Category Archives: Diseases
What do Mycotoxin Levels Mean?
Last week I was receiving text messages from a few of our farmers about corn harvest results from damaged corn. Low levels of mycotoxins are being detected in samples thus far, thankfully.
A reminder, the presence of mold does not automatically mean a mycotoxin is present. The fungi producing mold have the potential to produce mycotoxins.
Here’s What the Numbers Mean…
For aflatoxin, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has set a recommended limit of 20ppb (parts per billion) for dairy animals, 100 ppb for breeding animals, and 300 ppb for finishing animals. To put this is simpler terms, a sample would need 20 affected kernels out of a billion kernels to be at the legal limit for dairy animals. So far, most samples are coming up at 5-6ppb which is very low.
For fumonisin, 20ppm (parts per million) is the recommended limit set by FDA for swine, 30ppm for breeding animals, 60ppm for livestock for slaughter, and 100ppm for poultry for slaughter. So, this would mean 20 affected kernels in a million kernels could cause a problem for swine. Again, our levels are averaging closer to 5ppm right now which are low.
Deoxynivalenol (DON) also known as vomitoxin is another mycotoxin being tested from grain samples. This mycotoxin causes reduced weight gain and suppresses animal feeding, especially in swine. Concentrations greater than 10ppm can result in livestock vomiting and totally refusing feed. FDA has recommended that total feed levels of DON not exceed 5 ppm for cattle and chicken, and 1 ppm for swine.
It is very important to sample from several places in the grain to get an accurate sample for damage and mycotoxins. It is also very important that black light tests are not used to determine the presence or absence of mycotoxins. Some of these mold fungi produce a compound that fluoresces under black light, but research has shown that this quality does not consistently predict the presence of mycotoxins (often provides false positives). Finally, before any of your storm-damaged corn is put in a bin, call your insurance agent out to get a sample!
Protecting Your Health with a Mask
There is some great information from the University of Nebraska Med Center on what types of masks to use to protect your health from molds and potential mycotoxins. Some people tend to have more sensitive immune and respiratory systems than others, so I’d highly recommend checking out these short videos.
Feeding Storm Damaged Corn; a Few Thoughts from a Veterinarian
With the recent sprouting of grain on the ears and with more producers now learning what percent loss their crop insurance is determining for each field, I felt it would be good to talk about feeding this damaged grain again. This post is written by Dr. Dee Griffin, DVM at UNL’s Great Plains Veterinary Education Center at Clay Center. I appreciate Dee’s willingness to provide this information from a Veterinarian’s perspective. 
Also a note, to date we have not found Aspergillus in our hail damaged fields. The grain molds we are seeing are Diplodia and Fusarium. Diplodia does not have the potential to produce mycotoxins. Fusarium has the potential of producing fumonisin, vomitoxin, or DON. You can bring forage samples to Husker Harvest Days this coming week to the IANR building and have them tested that day for nitrates for free if you wish.
Dr. Griffin writes: Any time a growing grain producing plant is damaged there is a potential for changes in the plant or grain on the plant contaminated with fungus/molds to grow. The most common change in stressed plants is the accumulation of nitrates. Aspergillus or Fusarium will be the most likely fungi to be contaminating harvested grain from storm damaged corn in our area.
It is really important to know that most molds are not toxic. Therefore just because mold growth is observed doesn’t mean the feedstuff will harm livestock. Even though a mold may not be toxic it can still cause feed refusal. Not all livestock species are equally sensitive to mold contamination and not all production groups are equally sensitive. For instance pregnant and young animals are more sensitive than mature non-pregnant animals.
Nitrate accumulation in stressed plants can cause be harmless or cause serious harm depending on:
- the level of nitrate in the feed harvested from stressed plants,
- on the life stage of the animal,
- and on the species of animal.
Nitrates accumulate in the forage portion of the plant, so nitrates are not a concern in grain harvested from stressed plants. Additionally, it is important to know nitrate levels will always be highest in the bottom part of the plant and lowest in the top foliage. Nitrate testing is simple and reasonable quick. Your local UNL Extension Educator can help you locate the nearest facility that does forage nitrate testing.
Feed containing nitrate levels less than (<) 1000 parts per million (ppm) seldom are associated with an animal health concern. Feed containing nitrate levels greater than (>) 1000 ppm may be a concern in younger animals and levels >2000 ppm should not be fed to pregnant cattle. Feeder cattle are reasonably resistant to nitrates but feeds containing >4000 ppm should not be fed to any animals.
Molds in corn grain of concern could be either Aspergillus or Fusarium. Your UNL Extension Educator can be a great help in identifying mold growing on ears of your storm damaged corn before the grain is harvested. Both of these fungi are potentially dangerous when found in livestock feed. Toxins produced by molds are extremely stable, therefore if a significant level is found, the level will not decrease over time. Silage produced from damaged plants and grain harvested from mold infested plants is potentially a problem.
Good silage management is critical to lessen the likely hood of continued mold growth after ensiling. Proper packing to remove oxygen and improve fermentation which ensures the pH will be below 4.5 is critical.
You can’t look at harvested grains from storm damaged fields and visually identify mycotoxins. Corn grain from storm damaged fields can … and mostly likely should … be tested for mycotoxins before feeding to livestock. Your local UNL Extension Educator, nutritionist or veterinarian can help with mycotoxin testing.
Proper sampling is crucial to getting reliable results back from the laboratory. A “grab sample” is not adequate. The sample submitted to the lab should be representative of the entire load, bin, pit or pile of feedstuff being evaluated.
The steps are simple
- If sampling a field before harvest, sample at least two dozen ears that appear to have mold growth and submit all the ears to the laboratory for mycotoxin evaluation
- If sampling after harvest, take multiple samples uniformly from throughout the silage or grain in question
- The sample should be taken from what would be used in a single load of feed
- That means, if five loads of feed could be made from a 50,000 lb semi-load of corn, collect not less than five samples from the semi-load of corn
- The sample should be based on sample volume not weight
- For instance, collect “coffee can” size samples
- Mix all the all samples together that were collected from the feed in question
- For instance, if 10 coffee can size samples were collected from across the face of a silage pit, pour all 10 samples onto a plastic sheet and thoroughly mix them together
- Next, collect a single sample from within the 10 mixed samples
- Submit the single sample to the laboratory
The laboratory results usually will provide some recommendations for how the feedstuff can be used. There is an old saying, “Dilution is the solution …” meaning in this consideration, that many feedstuffs that contain higher levels of mycotoxin than would be acceptable, might be usable if a sufficient amount of non-mycotoxin contaminated feedstuff is used to dilute the mycotoxin. Your UNL Extension Educator, nutritionist or veterinarian can help evaluate the possible uses of a damaged feedstuff containing unacceptable levels of a mycotoxin.
Sprouting Corn Kernels on Hail-Damaged Ears
The latest event in the Clay County storm occurring August 1st has become germination of “good” kernels left on the ears that have been damaged by
hail. This event of kernel germination prior to harvest is also called “vivipary”.
Typically we wouldn’t see this occur before black layer because of the hormonal balance within the kernels-particularly the balance between gibberellin and abscisic acid. According to a study by White, et. al (2000), Gibberellin production with the lack of ABA allowed for kernel germination while less Gibberellin and more ABA deterred kernel germination. At full maturity, very little ABA is left in the kernel (in both corn and soybeans) which allows them to germinate in correct conditions after harvest. But this can also allow for sprouting in the ear after black layer when corn is still drying down, particularly in tight-husked, upright ears with conditions of high humidity or rain after black layer. Sprouting under those conditions typically occurs at the base of the ear first.
Why are kernels sprouting before we’ve reached black layer?
That’s a good question. I haven’t found much in the way of scientific explanation other than the thought that the hormonal balance of the kernels can be altered by physical damage from hail, bird feeding, and grain mold. Some ear mold fungi also produce gibberellic acid which can lead to a hormonal balance shift in these ears stimulating germination. I also haven’t observed that this is hybrid-dependent and am finding as much as 25-50% sprouted ears in various areas of hail-damaged fields.
What can you do now?
Make sure your crop insurance adjuster is aware of the situation and make sure to submit samples for kernel damage due to mold, sprouting, and check for mycotoxins prior to harvest.
The local co-op may or may not choose to accept the load depending on percent damage and the standards they need to follow. If the load is rejected, contact your crop insurance agent to determine your next step. DO NOT bin the grain on your farm until you contact your insurance agent as they have specific rules that need to be followed in the case of grain rejected due to mycotoxins or kernel damage from storms.
Sprouted kernels lead to higher kernel damage and more fines in a load. Keys for harvest will include harvesting early, getting corn dried down to 14%, potentially drying at a high temperature to kill the sprout, screening out fines, and monitoring stored grain closely for hot spots, mold, and additional sprouting grain.
You can also choose not to take it to grain right now, and honestly, that may be the best option for several of the hail-damaged fields. Silage is still an option and it would be recommended to sample the green chop going into the silage pit for potential mycotoxins. Mycotoxin level does not change with fermentation so cattle feeders would have a good idea of any mycotoxin levels if sampling was done in this manner. See this post for additional information on making silage.
Additional information:
Du-Pont Pioneer. (2007). Field Facts: Pre-mature Germination of Corn Kernels.
Nielsen, R.L. (2012). Premature Corn Kernel Sprouting (aka Vivipary). Corny News Network, Purdue University.
White et. al. (2000). Gibberellins and Seed Development in Maize. II. Gibberellin Synthesis Inhibition Enhances Abscisic Acid Signaling in Cultured Embryos. Plant Physiology Vol. 122 no. 4 pg. 1089-1098.
Wiebold, B. (2009). Wet Weather Can Cause Seeds to Sprout before Harvest. Integrated Pest & Crop Management Newsletter, Univ of Missouri.
Storm Damaged Crops
The rain was welcome on Thursday but the wind and hail damage that came were devastating to a good portion of the
County. I’m so sorry to all of you affected….for some of you, this is two years in a row of severely hail damaged or totaled out crops. We are thankful the damage wasn’t worse. You can see more pictures here.
So the big question is what do you do now? Ultimately, each field will need to be assessed on a case by case basis. The following are our NebGuides for hail damage to corn and soybeans. For the most part we were in brown-silk to blister for corn and late pod-beginning seed in soybean (R4-R5). The concerns I have right now are stalk quality, disease, grain filling, and the amount of diseased grain we may have due to mushy areas on hail-damaged cobs right now. Several years ago, we watched how severely hail-damaged corn a little later in the season turned brown and died. We also know that southern
rust is in the area and while much of the leaf tissue in the County is damaged, it is still in the County in other fields and south of us. The Puccinia polysora fungus that causes southern rust, when severe enough, will infect and cause pustules on the stalks. With the wounding and low leaf area for photosynthesis, stalk strength is a concern and fungicides may be a consideration depending on potential yield loss-again need to assess on a field by field basis.
I talked with a number of people on Friday regarding thoughts on silage, green chop, haying/baling, planting cover crops, etc. Dr. Bruce Anderson, UNL Extension Forage Specialist, said the most common salvage operation for corn damaged by hail, wind, drought, or other calamities is to chop it for silage. Don’t be in a hurry, though. Standing corn currently could be over 80 percent moisture. The easiest way, and maybe the best way, to lower moisture content is simply wait until some stalks start to turn brown. Waiting also allows surviving corn to continue to add tonnage.
But in some of our damaged fields, I don’t think we can wait to make silage. Bruce also shared you can reduce moisture by windowing the crop and allow it to wilt one-half to one full day before chopping. You also could mix grain or chopped hay to freshly chopped corn to lower the moisture content. It takes quite a bit of material for mixing though – about 7 bushels of grain or 350 pounds of hay to lower each ton of silage down to 70 percent moisture from an original 80 percent moisture. That’s 7 bushels grain or 350 pounds of hay for each ton of silage.
Or, you can allow that windrowed corn to dry completely and bale it as hay. Be sure to test it for nitrates before feeding. Grazing might be the easiest way to use damaged corn, and this is a good way to extend your grazing season. You might even plant some corn grain or sorghum-sudangrass or oats and turnips between rows to grow more forage for grazing if you can wait until late fall before grazing. Be sure to introduce livestock slowly to this new forage by feeding them before turning in to reduce the chances of digestive problems. Also, strip graze the field to reduce trampling losses and get more grazing from the corn.
Southern Rust
Several of us had been watching the USDA IPM Pipe Map for weeks. It wasn’t showing southern rust moving and only Georgia
was really lit up. Yet, I had heard reports in Texas and Oklahoma at one point. Spots were evident on corn leaves when backlit-so they were bound to develop into something.
That something has showed itself to be southern rust last week as it was confirmed in 11 Nebraska Counties: Kearney, Adams, Clay, Nuckolls, Thayer, Fillmore, Gage, Platte, Polk, York, and Boone. I’d like to thank all the crop consultants and ag industry professionals for sharing information on what we all were seeing and for submitting samples. 
So the common question was, why didn’t the map show anything south of us? Federal funding was no longer available for this site and scouting efforts associated with it. Many Extension Plant Pathologists weren’t aware that the site was even still online and were sharing information via other means instead. The map for Nebraska will continue to be updated, but for surrounding states, it is advised to consult with your local Extension Plant Pathologist.
Differentiating Rusts:
When differentiating between southern rust vs. common rust, there are several criteria to consider and this NebGuide is a great resource. Typically common rust will have brick-red pustules randomly scattered on the upper and lower leaf surfaces that are larger in size.
For southern rust, we’re seeing very small, raised, tan-orange pustules on the upper leaf surface of leaves in localized areas on mid-upper leaves. These pustules are tightly clustered on the leaves. 
However, color and size are relative as sometimes the two diseases can look alike.
Microscopic observation is the best way to differentiate the two diseases. Fungal spores from Puccinia sorghi causing common rust will be near perfect round circles whereas fungal spores from Puccinia polysora will be oblong in shape.
Disease Progression:
With the cooler weather last week, we were unsure how the disease would progress. Southern rust likes sustained temperatures in the 80’s-90’sF with humidity and leaf wetness. So we encourage scouting for it.
We saw how southern rust can be devastating to fields in the past regarding removing photosynthetic tissue leading to cannabalization of the stalk. In determining a fungicide application, consider 
disease pressure in your field, stage of growth, pre-harvest intervals, and length of time for fungicide residual in addition to economics.
Look-A-likes:
Other plant samples brought in contained diseases such as physoderma brown spot (which isn’t a significant yield limiting disease of corn). Because the spores of this fungus move via water (it’s closely related to oomycetes), numerous lesions can appear on leaves in bands or areas where water collects. While the lesions may look like early southern rust, there will be no pustules present and often the purple colored lesions will also be observed in the midrib, leaf sheath, stalk, and outer husks.
- More information can be found in this article from UNL Extension’s CropWatch.
Goss’ Wilt in Corn
Goss’ wilt was found this week in corn damaged from Memorial Day storms in Clay County. I’ve also received pictures that appeared to
be Goss’ from crop consultants in other areas of the State. Goss’ wilt lesions have a wavy edge, have a varnished look to them when wet, and have characteristic black “freckles” within and particularly along the lesion edges. We are seeing some plant death due to the systemic version of Goss’ wilt. This can be seen by taking a cross-section of the stem and looking for orange discoloration in the vascular bundles. Because this is a bacterial disease, fungicides are not effective in controlling Goss’ wilt. If you are interested in trying a product that is labeled for treating bacterial diseases in corn, we would recommend you test its effectiveness via on-farm research. Spraying in a paired comparison treatment design will give you a true answer if the product made a difference for you or not.
To do this simply:
1-Spray a pass or round with the product (depending on sprayer size) to ensure you can harvest two passes from the center of the treated area.
2-Skip the same amount of distance as you previously sprayed.
Repeat steps 1-2 at least three more times
Mark a few plants in each plot and take photos throughout the growing season to determine if disease progresses or not. You may also wish to keep track of percent of plants affected in each untreated and treated area throughout the season, and check for percent stalk rot and harvest population in each area before harvest as well.
Make sure to harvest two passes from the center of each treated and untreated 
area. Then compare the weights as shown in the harvest figure. Please let Jenny Rees jrees2@unl.edu (402) 762-3644 know if you decide to conduct this study and if you have any questions!
More information:
Goss’s Wilt from UNL
Sample Submission to UNL Plant and Pest Diagnostic Clinic
Nebraska On-Farm Research Network
Crop Update 6-20-13
The sun has been welcomed and crops are rapidly growing in South Central Nebraska! Corn right now is between V6-V8 (6-8 leaf) for the most part. Quite a few farmers were side-dressing and 
hilling corn the past two weeks. It never fails that corn looks a little stressed after this as moisture is released from the soil and roots aren’t quite down to deeper moisture.
Installing watermark sensors for irrigation scheduling, we’re finding good moisture to 3 feet in all fields in the area. The driest fields are those which were converted from pasture last year and we want to be watching the third foot especially in those fields. Pivots are running in some fields because corn looks stressed, but there’s plenty of moisture in the soil based on the watermark sensor readings I’m receiving for the entire area. So we would recommend to allow your crops to continue to root down to uptake deeper moisture and nitrogen.
The last few weeks we observed many patterns from fertilizer applications in fields but as corn and root systems are developing, they are growing out of it. We’ve also observed some rapid growth syndrome in plants. This can result from the quick transition we had from cooler temperatures to warmer temperatures, which leads to rapid leaf growth faster than they can emerge from the whorl. Plants may have some twisted whorls and/or lighter discoloration of these
leaves, but they will green up upon unfurling and receiving sunlight. This shouldn’t affect yield.
Damping off has been a problem in areas where we had water ponded or saturated conditions for periods of time. We’ve also observed some uneven emergence in various fields from potentially a combination of factors including some cold shock to germinating seedlings.
We began applying sugar to our on-farm research sugar vs. check studies in corn. We will continue to monitor disease and insect pressure in these plots and determine percent stalk rot and yield at the end of the season.
Leaf and stripe rust can be observed in wheat fields in the area and wheat is beginning to turn. We had some problems with wheat streak mosaic virus in the area again affecting producers’ neighboring fields when volunteer wheat wasn’t killed last fall. Alfalfa is beginning to regrow after first cutting and we’re encouraging producers to look for alfalfa weevils. All our crops could really use a nice slow rain right now!
Wheat Scab Potential Risk
With the recent rains in Nebraska, the potential for wheat scab has increased. This video shares more information including a fungicide table of products to consider with product efficacy ratings for scab. For more information, please check out http://cropwatch.unl.edu. Thanks to Rachel Stevens, UNL Extension Intern, for producing this video!
Sugar Applications to Crops
For the past ten years I’ve come across farmers who really believed in applications of sugar to reduce their pest populations. Being no research to my knowledge to prove it, I tucked the observation in the back of my head for future reference. With farmers looking to increase yields and looking to other farmers such as Kip Cullers for information, some of our on-farm research producers were curious about sugar applications in their operations with the hopes of increasing yield.
Nebraska On-Farm Research Corn Results
Using the application rates that Kip Cullers uses, one Clay County producer applied 3 lbs of sugar (purchased pallet of cane or beet sugar from the local grocery store) per 10 gallons of water at V7-V8 on corn in 2010-2011. Cullers also tanked mixed the sugar solution with a post-herbicide application like glyphosate but this producer didn’t do that. To simulate any affect of the water or driving through the field, he also drove through the untreated check spraying water only. Two years of research results showed no significant increase in yield. However, there was a noticeable difference in standability at harvest. This producer did not apply a foliar fungicide either year. When it came to harvest, this producer needed the reel in 2010 for the untreated check. Stalk rot ratings were taken using the pinch test two weeks prior to harvest. To him, the $1.25/acre of sugar was worth it to improve standability even if yield was not significantly improved. You can view the full research report here.
Several York County producers have also tried this with one producer finding a non-statistical 2 bu/ac yield difference with the check yielding better while the other producers found a statisically significant 2 bu/ac increase to the sugar treatment. Another producer in Hamilton County is testing this using the corn product he grows-using 1 qt of corn sugar (high fructose corn syrup) per 10 gal of water applied still at V7-v8.
In 2012, a small plot study was conducted at UNL’s South Central Ag Lab near Clay Center to determine any differences between sugar application, fungicide application, and untreated check in corn. All treatments were applied at R2. Because of the drought in 2012, there was minimal disease pressure, thus there were no significant differences between the three treatments regarding area under the disease progress curve. The untreated check did show the most stalk rot (via the push lodging test). The sugar application reduced the lodging rating by half and the fungicide application showed the lowest lodging rating. For yield, there were no significant yield differences with the untreated check yielding the highest followed by the fungicide and sugar applications. The entire study report can be found here.
In Soybeans we have had producers apply 3 lbs sugar in 10 gallons of water at R3 (beginning pod). In all years, there have been no significant differences in yield. Lodging ratings were not taken as that is more variety and water dependent.
Additional research…
has shown that application of sugar to crops increases the numbers of beneficial insects in those fields. South Dakota research entomologists showed that lady beetles benefited from a combination of prey and non-prey foods. In a follow-up study, these entomologists applied sugar sprays to soybeans and quantified the frequency of sugar feeding by analyzing the gut contents of common lady beetles in three states. They found all the tested lady beetles regularly consumed sugar-like nectar in soybean fields, even when it wasn’t applied as a supplement. They also found more lady beetles in the sugar treated plots compared to the untreated plots.
At this time we can’t explain the standability effect we’re seeing from our sugar applications to corn. Our hypothesis is that early application of sugar to corn is increasing beneficial microbes that may be keeping the exposed brace roots and stalks healthier. We hope to conduct more research in the future to answer this question.
In conclusion,
the application of sugar to corn and soybeans has not always shown increased yield. However, in nearly all of the corn studies, sugar treated plots have shown increased stalk strength at harvest. Research has also shown an increase in the number of beneficial insects in fields where sugar was applied. Further research is needed to understand the interactions aiding stalk strength in corn.
If you are interested in conducting on-farm research studies in your field, please contact any of our UNL Extension Educators or Specialists! You can also follow the conversations this year via our Facebook page and Twitter feed!
What do you think of sugar applications to crops? Have you tried this in the past and if so, what were your results?
Aflatoxin Concerns in #Corn
This article originally appeared in http://cropwatch.unl.edu written by Dr. Tamra Jackson-Ziems, UNL Extension Plant Pathologist.
Drought and high temperatures promote development of the disease Aspergillus ear rot (pictured right). The fungi that cause this disease (most commonly, Aspergillus flavus) can produce aflatoxin. Aflatoxin is one of many chemicals in a group known as mycotoxins that are produced by fungi (molds). Mycotoxins, such as aflatoxin, can be toxic to animal and human consumers and, at certain concentrations, can lead to dockage or rejection of grain at elevators.The unusually high temperatures and drought this summer are having severe impacts on Nebraska corn. In addition to reductions in test weight and overall yield, secondary problems are developing in some corn fields as a result of these conditions.
Corn harvested for grain to this point has been predominantly from fields that sustained substantial drought damage leading to early maturation and plant death. Notable aflatoxin contamination appears to be in a small percentage of southeast Nebraska fields, based on samples submitted to several laboratories in the area.
Mycotoxins are common and can be safely consumed at low concentrations. The concentration of aflatoxin that is considered safe for consumption depends on the age and species of the consumer. An abbreviated summary listing the Action Levels identified by the FDA for aflatoxin is listed in Table below.
Testing for Aflatoxin: Farmers and crop consultants can scout high risk fields for Aspergillus ear rot as an indicator for aflatoxin, but only lab testing of grain samples can accurately identify the concentrations of aflatoxin in the grain. Accurate lab test results for aflatoxin will depend greatly on the quality of the sample that is collected and the laboratory methods used to test it. The test results are only applicable to the sample that is submitted, so it is very important to collect an adequate sample for the best results. Refer to the publication, Sampling and Analyzing Feed for Fungal (Mold) Toxins (Mycotoxins) for recommendations on how to collect and submit a high quality sample for mycotoxin analysis.
Contact and submit samples to a laboratory that is certified by the federal Grain Inspection Service and Grain Inspection, Packers, and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA) for mycotoxin analysis for the most accurate results. A GIPSA website lists laboratories certified to conduct testing in Nebraska. They include
- Lincoln Inspection Service, Inc.;
- Fremont Grain Inspection Department, Inc.;
- Omaha Grain Inspection Service, Inc; and the
- Sioux City Inspection and Weighing service Company.
Some grain elevators and individuals may be using a black light (ultraviolet light) to detect for fluorescence as a method for rapid screening of grain samples. This practice is NOT recommended when making decisions about aflatoxin contamination in loads of grain. The component that produces fluorescence under black light is called kojic acid. Although kojic acid is produced by the same fungus that produces aflatoxin, its presence is not necessarily an indicator of aflatoxin and might lead to false positive results and unnecessary rejection of grain.
High Risk Factors for Aflatoxin Contamination in Corn
- Drought-damaged fields, including rainfed (dryland) fields and non-irrigated pivot corners
- Fields or areas with higher incidence of corn ear-feeding insects, such as the corn ear worm
- Grain damaged before or during harvest or after harvest while in storage
Ear rot diseases and aflatoxin are not evenly distributed across fields or in the grain, so scouting and/or sampling should include a substantial portion, at least several acres. The presence of the fungus in kernels does not always correlate well with the presence of aflatoxin, nor does the absence of visible fungal growth necessarily indicate the absence of aflatoxin.Scouting For Aspergillus Ear Rot
- Open husks to view a large number of ears.
- Look for the presence of dusty yellow-green to olive-green spores, especially on the surface of damaged kernels or ear tips (Figure above).
- Pay special attention to higher risk areas.
Harvest and Storage: If fields have documented Aspergillus ear rot and/or risk of aflatoxin contamination, it is recommended that you harvest and keep grain separate from other grain at less risk, such as irrigated fields. Storage of affected grain is not recommended because ear rot diseases and mycotoxins can continue to accumulate during storage. If storage is necessary, cooling and drying grain to less than 15% moisture within 48 hours of harvest will help to slow fungal growth and aflatoxin production. Grain intended to be stored for longer periods of time should be dried to less than 13% moisture.
Presently, it is too early in the harvest to know the extent of aflatoxin contamination in this year’s corn crop, but at this time only a small percentage appears to be affected.
Resources: For more information, refer to the list of publications below or view this week’s episode of Market Journal.
- Plant Disease Profiles #3: Ear Rot Diseases and Grain Molds, EC1901
- Understanding Fungal (Mold) Toxins (Mycotoxins), G1513
- Sampling and Analyzing Feed for Fungal (Mold) Toxins (Mycotoxins), G1515
- Use of Feed Contaminated with Fungal (Mold) Toxins (Mycotoxins), G1514
- Aspergillus Ear Rot and Aflatoxin Production, Iowa State University Integrated Crop Management News
- Check Cornfields for Aspergillus Ear Rot, University of Illinois the Bulletin
| Table 1: FDA action levels for aflatoxin contamination in corn intended for livestock. | |
|
|
|
| Commodity Action Level | (ppb) |
| Finishing (feedlot) beef cattle | 300 |
| Finishing swine of 100 pounds or greater | 200 |
| Breeding beef cattle, breeding swine, or mature poultry | 100 |
| Immature animals and dairy cattle | 20 |
| For animal species or uses not otherwise specified, or when the intended use is not known | 20 |
| Human food | 20 |
|
|
|
| Source: FDA Action Levels for Aflatoxin | |
JenResources 