Trial Data Silverleaf: wound infection, wound protection
Table 1. Wound sealant trial conducted on hybrid willow: July 1984-April 1985
|
Depth of Stained Wood² | |
|
| |
|
Butyl rubber |
88.5 |
|
Red Lead paint |
99.5 |
|
Tar - 9470 |
107.0 |
|
Pruntect |
126.0 |
|
Tar - Duroid |
136.6 |
|
Wattyl Masonry filler |
137.5 |
|
Tar - 4250 |
162.0 |
|
Berger Actylic Paint |
166.0 |
|
Berger Acrylic Paint + 1% captafol |
171.0 |
|
Untreated control |
128.5 |
|
| |
|
LSD³ = 29.0 | |
1. For each treatment 20 stems were treated 2. Depth (mm) of silverleaf infection from wound surface 3. LSD least significant difference (P<0.05) | |
Table 2. Trial Investigating fungicides applied in water at 3% ai for control of silverleaf infection conducted on hybrid willow - July 1985-January 1986
|
Treatment¹ fungicides |
Depth of stained wood² | |
|
Common Name |
Trade Name |
|
|
| ||
|
pyrocarbolid |
(Sicarol) |
30.0 |
|
captan |
(Captan) |
31.2 |
|
dichlofluanid |
(Euparen) |
33.0 |
|
capatafol |
(Difolatan) |
35.0 |
|
capatafol |
(Haipen) |
43.5 |
|
ditalimfos |
(Plondrel) |
48.4 |
|
furmecyclox |
(B 389) |
58.5 |
|
etaconazole |
(Sonax) |
67.0 |
|
propiconazole |
(Tilt) |
71.5 |
|
oxycarboxin |
(Plantvax) |
71.7 |
|
benomyl |
(Benlate) |
73.5 |
|
saprol |
(Saprol) |
79.0 |
|
chlorothalonil |
(Bravo) |
80.5 |
|
triadimefon |
(Bayleton) |
81.7 |
|
bitertanol |
(Baycor) |
83.0 |
|
thiophanate |
(Thiophanate) |
88.2 |
|
benodanil |
(Calirus) |
91.5 |
|
8-hydroxyquinoline sulphate |
(Chinosol) |
94.0 |
|
dodine |
(Melprex) |
94.0 |
|
imazalil |
(Fungaflor) |
101.0 |
|
cycloheximide |
(Cycloheximide) |
141.0 |
|
copper oxychloride |
(Cuprox) |
180.0 |
|
copper salts of fatty & rosin acids |
(Citcop 4E) |
187.0 |
|
copper naphthenate |
(Metallex) |
220.5 |
|
Untreated |
85.5 | |
|
LSD³ = 14.4 | ||
|
1,2,3 See footnotes Table 1.
| ||
Table 3. Trial incestigating Incorporation of fungicides into various bases as wound dressings for control of silverleaf conducted on hybrid willow - July 1987-June 1988
|
Treatment¹ |
Depth of Stained Wood² |
|
| |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% dichlofluanid 3% propiconazole + etc4 |
29.9 |
|
Wattyl Masonry Filler + 3% captan + etc |
39.0 |
|
3% dichlofluanid + 3% captan in water |
55.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% dichlofluanid + 3% bitertanol |
63.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% dichlofluanid + 3% pyrocarbolid |
69.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% dichlofluanid + 3% chlorothalonil |
71.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% captan + 3% pyrocarbolid |
75.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% captafol |
84.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% dichlofluanid |
88.0 |
|
Taubmans All Weather Acrylic + 3% captan etc |
126.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% propiconazole |
129.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% dichlofluanid + 3% penconazole |
133.0 |
|
Soil (applied directly to wound surface) |
139.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% penconazole |
140.0 |
|
Yates Pruning Paint (10 g/L captafol) |
140.0 |
|
Taubmans All Weather acrylic + 3% captan |
150.0 |
|
Pruntect |
153.0 |
|
Wattyl Masonry filler |
153.0 |
|
Taubmans All Weather Acrylic Paint |
156.0 |
|
Butyl rubber + 3% bitertanol |
161.0 |
|
Vaseline + 3% hydroxyquinoline sulphate |
165.0 |
|
Untreated control |
150.0 |
|
LSD³ = 32.0 | |
|
1-3 See Footnote Table 1. 4 Additional unspecified ingredients | |
Table 4. Silverleaf Wound Dressing Trial Conducted on Hybrid Willow - July 1990-July 1991
|
Treatment¹ |
Depth of Stained wood² |
|
| |
|
Mixture 1 |
6.0 |
|
Mixture 2 Formulations of the same |
11.0 |
|
Mixture 3 base with various |
13.0 |
|
Mixture 4 ingredients |
15.0 |
|
Mixture 5 |
18.0 |
|
Shell Pruning Grease4 |
22.0 |
|
Pancil T (Rohm + Haas) |
42.0 |
|
3% dichlofluanid + 3% captan in water |
48.0 |
|
Lac-Balsam (Ciba-Geigy) |
65.0 |
|
Yates Pruning Paint (10 g/litre chlorothalonil) |
89.0 |
|
Pruntect |
91.0 |
|
Dulux Timbacryl + 3% dichlofluanid + 3% captan |
91.0 |
|
Yates Pruning Stick (copper oxychloride) |
108.0 |
|
Control |
88.0 |
|
LSD³ = 15.5 | |
|
1,2,3 See Footnotes Table 1. 4Applied thickly | |
Table 5. Silverleaf Wound Dressing Trial August 1991-February 1992
|
Treatment¹ |
Depth of Stained Wood² |
|
| |
|
Mixture 1 |
2.0 |
|
Mixture 2 |
3.0 |
|
Mixture 3 Formulations of the |
4.6 |
|
Mixture 4 same base with |
4.9 |
|
Mixture 5 various ingredients |
12.2 |
|
Mixture 6 |
12.9 |
|
Mixture 7 |
14.0 |
|
Shell Pruning Grease4 |
30.0 |
|
Pancil T (Rohm + Haas) |
44.2 |
|
Bacseal (Bayer) |
56.8 |
|
Mobil Grafting Compound |
79.2 |
|
Pruntect |
80.8 |
|
Lac Balsam (Ciba-Geigy) |
83.3 |
|
Yates Pruning Paint (10g/litre chlorothalonil) |
110.8 |
|
Untreated control |
130.8 |
|
LSD³ = 31.0 | |
|
1-3 See Footnotes Table 1. 4 Applied thickly | |
Table 6. Silverleaf Wound Dressing Trial August 1992-January 1993
|
Treatment |
Host | ||||||
|
Red Delicious |
Captain Kidd |
Granny Smith |
Winter Nells |
Black Cherries |
Golden Queen |
Plane Trees | |
|
| |||||||
|
Formulation 1 |
1.0²a¹ |
0.0a |
0.0a |
0.0a |
27.8a |
16.9a |
0.0a |
|
Formulation 2 |
5.5a |
0.0a |
0.0a |
0.1a |
31.4a |
19.3a |
0.0a |
|
Formulation 3 |
8.3a |
0.0a |
0.0a |
0.2a |
35.8a |
25.4a |
0.0a |
|
Control |
29.3b |
10.7b |
8.2b |
35.0b |
99.8b |
56.4b |
53.8b |
|
Mean wound diam (mm) |
40 |
45 |
45 |
25 |
40 |
45 |
60 |
|
1 Tukey multiple range test results with letters in common are not significantly different at P<0.05 2 Depth silverleaf infection (mm) | |||||||
Table 7.
|
Treatment |
S. matsudana x S. alba cv 1184 |
S. matsudana x S. alba cv 1040 |
|
| ||
|
Trichoseal |
41.5²a¹ |
69.4b |
|
Trichospray |
60.2b |
53.7a |
|
Control |
60.1b |
70.2b |
|
% infected silverleaf |
100 |
100 |
|
2 See footnotes, Table 6 | ||