Group Title: Mimeo report - Indian River field laboratory ; IRL 64-4
Title: Evaluation of chemicals for control of diseases of tomato and pepper during 1963-64
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00055944/00001
 Material Information
Title: Evaluation of chemicals for control of diseases of tomato and pepper during 1963-64
Series Title: Indian River Field Laboratory mimeo report
Physical Description: 3 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Stall, Robert E
Indian River Field Laboratory
Publisher: Indian River Field Laboratory
Place of Publication: Fort Pierce Fla
Publication Date: [1964]
 Subjects
Subject: Tomatoes -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Peppers -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Tomatoes -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Peppers -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: Robert E. Stall.
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "April 29,1964."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00055944
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 66462089

Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida




S \
'- "^ J/


Indian River Field Laboratory Mimeo Report IRL 6l-l\ april 29, 1964

EVALUATION OF CHEMICALS FOR CONTROL OF DISEASS<.nF TO AAND PEPPER
DURING 1963-64

Robert E. Stall/
Evaluation of chemicals for control of plant diseases is a continuous process.
Only through repeated tests under as many conditions as possible can conclusions
be developed as to the best materials for use in particular situations. With
this in mind the results 6f tests of chemicals during 1963-64 are presented in
this report.

Control of bacterial spot of tomato.--The objective of this test was to
evaluate chemicals applied as sprays to tomato for control of bacterial spot
caused by Xanthomonas vesicatoria (Doidge) Dows. Plots were outlined in a
randomized block design with 4 replications. Tomato plant rows were 7 feet
apart and 30 feet long. Treated rows were not separated by a buffer row.
Seed of the tomato variety Indian River were sown directly in the plots on
September 12, 1963. The seed were inoculated before planting with a suspension
of the bacterial spot pathogen.

All materials were applied with the aid of a specially constructed power
sprayer which developed 350 pounds pressure per square inch at the pump. Three
or 5 nozzles, depending on plant size, equipped with No. 3 discs were used to
cover each row. Seventy-five to 125 gallons of spray per acre were delivered.
The first spray,was applied on September 20, three days after emergence. Twelve
sprays werb applied on a twice-weekly schedule until October 31, when the test
was concluded.

Piants were cultivated according to standard practices in the Indian River
area. Insecticides were applied as needed and separately from the test materials.
Ratings for disease development are in table 1.

Table 1. Incidence of bacterial spot on tomato after being sprayed with
listed bactericides.
Rate per Bacterial spot estimates/
Bactericide 100 gallons Oct. 18'/ Oct. 23a/ Oct. 23./
TBCS + Dithane M145 4.0 + 1.5 lbs. 1.2 a 2.6 a 2.0 a
TBCS + Manzate 4.O + 1.5 lbs. 1.4 a 5.0 a 3.3 b
Morton Soil prendh 1370 ppm 2.0 a 8.9 b 4.3 bc
Morton EP-234 1667 ppm 1.5 a 10.2 b 5.3 c
Naugatuck BC003 4.0 lbs. 2.0 a 10.4 b 4.5 bc
Tri-Basic Copper Sulfate 4.0 lbs. 2.4 a 11.7 bc 5.0 c
Geigy GA-106 4.0 lbs. 1.4 a 11.8 be 4.8 c
No treatment 4-.6 b 14.0 c 6.0 d
a/ Ave. lesions counted per leaflet from 10 leaflets per plot. Ave. of 4 replicates
b/ Ave4 disease index based on a 0-10 scale in which 0 equal no disease and 10 equalE
at lbatt 1 lesion on all leaflets. Ave. of 4 replicates.
c/ Statistical analyses based on Duncan's Multiple Range test. All treatments at
eaCh date having same letters are not statistically different at the 5% level
of significance.

1/ Associate Plant Pathologist, Indian River Field Laboratory, Ft. Pierce, Florida.






-2-


Control of bacterial spot of pepper.--The benefit of bactericidal sprays for
control of bacterial spot of pepper caused by Xanthomonas vesicatoria (Doidge)
Dows on each of three pepper varieties was evaluated in this test. Plots were
outlined in a split-plot design with 3 replications. Different bactericides
were the main-plot treatments and different varieties were planted in sub-plots.
Each sub-plot consisted of a double row of plants 15 inches apart on a bed and
included lh plants set 9 inches apart in the row. Each main-plot row was
separated by a buffer row of plants.

Seed of each variety were planted in a seedbed on July 15, 1963. Seedlings
were transplanted in the plots on August 20. The first spray treatments were
applied on August 28. Plants were then sprayed twice-weekly until November 1
and thereafter once-weekly until the last harvest on November 22. Twenty-two
treatment sprays were applied during this period.

Treatment sprays were applied with the aid of a specially constructed power
sprayer which developed 350 pounds pressure per square inch at the pump. From
5 to 7 nozzles, depending on plant size, equipped with No. 3 discs were used to
cover each row. One hundred-twenty five to 175 gallons of spray per acre were
delivered. Results of disease control are presented in table 2.

Buffer row plants became diseased after diseased seedlings were spread in
the row on August 28. These buffer plants were then a source of inoculum for
the treated plants. Insecticides were applied separately from treatment sprays
and on a weekly basis. Only the crown fruit were harvested and total weights of
fruit are recorded in table 3.

Table 2. Incidence of bacterial spot on three pepper varieties and sprayed
with various chemicals. Average of 3 replicates.
Spray treatments
Pepper No TBCS+ TBCS+ TBCS+
variety treatment TBCS maneb thiram ferbam Ave.
Yolo h3 9.oa/ 6.3 4.3 5.8 6.0 6.3
Early Calwonder 6.8 4.0 2.8 3.8 4.2 4.2
BS-202-7-3 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4

Average 5.4 3.6 2.4 3.2 3.3
a/ Rating based on a 0-10 scale, where 0 equals no disease and 10 equals at least
1 lesion on all leaves.

Thble 3. Weights (lbs.) of fruit harvested from plots of three pepper varieties
and sprayed with various chemicals. Average of 3 replicates.
Spray treatments _
Pepper No TECS+ TBCS+ TBCS+
variety treatment TBCS maneb thiram ferbam Ave.
Yolo S3 0.2 0.9 1.4 0.7 0.0 0.6
Early Calwonder 3.3 4i 5.8 4.5 249 4.2
BS-202-7-3 10.2 7.8 9.2 712 7.2 8.3

Average 4.6 4.4 5.4 4.1 3.4






-3-


Control of gray leaf spot of tomato.--Gray leaf spot caused by Stemphylium
solani Weber developed on tomato plants in this test and materials were evaluated
for its control. Plots were outlined in a randomized block with 4 replications.
Single row plots, 7 feet wide and 32 feet long, were separated by a buffer row.
Seed of the Homestead-24 variety were sown directly in the plots on November 15,
1963. Treatment sprays were started January 27, 1964. Nine weekly sprays were
applied through Iarch 24 and then 5 sprays on a h-5 day schedule through April 16.

All materials were applied with the aid of a specially constructed power
sprayer which developed 350 pounds pressure per square inch at the pump. Three
to nine nozzles, depending on plant size, equipped with No. 3 discs were used to
cover each row. Seventy-five to 225 gallons per acre were delivered.

Plants were cultivated according to the standard practices in the Indian
River area. Insecticides were applied separately. Results are in table U.

Table U. The amount of gray leaf spot on tomato after indicated treatments.
Average of h replicates.
Rate (lb.) per Gray leaf spot estimates
Fungicide 100 gallons Mlarch 24 April 8 April 16
Dithane M-22 + Dyrene 1.5 + 2.0 11.6 a 0.5 a 1.8 a
Dithane M-22 + Thylate 1.5 + 2.0 12.4 a 0.9 a 1.6 a
Dithane M-22 1.5 12.0 a 1.0 a 2.0 a
Dithane M-45 1.5 1..9 a 2.3 db 3.6 ab
Bayer 47531 2.0 22.8 a 2.4 ab 4.0 ab
Shell 7231 2.0 21.7 a 3.6 abc 5.0 abc
Manzate D 1.5 16.8 a 4.6 abc 9.9 bcd
Difolatan 1.5 12.3 a 5.5 bc 8.6 abc
Polyram 1.5 22.8 a 5.5 bc 11.3 cd
Du Pont 328 1.5 18.4 a 7.6 c 15&5 de
Olin 1763 4.0 26.4 b 12.0 d 20.0 e
No treatment 43.0 c 19.0 36,2 f
a/ Average lesions counted per leaflet from 25 leaflets per plot. Statistical
analyses based on Duncan's Multiple Range test. All treatments having same
letter are not statistically different at the 55 level.


IRL 64-4
350 copies




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs