Advertisement

Multi-environment assessment of fungicide performance for managing wheat head blast (WHB) in Brazil and Bolivia

  • Christian D. Cruz
  • Flávio M. Santana
  • Timothy C. Todd
  • João L. N. Maciel
  • Javier Kiyuna
  • Diego F. Baldelomar
  • Andrés P. Cruz
  • Douglas Lau
  • Claudine S. Seixas
  • Augusto C. P. Goulart
  • Angelo A. Sussel
  • Carlos A. Schipanski
  • Débora F. Chagas
  • Maurício Coelho
  • Tatiane Dalla Nora Montecelli
  • Carlos Utiamada
  • Adriano P. Custódio
  • Marcia G. Rivadeneira
  • William W. Bockus
  • Barbara Valent
Original Article

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the performance of fungicides against wheat head blast (WHB) under various environments and to determine scenarios best suited for fungicide applications. Field experiments were conducted at 23 environments in Brazil and Bolivia from 2012 to 2015. Data from all trials within the same country were combined for estimating mean WHB control efficacy and yield benefits from using a set of fungicides. Experiments were classified, based on disease index in the check treatment, as having low (CDI = 10), moderate (CDI = 40), and high (CDI = 70) disease pressure and this variable was tested as a covariate in the model. In Brazil, greater disease reduction and yield increase, in trials with moderate to high disease pressure, were obtained when using mancozeb-based fungicides, but with yield gains below 1276 kg/ha. In Bolivia, all fungicides reduced the disease at moderate to high disease pressure, but specific QoI + DMI premixes led to higher yield gains averaging 1834 kg/ha. Based on the evidence provided, we concluded that current WHB chemical strategies could have radically different results depending on country and disease pressure. Although WHB chemical control can be effective even under environmental conditions that favor the disease, integrated management strategies should be explored. Our results are useful for aiding decisions on fungicide application and identifying priorities for future research.

Keywords

Wheat blast Brusone Magnaporthe oryzae Pyricularia oryzae Head blast Fungicide efficacy 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Our research on wheat blast disease has been funded by Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Competitive Grants 2009-55605-05201 and 2013-68004-20378 (Blast Integrated Project) from the United States Department of Agriculture National Institute of Food and Agriculture (USDA-NIFA). This work was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch Project 1016253. We thank Purdue University start-up funds for supporting this work.

Supplementary material

40858_2018_262_MOESM1_ESM.pptx (126 kb)
ESM 1 (PPTX 125 kb)

References

  1. Barea G, Toledo J (1996) Identificación y zonificación de Pyricularia o brusone (Pyricularia oryzae) en el cutivo de trigo en el departamento de Santa Cruz. In: Centro de Investigación Agrícola Tropical. Informe Tecnico Proyecto de Investigacion Trigo. Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia. pp 76–86Google Scholar
  2. Bayer M, Klix MB, Klink H, Verreet JA (2006) Quantifying the effects of previous crop, tillage, cultivar and triazole fungicides on the deoxynivalenol content of wheat grain – A review. Journal Plant Diseases and Protection 113:241–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Castroagudín VL, Ceresini PC, Oliveira SC, Reges JT, Maciel JL, Bonato AL, Dorigan AF, McDonald BA (2015) Resistance to QoI fungicides is widespread in Brazilian populations of the wheat blast pathogen Magnaporthe oryzae. Phytopathology 105:284–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CBPTT - Comissão Brasileira de Pesquisa de Trigo e Triticale (2013) Informações técnicas para trigo e triticale - safra 2013. Fundação Meridional/IAPAR, LondrinaGoogle Scholar
  5. Couch BC, Kohn LM (2002) A multilocus gene genealogy concordant with host preference indicates segregation of a new species, Magnaporthe oryzae, from M. grisea. Mycologia 94:683–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cruz C.D., Valent B (2017) Wheat blast: danger on the move. Tropica Plant pathololgy.Google Scholar
  7. Cruz MFA, Diniz APC, Rodriguez FA, Barros EG (2011) Aplicação foliar de produtos na redução da severidade da brusone do trigo. Tropical Plant Pathology 36:424–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cruz CD, Kiyuna J, Bockus WW, Baldelomar DF, Todd TC, Stack JP, Valent B (2015) Magnaporthe oryzae conidia on basal wheat leaves as a potential source of wheat blast inoculum. Plant Pathology.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12414 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goulart A (2005) Perdas em trigo causadas pela brusone. In: Workshop de Epidemiologia de Doenças de Plantas. Viçosa, M. Quantificação de perdas no manejo de doenças de plantas: anais. Viçosa, M: Universidade Federal de Viçosa, 2004b. pp 123-130Google Scholar
  10. Goulart ACP, Paiva FA (1993) Avaliação de fungicidas no controle da brusone "Pyricularia oryzae" do trigo (Triticum aestivum). Fitopatologia Brasileira 18:167–173Google Scholar
  11. Goulart A, Paiva F (2000) Perdas no rendimento de grãos de trigo causada por Pyricularia grisea, nos anos de 1991 e 1992, no Mato Grosso do Sul. Summa Phytopathologica 26:279–282Google Scholar
  12. Goulart ACP, Paiva FA, Melo Filho GM, Richetti A (1996) Efeito da época e do número de aplicações dos fungicidas tebuconazole e mancozebe no controle da brusone (Pyricularia grisea) do trigo: viabilidade técnica e econômica. Fitopatologia Brasileira 21:381–387Google Scholar
  13. Goulart ACP, Sousa PG, Urashima AS (2007) Danos em trigo causados pela infecção de Pyricularia grisea. Summa Phytopathologica 33:358–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hurtado J, Toledo J (2004) Efectos de los fungicidas tebuconazol y pyraclostrobin + epoxiconazol en el control de la Piricularia o bruzone del trigo. In: Informe annual investigacion trigo – Verano 2003/04 Invierno 2004. Centro de Investigación Agrícola Tropical. Santa Cruz, BoliviaGoogle Scholar
  15. Inoue Y, Vy TTP, Yoshida K, Asano H, Mitsuoka C, Asuke S, Anh VL, Cumagun CJR, Chuma I, Terauchi R, Kato K, Mitchell T, Valent B, Farman F, Tosa Y (2017) Evolution of the wheat blast fungus through functional losses in a host specificity determinant. Science 357:80–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Islam MT, Croll D, Gladieux P, Soanes DM, Persoons A, Bhattacharjee P, Hossain MS, Gupta DR, Rahman MM, Mahboob MG, Cook N, Salam MU, Surovy MZ, Sancho VB, Maciel JLN, NhaniJúnior A, Castroagudín VL, Reges JTA, Ceresini PC, Ravel S, Kellner R, Fournier E, Tharreau D, Lebrun M-H, BA MD, Stitt T, Swan D, Talbot NJ, Saunders DGO, Win J, Kamoun S (2016) Emergence of wheat blast in Bangladesh was caused by a south American lineage of Magnaporthe oryzae. BMC Biology 14:84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kohli M, Mehta Y, Guzman E, Viedma L, Cubilla L (2011) Pyricularia blast – a threat to wheat cultivation. Czech Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding 47:S130–S134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2006) SAS for mixed models, Second Edition. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.Google Scholar
  19. Maciel JLN (2011) Magnaporthe oryzae, the blast pathogen: current status and options for its control. CABI. Perspectives in agriculture, veterinary science. Nutrition Natural Resources 6:1–28Google Scholar
  20. Maciel JL, Danelli AL, Boretto C, Forcelini CA (2013) Diagrammatic scale for assessment of blast on wheat spikes. Summa Phytopathologica 39:162–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Malaker PK, Barma NCD, Tiwari TP, Collis WJ, Duveiller E, Singh PK, Joshi AK, Singh RP, Braun HJ, Peterson GL, Pedley KF, Farman ML, Valent B (2016) First report of wheat blast caused by Magnaporthe oryzae pathotype triticum in Bangladesh. Plant Disease 100:2330–2330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. MAPA - Ministério da Agricultura Pecuária e Abastecimento (2017) Agrofit - Sistemas de Agrotóxicos Fitossanitários, Available at <http://agrofit.agricultura.gov.br/agrofit_cons/principal_agrofit_cons>Coordenação Geral de Agrotóxicos e Afins. Acessed on March 29, 2017
  23. Moore KJ, Dixon PM (2015) Analysis of combined experiments revisited. Agronomy Journal 107:763–771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Oliveira SC, Castroagudín VL, Maciel JLN, Pereira DAS, Ceresini PC (2015) Resistência cruzada aos fungicidas IQo azoxistrobina e piraclostrobina no patógeno da brusone do trigo Pyricularia oryzae no Brasil. Summa Phytopathologica 41:298–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pagani APS, Dianese AC, Café-Filho AC (2014) Management of wheat blast with synthetic fungicides, partial resistance and silicate and phosphite minerals. Phytoparasitica 42:609–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paul, P., Madden, L., McMullen, M., Hershman, D., Sweets, L., Wegulo, S., Bockus, W., Halley, S., and Ruden, K. 2007. An integrated approach to managing FHB and DON in wheat: uniform trials 2007. Pages 117-122 in: Proc. 2007 Natl. Fusarium head blight forum. Michigan State University, East LansingGoogle Scholar
  27. Rios JA, Rios VS, Paul PA, Souza MA, Araujo L, Rodrigues FA (2016) Fungicide and cultivar effects on the development and temporal progress of wheat blast under field conditions. Crop Protection 89:152–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rocha J, Pimentel A, Ribeiro G, de Souza M (2014) Eficiência de fungicidas no controle da brusone em trigo. Summa Phytopathologica 40:347–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Santana FM, Maciel JLN, Lau D, Cargnin A, Seixas CDS, Bassoi MC, Goulart ACP, Sussel AAB, Schipanski CA, Montecelli TDN, Chagas JH, Guizeline J (2013) Eficiência de fungicidas para o controle da brusone do trigo: resultados dos ensaios cooperativos - safra 2011. Embrapa Trigo. Comunicado Técnico Online, 328. Available at: <http://www.cnpt.embrapa.br/biblio/co/p_co328.htm> Accessed October 5, 2017
  30. Toledo J (2015) Piricularia. In: Manual de recomendaciones técnicas – Cultivo de trigo. Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Asociación de Productores de Oleaginosas y Trigo (ANAPO), pp 101-107Google Scholar
  31. Urashima AS, Lavorent NA, Goulart ACP, Mehta YR (2004) Resistance spectra of wheat cultivars and virulence diversity of Magnaporthe grisea isolates in Brazil. Fitopatologia Brasileira 29:511–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sociedade Brasileira de Fitopatologia 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian D. Cruz
    • 1
  • Flávio M. Santana
    • 2
  • Timothy C. Todd
    • 3
  • João L. N. Maciel
    • 2
  • Javier Kiyuna
    • 4
  • Diego F. Baldelomar
    • 5
  • Andrés P. Cruz
    • 1
  • Douglas Lau
    • 2
  • Claudine S. Seixas
    • 6
  • Augusto C. P. Goulart
    • 7
  • Angelo A. Sussel
    • 8
  • Carlos A. Schipanski
    • 9
  • Débora F. Chagas
    • 9
  • Maurício Coelho
    • 10
  • Tatiane Dalla Nora Montecelli
    • 11
  • Carlos Utiamada
    • 12
  • Adriano P. Custódio
    • 13
  • Marcia G. Rivadeneira
    • 14
  • William W. Bockus
    • 3
  • Barbara Valent
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Botany and Plant PathologyPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Embrapa TrigoPasso FundoBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Plant PathologyKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA
  4. 4.Centro Tecnológico Agropecuario en Bolivia, Fundación CETABOLSanta CruzBolivia
  5. 5.Asociación Nacional de Productores de Oleaginosas y TrigoSanta Cruz de la SierraBolivia
  6. 6.Embrapa SojaLondrinaBrazil
  7. 7.Embrapa Agropecuária OesteDouradosBrazil
  8. 8.Embrapa CerradosPlanaltinaBrazil
  9. 9.Fundação ABCCastroBrazil
  10. 10.Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária de Minas Gerais, Patos de MinasMinas GeraisBrazil
  11. 11.CoodetecCascavelBrazil
  12. 12.Tagro Tecnologia Agropecuária LtdaLondrinaBrazil
  13. 13.Instituto Agronômico do ParanáLondrinaBrazil
  14. 14.Centro de Investigación Agrícola Tropical, Estación Experimental Agrícola de Saavedra – EEASSanta CruzBolivia

Personalised recommendations