Back to Search Start Over

In-vitro evaluation of fungicides against Alternaria burnsii (Uppal, Patel and Kamat) causing blight of cumin (Cuminum cyminum L.).

Authors :
Varma, Sunaina
Kumhar, Data Ram
Source :
Environment Conservation Journal; 2024, Vol. 25 Issue 1, p50-55, 6p
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

The present investigation aimed to determine the per cent growth inhibition of different fungicides against Alternaria burnsii, the causal agent of cumin blight. The study was conducted during 2020-21 at the Experiential Unit of Plant Pathology, College of Agriculture, SKRAU, Bikaner. Using the poisoned food technique, eleven fungicides were tested at varying concentrations (100, 200, 300, and 500 ppm). After seven days of incubation, the radial growth and per cent growth inhibition of A. burnsii were measured. The results revealed that increasing the fungicide concentration led to greater inhibition of mycelium growth. Among the tested fungicides, Tebuconazole 50% + Trifloxystrobin 20% WG exhibited the highest mean inhibition (76.94%), followed by Tebuconazole 2DS (65.09%) and Pyraclostrobin 13.30% + Epoxiconazole 5% SE (58.75%). Notably, Tebuconazole 50% + Trifloxystrobin 20% WG at concentrations of 300 ppm and 500 ppm, as well as Tebuconazole 2DS at 500 ppm, demonstrated the highest effectiveness with cent per cent growth inhibition. On the other hand, Chlorothalonil showed the least mean growth inhibition (22.96%). The results demonstrated that as the fungicide concentration increased, there was a corresponding increase in the inhibition of A. burnsii growth. These findings highlight the potential effectiveness of selected fungicides, particularly Tebuconazole 50% + Trifloxystrobin 20% WG and Tebuconazole 2DS for managing cumin blight caused by A. burnsii. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
09723099
Volume :
25
Issue :
1
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
Environment Conservation Journal
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
176025440
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.36953/ECJ.24462652