Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Albert Tenuta presented the minutes from 2008 and they were approved by the committee.

David Wright, Director of Research of the North Central Soybean Research Program provided an update of the August 27 NCSRP Board of Directors meeting. David stated that the Board supports the Soybean Sentinel Plot (SSP) program and views them as very valuable to the industry. The Board did not feel the SSP in the Midwestern states was as important as in the southern states. The Board felt that the $364,000 available in 2010 would be best utilized in the southern states. David stated that it is getting harder to find funding from the farmers as economic loss to soybean rust has been minimal in the Midwest but the NCSRP board is supportive of individual state boards supporting monitoring efforts in their respective states. The Board will provide funding for next year, but it is a one year program by rule. The Board is invested in making the ipmPIPE effective. The Board agreed that education is high on their list of interests (Richard Joost of United Soybean Board, USB - agreed). David stated that NCSRP is very happy with NCERA activity and would like to see expansion of the modeling efforts. NCSRP also has soybean aphids and SDS as high priorities.

Scott Isard and X.B. Yang discussed the present status of the SBR yield loss prediction models. Scott felt that the rainwater spore network was not important in the south, that 4-8 collectors from each state would be needed, we should use networks to monitor other pathogens, needed 1 PCR technician at a central location working with a network of local operators, and that we could adopt AIMS model to run on very little data from the south.

Don Hershman asked about the spore trapping program lead by Les Szabo. Response was that not enough spores were found to warrant continuation of the project by USB.

Erik Stromberg mentioned that they have traps and PCR activities within the state of Virginia.

Carl Bradley asked about determination of the viability of the trapped spores, which is still not possible.

Loren Giesler asked what the spore data correlated with. Scott answered that there are correlations but that they are late.

Ray Schneider asked why the traps are of little value in the south. Scott answered that the traps work best when they are far away from the inoculum source so that they are actually detecting the long distance dispersal events.

X. B. stated that his model is a rain driven model that overlaps rain events with spore dispersal. It takes about 40-45 days to find the rust after the model predicts it. X.B. felt that his and Scott's models may be too sensitive, however neither of the models over predict the disease. His model was funded by the Iowa Board and is now looking for further funding and hoped to include in NCERA 208 project proposal.

Bob Kemerait asked how the model used the SSP data. X.B. explained that he uses the SSP plot data every week with the calculations based on the entire region.

Ray Schneider asked if either model considered the source strength and effect of applied fungicides on the source. Apparently, neither model considers strength or fungicide use very well.

Anne Dorrance wondered if kudzu was a good source of inoculum. Bob Kemerait replied that it was dependent upon the kudzu, with some patches producing more spores than others.

Loren Giesler commented that he liked the weekly PDF that X.B. sends out. That led to a discussion about how to get the information out. Don Hershman felt that one of the challenges we not to address is communication efficiencies in general. Getting the model information out early in the week so that the specialists could act on it during the week was one thing mentioned.

Ed Sikora asked if the money was awarded, how would X.B. use it. The reply was that he would run the model for one more growing season.

Scott and X.B. agreed that the models were talking to each other, with X.B.'s being longer term and Scott's being shorter term. Everyone agreed that publications concerning the information from the models should be weekly.

John Rupe initiated a discussion on how the models are being validated. X.B. replied that that yes the models are being validated and the result has been the elimination of low spore densities from the positive forecasts and that his model is better at guiding the growers when not to spray then when to spray.

In general the feeling was that the SSP were working at that data from the south was critical for the success of either model. It was also felt that data from Mexico is not very important in the models, but that Texas information is important. Adjusting the models to large events such as hurricanes was possible.

Funding Situation

Marty Draper, via polycom. presented information on the funding situation. There is no reference to SBR in the ipmPIPE, but there was an increase in AFRE funding. At this time we should assume there is no federal funding available to run the system.

Loren Giesler then presented funding proposal ideas for USB and NCSRP. He stated that since the data are going to be more local, more local funding will be necessary. In it there was no funding for Tier 2 and 3 states for SSP, however OK, AR, and SC were added to the Tier 1 states and would receive funding. Also negative data would not be uploaded into the system to reduce costs. This resulted in a serious discussion about what it would mean to have only positive data on the maps and the possibility of misrepresentation of the data. However, no conclusion was reached. Doug Jardine did suggest that maybe on the restricted site negative data could be presented, but not on the public site.

Melvin Newman asked in non-funded states should upload the data, and the reply was yes if they wanted to.

It was also concluded that overwintering data were needed, but that the proposed funding did not provide for that. Both models, however, only use data from after April 1.

Don Hershman stated that USB was interested in using the models as scouting tools to reduce costs. This led to a discussion about how to best do this. Anne Dorrance felt that each state should still interpret the models from X.B. and Scott, using the maps from the models as scouting tools. Anne proposed that a revised 4-page scouting tool be developed with the model produced maps included.

Finally, Anne Dorrance made the motion, seconded by Clayton Hollier, that X.B.'s budget request be included in the request to USB/NCSRP. It passed.

We also decided as a group to include OK, AR, and SC as Tier 1 states and thus make them available for funding. This was due in part to the need for information from the states for both models. All other states will be Tier 2, with no Tier 3 states anymore.

Bob Mulrooney asked about the status of the soybean aphid program. Jim VanKirk stated it was ending.

Anne Dorrance proposed that the support of state boards be recognized by the Committee. After discussion, it was decided that Steve Slack would prepare a letter and send it around for editing, and then everyone would sign it and send it to each of the State boards. This letter has been completed and is being distributed to State Boards.

David Wright posed the question "Is this program sustainable." The following discussion covered several perspectives, such as recasting the program, adding to the program (such as southern corn rust), or possibly looking for AFRE funds by bring in wheat and corn. Marty suggested that requesting $300,000 per year (funding level to be requested from USB/NCSRP) , with 22% overhead, from AFRE would be a big grant. Steve Slack asked him for suggestions and Marty responded that some how we needed the system to respond to a range of issues. It was pointed out with reduced state funding this would be even more challenging. Anne Dorrance asked about how the legume PIPE got support and Marty responded that it had separate components. Loren suggested we meet with 137 and try to develop an integrated approach. Anne Dorrance suggested we approach the banking industry. After discussion a committee of Anne Dorrance, Jim Marois, Marty Draper, David Wright, and Paul Esker was appointed to develop ideas.

Don Hershman presented information on the soybean rust yield loss calculator (tool) developed at Kentucky (PI: Saratha Kumudini). He asked that people try it out and report back on what they think about it.

We adjourned to enjoy a prime rib picnic provide by Jimmy Clements.

Thursday, September 24.

Tom Allen presented the rust situation in Mississippi. There are 2.4-2.5 million acres of soybeans in 76 counties in MS planted to MG IV and V, with 250,000 to 300,000 acres doubled cropped. There is also about 300,000 acres of kudzu. Overall, the growers ere tired of hearing about soybean rust, as indicated by the reduction in calls on his rust hotline. It is common to apply 4 oz of Quadris in 3 gal of water by air, with a lot of interesting in reducing the application rates further. In 2009 things changed very quickly. Rust was found throughout the state in a very short period of time; in the northern part of the state first, which was unexpected. Actual impact on yield is yet to be determined, but this was the worst year for soybean rust that the state had seen.

Steve Slack discussed the future of NCERA 208. The present project ends September 2011. Consideration was given to merging with 137, but conclusion was that without a formalized project it would be difficult to keep the group focused, garner support, and justify meetings. After discussion it was decided that the project should be renewed. Steve then led us through the process. A request with justification to write a proposal is due by September 15, 2010. Everyone has to be resubmitted on Appendix E by November 15. December 1 everything is due to NIMS, this is 90% of the effort. Must update the impact list. Also recommended that we show collaborative relationships (multistate grants, publications, etc the emphasize research and extension). Steve stated that he had not heard about any short comings associated with the group.

The annual report for this year is due 60 days from the meeting (Nov. 20, 2009). Steve recommended that we keep the impacts statements in good shape.

Steve recommended that 3-4 people take the leadership role in the renewal effort. It was decided that Jim Marois (Chair for 208 in 2010), Ray Schneider, Tom Allen (Secretary for 208 in 2010), and David Wright would get it done.

David Wright presented the present program for the APS Rust Symposium in New Orleans in December, 2009. A few changes were suggested, but overall the program is ready to go.

This lead to a discussion about future symposia. Anne Dorrance suggested that all soybean diseases be addressed. Erik Stromberg suggested leaning toward plant health. Gary Bergstrom pointed out the need to identify the primary audience. Anne then suggested the possibility of addressing plant health across all field crops.

Next state reports were presented.

Albert Tenuta adjourned the meeting at noon.

After lunch the Committee toured the NFREC research plots, visiting positive kudzu sites, fungicide plots, and David Walker's rust breeding trials. Microscopes were provided in the field to help participants re-familiarize themselves with rust if they are from the northern states and to examine other diseases of soybean on the station.

State reports were presented and these and other written state reports can be found in Appendix XX. Jim Marois (2009 committee secretary) will chair the committee in 2010 and Tom Allen, Mississippi State University, was elected the committee secretary. The next annual meeting will occur on December 1-2 Savannah, Georgia.

As of November 18, 2009, soybean rust was detected in 538 counties in 16 states in the U.S.. A few more counties in the southern US will most likely be added by year's end. In addition, 3 states and 9 municipalities in Mexico reported soybean rust. This is the fifth consecutive year the number of counties reporting the disease has increased since its 2004 detection in the continental U.S. (131 in 2005, 274 in 2006, 301 in 2007, and 392 in 2008). Although soybean rust was not detected in Canada in 2009, a large kudzu population (no rust observed) was found along the Canadian shore of Lake Erie.

Sentinel plots. These results would not be possible without the continued development of the North American soybean rust sentinel program which was established in 2005 and over 1000 sentinel sites were monitored for soybean rust in 46 states/provinces in 2009. The sentinel plot system includes locations in Ontario, Canada and Mexico. There were over 2300 sentinel and mobile locations scouted for rust this year which encompassed nearly 900 individual counties/municipalities across North America. These plots included established plots, overwintering plots, and mobile sites; soybean, kudzu, and other legume crops were monitored. In most incidences, the first find of soybean rust in a state was in a sentinel plot. Many states increased mobile scouting later in the season as sentinel plots matured which further assisted in soybean rust detections. Information from these findings was uploaded onto the USDA PIPE (Pest Information Platform for Extension and Education) website (http://www.sbrusa.net/) on a weekly basis where the movement of soybean rust could be monitored and the data could be used to develop and evaluate epidemiological models. Over 19,400 soybean rust records from both the field and lab were uploaded to the information platform. In addition to soybean rust, these plots were used by many cooperating states and Ontario to collect information on other soybean diseases. Specialists wrote commentaries for their state/province on a regular basis that helped growers and consultants make scouting and fungicide application decisions. Many of the project participants noted the importance of the sentinel plot in supporting no fungicide necessary recommendations. Nearly 100,000 visits and over 1,500,000 hits were recorded for the USDA PIPE website during 2009 from January 1, 2009 to November 15, 2009).

Spray Decision Calculator: Again in 2009, the University of Kansas assisted growers in the decision to spray by developing a spray calculator. Growers could input there expected yield, expected yield savings from spraying, selling price and chemical and application costs to determine if spraying would be profitable. The calculator can be found at: http://www.agmanager.info/crops/prodecon/decision/default.asp.

Spore trapping. There were various other spore-trapping activities this year which not only included visual assessments but incorporated DNA-based screening techniques. Various different airborne spore detection devices were evaluated again in 2009. One of the most extensive efforts was coordinated through the USDA-ARS Cereal Disease Laboratory in St. Paul, Minnesota which utilized the National Atmospheric Deposition program (NADP) rainfall collection sites. These sites represented the majority of soybean production areas in the U.S. Other spore trapping efforts using passive traps and rainwater-filtering traps were placed at 20 locations in in IL, IN, KY, MO, TN, AR, MS, LA, AL, FL, IO, MN, and TX. where state researchers worked in conjunction with USDA-ARS Illinois and Penn St. researchers. In many incidences data from the spore collectors were compared to data in the field plots next to the spore traps. These studies and others in Ontario (Canada) and Virginia used a species-specific real-time PCR (qPCR) assay developed by the USDA, and additional confirmatory DNA-based approaches to confirm the presence of P. pachyrhiz. A benefit of these studies is the results were used to calibrate the IAMS and others soybean rust forecasts.

Through project activities, Louisiana State University continued to develop to a very high level of sophistication a new electrostatic spore sampler. This device, on the verge of commercial production and called the Ionic Spore Trap, has a very high capture efficiency, and spores can be identified to species on the basis of scanning electron microscope observations. Please see www.ionicsporetrap.com for further details.

Host range. P. pachyrhizi is currently reported to occur on approximately 150 species in 53 genera of the legume family Fabaceae. The host species all belong to a monophyletic group within the Papilionoideae subfamily. Approximately 120 of the known hosts of P. pachyrhizi grow in North America and may play a role in the epidemiology of the disease as overwintering hosts or sources of inoculum to soybean. Additional field research in native habits of these hosts is needed to determine their extent of harboring P. pachyrhizi, as witnessed by Florida's confirmation of natural infections occurring on Crotalaria retusa, Lathyrus latifolius, Phaseolus angustissimus, P. polystachios, Robinia hispida, P. vulgaris, and Erythrina herbacea as new hosts for the pathogen.

Accomplishments for Objective 2: (identify and evaluate the best disease management strategies for soybean rust in the U.S. including host resistance, fungicide application, cultural measures, and predictive models based on sound epidemiological research)

Host resistance. Screening and breeding for resistance to soybean rust is an on-going effort. A select set of Plant Introduction (PI) lines were sent to numerous cooperators in the South and Paraguay (USDA-ARS, IL, AL, FL, GA, LSU); a few of these appear to have high levels of resistance. In 2008, the USDA-ARS began re-evaluating sample set lines which were not selected from the original 2004-2005 Fort Detrick BSL-3 greenhouse assays. Other on-going project accomplishments include the identification of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars with soybean rust resistance with cv. Aurora, Compuesto Negro Chimaltenango, and Pinto 114 being the most resistant of the sixteen cultivars evaluated (M. R. Miles et al., 2007). Soybean lines were developed that contain soybean rust resistance derived from Glycine tomentella; however, these lines were still susceptible to soybean rust (M. E. Patzoldt et al., 2007.). There are a number of public and private soybean breeding programs also involved in the effort to breed for resistance to soybean rust. Other methods have been investigated to aid in the breeding for resistance effort. For example, The Rpp1 locus that confers resistance to soybean rust was mapped between SSR markers BARC_Set_187 and BARC_SAT_064 (D. L. Hyten et al., 2007). Also, a detached leaf method used for screening for resistance against soybean rust was developed and tested (M. Twizeyimana et al., 2007).

For the third year, soybean lines (1500 in 2007 and over 900 in 2008 and 2097 in 2009) developed through the University of Guelph and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada breeding programs were evaluated in Quincy, Florida under significant disease pressure. A small number of food grade soybean lines show promise for the northern soybean production areas.

Pathogen collection. A collection of isolates from 2006 to 2009 has been purified and maintained at the National Soybean Research Center. These isolates have been used for screening germplasm and segregating populations, and have been used for molecular characterization of the pathogen based on SSR markers.

Fungicide efficacy research. Fungicide efficacy trials were conducted by several groups (USDA, FL, AL, LSU, and GA) in areas where soybean rust was a significant problem in the U.S. Trials determined the most effective fungicides available, demonstrated the importance of application timing, and studied the residual activity of some of these materials. These data are used for grower education and/or published in Fungicide & Nematicide Tests, Plant Disease Management Reports, Plant Disease, and other scientific publications. These trials have shown a well timed strobilurin or triazole fungicide application can effectively protect against losses due to soybean rust under North American conditions. Several north-central states and Ontario conducted foliar fungicide trials in the absence of soybean rust, and were able to determine efficacy on other diseases and make general plant health observations. Due to the presence of other pests in the U.S. soybean production region, many states conducted research that evaluated tank-mixing of fungicides with other crop protection chemicals, such as insecticides and herbicides.

Pathogen biology / epidemiology. Several research projects designed to understand the movement, deposition, transport, spread, characterization and effect of microclimate on soybean rust spores are on-going (Penn St., FL, GA, ISU and LSU). Predictive models. Predictive models conducted by multiple research teams (Penn St., ZedX Inc., ISU., NC St.) were integrated to develop simulations that were interpreted by a team of meteorologists. These interpretations were made available to researchers, extension specialists, and administrators on the restricted access PIPE web site. The predictive models continued to be refined and validated. Some of the constraints to modeling for soybean rust were identified and include unidentified sources of inoculum and the unknown effects of host (stage of development, cultivar) and environmental factors on disease progress. Kudzu resistance: Many of the southern states are evaluating resistance in kudzu to soybean rust. A detached leaf method is currently being used to screen kudzu isolates collected from various regions of Alabama and Florida for resistance to soybean rust. It appears that some populations are highly resistant to the fungus, whereas others are partially resistant and most are susceptible. Preplant soil supplements with chloride: A large multifactorial field experiment was conducted by LSU and UF in which KCl was added at three rates. Calcium chloride was added as a control for Cl at equivalent rates of Cl addition, and potassium sulfate and calcium sulfate were added as controls for the cations. In addition, side dress amendments were added at R1 and boron and manganese were applied as foliar sprays at R1. When analyzed across all treatments, the response in disease severity was most highly correlated with tissue concentrations of Cl. Minor element applications were variable in their responses and there was no enhanced response to side dress applications of the major nutrients. Field diagnosis tool. The development of a hand-held, field-friendly tool for in-field soybean rust diagnosis continued in 2008 (OSU., USDA and the U.S. Navy). Because soybean rust is difficult to detect early in the infection process, this tool would allow for a quick diagnosis that could lead to more timely fungicide applications, if needed. Further testing of a commercial product continued in 2009. Yield loss research. Understanding the effects of soybean rust on soybean yield is important to the entire U.S. agriculture industry. Research has continued (KY, LSU) to understand the effect of defoliation, caused by natural soybean rust and/or by manual defoliation, on soybean yield. This information will be used to build a yield loss prediction tool that will have several uses including helping growers make fungicide application decisions. Accomplishments for Objective 3: (provide forums for meetings to exchange and share research data among the land grant participants and with industry and commodity groups) The NCERA 208 annual meeting was held in Quincy, FL in September 2009 which allowed individuals from the USDA, Land Grant Universities, and commodity boards to exchange information concerning soybean rust. As always a major focus of the meeting was to continue the cooperation among agencies dealing with this disease. The group discussed how to show the impact of the international soybean rust effort and how to use this information to obtain future funding. The Fourth American Phytopathological Society National Soybean Rust Symposium will be held from December 9-11, 2009 in New Orleans, Louisiana and many members of NCERA 208 will not only participate but assist in the development and delivery of the program. The Soybean Rust Symposiums have demonstrated to be an effective technology transfer vehicle for NCERA 208 members and has contributed to the exchange of ideas, opportunity to discuss research data and increase interactions between Industry, Land Grant and Public Universities, USDA, International Organizations, and Commodity Groups. Many of the NCERA 208 members also participated in various local, state and regional soybean rust information, training and management meetings or events. Multiple media formats and outlets were used to convey these important messages including multi-state and individual state publications, websites, telephone hotlines, newsletters, radio and television appearances, and face-to-face presentations and contacts. For example extension specialists in individual states conducted grower education meetings on soybean rust and refresher courses for First Detectors. In 2009 the University of Florida's North Florida Research and Education Centre in Quincy, Florida held a one and half day soybean rust workshop for over 100 participants from 17 states, Brazil, and Canada. Participants included key stakeholders from government, industry (seed and chemical), commodity groups, growers, agronomy consultants, diagnostic services and education/research personnel. Since 2006 the Center has offered 6 classes, hosted over 80 southern soybean breeders for a one day class in 2008, and hosted NCERA 208 twice. In all over 600 people have been introduced to soybean rust at the Center since 2005. Iowa NCERA members helped package all soybean rust publications into a Resource Kit and mailed the kit to approximately 800 extension and agribusiness personnel. A survey was added to the Resource Kit which included questions on ISU and national extension efforts, ipmPIPE and fungicide use on soybean. Accomplishments for Objective 4: (develop educational materials for identification and management of soybean rust in the U.S.) The second edition of the fungicide manual Using Foliar Fungicides to Manage Soybean Rust came out in 2008 (with Dorrance, A.E., Draper, M., and Hershman, D. as editors)) in hardcopy print (20,000 printed) and on-line at http://oardc.osu.edu/soyrust/. This publication was developed largely by members of NCERA 208 and continued to be extremely valuable in 2009. To date, over 160,000 copies of the first edition of the manual have been distributed. A tri-fold, color-plated circular was developed and printed by the ipmPIPE: Soybean Rust: What is Your Risk? 2008. Mueller, D., Giesler, L., Bradley, C., Tenuta, A., and Brown-Rytlewski, D. Other new extension publications released in 2009 through NCERA efforts included: Sikora, E. J., D. P. Delaney, M. A. Delaney, K. S. Lawrence and M. Pegues. 2009. Evaluation of sequential fungicide spray programs for control of soybean rust. Plant Health Progress doi:10.1094/PHP-2009-03XX-01-RS. Sikora, E. J., D. Delaney, and M. Delaney. 2009. Developing an innovative team approach to address a newly introduced disease of soybeans in the United States. Journal of Extension: http://www.joe.org/joe/2009august/iw7.php Schwartz, H. F., Langham, M.A.C., Golod, J., Tolin, S.A., LaForest, J., and Cardwell, K.F. 2009. Legume ipmPIPE: The next evolution of web-based interactive tools for disease management and extension outreach. APSnet: http://www.apsnet.org/online/feature/ipmPIPE/ Mueller, T. A., Miles, M. R., Morel, W., Marois, J. J., Wright, D. L., Kemerait, R. C., Levy, C.,and Hartman, G. L. 2009. Effect of fungicide and timing of application on soybean rust severity and yield. Plant Disease 93:243-248. Douglas, M. H., G. K. O'Brien, J. J. Marois, D. L. Wright. 2009. Evaluation of chlorine and other nutrients for the control of soybean rust at the NFREC, Quincy, FL, 2008. Plant Disease Management Reports. 3:FC110 Douglas, M. H., G. K. O'Brien, J. J. Marois, D. L. Wright. 2009. Evaluation of fungicides for the control of soybean rust at the NFREC, Quincy, FL, 2008. Plant Disease Management Reports. 3:FC111 Douglas, M. H., G. K. O'Brien, J. J. Marois, D. L. Wright. 2009. Evaluation of soil applied Topguard for the management of soybean rust at the NFREC, Quincy, FL, 2008. Plant Disease Management Reports. 3:FC112 Douglas, M. H., G. K. O'Brien, J. J. Marois, D. L. Wright. 2009. Evaluation of Topguard fungicide for the control of soybean rust at the NFREC, Quincy, FL, 2008. Plant Disease Management Reports. 3:FC113 These publications have been distributed in many of the soybean producing states and Canada. In addition, many specialists have developed soybean rust educational materials (including websites, bulletins, and circulars) for their individual state. Examples include: Bradley, C. A. 2009. Soybean disease update. University of Illinois Pest Management and Crop Development Bulletin, Issue no. 21. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Soybean rust confirmed in thirteen counties so far in 2009. University of Illinois Pest Management and Crop Development Bulletin, Issue no. 23. Wise, K. 2009. Soybean rust update. Purdue Pest and Crop Newsletter. Issue 21, August 21, 2009. The Pest Management Recommendations for Field Crops, University of Maryland Extension Bulletin 237, was revised for print and on-line in 2009. It includes the state specific management recommendations that are also available on-line through the PIPE website. Koenning S. R. and E. J. Dunphy. Current Status of Soybean Rust in North America: July 2009 - Volume 24, Number 15, July 24, 2009 NCERA 208 has been important in providing input that has been used to develop and shape the PIPE (Pest Information Platform for Extension and Education), which is the primary tool used by the entire U.S. agriculture industry to track the movement of soybean rust and help make management decisions. For a full list of these and other NCERA member activities, please refer to the combined state report document attached in the Minutes Summary Section.

Peer reviewed journal articles:

Sikora, E. J., D. P. Delaney, M. A. Delaney, K. S. Lawrence and M. Pegues. 2009. Evaluation of sequential fungicide spray programs for control of soybean rust. Plant Health Progress doi:10.1094/PHP-2009-03XX-01-RS. Sikora, E. J., D. Delaney, and M. Delaney. 2009. Developing an innovative team approach to address a newly introduced disease of soybeans in the United States. Journal of Extension: http://www.joe.org/joe/2009august/iw7.php Schwartz, H. F., Langham, M.A.C., Golod, J., Tolin, S.A., LaForest, J., and Cardwell, K.F. 2009. Legume ipmPIPE: The next evolution of web-based interactive tools for disease management and extension outreach. APSnet: http://www.apsnet.org/online/feature/ipmPIPE/ Mueller, T. A., Miles, M. R., Morel, W., Marois, J. J., Wright, D. L., Kemerait, R. C., Levy, C.,and Hartman, G. L. 2009. Effect of fungicide and timing of application on soybean rust severity and yield. Plant Disease 93:243-248. Panthee, D.R., Marois, J.J., Wright, D.L., Narváez, D. Yuan, J. S., and Stewart, C. N. Jr. 2009. Differential expression of genes in soybean in response to the causal agent of Asian soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi Sydow) is soybean growth stage specific. Theoretical and Applied Genetics 118:359-370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00122-008-0905-1 Chakraborty, N., J. Curley, R.D. Frederick, D.L. Hyten, R.L. Nelson, G.L. Hartman, and B.W. Diers. 2009. Mapping and confirmation of a new allele at Rpp1 from soybean PI 504538A conferring RB lesion type resistance to soybean rust. Crop Science 49:783-790. Cui, D., Q. Zhang, M. Li, Y. Zhao, and G.L. Hartman. 2009. Detection of soybean rust using a multispectral image sensor. Sens. Instrum. Food Qual. Saf. or Sens. & Instrumen. Food Qual. DOI 10.1007/s11694-009-9070-8. Hartman, G.L., and J.S. Haudenshield. 2009. Movement of Phakopsora pachyrhizi (soybean rust) urediniospores by non-conventional means. European Journal of Plant Pathology 123:225-228. Paul, C., and G.L. Hartman. 2009. Sources of soybean rust resistance challenged with single-spored isolates of Phakopsora pachyrhizi collected from the USA. Crop Science 49:1781-1785. Pham, T.A., M.R. Miles, R.D. Frederick, C.B. Hill, and G.L. Hartman. 2009. Differential responses of resistant soybean genotypes to ten isolates of Phakopsora pachyrhizi. Plant Disease 93:224-228. Twizeyimana, M., P.S. Ojiambo, K. Sonder, T. Ikotun, G.L. Hartman, and R. Bandyopadhyay. 2009. Pathogenic variation of Phakopsora pachyrhizi infecting soybean in Nigeria. Phytopathology 99:353-361. Ivey, M.L.L., Baysal-Gurel, F., Frederick, R., Luster, D., Czarnecki, J., Dorrance, A. and Miller, S.A. 2009. Immunofluorescence assay detection of the soybean rust pathogen. Ohio State University Extension Fact sheet SBR-2-09. http://ohioline.osu.edu/sbr-fact/pdf/0002.pdf Morales, M.J.Y., Martinez, M.A., Malvick, D.M., Kurle, J.E., Floyd, C.M., and Krupa, S.V. Soybean Rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi) Detected in the state of Campeche on the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Plant Disease. 93.847. Tao, Z., Malvick, D., Claybrooke, R., Floyd, C., Bernacchi, C., Spoden, G., Kurle, J., Gay, D., Bowersox, V., Krupa, S. Predicting the risk of soybean rust in Minnesota. Published online 14 June 2009. DOI 10.1007/s00484-009-0239-y Bradley, C. A., Horn, V., Allen, T. W., Dorrance, A. E., Dunphy, J., Giesler, L. J., Hershman, D. E., Hollier, C. A., and Wrather, J. A. 2010. Evaluation of the Soybean Rust Pest Information Platform for Extension and Education (PIPE) public website's impact on Certified Crop Advisers. Plant Health Progress (submitted for review). Abstracts, Edited Scientific Reports, and Proceedings:

Delaney, D. P., E. J. Sikora, K. S. Lawrence, M. A. Delaney, M. Pegues and J. Jones. 2009. Evaluating foliar fungicides for control of Asian soybean rust in Alabama, 2008-2009. Submitted as an abstract for the 2009 National Soybean Rust Symposium. Schwartz, H. F., Langham, M.A.C., Tolin, S.A., Golod, J., LaForest, J., and Cardwell, K.F. 2009. ipmPIPE: Legume PIPE new option for generating, summarizing, and disseminating real-time pest data to stakeholders. APS Annual Meeting, Aug. 1-5, 2009, Portland, OR, S167, invited Oral Presentation. Jordon, S. A., Harmon, P. F., Marois, J. J., Wright, D. L., Harmon, C. L., Gevens, A. J. 2009. Characterization of kudzu (Pueraria spp.) resistance to Phakopsora pachyrhizi, the causal agent of soybean rust. Phytopathology 99:S59. Srivastava, P., Marois, J., Leandro, L., Wright, D., Walker, D. R., 2009. Effect of plant age and leaf maturity on the susceptibility to soybean rust caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi. Phytopathology 99:S123. Young, H. M., Marois, J. J., Wright, D. L., Narvaez, D. F., and O'Brien, G. K. 2009. Epidemiology of soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi) in soybean (Glycine max) in sentinel plots in Florida. Phytopathology 99:S148. Young, H. M., Marois, J. J., Wright, D. L., Narvaez, D. F. 2009. Epidemiology of soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi) in soybean (Glycine max) sentinel plots in Florida. Florida Phytopathological Society and APS Caribbean Division May 16-19, 2009, Orlando, FL. Allen, T. W., Moore, W. F., Milling, A. R., Broome, M. L., and Bridgers, J. 2009. 2009 soybean rust monitoring in Mississippi. 2009 National Soybean Rust Symposium. December 9-11, 2009. New Orleans, Louisiana. Allen, T. W., Bonde, M. R., Moore, W. F., Milling, A. R., Broome, M. L., and Bridgers, J. 2009. Tracking soybean rust susceptible kudzu in Mississippi. 2009 National Soybean Rust Symposium. December 9-11, 2009. New Orleans, Louisiana. Extension Publications:

Schwartz, H.F. et al., 2009. Bacterial Brown Spot; Bacterial Wilt; Common Bacterial Blight; Halo Blight; White Mold; Root Rots; Common Rust; and Legume Insect Pests.

Bradley, C. A. 2009. Get to know the common foliar diseases of soybean. University of Illinois Pest Management and Crop Development Bulletin, Issue no. 19.

Bradley, C. A. 2009. Soybean disease update. University of Illinois Pest Management and Crop Development Bulletin, Issue no. 21.

Bradley, C. A. 2009. Soybean rust confirmed in thirteen counties so far in 2009. University of Illinois Pest Management and Crop Development Bulletin, Issue no. 23.

Wise, K. 2009. Field Crop Diseases Recap for 2009 and Forecast for 2009. Purdue Pest and Crop Newsletter. Issue 1, March 6th, 2009.

Wise, K. 2009. Soybean rust forecast for 2009. Purdue Pest and Crop Newsletter. Issue 4, April 24th, 2009.

Wise, K. 2009. Soybean rust update. Purdue Pest and Crop Newsletter. Issue 4, July 17th, 2009.

Wise, K. 2009. Soybean rust update. Purdue Pest and Crop Newsletter. Issue 21, August 21, 2009.

Extension Presentations:

A Soybean Disease field day was held at the Research and Education Center at Milan (RECM) Tennessee on Sept. 9, 2009. Approximately 250 producers and county agents attended the 12 presentations on diseases, SBR, weeds and insects. It was centered on variety and fungicide test plots. Dr. Cliff Coker came from the Univ. of Arkansas to give an update on SBR. A 1.5 day Soybean Rust Class was held at the North Florida Research and Education Center in Quincy, Fl in which over 100 people attended to hear experts from across the nation and Brazil. There where also numerous extension presentations across the country in which soybean rust was addressed but not the sole topic. Soybean Rust Education efforts in Illinois. University of Illinois Extension newsletter articles were written about the identification, spread, and risk of soybean rust to Illinois growers. Several presentations were given during the winter meeting season and during the summer field day tours that presented information on soybean rust. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Fungicide use on corn and soybean. Northern Illinois Farm Show. DeKalb, IL, January 8. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn and soybean diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Corn and Soybean Classics Meeting Series. Mt. Vernon, Champaign, Bloomington, Springfield, Moline, and Malta, IL, January. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn, soybean, and wheat diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Crop Management Conference Meeting Series. Mt. Vernon, Champaign, Jacksonville, and Malta, IL, February. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn, soybean, and wheat diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Field Day. Ewing, IL, June 11. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Effect of foliar and seed treatment fungicides on soybean disease control and yield. Illinois Soybean Association Summer Research Forum. Champaign, IL, July 14. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn, soybean, and wheat diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Field Day. Brownstown, IL, July 30. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn and soybean diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Crop Training Center. Shabbona, IL, August 11, 2009. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn and soybean diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Field Day. Perry, IL, August 19, 2009. Bradley, C. A. 2009. Managing corn and soybean diseases with fungicides. University of Illinois Field Day. Monmouth, IL, August 20, 2009.