Abstract
Peach cover spray applications of the protectant fungicide captan were previously shown to significantly reduce brown rot caused by Monilinia fructicola during the preharvest fruit ripening periods in the 2012 through 2015 growing seasons. The protectants sulfur, ziram, and thiram failed to yield this benefit. Percentage disease control with captan ranged from 50 to 69%. Results of a bioassay indicated that the mechanism for this control was the creation of an effective, persistent fungicide residue on the fruit surface. Given these findings, the current 2017 to 2018 study was initiated to further refine the cover spray program. Cover spray applications of captan were made at lower rates and fewer timings with the goal of minimizing fungicide usage while maintaining control. High concentrations of the protectants sulfur and ziram were also examined in cover spray programs to determine whether greater concentrations could improve control. Results of the captan treatments from both years showed that the concentration could be reduced 17%, from 3.36 to 2.80 kg/ha active ingredient, without a significant increase in rot at harvest. Disease control at this medium rate was 69% in 2017 and 51% in 2018. The late season timing treatment, which consisted of the final two cover sprays at fifth and sixth cover, significantly reduced brown rot at harvest and provided control equivalent to the full cover spray program consisting of seven applications. Thus, a buildup of residue from many cover sprays is not needed to achieve control. As hypothesized, the midseason treatments, which consisted of two sprays at third and fourth cover, did not provide control of brown rot at harvest. The bioassay confirmed that insufficient residue remained on fruit for adequate control. However, the early season treatment, which consisted of sprays at shuck split, first cover, and second cover, provided 40% control, even though the bioassay showed that an effective residue was not present during the preharvest period. Brown rot management for this treatment was probably caused by inhibition of quiescent or latent infections on young green fruit. If confirmed, this novel finding indicates that high levels of latent infections are possible in eastern U.S. peach growing regions. Finally, higher rates of sulfur and ziram cover sprays were still ineffective for providing brown rot control at harvest. Comparison of half maximal effective concentration values calculated from the dose–response models confirmed that the sulfur and ziram intrinsic efficacies were too low for adequate control, even at the highest registered rates. These findings demonstrated that late season captan cover sprays can contribute significantly to control of brown rot at harvest, thereby augmenting the efficacy of preharvest fungicide programs. The year-to-year consistency of control should also be improved because heavy rainfall during the preharvest period did not reduce control by the captan residue. Furthermore, any reduction of the M. fructicola population by the captan cover sprays should reduce selection pressure against the site-specific fungicides commonly used during the preharvest period. The development of resistance to captan, a multisite protectant fungicide, is not likely, so this resistance management strategy should be sustainable.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Captan cover sprays on peach were previously shown to significantly reduce brown rot caused by Monilinia fructicola during preharvest fruit ripening in 2012 to 2015.
- Taxon
- Peach
Prunus persicat0 - Treatment
- cover spray applications of the protectant fungicide captane0
- Interactor
- Monilinia fructicola
Monilinia fructicolae0pathogen - Outcome
- brown rote0
- Direction
- reducee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Peach cover spray applications of the protectant fungicide captan were previously shown to significantly reduce brown rot caused by Monilinia fructicola during the preharvest fruit ripening periods in the 2012 through 2015 growing seasons”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Captan concentration could be reduced 17%, from 3.36 to 2.80 kg/ha active ingredient, without a significant increase in rot at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- captan treatmentse0
- Outcome
- increase in rot at harveste0
- Direction
- without a significant increasee0
- Value
- 17%e0
- Qualifier
- from 3.36 to 2.80 kg/ha active ingrediente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“captan treatments from both years showed that the concentration could be reduced 17%, from 3.36 to 2.80 kg/ha active ingredient, without a significant increase in rot at harvest”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Disease control at the medium captan rate was 69% in 2017.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Outcome
- Disease controle0
- Value
- 69%e0
- Qualifier
- 2017e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Disease control at this medium rate was 69% in 2017”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Disease control at the medium captan rate was 51% in 2018.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Outcome
- Disease controle0
- Value
- 51%e0
- Qualifier
- 2018e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Disease control at this medium rate was 69% in 2017 and 51% in 2018”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
The late season timing treatment (final two cover sprays at fifth and sixth cover) significantly reduced brown rot at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- late season timing treatmente0
- Outcome
- brown rot at harveste0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The late season timing treatment, which consisted of the final two cover sprays at fifth and sixth cover, significantly reduced brown rot at harvest”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
The late season timing treatment provided control equivalent to the full cover spray program of seven applications.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- late season timing treatmente0
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- equivalente0
- Qualifier
- seven applicationse0
- Comparator
- full cover spray programe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The late season timing treatment, which consisted of the final two cover sprays at fifth and sixth cover, significantly reduced brown rot at harvest and provided control equivalent to the full cover spray program consisting of seven applications”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
The midseason treatments (two sprays at third and fourth cover) did not provide control of brown rot at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- midseason treatmentse0
- Outcome
- control of brown rot at harveste0
- Direction
- did not providee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the midseason treatments, which consisted of two sprays at third and fourth cover, did not provide control of brown rot at harvest”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
The bioassay confirmed that insufficient residue remained on fruit for adequate control.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Organ / stage
- fruite0
- Outcome
- insufficient residue remained on fruite0
- Qualifier
- for adequate controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The bioassay confirmed that insufficient residue remained on fruit for adequate control”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
The early season treatment (sprays at shuck split, first cover and second cover) provided 40% control, even though the bioassay showed no effective residue during the preharvest period.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- early season treatmente0
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 40%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the early season treatment, which consisted of sprays at shuck split, first cover, and second cover, provided 40% control, even though the bioassay showed that an effective residue was not present during the preharvest period”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Brown rot management by the early season treatment was probably caused by inhibition of quiescent or latent infections on young green fruit.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Organ / stage
- young green fruite0
- Outcome
- Brown rot managemente0
- Qualifier
- inhibition of quiescent or latent infectionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Brown rot management for this treatment was probably caused by inhibition of quiescent or latent infections on young green fruit”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
If confirmed, this finding indicates that high levels of latent infections are possible in eastern U.S. peach growing regions.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae0
- Outcome
- high levels of latent infectionse0
- Setting
- eastern U.S. peach growing regionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“this novel finding indicates that high levels of latent infections are possible in eastern U.S. peach growing regions”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher rates of sulfur cover sprays were still ineffective for brown rot control at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- higher rates of sulfure0
- Outcome
- brown rot control at harveste0
- Direction
- ineffectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher rates of sulfur and ziram cover sprays were still ineffective for providing brown rot control at harvest”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher rates of ziram cover sprays were still ineffective for brown rot control at harvest.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- ziram cover sprayse0
- Outcome
- brown rot control at harveste0
- Direction
- ineffectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher rates of sulfur and ziram cover sprays were still ineffective for providing brown rot control at harvest”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur intrinsic efficacy was too low for adequate control even at the highest registered rates.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- sulfure0
- Outcome
- intrinsic efficaciese0
- Direction
- too lowe0
- Qualifier
- even at the highest registered ratese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the sulfur and ziram intrinsic efficacies were too low for adequate control, even at the highest registered rates”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Ziram intrinsic efficacy was too low for adequate control even at the highest registered rates.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- zirame0
- Outcome
- intrinsic efficaciese0
- Direction
- too lowe0
- Qualifier
- even at the highest registered ratese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the sulfur and ziram intrinsic efficacies were too low for adequate control, even at the highest registered rates”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
Heavy rainfall during the preharvest period did not reduce control by the captan residue.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- heavy rainfall during the preharvest periode0
- Outcome
- control by the captan residuee0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“heavy rainfall during the preharvest period did not reduce control by the captan residue”
t0“Peach”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors state that development of resistance to captan, a multisite protectant fungicide, is not likely, so this resistance management strategy should be sustainable.
- Taxon
- PeachPrunus persicat0
- Outcome
- resistance management strategy should be sustainablee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The development of resistance to captan, a multisite protectant fungicide, is not likely, so this resistance management strategy should be sustainable”
t0“Peach”
The same questions in other papers
captan · disease · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
sulfur atom · disease · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →application · disease · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →climate site · disease · Prunus persica (peach)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.