Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat

Muskan Bhullar; Seethiya Mahajan

doi:doi:10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat

Muskan Bhullar^*

, Seethiya Mahajan

Published in Journal of Plant Sciences (Volume 13, Issue 6)

Received: 17 September 2025 Accepted: 28 September 2025 Published: 31 December 2025

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Wheat is a vital global cereal crop, but its productivity and nutritional quality are severely threatened by stripe rust, a devastating fungal disease caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. When genetic resistance in cultivars fails, fungicide application is critical for protecting yields. A study conducted at Khalsa College Amritsar (2022-24) evaluated the efficacy of various fungicides against stripe rust using a Randomized Block Design. Treatments were compared to a control (cultivar PBW-343) based on disease severity, the Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI), and yield parameters including grain yield and 1000-grain weight. Under artificial inoculation, Nativo 75 WG (trifloxystrobin + tebuconazole) applied twice at 15-day intervals recorded the highest grain yield (49.41 q/ha) and 1000-grain weight (43.79 g), increasing yield by 60.95% over control. Custodia, Fusion Top, and Tilt followed, while Opera (pyraclostrobin + epoxiconazole) showed the lowest efficacy (45.68 q/ha, 41.17 g). Nativo also had the lowest ACI (1.6%), compared to the control (54.34%). Other treatments-Custodia (2.4%), Fusion Top (4.65%), Tilt (8.4%), and Opera (11.6%) were statistically superior to control. Systemic fungicides like Custodia, Nativo, Tilt, Opera, and Fusion Top, with diverse modes of action (e.g., DMIs, QoIs), effectively suppressed the disease. These findings highlight their role in managing stripe rust and safeguarding wheat productivity.

Published in	Journal of Plant Sciences (Volume 13, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
Page(s)	249-257
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

ACI, Stripe Rust, Systemic Fungicides, Wheat, Yield Attributes

1. Introduction

Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is a foundational cereal crop, measured by its vast cultivation area, high production volume, and the number of farmers it employs

[1]

This domesticated grass of the Poaceae family is a hexaploid species (2n=42)

[2]

that offers a balanced diet rich in protein, vitamins, and carbohydrates. Its economic importance in India is immense, serving as a primary nutritional source in the north and north-west

[3]

. Meeting global demand requires increased production; currently, wheat is planted on one-sixth of the world's arable land

[4]

. In India, the 2023-24 harvest spanned 341.57 lakh hectares, producing 110.554 million tons. Punjab state alone accounted for 35.26 lakh hectares and an output of 17.78 million tons

[5]

. A range of biotic and abiotic factors threaten wheat yields, with diseases caused by pathogens like fungi, bacteria, and viruses posing a major threat

[6]

. The most economically destructive diseases are the rusts (leaf, stripe, and stem rust), which are considered serious global threats to production

[7]

. These pathogens cause significant losses by developing pustules on leaves, which reduce the green leaf area available for photosynthesis. This damage directly leads to a decline in both grain yield and quality, often resulting in severe production losses

[8]

. The economic impact of wheat rust is severe, with stem rust capable of causing total (100%) crop loss and stripe rust losses of up to 60%

[9]

. These diseases are identified by the appearance of yellow, powdery spore masses (pustules) that form stripes on leaves and other aerial plant structures. The development of stripe rust epidemics is highly dependent on weather; the pathogen proliferates rapidly under conditions of low temperature, high relative humidity, and rainfall, while its development is suppressed by high maximum temperatures

[10]

. A key feature of its biology is its ability to be transported aerially over long distances, which facilitates sudden and widespread outbreaks in conducive environments

[11]

. The primary damage mechanism is the disruption of the plant's photosynthetic system by the pustules, leading to significant reductions in grain weight and overall quality

[12, 13]

. When host plant resistance is unavailable or has been overcome by evolving pathogen populations, fungicide application becomes a critical strategy for managing stripe rust. Although the use of susceptible cultivars often necessitates fungicide intervention to prevent epidemics, their effectiveness is highly dependent on the applied concentration

[14, 15]

. The efficacy of specific active ingredients-including epoxiconazole, pyraclostrobin, and propiconazole-has been demonstrated to be directly correlated with their dosage rates

[15]

. Despite concerns about cost and environmental impact, fungicides remain an efficient and routine practice in many countries for preventing epidemics and preserving both yield and grain quality, especially in high-value wheat crops

[16]

. This is particularly mandatory under high inoculum pressure to achieve optimum yield

[17]

. The emergence of novel, virulent pathotypes that break down resistance in commercial cultivars further underscores the necessity of fungicide intervention as a key component of integrated disease management

[18]

The primary fungicides deployed against wheat stripe rust belong to the triazole (DMI, Group 3) and strobilurin (QoI, Group 11) chemical classes

[19]

. Triazoles, known for their systemic activity as they are absorbed and translocated within the plant, are commonly used. However, combination products integrating a triazole with a strobilurin have become increasingly prevalent and are widely approved for control

[20]

. Strobilurins themselves are highly effective and represent some of the most extensively used agricultural fungicides globally. The success of any fungicide application is critically dependent on correct timing, aligning with both the susceptible stage of host development and the initial establishment of the pathogen

[21]

. Experimental evidence consistently demonstrates that sprayed plots yield significantly more than unsprayed controls, with the application interval being a key factor in reducing disease severity, as measured by metrics like the Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI)

[22, 23]

. Thus, the timely and precise use of these fungicides is a vital strategy for safeguarding crop productivity.

In Punjab state of India, yield losses up to 68.3 per cent have been reported

[24]

. In addition to the deliberate attempts to generate more reliable resistant cultivars, disease management through fungicide administration is conducted, particularly where non-recommended susceptible cultivars are cultivated

[25]

. The literature clearly shows that previously resistant varieties became susceptible over time. As a result, researchers must get a better understanding of the chemicals that are effective against the stripe rust pathogen to recommend appropriate and effective toxicants when chemical fungicide management is urgently required. Given all of this, it is worthwhile to assess the comparative efficacy of newer available fungicides to determine the optimal fungicide. Present investigations were undertaken to study the efficacy of new molecules fungicides against stripe rust of wheat in relation with yield attributes viz., Grain yield and thousand grain weight. In the Punjab state of India, stripe rust has been responsible for substantial yield losses, documented to reach up to 68.3%

[24]

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This research was carried out in Chheharta, Amritsar, an area representative of the major wheat-producing zones in the Majha region of Punjab, India, and a known hot spot for stripe rust epidemics. The experimental site, situated at 31.6335° N latitude and 74.8358° E longitude (218 meters above sea level), features a hot semi-arid to subtropical humid climate characterized by a wide temperature range, from 1-2°C in winter to 40-44°C in summer.

2.2. Description of Experimental Setup and Design

The experiment was arranged in a Randomized Block Design (RBD) with three replications to evaluate fungicide efficacy. A highly susceptible wheat cultivar, PBW 343, was uniformly sown across 18 plots, each measuring 3 × 2 m². This variety, known for its consistent susceptibility to stripe rust in previous screenings, was also planted as a susceptible check surrounding the experimental plots to promote uniform inoculum spread. All agronomic management practices, including field preparation, fertilizer application, weed control, and irrigation-were carried out in accordance with the recommended package of practices provided by Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana

[52]

. The experimental field featured clay-loam soil, which was prepared to a fine tilth through primary and secondary tillage operations. To promote optimal germination, light irrigation was applied immediately after sowing. Standard agronomic practices, including weeding, hoeing, and plant protection measures, were implemented once a uniform crop stand was established. Five fungicidal treatments were evaluated alongside an untreated control (tap water spray): azoxystrobin + tebuconazole (Custodia 320 SC), trifloxystrobin + tebuconazole (Nativo 75 WG), pyraclostrobin + metconazole (Opera 18.3 SE), propiconazole (Tilt 25 EC), and a premix of azoxystrobin (18.20%) + difenoconazole (11.40%) (Fusion Top). Two foliar sprays were applied for each treatment using a hand-operated sprayer. The first application was timed at the onset of disease, when approximately 5% of leaves exhibited initial symptoms, followed by a second spray 15 days later. Disease severity was assessed on randomly selected plants using the modified Cobb’s scale

[26, 27]

, and the resulting data were used for subsequent analysis.

Table 1. Description of systemic fungicides tested against Stripe rust of Wheat.

Treatment	Active ingredient	Trade name	Brand name	Formulations	Dose (in %)
T1	azoxystrobin+ tebuconazole	Custodia 320 SC	Adama	SC	0.1%
T2	trifloxystrobin (50%)+ tebuconazole (25%)	Nativo 75 WG	Bayer	WG	0.1%
T3	propiconazole 25 EC	Tilt 25 EC	Crystal	EC	0.1%
T4	pyraclostrobin (13.5%) + epoxiconazole (5%)	Opera 18.3 SE	AgCelence	SE	0.1%
T5	azoxystrobin (18.20%) + difenoconazole (11.40%)	Fusion Top	Indian Agrochemicals	SC	0.1%

SC-Aqueous suspension concentrates; WG-Wettable granules; SE-Aqueous suspension; EC-Emulsifiable concentrate

2.3. Induction of Disease Epiphytotic

Inoculation was conducted when the crop was 40 days old. The inoculum consisted of a mixture of Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici pathotypes (46S119, 110S199, 238S119, 110S84, and 47S103), which was procured from the Regional Station of the Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research (IIWBR), Flowerdale, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh. This pathogen mixture was used for screening wheat cultivars and evaluating fungicide efficacy against stripe rust. The pathotypes selected for the study were several, diversified, and highly virulent. These pathotypes are diverse and considerably different in terms of their capacity to survive major resistance genes. P. striiformis pathotypes were inoculated into wheat plants at the three to four leaf stage. Artificial inoculation of pathotype inoculum can be done by preparing a spore suspension i.e., mixing spore dust of pathotypes mixture in double distilled water and three to four fine mist sprays of water consisting of uredospores 1 g/litre with an approximate concentration of 10,000 spores/ml in the suspension were carried out in evening between 45-55 days after sowing. The spore suspension was sprayed with the help of small hand sprayer (sterilized with ethanol) evenly on the wheat germplasm at border lines to create natural epiphytotic conditions. The spore suspension was allowed to be applied repeatedly and if possible, immediately after a rainfall incidence to increase chances of disease establishment at the field.

Table 2. Host response of Stripe rust on basis of rust severity.

HOST RESPONSE	SEVERITY RANGE	RESPONSE VALUE
No Disease (O)	0	0.0
Resistant (R)	1-10	0.2
Resistant to Moderately Resistant (RMR)	10.1-20	0.3
Moderately Resistant (MR)	20.1-30	0.4
Moderately Resistant to Moderately Susceptible (MRMS)	30.1-40	0.6
Moderately Susceptible (MS)	40.1-50	0.8
Moderately Susceptible to Susceptible (MSS)	50.1-60	0.9
Susceptible (S)	More than 60	1.0

2.4. Disease Assessment, Grain Yield and Thousand Grain Weight

Upon the appearance of stripe rust symptoms, fungicide treatments were administered. Disease assessments were conducted at at 0^th day, 7^th day and 14^th day of spraying. The Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI) was calculated by multiplying the percentage disease severity by a constant value corresponding to the host response type, according to established methods

[28, 29]

, using the formula:

ACI=Rustseverityvalue×Responsevalue

At maturity, each plot (3 x 2 m²) was harvested and threshed individually to record grain yield data in kilograms, which was finally converted to hectare base and presented as quintal per hectare. The samples drawn from harvested grains were used to calculate thousand grain weight.

Percentage-based disease severity was determined by assigning estimated values from a standardized interval scale

[30]

Disease Severity (%) = \frac{Area of plant tissue infected}{Total area of the plant part examined} \times 100

Percent increases in yield by various treatments were calculated by using the formula

[30]

, Where Y I=Percent increase in yield; Y1=Yield of treated plot; Y2= Yield of Untreated plot (control).

Y I = \frac{Y 1 - Y 2}{Y 2} \times 100

1000-Grain weight: Thousand fully developed grains from the samples drawn by harvested grains were used to calculate Average (g) thousand grain weight

[15]

(Sharma et al 2016).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The data obtained from the field experiment, arranged in a Randomized Block Design (RBD), were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods as outlined by

[31]

. Critical Difference (CD) and Coefficient of Variation (CV) were calculated at a 5% significance level to evaluate differences among treatments. Treatment means were compared using Duncan’s Multiple Range Test (DMRT) executed in IBM SPSS Statistics version 22

[32]

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effect on Average Coefficient of Infection

The Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI) served as a key parameter for evaluating the comparative bio-efficacy of foliar-applied fungicides Chemical management against stripe rust were conducted under artificial inoculation condition, showed that all the treatments were significantly effective and attained lower ACI value compared with control (54.34%) during the 2023-24 cropping season. Each fungicide was sprayed twice at 15 days intervals. Among the five fungicides tested, Nativo 75 WG (tebuconazole 50% + trifloxystrobin 25% WG) applied at 0.1% concentration demonstrated the highest efficacy, achieving the lowest ACI (1.6%). It was followed by Custodia 320 SC (ACI = 2.4), Fusion Top (ACI = 4.65), and Tilt 25 EC (ACI = 8.4). Opera 18.8 SE showed the highest ACI value (11.6) among the treatments, though it remained statistically superior to the control. All fungicide treatments were significantly more effective than the untreated check based on statistical analysis.

3.2. Effect on Grain Yield and Thousand Grain Weight

The various fungicide treatments significantly influenced yield attributes, specifically grain yield and thousand-grain weight. As detailed in Table 3 and Figure 1, all treatments produced significantly higher grain yields compared to the untreated control (29.43 q/ha). The highest grain yield (49.41 q/ha) was obtained from plots treated with Nativo 75 WG (tebuconazole 50% + trifloxystrobin 25% WG) applied at 0.1%, followed by Custodia 320 SC (47.38 q/ha), Fusion Top (46.68 q/ha), and Tilt 25 EC (46.24 q/ha). The lowest yield among treated plots was recorded with Opera 18.8 SE (45.76 q/ha). Similarly, the highest thousand-grain weight (43.79 g) was observed in the Nativo 75 WG treatment, followed by Custodia 320 SC (42.98 g), Fusion Top (42.23 g), and Tilt 25 EC (41.87 g). Opera 18.8 SE resulted in the lowest thousand-grain weight (41.17 g). The study demonstrated that combination fungicides, particularly Nativo 75 WG and Custodia 320 SC, were most effective, increasing yield by 67.88% and 60.95%, respectively. Fusion Top, Tilt 25 EC, and Opera 18.8 SE also substantially improved yields, with increases of 58.61%, 57.11%, and 55.48%, respectively.

Table 3. Impact of fungicides on Average coefficient of infection (Disease severity) and yield parameters against Stripe rust of Wheat under artificial inoculation during Rabi 2023-24.

Treatments	No. of sprays	ACI value^*	Grain yield (q/ha)^*	1000 grain weight (gram)^*	Increase in yield (%)
Custodia 320 SC (azoxystrobin+ tebuconazole)	2	2.4	47.37^b+ 0.23^**	42.98^ab+0.13^**	60.95
Nativo 75 WG (trifloxystrobin 50%+ tebuconazole 25%)	2	1.6	49.41^a+ 0.32^**	43.79^a +0.07^**	67.88
Tilt 25 EC (propiconazole 25 EC)	2	8.4	46.24^c+ 0.41^**	41.87^c +0.4^**	57.11
Opera 18.3 SE (pyraclostrobin 13.5% + epoxiconazole 5%)	2	11.6	45.76^c+ 0.08^**	41.17^c +0.33^**	55.48
Fusion Top (azoxystrobin 18.20% + difenoconazole 11.40%)	2	4.5	46.68^bc+ 0.15^**	42.23^bc +0.27^**	58.61
Control	-	54.34	29.43	33.56	-
S.E.(m)		0.027	0.946	1.055
C.D. (ρ<0.05)		0.090
C.V.		0.826

ACI value: Average coefficient of infection

^*Average of three replications

^**Mean + SE with superscript row wise (small alphabet) differ significantly (ρ<0.05)

4. Discussion

Download: Download full-size image

Figure 1. Impact of systemic fungicides on yield parameters against Stripe rust of Wheat under artificial inoculation during, Rabi 2023-24.

The use of resistant cultivars and chemical substances are the main methods for the management of stripe rust. Fungicide application provides an effective and practical tool for minimizing disease epidemics

[33-36]

. To reduce subsequent progression of the disease on the plant, fungicides should be applied at the time of disease appearance to achieve effective results

[37, 38]

. The effectiveness of fungicides is dependent on the growth stage of the crop and disease level at the time of application

[39]

(Viljanen-Rollinson et al 2002). The results coincide with

[40]

reported higher grain yield and thousand grain weight was obtained by Amistar xtra (57.03 q/ha and 45.6 g) followed by Custodia 320 SC (51.1 q/ha and 43.1%), Opera 175 SE (52.6 q/ha and 43.4%), Tilt 25 EC (55.9 q/ha and 44.5%) each @ 0.1% and Nativo 75 WG @ 0.6% (52.9 q/ha and 43.9%).

Results are in conformity with

[41]

recorded maximum grain yield in the plot treated with tebuconazole 50%+ trifloxystrobin 25% WG@ 0.06% over untreated control (45.22 q/ha) followed by picoxystrobin 7.05%+ propiconazole 11.7% SC@ 0.1% (44.48 q/ha), azoxystrobin 11% + Tebuconazole 18.3% w/w SC@ 0.1% (43.73 q/ha), pyroclostrobulin 113 g/l+ epoxiconazole 50 g/l SE@ 0.1% (43.00 q/ha), propiconazole 25 EC@ 0.1% (42.31 q/ha), azoxystrobin 18.2%+ cyproconazole 7.3% w/w SC@ 0.1% (41.47 q/ha), azoxystrobin 18.2%+ difenconazole 11.4% SC@ 0.1% (40.95 q/ha), tebuconazole 25 EC@ 0.1% (40.04 q/ha). Also, highest 1000 grain weight 47.43 g was again observed in tebuconazole 50%+ trifloxystrobin 25% WG@ 0.06% followed by picoxystrobin 7.05%+ propiconazole 11.7% SC@ 0.1% (46.69 g), azoxystrobin 11% + tebuconazole 18.3% w/w SC@ 0.1% (45.2 g), pyroclostrobin 113 g/l+ epoxiconazole 50 g/l SE@ 0.1% (44.42 g), propiconezole 25 EC@ 0.1% (44.20 g), azoxystrobin 18.2%+ cyproconazole 7.3% w/w SC@ 0.1% (43.34 g), azoxystrobin 18.2%+ difenconazole 11.4% SC@ 0.1% (42.95 g), tebuconazole 25 EC@ 0.1% (41.83 g) and all treatments are effective and attained lower ACI value compared with control. The least ACI (1.33%) was observed in Tebuconazole 50%+ Trifloxystrobin 25% WG@ 0.06% followed by Picoxystrobin 7.05%+ Propiconazole 11.7% SC@ 0.1%(1.67%), Azoxystrobin 11% + Tebuconazole 18.3% w/w SC@ 0.1%(2.67%), Pyroclostrobin 113 g/l+ Epoxiconazole 50 g/l SE@ 0.1% (4.67%), Azoxystrobin 18.2%+ Cyproconazole 7.3% w/w SC@ 0.1% (5.33%), Propiconezole 25 EC@ 0.1% (6.0%), Azoxystrobin 18.2%+ Difenoconazole 11.4% SC@ 0.1% (7.33%), Tebuconazole 25 EC@ 0.1%(8.33). Similarly,

[22]

also concluded the highest mean grain yield of 32.24 q/ha was recorded in two sprays of azoxystrobin 20%+difenconazole 12.5% SC @0.1% with mean increase in yield of 56.73% over check, followed by 32.10, 31.47, 31.18 and 29.65 q/ha yield in tebuconazole 25% EC, azoxystrobin 23.1%SC, tebuconazole 50%+ trifloxystrobin 25% w/w 75 WG and propiconazole 25%EC, with mean yield increase of 11.54, 10.91, 10.62 and 9.08 q/ha with 56.08, 53.01, 51.60 and 44.14% over the unsprayed check which also supported the present study.

[42]

observed that disease severity of stripe rust reached 30% in various bread wheat cultivars during the 2017-18 season and discovered that rust diseases have a substantial negative correlation with grain production. Grain production losses in susceptible cultivars could reach 100% if stripe rust infection occurs early

[43]

. These fungicides have different modes of action against the fungus, such as demethylation inhibitors (DMI) with triazole and imidazole chemical families and quinine outside inhibitors (Qol) with strobilurins family

[44, 45]

. Mixture of triazoles and strobilurins help to check both fungal growth as well as spore germination and thus prove highly effective

[46]

. Fungicide formulations tested in the present study are a combination of different strobilurins and triazoles, which effectively checked the fungus on wheat through mitochondrial inhibition, and sterol bio-synthesis inhibition respectively

[46]

. Azoxystrobin, also known as β-methoxyacrylates, is synthesised from naturally occurring strobilurins

[47]

. Azoxystrobin interferes with ATP synthesis by binding to the Qo site of complex III in the mitochondrion, disrupting the electron transport chain

[48]

. Propiconazole is derivative of triazole, a demethylated inhibitor that interferes with ergosterol biosynthesis by suppressing the oxidative removal of 14 α -methyl group from 24- methylenedihydrolanosterol in fungi

[49]

. Ergosterol deprivation causes plasma membrane instability, that leads to failure of fungus nutrition and eventual death

[50]

. Difenoconazole is the first sterol inhibitor compound, classified on basis of its mode of action. First, it inhibits sterol C-14 demethylation, which interferes with the P-450 enzyme; second, it inhibits C-14 reductase

[51]

With multiple modes of action, they were able to give complete inhibition of the disease

[40]

. In the present study, it was found that the fungicide Tilt and fungicidal mixtures-Nativo, Custodia, Opera and Amistar top are highly effective against yellow rust in reducing the average coefficient of infection (also disease severity) and elevates the per cent grain yield and thousand grain over unsprayed plot and these fungicides may be used against this disease as a short-term alternative of resistant varieties for the multiple disease management strategies.

5. Conclusion

The current study clearly shows that in Punjab, it is difficult to grow susceptible wheat varieties without fungicide application in areas with stripe rust as a major problem. High grain yield and 1000 kernel weight recorded from plot treated with Nativo and Custodia were best comparative to other treatments. Mixture of triazoles and strobilurins help to check both fungal growth as well as spore germination and thus prove highly effective. However, further research is needed to come up with other management options to sustainable and cost effectively manage the disease under different agro-ecological regions.

Abbreviations

ACI	Average Coefficient of Infection
IIWBR	Indian Institute of Wheat and Barley Research
ICAR	Indian Council of Agricultural Research
CD	Critical Difference
CV	Coefficient of Variation
RBD	Randomized Block Design
DMRT	Duncan’s Multiple Range Test
QoI	Quinone Outside Inhibitor
DMI	Demethylation Inhibitor
SC	Soluble Concentrate
EC	Emulsifiable Concentrate
SE	Aqueous Suspension
WG	Wettable Granule

Acknowledgments

Authors are thankful for the valuable guidance and support from the Principal of Khalsa college Amritsar, Head of Agriculture Department, ICAR-Indian Institute of Wheat & Barley Research, Regional Station, Flowerdale, Shimla for providing stripe rust inoculum, and also the Division of Plant breeding and Genetics, Punjab Agricultural University for providing study material.

Author Contributions

Muskan Bhullar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curation, Formal analysis, Writing – original draft

Seethiya Mahajan: Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Zegeye F, Alamirew B and Tolossa D (2020) Analysis of wheat yield gap and variability in Ethiopia. International Journal of Agricultural Economics 5(4): 89-98. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijae.20200504.11
[2]	Tiwari A, Singh V, Singh S P, Dubey S and Singh V (2021) Assessment of genetic variability, heritability and genetic advance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under sodic soil 6: 12-17.
[3]	Kumar, S., Jacob, S. R., Mir, R. R., Vikas, V. K., Kulwal, P., Chandra, T., ... & Singh, K. (2022). Indian wheat genomics initiative for harnessing the potential of wheat germplasm resources for breeding disease-resistant, nutrient-dense, and climate-resilient cultivars. Frontiers in genetics, 13, 834366 https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.834366
[4]	Zhao J, Luo Q, Deng H and Yan Y (2008) Opportunities and challenges of sustainable agricultural development in China. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 363: 893-904 https://doi.org/10.22271/tpi.2021.v10.i4e.5940
[5]	Anonymous (2023-24) Ministry of Agriculture & Farmers Welfare.
[6]	Majeed A and Muhammad Z (2018) Potato production in Pakistan: challenges and prospective management strategies–a review. Pakistan Journal of Botany 50: 2077-2084.
[7]	Prasad P, Bhardwaj SC, Thakur RK, Adhikari S, Gangwar OP, Lata C and Kumar S (2021) Prospects of climate change effects on crop diseases with particular reference to wheat. Journal of Cereal Research 13: 118-135 http://doi.org/10.25174/2582-2675/2021/112817
[8]	Afzal F, Chaudhari SK, Gul A, Farooq A, Ali H, Nisar S and Mujeeb-Kazi A (2015) Bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under biotic and abiotic stresses: An overview. Crop production and global environmental issues 293-317 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23162-4_13
[9]	Park RF (2007) Stem rust of wheat in Australia. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58: 558−566 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR07117
[10]	Badar, R., Ahmed, A., Batool, S., Arshad, A., Shahin, A. A., Firdous, S., & Shafique, M. (2023) Puccinia triticina: wheat stripe (yellow) rust pathogen: a review. Pakistan Journal of Phytopathology, 35(2): 473-480 https://doi.org/10.33866/phytopathol.035.02.0889
[11]	Singh R, Mahmoudpour A, Rajkumar M and Narayana R (2017) A review on stripe rust of wheat, its spread, identification and management at field level. Research on Crops 18: 528-533. https://doi.org/10.5958/2348-7542.2017.00091.2
[12]	Line RF (2002) Stripe rust of wheat and barley in North America: a retrospective historical review. Annual review of phytopathology 40(1): 75-118. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.phyto.40.020102.111645
[13]	Chen XM (2005) Epidemiology and control of stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici) on wheat. Canadian journal of plant pathology 27: 314-337 https://doi.org/10.1080/07060660509507230
[14]	Conner RL and Kuzyk AD (1988) Effectiveness of fungicides in controlling stripe rust, leaf rust and black point in soft white spring wheat. Candian Journal Plant Pathology 10: 321–326 https://doi.org/10.1080/07060668809501706
[15]	Sharma RC, Nazari K, Amanov A, Ziyaev Z and Jalilov AU (2016) Reduction of winter wheat yield losses caused by stripe rust through fungicide management. Journal of Phytopathology 164: 671-677 https://doi.org/10.1111/jph.12490
[16]	Gomes C, Almeida A S, Coutinho J, Costa R, Pinheiro N, Coco J and Macas B (2018) Foliar fungicide application as management strategies to minimize the growing threat of yellow rust on wheat in Portugal. Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture 715-724 https://doi.org/10.9755/ejfa.2018.v30.i9.1793
[17]	Carmona M, Sautua F, Pérez-Hérnandez O and Reis EM (2020) Role of fungicide applications on the integrated management of wheat stripe rust Frontiers in Plant Science 11: 733 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.00733
[18]	Khanfri S, Boulif M and Lahlali R (2018) Yellow rust (Puccinia striiformis): a serious threat to wheat production worldwide. Notulae Scientia Biologicae 10(3): 410-423 https://doi.org/10.15835/nsb10310287
[19]	Chen XM and Kang ZS (2017) Introduction: history of research, symptoms, taxonomy of the pathogen, host range, distribution, and impact of stripe rust. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1111-9_1
[20]	Wang Y, Yu C, Cheng Y, Yao F, Long L, Wu Y and Zheng Y (2021) Genome-wide association mapping reveals potential novel loci controlling stripe rust resistance in a Chinese wheat landrace diversity panel from the southern autumn-sown spring wheat zone. BMC Genomics 22: 1-15 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-020-07331-1
[21]	Chen XM, Evans CK, Sprott J and Liu YM (2018) Evaluation of foliar fungicide treatments for control of stripe rust on winter wheat in 2017. Plant Disease. Management Reports 12: CF073.
[22]	Cooper J and Dobson H (2007) The benefits of pesticides to mankind and the environment. Journal of Crop protection 26: 1337-1348 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2007.03.022
[23]	Hailu D and Fininsa C (2007) Relationship between stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis) and grain quality of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) in the highlands of Bale, South-Eastern Ethiopia. International Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment. 5: 24-30.
[24]	Jindal MM, Sharma I and Bains NS (2012) Losses due to stripe rust caused by Puccinia striiformis in different varieties of wheat. Journal of Cereal Research 4(2).
[25]	Poole NF and Arnaudin ME (2014) The role of fungicides for effective disease management in cereal crops. Canadian Journal of Plant Pathology 36(1): 1-11 https://doi.org/10.1080/07060661.2013.870230
[26]	Peterson RF, Campbell AB and Hannah AE (1948) A diagrammatic scale for estimating rust intensity of leaves and stem of cereals. Canadian Journal of Research 26: 496-500 https://doi.org/10.1139/cjr48c-033
[27]	Sandhu R, Singh B, Dey T and Pandey MK (2021) Assessment of some Indian wheat genotypes and breeding lines for adult plant resistance (APR) against stripe rust. International Journal of Chemical Studies 9: 31-35 https://doi.org/10.22271/chemi.2021.v9.i2a.11902
[28]	Saari EE, Wilcoxson RD (1974) Plant disease situation of high yielding durum wheat in Asia and Africa, Annual Review. Phytopathology 2: 49-68 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.py.12.090174.000405
[29]	Pathon AK, Park RF (2006). Evaluation of seedling and adult plant resistance to leaf rust in European wheat cultivars. Euphytica 149: 327-342 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-005-9081-4
[30]	Ayele A, Chala A and Shikur E (2019) Effect of varieties, fungicides and application frequencies to wheat yellow rust disease (Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici) management in Arsi highlands of Ethiopia. American Journal of BioScience 7(6): 113-122 https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajbio.20190706.15
[31]	Gomez KA and Gomez AA (1984) Statistical procedures for agricultural research. John wiley & sons 9: 22-28.
[32]	Basandrai AK, Mehta A, Rathee VK, Basandrai D and Sharma BK (2020) Efficacy of fungicides in managing yellow rust of wheat. Journal of Cereal Research 12: 103-108.
[33]	Chen XM (2007) Challenges and solutions for stripe rust control in the United States. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58: 648-655 https://doi.org/10.1071/AR07045
[34]	Chen W, Wellings C, Chen X, Kang Z and Liu T (2014) Wheat stripe (yellow) rust caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. Molecular plant pathology 15(5): 433-446 https://doi.org/10.1111/mpp.12116
[35]	Ahamad S (2014) Fungicidal management of yellow rust diseases of wheat in Jammu. Research in Environment and Life Sciences 7(4): 319-322.
[36]	Selvakumar R, Madhumeeta Shekhawat PS, Verma RPS and Sharma I (2014) Management of stripe rust of barley using fungicides. Indian Phytopathology 67(2): 138-142.
[37]	Tadesse K, Amare A, Ayele B (2010) Effect of fungicide on the development of wheat stem rust and yield of wheat varieties in highlands of Ethiopia. African Crop Science Journal 18(1): 23-33 https://doi.org/10.4314/acsj.v18i1.54194
[38]	Wubishet A and Tamene M (2016) Verification and evaluation of fungicides efficacy against wheat rust diseases on bread wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Highlands of Bale, South-eastern Ethiopia. International Journal of Research Studies in Agricultural Sciences 2(9): 35-40 http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2454-6224.0209005
[39]	Viljanen-Rollinson SLH, Parkes RA, Armour T and Cromey MG (2002) Fungicide control of stripe rust in wheat: protection or eradication. The New Zealand Plant Protection 55: 336-340 https://doi.org/10.30843/nzpp.2002.55.3902
[40]	Tak PS, Pannu PPS and Kaur J (2021) Effect of foliar application of fungicides, neem extract and butter milk on yellow rust, plant growth and yield parameters of wheat. Agricultural Research Journal 58(2) https://doi.org/10.5958/2395-146X.2021.00035.1
[41]	Rani P (2021) Evaluation of elite wheat germplasm for resistance against stripe rust (Puccinia striiformis) and its ma=ement (M.Sc Thesis, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Jammu).
[42]	Gebrel EE, Gad MA and Kishk AMS (2018) Effect of sowing dates on potential yield and rust resistance of some wheat cultivars. Journal of Plant Production 9(4): 369-375 https://doi.org/10.21608/jpp.2018.35738
[43]	Afzal SN, Haque MI, Ahmedani MS, Bashir S and Rattu AR (2007). Assessment of yield losses caused by Puccinia striiformis triggering stripe rust in the most common wheat varieties. Pakistan Journal of Botany 39(6): 2127-2134.
[44]	Mueller D, Wise KA, Dufault NS, Bradley CA and Chilvers MI (2013) Fungicides for field crops. The American Phytopathololgical Society.
[45]	Joshi KD, Ullah G, Rehman AU, Javaid MM, Ahmad J, Hussain M, Pacheco A, Khalil IA and Baloch A (2017) Wheat yield response to foliar fungicide application against leaf rust caused by Puccinia triticina. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 7: 60-168 https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-6256/2017.03.003
[46]	FRAC (2018) Fungicide Resistance Action Committee (FRAC) Code list 2018: fungicides sorted by mode of action (including FRAC code numbering).
[47]	Inoue K, Tsurumi T, Ishii H, Park P and Ikeda K (2012) Cytological evaluation of the effect of azoxystrobin and alternative oxidase inhibitors in Botrytis cinerea. FEMS microbiology letters, 326(1): 83-90 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2011.02438.x
[48]	Hewitt HG (1998) Strobilurins. Fungicides in Crop Protection. CAB International, New York, pp. 128-129.
[49]	Sisler HD, Ragsdale NN and Waterfield WF (1984) Biochemical aspects of the fungitoxic and growth regulatory action of fenarimol and other pyrimidin‐5‐ylmethanols. Pesticide science 15: 167- 76 https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.2780150208
[50]	Baldwin BC and Wiggins TE (1984) Action of fungicidal triazoles of the diclobutrazol series on Ustilago maydis. Pesticide science 15: 156-66 https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.2780150207
[51]	Dahmen H and Staub T (1992) Protective, curative, and eradicant activity of difenoconazole against Venturia inaequalis, Cercospora arachidicola, and Alternaria solani. Plant disease 76: 774-77 https://doi.org/10.1094/PD-76-0774
[52]	Anonymous (2023) Package of practices for crops of Punjab (Rabi 2023-24). Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. 4-20 pp.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Bhullar, M., Mahajan, S. (2025). Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat. Journal of Plant Sciences, 13(6), 249-257. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Bhullar, M.; Mahajan, S. Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat. J. Plant Sci. 2025, 13(6), 249-257. doi: 10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Bhullar M, Mahajan S. Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat. J Plant Sci. 2025;13(6):249-257. doi: 10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16,
  author = {Muskan Bhullar and Seethiya Mahajan},
  title = {Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat},
  journal = {Journal of Plant Sciences},
  volume = {13},
  number = {6},
  pages = {249-257},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jps.20251306.16},
  abstract = {Wheat is a vital global cereal crop, but its productivity and nutritional quality are severely threatened by stripe rust, a devastating fungal disease caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. When genetic resistance in cultivars fails, fungicide application is critical for protecting yields. A study conducted at Khalsa College Amritsar (2022-24) evaluated the efficacy of various fungicides against stripe rust using a Randomized Block Design. Treatments were compared to a control (cultivar PBW-343) based on disease severity, the Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI), and yield parameters including grain yield and 1000-grain weight. Under artificial inoculation, Nativo 75 WG (trifloxystrobin + tebuconazole) applied twice at 15-day intervals recorded the highest grain yield (49.41 q/ha) and 1000-grain weight (43.79 g), increasing yield by 60.95% over control. Custodia, Fusion Top, and Tilt followed, while Opera (pyraclostrobin + epoxiconazole) showed the lowest efficacy (45.68 q/ha, 41.17 g). Nativo also had the lowest ACI (1.6%), compared to the control (54.34%). Other treatments-Custodia (2.4%), Fusion Top (4.65%), Tilt (8.4%), and Opera (11.6%) were statistically superior to control. Systemic fungicides like Custodia, Nativo, Tilt, Opera, and Fusion Top, with diverse modes of action (e.g., DMIs, QoIs), effectively suppressed the disease. These findings highlight their role in managing stripe rust and safeguarding wheat productivity.},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat
AU  - Muskan Bhullar
AU  - Seethiya Mahajan
Y1  - 2025/12/31
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
T2  - Journal of Plant Sciences
JF  - Journal of Plant Sciences
JO  - Journal of Plant Sciences
SP  - 249
EP  - 257
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0731
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
AB  - Wheat is a vital global cereal crop, but its productivity and nutritional quality are severely threatened by stripe rust, a devastating fungal disease caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. When genetic resistance in cultivars fails, fungicide application is critical for protecting yields. A study conducted at Khalsa College Amritsar (2022-24) evaluated the efficacy of various fungicides against stripe rust using a Randomized Block Design. Treatments were compared to a control (cultivar PBW-343) based on disease severity, the Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI), and yield parameters including grain yield and 1000-grain weight. Under artificial inoculation, Nativo 75 WG (trifloxystrobin + tebuconazole) applied twice at 15-day intervals recorded the highest grain yield (49.41 q/ha) and 1000-grain weight (43.79 g), increasing yield by 60.95% over control. Custodia, Fusion Top, and Tilt followed, while Opera (pyraclostrobin + epoxiconazole) showed the lowest efficacy (45.68 q/ha, 41.17 g). Nativo also had the lowest ACI (1.6%), compared to the control (54.34%). Other treatments-Custodia (2.4%), Fusion Top (4.65%), Tilt (8.4%), and Opera (11.6%) were statistically superior to control. Systemic fungicides like Custodia, Nativo, Tilt, Opera, and Fusion Top, with diverse modes of action (e.g., DMIs, QoIs), effectively suppressed the disease. These findings highlight their role in managing stripe rust and safeguarding wheat productivity.
VL  - 13
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Muskan Bhullar

Post Graduate Department of Agriculture, Khalsa College Amritsar, Punjab, India

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0000-1647-3468
Seethiya Mahajan

Post Graduate Department of Agriculture, Khalsa College Amritsar, Punjab, India

http://orcid.org/0009-0008-2001-6647

Download PDF

Submit an Article

Figure 1

Figure 1. Impact of systemic fungicides on yield parameters against Stripe rust of Wheat under artificial inoculation during, Rabi 2023-24.

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Bhullar, M., Mahajan, S. (2025). Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat. Journal of Plant Sciences, 13(6), 249-257. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Bhullar, M.; Mahajan, S. Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat. J. Plant Sci. 2025, 13(6), 249-257. doi: 10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Bhullar M, Mahajan S. Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat. J Plant Sci. 2025;13(6):249-257. doi: 10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16,
  author = {Muskan Bhullar and Seethiya Mahajan},
  title = {Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat},
  journal = {Journal of Plant Sciences},
  volume = {13},
  number = {6},
  pages = {249-257},
  doi = {10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jps.20251306.16},
  abstract = {Wheat is a vital global cereal crop, but its productivity and nutritional quality are severely threatened by stripe rust, a devastating fungal disease caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. When genetic resistance in cultivars fails, fungicide application is critical for protecting yields. A study conducted at Khalsa College Amritsar (2022-24) evaluated the efficacy of various fungicides against stripe rust using a Randomized Block Design. Treatments were compared to a control (cultivar PBW-343) based on disease severity, the Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI), and yield parameters including grain yield and 1000-grain weight. Under artificial inoculation, Nativo 75 WG (trifloxystrobin + tebuconazole) applied twice at 15-day intervals recorded the highest grain yield (49.41 q/ha) and 1000-grain weight (43.79 g), increasing yield by 60.95% over control. Custodia, Fusion Top, and Tilt followed, while Opera (pyraclostrobin + epoxiconazole) showed the lowest efficacy (45.68 q/ha, 41.17 g). Nativo also had the lowest ACI (1.6%), compared to the control (54.34%). Other treatments-Custodia (2.4%), Fusion Top (4.65%), Tilt (8.4%), and Opera (11.6%) were statistically superior to control. Systemic fungicides like Custodia, Nativo, Tilt, Opera, and Fusion Top, with diverse modes of action (e.g., DMIs, QoIs), effectively suppressed the disease. These findings highlight their role in managing stripe rust and safeguarding wheat productivity.},
 year = {2025}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Impact of Foliar Application of Systemic Fungicides on Yield Attributes and ACI Against Stripe Rust of Wheat
AU  - Muskan Bhullar
AU  - Seethiya Mahajan
Y1  - 2025/12/31
PY  - 2025
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
T2  - Journal of Plant Sciences
JF  - Journal of Plant Sciences
JO  - Journal of Plant Sciences
SP  - 249
EP  - 257
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0731
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20251306.16
AB  - Wheat is a vital global cereal crop, but its productivity and nutritional quality are severely threatened by stripe rust, a devastating fungal disease caused by Puccinia striiformis f. sp. tritici. When genetic resistance in cultivars fails, fungicide application is critical for protecting yields. A study conducted at Khalsa College Amritsar (2022-24) evaluated the efficacy of various fungicides against stripe rust using a Randomized Block Design. Treatments were compared to a control (cultivar PBW-343) based on disease severity, the Average Coefficient of Infection (ACI), and yield parameters including grain yield and 1000-grain weight. Under artificial inoculation, Nativo 75 WG (trifloxystrobin + tebuconazole) applied twice at 15-day intervals recorded the highest grain yield (49.41 q/ha) and 1000-grain weight (43.79 g), increasing yield by 60.95% over control. Custodia, Fusion Top, and Tilt followed, while Opera (pyraclostrobin + epoxiconazole) showed the lowest efficacy (45.68 q/ha, 41.17 g). Nativo also had the lowest ACI (1.6%), compared to the control (54.34%). Other treatments-Custodia (2.4%), Fusion Top (4.65%), Tilt (8.4%), and Opera (11.6%) were statistically superior to control. Systemic fungicides like Custodia, Nativo, Tilt, Opera, and Fusion Top, with diverse modes of action (e.g., DMIs, QoIs), effectively suppressed the disease. These findings highlight their role in managing stripe rust and safeguarding wheat productivity.
VL  - 13
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download