Fungicide Efficacy Summary Tables for Management of Diseases in Field Tomatoes

By: Dr. Cheryl Trueman, Ridgetown Campus – University of Guelph

About these tables:

• These tables were created using results from replicated processing tomato field trials at the Ridgetown Campus, University of Guelph. Please contact the author for more information on research methods and copies of full reports. The tables are for information only and do not guarantee successful results with the use of any product.
• Always check the most recent version of the product label before applying any product.

Late blight:

• An Ontario-specific version of fungicide ratings for late blight by Janice LeBoeuf (formerly OMAFRA) was updated in 2017 and is posted here.

Anthracnose (fruit rot):

• Fungicide trials for anthracnose management are completed on a regular basis at the Ridgetown Campus, University of Guelph. Only data from trials with high disease pressure were considered in developing these ratings.

Trade Name*	Active Ingredient(s)	FRAC Group(s)	# of Trials	Rating**
Various	Mancozeb	M3	1	+++
Various	Chlorothalonil	M5	5	+++
Inspire	Difenoconazole	3	3	+
Bravo Top	Difenoconazole + chlorothalonil	3 + M5	3	+++
Lance / Cantus WDG	Boscalid	7	3	0
Aprovia	Benzovindiflupyr	7	2	+++
Sercadis	Fluxapyroxad	7	2	++
Fontelis	Penthiopyrad	7	3	+++
Reason	Fenamidone	11	1	0
Cabrio	Pyraclostrobin	11	3	+++
Quadris	Azoxystrobin	11	4	+++
Quadris Top	Azoxystrobin + difenoconazole	11 + 3	3	+++

* Not all products may be registered for this crop-disease combination. Always check product labels before use. **0 (no effect) no difference from control plots that receive no fungicide; + (poor) inconsistent control and/or some effect at reducing; ++ (OK to good) consistent control, does not perform as well as +++ products in all years; +++ (very good) consistent control, consistently one of the best fungicides in the trial.

Early blight:

• Early blight ratings represent results of three efficacy trials when disease pressure was high and significant levels of late blight were absent. A mixed infection of Septoria leaf spot and early blight occurred in some years.

Trade Name*	Active Ingredient(s)	FRAC Group(s)	# of Trials	Rating**
Cueva	Copper octonoate	M1	2	0
Various	Mancozeb	M3	2	+
Various	Chlorothalonil (3.2 L/Ha)	M5	2	++ to +++
	Chlorothalonil (2.4 L/Ha)	M5	1	+++
Inspire	Difenoconazole	3	1	++
Lance / Cantus WDG	Boscalid	7	1	+++
Sercadis	Fluxapyroxad	7	2	+ to +++
Fontelis	Penthiopyrad	7	3	++ to +++
Luna Privilege	Fluopyram	7	1	+++
Aprovia Top	Benzovindiflupyr + difenoconazole	7 + 3	2	+++
Miravis Duo	Pydiflumetofen (‘Adepidyn’) + difenoconazole	7 + 3	1	+++
Scala SC	Pyrimethanil	9	1	++
Reason 500 SC	Fenamidone	11	1	++
Cabrio EG	Pyraclostrobin	11	1	++
Quadris	Azoxystrobin	11	3	+++
Quadris Top	Azoxystrobin + difenoconazole	11 + 3	1	+++
Tanos 50 DF	Famoxadone + cymoxanil	11 + 27	2	++ to +++
Phostrol	Mono- and di-potassium salts of phosphorous acid	33	2	0
Phostrol + Cueva	Mono- and di-potassium salts of phosphorous acid + copper octonoate	33 + M1	1	0
Phostrol + Bravo ZN	Mono- and di-potassium salts of phosphorous acid + chlorothalonil (2.4 L/Ha)	33 + M5	2	+++

*Not all products may be registered for this crop-disease combination. Always check product labels before use. **0 (no effect) no difference from control plots that receive no fungicide; + (poor) inconsistent control and/or some effect at reducing; ++ (OK to good) consistent control, does not perform as well as +++ products in all years; +++ (very good) consistent control, consistently one of the best fungicides in the trial.

Septoria leaf spot:

• Septoria leaf spot ratings represent results of three efficacy trials when disease pressure was high and significant levels of late blight were absent. A mixed infection of Septoria leaf spot and early blight occurred in some years.

Trade Name*	Active Ingredient(s)	FRAC Group(s)	# of Trials	Rating**
Cueva	Copper octonoate	M1	2	0
Various	Mancozeb	M3	2	+
Various	Chlorothalonil (3.2 L/Ha)	M5	3	++ to +++
	Chlorothalonil (2.4 L/Ha)	M5	1	+++
Bravo Top	Chlorothalonil + difenoconazole	M5 + 3	1	+++
Aprovia	Benzovindiflupyr	7	1	+++
Sercadis	Fluxapyroxad	7	3	++ to +++
Fontelis	Penthiopyrad	7	3	+++
Luna Privilege	Fluopyram	7	1	+++
Aprovia TOP	Benzovindiflupyr + difenoconazole	7 + 3	2	+++
Miravis Duo	Pydiflumetofen (‘Adepidyn’) + difenoconazole	7 + 3	1	+++
Quadris	Azoxystrobin	11	3	+++
Quadris Top	Azoxystrobin + difenoconazole	11 + 3	1	+++
Tanos	Famoxadone + cymoxanil	11 + 27	2	++ to +++
Phostrol	Mono- and di-potassium salts of phosphorous acid	33	2	0
Phostrol + Cueva	Mono- and di-potassium salts of phosphorous acid + copper octonoate	33 + M1	1	0
Phostrol + Bravo ZN	Mono- and di-potassium salts of phosphorous acid + chlorothalonil (2.4 L/Ha)	33 + M5	2	+++

** Not all products may be registered for this crop-disease combination. Always check product labels before use. **0 (no effect) no difference from control plots that receive no fungicide; + (poor) inconsistent control and/or some effect at reducing; ++ (OK to good) consistent control, does not perform as well as +++ products in all years; +++ (very good) consistent control, consistently one of the best fungicides in the trial.

Interested in a product not on the list?

If you didn’t find the product information you were looking for, check out the fungicide efficacy ratings from other locations:, New York (late blight), New York (late blight, early blight).

Keep in mind that the efficacy ratings linked above are US sources and not all of the products are registered in Canada, or registered on late blight of field tomato. For information on registered tomato fungicides for Ontario, see OMAFRA’s Vegetable Crop Protection Guide.  Always read and understand the label before using any crop protection product.