Corn Tar spot Disease: A 2024 Minnesota Fall Update with Dr. Dean Malvick
Good day, and welcome to the University of Minnesota Cropcast. It is our podcast from the University of Minnesota Extension. I am your host, Dave Nicolai, along with my cohost here, doctor Seth Nave. Seth is extension soybean specialist here at the University of Minnesota. And today, we have a special guest in our studio, doctor Dean Melvette, extension plant pathologist here at the University of Minnesota.
Speaker 1:Dean spends his time on crop diseases primarily in the areas of corn and soybean, and we asked Dean to stop by today to talk about a very important disease, one that a lot of people are talking about in the state of Minnesota and that is corn tar spot. So to begin with Dean, can you give us a little bit of an overview, history of this particular disease origination, how it developed, and a little bit more about in terms of in-depth of the spread of it in the state of Minnesota as well. But let's start at
Speaker 2:the beginning. Sure, Dave. Thanks for having me here today. So is we're talking about this because it's raised a fair amount of attention in Minnesota this year because it's been found in fields across the entire southern part of the state, and in fact, the southern half of the state. And just to to go back though, it was first found tar spot caused by a particular fungus was found on corn first in the US in 2015, not that long ago in Illinois and Indiana.
Speaker 2:And ever since then, it's been spreading in the US, and we first found it here in Minnesota in Southeastern Filmore County back in 2009, and it's been spreading ever since. So, again, like I said, it's been found in the entire southern half of Minnesota, plus even a little bit north of that, some areas. And it's a it's a new problem. We're still trying to understand it. But the reason, of course, we are concerned is because it can cause significant yield loss.
Speaker 2:Although in most fields, in most counties where it's been found in Minnesota, we haven't seen high enough levels to cause yield loss, that doesn't mean it can't in those at some point in time. We've seen the most damage in Southeastern Minnesota. Well, this last year, there's been indications that it's moved beyond Southeastern Minnesota to other sections of
Speaker 1:the state of Minnesota and surrounding states. You wanna give us a little review of an up to date portion of what kind of geographical spread that we are dealing with.
Speaker 2:Yeah. I will describe it, but I wanna make note that if somebody wants to see this visually on a map, please check out, the website corn, IPM, pipe. And there is a current map showing the distribution as confirmed this year and in previous years for tar spot. So, again, like I said, it's been found in essentially every county in the southern half of Minnesota, and some a little bit north. And recently, it's also been found in North Dakota, so it's definitely spreading.
Speaker 2:And it's been found in a large number of counties in the eastern third of South Dakota. And, you know, looking south and east of us, it's been found across Wisconsin. It's been found in virtually every county in Iowa at some point in the last few years as well. So it is spread across the region. We don't always see high levels, but definitely the disease is spreading.
Speaker 1:Do you wanna talk a little bit about the symptoms, when people are seeing this or when it's been observed in the field? What are some things that, are very obvious in terms of identifying corn tar spot?
Speaker 2:It's called tar spot because the spots on leaves of corn are as dark. They're as black as tar. They are, small, and I'd say a few millimeters across typically and slightly raised above the surface of the leaf. And they typically are elongated and not truly round, and they go through the entire leaf once they are developed. So you can if you see it on the top, you can also see it on the other side of the leaf at the same point.
Speaker 2:So those are some features to look for, and then if you have a moist finger, you cannot wipe it off. So those are some of the things. It's easiest to diagnose, you know, in July, August, early September. One confusion we've been having later in the season here now, we've also had a lot of rust in Minnesota on corn. And some of those rust pustules can develop, spores inside them are essentially black, and they are can look the same color.
Speaker 2:The appearance is different. If you look closely, you can see that the pustule has broken open, revealing those spores in the rust. Whereas with the star spot, the tar spot, there's there's a essentially a solid little spot, you know, very small, but nothing that breaks open that's very obvious like the rust pustule.
Speaker 1:In terms of affecting the yield, maybe a little bit of a primer here for people that are maybe not, you know, pathologists, what is the effect on the corn plant? Are we talking about from a standpoint of of, debilitating the amount of photosynthetic area on a leaf surface here because of the tar spot or is there something going on internally in the car plant in the in the corn plant? But exactly how is the tar spot itself, when it does occur early enough, debilitating the yield?
Speaker 2:Yeah. I think you hit on it. It's mainly just reducing the effective area of the leaf that can be used for photosynthesis and then ultimately filling the grain. And, yeah, there's I don't think there's a a real significant effect beyond that, but there's more than just the spots. You can have the spots, and then large areas between those spots on the leaves can can die, can be have big patches.
Speaker 2:And the other thing that you may notice in fields, we describe the primary spots as simply black, but sometimes they develop into what's been called a fisheye lesion. So there's a lesion that's around that several times the diameter of the tar spot that's also killing the tissue. So if we have a lot of those, you can have significantly more relief damage with the same number of lesions as you have with the single black tar spots.
Speaker 3:So then what's what's the what's the greatest yield loss that that's been noted? And what's, you know, what's the range? I know there's, you know, there's gonna be a lot of it out there where you don't have yield loss. So what's what can you point us to towards how, how bad this thing is?
Speaker 2:Yes. Definitely, 50 bushels is is a number that's been thrown around a lot. 50 bushels an acre loss can happen under severe conditions. I've heard higher numbers. In fact, much higher numbers at times.
Speaker 3:So, basically, if we're seeing it, and you have a lot of leaf loss, then, you know, this is something alarming. And then there's there will be a yield loss coming in that some something around 50 buck bushels potentially if you have pretty significant
Speaker 2:Yeah.
Speaker 3:Symptomology in in August, into September.
Speaker 2:Potentially. But those numbers to get them really firm is is a real challenge because we don't have any real plus or minus plots with and without tar spot or plus and minus parts of fields with and without tar spot to make a real good comparison. But 50 bushels plus is is pretty well documented, it seems like. Again, like, can be higher as well.
Speaker 3:So the key is it's a it's a big deal if you got it. Right? If it's if if you've got a field that has pretty high levels, then you're you've lost significant yield, and you're you're probably, you know, upset about it and wanna do something.
Speaker 2:That that's correct. And there's 2 other points I wanna make, and I mentioned this earlier. We have a a wide swath of the state where tar spot has been found, but most of that area had not did not have significant enough levels to cause any yield loss. I think that's really important to keep in mind. The other thing to think about here is this also affects silage corn and cause can cause dry down earlier than it would normally.
Speaker 2:That's affecting, you know, the moisture and the and the ratio of of of that product that comes out of there after ensiling it.
Speaker 1:So what you're really saying, Dean, is you can't overemphasize the timing aspect of this as far as a yield decrease is concerned because in a lot of situations, I think this last year in Minnesota and maybe in North Dakota as as well, a lot of this was noticed later in the season as opposed to earlier where it has been issues perhaps in Indiana and Michigan and other other parts of Iowa. So maybe just go over a little bit about the timing of when this does show up in terms of the wind moving it and that type of thing.
Speaker 2:Yeah. So we found it in Minnesota as as early as mid mid July. This year, for example, in Rosemount, we found it the 3rd early the in the 4th week of July, and we watched it very carefully over the the season. And we expected given the amount of rain that we're having that time of the year, I thought we I was thinking this might really take off, but it didn't. It's it's very widespread there across the research fields, but I don't suspect it caused any yield loss even though we had conditions that seem conducive and we had early infection.
Speaker 2:The early infection seems to be critical in those fields where we're getting the yield loss because it does take time for the disease to ramp up and become truly severe. And like you said, oftentimes, we see it much later in the season, not much until later August, even into September. Usually, if it's initiating at that late, we don't really see any yield loss typically.
Speaker 3:Yeah. So this is another one of those issues where farmers, even if they're scouting, they may not see anything, but they're out harvesting this time of year. And when we're recording this, we're kind of at the latter days of of harvest really here in in the end of October. So farmers are calling and seeing this from the combine window. Right?
Speaker 3:And so they're or they're getting out and looking at some of these these fields. And maybe maybe they hadn't noticed it before, and they'd even scouted some. So likely, that was a late season infection, and you're you're kinda leading me to believe that maybe that shouldn't have contributed significantly to any yield loss.
Speaker 2:Yes. I think that's the case in most places in Minnesota.
Speaker 1:Now one of the things that we've learned, I think, in the last couple of years, Dean, has been about the movement of the spores via wind, and we had a lot of moisture early on. Obviously, we had high record rainfalls this spring and that situation with that. Maybe you can talk a little bit about what we do know. There's a sweet spot here for temperature, moisture on the leaves, free water, or too dry, and so forth. Did it occur at the right the correct time and then with a combination of, you know, southerly winds just move across, the upper Midwest?
Speaker 1:In other words, it was it a perfect storm? All things had to come together for spores to move by the wind, for it to really move as fast and far as it did?
Speaker 2:That that's probably true. You know, the conditions that are truly needed to create high levels of tar spot, I think we're still trying to understand that. I expected in some of the fields, especially in Southeast Minnesota, near Rochester, for example, that I've been watching for few years, where there's a high level of inoculum in the area from previous crops. I thought the disease was really gonna take off given the amount of rain that went through the area and, in fact, across, you know, much of Minnesota until recently. But it it didn't.
Speaker 2:So there was another factor that wasn't there that we needed to really create high levels of the disease, and we're we're still trying to understand that a little bit better. But back to your point about spread, You know, that we know the pathogen can survive on infected corn residue in fields and can infect from that residue, you know, the following year. But we also see significant levels of tar spot or maybe even low levels in fields where we've never seen tar spot before. We've seen that frequently. And one of these fields, for example, I've been watching at Rosemont, Minnesota, there is no corn in that field last year.
Speaker 2:There was no tar spot that we could find the year before, yet it developed early. It developed in, like, in 3rd week of July. And the question is, where did that inoculum come from? So some of it comes from residue, but no doubt. I I think in my mind, it's wind borne.
Speaker 2:We need some more work to try to figure out how it's spreading and when and where. But I don't think there's any other clear way to explain how it's been moving as quickly and as far as it did, for example, into North Dakota this year.
Speaker 3:It seems like, you know, a a lot of you know, I'm no pathologist, but it just seems like the the inoculum question always comes up with these things. And it just seems like repeatedly, there's really enough inoculum around there if we have the rest of the the other two legs of the triangle show up. Right? It just seems it seems that's my my, armchair pathology view of the world is that, you know, there's once we once we reach this kind of a point in these kind of, diseases, there's plenty around. We just need to have the right setup around the rest of it.
Speaker 2:That's definitely the case now. But, again, it spread so far this year from where it had been found previously. You know, it I didn't look at the exact mileage, and I'm guessing a 152 100 miles at least from place some of the nearest places it's been found before to where it had been found this year at low levels. Well, given the fact that there are a lot
Speaker 1:of things that we're still researching or perhaps obviously don't know at this point, if we think about 2025 and and farmers either have it in their fields in the area or on their farm or are aware of it, a couple of things that you can mention that they should think about in terms of preparing for next year as far as, either cultural or variety selection, crop protection product. Where where should we start?
Speaker 2:That's that's that's a good question. So at this point, still the best way to manage this disease is through fungicides. Fungicides applied at the at the tasseling through the roughly r for growth stages. Now to back up, now are there hybrids that are less susceptible? Yes.
Speaker 2:There definitely seems to be. Definitely, all the seed companies are working hard on this and trying to identify more and more of those. That that will be an important part of this. It's an important part now, become more important in the future. But right now, even from from some studies I've seen, for example, in Indiana where they've been working on this quite a long time, there there is a huge difference in how much tar spot develops on a moderately resistant hybrid versus one that's very susceptible.
Speaker 2:So that would be the first thing to do, in terms of choosing and planning for next year. And, again, like I say, fungicides, those with at least 2 modes of action seem to be most effective. And so, again, with with a hybrid that has moderate levels of resistance and then a fungicide applied in that time frame of the, you know, tasseling to, r 4, this disease can be managed pretty well.
Speaker 3:So when we we're talking about fungicides, are we talking about purely preventative or curative? How what's the what's the application? How should farmers think about being prepared for dealing with the risk of or the actual disease?
Speaker 2:Mhmm. I I think they're more effective at a preventative action than they are at a purely curative. So if we can get ahead of the disease fully developing, we'll get a lot better control. Now the question is, when do we get that? The disease can be well established in a plant sometimes, and we don't see symptoms.
Speaker 2:It can take, you know, 12 to 19 days from the time of infection to the time we see the tar spots. During that time frame, when the fungus is inside the leaf kind of developing, now the fungus fungicide is not as effective generally as it is when you have the fungicide there before infection occurs. That doesn't mean you won't stop it somewhat. Most of these newer fungicides, they they do penetrate into the leaf, and they can slow down growth and and disease development. But I would still say very much like white mold.
Speaker 2:If you can put a fungicide on before the infection starts, you're gonna be better off than if you put it on after the infection is there.
Speaker 3:Okay. So gaming this out. A farmer is approached by a seed company. They're riding in the combine with them, and they're giving them kind of their rundown of varieties, hybrids to plant next year. And the salesman says, this is a really great hybrid.
Speaker 3:It's got top yields, but it seems to be more susceptible to this thing. So what do you does the farmer then just plan on and write in, a prophylactic application of fungicide, or should a farmer just stay away from that one completely and go down the list? And does that depend on whether that farmer has had, tar spot in the past?
Speaker 2:There there are a lot of parts to that there, Seth. And there's no absolute answer to any of it. The thing is, outside of Southeastern Minnesota, I still think it's significant to consider the fact that we haven't seen significant levels of disease in very many places. Now is that because we don't have conducive conditions generally, or is it because, we just haven't developed had enough chance for the disease to develop and kind of build up, so to speak, in the area. I think there's a lot we have to figure out.
Speaker 2:And and remember, like like white mold, this this is not white mold, but this disease is not gonna be a problem every year like white mold is. So do we spray a fungicide on on soybeans every year to stop white mold? No. We we don't. You know, many people don't do that, and I think that's the right approach for this as well.
Speaker 2:And for those areas that are particularly prone to this, a prophylactic application of a fungicide in areas where it's shown significant yield loss may be the right decision. Other areas, I would be more cautious about putting that investment in until we could see for sure that it truly is a high level of risk.
Speaker 3:Well, let me complicate this further because this is my job here. It's, that, you know, there's I from a farmer's psychological standpoint, I I often hear farmers, in their words, say they'd really like to justify an application. So they'd really like to spray for white mold, but they or they'd really like to put an application of fungicide on their soybean just to for this kind of plant health and potential value for yield enhancement. And then they justify it under white mold or something like this. Same thing that happens for insects all the time.
Speaker 3:What do you what do you think about this particular, is this an is this a disease where it's gonna get people to put out more prophylactic applications of of fungicide on corn for for yield enhancement just to give them some insurance that they're, not gonna have tar spot in their field?
Speaker 2:I I I think it will, and I think it already has. Whether that's the right decision, you know, I I don't know the answer to that for sure. You know, everybody would like a a simple solution to this. Right? There I don't think there is a simple absolute solution.
Speaker 2:It's gonna vary from field to field and location to location and from year to year, depending on the weather patterns. Now let's not forget back in 2000 a year ago, 2,000 23, we had virtually no tar spot in Minnesota, even in Southwestern Minnesota where it was very prone to it. A little bit developed late in the season, but it was at minor levels. So like a lot of other diseases, it's gonna depend on the weather patterns. We don't have enough moisture.
Speaker 2:We're not gonna have much tar spot. And we've already seen this year, we've had areas in the southeastern Minnesota fields that had a lot of tar spot in the past, and we had plenty of moisture. We still didn't see real high levels in some of those fields. There are other factors here we're still trying to understand that really drives this disease.
Speaker 3:Yeah. That's that's a good example. I think that's I think people should listen to that closely because we had a year where we basically were getting some of those areas had, you know, 2 or 3 inches of rain every week for, you know, 8 weeks here. So they were set up. I think you it'd be hard to it'd be hard to argue that those some of those fields weren't set up.
Speaker 3:And maybe it's too much rain for this thing. I don't know. But, still, there I think it's important to know that there's no guarantees on this for sure.
Speaker 1:You did touch on some general principles a little bit earlier, and that was your comments about timing. If if a fungicide is, a situation where a farmer wants to make that application, In terms of timing, some of the research from other states, I think, has indicated that there is a specific window in the development of this disease where you're going to be more profitable than otherwise in terms of making that application. In other words, what I'm talking about here is not too early,
Speaker 2:not too late. Again, you wanna just review that a little bit? Yes. That that general time frame is the tasseling, the VT, up to the, you know, melker early dose stages, r 3, r 4. That seems to be the time frame.
Speaker 2:And again and the other thing to keep in mind here is if we get an application on too early before the disease is really developing, we can lose some of the efficacy if the disease develops later. So we don't really, of course, wanna go to 2 applications. But if we put it on too early, there may be a time when that's required. Most of the studies say one well timed application is enough to provide the about as much benefit as you're gonna get out of a fungicide. That's not always the case.
Speaker 3:Do those studies define what a well timed application is, though, is the question. Right? I think that's Dave's question.
Speaker 2:It's it's true. It's in that time range.
Speaker 3:And that's a big window you're giving us.
Speaker 2:It's a very big window.
Speaker 1:But yet it's it's situation developing obviously when the corner is much larger, so the complicates, you know, your application technology. Because lately, we've we've known everything obviously from equipment that can get into that larger corn or aerial or even drones and so forth. A lot of people are looking at at at different options. But in terms of timing, may are there anything that you want to mention about growers in terms of scouting from the time frame of, like, let's say, for example, it's after 4th July, and if you're obviously not tasking at that point in time, but should they begin in earnest at that point in time or the consultant? And and what are we really looking for?
Speaker 1:It hasn't really perhaps flushed out and and developed, but I'm looking for those those triggers that might be out there to help you make a decision on a fungicide application.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Those are really good questions. And one pattern they've seen in some other states, if we do see early infections, say, the first in the early July, the odds of that disease developing at a higher levels later, of course, are higher. So we need to keep watching it. But we've also seen cases where we've seen early infection in Minnesota and then it becomes dry.
Speaker 2:The disease really slows up. So and one more thing I wanna say about how does this disease develop. So we watch this. Watch early infection. You see just a few black spots on leaves.
Speaker 2:Those tend to enlarge over time, and now they create more spores. It creates a second cycle of infection. So what we've seen is some of these early infections, you see just a few scattered black spots in the leaves. The second cycle of infection that occurs after those initial spots release lots of spores and have hundreds of tiny spores and hundreds of tiny spots that develop on those. That's where you start getting the significant damage, And each of those cycles takes 2 to 3 weeks.
Speaker 2:So in terms of what we're seeing right now and if they're in the combine and harvest and they were seeing out, you know, some of these leaves
Speaker 1:with quite a few on it, it could have been a situation where this is its second or third cycle of of spores in the area, the wind, the combination, but it certainly doesn't mean that they had that many ascospores or that much spores in this you know, back in July. It's it's propagated, so to speak.
Speaker 2:Yes. That's right. That's right. So, Seth, looks like you're about to
Speaker 3:Well, I I'm I'm just I'm parsing your words very carefully here, or I'm I'm I'm reading between the lines. You didn't say that you should wait to have a positive confirmation before spring, and yet you gave yourself a big window for application, and you implied that there's good control there's relatively good control, and that the subsequent, the infections that occurred or caused the real damage. When I'm hearing that, I hear you kinda steering people to wait until they actually see it in the field before they spray.
Speaker 2:That would be ideal. But here is the challenge, of course. By the time where this disease really starts developing, the corn is 7 or 8 feet tall. We're talking mid to late July. Now it doesn't always develop right along the edge of the field.
Speaker 2:I've seen cases where we had to walk in 20 or 30 yards to find it. So the point is it can be very hard to scout a field and really find if it's developing in these focal areas. It sounds like if you start in early to mid July and make weekly visits,
Speaker 1:at least that's a good best management practice. Do you borrow a
Speaker 2:term from our soils people, a good BMP? It it would be, and and still you could miss it because it's developing out in the middle of large fields and then spreading. But often, again, it's it's it's a balance here. Are you gonna see it on the edge of the fields where you can easily get into or not? And I don't always know the answer to that.
Speaker 3:Well, I think farmers can really look at the cost of that application and determine whether they're a farmer that's gonna spray a fungicide come hell or high water, or they're gonna spray if they need to. And I think fungicides cost enough and the application costs enough and there's enough problems with application at that time of year that I think farmers should be able to run a mental ROI on this thing and say, is this thing worth me scouting for? Is it worth me getting out of the truck and going into the field in this hot, sweaty, tall corn and and and looking around once a week and and and see? I think I I guess that's kind of the mental vision I have for trying to promote the scouting part of this is really go through that mental exercise and seeing seeing what how much they could save if they scout this field and they never have to spray it all year, and they they basically dodge the bullet and and miss that whole application, that that's a significant savings to their bottom line, especially in a year with low crop prices.
Speaker 2:That that's that's all all correct. Yes. The disease, I'd say again, we I mean, let's think about where in the state we are. If we're outside of Southeastern Minnesota, we haven't had significant issues yet. I would definitely lean towards scouting and making the decision as you're sort of suggesting there.
Speaker 2:Southeastern Minnesota, I think they've they've had more experience with it. They have slightly different ways of looking at it. I still think we can look at it the same way, but there's a higher risk in some of those fields just based on past history. So so scouting, I think, has a definite role here, and, but it's not always gonna be the absolute answer either.
Speaker 1:Well, you know, on the weather front, you know, we can't always let as you indicated, be definitive in terms of this relative humidity, this amount of free water on the leaf, this dew point, etcetera. You know, this many hours of of moisture and dew point. And I think that's some of the folks in Michigan are looking at, you know, how how to parse that out. You know, we we may not have a spring, hopefully, like we did this last year where we had what I was concerned is basically excessive moisture. But nonetheless, that so, you know, we can have a lot of variability with with the with the amount of disease and and the progression.
Speaker 1:And, you know, we're we're, I guess, somewhat tied behind one hand behind our back, you know, as we go into this because of we're not we're not a pure triangle here of disease. There's some other factors that may be going on. But I think I'll go back to that point about visiting with your seed supplier probably this time of the year. It's one of the things that you can do in in terms of at least asking the questions and find out what what types of tolerances are out there in their portfolio.
Speaker 2:That's correct. And like like I said before, we talked about a bit earlier, There are more and more differences developing the levels of resistance available in in corn hybrids for tar spot. And the best ones do seem to hold up significantly better than those that are very susceptible. So that's gonna be a real advantage. Well, I think it's a good thing to ask, like, how much data we have on some of these hybrids?
Speaker 2:You know, some of these diseases, it's hard to get good solid data to have enough hybrids in a trial with enough disease so we can make a good comparison. I think some of that data is out there. I think it's just a good question to ask.
Speaker 3:It'd be kind of fun to ask your seed salesman. If I was a farmer and in this in this situation, it would be kind of fun to ask the the seed salesman if this this hybrid that they're promoting is being tolerant, if if they can avoid a spray and see what they would say. I don't I don't think any of them would say that this is bulletproof enough that they would, say that. But I think it'd be be worth, asking the question anyway.
Speaker 1:Okay, Dean. We're gonna give you the last word here. We're at the end of our time for the podcast. Anything else that you wanna mention that we didn't touch on?
Speaker 2:I I do wanna mention one other thing. In terms of our corn fields, I think most everybody noted it wasn't just tar spot out there this year. There was a lot of southern rust, and more than I've seen in the 19 years I've been here in Minnesota for sure. And one distinct difference between tar spot and southern rust, southern rust does not overwinter here. Those spores have to be blown up from the southern US, from living corn plants each each spring or summer.
Speaker 2:And so so the the fact that we had high levels of it this year doesn't really say anything about what the risk is next year. Although the patterns that resulted in that increase this year, I think that we we need to figure that out too, but certainly had a lot to do with the moisture that we had. So that's a real difference. Whereas tar spot is it is residing here now. It is established.
Speaker 2:And, even though it didn't reach the same level as southern rust in many areas, it's more widely distributed and more established.
Speaker 3:So would that play a role in interpreting, strip data that somebody has handed out about fungicide applications this year? So, if someone is promoting, you know, a a particular fungicide and they said, we got x bushels from this, tar spot control with this, should a farmer be somewhat skeptical of that, that there might be more involved than just the tar spot this year?
Speaker 2:I think in some fields, definitely. And it wasn't only southern corn rust. There was also fields with some fields with a lot of northern corn leaf blight. So with all of our moisture this year, we had more significant, by far, leaf diseases on corn than we have most years. So they they could have in some fields, they might have had an effect in yield, especially the southern rust.
Speaker 2:Most areas, I don't think we had it an effect in yield, but some fields, it became pretty high. And I think it raises the question, did it affect yield?
Speaker 1:Well, Dean, thank you very much for your time. Just to borrow a statement from our grain marketing, you know, Ed, us at, growing corn is challenging, but it's certainly not simple. And you pointed that out there are some of those things that we gotta think about, you know, for 2025. And I'm sure we'll be visiting with you again when we have a little bit more data perhaps towards the spring of the year in terms of inputs, you know, applications, fungicide choices, varieties, and we'll perhaps learn a little bit more from this year's research. So thanks again for stopping in.
Speaker 1:We appreciate this and, we'll take it from there. So this has been Dave Nicolai with University of Minnesota, with our CropCast podcast along with my co host, doctor Seth Nave, University of Minnesota Extension Soybean Specialist, and we'll visit with you again next time. Thank you.
