Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:21:50.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An evaluation of potential seed treatments to control Fusarium solani f.sp. phaseoli, the cause of foot and root rot of Phaseolus vulgaris

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

P. E. Russell  and
A. E. A. Mussa
P. E. Russell
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, University of cambridge, Pembroke street, Cambridge CB2 3DX
A. E. A. Mussa
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, University of cambridge, Pembroke street, Cambridge CB2 3DX
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Two systemic fungicides, benomyl and thiabendazole, were more active than the non-systemic fungicide Drazoxolon in inhibiting fungal growth in vitro. A similar pattern was obtained in glasshouse trials with benomyl and thiabendazole giving adequate protection at low concentrations while Drazoxolon was ineffective unless applied at 50% the commercial product concentration. A field trial using thiabendazole, Drazoxolon and a mixture of benomyl and thiram confirmed the glasshouse results.

Some phytotoxicity was noticed with high concentrations of both benomyl and thiabendazole, but satisfactory disease control was achieved using fungicide concentrations which did not induce phytotoxicity.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 89 , Issue 1 , August 1977 , pp. 235 - 238
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Crosier, W. F., Nash, G. T. & Crosier, D. C. (1970). Differential reactions of Pythium sp. and five isolates of Rhizoctonia solanito fungicide on pea seed. Plant Disease Reporter 54, 349–52.Google Scholar
Ellis, M. A., Ilyas, M. B. & Sinclair, J. B. (1974). Effect of three fungicides on internally seed-borne fungi and germination of soybean seeds. Phytopathology 65, 553–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gray, L. E. & Sinclair, J. B. (1970). Uptake and translocation of systemic fungicides by soybean seedlings. Phytopathology 60, 1486–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jhooty, J. S. & Behar, D. S. (1970). Evaluation of different benomyl treatments for control of Rhizoctonia damping-off of peas. Plant Disease Reporter 54, 1049–52.Google Scholar
Natti, J. J. & Crosier, D. C. (1971). Seed and soil treatments for control of bean root rots. Plant Disease Reporter 55, 483–6.Google Scholar
Papavizas, G. C. & Lewis, J. A. (1975). Effect Of Seed treatments with fungicides on bean root rots. Plant Disease Reporter 59, 24–8.Google Scholar
Reyes, A. A. (1975). Phytotoxicity of benomyl to crucifers. Phytopathology 65, 535–9.Google Scholar
Russell, P. E. & Mussa, A. E. A. (1976). Factors affecting Fusarium foot and root rot of Phaseolus beans. Annual Report of the Bean Improvement Cooperative 1976, 64–5.Google Scholar
Steadman, J. R., Kerr, E. D. & Mumm, R. F. (1975). Root rot of beans in Nebraska: primary pathogen and yield loss appraisal. Plant Disease Reporter 59, 305–8.Google Scholar
Wallace, D. H. & Wilkinson, R. E. (1973). Cornell's fifty year search for root rot resistant dry beans. New York's Food and Life Sciences 6, 18–19.Google Scholar