BTH处理对哈密瓜品质产量及抗叶部病害的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以厚皮甜瓜哈密瓜‘早皇后’品种(Cucumis melo L. var.inodorus Jacq.Early Queen)为试材，研究BTH、Amistar和KDF在甜瓜生长期处理对果实品质、产量、抗病性的影响。试验采用完全随机区组设计，在甜瓜生长期，施用药剂，对其对甜瓜品质等指标进行评价。结果表明：三种处理能够提高甜瓜果实可溶性固形物的含量，对单果重量、单位面积的产量、果实硬度影响较小。BTH处理使果形指数下降，KDF提高了果实整齐度。各处理改善了果实色泽，减少了果皮裂纹。Amistar、BTH和KDF处理使果实病害指数分别下降了14.9%和12.4%，1级果率提高5.9%和5.2%。各处理均降低了甜瓜叶部白粉病病害指数。BTH处理的细菌性角斑病的发病指数比对照降低了0.95。BTH处理对甜瓜品质、产量没有影响，降低了甜瓜果实病害，抑制了白粉病和细菌性角斑病的发展。

关键词: 秸秆, 秸秆, 腐熟, 纤维素酶, 半纤维素酶, 正交实验

Abstract: Hami melon ‘Early Queen’ was used to study the Effect of BTH(benzothiadiazole), Amistar, KDF(kang du feng) treatment on quality, yield and resistance to leaf and fruit disease of hami melon , used a randomised complete block design, during growth period. The soluble solid content(SSC), firmness, single fruit weight, and yield of melon, and resistance to fruit and leaf disease of melon were investigated. The results indicated that all three treatments can increase SSC, single fruit weight, yield of melon fruit. Index of fruit shape was decreased by BTH treatment, increased by KDF treatment at harvest. Fruit colour and cracking was improved due to treatments during development of melon. Indexes of fruit disease treated with Amistar, BTH and KDF were declined at 14.9% and 12.4% respectively. Index of bacterial spot of leaf treated BTH compared with CK was reduced at 0.95. Quality and yield of melon was not affected by BTH treatment. Disease of fruit and leaf of powdery mildew and bacterial spot were suppressed by BTH treatment during development stages of melon.

中图分类号:

S432.26

李学文,姜明,冯作山,毛晓英,K.Y.Phan-Thien. BTH处理对哈密瓜品质产量及抗叶部病害的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2007, 23(2): 226-226.

Li Xuewen, Jiang Ming, Feng Zuoshan, Mao Xiaoying, K.Y.Phan Thien. Effect of BTH Treatment on Yield, Quality, and Resistance toLeaf Disease of Hami Melon[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2007, 23(2): 226-226.

参考文献

[1] 新疆西甜瓜资源调查组.新疆西甜瓜志.新疆:新疆人民出版社,1985,37-40.
[2] Yun J. Zhu, Xiaohui Qiu, Paul H. Moore, Wayne Borth, John Hu,Stephen Ferreira, Henrik H. Albertc. Syste mic acquired resistance induced by BTH in papaya. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology,2003, 63:237–248.
[3] Van de Rhee MD, Van Kan JA, Gonzalez-Jaen MT, Bol JF. Analysis of regulatory elements involved in the induction of two tobacco genes by salicylate treatment and virus infection. Plant Cell, 1990,2:357–66.
[4] Akinwunmio, Latunde-Dada, and John A.,Lucas. The plant defence activator acibenzolar-S- meth yl primes cowpea [Vigna unguiculata (L.) Walp.] seedlings for rapid induction of resistance. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology.,2001,58:199-208.
[5] Francesca Sparla, Lorenza Rotino, Maria Chiara Valgimigli,Paolo Pupillo, Paolo Trost. Systemic resistance induced by benzothiadiazole in pear inoculated with the agent of fire blight(Erwinia amylovora). Scientia Horticulturae,2004,101:269–279.
[6] Goarlach J , Vo lrath S, Knauf2Beiter G. Benzo th iadiazo le, a novel class of inducers of system ic acquired resistance, act ives gene exp ression and disease resistance in wheat. P lant Cell, 1996,8:629-643.
[7] Jean-Francois Godard, SmamK Ziadi, Claudie Monot, Daniel Le Corre, Drissa SilueH.Benzothiadiazole (BTH) induces resistance in cauliflower (Brassica oleracea var botrytis) to downy mildew of crucifers caused by Peronospora parasitica. Crop Protection, 1999,18: 397-405.
[8] Hongxia Liu, Weibo Jiang, Yang Bi, Yunbo Luo. Postharvest BTH treatment induces resistance of peach (Prunus persica L. cv. Jiubao) fruit to infection by Penicillium expansum and enhances activity of fruit defense mechanisms. Postharvest Biology and Technology,2005,35:263–269
[9] Benhanou, N., Belanger, R. Benzothiazole-mediated induced resistance to Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. radicis-lycopersici in tomato. Plant Physiol. 1998,118:1203–1212.
[10] Anfoka, G.H. Benzo-(1,2,3)-thiadiazole-7-carbothioic acid Smethyl ester induces systemic resistance in tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill cv.Vollendung) to cucumber mosaic virus. Crop Prot, 2000,19:401-405
[11] M. J. Stadnik, and H. Buchenauer. Inhibition of phenylalanine ammonia-lyase suppresses the resistance induced by benzothiadiazole inwheat to Blumeria graminis f. sp. tritici. Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology,2000, 57,:25-34
[12]Grisebach H.Lignins. Biochem Plants,1981,7:457-478
[13] 王伟,唐文华,周洪友,黄永.BTH对厚皮甜瓜抗病性的诱导作用研究.中国农业大学学报,2000,5(5):48-53.

[1]	胡雪纯, 解文艳, 马晓楠, 周怀平, 杨振兴, 刘志平. 长期秸秆还田对旱地玉米土壤有机碳及碳库管理指数的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(34): 8-13.
[2]	张云, 萨如拉, 包桂荣, 萨茹拉其其格, 邰继承, 李响. 秸秆降解菌系的筛选及其对酸碱度的响应[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(28): 21-27.
[3]	张楠, 潘仕球, 乔云发, 朱保国, 苗淑杰. 秸秆还田及添加生物炭对黑土玉米生长季N₂O排放的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(27): 79-85.
[4]	聂晓瑀, 于春静, 卢倩, 崔继哲. 微生物在农作物秸秆好氧堆肥过程中的研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(26): 76-81.
[5]	郭书亚, 尚赏, 王坤, 汤其宁, 张艳, 付国占, 卢广远. 秸秆覆盖深松对夏玉米田土壤酶活性的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(25): 96-101.
[6]	张雪廷, 袁恩平, 王灿, 李罡, 王绍祥, 李云, 赵水灵, 钟正阳, 李桂琼, 杨迪, 夏攀, 许姹, 赵昶灵. 云南文山州畜禽饲用秸秆的糖、蛋白和脂类养分的含量和综合等级[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(24): 145-150.
[7]	且天真, 李福, 厉雅华, 王丽芳, 张婷婷, 张佳倩, 王宏伟, 张德健. 秸秆还田条件下不同耕作方式对土壤化学性状的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(21): 58-69.
[8]	张奇, 刘海涛, 田静, 姚莉, 王宏, 林超文. 耕作方式对成都平原稻麦轮作系统吸收累积镉的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(19): 109-113.
[9]	马超. 黑龙江省黑土地保护性耕作实施基本情况及问题研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(17): 143-147.
[10]	范肖东, 张悦, 吴增游, 雍宬, 曲萍, 黄红英, 徐跃定, 孙恩惠. 微生物预处理秸秆纤维浆结构、形态及成膜性研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(15): 69-77.
[11]	李守华. 长期秸秆还田对提高小麦-玉米轮作耕层土壤养分及产量分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(14): 60-64.
[12]	闫童, 杨化恩, 刘凤华, 孙玉莹. 不同培肥措施对新增耕地养分变化及作物产量的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(12): 74-78.
[13]	宋芸, 樊平, 王敏, 王强, 薛鹏飞. 几种废弃物基质有氧堆肥腐解因素比较分析[J]. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(11): 53-57.
[14]	赵记军, 于显枫, 张绪成. 地膜源头减量化技术可行路径探讨[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(9): 57-63.
[15]	付梦雪, 吴名宇, 韩碧波, 张倩, 韩燕来, 谭金芳, 李培培, 张涛, 李慧. 秸秆还田与生物炭配施对麦-玉轮作体系产量和氮素利用率的影响[J]. 中国农学通报, 2021, 37(8): 89-96.