Management of wheat blast with synthetic fungicides, partial resistance and silicate and phosphite minerals

Field trials conducted on a yellow-red latossol (pH 6.0), replicated in 2010 and 2011, sought to examine the effect of silicon, phosphite minerals, synthetic fungicides and genetic resistance for wheat blast management ( Magnaporthe grisea ) in Central Brazil. Disease intensity was measured on cvs. BRS 264 and BR18 subjected to the following Si treatments: pre-plant furrow application of Ca & Mg silicate (300 kg ha -1 ); post-plant scattered application of Ca & Mg silicate on top of the soil (1 ton ha -1 ); multiple foliar SiO 2 applications (30 g l - 1 ); and non-treated control. Blast incidence and severity were scored. Further experiments were conducted on cv. BR-264, for examination of the effect of potassium phosphite and synthetic fungicides on wheat blast intensity, with the following treatments: K 2 HPO 3 (1ml l - 1 ); epoxinazole + pyraclostrobin (700 ml ha -1 ); tebuconazole (600 ml ha -1 ); tebuconazole + trifloxystrobin (750 ml ha -1 ); and non-treated control. In 2010, disease intensity was lower than in 2011. In the silicate experiments, disease was significantly lower when plants were treated with foliar or furrow silicate. Si applications significantly reduced disease in BRS-264. While BR-18 consistently demonstrated lower disease levels, cv. BRS-264 generally responded more markedly to silicon applications. In the phosphite/fungicide experiment of 2010, all treatments reduced disease when compared with the control, and in 2011 phosphite efficiency was not significantly different from some fungicide treatments. Synthetic fungicides demonstrated an average blast control of 55% by severity values. Yields were increased in the phosphite-treated plots (by 9–80%), in the Si treatments (by 26–92%), and more so, and more consistently, with synthetic fungicides (by 90–121%). Combined results of all field studies, carried out under environmental conditions highly conducive to disease, indicated that control of wheat blast necessitates the joint integration of several alternatives for efficient disease management.