BRITISH sugar beet review - Home - BBRO...Dr. John King, Independent Consultant The British Sugar Beet Review is published in January, May, and October. Itis sent to all sugar beet

BRITISHsugar beet review

JANUARY 2017 � volume 85 no. 1

www.beetreview.co.uk

59134-Beet Review Vol 85 No 1 Jan 17 7thPrf_- 24/01/2017 10:04 Page A

17/1/IFC/01

59134-Beet Review Vol 85 No 1 Jan 17 7thPrf_- 24/01/2017 10:04 Page B

JANUARY 2017 � volume 85 no. 1 BRITISH sugar beet review 1

BRITISHsugar beet review

Editor:Paul Simmonds

Editorial Consultants:

ProductionEditor:Denise Woodward

Mike May,IndependentConsultant

Dr. John King,IndependentConsultant

The British Sugar Beet Review is published inJanuary, May, and October. It is sent to all sugarbeet growers in the UK and is funded jointly bygrowers and British Sugar plc as part of theBritish Beet Research Organisation educationprogramme. The editor, British Sugar plc, andthe BBRO are not necessarily in agreement withopinions expressed in this journal.No responsibility is accepted for statementscontained in advertisements. © Copyright is onlyby permission of the editor and charges may beapplicable. Published images are copyright ofthis journal unless stated otherwise.

Designed and printed in England byFisherprint Ltd., Peterborough, Cambs.,PE1 5UL, Tel: 01733 341444 Fax: 01733 349416Website: www.fisherprint.co.uk

editorial office:British Sugar plc,Sugar Way, Peterborough,Cambs, UK, PE2 9AYt: 01733 422278f: 01733 422080e: [email protected]: www.beetreview.co.uk

Published jointly by British Sugar plc &The British Beet Research Organisation

contents

Industry update from British Sugar, BBRO and NFU 2

BBRO activities 38

Factory update 40

Pests and diseases update 4By Mark Stevens

2017-18 beet contract update 9By Ken Johnston

Conviso Smart to expand weed control options 12By Edward Hagues and Carsten Stibbe

Thrive or survive? 14By Pamela J. Forbes

Project Comet – Bury Anaerobic Digestion project update 15By Phil McNaughton

Getting to grips with mud 17By Philip Ecclestone and Tom Brown

International Institute for Beet Research (IIRB) studygroups – news roundup 21By Mark Stevens, Debbie Sparkes, Mike May and Colin Walters

Getting to know the BBRO 24

Betteravenir 2016 25By Colin Walters

The BBRO Stakeholder Board 27By Alison Lawson

Sugar beet – realise its potential 28By Ches Broom

The sugar beet seed journey 29By Robin Limb

John Deere celebrate in style 32By Philip Ecclestone

Soil sampling: a premier service for growers 34By Nikki Downs

regulars

features

BASIS / FACTSCP/51829/1917/g

2 CPD points (1CP, 1E)

NRoSONO462726f2 CPD points

Cover picture courtesy of Tim Scrivener, Agriphoto

Changes to the British Sugar Beet Review:In response to feedback from the readers and a review of the content we have made the decisionto publish the British Sugar Beet Review three times a year rather than four. This will allow us toprovide the relevant advice and articles at a more appropriate time in the crop calendar. Hopefullythis will allow you to act on any ideas or advice you get from the articles. The three issues will bedelivered in January, May and October.

Paul Simmonds, Editor and Colin MacEwan, Head of BBRO

59134-Beet Review Vol 85 No 1 Jan 17 7thPrf_- 24/01/2017 10:05 Page 1

2 BRITISH sugar beet review JANUARY 2017 � volume 85 no. 1

NFU updateWith 2016 coming to an end we can certainly look back at thelast 12 months as a year of change. Changes, especially Brexitand the demise of sugar quotas, will undoubtedly impact onthe UK sugar industry. However, we as a sector must lookforward, making sure we make the most of the futurechallenges and promote the sector.

NFU Sugar has worked hard in 2016 to support UK sugar beetproduction, working with growers to prepare for the post-quotaworld, being reactive to anti-sugar challenges and pushing forgreater profitability for growers in the future. Going forwardNFU Sugar, as well as the industry as a whole, must look formarket opportunities and wider prospects for sugar beet to bethe profitable choice for current and future growers.

Within the EU market and in the context of post-quotaproduction, efficiency and resilience are the two words that

the European Commission and European beet communitybelieve to be the core element of future production. The UKneeds to make sure we continue to produce quality withefficiency in an effort to develop the sector. NFU Sugarcontinues to work closely with BBRO and British Sugar to makesure that growers can access the latest research anddevelopment, and lobbies at the highest levels to retainimportant and necessary crop protection products within theUK system.

The war on sugar continues, with 2016 being the year thatGeorge Osborne hit the headlines with the UK ‘Sugar Tax’,marking the first political move to reduce sugar consumption.NFU Sugar has therefore joined the campaign, ‘Face the Facts,Can the Tax’ which calls for science-based policy decision-making on the issue. The NFU subsequently submitted a paperto the Government’s consultation on the policy, highlightingthe impact the tax would have on employment, and on the

Industry update from British Sugar, British Sugar update

A positive outlook for the sugar market andtherefore the crop

In the last edition of the British Sugar Beet Review, it was greatto see British Sugar’s new Managing Director, Paul Kenward,highlighting the positive future outlook for the sugar marketplace, and therefore the crop. The new contracting agreementwith NFU Sugar, from earlier this year, was specifically basedon feedback from growers and designed to give certainty forgrowers with the guaranteed minimum price, but was alsostructured so that growers shared in the benefit of the marketplace when sugar prices rise. This, plus the introduction of bothone-year and three-year contracts has, I am delighted to say,been very well received by growers with approximately 55% oftonnage contracted on the one-year contract and 45% on athree-year basis. The latter signed by growers keen to committo the crop for longer whilst sharing in higher levels of priceuplift from the market place. This is a ‘first’ for the UK, a newinnovative approach and a clear example of how, workingtogether with NFU Sugar and growers, we can develop anindustry aligned to the benefit of all growers and British Sugar.

BBRO update

As we deliver the final loads of the 2016 campaign into thefactories, I thought I would highlight some of the latest workthe BBRO has been supporting in the crop recovery pillar of itsactivities.

This year we have been testing a number of harvesters toassess performance differences, especially root breakage andoverall efficiency, concentrating particularly on yield recovery.We will be presenting some of these findings and ourthoughts at our two Winter Technical Events in February. Weare particularly keen to develop this work over the comingyears, to help us continue to maximise the yield potential ofthe crop. As we know, the yield of sugar beet, unlike manyother arable crops on UK farms, continues to improve year onyear. We need to continue this trend, and we are looking at a

programme focusing on what we call, ‘the Marginal Gain ofSugar Beet Production’.

In this programme, we break down the process of growing thecrop into a number of discrete areas, focusing on specificdetails in each of these areas and developing ways of makingimprovements. Although individually these details eachcontribute only a small percentage toward yield improvement,when brought together they represent a significant step inmaximising future yield potential.

Currently, we are finalising our R&D programme forimplementation in 2017/18. One of the regular questions weare asked concerns late lifted beet and variety differences; dosome varieties yield better later in the season than others?Previous work in this area was presented at the BBRO WinterConference in 2014 utilising data from the Recommended List

With the sugar marketoutlook looking positive,our industry is well placedto take advantage of thatand, as Paul stated in thelast edition, British Sugaris looking for additionalcontracted tonnage withexisting growers, newgrowers, or ex-growers whowould like to come backinto the crop. To highlightthis, promotional materialhas been produced whichhas been used at keyagricultural events thiswinter, including the EastMidlands Machinery Show,CropTec and LAMMA. Thispromotional material isproving very useful withexisting growers, new



food and drink sector, with little evidence to show that taxesreduce consumption levels. No doubt childhood obesity mustbe tackled; however we must look for mechanisms that deliverfor public health on a sound science basis.

Trade and labour seem to be the key words to come out of UKagriculture in relation to Brexit but, for the sugar market,growth is a realistic objective. We have seen strong increasesin the price for sugar globally, and also locally, but volatilitywill remain the name of the game going forward. The key rolefor NFU Sugar in 2017 will be to ensure that we capture ourshare of a rising market. The price deal for beet for the2017/18 crop includes a fixed price with an uplift connected tothe EU price for sugar. Growers also have the option ofcapturing a bigger slice of any price uplift by committing to athree-year contract rather than the conventional one-yeararrangement. This is a bold new step for growers and theprocessor, and it is our intention to work in partnership to

secure a strong UK beet industry, offering growers moreopportunities to tie into the market going forward.

It is hard to judge whether the removal of the EU SugarRegime or Brexit will have the bigger effect on our sector.Either way, NFU Sugar are not leaving anything to chance andhave commenced engagement with Defra and the Treasury toensure that UK beet growers’ interests are not over lookedin trade negotiations. We must now view Brexit as anopportunity, not a threat.

Pamela J. ForbesNFU Chief Sugar Adviser

BBRO and NFUgrowers, ex-growers andother industry partners whodo business with ourgrowers. It details thecompetitiveness of the cropversus the alternatives,the options available togrowers, the rotationalbenefits of the crop as wellas key support availablesuch as the BBRO R&D trialsprogramme, which playsa significant role in thecontinued sugar beet yieldadvancement that we allare seeing.

While highlighting thepositive outlook for thesugar market we are alsoaiming to draw attentionto the fact that thetrading environment for

our Industry has changed significantly. For example, sugarquotas have gone and competition in the market place hasincreased. Another good example of how the Industry haschanged being the new contracting arrangements with one-and three-year contracts giving guaranteed minimum pricesand price uplifts linked to the market place.

It’s very exciting to be writing about expanding our industryafter a couple of years of smaller crop areas, so if any of youwould like additional contracted tonnage, or would like moreinformation, please get in touch, we would be delighted tohear from you!

Best wishes for the remainder of the campaign.

Colm McKayBritish SugarAgriculture Director

programme. We will be using our new demonstration farms toinvestigate this further. We will use large scale blocks ofcurrent varieties and assess their differences in yieldaccumulation in a sequential lift programme throughout thecampaign. Ches Broom’s article in this edition further outlinesthe BBRO Demonstration Farm Network for 2017.

Grower innovation

We have also set up a way for growers to put forward theirideas on what they might do to make production of the cropmore efficient. This ‘What if’ scenario provides a means ofstimulating our researchers to address some of the challengesand develop innovations that you see (or want to see) on farm.These, along with feedback from the BBRO Stakeholder Board,are used to ensure that we are doing appropriate andinnovative work which will have a direct impact on your farm.

We are working our way through a number of ‘What if’applications, from strip drilling and fertiliser placement torotational impact of cover crops and storage temperatures.We also have a number of pieces of work evaluating newpellet technologies with the breeders and Germains, inaddition to a full programme of work in the glasshouse, onwhich we will keep you updated throughout the coming year.

Finally, we look forward to seeing as many of you as possible atour February events themed ‘Sugar beet – realising the potential’.

Colin MacEwanHead of BBRO



ByDr. Mark Stevens,

British Beet Research Organisation

Pests anddiseases updateThe need for good on-farm hygiene remains critical to limit the range of pests and diseases encountered on farm,as exemplified by the 2016 season, particularly after the very mild early winter period when average Decembertemperatures were 6.5°C higher than normal. Destroying beet remnants and crown material on cleaner-loader spoilheaps and Maus loading sites is essential to reduce the threat from virus yellows and downy mildew. Most growersare using a neonicotinoid seed treatment to protect against the virus-carrying aphids, but the more that can bedone to reduce infection levels the better for the long-term stewardship of these treatments. Downy mildew hasalso become an increasing feature over the past few seasons and, though the disease is often sporadic withinfields, it can damage the crown, making it easier for fusarium and other rots to affect the plant. This article is asummary of the key issues faced in beet throughout 2016.

Virus yellows In January and February 2016, the mean air temperatures fromthe three reference weather stations used for the forecastranged from 4.9-5.3°C, and so the potential risk from virusyellows infection was high (the higher the temperatureduring this period the greater the potential risk frominfection). However, with the use of insecticide treated seed(Table 1), and no evidence to date of neonicotinoid resistantaphids in the UK, this risk is kept to a minimum, and crops areprotected from significant yield loss.

As part of ongoing surveillance work, the BBRO network ofyellow water pans was placed in 30 crops across the fourfactory regions between the beginning of May and the end ofJuly. As a consequence of the warm, settled weather at thebeginning of this period, Myzus persicae were caught fromthe first week of trapping, and early aphid ‘hotspots’included Swayfield, Lincolnshire and Potton, Bedfordshire.However, the particularly wet conditions in June and July

had a negative impact on migration, significantly reducingaphid flight. During the 12-week trapping period 4,888M. persicae were caught. Although this sounds a lot, it isconsiderably less than in 2015, probably influenced bythose cooler, wetter conditions throughout the earlysummer. Once again, there was significant regionalvariation in aphid numbers affected by a range of factorsbut proximity to oilseed rape crops certainly influencedtheir numbers. By the end of September, small sporadicpatches of virus yellows symptoms could be found in somecrops but, as in other years, the strategies deployed tolimit its impact had controlled this potentially devastatingdisease successfully.

Bird/Mouse damageMouse damage was reported where seed cover was spoiled bythe lack of frost mould which had led to an open, clod-ridden,soil structure. Again, this is something which needed careful

Factoryarea

OptionVirus Yellows (%) on sowing dates of Usage of pesticide-

treated seedsMean

temperature15th March 30th March 15th April

BuryWithout pest management 23.9 32.1 45.6 –

4.99°CWith pesticide-treated seeds 0.93 1.06 1.25 99.60%

CantleyWithout pest management 30.2 39.8 75.3 –


WissingtonWithout pest management 23.9 32.1 45.6 –


NewarkWithout pest management 36.4 48.9 66.6 –


Table 1 – Virus Yellows incidence forecast for 2016/17 sugar beet crops using mean air temperatures from 1st January to 29th February 2016.


We’re on the same page.

Looking for fast, effective weed control for your

sugar beet?

www.bayercropscience.co.uk

Together we’re targeting maximum yields.For better beet yields and return on investment you need the herbicide that performs consistently in all conditions. Betanal maxxPro has a unique, fast acting formulation with a rapid uptake and 6-years proven performance. With outstanding crop safety and efficacy, it hits weeds hard ensuring your beet crop gets the best start possible.

Find out how Betanal maxxPro can help maximise your beet yield in all conditions at www.bayercropscience.co.uk/betanalmaxxpro

Betanal maxxPro contains desmedipham, phenmedipham, ethofumesate and lenacil. Betanal and maxxPro are registered Trade Marks of Bayer. Use plant protection products safely. Always read the label and product information before use. Pay attention to the risk indications and follow the safety precautions on the label. For further information, visit www.bayercropscience.co.uk or call Bayer Assist on 0808 1969522. © Bayer CropScience Limited 2017

17/1/5/02



(mangold fly) control in 2016. This was confirmed by theauthorities on the 21st June and approval was in place for120 days (until 18th October 2016). As before, application wasto be made via a ground boom sprayer in a minimum of200 l/ha, and no more than two sprays of Biscaya (maximumindividual dose: 0.4 l/ha of product) could be made to Englishsugar beet crops.

Just as with the aphid situation, the wet conditions appearedto help reduce the activity of adults in the second generation(end June/early July) and few reports of any significantincrease in leaf miner activity or damage were recorded forthe rest of the summer. No further reports of significantdamage were received by the BBRO until the end ofSeptember when we received several calls from growers andagronomists in the north Lincolnshire area, where significantthird generation attack had impacted crops (Pic. 1). This pestis clearly very mobile and affects different crops in differentregions each year, with each generation. It will be interestingto see where the issues will develop with this pest in beet, ifany, in 2017!

monitoring as, following a mild winter, mouse populationscan be higher and can soon clear large areas of a crop.

In addition, various comments were received about grazing bybirds, rabbits and slugs. Damage due to bird/animal attackappears to be an ongoing and increasing problem, althoughbeet will grow away if the growing point is not damaged.Also, slugs benefited from the mild winter of 2015/16, andseveral crops received treatment to limit plant losses.

Leaf miner Following the issues with leaf miner damage in 2015, this pestwas at the forefront of many grower’s minds in 2016 and,from late April onwards, eggs were found in all factory areas.However, experience from 2015 indicated that seedtreatments gave up to 10 weeks’ protection, hopefullycontrolling the development of the first generation of thispest (Ref. 1). By the third week in May, the presence ofleaf miner (mangold fly) and associated leaf miningdamage was increasing: typical hotspots included theWash area, parts ofNorfolk, Suffolk andCambridgeshire. Asthis 8-10 week periodof protection cameto an end, larvalactivity began toincrease, resulting inleaf damage.

The current thresholdfor additional foliarinsecticide treatmentis when the numberof eggs and larvaeexceeds the square ofthe number of trueleaves. For example, aplant with four trueleaves would need apopulation of 16 ormore eggs and larvaeto warrant treatment,and a crop with sixtrue leaves wouldneed a populationof 36 or more eggsand larvae. The onlyproduct with specificapproval for foliarapplication for leafminer is HallmarkZeon (lambda-cyhalothrin); whilst the level of control wasnot as high as some of the other experimental pesticidescompared in BBRO trials conducted by ADAS in 2015, it stillgave protection against yield loss. However, as with allpyrethroids, applications need to be targeted carefully tominimise the number of applications, protect beneficialorganisms and reduce potential for resistance build-up.Therefore, crops need to be monitored closely to establish theoptimum time for application.

In addition, because of the lack of alternative control options,BBRO successfully applied for and regained emergencyauthorisation for the use of Biscaya (thiacloprid) for leaf miner

Pic. 1 – Third generation leaf miner damage in North Lincolnshire, September 2016.

Other invertebrate pestsSilver Y moth numbers were generally low throughoutthe season as measured by the BBRO pheromone traps. Adifferent species, the diamondback moth caught all theattention in 2016; it initially invaded parts of Norfolk inbiblical proportions, and made the news and all the dailynewspapers too! At the time, the BBRO Plant Clinic received anumber of calls and comments about this pest, especially as ithad been found resting in large numbers in beet fields.However, all the literature shows that this species attacksbrassica crops specifically and so there was no reason to treatfor it in sugar beet.



There were also reports of localisedcapsid damage, especially nearhedge margins, but nothing majoror out of the ordinary; so again,there was no need to treat forthis pest.

Nematodes Whilst the wet weather providedplenty of water for crop growth(and in some cases too much), bothcyst and free-living nematodeswere also more mobile and visiblefor some. 2016 was also a yearwhere very little Vydate (oxamyl)was available for growers to usein beet and so the crop, in thesewet conditions, was potentiallyvulnerable to serious attack.Consequently, there was a flurry ofsamples into the Plant Clinic inJune/early July where free-livingnematodes were observed,particularly from crops wheregrowth may have been stunted inpatches or possibly showed signs of nutrient stress andyellowing of the older leaves. Other symptoms includeddistortion of the tap root, and early signs of bearding orfanging, the latter especially in the case of free-livingnematodes.

Unfortunately, once nematode infes tation has been identifiednothing can be done, but further soil testing will help on-farmdecisions to be made as to whether nematicides or tolerantBCN varieties should be selected for future years.

2016 Powdery mildew forecast Although the overall winter period was mild, 33 ground frostswere recorded in February and March (the key period for theforecast) and consequently 29.6% of the national crop waspredicted to be infected with this disease by the end ofAugust. This is the same number of ground frosts as recordedin 2012 but, due to a run of unfavourable weather in Augustand the use of timely fungicide applications, powdery mildewhas not been a major concern to most growers for the last fiveyears. 2016 was again no different as little disease was actuallyobserved, even though the weather would have been moreconducive to powdery mildew development this year.

Rust made its usual appearance, but again throughout thesummer and autumn levels were not as high as the previoustwo years, possibly being held in check by the hottemperatures experienced at times during August and the firstpart of September. A broad-spectrum fungicide would havebeen able to control these diseases once observed and asecond application may have been warranted, particularly iflifting from October onwards.

Cercospora leaf spot was particularly noticeable in fields in theautumn, at levels not previously observed in the UK, favouredby the late-summer weather experienced in 2016. Many othernorthern European countries had a very similar problem too.Although the fungicides used in the UK should control thisdisease, the BBRO is acutely aware that there are cercosporaisolates that are resistant to many of the fungicides approved

Pic. 2 – Stemphylium symptoms, North Norfolk October 2016.

Pic. 3 – Aphanomyces root rot, Norfolk July 2016.

across the EU, and so has sent samples for analysis to gain abaseline of the status of the resistant isolates in the UK; thisinformation will be made available in 2017.

Stemphylium was also observed, for the first time since 2014,in a field in north Norfolk, although at relatively low levels. Nofurther reports have been received at the time of going topress, although this disease continues to cause problems in theNetherlands (Pic. 2).


Downy mildew Downy mildew, especially in more susceptible varieties,was observed from late spring onwards, but not at thelevels seen in 2014 or 2015. This may be due to thedeployment of resistant varieties in the key hotspot areassuch as west Cambridgeshire.

Root rotsFor those growers who were forced to sow their cropslater than hoped, the weather and rapidly warming soilsin May encouraged the development of aphanomyces tolevels that have not been observed for a number of years(Pic. 3). This was despite the use of tachigaren which isapplied to the seed to try to protect plants from thispathogen. When this disease affects the seedling, it can leadto blackleg and, potentially, plant loss. If infection is lesssevere or slightly later in the season, the roots can becomedeformed, ultimately with dry rots or scarring developingwith time (Pic. 4).

Low levels of rhizoctonia and fusarium, along with violetroot rot, were being observed at the time of writing(early December), and it is imperative that any crops withroot rots should be candidates for harvesting first where atall possible (Pic. 5).

Reference1. White, S. (2016). Emergence patterns and pest control in mangold

fly. British Sugar Beet Review, 84 (2), 16-19.


Pic. 4 – Beet cyst nematode on sugar beet in June 2016.

Pic. 5 – Violet root rot, Suffolk September 2016.



ByKen Johnston,

British Sugar plc

2017-18 beetcontract updateIn response to grower consultations that the NFU and British Sugar held in 2015, the new sugar beet contract offersgrowers a choice of one- or three-year contracts, both providing the security of a minimum guaranteed beet priceof £22.00 per adjusted tonne, plus sugar market-linked payments. These contracts retain the security that UKgrowers have always had of a fixed price at the point of contract, plus a potential market uplift but without therisk of a ‘downside’ if the market falls. With the yield progression that the sugar beet crop is seeing, the marginscontinue to look favourable compared to other broad-acre crops.

BackgroundFollowing grower consultation over a period of many months,culminating in joint meetings held in November 2015, the NFUand British Sugar agreed to examine alternatives to thetraditional single guaranteed price being set each year forsugar beet contracting. Consideration had been given to arange of options, from linking to commodities or other cropssuch as wheat, to sugar market prices (including the worldmarket), and with durations ranging up to five years. Thefeedback from the consultation meetings was very useful; itgave a clear indication, that whilst there was wide-spreadsupport for some link to the UK sugar market, there was much

less appetite to link to wheat or any other market. Also thevast majority of growers still strongly supported the security ofa guaranteed price. Interest in a longer contract than one yearwas also evident, and the balance was in favour of up tothree years.

2016/17 Contract agreementThroughout the consultation, it had been made clear that ifnew options were introduced, it should not be at the expenseof the guaranteed annual contract, so it had been envisagedthat any new alternatives would be introduced alongside afixed annual contract. A sugar market link had received

Table 1 – Contract prices for 2017/18.

Example at an exchange rate of €1=£0.85 1 YEAR CONTRACT 3 YEAR CONTRACT

% Share of Sugar 10% Bonus Full Payment 25% Bonus Full Payment

% per tonne Beet 1.6% 3.9%

Trigger €475 €475

Sugar Price(EU Published, Bulk ex factory)

€450 £0.00 £22.00 £0.00 £22.00

€475 £0.00 £22.00 £0.00 £22.00

€500 £0.33 £22.33 £0.83 £22.83

€525 £0.66 £22.66 £1.66 £23.66

€550 £1.00 £23.00 £2.49 £24.49

€575 £1.33 £23.33 £3.32 £25.32

€600 £1.66 £23.66 £4.15 £26.15

€625 £1.99 £23.99 £4.98 £26.98

€650 £2.32 £24.32 £5.81 £27.81

€675 £2.66 £24.66 £6.64 £28.64

€700 £2.99 £24.99 £7.47 £29.47

(Max)



For all new and used harvesters, chaser bins and loaders contact : Matt Carse T: 01354 660552 E: [email protected] UK, 4 Thorby Avenue, March, Cambridgeshire, PE15 0AZ

T4-30 T4-40

LightTraxx SixxTraxx

drop in the price pulled the average for the marketing yearback below €475/tonne. The graphic in Fig. 1 illustrates themethod.

Market developmentThe view from British Sugar is that the EU market price shouldcertainly exceed €475/tonne, and for considerably more thanone month. Since early 2016 there has been a steadyimprovement in the market outlook for sugar. As well as arecovery in world market prices since the lows of 10-11 centsper pound of raw sugar experienced over the previous year,EU prices have risen significantly with Platts Kingsman1

publishing reports of spot deals at above €600/tonne. SinceFebruary 2016, the world raw sugar price has increased morethan 50%, as can be seen in Fig. 2 and this, together withmuch lower EU stock levels, has been a positive influence onthe market.

widespread support, so much of thediscussion that took place was aroundthe form this might take.

Across the rest of the EU similar sugarmarket linked contracts have been usedin the past, but the trend in the last yearhas been to move to more volatile higherrisk versions that mean that the beetprice could go down, as well as up, withthe sugar market. At the time, it was notseen as appropriate to introduce thoselevels of risk for UK growers. In the end,the agreement reached provided whatwas felt to be the best of both worlds. Aone-year contract was therefore offeredthat had a guaranteed price, but alsoprovided a low risk sugar market link inthe form of a 10% bonus above a‘trigger’ point of €475/tonne bulk sugarprice, but no downside if market prices were below that.

To provide an additional choice for those looking for longer-term security, a three-year contract was also agreed but witha higher, 25% bonus. Uptake has been quite evenly spreadbetween the two options, with about 55% of the tonnagecontracted on the one-year deal and 45% on the three-year.The two offers are as per Table 1.

Market uplift methodologyLinking a payment to the sugar market did offer onechallenge, which was to obtain transparency for the pricingwithout compromising market-sensitive information. Thesolution reached was to use the EU reported ex-factory bulksugar price, which is recorded by the Commission from themajority of bulk sales across the entire EU on a monthly basis.As these figures are audited and already in the public domain,it provides a reliable and independentsource of data that is an ideal reflectionof the market. At the time negotiationswere concluding, the Brexit vote had nottaken place, so since then we have had toconsider the implications of this! As thesituation with our place in the singlemarket is of course by no means clear, itis intended we will continue to use theEU Commission figures until we leave themarket and then revisit it if a newreference source is required.

When reviewing the working of thetrigger point, both the NFU and BritishSugar were keen to see the newmechanism operating successfully andagreed that it would work on a month-by-month basis, not an annual average.In that way, even if the EU sugar priceonly exceeds the €475/tonne trigger forone month of the year there will still bean additional payment. Any month thereis a premium over €475/tonne willdeliver an uplift for 1/12th of the year,which will not be lost if a subsequent

Fig. 1 – Illustrative example of sugar market payment mechanism.

Fig. 2 – World raw sugar price in cents per lb reported on the New York Exchange.

1 Part of S&P Global Platts, an independent provider of information and benchmark prices for the commodities and energy markets.


The average price the Commission reports has not respondedmuch to date, as the sales reported will have been dominatedby annual contracts struck as long ago as 2015. However, thereported price should ultimately rise in the wake of newannual contracts being struck towards the end of 2016. Themarket-linked payment for 2017/18 will, of course, depend onthe level of EU prices between October 2017 and September2018, so this is still some time away. In the event that prices areas good as the current spot rates during that period, it wouldgive a very satisfactory result with payments coming in themid-range of the table shown earlier.

Fig. 3 – Historic paid beet yield in adjusted t/ha.

Table 2 – Forecast sugar beet gross margin 2017/18.

SUGAR BEET 2017/18 per ha

Yield (t/ha) 76

Price (with LDA, before bonus) £22.17

Income (ex farm) £1,685

Variable costs (£/ha)

Seed 204

Fertiliser 151

Sprays 208

Total costs £563

GROSS MARGIN £/ha £1,122

For all new and used harvesters, chaser bins and loaders contact : Matt Carse T: 01354 660552 E: [email protected] UK, 4 Thorby Avenue, March, Cambridgeshire, PE15 0AZ

T4-30 T4-40

LightTraxx SixxTraxx

17/1/11/03

Potential marginsDespite a slight drop back in the forecast for this year, theten-year trend still shows a 2% p.a. increase in beet yields(Fig. 3), which continues to outperform other crops.

With an average forecast yield of this level (76.5 adj. t/ha),based on the guaranteed minimum price before any market-linked payment, beet has the potential to deliver a grossmargin of over £1,100/ha as per Table 2. Despite theweakening of sterling post Brexit vote, and some hardeningof wheat prices, this should still see beet contributing asignificantly greater gross margin than other broad-acrealternatives. With a market price uplift the picture would, ofcourse, be even more profitable for beet, so it is likely to beone of the most attractive crops for this spring.


12

The lowest bolting gives you more optionsBolters are bad news and unsightly. With the lowest bolting, HAYDN gives you options to drill when conditions are right to get the yield benefit of earlier drilling without the risk.

In three seasons at the top, HAYDN has demonstrated the consistent and credible commercial performance that should put it at the heart of your 2017 crop.

www.strube-sugarbeet.co.uk

[email protected] | Strube UK Ltd, 9 Constitution Hill, Fakenham, Norfolk NR21 9EF

Why is HAYDN first choice again for 2017?

High adjusted tonnes

The lowest bolting

Consistent commercial performance


ByEdward Hagues,

Bayer Root Crop Product Manager andDr. Carsten Stibbe,

KWS Head of International Sugar Beet Agro-Services

Conviso Smart to expandweed control optionsIt is not often that we experience innovative and game-changing technology in sugar beet growing, but such atechnology is on the horizon in the form of Acetolactate Synthase (ALS) tolerant varieties.

This technology, which will be called Conviso® Smart,combines ALS tolerant sugar beet varieties, developed byplant breeder KWS, with an ALS herbicide, developed bychemical company Bayer. When used in combination, thesetwo products enable a high level of weed control that isdesigned to make the job simpler: allowing more flexibilityand, in most situations, a reduction in the number of herbicideapplications required to achieve effective control. It is worthnoting however, that the herbicide cannot be applied to non-tolerant varieties.

In the spring of 2016, two Conviso® Smart varieties enteredBBRO Recommended List trials and are destined to go throughthe three-year system for testing and recommendation.Assuming they meet all necessary standards required by theBBRO Recommended List, including yield, disease resistanceand bolting, these varieties could be commercially availablefor drilling in spring 2020. Importantly, both varieties arerhizomania resistant, with one also carrying BCN tolerance.These traits will give a clear majority of UK grower’s access tothis technology when it becomes available.

Notably, these varieties are not the result of geneticmodification, but traditional plant breeding methods basedon a detailed understanding of how herbicide tolerance occurswithin plant cells. KWS screened 1.5 billion cells, equivalent toa single plant in a 15,000 ha crop, to identify the cell with ahigh resistance to ALS inhibitor herbicides. Once identified,this cell was back-crossed into elite hybrid plants to producehigh yielding varieties suited to commercial cultivation.

Although the varieties currently in trial are the product ofKWS’s breeding programme, there is no reason why, in futureyears, other breeders cannot utilise the technology. In 2012both Bayer and KWS released a public statement explainingthat the technology will be made available under licence to allbreeders who seek to incorporate it within their material.

The herbicide product is still under regulatory approval, butdevelopment trials have explored the technical abilities of theproduct. The application is for an oil dispersion formulationof foramsulfuron and thiencarbazone-methyl, two activesubstances selected specifically to target sugar beet weedspecies and already widely used in Europe on other crops.

The benefits of the Conviso® Smart system in enabling easycontrol of a broad spectrum of weeds with the need forfewer herbicide applications is perhaps the greatest advantage

of this development. Effective weed control should be reliable,simpler than existing practices, and offer greater flexibility.A particularly exciting aspect of the Conviso® Smart systemis the opportunity to use a herbicide to control existing weedbeet populations safely within the growing crop. This mayallow some fields that have been closed to beet to bereintroduced to the rotation and enable growers recon sideringthe crop to do so with confidence.

With the herbicide based on the ALS-inhibitor mode ofaction, there will be the need to manage herbicide chemistryacross the rotation to minimise the risk of weed resistance.Bayer is developing stew ardship and resistance man age mentguidelines for the industry to follow when the system islaunched.

Conviso® Smart in UK trials.


12

The lowest bolting gives you more optionsBolters are bad news and unsightly. With the lowest bolting, HAYDN gives you options to drill when conditions are right to get the yield benefit of earlier drilling without the risk.

In three seasons at the top, HAYDN has demonstrated the consistent and credible commercial performance that should put it at the heart of your 2017 crop.

www.strube-sugarbeet.co.uk

[email protected] | Strube UK Ltd, 9 Constitution Hill, Fakenham, Norfolk NR21 9EF

Why is HAYDN first choice again for 2017?

High adjusted tonnes

The lowest bolting

Consistent commercial performance

17/1/13/04



Thrive or survive?That was the question posed to the 450 delegates at the 2017 Oxford Farming Conference and, with so muchchange and uncertainty across the globe, surely a very valid proposition!

ByPamela J. Forbes,

NFU Chief Sugar Adviser

For those of you who are not regularOxford goers, the event follows a clearblue-print, always seeking to inform,challenge and inspire on an annual basis.It is an essential start to the year. Evenan old cynic like me with over twenty“Oxfords” under my belt came away witha greater clarity, at least about thequestions which need to be addressed, ifnot the answers to those questions. TheOxford formula is tried and tested with astrong political emphasis, an internationalfocus and a series of powerful case studiesdemonstrating farming businesses whichreally have done something different andare prepared to talk about it. This year,understandably, the focus was very muchcloser to home – more UK than EU!

The Secretary of State, Andrea Leadsomkicked off the event by reminding her somewhat partisanaudience that food and drink, from farm to fork, adds £110billion to our economy every year which makes it the UK’slargest manufacturing sector, adding more to the economythan the car and aerospace industries combined.

She furnished us with very little detail about what a domesticagricultural policy will look like post 2020, although she re-iterated the assurances given several months ago that farmerswill receive the same level of support until 2020. Mrs. Leadsominsisted that leaving the EU gives us an unprecedentedopportunity to design a domestic successor to the CAP, whichworks for the UK rather than trying to satisfy the needs of

28 different member states. So, Defra will consult on whatthat new mechanism should look like. They will imminentlypublish two green papers, one looking at food and farmingand the other at the environment. The emphasis will be onmanaging risk and making the industry more resilientto extreme weather and price volatility, prioritising capitalinvestment and boosting productivity, and last but not least,how can we increase food production at the same time asenhancing our natural environment – a tall order!

The Secretary of State then built us up for her bigannouncement of the morning. She claimed that Brexit willgive us a huge opportunity to scrap unnecessary red tape; topof her pile of futile regulation was the three-crop rule.Sadly for Andrea, her audience have been conditioned tocompliance with that particular rule and her momentousannouncement fell short of the unbridled gratitude whichshe seemed to be expecting! Perhaps it was about timing;making a major industry speech before the Prime Ministerhas set out her twelve-point route map for Brexit, leftMrs. Leadsom rather high and dry!

So, the farming industry faces a very different future, andthere are even more acute challenges for beet growersfaced with the post-quota world from October this year.However, for those who are committed to the industry andare prepared to view the future differently, there willundoubtedly be real opportunities ahead. Regardless ofhow you voted in the referendum, it’s time to move forwardand look to the future!Andrea Leadsom.



Project Comet – Bury AnaerobicDigestion project updateSome of you will have read about our investment in a 5MWe Anaerobic Digestion (AD) plant at Bury St. Edmundsin the Summer 2016 edition (Ref. 1), and following the completion of construction and the commencement ofoperations it is timely to provide an update on our progress with our renewable energy plant.

ByPhil McNaughton,British Sugar plc

Anaerobic Digestion Plant –Construction completionThe construction of the pulp feedingsystems, the digesters and associatedfeeding and gas systems, the gas trainand conditioning system, along withthe necessary pipework, electricalinstallations and control systems wascompleted during June. This wasintegrated into the two CHP gas enginesthat were in position, and successfullyunderwent a series of pre-commissioningtests during June and early July.Various views of the completed AD plantcan be seen in the pictures below(Pics. 1-4).

The completion of the main constructionof the plant was a huge effort, whichinvolved a great many people from avariety of equipment suppliers,contracting companies and our onsiteproject and operational teams. Therewas an extremely tight schedule that we had to deliveragainst, and this was achieved through excellent teamwork,co-ordination of the activities undertaken, and everyoneinvolved going the extra mile in order to meet the timelineand our targets.

Pic. 1 – Aerial view from south east.

Pic. 2 – Gas conditioning and CHPs.

Pic. 3 – Pulp feed hoppers by night.

Anaerobic Digestion Plant – CommissioningOne of the two primary digesters was seeded in late June, withseed material supplied from another local AD plant. Once thiswas stabilised and had reached the optimum temperature, wewere able to start feeding this digester with pressed pulp. Thiscame from the stored bales that had been produced during



complete the requirements for the critical G59 certificationtests, which is the regulation surrounding the connection ofany form of electrical generating device to the electricity gridnetwork, and this was actually achieved slightly ahead ofschedule on 22nd July.

Regulatory requirements – Feed in Tariffscheme (FITs) accreditationFITs is a Government scheme that is designed to encouragethe uptake of small-scale renewable and low-carbonelectricity generation schemes. One of the key milestonesfor this project was 12 months from the date of pre-accreditation determination for the FITs renewable energyscheme, which was early August last year. This is the date bywhich the plant needed to have completed the G59 teststo enable electricity to be exported to the grid, and actuallyhave exported some electricity. We successfully achieved allof this in late July, which enabled us to submit the fullFITs application on 26th July. Ofgem have subsequentlyconfirmed accreditation of the Bury AD plant to the FITs,which is an excellent achievement.

Digestate drying plantThe construction of the plant for the drying of the whole(liquid) digestate is now completed (Pic. 6), and thecommissioning of this part of the plant is scheduled tocommence in January 2017. The drying of the digestate willbe achieved by using the waste heat from the CHP gasengines, producing a dried digestate product that willpresent another exciting co-product opportunity for thebusiness.

the previous campaign, and it was pleasing to observe that thequality of the pulp from the bales was extremely good.

Once biogas was being generated from this digester insufficient quantity, the gas flare was commissioned as the gasvolume and methane content continued to gradually increase.The other primary digester was then filled with seed materialin early July, and followed the same process as the biogasstarted to be generated.

The AD plant in operation can be seen in the picture below(Pic. 5), with pulp in the day bund storage area and the feedsystems in operation.

Pic. 4 – Gas ring.

Pic. 5 – Pulp yard by night.

Pic. 6 – Digestate dryer building.

This has been an incredibly significant achievement byeveryone involved in this project and the start-up ofoperations: to successfully complete the construction in sucha challenging timeline and bring the AD plant online in a safeand efficient manner. The focus going forward will now be tooptimise the plant operations, and successfully commissionthe digestate drying part of the plant.

References1. McNaughton, P. (2016). Project Comet – Bury Anaerobic Digestion

project, British Sugar Beet Review, 84 (2), 11-12.

Once both of the gas holders above the two primarydigesters were full of biogas, the two gas engines (2.8 MWeand 2.2 MWe) were able to be commissioned on biogassolely generated from the plant. Again, this requiredrepresentatives from a number of different organisations tobe onsite at the same time in order to commission theoperation of the engines, enable the generation of electricity,synchronisation with the electricity grid network andexporting of electricity onto the grid. This enabled us to



Changing weather can hinder or help outside activities, and farming and growing crops is no exception. We usethe soil as a growth medium and it is a valuable resource that needs to be looked after and preserved. With today’smechanisation, when conditions are very wet and dates of harvest are slipping by, our preservation of the soil canbe compromised. Muddy conditions in the field can lead to mud getting onto the public highway. This article looksat the safety and legal implications of mud on the public roads, what can be done to prevent it becoming an issue,and the options for clearing it away.

Mud on the road – your responsibilities

The Highways Act 1980 (section 148) makes it an offence todeposit mud and other things on the highway. In addition, ifa person without lawful authority or excuse deposits anythingwhatsoever on a highway in consequence of which a user ofthe highway is injured or endangered, the person is guilty ofan offence (section 161). As a result, if you are responsible fordepositing mud on the road, you are at risk of committing acriminal offence and may face a prosecution or fine.

The local authority also has the power under the Highways Act1980 (section 149) to notify the person responsible fordepositing the mud on the road, requiring them to remove it.If the individual fails to comply with the notification, theauthority can then make a complaint to the Magistrates’ Courtfor a removal and disposal order. This allows the localauthority itself to remove the mud and charge this back to theperson responsible for depositing it.

ByPhilip Ecclestone and Tom Brown,

British Sugar plc

Getting to grips with mud



beet and very little is picked up on the tyres. However,conditions can change very quickly during the autumn andwinter months leading to very wet conditions. Even with aplanned approach to lift heavier fields first when conditions aremore suitable, it is inevitable that in some situations, especiallyin wetter years, in order to get the crops lifted, fields willbecome become rutted, and mud becomes an issue when it iscarried onto the road.

Newer approaches engaging the use of a chaser trailer doesenable mud to be kept in the field as the awaiting tractors andtrailers can be kept off the field and loaded on the edge.

Even where good planning has taken place, wet weather canresult in mud on the road; removing it before it presents adanger to other road users then becomes only solution.

Most farms and contractors will have access to a road sweeperof sorts, which is the best approach to remove mud from thepublic highway. Ideally, use after each tractor and trailermovement from the field, especially if the conditions arevery bad.

There are many different types of road sweepers available onthe market and in recent years these have been considerablydeveloped when compared to the humble brush on the backof a tractor.

Many brushes can now be attached to the front linkage of atractor or to a telescopic handler, skid steer, pivot steer,masted fork lift or even a shovel unit.

Sweeper attached to the front linkage.

Sweeping mud.

It is important to be aware that civil action may also be takenif the mud on the road is deemed to be a public nuisance, orresults in loss or injury, which can lead to a claim fornegligence. This can also include personal injury, damage toproperty and any other loss or inconvenience caused. Thisapplies to both the landowner and contractor. However, it ishighly likely that the landowner will be responsible despitethe contractor depositing mud on the road.

As well as the legal obligations, we all know that driving onmuddy roads, especially in a car or motor bike, can be quitehair raising, particularly in the winter time in poor light.Unfortunately, excessive mud on roads has led to some veryserious accidents and in some instances has resulted infatalities. It is really imperative that everything is done byfarmers, contractors and hauliers, as far as practically possible,to minimise mud becoming an issue on public roads.

It is not just vehicle and livestock movement that can depositmud on the road. Growing crops or rearing livestock involvesactivity out in the fields at many times of the year. With ourmaritime climate, rain is never far away. Dry soil can soon turninto mud which, under very severe conditions, ultimately canlead to water erosion of soil, particularly on sloping ground.

What can be done?When planning to grow a crop, as well as taking into accountthe most suitable cultivation approach for the soil type andcrop, also consider whether there are other options that causeless damage to the soil and may help to prevent soil run-offand mud becoming an issue. In some situations working downto a very fine tilth may increase the risk of the soil becomingvery muddy. Perhaps consider a different approach, such asminimum tillage or even direct drilling if the soil structure issuitable, to help maintain soil structure which is more resilientto adverse weather and not predisposed to soil erosion andmud becoming a problem.

Even after a crop has been established, soil in the tramlinescan turn into mud following applications of fertiliser andsprays. Most applications are applied with tractors or self-propelled units using tramlines which can get rutted and verymuddy when wet. Always use a wheel and tyre which will bestcarry and spread the weight of the equipment to help preventdamage and rutting and mud getting onto roads.

Harvest, especially for root crops such as for sugar beet, is thekey time when soil can turn into a lot of mud. Under good, drybut damp conditions very little soil comes out with the sugar

Ready for sweeping.



Brush diameters range from 500 – 900 mm with the brushmade out of heavy-duty nylon or a construction of steel andheavy duty nylon, making them more effective atremoving mud. They can be powered by the PTO or viathe hydraulics.

A brush can be added to a bucket, so that mud can be brushedand collected at the same time. Other options include, fordrier conditions, having the option of a water tank so thatwater can be sprayed under high pressure onto the road,particularly effective if the mud has dried onto the roadsurface. This will facilitate a better brush action and removalof the mud from the public highway.

Bucket with brush attachment.

Sweeper fitted with a water tank.

In summary, if you know that despite good planning andtaking all precautions mud might be an issue on the road,then the following should be considered.

What should you do?� Be prepared to hire in suitable equipment if you have

not got your own. A list of road sweepers available tohire in the sugar beet area can be accessed on British SugarBeet Portal (Search for ‘road sweepers’).

� Keep to your own farm roads and minor roads whereverpossible.

� Keep to low speeds, especially when travelling a shortdistance, to help retain mud on the vehicle.

� Keep a written record of your decision on whether or notto deploy signs and/or to clean the road. This information

Forultimateperformance

UK’s

No.1 Liming

product

for correction

of soil

acidity

Helpdesk 0870 240 2314

fax 0870 240 2729 [email protected]

LimeX is a business of British Sugar plc

*

Optimises soil pH

Increases available calcium

Fast acting and long lasting

Provides valuable nutrients

Improves soil structure

Flexible service options

17/1/19/05



Even with advancing technology and a more environmentallysustainable way of farming that recognises the need to lookafter the soil, at times all these factors cannot alwaysguarantee that mud will not be an issue. It is no longeracceptable for growers and contractors to operate in a way,particularly on the public highway, which could lead to unsafeconditions for fellow road users. Mud can be a seriousproblem, but there is a lot that can be done in the field toprevent it becoming an issue. As a last resort, goodequipment is available which can be used to sweep and clearit from the road.

AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to thank Suffolk Farm Machinery (whosell the Padagas range of sweepers) and Bema Sweepers fortheir contribution to this article and for supplying the photos.

may assist in your defence in the event of any accident orinjury.

What must you do?� Do everything possible to prevent mud being deposited on

the road. This includes cleaning mud from vehicles as far aspracticable before they are taken on the road.

� If there is a danger of mud accidentally being deposited onthe road, use the ‘slippery road’ signs with a ‘mud on road’sub-plate to alert other road users. Check with your localhighways authority their requirements for warning signson the side of the road. British Sugar has secured a verygood discount on signage for mud on road, please see thebelow advert for details and to take advantage of thisoffer.

� Clean the road as necessary during the working day andalways at the end of the working day.

� Ensure that labour and equipment is available and issuitable for the soil and weather likely to be experienced.

� Where a contractor is used, ensure that prior agreement isreached as to who is responsible for mud on road issues(signage, cleaning etc.) and ensure that adequate publicliability insurance is in place.

This outlines your responsibility for dealing with mud on road.For full information on the Highways Act 1980 please go towww.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1980/66

British Sugar, in partnership with Arco, would like to give Sugar Beet Growers the opportunity topurchase the illustrated sign for a discounted price of £75.25 + VAT.

Package Includes:Slippery Road Surface 750mm Sign

‘Mud On Road’ Zintec 870x300mm Sign

750mmTriWithSpace..Stanchion

To order, please contact your local area manageror the Agricultural Helpdesk on 08702 402314.

ArcoAdvert_A5Landscape_Layout 1 04/08/2016 09:58 Page 1

17/1/20/06



International Institute forBeet Research (IIRB) studygroups – news roundupThroughout 2016, the BBRO’s representatives have attended a number of meetings of the IIRB working groups.These are the ‘engine houses’ of this institute, providing an excellent way for members to keep up-to-date withwork going on in Europe and further afield, as well as an opportunity to interact with fellow researchers, scientistsand the wider sugar industry directly. This article provides a short summary of four of these events held in 2016and attended by the authors.

ByDr. Mark Stevens, British Beet Research Organisation,

Dr. Debbie Sparkes, The University of Nottingham,Mike May, Independent Consultant and

Colin Walters, British Beet Research Organisation

Beet quality & storage group (Colin Walters)

This group met on the 14th April at the headquarters ofIRS (Institute of Sugar Beet Research, the Dutch BBROequivalent) in Bergen op Zoom. The working group waschaired by Martijn Leijdekkers from IRS, and attended by15 members from around Europe to discuss the presentedpapers highlighted below.

Cost of production – Martijn Leijdekkers. Previous work byIRS showed that there is no correlation between cost ofproduction per hectare and sugar yield; that is to say thathigh yielding crops cost no more to grow than loweryielding ones, and the only way to achieve yields close topotential is through awareness, attention to detail andtimeliness of operations. To aid this, the IRS knowledgeexchange efforts feature ‘active learning’ through theformation of discussion groups involving farmers andcontractors, as well as practical training for operators.

Storage losses – Joakim Ekelöf (Nordic Beet Research). Thispaper focused on the effects of sub-zero temperaturesand surface moisture on sugar beet storage losses. A four-year series of trials, set up in 2012, showed that during thelong, cold Nordic campaigns with sub-zero temperatures,high losses due to freezing (up to 50%) were observed inuncovered beet piles, whereas losses were reduced to 5%where Toptex covering was used. However, temperaturesin the Toptex-covered and uncovered piles did not differstrongly, so a trial was set up in climate chambers to testthe effect of moisture on the surface of the beet. Dry andmoist beet were kept at sub-zero temperatures of -1, -3 and-5°C until their temperature stabilised, and were thenstored at +8°C for 18 and 35 days after the frost period.The results showed a significant negative impact of surfacemoisture at sub-zero temperatures, with around doublethe level of sugar losses occurring compared to dry beet.Adding a wind of 10 m/s doubled the freezing effect in

uncovered beet whilst Toptex covers reduced the windby 90%.

Joakim went on to describe how differences in freezingdamage were observed between individual beets of thesame variety, even though they had been stored in thesame boxes at the same temperatures. Nutrient status andvarietal differences were suggested as possible reasons forsuch differences but further studies are required to try andunderstand the causes fully.

Root shape and soil tare – Joachim Ekelöf. Soil tare bringswith it additional costs in terms of haulage, washing,recovery and disposal and there are also importantenvironmental sustainability considerations. Aggressivecleaning to reduce soil adhered to beet leads to higher levelsof beet damage and consequent poor storage.

A measurement of the different root shapes of varietiescould provide a useful indicator of a variety’s potential tocarry soil tare. Root shape is currently measured in differentways, e.g. by imaging, subjective visual assessment, rootgroove measurement, etc. It was felt that the developmentof an IIRB standard method of root shape assessment mighthelp the development of smoother varieties, as breederscould be confident of breeding for the same market needin all countries.

Impact of invert sugar in beet processing – Jan Maarten deBruijn (Sudzücker). Invert sugars reduce extractable sugarand/or increase the cost of processing beet. Invert sugarsaffect juice alkalinity and, during juice purification, theydegrade into organic acids and higher molecular weight,coloured compounds. Organic acids neutralise alkalinity,which needs to be compensated for, but the addition oflime salts may result in scaling of factory evaporators.Organic acids increase the sugar loss in molasses, and theadditional coloured compounds may require extra measuresto control juice colour during processing, as well as



Plant & soil group (Debbie Sparkes)The meeting was held on 20th and 21st June and hostedby IFZ (German Sugar Beet Research Institute) in Gottingen,Germany.

Soil plant interactions. Remy Duval (ITB) introduced Syppre,a French project that has been set up for a minimum of15 years to investigate optimum cropping systems for thefuture. The project considers all the major crops in therotation, not just sugar beet, and involves growers,technicians and scientists to develop innovative systems.Five platforms have been established across contrastingcropping regions in France where current practice will becompared with new, innovative approaches. Debbie Sparkesthen gave an update on the BBRO-funded project on soil-plant interactions based at the University of Nottingham(Ref. 1).

Nutritional status of soils. This part of the programmehad particular focus on P supply and fertiliser placementand was led by delegates from The Netherlands, Austriaand Germany. One recurrent theme was the response toP fertilisation that was often detected, even when soilanalyses indicated an adequate supply. The role ofplacement of P at drilling was also discussed in detail.

Strip-tillage is an area of increasing interest within themember countries. Natalia Mioduszewska (Poland)presented results from the first year of an experimentcomparing different cultivation strategies, including strip-

tillage, on soil physical properties and the yield of sugarbeet. Preliminary findings indicated that, although soilcompaction was higher in the strip-tillage plots, this did notdepress yields which were similar to the conventionalplough-based systems.

Heinz-Josef Koch (IFZ), who some readers will rememberfrom the BBRO technical meetings last year, summarised hiswork on spring and autumn strip-tillage for sugar beet.Spring strip-tillage worked well on sandy soils but was notfeasible on clay or loam soils. Autumn strip-tillage may bepossible on heavier soils but further research is neededbefore this system could be recommended. Heinz-Josef alsohighlighted the strong potential to control soil erosion andincrease plant available water when strip-tillage is optimisedfor sugar beet production

Rotations. The final session of the meeting considered theimpact of crop rotation on sugar beet production. Thesession included a paper by Melanie Hauer (IFZ) whodescribed her work on the impact of catch crops onnematode control, water use by the crop, and sugar yield.She concluded that there were no negative effects of catchcrops on availability of water for the subsequent sugar beetcrop: over-winter rainfall replaced that taken up by thecatch crops. The nematode resistant mustard used in thiswork did not reduce nematode density any more than thecontrol (straw mulch). Across six environments, there was nosignificant difference in sugar beet yield after mustard trapcrops, cover crop mixtures and straw mulch.

needing more wash water for centrifuges and an increasedre-crystallisation to produce the required white sugarquality.

Typical levels of invert sugar in fresh, healthy sugar beets arebelow 800 g/t beet, but these sugars accumulate at a rateof 10-20 g/t of beet/day during beet storage at -10°C. Theprocess is temperature-dependent and is also influencedby beet bruises/injuries. After prolonged storage, levelsincrease to 1700 g/t beet whilst in heavily deteriorated beetit can be greater than 3400 g/t beet.

The Dutch industry now measures the levels of invert sugarsin delivered beet and advises that the most suitable beetvarieties should be selected to control the amount of invertsugar formation. This, combined with careful harvesting andhandling of beet at loading, and minimising the duration ofstorage, were key to minimising the detrimental effects thathigh levels of invert sugar can cause.

Sprouting during storage – Suzanne Blocaille (French SugarBeet Institute (ITB). Trials using both full size and miniexperimental clamps were carried out in 2013 and 2014.Eight netted samples of beet were taken after storage (fourwith sprouts and four without) and analysed for sugarcontent and defoliation.

In sugar beet stored for one month (355 degree days Celsius)in mini clamps, the average sugar content of unsproutedbeet before and after storage was 17.95% and 18.70%respectively. In this and another trial (after 560 degree daysCelsius), beet with sprouts lost 1% in sugar content. In amini-clamp trial where two varieties of beet were storedfor one month (432 degree days Celsius) with and without

Toptex cover, covering increased the average sugar contentof the two varieties by 0.5% and 0.7%. Regrowth reducedsugar content of the varieties in both covered and uncoveredclamps, by about 2.7% and 4.0% respectively. Regrowth wasobserved in correctly topped (or even over-topped) beet butmostly in beets with petioles or under-topped beet.

Observations in the full-sized clamp showed that beetsamples from the inner layer of the clamp had fewer sproutsthan those in the outer layer. Differences in regrowth alsoseemed to depend on the orientation of the clamp:regrowth was higher on the North-facing than the South-facing side. Among the several factors influencing sugarlosses, defoliation level, humidity, and temperature duringstorage are important.

Marc composition of beet – Martijn Leijdekkers (IRS). Marc isdefined as the residue left after extraction of all solubleconstituents with water, and is used to forecast theproduced beet pulp volume. Previous research (2012-2015)showed statistical differences in marc content betweendifferent varieties, location and year (growing conditions)and increases during storage. No direct correlation wasnoticeable between the marc content and storage losses.

Differences in marc composition are of particular interest toprocessors, and Martijn outlined a new methodology whichallowed a cheaper and faster determination of marccontent. Further research will be needed to investigate anycorrelation of marc quality with processing quality orstorability characteristics.

The next meeting of the study group is scheduled for April2017.



Weed group (Mike May)

The meeting was held at Borgeby in Sweden on 25th May,with representatives from Austria, Belgium, Denmark,Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and UK attending.

ALS tolerant beet. This was the main topic for the meetingand the group was joined for part of this session byexperts from Bayer and KWS, the companies that havedeveloped the new ALS herbicides and tolerant sugarbeet varieties. This new weed control system, currentlyundergoing tests in the UK and other EU countries, wasintroduced in the last British Sugar Beet Review (Ref. 2)and on page 12 of this issue.

Bayer have a large dataset from early trials that showsgood control of the wide range of weeds commonly foundin beet fields. The IIRB weed group members are involvedin trials to get the best out of the technology and toidentify the best options to control the range of weedsencountered in different countries.

ALS resistance in weeds in Europe is generally widespreadbut details are only available for the UK and Belgium.In these two countries the main ALS resistant weedsidentified to date are black-grass (Alopecurusmyosuroides), common chickweed (Stellaria media),common poppy (Papaver rhoeas) and mayweeds(Matricaria and Tripleurospermum species). ALS resistantloose silky bent (Apera spica-venti) has also been foundin Belgium. Consequently, a focus of research beingundertaken across Europe is to determine whether suchresistances also apply to the new herbicide to be used inthe ALS tolerant beet, and on the strategies to be used toprevent or overcome this.

Obviously, strategies are required to preventestablishment of ALS resistant ‘weed’ beet and everyonerecognises that these need to be available to growersbefore marketing. A major aspect will be preventionof viable seed production in the beet crop. The ALSherbicides should give good control of weed beet in thecrop and, if bolters are controlled, prevention of viableseed formation should be relatively simple.

Metamitron resistance. Resistance in fat-hen(Chenopodium album) is a problem in some EU countries,particularly Belgium, and recently a metamitron resistantpopulation of common orache (Atriplex patula) wasidentified there. Resistance in fat-hen was suspected (inthe old Kidderminster beet factory area) but neverconfirmed in the UK. The resistances are most likely aresult of the use of atrazine in maize. There is risk of cross-resistance from use of metribuzin, but this herbicide hasgenerally been used rotationally (mainly in potatoes) andthe risk to metamitron use in beet should be very low inthe UK. However, the restricted doses of metamitron inbeet may throw up some surprises and should be borne inmind for potential future issues.

Rotations. Increasing the number of crops in rotations canprevent build-up of weed problems and allow a widerrange of approaches to weed control. The group issharing information to identify the major benefits andconsequential changes to weed control systems.

The next meeting of the group is scheduled for May 2017.

Pests & diseases group (Mark Stevens)

On the 7th and 8th September, over 30 members of thegroup met in Sweden, on the first day at Syngenta’s sugarbeet facility in Landskrona and on the second at theNordic Beet Research centre in Borgeby. This group meetsevery other year and, at this meeting, foliar diseases,especially cercospora, as well as rhizoctonia andnematodes were all on the agenda; some of the highlightsare described here.

Foliar diseases. The need for monitoring, understandingand deploying appropriate control strategies to limit theimpact of foliar leaf diseases on yield affects all countriesgrowing sugar beet. Experiences from North Americashow that cercospora leaf spot resistance to fungicidescontinues to dominate (with up to eight fungicides beingapplied this year), and a similar situation is occurring inmainland Europe. Potential novel control strategies forthe disease are being investigated by understanding themolecular biology of this pathogen. In addition, work isongoing, including in the UK, to find new ways ofdetecting the spores to aid fungicide application andtiming.

Downy mildew. This has affected several Europeancountries over the last five years, including the UK andBelgium, and chemical methods for its control are beingevaluated, as well as tests to assess varietal resistance.Methods for inoculation of downy mildew have alsobeen developed, and have been used in field trialssuccessfully, as demonstrated from results in Belgiumfrom 2016.

Rhizoctonia. This also seems to be a growing problem andis regarded as the number one issue in the USA wheregrowers must use both tolerant varieties and fungicidesto ensure the crop is not lost to rots. Similar to thework presented on cercospora, further molecularcharacterisation and understanding of gene regulation ofthis pathogen is underway in several Europeanlaboratories to provide potential new approaches for itsfuture control.

The event also provided an opportunity, on the finalafternoon, to visit a number of Nordic field trials andexperiments on foliar disease, BCN and aphanomycescontrol, including one of the recommended lists trials insouthern Sweden where, unlike the UK, two replicates aretreated with fungicide and the other two remainuntreated for foliar diseases to enable the determinationof differential varietal responses to disease control andhence yield performance.

References1. Sparkes, D. (2014). A summary of the BBRO research review of crop

production. British Sugar Beet Review, 82 (1), 11-14.

2. News (2016). Herbicide tolerant sugar beet enters UK trials. BritishSugar Beet Review, 84 (2), 55.



What does a typical day look like for you? (at this time of year)

The job is really varied,so you do need to bequite organised. We’recurrently planning the2017 Reference Bookand the BBRO WinterTechnical Events beingheld in February. Wealso have over 1,000sugar beet leaves inthe lab that need to beprocessed and tested, so I pop on a white coat to help outwhen I can.

What is your favourite part of the sugar beet year?

Definitely June. Canopy is establishing and you can see howthe crop is developing as you drive around the area. Also theplant clinic starts to get busy, which may not be good for thegrowers but is really interesting for me and a good excuse toplay with the microscopes.

What projects are you involved in?

All of them! I get to see projects from the initial conceptthrough to final report, all from the comfort of my desk. Imanage the paperwork that accompanies the projects andhelp to communicate the key messages out to growers.

What do you think is the ‘next big thing’ in agriculture?

Spot application. I think we have got to get smarter on our useof chemicals. Targeted use is currently not a cost-effectiveoption, but if it prolongs the use of, or access to, an effectiveproduct then we need to seriously consider it. However, timeis running out for us to safeguard use, whether we are in orout of Europe.

What are your aspirations for the future?

For BBRO, it would be to engage with more growers. I may bea tad sad, but I find the crop and its potential quite exciting. Itwould be good to increase the positive vibe amongst ourgrowers.

As for personal aspirations, it would be nice to finish thebuilding work at home!

Getting to knowthe BBROIn each issue we will be meeting a different member of the BBRO team, asking them about their day-to-day rolesand what they think is important in the future of sugar beet growing.

Name:Ches Broom

Role:Research Administratorand KnowledgeExchange Co-ordinator

Where are you from?

Norfolk born and bred.

How long have you beenwith the BBRO?

18 months.

What did you do previously?

I had the pleasure of working for Norfolk Young Farmers for20 years, promoting agriculture and providing support andtraining to the members. This role was part-time and for thelatter years I also took on the role of Partnership Manager forEaston & Otley College.

Why did you want to work here?

I wanted to remain in agriculture; though at the time I had noidea what I had let myself in for!



In late October of 2016, theFrench and Belgian sugarindustries held a sugar beetharvesting demonstration inMoyvillers, in the Oise region ofFrance. Organised jointly by theITB and IRBAB, respectively theFrench and Belgian equivalentsof BBRO, the event was titledBetteravenir, and is the largestEuropean trade fair dedicated tosugar beet.

In addition to demonstratingdifferent types of sugar beetharvester, the event set out todemonstrate that sugar beet growingrepresented a strong, dynamic andambitious sector of agriculture,something which was seen as veryimportant if sugar beet is to remain apart of the agricultural and industriallandscape following the removal ofproduction quotas in 2017.

The event site comprised some 80 hectares of sugar beet, togetherwith a tented exhibitors’ area and a technical village featuring thelatest trials work pertaining to soil management, crop recovery andstorage.

Static displaysThe full range of trade exhibitors was on hand to promote their latesttechnologies to visitors, and with more than 150 stands on site therewas plenty of opportunity for discussion on all matters, from seedchoice through to crop nutrition and protection, and including thelatest in machinery from cultivators through to remote sensingtechnology. The main tented area proved to be a real throng ofpeople, particularly on day one of the event when persistent thick fogmade viewing the harvesters a challenge, and the cool temperaturesmeant time in the field was only really for the particularly hardy.

The technical village featured static displays of the effects of soilcompaction (Pic. 1), as well as tall boxes with Perspex sides whichenabled visitors to see the effects of beet cyst nematodes (BCN) onroot development. In speaking with the researchers here, they werequite clear that it was critical to sample to a depth of 60 cm whentesting soils for the presence of BCN. Other displays featured rootswhich had been handled with differing levels of aggressiveness,showing how secondary moulds and rots in storage weremore prevalent in those roots which were more damaged. (Pic. 2)

ByColin Walters,


Betteravenir 2016



Topping standards was another area of interest which theorganisers addressed through a display of the toppingmechanisms from each of the most popular types of harvester,and the sample that each was capable of producing.

There was a display of the Klunder mechanised clampcovering/uncovering equipment, as well as the full range ofToptex sheets. Continental climates in mainland Europemean that protection of beet from frost in store is acritical factor. The UK is generally more fortunate, with itsmaritime climate meaning that frost protection is more ofan occasional need rather than a routine necessity. Perhaps itis this more sporadic nature of frost events which has beena blocker to investment in mechanised covering/uncoveringin the UK.

Pic. 1 – Compaction and tyre pressures.

Pic. 2 – The various stages of damaged root rots.

Pics. 3 and 4 – Heaps provided a clear comparison on harvester damage to beet.

Sugar beet harvestingThe harvesting demonstration took place on a sandy silt soilwhich, with sufficient moisture, had the potential to grow verygood crops of sugar beet. The crop this year had benefitedfrom storms in August which had helped sustain growth, andlifting conditions on the day were very good. The site was veryuniform and, with 13 or so harvesters running, it was a goodopportunity to compare the different machines. Unfortunately,there were no harvester assessments carried out at the event,meaning that there was little in the way of data available tocompare harvesting performance. That said, one only had towalk down the row of beet heaps produced by each machineto see the very real differences in beet damage betweenharvesters (see Pics. 3 and 4). BBRO’s harvester loss data overrecent years has shown that the difference in yield betweenroots with tip breakage of less than 2 cm compared with tipbreakage of 4 cm amounts to some seven percent.

To the author’s eye, the Grimme Maxtron once again stoodhead and shoulders over every other harvester when it cameto the recovery of root tails; something which has been seenat previous harvesting demonstrations. It is undoubtedly amissed opportunity for the UK industry not to have embracedthis model of harvester more, as the yield benefits are there tobe seen.

For more information on the key features of the harvester modelsthat were demonstrated please visit www.Betteravenir.com



The BBROStakeholder BoardThe BBRO Stakeholder Board was formed just over a year ago with the task of determining the strategic directionof BBRO and its portfolio of projects. Members include growers, industry and British Sugar representatives whoprovide a wide breadth of knowledge, ensuring BBRO are suitably challenged and resourced. Thus improving andenhancing the sustainability of the UK sugar beet industry, including its profitability and competitiveness, as wellas environmental protection and product safety.

ByAlison Lawson,


The Board receives regular updates from the research teamwhich helps in determining new areas of work, and keepingcurrent programmes on track. We are particularly keen toensure that scientific data is translated into grower take-homemessages, strengthening the industry going forward.

Investing in our future is of great importance, so we haveagreed to increase investment in PhDs, and will be looking todevelop at least one new PhD per year. This not only bringsnew thinking into the business but ensures sustainability byencouraging a new generation of scientists to specialise in thisimportant crop. Adding to our skills is always important and,as I write this article, we have just received news of a successfulKTP (Knowledge Transfer Partnership) bid. This will provide anew skill source within BBRO, to support our data analysis andbenchmarking work.

The Board also works to develop the research programmethrough pro-active commissioning of initiatives and gainingfeedback from the technical board on the quality, value andscientific efficacy of the work that BBRO conducts. The recentCrop Stability Call received 16 applications, of which eight arebeing progressed into full proposals. Further details of thesuccessful applications will be released in the next editionof British Sugar Beet Review. We have two new projectsabout to commence within the Crop Progression pillar:sugar beet response to additional sulphur fertiliser (led byDr. Simon Bowen) and a desk-based research study oneconomics of sugar beet irrigation (led by Dr. Tim Hess –Cranfield University).

The board meets on a regular basis, and we are always keen tohear of new ideas; please take this opportunity to tell us of

your challenges and aspirations forthe crop.

I feel privileged to be chairing thisgroup and supporting the researchwork of BBRO on behalf of all the UKgrowers. However, chairing such agroup of well educated, enthusiasticand energetic people does notmake my job an easy one! Rightfullyso, there are a number of heateddiscussions and much debate whichensures we are all clearly focused onmeeting the demands of industry.

Lastly, on behalf of the StakeholderBoard, I would also like to expressour thanks and best wishes toColin Walters who, after 22 years atBritish Sugar, has decided to explorepastures new. Colin has been a keensupporter of BBRO and has ledthe seconded field trials team atHolmewood Hall for the past fewyears. We all wish him well for hisfuture endeavours. Students involved in last year’s Winter Technical events.



ByChes Broom,


Sugar beet –realise its potentialBBRO are looking forward to hosting two technical events in February, aimed at maximising the sugar beet crop’spotential for all growers. We are all aware of the impact that soil type can have on the crop. Whilst we would alldearly love to be hitting the 100 tonne a hectare mark, for the majority of growers this is not a realistic target sothe challenge is to find what more you could be doing to squeeze a bit more from your crop?

Our half-day events will build on our previous work, ‘Makingevery hectare count’, by looking closely at soil health,rotations, seed bed preparation and cover crops. We arepleased to announce that soil specialist Philip Wright will bejoining us, and will be part of an open discussion session. JakeRichards, one of our PhD students from the University ofNottingham, will also be updating us on his work in covercrops that has delivered some interesting and exciting results.We will be showcasing some grower ideas and discussingon-farm findings that we will beinvestigating further.

Of course, a technical update wouldn’tbe the same without a nitrogendiscussion. We will discuss the outcomeof the new RB209, and look at precisionnutrition with nitrogen placement,organic amendments and bio-stimu -lants; is there really anything in the‘muck and magic’ box? And what ofwater? Jenny Bussell will join Dr. DebbieSparkes on the discussions on soil,rooting traits and water uptake.

Those of you who attended the SummerOpen Days, may remember AlistairWright our PhD student studying BCN.Alistair’s work has progressed over thepast few months and he will be joiningDr. Mark Stevens in the pest and diseasessession, updating growers on the threatsand opportunities ahead.

An exciting new venture for BBRO will be launched atthese winter events: the BBRO Demonstration FarmNetwork. These farms will provide a cross-section of soiltypes and the opportunity to deliver more practical-based research work for quicker farm impact. This willinclude work on strip-tillage, long-term storage and covercrops.

To book a place please email: [email protected]

14th February 2017 –The Granary Barns,

Woodditton, Near Newmarket,SUFFOLK CB8 9RZ

16th February 2017 –Cedric Ford Pavilion,

Newark Showground, Lincoln Road,Newark-on-Trent, Notts. NG24 2NY

Join us at the BBRO technical events



The sugar beet seed journey

ByRobin Limb,

Independent Consultant

Historical background

Germains Inc. was originally a family-owned business,established in Los Angeles, California in 1871, and grewrapidly to become one the leading seed companies in theWestern States of America. A programme of diversificationduring the 1940s and 1950s saw the establishment of severalbusiness divisions; these included plant breeding (rose, cotton,corn maize and alfalfa), horticultural paper and twineproducts for the home and garden market, and professionalseed pelleting and coating.

Germains was the first to introduce pelleted seed into theAmerican market and, with the proven agronomic benefitfrom coated seed, the Division played an ever-increasing role incommercial agriculture, both nationally and internationally. Inthe 1960s, Germains introduced the first pellet for sugar beetseed to the US market. Germains (UK) Limited was formed anda Filmcoat processed seed plant was established to serve the UKand Continental European markets. After three years ofpelleted sugar beet trials organised by British Sugar, Germains’became British Sugar’s recommended pellet of choice.

The significance of the pelleting business extended beyondthe US and UK. In the 1970s, facilities were established inEurope. Germains ceased to be family owned in 1990, withthe pelleting and coating technology process coming under

the ownership of AssociatedBritish Foods, also ownersof AB Sugar and BritishSugar today. Germains SeedTechnology UK, based inKing’s Lynn, Norfolk, hasnow been involved in thepelleting and treatment ofsugar beet seed for over50 years. This article seeksto take you on the seedjourney through Germains’seed treatment process,from reception of the rawbreeders’ seed lots, todelivery on-farm to thegrower.

Introduction to Germains Seed TechnologyThe role of Germains in the UK beet seed supply chain hasits origins in the historical unified nature of the industry.Significant distribution and handling gains are leveraged fromall UK seed being handled through one processor, ensuringthat the grower receives his seed at the lowest possibledistributed cost, with the jointly-managed NFU Sugar/British

Sugar seed account being run on a ‘not-for-profit’ basis.Germains adheres to an industry agreed incoming seed andoutgoing seed specification which drives its quality andprocesses.

There are over 270 quality tests carried out on every bulk ofsugar beet seed delivered in its raw form by the main fivebreeders: Betaseed, KWS, SESVanderHave, Strube andSyngenta. The primary objective of the pelleting and otherenhancement processes is to preserve the quality and integrityof the breeders’ seed genetics at all stages of the process. Theoriginal principle driver of the pelleting process was tofacilitate mechanised precision drilling of monogerm seeds. Itovercame the tedious and labour-intensive handwork neededto single multigerm plants and achieve the ideal plantpopulation and spatial arrangement essential to maximiseyield. Latterly, the pelleting process became a vehicle to carryplant protection products.

Novel seed enhancement technologies such as steeping andpriming complement the latest advances in pelleting technolo -gies. The combined seed technology package now deliverssignificant value for the UK beet grower. Figure 1 highlightsthe sugar beet yield increase attributable to each seedtechnology, demonstrating a total yield improvement of 10%.

Germains was founded by EugeneGermain, a Swiss Pioneer whosettled in Los Angeles, Californiain his early twenties.

Thiram steep

Advantage

XBEET

XBEET plus

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Perc

ent

ag

e y

ield

imp

rove

me

nt

Fig. 1 – The significant value added to yield by seed technology.

The seed undergoes a unique and transparent journey,through pre-delivery breeders’ sample analysis; pre-test andcalibration; arrival of the bulk seed on site at King’s Lynn;priming; pelleting; incorporation of fungicides andinsecticides; and finally film-coating, packaging and despatchto the grower. Each year, breeders’ commercial seed bulks arerequired to be on site at King’s Lynn by 1st December at the



If there remain significant variances regarding test results,Germains refers samples to an independent laboratory forarbitration, and if the seed subsequently passes these thirdparty tests it will be authorised for bulk shipment. Tests areconducted to check consistent adherence to specificationand ensure the UK seed account receives the best availableseed. Also implemented are quality standard protocols,which include methods recognised by the InternationalStandardisation Organisation (ISO) such as: Purity GerminationTest ISO 9001; Quality Management ISO 18001, seed treatmentfacility ESTA (European Seed Treatment Accreditation).Germains is a satellite seed testing station – licensed by APHA(Animal and Plant Health Agency) with trained staff to ISTA(International Seed Testing Association) standards, and twoNIAB-qualified seed analysts.

Germains employs qualified and experienced staff to checkthat all seed meets the required specifications. ICARUS is anautomated germination-speed testing process, a uniquetechnology developed by Germains. Pictures are taken everytwo hours to count germinated seed. This offers a rapidassessment of the germination speed of the seeds, to tailor thepriming process. The priming process is tailored to each andevery seed lot to enhance performance.

2. Arrival of the bulk seed. After the bulk arrives, all the pre-delivery tests are done again to check that it matches the pre-sample analysis. The bulk can be rejected for the followingreasons: low germination, high percentage of abnormal ordamaged seeds, small/large seed size distribution, andcontamination with foreign matter. No compromises are madeat any stage, to ensure seed quality and consistency aremaintained. Germains’ objective in priming is to improve seedperformance, creating more reliable germination underabiotic stress situations, such as dry, wet or cold conditions.One of the other benefits from priming is improved uniformitythat leads to easier harvesting, thereby maximising recoveredyield potential.

3. Pelleting the seed. The pelleting process involves tumblingthe raw primed seed in a rotary revolving drum (Pic. 3). Thepelleting material is slowly and carefully introduced into themixing chamber, and the seed pellet is slowly built up towithin its specified range of between 3.5 mm and 4.75 mm.

4. Film-coating and colour-coding. Seed colour coding hasbeen employed by Germains for over 20 years, to assist thegrower in identifying the seed treatment being used, and toassist in any assessment of field germination and performance.In the current protocol, pesticide treated seed is also colouredso as to identify it for field use only, and avoid it entering the

latest, to ensure the deadline for delivery onto farms by theend of February is met.

In conjunction with the ever-increasing genetic contributionfrom seed breeders, the pelleting and seed enhancementprocesses now include priming, the application of fungicidesand insecticides in film-coating as one comprehensivepackage. The contribution made by insecticide seedtreatments has achieved a simultaneous ‘win-win’ for growersand the environment. For more than 25 years, Germains hasfacilitated both a ten-fold reduction in volume of chemicalusage, and a better targeted and more effective pest anddisease control for growers. The progression of UK beet yieldsover recent years from an average of 60 t/ha in 2005, to almost80 t/ha in 2014, has been in no small order due to the impactof seed genetics and seed technology.

The sugar beet seed journey

Processing stages

1. Arrival of the breeders’ pre-delivery sample. This involvesan agreed pre-testing and priming calibration process on aminimum of 3.5 kg of raw seed, including a visual damageassessment, and using the ICARUS germination procedure(Pic. 1). Primed calibration samples are retained for futurereference, with a Pass/Fail record of the test. Also assessed areseed purity, grading tolerance, relative humidity, and seedcount per kilogram. The pre-delivery calibration is designed tocheck that the seed meets the necessary UK and industryspecifications, and to understand the seed’s ability to adoptthe process on a larger scale.

Pic. 1 – ICARUS automated germination-speed testing technology.

Normal germination

Cotyledons Hypocotyl Root Stunted Root Hypocotyl Cotyledons Root

Abnormal germination(e.g. Stunted root)

Slow germination categorisedas abnormal

Pic. 2 – Germination test.



‘unit’ of seed. All boxes are clearly labelled with the varietyname, seed treatment, plus UK statutory declarations requiredby law in respect of plant protection products used in theprocess of seed treatment. Units are packaged in intermediateformats of four boxes, and then palletised to facilitatehandling and dispatch. Delivery onto farms takes place via astrictly controlled and managed intermediate seed store.

6. Seed performance data. A full quality assessment of theseed is conducted on the final product. Performance data forall seed lots is available online for growers to access. Germainsworks closely with British Sugar in case of any queriesregarding the delivered seed package. All seeds aredespatched by Germains to a Central Store by 31st of January.The Central Store is responsible for the on-time delivery togrowers by 1st March.

Box number, local certification, season number, bulk number,packing samples are recorded and storage samples of seedsare taken during the different stages of the process. Thesesamples are kept as reference and stored in a controlledenvironment room at Germains for one year, and then movedto an independent external warehouse for three years beforebeing safely disposed of.

food chain. This year with the agreement of the Breeders andBritish Sugar, Germains have coloured the BCN varieties ashade of grey to distinguish them from other varieties PonchoBeta will be a light grey versus Cruiser Force being a fewshades darker. A similar approach may be used for AYPRvarieties. Film-coating finally seals the outer layer of the pelletto ensure that the full range of chemicals included is retainedand pellets generate extremely low dust levels. All processesfollow ESTA standards, carrying out all specified dust testingto Heubach (an industry standard) method and standards.Germains consistently follow best practice in order to supportsafe use of products and uses and labels products in strictaccordance with UK approvals. Germains is the first ESTAaccredited company in UK, followed by its Netherlands sitetwo years ago

5. Packaging and dispatch. All seed is packaged in boxes of100,000 seeds, within agreed tolerances, and referred to as one

Pic. 3 – Germains’ rotary pelleting equipment

Appendix written by Tessa Seymour

Germains’ new product Xbeet® enrich100

Germains is committed to delivering innovative seed technologies to theUK’s sugar beet industry. For the last six years Germains have been runningfield trials on UK sites with Armstrong Fisher, the British Beet ResearchOrganisation (BBRO) and growers. These trials have demonstrated strongresults for Germains’ new UK product Xbeet® enrich100. The new productinvolves the application of a new pellet technology and elicitor treatment.The elicitor is a naturally-derived, environmentally benign treatment thattriggers a plant’s natural defence mechanism. This improved toleranceenhances crop establishment and growth, leading to greater final yield.In conjunction with the new pellet technology, Xbeet® enrich100 hasdemonstrated improved emergence, greater leaf coverage, and strongerplants leading to increased yield potential.

Other services provided by Germains to the beet industry include thehandling and processing of all BBRO Recommended List trials seed samples(over 100) for variety trials to help ensure the genetic potential of varietiescan be compared. This is part of its ongoing support to the industry and isprovided pro-bono. Political and regulatory advocacy is undertakenthrough ESA (European Seed Association) and ISF (International SeedFederation) to support registration of seed treatments in the EU andglobally, and ensure UK interests are fully represented. Unique access tothe industry in other countries is facilitated, e.g. advanced knowledge ofnew products from other global markets, and adaptation of other croptechnology sectors. The primary focus of Germains is to support UKgrowers, demonstrated by its close co-operation at every stage of the seedjourney with NFU Sugar, British Sugar and BBRO.


ByPhilip Ecclestone,British Sugar plc

In the world of agricultural machinery, John Deere is one ofthe largest global suppliers and is still independent to this day,unlike many of its competitors who have been taken over andare now part of larger groups or have totally disappeared.

The history of John Deere is well documented and stretchesway past the 50 years being celebrated this year in the UK. Itwas in 1837 that a blacksmith by the name of John Deeredeveloped the first self-cleaning steel plough share in GrandDetour, Illinois in the USA. This invention enabled farmers toplough on a large scale and begin to open up the vast tracts ofthe prairies, and John Deere started to develop as anagricultural machinery manufacturer. As the business grew, sothe company moved to Moline, Illinois in 1848. Today theheadquarters for the whole company, Deere and Company, isstill situated there. As horses gave way to tractors so, by 1918,John Deere got involved in making tractors through its tiewith the Waterloo Gasoline Engine Company. By 1923, all thecompany’s tractors and equipment were being sold under theJohn Deere name.

It was these early tractors that started John Deere’s presencein Europe, particularly in the UK and Ireland where increasingmechanisation was needed to feed the populations duringand after the First World War. During this time, the tractors

were sold in the UK under the Overtime name, being importedby the Overtime Tractor Company, of London.

With the outbreak of the Second World War, more tractorswere needed and many were sent over from the US. Towardsthe end of the war, under the lease lend deal, many JohnDeere three-wheel high-clearance row crop tractors were sentover, mainly for use in East Anglia where a lot of vegetables,potatoes and sugar beet were being grown.

One of the world’s leading agricultural machinery manufacturers, John Deere, recently celebrated 50 years oftrading in the UK and Ireland. John Deere is probably best known in the UK for its extensive range of tractors,combines and associated implements, even including lawn mowers for the garden! To mark this milestone, JohnDeere, held a special event at their Langar headquarters near Nottingham in September.

The Overtime tractor.

John Deerecelebrate in style



Today the John Deere range includesnot only tractors, combines andother farm implements, but alsolawn care and forestry equipment.The precision drill manufacturer,Monosem is also now part ofJohn Deere Company. In otherparts of the world, constructionequipment is also sold. In all, thecompany has a presence in 35 differ-ent countries, with manufacturingtaking place in 15 countries.

With new technologies, John Deerehas developed many precisionfarming aids which are also usedwith other makes as well. They

continue to pioneer new ideas and further develop existinglines, like tractors for example.

Although a number of events had been planned in the UK andIreland, the main event to mark the 50 year milestone washeld on the weekend of 24th and 25th September at theLangar site. The aim was to get examples of all tractors thathad been sold from 1966 until the present day.

Several hundred acres were set-aside opposite John Deere’sLangar premises to hold what was a public event, with wellover 200 tractors on show together with a working area. Morethan 14,000 people attended over the two days, and were ableto see a large number of static displays including tractors,combines and implements of all ages, including some vintageexamples. There were also stands promoting produce fromthe local area.

Each day consisted of a parade of tractors to mark 100 yearsof John Deere tractors.

Out in the fields there were a number of workingdemonstrations, from ploughing and cultivating by tractors ofall ages through to combining featuring some of the very firstcombine harvesters.

Today, John Deere is one of the largest and yet stillindependent agricultural manufacturers in the world, havingcome a long way from humble beginnings in 1837. Itstrademark green and yellow colour scheme is well knownand the company continues to innovate for the future.Celebrating the 50 year milestone with a special event for theUK and Ireland was a unique occasion, carried out in style!

By the early 1950s, John Deereconsidered having a manufacturingbase in Europe, with the UK beingone of the desired locations.However, due to many issues,another option arose with thepurchase of the Heinrich Lanz tractorbusiness which had several locationsin Germany, including the tractorfactory at Mannheim and one inSpain. Although John Deere had anumber of dealers in the UK, therewas no formal presence by theparent company until 1966 when amarketing branch was set up atLangar to look after the UK andIreland. The Langar facility hadpreviously been owned by the Royal Canadian Airforce andused as a medical supply stores together with the nearbyairfield. Even in the 1960s John Deere was still not well knownin the UK compared to some of the well-established tractormanufacturers, and did not sell many units. That was all aboutto change now that they had both a manufacturing base inGermany and a branch in the UK. From small beginnings theymanaged to make great strides in the sales league, particularlywith successive launches. By the year 2000, John Deereofficially sold more tractors than anyone else in the UK. Aposition they have held ever since.


The three-wheel row crop tractor.



ByNikki Downs,

British Sugar plc

Soil sampling: a premierservice for growers

The Wissington Soil Sampling Team offer a professional and comprehensive soil sampling service for accurate‘as found’ pH determination, with additional options to establish the nutrient requirement for all crops – not justsugar beet.

Wissington soil sampling team 2016

Pic. 1 – From left to right: James Mikulik, Nikki Downs, Annabel Charlton, Sharon Mort, Piotr Krupinski.

Pic. 2 – Distinctive British Sugar livery on vehicles.

Our ‘in-house’ service primarily focuses on pH measurementon farms throughout the Wissington factory area, and isavailable all year round.

This year we had a core team of five, comprising of our co-ordinator – Nikki, soil samplers – Annabel, Jim and Piotr alongwith Sharon assisting with the laboratory work and mappingprocesses.

This is truly a multi-tasking team as Jim, Piotr and Sharon allhave Beet Intake duties throughout the campaign.

We take Health and Safety on farm very seriously, so oursamplers wear approved PPE, and our vehicles have distinctivelivery to clearly stand out on farm, all making for aprofessional presence.



A challenging season

In 2016, the peak soil samplingseason turned out to be a biggerchallenge for the team than usual,owing to the season starting muchlater in the year.

Our season usually starts in May, butthis year the bulk of our samplingwas completed between mid-Julyand mid-September.

The late start to our season put extrapressure on the team who take theannual root digs used to supportcrop yield forecasting. This startedduring the first week of August andcontinued for six weeks.

To ensure we did not delay thereturn of field pH and nutrientresults, we were assisted greatlythrough the busy spell with supportfrom the Wissington tarehouseteam, who buddied up with ourteam in order to cover the higherwork load and to maintain ourprompt turnaround of results forarea managers and customers. Thereis no doubt we would have struggledwithout their input.

pH sampling

Our primary service here atWissington is pH testing, and thestart of this process takes place whengrowers and area managers submitrequests for sampling.

This provides us with all of the farmdetails, including field name, fieldsize and field number, so that wecan locate the fields and produce accurate maps forinterpretation.

For soil nutrient analysis we use NRM Limited, an accreditedindependent laboratory, to provide optional tests for a rangeof parameters such as organic matter and available calcium.This service ensures our grower customers can have thehighest confidence on the validity of the results and therecommendations given in order to meet RB209 guidance. Theresults can then be discussed with our FACTS qualified areamanagers.

Method – in-field sampling

Soil samples are taken using a grid system and, as a standard,we take one soil sample per acre (~0.4 hectares). We do,however, take additional samples where there might be anacid patch in a field (see Fig. 3).

The soil sampling auger is pushed 15 cm into the topsoillayer, and removed with the soil core (Pic. 3) that is thenguided into a plastic test tube – approximately 3 cm of soilis taken (Pic. 4).

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept

Total Hectares Tested by Month 2015-2016

Fig. 1 – Our challenging year is illustrated clearly in the above graph, where you can see the bulkof our testing came in from mid-July to mid-September. We tested a total of 9,300 ha,primarily in the last nine weeks of the season.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept

Total Hectares Tested by Month 2014-2015

Fig. 2 – Our 2014-2015 season followed a more traditional pattern with soil sampling taking placethroughout each month of the year. 11,350 ha were tested in total.

Fig. 3 – Field sampling frequency illustration.



Each tube is numbered to identify thesample and it’s position within the field.

With the cap in place, the sampler isready to move onto the next samplepoint (Pic. 5).

The sampler will record on a map of thefield where any additional samples aretaken, recording the reason for extrasampling, such as checking low lying, lessdeveloped crop, or more weedy areaswithin the field.

In order to maintain sample integrity, thesamplers wear gloves so that the soil doesnot come into contact with bare hands.

When sampling for standard nutrientanalysis that includes phosphate,potassium, magnesium and sodium, withoptional plus boron, we ensure that wehave enough soil for NRM to mix andsubsample for their analysis.

Once the field samples have beencollected, they are returned to our soillaboratory situated within the tarehouseat Wissington sugar factory where theyare tested for pH, or submitted to NRMfor further analysis.

Back to the laboratorypH testing on the soil samples takes placeunder laboratory conditions and followsprecise protocols, including frequentcalibration checks, on our Jenway metersfor ensured accuracy of readings (Pics. 6and 7).

Each soil sample taken is testedaccurately, with the precise pH valuebeing recorded for each specific samplepoint in the field (Pic. 8).

We work hard to ensure that themapped pH results are a true reflectionof where the sample soil core was taken,and this in turn provides the data for anaccurate mapped pH result for the areamanager to discuss with a grower.

Any liming requirement can then beconfirmed and area managers willadvise on the most cost-effectiverecommendation.

One of the prime benefits of using ourSoil Sampling Service is the quality andclarity of the results map you receivefollowing analysis of the soil samples.

Example of a mapped pHresultOur team’s aim is to assist in promotinghigh crop yields through accurate soiltesting, to allow growers to makeinformed decisions.

Pic. 4 – Soil guided into the sample tube.

Pic. 5 – Sample secure, ready to move on to the next sample point.

Pic. 3 – Soil core extracted.



What our growers say about our soilsampling service…

“We are always happy with the soil sampling thatBritish Sugar provide. The soil samplers have a goodattitude, are helpful and their communication isgood. As samples are taken every acre we are able totailor LimeX application rates to the field’srequirements. All of these factors lead us to beconfident in the service offered. ”Peter Legge – A. L. Legge & Son Ltd 13/10/16

“ British Sugar’s soil nutrient and pH testing service isan easy to use professional service, which we havecome to rely on as the cornerstone of our farmingoperation.

The test results come back in a standard, easy tounderstand format, complete with pH mapping andnutrient status for each field.

Based on the results, recommendations are suppliedtailored to the requirement of the followingcropping.

Couple all this to the availability of British Sugar’s‘LimeX’, which is an easy to spread product offeringgreat neutralising properties, nutrient analysis andsoil conditioning properties and we have a very usefuland integrated solution to our soil management. ”George Munns – L & A E Munns and Son 12/10/16

“ I find the soil sampling service is very good, I valuethe precise sampling per acre to locate the acidpatches. It’s a very reliable service, good turnaroundof results and operated by very good people. ”Arthur Gee – Arthur Gee Thorney Ltd 13/10/16

Pic. 6 – Calibration buffers. Pic. 7 – Addition of demineralised water. Pic. 8 – pH analysis and results.

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

�� !"#��$%&'�� ("�� $)*%#��+%"*�� ,(��%- &*-

�%./00%)'"*$/)-�"#%�0"'%�/)�*+%�1"-$-�/2�$)2/#0"*$/)�"3"$&"1&%�"*�*+%�*$0%��4#$*$-+�� !"#�,&.�"..%,*-)/�&$"1$&$*5�"#$-$)!�2#/0�*+%0��2�-+/6)7� ��'"*"�$-�#%,#/' .%'�6$*+�*+%�,%#0$--$/)�/2�*+%��/)*#/&&%#�/2�(�� 8��#/6)��/,5#$!+*�

� ��

��

�/2*6"#%�15��%"#��%.+)/&/!5��%#3$.%-��*'�

� A professional approach

� Reliable sampling service

� Strict laboratory protocols

� Accurate results for our growers

SUMMARY

Further reading:British Sugar LimeX – www.limex.co.uk

FWI Academy – www.fwi.co.uk



DRILLING FOR BETTER ESTABLISHMENTAND IMPROVED CROP PERFORMANCE

Drill OperatorTraining Days

A successful sugar beet harvest begins with thepreparation of the seed bed and ensuring optimumperformance of both drill and operator. Good cropestablishment helps to produce healthy uniformplants, improving yield and profitability.

The course is open to all sugar beet drill operatorsand contractors, providing the basic principles ofdrill set-up for all models.

SESSIONS TO INCLUDE:

Practical soil management.•

Cultivation techniques for the perfect•seed bed.

Pelleting and seeds.•

Drill maintenance for optimum•performance.

Presentations and practical support from Kverneland, Monosem and Vaderstad

Monday 6th February 2017Morley Farms, Nr Wymondham, NR18 9DF

Friday 24th February 2017Mere Potato Stores, Bracebridge Heath, LN4 2HT

The course will start 08:30 and come to a close at 13:30. Refreshments will be provided.For further information or to reserve your place:email: [email protected]

or call: 01603 672172

Drill Testing Advert_A4_Layout 1 19/12/2016 11:08 Page 1


Following the difficult growing season that gave somechallenging weather, I wondered what would be in store withthe weather for the 2016 harvesting campaign which requiredthe BBRO team to work many long days and travel numerousmiles across the beet growing area.

The team began harvesting on the 29th September with the6-row Garford plot harvester on some heavy land near Bury St.Edmunds. Fortunately there was enough rain the week beforeto allow harvesters to roll and clear the field without the severeroot breakages that might have occurred under the previoushard, dry conditions. The first trial was scrutinised duringharvest by the independent inspector Ken Matthews whoreports back to the Recommended List (RL) board on the qualityof topping, harvester settings, crop recovery and ensures thatprocedures are being correctly followed. All was ok!

Like all growers, hauliers and contractors, we were faced witha shorter campaign to complete the busy harvest programme,so a good start was vital. With trials spread over the wholebeet growing area, meticulous planning was fundamental toensure all went well and the harvest plan stayed on track. Co-ordinating the movement of harvesters and hauliers,communication with other trial operators, growers and theBBRO plot processing facility are a few of the many tasksnecessary to ensure the trials are harvested in the correct orderand according to protocols. Ten RL/National List (NL) trialswere harvested before the end of November. These trialresults will continue to add data to form the BBRORecommended List that growers make their seed choices from.Other trials harvested within the BBRO programme were:fungicide trials on new product developments, pellet types,leaf miners and contract harvesting for other trial operators.

Another significant element that has led to the good seasonhas been the improvements within the BBRO plot processing

6-row plot harvester.

3-row plot harvester working at Nottingham University.

ByDaniel Godsmark,

BBRO Trials Manager

BBROactivities

BBRO field team

facility at Wissington. Changes to critical processes wereintroduced in the summer, and these have made throughputsmuch better; if we can’t get the trial beet processed, we can’tcontinue the harvest programme! A good example of this isreplacing the old main hoist, that lifts the trial bags intoposition and presents them to the washer, with a faster hoist:a simple, yet effective, fix that shows the continuousimprovement mentality at Wissington.

Planning for BBRO trials in 2017 is underway and sites havehad soil nutrient and BCN tests completed. Checking thesefields by walking them, inspecting them on Google Maps andnow flying over with a drone all adds to making the bestdecisions at planning. Great planning will always help withdelivery when the drill sets in the field. With planning comespreparation and that includes the servicing of all the drillingequipment and staff training before drilling begins.

The BBRO is always looking for potential host growersbecause trials often require various differing elements (soiltype, lifting dates, pest,topography, locationetc.) in their protocols,which means it is notalways as simple ashaving one field andputting as many trialsas possible in it. Thatwould be too easy! Ifyou are interested inworking with the BBROplease contact the BBROon 01603 672169 orDaniel Godsmark on07850 369849. Harvesting at Barway.


DRILLING FOR BETTER ESTABLISHMENTAND IMPROVED CROP PERFORMANCE

Drill OperatorTraining Days

A successful sugar beet harvest begins with thepreparation of the seed bed and ensuring optimumperformance of both drill and operator. Good cropestablishment helps to produce healthy uniformplants, improving yield and profitability.

The course is open to all sugar beet drill operatorsand contractors, providing the basic principles ofdrill set-up for all models.

SESSIONS TO INCLUDE:

Practical soil management.•

Cultivation techniques for the perfect•seed bed.

Pelleting and seeds.•

Drill maintenance for optimum•performance.

Presentations and practical support from Kverneland, Monosem and Vaderstad

Monday 6th February 2017Morley Farms, Nr Wymondham, NR18 9DF

Friday 24th February 2017Mere Potato Stores, Bracebridge Heath, LN4 2HT

The course will start 08:30 and come to a close at 13:30. Refreshments will be provided.For further information or to reserve your place:email: [email protected]

or call: 01603 672172

Drill Testing Advert_A4_Layout 1 19/12/2016 11:08 Page 1

17/1/39/07



factory newsCANTLEY FACTORYBURY ST. EDMUNDS FACTORY

‘Out in the field’

Being relatively new to the area west of the Bury factory, I am still ona rapid learning curve through these exciting and challenging times.During the past few months, we have seen the winter cereal drillingcompleted, drought and flea beetle attack on oilseed rape crops, andmany new growers joining the beet industry.

The season to date has seen a wide range of lifting conditions andyields. The campaign kicked off with hard ground conditions slowingdown the progress of harvesters and, in places, making liftingconditions challenging in the field. On a positive note, these dryconditions have meant that land is being ploughed in ideal conditionsfor next years’ beet crops. Thankfully ground conditions have nowimproved greatly allowing the harvesters to eat through the hectares.Bury factory has performed very well, with consistent and smoothoperation since the campaign start in early October.

In the previous Cantley update, Jonathan Pilbrow wrote about thewet spring we had experienced and the impact that had on drilling.Little did we know that we were about to endure one of the wettestand dullest Junes on record.

In the spring, the wet weather had delayed drilling but many growerspushed on against their better judgement. This resulted incompaction in some areas, particularly on the headlands where fieldtraffic could not be avoided. This compaction has impacted on rootdevelopment and subsequent yield. Moving into June, Nigel Wright’srainfall data shows that Stalham received 161% of the averagemonthly rainfall (91 mm in total), coupled with this the Met Officerecorded just 73% of average sunshine, making it the fourth dullestJune on record. This slowed the development of the crop and made itmore vulnerable to the dry conditions in July where Stalham receivedjust 40 mm of rain compared to the average of 62 mm for this month.With slightly higher than average temperatures and underdevelopedroot structure, crops started to suffer from lack of water on lighterland with headlands suffering the most. Some crops began to yellowand we lost some canopy. Where irrigation was used growers havereported good results with improved root weights.

The wet season had a noticeable effect on soil pH levels with a dropin recorded pHs at Cantley from June onwards. This led to an increasein demand for LimeX. With the dry weather over the later summermonths, and increasing focus on LimeX quality and vehicleturnaround within the factory, sales have been buoyant. As I write thisarticle in early December we are still dispatching good quality productfrom the store.

From September, the crop started to improve with canopies greeningagain. However, headlands did not recover fully, and with theseaccounting for an average of 15% of field area, this has impacted onyields. At the start of the campaign yields were generally lower thananticipated, with sugars hovering around the 17% mark. As thecampaign progressed both yield and sugar contents started toincrease, although we are still seeing a very mixed bag. There havebeen some verified yields of over 90 t/ha where crops look best. Just-in-time delivery has been practised throughout much of thecampaign, although sometimes not by choice as the wet weather inOctober and November made lifting conditions challenging. Ourhauliers have been chasing beet for what feels like most of thecampaign. Fortunately as I’m writing this we have had a break in theweather for the last few weeks and harvesters have been full steamahead lifting in excellent conditions in most circumstances.

Looking forward to next season, land preparation seems to be goingwell with growers taking the opportunity to sub-soil when theconditions have allowed. Land is ploughing over very well and, sofar, we are positive about the potential for next season: so let’s hopethe weather is kinder in 2017! We still have additional contractavailable for the spring so please don’t forget to speak to your areamanager if you would like to increase your crop area and contractfor the 2017/18 season.

Sarah Bebb, Area Manager

Conditions across the Bury factory area have varied greatly, with itbeing the total opposite to last campaign. To the west of the factory,we have seen some tremendous yields for the crop with sugars above21% in places, but to the east growers have experienced some morechallenging yields that, in many cases, have stemmed from thedifficult spring we experienced, and through no fault of their own.These dry ground conditions have provided fantastic opportunities toget LimeX out on farm, and spread in very good order.

The end of sugar quotas in September 2017, is bringing an excitingopportunity for growers to increase their tonnage, and for newgrowers, especially those suffering from high flea beetle pressure, tojoin the industry and add an additional break crop into their rotation;so introducing a wider range of chemistry to be used on farms wherebeet hasn’t been grown in the past. The south-west of the factory hasseen a large increase in the volume of beet grown; the main factorsinfluencing this increase are competitive sugar beet profit margins,failed OSR crops, increased transport allowance from 50 to 60 miles,and black-grass issues. Jo Franklin, a new grower to the west of thefactory, made the following comments, “Sugar beet stacks up betterthan any of the alternative crops, and will be grown on relativelyheavy land so it will have to be lifted early. It is the most attractivespring crop option at the moment, and the way the market is going,and the contract is structured, there’s every chance that we will getmore than the minimum £22/t price for it.”

Stef Hendy, Area Manager



NEWARK FACTORY WISSINGTON FACTORYArea 45

What a rollercoaster season beet has had in 2016! Where to start? Monthlyrainfall for the March/April drilling period was almost three times higherthan in the previous three years, we also had twice as many rain days,temperatures were 2-3 degrees lower, coupled with below averageradiation. All this resulted in the second latest average drilling date of thepast 20 years: around the 7th April! Plant populations were around 3%down as well. When the crop did finally get drilled, June delivered awhopping 105 mm of rain, pulling seedbeds down tight and turning thecrop yellow where anaerobic soilconditions occurred.

August finally gave some relief witha significant dry spell that allowedthe heavier soil types to correctthemselves, opening up cracks youcould lose a Chunky KitKat down, tolet some air back into the soil (Pic. 1).

From this point on, I’m pleased tosay, the sugar beet crop turned acorner and has never looked back.A few months down the line, thevast majority of my growers seem very happy, and a large number areachieving record crops for their farms, with plenty of reports of yields inthe region of 80-90 t/ha, delivering gross margins of £1100-£1300/ha. Ithink we’ve all been reminded how robust sugar beet is, delivering profitto growers in challenging conditions across a wide range of soil types. Oneadvantage of the beet crop is, it continues to grow throughout the autumnso can make up for lost time at the start. My area in particular benefitedfrom the organic matter in the soil offering a continual supply of N,whereas other areas sufferedleaching during the heavy rainfallin June. Despite the odd leafminer attack (Pics. 2), we had alowdisease pressure and goodfungicide efficacy which hasresulted in an average sugarcontent of 17.46% for Area 45, thehighest of all the Wissington areas.

On the back of the positive results so far, there’s been a really good uptake,by current growers, of the opportunity to increase beet acreage for 2017,in anticipation of sugar quotas ending.

A greater need for profitablespring crops to combat black-grass,a focus on the need for break cropsto sustain cereal yields (Pic. 3) therecent poor performance of OSR,and the improved prospects for thesugar industry seem to be the othermain drivers.

I would encourage growers to takeadvantage of quotas ending, andgrow more beet if they so wish,whilst British Sugar are looking toexpand the crop area. I havealready signed up a good numberof new growers for 2017 and there is plenty of interest from additionalnew growers for 2018. Area 45 growers have shown great commitment tobeet with a large proportion of the crop on a 3-year contract for 2017,which has encouraged some investment in new drills and harvesters, I ampleased to see.

It has been a good year for LimeX in the area, with a trend towardsgrowers using LimeX as a blanket soil application to take advantage of itscheap fertiliser content, and to realise the beneficial role that availablecalcium plays in the tolerance to disease across a range of crops, as well assoil flocculation.

Bring on 2017!

Ben Hunt, Area Manager

A view from the field

Despite a late drilled crop and an incredibly wet June contributing tobackward crops, sugar beet has proven to be hardy, and stood up tothe challenges this growing season has brought. At the time ofwriting, in early December, finished growers are averaging just over69 t/ha adjusted yield.

Following root digs in August and September (many thanks to allfarmers who have helped with our spec. fields this year) campaignstart was delayed by a week, commencing on the 4th October. Thisallowed crops to grow a little longer in the ground and gain yield.October, for many, was the opposite of June, and a week intocampaign led to very dry harvesting conditions. With low yields inparts and lifting being challenging to say the least, harvesters werestruggling to keep up with the lorries. Further to the east of theregion (around Boston and up towards Grimsby), persistent rainhampered harvesting whilst, further north, harvesters were stoppedas it was too dry.

At the start of the campaign the first week’s average sugar contentwas 16.24% (with some sugars in the low 15s). Despite the dry and thewet conditions, crops have grown well throughout October andNovember, and sugar content increased steadily to 17.76% weeklyaverage on the 7th week of campaign.

Some crops that were harvested in late October missed a secondfungicide; moderate disease levels and pressure from leaf miner,meant maximising green leaf area was very important given the goodgrowing conditions. Late harvested crops will certainly have benefitedfrom a second fungicide to maintain a healthy canopy to protectagainst any frosts. A lot of beet is currently being lifted and stored,beet that is being clamped for longer term storage will benefit froma well-maintained clamp (see guidelines in the BBRO Reference Book2016). Clamp sheets are also available for delivery within 48 hours (call0870 2402314/see Campaign Handbook p26).

At the time of writing, we are nearly half way through the campaign;re-allocation of haulier permits is underway and we have extendedthe campaign until the 26th February following encouragingstocktake feedback from growers and hauliers. Whilst attention is onthe current campaign; thinking about managing clamps, working outhow much beet is left to come in, and looking towards end ofcampaign to work out final yields; it is also important to think aboutthe 2017 beet crop. Given the lessons from the last two years of a lackof winter, quality seedbeds and optimal plant populations are veryimportant to aid maximum harvesting efficiency and delivery ofhigher yields. Growers should aim to drill the crop to achieve 100,000plants/ha, remembering around 80% of seeds will reach full maturity.

All the best for a successful campaign and a good drilling season.

Alec McNulty, Area Manager

Pic. 1 – Soil cracking open, theturning point for the crop.

Pic. 2 – Leaf miner damage.

Pic. 3 –A wheat crop following a split fieldof barley and beet, showing thebenfits of beet as a rotational breakcrop.


SEEDING THE FUTURE

SINCE 1856

Beet Cyst Nematode – Identify, Act and Protect Yields

www.kws-uk.com

positive BCN soil samples

Beet Cyst Nematode in the UK

Regularly check soil and crop for BCN infestation. Annual soil sampling will indicate population levels.

There are now no yield penalties for BCN tolerant varieties. Drill BCN tolerant varieties alongside non-tolerant varieties in suspected fields. Monitor for any differences during the season.

BCN infestation decreases by approx. −40 % per year in non-host plants. A wide crop rotation helps to reduce infestation.

What to do against nematodes?

Observation + Soil sampling1. Crop

rotation2.

BCN tolerant variety(under BCN infestation)

75 t / ha

root yield

Non-tolerant variety(under BCN infestation)

52 t / ha

root yield

Choose BCN tolerant varieties3.

BCN +

BCN –

The effect:

Yield losses

Roots develop a “bearded appearance”

Stunted and deformed root growth

Visible white or brown cysts on root hairs

Patches of wilting leaves under midday sun

30 – 60 %Source: BBRO, 2016

What are Beet Cyst Nematodes (BCN)? 1 mm long eelworms that invade and feed from the root cells. Each cyst holds up to 200 eggs and larvae.

The first 10 % of yield losses mostly shows no visible symptoms.

Common risk factors

Tight crop rotation

Host plants e. g. OSR

Spread by cultivation & machinery

Warm and moist soils

KWS_Nematoden_Infografik_RZ.indd 1 24.05.16 11:37

17/1/BC/08


Documents

BRITISH sugar beet review - Home - BBRO...Dr. John King, Independent Consultant The British Sugar Beet Review is published in January, May, and October. Itis sent to all sugar beet