4.5 Article

A temperature-based model for latent-period duration in stem rust of perennial ryegrass and tall fescue

期刊

PHYTOPATHOLOGY
卷 91, 期 1, 页码 111-116

出版社

AMER PHYTOPATHOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1094/PHYTO.2001.91.1.111

关键词

Festuca arundinacea; Lolium perenne

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A temperature-response curve for latent-period duration in stem rust (caused by Puccinia graminis subsp. graminicola) on perennial ryegrass and tall fescue was developed from constant-temperature experiments with inoculated plants and evaluated in field experiments. Under constant-temperature conditions, time from infection to 50% of pustules erupted for perennial ryegrass ranged from 54 days at 3.5 degreesC to 5.9 days at 26.5 degreesC. The latent period (LP50) duration of tall fescue was 69 and 8.5 days at these respective temperatures. The dependence of latent-period completion rate on temperature was best described as a linear increase in rate with temperature up to approximately 26 degreesC, then an exponential decline with temperature up to the maximum (lethal) temperature of approximately 35.5 degreesC. LP20, the time required for 20% of open pustules to appear, was used as an estimator of latent-period duration for field observations. Percentage of one latent period completed per half hour (half-hourly rate), for perennial ryegrass was modeled as (0.0156T - 0.0206) {1 - exp[0.497(T - 35.5)]}, where T = average temperature (degreesC) during the half-hour period. For tall fescue the modeled rate was (0.0109T - 0.00214) (1 - exp[0.417(T - 35.5)]}. Latent periods modeled by these equations were compared with observed latent periods in field experiments with potted plants, where half-hourly temperatures were measured. Linear regressions of modeled Versus observed latent periods had adjusted r(2) values of 0.96 for perennial ryegrass and 0.93 for tall fescue. The latent-period equations could be used as components of a weather-based disease advisory model to optimize fungicide use in stem-rust management on these crops.

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

4.5
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