Faba bean disease tolerance – Breeza 2016

2016

Research organisaton
Funding sources

Trial details

Researcher(s) Bill Manning (North West Local Land Services)
Stuart Marshman (NSW DPI)
Joop van Leur (NSW DPI)
Year(s) 2016
Contributor Department of Primary Industries NSW
Trial location(s) Breeza, NSW
Further information View external link
Faba bean disease tolerance – Breeza 2016 locations
Aims

KEY FINDINGS:

  • To compare the performance of faba bean varieties and advanced breeding lines under different levels of rust pressure.
  • To compare fungicides for their effectiveness to control diseases as well as improve yield and seed size in faba bean. Experiment one used a low frequency (LF) program, while experiment two involved a high frequency (HF) fungicide program.

Conclusions

  • Genotypes differed in there susceptibility to rust, chocolate spot and Stemphylium blight, with one of the northern breeding lines (11NF001a-10) showing rust resistance equal to current commercial varieties and superior chocolate spot resistance. Fungicides were highly effective in reducing rust symptoms and improving leaf retention but in this trial had no effect on chocolate spot. Note that the permit for tebuconazole allows for only three applications of 145ml/ha in commercial crops.

Key messages
  • In a year with high rust pressure, fungicide application provided beneficial to all genotypes, even those with a good level of rust resistance.
  • Several advanced breeding lines from the northern breeding program show promise, with high yield and large seed size combined with rust and chocolate spot resistance equal to or better than the current northern varieties.

Conclusion:

The high rust pressure and frequent rainfall towards the end of the season was likely responsible for the poor fungicide response in the LF experiment in terms of reducing symptoms and improving yield and seed size. In the HF experiment, mancozeb and
tebuconozole were most effective overall in reducing symptoms and improving yield and seed size. Four of the five fungicides were effective in increasing yield in the HF experiment compared with only one in the LF experiment, indicating the need for repeated sprays when disease pressure is high.

Note that the permit for tebuconazole allows for only three applications of 145 mL/ha in commercial crops.


 

Lead research organisation Department of Primary Industries NSW
Host research organisation N/A
Trial funding source PBA UA00127
Trial funding source GRDC DAN00176
Related program Northern NSW integrated disease management
Acknowledgments

This research is part of the projects PBA Australian faba bean breeding program (UA00127) and Northern NSW integrated disease management (DAN00176), with joint investment by NSW DPI, NWLLS and GRDC. Thanks to Merv Riley and Ivan Stace for technical assistance.


Other trial partners Pulse Breeding Australia; Scott Goodworth
Download the trial report to view additional trial information

Method

Crop type Grain Legume: Faba beans
Treatment type(s)
  • Crop: Variety
Trial type Experimental
Trial design Randomised,Replicated,Blocked

Breeza 2016

Sow rate or Target density 20 plants/m2
Sow date 27 May 2016 27 May 2016
Harvest date 21 November 2016 21 November 2016
Plot size Not specified
Plot replication 3
Plot blocking Split plot design with fungicide as the main plot and varieties as subplots; three replications.
Fertiliser

Nil fertiliser used.

Herbicide

Post-sowing/pre-emergent Terbyne® 1 kg/ha (terbuthylazine 750 g/kg) applied on 27 April.

Insecticide

Insect pressure was low and no insecticides were used.

Fungicide
  • Low frequency (LF): application of fungicides  on 16 June and 18 August
  • High frequency (HF): application of fungicides  on 16 June, 1 August, 18 August, 9 September

Application of either mancozeb 1kg/ha (750g/kg mancozeb) or tebuconozole 350ml/ha (430 g/L tebuconozole) on 16 June, 1 August, 18 August and 9 September.

Pesticide

Insect pressure was low and no insecticide was used

Other trial notes

Results: 

Early disease development

The experiments were located next to a faba bean rust (Uromyces viciae-fabae) screening experiment where a high disease level was initiated by sowing rust-susceptible spreader plots, distributing pots with greenhouse-grown rust-infected plants and repeated inoculations with rust spore suspension. The resulting high disease pressure provided a continuous load of rust inoculum to the fungicide experiments. Rust was noted in the disease management experiments soon after plant emergence and developed rapidly in non-fungicide-treated plots. Towards the end of July a high incidence of Stemphylium blight (Stemphylium spp) symptoms was noted. On 10 August, plots were scored (% leaf coverage) for both rust and Stemphylium blight.

Impact of early fungicide application on disease symptoms

On 10 August both the LF and HF experiments showed a significant (P<0.05) reduction of rust infection levels for the tebuconazole and mancozeb treatments  compared with the carbendazim, procimidone and unsprayed control. No difference for Stemphylium blight was noted in the LF experiment on 10 August, but the extra tebuconazole application in the HF experiment on 1 August resulted in a significant (P<0.05) difference from the control, with procymidone and carbendazim treatments both showing a non-significant trend to greater incidences of Stemphylium blight. No interactions were found between fungicide treatment and variety for rust or Stemphylium blight scores.

Varietal differences in disease

Averaged over treatments, Fiord had significantly (P<0.05) more rusted leaf area in August than PBA NasmaA or PBA WardaA (data not shown). For Stemphylium blight, the genotype effect in both experiments was highly significant (P<0.001) with PBA WardaA showing a very high level of susceptibility and PBA NasmaA significantly less affected than Fiord (data not shown).

Late disease development

Chocolate spot (Botrytis fabae) became noticeable in late August and progressed very fast after a number of high intensity, long duration rainfall events. Rust and chocolate spot severities were recorded on 27 September. On 30 September, plots were scored for leaf retention using a 1–5 scale (1 = no leaves dropped; 3 = 50% of the leaves dropped; 5 = > 90 % of the leaves dropped). Stemphylium blight appeared not to progress further after August. On 27 September only minor Stemphylium blight symptoms were noted on the top leaves, but both rust and chocolate spot reached high incidences.

Impact of late fungicide application on disease symptoms

Fungicide treatments were less successful in reducing rust and chocolate spot symptoms later in the season. There was little difference amongst treatments for rust on leaves, while rust severity of the procymidone treatments was significantly (P<0.05) higher than the control in both LF and HF application, and carbendazim was higher (P<0.05) in the HF application. There was no difference in chocolate spot severity between treatments in the LF experiment. In the HF experiment chlorothalonil gave a significantly better (P<0.05) result than carbendazim and tebuconazole, but was no different from mancozeb and procymidone. The poor performance of carbendazim and procymidone for chocolate spot control was surprising, given that both are considered to be the fungicides of choice for chocolate spot control. The tebuconazole-treated plots showed a significantly higher level of leaf retention than all other treatments in the HF experiment

Grain yield

Under severe rust pressure, tebuconazole was clearly the best treatment with a 20% and 68% increase in grain yield compared with the unsprayed control in the LF and HF experiments respectively (Tables 4 and 5). Fungicide treatments had a significant (P<0.05) effect on seed weight in the HF experiment where tebuconazole clearly provided a more positive effect than other treatments. Comparing the effect of the different fungicides on the three diseases present, it is likely that most of the yield gains in these experiments resulted from controlling rust, but not chocolate spot or Stemphylium blight. It should be noted that the rust inoculum pressure in the experiments was far higher than would normally be present under commercial conditions.

Download the trial report to view additional method/treatment information

Download results

Trial results Rust severity on genotypes, control vs fungicide - August

# Variety
Treatment 1
Disease severity (% leaf area affected)
1 Doza Control 16.4
2 PBA Warda Control 13.3
3 PBA Nasma Control 20.6
4 IX474/4-12 Control 16.7
5 IX486/7-6 Control 11.4
6 IX561f/4-2 Control 26.7
7 11NF001a-10 Control 7
8 Fiesta Control 45.6
9 PBA Samira Control 30.6
10 PBA Zahra Control 22.2
11 AF09169 Control 15.8
12 AF11212 Control 14.4
13 Doza Mancozeb 4.3
14 PBA Warda Mancozeb 2
15 PBA Nasma Mancozeb 1.8
16 IX474/4-12 Mancozeb 1.2
17 IX486/7-6 Mancozeb 0.8
18 IX561f/4-2 Mancozeb 4.9
19 11NF001a-10 Mancozeb 1.1
20 Fiesta Mancozeb 5.2
21 PBA Samira Mancozeb 5.8
22 PBA Zahra Mancozeb 3.1
23 AF09169 Mancozeb 2
24 AF11212 Mancozeb 2.9
25 Doza Tebuconazole 0.9
26 PBA Warda Tebuconazole 1.1
27 PBA Nasma Tebuconazole 0.7
28 IX474/4-12 Tebuconazole 0.2
29 IX486/7-6 Tebuconazole 0.2
30 IX561f/4-2 Tebuconazole 0.7
31 11NF001a-10 Tebuconazole 0.3
32 Fiesta Tebuconazole 1.4
33 PBA Samira Tebuconazole 1
34 PBA Zahra Tebuconazole 0.8
35 AF09169 Tebuconazole 0.1
36 AF11212 Tebuconazole 1.2

Disease severity % leaf area affected


Loading

Trial results Stemphylium blight on genotypes, control vs fungicide - August

# Variety
Treatment 1
Disease severity (% leaf area affected)
1 Doza Control 2.4
2 PBA Warda Control 16.9
3 PBA Nasma Control 10.6
4 IX474/4-12 Control 5.1
5 IX486/7-6 Control 2.6
6 IX561f/4-2 Control 26.7
7 11NF001a-10 Control 8.6
8 Fiesta Control 8
9 PBA Samira Control 0.7
10 PBA Zahra Control 4.9
11 AF09169 Control 0.9
12 AF11212 Control 32.2
13 Doza Mancozeb 6.6
14 PBA Warda Mancozeb 14.8
15 PBA Nasma Mancozeb 4.9
16 IX474/4-12 Mancozeb 5.3
17 IX486/7-6 Mancozeb 6.8
18 IX561f/4-2 Mancozeb 13.9
19 11NF001a-10 Mancozeb 3.3
20 Fiesta Mancozeb 2.9
21 PBA Samira Mancozeb 0.1
22 PBA Zahra Mancozeb 0.4
23 AF09169 Mancozeb 0.8
24 AF11212 Mancozeb 37.8
25 Doza Tebuconazole 2
26 PBA Warda Tebuconazole 5.3
27 PBA Nasma Tebuconazole 4.1
28 IX474/4-12 Tebuconazole 1.4
29 IX486/7-6 Tebuconazole 1.8
30 IX561f/4-2 Tebuconazole 2.4
31 11NF001a-10 Tebuconazole 0.6
32 Fiesta Tebuconazole 2
33 PBA Samira Tebuconazole 0.3
34 PBA Zahra Tebuconazole 0.2
35 AF09169 Tebuconazole 0.6
36 AF11212 Tebuconazole 18.7

Disease severity % leaf area affected


Loading

Trial results Rust severity on top leaves of genotypes, control vs fungicide - September

# Variety
Treatment 1
Disease severity (% leaf area affected)
1 Doza Control 10.8
2 PBA Warda Control 12.3
3 PBA Nasma Control 16.7
4 IX474/4-12 Control 14.5
5 IX486/7-6 Control 11.7
6 IX561f/4-2 Control 22
7 11NF001a-10 Control 12.8
8 Fiesta Control 24.2
9 PBA Samira Control 17.5
10 PBA Zahra Control 9.7
11 AF09169 Control 17.5
12 AF11212 Control 19.2
13 Doza Mancozeb 1.7
14 PBA Warda Mancozeb 1.5
15 PBA Nasma Mancozeb 1.5
16 IX474/4-12 Mancozeb 1.2
17 IX486/7-6 Mancozeb 1.3
18 IX561f/4-2 Mancozeb 2.2
19 11NF001a-10 Mancozeb 1.3
20 Fiesta Mancozeb 2.8
21 PBA Samira Mancozeb 2.2
22 PBA Zahra Mancozeb 2.5
23 AF09169 Mancozeb 1.5
24 AF11212 Mancozeb 1.7
25 Doza Tebuconazole 0.7
26 PBA Warda Tebuconazole 1.7
27 PBA Nasma Tebuconazole 1.7
28 IX474/4-12 Tebuconazole 1.7
29 IX486/7-6 Tebuconazole 1.5
30 IX561f/4-2 Tebuconazole 1.5
31 11NF001a-10 Tebuconazole 1
32 Fiesta Tebuconazole 2.2
33 PBA Samira Tebuconazole 1.5
34 PBA Zahra Tebuconazole 0.8
35 AF09169 Tebuconazole 0.7
36 AF11212 Tebuconazole 2.5

Disease severity % leaf area affected


Loading

Trial results Leaf retention score of genotypes, control vs fungicide - September

# Variety
Treatment 1
Leaf retention score (1-5)
1 Doza Control 4
2 PBA Warda Control 4
3 PBA Nasma Control 4
4 IX474/4-12 Control 3.7
5 IX486/7-6 Control 3.5
6 IX561f/4-2 Control 5
7 11NF001a-10 Control 3.7
8 Fiesta Control 5
9 PBA Samira Control 3.5
10 PBA Zahra Control 4.2
11 AF09169 Control 3.7
12 AF11212 Control 4
13 Doza Mancozeb 3.2
14 PBA Warda Mancozeb 3.2
15 PBA Nasma Mancozeb 3.3
16 IX474/4-12 Mancozeb 3.2
17 IX486/7-6 Mancozeb 2.8
18 IX561f/4-2 Mancozeb 2.7
19 11NF001a-10 Mancozeb 2.8
20 Fiesta Mancozeb 3.7
21 PBA Samira Mancozeb 3.2
22 PBA Zahra Mancozeb 2.7
23 AF09169 Mancozeb 2.8
24 AF11212 Mancozeb 3
25 Doza Tebuconazole 2.3
26 PBA Warda Tebuconazole 2.8
27 PBA Nasma Tebuconazole 2.5
28 IX474/4-12 Tebuconazole 2
29 IX486/7-6 Tebuconazole 2
30 IX561f/4-2 Tebuconazole 2.2
31 11NF001a-10 Tebuconazole 1.8
32 Fiesta Tebuconazole 2.3
33 PBA Samira Tebuconazole 2
34 PBA Zahra Tebuconazole 2.3
35 AF09169 Tebuconazole 1.8
36 AF11212 Tebuconazole 2.7

Leaf retention score 1-5


Loading
Observed trial site soil information
Trial site soil testing
Not specified
Soil conditions
Trial site Soil texture
Breeza, NSW Vertisol
Derived trial site soil information
Australian Soil Classification Source: ASRIS
Trial site Soil order
Breeza, NSW 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 Breeza NSW
2016 412.3mm
2015 397.7mm
2014 371.0mm
2013 385.9mm
2012 415.5mm
2011 414.7mm
2010 429.5mm
2009 388.5mm
2008 365.5mm
2007 359.3mm
2006 373.1mm
2005 376.3mm
2004 406.5mm
2003 402.5mm
2002 330.7mm
2001 349.6mm
2000 397.9mm
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

Breeza NSW 2016


Observed climate information

Rainfall avg ann (mm) 637.5mm
Rainfall avg gsr (mm) 367.6mm
Rainfall trial gsr (mm) 495mm

Derived climate information

Breeza NSW

NOTE: Exact trial site locality unknown - Climate data may not be accurate
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 last modified: 19-10-2023 13:59pm AEST