|
Fungicide management strategies
for Myrothecium leaf spot on New Guinea impatiens
Jeffrey Woodworth and Mary Hausbeck
Plant Pathology
|
Myrothecium leaf spot has been an increasing problem
in the production of New Guinea impatiens for the Michigan greenhouse
industry. The causal fungus, Myrothecium roridium, is considered
a weak pathogen that attacks compromised plant tissues. Injuries
and plant stresses associated with rooting and transplanting provide
an excellent scenario for the establishment of Myrothecium
in the impatiens crop. Once established, the disease can become
difficult to manage, especially under warm, moist environmental
conditions.
On New Guinea impatiens, Myrothecium causes
necrotic foliar lesions that are often, but not always associated
with the leaf margin. The lesions can become quite large (greater
than 1 cm) and may coalesce together if there is more than one lesion
per leaf. Lesions on the petioles and stems can lead to defoliation.
Careful examination of the leaf spots reveals dark rings within
the lesion. When infected leaves are placed in a very humid environment
(such as a moistened sandwich bag), white tufts called sporodochia
form. Green to black spore masses eventually develop on the white
sporodochia and help differentiate the disease from other leaf spots,
such as INSV. Please see the accompanying
pictures of a sporulating leaf lesion.
Myrothecium roridium has a very broad host
range and causes leaf spots and stem rots on several greenhouse
crops including pansy, begonia, snapdragon, rudbeckia and gloxinia.
Myrothecium spores are rain splashed and are easily spread
by overhead irrigation. The pathogen survives well on organic debris,
so proper sanitation of the greenhouse is imperative before any
susceptible crops are placed back in the range. Rigorous fungicide
spray schedules are recommended on both stock plants and transplants
if Myrothecium blights have been noted in prior years.
In a recent study at Michigan State University,
New Guinea impatiens were wounded to simulate transplanting injury.
Fungicide sprays, representing several different chemistries, were
applied at 7-day intervals. Plants were inoculated with Myrothecium
spores and were placed in plastic bags to create high humidity levels.
Evaluations of the number of foliar lesions were taken 7 and 14
days following inoculation. Disease pressure was severe in this
trial (99.5 foliar lesions per plant in the inoculated control)
and no treatment was able to completely control lesion development.
Daconil Weather Stik 6F and Medallion 50WP offered the best protection,
reducing the number of lesions by 75 percent compared to the control.
Terraguard 50W, 3336 WP 50WP and Camelot 58EC offered moderate levels
of control, reducing the number of lesions by approximately one
half. The biopesticide Endorse 2.5WP (labeled only for turf currently)
and the strobilurins (Insignia 20WG [labeled only for turf currently],
Heritage 50WG and Compass O 50WDG) offered little disease suppression
compared to the untreated inoculated control.
If Myrothecium spot is found in a crop, a fungicide
rotation incorporating a chlorothalonil product (such as Daconil
Weather Stik 6F) and Medallion 50WP, coupled with good sanitation
and a program to minimize plant stress, should provide an effective
management strategy.
|
Treatment and rate/100 gal applied at
7-day intervals
|
Foliar lesions (#)
|
|
24 June
|
1 July
|
|
Untreated inoculated control
|
31.2
|
bc
|
99.5
|
d
|
|
Endorse 2.5WP 14.0 oz
|
40.2
|
c
|
83.0
|
cd
|
|
Heritage 50WG 4.0 oz
|
50.3
|
c
|
93.7
|
d
|
|
Compass O 50WDG 4.0 oz
|
38.0
|
c
|
81.8
|
cd
|
|
Insignia 20WG 4.0 oz
|
29.7
|
bc
|
83.8
|
cd
|
|
Insignia 20 WG 8.0 oz
|
14.5
|
ab
|
61.8
|
bcd
|
|
Terraguard 50W 8.0 oz
|
6.8
|
a
|
47.7
|
bc
|
|
3336 WP 50WP 16.0 oz
|
8.5
|
a
|
46.2
|
abc
|
|
Camelot 58EC 48.0 fl oz
|
13.3
|
ab
|
45.7
|
abc
|
|
Daconil Weather Stik 6F 22.0 fl oz
|
7.2
|
a
|
25.2
|
ab
|
|
Medallion 50WP 2.0 oz
|
2.3
|
a
|
23.0
|
ab
|
*Column
means followed by the same the letter are not significantly different
(Tukey's
Studentized Range; P=0.05).
|
|
Evaluation of Topflor for
height control of poinsettia
By Erik Runkle, Cathy Whitman, David Joeright,
and Royal Heins
Horticulture
|
By now, poinsettias are probably not on your mind. However, we have wrapped up some research on
height control of poinsettia that we wanted to share.
Topflor is a promising new plant growth regulator
for greenhouse crops that is scheduled for release in 2004 or 2005.
The active ingredient is flurprimidol, and the mode of action is
similar to that of A-Rest, but with greater activity.
Flurprimidol has been labeled as Cutless for use on ornamental
crops in the U.S. and trialed on a number of woody crops. Topflor is effective on a wide range of greenhouse crops, and has
been extensively used in Europe since the early 1990s.
Recommendations exist for European growers, but
a slightly different formulation of Topflor will be available for
use in the United States. Testing
of the new formulation has begun, but it has not been trialed under
northern growing conditions. Suggested rates vary by growing location, and
for poinsettia, preliminary proposed rates range from 2.5 to 5.0
ppm in Indiana to 35 to 40 ppm in North Carolina.
We performed an experiment to determine appropriate
rates for Michigan producers. Poinsettia
was selected for study because it is still the most valuable floriculture
crop produced, and because height control is a challenge every year. We trialed three rates of Topflor, alone or
in combination with B-Nine, as well as a tank mix of B-Nine and
Cycocel.
Poinsettia 'Freedom Red' plants were placed under
short days on October 7, 2002 and spray applications (listed below)
were made on October 8, 2002 beginning at 8:30 AM.
Plants were grown at 68°F (20°C) with a 9-hour photoperiod. Capsil surfactant was added to all treatments at the rate of 16
oz/100 gallons. All treatments
were applied as sprays at a volume of 2 quarts per 100 ft2.
Treatments:
|
Control (no plant growth retardant)
|
|
Topflor: 5 ppm
|
|
Topflor: 10 ppm
|
|
Topflor: 20 ppm
|
|
B-Nine: 1250 ppm
|
|
B-Nine: 2500 ppm
|
|
Topflor: 5ppm + B-Nine: 1250 ppm
|
|
Topflor: 10ppm + B-Nine: 1250 ppm
|
|
B-Nine: 1250 ppm + Cycocel: 1000 ppm
|
On the date of the first PGR spray application,
plant height was measured (from soil level to tallest shoot apex)
and recorded. Two days after spray application, the plants
were observed for phytotoxicity. At
anthesis, the date was recorded, plant height was measured, and
area of the three largest bracts was measured.
All the plant growth regulator treatments reduced
final plant height compared to untreated plants (Figures
1 and 2). The most compact plants were those treated with
Topflor at 20 ppm, which were 27 percent shorter than untreated
plants. Height reduction in response to B-Nine (at 1250 or 2500
ppm) was between 21 and 22 percent.
Combining Topflor and B-Nine in a tank mix did not increase
their effectiveness significantly. The B-Nine + Cycocel tank mix was the least
effective treatment.
All treatments reduced bract size, but the reduction
caused by Topflor was less than that caused by B-Nine. Topflor at 20 ppm reduced bract size by 16 percent, while the reductions
from B-Nine ranged from 26 to 34 percent. None of the treatments influenced time to flower, and no phytotoxicity
was observed in any treatment.
These results indicate that Topflor was effective
for height control of poinsettia, and caused less reduction in bract
size than B-Nine. This chemical
appears to offer growers a good option for height control, but more
studies are needed to fine-tune rates, times of application, and
assess its effect on bract size if applied later in production.
We thank
the Detroit Metro Flower Growers Association and the Western Michigan
Greenhouse Association for helping fund this project.
|
Does
your farm have a high capacity well?
Tom Dudek
MSU Extension Horticulture Agent |
Two recent water-use laws were passed in Michigan that will affect
many farm operations. These public acts will be changed to the Natural
Resources & Environmental Protection Act (NREPA).
A copy of the complete act may be found at http://www.michiganlegislature.org
Both acts use the like definitions for "large capacity well"
that the acts apply to. Large capacity wells are those with the
capacity to withdraw 100,000 gallons per day (70 gallons per minute)
average in any consecutive 30-day period. The combined capacity
of the wells 100,000 gallons or greater capacity per day (70 gallons
per minute) on a site, also meets the large capacity well definition.
Water use reporting will also include surface water withdraws. All
agricultural water uses will apply to these laws.
Act PA 177 Aquifer Protection and Dispute Resolution: this will
be a new part 317 of the NREPA. This establishes a system within
the Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA)/Michigan Department
of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) to receive complaints from small
well users against high capacity well users and work toward a solution.
Act PA 148 Groundwater Mapping and Water Use Reporting: this act
amends part 327 of the NREPA. This law will create a groundwater
resource map of the state and establish a groundwater advisory committee
to direct groundwater protection efforts in the future.
The MDA will assemble township-based reports annually and forward
to the MDEQ. If a producer has a site that exceeds the 70-gallon
per minute threshold, then he must start filing annual water use
reporting forms in January 2005.
Large capacity water users will be required to report the following:
(a) The amount and rate of water withdrawn on an annual/monthly
basis in either gallons or acre inches
(b) The type of crop irrigated, if applicable
(c) The acreage of each irrigated crop, if applicable
(d) The source or sources of the water supply
(e) If the water withdrawn is not used entirely for irrigation,
the use or uses of the water withdrawn
(f) If the source of water withdrawn is groundwater, the static
water level of the aquifer or aquifers needs to be identified
(g) Applicable water conservation practices and an implementation
plan for those practices
Estimating the producer's water use could be accomplished by several
methods:
§ Pump
capacity multiplied by run time: run time timers are less costly
and more trouble free than flow meters
§ Flow
meter: meters actual flow, maintenance and calibration
§ Water
application multiplied by number of applications, plus estimate
of additional water use
§ Industry
average numbers (Mid West Plan Service or ASAE ) with appropriate
adjustments.
Conducted correctly, any of these systems or combination of them
could produce estimates that meet the needs of the law. Producers
need to evaluate their water use and devise a simple, low cost,
low time input method, to accomplish the goal of the legislation
that may improve the management of the operation. Most farm supply
houses, greenhouse supply houses and irrigation supply houses carry
flow meters and run time timers.
MSU Extension will be working with growers to develop the easiest
and most accurate methods to estimate greenhouse water usage. Stay
tuned for more information this winter.
|