A major challenge that organic grain crop growers face is weed management. Th e use of a rye (Secale cereale L.) cover crop to facilitate no-tillage (NT) organic soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] production may improve weed suppression and increase profitability. We conducted research in 2008 and 2009 to determine the eff ect of rye management (tilling, crimping, and mowing), soybean planting date (mid-May or early June), and soybean row width (76 or 19 cm), on soybean establishment, soil moisture, weed suppression, soybean yield, and profi tability. Soybean establishment did not diff er between tilled and NT treatments; and soil moisture measurements showed minimal risk of a drier soil profi le in NT rye treatments. Rye mulch treatments eff ectively suppressed weeds, with 75% less weed biomass than in the tilled treatment by mid-July. However, by this time, NT soybean competed with rye regrowth, were defi cient in Cu, and accumulated 22% as much dry matter (DM) and 28% as much N compared to the tilled treatment. Soybean row width and planting date within NT treatments impacted soybean productivity but not profi tability, with few diff erences between mowed and crimped rye. Soybean yield was 24% less in the NT treatments than the tilled treatment, and profi tability per hectare was 27% less. However, with fewer labor inputs, profi tability per hour in NT rye treatments was 25% greater than in tilled soybean; in addition, predicted soil erosion was nearly 90% less. Although soybean yields were less in NT rye mulch systems, they represent economically viable alternatives for organic producers in the Upper Midwest.

OFRF encourages organic farmers to participate in the policy process by joining our Organic Farmers Action Network (OFAN). OFAN subscribers will receive free policy updates and tools for communicating with representatives in Congress to advocate for increased funding for organic research, technical assistance and marketing support, organic conservation programs and maintenance and improvement of national organic standards. Email action@ofrf.org to join. EducationOFRF seeks to share new insights into organic farming systems with all farmers who use or want to adopt organic practices. The results of research projects funded by OFRF generate information useful to farmers who are working to develop and improve integrated, systems-level organic management practices. Every OFRF-funded project is required to have an outreach component that disseminates the results to the grower and research communities. ResearchOFRF conducts original research about organic farming in the U.S. OFRF research reports include:• National Organic Farmers' Surveys OFRF's integrated strategy of grantmaking, policy, research and education initiatives and networking activities support organic farmers' immediate information needs while moving the public and policymakers toward greater investment in organic farming systems. GrantmakingSince 1992, OFRF's grantmaking program has awarded more than $1.5 million for over 200 projects. Our grantmaking objective is to generate practical, science-based knowledge to support modern organic farming systems. OFRF-funded projects emphasize grower-researcher collaboration, studies conducted on-farm and in certified organic settings, and outreach of project results. PolicyOFRF's policy program objectives are to ensure that the public and policymakers are well-informed about organic farming issues, and to increase public institutional support for organic farming research and education.The results of OFRF-funded projects are published in our newsletter, the Information Bulletin, available free online at www.ofrf.org. Our special appreciation goes to Martha Brown, who helped edit the project and greatly improved the accessibility of the material. Thank you to Sarah Miles for designing the publication, and to Paul Bousquet for kindly allowing us the use of his images. NATIONAL ORGANIC RESEARCH AGENDA SOILS • PESTS • LIVESTOCK • GENETICSWe also extend our kindest thanks to our reviewers, particularly Nick Maravell, who contributed text and reviewed various drafts of the document and provided invaluable feedback on the content, greatly improving its quality.The reviewers were:We are grateful to the USDA-CSREES Initiative for Future Agriculture and Food Systems for their generous support of this project, prepared for Project #000-5192, "Revitalizing Small and Mid-Sized Farms: Organic Research, Education and Extension," and to our cooperators in this project.We would also like to acknowledge the Forrest C. Lattner Foundation, the Wallace Genetic Foundation, and the Philanthropic Ventures Foundation --Barkley Fund for th...

In August of 2006, soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) plants collected from Columbia, Dane, Green Lake, Walworth, Jefferson, and Waushara counties in southern Wisconsin exhibited symptoms typical of sudden death syndrome (SDS) caused by Fusarium virguliforme O'Donnell & Aoki [synonym F. solani (Mart.) Sacc. f. sp. glycines] (1). Foliar symptoms ranged from chlorotic spots to severe interveinal chlorosis and necrosis. Taproots of symptomatic plants were necrotic and stunted and stems exhibited a light tan discoloration, but never the dark brown discoloration typical for brown stem rot, a disease with similar foliar symptoms. Isolations from root and crown tissue of symptomatic plants were made using one-quarter-strength potato dextrose agar (PDA) amended with 100 ppm of streptomycin. Slow-growing, white-to-cream fungal colonies with blue and turquoise sporodochia were observed. Spores produced in sporodochia grown on PDA ranged in size from 32.5 to 70 μm long (average 53.1 μm) and 3 to 6 μm wide (average 4.4 μm) and with 3-5 septa (mode of 3). Isolates were characteristic of F. virguliforme based on colony morphology, spore morphology and size, and the absence of microconidia (3). The identity of F. virguliforme was confirmed by PCR amplification and DNA sequencing of the ITS, BT1, Act, and EF1B regions. All isolate sequences exhibited single nucleotide polymorphisms that matched the sequences of these regions of F. virguliforme. Koch's postulates were conducted to confirm that the causal agent of the observed symptoms was F. virguliforme. Inoculum of single-spore isolates was produced on sterilized sorghum seed. After 14 days of incubation at 20 to 22°C and a 12-h photoperiod, the sorghum seed was assayed to determine colonization incidence by transferring seeds to PDA. In all trials, sorghum seed was 100% infested. Infested sorghum seeds (35) were placed in potting soil at 2 cm beneath each seed of the susceptible soybean cv. Williams 82 (4). Noninfested sorghum seed was used for a noninoculated control. Three trials were performed, each using 15 replicates of several fungal isolates and 15 replicates of the noninoculated control. Plants were grown in water baths located in a greenhouse (trial 1) and in a growth chamber (trial 2) and both maintained at an average temperature of 25°C with a 14-h photoperiod (2). The third trial was conducted in the growth chamber without a water bath with the same temperature and light regimen. In all environments, inoculated plants developed chlorotic spots 14 days after planting. After 21 days, symptoms progressed to a range of chlorotic mottling to interveinal chlorosis and necrosis. Foliar and root symptoms that resembled those on the original plant samples infected with F. virguliforme appeared on 88% of inoculated plants. Isolates that resembled the original F. virguliforme were recovered from 75% of inoculated plants and from 88% of plants showing symptoms. No symptoms were observed and no isolates were recovered from noninoculated plants. There was a statistically significant difference between inoculated and control plants (P < 0.001) based on the presence of symptoms and isolation success using the Goodman χ2 analysis. The confirmation of the presence of SDS in five counties suggests that the disease is widespread in Wisconsin and could become a serious threat to soybean production in the future. References: (1) T. Akoi et al. Mycoscience 46:162, 2005. (2) R. Y. Hashmi et al. Online publication. doi:10.1094/PHP-2005-0906-01-RS. Plant Health Progress, 2005. (3) K. W. Roy et al. Plant Dis. 81:259, 1997. (4) J. C. Rupe et al. Can. J. Bot. 79:829, 2001.