Investigations into Economic Returns Resulting from Foliar Fungicides and Application Timing on Management of Tar Spot in Indiana Hybrid Corn.

Tar spot, caused by Phyllachora maydis, is the most significant yield-limiting disease of corn (Zea mays L.) in Indiana. Currently, fungicides are an effective management tool for this disease, and partial returns from their use under different disease severity conditions has not previously been studied. Between 2019 and 2021, two separate field experiments were conducted in each year in Indiana to assess the efficacy of nine foliar fungicide products and nine fungicide application timings based on corn growth stages on tar spot symptoms and stromata, canopy greenness, yield, and influence on partial returns. All fungicides evaluated significantly suppressed tar spot development in the canopy and increased canopy greenness over the nontreated control. Additionally, applications of mefentrifluconazole + pyraclostrobin, metconazole + pyraclostrobin, cyproconazole + picoxystrobin at tassel, and propiconazole + benzovindiflupyr + azoxystrobin between the tassel and dough growth stages were the most effective at significantly reducing disease severity, increasing canopy greenness, protecting yield, and offered the greatest partial return. Fungicide products varied in their ability to protect yield under low and high disease severity conditions relative to the nontreated control. Consistently, positive yield increases were observed when disease severity was high, which translated to greater profitability relative to low severity conditions. On average, the yield increases across foliar fungicide products and timed application treatments were 544.6 and 1,020.7 kg/ha greater, and partial returns using a grain value of $0.17/kg were $92.6/ha and $173.5/ha greater, respectively, when high severity conditions occurred. This research demonstrates that foliar fungicides and appropriately timed fungicide applications can profitably be used to manage tar spot in Indiana under high disease severity conditions.

Perception versus reality of the COVID-19 pandemic in U.S. meat markets.

Disruptions to meat markets during the COVID-19 pandemic spurred mass media attention. While media deeming the U.S. food system 'broken' garnered a great deal of attention, the actual production and meat availability data does not support this conclusion. The U.S. meat supply chain, while certainly strained and with measurable consequence during periods of adjustment, proved ultimately resilient and rebounded quickly. Increased attention on meat supply chains may drive continued efforts to improve resiliency, but analyses of online media and U.S. production and cold storage data do not support a narrative that the system 'broke', but was perhaps 'strained' and 'responded efficiently'. Findings indicate that public sentiment about U.S. meat supply overall was not as dominated by pandemic-era concerns as may be hypothesized.

US respondents' willingness to pay for Cheddar cheese from dairy cattle with different pasture access, antibiotic use, and dehorning practices.

Cheese is a widely consumed product in American diets and an important economic driver of US dairy markets. Given the widespread interest in credence attributes of fluid dairy products, the lack of knowledge of demand for animal welfare, environmental, and other credence attributes in cheeses is surprising. Increasing attention surrounding dairy cattle welfare has been placed on the disbudding or dehorning of dairy cattle, in addition to the longer term debates surrounding pasture access and antibiotic use. This work estimates willingness to pay for these attributes of dairy cattle management systems for Cheddar cheese in a nationally representative sample of 749 US household members. Ninety percent of respondents indicated they or someone in their household consumed cheese in the last year. Higher proportions of respondents with children in the household purchased cheese of any kind. Respondents had positive willingness to pay for Cheddar cheese that had the following attributes: USDA-, retailer-, and industry-verified antibiotic use not permitted, required pasture access, and dehorning with pain relief as well as polled (when compared with dehorning without pain relief). As dairy producers face tighter margins and shifting consumer preferences, increasing attention on consumer preferences for cheese may aid in increasing profitability if demanded attributes can be profitability provided.

Economic considerations of breeding for polled dairy cows versus dehorning in the United States.

This paper examines the costs and benefits of selecting for polled dairy heifers versus traditional dehorning practices. Stochastic budgets were developed to analyze the expected costs (EC) associated with polled dairy genetics. The economic assessment was expanded beyond on-farm cash costs by incorporating cost and benefit estimates to generate industry-wide discussion, and preliminary economic evaluations, surrounding the public acceptance and attitude toward polled genetics versus dehorning calves. Triangular distributions, commonly used to represent distributions with limited data, were used to represent labor costs for dehorning, the likelihood of treatment of calf, and the cost of veterinary treatment. In total, 10,000 iterations were run using @Risk v 6.0 (Palisade Corp., Newfield, NY). The EC of the 4 traditional dehorning methods evaluated in this study ranged from $6 to $25/head, with a mean EC around $12 to $13/head. The EC of incorporating polled genetics into a breeding program ranged from $0 to $26/head depending on the additional cost, or premium, associated with polled relative to horned genetics. Estimated breakeven premiums associated with polled genetics indicate that, on average, producers could spend up to $5.95/head and $11.90/head more for heterozygous and homozygous polled genetics, respectively, compared with conventional horned genetics (or $2.08 and $4.17/straw of semen at an assumed average conception rate of 35%). Given the parameters outlined, sensitivity to individual farm semen and dehorning costs are likely to swamp these differences. Beyond on-farm costs, industry-wide discussion may be warranted surrounding the public's acceptance and attitude toward polled genetics versus dehorning or disbudding of calves. The value of avoiding dehorning may be larger for the industry, and perhaps some individual farms, than initially suggested if additional value is put on calf comfort and possible worker aversion to dehorning. If public perception of dehorning influences market access, the EC of dehorning may be large but that cost is unknown at present.