<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJE</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Ecology</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2162-1985</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/oje.2023.131001</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJE-122367</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Evaluation of Fungicides for Effective Management of Leaf and Fruit Spot (&lt;i&gt;Pseudocercospora angolensis&lt;/i&gt;) Disease of Citrus under Field Conditions
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mandefro</surname><given-names>Aslake</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Assefa</surname><given-names>Sintayehu</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Teferi</surname><given-names>Alem</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Merkuz</surname><given-names>Abera</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2"><sup>2</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia</addr-line></aff><aff id="aff2"><addr-line>College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, University of Bahir Dar, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>12</day><month>01</month><year>2023</year></pub-date><volume>13</volume><issue>01</issue><fpage>1</fpage><lpage>8</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>24,</day>	<month>November</month>	<year>2022</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>9,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2023</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>12,</day>	<month>January</month>	<year>2023</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Leaf and fruit spot (
  <em>Pseudocercospora angolensis</em>) disease of citrus attacks leaves, fruits, and young twigs of the plant. The disease can cause a yield loss of (50% to 100%) in areas with high rainfall and humidity during the active growth stages of the crop. Currently, citrus plantations in the south, south-west and north-west of Ethiopia are seriously affected by this disease. As a result, this study was proposed to study the effect of fungicides in controlling. And candidate fungicides were: Carbonchlor 50% SC only, Benline 50% WP only, Bellis 38% WG only, Carbonchlor 50% SC combined with Bellis 38% WG, Benline 50% WP combined with Carbonchlor 50% SC and Benline 50% WP combined with Matco 72% WP for effective management of citrus leaf and fruit spot (
  <em>Pseudocercospra angolensis</em>) disease. The study was carried out in 2021 cropping season. A Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications was the design applied. The result showed that the highest level of efficacy (90.46%) was produced by Bellis 38% WG fungicide followed by Carbonchlor 50% SC (86.50%), Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC (82.00%), Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP (67.89%), Benline 50% WP (65.62%) and Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP (49.48%). Therefore, based on the outcome of the study application of Bellis 38% WG only followed by Carbonchlor 50% SC only, Carbonchlor 50% SC combined with Benline 50% WP, Bellis 38% WG combined with Carbonchlor 50% SC, Bellis 38% WG only, Benline 50% WP only and Matco 72% WP combined with Benline 50% WP were effective fungicides to be used for the control of leaf and fruit spot disease.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Fungicides</kwd><kwd> Severity</kwd><kwd> Infection</kwd><kwd> Citrus</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>In most of the Sub-Saharan African countries the supply of citrus fruits especially sweet orange is far below the demand mainly due to a significant yield loss caused by leaf and fruit spot Pseudocercosporaangolensis disease. Due to its devastating nature and geographic distribution, this disease is considered as a quarantine pest for Europe. And this will critically affect the market linkage of the citrus industry and also the germ plasm exchange between countries. Moreover, this economically important disease can cause a potential threat to the rest of the world, especially to citrus growing areas of the tropical climate [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref1">1</xref>].</p><p>The most devastating effect of the disease on various citrus species is substantial premature abscission of leaves and fruits. And fruits may become blemish and remain on the tree. Infected fruits produce poor quality juice, or become very hard, juiceless and unattractive which are not suitable for market [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref2">2</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref4">4</xref>].</p><p>Leaf and fruit spot disease of citrus attacks leaves, fruits, and young twigs of the plant [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref3">3</xref>]. The disease can cause a yield loss of (50% to 100%) in areas with high rainfall and humidity during the active growth stages of the crop [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref1">1</xref>].</p><p>In Ethiopia, the disease was first reported in 1988 from the Southern part of the country [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref5">5</xref>]. Later, it spreads to South, Southwest, and Northwest parts of the country and cause heavy crop damage, often total crop loss [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref7">7</xref>].</p><p>Currently, citrus plantations in the south, south-west and north-west of Ethiopia are seriously affected by this disease. Consequently, the supply of citrus fruits in these areas has been insufficient for the last ten years. Several small-scale citrus growers have abandoned their trees due to severe infection of citrus by the disease and also the disease is becoming major limiting factor of the citrus industry in the country [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref3">3</xref>].</p><p>Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of fungicides in controlling leaf and fruit spot disease of citrus.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Study Area</title><p>The trial was carried out at Bikolo nursery in Mecha district, North-Western Ethiopia, where the disease was prevalent. The site was located 11˚33'45&quot; North latitude to 37˚16'14&quot; East longitude and at an altitude of 1850 m.a.s.l.</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Treatments, Field Management and Experimental Design</title><p>The test contained seven treatments: Carbonchlor 50% SC, Benline 50% WP, Bellis 38% WG, Carbonchlor 50% SC combined with Bellis 38% WG, Benline 50% WP combined with Carbonchlor 50% SC, Benline 50% WP combined with Matco 72% WP and un-sprayed check. The fungicides were applied based on the manufacturers’ recommendation rate i.e., 20 ml and 20 mg per 10 liters of water for liquid and solid formulations, respectively. In order to spray fungicides thoroughly, Knapsack sprayer was used for applying. And the timing of application was started at the onset of the disease and had been continued at fourteen days of interval until one week left for harvesting. And during application, to avoid drift problem the plots under application were protected with plastic sheet supported by four wooden poles.</p><p>A Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications was the design applied. Consequently, 21 sweet orange trees of Jaffa variety were chosen for the test as experimental unit.</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Disease Assessment</title><p>Disease severity was estimated both on leaves and fruits of the tree. On leaves, it was estimated on eight randomly selected terminal shoots from the upper and lower halves of the canopy in four directions (North, South, East and West) of each selected tree [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref7">7</xref>]. And it was computed based on a zero-to-four scoring scale, where 0 = no symptoms, 1 = 1% to 25%, 2 = 26% to 50%, 3 = 51% to 75% and 4 = above 75% of leaf area infected [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref8">8</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref9">9</xref>].</p><p>On fruits, disease severity was assessed on 5 to 40 randomly selected intact fruits in four directions of each tree [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref7">7</xref>]. And it was recorded using the following zero to four scoring scale, where 0 = healthy, 1 = less than 5%, 2 = 5% to 20%, 3 = 21% - 50% and 4 = above 50% of fruit surface affected [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref10">10</xref>].</p><p>For analysis, severity grades were converted into percentage severity index (PSI) and calculated using the formula suggested by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref11">11</xref>]:</p><p>PSI = Sum of   all numerical ratings Total no . of observations ∗ Maximum disease score ∗ 100</p><p>From the severity data, AUDPC for each treatment was calculated as described by [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref12">12</xref>] as follow:</p><p>AUDPC = ∑ i = 1 n [ ( x i + x i − 1 ) / 2 ] [ t i − t i − 1 ]</p><p>where, x<sub>i</sub> = Present disease severity;</p><p>x<sub>i</sub><sub>-1</sub> = Previous disease severity;</p><p>t<sub>i</sub>− t<sub>i</sub><sub>-1</sub> = Time difference between two consecutive disease severities; and</p><p>n—is the total number of days disease severity was assessed.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Fungicide Efficacy</title><p>The efficacy of fungicides was calculated using [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref13">13</xref>] formula:</p><p>EF ( % ) = X − Y X ∗ 100</p><p>where,</p><p>X—Disease severity in control plots;</p><p>Y—Disease severity in treated plots.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Data Analysis</title><p>All recorded data were analyzed by analysis of variance and tested for comparison of treatments at 0.01/0.05 level of probability using least significant difference (LSD). SAS separate analysis of variance, version 9.2 was the statistical package used for analysis [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.122367-ref14">14</xref>].</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results</title><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Fungicides Effect on the Severity of the Disease</title><p>Significant variations at (P ≤ 0.05) were detected between Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP and Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC, Carbonchlor 50% SC only and Bellis 38% WG. Whereas, there were no significant variation observed among Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP, Benline 50% WP only and Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP. Likewise, significant variation was not observed among Benline 50% WP only, Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP, Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC, Carbonchlor 50% SC only and Bellis 38% WG (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>).</p><p>Furthermore, differences among treatments on the recorded mean disease severity of leaves over time were discerned. Consequently, minimum mean disease severity (PSI) of leaves (1.73%) was recorded in Bellis 38% WG treated trees. However, maximum severity (PSI) (18.15%) was observed in the control plots (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>).</p><p>However, on fruits the highest disease severity (35.66%) was recorded in unsprayed trees. And it was zero in all fruits of trees treated with different fungicides (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>).</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Computed disease severity (PSI) of leaves</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="9"  >Disease severity (PSI)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="9"  >Days after the first spray</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Treatments</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >112</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >126<sup>⁎</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1) Control</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.69</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.39</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.05</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31.85</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37.84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.15<sup>a</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2) Matco 72% Wp + Benline 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.18</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.49</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.17<sup>b</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >3) Benline 50% WP only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.59</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.03</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13.67</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.88</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.24<sup>bc</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >4) Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.48</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.96</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.83<sup>bc</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5) Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.06</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.62</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.27<sup>c</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >6) Carbonchlor 50% WP only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.09</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.92</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.58</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.45<sup>c</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >7) Bellis 38% WG</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.66</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.73<sup>c</sup></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>The day <sup>⁎</sup>126 after the first fungicides spray, is the mean of the three replications; means followed by the same letter are not significantly different by LSD (P &lt; 0.05).</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Recorded disease severity of fruits</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="12"  >Disease severity (PSI)</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="12"  >Days after the first spray</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Treatments</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >70</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >84</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >98</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >112</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >126</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >140</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >156</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >170<sup>⁎</sup></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Carbonchlor 50% SC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bellis 38% WG only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Benline 50% WP only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Check (Control)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >20</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >23.07</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >26.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >27.65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >29.95</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >32.68</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >42.76</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >45.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50.65</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >58.46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >35.66</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p><sup>⁎</sup><sup>⁎</sup>170 days after the first fungicides spray is the mean of the three replications.</p></sec><sec id="s3_2"><title>3.2. Calculated Area under the Disease Progress Curve (AUDPC)</title><p>Low rate of AUDPC (Area Under the Disease Progress Curve) was computed by Bellis 38% WG that was (149.38) followed by Carbonchlor 50% SC (220.92), Bellis 38% WG combined with Carbonchlor 50% SC (292.25), Benline 50% WP combined with Carbonchlor 50% SC (536.55), Benline 50% WP (594.44) and Matco 72% WP combined with Benline 50% WP (867.30). Whereas, it was (1736.56) by the unsprayed check (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>).</p></sec><sec id="s3_3"><title>3.3. Fungicide Efficacy (FE)</title><p>Based on the efficacy level of the fungicides, the highest level of efficacy (90.46%) was produced by Bellis 38% WG treated trees followed by Carbonchlor 50% SC (86.50%), Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC (82.00%), Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP (67.89%), Benline 50% WP (65.62%) and Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP (49.48%) (<xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>).</p></sec></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Discussion</title><p>Significant variations in between fungicides treated plots and un-sprayed check regarding the recorded disease severity percentage of fruits (null) and (35.66%), respectively were observed. And the maximum Area under the Disease Progress</p><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Efficacy of fungicides</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >No</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Treatments</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Disease severity (PSI)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >The level of efficacy</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bellis 38% WG only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >90.46</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Carbonchlor 50% SC only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >86.50</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.27</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >82.00</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.83</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >67.89</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Benline 50% WP only</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >65.62</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.17</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >49.48</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >Control</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >18.15</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >-</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Curve (AUDPC) rate (1736.56) was recorded in the unsprayed check. Moreover, significant difference was also observed between the candidate fungicides and the unsprayed check on their recorded mean disease severity of leaves over time. Consequently, the highest disease severity (PSI) (18.15%) was computed in the control plots. From these, it is possible to discuss that all candidate fungicides were showed effective result in controlling the disease as compared to the unsprayed check.</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Conclusions</title><p>The study result revealed that the highest level of efficacy (90.46%) was produced by Bellis 38% WG treated trees followed by Carbonchlor 50% SC (86.50%), Bellis 38% WG + Carbonchlor 50% SC (82.00%), Carbonchlor 50% SC + Benline 50% WP (67.89%), Benline 50% WP (65.62%) and Matco 72% WP + Benline 50% WP (49.48%).</p><p>Therefore, based on the outcome of the study application of Bellis 38% WG only followed by Carbonchlor 50% SC only, Carbonchlor 50% SC combined with Benline 50% WP, Bellis 38% WG combined with Carbonchlor 50% SC, Bellis 38% WG only, Benline 50% WP only and Matco 72% WP combined with Benline 50% WP were effective fungicides to be used for the control of leaf and fruit spot disease.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Recommendation</title><p>It is further recommended that additional management strategies through host resistance, fungicides integrated with cultural and agronomic practices have to be implemented.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>Our appreciation and thank goes to Mecha District Agricultural Office for allowing us to carry out this field experiment at Bikolo fruit crops nursery site. Our thanks are due to all Bikolo nursery staff members for their assistances and help during the field work.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>We have no conflict of interest to disclose.</p></sec><sec id="s9"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Aslake, M., Sintayehu, A., Alem, T. and Abera, M. (2023) Evaluation of Fungicides for Effective Management of Leaf and Fruit Spot (Pseudocercosporaangolensis) Disease of Citrus under Field Conditions. Open Journal of Ecology, 13, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.4236/oje.2023.131001</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.122367-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Seif, A.A. and Whittle, A.M. (1984) Diseases of Citrus in Kenya. FAO Plant Protection Bulletin, 32, 122-127.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kuate</surname><given-names> J. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1998</year>)<article-title>Citrus Fruit and Leaf Spot Disease Caused by Phaeoramularia angolensis</article-title><source> Cahiers Agricultures</source><volume> 7</volume>,<fpage> 121</fpage>-<lpage>129</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Timmer, L.W., Garnsey, S.M. and Broadbent, P. (2003) Diseases of Citrus. In: Ploetz, R.C., Ed., Diseases of Tropical Fruit Crops, CAB International, Wallingford, 163-195. https://doi.org/10.1079/9780851993904.0163</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chung, K.R. and Timmer, L.W. (2009) Citrus Diseases Exotic to Florida: Phaeoramularia Fruit and Leaf Spot (PFLS) Fact Sheet PP-234. University of Florida, Gainesville.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Yimenu, J. (1993) Preliminary Survey Report on Leaf Spot Disease of Citrus in Sidamo. Coffee Development Authority, Addis Ababa.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mohammed, Y. (2007) Distribution and Management of Phaeoramularia Leaf and Fruit Spot Disease of Citrus in Ethiopia. Fruits, 62, 99-106. https://doi.org/10.1051/fruits:2007003</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Asmare, D., Derbew, B., Belayneh, A. and Mohammed, Y. (2014) Citrus Production, Constraints and Management Practices in Ethiopia: The Case of Pseudocercospora Leaf and Fruit Spot Disease. Science, Technology and Arts Research Journal, 3, 4-18. https://doi.org/10.4314/star.v3i2.2</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Amadi, J.E. (2008) Studies of the Etiology of Leaf Spot of Disease of Rough Lemon (Citrus jambhiri-B. Jamir; H. jhambhiri). Bio-Research, 6, 343-345. https://doi.org/10.4314/br.v6i1.28662</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ezeibekwe</surname><given-names> I.O. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2011</year>)<article-title>Study of Citrus Disease Prevalence on Four Citrus Varieties at the National Institute of Horticultural Research (NIHORT) Mbato, Okigwe, Imo State, Nigeria</article-title><source> African Journal of Plant Science</source><volume> 5</volume>,<fpage> 360</fpage>-<lpage>364</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Seif</surname><given-names> A.A. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1999</year>)<article-title>Reaction of Some Citrus Cultivars to Phaeoramularia Fruit and Leaf Spot in Kenya</article-title><source> Fruits</source><volume> 54</volume>,<fpage> 323</fpage>-<lpage>329</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chaube, H.S. and Singh, U.S. (1991) Plant Disease Management: Principles and Practices. CRC Press, Boca Raton.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Campbell, C.L. and Madden, L.V. (1990) Introduction to Plant Disease Epidemiology. John Wiley and Sons, New York.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Abbott, W.S. (1925) A Method of Computing the Effectiveness of an Insecticide. Journal of Economic Entomology, 18, 265-267. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/18.2.265a</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.122367-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">SAS (Statistical Analysis System) (2011) Version 9.2 Computer Software. https://www.statsoft.com</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>