Adult plant resistance and strategic fungicide use for integrated management of cereal rust

2012
CC BY 4.0

Research organisaton
Funding source

Trial details

Researcher(s) Nick Poole (FAR)
Tracey Wylie (FAR)
Year(s) 2012
Contributor Southern Farming Systems
Trial location(s) Westmere, VIC
Adult plant resistance and strategic fungicide use for integrated management of cereal rust locations
Aims

• To define the expression of Adult Plant Resistance (APR) in a range of wheat cultivars in relation to environmental conditions and growth stage.
• To develop improved strategies for intervention with fungicides in the control of stripe rust and yellow leaf spot in susceptible and resistant wheat, and the communication of the strategies to industry stakeholders.

Key messages

• Where Flutriafol in furrow was used at establishment no stripe rust was observed in the MS-S cultivar Chara until approximately 130 days after establishment at third –fourth node GS33-34.
• In Chara Flutriafol alone was still giving 80% control of stripe rust at the end of flowering, the same level of control achieved with a GS32 application of Folicur (145ml/ha). Where the crop had received a flag leaf spray at booting GS45 (late flag leaf spray) there was 99-100% control of stripe rust on the flag leaf throughout grain fill.
• All fungicide programmes applied to the cultivar Chara produced a significant yield increase (0.74 – 1.64 t/ha or 12-27%). The greatest yield increase of 1.64t/ha was the result of Flutriafol in furrow with two foliar fungicides
follow ups at GS32 and GS45.
• Chara gave an 18% yield increase from the use of fungicide, averaged across all fungicide treatments, Yitpi gave a 2.5% yield increase and Beaufort gave no response despite a late low level stem rust infection.
• Three of the eight fungicide programmes produced significantly higher yields than the fully untreated crop and the flutriafol alone when meaned across the three cultivars, they were the two programmes receiving two foliar fungicides and the flutriafol followed by a foliar fungicide applied at booting (GS45).
 

Lead research organisation N/A
Host research organisation N/A
Trial funding source GRDC
Related program N/A
Acknowledgments N/A
Other trial partners Not specified
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Cereal (Grain): Wheat
Treatment type(s)
  • Crop: Variety
  • Fungicide: Rate
  • Fungicide: Timing
  • Fungicide: Type
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Randomised,Replicated,Blocked

Westmere 2012

Sow date 30 May 2012
Harvest date Not specified
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication Not specified
Psuedoreplication Not specified
Fungicide

1. Impact in furrow 400ml/ha (full rate)
2. Impact in furrow 400ml/ha (full rate) f.b. Folicur 145 ml/ha (GS32)
3. Impact in furrow 400ml/ha (full rate) f.b. Folicur 145 ml/ha (GS39)
4. Impact in furrow 400ml/ha (full rate) f.b. Folicur 145 ml/ha x 2 (GS32 plus GS39)
5. Untreated f.b. Folicur 145ml/ha (GS32)
6. Untreated f.b. Folicur 145 ml/ha (GS39)
7. Untreated f.b. Folicur 145 ml/ha x 2 (GS32 plus GS39)
8. Untreated
f.b. – followed by. All seed was treated for seed borne disease with Raxil.

Seed treatment

Raxil

Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Table 1

# Variety
Treatment 1
Grain yield (t/ha)
1 Beaufort no fungicide plus Impact 7.09
2 Yitpi no fungicide plus Impact 6.23
3 Chara no fungicide plus Impact 6.83
4 Beaufort no fungicide minus impact 7.52
5 Yitpi no fungicide minus impact 6.23
6 Chara no fungicide minus impact 6.09
7 Beaufort GS 49 fungicide application plus impact 7.7
8 Yitpi GS 49 fungicide application plus impact 6.43
9 Chara GS 49 fungicide application plus impact 7.11
10 Beaufort GS 49 fungicide application minus impact 7.09
11 Yitpi GS 49 fungicide application minus impact 6.43
12 Chara GS 49 fungicide application minus impact 7.24
13 Beaufort GS 32 fungicide application plus impact 7.38
14 Yitpi GS 32 fungicide application plus impact 6.44
15 Chara GS 32 fungicide application plus impact 7.12
16 Beaufort GS 32 fungicide application minus impact 7.4
17 Yitpi GS 32 fungicide application minus impact 6.44
18 Chara GS 32 fungicide application minus impact 6.87
19 Beaufort GS 32 and 49 fungicide application plus impace 7.32
20 Yitpi GS 32 and 49 fungicide application plus impace 6.4
21 Chara GS 32 and 49 fungicide application plus impace 7.55
22 Beaufort GS 32 and 49 fungicide application minus impact 6.98
23 Yitpi GS 32 and 49 fungicide application minus impact 6.4
24 Chara GS 32 and 49 fungicide application minus impact 7.73

Grain yield t/ha


Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Not specified
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
Westmere, VIC Not specified
Derived trial site soil information
Australian Soil Classification Source: ASRIS
Trial site Soil order
Westmere, VIC Sodosol
Soil Moisture Source: BOM/ANU
Average amount of water stored in the soil profile during the year, estimated by the OzWALD model-data fusion system.
Year Westmere VIC
2012 466.6mm
2011 494.5mm
2010 483.6mm
2009 416.3mm
2008 394.1mm
2007 381.0mm
2006 367.4mm
2005 388.6mm
2004 392.0mm
2003 416.1mm
2002 402.3mm
2001 451.9mm
2000 441.1mm
National soil grid Source: CSIRO/TERN
NOTE: National Soil Grid data is aggregated information for background information on the wider area
Actual soil values can vary significantly in a small area and the trial soil tests are the most relevant data where available

Soil properties

Loading

Climate

Derived climate information

No observed climate data available for this trial.
Derived climate data is determined from trial site location and national weather sources.

Westmere VIC

Loading
Loading
Loading

Some data on this site is sourced from the Bureau of Meteorology

SILO weather estimates sourced from https://www.longpaddock.qld.gov.au/silo/
Jeffrey, S.J., Carter, J.O., Moodie, K.B. and Beswick, A.R. (2001). Using spatial interpolation to construct a comprehensive archive of Australian climate data , Environmental Modelling and Software, Vol 16/4, pp 309-330. DOI: 10.1016/S1364-8152(01)00008-1.

Trial report and links

2012 trial report



Trial last modified: 28-10-2019 15:50pm AEST