<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=199839833918882&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

Stay up-to-date to the latest blog articles

Join our Hub
16 April 2021 - by Andrew Bailey - Cereals Fungicide Technical Specialist
2 min

2021 - Include folpet at T1 for added septoria control, yield response and resistance management

With the T1 window for wheat rapidly approaching, one question is being asked with increasing frequency:

“should I add folpet to my crop protection programme at T1, or rely solely on the use of single site active ingredients?”

In this blog we’ll explain why using folpet at T1 is the recommended option, not only in terms of disease control efficacy and margin over fungicide costs, but also to protect the long-term efficacy of other chemistries.

Disease control efficacy

Formulating a crop protection programme that encompasses a diverse range of active ingredients is a fundamental part of ensuring disease control programmes offer effective, long-term protection.

T1 treatments should therefore include folpet as it has been shown to offer excellent protection against septoria, with programmes which include folpet alongside azole and SDHI fungicides benefitting from improved disease control and increased yields.

ARIZONA boosted efficacy on Septoria, and improved efficacy per £/ha spent

Efficacy on Septoria Graphs

Trial Commissioned by ADAMA, Kerrin 2020 Ross on wye, assessed 24 June and 10 July

adas logo

ARIZONA benefit carried through to yield 

Benefits to Yield Graphs

MOFC based on £165/t wheat price

adas logo

Similar work on Reystar also showed benefits

Reystar Benefits Graphs

Trial commissioned by ADAMA, Kerrin 2020 Ross on wye

adas logo

Return on investment

One of the main arguments against the inclusion of folpet at T1 is the assumption that it doesn’t offer enough of a benefit in comparison to simply increasing the dose of azoles and SDHIs.

However, as the slides above show, this isn’t true. In fact, compared to using leading single site co-formulations on their own, the inclusion of ARIZONA (500 g/L folpet) gives a clear economic benefit through improved disease control. Folpet can also improve the yield of high-risk varieties, with trials showing the that the highest margin over fungicide costs (MOFC) are achieved when 1.0 l/ha of ARIZONA is partnered with single site actives at T0, T1 and T2.

Future-proofing septoria control

As well as the economic and yield benefit effects of using folpet at T1, it’s multi-site mode of action also offers an important resistance management benefit.

Using single site active ingredients time and time again throughout the season, year after year can increase the rate at which disease resistance develops. Conversely, folpet is unlikely to lose its efficacy thanks to its ability to work against multiple metabolic processes within the target pathogen.

The inclusion of folpet (particularly at T1) can also counter the reduction in sensitivity to single sites, with modelling studies carried out by Rothamsted Research predicting that mixing with folpet could double the effective life of epoxiconazole (from eight to 16 years).

Likewise, 2019 studies conducted by ADAS predict that folpet can double the effective life of fluxapyroxad from seven to 14 years and that mixing folpet with field rates of fluxapyroxad delivers improved disease control.

Folpet is therefore recognised by the Fungicide Resistance Action Group (FRAG) as a valuable tool for managing resistance thanks to its ability to provide added levels and spectrum of disease control which can protect and prolong the lifespan of medium to high resistance risk fungicides like SDHIs. For more information visit https://ahdb.org.uk/frag

Don’t put all your eggs in one basket

With the evidence above duly considered, it is clear that the best approach is to use a combination of single site and multi-site active ingredients at T1.

For the sake of simplicity, it might be tempting simply to commit 100% of your T1 budget to higher rate applications of SDHI/azole co-formulations. This will provide good short-term disease control, but it will also encourage further sensitivity shifts and increase selection pressures further down the line.

The better option is therefore to apportion an element of the T1 budget to the inclusion of folpet which will not only provide improved disease control and a positive yield response but will also achieve the added bonus of introducing an element of resistance management.

Folpet Fungicide Diagram

cereal disease hub

Andrew Bailey - Cereals Fungicide Technical Specialist
Andrew Bailey - Cereals Fungicide Technical Specialist
One of the UK arable sector’s most experienced fungicide specialists. With a background in applied biology (specialising in crop science and plant pathology), and with a career spanning 30 years in field based research, fungicide development and fungicide technical support, Andy has worked in the crop protection sector on a UK, European and global level.

You may also be interested in