CHEMICAL CONTROL of SOYBEAN RUST (PHAKOPSORA Pachyrhizl) on SOYBEANS
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHEMICAL CONTROL OF SOYBEAN RUST (PHAKOPSORA PACHYRHIZl) ON SOYBEANS by Eve Diane du Preez submitted in fulfilment ofthe requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in the Discipline ofPlant Pathology School ofApplied Environmental Sciences Faculty ofScience and Agriculture University ofKwaZulu-Natal Pietermaritzburg Republic ofSouth Africa March 2005 ABSTRACT Soybean rust (SBR) caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi Syd. is an aggressive wind dispersed fungal disease which has spread around the world at an alarming rate in the last decade. The disease was fIrst reported in South Africa (SA) in 2001. It has become well established in the province ofKwaZulu-Natal. Reports are occasionally made from eastern Mpumalanga, late in the growing season, in years with good rainfall. Yield losses of 10 - 80% have been reported due to SBR infection. Literature was reviewed to better understand the pathogen in an attempt to fInd suitable disease management strategies. Many strategies involve delaying, rather than preventing, SBR infection. Of the two strategies to prevent infection, the use of fungicides was the only option for disease control in SA, as no resistant cultivars are available. Field trials were conducted to determine which fungicides are effective in controlling SBR. Further research was conducted to determine the timing, frequency and rate of fungicide applications for optimal control of SBR. Trials were evaluated for disease severity, seed yield and the effect offungicides on seed quality. Fungicides from the triazole class of the sterol biosynthesis inhibiting group of fungicides were found to be the most effective in controlling SBR. A fungicide from the strobilurin group was found to be less effective than the triazoles at the suggested rate, but was found to be as effective when evaluated at higher dosage rates. Triazoles premixed with fungicides from the benzimidazole and strobilurin groups were also effective in controlling SBR. Timing of application was found to be critical for strobilurin fungicides, but not for triazole fungicides, which have a curative ability, unlike strobilurins. Strobilurin fungicides applied preventatively, before the appearance of disease symptoms were as effective as triazole fungicides applied after disease symptoms, but before infection levels had reached 10%. Across both wet and dry seasons two fungicide applications applied at 21 d intervals at the R2 growth stage resulted in effective disease control. In wet seasons, a third fungicide application resulted in yields that were higher, albeit not statistically signifIcant, than two fungicide applications. Assessments of individual fungicides for optimal dosage rate found that registered rates were already optimal for some fungicides, but for others it appeared as ifalterations were necessary to the rate suggested for registration. This study was one of the first to extensively evaluate the efficacy of the new triazole and strobilurin fungicides on SBR control. The results have been shared globally, but particularly with newly affected countries in South and North America. Although this research has been groundbreaking, there are still many aspects of fungicide control which need to be studied in order to further optimise chemical control ofSBR. 11 DECLARATION I, Eve Diane du Preez, declare that the research reported in this thesis, except where otherwise indicated, is my own original research. This thesis has not been submitted for any degree or examination at any other university. ~.. Dr P.M. Caldwell - SUPERVISOR 111 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I gratefully acknowledge: Dr P.M. Caldwell, my supervisor, for her encouragement and faith in my ability, her willingness to meet with me whenever necessary, for always putting me first and for editing this manuscript. Prof. M.D. Laing, co-supervisor of this thesis, for brainstorming in the initial planning ofresearch projects and editing this manuscript. Mr R.A. Bell for support throughout the trials and editing this manuscript. Mr N.C. van Rij, for technical field support and for discussions on theories developed in the course ofthis research. Mrs M.I. Whitwell and Mrs C.M. Stevens for their devoted assistance in statistical analyses. Ms S. Tweer, Mr K. Puswe, Ms N. Thurtell, Ms Z.S. Mavuso and Mr S.C. Hadebe for assistance in spraying, disease assessments and general maintenance oftrials. Field and research staff in Crop Protection, Agronomy and Horticulture of KZNDAEA for assistance at planting and harvesting. Mrs L. Thurtell, and her staff, for assistance in determination ofoil and protein content. KwaZulu-Natal Department ofAgriculture and Environmental Affairs for granting me a bursary to pursue these studies. Seed and agrochemical companies for donations ofseed and fungicides. IV Protein Research Foundation for financial support m conducting these and other research trials. Mr L. Killian for advice on soybean cultivation practices. Dr C. Levy for sharing his research fmdings on chemical control of soybean rust in Zimbabwe. Prof. N.W. McLaren for encouragement and discussions on research progress. Dr J.M.J. Ward, my predecessor, who set a good example with his pioneering work on .control of grey leaf spot in maize in South Africa, and whose retirement, afforded me the opportunity to pioneer the research in fungicide control ofsoybean rust. My son, Sean, for time we sacrificed being together and for his love, support, inspiration, patience and understanding. Peter du Preez, for believing in my ability to succeed and for sacrifices made. My parents, John Mackenzie and Rosemary Gardner, for good genes, without which I would never have come this far. My brother and sister-in-law, Andrew and Tracey Mackenzie, whose fmancial assistance enabled me to pursue my Honours degree, thereby enabling me to pursue my MSc. degree. My friends, Lorraine Strathie, Brigid Letty and Lance van der Bank for valuable support and encouragement. v To Sean VI CONTENTS . ABSTRACT · .. ·.·.··.· ........... I ... ........ III . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ·. IV CONTENTS ·.··. VII GENERAL INTRODUCTION . 1 CHAPTERl Literature review 1.1 Introduction 3 1.2 Pathogen nomenclature and morphology •••.....•......•........••. 4 1.3 Symptoms ................................................. .. 7 1.4 Host range ................................................. .. 8 1.5 History and distribution ofsoybean rust caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi •...................•.•......•.. 9 1.6 Economic importance .................................... .. 12 1.7 Infection process .......................................... .. 14 1.8 Epidemiolog)' .......................................... .. 16 1.9 Disease management ..............................•..... .. 19 1.9.1 Chemical approaches ••.........•........•...•...•• .• 19 1.9.2 Cultural approaches. ...........•.................•..... .. 22 1.9.3 Biological approaches ..•..•.......••..............• .. 24 1.9.4 Genetic approaches •..................................•.• 26 1.10 Conclusions 28 1.11 References ................................................ .. 28 vu CHAPTER 2 Fungicide efficacy in soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi Syd.) control on soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) Abstract ...................................................... .. 38 2.1 Introduction. ............................................... .. 39 2.2 Materials and methods .....................•.............. .. 41 2.3 Results ..••............................................ .. 46 2.3.1 2001/2002 season 48 2.3.2 2002/2003 season •.............................•..... .. 53 2.3.3 2003/2004 season ..................................•. .. 56 2.4 Discussion .•.•.......................................•.... .. 60 2.5 References ................................................ .. 64 CHAPTER 3 Rate of fungicide application for soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi Syd.) control on soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) Abstract ,_ ............ .. 69 3.1 Introduction 70 3.2 Materials and methods .................................... .. 72 3.3 Results ................................................ .. 78 3.3.1 2001/2002 season .................................... .. 79 3.3.2 2002/2003 season ....•............................... .. 86 3.3.3 2003/2004 season. ................................... .. 90 3.3.4 Response of individual fungicides to rate ofapplication for all trials ....................... .. 95 3.4 Discussion ................................................. 102 3.5 References ................................................. 105 Vlll CHAPTER 4 Number of fungicide applications for control.of soybean rust (phakopsora pachyrhizi Syd.) on soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) Abstract 108 4.1 Introduction . 109 4.2 Materials and methods 111 4.3 Results 116 4.3.1 Final disease severity ............................. .. 117 4.3.2 Standardised area under disease progress curve (SAUDPC) . 124 4.3.3 Yield 128 4.3.4 Seed mass ......................................... .. 133 4.3.5 Protein content ................................... .. 138 4.3.6 Oil content ......................................... .. 142 4.4 Discussion ............................................... .. 145 4.5 References ............................................... .. 148 CHAPTERS Timing of initial fungicide application for soybean rust (Phakopsora pachyrhizi Syd.) control on soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) Abstract ..................................................... .. 150 5.1 Introduction. .............................................. .. 151 5.2 Materials and methods ..................................