4.1 Article

Estimating disease losses to the Australian barley industry

期刊

AUSTRALASIAN PLANT PATHOLOGY
卷 39, 期 1, 页码 85-96

出版社

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/AP09064

关键词

crop loss assessment; fungi; nematodes; bacteria; viruses; net blotch; powdery mildew; rust; root rot

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The incidence, severity and yield loss caused by 40 pathogens associated with 41 diseases of barley were assessed from a survey of 15 barley pathologists covering the winter cereal growing areas of Australia. The survey provided data on the frequency of years that each pathogen developed to its maximum extent, the proportion of the crop then affected in each growing area, and the yield loss that resulted in the affected crops with and without current control measures. These data were combined with crop production and grain quality data to estimate the value of the losses aggregated to the Northern, Southern and Western production regions. Pathogens were estimated to cause a current average loss of $252 x 10(6)/year or 19.6% of the average annual value of the barley crop in the decade 1998-99 to 2007-08. Nationally, the three most important pathogens are Pyrenophora teres f. maculata, Blumeria graminis f. sp. hordei and Heterodera avenae with current average annual losses of $43 x 10(6), $39 x 10(6) and $26 x 10(6), respectively. If current controls were not used, losses would be far higher with potential average annual losses from the three most important pathogens, P. teres f. maculata, H. avenae and P. teres f. teres, being $192 x 10(6), $153 x 10(6) and $117 x 10(6), respectively. The average value of control practices exceeded $50 x 10(6)/year for nine pathogens. Cultural methods (rotation, field preparation) were the only controls used for 14 pathogens and contributed more than 50% of the control for a further 13 pathogens. Breeding and the use of resistant cultivars contributed more than 50% of control for five pathogens and pesticides for four pathogens. The relative importance of pathogens varied between regions and zones.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据