Title: Comparison of soil fumigants, aldicarb and fumigant-aldicarb combinations for control of nematode and soil borne diseases affecting Atlantic and Sebag
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076390/00001
 Material Information
Title: Comparison of soil fumigants, aldicarb and fumigant-aldicarb combinations for control of nematode and soil borne diseases affecting Atlantic and Sebag
Physical Description: Book
Creator: Weingartner, David Peter,
Publisher: Agricultural Research and Education Center,
Copyright Date: 1987
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076390
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: 145732776 - OCLC

Full Text


p L.

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
Hastings, Florida


Hastings AREC Research Report HAS 1987-1 September 10, 1987

Comparison of soil fumigants, aldicarb and fumigant-aldicarb combinations for
control of nematode and soil borne diseases affecting Atlantic and Sebago cultivar
potatoes.


D. P. Weingartner, Assoc. Plant Pathologist Scienrce
i Librari
J. R. Shumaker, Assoc. Horticulturist
OCT .14 1987
Nematode control has been a standard cultural practice in va rtheast Florida
(NEF) potato production since the mid 1970's. Most of te-OONE2 photo
acres are treated with aldicarb 15G. In addition soil fumigants are applied
either alone or in combination with aldicarb on approximately one third of the
NEF acreage. Aldicarb provides nematode control and reduces incidence of corky
ringspot disease (CRS) (10). Soil fumigants provide nematode control and reduce
incidence of bacterial wilt caused by Pseudomonas solanacearum but do not provide
control of CRS (10,11,12). Increases in yield associated with use of either
aldicarb or soil fumigants are often additive when the chemicals are used in
combination (D. P. Weingartner, unpublished data). When soil conditions are
relatively dry, efficacy of soil fumigants generally exceeds that of aldicarb
whereas moist soil conditions favor effectiveness of the later chemical. The
most widely used fumigant in NEF was EDB until EPA's withdrawal of its
registration in 1983. Presently, Telone II and some metham sodium (MS) are
used.

Metham sodium was first introduced during the mid 1950's and was sold as Vapam.
The patent on MS recently expired and the chemical is now marketed under several
commercial labels. Upon contact with water, MS releases methylisothiocyanate
which is the actual active ingredient (7). Metham sodium, depending upon
concentration, provides control of a wide range of soil borne pests and pathogens
including nematodes (1,3), fungi (4,5,13), bacteria (2,6), weeds (8), and
arthropods (8). Generally the chemical has been most effective when applied
as a drench as opposed to being injected (2,8). Until recently MS was too







expensive to be used profitably on low valued row crops such as potatoes.
Decreases in relative cost of the chemical compared to the value of the crop,
restrictions placed on use of other fumigants, and the ability to apply MS through
center pivot irrigation systems have contributed to its greater use in recent
years. Large acreages of potatoes in the Pacific Northwest are presently treated
with 50-75 gallons/acre MS for nematode and verticillium wilt control (9).


The efficacy of MS was not studied prior to the 1980's in NEF due to relatively
high costs of the chemical compared to other fumigants which were commercially
available during the late 1970's and early 1980's (Table 1). Loss of EDB and
potential loss of 1,3D due to EPA regulatory action prompted this study.


The objectives of research summarized in this report were to: (i) compare efficacy
of MS (Busan 1020) to 1,3D (Telone II); (ii) determine efficacy of low rates
of MS when injected using multiple chisels/row.

Methods and Materials


Fumigants were evaluated during 1984, 85, and 86, in three separate experiments
having multiple level plot designs. Treatments during 1984 consisted of three
fumigation treatments [Telone II (1,3D); Telone C-17 (1,3D + 17% chloropicrin);
and Busan 1020 (3.1 lb metham sodium/gallon)]; two rates of each fumigant
[Telone II at 6.0 and 12.0, Telone C-17 at 7.25 and 15.0 and Busan 1020 at
15 and 45 gallons/acre in-the-row (40 in row spacing) respectively], and two
cultivars ('Atlantic' and 'Sebago'). All fumigants were evaluated both alone
and in combination with 3.0 lb ai/acre in-the-row Temik 15G (aldicarb) during
each season. Temik 15G treatments will be discussed in detail in another report.
Six replications of fumigant treatments were applied the first week of February
in the mainplots with rates entered as sub plots. Subplots were 25 feet long
and four rows wide. Sub-subplots were aldicarb treatments (3.0 lb ai/acre
in-the-row) made Feb 20 at planting. Cultivars were planted as two row wide
strips across all fumigant and nematicide treatments so the center two rows
(ie data rows) of each plot consisted of one row of each cultivar. The lower
rate of each fumigant was injected at 10-12 in using a single chisel/row. The
higher rates were split between two chisels with Busan 1020 chisels spaced
4-5 in apart and a 10-12 in spacing for Telone II and Telone C-17. Due to







seed piece decay resulting from heavy rains, the test was replanted March 9.
Potatoes were harvested, washed and graded June 6.


The 1985 plot design was similar to that used during 1984. Six replications
of Telone II and Busan 1020 were evaluated in mainplots having sub plots
consisting of three rates of each fumigant (Telone II at 5, 10, and 15 gallons,
and Busan 1020 at 10, 20, and 30 gallons, respectively). Chisels were placed
at 5 in apart. The lowest rate was applied through the middle chisel.
Intermediate rates were applied through lateral chisels whereas the greatest
rate was split among all three chisels. The center chisel was positioned 1.5-2.0
in deeper than the others. Cultivars were planted as during 1984. During 1985
pairs of control plots (ie aldicarb treated and nontreated) were randomly placed
in each mainplot replication to provide a comparison of nematicide treatments
to nontreated potatoes. The crop was harvested May 20, 1985.


During 1986 fumigant treatments were replicated four times in 25 feet long main
plots. Subplots were aldicarb and nonaldicarb treated plots. Telone II was
applied at 6.0, Busan 1020 at 20, and Telone C-17 at 7.25 and 14.50
gallons/acre, respectively. Telone II and the low rate of Telone C-17 were
applied using a single chisel/row whereas the 14.50 rate of Telone C-17 and
Busan 1020 were injected using two chisels/row. The cultivars were planted
in two row strips as in 1984 and 1985. Fumigants were applied Feb 6-7, the
planting and Temik applied Feb 21, while harvest was on June 2.


In addition to the replicated experiments Busan 1020 and Telone II were
evaluated during 1985, 86, and 87 in large non replicated (125 feet x 8 rows)
plots. The tests were designed to similate use of the fumigants under grower
conditions. Alternating rows of Atlantic and Sebago cultivars were planted
during mid February each year. Telone II was applied at 6.0 gallons/acre
in-the-row using a single chisel/row and Busan 1020 at 20 gallons using two
chisels. Busan 1020 was applied to the same plots each year. Four 125 feet
rows, two of each cultivar, were harvested May 31, June 2, June 11 during 1985,
1986, and 1987 respectively.


-3-






Results


Yields Yields of US Size A tubers in 1984 were significantly greater in Busan
1020 plots than in either Telone II or Telone C-17 plots (Table 2). The
difference in yield was entirely due to greater production associated with the
45 gallon rate. Based on these data Busan 1020 plots during 1985 were fumigated
with 10, 20, and 30 gallons/acre. Busan 1020 plots during 1986 again produced
greater yields than those of Telone II (Table 3). Although there was no
significant rate x fumigant interaction, yields in Busan 1020 plots tended
to plateau at 20 gallons/acre. The 20 gallon rate was further evaluated during
1986. There were no significant differences among fumigation treatments during
1986 (Table 4). There was a significant cultivar x fumigant interaction due
to significantly lower yields of the Atlantic control. This was due to high
incidence of bacterial wilt in the control.


Similar results were observed in the large non replicated tests during 1985,
86, and 1987. Yields of Busan 1020 treated plots were equal to or greater
than those of Telone II plots during each season (Table 5).


Bacterial wilt Significant levels of bacterial wilt occurred during 1984 and
1986. Bacterial wilt data are averaged across both Atlantic and Sebago cultivar
(Table 6 and 7). Although final bacterial wilt incidence in Busan 1020 plots
was numerically intermediate between Telone II and Telone C-17, the differences
were non significant. There were no significant differences in % brown rot
observed (Table 6). Similar results were observed during 1986 (Table 7). There
were no significant differences in accumulated wilt ratings among soil fumigants.
Both Telone II and Busan 1020, however, were significantly (P=.05) less severely
affected than the control (Table 7).


Corky ringspot disease Soil fumigants have been ineffective in controlling
CRS (10,11,12), and D. P. Weingartner, unpublished data). There were no
significant differences in the percentage CRS among the fumigants, regardless
of rate, during 1984, 1985, and 1986. The percentage CRS in Telone II and
Busan 1020 treated potatoes were not significantly different from those of
the controls during 1985 and 1986 (Table 8).







Nematode population densities The principle nematodes found in the test plots
were sting [Belonolaimus longicaudatus (BL)] and southern root-knot [Meloidogyne
incognita (MI)]. Very low population densities were observed both during 1984
and 1985. The data from 1985 are not shown. .There were no significant
differences in population densities of BL and MI observed among fumigants or
between rates of fumigants during 1984 (Tables 9 & 9A). At harvest, population
density of MI in plots receiving the low rate of Busan 1020 was, however,
considerably greater than those receiving the higher dosage (Table 9A).
Population densities of BL and MI were moderate during 1986. There were no
significant differences in MI population densities among the different treatments
and the control until the harvest sample (Table 10). Population densities of
MI were significantly lower in all fumigated plots than they were in the control.
There were no significant differences in MI population densities at harvest
among the fumigation treatments. Trends in population densities of BL were
similar to those of MI except that non treated plots had significantly greater
populations than the fumigated plots in the midseason samples as well.


Discussion and Conclusions


Based on the data presented in this report, we conclude that MS applied at 20
gallons/acre in-the-row, using two chisels/row, provides nematode and soil borne
disease control approximately equal to that of Telone II applied at 6.0
gallons/acre using a single chisel. Control of bacterial wilt and of nematodes
was similar with those treatments as were increases in potato yields associated
with their use. Both fumigants failed to provide control of CRS. As shown
in Table 1, based on 1983 prices, the cost of using MS at this rate is $130/acre
(actual costs will vary depending upon volume purchased, vendor, etc) compared
to $50-60/acre for Telone II.


The efficacy of MS could be improved over the results shown in these experiments
by: increasing dosage; using overall application; applying through a sprinkler
system coupled with large volumes of water; and covering with plastic after
application (8,9). Each of these methods were judged either impractical or
too costly in the NEF production system.


Limited data using Temik in combination with MS are shown, however, results






were similar to those observed when Temik is used in combination with Telone
II. Reductions in nematode population densities tend to last longer when
combinations are used. Often, but not always, an increase in yield is also
observed (D. P. Weingartner, unpublished data).


Literature Cited


1. Baines, R. C., R. H. Small, T. A. De Wolfe, J. P. Martin, and L. H. Stolzy.
1957. Control of the citrus nematode and phytophthora spp. by Vapam. Plant
Dis. Rep. 41:405-414.


2. Dickey, Robert S. 1962. Efficacy of five fumigants for the control of
Agrobacterium tumefaciens at various depths in the soil. Plant Dis. Rep.
46:73-76.


3. Lear, B. and I. J. Thomason. 1956. Control by soil fumigation of root-knot
nematodes affecting fresh fruit and canning tomatoes in California. Plant
Dis. Rep. 40:981-986.


4. Lautz, W. 1957. Treatment of blackroot rot infected soil with Vapam,
chlorobromopropene, and allyl bromide. Plant Dis. Rep. 41:174-176.


5. McKean, D. M. 1958. Some experiments concerned with the formation and
inhibition of apothecia of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) D. By. Plant
Dis. Rep. 42:409-412.


6. Munnecke, D. E. and J. Ferguson. 1960. Effect of soil fungicides upon
soil-borne pathogenic bacteria. Plant Dis. Rep. 44:552-555.


7. Munnecke, D. E. 1967. Fungicides in the soil environment. Pages 509-559.
in D. C. Torgesson, ed. Fungicides i An Advanced Treatise. Vol 1. Academic
Press NY and London.


8. Parris, G. K. 1958. Soil fumigants and their use. A summary. Plant Dis.
Rep. 42:273-278.







9. Santo, G. S. and M. Quails. 1984. Control of Meloidogyne spp. on Russet
Burbank potato by applying metham sodium through center pivot irrigation
systems. J. of Nematology. 16:159-161.


10. Weingartner, D. P. and J. R. Shumaker. 1981. Comparisons of nematode control
and potato yields in large plots treated with different nematicide
combinations during 1977-1981. Proc. State Hort. Soc. 94:141-144.


11. Weingartner, D. P., J. R. Shumaker, and G. C. Smart, Jr. 1983. Why soil
fumigation fails to control potato corky ringspot disease in Florida. Plant
Dis. Rep. 67:130-134.


12. Weingartner, D. P. and J. R. Shumaker. 1983. Nematicide options for
northeast Florida potato growers. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 96:122-127.


13. Young, R. A. and N. J. Tolmsoff. 1958. Current season and residual effects
of Vapam soil treatments for control of Verticillium wilt of potatoes. Plant
Dis. Rep. 42:437-440.








Table 1. Comparative costs of several soil fumigants during 1983 1/.

Fumigant Proprietary Cost/gallon Cost/acre
Common name Name $ $
EDB + Chloropicrin Terr-o-cide 54-45 9.00 9-13
EDB Soilbrom 90 19.25 37-39
1, 3D Telone II 8-11 36-66
1,3 + Chloropicrin Telone C-17 11-13 60-95
Metham sodium Vapam, Busan 1020 6.50 175-650
The data presented were obtained from local vendors and the actual
cost would vary depending upon volume purchased and other factors.
In most instances, the values presented would be maximum price.


Table 2. Yield size A potato (cwt/acre) tubers
following use of soil fumigants during 1984.

Dosage 1/
Fumigant2/ High Low3/ Mean
Telone II 133 b 130 b 131 B
Busan 1020 168 a 137 b 153 A
Telone C-17 139 b 142 b 141 B
1/ High and low dosages were, respectively, Telone
II 6.0 and 12.0 gallons/acre in-the-row; Busan
1020 15.0 and 45.0 gallons and Telone C-17
7.25 and 14.50 gallons. High rates of Telone
II and Telone C-17 were applied with two
chisels/row whereas Busan 1020 was applied
using three chisels.

2/ Yields presented are averaged across both
Atlantic and Sebago cultivars and include
fumigant + Temik 15G data as well.

3/ Yields in dosage or mean columns followed
by the same letter of like case do not differ
significantly (P=.05) according to Duncan's
Multiple Range Test.







Table 3. Yields (cwt/acree Size A potato tubers following
use of Busan 1020, Telone II and Temik 15G during 198517.
Nematicide 1 x Rate Fumigant
treatment rate 1 x 2 x 3 x mean
Busan 1020 10 gal 164 173 172 170
Telone II 5 gal 154 153 157 155
Rate means 159 163 164

Nontreated 148
.Temik 15G @ 20 Ib 164


1/ Fumic
and
and
in y
and
All


nation data are presented as means of main plots
are averaged across Sebago and Atlantic cultivars
fumigant + Temik 15G treatments. Differences
ield between Temik 15G treated, fumigated plots
the nontreated control were significant (P=.05).
other differences in yield were nonsignificant.


Table 4. Tuber yields (cwt/acre) Atlantic and Sebago
potatoes following soil fumigation during 1986.
Soil Gallons Cultivar
fumigant/ per acre Atlantic Sebago Mean
Telone II 6.0 253 ab 261 ab 257 A
Telone C-17 7.25 237 ab 264 a 251 A
Telone C-17 1/ 14.5 252 ab 268 a 260 A
Busan 1020 20.0 229 b 260 ab 245 A
Control 152 c2/ 235 ab 194 B
Mean 225 258

1/ Telone C-17 at 14.5 and Busan 1020 were applied using
two chisels/row. Values within variety rows and
columns and the mean column followed by the same
letter of like case do not vary significantly (P=.05)
via Duncan's Multiple Range Test. Lack of letters
denotes nonsignificance.
2/ Low yield in Atlantic control was due to severe
bacterial wilt and tuber brown rot.










Table 5. Yields (cwt/acre) Size A potato tubers following
treatment of large plots with nematicides during 1985-87.
Nematicide Season
treatment Acre 1985 1986 19872/ Mean
Telone II (T II) 6.0 gal 271 210 116 199
Busan 1020 (B) 20.0 gal 263 233 173 223
Temik 15G (TK) 20.0 Ib 268 187 105 187
T II + TK 6 gal+20 lb 270 190 171 210
B + TK 20 gal+20 lb 285 237 194 239
Nontreated 163 180 104 149

1/ Telone II applied using a single chisel/row
whereas dosage of Busan 1020 was split between
two chisels. 1985 and 1986 data are averages
of Sebago and Atlantic cultivars. 1987 data
are Atlantic, Sebago and La Chipper cultivars.


2/ Yields in
affected
following


Telone II plots may have been adversely
by fumigant remaining in the soil
heavy rains.


-10-











Table 6. Wilted plants and tuber brown rot following
use of soil fumigants during.

Soil Wilted plants/25 linear feet/ Brown3/
fumigant 1/ 5/17/84 5/10/84 5/15/84 rot
Telone II 2.9 3.3 5.1 A 1.9
Busan 1020 2.2 3.2 4.6 AB 1.8
Telone C-17 2.1 2.7 3.5 B 1.8

1/ High and low dosages were, respectively, Telone
II 6.0 and 12.0 gallons/acre in-the-row; Busan
1020 15.0 and 45.0 gallons and Telone C-17
7.25 and 14.50 gallons. High rates of Telone
II and Telone C-17 were applied with two
chisels/row whereas Busan 1020 was applied
using three chisels.

2/ Data are averaged for both Atlantic and Sebago.
Values followed by the same letter do not
vary significantly (P=.05) via Duncan's Multiple
Range Test. Lack of a letter denotes
nonsignificance. There were no significant
dosage, dosage x cultivar or dosage x fumigant
differences detected.

3/ Based on 20 tuber samples of Atlantic only.


-11-









Table 7. Accumulated bacterial wilt ratings/ as
affected by soil fumigants and use of Temik 15G in 1986.

Temik treatment 3/
Soil Gallons No
fumigant2/ per acre Temik Temik Mean
Telone II 6.0 7.5 bc 4.6 c 6.1 B
Telone C-17 7.25 15.3 a 8.3 bc 11.8 AB
Telone C-17 14.5 13.1 ab 4.5 c 8.8 AB
Busan 1020 20.0 4.6 c 7.4 bc 6.0 B
Control 13.5 ab 15.3 a 14.4 A

Mean 10.8 A 8.0 B


1/ Individual plants were rated using
1-12 system. Values shown are the
for each plot.


Horsfall Barratt
sums of ratings


2/ Telone C-17 at 14.5 gal and Busan 1020 were applied
using two chisels/row.

3/ Values within Temik 15G columns or rows or the fumigant
mean column followed by the same letter of like case
do not differ significantly (P=.05) via Duncan's
Multiple Range Test. Temik 15G was applied at 20
Ib/acre in-the-row.


-12-









Table 8. Incidence of corky ringspot in Sebago tubers
following soil fumigation during 1984, 1985, and 1986 1/.
Fumigation % tubers with CRS
treatment 1984 1985 1986
Telone II 9.0 53.1 0.5
Telone C-17 3.5 1.7
Busan 1020 4.5 61.5 1.5
Nontreated 82.0 1L5
1/ Values averaged across all fumigation rates since
there were no differences among rates. The
in-the-row (40 in spacing) gallons used during
each year were: 1984 Telone II 6.0 and 12.0;
Telone C-17 7.25 and 15.0; Busan 1020 15.0
and 45.0; 1985 Telone 5.0, 10.0, and 15.0,
Busan 1020 10.0, 20.0, and 30.0; 1986 Telone
II 6.0; Telone C-17 7.25 and 15.0; and Busan
1020 20.0


-13-







Table 9 and 9A. Population densities of Sting (B. longicaudatus) and
southern root-knot (M. incognita) nematodes following soil fumigation/
during 1986.

B. longicaudatus/100 cm3 soil
Low rate High rate
Fumigant 31 Jan 3 May 1 June 31 Jan 3 May 1 June
Telone II 1.3 0.3 2.8 5.8 0.7 0.7
Telone C-17 2.3 0.0 1.6 6.4 0.3 1.0
Busan 1020 3.6 2.6 2.8 6.3 1.3 4.1




Table 9A





M. incognita/100 cm soil
Low rate High rate
Fumigant 31 Jan 1 June 31 Jan 1 June
Telone II 4.6 10.9 5.1 11.4
Telone C-17 3.3 2.5 3.8 16.5
Busan 1020 5.5 83.6 3.6 4.1

1/ There were no significant differences among nematode populations
densities observed for either nematode on any sample date.


-14-









Table 10. Population densities of southern root-knot (Meloidogyne incognita)
and sting (Belonolaimus longicaudatus) nematodes following soil fumigation
during 1986.

Nematodes/100 cm 2 soil 1/
M. incognita B. longicaudatus
Soil Fumigation Gallons/
treatment acre 5 Feb 15 Apr 28 May 5 Feb 15 Apr 28 May
Telone II 6.0 11.3 0.0 2.4 a 6.0 0.0 b 0.5 a
Telone C-17 7.25 12.3 0.0 0.0 a 20.3 0.0 b 0.0 a
Telone C-17 15.0 21.3 0.0 4.1 a 8.5 0.0 b 1.5 a
Busan 1020 20.0 19.5 0.0 2.0 a 8.8 0.5 b 2.0 a
Nontreated 3.8 2.0 81.5 b 17.3 7.4 a 7.1 b
1/ Values within a column followed by the same letter do not vary
significantly (P=.05) via Duncan's Multiple Range Test. Lack of a
letter denotes nonsignificance. Samples taken 5 Feb were preplant,
pretreatment samples and those of 28 May were taken immediately before
harvest.


-15-




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