Tag Archives: fungicide

163–176 I.Yu. Kuznetsov, R.R. Alimgafarov, B.G. Akhiyarov, F.F. Safin and A.R. Nafikova
Effect of different pesticides combined with Melafen on grain yield and quality of winter wheat
Abstract |
Full text PDF (270 KB)

Effect of different pesticides combined with Melafen on grain yield and quality of winter wheat

I.Yu. Kuznetsov*, R.R. Alimgafarov, B.G. Akhiyarov, F.F. Safin and A.R. Nafikova

University Federal state budgetary educational institution of higher education “Bashkir state agrarian university”, Department of plant growing, plant breeding and biotechnology, 50 anniversary of October St., 34, RU450001 Ufa, Russia
*Correspondence: kuznetsov_i1@rambler.ru

Abstract:

The use and search for new pesticides ensuring high and stable yields is one of the topical issues in winter wheat growing. The aim of the study was to develop theoretical foundations and farming practices for highly productive winter wheat through the use of pesticides of different groups in the southern forest-steppe of the Republic of Bashkortostan. An experiment (2016–2019) with 4 main blocks was conducted to determine the optimal combination of pesticides in cultivation of winter wheat. The pesticides were used at the tillering ((ZGS) 25) and heading stages ((ZGS) 59) of wheat growth. The experiment was replicated 4 times. The study results show that pesticides used to treat winter wheat increased grain yield and improved grain quality characteristics. The best results were reached in the block where treatment included Melafen plant growth promoter combined with the insecticide, herbicide and fungicide at different stages of winter wheat growth. The pesticides used in the experiment confirmed their efficiency. On the whole, the block of variants that used seed treatment produced a yield of 3.33–6.37 t ha-1. The new plant growth promoter Melafen worked well in the experiments on winter wheat, especially in combination with pesticides in different variations. It produced the highest grain yield (6.36–7.41 t ha-1). All experiment variants demonstrated positive economic efficiency. The study results may be useful in developing winter wheat cultivation practices aimed at increasing yields and improving grain quality.

Key words:

, , , , ,



2134–2143 P. Sooväli, M. Koppel, E. Lauringson and L. Talgre
The advantage of Decision Support System for managing spring barley disease in Estonia
Abstract |
Full text PDF (362 KB)

The advantage of Decision Support System for managing spring barley disease in Estonia

P. Sooväli¹*, M. Koppel¹, E. Lauringson² and L. Talgre²

¹Crop Research Institute, J. Aamisepa 1, EE48309 Jõgeva, Estonia
²University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 1, EE51014 Tartu, Estonia
*Correspondence: pille.soovali@etki.ee

Abstract:

A Decision Support System (DSS) I-Taimekaitse focusing on use of timely applied and reduced fungicide rates in control of cereal diseases has been tested in field trials since 2003. We compared the conventional treatment and the DSS-based spray practices in 18 field trials in five agricultural locations over 7-year period. Efficacy of the control of net blotch caused by Pyrenophora teres (Drechsler, am Drechlera teres Sacc. Shoem), the main fungal disease in spring barley has been tested to determine the economic advantage of DSS use. Compared with the conventional spray practices, the advantage I-Taimekaitse resulted in reduction of application doses by 30 to 60% of the registered rate. According to I-Taimekaitse, the fungicides were applied mainly between heading and flowering growth stages (GS 55–65), whereas traditional routine spraying is commonly made at booting (GS 37–49). The experiment clarifies the cost-benefit of using DSS-based approach in barley disease management with average yield increase above the control in 12.8% and above the conventional treatment in 14.1%. I-Taimekaitse gave competitive disease control and average yield output reduction compared with conventional practice by 9%. In general the Treatment Frequency Index applied in conventional treatment was 0.65 and in DSS 0.41. Although the cost of treatment expense in DSS was 20% less compared with conventional practice, the performance of conventional used spray practices was outstanding in economic return.

Key words:

, , , ,



280–287 P. Sooväli, M. Koppel and T. Kangor
Effectiveness of seed treatment against Fusarium spp. and Cochliobolus sativus of spring barley in different conditions
Abstract |
Full text PDF (271 KB)

Effectiveness of seed treatment against Fusarium spp. and Cochliobolus sativus of spring barley in different conditions

P. Sooväli*, M. Koppel and T. Kangor

Estonian Crop Research Institute, J. Aamisepa 1, EE48309 Jõgeva, Estonia
*Correspondence: pille.soovali@etki.ee

Abstract:

Effect of fungicide seed treatments on initial growth of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) was evaluated in greenhouse trials. The soil collected from minimum tillage fields where spring barley, spring wheat (Triticum L.) and oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) have been cultivated in previous growing season were used in trials. Eight fungicide seed treatments and untreated seed as the control were evaluated. Root rot severity and seedling emergence rate were assessed at growth stages 20–22. In addition the incidence of seed-borne Fusarium spp. and Cochliobolus sativus and germination were assessed in treated and untreated spring barley seeds in laboratory condition. Fungicides prothioconazole and tebuconazole significantly reduced incidence of seed-borne Fusarium spp. Seed treated with fludioxonil and tebuconazole more effectively decreased root rot infection in soil from minimum tilled barley field, fludioxonil + difenoconazole in soil from minimum tilled spring wheat field and prothioconazole mixes with tebuconazole or fluoxastrobin in soil from minimum tilled oilseed rape field. This study brings out the pre-crop and seed treatment interaction effect on control of root rot in spring barley.

Key words:

, , , ,