£34/Ha Margin Boost From Take-All Treatment In Independent Wheat Trials

June 2003 - Treating second wheats for take-all as part of a standard fungicide programme boosted margins by an average of £34/ha at 2002 harvest prices in extensive trials undertaken by East Riding Crop Consultancy last season. And with the highest value Group 1 variety the margin over treatment costs was an even more impressive £40/ha. What is more, healthier 2003 harvest prices promise financial benefits of up to £55/ha.

The trials were conducted on a Holderness farm site with three leading wheat varieties from different quality classes and a range of strobilurin-based foliar fungicide programmes. They compared performance from standard single purpose seed dressing Sibutol with or without the specialist take-all fungicide Latitude (silthiofam).

Across all 10 strobilurin-based foliar treatments, the response to take-all fungicide treatment ranged from 0.99 t/ha with Napier to 1.11 t/ha with Option – an average of 1.04 t/ha. At the decidedly mediocre wheat values realised for the different varieties last harvest this was calculated to be worth an extra £65/ha on average – or £34/ha over the cost of the take-all fungicide even at the relatively high 200kg/ha seed rate (Table).

Table: East Riding Crop Consultancy Trials 2001/2002

Variety	Sibutol Only Yield	Sibutol + LatitudeYield	Latitude Response *		Margin overLatitude cost **
	t/ha	t/ha	t/ha	£/ha	£/ha
Napier	10.56	11.55	0.99	55	24
Option	10.66	11.77	1.11	69	38
Hereward	9.63	10.64	1.01	71	40
Average	10.28	11.32	1.04	65	34

* At realistic 2002 harvest values - Napier £55/t; Option £62/t; Hereward £70/t.
** Extra cost of treatment £31/ha with Latitude at £155/t and 200kg/ha seed rate

“While we calculate our results gave an average margin of £34/ha from Latitude treatment, the higher quality wheats repaid the cost of the take-all treatment to an even greater extent,” explained Brian Beeney who runs the independent Yorkshire-based advisory business with his son Andrew.

“Even being fairly conservative with the premiums available, the responses we recorded were worth £69/ha with the Option and £71/ha with the Hereward – margins over treatment costs of £38/ha and £40/ha respectively. While take-all treatment gave a similar yield benefit across all three varieties, it was clearly worth more with the higher quality grain.

“We definitely had more take-all in the site than we usually get,” he pointed out. “Root analysis in the summer confirmed our observations of widespread patchy growth, yellowing and whiteheads. The fact that we ploughed, power-harrowed and drilled the trials in a single operation on October 4th ahead of some heavy rain and didn’t get the chance to roll the seedbed undoubtedly played its part in this. Even so, at 10.28t/ha our average yields were good for a second wheat. To get an extra 1t/ha-plus on top of this was very encouraging.”

In common with most people, Brian Beeney stresses they are only just learning how to make the best use of take-all dressings. He has no doubt they can be of great economic value in improving second wheat performance; especially that of inherently higher value varieties.

From his 2001/2002 trial programme, at 2002 market prices he calculates breakeven returns of 0.6t/ha for a feed wheat like Napier, 0.5t/ha for a Group 2 like Option and 0.4 t/ha for a full breadwheat such as Hereward.

With feed wheat for 2003 harvest currently trading at £65/t, Option at £72/t and Hereward £85/t, of course, breakeven returns come down to 0.5 t/ha for feed wheat, 0.4 t/ha for the Group 2 and 0.35 t/ha for the breadwheat.

“Our experience leaves us equally sure take-all seed dressings shouldn’t be seen as a panacea, though” insisted Brian Beeney. “You need to recover sufficient yield to justify their cost. Which means you need to get all the elements of crop management working together to combat take-all. Most importantly, these include well-prepared and consolidated seedbeds, the right varieties, appropriate fertilisation and effective overall fungicide programmes.”