Farms.com Home  › News

Reminder: One Herbicide in the Postemergence Application Will Likely Not Be Effective

By Eric Jones and Philip Rozeboom et.al

The SDSU Extension Weed Science Project is currently conducting a plethora of field research evaluating weed management in soybean. One study is investigating the effectiveness of 2,4-D (Enlist One; 32 fluid ounces per-acre) and tank mixtures applied one time to 4-inch weeds. The applications were done on June 25, 2024. Since 2,4-D has no effect on grass weeds, clethodim (Select; 16 fluid ounces per-acre) was applied on June 28, 2024. Seven days after application, I was evaluating the study and was reminded that this treatment would likely not be effective on a farm scale. The majority of weed species in this study were common lambsquarters and waterhemp; fairly susceptible to 2,4-D. My initial thoughts during the evaluation were, “Great. The weeds are doing the twist and will likely die soon!” But there was a broadleaf weed that was not exhibiting any signs of twisting or curling.

The weed that was not exhibiting symptoms was kochia (Figure 1). Many know that 2,4-D is not effective on kochia, but what was noteworthy is that there were only a few kochia plants throughout this small study.

Although there were only a few plants, I started to play “what if” in my head. Even if there were hypothetically 10 kochia plants in this study, and each kochia plant produced 1000 seeds, the kochia problem increases by 10,000 (assume all the seeds are viable and germinate). The study was approximately one-half acre in size, but if we assume that there are 10 kochia plants that survive on a half acre throughout a section (640 acres), the initial relatively small problem of 12,800 kochia plants across 640 acres turns into 12,800,000 kochia plants to manage next year (again, assuming all seeds are viable and germinate).

The “what if” game results seem very doom and gloom, but the results do indeed illustrate the need to implement management tactics that are effective on the whole weed community, not just select species. Within this study, a tank mixture of 2,4-D (Enlist One; 32 fluid ounces per-acre) and glufosinate (Liberty; 43 fluid ounces per-acre) was applied as well. No kochia plants were evident in these plots, but I would assume that this tank mixture would likely be effective (Figure 2). However, if kochia gets too large (more than 4 inches in height), even glufosinate may not be effective enough alone (Figure 3). Later that day, I was walking a study that needed to be weed-free and was reminded that, even if there are weed escapes, there is still an effective tactic; albeit laborious.

Source : sdstate.edu

Trending Video

The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety

Video: The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety!



Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it.

The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere—and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026–27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson—one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group—a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult—and particularly costly—to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not simply how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines—far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s.

But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses.

That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”