Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/46323 |
Resumo: | Ripe grape rot disease, caused by Colletotrichum spp., threatens grape cultivation under high precipitation and temperatures. Information regarding the control of this disease in American table grapes such as ‘Niagara Rosada’ is scarce, and this study aims at answering the following questions: a) at which phenological stage does the fungicide application have better control efficiency, b) which fungicides and/or biological products have a better control efficiency, c) do the spray side and target components of the vine influence disease control, and d) does eradication by removing crop residues, applying urea in the soil, or applying lime sulfur influence disease control? To answer these questions, four experiments were conducted in randomized blocks in commercial vineyards located in the municipality of Rosário do Ivaí, PR, Brazil, from 2016 to 2020. In the first experiment, the fungicide application was evaluated in different phenological phases on disease control: a) full flowering, b) end of flowering, c) berries at the pea stage, d) beginning of bunch closure (half berry), e) beginning of bunch ripening, f) half of bunch ripening, and g) beginning and half of bunch ripening. In the second experiment, we evaluated the effects of different fungicides and biological products on disease control. In the third experiment, which was conducted in a factorial arrangement (2×2), the following factors and levels were evaluated for disease control: a) application targets (directed to clusters, and directed to shoots and clusters) and b) application modes (on one side of the vine and on both sides of the vine). The fourth experiment was conducted in a factorial arrangement (2×2×2), and the following factors were evaluated for disease control: a) inoculum source – mummified bunches (removed or not), b) application of urea in the soil for the degradation of crop residues (applied or not), and c) application of lime sulfur after winter pruning (applied or not). At the end of each season, the ripe rot incidence in the bunch was evaluated in all experiments. Data were subjected to an analysis of variance, and the means were compared using Fisher's test (LSD) at a significance of 5%. Spraying the fungicide at the final flowering, pea size, and ripening phenological stages (directed to bunches on one side of the vine), reduced the ripe grape rot incidence in the ‘Niagara Rosada’ grape, and the following fungicides can be used: metiram combined with pyraclostrobin, with or without potassium phosphite or with a biofungicide formulation containing the bacterium Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain d-747, trifloxystrobin combined with tebuconazole, tebuconazole, tetraconazole, captan, and folpet. Removing mummified bunches of previous seasons reduces the disease incidence by eliminating the primary inoculum. |
id |
UEL-11_f81e89789bbb6879292c1931495f0dc3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/46323 |
network_acronym_str |
UEL-11 |
network_name_str |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevineManejo da podridão da uva madura em videira ‘Niagara Rosada’Colletotrichum spp.FungicidasVitis labrusca.colletotrichum ssp. FungicidesVitis labruscaRipe grape rot disease, caused by Colletotrichum spp., threatens grape cultivation under high precipitation and temperatures. Information regarding the control of this disease in American table grapes such as ‘Niagara Rosada’ is scarce, and this study aims at answering the following questions: a) at which phenological stage does the fungicide application have better control efficiency, b) which fungicides and/or biological products have a better control efficiency, c) do the spray side and target components of the vine influence disease control, and d) does eradication by removing crop residues, applying urea in the soil, or applying lime sulfur influence disease control? To answer these questions, four experiments were conducted in randomized blocks in commercial vineyards located in the municipality of Rosário do Ivaí, PR, Brazil, from 2016 to 2020. In the first experiment, the fungicide application was evaluated in different phenological phases on disease control: a) full flowering, b) end of flowering, c) berries at the pea stage, d) beginning of bunch closure (half berry), e) beginning of bunch ripening, f) half of bunch ripening, and g) beginning and half of bunch ripening. In the second experiment, we evaluated the effects of different fungicides and biological products on disease control. In the third experiment, which was conducted in a factorial arrangement (2×2), the following factors and levels were evaluated for disease control: a) application targets (directed to clusters, and directed to shoots and clusters) and b) application modes (on one side of the vine and on both sides of the vine). The fourth experiment was conducted in a factorial arrangement (2×2×2), and the following factors were evaluated for disease control: a) inoculum source – mummified bunches (removed or not), b) application of urea in the soil for the degradation of crop residues (applied or not), and c) application of lime sulfur after winter pruning (applied or not). At the end of each season, the ripe rot incidence in the bunch was evaluated in all experiments. Data were subjected to an analysis of variance, and the means were compared using Fisher's test (LSD) at a significance of 5%. Spraying the fungicide at the final flowering, pea size, and ripening phenological stages (directed to bunches on one side of the vine), reduced the ripe grape rot incidence in the ‘Niagara Rosada’ grape, and the following fungicides can be used: metiram combined with pyraclostrobin, with or without potassium phosphite or with a biofungicide formulation containing the bacterium Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain d-747, trifloxystrobin combined with tebuconazole, tebuconazole, tetraconazole, captan, and folpet. Removing mummified bunches of previous seasons reduces the disease incidence by eliminating the primary inoculum.A podridão da uva madura causada por Colletotrichum spp. é uma ameaça ao cultivo de uvas sob condições de alta precipitação e temperaturas elevadas. Devido à carência de informações disponíveis sobre medidas de controle desta doença em uva rústica de mesa ‘Niágara Rosada’, este trabalho teve como objetivo responder às seguintes questões: a) em quais estádios fenológicos a aplicação de fungicidas tem maior eficiência no seu controle? b) quais fungicidas e produtos biológicos apresentam maior eficiência no seu controle? c) os componentes lado e alvo de pulverização da videira influenciam no seu controle? e d) a erradicação do inóculo por remoção de restos culturais, aplicação de ureia no solo ou aplicação de calda sulfocálcica influenciam no seu controle? Para responder essas questões, foram realizados quatro experimentos em blocos casualizados, em parreirais comerciais localizados em Rosário do Ivaí, PR, Brasil, durante as safras de 2016 a 2020. No primeiro experimento avaliou-se a aplicação de fungicidas nas fases fenológicas: a) pleno florescimento; b) fim do florescimento; c) bagas no estágio de grão de ervilha; d) início do fechamento do cacho (meia baga); e) início do amadurecimento do cacho; f) metade do amadurecimento do cacho; e g) início e metade do amadurecimento do cacho. No segundo experimento avaliou-se a aplicação de diferentes fungicidas e produtos biológicos. No terceiro experimento, realizado em arranjo fatorial 2×2, avaliaram-se os seguintes fatores e níveis: a) alvos de aplicação (direcionada aos cachos, e direcionada aos ramos e aos cachos); e b) modos de aplicação (em um lado da videira somente e nos dois lados da videira). No quarto experimento, realizado em arranjo fatorial 2×2×2, avaliaram-se os seguintes fatores e níveis: a) fonte de inóculo – cachos mumificados da safra anterior (removidos ou não); b) aplicação de ureia no solo para degradação dos restos culturais (aplicada ou não); e c) aplicação de calda sulfocálcica após a poda de inverno (aplicada ou não). No fim do ciclo produtivo, foi avaliada a incidência de podridão da uva madura em todos os experimentos. Os dados foram submetidos à análise de variância e as médias comparadas pelo teste de Fisher (LSD) a 5% de significância. A pulverização de fungicidas nos estádios fenológicos fim do florescimento, grão ervilha e amadurecimento, direcionada aos cachos em um lado da videira, reduziu a incidência de podridão da uva madura nos cachos de ‘Niágara Rosada’, podendo ser utilizados os seguintes fungicidas: metiram em mistura com piraclostrobina, associado ou não ao fosfito de potássio ou ao biofungicida a base de Bacillus amyloliquefaciens cepa d-747, trifloxistrobina em mistura com tebuconazol, tebuconazol, tetraconazole, captana, folpete. A remoção de cachos mumificados da safra anterior reduziu a incidência da doença.UEL2022-10-27info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionexperimentaçãoapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/4632310.5433/1679-0359.2022v43n5p2189Semina: Ciências Agrárias; Vol. 43 No. 5 (2022); 2189-2204Semina: Ciências Agrárias; v. 43 n. 5 (2022); 2189-22041679-03591676-546Xreponame:Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELenghttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/46323/47918Copyright (c) 2022 Semina: Ciências Agráriashttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLeles, Nathalia RodriguesGenta, WernerMarques, Viviani VieiraTessmann, Dauri JoséRoberto, Sergio Ruffo2022-11-17T13:29:39Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/46323Revistahttp://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrariasPUBhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/oaisemina.agrarias@uel.br1679-03591676-546Xopendoar:2022-11-17T13:29:39Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine Manejo da podridão da uva madura em videira ‘Niagara Rosada’ |
title |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine |
spellingShingle |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine Leles, Nathalia Rodrigues Colletotrichum spp. Fungicidas Vitis labrusca. colletotrichum ssp. Fungicides Vitis labrusca |
title_short |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine |
title_full |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine |
title_fullStr |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine |
title_full_unstemmed |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine |
title_sort |
Management of ripe grape rot on ‘Niagara Rosada’ grapevine |
author |
Leles, Nathalia Rodrigues |
author_facet |
Leles, Nathalia Rodrigues Genta, Werner Marques, Viviani Vieira Tessmann, Dauri José Roberto, Sergio Ruffo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Genta, Werner Marques, Viviani Vieira Tessmann, Dauri José Roberto, Sergio Ruffo |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Leles, Nathalia Rodrigues Genta, Werner Marques, Viviani Vieira Tessmann, Dauri José Roberto, Sergio Ruffo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Colletotrichum spp. Fungicidas Vitis labrusca. colletotrichum ssp. Fungicides Vitis labrusca |
topic |
Colletotrichum spp. Fungicidas Vitis labrusca. colletotrichum ssp. Fungicides Vitis labrusca |
description |
Ripe grape rot disease, caused by Colletotrichum spp., threatens grape cultivation under high precipitation and temperatures. Information regarding the control of this disease in American table grapes such as ‘Niagara Rosada’ is scarce, and this study aims at answering the following questions: a) at which phenological stage does the fungicide application have better control efficiency, b) which fungicides and/or biological products have a better control efficiency, c) do the spray side and target components of the vine influence disease control, and d) does eradication by removing crop residues, applying urea in the soil, or applying lime sulfur influence disease control? To answer these questions, four experiments were conducted in randomized blocks in commercial vineyards located in the municipality of Rosário do Ivaí, PR, Brazil, from 2016 to 2020. In the first experiment, the fungicide application was evaluated in different phenological phases on disease control: a) full flowering, b) end of flowering, c) berries at the pea stage, d) beginning of bunch closure (half berry), e) beginning of bunch ripening, f) half of bunch ripening, and g) beginning and half of bunch ripening. In the second experiment, we evaluated the effects of different fungicides and biological products on disease control. In the third experiment, which was conducted in a factorial arrangement (2×2), the following factors and levels were evaluated for disease control: a) application targets (directed to clusters, and directed to shoots and clusters) and b) application modes (on one side of the vine and on both sides of the vine). The fourth experiment was conducted in a factorial arrangement (2×2×2), and the following factors were evaluated for disease control: a) inoculum source – mummified bunches (removed or not), b) application of urea in the soil for the degradation of crop residues (applied or not), and c) application of lime sulfur after winter pruning (applied or not). At the end of each season, the ripe rot incidence in the bunch was evaluated in all experiments. Data were subjected to an analysis of variance, and the means were compared using Fisher's test (LSD) at a significance of 5%. Spraying the fungicide at the final flowering, pea size, and ripening phenological stages (directed to bunches on one side of the vine), reduced the ripe grape rot incidence in the ‘Niagara Rosada’ grape, and the following fungicides can be used: metiram combined with pyraclostrobin, with or without potassium phosphite or with a biofungicide formulation containing the bacterium Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain d-747, trifloxystrobin combined with tebuconazole, tebuconazole, tetraconazole, captan, and folpet. Removing mummified bunches of previous seasons reduces the disease incidence by eliminating the primary inoculum. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-10-27 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion experimentação |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/46323 10.5433/1679-0359.2022v43n5p2189 |
url |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/46323 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5433/1679-0359.2022v43n5p2189 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/semagrarias/article/view/46323/47918 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Semina: Ciências Agrárias http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Semina: Ciências Agrárias http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Semina: Ciências Agrárias; Vol. 43 No. 5 (2022); 2189-2204 Semina: Ciências Agrárias; v. 43 n. 5 (2022); 2189-2204 1679-0359 1676-546X reponame:Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) instacron:UEL |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
instacron_str |
UEL |
institution |
UEL |
reponame_str |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
collection |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Semina. Ciências Agrárias (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
semina.agrarias@uel.br |
_version_ |
1799306086808813568 |