Advertisement

Inorganic sulfur as a fungicide

  • B. G. Tweedy
Conference paper
Part of the Residue Reviews book series (RECT, volume 78)

Abstract

Elemental sulfur is undoubtedly the oldest of all pesticides. Much of the early history of this pesticide is lost, but its pesticidal properties were known by the ancient Greeks as early as 1000 B.C. FORSYTH (1802) first recorded the recommendation of sulfur for the control of diseases. His recommendation for the control of powdery mildew on fruit trees was a concoction of quicklime, sulfur, elderberry bud, and tobacco. ROBERTSON (1824) reported at the London Horticultural Society that sulfur was the only effective remedy that he knew for the control of mildew on peaches. He recommended the addition of soap to augment disease control; thus the use of surfactants to enhance pesticidal properties is not a modern innovation. ROBERTSON further emphasized the importance of complete coverage for improved disease control. Later MEARNS (1835) recommended that sulfur be mixed with soft soap and barnyard manure for the control of mildew on roses. In 1841, MEARNS recommended a mixture of alcohol and sulfur for the control of powdery mildew on peaches. He recognized the importance of early applications and stated that the mixture should be painted on the branches during dormancy in early spring.

Keywords

Powdery Mildew Hydrogen Sulfide Carbon Disulfide Fungicidal Action Electron Transport System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abo-el-Ghar, M. R., and H. B. Boudreaux: Comparative responses of five species of spider mites to four acaracides. J. Econ. Entomol. 51, 518 (1958).Google Scholar
  2. Agnew, E. L., and N. F. Childers: The effect of two mild sulfur sprays on the photosynthetic activity of apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 37, 379 (1939).Google Scholar
  3. Ahlström, L., H. Euler, I. Gernow, and B. Hägglund: Über die Hydrierung des Schwefels durch Hefe und durch schwefelhaltige organische Stoffe. Arkiv Kemi 18, Paper No. 20, 1 (1944).Google Scholar
  4. Barker, B. T. P.: Investigations on the fungicidal actions of sulfur. Ann. Rept. Agricultural Horticulture Research Station, Long Ashton, Bristol, p. 72 (1927).Google Scholar
  5. Barker, B. T. P.:Investigations on the fungicidal action of sulfur. Ann. Rept. Agricultural Horticulture Research Station, Long Ashton, Bristol, p. 130 (1929).Google Scholar
  6. Barker, B. T. P., and T. A. Wallace: A new method of sulfur fumigation. Ann. Rept. Agricultural Horticulture Research Station, Long Ashton, Bristol, p. 122 (1922).Google Scholar
  7. Barker, B. T. P., C. T. Gimingham, and S. P. Wiltshire: Sulphur as a fungicide. Ann. Rept. Agricultural Horticulture Research Station, Long Ashton, Bristol, p. 57 (1920 a).Google Scholar
  8. Barker, B. T. P., C. T. Gimingham, and S. P. Wiltshire: Investigations of the fungicidal action of sulfur. Ann. Res. Rept. Agricultural Horticulture Research Station, Long Ashton, Bristol, p. 72 (1920 b).Google Scholar
  9. Barratt, R. W., and J. G. Horsfall: Fungicidal action of metallic alkyl bisdiothio-carbamate. Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, New Haven, Bull. 508 (1947).Google Scholar
  10. Bergmann, M.: Gardner’s Chron. 12, 419 (1852).Google Scholar
  11. Brody, H. W., and N. F. Childers: The effect of dilute liquid lime-sulphur sprays on the photosynthesis of apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 36, 205 (1939).Google Scholar
  12. Burrell, A. B.: A six-year comparison of lime-sulphur and flotation sulphur as to yield and growth of young Mclntosh apple trees. Phytopathol. 33, 1 (Abstr.) (1943).Google Scholar
  13. Byrde, R. J. W., J. T. Martin, and D. J. D. Nicholas: Effect of fungicides on fungus enzymes. Nature 178, 638 (1956).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Christopher, E. P.: The effects of flotation sulphur sprays on the CO2 assimilation of apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 33, 149 (1936).Google Scholar
  15. Christopher, E. P.:Influence of sulphur sprays on the trunk diameter of young apple trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 39, 8 (1941).Google Scholar
  16. Christopher, E. P.: A comparison of lime-sulphur and flotation and sulphur on apple trees. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 40, 63 (1942).Google Scholar
  17. Cordley, A. B.: Lime-sulfur spray to prevent apple scab. Better Fruit 3, 26 (1908).Google Scholar
  18. Cugini, G.: Sulla alimentazione delle piante cellulari. Just’s Bontanischer Jahresben. 4, 113(1876).Google Scholar
  19. Dabrowski, K. T.: Toksycznöśc pestycydöw ala drapieznych roztoczy (Phytoseiidat, Acarina) wystepujacych w sadach jabloniowych. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych, Seria A 95, 265 (1970 a).Google Scholar
  20. Dabrowski, K. T.: Badania nad dzialaniem nastepczym pestycydow na przedziorki (tetranychidae) i drapiezne roztocze (phytosiidae) w sadach jabloniowych. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych, Seria E 1, 1 and 7 (1970b).Google Scholar
  21. Doran, W. L.: Laboratory studies of the toxicity of some sulfur fungicides. New Hampshire State Agricultural Experiment Station, Tech. Bull. 19 (1922).Google Scholar
  22. Eyre, J. V., and E. S. Salmon: The fungicidal properties of certain spray fluids. J. Agr. Sci. 7, 473 (1916).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Farm Chemicals Handbook: Willoughby, Ohio: Meister Publishing Company (1964).Google Scholar
  24. Farm Chemicals Handbook: Willoughby, Ohio: Meister Publishing Company (1980). Food and Agricultural Organization: Production Yearbook 17, 286 (1973).Google Scholar
  25. Foreman, F. W.: The fungicidal properties of lime sulphur. J. Agr. Sci. 3, 400 (1910).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Forsyth, W.: A treatise on the culture and management of fruit trees. London: Nichols and Son (1802).Google Scholar
  27. Goodwin, W., and H. Marshall: The action of sulphur as a fungicide and as an acaricide. Part I. Ann. Applied Biol. 15, 623 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Griffiths, J. T., and F. E. Fisher: Residues on citrus trees in Florida: Change in purple scale and rust mite populations following the use of various spray materials. J. Econ. Entomol. 43, 299 (1950).Google Scholar
  29. Groves, A. B.: Comparative effect of limesulfur and flotation sulfur on tree growth and fruit yield. Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, Tech. Bull. 103, p. 1 (1946).Google Scholar
  30. Halstead, B. D.: Sulfur for the control of diseases. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, Spec. Bull. 8 (1900).Google Scholar
  31. Hamilton, J. M.: Studies of the fungicidal action of certain dusts and sprays in the control of apple scab. Phytopathol. 21, 445 (1931).Google Scholar
  32. Hoffman, M. B.: The effect of certain spray materials on the carbon dioxide assimilation by Mclntosh apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 29, 389 (1933).Google Scholar
  33. Hoffman, M. B.: Carbon dioxide assimilation by apple leaves as affected by lime-sulphur sprays. II. Field experiments. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 30, 1969 (1934).Google Scholar
  34. Hoffman, M. B.: The effect of lime-sulphur spray on the respiration rate of apple leaves. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 33, 173 (1936).Google Scholar
  35. Holloway, J. K., C. F. Henderson, and H. V. Mcburnee: The effect of magnesium deficiency on infestations of purple scale on citrus. J. Econ. Entomol. 35, 348 (1942).Google Scholar
  36. Howlett, F. S., and C. May: The relation of lime-sulphur to the abcission of young apples. Phytopathol. 19, 1001 (1929).Google Scholar
  37. Ishimoto, M., J. Kayoma, T. Yagi, and M. Shiraki: Biochemical studies on sulfate-reducing bacteria. VII. Purification of the cytochrome of sulfate-reducing bacteria and its physiological role. Biochem. J. 44, 413 (1957 a).Google Scholar
  38. Ishimoto, M., T. Yagi, and M. Shiraki: Biochemical studies on sulfate-reducing bacteria. VIII. The function of cytochrome of sulfate-reducing bacteria in decomposition of formate and reduction of sulfur and hydroxy lamine. Biochem. J. 44, 707 (1957 b).Google Scholar
  39. Latimer, W. M., and J. H. Hildebrand: Reference book of inorganic chemistry. New York: MacMillan (1951).Google Scholar
  40. Lee, H. A., and J. P. Martin: The development of more effective dust fungicides by adding oxidizing agents to sulphur. Science 66, 178 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Long, C.: Biochemists’ handbook. London: Spon (1961).Google Scholar
  42. Mccallan, S. E. A., and F. Wilcoxon: The fungicidal action of sulphur. II. The production of hydrogen sulfide by sulphured leaves and spores and its toxicity to spores. Contrib. Boyce-Thompson Inst. 3, 13 (1931).Google Scholar
  43. Mccallan, S. E. A., A. Hartsell, and F. Wilcoxon: Hydrogen sulfide injury to plants. Contrib. Boyce-Thompson Inst. 8, 189 (1936).Google Scholar
  44. Mccallan, S. E. A., and L. P. Miller: Equimolar formation of carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide when fungus tissue reduces sulfur. Contrib. Boyce-Thompson Inst. 18, 497 (1957).Google Scholar
  45. Mcdaniel, A. S.: Colloidal bentonite sulfur. A new fungicide. Ind. Eng. Chem. 26, 340 (1934).Google Scholar
  46. Mach, E.: Weinlaube, Berlin. II, 113 (1879) (after MARTIN 1964).Google Scholar
  47. Mach, E., and K. Portele: Weinlaube, Berlin 16, 433 (1884) (after MARTIN 1964).Google Scholar
  48. Mackie, W. W., and F. N. Briggs: Fungicidal dusts for the control of bunt. Calif. Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 364 (1923).Google Scholar
  49. Mangini: Weinlaube, Berlin 3, 18 (1871) (after MARTIN 1964).Google Scholar
  50. Marcille, N.: Sur le mode d’action des soufres utilises pour combattre l’oidium. Compt. Rend. 152, 780 (1911).Google Scholar
  51. Markosyan, Zh. K.: Effect of pesticides on trees under hot-house conditions. Through Chem. Abstr. 73, pt. 6, Sec. 2, no. 130138u (1970).Google Scholar
  52. Marsh, R. W.: Investigations on the fungicidal action of sulfur. III. Studies on the toxicity of sulphuretted hydrogen and on the interaction of sulphur with fungi. J. Hort. Sci. 7,237 (1929).Google Scholar
  53. Martin, H.: The hydrolysis of sulphur in relation to its fungicidal activity. J. Agr. Sci. 20,32 (1930).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Martin, H., and E. S. Salmon: The fungicidal properties of certain spray fluids. IX. The fungicidal properties of the products of hydrolysis of sulphur. J. Agr. Sci. 22, 595 (1932).Google Scholar
  55. Mearns, J.: London Horticultural Society (1835) (after SHARVELL 1961).Google Scholar
  56. Millardet, P. M. A.: Traitement on mildiou par le mélange de sulphate de cuivre et du chaux. J. Agr. Prat. 2, 707 (1885).Google Scholar
  57. Miller, L. P., S. E. A. Mccallan, and R. M. Weed: Quantitative studies on the role of hydrogen sulfide formation in the toxic action of sulfur to fungus spores. Contrib. Boyce-Thompson Inst. 17, 151 (1953).Google Scholar
  58. Mills, W. D.: Leaf growth as affected by spray materials. Proc. N. Y. State Hort. Sci. 82,211 (1937).Google Scholar
  59. Moeller, T.: Inorganic chemistry, an advanced textbook. New York: Wiley (1952).Google Scholar
  60. Owens, R. G.: Effects of elemental sulfur, dithiocarbamates and related fungicides on organic acid metabolism of fungus spores. Develop. Ind. Microbiol. 1, 187 (1960).Google Scholar
  61. Parrott, P. J., S. A. Beach, and F. A. Sirrino: Sulfur washes for orchard treatment. II. New York State Agr. Expt. Sta., Geneva, N. Y. Bull. 262, 37 (1905).Google Scholar
  62. Pesticide Use Report—Third Quarter 1976. Department of Food and Agriculture, State of California; p. 151 (1976).Google Scholar
  63. Pierce, N. B.: Peach leaf cure, its nature and treatment. U.S. Dept. Agr., Div. Veg. Physiol and Pathol. Bull. 20, 1 (1900).Google Scholar
  64. Pollacci, E.: Delia ragione per cui il solfo uccide l’oidio delia vite, e sulla emmissione d’idrogeno libero dalle piante. Gazz. Chim. Ital. 5, 45 (1875).Google Scholar
  65. Pollacci, E.: Oxydation spontanée du soufre et des sulfures métallique et méttalloideques. Monit. Sci. 22,373 (1908).Google Scholar
  66. Pomeranz, H. Z.: Farb. Text. Ind. 4, 392 (1905) (after MARTIN 1930).Google Scholar
  67. Postgate, J.: Sulphate reduction by bacteria. Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 13, 505 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. de Ray-Pailhade, J.: Novvelles recherches physiologigues sen la substance organique hydrogénant le soufre a froid. Compt. Rend. 107, 43 (1888 a).Google Scholar
  69. de Ray-Pailhade, J.: Sur un corps d’ origine organizue hydrogénant le soufre a’ froid. Compt. Rend. 106,1683 (1888b).Google Scholar
  70. Roach, W. A.: Sulfur as a soil fungicide against the potato wart disease organism. J. Agr. Sci. 20,74 (1930).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Roach, W. A., and M. D. Glynne: The toxicity of certain sulphur compounds to Synchytrium endobioticum, the fungus causing wart disease of potatoes. Ann. Applied Biol. 15, 168 (1928).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Roach, W. A., W. D. Brierley, and E. M. Crowther: Experiments on the control of wart diseased potatoes by soil treatment with particular reference to the use of sulphur. Ann. Applied Biol. 12, 152 (1925).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Robertson, J.: On the mildew and some diseases incident to fruit trees. Trans. Hort. Soc, London 5, 175 (1824).Google Scholar
  74. Rupprecht, G.: Ein neues Verfahren zum Schwefelen von Pflanzenkulturen. Avgew. Botan. 3,253 (1921).Google Scholar
  75. Safro, V. I.: Res. Bull. Ore. Agr. Expt. Sta. 2 (1913) (after MARTIN 1964).Google Scholar
  76. Sciarini, L. J., and F. F. Nord: On the mechanisms of enzyme action. Part 22. Elementary sulfur as hydrogen acceptor in the dehydrogenation by living Fusaria. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 3, 261 (1943).Google Scholar
  77. Selmi, F.: Osservazioni sullo svilluppo d’idrogene nascente dalle muffe e dei funghi. Just’s Botan. Jahrb. 4, 116 (1875).Google Scholar
  78. Sempio, C.: Sulla interpretazione del mecconismo intimo di azione dello solfo some acticrittogamico. Accademia d’ Italia, Rome, Classe de scienze, fisiche, mate-matiche e naturali, memorie Vol. 3. Biologic 2, 1 (1932).Google Scholar
  79. Shafer, G.: HOW contract insecticides kill. Mich. State Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Tech. Bull. 11 (1911).Google Scholar
  80. Sharvelle, E. G.: The nature and uses of modern fungicides. Minneapolis, Minn.: Burgess (1961).Google Scholar
  81. Sluiter, E.: The production of hydrogen sulphide by animal tissues. Biochem. J. 24, 549 (1930).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Streeter, L. R.: Physical properties of commercial dusting and spraying materials. New York State Agr. Expt. Sta., Geneva, New York. Tech. Bull. 125 (1927).Google Scholar
  83. Thatcher R. W., and L. R. Streeter: The adherence to foliage of sulfur in fungicidal dusts and sprays. New York State Agr. Expt. Sta., Geneva, New York. Tech. Bull. 116 (1925).Google Scholar
  84. Tweedy, B. G., and N. Turner: The mechanism of sulfur reduction by conidia of Monilinia fructicola. Contrib. Boyce-Thompson Inst. 23, 255 (1966).Google Scholar
  85. Uppal, B. N., and J. S. Malelu: Control of grain smut of jowar. Agr. J. India. 23, 471 (1928).Google Scholar
  86. Volck, W. H.: Injury caused by the apple powdery mildew. Better Fruit. 5, 60 (1911).Google Scholar
  87. Waite, M. B.: Experiments on the apple with some new and little-known fungicide. U.S. Dept. Agr., Circ. 58 (1910).Google Scholar
  88. Wallace, E.: Spray injury induced by lime-sulfur preparations. Cornell Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 288 (1910).Google Scholar
  89. Wallace, E., F. M. Blodgett, and L. R. Hesler: Studies of the fungicidal value of lime-sulfur preparations. Cornell Univ. Agr. Expt. Sta. Bull. 290 (1911).Google Scholar
  90. Walter, E. V.: Oligonychus pratensis, a new mite on corn. J. Econ. Entomol. 49, 265 (1956).Google Scholar
  91. Wilcox, J., and A. F. Howland: Experiments on the control of the two-spotted spider mite on strawberries. J. Econ. Entomol. 49, 2, 242 (1956).Google Scholar
  92. Wilcoxon, F., and S. E. A. Mccallan: The fungicidal action of sulfur. I. The alleged role of pentathionic acid. Phytopathol. 20, 391 (1930).Google Scholar
  93. Wilcoxon, F., and S. E. A. Mccallan: The fungicidal action of sulfur. III. Physical factors affecting the efficiency of dusts. Contrib. Boyce-Thompson Inst. 3, 509 (1931) Google Scholar
  94. Williams, R. C., and H. C. Young: The toxic property of sulphur: Chemistry in relation to toxic factors. Ind. Eng. Chem. 21, 359 (1929 a).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Williams, R. C., and H. C. Young: Chemistry of the toxic factor of sulphur. Phytopathol. 19, 89 (1929 b).Google Scholar
  96. Yarwood, C. E.: Therapeutic treatments for rusts. Phytopathol. 38, 542 (1948).Google Scholar
  97. Young, H. C.: The toxic property of sulfur. Ann. Missouri Botan. Garden 9, 403 (1922).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Young, H. C., and R. C. Williams: Pentathionic acid. The fungicidal factor of sulfur. Science 67, 19 (1928 a).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Young, H. C., and R. C. Williams: Factors affecting the fungicidal property of sulphur. Phytopathol. 18, 147 (1928 b).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. G. Tweedy
    • 1
  1. 1.Biochemistry DepartmentCIBA-GEIGY CorporationGreensboroUSA

Personalised recommendations