Yield reduction in barley in relation to spot-type net blotch

Jayasena, K. W.; Burgel, Andrew van; Tanaka, Kazue; Majewski, Janusz; Loughman, Robert

doi:10.1071/ap07046

Cited by 58 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Losses being greater where rainfall is frequent and leaf wetness sustained for several hours (Deadman and Cooke 1989;van den Berg and Rossnagel 1991), especially during the reproductive growth stages of the crop. Findings from this study that SFNB significantly affected grain quality were consistent with previous findings in studies by Khan (1989) and Jayasena et al (2002Jayasena et al ( , 2007 who determined that grain plumpness was typically affected by SFNB in Western Australia. However, it was identified that grain retention can be affected in addition to screenings.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…No significant yield loss was recorded in three experiments which was likely due to unfavourable climatic conditions for disease development. Maximum grain yield loss was less in our study than the 44 % grain yield loss recorded in the high rainfall zone of Western Australia by Jayasena et al (2002Jayasena et al ( , 2007. This illustrates the influence that climatic conditions have on SFNB development and the subsequent effect on grain yield loss.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

“…Production losses due to SFNB have been reported for Western Australia with reduction in grain yield of up-to 44 % in the southern, high rainfall barley growing regions (Jayasena et al 2007), and up-to 22 % in the northern, low rainfall barley growing regions (Khan 1989). According to Khan (1989) and Jayasena et al (2007), SFNB causes grain yield loss when infection is greater than 10 % on the top three leaves, increasing by 0.4 t/ ha for each additional 10 % of leaf area infected where yield potential is 4-6 t/ha. Grain plumpness and weight can also be affected by SFNB (Jayasena et al 2002;2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…According to Khan (1989) and Jayasena et al (2007), SFNB causes grain yield loss when infection is greater than 10 % on the top three leaves, increasing by 0.4 t/ ha for each additional 10 % of leaf area infected where yield potential is 4-6 t/ha. Grain plumpness and weight can also be affected by SFNB (Jayasena et al 2002;2007). Grain yield and quality losses associated with SFNB vary depending on regional factors such as inoculum load, variety susceptibility, sowing date and climatic conditions (McLean et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Spot form of net blotch suppression and yield of barley in response to fungicide application in the Wimmera region of Victoria, Australia

McLean¹,

Weppler²,

Howlett

et al. 2015

Australasian Plant Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spot form of net blotch (SFNB), caused by Pyrenophora teres f. maculata caused up to 25 % (0.9 t/ha) grain yield loss to barley and significant reductions in grain quality parameters such as retention (13 %), screenings (5 %) and grain weight (6 %) in the Wimmera region of Victoria during 2005-11. Spot form of net blotch was suppressed by varying degrees between experiments, seasons, and crop growth stages when foliar fungicide (propiconazole) was applied. Of single applications, treatment at the stem elongation (Z31) or flag leaf (Z39) growth stages generally provided the greatest disease suppression. Single application at tillering (Z25) or ear emergence (Z55) were generally ineffective. Eight chemical seed treatments registered for use in barley were tested as potential low cost management options for SFNB. Four seed treatments reduced SFNB severity in the glasshouse, but none were effective in the field.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 47%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Spot form of net blotch suppression and yield of barley in response to fungicide application in the Wimmera region of Victoria, Australia

McLean¹,

Weppler²,

Howlett

et al. 2015

Australasian Plant Pathol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are two types of symptoms caused by this pathogen: net-type lesions caused by P. teres f. teres and spot-type lesions caused by P. teres f. maculata. In recent years, epidemics of P. teres f. maculata have occurred throughout the world (McLean et al, 2010), reducing grain quality parameters such as 1,000-grainweight by up to 19% (Jayasena et al, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of Trichoderma spp. against Common Fungal Pathogens

Živanov¹,

Jevtić²,

Lalošević³

et al. 2017

Ratar i povrt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Transcriptional Switching of Host Defence Response to Combat Hemibiotrophic Fungal Infection

Abdullah

Bahari

Sakeh

2022

Annual Plant Reviews Online

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hemibiotrophic fungal pathogens cause major destruction to food and industrial crops globally. Their dual infection phases appear to be a winning strategy. The pathogen establishes an initial colonisation biotrophically keeping the host cells alive. It then shifts to the notorious necrotrophic mode of infection, killing the host cells resulting in biochemical and physiological impairment destructive to the whole plant. A better understanding of the molecular interaction at the early stage of infection is critical to save the infected crops. In this article, we integrate findings from different plant–pathogen pathosystems to provide a comprehensive evaluation about the defence response network, covering crops that are infected through the aerial and root tissues. The high‐throughput transcriptomics and metabolomics approaches as well as relevant biochemical and physiological analyses have revealed key genes and cellular components associated with signalling pathways and defence responses during the biotrophic and necrotrophic phases. Factors influencing the biotrophy to necrotrophy transition are discussed. Transcriptional reprogramming involving key regulatory proteins acting as master or key transcription factors to provide an effective two‐stage defence network in host plants is also elaborated.

show abstract

Yield reduction in barley in relation to spot-type net blotch

Cited by 58 publications

References 8 publications

Spot form of net blotch suppression and yield of barley in response to fungicide application in the Wimmera region of Victoria, Australia

Spot form of net blotch suppression and yield of barley in response to fungicide application in the Wimmera region of Victoria, Australia

Efficacy of Trichoderma spp. against Common Fungal Pathogens

Transcriptional Switching of Host Defence Response to Combat Hemibiotrophic Fungal Infection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About