National IPM Initiative Phase I Projects Improving Forage Legume Persistence through Ecologically-Based Pest Management Final Progress Report

Contents

1. Project Title	2. Project Co-leaders	3. States Involved	4. Involvement of Stakeholders	5. Situation
6. Potential Benefits	7. Actions Needed	8. Phase I Outcomes	9. Quotes	10. Process Used

1. Project Title

2. Names of Co-Project Leaders:

William Lamp, Dept of Entomology, Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742

Mark McCaslin, Forage Genetics Inc, West Salem, WI 54669

3. States Involved

Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Wisconsin,

Back to the Table of Contents

4. Involvement of Stakeholders:

Teams of research and extension scientists, producers, and representatives of private companies met in Illinois to discuss the improvement of persistence of forage legume stands through implementation of ecologically-based pest management. The 38 individuals came from 14 states, representing many scientific disciplines, extension specialists and county agents, seed and farm management industry representatives, and producers themselves - all concerned about limitations to forage legume stand life. Research and extension needs were identified not only at this meeting, but at subsequent grower meetings in individual states. The Phase I project opened new lines of communication that have continued to date. One example of this is a continuing linkage between seed industry and research/extension specialists towards improving cultivars for resistance to key pests. Another is the development of on-farm demonstrations of IPM practices in forage legumes.

Back to the Table of Contents

5. Situation:

Forage legume crops are essential components of livestock production systems, with added value as contributors to soil improvement and conservation. The value to producers of forages is to provide low-cost, high-nutritive feed for ruminants, which convert plant tissue into desirable products such as meat, milk, and wool. The value of ruminant livestock, which derive 80% of their nutrition from forage, was approximately $70 billion in 1997. Forages may be used on-farm for animal production, or they may be sold as a cash crop. Alfalfa is the most important forage legume in the U.S., with 25 million acres harvested in 1997 and an estimated cash value of $10 billion. Forages are also valuable for soil conservation, especially on highly erodible land, and for their contribution to minimizing pests (weeds, insects, pathogens) within rotational systems. In addition, forages are used as ground covers for recreation and aesthetic purposes, and stands provide food, nesting sites, and winter cover for wildlife. Thus, forages have great value for human utilization and as components of ecosystems.

The Forage Legume Persistence Phase I Project addressed a critical area of concern to producers: the significant reduction in forage legume stand life caused by pests. Although forage legumes are capable of persisting in stands for many years, ecological and physiological factors act in concert with the pest community (e.g., weeds, pathogens, arthropods) to shorten the life of stands. The resulting lack of persistence significantly reduces profitability and, in locations and periods of severe stress, effectively prevents the cultivation of these species. The mission of this project was to improve persistence of forage legume stands through implementation of ecologically-based pest management. Current estimates of IPM adoption within forage systems of the 12 states represented in the project range from 10% to 30% of the acreage.

6. Potential Benefits:

Addressing the problem of stand persistence will dramatically increase the implementation of IPM because

• 1) legume persistence is of major economic importance to growers, yet current IPM strategies do not place primary importance on persistence,
• 2) integration of technologies is required across disciplines, thus providing more realistic solutions to pest problems as faced by producers,
• 3) the concerns of pesticide contamination of meat and dairy products will be addressed from a more holistic view of cropping system design,
• 4) legumes play a critical role in sustainable rotation systems through their contribution of soil nitrogen and beneficial organisms, and
• 5) use of legumes in conservation programs is growing and persistence is of critical importance.

7. Actions Needed:

Currently, IPM practices are focused on short-term impacts of pests. The long-term approach to improve forage legume persistence is a challenge for all. For researchers, interdisciplinary collaboration is needed to develop conceptual models of persistence (e.g. plant demography, plant aging, and replacement value economic models) and to conduct research on the interaction among cultural practices, abiotic stresses, and the many types of biotic stresses. For extension specialists, education needs to focus on the long-term economic and environmental benefits of persistence, and on how decisions today will affect the life of the stand. For industry, the focus must be on collaboration with public institutions and the development of a long-term view in the market place. For producers, the uniqueness of problems that they experience must be communicated to the public and private sectors. We believe that communication is the key; that the focus of a wide range of individuals on the specific problem of forage legume persistence is needed to develop solutions for such a complex problem.

To accomplish the continuing mission, four project goals were proposed:

1) to assess the effectiveness of current pest management programs and identify areas for improvement,

2) to conduct high priority research for implementation of enhanced pest management programs,

3) to promote and improve communication across research/extension/ industry/farmer interfaces, and

4) to measure the economic, environmental, and social impact of project implementation.

A key need identified by the project was enhanced communication of information across professional groups: e.g., research and extension specialists, crop and IPM consultants, agribusiness representatives, and farmers/decision-makers. A wide range of scientific disciplines are affected by the problem: crop protection disciplines such as plant pathology, weed science, and entomology; crop management disciplines such as agronomy, agricultural economics, soil science, and meteorology.

Communication across disciplines is personal, long-term, and vital for such a diverse project. Needs assessment, the implementation of programs, the delivery of existing information, and the generation of new information are all elements that will be integrated through communication.

Back to the Table of Contents

8. Phase I Outcomes:

The Phase I project has had lasting effects within IPM. Briefly, the following outcomes remain active today:

A. A USDA Regional Research Project has been proposed entitled, "Development of Pest Management Strategies for Forage Legume Persistence."

B. A collaboration of seed industry and public research/extension scientists on the development of leafhopper-resistant alfalfa.

C. The development of research and extension proposals for National Research Initiative and Regional IPM Programs and others, some funded and others pending, that focus on specific or regional problems relating to forage legume persistence.

These outcomes are increasing our knowledge base and maintaining lines of communication, however overall communication of efforts such as through regular meetings and web site linkages, and continued focus of research and extension efforts, are needed to achieve our mission.

9. Quotes:

On research needs:

* A need exists to integrate forages from the perspectives of crop growth and animal requirements. Current focus is IPM; we need to move towards integrated crop management (ICM) and integrated farm management (IFM).

* An often suggested need is voiced as "stand decline", yet stand persistence is a result of complex interactions of crop genetics, management practices, abiotic factors, as well as biotic factors (especially pests).

* Generally, producers need clearly defined thresholds and easily implemented control alternatives, including the use of crop management practices for managing pests.

* Producers desire economic data to support their decision-making.

On extension and communication:

*Because of the low crop value and shifting paradigms at universities, no one state has all the expertise necessary to implement forage crop programs. Yet, all states need to transfer information because of the integral nature of forages within many farm systems. Thus, more emphasis should be placed on regional or national approaches to forage crop IPM.

* Conversely, there remains the need for local expertise in forages who understand local problems and needs.

* A more holistic approach to planning is needed, i.e., a team approach involving multiple disciplines and/or industry/university partnerships. These teams force a shift from parochial to a more holistic perspectives.

* Communication is needed among all participants in understanding the forage system.

* Education should focus on specific issues and provide recommendations with regard to economic costs and benefits.

* Simply stated, farmers want answers, not statistics.

The following conclusion came from Oklahoma discussions that included a series of meetings with groups of 30-40 producers:

"The consensus from all sources has been that the highest priority for research and extension programs relating to forage legumes, especially alfalfa, should be stand persistence. Great concern has been expressed by nearly all farmers that productive stand life for alfalfa has decreased; in some stated instances from 6-7 years to as little as 3-4 years. There has been no consensus as to the cause(s) for this decrease in stand longevity; reasons range from increased acidity of soils, to more intensive harvesting at short intervals, to greater pest damage."

From Trey Lam, Producer, Pauls Valley, Oklahoma:

"All I want to know is, what do I have to do to make my alfalfa last another year?"

 

Back to the Table of Contents

10. Process Used:

The communication that began with the Phase I project continues today. Although overall coordination of efforts is currently lacking (and sorely needed!), individual state teams, as well as collaborators across state and discipline lines, are now focused on specific or regional problems relating to the persistence of forage legumes within stands. Future projects should also focus on communication.

---

Links

Top of this page

Index of Northeast Region Phase I Projects

IPM in the Northeast Region

About this Page