COMPARATIVE EFFICACY OF BAU-BIOFUNGICIDE AND SOME CHEMICAL FUNGICIDES IN CONTROLLING LEAF BLAST AND BROWN SPOT OF RICE

Authors: 1M. Dey and 2M. S. Monjil*

Abstract

Efficacy of BAU-Biofungicide, a product of Trichoderma harzianum, Contaf 5EC (Hexaconazole), Bavistin DF (Carbendazim), Tilt 250EC (Propiconazole), Dithane M45 (Mancozeb) and Companion (Mancozeb+ Carbendazim) were evaluated for the management of some foliar diseases of rice under field condition. Leaf blast and brown spot incidence and disease severity were lowest in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide. The maximum number of effective tillers/hill (21.96) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide followed by Bavistin DF (21.05). The highest number of primary branches/panicle (16.36) was recorded in plots sprayed with Companion and the highest weight of grain/panicle (g) was recorded in BAU-Biofungicide (43.93) followed by Tilt 250EC (41.73). Among all treatments Trichoderma based BAU-Biofungicide showed enhanced effect for controlling blast and brown spot of rice as well as increasing rice yield.

Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

INTRODUCTION

Rice (Oryza sativa L.) is one of the important food crops of Gramineae family and staple food crop in Bangladesh. In Bangladesh, about 15.04 million acres of cropped areas are under cultivation (BBS 2014), where rice grown in 1051.37 hectares of land and produces 2,326 metric tons of grains in Aus season, 5530.43 hectares of land and produces 13,023 metric tons in Aman season and 4790.67 hectares of land produces 19,007 metric tons in Boro season (BBS 2014). In Bangladesh an average yield of rice is 3.01 t/ha that is lower compared to that of China (6.9 t/ha), India (3.7 t/ha) and Indonesia (3.4 t/ha) (FAO 2014). In spite of the soil and climate of Bangladesh being favourable for rice cultivation throughout the year, there are many constraints responsible for low yield of rice in Bangladesh. Among these, disease is a major threat to its production (Ou1985). There are 12 major diseases of rice reported during rice cultivation in Bangladesh (BRRI 2014). Out of these, some foliar diseases of rice viz. blast, brown spot, narrow brown leaf spot and bacterial leaf blight cause 12-13% average yield loss (BRRI 2014). Among the diseases, Blast is a destructive foliar disease and may cause considerable yield loss (6-7) % of rice every year in Bangladesh (Khan et al. 2015).

In the last decades, a number of chemical fungicides with different mode of action and targets have been applied to reduce the losses caused by the diseases. The most common foliar diseases of rice are being controlled specially by fungicides application in field condition (Prosad et al. 2015). The use of large amount of fungicides can effectively control most of the crop diseases and decrease the crop production loss. Chemical fungicides are effective in controlling rice diseases but are important reasons for environmental hazards by breaking down natural ecosystem or by killing beneficial soil microbs etc. (Pal et al. 2015).

Besides chemical fungicides, biological control is one of the best options which have been emphasized to combat the problem. The use of biocontrol means may help in avoiding environmental pollution. It may be economically beneficial to our farmers as well as, it may increase the production of rice (Prajapati et al. 2011). BAU-Biofungicide is a Trichoderma based biocontrol agent which is used to protect crops from different diseases. BAU-Biofungicide protects seeds in soil from huge number of soil borne as well as seed borne fungi (Hossain and Sultana 2011). Trichoderma harzianum and Pseudomonas fluorescens in talc and oil based formulations were found to be effective against brown spot diseases caused by Helminthosporium oryzae of rice under field condition in India (Biswas 2012). Considering the above facts the present study was undertaken to study the comparative efficacy of BAU-Biofungicide with some chemical fungicides in controlling leaf blast and brown spot of rice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The experiment was conducted in the field laboratory of the Department of Plant Pathology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh. BRRI dhan 50, known as “Banglamoti” a high yielding and aromatic rice variety grown in Boro season was used. The seedlings were transplanted at the age of 15 days with spacing of 25cm×15cm in the experimental field. Seven treatments viz. BAU-Biofungicide (2%), a product of Trichoderma harzianum, Contaf 5EC (Hexaconazole, 1ml/L), Bavistin DF (Carbendazim, 1g/L), Tilt 250EC (Propiconazole, 2ml/L), Dithane M45 (Mancozeb, 4.5g/L), Companion (Mancozeb+ Carbendazim, 2g/L) including untreated control were included in the experiment. The experiment was done following Randomised Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications, where each plot was 10 m2 (5m x 2m).

Prepared BAU-Biofungicide collected from Eco-friendly Plant Disease Management Lab. of the Department of Plant Pathology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh was used @ 20g/L. The chemical fungicides were collected from the local market and used as per dose mentioned above.

BAU-Biofungicide and chemicals were sprayed in the experimental plots as per treatments. Spraying was done for 3 times with 15 days interval before ten days of data collection at 60, 75 and 90 Days After Transplanting (DAT). Number of leaves/plant, number of infected leaves/plant, disease incidence and severity were recorded. The disease incidence was calculated by following formula of Ansari (1995) and the disease severity was calculated by following formula of Sharma (2010).

The recorded data on different parameters were subjected to statistical analysis by using MSTAT-C and WASP softwares to find out the significance of variation resulting from experimental treatments. The difference between the treatment means were judged by Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) following Gomez and Gomez (1984).

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Effect of BAU-Biofungicide and chemical fungicides on No. of infected leaves/plant was differed  significantly among the different treatments (Table 1). The highest number of infected leaves/plant was recorded in Companion (6.96) followed by control (6.56) and the minimum number of infected leaves/plant was recorded in Dithane M45 (3.85) preceded by BAU-Biofungicide (4.53) at 60 DAT. At 75 DAT the highest number of infected leaves/plant was recorded in Contaf (7.43) and the lowest total number of infected leaves/plant was recorded in Dithane M45 (5.70). At 90 DAT the highest number of infected leaves/plant was recorded in control (10.40) and the lowest number of infected leaves/plant was recorded in Contaf 5EC (5.45). Raju and Hossain (2015) reported lowest leaf infection of rice disease in plots treated with BAU-Biofungicide. Contaf 5EC/Hexaconazole (Johnson et al., 2013; Lore et al, 2007), Tilt 250EC/Propiconazole (Lore et al. 2007), Dithane M45/Mancozeb (Hajano et al. 2012) were reported to control leaf infection of rice.

The disease incidence (%) of leaf blast was significantly influenced by the treatments and ranged from 10.90% to 6.31% at 60 DAT, where the highest disease incidence (%) was recorded in control (10.90%) and the lowest disease incidence (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (6.31%). At 75 DAT, the maximum leaf blast disease incidence (%) was found in control plot (19.21%) and the minimum disease incidence (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (10.73%). At 90 DAT, the highest disease incidence (%) was recorded in control (29.70%) followed by Contaf 5EC (28.23%).  The lowest disease incidence (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (15.33%) as shown in Table 2. The highest disease severity (%) was recorded in control (21.90%) followed by Bavistin DF (16.78%) and the lowest disease severity (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (6.78%) at 60 DAT. At 75 DAT, the disease severity of leaf blast was also significantly affected by the treatments. The disease severity (%) ranged from 16.47% to 47.28% where the maximum disease severity (%) was found in control plot (47.28%) and the minimum disease severity (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (16.47%). At 90 DAT, the highest disease severity (%) was recorded in control (51.75%) and the lowest disease severity (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (23.72%) (Table 2). Thus, Trichoderma based BAU-Biofungicide was effective to control leaf blast of rice. Hajano et al. (2012) found in a in-vitro study that Trichoderma was effective to reduce rice blast pathogen, Pyricularia oryzae.

The disease incidence (%) of brown spot of rice was significantly influenced by different treatments and ranged from 5.47% to 10.30%, where the highest disease incidence (%) was recorded in control (10.30%) and the lowest disease incidence (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (5.47%). At 75 DAT, the maximum disease incidence (%) was found in control plot (26.55%) followed by Companion (14.23%). The minimum disease incidence (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (11.01%). At 90 DAT, the highest disease incidence (%) was recorded in control (37.00%) and the lowest disease incidence (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (12.69%) (Table 3). The disease severity (%) ranged from 17.37% to 28.46%, where the highest disease severity (%) was recorded in control (28.46%) and the lowest disease severity (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (17.37%) preceded by Companion (19.20%). At 75 DAT, the disease severity (%) ranged from 21.22% to 47.09% where the maximum disease severity (%) was found in control plot (47.09%) followed by Companion (40.10%) and Dithane M45 (35.38%). The minimum disease severity (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (21.22%). At 90 DAT, the mean disease severity (%) was also significantly influenced by the treatments the highest disease severity (%) was recorded in control (58.92%) followed by Tilt 250 (51.55%).  The lowest disease severity (%) was recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (26.54%). This findings are similar to the observation of Joshi et al. (2007) who evaluated the efficacy of Trichoderma harzianum in talc- and oil-based formulations against brown spot (caused by Helminthosporium oryzae) of rice cultivars PR 116 and Basmati rice 386 under field conditions in India during 2005. Sharma et al. (2015) found that seed treatment with Trichoderma harzianum was most effective against brown spot intensity. Ahmed (2002) observed that Trichoderma solution spraying was effective against Bipolaris oryzae at field condition. Raju and Hossain (2015) reported that the lowest disease incidence and severity of leaf blast, brown spot, and narrow brown leaf spot were observed in field condition spraying with BAU-Biofungicide.

The number of tillers/hill was significantly affected by the treatments (Table 4). The total number of tillers/hill ranged from 13.00 to 18.90, where the maximum number of tillers/hill was recorded in plots sprayed with Companion (18.90) and the minimum number of tillers/hill was recorded in Contaf 5EC (13.00). The maximum number of effective tillers/hill were recorded in plots sprayed with BAU-Biofungicide (21.96). The minimum number of effective tillers/hill were recorded in control (12.61) preceded by Dithane M45 (18.29). The total number of panicle length (cm) ranged from 18.83 to 25.60, where the highest plant height was recorded in Bavistin DF (25.60) followed by Companion (24.30). The lowest plant height was found in Contaf (18.83). The total number of primary branches/panicle ranged from 10.42 to 16.36, where the maximum number of primary branches/panicle was recorded in plots sprayed with companion (16.36) followed by Bavistin DF (14.76) and Tilt 250EC (13.16). The minimum number of primary branches/panicle was recorded in control (10.42). Significant differences were found among the weights of grain/panicle (g). The total weight of grain/panicle (g) ranged from 31.73 to 43.93, where the highest weight of grain/panicle (g) was recorded in BAU-Biofungicide (43.93) followed by Tilt 250EC (41.73). The lowest weight of grain/panicle (g) was found in Contaf 5EC (31.73) preceded By Dithane M45 (38.63).

These results, in conjunction with the present study provide evidences that BAU-Biofungicide is an effective biocontrol means for controlling blast and brown spot of rice as well as increasing rice yield.


Table 1. Effect of BAU-Biofungicide and chemical fungicides on No. of infected  leaves/ plant

Treatment Number of infected leaves/ plant
60 DAT 75 DAT 90 DAT
T1= BAU-Biofungicide 4.53 cd 6.23 bc 5.73 c
T2= Contaf 5EC 5.66 abc 7.43 a 5.45 c
T3= Bavistin DF 5.16 bcd 5.80 c 7.00 bc
T4= Tilt 250EC 6.00 abc 5.96 bc 5.94 c
T5= Dithane M45 3.85 d 5.70 c 7.63 b
T6= Companion 6.96 a 6.90 ab 5.66 c
T7= Control 6.56 ab 6.30 bc 10.40 a
Level of significance            *          * **
CV (%) 12.23 8.79 13.62

DAT = Day After Transplanting, Data were subjected to ANOVA. *P < 0.05, *P < 0.01. Similar letter(s) in a column did not differed significantly at 5% level by DMRT 

Table 2. Effect of BAU-Biofungicide and some chemical fungicides on disease incidence and disease severity of leaf blast of rice

Treatment                60 DAT                  75 DAT                   90 DAT
Disease incidence (%) Disease severity (%) Disease incidence (%) Disease severity (%) Disease incidence (%) Disease severity (%)
T1= BAU-Biofungicide 6.31 c 6.78 e 10.73 c 16.06 e 15.33 e 23.72 e
T2= Contaf 5EC 7.38 bc 12.26 cd 17.25 ab 21.47 cd 28.23 ab 28.63 d
T3= Bavistin DF 6.78 bc 16.78 b 15.22 b 36.71 b 26.00 ab 40.47 c
T4= Tilt 250EC 7.35 bc 10.55 cd 16.22 ab 25.08 c 22.61 cd 31.49 d
T5= Dithane M45 8.08 bc 14.14 bc 17.00 ab 45.46 a 20.38 d 46.44 b
T6= Companion 8.63 b 7.72 e 14.56 b 19.15 de 25.34 bc 40.06 c
T7= Control 10.90 a 21.90 a 19.21 a 47.28 a 29.70 a 51.75 a
Level of significance * ** ** ** ** **

DAT = Day After Transplanting, Data were subjected to ANOVA. *P < 0.05, *P < 0.01. Similar letter(s) in a column did not differed significantly at 5% level by DMRT

 

Table 3. Effect of BAU-Biofungicide and some chemical fungicides on disease incidence and disease severity of Brown spot of rice

Treatment                60 DAT                  75 DAT                   90 DAT
Disease incidence (%) Disease severity (%) Disease incidence (%) Disease severity (%) Disease incidence (%) Disease severity (%)
T1= BAU-Biofungicide 5.47 c 17.37 d 11.01 c 21.22 e 12.69 d 26.54 e
T2= Contaf 5EC 6.70 bc 19.87 cd 11.11 bc 34.74 c 14.03 d 40.23 d
T3= Bavistin DF 6.78 bc 22.45 bc 14.35 b 24.56 e 19.79 c 48.03 c
T4= Tilt 250EC 5.81 c 26.48 ab 12.42 bc 29.68 d 18.56 c 51.55 a
T5= Dithane M45 5.70 c 22.83 bc 14.24 bc 35.38 c 28.69 b 41.33 d
T6= Companion 8.33 ab 19.20 cd 14.23 bc 40.10 b 19.67 c 49.99 bc
T7= Control 10.30 a 28.46 a 26.55 a 47.09 a 37.00 a 58.92 b
Level of significance ** ** ** ** ** **

DAT = Day After Transplanting, Data were subjected to ANOVA. *P < 0.05, *P < 0.01. Similar letter(s) in a column did not differed significantly at 5% level by DMRT

 

Table 4. Efficacy of BAU-Biofungicide and chemical fungicides on No. of tillers/hill, No. of effective tillers/hill, panicle length, No. of primary branches/panicle and weight of grain/panicle of rice

Treatments No. of tillers/ hill No. of effective tillers/ hill Panicle length (cm) No. of primary branches/ panicle Weight of grain/panicle (g)
T1= BAU-Biofungicide 16.00 ab 21.96 a 19.26 cd 12.10 cd 43.93 a
T2= Contaf 5EC 13.00 b 18.63 c 18.83 d 12.66 bcd 31.73 d
T3= Bavistin DF 18.63 a 21.05 ab 25.60 a 14.76 ab 39.16 bc
T4= Tilt 250EC 17.30 a 19.70 abc 21.56 bcd 13.16 bc 41.73 ab
T5= Dithane M45 18.10 a 18.29 c 22.30 b 12.73 bcd 38.63 c
T6= Companion 18.90 a 18.50 bc 24.30 ab 16.36 a 39.10 bc
T7= Control 15.96 ab 12.61 d 21.66 bc 10.42 d 38.06 c
Level of significance      *      **    ** **         **

DAT = Day After Transplanting, Data were subjected to ANOVA. *P < 0.05, *P < 0.01. Similar letter(s) in a column did not differed significantly at 5% level by DMRT

 


LITERATURE CITED

 

Ahmed, M.F. 2002. Efficacy of some fungicides and plant extracts against Bipolaris oryzae. M.S Thesis, Dept. of Plant Path., B.A.U.,  Mymensingh.

Ansari, M.M. 1995. Control of sheath blight of rice by plant extracts. Indian J. Phytopath. 48(3): 268-270.

B.B.S, 2014. Monthly Statistically Bulletin, Bangladesh. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Statistical Division, Ministry of Planning, Govt. of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka. 207p.

B.R.R.I, 2014. Some appropriate technologies of rice cultivation, Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Gazipur. 135 p.

Biswas, A. 2012. Evaluation of some commercial available fungicides against sheath blight of rice. J. Mycopath. Res. 43(1): 141-142.

F.A.O, 2014. Production year book. Food and Agricultural Organization. Rome, Italy. pp.79-82

Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A. 1984. Statistical procedures for Agricultural Research 2nd Edn. New York. pp. 97-111.

Hajano, J., Lodhi, M., Pathan, A.M. and Khandaker, M.A. 2012. In-vitro evaluation of fungicides, plant extracts and biocontrol agents against rice blast pathogen Magnaporthe oryzae. Pakistan J. Biotechnol. 5:1775-1778.

Johnson, I., Marimutha, T., Ramjegathes, R. and Raguchander, T. 2013. Hexaconazole 5EC for the controlling of rice sheath blight. J. Todays Biol. Sci. 2:29-35.

Joshi, N., Brar, K.S., Pann, P.P.S. and Singh, P. 2007. Field efficacy of fungal and bacterial antagonists against brown spot of rice. J. Bio. Res. 21: 159-162.

Khan, A.A. and Sinha, A.P. 2005. Integration of Fungal antagonist and organic amendments for controlling rice sheath blight. Indian Phytopathol. 59(3): 363-365.

Khan, M.A.I., Bhuiyan, M.R., Hossain, M.S., Sen, P.P. and Ara, A. 2015. Neck Blast Diseases influences grain yield and quality traits of aromatic rice. C. R. Biology. 3(37): 635-641.

Lore, J.S., Thind, T.S., Hunjan, M.S. and Goel, R.K. 2007. Performance of different fungicides against multiple diseases of rice. Indian Phytopathol. 60(3): 296-301.

Ou, S. H. 1985. Rice Diseases, 2nd ed. Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, Surrey, England.

Padmanabhan, S.Y. 1973. The Great Bengal Famine. Ann. Rev. Plant Pathol. 11: 11-24.

Pal, R., Biswas, M.K., Mondol, D. and Naik, B.S. 2015. Management of sheath blight disease of rice through biocontrol agents in west central table land zone of Odisha. Intl. J. Adv. Res. 3 (11) 747-753.

Prajapati, K.S., Korat, D.M., Dodia, J.F., Pathak, A.R. and Patel, R.C. 2011. Field Evaluation of Compatibility of Insecticides and Fungicides on Rice. Pest. Res. J. 6 (2): 670-676.

Prosad, S.S., Gupta, P.K. and Mishra, J.P., 2015. Field studies on compatibility of new insecticides and fungicides against stem borer and leaf blast of rice under semideep water. Intl. J. Res. and Rebiem 2 (12).

Raju, M.A.U. and Hossain, I. 2015. Eco-friendly management of rice diseases. Int. J. Applied Sci. and Biotech.3 (1): 80-88.

Sharma, P.N. 2010. Measurement of diseases. Dept. of p. path. CSK HPKV Palampur.

Did you find apk for android? You can find new Free Android Games and apps.


1M. Dey and 2M. S. Monjil* Post-graduate student and2Professor, Department of Plant Pathology, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh, *Corresponding author's e-mail: smonjil@yahoo.com

LEAVE A REPLY


Related Papers: