What the research measured
The cited meta-analysis of more than 200 trials in 12 states and Ontario reported a 35% reduction in SDS foliar disease and a 295 kg/ha (7.6%, or 4.4 bu/ac) average yield increase from adding fluopyram to a commercial base seed treatment, with the probability of a yield gain above 80% where disease was high and very low where no foliar symptoms appeared. Missouri strip trials reported a 50% chance of at least 3.5 bu/ac where SDS was confirmed and about 1 bu/ac where it was not; Iowa data in the same report showed no evidence of a gain on SDS fields. Nebraska on-farm trials reported +3 bu/ac on one SDS-history field in 2020 and no difference on a field where SDS did not appear in 2017.
A peer-reviewed meta-analysis of over 200 field trials (12 US states and Ontario, 2013–15), a two-year university product evaluation combining 14 locations in six states (2015–16), 20 Missouri and 23 Iowa on-farm strip trials (2015–18), and two University of Nebraska on-farm trials (2017 and 2020).5 independent sources.What it is. A fungicide seed treatment whose active ingredient is fluopyram (48.4% of the formulation), applied at a seed-treating facility on top of a standard fungicide-and-insecticide base package at 1.18 to 1.97 ounces per 140,000 soybean seeds, with the high end of that range labelled for both sudden death syndrome and soybean cyst nematode. It reached Missouri farmers in 2015 as the first commercial seed treatment marketed for SDS.
Study conditions and limitations
- Response tracks disease. The meta-analysis found yield gains very unlikely without foliar SDS symptoms, and disease severity explained 19% of the yield variation against 8% for region and 10% for sowing date; cultivar resistance level did not explain it.
- Results differed between neighbouring states: Iowa Soybean Association data from 23 trials (2015–16) showed no evidence that ILeVO raised yield on Iowa fields with SDS, while Missouri farms with confirmed SDS (4 of 20) had a 50% chance of 3.5 bu/ac or more.
- A 17-replicate Nebraska field chosen for its 2014 SDS history showed no disease in 2017 and no yield difference (66 vs 65 bu/ac in the SDS zone, 65 vs 65 in the rest), so the $15.17/ac treatment returned less than the standard package.
- Trial rates vary: 1.18 fl oz per 140,000 seeds (Nebraska 2017), 2.14 oz per 100 lb of seed (Nebraska 2020), 1.98 oz per 140,000 seeds (Missouri), and 0.15 mg active ingredient per seed in the multi-state evaluation; the Missouri report says only the high rate is labelled for SCN.
- SCN effects were variable: Missouri found the high rate reduced the SCN reproductive factor by more than 50% using all data and about 20% where Rf was under 10, with highly variable egg counts; the Nebraska 2020 trial found no difference in SCN reproduction (Rf 4.2 with ILeVO vs 3.6 without).
- Break-even depends on how often SDS shows up: the Missouri analysis at $14/ac and SDS in 20% of years put the best-case break-even soybean price near $6.50/bu; the multi-state analysis gave an 89% chance of a positive return at $13/ac and $10 beans only where SDS was severe.
Read the sources · 5
- Benefits and profitability of fluopyram-amended seed treatments for suppressing sudden death syndrome and protecting soybean yield: a meta-analysis ↗
Over 200 field trials in 12 US states and Ontario (2013–15) comparing a commercial base seed treatment with and without fluopyram: 35% less foliar SDS and 295 kg/ha (7.6%) more yield on average. Disease severity explained 19% of the yield variation, region 8% and sowing date 10%; the probability of a yield gain was above 80% when disease was high and very low when foliar symptoms were absent.
- Seed Treatment and Foliar Fungicide Impact on Sudden Death Syndrome and Soybean Yield ↗
The same land-grant group’s 2015–16 evaluation at seven locations in six states: ILeVO at 0.15 mg active ingredient per seed cut the SDS foliar disease index by over 50% in 2015 and over 40% in 2016, raising yield 8.9% in a susceptible variety and 3.5% in a resistant one in 2015, and 3.5% in the resistant variety in 2016. The pooled 200-trial analysis is restated as 4.4 bu/ac (7.6%) with an 89% chance of a positive return at $13/ac and $10/bu where SDS was severe (>10 FDX).
- ILeVO seed treatment: MU Certified strip trials ↗
Twenty usable Missouri farmer strip trials (2017–18) comparing the farmer’s seed treatment with and without the high ILeVO rate (1.98 ounces per 140,000 seeds): over a 50% chance that ILeVO added at least 2.0 bu/ac across all farms, 3.5 bu/ac or more on the four farms where SDS was confirmed, and about 1 bu/ac where it was not. Iowa Soybean Association data from 23 Iowa trials (2015–16) showed no evidence of a yield increase on fields with SDS.
- Evaluating Soybean Seed Treatments for Sudden Death Syndrome in Soybeans (York County, study 0276185202001) ↗
Eight-replicate irrigated strip trial on a field with SDS history: base (CruiserMaxx and Vibrance) 83 bu/ac, base plus ILeVO at 2.14 oz/100 lb seed 86 bu/ac, base plus Saltro 83 bu/ac (P = 0.006). Both products cut the Sept. 4 SDS severity index (2.5 and 1.2 vs 9.5) and neither changed SCN reproduction. Budgets used $15/ac for ILeVO over a $12/ac base.
- Multi-Hybrid Planting for Spatial Soybean Seed Treatments (Saunders County, study 078155201704) ↗
Seventeen-replicate field selected for SDS in its 2014 crop, with ILeVO at 1.18 fl oz per 140,000 seeds prescribed to the historical SDS zone: no disease developed, and yields were 66 vs 65 bu/ac in the SDS zone and 65 vs 65 in the standard zone (P = 0.963 and 0.949). Marginal net return at $15.17/ac for ILeVO was $529.06 vs $607.79/ac in the SDS zone and $584.44 vs $599.98 in the standard zone. University-run trial with partial manufacturer sponsorship.
Before you buy, ask
- What pest or disease pressure did the trials with a response actually have?
- What does the treatment cost per unit, and how many bushels would it need to add to pay?
- Can I buy the same variety untreated or with a different package?
Record
- Sources checked
- October 12, 2026. Every figure shown is printed on the linked page; unit conversions are noted on the chart.
- Company response
- None yet. BASF (originally Bayer CropScience) can send corrections, additional trials, or a statement; it is published here, labelled, and never edits the research summary. Send a correction →