
doi: 10.1071/ap08046
Ascochyta blight has constrained chickpea production in Australia. Therefore, control strategies are required to prevent major crop losses. Field experiments in 1998 and 1999 showed that all the chickpea varieties grown commercially in Australia at that time were very susceptible to the disease. Fortnightly sprays with the fungicide chlorothalonil could effectively control epidemics but the additional cost significantly reduced profitability. The kabuli variety Kaniva was still profitable to grow but desi varieties were less profitable than alternative crops. Further experiments were conducted throughout Australia in 1999, 2000 and 2001 to compare a range of fungicides and to determine the optimum rates and frequency of fungicide sprays. Chlorothalonil was superior to mancozeb and carbendazim. Fortnightly sprays of chlorothalonil controlled ascochyta blight in all varieties; sprays every 3 weeks did not eliminate yield losses due to ascochyta blight in susceptible varieties under high disease pressure.Lowfungicide rates were less effective than maximum recommended rates when conditions favoured a severe epidemic. Several newvarieties with improved resistance to ascochyta blight have been released and arenowgrown commercially in Australia. Field experiments were established in 2002 and 2005 to compare these new varieties with the older, susceptible varieties. The new varieties had significantly less disease than the older varieties and did not require fortnightly sprays. The best new varieties required fungicide sprays only at the podding stage in order to prevent pod and seed infection. As more varieties with greater resistance become available, growers will need to apply fewer fungicides and the consequences of missing a fungicide spray will be less serious. However, variety specific management strategies still need to be developed to enable growers to tailor their control strategy to each variety’s susceptibility in order to minimise fungicide usage and maximise profits.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 21 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
