Paper · 2002 · South African Journal of Plant and Soil

Initial studies on fungicide evaluation for efficacy in the management of Fusarium head blight in wheat

K. Ntushelo; W. H. P. Boshoff

3
claims
7
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The efficacy of the fungicides bromuconazole, carbendazim/epoxiconazole, carbendazim/flusilazole, carbendazim, cypro- conazole, flutriafol, prochloraz, propiconazole and tebucona- zole in controlling head blight was determined in the greenhouse. Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) spikes of cultivar SST 38 were inoculated at the onset of flowering with 2.6 × 105 spores. ml−1 of four isolates of Fusarium graminearum (Schwabe). Fungicides were applied either as three-day prior or three-day post-inoculation treatments. Inoculated plants were maintained in the greenhouse at a day/night temperature regime of 25/15°C. Data was captured at two-day intervals for 14 days commencing four days after inoculation. Bromuconazole, carbendazim/epoxiconazole, flutriafol, prochloraz, propiconazole and tebuconazole were most effective against head blight (P = 0.05) whereas carbendazim/flusilazole, carbendazim and cyproconazole did not differ from the unsprayed control. No difference was found between the pre- and the post-inoculation fungicide applications. Future trials will be conducted in the field in order to make recommendations to producers.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Six fungicides were the most effective against head blight.

Treatment
Bromuconazole, carbendazim/epoxiconazole, flutriafol, prochloraz, propiconazole and tebuconazolee0
Interactor
Fusarium graminearumFusarium graminearume1pathogene0
Outcome
head blightt0
Direction
most effectivee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Fusarium graminearum
Fusarium graminearum · InteractorScot Nelson from Honolulu, USA · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bromuconazole, carbendazim/epoxiconazole, flutriafol, prochloraz, propiconazole and tebuconazole were most effective against head blight (P = 0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 704–851 · show in text ↑
t0

“Initial studies on fungicide evaluation for efficacy in the management of Fusarium head blight in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–103 · show in text ↑
e1

“four isolates of Fusarium graminearum (Schwabe)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 374–421 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Carbendazim/flusilazole, carbendazim and cyproconazole did not differ from unsprayed control.

Treatment
carbendazim/flusilazole, carbendazim and cyproconazolee0
Outcome
head blightt0
Direction
did not differe0
Comparator
unsprayed controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“carbendazim/flusilazole, carbendazim and cyproconazole did not differ from the unsprayed control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 860–957 · show in text ↑
t0

“Initial studies on fungicide evaluation for efficacy in the management of Fusarium head blight in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–103 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre- and post-inoculation fungicide applications did not differ.

Treatment
pre-e0
Outcome
differencee0
Direction
No differencee0
Comparator
post-inoculation fungicide applicationse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No difference was found between the pre- and the post-inoculation fungicide applications.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 958–1047 · show in text ↑
t0

“Initial studies on fungicide evaluation for efficacy in the management of Fusarium head blight in wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–103 · show in text ↑

tebuconazole · Fusarium graminearum · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

13 papers: 11 positive, 2 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

flusilazole · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

cyproconazole · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

carbendazim · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

20 papers: 15 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

16 papers more in this group

See all 20 papers →

propiconazole · Fusarium graminearum · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.