Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T12:37:48.621Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of adjuvants on disease development by Pleospora papaveracea on opium poppy (Papaver somniferum)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Bryan A. Bailey ,
Nichole R. O'Neill  and
James D. Anderson
Nichole R. O'Neill
Affiliation:
Molecular Plant Pathology Laboratory, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD 20705
James D. Anderson
Affiliation:
Plant Sciences Institute, USDA-ARS, Beltsville, MD 20705
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Adjuvant effects on disease severity caused by the bioherbicide P. papaveracea on opium poppy were evaluated. Tween 20, Tween 80, Triton X-100, Tactic, CelGard, and Keltrol inhibited appressorium formation but not conidial germination on detached leaves. The disease severity varied from 11 to 83% necrosis in field experiments involving eight adjuvants at various concentrations plus 1 × 106 conidia ml−1 or minus pathogen. The three best-performing adjuvants when combined with pathogen, Tactic (1%, v/v), Bond (1%, v/v), and Tween 20 (1%, v/v), were included along with Tween 20 (0.001%, v/v) in field experiments in 1998. Tween 20 (1%, v/v) plus pathogen (1 × 106 conidia ml−1) caused the most severe disease, averaging 68% necrosis within 2 wk of treatment. Overall, plots treated with adjuvant plus P. papaveracea had a 22% reduction in capsule weight per plot as compared to plots treated with the adjuvant alone. Tactic (1%, v/v), Silwet-L77 (0.1%, v/v), Tween 20 (1%, v/v), and Tween 20 (0.001%, v/v) were included in field experiments in 1999. The treatment with Tween 20 (1%, v/v) plus pathogen (2 × 106 conidia ml−1) caused severe disease, averaging 56% necrosis within 2 wk of treatment. In 1999 plots treated with adjuvant plus pathogen averaged a 27% reduction in capsule weight as compared with plots treated with the adjuvants alone. The inclusion of Tween 20 (1%, v/v) with P. papaveracea conidia greatly enhanced efficacy on opium poppy.

Keywords

Opium poppy, Papaver somniferum L. PAPSOPleospora papaveracea SaccBiological controlmycoherbicidemorphineheroin
Type
Weed Management
Information
Weed Science , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , June 2004 , pp. 424 - 432
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Abbas, H. K. and Egley, G. H. 1996. Influence of unrefined corn oil and surface-active agents on the germination and infectivity of Alternaria helianthi . Biocontrol Sci. Technol 6:531–538.Google Scholar
Bailey, B. A., Apel-Birkhold, P. C., Gracia-Garza, J., Hebbar, K. P., Nelson, A. J., Lumsden, R. D., and Elias, K. S. 1997. Strategies for biocontrol of narcotic plants. Section 4. Pages 25–33 in Proceedings of the 1997 ONDCP International Technology Symposium, Chicago, IL. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Bailey, B. A., Apel-Birkhold, P. C., O'Neill, N. R., Plaskowitz, J., Alavi, S., Jennings, J. C., and Anderson, J. D. 2000. Evaluation of infection processes and resulting disease caused by Dendryphion penicillatum and Pleospora papaveracea on Papaver somniferum . Phytopathology 90:699–709.Google Scholar
Boyette, C. D. 1994. Unrefined corn oil improves the mycoherbicidal activity of Colletotrichum truncatum for hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata) control. Weed Technol 8:526–529.Google Scholar
Carlton, J. B. 1996. Retention phenomenon from saturating plant leaves with agricultural liquids. Trans. Am. Soc. Agric. Eng 39:393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choudhary, D. K., Kaul, B. L., Kak, S. N., Singh, C., and Ram, G. 1977. Cultivation and utilization of opium poppy in India: a review. Indian Drugs 15:2–8.Google Scholar
Czyzewska, S. and Zarzycka, H. 1960. Niektore dane z biologii grzyba Helminthosporium papaveris Hennings, stadium doskonale Pleospora papaveracea (Wint) de Not. Lacta Agrobot 10:41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daigle, D. J. and Cotty, P. J. 1991. Factors that influence germination and mycoherbicidal activity of Alternaria cassiae . Weed Technol 5:82–86.Google Scholar
Dean, R. A. 1997. Signal pathways and appressorium morphogenesis. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol 35:211–234.Google Scholar
Egley, G. H. and Boyette, C. D. 1995. Water-corn oil emulsions enhance conidia germination and mycoherbicidal activity of Colletotrichum truncatum . Weed Sci 43:312–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farr, D. F., O'Neill, N. R., and van Berkum, P. B. 1999. Morphological and molecular studies on Dendryphion penicillatum and Pleospora papaveracea, pathogens of Papaver somniferum . Mycologia 92:145–153.Google Scholar
Green, S., Stewart-Wade, S. M., Boland, G. J., Teshler, M. P., and Liu, S. 1997. Formulating microorganisms for biological control of weeds. Pages 249–282 in Boland, G. J. and Kuykendall, L. D. eds. Plant- Microbe Interactions and Biological Control. New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar
Hebbar, K. P., O'Neill, N. R., Bailey, B. A., and Lumsden, R. D. 1997. Fermentation and formulation of Dendryphion penicillatum, a potential mycoherbicide of Papaver somniferum . Phytopathology 87:S41.Google Scholar
Horowitz, M. 1980. Herbicidal treatments for the control of Papaver somniferum L. Bull. Narc. XXXII 1:33–43.Google Scholar
Johnson, D. R., Wyse, D. L., and Jones, K. J. 1996. Controlling weeds with phytopathogenic bacteria. Weed Technol 10:621–624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kapoor, L. D. 1995. Agricultural studies. Chap. 4. Pages 65–94 in Kapoor, L. D. ed. Opium Poppy, Botany, Chemistry, and Pharmacology. Binghamton, NY: Haworth.Google Scholar
Klein, T. A. and Auld, B. A. 1995. Evaluation of Tween 20 and glycerol as additives to mycoherbicide suspensions applied to Bathurst burr. Plant Prot. Q 10:14–16.Google Scholar
Krikorian, A. D. and Ledbetter, M. C. 1975. Some observations on the cultivation of opium poppy (Papaver somniferum L.) for its latex. Bot. Rev 42:30–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawrie, J., Down, V. M., and Greaves, M. P. 2000. Factors influencing the efficacy of the potential microbial herbicide Alternaria alternata (Fr.) Keissler on Amaranthus retroflexus (L). Biocontrol Sci. Technol 10:81–87.Google Scholar
Lawrie, J., Greaves, M. P., and Down, V. M. 1997. Some effects of spray droplet size on distribution, germination of and infection by mycoherbicide spores. Asp. Appl. Biol 48:175–182.Google Scholar
McElwee, M., Irvine, J. I. M., and Burge, M. N. 1990. A mycoherbicidal approach to bracken control. Pages 74–79 in Bassett, C., Whitehouse, L. J., and Zabkiewicz, J. A. eds. Alternatives to the Chemical Control of Weeds, Proceedings of an International Conference, Rotorua, New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Forestry, FRI Bulletin 155.Google Scholar
Meffert, M. E. 1950. Ein beirtag zur biologie und morphologie der erreger der parasitaren blattdurre des mohns. Z. Parasitenkd 14:442–498.Google Scholar
Miczulska, I. 1967. Observation on the influence of infection of poppy (P. somniferum L.) by parasitic fungi on the morphine content in the poppy head. Rocz. Nauk. Roln. Ser. A Rosl 93:189–195.Google Scholar
Milatovic, I. 1950. Prilog poznavanju gljive Pleospora calvescens (Fr.) Tulasne na maku. Poljopr. Znan. Smotra 13:121–132.Google Scholar
National Drug Control Strategy. 1998. Budget Summary. McCaffrey, Barry R., Director. Washington, DC: Office of National Drug Control Policy, Executive Office of the President.Google Scholar
Neumann, S. and Boland, G. J. 1999. Influence of selected adjuvants on disease severity by Phoma herbarum on dandelion (Taraxacum officinale). Weed Technol 13:675–679.Google Scholar
O'Neill, N. R., Jennings, J. C., Bailey, B. A., and Farr, D. F. 2000. Dendryphion penicillatum and Pleospora papaveracea, destructive seed-borne pathogens and potential mycoherbicides for Papaver somniferum . Phytopathology 90:691–698.Google Scholar
Schmitt, C. G. and Lipscomb, B. 1975. Pathogens of selected members of the Papaveraceae—an annotated bibliography. Beltsville, MD: Agricultural Research Service, USDA. 185 p.Google Scholar
Shabana, Y. M., Charudattan, R., Devalerio, J. T., and Elwakil, M. A. 1997. An evaluation of hydrophilic polymers for formulating the bioherbicide agents Alternaria cassiae and A. eichhorniae. Weed Technol 11:212–220.Google Scholar
Stevens, P. J. G. 1993. Organosilicone surfactants as adjuvants for agrochemicals. Pestic. Sci 38:103–122.Google Scholar
Watson, A. K. 1989. Current advances in bioherbicide research. Pages 987–996 in British Crop Protection Council eds. Proceedings of the British Crop Protection Conference (Weeds). Suffolk, Great Britain: Lavenham.Google Scholar
Womack, J. G. and Burge, M. N. 1993. Mycoherbicide formulation and the potential for bracken control. Pestic. Sci 37:337–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhukovskii, P. M. and Bazilevskaya, N. A. 1933. Opium Poppy. La Turquie Agricole—Krashkaw. Moscow. Pp. 476–507. [Technical Translation from Russian, TT 74-52024, 1975. New Delhi, India: Armerind Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd. Pp. 1-40].Google Scholar
Zidack, N. K., Backman, P. A., and Shaw, J. J. 1992. Promotion of bacterial infection of leaves by an organosilicone surfactant: implications for biological weed control. Biol. Control 2:111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar