Suppression of Root Diseases and Weeds in Peas<i>(Pisum sativum)</i>Treated with Dinitrophenol and Dinitroaniline Herbicides

Sacher, R. F.; Hopen, H. J.; Jacobsen, Barry J.

doi:10.1017/s0043174500064614

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In 1972, about 60% of the pea acreage in Wisconsin, a major pea growing area in the United States, was treated with these herbicides (Bruehl, 1987). This class of herbicides has subsequently been shown, in many reports, to suppress pea root rot disease (Grau and Reiling, 1977;Harvey et al, 1975;Hopen, 1975, 1981;Sacher et al, 1978;Teasdale et al, 1979b). A. euteiches zoospore production was shown to be reduced by dinitroaniline herbicides (Grau, 1977;Teasdale, et al, 1979a).…”

Section: Herbicidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Wakelin

Walter

Jaspers

et al. 2002

Austral. Plant Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

i Spore-forming bacteria were investigated as potential biological control agents of the pea root rot fungus, Aphanomyces euteiches (Oomycete). Isolations of the bacteria were made both directly from field soils (558) and from the rhizosphere of peas grown in soil (146).When the 704 isolates were screened for inhibition of A. euteiches mycelial expansion in vitro, a low frequency of suppressiveness was observed in isolates taken directly from field-soil (0.05%), whilst 19% of the bacterial isolates taken from the rhizosphere were suppressive.Mycelial suppressive isolates were subsequently screened for inhibition of zoospore germination and germ tube growth.The Seed coat, prill and granule formulations of B. mycoides MW 27 were evaluated in a field trial. As a seed coat formulation, the isolate significantly (a=0.05) increased plot stand by about 10%. In a prill formulation, B. mycoides MW 27 had no effect on plot stand (early damping-off disease), but significantly (a=0.05) increased the number of pods per plant and average pod weight per plant. Apron C70SD controlled damping-off disease but had no effect on root rot disease.Bacillus pumilus PT 10, B. mycoides MW 27, P. polymyxa 18·25 and fluquinconazole were tested as seed treatments for control of another root disease, take-all of wheat. Bacillus pumilus PT 10 significantly (a=0.05) increased plant yield by 77%. Bacillus mycoides MW 27 had similar efficacy as fluquinconazole, increasing yield by approximately 10%(not significant at a=0.05). As a seed coat treatment, B. mycoides MW 27 also effectively controlled damping-off disease.iii Paenibacillus polymyxa 18'25 suppressed a wide range of plant pathogenic fungi in vitro, possibly through production of the cell wall-degrading enzymes chitinase or cellulase, or an antibiotic compound which the bacterium was found to produce. Bacillus mycoides MW 27 was slightly suppressive to only two pathogenic fungi in vitro, and did not degrade chitin or cellulose.The soil bacterium Bacillus mycoides MW 27 has excellent potential for development as a biological control agent of Aphanomyces root rot of pea. A formulation of the bacterium could be marketed on both its ability to increase yields under Aphanomyces disease pressure, and to limit oospore development, thereby limiting disease in continuous cropping situations.

show abstract

Section: Herbicidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Wakelin

Walter

Jaspers

et al. 2002

Austral. Plant Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are currently no control practices that are economically feasible other than avoidance of heavily infested fields (4,6,12,16,20). The use of dinitrophenol and dinitroaniline herbicides and cruciferous soil amendments has given some control (5,17), however, these controls are not sufficient when inoculum levels are high. No commercial varieties are available that have resistance sufficient enough to avoid economic loss in severely infested fields (6).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Aphanomyces euteiches in Field Soil from Northern Idaho by a Wet-Sieving/Baiting Technique

Kraft¹,

Marcinkowska²,

Muehlbauer³

1990

Plant Dis.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aphanomyces euteiches was detected at three locations in northern Idaho by a wet-sieving technique. Five-day-old pea seedlings were used to bait the fungus from the sieved organic fraction from 10 soil samples per field. Inoculated seedlings in rolled germination paper were incubated and observed at weekly intervals for 3 wk. Almost all fields sampled in the Grangeville area were severely infested, and fields in the Kendrick area and two out of six fields in the Genesee area were heavily infested with A. euteiches. This wet-sieving technique gave results similar to the greenhouse-pot technique currently used to determine Aphanomyces root rot potential and required no greenhouse space or special watering requirements. This technique revealed that infective oospores of A. euteiches were as deep as 60 cm in the soil profile and were present in areas with poor drainage in fields with low inoculum levels overall. A hierarchical statistical analysis was used to separate differences in inoculum levels within areas and between fields. Common root rot of peas (Pisum sativum L.), caused by Aphanomyces euteiches Drechs., is a very destructive Cooperative investigations of the ARS, USDA, and the

show abstract

Suppression of Root Diseases and Weeds in Peas(Pisum sativum)Treated with Dinitrophenol and Dinitroaniline Herbicides

Cited by 2 publications

References 8 publications

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Biological control of Aphanomyces euteiches root-rot of pea with spore-forming bacteria

Detection of Aphanomyces euteiches in Field Soil from Northern Idaho by a Wet-Sieving/Baiting Technique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About