Economics of herbicide programs for weed control in conventional, glufosinate, and dicamba/glyphosate-resistant soybean across Nebraska

Despite widespread adoption of dicamba/glyphosate-resistant (DGR) soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] in Nebraska and across the United States in recent years, economic information comparing herbicide programs with glufosinate-resistant (GLU-R) and conventional soybean is not available. The objectives of this study were to evaluate weed control efficacy, crop safety, gross profit margin, and benefit/cost ratios of herbicide programs with multiple sites of action in DGR, GLU-R, and conventional soybean. Field experiments were conducted in 2018 and 2019 at three irrigated and two rain-fed locations across Nebraska, for a total of 10 site-years. Herbicides applied pre-emergence (PRE) that included herbicides with three sites of action provided 85–99% control of common lambsquarters (Chenopodium album L.), Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri S. Watson), velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti Medik.), and a mixture of foxtail (Seteria spp.) and Poaceae species. Pre-emergence herbicides evaluated in this study provided 72–96% weed biomass reduction and 61‒79% weed density reductions compared with the nontreated control. Herbicides applied post-emergence (POST; dicamba plus glyphosate, glyphosate, glufosinate, and acetochlor plus clethodim plus lactofen) provided 93–99% control of all weed species 28 d after POST (DAPOST). Herbicides applied POST provided 89–98% weed biomass reduction and 86–96% density reduction at 28 DAPOST. For individual site-years, yield was often similar for PRE followed by POST herbicide programs in herbicide-resistant (HR) and conventional soybean. Gross profit margins and benefit/cost ratios were higher in HR soybean than in conventional soybean, although price premiums for conventional soybean can help compensate for increased herbicide costs.