APPLICATION METHOD AND RATE OF QUADRIS FOR CONTROL OF RHIZOCTONIA CROWN AND ROOT ROT. Jason R. Brantner and Carol E. Windels

Similar documents
EFFECT OF IN-FURROW FUNGICIDE APPLICATION METHOD ON CONTROL OF RHIZOCTONIA AND SUGARBEET STAND ESTABLISHMENT. Jason R. Brantner and Jeffrey D.

ROTATION CROP EFFECTS ON RHIZOCTONIA DISEASES OF SUGARBEET IN INFESTED FIELDS. Carol E. Windels and Jason R. Brantner

Control of Rhizoctonia from Planting to Harvest

Update on Root Rot Research: Aphanomyces and Rhizoctonia

RHIZOCTONIA CROWN AND ROOT ROT ON SUGARBEET FOLLOWING CORN

AGGRESSIVENESS OF RHIZOCTONIA SOLANI AG 2-2 ON SUGARBEET AND ROTATION CROPS. Carol E. Windels and Jason R. Brantner

CERCOSPORA BETICOLA INSENSITIVITY IN MICHIGAN AND MICHIGAN SUGAR COMPANY S RESISTANCE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

EFFECT OF HEADLINE (PYRACLOSTROBIN) AS A YIELD ENHANCER FOR SUGARBEETS IN MICHIGAN

Seed rots and Seedling diseases and what to look for in 2013?

Management of Tobacco Diseases Agent Training Dark Tobacco

Further Evaluation of Biological Control Agents for Verticillium Wilt in Peppermint. Sai Sree Uppala, Bo Ming Wu, Mark Hagman and Jim Cloud

Foliar fungicide timing and interaction with soybean maturities: Effect on soybean disease suppression and yield

Soybean plant health: Foliar fungicide and insecticide effects on soybean disease suppression, senescence and yield I.

The Impact of Post Application Irrigation on Dollar Spot, Brown Patch and Algae Control with Renown Fungicide, 2008

Influence of Fungicides and Biological Controls on Potato Diseases and Yukon Gold Yield and Quality

STRAWBREAKER FOOT ROT OR EYESPOT OF WHEAT

Effects of Phosphorus and Calcium on Tuber Set, Yield, and Quality in Goldrush Potato

Research Progress Report Southern Region Small Fruit Consortium

Ditylenchus dipsaci, which proliferates in the storage

THE EFFECTS OF MINITUBER SIZE AND HARVEST DATE ON GERMINATION, TUBER SET, AND YIELD OF RUSSET BURBANK POTATOES. Steven R. James '

REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCCESSFUL ALFALFA ESTABLISHMENT

Influence of Fungicides and Biological Products on Potato Diseases and Yukon Gold Yield and Quality

Weed Management in Sugar Beets: 2008 Research Results. Prepared for the. Ontario Sugar Beet Growers Association

2016 Tillage Radish Planting Date x Seeding Rate Trial

White Rot Fungicide Evaluations in Fresno County & Nitrogen Balance Progress Report

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS ON WHITE LUPINE AT MADRAS AND REDMOND, OREGON, IN J. Loren Nelson '

Steven R. James and Gary L. Reed

IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Program Research Report Cover Sheet

Effect of Method of Application of Double Superphosphate on the Yield and Phosphorus Uptake by Sugar Beets 1

Potato Early Blight. Identification and Life Cycle. Plant Response and Damage. Management Approaches. Biological Control

(F) (%) (mph) (inches) May Calm 8:30 AM 2 true leaves

LEVELS OF SEED AND SOIL BORNE

Optimizing Peach Disease Management

PHYTOPHTHORA ROOT AND RUNNER ROT OF CRANBERRY IN WISCONSIN- THE CURRENT SITUATION

The Dutch Potato Report 2016 With Micosat mycorrhizae, fungi and bacteria

HealthyGro Fertilizer Trials

Spring Barley Seed Treatment Trial, Hettinger County, North Dakota, 2005

TREATMENT. 3-4 year crop rotation. Apply fungicides beginning when disease first appears.

FIRE BLIGHT INFECTIONS OF SHOOTS (SHOOT BLIGHT) FOR SUSCEPTIBLE APPLE VARIETIES

Disease Management in Peanuts. Barbara Shew Plant Pathology Research and Extension David Jordan Peanut Agronomist NC State University

Managing Seedling Disease Problems on Rice Through Fungicides, Adapted Cultivars, and Cropping Systems

Seed tuber-borne inoculum of Rhizoctonia significantly contributes to Rhizoctonia disease epidemics on potato and pathogen population genetic changes

When and What Herbicides to Apply for Layby Weed Control in Sugarbeets during the 2008 Growing Season. Robert Wilson

Weed Control in Green Peas. Tim Miller and Carl Libbey, WSU Mount Vernon

Potatoes (2007) Potatoes Comparisons of Nitrogen Sources and Foliars (2008) Potatoes Nitrogen Types (2008) Potato Seed Piece Direct Fertilizer

Hawaii Agriculture Research Center -1- Vegetable Report 2. Hawaii Agriculture Research Center Vegetable Report 2 January 2000

Onion Production. IDEA-NEW, May, 2010

Sorghum Disease Update. Doug Jardine Extension Plant Pathologist

Effect of Max-In Technology on Roundup Power Max Performance on Sugarbeet and Weeds at Mitchell, Nebraska during the 2009 Growing Season.

Strategy for Control of Seedling Diseases of Cotton

Seed Quality and Guidelines for Seed Borne Diseases of Pulse Crops

Comparison of Field Seeding of Sugar Beets and Mangel Wurzels with Two Methods of Transplanting 1

High Tunnel Pepper Variety Trial, 2011

Potato early dying. What it is and what you can do to help manage it

EFFECTS OF TANK MIXES OF ROUNDUP WITH FUNGICIDES AND INSECTICIDES ON ROUNDUP READY SOYBEANS

BEAN ROOT ROT EVALUATION PROTOCOLS

Welcome! Please download the Kahoot! App to your smartphone Available on the App Store (iphone) and Play Store (Android)

MANAGEMENT OF DISEASES ON COTTON AND SOYBEAN,

THE POSSIBILITY OF CONTROLLING SCLEROTIUM ROLFSII ON SOYBEAN (GLYCINE MAX) USING TRICHODERMA AND TEBUCONAZOLE*) OKKY S.

Fusarium wilt of lettuce. Michael E. Matheron Extension Plant Pathologist Yuma Agricultural Center

CRP Conversion: Missouri

Managing Phosphorus to Optimize Potato Tuber Yield in the San Luis Valley

Important Lettuce Diseases and Their Management

Rice Sheath Blight Disease Management

Cereal Seed Health and Seed Treatment Strategies: Exploiting new seed testing technology to optimise seed health decisions for wheat.

High Tunnel Bramble Production

Sam Turner Agronomist B.T. Loftus Ranches, Inc.

Peanut Disease & Nematode Control Recommendations

USE OF A LOWER RATE WHEN APPLIED ON CEREALS AT THE HERBICIDE TIMING (FEEKES 4-6) - AL, AR, AZ ETC.

Seed & Soil-borne Diseases - What s New? 2012 Agronomy Update Crop Establishment

Management of Field Pea Diseases

Peanut Leaf Spot Disease Biology Early leafspot (Cercospora arachidicola) Spots first appear on the upper surface of lower leaves as faint brown to

Rust Update San Angelo April 2, Dr. David Drake, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension San Angelo

Total applications (out of 5)

Clubroot of Canola: Overview of an Emerging Problem

2000 CORN ROOTWORM SOIL INSECTICIDE EVALUATIONS AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER MEAD, NEBRASKA

Guidelines for Managing Onion Thrips on Onion

INVESTIGATOR: Bruce Potter - University of Minnesota Extension Travis Vollmer University of Minnesota Southwest Research and Outreach Center

New Planting. A&L Canada Laboratories Small Fruit News Letter Vol. 3 April 17, application should be at a 90 o direction to the row direction.

Vegetable Report 1 from Experiment Station, HARC December 1998

TOBACCO DISEASE MANAGEMENT Paul D. Peterson, Research Plant Pathologist

2003 NTEP Bentgrass Putting Green Cultivar Evaluation Performance Data, Cale A. Bigelow and Glenn A. Hardebeck

ORNAMENTALS NORTHWEST ARCHIVES

Effect of Five Planting Dates on Yield of Six Sweet Onions

Asparagus (Asparagus officinalis) is a

Pecan scab Winning the battle, but will we win the war? Tim Brenneman

Evaluation of Fiesta and liquid corn gluten meal for pre-emergent control of turfgrass weeds greenhouse and bare soil trial.

Snow Mold Control Evaluation: Marquette Golf Club Marquette, MI

Evaluation of grafting for the mature green tomato production system

Fungicide Efficacy and Spore Dispersal of Cercosporidium Needle Blight on Leyland Cypress

EverGol Energy CONTENTS

TRENDS. Acanopy is often thought of as the leafy. Turf Grass. The turfgrass canopy and its environment

Lessons from Onion Downy Mildew & Stemphylium Leaf Blight

Soilborne Root and Stem Diseases of Dry Beans in Nebraska

Green Peach Aphid Apterous Green Peach Aphid Alate Symptoms of Leafroll GREEN PEACH APHID/PLRV POPULATION DYNAMICS

Alpine Russet Management Recommendations Idaho

Karnal Brand. Cathy de Villiers Small Grain Institute, Bethlehem

Peanut fungicide comments 2016

High Tunnel Tomato Production Horticulture and Armstrong Farms 2007

MEDLEY 50G SYSTEMIC GRANULAR FUNGICIDE

Transcription:

APPLICATION METHOD AND RATE OF QUADRIS FOR CONTROL OF RHIOCTONIA CROWN AND ROOT ROT Jason R. Brantner and Carol E. Windels Research Fellow and Professor, respectively University of Minnesota, Northwest Research and Outreach Center, Crookston, MN 56716 Rhizoctonia crown and root rot (RCRR) of sugarbeet, caused by the soilborne fungus Rhizoctonia solani AG 2-2, is increasing in prevalence and severity in Minnesota and North Dakota. This increase is due to a buildup of pathogen populations over many years of growing sugarbeet and susceptible rotation crops, as well as occurrence of warm and wet weather favorable for disease development. There is a need for effective and economical control methods. Current control methods include planting partially resistant varieties, cultural practices (i.e., non-host crops in the rotation), and band application of fungicides in-furrow or post-emergence. The fungicide Quadris (azoxystrobin, Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc.) controls RCRR when applied before infections occur. The product is expensive and growers often are confused about when to apply the fungicide for maximum disease control. Labeled rates of Quadris for control of Rhizoctonia (in 22-inch rows) are from 0.4 to 0.7 fl oz product per 1,000 ft of row in a 7-inch band (= 9.5 to 16.6 fl oz product A -1 ). At a current price tag of around $320 per gallon, cost for Quadris is from $23.75 to $41.50 A -1. Product rebates sometimes decrease the cost per gallon. Questions have arisen about the possibility of reducing rates of Quadris in band applications (amount of product and/or band width) and for growers without band sprayers, about the effectiveness of broadcast applications. OBJECTIVES Two field trials were established to evaluate Quadris in 5- and 7-inch band widths and broadcast applications at four rates for 1) control of RCRR and 2) effects on sugarbeet yield and quality. MATERIALS AND METHODS The trial was established in two locations at the University of Minnesota, Northwest Research and Outreach Center, Crookston. One site was naturally infested with low population densities of R. solani (non-inoculated) and the other site was inoculated with R. solani AG 2-2 IIIB. Trials were sown with a susceptible variety (2-year RCRR rating = 5.8) in six-row plots (22-inch row spacing) on May 11 and May 17, 2010 at a 2.4-inch seed spacing. Counter 15 G (1.4 lb a.i. A -1 ) was applied at planting for control of root maggot and glyphosate (4.5 lb product ae/gallon) was applied on June 3 and 24 or 29 (24 and 28 oz A -1, respectively) for control of weeds. Quadris treatments included 5- and 7-inch bands and broadcast applications at 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, and 0.6 fl oz product per 1,000 ft of row (= 5, 7.5, 10, and 14.5 fl oz product A -1 ). Non-inoculated and inoculated, no fungicide controls also were included. Treatments were arranged in a randomized block design with four replicates. Cercospora leaf spot was controlled by Super Tin 80WP + Topsin M (5 oz + 0.5 lb product) and Headline (9 oz product) in 20 gallons of water A -1 with a tractormounted sprayer with TeeJet 8002 flat fan nozzles at 100 psi on August 17 and September 4, respectively. Non-inoculated trial. Plots were thinned to the equivalent of 175 plants per 100 ft of row on June 2. Quadris applications were made on June 7 when plants were in the 4-leaf stage and the 4-inch soil temperature maximum was 60.4 F. Stand counts were taken after thinning and at 11 and 21 days after Quadris application. The center two rows of plots were harvested September 28 and data were collected for number of harvested roots, yield and quality. Twenty roots per plot also were arbitrarily selected and rated for severity of RCRR using a 0 to 7 scale (0 = healthy root, 7 = root completely rotted and foliage dead). Inoculated trial. Plots were thinned to the equivalent of 175 plants per 100 ft of row on June 9. Quadris applications were made on June 16 when plants were in the 6-leaf stage and the 4-inch soil temperature maximum was 71.9 F. Later on the same day, R. solani AG 2-2 IIIB-infested ground barley inoculum (28 g/30 ft row) was deposited in sugarbeet crowns in the four middle rows of plots with a Gandy granule applicator. Then the trial was

cultivated to throw soil into crowns and cover inoculum. Stand counts were taken after thinning and at 14, 20, 34, 42, and 64 days after inoculation. Plots were harvested October 4 and data was collected as previously described. Statistical analysis. Data were subjected to orthogonal contrasts (P = 0.05) for comparison of application methods and linear and quadratic responses to rate of Quadris using SAS Proc Mixed (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). RESULTS Non-inoculated trial. Data for the no fungicide control are shown for comparison (Table 1), but are not included in the statistical analysis to have balance for orthogonal contrasts. There were no significant application method by rate interactions (Table 1) so main effects will be discussed separately. Broadcast applications were significantly higher (Table 1) for number of harvested roots and root yields and were significantly lower for RCRR than band applications. There were no statistical differences between broadcast and band applications for sucrose (percent, pounds per ton, pounds recoverable A -1 ) and revenue. There were no significant differences between 5- and 7-inch bands for any parameter (Table 1). There were no significant (P = 0.05) effects (linear or quadratic) of Quadris rate on any of the harvest parameters (Table 1). There was, however, a trend for increased yield, recoverable sucrose A -1, and revenue as Quadris rates increased (Table 1). The increase in revenue over the no fungicide control at the 10.0 and 14.5 fl oz product A -1 rates was greater than the cost of the product but the 5.0 and 7.5 fl oz rates did not increase revenue enough to pay for the product cost (Table 2). Table 1. Effect of various rates and application methods of Quadris (azoxystrobin) applied at the 4-leaf stage on Rhizoctonia crown and root rot (RCRR) at harvest and on sugarbeet yield and quality compared to a no fungicide control in a field that was naturally infested with a low population density of Rhizoctonia solani. No. harvested RCRR Yield Sucrose Revenue Treatment roots/100 ft (0-7) (T/A) % lb/ton lb recov./a ($/A) Control (no fungicide) 137 2.4 24.0 18.4 343 8270 1401 Application method 5-inch band 146 2.1 25.3 17.7 331 8379 1370 7-inch band 147 1.8 26.6 17.9 334 8903 1469 Broadcast 163 1.5 27.7 17.8 332 9181 1501 Broadcast vs. band *** ** * NS NS NS NS 5-inch vs. 7-inch band NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Application rate 5.0 fl oz product/a 151 1.8 25.5 17.7 330 8413 1368 7.5 fl oz product/a 150 1.8 25.9 17.7 331 8587 1403 10.0 fl oz product/a 156 1.8 27.0 17.9 334 9062 1496 14.5 fl oz product/a 151 1.7 27.6 17.9 334 9223 1520 Rate linear NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Rate quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Method x rate linear NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Method x rate quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS z * signifies significant contrast at P = 0.05, ** = significant at P = 0.01, *** = significant at P = 0.001 ; NS = not significant.

No. plants/100 ft row Table 2. Revenue summary for Quadris treatment rates minus product cost in a field that was naturally infested with a low population density of Rhizoctonia solani. Quadris rate Revenue Product cost Benefit over no fungicide (fl oz product/a) ($/A) ($/A) ($/A) Control (no fungicide) 1401 - - 5.0 1368 12.50-46 7.5 1403 18.75-17 10.0 1496 25.00 70 14.5 1520 36.25 83 Product cost subtracted, but does not account for other costs associated with application. Inoculated trial. By 2 weeks after inoculation, stands were declining in the Rhizoctonia-inoculated, no fungicide control and 6 weeks later, averaged only 20 plants per 100-ft row (Fig. 1). Plots treated with all rates and application methods of Quadris (banded and broadcast) and in the non-inoculated control maintained nearly uniform stands throughout this period (Fig. 1). 200 180 Quadris treatments 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 Non-inoculated, no fungicide Inoculated, no fungicide 0 6/14 6/21 6/28 7/5 7/12 7/19 7/26 8/2 8/9 8/16 Date Fig. 1. Sugarbeet stand during 2 months after plants in the 6-leaf stage were treated with various rates of Quadris (= azoxystrobin at 5, 7.5, 10, 14.5 fl oz product per 1000-ft row) and application methods (5- and 7-inch bands, broadcast) on June 16; later in the day, inoculum of Rhizoctonia solani AG 2-2 IIIB (28g of infested ground barley grain per 30-ft row) was deposited in sugarbeet crowns with a Gandy applicator and plots were cultivated to throw soil into crowns to favor infections and disease development. Controls (bold lines) included non-inoculated and inoculated plots, each with no fungicides. Each data point is averaged over four replicates.

Data for the no fungicide controls (non-inoculated and inoculated) are shown for comparison (Table 3), but are not included in the statistical analysis to have balance for orthogonal contrasts. Ratings for RCRR in the inoculated, no fungicide control averaged 6.8 (nearly all roots were completely rotted and foliage was dead) and harvest parameters were extremely poor (Table 3). All application methods and rates controlled RCRR but there were some differences in level of control and harvest data (Table 3). There were no significant application method by rate interactions (Table 3) so main effects will be discussed separately. Band applications resulted in significantly higher yield, recoverable sucrose A -1, and revenue compared to broadcast applications. There were no differences between broadcast and band applications for number of harvested roots, RCRR, percent sugar, and pounds of sugar per ton. All harvest parameters were equal for 5- and 7-inch bands except number of harvested roots, which was higher for the 7-inch band. There was a significant linear effect of Quadris rate on RCRR (Table 3) but not on any other harvest parameter. There was a trend for higher root yield, recoverable sucrose A -1, and revenue as Quadris rate increased (Table 3). When compared with the inoculated, no fungicide control (where disease was very severe and revenue very low), all rates of Quadris increased revenue tremendously (Table 4). Even when compared with the non-inoculated, no fungicide control (where disease was very low), the 7.5, 10.0, and 14.5 fl oz product A -1 rates resulted in revenue increases greater than the cost of the product, but the 5.0 fl oz rate did not increase revenue (Table 4). Table 3. Effect of various rates and applications of Quadris (azoxystrobin) applied at the 6-leaf stage on Rhizoctonia crown and root rot (RCRR) at harvest and on sugarbeet yield and quality compared to two controls (non-inoculated, no fungicide and inoculated with Rhizoctonia solani AG 2-2, no fungicide). Fungicides were applied on June 16 and crowns were inoculated with R. solani later the same day. No. harvested RCRR Yield Sucrose Revenue Treatment roots/100 ft (0-7) (T/A) % lb/ton lb recov./a ($/A) Controls Non-inoculated 150 2.3 25.9 19.0 358 9253 1614 Inoculated, no fungicide 13 6.8 2.7 16.5 301 825 124 Application method 5-inch band 153 2.2 27.0 18.9 355 9613 1670 7-inch band 162 2.2 27.7 19.1 360 9953 1745 Broadcast 158 2.4 25.8 18.9 357 9218 1609 Broadcast vs. band NS NS * NS NS * * 5-inch vs. 7-inch band * NS NS NS NS NS NS Application rate 5.0 fl oz product/a 153 2.5 26.4 18.7 352 9304 1605 7.5 fl oz product/a 160 2.3 26.5 19.1 360 9543 1677 10.0 fl oz product/a 157 2.1 27.2 19.0 358 9754 1706 14.5 fl oz product/a 160 2.0 27.2 19.0 359 9777 1712 Rate linear NS * NS NS NS NS NS Rate quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Method x rate linear NS NS NS NS NS NS NS Method x rate quadratic NS NS NS NS NS NS NS * signifies significant contrast at P = 0.05; NS = not significant.

Table 4. Revenue summary for Quadris treatment rates minus product cost in a field inoculated with high levels of Rhizoctonia solani. Benefit over no fungicide Quadris rate Revenue Product cost Inoculated Non-inoculated (fl oz product/a) ($/A) ($/A) ($/A) ($/A) No fungicide, non-inoculated 1614 - - - No fungicide, inoculated 124 - - - 5.0 1605 12.50 1469-22 7.5 1677 18.75 1534 44 10.0 1706 25.00 1557 67 14.5 1712 36.25 1552 62 Product cost subtracted, but does not account for other costs associated with application. DISCUSSION Results for application method differed for the natural, low disease pressure site and the inoculated, high disease pressure site. Under low disease pressure, broadcast applications performed better than band applications, while the opposite was true in the high disease pressure site. Equipment used to apply Quadris was the same for both sites but applications in the low disease pressure site were made earlier (June 7) and on smaller plants (4-leaf) than in the high disease pressure site (June 16 on 6-leaf plants). Currently, Quadris is NOT labeled as a broadcast product for control of RCRR use of the product in this manner wastes product on exposed soil between rows and is environmentally unsound. Results with 5- and 7-inch bands were similar at both sites. Although Quadris rate did not significantly (P = 0.05) affect harvest parameters in either site, there were trends at both sites for increased yield, recoverable sucrose, and revenue with increasing rates of Quadris. This increase in revenue with higher rates of Quadris was more than enough to pay for the product at both sites regardless of whether or not plots were inoculated. All rates of Quadris increased revenue tremendously under high disease pressure compared with the inoculated, no fungicide control. Compared with non-inoculated plots, revenue was lost at both sites with the 5 oz product A -1 rate and lost at one site with the 7.5 oz product A -1 rate. Based on this preliminary (one year) data, labeled rates (10-14.5 fl oz product A -1 ) give more consistent benefit over a wide range of disease conditions, so reduced rates are not recommended. The most significant factor in controlling RCRR is to apply Quadris before plants become infected by R. solani. It is difficult to time application of fungicides before Rhizoctonia infects plants, however, applying Quadris when soil temperatures reach 65 F at the 4-inch depth is a helpful tool. While Quadris protects roots from infections originating in the crown, which is most common, its effect on infections that occur lower in the soil is questionable. Further research under natural inoculum conditions where infections occur at the crown and/or lower in the soil, as well as at different timings, is warranted to clarify efficacy of different application methods and rates of Quadris. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank American Crystal Sugar Co., Moorhead, MN for providing seed and a grant-in-aid; Syngenta for providing Quadris; the University of Minnesota, Northwest Research and Outreach Center, Crookston for providing land, equipment and other facilities; Todd Cymbaluk and Jeff Nielsen for plot maintenance; Dr. John Wiersma for aid with statistical analysis; student workers Chloe Danielson, Katie Baird, and Chelsie Solheim for technical assistance; and American Crystal Sugar Co., East Grand Forks, MN for quality analysis.