Fungicide Sensitivity of Cold Climate Grape Varieties Patricia - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Fungicide Sensitivity of Cold Climate Grape Varieties

Patricia McManus University of Wisconsin-Madison UW-Extension

Topics

• Role of copper and sulfur for disease control in

grapes

• Research results on copper, sulfur, and

difenoconazole, 2012-2015

• Considerations for integrating copper and sulfur into

a spray program

Role of Copper and Sulfur in Managing Diseases of Grapes

• Copper-based fungicides

– Highly effective on downy mildew – Limited activity against

• ther pathogens
• Sulfur

– Highly effective on powdery mildew – Little or no activity on other pathogens

Role of Copper and Sulfur in Managing Diseases of Grapes

• Liquid lime-sulfur, liquid sulfur

– Dormant application may have eradicant activity on anthracnose, Phomopsis, and powdery mildew

• GREEN TISSUES BURNED BY

LIME-SULFUR! DO NOT APPLY AFTER LEAVES EMERGE!

Role of Copper and Sulfur in Managing Diseases of Grapes

• 1. Fungicide resistance management

– Both copper and sulfur act by non-specific disruption of proteins – Still effective after centuries of use – Sterol inhibitors, strobilurins, and others can be overcome by a few mutations in pathogens  fungicide resistance

• 1. Some forms of copper and sulfur cheaper than

synthetic fungicides

Role of Copper and Sulfur in Managing Diseases of Grapes

• 3. Important in organic production

– Some forms of copper and sulfur are approved by OMRI – Copper and sulfur often less expensive than other OMRI-approved products

Topics

• Role of copper and sulfur for disease control in

grapes

• Research results on copper, sulfur, and

difenoconazole, 2012-2015

• Considerations for integrating copper and sulfur into

a spray program

Sensitivity to copper, sulfur, 2,4-D, and dicamba, as well as disease susceptibility

Cultivar BR DM PM Phom. Anthr. S Cu Brianna ? + ? ? ? ? ? Edelweiss ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Maréchal Foch ++ + ++ + ++ Yes Yes Frontenac +++ + ++ + + No ? Frontenac gris ++ + ++ + + No ? La Crescent ++ +++ ++ +++ + ? ? La Crosse +++ ++ ++ ++ + ? ? Marquette +++ + + ? ? ? ?

• St. Croix

? ++ ++ +++ + ? ?

Lots of Unknowns for Cold Climate Varieties

Degree of susceptibility/sensitivity: + = slightly; ++ = moderately; +++ = highly; ? = not known

• Objective

– Determine relative sensitivity of northern varieties to copper, sulfur, and difenoconazole

• Collaborators

– Matt Stasiak, Brian Shauske, Janet Hedtcke, Victoria Kartanos, Dave Jones—UW-Madison research stations and UW Plant Pathology

Fungicide Sensitivity Research

Crop injury warning for products containing difenoconazole: Inspire, Inspire Super, Revus Top, Quadris Top

PARS 1 & 2 WM1 & WM2

Brianna Frontenac Frontenac gris La Crescent La Crosse Leon Millot Maréchal Foch Marquette MN1220 Noiret NY76 Petite Pearl

• St. Croix

Valiant Vignoles

Research Sites and Varieties

Treatments

• 1. Cuprofix Ultra 40 or Champ WG, 1.2 - 2 lb actual

copper/acre

• 2. Microthiol Disperss, 8-10 lb micronized sulfur/acre
• 3. Inspire Super or Inspire, 0.114 lb difenoconazole

per acre

• 4. Non-treated control

Treatments

• Applied 2 to 6 times at 2- to 3-week intervals in May-

Aug 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 (11 trials total)

• Applied without adjuvants and not mixed with other

pesticides

Data Collection

• About every 2 weeks, foliage rated for injury

1 = no visible injury 2 = minor injury 3 = moderate injury 4 = severe injury

• For any given trial, same person did ratings weekly

season-long

• Toxicity = average rating of 2.5 and statistically

different from non-treated control

Copper injury on Brianna, PARS 2012

Copper injury on Marquette, WMARS, 4-Sep 2013

Foch at Peninsular Station, 2013 Sprayed with sulfur

Foch at Peninsular Station, 2012

Sprayed with sulfur Sprayed with copper

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Brianna

• M. Foch

Frontenac Fronten gris LaCrescent LaCrosse Leon Millot Marquette MN1220 Noiret NY76 Petite Pearl

• St. Croix

Valiant Vignoles

Sensitivity to Copper

Sensitivity to Copper

• Do not apply copper to Brianna
• Restrict copper to 1-2 sprays/season on

Frontenac, Frontenac gris, LaCrescent, Leon Millot, Maréchal Foch, Marquette, and St. Croix

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Brianna

• M. Foch

Frontenac Fronten gris LaCrescent LaCrosse Leon Millot Marquette MN1220 Noiret NY76 Petite Pearl

• St. Croix

Valiant Vignoles

Sensitivity to Sulfur

Sensitivity to Sulfur

• Do not apply sulfur to Maréchal Foch, Leon

Millot, or Brianna

• Restrict sulfur to 1-2 sprays/season on

LaCrescent and St. Croix

Sensitivity to Difenoconazole

• Noiret was sensitive in 1 of 2 trials
• The following varieties were tested in at least

3 trials, and none were sensitive:

– Brianna, Frontenac, Frontenac gris, LaCrescent, LaCrosse, Leon Millot, Maréchal Foch, Marquette, NY76, St. Croix, Valiant, and Vignoles

Topics

• Role of copper and sulfur for disease control in

grapes

• Research results on copper, sulfur, and

difenoconazole, 2012-2015

• Considerations for integrating copper and sulfur

into a spray program

Integrating Copper and Sulfur into a Spray Program

Initial considerations

• Do you have a good reason to try Cu and/or S?

– Organic – Resistance management – Economics

• Do you have any Cu or S sensitive varieties?
• Are Cu and S compatible with other products you

rely on?

pH and Copper Solubility

• At lower pH, copper ions released from “fixed”

fungicides more quickly

• Copper fungicides should not be mixed with

phosphorous acid fungicides or any product that will reduce pH below 6.5

• Because some forms of copper are persistent,

consider the interval between copper and PA fungicide sprays

Integrating Copper and Sulfur into a Spray Program

Further considerations

• Do you need post-infection activity?

– Cu strictly protective, needs to go on before infection – S primarily protective, but good post-infection control up until time that PM growth appears – Other fungicides provide better post-infection activity against DM and PM

Integrating Copper and Sulfur into a Spray Program

• Weather at time of application and within 24 hours

after – Hot temps increases risk of S injury – Cool temps, prolonged wetness increase risk of Cu injury

Integrating Copper and Sulfur into a Spray Program

• “Weathering” of fungicides after application

– S especially subject to wash off with 1-2 inches rain – Micronized forms of Cu and S more weather-fast than wettable powder

Thank You!

Questions?

Vine N Nutri rition

• n of
• f C

Col

• ld-Hard

rdy Cultiva vars

Carl Rosen sen a and J d James es Crants Department o

• f S

Soil il, Water, and Clim imate Un Univ iversit ity of Min innesota

Northe hern n Grape pes P Project W Webi bina nar April 12, 2, 201 2016

Collaborators

Tim Martinson and Chrislyn Particka, Cornell University Paul Domoto and Diana Cochran, Iowa State University Harlene Hatterman-Valenti, North Dakota State University Rhoda Burrows and Anne Fennell, South Dakota State University

Background

• Recently developed cold hardy grape varieties offer

new opportunities for winemaking

• Optimal nutrition and soil management practices have

not been established

• Tissue analysis is a tool used to assess nutritional

status, but critical values are based on V. labrusca and

• V. vinifera
• Values may need to be adjusted for cold hardy

varieties, which have a V. riparia background

Background

• Tissue analysis is traditionally

based on petioles samples

• The use of petioles has come

into question, even for traditional varieties

• Leaf blade tissue or whole leaf

(petiole + blade) may be a better indicator of nutritional status

Background

 Optimum petiole sampling time?  Bloom

 +: more time to correct issues  -: nutrient concentrations unstable

 Veraison

 +: concentrations stable

 predict nutrient needs for next year

 -: little time to address

problems before harvest

Current Petiole Guidelines

Element Bloom Veraison N (%) 1.60 - 2.50 0.90 - 1.3 P (%) 0.16 - 0.60 0.13 - 0.40 K (%) 1.50 - 4.00 1.50 - 2.50 S (%) no data no data Ca (%) 0.40 - 1.50 1.20 - 1.80 Mg (%) 0.20 - 0.40 0.26 - 0.45 Zn (ppm) 20 - 100 20 - 40 Fe (ppm) 40 - 180 30 - 100 Mn (ppm) 20 - 150 30 - 150 Cu (ppm) 5 - 10 5 -15 B (ppm) 25 – 50 25 - 50

Values tabulated by Rosen and Domoto Ranges based on data from V. vinifera and V. labrusca Western and Eastern U.S. research

Overall Objectives

• Establish/fine-tune nutrient diagnostic criteria and

interpretations for recently released cold hardy grape cultivars

• Determine relationships between soil characteristics

and tissue nutrient levels (petiole, blade, whole leaf) and juice quality

14-16 Study Sites, 3 Years

Used in 1 – 2 seasons Used in all 3 seasons

Approach

 Four-year-old vines (or older) of Marquette, La

Crescent, and Frontenac grape cultivars selected in 2012

 3 replicates/cultivar per vineyard  Original plan - 144 samples/cultivar over 3 years

 Soil samples for 0-8” and 8-16” depths collected in

the springs of 2012 and 2015

 Characterize physical and chemical properties

 Leaf blade and petiole samples collected in 2012,

2013, and 2015 at:

 Full bloom  Midsummer (~ 30 days later)  Veraison

Approach

• Full bloom

 Petioles and leaves

• pposite the bottom

flower cluster

Approach

 Midsummer (~ 30 days

post-bloom) and veraison

 Petioles and leaves from the

most recently matured leaf

 5th to 7th leaf from the

terminal

5 7 6

Approach

 Soil and tissue samples were sent to a commercial lab for

analysis using standard protocols

 At harvest, grape yields were measured or estimated  Grape samples were collected for juice quality analysis:

 Brix, pH, titratable acidity, YAN

Approach – Data Used for Developing Nutrient Diagnostic Criteria

 Data from vines that had adequate

yields (range ~ 4 – 39 lbs/vine);

 Eliminated highest and lowest nutrient

concentration value in each cultivar

 Vines were also excluded if:

 Vines recovering from frost damage  No yield per vine data provided  Nutrient stress symptoms evident in vines

Approach –

 62 replicate-years remained for Frontenac

 6 – 8 vineyards each year

 75 remained for La Crescent

 7 – 8 vineyards each year

 80 remained for Marquette

 9 – 10 vineyards each year

Approach – Tissue Sufficiency Ranges

 Mean, standard deviation, maximum, and minimum

nutrient concentrations were calculated for each cultivar separately and all cultivars combined

 Concentrations and ranges are based on all

cultivars combined

 Sufficiency range: Mean – SD to Mean + SD  Sufficiency ranges were similar among cultivars, for

the most part

Results – Soil Properties

Variable Mean Range Texture Loamy sand to clay loam pH 6.7 5.1 – 7.9 O.M. (%) 3.1 1.2 – 5.7 Bray P1 (ppm) 33 3 – 147 K (ppm) 203 81 – 630 Mg (ppm) 439 106 – 1097 Zn (ppm) 1.69 0.25 – 5.75 B (ppm) 0.39 0.16 – 0.89

Results – Tissue at bloom

Element Petiole Blade Whole leaf N (%) 1.20 - 1.90 3.10 - 4.00 2.90 - 3.75 P (%) 0.25 - 0.65 0.25 - 0.50 0.25 - 0.50 K (%) 1.30 - 3.00 0.75 - 1.50 0.75 - 1.50 S (%) 0.10 - 0.25 0.20 - 0.40 0.20 - 0.40 Ca (%) 1.00 - 1.75 1.00 - 2.00 1.00 - 2.00 Mg (%) 0.20 - 0.50 0.20 - 0.40 0.20 - 0.40 Zn (ppm) 20 - 50 20 - 40 20 - 50 Fe (ppm) 20 - 40 60 - 125 50 - 120 Mn (ppm) 20 - 50 30 - 170 30 - 150 Cu (ppm) 7 - 15 7 - 15 7 - 15 B (ppm) 25 - 40 25 - 50 25 - 50

Results – Tissue at Veraison

Element Petiole Blade Whole leaf N (%) 0.80 - 1.20 2.25 - 3.20 2.10 - 3.00 P (%) 0.20 - 0.60 0.20 - 0.35 0.20 - 0.35 K (%) 1.25 - 3.25 0.70 - 1.10 0.75 - 1.25 S (%) 0.10 - 0.15 0.15 - 0.25 0.15 - 0.25 Ca (%) 1.20 - 2.00 1.25 - 2.35 1.25 - 2.30 Mg (%) 0.25 - 0.65 0.30 - 0.50 0.30 - 0.50 Zn (ppm) 35 - 55 20 - 30 25 - 35 Fe (ppm) 20 - 35 40 - 125 40 - 115 Mn (ppm) 20 - 80 40 - 100 40 - 90 Cu (ppm) 5 - 10 5 - 10 5 - 10 B (ppm) 25 - 45 20 - 45 20 - 45

Relationships Between Tissue Nutrients and Juice Quality

 Analysis of variance was performed on the full data

set for the main effect of each independent variable on each juice variable (Brix, pH, TA, YAN), controlling for effects of cultivar and year

 Main effects with P-values less than 0.05 were

considered meaningful:

 if there was no interaction with cultivar or year, or  if the trend was in the same direction for each cultivar

across all years

Relationships with YAN

 YAN increased with increases in tissue N

 Strongest in bloom blades  Blades higher in N than petiole

 YAN increased with bloom blade, whole-leaf

S, veraison petiole S

 S positively correlated with N

Relationships with Juice pH

 Juice pH increased with increases in bloom

petiole K

 K higher in petioles than blades

 Juice pH increased with increases in veraison

whole-leaf N, with weaker effects for blades and petioles separately

 Juice pH decreased with increasing yield per

vine

Relationships with Titratable Acidity (TA)

 TA Increased with increasing bloom blade

and whole-leaf S

 Mean S concentration highest in bloom blades

 Increased with bloom petiole P

Relationships with Sugar (˚Brix)

 No independent variable was consistently

related to juice sugar concentration

 NOTE:

 Juice composition, including Brix, is related to

• ther management factors such as cropping

levels, fruit exposure, pruning, training system, and harvest timing

What We Have Learned So Far

■ Wide range of soil properties in the study ■ Wide range in tissue nutrient levels ■ Some previous petiole diagnostic ranges

based on traditional cultivars will be fine- tuned for cold-climate cultivars

 N, P, K, S, Ca, Fe at bloom  N, P, K, S, Zn, Fe, Mn at veraison

What We Have Learned So Far

▪ Tissues collected at bloom were more

predictive of juice quality than those collected at veraison

 Tissue N and S influence juice YAN  Tissue K and yield per vine influence juice pH  S influences juice TA  No consistent influences on juice sugar

What We Have Learned So Far

■ Our most robust result is the positive correlation

between tissue N and YAN

■ Growers base harvest times on other variables

(Brix, pH, TA)

■ Thus, these variables may not respond strongly to

factors other than grower targets

■ Data analysis is still in progress; consider results

presented today as preliminary

Thank You & Questions?