EDIBLE BEAN AGRONOMY AND PEST MANAGEMENT RESEARCH RESULTS C.L. GILLARD S. WILLIS D. DEPUYDT

Transcription

1 EDIBLE BEAN AGRONOMY AND PEST MANAGEMENT RESEARCH RESULTS 2006 C.L. GILLARD S. WILLIS D. DEPUYDT

2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements. 3 Executive Summary Weather.. 8 Control of Anthracnose in Dry Beans with Seed s Head to Head Comparison of Foliar Fungicides to Control Anthracnose in Dry Beans Interaction of Foliar Fungicides and Seed s to Control Anthracnose.. 49 Evaluation of Foliar Fungicides for Plant Health in Dry Beans 87 Evaluation of Narrow Row Production Methods for Cranberry and Kidney Beans. 91 Efficacy of Matador Tankmixes to Control Leafhoppers in Dry Beans 100 Evaluation of Repeated Applications of Cygon at Various Rates in Dry Beans 113 Control of White Mold in Dry Beans with Foliar Fungicides 116 Control of Root Rot in Dry Beans with Seed s. 130 Field Validation of Common Bacterial Blight (CBB) Resistance in Dry Bean Cultivars 148 Evaluation of the Incidence of Marsh Spot in Cranberry Bean Varieties Dry Bean Variety Registration/Performance Trials 159 Dry Bean Variety Preliminary Yield Trials 165 Appendix A

3 Agronomy and Pest Management Research Results for Dry Edible Beans 2006 This report is a compilation of agronomy and pest management research results in dry edible beans at Ridgetown College and the Huron Research Station for It has been produced as a reference for growers and industry personnel. A number of the pesticides that are included in this report are not currently registered for use in dry edible beans in Ontario. Always follow label directions when applying pesticides. Acknowledgments Funding for this research was received from: Agricultural Adaptation Council CanAdvance Program Syngenta Crop Protection The Ontario White Bean Producers Summer Experience Program The Ontario Coloured Bean Growers BASF Canada Summer Career Placement Program The Bean Team Steve Willis Chris Gillard Don Depuydt Student Assistance by: Allison Vandermeer Kristen Verhoog Laura McKenzie Diane Murray Kelsey Nickel Kylie O Neill Danelle Aulenback Copyright by University of Guelph, Ridgetown Campus Ridgetown Ontario Canada N0P 2C0 Telephone: (519) Facimile (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca 3

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY For each of the following summaries, there are individual reports attached that will provide additional details and data summaries for the reader Weather Heat unit accumulation for 2006 was close to average at all locations. Temperatures were quite moderate all summer, with little extreme heat. Precipitation was below average for May and June, but average to above average for July and August. Rainfall was not a limiting factor for most of the summer. Harvest started normally, but from mid-september on, extremely wet weather and cloudy conditions made progress very difficult. This was the worst harvest season since A large number of plots were hand pulled, and brought into the shop to dry before threshing. The last soybean plots had to be hand harvested, because soil conditions were too wet to support the weight of a combine. Dispite difficult weather conditions, harvest was finished before the end of October. A killing frost did not occur until well into November, across much of southern Ontario. The irrigation system at the Huron Research Station worked very well. Some irrigation was done in June to alleviate drought stress. The system was used extensively in the white mold nursery, with good success. Anthracnose Experiments This was the second year for the national anthracnose project. The project has three objectives: - develop a rapid DNA based test to detect anthracnose in seed and plant samples - develop new IPM tools by surveying the disease races present in commercial fields, develop a comprehensive list of genetic resistance present in commercial varieties, and fill in gaps in existing chemical and cultural control measures. - develop breeding lines with pyramided genes for resistance Collaborating partners in the project include Dr. R. Conner and Dr. P. Balasubaramanian at AAFC Morden, and Dr. G. Boland at U of Guelph. A number of field studies were initiated in June 2005 at Exeter ON and Morden MB, and repeated in Each study was planted twice; the first using infected seed with no visible lesions (mild infection), and the second using seed with visible lesions (severe infection). This provided a range of disease pressure for the treatments applied. This research will be wound down at the end of 2006, and new graduate student research projects will be initiated in In Ontario, regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthacnose disease pressure. In 2006, the leaf vein damage was less than in 2005, but the pod damage was greater. This followed a similar trend as the year before. In Manitoba, very dry weather after planting limited the disease in some trials. Some trials were located at the AAFC research station at Morden, and irrigation was used to promote disease development. Control of Anthracnose with Seed s was compared to four other seed treatments (Apron Maxx, Senator, DCT and Vitaflo 280) and one foliar product (Quadris). There were three locations; two near Exeter ON, and one near Morden MB. was evaluated at four rates, with and without Apron Maxx. It is interesting to note that Apron Maxx was more effective than its performance average over the last four years. applied at 0.5 or 1.0 g a.i. + Apron Maxx was equivalent to DCT. This is the first time in five years that a treatment has been identified that is equivalent to DCT. 4

5 Head-to-Head Comparison of Foliar Fungicides for the Control of Anthracnose Quadris and Headline were compared at 4 application timings (A= late vegetative, B = early flower, C = late flower, and D = early pod fill) in two trials near Exeter ON. Each fungicide had seven treatments applied; four single applications (A, B, C and D) and three sequential applications (AC, BC and BD). Early leaf vein and pod ratings at 8 WAP were inconclusive measures of performance, since some foliar timings had been just applied, or were not even applied yet. The top single application was the C timing, while the top sequential application were the BC and BD timing. There was a dramatic increase in disease pressure just after the C timing of fungicide application. This favoured the C timing, over earlier fungicide timings. Headline was found to be significantly better than Quadris in a number of treatment comparisons, for disease incidence and severity, and for crop assessment and yield. This agrees with a trend in the data set from Interaction of Foliar Fungicide and Seed s for the Control of Anthracnose The interaction of two foliar fungicides (Quadris and Headline) and two seed treatments (DCT and Apron Maxx) was evaluated in four trials near Exeter ON. Seven different application timings were used for each foliar fungicide; four single applications (A, B, C and D) and three sequential applications (AC, BC and BD). The foliar fungicide treatments overlaid on separate experiments seeded with each seed treatment. For all the experiments, treatments using DCT were consistently better than treatments using Apron Maxx as a seed treatment. The best single fungicide application was the B or C timing. The B timing was favoured in treatments containing Apron Maxx as a seed treatment or Quadris as a foliar fungicide. The C timing was favoured in treatments containing DCT as a seed treatment, or Headline as a foliar fungicide. Under lower disease pressure, two sequential applications of Headline were no better than the best single application timing. This was particularly evident when DCT was used as a seed treatment. Under higher disease pressure, two sequential applications of Headline were more consistent than one single application. In the two Quadris experiments, two sequential applications were more consistent than a single fungicide application. Efficacy of Foliar Fungicides for Plant Health in Dry Beans The purpose of the experiment was to measure the effects of foliar fungicides on plant health, in the absence of any disease pressure. Quadris and Headline were tested at ½ and full label rates in four replicated studies. Each study used a different bean cultivar (OAC Rex, T9905, Red Hawk and Etna). A series of grower strip trials were also done, but will not be reported on. In each experiment, the fungicides had no effect on yield. A combined analysis over locations did not identify any significant yield responses. This research will continue in 2007, using the same methodology. It is anticipated that the yield response to fungicide application is quite small, in the absence of any disease pressure. A combined analysis over locations and years will likely be needed to measure any differences. The Response of Cranberry and Kidney Varieties to Narrow Row Production Methods. Two cranberry (Hooter/Etna) and two kidney (Red Hawk/Red Kanner) varieties were compared under two row width management systems (76 and 38 cm) at three locations (Thorndale, Exeter and the Huron Research Station). The varieties were selected on their popularity, and differences in maturity and architecture. Seeding rates were increased by 25% in the narrow row system. Some variation in plant stands were noticed between varieties, in each row width. The narrow row system produced significantly higher yields at two sites. At these sites, each variety responded positively to narrow rows. The average yield advantage for the narrow row system was 273 kg/ha. 5

6 This research will continue in 2007, with a slight change to the protocol. A high seeding rate will be used for each plot, and then hand thinning will be done to achieve the correct plant population and spacing. Evaluation of Matador Tankmixes for the Control of Potato Leafhoppers Matador tank mixes were compared in two dry bean varieties (T9905 and Berna) at two locations (Huron Research Station and Ridgetown Campus). The insecticide Matador was applied alone, and as a tankmix with two fungicides (Allegro and cyprodinil/fludioxonil) in each trial. This research will support the registration of these tank mixes for crop group 6C (legumes). The main pests include PLH/white mold in dry beans and aphids/rust in soybeans. PLH nymph populations were below average at Huron, and average at Ridgetown. The tank mixes had some impact on PLH nymph populations, but there was no effect on crop yield or phytotoxicity. Evaluation of Repeated Applications of Cygon at Various Rates on White Beans Three rates of Cygon (25, and 100% of the label rate) were applied three times to two dry bean varieties (T9905 and SVM Taylor), to document the impact of repeated applications of Cygon on dry bean cultivars. Insecticide application was done every two weeks for a six week period. A standard PLH nymph threshold was used to initiate the timing of the first insecticide application. No differences in yield were recorded. This research has been conducted for four years, and there is no evidence that repeated applications of Cygon, even at the full label rate, have any effect on yield. Control of White Mold in Dry Edible Beans with Foliar Fungicides Three experiments were conducted at the Huron Research Station, under irrigation, to evaluate five products (Lance, Ronilan, Quadris, Allegro and cyprodinil/fludioxonil) alone and as tank mixes with other products. A great northern bean cv. Matterhorn was planted on three separate dates at a sheltered site, and intensively managed to increase the likelihood of white mold infection. There was no white mold disease pressure in the first experiment, and it was discarded. differences were detected for disease incidence and severity shortly after fungicide application, and the differences continued through to harvest. The top treatments included Lance, Ronilan and Allegro. One experiment was conducted in a cranberry bean (cv. Dolly) field near Thorndale. Three fungicides (Lance, Ronilan and Allegro) were compared to two rates of CaCl. Disease incidence was high, and no differences were found between treatments. The Lance and Allegro treatments had the least disease severity, and the highest yield. The CaCl treatments were not significantly different that the untreated control. Control of Seedling Root Rot (Rhizoctionia) in Dry Edible Beans with Seed s Four experiments were conducted at the Huron Research Station, using cranberry (cv. SVM Taylor) and kidney (Red Hawk) varieties. In the first two experiments, a Rhizoctonia root rot culture was inoculated into the seed trench at planting. In the other two experiments, native strains of root rot in the soil were used to evaluate the treatments. Hot and dry conditions following planting were not considered ideal for the development of root rot. Native strains of root rot in the soil did not provide enough root rot pressure to provide treatment differences. The addition of Rhizoctonia inoculum produced dramatic results for plant emergence and vigour. This was particularly evident in the kidney bean experiment. Apron Maxx was dramatically better than DCT. The addition of high rates of to Apron Maxx, were incrementally better than Apron Maxx alone. Ratings for root rot and plant weight at 37 days after planting did not provide consistent treatment differences. 6

7 Field Validation of Common Bacterial Blight (CBB) Resistance in Dry Bean Cultivars Fourteen cultivars with CBB tolerance were compared to three CBB susceptible cultivars in separate CBB inoculated and uninoculated experiments. A low level of disease was documented on each treatment in the uninoculated experiment. There were no significant differences between susceptible and resistant cultivars. A moderate level of CBB infection was initially documented in the inoculated experiment. Most of the CBB tolerant cultivars had lower disease levels than the susceptible cultivars. Disease symptoms did not spread on the plants, or onto the pods and seed. There were no differences between treatments for yield, or a calculated yield index. This research will continue in Evaluation of Marsh Spot in Dry Beans The cranberry cultivars entered into the variety trials at the Kippen, Thorndale, St. Thomas and Monkton locations were evaluated for marsh spot and compared to Messina, which was also planted at each trial location. Marsh spot was quite noticeable at the Thorndale and St. Thomas sites. A combined analysis of all four locations shows that Messina, HR and HR are significantly worst than any other variety. This agrees with data from This research will continue in Variety Trials There were 5 registration/performance trials planted in The Brussels location (whites) was discarded, due to extreme white mold pressure. Yield and mold summaries were prepared, but are of limited value. The Kippen location (white, major coloured, minor coloured) was excellent with very low c.v. s, considering the harvest weather conditions. The Thorndale location (major coloured) had severe crusting problems at emergence, which affected plant stands. Good growing conditions for the rest of the season produced an excellent trial with above average yields and a c.v. of 7.3. All of the cranberry and kidney entries were tested at the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool lab for halo blight infection, at a cost of $20. A new methodology to detect halo blight was used for Three coloured bean entries (HR , OAC 06-D1 and OAC 06-D2) were found to have moderate Pseudomonas infection. These lines were removed from the entry list for There was no halo blight infection at any location in The Kemptville white bean trial data has been added to this report, to provide this information to the participants in the trial. This site was considered a valid trial, and it was inspected by an OPCC member. A series of preliminary yield trials (PYT) were organized and planted at the Kippen location in These trials planted beside the registration/performance trials, and managed the same way. The use of common checks will allow some comparisons to be made between the PYT entries and entries in the official trials. A total of 80 lines were tested in three trials; a narrow row trial (25 white/17 black), a wide row major (12 LRK/12 DRK/6 cran) and a wide row minor (adzuki, otebo, yellow, pink, small red etc.). Seven private (ADM, Agricore United, Coop, ISB, Rogers, Seminis, Syngenta) and five public (Ag. Can, Cornell, MSU, NDSU, WSU) breeding institutions participated. This research will continue in

8 2006 Heat Unit and Precipitation Summary for Ridgetown, Exeter and Brussels Ontario Corn Heat Units (OCHU) Huron Research (Exeter) Brussels Ridgetown College Norm Norm Norm Month (28 yr) (18 yr) (34 yr) May June July August September October Total Precipitation (mm) Huron Research (Exeter) Brussels Ridgetown College Norm Norm Norm Month (28 yr) (18yr) (34 yr) May June July August September October Total % or more below average 20% or more above average 8

9 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans, Common white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen, common white bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianumi NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH NO LESIONS USING DIFFERENT SEED APPLIED AND FOLIAR CHEMICAL TREATMENTS (EXETER) MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); VITAFLO 280 (carbathiin + thiram, 44g + 39g ai/100 kg seed) ; SENATOR (thiophanate-methyl 72.8 g ai/100 kg seed );A14379B; CRUISER 5 FS (thiamethoxam, g ai /100 kg seed); Cruiser Maxx (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil + thiamethoxam, g ai /100 kg seed); (azoxystrobin.25,.5,1.0, & 2.0 g ai/100 kg seed). METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was primarily infected with anthracnose lesions, and for the remainder of this report, the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed used had no visible lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 18 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted at a farm near Exeter, Ontario on 9 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa (psi) in 200 L/ha water. Sentinel plots were set up using all the infected seed checks (treatment 1). Each plot had ten random plants labelled with plastic corn tags. Every 2-3 days, incidence and severity ratings were done on these tagged plants. This system was used to determine the start date for ratings on the all the trials. The ratings were timed to document the maximum treatment differences, before the disease had a chance to spread throughout the experiment and overwhelm the treatments applied. Assessments for emergence and vigour damage were done using the middle 4 meter long area located in the centre row of the three infected rows of the plot. Plant emergence was assessed for 3 weeks starting on 2 weeks after planting (WAP). Plant emergence ratings were then converted to a percentage of seed planted. Plant vigour was assessed using a scale of 0-10 (0 = best plant development and 10 = poorest plant development) and was assessed for 3 weeks starting at 2 WAP. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 8 WAP. These leaf ratings were determined by visually rating the percent total leaf vein area that was discoloured. An attempt was made at the 6 WAP stage but there was not enough damage to record treatment differences. Pod disease incidence ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 8 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 11 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. The applications of foliar sprays (Table 1) occurred at the 4-5 trifoliate stage (5 WAP, July 14), late % bloom stage (6 WAP, July 22) and late full bloom stage (7 WAP, July 28). 9

10 A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 8. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 X ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before cleaning and the weight after cleaning was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses a larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick, but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The final crop assessments include yield which was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. To calculate the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality deficiencies; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a value per acre. The additional value for each treatment was calculated by subtracting the value per acre for the infected seed check treatment from the value per acre of each treatment. Additional costs were calculated using the suggested grower list prices for each product applied. The return on investment was calculated by subtracting the additional cost from the additional value for each treatment. RESULTS: See Tables 1 8, Figure 1 CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. There were noticeable differences between the infected and uninfected treatments for plant emergence (Table 2) and plant vigour (Table 3). s containing Apron Maxx had better emergence and vigour than most other treatments. Significant differences were detected between treatments for leaf vein discolouration and the incidence of pod lesions at 8 WAP (Tables 4 and 5). s were significantly better if they had a foliar fungicide application. Seed treatment only treatments had fewer veins purple and pod lesions if the treatment contained a high rate of with Apron Maxx, compared to either treatment alone. at 0.5 or 1.0 g a.i. + Apron Maxx, was equivalent to the label rate of DCT. A pod damage index was created to estimate the severity of pod damage, and allow for pods already destroyed (Table 6). Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100% destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The index shows a dramatic difference between the infected check and the uninfected check that was sprayed with Quadris. Seed treatment only treatments containing high rate of or Senator with Apron Maxx provided the best results. Adding Apron Maxx to a treatment generally reduced the severity of pod lesions. at 1 g a.i. + Apron Maxx was equivalent to the label rate of DCT. s with high disease pressure tended to have smaller seed, poorer visual seed quality, higher dockage and pick (Table 7) and lower yield and value per acre (Table 8). A dramatic difference can be seen between the infected check and the uninfected check that was sprayed with Quadris for each parameter in Tables 7 & 8. s containing thiophanate-methyl in combination with Apron Maxx or high rates of provided the best results (excluding the foliar treatments). Adding Apron Maxx to a treatment generally improved each of the crop seed assessments as well as yield and value per acre. at 0.5 or 1.0 g a.i. + Apron Maxx, was equivalent to the label rate of DCT. In Table 8, the calculations for additional value, additional costs and return on investment were not analyzed for statistical significance. All treatments except Cruiser alone had a positive Return On Investment (ROI) for this trial. The best treatments (excluding foliar treatments) were treatments including or Senator + Apron Maxx. at 0.5 g a.i. + Apron Maxx, was equivalent to the label rate of DCT. 10

11 Figure # 1 Sentinel plot anthracnose incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date Table 1 Application timing for the fungicides in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter, ON Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Weeks After Planting Uninfected Check + Quadris 0 ml * * * 15 Senator + Apron Maxx + Quadris 104 g ml + 0 ml * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 11

12 Table 2 Emergence in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) % Crop Emergence 2 WAP 3 WAP 4 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 83 b-e 82 c-f 83 b-f 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 85 a-d 95 a 94 a 3 Cruiser 83 ml 85 a-d 85 b-f 82 b-f 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 84 b-e 86 a-e 86 a-d 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 78 cde 81 def 74 f 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 96 a 78 ef 81 b-f 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 87 abc 76 f 75 ef 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 83 b-e 92 ab 90 ab 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 80 b-e 89 a-d 86 a-d 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 89 abc 90 a-d 87 a-d 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 87 abc 88 a-e 85 a-e 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 90 ab 90 a-d 87 a-d 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 80 b-e 91 a-d 80 b-f 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 79 b-e 82 c-f 80 c-f 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 87 abc 90 a-d 89 abc Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 74 e 89 a-d 85 a-d 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 81 b-e 91 abc 85 a-d 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 89 ab 87 a-e 82 b-f 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 74 de 90 a-d 79 def 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 82 b-e 85 b-f 81 b-f Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

13 Table 3 Vigour in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Crop Vigour 2 WAP 3 WAP 4 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 4.5 a 6.0 a 5.0 a 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 1.0 e 2.0 g 1.5 d 3 Cruiser 83 ml 3.5 abc 4.8 bcd 3.0 bc 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 4.0 ab 5.3 abc 3.8 abc 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 3.5 abc 5.5 ab 4.3 ab 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 3.5 abc 5.3 abc 4.3 ab 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 4.5 a 5.5 ab 4.0 ab 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 2.8 cd 4.8 bcd 3.0 bc 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 3.0 bcd 3.3 ef 3.0 bc 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 2.3 d 4.0 def 3.0 bc 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 3.0 bcd 4.0 def 2.5 cd 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 3.0 bcd 4.5 bcd 3.5 bc 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 3.3 bcd 3.8 def 3.0 bc 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 3.3 bcd 4.3 cde 3.0 bc 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 2.8 cd 4.0 def 3.0 bc Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 3.3 bcd 4.0 def 3.0 bc 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 2.3 d 3.0 fg 3.0 bc 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 3.5 abc 4.0 def 3.8 abc 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 2.5 cd 4.3 cde 3.8 abc 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 3.0 bcd 4.3 cde 3.3 bc Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

14 Table 4 Leaf vein discolouration ratings in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Leaf Vein Rating 8 WAP 9 WAP 10 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 11 a 34 a 81 a 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 0 c 0 c 0 d 3 Cruiser 83 ml 8 a 30 a 75 a 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 2 bc 10 b 20 bcd 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 0 c 1 bc 11 bcd 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 0 c 2 bc 16 bcd 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 0 c 1 bc 11 bcd 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 2 bc 10 bc 35 B 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 1 bc 5 bc 20 bcd 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 0 c 3 bc 17 bcd 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 0 c 1 bc 7 cd 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 0 c 1 bc 9 bcd 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 2 bc 6 bc 21 bcd 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 c 1 bc 5 d 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 c 0 bc 1 d Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 0 c 6 bc 23 bcd 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 1 bc 2 bc 9 bcd 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 0 c 2 bc 33 bc 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 1 bc 2 bc 11 bcd 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 6 ab 7 bc 35 b Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

15 Table 5 Incidence of pod lesions in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Incidence of Pod Lesions 8 WAP 9 WAP 10 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 14 a 37 a 33 abc 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 0 c 0 c 0 f 3 Cruiser 83 ml 12 ab 32 a 35 ab 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 4 c 14 bc 32 abc 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 0 c 6 bc 20 b-e 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 0 c 10 bc 23 a-d 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 0 c 3 bc 15 def 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 3 c 15 b 38 a 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 3 c 13 bc 37 a 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 0 c 6 bc 33 abc 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 0 c 3 bc 18 cde 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 0 c 3 bc 23 a-d 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 2 c 9 bc 23 a-d 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 c 4 bc 19 b-e 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 c 0 c 6 ef Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 1 c 10 bc 27 a-d 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 2 c 4 bc 23 a-d 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 2 c 8 bc 32 abc 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 0 c 6 bc 25 a-d 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 6 bc 16 b 26 a-d Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

16 Table 6 Severity of pod damage in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) % Pod Area With Lesions Severity of Pod Lesions (11 WAP) % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Seed Check 15 d 47 a 56 ab 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 4 e 0 h 4 i 3 Cruiser 83 ml 35 a 46 a 65 a 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 26 abc 25 b-f 44 b-e 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 21 cd 12 fgh 30 efg 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 27 abc 25 b-f 45 bcd 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 21 cd 10 fgh 30 fg 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 21 cd 35 abc 49 bc 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 21 cd 30 b-e 45 bcd 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 28 abc 38 ab 55 ab 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 23 bcd 16 e-h 35 d-g 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 23 bcd 8 gh 29 fg 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 28 abc 9 gh 33 d-g 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 15 d 12 fgh 25 gh 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 14 d 0 h 14 hi Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 31 ab 35 a-d 55 ab 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 25 bc 13 fgh 34 d-g 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 28 abc 23 b-g 44 bcd 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 25 bc 19 d-g 39 c-f 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 26 abc 20 c-g 41 c-f Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 16

17 Table 7 Seed quality ratings in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Seed Moisture Crop Seed Assessment 100 Seed Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Seed Check 19.9 a 14.1 f 4.8 a 15 a 44 abc 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 16.8 f 17.3 a 1.9 f 2 e 19 f 3 Cruiser 83 ml 19.0 abc 14.5 ef 4.6 a 15 a 52 a 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 18.1 b-e 15.6 b-f 4.6 ab 9 bc 45 abc 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 18.0 b-f 16.1 a-d 4.1 bcd 6 bcd 38 bcd 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 19.0 ab 15.3 c-f 4.4 abc 8 bc 42 bcd 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 17.8 b-f 15.7 b-f 4.1 bcd 7 bcd 40 bcd 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 18.5 bcd 15.4 c-f 4.6 ab 9 bc 39 bcd 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+83 ml+328 ml 19.0 abc 15.8 a-e 4.5 ab 9 bc 45 abc 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5 ml+ 83 ml ml 17.8 b-f 15.5 b-f 4.1 bcd 7 bcd 39 bcd 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10 ml+83 ml+ 328 ml 18.4 bcd 15.9 a-e 4.1 bcd 6 bcd 39 bcd 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20 ml+83 ml+328 ml 18.6 a-d 16.7 abc 3.6 d 7 bcd 39 bcd 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 18.0 b-f 15.9 a-e 4.5 ab 7 bcd 44 abc 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g+83 ml+328 ml 17.6 c-f 16.6 abc 3.8 cd 6 cde 37 cd 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g+83 ml+ 328 ml 17.0 ef 17.0 ab 2.8 e 4 de 27 ef Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 17.5 def 15.9 a-e 4.3 bcd 8 bc 40 bcd 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 16.9 ef 16.2 a-d 3.6 d 6 bcd 35 de 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 18.5 a-d 14.9 def 4.5 ab 10 b 43 bcd 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 18.0 b-f 15.6 b-f 4.3 bcd 8 bc 42 bcd 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 18.7 a-d 15.5 b-f 4.5 ab 9 bc 46 ab Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

18 Table 8 Crop Value Assessment in white beans with no anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Yield (kg ha 1 ) Value ($ per ac.) Crop Value Assessment Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Seed Check 695 e fg 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 2765 a a 3 Cruiser 0 ml 704 e g Cruiser 83 ml 1381 d efg Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 1712 cd cde Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 1359 d d-g Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 1746 cd c-f Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 1343 d d-g Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 13 Cruiser+ Senator 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA Quadris + A14379B (Cruiser 16 Maxx) + A14379B (Cruiser 17 Maxx) 83 ml ml 1471 cd d-g ml+ 83 ml ml 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 1672 cd c-f bc cde cd c-f cd d-g ml g 1847 bcd cd g + 83 ml ml 104 g + 83 ml ml 2323 ab b ml 1624 cd c-f ml ml 1961 bc c DCT + Cruiser 10.0 ml ml 1366 d d-g DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 16 cd d-g Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 1444 cd efg Mean 260 ml+ 83 ml PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV grower list price Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $ 4.13/ac. Apron Maxx $ 3.08/ac. DCT (low rate) $ 2.60/ac. DCT (high rate) $ 5.20/ac. Vitaflo 280 $ 2.19/ac. A14379B and Cruiser + Apron Maxx are estimated at $10./ac. based on US data estimated at $8.70/ac Application rate $ 8.00 /ac. was for the foliar applications. Seed s had no application costs attached. 18

19 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans, Common white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen, common white bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianumi NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH LESIONS USING DIFFERENT SEED APPLIED AND FOLIAR CHEMICAL TREATMENTS (EXETER) MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); VITAFLO 280 (carbathiin + thiram, 44g + 39g ai/100 kg seed) ; SENATOR (thiophanate-methyl 72.8 g ai/100 kg seed );A14379B; CRUISER 5 FS (thiamethoxam, g ai /100 kg seed); Cruiser Maxx (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil + thiamethoxam, g ai /100 kg seed); (azoxystrobin.25,.5,1.0, & 2.0 g ai/100 kg seed). METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was primarily infected with anthracnose lesions, and for the remainder of this report, the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed used had visible lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 18 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted at a farm near Exeter, Ontario on 9 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa (psi) in 200 L/ha water. Sentinel plots were set up using all the infected seed checks (treatment 1). Each plot had ten random plants labelled with plastic corn tags. Every 2-3 days, incidence and severity ratings were done on these tagged plants. This system was used to determine the start date for ratings on the all the trials. The ratings were timed to document the maximum treatment differences, before the disease had a chance to spread throughout the experiment and overwhelm the treatments applied. Assessments for emergence and vigour damage were done using the middle 4 meter long area located in the centre row of the three infected rows of the plot. Plant emergence was assessed for 3 weeks starting on 2 weeks after planting (WAP). Plant emergence ratings were then converted to a percentage of seed planted. Plant vigour was assessed using a scale of 0-10 (0 = best plant development and 10 = poorest plant development) and was assessed for 3 weeks starting at 2 WAP. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 8 WAP. These leaf ratings were determined by visually rating the percent total leaf vein area that was discoloured. An attempt was made at the 6 WAP stage but there was not enough damage to record treatment differences. Pod disease incidence ratings were done for 2 weeks, starting at 8 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 11 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. The applications of foliar sprays (Table 1) occurred at the 4-5 trifoliate stage (5 WAP, July 14), late % bloom stage (6 WAP, July 22) and late full bloom stage (7 WAP, July 28). 19

20 A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 8. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 X ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before cleaning and the weight after cleaning was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses a larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick, but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The final crop assessments include yield which was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. To calculate the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality deficiencies; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a value per acre. The additional value for each treatment was calculated by subtracting the value per acre for the infected seed check treatment from the value per acre of each treatment. Additional costs were calculated using the suggested grower list prices for each product applied. The return on investment was calculated by subtracting the additional cost from the additional value for each treatment. RESULTS: See Tables 1 8, Figure 1. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. There were noticeable differences between the infected and uninfected treatments for plant emergence (Table 2) and plant vigour (Table 3). DCT provided the best results. Adding Apron Maxx to improved emergence and vigour. at 1 g a.i. + Apron Maxx was equivalent to the label rate of DCT. Significant differences were detected between treatments for leaf vein discolouration and the incidence of pod lesions (Tables 4 and 5). s were significantly better if they had a foliar fungicide application. Seed treatment containing high rates of or thiophanate-methyl had less vein discolouration or pod lesions. at 1 or 2 g a.i. + Apron Maxx was equivalent to the label rate of DCT. A pod damage index was created to estimate the severity of pod damage, and allow for pods already destroyed (Table 6). Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100% destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The index shows a dramatic difference between the infected check and the uninfected check that was sprayed with Quadris. The other treatments did not differ greatly from each other. s with high disease pressure tended to have smaller seed, poorer visual seed quality, higher dockage and pick (Table 7) and lower yield and value per acre (Table 8). A dramatic difference can be seen between the infected check and the uninfected check that was sprayed with Quadris for each parameter. The other treatments did not differ greatly from each other. In Table 8, the calculations for additional value, additional costs and return on investment were not analyzed for statistical significance. All treatments except treatments # 13 and # 15 had a negative Return On Investment (ROI) for this trial. The seed treatments were overwhelmed, and unable to provide adequate disease control in this experiment. 20

21 Figure # 1 Sentinel plot anthracnose incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date Table 1 Application timing for the fungicides in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter, ON Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Weeks After Planting Uninfected Check + Quadris 0 ml * * * 15 Senator + Apron Maxx + Quadris 104 g ml + 0 ml * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 21

22 Table 2 Emergence in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) % Crop Emergence 2 WAP 3 WAP 4 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check def 66 def 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml a 96 a 3 Cruiser 83 ml bc 71 cde 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml f 58 f 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml cde 69 de 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ef 61 ef 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml cde 70 de 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml bc 76 bcd 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml cde 72 cd 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml cde 75 bcd 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml bc 76 bcd 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml cde 69 de 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g cde 70 de 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml bc 76 bcd 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml bcd 74 bcd Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml bc 81 bc 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml bc 74 bcd 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml bc 75 bcd 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml b 84 b 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml cde 74 bcd Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

23 Table 3 Vigour in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Crop Vigour 2 WAP 3 WAP 4 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 5.0 ab 6.3 a 5.3 a 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 1.3 d 3.0 f 2.8 d 3 Cruiser 83 ml 5.3 a 6.0 ab 4.8 ab 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 4.5 abc 6.0 ab 4.8 ab 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 5.3 a 5.3 a-d 4.3 abc 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 5.3 a 6.0 ab 5.3 a 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 4.5 abc 5.5 abc 4.8 ab 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 4.3 abc 4.5 cde 3.8 bcd 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 3.8 bc 5.0 b-e 4.3 abc 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 3.3 c 4.3 de 3.3 cd 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 4.0 abc 5.0 b-e 4.0 a-d 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 4.5 abc 5.3 a-d 4.0 a-d 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 5.0 ab 5.5 abc 4.0 a-d 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 4.3 abc 4.5 cde 3.8 bcd 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 4.0 abc 5.5 abc 4.0 a-d Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 3.8 bc 4.5 cde 3.8 bcd 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 4.3 abc 4.3 de 3.3 cd 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 4.5 abc 4.0 ef 3.3 cd 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 3.8 bc 4.3 de 3.3 cd 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 4.8 ab 5.5 abc 4.8 ab Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

24 Table 4 Leaf vein discolouration ratings in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Leaf Vein Rating 8 WAP 9 WAP 10 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 3 a 18 ab 62 ab 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 0 d 0 f 0 i 3 Cruiser 83 ml 3 ab 25 a 72 a 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 2 abc 9 cd 51 b-e 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 1 cd 12 bc 47 b-g 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 0 d 2 ef 25 h 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 0 d 3 def 37 c-h 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 3 ab 12 bc 55 abc 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 1 cd 6 c-f 32 d-h 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 1 bcd 5 c-f 38 c-h 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 2 abc 9 cd 55 abc 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 1 cd 7 c-f 31 fgh 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 0 d 8 cde 32 e-h 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 d 1 ef 28 gh 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 d 0 f 3 i Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 1 bcd 8 cde 51 bcd 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 2 a-d 7 c-f 42 c-h 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 0 d 4 def 33 d-h 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 1 cd 1 ef 39 c-h 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 1 cd 9 cd b-f Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

25 Table 5 Incidence of pod lesions in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Incidence of Pod Lesions 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Seed Check 32 a 40 abc 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 0 e 0 g 3 Cruiser 83 ml 32 a 47 a 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 17 bc 39 a-d 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 21 ab 40 abc 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 6 cde 26 ef 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 6 cde 29 def 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 30 a 42 ab 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml 9 b-e 30 c-f 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 15 bcd 34 b-e 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 16 bc 38 a-d 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 10 b-e 31 c-f 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 11 b-e 27 ef 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 3 de 22 f 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 e 5 g Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml 16 bc 30 c-f 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml 17 bc 38 a-d 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 11 b-e 31 c-f 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 3 de 36 b-e 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 12 b-e 35 b-e Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

26 Table 6 Severity of pod damage in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) % Pod Area With Lesions Severity of Pod Lesions (11 WAP) % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Seed Check a 55 ab 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 3 0 c 3 c 3 Cruiser 83 ml ab 54 ab 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ab 45 ab 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ab 46 ab 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ab 56 ab 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml ab 56 ab 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml a 60 a 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml ab 47 ab 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml ab ab 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml b 42 b 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml ab 55 ab 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g ab 47 ab 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml ab 51 ab 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 104 g + 83 ml ml 11 1 c 12 c Quadris 0 ml 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml ab 53 ab 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml ab 47 ab 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml ab 54 ab 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml ab 52 ab 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml ab 55 ab Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

27 Table 7 Seed quality ratings in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Crop Seed Assessment Seed 100 Seed Moisture Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Seed Check bc 4.9 ab 25 abc 40 abc 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml a 2.8 e 8 i 27 d 3 Cruiser 83 ml c 5 a 29 a 38 bc 4 + Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml b 5 a 24 bcd 38 bc 5 + Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml b 4.9 ab 22 b-f 42 ab 6 + Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml b 4.8 abc 19 d-g 44 ab 7 + Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml b 4.9 ab 19 d-g 40 abc 8 Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml c 4.7 abc 26 ab 40 abc 9 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+ 83 ml ml b 4.5 c 21 c-g 40 abc 5.0 ml+ 83 ml ml b 4.9 ab 20 d-g 47 a 10.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 14.3 b 4.8 abc 23 b-e 38 bc 20.0 ml+ 83 ml ml 15.3 b 4.6 bc 20 c-g 42 ab 13 Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g b 4.5 c 19 efg 42 ab 14 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA Quadris 104 g + 83 ml ml 104 g + 83 ml ml 0 ml b 4.6 bc 17 fg 45 ab a 3.6 d 11 hi 33 cd 16 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 5.0 ml ml b 4.9 ab 16 gh 42 ab 17 + A14379B (Cruiser Maxx) 10.0 ml ml b 4.6 bc 22 b-f 39 bc 18 DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml b 4.9 ab 18 efg 41 abc 19 DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml b 4.9 ab 18 fg 45 ab 20 Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml b 4.9 ab 21 c-g 43 ab Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

28 Table 8 Crop Value Assessment in white beans with anthracnose lesions at Exeter Ontario Product Rate (g/100 kg seed or ml/ha) Yield (kg ha 1 ) Crop Value Assessment Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Seed Check 415 g c 2 Uninfected Seed Check + Quadris 0 ml 2205 a a 3 Cruiser 83 ml 419 g c Cruiser 2.5 ml+ 83 ml 8 fg c Cruiser 5.0 ml+ 83 ml 598 d-g c Cruiser 10.0 ml+ 83 ml 686 c-f c Cruiser 20.0 ml.+ 83 ml 703 c-f c Cruiser + Apron Maxx RTA 83 ml ml 432 g c Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 10 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 11 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 12 +Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 2.5 ml+83 ml+328ml 685 c-f c ml+83 ml+ 328 ml 689 c-f 7.37 c ml+83 ml+328 ml 555 efg c ml+83 ml+328 ml 677 c-f c Cruiser+ Senator 83 ml g 810 cd c Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA 15 Senator+Cruiser+Apron Maxx RTA Quadris + A14379B 16 (Cruiser Maxx) + A14379B 17 (Cruiser Maxx) 104 g+83 ml+328 ml 908 c c g+83 ml+328 ml 1719 b b ml 5.0 ml ml 540 efg c ml ml 543 efg c DCT + Cruiser 260 g+ 83 ml 699 c-f c DCT + Cruiser 520 g+ 83 ml 768 cde 9.24 c Vitaflo 280+ Cruiser 260 ml+ 83 ml 556 efg c Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV grower list price Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $ 4.13/ac. Apron Maxx $ 3.08/ac. DCT (low rate) $ 2.60/ac. DCT (high rate) $ 5.20/ac. Vitaflo 280 $ 2.19/ac. A14379B and Cruiser + Apron Maxx are estimated at $10./ac. based on US data estimated at $8.70/ac Application rate $ 8.00 /ac. was for the foliar applications. Seed s had no application costs attached. 28

29 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Dry edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen, white pea bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianum NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON OF FOLIAR FUNGICIDES FOR THE CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH NO LESIONS MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha); HEADLINE (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 1400g ai/ha ). METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was an assortment of some light green and grey seeds but most had anthracnose lesions. For the remainder of this report the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed had no lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 18 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted a farm near Exeter on 10 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa (psi) in 200 L/ha water. The fungicide application timing is shown in Table 1. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 2 weeks, starting at 7 WAP, by observing the percentage of the leaf vein area that was purple. Pod disease incidence ratings were done at 8 and 9 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 11 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. Another indication of disease pressure on the plant was the amount of plant regrowth at 9 WAP. Plant maturity was determined just prior to harvest. A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 15. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 x ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before and the weight after was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick, but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The final crop assessments were determined using the following: The yield was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality issues; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was adjusted to a yield per acre, and multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a value 29

30 per acre. In calculating the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. The additional value for each treatment was calculated by subtracting the value per acre for the infected seed check treatment from the value per acre of each treatment. Additional costs were calculated using the suggested grower list prices for each product applied. The return on investment was calculated by subtracting the additional cost from the additional value for each treatment. RESULTS: See Figure 1, Tables 1 7. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). Rainfall during the middle of July caused disease pressure to expand rapidly after July 26. In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. The A timing of fungicide application had some slight advantages for leaf vein discolouring at 7 WAP (Table 2). By 9 WAP, the A timing had failed, and the effects of the B and C timings were evident. A similar trend can be seen in the % incidence of pod lesions (Table 3). By 9 WAP, the AC and BC sequential timings of fungicide application are dramatically better than any single application. In order to better estimate the severity of pod damage an index was designed (Table 4) to allow for pods already destroyed. Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100% destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The index shows that the best control of pod lesion severity at this point in time (11 WAP) was the sequential application treatments. The A timing has failed by this point. Too much disease pressure was present when the D timing was applied, to give effective disease control. Rating for plant maturity and regrowth (Table 5) show that treatments with higher disease levels matured earlier, and treatments with a later fungicide application had greater tendency to regrow. s with high disease levels had lower seed weights, poorer seed quality and higher dockage and pick (Table 6). The B or C timings were the best timing for a single application of fungicide, producing the lowest dockage, pick and seed quality ratings. The BC and BD timings were the best timings for a sequential application of fungicide. In 2006, there was a dramatic increase in disease pressure just prior to the D application timing (Figure #1). For Headline, the AC timing had significantly higher yields but the seed quality reduced the final value (Table 7). The multiple fungicide applications gave a higher return on investment than a single fungicide application. Headline was found to be significantly better than Quadris in a number of treatment comparisons, for disease incidence and severity, and for crop assessment and yield. 30

31 Figure # 1 Sentinel plot disease incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date 31

32 Table 1. Fungicide application timing for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, ON 2006 Timing 2 Rate Per Product ha 34 (July 14) Days After Planting (date) 42 (July 22) 48 (July 28) 57 (Aug 6) 1 Infected Check Uninfected Check + 2 Quadris 3 Uninfected Check ABC 0 ml * * * 4 Headline A 400 ml * 5 Headline B 400 ml * 6 Headline C 400 ml * 7 Headline D 400 ml * 8 Headline AC 400 ml * * 9 Headline BC 400 ml * * 10 Headline BD 400 ml * * 11 Quadris A 0 ml * 12 Quadris B 0 ml * 13 Quadris C 0 ml * 14 Quadris D 0 ml * 15 Quadris AC 0 ml * * 16 Quadris BC 0 ml * * 17 Quadris BD 0 ml * * 18 Senator B 10 g * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 2 Timing A = 5 th trifoliate leaf stage, Timing B = early flower, Timing C = late flower, Timing D = 10 days after late flower 32

33 Table 2. Leaf vein ratings for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Leaf Vein Rating 7 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 6 ab 72 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 e 1 f 3 Uninfected Check 0 e 54 b 4 Headline A 0 e 24 d 5 Headline B 3 b-e 5 f 6 Headline C 4 b-e 6 f 7 Headline D 3 b-e 40 c 8 Headline AC 0 e 0 f 9 Headline BC 3 cde 0 f 10 Headline BD 1 de 3 f 11 Quadris A 0 e 59 ab 12 Quadris B 1 de 10 def 13 Quadris C 5 abc 22 de 14 Quadris D 4 bcd 62 ab 15 Quadris AC 1 de 9 ef 16 Quadris BC 2 de 2 f 17 Quadris BD 8 a 11 def 18 Senator B 1 de 21 de Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

34 Table 3. Incidence of pod lesions for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, Ontario, 2006 Timing % Incidence of Pod Lesions 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 9 a 44 abc 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 c 7 hi 3 Uninfected Check 4 bc 47 ab 4 Headline A 1 bc 40 a-d 5 Headline B 1 bc 20 fgh 6 Headline C 4 b 23 efg 7 Headline D 9 a 47 a 8 Headline AC 0 c 3 i 9 Headline BC 0 bc 3 i 10 Headline BD 1 bc 14 ghi 11 Quadris A 4 bc a 12 Quadris B 1 bc 28 def 13 Quadris C 8 a 33 cde 14 Quadris D 11 a 51 a 15 Quadris AC 4 bc 28 def 16 Quadris BC 1 bc 12 ghi 17 Quadris BD 3 bc 34 b-e 18 Senator B 2 bc 31 def Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

35 Table 4. Severity of pod lesions for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, Ontario Timing % Pod Area With Lesions Severity of Pod Lesions (11 WAP) % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Check 18 a 38 ab 52 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 8 a 2 ef 10 efg 3 Uninfected Check 13 a 43 a a 4 Headline A 20 a 22 cd 38 abc 5 Headline B 11 a 13 c-f 23 def 6 Headline C 13 a 10 def 22 def 7 Headline D 8 a 16 cde 23 de 8 Headline AC 5 a 0 f 5 g 9 Headline BC 2 a 0 f 2 g 10 Headline BD 10 a 1 ef 11 efg 11 Quadris A 11 a 43 a a 12 Quadris B 14 a 21 cd 32 cd 13 Quadris C 16 a 27 bc 39 abc 14 Quadris D 5 a 45 a 48 ab 15 Quadris AC 19 a 13 c-f 29 cd 16 Quadris BC 7 a 2 ef 9 fg 17 Quadris BD 20 a 19 cd 35 bcd 18 Senator B 19 a 15 c-f 30 cd Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 35

36 Table 5. Miscellaneous field observations for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Maturity Regrowth 1 Infected Check 84 h 2.9 cde 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 89 bc 1.9 e 3 Uninfected Check 85 gh 2.1 de 4 Headline A 85 gh 3.5 a-d 5 Headline B 86 efg 3.1 a-e 6 Headline C 87 def 3.0 b-e 7 Headline D 86 fg 4.3 abc 8 Headline AC 89 bcd 1.8 e 9 Headline BC 91 a 2.6 de 10 Headline BD 91 ab 3.0 b-e 11 Quadris A 85 gh 3.0 b-e 12 Quadris B 86 efg 3.3 a-e 13 Quadris C 86 efg 2.9 cde 14 Quadris D 86 efg 4.5 ab 15 Quadris AC 88 cde 3.1 a-e 16 Quadris BC 89 bc 2.4 de 17 Quadris BD 87 c-f 4.6 a 18 Senator B 87 def 3.3 a-e Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

37 Table 6. Seed quality ratings for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Crop Seed Assessment Seed Moisture 100 Seed Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Check hi 4.6 ab 20 a 36 abc 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC b-f 2.8 ghi 4 ij 31 cde 3 Uninfected Check i 4.8 a 15 b 42 a 4 Headline A ghi 4.3 abc 12 bc 42 a 5 Headline B a-e 3.4 efg 7 e-h 31 cde 6 Headline C abc 3.1 fgh 6 f-i 29 c-f 7 Headline D ghi 4.3 abc 11 cd 35 a-d 8 Headline AC ab 2.3 i 2 j 23 efg 9 Headline BC a 3.1 fgh 4 hij 20 fg 10 Headline BD ab 2.5 hi 4 hij 19 g 11 Quadris A hi 4.4 ab 14 b 41 ab 12 Quadris B d-h 3.5 def 9 cde 35 a-d 13 Quadris C f-i 4.1 a-d 10 cde 32 bcd 14 Quadris D hi 4.0 b-e 15 b 34 a-d 15 Quadris AC e-i 3.6 c-f 8 def 31 cde 16 Quadris BC a-d 3.3 fg 5 g-j 27 d-g 17 Quadris BD c-g 3.3 fg 7 efg 29 c-f 18 Senator B hi 4.0 b-e 9 def 36 a-d Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

38 Table 7. Crop Value Assessment for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Mild) at Exeter, Ontario, 2006 Crop Value Assessment Timing Yield (kg ha 1 ) Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Check 513 j gh 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 2300 ab bc 3 Uninfected Check 859 hi gh 4 Headline A 1022 gh gh Headline B 1649 cd de Headline C 1772 c bcd Headline D 1009 gh fgh Headline AC 2575 a a Headline BC 2080 b a Headline BD 2080 b a Quadris A 694 ij h Quadris B 1355 ef efg Quadris C 1183 fg e-h Quadris D 811 hi gh Quadris AC 1455 def def Quadris BC 2128 b b Quadris BD 1539 cde cde Senator B 1326 ef e-h Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV * 2006 grower list price : Headline $ /ac., Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $36.00/ac * application rate $ 8.00 /ac 38

39 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Dry edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen, white pea bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianum NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON OF FOLIAR FUNGICIDES FOR THE CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH LESIONS MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha); HEADLINE (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 1400g ai/ha ). METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was an assortment of some light green and grey seeds but most had anthracnose lesions. For the remainder of this report the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed had visible lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted a farm near Exeter on 10 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa ( psi) in 200 L/ha water. The fungicide application timing is shown in Table 1. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 6 WAP, by observing the percentage of the leaf vein area that was purple. Pod disease incidence ratings were done at 8 and 9 WAP periods.. Pod severity ratings were done at 11 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. Another indication of disease pressure on the plant was the amount of plant regrowth at 9 WAP. Plant maturity was determined just prior to harvest. A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 17. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 x ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before and the weight after was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The final crop assessments (Table 9) were determined using the following: The yield was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality issues; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was adjusted to a yield per acre, and multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a value 39

40 per acre. In calculating the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. The additional value for each treatment was calculated by subtracting the value per acre for the infected seed check treatment from the value per acre of each treatment. Additional costs were calculated using the suggested grower list prices for each product applied. The return on investment was calculated by subtracting the additional cost from the additional value for each treatment. RESULTS: See Figure 1, Tables 1-7. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). Rainfall during the middle of July caused disease pressure to expand rapidly after July 26. In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. The A timing of fungicide application had some slight advantages for leaf vein discolouring at 6 WAP (Table 2). By 9 WAP, the A timing had failed, and the effects of the B and C timings were evident. A similar trend can be seen in the % incidence of pod lesions (Table 3). By the 9 WAP, there was a large advantage to multiple treatments found in the incidence of pod infection (Table 3), particularly for the product Headline. In order to better estimate the severity of pod damage an index was designed (Table 4) to allow for pods already destroyed. Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100 % destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The sequential application treatments provided the best disease control at this point in time (11 WAP), with the BC timing have the best control. The B and C timing were the best single fungicide application timings. The A timing has failed by this point. Too much disease pressure was present when the D timing was applied, to give effective disease control. Rating for plant maturity and regrowth (Table 5) show that treatments with higher disease levels matured earlier, and treatments with a later fungicide application had greater tendency to regrow. s with high disease levels had lower seed weights, poorer seed quality and higher dockage and pick (Table 6). The B or C timings were the best timing for a single application of fungicide, producing the lowest dockage, pick and seed quality ratings. The BC and BD timings were the best timings for a sequential application of fungicide. In 2006, there was a dramatic increase in disease pressure at the D application timing (Figure #1). The BC timing had significantly higher yields (Table 8) for both fungicides. The multiple applications gave a higher return on investment for the Headline treatments but the Quadris treatments have a better return with a single fungicide application at the C timing. Headline was found to be significantly better than Quadris in a number of treatment comparisons, for disease incidence and severity, and for crop assessment and yield. 40

41 Figure # 1 Sentinel plot disease incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date 41

42 Table1. Fungicide application timing for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, ON 2006 Timing 2 Rate Per Product ha 34 (July 14) Days After Planting (date) 42 (July 22) 48 (July 28) 57 (Aug 6) 1 Infected Check Uninfected Check + 2 Quadris 3 Uninfected Check ABC 0 ml * * * 4 Headline A 400 ml * 5 Headline B 400 ml * 6 Headline C 400 ml * 7 Headline D 400 ml * 8 Headline AC 400 ml * * 9 Headline BC 400 ml * * 10 Headline BD 400 ml * * 11 Quadris A 0 ml * 12 Quadris B 0 ml * 13 Quadris C 0 ml * 14 Quadris D 0 ml * 15 Quadris AC 0 ml * * 16 Quadris BC 0 ml * * 17 Quadris BD 0 ml * * 18 Senator BC 10 g * * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 2 Timing A = 5 th trifoliate leaf stage, Timing B = early flower, Timing C = late flower, Timing D = 10 days after late flower 42

43 Table 2. Leaf vein ratings for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Leaf Vein Rating 6 WAP 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 2 abc 21 a 86 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 e 0 e 0 f 3 Uninfected Check 0 e 12 bcd 65 b 4 Headline A 0 e 1 e 26 cd 5 Headline B 3 ab 2 e 5 ef 6 Headline C 3 ab 5 de 12 def 7 Headline D 2 abc 12 bc 56 b 8 Headline AC 0 e 1 e 0 f 9 Headline BC 2 bc 2 e 0 f 10 Headline BD 3 ab 1 e 3 f 11 Quadris A 1 de 2 e 61 b 12 Quadris B 2 abc 4 e 20 de 13 Quadris C 3 a 7 cde 35 c 14 Quadris D 1 cd 18 ab 81 a 15 Quadris AC 1 cde 1 e 12 def 16 Quadris BC 2 cd 2 e 4 f 17 Quadris BD 1 cde 1 e 12 def 18 Senator BC 2 bc 1 e 8 ef Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

44 Table 3. Incidence of pod lesions for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, Ontario, 2006 Timing % Incidence of Pod Lesions 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 12 a 47 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 c 1 j 3 Uninfected Check 3 c 35 bc 4 Headline A 1 c 28 cd 5 Headline B 0 c 15 fgh 6 Headline C 7 b 17 fg 7 Headline D 12 a 36 bc 8 Headline AC 1 c 4 ij 9 Headline BC 0 c 1 j 10 Headline BD 0 c 11 ghi 11 Quadris A 6 b 46 a 12 Quadris B 0 c 22 def 13 Quadris C 7 b 25 de 14 Quadris D 11 a 41 ab 15 Quadris AC 1 c 18 efg 16 Quadris BC 0 c 7 hij 17 Quadris BD 0 c 20 def 18 Senator BC 2 c 19 efg Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

45 Table 4. Severity of pod lesions for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, Ontario Timing % Pod Area With Lesions Severity of Pod Lesions (11 WAP) % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Check 12 b-e 38 ab 45 ab 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 h 0 e 0 g 3 Uninfected Check 15 a-d 39 a 47 a 4 Headline A 16 ab 17 cd 31 cd 5 Headline B 15 abc 15 cd 28 cde 6 Headline C 6 e-h 14 d 18 ef 7 Headline D 5 fgh 26 bc 30 cd 8 Headline AC 9 c-g 6 de 14 f 9 Headline BC 1 h 0 e 1 g 10 Headline BD 17 ab 6 de 22 def 11 Quadris A 20 a 30 ab 44 ab 12 Quadris B 14 a-d 16 cd 28 cde 13 Quadris C 8 d-g 17 cd 23 def 14 Quadris D 4 gh 34 ab 37 bc 15 Quadris AC 15 a-d 16 cd 28 cde 16 Quadris BC 14 a-d 1 e 15 f 17 Quadris BD 12 b-f 14 d 25 def 18 Senator BC 12 b-e 14 d 24 def Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 45

46 Table 5. Miscellaneous field observations for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Maturity Regrowth 1 Infected Check 84 i 2.3 efg 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 90 abc 1.0 h 3 Uninfected Check 84 i 1.9 fgh 4 Headline A 84 i 2.3 efg 5 Headline B 87 ef 3.0 cde 6 Headline C 87 de 3.9 bc 7 Headline D 85 ghi 5.0 a 8 Headline AC 89 bc 2.3 efg 9 Headline BC 90 ab 1.4 gh 10 Headline BD 91 a 1.9 fgh 11 Quadris A 85 hi 2.3 efg 12 Quadris B 86 efg 3.6 cd 13 Quadris C 86 fgh 3.8 bcd 14 Quadris D 85 ghi 4.6 ab 15 Quadris AC 87 ef 3.9 bc 16 Quadris BC 89 cd 2.5 ef 17 Quadris BD 86 fgh 4.6 ab 18 Senator BC 87 ef 2.9 de Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

47 Table 6. Seed quality ratings for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Crop Seed Assessment Seed Moisture 100 Seed Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Check i 4.9 ab 26.4 a 46.2 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC a 2.4 f 1.8 i 20.3 h 3 Uninfected Check hi 5.0 a 16.3 bc 39.3 a-e 4 Headline A ghi 4.8 abc 14.6 c 42.2 abc 5 Headline B abc 4.4 bcd 7.8 def 39.9 a-e 6 Headline C a-e 3.8 e 6.7 efg 31.2 g 7 Headline D f-i 4.8 abc 14.8 c 39.2 a-f 8 Headline AC abc 4.3 cde 4.0 ghi 33.8 efg 9 Headline BC ab 3.8 e 3.4 hi 31.4 fg 10 Headline BD a-d 4.1 de 5.6 fgh 41.7 a-d 11 Quadris A hi 4.9 ab 14.0 c 41.7 a-d 12 Quadris B d-h 4.4 bcd 10.2 d 36.9 b-g 13 Quadris C d-h 4.4 bcd 10.5 d 35.3 c-g 14 Quadris D hi 5.0 a 19.1 b 41.2 a-e 15 Quadris AC b-f 4.5 a-d 8.9 de 41.8 a-d 16 Quadris BC c-g 4.4 bcd 6.3 e-h 43.8 ab 17 Quadris BD e-h 4.1 de 6.9 efg 34.0 d-g 18 Senator BC d-h 4.4 bcd 8.3 def 38.3 b-g Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

48 Table 7. Crop Value Assessment for the Foliar Head-to-Head (Severe) at Exeter, Ontario, 2006 Crop Value Assessment Timing Yield (kg ha 1 ) Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Check 4 j 4.97 h 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 2729 a a 3 Uninfected Check 841 hi e-h 4 Headline A 1034 gh fgh Headline B 1567 def e-h Headline C 1618 de bcd Headline D 977 hi e-h Headline AC 2136 b bc Headline BC 2234 b b Headline BD 1992 bc efg Quadris A 873 hi fgh Quadris B 1292 fg efg Quadris C 1396 ef def Quadris D 705 ij gh Quadris AC 1448 ef e-h Quadris BC 1751 cd e-h Quadris BD 1394 ef cde Senator BC 1453 ef d-g Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV * 2006 grower list price : Headline $ /ac., Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $36.00/ac * application rate $ 8.00 /ac 48

49 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Dry edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen white pea bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianum NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH NO LESIONS USING DIFFERENT HEADLINE FOLIAR TIMINGS AND TWO DIFFERENT SEED TREATMENTS MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w & 98.9 g ai/ha) QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha); HEADLINE (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanatemethyl 1400g ai/ha ); METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was an assortment of some light green and grey seeds but most had anthracnose lesions. For the remainder of this report the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed had no lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 18 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted at a farm near Exeter on 10 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa ( psi) in 200 L/ha water. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 7 WAP, by observing the percentage of the leaf vein area that was purple. Pod disease incidence ratings were done 3 weeks, starting at 7 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 12 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. An indication of the response of the plant to the disease was the amount of regrowth at rated at maturity. Plant maturity was determined just prior to harvest. A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept. 15. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 X ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before and the weight after was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The yield was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality deficiencies; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was adjusted to a yield per acre, and multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a 49

50 value per acre. In calculating the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. RESULTS: See Figure 1, Tables 1 7. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). Rainfall during the middle of July caused disease pressure to expand rapidly after July 26. In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. differences were not detected for leaf vein ratings (Table 2). For pod lesion incidence (Table 3), the A timing of fungicide application was failing by 11 WAP, while the B and C applications were still effective. Too much disease pressure was present when the D timing was applied, to give effective disease control. All of the sequential fungicide treatments provided excellent disease control, but were not better than a single fungicide application at the B or C timing. In order to better estimate the severity of pod damage an index was designed (Table 4) to allow for pods already destroyed. Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100 % destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The sequential application treatments have the best index scores at 12 WAP. However, in most cases, the sequential treatments were not better than a single fungicide application at the B or C timing. The D timing of fungicide application was too late to prevent serious plant damage from the disease. Only small differences were detected between the DCT and Apron Maxx seed treatments. Rating for plant maturity and regrowth (Table 5) show that treatments with higher disease levels matured earlier, and treatments with a later fungicide application had greater tendency to regrow. s with higher disease levels had reduced seed size and seed moisture (Table 6). These treatments had significantly higher dockage and pick, which gave significantly poorer seed quality values (Table 6). The B and C timings were the best timings for a single application of fungicide, producing the lowest dockage, pick and seed quality ratings. They had similar yield and crop value per acre (Table 7). The BC timing was the best timing for a sequential application of fungicide. In most cases, the return on investment favoured the sequential fungicide over all other single applications, except the DCT treatment with a single fungicide application at the B timing.

51 Figure 1. Sentinel plot disease incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date 51

52 Table 1. Foliar application timing for the foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) Exeter ON 2006 Timing 2 Rate Per Product ha 34 (July 14) Days After Planting (date) 42 (July 22) 48 (July 28) 57 (Aug 6) 1 Infected Check 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 ml * * * 3 Uninfected Check 4 DCT + Headline A 400 ml * 5 DCT + Headline B 400 ml * 6 DCT + Headline C 400 ml * 7 DCT + Headline D 400 ml * 8 DCT + Headline AC 400 ml * * 9 DCT + Headline BC 400 ml * * 10 DCT + Headline BD 400 ml * * 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 0 ml * 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 0 ml * 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 0 ml * 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 0 ml * 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 0 ml * * 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 0 ml * * 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 0 ml * * 18 DCT + Senator B 10 g * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 2 Timing A = 5 th trifoliate leaf stage, Timing B = early flower, Timing C = late flower, Timing D = 10 days after late flower 52

53 Table 2. Leaf vein ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Leaf Vein Rating 7 WAP 9 WAP 11 WAP 1 Infected Check 1 a 48 a 64 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 b 0 b 0 c 3 Uninfected Check 0 b 6 b 6 bc 4 DCT + Headline A 0 b 1 b 5 bc 5 DCT + Headline B 0 b 1 b 2 c 6 DCT + Headline C 0 b 0 b 0 c 7 DCT + Headline D 0 b 1 b 9 bc 8 DCT + Headline AC 0 b 0 b 0 c 9 DCT + Headline BC 0 b 0 b 0 c 10 DCT + Headline BD 0 b 0 b 0 c 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 0 b 5 b 9 bc 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 0 b 1 b 3 bc 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 0 b 0 b 0 c 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 0 b 11 b 16 b 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 0 b 0 b 0 c 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 0 b 0 b 0 c 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 0 b 0 b 0 c 18 DCT + Senator B 0 b 0 b 3 bc Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

54 Table 3. Incidence of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, ON Timing % Incidence of Pod Lesions 7 WAP 9 WAP 11 WAP 1 Infected Check 14 a 35 a 55 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 b 0 d 0 e 3 Uninfected Check 0 b 7 bcd 27 b 4 DCT + Headline A 0 b 5 cd 16 bc 5 DCT + Headline B 0 b 2 d 4 cde 6 DCT + Headline C 0 b 1 d 6 cde 7 DCT + Headline D 0 b 11 bc 29 b 8 DCT + Headline AC 0 b 1 d 0 e 9 DCT + Headline BC 0 b 0 d 1 e 10 DCT + Headline BD 0 b 1 d 5 cde 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 0 b 4 cd 15 bcd 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 0 b 3 cd 13 cde 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 0 b 1 d 7 cde 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 0 b 16 b 29 b 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 0 b 1 d 1 de 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 0 b 0 d 1 e 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 0 b 1 d 3 cde 18 DCT + Senator B 0 b 1 d 7 cde Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

55 Table 4. Severity of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario 2006 Timing Severity of Pod Lesions (12 WAP) % Pod Area With Lesions % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Check 16 a 41 a 53 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 d 0 d 0 h 3 Uninfected Check 16 a 17 b 31 b 4 DCT + Headline A 10 ab 3 cd 13 def 5 DCT + Headline B 4 bcd 0 d 4 fgh 6 DCT + Headline C 4 bcd 0 d 4 gh 7 DCT + Headline D 14 a 0 d 14 cde 8 DCT + Headline AC 1 d 0 d 1 h 9 DCT + Headline BC 1 d 0 d 1 h 10 DCT + Headline BD 2 d 0 d 2 gh 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 10 abc 12 bc 21 cd 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 10 abc 1 d 11 efg 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 6 bcd 0 d 6 e-h 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 14 a 10 bcd 22 bc 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 2 d 0 d 2 gh 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 1 d 1 d 2 h 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 2 cd 0 d 2 gh 18 DCT + Senator B 5 bcd 0 d 5 fgh Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 55

56 Table 5. Miscellaneous field observations for foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario 2006 Timing Maturity Regrowth 1 Infected Check 86 h 1.8 de 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 91 abc 1.3 e 3 Uninfected Check 87 h 2.0 d 4 DCT + Headline A 89 fg 1.8 de 5 DCT + Headline B 90 d-g 1.6 de 6 DCT + Headline C 90 c-f 2.8 bc 7 DCT + Headline D 89 efg 4.8 a 8 DCT + Headline AC 92 a 1.9 de 9 DCT + Headline BC 91 abc 2.0 d 10 DCT + Headline BD 91 a-d 2.3 cd 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 89 efg 2.0 d 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 88 g 2.1 cd 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 89 efg 3.3 b 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 88 g 4.4 a 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 90 b-e 2.3 cd 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 91 ab 2.1 cd 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 92 a 3.0 b 18 DCT + Senator B 89 efg 2.0 d Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

57 Table 6. Seed quality ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Crop Seed Assessment Seed 100 Seed Moisture Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Check d 4.9 a 11 a 46 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC ab 1.0 h 1 f 7 g 3 Uninfected Check c 3.9 b 6 b 31 b 4 DCT + Headline A c 3.0 bcd 4 bc 25 bcd 5 DCT + Headline B bc 1.6 e-h 2 def 12 efg 6 DCT + Headline C a 2.0 efg 2 c-f 14 efg 7 DCT + Headline D bc 3.4 b 6 b 26 bc 8 DCT + Headline AC a 1.0 h 2 c-f 5 g 9 DCT + Headline BC a 1.1 gh 2 ef 7 g 10 DCT + Headline BD a 1.8 e-h 2 def 11 efg 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A bc 3.3 bc 4 bcd 26 bc 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B bc 3.3 bc 4 b-e 24 bcd 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C a 2.1 def 3 c-f 12 efg 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D ab 3.0 bcd 6 b 20 cde 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC a 1.4 fgh 2 def 11 efg 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC ab 1.3 fgh 1 f 9 fg 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD a 1.5 e-h 2 def 7 g 18 DCT + Senator B ab 2.4 cde 2 c-f 17 def Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

58 Table 7. Crop Value Assessment in Headline foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, ON 2006 Timing Yield (kg ha 1 ) Crop Value Assessment Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Check 1143 g g 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 2829 ab ab 3 Uninfected Check 2156 ef f 4 DCT + Headline A 2263 def f DCT + Headline B 2810 ab abc DCT + Headline C 2692 abc bc DCT + Headline D 2113 f f DCT + Headline AC 2575 bcd abc DCT + Headline BC 2996 a a DCT + Headline BD 2854 ab abc ApronMaxx + Headline A 2254 def f ApronMaxx + Headline B 2296 c-f ef ApronMaxx + Headline C 2530 b-e bcd ApronMaxx + Headline D 2189 def def ApronMaxx + Headline AC 2705 ab abc ApronMaxx + Headline BC 2868 ab abc ApronMaxx + Headline BD 2675 abc abc DCT + Senator B 2722 ab cde Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV Seed s had no application costs attached. * 2006 grower list price : Headline $ /ac., Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $36.00/ac, Apron Maxx $ 3.08/ac.,DCT (high rate) $ 5.20/ac * application rate $ 8.00 /ac 58

59 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Dry edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen white pea bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianum NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH LESIONS USING DIFFERENT HEADLINE FOLIAR TIMINGS AND TWO DIFFERENT SEED TREATMENTS MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w & 98.9 g ai/ha) QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha); HEADLINE (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanatemethyl 1400g ai/ha ); METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was an assortment of some light green and grey seeds but most had anthracnose lesions. For the remainder of this report the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed had lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted at a farm near Exeter on 10 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa ( psi) in 200 L/ha water. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 6 WAP. by observing the percentage of the leaf vein area that was purple. Pod disease incidence ratings were done 2 weeks, starting at 8 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 12 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. Another indication of disease pressure on the plant was the amount of regrowth at rated at maturity. Plant maturity was determined just prior to harvest. A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 17. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 X ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before and the weight after was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The yield was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality deficiencies; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was adjusted to a yield per acre, and multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a 59

60 value per acre. In calculating the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. RESULTS: See Figure 1, Tables 1 7. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). Rainfall during the middle of July caused disease pressure to expand rapidly after July 26. In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. For leaf vein ratings (Table 2) and pod lesion incidence (Table 3), the A timing of fungicide application was failing by 9 WAP, while the C application was still effective. The B application timing was still effective for DCT, but was failing when Apron Maxx was used as a seed treatment. Too much disease pressure was present when the D timing was applied, to give effective disease control. All of the sequential fungicide treatments provided excellent disease control, and were equal to or better than a single fungicide application at the C timing. In order to better estimate the severity of pod damage an index was designed (Table 4) to allow for pods already destroyed. Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100 % destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The sequential application treatments have the best index scores at 12 WAP. The D timing of fungicide application was too late to prevent serious plant damage from the disease. s using DCT were consistently better than treatments using Apron Maxx as a seed treatment. s that had significantly higher dockage and pick gave significantly poorer seed quality values (Table 5). The B and C timings were the best timings for a single application of fungicide, producing the lowest dockage, pick and seed quality ratings and the highest yield and crop value per acre (Table 6). The BC timing was the best timing for a sequential application of fungicide. In all cases, the return on investment favoured the sequential fungicide applications over the single fungicide applications. s using DCT were consistently better than treatments using Apron Maxx as a seed treatment. 60

61 Figure 1. Sentinel plot disease incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date 61

62 Table 1. Fungicide application timing in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing 2 Rate Per Product ha 34 (July 14) Days After Planting (date) 42 (July 22) 48 (July 28) 57 (Aug 6) 1 Infected Check 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 ml * * * 3 Uninfected Check 4 DCT + Headline A 400 ml * 5 DCT + Headline B 400 ml * 6 DCT + Headline C 400 ml * 7 DCT + Headline D 400 ml * 8 DCT + Headline AC 400 ml * * 9 DCT + Headline BC 400 ml * * 10 DCT + Headline BD 400 ml * * 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 0 ml * 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 0 ml * 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 0 ml * 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 0 ml * 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 0 ml * * 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 0 ml * * 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 0 ml * * 18 DCT + Senator BC 10 g * * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 2 Timing A = 5 th trifoliate leaf stage, Timing B = early flower, Timing C = late flower, Timing D = 10 days after late flower 62

63 Table 2. Leaf vein ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Leaf Vein Rating 6 WAP 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 3 a 30 a 69 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 c 0 e 0 g 3 Uninfected Check 0 c 1 de 27 c 4 DCT + Headline A 0 c 0 e 14 def 5 DCT + Headline B 0 c 0 e 1 g 6 DCT + Headline C 0 c 0 e 1 g 7 DCT + Headline D 0 c 5 cd 15 de 8 DCT + Headline AC 0 c 0 e 0 g 9 DCT + Headline BC 0 c 0 e 0 g 10 DCT + Headline BD 0 c 0 e 0 g 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 0 c 1 de 17 cd 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 3 ab 1 e 4 fg 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 2 ab 5 c 5 efg 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 2 b 18 b 39 b 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 0 c 0 e 0 g 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 2 ab 0 e 0 g 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 2 b 2 cde 4 fg 18 DCT + Senator BC 0 c 0 e 0 g Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

64 Table 3. Incidence of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment ( lesions) at Exeter, ON Timing % Incidence of Pod Lesions 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 40 a 73 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 f 1 f 3 Uninfected Check 5 de bc 4 DCT + Headline A 0 f 33 d 5 DCT + Headline B 0 f 8 ef 6 DCT + Headline C 3 ef 4 f 7 DCT + Headline D 10 c 46 c 8 DCT + Headline AC 0 f 1 f 9 DCT + Headline BC 0 f 1 f 10 DCT + Headline BD 0 f 6 ef 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 2 ef 61 ab 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 2 ef 33 d 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 9 cd 18 e 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 24 b 60 b 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 3 ef 8 ef 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 0 ef 3 f 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 2 ef 19 e 18 DCT + Senator BC 1 ef 7 ef Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

65 Table 4. Severity of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario 2006 Timing Severity of Pod Lesions (12 WAP) % Pod Area With Lesions % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Check 8 cde 35 a 40 ab 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 0 e 0 d 0 g 3 Uninfected Check 24 a 22 bc 42 ab 4 DCT + Headline A 16 b 13 c 27 de 5 DCT + Headline B 8 cd 13 c 20 e 6 DCT + Headline C 3 de 3 d 6 fg 7 DCT + Headline D 22 ab 20 bc 38 bc 8 DCT + Headline AC 0 e 0 d 0 g 9 DCT + Headline BC 0 e 0 d 0 g 10 DCT + Headline BD 3 de 2 d 4 fg 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A 26 a 28 ab 47 a 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B 15 bc 18 c 30 cd 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C 6 de 17 c 21 de 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D 4 de 22 bc 25 de 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC 6 de 3 d 8 fg 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC 1 de 0 d 1 g 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD 2 de 3 d 4 fg 18 DCT + Senator BC 8 cde 3 d 10 f Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 65

66 Table 5. Seed quality ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Crop Seed Assessment Seed Moisture 100 Seed Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Check j 5.0 a 25 a 44 bc 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC a 2.4 gh 2 i 13 j 3 Uninfected Check ij 5.0 a 13 b 52 a 4 DCT + Headline A gh 4.8 ab 12 bc 41 bcd 5 DCT + Headline B a-d 3.9 cde 5 f-i 31 fg 6 DCT + Headline C ab 4.3 a-d 4 f-i 34 d-g 7 DCT + Headline D fg 4.6 abc 9 cd 44 abc 8 DCT + Headline AC ab 3.0 fg 2 hi 17 ij 9 DCT + Headline BC ab 2.0 h 2 ghi 14 ij 10 DCT + Headline BD abc 3.1 efg 3 ghi 22 hi 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A hi 4.9 ab 14 b 47 ab 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B efg 4.5 abc 8 de 38 b-f 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C def 4.1 bcd 7 def 36 c-f 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D gh 4.9 ab 12 bc 39 b-f 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC a-d 4.1 bcd 5 e-h 32 efg 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC ab 3.5 def 3 ghi 27 gh 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD b-e 4.3 a-d 4 f-i 32 efg 18 DCT + Senator BC c-f 4.3 a-d 5 efg 40 b-e Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

67 Table 6. Crop Value Assessment in Headline foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, ON 2006 Timing Yield (kg ha 1 ) Crop Value Assessment Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Check 571 i 9.18 gh 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC 2875 a a 3 Uninfected Check 1045 gh h 4 DCT + Headline A 1334 fg fgh DCT + Headline B 2182 cd cd DCT + Headline C 2340 cd de DCT + Headline D 1493 ef fgh DCT + Headline AC 2790 a a DCT + Headline BC 2643 ab a DCT + Headline BD 2455 bc b ApronMaxx + Headline A 974 h gh ApronMaxx + Headline B 1691 e fg ApronMaxx + Headline C 1656 e def ApronMaxx + Headline D 1069 gh fgh ApronMaxx + Headline AC 2196 cd de ApronMaxx + Headline BC 2426 bc bc ApronMaxx + Headline BD 2119 d de DCT + Senator BC 2205 cd ef Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV Seed s had no application costs attached. * 2006 grower list price : Headline $ /ac., Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $27.00/ac, Apron Maxx $ 3.08/ac.,DCT (high rate) $ 5.20/ac * application rate $ 8.00 /ac 67

68 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans, Common white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen, common white bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianumi NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH NO LESIONS USING DIFFERENT QUADRIS FOLIAR TIMINGS AND TWO DIFFERENT SEED TREATMENTS MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w & 98.9 g ai/ha) QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha);quadris (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 1400g ai/ha ); METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was an assortment of some light green and grey seeds but most had anthracnose lesions. For the remainder of this report the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed had no lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 18 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted at a farm near Exeter on 10 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa ( psi) in 200 L/ha water. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 7 WAP. by observing the percentage of the leaf vein area that was purple. Pod disease incidence ratings were done 3 weeks, starting at 7 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 12 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. An indication of the response of the plant to the disease was the amount of regrowth at rated at maturity. Plant maturity was determined just prior to harvest. A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 15. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 X ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before and the weight after was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The yield was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality deficiencies; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was adjusted to a yield per acre, and multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a 68

69 value per acre. In calculating the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. RESULTS: See Figure 1, Tables 1 7. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). Rainfall during the middle of July caused disease pressure to expand rapidly after July 26. In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. For leaf vein rating (Table 2) and pod lesion incidence (Table 3), the A timing of fungicide application was failing by 9 WAP, while the B and C applications were still effective up to 11 WAP. Too much disease pressure was present when the D timing was applied, to give effective disease control. All of the sequential fungicide treatments provided excellent disease control, but were not better than a single fungicide application at the B or C timing. In order to better estimate the severity of pod damage an index was designed (Table 4) to allow for pods already destroyed. Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100 % destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The sequential application treatments have the best index scores at 12 WAP. The D timing of fungicide application was too late to prevent serious plant damage from the disease. Only small differences were found between the DCT and Apron Maxx treatments. Rating for plant maturity and regrowth (Table 5) show that treatments with higher disease levels matured earlier, and treatments with a later fungicide application had greater tendency to regrow. s with more anthracnose had smaller seed and lower seed moisture (Table 6). These treatments had significantly higher dockage and pick, which gave significantly poorer seed quality values (Table 6). The B and C timings were the best timings for a single application of fungicide, producing the lowest dockage, pick and seed quality ratings. They had similar yield and crop value per acre (Table 7). The sequential applications of the fungicide produced similar yields irregardless of timing. In most cases, the return on investment favoured the sequential fungicide over all other single applications and the greatest value was obtained from the BD treatment. 69

70 Figure # 1 Sentinel plot disease incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date 70

71 Table 1. Foliar application timing for the foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing 2 Rate Per Product ha 34 (July 14) Days After Planting (date) 42 (July 22) 48 (July 28) 57 (Aug 6) 1 Infected Check Uninfected Check + 2 Quadris 3 Uninfected Check ABC 0 ml * * * 4 DCT + Quadris A 0 ml * 5 DCT + Quadris B 0 ml * 6 DCT + Quadris C 0 ml * 7 DCT + Quadris D 0 ml * 8 DCT + Quadris AC 0 ml * * 9 DCT + Quadris BC 0 ml * * 10 DCT + Quadris BD 0 ml * * 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 0 ml * 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 0 ml * 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 0 ml * 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 0 ml * 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 0 ml * * 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 0 ml * * 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 0 ml * * 18 DCT + Senator B 1400 g * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 2 Timing A = 5 th trifoliate leaf stage, Timing B = early flower, Timing C = late flower, Timing D = 10 days after late flower 71

72 Table 2. Leaf vein ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Leaf Vein Rating 7 WAP 9 WAP 11 WAP 1 Infected Check 3 a 74 a 86 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 a 0 e 0 e 3 Uninfected Check 0 a 25 bcd 51 b 4 DCT + Quadris A 0 a 11 cde 15 de 5 DCT + Quadris B 0 a 0 e 1 e 6 DCT + Quadris C 0 a 4 de 4 e 7 DCT + Quadris D 0 a 32 bc 48 b 8 DCT + Quadris AC 0 a 0 de 1 e 9 DCT + Quadris BC 0 a 0 e 0 e 10 DCT + Quadris BD 0 a 0 e 1 e 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 0 a 42 b 44 bc 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 0 a 5 de 5 e 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 0 a 3 de 9 de 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 2 a 22 b-e 34 bcd 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 0 a 5 de 7 e 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 0 a 2 de 1 e 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 0 a 3 de 4 e 18 DCT + Senator B 0 a 17 cde 21 cde Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

73 Table 3. Incidence of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, ON Timing % Incidence of Pod Lesions 7 WAP 9 WAP 11 WAP 1 Infected Check 22 a 43 a 41 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 1 b 1 f 1 f 3 Uninfected Check 2 b 27 abc 43 a 4 DCT + Quadris A 0 b 18 b-f 18 cde 5 DCT + Quadris B 0 b 2 ef 5 ef 6 DCT + Quadris C 1 b 10 c-f 9 ef 7 DCT + Quadris D 2 b 27 abc 34 ab 8 DCT + Quadris AC 0 b 4 ef 3 f 9 DCT + Quadris BC 0 b 1 f 1 f 10 DCT + Quadris BD 1 b 1 f 2 f 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 5 b 35 ab 31 abc 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 1 b 10 c-f 8 ef 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 2 b 9 def 11 ef 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 2 b 26 a-d 26 bcd 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 1 b 7 ef 11 ef 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 0 b 12 c-f 4 f 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 0 b 10 c-f 9 ef 18 DCT + Senator B 2 b 20 b-e 14 def Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

74 Table 4. Severity of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario 2006 Timing Severity of Pod Lesions (12 WAP) % Pod Area With Lesions % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Check 8 c-f 54 a 58 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 3 f 0 f 3 f 3 Uninfected Check 21 ab 47 ab 60 a 4 DCT + Quadris A 18 abc 16 cde 30 bc 5 DCT + Quadris B 9 c-f 0 f 9 ef 6 DCT + Quadris C 17 a-d 3 ef 19 cde 7 DCT + Quadris D 17 abc 21 c 34 b 8 DCT + Quadris AC 5 ef 0 f 5 ef 9 DCT + Quadris BC 2 f 0 f 2 f 10 DCT + Quadris BD 2 f 0 f 2 f 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 25 a 38 b 54 a 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 15 a-e 3 f 17 cde 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 11 b-f 8 c-f 18 cde 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 13 b-f 16 cd 27 bcd 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 10 b-f 5 def 14 def 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 5 def 3 ef 8 ef 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 8 c-f 4 def 11 ef 18 DCT + Senator B 15 a-e 0 f 15 def Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 74

75 Table 5. Miscellaneous field observations for foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario 2006 Timing Maturity Regrowth 1 Infected Check 86 h 1.6 f-i 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 89 def 1.1 i 3 Uninfected Check 86 h 1.5 ghi 4 DCT + Quadris A 88 g 2.1 d-i 5 DCT + Quadris B 89 def 2.1 d-i 6 DCT + Quadris C 89 ef 3.1 cd 7 DCT + Quadris D 88 fg 4.5 ab 8 DCT + Quadris AC 91 b 2.1 d-i 9 DCT + Quadris BC 90 c 1.3 hi 10 DCT + Quadris BD 93 a 2 e-i 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 88 g 2.6 c-f 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 89 def 2.1 d-i 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 88 fg 3.6 bc 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 88 g 4.8 a 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 90 cd 2.3 d-h 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 89 cde 2 e-i 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 92 b 2.8 cde 18 DCT + Senator B 89 ef 2.4 d-g Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

76 Table 6. Seed quality ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Crop Seed Assessment Seed Moisture 100 Seed Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Check g 5.0 a 19 a 42 a 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC abc 2.6 e-h 2 e 16 efg 3 Uninfected Check fg 4.9 a 11 b 44 a 4 DCT + Headline A b-f 4.0 a-d 8 bcd 30 bcd 5 DCT + Headline B a-e 3.0 d-g 4 de 26 b-f 6 DCT + Headline C a-e 3.5 b-e 4 de 27 b-e 7 DCT + Headline D d-g 4.0 a-d 10 b 37 ab 8 DCT + Headline AC a 2.9 e-h 3 e 20 d-g 9 DCT + Headline BC ab 1.9 h 2 e 13 g 10 DCT + Headline BD a 2.0 gh 2 e 14 g 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A efg 4.5 ab 11 b 43 a 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B b-f 3.5 b-e 6 cde 25 b-f 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C abc 3.1 c-f 5 de 24 c-g 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D c-g 4.1 abc 10 bc 33 abc 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC a-d 2.6 e-h 4 de 22 c-g 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC ab 2.8 e-h 3 e 21 c-g 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD ab 2.4 fgh 3 e 15 fg 18 DCT + Senator BC a-f 3.4 c-f 8 bcd 28 bcd Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

77 Table 7. Crop Value Assessment in Quadrisfoliar fungicide x seed treatment (no lesions) at Exeter, ON 2006 Crop Value Assessment Timing Yield (kg ha 1 ) Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Check 600 f g 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 2666 a ab 3 Uninfected Check 1361 e fg 4 DCT + Quadris A 1752 cde d-g DCT + Quadris B 2171 abc cde DCT + Quadris C 2151 abc cde DCT + Quadris D 1300 e efg DCT + Quadris AC 2414 ab abc DCT + Quadris BC 2495 ab ab DCT + Headline BD 2623 a a ApronMaxx + Quadris A 1275 e fg ApronMaxx + Quadris B 2080 bc cde ApronMaxx + Quadris C 2021 bcd cde ApronMaxx + Quadris D 1522 de d-g ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 2232 abc bcd ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 2333 ab abc ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 2267 abc ab DCT + Senator B 1752 cde c-f Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV Seed s had no application costs attached. * 2006 grower list price : Quadris$ /ac., Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $36.00/ac, Apron Maxx $ 3.08/ac., DCT (high rate) $ 5.20/ac * application rate $ 8.00 /ac 77

78 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans, Common white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Kippen, common white bean Anthracnose, Colletotrichum lindemuthianumi NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS S., DEPUYDT D., Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF ANTHRACNOSE IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH LESIONS USING DIFFERENT QUADRIS FOLIAR TIMINGS AND TWO DIFFERENT SEED TREATMENTS MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 3.8g + 2.5g ai/ha.); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w & 98.9 g ai/ha) QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha);quadris (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 1400g ai/ha ); METHODS: The anthracnose pressure was modified by using mixtures of seed with and without visible anthracnose damage. The presence of visible damage has been shown to increase disease pressure. The seed for this trial was obtained from previous studies. The seed was sorted using a SORTEX ELECTRIC EYE which separated the seed into white and off white seed. The off white seed was an assortment of some light green and grey seeds but most had anthracnose lesions. For the remainder of this report the off white seed will be called seed with lesions. In this experiment the infected seed had lesions. The trial was set up using a RCBD with 4 replications. Plots contained 5 rows which were 0.43 m apart and 6.0 m in length. The centre 3 rows contained the infected white beans and the outside two rows contained soybeans. The soybean rows were used to help prevent disease transmission from plot to plot. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre for the white beans and 25 seeds per metre for the soybeans. The trial was planted at a farm near Exeter on 10 June 2005 using a five-row cone-seeder with John Deere Max Emerge planter units. The fungicides were sprayed using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Air Bubble Nozzles spaced at cm, at 346kPa ( psi) in 200 L/ha water. Disease ratings were accessed on leaves and pods. Leaf ratings were done for 3 weeks, starting at 6 WAP. by observing the percentage of the leaf vein area that was purple. Pod disease incidence ratings were done 2 weeks, starting at 8 WAP. Pod severity ratings were done at 12 WAP. Pod severity ratings used an index of the number of destroyed pods and the % damage on the remaining pods. An indication of the response of the plant to the disease was the amount of regrowth at rated at maturity. Plant maturity was determined just prior to harvest. A 4 meter section from the centre of the three infected rows was harvested on Sept 17. The seed from each plot was weighed and the seed moisture was measured. The seed was then put through a CLIPPER CLEANER equipped with a 10 X ¾ screen (industry standard). The difference between the weight before and the weight after was calculated as a percent dockage. A weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot was obtained. Of these 100 seeds a weight of the seeds rejected for discolouration and/or misshapen appearance was established as a percent and called pick. The dry bean industry uses larger sample (minimum 0 grams) to determine the pick but this is not practical for this study. A visual seed quality rating was done using a 1 to 5 scale (1 = excellent seed quality and 5 = poor seed quality). The yield was calculated using all of the seed harvested from each plot, after cleaning to remove any foreign material. Each plot weight was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%, and then converted to kg/ha. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for two possible quality deficiencies; dockage and pick. Dockage (undersized seed and diseased splits) is removed as a straight percentage. For pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) the percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The remaining large clean seed yield was adjusted to a yield per acre, and multiplied by a price of $0.21 per pound to calculate a 78

79 value per acre. In calculating the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. RESULTS: See Figure 1, Tables 1 6. CONCLUSIONS: Regular precipitation and moderate temperatures resulted in good anthracnose disease pressure (Figure 1). Rainfall during the middle of July caused disease pressure to expand rapidly after July 26. In 2006, the leaf vein discolouration was less than in 2005, but the pod damage started earlier, and was more severe. For leaf vein ratings (Table 2) and for pod lesion incidence (Table 3), the A timing of fungicide application was failing by 9 WAP, while the B and C applications were still effective. Too much disease pressure was present when the D timing was applied, to give effective disease control. The AC and BC sequential fungicide application timings provided excellent disease control, but were not better than a single fungicide application at the B timing. In order to better estimate the severity of pod damage an index was designed (Table 4) to allow for pods already destroyed. Shriveled pods (< % in size of a normal sized pod) were counted as 100 % destroyed and the remaining pods had a damage estimate done (using the % of the pod area with lesions). The sequential application treatments and treatment 5 (DCT + a single application of Quadris at the B timing of application) have the best index scores at 12 WAP. The D timing of fungicide application was too late to prevent serious plant damage from the disease. Differences were observed between the DCT and Apron Maxx seed treatments, although these differences are often insignificant. s with higher disease levels had a decrease in seed size (Table 6). These treatments had significantly higher dockage and pick, which gave significantly poorer seed quality values (Table 6). The B and C timings were the best timings for a single application of fungicide, producing the lowest dockage, pick and seed quality ratings. They had similar to any of the sequential application treatments. The BC sequential application of the fungicide produced the highest yields, and the highest return on investment. The single application at the B timing had as good a return on investment as the other sequentials. 79

80 Figure # 1 Sentinel plot disease incidence and severity ratings in white beans at Exeter, ON Comparison of Lesion to Non Lesion on Navy Bean Leaves No lesion incidence Lesion incidence No lesion severity Lesion severity Percentage Jul-11 Jul-14 Jul-17 Jul-19 Jul-21 Jul-24 Jul-26 Jul-31 Aug-02 Aug-04 Aug-08 Date 80

81 Table 1. Foliar application timing for the foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing 2 Rate Per Product ha 34 (July 14) Days After Planting (date) 42 (July 22) 48 (July 28) 57 (Aug 6) 1 Infected Check Uninfected Check + 2 Quadris 3 Uninfected Check ABC 0 ml * * * 4 DCT + Quadris A 0 ml * 5 DCT + Quadris B 0 ml * 6 DCT + Quadris C 0 ml * 7 DCT + Quadris D 0 ml * 8 DCT + Quadris AC 0 ml * * 9 DCT + Quadris BC 0 ml * * 10 DCT + Quadris BD 0 ml * * 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 0 ml * 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 0 ml * 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 0 ml * 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 0 ml * 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 0 ml * * 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 0 ml * * 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 0 ml * * 18 DCT + Senator BC 1400 g * * indicates when the foliar fungicides was applied 2 Timing A = 5 th trifoliate leaf stage, Timing B = early flower, Timing C = late flower, Timing D = 10 days after late flower 81

82 Table 2. Leaf vein ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter,Ontario Timing Leaf Vein Rating 6 WAP 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 2 a 22 a 68 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 0 e 0 d 1 h 3 Uninfected Check 0 e 1 bcd 27 cd 4 DCT + Quadris A 0 e 1 cd 30 cd 5 DCT + Quadris B 0 e 0 d 3 gh 6 DCT + Quadris C 0 e 3 bcd 19 d-g 7 DCT + Quadris D 1 de 6 bc 24 de 8 DCT + Quadris AC 0 e 0 d 4 fgh 9 DCT + Quadris BC 0 e 0 d 1 h 10 DCT + Quadris BD 0 e 1 cd 9 e-h 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 1 cde 7 b 44 bc 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 1 de 2 bcd 10 e-h 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 2 a-d 3 bcd 21 def 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 2 abc 19 a 57 ab 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 1 b-e 2 bcd 6 fgh 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 2 ab 2 bcd 3 fgh 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 3 a 4 bcd 16 d-h 18 DCT + Senator BC 1 de 3 bcd 7 fgh Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

83 Table 3. Incidence of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, ON Timing % Incidence of Pod Lesions 8 WAP 9 WAP 1 Infected Check 30 a 49 a 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 1 ef 2 j 3 Uninfected Check 7 def 31 b-e 4 DCT + Quadris A 3 ef 28 c-f 5 DCT + Quadris B 0 f 7 ij 6 DCT + Quadris C 8 def 21 efg 7 DCT + Quadris D 9 de 34 bcd 8 DCT + Quadris AC 2 ef 8 ij 9 DCT + Quadris BC 0 f 2 j 10 DCT + Quadris BD 1 ef 20 fgh 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 13 cd 42 ab 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 3 ef 18 f-i 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 18 bc 27 c-f 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 24 ab 38 abc 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 5 def 15 ghi 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 2 ef 9 hij 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 6 def 27 c-f 18 DCT + Senator BC 6 def 24 d-g Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV

84 Table 4. Severity of pod lesions in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario 2006 Timing Severity of Pod Lesions (12 WAP) % Pod Area With Lesions % of Pods Destroyed Pod Destruction Index ** 1 Infected Check 8 c-g 34 ab 40 abc 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 2 fg 1 g 3 j 3 Uninfected Check 18 ab 39 a 51 a 4 DCT + Quadris A 22 a 29 abc 45 ab 5 DCT + Quadris B 3 efg 3 fg 6 hij 6 DCT + Quadris C 13 a-d 18 de 28 def 7 DCT + Quadris D 4 d-g 34 ab 37 bcd 8 DCT + Quadris AC 12 a-e 4 fg 16 ghi 9 DCT + Quadris BC 1 g 1 g 2 j 10 DCT + Quadris BD 12 b-e 5 fg 17 gh 11 ApronMaxx + Quadris A 9 b-g 27 bcd 33 cde 12 ApronMaxx + Quadris B 11 b-g 25 bcd 33 cde 13 ApronMaxx + Quadris C 7 c-g 22 cd 28 def 14 ApronMaxx + Quadris D 11 b-f 33 ab 40 abc 15 ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 11 b-f 9 efg 19 fg 16 ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 5 c-g 0 g 5 ij 17 ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 6 c-g 19 de 23 efg 18 DCT + Senator BC 14 abc 12 ef 24 efg Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV ** pod destruction index =(100%*%of dest. pods)+(% pod area with lesions*(1- % of dest.pods))*100 84

85 Table 5. Seed quality ratings in foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, Ontario Timing Crop Seed Assessment Seed Moisture 100 Seed Weight Seed Quality Dockage Pick 1 Infected Check h 5.0 a 23 a 43 a-d 2 Uninfected Check + Headline ABC a 3.0 g 3 j 20 f 3 Uninfected Check fgh 4.8 abc 15 cde 44 abc 4 DCT + Headline A c-f 4.8 abc 12 def 47 a 5 DCT + Headline B bc 3.9 ef 6 ghi 35 de 6 DCT + Headline C d-g 4.4 b-e 12 ef 43 a-d 7 DCT + Headline D efg 4.9 ab 16 cd a 8 DCT + Headline AC b-e 4.3 c-f 7 ghi 38 b-e 9 DCT + Headline BC ab 3.8 f 4 ij 34 e 10 DCT + Headline BD ab 4.1 def 6 hij 38 b-e 11 ApronMaxx + Headline A gh 4.9 ab 18 bc 44 ab 12 ApronMaxx + Headline B bcd 3.9 ef 8 gh 37 b-e 13 ApronMaxx + Headline C cde 4.6 a-d 10 fg 35 cde 14 ApronMaxx + Headline D gh 4.9 ab 19 b 44 ab 15 ApronMaxx + Headline AC bcd 4.3 c-f 8 gh 38 b-e 16 ApronMaxx + Headline BC bc 4.3 c-f 6 ghi 34 e 17 ApronMaxx + Headline BD bcd 4.1 def 9 fg 33 e 18 DCT + Senator BC cde 4.6 a-d 8 gh 44 ab Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) n/a CV

86 Table 6. Crop Value Assessment in Quadris foliar fungicide x seed treatment (lesions) at Exeter, ON Timing Yield (kg ha 1 ) Crop Value Assessment Value ($ per ac.) Additional Value ($ per ac.) Additional Costs* ($ per ac.) Return on Investment ($ per ac.) 1 Infected Check 557 h fg 2 Uninfected Check + Quadris ABC 2519 a a 3 Uninfected Check 940 fg efg 4 DCT + Quadris A 1103 def efg DCT + Quadris B 1873 b bc DCT + Quadris C 1326 cde d-g DCT + Quadris D 976 efg 0.39 g DCT + Quadris AC 1802 b bcd DCT + Quadris BC 2347 a b DCT + Headline BD 1916 b bcd ApronMaxx + Quadris A 834 fgh efg ApronMaxx + Quadris B 1620 bc cde ApronMaxx + Quadris C 1317 cde c-f ApronMaxx + Quadris D 726 gh efg ApronMaxx + Quadris AC 1582 bc c-f ApronMaxx + Quadris BC 1900 b bc ApronMaxx + Quadris BD 1430 cd bcd DCT + Senator BC 1442 cd d-g Mean PR>F LSD (P=. 05) CV Seed s had no application costs attached. * 2006 grower list price : Headline $ /ac., Quadris $ 22.09/ac., Senator $27.00/ac, Apron Maxx $ 3.08/ac., DCT (high rate) $ 5.20/ac * application rate $ 8.00 /ac 86

87 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv. OAC Rex, T9905, Red Hawk, Etna NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, DEPUYDT, D and WILLIS, S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF FOLIAR FUNGICIDES FOR PLANT HEALTH IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS AT THE HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); HEADLINE (pyraclostrobin 100g ai/ha); QUADRIS 2 SC (azoxystrobin 125g ai/ha). METHODS: The seed for the experiments was treated with DCT and, at label rates, for protection against early season seedling diseases and insects. The experiment was planted June 1, 2006 using a four row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre of row for the white bean varieties and 17 seeds for the large seeded kidney and cranberry beans. An experimental unit contained 4 rows 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. The spray treatments were applied once during the growing season, when a single flower was present on the majority of plants in that variety. The experiments were sprayed on July 11 (40 DAP) for the Red Hawk and Etna and July 17 (46 DAP) for the white bean varieties. The spray was applied using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a three Airbubble nozzles spaced at cm, at 277 kpa (40 psi) in 200 L/ha water. The treatments were assessed for any disease and notes were made before harvest. The Etna and Red Hawk experiments were harvested on August 31 with the white bean trials following on September 22. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 1-5. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences between treatments for yield in any of the four experiments (Table 1-4). When the data was combined and analyzed, no significant differences were found (Table 5). 87

88 Table 1. Headline/Quadris Evaluation in White Beans (OAC Rex), Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Seed Weight (g/100 seeds) % Pick Crop Assessment Yield (kg/ha) Yield Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Headline (Half Rate) Headline (Full Rate) Quadris (Half Rate) Quadris (Full Rate) Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A Table 2. Headline/Quadris Evaluation in White Beans (T9905) - Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Seed Weight (g/100 seeds) % Pick Crop Assessment Yield (kg/ha) Yield Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Headline (Half Rate) Headline (Full Rate) Quadris (Half Rate) Quadris (Full Rate) Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 88

89 Table 3. Headline/Quadris Evaluation in DRK (Red Hawk) - Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Seed Weight (g/100 seeds) % Pick Crop Assessment Yield (kg/ha) Yield Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check a Headline (Half Rate) c Headline (Full Rate) abc Quadris (Half Rate) ab Quadris (Full Rate) bc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A 1.2 N/A N/A Table 4. Headline/Quadris Evaluation in Cranberry Bean (Etna) - Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Seed Weight (g/100 seeds) % Pick Crop Assessment Yield (kg/ha) Yield Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Headline (Half Rate) Headline (Full Rate) Quadris (Half Rate) Quadris (Full Rate) Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 89

90 Table 5. Headline/Quadris Evaluation Combined Analysis over All Locations, Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Seed Weight (g/100 seeds) Crop Assessment 1 % Pick 2 Yield (kg/ha) Yield Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Headline (Half Rate) Headline (Full Rate) Quadris (Half Rate) Quadris (Full Rate) Mean PR>F Analysis performed using SAS 2 - Used log transformation 90

91 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv., Hooter, Etna, Red Hawk & Red Kanner none NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S. and DEPUYDT, D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: THE RESPONSE OF CRANBERRY AND KIDNEY VARIETIES TO NARROW ROW PRODUCTON METHODS AT THORNDALE, ONTARIO IN 2006 MATERIALS: CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); RONILAN 0EG (vinclozolin, 0 g a.i./kg). METHODS: The experiment was conducted to determine the adaptability of cranberry and kidney bean varieties to narrow row production. Four varieties were selected on their popularity, maturity and plant type or architecture: 1. Hooter cranberry late maturity, large plant 2. Etna cranberry late maturity, compact plant 3. Red Hawk DRK mid maturity, very compact plant 4. Red Kanner LRK late maturity, large plant The experiment was designed as a split plot with row width as the main effect and variety as the split effect. Two row widths were compared; the traditional wide rows at 30 inches or 75 cm and narrow rows at 15 inches or 38 cm. The seeding rate was set at seeds/ac (157,0 seeds/ha or 3.6 seeds per foot of row) for the wide rows. The seeding rate was increased by 25% to seeds/ac (1970 seeds/ha or 2.25 seeds per foot of row) for the narrow rows. DCT and seed treatments were applied at label rates, for protection against early season seedling diseases and insects. Each experimental unit contained either four wide rows or six narrow rows. Each experimental unit was six meters in length. The experiment was planted May 30 th, 2006 using a six row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter which is convertible to planting either four wide rows or six narrow rows. All assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and in the center 2 or 4 rows, for the wide or narrow row treatments, respectively. A heavy rain before emergence caused a soil crust and the farm co-operator rotary hoed the experiment to improve emergence. A plant emergence count was performed on June 29 at 30 days after planting (DAP), from the harvest area of each plot. On August 4 th, Ronilan was applied to the trial as some white mold was detected within the experiment and also in adjacent farmers fields. A plant height and harvestability rating on a scale of 1-5 (1 = erect with no pods touching the ground, 5 = flat with majority of pods touching the ground) were taken just before harvest. The experiment was harvested on September 6 th and 17 th. Visual seed quality was determined using a scale of 1-5 (1 = excellent seed quality, 5 = poor seed quality). Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 1-2. CONCLUSIONS: For the main effect (row width), significant differences were detected for yield (Table 2). The narrow row treatments had a yield advantage of 258 kg, averaged over varieties. Each variety had 91

92 a higher yield in narrow rows. A number of significant differences were detected for the split effect (variety), but all of the differences were expected, due to differences in variety characteristics. Table 1: Plant Emergence, Height and Harvestability for the Cran/Kidney Row Width Experiment Thorndale, Ontario s Row Width Analysis Row Width Variety (Factor A) (Factor B) % Emergence Plant Height (cm) Harvestability (1-5) Wide Row Narrow Row Hooter 85 a 38.2 a 3.4 e Etna 83 ab 32.6 c 2.6 a Red Hawk 80 ab 37.4 ab 3.2 d Red Kanner 66 d 38.1 ab 3.2 d Wide Row Hooter Narrow Row Hooter Wide Row Etna Narrow Row Etna Wide Row Red Hawk Narrow Row Red Hawk Wide Row Red Kanner Narrow Row Red Kanner Mean PR>F (A) PR>F (B) PR>F (A x B) LSD(.05) (A) N/A N/A N/A LSD(.05) (B) LSD(.05) (A x B) N/A N/A N/A 92

93 Table 2: Crop Assessment for the Cran/Kidney Row Width Experiment, Thorndale, Ontario s Crop Assessment Row Width (Factor A) Variety (Factor B) Yield (kg / ha) Seed Quality (1-5) 100 Seed Weight (g) Days to Harvest Wide Row 3539 c Narrow Row 3797 a Hooter 3749 a 2.1 c 60.1 a 110 Etna 3726 a 1.9 b 59.1 ab 99 Red Hawk 3475 c 1.6 a 57.2 ab 100 Red Kanner 3724 a 2.1 c 49.9 e 110 Wide Row Hooter Narrow Row Hooter Wide Row Etna Narrow Row Etna Wide Row Red Hawk Narrow Row Red Hawk Wide Row Red Kanner Narrow Row Red Kanner Mean PR>F (A) PR>F (B) PR>F (A x B) LSD(.05) (A) 147 N/A N/A N/A LSD(.05) (B) N/A LSD(.05) (A x B) N/A N/A N/A N/A 93

94 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv., Hooter, Etna, Red Hawk & Red Kanner Row Width NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S. and DEPUYDT, D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: THE RESPONSE OF CRANBERRY AND KIDNEY VARIETIES TO NARROW ROW PRODUCTON METHODS AT HURON RESEARCH STATION, EXETER, ONTARIO IN 2006 MATERIALS: CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w). METHODS: The experiment was conducted to determine the adaptability of cranberry and kidney bean varieties to narrow row production. Four varieties were selected on their popularity, maturity and plant type or architecture: 5. Hooter cranberry late maturity, large plant 6. Etna cranberry late maturity, compact plant 7. Red Hawk DRK mid maturity, very compact plant 8. Red Kanner LRK late maturity, large plant The experiment was designed as a split plot with row width as the main effect and variety as the split effect. Two row widths were compared; the traditional wide rows at 30 inches or 75 cm and narrow rows at 15 inches or 38 cm. The seeding rate was set at seeds/ac (157,0 seeds/ha or 3.6 seeds per foot of row) for the wide rows. The seeding rate was increased by 25% to seeds/ac (1970 seeds/ha or 2.25 seeds per foot of row) for the narrow rows. DCT and seed treatments were applied at label rates, for protection against early season seedling diseases and insects. Each experimental unit contained either four wide rows or six narrow rows. Each experimental unit was six meters in length. The experiment was planted June 1 st, 2006 using a six row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter which is convertible to planting either four wide rows or six narrow rows. All assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and in the center 2 or 4 rows, for the wide or narrow row treatments, respectively. A plant emergence count was performed on June 29 at 30 days after planting (DAP), from the harvest area of each plot. A plant height and harvestability rating on a scale of 1-5 (1 = erect with no pods touching the ground, 5 = flat with majority of pods touching the ground) were taken just before harvest. The experiment was harvested on August 31 th and September 6 th. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 1-2. CONCLUSIONS: For the main effect (row width), significant differences were detected for seed weight and yield (Table 2). Wide rows had higher seed weight, but lower yield than narrow rows. The yield advantage for narrow rows was 287 kg, averaged over varieties. Each variety had a higher yield in narrow 94

95 rows. A number of significant differences were detected for the split effect (variety), but all of the differences were expected, due to differences in variety characteristics. Table 1: Plant Emergence, Height and Harvestability for the Cran/Kidney Row Width Experiment Thorndale, Ontario s Row Width Analysis Row Width Variety (Factor A) (Factor B) % Emergence Plant Height (cm) Harvestability (1-5) Wide Row Narrow Row Hooter 92 a 25.4 b 2.3 b Etna 87 ab 24.9 b 2.1 a Red Hawk 80 b 26.1 ab 2.4 b Red Kanner 67 c 28.6 a 2.9 d Wide Row Hooter Narrow Row Hooter Wide Row Etna Narrow Row Etna Wide Row Red Hawk Narrow Row Red Hawk Wide Row Red Kanner Narrow Row Red Kanner Mean PR>F (A) PR>F (B) PR>F (A x B) LSD(.05) (A) N/A N/A N/A LSD(.05) (B) LSD(.05) (A x B) N/A N/A N/A 95

96 Table 2: Crop Assessment for the Cran/Kidney Row Width Experiment, Thorndale, Ontario s Crop Assessment Row Width Variety Yield Yield Pick 100 Seed Pick (%) (Factor A) (Factor B) (kg / ha) (kg / ha) Weight (g) Wide Row 1729 c c 51.1 a Narrow Row 2016 a a 49.2 c Hooter 1982 ab a 54.1 a Etna 1992 a a 52.7 b Red Hawk 1704 c b 47.2 f Red Kanner 1811 bc b 46.6 f Wide Row Hooter Narrow Row Hooter Wide Row Etna Narrow Row Etna Wide Row Red Hawk Narrow Row Red Hawk Wide Row Red Kanner Narrow Row Red Kanner Mean PR>F (A) PR>F (B) PR>F (A x B) LSD(.05) (A) 124 N/A LSD(.05) (B) 175 N/A LSD(.05) (A x B) N/A N/A N/A N/A 96

97 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv., Hooter, Etna, Red Hawk & Red Kanner Row Width NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S. and DEPUYDT, D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: THE RESPONSE OF CRANBERRY AND KIDNEY VARIETIES TO NARROW ROW PRODUCTON METHODS AT EXETER, ONTARIO IN 2006 MATERIALS: CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w) METHODS: The experiment was conducted to determine the adaptability of cranberry and kidney bean varieties to narrow row production. Four varieties were selected on their popularity, maturity and plant type or architecture: 9. Hooter cranberry late maturity, large plant 10. Etna cranberry late maturity, compact plant 11. Red Hawk DRK mid maturity, very compact plant 12. Red Kanner LRK late maturity, large plant The experiment was designed as a split plot with row width as the main effect and variety as the split effect. Two row widths were compared; the traditional wide rows at 30 inches or 75 cm and narrow rows at 15 inches or 38 cm. The seeding rate was set at seeds/ac (157,0 seeds/ha or 3.6 seeds per foot of row) for the wide rows. The seeding rate was increased by 25% to seeds/ac (1970 seeds/ha or 2.25 seeds per foot of row) for the narrow rows. DCT and seed treatments were applied at label rates, for protection against early season seedling diseases and insects. Each experimental unit contained either four rows spaced 75 cm apart or six rows spaced at 38 cm apart. Each experimental unit was six meters in length. The experiment was planted at a site near Exeter on June 14 th, 2006 using a six row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter which is convertible to planting either four wide rows or six narrow rows. All assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and in the center 2 or 4 rows, for the wide or narrow row treatments, respectively. A plant emergence count was performed on June 29 at 30 days after planting (DAP), from the harvest area of each plot. A plant height and harvestability rating on a scale of 1-5 (1 = erect with no pods touching the ground, 5 = flat with majority of pods touching the ground) were taken just before harvest. The experiment was harvested on August 31 th and September 6 th. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 1-2. CONCLUSIONS: For the main effect (row width), significant differences were detected for plant height (Table 1) and seed weight (Table 2). Wide rows produced taller plants, with higher seed weights. A number of significant differences were detected for the split effect (variety), but all of the differences were expected, due to differences in variety characteristics. There were no significant differences in yield between wide and narrow rows. 97

98 Table 1: Plant Emergence, Height and Harvestability for the Cran/Kidney Row Width Experiment Thorndale, Ontario s Row Width Analysis Row Width Variety Plant Height Harvestability Days to % Emergence (Factor A) (Factor B) (cm) (1-5) Maturity Wide Row a Narrow Row c Hooter 83.5 a 34.0 a 2.4 a 112 c Etna 89.8 a 31.9 abc 2.3 a 96 a Red Hawk 65.1 c 30.4 c 2.8 b 107 b Red Kanner 59.0 c 33.2 ab 2.8 b 127 d Wide Row Hooter Narrow Row Hooter Wide Row Etna Narrow Row Etna Wide Row Red Hawk Narrow Row Red Hawk Wide Row Red Kanner Narrow Row Red Kanner Mean PR>F (A) PR>F (B) PR>F (A x B) LSD(.05) (A) N/A 1.5 N/A N/A LSD(.05) (B) LSD(.05) (A x B) N/A N/A N/A N/A 98

99 Table 2: Crop Assessment for the Cran/Kidney Row Width Experiment, Thorndale, Ontario s Crop Assessment Row Width Variety Yield Yield Pick 100 Seed Pick (%) (Factor A) (Factor B) (kg / ha) (kg / ha) Weight (g) Wide Row a Narrow Row b Hooter 2794 a 3.6 a 2696 a 61.6 a Etna 2714 b 3.9 a 2607 a 54.4 b Red Hawk 2279 c 2.9 a 2214 b 52.6 b Red Kanner 2237 c 8.4 c 2075 b 60.5 a Wide Row Hooter Narrow Row Hooter Wide Row Etna Narrow Row Etna Wide Row Red Hawk Narrow Row Red Hawk Wide Row Red Kanner Narrow Row Red Kanner Mean PR>F (A) PR>F (B) PR>F (A x B) LSD(.05) (A) N/A N/A N/A 2.8 LSD(.05) (B) LSD(.05) (A x B) N/A N/A N/A N/A 99

100 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv PEST: Potato Leafhopper Empoasca fabae Harris NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, DEPUYDT, D and WILLIS, S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF MATADOR TANKMIXES FOR POTATO LEAFHOPPER CONTROL IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS (WHITE BEANS) AT RIDGETOWN COLLEGE MATERIALS: ALLEGRO 0F (fluazinam, 0 g a.i./l); APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 1.07% %); CYPRODINIL / FLUDIOXONIL (37.5% %); MATADOR 120EC (lambda-cyhalothrin 120g ai/l). METHODS: A 1.2 kilogram lot of seed was treated with ApronMaxx RTA using a syringe to apply the treatment to the seed. The seed was then mixed in a plastic bag for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted June 7, 2006 using a four row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre of row. An experimental unit contained 2 rows 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Matador was applied alone, and in combination with several fungicides when the nymph counts reached threshold for the specific growth state of the crop (Table 1). The spray treatments were applied once during the growing season, on July 7 (30 DAP) using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a three Airbubble nozzles spaced at cm, at 277 kpa (40 psi) in 200 L/ha water. The treatments were assessed for phytotoxicity at 3 days after spray application (DAA). The experiments were monitored weekly to determine if potato leafhoppers (PLH) were present. PLH nymph counts were performed for seven weeks, starting at 26 DAP. The average number of nymphs per leaf was calculated, based on a 10 leaf sample per experimental unit. At the trifoliate leaf stages of development, a single leaf sample included all three leaflets of the trifoliate leaf. The experiment was harvested on September 7. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 2-4. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between the sprayed treatments and the check were detected for several PLH nymph counts (see Table 2 and 3), but there were no differences between the Matador tank mixes. No differences in phytotoxicity were detected (data not shown). No differences in crop assessments were detected in this experiment (Table 4). 100

101 Table 1. Insecticide application thresholds for potato leafhoppers. Standard Thresholds Leafhopper Nymph Threshold at Specific Growth Stages Unifoliate 2 nd Trifoliate 4 th Trifoliate First Bloom Early Pod Fill N/A Table 2. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for white beans Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf 26 DAP 2 nd Tri. 30 DAP 3 rd Tri. 33 DAP 4 th Tri. 36 DAP 6 th Tri. Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) Untreated Check a 1.07 a 2 Matador 120EC b 0.15 b 3 4 Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b 0.08 b b 0.18 b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A * Bold Text indicates the timing of treatment application based on PLH thresholds 101

102 Table 3. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for white beans Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf 43 DAP Flower DAP Early Pod 57 DAP Mid. Pod 64 DAP Late Pod 71 DAP Late Pod Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) 2.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 Untreated Check 2.30 a Matador 120EC b Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b ab Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) 1.00 N/A N/A N/A N/A * Bold Text indicates the timing of treatment application based on PLH thresholds Table 4. Matador Evaluation Trial Crop Assessment on white beans Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario G A/HA Crop Assessment 100 Seed Weight (grams) Yield (kg / ha) % Pick Yield-Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Matador 120EC Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 102

103 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv PEST: Potato Leafhopper Empoasca fabae Harris NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, DEPUYDT, D and WILLIS, S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT TANK MIX FORMULATIONS OF MATADOR FOR CONTROL OF POTATO LEAFHOPPERS IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS (WHITE BEANS) AT THE HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: ALLEGRO 0F (fluazinam, 0 g a.i./l); APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 1.07% %); CYPRODINIL / FLUDIOXONIL (37.5% %); MATADOR 120EC (lambda-cyhalothrin 120g ai/l). METHODS: A 1.2 kilogram lot of seed was treated with ApronMaxx RTA using a syringe to apply the treatment to the seed. The seed was then mixed in a plastic bag for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted June 1, 2006 using a four row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre of row. An experimental unit contained 2 rows 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Matador was applied alone, and in combination with several fungicides when the nymph counts reached threshold for the specific growth state of the crop (Table 1). The spray treatments were applied once during the growing season, on July 7 (36 DAP) using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a three Airbubble nozzles spaced at cm, at 277 kpa (40 psi) in 200 L/ha water. The treatments were assessed for phytotoxicity at 0, 3, 7 and 10 days after spray application (DAA). The experiments were monitored weekly to determine if potato leafhoppers (PLH) were present. PLH nymph counts were performed for six weeks, starting at 33 DAP. The average number of nymphs per leaf was calculated, based on a 10 leaf sample per experimental unit. At the trifoliate leaf stages of development, a single leaf sample included all three leaflets of the trifoliate leaf. Leaf burn due to PLH feeding was assessed each time a nymph count was performed, using a 1-10 scale (1 = low leaf burn, 10 = high leaf burn). The experiment was harvested on September 22. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield was adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 2-4. CONCLUSIONS: Potato leafhopper nymph pressure at the Huron Research Station was very low for the entire season. Only one significant difference was observed in PLH nymph counts, this was just 3 days after the experiment was sprayed between the sprayed treatments and the control (Table 2 and 3). There were no differences between the Matador tank mixes for PLH nymph control. No differences in PLH leaf burn were detected and were not shown in a table. Phytotoxicity ratings were all zeros and therefore are not shown in a table. No differences in Crop Assessments were detected in this experiment (Table 4). 103

104 Table 1. Insecticide application thresholds for potato leafhoppers. Standard Thresholds Leafhopper Nymph Threshold at Specific Growth Stages Unifoliate 2 nd Trifoliate 4 th Trifoliate First Bloom Early Pod Fill N/A Table 2. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for white beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf 33 DAP 2 nd Tri. 36 DAP 2 nd Tri. 39 DAP 3 rd Tri. 43 DAP 4 th Tri. Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) Untreated Check a Matador 120EC b Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b b 0.00 Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A 0.08 N/A * Bold Text indicates leafhoppers reached threshold and were sprayed 104

105 Table 3. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for white beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf 46 DAP 5 th Tri. DAP flower 53 DAP flower 61 DAP Pod 70 DAP Pod Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) N/A N/A 1 Untreated Check Matador 120EC Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A * Bold Text indicates leafhoppers reached threshold and were sprayed Table 4. Matador Evaluation Trial Crop Assessment for white beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Crop Assessment 100 Seed Weight (grams) Yield (kg / ha) % Pick Yield-Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Matador 120EC Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 105

106 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv. Berna Dutch Brown Potato Leafhopper Empoasca fabae Harris NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, DEPUYDT, D and WILLIS, S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF MATADOR TANKMIXES FOR POTATO LEAFHOPPER CONTROL IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS (BROWN BEANS) AT RIDGETOWN COLLEGE MATERIALS: ALLEGRO 0F (fluazinam, 0 g a.i./l); APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 1.07% %); CYPRODINIL / FLUDIOXONIL (37.5% %); MATADOR 120EC (lambda-cyhalothrin 120g ai/l). METHODS: A two kilogram lot of seed was treated with ApronMaxx RTA using a syringe to apply the treatment to the seed. The seed was then mixed in a plastic bag for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted June 7, 2006 using a four row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre of row. An experimental unit contained 2 rows 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Matador was applied alone, and in combination with several fungicides when the nymph counts reached threshold for the specific growth state of the crop (Table 1). The spray treatments were applied twice during the growing season, on July 3 (26 DAP) and July 13 (36 DAP) using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a three Airbubble nozzles spaced at cm, at 277 kpa (40 psi) in 200 L/ha water. The treatments were assessed for phytotoxicity at approximately 4 days after spray application (DAA). The experiments were monitored weekly to determine if potato leafhoppers (PLH) were present. PLH nymph counts were performed for seven weeks, starting at 26 DAP. The average number of nymphs per leaf was calculated, based on a 10 leaf sample per experimental unit. At the trifoliate leaf stages of development, a single leaf sample included all three leaflets of the trifoliate leaf. The experiment was harvested on September 7. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 2-4. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between the sprayed treatments and the check were detected for several PLH counts (see Table 2 and 3), but there were no differences between the Matador tank mixes for PLH nymph control. No differences for phytotoxicity were detected (data not shown). No differences in crop assessments were detected in this experiment (Table 4). 106

107 Table 1. Insecticide application thresholds for potato leafhoppers. Standard Thresholds Leafhopper Nymph Threshold at Specific Growth Stages Unifoliate 2 nd Trifoliate 4 th Trifoliate First Bloom Early Pod Fill N/A Table 2. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for brown beans Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf 26 DAP 2 nd Tri. 30 DAP 4 th Tri. 36 DAP 6 th Tri. 43 DAP early pod Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) N/A 1 Untreated Check a 2.80 a 4.90 a 2 Matador 120EC b 1.25 b 0.68 b 3 4 Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b 1.65 b 1.22 b b 1.27 b 0. b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A * Bold Text indicates the timing of treatment application based on PLH thresholds 107

108 Table 3. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for brown beans Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf DAP Mid. Pod 57 DAP Mid. Pod 64 DAP Late Pod 71 DAP Late Pod Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 Untreated Check 3.43 a 1.85 b Matador 120EC b 3.75 a Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b 3. a b 4.25 a Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A * Bold Text indicates the timing of treatment application based on PLH thresholds Table 4. Matador Evaluation Trial Crop Assessment on brown beans Ridgetown Campus, Ridgetown, Ontario G A/HA Crop Assessment 100 Seed Weight (grams) Yield (kg / ha) % Pick Yield-Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check 35.4 b Matador 120EC a Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil a b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) 1.0 N/A N/A N/A 108

109 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv. Berna Dutch Brown Potato Leafhopper Empoasca fabae Harris NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, DEPUYDT, D and WILLIS, S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF MATADOR TANKMIXES FOR POTATO LEAFHOPPER CONTROL IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS (BROWN BEANS) AT THE HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: ALLEGRO 0F (fluazinam, 0 g a.i./l); APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 1.07% %); CYPRODINIL / FLUDIOXONIL (37.5% %); MATADOR 120EC (lambda-cyhalothrin 120g ai/l). METHODS: A two kilogram lot of seed was treated with ApronMaxx RTA using a syringe to apply the treatment to the seed. The seed was then mixed in a plastic bag for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted June 1, 2006 using a four row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre of row. An experimental unit contained 2 rows 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Matador was applied alone, and in combination with several fungicides when the nymph counts reached threshold for the specific growth state of the crop (Table 1). The spray treatments were applied once during the growing season, on July 4 (33 DAP) using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a three Airbubble nozzles spaced at cm, at 277 kpa (40 psi) in 200 L/ha water. The treatments were assessed for phytotoxicity at 2, 5 and 9 days after spray application (DAA). The experiments were monitored weekly to determine if potato leafhoppers (PLH) were present. PLH nymph counts were performed for seven weeks, starting at 33 DAP. The average number of nymphs per leaf was calculated, based on a 10 leaf sample per experimental unit. At the trifoliate leaf stages of development, a single leaf sample included all three leaflets of the trifoliate leaf. Leaf burn due to PLH feeding was assessed each time a nymph count was performed, using a 1-10 scale (1 = low leaf burn, 10 = high leaf burn). The experiment was harvested on September 8. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Tables 2-6. CONCLUSIONS: Only one significant difference was observed in PLH nymph counts, between the untreated check and the sprayed treatments this was 5 DAA or 38 DAP (see Table 2 and 3). There were no differences between the Matador tank mixes for PLH nymph control. For leaf burn, differences between the check and Matador treatments were detected at 13 DAA (Table 4 and 5). No differences in phytotoxicity were detected (data not shown). No differences in crop assessments were detected in this experiment (Table 6). 109

110 Table 1. Insecticide application thresholds for potato leafhoppers. Standard Thresholds Leafhopper Nymph Threshold at Specific Growth Stages Unifoliate 2 nd Trifoliate 4 th Trifoliate First Bloom Early Pod Fill N/A Table 2. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for brown beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Number of Nymphs per Leaf 33 DAP 2 nd Tri. 35 DAP 2 nd Tri. 38 DAP 3 rd Tri. 42 DAP 4 th Tri. 46 DAP flower Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) Untreated Check a Matador 120EC b Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A 0.20 N/A N/A * Bold Text indicates the timing of treatment application based on PLH thresholds 110

111 Table 3. Matador Evaluation Trial Leafhopper counts for brown beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA DAP Pod Number of Nymphs per Leaf 53 DAP Pod 61 DAP Pod 70 DAP Pod 75 DAP Pod Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 Untreated Check Matador 120EC Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A * Bold Text indicates the timing of treatment application based on PLH thresholds Table 4. Matador Evaluation Trial Leaf Burn ratings for brown beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA 33 DAP 2 nd Tri. Leaf Burn (0 = none, 10 = high) 35 DAP 38 DAP 42 DAP 2 nd Tri. 3 rd Tri. 4 th Tri. 46 DAP flower Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) Untreated Check a 2 Matador 120EC b 3 4 Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil b b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A

112 Table 5. Matador Evaluation Trial Leaf Burn ratings for brown beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA DAP Pod Leaf Burn (0 = none, 10 = high) 53 DAP Pod 61 DAP Pod 70 DAP Pod 75 DAP Pod Standard Thresholds (see Table 1) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1 Untreated Check Matador 120EC Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Table 6. Matador Evaluation Trial Crop Assessment for brown beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/HA Crop Assessment 100 Seed Weight (grams) Yield (kg / ha) % Pick Yield-Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check Matador 120EC Matador 120EC Allegro Matador 120EC Cyprodinil/Fludioxonil Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 112

113 PMR REPORT # ICAR: SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv. T9905 cv. SVM Taylor Potato Leafhopper Empoasca fabae Harris NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C.L., DEPUYDT D., WILLIS S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF REPEATED APPLICATIONS OF CYGON AT VARIOUS RATES ON WHITE AND CRANBERRY BEANS (HURON RESEARCH STATION) IN 2006 MATERIALS: CYGON 4E (dimethoate,480 g ai/l); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w) METHODS: The trial seed was treated with DCT and planted June 7, 2006 using a four row conemounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 20 seeds per metre for the white beans and 17 seeds per metre for the cranberry beans. Plots contained 2 rows 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. An untreated check was compared with quarter, half and full rate of Cygon applied every two weeks once leafhopper nymph populations reached standard threshold numbers. Cygon was applied at rates of 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 L of product per hectare using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three Airbubble nozzles spaced at cm, at 277 kpa (40 psi) in 200 L/ha water. The experiment was sprayed three times during the growing season (Tables 1 & 2). The cranberry bean trial was harvested on August 31 and the whites on September 22. Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. RESULTS: See Table 3 and 4 CONCLUSIONS: The insecticide application dates and plant developmental stages are included in Tables 1 and 2. Leafhopper pressure was considered very low at the Huron Research Station in There were no significant differences in the crop assessments between the treatments in the white and cranberry bean experiments (Table 3&4). 113

114 Table 1. Application Dates and Crop Stage for each application of Cygon in white beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Leafhopper Nymph Threshold at Specific Growth Stages Unifoliate 2 nd Trifoliate 4 th Trifoliate First Bloom Early Pod Fill Pod Fill 1 Untreated Check N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Cygon 25% Rate 3 Cygon % Rate 4 Cygon 100% Rate July 7 ( 30 DAP) July 7 (30 DAP) July 7 (30 DAP) July 21 (44 DAP) July 21 (44 DAP) July 21 (44 DAP) Aug 4 (58 DAP) Aug 4 (58 DAP) Aug 4 (58 DAP) Table 2. Application Dates and Crop Stage for each application of Cygon in cranberry beans Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Leafhopper Nymph Threshold at Specific Growth Stages Unifoliate 2 nd Trifoliate 4 th Trifoliate First Bloom Early Pod Fill Pod Fill 1 Untreated Check N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2 Cygon 25% Rate 3 Cygon % Rate 4 Cygon 100% Rate July 7 (30 DAP) July 7 (30 DAP) July 7 (30 DAP) July 21 (44 DAP) July 21 (44 DAP) July 21 (44 DAP) Aug 4 (58 DAP) Aug 4 (58 DAP) Aug 4 (58 DAP) 114

115 Table 3. Crop assessments for white beans treated with different rates of Cygon at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Crop Assessment Seed weight (g) % Pick Yield (kg / ha) Yield Pick (kg / ha) 1 Untreated Check Cygon 25% Rate Cygon % Rate Cygon 100% Rate Mean C.V PR>F LSD(.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A Table 4. Crop assessments for cranberry beans treated with different rates of Cygon at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Crop Assessment Seed weight (g) % Pick Yield (kg / ha) Yield Pick (kg / ha) 1 Untreated Check Cygon 25% Rate Cygon % Rate Cygon 100% Rate Mean C.V PR>F LSD(.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 115

116 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Matterhorn great northern White Mold Sclerotinia sclerotiorum NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S, and DEPUYDT, D. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF WHITE MOLD IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH FOLIAR FUNGICIDES MATERIALS: ALLEGRO 0F (fluazinam, 0 g a.i./l); BAS 510KCF; BAS 51004F; BAS 600KGF; BAS 93141F; CYPRODINIL / FLUDIOXONIL (37.5% %); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); QUADRIS (Azoxystrobin 2 g a.i./l); RONILAN 0EG (vinclozolin, 0 g a.i./kg). METHODS: Three experiments were established using dry beans (cv. Matterhorn great northern) with a staggered planting of two weeks between experiments. Urea was broadcasted before planting at a rate of 120 kg/ha of actual nitrogen and incorporated into the soil. An additional 100 kg/ha of actual nitrogen was side dressed before flowering, using ammonium nitrate. White mold sclerotia were applied at a rate of 100 kg/ha (actual) and incorporated into the soil. The sclerotia were in white bean screenings, at a concentration of approximately 28%. The experiments were planted on May 31th, June 14th and June 27th respectively. All sites had a plot length of 6 meters, and a row spacing of 0.38 m. The experiments were arranged in a RCBD design with 4 replications. s were applied to the middle four rows of each plot. Fungicide application codes and the application dates are outlined in Table 1. All of the treatments were applied using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a four air bubble jet nozzles spaced at cm, at 310 kpa (45 psi) in 300 L/ha water. Precipitation and supplementary irrigation amounts are listed in Table 2. Irrigation was applied using a 64 m Briggs low pressure boom and a Cadman 4000 reel. A visual assessment for plant phytotoxicity was done within 7 days after application (DAA), using a 0-10 scale (0 = excellent, 10 = poor). An assessment for white mold incidence and severity was done at 1, 7, 14, 21 days after the first treatment application. The incidence was determined by arbitrarily placing a 4 metre rod between the center two rows of each plot. The rod was marked into 5 equal sections thus creating 5 separate quadrants on each side of the rod. It was recorded whether there was diseased material present (or not) in each quadrant. Thus, 10 evaluations were made in each plot, and incidence is a number from 0-1, where 0 indication no infection in any plot and 1 has infection in all quadrants. White mold severity was evaluated in each quadrant, by visually rating the percent white mold in the plant canopy. Horsfall Barrett?? The 2 nd and 3 rd planting dates were harvested on September 26th and October 16th respectively. RESULTS: See Tables 1-8. CONCLUSIONS: The 1 st planting date was not harvested due to a lack of disease pressure. No differences in phytotoxicity were detected in any of the experiments (data not shown). For the 2 nd planting date, differences between the untreated check and all the fungicide treatments were detected for disease incidence and severity at 5 DAA (Tables 3 and 4). For disease severity, treatment differences continued until plant maturity (Table 4). At 20 DAA, Allegro, Ronilan and BAS51004F+BAS 600KGF provided the best white mold control. By 36 DAA, there were few 116

117 differences between the fungicide treatments. Significant differences were detected between most of the fungicide treatments and the untreated check, for yield and for yield minus pick (Table 5). The top treatments were Quadris + Allegro and cyprodinil/fludioxonil at a high rate. For the 3 rd planting date, differences in disease incidence were detected at 18 DAA (Table 6). BAS51004F (high rate) and Ronilan provided the lowest incidence scores. For disease severity, differences between the untreated check and the fungicide treatments were detected at 18 DAA (Table 7). Other treatment differences were detected at 42 DAA, with the mid and high rates of BAS51004F giving the best results. For crop assessment, treatment differences were detected for % pick, yield and yield minus pick. Most of the fungicide treatments were better than the untreated check for each parameter. Pick was not strongly correlated to yield. The top yielding treatments were BAS510KAF, Quadris + Allegro and Matador + Allegro. Table 1. White Mold Trials Application code with associated spray volume rate and spray timing. Application Code Spray Volume Rate (l/ha) Spray Timing Spray Dates 1 st Planting 2 nd Planting 3 rd Planting A st Flower Present July 8 July 19 August 3 B % Bloom July 19 July 25 August 8 C Days Later August 3 August 9 August

118 Table 2. Precipitation and irrigation amounts during the growing season, Huron Research Station, Exeter ON, Day Precipitation (mm) - Bold indicates irrigated June July August 1 May 31 1 st Planted rd Planting 1 st spray nd Planted & nd Planting 2 nd spray st Planting 1 st spray rd Planting 2 nd spray rd Planted st Planting 2 nd spray 31 2 nd Planting 1 st spray Total (65.5) 91.5 (81.5) 118

119 Table 3. Disease Incidence in White Mold Experiment (2 nd Planting Date), Huron Research Station, Exeter Ontario A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Aug 14 (5 DAA) Incidence (0-1) Aug 29 (20 DAA) Sep 14 (36 DAA) 1 Untreated Check 0.17 a BAS 51004F 400 BC 0.00 b BAS 41004F 540 BC 0.00 b BAS 51004F 600 BC 0.00 b BAS 510KAF 540 BC 0.03 b BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC 0.00 b BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC 0.00 b BAS 93141F 200 BC 0.00 b BAS 93141F 400 BC 0.03 b Quadris 2SC 2 BC 0.03 b Allegro 0F 0 BC 0.00 b Quadris 2SC + Allegro 0F A + BC 0.03 b Ronilan EC 0 BC 0.00 b Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 484 BC 0.00 b Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 609 BC 0.00 b Matador + Allegro 0F BC 0.00 b Matador + Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil BC 0.00 b Senator 1210 BC 0.00 b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

120 Table 4. Disease Severity in White Mold Experiment (2 nd Planting Date), Huron Research Station, Exeter Ontario A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Jul 31 (6 DAA) Aug 14 (5 DAA) Severity (%) Aug 29 (20 DAA) Sep 14 (36 DAA) 1 Untreated Check a 10.0 a 14.6 a 2 BAS 51004F 400 BC b 4.6 b-e 6.8 bcd 3 BAS 51004F 540 BC b 3.7 b-e 6.9 bcd 4 BAS 51004F 600 BC b 3.8 b-e 5.9 cd 5 BAS 510KAF 540 BC b 5.5 bcd 8.5 bcd 6 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC b 6.5 b 7.4 bcd 7 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC b 2.5 de 5.6 cd 8 BAS 93141F 200 BC b 4.0 b-e 5.2 d 9 BAS 93141F 400 BC b 2.6 cde 4.7 d 10 Quadris 2SC 2 BC b 5.7 bc 10.4 b 11 Allegro 0F 0 BC b 2.1 e 4.9 d 12 Quadris 2SC + Allegro 0F A + BC b 4.2 b-e 4.4 d 13 Ronilan EC 0 BC b 2.1 e 5.3 d 14 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 484 BC b 2.8 cde 5.8 cd 15 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 609 BC b 2.7 cde 7.4 bcd 16 Matador + Allegro 0F BC b 2.6 cde 4.9 d 17 Matador + Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil BC b 4.4 b-e 7.2 bcd 18 Senator 1210 BC b 3.6 b-e 9.5 bc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

121 Table 5. Crop Assessment in White Mold Experiment (2 nd Planting Date), Huron Research Station, Exeter Ontario A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Seed Weight Crop Assessment % Pick Yield (kg/ha) Yield - Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check e 2978 f 2 BAS 51004F 400 BC a-d 3343 a-e 3 BAS 51004F 540 BC a-d 3388 a-e 4 BAS 51004F 600 BC cde 3222 b-f 5 BAS 510KAF 540 BC b-e 3263 a-f 6 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC cde 3214 c-f 7 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC a-d 3204 def 8 BAS 93141F 200 BC abc 3451 a-d 9 BAS 93141F 400 BC de 3110 ef 10 Quadris 2SC 2 BC a-d 3309 a-e 11 Allegro 0F 0 BC abc 3351 a-e 12 Quadris 2SC + Allegro 0F A + BC a 3538 a 13 Ronilan EC 0 BC b-e 3235 a-f 14 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 484 BC a-d 3351 a-e 15 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 609 BC a 3540 a 16 Matador + Allegro 0F BC ab 3530 ab 17 Matador + Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil BC abc 3467 a-d 18 Senator 1210 BC ab 3522 abc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A

122 Table 6. Disease Incidence in White Mold Experiment (3 rd Planting Date), Huron Research Station, Exeter Ontario A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Aug 31 (7 DAA) Incidence (0-1) Sept 11 (18 DAA) Oct 5 (42 DAA) 1 Untreated Check abc BAS 51004F 400 BC a-d BAS 5104F 540 BC de BAS 51004F 600 BC e BAS 510KAF 540 BC abc BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC cde BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC abc BAS 93141F 200 BC cde BAS 93141F 400 BC cde Quadris 2SC 2 BC abc Allegro 0F 0 BC cde Quadris 2SC + Allegro 0F A + BC cde Ronilan EC 0 BC e Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 484 BC ab Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 609 BC b-e Matador + Allegro 0F BC abc Matador + Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil BC a Senator 1210 BC abc 0.85 Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A 0.32 N/A 122

123 Table 7. Disease Severity in White Mold Experiment (3 rd Planting Date), Huron Research Station, Exeter Ontario A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Aug 31 (7 DAA) Severity (%) Sept 11 (18 DAA) Oct 5 (42 DAA) 1 Untreated Check a 42.7 a 2 BAS 51004F 400 BC b 13.2 b-e 3 BAS 51004F 540 BC b 3.2 e 4 BAS 51004F 600 BC b 3.7 de 5 BAS 510KAF 540 BC b 6.2 cde 6 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC b 12.7 b-e 7 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC b 24.3 a-d 8 BAS 93141F 200 BC b 4.4 cde 9 BAS 93141F 400 BC b 14.0 b-e 10 Quadris 2SC 2 BC b 24.9 abc 11 Allegro 0F 0 BC b 19.0 b-e 12 Quadris 2SC + Allegro 0F A + BC b 6.6 cde 13 Ronilan EC 0 BC b 4.1 cde 14 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 484 BC b 19.0 b-e 15 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 609 BC b 11.0 b-e 16 Matador + Allegro 0F BC b 14.4 b-e 17 Matador + Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil BC b 30.3 ab 18 Senator 1210 BC b 19.5 b-e Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A

124 Table 8. Crop Assessments in White Mold Experiment (3 rd Planting Date), Huron Research Station, Exeter Ontario A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Seed Weight Crop Assessment % Pick Yield (kg/ha) Yield - Pick (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check a-f 2123 d 1969 d 2 BAS 51004F 400 BC ab 2779 bc 2515 bc 3 BAS 51004F 540 BC a 2638 c 2371 cd 4 BAS 51004F 600 BC b-g 2787 abc 2620 abc 5 BAS 510KAF 540 BC a-e 3284 a 3029 a 6 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC c-h 2556 cd 2421 bcd 7 BAS 51004F + BAS 600KGF BC gh 2698 bc 2606 abc 8 BAS 93141F 200 BC b-g 2817 abc 2641 abc 9 BAS 93141F 400 BC h 2683 bc 2627 abc 10 Quadris 2SC 2 BC d-h 2717 bc 2591 abc 11 Allegro 0F 0 BC e-h 2846 abc 2723 abc 12 Quadris 2SC + Allegro 0F A + BC gh 3159 ab 3065 a 13 Ronilan EC 0 BC a-d 2964 abc 2724 abc 14 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 484 BC abc 2963 abc 2686 abc 15 Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil 609 BC d-h 2841 abc 2706 abc 16 Matador + Allegro 0F BC gh 3151 ab 3060 a 17 Matador + Cyprodinil / Fludioxonil BC fgh 2569 cd 2464 bc 18 Senator 1210 BC gh 2992 abc 2900 ab Mean C.V PR>F

125 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cv. Dolly cranberry bean White Mold Sclerotinia sclerotiorum NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S, and DEPUYDT, D. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF WHITE MOLD IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH FOLIAR FUNGICIDES MATERIALS: ALLEGRO 0F (fluazinam, 0 g a.i./l); ASSIST 90EC (surfactant 17%, paraffin based mineral oil 83%); CALCIUM CHLORIDE (77% Flake); LANCE WDG (Boscalid, 70%); RONILAN 0EG (vinclozolin, 0 g a.i./kg). METHODS: A site was selected in the Thorndale area with considerable white mold pressure. The location was in fields of cranberry beans (cv. Hooter), which was planted on June1. The field had a row spacing of 0.76 m. An experimental unit consisted of three bean rows 6 meters long. An RCBD design was employed with 5 replications. The fungicide treatments were applied to two rows, with the third row acting as a shared guard row in order to minimize treatment overlap. The experimental trial was sprayed on August 11 with the crop at the pod fill stage and with an initial white mold severity at 6.9 percent (Table 2). s 7 and 8 (calcium chloride) had a second application seven days later on August 8 th. All of the treatments were applied using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with a three air bubble jet nozzles spaced at cm, at 310 kpa (45 psi) in 300 L/ha water. A visual assessment for plant phytotoxicity was done at 8 days after application (DAA), using a 0-10 scale (0 = excellent, 10 = poor). An assessment for white mold incidence and severity was performed at the time of spray application and then weekly thereafter. White mold incidence was determined by arbitrarily placing a 4 metre rod between the two bean rows. The rod was marked into 5 equal sections thus creating 5 separate quadrants on each side of the rod. It was recorded whether there was diseased material present (or not) in each quadrant. Thus, 10 evaluations were made in each plot, and incidence is a number from 0-1, where 0 = no infection in any quadrant and 1 = infection in all quadrants. White mold severity was evaluated in each of the 10 quadrants, by visually rating the % white mold infection in the plant canopy. Yield was determined using the two treated rows from each plot, with a total of 4 m harvested from each row. The site was harvested on August 30. Visual seed quality was determined using a scale of 1-5 (1 = excellent seed quality, 5 = poor seed quality). Pick percentage (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) were also calculated for each plot. Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seed from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to a standard moisture of 18%. To calculate the value of the crop, the goal was to mirror the grading standards used by the dry bean industry for commercial production as much as possible. The value of the crop ($/acre) was determined by reducing the seed yield for pick. Pick (discoloured and/or misshapen seed) is calculated on as a % of the total seed yield. The percentage is doubled to allow not only for the actual poor seed but also for the cost of removing that seed. The harvest value per acre was determined using a price of $0.28 per pound for cranberry beans. The additional value for each treatment was calculated by subtracting the value per acre for the infected seed check treatment from the value per acre of each treatment. Additional costs were calculated using the 125

126 suggested grower list prices for each product applied. The return on investment was calculated by subtracting the additional cost from the additional value for each treatment RESULTS: See Tables 1-4. CONCLUSIONS: The fungicide treatments did not cause any crop phytotoxicity (data not shown). No differences in white mold incidence were found over time (Table 1). There were no significant differences between treatments for white mold severity on August 1 st (0 DAA), the date of the first fungicide application. The Lance and Allegro had significantly less white mold (Table 2), significantly more yield (Table 3) and a significantly higher value per acre (Table 4), compared to the untreated check and calcium chloride only treatments. Also, the Allegro treatment provided better seed quality and pick values, compared to any other treatment (Table 3). Table 1. White Mold Incidence on Cranberry Beans White Mold, Thorndale, A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code White Mold Incidence (0-1) 0 DAA 8 DAA 20 DAA 27 DAA 1 Untreated Check A Lance 540 A Ronilan 7 A Ronilan (1/2 rate) + Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 5 Ronilan + Assist A % A Allegro 4 A Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 8 Calcium Chloride (1/2 lb/ac) 219 AB AB Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 126

127 Table 2. White Mold Severity on Cranberry Beans White Mold, Thorndale, 2006 A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code White Mold Severity % 0 DAA 8 DAA 20 DAA 27 DAA 1 Untreated Check A a 43.8 ab 2 Lance 540 A c 28.6 c 3 Ronilan 7 A bc 36.4 abc 4 Ronilan (1/2 rate) + Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 5 Ronilan + Assist A bc 35.0 bc 7 1.0% A bc 36.4 abc 6 Allegro 4 A c 28.8 c 7 Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 8 Calcium Chloride (1/2 lb/ac) 219 AB ab 43.0 ab 437 AB ab 45.2 a Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A

128 Table 3. Seed Assessments on Cranberry Beans White Mold, Thorndale, A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Seed Weight (g/100 seeds) Seed Quality (1-5) Seed Assessment % Pick Yield (kg/ha) 1 Untreated Check A a 9.1 a 2638 b 2 Lance 540 A a 8.1 ab 3184 a 3 Ronilan 7 A a 6.6 b 2882 ab 4 Ronilan (1/2 rate) + Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 5 Ronilan + Assist A a 8.0 ab 2962 ab 7 1.0% A a 7.6 ab 2952 ab 6 Allegro 4 A b 4.7 c 3076 a 7 Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 8 Calcium Chloride (1/2 lb/ac) 219 AB a 7.5 ab 2696 b 437 AB a 8.6 a 2700 b Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A

129 Table 4. Crop Value Assessment on Cranberry Beans White Mold, Thorndale, A.I. Rate g/ha Appl. Code Yield Pick (kg/ha) Value ($/acre) 1 Untreated Check A 2402 b c Crop Value Assessment Additional Value ($/acre) Additional Costs* ($/acre) Return on Investment ($/acre) 2 Lance 540 A 2929 a a Ronilan 7 A 2695 ab ab Ronilan (1/2 rate) + Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 5 Ronilan + Assist A 2726 ab ab % A 2730 ab ab Allegro 4 A 2933 a a Calcium Chloride (1/4 lb/ac) 8 Calcium Chloride (1/2 lb/ac) 219 AB 2498 b bc AB 2467 b bc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) * 2006 product retail prices: Lance $ / ac., Ronilan (full) $ / ac., Allegro $ / ac., Assist $ 3.45 / ac., Calcuim Chloride ¼ lb/acre $ 0.10 / ac., ½ lb/ac $ 0.20 / ac. * includes an application cost of $ 8.00/ac. 129

130 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans, cv. RED HAWK dark red kidney Root rot, native strains plus Rhizoctonia solani Kuhn NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S., and DEPUYDT D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF SEEDLING ROOT ROT (RHIZOCTONIA) IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH SEED TREATMENTS AT HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 19.2 g ai/l); CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); CRUISER MAXX (thiamethoxam + metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 22.61% % %); DYNASTY 100FS (azoxystrobin 100 g ai/l). VITAFLO (carbathiin + thiram, 14.9% %) SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 70%). METHODS: For each treatment, seed was treated in 0.9 kg lots in individual plastic bags by applying the appropriate treatment. The seed was then mixed for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted May 29, 2006 at a seeding rate of 17 seeds per meter, using a four-row coneseeder mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. An experimental unit contained 2 rows that were 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. The Rhizoctonia root rot inoculum was applied at a rate of 5 g/m of row. All of the assessments were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Plant emergence counts were assessed at 9, 15, 22, 28, and 35 days after planting (DAP), using a 2 m length from the two rows of each plot. Plant vigour, using a scale of 0-10 (0 = best plant development and 10 = poorest plant development) was assessed at 15, 22, 28, and 35 DAP. Root rot ratings were performed on July 7 at 37 DAP. A set of 10 representative plants if possible, were dug from the plot area. The fresh and dry weight of the above ground portion of the plants was determined. The primary root (radicle) was scored for external damage, based on disease symptoms. It was then split open and a score given for internal damage. A scale of 0-10 (0 = 0% root damage, 10 = 100% root damage) was used. The experiment was not harvested for yield, due to poor plant stands following the plant sampling above. INOCULUM: A strain of Rhizoctonia solani (86-8b) was cultured onto Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA). One kg of hulless oats was added to each of several 4 litre plastic jugs and covered with 2% V8 Juice. Bottles were capped and left to stand for 2-3 hours. After standing, excess liquid was poured off and the bottles autoclaved at 15 psi and 121 C for 1 hour. Autoclaving procedure was repeated after 3 days. The PDA plates of R. solani were cut up into small squares and 5-6 plugs placed in the bottles of sterile oats. The bottles were incubated for 2 weeks. After 2 days of incubation there were golf ball sized chunks of inoculum present and the bottles were shaken every 2 days to ensure even distribution of inoculum. After 2 weeks incubation, the inoculum was dried and weighed into 30 g packages. RESULTS: See Tables 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: In 2006, environmental conditions for root rot were not ideal, with hot, dry weather after planting. The addition of Rhizoctonia solani inoculum provided dramatic differences between treatments for plant emergence (Table 1) and plant vigour (Table 2). Apron Maxx dramatically improved plant emergence, compared to the inoculated check or the standard fungicide treatment of DCT. Adding 130

131 high rates of to Apron Maxx provided plant vigour ratings that were significantly better than standard fungicide treatment of DCT, and also provided an incremental increase in plant emergence, compared to Apron Maxx alone. There were limited differences between treatments for external and internal root ratings (Table 3). Often there was not a consistent response as the rate of a product was increased. Fresh and dry plant weights showed similar trends to the plant emergence data, except that the standard fungicide treatments (DCT and Vitaflo) were not significantly different from the best treatments. 131

132 Table 1. Percent Plant Emergence of RED HAWK dark red kidney beans with seed treatments for Rhizoctonia seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario % Emergence G A/100 kg of seed 9 DAP 15 DAP 22 DAP 28 DAP 35 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check 59 a 81 a 79 a 80 a 80 a 2 Inoculated Check 0 c 0 j 2 h 1 h 1 h 3 0 c 1 j 2 h 2 h 2 h 4 Apron Maxx RTA c 42 cde 35 cd 34 cde 31 cd 5 DCT c 4 j 6 h 6 h 4 h c 5 j 8 h 7 h 7 gh c 8 j 9 gh 7 h 6 gh c 17 i 17 fg 17 g 14 fg c 24 hi 22 ef 21 fg 20 ef Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo bc 34 fg 32 d 29 def 27 de 1 c 39 def 37 cd 38 cd 34 cd 4 bc 49 bc 41 c 40 bc 39 bc 3 bc 54 b b 49 b 47 b 0 c 0 j 1 h 1 h 1 h 1 c 30 gh 31 d 27 ef 27 de 3 bc 36 efg 30 de 31 cde 29 de 0 c 42 cde 37 cd 38 cd 34 cd 6 b 47 bcd 38 cd 36 cde 35 cd Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

133 Table 2. Crop Vigour of RED HAWK dark red kidney beans with seed treatments for Rhizoctonia Seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Vigour (0-10) G A/100 kg of seed 15 DAP 22 DAP 28 DAP 35 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check 2.0 f 2.0 g 2.0 f 2.5 f 2 Inoculated Check 4.0 e 6.0 b-e 9.0 a 8.5 a abc 7.0 ab 7.7 b 7.3 ab 4 Apron Maxx RTA cde 5.0 ef 6.3 de 5.5 de 5 DCT abc 6.8 abc 6.3 de 6.5 bcd abc 7.3 a 7.3 bc 7.0 bc ab 6.8 abc 7.5 bc 7.0 bc a 6.5 a-d 7.0 bcd 6.3 b-e abc 6.5 a-d 6.8 b-e 6.0 cde Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo bcd 5.5 def 6.0 de 6.3 b-e 4.3 de 5.8 c-f 6.0 de 5.5 de 4.3 de 5.3 ef 6.3 de 5.0 e 4.3 de 4.8 f 6.0 de 6.0 cde 5.0 abc 5.5 def 7.0 bcd 6.0 cde 5.0 abc 6.5 a-d 6.5 cde 6.3 b-e 4.3 de 5.8 c-f 6.5 cde 6.5 bcd 4.3 de 5.5 def 6.0 de 5.8 cde 4.3 de 5.5 def 5.8 e 5.5 de Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

134 Table 3. Plant Assessment for RED HAWK dark red kidney beans with seed treatments for Rhizoctonia seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/100 kg of seed Plant Assessment Primary Primary Fresh Weight External (0-10) Internal (0-10) (g/10 plants) 1 Non-Inoculated Check 4.0 f 4.2 f a 32.1 a 2 Inoculated Check a 7.3 a 60.9 d 14.0 d Apron Maxx RTA DCT Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo Dry Weight (g/10 plants) 5.0 cde 5.0 c-f abc 25.4 abc 5.1 b-e 5.7 bcd abc 25.1 abc 5.3 bcd 5.2 b-f 82.3 cd 18.3 cd 5.4 bc 5.5 b-e 99.2 bcd 21.5 bcd 5.2 bcd 6.3 ab bc 23.9 abc 5.2 bcd 5.0 c-f ab 28.1 ab 5.1 b-e 4.7 def ab 28.3 ab 4.8 de 5.9 bc ab 27.3 ab 5.0 cde 4.5 ef ab 26.8 ab 5.2 b-e 4.9 c-f bc 23.6 bc 5.5 ab 4.8 def 91.8 bcd 23.5 bc 5.2 bcd 5.7 bcd ab 28.0 ab 4.7 e 4.6 def abc 24.9 abc 5.1 b-e 4.8 def bc 22.9 bc 5.4 bc 5.4 b-e ab 26.7 abc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

135 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans, cv. SVM TAYLORS cranberry bean Root rot, native strains plus Rhizoctonia solani Kuhn NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S., and DEPUYDT D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF SEEDLING ROOT ROT (RHIZOCTONIA) IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH SEED TREATMENTS AT HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 19.2 g ai/l); CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); CRUISER MAXX (thiamethoxam + metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 22.61% % %); DYNASTY 100FS (azoxystrobin 100 g ai/l). VITAFLO (carbathiin + thiram, 14.9% %); SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 70%). METHODS: For each treatment, seed was treated in 1.0 kg lots in individual plastic bags by applying the appropriate treatment. The seed was then mixed for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted May 29, 2006 at a seeding rate of 17 seeds per meter, using a four-row coneseeder mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. An experimental unit contained 2 rows that were 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. The Rhizoctonia root rot inoculum was applied at a rate of 5 g/m of row. All of the assessments were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Plant emergence counts were assessed at 9, 15, 22, 28, and 35 days after planting (DAP), using a 2 m length from the two rows of each plot. Plant vigour, using a scale of 0-10 (0 = best plant development and 10 = poorest plant development) was assessed at 15, 22, 28, and 35 DAP. Root rot ratings were performed on July 6 at 36 DAP. A set of 10 representative plants if possible, were dug from the plot area. The fresh and dry weight of the above ground portion of the plants was determined. The primary root (radicle) was scored for external damage, based on disease symptoms. It was then split open and a score given for internal damage. A scale of 0-10 (0 = 0% root damage, 10 = 100% root damage) was used. The experiment was not harvested for yield, due to poor plant stands following the plant sampling above. INOCULUM: A strain of Rhizoctonia solani (86-8b) was cultured onto Potato Dextrose Agar (PDA). One kg of hulless oats was added to each of several 4 litre plastic jugs and covered with 2% V8 Juice. Bottles were capped and left to stand for 2-3 hours. After standing, excess liquid was poured off and the bottles autoclaved at 15 psi and 121 C for 1 hour. Autoclaving procedure was repeated after 3 days. The PDA plates of R. solani were cut up into small squares and 5-6 plugs placed in the bottles of sterile oats. The bottles were incubated for 2 weeks. After 2 days of incubation there were golf ball sized chunks of inoculum present and the bottles were shaken every 2 days to ensure even distribution of inoculum. After 2 weeks incubation, the inoculum was dried and weighed into 30 g packages. RESULTS: See Tables 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: In 2006, environmental conditions for root rot were not ideal, with hot, dry weather after planting. The addition of Rhizoctonia solani inoculum provided dramatic differences between 135

136 treatments for plant emergence (Table 1), although the differences were not as dramatic as in the kidney bean experiment. Apron Maxx dramatically improved plant emergence, compared to the inoculated check or the standard fungicide treatment of DCT. alone was no better than the standard treatment of DCT. Adding high rates of to Apron Maxx provided an incremental increase in plant emergence, compared to Apron Maxx alone. There were limited differences between treatments for plant vigour (Table 2) and internal root ratings, fresh and dry plant weights (Table 3). Often there was not a consistent response as the rate of a product was increased. 136

137 Table 1. Percent Plant Emergence of SVM TAYLOR cranberry beans with seed treatments for Rhizoctonia seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario % Emergence G A/100 kg of seed 9 DAP 15 DAP 22 DAP 28 DAP 35 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check 64 a 81 a 80 a 85 a 83 a 2 Inoculated Check 0 d 11 f 11 g 13 i 11 h 3 0 cd 7 f 13 g 12 i 11 h 4 Apron Maxx RTA bcd 47 c 59 b 58 bcd 51 b-e 5 DCT cd 24 e 39 def 40 fgh 33 fg d 24 e 31 ef 35 fgh 33 fg cd 24 e 32 ef 34 gh 30 g bcd 22 e 28 f 29 h 27 g bcd 37 d 43 cde 47 def 45 def Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo bcd 47 c 52 bc 54 cde cde 5 bcd 58 b 62 b 68 b 57 bcd 6 bc 58 b 60 b 60 bcd 51 b-e 4 bcd 49 c 52 bc 57 bcd 53 b-e 0 d 8 f 14 g 13 i 12 h 3 bcd 37 d 42 cde 41 e-h 37 fg 4 bcd 47 c 60 b 62 bc 58 bc 3 bcd 54 bc 58 b 67 b 62 b 7 b 52 bc 45 cd 44 efg 43 ef Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

138 Table 2. Crop Vigour of SVM TAYLOR cranberry beans with seed treatments for Rhizoctonia seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Vigour (0-10) G A/100 kg of seed 15 DAP 22 DAP 28 DAP 35 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check 2.5 e 3.3 e 2.8 f 2.8 d 2 Inoculated Check 4.5 abc 6.0 bcd 6.5 bcd 7.3 ab a 7.3 a 8.0 a 7.8 a 4 Apron Maxx RTA cd 5.8 bcd 5.5 cde 6.0 bc 5 DCT abc 6.3 a-d 6.5 bcd 7.0 abc bcd 6.0 bcd 6.5 bcd 7.0 abc bcd 6.8 ab 7.0 ab 7.3 ab ab 5.5 cd 6.3 b-e 6.5 abc bcd 6.0 bcd 6.8 abc 6.5 abc Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo cd 5.5 cd 5.5 cde 6.0 bc 3.8 d 6.0 bcd 5.5 cde 6.0 bc 3.8 d 6.0 bcd 5.3 de 6.3 bc 4.0 cd 5.3 d 5.0 e 6.0 bc 4.8 ab 6.5 abc 6.3 b-e 6.8 abc 4.0 cd 6.0 bcd 5.8 b-e 6.0 bc 4.0 cd 5.8 bcd 5.5 cde 6.0 bc 3.8 d 5.3 d 5.3 de 5.8 c 4.0 cd 5.3 d 5.5 cde 6.3 bc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05)

139 Table 3. Plant Assessment for SVM TAYLOR cranberry beans with seed treatments for Rhizoctonia seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Plant Assessment G A/100 kg of seed Primary Primary Fresh Weight Dry Weight External (0-10) Internal (0-10) (g/10 plants) (g/10 plants) 1 Non-Inoculated Check h ab 20.7 a 2 Inoculated Check a 75.6 cd 15.0 bcd ab 70.2 cd 14.0 bcd 4 Apron Maxx RTA fg 73.2 cd 14.4 bcd 5 DCT c-f 63.7 d 12.7 d efg 76.1 cd 14.7 bcd bcd 74.4 cd 14.7 bcd c-f 87.5 abc 17.3 abc fg 77.2 cd 15.0 bcd Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo efg 84.8 bcd 17.1 a-d gh 85.2 a-d 16.9 a-d efg 89.6 abc 17.3 abc fg 91.6 abc 17.9 ab abc 64.7 d 12.9 cd b-e a 21.3 a efg 77.1 cd 15.1 bcd g 71.9 cd 13.9 bcd def 84.3 cd 16.8 a-d Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A

140 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS CROP: PEST: Edible beans, cv. RED HAWK dark red kidney Root rot, native strains NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S., and DEPUYDT D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF SEEDLING ROOT ROT IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH SEED TREATMENTS AT HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 19.2 g ai/l); CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); CRUISER MAXX (thiamethoxam + metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 22.61% % %); 100FS (azoxystrobin 100 g ai/l). VITAFLO (carbathiin + thiram, 14.9% %) SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 70%). METHODS: For each treatment, seed was treated in 0.9 kg lots in individual plastic bags by applying the appropriate treatment. The seed was then mixed for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted May 29, 2006 at a seeding rate of 17 seeds per meter, using a four-row coneseeder mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. An experimental unit contained 2 rows that were 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. All of the assessments were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Plant emergence counts were assessed at 9, 15, 22, 28, and 35 days after planting (DAP), using a 2 m length from the two rows of each plot. Plant vigour, using a scale of 0-10 (0 = best plant development and 10 = poorest plant development) was assessed at 15, 22, 28, and 35 DAP. Root rot ratings were performed on July 7 at 37 DAP. A set of 10 representative plants, were dug from the plot area. The fresh and dry weight of the above ground portion of the plants was determined. The primary root (radicle) was scored for external damage, based on disease symptoms. It was then split open and a score given for internal damage. A scale of 0-10 (0 = 0% root damage, 10 = 100% root damage) was used. The experiment was not harvested for yield due to a lack of visual differences between treatments. RESULTS: See Tables 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: In 2006, environmental conditions for root rot were not ideal, with hot, dry weather after planting. The native strains of root rot in the soil did not cause treatment differences for plant emergence (Table 1) or plant vigour (Table 2). There were slight differences between treatments for internal primary root rating (Table 3), but most of the treatments were not significantly different. 140

141 Table 1. Percent Plant Emergence of RED HAWK dark red kidney beans with seed treatments for seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario % Emergence G A/100 kg of seed 7 DAP 15 DAP 21 DAP 35 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check Non-Inoculated Check Inoculated Check Apron Maxx RTA DCT Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A 141

142 Table 2. Crop Vigour of RED HAWK dark red kidney beans with seed treatments for seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Vigour (0-10) G A/100 kg of seed 15 DAP 22 DAP 35 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check Non-Inoculated Check Apron Maxx RTA DCT Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A 142

143 Table 3. Plant Assessment for RED HAWK dark red kidney beans with seed treatments for seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/100 kg of seed Primary External (0-10) Plant Assessment Primary Internal (0-10) Fresh Weight (g/10 plants) Dry Weight (g/10 plants) 1 Non-Inoculated Check a-e Non-Inoculated Check a Inoculated Check a Apron Maxx RTA a-d DCT a-e ab a a-e abc Apron Maxx RTA cde Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo a-e de a-e e b-e a de a-e Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A 1.1 N/A N/A 143

144 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans, cv. SVM TAYLORS cranberry bean Root rot, native strains NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S., and DEPUYDT D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: CONTROL OF SEEDLING ROOT ROT IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS WITH SEED TREATMENTS AT HURON RESEARCH STATION MATERIALS: APRONMAXX RTA (metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 19.2 g ai/l); CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); CRUISER MAXX (thiamethoxam + metalaxyl-m + fludioxonil, 22.61% % %); DYNASTY 100FS (azoxystrobin 100 g ai/l). VITAFLO (carbathiin + thiram, 14.9% %) SENATOR 70WP (thiophanate-methyl 70%). METHODS: For each treatment, seed was treated in 1.0 kg lots in individual plastic bags by applying the appropriate treatment. The seed was then mixed for 1 minute to ensure thorough seed coverage. The experiment was planted May 29, 2006 at a seeding rate of 17 seeds per meter, using a four-row coneseeder mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. An experimental unit contained 2 rows that were 0.75 m apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All of the assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. All of the assessments were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Plant emergence counts were assessed at 9, 15, 22, 28, and 35 days after planting (DAP), using a 2 m length from the two rows of each plot. Plant vigour, using a scale of 0-10 (0 = best plant development and 10 = poorest plant development) was assessed at 15, 22, 28, and 35 DAP. Root rot ratings were performed on July 6 at 36 DAP. A set of 10 representative plants were dug from the plot area. The fresh and dry weight of the above ground portion of the plants was determined. The primary root (radicle) was scored for external damage, based on disease symptoms. It was then split open and a score given for internal damage. A scale of 0-10 (0 = 0% root damage, 10 = 100% root damage) was used. The experiment was not harvested for yield due to a lack of visual differences between treatments. RESULTS: See Tables 1-3. CONCLUSIONS: In 2006, environmental conditions for root rot were not ideal, with hot, dry weather after planting. The native strains of root rot in the soil did not cause treatment differences for plant emergence (Table 1) or plant vigour (Table 2). There were significant differences between treatments for internal primary root rating (Table 3). Cruiser + Apron Maxx + was significantly better than the check, but was not significantly better than Cruiser + Apron Maxx or the standard fungicide treatment (DCT). 144

145 Table 1. Percent Plant Emergence of SVM TAYLOR cranberry beans with seed treatments for seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario % Emergence G A/100 kg of seed 7 DAP 15 DAP 22 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check Non-Inoculated Check Apron Maxx RTA DCT Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A N/A 145

146 Table 2. Crop Vigour of SVM TAYLOR cranberry beans with seed treatments for seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Vigour (0-10) G A/100 kg of seed 15 DAP 22 DAP 1 Non-Inoculated Check Non-Inoculated Check Apron Maxx RTA DCT Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A N/A 146

147 Table 3. Plant Assessment for SVM TAYLOR cranberry beans with seed treatments for seedling disease at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario G A/100 kg of seed Plant Assessment Primary Primary Fresh Weight External (0-10) Internal (0-10) (g/10 plants) 1 Non-Inoculated Check a Non-Inoculated Check abc a-d Apron Maxx RTA DCT Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Apron Maxx RTA Senator 70 WP Cruiser Maxx Cruiser Maxx Vitaflo Dry Weight (g/10 plants) a-d cd a-d bcd ab a-d bcd cd a-d d cd d cd cd abc Mean C.V PR>F LSD (P=.05) N/A 1.09 N/A N/A 147

148 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv. 17 Varieties Bacterial Blight (Xanthomonas campestris pv. phaseoli) NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, DEPUYDT, D and WILLIS, S. Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: FIELD VALIDATION OF THE COMMON BACTERIAL BLIGHT (CBB) RESISTANCE GENE(S) IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS (HURON RESEARCH STATION) MATERIALS: CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w); Sylgard 309 (siloxylated polyether + surfactant mixture, 76% + 24%); Bacterial Blight Culture OVERVIEW: Document the impact of CBB (Xanthomonas campestris pv. phaseoli) on seed yield, leaf and seed quality in dry bean cultivars that possess a CBB resistance gene(s), compared to bean cultivars that are susceptible to CBB. METHODS: This report encompasses two experiments; experiment A (not inoculated with a CBB culture) and experiment B (inoculated with a CBB culture). Each experiment had 17 treatments; Fourteen were varieties with potential CBB resistance and three were CBB susceptible control varieties (AC Compass, Envoy, and Navigator). Seed was treated with DCT and at registered rates, for protection against early season seedling diseases and insects. Disease spread was minimized by separating the two experiments, and by separating the treatments within an experiment. Two 75 cm rows of soybeans were planted between each experimental unit within a tier and 6 meters of soybeans were planted between adjacent tiers. The experiments were planted June 8 th, 2006 using a four row cone-mounted planter mounted on a John Deere Max Emerge planter. The seeding rate was 17 seeds per metre. An experimental unit contained 2 rows 75 cm apart, 6 m in length, arranged in an RCBD design with 4 replications. All assessments and yields were obtained from a harvest area 4 m long and 2 rows wide. Nitrogen was applied at 60 kg actual / hectare to provide good plant growth. Bacterial blight inoculum was applied twice during the season on experiment B. The first application was in the late afternoon on July 14 th when the plants were at the 4 th trifoliate. The site received 5 mm of rain on that evening about 2 hours after application. The second application was on the morning of July 17 th in a heavy due. The inoculum was applied using a CO 2 pressurized sprayer with three teejet split fan nozzles spaced at cm, at 242kPa (35 psi). Rate of application of the bacterial culture was 167 ml per meter of row + 0.2% Sylgard 309. Disease severity on leaves was done using two methods. The first method used a 0-5 scale: 0 = no infection, 1 =< 5%, 2 = 5-10%, 3 = 10-25%, 4 = 25-%, 5 = -100%. The second method used a 0-4 scale: 0 = no infection, 1 = very small necrotic lesions only, 2 = a few small lesions (no bigger than a dime), 3 = large spreading lesions, 4 = entire plant covered with large spreading lesions. Scores of 0.5 are used to describe a treatment that falls between two categories on the disease scale. Leaf ratings were done on August 15 th and on the 22 th. Leaf ratings were taken on August 15 th and on the 22 th. Pod and seed ratings were not done, due to a lack of disease development in the inoculated experiment. The experiments were harvested between September 27 th and October 6 th. Plant maturity was determined by recording the days needed for 95% of the pods on the plant to be ready for harvest. Visual seed quality 148

149 was determined using a scale of 1-5 (1 = excellent seed quality, 5 = poor seed quality). Seed weight was determined by recording the weight of 100 randomly selected seeds from each plot. Yield and seed weights were adjusted to the standard storage moisture of 18%. INOCULUM: The bacterial blight culture was grown in Luria Bertani (LB) media. The protocol is as follows: To 980 ml of double distilled water add 10g of Bacto-tryptone (Difco), 5g Bacto-yeast extract (Difco) and 5 g Sodium Chloride (NaCl). 1 M Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) was added to the solution until a ph of was reached. Double distilled water was then added to a final volume of one litre. The flask containing the LB media was autoclaved for purpose of sterilization of the media on wet cycle for 25 minutes. An initial culture of the four Xap strains was started two days before inoculation of the main cultures. The culture was started by taking a loop full of bacteria from a frozen stock of the four mixed strains or by taking a loop from each of the separately frozen strains and dipping the loop into a 1 ml flask of LB media. The inoculated flask was placed on a shaker (1 rpm) at 28 o C for 2 days (the flask should gradually turn cloudy and clumps of cells should be visible when swirled). It is very important that proper sterile technique is used to inoculate the media as contamination will lead to other unwanted bacteria and fungus growing in the media. For the mass inoculations Erlenmayer flasks were filled to 70% of listed volume (1000 ml flask was filled to 700 ml) with LB media. To the flasks 0.07% (700 ul to 1000 ml flask) of the volume of the flask was added in inoculum from the initial culture. The cultures were placed on a shaker at 28 o C for 2 days and should appear cloudy at the second day. To determine how much the cultures must be diluted the optical density (O.D.) of the cultures was taken using the spectrophotometer (Beckmann Instruments Inc., USA). The cultures must be diluted to an O.D. of 0.32 corresponding to 1x 10 8 colony forming units ml -1. Dilution of the inoculum was carried out in the sprayer tank using non-chlorinated tap water. METHODS: RESULTS: See Tables 1-4. CONCLUSIONS: A low level of CBB infection was documented in each treatment in the non-inoculated experiment (Table 1). No significant differences were detected between the susceptible and tolerant cultivars. It is believed that the seed was the source of the infection. In the inoculated experiment, a moderate level of CBB infection was documented (Table 2). All of the CBB tolerant treatments were significantly better than the three control treatments, except for HR67 and MABC Differences in plant maturity and seed weight were expected within each experiment (Table 3 and 4), due to inherent differences between varieties. Differences in plant maturity between experiments may be due to differences in soil type and CBB infection levels. Trends in yield are not clearly evident in the data set (Table 3&4). A yield index was calculated, using the following formula: Non-inoculated Yield Inoculated Yield x 100 Non-inoculated Yield The yield index calculations show no differences between the susceptible and resistant treatments. The CBB resistant treatments had an average yield index of 42.0%, and the CBB susceptible treatments had an average yield index of 41.4%. 149

150 Table 1. Bacterial Blight Analysis for Experiment A (Non-inoculated) at the Huron Research Station. Exeter, Ontario Bacterial Blight Leaf Analysis August 15 August 22 Percentage 0-5 Scale 0-4 Scale Percentage 0-5 Scale 0-4 Scale 1 Envoy Compass Navigator HR HR HR HR HR Harohawk OAC Rex OAC OAC 06-B OAC MABC MABC MABC F4GR Mean C.V PR>F LSD(.05) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1

151 Table 2. Bacterial Blight Analysis for Experiment B (Inoculated) at the Huron Research Station. Exeter, Ontario Bacterial Blight Leaf Analysis August 15 August 22 Percentage 0-5 Scale 0-4 Scale Percentage 0-5 Scale 0-4 Scale 1 Envoy 65.0 a 5.0 a 3.8 a 55.0 a 5.0 a 3.5 a 2 Compass 40.0 b 4.0 b 3.0 b 40.0 bc 3.8 bc 3.0 b 3 Navigator 43.8 b 4.0 b 3.0 b 33.8 cde 3.5 bcd 3.0 b 4 HR bc 3.8 bc 3.0 b 37.5 bcd 3.8 bc 3.0 b 5 HR def 3.0 def 3.0 b 27.5 efg 3.3 cde 3.0 b 6 HR def 2.8 ef 3.0 b 28.8 efg 3.5 bcd 3.0 b 7 HR def 3.0 def 3.0 b 23.8 fg 3.0 de 3.0 b 8 HR def 3.3 cde 2.8 b 22.5 fg 3.0 de 3.0 b 9 Harohawk 30.0 cd 3.3 cde 3.0 b 37.5 bcd 4.0 b 3.0 b 10 OAC Rex 18.8 fg 3.0 def 3.0 b 21.3 g 2.8 e 3.0 b 11 OAC ef 2.8 ef 3.0 b 28.8 efg 3.5 bcd 3.0 b 12 OAC 06-B g 2.5 f 2.8 b 27.5 efg 3.3 cde 3.0 b 13 OAC de 3.5 bcd 3.0 b 32.5 cde 3.5 bcd 3.0 b 14 MABC de 3.0 def 3.0 b 32.5 cde 3.5 bcd 3.0 b 15 MABC bc 3.8 bc 3.0 b 43.8 b 4.0 b 3.0 b 16 MABC de 3.0 def 3.0 b 30.0 def 3.3 cde 3.0 b 17 F4GR cd 3.3 cde 3.0 b 30.0 def 3.3 cde 3.0 b Mean C.V PR>F LSD(.05)

152 Table 3. Crop Assessment for Experiment A (Non-inoculated) at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Crop Assessment Yield (kg/ha) Days to Maturity Seed Weight Seed Quality 1 Envoy h 21.3 d 1.5 e 2 Compass gh 22.7 bc 2.1 bc 3 Navigator efg 21.2 d 1.8 cde 4 HR de 24.1 b 1.6 de 5 HR abc 21.8 cd 1.8 cde 6 HR ab 21.3 d 2.0 bcd 7 HR bcd 23.1 bc 1.5 e 8 HR def 23.7 b 2.0 bcd 9 Harohawk def 21.8 cd 1.4 e 10 OAC Rex ab 21.8 cd 1.8 cde 11 OAC ab 22.1 cd 1.6 de 12 OAC 06-B fgh 23.0 bc 2.4 b 13 OAC bcd 22.0 cd 2.1 bc 14 MABC d-g 20.9 d 1.4 e 15 MABC d-g 23.5 b 1.5 e 16 MABC cd 21.3 d 1.6 de 17 F4GR a 26.9 a 3.5 a Mean C.V PR>F LSD(.05) N/A

153 Table 4. Crop Assessment for Experiment B (Inoculated) at the Huron Research Station, Exeter, Ontario Crop Assessment Yield (kg/ha) Yield Index Days to Maturity Seed Weight Seed Quality 1 Envoy 1152 b-e f 22.3 cde 1.8 def 2 Compass 1518 abc e 23.4 bcd 1.9 cde 3 Navigator 1283 bcd e 21.6 ef 1.9 cde 4 HR cde ab 24.1 b 2.1 c 5 HR bcd abc 22.8 b-e 1.9 cde 6 HR b-e abc 21.3 ef 1.5 f 7 HR abc d 22.8 b-e 1.5 f 8 HR a e 23.5 bc 2.0 cd 9 Harohawk 1518 abc e 21.9 def 1.6 ef 10 OAC Rex 1207 bcd a 22.8 b-e 1.8 def 11 OAC b-e bc 22.8 b-e 1.9 cde 12 OAC 06-B ab e 24.0 b 3.3 a 13 OAC abc bc 21.6 ef 1.9 cde 14 MABC bcd e 20.7 fg 1.8 def 15 MABC de f 23.5 bc 1.6 ef 16 MABC e cd 19.2 g 1.6 ef 17 F4GR185 8 de a 28.6 a 2.8 b Mean C.V PR>F LSD(.05)

154 PMR REPORT # SECTION J: CEREAL, FORAGE, AND OILSEED CROPS ICAR: CROP: PEST: Edible beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), cv. as per treatment Marsh Spot NAME AND AGENCY: GILLARD C L, WILLIS, S. and DEPUYDT, D Ridgetown College, University of Guelph, Ridgetown, Ontario, N0P 2C0 Tel: (519) Fax: (519) cgillard@ridgetownc.uoguelph.ca TITLE: EVALUATION OF INCIDENCE OF MARSH SPOT IN DRY EDIBLE BEANS VARIETY TRIALS (THORNDALE, KIPPEN, ST. THOMAS AND MONKTON) MATERIALS: CRUISER 5FS (thiamethoxam, 600 g ai /L); DCT (diazinon + captan + thiophanate methyl, 18% + 6% + 14% w/w) METHODS: Cranberry beans are prone to a disorder, known as Marsh Spot, that discolors the interior of the cotyledon and can create marketing issues. The experiment was conducted to determine if any of the Ontario registered or candidate cranberry varieties are susceptible to Marsh Spot compared to Messina, a highly susceptible variety of cranberry beans. Seed was treated with DCT and at registered rates, for protection against early season seedling diseases and insects. Four locations were planted across southern Ontario; St. Thomas, Thorndale, Kippen and Monkton. The experiments were part of the Ontario dry bean variety registration and performance trials. The experiments were arranged as a RCBD design with 4 replications. Samples of seed harvested from these experiments were sent to the Huron Research, and scored for marsh spot incidence and severity. Fifty seeds were split and each half was rated for marsh spot incidence. The percentage incidence was then calculated for each variety. If marsh spot was present, its severity was visually rated on a scale of one to five, using the standards found in Figure 1. RESULTS: See Tables 1-5. CONCLUSIONS: Marsh spot scores for each of four locations are presented in Tables 1-4. Marsh spot was quite noticeable at the Thorndale (Table 1) and St. Thomas (Table 3) sites. A combined analysis of all four locations is presented in Table 5. Incidence by severity calculations show that Messina, HR and HR are significantly worst than any other variety. 154

155 Figure 1: Marsh Spot Severity Ratings 155