Impact of Diversified Chemical and Biostimulator Protection on Yield, Health Status, Mycotoxin Level, and Economic Profitability in Spring Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Cultivation

Abstract

Biostimulators with chemical protection are a challenge in sustainable agriculture to obtain high yield, healthy, and pesticide-free wheat. The aim of this four-year spring wheat field experiment was to assess the effectivity of using herbicide, mixed fungicides protection, and a humic biostimulator. The following treatments were tested: biostimulator (S), sulfosulfuron (H), H + S, H + propiconazole + cyproconazole/spiroxamin + tebuconazole + triadimenol (H + F1 + F2), and H + F1 + F2 + S. Evaluations of wheat yield and fungal diseases (Septoria tritici blotch, eyespot, sharp eyespot, Fusarium spp.) were performed using visual and qPCR methods. Thirteen mycotoxins were analyzed by LC–MS/MS. Infestations of six weeds were examined visually. Temperatures and precipitation data of the vegetative seasons were monitored. Precipitation most affected the occurrence of leaf diseases despite the same chemical/biostimulator treatments (up to 48% Septoria tritici blotch severity for the S treatment). The highest mean yield was obtained for H + F1 + F2 + S (5.27 t ha−1), while the lowest level of mycotoxins was obtained for H + F1 + F2 (221.68 µg kg−1). For H + S, a greater reduction of mycotoxins was determined compared to the H treatment (27.18%), as well as a higher severity of eyespot (18%) and sharp eyespot (24%). For H + F1 + F2, the most effective reduction of weed infestation and Fusarium spp. DNA on ears was indicated (19 m−2 and 0.88 pg g−1 DNA, respectively). The greatest saved production value (890€) was determined for H + F1 + F2 + S.

Development and Validation of an UHPLC-MS/MS Method for the Simultaneous Determination of 11 EU-Regulated Mycotoxins in Selected Cereals

“…Looking at the work of other authors, mainly UHPLC, but also HPLC analytical columns with variations of C18 packing materials were used for chromatographic separation of analytes, maintained at 25–40 °C, with a mobile phase flow of 0.3–1.0 mL/min, mostly consisting of H 2 O and MeOH with the addition of modifiers (AFNH 4 , AA, FA, HAc, etc.) [ 8 , 16 , 25 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 ], confirming MeOH as more suitable for mycotoxin chromatographic separation. In addition, a relatively high percentage (≥75%) of the aqueous mobile phase in the initial conditions was generally maintained, and the injection volume was kept at no more than 20 µL, depending on the column type.…”

“…The dilute-and-shoot principle of sample preparation in mycotoxin determination has also been applied by other authors [ 8 , 16 , 25 , 30 , 31 ], performed using solvent mixtures consisted of H 2 0, ACN and/or MeOH, and FA or HAc, but often in combination with sample extract evaporation and reconstitution. The Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe (QuEChERS) approach was also frequently employed [ 28 , 32 , 33 ]), consisting of acidic acetonitrile extraction/salt mixture partitioning and clean-up by dispersive solid phase extraction, and in certain cases followed by evaporation and reconstitution using a suitable solvent. Compared to the sample preparation methods developed by the aforementioned authors for the analysis of a similar scope of analytes and matrices [ 28 , 29 , 30 , 33 ], the method developed in this work has the same or shorter extraction time for the same analytes, a cheaper preparation procedure and shorter overall sample preparation time, since it does not involve evaporation or reconstitution steps.…”

“…In addition, this developed and validated UHPLC-MS/MS multi-mycotoxin method based on the dilute-and-shoot principle was successfully employed for EU-regulated mycotoxin determination in unprocessed cereal crops grown in Croatian fields, as already published by Kovač et al (2021;2022) [2,3]. A total of 119 cereal samples from the 2016 harvest were analyzed during the cereal multi-contaminant investigation, revealing 8.5% of samples to be non-compliant with the relevant EU mycotoxin legislation, with Fusarium mycotoxin DON being the most frequently occurring (73.7%) [2].…”

Implications of Crop Rotation and Fungicide on Fusarium and Mycotoxin Spectra in Manitoba Barley, 2017–2019

“…The Fusarium species spectra associated with FHB of barley appear be different than that affecting wheat. Fusarium graminearum is typically considered the most prevalent and aggressive FHB pathogen of wheat in the temperate and warmer regions of the United States and Canada [ 31 , 32 ], while in cooler regions of Europe F. graminearum , F. culmorum and F. avenaceum are predominant [ 33 ]. Therefore, research on Fusarium pathogens associated with FHB of barley in these regions has primarily focused on F. graminearum .…”

Deoxynivalenol Biosynthesis in Fusarium pseudograminearum Significantly Repressed by a Megabirnavirus

“…Besides the significant decrease in wheat yield, F. pseudograminearum produces a diverse array of toxic secondary metabolites including mycotoxins [ 10 , 11 ]. Cereals contaminated with mycotoxins are unsuitable for food or feed [ 12 , 13 ]. The mycotoxins produced by Fusarium include trichothecenes, fumonisins, etc.…”