S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 1

SoybeanSeed Guide

2 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 3

Publication Overview .........................................................4

Leadership Recognition ...................................................... 5MSMC Board Members ........................................................5MSA Board Members ...........................................................5Staff ..........................................................................................5Seed Committee ....................................................................5Chairman Column................................................................. 6Funding and ROI ....................................................................7

Southern Breeding Program Lines..................................8NewS13-2743C .......................8S13-3851C ........................9

LegacyS14-15146GT ................. 10S11-20242C .................... 11S14-9017GT .................. 12

Northern Breeding Program Lines .................................13NewSA14-9653 ............................................................................13SA13-1310 ..............................................................................14SA13-1363..............................................................................15SA13-1385 .............................................................................16

SOYLEIC Information .........................................................17

Weed Management in Conventional Soybean ............18 Chemical Control ................................................................. 19

Soybean Breeder Bios ........................................................21Dr. Pengyin Chen ................................................................. 21Dr. Andrew Scaboo ............................................................. 21

Missouri’s Soybean Breeding History .........................22Breeding Sites ..................................................................... 23MSA Bay Farm Research Facility ................................... 23MU Fisher Delta Research Center................................... 24

Notes .......................................................................................25

CONTENTS

4 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Publication OverviewMISSOURI SOYBEAN MERCHANDISING COUNCIL

MissionWe are committed to promoting and advancing innovative research, production and marketing solutions to maximize Missouri soybean farmer profitability.

VisionEmpowering Missouri Soybean farmers through innovation.

The Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council (MSMC) is a farmer run organization dedicated to improving the profitability of the Missouri soybean farmer through a combination of marketing, research and commercialization programs. Thirteen farmer-directors are elected in statewide elections to serve his or her geographic region and oversee the investment of 50 percent of Missouri’s checkoff dollars. MSMC activities are coordinated through a full-time staff in Jefferson City, Missouri. This publication highlighting Missouri’s soybean varieties and traits developed through soybean checkoff-supported research comes as a direct result of those efforts.

Missouris

brought to you by Missouri soybean farmers and their checkoff

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 5

Leadership RecognitionMSMC Board Members:Robert Alpers, Prairie HomeJason Bean, HolcombCecil DeMott, Rock PortKyle Durham, NorborneHarold Gloe, HermannTim Gottman, Monroe CityJohn Kelley, FaucettMark Lehenbauer, PalmyraBob Littleton, DaltonTim Lichte, LexingtonBaughn Merideth, CaruthersvilleAaron Porter, DexterLewis Rone, Portageville

MSA Board Members:Cody Brock, NorborneDan Brunjes, LabadiDane Diehl, ButlerKelly Forck, Jefferson CityRenee Fordyce, BethanyJohn Hunter, DexterC. Brooks Hurst, TarkioAndrew Lance, BarnardMatt McCrate, Cape GirardeauTom Raffety, WyattGarrett Riekhof, HigginsvillePeter Rost Jr., New MadridRonnie Russell, RichmondDoug Thomas, BrashearBruce Wilson, MexicoMatt Wright, Emden

USB Board Members:Neal Bredehoeft, AlmaTodd Gibson, NorborneMeagan Kaiser, Bowling GreenLewis Rone, Portageville

ASA Board Members:C. Brooks Hurst, TarkioRonnie Russell, Richmond

Seed CommitteeTaking soybean lines from the research program through the commercialization process is a team effort. Missouri farmers, University of Missouri staff, and the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council all work together on the Seed Committee.

For more information on the Seed Committee, contact Sam Bish, senior licensing and business development associate for the University of Missouri at (573) 882-5016 or bishs@missouri.edu.

6 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Chairman ColumnFor the entire time I’ve been on the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council board of directors, it’s been clear that research has been a top priority. Specifically, putting what we learn through research back into the hands of farmers is the focus. That importance put on getting the results back to the men and women who made it possible with their checkoff investments is part of why I’m so proud to serve on the board and to talk about the work we’re doing together, and it’s a major driver for the lines we’re showing in this book.

The investment we make in soybean breeding accounts for a lot of our research work – more than half. We’ve not put all our eggs in this particular basket, but we have set it as a leading way to bring farmers a return on their checkoff by giving them additional choices in the highly competitive and highly consolidated seed market. Conventional varieties tailored to our growing conditions – soil, moisture, pest and disease pressures – are the core of the breeding program. We’re working to address specific challenges Missouri farmers and adding diversity to the soybean germplasm in the process. We’re proud of the results, and excited to bring these lines together for you like this.

Thank you, Missouri’s soybean farmers and our partners across the entire soybean value chain, for making this possible and supporting the bright future for soy.

Robert AlpersMSMC Chairman - Prairie Home

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 7

Funding and ROIThe Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council’s farmer leaders look to address challenges and improve opportunities for their fellow growers when prioritizing soybean checkoff investments into research. Investment areas over the past year included agronomic research, soybean breeding, soybean and crop physiology, as well as feed, food and new uses for soy. Soybean breeding research account for the largest share of Missouri’s soybean checkoff investment. During the last fiscal year, that investment amounted to $2.1 million for soybean breeding and line development, representing roughly 53 percent of the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council’s overall checkoff investment into research.

Funding is divided into specific projects, as outlined in the Annual Research Report, and reviewed each year. Support is also dedicated to the Southern and Northern Soybean Breeding programs as a budget line item focused on developing soybean lines tailored to Missouri’s variations in growing conditions.

FY18 Research Expense:

47%

53%

Breeding - $2,169,995Others - $1,897,752

8 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Southern Breeding Program Lines

S13-2743C (New)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot ........................ Resistant

Relative Maturity ........................................ 4.1 SCN ......................................... R to races 3,14

Flower Color ...........................................White SDS .................................................. Resistant

Pubescence Color ................................... Grey Stem Canker .................................. Resistant

Pod Wall Color ......................................Brown Frogeye ....................................... Susceptible

Hila Color ...................................................Buff Root Knot ................................... Susceptible

Height ...............................................37 inches Protein % ..................................................34.4

Lodging Score ............................................2.0 Oil % ............................................................ 19.9

Seed per lb. .............................................3300 Chloride ............................................. Includer

Seed luster ................................Intermediate Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Four Year Means for Yield (Bu/A) by Soil Type, Maturity, Height, & Lodging Southeast MO, 2014-2017

Variety Loam Clay Sand 4 Year Mean YLD Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S13-2743C 67.4 65.7 28.9 60.0 9/21 34 2.0

AG 43X7* 73.8 67.7 25.2 63.1 9/25 38 2.5

AG4135** 68.1 69.4 30.7 61.9 9/21 34 2.3 # Locations 8 6 3 17 14 14 14

*Check was AG4232 instead of AG 43X7 in 2014-2016.**Check was P93Y92 instead of AG4135 in 2014.

Performance of S13-2743C versus two Asgrow RR2 checks in the Regional Uniform Trial Test-Southern States (2017) across 8 sites

Variety YLD Bu/A Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S13-2743C 65.1 9/14 38 2.0

Asgrow AG4232 59.5 9/17 35 2.2

Asgrow AG4135 64.6 9/13 35 1.9

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 9

S13-3851C (New)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot ........................ Resistant

Relative Maturity .......................................4.4 SCN .............................................. Susceptible

Flower Color ..........................................Purple SDS .................................................. Resistant

Pubescence Color ......................... Lt. Tawny Stem Canker .................................. Resistant

Pod Wall Color ...........................................Tan Frogeye Leaf spot .................... Susceptible

Hila Color ................................................ Black Root Knot ................................... Susceptible

Height ...............................................34 inches Protein % ..................................................34.4

Lodging Score ............................................ 2.5 Oil % ............................................................ 19.9

Seed per lb. ............................................ 3000 Chloride ............................................. Includer

Seed luster ................................Intermediate Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Four Year Means for Yield (Bu/A) by Soil Type, Maturity, Height, & LodgingSoutheast MO, 2014-2017

Variety Loam Clay Sand 4 Year Mean YLD Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S13-3851C 72.8 72.8 37.0 68.6 10/6 37 2.6

AG4232* 72.5 69.0 32.8 66.4 10/4 37 2.5

AG4632** 72.6 77.4 39.9 70.8 10/9 41 2.7

# Locations 8 7 2 17 13 13 13

*Checks were AG5332 and AG4135 instead of AG4232 in 2014 and 2017, respectively.**AG43X7 extend check instead of AG4632 in 2017.

Performance of S13-3851C versus two Asgrow RR2 checks in the Uniform Group IV-S early test - Southern States across 8 sites, 2017

Variety Yld Bu/A Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S13-3851C 61.9 9/19 35 2.0

AG4232RR2Y 59.5 9/17 35 2.2

AG3934RR2 48.7 9/10 28 1.9

10 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

S14-15146GT (Legacy)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot .................Field tolerant

Relative Maturity .......................................4.6 SCN ........................ Moderately susceptible

Flower Color ...........................................White SDS ............................. Moderately resistant

Pubescence Color ............................... Tawny Stem Canker .................................. Resistant

Pod Wall Color ...........................................Tan Frogeye ........................................... Resistant

Hila Color ................................................ Black Root Knot ............. Moderately susceptible

Height ...............................................34 inches Protein % ................................................... 34.1

Lodging Score ............................................ 3.0 Oil % ...........................................................20.3

Seed per lb. .............................................3300 Chloride ............................................. Includer

Seed luster ................................Intermediate Herbicide ................................................... RR1

Three Year Means of S14-15146GT versus two Asgrow checks for Yield (Bu/A) by Soil Type, Maturity, Height, & Lodging, Southeast MO, 2015-2017

Variety Loam Clay** Sand** 3 Year Mean YLD Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S14-15146GT 76.0 70.7 34.6 71.1 10/4 39 3.0

AG4632 73..2 73.0 27.6 68.6 10/4 42 2.8

AG4232 71.1 68.0 20.7 64.9 9/29 37 2.6

# Locations 6 3 1 10 7 7 7

*Check In 2017 was AG43X7 dicamba variety instead of AG4232.**All 2017 locations affected by Dicamba. Yield on Clay and Sand sites were severely affected and

2017 data was not included in 3 year means.

Performance of S14-15146GT versus two checks in the Regional Uniform Trial IV-Late Test-Southern States (2017) over 13 sites

Variety Yld Bu/A Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S14-15146GT 58.0 9/24 31 1.7

Asgrow AG4632 63.5 9/24 36 2.1

Asgrow AG4835 60.8 9/27 36 1.7

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 11

S11-20242C (Legacy)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ................. Semi-determinate Phytophthora Rot .................Field tolerant

Relative Maturity ........................................ 5.1 SCN ............................R to races 1, 2, 3, 5, 14

Flower Color ...........................................White SDS .................................................. Resistant

Pubescence Color ............................... Tawny Stem Canker ........ Moderately susceptible

Pod Wall Color ...........................................Tan Frogeye ........................................... Resistant

Hila Color ................................................ Black Root Knot ....................................... Resistant

Height (inches) ............................................ 32 Protein % ................................................... 34.1

Lodging ........................................................2.6 Oil % ............................................................ 19.7

Seed per lb ..............................................3070 Chloride ...........................................Excluder

Seed luster ................................Intermediate Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Five Year Means for Yield by Soil Type, and over years for Yield, Maturity, Height, & Lodging, Southeast MO, 2012-2016

Variety Loam Clay* Sand* 5 Year Mean YLD Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S11-20242C 67.5 77.4 44.9 68.1 -1 32 2.6

AG5335RR2* 66.8 72.4 36.3 64.3 0 38 2.3

# Locations 10 8 4 22 21 19 19

*P94Y10 was the check in 2012, AG5332 was the check in 2013-14, and AG5335 was the check in 2015-16.

Performance S11-20242C versus 2 checks in the Southern Regional Uniform Test Group V Test, 2014-2016 across 53 location

Variety Yld Bu/A Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S11-20242C 59.8 10/4 35 2.8

AG 5534RR2 55.8 10/8 33 1.5

AG 5335 57.5 10/5 38 1.6

# Locations 53 16* 16* 16*

*Data from 2016 Southern Regional Uniform Test Group V.

12 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

S14-9017GT (Legacy)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit .................Semi-Determinate Phytophthora Rot ........................ Resistant

Relative Maturity ....................................... 5.3 SCN ................Resistant to races 1, 2, 3 & 5

Flower Color ...........................................White SDS .................................................. Resistant

Pubescence Color .......................... Lt Tawny Stem Canker .................................. Resistant

Pod Wall Color ...........................................Tan Frogeye Leaf spot ........................ Resistant

Hila Color ................................................ Black Root Knot .............Moderately Susceptible

Height ...............................................37 inches Protein % ................................................... 33.1

Lodging Score ............................................ 2.4 Oil % ............................................................21.3

Seed per lb. .............................................3300 Chloride ............................................. Includer

Seed luster ................................Intermediate Herbicide ................................................... RR1

Three Year Means for S14-9017 versus Asgrow AG 5535 and Asgrow AG 5335 for Yield (Bu/A) by Soil Type, Maturity, Height, & Lodging, Southeast MO, 2015-2017

Variety Loam Clay Sand 3 Year Mean YLD Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S14-9017GT 70.4 69.1 54.5 68.5 10/3 37 2.4

AG5535RR2* 60.4 71.6 55.5 65.2 10/3 35 2.4

AG5335RR2 63.8 70.9 44.0 64.9 10/2 44 2.2

# Locations 6 6 1 13 7 7 7

*Check in 2017 was AG 53X6 instead of AG5535.

Performance of S14-9017GT versus two checks in the Regional Uniform Trial V Test - Southern States (2017) over 8 sites

Variety Yld Bu/A Maturity Height Lodging

(Inches) Score

S14-9017GT 64.1 10/4 32 1.4

AG 5335 62.0 10/3 37 1.7

Ellis 61.7 10/2 27 1.3

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 13

Northern Breeding Program Lines

Name Yield% TestMean Maturity

Lodging Height

SeedWeight Protein Oil

SA14-9653 (New)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot ................Field Tolerant Relative Maturity ....................................... 3.6 SCN ........ PI88788 (Race 3, 14 resistance) Flower Color ..........................................Purple SDS ........................Moderately Susceptible Pubescence Color ............................... Tawny Stem Canker ........Moderately Susceptible Pod Wall Color ......................................Brown Frogeye .................Moderately Susceptible Hila Color ................................................ Black Root Knot ......................................Not tested Height (inches) ............................................36 Protein % ..................................................35.6 Lodging ........................................................2.0 Oil % ............................................................18.4 Seed per lb. .............................................2580 Chloride .........................................Not tested Seed luster ............................................. Shiny Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Performance of SA14-9653 across two years and 11 environments in Missouri during 2016 and 2017

93Y41 79.2 25 AG3832 79.1 27 85.9 35 82.2 31SA14-9653 78.1 27 82.9 32 80.3 29P33T60 75.5 25 AG38X6 75.4 28 AG3555 75 24 TEST MEAN 67.5 26 CV 8.5 5.9 LSD(0.05) 4.1 1

Performance of SA14-9653 across 10 locations in 7 states (IA, IL, IN, KS, MO, NE, and OH) during 2017 in the USDA Uniform Soybean Tests – Northern Region

LD11-2170 74.2 107 9/25 1.3 34 16.4 34.0 19.2IA3048 72.3 104 1.4 1.8 36 15.9 34.5 17.9LD07-3395bf 71.2 103 5.3 1.3 32 16.6 32.3 19.9U11-920017 66.2 95 -4.6 1.7 32 17.7 32.7 19.3SA13-9653 73.0 105 3.3 2.0 36 17.6 35.6 18.4TEST MEAN 69.4 27.4 1.4 34.2 16.0 CV 11.0 40.0 32.5 9.3 4.9 LSD(0.05) 4.0 6.0 0.3 1.8 0.5

NameYear(Locations)

Yield2017

(6 MO)

Maturity2017

(6 MO)

Yield2016

(5 MO)

Maturity2016

(5 MO)

Yield2016 - 2017

(11 MO)

Maturity2016 - 2017

(11 MO)

14 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Name Yield% TestMean Maturity

Lodging Height

SeedWeight Protein Oil

SA13-1310 (New)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot ................Field Tolerant

Relative Maturity ....................................... 3.9 SCN ........ PI88788 (Race 3, 14 resistance)

Flower Color ..........................................Purple SDS ........................Moderately Susceptible

Pubescence Color ................................... Grey Stem Canker ........Moderately Susceptible

Pod Wall Color ......................................Brown Frogeye .................Moderately Susceptible

Hila Color ............................. Imperfect Black Root Knot ......................................Not tested

Height (inches) ............................................ 35 Protein % ..................................................35.0

Lodging ......................................................... 1.4 Oil % ............................................................18.5

Seed per lb. .............................................2700 Chloride .........................................Not tested

Seed luster ............................................. Shiny Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Performance of SA13-1310 across three years and 18 environments in Missouri during 2015, 2016, and 2017

AG43X7 77.0 32

AG40X6 75.8 27

SA13-1310 71.7 26 77.3 30 70.6 31 73.6 29P39T28X 73.4 26

AG3956 70.9 25

94Y21 66.0 27

AG4034 74.7 30 68.1 32

NKS39-U2 73.5 29 69.4 32

93Y92 73.1 30 68.9 31

AG4232 71.7 34 67.9 36

TEST MEAN 65.9 27 70.6 31 66.9 32

CV 9.3 5.7 8.2 7.1 5.8 3.9

LSD(0.05) 4.0 1.0 3.5 1.0 2.8 1.0

Performance of SA13-1310 across 13 locations in 7 states (IA, IL, IN, KS, MO, NE, and OH) during 2017 in the USDA Uniform Soybean Tests – Northern Region

LD11-2170 70.2 106 9/25 1.2 32 16.4 34.1 19.7

IA3048 66.5 100 0.2 1.7 34 15.9 34.2 18.5

LD07-3395bf 68.4 103 5.2 1.5 32 16.5 31.8 20.3

U11-920017 63.0 95 -4.5 1.5 32 17.2 31.8 19.8

SA13-1310 70.5 106 6.5 1.4 35 16.7 35.0 18.5TEST MEAN 66.3 28.1 33.8 16.0

CV 10.3 6.3 7.8 6.8

LSD(0.05) 2.8 0.7 1.1 0.6

NameYear(Locations)

Yield2017

(6 MO)

Maturity2017

(6 MO)

Yield2016

(7 MO)

Maturity2016

(7 MO)

Yield2015

(5 MO)

Maturity2015

(5 MO)

Yield2015-2017

(18 MO)

Maturity2015-2017

(18 MO)

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 15

Name Yield% TestMean Maturity

Lodging Height

SeedWeight Protein Oil

SA13-1363 (New)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot ................Field Tolerant

Relative Maturity ....................................... 3.9 SCN ........ PI88788 (Race 3, 14 resistance)

Flower Color ..........................................Purple SDS ........................Moderately Susceptible

Pubescence Color ................................... Grey Stem Canker ........Moderately Susceptible

Pod Wall Color ...........................................Tan Frogeye .................Moderately Susceptible

Hila Color ............................. Imperfect Black Root Knot ......................................Not tested

Height (inches) ............................................34 Protein % ..................................................33.4

Lodging ......................................................... 1.5 Oil % ............................................................ 19.3

Seed per lb. .............................................2970 Chloride .........................................Not tested

Seed luster ............................................. Shiny Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Performance of SA13-1363 across three years and 18 environments in Missouri during 2015, 2016, and 2017

AG43X7 77.0 32

AG40X6 75.8 27

SA13-1363 73.6 27 73.1 28 71.3 29 72.7 28P39T28X 73.4 26

AG3956 70.9 25

94Y21 66.0 27

AG4034 74.7 30 68.1 32

NKS39-U2 73.5 29 69.4 32

93Y92 73.1 30 68.9 31

AG4232 71.7 34 67.9 36

TEST MEAN 65.9 27 70.6 31 66.9 32

CV 9.3 5.7 8.2 7.1 5.8 3.9

LSD(0.05) 4.0 1.0 3.5 1.0 2.8 1.0

Performance of SA13-1363 across 13 locations in 7 states (IA, IL, IN, KS, MO, NE, and OH) during 2017 in the USDA Uniform Soybean Tests – Northern Region

LD11-2170 70.2 106 9/25 1.2 32 16.4 34.1 19.7

IA3048 66.5 100 0.2 1.7 34 15.9 34.2 18.5

LD07-3395bf 68.4 103 5.2 1.5 32 16.5 31.8 20.3

U11-920017 63.0 95 -4.5 1.5 32 17.2 31.8 19.8

SA13-1363 68.7 103 6.2 1.5 34 15.2 33.4 19.3TEST MEAN 66.3 28.1 33.8 16.0

CV 10.3 6.3 7.8 6.8

LSD(0.05) 2.8 0.7 1.1 0.6

NameYear(Locations)

Yield2017

(6 MO)

Maturity2017

(6 MO)

Yield2016

(7 MO)

Maturity2016

(7 MO)

Yield2015

(5 MO)

Maturity2015

(5 MO)

Yield2015-2017

(18 MO)

Maturity2015-2017

(18 MO)

16 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Name Yield% TestMean Maturity

Lodging Height

SeedWeight Protein Oil

Show Me Soy 3901C - SA13-1385 (New)

Agronomic Traits Disease Ratings Growth Habit ......................... Indeterminate Phytophthora Rot ................Field Tolerant

Relative Maturity ....................................... 3.9 SCN ........ PI88788 (Race 3, 14 resistance)

Flower Color ..........................................Purple SDS ........................Moderately Susceptible

Pubescence Color ................................... Grey Stem Canker ........Moderately Susceptible

Pod Wall Color ......................................Brown Frogeye .................Moderately Susceptible

Hila Color ............................. Imperfect Black Root Knot ......................................Not tested

Height (inches) ............................................ 35 Protein % ................................................... 33.1

Lodging ......................................................... 1.5 Oil % ............................................................19.2

Seed per lb. .............................................2970 Chloride .........................................Not tested

Seed luster ............................................. Shiny Herbicide ................................. Conventional

Performance of SA13-1385 across three years and 18 environments in Missouri during 2015, 2016, and 2017

AG43X7 77.0 32

AG40X6 75.8 27

SA13-1385 74.5 26 70.3 30 68.9 31 71.3 29P39T28X 73.4 26

AG3956 70.9 25

94Y21 66.0 27

AG4034 74.7 30 68.1 32

NKS39-U2 73.5 29 69.4 32

93Y92 73.1 30 68.9 31

AG4232 71.7 34 67.9 36

TEST MEAN 65.9 27 70.6 31 66.9 32

CV 9.3 5.7 8.2 7.1 5.8 3.9

LSD(0.05) 4.0 1.0 3.5 1.0 2.8 1.0

Performance of SA13-1385 across 13 locations in 7 states (IA, IL, IN, KS, MO, NE, and OH) during 2017 in the USDA Uniform Soybean Tests – Northern Region

LD11-2170 70.2 106 9/25 1.2 32 16.4 34.1 19.7

IA3048 66.5 100 0.2 1.7 34 15.9 34.2 18.5

LD07-3395bf 68.4 103 5.2 1.5 32 16.5 31.8 20.3

U11-920017 63.0 95 -4.5 1.5 32 17.2 31.8 19.8

SA13-1385 70.3 106 6.0 1.5 35 15.3 33.1 19.2TEST MEAN 66.3 28.1 33.8 16.0

CV 10.3 6.3 7.8 6.8

LSD(0.05) 2.8 0.7 1.1 0.6

NameYear(Locations)

Yield2017

(6 MO)

Maturity2017

(6 MO)

Yield2016

(7 MO)

Maturity2016

(7 MO)

Yield2015

(5 MO)

Maturity2015

(5 MO)

Yield2015-2017

(18 MO)

Maturity2015-2017

(18 MO)

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 17

SOYLEIC InformationHigh oleic technology is an advancement in the soybean market that gives soybean oil greater potential for high temperature and prolonged uses like baking, frying and sautéing in both commercial and home kitchens. Soybean oil with high oleic acid content can be used at high temperatures without hydrogenation or producing trans fats.

In May 2015, the first of two patents was issued for a method to produce soybeans with high oleic acid content developed through soybean breeding. The patented process is the product of a partnership between the University of Missouri (MU) and USDA, and soybean checkoff investments from the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council and United Soybean Board.

The technology developed in Missouri is unique as it is the first non-GMO high oleic trait available for commercialization. The beans’ oil contains as much as 80-85 percent oleic acid, significantly exceeding the industry’s 70 percent standard for high oleic.

The Curators of the University of Missouri and the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) are joint owners of patents 9,035,129 and 9,198,365. The Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council is the exclusive licensee of the patented trait. The licenses are non-exclusive and non-sub licensable. All packages of commercial seed containing the trait will be marked with patent numbers 9,035,129 or 9,198,365.

Companies interested in working with the non-GMO high oleic trait may receive a sub-license from the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council. Sub-licenses are not transferrable and may not be further sub-licensed. Academic researchers interested in the trait may pursue at Material Transfer Agreement from the University of Missouri. SOYLEIC is the branding associated with the non-GMO high oleic trait technology developed in Missouri. The trademark is held by the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council. The SOYLEIC logo appears on packages of commercial seed containing the trait.

18 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Weed Management in Conventional Soybean

Given the extent of herbicide-resistant weeds that occur throughout Missouri and most of the United States, the first recommendation is to plant conventional soybean into your fields that have the lowest weed pressure. Grass weeds are much easier to control in conventional soybeans than many broadleaf weeds, therefore fields with mostly grass pressure would be good candidates. Second, while the recommendations below are primarily focused on chemical control options, the most effective strategies to reduce herbicide-resistant weed populations will integrate cultural and mechanical techniques with chemical control.

The following cultural and mechanical options should be considered when possible:

• Narrow row spacing and optimum soybean planting populations, which increase the crop’s ability to outcompete weeds for nutrients and resources.

• Consider deep tillage where appropriate, which reduces the amount of waterhemp and Palmer amaranth seed that germinates by burying the seed at unfavorable depths. A program consisting of deep tillage in combination with residual herbicides has been shown to reduce emergence of pigweeds, including waterhemp and Palmer amaranth, by 97 percent.

• Fall-seeded cover crops, such as cereal rye, can reduce early-season waterhemp and Palmer amaranth emergence the following spring.

Kevin Bradley and Mandy Bish, University of Missouri

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 19

Chemical ControlStep 1. Start with clean fields prior to planting either through tillage or an effective burndown herbicide program. Burndown programs usually consist of a base herbicide consisting of glyphosate (Roundup, Durango, etc.), paraquat (Gramoxone), or glufosinate (Liberty, Interline, etc.) plus 2,4-D, dicamba, or saflufenacil (Sharpen). Observe label precautions for minimizing risk of injury to soybean, especially the minimum number of days between application and planting.

Step 2. Soon before or after soybean planting, apply a full rate (according to label guidelines for soil type and organic matter content) of an effective pre-emergence (PRE), soil-residual herbicide. If planting no-till, the PRE residual herbicide can be included as a component of the burndown herbicide application, but consider that the longer the interval between the PRE herbicide application and planting, the sooner weeds will emerge after planting in-crop.

• Why invest in a soil-residual herbicide? The most important component of a conventional soybean herbicide program is a good PRE herbicide with multiple effective modes of action. Post-emergence (POST) herbicide options are limited in conventional soybean, and over-reliance on the limited POST herbicides for control of many weeds like waterhemp, Palmer amaranth, ragweeds, and others has contributed substantially to the development of herbicide resistance in these species. Application of an effective, PRE soil-applied residual herbicide introduces an effective herbicide group, delays emergence of most grasses and small-seeded broadleaf weeds, and protects soybean yield potential from early season interference. Depending on the herbicide resistance profile of the weeds in your fields, effective soil-residual herbicides may include: Authority-based products, Valor-based products, Fierce products, Sonic, Boundary, Prefix, Zidua Pro, Trivence, or others. Preference should be given to broad-spectrum products that include at least 2 modes of action.

• Why use a full rate instead of a reduced (“set-up”) rate? The emergence of some of our most problematic weeds like waterhemp and Palmer amaranth extends late into the growing season. The later that emergence can be delayed, the greater the potential to achieve maximum or near-maximum soybean yield and improve the success of post-emergence (POST) herbicide treatments. Reduced rates are likely to reduce the percentage of the weed populations that will be controlled by the POST products. Full rates are also more likely to delay the onset of herbicide resistance when compared to reduced rates.

20 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

Step 3. Apply an effective POST herbicide with an overlapping residual herbicide. Regardless of the herbicide resistances in waterhemp or Palmer amaranth noted below, the addition of an effective overlapping residual herbicide to the POST herbicide is likely to reduce or eliminate grass and small-seeded broadleaf weed emergence for the remainder of the season. Effective overlapping residual herbicides include, but are not limited to Group 15 herbicides such as S-metolachlor (Dual II Magnum, Cinch, in Prefix, etc.), dimethenamid (Outlook), acetochlor (Warrant), and pyroxasulfone (Zidua, Anthem, Anthem Flex). Remember these Group 15 herbicides provide control of emerging weeds but will not control weeds that have already emerged.

A. If there is no reason to believe the waterhemp or Palmer amaranth population is resistant to Group 14 (e.g., PPO-inhibitors) herbicides, apply a Group 14 herbicide like lactofen (Cobra), fomesafen (Flexstar), or acifluorfen (Ultra Blazer) to weeds not more than 3-4 inches in height.

• The size of the weeds at the time of application is a critical determinant

of the level of control achieved, as Group 14 herbicides are most effective

against weeds four inches or less in height, especially pigweed species.

• Group 14 herbicides like Flexstar and Cobra should be applied in a minimum

of 15 gallons of water per acre. In dense weed/crop canopies, 20 to 30

gallons of water per acre should be used to ensure thorough spray coverage.

• If Prefix has been applied PRE, do not apply Flexstar or any fomesafen

product POST due to label restrictions.

B. If Group 14 resistance is known or suspected in the waterhemp or Palmer amaranth population, the only additional options for waterhemp control include: 1) applying an overlapping residual herbicide prior to the emergence of any subsequent waterhemp or Palmer amaranth germination events, 2) inter-row cultivation, or (3) hand rogueing.Clethodim (Select Max), fluazifop (Fusilade, in Fusion), quizalofop (Assure II), and sethoxydim (Poast Plus) are examples of POST herbicides that control a broad spectrum of grasses including such problem weeds as volunteer corn and johnsongrass. Grass control is often reduced when these herbicides are applied as a tank mix partner with certain POST broadleaf herbicides. Consult product labels to determine if application rates for postemergence grass herbicides should be adjusted when tank mixed with other products.

Step 4: Scout the field within 7 to 14 days after the initial post-emergence application to determine treatment effectiveness. If there are still surviving plants present, rogue these plants from the field before they reach a reproductive growth stage.

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 21

Dr. Pengyin ChenDr. Pengyin Chen serves as the David M. Haggard Endowed Professor of Soybean Breeding at the University of Missouri. He joined the team within the University’s College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources Division of Plant Sciences in September 2016 after many years with the University of Arkansas’ soybean program.

Chen leads the Southern Missouri Soybean Breeding Program, based at the Fisher Delta Research Center in Portageville. His research program focuses on conventional and herbicide tolerant variety development and germplasm enhancement. He also develops value-added specialty varieties for various food and feed markets.

Chen received his doctorate in plant breeding and genetics from Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, and his masters and bachelors of science degrees from Northwestern University of Agriculture.

Dr. Andrew ScabooDr. Andrew Scaboo serves as an assistant research professor in the University of Missouri’s College of Agriculture, Food & Natural Resources Division of Plant Sciences. He also leads the Northern Missouri Soybean Breeding Program, as he has since joining the team in Missouri in 2012.

Prior to joining the team at the University of Missouri in 2012 as a senior research scientist, Scaboo worked as a post-doctoral Research Geneticist with the USDA-ARS soybean breeding program at North Carolina State University. He previously earned bachelor of science and master of science degrees from the University of Tennessee, and his doctorate at University of Arkansas.

Soybean Breeder Bios

22 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

In 1991, U.S. soybean farmers created the national soybean checkoff. The U.S. Congress passed a

provision as part of the 1990 farm bill to form the checkoff at the request of soybean farmers throughout the nation. Soybean checkoff dollars collected in each

state are evenly divided between the state’s organization, known as a Qualified State Soybean Board, and the national-level United Soybean Board. Prior to the national soybean checkoff, Missouri had a state-level checkoff program supporting soybean research as well, administered first by the Missouri Soybean Association, and later by the Missouri Soybean Merchandising Council.

Missouri’s Soybean organizations have a long history of prioritizing soybean breeding through checkoff investments and partnerships. Chief among those partnerships is a long-standing relationship with the University of Missouri that has seen soybean genetics and germplasm prominent in the research program at the Fisher Delta Research Center in southeastern Missouri, as well as across the state. Partnerships with USDA researchers, as well as across industry, have further strengthened Missouri farmers’ work through their soybean breeding program.

Today, Missouri’s efforts are organized into the Southern Soybean Breeding Program, based in Portageville at the University of Missouri’s Fisher Delta Research Center, and the Northern Soybean Breeding program, based at the Missouri Soybean Association’s Bay Farm Research Facility in Columbia. Missouri’s soybean breeding work continues to be a partnership with the University of Missouri, USDA, and other stakeholders – including the United Soybean Board.

Missouri’s Soybean Breeding History

brought to you by Missouri soybean farmers and their checko�

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 23

MSA Bay Farm Research FacilityThe Bay Farm Research Facility is a cornerstone in the Missouri Soybean Association’s work to improve the bottom line for Missouri soybean farmers. The nearly 300 acre farm supports and facilitates research, business and market development and educational pro-grams and is home to partnerships between soybean farmers, the University of Missouri, USDA and many others. The farm is also home to a large portion of Missouri’s soybean checkoff funded research, similarly focused on growing opportunities and demand for the soy-bean crop and soy-based products.

The Bay Farm Research Facility began to take shape in 2004 with the purchase of the first parcel of land just off Rangeline Road outside Columbia. Eight years later, in 2012, the site opened with a top-notch facility for soybean-related research. Named after the family who farmed the land for many years prior, the Bay Farm Research Facility and its staff strive to be responsive to the needs of Missouri soybean producers, showcase the importance of biosciences in agriculture, and support Missouri’s soybean industry in bringing reliable, safe, sustainable and profitable products to the marketplace.

The Bay Farm Research Facility is home to the Northern Missouri Soybean Breeding Program.

Breeding Sites

24 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

MU Fisher Delta Research CenterThe soils and topography of southeast Missouri have offered researchers at the Fisher Delta Research Center a unique opportunity to study crop production since 1959. Researchers are evaluating soybean, rice, cotton and corn cropping systems, as well as weed, insect and disease-control systems. The Center is also home to Missouri’s southern soybean breeding program.

Three locations make up the Fisher Delta Research Center, totaling 1,078 acres in a 12-county area that forms the Missouri Bootheel. Scientists at the Center have gained recognition for developing improved soybean varieties, especially those with soybean cyst nematode resistance. The Center also maintains a regional soil and plant testing laboratory.

Throughout its history, the Fisher Delta Research Center has conducted high quality research that responds to the needs of Missouri citizens, maintained and enhanced its natural resource base, supported a vital food and fiber system, and helped keep Missouri producers competitive. The Center works with University of Missouri Extension, state and federal agencies and Missouri agribusiness to support a reliable, safe supply of quality food supplied in a sustainable, profitable manner.

S o y b e a n S e e d G u i d e 25

Notes

26 M i s s o u r i S o y b e a n M e r c h a n d i s i n g C o u n c i l

3337 Emerald LaneJefferson City, MO 65109

(573) 635-3819