Field evaluation of systemic inducing resistance chemicals at different growth stages for the control of apple (Venturia inaequalis) and pear (Venturia pirina) scab

Two field trials were conducted using established apple (Malus cv. Golden Delicious) and pear (Pyrus communis 'Williams' Bon Chretien') to assess the efficacy of three commercially available systemic inducing resistance (SIR) products, Messenger (a.i. Harpin protein), Phoenix (a.i. Potassium phosphite) and Rigel (a.i. Salicylic acid derivative) applied at four different growth stages of tree development (bud break, green cluster, 90% petal fall, early fruitlet) against the foliar pathogens Venturia inaequalis and Venturia pirina which cause apple and pear scab respectively. A conventional synthetic fungicide (penconazole) used within the UK for apple and pear scab control was included for comparison. Little efficacy as scab protectants was demonstrated when each SIR product and penconazole was applied at only two growth stages (bud break, green cluster). However when the above compounds were applied at three or more growth stages efficacy as scab protectants was confirmed. The synthetic fungicide penconazole provided greatest protection against apple and pear scab in both the 2006 and 2007 field trials. There was little difference in the magnitude of scab protection conferred by each SIR agent. Results suggest application of at least three sprays during bud break to early fruitlet formation with an appropriate SIR agent may provide a useful addition to existing methods of apple and pear scab management under field conditions. (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Fungicide resistance: the dose rate debate

It makes economic sense to use as little fungicide as possible on a crop. In many settings, it is common to apply less than the manufacturer's recommended dose. If sources of disease are scarce, or conditions are unsuitable for it to increase, the reduced control from a low dose may be adequate. In other cases, a big reduction in dose may cause little reduction in control, again permitting savings - especially for growers prepared to run a little risk. But the label recommendations for most fungicides state that to avoid resistance, a full dose must always be used. Are individual cost-savings therefore endangering everyone's access to an exceptionally useful tool? The emergence of fungicide resistance is evolution in action. In all cases, it involves the genetic replacement of the original susceptible population of the pathogen by a new population with genetically distinct biochemistry, which confers resistance. The resistant biochemistry originates in rare genetic mutations, so rare that initially the population is hardly altered. Replacement of susceptible forms by resistant ones happens because, with fungicide present, the resistant form multiplies more rapidly than the susceptible form. The key point to notice is that only the relative rates of multiplication of the resistant and susceptible types are involved in the evolution of resistance. The absolute rates are irrelevant.

Interaction of pesticides with p-glycoprotein and other ABC proteins: A survey of the possible importance to insecticide, herbicide and fungicide resistance

P-glycoproteins (p-gps) are ubiquitous membrane proteins from the ABC (ATP-binding cassette) family. They have been found in many animals, bacteria, plants and fungi and are extremely important in regulating a wide range of xenobiotics including pesticides. P-gps have been linked to xenobiotic resistance, most famously in resistance to cancer drug treatments. Their wide substrate range has led to what is known as "multidrug resistance", where resistance developed to one type of xenobiotic gives resistance to a different classes of xenobiotic. P-gps are a major contributor to drug resistance in mammalian tumours and infections of protozoan parasites such as Plasmodium and Leishmania. There is a growing body of literature suggesting that p-gps, and other ABC proteins, are important in regulating pesticide toxicity and represent potential control failure through the development of pesticide resistance, in both agricultural and medical pests. At the same time, aspects of their biochemistry offer new hope in pest control, in particular in furthering our understanding of toxicity and offering insights into how we can improve control without recourse to new chemical discovery. (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.