Indian Phytopathology

, Volume 71, Issue 4, pp 621–625 | Cite as

New generation fungicides for the management of buckeye rot of tomato

  • B. P. Shridhar
  • Monica SharmaEmail author
  • S. K. Gupta
  • Satish K. Sharma
Short Communication


Efficacy of nine systemic and non-systemic fungicides was evaluated under in vitro and in vivo conditions against Phytophthora nicotianae causing buckeye rot disease of tomato. Under in vitro conditions, famaxadone + cymoxanil, fenamidone + mancozeb, cymoxanil + mancozeb, metalaxyl-M + mancozeb and metiram + pyraclostrobin were found most effective with complete inhibition in mycelial growth of the pathogen at 100, 250 and 500 ppm. Fungicide azoxystrobin was least effective with only 27.77% of inhibition in mycelial growth of test pathogen. The minimum inhibitory concentration was 100 ppm for famaxadone + cymoxanil, fenamidone + mancozeb, cymoxanil + mancozeb, metalaxyl + mancozeb and metiram + pyraclostrobin and 500 ppm for propineb and mancozeb. Under in vivo conditions, foliar spray of fungicide fenamidone + mancozeb was found most effective with least buckeye rot disease incidence (16.15%) and also significantly increased the fruit yield. Famoxadone + cymoxanil, metalaxyl-M + mancozeb and metiram + pyraclostrobin were next best in order with 19.45, 19.71 and 19.76% disease incidence, respectively while mancozeb was found least effective which resulted in 32.54% disease incidence.


Disease management Fenamidone Pyraclostrobin Famoxadone Phytophthora nicotianae 


  1. Bharat NK, Gupta SK (2011) Management of tomato buckeye rot and Alternaria leaf spot through strobilurin fungicide. Plant Dis Res 26:97–98Google Scholar
  2. Boughalleb N, Moulahi A, Mahjoub ME (2006) Effect of four fungicides on development and control of Phytophthora on apple tree in vitro and in vivo. Int J Agric Res 1:582–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dhingra OD, Sinclair JB (1995) Basic plant pathology methods. Lewis, London, pp 232–233Google Scholar
  4. Dube HC (2009) Modern plant pathology. Agrobios, India, pp 290–300Google Scholar
  5. Ellis MA, Grover GG, Ferree DC (1982) Effect of metalaxyl on Phytophthora cactorum. Phytopathology 72:1431–1433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Falck R (1907) Wachtumgesetze, wachstum Laktorehnund temperature wertde holzersterenden. Myceture 32:38–39Google Scholar
  7. Gupta SK, Bharat NK (2008) Management of buckeye rot and late blight of tomato through combifungicides. Pestology 32:17–19Google Scholar
  8. Gupta SK, Thind TS (2006) Disease problems in vegetable production. Scientific, Jodhpur, p 576pGoogle Scholar
  9. Jordan DB, Livingston RS, Bisaha JJ, Duncan KE, Pember SO, Picollelli MA, Schwartz RS, Sternberg JA, Tang XS (1999) Mode of action of famoxadone. Pest Manag Sci 55:105–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Murray MG, Thompson WF (1980) Rapid isolation of high molecular weight plant DNA. Nucleic Acids Res 8:4321–4325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shah TA (2009) Cause and management of Phytophthora fruit rot of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) in Kashmir. Ph. D. Thesis, Division of Plant Pathology. Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology, Shalimar Campus, Srinagar, pp 22–76Google Scholar
  12. Shashidhara S (2007) Studies on foot rot of black pepper caused by Phytophthora capsici Leonian, emend, Alizedeh and Tsao. M. Sc. Thesis, Department of Plant Pathology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad, p 63Google Scholar
  13. Shyam KR, Gupta SK (1994) Management of buckeye rot and Alternaria leaf spot of tomato through fungicide application. Plant Dis Res 9:233–234Google Scholar
  14. Thakur N, Tripathi A (2015) Biological management of damping-off, buckeye rot and fusarium wilt of tomato (cv. Solan Lalima) under mid-hill conditions of Himachal Pradesh. Agric Sci 6:535–544Google Scholar
  15. Thomidis T, Tsipouridis K (2001) Effectiveness of metalaxyl, fosetyl-Al, dimethomorph, and cymoxanil against Phytophthora cactorum and P. citrophthora of peach tree. Phytopathol Mediterr 40:253–259Google Scholar
  16. Tomlin CDS (2000) The pesticide manual: world compendium, 12th edn. British Crop Protection Council, Farnham, pp 132–133Google Scholar
  17. Verma TS, Ramesh C, Lakhanpal KD, Sharma SC, Chand R (1994) Use of fungicides in controlling fungal fruit rots and increasing fruit and seed yield in tomato. Himachal J Agric Res 20:44–48Google Scholar
  18. Vincent JM (1947) Distortion of fungal hyphae in the presence of certain inhibitors. Nature 159:850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Waterhouse GM (1963) Key to the species of Phytophthora de Bary. Mycological Papers Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew SurreyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Phytopathological Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. P. Shridhar
    • 1
  • Monica Sharma
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. K. Gupta
    • 1
  • Satish K. Sharma
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Plant PathologyDr. YSP University of Horticulture and ForestrySolanIndia

Personalised recommendations