UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON D.C., 20460 

JUN 0 5· 2014 

MEMORANDUM 

OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY 

AND POLLUTION PREVENTION 

SUBJECT: Qualitative Assessment ofBenefits ofTriflumizole and Other Demethylation 

Inhibiting Fungicides Used on Cherry, Apple, Hazelnut, Grape, Strawberry and 

Cucurbits 

FROM: Leonard Y ourman, Plant Pathologist ~ Biological Analysis Branch ~ v( 

THRU: 

Stephen Smearman, Economist L ~ J 

Economic Analysis Branch ~ ~ 

Rafael Prieto, Environmental Protection Specialist ~t[ -~-- ·. ~ Science and Information Analysis Branch P/vt;Vf c.-

Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) 

Amet Jones, Chief 

Biological Analysis Branch 

Tim Kiely, Chief r<\-

Economic Analysis Branch \J J 

Diann Sims, Chief !{] ~ Science and Information Analysis Branch 

Biological and Economic Analysis Division (7503P) 

TO: Steven Snyderman, Chemical Review Manager 

Risk Management and Implementation Branch III 

Product Reevaluation Division (7508P) 

Product Review Panel: May 28, 2014 

INTRODUCTION 

BEAD examined the characteristics and uses of triflumizole, and by extension some other similar 

fungicides, to qualitatively assess benefits and overall use patterns. This assessment may be used to 

provide further information in a refinement of a risk assessment for triflumizole. BEAD reviewed 

triflumizole uses on cherry, hazelnut, apple, grape, strawberry, and cucurbits because usage 
information indicated substantial use in terms of pounds and/or acres treated. However, triflumizole 

has uses on many crops, which were not evaluated. 

Triflumizole is a demethylation inhibiting (DMI) fungicide, sometimes referred to as sterol 

biosynthesis inhibitor (SBI). All DMI fungicides, are classified by the Fungicide Resistance Action 

Committee (FRAC, 2014) as Group 3 fungicides. Triflumizole is further classified within the DMI 

group as a triazole chemical as are tebuconazole, propiconazole, difenoconazole, and metconazole, 

among several other similarly grouped fungicides. Group 3 fungicides in general are one of the most 

important group of fungicides because of their efficacy against economically significant pathogens. 

They play an integral role as a component of overall fungicide application programs that seek to 

limit the development of resistance to several different fungicide chemistries, including quinone 

outside inhibitors (Qol, Group 11, including azoxystrobin and pyraclostrobin) and succinate 

dehydrogenase inhibitors (Group 7, e.g., boscalid, penthiopyrad). 

For the crops on which triflumizole is commonly used, generally, there are a few to several other 

DMI fungicides registered for the same use. Because resistance to this group of fungicides has 

developed for some important diseases, use restrictions and recommendations apply to Group 3 

fungicides as a whole. In particular, there are restrictions or recommendations against numerous 

sequential applications. 

In this assessment BEAD found that extension services recommended fewer applications per season 

oftriflumizole (and other DMI fungicides) than is allowed by the labels. BEAD proprietary usage 

databases showed average usage oftriflumizole to be fewer than two applications per season (from 

2008-20012) for apple, hazelnut, cherry, raisin and table grapes, squash, and strawberry. In addition, 

due to fewer applications oftriflumizole and programs to alternate with other fungicide groups, 

application intervals were longer between applications oftriflumizole (and other DMI fungicides). 

For apple, cherry, and strawberry, BEAD found that, in general, the average cost per acre of 

triflumizole was higher than for other DMI fungicides. Even so, these crops were treated with 

triflumizole on average at a relatively high percent crop treated, suggesting that growers found 

benefits that can be attributed to triflumizole in comparison to other DMI fungicides. BEAD 

proprietary data indicated that the average use rates (from 2008 to 2012) were on the upper end of 

the label rate range for strawberry, squash, hazelnut, and watermelon, in the mid-range of label rates 

for cherry, grape and cucumber, and at the lower end of the label rate range for apple. 

COMPARISON OF DMI FUNGICIDES 

Powdery mildew is an important disease of apple, cherry, grape, strawberry, and cucurbits 

(cantaloupe, squash, and watermelon). Eastern Filbert Blight is the most important disease in the 

production of hazelnuts. BEAD searched a proprietary database for data on managing powdery 

mildew and eastern filbert blight and compared the rates, preharvest intervals (PHI) and the seasonal 

maximum number of pounds of active ingredient that can be applied for the listed DMI fungicides in 

the tables below. BEAD also compared the costs of several DMI fungicides registered for use on the 

crops presented below. The tables include the total per acre costs to illustrate the difference in cost 

between selected DMI fungicides that can be used on the crops to control either powdery mildew or 

eastern filbert blight. Comparing the cost can provide some indication of value to growers of the use 

oftriflumizole. For example, for apple, cherry, and strawberry the cost of per acre oftriflumizole 

2 
treatments tended to be higher than treatments with other DMI fungicides, yet the percent crop 

treated with triflumizole for these crops was substantial (on average, 25% crop treated for each 

crop). Therefore, it is likely that some attribute(s) were valued by the user in choosing a more costly 

treatment. 

APPLE 

The diseases for which triflumizole is labeled are apple scab (Venturia inaequalis) and powdery 

mildew (Podosphaera leucotricha). Pathogens causing both diseases are known to have developed 

resistance to DMI fungicides in some apple-growing areas, such as New York and California. In the 

Midwest, extension services issued an alert: "The development of strains of the apple scab fungus 

with resistance to the sterol inhibiting or DMI. .. has become a serious problem in the last few years 

in several regions of the Midwest. Five orchards tested for resistance in Ohio in 2005 and two 

orchards in Wisconsin all had very high levels of resistance" (Midwest, 2014). Alternating 

fungicides with different chemistries, therefore, is considered a good management practice. 

Preventing pathogens from infecting plants (e.g., fungicide applications prior to the presence of the 

pathogen) is always more effective than attempting to cure a plant after infection. However, certain 

fungicide groups, such as DMI fungicides, have "kickback" properties and may provide some 

curative activity. For apple scab (in locations where there is no history of resistance) or where 

powdery mildew is prevalent a higher use rate ofDMI fungicides is used. 

Application intervals may depend on scab and powdery mildew disease pressure. Effective disease 

management relies on preventing infection in the spring. Both diseases would likely be treated 

concurrently with the same applications, as opposed to independent treatments. For resistance 

management as well as disease management a seasonal maximum would be two applications. 

Intervals could be 28 days, but depending on the spray schedule (and disease pressure) there might 

be conditions for a 14 day interval, followed by alternating different chemistries. PHI vary among 

registered Group 3 fungicides (Table 1) and may be a factor in the choice of a fungicide depending 

on how late in the season there are disease concerns. The average percent apple crop treated was 

25% from 2004 to 2011 (BEAD, 2013), while the cost to treat with triflumizole was $10-21 per acre 

higher than for other registered DMI fungicides. This likely indicates a benefit placed on 

triflumizole use in choosing a more expensive treatment. 

Apple Scab 

Fungicide applications begin in the spring during wet periods beginning at blossom green tip growth 

stage until petal fall. Several different chemistries are available for alternating, with a total of four to 

six applications and no more than two (possibly three) applications of a Group 3 fungicide (primarily 

dependent on spring wetness). At higher rates Group 3 fungicides (as with some other fungicide 

groups) can provide curative activity, when there is high disease pressure. For resistance 

management, applications of any Group 3 fungicide (Table 1) can be limited to no more than two or 

three times per season, generally at 28 day intervals (e.g., NC, 2014). 

Powdery mildew 

Powdery mildew is managed by pruning affected tips in early spring and applying various fungicides 

to reduce inoculum. Several Group 3 fungicides are available (Table 1) as well as fungicides of 

other modes of action. Applications may be made at petal fall and first cover (in New York around 

3 
May 18-May 29) (Cox, 2007). DMI fungicides and Qoi fungicides performed similarly such that 

there might be one or two applications of a DMI fungicide, such as triflumizole. Rotational 

programs involving DMI fungicides followed by Qoi fungicides were as effective as DMI-only 

programs and can help manage the development of resistance to both fungicide groups. They have 

provided good commercial control during the susceptible five week period. Like managing apple 

scab, powdery mildew can be managed with a fungicide rotation program that could include two 

applications of a DMI fungicide such as triflumizole at 28 day intervals. 

Table 1. DMI (Group 3) fungicides registered for use on apple trees. 

Active A.I.- High Label PHI (days) Max/season Average Cost2 

Ingredient Rate1 (lb/acre) (lb/acre) per Acre($) 

Triflumizole 0.50 14 2.0 28 

Difenoconazole 0.073 72 0.33 7 

Fenarimol 0.094 30 0.657 18 

Flutriafol 0.106 14 0.423 13 

Myclobutanil 0.25 14 2.0 18 

Tebuconazole 0.225 75 1.35 7 

Triadimefon 0.25 45 0.75 13 

1 Only the highest label rate is listed in the table. A rate range was indicated on product labels; 

Generally, the highest label rate was double the low rate listed on the labels. 2 Source: Proprietary Data, 2008 -2012 3 Must also add 0.07 lb cyprodinil per acre, according to the label. 

CHERRY 

Although product labels suggest a possible six applications oftriflumizole (and other DMI 

fungicides), extension information indicates acceptable results from one or two applications, or up to 

three under extreme disease pressure conditions. This is primarily because the important cherry 

pathogens causing powdery mildew (Podosphaera clandestina) and cherry leaf spot (Blumeriella 

jaapii) are known to have developed resistance to DMI fungicides (as well as to other fungicide 

groups). There was no differentiation of efficacy among individual fungicides, rather 

recommendations were for use of a Group 3 fungicide. However, the average percent cherry crop 

treated was 25% from 2004 to 2011 (BEAD, 2013) and the cost to treat with triflumizole was $6-20 

per acre higher than for other registered DMI fungicides. This suggests some benefit attributed 

specifically to triflumizole, in spite of higher costs per acre (Table 2). 

Different production regions may have different cherry cultivars and different disease pressure and 

disease pressure varies from year to year-therefore, one region may not use a Group 3 fungicide 

and another may need two or three applications depending on needs for individual years. PHI for 

registered Group 3 fungicides vary slightly, but are relatively short. However, there may be 

situations where PHI is factored into the choice for use of an individual fungicide late in the season 

(Table 2). 

Tart Cherry (Michigan) 

Powdery mildew (Sundin, 2013a) and cherry leaf spot (Sundin, 2013b) are the two major diseases of 

tart cherry in Michigan. Michigan State University extension information indicates that Group 3 

fungicides are not the primary fungicide group used against either disease due to lower efficacy and 

resistance development. Extension recommended newer succinate dehydrogenase inhibiting (SDHI) 

4 
fungicides (Group 7) and trifloxystrobin (Group 11) rather than DMI fungicides although there is a 

concern for resistance development with these other fungicide groups as well. If resistance develops 

significantly to Group 7 or 11, DMI fungicides may be considered useful. 

Sweet Cherry 

Powdery mildew is an important disease of sweet cherries in Washington. The DMI fungicides were 

routinely used to manage the disease in orchards and nurseries beginning in the late 1980s (Grove, 

2000). These fungicides became the primary fungicides used for managing powdery mildew in 

Washington. Up to eight applications at 10- to 14-day intervals were routinely made when disease 

pressure was severe. According to Grove (2000) the first reports ofDMI-related control failures 

occurred in the mid-1990s. Fungicide alternation programs consisting of one or two early spray oil 

applications followed by strobilurin and DMI treatments at 14-day intervals provided disease control 

superior to that obtained with DMI fungicides used alone. Using this approach, the number of 

applications of DMI or strobilurin fungicides was limited to no more than two per season, which 

conforms to the fungicide resistance management guidelines developed by FRAC. Washington 

State University guidelines for powdery mildew on eastern Washington cherry is that Group 3 

fungicides "should be applied no more than 3 times per season and no more than twice in sequence" 

(WSU, 2013). Some recommendations are more conservative with regard to resistance management 

in that no more than two applications of any mode of action be applied per season and there should 

be no sequential applications (Grove, 2010). California (UC-Cherry, 2013) guidelines for powdery 

mildew management state "do not use the same fungicide or fungicides with similar chemistry more 

than twice in one year, to reduce the potential for the development of resistance by the pathogen to 

the fungicide." For midwestern state cherry growers, recommendations for managing cherry leaf 

spot included a total of seven fungicide applications, ofwhich only one was a DMI fungicide 

(Midwest, 2014). Generally, due to recommendations of fewer applications than labels allow, 

intervals between applications oftriflumizole and other DMI fungicides would increase, likely to 

greater than 28 days. 

Table 2. DMI (Group 3) fungicides registered for use on cherry trees. 

Active A.I.- High PHI Max/season Average Cost2 

Ingredient Label Rate1 (days) (lb/acre) per Acre($) 

(lb/acre) 

Triflumizole 0.50 I 3.0 33 

Fenarimol 0.094 0 0.28 22 

Flutriafol 0.114 7 0.455 N/R* 

Metconazole 0.125 14 0.375 27 

Myclobutanil 0.15 0 1.3 20 

Propiconazole 0.113 0 0.56 13 

Tebuconazole 0.225 0 1.35 18 

1 Only the highest label rate is listed in the table. A rate range was indicated on product labels; 

Generally, the highest label rate was double the low rate listed on the labels. 2 Source: Proprietary Data, 2008 -2012 

*No use was reported, therefore cost was not available. 

HAZELNUT (FILBERT) 

Eastern Filbert Blight (EFB) is the most important disease of hazelnuts. Fungicide programs for its 

control have been well established and include one or two applications of a DMI fungicide 

alternating with other fungicide modes of action. Oregon State University Extension recommends a 

5 
program to alternate fungicides by modes of action. A total of four applications of fungicides are 

recommended with applications beginning in the spring at bud break (PNW, 2014; Pscheidt, 2013). 

Fungicide applications are made two weeks apart for eight weeks (thus, four applications). A Group 

3 fungicide (Table 3) could be applied one or two times. Oregon research indicates that one or two 

applications of chlorothalonil followed by one or two of a Group 3 fungicide provided 97% control 

(OSU, 2013). Alternating fungicides with different modes of action has been effective to manage 

EFB. According to Oregon State University they have not determined that any one strategy for 

alternating fungicides is better than any other strategy (Pscheidt, 2013). Of four fungicide groups 

available extension recommended that the first application be chlorothalonil (Group M5) followed 

by a Group 3 or 11 (Qoi, e.g., azoxystrobin) fungicide. Each ofthe next two applications would be 

different from the previous one. An example provided by extension would be a first application of 

chlorothalonil at bud break, followed by trifloxystrobin (Group 11) two weeks later, then 

propiconazole (Group 3) two weeks after that and ending with pyraclostrobin (Group 11). PHI for 

registered Group 3 fungicides differ (Table 3) although given the spring applications the effect on 

harvest may be minimal. Intervals between applications of a DMI fungicide may be 28 days. While 

used only once or twice per season to manage EFB, DMI fungicides appear to be an important 

component of the overall fungicide program for both disease control and resistance management. 

The cost to treat with triflumizole was similar to propiconazole or tebuconazole. Metconazole was 

substantially more per acre than other DMI fungicides that were examined. On average 5 percent of 

the hazelnut crops were treated with triflumizole between 2004 and 2011 (BEAD, 2013). The low 

percent crop treated might be attributed to the various other fungicides available for the fourfungicide spray program that might be preferable with an unknown characteristic. 

Table 3. DMI (Group 3) fungicides registered for managing eastern filbert blight 

on hazelnut trees. 

A.I.- High PHI Max/season Average 

Active Ingredient Label Rate1 

(days) (lb/acre) Cost1 per 

(lb/acre) Acre($) 

Triflumizole 0.188 18 0.75 18 

Difenoconazole (premix 0.1153 45 0.46 NIR"' 

w/azoxystrobin)_ 

Metconazole 0.11 25 0.438 32 

Propiconazole 0.225 60 0.9 14 

Tebuconazole 0.225 36 0.9 18 

1 Only the highest label rate is listed in the table. A rate range was indicated on product labels; 

Generally, the highest label rate was double the low rate listed on the labels. 2 Source: Proprietary Data, 2008 -2012 3 Difenoconazole rate. 

• No use was reported, therefore cost was not available. 

GRAPE 

Powdery mildew can be a problem in grapes where there is unusually wet spring weather. DMI 

fungicides (Table 4) as well as several other fungicides with different modes of action are registered 

to manage powdery mildew (Erysiphe necator) on grape (e.g., UC-Grape, 2014). In California, 

Group 3 fungicides were recommended at 21 day intervals except in epidemic conditions where 10-

14 day intervals are recommended. No more than two sequential applications were recommended. 

At the high use rate four applications per season would be allowed. Except with epidemic pressure, 

a Group 3 fungicide might be used after 21 day or a fungicide with another mode of action can be 

6 
used. In the latter case, application of a Group 3 fungicide would not occur earlier than 42 day after 

the first. Washington State University Extension recommended no more than three applications of a 

Group 3 fungicide per season and not more than two sequential applications (WSU, 2012a; WSU, 

2012b). One product label for tetraconazole limits applications to three per season. 

PHI varies among registered Group 3 fungicides and might be a factor in the fungicide choice. 

Approximately 5 percent ofthe grape crops were treated with triflumizole between 2004 and 2011 

(BEAD, 2013). Costs of treating with DMI fungicides were similar. The low percent crop treated 

suggests that there are other preferable treatments available, or powdery mildew may not be a 

problem currently, for example, due to dry conditions in California in recent years,. 

Table 4. DMI (Group 3) fungicides registered for use on grapevines. 

Active A.I.- High Label Rate1 

PHI (days) Max/season Average Costl 

Instredient (lb/acre) (lb/acre) per Acre($) 

Triflumizole 0.25 7 1.0 18 

Fenarimol 0.05 21 0.15 13 

Myclobutanil 0.125 14 0.6 NIR* 

Tebuconazole 0.113 14 0.9 18 

Tetraconazole 0.04 14 0.08 NIR* 

Triadimefon2 0.1875 14 0.56 NIR* 

1 Only the highest label rate is listed in the table. A rate range was indicated on product labels; 

Generally, the highest label rate was double the low rate listed on the labels. 

2 Not recommended by Midwestern extension services (UKY, 2014; 

http://www2.ca.uky.edu/agcollege/plantpathology/ext files/PPFShtml/ID-94.pdf) 

3 Source: Proprietary Data, 2008 -2012 

*No use was reported, therefore cost was not available. 

STRAWBERRY 

Powdery mildew (Sphaerotheca macularis) can be managed by alternating DMI fungicides with 

fungicides of different modes of action (UC-Strawberry, 2008). California recommendations for 

powdery mildew control are one fungicide application one month after planting and again 30 days 

later. In the eastern U.S. powdery mildew may be a concern in the spring and might warrant 

alternating quinoxyfen, a Qoi fungicide (Group 11), and a Group 3 fungicide (MD, 2013). For 

powdery mildew on strawberry a Group 3 fungicide can be applied two to three times at 28-42 day 

intervals, depending on the designated spray schedule. Approximately 25 percent of the strawberry 

crops were treated with triflumizole between 2004 and 2011 (BEAD, 2013). Costs of treating with 

DMI fungicides were $7-14 per acre higher for triflumizole than for some other DMI fungicides. 

The relatively high percent crop treated and the higher cost per acre indicates a possible advantage in 

using triflumizole as opposed to other DMI fungicides. 

7 
Table 5. DMI (Group 3) fungicides registered for use on strawberry. 

Active A.I.- High Label PHI (days) Max/season Average Cost2 

Ingredient Rate (lb/acre) (lb/acre) per Acre (_$}_ 

Triflumizole 0.25 1 0.75 24 

Myclobutanil 0.125 0 0.75 17 

Propiconazole 0.113 0 0.45 10 

Tetraconazole 0.04 0 0.16 N/R* 

1 Only the highest label rate is listed in the table. A rate range was indicated on product labels; 

Generally, the highest label rate was double the low rate listed on the labels. 

2 Source: Proprietary Data, 2008 -2012 

* No use was reported, therefore cost was not available. 

CUCURBITS 

Triflumizole, myclobutanil, and tebuconazole are the common Group 3 fungicides (Table 6) used for 

managing powdery mildew (Sphaerothecafuliginea) on cucurbit crops. Powdery mildew affects all 

cucurbits but, generally, has impacted watermelon least (UC-Cucurbits, 2012). Approximately 5 

percent ofthe watermelon crops were treated with triflumizole between 2004 and 2011 (BEAD, 

2013). However, in recent years the incidence of powdery mildew on watermelon has increased in 

the eastern U.S. (Everts, 2011). Where confirmed on watermelon, a DMI fungicide is recommended 

mixed with chlorothalonil and alternated with quinoxyfen + chlorothalonil. An additional 

application may be necessary if infection is severe. Thus, one or two applications of a Group 3 

fungicide can be used for powdery mildew control. In Florida, failure to manage powdery mildew 

on cucumber and squash can have economic impacts (Nufiez-Palenius et al., 2012). 

Group 3 fungicides may not be the most effective group of fungicides for powdery mildew on 

cucurbits, but they can play a role in a resistance management program that includes other modes of 

action (NJ, 2013). Cultivars with tolerance to powdery mildew pathogens may be available for 

melons and squash and may reduce the incidence of the disease. Resistance by powdery mildew 

pathogens to Group 3 fungicides is known in the eastern U.S. (MD, 2013). Where melon pathogens 

remain sensitive Group 3 fungicides are alternated with two other modes of action from mid-July to 

September. Two or three applications of Group 3 fungicides can be alternated with other modes of 

action. Effective application intervals could be 21-28 days or longer. Costs oftreating with DMI 

fungicides were somewhat higher for triflumizole (Table 6). The low percent crop treated may 

indicate that powdery mildew is generally not a major problem or that there are effective alternatives 

that are more often used. 

Table 6. DMI (Grou~ 3) fungicides registered for use on cucurbits. 

Active A.I.- High Label Max/season Average 

PHI (days) Cost2 per Ingredient Rate (lb/acre) (lb/acre) Acre($) 

Tri/lumizole 0.25 0 1.25 21 

Myclobutanil 0.125 0 0.6 16 

Tebuconazole 0.225 7 0.675 5 

1 Only the highest label rate is listed in the table. A rate range was indicated on product labels; 

Generally, the highest label rate was double the low rate listed on the labels. 2 Source: Proprietary Data, 2008 -2012 

8 
CONCLUSION 

BEAD reviewed use patterns for triflumizole and other Group 3 fungicides for selected crops and 

important target diseases. BEAD found that extension services recommended fewer applications per 

season oftriflumizole (and other DMI fungicides) than is allowed by the labels. BEAD proprietary 

usage databases showed average usage of triflumizole to be fewer than two applications per season 

(from 2008-20012) for apple, hazelnut, cherry, raisin and table grapes, squash, and strawberry. In 

addition, due to fewer applications of triflumizole and programs to alternate with other fungicide 

groups, application intervals were longer between applications oftriflumizole (and other DMI 

fungicides). However, as an "average" number indicates, there may be conditions, such as high 

disease pressure, where more than two applications or shorter intervals might be used and warranted. 

For apple, cherry, and strawberry, BEAD found that, in general, the average cost per acre of 

triflumizole was higher than for other DMI fungicides. Even so, these crops each averaged 25 

percent crop treated, suggesting that benefits can be attributed to triflumizole in comparison to other 

DMI fungicides. A decision to use triflumizole may depend on greater efficacy against a specific 

disease on a particular crop, or possibly differences in plant back restrictions for rotational crops (not 

evaluated here), differences in PHI, product distribution availability, etc. For hazelnut, grape, and 

cucurbits the low percent crop treated and relatively similar costs ofDMI fungicides may indicate 

that triflumizole, or DMI fungicides in general, are either not instrumental in disease management 

(possibly due to alternative methods of disease control) or that the target diseases have not been a 

concern for growers in recent years. 

BEAD proprietary data indicated that the average use rates (from 2008 to 2012) were on the upper 

end of the label rate range for strawberry, squash, hazelnut, and watermelon, in the mid-range of 

label rates for cherry, grape and cucumber, and at the lower end of the label rate range for apple. 

Not all Group 3 alternative fungicides or products were considered here, nor were all labeled target 

diseases. Many disease management recommendations for DMI fungicides were as a group such 

that recommendations for spray programs suggested "Group 3 fungicides" rather than individual 

active ingredients. For the scenarios examined by BEAD there are alternative DMI fungicides from 

which growers may choose. While BEAD did not find information attesting to substantially 

different efficacy for triflumizole compared to other DMI fungicides, it is possible for specific crops 

and diseases that there would be efficacy differences among DMI fungicides and, therefore, a reason 

to choose one versus another DMI fungicide. The higher cost per acre for triflumizole for some 

crops and relatively high percent crop treated indicates benefits that may be specific for triflumizole. 

REFERENCES 

BEAD. 2013. Triflumizole (128879) Screening Level Usage Analysis (SLUA). Biological and 

Economic Analysis Division, Office of Pesticide Programs, US Environmental Protection Agency. 

January 30, 2013. 

9 
Cox, K. 2007. Evaluating fungicide programs for apple powdery mildew-Summary of 1st year data 

from Geneva NYSAES. New York Fruit Quarterly 15 (3):11-15. http://www.nyshs.org/pdf/fg/2007-

Volume-15N ol-15-No-3/Evaluating-Fungicide-Programs-for-Apple-Powdery-Mildew-Summary-of1 st-Year-Data-trom-Geneva-NYSAES.pdf 

Everts, K. 2011. Powdery Mildew on Watermelon. University ofDelaware Extension. 

http:/ /agdev .anr. udel.edu/weeklycropupdate/?tag=watermelon-powdery -mildew 

FRAC. 2014. Fungicide Resistance Action Committee Code List: Fungicides Sorted by Mode of 

Action. http://www .frac.info/publication/anhang/20 14%20 FRA C%20C ode%20List. pdf 

Grove, G. G. 2010. Powdery Mildews-General Biology. Presentation. 

http://www.utahhort.org/talks/20 1 0/Grove USHA20 1 O.pdf 

Grove, G. G. 2000. Managing powdery mildew of cherry in Washington orchards and nurseries with 

spray oils. Plant Health Progress, July 28, 2000. 

http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/php/research/sprayoil/ 

MD. 2013. Commercial Vegetable Production Recommendations. University of Maryland 

Extension. http:/ /extension.umd.edu/sites/default/files/ docs/EB-236 20 13RecGuide.pdf 

Midwest. 2014. Midwest Tree Fruit Spray Guide. Consortium of state extension. 

http://www.extension.iastate.edu/publications/pm 1282.pdf 

NC. 2014. 2014 North Carolina Agricultural Chemical Manual. http://ipm.ncsu.edu/agchem/6-

toc.pdf 

NJ. 2013.2013 Fungicide Resistance Management Guidelines for Cucurbit Downy Mildew and 

Powdery Mildew Contol in the mid-Atlantic & Northeast Regions of the United States. Rutgers 

University. http:/ /plant-pest-advisory.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/20 13/06/20 13-FRACguidelines-for-CDM -and-PM FIN AL-mtm.pdf 

Nufiez-Palenius, H. G., Hopkins, D. and Cantliffe, D. J. 2012. Powdery Mildew ofCucurbits in 

Florida. University of Florida Extension Publ. HS1067. http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/hs321 

OSU. 2013. Eastern Filbert Blight-Tables of Registered Material. Oregon State University 

Extension. http://oregonstate.edu/dept/botany/epp/EFB/management/applytables.htm#table4 

PNW. 2014. Hazelnut (Corylus avellana)-Eastern Filbert Blight. Pacific Northwest Plant Disease 

Mangment Handbook. http:/ /pnwhandbooks.org/plantdisease/hazelnut -cory lus-avellana-easternfilbert-blight 

Pscheidt, J. W. 2013. Strategies for using fungicides for management of eastern filbert blight. 

Oregon State University Extension. 

http://oregonstate.edu/dept/botany/epp/EFB/management/applyintro.htm 

Sundin, G. 2013a. Controlling powdery mildew in tart cherry orchards. Michigan State University 

Extension. http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/controlling powdery mildew in tart cherry orchards 

10 
Sundin, G. 2013b. Fungicide considerations for cherry leaf spot control at first cover. Michigan State 

University Extension. 

http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/fungicide considerations for cherry leaf spot control at first cove 

! 

UC-Cherry. 2013. University of California Pest Management Guidelines-Cherry: Powdery 

Mildew. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/rl 051 00411.html 

UC-Cucurbits. 2012. University of California Pest Management Guidelines-Cucurbits: Powdery 

Mildew. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r116100711.html 

UC-Grape. 2014. University of California Pest Management Guidelines-Grape: Powdery 

Mildew. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r3021 0031l.html 

UC-Strawberry. 2008. University of California Pest Management Guidelines-Strawberry: 

Powdery Mildew. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r734100711.html 

UKY. 2014. Midwest Small Fruit and Grape Spray Guide. Consortium of Midwest University 

Extension Services, OSU Bulletin 861. 

http://www2.ca.uky.edu/agcollege/plantpathology/ext files/PPFShtml/ID-94.pdf 

WSU. 2012a. Powdery Mildew in Western Washington Commercial Grape Production: Biology and 

Disease Management. Washington State University Extension Publ. EM059E. 

http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/EM059E/EM059E.pdf 

WSU. 2013. Powdery mildew of cherry: New fungicide tools and resistance management guidelines. 

Washington State University Extension, April!, 2013. 

http:/ldas.wsu.edu/news/story/2013/04/01 /Powdery Mildew of Cherry New Fungicide Tools and 

Resistance Management Guidelines 

WSU. 2012b. Powdery Mildew in Eastern Washington Commercial Grape Production: Biology and 

Disease Management. Washington State University Extension Publ. EM058E. 

http://cru.cahe.wsu.edu/CEPublications/EM058E/EM058E.pdf 

11