Full TGIF Record # 204062
Item 1 of 1
Web URL(s):https://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/trial/PDMR/repors/2012/T003.pdf
    Last checked: 11/14/2016
    Requires: PDF Reader
    Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website
Publication Type:
i
Report
Author(s):Smith, D. L.; Walker, N. R.
Author Affiliation:Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Title:Evaluation of fungicide, application timing, and foliage wetness on control of brown patch of tall fescue in Oklahoma, 2011
Section:Turfgrass
Other records with the "Turfgrass" Section
Source:PDMR: Plant Disease Management Reports. Vol. 6, 2012, p. T003.
Publishing Information:St. Paul, Minnesota: American Phytopathological Society
# of Pages:2
Related Web URL:http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/trial/PDMR/volume6/abstracts/T003.asp
    Last checked: 04/30/2012
    Access conditions: Document is within a limited-access website
    Notes: Summary only
Keywords:TIC Keywords: Application timing; Azoxystrobin; Azoxystrobin + Propiconazole; Festuca arundinacea; Fungicide evaluation; Loam soils; Preventive control; Pyraclostrobin; Rhizoctonia solani; Triticonazole; Pyraclostrobin + Triticonazole
Cultivar Names:Rebel IV
Trade Names:Pillar G; Insignia; Trinity; Heritage
Abstract/Contents:"Plots were established at the Turfgrass Research Center in Stillwater, OK. The turfgrass sward was a mature stand of tall fescue on an Easpur loam soil, which had a history of severe brown patch. Plots were 3 ft wide and 8 ft long with 2-ft alleys between plots. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with four replicates. Mowing height was 3-in. and irrigation was applied to maintain an environment favorable for the disease. Recommended turfgrass management practices were followed throughout the growing season. Fungicides were applied preventatively or curatively to pre-wetted or dry turfgrass foliage. Preventative treatments were initiated on 14 Jun prior to symptom development. Curative treatments of fungicide were initiated on 12 Jul after symptoms of brown patch developed. Fungicide applications were applied on a 21-day interval. Liquid fungicides were applied with a CO2-pressurized wheelbarrow sprayer equipped with TX8008 flat fan nozzles and calibrated to deliver 87 gal/A or 2 gal/1,000 ft2. Granular fungicides were pre-weighed and broadcast by hand. Ratings of disease severity (percent of plot area with symptoms of brown patch) and turfgrass quality (scale of 1 - 9 where 1 = no turf present, 5 = unacceptable turfgrass, 6 = acceptable turf, 9 = dense, dark color, thick stand of turfgrass) were taken at weekly intervals. Area under the disease progress curve (AUDPC) was calculated from the weekly ratings of disease to account for the season-long epidemic. AUDPC and average turf quality data were analyzed using analysis of variance (α = 0.05). Mean comparisons were performed using Fisher's test of protected least significant difference (α = 0.05). The 2011 season was abnormally hot and dry. Average temperature across the state of Oklahoma between 1 Jun and 31 Aug was the warmest on record (86.8°F). Rainfall during that same period was 5.64 in. below normal. From 3 Jul to 2 Aug the brown patch epidemic was active except for a period around 19 Jul. Brown patch in plots treated with the preventative Pillar (dry and wet applications) and preventative Heritage G (dry) was high, and not significantly different from the non-treated control. Pots treated with preventative Heritage G (wet), Curative Heritage G (dry and wet), preventative Insignia + Trinity (wet), and curative Pillar (dry) had significantly lower levels of disease throughout the season than compared to the non-treated control. Somewhat better control of brown patch (although not statistically significant in some cases from the previously described treatments) was observed in plots treated with curative Pillar (wet), curative Heritage 50WG (wet and dry), and preventative and curative Insignia + Trinity (dry). Plots treated with preventative Heritage 50 WG (wet and dry) and curative Insignia + Trinity (wet) had the lowest levels of brown patch throughout the season. However, these treatments were not statistically different from plots treated with curative Pillar (wet), curative Heritage 50WG (wet and dry), and preventative and curative Insignia + Trinity (dry). Turf quality was acceptable for all treatments. However, all Heritage 0.31G treatments, all but one of the Pillar 0.81G treatments (curative Pillar 0.81G, wet), and the preventative Insignia + Trinity (wet) treatment were statistically similar to the non-treated control. All other treatments resulted in turf quality better than the non-treated control. No symptoms of phytotoxicity were observed. Single-degree-of-freedom contrast statements were developed for three specific research questions addressed in this study. Overall level of mean disease in plots treated curatively was significantly less than in plots treated preventatively, however, there was no overall difference in turfgrass quality. No differences in the level of disease or overall turfgrass quality was identified in comparisons of applying applications to dry turfgrass foliage versus applying them to wet turfgrass foliage. Finally, overall level of mean disease in plots treated with granular fungicides was significantly higher, and quality was significantly less, than in plots treated with liquid fungicides."
Language:English
References:0
Note:Tables
ASA/CSSA/SSSA Citation (Crop Science-Like - may be incomplete):
Smith, D. L., and N. R. Walker. 2012. Evaluation of fungicide, application timing, and foliage wetness on control of brown patch of tall fescue in Oklahoma, 2011. PDMR: Plant Dis. Manage. Rep. 6:p. T003.
Fastlink to access this record outside TGIF: https://tic.msu.edu/tgif/flink?recno=204062
If there are problems with this record, send us feedback about record 204062.
Choices for finding the above item:
Web URL(s):
https://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/trial/PDMR/repors/2012/T003.pdf
    Last checked: 11/14/2016
    Requires: PDF Reader
    Access conditions: Item is within a limited-access website
Find from within TIC:
   Digitally in TIC by record number.
Request through your local library's inter-library loan service (bring or send a copy of this TGIF record)