“My biggest concern is that we’re opening the gates to infect thus far uninfected areas of the province,” said Janice Reyda, who farms in the Peace Country near Brownvale. “Fusarium is a poison to animals, to humans, to anything that eats it. We should not be opening the gates to contaminate areas of the province that were so far not contaminated with this nasty fungus.

“They sold us out, as far as I’m concerned.”

Fusarium graminearum — the fungal plant pathogen that causes fusarium head blight (mainly in wheat and barley) — has been regulated under the Pest and Nuisance Control Regulation since 2002 to help control the spread of fusarium head blight in the province.

On June 3, the Alberta government deregulated it, saying in a release at the time that the zero-tolerance policy had “failed to stop its spread.” The change was welcomed by many farmers, particularly those in the more heavily infected parts of southern Alberta, who were struggling to source clean seed from other parts of the Prairies where fusarium is well established.

But in northern Alberta, where fusarium is present in small levels or not at all, the change has been protested by some — including Reyda, who is encouraging other wheat and barley producers to request their checkoff dollars back from Alberta Wheat and Alberta Barley.

“I’ve been telling people to protest — to get our wheat commission that’s supposed to be advocating for us to actually advocate for us to keep it out of our area of the province,” said Reyda, who is also a councillor of the Municipal District of Peace. “We still need some protection here.”

The MD of Peace currently has a notice about the protest on the home page of its website, a move that Reyda hopes will spur the government to divide the province and return to a zero-tolerance approach in northern Alberta.

“They said they couldn’t do that in the interest of red tape reduction — that they simply had to treat the whole province the same,” said Reyda. “Now we’re being sold out in the interest of red tape reduction? Are you kidding me?

“They want to treat the province evenly. Well, now we all have to play in an infected sandbox. I just don’t understand infecting the whole province like this.

“I’d still like to see them divide the province between the areas that have the infection established and those that don’t.”

A lost battle?

Even that’s unlikely to stop the spread of fusarium across the province, said Tom Steve, general manager of Alberta Wheat and Alberta Barley.

“The prevailing opinion a number of years ago was that you could prevent it by restricting the presence of fusarium in seed. History has shown that, that has not been particularly effective,” said Steve.

“In the Peace region, because it’s remote from the rest of the province, they feel that they can prevent the spread of the disease through a zero-tolerance policy on presence in the seed. That hasn’t proven effective anywhere else in the province.

“We’ve gradually come to the conclusion that the best way to manage it is to assume that you have it and then implement best management practices to control it.”

That’s been the strategy in Saskatchewan and Manitoba, where fusarium is well established, he added.

“Some individuals take a different approach and thinking regulation is the way to stop the spread, but we think it’s more of a multi-phased approach,” said Steve.

“We’re really trying to promote a management plan around fusarium. It’s a primary focus of the commission in terms of research and extension activities.”

Seed testing is the cornerstone of that, particularly in the northern parts of the province where fusarium isn’t as prevalent.

“The management of it is upon farmers now,” said Samiya Fatima, disease diagnostician at 20/20 Seed Labs. “They have to control the disease to reduce their losses, and in the areas that have not seen fusarium yet, they have to test even more vigorously to contain the pathogen.”

Before, any wheat or barley seed sold had to be tested for fusarium, but that condition has been removed.

“Now testing is upon farmers, and I would hope they would put in that effort. You’re not bound to do it, but it’s good to do — like wearing face masks,” she said. “It could save you millions of dollars in yield losses.”

When sending seed for testing, farmers can opt for a plate test (which runs about $50 at 20/20 Seed Labs), but in areas where fusarium is present at lower levels, a DNA test is more sensitive and might be a better option.

“Since northern Alberta is quite free of fusarium still, it’s more important that they start with clean seed there so as not to introduce the disease,” said Fatima.

Few options for northern farmers

But given the way clubroot has spread in canola fields across Alberta, Blake Gaugler isn’t convinced farmers will do their due diligence to stop fusarium’s spread — and that could leave northern farmers with few options.

“Once you get north of Edmonton, the number of crops you can grow in a year drastically decreases,” said Gaugler, who farms near Hawk Hills, about 120 kilometres north of the town of Peace River.

“If basically all we’re growing is brassicas and cereals and we get both clubroot and fusarium because they’re left to spread unchecked, it’s going to cause some economic hardship up here for sure.”

Downgrading as a result of fusarium can cause revenue losses between $35 and $100 an acre, according to a study by the province in 2018, and in northern Alberta, that could be a farmer’s entire profit margin for the year.

“If there’s a loss of $30 to $100 an acre, that all of a sudden makes a lot of these cereals no longer profitable,” said Gaugler, who is also an agricultural fieldman for the county of Northern Lights. “Some years, a guy hopes to make $50 to $100 an acre, depending on the year. That’s all your profit gone.”

Given that, Gaugler is worried farmers aren’t getting the full picture of the risk fusarium presents in the province.

“We don’t like to believe we get government propaganda, but they’re painting it as this great picture — that the industry is only going to get better, that private industry is going to get more involved, and we’re just going to solve this problem,” he said.

“They’re painting everything rosy, but they’re not talking about the negatives. They don’t talk about what this could mean for our export markets or for our status as the highest-quality cereal producer in all of Canada and across the world. They’re not telling farmers, ‘Hey, you could lose $30 to $100 an acre.’

“They’re not talking about any of that. I would just like them to accurately present both sides of the argument.”

“There are a lot of management tools that are available — you can spray for it, you can apply seed treatment — but all those things cost producers money,” said Sexsmith-area farmer Corey Beck. So to now introduce it when you don’t have it, you now have an additional management cost.”

Steve acknowledges that “there’s an economic consequence” to fusarium.

“If it shows up in the shipments in any significant way, that’s certainly going to have a market impact and a price impact back to the farm,” he said, adding proper management can reduce that risk.

“The presence of fusarium graminearum at low levels in the seed is not indicative of what the crop will produce if it’s properly managed — and it’s been managed in Saskatchewan and Manitoba for many years at low levels.”

Balancing risk versus need

That’s been the key to balancing the risk of the disease and the needs of producers in other provinces, he added.

“It ensures that farmers have access to high-quality seed,” said Steve. “If it’s overregulated, farmers will end up going across the border into Saskatchewan to access seed because the rules are different there. They have a more flexible regulatory regime in terms of tolerances, as does Manitoba. Fusarium is just a reality in those jurisdictions.

“It’s all going to have some level of presence. It’s very difficult to keep it out.”

But Reyda doesn’t buy that argument.

“They could have sourced seed from areas of our own province that are fusarium free rather than smuggling infected seed across the border from Saskatchewan,” she said.

There’s also a risk that northern farmers won’t be able to source clean seed any longer, added Beck, who is also a councillor at the County of Grande Prairie.

“We don’t have a high level of it, but we get a lot of our seed stock from down south,” he said. “By deregulating it, it makes it tougher for us not to have seed that has fusarium head blight on it.”

At this point, though, northern Alberta farmers are left with few options to protect their operations, Reyda said. With the removal of fusarium from the act, municipal agricultural fieldmen aren’t able to enter fields if they suspect a fusarium infection if the farmer refuses them entrance.

But in making the change, the provincial government gave municipalities the authority to re-elevate fusarium as a pest within their jurisdictions.

“We’ve been advised that a bylaw is pretty much the only option we’ve got here now,” said Reyda.

“With a bylaw, they could get back in the fields again, but there’s always the issue of enforcement. Our municipality is very small, and we simply don’t have the resources for that.

“They’re not in the habit of hauling RCMP officers around as they’re going about their duties. It’s a pretty cumbersome way of handling things.”

That’s Beck’s concern as well.

“We want to make sure, if we do decide to look at something to protect the Peace Country from fusarium, that it’s enforceable,” he said.

It’s also unclear whether the government or the cereal commissions will be funding further surveillance and monitoring of the disease.

“It’s off the act now, so we don’t really care where the money comes from — we just want guaranteed, stable funding so we can get out there and do some surveillance and monitoring,” said Gaugler.

Alberta Wheat and Alberta Barley have launched a website — managefhb.ca — to highlight the risks and share best management practices. Steve has also reached out to the counties “to indicate that we’d like to work with them collaboratively as opposed to having these debates over the internet.”

“We certainly did advocate for it, but we didn’t make the policy change,” said Steve. “Now we’re just trying to make the system work better by controlling the spread of fusarium through best management practices rather than regulation.”

That’s really the only option that Beck sees moving forward.

“We’re looking at how we can somehow keep ourselves somewhat fusarium free, but it’s inevitable when it’s deregulated that it’s going to work its way into the area,” he said. “It’s just a matter of how and when… Our path forward without regulation is going to have to be education.”

But for northern producers like Gaugler, that approach might not be enough to protect their operations from fusarium.

“The cheapest, best method for managing fusarium is obviously prevention — taking every precaution to never have it come on your farm in the first place,” he said.

“It sounds like it was more of a political decision than an actual look at the science. It’s not really clear what alternatives they looked at. It’s been muddy to say the least.”

The post Fusarium removal from pest act sparks protest appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“This news has been a long time coming,” said Alberta Wheat chair Todd Hames. “FHB (fusarium head blight) is well established in Alberta and since it’s spread through airborne spores, we know that zero tolerance policies are not effective.

The change “will allow farmers to focus on real risk factors to better manage the disease,” said Alberta Seed Processors president Tom Coppock.

Both organizations are part of the fusarium head blight working group, which is in the process of launching a website (managefhb.ca) detailing best practices for fusarium control.

The post Fusarium rule change applauded appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Harvest management of fusarium-damaged kernels (FDK) will improve the grade of a cereal crop, said Neil Whatley.

“Many FDKs — especially in wheat — are smaller, lighter in weight, and more shrunken than normal, healthy kernels,” said Whatley. “Combine fan speed can be increased to blow out those infected kernels.”

However, this may not be an option for FHB-infected barley and oats where there is less kernel shrivelling, he added.

“Slower combine travel speed, especially in lodged wheat, also aids in separating good kernels from FDKs by avoiding occasional combine overloads. That ensures an increase in air blast time to reduce FDK level in the grain sample.”

Using a gravity table after harvest can further help with separating lightweight FDK.

“However, producers in areas where FHB caused by Fusarium graminearum is just starting to appear and become established, may want to be cautious about using combine settings to blow out infected wheat kernels,” said Whatley. “The shrivelled kernels tend to be the part of the wheat plant that is one of the most prolific producers of the wind-borne spore stage. It would then represent a higher risk to subsequent crops.”

In areas with a lower risk of FHB, producers can use post-harvest cleaning of grain to remove FDKs to improve grade and reduce the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol (DON), he added.

Additionally, combines should be properly set to thoroughly chop and uniformly spread cereal straw and chaff to encourage better residue decomposition and reduce pathogen survival in a field.

“Remove loose crop residue from harvest equipment before leaving an infested field to prevent spreading the disease to non-infected fields,” said Whatley.

Symptoms of FHB can be seen in harvested grain, especially in wheat. Typically, infected wheat kernels will be shrivelled and have a chalky white appearance with some evidence of fungal growth. In contrast, infected barley kernels do not typically exhibit a lot of shrivelling. Instead of having a chalky white appearance, they will exhibit a brownish discolouration and may show evidence of fungal growth. The brownish discolouration can be easily confused with infections due to the spot blotch fungus (kernel smudge) while hail damage can also produce similar discolouration in barley.

While infection occurring at early flowering can lead to complete abortion of kernels, fusarium-damaged kernels generally result from infection that occurs from the early- to mid-flowering stages. Later infections that occur well after flowering and up to the soft-dough stage of kernel development may not show visible symptoms. However, kernels may contain the fungus, and more importantly, the mycotoxin it produces.

Even if symptoms are not observed when the crop is growing, representative grain samples collected at harvest can be sent to a seed testing lab to determine the level of grain infection by Fusarium graminearum, the most important FHB species, and the concentration of DON. If FDKs are observed in the harvested grain, these can also be tested by commercial labs.

“DON can continue to develop in wet grain, so drying or aerating cereal grains to safe storage moisture contents as soon as possible after combining is important,” said Whatley. “High DON grain should be segregated and monitored while in storage. Prevent moisture migration or rewetting of an area of the bin to avoid further DON development.”

Routine testing of harvested grain and seed intended for planting is another way of assessing the presence and extent of Fusarium graminearum, especially if harvested grain is downgraded due to the presence of FDK. Several private seed company labs offer testing services for Fusarium graminearum in cereal seed.

If grain infested with FHB is intended to be used for livestock feed, grain samples should be tested for DON levels through a lab analysis.

“Knowledge of mycotoxin levels will provide guidance as to whether the grain is suitable for feeding, especially for more sensitive animals, such as swine, dairy cattle and horses that tolerate a maximum of one part per million (PPM),” said Whatley. “The maximum tolerated DON level for beef cattle, sheep and poultry is five PPM. It is important to know the amount of DON present (PPM) and then dilute the contaminated grain with healthy grain or forages to lower the amount of toxins to a safe level for feeding.”

The post Proper combine adjustment pays off now and later appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Forecasting head blight is really quite challenging,” said Mike Harding, a research scientist and plant pathologist with Alberta Agriculture and Forestry.

• Read more: Provincial legislation isn’t helping fusarium battle, say seed growers

The province saw record levels of fusarium graminearum in 2016 because it was a wet year. The extremely dry conditions last summer reduced the incidence but the pathogen continues to spread to new areas, and there is more of it in areas that have already been infested.

“We can’t say that it is necessarily established everywhere, but it certainly is spreading,” said Harding.

Fusarium species are very adept at colonizing cereals and corn at the ground level, particularly in the first node of the plant, where the largest number of pathogens are found. Some of the pathogens that cause head blight produce asexual spores that can splash higher up on the plant when it rains. These spores then infect the anthers, grow down into developing kernels, and cause shrunken, bleached kernels.

“In years where we don’t see a lot of head blight, it doesn’t mean that the fusarium has gone away,” said Harding. “It just means that the fusarium may be present low down in the canopy or even on the roots.”

The pathogen could simply have been completing its life cycle down in the crop in 2017. As a result, producers should be on the lookout in any area where fusarium graminearum is common.

In 2017, there were dry conditions in south and central Alberta during the flowering period, and a survey by the Canadian Grain Commission showed that numbers were down.

“The weather influences this disease to a great extent,” said Harding, noting the highest risk is when there are wet conditions during the flowering period.

Even if the disease wasn’t seen in 2017, it could still have colonized crop residues.

“Just because we had low levels in 2017 doesn’t mean we couldn’t have another record-breaking year in 2018,” said Harding.

Fusarium graminearum head blight has been most common and damaging in southern Alberta, but a 2016 survey by Alberta Agriculture found 20 per cent of all the fields on the eastern side of the province had some signs of the pathogen. There are also a few pockets in other areas of the province and researchers found their first positive sample in the Peace in 2016.

“There are some areas where it is more severe and we expect to see a significant number with more than 20 per cent of fields with it in a wetter year,” said Harding. “But every field in the province needs to be on alert for this. It’s probably not going to stop moving.”

By the time symptoms of head blight have been found, there are no management options left. But it’s still good to scout during the late-milk to early-dough stage to look for signs of prematurely ripening florettes.

“Sometimes, even when you peel back or look around the edge of the bloom, you can see a pink or salmony-coloured growth of the fungus,” said Harding.

At harvest, producers will see shrivelled and bleached kernels.

In order to prevent the spread of the pathogens, producers should test their seed, and avoid bringing contaminated or infected seed onto their farm.

“Because fusarium is surviving on crop residue, crop rotation is a good management tool,” said Harding.

Other tips include using high-quality seed, seed treatment, purchasing good genetics, applying fungicide, and increased seeding rates.

This year, Alberta Agriculture has also developed an app that can be used on a computer or mobile phone. The app, which can be found at weatherdata.ca/m calculates hourly risk, and also offers weather alerts and historical fusarium data.

Producers should check it daily because the situation can change from day to day, said Harding. The site is only active during the growing season.

The post Don’t let your guard down — fusarium still a risk appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Now that it’s in the pest act, it’s hard to get it out of the pest act,” said Ward Oatway, chair of the Alberta Seed Growers Association and owner of Oatway Seeds in Lacombe.

His association, the provincial wheat and barley commissions, and others have been calling on the province to take fusarium graminearum off the Agricultural Pests Act. That would still leave the fungal disease under the Pest and Nuisance Control Regulation, which as its name suggests, is about controlling rather than eradicating a pest. (For example, the Norwegian rat is a pest but coyotes and magpies are nuisances.)

Fusarium graminearum was listed under the pest act in 1999, a few years after a major outbreak in Manitoba of the fungal disease, which reduces yield and grade and produces mycotoxins. That means there is zero tolerance for fusarium graminearum in grain seed, and seed growers are prohibited from selling seed with any detectable level of the pathogen.

• Read more: Don’t let your guard down — fusarium still a risk

“It’s hard because there hasn’t been any enforcement for it. You don’t want to break the law, so you test it, and you do it and you follow the rules as best you can,” said Oatway. “It’s harder in certain areas of the province where you have seed that has 0.5 per cent of fusarium and you can’t sell it.”

That’s despite the fact that seed treatments kill fusarium.

“If you treat the seed, the chances of fusarium being there is virtually none,” said Oatway. “That’s different from what we’ve been told in the pest act. If it’s present and you’re testing, it’s a moot point because you can’t sell it.”

Agriculture Minister Oneil Carlier has been sympathetic to calls from farm groups and his department recently conducted a survey (which closed earlier this month) and has pledged to review the matter. However, several municipalities are opposed, said Oatway.

Downgrading the pathogen to a nuisance and dealing with the problem on a case-by-case basis is the better route, he said.

“As long as you’re treating your seed and testing the seed, you’re propagating it much less. We’re not looking for an accepted level. We’re looking for a flexible program — not just zero.”

For example, durum is a significant challenge for seed growers. Good durum seed can have one or two per cent fusarium in it, and be treated to remove the risk. However, under the current law, that treated seed can’t be sold in Alberta. That’s not the case across the border in Saskatchewan, where seed can contain up to 20 per cent fusarium before it is treated.

“With seed treatment, the problem is that fusarium on the seed does not mean that you will have fusarium on your crop in the fall — it just means that it’s present,” said Oatway, adding proper management and rotations are the keys to reducing the spread of the pathogen.

Moreover, fusarium was added to the act to stop its spread through seed, but the main way it’s transmitted is through crop residue — either when it’s blown into neighbouring fields or hitches a ride on equipment, he added. The main problem areas are south of the Trans-Canada, although it has been found in the Wainwright area, and is moving towards the Saskatchewan border.

“It’s not as pervasive as clubroot, but it moves with the environment, as well,” said Oatway.

“We get a wet year, and there’s more fusarium present.

“Back in the early 2000s, during the drought, we were getting fusarium hauled in (from other provinces) and fusarium on the bedding straw. That didn’t help the situation at all either.”

Having the disease in the pest act also prevents new crop varieties with better fusarium graminearum tolerance from being brought into the province.

At present, the industry has been educating people to test their seed. Only 20 per cent of the seed sold in Alberta is certified and has gone through testing, said Oatway. The vast majority of producers don’t test their seed if they are using farm-saved or common seed, which means that they could be spreading fusarium without knowing it.

“It’s not just the seed growers who have to worry about this. We’re the ones who have to follow the rules by law,” he said.

In order to prevent fusarium, producers should use pedigreed seed, test their own seed, and use good management practices, such as a four-year rotation, he said.

The post Provincial legislation isn’t helping fusarium battle, say seed growers appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Fusarium graminearum is considered the most important fusarium head blight (FHB) species due to its aggressiveness and production of deoxynivalenol or DON (a.k.a. vomitoxin), said crop specialist Neil Whatley.

To limit impact, farmers should use a combination of disease prevention strategies throughout the growing season, he said.

“The first step to trying to limit FHB is knowing whether the disease is present in a field by searching for and observing disease symptoms,” he said. “Additionally, learning whether fusarium graminearum is the dominant FHB species under observation, and becoming aware of its prevalence and severity, contributes to this first step toward potentially reducing its impact.”

FHB symptoms appear during the heading stage, typically once the plant reaches late milk to early dough during the last part of July or early August. The most apparent disease symptom in wheat is premature bleaching of one or more infected spikelets in the cereal plant’s head, which visibly stands out on green heads. Rain-splashed spore growth appears as an orange, pink or salmon-coloured fungal growth at the base and edges of the glumes on these blighted head parts. Symptoms in barley are much less distinct and the brownish discolouration due to FHB can be easily confused with hail damage, or symptoms of net blotch or spot blotch infection.

Diseased spikelets can contain visibly affected kernels. In grading terms, visibly affected wheat seeds are called fusarium-damaged kernels (FDK), whereas in barley, it is called fusarium mould. FDKs in wheat are shrunken and are typically a chalky white colour, while fusarium mould on barley appears as an orange or black encrustation of the seed surface. Symptoms in barley may be confused with hail damage, kernel smudge, or infection by leaf diseases (such as net blotch or spot blotch).

“Infection timing determines the severity of kernel damage,” said Whatley. “While infection occurring at early flowering can lead to complete abortion of kernels, FDKs generally result from infection from the early- to mid-flowering stages. Late infections well after flowering and up to the soft-dough stage of kernel development may not show visible symptoms. However, kernels can contain the fungus and, more importantly, the mycotoxin it produces.”

If any symptoms are observed, send the affected cereal head samples to a lab to determine whether the species is indeed fusarium graminearum and its prevalence.

“Routine testing of harvested grain and seed intended for planting is another way of assessing the presence and extent of fusarium graminearum, especially if harvested grain is downgraded due to the presence of FDK,” said Whatley. “Several private seed company labs offer testing services for fusarium graminearum in cereal seed/grain.”

If fusarium graminearum is not found in plant, grain or seed samples, producers should be cautious about their seed source and ensure that they limit their exposure to this pathogen via infected seed, he said.

“This is less of a concern where the pathogen is well established on crop residues from previous growing seasons. Ultimately, determining the need for a fungicide application in an area where fusarium graminearum is established will largely depend on the occurrence of moderate temperatures and suitable moisture just prior to and during the early stages of flowering.”

The post Now is the time to create next year’s battle plan for fusarium appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Typically, protein and energy contents are lower in the spring compared to the fall,” said provincial beef and forage specialist Barry Yaremcio. “Digestibility of the feeds can be reduced as well. In the case of greenfeed or swath grazing, digestibility could be up to 10 per cent lower.”

That means unthreshed crops or spring-threshed grain need to be blended with other feedstocks to improve quality.

As well, animals in late pregnancy or in lactation have approximately 25 to 30 per cent higher nutrient requirements than animals in early or mid-pregnancy.

“While there are differences between species, this trend is true for all,” said Yaremcio. “As a result, spring swath grazing or cereal greenfeed harvested from overwintered crops need to be tested for quality, and rations need to be balanced to meet animal requirements.”

Mycotoxins are another concern. They are often found in cereal crops but are much less common in canola and legumes as the fungi that can produce mycotoxins “predominantly infect the seed head and not the stems or leaves of the plant.”

“If the weather is reasonably mild with high relative humidity, conditions are ideal for mycotoxin development,” said Yaremcio. “Ergot concentrations appear to reach maximum values by mid- to late July. Levels remain stable for ergot. Levels of some of the fusarium mycotoxins can increase when grain is in storage.”

Testing is critical, he added.

It’s important to test for the presence of mycotoxins, not the type of microbes or populations present on the material,” he said. “If feed test results indicate that there is sufficient nutritional quality to feed to livestock, then testing for mycotoxins is required before any of the material is actually fed to the livestock.”

For more detailed information, go to www.agriculture.alberta.ca and search for ‘overwintered crops.’

The post Tips when feeding unharvested crops appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“As you know, the severity and incidence of fusarium is actually on the rise — if we continue to get the weather that we’re getting, we can expect the same,” Agriculture Canada research scientist Brian Beres said during a session at FarmTech.

Fusarium is well established in the Irrigation Belt in the province’s south and becoming more prevalent in the area around Oyen.

“For the most part, you’ll get fusarium in one of two ways,” said Beres, who works at Ag Canada’s Lethbridge research station. “It’s colonized on the crop debris, so it’s sitting in the crop, or it’s sitting on the soil surface, and then by rain events or irrigation, it (the spores) start getting splashed up and the spores release.”

Because breeders are developing shorter varieties of cereal crops, it “doesn’t take much” for the spores to splash up into the head of the crop and infest it.

• Read more: Don’t delay if you haven’t lined up seed
• Read more: Battling fusarium requires new initiatives

“Once it gets into the head, you’re in big trouble,” he said.

One way to mitigate the risk is to plant winter wheat which disrupts the fusarium life cycle because it matures so much earlier.

“It’s not a magic bullet, but it’s one thing that can help you in your defence,” said Beres. “If things are getting bad on your farm and you’re not doing winter wheat, you might want to do a rethink because it’s one of the few classes that also has a resistant variety.”

Some varieties in Canadian Western Red Spring and Canadian Prairie Spring have resistance and while some CPS varieties are improving on this score, durum is highly susceptible.

“If you’re flexible with your market class, things like winter wheat and CPS are probably the way to go,” said Beres.

“If you like Grade 1 and you’re experiencing fusarium, you’re not going to get it with CWRS… You’re going to make a lot more money with winter wheat.”

Only about one million acres of winter wheat are grown in Western Canada, something Beres called “a little mind boggling.”

“I think there’s a market out there. I think there’s a chance to manage some of the issues that we have on farm with disease. But it’s a mindset and that mindset is pretty tough to break.”

Another defence is not to delay seeding dates. When the temperature in the top inch of soil is about 2 C, spring wheat can be planted as long as growers use dual fungicide and insecticide.

“With winter wheat or spring wheat, if you go in early, the flowering period will not be at the same time as the major spores of fusarium head blight,” said Beres.

Seed treatments can be useful for combating fusarium when growers are not sure that they have a clean seed lot. Using a good seed treatment can reduce the number of fusarium-damaged kernels. As well, higher seeding rates can add to uniformity in the field, which can help the crop fight off both disease and weeds.

Fungicides can help control fusarium, but they aren’t a silver bullet.

“Relying solely on fungicide is not going to give you the results you (might expect),” he said.

Fungicide is only effective if it drenches the head of the plant, and its efficacy is affected by sprayer or applicator speed, boom height, nozzle angle, and application timing.

The post Fusarium is tough, but you can fight back, says crop scientist appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Disease levels are a little higher this year and that’s having an adverse effect on quality,” said Trevor Nysetvold of BioVision, a seed-testing company with offices in Sherwood Park and Grande Prairie.

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) specifically is higher this year. On average, with barley we’re seeing roughly 20 per cent of the samples showing up positive for fusarium. Last year it was nine per cent. We’re finding these types of general trends in seed from all cereal crops classes including barley, durum, oats, and wheat.”

• Read more: Battling fusarium requires new initiatives

Nysetvold recommends producers who haven’t secured their seed supply for this spring, talk to their local retailers right away.

“There’s good-quality seed out there so from our standpoint we always suggest growers contact their local seed retailer and talk to them because these issues do become quite regional.”

Alberta is not alone on the Prairies when it comes to heightened FHB content. At BioVision’s Winnipeg branch, 18.5 per cent of samples is testing positive for fusarium. However, Alberta is the only Prairie province with zero-tolerance legislation towards fusarium graminearum — and that’s troublesome news for grain producers.

“If it’s found, it’s deemed not fit for use as seed in Alberta,” said Nysetvold.

The president of Alberta Seed Growers is also recommending that farmers line up their seed ASAP.

“I advise producers to order their seed early to get the quality they want,” said Glenn Logan, who farms near Lomond in southern Alberta. “There’s definitely going to be a reduced supply of good-quality seed.”

Province-wide issue

Last year’s wet conditions are the main culprit for the high levels of FHB, said Nysetvold.

“If we go back to 2014, following the wet 2013 season, about 16 per cent of the barley seed we tested showed positive for fusarium. It varies year to year mostly due to weather conditions — it was wet last year and there is a direct correlation.”

Historically, southern Alberta has always been most at risk, but this year other regions are seeing high levels, too.

“Northern Alberta has probably seen the larger increase in the amount of fusarium found,” he said.

Germination levels are also an issue — down a full percentage point, said Nysetvold.

“When you consider the number of samples we’ve tested that’s not inconsequential. It is showing that disease levels and other adverse harvest conditions are having a detrimental effect on germination quality, but it’s not extreme.”

So what can producers who find themselves with FHB-infected seed do?

Unfortunately, in Alberta, not much, said Logan.

You shouldn’t plant it and the livestock market may not be as receptive to FHB-infected seed as it has in the past.

“The livestock market has kind of been the dumping ground for fusarium-infected grain,” said Logan. “However, the tolerance level you can feed to livestock safely has been reached. Feedlot operators are fairly discerning now when selecting their grains, leaving farmers with not a lot of alternatives for marketing.”

It’s the same story at many elevators.

“There was a high incidence of fusarium in the cash crop taken off last fall and that means a lot of refusals at the terminals, which to my knowledge hasn’t happened in Alberta in the past,” said Logan.

But producers can — and should — be thinking about fusarium prevention for this year.

“Ensure you get the best seed possible,” said Logan. “Treat your seed to the label suggestions — don’t try to cut corners on it. Watch your rotations carefully. Fungicide applications at the proper time will go a long ways. It’s part of an education process.”

The post Don’t delay if you haven’t lined up seed appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

One of the first things to do is recognize that FHB has become a significant problem and then create policies that do not unnecessarily penalize producers, said Glenn Logan.

• Read more: Don’t delay if you haven’t lined up seed

“Across the province there’s a lot of variance in thought on this,” he said. “Some counties want to maintain the zero-tolerance level because they think they are fusarium free. If you look hard enough, though, you can find it pretty much anywhere.”

Sample testing by the Canadian Grain Commission shows a dramatic increase in Alberta in recent years. A decade ago, the percentage of positive results for fusarium were in the low single digits, and often zero or near zero. Now results in the high teens or above 20 per cent are commonplace.

More seed treatment is also needed, said Logan.

“A few years ago a study showed that you could safely treat seed up to about five per cent fusarium infection and kill it on the seed,” he said. “Treating seed won’t do much about soil infected by fusarium, but you can safely plant the seed on fusarium-free soil and maybe not have to worry so much.”

The post Battling fusarium requires new initiatives appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.