2014
DOI: 10.1590/s0103-84782014000200001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Controle da podridão abacaxi da cana-de-açúcar por meio da pulverização de fungicidas em rebolos no sulco de plantio

Abstract: RESUMOA pod ridão abacaxi da cana-de-açúcar

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
4

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
(6 reference statements)
0
6
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…bras., Brasília, v.53, n.12, p.1311-1319, Dec. 2018 DOI: 10.1590/S0100-204X2018001200003 with the management adapted to the driest and coldest seasons (Aguiar et al, 2014), and planting in this period can be affected by Thielaviopsis paradoxa (Ceratocystis paradoxa), a fungus that causes the pineapple disease of sugarcane. This disease is associated with retards of the bud germination and shoot development, early shoot vigor, and seed piece decay (Raid & Rott, 2012;Chapola et al, 2014). In the state of São Paulo, Brazil, C. paradoxa is the diseasecausing agent most commonly associated with a poor germination of seed piece (Carvalho, 1963;Rossetto et al, 1986).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…bras., Brasília, v.53, n.12, p.1311-1319, Dec. 2018 DOI: 10.1590/S0100-204X2018001200003 with the management adapted to the driest and coldest seasons (Aguiar et al, 2014), and planting in this period can be affected by Thielaviopsis paradoxa (Ceratocystis paradoxa), a fungus that causes the pineapple disease of sugarcane. This disease is associated with retards of the bud germination and shoot development, early shoot vigor, and seed piece decay (Raid & Rott, 2012;Chapola et al, 2014). In the state of São Paulo, Brazil, C. paradoxa is the diseasecausing agent most commonly associated with a poor germination of seed piece (Carvalho, 1963;Rossetto et al, 1986).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even if the seed pieces are affected to a lesser extent, without the need for replanting, losses will occur in all plot cuts. These problems are aggravated by the mechanized planting, in which smaller seed pieces are used, resulting in fewer buds and more injuries (Raid & Rott, 2012;Serafim et al, 2013;Chapola et al, 2014).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This pathogen contaminates sugarcane setts and seeds and leads to irregular germination and destruction of sugarcane stands. It can cause a 50% reduction in sprouting and reduce the yield by more than 42% ( Chapola et al., 2014 ). This pathogen thrives under conditions with long-term humidity and low temperatures.…”
Section: Biotic Stresses Affect Sugarcanementioning
confidence: 99%
“…T. ethacetica) [24][25][26][27][28]. Contrastingly, while pre-harvest burning resulted in a substantial decrease in the survival of soilborne insect pests populations and fungal plant pathogens' inocula, with no burning, mechanical harvesting maintains sugarcane straw as abundant crop residues in the areas, favoring the survival of both insect pests and plant pathogens [18,20,[29][30][31][32][33]. In fact, in areas where harvest was carried out without prior burning, there was a 1.5% decrease in sugar levels due to damage caused by Mahanarva fimbriolata on stalks [34].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is because the pathogen rots and destroys the infected cuttings or setts (i.e., sugarcane segments that sprout to form new stalks) (Figure 1C), which are prevented from sprouting or undergoing further development, impacting the final plants' stand per area [27,32,37]. Controlling pineapple root rot has become a growing concern for local sugarcane growers and plantation extension personnel [20,23,25,30,37]. Similarly, since the prohibition of pre-harvest crop burning, the incidence of pineapple sett rot associated with T. paradoxa has also significantly increased in Brazilian sugarcane fields, which led to high yield losses [25,36,37].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%