US20140182016A1 - Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens - Google Patents
Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US20140182016A1 US20140182016A1 US14/107,479 US201314107479A US2014182016A1 US 20140182016 A1 US20140182016 A1 US 20140182016A1 US 201314107479 A US201314107479 A US 201314107479A US 2014182016 A1 US2014182016 A1 US 2014182016A1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- chinensis
- plant
- seed
- plants
- preparation
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 57
- 239000000203 mixture Substances 0.000 title claims abstract description 23
- 230000002538 fungal effect Effects 0.000 title claims abstract description 15
- 239000000853 adhesive Substances 0.000 claims abstract description 65
- 230000001070 adhesive effect Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 64
- 238000002360 preparation method Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 37
- 230000000855 fungicidal effect Effects 0.000 claims abstract description 21
- 240000001667 Glycosmis parviflora Species 0.000 claims description 72
- 241000196324 Embryophyta Species 0.000 claims description 59
- 241001555224 Microdochium majus Species 0.000 claims description 28
- XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N water Substances O XLYOFNOQVPJJNP-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 claims description 19
- 239000002002 slurry Substances 0.000 claims description 13
- 239000002689 soil Substances 0.000 claims description 12
- 235000013339 cereals Nutrition 0.000 claims description 10
- 208000015181 infectious disease Diseases 0.000 claims description 7
- 235000012054 meals Nutrition 0.000 claims description 6
- 241000235349 Ascomycota Species 0.000 claims description 4
- 241000209504 Poaceae Species 0.000 claims description 4
- 235000013399 edible fruits Nutrition 0.000 claims description 4
- 241000221198 Basidiomycota Species 0.000 claims description 3
- 235000016068 Berberis vulgaris Nutrition 0.000 claims description 3
- 241000335053 Beta vulgaris Species 0.000 claims description 3
- 241000223218 Fusarium Species 0.000 claims description 3
- 241000228456 Leptosphaeria Species 0.000 claims description 3
- 241001459558 Monographella nivalis Species 0.000 claims description 3
- 241000233654 Oomycetes Species 0.000 claims description 3
- 239000007788 liquid Substances 0.000 claims description 3
- 235000013311 vegetables Nutrition 0.000 claims description 3
- 241000221760 Claviceps Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000221752 Epichloe Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241001149504 Gaeumannomyces Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 244000043261 Hevea brasiliensis Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000947859 Microdochium Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000005783 Monographella albescens Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000131448 Mycosphaerella Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 235000002637 Nicotiana tabacum Nutrition 0.000 claims description 2
- 244000061176 Nicotiana tabacum Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000124061 Plectosphaerella cucumerina Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000228453 Pyrenophora Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000221662 Sclerotinia Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000317942 Venturia <ichneumonid wasp> Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000219094 Vitaceae Species 0.000 claims description 2
- 235000020971 citrus fruits Nutrition 0.000 claims description 2
- 239000006185 dispersion Substances 0.000 claims description 2
- 239000000835 fiber Substances 0.000 claims description 2
- 235000021021 grapes Nutrition 0.000 claims description 2
- HELXLJCILKEWJH-NCGAPWICSA-N rebaudioside A Chemical compound O([C@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O[C@H]([C@@H]1O[C@H]1[C@@H]([C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O1)O)O[C@]12C(=C)C[C@@]3(C1)CC[C@@H]1[C@@](C)(CCC[C@]1([C@@H]3CC2)C)C(=O)O[C@H]1[C@@H]([C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@@H](CO)O1)O)[C@@H]1O[C@H](CO)[C@@H](O)[C@H](O)[C@H]1O HELXLJCILKEWJH-NCGAPWICSA-N 0.000 claims description 2
- 241000233866 Fungi Species 0.000 claims 1
- 241000544066 Stevia Species 0.000 claims 1
- 238000011282 treatment Methods 0.000 description 83
- 238000002474 experimental method Methods 0.000 description 24
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 description 22
- 240000002657 Thymus vulgaris Species 0.000 description 19
- 230000035784 germination Effects 0.000 description 19
- 244000308505 Filipendula ulmaria Species 0.000 description 17
- 238000000576 coating method Methods 0.000 description 16
- 239000011248 coating agent Substances 0.000 description 13
- 239000000843 powder Substances 0.000 description 13
- 229920001817 Agar Polymers 0.000 description 10
- 239000008272 agar Substances 0.000 description 10
- 239000000417 fungicide Substances 0.000 description 10
- 244000042664 Matricaria chamomilla Species 0.000 description 9
- 239000011230 binding agent Substances 0.000 description 8
- 230000009467 reduction Effects 0.000 description 8
- 235000016622 Filipendula ulmaria Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- 235000007232 Matricaria chamomilla Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- 235000014220 Rhus chinensis Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- 240000003152 Rhus chinensis Species 0.000 description 7
- 235000007303 Thymus vulgaris Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- 241000209140 Triticum Species 0.000 description 7
- 235000021307 Triticum Nutrition 0.000 description 7
- 239000000284 extract Substances 0.000 description 7
- 238000011534 incubation Methods 0.000 description 7
- 238000012404 In vitro experiment Methods 0.000 description 6
- 230000001580 bacterial effect Effects 0.000 description 6
- 244000053095 fungal pathogen Species 0.000 description 6
- 238000000338 in vitro Methods 0.000 description 6
- 239000000463 material Substances 0.000 description 6
- 239000001965 potato dextrose agar Substances 0.000 description 6
- 239000001585 thymus vulgaris Substances 0.000 description 6
- 239000008367 deionised water Substances 0.000 description 5
- LNTHITQWFMADLM-UHFFFAOYSA-N gallic acid Chemical compound OC(=O)C1=CC(O)=C(O)C(O)=C1 LNTHITQWFMADLM-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 5
- 238000009331 sowing Methods 0.000 description 5
- 241001092073 Filipendula Species 0.000 description 4
- 241001551177 Markhamia Species 0.000 description 4
- 239000000047 product Substances 0.000 description 4
- 229940018489 pronto Drugs 0.000 description 4
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 4
- 239000007858 starting material Substances 0.000 description 4
- 210000001541 thymus gland Anatomy 0.000 description 4
- 239000004480 active ingredient Substances 0.000 description 3
- 238000000540 analysis of variance Methods 0.000 description 3
- 150000001875 compounds Chemical class 0.000 description 3
- 229940074391 gallic acid Drugs 0.000 description 3
- 235000004515 gallic acid Nutrition 0.000 description 3
- 239000004615 ingredient Substances 0.000 description 3
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000007613 slurry method Methods 0.000 description 3
- 239000000725 suspension Substances 0.000 description 3
- 238000007492 two-way ANOVA Methods 0.000 description 3
- 240000002234 Allium sativum Species 0.000 description 2
- 235000007319 Avena orientalis Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 244000075850 Avena orientalis Species 0.000 description 2
- 235000005747 Carum carvi Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 240000000467 Carum carvi Species 0.000 description 2
- 244000144994 Galla Rhois Species 0.000 description 2
- 235000010469 Glycine max Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 244000068988 Glycine max Species 0.000 description 2
- 235000017945 Matricaria Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 240000004658 Medicago sativa Species 0.000 description 2
- 235000017587 Medicago sativa ssp. sativa Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 244000178231 Rosmarinus officinalis Species 0.000 description 2
- 241000212346 Spermolepis Species 0.000 description 2
- 241000219793 Trifolium Species 0.000 description 2
- 230000000843 anti-fungal effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 230000000845 anti-microbial effect Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000007900 aqueous suspension Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000003795 chemical substances by application Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000004927 clay Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000012297 crystallization seed Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000003085 diluting agent Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000001035 drying Methods 0.000 description 2
- 235000013305 food Nutrition 0.000 description 2
- 239000004459 forage Substances 0.000 description 2
- -1 gallic acid ester Chemical class 0.000 description 2
- 238000010348 incorporation Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000002054 inoculum Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000002609 medium Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000000401 methanolic extract Substances 0.000 description 2
- FBSFWRHWHYMIOG-UHFFFAOYSA-N methyl 3,4,5-trihydroxybenzoate Chemical compound COC(=O)C1=CC(O)=C(O)C(O)=C1 FBSFWRHWHYMIOG-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 239000003921 oil Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000005416 organic matter Substances 0.000 description 2
- 239000004033 plastic Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000001556 precipitation Methods 0.000 description 2
- 241000894007 species Species 0.000 description 2
- QTENRWWVYAAPBI-YCRXJPFRSA-N streptomycin sulfate Chemical compound OS(O)(=O)=O.OS(O)(=O)=O.OS(O)(=O)=O.CN[C@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H](CO)O[C@H]1O[C@@H]1[C@](C=O)(O)[C@H](C)O[C@H]1O[C@@H]1[C@@H](N=C(N)N)[C@H](O)[C@@H](N=C(N)N)[C@H](O)[C@H]1O.CN[C@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@H](CO)O[C@H]1O[C@@H]1[C@](C=O)(O)[C@H](C)O[C@H]1O[C@@H]1[C@@H](N=C(N)N)[C@H](O)[C@@H](N=C(N)N)[C@H](O)[C@H]1O QTENRWWVYAAPBI-YCRXJPFRSA-N 0.000 description 2
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 description 2
- DSSYKIVIOFKYAU-XCBNKYQSSA-N (R)-camphor Chemical compound C1C[C@@]2(C)C(=O)C[C@@H]1C2(C)C DSSYKIVIOFKYAU-XCBNKYQSSA-N 0.000 description 1
- PXMNMQRDXWABCY-UHFFFAOYSA-N 1-(4-chlorophenyl)-4,4-dimethyl-3-(1H-1,2,4-triazol-1-ylmethyl)pentan-3-ol Chemical compound C1=NC=NN1CC(O)(C(C)(C)C)CCC1=CC=C(Cl)C=C1 PXMNMQRDXWABCY-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- UHPMCKVQTMMPCG-UHFFFAOYSA-N 5,8-dihydroxy-2-methoxy-6-methyl-7-(2-oxopropyl)naphthalene-1,4-dione Chemical compound CC1=C(CC(C)=O)C(O)=C2C(=O)C(OC)=CC(=O)C2=C1O UHPMCKVQTMMPCG-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 241000234282 Allium Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000002732 Allium cepa var. cepa Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000144725 Amygdalus communis Species 0.000 description 1
- 241001124076 Aphididae Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000003416 Asparagus officinalis Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000005340 Asparagus officinalis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000228212 Aspergillus Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000005343 Azadirachta indica Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000219310 Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000167854 Bourreria succulenta Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000056139 Brassica cretica Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000003351 Brassica cretica Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000007124 Brassica oleracea Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000003899 Brassica oleracea var acephala Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000011301 Brassica oleracea var capitata Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000001169 Brassica oleracea var oleracea Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000003343 Brassica rupestris Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000208199 Buxus sempervirens Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000222120 Candida <Saccharomycetales> Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000025254 Cannabis sativa Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000012766 Cannabis sativa ssp. sativa var. sativa Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000012765 Cannabis sativa ssp. sativa var. spontanea Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000004160 Capsicum annuum Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000008534 Capsicum annuum var annuum Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000007866 Chamaemelum nobile Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000723346 Cinnamomum camphora Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000223760 Cinnamomum zeylanicum Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000005979 Citrus limon Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000131522 Citrus pyriformis Species 0.000 description 1
- 241001672694 Citrus reticulata Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000000560 Citrus x paradisi Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000222290 Cladosporium Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000013162 Cocos nucifera Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000060011 Cocos nucifera Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000218631 Coniferophyta Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000000491 Corchorus aestuans Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000011777 Corchorus aestuans Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000010862 Corchorus capsularis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229920000742 Cotton Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 241000219112 Cucumis Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000015510 Cucumis melo subsp melo Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000008067 Cucumis sativus Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000010799 Cucumis sativus var sativus Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000219104 Cucurbitaceae Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000002767 Daucus carota Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000000626 Daucus carota Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000001950 Elaeis guineensis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000003133 Elaeis guineensis Species 0.000 description 1
- 239000001653 FEMA 3120 Substances 0.000 description 1
- 240000009088 Fragaria x ananassa Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000299507 Gossypium hirsutum Species 0.000 description 1
- 241001091440 Grossulariaceae Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000208818 Helianthus Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000003222 Helianthus annuus Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000005979 Hordeum vulgare Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000007340 Hordeum vulgare Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000003332 Ilex aquifolium Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000209027 Ilex aquifolium Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000003228 Lactuca sativa Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000008415 Lactuca sativa Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000165082 Lavanda vera Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000010663 Lavandula angustifolia Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241001530572 Lavandula stoechas Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000010661 Lavandula stoechas Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000004322 Lens culinaris Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000014647 Lens culinaris subsp culinaris Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000004431 Linum usitatissimum Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000006240 Linum usitatissimum Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000007688 Lycopersicon esculentum Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000013500 Melia azadirachta Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000207836 Olea <angiosperm> Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000007594 Oryza sativa Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000007164 Oryza sativa Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000264479 Persea americana guatemalensis Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000010627 Phaseolus vulgaris Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000046052 Phaseolus vulgaris Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000004713 Pisum sativum Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000010582 Pisum sativum Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241001516739 Platonia insignis Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000005809 Prunus persica Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000006040 Prunus persica var persica Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241001646398 Pseudomonas chlororaphis Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000220324 Pyrus Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000208225 Rhus Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000002357 Ribes grossularia Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000000528 Ricinus communis Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000004443 Ricinus communis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000007651 Rubus glaucus Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000006293 Salvia fruticosa Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000114218 Salvia fruticosa Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000007238 Secale cereale Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000082988 Secale cereale Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000003768 Solanum lycopersicum Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000002595 Solanum tuberosum Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000061456 Solanum tuberosum Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000009337 Spinacia oleracea Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000300264 Spinacia oleracea Species 0.000 description 1
- 239000005837 Spiroxamine Substances 0.000 description 1
- 244000107946 Spondias cytherea Species 0.000 description 1
- 229920002472 Starch Polymers 0.000 description 1
- 244000228451 Stevia rebaudiana Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000021536 Sugar beet Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000005839 Tebuconazole Substances 0.000 description 1
- 244000299461 Theobroma cacao Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000009470 Theobroma cacao Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 241000722133 Tilletia Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000019714 Triticale Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 240000000359 Triticum dicoccon Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000959260 Typhula Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000221566 Ustilago Species 0.000 description 1
- 244000078534 Vaccinium myrtillus Species 0.000 description 1
- 241000082085 Verticillium <Phyllachorales> Species 0.000 description 1
- 241001532059 Yucca Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000004552 Yucca aloifolia Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000012044 Yucca brevifolia Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000017049 Yucca glauca Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000006012 Yucca schidigera Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 244000110633 Yucca schidigera Species 0.000 description 1
- 240000008042 Zea mays Species 0.000 description 1
- 235000016383 Zea mays subsp huehuetenangensis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000002017 Zea mays subsp mays Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000002159 abnormal effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000020224 almond Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000004075 alteration Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000000844 anti-bacterial effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000006286 aqueous extract Substances 0.000 description 1
- 125000003118 aryl group Chemical group 0.000 description 1
- WHGYBXFWUBPSRW-FOUAGVGXSA-N beta-cyclodextrin Chemical compound OC[C@H]([C@H]([C@@H]([C@H]1O)O)O[C@H]2O[C@@H]([C@@H](O[C@H]3O[C@H](CO)[C@H]([C@@H]([C@H]3O)O)O[C@H]3O[C@H](CO)[C@H]([C@@H]([C@H]3O)O)O[C@H]3O[C@H](CO)[C@H]([C@@H]([C@H]3O)O)O[C@H]3O[C@H](CO)[C@H]([C@@H]([C@H]3O)O)O3)[C@H](O)[C@H]2O)CO)O[C@@H]1O[C@H]1[C@H](O)[C@@H](O)[C@@H]3O[C@@H]1CO WHGYBXFWUBPSRW-FOUAGVGXSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 230000004071 biological effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010170 biological method Methods 0.000 description 1
- QKSKPIVNLNLAAV-UHFFFAOYSA-N bis(2-chloroethyl) sulfide Chemical compound ClCCSCCCl QKSKPIVNLNLAAV-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 235000021029 blackberry Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000006227 byproduct Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000009120 camo Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 229960000846 camphor Drugs 0.000 description 1
- 229930008380 camphor Natural products 0.000 description 1
- 239000001511 capsicum annuum Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000000969 carrier Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000005607 chanvre indien Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000019693 cherries Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000017803 cinnamon Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000004140 cleaning Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000007799 cork Substances 0.000 description 1
- 201000010099 disease Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 208000037265 diseases, disorders, signs and symptoms Diseases 0.000 description 1
- 238000009826 distribution Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000003995 emulsifying agent Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 description 1
- 150000002148 esters Chemical class 0.000 description 1
- 238000013401 experimental design Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000004611 garlic Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000003306 harvesting Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000036541 health Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000010438 heat treatment Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000011487 hemp Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000003864 humus Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000002452 interceptive effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000001102 lavandula vera Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000018219 lavender Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000009973 maize Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- IBKQQKPQRYUGBJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N methyl gallate Natural products CC(=O)C1=CC(O)=C(O)C(O)=C1 IBKQQKPQRYUGBJ-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 238000003801 milling Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000010460 mustard Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000001422 normality test Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000014571 nuts Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000001543 one-way ANOVA Methods 0.000 description 1
- 244000052769 pathogen Species 0.000 description 1
- 230000001717 pathogenic effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000021017 pears Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000003415 peat Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000000575 pesticide Substances 0.000 description 1
- 239000000546 pharmaceutical excipient Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000035479 physiological effects, processes and functions Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000003032 phytopathogenic effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000008659 phytopathology Effects 0.000 description 1
- 235000021018 plums Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000021039 pomes Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000012015 potatoes Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000021013 raspberries Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 238000012552 review Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000009566 rice Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000015639 rosmarinus officinalis Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000002020 sage Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000005413 snowmelt Substances 0.000 description 1
- PUYXTUJWRLOUCW-UHFFFAOYSA-N spiroxamine Chemical compound O1C(CN(CC)CCC)COC11CCC(C(C)(C)C)CC1 PUYXTUJWRLOUCW-UHFFFAOYSA-N 0.000 description 1
- 238000005507 spraying Methods 0.000 description 1
- 235000020354 squash Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 235000019698 starch Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 239000008107 starch Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000007619 statistical method Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000003756 stirring Methods 0.000 description 1
- 239000004575 stone Substances 0.000 description 1
- 235000021012 strawberries Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000002195 synergetic effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000000454 talc Substances 0.000 description 1
- 229910052623 talc Inorganic materials 0.000 description 1
- 235000012222 talc Nutrition 0.000 description 1
- 230000035899 viability Effects 0.000 description 1
- 230000000007 visual effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000005406 washing Methods 0.000 description 1
- XOSXWYQMOYSSKB-LDKJGXKFSA-L water blue Chemical compound CC1=CC(/C(\C(C=C2)=CC=C2NC(C=C2)=CC=C2S([O-])(=O)=O)=C(\C=C2)/C=C/C\2=N\C(C=C2)=CC=C2S([O-])(=O)=O)=CC(S(O)(=O)=O)=C1N.[Na+].[Na+] XOSXWYQMOYSSKB-LDKJGXKFSA-L 0.000 description 1
- 241000228158 x Triticosecale Species 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
- A01—AGRICULTURE; FORESTRY; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; HUNTING; TRAPPING; FISHING
- A01N—PRESERVATION OF BODIES OF HUMANS OR ANIMALS OR PLANTS OR PARTS THEREOF; BIOCIDES, e.g. AS DISINFECTANTS, AS PESTICIDES OR AS HERBICIDES; PEST REPELLANTS OR ATTRACTANTS; PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
- A01N65/00—Biocides, pest repellants or attractants, or plant growth regulators containing material from algae, lichens, bryophyta, multi-cellular fungi or plants, or extracts thereof
- A01N65/08—Magnoliopsida [dicotyledons]
Definitions
- the present invention relates to a method for controlling fungal phytopathogens using Galla chinensis preparations, and to a fungicidal composition comprising Galla chinensis in combination with at least one suitable adhesive.
- Botanicals based on preparations from medicinal and aromatic plants have high potential for the control of various fungal pathogens. Frequent examples include garlic ( Allium sativum L.), caraway ( Carum carvi L.), meadowsweet ( Filipendula ulmaria L.), lavender ( Lavandula stoechas L.), chamomile ( Matricaria chamomilla L.), rosemary ( Rosmarinus officinalis L.), sage ( Salvia fruticosa Mill.), thyme ( Thymus vulgaris L.) and yucca ( Yucca schidigera Roezl ex Ortgies) against fungal pathogens of the genera Aspergillus, Candida, Cladosporium, Fusarium, Leptosphaeria, Penicllium and Verticillium.
- WO-A-2011/138345 discloses fungicidal compositions comprising a gallic acid ester in combination with one or more further fungicide(s).
- the technical problem underlying the present invention is the provision of a novel regiment for controlling fungal phytopathogens.
- the present invention provides a method for controlling fungal phytopathogens comprising the step of contacting the plants, parts thereof, their seed, their soil and/or their habitat with an effective amount of a preparation containing Galla chinensis and/or a composition containing such preparation.
- the invention also relates to a corresponding method using an aqueous extract of G. chinensis.
- FIG. 1 is a graph that depicts an in vitro experiment showing the effect of four botanicals at three different concentrations in aqueous suspensions on conidia germination of Microdochium majus in vitro.
- Galla Galla chinensis
- Filipendula Filipendula ulmaria
- Matricaria Matricaria chamomilla
- Thymus Thymus vulgaris. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
- FIG. 2 is a graph that depicts an in vitro experiment showing the effect of four botanicals at three different concentrations incorporated as powder into agar on radial mycelial growth (colony diameter after 6 d) of Microdochium majus in vitro.
- Galla Galla chinensis
- Filipendula Filipendula ulmaria
- Matricaria Matricaria chamomilla
- Thymus Thymus vulgaris.
- Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
- FIG. 3 is a bar graph that depicts an incubation chamber experiment showing the effect of three botanicals and two adhesives on the incidence of Microdochium majus colonies assessed in a seed health test. For each botanical, 2 g were used for 100 g seeds. Results from the two application methods (coating versus slurry) were pooled for plotting.
- DR adhesive DiscoRed
- OB adhesive Organic Binder
- Galla Galla chinensis
- Filipendula Filipendula ulmaria
- Thymus Thymus vulgaris.
- FIG. 4 is a bar graph that depicts a growth chamber Experiment 1 showing the effect of three botanicals and two adhesives on total seedling emergence from seeds infected by Microdochium majus. For each botanical, 2 g were used for 100 g seeds.
- DR adhesive DiscoRed
- OB adhesive Organic Binder
- Galla Galla chinensis
- Filipendula Filipendula ulmaria
- FIG. 5 is a bar graph that depicts a growth chamber Experiment 2 showing the effect of Galla chinensis and an adhesive with a slurry or a “sandwich” coating technique as well as a warm water and a bacterial treatment on total seedling emergence from seeds infected by Microdochium majus.
- Galla Galla chinensis (2 g 100 g seeds ⁇ 1);
- C1 seed coating by Incotec with the adhesive Organic Binder (OB) at 50%;
- C1+Galla C1 applying G.
- C2 seed coating by Agroscope ART with OB at 50%;
- C2+Galla C2 applying G.
- FIGS. 6A and 6B are bar graphs depicting field experiments 2009 to 2011, which show the effect of Galla chinensis and an adhesive using a slurry or a “sandwich” coating technique, a warm water and a bacterial treatment on (a) number of emerged plants per row and (b) yield from seeds infected by Microdochium majus .
- Galla Galla chinensis (2 g 100 g seeds ⁇ 1 ).
- C1 seed coating by Incotec with the adhesive Organic Binder (OB) at 50%;
- C1+Galla C1 applying G.
- C2 seed coating by Agroscope ART with OB at 50%;
- C2+Galla C2 applying G.
- Chinese galls (synonyms: Galla chinensis , G. rhois, Chinese sumac, Wu Bei Zi) are produced by aphids feeding on leaves of Chinese sumac or nutgall tree (Rhus spp.) (see, e.g., Ahn et al. (2005), supra).
- the term “preparation containing Galla chinensis ” is a preparation comprising material from substantially complete Chinese galls.
- the preparation contains G. chinensis in pulverized form such as a meal or powder of G. chinensis.
- the preparation contains further phytologically acceptable, i.e. for phytoglogical applications suitable, ingredients such as carriers, excipients, diluents, further fungicidal compounds, adhesives and/or emulsifiers.
- suitable ingredients such as carriers, excipients, diluents, further fungicidal compounds, adhesives and/or emulsifiers.
- chinensis preparations of the invention preferably contain about 0.01 to about 99 weight %, more preferably about 0.1 to about 50 weight %, even more preferred about 0.1 to about 10 weight %, still more preferred about 0.1 to about 2 weight %, particularly preferred about 0.1 to about 1 weight % of the active ingredient, in particular G. chinensis ground to an appropriate mesh size.
- the content of the active ingredient typically varies depending on the route of administration and/or the plant, parts thereof, seed etc. to be treated.
- the preparation or composition of the invention may have a content of G.
- chinensis of about 0.1 to about 4 weight %, more preferably about 0.1 to about 2 weight %, whereas for application on plant parts such as leaves typically using spraying devices, the content may be about 0.1 to about 1 weight %, more preferably about 0.1 to about 0.5 weight % or lower.
- the preparation may also be substantially pure ground G. chinensis.
- galls are ground to the appropriate mesh size, e.g. from about 0.001 to about 0.2 mm, more preferably from about 0.005 to about 0.1 mm, even more preferred about 0.01 to about 0.08 mm, typically using commercially available milling equipment.
- the meal is then typically mixed with the further ingredients in a known manner.
- the G. chinensis preparation contains at least one further fungicide.
- Fungicides are known to the skilled person and commercially available from various suppliers (see, e.g. the respective disclosure in WO-A-2011/138345). Appropriate selections for specific phytopathogens and their respective plant hosts are also described in the prior art, e.g. Hewitt, H. G. 1998: Fungicides in crop protection: Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 232 pp.
- a particularly preferred composition containing G. chinensis for application in the inventive method further comprises one or more phytologically acceptable adhesive(s).
- a “phytologically acceptable” adhesive is a compound or composition providing adherence of a fungicidal active or composition to the targeted object (i.e. plants, their parts such as crop material, seed, soil, habitat etc.) while substantially not interfering with any of the relevant properties of the targeted object such as viability, propagation, usefulness (e.g. use for food or other purposes) etc.
- adhesives useful in the present invention are essentially bio-compatible.
- Corresponding adhesives are known to the skilled person (see, for example, Legro, R. J. 2004: Organic seed & coating technology: a challenge and opportunity.
- adhesives for use in the present invention include, but are not limited to, starch, talcum, and synthetic binders such as DiscoAg-Red (L203) and, particularly preferred, Organic Binder (A6.6041) (Incotec Holding BV, Enkhuizen, The Netherlands).
- the amount of adhesive(s) present in the composition according to the invention depends on various factors such as the object to be treated and the adhesive(s) used, and may be optimized for the selected object/adhesive in combination with the respective G. chinensis preparation by routine experimentation.
- concentrations typically lie in the range of from about 5 weight % to about 50 weight % usually depending on the mode of administration and/or the plant, plant parts, seeds etc. to be treated.
- compositions for treatment of seeds typically contain about 40 to about 50 weight % adhesive
- compositions for leave treatments usually contain much less adhesive, e.g. about 1 to about 10 weight %, more preferably about 2 to about 8 weight % such as about 5 weight % adhesive.
- a particularly preferred mode of the inventive method comprises forming a slurry, i.e. a dispersion, of a G. chinensis preparation in a liquid, e.g. water, optionally containing further components, preferably an adhesive (or more of them).
- a slurry method is particularly suitable for the treatment of plant seeds being coated with the slurry, which are then typically dried.
- the co-application of G. chinensis preparation and an adhesive may be carried out sequentially, i.e. the G. chinensis preparation and the adhesive(s) may not be present in the same composition.
- An example is an inventive method wherein, firstly, the adhesive (typically a composition containing the adhesive(s)) is applied on the targeted object (i.e. plant, plant parts, seed), and then contacting the target(s) with the G. chinensis preparation.
- this mode of the present invention is further extended to a so-called “sandwich approach” by including a further step of treating the targeted object(s) with adhesive(s) again.
- Such embodiments of the present invention are particularly useful for the treatment of seeds. Also after such treatment the seed is usually subjected to a drying process.
- the treatment with G. chinensis is combined with a heat treatment, preferably using hot air, preferentially when applied for 1 to 5 days to plant seeds.
- the hot air has a temperature of from about 55 to about 80° C., more preferably from about 60 to about 75° C.
- Such combined treatments provide a synergistic fungicidal effect.
- Heat application methods using hot air have been described in the art. For example, Forsberg ( Control of Cereal Seed-borne Diseases by Hot Humid Air Seed Treatment. Uppsala, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 49 pp., PhD thesis, 2004) describes fungicidal methods using humid air. Typically, humid air for use in the present invention has a relative humidity of more than about 85%.
- dry hot air is used, preferably having a relative humidity of not more than about 5%. Processes using dry hot air have been described in the art as well (see, e.g., Gilbert et al. (205) Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology-Revue Canadienne de Phytopathologie 27, 448-452).
- Preferred fungal pathogens to be controlled by the method according to the invention may be selected from Ascomycetes, Basidiomycetes and Oomycetes.
- Preferred phytopathogenic Ascomycetes vulnerable to the inventive method include Microdochium spp., in particular M. majus, M. nivale, M. oryzae, M. tabacinum and M. triticicola, Gibberella spp., Claviceps spp., Gaeumannomyces spp., Epichloe spp., Sclerotinia spp., Leptosphaeria spp., Pyrenophora spp., Venturia spp. and Mycosphaerella spp.
- Preferred Basidiomycetes controllable by the method of the invention include Ustilago spp., Tilletia spp. and Typhula spp.
- Preferred Oomycetes to which the inventive method may be applied include Phytium spp. and Phytophthera spp. With respect to indications of fungal pathogens as mentioned herein, it is to be understood that, if the respective teleomorph is mentioned, the invention intends also the respective anamorph, and vice versa.
- cereals e.g. wheat, rye, barley, triticale, oats, rice or maize
- beets such as sugar beet or fodder beet
- fruits in particular pomes, stone fruits or soft fruits, e.g. apples, pears, plums, peaches, almonds, cherries, strawberries, raspberries,
- rapes mustard, olives, sunflowers, coconut, cocoa beans, castor oil plants, oil palms, ground nuts or soybeans; cucurbits, in particular squashes, cucumber and melons; fiber plants such as cotton, flax, hemp and jute; citrus fruits, e.g. oranges, lemons, grapefruits or mandarins; vegetables, in particular spinach, lettuce, asparagus, cabbages, carrots, onions, tomatoes, potatoes, cucurbits or paprika; lauraceous plants, e.g. avocados, cinnamon and camphor; grapes; tobacco; Stevia; natural rubber plants, ornamental and forestry plants such as flowers, shrubs, broad-leaved trees or evergreens such as conifers; and grasses.
- cucurbits in particular squashes, cucumber and melons
- fiber plants such as cotton, flax, hemp and jute
- citrus fruits e.g. oranges, lemons, grapefruits or mandarins
- vegetables in particular spinach, lettuce, asparagus, cabbages,
- Highly preferred plants and their corresponding pathogenic fungi as targets of the inventive methods are cereals, vegetables, leguminous forage crops including alfalfa and clover, and grasses including forage grasses, lawns and pastures, in particular the above-mentioned preferred examples thereof.
- the present invention further relates to the fungicidal composition
- a preparation containing Galla chinensis and at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive as outlined above.
- Preferred embodiments of such compositions have already been elaborated above.
- Particularly preferred compositions according to the invention comprise about 0.1 to about 2 weight % G. chinensis preparation and about 5 to about 50 weight % adhesive.
- the rest is water or other suitable diluent, potentially containing further ingredients as outlined above.
- Further subject matter of the present invention constitutes plant seeds, seedlings and subterranean plant parts (e.g. roots), or plants containing such plant parts, respectively, coated with a G. chinensis preparation or fungicidal composition as described herein.
- plant seed according to the invention may also be coated with an adhesive as described therein and then with the G. chinensis preparation, and optionally again with an adhesive, thus forming a plant seed coated with adhesive— G. chinensis , or coated with a sandwich of adhesive— G. chinensis —adhesive.
- the G. chinensis preparation itself usually does not contain adhesive(s).
- Microdochium majus Mm0327
- the strain was isolated in 2003 in an experimental field in Zurich-Reckenholz, Switzerland, from grains of the winter wheat cultivar ‘Runal’ and deposited as CBS 121295 at the public culture collection of the Fungal Biodiversity Centre, Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, The Netherlands.
- Agroscope Reckenholz-Tanikon a stock culture was maintained at 5° C.
- Starter cultures of fungal inoculum were produced by placing individual aliquots from stock cultures in Petri plates (diameter 9 cm) containing potato dextrose agar (39 g L ⁇ 1 ; CM0139, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), supplemented with streptomycin sulphate (0.1 g L ⁇ 1 ; Fluka, Sigma-Aldrich, Buchs, Switzerland) (PDA +) after autoclaving for 20 min at 121° C. Plates were incubated for 6 to 7 days at 19 ⁇ 1° C. with a photoperiod of 12 h dark/12 h near UV light.
- the germination rate was assessed with the aid of a light microscope (400 ⁇ magnification) by determining the ratio of germinated conidia from a total of 30 conidia within three different visual fields. A conidium was assigned as germinated when the germination tube was longer than the width of the conidium.
- the first method consisted of dispersing the powder with water and the adhesive in a liquid seed treater (Hege 11, inductor 190 V, volume 20 to 3000 g seeds, Hege Maschinenbau, Waldenburg, Germany), resulting in a slurry that was applied in a single step onto the seeds.
- a liquid seed treater Hege 11, inductor 190 V, volume 20 to 3000 g seeds, Hege Maschinenbau, Waldenburg, Germany
- seeds were coated using a “sandwich” technique, in which seeds were first coated with the adhesive (Hege 11), followed by a powder application with a rotating machine (Turbula®, type 2A, 3 ⁇ 380 V, Willy A. Bachofen AG, Basel, Switzerland) and a second layer of the adhesive (Hege 11).
- the treated and untreated seeds were placed on PDA+ agar in Petri plates (diameter 9 cm). For each treatment, ten plates with ten seeds in each plate were used. Plates were incubated for 6 days at 19 ⁇ 1° C. with a photoperiod of 12 h dark/12 h near UV light. Subsequently, the number of M. majus colonies growing from seeds was determined and expressed as incidence in %.
- Seeds were sown in plastic trays (dimensions: 30 ⁇ 47 ⁇ 6 cm) containing moistened shrub soil (Obiter, Switzerland) at a depth of 2 cm. For each treatment, three trays with 100 seeds each (ten rows with ten seeds) were sown. After sowing, the soil was watered and trays were placed in a greenhouse for 24 h at 20 ⁇ 1° C. to stimulate germination. Trays were then wrapped in plastic bags, transferred to a growth chamber and incubated for 21 days at 5° C. in the dark without watering. Subsequently, trays were unwrapped and further incubated for 14 days at 10° C.
- Weather data were obtained from a MeteoSwiss operated weather station (SwissMetNet) located at Zurich-Reckenholz approximately 0.5 to 1 km from the experimental sites. Data included daily mean air temperature (at 2 m height) and sum of precipitation (1.5 m) and were taken according to WMO guidelines (WMO guide to meteorological instruments and methods of observation. WMO-No. 8, 7th edition, 2008, World Meteorological Organisation).
- the mean germination rate of M. majus conidia from the control treatment was 96%.
- the treatment with the synthetic fungicide Pronto® Plus completely inhibited germination (data not shown).
- the reduction of germination through the four botanicals ranged between 1% ( T. vulgaris —mean of 95% germinated conidia) and 60% ( G. chinensis —mean of 39% germinated conidia).
- the reduction was highly significant (P ⁇ 0.001) for G. chinensis at 0.5 and 1.0% as well as for F. ulmaria at 0.5% ( FIG. 1 ). None of the treatments with M. chamomilla or with T. vulgaris significantly reduced the germination rate.
- the greatest reduction of 97% (2.5% germination) was obtained with G. chinensis at 1.0%.
- the mean incidence of M. majus based on the number of colonies from untreated seeds was 24% compared with 23% and 24% from seeds treated with the adhesives OB and DR, respectively, with no significant differences.
- the reduction of the fungal incidence was significantly better (P ⁇ 0.006) when botanicals were applied with the adhesive OB, compared with the adhesive DR ( FIG. 3 ).
- the best effect was obtained with G. chinensis , followed by F. ulmaria .
- the efficacy in reducing fungal incidence was significant (P ⁇ 0.001) for both G. chinensis treatments and for the F. ulmaria treatment applied with the adhesive OB.
- chinensis ranged between 18 and 23, whereas in the treatments containing OB together with G. chinensis, the number ranged between 26 and 27 ( FIG. 6 a ).
- the Cerall® treatment resulted on average in only 21 plants and warm water was the best treatment, resulting on average in 39 plants within 1 m ( FIG. 6 a ).
- the yield from seeds of the untreated control was 4.7 t ha ⁇ 1 . Seeds treated with G.
- chinensis resulted in a yield between 5.5 and 5.7 t ha ⁇ 1 whereas yield from seeds that received only the adhesives, ranged between 4.9 and 5.0 t ha ⁇ 1 .
- the average yield from the Cerall® and the warm water treatment was 5.2 and 6.5 t ha ⁇ 1 , respectively ( FIG. 6 b ).
- the two-way ANOVA showed highly significant effects on yield from all treatments containing G. chinensis on yield (P ⁇ 0.001) ( FIG. 6 b ).
- G. chinensis was substantially more effective compared with other botanicals and higher concentrations of G. chinensis greatly or completely inhibited M. majus conidia germination and mycelial growth.
- the efficacy of G. chinensis at a concentration of 1% was almost as high as that from the synthetic fungicide Pronto® Plus, resulting in 97% or 100% reduction of conidia germination, respectively.
- Pronto® Plus resulting in 97% or 100% reduction of conidia germination, respectively.
- it was not surprising that the pattern of results on conidia germination was not always equivalent to that on mycelium growth. In fact, treatments with T. vulgaris did not reduce germination of M. majus conidia whereas high concentrations of T.
Landscapes
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- General Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Mycology (AREA)
- Biotechnology (AREA)
- Agronomy & Crop Science (AREA)
- Microbiology (AREA)
- Natural Medicines & Medicinal Plants (AREA)
- Plant Pathology (AREA)
- Dentistry (AREA)
- Wood Science & Technology (AREA)
- Zoology (AREA)
- Environmental Sciences (AREA)
- Pretreatment Of Seeds And Plants (AREA)
- Agricultural Chemicals And Associated Chemicals (AREA)
Abstract
The present invention relates to a method for controlling fungal phytopathogens using Galla chinensis preparations, and to a fungicidal composition comprising Galla chinensis in combination with at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive.
Description
- The present invention relates to a method for controlling fungal phytopathogens using Galla chinensis preparations, and to a fungicidal composition comprising Galla chinensis in combination with at least one suitable adhesive.
- Botanicals based on preparations from medicinal and aromatic plants have high potential for the control of various fungal pathogens. Frequent examples include garlic (Allium sativum L.), caraway (Carum carvi L.), meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria L.), lavender (Lavandula stoechas L.), chamomile (Matricaria chamomilla L.), rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.), sage (Salvia fruticosa Mill.), thyme (Thymus vulgaris L.) and yucca (Yucca schidigera Roezl ex Ortgies) against fungal pathogens of the genera Aspergillus, Candida, Cladosporium, Fusarium, Leptosphaeria, Penicllium and Verticillium.
- Other plant-based preparations that have been investigated for an antimicrobial activity include oil from neem trees (Azadiracta indica A. Juss.) and extracts of Chinese galls (Galla chinensis; syn. G. rhois, Chinese sumac, Wu Bei Zi). Tian et al. (Food Chem. 113, 171-179, 2009) report an antibacterial activity of G. chinensis extracts, but no fungicidal activity. Ahn et al. (2005) Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 81, 105-112, described a fungicidal activity of methanol extracts of G. chinensis, particularly attributed to methyl gallate and gallic acid. However, Ahn et al. (2005) observed antifungal effects only from methanol extracts of G. chinensis applied on leaves and not from water or other extracts nor from preparations including the complete material of the botanical G. chinensis.
- WO-A-2011/138345 discloses fungicidal compositions comprising a gallic acid ester in combination with one or more further fungicide(s).
- The technical problem underlying the present invention is the provision of a novel regiment for controlling fungal phytopathogens.
- The solution to the above technical problem is provided by the embodiments of the present invention described herein and as defined in the claims.
- In particular, the present invention provides a method for controlling fungal phytopathogens comprising the step of contacting the plants, parts thereof, their seed, their soil and/or their habitat with an effective amount of a preparation containing Galla chinensis and/or a composition containing such preparation. Alternatively, the invention also relates to a corresponding method using an aqueous extract of G. chinensis.
- The above and other features of the present invention will now be described in detail with reference to certain exemplary embodiments thereof illustrated the accompanying drawings, which are given hereinbelow by way of illustration only, and thus are not limitative of the present invention, and wherein:
-
FIG. 1 is a graph that depicts an in vitro experiment showing the effect of four botanicals at three different concentrations in aqueous suspensions on conidia germination of Microdochium majus in vitro. Galla: Galla chinensis, Filipendula: Filipendula ulmaria, Matricaria: Matricaria chamomilla, Thymus: Thymus vulgaris. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. -
FIG. 2 is a graph that depicts an in vitro experiment showing the effect of four botanicals at three different concentrations incorporated as powder into agar on radial mycelial growth (colony diameter after 6 d) of Microdochium majus in vitro. Galla: Galla chinensis, Filipendula: Filipendula ulmaria, Matricaria: Matricaria chamomilla, Thymus: Thymus vulgaris. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. -
FIG. 3 is a bar graph that depicts an incubation chamber experiment showing the effect of three botanicals and two adhesives on the incidence of Microdochium majus colonies assessed in a seed health test. For each botanical, 2 g were used for 100 g seeds. Results from the two application methods (coating versus slurry) were pooled for plotting. DR: adhesive DiscoRed, OB: adhesive Organic Binder; Galla: Galla chinensis, Filipendula: Filipendula ulmaria, Thymus: Thymus vulgaris. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. ‘*’ indicate treatments that were significantly different from the control treatment (at α=0.05). -
FIG. 4 is a bar graph that depicts agrowth chamber Experiment 1 showing the effect of three botanicals and two adhesives on total seedling emergence from seeds infected by Microdochium majus. For each botanical, 2 g were used for 100 g seeds. DR: adhesive DiscoRed, OB: adhesive Organic Binder; Galla: Galla chinensis, Filipendula: Filipendula ulmaria, Thymus: Thymus vulgaris. All treatments were performed by an encrusting and pelleting process using a rotary batch coater. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. ‘*’ indicate treatments that were significantly different from the control treatment (at α=0.05). - FIG. 5 is a bar graph that depicts a
growth chamber Experiment 2 showing the effect of Galla chinensis and an adhesive with a slurry or a “sandwich” coating technique as well as a warm water and a bacterial treatment on total seedling emergence from seeds infected by Microdochium majus. Galla: Galla chinensis (2 g 100 g seeds−1); C1: seed coating by Incotec with the adhesive Organic Binder (OB) at 50%; C1+Galla: C1 applying G. chinensis with a slurry technique; C2: seed coating by Agroscope ART with OB at 50%; C2+Galla: C2 applying G. chinensis with a “sandwich” technique; C3: seed coating by Agroscope ART with OB at 40%; C3+Galla: C3 applying G. chinensis with a slurry technique; warm water: 45° C., 2 h; Cerall®: Bacterial product at 1 ml 100 g seeds−1. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. ‘*’ indicate treatments that were significantly different from the control treatment (at α=0.05). -
FIGS. 6A and 6B are bar graphs depicting field experiments 2009 to 2011, which show the effect of Galla chinensis and an adhesive using a slurry or a “sandwich” coating technique, a warm water and a bacterial treatment on (a) number of emerged plants per row and (b) yield from seeds infected by Microdochium majus. Galla: Galla chinensis (2 g 100 g seeds−1). C1: seed coating by Incotec with the adhesive Organic Binder (OB) at 50%; C1+Galla: C1 applying G. chinensis with a slurry technique; C2: seed coating by Agroscope ART with OB at 50%; C2+Galla: C2 applying G. chinensis with a “sandwich” technique; C3: seed coating by Agroscope ART with OB at 40%; C3+Galla: C3 applying G. chinensis with a slurry technique; warm water: 45° C., 2 h; Cerall®: Bacterial product at 1 ml 100 g seeds−1. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean. ‘*’ indicate treatments that were significantly different from the control treatment (at α=0.05). - The following non-limiting example further illustrates the present invention.
- Chinese galls (synonyms: Galla chinensis, G. rhois, Chinese sumac, Wu Bei Zi) are produced by aphids feeding on leaves of Chinese sumac or nutgall tree (Rhus spp.) (see, e.g., Ahn et al. (2005), supra).
- In comparison to previous antimicrobial studies using G. chinensis extracts or individual compounds such as gallic acid and esters thereof it was surprisingly found according to the present invention that preparations containing substantially complete G. chinensis, e.g. G. chinensis in pulverized form, show superior antifungal properties as demonstrated by an up to 100% reduction of conidia germination and mycelium growth of Microdochium majus. According to the present invention, it is therefore surprisingly not necessary—contrary to the teaching of the prior art—to produce extracts of G. chinensis or to even synthetically manufacture certain components present G. chinensis in order to achieve a fungicidal effect.
- According to the present invention the term “preparation containing Galla chinensis” is a preparation comprising material from substantially complete Chinese galls. Preferably, the preparation contains G. chinensis in pulverized form such as a meal or powder of G. chinensis. Typically, the preparation contains further phytologically acceptable, i.e. for phytoglogical applications suitable, ingredients such as carriers, excipients, diluents, further fungicidal compounds, adhesives and/or emulsifiers. The G. chinensis preparations of the invention preferably contain about 0.01 to about 99 weight %, more preferably about 0.1 to about 50 weight %, even more preferred about 0.1 to about 10 weight %, still more preferred about 0.1 to about 2 weight %, particularly preferred about 0.1 to about 1 weight % of the active ingredient, in particular G. chinensis ground to an appropriate mesh size. The content of the active ingredient typically varies depending on the route of administration and/or the plant, parts thereof, seed etc. to be treated. For example, for an application of the G. chinensis preparation on seeds, the preparation or composition of the invention may have a content of G. chinensis of about 0.1 to about 4 weight %, more preferably about 0.1 to about 2 weight %, whereas for application on plant parts such as leaves typically using spraying devices, the content may be about 0.1 to about 1 weight %, more preferably about 0.1 to about 0.5 weight % or lower. In other embodiments of the invention, the preparation may also be substantially pure ground G. chinensis.
- Methods for producing such G. chinensis preparations are known in the art. Preferably, galls are ground to the appropriate mesh size, e.g. from about 0.001 to about 0.2 mm, more preferably from about 0.005 to about 0.1 mm, even more preferred about 0.01 to about 0.08 mm, typically using commercially available milling equipment. The meal is then typically mixed with the further ingredients in a known manner.
- According to preferred embodiments of the present invention, the G. chinensis preparation contains at least one further fungicide. Fungicides are known to the skilled person and commercially available from various suppliers (see, e.g. the respective disclosure in WO-A-2011/138345). Appropriate selections for specific phytopathogens and their respective plant hosts are also described in the prior art, e.g. Hewitt, H. G. 1998: Fungicides in crop protection: Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 232 pp.
- A particularly preferred composition containing G. chinensis for application in the inventive method further comprises one or more phytologically acceptable adhesive(s). A “phytologically acceptable” adhesive is a compound or composition providing adherence of a fungicidal active or composition to the targeted object (i.e. plants, their parts such as crop material, seed, soil, habitat etc.) while substantially not interfering with any of the relevant properties of the targeted object such as viability, propagation, usefulness (e.g. use for food or other purposes) etc. Thus, adhesives useful in the present invention are essentially bio-compatible. Corresponding adhesives are known to the skilled person (see, for example, Legro, R. J. 2004: Organic seed & coating technology: a challenge and opportunity. In First World Conference on Organic Seed, edited by E. L. Van Bueren, R. Ranganathan and N. Sorensen. Rome, Italy: FAO; and Backman, P.A. (1978): Fungicide formulation—relationship to biological activity. Annual Review of Phytopathology 16: 211-237) and commercially available from various suppliers. Preferred examples of adhesives for use in the present invention include, but are not limited to, starch, talcum, and synthetic binders such as DiscoAg-Red (L203) and, particularly preferred, Organic Binder (A6.6041) (Incotec Holding BV, Enkhuizen, The Netherlands). The amount of adhesive(s) present in the composition according to the invention depends on various factors such as the object to be treated and the adhesive(s) used, and may be optimized for the selected object/adhesive in combination with the respective G. chinensis preparation by routine experimentation. For synthetic or organic binders such as those available from Incotec Holding BV, The Netherlands, recommended concentrations typically lie in the range of from about 5 weight % to about 50 weight % usually depending on the mode of administration and/or the plant, plant parts, seeds etc. to be treated. For example, compositions for treatment of seeds typically contain about 40 to about 50 weight % adhesive, whereas compositions for leave treatments usually contain much less adhesive, e.g. about 1 to about 10 weight %, more preferably about 2 to about 8 weight % such as about 5 weight % adhesive.
- A particularly preferred mode of the inventive method comprises forming a slurry, i.e. a dispersion, of a G. chinensis preparation in a liquid, e.g. water, optionally containing further components, preferably an adhesive (or more of them). The “slurry method” is particularly suitable for the treatment of plant seeds being coated with the slurry, which are then typically dried.
- In certain preferred embodiments of the inventive method, the co-application of G. chinensis preparation and an adhesive (or more than one) may be carried out sequentially, i.e. the G. chinensis preparation and the adhesive(s) may not be present in the same composition. An example is an inventive method wherein, firstly, the adhesive (typically a composition containing the adhesive(s)) is applied on the targeted object (i.e. plant, plant parts, seed), and then contacting the target(s) with the G. chinensis preparation. According to a further embodiment, this mode of the present invention is further extended to a so-called “sandwich approach” by including a further step of treating the targeted object(s) with adhesive(s) again. Such embodiments of the present invention are particularly useful for the treatment of seeds. Also after such treatment the seed is usually subjected to a drying process.
- In further preferred embodiments of the present invention the treatment with G. chinensis is combined with a heat treatment, preferably using hot air, preferentially when applied for 1 to 5 days to plant seeds. Preferably, the hot air has a temperature of from about 55 to about 80° C., more preferably from about 60 to about 75° C. Such combined treatments provide a synergistic fungicidal effect. Heat application methods using hot air have been described in the art. For example, Forsberg (Control of Cereal Seed-borne Diseases by Hot Humid Air Seed Treatment. Uppsala, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 49 pp., PhD thesis, 2004) describes fungicidal methods using humid air. Typically, humid air for use in the present invention has a relative humidity of more than about 85%. According to alternative embodiments, dry hot air is used, preferably having a relative humidity of not more than about 5%. Processes using dry hot air have been described in the art as well (see, e.g., Gilbert et al. (205) Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology-Revue Canadienne de Phytopathologie 27, 448-452).
- Preferred fungal pathogens to be controlled by the method according to the invention may be selected from Ascomycetes, Basidiomycetes and Oomycetes. Preferred phytopathogenic Ascomycetes vulnerable to the inventive method include Microdochium spp., in particular M. majus, M. nivale, M. oryzae, M. tabacinum and M. triticicola, Gibberella spp., Claviceps spp., Gaeumannomyces spp., Epichloe spp., Sclerotinia spp., Leptosphaeria spp., Pyrenophora spp., Venturia spp. and Mycosphaerella spp. Preferred Basidiomycetes controllable by the method of the invention include Ustilago spp., Tilletia spp. and Typhula spp. Preferred Oomycetes to which the inventive method may be applied include Phytium spp. and Phytophthera spp. With respect to indications of fungal pathogens as mentioned herein, it is to be understood that, if the respective teleomorph is mentioned, the invention intends also the respective anamorph, and vice versa.
- Plants (parts thereof, e.g. crop material, seed etc.) to be protected against corresponding infections by pathogenic fungi include cereals, e.g. wheat, rye, barley, triticale, oats, rice or maize; beets such as sugar beet or fodder beet; fruits, in particular pomes, stone fruits or soft fruits, e.g. apples, pears, plums, peaches, almonds, cherries, strawberries, raspberries, blackberries or gooseberries; leguminous plants such as lentils, peas, alfalfa, clover or soybeans; oil plants, e.g. rapes, mustard, olives, sunflowers, coconut, cocoa beans, castor oil plants, oil palms, ground nuts or soybeans; cucurbits, in particular squashes, cucumber and melons; fiber plants such as cotton, flax, hemp and jute; citrus fruits, e.g. oranges, lemons, grapefruits or mandarins; vegetables, in particular spinach, lettuce, asparagus, cabbages, carrots, onions, tomatoes, potatoes, cucurbits or paprika; lauraceous plants, e.g. avocados, cinnamon and camphor; grapes; tobacco; Stevia; natural rubber plants, ornamental and forestry plants such as flowers, shrubs, broad-leaved trees or evergreens such as conifers; and grasses.
- Highly preferred plants and their corresponding pathogenic fungi as targets of the inventive methods are cereals, vegetables, leguminous forage crops including alfalfa and clover, and grasses including forage grasses, lawns and pastures, in particular the above-mentioned preferred examples thereof.
- The present invention further relates to the fungicidal composition comprising a preparation containing Galla chinensis and at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive as outlined above. Preferred embodiments of such compositions have already been elaborated above. Particularly preferred compositions according to the invention comprise about 0.1 to about 2 weight % G. chinensis preparation and about 5 to about 50 weight % adhesive. Typically the rest is water or other suitable diluent, potentially containing further ingredients as outlined above.
- Further subject matter of the present invention constitutes plant seeds, seedlings and subterranean plant parts (e.g. roots), or plants containing such plant parts, respectively, coated with a G. chinensis preparation or fungicidal composition as described herein. Alternatively, especially plant seed according to the invention may also be coated with an adhesive as described therein and then with the G. chinensis preparation, and optionally again with an adhesive, thus forming a plant seed coated with adhesive—G. chinensis, or coated with a sandwich of adhesive—G. chinensis—adhesive. In the latter coating embodiments, it is clear that the G. chinensis preparation itself usually does not contain adhesive(s).
- Materials and Methods
- Fungal Material and Inoculum Production of Starter Cultures
- For the experiments on conidia germination and mycelium growth, a single conidium strain of Microdochium majus (Mm0327) was selected. The strain was isolated in 2003 in an experimental field in Zurich-Reckenholz, Switzerland, from grains of the winter wheat cultivar ‘Runal’ and deposited as CBS 121295 at the public culture collection of the Fungal Biodiversity Centre, Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures, The Netherlands. At the research station Agroscope Reckenholz-Tanikon, a stock culture was maintained at 5° C. in screw cap slants (15 cm, diameter 1.5 cm), filled to ¾ of its volume with autoclaved shrub soil (“Staudenerde” [41% white peat, 36% bark humus, 20% expanded clay, 3% clay, pH 5.5-6.3], Obiter, Marwil, Switzerland), supplemented with 1% ground rolled oats and moistened with 3 mL sterile deionised water. For molecular identification of the M. majus strain (in vitro experiments) and for seed lots infected with M. majus (in planta experiments), a forward primer for M. nivale (EFNiv/F) and M. majus (EFMaj/F) and a reverse primer common for both species (EFMic/R) (Glynn et al. (2005) Mycological Research 109, 872-880) were used and confirmed the species status for both the strain and the pathogen within the seeds. Starter cultures of fungal inoculum were produced by placing individual aliquots from stock cultures in Petri plates (
diameter 9 cm) containing potato dextrose agar (39 g L−1; CM0139, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), supplemented with streptomycin sulphate (0.1 g L−1; Fluka, Sigma-Aldrich, Buchs, Switzerland) (PDA +) after autoclaving for 20 min at 121° C. Plates were incubated for 6 to 7 days at 19±1° C. with a photoperiod of 12 h dark/12 h near UV light. - Botanicals
- Dried and chopped flowers of Matricaria chamomilla (origin: Egypt), flowers of Filipendula ulmaria (origin: Bulgaria and Poland) and whole plants of Thymus vulgaris (origin: Poland and Peru) (purchased from Mäseler AG, Herisau, Switzerland and from Berg-Apotheke, Zurich, Switzerland) were finely ground with a centrifugal mill (mesh size 0.08 mm; Retsch ZM 200, Schieritz & Hauenstein AG, Arlesheim, Switzerland). Meal of Galla chinensis galls (origin: Sichuan, China; purchased from Berg-Apotheke, Zurich, Switzerland) was reduced to the same mesh size.
- In this experiment, for each of the four botanicals, 10 g powder were suspended in 100 mL autoclaved deionised water and stirred for 3 h at ambient temperature. The aqueous suspensions were subsequently filtered using fluted filters (
diameter 15 cm, 520 A ½, Schleicher & Schuell, Riehen, Switzerland). Three concentrations of these preparations were tested, including 0.1, 0.5 and 1.0%. Microscope slides (76×26 mm) were placed in Petri plates (diameter 9 cm) onto moistened (2 mL sterile deionised water) filter papers (diameter 8.5 cm, Nr. 591, Schleicher & Schuell) and three water agar plugs (diameter 1 cm) were placed on each slide. Each treatment consisted of two Petri plates, resulting in a total of six agar plugs. Conidia suspensions were obtained by washing each incubated plate of the starter cultures with 7 ml sterile deionised water and adjusting the resulting suspension to a concentration of 3.3×104 conidia ml−1. For each botanical and each concentration, 15 μl extract were pipetted onto each agar plug. Sterile, deionised water served as the control treatment. To compare the efficacy of the botanicals with a synthetic fungicide, a treatment with Pronto® Plus (0.035%; 25.5% spiroxamine, 13.6% tebuconazole) was included. Extracts, water and fungicide solutions were allowed to evaporate for 20 min. Subsequently, 15 μl conidia suspension were pipetted onto the agar plugs. Petri plate lids were closed and plugs were incubated for 24 h at 10° C. and 70% rh in the dark. Conidia were killed and stained with one drop of a Pronto® Plus (0.19%) and Cotton blue (0.5%) mixture. The germination rate was assessed with the aid of a light microscope (400× magnification) by determining the ratio of germinated conidia from a total of 30 conidia within three different visual fields. A conidium was assigned as germinated when the germination tube was longer than the width of the conidium. - Autoclaved PDA medium in Schott flasks was placed in a water bath (60° C.) and while stirring constantly, supplemented with streptomycin sulphate and the desired quantities of the four botanical powders before pouring into Petri plates (
diameter 9 cm): Concentrations of powders were 0.1, 0.5 and 1% (0.1 g, 0.5 g, 1g powder 100mL −1 medium, respectively). PDA+ without powders served as the control treatment. Using a cork borer, mycelial plugs (diameter 0.5 cm) were cut from starter cultures and for each PDA plate, one plug was placed in the centre with the mycelial side facing the agar. For each treatment, five Petri plates were used. Plates were incubated in the dark at 20±1° C. and 50% rh for 6 days. Subsequently, radial growth was determined by measuring the diameter of the fungal colony at two positions (smallest and largest diameter) and calculating the average of both values. - Winter wheat seeds (cultivar ‘Siala’) infected with M. majus (infection rate 25-30%) were treated with the botanicals F. ulmaria, T. vulgaris and G. chinensis and two different adhesives, “DiscoAg-Red” (L203; DR) and “Organic Binder” (A6.6041; OB) (Incotec Holding BV, Enkhuizen, The Netherlands). For each botanical, 2 g were used for 100 g seeds and for each adhesive, two different application methods were evaluated. The first method consisted of dispersing the powder with water and the adhesive in a liquid seed treater (Hege 11, inductor 190 V,
volume 20 to 3000 g seeds, Hege Maschinenbau, Waldenburg, Germany), resulting in a slurry that was applied in a single step onto the seeds. For the second method, seeds were coated using a “sandwich” technique, in which seeds were first coated with the adhesive (Hege 11), followed by a powder application with a rotating machine (Turbula®,type 2A, 3×380 V, Willy A. Bachofen AG, Basel, Switzerland) and a second layer of the adhesive (Hege 11). Several preliminary trials were conducted to determine the most suitable concentration and amount of adhesive in terms of viscosity and adherence of the botanical (data not shown). For the slurry method, 100 g seeds were treated with 4.7 mL of DR or OB (both 40%) for F. ulmaria and T. vulgaris and with 4.5 mL of DR or OB (40%) for G. chinensis. For the coating method, 3.5 mL (2×1.75 mL) of DR or OB (50%) were used for all three botanicals. Treatments with the adhesives but without the botanicals as well as grains without any treatment were included as controls. Following treatment, seeds were air-dried at 30° C. for approximately 60 min. The treated and untreated seeds were placed on PDA+ agar in Petri plates (diameter 9 cm). For each treatment, ten plates with ten seeds in each plate were used. Plates were incubated for 6 days at 19±1° C. with a photoperiod of 12 h dark/12 h near UV light. Subsequently, the number of M. majus colonies growing from seeds was determined and expressed as incidence in %. -
Experiment 1 - Winter wheat seeds (cultivar Tiorina') infected with M. majus (
infection rate 30%) were treated at Incotec with F. ulmaria, T. vulgaris and G. chinensis and the two adhesives DR and OB. For this, an encrusting and pelleting process (EPM03) with a rotary batch coater (Satec concept ML 2000,diameter 30 cm, SATEC seed coating, Elmshom, Germany) was used. For 100 g seed, 2 g of the respective botanical and 3.5 mL of DR or OB (50%) in complete mixes (slurry) were used. Treated seeds were dried for 5 min in unheated air. Treatments with the adhesives but without botanicals and untreated seeds served as controls. Seeds were sown in plastic trays (dimensions: 30×47×6 cm) containing moistened shrub soil (Obiter, Switzerland) at a depth of 2 cm. For each treatment, three trays with 100 seeds each (ten rows with ten seeds) were sown. After sowing, the soil was watered and trays were placed in a greenhouse for 24 h at 20±1° C. to stimulate germination. Trays were then wrapped in plastic bags, transferred to a growth chamber and incubated for 21 days at 5° C. in the dark without watering. Subsequently, trays were unwrapped and further incubated for 14 days at 10° C. in the light (fluorescence and red light, 350 μmol m−2 s−1) and watered as needed. At the end of the second incubation period, the number of emerged seedlings was counted and the ratio of healthy looking and abnormal seedlings (twisted, truncated, without coleoptiles) was determined. - Since all in vitro experiments and the seedling emergence in soil from
Experiment 1 demonstrated a superior effect of G. chinensis compared with the other botanicals, the following experiments were conducted solely with G. chinensis. As above, 2 g of G. chinensis powder for 100 g seed (winter wheat cultivar ‘Siala’,infection rate 35%) were used. With respect to the adhesives and for 100 g seed, 4.5 mL of DR or OB (40%) were applied for the slurry method, whereas 3.5 mL (2×1.75 mL) of DR or OB (50%) as described for the incubation chamber experiment were used for the coating method. In order to compare the effects of these small scale seed treatments conducted at Agroscope ART with those from large scale seed treatments, the coating method by Incotec as described forExperiment 1 was also included. Furthermore, to compare the effect of botanicals with a physical and a biological method, a treatment with warm water (45° C., 2 h) (Winter et al. 1998) and a treatment with the bacterial product Cerall® (active ingredient Pseudomonas chlororaphis) (Stähler Suisse SA, Zofingen, Switzerland) (1 mL for 100 g seeds) were tested as well. Treatments with the adhesives but without G. chinensis and untreated seeds served as controls. The number of trays and seeds per tray for each treatment was the same as inExperiment 1. Seeds were sown, incubated and seedling emergence was rated as described above. - Throughout three consecutive years, the effect of seed treatments with G. chinensis powder was evaluated in the field. Treatments were the same as in the growth chamber experiments, except that for the adhesive, solely OB was used. For the field experiments sown in 2008 and 2009, a single winter wheat seed lot of the cultivar ‘Siala’ infected with M. majus (35% infection rate) was chosen. For the experiment sown in 2010, another seed lot of ‘Siala’ (25-30% infection rate) was used.
- The experiments were carried out on the experimental farm of the Research Station Agroscope ART in Zurich-Reckenholz. The soil type in 2008 and 2009 was a loamy anthrosol with 2.8% and 2.2% organic matter, respectively. In 2010, the soil type was a loamy cambisol with 2.4% organic matter. Plot size was 1.2×8.7 m and wheat was drilled at 150 kg ha−1. Each treatment consisted of four plots. The sowing dates for the three years were Nov. 10, 2008, Oct. 21, 2009 and Nov. 3, 2010. Husbandry operations were standard for the farm except that no fungicides were applied. Seedling emergence was determined at growth stages DC 11 to DC 12 after snow melt (Zadoks et al. (1974) Weed Research 14, 415-421). For each plot, four rows were randomly selected while excluding the border rows and the number of emerged seedlings within 1 m of each row was counted. Assessment of seedling emergence for the different years took place on Mar. 18, 2009, Mar. 24, 2010, and on Mar. 9, 2011. Plots were combine-harvested on Jul. 30, 2009, Aug. 1, 2010, and on Jul. 25, 2011. Wheat grains were passed through a grain cleaning machine (aspiration cleaner Kongskilde KF12, Kongskilde Industries, Sorø, Denmark) to remove harvest by-products and grain yield (t ha-1) was determined at approximately 14% moisture content. Weather data were obtained from a MeteoSwiss operated weather station (SwissMetNet) located at Zurich-Reckenholz approximately 0.5 to 1 km from the experimental sites. Data included daily mean air temperature (at 2 m height) and sum of precipitation (1.5 m) and were taken according to WMO guidelines (WMO guide to meteorological instruments and methods of observation. WMO-No. 8, 7th edition, 2008, World Meteorological Organisation).
- Experimental Design and Analyses
- All laboratory, incubation and growth chamber experiments were set up in a completely randomised design and were performed twice. The field experiment was set up in a randomised complete block design and was conducted three times. For all experiments, results from the experimental runs were pooled. In case of a failed normality test and in order to approach normal distribution, percentage data (conidial germination rate, incidence of M. majus from grains, seedling emergence in growth chambers) were arcsine transformed whereas data from radial mycelial growth, number of emerged plants in the field and yield were in transformed before analysis of variance (ANOVA). Apart from one-way ANOVAs analysing the effect of one treatment factor only, two-way ANOVAs were also conducted for experiments where other factors than the botanicals were expected to be important (e.g. application procedure, different adhesives, years). When the overall effect of the tested factor was significant in ANOVA, an all-pairwise multiple comparison procedure according to Holm-Sidak (α=0.05) (Holm (1979) Scandinavian Journal of
Statistics 6, 65-70) was conducted in order to evaluate differences between treatment means. For plotting of graphs, untransformed data were used. All statistical analyses were conducted using SigmaStat® (Systat Software, San Jose, Calif., USA). - Results
- In Vitro Experiment—Conidia Germination
- The mean germination rate of M. majus conidia from the control treatment was 96%. The treatment with the synthetic fungicide Pronto® Plus completely inhibited germination (data not shown). When data from all three concentrations were combined, the reduction of germination through the four botanicals ranged between 1% (T. vulgaris—mean of 95% germinated conidia) and 60% (G. chinensis—mean of 39% germinated conidia). The reduction was highly significant (P<0.001) for G. chinensis at 0.5 and 1.0% as well as for F. ulmaria at 0.5% (
FIG. 1 ). None of the treatments with M. chamomilla or with T. vulgaris significantly reduced the germination rate. The greatest reduction of 97% (2.5% germination) was obtained with G. chinensis at 1.0%. - In Vitro Experiment—Mycelium Growth
- For the control treatment, the mean colony diameter of M. majus after 6 days incubation was 7.1 cm. When data from all three concentrations of incorporated powders were combined, reduction of colony growth was greatest with G. chinensis (mean diameter 0.9 cm). Clearly less effective were incorporations by F. ulmaria (4.1 cm), T. vulgaris (5.3 cm) and M chamomilla (6.6 cm) (
FIG. 2 ). Highly significant (P<0.001) reductions of mycelial growth were obtained with G. chinensis at all three concentrations, for F. ulmaria at 0.5 and 1.0%, for T. vulgaris at 0.5 and 1.0% and for M. chamomilla at 1.0%. Incorporation of G. chinensis at 0.5 and 1.0% completely inhibited mycelial growth of M. majus. - Incubation Chamber Experiment—Incidence of M. majus from Infected Seeds on Agar
- The mean incidence of M. majus based on the number of colonies from untreated seeds was 24% compared with 23% and 24% from seeds treated with the adhesives OB and DR, respectively, with no significant differences. For the treatments containing adhesives and botanicals, no significant difference was found between the coating and the slurry application technique (data not shown). Overall, the reduction of the fungal incidence was significantly better (P<0.006) when botanicals were applied with the adhesive OB, compared with the adhesive DR (
FIG. 3 ). The best effect was obtained with G. chinensis, followed by F. ulmaria. The efficacy in reducing fungal incidence was significant (P<0.001) for both G. chinensis treatments and for the F. ulmaria treatment applied with the adhesive OB. The alteration of M. majus incidence through the botanicals compared with the control treatment ranged from an increase of 12% (DR+T. vulgaris: 27% incidence) to a decrease of 59% (OB+G. chinensis: 10% incidence) (FIG. 3). - Growth Chamber Experiment—Seedling Emergence from Soil
- In
Experiment 1 with three botanicals and the two adhesives applied by Incotec, mean emergence of total and healthy seedlings from the control treatment was 49 and 42%, respectively. The adhesives DR and OB without botanicals showed no significant effect on total seedling emergence (FIG. 4 ). Treatment with botanicals resulted in a mean increase of total emerged seedlings between 16 and 59%. Highly significant (P<0.001) effects were observed for both treatments with G. chinensis (emergence with DR: 72%, with OB: 77%), both T. vulgaris treatments (with DR: 61%, with OB: 59%) and for the F. ulmaria treatment with OB (60%) (FIG. 4). The effect of the botanicals on the ratio of healthy seedlings was similar. However, apart from the superior G. chinensis treatments (with DR: 66%, with OB: 71%), only the T. vulgaris treatment with DR (55%) significantly (P<0.001) increased the ratio of healthy looking seedlings when compared with the control treatments (data not shown). - In
Experiment 2 using G. chinensis applied with different techniques as well as a warm water and a Cerall® treatment, the mean emergence of total and healthy seedlings from the control treatment was 53 and 42%, respectively. None of the treatments with the adhesive OB without G. chinensis showed a significant effect on total seedling emergence (FIG. 5 ). There was a highly significant (P<0.001) increase of total and healthy emerged seedlings following a treatment including G. chinensis with different application techniques, with mean emergence between 65 and 69% and between 54 and 58%, respectively. The application techniques used by Agroscope ART led to slightly higher total seedling emergence compared with the technique by Incotec, but the differences were not significant (FIG. 5 ). The emergence following a treatment with Cerall® was similar (total emergence: 66%; healthy: 55%) to that with G. chinensis treatments. The effect of the warm water treatment was substantially greater than all other treatments, resulting in a mean emergence of 96% total seedlings (FIGS. 5 ) and 93% healthy seedlings (data not shown). - Field Experiment—Plant Emergence and Yield
- There were highly significant interactions (P<0.001) between the effect of the year and the treatment on plant emergence and yield. From all three years, the winter after sowing in 2008 was the coldest with the longest snow cover whereas the winter after sowing in 2010 was the warmest with the lowest amount of precipitation. The lowest and highest temperature immediately after sowing was recorded for 2008 and 2010. When data were combined over all treatments, the average number of plants within 1 m of each row showed a large range from 10 (2009) up to 34 plants (2011) and for the yield from 3.8 (2009) up to 6.3 t ha−1 (2011). Nevertheless, even when data were combined over all three years, differences were observed between the seed treatments. The average number of emerged plants from the control treatment was 15 within 1 m. The number of plants in treatments containing the adhesive OB without G. chinensis ranged between 18 and 23, whereas in the treatments containing OB together with G. chinensis, the number ranged between 26 and 27 (
FIG. 6 a). The Cerall® treatment resulted on average in only 21 plants and warm water was the best treatment, resulting on average in 39 plants within 1 m (FIG. 6 a). The two-way ANOVA with the factors year and seed treatment separated, demonstrated highly significant effects from all treatments containing G. chinensis, from Cerall® and also from the two treatments containing OB only (FIG. 6 a). The yield from seeds of the untreated control was 4.7 t ha−1. Seeds treated with G. chinensis resulted in a yield between 5.5 and 5.7 t ha−1 whereas yield from seeds that received only the adhesives, ranged between 4.9 and 5.0 t ha−1. The average yield from the Cerall® and the warm water treatment was 5.2 and 6.5 t ha−1, respectively (FIG. 6 b). The two-way ANOVA showed highly significant effects on yield from all treatments containing G. chinensis on yield (P<0.001) (FIG. 6 b). - Discussion
- In the above in vitro experiments, G. chinensis was substantially more effective compared with other botanicals and higher concentrations of G. chinensis greatly or completely inhibited M. majus conidia germination and mycelial growth. Remarkably, the efficacy of G. chinensis at a concentration of 1% was almost as high as that from the synthetic fungicide Pronto® Plus, resulting in 97% or 100% reduction of conidia germination, respectively. Bearing the different target sites in mind, it was not surprising that the pattern of results on conidia germination was not always equivalent to that on mycelium growth. In fact, treatments with T. vulgaris did not reduce germination of M. majus conidia whereas high concentrations of T. vulgaris powder incorporated into agar significantly reduced mycelial growth. In general, the effects of botanicals on conidia germination were clearly smaller than those observed on mycelium growth, except for G. chinensis. The findings from the in vitro experiments were confirmed in the following in planta test systems. All G. chinensis treatments had a substantially higher efficacy compared with those from F. ulmaria or T. vulgaris. Thus, it has been demonstrated that the medicinal herb G. chinensis applied to seeds has the potential to control M. majus through improved plant emergence resulting in increased yield in infested seed lots. As regards the fungicidal activity, the warm water treatments were clearly superior compared with the bacterial product and the botanicals. However, treatment with warm water affords longer re-drying processes, e.g. of seeds, which are usually too costly for the crop industries. Overall, therefore, treatment with G. chinensis offers excellent control of fungal phytopathogens at reasonable costs.
Claims (17)
1. A method for controlling a fungal phytopathogen or preventing infection of a plant by a fungal phytopathogen comprising the step of contacting the plant, plant parts, its seed, soil and/or habitat with an effective amount of a preparation containing Galla chinensis.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein the preparation further contains Galla chinensis meal.
3. The method of claim 1 wherein the G. chinensis preparation is used in a composition further containing at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive.
4. The method of claim 1 further comprising the step of treating the plant, plant parts, its seed, soil and/or habitat with an effective amount of hot air, preferably having a temperature of from 55 to 80° C., more preferably from 60 to 75° C.
5. The method of claim 4 wherein the air has a relative humidity of not more than 5% or more than 85%.
6. The method according to claim 1 comprising the step of forming a dispersion of the Galla chinensis preparation in a liquid, preferably water, optionally containing at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive.
7. The method of claim 6 wherein the slurry is applied onto plant seed, seedlings or subterranean plant parts.
8. The method of claim 3 further comprising the steps of:
treating the plant seed with at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive; and
contacting the seed with the preparation containing Galla chinensis; optionally treating the seed again with the at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive.
9. The method of claim 1 wherein the fungal phytopathogen is selected from the group consisting of Ascomycetes, Basidiomycetes and Oomycetes.
10. The method of claim 9 wherein the Ascomycete is selected from the group consisting of the genera Microdochium, Gibberella, Claviceps, Gaeumannomyces, Epichloe, Sclerotinia, Leptosphaeria, Pyrenophora, Venturia, and Mycosphaerella.
11. The method of claim 10 wherein the fungus is selected from the group consisting of Microdochium majus, Microdochium nivale, M. oryzae, M. tabacinum and M. triticicola.
12. The method of claim 1 wherein the plant is selected from cereals, beets, fruits, leguminous plants, oil plants, cucurbits, fiber plants, citrus fruits, vegetables, lauraceous plants, grapes, tobacco, Stevia, natural rubber plants, grasses, ornamental and forestry plants.
13. A fungicidal composition comprising a preparation containing Galla chinensis and at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive.
14. The composition of claim 13 comprising Galla chinensis meal.
15. A plant seed, a plant seedling or a subterranean plant part being coated with the composition according to claim 13 .
16. The method of claim 1 wherein the preparation consists essentially of Galla chinensis meal.
17. A plant seed, a plant seedling, or a subterranean plant part being sequentially coated with at least one phytologically acceptable adhesive according to claim 13 and a preparation containing G. chinensis.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US15/422,242 US11553719B2 (en) | 2012-12-20 | 2017-02-01 | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| EP12198782.0A EP2745693B1 (en) | 2012-12-20 | 2012-12-20 | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens |
| EP12198782.0 | 2012-12-20 |
Related Child Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US15/422,242 Continuation US11553719B2 (en) | 2012-12-20 | 2017-02-01 | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| US20140182016A1 true US20140182016A1 (en) | 2014-06-26 |
Family
ID=47435816
Family Applications (2)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US14/107,479 Abandoned US20140182016A1 (en) | 2012-12-20 | 2013-12-16 | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens |
| US15/422,242 Active 2034-12-22 US11553719B2 (en) | 2012-12-20 | 2017-02-01 | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens |
Family Applications After (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US15/422,242 Active 2034-12-22 US11553719B2 (en) | 2012-12-20 | 2017-02-01 | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens |
Country Status (3)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (2) | US20140182016A1 (en) |
| EP (1) | EP2745693B1 (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2836966C (en) |
Families Citing this family (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CN106561717A (en) * | 2015-10-12 | 2017-04-19 | 成都新朝阳作物科学有限公司 | Pesticide for preventing and controlling ginger blast, and preparation method thereof |
Citations (7)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPH0421617A (en) * | 1990-05-11 | 1992-01-24 | Matsuura Yakugiyou Kk | Natural agricultural chemical for lawn |
| US5589381A (en) * | 1994-06-30 | 1996-12-31 | Rutgers, The State University Of New Jersey | Bacillus licheniformis producing antifungal agents and uses thereof for control of phytopathogenic fungi |
| US6448228B1 (en) * | 1998-11-30 | 2002-09-10 | Isagro Ricerca S.R.L. | Dipeptide compounds having a high fungicidal activity and their agronomic use |
| CN1969636A (en) * | 2005-11-21 | 2007-05-30 | 刘伟平 | Compound botanical disinfectant use in agriculture and method for producing same |
| CN101107934A (en) * | 2006-07-17 | 2008-01-23 | 河北农业大学 | Fungicide containing Galla gall extract and composition thereof |
| US20110070322A1 (en) * | 1998-07-28 | 2011-03-24 | Ecosmart Technologies, Inc. | Pesticidal compositions containing rosemary oil and wintergreen oil |
| US20130078272A1 (en) * | 2009-12-09 | 2013-03-28 | Auckland Uniservices Limited | Fungicidal compounds and methods of their use |
Family Cites Families (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WO2011138345A2 (en) | 2010-05-06 | 2011-11-10 | Basf Se | Fungicidal mixtures based on gallic acid esters |
-
2012
- 2012-12-20 EP EP12198782.0A patent/EP2745693B1/en active Active
-
2013
- 2013-12-16 CA CA2836966A patent/CA2836966C/en active Active
- 2013-12-16 US US14/107,479 patent/US20140182016A1/en not_active Abandoned
-
2017
- 2017-02-01 US US15/422,242 patent/US11553719B2/en active Active
Patent Citations (7)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JPH0421617A (en) * | 1990-05-11 | 1992-01-24 | Matsuura Yakugiyou Kk | Natural agricultural chemical for lawn |
| US5589381A (en) * | 1994-06-30 | 1996-12-31 | Rutgers, The State University Of New Jersey | Bacillus licheniformis producing antifungal agents and uses thereof for control of phytopathogenic fungi |
| US20110070322A1 (en) * | 1998-07-28 | 2011-03-24 | Ecosmart Technologies, Inc. | Pesticidal compositions containing rosemary oil and wintergreen oil |
| US6448228B1 (en) * | 1998-11-30 | 2002-09-10 | Isagro Ricerca S.R.L. | Dipeptide compounds having a high fungicidal activity and their agronomic use |
| CN1969636A (en) * | 2005-11-21 | 2007-05-30 | 刘伟平 | Compound botanical disinfectant use in agriculture and method for producing same |
| CN101107934A (en) * | 2006-07-17 | 2008-01-23 | 河北农业大学 | Fungicide containing Galla gall extract and composition thereof |
| US20130078272A1 (en) * | 2009-12-09 | 2013-03-28 | Auckland Uniservices Limited | Fungicidal compounds and methods of their use |
Non-Patent Citations (2)
| Title |
|---|
| Hu Tongle et al. Acta Phytophatologoca Sinica. 2008. Vol. 38, No. 6, pages 619-625. CABA Abstract of this document also enclosed. * |
| Wang et al. Front. Agric. China. 2007. Vol. 1, No. 1, pages 43-46. * |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| EP2745693A1 (en) | 2014-06-25 |
| US20170360050A1 (en) | 2017-12-21 |
| CA2836966A1 (en) | 2014-06-20 |
| EP2745693B1 (en) | 2019-05-08 |
| CA2836966C (en) | 2023-03-07 |
| US11553719B2 (en) | 2023-01-17 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| Nicosia et al. | Control of postharvest fungal rots on citrus fruit and sweet cherries using a pomegranate peel extract | |
| Wang et al. | Antifungal activities of neem (Azadirachta indica) seed kernel extracts on postharvest diseases in fruits | |
| US20240049709A1 (en) | Method of controlling fungal infections in plants | |
| Garganese et al. | Pre-and postharvest application of alternative means to control Alternaria Brown spot of citrus | |
| Abaya et al. | Control of Fusarium head blight using the endophytic fungus, Simplicillium lamellicola, and its effect on the growth of Triticum aestivum | |
| Nwachukwu et al. | Evaluation of plant extracts for antifungal activity against Sclerotium rolfsii causing cocoyam cormel rot in storage | |
| Gazo et al. | Antimicrobial and herbicidal properties of the fruticose lichen Ramalina from Guimaras Island, Philippines | |
| Ononuju | Evaluation of some pesticides of plant origin for control of anthracnose disease (Colletotrichum destructivum O’Gara) in cowpea | |
| KR101837622B1 (en) | Composition for controlling plant diseases comprising an extract of Maesa japonica, and method for controlling plant diseases using the same | |
| Xuan et al. | Kava root (Piper methysticum L.) as a potential natural herbicide and fungicide | |
| Jadon et al. | Management of blight of bell pepper (Capsicum annuum var. grossum) caused by Drechslera bicolor | |
| Vogelgsang et al. | Control of M icrodochium majus in winter wheat with botanicals–from laboratory to the field | |
| US11553719B2 (en) | Method and composition for controlling fungal phytopathogens | |
| Oboho et al. | Efficacy of Cymbopogon citratus Stapf leaf extract as seed protectant against Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on stored maize (Zea mays L.) | |
| de Rezende Ramos et al. | Neem (Azadirachta indica a. Juss) components: Candidates for the control of Crinipellis perniciosa and Phytophthora ssp. | |
| ISMAEL et al. | Management of tomato damping-off using natural plant extracts, Trichoderma harzianum and selected fungicides in Penjween, Sulaimani Governorate, Kurdistan, Iraq. | |
| Sudirga et al. | Antifungal activity of leaf extract of Mansoa alliacea against Colletotrichum acutatum the cause of anthracnose disease on chili pepper | |
| Enyiukwu et al. | Antifungal Potentials of Aqueous Extracts of Selected Indigenous Flora Against Leaf and Stem Blight (Alternaria bataticola) Disease of Sweet Potato: doi. org/10.26538/tjnpr/v5i8. 27 | |
| Osai et al. | Comparative efficacy of three plant extracts for the control of leaf spot disease in fluted pumpkin (Telfairia occidentalis Hook F.) | |
| Obongoya et al. | Fungitoxic properties of four crude plant extacts on fusarium oxysporum schl. F. sp phaseoli. | |
| Erzurum et al. | Passalora blight of anise (Pimpinella anisum) and its control in Turkey | |
| Rajput | Studies on Banded Leaf and Sheath Blight of Maize Caused by Rhizoctonia solani f. sp. sasakii EXNER | |
| Odeh et al. | Effect of bioactive constituents of tuber extracts of Dioscorea dumetorum (wild variety) on some plant pathogens for control of post-harvest losses | |
| OYEDEJI | INHIBITORY POTENTIAL OF SORGHUM LEAF AND ROOT EXTRACTS AGAINST FUSARIUM OXYSPORUM F. SP LYCOPERSICI | |
| Moraes et al. | Evaluation of Magonia pubescens Extract against Phytopathogens: Searching for Eco-Friendly Crop Protection Products |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: AGROSCOPE, INSTITUT FUER NACHHALTIGKEITSWISSENSCHA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:VOGELGSANG, SUSANNE;FORRER, HANS-RUDOLF;KREBS, HEINZ;REEL/FRAME:032798/0859 Effective date: 20140227 |
|
| STCB | Information on status: application discontinuation |
Free format text: ABANDONED -- FAILURE TO RESPOND TO AN OFFICE ACTION |