Using ILEVO with Preemergence Herbicides
Published: 03/19/2025
DOI: doi.org/10.31274/cpn-20190620-029
CPN-1013
***Updated in 2025, this version replaces the previous 2016 Using ILEVO with Preemergence Herbicides publication.***
Fluopyram (ILEVO®; BASF) is a fungicide seed treatment used to manage soybean sudden death syndrome (SDS). Use of ILEVO® can result in cotyledon discoloration known as the “halo effect” (Figure 1).
Figure 1. ILEVO® injury (halo effect) on soybean cotyledons.
Brandon Kleinke, Iowa State University
Farmers and crop advisors question if seedling damage is more severe when preemergence herbicides are applied to fields that have been planted with ILEVO®-treated seed since preemergence herbicides can also injure seedlings (Figures 2 and 3). To answer this question, a two-year study in Indiana and Iowa examined the interaction of ILEVO® and common preemergence herbicides on phytotoxicity, stand, and yield.
Figure 2. Herbicide injury to soybean seedlings.
Kiersten Wise, University of Kentucky
Figure 3. Seedlings with ILEVO® + preemergence herbicide treatment.
Kiersten Wise, University of Kentucky
This research found no negative effect on plant stand and soybean yield from phytotoxicity caused by ILEVO® and/or preemergence herbicides. Although visual damage may seem severe when ILEVO® and preemergence herbicides are used together, there was no detectable interaction between ILEVO® and the preemergence herbicides tested in this experiment. This means that ILEVO® did not increase seedling damage from herbicides and herbicides did not increase damage from ILEVO®. In all treatments, phytotoxicity subsided by the V4 growth stage and any damage caused by preemergence herbicides did not make ILEVO® less effective.
Cool, wet conditions increase phytotoxicity symptoms for both ILEVO® and preemergence herbicides. These conditions also favor infection by the fungus that causes SDS. Research conducted by several Land Grant Universities and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and AgriBusiness (OMAFA) indicates that ILEVO® can be a useful SDS-management strategy in fields with a history of SDS that will be planted in less than ideal conditions.
Acknowledgments
Authors
Kiersten Wise, University of Kentucky; Daren Mueller, Iowa State University; Bill Johnson, Purdue University; Travis Legleiter, University of Kentucky; Carl Bradley, University of Kentucky; Martin Chilvers, Michigan State University; Loren Giesler, University of Nebraska-Lincoln; Adam Sisson, Iowa State University; Damon Smith, University of Wisconsin-Madison; and Albert Tenuta, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and AgriBusiness
Reviewers
Edward Sikora, Auburn University and Alyssa Betts, University of Delaware.
Sponsors
The authors thank the United Soybean Board and the Grain Farmers of Ontario through the Sustainable Canadian Agricultural Partnership (Sustainable CAP), a federal-provincial territorial initiative, for their support. Support was also provided by State and Federal Funds appropriated to the State Land Grant Institutions of cooperating authors and the United States Department of Agriculture - National Institute of Food and Agriculture (USDA-NIFA). This project was funded in part through Bayer CropScience and Growing Forward 2 (GF2), a federal-provincial territorial initiative.
This publication was developed by the Crop Protection Network, a multi-state and international collaboration of university/provincial extension specialists and public/ private professionals that provides unbiased, research-based information to farmers and agricultural personnel. This information in this publication is only a guide, and the authors assume no liability for practices implemented based on this information. Reference to products in this publication is not intended to be an endorsement to the exclusion of others that may be similar. Individuals using such products assume responsibility for their use in accordance with current directions of the manufacturer.
In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.
Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the State or local Agency that administers the program or contact USDA through the Telecommunications Relay Service at 711 (voice and TTY). Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.
To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Mail Stop 9410, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: program.intake@usda.gov.
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
©2025 by the Crop Protection Network. All rights reserved.
