timing of fungicide applications to manage …...department of employment, economic development and...
TRANSCRIPT
Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation
Timing of fungicide applications to manage postharvest diseases of mango
Chrys Akem, Gerry MacManus and Paula Boccalatte
2© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Current Industry Problem
Shelf-life in mangoes is limited mainlyby two postharvest diseases:
Anthracnose and Stem-end rots
3© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
The major disease - Anthracnose
4© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Another Major - Stem End Rots
5© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Control of these diseases is largely based on the use of synthetic fungicides
The routine process
Air blast tower sprayer Fruit exiting tank via rollers onto prochloraz spray
6© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Field - Spray Options
Mancozeb
Copper
Octave
Amistar Aero
Shed - Postharvest options
Sportak (prochloraz)
Spinflo (carbendazin) – Out
Hot Dips – Scholar
7© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Current Concerns with Pesticide use
Overuse – Routine calendar sprays
Increasing costs of new ones - Amistar
Environmental concerns - Cu
Resistance development - Systemics
Export market restrictions
- Dictation of what to use
- MRLs limitation
- Need to use them more sustainably
8© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Study Objectives Compare the efficacy of the 2 “systemic fungicides”
- AmistarR - Azoxystrobin
- AeroR – Metiram & Pyraclostrobin
Determine the best time of single and multiple spray applications on:
- Postharvest disease incidence & severity
. Anthracnose
. Stem end rots
Make recommendations based on findings
9© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Treatments(Spray Timing)
Fruit-Set(E=Early)
Fruit Development(M=Mid)
Near Harvest(L=Late)
Single Sprays1. Amistar (E*) Amistar
2. Aero (E) Aero
3. Amistar (L*) Amistar
4. Aero (L) Aero
Double Sprays5. Amistar (E, L) Amistar Amistar
6. Aero (E, L) Aero Aero
Triple Sprays7. Amistar (E, M*, L) Amistar Amistar Amistar
8. Aero (E, M, L) Aero Aero Aero
Combination Sprays9. Amistar (E) + Aero (L) Amistar Aero
10. Aero (E) + Amistar (L) Aero Amistar
11. UTC (Untreated Control) Water Water Water
Treatments
10© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Process- Trial carried out at Ayr Research Station on a KP block
- Four treatment trees for each treatment
- At end of the season harvested 30 random fruits from
each tree replication
- Selected 25 more uniform fruits from each tree harvest
- Washed with mango wash
- Incubated in cool room at 20-22C
- Assessed for disease development at
- 14 DAI and
- 19 DAI
11© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011 Am(E)& Ae(L) Ae(E)& Am(L)
Ae(L)Ae(E)Am(E) Am(L)
UTC
Am(E,L) Am(E,M,L) Ae(E,M,L)Ae(E,L)
12© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Disease incidence on fruits 14 DAI
Treatment SER Anthracnose Dendritic spot Total RotsSingle Sprays1. Amistar (E) 9 a 23 ab 1 a 26 ab2. Aero (E) 13 ab 24 ab 2 a 28 ab3. Amistar (L) 27 bc 37 b 3 ab 55 c4. Aero (L) 34 c 40 b 8 c 60 cDouble Sprays5. Amistar (E, L) 7 a 9 a 0 a 14 ab6. Aero (E, L) 18 abc 23 ab 1 a 33 bTriple Sprays7. Amistar (E, M, L) 4 a 5 a 0 a 8 a8. Aero (E, M, L) 6 a 5 a 0 a 9 aCombination Sprays9. Amistar (E) + Aero (L) 5 a 5 a 0 a 8 a10. Aero (E) + Amistar (L) 4 a 7 a 0 a 9 a11. UTC 43 c 86 c 7 bc 86 dFpr 0.001 <0.001 0.014 <0.001LSD (P=0.05) 16.68 19.22 4.997 21.79
13© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Disease incidence on fruits 19 DAITreatment SER Anthracnose Dendritic spot Total Rots
Single Sprays1. Amistar (E) 36 ab 46 cd 1 a 55 bc
2. Aero (E) 34 ab 57 de 1 a 60cd
3. Amistar (L) 69 de 77 ef 1 a 84 de
4. Aero (L) 81 e 74 e 9 a 90 e
Double Sprays5. Amistar (E, L) 19 ab 24 ab 4 a 34 ab
6. Aero (E, L) 42 bcd 42 bcd 2 a 54 bc
Triple Sprays7. Amistar (E, M, L) 10 a 12 a 1 a 18 a
8. Aero (E, M, L) 20 ab 12 a 0 a 24 a
Combination Sprays9. Amistar (E) + Aero (L) 18 ab 27 abc 1 a 30 ab
10. Aero (E) + Amistar (L) 31 abc 31 abc 1 a 41 abc
11. UTC 58 cde 97 f 5 a 98 e
Fpr <0.001 <0.001 0.077 <0.001
LSD (P=0.05) 27.78 20.62 NSD* 25.68
14© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Am (E)
Ae (E)
Am (L)
Ae (L)
Am (E,L)
Ae (E,L)
Am (E,M
,L)Ae (
E,M,L)
Am (E) +
Ae (L)
Ae (E) +
Am (L)
UTC
Systemic fungicides
Dis
ease
inci
denc
e (%
)
14 DAI
19 DAI
Treatment Effects on Total Rots Incidence - 2009
15© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
0
20
40
60
80
100
Am(E) Ae(E) Am(L) Ae(L)
Systemic Fungicides
Dise
ase
Inci
denc
e (%
)
SERAnthracnoseAll Rots
2009 Disease Incidence of SER, Anthracnose and All Rots 19 DAI
16© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
2010 Evaluations
17© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
aa
bc bbcd bcde cde cde de e e
0102030405060708090
100
Am(E,M
,L)Ae(E
,M,L)
Ae(E)+Am(L)Ae(E
, L)
Am(L)Am(E
,L)
Ae(L)
Am(E)+Ae(L
)
Ae(E)
Am(E)
Contro
l
Systemic fungicidies
Dis
ease
inci
denc
e (%
)Treatment effects on total rots incidence - 14 DAI - 2010
18© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Weather Data for 2009 & 2010
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Month
Rai
nfal
l (m
m)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Ave
rage
Mon
thly
Tem
p(d
egre
e C
)
09 Rainfall
10 Rainfall
09 Temp
10 Temp
19© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Conclusions Timing is critical for field fungicide applications to
manage postharvest diseases
An early application should be considered over a late
one, if only one spray is to be made (depending on
seasonal conditions) - 2009
In a season with highly favourable conditions, follow
label recommendation of multiple sprays in a program
and rotate accordingly – 2010
Trial will be repeated in another “normal” season to
establish the 2009 trend for recommendations.
20© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Acknowledgement with Thanks
• Tropical Pathology Team:
Chrys Akem, Gerry MacManus, Paula Boccalatte, Kerry Stockdale, Dalvinder Lakhesar and Elio Jovicich
Additional Funding support from
21© The State of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, 2011
Thank youThank you