Head and Leaf Fungicide Deposit on Winter Wheat, Deoxynivalenol Content and Yield Parameters As Affected by Different Nozzle Types
In 2014 and 2015, we studied the effect of fungicide spraying with 11 different nozzles on the quality and quantity of head and leaf fungicide deposit, the percentage of Fusarium head blight (FHB) incidence, FHB index, the DON content, yield and grain quality parameters. The best quality and quantity of fungicide deposit on the front and rear head sides was achieved with the TeeJet Turbo FloodJet TF VP2 nozzle (FLOOD) and the Albuz AVI-TWIN 110-03 nozzle (AVI). In comparison with the majority of treatments, the FHB incidence and the FHB index was the highest on the unsprayed control. The FHB index was higher using the Lechler IDK 120-03 nozzle (IDK) than with the other nozzle types. In all the treatments, the DON content in the grain was less than 50 µg/kg. At this very low level of infection this is not surprising. The grain yield was the smallest on the unsprayed control. Better fungicide coverage of wheat heads with the FLOOD and AVI nozzles did not result in a statistically higher yield or better grain quality parameters. Negative correlations were confirmed between yield and variables as DON content, FHB incidence and FHB index and also between falling number and variables as fungicide coverage, FHB incidence and FHB index. Positive correlations were determined between DON content and FHB incidence, between hectolitre weight and variables as spray deposit and coverage and between protein content and variables as spray deposit and coverage.
Keywordsnozzles coverage value deposit Fusarium head blight yield grain quality
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Ages 2013. Austrian list of described cultivars. Österreichische Agentur fur Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit GmbH, Vienna, Austria. 131 p. (in German)Google Scholar
- Blandino, M., Pascale, M., Haidukowski, M., Reyneri, A. 2011. Influence of agronomic conditions on the efficacy of different fungicides applied to wheat at heading: effect of flag senescence, Fusarium head blight attack, grain yield and deoxynivalenol contamination. Italian J. of Agron. 6:204–211.Google Scholar
- EPPO 1997. Guidelines for the efficacy evaluation of plant protection products. Vol. 2 fungicides and bactericides. European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organization, Paris, France.Google Scholar
- Halley S., Pederson J., McMullen M., Lukach J. 1999. Sprayer modifications for enhanced control of Fusarium head blight with fungicides. In: Proc. National Fusarium Head Blight Forum, Sioux Fall, SD, USA, pp. 50–52.Google Scholar
- Hollingsworth, C.R., Motteberg, C.D., Thompson, W.G. 2006. Assessing fungicide efficacies for the management of Fusarium head blight on spring wheat and barley. Plant Health Progress pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
- https://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/php/research/2006/fusarium/Google Scholar
- Marshall, D.J., Robinson, T.H., Scott, T. 2000. The effects of forward speed, spray quality and nozzle types on the deposition and biological performance of strobilurin fungicide. Asp. Appl. Biol. 57:235–242.Google Scholar
- Miedaner, T. 2012. Mykotoksine in Weizen und Mais. Fusarien erfolgreich vorbeugen (Mycotoxins in Wheat and Maize. Efficient Fusarium Control). DLG Verlag GmbH, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 88 p. (in German).Google Scholar
- Parkin, C.S., Miller, P.C.H., Powell, E.S., Orson, J.H., Gill, J., Magan, N., Aldred, D. 2006. Improving the deposition and coverage of fungicides on ears to control Fusarium ear blight and reduce mycotoxin contamination of grain. Project Report No. 383. HGCA. London, UK. 33 p.Google Scholar