Studies On Chemical Control Of Some Diseases That Attack The Root Of Beans Vulgaris L:

Abdou Mahdy Mohamed Mahdy

Bean (Phaso,lus vulgaris L.) i. an imporlant .leguaa orop grown in A.R.B. and other countri... Daaping_ ott and root 4i •• ~es are the mo.t iaporiant d~.ase.c;/whiob attack the b.an.’ plant oausing decrease in plant .tandand. total yield. Several atud1e•• ere carr1ad-outUDderlaboratory, greenhouse. and field ooD4itionSto study theimportall” fUD&1 that attack bean root. and •• thod. ot 1t8oontrol. .uso, the study inolude’ i.olation of tlmgaltox1na and studying th.ir 8fteois. !h•.8tudy includedal80 stud,,1n& 8nzymesactivity both in fungal filtrate and1noculat.d ’issues .f1:8ct of storage period8 on the percentagesof tungi isolated from •• e48 treated .1t1?- ditterenttUD&ioide. and 8urvival plants. The abaorpt1onan4 translocationof 80•• systemio tuDg10id•• ~ it. residual.tteot was also atudied. ae.ults could be 8u..an.e4 inthe following_ I1- The fungi isolated with high frequencies trom diseasedbean roots of different cultivars were Rhizoctonia~ol~ Triohothec~um roseum Fusarium mon111iorme. ~’u8a~iymsemitectum and Macrophomina phaseo11na.In tbi. respect the a08t .•. 1rul.nt fun&! 1n the pre ••__ ZOC_no •• t&&_ were .R...eolalli. •T..•.. ros..eua aDd !t .on11~.- ~form. while the least v1rulant 0118. was-·11.phaBeoiiDa.2- :ruD&ioidt&differe4 ill their oODCen’trat1onrequired for 1Dh1blt1on of tUD&al aZ”o’rih and alao thetested fw:l&1 d1ft_red u regard. the1r •• ns1t1v1t, ”,0 aceria1D tuDelc1de. In thi. reapeot. Bavi.tiD 50. feoto 60and Qu1nolate V 4)to were IIOre efteciive 1JL1DhibitI01l offuD&al growth thaD all other tested tungi where•• ~. p r_o_._tU_1Ilwas aore ••Daitlv. tor the t.sted fungicide. e.peciell,.ya.telD1cfuugioldea than the other fUDgl.)_ 8pon•. aDd8clerotial gemination aDd lena tu’ielengtha •• re tdtectedbyo the fuqioid •• whioh 41ftered intheir etteot acoording to ’the fw1&1cide aDd the OODCentzoatiODu.ed. In oas. ot !!ros.u.t •. the 80.” .ttect1 ••fungicides •• re Bav18tln 50 and Qu1Ilolate Y 4 X at 5 PP.,.hUe .pere. of !! _!iO_ni_l_l_t_ol”lD8,;”.;;;,; ge1”ll1nate4 tUl 50 ppa ofBaTi.tin 50. t.oto 60 aDd Botran 15.4- Po17&alaoturonase (PG)I cellulase (ez) aDd PeotinaetlQ’le.tras. (PIlI) activiti •• 1n fuD,gal fUtrat •••• n d1fterentl7affected by the t ••t tUD&1oUe. u4 tbe1r oouoeDtrat1ou.80•• .,8r, the higb•• t eo1ily1t7et Po aDdCx-.DZ,.••••• in the filtrate of ~ Jlonl11forma and ~.phaseolina and·-the lo ••..at was in tll trat. of -!. ros.ua.JuDgio1de. had d1rtorent etfect on the &CtiYlt1of fG and 0%enzymes in fUD&alfiltrate.. In this respeot.,Bavi.tin 50 aDd Quinolat. V 4 .ere the m08t eftectiY.fUD&iold•• on 1Dh1’bltlng the activit1 of iha enzyae8 of l.!monillforma aDd -K. phaseollna whil. Boteo 60 and Botran 15 .were 1.s8 etteotive. Ho.ever, the effect: of t:he tungioldesd1ftered on the activity of FG and ex eUZJ1l88 in llooulatedor Don-inoculated tissue. ot bean •• edlinga with -f. ro •• a. the aciivit, of both enz,.. 1Dore••• d •• the t1 •• of inoubat.1oD iDoreas.d.5_ Higher oonoentratlollll of the tuDaal :f11irat .••• ere ao1”’8.ft.otly. and actlv~t.d •••4 ,el’ldDailGn &lidradiol. 1.USth. However, the .tfeot: ot tUucal tiltrat ••.depended on both the eae of the fWJ&&loulture aDd lIeanculttvar.6- Wl1t 8111Ptou in bean ••• 4118&8aDd tout. cuttiugSnqu:1l’ed ahort.r perion whaDt.aeNed :1D. •• ad-. ,---l1fo:rme o1’lde filtrate follo •• el b7 tho •• procluoecl b7-II. .phaseoliDa. Ifha longest p.riod. tor appearaaoe fd wilt,871RPtoa8 •• re 1Jl bean ••• dl1D&. IIIUl to_to outt1D&8 WheD1JIuaerae4 1Jl-If.-ro-seu-m crude. filtrate In th18 NSud •- .. _ .... _-_._----- 55-H1gher _Gunt. 0 t on:u( a) ,.eN produ.oed b7 !!.monil1to:nD8 while the .1’ •• at ”Gunia .ere produoed 117-!. roseua. !he purified t x1D(a) trom &QJ of the three tUDalappeand in ditr8reni 0 .tal1n8 forms(ligures _11,2 and J),_ ae.t exudatea spore and ao1.rol1alCerainatioD aDd gera-tu 8 lengtha of all the three t••te4fungi. Bo.e.,.er,th1a • teot depended on the reaction b.tweenthe tWlgU8 and be cul tlTar. Ho•• ver, 1D 80118. o•• e.there WU Complet. lub! of .pore or Bolerot1al &eraiDatlon.Ho.ever, the l•••t artected were -r. aoDilltorme .porea where •• tho.e of .!! ros.WI .ere the moat .euit1.,..1D thi- respect. fhe. iaulatioD ettect ot the •• e%WI.t••••• fo1UUl to _e muoh ao pronounoed in root e%UClate. otGiza- 3 (8usceptible) 0 ’liver whUe that of conte.er.( ~a81.tUlt) 1Dh1blted apo se1”llL1DatloDof -,. :rosewa u4 L .monl11to~ and Bolerot al aeratnatloD of-K. phaseolin ••and .r-. .oDil1rorme in 0 or 01&&- ) and SW188- Bl&DQ oultivar. ’but decreased 0.”. ot Cont.ndN (Relli.tant) .•In ~h1.respeot, aaDunt. ot ortho.1bT4~1 phenolshwere mostlyhigher 1. the pft.el1o. .,. mon111tol”lH. !ollalaa1Do ao1d~a- Perceu’tac8’ 0••n D•• 001&ll1’-en” 1D and lIbere ••• Dot n1.1I108b.”•• e. the. a4 the 41.toraae perloda varied cord.iDa to the tim. of .tona.(ODe, .ix aDcl t •• 1Te ao hII) and fro. one Tariety ’0another. I.olat10n fr . QlStre.tea ••• u of dlftenutcult1v:ar. N.ulted in i olatlDg!. ••• lIl1t.otwa, b ou.porum..I•.f... -rO.8ua, -A. tlavua, -J.. niger, J.. tenui_, Penioilliua ’PP•and Rh1Z0pU8 ap ••’nate4 ••• ds IftereD1I ’aao cul1:1vara 41d DOt7:181dP••• ll1tectua a:tt ona _nth when ••• 48 of Giu - 3 - oult1.U’ •• re treated wi h Qu1.Do1ata V 4X or Bavi.tiD 50,.•• 1D11arl’1·Sw1.s- Blano CODtelUlre ••• 4a trea1:edw11:11Boteo 60. In this reap thi. tuDgU8 ••• Dot 1801a1:.4atter t••1••• onth. 8to e fro •••• d8 at Gl~ 3 treatedw1th Hdoail + Cu++ or tee 60, thOs. of Swi88- BlaDO trea-. ted with Bavistin 50, 11 0Il11 + 011++, Botec ’” aDdConteuntreated with Bayin1D 50, Qu.1JIolat. V 4:J ADd Woall +Cu++.•!-157-1l•• ult8 Ind1cat,d that treated se.d. of diUereDtbean cult1”’~8_ with ant of the fi.,.. fungicid •• d1dnot .7181d ”I. qqaporLlll. ’~1. indicate. that !.... 0,Jy8POrua Was. - .•.ery 1II.lUIlt!.,.. ”,0 :tUD&~o1dal’treat •• n”ts and 1011.& .tor8&8periods.T. roseum was n,t 180lated whan S••d8 of G1za- )I were treated with BotrF 75, Bwia.- BIILDO ••• d8 with Bav1a-I ’ .t1n50. Isolation o~I Penicillium 8PP.~~ flavua • .!.D1ger,and Rh1zopus ap. was n~t affected b7 d1ft.rent ••• 4 ”1”’8&t-.*188n1;8a,.nd was not con,1st8nt &III DO S8D8ral trend 1Dtheir’1s01at1011 was abe erV1ed, Tbi8.83 b” becauae the.. tuDgiare acat17 aaprophytestnat1D& •• 8d8 11ih.ither BaTi.tin 5O-rBot” ~·GOor ~1)tran .75 erally resll1ted ·in increasing ·thenuaber of survi.,.al pl 1;8 •• pecial17 at’tier QIl8 aonth .torag.period.v1v!Jl& plantsspect, the highest DUmber ot ~Conti.adre oult~.,.ar whioh ••••• tobe 1.88 affect.d bl 8t rag. coDdit1aJl than the o”he~’ oult1var8.8 df dUfenDt b.aD oult1varII.Glza- 3,.Swi•• - BlaDe aDd Conte re t w1th dU:re2WJl’li fUD&101d.. 1.e.,Bav1.tiD 50 (JIBC). 01at.’ 4 X aDd tecto :6«fBi) Howedthat th.· fuq,ic1d.. we ablllorlae41D81de the p%’ldDat1D&••• 48 tor ·tour hre. by dipping th•• loditt.-rent tunaic1daJicultiv81” resulted in gel”lll1l1&t1p,d~. 1D ditterent pari. ot ••e4-1b1tioD index was hl&ber forother two fungicide.,60 (fBZ). In oase of BaT1atin50Dre8.!D& 8e.48 ot Giaa-•••ds aDd per.1ated torl1Dae. In thi. re&ard.BaT1.tiD 50 (MBC) compQu1.Dolate V 4 Jt and Teet(DC) 1Dh1b1tioD 1Ddex • h1per tor -M. phaseolina thaD1. aonil1forae. Aa for • phaseolina, apicotl1 and 1.aY.8orootl1edoD8 showed hi er inhibition 1Dd.Z8~ Qompared wit.the other part. of seed1 !fbi. indicat. that th... fuD-&101de. aOTed 878t.m1Cal’y upward. in bean •••dlings wheD·applied •• a •••4 treatm nt.S••dliq. (7 4Q8 old) of Giu-3 cu):t!yan’” lettdipped· tor 7 dq81n 4i ferel1’OODoeDtrat1ou of the twofuna1c1d •• BaYietiD 50 ( a) aDd Quinola”. Y 4:I ahoweddifterence. to the a.oun a of tuD&101de. absorbed dur1D&. this period. Inhibition index for BaTi.tiD 50 (JIBe) .•••alloh :JUgherth8ll that to QuiDolate V 4 x. It... al.ob1gher 1D oue ot-M. ph eal1na thall -P. lIOD1litm..-.dUteNd areat17 110001”4of t’uDa1c1d.. adcled to the .01.1to the ~101d... it. oODOeutra1i1on- J9-and part” o~ the a•• dl • In ’tibia rega:rd, 1nh1bition” iDdex w•• h1gh_~r for Ba 1st1D 50 (60) than the other twofUngioide. Qu1Dolate v~ 4 X and Tecto 60 (TBZ).lah1bition inde% ~ro. the b1poootyl increased with1Doreaaiq theconoentr tiOD of Be,v1a11n 50. Ho•• ver, 1Jloase of QuiDolate V 4 Xt inhibition index was”zero tormoat parts of seedlings ith the exception of t~ root ”at250 and 500 ppm. This ieate that Quinolate V 4 X .saab80rbed ill roots only case ot high OODC8utrationa•.lcld1q Tecto 60 ( BZ) to 80U resuJ.ted hUgh iDhib1t1oDindex’ a tor ’Ii root t coty1.dolUl. !hi. 11icl1oatedthat this fungicide was ab80rbed and transported’ an4aooUllUlated 111th. ootyl dona.10- Bio88sq stud! iii oho1red that there .88 DOresidualeffeotfrom pods co 1ect.4 fro. bean plants grown tromprevioual, treated seeds with Baviat1n 50 (JlBC). ’hi. indioat.that the tUD&ic1d ••• broken·down aDd Dot ”tranBlo-0’oated to the uw p~due d ••• d8.11- BeaD oultiYars reaction to 1Df’eot10n or n81.tanoewas te.ted in greenhouse ua1D&iDte.ted be”t-llo •• wltll each;tuqu .1JJ&l7 or their 0 biDat1_. baul t. u_d olearlythat bean cult1yar8 d1ft. d in their reaction and Conte.nIcultlvarwBS the least usceptible to T. r08eum and P.moniliform. while Glza- ) was the least 8U8ceptlbleto -M. phaseolina, In this re peot, T. roseum caused the high •• tIpercentage ot pre- emer ence damping - qft wh1le,P. moDi-. . ,- ----.11torme cBUsed the highe percentage ot damping - otf in ”However, the number ot hea1t~ plant aurvlthepost- emergencevals was obtained when t e seeds were planted in 8011 intestedwith f. rosaum.12- ~reat1ng seeds with fungicides showed that theirwas specificity between ungloldes and the difterent oultlvar8as regards contro ling daapiDg- ott caused by eitherT. reseull or p•• oniliio e orK. phaseolina.In this regardresult. indicate hat Contendre cultivar was aoreresistant to iDfection b the three tuDgl and .&8 also theleast ••nsit1”. to tUl)gl 1d•• having at the.ama 1iiu aleSser ”Spo•• to .8ed reatm8n1! aDd:thus could be noollmend.d for grow1D& in tor obt&1rdng” the h1ghest crop.Plant: and ~pocotl leDg1iu and dr¥ -1:ter (,) werealso aftected by tUDgal:L ection aDd tub&lcidal treataeDt •1)- Comparingth eftect ot dirt.reno •• in •• edasize in the sameOultiv showedclearly thai ungradedor the lars_ slz. seed the le •• t percenta&. or damp1J1g_ oft and consequ ntl,. the high •• tperoenta&88 ofhealthy plant survival In contrast with the small s1a.d••ed••S.ed treatments with fungioide. indioated d1ft.rences1n the 4ecre&8e of both hypooot,.l and plant lengthd1ffereDo •• with .eed lz8 and possibly due to phl1otoxiceffeci otthe funsic1d • and1ihe difterenoe. of .e.d .urfaceof bean .e.d8 as he ere. of ihis surfac. 1nore ••••• ·the amoUAt of tungicld on the se.d d1ftered oontrastlyrev.r.ely with ihe siz of ••• d aDd this oontortU withthe inorease of 4_piD8 - otf aDdplant arowth with the malleI’ s1•• of .ee~.wiih .~l slz. of •• fhe.e results indio ate that14- Beduo1Dgandl total 8ugU’8 •• re geaeralq h1&herin root. of plants from the non-1D:t•• t.d .011 thaD ’IroaiDfes;ted 80U for a1&e;- ) (suaoep1iible) and s.u•..Blano(uderately reaistant) .he~”. ConteDeln oultiY&r (reaistant).how.d lo••r amounia ot recluo1q aDd total 8l&&rswhenplanted ill iJd •• ted 8011.Treat1D& ••• 0 with BayutlD-50 or Boteo 60 rdulted in aD 1JIan_ 1D tbe ..”lIDt. of ..reduc1ug and total sugars compared with the control.High amolDts ot nduoUt...g aDd total sugars .ere al80 obtaiDedfro. root. ot plants grown from .e.4a treated withBoteo 60.15- lree phenola .ere higher in roots fro. plantsot aRtencln (resi.tan1l oultivar) cOlllp~d .ith othercultiYar. whether planted in infe.ted or Don-int ••tedso11. ~~UDt. ot conjugated phenola dlftered al80 •• regardsthe difterence. !Xl bean cu11iivB.r ,and ••• higher incase otint •• tation w1t,h T. roseum and p. aonilitorme torGiza -.3 cul1iivBr and-,p~ moniliform. tor Oontendre oul1ii- Tar. In this respeot ’&mOunt.ot orthod1lqdro~ phenol awere h1&her for the NSiiatant Gont.ndre oul tiv&r comparedwith the other cultivars. Ai.o, soil inte.ted with 411’fe-,rent fungi .Drtied an lDcre••• in the •• phenola in the twocultivara Glza- .3 and SW1.8-’ Blanc and decreased them’ in,Contendn •16- fotal aa1Do &01ds .ere hiper 1Dthe roota otG1&.- ) oul tiTer &lUi nlarl, ••• equal for the other’ twocultivara. Soil intest_tion Withtach ane of the tested fung1,exeriecl • cleore••• ~ the _Wlt of aa:lDoacids inroo.. of Oi•• - ) while rsulted ill aD iDereu. 111theoth.rcultiT&r8. fna’iDg ••• 4. With tuna1cU •• Naul tedin a d.er •••• 1D the aDI~un1i1lof am1.noacids in roots ofGiza - 3 and Contend:re.cultiYu •• whil. 1D Bwi88-Blanc·th. effeot d1ttered wl1i~the diff.rent tunglc1d •••17- Under field cond1~10n.treating ••• d8 with&Dr ot the three rates or application ot the t~101de.re8ulted 1D .oat C••• 8 •• in an inorease ot p18l1t heal tlQ’8urv1yal••• compared w•.th Wl-treated ••• ds. BaTt.tin-50, Quinolat. V.4 X 1U11~ Boteo 60 at rate 2 g I kg ••• d.ere superior 1n thi. ~.8P8ct when.. Botran 75. was.tt.ctive in thia reapec_1i 0111, at the rate ot ) I {te.Generall, healtb1’ surY!’ral plants and .11.14 of ’.an cul-1i1var8 1J1Oreaaec1by 1nc~teasiDg the rate, ot application ot80me tuna1c1des. Also, I.eight ot 100 ••ed8 was mo8t11higher for. h1.gher rates of application () g I kg .e.d) •,