`
`TRANSLATION CERTIFICATION
`
`Date: January 5, 2022
`
`To whom it may concern:
`
`This is to certify that the attached translation is an accurate representation of the document
`received by this office. The translation was completed from:
`
`• Portuguese
`
` •
`
`To:
`
` English
`
`The document is designated as:
`
`Godoy et al., “Eficiência de fungicidas multissítios no controle da ferrugem-asiática da soja, Phakopsora
`pachyrhizi, na safra 2015/16: resultados sumarizados dos ensaios cooperativos”, Londrina, PR Agosto
`2016 (Embrapa Soja, Circular Técnica, 121)
`
`
`Jordan Woodard, Project Manager in this company, attests to the following:
`
`“To the best of my knowledge, the aforementioned document is a true, full and accurate
`translation of the specified document.”
`
`Signature of Jordan Woodard
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SYNGENTA EXHIBIT 1005
`Syngenta v. UPL, PGR2023-00017
`
`

`

`ISSN 2176-2864
`
`
`
`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in
`controlling Asian soybean rust,
`Phakopsora pachyrhizi, in the 2015/16
`harvest: summarized results of
`cooperative trials
`
`
`The diseases that affect the soybean crop represent one of the main
`threats to productivity and national competitiveness. Annual production
`losses due to diseases are estimated at around 15 % to 20 %
`(TECNOLOGIAS, 2013). The use of fungicides to control diseases in the
`crop began with the epidemic outbreak of powdery mildew
`(Microsphaera diffusa), in the 1996/97 harvest. Subsequently, the
`increase in the incidence of end-of-cycle diseases (Septoria glycines and
`Cercospora kikuchii), mainly due to intensive cultivation and the lack of
`crop rotation, also demanded registration of fungicides (TECNOLOGIAS,
`2013). With the emergence of Asian soybean rust (Phakopsora
`pachyrhizi) in Brazil in 2001 (YORINORI et al., 2005), new products were
`registered. Among other diseases also controlled by fungicides, we can
`mention target spot (Corynespora cassiicola), anthracnose
`(Colletotrichum truncatum), white mold (Sclerotinia sclerotiorum) and
`rhizoctonia root rot (Rhizoctonia solani AG1).
`
`Among the main modes of action used to control diseases in soybean
`crops, the most common ones are the site-specific fungicides methyl
`benzimidazole carbamate (MBC), demethylation inhibitors (DMI),
`quinone oxidase inhibitors (QoI) and succinate dehydrogenase inhibitors
`(SDHI). Despite the great contribution that site-specific fungicides
`provide in disease control, their intensive use may result in the selection
`of less sensitive or resistant fungal isolates. Populations of the fungus C.
`cassiicola resistant to MBC (XAVIER et al., 2013) and P. pachyrhizi less
`sensitive to DMI and QoI have been reported (SCHMITZ et al., 2014;
`KLOSOWSKI et al., 2016).
`
`The limited number of different modes of action of fungicides available
`to control diseases in soybeans crops, associated with less sensitive
`populations of fungi already observed in the field and the low efficiency
`of isolated active ingredients, make it difficult to use resistance
`management strategies such as the rotation of modes of action.
`Evaluating the efficiency of fungicides with different modes of action is
`essential to increase disease control options in soybeans crops. The use
`of multisite fungicides can be an option for both Asian soybean rust
`control and an anti-resistance strategy.
`
`
`
`The objective of this work is to present the summarized results of
`cooperative trials with multisite fungicides, carried out on 2015/16
`harvest, to control diseases in soybeans crops.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`121
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Londrina, PR
`August 2016
`
`Authors
`
`Cláudia V. Godoy, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Embrapa Soja, Londrina, PR.
`
`Carlos M. Utiamada
`Agricultural Engineer,
`TAGRO,
`Londrina, PR.
`
`Maurício C. Meyer, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Embrapa Soybean,
`Londrina, PR.
`
`Hercules D. Campos, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer, UniRV,
`Rio Verde, GO.
`
`Carlos A. Forcelini, Ph.D.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`University of Passo Fundo,
`Passo Fundo, RS.
`
`Cláudia B. Pimenta, M.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Emater-GO,
`Goiânia, GO.
`
`David S. Jaccoud Filho, Ph.D.
`Biologist, Agricultural Engineer,
`Sate University of Ponta
`Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR.
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in controlling Asian soybean rust, Phakopsora pachyrhizi,
`in the 2015/16 harvest: summarized results of cooperative trials
`
`Material and Methods
`With the objective of evaluating the efficiency of multisite fungicides,
`isolated and associated, two protocols were carried out in the 2015/16
`harvest, by 19 institutions in 23 locations (Table 1).
`
`Table 1. Soybean sowing institutions, locations, and dates.
`
`Institution
`
`1 Embrapa Soja
`
`City, State
`
`Londrina, PR
`
`2 Agricultural Research Center Copacol
`
`Cafelândia, PR
`
`3 AgroCarregal Plant Research and Protection
`
`Rio Verde, GO
`
`4
`
`Instituto Biológico
`
`Paulínia, SP
`
`5
`
`Instituto Mato-Grossense do Algodão
`
`Primavera do Leste, MT
`
`6 UniRV
`
`7 CWR Pesquisa Agrícola
`
`8 Phytus Institute
`
`Rio Verde, GO
`
`Palmeira, PR
`
`Itaara, RS
`
`9 Fundação Mato Grosso
`
`Primavera do Leste, MT
`
`10 Agrodinâmica Cons. e Pesquisa Agropecuária
`
`Deciolândia, MT
`
`11 Agrodinâmica Cons. e Pesquisa Agropecuária
`
`Campos Novos dos Parecis, MT
`
`Uberlândia, MG
`
`Edson R. de Andrade Junior, M.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Instituto Mato-Grossense do Algodão,
`Cuiabá, MT.
`
`Edson P. Borges, M.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Fundação Chapadão,
`Chapadão do Sul, MS.
`
`Fabiano V. Siqueri
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Fundação Mato Grosso,
`Rondonópolis, MT.
`
`Fernando C. Juliatti, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Federal University of Uberlândia,
`Uberlândia, MG.
`
`Fernando Favero
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Agricultural Research Center Copacol,
`Cafelândia, PR.
`
`Ivan Pedro Araújo Júnior
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Fundação Mato Grosso,
`Rondonópolis, MT.
`
`
`
`
`
`Sowing
`
`11-23-2015
`
`10-15-2015
`
`
`12-9-2015
`
`11-10-2015
`
`12-18-2015
`
`12-7-2015
`
`12-9-2015
`
`
`
`12-1-2015
`
`11-19-2015
`
`1-3-2016
`
`
`
`12-16-2015
`
`11-27-2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12 Federal University of Uberlândia
`
`13 Fundação Chapadão
`
`Chapadão do Sul, MS
`
`14 Fundação Mato Grosso
`
`15 Fundação Mato Grosso
`
`16 Fundação Mato Grosso
`
`17 State University of Ponta Grossa
`
`Campo Verde, MT
`
`Nova Mutum, MT
`
`Pedra Preta, MT
`
`Ponta Grossa, PR
`
`18 Círculo Verde Agronomic Consultancy and Research
`
`Luís Eduardo Magalhães, BA
`
`19 The University of Passo Fundo
`
`Passo Fundo, RS
`
`20 CTPA/ Emater
`
`21 CTPA/ Emater
`
`22 TAGRO
`
`23 Dalcin Consultoria
`
`
`
`Senador Canedo, GO
`
`Senador Canedo, GO
`
`Mauá da Serra, PR
`
`Nova Xavantina, MT
`
`11-19-2015
`
`11-17-2015
`
`11-16-2015
`
`12-3-2015
`
`12-2-2015
`
`
`
`12-16-2015
`
`11-30-2015
`
`12-22-2015
`
`12-30-2015
`
`12-17-2015
`
`
`12-4-2015
`
`The first protocol was carried out with the isolated multisite fungicides
`(Table 2) and the second one with the products used in association with
`the fungicides picoxystrobin + cyproconazole 60 + 24 g a.i. ha-1
`(Aproach®Prima, DuPont) and azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g
`a.i. ha-1 (Elatus®, Syngenta) (Table 3). The associated products protocol
`was not carried out at location 10 (Deciolândia, MT).
`
`The list of treatments (Tables 2 and 3), the experimental design and the
`evaluations were defined with a single protocol, for the joint
`summarization of the results of the trials. The fungicides of treatments 2,
`5, 6, 9, 10 and 13 (Table 2) are registered in MAPA (ministry of agriculture,
`livestock, and food supply) for the control of Cercospora kikuchii
`(treatments 5, 6 and 13), Septoria glycines (treatments 2, 5, 6, 10 and 13),
`Corynespora cassiicola (treatments 5, 6 and 13), Phakopsora pachyrhizi
`(treatment 13), Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (treatment 9), Microsphaera diffusa
`(treatment 13), Rhizoctonia solani (treatment 13) and Peronospora
`manshurica (treatment 10). The fungicides of treatments 3, 4, 8, 11 and 12
`have Temporary Special Registration (RET) III. Fungicides from treatments
`2 to 12 present RET for the biological target P. pachyrhizi.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`José Nunes Junior, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Technological Center for
`Agricultural Research (CTPA),
`Goiânia, GO.
`
`Luis Henrique C. P. da Silva, M.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Agro Carregal Plant Research
`and Protection,
`Rio Verde, GO.
`
`Luiz Nobuo Sato
`Agricultural Engineer,
`TAGRO,
`Londrina, PR.
`
`Marcelo R. Volf, M.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Dalcin Serviços Agropecuários,
`Nova Xavantina, MT.
`
`Mônica Paula Debortoli, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Phytus Institute,
`Santa Maria, RS.
`
`Mônica C. Martins, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Círculo Verde Agronomic
`Consultancy and Research,
`Luís Eduardo Magalhães, BA.
`
`Ricardo S. Balardin, Ph.D.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Phytus Institute,
`Santa Maria, RS.
`
`Silvânia H. Furlan, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Instituto Biológico,
`Campinas, SP.
`
`Tiago Madalosso, M.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Agricultural Research Center Copacol,
`Cafelândia, PR.
`
`Valtemir J. Carlin
`Agricultural Engineer,
`Agrodinâmica,
`Tangará da Serra, MT.
`
`Wilson Story Venâncio, D.Sc.
`Agricultural Engineer, CWR
`Pesquisa Agrícola Ltda/
`State University of
`Ponta Grossa,
`Ponta Grossa, PR.
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in controlling Asian soybean rust, Phakopsora pachyrhizi,
`in the 2015/16 harvest: summarized results of cooperative trials
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Table 2. Active ingredient (a.i.), commercial product (C.P.) and dose of fungicides to control diseases in soybeans crops,
`
`Dose
`g a.i. ha-1
`
`Commercial product
`(C.P.)
`
`Dose
`l-kg C.P. ha-1
`
`2015/16 harvest.
`
`Treatments:
`Active ingredient (a.i.)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`control
`
`chlorothalonil
`
`copper oxychloride
`
`copper oxychloride
`
`5 mancozebe1
`
`6 mancozebe1
`
`7
`
`copper sulfate
`
`8 propineb2
`
`9
`
`fluazinam1
`
`10 chlorothalonil
`
`11 chlorothalonil
`
`12 mancozebe1
`
`
`
`-
`
`1080
`
`280
`
`560
`
`1500
`
`1875
`
`Previnil®, Helm
`
`PNR4, Sapec Agro
`
`PNR4, Sapec Agro
`
`Unizeb Gold®, UPL
`
`Unizeb Gold®, UPL
`
`113.85
`
`PNR4, Nortox
`
`1400
`
`500
`
`1000
`
`1000
`
`2000
`
`PNR4, Bayer
`
`Frowncide®/Zignal®, ISK/FMC
`
`Bravonil 500®, Syngenta
`
`PNR4, Ourofino
`
`PNR4, Nufarm
`
`
`
`
`
`1.5
`
`0.4
`
`0.8
`
`2.0
`
`2.5
`
`0.75
`
`2
`
`1
`
`2
`
`2.0
`
`2.5
`
`0.20
`
`13 azoxystrobin+benzovindiflupyr3
`
`60+30
`
`Elatus®, Syngenta
`
`1 Added Agris 0,5 %; 2 Added Aureus 0,25 %; 3 Added Nimbus 0,6 l ha-; 4 PNR - Product not registered for the soybean crop - RET III.
`
`Table 3. Active ingredients (a.i.), commercial product (C.P.) and dose of fungicides evaluated in associated treatments to
`
`control diseases in soybean crops, 2015/16 harvest.
`
`Active ingredient (a.i.)
`
`1 control
`
`2 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1
`
`Dose
`g a.i. ha-1
`
`-
`
`60+24
`
`Commercial product (C.P.)
`
`Control
`
`Aproach®Prima
`
`Dose
`l-kg C.P. ha-1
`
`-
`
`0.3
`
`3 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and copper oxychloride
`
`60+24 and 294
`
`Aproach®Prima and Difere®
`
`4 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and chlorothalonil
`
`60+24 and 1080
`
`Aproach®Prima and Previnil®
`
`5 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and copper oxychloride
`
`60+24 and 280
`
`Aproach®Prima and PNR2
`
`6 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and mancozeb
`
`60+24 and 1500
`
`Aproach®Prima and Unizeb Gold®
`
`7 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and copper sulfate
`
`60+24 and 113,85
`
`Aproach®Prima and PNR2
`
`8 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and propineb
`
`60+24 and 1400
`
`Aproach®Prima and PNR2
`
`9 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and fluazinam
`
`60+24 and 500
`
`Aproach®Prima and Frowncide®/Zignal®
`
`10 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and chlorothalonil
`
`60+24 and 1000
`
`Aproach®Prima and Bravonil 500®
`
`11 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and chlorothalonil
`
`60+24 and 1000
`
`Aproach®Prima and PNR2
`
`12 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and mancozeb
`
`60+24 and 2000
`
`Aproach®Prima and PNR2
`
`13 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1
`
`60+30
`
`Elatus®
`
`14 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and copper oxychloride
`
`60+30 and 294
`
`Elatus® and Difere®
`
`15 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and chlorothalonil
`
`60+30 and 1080
`
`Elatus® and Previnil®
`
`16 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and copper oxychloride
`
`60+30 and 280
`
`Elatus® and PNR2
`
`17 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and mancozeb
`
`60+30 and 1500
`
`Elatus® and Unizeb Gold®
`
`18 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and copper sulfate
`
`60+30 and 113,85
`
`Elatus® and PNR2
`
`19 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupir1 and propineb
`
`60+30 and 1400
`
`Elatus® and PNR2
`
`20 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and fluazinam
`
`60+30 and 500
`
`Elatus® and Frowncide®/Zignal®
`
`21 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and chlorothalonil
`
`60+30 and 1000
`
`Elatus® and Bravonil 500®
`
`22 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and chlorothalonil
`
`60+30 and 1000
`
`Elatus® and PNR2
`
`23 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and mancozeb
`
`60+30 and 2000
`
`Elatus® and PNR2
`
`0.3 and 0.5
`
`0.3 and 1.5
`
`0.3 and 0.4
`
`0.3 and 2.0
`
`0.3 and 0.75
`
`0.3 and 2.0
`
`0.3 and 1.0
`
`0.3 and 2.0
`
`0.3 and 2.0
`
`0.3 and 2.5
`
`0.2
`
`0.2 and 0.5
`
`0.2 and 1.5
`
`0.2 and 0.4
`
`0.2 and 2.0
`
`0.2 and 0.75
`
`0.2 and 2.0
`
`0.2 and 1.0
`
`0.2 and 2.0
`
`0.2 and 2.0
`
`0.2 and 2.5
`
`1 Added Nimbus 0,6 L ha-1; 2 PNR – Product not registered for the soybean crop, RET III.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in controlling Asian soybean rust, Phakopsora pachyrhizi,
`in the 2015/16 harvest: summarized results of cooperative trials
`
`4
`
`
`The experimental design was randomized
`blocks with four replications. Each replication
`consisted of plots with at least six rows of five
`meters each. The applications started in the
`pre-closing of the sowing lines and the two
`protocols were carried out in the same area in
`each location, with the exception of
`location 10, where only the test with isolated
`protectors was carried out.
`
`In the first protocol (Table 2) five applications
`were carried out, with an average interval of
`10 days between the first and second
`application, 11 days between the second and
`third and 10 days between the third and fourth
`and the fourth and fifth application. For
`treatment 13 (azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr)
`three applications were carried out with
`average intervals of 21 and 14 days after the
`first and second application, respectively.
`
`
`
`In the second protocol (Table 3)
`three applications were carried out with
`average intervals of 21 and 15 days after the
`first and second application, respectively.
`
`To apply the products, a knapsack sprayer
`pressurized with CO2 and a minimum
`application volume of 120 L ha-1 was used.
`
`It was carried out evaluations of the severity
`and/or incidence of diseases at the time of
`application of the products; of the severity
`periodically and after the last application; of
`defoliation when the control showed around
`80 % of defoliation; of productivity in a
`minimum area of 5 m2 in the center of each
`plot and the weight of 1000 grains.
`
`For the joint analysis, severity assessments
`were used, carried out between the
`phenological stages R5 (beginning of grain
`filling) and R6 (pods with 100 % graining) and
`productivity.
`
`
`
`Exploratory analyzes of variance were carried
`out for each location. In the individual
`analyses, the following were observed: the
`residual mean square, the coefficient of
`variation, the asymmetry coefficient, the
`kurtosis coefficient, the normality of the
`distribution of residues (SHAPIRO; WILK,
`1965), the additivity of the statistical model
`(TUKEY, 1949) and the homogeneity of
`treatment variances (BURR; FOSTER, 1972).
`
`Tukey's test of multiple comparisons of means
`(p=0.05) was applied to the joint analysis, in
`order to obtain groups of treatments with
`similar effects. All analyzes were carried out in
`routines generated in the SAS® program,
`version 9.1.3. (SAS/ STAT, 1999).
`
`Results and Discussion
`The common disease in the trials and which it
`was possible to carry out joint summarization
`was Asian soybean rust (P. pachyrhizi). In the
`test location 23 there was no incidence of
`rust. At the time of the first application of
`the treatments, of the 23 trials, five showed
`symptoms of rust (locations 4, 14, 16, 19
`and 22).
`
`In the protocol with the application of isolated
`products, the lowest severity was observed
`for the treatment with three applications of
`azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g a.i.
`ha-1 (T13 – 19.4 %) (Table 4). Among the
`multisite, the lowest severity was observed for
`the treatment with mancozeb 2000 g a.i. ha-1
`(T12 - 25.8 %), followed by treatments with
`mancozeb 1875 g a.i. ha-1 (T6 – 28 %),
`mancozeb 1500 g a.i. ha-1 (T5 – 34.1 %) and
`chlorothalonil 1080 g a.i. ha-1 (T2 – 34.3 %),
`with percentage of control ranging from 56 %
`to 67 % in relation to the control treatment.
`
`The correlation (r) of the severity variable with
`productivity was -0.98 (p<0.001). The highest
`productivity was observed for the treatment
`with three applications of azoxystrobin +
`benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g a.i. ha-1 (T13 –
`3257 kg ha-1). Among the multisite, the highest
`productivity was observed for treatments with
`mancozeb 2000 g a.i. ha-1 (T12 – 3062 kg ha-1)
`and mancozeb 1875 g a.i. ha-1 (T6 – 3004 kg
`ha-1), followed by mancozeb 1500 g a.i. ha-1
`(T5 – 2920 kg ha-1) and chlorothalonil 1080 g
`a.i. ha-1 (T2 – 2900 kg ha-1).
`
`In the joint analysis of the protocol trials with
`the association of protectors, location 21 was
`eliminated for the severity variable due to the
`late evaluation in relation to the last
`application. The severity of all treatments was
`lower than that of the control without control
`(T1 – 78.5 %). For treatments with
`applications associated with picoxystrobin +
`cyproconazole 60 + 24 g a.i. ha-1, there was a
`significant reduction in severity with the
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in controlling Asian soybean rust, Phakopsora pachyrhizi,
`in the 2015/16 harvest: summarized results of cooperative trials
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`association of multisite in all combinations.
`The lowest severity was observed for the
`association with mancozeb 2000 g a.i. ha-1
`(T12 – 29.2 %), followed by chlorothalonil
`1080 g a.i. ha-1 (T4 – 31.6 %), mancozeb
`1500 g a.i. ha-1 (T6 – 31.6 %) and copper
`oxychloride 294 g a.i. ha-1 and 280 g a.i. ha-1
`(T3 and T5 – 32.9 %). Despite the significant
`reduction in severity with the associated
`application, no treatment with picoxystrobin
`+ cyproconazole 60 + 24 g a.i. ha-1 showed a
`reduction in severity similar to treatment with
`azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g
`a.i. ha-1 isolated (T13 – 18.3 %).
`
`For applications associated with the
`fungicide azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr 60
`+ 30 g a.i. ha-1, only associations with
`mancozeb 2000 and 1500 g a.i. ha-1 (T23 –
`15 %; T17 - 15.2 %), copper oxychloride
`294 g a.i. ha-1 (T14 – 15.2 %), chlorothalonil
`1080 g a.i. ha-1 (T15 – 15.6 %) and copper
`oxychloride 280 g a.i. ha-1 (T16 – 16.4 %)
`differed statistically from the isolated
`application.
`
`The correlation (r) of the severity variable
`with productivity was -0.97 (p<0.001). All
`treatments showed statistically higher
`productivity than the control without control
`(Table 5). For the applications associated
`with the fungicide picoxystrobin +
`cyproconazole, the associations with copper
`sulfate 113.85 g a.i. ha-1 (T7 – 2737 kg ha-1),
`propineb 1400 g a.i. ha-1 (T8 – 2750 kg ha-1)
`and fluazinam 500 g a.i. ha-1 (T9 – 2711 kg
`ha-1) did not differ significantly from
`treatment with picoxystrobin +
`cyproconazole 60 + 24 g a.i. ha-1 without
`association (T2 – 2654 kg ha-1). The highest
`productivities were observed for associations
`with mancozeb 2000 g a.i. ha-1 and 1500 g
`a.i. ha-1 (T12 – 2932 kg ha-1; T6 – 2876 kg ha-
`1, respectively), chlorothalonil 1080 g a.i. ha-1
`and 1000 g a.i. (T4 – 2876 kg ha-1; T11 –
`2841 kg ha-1, respectively) and copper
`oxychloride 294 g a.i. ha-1 (T3 – 2823 kg ha-1).
`Despite the significant increase in
`productivity with the associated application,
`the productivity of any treatment with
`picoxystrobin + cyproconazole 60 + 24 g a.i.
`ha-1 was equal to treatment with
`azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g
`a.i. isolated ha-1 (T13 – 3186 kg ha-1).
`
`For applications associated with fungicide
`azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g a.i.
`ha-1, the highest productivities were observed
`for treatments with associations of mancozeb
`1500 g a.i. ha-1 and 2000 g a.i. ha-1 (T17 –
`3377 kg ha-1; T23 – 3270 kg ha-1, respectively),
`although the productivity of the association
`with mancozeb 2000 g a.i. ha-1 was
`statistically similar to azoxystrobin +
`benzovindiflupyr 60 + 30 g a.i. isolated ha-1
`(T13 – 3186 kg ha-1).
`
`The efficiency with the best multisite
`fungicides, with five applications, ranged
`from 56 % to 67 % (Table 4). Among the
`different fungicides with the same active
`ingredient (mancozeb, chlorothalonil and
`copper oxychloride), a reduction in severity
`was observed with an increase in the dose of
`the active ingredient.
`
`In the applications associated with the site-
`specific fungicide Aproach®Prima, which
`alone presented 44 % of control, all multisite
`significantly increased the control, with a
`maximum of 63 % for the association with
`mancozeb 2000 g a.i. ha-1 (Table 5). However,
`despite the significant increase in control, not
`all fungicides provided a significant increase
`in productivity.
`
`For the fungicide Elatus®, which alone
`presented 77 % of control, the gains in control
`in the associations were lower than those
`observed for the fungicide Aproach®Prima,
`with a maximum control of 81 % observed for
`the associations with mancozeb 2000 g a.i.
`ha-1 and 1500 g a.i. ha-1 and copper
`oxychloride 294 g a.i. ha-1. Similarly, the
`productivity increments were not significant
`for the associations, with the exception of
`mancozeb 1500 g a.i. ha-1.
`
`The results of this work are from research and
`should not be used as a recommendation in
`the field. With the exception of the fungicides
`Aproach®Prima and Elatus®, the others are
`not registered in MAPA for the control of P.
`pachyrhizi.
`
`

`

`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in controlling Asian soybean rust, Phakopsora pachyrhizi,
`in the 2015/16 harvest: summarized results of cooperative trials
`
`Multisite fungicides can be an important tool
`in Asian soybean rust management
`
`programs, requiring MAPA registration for
`their use.
`
`Table 4. Rust severity, percentage of control (C) in relation to the control without fungicide, productivity, and percentage
`of productivity reduction (PR) in relation to the treatment with the highest productivity, for the different treatments.
`Average of 22 trials. 2015/16 harvest.
`
`Treatment
`Active ingredient (a.i.)
`
`1 control
`
`2 chlorothalonil
`3 copper oxychloride4
`
`4 copper oxychloride4
`
`5 mancozebe1
`
`6 mancozebe1
`
`7 copper sulfate4
`8 propineb2, 4
`
`Dose
`g a.i. ha-1
`
`Severity
`(%)
`
`C
`(%)
`
`Productivity
`kg ha-1
`
`-
`
`1080
`
`280
`
`560
`
`1500
`
`1875
`
`113.85
`
`1400
`
`77.5 A
`
`34.3 E
`
`46.5 B
`
`39.8 C
`
`34.1 E
`
`28.0 F
`
`47.8 B
`
`41.2 C
`
`0
`
`56
`
`40
`
`49
`
`56
`
`64
`
`38
`
`47
`
`52
`
`2120 I
`
`2900 DE
`
`2604 H
`
`2692 GH
`
`2920 CD
`
`3004 BC
`
`2610 H
`
`2664 H
`
`2770 FG
`
`PR
`(%)
`
`35
`
`11
`
`20
`
`17
`
`10
`
`8
`
`20
`
`18
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`9 fluazinam1
`
`10 chlorothalonil
`
`11 chlorothalonil4
`
`12 mancozebe1, 4
`
`13 azoxystrobin+benzovindiflupyr3
`
`500
`
`1000
`
`1000
`
`2000
`
`60+30
`
`37.3 D
`
`39.9 C
`
`37.0 D
`
`25.8 G
`
`19.4 H
`
`C.V. %
`
`
`
`8.4
`
`
`
`48
`
`52
`
`67
`
`75
`
`2824 EF
`
`2806 F
`
`3062 B
`
`3257 A
`
`6.5
`
`13
`
`14
`
`6
`
`0
`
`
`
`Means followed by the same letter, in the column, do not differ according to Tukey's test (p=0.05). 1Added Agris 0.5 %; 2added aureus 0.25 %; 3added
`Nimbus 0.6 l ha-1; 4PNR - Product not registered for soybean crops - RET III.
`
`Table5. Rust severity, percentage of control (C) in relation to the control without fungicide, productivity, and percentage
`of productivity reduction (PR) in relation to the treatment with the highest productivity, for the different treatments.
`Average of 20 tests for severity and 21 for productivity. 2015/16 harvest.
`
`Treatment
`Active ingredient (a.i.)
`
`1 control
`
`2 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1
`
`3 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and copper oxychloride
`
`4 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and chlorothalonil
`
`Dose
`g a.i. ha-1
`
`-
`
`60+24
`
`60+24 and 294
`
`60+24 and 1080
`
`Severity
`(%)
`
`78.5 A
`
`43.8 B
`
`32.9 DE
`
`31.6 E
`
`C
`(%)
`
`0
`
`44
`
`58
`
`Productivity
`kg ha-1
`
`2175 I
`
`2654 H
`
`2823 DEF
`
`PR
`(%)
`
`36
`
`21
`
`16
`
`5 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and copper oxychloride2
`
`60+24 and 280
`
`32.9 DE
`
`6 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and mancozeb
`
`7 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and copper sulfate2
`
`8 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and propineb2
`
`9 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and fluazinam
`
`10 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and chlorothalonil
`
`11 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and chlorothalonil2
`
`12 picoxystrobin + cyproconazole1 and mancozeb2
`
`13 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1
`
`60+24 and 1500
`
`60+24 and 113,85
`
`60+24 and 1400
`
`60+24 and 500
`
`60+24 and 1000
`
`60+24 and 1000
`
`60+24 and 2000
`
`60+30
`
`31.6 E
`
`37.0 C
`
`36.1 C
`
`34.1 D
`
`33.8 D
`
`34.0 D
`
`29.2 F
`
`18.3 G
`
`14 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and copper oxychloride
`
`60+30 and 294
`
`15.2 JK
`
`60
`
`58
`
`60
`
`53
`
`54
`
`57
`
`57
`
`57
`
`63
`
`77
`
`81
`
`2876 DE
`
`2780 EFG
`
`2876 DE
`
`2737 FGH
`
`2750 FGH
`
`2711 GH
`
`2793 EFG
`
`2841 DEF
`
`2932 D
`
`3186 BC
`
`3195 BC
`
`15
`
`18
`
`15
`
`19
`
`19
`
`20
`
`17
`
`16
`
`13
`
`6
`
`5
`
`15 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and chlorothalonil
`
`16 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and copper oxychloride2
`
`17 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and mancozeb
`
`60+30 and 1080
`
`60+30 and 280
`
`60+30 and 1500
`
`15.6 IJK
`
`16.4 HIJK
`
`15.2 JK
`
`18 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and copper sulfate2
`
`60+30 and 113,85
`
`16.8 GHIJ
`
`19 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and propineb2
`
`20 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and fluazinam
`
`21 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and chlorothalonil
`
`22 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and chlorothalonil2
`
`23 azoxystrobin + benzovindiflupyr1 and mancozeb2
`
`C.V. %
`
`
`
`60+30 and 1400
`
`60+30 and 500
`
`60+30 and 1000
`
`60+30 and 1000
`
`60+30 and 2000
`
`17.5 GH
`
`17.5 GH
`
`16.8 GHIJ
`
`17.0 GHI
`
`15.0 K
`
`10.5
`
`
`
`80
`
`79
`
`81
`
`79
`
`78
`
`78
`
`79
`
`78
`
`81
`
`3238 BC
`
`3147 C
`
`3377 A
`
`3176 BC
`
`3192 BC
`
`3205 BC
`
`3219 BC
`
`3224 BC
`
`3270 AB
`
`6.6
`
`Means followed by the same letter, in the column, do not differ according to Tukey's test (p=0.05). 1Added Nimbus 0.6 L ha-1; 2PNR – product not
`registered for the soybean crop, RET III.
`
`4
`
`7
`
`0
`
`6
`
`5
`
`5
`
`5
`
`5
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Efficiency of multisite fungicides in controlling Asian soybean rust, Phakopsora pachyrhizi,
`in the 2015/16 harvest: summarized results of cooperative trials
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`References
`
`BURR, I.W.; FOSTER, L.A. A test for equality
`of variances. West Lafayette: University of
`Purdue, 1972. 26p. (Mimeo Series, 282).
`
`KLOSOWSKI, A.C.; MAY DE MIO, L.L.;
`MIESSNER, S.; RODRIGUES, R.; STAMMLER,
`G. Detection of the F129L mutation in the
`cytochrome b gene in Phakopsora pachyrhizi.
`Pest Management Science, v. 72, p. 1211–
`1215, 2016.
`
`SAS/STAT®. Version 9.1.3 of System SAS for
`Windows, copyrightã 1999-2001. SAS
`Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SHAPIRO, S.S.; WILK, M.B. An analysis of
`variance test for normality. Biometrika, v. 52,
`p. 591-611, 1965.
`
`TECNOLOGIAS de produção de soja - Central
`Region of Brazil 2014. Londrina: Embrapa Soja,
`2013. 265 p. (Embrapa Soja. Production
`Systems, 16).
`
`TUKEY, J. W. One degree of freedom for non-
`additivity. Biometrics, v.5, p. 232-242, 1949.
`
`XAVIER, S.A.; CANTERI, M.G.; BARROS,
`D.C.M.; GODOY, C.V. Sensitivity of
`Corynespora cassiicola from soybean to
`carbendazim and prothioconazole. Tropical
`Plant Pathology, v.38, p. 431-435, 2013.
`
`SCHMITZ, H.K., MEDEIROS, C.A., CRAIG, I.R.,
`STAMMLER, G. Sensitivity of Phakopsora
`pachyrhizi towards quinone-outside-
`inhibitors and demethylation-inhibitors, and
`corresponding resistance mechanisms. Pest
`Management Science, v. 70, p. 378–388,
`2014.
`
`YORINORI, J.T.; PAIVA, W.M.; FREDERICK,
`R.D.; COSTAMILAN, L.M.; BERTAGNOLLI,
`P.F.; HARTMAN, G.L.; GODOY, C.V.; NUNES
`JUNIOR, J. Epidemics of soybean rust
`(Phakopsora pachyrhizi) in Brazil and
`Paraguay. Plant Disease, v. 89, p. 675-677,
`2005.
`
`Cooperation:
`
`CGPE 13047
`
`Publications
`committee
`
`President: Ricardo Villela Abdelnoor
`
`Executive Secretary: Regina Maria Villas Bôas de
`Campos Leite
`
`Members: Alvadi Antonio Balbinot Junior, Claudine
`Dinali Santos Seixas, Fernando Augusto Henning,
`José Marcos Gontijo Mandarino, Liliane Márcia
`Mertz- Henning, Maria Cristina Neves de Oliveira,
`Norman Neumaier e Vera de Toledo Benassi.
`
`
`
`
`Expedient
`
`Editorial supervision: Vanessa Fuzinatto Dall´Agnol
`
`Bibliographic standardization: Ademir Benedito Alves
`de Lima
`
`Electronic publishing: Vanessa Fuzinatto Dall´Agnol
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Circular
`Técnica, 121
`
`Embrapa Soja
`
`Rod. Carlos João Strass, s/n, access Orlando
`
`Amaral, P.C. 231, Zip Code: 86001-970,
`Distrito de Warta, Londrina, PR
`
`Phone: (43) 3371 6000 Fax: (43) 3371 6100
`www.embrapa.br/soja
`www.embrapa.br/fale-conosco/sac/
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1ª edition
`PDF digitalized (2016).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`