Abstract
Due to increasing demands to reduce chemical plant protection products, including prophylactic chemical seed treatments, there is a renewed interest in thermal seed treatments for cereal crops. We carried out contemporary evaluations of various alternative seed treatments for economically relevant cereal diseases in Switzerland. Thermal seed treatments were evaluated for effectiveness against two seed-borne diseases, snow mold (Microdochium spp.) and loose smut of barley (Ustilago nuda), commonly found in Swiss cereal production. Field trials testing seed treatments against Microdochium spp., including M. majus and M. nivale, on wheat were conducted across four growing seasons from 2016/17 to 2019/20 and against U. nuda on barley across three growing seasons from 2016/17 to 2018/19. The foci of these trials were primarily on thermal seed treatments, including steam, hot air, and warm water. Additionally, a Cerall® treatment, based on the microorganism Pseudomonas chlororaphis strain MA 342, was included in two of the trials focusing on Microdochium spp. Steam, warm water, and hot air showed high efficacy against Microdochium spp., while Cerall® showed no disease reduction. In the Microdochium spp. 2018/19 trial, a combination of poor field conditions, low quality seed, and high disease pressure reduced seed germination. The 2019/20 Microdochium spp. field trial, which occurred during less challenging field conditions than those in 2018/19 and included the same seed lot from 2018/19 and a less diseased second lot, showed an improved efficacy of the steam treatments. The warm water treatments were found to be the only effective thermal treatment against U. nuda. Our results demonstrate that the steam treatments more readily affected germination rate in a highly diseased seed lot, while warm water treatments showed limited damage to the seed. Warm water was found to be the most consistently effective thermal treatment against both diseases, and constraints in implementing such a treatment are discussed. If the steam treatment parameters are correctly set to minimize damage to the plant, it offers effective protection against some seed-borne diseases. Overall, the results from this study give more information about effectiveness of alternative seed treatments under various field conditions.
Highlights
IntroductionPreventive chemical-synthetic seed dressing is common practice for field crops
In conventional agriculture, preventive chemical-synthetic seed dressing is common practice for field crops
Winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L. subsp. aestivum) seed naturally infected with Microdochium spp. and winter barley (Hordeum vulgare L. subsp. vulgare) seed naturally infected with U. nuda were used for the laboratory investigations and field trials (Table 1)
Summary
Preventive chemical-synthetic seed dressing is common practice for field crops. Increasing interest in planting non-treated seed outside of organic grain cultivation may lead to a reduction of prophylactic seed treatments in cereals in integrated production (Lamichhane, 2020). Concerns about human and ecosystem health as well as the rise of fungal resistance to fungicides have led to increased societal pressure to reduce chemical pesticides (Nicolopoulou-Stamati et al, 2016; Berger et al, 2017). Several European countries have introduced national action plans since 2011 that mandate the reduction of pesticides (Directive 2009/128/EC), encouraging a reduction of preventative seed dressings. Similar to national action plans from several European countries (Barzman and Dachbrodt-Saaydeh, 2011; Möhring et al, 2020), a Swiss national action plan launched in 2017 aims to reduce the risk of plant protection products by 50% (Bundesrat, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
