Rice Farming April 2023

Arkansas studies show alternative rice fertilizer New tool calculates crop rotation costs, benefits for California growers

Getting into the weeds

I have always believed there are certain things in life that are not worth getting too into the weeds about. Sometimes I will research something so much that I start questioning even the basics of the original topic I set out to learn. Rice, however, is not one of those things. My goal is to dig more into the weeds of this crop and continue to learn about it every month.

It is fitting for this month’s theme to be weed management. There are several things I was already able to learn and appreciate as I read through all the articles herein.

The Endangered Species Act is becoming more of a hot topic. Beginning on page 10, details of the original act, along with its intersection with other acts and agencies, are discussed regarding their impact on pesticides — and what it could mean for the future of rice herbicides. This is a concept full of moving parts and still lacking of many to come. While not on the front end of the herbicides being impacted now, it is important to be aware of what is going on before it gets to where regulations further affect rice.

Pages 16 and 17 showcase a new California rice tool meant to help growers calculate costs and benefits for their rice crop. According to Whitney Brim-DeForest, rotating cropping systems can allow for the use of different weed control tools, such as different herbicide modes of action, and different cultural controls such as tillage, reducing the chances of selecting for herbicide-resistant weeds — an increasingly pervasive issue in rice systems.

Don’t miss this month’s USA Rice update. Betsy Ward commented on extending the reach of rice into the K-12 school systems. “Through developing healthy, delicious, and practical recipes that kids will love, helping school districts source and integrate U.S. rice into their nutrition programs, and positioning rice as a solution that addresses some of the challenges school operators face, USA Rice provides support and guidance to our nation’s schools and children,” Ward said.

I would be remiss if I didn’t mention how honored I am that Ms. Carroll and Mrs. Lia would have the confidence to allow me to step into this role. They have been great mentors, and I hope to use the knowledge I have learned from them to gain additional insight into many topics and get further into the weeds of rice.

Cassidy

EDITORIAL/PRODUCTION

Editor Cassidy Nemec cnemec@onegrower.com

Copy Editor Carroll Smith csmith@onegrower.com

Digital Content Editor Katie Guthrie kguthrie@onegrower.com

Art Director Ashley Kumpe akumpe@onegrower.com

ADMINISTRATION

Publisher/Vice President Lia Guthrie 901-497-3689 lguthrie@onegrower.com

Associate Publisher/Editor-In-Chief Carroll Smith 901-326-4443 csmith@onegrower.com

Associate Publisher/Sales Manager Scott Emerson 386-462-1532 semerson@onegrower.com

Production Manager David Boyd dboyd@onegrower.com

Audience Services

Kate Thomas 847-559-7514

For subscription changes or change of address, call 847-559-7578 or email ricefarming@omeda.com.

ONE

ASSOCIATED PUBLICATIONS — One Grower Publishing LLC also publishes COTTON FARMING, THE PEANUT GROWER, SOYBEAN SOUTH and CORN SOUTH magazines. RICE FARMING (ISSN 0194-0929) is published monthly January through May, and Decem ber, by One Grower Publishing LLC, 875 W. Poplar Ave., Suite 23, Box 305, Collierville, TN 38017. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to OMEDA COMMUNICATIONS, CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPARTMENT, P.O. BOX 1388, NORTHBROOK, IL 60065-1388. Annual subscriptions are $25.00. International rates are $55.00 Canada/Mexico, $90.00 all other countries for Air-Speeded Delivery. (Surface delivery not available due to problems in reliability.) $5.00 single copy.

All statements, including product claims, are those of the person or organization making the statement or claim. The publisher does not adopt any such statement or claims as its own and any such statement or claim does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the publisher. RICE FARMING is a registered trademark of One Grower Publishing LLC, which reserves all rights granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in association with its registration.

© Copyright 2023

Send comments to: Editor, Rice Farming Magazine, 875 W. Poplar Ave., Suite 23, Box 305, Collierville, TN 38017 or email cnemec@onegrower.com.

One Grower Publishing, LLC 875 W. Poplar Ave., Suite 23, Box 305 Collierville, TN 38017

Mike Lamensdorf President/Treasurer Lia Guthrie Publisher/Vice President

GROWER PUBLISHING, LLC

Cassidy Nemec Editor

2023 Rice Awards Nomination Form

The Rice Farmer of the Year, Rice Industry Award and Rice Lifetime Achievement Award recognize those rice leaders who have demonstrated dedication, determination and innovation to the industry. We need your help to identify candidates who are worthy of these prestigious awards. Please take time to consider which industry members in your area should be recipients of these honors and mail or scan/email this form and supporting materials or go to ricefarming.com/ra to nominate online.

Categories:

Please check the box of the appropriate award category:

 Rice Farmer of the Year Award

■ Must farm at least 200 acres.

■ A farmer who has successfully achieved goals in his/her farming operation, rice industry association, community leadership/development, innovative production practices and/or environmental stewardship.

 Rice Industry Award

■ Has been in the rice industry for more than five years.

■ A researcher, Extension person, government/association leader, etc... who has demonstrated commitment to the rice industry through innovative practices, industry association, community leadership/development.

 Rice Lifetime Achievement Award

■ Has been in the rice industry for more than 10 years.

■ An industry leader who has provided great contributions to the rice industry through industry associations, community leadership/development, innovative practices/projects that have advanced the industry.

Deadline: June 30, 2023

If you are submitting more than one nomination form, please make a copy before you fill out the form. Nomination forms can be downloaded or submitted online at ricefarming.com/ra

Nominee’s name

Nominee’s address

Nominee’s phone number/email address

Nominee’s rice acreage (if applicable)

Number of years involved in the rice industry (if applicable)

Your name

Your profession

Your address

Your phone number/email address

Your signature

Date

Please send completed form & supporting materials to: Carroll Smith 7201 Eastern Ave., Germantown, TN 38138

Scan/Email: csmith@onegrower.com Online: ricefarming.com/ra

In addition to completing this form, on a separate piece of paper, please describe the nominee in terms of the following guidelines:

Dedication to farming and/or agriculture and the rice industry, local community and education. Determination to succeed and overcome hurdles that have emerged while trying to reach goals. Innovation to identify new and better ways for the industry to become more profitable, manage risk, achieve a higher level of efficiency.

It also is helpful to send letters of recommendation for the nominee from other individuals in the rice industry who are familiar with his/her accomplishments. A panel of judges from across the Rice Belt will select the recipients of the 2023 Rice Awards.

The award recipients will be honored at the USA Rice Outlook Conference, Dec. 6-8 in Indian Wells, California, where an official presentation will be made at the awards luncheon. They also will be featured in a special salute sponsored by Horizon Ag, USA Rice and Rice Farming magazine in the December 2023 issue.

SPONSORS

By Betsy Ward President and CEO USA Rice

K-12 chefs extend rice’s reach in schools

The U.S. rice industry has always had a close connection to this nation’s school nutrition programs. As a staple grain that is affordable, nutritious, easy to prepare in large quantities, and (most importantly) appealing to kids, rice and school foodservice go hand in hand. This is an especially important partnership these days considering grocery inflation, labor shortages, and other issues that put strain on school budgets.

To strengthen this vital market for U.S.grown rice and ensure the wellbeing of our children, I’m excited to announce that USA Rice has formed the K-12 Chef Advisory Board.

The K-12 Chef Advisory Board is a four-person team of professionals from school districts across the country. With their expertise in children’s nutrition and practical

their operations. This included a video series on rice’s versatility, recipe development, direct engagement with school officials, and donation support to school districts during a time when schools were facing many challenges due to COVID-19. We also hosted accredited training webinars on the importance of using and sourcing U.S.-grown rice in school foodservice operations, where professionals could educate themselves on the benefits of including U.S.-grown rice in their programs while earning Continuing Education Credits. We also revamped the Schools Think Rice newsletter last year. The new streamlined, mobile-friendly design featuring strong calls to action resulted in increased engagement among readers, and provides an effective way to reach school foodservice audiences directly and effectively.

knowledge of school nutrition programs, the Board will provide insight, leverage relationships, and create new tools that will extend the rice industry’s reach into school kitchens across the country.

This Board is the culmination of a series of initiatives we have made in the school nutrition space in recent years. The K-12 Rice to the Rescue program, launched in late 2021, provided support and resources to schools while working to elevate the role of rice in

Through developing healthy, delicious, and practical recipes that kids will love, helping school districts source and integrate U.S. rice into their nutrition programs, and positioning rice as a solution that addresses some of the challenges school operators face, USA Rice provides support and guidance to our nation’s schools and children. This is just the beginning; as more districts focus on menus that are healthy yet practical, the K-12 Chef Advisory Board will be key in facilitating these future opportunities by developing relationships and providing expertise.

It’s an easy decision on our end to invest in school foodservice. U.S.-grown rice belongs in schools, because keeping our children fed, happy, and healthy will always be the top priority.

It’s an easy decision on our end to invest in school foodservice. U.S.-grown rice belongs in schools, because keeping our children fed, happy, and healthy will always be the top priority.

Weed Control Strategies In Rice

Wendell Minson

Bootheel Crop Consultants

Dexter, Missouri

I received a B.S. degree in agricultural education from the University of Missouri. After obtaining a teaching certificate, I taught vocational agriculture for four years in Dexter, Missouri, before going to work for a manufacturer as a sales rep. In 2000, I started my own business — Bootheel Crop Consultants — where, today, I consult on rice, wheat, corn and soybeans.

Last year was extremely wet, so planting was delayed by two weeks. When we got the rice in and got it up, conditions went to extremely dry in the middle of the summer. This affected our weed control, especially on row rice. It was difficult to get the grasses in check. You can irrigate, but Mother Nature still needs to throw a rain in there for you.

Resistance rears its ugly head

Battling resistant grass that we’ve never had before, along with some resistant sedges, is going to be our biggest challenge this year. My clients rotate from rice to beans and then back to rice, so resistance hasn’t been a problem for us in the past. But now we are seeing more of it.

We overlay herbicides to keep residuals out there. The goal is to never see any weeds come up. We’ll change up our chemistry a little bit, too.

Barnyardgrass is the main weed that’s resistant to different products. Palmer amaranth in row rice is not resistant to any of the products we use, and Loyant® herbicide does a great job controlling it. I apply Loyant as the last shot before flushing in the fertilizer in row rice. If pigweed is in the field and it’s a pretty good size, Loyant is an excellent choice. We’ll be watering right behind it, which makes it work well.

Grandstand® R herbicide is still a good product for pigweed, too. I’ve used a lot of Clincher® SF over the years for grassy weeds. You can put it out early and not bang up the crop, and it’s as broad spectrum as anything on the market over the top. I may start using more Grasp® SC herbicide to take out resistant grass in every rice stage, including one-leaf and two-leaf. It also helps control coffeebean, indigo and eclipta. Application timeliness is a key component for killing post-emerge grasses.

On a positive note going into this season, some of our expenses are down, and the price of rice is still good. If we get rice in the ground in a timely manner, we have a good chance of making a good crop.

• B.S. degree in agricultural education, University of Missouri.

• Established Bootheel Crop Consultants in 2000. Consults on rice, wheat, corn and soybeans.

• Has served on the board of the T.E. “Jake” Fisher Delta Research, Extension and Education Center in Portageville, Missouri, since 1981. Serves on the board of several ag scholarship committees in the area.

• Serves as a deacon at the First Baptist Church in Dexter.

• Has coached grade school baseball, basketball and football for two generations.

• Married to wife Karyl for 35 years. Two sons: Matt Stone (Christin) and David Stone (Laura). Four grandsons — Chris, Carter, Chance and Camden. One granddaughter — Caroline.

• Enjoys duck hunting and traveling up North to pheasant hunt in the wintertime.

Recap: Weed Control Strategies In Rice

1. Battling resistant grass that we’ve never had before, along with some resistant sedges, is going to be our biggest challenge this year.

2. We overlay herbicides to keep residuals out there. The goal is to never see any weeds come up.

3. I apply Loyant® herbicide as the last shot before flushing in the fertilizer in row rice. If pigweed is in the field and it’s a pretty good size, Loyant is an excellent choice.

4. I may use more Grasp® SC herbicide to take out resistant grass in every rice stage, including one-leaf and two-leaf. It also helps control coffeebean, indigo and eclipta.

Arkansas studies show alternative fertilizer for rice

By John Lovett

Struvite, the same substance that makes up kidney stones and irritates sewage plant operators, could be an effective alternative to using a limited supply of mined phosphate for crop fertilizer.

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, 19% of the 22.02 billion tons of fertilizer used in the United States in 2015 — the most recent data available — was phosphate based.

Struvite is the common name for magnesium ammonium phosphate, a crystal-like substance that often coats the inside of sewage pipes and causes blockages. Struvite can, however, be created by chemical engineers from solid wastes or wastewater as a fertilizer with slow-release potential because most of it is not water soluble. The substance is taken up by plants as magnesium, nitrogen, and phosphorus as the roots acidify the soil around it, so excess nutrient runoff is limited.

There are two ways to precipitate struvite from a solution. The “electrochemical method” involves using an electrical current through a magnesium electrode, putting magnesium atoms into the solution that react with ammonium and phosphate in the solution. The “chemical method” usually includes adding magnesium salts to a solution, which results in a chemical reaction with the ammonium and phosphate. Using either method, struvite is produced.

Two-year field studies by the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station showed that struvite produced by electrochemical means performs as well as the common sources of phosphate fertilizer, and the chemically created struvite, on yields in rice, corn, and soybeans in east Arkansas soils.

“The results of our study demonstrate that electrochemically precipitated struvite has potential as an alternative fertilizer source for upland and lowland row crops in eastern Arkansas, where there is a documented nutrient deficiency,” said

Kristofor Brye, University Professor of applied soil physics and pedology with the experiment station, the research arm of the University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture.

The field study’s results are the culmination of research done with chemical engineers and agricultural economists supported by the National Science Foundation.

Recovering nutrients from wastewaters could have a positive impact on the environment and create an additional revenue stream for wastewater treatment facilities, Brye added.

A previous experiment station study indicated flood-irrigated rice grown with electrochemically precipitated struvite produced less methane, a greenhouse gas, than other phosphate fertilizers, including a chemically precipitated struvite. A confirmation study is ongoing.

“A fertilizer-phosphorus source that is environmentally friendly, as the product of recovered nutrients from wastewater,

would be a substantial benefit for Arkansas row-crop producers, provided electrochemically precipitated struvite is economically cost-effective,” Brye said.

Research by the University of Arkansas chemical engineering department has been supported by the National Science Foundation to develop innovative methods of creating electrochemically precipitated struvite.

Testing the options

Prior to the two-year field studies on each crop, Brye said no field research had been conducted using electrochemically precipitated struvite in the highly agriculturally productive soils of the MidSouth and southern United States. Lauren Greenlee, former associate professor in chemical engineering for the University of Arkansas, had the idea for an electrochemical approach to making struvite from wastewaters, Brye said. She decided to prove the concept of making the mate-

Struvite (upper left), created by an electrochemical method from stimulated wastewater, was compared to common phosphate sources and a chemically created struvite.

rial and Brye followed up with agronomic testing. Greenlee is now at Penn State University. The studies were conducted from 2018 to 2020.

Previous research leading up the field trials for each crop included lab and greenhouse studies, including a study by Niyi Omidire, now a postdoctoral fellow in crop, soil, and environmental sciences at the University of Arkansas, comparing a chemically precipitated struvite to triple super phosphate on both irrigated and non-irrigated land in a wheat-soybean double crop system in east Arkansas. The results upheld the use of chemically precipitated struvite as a potential alternative fertilizer-phosphorus and magnesium source on a silt-loam soil for crop production.

Brye also served as adviser to crop, soil, and environmental sciences graduate student Ryder Anderson’s struvite in moist-soil incubation study. Ryder’s study showed phosphorus concentrations differed among soil textures and previous management histories, indicating struvite’s “slow-release” characteristic is more dependent on soil type.

The goal of the two-year confirmation field study was to evaluate the potential effectiveness of struvite for use in rice, corn, and soybeans. Electrochemically precipitated struvite from real wastewater is now being used in a field study to test greenhouse gas emission differences in flood-irrigated rice. Researchers are also looking at rain runoff levels of each phosphorus source.

How the test was done

A uniform application rate of phosphorus was used for each fertilizer source in the field study. The chemically precipitated struvite was Crystal Green® by Ostara.

Generally, struvite contains between 11% and 26% total phosphorus depending on the initial source and production method. Because of the small amount of electrochemically precipitated struvite that could be created in the lab, the field test areas in the two-year study were equally small, 5-by-5 feet.

Brye said there were no major differences in yield performance between the electrochemically precipitated struvite and all the other mined phosphate sources used in the various studies for rice, corn, and soybeans.

While the researcher’s struvite appeared to be more effective on corn and soybeans than rice, Brye said there are contribut-

Struvite created from simulated wastewater was applied to 5-by-5-foot sections as part of a study to compare electrochemically precipitated struvite to commonly mined phosphate sources and a chemically created struvite.

ing factors that would lead him to believe there is more to the story.

When rice is flood-irrigated, the plants can tap into a greater pool of phosphorus released by the water, but the fertilizer is less efficiently used than in corn. Also, corn has a different root structure that allows it to explore the ground better, and the slow-release characteristic of struvite better matches the physiological growth of corn and soybeans, he said. Corn also has a higher phosphorus demand than the other crops.

Economics of recycling

“By all accounts we’ve concluded this electrochemically precipitated struvite can be more than a viable alternative fertilizer phosphorus source,” Brye said. “While there is no large-scale production of electrochemically precipitated struvite, there is large-scale production of chemically pre-

cipitated struvite.”

Studies show that recovery of struvite from wastewater treatment plants is possible and would be a relief in the wastewater treatment industry, Brye said.

“Struvite works as a fertilizer, but it is only a rational choice if the benefits of using it outweigh the costs,” said Jennie Popp, professor of agricultural economics and agribusiness and associate dean of the University of Arkansas Honors College.

Popp noted more research is needed to determine the economic feasibility of electrochemically precipitated struvite in rowcrop agriculture. However, their economic analysis of the experiment station’s field study data shows electrochemically precipitated struvite showed “real promise” on corn when they price similar products, like the chemically precipitated struvite Crystal Green, to estimate a price. The results were mixed on the other crops, Popp said.

In addition to Brye, Greenlee, Omidire, Anderson and Popp, co-authors of the related struvite studies included Leah English, research program associate in agricultural economics and agribusiness; Laszlo Kekedy-Nagy, now a postdoctoral fellow at Concordia University in Montreal, Canada; Edward E. Gbur, retired director of the experiment station’s Agricultural Statistics Laboratory; Leandro Mozzoni, former soybean breeding and genetics associate professor for the experiment station; and Trenton Roberts, associate professor and Endowed Chair in Soil Fertility Research for the experiment station.

The Endangered Species Act

Understanding the ramifications on pesticides across the country

By Cassidy Nemec Editor

Figuring out how the Endangered Species Act affects the agricultural industry can be both complex and frustrating. The ESA of 1973 was enacted by Congress under President Nixon and has since drawn much attention to species across the U.S. that had/have the potential to be threatened or completely wiped from the map.

In recent years especially, it has become increasingly critical for growers, crop advisors, Extension, and a plethora of others throughout the agricultural industry to not just be aware of the ramifications from the ESA on their operations, but also be more and more involved.

FWS has jurisdiction

It is to be noted that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services federal agency (or the National Marine Fisheries Service in cases of aquatic species) has jurisdiction over the ESA. According to the FWS website, the act itself “establishes protections for fish, wildlife, and plants that are listed as threatened or endangered species, and for preparing and implementing plans for their recovery.”

Species become listed one of two ways. The FWS may propose species, or any citizen can petition for it. The citizen petition route is the most common way for this to happen, due in part to the FWS having an extreme backlog of requests it must funnel

through keeping the agency busy.

The FWS agency involves themselves in the candidate conservation, listing and classification, and recovery processes as they relate to ESA. Their website also mentions the provision “for interagency cooperation to avoid take of listed species and for issuing permits for otherwise prohibited activities.” This brings up two concepts: interagency cooperation should be taking place, and “take” can be broadly defined.

The Ag Law in the Field podcast is hosted by Texas A&M Agri–Life Extension ag law specialist Tiffany Lashmet. She recently sat down with Jonathan Wood, a lawyer by training who is now the vice president of law and policy at the Property Environment Research Center. He has been working with ESA for years now and discussed how “take” is defined in relation to the act.

“Essentially, it’s any private activity that harms a listed species and, to some extent, also its habitat. The FWS may also issue regulations extending that prohibition to threatened species,” Wood said. He followed up by saying this is applied for both endangered (listed) and threatened species in terms of critical habitat and conservation, but the ESA only applies the “take” definition to endangered species for private land use.

One concern about potential regulations on already scrutinized rice herbicides down the road is the impact they would have on aerial applications.

Information related to geographic pesticide use limitations is included in Endangered Species Protection Bulletins, which can be obtained through EPA’s website.

Reemphasizing what he terms the “teeth of the law,” Wood further explained just what the “take” definition can encompass.

“Most people think it means you’re intentionally taking or harming, but the FWS interprets it far more broadly. If you harm a species, even unintentionally, if you disturb a species, if you modify its habitat in a way that may, in the future, restrict its ability to find food or to breed and reproduce — all of those things could violate the “take” prohibition, which, depending on the species and use of the land, can make continued use of that property really complicated.”

Wood confirmed that FWS can also regulate all other agencies and their respective activities that could have any effect on species.

In the podcast, Wood mentioned that FWS is currently facing a 10-year backlog of citizen requests, including those requests made mainly by about three major environmental litigation groups.

FIFRA, the Endangered Species Protection Program, and Bulletins Live! Two

In 1947, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act was enacted with the original intent of establishing measures regarding the registering of pesticides used in interstate commerce with USDA as well as labeling provisions. The act was later expanded due to concerns over pesticides’ toxic effects and residues and now involves everything dealing with the “sale, distribution, and use of pesticides,” according to EPA’s website.

So where does FIFRA intersect with the ESA?

Wood said the ESA, while historically focused on more charismatic species like wolves in the Western U.S., has gone nationwide in the last 20 years with more types of species being added to the list that are more vulnerable to pesticide use.

“Increasingly, the ESA is requiring EPA when it’s approving pesticides to set species-protective limits on how they’re used,” he said. “With every additional species you add to that process, with every different pesticide or application you’re adding, you just add to the complexity.”

Registering and reregistering pesticides takes time, and EPA has

Breaking down the “legalese”

• FWS/NMFS has jurisdiction over ESA.

• EPA has authority over FIFRA.

• ESA focuses on continued existence of listed species and prohibits “taking” of them.

• FIFRA deals with sale, distribution, and use of pesticides.

• Ideally, FWS and EPA work together to comply with ESA.

• Both FWS and EPA have been backlogged for a long time.

• EPA has released a workplan and updated workplan in 2022.

• Taking Action/What You Can Do: COMMENT, COMMENT, COMMENT! Stay aware of public notice and comment periods. Comments are to be submitted on EPA’s website when the comment period opens.

a similar backlog to FWS in their listing petitions and permitting process. They are supposed to be evaluating every product and how they may impact species, which is both challenging due to lack of data and time consuming with their ongoing list of what they should be accomplishing. In working to comply with ESA and FIFRA’s regulations, EPA has implemented the Endangered Species Protection Program to help with this large task at hand.

Within the past two years, EPA has been having regular ESA-FIFRA meetings to work toward addressing what steps to take moving forward. They produced their first workplan in 2022 and an update to that plan in November 2022. The update includes regulation review efforts and other initiatives, which include many mitigation strategies for both agricultural and nonagricultural use.

Information related to geographic pesticide use limitations is included in Endangered Species Protection Bulletins, which can be obtained through EPA’s website. As stated there, “Bulletins set forth geographically specific pesticide use limitations for the protection of threatened and endangered (listed) species and their designated critical habitat.”

Bulletins Live! Two is the application system where these bulletins are housed. This is where a pesticide label comes into play. When reviewing a label that directs you to the website, it will then instruct you on the pesticide use limitations for the applicable area, or PULAs. The applicator is required to follow these for the intended area, product, and application month.

Bulletins are good for six months from the time they are created and protect the pesticide applicator for that entire length of time, even if additional measures arise that did not exist at the time of printing that bulletin. If no PULAs are listed, it is important to still print the documentation saying there are no bulletins for that area in order to still cover the applicator.

Information on how to find the EPA registration number needed to search for a product in the Bulletins Live! Two application, along with a tutorial on the system as a whole, is available at https://www.epa.gov/endangered-species/endangered-speciesprotection-bulletins.

Impact on rice

While most pesticides, mostly herbicides, affected thus far have been impacting cotton, there are several concerns coming down the pipeline in terms of rice.

Drs. Thomas Butts and Jarrod Hardke, University of Arkansas weed specialist and rice specialist, respectively, spoke on how the ESA is currently impacting agriculture and what it looks like for rice down the road.

Butts commented that the process looks different for every product, state, and active ingredient. “Moving forward, it’s going to be that we either have more regulations and paperwork to do in order to make legal applications — or we’re just going to outright lose options.”

He remarked on how challenging the framework of the ESA is. “On the website, it’s listed as ‘present or believed to be present,’ so we don’t even have the data to know whether they’re there or not. There’s a lot of missing information in all of this, and it’s an impossible task for applicators, the EPA, and the FWS alike.”

The new 2,4-D (Enlist) and dicamba (Engenia, XtendiMax, and Tavium) formulations registered for use over-the-top of resistant crops have been the big players recently as far as reregistration goes in accordance with the new ESA measures. The next ones up to the plate are atrazine, fluometuron, and diuron, which are more residual, soil, and water based. Others up for bid next are paraquat, glyphosate, and metribuzin.

While not herbicides that come to mind for rice, Butts said paraquat and glyphosate are known to be used for burndown prior to their rice crop, and Hardke reiterated the role of starting clean for rice being key.

Butts reflected on how the regulation process used to look more like a risk-benefit analysis but now is strictly a risk assessment with no benefits factored in. He noted the lack of warning given in the cases of pulled products, providing the example of when Arkansas lost the ability to use Enlist in 11 counties last year.

“What was really scary for a lot of us is that none of us knew that was coming. It was just kind of a memo slid across a desk one afternoon, and all of a sudden, we didn’t have those products in those counties anymore.”

He said they currently do not have any sort of consistency with these regulations nor the capability to know how to better prepare — or prepare at all — for when they do come along. Butts

“Getting those opinions and voices out there and having EPA hear them directly from growers and consultants goes a lot further than the mass emails or comments they get that’s just a template or form signed by a different name,” Butts said.

NIALL WIGGAN DREAMSTIME.COM

commented that better direction moving forward would help at least in the sense that they could figure out what they could do to get a better handle on circumstances before they occur and plan for the future.

In attempting to comply with the runoff mitigation measures brought up, Butts discussed how many of the measures do not work for the Mid-South region and that they will be difficult to follow since they’re not driven for that area. “If you look at the proposed picklist of mitigation strategies, at all, it does not fit MidSouth growers because it’s very much geared toward crops grown on a slope, and about 75%-85% of our arable land in Arkansas is on a 0% to 3% slope. That picklist gets very limited in a hurry for our growers down here.”

He (Butts) said another consideration for the future of rice, in addition to rice herbicides already being so limited and under scrutiny due to the water aspect, is the impact these regulations could have on aerial applications. Given some of his recent survey results that around 50% of their applications go out by air, he said it could be detrimental if those products begin getting further limited or banned.

Making comments to make a difference

To make a difference, EPA is encouraging those in agriculture to make comments during the comment periods that come up during the lengthy registration and reregistration processes that will inevitably be ongoing for the foreseeable future.

Butts said he has been making a big push for people to pay attention to when the comment periods open to go and submit comments.

“That’s the only way we’re going to get our voices heard. Something like ‘aerial applications are super important for us in the MidSouth, or we’re already limited with herbicides in rice and can’t lose more options.’ That’s an opportunity where EPA can hear directly from growers about our practices. Getting those opinions and voices out there and having EPA hear them directly from growers and consultants goes a lot further than the mass emails or comments they get that’s just a template or form signed by a different name.”

The Endangered Species Act turns 50 years old this year and is a complex issue for agriculture today. It will continue to become more of an important concept in the industry. This article is not all-encompassing. For more information on EPA, FWS, or any of the discussed Acts or programs, visit www.fws.gov/ or www.epa.gov/.

Southern region land-grant researchers finding solutions to control feral hogs

By V. Todd Miller

Feral hogs are a nuisance in many areas of the United States, causing billions of dollars in damage. ey are reported in 35 states with a population of approximately nine million hogs causing billions in damages each year. ey eat crops, dig up trees, and devour food that other animals depend on.

Feral swine can signi cantly damage native ora and fauna through their rooting behaviors or indirectly by facilitating the spread of invasive plants, altering soil and water resources, and limiting regeneration of native plants. Habitat degradation by feral swine may in uence the diversity and occurrence of native wildlife communities. Feral swine also carry and transmit diseases such as brucellosis and pseudorabies virus that pose signi cant risks to the health of many wild and domestic animals.

Feral hogs cause an estimated $1.5 billion in economic damages annually across the United States, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Land-grant researchers from the southern region are developing solutions to manage this infestation.

Feral hogs have been part of the American landscape since the 1500s when early explorers and settlers imported swine as a food source. Free-range livestock management practices and escapes from enclosures led to the rst feral hog populations taking hold.

In the 1900s, the Eurasian wild boar was introduced to some states for sport hunting. Modern feral swine are a combination of escaped domestic pigs, wild boars, and hybrids of the two.

Arkansas Forest Resources Center damage assessment

To serve as a baseline for feral swine damage assessments to private landowners and help guide management practices, the Arkansas Forest Resources Center in Monticello led a multi-state survey of 4,500 landowners to gauge economic damage to croplands, forestlands, pasturelands/livestock, and their combinations.

e study, “Assessing feral swine damage in the western gulf region of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas,” was published in the Biological Invasions journal in January and estimates feral swine damages over ve years across all of Arkansas and Louisiana and 38 counties in east Texas. e project was initiated by Nana Tian, assistant professor of

forest economics in the College of Forestry, Agriculture and Natural Resources at the University of Arkansas at Monticello and researcher for the Arkansas Agricultural Experiment Station. Her research partners were Jianbang Gan, professor in the department of ecology and conservation biology at Texas A&M University’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences; and Gordon Holley, professor in the School of Agricultural Sciences and Forestry at Louisiana Tech University.

e survey estimates private landowners’ average agricultural cropland damage in the past ve years was $28 per acre in both Arkansas and Louisiana and approximately $25 per acre in east Texas. e most-reported feral swine damage to agricultural crops was to corn, soybeans, rice, wheat, hay, silage, and forage crops.

Feral hog baits are Louisiana’s answer

e Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries estimates the state’s population of feral hogs at more than 900,000. e damage estimates based on a Louisiana State University AgCenter survey to Louisiana’s commodity production are $66 million and other non-production losses are at almost $25 million.

LSU AgCenter researcher Glen Gentry, along with the LSU Department of Chemistry, is working on a bait and delivery system to help reduce the population of feral hogs. e baits are so and can be swallowed whole by the pigs, which reduces the chances of crumbs being consumed by other animals.

e baits have sodium nitrite, a common food additive in products, such as bacon. It is lethal to pigs at fairly low levels.

e researchers had to look at several factors when developing the bait. One involved choosing a formula that was more attractive to hogs than other animals and was based on features like smell and texture.

Louisiana’s next steps

e LSU AgCenter team plans to commercialize the bait system once they are satis ed with its performance. e product will then be patented and go through federal and state approval processes. A landowner will probably need to get some form of pesticide applicators license to distribute the bait.

Submit

MSU scientists develop climate-resilient rice

Scientists at Mississippi State are part of a multi-institutional, $10-million e ort to improve the sustainability and pro tability of rice farming in the face of climate change.

an outstanding consultant for his or her dedication, leadership and innovation in the Mid-South rice industry.

For

“Because of our interdisciplinary expertise and MSU’s facilities, we are developing genetic mapping tools to identify the genes associated with stress tolerance, including projected changes in climate,” said Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station Agronomist Raja Reddy. “Being able to identify these genes will help rice breeders develop climate-resilient cultivars, or plant varieties.”

Reddy, a research professor in MSU’s Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, is working alongside assistant research professors Raju Bheemanahalli Rangappa and Hunter Bowman, also MAFES agronomists. e research team has been awarded $970,000 as part of a four-year, $10 million grant from the USDA’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture. Louisiana State University is the lead institution on the grant from NIFA’s Sustainable Agricultural Systems program. Other partners include the University of Arkansas and Texas A&M University.

Ranking sixth in the nation, Mississippi rice production is a $97 million industry, with over 115,000 farmed acres. In recent years, increasing extremes and unpredictability in weather patterns have begun to threaten the stability of this agricultural commodity.

“Like much of the U.S. Midsouth, Mississippi is seeing greater extremes in our high and low temperatures and greater intensities of drought during the early season,” Reddy said. “ ese conditions and higher temperatures during owering are signi cant impediments to rice yield and grain quality.”

Reddy said the researchers, who collectively have many years of experience studying rice cultivation and breeding, also are planning Extension activities to help growers optimize their resources — particularly water and nutrients — to get the best growth and yield from newly developed cultivars.

According to the LSU AgCenter, the speci c project objectives are to assess the socioeconomic and environmental impacts of current crop management practices, identify barriers to adopting novel technologies and practices, develop novel genotypes with enhanced tolerance to biological and environmental stressors, develop and optimize environmentally friendly crop management practices, and implement a robust Extension program to disseminate the concepts and bene ts of sustainable farming techniques.

e grant is part of a $70 million investment from USDA to establish robust, resilient, and climate-smart food and agricultural systems.

NOMINATION FORM

Nominate an outstanding consultant for the Rice Consultant of the Year Award.

Sponsored by Corteva Agriscience and Rice Farming magazine, the annual award recognizes the dedication, leadership and innovation of this crucial segment of the Mid-South rice industry.

“Corteva Agriscience® is committed to rice consultants and the key role they play in agronomic guidance and support,” said Breanna Thompson, Corteva Agriscience product manager, rice and cereals.

“As the sponsor of the Rice Consultant of the Year program, Corteva is honored to recognize consultants who continuously strive to impact the rice industry and their local communities,” she said.

The RCOY Award recipient will:

 Be featured in a four-page salute in the February 2024 Rice Farming magazine and honored at a special recognition event Feb. 29, 2024.

 Receive a personalized Rice Consultant of the Year jacket. The award recipient and nominator each will receive one night’s hotel stay and round-trip travel to the event.

SUBMIT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Please use a separate page for biographical/professional information.

Additional recommendation letters from rice farmers, consultants and industry members in support of the nominee are encouraged.

Submit all materials via:

Email: csmith@onegrower.com

Mail: Carroll Smith

7201 Eastern Ave. Germantown, TN 38138

Online: ricefarming.com/rcoy

Submit nominations by July 15, 2023.

Consultant’s Name:

Company Name: Mailing Address: City: State: ZIP: Phone: Email:

Please describe the dedication, leadership and innovation that makes this person a good candidate for the 2023 Rice Consultant of the Year Award. (Be as specific as possible, and use a separate sheet, if needed.)

Your Name: Address:

New tool calculates crop rotation costs, benefits for California rice growers

By Mike Hsu UC Agriculture & Natural Resources

Due to severe water shortages, rice acres planted in California plummeted by 37% from 2021 to 2022, according to numbers released recently by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service. But now, thanks to University of California researchers, growers have a new tool they could potentially use to cope with droughts and other environmental and socioeconomic changes.

A crop rotation calculator provides farmers in the Sacramento Valley — where 97% of California rice is grown — with projections on the economic impacts of transitioning their fields from rice into four less-water-intensive crops: dry beans, safflower, sunflower, or tomato.

The tool represents an initial attempt to address the dearth of research on rice crop rotation in California, while giving growers much-needed, science-backed data on whether the practice would make financial sense for their farms.

“I believe more rice growers could benefit from the many advantages of crop rotation, and this new tool is an excellent first step by the UC to help growers look into making such a transition,” said George Tibbitts, a Colusa County rice farmer.

Funded in part by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, through the Western Integrated Pest Management Center, the calculator is a collaborative effort of UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, UC Integrated Pest Management and UC Davis to fill a major gap in rice research.

“I do think there are people who would have tried rotational crops in the past, but it’s just so unknown, we didn’t have anything we could give them and be like, ‘Hey, this is the recommended crop for your area,’” said Whitney Brim-DeForest, UC Cooperative Extension rice advisor. “This

tool gives them some preliminary data they can use to make a more informed decision.”

The tool allows farmers to enter variables unique to their operation to calculate potential costs and benefits of rotating from rice to dry beans, tomato, sunflower, or safflower.

Crop rotation a potential boon to growers, environment

UC Davis doctoral student Sara Rosenberg and Brim-DeForest, alongside other members of the UC rice research team, surveyed California rice growers in 2020 on their experiences with and perceptions of crop rotation. Although the practice is rare

in the Sacramento Valley (only an estimated 10% of rice acreage is under rotation), some farmers reported benefits that could be crucial in a water-scarce future.

“From having conversations with growers who do rotate, one of the biggest benefits they describe is their flexibility in times of drought, where they can keep producing on their land when there isn’t enough water to grow rice,” said Rosenberg, noting that crop rotation could be one option in a “toolbox” of strategies that growers also use to manage fertilizer price shocks, herbicide resistance, and other challenges.

During the ongoing drought that caused about half of California’s rice acreage to go

The tool allows farmers to enter variables unique to their operation to calculate potential costs and benefits of rotating from rice to dry beans, tomato, sunflower, or safflower.

University of California researchers have created a tool to help growers manage drought, pests, and other challenges.

The rice calculator tool can be found at: https://ricerotation-calculator. ipm.ucanr.edu/.

© 2022 REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. USED BY PERMISSION

fallow in 2022, Tibbitts said his water district was only able to allocate 10% of his usual allotment.

“With such a limited supply, it would have been tough to grow even one field of rice,” he said. “But it was enough water so that we could rent two of our fields to a tomato grower – tomatoes under drip irrigation use much less water than a flooded field of rice. We were also able to grow one field of sunflowers, which doesn’t need any irrigation at all if you can plant the seeds into existing moisture in the early spring.”

While drought is one motivating factor to rotate crops, Tibbitts said that on principle he avoids planting all his acreage in rice and “not have all (his) eggs in one basket.”

“My primary motivation for rotating into and out of rice has been to help with weed and disease control,” he added. “Crop rotation is a primary tool of IPM (integrated pest management), and I feel it has helped me greatly over the years.”

According to Brim-DeForest, rotating cropping systems can allow for the use of different weed control tools, such as different herbicide modes of action, and different cultural controls such as tillage, reducing the chances of selecting for herbicide-resistant weeds — an increasingly pervasive issue in rice systems.

Rosenberg noted that, in some situations — and depending on the crops in rotation — the practice can also disrupt the life cycles of insects and diseases and potentially improve soil structure and in-

crease nutrient cycling and uptake, which may lead to a reduction in inputs such as fertilizer.

More crop diversification research needed in rice systems

The benefits of crop rotation for California rice growers are largely theoretical and anecdotal, however, so the UC rice team is looking to add evidence-based grounding through a variety of studies — from looking at long-term effects on soil health indicators to testing various cover crops (which may deliver some benefits of diversification, similar to those of rotation).

In addition to crop rotation in rice, researchers are also studying cover cropping, which may deliver some benefits of diversification, UC Davis doctoral student Sara Rosenberg said.

“In California, there is no quantitative data on crop rotation in rice,” said Brim-DeForest. “You’d think after a hundred and some odd years (of UC agricultural research), all the research would have been done, but, no – there’s tons still to do.”

Through interviews with Sacramento Valley growers, researchers found that cost was frequently mentioned as a barrier to trying crop rotation, along with incompatible soil conditions and a lack of equipment, knowledge, and experience.

To help clarify those economic uncertainties, the new calculator tool allows growers to enter baseline information specific to their circumstances — whether they rent or own their own land, whether

In addition to crop rotation in rice, researchers are also studying cover cropping, which may deliver some benefits of diversification, UC Davis doctoral student Sara Rosenberg said.

they contract out the work to plant the rotational crop, and other factors. The calculator then generates potential costs and benefits of staying in rice versus rotating to dry beans, safflower, sunflower, or tomato, during the first year and in an “average” year for those crops.

The upfront costs of rotation during “year one” can be daunting. Therefore, the tool only focuses on a short-term profitability perspective. Researchers are currently working on longer-term modeling for crop rotation — incorporating the possibility of reduced herbicide use over time, and under different crop yield scenarios, for example — that could significantly change the growers’ calculus.

“You could actually be profitable in the long term, whereas this first, short glimpse is showing you a negative,” Rosenberg said.

In addition, thanks to collaboration with the UC IPM team, the rice rotation calculator is an evolving tool that will be continually improved based on user feedback and additional data. Brim-DeForest also said it could be adapted to other cropping systems — for example, alfalfa going into another rotational crop.

Other contributors to the project include Bruce Linquist, Luis Espino, Ellen Bruno, Kassim Al-Khatib, and Michelle Leinfelder-Miles of UCCE; Cameron Pittelkow of UC Davis; as well as UC IPM team members Chinh Lam, Tunyalee Martin and Hanna Zorlu; and the California rice growers and industry members who participated in the research.

Given the dearth of quantitative data on crop rotation in rice, more studies are needed on the practice in California, according to Whitney Brim-DeForest, UCCE rice advisor.

© 2022 REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. USED BY PERMISSION

© 2022 REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. USED BY PERMISSION

‘Super Seniors’ graduate from Rice Leadership Development Program

As reported on in USA Rice’s The Daily, the 2021-23 Rice Leadership Development Class recently completed the two-year program with their final session held in conjunction with the USA Rice Legislative Fly-In in Washington, D.C., Feb. 26–March 1.

“This group had a very different trajectory due to the outbreak of COVID-19,” said Dr. Steve Linscombe, director of the program. “They were selected during the Rice Outlook Conference in Little Rock in December 2019, and their program, which should have begun in 2020, ended up being extended by a year.”

Upon arriving in Washington, the class traveled to the USA Rice staff office in Arlington, Virginia, to review the week ahead and discuss the many issues USA Rice is working on for the industry.

Class spokesperson, Christine Wylie, from Colusa, California, talked about the impact the class had on her outlook for the future of U.S. agriculture. She encouraged everyone to have at least one conversation a day about U.S. ag with someone not involved in the industry as an effective way to spread the message about the vital role the industry plays in our country’s food security.

Class members then joined their individual home state delegations making visits on Capitol Hill and speaking with legislators about the importance of the upcoming Farm Bill and significant concerns unique to rice that the industry hopes to see included.

In addition to Wylie, class members are Elliot Maschmann from Oran, Missouri; Mallory Scott from Wynne, Arkansas; Adam Shea from Little Rock, Arkansas; Derek Sohnrey from Durham, California; and Garrett Williams from Stuttgart, Arkansas.

During their four sessions, they visited rice growing regions in Arkansas, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Texas where they met rice producers and industry leaders. They also attended several sessions on improving leadership skills.

The Rice Leadership Development Program is open to U.S. rice producers or individuals who work in the rice industry between the ages of 25-45. The application period will open in July and details will be announced in the USA Rice Daily

2023 Rice is Nice Youth Cooking Contest rules

Arkansas produces just under 50% of the nation’s rice each year, and this contest is designed to introduce budding chefs to rice as a

crop and as a versatile diet staple. Students age 9-18, or in grades 4-12 as of Jan. 1, 2023, and living in Arkansas may enter. Homeschooled students are welcome to enter. Contestants, certified by their county Farm Bureau or county Extension agent, will compete in one of two categories: Main Dish or Party Ideas.

County winners may be selected in a manner deemed most suitable for each county. County winner entries to the state contest are due by May 26. Students must be willing to participate in the state cook-off in Little Rock, Arkansas, if their recipe is selected for the finals. Finalists will be notified by June 2.

The top three winners in each category will prepare and serve their recipe at the state contest June 27 in Little Rock. Prizes will be awarded in each category as follows: First place, $150; second place, $125; third place $100. All recipes and entries become the property of Arkansas Farm Bureau.

For more details, visit https://www.arfb.com/uploads/resources/ documents/2023_rice_is_nice_contest_booklet.pdf.

Neal Stoesser named Rice Farmer of the Year

Neal Stoesser, Raywood, Texas, has been named the 2023 Rice Farmer of the Year at the 26th Annual National Conservation Systems Cotton & Rice Conference, Southern Precision Ag Conference, Southern Soybean & Corn Conference, and the Delta States Irrigation Conference.

Stoesser is a fourth-generation farmer, growing rice, soybeans, milo, and hay and raising cattle along the Texas Gulf Coast. He grew up watching his father, the late Ray Stoesser, advocate for the rice industry and now proudly follows in his footsteps. Stoesser’s love of farming began early. At age eight, he started actively helping his father’s farm by driving the cart and has not stopped since. He farmed his first solo crop at the age of 18 and now farms a minimum of 6,000 acres of rice per year. He has continuously adapted and innovated to meet the current demands of farming.

Stoesser serves as the Vice-Chair of the US Rice Producers Association (USRPA) and a board member of the Texas Rice Council. He also serves on the Texas Rice Research Foundation and the Liberty County Farm Bureau board and consults on different local agricultural advisory committees. He has participated in USRPA’s trade missions and reverse trade missions to increase rice exports in the U.S. He has traveled internationally to help promote high-quality U.S.-grown rice and has hosted international buyers at his farm and facilities to continue to grow rice export markets.

Stoesser is joined on his farming operation by his wife, Meredith, and two sons, Nate, 13, and Wes, 9.

Class of 2021-23 (from left): Elliott Maschmann, Derek Sohnrey, Christine Wiley, Mallory Scott, Garrett Williams, and Adam Shea

USA RICE

Pyrethroids in California rice

DR. LUIS ESPINO CALIFORNIA Rice Farm Advisor University of California Cooperative Extension laespino@ucanr.edu

We are fortunate that in California the pressure from arthropod pests is not as severe as in other parts of the world. However, we do have arthropods that can be considered key or important. In some fields, tadpole shrimp is a problem that requires management every year. Armyworms are a problem some years but not always. Rice seed midge has not been a problem for some time, but in the past two years, there have been some fields affected. The rice water weevil, once a key pest, is found causing economic damage very rarely. In my 15 years working in California, I have not seen fields with economic damage caused by the rice leafminer or aster leafhopper.

After carbofuran use was phased out in the late ‘90s, pyrethroid insecticides took its place as the main active ingredient used in California rice. Overall, I believe this was a positive change. Pyrethroids are used at much lower rates and are less toxic to vertebrates via ingestion than carbofuran. But the increase in use also meant higher risk of contamination. Currently, irrigation drains are monitored to make sure pyrethroid insecticides residues are not leaving rice fields.

Pyrethroids have a place in rice, but not for all pests. They are very effective against tadpole shrimp, although in some areas, tolerance is building up. Similarly, they offer protection against rice water weevils. Recent trials by UC Davis Extension entomologist Ian Grettenberger have shown that pyrethroids do not do a good job against rice seed midge. He is studying what other products may be options. I have conducted several trials against armyworms, and pyrethroids only achieve 50% control; Intrepid or Dimilin are the products to use if armyworms are a problem. Consider these facts when deciding what insecticides to use, and always follow the label. Pyrethroids are a good tool for pest control in rice; let’s protect it by using it wisely.

Bugs in the System

DR. JARROD T. HARDKE

ARKANSAS

Professor/Rice Extension Agronomist University of Arkansas System Division of Agriculture

jhardke@uada.edu

Our entomologists Nick Bateman and Ben Thrash have been improving our rice insect control recommendations over the past few years. There are questions that we have needed answers to for both early season and late-season pests of rice. We’re at least a little closer to answers, but definitely

could have more information to guide us.

For early season insect pests, we’re usually worried about rice water weevil and grape colaspis. While not all soils/fields have to worry about grape colaspis, all fields have to worry about rice water weevil. We consistently use the neonics CruiserMaxx or NipsIt on rice as they are excellent on grape colaspis and good on rice water weevil.

However, we’ve discussed for years that the neonics begin to run out around 35 days after planting, and we’re not always ready to flood then — meaning less control of rice water weevil. The answer now is to consider adding a diamide seed treatment (Dermacor or Fortenza) to prolong our control of rice water weevil (and some bonus residual against armyworms and other caterpillars).

The diamides certainly add another cost, but their improved rice water weevil control and their positive net return over cost have been apparent. This also applies to row rice fields where they seem to have activity on rice billbug. Notice I didn’t say control, but there have been positive yield benefits to the diamides in these scenarios.

As for the late season issue, it is of course the rice stink bug. Our pyrethroid insecticides such as lambda-cyhalothrin continue to provide less and less control each season. Our only answer is to begin shifting to other modes of action, especially if infestation levels are much above threshold.

Alternatives are currently limited, with Tenchu the best labeled option. The past two seasons, Endigo has received emergency exemptions for use, but it is unknown at this time whether that product will receive a full label or be allowed an exemption again for the 2023 season. Ultimately, we need help if we’re going to be able to manage stink bugs this year.

To sum things up, start off with an insecticide seed treatment, and consider stacking a neonic with a diamide to maximize control. Be diligent in your scouting for rice stink bug, and use the best product you can for the job that’s available. Finally, avoid “throwing in” insecticides with other applications that may flare stink bugs later.

Rice water weevil

DR. RONNIE LEVY

LOUISIANA

Extension Rice Specialist

Louisiana State University

RLevy@agcenter.lsu.edu

The rice water weevil is the most important early season insect pest of rice in Louisiana. Adults of this insect emerge from overwintering sites beginning in early April in southern Louisiana (later in northern Louisiana) and fly to rice fields where they feed on young rice leaves. This form of injury is not economically important except under unusually heavy infestations or prolonged cold springs when rice grows slowly.

Egg-laying commences when standing water is present in a field that is infested with adults. This condition is usually met immediately after a permanent flood is applied to a field. Young

rice is preferred for oviposition. After emerging from eggs, larvae feed under water on rice roots and pass through four larval instars and a pupal stage in approximately 30 days.

The rice water weevil is the most injurious insect pest in Louisiana rice production. Yield losses in excess of 25% can occur from severe infestations. Rice water weevil adults are grayish-brown weevils (beetles) about 1/8-inch long with a dark brown, V-shaped area on their backs. Rice water weevils overwinter as adults in grass clumps and ground debris near rice fields and in wooded areas. Emergence from overwintering sites usually begins in the first two weeks of April in southwestern Louisiana. Adults emerging from overwintering will invade either unflooded or flooded rice fields and begin feeding on the leaves of rice plants.

One key aspect of the biology of female rice water weevils is that females do not lay many eggs until fields are flooded. In unflooded fields, females may lay eggs in areas of fields that contain standing water, such as low spots, potholes, or tractor tire tracks. Application of the permanent flood is a trigger for females to lay numerous eggs in leaf sheaths of rice plants. Females deposit white, elongated eggs in the leaf sheath at or below the waterline. In addition to laying eggs in rice, adult rice water weevils will oviposit (lay eggs) in most aquatic grasses and sedges, including barnyard grass, fall panicum, red rice, yellow nutsedge, and broadleaf signalgrass. White, legless, C-shaped larvae with small brown head capsules emerge from eggs in about seven days.

First instar larvae are about 1⁄32-inches long and feed in the leaf sheath for a short time before exiting the stem and falling through the water to the soil where they burrow into the mud and begin

feeding on the roots of rice plants. The larvae continue to feed in or on the roots of rice plants and weeds in and around the field, developing through four instars in about 27 days. Larvae increase in size with each succeeding molt. Fourth instar larvae are about 3⁄16-inches long. Larvae pupate in oval, watertight cocoons attached to the roots of rice and weed plants. The cocoons are covered with a compacted layer of mud and resemble small mud balls. Peak larval density occurs three to five weeks after flooding. Adults emerge from the cocoons and are able to fly a short time after emerging and may return to overwintering sites or attack a different rice field. Newly emerged adult weevils usually do not re-infest the same field that they come from because they prefer to attack young plants.

The life cycle from egg to adult takes about 30 days. The length of the life cycle is temperature-dependent, however, and can vary from 25 to 45 days in warm and cool weather, respectively. The number of generations per year varies with latitude. As many as three to four generations can occur in the southern rice-growing areas of Louisiana. Fewer generations occur in the northern rice-growing areas.

Adult rice water weevils feed on the upper surface of rice leaves, leaving narrow, longitudinal scars that parallel the midrib. Adult feeding can kill plants when large numbers of weevils attack very young rice, but this is rare and is usually localized along the field borders. Most economic damage is caused by larvae feeding in or on rice roots. Under heavy infestation, the root systems of affected plants can be severely damaged.

All currently grown rice varieties are susceptible to the rice water weevil. Recent research, however, indicates some differences in varietal susceptibility. Medium-grain varieties appear to be more susceptible to infestation than long-grain varieties. Most producers are using prophylactic seed treatments. With this method of control, the insecticide is applied directly to the seed. Depending on the type of insecticide, either larval or adult control may occur. Scouting is not required with this method since it is used as a preventative treatment. Effectiveness of prophylactic seed treatment, however, should be assessed by monitoring larval populations. For other control methods, contact your local county agent.

Water management strategies

HUNTER BOWMAN

MISSISSIPPI

Assistant Research Professor/ Extension Rice Agronomist

Mississippi State University

hdb207@msstate.edu

With input supply, commodity prices, and the need for rotation, many traditional Mississippi rice acres were planted to soybean during 2022. However, rice acres for 2023 are expected to increase. Additionally, with margins for corn looking tighter this year, more growers are beginning to evaluate rice as an option. With this new interest, questions have arisen about different water management strategies.

Larvae pupate in oval, watertight cocoons attached to the roots of rice and weed plants. The cocoons are covered with a compacted layer of mud and resemble small mud balls.

PHOTOS BY RONNIE LEVY

Adults emerging from overwintering will invade either unflooded or flooded rice fields and begin feeding on the leaves of rice plants.

In Mississippi, I would say water is managed in one of two ways. The first of these is continuous flood or alternate wetting and drying. I consider this one management strategy because Mississippi State has generated a large amount of data showing that weed control, fertility, and insect management do not differ much. When rice is grown in this way, it is essential to have a plan to establish a four-inch-deep flood once rice begins tillering. From my time on the farm, I know it can be easy to get behind. For example, if we do not prepare to establish the flood prior to tillering, we can often run into situations where we have two or three tillers before actually establishing a flood.

The second is row rice or furrow-irrigated rice. This has gained popularity because of the ease of rotating between other row crops from year to year. Currently at Mississippi State, extensive research is being conducted on establishing irrigation timings, thanks to the Mississippi Rice Promotion Board. So far, it seems that the best frequency is every three to five days after we reach the tillering stage. Billbug, which tunnels into the base of the plant and results in blank heads, has arisen as an issue in row rice. So far, the best management strategy has been to include Dermacor or Fortenza with CruiserMaxx Rice or NipsIt seed treatments.

The last important insect issue I would like to point out for growers to consider for 2023 rice production is control failures with pyrethroids targeting rice stinkbug. With pyrethroids not being a viable option, growers may want to plan ahead for rice stinkbug sprays. In Mississippi, we recommend a spray when three rice stinkbugs are present per 10 sweeps until the soft dough stage, and then it becomes 10 bugs per 10 sweeps. One control option is Malathion which provides little to no residual control. The second option is Tenchu; however, due to supply issues, there has been little of this product available in past years. During 2022, a section 18 label was made available for Endigo due to lack of available options. Hopefully, it will be granted again in 2023 if needed.

Furrow-irrigated rice [slightly] exposed in 2022?

DR. JUSTIN CHLAPECKA MISSOURI Assistant Research Professor/ Rice Extension Specialist University of Missouri jchlapecka@missouri.edu

Every year around this time, everyone is getting sick of office and shop work. February tried to fool us into thinking we’d have an early spring, but here we are in late March seeing temperatures well below freezing between periods of rainfall. We were able to get our first planting date in at both trial sites on March 15 and 16, but to my knowledge, those are the only two acres of rice planted in the state of Missouri. After the dry fall, there is a lot of ground ready to go in the Bootheel. If we ever get a dry period leading into the first of April, rice planting will begin.

While we are currently worried about getting water off our fields, it won’t be long until we’re in the dry summer months and running wells nonstop. Last year tested the limits of some of our wells as well as the limitations on some of our rice ground, particularly furrow-irrigated rice (FIR).

It’s obvious that I like talking about furrow-irrigated rice, so why stop now? The large surge in FIR acres over the last five or six years has spanned over seasons where we’ve caught some tremendous “catch-up” rainfalls at key times on our FIR. However, 2022 was a different story, and most of us did not receive those “catchup” rains, exposing a key weakness of furrow-irrigated rice — that being a dry summer.

With that weakness exposed, I’d expect us to better refine where FIR has a fit, as there are many farms still loving the benefits of the system.

For those of us growing FIR, another issue we have seen as acreage increases is rice billbug damage. Billbug larvae will burrow into the rice stem and can cause severe damage where infestations occur. The new MU Crop Protection Specialist Dr. Chase Floyd has and will continue to study the habits of the rice billbug in the Mid-South.

Currently, Floyd and others say the only effective way to minimize damage is with a diamide seed treatment. Consider adding either Dermacor or Fortenza to your seed treatment package if you expect to have billbug pressure or have seen severe damage in the past.

We may not ever know if a seed treatment truly paid off, but research data routinely shows an economic benefit to a diamide seed treatment regardless of billbug numbers. If you’ve got any questions, don’t hesitate to give me or Dr. Floyd a shout. As always, eat MO rice!

JUSTIN CHLAPECKA

Chlapecka: The large surge in FIR acres over the last five or six years has spanned over seasons where we’ve caught some tremendous “catch-up” rainfalls at key times on our FIR.

UPL is with you.

Every step of the way.

When rice growers face challenges, the team at UPL is right there with them, with boots-on-the-ground expertise and a portfolio of proven solutions to help them succeed. Like dependable RICEBEAUX® herbicide, developed to fill the weed gap in the Clearfield® Production System. And because we’re a global manufacturer, our product formulations and reliable supply chain are second to none. From preplant to postharvest, UPL will be there to help you succeed. That’s our promise.

UPLRicePortfolio.com

Smart solutions from preplant to postharvest.