Paul D. Mitchell Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Wisconsin-Extension

Economic Analysis of Control Economic Analysis of Control Options for the Options for the

Western Corn Rootworm Western Corn Rootworm Soybean Variant in Southern Soybean Variant in Southern

WisconsinWisconsinPaul D. MitchellPaul D. Mitchell

Agricultural and Applied EconomicsAgricultural and Applied EconomicsUniversity of Wisconsin-ExtensionUniversity of Wisconsin-Extension

Johnstown, WI and Burlington, WIJohnstown, WI and Burlington, WIDecember 8, 2004December 8, 2004

Goal of AnalysisGoal of Analysis Estimate the $/ac Net Benefit for a seed Estimate the $/ac Net Benefit for a seed

treatment, soil insecticide, and treatment, soil insecticide, and YieldGard Rootworm in first year cornYieldGard Rootworm in first year corn

Convert beetles/trap/day from Soybean Convert beetles/trap/day from Soybean Trapping Network into $/ac Net BenefitTrapping Network into $/ac Net Benefit

Costs: use Peg Reedy’s workCosts: use Peg Reedy’s work Benefits: more difficult—link entomology Benefits: more difficult—link entomology

field research and economicsfield research and economics

Step 1Step 1 Convert beetles/trap/day into expected root Convert beetles/trap/day into expected root

rating (1-6 scale) the following year, rating (1-6 scale) the following year, assuming no rootworm control is usedassuming no rootworm control is used

An estimate of larval pressure next yearAn estimate of larval pressure next year Use O’Neal et al. (2001) formula estimated Use O’Neal et al. (2001) formula estimated

using IL data from 1997-1999using IL data from 1997-1999RRRRnono = 1.96 + 0.22 x (beetles/trap/day) = 1.96 + 0.22 x (beetles/trap/day)

Step 2Step 2 Estimate expected root rating for each Estimate expected root rating for each

control method based on RRcontrol method based on RRnono How much less is the RR with control?How much less is the RR with control? Use field trial data from all around Use field trial data from all around

Midwest (1999-2000)Midwest (1999-2000) Add in more recent IL and WI dataAdd in more recent IL and WI data

RRRRSeedTrtSeedTrt = 1 + 0.687 x (RR = 1 + 0.687 x (RRnono – 1) – 1) RRRRSoilInsSoilIns = 1 + 0.432 x (RR = 1 + 0.432 x (RRnono – 1) – 1) RRRRYldGardYldGard = 1 + 0.262 x (RR = 1 + 0.262 x (RRnono – 1) – 1)

Step 3Step 3 Convert root ratings into % yield lossConvert root ratings into % yield loss Based on Mitchell, Gray and Steffey Based on Mitchell, Gray and Steffey

(2004), but updated method and data(2004), but updated method and data %YL%YL = 0.063 x (RR – 1)= 0.063 x (RR – 1) Meaning: each 1 unit increase in the Meaning: each 1 unit increase in the

root rating implies 6.3% more yield lossroot rating implies 6.3% more yield loss Calculate %YL for No Control, Seed Calculate %YL for No Control, Seed

Treatment, Soil Insecticide, and Treatment, Soil Insecticide, and YieldGard RootwormYieldGard Rootworm

Step 4Step 4 Calculate the Net BenefitCalculate the Net Benefit Benefit: (%YLBenefit: (%YLnono - %YL - %YLtreatedtreated) x price x yield) x price x yield

Gives $/ac gained by using the treatmentGives $/ac gained by using the treatment Net Benefit: Subtract the treatment costNet Benefit: Subtract the treatment cost Example: 11% yield loss with no control, Example: 11% yield loss with no control,

6% with a treatment, Benefit = 5% yield 6% with a treatment, Benefit = 5% yield gain x $2/bu x 125 bu/ac = $12.50/acgain x $2/bu x 125 bu/ac = $12.50/ac

Cost is $10/ac, so Net Benefit is $2.50/acCost is $10/ac, so Net Benefit is $2.50/ac

Show results today Show results today for a range of assumptionsfor a range of assumptions

Expected yield: 120, 135, 150 bu/acExpected yield: 120, 135, 150 bu/ac Corn price: $1.90/bu, $2.05/bu, Corn price: $1.90/bu, $2.05/bu,

$2.20/bu$2.20/bu Show results for three different Show results for three different

densitiesdensities 2.5 Beetles/Trap/Day (Kenosha County)2.5 Beetles/Trap/Day (Kenosha County) 3.75 Beetles/Trap/Day (Rock County)3.75 Beetles/Trap/Day (Rock County) 5 Beetles/Trap/Day (Walworth County)5 Beetles/Trap/Day (Walworth County)

Summary of Summary of Soybean Trapping Network Soybean Trapping Network

DataDataCounty Sites Avg B/T/DColumbia 5 0.35Dane 3 0.53Green 3 0.51Jefferson 5 2.07Kenosha 2 2.51Racine 2 1.81Rock 10 3.75Walworth 9 5.04

Net Benefit ($/ac) vs No Controlwith different planting densities

2.5 Beetles/Trap/Day (Kenosha County)

Yield Price Low Med High Low Med High $16/ac $18/ac120 1.90 -8.21 -9.71 -11.21 -1.99 -3.79 -5.59 -3.68 -5.68120 2.05 -7.68 -9.18 -10.68 -0.73 -2.53 -4.33 -2.71 -4.71120 2.20 -7.14 -8.64 -10.14 0.53 -1.27 -3.07 -1.74 -3.74135 1.90 -7.36 -8.86 -10.36 0.01 -1.79 -3.59 -2.14 -4.14135 2.05 -6.76 -8.26 -9.76 1.43 -0.37 -2.17 -1.05 -3.05135 2.20 -6.16 -7.66 -9.16 2.85 1.05 -0.75 0.05 -1.95150 1.90 -6.51 -8.01 -9.51 2.01 0.21 -1.59 -0.60 -2.60150 2.05 -5.84 -7.34 -8.84 3.59 1.79 -0.01 0.62 -1.38150 2.20 -5.17 -6.67 -8.17 5.17 3.37 1.57 1.83 -0.17

YieldGard RWSeed Treatment Soil Insecticide

Yield Price Low Med High Low Med High $16/ac $18/ac120 1.90 -6.97 -8.47 -9.97 0.92 -0.88 -2.68 -1.44 -3.44120 2.05 -6.34 -7.84 -9.34 2.42 0.62 -1.18 -0.29 -2.29120 2.20 -5.71 -7.21 -8.71 3.91 2.11 0.31 0.86 -1.14135 1.90 -5.97 -7.47 -8.97 3.29 1.49 -0.31 0.38 -1.62135 2.05 -5.26 -6.76 -8.26 4.97 3.17 1.37 1.68 -0.32135 2.20 -4.55 -6.05 -7.55 6.65 4.85 3.05 2.97 0.97150 1.90 -4.97 -6.47 -7.97 5.65 3.85 2.05 2.20 0.20150 2.05 -4.18 -5.68 -7.18 7.52 5.72 3.92 3.64 1.64150 2.20 -3.38 -4.88 -6.38 9.39 7.59 5.79 5.08 3.08

Net Benefit ($/ac) for Each Control Method vs No Control

with different planting densities3.75 Beetles/Trap/Day (Rock County)

Net Benefit ($/ac) for Each Control Method vs No Control

with different planting densities5.0 Beetles/Trap/Day (Walworth County)

Yield Price Low Med High Low Med High $16/ac $18/ac120 1.90 -5.74 -7.24 -8.74 3.84 2.04 0.24 0.81 -1.19120 2.05 -5.01 -6.51 -8.01 5.56 3.76 1.96 2.13 0.13120 2.20 -4.28 -5.78 -7.28 7.29 5.49 3.69 3.46 1.46135 1.90 -4.58 -6.08 -7.58 6.57 4.77 2.97 2.91 0.91135 2.05 -3.76 -5.26 -6.76 8.51 6.71 4.91 4.40 2.40135 2.20 -2.94 -4.44 -5.94 10.45 8.65 6.85 5.89 3.89150 1.90 -3.42 -4.92 -6.42 9.30 7.50 5.70 5.01 3.01150 2.05 -2.51 -4.01 -5.51 11.45 9.65 7.85 6.67 4.67150 2.20 -1.60 -3.10 -4.60 13.61 11.81 10.01 8.33 6.33

Main PointMain Point On average,On average, seed treatments seed treatments

generally do not seem to create generally do not seem to create enough benefit to justify their costenough benefit to justify their cost

Soil insecticide or YieldGard RW Soil insecticide or YieldGard RW generally seem justified in Walworth generally seem justified in Walworth and eastern/southeastern Rock and eastern/southeastern Rock County, especially for fields with high County, especially for fields with high average yields and/or high priceaverage yields and/or high price

Caveat: Analysis based on Caveat: Analysis based on averagesaverages

Average RR based on beetles/trap/dayAverage RR based on beetles/trap/day Sometimes high beetles ≠ high RR, but on average it doesSometimes high beetles ≠ high RR, but on average it does

Average RR decrease for each control methodAverage RR decrease for each control method Sometimes Soil Insecticide outperforms YieldGard in terms Sometimes Soil Insecticide outperforms YieldGard in terms

of RR, but on average YieldGard does a little betterof RR, but on average YieldGard does a little better Average yield loss based on RRAverage yield loss based on RR

Sometimes high RR ≠ high loss, but on average it doesSometimes high RR ≠ high loss, but on average it does Average yield and priceAverage yield and price Data show tremendous variation around averagesData show tremendous variation around averages $0/ac Net Benefit means you win ½ the time and $0/ac Net Benefit means you win ½ the time and

you lose ½ the timeyou lose ½ the time

What’s missing? What’s missing? 1.1. Uncertainty: typically increases Uncertainty: typically increases

beetle/trap/day threshold because risk of beetle/trap/day threshold because risk of wasted money exceeds risk of untreated losswasted money exceeds risk of untreated loss

2.2. Cost and control benefits for LodgingCost and control benefits for Lodging3.3. Cost of Refuge for YieldGard RW Cost of Refuge for YieldGard RW 4.4. Added harvest & drying costs with higher Added harvest & drying costs with higher

yieldsyields5.5. Non-financial costs of insecticides and Non-financial costs of insecticides and

associated benefits of YieldGard RW and seed associated benefits of YieldGard RW and seed treatmentstreatments

Spreadsheet AvailableSpreadsheet Available

Paul D. MitchellPaul D. Mitchell(608) 265-6514(608) 265-6514

mitchell@aae.wisc.edumitchell@aae.wisc.edu

Contact InformationContact Information

Internet: www.aae.wisc.edu/mitchellInternet: www.aae.wisc.edu/mitchell Email me: mitchell@aae.wisc.eduEmail me: mitchell@aae.wisc.edu On disk todayOn disk today

Black Circle = Below Threshold0.17 to 3.55 B/T/D

Yellow Triangle: Approaching Threshold3.92 to 4.28 B/T/D

Red Diamond: Above Threshold5.01 to 8.83 B/T/D

Source: Dr. Eileen Cullen, UW-Entomology

Paul D. Mitchell Agricultural and Applied Economics University of Wisconsin-Extension

Documents

WisconsinSafeFood PreservationSeries Canning … · BarbaraH.Ingham Canning Vegetables Safely B1159 University of Wisconsin-Extension Cooperative Extension WisconsinSafeFood PreservationSeries

Collecting and Analyzing Data Adapted from University of Wisconsin-Extension, Cooperative Extension,…

A Brief History of Immigration in Wisconsin Presented to Western Wisconsin Rural Immigration Summit September 25, 2007 University of Wisconsin Extension

Calibration 2014 Wisconsin Pesticide Applicator Training Program University of Wisconsin Extension 1 of 40

2014 University of Wisconsin Extension Plan of Workportal.nifa.usda.gov/.../2014-University-of-Wisconsin-Extension-Plan-o… · 2014 University of Wisconsin Extension Plan of Work

GROUNDWATER RECHARGE IN SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN …€¦ · · 2016-06-22wisconsin geological and natural history survey university of wisconsin-extension southeastern wisconsin

Authored by Philippe Rosinski Information Presented by Kshinté Brathwaite University of Wisconsin Extension, Cooperative Extension

Grain Drying Systems - University of Wisconsin-Extension

2013 University of Wisconsin Extension Plan of Workportal.nifa.usda.gov/.../2013-University-of-Wisconsin-Extension-Plan-o… · 2013 University of Wisconsin Extension Plan of Work

Central Wisconsin Agricultural Extension Report...Volume 17, Issue 3 October 2014 Central Wisconsin Agricultural Extension Report An EEO/Affirmative Action employer, University of

Wisconsin’s Cooperative Extension State Annual …...Arlen Leholm, Dean and Director University of Wisconsin-Extension Cooperative Extension 601 Extension Bldg., 432 N. Lake St

Wisconsin SECRETARY - University of Wisconsin-Extension

Awards Banquet - UW-Ex€¦ · Wisconsin Association of Extension 4-H Youth Development Professionals Wisconsin Association of Extension 4-H Youth Development Professionals Awards

Building Green Guide, University of Wisconsin-Extension

OUTAGAMIE COUNTY UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN EXTENSION ASSOCIATION FOR HOME · PDF file · 2017-07-17UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN EXTENSION ASSOCIATION FOR HOME AND COMMUNITY EDUCATION 2017

University of Wisconsin-Extension Ellen Taylor-Powell, Ph.D. Evaluation Specialist University of Wisconsin- Extension-Cooperative Extension Logic models

Cover Crops for Wisconsin - Wisconsin Land+Water · Cover Crops for Wisconsin Heidi Johnson Dane County UW-Extension Crops and Soils Agent

University of Wisconsin-Extension

Central Wisconsin Agricultural Extension Report · VOLUME 15, ISSUE 2 CENTRAL WISCONSIN AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION REPORT PAGE 4 Selling $1,000 Calves By: Keith VanderVelde, Marquette

University of Wisconsin - Extension, Cooperative Extension, Program Development and Evaluation Developing a logic model