Clubroot management strategies for brassica production Aaron Heinrich and Alex Stone Dept. of Horticulture
Dec 18, 2015
Clubroot management strategies for brassica production
Aaron Heinrich and Alex StoneDept. of Horticulture
It’s called clubroot for a reason…
Hosts
And more…Susceptibility varies by species and cultivar
Clubroot’s impact“In the past 3 years [2009-12] we have had a 25% loss in our brassica crops due to clubroot, costing us between $60-80K/year. We are running out of clubroot free ground on which to rotate brassica crops.”
“In 2013 we experienced a 30 to 50% loss in 5 of our highest yielding brassica crops this year totaling $20K. Three years ago we played out this scenario knowing that our future looked quite bleak... We need to figure out a way to grow brassicas in fields that have a high clubroot population.”
Is incidence increasing?
1. Increase in radish and turnip cover crop seed2. More farms with 15+ year history of short
rotations (<4 yrs)3. Increased brassica production to meet
demand4. More overwintering brassica crops
Disease cycle
Disease severity affected by:1. Moisture2. Temperature3. Low soil pH4. Spore density
Management strategies
1. Rotation– 5 to 7 years out of brassicas
2. Sanitation3. pH manipulation– lime to pH ≥7.0
4. Boron?5. Biologic controls?6. Resistant cultivars?7. Water management
Control not eradication is the goal
Management strategies
1. Rotation– 5 to 7 years out of brassicas
2. Sanitation3. pH manipulation– lime to pH ≥7.0
4. Boron?5. Biologic controls?6. Resistant cultivars?7. Water management
Control not eradication is the goal
Liming success in California
• 1978 clubroot first identified• Started aggressive liming program• Still present but controlled
2012 clubroot survey
Response from 19 of 37 farmers• 83% had used lime as a control– 21% aimed for pH ≥6.8– 52% verified if target pH reached– 26% said liming helped
Is liming effective in western Oregon?Are farmers liming “correctly”?
2014 Greenhouse study: Cauliflower
ControlpH= 5.7Infection rate: 100%Avg plant wt: 0.3 g
LimedpH ≥ 7.1Infection rate: <4%Avg plant wt: 0.8 g
2014 Greenhouse studies: cauliflower
Control Serenade Boron (10 lb/A)
Lime Lime
5.7 5.7 5.7 6.3 7.1
0
20
40
60
80
100
5 rating
4 rating
3 rating
2 rating
1 rating
Infe
ctio
n r
ate
and
sev
er-
ity
(%)
Dead/dying
Minor clubs on laterals
1. Serenade not effective 2. Boron reduced severity but not infection rate3. Increasing pH from 5.7 to 6.3 slightly effective4. pH >7.0 highly effective
pH
2014 Field studies: broccoli & kale
2014 Field studiespH 6.7
pH 7.3
2014 Field studies: Lacinato Kale
No lime Lime6.7 7.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Rating 3
Rating 2
Rating 1
Infe
ction
rate
and
se
verit
y (%
)
No lime lime0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Plan
t wt (
g)
In 3 field trials:• 44-77% reduction in infection rate• 74-90% reduction in disease severity• Serenade and B (4 and 8 lb/A) not effective in these studies
>50% clubbed<50% clubbedclubs on laterals
pH
Why is there a difference between greenhouse and field studies?
Treatment pHInfected
plants (%)Control 6.0 91Limed (field mixed) 7.0 34Limed (sieved/mixed) 7.0 6
(Adapted from Dobson et al., 1983)
Clubroot field trial: western WA
Same pH, different infection rate
Importance of uniform soil mixing
Treatment pHInfected
plants (%)
Microscale pH variability
(pH unit)Control 5.9 100 0.7Limed (field mixed) 6.4 86 1.1Limed (sieved/mixed) 6.5 25 0.3
(Adapted from Dobson et al, 1983)
Clubroot greenhouse trial
Under field conditions, 100% clubroot control highly unlikely with liming.
Implementing a successful clubroot liming program
Steps:1. Estimate lime requirement2. Choose lime material3. Apply at correct time4. Incorporate thoroughly 5. Measure soil pH
Target pH ≥ 7.0
Step 1: Estimate lime requirement1. Use SMP buffer test and OSU pub. EM 9057 to
raise pH to ~6.7 (6” incorporation depth)2. Multiply SMP buffer rate by 1.5-2.0 to increase pH
>6.7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 75.96.16.36.56.76.97.17.37.5
ton lime/acre
SMP Buffer
1.5-2.0 x SMP Buffer
Step 2: Choose lime material
Product Form Cost material only ($/ton)
Microna Ag-H2O Powder 210
Microna Access Powder 105
Ash Grove Ag lime Powder 60
CalPril Prilled 260
Microna Garden Pearls Prilled 392
Most reactive
Least reactive
Most economical, similar performance
Using pelleted limeAdvantages– Easy to handle
Disadvantages– Expensive – Less reactive (i.e.
requires higher rates)– Requires additional steps
Using pelleted lime efficiently If incorporated too soon, the pellets will not disperse!
Option 1:– Broadcast – Apply irrigation (or wait for rain)– Till
Option 2:– Broadcast – 1st tillage – If sufficient moisture, no irrigation needed– 2nd tillage
1.5 minutes
Step 3: Apply at correct timeApply 1 wk minimum before planting
0 1 2 3 45.6
5.8
6.0
6.2
6.4
6.6
6.8
7.0
7.2
Ash Grove (3 t/a)Microna Ag H2O (3.1 t/a)Microna Access (3.0 t/a)Cal Pril (3.3 t/a)Garden Pearls (3.6 t/a)
Weeks after application
pH
Step 4: Incorporate thoroughly
Treatment pHInfected
plants (%)
Microscale pH variability
(pH unit)Control 5.9 100 0.7Limed (field mixed) 6.4 86 1.1Limed (sieved/mixed) 6.5 25 0.3
Clubroot greenhouse trial
(Adapted from Dobson et al., 1983)
Step 5: Measure soil pH
Soil sample!• Verify if target pH
reached
Caution: if you can see unreacted lime, the soil test pH may be higher than what the plants are experiencing!
Integrated Clubroot Management
• Scouting• Rotation (4-5+ yrs)• Maintain soil pH ≥6.8• Plant resistant varieties• Irrigation management
No one strategy is enough!
Acknowledgements
We thank our farmer partners for their collaboration as well as the following organizations for funding this project:
The Agriculture Research FoundationOregon Processed Vegetable Commission