Protection of Oats against Puccinia and Drechslera Fungi in Various Meteorological Conditions
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- FAOSTAT 2024. Crop and Livestock Products. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Perrelli, A.; Goitre, L.; Salzano, A.M.; Moglia, A.; Scaloni, A.; Retta, S.F. Biological activities, health benefits and therapeutic properties of avenanthramides: From skin protection to prevention and treatment of cerebrovascular diseases. Oxid. Med. Cell Longev. 2018, 2018, 402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Akay, H.; Mut, Z.; Bahadir, M.C.; Doğanay, Ö.; Köse, E. Significance of oat in human nutrition and health. In Proceedings of the 5th International Eurasian Congress on Natural Nutrition, Healthy Life & Sport, Ankara, Turkey, 2–8 October 2019; pp. 464–471. [Google Scholar]
- Jena, J.; Palai, J.B.; Dash, G.K. Nutrient management sustainabale oat production–A review. Forage Res. 2019, 45, 165–172. [Google Scholar]
- Turrini, E.; Maffei, F.; Milelli, A.; Calcabrini, C.; Fimognari, C. Overview of the Anticancer Profile of Avenanthramides from Oat. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2019, 20, 4536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Johnsen, N.F.; Frederiksen, K.; Christensen, J.; Skeie, G.; Lund, E.; Landberg, R.; Johansson, I.; Nilsson, L.M.; Halkjaer, J.; Olsen, A. Whole-grain products and whole-grain types are associated with lower all-causeand cause-specific mortality in the Scandinavian HELGA cohort. Br. J. Nutr. 2015, 114, 608–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- GUS. Oats sown area. In Statistical Yearbook of Agriculture; Statistics Poland: Warsaw, Poland, 2023; 441p. [Google Scholar]
- Kolenda, M.; Mroczkowski, S. Fusarium mycotoxins and methods of assessing the mycotoxity: A review. J. Cen. Eur. Agric. 2013, 14, 169–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korbas, M.; Jajor, J.; Horoszkiewicz-Janka, J.; Danielewicz, J. Atlas Chorób Roślin Rolniczych; Hortpress: Warsaw, Poland, 2018; 219p. [Google Scholar]
- Harder, D.E.; Haber, S. Oat diseases and pathological techniques. In Oat Science and Technology; Marshall, H.G., Sorrells, M.E., Eds.; American Society of Agronomy, Inc.: Madison, WA, USA, 1992; pp. 307–425+672. [Google Scholar]
- Forcellini, C.A.; Reis, E.M. Deoncas da aveia. In Manual de Fitopatologia: Doencas das Plantas Cultivadas; Kimati, H., Amorim, L., Bergamin Filho, A., Camargo, L.E.A., Eds.; Agronomica Ceres: Sao Paulo, Brazil, 2005; pp. 95–98. [Google Scholar]
- Chaves, M.S.; Martinelli, J.A.; Wesp, C.L.; Greichen, F.A.S. The cereal rust: An overview. Pest Technol. 2008, 2, 38–55. [Google Scholar]
- Fetch, J.M.W.; Brown, P.D.; Ames, N.; Chong, J.; Fetch, T.G., Jr.; Haber, S.M.; Menzies, J.G.; Tekauz, A.; Townley-Smith, T.F.; Stadnyk, K.D. Stainless oat. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2011, 91, 357–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shakeel, Q.; Raheel, M.; Bajwa, R.T.; Rashid, I.; Raza, H.Y.; Saleem, S.R. Etiology and Management of Economically Significant Diseases of Avena sativa. In Sustainable Winter Fodder; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; pp. 131–163. [Google Scholar]
- Neto, S.; Zeffa, D.; Arruda, K.; Riede, C. White oat agronomic performance and cultivar reactions to leaf rust and leaf spot. Agron. Sci. Biotechnol. 2019, 5, 24–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sowa, S.; Paczos-Grzęda, E. A study of crown rust resistance in historical and modern oat cultivars representing 120 years of Polish oat breeding. Euphytica 2020, 216, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martinelli, J.A.; Federizzi, L.C.; Bennedetti, A.C. Effect of oat cultivars mixtures and seed treatments on the restriction of leaf rust disease progress. Summa Phytopathol. 1994, 20, 113–115. [Google Scholar]
- Picinini, E.C.; Fernandes, J.M.C. Efficacy of fungicides for controlling crown rust of oats. Fitopatol. Bras. 1994, 19, 74–78. [Google Scholar]
- Sooväli, P.; Koppel, M. Timing of fungicide application for profitable disease management in oat (Avena sativa L.). Zemdirb.-Agric. 2011, 98, 167–174. [Google Scholar]
- May, W.E.; Ames, N.; Irvine, R.B.; Kutcher, H.R.; Lafond, G.P.; Shirtliffe, S.J. Are fungicide applications to control crown rust of oat beneficial? Can. J. Plant Sci. 2014, 94, 911–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korbas, M.; Czubiński, T.; Horoszkiewicz-Janka, J.; Jajor, E.; Danielewicz, J. Atlas Chorób Roślin Rolniczych; PWRiL: Warsaw, Poland, 2015; 368p. [Google Scholar]
- Van Niekerk, B.D.; Pretorius, Z.A.; Boshoff, W.H.P. Potential yield losses caused by barley leaf rust and oat leaf and stem rust to South African barley and oat cultivars. S. Afr. J. Plant Sci. 2001, 18, 108–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiecana, I.; Mielniczuk, E.; Cegiełko, M.; Pszczółkowski, P. Badania nad chorobami podsuszkowymi owsa (Avena sativa L.) z uwzględnieniem temperatury i opadów. Acta Agrobot. 2003, 56, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cegiełko, M.; Kiecana, I.; Kachlicki, P.; Wakuliński, W. Pathogenicity of Drechslera avenae for leaves of selected oat genotypes and ist ability to produce anthraquinone compounds. Acta Sci. Pol. Hortorum Cultus 2011, 10, 11–22. [Google Scholar]
- Admassu-Yimer, B.; Bonman, J.M.; Klos, K.E. Mapping of crown rust resistance gene Pc53 in oat (Avena sativa). PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0209105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Okoń, S.M.; Ociepa, T. Effectiveness of new sources of resistance against oat powdery mildew identified in A. sterilis. J. Plant Dis. Sci. 2018, 125, 505–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menzies, J.G.; Xue, A.; Gruenke, J.; Dueck, R.; Deceuninck, S.; Chen, Y. Virulence of Puccinia coronata var. avenae f. sp. avenae (oat crown rust) in Canada during 2010 to 2015. Can. J. Plant Pathol. 2019, 41, 379–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kebede, A.Z.; Admassu-Yimer, B.; Bekele, W.A.; Gordon, T.; Bonman, J.M.; Babiker, E.; Jin, Y.; Gale, S.; Wight, C.P.; Tinker, N.A.; et al. Mapping of the stem rust resistance gene Pg13 in cultivated oat. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2020, 133, 259–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, A.R.D.; Boller, W.; Forcelini, C.A.; Blum, R.; Lopes, A. Fungicidas, doses e volumes de calda no controle químico da ferrugem da folha da aveia (Puccinia coronata f. sp. avenae). Engenharia Agrícola 2007, 27, 48–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dalla Favera, D.; Gulart, C.; Debona, D.; Madalosso, M.G.; Debortoli, M.P.; Balardin, R.S. Chemical control of oat diseases. Rev. FZVA 2009, 16, 42–51. [Google Scholar]
- De Paiva Oliveira, E.A.; Zucareli, C.; Fonseca, I.; de Oliveira, J.C.; do Rego Barros, A.S. Foliar fungicide and environments on the physiological quality of oat seeds. J. Seed Sci. 2014, 36, 15–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hutorowicz, H.; Grabowski, J.; Olba-Zięty, E. Częstotliwość występowania okresów posusznych i suchych w dwóch mezoregionach Pojezierza Mazurskiego. Acta Agrophys. 2008, 12, 663–673. [Google Scholar]
- Gałęzewska, M.; Kapuściśski, J. Próba określenia prawdopodobieśstwa posuchy i suszy w Wielkopolsce na przykładzie Poznania [An attempt of defining the probability of drought in Wielkopolska region with Poznań as an example]. Ann. Agric. Acad. Poznań 1978, 105, 3–11. [Google Scholar]
- Skowera, B.; Puła, J. Skrajne warunki pluwiotermiczne w okresie wiosennym na obszarze Polski w latach 1971–2000. Acta Agroph. 2004, 3, 171–177. [Google Scholar]
- Shapiro, S.S.; Wilk, M.B. An Analysis of Variance Test for Normality. Biometrika 1965, 52, 591–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McCallum, B.D.; Fetch, T.; Chong, J. Cereal rust control in Canada. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 2007, 58, 639–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kryczyński, S. Fitopatologia–Choroby Roślin Uprawnych. T. 2; PWRiL: Poznań, Poland, 2011; 464p. [Google Scholar]
- Behnken, L.M.; Breitenbach, F.R.; Miller, R.P. Impact of Foliar Fungicide to Control Crown Rust in Oatsin 2009; University of Minnesota-Extension Servise: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2009; pp. 1–2. [Google Scholar]
- Šebesta, J.; Zwatz, B.; Roderick, H.; Corazza, L.; Manisterski, J.; Stojanovic, S. Incidence of crown rust and virulence of Puccinia coronata Cda. F. sp. avenae Eriks. and effectiveness of Pc genes for resistance in Europe, Middle East and North Africa. Arch. Phytopathol. Plant Prot. 2003, 36, 179–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cook, R.J.; Hims, M.J.; Vaughan, T.B. Effects of fungicide spray timing on winter wheat disease control. Plant Pathol. 1999, 48, 33–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Tempe, J. Helminthosporium spp. in seeds of wheat, barley, oats and rye. Proc. Int. Seed Test Assoc. 1964, 29, 117–140. [Google Scholar]
- Dennis, W.G. Studies on the morphology and biology of Helminthosporium avenae. Trans. Br. Mycol. Soc. 1993, 18, 223–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carson, M.L. Virulence in oat crown rust (Puccinia coronate f. sp. Avenae) in the United States from 2006 through 2009. Plant Dis. 2011, 95, 1528–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gautam, H.R.; Bhardwaj, M.L.; Kumar, R. Climate change and its impact on plant diseases. Curr. Sci. 2013, 105, 1685–1691. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, C.; Wang, X.; Jin, Z.; Müller, C.; Pugh, T.A.; Chen, A.; Wang, T.; Huang, L.; Zhang, Y.; Li, L.X.; et al. Occurrence of crop pests and diseases has largely increased in China since 1970. Nat. Food 2022, 3, 57–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
K-Index Classes | Values | Color Marking |
---|---|---|
Extremely dry | k ≤ 0.4 | |
Very dry | 0.4 < k ≤ 0.7 | |
Dry | 0.7 < k ≤ 1.0 | |
Slightly dry | 1.0 < k ≤ 1.3 | |
Optimum | 1.3 < k ≤ 1.6 | |
Slightly humid | 1.6 < k ≤ 2.0 | |
Humid | 2.0 < k ≤ 2.5 | |
Very humid | 2.5 < k ≤ 3.0 | |
Extremely humid | k > 3.0 |
Month | Year | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | |
January | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.7 | 5.8 | 0.0 |
February | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 3.2 |
March | 0.5 | 0.0 | 2.2 | 2.8 | 1.8 |
April | 0.9 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 0.0 |
May | 0.9 | 1.9 | 2.8 | 0.7 | 0.5 |
June | 0.7 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 1.1 | 0.6 |
July | 1.1 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 1.6 | 1.8 |
August | 1.9 | 0.2 | 1.1 | 0.3 | 0.5 |
September | 1.6 | 2.7 | 1.7 | 0.4 | 0.0 |
October | 1.2 | 0.5 | 0.8 | 1.2 | 1.7 |
November | 0.8 | 2.9 | 0.8 | 2.7 | 2.3 |
December | 2.2 | 2.0 | 4.9 | 1.4 | 6.9 |
Month | Average Temperature [°C] | Precipitation [mm] | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 1960–2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 1960–2016 | |
March | 6.2 | –2.1 | 7.4 | 6.0 | 4.0 | 3.2 | 10.6 | 23.0 | 22.4 | 33.4 | 55.0 | 29.5 |
April | 9.3 | 8.2 | 11.3 | 9.2 | 9.1 | 8.2 | 22.4 | 23.6 | 28.2 | 26.2 | 39.8 | 31.2 |
May | 15.1 | 14.1 | 14.1 | 13.4 | 15.2 | 13.4 | 54.4 | 79.0 | 43.2 | 23.0 | 35.4 | 47.4 |
June | 16.7 | 18.6 | 17.3 | 16.1 | 18.1 | 16.7 | 109.2 | 17.0 | 25.3 | 50.6 | 105.4 | 62.8 |
July | 19.1 | 20.1 | 22.4 | 20.0 | 19.3 | 18.2 | 75.8 | 40.0 | 57.8 | 54.2 | 145.6 | 76.9 |
August | 19.4 | 19.2 | 17.5 | 22.1 | 18.2 | 17.8 | 59.8 | 35.8 | 56.8 | 60.6 | 31.6 | 63.7 |
March–August | 14.3 | 13.0 | 15.0 | 14.5 | 14.0 | 12.9 | 332.2 | 218.4 | 233.7 | 248.0 | 412.8 | 311.5 |
Variety | Treatments | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Inf. 1 | Efficacy | Inf. 1 | Efficacy | Inf. 1 | Efficacy | Inf. 1 | Efficacy | Inf. 1 | Efficacy | ||
Arab | Untreated check | 13.38 a | 0.0 | 9.10 b | 0.0 | 11.31 a | 0.0 | 8.00 ab | 0.0 | 5.13 bcd | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin 2 | 3.00 b | 77.6 | 0.43 e | 95.3 | 4.81 defg | 57.5 | 0.94 h | 88.3 | 0.69 ef | 86.6 | |
Epoxiconazole | 4.50 b | 66.4 | 1.53 cde | 83.2 | 4.50 defgh | 60.2 | 2.19 fgh | 72.7 | 0.94 ef | 81.7 | |
Picoxystrobin | 2.50 b | 81.3 | 1.31 de | 85.6 | 5.00 def | 55.8 | 2.69 efgh | 66.4 | 2.31 def | 54.9 | |
Tebuconazole | 3.75 b | 72.0 | 2.03 cde | 77.8 | 4.88 defg | 56.9 | 2.63 efgh | 67.2 | 0.25 f | 95.1 | |
Arden | Untreated check | 11.75 a | 0.0 | 11.6 b | 0.0 | 9.50 ab | 0.0 | 7.50 abc | 0.0 | 6.00 abc | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 3.25 b | 72.3 | 0.78 de | 93.3 | 4.56 defgh | 52.0 | 5.63 bcde | 25.0 | 1.00 ef | 83.3 | |
Epoxiconazole | 3.25 b | 72.3 | 0.68 de | 94.2 | 4.31 defgh | 54.6 | 3.56 defgh | 52.5 | 1.00 ef | 83.3 | |
Picoxytrobin | 2.25 b | 80.9 | 1.90 cde | 83.6 | 2.38 efghi | 75.0 | 4.94 bcdef | 34.2 | 1.13 ef | 81.3 | |
Tebuconazole | 2.25 b | 80.9 | 3.73 cd | 67.9 | 5.44 cdef | 42.8 | 3.06 defgh | 59.2 | 2.00 def | 66.7 | |
Bingo | Untreated check | 11.25 a | 0.0 | 4.60 c | 0.0 | 6.7 bcd | 0.0 | 4.63 cdefg | 0.0 | 8.50 a | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 2.50 b | 77.8 | 0.98 de | 78.8 | 3.44 efghi | 49.1 | 1.50 gh | 67.6 | 0.88 ef | 89.7 | |
Epoxiconazole | 2.50 b | 77.8 | 0.48 e | 89.7 | 1.44 hi | 78.7 | 1.00 h | 78.4 | 1.81 ef | 78.7 | |
Picoxytrobin | 2.00 b | 82.2 | 0.78 de | 83.2 | 2.25 fghi | 66.7 | 0.63 h | 86.5 | 1.13 ef | 86.8 | |
Tebuconazole | 3.50 b | 68.9 | 0.49 de | 89.4 | 1.06 i | 84.3 | 1.31 h | 71.6 | 1.00 ef | 88.2 | |
Breton | Untreated check | 12.50 a | 0.0 | 9.10 b | 0.0 | 5.56 cde | 0.0 | 6.25 bcd | 0.0 | 6.88 ab | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 2.00 b | 84.0 | 0.43 e | 95.3 | 3.69 defghi | 33.7 | 2.88 efgh | 54.0 | 2.25 def | 67.3 | |
Epoxiconazole | 2.50 b | 80.0 | 1.53 cde | 83.2 | 1.38 hi | 75.3 | 3.69 defgh | 41.0 | 2.81 cdef | 59.1 | |
Picoxytrobin | 1.75 b | 86.0 | 1.31 de | 85.6 | 1.69 ghi | 69.7 | 2.69 efgh | 57.0 | 3.75 bcde | 45.5 | |
Tebuconazole | 2.80 b | 77.6 | 2.03 cde | 77.8 | 1.56 hi | 71.9 | 3.50 defgh | 44.0 | 0.88 ef | 87.3 | |
Maczo 3 | Untreated check | 13.75 a | 0.0 | 17.25 a | 0.0 | 8.31 abc | 0.0 | 10.00 a | 0.0 | 6.63 ab | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 3.50 b | 74.6 | 2.40 cde | 86.1 | 4.94 def | 40.6 | 1.44 gh | 85.6 | 1.88 ef | 71.7 | |
Epoxiconazole | 2.50 b | 81.8 | 1.65 cde | 90.4 | 3.19 efghi | 61.7 | 3.38 defgh | 66.3 | 0.63 ef | 90.6 | |
Picoxytrobin | 3.50 b | 74.6 | 0.58 de | 96.7 | 3.00 efghi | 63.9 | 2.94 efgh | 70.6 | 1.81 ef | 72.7 | |
Tebuconazole | 2.75 b | 80.00 | 2.50 cde | 85.5 | 4.00 defghi | 51.9 | 3.25 defgh | 67.5 | 1.50 ef | 77.4 | |
LSD (0.05) | Variety: 0.647; fungicide: 0.647; years: 0.647; V × F: 1.447; V × Y: 1.447; F × Y: 1.447; V × F × Y: 3.235 |
Variety | Treatments | 2013 | 2014 | 2016 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Inf. 1 | Efficacy | Inf. 1 | Efficacy | Inf. 1 | Efficacy | ||
Arab | Untreated check | 11.75 a | 0.0 | 7.31 ab | 0.0 | 8.75 bc | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin 2 | 1.15 b | 90.2 | 3.69 cdef | 49.6 | 0.06 d | 99.3 | |
Epoxiconazole | 0.48 b | 96.0 | 1.81 defg | 75.2 | 0.25 d | 97.1 | |
Picoxytrobin | 0.43 b | 96.4 | 1.00 efg | 86.3 | 0.13 d | 98.6 | |
Tebuconazole | 0.73 b | 93.8 | 1.00 efg | 86.3 | 1.38 d | 84.3 | |
Arden | Untreated check | 13.05 a | 0.0 | 5.69 abc | 0.0 | 9.29 bc | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 0.23 b | 98.3 | 2.13 defg | 62.6 | 1.00 d | 89.2 | |
Epoxiconazole | 0.90 b | 93.1 | 0.81 fg | 85.7 | 1.25 d | 86.5 | |
Picoxytrobin | 0.43 b | 96.7 | 0.94 efg | 83.5 | 1.00 d | 89.2 | |
Tebuconazole | 0.40 b | 96.9 | 0.31 g | 94.5 | 0.50 d | 94.6 | |
Bingo | Untreated check | 11.35 a | 0.0 | 4.19 bcde | 0.0 | 13.50 a | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 0.50 b | 95.6 | 3.06 cdefg | 26.9 | 0.75 d | 94.4 | |
Epoxiconazole | 0.38 b | 96.7 | 1.50 defg | 64.2 | 0.50 d | 96.3 | |
Picoxytrobin | 0.10 b | 99.1 | 1.38 defg | 97.2 | 0.13 d | 99.1 | |
Tebuconazole | 0.05 b | 99.6 | 0.25 g | 94.0 | 0.00 d | 100.0 | |
Breton | Untreated check | 2.45 b | 0.0 | 7.81 a | 0.0 | 7.13 c | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 0.05 b | 98.0 | 4.38 bcd | 44.0 | 0.50 d | 92.9 | |
Epoxiconazole | 0.05 b | 98.0 | 1.56 defg | 80.0 | 0.50 d | 92.9 | |
Picoxytrobin | 0.11 b | 95.4 | 1.94 defg | 75.2 | 0.50 d | 92.9 | |
Tebuconazole | 0.15 b | 93.9 | 0.56 fg | 92.8 | 0.50 d | 92.9 | |
Maczo 3 | Untreated check | 1.40 b | 0.0 | 3.19 cdefg | 0.0 | 11.25 ab | 0.0 |
Azoxystrobin | 0.25 b | 82.1 | 2.94 cdefg | 7.8 | 0.25 d | 97.8 | |
Epoxiconazole | 0.00 b | 100.0 | 1.25 defg | 60.8 | 0.38 d | 96.7 | |
Picoxytrobin | 0.05 b | 96.4 | 0.38 g | 88.2 | 0.31 d | 97.2 | |
Tebuconazole | 0.00 b | 100.0 | 0.38 g | 88.2 | 3.00 d | 73.3 | |
LSD (0.05) | Variety: 0.653; Fungicide: 0.653; Year: 0.653; V × F: 1.46; V × Y: v; F × Y: 1.46; V × F × Y: 3.264 |
Variety | Treatments | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Yield [t × ha−1] | Rel 1 | Yield [t × ha−1] | Rel | Yield [t × ha−1] | Rel | Yield [t × ha−1] | Rel | Yield [t × ha−1] | Rel | ||
Arab | Untreated check | 6.47 ij | 100 | 7.03 bcdef | 100 | 6.38 c | 100 | 6.20 bcd | 100 | 4.88 abcd | 100 |
Azoxystrobin 2 | 6.83 hi | 106 | 7.74 ab | 110 | 6.70 bc | 105 | 7.12 a | 115 | 5.06 ab | 104 | |
Epoxiconazole | 6.68 hij | 103 | 7.74 ab | 111 | 6.92 abc | 109 | 6.84 ab | 110 | 4.97 abc | 102 | |
Picoxytrobin | 7.21 fgh | 112 | 7.77 a | 111 | 6.42 c | 101 | 7.29 a | 118 | 5.08 ab | 104 | |
Tebuconazole | 7.04 ghi | 109 | 7.05 abcde | 100 | 7.06 abc | 111 | 6.72 abc | 109 | 4.97 abc | 102 | |
Arden | Untreated check | 7.71 defg | 100 | 6.54 ef | 100 | 6.97 abc | 100 | 5.79 de | 100 | 4.47 abcd | 100 |
Azoxystrobin | 7.93 bcdef | 103 | 6.76 def | 103 | 6.99 abc | 100 | 5.79 de | 100 | 4.46 abcd | 100 | |
Epoxiconazole | 7.82 cdef | 101 | 6.68 ef | 102 | 7.49 a | 108 | 6.21 bcd | 107 | 4.66 abcd | 104 | |
Picoxytrobin | 7.60 efg | 99 | 6.65 ef | 102 | 7.05 abc | 101 | 6.24 bcd | 108 | 4.59 abcd | 103 | |
Tebuconazole | 7.78 def | 101 | 6.65 ef | 102 | 7.37 ab | 106 | 6.10 cd | 105 | 4.71 abcd | 105 | |
Bingo | Untreated check | 8.13 abcde | 100 | 6.80 def | 100 | 6.75 bc | 100 | 3.55 k | 100 | 4.16 d | 100 |
Azoxystrobin | 8.44 abcd | 104 | 6.77 def | 100 | 7.02 abc | 104 | 3.60 jk | 101 | 4.44 bcd | 109 | |
Epoxiconazole | 8.52 abc | 104.8 | 6.31 f | 93 | 6.98 abc | 104 | 3.60 jk | 102 | 4.39 bcd | 106 | |
Picoxytrobin | 8.50 abc | 105 | 6.80 def | 100 | 6.45 c | 96 | 3.82 ijk | 108 | 4.25 cd | 102 | |
Tebuconazole | 8.56 ab | 105 | 6.87 cdef | 101 | 6.97 abc | 103 | 3.37 k | 95 | 4.31 cd | 104 | |
Breton | Untreated check | 8.06 abcde | 100 | 7.53 abc | 100 | 6.72 bc | 100 | 5.22 efg | 100 | 4.93 abc | 100 |
Azoxystrobin | 8.32 abcd | 103 | 7.54 abc | 100 | 6.37 c | 95 | 5.22 efg | 100 | 5.18 a | 105 | |
Epoxiconazole | 8.23 abcde | 102 | 6.84 cdef | 91 | 6.67 bc | 99 | 5.66 de | 108 | 4.92 abc | 100 | |
Picoxytrobin | 8.71 a | 108 | 7.46 abcd | 99 | 6.62 c | 98 | 5.53 def | 106 | 5.10 ab | 104 | |
Tebuconazole | 8.27 abcde | 103 | 7.04 bcdef | 94 | 6.94 abc | 103 | 5.59 de | 107 | 5.08 ab | 103 | |
Maczo 3 | Untreated check | 6.10 j | 100 | 4.15 g | 100 | 4.54 d | 100 | 4.41 hi | 100 | 2.96 ef | 100 |
Azoxystrobin | 6.09 j | 100 | 4.80 g | 116 | 5.05 d | 111 | 4.62 gh | 105 | 3.13 ef | 106 | |
Epoxiconazole | 6.05 j | 99 | 4.18 g | 101 | 4.79 d | 105 | 4.81 fgh | 109 | 3.34 e | 113 | |
Picoxytrobin | 6.68 hij | 110 | 4.59 g | 111 | 4.65 d | 102 | 4.32 hij | 98 | 2.97 ef | 101 | |
Tebuconazole | 6.51 hij | 107 | 4.25 g | 103 | 4.61 d | 102 | 4.44 hi | 101 | 2.52 f | 85 | |
LSD (0.05) | Variety: 0.145; fungicide: 0.145; year: 0.145; V × F: 0.324; V × Y: 0.324; F × V: 0.324; V × F × Y: 0.724 |
Feature | Drechslera avenae (Da) | Puccinia coronata (Pc) | Hydrothermal index (H) | |||||||||||
2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2013 | 2014 | 2016 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | ||
Da | 2012 | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.009 (0.000) | - | - | - | - |
2013 | - | 1 | - | - | - | 0.486 3 (0.236) | - | - | - | 0.028 (0.001) | - | - | - | |
2014 | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | 0.634 1 (0.402) | - | - | - | −0.155 (0.024) | - | - | |
2015 | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.115 (0.024) | - | |
2016 | - | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | 0.777 3 (0.604) | - | - | - | - | −0.093 (0.009) | |
Pc | 2013 | - | 0.486 1 (0.236) | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | −0.080 (0.006) | - | - | - |
2014 | - | - | 0.634 1 (0.402) | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | −0.068 (0.005) | - | - | |
2016 | - | - | - | - | 0.777 3 (0.604) | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | - | −0.043 (0.002) | |
H | 2012 | 0.009 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | - |
2013 | - | 0.028 (0.001) | - | - | - | −0.080 (0.006) | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | - | |
2014 | - | - | −0.155 (0.024) | - | - | - | −0.068 (0.005) | - | - | - | 1 | - | - | |
2015 | - | - | - | 0.115 (0.024) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 1 | - | |
2016 | - | - | - | - | −0.093 (0.009) | - | - | −0.043 (0.002) | - | - | - | - | 1 | |
Y | 2012 | −0.209 1 (0.044) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | −0.499 3 (0.249) | - | - | - | - |
2013 | - | −0.214 1 (0.046) | - | - | - | 0.115 (0.024) | - | - | - | 0.022 (0.000) | - | - | - | |
2014 | - | - | −0.078 (0.006) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | 0.115 (0.024) | - | - | |
2015 | - | - | - | 0.134 (0.018) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | −0.511 3 (0.261) | - | |
2016 | - | - | - | - | −0.040 (0.002) | - | - | −0.131 (0.017) | - | - | - | - | −0.687 3 (0.472) |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Danielewicz, J.; Jajor, E.; Horoszkiewicz, J.; Korbas, M.; Blecharczyk, A.; Idziak, R.; Sobiech, Ł.; Grzanka, M.; Szymański, T. Protection of Oats against Puccinia and Drechslera Fungi in Various Meteorological Conditions. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 7121. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167121
Danielewicz J, Jajor E, Horoszkiewicz J, Korbas M, Blecharczyk A, Idziak R, Sobiech Ł, Grzanka M, Szymański T. Protection of Oats against Puccinia and Drechslera Fungi in Various Meteorological Conditions. Applied Sciences. 2024; 14(16):7121. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167121
Chicago/Turabian StyleDanielewicz, Jakub, Ewa Jajor, Joanna Horoszkiewicz, Marek Korbas, Andrzej Blecharczyk, Robert Idziak, Łukasz Sobiech, Monika Grzanka, and Tomasz Szymański. 2024. "Protection of Oats against Puccinia and Drechslera Fungi in Various Meteorological Conditions" Applied Sciences 14, no. 16: 7121. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167121