Effect of methyl bromide alternatives on seedling quality, nematodes and pathogenic soil fungi at the Jesup and Glennville Nurseries in Georgia: 2007 to 2008

For many years, forest-tree nurseries in the United States have relied on methyl bromide (MBr) soil fumigation to control weeds, pathogenic fungi, insects and nematodes. However, due to the concern over ozone depletion in the stratosphere, finding a soil fumigant alternative for MBr has been a priority for the forest nursery industry since 1991. A large-scale study comparing seven fumigants using operational application techniques and normal nursery management practices over two growing seasons was installed in two forest-tree nurseries in Georgia: the Plum Creek Nursery in Jesup, and the Rayonier Nursery in Glennville. Control of weeds, nematodes, and soilborne fungi was dependent upon the soil fumigant used and cropping season. By the end of the second growing season in 2008, there were no significant differences in seedling densities for any of the soil fumigants tested, as all soil fumigants were similar to MBr. While many seedling producers would prefer to use MBr to produce forest-tree seedlings in perpetuity, each nursery manager will need to identify the best alternative for their nursery conditions. Based on these 2 year trials, the soil fumigants with 100% chloropicrin and Pic + at 336 kg/ha (300 lbs/a) appear to be suitable alternatives for MBr in controlling forest-nursery pests and producing high quality seedlings at the Jesup and Glennville, GA Nurseries.   Key words: Soil fumigation, chloropicrin, soilborne fungi, nematodes, loblolly pine.

[1]  M. Cram,et al.  Forest Nursery Pests , 2012 .

[2]  D. Jacobs,et al.  Quantifying root system quality of nursery seedlings and relationship to outplanting performance , 2005, New Forests.

[3]  J. Frampton,et al.  Effects of nursery characteristics on field survival and growth of loblolly pine rooted cuttings. , 2002 .

[4]  S. Enebak,et al.  Chloropicrin as a soil fumigant in forest nurseries , 1997 .

[5]  G. Samuels.  Trichoderma: a review of biology and systematics of the genus , 1996 .

[6]  Glyndon E. Hatchell,et al.  Nursery Cultural Practices and Morphological Attributes of Longleaf Pine Bare-Root Stock as Indicators of Early Field Performance , 1990 .

[7]  Li-Fen Dong,et al.  Breaking seed dormancy of Pinus bungeana Zucc. with Trichoderma-4030 inoculations , 1987, New Forests.

[8]  Y. Elad,et al.  A selective medium for improving quantitative isolation ofTrichoderma spp. from soil , 1981, Phytoparasitica.

[9]  G. Knudsen,et al.  Efficacy of Trichoderma harzianum as a biological control of Fusarium oxysporum in container-grown Douglas-fir seedlings , 2004, New Forests.

[10]  G. Papavizas.  Trichoderma and Gliocladium: Biology, Ecology, and Potential for Biocontrol , 1985 .

[11]  P. E. Nelson,et al.  Fusarium species: an illustrated manual for identification. , 1983 .

[12]  M. E. Kannwischer.  Relationships of Numbers of Spores ofPhytophthora parasiticavar.nicotianaeto Infection and Mortality of Tobacco , 1981 .

[13]  W. Ko,et al.  A selective medium for the quantitative determination of Rhizoctonia solani in soil. , 1971 .

[14]  B. W. Henry.  Control of a root rot of pine seedlings by soil fumigation. , 1950 .