Paper · 2017 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

The role of genetics, growth habit, and cultural practices in the mitigation of Fusarium head blight

Zesong Ye; Anita Brule-Babel; Robert Joseph Graf; et al.

13
claims
21
verbatim quotes
12
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Field trials were conducted under natural infection and artificial inoculation from 2012 to 2014 at seven sites across the Canadian prairies to determine genetic and management effects on Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems. A system of management, which consisted of (1) a control of no fungicide was compared with (2) the seed treatment (ST) thiamethoxam + difenoconazole + metalaxyl-M + S-isomer, (3) an in-crop foliar fungicide (tebuconazole + prothioconazole), or (4) ST + foliar fungicide, was integrated with four wheat cultivars of contrasting growth habits and levels of FHB resistance. Results indicated the cultivars expressing improved FHB resistance, Carberry (spring wheat) and Emerson (winter wheat), were superior over susceptible cultivars, Harvest (spring wheat) and CDC Falcon (winter wheat), in reducing Fusarium-damaged kernel (FDK) and deoxynivalenol (DON) levels, and displayed higher yield under high Fusarium pressure. Winter wheat displayed higher overall yield, with Emerson producing the highest and most stable yields across environments. Application of foliar fungicide, with or without the ST, increased grain yield, seed mass, and test weight; and lowered FDK and DON. Seed treatment alone increased test weight, spring plant density of both winter wheat varieties, and kernel weight in Emerson. A management strategy of foliar fungicide and (or) ST + foliar fungicide generally produced higher yields with greater stability, particularly for susceptible cultivars in high FHB environments. The results of this study reinforce that integration of FHB-resistant cultivars with appropriate cultural practices is required to reduce the risk of FHB and optimize grain yield, and is further enhanced with a winter vs. spring growth habit.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 13

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Resistant Carberry and Emerson had less damaged kernels than susceptible cultivars.

Material
Carberrye0
Interactor
FusariumFusariume0pathogen
Outcome
Fusarium-damaged kernel (FDK)e0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
susceptible cultivarse0

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
Fusarium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Carberry (spring wheat) and Emerson (winter wheat), were superior over susceptible cultivars, Harvest (spring wheat) and CDC Falcon (winter wheat), in reducing Fusarium-damaged kernel (FDK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 683–872 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Resistant cultivars reduced deoxynivalenol relative to susceptible cultivars.

Material
Emersone0
Interactor
FusariumFusariume0pathogen
Outcome
deoxynivalenol (DON) levelse0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
susceptible cultivarse0

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
Fusarium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Carberry (spring wheat) and Emerson (winter wheat), were superior over susceptible cultivars, Harvest (spring wheat) and CDC Falcon (winter wheat), in reducing Fusarium-damaged kernel (FDK) and deoxynivalenol (DON) levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 683–904 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Resistant cultivars yielded more under high Fusarium pressure.

Interactor
FusariumFusariume0pathogen
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0

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
Fusarium · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“displayed higher yield under high Fusarium pressure”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–961 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Winter wheat had higher overall yield.

Material
Winter wheate0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0

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

“Winter wheat displayed higher overall yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 963–1006 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Emerson had the highest and most stable yields across environments.

Material
Emersone0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
higheste0

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

“Emerson producing the highest and most stable yields across environments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1013–1085 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fungicide increased grain yield.

Treatment
foliar fungicidee0
Outcome
grain 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

“Application of foliar fungicide, with or without the ST, increased grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1087–1165 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fungicide increased seed mass and test weight.

Treatment
foliar fungicidee0
Outcome
seed mass, and test weighte0
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

“Application of foliar fungicide, with or without the ST, increased grain yield, seed mass, and test weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1087–1193 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fungicide lowered damaged kernels and deoxynivalenol.

Outcome
FDK and DONe0
Direction
lowerede0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

“and lowered FDK and DON”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1195–1218 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment alone increased test weight.

Treatment
Seed treatmente0
Outcome
test weighte0
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

“Seed treatment alone increased test weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1262 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment increased spring plant density of both winter varieties.

Treatment
Seed treatmente0
Outcome
spring plant densitye0
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

“Seed treatment alone increased test weight, spring plant density of both winter wheat varieties”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1315 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seed treatment increased kernel weight in Emerson.

Material
Emersone0
Treatment
Seed treatmente0
Outcome
kernel weighte0
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

“Seed treatment alone increased test weight, spring plant density of both winter wheat varieties, and kernel weight in Emerson”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1220–1345 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fungicide with or without seed treatment improved yield and stability, especially in susceptible cultivars.

Treatment
foliar fungicidee0
Outcome
yields with greater stabilitye0
Direction
highere0

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

“foliar fungicide and (or) ST + foliar fungicide generally produced higher yields with greater stability, particularly for susceptible cultivars in high FHB environments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1372–1540 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend resistant cultivars integrated with cultural practices to lower FHB risk and optimize yield.

Outcome
integration of FHB-resistant cultivars with appropriate cultural practicese0

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

“integration of FHB-resistant cultivars with appropriate cultural practices is required to reduce the risk of FHB and optimize grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1583–1720 · show in text ↑
t0

“Fusarium head blight (FHB) in wheat production systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 188–242 · show in text ↑

fungicide · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

24 papers: 20 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 papers →

seed treatment · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 19 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. no effect

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

application · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

43 papers: 38 positive, 5 negative or no effect

37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

39 papers more in this group

See all 43 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. positive
  3. positive

258 papers more in this group

See all 262 papers →

seed treatment · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

301 papers: 270 positive, 31 negative or no effect

269 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

297 papers more in this group

See all 301 papers →

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

877 papers: 795 positive, 82 negative or no effect

794 papers in the same direction as this paper · 75 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

873 papers more in this group

See all 877 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.