Paper · 2018 · Plant Disease

Integrated Effects of Genetic Resistance and Prothioconazole + Tebuconazole Application Timing on Fusarium Head Blight in Wheat

P. A. Paul; J. D. Salgado; G. Bergstrom; et al.

14
claims
53
verbatim quotes
53
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Integrated Fusarium head blight (FHB) management programs consisting of different combinations of cultivar resistance class and an application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole at or after 50% early anthesis were evaluated for efficacy against FHB incidence (INC; percentage of diseased spikes), index (IND; percentage of diseased spikelets per spike), Fusarium damaged kernel (FDK), deoxynivalenol (DON) toxin contamination, grain yield, and test weight (TW) in inoculated field trials conducted in 11 U.S. states in 2014 and 2015. Mean log response ratios and corresponding percent control values for INC, IND, FDK, and DON, and mean differences in yield and TW relative to a nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK), were estimated through network meta-analyses as measures of efficacy. Results from the analyses were then used to estimate the economic benefit of each management program for a range of grain prices and fungicide applications costs. Management programs consisting of a moderately resistant (MR) cultivar treated with the fungicide were the most efficacious, reducing INC by 60 to 69%, IND by 71 to 76%, FDK by 66 to 72%, and DON by 60 to 64% relative to S_CK, compared with 56 to 62% for INC, 68 to 72% for IND, 66 to 68% for FDK, and 58 to 61% for DON for programs with a moderately susceptible (MS) cultivar. The least efficacious programs were those with a fungicide application to a susceptible (S) cultivar, with less than a 45% reduction of INC, IND, FDK, or DON. All programs were more efficacious under conditions favorable for FHB compared with less favorable conditions, with applications made at 50% early anthesis being of comparable efficacy to those made 2 to 7 days later. Programs with an MS cultivar resulted in the highest mean yield increases relative to S_CK (541 to 753 kg/ha), followed by programs with an S cultivar (386 to 498 kg/ha) and programs with an MR cultivar (250 to 337 kg/ha). Integrated management programs with an MS or MR cultivar treated with the fungicide at or after 50% early anthesis were the most likely to result in a 50 or 75% control of IND, FDK, or DON in a future trial. At a fixed fungicide application cost, these programs were $4 to $319/MT more economically beneficial than corresponding fungicide-only programs, depending on the cultivar and grain price. These findings demonstrate the benefits of combining genetic resistance with a prothioconazole + tebuconazole treatment to manage FHB, even if that treatment is applied a few days after 50% early anthesis.

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 14

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MR cultivar plus fungicide reduced incidence by 60 to 69%.

Material
moderately resistant (MR) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
INCe0
Direction
reducinge0
Value
60 to 69%e0
Comparator
S_CKe4

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

“reducing INC by 60 to 69%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1099–1124 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately resistant (MR) cultivar treated”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1052 · show in text ↑
e4

“nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–739 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MR cultivar plus fungicide reduced index by 71 to 76%.

Material
moderately resistant (MR) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
INDe0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
71 to 76%e0
Comparator
S_CKe4

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

“IND by 71 to 76%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1126–1142 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately resistant (MR) cultivar treated”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1052 · show in text ↑
e4

“nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–739 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MR cultivar plus fungicide reduced damaged kernels by 66 to 72%.

Material
moderately resistant (MR) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
FDKe0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
66 to 72%e0
Comparator
S_CKe4

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

“FDK by 66 to 72%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1144–1160 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately resistant (MR) cultivar treated”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1052 · show in text ↑
e4

“nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–739 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MR cultivar plus fungicide reduced DON by 60 to 64%.

Material
moderately resistant (MR) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
DONe0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
60 to 64%e0
Comparator
S_CKe0

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

“DON by 60 to 64% relative to S_CK”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1199 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately resistant (MR) cultivar treated”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1052 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MS programs reduced incidence by 56 to 62%.

Material
moderately susceptible (MS) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
INCe0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
56 to 62%e0
Comparator
S_CKe4

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

“56 to 62% for INC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1215–1232 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately susceptible (MS) cultivar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1314–1350 · show in text ↑
e4

“nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–739 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MS programs reduced index by 68 to 72%.

Material
moderately susceptible (MS) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
INDe0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
68 to 72%e0
Comparator
S_CKe4

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

“68 to 72% for IND”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1234–1251 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately susceptible (MS) cultivar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1314–1350 · show in text ↑
e4

“nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–739 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MS programs reduced damaged kernels by 66 to 68%.

Material
moderately susceptible (MS) cultivare3
Treatment
prothioconazole + tebuconazolee2
Outcome
FDKe0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
66 to 68%e0
Comparator
S_CKe4

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

“66 to 68% for FDK”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1253–1270 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“application of the fungicide prothioconazole + tebuconazole”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 131–190 · show in text ↑
e3

“moderately susceptible (MS) cultivar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1314–1350 · show in text ↑
e4

“nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–739 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Programs were more effective under FHB-favorable conditions.

Outcome
efficaciouse0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
less favorable conditionse0

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

“All programs were more efficacious under conditions favorable for FHB compared with less favorable conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1511–1620 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Application at anthesis was comparably effective to two to seven days later.

Treatment
50% early anthesise0
Outcome
efficacye0
Direction
comparablee0
Comparator
2 to 7 days latere0

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

“applications made at 50% early anthesis being of comparable efficacy to those made 2 to 7 days later”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1627–1727 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MS programs increased yield 541 to 753 kg/ha.

Treatment
MS cultivare0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasese0
Value
541 to 753 kg/hae0
Comparator
S_CKe0

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

“MS cultivar resulted in the highest mean yield increases relative to S_CK (541 to 753 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1746–1838 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

S programs increased yield 386 to 498 kg/ha.

Treatment
S cultivare0
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
increasee4
Value
386 to 498 kg/hae0
Comparator
S_CKe2

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

“S cultivar (386 to 498 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1869–1898 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“relative to a nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 678–739 · show in text ↑
e3

“mean yield increases relative to S_CK”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1782–1819 · show in text ↑
e4

“highest mean yield increases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1774–1802 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MR programs increased yield 250 to 337 kg/ha.

Treatment
MR cultivare0
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
increasee4
Value
250 to 337 kg/hae0
Comparator
S_CKe2

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

“MR cultivar (250 to 337 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1920–1950 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
e2

“relative to a nontreated, inoculated susceptible check (S_CK)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 678–739 · show in text ↑
e3

“mean yield increases relative to S_CK”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1782–1819 · show in text ↑
e4

“highest mean yield increases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1774–1802 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositiveprojected

Claim · model-written summary

MS or MR treated programs were most likely to reach 50 or 75% control in future trials.

Treatment
fungicidee0
Outcome
control of IND, FDK, or DONe0
Value
50 or 75%e0

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

“Integrated management programs with an MS or MR cultivar treated with the fungicide at or after 50% early anthesis were the most likely to result in a 50 or 75% control of IND, FDK, or DON in a future trial”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1952–2158 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 122–127 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Integrated programs had $4 to $319/MT greater economic benefit than fungicide-only programs.

Outcome
economically beneficiale0
Direction
moree0
Value
$4 to $319/MTe0
Comparator
fungicide-only programse0

Verbatim

e0

“These programs were $4 to $319/MT more economically beneficial than corresponding fungicide-only programs”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 2199–2304 · show in text ↑

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

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

tebuconazole · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

36 papers: 36 positive, 0 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

32 papers more in this group

See all 36 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.