European Journal of Plant Pathology

, Volume 101, Issue 6, pp 601–611 | Cite as

Soil tillage and eyespot: influence of crop residue distribution on disease development and infection cycles

  • Nathalie Colbach
  • Jean-Marc Meynard
Research Articles


Two deep-working soil tillage tools, one which inverts soil (plough) and one which does not (chisel), were used before sowing wheat after various crop successions combining eyespot host and non-host crops. Soil structure was nearly the same and crop residues were located in the different soil layers. Eyespot sporulation was estimated by visually assessing pot plants which had been on the trial plots for a fixed length of time. Field plants were also assessed for disease at several wheat growth stages. A kinetic equation expressing disease level as a function of degree-days was fitted to the disease levels observed on the field plants. This equation is based on eyespot epidemiology and depends on two parameters reflecting the importance of the primary and the secondary infection cycles respectively. Pot plant and early field plant disease levels and primary infection were closely correlated to the presence of crop residues in the top layer. The amount of residues depended on both crop succession and soil tillage. Where the previous crop was a host crop preceded by a non-host crop, soil inversion buried host residues, thus decreasing the primary infection risk. Where however the previous crop was a non-host crop preceded by a host crop, soil inversion carried the host residues back to soil surface, thus increasing the primary infection risk. Secondary infection was not correlated to either crop succession or soil tillage.

Key Words

crop residue distribution kinetic equation infection cycles Pseudocercosporella herpotrichoides crop succession soil tillage 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Box GEP, Hunter WG and Hunter JS (1978) Statistics for Experimenters: an Introduction to Design, Data Analysis and Model Building. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Brooks DH and Dawson MG (1968) Influence of direct drilling of winter wheat on incidence of take-all and eyespot. Ann Appl Biol 61: 57–64Google Scholar
  3. Cox J and Cock LJ (1962) Survival ofCercosporella herpotrichoides on naturally infected straws of wheat and barley. Plant Pathol 11(2): 65–66Google Scholar
  4. Fitt BDL and Bainbridge A (1983) Recovery ofPseudocercosporella herpotrichoides spores from rain splash samples. Phytopathol Z 106: 177–182Google Scholar
  5. Gautronneau Y and Manichon H (1987) Guide méthodique du profil cultural. Editions GEARA-CEREF, 71 pGoogle Scholar
  6. Glynne MD (1951) Effect of cultural treatments on wheat and on the incidence of eyespot lodging, take-all and weeds. Ann Appl Biol 38: 665–688Google Scholar
  7. glynne MD (1953) Production of spores byCercosporella herpotrichoides. Trans Br Mycol Soc 36: 46–51Google Scholar
  8. Grazzeck E (1986) Der Einfluß der Grundbodenbearbeitung auf das Auftreten der Halmbruchkrankheit (Pseudocercosporella herpotrichoides (Fron) Deighton) in Wintergerste und Winterweizen. Nachrichtenbl Pflanzenschutz DDR, Berlin 40 (9) 193–195Google Scholar
  9. Groll U and Luzi K (1991) Untersuchungen zum Einfluß acker-und pflanzenbaulicher Faktoren auf den Halmbruchbefall an Wintergetreide. Arch Phytopathol Pflanzensch 27: 459–470Google Scholar
  10. Hénin S, Gras R. and Monnier G (1969) Le profil cultural. Editions Masson, Paris, 266 pGoogle Scholar
  11. Huet P (1986) Influence du système de culture sur le piétin-verse du blé. In: Les rotations céréalières intensives. Dix années d'études concertées INRA-ONIC-ITCF; 1973–1983, INRA Paris 1986. 95–111Google Scholar
  12. Macer RCF (1961a) Saprophytic colonization of wheat straw byCercosporella herpotrichoides (Fron) and other fungi. Ann Appl Bio 49: 152–164Google Scholar
  13. Macer RCF (1961b) Survival ofCercosporella herpotrichoides (Fron) in wheat straw. Ann Appl Biol 49: 165–172Google Scholar
  14. Maenhout CAAA (1975) Eyespot in winter wheat: effects of crop rotation and tillage, and the prediction of incidence. Bull OEPP 5: 407–413Google Scholar
  15. Mielke H (1983) Untersuchungen über den Einfluß verschiedener Bodenbearbeitungen auf Fußkrankheiten des Getreides, Nachrichtenbl dtsch Pflanzenschutzdienstes, Braunschweig 35(3): 33–39Google Scholar
  16. Moreau JM, Van Schingen JC and Maraite H (1990) Epidémiologie dePseudocercosporella herpotrichoides var.acuformis et var.Herpotrichoides sur froment d'hiver, démonstration d'un cycle secondaire. Med Fac Landbouwwet, Rijksuniv Gent 55 (3a): 889–898Google Scholar
  17. Nirenberg HI (1981) Differenzierung des Erregers der Halmbruchkrankheit. I. Morphologie. Z Pflanzenkr Pflanzenschutz 88: 241–248Google Scholar
  18. Polley RW and Thomas MR (1991) Surveys of diseases of winter wheat in England and Wales, 1976–1988. Ann Appl Biol 119: 1–20Google Scholar
  19. Ponchet J (1959) La maladie du piétin-verse des céréales, importance agronomique, biologie et épiphytologie. Ann. Epiphyt. 1: 45–98Google Scholar
  20. Prew RD (1981) Cropping system in relation to soil-borne and trashborne diseases of cereals. In: Jenkin JF and Plumb RT (eds) Strategies for the Control of Cereal Diseases (pp. 149–156) Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Rapilly F, Laborie Y, Eschenbrenner P, Choisnel E and Lacroze F (1979) La prévision du piétin-verse sur blé d'hiver. Perspect agric 49: 30–40Google Scholar
  22. schulz H, Bodker L, Nistrup Jorgensen L and Kristensen K (1990) Influence of different cultural practices on distribution and incidence of eyespot (Pseudocercosporella herpotrichoides) in winter rye and winter wheat. Tidsskr Planteavl 94: 211–221Google Scholar
  23. Steinbrenner K and Höflich G (1984) Einfluß acker-und pflanzenbaulicher Maßnahmen auf den Befall des Getreides durchPseudocercosporella herpotrichoides (Fron) Deighton undGaeumannomyces graminis (Sacc.) Arx et Olivier. Arch Phytopathol Pflanzensch Berlin 20 (6): 469–486Google Scholar
  24. Steinbrenner K and Obenauf U (1988) Untersuchungen zur Anbaupause von Winterweizen. Arch Acker-Pflanzenbau Bodenkd 32 (1): 57–62Google Scholar
  25. Van der Plank JE (1963) Plant Diseases: Epidemics and Control (Academic Press, New York)Google Scholar
  26. Zadoks JC, Chang TT and Konzak CF (1974) A decimal code for the growth stage of cereals. Weed Res 14: 415–421Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathalie Colbach
    • 1
  • Jean-Marc Meynard
    • 2
  1. 1.INRA, SRIVLe RheuFrance
  2. 2.INRA, AgronomieCentre de GrignonThiverval-GrignonFrance

Personalised recommendations