Fungicide Efficacy and Yield Responses to Fungicide Treatments Based on Predicitons of Cercospora Leaf Spot of Sugar Beet

Kerr, Eric D.; Weiss, Albert

doi:10.5274/jsbr.27.3.58

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CLS, caused by Cercospora beticola Sacc., is one of the most destructive foliar diseases of sugar beet in warm, humid areas worldwide (7)(8)(9), and is responsible for significant reductions in root yield, sucrose concentration, and recoverable sugar, while increasing the concentration of impurities which result in higher processing costs (25,28).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival, Dispersal, and Primary Infection Site for Cercospora beticola in Sugar Beet

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cercospora beticola survives as stromata in infected crop residue. Spores produced on these survival structures serve as primary inoculum during the next cropping season. This study was conducted to determine how long C. beticola can survive at different soil depths, the mechanism of inoculum dispersal, and the primary infection site in sugar beet. Longevity of C. beticola was studied over a 3-year period under field conditions at Fargo, ND. C. beticola-infected leaves were placed at depths of 0, 10, and 20 cm and retrieved after 10, 22, and 34 months. Survival of C. beticola inoculum declined with time and soil depth. Inoculum left on the soil surface, 0 cm in depth, survived the longest (22 months) compared with that buried at 10 cm (10 months) and 20 cm (10 months). C. beticola dispersal from the primary source of inoculum was studied in the field for three growing seasons. Sugar beet plants were surrounded with plastic cages with and without ground cover, or exposed with and without ground cover. Significantly higher disease severity was observed on exposed plants than caged plants with or without ground cover, suggesting that wind was the major dispersal factor for C. beticola inoculum. The primary infection site by C. beticola was determined in a greenhouse study. Leaves, roots, and stems of healthy sugar beet plants were inoculated with C. beticola. Cercospora leaf spot symptoms were observed only on plants that were leaf inoculated, suggesting that the leaf was the primary infection site for C. beticola.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Survival, Dispersal, and Primary Infection Site for Cercospora beticola in Sugar Beet

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Temperatures less than 30°C (optimal 25°C) with 12 to 16 h of leaf wetness are prerequisites for white mold development (3,5,6,20,26). The CLS forecasting system was developed in the late 1980s specifically for western Nebraska (7,25). This model is well known and has been routinely implemented by growers and consultants as a management tool for another yield-limiting fungal disease in the Central High Plains for more than 15 years (4).…”

Section: Decision Aidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It was included as a comparison to the blue plate test since environmental conditions favorable for both diseases are similar (high humidity, wet, closed plant canopies, and moderate temperatures) (3,4,19,25,26). The pathogen, Cercospora beticola, requires 11 to 12 h of leaf wetness and day temperatures of 25 to 35°C with night temperatures above 16°C for infection and growth (4,7,25). The CLS model determines daily infection values (DIV) based on the number of hours of leaf wetness or high relative humidity (> 90%) and concurrent average temperature during this period.…”

Section: Decision Aidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The four subplot treatments included: (i) untreated control; (ii) fungicide application when blue plate count thresholds reached ≥ 5 positive colonies per plate, or when 80% of plates had at least one positive colony (23); (iii) fungicide application based on optimal conditions for disease development for C. beticola as estimated by the CLS forecasting model (7,25); and (iv) fungicide application at 90% bloom. A single fungicide application per treatment was performed with a back pack sprayer utilizing thiophanate-methyl at 1.7 kg/ha.…”

Section: Evaluating Planting Date and Decision Aid Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus disease management based on integrating multiple techniques provides the best approach for reducing white mold in dry beans while maintaining yield potential. This study was conducted over a 3-year period to evaluate effects of planting dates and fungicide applications based on the use of decision aids, including the blue plate test (23) and a forecasting model originally developed for the sugar beet fungal foliar disease, Cercospora leaf spot (CLS) (7,25). These treatments were compared with a standard application made at 90% bloom, and an untreated control.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Integrating Planting Dates and Fungicide Applications for Managing White Mold of Dry Beans in Western Nebraska

Harveson

Steadman

Urrea

2010

Plant Health Progress

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

White mold, caused by the soilborne fungus Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, is one of the most destructive diseases of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and is greatly influenced by environmental conditions and certain agronomic practices. A 3-year study (2003 to 2005) evaluated planting date and thiophanate-methyl fungicide applications based on decision aids consisting of blue plate technique, sugar beet Cercospora leaf spot (CLS) disease forecasting model, and crop phenology (90% bloom). Overall yields were lower in 2003 and higher in 2005, and disease severity was greater in 2004. Planting dry beans in late June to early July resulted in higher levels of disease than planting in late May or mid-June in 2004. Late planting also resulted in lower yields and 100-seed weight in 2004 and 2005 than the early and mid-plantings. Compared to the control and CLS model, fungicide applications based on the blue plate and 90% bloom treatments reduced disease severity in 2004 and 2005, while also increasing 100-seed weight and yields in 2004. Accepted for publication 8 May 2010. Published 1 July 2010.

show abstract

Sugar Beet Diseases: Cercospora Leaf Spot

Khan

2015

Fungicide Resistance in Plant Pathogens

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fungicide Efficacy and Yield Responses to Fungicide Treatments Based on Predicitons of Cercospora Leaf Spot of Sugar Beet

Abstract: Number of hours of leaf wetness on sugar beet foliage and average leaf surface temperature during the period of leaf wetness were determined by a leaf wetness sensor and an infrared thermometer (LWS/IRTI, respectively,

Cited by 11 publications

References 1 publication

Survival, Dispersal, and Primary Infection Site for Cercospora beticola in Sugar Beet

Survival, Dispersal, and Primary Infection Site for Cercospora beticola in Sugar Beet

Integrating Planting Dates and Fungicide Applications for Managing White Mold of Dry Beans in Western Nebraska

Sugar Beet Diseases: Cercospora Leaf Spot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About