Paper · 1994 · Plant Pathology

Evaluation of fungicides for control of eyespot disease and yield loss nationships in winter wheat

D. R. JONES

20
claims
43
verbatim quotes
20
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Following the discovery of resistance to benzimidazole fungicides in the cereal eyespot pathogen Pseudocercosporella herpotrichoides in the UK in 1981, and an initial in vitro screen to select the fungicides with greatest activity against the pathogen, 40 field experiments were carried out between 1983 and 1986 to evaluate alternative fungicides for control of eyespot. At the majority of experimental sites, benomyl‐resistant strains of the pathogen were present, and carbendazim did not control eyespot. Prochloraz was the most effective fungicide, reducing the eyespot index by 30–60%. There was no extra benefit from adding carbendazim to prochloraz. Flusilazole was almost as effective as prochloraz, but other fungicides had little or no effect. At sites with a high incidence of eyespot, prochloraz, with or without the addition of carbendazim, generally gave the largest yield increase. The mean yield increases each year were in the range 0·36–0·85 t/ha, and the greatest yield increase at any site was 2·27 t/ha. Most other fungicides increased yield, but carbendazim did not from 1984 to 1986. There were also yield increases at many sites with a low incidence of eyespot. Yield increases were associated with increases in thousand‐grain weight at the majority of sites, but in only a few instances were there associated increases in specific weight. Prochloraz application at GS30‐31 was cost effective at 71% of sites. At most sites, in regression of yield on eyespot, eyespot accounted for less than 25% of the variance in yield. The mean relationship between severe eyespot lesions and yield loss was such that each 1% increase in the percentage of tillers affected by severe eyespot was associated with a yield loss of 0·21 %. There was a significant positive correlation between eyespot at GS75 and GS30‐31, and between yield increase from prochloraz treatment (at GS30‐31) and eyespot at GS75, but not between yield increase and eyespot at GS30‐31. The ADAS threshold for fungicide application of 20% tillers affected at GS30‐31 was a reliable indicator of the cost‐effectiveness of treatment at 60% of sites.

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 20

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Carbendazim did not control eyespot at most sites with resistant strains.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
carbendazime0
Interactor
pathogene0pathogen
Outcome
eyespote0
Direction
did not controle0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At the majority of experimental sites, benomyl‐resistant strains of the pathogen were present, and carbendazim did not control eyespot.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 372–507 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Prochloraz reduced eyespot index by 30–60%.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Prochloraze0
Outcome
eyespot indexe0
Direction
reducinge0
Value
30–60%e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Prochloraz was the most effective fungicide, reducing the eyespot index by 30–60%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 508–590 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adding carbendazim to prochloraz provided no extra benefit.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
adding carbendazim to prochloraze0
Outcome
no extra benefite0
Direction
no extra benefite0
Comparator
prochloraze0

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

“There was no extra benefit from adding carbendazim to prochloraz.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–656 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Flusilazole was almost as effective as prochloraz against eyespot.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Flusilazolee0
Outcome
almost as effectivee0
Direction
almost as effectivee0
Comparator
prochloraze0

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

“Flusilazole was almost as effective as prochloraz”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 657–706 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Other fungicides had little or no effect against eyespot.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
other fungicidese0
Outcome
little or no effecte0
Direction
little or no effecte0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“other fungicides had little or no effect.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 712–753 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At high-eyespot sites prochloraz generally gave the largest yield increase.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
prochloraze0
Outcome
yield increasee0
Direction
largeste0
Qualifier
sites with a high incidence of eyespote0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At sites with a high incidence of eyespot, prochloraz, with or without the addition of carbendazim, generally gave the largest yield increase.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 754–896 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adding carbendazim to prochloraz at high-eyespot sites generally gave the largest yield increase.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
prochloraz, with or without the addition of carbendazime0
Outcome
yield increasee0
Direction
largeste0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At sites with a high incidence of eyespot, prochloraz, with or without the addition of carbendazim, generally gave the largest yield increase.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 754–896 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean annual yield increases ranged from 0·36–0·85 t/ha.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome
mean yield increasese0
Direction
increasese0
Value
0·36–0·85 t/hae0

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

“The mean yield increases each year were in the range 0·36–0·85 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 897–964 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The greatest site yield increase was 2·27 t/ha.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome
yield increasee0
Direction
greateste0
Value
2·27 t/hae0

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

“the greatest yield increase at any site was 2·27 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1023 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Most other fungicides increased yield.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Most other fungicidese0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Most other fungicides increased yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1025–1062 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Carbendazim did not increase yield from 1984 to 1986.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
carbendazime0
Outcome
yielde1
Direction
did note0
Qualifier
from 1984 to 1986e0

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 ↗

Verbatim

e0

“carbendazim did not from 1984 to 1986.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1106 · show in text ↑
e1

“Most other fungicides increased yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1025–1062 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Many low-eyespot sites also had yield increases.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome
yield increasese0
Direction
increasese0
Qualifier
sites with a low incidence of eyespote0

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

“There were also yield increases at many sites with a low incidence of eyespot.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1107–1185 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield increases were associated with thousand-grain weight increases at most sites.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
thousand‐graine0
Outcome
Yield increasese0
Direction
increasese0
Qualifier
majority of sitese0

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

“Yield increases were associated with increases in thousand‐grain weight at the majority of sites”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1186–1282 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield increases were associated with specific weight increases only rarely.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
thousand‐graine1
Outcome
specific weighte0
Direction
increasese0
Qualifier
only a few instancese0

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

“in only a few instances were there associated increases in specific weight.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1288–1363 · show in text ↑
e1

“Yield increases were associated with increases in thousand‐grain weight at the majority of sites”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1186–1282 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Prochloraz at GS30‐31 was cost effective at 71% of sites.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Prochloraz application at GS30‐31e0
Outcome
cost effectivee0
Value
71% of sitese0

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

“Prochloraz application at GS30‐31 was cost effective at 71% of sites.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1364–1433 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Eyespot explained under 25% of yield variance at most sites.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Interactor
eyespote0pathogen
Outcome
variance in yielde0
Value
less than 25%e0

Not reportedDirection

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

“At most sites, in regression of yield on eyespot, eyespot accounted for less than 25% of the variance in yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1434–1545 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Each 1% more tillers with severe eyespot was associated with 0·21 % yield loss.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Interactor
eyespote0pathogen
Outcome
yield losse0
Direction
losse0
Value
0·21 %e0
Qualifier
each 1% increase in the percentage of tillers affected by severe eyespote0

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

“each 1% increase in the percentage of tillers affected by severe eyespot was associated with a yield loss of 0·21 %.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1628–1744 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Eyespot at GS75 correlated positively with eyespot at GS30‐31.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Interactor
eyespote0pathogen
Outcome
eyespot at GS75e0
Direction
positivee0
Comparator
GS30‐31e0

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

“There was a significant positive correlation between eyespot at GS75 and GS30‐31”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1745–1825 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Prochloraz yield increase correlated positively with eyespot at GS75 but not GS30‐31.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
prochloraz treatmente0
Outcome
yield increasee0
Direction
positivee1
Qualifier
but not between yield increase and eyespot at GS30‐31e0

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

“between yield increase from prochloraz treatment (at GS30‐31) and eyespot at GS75, but not between yield increase and eyespot at GS30‐31.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1831–1968 · show in text ↑
e1

“There was a significant positive correlation between eyespot at GS75 and GS30‐31”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1745–1825 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 20% tiller threshold indicated treatment cost effectiveness at 60% of sites.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome
reliable indicator of the cost‐effectiveness of treatmente0
Value
60% of sitese0
Qualifier
20% tillers affected at GS30‐31e0

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

“The ADAS threshold for fungicide application of 20% tillers affected at GS30‐31 was a reliable indicator of the cost‐effectiveness of treatment at 60% of sites.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1969–2129 · show in text ↑
t0

“winter wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑

carbendazim · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

10 papers: 8 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

prochloraz · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

fungicide · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

262 papers: 232 positive, 30 negative or no effect

231 papers in the same direction as this paper · 30 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

258 papers more in this group

See all 262 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.