Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment
- Autores
- Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo; Paul, Pierce A.; Amorim, Lilian; da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira; Siqueri, Fabiano Victor; Borges, Edson Pereira; Campos, H.D.; Nunes Júnior, José; Meyer, Maurício Conrado; Martins, Mônica Cagnin; Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro; Carlin, Valtemir José; Grigolli, José Fernando; Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi; Godoy, Claudia Vieira
- Año de publicación
- 2018
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión aceptada
- Descripción
- Target spot of soybean has spread in Brazil, the southeastern United States and Argentina in the last decade. A collaborative network of field Uniform Fungicide Trials (UFT) in Brazil was created in 2011 to study the target spot control efficacy of fungicides, including azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr (AZ_BF), carbendazim (CZM), fluxapyroxad + pyraclostrobin (FLUX_PYRA), epoxiconazole + FLUX_PYRA (EPO_FLUX_PYRA), mancozeb (MZB) and prothioconazole + trifloxystrobin (PROT_TRIF). Network meta‐analysis was used to conduct a quantitative synthesis of UFT data collected from 2012 to 2016 and to evaluate the effects of disease pressure (DP, low ≤ 35% target spot severity in the nontreated control < high) and year of experiment on the overall mean efficacy and yield response to each of the tested fungicides. Based on mean percentage control of target spot severity, the tested fungicides fall into three efficacy groups (EG): high EG, FLUX_PYRA (76.2% control relative to the nontreated control) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (75.7% control); intermediate EG, PROT_TRIF (66.5% control) and low EG, MZB (49.6% control), AZ_BF (46.7% control) and CZM (32.4% control). DP had a significant effect on yield response. At DPLow, the highest response was due to PROT_TRIF (+342 kg ha−1, +12.8%) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (+295.5 kg ha−1, +11.2%), whereas at DPHigh, EPO_FLUX_PYRA and FLUX_PYRA outperformed the other treatments, with yield responses of 503 kg ha−1 (+20.2%) and 469 kg ha−1 (+19.1%), respectively. The probability of a positive return on fungicide investment ranged from 0.26 to 0.56 at DPLow and from 0.34 to 0.66 at DPHigh.
Instituto de Patología Vegetal
Fil: Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Argentina
Fil: Paul, Pierce A. Ohio State University. Department of Plant Pathology. Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center; Estados Unidos
Fil: Amorim, Lilian. Universidade de São Paulo. Departamento de Fitopatologia e Nematologia; Brasil
Fil: da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira. Agro Carregal, Rio Verde; Brasil
Fil: Siqueri, Fabiano Victor. Fundação Mato Grosso; Brasil
Fil: Borges, Edson Pereira. Fundação Chapadão; Brasil
Fil: Campos, H.D. Universidade de Rio Verde; Brasil
Fil: Nunes Júnior, José. Centro Tecnológico para Pesquisas Agropecuárias, Goiânia; Brasil
Fil: Meyer, Maurício Conrado. Embrapa Soja; Brasil
Fil: Martins, Mônica Cagnin. Círculo Verde Assessoria Agronômica e Pesquisa, Luís Eduardo Magalhães; Brasil
Fil: Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro. Universidade Federal de Santa Maria; Brasil
Fil: Carlin, Valtemir José. Agrodinâmica, Tangará da Serra; Brasil
Fil: Grigolli, José Fernando. Fundação MS, Maracajú; Brasil
Fil: Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi. Fundação Rio Verde, Lucas do Rio Verde; Brasil
Fil: Godoy, Claudia Vieira. Embrapa Soja; Brasil - Fuente
- Plant pathology. (04 August 2018)
- Materia
-
Soja
Glycine Max
Rendimiento
Corynespora Cassiicola
Rentabilidad
Fungicidas
Soybeans
Yields
Profitability
Fungicides
Network Meta-analysis - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso restringido
- Condiciones de uso
- Repositorio
.jpg)
- Institución
- Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
- OAI Identificador
- oai:localhost:20.500.12123/3642
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
| id |
INTADig_811a877ef3dc8ff8c66380232792f269 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/3642 |
| network_acronym_str |
INTADig |
| repository_id_str |
l |
| network_name_str |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
| spelling |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessmentEdwards Molina, Juan PabloPaul, Pierce A.Amorim, Lilianda Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal PereiraSiqueri, Fabiano VictorBorges, Edson PereiraCampos, H.D.Nunes Júnior, JoséMeyer, Maurício ConradoMartins, Mônica CagninBalardin, Ricardo SilveiroCarlin, Valtemir JoséGrigolli, José FernandoBelufi, Luana Maria de RossiGodoy, Claudia VieiraSojaGlycine MaxRendimientoCorynespora CassiicolaRentabilidadFungicidasSoybeansYieldsProfitabilityFungicidesNetwork Meta-analysisTarget spot of soybean has spread in Brazil, the southeastern United States and Argentina in the last decade. A collaborative network of field Uniform Fungicide Trials (UFT) in Brazil was created in 2011 to study the target spot control efficacy of fungicides, including azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr (AZ_BF), carbendazim (CZM), fluxapyroxad + pyraclostrobin (FLUX_PYRA), epoxiconazole + FLUX_PYRA (EPO_FLUX_PYRA), mancozeb (MZB) and prothioconazole + trifloxystrobin (PROT_TRIF). Network meta‐analysis was used to conduct a quantitative synthesis of UFT data collected from 2012 to 2016 and to evaluate the effects of disease pressure (DP, low ≤ 35% target spot severity in the nontreated control < high) and year of experiment on the overall mean efficacy and yield response to each of the tested fungicides. Based on mean percentage control of target spot severity, the tested fungicides fall into three efficacy groups (EG): high EG, FLUX_PYRA (76.2% control relative to the nontreated control) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (75.7% control); intermediate EG, PROT_TRIF (66.5% control) and low EG, MZB (49.6% control), AZ_BF (46.7% control) and CZM (32.4% control). DP had a significant effect on yield response. At DPLow, the highest response was due to PROT_TRIF (+342 kg ha−1, +12.8%) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (+295.5 kg ha−1, +11.2%), whereas at DPHigh, EPO_FLUX_PYRA and FLUX_PYRA outperformed the other treatments, with yield responses of 503 kg ha−1 (+20.2%) and 469 kg ha−1 (+19.1%), respectively. The probability of a positive return on fungicide investment ranged from 0.26 to 0.56 at DPLow and from 0.34 to 0.66 at DPHigh.Instituto de Patología VegetalFil: Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Paul, Pierce A. Ohio State University. Department of Plant Pathology. Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center; Estados UnidosFil: Amorim, Lilian. Universidade de São Paulo. Departamento de Fitopatologia e Nematologia; BrasilFil: da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira. Agro Carregal, Rio Verde; BrasilFil: Siqueri, Fabiano Victor. Fundação Mato Grosso; BrasilFil: Borges, Edson Pereira. Fundação Chapadão; BrasilFil: Campos, H.D. Universidade de Rio Verde; BrasilFil: Nunes Júnior, José. Centro Tecnológico para Pesquisas Agropecuárias, Goiânia; BrasilFil: Meyer, Maurício Conrado. Embrapa Soja; BrasilFil: Martins, Mônica Cagnin. Círculo Verde Assessoria Agronômica e Pesquisa, Luís Eduardo Magalhães; BrasilFil: Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro. Universidade Federal de Santa Maria; BrasilFil: Carlin, Valtemir José. Agrodinâmica, Tangará da Serra; BrasilFil: Grigolli, José Fernando. Fundação MS, Maracajú; BrasilFil: Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi. Fundação Rio Verde, Lucas do Rio Verde; BrasilFil: Godoy, Claudia Vieira. Embrapa Soja; BrasilWileyinfo:eu-repo/date/embargoedEnd/2019-08-142018-10-19T12:42:16Z2018-10-19T12:42:16Z2018info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/3642https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ppa.129251365-3059https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12925Plant pathology. (04 August 2018)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess2025-10-16T09:29:20Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/3642instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-10-16 09:29:20.762INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| title |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| spellingShingle |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo Soja Glycine Max Rendimiento Corynespora Cassiicola Rentabilidad Fungicidas Soybeans Yields Profitability Fungicides Network Meta-analysis |
| title_short |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| title_full |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| title_fullStr |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| title_sort |
Meta‐analysis of fungicide efficacy on soybean target spot and cost–benefit assessment |
| dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo Paul, Pierce A. Amorim, Lilian da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira Siqueri, Fabiano Victor Borges, Edson Pereira Campos, H.D. Nunes Júnior, José Meyer, Maurício Conrado Martins, Mônica Cagnin Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro Carlin, Valtemir José Grigolli, José Fernando Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi Godoy, Claudia Vieira |
| author |
Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo |
| author_facet |
Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo Paul, Pierce A. Amorim, Lilian da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira Siqueri, Fabiano Victor Borges, Edson Pereira Campos, H.D. Nunes Júnior, José Meyer, Maurício Conrado Martins, Mônica Cagnin Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro Carlin, Valtemir José Grigolli, José Fernando Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi Godoy, Claudia Vieira |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Paul, Pierce A. Amorim, Lilian da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira Siqueri, Fabiano Victor Borges, Edson Pereira Campos, H.D. Nunes Júnior, José Meyer, Maurício Conrado Martins, Mônica Cagnin Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro Carlin, Valtemir José Grigolli, José Fernando Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi Godoy, Claudia Vieira |
| author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author author author author author author |
| dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Soja Glycine Max Rendimiento Corynespora Cassiicola Rentabilidad Fungicidas Soybeans Yields Profitability Fungicides Network Meta-analysis |
| topic |
Soja Glycine Max Rendimiento Corynespora Cassiicola Rentabilidad Fungicidas Soybeans Yields Profitability Fungicides Network Meta-analysis |
| dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
Target spot of soybean has spread in Brazil, the southeastern United States and Argentina in the last decade. A collaborative network of field Uniform Fungicide Trials (UFT) in Brazil was created in 2011 to study the target spot control efficacy of fungicides, including azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr (AZ_BF), carbendazim (CZM), fluxapyroxad + pyraclostrobin (FLUX_PYRA), epoxiconazole + FLUX_PYRA (EPO_FLUX_PYRA), mancozeb (MZB) and prothioconazole + trifloxystrobin (PROT_TRIF). Network meta‐analysis was used to conduct a quantitative synthesis of UFT data collected from 2012 to 2016 and to evaluate the effects of disease pressure (DP, low ≤ 35% target spot severity in the nontreated control < high) and year of experiment on the overall mean efficacy and yield response to each of the tested fungicides. Based on mean percentage control of target spot severity, the tested fungicides fall into three efficacy groups (EG): high EG, FLUX_PYRA (76.2% control relative to the nontreated control) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (75.7% control); intermediate EG, PROT_TRIF (66.5% control) and low EG, MZB (49.6% control), AZ_BF (46.7% control) and CZM (32.4% control). DP had a significant effect on yield response. At DPLow, the highest response was due to PROT_TRIF (+342 kg ha−1, +12.8%) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (+295.5 kg ha−1, +11.2%), whereas at DPHigh, EPO_FLUX_PYRA and FLUX_PYRA outperformed the other treatments, with yield responses of 503 kg ha−1 (+20.2%) and 469 kg ha−1 (+19.1%), respectively. The probability of a positive return on fungicide investment ranged from 0.26 to 0.56 at DPLow and from 0.34 to 0.66 at DPHigh. Instituto de Patología Vegetal Fil: Edwards Molina, Juan Pablo. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Paul, Pierce A. Ohio State University. Department of Plant Pathology. Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center; Estados Unidos Fil: Amorim, Lilian. Universidade de São Paulo. Departamento de Fitopatologia e Nematologia; Brasil Fil: da Silva, Luis Henrique Carregal Pereira. Agro Carregal, Rio Verde; Brasil Fil: Siqueri, Fabiano Victor. Fundação Mato Grosso; Brasil Fil: Borges, Edson Pereira. Fundação Chapadão; Brasil Fil: Campos, H.D. Universidade de Rio Verde; Brasil Fil: Nunes Júnior, José. Centro Tecnológico para Pesquisas Agropecuárias, Goiânia; Brasil Fil: Meyer, Maurício Conrado. Embrapa Soja; Brasil Fil: Martins, Mônica Cagnin. Círculo Verde Assessoria Agronômica e Pesquisa, Luís Eduardo Magalhães; Brasil Fil: Balardin, Ricardo Silveiro. Universidade Federal de Santa Maria; Brasil Fil: Carlin, Valtemir José. Agrodinâmica, Tangará da Serra; Brasil Fil: Grigolli, José Fernando. Fundação MS, Maracajú; Brasil Fil: Belufi, Luana Maria de Rossi. Fundação Rio Verde, Lucas do Rio Verde; Brasil Fil: Godoy, Claudia Vieira. Embrapa Soja; Brasil |
| description |
Target spot of soybean has spread in Brazil, the southeastern United States and Argentina in the last decade. A collaborative network of field Uniform Fungicide Trials (UFT) in Brazil was created in 2011 to study the target spot control efficacy of fungicides, including azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr (AZ_BF), carbendazim (CZM), fluxapyroxad + pyraclostrobin (FLUX_PYRA), epoxiconazole + FLUX_PYRA (EPO_FLUX_PYRA), mancozeb (MZB) and prothioconazole + trifloxystrobin (PROT_TRIF). Network meta‐analysis was used to conduct a quantitative synthesis of UFT data collected from 2012 to 2016 and to evaluate the effects of disease pressure (DP, low ≤ 35% target spot severity in the nontreated control < high) and year of experiment on the overall mean efficacy and yield response to each of the tested fungicides. Based on mean percentage control of target spot severity, the tested fungicides fall into three efficacy groups (EG): high EG, FLUX_PYRA (76.2% control relative to the nontreated control) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (75.7% control); intermediate EG, PROT_TRIF (66.5% control) and low EG, MZB (49.6% control), AZ_BF (46.7% control) and CZM (32.4% control). DP had a significant effect on yield response. At DPLow, the highest response was due to PROT_TRIF (+342 kg ha−1, +12.8%) and EPO_FLUX_PYRA (+295.5 kg ha−1, +11.2%), whereas at DPHigh, EPO_FLUX_PYRA and FLUX_PYRA outperformed the other treatments, with yield responses of 503 kg ha−1 (+20.2%) and 469 kg ha−1 (+19.1%), respectively. The probability of a positive return on fungicide investment ranged from 0.26 to 0.56 at DPLow and from 0.34 to 0.66 at DPHigh. |
| publishDate |
2018 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-10-19T12:42:16Z 2018-10-19T12:42:16Z 2018 info:eu-repo/date/embargoedEnd/2019-08-14 |
| dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
acceptedVersion |
| dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/3642 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ppa.12925 1365-3059 https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12925 |
| url |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/3642 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ppa.12925 https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12925 |
| identifier_str_mv |
1365-3059 |
| dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
| language |
eng |
| dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
restrictedAccess |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Wiley |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Wiley |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Plant pathology. (04 August 2018) reponame:INTA Digital (INTA) instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
| reponame_str |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
| collection |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
| instname_str |
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar |
| _version_ |
1846143506561630208 |
| score |
12.712165 |