An integrated control program for peaches and apples powdery mildew wasevaluatedboth Burg Al-Arab and South of Tahreer regions. In the first season, the efficiency of theprogram's fungicides were tested in terms of the number of sprays and the most appropriate time torepeat the sprays, as well as the best effective fungicides. It was found that they all treatments wereeffective in controlling the disease. The best time to repeat spraying was from seven up to 10 days. Inthe second season, the chosen fungicides were evaluated compared with the farm fungicidesindividually, and the general control (sprayed with water only). On the other hand, evaluation ofessential oils and fertilizers were done individually. The results showed the efficiency of systemicfungicide (Scor), copper and sulfur (preventive fungicides) and cinnamon oil and chitosan as Eco -friendly alternatives in controlling the disease. In the third season all tested fungicides used at thedormancy stage of trees at first January before buds swelling , data showed that all fungicides indicatehigh effect in decreasing the disease comparing with control at the in first of May compared to thecontrol (100% disease severity). The tested fungicides gave 2.9% and 3.3% in case of peach at BorgAl-Arab and South of Tahreer respectively and 6%, 8.6% in apple at Borg Al-Arab and South ofTahreer respectively. At the fourth season all treatments combined in the integrated program weredone at beginning spray (at 8 January while dormancy stage of trees) on apple. The tested programshowed significant reduction on peach and apple powdery mildew compared to the control (100%disease severity) at the end of tested program comparing with the farm of tested program in case ofpeach and apple at Borg Al-Arab and South of Tahreer respectively, in May before harvest. In the fifthseason the same tested program applied at t at the first of November during the winter tree service.The tested program was effective in control peach and apple powdery disease in locations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdahlla et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: