TABLE 2.
Effect of different application methods on tobacco mildew.
| Application method | Isolate | Disease index | Disease rate (%) | Control efficacy (%) |
| Spray | Control | 21.24 ± 0.23a | 61.33 ± 0.91a | NA |
| Y2 | 0.48 ± 0.16b | 4.28 ± 1.45b | 97.76 ± 0.76e | |
| Pb | 1.08 ± 0.04b | 9.69 ± 0.35bc | 94.93 ± 0.18cd | |
| Th-B | 1.78 ± 0.26bc | 16.01 ± 2.31c | 91.62 ± 1.21a | |
| Soak | Control | 21.18 ± 0.11a | 59.22 ± 0.52a | NA |
| Y2 | 0.54 ± 0.11b | 4.88 ± 1.02b | 97.45 ± 0.53e | |
| Pb | 0.89 ± 0.05b | 8.02 ± 0.44b | 95.81 ± 0.23de | |
| Th-B | 1.79 ± 0.13bc | 16.14 ± 1.19c | 91.56 ± 0.62a | |
| Y2/Pb | 1.67 ± 0.22bc | 15.07 ± 1.94c | 92.12 ± 1.02ab | |
| Th-B/Pb | 1.46 ± 0.12b | 13.16 ± 1.06bc | 93.12 ± 0.56abc | |
| Y2/Th-B | 1.22 ± 0.05b | 11.02 ± 0.46bc | 94.24 ± 0.24bcd |
Data are mean ± SD. Different letters after significant difference at p < 0.05 level by Duncan’s test.