Soybean guide west

October 2015

Those Extra Bushels At last, we‘re closer to growing soys as intensively as corn PG. 6

Soybeans: Do your homework before jumping in head first PG. 14

soy health claim pG. 3 Shaw‘s Market outlook pG. 10 Microbial biotech coming pG. 20

Advancements in the lab move you forward in the field.

Dow Seeds may be a new name, but it has the power of Dow AgroSciences firmly behind it. This includes a robust R&D pipeline and leading-edge trait technologies like Herculex, SmartStax and the Enlist Weed Control System. So expect better. Better traits, genetics and performance.

We’re behind you all the way.

I work for Dow AgroSciences.

I am Dow Seeds.

@DowSeedsCA

Regulatory approvals are pending in other geographies for the Enlist™ herbicide solution and crops containing Enlist herbicide tolerance traits. The information presented here is not an offer for sale. DOW, the DOW Diamond design, Dow AgroSciences, Enlist, Herculex and Dow Seeds are trademarks of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow. SmartStax™ multi-event technology developed by Dow AgroSciences and Monsanto. SmartStax™ is a trademark of Monsanto Technology LLC. Herculex™ Insect Protection technology by Dow AgroSciences and Pioneer Hi-Bred.

10/15-43356-2 CGE

Soyguide

Soy wins health claim The label approval is seen as an important step toward increased Canadian consumption

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

Soybean Guide, October 2015

T

he popular saying is that good things come in small packages, which exactly describes Canada in terms of its overall output as one of the world’s soybean producers.

Because good things do come from Canada. In fact, they may even be great things, thanks to our capabilities at producing high-quality identity-preserved, non-GMO soybeans, as we have demonstrated over the last two decades and more.

We have the expert producers who grow the soybeans, and grow them well.

We have the infrastructure for segregation.

And, after many years, we have a quality reputation among global consumers.

Despite all these positives, however, Canada, unlike the U.S., has not allowed health claims that promote the benefits of soy protein in human diets. But that changed in March 2015, when the country’s agri-food value chain received Health Canada’s approval to recognize soy protein’s benefit in the daily diets of Can­adians.

Making the rounds of the Grain Farmers of Ontario’s “Spring Classic,” Soy 20/20 chief executive officer Jeff Schmalz was sharing the news, highlighting the journey that took more than three years to finally garner this important claim.

The Health Canada decision covering the claim is eight pages long, but of particular importance to the IP sector, including producers and processors, are three key paragraphs, cited from the document, “Assessment of a Health Claim About Soy Protein and Cholesterol Lowering”: “The ‘daily amount’ referred to in the primary statement is 25 g of soy protein.

This amount is based on the evidence

available concerning the amount of soy protein shown to help reduce cholesterol.

In this statement, the percentage of the daily amount of soy protein provided in one serving should be rounded to the nearest multiple of five per cent.

“The following additional statements could be placed adjacent to the primary statement, in letters up to twice the size and prominence of those in the primary statement: • soy protein helps reduce/ lower cholesterol • high cholesterol is a risk factor for heart disease • soy protein helps reduce/lower cholesterol, (which is) a risk factor for heart disease “Foods and ingredients eligible for the claim include soy beverages, tofu, miso, tempeh, natto, soy cheese, soy nuts, isolated soy protein (ISP), soy protein concentrate (SPC), textured soy protein (TSP) and soy flour (SF). Soy sauce and soybean oil are excluded from the claim because they lack substantial amounts of soy protein.”

The claim is particularly timely. Statis­ tics Canada numbers indicate 39 per cent of Canadians between the ages six and 79 have unhealthy levels of cholesterol in their systems.

Despite those numbers, Schmalz says navigating the specific disease risk-reduction claim has been a difficult process, since researchers are consulted for critiques and analysis. Although it took more than three years from application to approval, Schmalz notes that process is not out of line with other, similar claims applications.

Continued on page 4

3

Continued from page 3

Real work begins Now that the claim is in hand, the next phase starts with a three-year communications plan to reach consumers and help them better understand the benefits of soy foods. Knowing that Canada is a leading producer of food-grade soybeans can’t hurt either. The communications strategy involves four or five of the larger Canadian companies involved with IP soybean processing, with each company’s marketing department lending its expertise to the plan.

“If we have a successful media plan, we’ll bring more consumers to the table, and that’s going right back to what gets planted in the ground,” says Schmalz, based at Soy 20/20’s headquarters in Guelph. “We have also applied for some government funding, which is going to give us the wherewithal to approach consumers. And then another part of the strategy is determining what we’re going to do on packaging for a soy milk or tofu container, and we’ve designed a new logo for that.”

The overall objective is to grow the sector, of course. Production of IP soybeans has been relatively flat for the last five years (industry members suspected it may have fallen to just 20 per cent of total soybean production in Canada in 2013), and any growth has come from newer products and not the beverage sector.

That’s the key driver, not just where the health claim is concerned, but as it pertains to the domestic soy food market.

North American tastes tend to lean away from soy foods, known more for their “beany” taste than their health benefits.

Another factor is more cultural, in that our diets don’t tend to include tofu or miso, or natto or tempeh. The easier sell on this continent is the flavoured soy-beverage category.

There’s also the trend in protein consumption that’s been highlighted by various individuals during the last 16 years.

World protein consumption, fuelled by rising Indian and Chinese demand, leads to a much more bullish outlook on protein.

“We think that over the next 10 to 20 years, there’s going to be an almost unfettered, compound growth in the market because of the insatiable demand for protein,” says Schmalz. “And much of that demand will be coming from China and India because they’re also looking for our quality feed to feed their animals and get them to slaughter.”

But in many cases within the agri4

food sector, a business has to learn to walk before it can run. David Hendrick, CEO and board chair of Sevita Foods, based in Inker­man, Ont., also notes there are currently no large-scale processors of food-grade soybeans in Canada. If one of the current processors steps up, particularly on soy beverages, this dynamic could change dramatically.

“We want to remember the context of this claim — it’s a Canadian claim,” says Hendrick, who helped initiate food-grade exports to Japan in the 1990s. “We don’t want to get carried away that this is going to do something for us in China or Japan — it’s a domestic regulatory decision that’s potentially a very positive one in Canada.”

In the early 2000s, when the U.S. came out with its health claim, consumption of soy foods rapidly increased. Will we start seeing higher consumption rates of soy

“If we have a successful media plan, we’ll bring more consumers to the table,” says Soy 20/20’s Jeff Schmalz foods in Canada? Hendrick says it will depend on the marketing and branding, which in turn needs to be focused on convincing Canadian consumers about these benefits.

“If we do a good job on those two aspects, I think that this health claim will be a positive addition to all of the positive things attributable to food-grade soybeans,” says Hendrick. “I’m not sure the health claim will necessarily increase premiums, as processors need to compete in their sector. Whether you’re going to use those beans for Canadian end use, U.S. end use, or Japanese end use, essentially the premiums are within the same relative framework.

Although he doesn’t think the health claim is going to mark that big a change in premiums, Hendrick is interested to see whether the demand and the market requirement increase.

Hendrick says that perhaps the Can­ ad­ian IP sector has spent too much of its focus on Japan.

That’s a potential additional benefit of the health claim, encouraging the Can­adian sector to stabilize its domestic opportunities, yet still be an opening line in discussions about increasing exports to other countries.

Processing pull One person’s potential is another person’s stumbling block, however, and Hendrick still points to the lack of a large-scale processor in Canada as a key restraint on the push for increased domes­tic consumption. That picture is the same whether it’s IP soybeans or a new wheat variety for Eastern Canada.

It’s always easier to launch a product when part of the industry is pulling it through the value chain as a demand, rather than growers or farm organizations trying to push it through as a supply. But just as Hendrick is quick to identify it as a barrier, he also suggests there’s an industry pull being created with the health claim.

“If you build it they will come,” says Hendrick. “The health claim has now been built by Health Canada and Soy 20/20, and now, if there’s an indication that the consumer is really going to change their habits and significantly increase consumption, then the infrastructure will come.”

Right now, the focus of this story is centred on the health claim and the picture of the industry going forward. Does this move favour Ontario and Quebec (because they’re the primary production region for IP soybeans)?

That’s likely a short-term fact. Could it help develop IP soybeans in Manitoba or the Maritimes? That remains to be seen.

Hendrick insists the processing picture must become clearer first, then production may increase, whether you’re talking Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba or Prince Edward Island.

But as Schmalz notes, Ontario and Quebec are the leaders in the IP soybean sector, and have been for years for one very good reason: agronomics. The g row ing season, e ven in wester n Quebec or eastern Ontario is much longer than on the Prairies, and that continues to be a major consideration despite thee dramatic enhancements in shorter-season soybean varieties in the last five to 10 years.

That longer growing season does a lot to drive protein levels, and when it comes to IP soybeans, it’s all about the protein.

“There’s a lot of variety work going on — and the West is a new frontier for soybeans,” says Schmalz, adding that there were about 250,000 acres planted in Saskatchewan in 2015. “And I’ve seen projections over the next five years for dramatic increases in that volume, and it’ll be coming out of canola.” SG Soybean Guide, October 2015

the Varieties

THE PERFECT SOY CROP IN

STEPS

Developed to meet the highest quality standards, our varieties are designed and proven to offer superior performance and great yields.

Anser — 2350 HU Kea — 2600 HU RD-714 — 2600 HU Loriot — 2650 HU Havane — 2775 HU Calao — 2750 HU Eider — 2800 HU

New Varieties Kanuk — 2400 HU Vireo — 2650 HU

AAC

Coryllis — 2750 HU

the Team From sowing to harvest, our team of agronomists and technicians are hard at work in the field and are always available offering you advice and assistance. These specialists, recognized for their expertise, ensure rigorous monitoring and offer solutions tailored to your needs.

East Ontario region

Andrew Hodges

819 208-0787

Élise Vincent 613 894-5338

Montérégie region

Adriana Puscasu, agr.

514 770-2627

Eastern Townships and Montérégie region

Hicham Fram, agr.

514 771-3831

Laurentians region

Valentin Baciu, agr.

514 208-6639

Central Quebec region

Guillaume Vincent

819 818-7853

the Knowledge With over 25 years of experience with soy growers, Ceresco offers well proven varieties, for superior performance, as well as support from a skilled technical team working for you.

311-08/2015

Growing Soybean Culture

1 888 427-7692 www.sgceresco.com

Soyguide

Grow intensive!

Growing soybeans more intensively raises crucial new questions

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

I

n the mid-2000s, a spirited discussion between a private-sector crop adviser and a public-sector employee working in extension reflected the disparity that existed between corn and soybean production. At the time, corn yields were climbing at a stronger pace than soybeans, despite the arrival of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans.

The adviser suggested that more had been done by the private sector to boost corn yields than the public sector was able to do for soybean yields — a take on the “what have you done for me, lately?” taunt.

It was an unfair comparison then: soybeans had recently been decimated by drought, excessive heat and the explosion of soybean aphids in 2001. Plus, an expansion of weed species and diseases,

“Many growers are managing soybeans today exactly the same as they did 30 or 40 years ago.

Why?” — Eric Richter, Syngenta

Growers continue to face challenges in residue management, which is why Syngenta’s Eric Richter added it to his list of 33 production parameters that can affect soybean yield.

6

together with the spread of soybean cyst nematode in subsequent years further hampered the same upward progress on yield as had been enjoyed by corn.

It didn’t help that soybeans had also acquired a reputation of “it takes three (environmental) strikes to hurt your soybean yields.” That was the same as giving the industry permission to ignore the crop and let it fend for itself.

Today, it’s still an unfair comparison, primarily because the two crops are so different in so many ways — one is essentially a hybrid grass, the other a varietal legume.

One is a monocotyledon, the other is a dicot.

The growing points, nutrient demands, vegetative and reproductive stages, and unique sink (grain storage) structures — all are different.

But what if the same intensity of agronomic and biological management practices used in corn was applied to soybeans?

It’s arguable that soybean production parameters have lagged behind those of corn up to the last five years. Corn’s reputation as the driver of farm revenue is almost unassailable, pushing soybeans into the back seat, despite the fact that soybean acres have eclipsed those of corn in Eastern Canada since at least 2011.

Yet the rationalization continues.

Soybeans are supposed to be able to tough it out on their own. Or, if you look at it from the opposite direction, there just isn’t supposed to be as much return from pushing soybeans as from pushing corn.

33 factors in all Eric Richter wants to change that line of thinking, and he has at least 33 ways to start.

At a workshop attended by Syngenta seed growers last January, Richter spent part of the afternoon session exploring the many facets of soybean production. During breaks between presentations, he began writing down the parameters as they came to mind.

Some were more obvious — like ideal row width, canopy closure, nutrient uptake amounts and timing — while others were part of a strategic renaissance, addressing overall production parameters, whether they’re seen as corn concepts or soybean ideals (see the complete list in sidebar).

“The concepts and ideas are not ranked, weighted or grouped in any way, but they need to be, and that’s the next step,” says Richter, who has studied soybean plant biology and production parameters for nearly 30 years. He’s quick to note that many of the ideas are not original, nor are they exclusively his, but more a summary of production concepts and techniques he’s gathered over the years. Some have come from growers, some from researchers and some Syn­ genta’s product development team, includ­ing David Lee and Don McClure, respectively Syngenta’s long-serving soybean senior technician and breeder.

Initially, Richter wrote down 31 facets he deemed noteworthy and came up with a 32nd parameter after the workshop, while the 33rd was added as the 2015 growing season progressed. But he also points out that these facets represent a series of starting Soybean Guide, October 2015

Although corn and soybeans are different plants, it doesn’t mean growers can’t employ the same management practices in soybeans as they do in corn.

Bean flex is a relatively new term that refers to the plant’s ability to generate additional yield late in the bean- or pod-fill stage.

Soybean Guide, October 2015

points on their own, and he continues to add to this list and knows there are many more that can still be added.

Two terms he’s particularly emphatic about are “bean flex” and “G x E.” He characterizes bean flex as the ability of a soybean plant to generate additional yield very late in the bean-fill stage — as a function of seed size. Richter has been using this term for years, yet as far as he knows, it’s an agronomic term particular to soybeans that does not exist in any research literature or publication. Recent Syngenta soybean data confirms the importance of bean flex with up to 30 per cent of yield bonus being derived from bean flex in a high-management soybean trial.

As for G x E (or ‘G by E’), it encompasses the relationship of the Genetics of the seed with the Environment into which that seed is planted. But it’s more than the seed-to-soil link: it’s also soil type, weed, pest and disease species and spectra, weather conditions, and fertility levels. In short, it’s everything involved with where, how and why the seed is being planted.

Although it’s not a new concept like bean flex, it is something that Syngenta was first to acknowledge (as part of the company’s “The right bean for the right land” campaign in the mid-1980s). Yet G x E is just as relevant today as it was back when Richter started his career. And the layers of information that can be added are limited only by the advance of precision ag applications, including yield monitor information and yield maps.

“What I try to say to growers is that if you look at G by E, and if you understand and capitalize on that concept, you can add about 15 per cent yield without doing anything radically different other than really positioning the varieties to the best fit,” Richter says.

Still the disparity It’s something Richter put a lot of thought into during his near-30 years in agriculture. He has taken portions of what he has learned working in forages — including the creation of the Forage Masters distinction — and tried to determine why soybeans have been neglected.

One sign of that neglect is the relative disparity between theoretical and actual (infield) yields in both corn and soybeans, and he asks why the two are so different. In corn, the gap is the 500-plus bu./ac. theoretical versus about 170 actual (Ontario Continued on page 8

7

Continued from page 7

provincial average), which is roughly 34 per cent of theoretical yield. In soybeans, that gap is at least 15 per cent lower — 250-plus bu./ac. theoretical versus 45 to 48 actual (Ontario provincial average), which translates to 18 to 19.2 per cent.

“Corn is relatively easy to grow, but soybeans — it’s a very complex crop in so many aspects, and the spoils go to the detail-oriented soybean grower,” says Richter. “I find it interesting that many growers list slow genetic improvement of soybean germplasm as one of the main

limitations to improving on-farm soybean yields, when it’s actually their current soybean production systems that are failing them. Many growers are managing soybeans today, exactly the same as they did 30 or 40 years ago. Why?” Richter also believes more yield is lost by the cumulative effect of diseases and pests, a factor worsened by bean-on-bean or continuous-bean cropping. Hence the placement of the pest and disease limiting factor as first on the list: years ago, McClure convinced him that too much yield is lost because growers underestimate those impacts.

33 Reasons for Reflection Eric Richter, agronomist with Syngenta Canada, has gathered a list of 33 different production parameters that can affect soybean production. The hope was that in addressing these specific components, growers might be able to positively affect soybean production on their farms.

In no order of importance, here are the 33 facets he collected.

1. Pest- and disease-limiting factor

17. Picket fence stands

2. Soybean system versus corn system

19. Nutrient uptake amounts and timing

3. Soybean system versus white bean system

20. ‘W’ canopy

4. Cotelydon retention strategy

21. Bean flex

5. Canopy closure

22. Reflowering during terminal bud stage

6. Maturity versus yield potential

23. Fertility (macro — N/P/K/ Ca/S micro — Bo/Mn/Mg)

7. Ideal row width 8. Ideal/optimum population

24. Vegetative growth versus nodal growth

9. Weed management strategies (e.g. V stages versus R stages)

25. Yield components (number of nodes, pods, beans and weight)

10. Plant types and growth characteristics

26. Genetic potential

11. Optimum leaf area index

28. Maturity compression

12. Lodging tolerance

29. Germination process

13. Soil health strategy

30. Source-sink relationship

14. Ideal R stage initiation

31. Maximum yield/node (grams)

15. Uniform emergence 16. Key physiological characteristics (legume, indeterminant flowering, broadleaf) 8

18. Micro-count concept

27. Day-length sensitivity

32. G x E 33. Residue management during planting and stand establishment

Current production trends In many ways, these are also a reflection of the default approach growers have taken in the past 10 years. The advances of researchers and plant breeders in selecting from elite germplasms and breeding those high-end performing hybrids and varieties have led to something of a letdown in production methods. Growers are expecting 300 bu./ac. corn yields more on the strength of the performance of the seed without necessarily doing all they can to help improve the health of the soil.

Richter points to five such factors that should be fairly obvious, but have fallen off the radar for growers — for any of a number of reasons. Those are: soil health — specifically relationships to those cropping systems that include tight rotations of soybeans; limitations of the “Scavenger Crop” concept; planting date for soybeans — what is the optimum time; managing extreme residue levels to maximize seed emergence and establishment, and implications from excessive planting rates of soybeans.

These are fundamental in their nature, yet with the job the seed and trait companies have done in bringing innovations to the field, many of these concepts, especially in soybeans, have not just become secondary — many have been ignored outright.

What’s old is new again The concept of growing soybeans with the same enthusiasm as with corn is certainly worth repeating and sharing. Richter concedes that the overall principle behind it — what he calls the “crop management intensity concept” was something he encountered nearly 30 years ago when he was working in forage research. When he began working as a sales agronomist and moved into row crops, he found that same approach and many of the same concepts applied to soybean production.

“It was amazing travelling the back roads and being able to identify forage producers who stood out within their area as true Forage Masters,” he says. “My work term with soybean growers has taught me that the same concept applies to soybeans just as much as to any forage crop — it’s all about the details.”

Next, look for more in this series on enhanced soybean production in future editions of Country Guide. SG Soybean Guide, October 2015

It outlasts, outperforms and out-yields.

Are you in?

Nodulator® PRO with Integral® biofungicide is the only preinoculant system that’s Biostacked®. It has a more active strain of rhizobium, and thanks to the benefits of Integral, it delivers suppression of fusarium and rhizoctonia1.

Nodulator PRO also offers a very low application volume and 60 day on-seed survival. It even helps deliver at the end of the season with up to 6% more yield2 than the competition. So why not “Biostack” the odds in your favour?

Visit agsolutions.ca/nodulatorpro or contact AgSolutions® Customer Care at 1-877-371-BASF (2273) for more info.

1

Biological fungicide activity is a PMRA registered claim in Canada. 2 Source: BASF, 76 Station Years (n sites x n years)

Always read and follow label directions.

AgSolutions, BIOSTACKED, and INTEGRAL are registered trade-marks of BASF Corporation; HISTICK, and NODULATOR are registered trade-marks of BASF; all used with permission by BASF Canada Inc. © 2015 BASF Canada Inc.

Soyguide

When a supply interruption eventually comes, which it will, soybean prices will have

Market outlook

to go up to ration demand

D

By Philip Shaw

10

riving through Eastern Canada this summer, you could see the crop everywhere. Fields of soy­ beans stretched from Windsor, Ont. into Quebec and beyond into New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. And that’s without even mentioning the West.

Soybeans have truly transformed the farm landscape over the last several decades. They have become an integral part of the farm income picture in Canada.

Of course, though, for farmers the challenge is managing our soybeans effi­ ciently and marketing our soybeans prof­ itably.

In 2015, according to Statistics Can­ ada, eastern Canadian soybean acres have actually dropped from record 2014 levels.

For instance, in Quebec in 2015, har­ vested acres are expected to end up at 775,900, down from the 852,500 acres in 2014. In Ontario, meanwhile, StatsCan’s estimates show 2.92 million acres of soy­ beans at harvest versus 3.06 million acres in 2014.

Changing market dynamics as well as rotational concerns and the lack of wheat acreage in Ontario in 2015 surely had an impact on soybean acres, and in 2016, this fluid acreage consideration is likely to continue.

It is one thing to grow soybeans and another to market them profitably. In Eastern Canada, soybeans are crushed at domestic crushers both in Ontario and Quebec, but the crop also moves throughout the year into export markets.

Typically, in Ontario at harvest time, soy­ beans move out of province partly because of our lack of storage as well as market opportunity.

With Quebec’s closeness to saltwater, soybeans can quickly move into export markets. However, there is also an active livestock market which can use soybean meal, with the result that there is a dynamic market environment where soy­ beans move to where they are needed.

That said, further domestic processing within Ontario and Quebec would cer­

tainly be helpful for value-added oppor­ tunities for eastern Canadian farmers.

Within the soybean market in Eastern Canada, there are both non-GMO foodgrade soybeans and GM soybeans grown side by side but with dif­ferent market opportunities. For the most part, nonGMO food-grade soybeans are processed and put into containers and exported to markets in the Far East. In East Asia, peo­ ple sit down every day to eat some type of soybean product. This demand reaches back into Canada, where processors and farmers have been able to satisfy that d e m a n d i n a n e f f i c i e n t m a n n e r.

Premiums above posted cash prices for soybeans are constantly in flux, but remain a real part of the soybean econ­ omy within Eastern Canada.

Of course, Canadian soybeans are not marketed in a pricing vacuum. Each enduser calculates the price of soybeans based on a nearby futures price determined at the Chicago Mercantile exchange plus or minus a specific basis value, which reflects localized demand. In 2015, we have seen a major decrease in the futures price for soybeans as the USDA has predicted a very strong crop yield for 2015.

For instance, the August 12 USDA report said 84.3 million acres of soybeans were planted in the United States in 2015.

It also projected a yield of 46.9 bushels per acre for a total crop of 3.916 billion bushels.

This fall’s huge projection from the USDA were somewhat different from what the trade had been expecting after difficult early-spring weather in the east­ ern Corn Belt. Soybean futures decreased substantially on this news and have retreated more than $1 below September 2014 values.

These lower futures prices have cer­ tainly put a bearish tone on the soybean market. However, to a great extent Can­ adian producers have been shielded from even greater price drops because of the precipitous drop in the Canadian dollar over 2014 and 2015. The cash price for Canadian farmers is the nearby futures Soybean Guide, October 2015

price plus or minus the basis in Canadian dollar terms. With the Canadian dollar reaching down into the US$.75 range in early September 2015, this has meant cash prices of approximately C$11 a bushel as of early September. In other words, the lower Canadian dollar has led to a +$2 Canadian basis value mitigating the drop in futures prices. In many ways, despite the price drop in soybean futures, the precipitous drop in the value of the Canadian dollar has been “the story” in the Canadian soybean market in 2015.

The value of the Canadian dollar is a reflection of the demand for Canadian currency. In many ways, it is an inverse to the value of the U.S. dollar, which has been higher into 2015. With the Bank of Canada cutting interest rates and our economy slowing, it has caused our Canadian dollar to drop, giving a boost to our grain basis values. China, which is also a large buyer of Canadian commodities, has also seen a slowing of its economy in 2015 further pressuring our Canadian currency.

With the Chinese economy slowing in 2015, this has had a negative effect on soybean prices, as China is the largest importer of soybeans in the world.

However, to some extent the futures market has been “chasing these headlines” and anything negative to do with China often is negative for commodity prices. Food demand is not the same thing as manufacturing activity and it is likely to remain robust and actively growing.

China has purchased so many Brazil­ian soybeans this past year that the USDA actually reduced Brazilian soybean ending stocks to just 128 million bushels for 201415. So despite problems with the Chinese economy, it is expected the Chinese demand for soybeans will remain robust.

Livestock production in China continues to expand and protein demand for both swine and poultry is going up too.

Big crops in both North and South America have satisfied this demand, but when the supply interruption eventually comes, which it will, demand will not be easily tempered. Soybean prices will have to go up to ration this demand.

For Canadian soybean producers, there is much to measure with regard to market factors looking ahead for our soybeans. What will the Canadian dollar do in the next several months? Essentially, Soybean Guide, October 2015

How do we find that sweet spot for marketing our soybeans with a low dollar and a high futures price? this is another layer to Canadian soybean marketing as large movements in the Canadian dollar can cause large cash price movements.

Will the USDA increase its August projection, putting even more pressure on the futures price for soybeans? Or will it reduce its estimate?

As Canadian soybean farmers, how do we find that sweet spot for marketing our soybeans with a low Canadian dollar and a higher futures price?

We also have to ask, how will South American planting affect prices? How much will it put in the ground, what will its weather outlook be, and how will this affect soybean futures?

No discussion about world soybean prices can take place without looking at the South American situation.

The USDA in its latest report is predicting that Brazil will harvest 97 MMT of soybeans in 2016 and Argentina will maintain its soybean production in 2016 at 57 MMT. The Brazilian number continues to increase every year, Argentina not so much, since export taxes and political issues there have stemmed production in the short term. However, the important consideration for Canadian farmers to be

aware of is their planting time, which takes place between October and Decem­ ber 2015 and their harvest between March and May 2016. Any weather anomalies affecting this planting or harvest period will affect futures prices greatly. Daily market intelligence will be key.

USDA reports will remain flashpoints for soybean market action moving ahead.

The final USDA report on the size of the 2015 soybean crop will be published in early January 2016 and often produces explosive price movement.

Much of the price action until then will be reflected in actual yields when combines roll as well as the interest of investment funds in our soybean market, which have exited to a large extent since July 2015.

It has been a long way down from the record soybean futures price of $17.89 a bushel achieved in 2012. In effect, current futures prices reflect less than half that.

Of course the test for Canadian producers is to measure all the market factors that affect both the futures price and our Canadian dollar value as we move ahead.

Managing both of these soybean-marketing layers presents us a unique challenge. Rewards for our management can be substantial. SG 11

FO R NO TH W E BO 20 O 16 KI ED NG IT IO N

ADVERTISE YOUR AG BUSINESS WHERE IT COUNTS.

The Farmer’s Product Guide helps farmers make informed decisions on everything that’s essential to their farm. From equipment and accessories to buildings, technology, tillage and trucks – the Farmer’s Product Guide covers it all.

If you’re in the Ag business, the Farmer’s Product Guide offers you some amazing opportunities to reach your target audience! Call to find out about our fully integrated media solutions featuring print, online, email and interactive.

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:

Terry McGarry Ph: (204) 981-3730 Email: trmcgarr@mts.net

FARMER’S PRODUCT GUIDE ONLINE - THOUSANDS OF FULLY SEARCHABLE AG

P

AG

Farmer’s Product Guide is distributed through:

100,000 COPIES PRINTED

and at all major farm shows.

PRODUCT AND SERVICE LISTINGS: WWW.FARMERSPRODUCTGUIDE.COM

Soyguide

Soybeans Do your homework before jumping in head first

Soybean varieties and the business case for growing them have been improving, but Saskatchewan isn’t Iowa yet. Even seed salesmen recommend going slowly at first

By Gord Gilmour, Associate Editor

14

S

oybeans have expanded well beyond their traditional base in Manitoba’s Red River Valley, so growers even farther west into Saskatchewan are giving them a close look.

But they might want to wade through the hype before making any big decisions, says one agronomist who’s been working with new growers.

Dieter Schwarz, a market development agronomist with Pride Seed, says this region is unproven ground for a crop that developed biologically under much different conditions.

“This is, originally, a warm-season crop,” Schwarz told C ountry G uide .

“Growers need to really start small and see how a variety, even the short-season varieties, actually performs in their own local growing area.”

Schwarz says he knows growers who reliably get 50 to 60 bushels an acre of canola but who have tried certain soybean varieties only to find yields in the low 30s, which simply won’t pay the bills.

“I’ve heard a lot of growers say they need $500 an acre in income from their canola crop — if they’re not getting at least 50 bushels of canola an acre, they’re losing money,” Schwarz says. “It is important to know your costs for your operation, and to research local crop yields in an effort to create realistic cropping budgets for grow­ing soybeans.”

Schwarz adds it’s extra important with soybeans because going into the crop in a big way requires substantial investment in

specialized equipment like flex headers, air reels and even conveyor systems.

It’s surprisingly blunt talk from a company representative who wants to see growers trying beans, but Schwarz says the goal isn’t to talk growers into putting more soybeans in the ground — it’s making sure they make money when they do.

If they do, a viable soy industry in Western Canada will be possible. If they don’t, soybeans will be a flash in the pan.

Says Schwarz, “I don’t want to rush out just to be the first, and have growers be disappointed.”

Frost cools enthusiasm Another observer says the hype might have enticed a few growers in Saskatch­ ewan, but reality is starting to set in. Dale Risula, a pulse crop specialist with the Saskatchewan Agriculture Department, told Guide a frost in early last September seems to have slowed interest this season.

“We saw soybean production in Saskatchewan go from about 50,000 acres to 300,000 acres in just three seasons,” Risula says. “But I think that early frost knocked it back a bit, and slowed that growth. It’s still there, and there’s still a lot of interest, but acreage has crept back a bit.”

This pattern isn’t unfamiliar, and likely reflects the learning curve that comes with any new crop. Schwarz says that at least initially there was a lot of hype around soybeans in non-traditional areas, and as Continued on page 16

Soybean Guide, October 2015

We’re here for you, from field to fork

...and every step in between!

We’re here for the producers

We’re here for the processors

We’re here for the exporters

at harvest time and all year round, with a wide range of equipment types to transport your soy bean crop for processing. We’re always flexible and responsive to your requirements.

and partner with them to get their processed soy beans to market. Our modern chassis fleet, rail network and forwarding expertise connect you to ports worldwide.

and as an accredited freight forwarder you can rely on our team to reach any and all destinations. Our specialization is container shipping of soy beans from Canada to Japan.

Continued from page 14

growers gain experience, they’re learning it’s a crop with risks like any other.

“Thankfully a lot of growers are realizing that soybean isn’t necessarily a lowinput crop,” Schwarz says. “They reality is a good soybean crop will take off 85 pounds of phosphorus… If you’re not fertilizing you’ll hate yourself the next season.”

That’s not to say there aren’t fertility advantages — soybeans fix their own nitrogen from the air — but even that process requires some knowledge and management.

“Soybeans require a different inoculant than peas and lentils, and it’s not naturally present in our soils,” Risula says.

“Growers will need to make sure they’re inoculating, and inoculating with the right type of product.”

Pride Seed’s Schwarz echoes that sentiment, saying he’s seen and heard of some real wrecks when this doesn’t happen.

“Some growers put bare seed in the ground, and that’s a recipe for disaster,” he says. “We recommend full fungicide — and possibly insecticide, depending on field scouting — as well as a double inoculant.”

So that would mean inputs right on the seed itself, then an additional eight pounds an acre granular application in furrow at seeding time on new soybean ground.

Even at that, growers who are used to seeing residual nitrogen from other pulse crops may find themselves surprised and even disappointed by what’s left at the end of the season, Schwarz says.

“Soybean is no soil builder, like peas or lentils,” he says. “A healthy soybean crop will require 200 pounds of nitrogen in the season.”

Risula says one strategy growers might want to consider when picking a field is finding one that’s very low in N, because the crop will pump nitrogen out of the soil it turns to its nodules to fix that “free” nitrogen in the air.

Clean field is imperative Risula also says the crop isn’t terribly competitive early in the season until it begins to bush out and starts to choke out weeds. That means a clean field is imperative, starting with both a pre-seeding burn-off and an in-season application.

Schwarz adds that the presence of Roundup Ready canola could also complicate this challenge, and add some expense.

“That means more than just a cheap and simple glyphosate application — it’s 16

“If you have some neighbours who are growing soybeans, talk to them, keep a close eye over their fence, maybe even ride the combine with them.”

— Dieter Schwarz, Pride Seed going to take some more expensive products, things like Odyssey, Viper or Heat,” Risula says.

In the end it’s going to go back to a bit of old-fashioned trial-and-error agronomy and Schwarz suggests keeping a close eye on what’s happening close to home.

Soybean is a plant that reacts fairly dramatically to things like changes in the photoperiod, so observing the crop under local conditions will be key.

“If you have some neighbours who are growing soybeans, talk to them, keep a close eye over their fence, maybe even ride the combine with them for a bit if you’re done harvesting wheat and canola,” Schwarz says. “There is nothing that will substitute for local research and production experience.”

In fact Schwarz says soybean production should start as early as possible the year before, by getting as much of this information together as possible, and reconciling it with what’s known about local growing conditions. Picking a field is a key part of the decision. Risula says land type plays an important role. Soybeans can handle a bit wetter feet than canola and really don’t like drying out, as the plant developed naturally in high-rainfall environments.

“When we talk about soil types for soybeans we’re really looking at clay and clay

loam,” Schwarz says. “Avoid sand because dry conditions will really hit yield.”

Schwarz also notes that heavier soils can help retain moisture for crucial periods during growth, like right after the last pods appear in late July and very early August.

“We call those the bonus beans, and if you want those pods to fill you really need some rainfall right then, or a heavier soil that has retained some moisture,” he says. “I always tell people if they want really good soybeans, they might have to be OK with No. 2 wheat that season because of this.”

One thing both Schwarz and Risula agree on is the importance of truly understanding the crop and getting past the hype, something Risula says should be any potential soy producer’s mantra.

“Prepare, prepare, prepare,” he says.

“Do your research, prepare your ground this year, and be ready for next year.”

Despite sounding a note of caution, Schwarz says he remains overall quite positive for soybeans as a part of the western Canadian rotation, over time. In the end there are just too many compelling reasons to try to make it work.

“It’s an excellent addition to a crop rotation,” he says. “It adds a pulse crop, it gives you a break on your canola disease cycle, and has the potential to be nicely profitable.” SG Soybean Guide, October 2015

I go to AgDealer.com when I need to search and find the right equipment fast! OVER 30,000 NEW & USED EQUIPMENT LISTINGS POWERFUL LOCAL, REGIONAL OR NATIONAL SEARCH FUNCTIONS NORTH AMERICA’S #1 AG CLASSIFIED NETWORK!

RIGHT EQUIPMENT » RIGHT PRICE » RIGHT NOW

FOR ADVERTISING INFORMATION: 1-888-999-4178

Iowa receives an annual average of 43.35 inches of rain, double that of Manitoba.

Is Manitoba the new Iowa?

By Ron Friesen

Moisture gives the top U.S. soybean-producing state a yield advantage, but also causes more disease problems

I

s Manitoba the new Iowa? That was the official

with Country Guide, he said he hardly ever has to

theme of a recent Manitoba Agronomists’

worry about frost. “Very seldom do we ever have

Conference as professionals considered the

beans frosted off. Once in a great while, like any-

future of soybeans in the Keystone province.

It is also the question that producers and industry officials are pondering now that soybeans in Manitoba are well over the million-acre mark.

The doubling of soybean acres in Manitoba in the past four years has drawn inevitable comparisons with Iowa, which, until recently, was the largest soybean-producing state in the United States.

The truth is, however, that Manitoba is no Iowa.

While Manitoba’s 1.3 million acres of soybeans planted in 2015 are impressive, they are dwarfed by the estimated 10 million acres seeded by Iowa growers.

As for the differences in growing conditions, just ask an Iowa farmer.

John Heisdorffer planted his 44th soybean crop near Keota in southeast Iowa this year. Earlier this summer, he expected to meet his average annual yield of 48 to 50 bushels an acre.

Heisdorffer estimates average soybean yields in Iowa range from 45 to 50 bushels an acre in northern regions of the state to 50 to 60 bushels in the south.

By contrast, the 10-year average provincial yield in Manitoba is 33 bushels an acre.

Heisdorffer, 63, normally starts planting soybeans in late April or early May and harvests them in late September or early October. In a phone interview

18

thing else, we’ll get caught. But I don’t remember in my lifetime it ever hurting the beans.”

Heisdorffer also doesn’t need to worry about cool nights during ripening, since daytime highs during the growing season average 30 C or more.

D r y c o n d i t i o n s a re s e l d o m a p ro b l e m .

According to the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, the state’s average annual precipitation is 43.35 inches, double the Manitoba average.

Admittedly, Iowa’s wetter climate can produce plant diseases not known in Manitoba. One of the big ones is sudden death syndrome, one of the most important soybean diseases in the U.S. Midwest. A fungal disease, SDS places plants in high-moisture areas at risk and causes yield losses of over 20 per cent in some fields.

For that reason, Heisdorffer, who sits on the Iowa Soybean Association, the American Soybean Association and the U.S. Soybean Export Council, thinks Manitoba may have an advantage.

“Maybe your yields aren’t quite up there but beans like dry heat. They’re more of a dryland crop.

If you can get the rains in August or so, that’ll make your beans.”

Maybe. But judging by the statistics, Manitoba isn’t about to become the Iowa of the north any time soon.

Soybean Guide, October 2015

G E N E R AT IONS O F

Firsts in the Field

AND THE FIRST TO BRING SOYBEANS TO WESTERN CANADA Trust in the soybean agronomic leader. We’re first to introduce soybeans to western Canada. Be first to secure the region’s top yielding soybean seed for your field.

QUARRY SEED 888-274-9243

w w w. t hun d e r s e e d . c a

Soyguide

The next ‘biotechnology’ Faster to market, with even more potential usage, microbial innovations are set to enhance today’s biotech options

By Ralph Pearce, CG Production Editor

W

hen the word “biotech” first leapt onto the agri-food scene, there were plenty of proponents and opponents for the science of implanting different genes into corns, soybean and canola genetics. The first Bt hybrids offered yield advantages, and the early days of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans saw cost savings that began with weed management practices but also led to the wider adoption of no till.

The optimism surrounding those first innovations was undeniable and, among other things, prompted the “Five Phases of Biotechnology,” a short bare-bones road map to the anticipated stages of developments within the sector. From the herbicide and pest resistance that marked Phase I to the bioenergy processes predicted — and realized — in Phase V, biotechnology was going to revolutionize agriculture.

using natural selection. That compares to plant biotech which involves the manipulation of a plant’s genes or inserting new genes into a plant.

Dr. Tyler Whale, president of Ontario Agri-Food Technologies (OAFT), based in Guelph, adds to the USDA definition, noting that for Canadian regulators, a symbiotic or mutually beneficial relationship must be part of the innovation, and that it must contain the unaltered whole organism(s).

It’s why Bt corn (based as it is on the insertion of a gene or genetic derivative) cannot be classed as a microbial: the Bt gene insertion is a single-site occurrence — there’s no symbiosis or relationship with or within the host plant.

“The funny thing about microbial biotech is that it’s happening right now, and it’s been happening since the dawn of agriculture and the dawn of life,”

“Microbial biotech is happening right now — and has been since the dawn of agriculture and the dawn of life.”

— Dr. Tyler Whale, Ontario Agri-Food Technologies Now, two decades after those first traited plants began appearing in fields in North America, we are beginning to see a new oppor tunit y, based on microbes, which could rapidly eclipse many of our current limitations.

It’s still early in the game for microbials (part of what are often called “biologicals”) but the benefits and advantages for modern agriculture are already enticing.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has adopted a straightforward definition: “Microbial innovation is a micro-organism (bacterium, fungus, virus or protozoan) that can be used for controlling pests or enhancing plants. It’s a living micro-organism and the substances produced by the micro-organisms.”

The microbe can be modified to produce more cells or compounds, but only by finding alternative food sources and 20

says Whale. “Single-celled organisms, mic­robes, fungi, bacteria and viruses (to some extent) are interacting with more complex organisms and finding symbiotic relationships where a microbe can survive by improving a host’s chances of surviving.”

Where microbial biotech is really getting started, Whale says, is in understanding the complexities within those microbial ecosystems, and then learning to manipulate and promote their symbiotic relationships.

As an example, Whale points to an emerging and improved understanding of mycorrhizal fungi. Farmers, agronomists and researchers are learning more about this microbial ecosystem, including the effects on soil quality, crop rotation and tillage, and the use of pesticides and agricultural inputs. The potential Soybean Guide, October 2015

impact from enhancing just those particular aspects is incredible, to say the least.

Vast potential Yet those more-obvious components of production agriculture are just the beginning. According to Dr. Pam Marrone, chief executive officer and founder of Marrone Bio Innovations, based in Davis, California, current sales for microbial innovations are somewhere between $3.6 billion and $4.6 billion, with double-digit growth rates.

Biopesticides that are now available are generating roughly $2.0 billion to $3.0 billion, which is admittedly a tiny fraction of the $55 billion to $60 billion for chemical pesticides. But the chemical sector’s sales are growing at single-digit rates while the biopesticide market for registered, regulated products is leaping ahead by 15 to 16 per cent per year.

“Then there’s another category of plant stimulants — or biostimulants,” says Marrone, who participated in a panel discussion called A New Paradigm for Biotech in Ag last January in St. Louis, Missouri. “These could be microbes or nature-identical substances. They do not control a pest or do not cause a physiological response in a plant — they only enhance the growth of the plant, and as such, they do not require registration from the PMRA or the EPA. That segment is worth another $1.6 billion in current sales, and they’re also growing in double digits, just not as quickly as the biopesticide category.”

The benefits of such naturally based or naturally occurring products quickly become obvious, even beyond the farm.

A consumer base that’s becoming more vocal about so-called “unnatural” genetic manipulations in Bt corn might be more receptive to a symbiotic interplant relationship along with the natural substances produced by these microbes.

That could translate into more support for farmers and what they do.

Yet as much as there are positives in the development of microbial biotech, there is some disparity in its development too, and that’s in the difference between U.S. and Canadian regulatory authorities.

Marrone isn’t betraying any secrets when she echoes a familiar refrain about scientific research and development in Canada: dealing with the PMRA has its challenges in part because it demands efficacy data gathered in this country.

For better or worse, the U.S. EPA is more concerned with quality control, physicalchemical properties, and ensuring there are no human pathogens present. Some efficacy data is required, but the U.S. focuses on health and safety and less on performance, and as is known on both sides of the border, that speeds the approval process considerably.

There is a joint-review provision that

does exist for biopesticides, adds Marrone, but she notes that most American biopesticide companies opt out of that process because they understand the PMRA’s involvement is likely to slow things down.

Whale agrees that there is the need to ensure Canadian development doesn’t force the industry into unnecessary Continued on page 22

THE EXPERTS IN SHIPPING SOYBEANS WORLDWIDE

Soybean Guide, October 2015

THE EXPERTS IN SHIPPING SOYBEANS WORLDWIDE THE EXPERTS IN SHIPPING SOYBEANS WORLDWIDE

THE EXPERTSCFT INCFT SHIPPING SOYBEANS WORLDWIDE CORPORATION CORPORATION CFT CORPORATION

WinstonPark Park Drive, Suite 300 300 20202020 Winston Drive, Suite 2020 Winston Park Drive, Oakville, Ontario L6HSuite 6X7 300 CFT CORPORATION Oakville, L6H Oakville,Ontario Ontario L6H 6X76X7 Canada Canada 2020 Winston Park Drive, Suite 300 Canada Telephone: (905) 829-5829 Oakville, Ontario L6H 6X7 Telephone: (905) 829-5829

ll Free: (800) 561-8238 Telephone: (905) 829-5829 Canada ll Free: (800) 561-8238 Fax: (905) 829-5219 Fax: (905) 829-5219 ll Free: (800) 561-8238 Email: cft@cftcorp.com Telephone: (905) 829-5829 Email: cft@cftcorp.com llwww.cftcorp.com Free: (800) 561-8238 Fax: (905) 829-5219 Fax: (905) 829-5219 www.cftcorp.com Email: cft@cftcorp.com

Email: cft@cftcorp.com

www.cftcorp.com www.cftcorp.com

21

Continued from page 21

delays getting products to the field. It’s one thing to have a reputation for regulatory scrutiny and thoroughness, but you can’t delay things at the expense of adopting technology late,” Whale says.

“The costs of ‘late-to-the-party’ are higher than ever, and we have to find where we fit but we can’t delay — for our farmers’ sake or for our own foodsovereignty sake.

Benefits — to the grower Regulatory delay aside, microbial biotech stands to rewrite the story for biotech as a science and biologicals as an industry.

It takes 10 years and $250 million to bring a new chemical pesticide to market. For a plant-biotech innovation, that can be 12 to 13 years and $130 million.

Yet for microbes, the process can be faster and cheaper — perhaps too fast, in a way.

“Since biologicals can come to market within three to five years of development with only $3.0 million to $5.0 million invested, you’re still in the early stages of the commercial adoption of your product when you launch it,” Marrone explains. That sounds like an advantage but it also means there hasn’t been the time to develop the same stream of data and information as from a lengthier R&D term.

Adds Marrone, “You don’t have 10 years, just three, so you’re still doing the development of your product when you’re in the market. So that’s great for early adopters, but it’ll take longer to reach the mainstream grower because you don’t have the same amount of data and experience behind the product.”

It’s also a different business model than chemicals. That means a slower adoption of these technologies, although Marrone believes lengthening the development of some of these products and even $20 million or $30 million in R&D would speed their uptake, although many small companies may not be able to afford this extra wait-time and money before getting into the market.

Working in co-operation Despite the speed and lower relative costs with which these products are brought to market, Marrone shares something she told the panel discussion in St. Louis earlier this year: microbial biotech will not replace current plant biotech applications. She refers to Monsanto’s alliance with Novozymes in the development 22

“I don’t see microbials replacing plant biotech — they’ll be used in conjunction.

— Dr. Pam Marrone, Marrone Bio Innovations of a combination of a traited corn hybrid, plus a microbe from Novozymes on top of that, placed on the seed, with a chemical application added to that combination.

“So they’ll have all three technologies integrated into one… I don’t see microbials replacing plant biotech — they’ll be used in conjunction,” says Marrone.

That collaborative approach, Marrone adds, will do more to extend the life of existing plant biotech applications.

Unlike Bt corn or glyphosate-tolerant soybeans, resistance with microbes and microbial ecosystems is not believed to be an issue.

One of Marrone Bio Innovations’ products, Grandevo, is a new species of bacteria that produces four different com­­pounds that work in four different ways. That diversity if important because if it had only one chemical in its makeup, it would be easier to develop natural resistance.

At the same time, many of these microbial ecosystems are also biodegradable, so they don’t exist long enough for resistance to develop.

Whale agrees that the key to fighting the development of resistance comes from the symbiotic relationship between microbes and plants, where that “living organism” (which can produce multiple natural compounds) distinction creates an evolutionary resilience. In a Bt hybrid, for instance, the implantation of the

Bacillus thuringiensis bacterium is a mode of action with a single-site application, so pests such as European corn borer can develop resistance more easily and readily. With microbial applications, since they require that ecosystem approach, they’re better suited to evolve and adapt according to the actions of a pest or disease pathogen.

In essence, two — or multiple — modes of “living” action are better than one.

A new ‘S’ word As unique as microbial biotech may be, however, some of the same old issues facing plant biotech applications are undoubtedly going to surface. In spite of what transgenic discovery has done for agriculture — and society as a whole — there has been growing opposition to “GMOs” from the non-farming, consumer base.

That opposition, while not gaining much ground in North America due to the recent responses of members of the scientific community, is still grabbing media attention. It’s to the point where the issue of “sustainability” has been eclipsed in consumers’ ranking by “social licence,” i.e. a permission from consumers that allows the farmers to produce.

Farmers, producer groups, governments and all of agriculture’s stakeholders need to be better at appealing to the public as to what they do proactively to Soybean Guide, October 2015

help the environment or to be more sustainable in their practices. But technologies like biotech can encourage or discourage the public’s confidence in agriculture, and their willingness to extend that social licence to producers.

That’s why it’s important that there’s been more research and information generated on farm management practices, such as mychorrizal fungi and their impact on soil health, leading to healthier crops and higher productivity.

Combin­ing these kinds of information with information on other biotech benefits could potentially turn opposition into support.

“Farmers are science based, for the most part. They’re evidence-based people,” says Whale. “They make their decisions based on return on investment and

demonstrations of a technology. They’re not ones to accept huge risks. They already accept huge risks by dealing with Mother Nature and by dealing with high capital costs. So for a technology like this to be accepted, certainly it has to be proven to them, and proven to them in their soil type and the crop type and the genetics that they use. But suppose a technology can attract early adopters and shows wonderful results: from this you’ll gain more security and knowledge and experience.”

From that point, the social licence issue would take over. Yet Whale is frustrated with the fact that there are those who would rather see the world’s citrus industry decimated by huanglongbing (greening disease) than allow a GMO solution that stakeholders and growers

are hesitant to use for fear of consumer backlash.

Meanwhile, there are the positive examples of biotechnology (GMO) that can deliver amazing results, including Golden Rice and the saving of the Hawaiian papaya industry from papaya ringspot virus (PRV). Both of those examples have been created for nonprofit purposes.

The challenge remains how to find that median between being productive enough to feed the world while allaying the fears of a consuming public that’s largely out of touch with modern farming practices and the realities of the global marketplace.

It could be that microbial biotech is the opporunity that plant biotech can use to create balance in the agri-food industry. SG

focus on performance focus on Higher yields PRIDE Seeds one goal is to Focus on Performance by delivering best in class genetics combined with new technologies. The result is higher yield potential year in and year out.

ONE GOAL/ONE FEELING/PRIDE PRIDESEED.COM 1.800.265.5280

@PRIDESEEDS

PRIDE® & Design and P® & design is a registered trademark of AgReliant Genetics Inc. All orders and sales are subject to the terms and conditions of sale of PRIDE Seeds, including without limitation as set out on the PRIDE Seeds’ order form and on the bags and tags of the products (including the Limitation of Warranty and Remedy). © 2015 AgReliant Genetics Inc.

REACHING NEW HEIGHTS with AKRAS R2

Designing the ultimate soybean AKRAS R2 was bred by Elite® and selected from their Western Canadian breeding program because of its excellent yield and industry standardsetting pod height. Higher pods mean easier harvest, fewer pods on the ground and more beans in your bin.

AKRAS R2 also has excellent disease resistance and has an early-to midmaturity, making it well adapted to all soybean growing areas.

Higher pods for easier harvestability

More yield for improved return on investment

TELL US ABOUT YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH ELITE® SOYBEANS FROM BrettYoung:

@BY_Seeds | #BYSoybean15

Visit brettyoung.ca 1-800-665-5015 Elite® is a registered trademark of La Coop fédérée. BrettYoungTM is a trademark of Brett-Young Seeds Limited. Monsanto Company is a member of Excellence Through Stewardship® (ETS). Monsanto products are commercialized in accordance with ETS Product Launch Stewardship Guidance, and in compliance with Monsanto’s Policy for Commercialization of Biotechnology-Derived Plant Products in Commodity Crops. This product has been approved for import into key export markets with functioning regulatory systems. Any crop or material produced from this product can only be exported to, or used, processed or sold in countries where all necessary regulatory approvals have been granted. It is a violation of national and international law to move material containing biotech traits across boundaries into nations where import is not permitted. Growers should talk to their grain handler or product purchaser to confirm their buying position for this product. Excellence Through Stewardship® is a registered trademark of Excellence Through Stewardship. Always read and follow pesticide label directions. Roundup Ready® crops contain genes that confer tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides. Roundup® brand agricultural herbicides will kill crops that are not glyphosate tolerant. Genuity®, Genuity and Design®, Genuity Icons, Roundup®, Roundup Ready®, and Roundup Ready 2 Yield® are trademarks of Monsanto Technology LLC used under license. 5032 09/15