Sensitivity and efficacy of the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor fluxapyroxad, against raspberry spur blight fungus Didymella applanata
- 37 Downloads
Didymella applanata, the causal agent of raspberry spur blight, is a destructive plant pathogen that can cause serious reductions in total yield. The use of fungicides plays a crucial role in successful control of the pathogen. The sensitivity of 94 isolates (66 collected during 2013 and 28 in 2017) of D. applanata to the succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor, fluxapyroxad, was evaluated in this study. In addition, the efficacy of fluxapyroxad in raspberry spur blight control in the field was determined. The isolates tested in this study showed different sensitivity to fluxapyroxad in vitro. The EC50 values of total number of isolates tested were ranged from 0.82 to 5.92 µg ml−1. The ranges of EC50 values for the isolates varied between the localities where the isolates originated from and also the year of isolation. The mean EC50 values in the group of isolates obtained in 2013 were 1.95 µg ml−1 ± 0.81 (0.82 to 4.05 µg ml−1), while the EC50 values for those isolated in 2017 were ranged from 1.16 to 5.78 µg ml−1 (mean = 3.24 µg ml−1 ± 1.38). The efficacy trials were conducted during 2017 and 2018 in a commercial raspberry field at two locations in western part of Serbia. Applied in both concentration rates 0.02 and 0.03% of the formulated product (0.006 and 0.009% of a.i.), fluxapyroxad showed a very high efficacy in spur blight control in practical condition.
KeywordsDidymella applanata Fluxapyroxad Sensitivity Efficacy
This research was carried out within the Project III46008, supported by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Ellis MA (2008) Spur blight of red raspberries, Ohio State University Extension. https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/plpath-fru-28. Accessed 04 Oct 2018
- EPPO (2012) Design and analysis of efficacy evaluation trials—PP 1/152(4). In: EPPO standards: guidelines for the efficacy evaluation of plant protection products. EPPO Bulletin, Vol 42, p 367–381Google Scholar
- FAOSTAT (2016) Food and agricultural commodities production. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC. Accessed 10 Sep 2018
- Finney DJ (1971) Probit analysis. University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Fox RTV (2006) Spur blight of raspberry. Mycologist 20: 77 https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0269915X06000358/1-s2.0-S0269915X06000358-main.pdf?_tid=5782dd09-8f7d-47bd-8a73-059d0b9f49f0&acdnat=1543572855_097a5cab6b1489305c20c2bdd1a43112. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
- Gouot JM (1994) Characteristics and population dynamics of Botrytis cinerea and other pathogens resistant to dicarboximides. In: Delp CJ (ed) Fungicide resistant in North America. The American Phytopathological Society, St. Paul, pp 53–55Google Scholar
- Mikulic-Petkovsek M, Schmitzer V, Stampar F, Veberic R, Koron D (2014) Changes in phenolic content induced by infection with Didymella applanata and Leptosphaeria coniothyrium, the causal agents of raspberry spur and cane blight. Plant Pathol 63:185–192. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mirković B, Tanović B, Hrustić J, Mihajlović M, Stević M, Delibašić G, Vukša P (2015a) Toxicity of copper hydroxide, dithianon, fluazinam, tebuconazole and pyraclostrobin to Didymella applanata isolates from Serbia. J Environ Sci Health Part B Pestic Food Contam Agric Wastes 50: 175–183. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271222687_Toxicity_of_copper_hydroxide_dithianon_fluazinam_tebuconazole_and_pyraclostrobin_to_Didymella_applanata_isolates_from_Serbia. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
- Mirković B, Tanović B, Stević M, Hrustić J, Mihajlović M, Delibašić G, Vukša P (2015b) Toxicity of mancozeb, chlorothalonil, captan, fluopyram, boscalid, and difenoconazole to Didymella applanata isolates from Serbia. J Environ Sci Health Part B Pestic Food Contam Agric Wastes 50: 845–850. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280867202_Toxicity_of_mancozeb_chlorothalonil_captan_fluopyram_boscalid_and_difenoconazole_to_Didymella_applanata_isolates_from_Serbia. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
- Punithalingam E (1982) Didymella applanata. In: Commonwealth Mycological Institute (CMI) descriptions of pathogenic fungi and bacteria. Kew, Surrey,Vol 74, p 731–740Google Scholar
- Sierotzki H, Scalliet G (2013) A review of current knowledge of resistance aspects for the next-generation succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor fungicides. Phytopathology 103: 880–887 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23593940. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
- Stević M, Pavlović B, Tanović B (2017) Efficacy of fungicides with different modes of action in raspberry spur blight (Didymella applanata) control. Pestic Phytomed 32: 25–32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317712511_Efficacy_of_fungicides_with_different_modes_of_action_in_raspberry_spur_blight_Didymella_applanata_control. Accessed 10 Oct 2018
- Williamson B (1991) Spur blight. In: Ellis MA, Converse RH, Williams RN, Williamson B (eds) Compendium of raspberry and blackberry diseases and insects. APS Press, St. Paul, pp 7–9Google Scholar
- Williamson B (2003) A possible resurgence of minor fungal diseases of Rubus caused by reductions in fungicide use. IOBC-WPRS Bull 26:139–146Google Scholar
- Williamson B, Hargreaves AJ (1981) Effects of Didymella applanata and Botrytis cinerea on axillary buds, lateral shoots and yield of red raspberry. Ann Appl Biol 97:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348.1981.tb02994.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar