IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Program Research Report Cover Sheet

Transcription

1 b.pdf IR4 Ornamental Horticulture Program Research Report over Sheet Researcher(s) Gary hastagner Trial: 2015 WA Affiliation: Washington State University Pullayup WA PhoneNumber: (253) ProjectTitle: Botrytis Efficacy Protocol #: PR# Research Target rop/plant Product EPA Reg. # Production Site Status a sp. BAS703 06F/BAS703 01F Fluxapyroxad + pyraclostrobi BASF a sp. hipco N/G Iprodione Bayer a sp. F9110 F9110 FM a sp. MBI 110 MBI110 Marrone Bio In a sp. NUP fludioxonil Nufarm a sp. Pageant Intrinsic Boscalid + Pyraclostrobin BASF a sp. Proud 3 Thyme oil (5.6%) Biohumanetics a sp. S2200 4S Mandestrobin Valent

2 Narrative Summary (Results/Discussion) This material is based upon work that is supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture, under award number , with substantial cooperation and support from the State Agricultural Experiment Stations. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. A total of 8 products were evaluated for their effectiveness in controlling on fieldgrown Pink Jumbo tulips. Nonsprayed plants served as checks. Disease pressure progressed steadily in all test cells during this trial. By the end of the 152day test, the average severity rating of the nonsprayed checks was 6.8. The ratings of all the treatments ranged from 1.0 to 6.8. The ANOVA analysis of data indicated that treatments had a highly significant (P<0.001) effect on disease severity and the percent of blighted flowers. All treatments except Proud 3 and MBI110 had severity ratings that were significantly less than the checks (Table 1). Pageant 38WG, both rates of BAS F, both rates of S2200, and the high rate of NUP were the most effective materials in reducing disease development. Those same products, plus hipco 26019, had fewer blighted flowers and yielded more bulbs greater than 12cmindiameter than the nontreated checks (Tables 1 & 3). Three biofungicides were included in this trial. Although Proud 3 and MBI110 were ineffective, applications of F9110 did significantly reduce disease development on the foliage. Phytotoxicity was observed in this trial. Proud 3 did appear to damage plant foliage shortly after the initial applications of fungicides (see Figure 1). As disease severity increased throughout the trial, it was difficult to discern disease from chemical injury (see Figure 2). All of the products, except the three biofungicides were rated as leaving slight to moderate levels of visible residue on the foliage (Table 1). The data from these trials indicate that several of the fungicides tested have the potential to provide effective control of Botrytis on tulips. This includes the biofungicide F9110, which showed promise in reducing disease development on the foliage. However, it did not perform as well as it did in our 2014 trial. This may be due to the fact that new material was not available for this year s trial; thus the product used was more than 12 months old. In addition, a different tulip cultivar was tested in the 2014 trial, which could also explain the results.

3 Field Layout

4 Results Table Table 1. Effect of foliar fungicides on foliar phytotoxicity on March 2, the percentage of blighted flowers on April 10, fungicide residues on April 13, and disease severity on April 28, Prod/100 Intervals Phytoxicity % Blighted Noticeable Disease Trt # Product gal on foliage Flowers Residue Severity 3 BAS fl oz 14 day 0.0 b 3.5 d 1.0 b 1.0 d 11 Pageant 38 WG 14 oz 14 day 0.0 b 4.9 cd 1.0 b 1.0 d 2 BAS fl oz 14 day 0.0 b 6.2 cd 0.8 b 1.3 d 6 S fl oz 14 day 0.0 b 29.9 cd 1.0 b 1.3 d 7 S fl oz 14 day 0.0 b 14.5 cd 2.0 a 1.3 d 10 NUP fl oz 14 day 0.0 b 40.9 bc 1.0 b 1.3 d 9 NUP fl oz 14 day 0.0 b 73.1 ab 1.0 b 2.0 cd 12 hipco oz 14 day 0.0 b 20.1 cd 1.0 b 2.3 cd 4 F oz 7 day 0.0 b 69.5 ab 0.0 c 4.0 bc 8 MBI110 1 gal 7 day 0.0 b 69.6 ab 0.0 c 5.0 ab 1 heck 0.0 b 81.9 a 0.0 c 6.8 a 5 Proud 3 1 gal 7 day 4.0 a 84.1 a 0.0 c 6.8 a 1 Numbers in columns that are followed by the same letter are not significantly different, P=0.05, Tukey's Studentized Range Test. Table 2. Effect of foliar fungicides on flower heights on March 17, Flower Heights (in) Trt # Product Prod/100 gal Intervals < >13 Total 2 BAS fl oz 14 day 8.3 ab 16.5 a 16.3 a 41.0 a 10 NUP fl oz 14 day 6.8 ab 19.5 a 14.8 a 41.0 a 11 Pageant 38 WG 14 oz 14 day 5.0 b 17.5 a 14.3 ab 37.5 a 6 S fl oz 14 day 8.5 ab 17.3 a 13.8 ab 39.5 a 3 BAS fl oz 14 day 7.0 ab 17.8 a 12.0 ab 36.8 a 8 MBI110 1 gal 7 day 8.0 ab 16.8 a 11.0 ab 35.8 a 7 S fl oz 14 day 5.0 b 20.5 a 11.0 ab 36.5 a 1 heck 7.8 ab 18.3 a 10.5 ab 36.5 a 4 F oz 7 day 9.3 ab 18.8 a 8.3 ab 36.3 a 9 NUP fl oz 14 day 6.8 ab 19.5 a 8.0 ab 34.3 a 12 hipco oz 14 day 9.0 ab 22.5 a 6.0 ab 37.5 a 5 Proud 3 1 gal 7 day 14.5 a 22.5 a 2.0 b 39.0 a 1 Numbers in columns that are followed by the same letter are not significantly different, P=0.05, Tukey's Studentized Range Test.

5 Table 3. Effect of foliar fungicides on bulb size on July 15, Number of bulbs Trt # Product Prod/100 gal Interval s 810 cm 1012 cm >12 cm Total 2 BAS fl oz 14 day 5.0 c 9.5 a 23.3 a 37.8 ab 11 Pageant 38 WG 14 oz 14 day 6.3 c 14.3 a 20.3 ab 40.8 ab 3 BAS fl oz 14 day 5.0 c 14.0 a 19.8 ab 38.8 ab 10 NUP fl oz 14 day 6.5 c 17.8 a 18.0 ab 42.3 a 7 S fl oz 14 day 4.8 c 14.5 a 17.3 abc 36.5 ab 6 S fl oz 14 day 8.0 bc 16.5 a 14.8 ad 39.3 ab 12 hipco oz 14 day 5.5 c 12.3 a 14.3 ad 32.0 b 9 NUP fl oz 14 day 7.0 c 14.5 a 14.0 bcd 35.5 ab 4 F oz 7 day 8.8 bc 14.8 a 8.3 cde 31.8 b 8 MBI110 1 gal 7 day 10.0 abc 15.3 a 6.3 de 31.5 b 5 Proud 3 1 gal 7 day 16.5 a 17.8 a 2.3 e 36.5 ab 1 heck 14.8 ab 15.5 a 1.8 e 32.0 b 1 Numbers in columns that are followed by the same letter are not significantly different, P=0.05, Tukey's Studentized Range Test. Figure 1. Phytotoxicity observed on Proud 3 treated plants on February 24, 2015 (Day 11). Nontreated heck Proud 3 Treatment

6 Figure 2. Disease severity on Proud 3 treated plants on May 11, 2015 (Day 87). Nontreated heck Proud 3 Treatment Figure 3. Healthy and Blighted Flower Stems on April 10, 2015 (Day 56). Healthy Flower Stems Blighted Flower Stems

7 Experiment Information Experimental Design: Randomized omplete Block Number of Reps: 4 Materials & Methods/Recordkeeping Please fill out the information below or attach a separate document with comparable information. Bulbs used in this trial were 1011 cm diameter Pink Jumbo tulip bulbs obtained from Washington Bulb ompany. Bulbs were planted on September 30, 2014 in an area that has been planted with tulip bulbs for the past four seasons. Field design consisted of 5 rows spaced on 40 centers. Each row contained 10 3footlong planting cells with 3 feet between the planted cells. Prior to planting, all cells were fertilized by incorporating Plantacoat lbs. per acre in an 8 to 12inch wide band just below the soil surface within the rows where the bulbs were to be planted. After placing 45 bulbs in each planting cell, bulbs were treated with an infurrow 18 wide band of Terraclor 75WP at 3 lbs/1000 ft of row prior to hilling to control soilborne diseases. On January 14, 2015, the plot was inoculated with previous season tulip foliage that was dried, finely chopped, and evenly spread over the hills. Initial emergence of plants was observed the last week of January On February 10, 2015, cells were assigned to blocks based on the incidence of disease already present. Disease incidence was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 = none, 1 = 110%, 2 = 1120%,.., and 10 = 91100% of plant foliage were diseased. Initial incidence ratings ranged from 02. All Treatments were applied on 1 and 2week intervals starting on February 13, MBI110 was initially applied on February 20, Disease was visually monitored and severity was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 = none, 1 = 110%, 2 = 1120%,.., and 10 = 91100% of the foliage was killed. Disease severity ratings were taken on days 45, 59, and 74. Foliage residue ratings was rated on a scale of 0 to 3 where 0 = none, 1 = slight, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe residue present on foliage. Flower heights were collected on March 17, 2015 (Day 32) and the number of blighted flowers was assessed on April 10, 2015 (Day 56). Blighted flowers were based on the number of flowers per cell where the disease had spread into the stem. Flower height was a measurement of the length of the flower stem from soil line to base of flower. bulbs were harvested on June 30, 2015 (Day 137) and sorted and weighted on July 15, 2015 (Day 152).

8 Name(s) of Personnel onducting Research: Gary hastagner and Annie DeBauw Location of Trial (city/state): WSU Puyallup Research and Extension enter Use Site (greenhouse/shadehouse/field container/etc): Field rop History rop ultivar/variety: Pink Jumbo s Source: Washington Bulb ompany Bulb Size: 1011 cm diameter Date of Seeding: September 30, 2014 Date of Emergence: Last week of January 2015 Bed size: 960 ft 2 Row spacing 40 centers Seeding density: 45 bulbs/3 ft cells Harvest Date: June 30, 2015 Product(s) applied prior to start of experiment: Product Rate Application Type Date of Application rop Growth Stage Plantacoat lbs/acre Infurrow 9/30/2014 Prior to planting Terraclor 75WP 3 lbs/1000 ft of Infurrow 9/30/2014 Prior to hilling row Surflan + Buccaneer 0.5 fl oz fl Broadcast 11/21/2014 After hilling oz/1000 sq. ft. Ranger Pro 2.33 oz/gal Spot Spray 2/11/15, 4/2/15 Various stages Product(s) applied during experiment (including treatments, fertilizers, etc): PRODUT/ODE PRNUMBERS OMMON NAME MANUFATURER BAS F Fluxapyrosad + pyraclostrobin BASF F extract of Lupinus FM Proud thyme oil (5.6) BioHumanetrics S2200 4S mandestrobin NuFarm MBI Bacillus amvloliquifaciens strain F727 Marrone Bio Innovations NUP fludioxonil NuFarm Pageant 38 WG pyraclostrobin (12.8). boscalid (25.2) BASF hipco N/G iprodione OHP

9 Treatment List and Application Dates Rate/100 gal/a Application Interval Application Dates 1 Trt #* TRT/PRODUT PRnumbers Batch # 1 heck 2 BAS F fl oz 14 day A 3 BAS F fl oz 14 day A 4 F fl oz 7 day B 5 Proud gal 7 day B 6 S2200 4S fl oz 14 day A 7 S2200 4S fl oz 14 day A *8 MBI gal 7 day 9 NUP fl oz 14 day A 10 NUP fl oz 14 day A 11 Pageant 38 WG oz 14 day A 12 hipco oz 14 day A 1 Dates: 1 = 2/13/15, 2 = 2/20/15, 3 = 3/2/15, 4 = 3/9/15, 5 = 3/16/15, 6 = 3/24/15 7 = 3/30/15, 8 = 4/6/15, 9 = 4/13/15, 10 = 4/20/15, 11 = 4/27/15, 12 = 5/4/15 A = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11 B = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 = 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 *Product arrived 1 week late Photos See T115; IR4 Photos file for representative treatment effects. Data ollected Please describe data collected and scoring system. Also include the dates data were collected. Disease incidence was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 = none, 1 = 110%, 2 = 1120%,.., and 10 = 91100% of plant foliage were diseased. Disease severity was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 = none, 1 = 110%, 2 = 1120%,.., and 10 = 91100% of the foliage was killed. Phytotoxicity was rated on a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 = none, 1 = 110%, 2 = 11 20%,.., and 10 = 91100% of plant foliage were damaged. Disease severity ratings were taken on days 45, 59, and 74. Foliage residue ratings was rated on a scale of 0 = none, 1 = slight, 2 = moderate, and 3 = severe residue visible on the foliage. Flower heights were collected on March 17, 2015 (Day 32) and the number of blighted flowers was assessed on April 10, 2015 (Day 56). Blighted flowers were based on the number of flowers per cell where the disease had spread into the stem. Flower height was a measurement of the length of the flower stem from soil line to base of flower. bulbs were harvested on June 30, 2015 (Day 137) and sorted and weighted on July 15, 2015 (Day 152). Data analysis: Data were analyzed using ANOVA (GLM SAS). Treatment means were separated using Tukey s Studentized Range (HSD) Test.

10 Application Equipment: During the growing season, weeds were controlled with a combination of 0.5 fl oz / 1000 sq. ft and Buccaneer as well as broadcast and spot applications of Ranger Pro using a Solo backpack sprayer. For broadcast applications, sprayer was equipped with a Spray Systems TK 2 nozzle. For spot applications sprayer was equipped with a 8003 LP Teejet nozzle. All trial treatment applications were applied with a O 2 sprayer equipped with an 8002 Teejet nozzle at 15 psi in the indicated volume of water. Raw Data See T115; IR4 Data file for raw data Environmental conditions during the experiment: See T115; IR4 Data file for outdoor environmental conditions.

11 T 115; IR 4 Botrytis Trial on Pink Jumbo s TRT 1 TRT 2 TRT 3 TRT 4 TRT 5 TRT 6 TRT 7 TRT 8 TRT 9 TRT 10 TRT 11 TRT 12