4.7 Article

Evaluation of Fungicides for the Management of Botryosphaeria Canker of Grapevines

Journal

PLANT DISEASE
Volume 96, Issue 9, Pages 1303-1308

Publisher

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PDIS-11-11-0998-RE

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Winegrowing Futures Program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The family Botryosphaeriaceae comprises a number of species that are associated with the dieback disease of grapevine (Vitis vinifera), referred to as Botryosphaeria canker. To date, there are few effective agents available for the management of this disease. In this study, fungicides were evaluated for controlling the disease using a combination of in vitro tests and field trials. Twenty fungicides registered for use on other diseases in Australian viticulture were tested in vitro for their effect on mycelia] growth of four species within the Botryosphaeriaceae. The concentrations of fungicide at which 50% of mycelial growth is inhibited (EC50 values) were significantly affected both by fungicide and isolate (P < 0.001). Differences in sensitivities of the four species to the fungicides were negligible (0.41 to 0.59 mg/liter). The most effective fungicides were fludioxonil, carbendazim, fluazinam, tebuconazole, flusilazole, penconazole, procymidone, iprodione, myclobutanil, and pyraclostrobin, for which EC50 values were <1.0 mg/liter. These fungicides were evaluated under field conditions, in addition to the pruning wound protectants Bacseal Super, Garrison, and ATCS tree wound dressing, as well as the biological control agent Vinevax. In field trials, carbendazim (Bavistin), fluazinam (Shirlan), tebuconazole (Folicur), Garrison, and ATCS tree wound dressing applied to freshly cut pruning wounds were the most effective and reduced infection by Diplodia seriata and D. main by 41 to 65%. These results suggest that the occurrence of Botryosphaeria canker on grapevines may be reduced via treatment of pruning wounds with selected fungicides as soon as possible after pruning.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available