Abstract
The application of fungicides in maize by the commonly used overhead spraying technique is more challenging than in small-grain cereals. Especially in later development stages, when the plant has reached a considerable height, lower plant organs (e.g., ears) may be insufficiently protected, since a large part of the applied fungicide is deposited on the upper leaves. In contrast, lower plant organs can be reached by the dropleg spraying technique, which allows sub-canopy applications. This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species, which can affect leaves and ears, respectively. The efficacy was evaluated in field trials under natural K. zeae and artificial Fusarium inoculum conditions in Northern Germany by measuring disease severities of K. zeae on maize leaves, dry matter yields, and concentrations of the Fusarium mycotoxins deoxynivalenol (DON) and zearalenone (ZEN) at harvest. Fusarium inoculations of main ears at full flowering resulted in significantly higher DON and ZEN concentrations compared to natural Fusarium infections, whereas the dry matter yield was not affected. The strongest disease progressions of K. zeae were determined after flowering on the upper leaves and leaves around the main ear. Disease severities were significantly reduced on the upper leaves by the overhead application and the combination of the overhead and dropleg spraying technique, whereby the three spraying techniques were equally able to decrease the infestation on the yield-essential leaves around the main ear. No differences in dry matter yield were found between the application techniques, but they were significantly higher than in the untreated control. The contamination with DON and ZEN was most effectively reduced by sub-canopy applications using the dropleg technique, whether as a solo application or in combination with the overhead technique. The main ears were reached better with the applied fungicide, reducing Fusarium infections, and therefore, contamination with mycotoxins. The dropleg technique offers an opportunity for improved protection of lower plant organs, especially in tall growing crops. In combination with the overhead spraying technique, the protection of various plant organs along the entire plant with the applied fungicide could be advantageous, especially when different parts of the plant are affected by different fungal diseases.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Overhead fungicide application significantly reduced Kabatiella zeae disease severity on the upper maize leaves.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Organ / stage
- upper leavese2
- Treatment
- overhead applicatione2
- Interactor
- Kabatiella zeaeAureobasidium zeaee0pathogen
- Outcome
- Disease severitiese2
- Direction
- significantly reducede2
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e2“Disease severities were significantly reduced on the upper leaves by the overhead application and the combination of the overhead and dropleg spraying technique, whereby the three spraying techniques were equally able to decrease the infestation on the yield-essential leaves around the main ear”
Claim · model-written summary
The combination of overhead and dropleg spraying significantly reduced Kabatiella zeae disease severity on the upper maize leaves.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Organ / stage
- upper leavese2
- Treatment
- the combination of the overhead and dropleg spraying techniquee2
- Interactor
- Kabatiella zeaeAureobasidium zeaee0pathogen
- Outcome
- Disease severitiese2
- Direction
- significantly reducede2
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e2“Disease severities were significantly reduced on the upper leaves by the overhead application and the combination of the overhead and dropleg spraying technique, whereby the three spraying techniques were equally able to decrease the infestation on the yield-essential leaves around the main ear”
Claim · model-written summary
The three spraying techniques were equally able to decrease infestation of the yield-essential leaves around the main ear.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Organ / stage
- leaves around the main eare2
- Treatment
- the three spraying techniquese2
- Outcome
- infestation on the yield-essential leaves around the main eare2
- Direction
- equally able to decreasee2
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e2“Disease severities were significantly reduced on the upper leaves by the overhead application and the combination of the overhead and dropleg spraying technique, whereby the three spraying techniques were equally able to decrease the infestation on the yield-essential leaves around the main ear”
Claim · model-written summary
Fusarium inoculation of main ears at full flowering significantly increased DON and ZEN concentrations compared with natural Fusarium infection.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Treatment
- Fusarium inoculations of main ears at full floweringe1
- Outcome
- DON and ZEN concentrationse1
- Direction
- significantly highere1
- Comparator
- natural Fusarium infectionse1
FusariumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e1“Fusarium inoculations of main ears at full flowering resulted in significantly higher DON and ZEN concentrations compared to natural Fusarium infections, whereas the dry matter yield was not affected”
Claim · model-written summary
Fusarium inoculation of main ears at full flowering did not affect dry matter yield.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Treatment
- Fusarium inoculations of main ears at full floweringe1
- Outcome
- dry matter yielde1
- Direction
- was not affectede1
- Comparator
- natural Fusarium infectionse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e1“Fusarium inoculations of main ears at full flowering resulted in significantly higher DON and ZEN concentrations compared to natural Fusarium infections, whereas the dry matter yield was not affected”
Claim · model-written summary
The strongest K. zeae disease progression occurred after flowering on the upper leaves and on leaves around the main ear.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Organ / stage
- upper leavese3
- Interactor
- K. zeaeAureobasidium zeaee3pathogen
- Outcome
- disease progressions of K. zeaee3
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e3“The strongest disease progressions of K. zeae were determined after flowering on the upper leaves and leaves around the main ear”
Claim · model-written summary
No differences in dry matter yield were found between the fungicide application techniques.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Treatment
- application techniquese4
- Outcome
- dry matter yielde4
- Direction
- No differencese4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e4“No differences in dry matter yield were found between the application techniques, but they were significantly higher than in the untreated control”
Claim · model-written summary
Fungicide application techniques significantly increased dry matter yield compared with the untreated control.
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e4“No differences in dry matter yield were found between the application techniques, but they were significantly higher than in the untreated control”
Claim · model-written summary
Sub-canopy dropleg applications, alone or combined with overhead spraying, most effectively reduced DON and ZEN contamination.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Treatment
- sub-canopy applications using the dropleg techniquee5
- Outcome
- contamination with DON and ZENe5
- Direction
- most effectively reducede5
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e5“The contamination with DON and ZEN was most effectively reduced by sub-canopy applications using the dropleg technique, whether as a solo application or in combination with the overhead technique”
Claim · model-written summary
The applied fungicide reduced Fusarium infections of the main ears.
- Taxon
- forage maizee0
- Treatment
- applied fungicidee6
- Outcome
- Fusarium infectionse6
- Direction
- reducinge6
- Qualifier
- The main ears were reached bettere6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e6“The main ears were reached better with the applied fungicide, reducing Fusarium infections, and therefore, contamination with mycotoxins”
Claim · model-written summary
The dropleg technique offers an opportunity for improved protection of lower maize organs, especially in tall crops.
Verbatim
e0“This study investigated the efficacy of fungicide applications during flowering in forage maize using the overhead and dropleg spraying techniques as well as a combination for the control of Kabatiella zeae and mycotoxin-producing Fusarium species”
e7“The dropleg technique offers an opportunity for improved protection of lower plant organs, especially in tall growing crops”
The same questions in other papers
Fusarium · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →stage · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →fungicide · Fusarium · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →application · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →stage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
94 papers more in this group
See all 98 papers →inoculation · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
66 papers in the same direction as this paper · 93 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
156 papers more in this group
See all 160 papers →inoculation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 479 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
534 papers more in this group
See all 538 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.