Epidemiology of Pyrenophora Teres and Its Effect On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EPIDEMIOLOGY OF PYRENOPHORA TERES AND ITS EFFECT ON GRAIN YIELD OF HORDEUM VULGARE A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Crop Science and Plant Ecology University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon by Cornelius Gerardus Jacobus van den Berg July, 1 988 The author claims copyright. Use should not be made of the material contained herein without proper acknowledgement, as indicated on the following page. The author has agreed that the Library, University of Saskatchewan, may make this thesis freely available for inspection. Moreover, the author has agreed that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised the thesis work recorded herein or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which the thesis work was done. It is understood that due recognition will be given to the author of this thesis and to the University of Saskatchewan in any use of the material in this thesis. Copying or publication or any other use of the thesis for financial gain without approval by the University of Saskatchewan and the author's written permission is prohibited. Requests for permission to copy or to make any other use of material in this thesis in whole or in part should be addressed to: Head of the Department of Crop Science and Plant Ecology University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Canada S7N OWO ABSTRACT Recent surveys in Saskatchewan have shown that the prevalence of Pyrenophora teres Drechs., the causal agent of net blotch of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), has increased. Severe epidemics have been observed in several commercial fields. The major objectives of this study were the investigation of the epidemiology of net blotch and the determination of the effect of net blotch on barley production. Conidium germination and time to infection were compared for two spot-type isolates (~ teres f. maculata) and one net-type isolate (!:.:_ teres f. teres) in a growth cabinet. Spot-type isolates germinated sooner than the net-type isolate between 10 and 20 °c. Time to infection was shorter for the spot-type isolates than for the net-type isolate at all temperatures. The relationships among local weather conditions, incidence of airborne conidia, barley development and sporulation were investigated in field experiments with the susceptible cultivar Elrose at Shellbrook, Saskatchewan in 1986 and 1987. Airborne conidia were observed daily throughout the growing season. Their incidence showed a diurnal pattern with a peak between 12:00 and 16:00 h. At night, frequent dew formation favoured infection. Infection of lower leaves was due to infection by primary inoculum produced on crop debris. Infection of upper leaves was iv due to primary inoculum and to secondary inoculum produced on the lower leaves. The effect of net blotch on barley production was investigated in an experiment using Tilt (propiconazole) on Elrose in 1985 and 1986 and on the moderately resistant cultivar Argyle in 1986 at Saskatoon, Shellbrook and Medstead, Saskatchewan. Repeated application of Tilt reduced the rate of disease progress on Elrose, but not on Argyle, where resistance reduced the rate of disease progress. Resistance slowed disease progress more than repeated application of Tilt. On Elrose, Tilt increased grain yield and kernel weight, but had no effect on number of tillers and number of kernels per spike. On Argyle, Tilt had no effect on any trait. The potential yield loss caused by net blotch was estimated at 50%. Infection of net blotch lowered grain grade through kernel discolouration and low test weight. Using the components of variance and covariance, strong correlations were obtained between treatment effects of grain yield and disease severity. However, no satisfactory critical point mode·l could be developed to predict percentage yield loss from disease severity. In Saskatchewan, infected crop debris is the most important source of primary inoculum of ~ teres. Under favourable conditions with sufficient primary inoculum, severe epidemics can be expected on susceptible cultivars. Foliar fungicide application is not cost effective at v current grain prices, therefore extended rotations or the use of resistant cultivars are the only practical means to control net blotch in barley. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to thank Dr. B.G. Rossnagel for his guidance and continuous support throughout this study; Drs. L.J. Duczek, B.L. Harvey, D.R. Knott and R.A~A. Morrall for their constructive criticism and suggestions; Mr. C. Brown and Miss J. Weller for technical assistance. Financial support was provided by a Postgraduate Scholarship from the University of Saskatchewan, the R. Vandeveld postgraduate scholarship and the Western Grains Research Foundation. Also, I would like to thank Dr. R.J. Baker for the stimulating discussions on statistics and the Department of Interlibrary Loans for the prompt delivery of many references. Last, but not least I wish to thank Dr. L.S.L. Wong for her inexhaustible patience, her encouragement and support. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABS TRACT . • • • • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • . • • iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .•••••••.•••••••••••.••••••••••••••••.• vii TABLE OF CONTENTS •••.••••.••••••••••••••••.•••••••••••• viii LIST OF FIGURES . • • • . • . • • • . • • . • . • . • . • . xi LIST OF TABLES •••••••••••••••••...•••••••.••••...•.••.. xiii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS • • • • • • . • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • xvi 1 • INTRODUCTION • • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • 1 2. LITERATURE REVIEW • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • 3 2.1. Pathosystem •••••••••••••..••••••••••.•••••••••• 3 2. 1 . 1 . Host • • . • • • • • . • . • • • . • • . • • • . • . • • 3 2. 1 • 1 • 1 • Morphology • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . • • 3 2. 1 . 1 . 2. Agronomy. 4 2 . 1 . 2 • Pathogen. • • • • • • • . • . • . • • • . • • . • . • . • • . • • 5 2.1.2.1. Morphology..................... 5 .2.1.2.2. Taxonomy....................... 6 2.1.2.3. Symptomatology................. 8 2.1.3. Distribution, prevalence and importance. 9 2.1.4. Disease cycle •••••.••••••••••••••••••••• 10 2.2. Measurement and analysis of disease progress .•• 13 2.2.1. Measurement ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 13 2.2.2. Analysis .................... ·. ... ... ... 16 2.2.3. Effect of fungicides on disease progress 20 2.2.4. Progress of net blotch •••••••.••.••••••• 21 2.3. Effect of disease on plant production •••••••••• 23 2.3.1. Measurement of the effect on grain yield 23 2.3.2. Measurement of the effect on primary yield components ........................ 27 2.3.3. Effect of net blotch on barley production 30 2.3.4. Effect of net blotch on kernel quality 32 2.4. Relationship between grain yield and disease severity . 33 2.4.1. Linear regression analysis •••••••.•••••• 33 2.4.2. Critical point analysis ....••...•••••••• 35 2.4.3. Analysis using area under the disease progress curve . 3 7 2.4.4. Multiple point analysis .••••••••••..•... 38 viii 3. MATERIALS AND METHODS ••••..•.••••••••••••••••••••••. 40 3.1. Experiment I: Conditions for infection 40 3.2. Experiment II: Potential for disease establishment . .. 45 3.3. Experiment III: Effect of fungicides on the pathosystem • • • . • • • . • • . • • . • • . • . • . • • . • . 52 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION • • . • • • • • • • . • • • • . • • • • . • • • • • • • . • 62 4.1. Conditions fo~ infection •.•••••••••..••..•••.•• 62 4.1.1. Conidium germination ••..•••••.•••••••..• 62 4.1.2. Time to infection •••••••.••.••••.••.•••• 72 4.1.3. Discussion ••••••..•••••••.•.•.••...•••.. 75 4.2. Potential for disease establishment in Saskatchewan .................... ; .............. 76 4.2.1. Microclimate •••••••••••••.•••••••••••.•• 76 4.2.2. Development of barley ••••••••••••••.•••• 81 4.2.3. Progress of net blotch ••••••.••••••••••• 81 4.2.4. Sporulation potential and latent period • 85 4.2.5. Incidence of airborne conidia .••.••••.•. 90 4.2.6. Discussion •••.•.••••••.••••••••••••••.•. 96 4.3. Progress curves for net blotch ••••••••••.•••.•• 97 4.3.1. Fitting of disease progress curves •••••• 98 4.3.1.1. Estimation of parameters .•••••• 98 4.3.1.2. Biological interpretation •••••• 99 4.3.2. Observed progression for net blotch ••••• 101 4.3.2.1. Percentage necrotic leaf area •• 101 4~3.2.2~ Percentage affected leaf area •. 105 4.3.3. Discussion •••...••.•.•••••••••..•••••••• 110 4.4. Effect of net blotch on barley •••.••.•••••••..• 111 4.4.1. Percentage affected leaf area •.•••••..•• 111 4.4.2. Grain yield •••••••.•••••••.•...•.•••••.• 117 · 4.4.2.1. Effect of fungicide application 117 4.4.2.2. Estimation of potential yield loss ............. ·. 1 2 0 4.4.3. Primary yield components •••••.•.••.••.•• 124 . 4.4.3.1. Effect of fungicide application 124 4.4.3.2. Relationship between grain yield and yield components •..••...••• 128 4.4.4. Grain quality ........................... 129 4.4.5. Discussion •••••••.•••••••••••.•.•••.•••. 130 4.5. Relationship between disease severity and grain yield .......................................... 133 4.5.1. Relationship between independently measured variables . • • • • • . • • • • • . • . • . • • 133 4.5.2. Correlation .•...•••..•.•••.••....••••••• 138 4.5.3. Regression .............................. 142 4.5.4. Discussion ••...••••..••••••.•.••••..•.•• 146