DON Threatens Wheat
Spores Overwinter In Corn Refuse, Attack Next Wheat Crop
MINER, MO.
Two sub-topics of a larger issue, Fusarium head blight, were examined
in detail recently by Dr. Don Hershman, outgoing extension plant
pathologist at the University of Kentucky. He discussed Deoxynivalenol
or DON and wheat head scab relative to different production scenarios.
“Last year in Kentucky, and I believe parts of southeast Missouri as
well, there wasn’t a great deal of head scab symptom expression in
fields but apparently there were enough late infections to result in a
situation where some of the grain was surprisingly contaminated with a
mycotoxin called Deoxynivalenol or DON,” he said. “DON is a serious
issue to grain producers and the industry because it results in
discounts at the elevator and can negatively affect end use of
contaminated grain; a significant amount of the value of the crop can be
lowered at the grain elevator because of this DON.”
Many producers have heard about DON but probably know very little
about it. Hershman explained what DON is, how it relates to head scab;
he also described some of the nuances of how DON could result in what
looks like a relatively good grain in the field with very little
Fusarium head blight or head scab.
The second part of his message was to explain how corn fits into the
wheat head scab picture. In fact, the same fungus that causes head scab
also causes an ear rot and a stalk rot of corn; also the fungus that
causes wheat head scab overwinters in the residue of corn. Most plant
pathologists feel that the increase in the number of acres of corn
production in this country and also the expansion of traditionally non
corn areas, has really been the reason that there has been more head
scab through the years.
Dr. Don Hershman, outgoing
extension plant pathologist at the University of Kentucky, discussed
Deoxynivalenol or DON and wheat head scab relative to different
production scenarios.
Photo by John LaRose, Jr.
“Nationally and even regionally the amount of corn has played a big
difference in the fact that we’re seeing more head scab,” Hershman said.
“Planting wheat behind corn in a no-till system, as many Kentucky
producers do, appears to be the worst case scenario. We do a really good
job of producing our soft red winter wheat crop in Kentucky. The
question is how that could happen if planting wheat no till behind corn
is the worse case scenario; as it turns out we did some research on
this, particularly through a survey in the late 1990s. Then in the last
five years a group of scientists from across the country has started to
look at this issue. Many people are realizing that you can do a really
good job of growing wheat behind corn and they want to understand how
that can happen.”
There are two scenarios. One is where you live in a state where corn
is concentrated in a particular part of the state but not in another
where they grow wheat, and in those situations planting wheat behind
soybeans is the preferred plan. The corn residue does appear to have a
very significant impact on whether this head scab and then DON also
develop.
But, with the second scenario, for example, in Kentucky and many
other states where there’s widely scattered corn acres, no matter where
you plant your wheat crop there’s going to be an old corn crop a stone’s
throw away. In that situation the amount of the spores of the head scab
fungus that blow into a field tends to be more important than the
amount of fungus that overwinters in a particular field.
“The point is that regardless of crop rotation, what crop you’re
planting wheat behind in places where there’s a lot of corn produced,
whether you’re planting wheat behind soybeans or behind corn, whether
it’s conventionally tilled or no-tilled really has a minor impact on the
development of head scab. You’re going to have spores blowing into
those wheat fields no matter what you do,” he said.
“However, in places like North Dakota where the wheat would tend to
be concentrated and separated from the corn acres, then it would make a
big difference. What you do in a particular field might have more
importance then. So there are two scenarios and in places like Kentucky,
Missouri, Illinois, Indiana and surrounding states, there’s just a lot
of corn, statewide, and this is where the head scab fungus survives; and
when the conditions are right, when you have the proper conditions for
sporulation of the fungus in the residue, you’re going to have a lot of
spores produced no matter what you do,” Hershman explained.
“In this situation, there’s no reason for a farmer to get too
concerned about planting wheat behind corn or behind soybeans or
anything else, because no matter what there will be a lot of spores
flying around when the conditions are favorable, and that really is my
take home message.”
Another issue is how DON could be at a significant level and little
or no head scab is apparent. Hershman explained that just by looking at
the situation one can usually analyze how it happens.
”You can actually do a really good job raising wheat as long as you
do other things that are required to manage head scab,” he said. “These
efforts include growing varieties that have some resistance, using
fungicides when necessary, and then also planting different varieties
that might flower at different times which would allow for some escape
of individual fields.”
DON is called a trichothecene toxin and there are actually different
toxins in the same category. However, the main fungus that causes
Fusarium head blight or head scab in the United States is Fusarium
graminearum and this DON is the primary mycotoxin that’s produced by
that particular fungus.
In other countries, there are different fungi and different toxins
but DON is the one prevalent here. There are a couple of ways to measure
DON, which is in the grain and is a product of the fungus during the
infection and the disease development process. So every time you see
head scab in a field there is going to be some element of DON in the
harvested grain and it can be measured.
“Many times it’s measured using various kinds of kits that are
available at the grain elevator,” he explained. “That’s sort of a down
and dirty way to know more or less what sort of concentrations of the
mycotoxins there are, typically talking of parts per million. Anything
below two parts per million in grain is acceptable and would not be
docked and anything above two to four parts per million will result in a
dockage. Some years when the concentration is above four and certainly
at five, six or 10 parts per million, if there’s other wheat that is
available in an area, some elevators will reject that wheat, so it can
be a real significant problem. There really is nothing else you can do
with that once it’s rejected because it wouldn’t be acceptable for feed
and certainly wouldn’t be useful in other ways.”
There are some marketing strategies but it’s a problem no matter
what. Chemists in the lab have a very accurate way to measure DON, but
it’s very expensive and takes time to complete the test, so most
producers and grain elevators just use the kit format. Kits are good,
just not as accurate as the gas chromatography method used in scientific
laboratories.
“DON is an issue, its not actually a poison, but it does cause feed
refusal in animals; it can cause some physiological changes that can
result in death of swine and other animals if exceeded. From a human
perspective, probably the most significant symptom it produces is
reduced hunger in children which might result in malnutrition and all
the negative consequences that come from that. DON also causes beer to
gush, so when you open a bottle of beer it just gushes out
uncontrollably and it’s not something that you would desire. Then just
from a safety standpoint, most of the industry is very keen on not
having any DON in their products, because wheat is one of those products
that is often consumed in raw material. In whole grain wheat, that’s
obviously not a very good thing. The industry is very, very tuned into
DON, probably more than the producers, but ultimately that’s the reason
there’s a dockage associated with excessive DON in grain.”
There is no way to get rid of DON, the only way is to manage Fusarium
head blight; when you manage the disease, that’s going to result in
less DON in most cases. The best efforts are to use resistant varieties,
fungicides, multiple varieties, do the best job you can to result in
less head scab.
“Regardless, there are situations where you do the best you can
possibly do and you still end up with DON and there’s really no way to
get rid of it,” Hershman said. “Sometimes you can blend grain that
doesn’t have DON with grain that has some DON and the average situation
then brings that DON down to acceptable levels.
“Most growers do not segregate their grain for different logistical
reasons so that’s really difficult unless you are segregating your loads
of grain. It’s a complex thing. The ideal situation is to be sure you
don’t let DON develop in the first place. The ultimate determiner really
is weather. If you have a lot of moisture during the flowering period
in the spring, the risk of head scab and DON skyrockets, and that’s when
it becomes difficult to manage. In four out of five years, head scab
and DON is not a significant problem because the weather simply isn’t
favorable for spore production or infection; hopefully, next year will
not be a Fusarium head blight year and we’ll be good to go,” Hershman
summed. ∆
BETTY VALLE GEGG-NAEGER: Senior Staff Writer, MidAmerica Farmer Grower