Submitted:
28 November 2024
Posted:
29 November 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Greenhouse Studies
2.2. Pathogen Inoculations
2.3. Field Studies
2.4. Planting and Disease Assessments
2.5. Yield and Agronomic Assessments
2.6. Data Analysis
2.6.1. Greenhouse and Growth Chamber Studies
2.6.2. Field Studies
3. Results
3.1. Greenhouse Tan Spot Study
3.2. Stripe Rust Growth Chamber Studies
3.3. Field Assessments of Fungicide Efficacies on Tan Spot
3.4. Yield, Test Weight, and Protein Content
3.5. Post-Winter Plant Vigor and Survival
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Breiman, A.; Graur, D. Wheat Evolution. Isr. J. Plant Sci., 1995, 43(2), 85–98. [CrossRef]
- Curtis, B.C.; Rajaram, S.; Gomez Macpherson, H. Bread Wheat: Improvement and Production. FAO Plant Prod. Prot. Ser. No. 30, 2002, Rome: FAO.
- Heydari, A.; Pessarakli, M. A Review on Biological Control of Fungal Plant Pathogens Using Microbial Antagonists. J. Biol. Sci., 2010, 10, 273–290. [CrossRef]
- Menzies, J.; Gilbert, J. Diseases of Wheat. In Diseases of Field Crops in Canada, 3rd ed.; Bailey, K.L., Gossen, B.D., Gugel, R.K., Morrall, R.A.A., Eds.; Can. Phytopathol. Soc.: Harrow, Ontario, Canada, 2003; pp. 94–128.
- Wiese, M.V. Compendium of Wheat Diseases, 2nd ed.; Am. Phytopathol. Soc.: St Paul, MN, 1987; pp. 112.
- Shabeer, A.; Bockus, W.W. Tan Spot Effects on Yield and Yield Components Relative to Growth Stage in Winter Wheat. Plant Dis., 1988, 72, 599–602. [CrossRef]
- Byamukama, E. Stripe Rust and Viral Diseases Developing in Wheat. Igrow.SDSU Extension, 2015. Available online: http://igrow.org/agronomy/wheat/stripe-rust-and-viral-diseases-developing-in-wheat/ (accessed on July 2018).
- Boshoff, W.H.P.; Pretorius, Z.A.; Van Niekerk, B.D. Fungicide Efficacy and the Impact of Stripe Rust on Spring and Winter Wheat in South Africa. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil, 2003, 20, 11–17. [CrossRef]
- Chen, X.M. Epidemiology and Control of Stripe Rust [Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici] on Wheat. Can. J. Plant Pathol., 2005, 27, 314–337. [CrossRef]
- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. Wheat Stripe Rust. Available online: https://www.ars.usda.gov/midwest-area/stpaul/cereal-disease-lab/docs/cereal-rusts/wheat-stripe-rust/ (accessed on 23 November 2024).
- Stack, R.W.; McMullen, M.P. Effect of Fungicidal Seed Treatments on Common Root Rot of Spring Wheat and Barley. N. D. Farm Res., 1991, 49, 13–16.
- Sharma-Poudyal, D.; Duveiller, E.; Sharma, R.C. Effects of Seed Treatment and Foliar Fungicides on Helminthosporium Leaf Blight and on the Performance of Wheat in Warmer Growing Conditions. J. Phytopathol., 2005, 153, 401–408. [CrossRef]
- Mehta, Y.R. Spot Blotch. In Seed-Borne Disease and Seed Health Testing of Wheat; Mathur, S.B., Cunfer, B.M., Eds.; Jordhurgsforlaget: Copenhagen, Denmark, 1993; pp. 105–112.
- Duveiller, E.; Kandel, Y.R.; Sharma, R.C.; Shrestha, S.M. Epidemiology of Foliar Blights (Spot Blotch and Tan Spot) of Wheat in the Plains Bordering the Himalayas. Phytopathology, 2005, 95, 248–256. [CrossRef]
- Buchenauer, H. Mechanism of Action of Triazole Fungicides and Related Compounds. In Modern Selective Fungicides; Lyr, H., Ed.; Gustav-Fischer-Verlag: Jena, Germany, 1987; pp. 205–232.
- Davidse, L.C. Antimitotic Activity of Methyl Benzimidazole-2-yl-Carbamate in Fungi and Its Binding to Cellular Protein. In Microtubules and Microtubule Inhibitors; Borgers, M., DeBrabander, M., Eds.; North-Holland Publishing Co.: Amsterdam, 1975; pp. 483.
- Sierotzki, H.; Scalliet, G. A Review of Current Knowledge of Resistance Aspects for the Next-Generation Succinate Dehydrogenase Inhibitor Fungicides. Phytopathology, 2013, 103, 880–887. [CrossRef]
- Wegulo, S. The Importance of Certified, Fungicide-Treated Wheat Seed. CropWatch, 2017. Available online: https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2017/importance-certified-fungicide-treated-wheat-seed (accessed on 9 August 2018).
- Bartlett, D.W.; Clough, J.M.; Godwin, J.R.; Hall, A.A.; Hamer, M.; Parr-Dobrzanski, B. The Strobilurin Fungicides. Pest Manag. Sci., 2002, 58, 649–662. [CrossRef]
- Da Luz, W.C.; Bergstrom, G.C. Evaluation of Triadimenol Seed Treatment for Early Season Control of Tan Spot, Powdery Mildew, Spot Blotch, and Septoria nodorum Spot on Spring Wheat. Crop Prot., 1986, 5, 83–87. [CrossRef]
- Hollaway, G. Stripe Rust of Wheat. Agric. Victoria, 2018. Available online: http://agriculture.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/402767/stripe-rust-wheat-AG1167-2018.pdf (accessed on 17 September 2018).
- Gusta, L.V.; O’Connor, B.J.; Lafond, G.P.; Austenson, H.M. The Effect of Fungicides and Plant Growth Regulators Applied as a Seed Treatment on the Freezing Tolerance of Winter Wheat. Can. J. Plant Sci., 1994, 74, 63–69. [CrossRef]
- R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2018. Available online: https://www.R-project.org.
- Bockus, W.W.; Claassen, M.M. Effects of Crop Rotation and Residue Management Practices on the Severity of Tan Spot of Winter Wheat. Plant Dis., 1992, 76, 633–636. [CrossRef]
- Beres, B.L.; Turkington, T.K.; Kutcher, H.R.; Irvine, B.I.; Johnson, E.N.; O’Donovan, J.T.; Harker, K.N.; Holzapfel, C.B.; Mohr, R.; Peng, G.; Spaner, D.M. Winter Wheat Cropping System Response to Seed Treatments, Seed Size, and Sowing Density. Agron. J., 2016, 108, 1101–1111. [CrossRef]
- Giri, G.K.; Gade, R.M.; Patil, C.U. Seed-Borne Bipolaris sorokiniana in Wheat and Its Chemical Control. J. Soils Crops., 2001, 11, 109–112. Available online: https://eurekamag.com/research/003/555/003555793.php#buynow.
- Turkington, T.K.; Kutcher, H.R.; Clayton, G.W.; O’Donovan, J.T.; Johnston, A.M.; Harker, K.N. Impact of Seedbed Utilization and Fungicide Application on the Severity of Net Blotch (Pyrenophora teres) and Production of Barley. Can. J. Plant Pathol., 2004, 26, 533–547. [CrossRef]
| Time (days) of inoculation and Treatment | Disease severity (%) | Number of lesions | Size of lesions (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 DAP | |||
| Check | 55.2 a | 32.2 a | 0.6 a |
| Pyraclostrobin | 38.4 b | 23.1 b | 0.5 a |
| Thiamethoxam + difenoconazole + mefenoxam + fludioxonil + sedaxane | 38.0 b | 22.2 b | 0.5 a |
| 14 DAP | |||
| Check | 70.4 a | 33.3 a | 0.6 a |
| Pyraclostrobin | 47.2 b | 23.3 b | 0.5 a |
| Thiamethoxam + difenoconazole + mefenoxam + fludioxonil + sedaxane | 43.3 b | 22.1 b | 0.5 a |
| 21 DAP | |||
| Check | 72.3 a | 41.0 a | 0.5 a |
| Pyraclostrobin | 61.2 b | 34.1 b | 0.5 a |
| Thiamethoxam + difenoconazole + mefenoxam + fludioxonil + sedaxane | 57.1 b | 31.2 b | 0.4 a |
| 28 DAP | |||
| Check | 69.0 a | 39.1 a | 0.7 a |
| Pyraclostrobin | 65.1 ab | 35.2 b | 0.5 b |
| Thiamethoxam + difenoconazole + mefenoxam + fludioxonil + sedaxane | 63.2 b | 34.4 b | 0.5 b |
| Values are least squared means of 32 replications for the two runs and two varieties. Runs and cultivars combined after homogeneity of variance test and interaction F-values, respectively. For each treatment within a column, means followed by a common letter are not significantly different according to Fishers least-square means T-tests (P ≤ 0.05) | |||
| Variable | Df | Mean Square | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment | 2 | 2894 | 0.001 |
| Cultivar | 1 | 29 | 0.667 |
| Treatment*Cultivar | 2 | 74 | 0.627 |
| Treatment Mean Separations | |||
| Treatment | Disease severity (%) | ||
| Check | 55.3 a | ||
| Difeconazole + mefonoxam | 42.1 b | ||
| Pyraclostrobin + Triticonazole + metalalzyl |
36.3 b | ||
| Values are the least squared means of 40 replications for the two runs and cultivars. For each treatment within a column, means followed by a common letter are not significantly different according to Fishers Least Significance Difference test (P ≤ 0.05) | |||
| Variable | bDf | cSum Sq. | dMean Sq. | eF. value | fPr (>F) |
| 10 aDAP | |||||
| Treatments | 5 | 1857 | 371 | 4.257 | 0.001** |
| Cultivars | 1 | 423 | 422 | 4.841 | 0.029* |
| Locations | 1 | 1693 | 1693 | 19.40 | 2E-05*** |
| Planting timing | 1 | 364 | 364 | 4.166 | 0.043* |
| Residuals | 183 | 15970 | 87 | ||
| 20 DAP | |||||
| Treatments | 5 | 2059 | 412 | 3.659 | 0.004** |
| Cultivars | 1 | 791 | 791 | 7.025 | 0.009** |
| Locations | 1 | 7470 | 7470 | 66.380 | 6E-14*** |
| Planting timing | 1 | 2051 | 2052 | 18.229 | 3E-05*** |
| Residuals | 183 | 20594 | 113 | ||
| Values are least squared means of 32 replications for each variable i.e., cultivars, locations, and planting times. Different letters in the same column for each treatment represent significant differences according to Fishers Least Significant Difference test (P ≤ 0.05). aDays After Planting bDegrees of Freedom cSum of Squares dMean Swuares eF statistic fP value | |||||
| Variables | Mean Tan spot Severity (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Treatments | 10 aDAP | 20 DAP |
| Check | 17.7 a | 23.6 a |
| Sedaxane | 10.5 b | 14.0 b |
| Ipconazole+ metalaxyl | 10.4 b | 16.0 ab |
| Prothioconazole + penflufen + metalaxyl | 9.8 b | 15.3 b |
| Pyraclostrobin | 8.8 b | 15.5 b |
| Difenoconazole + mefenoxam | 8.5 b | 14.3 b |
| Cultivars | 10 DAP | 20 DAP |
| Ideal | 12.5 a | 18.5 a |
| Redfield | 9.5 b | 14.4 b |
| Planting times | 10 DAP | 20 DAP |
| Early planting | 9.6 b | 19.7 a |
| Late planting | 12.3 a | 13.2 b |
| Locations | 10 DAP | 20 DAP |
| Volga | 14.0 a | 22.6 a |
| Nerf | 8.0 b | 10.2 b |
| Values are least squared means of 32 replications for each variable i.e., cultivars, locations, and planting times. Different letters in the same column for each treatment represent significant differences according to Fishers Least Significant Difference test (P ≤ 0.05). aDays After Planting | ||
| Planting time | Tan spot severity | Yield components from the early and late planted plots | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Early planting | 10 DAP | 20 DAP | Yield (kg/ha) | Test weight (kg hl−1) | Protein (%) |
| Check | 17.5 a | 27.3 a | 1327.2 b | 64.3 a | 11.0 b |
| Sedaxane | 8.8 b | 16.8 a | 1768.3 a | 72.3 a | 13.1 ab |
| Ipconazole+metalaxyl | 8.2 b | 19.1 a | 1804.6 a | 72.2 a | 13.3 ab |
| Prothioconazole+penflufen+ metalaxyl | 10.1a | 19.2 a | 1676.1 a | 72.3 a | 12.2 b |
| Pyracrostrobin | 6.9 a | 18.4 a | 1777.2 a | 72.1 a | 14.4 ab |
| Difenoconazole+mefenoxam | 6.0 a | 17.2 a | 1724.4 a | 71.3 a | 13.2 ab |
| Late planting | |||||
| check | 17.9 a | 20.0 a | 563.3 b | 42.4 c | 11.0 b |
| Sedaxane | 12.2 b | 11.1 b | 790.2 ab | 64.3 ab | 13.4 a |
| Ipconazole+metalaxyl | 12.6 ab | 12.8 b | 771.4 ab | 61.4 ab | 12.2 b |
| Prothioconazole+penflufen + metalaxyl | 9.5 b | 11.3 b | 844.2 ab | 59.0 ab | 12.4 b |
| Pyracrostrobin | 10.8 b | 12.5 b | 1033.3 a | 66.3 a | 12.0 b |
| Difenoconazole+mefenoxam | 11.0 b | 11.3 b | 727.1 ab | 53.4 bc | 12.0 b |
| Values are least squared means of 32 replications for planting times. Different letters in the same column for each treatment represent significant differences according to Fishers Least Significant Difference test (P ≤ 0.05). aDays After Planting | |||||
| Location and Treatment | Tan spot severity | Winter survival of late planted plots from Nerf and Volga locations | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NeRF Location | 10 DAE | 20 DAE | Plant density/m2 | Height(cm) |
| check | 16.6 a | 17.5 a | 45.3 c | 4.1 a |
| Sedaxane | 6.8 b | 7.8 b | 95.3 a | 4.3 a |
| Ipconazole+metalaxyl | 6.7 b | 8.4 b | 88.2 a | 4.8 a |
| Prothioconazole+penflufen + metalaxyl | 5.8 b | 8.8 b | 87.3 a | 4.2 a |
| Pyracrostrobin | 6.0 b | 9.2 b | 97.2 a | 4.5 a |
| Difenoconazole+mefenoxam | 6.2 b | 9.3 b | 69.2 b | 4.1 a |
| Volga Location | ||||
| check | 18.7 a | 29.6 a | 68.3 b | 9.1 a |
| Sedaxane | 14.3 a | 20.1 a | 90.1 a | 9.3 a |
| Ipconazole+metalaxyl | 14.1 a | 23.5 a | 87.3 a | 9.4 a |
| Prothioconazole+penflufen + metalaxyl | 13.7 a | 21.6 a | 94.1 a | 9.5 a |
| Pyracrostrobin | 11.9 a | 21.8 a | 90.3 a | 9.6 a |
| Difenoconazole+mefenoxam | 10.8 a | 19.1 a | 92.2 a | 9.5 a |
| Values are least squared means of 32 replications for two locations and cultivars. Different letters in the same column for each treatment represent significant differences according to Fishers Least Significant Difference test (P ≤ 0.05). aDays After Emergency (for ratings in the early spring after seed emergency) | ||||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).