Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Welcome, Introductions, and Announcements. Beuzelin addressed the group as the chair for the S1055 project and thanked Stewart for work with local arrangements. The floor was opened for modifications to the meeting schedule. All members accepted the format and continued with the agenda that was presented.

Administrative Update. Dr. Rogers Leonard, Administrative Advisor, provided some general background information on the group for new people in attendance and commented on the continued success of the participants and the activity of the group within the US. He encouraged the group to continue producing outputs and impacting stakeholders.  He mentioned the possibility of nomination for a team / project award in the future.  He noted that the strength of the committee resides in the membership, which includes broad representation across the US. Leonard made it a point to indicate that it is important to invite public stakeholders and private industry to this meeting.  Participation is not exclusive to land grant universities and encouraged student involvement, industry representation, and breadth in subject matter, which has allowed non-members to add an important perspective.  Leonard made comments about funding allocations and recognized the efforts that went into the formal S1055 symposium to be presented later in the week at the Southeastern Branch Entomological Society of America (SEB-ESA) conference. He urged the group to keep this activity ongoing; participation in the SEB-ESA regional meeting is an effective model for dissemination of information generated from the S1055 project. Leonard also reminded the group of the important task ahead, which is a revision of the current project.  He also commented on the process and the importance of current members to resubmit approvals for Appendix E.  Non-Land-Grant scientists interested in participating should contact Leonard directly to be included in Appendix E.  However, he suggested that the group may wish to create an Executive Board / Committee to make decisions for the group on interactions with a broad segment of stakeholders.

Discussion of the Project Renewal.  There was a discussion of the current project facilitated by Beuzelin.  The S1055 participants moved to make Davis as the chair of the new project development committee; while O’Neal, McCornack, Musser, and Beuzelin will participate as members supporting Davis.  Davis led a discussion how to outline objectives and stressed the importance of defining objectives that allow multiple states to report and share data. Other topics included a specific objective around the annual symposium, but included other topics like the soybean pest loss report that is currently coordinated by Musser.  One proposed research objective included the impact of cover crops on soybean pest dynamics. O’Neal suggested that the group focus on broad objectives that allow members to respond to emerging pests. There was general discussion about double reporting and that new project objectives should include activities that are not listed in other Federal-approved projects.

The group agreed to continue the S1055 symposium at a ESA branch meeting annually, adopt/modify the Musser pest loss report to other states not currently participating, and to develop are more broad research objective, where ideas are to be shared with Davis. The deadline for suggestions was one week following this meeting.

Selection of Officers, Meeting Date, and Venue for 2018.  Location of the next S1055 meeting will coincide with the Entomological Society of America (ESA) Southeastern Branch meeting, which will be held from March 4-7, 2018, in Orlando, FL. Hunt noted that limiting the general project discussion to a single day reduced the amount of information shared and networking that had been present in previous meetings for this project.   Musser suggested that it was due to fewer collaborative activities. There was general discussion about symposium topics that would attract SEB-ESA meeting attendees. O’Neal proposed that symposium planning start immediately to ensure the group can solicit noteworthy speakers. There was a general discussion regarding the timing of the symposium. The working group voted unanimously to move the symposium to Tuesday with the S1055 annual meeting occurring on Wednesday.  Koch noted that this change will allow for a more productive discussion after viewing the symposium. Potential symposium topics were discussed and included stink bugs, Hemiptera in general, sucking bugs, ecology, secondary pests outbreaks and interactions, and host plant resistance (HPR).

Insect Pest and Soybean Yield Loss Reports. Musser discussed the history of the soybean insect pest and yield loss reports, which started in 2004. Since its initiation, AL, AR, LA, MS, NC, TN, and VA contributed to the report, which represents 14% of the soybean crop nationally (roughly 11.7M acres in 2015, but acreage went down in 2016). This is a publically available resource of estimates on insect pest management and damage in soybeans, adoption of practices (foliar, seed treatments), and HPR/transgenic (future use of survey) adoption.  He noted that the report allows specialists to retrieve information by state or region and identify trends or shifts in practices over time. Musser described data sources, which included informal surveys with consultants and agents and pesticide distributors.  The survey information was then revised with personal experience, phone calls, and firsthand experience. This report is published as a non-refereed article in the Mid-South Entomologist, which is open access. The main purpose of the report is to show patterns, trends, or regional differences and compare these results with other published work. Participants report following: total soybean acreage, average yield, price (USDA-NASS estimates), percent treated seed, acres infested with pests, acres above a pest action threshold, acres treated with pesticides, and number of applications.  The data reported with the least confidence is percent loss per acre infested with a pest.  Outputs for the formal report include yield lost to insects, number of foliar sprays, treatment costs, value of yield lost to insects, pest specific costs, other (e.g., automatic sprays).   Catchot noted that an automatic application has its own line, not combined with “other” pests.  

Musser discussed the most recent report from 2016.  The number of sprays per acre were consistent at 1.2 to 1.5.  The MS data showed corn earworm (CEW) was not recognized as a pest for several years, but in 2011 infestations increased and significant yields has been observed.  Musser commented that mild winters tend to support higher stink bug injury in soybeans the following year. Conversely, mild winters for CEW means better biocontrol the following year, which is a working hypothesis. The survey also documents spread of kudzu bug (economic losses and infested acreage). It appears that entomopathogens and parasitism are managing this pest a low levels. In general, those soybean acres using seed treatments also were associated with scouting.  The common factor for use of seed treatments and scouting was an expectation of insect pest problems from recent history. The North/South trend in number of acres scouted indicated more acreage in the Southeastern US is scouted than that in the Midsouth states, even in spite of the estimates that Midsouth acres have more pest issues. More information on the report can be found at: http://midsouthentomologist.org.msstate.edu.

Open Discussion. Koch provided an update on recent pollinator activities in Minnesota, including some key policy occurring at the state legislative level. The Minnesota Department of Agriculture mandated a risk assessment and overview as first steps to reverse pollinator decline and restore pollinator health in MN. Koch expressed concern over the mandate, as key entomologists MN were not involved in the mandate released on August 25, 2016. There were general concerns regarding the ban on neonicotinoids especially for those relying on this insecticide group for crop production. Koch made further comments about the mandate, which included a requirement to verify need, review labels, use inspections, and support pollinator stewardship. The governor directed state agencies on how neonicotinoids should be used. These comments generated a general discussion within the S1055 group regarding neonicotinoids and return on investment. In general, return on investment is higher for Southern soybeans and not as well-defined across the Northern soybean belt. One issue is that a state mandate is needed to give a producer a choice to have seed non-treated; at this time there is no choice.  There is a push for the MN governor’s committee on pollinator protection to not create policy by building comments with a hope to influence outcomes. O’Neal provided an update on Best Management Practices (BMP’s) for pollinators currently being organized by the USDA to conserve pollinators in soybean. These BMP’s are modeled after strategy used in almond production. This is a keystone partnership of select experts to write BMPs highlighting where pollinators would be at risk, separate from what is legally required.  A lengthy group discussion ensued about the benefits and concerns around “top-down” administrative guidance and potential mandates that could result in required implementation of BMPs. This discussion prompted a suggestion to more formally present the key issues and arguments in an organized symposium at the next S1055 meeting, which will be co-organized by Lorenz and O’Neal. The main goal would be to invite stakeholders and scientists representing broad pollinator issues as participants in the discussion at the symposium.    

Afternoon discussion included current status of kudzu bug, soybean aphid, stink bugs, and lepidopteran pests. Koch presented data on the rising level of soybean aphid resistance to pyrethroids in MN using glass vial bioassays. Biological control is occurring through the steady increase of Aphelinus certus, which has been documented in several northern soybean-producing states.  Davis expects redbanded stink bug to be high this year in LA due to ideal overwintering conditions. Lorenz commented on this species movement into AR and also was expecting higher populations, similar to those levels observed in 2009. Reed also felt that this stink bug will be a more serious pest in 2017 and plans to conduct surveys to determine levels across AL.  Koch detected first field in MN with Brown marmorated stink bug nymphs outside urban areas. This observation is an indicator that populations are established and survey efforts on its expansion are planned.

There was a discussion about Lepidoptera control, including soybean loopers, with regards to possible diamide failures in field trials. Lorenz also noted unsatisfactory control with Prevathon used against CEW.  He also used this issue to justify the value of Bt soybean as a promising tool in south where Lepidoptera are a yield-limiting issue. Members discussed potential refuge requirements in other crops with similar Lepidopteran species.

Concluding Remarks. McCornack will be the incoming S1055 President (2017-2018). The group revisited potential objectives for the next project proposal given the day’s discussion, and included: 1) a formal symposium at a professional conference, 2) a soybean pest infestation and yield loss survey to estimate national information using a common template, 3) a general topic to target pest ecology and behavior, and 4) a shared research topic. The formal symposium topic will address pollinator issues in soybean production.  A motion was made by Musser to have Lorenz and O’Neal co-organize the symposium, which was seconded by Tilmon. Motion passed. McCornack will work with ESA SEB to organize local arrangements for the 2018 meeting. The business meeting was then adjourned and participants moved to discuss S1055 project accomplishments and impacts.

Activities:  Reports from nine states (Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Tennessee, and Texas) were received and used to summarize accomplishments for the S1055 Project during the reporting period.

Research and extension efforts in the Midwest focused on the soybean aphid resistance to pyrethroids and stink bug monitoring for invasive and endemic species, whereas efforts in the Southeast continue to focus several stink bug species and key lepidopteran pests like loopers and CEW. Efforts in the Midsouth address the diverse group of insects attacking soybean, including stink bugs, the soybean looper, the corn earworm, and the three-cornered alfalfa hopper.

For soybean aphid in Iowa, late-season accumulation of aphid pressure (i.e., after R5) may not impact yield like it does in early reproductive growth; a foliar insecticide applied after seed set may not be an economically profitable choice. Other research activities in Iowa included estimating the economic returns of conventional soybean pest management, area-wide management of soybean aphids through importation biological control and host plant resistance, developing an IRM plan for soybean aphid resistant soybeans, and understanding the effect of soybean trichome density on soybean aphid and its natural enemies

Researchers in Kansas continue mapping quantitative trait loci (QTLs) that explain resistance in PI165673 to Dectes texanus and will develop molecular markers linked to these QTLs. Activities in 2016 focused on creating a different type of borer-resistant plant by moving the silenced laccase2 (Lac2) borer gene required for skin development into soybean plants and kill D. texanus beetle adults and larvae. Other research focused on limiting sprays for controlling adult D. texanus in production soybean fields and the development of a sampling plan for making management decisions.

An annual survey led by Mississippi was conducted among seven southern states that grew a total of more than 11 million acres of soybean to document inputs and losses attributed to insects. Stink bug was the most costly pest during 2015 followed by corn earworm, soybean looper, and bean leaf beetle. Estimated yield losses to insects were 3.51% or $14.25/acre even after spending $23.85/acre on insect controls. This survey has been conducted annually since 2004 and provides a valuable perspective on changes in insect pressure and management over time. Research was also initiated during 2016 to better understand the biology of the kudzu bug, a new pest of soybean. In particular we are monitoring its population dynamics in soybean and its impact on soybean when it infests soybean during early vegetative stages. Surveys were conducted over many planting dates, geographical regions and soybean varieties to evaluate population dynamics of pest and beneficial insects in soybean. Research was initiated in 2016 to evaluate the impact of agronomic management on nectar production in soybean.

The NDSU Extension's Integrated Pest Management Survey monitored for soybean aphids, spider mites and bean leaf beetles in a total of 488 soybean fields in 40 counties of North Dakota during 2016. These data provided timely updates on the detection and population levels of soybean aphids. Results were posted on the IPM website weekly during the field season. http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/ndipm.

Nebraska monitored for stink bug movement in several soybean production fields. In addition, select cooperators were contacted to test “do-it yourself” bioassay kit to monitor for soybean aphid insecticide resistance. Kits were sent to cooperators from Iowa and Minnesota, and retested in Nebraska. This initial field tests used increasing concentrations of thiamethoxam, rather than a discriminating dose to calculate the current LD₅₀s of these populations. Cooperators assayed their respective soybean aphid populations and forwarded data to the University of Nebraska – Lincoln.

Coordinated surveys were implemented for kudzu bug in parishes across Louisiana. Four new parishes were added in 2016.  Kudzu bug movement across LA has slowed but the reduction in populations that the southeast states have observed has not yet occurred in LA. Delayed leaf senescence in soybean was characterized and a publication codifying terms and causes was published.

A new insect associated with soybean plots in Texas were observed at the Beaumont Center in September 2016. This insect was Spoladea recurvalis (F.) and is in the family Crambidae. James McDermott in the Department of Entomology at Texas A&M University identified the insect. It was found in abundance in the adult stage and was collected from soybean plots.

In South Dakota, companion plants calendula and cuphea, whether alone or in combination, do not have an effect on the amount of Aphis glycines consumed by Orius insidiosus on soybean plants. South Dakota also identified several phenylpropanoid compounds that may be applied to recruit green lacewings and flower flies to point sources within crop fields. In addition, peak aphid populations were reduced by 40% and 75% in 2 of 3 years by planting spring wheat before soybeans relative to oat–pea mixture.

Tennessee continued a long term, regional study to evaluate the efficacy and value of insecticide seed treatments in soybean. The study was duplicated in one or more locations in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana. In general, insect pest pressure was low although there was increased vigor in soybean receiving an insecticide seed treatment. A significant yield response was not observed in the Tennessee trials.

Outputs: Members of Project S1055 published at least 17 peer-reviewed research articles and developed numerous extension publications on soybean insect pest biology and management during the reporting period (see list below). Outputs included the mentorship and training of graduate students including publication of theses and dissertations. Members of the project held educational meetings and field days for growers, extension agents, crop consultants, Ag industry representatives, and other scientists.

Patents:  No. US20160309720 A1     Date: April 25, 3016       Title: Methods and compositions comprising steroid honey bee feeding inhibitors

Refereed Journal Articles:

Adams, B. P., D. R. Cook, A. L. Catchot, J. Gore, F. Musser, S. D. Stewart, D. L. Kerns, G. M. Lorenz, J. T. Irby and B. Golden. 2016. Evaluation of corn earworm, Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), economic injury levels in Mid-South reproductive stage soybean. J. Econ. Entomol. 109(3): 1161-1166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jee/tow052.

Baldin, E.L.L., L. Marchi-Werle, L.E.R. Pannuti, T.M. Heng-Moss, T.E. Hunt. 2016. Evaluating categories of resistance in soybean genotypes from United States and Brazil to Aphis glycines (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Florida Entomologist 99 (3): 487-495.

Cruz, P.L., E.L.L. Baldin, L.R.P. Guimarães, L.E.R. Pannuti, G.P.P. Lima, T.M. Heng-Moss, T.E. Hunt. 2016. Tolerance of KS-4202 soybean to the attack of Bemisia tabaci biotype B (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Florida Entomologist 99 (4): 1-8.

Dolezal, A.G., N.A. Scavo, S.D. Hendrix, M.A. Harris, M.J. Wheelock, M.E. O’Neal, and A.L. Toth. Honey bee viruses in wild bees: viral prevalence, loads and experimental inoculation. PloS One. E0166190

Dunbar, M.W., A.J. Gassmann, and M.E. O’Neal. Impacts of rotation schemes on ground-dwelling arthropods. Environmental Entomology. 45: 1154-1160. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvw104

Harbach, C.J., Allen, T.W., Bowen, C.R., Davis, J.A., Hill, C.B., Leitman, M., Leonard, B.R., Mueller, D.S., Padgett, G.B., Phillips, X.A., and Schneider, R.W. 2016. Delayed senescence in soybean: Terminology, research update, and survey results from growers. Plant Health Progress 17: 76-83.

Hesler, L.S. Volatile semiochemicals increase trap catch of green lacewings (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) and flower flies (Diptera: Syrphidae) in corn and soybean plots. J. Insect Sci. 16(1), article 77, pp. 1–8. 2016. doi: 10.1093/jisesa/iew057.

Hough, A. R., J. R. Nechols, B. P. McCornack, D. C. Margolies, B. K. Sandercock, D. Yan, & L. Murray. 2016. The Effect of temperature and host plant resistance on population growth of the soybean aphid biotype 1 (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Environmental Entomology, December, nvw160. doi:10.1093/ee/nvw160.

Jurenka, R., K. Russell, M.E. O’Neal. 2016. Phytoecdysteroids as antifeedants towards several beetles that include polyphagous and monophagous feeding guilds. Pest Management Science. Doi:10.1002/ps.4500.

Knodel, J.J., P.B. Beauzay and P. Prasifka. 2016. Efficacy of foliar-applied sulfoxaflor for control of soybean aphid and impact on lady beetles, 2015. AMT 41(1).  doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsw060

Lundgren, J.G., L.S. Hesler and R.L. Anderson. Preceding crop affects soybean aphid abundance and predator–prey dynamics in soybean. J. Appl. Entomol. doi:10.1111/jen.12395. 2016.

Nemec, K., E. Beckendorf, L. Hesler, W. Riedell & J. Lundgren. The effect of flowering calendula and cuphea plants on Orius insidiosus survival and predation of Aphis glycines. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 261:12-22, DOI:10.1080/09583157.2015.1072130. 2016.

North, J., J. Gore, A. Catchot, S. Stewart, G. Lorenz, F. Musser, D. Cook, D. Kerns and D. Dodds. 2016. Value of neonicotinoid insecticide seed treatments in Mid-South soybean (Glycine max L.) production systems. J. Econ. Entomol. 109(3): 1156-1160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jee/tow035.

Wheelock, M.J. and M.E. O’Neal. 2016. Insect pollinators in Iowa cornfields: community identification and trapping method analysis. PLoS ONE 11(7): e0143479. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0143479

Wheelock, M.J., K.P Rey, and M.E. O’Neal. 2016. Defining the insect pollinator community found in Iowa corn and soybean fields: implications for pollinator conservation.  Environmental Entomology. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvw087

Theses and Dissertations:

North, J. Impact of neonicotinoids in mid-south row crop systems. M.S. thesis. Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University.

Marchi-Werle, L. 2016. Soybean tolerance to soybean aphid (Aphis glycines Matsumura) herbivory. Dissertation, University of Nebraska - Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.

Camargo Gil, Carolina. 2016. Ecological risks of the conventional insecticide/fungicide seed treatment mixture of thiamethoxam and mefenoxam in soybean on beneficial insects. Dissertation, University of Nebraska - Lincoln, Lincoln, NE.

Outreach / Extension / Stakeholder Friendly Publications:

Musser, F. R., A. L. Catchot, Jr., J. A. Davis, D. A. Herbert, Jr., G. M. Lorenz, T. Reed, D. D. Reisig, & S. D. Stewart. 2016. 2015 Soybean Insect Losses in the Southern US. MidSouth Entomol. 9: 5-17.

Koch, R., B. Potter, E. Hodgson, C. Krupke, J. Tooker, C. DiFonzo, A. Michel, K. Tilmon, T. Prochaska, J. Knodel, R. Wright, T. Hunt, B. Jensen, K. Estes, and J. Spencer. The biology and economics behind soybean aphid insecticide recommendations. 2016. Plant Health Progress 17: 265-269. DOI: 10.1094/PHP-RV-16-0061

Hodgson, E. W. 2016. Getting to know the insects, 12 pp. Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Publication PMR 1021.

Hodgson, E. W. Resistance management for soybean aphid, pp. 97-99. In Proceedings: 28th Annual Iowa State University Integrated Crop Management Conference, Ames, IA, 30 November - 1 December 2016.

Hodgson, E. W., and G. VanNostrand. 2016. 2016 Yellow Book Report of insecticide evaluation for soybean pests, 22 pp. Department of Entomology, Iowa State University, Publication 300-16.

Hodgson, E. W., and G. VanNostrand. 2016. Evaluation of insecticides for control of soybean aphid, 2015. Entomological Society of America Arthropod Management Tests. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsw041.

Hodgson, E. “Bean leaf beetle activity noted in 2016.” In Integrated Crop Management News. 4 August 2016.

Hodgson, E. “Spider mite injury confirmed in soybean.” In Integrated Crop Management News. 6 July 2016.

Hodgson, E. “Look for seed corn maggot in corn soybean.” In Integrated Crop Management News. 13 April 2016.

Hodgson, E., E. Clifton, G. Tylka, and A. Gassmann. “Managing two soybean pests to optimize yield.” In Integrated Crop Management News. 11 February 2016.

Knodel, J.J., P. Beauzay and M. Boetel. 2016. 2017 North Dakota Field Crop Insect Management Guide. NDSU Ext. Serv., E-1143 (Revised). 

Knodel, J.J. 2016. Cutworms Active. NDSU Crop and Pest Report #1 (May 5, 2016).

Knodel, J.J. 2016. Time to Scout for Soybean Aphid. NDSU Crop and Pest Report #9 (June 30, 2016).

Knodel, J.J. 2016. Soybean Aphid Economic Threshold. NDSU Crop and Pest Report #12 (July 21, 2016).

Knodel, J.J. 2016. Soybean Aphids – IPM Scouting Reports. NDSU Crop and Pest Report #12 (July 21, 2016).

Knodel, J.J. 2016. Soybean Aphids Continues to be Low. NDSU Crop and Pest Report #13 (July 28, 2016).

Knodel, J.J. 2016. Soybean Aphids Continues to be Low. NDSU Crop and Pest Report #15 (August 18, 2016).

Hunt, T. R. Wright. 2016. Insect Resistance Management: Basic Concepts and Importance to Modern Agriculture. Proc. of the 2016 Crop Production Clinics, pp. 53-55. University of Nebraska Extension, Lincoln, NE.

Hunt, T., W. Ohnesorg. 2016. Soybean Insect Defoliators. Proceedings of the 2016 Crop Production Clinics, pp. 41-42. University of Nebraska Extension, Lincoln, NE.

Graham, S., and S. Stewart 2016. Common defoliating pests in soybean. University of Tennessee Extension, Institute of Agriculture, W392.