HGCA Research and Development, Annual Project Report, 2011 results

The results described in these summary reports are interim and relate to one year. In all cases, the reports refer to
projects that extend over a number of years. The HGCA has provided funding for this project but has not conducted
the research or written this report. While the author has worked on the best information available to them, neither
HGCA nor the author shall be liable for any loss, damage or injury howsoever suffered directly or indirectly in relation
to the report or the research on which it is based. 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.

Project number:

RD-2010-3734

Project title:

New Fungicide Performance in Winter Wheat

Lead partner:

ADAS UK Ltd

Scientific partners:

ADAS, TAG, SAC, CEL, HGCA

Industry partners:

RD-2010-3734

Government sponsor:

Start date and duration:

01 Sep 10, 43 Months

Project aim:

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:

All the new succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicides added good efficacy
on Septoria tritici in protectant situations compared to their azoles partners applied
alone.

Adexar and Aviator Xpro showed excellent curative activity against Septoria tritici.

All the new SDHI / azole mixtures contribute to the control of yellow rust. In a trial of

T1 + T2 treatments, Adexar and Seguris showed the highest level of control.

Summary of results from reporting year:

Seven trial sites in 2011 tested eight products against the four major foliar pathogens
of wheat, Septoria tritici, yellow rust, brown rust, and powdery mildew. Four sites
tested fungicides on Septoria tritici, reflecting its importance in UK crops (Table 1).

Table 1: Sites and target diseases in 2011

1

ADAS (Rosemaund)

Septoria tritici (5 spray timings)

2

NIABTAG (Andover)

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) timings, and

two Septoria tritici sites (Fife and Andover) tested dose responses at both timings.

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. Results supported findings from previous seasons indicating similar
protectant and eradicant activity for the two key triazoles, Proline and Opus. 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. Additional trials investigated efficacy of a simple two-spray sequence of half
label rates at T1 and T2 timings at each site with the exception of ADAS Rosemaund,
where additional treatments tested half rates of each product at 10 or 20 days before

or after the main rate response application at T2 (to assess the width of the spray
window).

At all the septoria sites, the rank order of products in curative and protectant

HGCA Research and Development, Annual Project Report, 2011 results

The results described in these summary reports are interim and relate to one year. In all cases, the reports refer to
projects that extend over a number of years. The HGCA has provided funding for this project but has not conducted
the research or written this report. While the author has worked on the best information available to them, neither
HGCA nor the author shall be liable for any loss, damage or injury howsoever suffered directly or indirectly in relation
to the report or the research on which it is based. 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.

situations was similar, so the data was combined across trials.

*IZM only available in mixtures

Figure 1. Efficacy of products at controlling Septoria tritici in curative (C) and
protectant (P) situations, mean of four sites (six trials) in 2011.

Proline (prothioconazole) and Opus (epoxiconazole) continued to provide similar levels

of control of Septoria tritici in both curative and protectant situations. The new
epoxiconazole formulation Ignite was shown to be similar to Opus in efficacy. Brutus,
(epoxiconazole and metconazole), showed high levels of activity on Septoria tritici; as
in previous years the efficacy was greater than could be explained simply by the

higher azole loading of the product. New products including Aviator Xpro

(prothioconazole and bixafen) and Adexar (epoxiconazole and fluxapyroxad) showed
significant improvements in control in both curative and protectant situations,
compared to their azole compoents applied alone. One solo SDHI, Isopyrazam (IZM),
was also tested both alone and in mixture with epoxiconazole as Seguris. IZM was

shown to have good activity in both situations, however the addition of epoxiconazole
in Seguris did not significantly improve efficacy in either protectant or curative

situations.

On yellow rust, good activity was seen from all treatments 3 weeks after application,
with all SDHI’s contributing to the activity of their azole partners.

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.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Dose (proportion of label rate)

Opus
Brutus
Adexar
Seguris
Proline
Ignite
IZM*
AviatorXpro

P

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

Dose (proportion of label rate)

% Septoria tritici

C