By Andy Doyle

While most crops have already received fertilizer and probably some sprays like herbicide and possibly a PGR, the spraying season proper is only set to begin.

And like every other season, the same issues and concerns will apply. High input costs, high rental costs, big fertilizer bills and high machinery costs all add up to high production costs that threaten margin and profit.

Harvest price is also less than certain and the mild hope that the Ukraine/Russia conflict, and suggested drought issues on a number of continents may help price and profitability, remains but a hope.

These factors may impact, but at the time of writing these are but hopes and growers must remain grounded in the fact that last year’s price levels may well be the best that can be expected, which also means that lower prices are also quite possible should another record harvest occur.

So there is little scope for excessive spending on crop protection but there is also the definite fact that crops, once emerged, must be protected to maintain potential yield.

But the majority of chemical inputs merely maintain yield; adding to potential yield is more likely to come from the improvement of your soil and serious tillage farmers need to increase their long-term focus on this resource.

We are where we are for 2014. Thankfully, the majority of crops are in better shape than they were this time last year. This is always a plus in terms of potential yield level.

The few exceptions are those who got hit with flooding or high water tables over the late winter. Spring planting will be later than average but this means little when one remembers 2013. Well-planted is key to early growth and this is where yield potential comes from. So ensure that seedbeds are as good as practically possible when planting takes place.

Resistance risk continues

The dry year in 2013 was a godsend in terms of disease control on all crops and especially for septoria on wheat. Only time will tell how important it may prove to be in terms of staving off the development of resistance.

A low pressure disease year may set the development of septoria resistance to SDHIs back for another few years. Let’s hope so anyway.

The same situation may apply for net blotch. News that spores with resistance to SDHI actives were found in air sampling around Europe serves as a further shot across the bow for farmers re the fragility of this fungicide family.

While spores exhibiting reduced sensitivity (not full resistance) to both net blotch and septoria had been found one year earlier, these were found at research centres rather than blowing in the air and this was the first place where they might be expected to appear.

But resistant spores blowing in the air marks a more serious development in this saga.

While there has been no evidence of decreased SDHI sensitivity in Ireland, there is evidence that reduced triazole sensitivity in septoria has become almost universal across the country.

One year earlier saw some regions still quite sensitive to triazoles like epoxiconazole, while others were relatively insensitive. Last year, individual triazoles struggled everywhere.

A further worrying development is the increasing prominence of septoria isolates with reduced sensitivity to both epoxiconazole and tebuconazole.

These represented the two separate activity groupings up to now when all isolates were capable of being killed by an active from the combined groups.

Now we know that isolates have developed that can withstand a mix of actives from both of these triazole groupings, specifically epoxiconazole and tebuconazole. Up to two years ago, whatever escaped one of these actives would be caught by the other and vice versa but now this is changing.

However, it seems that sensitivity to methconazole (Caramba) is still holding up well and that this product alone, or in combination with epoxiconazole such as Gleam, remains more likely to offer preventative control of septoria to help protect SDHIs with curative activity, such as fluxapyroxad (Imtrex) and penthiopyrad (Vertisan).

Protecting the SDHIs requires that both curative and protective partners are used in any programme at rates proportionate to the specific characteristics of the SDHI.

Agchem resistance is not confined to fungicides. Last year, it was confirmed that aphids have been found in parts of the country with at least partial resistance to pyrethroid insecticides confirmed. While all actives are still thought to work, the partial knock down resistance (KDR) is now likely to mean that full rates are now required to ensure aphid kill.

Problems continue with weed resistance to SU or ALS-inhibiting herbicides and more weeds appear to be showing problems over time.

This reaction by nature seemed inevitable following the continued use of single mode of action products and now mixed activities are essential to achieve good control in many fields.

For those who do not have a problem yet, take care not to introduce resistant weed seed onto your land. Seeds can be brought in directly on machinery via contractors or moving within your own farm base, on imported straw or farmyard manure or even in soil from a field which already has a resistance problem.

The most likely routes for transfer of weed resistance will be man-made but birds also represent a serious distribution threat. Think weed hygiene when moving anything from field to field, including your own boots.

Changing requirements

This year sees the introduction of a number of new changes for those in the pesticide application business.

The Sustainable Use Directive brings with it the requirement for all pesticide advisers to be registered and trained up to a minimum standard.

The same legislation will also introduce a requirement for the registration and training of those actually applying pesticides, as well as the regular testing of pesticide application equipment.

Growers must now practice alternative control techniques in an effort to either reduce the requirement for pesticides or perhaps occasionally to save on their application.

Growers are obliged to practise techniques that will reduce their dependence on pesticides and to record these actions at farm level.

Farmers already practise many such techniques and should not be afraid of but rather embrace these principles, as they can, in time, help reduce dependence on chemicals to control every crop ailment, all of which cost money and consume potential profit.

New products

Not for the first time there are no new actives in the market this year. But there are a number of new products from many different quarters.

Last year’s new active, penthiopyrad, was the last of the new generation SDHIs to come to market and was sold in a mixture with chlorothalonil as Treoris.

This year, it comes in other configurations – with picoxystrobin as Frelizon and as a stand-alone active as Vertisan and Intellis, both at 200g/litre concentration.

DuPont has also introduced a second version of Treoris called Aylora.

BASF has introduced a three-way mixture of triazole, strobilurin and SDHI called Ceriax. This is targeted at barley and at the full 3.0 litres/ha rate, it applies a full rate of Opus, a full rate of Imtrex (Xemium) and a 0.8 rate of F500 (Modem).

The three modes of action in the mix are all strong against barley diseases and the inclusion of both an SDHI and a strobilurin is to help protect against the possibility of resistance developing in net blotch in particular to SDHIs.

Bayer CropScience also brought an Aviator equivalent to the market called Skyfall.

This is a Prosaro Bixafen mix rather than the Proline Bixafen mix which makes Aviator.

At full rate of 1.25 litres/ha, it supplies the same amount of bixafen per hectare as full rate Aviator plus Prosaro at 1.0 litres/ha (which is a half rate Proline plus half rate Folicur).