Fusarium Head Blight (FHB), caused by Fusarium
graminearum, is in important disease on wheat in Indiana. In addition,
F. graminearum can contaminate grain with deoxynivalenol (DON), which can
impact both animal and human health. In favorable disease years high levels of
FHB and DON can cause load rejections across Indiana, therefore this disease is
of concern to both conventional and organic grain growers. Cultivars with
moderate resistance to FHB have not always provided desirable levels of disease
control, and fungicides have become an important component in FHB and DON
management plans. The overall goal of this research was to use an integrated
approach that combines genetic resistance and fungicide application to achieve
optimal FHB management. From 2019 to 2022, wheat trials were established at the
Purdue Agronomy Center for Research and Education (ACRE) in Tippecanoe County,
IN and at the Southwest Purdue Agricultural Center (SWPAC) in Knox County, IN
to evaluate both fungicide efficacy and the integration of cultivars and fungicides.
In general, the experiments were either a randomized complete block design to
evaluate fungicide efficacy or a strip-plot design to evaluate the integration
of cultivars with fungicides. Synthetic and OMRI approved products were applied
at Feekes 10.3 and/or Feekes 10.51 (early-anthesis) and 3 to 7 days after Feekes
10.51. Data collection included FHB incidence, severity, and index, DON, and yields.
A summary of the last four years of research in Indiana in both conventional and
organic grain will be shared and will help determine the impact of implementing
these FHB management tools in both conventional and organic wheat in Indiana.
This material is based upon work supported by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, under agreement Nos. 59-0206-0-118, 59-0206-2-164, 59-0206-9-123, National Institute of Food and Agriculture award
number H008917109 through the North Central Region SARE program under project
number LNC20-443, and Hatch Project #IND00162952. USDA is an equal
opportunity employer and service provider. Any opinions, findings,
conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the
author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture.