Advertisement

BioControl

pp 1–11 | Cite as

Development of Cercospora leaf spot on Ipomoea weed species for biological control

  • Kátia L. Nechet
  • Bernardo A. Halfeld-Vieira
Article
  • 40 Downloads

Abstract

Morning glories (Ipomoea spp.) are important weeds in non-burning sugarcane farming in Brazil, and their chemical control has low efficacy due to the straw mulching. The purpose of this work was to determine the effect of epidemiological parameters on the development of Cercospora leaf spot (Cercospora aff. canescens Ellis & G. Martin) on four Ipomoea weed species, as well as on the host range. The results demonstrated that the use of a suspension of 2 × 107 conidia ml−1 on specific host phenological stages (3–5 leaves, open flowers, and with fruit), with a minimum of a 24 h dew period, induces plant defoliation and a higher disease incidence on Ipomoea nil L. (Roth). However, the same disease incidence and defoliation on I. grandifolia (Dammer) O’Donell, I. quamoclit L., and I. hederifolia L. were not achieved. The pathogen was specific to these four Ipomoea species among 18 plant species. These results represent an important step in the development of a mycoherbicide to control morning glories.

Keywords

Cercospora aff. canescens Mycoherbicide Inundative biological control Ipomoea spp. Morning glories Convolvulaceae 

Notes

Acknowledgements

A grant for studies was provided by Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa) (03.13.12.002.00.00).

References

  1. Ash GJ (2010) The science, art and business of successful bioherbicides. Biol Control 52:230–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auld BA, Hertherington SD, Smith HE (2003) Advances in bioherbicide formulation. Weed Biol Manag 3:61–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bailey KL, Pitt WB, Leggett F, Sheedy C, Derby J (2011) Determining the infection process of Phoma macrostoma that leads to bioherbicidal activity on broadleaved weeds. Biol Control 59:268–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bhullar MS, Walia US, Singh S, Singh M, Jhala AJ (2012) Control of morningglories (Ipomoea spp.) in sugarcane (Saccharum spp.). Weed Technol 26:77–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association (2018). Final report of 2017/2018 harvest season south-central region. UNICA. http://www.unicadata.com.br/listagem.php?idMn=102
  6. Campbell CL, Madden LV (1990) Introduction to plant disease epidemiology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Charudattan R, Dinoor A (2000) Biological control of weeds using plant pathogens: accomplishments and limitations. Crop Prot 19:691–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chauhan BS, Abugho SB (2012) Threelobe morningglory (Ipomoea triloba) germination and response to herbicides. Weed Sci 60:199–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Companhia Nacional de Abastecimento (2018) Acompanhamento da safra brasileira: cana-de-açúcar, v.5—safra 2018/2019. CONAB. http://www.conab.gov.br. Cited 01 Jun 2018
  10. Correia NM (2016) Chemical control of morning glory species in sugarcane harvested in the dry and semi-wet seasons. Planta Daninha 34:333–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Correia NM, Kronka JRB (2010) Controle químico de plantas dos gêneros Ipomoea e Merremia em cana-soca. Planta Daninha 28:1143–1152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Correia NMI, Camilo EH, Santos EA (2013) Sulfentrazone efficiency on Ipomoea hederifolia and Ipomoea quamoclit as influenced by rain and sugarcane straw. Planta Daninha 31:165–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Crous PW, Braun U (2003) Mycosphaerella and its anamorph: 1. names published in Cercospora and Passalora. Central voor Schimmelcultures, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. Dagno K, Lahlali R, Diourté M, Jijakli MH (2012) Present status of the development of mycoherbicides against water hyacinth: successes and challenges. A review. Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ 16:360–368Google Scholar
  15. Elzein A, Kroschel J, Müller-Stöver D (2004) Effects of inoculum type and propagule concentration on shelf life of pesta formulations containing Fusarium oxysporum Foxy 2, a potential mycoherbicide agent for Striga spp. Biol Control 30:203–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Faria RM, Barros RE, Tuffi Santos LD (2014) Weed interference on growth and yield of transgenic maize. Planta Daninha 32:515–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Giancotti PRF, Toledo REB, Alves PLCA, Victoria Filho R, Cason JB, Rocha MG (2014) Chemical control of morning glory as a function of water restriction levels. Planta Daninha 32:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gómez DE, Reis EM (2013) Influence of substrates, light, filter paper and pH on the sporulation of Cercospora sojina. Summa Phytopathol 39:126–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Green S, Stewart-Wade SM, Boland GJ, Teshler MP, Liu SH (1997) Formulating microorganism for biological control of weeds. In: Boland GJ (ed) Plant microbe interactions and biological control. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 249–281Google Scholar
  20. Harding DP, Raizada MN (2010) Controlling weeds with fungi, bacteria and viruses: a review. Front Plant Sci 6:659.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00659 Google Scholar
  21. Hine RB, Aragaki M (1963) Pathogenicity, vitamin nutrition, and cultural characteristics of isolates of Phytophthora parasitica from carnation and other hosts in Hawaii. Phytopathology 53:1194–1197Google Scholar
  22. Holm L, Doll J, Holm E, Pancho J, Herberger J (1997) World weeds: natural histories and distribution. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Jenkins NE, Heviefo G, Langewald J, Cherry AJ, Lomer CJ (1998) Development of mass production technology for aerial conidia for use as mycopesticides. Biocontrol News Inf 19:21–31Google Scholar
  24. Landry C, Bonnot F, Ravignéb V, Carlier J, Rengifo D, Vaillant J, Abadie C (2017) A foliar disease simulation model to assist the design of new control methods against black leaf streak disease of banana. Ecol Model 359:383–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Léger C, Hallett SG, Watson AK (2001) Performance of Colletotrichum dematium for the control of fireweed (Epilobium angustifolium) improved with formulation. Weed Technol 15:437–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mani KK, Hollier CA, Groth DE (2017) Effect of cultivar susceptibility and planting date on narrow brown leaf spot progression in rice. Crop Prot 102:88–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Nechet KL, Barreto RW, Mizubuti ESG (2004) Sphaceloma poinsettiae as a potential biological control agent for wild poinsettia (Euphorbia heterophylla). Biol Control 30:556–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Piccinini F, Machado SLO, Martin TN, Kruse ND, Balbinot A, Guareschi A (2018) Interference of morning glory in soybean yield. Planta Daninha 36:e018150988.  https://doi.org/10.1590/s0100-83582018360100063 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pizzo IV, Azania CAM, Azania AAPM, Schiavetto AR (2010) Seletividade e eficácia de controle de plantas daninhas pela associação entre óleo fúsel e herbicidas em cana-de-açúcar. Planta Daninha 28:347–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Santos THF, Halfeld-Vieira BA, Assis MC, Nechet KL (2016) Patogenicidade da micobiota de Ipomoea spp. para prospecção de micoherbicida. In: Anais do congresso interinstitucional de iniciação científica (16411). Embrapa Monitoramento por Satélite, Campinas. https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/155914/1/2016AA42.pdf
  31. SAS (2009) SAS Institute Inc. 2009.SAS/STAT®9.2 user’s guide, 2nd edn. SAS institute inc., CaryGoogle Scholar
  32. Silva PV, Monquero PA, Silva FB, Bevilaqua NC, Malardo MR (2015) Influence of sugarcane straw and sowing depth on the emergence of weed species. Planta Daninha 33:405–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Silva MG, Pozza EA, Lima CVRV, Fernandes TJ (2016) Temperature and light intensity interaction on Cercospora coffeicola sporulation and conidia germination. Ciênc Agrotecnol 40:198–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Singh M, Tan SY, Sharma SD (2002) Adjuvants enhance weed control efficacy of foliar-applied diuron. Weed Technol 16:74–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Smalheiser NR (2017) Chapter 11 ANOVA. In: Smalheiser NR (ed) Data literacy: how to make your experiments robust and reproducible. Academic Press, New York, pp 149–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. TeBeest DO (1996) Biological control of weeds with plant pathogens and microbial pesticides. Adv Agron 56:115–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tonieto TAP, Regitano JB (2014) Effects of straw decomposition degree on leaching and weed control efficacy of the buthiuron and hexazinone in green sugarcane harvesting. Planta Daninha 32:809–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Walker L (1980) Alternaria macrospora as a potential biocontrol agent for spurred anoda: production of spores for field studies. Adv Agric Technol 12:1–15Google Scholar
  39. Wapshere AJ (1974) A strategy for evaluating the safety of organisms for biological weed control. Ann App Biol 77:201–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wyss GS, Charudattan R, Rosskopf EN, Littell RC (2004) Effects of selected pesticides and adjuvants on germination and vegetative growth of Phomopsis amaranthicola, a biocontrol agent for Amaranthus spp. Weed Res 44:469–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yang XB, TeBeest DO (1993) Epidemiological mechanisms of mycoherbicide effectiveness. Phytopathology 83:891–893CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Organization for Biological Control (IOBC) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Embrapa Meio AmbienteJaguariúnaBrazil

Personalised recommendations