Annual Project Report 2012
The results described in this summary report are interim and relate to one year. In all cases, the reports refer to projects that extend
over a number of years.
While the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, operating through its HGCA division, seeks to ensure that the information
contained within this document is accurate at the time of printing, no warranty is given in respect thereof and, to the maximum extent
permitted by law, the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board accepts no liability for loss, damage or injury howsoever caused
(including that caused by negligence) or suffered directly or indirectly in relation to information and opinions contained in or omitted from
this document. Reference herein to trade names and proprietary products without stating that they are protected does not imply that
they may be regarded as unprotected and thus free for general use. No endorsement of named products is intended, nor is any criticism
implied of other alternative, but unnamed, products.
HGCA is the cereals and oilseeds division of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board.
New Fungicide Performance in Winter Wheat
Project number
RD-2010-3734
Start date
Sep 2010
End date
Mar 2014
Project aim and objectives
Provide growers with independent information on the performance and use of novel and existing
fungicides against the economically important foliar diseases of winter wheat.
Key messages emerging from the project
The three registered SDHI / azole mixtures (Seguris, Adexar and Aviator Xpro) all showed high
levels of protectant activity on Septoria tritici. Of the products tested and approved to date, Aviator
Xpro, and Adexar were the most curative. These showed a marked improvement in efficacy
compared to their respective azole partners, Ignite or Proline, applied alone. Multisite protectant
products Bravo and Phoenix also
had useful activity on septoria tritici. On rusts, all SDHI’s were
shown to add to the rust activity of their azole partners. The best yellow rust control was achieved
by epoxiconazole-based SDHI mixtures Seguris and Adexar. The strobilurin Comet was also
shown to have good yellow rust activity.
Summary of results from the reporting year
Seven trial sites in 2012 tested eight products against the four major foliar pathogens of wheat (see
table below for trial locations and target diseases).
1
ADAS (Rosemaund)
Septoria tritici (5 spray timings)
2
NIABTAG (Sutton Scotney)
Septoria tritici (double trial)
3
SAC (Fife)
Septoria tritici (double trial)
4
ADAS (Terrington)
Yellow rust
5
NIABTAG (Cambridge)
Brown rust
6
SAC (Fife)
Mildew
7
Teagasc (Carlow, Eire)*
Septoria tritici
* funded by Teagasc, and included with permission.
All sites tested products at T1 (leaf 3 emerged) or T2 (flag leaf emerged) timing, and two Septoria
tritici sites (Fife and Sutton Scotney) tested dose responses at both timings in separate
experiments.
Patterns of disease control were similar at both T1 and T2, and differences between sites in the
ranking of products were small, so responses were combined both within and between sites. To
ensure accurate fitting of dose response curves, products were tested at doses up to double the
maximum label dose. Grain from these experimental treatments was destroyed. Note: it is illegal
to apply products at more than the label recommended dose. At ADAS Rosemaund, additional
treatments tested half doses of each product at 10 or 20 days before or after the main dose
Annual Project Report 2012
The results described in this summary report are interim and relate to one year. In all cases, the reports refer to projects that extend
over a number of years.
While the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, operating through its HGCA division, seeks to ensure that the information
contained within this document is accurate at the time of printing, no warranty is given in respect thereof and, to the maximum extent
permitted by law, the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board accepts no liability for loss, damage or injury howsoever caused
(including that caused by negligence) or suffered directly or indirectly in relation to information and opinions contained in or omitted from
this document. Reference herein to trade names and proprietary products without stating that they are protected does not imply that
they may be regarded as unprotected and thus free for general use. No endorsement of named products is intended, nor is any criticism
implied of other alternative, but unnamed, products.
HGCA is the cereals and oilseeds division of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board.
response application at T2, to assess the width of the spray window. The rank order of products in
curative and protectant situations against septoria was similar, so data was combined across trials.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Dose (proportion of full label rate)
%
S
e
p
to
ri
a
t
ri
tic
i
C
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Dose (proportion of full label rate)
Seguris
Proline
Ignite
AviatorXpro
Imtrex
Phoenix
Adexar
Bravo
P
Proline (prothioconazole) and Ignite (epoxiconazole) continued to provide similar levels of control
of Septoria tritici to each other in both curative (C in figure above) and protectant (P) situations, but
lower levels than have been seen in previous seasons. Succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI)
mixtures Aviator Xpro (prothioconazole + bixafen) and Adexar (epoxiconazole + fluxapyroxad)
showed significant improvements in control in both curative and protectant situations, compared to
their azole components applied alone. Seguris (epoxiconazole and isopyrazam) also had excellent
protectant activity but was less effective in curative situations. One solo SDHI, Imtrex
(fluxapyroxad), also had excellent curative and protectant activity, however Imtrex treatments had
a lower yield response and poorer yellow rust control than Adexar (data not shown). Note: Imtrex
should only be used in a balanced mixture with at least one fungicide from an alternative mode of
action group at a dose which gives robust control. Of the multisite protectant products, Bravo
(chlorothalonil) was shown to have good activity still; Phoenix (folpet) appeared less active, but still
provided 40% control at full label rate in protectant situations.
On yellow rust, products were tested in a very curative situation. Epoxiconazole-based treatments
(including SDHI mixtures) were the most effective, with Seguris (isopyrazam + epoxiconazole) and
Adexar providing 84% and 86% control at full label rates, respectively. The strobilurin Comet
(pyraclostrobin) also showed 73% control at full label rate. Aviator was less effective, providing
65% control on yellow rust, and appearing to add little over the activity of Proline. However, on
brown rust, control with Aviator was as effective as other SDHI mixtures, Adexar and Seguris.
Key issues to be addressed in the next year
Test new and existing products, and detect changes in efficacy to prevent yield loss due to
disease. Assess the value of information on flexibility of spray timing through the new design at
the Rosemaund site. Provide information to levy payers on new products as soon as they are
approved for use in the UK.
Annual Project Report 2012
The results described in this summary report are interim and relate to one year. In all cases, the reports refer to projects that extend
over a number of years.
While the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, operating through its HGCA division, seeks to ensure that the information
contained within this document is accurate at the time of printing, no warranty is given in respect thereof and, to the maximum extent
permitted by law, the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board accepts no liability for loss, damage or injury howsoever caused
(including that caused by negligence) or suffered directly or indirectly in relation to information and opinions contained in or omitted from
this document. Reference herein to trade names and proprietary products without stating that they are protected does not imply that
they may be regarded as unprotected and thus free for general use. No endorsement of named products is intended, nor is any criticism
implied of other alternative, but unnamed, products.
HGCA is the cereals and oilseeds division of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board.
Lead partner
ADAS
Scientific partners
NIAB, SRUC, TEAGASC
Industry partners
Government sponsor
Has your project featured in any of the following in the last year? YES
Events
Press articles
Demonstrated at:
Cereals 2012
– 13/14 June 2012
ADAS Rosemaund Open day
– 19 Jun 2012
ADAS Boxworth Open Day - 30 May 2012
SDHI fungicides which one to choose?
–
Farmers weekly 2 March 2012
Conference presentations, papers or posters Scientific papers
Information from this project was presented to
the UK industry at the following conferences by
either Jonathan Blake (JJB) ADAS, Stuart
Knight (SMK) NIABTAG, or Fiona Burnett (FJB)
SAC / SRUC.
HGCA agronomy workshops / conferences at:
Andover
– 17
th
Feb 2012 (JJB)
Gloucester
– 25
th
Feb 2012 (JJB)
York
– 21
st
Feb 2012 (SMK)
Newark
– 8
th
Feb 2012 (JJB)
Newmarket 24
th
Jan 2012 (SMK)
Saffron Walden
– (Farmer briefing) 7
th
Feb 2012
(JJB)
Peterborough
–(agronomists conference) 8
th
Dec 2012
HGCA Roadshow, Carfraemill
– 11
th
Jan 2012
(FJB)
HGCA Roadshow, Perth, 12 Jan 2012 (FJB)
HGCA Roadshow, Inverurie, 19 Jan 2012 (FJB)
Featured in presentations at:
ADAS FAHM conference, Malton
– 20
th
Feb
2012 (JJB)
ADAS RFA Conference Ledbury
– 22
nd
Feb
2012 (JJB)
Crest conference, Grantham
– 7
th
Feb 2012
(JJB)
ADAS Boxworth Farming association
– 28
th
Feb
2012 (JJB)
Agritek cereal fungicides briefing
– 31
st
Jan
2012 (JJB)
Crop management partners briefing
– 31
st
Jan
Annual Project Report 2012
The results described in this summary report are interim and relate to one year. In all cases, the reports refer to projects that extend
over a number of years.
While the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, operating through its HGCA division, seeks to ensure that the information
contained within this document is accurate at the time of printing, no warranty is given in respect thereof and, to the maximum extent
permitted by law, the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board accepts no liability for loss, damage or injury howsoever caused
(including that caused by negligence) or suffered directly or indirectly in relation to information and opinions contained in or omitted from
this document. Reference herein to trade names and proprietary products without stating that they are protected does not imply that
they may be regarded as unprotected and thus free for general use. No endorsement of named products is intended, nor is any criticism
implied of other alternative, but unnamed, products.
HGCA is the cereals and oilseeds division of the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board.
2012 (JJB)
Scottish Agronomy Trade meeting, Kinross
–
16th Jan 2012 (FJB)
Monitor Farm meeting, Swinton
– 21
st
Feb 2012
(FJB)
SAC subscribers meeting, Forfar
– 29
th
Feb
2012 (FJB)
SAC Farm Business Group Training Meeting
–
24
th
Jan 2012 (FJB)
Fungicide Working Group
– 22
nd
Oct 2012 (FJB
/ JJB)
Monitor farm meeting Whitsomehill, Borders
–
4
th
Dec 2012 (FJB)
SAC BASIS training
– 16
th
Nov 2012 (FJB)
Monitor farm meeting, Swinton
– 6
th
Dec 2012
(FJB)
Bayer CropScience Training Meeting,
Peterborough
– 28
th
Nov 2012 (JJB)
Scottish Agronomy Members meeting, Ellon,
Aberdeenshire
– 10
th
Dec 2012 (FJB)
Scottish Agronomy Members meeting,
Carfraemill
– 12
th
Dec 2012 (FJB)
NIAB TAG member conference, Norfolk
– 23
rd
Jan 2012 (SMK)
NIAB TAG member conference, Essex
– 26
th
Jan 2012 (SMK)
NIAB TAG member conference, Beds
– 31
st
Jan
2012 (SMK).
NIAB TAG cereal disease training courses for
farmers / agronomists (all open events) (SMK):
Newbury 20
th
Jan 2012
York 8
th
Feb 2012
Cirencester 23
rd
Feb 2012
Warwick 27
th
Feb 2012
Morley 29
th
Feb 2012
Cambridge 9
th
Mar 2012
Lincoln 15
th
Mar 2012
Other