8
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Azole Use in Agriculture, Horticulture, and Wood Preservation – Is It Indispensable?

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Plant pathogens cause significant damage to plant products, compromising both quantities and quality. Even though many elements of agricultural practices are an integral part of reducing disease attacks, modern agriculture is still highly reliant on fungicides to guarantee high yields and product quality. The azoles, 14-alpha demethylase inhibitors, have been the fungicide class used most widely to control fungal plant diseases for more than four decades. More than 25 different azoles have been developed for the control of plant diseases in crops and the group has a world market value share of 20-25%. Azoles have proven to provide long-lasting control of many target plant pathogens and are categorized to have moderate risk for developing fungicide resistance. Field performances against many fungal pathogens have correspondingly been stable or only moderately reduced over time. Hence azoles are still, to date, considered the backbone in many control strategies and widely used as solo fungicides or as mixing partners with other fungicide groups, broadening the control spectrum as well as minimizing the overall risk of resistance development. This review describes the historic perspective of azoles, their market shares and importance for production of major crops like cereals, rice, oilseed rape, sugar beet, banana, citrus, and soybeans. In addition, information regarding use in amenity grass, in the wood preservation industry and as plant growth regulators are described. At the end of the review azoles are discussed in a wider context including future threats following stricter requirements for registration and potential impact on human health.

          Related collections

          Most cited references142

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology.

          The aim of this review was to survey all fungal pathologists with an association with the journal Molecular Plant Pathology and ask them to nominate which fungal pathogens they would place in a 'Top 10' based on scientific/economic importance. The survey generated 495 votes from the international community, and resulted in the generation of a Top 10 fungal plant pathogen list for Molecular Plant Pathology. The Top 10 list includes, in rank order, (1) Magnaporthe oryzae; (2) Botrytis cinerea; (3) Puccinia spp.; (4) Fusarium graminearum; (5) Fusarium oxysporum; (6) Blumeria graminis; (7) Mycosphaerella graminicola; (8) Colletotrichum spp.; (9) Ustilago maydis; (10) Melampsora lini, with honourable mentions for fungi just missing out on the Top 10, including Phakopsora pachyrhizi and Rhizoctonia solani. This article presents a short resumé of each fungus in the Top 10 list and its importance, with the intent of initiating discussion and debate amongst the plant mycology community, as well as laying down a bench-mark. It will be interesting to see in future years how perceptions change and what fungi will comprise any future Top 10. © 2012 THE AUTHORS. MOLECULAR PLANT PATHOLOGY © 2012 BSPP AND BLACKWELL PUBLISHING LTD.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The global burden of pathogens and pests on major food crops

            Crop pathogens and pests reduce the yield and quality of agricultural production. They cause substantial economic losses and reduce food security at household, national and global levels. Quantitative, standardized information on crop losses is difficult to compile and compare across crops, agroecosystems and regions. Here, we report on an expert-based assessment of crop health, and provide numerical estimates of yield losses on an individual pathogen and pest basis for five major crops globally and in food security hotspots. Our results document losses associated with 137 pathogens and pests associated with wheat, rice, maize, potato and soybean worldwide. Our yield loss (range) estimates at a global level and per hotspot for wheat (21.5% (10.1-28.1%)), rice (30.0% (24.6-40.9%)), maize (22.5% (19.5-41.1%)), potato (17.2% (8.1-21.0%)) and soybean (21.4% (11.0-32.4%)) suggest that the highest losses are associated with food-deficit regions with fast-growing populations, and frequently with emerging or re-emerging pests and diseases. Our assessment highlights differences in impacts among crop pathogens and pests and among food security hotspots. This analysis contributes critical information to prioritize crop health management to improve the sustainability of agroecosystems in delivering services to societies.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Crop losses to pests

              E-C Oerke (2005)
              The Journal of Agricultural Science, 144(1), 31-43 ["Productivity of crops grown for human consumption is at risk due to the incidence of pests, especially weeds, pathogens and animal pests. Crop losses due to these harmful organisms can be substantial and may be prevented, or reduced, by crop protection measures. An overview is given on different types of crop losses as well as on various methods of pest control developed during the last century.", "Estimates on potential and actual losses despite the current crop protection practices are given for wheat, rice, maize, potatoes, soybeans, and cotton for the period 2001–03 on a regional basis (19 regions) as well as for the global total. Among crops, the total global potential loss due to pests varied from about 50% in wheat to more than 80% in cotton production. The responses are estimated as losses of 26–29% for soybean, wheat and cotton, and 31, 37 and 40% for maize, rice and potatoes, respectively. Overall, weeds produced the highest potential loss (34%), with animal pests and pathogens being less important (losses of 18 and 16%). The efficacy of crop protection was higher in cash crops than in food crops. Weed control can be managed mechanically or chemically, therefore worldwide efficacy was considerably higher than for the control of animal pests or diseases, which rely heavily on synthetic chemicals. Regional differences in efficacy are outlined. Despite a clear increase in pesticide use, crop losses have not significantly decreased during the last 40 years. However, pesticide use has enabled farmers to modify production systems and to increase crop productivity without sustaining the higher losses likely to occur from an increased susceptibility to the damaging effect of pests.", "The concept of integrated pest/crop management includes a threshold concept for the application of pest control measures and reduction in the amount/frequency of pesticides applied to an economically and ecologically acceptable level. Often minor crop losses are economically acceptable; however, an increase in crop productivity without adequate crop protection does not make sense, because an increase in attainable yields is often associated with an increased vulnerability to damage inflicted by pests."]
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                URI : https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/1167697
                URI : https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/470805
                Journal
                Front Cell Infect Microbiol
                Front Cell Infect Microbiol
                Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.
                Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2235-2988
                07 September 2021
                2021
                : 11
                : 730297
                Affiliations
                [1]Department of Agroecology, Aarhus University , Slagelse, Denmark
                Author notes

                Edited by: Dominique Sanglard, University of Lausanne, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Anja Forche, Bowdoin College, United States; Lukasz Kozubowski, Clemson University, United States

                *Correspondence: Lise Nistrup Jørgensen, lisen.jorgensen@ 123456agro.au.dk

                This article was submitted to Fungal Pathogenesis, a section of the journal Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology

                Article
                10.3389/fcimb.2021.730297
                8453013
                34557427
                1e5e0135-9b62-43ff-91e2-965479db3bc8
                Copyright © 2021 Jørgensen and Heick

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 24 June 2021
                : 11 August 2021
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 148, Pages: 16, Words: 9170
                Categories
                Cellular and Infection Microbiology
                Review

                Infectious disease & Microbiology
                fungicide resistance,plant pathogens,yield losses,human health,azole market

                Comments

                Comment on this article