) Cultivar mean ND Genesis a a 3.2 b 44.1 a 68.2 Newdale ab b 3.0 b 42.1 b 69.2 AAC Synergy b b 3.9 b 42.6 b 63.3 KWS Tinka ab b 7.4 a 42.9 b 60.4 HSD (P=0.05) NS 2.66 NS NS CV (%) Treatment mean Non-sprayed, inoculated control 0.3 a 7.5 a 4.0 a 2.9 a 6.8 a 42.1 c 64.3 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 2.5 b 1.7 b 1.4 ab 4.3 b 43.2 ab 66.8 Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated FGS b 2.7 b 1.4 b 1.7 ab 4.2 b 42.6 bc 64.0 Prosaro 421SC (8.2 fl. oz) and inoculated FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC (17.0 fl oz) and inoculated 7 days later 0.0 b 1.9 b 0.8 b 1.2 b 1.9 c 43.7 a 65.7 HSD (P=0.05) NS CV (%) z Column numbers followed by different letters are significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey-Kramer HSD. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF044 Page 2

24 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 22 BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare, Pinnacle ) J.A. Cummings, K.L. Myers, G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Fusarium head blight (scab); Fusarium graminearum Pathology and Plant-Microbe Section, School of Integrative Spot blotch; Bipolaris sorokiniana Plant Science, and P.J. Stachowski, Cornell Agricultural Net blotch; Pyrenophora teres Experiment Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Leaf rust; Puccinia hordei Powdery mildew; Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei Scald; Rhynchosporium commune Evaluation of foliar fungicides for control of Fusarium head blight and foliar diseases of spring malting barley in New York, The fungicide trial was conducted at the Musgrave Research Farm in Aurora, NY in a Lima silt loam soil planted with the two-row, spring malting barley variety Pinnacle sown at 100 lb/a with a no-till grain drill into a terminated hay field on 31 Apr. Nine foliar treatments (combinations of products and timings of applications) were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Plots were ft including 15 rows spaced 7.5-in. apart. The plots were fertilized at planting (200 lb/a of ) and topdressed on 23 May (60 lb/a of urea, providing an additional 27.6 lb/a of nitrogen). Fungicides were applied on 16 Jun at Feekes growth stage (FGS 9) (ligule of flag leaf just visible), on 28 Jun at FGS 10.5 (head emergence), and on 5 Jul at FGS days ( late ), depending on the treatment. All plots were inoculated with a conidial suspension of Fusarium graminearum (40,000 conidia/ml) on 28 Jun and 5 Jul, after fungicide applications were completely dried, to augment natural inoculum for initiation of Fusarium head blight (FHB). Treatments and F. graminearum inoculum were applied by a tractor-mounted sprayer with TJ-AI3070 nozzles, 18-in. apart, pressurized at 32 psi, and calibrated to deliver 20 gal/a. Incidence and severity (percent of symptomatic spikelets on symptomatic heads) of FHB in each plot were rated on 18 Jul. Primarily spot blotch, caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana, and some net blotch, caused by Pyrenophora teres, were rated collectively as leaf blights on 18 Jul as percent disease severity on flag leaves and one leaf below the flag leaf (average rating for whole plot). Leaf rust, caused by Puccinia hordei, powdery mildew, caused by Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei, and scald, caused by Rhynchosporium commune, were similarly rated on 18 Jul. Grain was harvested on 9 Aug from a 20 5 ft area in each plot using an Almaco plot combine. Grain moisture, grain yield, and test weight for individual plots were recorded and yield and test weight were recalculated to bu/a and lb/bu, respectively, at 14.5% moisture. Deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration (ppm) in grain was analyzed in the Mycotoxin Analysis Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Treatment means were calculated, subjected to analysis of variance, and separated by Tukey-Kramer HSD test (P = 0.05). The 2017 growing season was conducive for moderately low levels of foliar diseases, FHB, and DON, with the exception of a moderately high level of leaf rust in this trial. All treatments significantly reduced powdery mildew and leaf rust, as compared to the non-treated control, but none had any effect on scald. Caramba alone at all timings was the only treatment that did not significantly reduce leaf blotches. All treatments resulted in significantly lower FHB index than the non-treated control, but only the double application of Caramba and the late application of Prosaro actually resulted in a significant reduction in DON. None of the treatments had any significant effect on yield or test weight. Overall, these results indicate that all of the fungicides evaluated are effective at reducing powdery mildew and leaf rust, and that all but Caramba effectively reduce leaf blotches. Also, under moderately low disease pressure, none of the treatments had any significant impact on yield or test weight. The DON results did not closely match the FHB index, indicating that for malting barley, visual ratings of FHB incidence and severity may not be adequate predictors of DON in the final grain. Additionally, the treatments that included the late applications of Caramba or Prosaro resulted in the lowest concentrations of DON. Leaf rust (%) Leaf blotch (%) Test weight (lbs/bu) Product, amount/a, Feekes growth stage at application Powdery mildew (%) z Scald (%) FHB Index DON (ppm) Yield (bu/a) Non-treated Control 3.3 a 45.0 a a 3.9 a 1.7 ab Aproach 2.08SC, 9 fl oz FGS 9, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17 fl oz FGS c 9.5 bc bc 1.3 b 2.3 a Aproach 2.08SC, 9 fl oz and Tilt 3.6EC 2 fl oz FGS 9, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17 fl oz FGS c 10.0 bc bc 1.6 b 2.2 a Caramba 0.75EC, 17 fl oz FGS bc 9.3 bc ab 1.6 b 1.5 ab Caramba 0.75 EC, 17 fl oz 7 days after FGS b 16.8 b abc 1.6 b 1.1 ab Caramba 0.75EC, 17 fl oz FGS 10.5, followed by Caramba 0.75EC, 17 fl oz 7 days later 0.9 bc 12.5 bc abc 1.6 b 0.7 b Proline 480SC, 2.8 fl oz FGS 9, followed by Prosaro 421SC 8.2 fl oz FGS c 9.8 bc c 1.0 b 2.2 a Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz FGS bc 6.3 bc bc 1.1 b 2.1 ab Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz 7 days after FGS bc 4.0 c c 1.4 b 0.7 b HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS CV (%) z Column means with the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey-Kramer HSD Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF043

25 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare, Pinnacle ) J.A. Cummings, K.L. Myers, G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Fusarium head blight (scab); Fusarium graminearum Pathology and Plant-Microbe Section, School of Integrative Spot blotch; Bipolaris sorokiniana Plant Science, and P.J. Stachowski, Cornell Agricultural Net blotch; Pyrenophora teres Experiment Station, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Leaf rust; Puccinia hordei Powdery mildew; Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei Scald; Rhynchosporium commune Evaluation of organic foliar fungicides for control of Fusarium head blight and foliar diseases of spring malting barley in New York, The fungicide trial was conducted at the Musgrave Research Farm in Aurora, NY in a Lima silt loam soil planted with the two-row, spring malting barley variety Pinnacle sown at 100 lb/a with a no-till grain drill into a terminated hay field on 31 Apr. Six foliar treatments were arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Plots were ft including 15 rows with 7.5-in. row spaces. The plots were fertilized at planting (200 lb/a of ) and topdressed on 23 May (60 lb/a of urea, providing an additional 27.6 lb/a of nitrogen). Fungicides were applied on 16 Jun at Feekes growth stage (FGS) 9 (ligule of flag leaf just visible), and on 28 Jun at FGS 10.5 (head emergence), depending on the treatment. All plots were inoculated with a conidial suspension of Fusarium graminearum (40,000 conidia/ml) on 28 Jun and 5 Jul, after fungicide applications were completely dried, to augment natural inoculum for initiation of Fusarium head blight (FHB). Treatments and F. graminearum inoculum were applied by a tractor-mounted sprayer with TJ-AI3070 nozzles, 18-in. apart, pressurized at 32 psi, and calibrated to deliver 20 gal/a. Incidence and severity (percent of symptomatic spikelets on symptomatic heads) of FHB in each plot were rated on 18 Jul and used to calculate FHB Index, where FHB index = (FHB severity * FHB incidence)/100. Primarily spot blotch, caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana, and some net blotch, caused by Pyrenophora teres, were rated collectively as leaf blights on 18 Jul as percent disease severity on flag leaves and one leaf below the flag leaf (average rating for whole plot). Leaf rust, caused by Puccinia hordei, powdery mildew, caused by Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei, and scald, caused by Rhynchosporium commune were similarly rated on 18 Jul. Grain was harvested on 9 Aug from a 20 5 ft area in each plot using an Almaco plot combine. Grain moisture, grain yield, and test weight for individual plots were recorded and yield and test weights were recalculated to bu/a and lb/bu, respectively, at 14.5% moisture. Deoxynivalenol (DON) concentration (ppm) in grain was analyzed in the Mycotoxin Analysis Laboratory at the University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN. Treatment means were calculated, subjected to analysis of variance, and separated by Tukey-Kramer HSD test (P = 0.05). The 2017 growing season was conducive for moderately low levels foliar diseases, FHB, and DON, with the exception of a moderately high level of leaf rust in this trial. All treatments were effective at significantly reducing powdery mildew, as compared with the non-treated control, except for Nutrimag and Trichoderma. Only the two conventional treatments, Prosaro and Caramba, significantly reduced leaf rust, and only Prosaro significantly reduced leaf blights, as compared with the non-treated control. All treatments resulted in a significant reduction in scald. None of the organic treatments had any effect on FHB, and Prosaro was the only treatment that resulted in a significantly lower FHB index than the non-treated control. Under the conditions of this trial, none of the treatments had any effect on DON, test weight or yield. The DON results did not closely match the FHB index, indicating that for malting barley, visual ratings of FHB incidence and severity may not be adequate predictors of DON in the final grain. None of the treatments resulted in grain below the acceptable DON level of 1.0 ppm for malting barley. Product, amount/a, Feekes growth stage at application Powdery mildew (%) z Leaf rust (%) Scald (%) Leaf blights (%) FHB Index DON (ppm) Test Weight (lb/bu) Yield (bu/a) Non-treated Control 3.3 ab 45.0 a 1.1 a 18.3 a 3.9 ab Caramba 0.75EC, 17 fl oz FGS de 9.3 b 0.1 b 15.0 ab 1.6 bc ChampION 50 WP, 1.5 lb FGS 9, followed by ChampION 50 WP 1.5 lb FGS cd 38.8 a 0.3 b 15.0 ab 4.1 ab Nutrimag 2 gal, FGS bc 42.5 a 0.3 b 10.5 ab 4.3 a Proprietary Trichoderma FGS 9, followed by proprietary Trichoderma FGS a 43.8 a 0.3 b 10.5 ab 3.6 abc Prosaro 421SC, 8.2 fl oz FGS e 6.3 b 0.3 b 6.8 b 1.1 c HSD (P=0.05) NS NS NS CV (%) z Column means are not significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey-Kramer HSD Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF042

26 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 24 WHEAT (Triticum aestivum) and BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare) Powdery mildew; Blumeria graminis f. sp. tritici, hordei Leaf rust; Puccinia triticina, hordei Stagonospora blotch; Parastagonospora avenae M. Fulcher, G. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology Section, D. Benscher, and M. Sorrells, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, and J. O'Dea, Cornell Cooperative Extension of Ulster County, Kingston, NY Evaluation of foliar diseases on winter wheat and barley varieties in eastern New York, 2017 Winter wheat and barley variety trials were conducted under two management treatments (M1, M2) at the Hudson Valley Farm Hub in Hurley, NY. Trials were designed in completely randomized blocks and split by management. Varieties were grouped by crop, and plots were six rows wide, measuring x 4.13-ft and separated by several empty rows. Each variety was replicated three times. Management treatments differed in fertilization and weed management. The M1 plots were tine-weeded and fertilized with a chicken manure compost, and the M2 plots received conventional fertilizer and a broad-leaf herbicide. No pathogen inoculum was applied. Disease severity was recorded 12 June, during early grain filling (Feekes Growth Stage 11). Percent disease coverage of flag leaves was estimated as an average across each wheat plot, and disease coverage of the top two leaves was estimated in barley plots. A trace rating of 0.1% was assigned when extremely low levels of a disease were present. Variety means from each trial were subjected to ANOVA, and significant differences were identified using Tukey s HSD test (P=0.05). Disease severity was similar under both management programs. Although overall disease levels in the wheat were low, significant varietal differences were observed in susceptibility to powdery mildew and leaf rust. Expedition was moderately affected by powdery mildew under low disease pressure. Medina and the heritage varieties Fulcaster and Pride of Genesee were rated as the most susceptible to leaf rust. Trace levels of stripe rust, Septoria blotch and Stagonospora glume blotch were also found across wheat varieties. Several two-row barleys showed low susceptibility to both powdery mildew and leaf rust. The six-row line 10467r2 was significantly less susceptible to both diseases when compared to 6Ab08-X03W012-5, the only other six-row variety planted. Trace amounts of scald and spot blotch were found in some barley plots, but not at ratable levels. Careful selection of variety is important for disease control in any management framework, and its role is increased in the absence of fungicide. Wheat Variety Powdery Mildew (%) Leaf Rust (%) M1 M2 M1 M2 AC Morely 0.1 c 0.7 b 0.1 b 0.1 a Appalachian White 0.1 c 1.7 b 0.1 b 0.7 a Erie 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.1 b 0.1 a Expedition 10.0 a 15.0 a 0.1 b 0.1 a Fulcaster 0.4 bc 0.1 b 5.3 ab 2.0 a Medina 0.1 c 0.4 b 8.3 a 2.3 a NuEast 2.3 b 5.0 b 0.0 b 0.1 a Pride of Genesee 0.7 bc 1.0 b 5.0 ab 1.0 a Warthog 0.1 c 0.4 b 2.3 b 0.1 a Zorro 0.1 c 0.1 b 0.7 b 0.1 a Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 HSD at P = Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF024 Page 1

27 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Barley Variety Powdery Mildew (%) Leaf Rust (%) M1 M2 M1 M2 02Ab671 (2)* 10.0 ab** 15.0 b 9.0 ab 0.1 b 10467r2 (6) 0.0 c 0.1 c 0.0 b 0.0 b 6Ab08-X03W012-5 (6) 18.3 a 31.7 a 5.3 ab 11.7 a Charles (2) 0.0 c 0.1 c 30.0 a 3.7 b Endeavor (2) 1.7 bc 0.7 c 0.4 b 0.1 b Flavia (2) 0.4 c 0.3 c 0.1 b 0.0 b Scala (2) 0.4 c 0.1 c 0.4 b 0.0 b Somerset (2) 0.1 c 0.1 c 0.1 b 0.0 b Nectaria (2) 16.7 a 11.7 b 0.0 b 0.0 b Tepee (2) 0.0 c 0.0 c 0.1 b 0.0 b Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 HSD at P = *Barley variety is followed by 2- or 6-row designation **Numbers within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other according to Tukey s HSD Test (P=0.05) Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF024 Page 2

28 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 26 WHEAT (Triticum aestivum), BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare), and RYE (Secale cereal) Stripe rust; Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici Septoria blotch; Zymoseptoria tritici, Septoria secalis Scald; Rhynchosporium commune M. Fulcher, G. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant- Microbe Biology Section, D. Benscher, and M. Sorrells, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of foliar disease on winter small grains varieties in New York, 2017 Winter wheat, barley and rye varieties were planted at three fields, with one field in Tompkins County and two in Ontario County. Trials were designed in completely randomized blocks and split by crop. Plots were six rows wide, x 4.13-ft, and separated by several empty rows. Each variety was replicated three times. Seed was sown on 7 Oct in Tompkins Co. and on 14 Oct in Ontario Co. Wheat, barley, and rye were seeded at rates of 180 lb/a, 96 lb/a, and 200 kernels/m 2, respectively. A pre-plant fertilizer (200 lb/a of 20:20:20) and a spring top dress (50 lb/a of nitrogen as UAN-30) were applied. No pathogen inoculum or fungicides were applied, and disease severity was recorded June during grain filling (Feekes Growth Stage 11). Severity was estimated as average percent flag leaf damage in each plot for wheat and rye, and as the average percent damage to the top two leaves was estimated for barley. The lowest levels of disease were assigned a trace rating of 0.1%. The mean values for each variety were subjected to ANOVA, and Tukey s HSD test (P=0.05) was used to identify significant differences. Disease pressure on wheat in Ontario Co. differed between fields, but stripe rust was present at both locations. Medina and NuEast were the most susceptible, though all four varieties were affected. Barley in both counties was susceptible to scald, and Scala was the most damaged. Low levels of Septoria blotch were recorded on rye, and significant differences were seen among varieties, with Brasetto and Danko appearing to be more susceptible than Mattino and Binntto. These data serve as a reminder that foliar diseases of small grains can cause significant damage to flag leaves in the absence of fungicide. Wheat Variety Stripe Rust (%) Ontario A Ontario B a* Erie b Medina 20.0 a 48.3 a NuEast 0.1 a 10.0 b Warthog 11.7 a 30.0 ab Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value HSD at P = Barley Variety Scald (%) Tompkins Ontario A Flavia 18.3 ab 0.4 a Scala 25.0 a 6.7 a Somerset 3.7 b 7.0 a Tepee 7.0 ab 1.0 a Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value HSD at P = Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF023 Page 1

29 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Rye Variety Leaf Blotch (%) Tompkins Ontario A Brasetto 8.3 a 10.0 a Danko 6.7 ab 11.7 a Binntto 2.0 ab 1.0 b Mattino 0.7 b 3.7 ab Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value HSD at P = *Numbers within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other according to Tukey s HSD Test (P=0.05) Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF023 Page 2

30 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 28 BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare) Fusarium head blight; Fusarium graminearum Leaf rust; Puccinia hordei Powdery mildew; Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei Scald; Rhynchosporium commune A.F. Blachez and G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology Section, D. Benscher and M.E. Sorrells, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of Fusarium head blight and foliar diseases on winter malting barley varieties in New York, Winter malting barley variety trials were conducted at four locations in central and western New York, including one trial each in Monroe and Seneca Counties and two trials in Tompkins County (Ketola and McGowan). Each trial was conducted in a randomized complete block design with three replicates. Plots were 13-ft long and six rows wide with 7-in. row spacing. Seed was planted the previous autumn at a rate of 96 lb/a on 27 Sep in Monroe County, 28 Sep in McGowan, 6 Oct in Ketola, and 7 Oct in Seneca County. Before planting, 200 lb/a of 20:20:20 fertilizer was applied (delivering 40 lb/a of nitrogen). In the spring, the field was top-dressed with 50 lb/a of nitrogen. A broadleaf herbicide (Harmony Extra and Bromoxynil with Induce) was applied in early April. No fungicides or insecticides were applied over the course of the trial, and no artificial inoculations were performed. Foliar disease ratings were estimated as the percent of the top two leaves affected by a disease averaged over the entire plot. Fusarium head blight (FHB) incidence and severity was assessed in each plot and a FHB index was calculated. Incidence was estimated by counting the number of symptomatic heads out of 25, and multiplying by four. Severity for each plot was determined by estimating the average percentage of infected kernels on symptomatic heads, reported as a whole number. FHB index was calculated as incidence x severity/100. Foliar diseases were rated at the soft dough growth stage in Tompkins and Seneca County, and at the hard dough growth stage in Monroe County. FHB was rated at the hard dough growth stage at Monroe and Seneca Counties at the ripening growth stage in Tompkins County. Disease severities and FHB index were square root-transformed and the means of the transformed data were analyzed with analysis of variance and separated by Tukey s HSD test (P=0.05). Fusarium head blight index was consistently highest for 10467r2, a 6-row breeding line. KWS Scala had an equivalently high FHB index of 2.3 in McGowan, but had very low levels of the disease in the other two trials. DH140082, SU Mateo, and MW11S had consistently low levels of FHB, with index scores at or below 0.3 at all locations. Leaf rust was only recorded at Monroe, where MW11S (53.3%), 6Ab08-X03W012-5 (43.3%), and Charles (23.7%) were the only lines with severities higher than 10%. Powdery mildew was highest on DH and MW11S , 2-row and 6-row breeding lines, respectively. Nectaria, 6W , and 6Ab08-X03W012-5 showed relatively high levels of powdery mildew, and several 6-row lines showed moderate levels of the disease, including 6W , 6W , Alba, and MW11S Overall, scald was the foliar disease with the highest severity in 2017, reaching a peak of 75% severity in Monroe and 60% severity in Ketola on KWS Scala. In McGowan, the variety with the highest scald severity was Charles, with a severity of 41.7%. Across environments, KWS Scala and Flavia were consistently in the top three varieties with the most scald, and Charles, OSU , and 10/069/1 were consistently in the top five. All other varieties had average scald severities under 10% at all locations. Scald and FHB were also observed in Seneca County, but the levels were too low to report. These data indicate that the tested varieties have a range of susceptibility to all of the diseases observed. Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF028 Page 1

31 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts FHB Index Leaf Rust (%) Powdery Midew (%) Scald (%) Variety Rows* Ketola** McGowan Monroe Monroe Ketola McGowan Ketola McGowan Monroe Charles b 1.2 a-d 0.3 ab 23.7 ab 0.0 c 0.0 e 30.0 abc 41.7 a 3.3 c DH b 2.4 ab 0.3 ab 3.7 bc 1.0 c 8.3 bcd 0.0 d 0.0 b 0.2 c DH b 0.5 a-d 0.3 ab 2.0 bc 0.0 c 0.0 e 6.8 bcd 1.0 b 0.2 c DH ab 0.1 d 0.0 b 0.7 bc 10.3 abc 53.3 a 8.3 bcd 0.0 b 0.2 c Endeavor b 0.6 a-d 0.1 ab 0.3 bc 0.0 c 0.8 cde 3.0 bcd 2.2 b 3.7 c Flavia ab 0.8 a-d 0.2 ab 0.3 c 0.0 c 0.5 cde 46.7 a 10.0 b 70.0 a KWS Scala b 2.3 a 0.1 ab 0.0 c 0.0 c 0.2 de 60.0 a 11.7 ab 75.0 a KWS Somerset b 0.7 a-d 0.4 ab 0.5 bc 0.0 c 0.7 cde 6.0 bcd 0.0 b 1.8 c KWS ab 0.8 a-d 0.3 ab 0.2 c 0.0 c 0.8 cde 5.2 bcd 0.0 b 10.2 bc Nectaria ab 0.2 cd 0.3 ab 0.5 bc 5.0 abc 35.0 a 2.0 cd 0.0 b 0.2 c OSU ab 1.6 abc 0.3 ab 0.2 c 0.0 c 0.3 de 23.3 abc 3.3 b 65.0 a SU-Mateo b 0.2 cd 0.1 ab 0.7 bc 0.0 c 0.0 e 0.5 d 0.2 b 0.2 c SY Tepee (209-66) ab 0.8 a-d 0.1 ab 0.2 c 0.0 c 0.0 e 2.2 bcd 0.2 b 5.2 c Vincenta b 0.3 bcd 0.1 ab 0.0 c 0.0 c 0.3 de 3.5 bcd 1.2 b 8.7 c 06-OR b 1.6 abc 0.0 b 0.3 c 2.0 abc 11.0 bc 0.2 d 0.0 b 0.3 c 10/069/ ab 1.8 abc 0.1 ab 0.0 c 0.0 c 0.5 cde 26.7 ab 6.7 b 36.7 ab 10467r a 2.3 a 1.1 a 0.5 bc 0.0 c 0.0 e 6.8 bcd 0.3 b 0.3 c 6Ab08-X03W ab 0.6 a-d 0.1 ab 43.3 a 11.7 ab 26.7 ab 0.2 d 0.0 b 0.2 c 6W ab 1.6 abc 0.3 ab 2.2 bc 6.7 abc 40.0 a 0.3 d 0.0 b 0.3 c 6W b 0.5 a-d 0.0 ab 2.2 bc 0.8 bc 21.7 ab 0.3 d 0.0 b 0.2 c Alba b 0.9 a-d 0.0 b 2.2 bc 6.0 abc 26.7 ab 0.0 d 0.0 b 0.0 c MW11S ab 0.4 a-d 0.4 ab 53.3 a 3.8 abc 26.7 ab 7.7 bcd 0.2 b 0.0 c MW11S ab 0.0 d 0.1 ab 3.8 bc 15.0 a 41.7 a 0.3 d 0.2 b 0.5 c Saturn ab 0.7 a-d 0.2 ab 8.8 bc 0.0 c 0.2 de 0.0 d 0.2 b 0.2 c p-value <0.01 < <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 * Number of rows of fertile florets along the spike **Columns followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey's HSD Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF028 Page 2

32 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 30 WHEAT (Triticum aestivum), BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare), and OAT (Avena sativa) Crown rust; Puccinia coronata var. avenae Leaf rust; Puccinia triticina, hordei Powdery mildew; Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei Septoria blotch; Zymoseptoria tritici Spot blotch; Bipolaris sorokiniana Stagonospora blotch; Parastagonospora nodorum M. Fulcher, G. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant- Microbe Biology Section, D. Benscher, and M. Sorrells, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of foliar disease on spring small grains varieties in central New York, 2017 Spring wheat, barley and oat variety trials were conducted at four locations in Tompkins and Genesee Counties. Trials were designed as completely randomized blocks, split by crop, and separated by several empty rows. Each plot was six rows wide,13.12 x 4.13-ft, and replicated three times. Seed was sown at 180 lb/a for wheat or 96 lb/a for barley and oat in late April and early May. Fields were fertilized with 120 lb/a of 27:18:9. No pathogen inoculum or fungicides were applied, and disease severity was recorded in July during early grain filling (Feekes Growth Stage 11). The average percent of flag leaf area covered by disease was estimated across plots for wheat and oats, and the percent coverage of the top two leaves was recorded for barley. Trace amounts of disease were assigned a rating of 0.1%. The mean values for each variety were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey s HSD test (P=0.05) to determine significant differences. Leaf rust and blotches (Septoria and Stagonospora) were recorded on wheat in Tompkins County. Red Fife, a heritage variety, was highly susceptible to leaf rust at both field sites, and Faller was significantly more susceptible to leaf blotches than other varieties. The six-row barley Quest was the only variety to have high levels of powdery mildew, and at one site was severely infected with leaf rust. Conlon was also highly susceptible to leaf rust and exhibited the most severe symptoms of spot blotch. Synergy was the least susceptible to all foliar diseases across locations. Crown rust was found on oat at all four sites. Corral and Ogle were significantly more susceptible to crown rust than Hayden and MN In New York, Corral is the most widely planted spring oat, and in some cases yield may be reduced by the severity of crown rust infections. These foliar diseases can be limiting factors for small grain production in New York, and avoiding highly susceptible varieties is important for integrated management. Wheat Variety Leaf Rust (%) Leaf Blotches (%) Tompkins 1 Tompkins 2 Tompkins 2 Faller 0.0 b* 0.1 b 13.3 a Glenn 0.0 b 0.0 b 8.3 ab Red Fife 23.3 a 53.3 a 5.0 b Tom 0.0 b 0.0 b 5.0 b Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value <0.001 < HSD at P = Barley Variety Powdery Mildew (%) Leaf Rust (%) Spot Blotch (%) Tompkins 1 Tompkins 2 Tompkins 3 Tompkins 1 Tompkins 2 Tompkins 2 Tompkins 3 Conlon 0.0 b 0.4 b 0.0 b 53.3 a 3.7 a 20.0 a 8.3 a Newdale 0.0 b 0.1 b 0.0 b 20.0 b 0.1 b 2.3 b 1.0 b Quest 5.0 a 46.7 a 11.7 a 70.0 a 0.7 ab 3.7 b 1.0 b Synergy 0.0 b 0.1 b 0.0 b 11.7 b 0.0 b 3.7 b 1.0 b Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 < <0.001 <0.001 HSD at P= E Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF021 Page 1

33 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Oat Variety Crown Rust (%) Tompkins 1 Tompkins 2 Tompkins 3 Genesee Corral 33.3 a 26.7 a 21.7 a 66.7 a Hayden 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.0 c 0.0 b MN c 0.1 b 0.7 c 0.0 b Ogle 21.7 b 13.3 ab 10.0 b 20.0 b Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value < <0.001 <0.001 HSD at P = *Numbers within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other according to Tukey s HSD Test (P=0.05) Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF021 Page 2

34 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 32 BARLEY (Hordeum vulgare) Spot blotch; Bipolaris sorokiniana Leaf rust; Puccinia hordei Powdery mildew; Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei A.F. Blachez and G.C. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology Section, D. Benscher and M.E. Sorrells, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Evaluation of foliar diseases on spring barley varieties in New York, Spring malting barley variety trials were conducted at four locations in central and western New York. One trial was planted in Genesee County, another was planted in Steuben County, and two were planted in Tompkins County (Helfer and Ketola). Each trial was conducted in a complete randomized block design with three replicates. The fields were prepared with an application of 120 lb/a 27:18:9 fertilizer (delivering 32 lb/a of nitrogen). Plots were 13-ft long and six rows wide with 7-in. row spacing. Seed was planted at 96 lb/a on 24 Apr at Ketola, 27 Apr in Steuben County, 28 Apr at Helfer, and 11 May in Genesee County. No fungicides were applied, and no artificial inoculations were performed. The severities of the foliar diseases were estimated as the percent of the top two leaves showing symptoms of disease averaged across the plot. Diseases were rated on 14 Jul at Helfer, on 15 Jul at Ketola, and on 16 Jul in Genesee and Steuben Counties. The barley was at the hard dough growth stage for all disease ratings. All disease severities were square root-transformed except for the ratings of leaf rust at Ketola. The mean values were analyzed with analysis of variance and separated by Tukey s HSD test (P=0.05). There were reportable levels of spot blotch at all four locations. Odyssey, a 6-row malting variety, had the highest severity at Helfer and Steuben County, but had below 5% spot blotch severity at Ketola and Genesee County. At Ketola, KWS 15/3716 had the highest level of spot blotch with 52.5% severity, and in Genesee County, 07AB-59 had the highest severity at 11.7%. Both of these lines had mid- to high-severity at the other locations. The Helfer location had high levels of spot blotch, with most varieties reaching greater than 10% severity. A few varieties, especially 6-rows, had no or very low levels of spot blotch at that location. The 6-row varieties, Quest (malting), Bastile (feed), and AAC Azimuth (food) had no spot blotch at any location. The 2-row variety AAC Synergy (malting) had only 3.7% severity spot blotch at Helfer and was not observed at the other trial locations. Leaf rust was consistently highest on the 6-row feed barley varieties, Bastile and Harmony. Most varieties had moderate severities of leaf rust (20-40%) at Ketola. The 2-row varieties KWS 15/2650 and KWS 15/3716 consistently had the lowest leaf rust severities. Powdery mildew was also reported at all four locations. The 6-row varieties Quest and M160 had the highest powdery mildew severities, both reaching more than 80% in Steuben County. Craft was the only 2-row variety with powdery mildew severity over 50%, reaching 55% in Ketola. These data indicate that the tested varieties have a range of susceptibility to the diseases observed on spring barley in Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF027 Page 1

35 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Spot Blotch (%) Leaf Rust (%) Powdery Mildew (%) Variety Rows* Helfer** Ketola Genesee Steuben Helfer Ketola Steuben Helfer Ketola Genesee Steuben 07AB a-e 0.0 b 11.7 a 18.3 ab 0.7 bc 25.0 ab 0.7 abc 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.0 e 08MT a-g 0.0 b 0.0 b 2.0 bcd 0.7 bc 35.0 ab 0.2 bc 2.0 ef 30.0 abc 0.0 b 23.7 b-e 08WA a-g 0.0 b 0.0 b 1.7 bcd 1.7 bc 10.0 b 0.0 c 0.0 f 2.5 bc 6.7 ab 1.7 de 09N c-h 0.0 b 1.7 b 3.3 bcd 1.8 bc 25.0 ab 0.2 bc 0.3 ef 7.5 abc 3.3 ab 5.0 de 09N c-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 3.3 bcd 0.3 bc 15.0 b 0.3 abc 8.3 b-f 7.5 abc 0.2 ab 25.0 a-e 09N fgh 0.0 b 0.3 b 0.0 d 0.2 bc 40.0 ab 0.3 abc 3.3 ef 17.5 abc 0.3 ab 10.0 cde 09N a-f 0.0 b 0.2 b 3.3 bcd 0.2 bc 22.5 ab 0.2 bc 3.3 ef 25.0 abc 0.3 ab 23.3 a-e 09N fgh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.3 cd 1.0 bc 20.0 ab 1.0 abc 0.3 ef 15.0 abc 0.3 ab 0.5 de 09N fgh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.3 cd 0.5 bc 27.5 ab 0.8 abc 8.8 c-f 12.5 abc 0.5 ab 1.8 de 09N e-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 3.3 bc 15.0 b 0.8 abc 2.0 ef 35.0 abc 0.0 b 8.5 cde 09N d-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.2 d 0.2 bc 12.5 b 0.3 abc 3.3 ef 7.5 abc 0.0 b 3.5 de 2MS14_ gh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.2 d 5.3 bc 20.0 ab 0.8 abc 13.3 b-e 45.0 abc 1.7 ab 30.0 a-e 2MS14_ a-g 0.0 b 0.2 b 0.5 cd 0.2 bc 30.0 ab 2.0 abc 0.0 f 5.0 bc 0.0 b 0.0 e 2MS14_ a-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 3.5 bcd 2.3 bc 40.0 ab 1.5 abc 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.0 e 2MS14_ e-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.2 d 3.7 bc 40.0 ab 0.8 abc 8.3 c-f 15.0 abc 0.2 ab 23.3 a-e 2MS14_ a-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 3.7 bcd 6.7 bc 20.0 ab 2.0 abc 6.7 def 12.5 abc 0.0 b 11.7 cde AAC Synergy fgh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 0.5 bc 35.0 ab 0.0 c 0.5 ef 12.5 abc 0.0 b 6.8 de CDC Clear e-h 2.5 b 0.0 b 0.5 cd 1.7 bc 35.0 ab 3.5 ab 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.0 e Cerveza d-h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.3 d 0.2 bc 20.0 ab 0.0 c 0.0 f 10.0 abc 0.0 b 6.8 de Conlon b-h 0.0 b 0.2 b 1.7 bcd 0.3 bc 45.0 ab 2.3 abc 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 1.7 de Craft fgh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 6.7 bc 17.5 b 1.2 abc 26.7 a-d 55.0 ab 1.7 ab 46.7 a-d KWS 15/ ab 5.0 b 0.2 b 5.3 bcd 0.0 c 2.0 b 0.2 bc 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.2 de KWS 15/ abc 52.5 a 1.7 b 11.7 a-d 0.0 c 3.0 b 0.2 bc 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.0 e KWS Tinka a-d 0.5 b 0.0 b 3.7 bcd 0.0 c 12.5 b 0.2 bc 0.0 f 2.5 bc 1.7 ab 0.0 e ND Genesis a-g 2.5 b 0.2 b 3.7 bcd 0.5 bc 7.5 b 0.2 bc 1.7 ef 15.0 abc 0.0 b 0.0 e Newdale d-h 0.0 b 0.2 b 0.0 d 0.3 bc 25.0 ab 0.0 c 0.0 f 10.0 abc 0.0 b 2.2 de Odyssey a 2.5 b 1.7 b 33.3 a 0.0 c 10.0 b 0.0 c 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 0.0 e Pinnacle a-f 0.0 b 0.0 b 26.8 abc 1.8 bc 15.0 b 0.0 c 5.0 ef 7.5 abc 0.0 b 11.7 b-e AAC Azimuth h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 7.3 bc 12.5 b 1.7 abc 33.3 ab 40.0 abc 5.0 ab 45.0 a-e Bastile h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.5 cd 30.0 a 80.0 a 2.3 abc 0.0 f 0.0 c 0.0 b 1.7 de Harmony gh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 8.3 ab 60.0 ab 3.7 a 0.0 f 2.5 bc 0.0 b 1.8 de HS gh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.2 d 1.0 bc 40.0 ab 0.8 abc 1.8 ef 7.5 abc 0.0 b 0.5 de M h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 1.7 bc 5.0 b 0.2 bc 56.7 a 80.0 a 31.7 a 88.3 a ND h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 0.5 bc 5.0 b 1.8 abc 31.7 abc 45.0 ab 10.0 ab 73.3 abc Oceanik gh 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.7 cd 1.0 bc 25.0 ab 1.5 abc 0.5 ef 5.0 bc 25.3 ab 16.8 cde Quest h 0.0 b 0.0 b 0.0 d 1.0 bc 30.0 ab 0.2 bc 68.3 a 40.0 abc 16.7 ab 85.0 ab p-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <.01 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.01 <0.001 *Number of rows of fertile florets along the spike; **Columns followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.05 as determined by Tukey's HSD Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF027 Page 2

36 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 34 OAT (Avena sativa) Crown rust; Puccinia coronata var. avenae M. Fulcher, G. Bergstrom, Plant Pathology and Plant-Microbe Biology Section, D. Benscher, and M. Sorrells, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, School of Integrative Plant Science, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY Susceptibility of spring oat varieties to crown rust in central New York, 2017 Spring oat variety trials were conducted at three locations in Tompkins and Genesee Counties. Varieties were designed in a complete randomized block, with two replicates of each variety at the Tompkins County fields (Helfer and Ketola) and three replicates at the Genesee County field. Plots were six rows wide, x 4.13 ft, and separated from one another by several empty rows. Seed was sown at a rate of 96 lbs/a on 24 and 28 Apr at Ketola and Helfer respectively, and 11 May in Genesee. A pre-plant fertilizer was applied (120 lbs/a of 27:18:9), and a single, mixed application of Harmony Extra and bromoxynil with Induce was used to control broadleaf weeds. No pathogen inoculum or fungicides were used, and disease severity was recorded during grain filling (Feekes Growth Stage 11.1) on 3-4 July as the percent coverage of flag leaves estimated across entire plots. Trace levels of disease were scored as 0.1%. Variety means were subjected to ANOVA and Tukey s HSD test (P=0.05) to determine significant differences. Crown rust severity was moderate at the Helfer and Ketola farms and highest at the Genesee County site. The varieties Corral and Hidalgo were highly susceptible, while Ogle, Vitality and IL were moderately susceptible. Newdak, Hayden, and Norseman were the least susceptible of the commercially available varieties, and many breeding lines performed well. In New York, crown rust is the primary pathogen of concern on oat, and susceptible varieties are commonly deployed in the field. These data support informed variety selection and breeding efforts. Oat Variety Crown Rust (%) Helfer Ketola Genesee Buff 3.0 cd* 1.0 c 18.7 c Norseman 0.6 d 0.6 c 1.7 c Corral 32.5 a 27.5 a 63.3 a Hayden 0.0 d 0.0 c 0.0 c Hidalgo 12.5 bcd 32.5 a 46.7 ab IL ab 12.5 bc 23.3 bc IL d 0.0 c 0.1 c MN d 0.0 c 0.1 c MNBT d 0.0 c 0.0 c MNBT d 0.0 c 0.0 c ND d 0.0 c 0.0 c ND d 0.0 c 0.0 c Newdak 0.5 d 0.0 c 0.1 c Ogle 12.5 bcd 20.0 ab 21.7 bc OT d 0.0 c 0.7 c SD d 0.0 c 0.1 c SD d 0.0 c 0.1 c SD d 0.0 c 0.1 c SD d 0.0 c 0.0 c SD d 0.0 c 0.0 c SD d 0.0 c 0.1 c SD d 0.0 c 0.1 c Streaker 5.5 cd 3.0 c 3.7 c Vitality 17.5 bc 7.5 bc 23.3 bc Mean CV (%) ANOVA P-value <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 HSD at P = *Numbers within a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other according to Tukey s HSD Test (P=0.05) Plant Disease Management Reports 12:CF025

37 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

38 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 36

39 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

40 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 38

41 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

42 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 40

43 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

44 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 42

45 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

46 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 44

47 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

48 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 46

49 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

50 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 48

51 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Cornell Cooperative Extension MALTING BARLEY KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL PRODUCTION IN NEW YORK STATE Have a marketing plan before you plant Contact a malthouse before planting to determine their need for the crop and preferred varieties. A contract with a malthouse is recommended. The contract should be specific to the variety(s), acres contracted, price/bu, and the grain quality parameters required to fulfill the contract. Contracts allow: 1. malthouses to secure the quality and quantity of barley they need, and 2. growers security to have a home for the malting barley they grow, provided it meets quality standards. Choose variety based on market demand and regional performance data Choose varieties based on Cornell University s variety-screening program to select modern varieties that have the potential to perform well in NY. Cornell evaluates malting barley varieties for yield, grain quality, lodging, and disease resistance potential. Use certified seed to insure variety purity so that you deliver to the malthouse the variety for which you contracted. Using certified seed reduces the risk of introducing weeds, and also reduces the risk of seed borne diseases that can affect yield and quality. Do not mix varieties within a field or in the bin. Malthouses are looking for lots of malting barley of the same variety so they can malt uniformly and sell a consistent product. Grow winter barley vs. spring barley based on risk/benefit for your farm Choices between winter and spring malting barley should be based on understanding the risk, yield, grain quality, and recommendations of the malthouse to which you are selling. Winter barley Average winter barley yields are typically bushels per acre but they are also the least winterhardy small grain that can be grown in New York so management guidelines for planting date and depth and soil drainage must be followed or frost heaving and plant death will occur. Since snow cover is key to protecting winter barley from extreme temperatures and drying winds, some degree of winter damage may occur in fields lacking snow cover, even if best practices were followed. Avoid varieties that are not winter hardy. Spring barley Average spring barley yields are typically bushels per acre. Management guidelines for planting date and soil drainage must be followed or spring barley yield potential will be low from late planting. Head emergence and grain filling during warmer weather for spring barley is often more conducive for fungal diseases.

52 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 50 Plant in well-drained fields with ph of 6.3 or higher Plant malting barley on well-drained fields with a ph of 6.3 or greater. Compared to other small grains, malting barley is markedly less tolerant of wet soils and low ph. Malting barley should ideally be planted in soils that: 1. have good soil health and a well-drained texture (good infiltration and percolation potential), 2. are not subject to a persistently high-water table that inhibits drainage (despite well-drained soil textures), and 3. have a low chance for ponding (topography that allows for surface drainage). Winter barley can more commonly suffer from wet soils because of exposure to spring thaw conditions. Malting barley should not be planted without first soil testing potential fields for ph and other plant nutrients. Target planting in mid-september and early April for optimal stands Planting date, rate, and seed depth are important to achieve your desired plant population. Winter barley should be ideally planted the second or third week of September. Spring barley should be planted in early April to strongly reduce summer weed pressure and maintain yield potential which drops by ~0.5-1 bushel per day after April 15th. Plant malting barley at a rate of two bushels (96 lbs) per acre. Higher seeding rates may increase lodging, disease potential, and lead to smaller and more variable kernels. Plant seed inches deep with a grain drill. Shallow planting hinders proper root development; this is particularly crucial for winter barley. Do not broadcast seed of a malting barley crop as seed depth will be inconsistent and may result in stands that are too thick, thin, or variable. Optimize fertilization to achieve yield and grain protein targets Nitrogen fertility management is important for malting barley to yield well and meet malting quality standards. The protein content in malting barley should generally be >9% and <12.5%. Protein levels are dependent on available N. Targeting N fertility can be difficult though because of potential losses due to denitrification and leaching with high precipitation and variable soil drainage. Also, malting barley N fertility rates have not been thoroughly evaluated in the Northeast to date. Growers need to consider N contributions from previous crops, manure, and nitrogen fertilizer to preserve grain quality and avoid lodging. Given what is known for spring barley, apply pounds per acre of N at planting. For winter barley apply pounds per acre of N at planting in the fall and target pounds of N per acre at green-up in early spring or split applied between green-up and stem elongation. Growers will need to adjust nitrogen rates for their situation to achieve the desired crude protein. Over-fertilizing with N can also make barley more prone to lodging. Because barley already has relatively soft straw, and our climate commonly has midsummer rain, dew, and wind that puts extra weight on grain heads, targeted N fertility is a key component of managing barley lodging. All other nutrients should be applied according to soil tests.

53 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Reduce disease and mycotoxin risk through integrated management Use integrated strategies to control Fusarium head blight, other diseases, and their effects on grain. There are no varieties with high Fusarium head blight resistance, though some possess moderate resistance. Management of Fusarium head blight requires an integrated strategy that includes less susceptible varieties, cultural practices, and fungicidal protection. Malting barley markets are very stringent about the DON (deoxynivalenol, aka, vomitoxin ) mycotoxin levels found in grains infected with Fusarium. Grain lots that test >1 ppm for DON concentrations are likely to be rejected for malting. The Fusarium head blight pathogen spreads mostly via spores in the air and is common because many grasses and corn are hosts. Barley should not be grown continuously, nor after corn or wheat, but in rotation with non-grass crops; planting barley into corn residues should especially be avoided. Fusarium infection occurs when there is persistent moisture on the heads from head emergence through the early grain formation stages. Fungicides to suppress Fusarium head blight should be applied when nearly all seed heads on the primary stems in a field have emerged from the boot. If weather conditions prevent fungicide application at this optimal timing, research has shown that fungicide application up to 7 days after full head emergence will still result in significant disease and toxin suppression, whereas fungicide application prior to head emergence has little benefit. For Fusarium suppression, only use labeled, recommended triazole fungicides (Caramba, Prosaro) at the full-labeled rate. Foliar fungal diseases, such as spot blotch, scald, powdery mildew, and leaf rust, may require management by planting varieties with resistance to specific diseases and/or by spraying labeled fungicides at appropriate timing for disease control. Fungicide products that include a strobilurin ingredient should not be applied after the flag leaf is visible to avoid an increased risk of DON mycotoxin accumulation in grain. Utilize the best tools to manage weeds in your fields Good weed control is essential to achieving high yields and allowing for the crop to be more easily combined and stored. Good pre-emergence weed control, timely spring seeding, strong crop competition (full, healthy, well-nourished stands), and weed seed bank control with herbicides and/or cultivation and crop rotations are important to managing weeds in northeastern grains. Herbicides such as 2,4-D and dicamba (Banvel, Clarity), bromoxynil (Buctril), and thifensulfuron + tribenuron (Harmony Extra) may provide annual broadleaf control. Pinoxiden (Axial XL) is labeled for annual grass control (ie. foxtail species) in spring barley. Pyrasulfotole + bromoxynil (Huskie) is also labeled for marestail control in winter barley. Read the label before use for specific rates, application timing, and weeds controlled. If using growth regulators such as 2,4-D and dicamba products, apply before stem elongation. Weeds can also be controlled by cultivation with a tine weeder; typically, at least two passes are used, with one just before seedling emergence and another at the 3 to 5-leaf stage. MALTING BARLEY KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL PRODUCTION IN NEW YORK STATE

54 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 52 Timely harvest is essential to produce malt-quality grain Maturing malting barley should be harvested as close to maturity as possible to reduce pre-harvest sprouting. Pre-harvest sprouting or pre-germination occurs when the grain has begun to mature and dry in the field but rain and/or dew is sufficient for the kernel to begin germinating. Do not allow barley to dry and then gain moisture before harvest if possible. Monitor diligently for physical signs of maturity (green color disappearance from glumes and peduncle, nodding grain heads) and target harvesting malting barley between 16-20% moisture if you have sufficient grain drying capacity. Allowing malting barley to field dry to the 12-13% kernel moisture level needed for long-term storage will lead to pre-harvest sprouting if excess moisture is present. A germination rate of 95% is desired for malting. Pre-harvest sprouting damage also limits the length of time the seed may be viable even if germination is 95% or better at harvest. Growers can also use varieties with resistance to pre-harvest sprouting in addition to timely harvest. Precision drying, cleaning, and storage will sustain grain quality to end markets Grain drying equipment, cleaning and storage are key tools for northeastern malting barley production. Malting barley production is often compared to certified seed production; barley kernels need to be high quality, uniform, clean, and most importantly - alive. Additional cleaning is usually needed to remove weed seeds and green matter that impart moisture and (sometimes) off- flavors. Access to at least a rotary cleaner is a must, but more cleaning equipment may be needed. Grain cleaning can also cull out diseased kernels that are often lighter than healthy ones. Lodged barley may also need to be cleaned to remove stones after harvest. Harvesting at higher moisture levels requires growers to have a robust grain-drying system that can move sufficient air and/or provide low-grade heat ( 100 F, no greater) if needed. Adequate cleaning, drying and storage should be lined up well before harvest. For more information, consult Cornell University s malting barley website: This publication was produced with support from the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, the Genesee Valley Regional Market Authority, the New York Farm Viability Institute, Cornell Cooperative Extension, and Cornell University School of Integrative Plant Science. fieldcrops.cals.cornell.edu/ small-grains/malting-barley Cornell Cooperative Extension MALTING BARLEY KEYS TO SUCCESSFUL PRODUCTION IN NEW YORK STATE May 2018

55 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Malting Barley Budgets, Conventional and Reduced Tillage, New York, 2018 John J. Hanchar, Cornell University/NWNY Dairy, Livestock, and Field Crops Program The 2018 estimates in tables 1 and 2 resulted from working with growers, and Cornell University regional agronomists and faculty. The estimates were prepared for the Empire State Barley & Malt Summit, December 13 & 14, 2017, Liverpool, NY, and the Empire State Producers Expo, January 16 18, 2018, Syracuse, NY. See <nwnyteam.cce.cornell.edu> for more economics of growing malting barley in NY. Table 1. Estimated Value of Production, Costs and Returns for Malting Barley by Variety by Management Intensity, Conventional Tillage, NY, Spring, Standard Management, 50 bu./acre Spring, Intensive Management, 65 bu./acre Winter, Standard Management, 70 bu./acre Winter, Intensive Management, 80 bu./acre Item Value of Production, Revenue --- $ per acre --- Barley at $6.63/bu. (grain only) *Est. weighted avg. price Total Costs of Production Variable Inputs --- $ per acre -- Fertilizer & Lime Seeds Sprays & Other Variable Inputs Labor Repairs & Maintenance Tractor Equipment Fuels & Lubricants Interest on Operating Capital Total Variable Inputs Costs --- $ per acre --- Total $ per bushel --- Total Fixed Inputs --- $ per acre -- Tractor Equipment Land charge Value of Op. & Family Mgt. *Excluded

56 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 54 Table 1. Estimated Value of Production, Costs and Returns Conventional Tillage, NY, continued Spring, Standard Management, 50 bu./acre Spring, Intensive Management, 65 bu./acre Winter, Standard Management, 70 bu./acre Winter, Intensive Management, 80 bu./acre Item Total Fixed Input Costs --- $ per acre --- Total $ per bushel -- Total Total Costs --- $ per acre --- Total $ per bushel --- Total Returns --- $ per acre --- Return above variable costs $ per bushel --- Return above variable costs $ per acre --- Return above total costs $ per bushel --- Return above total costs Costs of production include variable and fixed costs, excluding a charge for operator management, up to the time when grain is in the bin bin prep, hauling and drying are included, while storage and other marketing costs are excluded. Selected differences, spring versus winter barley, include the following: expected yields for spring varieties are typically lower than yields for winter varieties; spring barley receives a single application of fertilizers at planting, while winter varieties receive an application at planting in the fall, and a second at green-up in early spring. Selected differences, standard versus intensive barley, include the following: expected yields for standard management are typically lower than goals for intensively managed barley; intensively managed barley receives on average one fungicide application often in combination with an insecticide. Selected characteristics for the conventional tillage system include: a primary tillage pass with a combination chisel plow, disk; a secondary tillage pass with a medium, light disk; planting with a small grains drill; pre-emergence weed control; harvest with a grain combine at low speed. Expected weighted average price for barley estimated using price, and percentage marketed by end use data (Newbold and Thayer NYS Brewery Supply Chain Analysis. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Cooperative Extension, Harvest, NY). Expected yields per Ten Keys to Successful Malting Barley Production in New York. Cornell Cooperative Extension. The Spray & Other Variable Inputs cost item includes: spray materials; custom operator charges for spraying and other crop management tasks; crop professional fees for soil testing, scouting, consulting etc.; bin prep; drying; and others. Acknowledgement of funding sources: NYS Ag & Markets; Genesee Valley Regional Marketing Authority; NY Farm Viability Institute. Questions? Comments? Contact John Hanchar, jjh6@cornell.edu, (585)

57 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Table 2. Estimated Value of Production, Costs and Returns for Malting Barley by Variety, Reduced Tillage, Intensive Management, NY, Spring, Intensive Management, 65 bu./acre Winter, Intensive Management, 80 bu./acre Item Value of Production --- $ per acre --- Barley at $6.63/bu.* (grain only) *Est. weighted avg. price Total Costs of Production Variable Inputs --- $ per acre --- Fertilizers & Lime Seeds Sprays & Other Variable Inputs Labor Repairs & Maintenance Tractor Equipment Fuels & Lubricants Interest on Operating Capital Total Variable Inputs Costs --- $ per acre --- Total $ per bushel --- Total Fixed Inputs --- $ per acre --- Tractor Equipment Land charge Value of Op. & Family Mgt.* *Excluded Total Fixed Input Costs --- per acre --- Total $ per bushel --- Total

58 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 56 Table 2. Estimated Value of Production, Costs and Returns Reduced Tillage, continued Spring, Intensive Management, 65 bu./acre Winter, Intensive Management, 80 bu./acre Item Total Costs --- $ per acre --- Total $ per bushel --- Total Returns --- $ per acre --- Return above variable costs $ per bushel --- Return above variable costs $ per acre --- Return above total costs $ per bushel --- Return above total costs Costs of production include variable and fixed costs, excluding a charge for operator management, up to the time when grain is in the bin bin prep, hauling and drying are included, while storage and other marketing costs are excluded. Selected differences, spring versus winter barley, include the following: expected yields for spring varieties are typically lower than yields for winter varieties; spring barley receives a single application of fertilizers at planting, while winter varieties receive an application at planting in the fall, and a second at green-up in early spring. Selected characteristics, intensive management, include the following: expected yields for intensive management are typically higher than goals for standard management; intensively managed barley receives on average one fungicide application annually often in combination with an insecticide. Selected characteristics for the reduced tillage system include: a single tillage pass with a light disk or Aerway type tool; planting with a no till small grains drill; pre-emergence weed control; harvest with a grain combine at low speed. Expected weighted average price for barley estimated using price, and percentage marketed by end use data (Newbold and Thayer NYS Brewery Supply Chain Analysis. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Cooperative Extension, Harvest, NY). Expected yields per Ten Keys to Successful Malting Barley Production in New York. Cornell Cooperative Extension. The Spray & Other Variable Inputs cost item includes: spray materials; custom operator charges for spraying and other crop management tasks; crop professional fees for soil testing, scouting, consulting etc.; bin prep; drying; and others. Acknowledgement of funding sources: NYS Ag & Markets; Genesee Valley Regional Marketing Authority; NY Farm Viability Institute. Questions? Comments? Contact John Hanchar, jjh6@cornell.edu, (585)

59 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts

60 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 58

61 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts INSURING MALTING BARLEY 2018 Crop Year, NY Crop insurance is a safety net for farmers that helps you manage risk. If you have a crop failure, crop insurance can help you plant again next year. How it works: If you have a crop failure You buy a policy Notify your agent & file a claim Your farm continues for another year You receive an indemnity payment You can plant again next year Hi, I m new here! Malting barley production is increasing in New York state in response to the NY Farm Brewery Law passed in Malting barley is more difficult to grow than feed barley and brings a higher price. A new New York pilot program now provides a crop insurance option that reflects the higher cost of growing malting barley. Introducing: The New York Malting Barley Contract Option If you hold a contract to sell malting barley, you can insure your crop using the price in your contract, up to 1.85 times the price for feed barley established by the USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA). This means that if you buy a yield protection policy and have a yield loss, you can be compensated using the per-bushel rate which the malting house had agreed to pay you. For revenue protection policies, your allowable revenue can be calculated using your contract price. Note: New York s Malting Barley Contract Option is different from the Malting Barley Endorsement available in other states. Unlike the Endorsement, the Contract Option does not cover barley rejected because it does not meet industry standards for malting, and coverage is limited to a lower percentage of feed barley price. Cornell University delivers crop insurance education in New York State in partnership with the USDA Risk Management Agency. Diversity and Inclusion are a part of Cornell University's heritage. We are an employer and educator recognized for valuing AA/EEO, Protected Veterans, and Individuals with Disabilities.

62 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 60 Policies & Provisions Where can I insure malting barley? In all 44 New York counties where barley is insurable: Albany, Allegany, Broome, Cattaraugus, Cayuga, Chautauqua, Chenango, Columbia, Cortland, Delaware, Dutchess, Erie, Franklin, Genesee, Greene, Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Livingston, Madison, Monroe, Montgomery, Niagara, Oneida, Onondaga, Ontario, Orange, Orleans, Oswego, Otsego, Rensselaer, St. Lawrence, Saratoga, Schoharie, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Suffolk, Tioga, Tompkins, Washington, Wayne, Wyoming, Yates. Revenue protection insures against declines in both yield and prices; you can receive a payment because of revenue loss caused either by crop failure or by low prices. Yield protection insures that you have a given yield; you can receive a payment (based on your contract price) if your yield is low. Quality loss provisions, included in all barley policies, can provide some compensation if you have specific quality issues such as excess moisture or damaged kernels, even if your yields are not affected.* Prevented planting provisions, also included in barley policies, can help compensate you when weather conditions result in late planting or prevent you from planting barley at all. Causes of Loss Barley crop insurance protects against losses due to most natural causes as long as the loss could not have been prevented using standard management practices. Covered natural causes include excess moisture, drought, and cold temperatures. Deadlines Fall-planted Spring-planted Enrollment deadline to sign up for crop insurance Acreage reporting date. Report planted acreage to your agent. Premium payments are due. Note that premiums are due closer to harvest time, rather than at enrollment. September 30, 2017 March 15, 2018 November 15, 2017 July 15, 2018 August 15, 2018 August 15, 2018 Find an Agent Ask a neighbor for a recommendation or use the Agent Locator tool at rma.usda.gov/tools/agent.html Learn More Find crop insurance information at ag-analytics.org/cropinsurance * Quality loss provisions for NY policies are not specific to the Malting Barley Contract Option, but rather are included with all barley policies, including feed barley. Losses related directly to the specific requirements for malting are not necessarily covered.

63 Page Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts INSURING MALTING BARLEY New York Malting Barley Contract Option Example Quality Loss Scenarios New York barley growers can now insure their malting barley production using the New York Malting Barley Contract Option. The Contract Option allows growers to buy coverage using or approaching their contract price for malting barley, but covers only those losses also covered by non-malting barley policies. What does that look like? The following example shows how a decrease in marketability related to excess moisture can impact outcomes for a malting barley grower who carries a yield protection policy using the Contract Option. Yield Protection/Quality Loss Example Farmer Melanie is growing 100 acres of malting barley. She buys a yield protection insurance policy at the 80% coverage level, based on her actual production history (APH) yield of 50 bushels/acre. This results in a yield guarantee of 40 bushels/acre (50 x 80% = 40). She has a contract to sell the barley to a malting house for $5/bushel. Excess moisture results in yields of 45 bushels/acre. It also results in a 30% moisture level, and the barley is rejected by the malting house. Instead, Melanie must sell it for feed for $3/bushel. Melanie s yield loss alone would not be enough to trigger an indemnity payment, because her actual yield did not fall below 80% of her approved APH yield. However, because her policy contained a provision that protects against excess moisture, she can file a claim. When farmers have a loss due to excess moisture, insurers use a formula to translate that loss in value into yield-loss terms. The rules for excess moisture say that production will be reduced by.12% for each.1 percentage point of moisture in excess of 14.5%. Melanie s moisture level is 15.5 percentage points in excess of that level, meaning her total production will be reduced by 18.6%, bringing her adjusted production-to-count down to 36.6 bushels/acre, which is 3.4 bushels less than her acre guarantee of 40 bushels/acre. Melanie will receive an indemnity that pays her $5/bushel (her contract price) for her 3.4 bushel loss per acre on each of her hundred acres, for a total of $17/acre or $1700 overall. Melanie s total expected gross revenue from the barley crop was: $25,000 Without crop insurance, she would have earned: $13,500 With crop insurance, her gross revenue will be: $15,200 Crop insurance premium costs vary based on location, production history, coverage selected, and other factors. For Cortland county in 2017, the approximate premium for Melanie s yield protection policy is: $491 Cornell University delivers crop insurance education in New York State in partnership with the USDA Risk Management Agency. Diversity and Inclusion are a part of Cornell University's heritage. We are an employer and educator recognized for valuing AA/ EEO, Protected Veterans, and Individuals with Disabilities. Note: the New York Malting Barley Contract Option does not cover quality loss related directly to malting quality. Only quality losses that would also be covered for non-malting barley are covered. The fact that, in this scenario, the malting house rejected the barley is irrelevant in terms of coverage.

64 2018 Small Grains Management Field Day Handouts Page 62 30% % By the Numbers Moisture content of Farmer Melanie s barley Maximum okay moisture level 15.5% Excess moisture content 0.1% x.12% "Production will be reduced by.12 percent for each.1 percentage point of moisture in excess of..." 155 Total times to reduce production by factor below Production reduction factor 18.6% Percentage by which to reduce production level x 45 Production-to-count 8.4 Quality loss counted as production loss Find an Agent Ask a neighbor for a recommendation or use the Agent Locator tool at rma.usda.gov/tools/ agent.html Learn More Find crop insurance information and interactive tools at x x $5 45 Production-to-count Quality loss counted as production loss 36.6 Adjusted production-to-count 50 County average yield per acre Coverage level 40 Acre guarantee Adjusted production-to-count 3.4 Loss per acre Contract price $17 Indemnity per acre