Optimizing Cercospora Leaf Spot Control in Table Beet Using Action Thresholds and Disease Forecasting.

ABSTRACT

Cercospora leaf spot (CLS), caused by the fungus Cercospora beticola, is the dominant foliar disease affecting table-beet production in New York. CLS epidemics occur annually and, if uncontrolled, will rapidly lead to defoliation. In broad-acre production, season-long maintenance of healthy leaves is important to facilitate harvest by top-pulling. Fungicides are the dominant means of CLS control and applications are initiated at an action threshold of 1 CLS lesion/leaf. Regular fungicide application occurs thereafter without regard for scheduling based on weather-based risk. The current action threshold was evaluated with selected fungicides in two replicated field trials. Copper oxychloride + copper hydroxide and propiconazole significantly improved CLS control if initiated prior to infection. Pydiflumetofen + difenoconazole significantly reduced area under the disease progress stairs compared with other fungicides tested and was most efficacious when applications began at 1 CLS lesion/leaf. Six replicated field trials also evaluated the utility of scheduling fungicides on weather-based risk rather than a calendar approach. Two risk thresholds (moderate and high) integrating the accumulation of daily infection values based on temperature and relative humidity from a forecaster for CLS in sugar beet were evaluated. Applications of pydiflumetofen + difenoconazole were reduced from three to two by using the forecaster at either risk threshold compared with calendar applications without affecting CLS control. For propiconazole, the moderate risk threshold provided CLS control equivalent to calendar applications and saved one spray per season. Thus, there was substantial scope to reduce spray frequency by scheduling based on weather-based risk rather than calendar applications. The optimal risk thresholds for pydiflumetofen + difenoconazole and propiconazole were high and moderate, respectively. In these trials, periods of high risk occurred less frequently than moderate risk, increasing the reapplication intervals and, hence, represented a less conservative approach to disease management.