AgroPages-Herbicides Expenditure increases 49% in Argentina-Agricultural news

From 2010 to 2013, the herbicides expenditure has grown 49% in Argentina, mostly because of increased price of glyphosate, pointed out by EASOC (Experimental Agroindustrial Station Obispo Colombres). However, this inflation is just valid for crops free of tolerant weeds. If the overall spending is accounted, the number increased for more than the double.

This is not the only issues that hurts growers in the South American country. There is a widespread fall on soybean earnings in the last three seasons, due to climate adversities, and an increase of production costs and governmental restrictions.

Among other increases, the expense of fallowing and harvest has grown 12% in 2010/11 and 2012/13 season, according to the study signed by the experts Mario Devani, Daniela Pérez et al.

The problem of glyphosate-resistant weeds preoccupied not just farmers, remarked the experts. The Experimental Station report exhibits a scenario where three situations are considered: two of them without resistant weeds in the field; and the other one with annual glyphosate-resistant grasses.

The conventional glyphosate management is to control the weeds once they emerged.

In the first case, there was a conventional management with glyphosate; in the second case, a mixture of pre-emergency herbicides was added to prevent the appearance of resistances; and in the third case, an application of a graminicide was included.

The conventional treatment with glyphostate has shown an expense of 61 U$S/ha and encompassed three applications: two fallows, one in winter and one in summer, both with glyphosate + 2,4-D, and glyphosate application.

The preventive treatment included the same applications, plus a mixture of "pre-emergents", summing up an expense of 104 U$S/ha, which is 70% more than the conventional management.

In the third case, the same applications as the second case were used, plus a graminicide. The expenditure is 142 US$/ha, which is 30% more than in the second case, and 133% more than in the first case.