November
2002
, Volume
86
, Number
11
Pages
1,240
-
1,246
Authors
Gerald L.
Miller
and
Katherine L.
Stevenson
,
Department of Plant Pathology, University of Georgia, Miller Plant Sciences Building, Athens 30602
; and
Leon L.
Burpee
,
Department of Plant Pathology, University of Georgia, Georgia Experiment Station, Griffin 30223
Affiliations
Go to article:
RelatedArticle
Accepted for publication 25 June 2002.
Abstract
ABSTRACT
In response to reports of reduced efficacy of propiconazole for control of dollar spot, isolates of Sclerotinia homoeocarpa were collected from several locations in Georgia and tested for sensitivity to propiconazole and other demethylation-inhibiting (DMI) fungicides. Two discriminatory concentrations of propiconazole (0.02 and 0.2 μg ml-1) were used to detect lower in vitro sensitivity in two populations that had been exposed repeatedly to propiconazole than in four nonexposed populations. Mean 50% effective concentration (EC50) values for a nonexposed population (baseline) and a DMI-exposed population were 0.0049 and 0.0283 μg ml-1, respectively. Positive correlations were significant among log10 EC50 values for propiconazole, fenarimol, and myclobutanil but not between triadimefon and any of the other three fungicides, indicating cross-resistance relationships in this pathogen may not be universal among the DMIs. In greenhouse experiments, propiconazole-treated bentgrass was inoculated with seven isolates of S. homoeocarpa differing in sensitivity to propiconazole. Incubation period decreased and relative area under the disease progress curve and disease severity 28 days after inoculation increased linearly with increasing log10 EC50 value of the isolate. Results of this study confirm a significant relationship between in vitro sensitivity of S. homoeocarpa and in planta control efficacy of propiconazole and provide evidence of field resistance to propiconazole in S. homoeocarpa in Georgia.
JnArticleKeywords
Additional keywords:
Agrostis palustris,
disease management,
fungicide resistance,
sterol inhibitors
Page Content
ArticleCopyright
© 2002 The American Phytopathological Society