HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) An erratum has been published An erratum has been published Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mathre, D. E. Articles by Baldridge, D. E. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Mathre, D. E. Articles by Baldridge, D. E. Agricola Articles by Mathre, D. E. Articles by Baldridge, D. E.

Fungicide Treatment of Wheat Seed: Is it Necessary?^1,2,

ABSTRACT

The value of using nonmercury fungicide seed treatments to increase stand and yield of winter and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and to control common stinking smut (Tilletia caries [DC.] Tul.) was investigated. In a greenhouse test using soil from 38 locations in Montana, emergence from seed treated with mercury averaged 91.2% compared to 88.4% from untreated seed. Field tests using both winter and spring wheat which had been treated with various mercury or nonmercury based fungicides, failed to produce any significant increase in stand or yield.

Control of common stinking smut in winter wheat with nonmercury seed treatments was accomplished, in some cases at rates lower than the label recommendation.

The toxicity of the various nonmercury materials that will control common stinking smut indicates that these compounds should have less deleterious effects upon the environment than the mercury-based seed treatments.

Key Words: Triticum aestivum • Tilletia caries • smut • mercury and nonmercury-based fungicides

¹ Contribution from the Montana Agr. Exp. Sta. Journal Series Paper No. 493. Supported in part by a grant from the Montana Wheat Research and Marketing Committee.

² This is a report on the current status of research involving use of certain chemicals that require registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. It does not contain recommendations for the use of such chemicals, nor does it imply that the uses discussed have been registered. All uses of these chemicals must be registered by the appropriate State and Federal agencies before they can be recommended. Mention of a trademark or proprietary product does not constitute guarantee or warranty of the product by the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, and does not imply its approval to the exclusion of other products that may also be suitable.

³ Professor and Research Associate, Department of Plant Pathology, Montana State Univ., Bozeman, Mont. 59715.

⁴ Superintendent, Northwestern Montana Agr. Res. Center, Kalispell, Mont. 59901.

⁵ Agronomist, Southern Montana Agr. Res. Center, Huntley, Mont. 59037.

Received for publication March 1, 1974.