RAPID ACCESS TO THE LATEST REGIONAL CROP PEST AND DISEASE LEVELS
HGCA logo
CropMonitor > Winter Wheat > Encyclopaedia > Fusarium Head Blight > Effect of humidity on yield  


EFFECT OF HUMIDITY ON YIELD
 
The work presented here forms part of a three-year project funded by the HGCA on the 'Epidemiology and control of fusarium ear blight' (Project Report No. 143).

The incidence of wet weather (high humidity) is the most important factor in the development of FHB.

The effect of humidity on FHB and mycotoxin production was assessed in trials carried out between1994 and 1996. Symptom development, ear infection, mycotoxin production and yield loss were assessed under three humidity regimes ambient, medium (>70%) and high (>80%). Control of humidity was achieved using mist irrigation.

In 1994, individual plots were inoculated with one of the four FHB pathogens; Fusarium avenaceum, Fusarium culmorum, Fusarium poae or Microdochium nivale. In subsequent years inoculation with Fusarium graminearum was also included. Plots were inoculated at early anthesis (GS60).

Yield loss figures were calculated by comparing thousand-grain weights for the individual FHB pathogen treatments to that determined for the ambient uninoculated control. Results for 1995 are shown below.
 
 
Losses ranged from 3.5 to 8% on inoculated plots at ambient humidity, with F. culmorum producing greatest losses.

At high humidity significant losses were seen on all plots including the uninoculated control. Results from ear isolations indicated that the losses of 14.5, 14.5 and 13.9% on control, M. nivale and F. poae treated plots respectively could be attributed to infection by M. nivale. The losses on F. avenaceum, F. culmorum and F. graminearum inoculated plots, 13.9, 27.4 and 28.4% respectively, were caused in the main by the inoculated species.
 
 
Return to FHB Index page

 
Defra Logo delivered to the industry by HGCA
This website was last updated on: 18/11/2008     © Crown Copyright Central Science Laboratory 2007
CSL Logo
All risk predictions published by CropMonitor are provided in good faith and are NOT a substitute for rigorous fieldwalking in combination with advice from BASIS qualified persons. CropMonitor accepts no liability for crop loss or damage resulting from the use of CropMonitor.