Effect of fungicide application technology on seed yield in field pea under variable Mycosphaerella blight pressure

Figures & data

Table 1. List of treatments used to apply pyraclostrobin fungicide to field pea in two field studies (1 and 2) conducted at Morden, MB, Saskatoon, SK, Lacombe, AB and Edmonton, AB, from 2008 to 2011

Nozzle^a		Droplet size	Angle	Study 1 (6 station years)	Study 2 (7 station years)
Single
ER8002		fine	vertical	X	X
MR8002		coarse	vertical	X	X
ER8001^b		fine	vertical	X
ER8002		fine	60°		X
MR8002		coarse	60°		X
Double
ER8001	ER8001	fine	vertical	X	X
DR8001	DR8001	coarse	vertical	X	X
ER8001	DR8001	fine/coarse	60°/vertical	X	X
ER8001	ER8001	fine	60°	X	X
DR8001	DR8001	coarse	60°	X	X
Control				X	X

^aComboJet™ nozzles – ER (extended range), MR (mid-range), and DR (drift reduction) with a flat fan pattern spraying at an 80° angle from the nozzle tip. Nozzles ending in −02 have higher output than nozzles ending in-01.

^bWater carrier volume applied at 100 L ha⁻¹. All other treatments were applied at 200 L ha⁻¹.

Table 2. List of nozzle treatments and carrier volumes used to apply pyraclostrobin fungicide in field and growth chamber trials at Saskatoon, SK, and Lacombe, AB, in 2010 and 2011

Nozzle^a		Volume (L ha^−1)
Single
ER8002	–	50
ER8002	–	100
ER8004	–	200
ER8008	–	400
ER8025	–	800
Double
ER8001	ER8001	50
ER8001	ER8001	100
ER8002	ER8002	200
ER8004	ER8004	400
ER8015	ER8015	800
Control

^aComboJet ™ nozzles – ER (extended range) with a flat fan pattern spraying at an 80° angle from the nozzle tip. Nozzles ending in −01 have lowest output and output increases as number increases with nozzles ending in −25 having the highest output.

Table 3. The effect of pyraclostrobin fungicide application treatments at Morden, MB, Saskatoon, SK, Lacombe, AB, and Edmonton, AB, from 2008 to 2011 based on orthogonal contrasts of least square means

Year	Location	Cultivar	Treatment A	Yield	Treatment B		Yield	Pr > |t|
				(T ha^−1)	Nozzle	Angle	(T ha^−1)
2008	Saskatoon	Delta	control	1.90	single-fine	vertical	2.22	0.0060
			control	1.90	double-fine	vertical	2.15	0.0265
2009	Morden	Topper	control	3.60	double-fine	vertical	4.47	0.0052
			control	3.60	double-coarse	vertical	4.33	0.0156
			control	3.60	double-both	both	4.39	0.0100
			single-coarse	3.74	double-coarse	vertical	4.33	0.0442
2009	Saskatoon	Nitouche	control	3.60	double-coarse	vertical	4.06	0.0148
			single-fine	4.01	double-fine	vertical	3.53	0.0118
			double-fine	3.53	double-both	vertical	3.90	0.0212
		Nitouche/Montero	control	4.01	double coarse	vertical	4.38	0.0136^a
			single-coarse	4.07	double coarse	vertical	4.38	0.0347^a
2009	Edmonton	Topper	control	1.75	single-fine	vertical	2.06	0.0212
			control	1.75	double-fine	vertical	2.17	0.0034
			control	1.75	single-fine	high	2.12	0.0084
			control	1.75	single-coarse	high	2.10	0.0112
			control	1.75	double-fine	high	2.20	0.0205
			control	1.75	double-coarse	high	2.07	0.0018
		Topper/Carneval	control	2.00	double-fine	vertical	2.35	0.0234^a
			control	2.00	double-coar	high	2.20	0.0146^a
2009	Lacombe	Topper	control	1.47	single-fine	vertical	2.04	0.0161
			control	1.47	single-coarse	vertical	2.42	0.0002
			control	1.47	double-fine	vertical	2.00	0.0231
			control	1.47	double-coarse	vertical	2.33	0.0012
			control	1.47	single-fine	high	2.37	0.0004
			control	1.47	single-coarse	high	2.32	0.0008
			control	1.47	double-fine	high	2.38	0.0004
			control	1.47	double-coarse	high	2.21	0.0025
2011	Lacombe	Topper	control	1.72	single-fine	vertical	2.62	0.0029
			control	1.72	single-coarse	vertical	2.53	0.0009
			control	1.72	single-fine	high	2.66	0.0196
			control	1.72	single-coarse	high	2.33	0.0003
			control	1.72	double-fine	high	2.78	0.0013
			control	1.72	double-coarse	high	2.62	0.0010

Single nozzle either mounted in a vertical position from the boom (vertical) or mounted at a 60° angle (high). Double nozzles (two nozzle) either mounted in a vertical position from the boom (vertical) or mounted at a 60° angle (high). Nozzles delivered either a small droplet size (fine) or a large droplet size (coarse).

^aPooled data.

Table 4. Analysis of variance (fixed effects) of pyraclostrobin fungicide application treatments and cultivar effects on yield on two studies in 2009

Location	Cultivars	Effect	Num DF	Denom DF	F value	Pr > F
Saskatoon	Montero/Nitouche	Treatment (T)	6	39	1.89	0.1072
(Study 1)		Cultivar (C)	1	39	81.27	< 0.0001
		T*C	6	39	0.67	0.6766
Edmonton	Carneval/Topper	Treatment (T)	8	51	1.52	0.1748
(Study 2)		Cultivar (C)	1	51	22.44	< 0.0001
		T*C	8	51	1.02	0.4349

Treatments including single and double nozzles, vertical and high angles, fine and coarse spray droplets.

Table 5. Mycosphaerella blight severity and seed yield following selected treatments for application of pyraclostrobin fungicide on field pea cv. Topper at Lacombe, AB, in 2009 and 2011 (Study 2)

	2009			2011
	Severity rating^a		Yield	Severity rating^a		Yield
Nozzle type and angle	20-Aug	26-Aug	(T ha^−1)	2-Aug	25-Aug	(T ha^−1)
Single Nozzle
- fine spray	7.9	8.2	2.04^b	5.4	5.6	2.62^b
- coarse spray	8.1	8.1	2.42^b	5.1	5.5	2.53^b
- fine spray, 60° angle	8.1	8.4	2.37^b	5.2	5.7	2.66^b
- coarse spray, 60° angle	8.0	8.2	2.32^b	5.5	5.4	2.33^b
Double Nozzle
- fine spray	7.6	8.0	2.00^b	5.4	5.6	2.25^b
- coarse spray	8.0	8.3	2.33^b	4.9	5.4	2.17
- fine spray, 60° angle	7.7	7.7	2.38^b	5.0	5.4	2.78^b
- coarse spray, 60° angle	8.0	8.5	2.21^b	5.4	5.6	2.62^b
Control	8.5	8.8	1.47	5.7	5.8	1.72

^aVisual ratings using a scale of 0–9 (Xue 1996).

^bYield significantly different than nontreated control at p ≤ 0.05 using Proc Mixed in SAS 9.2.

Table 6. Effects of pyraclostrobin fungicide application treatments on seed yield of field pea cv. Topper at Lacombe, AB, in 2009 and 2011 based on orthoganol contrast of pooled least square means (Study 2)

Treatment A	Yield (T ha^−1)	Treatment B	Yield (T ha^−1)	Estimate	Pr > |t|
single fine	2.33	single fine – 60°	2.52	−163.54	0.2984
single coarse	2.51	single coarse – 60°	2.32	167.77	0.2869
double fine	2.13	double fine – 60°	2.58	−407.83	0.0605
double coarse	2.23	double coarse – 60°	2.42	−171.04	0.2782

Table 7. Factorial analysis of variance (fixed effects) of pyraclostrobin fungicide application treatment effects on Topper pea yield at Morden, MB, Saskatoon, SK, Lacombe and Edmonton, AB, in 2008–2011 (Study 1 and 2, pooled data)

Treatments^a	Effect^b	Num DF	Denom DF	F value	Pr > F
2–5	Nozzle number (N)	1	70	0.01	0.9306
	Droplet size (S)	1	70	0.01	0.9036
	N*S	1	70	0.01	0.9951
2–5 and 8–11^c	Nozzle number (N)	1	82	0.16	0.6945
	Droplet size (S)	1	82	0.07	0.7955
	N*S	1	82	0.00	0.9512
	Angle (A)	1	82	3.63	0.0603
	N*A	1	82	1.49	0.2264
	S*A	1	82	1.16	0.2844
	N*S*A	1	82	0.29	0.5913

^aTreatments: 2 = a single nozzle, producing a fine spray, vertical position; 3 = a single nozzle, producing a coarse spray, vertical position; 4 = double nozzles, producing a fine spray, vertical position; 5 = double nozzles, producing a coarse spray, vertical position; 8 = a single nozzle, producing a fine spray, 60° angle; 9 = single nozzle, coarse spray, 60° angle; 10 = double nozzles, fine spray, 60° angle, and 11 = double nozzles, coarse spray, 60° angle.

^bNozzle number including single and double nozzles, droplet size including fine and coarse spray droplets, and angles including vertical and high (60°).

^cTreatments 8–11 were included in the analysis at sites tested and when sdf contrast was significant at p ≤ 0.05.

Table 8. Orthogonal contrast analysis of least square means for yield response to pyraclostrobin fungicide carrier volume application treatments at Lacombe, AB, in 2010 and 2011

Year	Treatment A	Treatment B			Std
		Nozzle	Volume (L ha^−1)	Estimate	Error	t-value	Pr > |t|
2010	control	single nozzle	100	−615.70	180.45	−3.41	0.0028
	control	single nozzle	400	−477.70	180.45	−2.65	0.0155
	control	double nozzles	200	−474.53	179.41	−2.64	0.0155
2011	control	single nozzle	800	−1020.75	369.39	−2.76	0.0097
2010/2011	control	single nozzle	800	−746.31	225.76	−3.31	0.0079

Table 9. Pearson correlation analysis results of Mycosphaerella disease severity ratings and yield to pyraclostrobin fungicide application treatments and carrier volumes at Morden, Saskatchewan, Lacombe, and Edmonton, 2008 to 2011

Test	Year	Location	Cultivar	N	r	p
Study 1	2008	Saskatoon	Delta	28	−0.67	0.0181
	2009	Morden	Topper	28	−0.56	0.0018
		Saskatoon	Nitouche	28	−0.37	0.0512
	2010	Morden	Topper	28	−0.34	0.0744^a
Study 2	2009	Edmonton	Topper	36	−0.26	0.1233^a
		Lacombe	Topper	35	−0.14	0.4220^a
	2011	Lacombe	Topper	36	−0.07	0.6596^a
Carrier Volume	2010	Lacombe	Cutlass	44	−0.80	<.0001
	2011	Lacombe	Cutlass	44	−0.27	0.0767^a

^aNot significantly correlated at p ≤ 0.05 using Proc Corr in SAS 9.2.

Fig. 1 Yield response of field pea cultivar ‘Topper’ following selected application treatments of pyraclostrobin fungicide at Lacombe, AB, in 2009 and 2011 (pooled data). sing = single nozzle; fine = fine droplet size; coar/cor = coarse droplet size; doub/dob = double nozzles; ha = applied a 60° angle. Capped line = standard error

Fig. 2 Yield response of field pea cutlivar ‘Cutlass’ in response to water carrier volumes of pyraclostrobin fungicide applied with double nozzles in a field trial at Lacombe, AB, in 2010

Fig. 3 Negative quadratic effect of nozzle orientation and water carrier volumes with single and double nozzles of fungicide applications on Mycosphaerella blight severity (0–9 scale) on the pea cultivar ‘Cutlass’ in a growth chamber experiment (pooled across repetitions). Pyraclostrobin was applied to 21-day-old plants at an equivalent field rate of 100 g a.i. ha⁻¹ (5 mL per pot) and corresponding field water volumes (0.5 L, 1 L, 2 L, 4 L, 8 L)