Impacts of strobilurin fungicides on yield and soil microbial processes in Minnesota strawberry
production
K. Spokas and B. JacobsonUSDA-ARS
St. Paul, MN
Pine Tree Apple Orchard
White Bear Lake, MN
Presented at the Upper Midwest Regional Fruit & Vegetable
Growers Conference & Trade Show (Jan 21)
Background – Strobilurin fungicides
• Many of the newest and most important disease-control chemicals are in the strobilurin class of fungicides
– In 1991, 10% of global fungicide market
– Estimates currently well over 65% of global fungicide market
• Initial fungicides were isolated from wood-rotting mushroom fungi (pine cone fungi), including one called Strobilurus tenacellus
• This is the origin of the name “strobilurin” fungicides
Background (continued)
• Designated: QoI fungicides (Vincelli, 2002)
– Interfere with the electron transfer during the energy production of ATP in the fungi mitochondrial cells
– Targets the electron transfer at the site of quinol oxidation (Qo site) in the cytochrome BC1 complex
• Referred to as the QoI fungicides based on this mechanism
– Specific activity Microbial resistance issues
Why are strobilurin fungicides so effective?
1. QoI site mode of action
2. Translaminar movement
– “Across the lamina” or chemical can move through the leaf (top to bottom)
– If sprayed on the top of the leave can be found on the bottom of the leaf
3. Also can move Systemically
– Through the plant's vascular system
• leaf stem roots
• Leads to several advantages
– e.g. Compensates for incomplete spray coverage
Increasing Strobilurin (QoI) Fungicides Use
• Effective against a wide range of fungal diseases
– Water molds, downy mildews, powdery mildews, leaf spotting and blighting fungi, fruit rotters, and rusts
• Labeled for use on a variety of crops
– Berries, carrots, grapes, onions and other bulb vegetables, pome fruit, stone fruit, strawberries, tree nuts, hops, turfgrasses, and ornamentals
Strobilurin Impacts
• Several strobilurin (QoI) fungicides have been cited to cause positive plant growth and yield effects
• Testimonials of higher yielding “field trials”
– Strobilurin fungicides have been linked to changes in the hormonal balance of wheat
• Results in increased grain yield, delayed leaf senescence and reduced stomata conductance (water-conserving effects)
– Claims for other crops
• However, these positive effects are not universally observed (e.g. Vincelli and Hershman. 2009)
Still influencing the increasing popularity
91
56
43 4240
32
21
73
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
% o
f C
rop
Acr
eag
e T
reat
ed
Azoxystrobin
Pyraclostrobin
All Strobilurin fungicides
Strobilurin Use Across Different Commodities(US – 2006 data)
Note: Data from USDA-National Agriculture Statistics Service (NASS) Chemical Use Database located at http://www.pestmanagement.info/nass/
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
% S
traw
be
rry
Acr
eag
e T
reat
ed
US
California
Minnesota
Strobilurin Use in Strawberries
Note: Data from USDA-NASS:\Chemical Use Database and Reports
Most Recent Data 2006
Importance of fungi
• Fungi have many vital roles
– Soil water dynamics
• Physically bind soil particles together (hyphae)
– increase water infiltration and soil water holding capacity.
– Nutrient cycling
– Natural disease suppression
– Decomposers in the soil food web
• Particularly for hard-to-digest organic materials
– cellulose and lignin crop residues
• Any impact on fungal populations could have large ramifications on the balance of the soil system
Objectives of Current Project
1. Observe impacts on strawberry yield as a consequence of strobilurin use
2. Observe alterations in soil microbial community both in terms of structure and functionality
3. Observe fate and transport of strobilurin fungicide under irrigation
• Worst case scenario: Sandy soil + irrigation
Fungicide* evaluated
• Pristine® [BASF]#
– Contains pyraclostrobin
– Recall: Over 60% of strawberry production acres apply pyraclostrobin
– Applied at label recommended rates for strawberry*
# - Names are necessary to report factually on available data; however, the USDA neither
guarantees nor warrants the standard of the product, and the use of the name by USDA implies no
approval of the product to the exclusion of others that may also be suitable
* - This presentation reports research involving fungicides. It does not contain recommendations for
their use nor does it imply that uses discussed here have been registered. All uses of pesticides
must be registered by appropriate State and/or Federal agencies before they can be recommended
Field Plots
Control Area – No Pristine
Post with weather station
Treated Plots (Pristine)
No plot
• Triplicate plots (random placement)
• 20 ft x 4 rows of strawberry plants
• Located at edge of field to minimize impacts on management and operations at collaborator field site
• Manual fungicide application with backpack sprayer
Field Data Collected
• Continuous weather station
– Air temperature
– Precipitation
– Soil temperature (in-row and between-row)
– Soil moistures (in-row and between-row)
• Soil microbial community profiles
• Greenhouse gas fluxes (bi-weekly)
• 10 cm soil gas concentrations
1. Impacts on Strawberry Yield
• Sampling occurred close to identical growing degree days (GDD)
– 2008 – June 27
• 1172 GDD
– 2009 – June 22
• 1193 GDD
• Differences in precipitation
– Not significant due to irrigation
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
0 100 200 300 400
Cu
mu
lati
ve
gro
win
g D
egr
ee
Da
ys
(GD
D)
Day of Year
2008
2009
(A)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 100 200 300 400
Cu
mu
lati
ve
Pre
cip
itat
ion
(cm
)
Day of Year
(B)
Strawberry Sampling
• Sampling
• All berries picked in 1 m (3 ft) long row sections
• 4 sections per plot (randomly selected from 2 middle rows)
• Excluded 5 ft from plot edge
• Separated out ripe berries (red) within 1 day of picking
• Total berries counted and weighed
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Control Agro-K (Vigor Cal Phos with Boron)
Agro-K+Pristine
Yie
ld (
g/m
_ro
w)
Total Strawberry Production
Ripe Berries
a
a
a
ab
b
a
a
a
1. Impacts on Yield
• June 26, 2008: 1172 GDD
32% increase
over control
64% increase
over control
616
822
1012
1. Impacts on Yield
• June 22, 2009: 1193 GGD
– Without fertilizer effect
Treated Control
gra
ms (
1 m
ro
w)-1
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800Total Production
Treated Control
gra
ms (
1 m
ro
w)-1
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700Ripe Berries
• Although increased production, no statisticallysignificant differences observed
1197
920352
260
• No difference observed in individual berry size
– Control : 8.19 ± 2.3 g/berry
– Pristine treated : 9.95 ± 3.0 g/berry
• Highest observed yield of ripe berries
in 2009 (887 g/1 m row) was
observed in a Pristine treated plot
However, results for all plots were
not statistically different
• Stresses the importance of looking at replicated field plotsas well as multiple years of data for fungicide yield effects
Yield Notes
g ripe berries (1 m row)-1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Co
un
t
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Pristine Treated
Control
2. Impacts on Soil Microbial Community
• Some alterations in the field were seen immediately following Pristine application (surface soil)
1.00E+00
1.00E+01
1.00E+02
1.00E+03
1.00E+04
1.00E+05
1.00E+06
1.00E+07
1.00E+08
1.00E+09
Heterotrophic Bacteria
Anaerobic Bacteria Yeast/Molds Actinomycetes Pseudomonads Nitrogen-f ixing bacteria
log
Pla
te C
ounts
Control Pristine Treatment
*
*
2. Impacts on Soil Microbial Community
Summary –
Differences between field and laboratory testing:
Fungicide decreases yeasts/molds (fungi):
75% reduction in laboratory incubations
37% reduction in field plots
Pseudomonads (aerobic gram-negative bacteria)
240% increase in field sampling
No significant increases seen in laboratory incubations
Heterotrophic bacteria
No significant differences were observed in the field
Laboratory incubations increased heterotrophic bacteria nearly 2-fold (90% increase)
Possible explanation Field behavior of fungicide
2. Greenhouse Gas Fluxes(functionality)
• No differences observed for nitrous oxide (N2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) or methane (CH4) surface flux
5/4/09 5/18/09 6/1/09 6/15/09 6/29/09 7/13/09
CO
2 F
lux (
g/m
2/d
ay)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Control
Pristine
Pristine Application
Insignificant decreases in CO2 flux
• Agrees with microbial sampling results
Soil Gas Sampling (10 cm)
• Driving force (concentration gradient) of surface emissions
5/4/09 5/18/09 6/1/09 6/15/09 6/29/09 7/13/09
CO
2 (
pp
m)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
Control
Pristine
5/4/09 5/18/09 6/1/09 6/15/09 6/29/09 7/13/09
N2O
(pp
b)
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
2200
Pristine Application
Contrast to other soil incubations
• Soils with 10+ year history of strobilurin application have also been evaluated in the laboratory
no stro
b CM
stro
b 07
08 C
M
stro
b 08
09 C
M
no stro
b SW
stro
b 07
08 S
W
stro
b 08
09 S
W
mg C
-CO
2 g
soil
-1 d
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
• Strobilurin applications decreased CO2 and N2O production
no strob
CM
strob 07
08 C
M
strob 08
09 C
M
no strob
SW
strob 07
08 SW
strob 08
09 SW
g N
-N
2O
gso
il
-1 d
-1
-0.2
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
CO2 N2O
Contr
ol
Contr
ol
Contr
ol
Contr
ol
3. Pristine fate and leaching potential
µg pyraclostrobin per g soil (or straw)
2008 20091 day after application 3 days after application
Surface Straw Mulch 1.5 1.0
0-5 cm <1.0 <1.0
5-10 cm <1.0 <1.0
10-15 cm <1.0 <1.0
15-20 cm <1.0 <1.0
20-25 cm <1.0 <1.0
25-50 cm <1.0 <1.0
Fungicide only detected in straw mulch immediately after application
Strobilurin fate and leaching potential
µg pyraclostrobin per g soil (or straw)
2008 2009>7 days after application >7 days after application
Surface Straw Mulch <1.0 <1.0
0-5 cm <1.0 <1.0
5-10 cm <1.0 <1.0
10-15 cm <1.0 <1.0
15-20 cm <1.0 <1.0
20-25 cm <1.0 <1.0
25-50 cm <1.0 <1.0
After 1 week and following No detection of fungicide
in soil or mulch
3. Pristine Leaching
• No leaching observed in the 2 years of field sampling
• Fungicide was not detected in the soil beneath the straw mulch
– Could explain differences between impacts seen in laboratory soil incubations and field observations
– Also could explain observed differences between soils from fields with long history (10+ years) of strobilurin use (no mulch present) and soil from current strawberry production
– Could straw mulch protect the soil from fungicide impacts?
Summary
• Strobilurin use is increasing at exponential rates
– Particularly high percent use in fruit and vegetable production
• No statistically significant yield increases observed in the first two years of project as a result of fungicide applications
• Only significant observation: fertilizer + fungicide vs. control(2008)
• 65% increase in total production
• All other yields of fungicide to control were not significantly different due to natural variability in the production rates across the field
– Differences did not exceed those that were expected by chance
Summary
• Minor alteration seen in field soil microbial community structure
– Differences did disappear with time
– Results were different than laboratory incubations
• No fungicide in the field soil
• No leaching of fungicide was detected into the soil system
– Strobilurin fungicide only detected in straw mulch immediately after application & dissipated quickly (7 days)
– Could be one of the reasons for lack of significant microbial impacts
• Current plan is for one more year of monitoring
Acknowledgements
• Bill Jacobson and the entire staff at Pine Tree Apple Orchards for their assistance
• Martin du Saire, Tia Phan, Lianne Endo, Lindsey Watson and Matt Montgomery for their assistance with laboratory gas analyses and field sampling
• Brian Barber for his assistance in running the LC-MS analyses of the soil and straw extractions