Durum....and the F word

[Daylate]

What are others seeing so far. Ours are anywhere from 1.5 to 5.5 fuzz. Not impressed. We're an hour north of Regina. Have grown a lot of Durum for years here and this will be worse than 2014 for us. What are other areas seeing. Heard west of us is high too. Just curious what others are seeing. So much for my favorite crop.

[sumdumguy]

We just started straight cutting durum last night, just 100 bushels before a shower at 6:00. Looks very nice, probably a #2. We haven't seen such a nice sample in years. Just want to repor that the lentil fields that were desiccated by air don't have any green weeds under. We think it is proof that the plane does blast the spray through the crop -just sayin.

[mustardman]

First year with fusarium here , up to 8 percent on some. Is it possible to clean this out?

[farmaholic]

....as it continues it's march across the susceptible areas of Sask and into Alberta. Some areas will be more prone that others. Even areas that are typically drier will suffer in years when all the sides of the disease triangle are present. Remember mustardman, picking fusarium IS SUBJECTIVE. Besides being subjective, if you're relying on the people who buy it to grade it, now you're also dealing with possible bias. Start with the CGC or SGS. Know what you have but don't be surprised if it is the same OR worse.

[wmoebis]

....as it continues it's march across the susceptible areas of Sask and into Alberta. Some areas will be more prone that others. Even areas that are typically drier will suffer in years when all the sides of the disease triangle are present. Remember mustardman, picking fusarium IS SUBJECTIVE. Besides being subjective, if you're relying on the people who buy it to grade it, now you're also dealing with possible bias. Start with the CGC or SGS. Know what you have but don't be surprised if it is the same OR worse.

Fus is an OBJECTIVE factor. Well defined in the guide. Problem is lack of training at elev and farmers not knowing.
Need universal/certified training and Grain Farmers Advocacy Office.

[farmaholic]

wmoebis.... I agree that tolerances are well defined in the grain grading guide. But does it have to be completely tombstone or even if there is "evidence" of fusarium in the crease of the kernel.... that is where I am going. When you can't measure it with a machine with consistent results and you have rely on "opinion" that is why I call it subjective.

[farmaholic]

Fusarium damage (FUS DMG)

Fusarium-damaged wheat is typically characterized by thin or shrunken chalk-like kernels. Fusarium-damaged kernels have a white or pinkish mould or fibrous growth.

Representative portion for analysis
Minimum—10 g Optimum—100 g Export— 100 g

Procedures:

1-Using a Boerner-type divider, divide the representative portion.

2-Separate all kernels showing any evidence of fusarium damage, including any kernels that have a chalk-like appearance.

3-You may examine kernels using a 10-power magnifying lens to confirm evidence of a white or pinkish mould or fibrous growth.

In determining fusarium damage, select only kernels with this white or pinkish mould or fibrous growth.

[wmoebis]

Fusarium damage (FUS DMG)

Fusarium-damaged wheat is typically characterized by thin or shrunken chalk-like kernels. Fusarium-damaged kernels have a white or pinkish mould or fibrous growth.

Representative portion for analysis
Minimum—10 g Optimum—100 g Export— 100 g

Procedures:

1-Using a Boerner-type divider, divide the representative portion.

2-Separate all kernels showing any evidence of fusarium damage, including any kernels that have a chalk-like appearance.

3-You may examine kernels using a 10-power magnifying lens to confirm evidence of a white or pinkish mould or fibrous growth.

In determining fusarium damage, select only kernels with this white or pinkish mould or fibrous growth.

So what part is SUBJECTIVE? As you have quoted kernals must meet given characteristics to be assessed given process followed and grader properly trained. Up to farmer to make sure they are and get unbias 3rd party if doesn’t agree.

[farmaholic]

wmoebis... please don't take this exchange as argumentative.

But is the "slightest evidence" of fibrous growth, or pinkish or white mold considered fusarium damage?

I guess it is the human element I have trouble with. Machines measure based on data/readings/mechanics, not emotions/bias/opinions. Machines are also prone to failure and an improperly calibrated one isn't any good either.

If the grain could be put through a machine and the amount of DON measured accurately like protein testers, I would likely be able to accept the results quicker than a human hand picking a sample.

Do the more "harmless" fusariums display the same symptoms as fusarium graminearum which is one of the more common ones responsible for DON, therefore allowing for unnecessary downgrading? In essence, is there any way to distinguish the difference?

I thought there was a kind of an inconvenient "quick test" with grinding and putting the flour into solution and reading a test strip dipped into the solution, I may be completely wrong(ELISA test). Or are there only plate tests available for most accurate testing and determining which species are present.

[wmoebis]

wmoebis... please don't take this exchange as argumentative.

But is the "slightest evidence" of fibrous growth, or pinkish or white mold considered fusarium damage?

I guess it is the human element I have trouble with. Machines measure based on data/readings/mechanics, not emotions/bias/opinions. Machines are also prone to failure and an improperly calibrated one isn't any good either.

If the grain could be put through a machine and the amount of DON measured accurately like protein testers, I would likely be able to accept the results quicker than a human hand picking a sample.

Do the more "harmless" fusariums display the same symptoms as fusarium graminearum which is one of the more common ones responsible for DON, therefore allowing for unnecessary downgrading? In essence, is there any way to distinguish the difference?

I thought there was a kind of an inconvenient "quick test" with grinding and putting the flour into solution and reading a test strip dipped into the solution, I may be completely wrong(ELISA test). Or are there only plate tests available for most accurate testing and determining which species are present.

Not taken as argumentative at all. Nor should my comments only as informative.

Yes any amount of fibrous growth is concidered that being said it must have fibrous growth even if only visable with 10X. The inclusion of chalky white kernals is because of the obvious fact that there will be less flour or the inclusion of white specs in semolina (lower quality).

[wmoebis]

Not taken as argumentative at all. Nor should my comments only as informative.

Yes any amount of fibrous growth is concidered that being said it must have fibrous growth even if only visable with 10X. The inclusion of chalky white kernals is because of the obvious fact that there will be less flour or the inclusion of white specs in semolina (lower quality).

There is a direct scientific correlation to visual objective assessment by WELL TRAINED INSPECTORS to the various tests performed in the lab. That is how the guide is designed.

Problem is the lack of proper instruction on the interpretation of the guide.

[farmaholic]

This brings up my point of attaining a #1 grade for CWAD or CWRS pretty tough! Not taking into account the obvious tombstone kernels(which are light weight in comparison to my next point). What would "appear" to be quite sound kernels could be included in the total of fusarium damage. The sad part is, the apparently sound kernels(ones with little evidence of damage or the fact you may need a 10X to verify) will likely add the most weight to the total picked and make getting under a quarter percent for CWRS or .4% for a CWAD damage for #1 grade very hard. That has been the point of my vulgar rants in other threads.

[wmoebis]

This brings up my point of attaining a #1 grade for CWAD or CWRS pretty tough! Not taking into account the obvious tombstone kernels(which are light weight in comparison to my next point). What would "appear" to be quite sound kernels could be included in the total of fusarium damage. The sad part is, the apparently sound kernels(ones with little evidence of damage or the fact you may need a 10X to verify) will likely add the most weight to the total picked and make getting under a quarter percent for CWRS or .4% for a CWAD damage for #1 grade very hard. That has been the point of my vulgar rants in other threads.

That is why you must have fiborous growth. So that you can't mistake for bleached or some other reason for being light coloured. Also why you pick all suspected then confirm with 10X

[farmaholic]

....thank you!

I have a feeling your knowledge of the CGC grading and policies are from work experience?

[wmoebis]

....thank you!

I have a feeling your knowledge of the CGC grading and policies are from work experience?

Lol many years on grading bench and training others.