Evaluation of foliar fungicide application methods on soybean

Bradley, Carl A.; Chesrown, C. D.; Hofman, Vern

doi:10.1080/07060660709507457

Cited by 6 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Mean top coverage was 18% at Boone and 17% at Chariton, but ranged from 1% to 8% mean coverage at the bottom or middle canopy positions depending on site and canopy position. Bradley et al (2007) also reported similar results in their work on soybeans, that is, coverage in the upper canopy was considerably greater than coverage in the lower canopy. Deposited droplet size was reduced at lower canopy locations.…”

Section: Depositionsupporting

confidence: 65%

“…equivalent across all application treatments and the unsprayed check (table 11). Tebuconazole did not affect soybean yield in similar field trials in North Dakota (Bradley et al, 2007). Although crop yield in this study was unaffected by fungicide application treatment, results may have been different under high disease pressure.…”

Section: Areacontrasting

confidence: 48%

“…yield effect was not tested by earlier application). Bradley et al (2007) also reported that applications of tebuconazole at growth stage R5 did not result in a positive yield response on soybeans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…On short-season, narrow-row [19 cm (7.5 in. )] soybean in North Dakota, Bradley et al (2007) found spray coverage using single-orifice tips reduced in lower portions of the plant canopy and application of fungicide had no effect on yield. Coverage was not affected by spray treatment (including conventional and air-assisted sprayers), with the exception of a slight improvement in the lower canopy using a flat-fan tip on a conventional sprayer.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Nozzle and Carrier Application Effects on Control of Soybean Leaf Spot Diseases

Hanna¹,

Robertson²,

Carlton³

et al. 2009

Applied Engineering in Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increased soybean foliar disease potential has heightened grower interest in fungicide application techniques. Application field trials comparing application rate [187 vs. 112 L/ha (20 vs. 12 gal/acre)], nozzle style (twin-orifice; single-orifice) and spray quality (fine vs. medium and coarse spray quality), and application technique (with and without air-assist) along with an unsprayed check were done at two locations over two years. Fungicide deposition (coverage and droplet size) and disease severity in the bottom, middle, and top parts of the plant canopy, and soybean yield were measured. Fungicide deposition coverage reduced from the top (8%-18%) to the middle (4%-8%) to the bottom (1%-4%) of the canopy. Coverage was less affected by application treatment, however in wider rows [76-cm (30-in.)] coverage increased with the high-rate and air-assist treatments when spray quality was near the border between fine and medium. Conversely, in narrow rows [38-cm (15-in.)], least coverage was obtained with fine droplets produced by hollow-cone tips on an air-assisted sprayer. Size of droplets deposited generally followed predictions suggested by spray quality. Few disease severity differences were observed. Yield was unaffected by treatments sprayed during late reproductive stages (late R3-R5) of the soybean plant.

show abstract

Section: Depositionsupporting

confidence: 65%

Section: Areacontrasting

confidence: 48%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 96%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Nozzle and Carrier Application Effects on Control of Soybean Leaf Spot Diseases

Hanna¹,

Robertson²,

Carlton³

et al. 2009

Applied Engineering in Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Currently the only method of controlling the disease is the application of foliar fungicides (Ozkan et al, 2006). Soybean rust generally initiates in the lower portion of the soybean canopy and moves upward; thus canopy penetration and good coverage from spray applications are critical when applying fungicides to treat soybean rust (Wolf and Daggupati, 2006;Zhu et al, 2006;Bradley et al 2007;Mueller, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of spray application rate and droplet size on applications to control soybean rust

Bretthauer¹,

Mueller²,

Derksen³

et al. 2008

2008 Providence, Rhode Island, June 29 - July 2, 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Canopy penetration and thorough coverage are important when applying foliar fungicides to soybeans for the control of rust. The purpose of this study was to examine how spray application rate and spray droplet size affect the efficacy of soybean rust applications. Four treatments were examined: a medium droplet spectrum applied at 47 L/ha (5 GPA) and at 140 L/ha (15 GPA), and a very coarse droplet spectrum applied at 47 L/ha (5 GPA) and at 140 L/ha (15 GPA). Applications were made to soybeans planted with 91 cm (36 inch) row spacing in the R5 growth stage. Spray coverage, deposition, soybean rust severity, and yield were measured to evaluate the effectiveness of these treatments. Spray coverage was measured on Kromekote paper positioned in the upper and lower parts of the canopy. Deposition was measured using a dye and Mylar plates positioned in the upper and lower parts of the canopy. The very coarse droplet spectrum at 140 L/ha (15 GPA) had the highest coverage and deposition in both the upper and lower canopy. Overall the very coarse droplet spectrum performed better than the medium droplet spectrum. There was no difference among the treatments in soybean rust severity or yield. All the treatments had significantly lower soybean rust severity than an untreated control, and all but the very coarse droplet spectrum at 140 L/ha (15 GPA) had a significantly higher yield than the untreated control.

show abstract