Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2020, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (18): 154-159.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb19030096
Previous Articles Next Articles
Ouyang Wensen1,2, Yu Kuai1,2, Deng Xiaojun1,2, Kong Xuanqing1,2, Li Jianming1,2, Ou Xiaoming1,2()
Received:
2019-03-22
Revised:
2019-09-17
Online:
2020-06-25
Published:
2020-07-10
Contact:
Ou Xiaoming
E-mail:xmouhn@163.com
CLC Number:
Ouyang Wensen, Yu Kuai, Deng Xiaojun, Kong Xuanqing, Li Jianming, Ou Xiaoming. Metamitron: Growth Inhibition on 2 Freshwater Aquatic Plants[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(18): 154-159.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb19030096
处理 | 0 d实测平均浓度 | 3 d平均实测浓度 | 5 d实测平均浓度 | 7 d实测平均浓度 | 几何平均浓度 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
换药前 | 换药后 | 换药前 | 换药后 | ||||||
CK | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ||
1 | 0.1795 | 0.1751 | 0.1861 | 0.1769 | 0.1871 | 0.1702 | 0.1791 | ||
2 | 0.2769 | 0.2548 | 0.2809 | 0.2714 | 0.2777 | 0.2521 | 0.2688 | ||
3 | 0.4113 | 0.3868 | 0.4210 | 0.4031 | 0.4183 | 0.3745 | 0.4021 | ||
4 | 0.6104 | 0.5466 | 0.6381 | 0.6075 | 0.6318 | 0.5705 | 0.5999 | ||
5 | 0.9352 | 0.8829 | 0.9434 | 0.8889 | 0.9329 | 0.8273 | 0.9008 |
处理 | 0 d实测平均浓度 | 3 d平均实测浓度 | 5 d实测平均浓度 | 7 d实测平均浓度 | 几何平均浓度 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
换药前 | 换药后 | 换药前 | 换药后 | ||||||
CK | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | ||
1 | 0.1795 | 0.1751 | 0.1861 | 0.1769 | 0.1871 | 0.1702 | 0.1791 | ||
2 | 0.2769 | 0.2548 | 0.2809 | 0.2714 | 0.2777 | 0.2521 | 0.2688 | ||
3 | 0.4113 | 0.3868 | 0.4210 | 0.4031 | 0.4183 | 0.3745 | 0.4021 | ||
4 | 0.6104 | 0.5466 | 0.6381 | 0.6075 | 0.6318 | 0.5705 | 0.5999 | ||
5 | 0.9352 | 0.8829 | 0.9434 | 0.8889 | 0.9329 | 0.8273 | 0.9008 |
处理 | 0 d实测平均浓度 | 7 d实测平均浓度 | 14 d实测平均浓度 | 几何平均浓度 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
换药前 | 换药后 | |||||
CK | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | |
1 | 0.8410 | 0.6254 | 0.7629 | 0.4989 | 0.6689 | |
2 | 1.9374 | 1.3729 | 1.6070 | 1.1553 | 1.4907 | |
3 | 4.1103 | 3.2768 | 3.7177 | 2.7699 | 3.4317 | |
4 | 9.6407 | 7.5899 | 8.2563 | 6.0965 | 7.7903 | |
5 | 19.9953 | 17.6389 | 20.0526 | 15.9815 | 18.3357 |
处理 | 0 d实测平均浓度 | 7 d实测平均浓度 | 14 d实测平均浓度 | 几何平均浓度 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
换药前 | 换药后 | |||||
CK | ND | ND | ND | ND | ND | |
1 | 0.8410 | 0.6254 | 0.7629 | 0.4989 | 0.6689 | |
2 | 1.9374 | 1.3729 | 1.6070 | 1.1553 | 1.4907 | |
3 | 4.1103 | 3.2768 | 3.7177 | 2.7699 | 3.4317 | |
4 | 9.6407 | 7.5899 | 8.2563 | 6.0965 | 7.7903 | |
5 | 19.9953 | 17.6389 | 20.0526 | 15.9815 | 18.3357 |
浓度/(mg/L) | 叶状体 | 鲜重 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
平均数/个 | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | 平均数/g | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | ||
CK | 103 | 2.57 | 0.3482 | - | - | 0.3455 | 3.04 | 0.3211 | - | - | |
0.1791 | 85 | 6.06 | 0.3202 | 8.04 | 19.50 | 0.2755 | 3.59 | 0.2872 | 10.55 | 23.61 | |
0.2688 | 68 | 6.41 | 0.2889 | 17.03 | 37.23 | 0.2508 | 3.23 | 0.2753 | 14.25 | 30.64 | |
0.4021 | 40 | 3.85 | 0.2119 | 39.15 | 67.38 | 0.1320 | 5.64 | 0.1837 | 42.79 | 69.08 | |
0.5999 | 28 | 8.88 | 0.1638 | 52.95 | 79.43 | 0.1127 | 7.35 | 0.1610 | 49.85 | 75.35 | |
0.9008 | 15 | 10.41 | 0.0697 | 79.97 | 93.97 | 0.0563 | 11.81 | 0.0618 | 80.74 | 93.60 |
浓度/(mg/L) | 叶状体 | 鲜重 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
平均数/个 | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | 平均数/g | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | ||
CK | 103 | 2.57 | 0.3482 | - | - | 0.3455 | 3.04 | 0.3211 | - | - | |
0.1791 | 85 | 6.06 | 0.3202 | 8.04 | 19.50 | 0.2755 | 3.59 | 0.2872 | 10.55 | 23.61 | |
0.2688 | 68 | 6.41 | 0.2889 | 17.03 | 37.23 | 0.2508 | 3.23 | 0.2753 | 14.25 | 30.64 | |
0.4021 | 40 | 3.85 | 0.2119 | 39.15 | 67.38 | 0.1320 | 5.64 | 0.1837 | 42.79 | 69.08 | |
0.5999 | 28 | 8.88 | 0.1638 | 52.95 | 79.43 | 0.1127 | 7.35 | 0.1610 | 49.85 | 75.35 | |
0.9008 | 15 | 10.41 | 0.0697 | 79.97 | 93.97 | 0.0563 | 11.81 | 0.0618 | 80.74 | 93.60 |
浓度/(mg/L) | 植株长度 | 鲜重 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
平均数/cm | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | 平均数/g | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | ||
CK | 27.5 | 1.64 | 0.0638 | - | - | 1.687 | 2.07 | 0.0534 | - | - | |
0.6689 | 26.6 | 1.30 | 0.0614 | 5.52 | 5.56 | 1.473 | 1.67 | 0.0438 | 18.04 | 23.96 | |
1.491 | 23.2 | 1.74 | 0.0516 | 26.62 | 26.66 | 1.287 | 2.27 | 0.0342 | 36.10 | 44.93 | |
3.432 | 20.0 | 2.18 | 0.0419 | 44.72 | 44.75 | 1.216 | 1.95 | 0.0301 | 43.69 | 52.93 | |
7.790 | 15.9 | 4.12 | 0.0248 | 71.24 | 71.26 | 1.129 | 5.46 | 0.0248 | 53.64 | 62.75 | |
18.33 | 14.4 | 1.45 | 0.0175 | 80.84 | 80.85 | 0.9026 | 1.45 | 0.0088 | 83.48 | 88.17 |
浓度/(mg/L) | 植株长度 | 鲜重 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
平均数/cm | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | 平均数/g | 变异 系数/% | 平均特定 生长率/% | 生长率 抑制率/% | 生物量 抑制率/% | ||
CK | 27.5 | 1.64 | 0.0638 | - | - | 1.687 | 2.07 | 0.0534 | - | - | |
0.6689 | 26.6 | 1.30 | 0.0614 | 5.52 | 5.56 | 1.473 | 1.67 | 0.0438 | 18.04 | 23.96 | |
1.491 | 23.2 | 1.74 | 0.0516 | 26.62 | 26.66 | 1.287 | 2.27 | 0.0342 | 36.10 | 44.93 | |
3.432 | 20.0 | 2.18 | 0.0419 | 44.72 | 44.75 | 1.216 | 1.95 | 0.0301 | 43.69 | 52.93 | |
7.790 | 15.9 | 4.12 | 0.0248 | 71.24 | 71.26 | 1.129 | 5.46 | 0.0248 | 53.64 | 62.75 | |
18.33 | 14.4 | 1.45 | 0.0175 | 80.84 | 80.85 | 0.9026 | 1.45 | 0.0088 | 83.48 | 88.17 |
水生植物 | 数据分析 | 回归方程Y=a+bx | 相关系数(R2) | EC50/(mg/L) | 95%置信限/(mg/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
小浮萍 | 叶状体数ErC50 | Y=0.896+3.149x | 0.989 | 0.519 | 0.474~0.575 |
叶状体数EyC50 | Y=1.672+3.398x | 0.992 | 0.322 | 0.294~0.351 | |
鲜重ErC50 | Y=0.866+3.038x | 0.951 | 0.518 | 0.408~0.717 | |
鲜重EyC50 | Y=1.548+3.195x | 0.955 | 0.328 | 0.241~0.418 | |
穗状狐尾藻 | 植株长度ErC50 | Y=-1.244+1.564x | 0.972 | 6.240 | 5.182~7.676 |
植株长度EyC50 | Y=-1.029+1.638x | 0.967 | 4.248 | 3.568~5.088 | |
鲜重ErC50 | Y=-0.700+1.144x | 0.933 | 4.092 | 2.129~8.835 | |
鲜重EyC50 | Y=-0.474+1.134x | 0.938 | 2.616 | 1.252~4.751 |
水生植物 | 数据分析 | 回归方程Y=a+bx | 相关系数(R2) | EC50/(mg/L) | 95%置信限/(mg/L) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
小浮萍 | 叶状体数ErC50 | Y=0.896+3.149x | 0.989 | 0.519 | 0.474~0.575 |
叶状体数EyC50 | Y=1.672+3.398x | 0.992 | 0.322 | 0.294~0.351 | |
鲜重ErC50 | Y=0.866+3.038x | 0.951 | 0.518 | 0.408~0.717 | |
鲜重EyC50 | Y=1.548+3.195x | 0.955 | 0.328 | 0.241~0.418 | |
穗状狐尾藻 | 植株长度ErC50 | Y=-1.244+1.564x | 0.972 | 6.240 | 5.182~7.676 |
植株长度EyC50 | Y=-1.029+1.638x | 0.967 | 4.248 | 3.568~5.088 | |
鲜重ErC50 | Y=-0.700+1.144x | 0.933 | 4.092 | 2.129~8.835 | |
鲜重EyC50 | Y=-0.474+1.134x | 0.938 | 2.616 | 1.252~4.751 |
[1] |
Prado R, Rioboo C, Herrero C, et al. Characterization of cell response in Chlamydomonas moewusii cultures exposed to the herbicide paraqual: Induction of chlorosis[J]. Aquatic Toxicology, 2011,102:10-17.
doi: 10.1016/j.aquatox.2010.12.013 URL pmid: 21371607 |
[2] | 王林林, 张光富, 何谐, 等. 除草剂百草枯对浮萍科不同植物的毒性效应比较[J]. 生态学杂志, 2013,32(6):1551-1556. |
[3] | Pimentel D. Amounts of pesticides reaching target pests:environmental impacts and ethics[J]. Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics, 1995,8:17-29. |
[4] |
Capel P D, Larson S J, Winterstein T A. The behavior of thirty-nine pesticides in surface waters as a function of scale[J]. Hydrological processes, 2001,15:1251-1269.
doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1085 URL |
[5] | 顾林玲. 三嗪酮类除草剂–苯嗪草酮[J]. 现代农药, 2016,15(4):51-54. |
[6] | 华乃震. HPPD抑制剂除草剂的研究进展及应用述评[J]. 农药市场信息, 2017(16):24-27. |
[7] | 张悦. Agrow评选2016最佳农药产品[J]. 农药市场信息, 2016(24):48. |
[8] | 严雪, 沈国兴, 严国安. 水生植物毒性试验及在生态风险评价中的作用[J]. 上海环境科学, 1998(07):24-26,39. |
[9] | 李国新, 薛培英, 李庆召, 等. pH对穗花狐尾藻吸附重金属镉的影响[J]. 环境科学研究, 2009,22(11):1329-1333. |
[10] | 宋碧玉, 王建, 曹明, 等. 利用人工围隔研究沉水植被恢复的生态效应[J]. 生态学杂志, 1999(05):21-24. |
[11] | 中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会. 穗状狐尾藻[M].中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会.中国植物志:第53卷第2分册. 北京: 科学出版社, 2000. |
[12] | 刘婷婷, 郑欣, 闫振广, 等. 水生态基准大型水生植物受试生物筛选[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2014,33(11):2204-2212. |
[13] | 吴业颖, 操瑜, 郑志伟, 等. 穗花狐尾藻在不同营养水平湖泊繁殖策略的比较研究[J]. 水生态学杂志, 2017,38(01):30-34. |
[14] |
Blaylock B, Frank M, Mccarth J. Comparative toxicity of copperand acridine to fish ,daphnia and algae[J]. Environmental toxicology and chemistry. 1985,4:63-71.
doi: 10.1002/etc.v4:1 URL |
[15] | Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2006. OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals, Test No. 221, Lemna sp. Growth Inhibition Test[M]. Adopted 23 March, 2006. |
[16] | 中华人民共和国农业部. NY/T 3090—2017,浮萍生长抑制试验准则[S]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2017. |
[17] | Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2014. OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals,Test No. 239, Water-sediment Mypriophyllum spicatum Toxicity Test[M]. Adopted 26 September, 2014. |
[18] | 潘洪吉, 张群峰, 李常平. 苯嗪草酮原药的液相色谱分析方法[J]. 农药科学与管理, 2000(02):4-24. |
[19] | 冯天翼, 宋超, 陈家长. 水生藻类的环境指示作用[J]. 中国农学通报, 2011,27(32):257-265. |
[20] | 中华人民共和国国家质量监督检验检疫总局. GB/T 31270—2014,化学农药环境安全评价试验准则[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2014. |
[21] | 梁艺怀, 张琨, 张京佶, 等. 青萍生长抑制试验对稀脉浮萍的适用性研究[J]. 生态毒理报, 2015,10(01):305-311. |
[22] | 李肇丽, 赵汉卿. 3,5-二氯苯酚对穗状狐尾藻的毒性影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2018,46(05):85-86,95. |
[23] | International Organization for Standardization. ISO 20079 Water quality-Determination of the toxic effect of water constituents and waste water on duckweed (Lemna minor)-Duckweed growth inhibition test[S]. Geneva: IOS, 2005. |
[24] | 侯慧姣, 韩鸿鹏. 单、双子叶植物气孔发育调控差异研究进展[J]. 分子植物育种, 2016,14(4):896-903. |
[25] |
Popper Z A, Fry S C. Primary cell wall composition of pteridophytes and spermatophytes[J]. New Phytologist, 2004,164(1):165-174.
doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01146.x URL |
[26] | 程小乔, 李科, 陈雪梅, 等. 若干双子叶与单子叶植物细胞壁果胶结构单糖组成特征研究[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2012,34(5):44-49. |
[1] | ZHU Haixia, LI Xiang, WEI Youhai. 800 g/L Prosulfocarb EC: Annual Weeds’ Control Effect and Safety Analysis in Broad Bean Field [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(33): 97-102. |
[2] | LI Binghua, LIU Xiaomin, XU Xian, ZHAO Bochui, LI Zhuolin. Safety of 6 Herbicides on Setaria italica and Their Weed Control Efficacy [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(19): 133-138. |
[3] | Zhou Wei, Xiang Deming, Tian Minghui, Yang Hongwu, Xiang Qingsong, Teng Kai, Rao Wei. Application and Safety Evaluation of Rimsulfuron in Flue-cured Tobacco Production [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(28): 88-95. |
[4] | Li Wei. A New Herbicide Flurochloridone in Potato Field on Qinghai Plateau: Application and Safety [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(9): 149-154. |
[5] | Yang Xiaosong, Wen Chao, Jia Weixing, Jiang Lan, Si Riguleng, Zhang Jun, Chu Jingfen, Yang Shuai, Shan Yumei, Xie Yourong, Yu Lan. Cenchrus pauciflorus in Khorchin: The Screening of Chemical Control Herbicide [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(33): 120-126. |
[6] | Zhu Wenda, Yu Jinping, Qi Wenquan, He Yanhong, Li Lin, Liu Xiaohong. Control Effect of 960 g/L S-metolachlor EC on Gramineous Weeds in Corn Field [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(15): 136-141. |
[7] | Liu Jianwei, Wang Zongsheng, Shi Guangliang, Jiang Yanjun, Han Juhong, Li Qingmei, Yue Decheng. Effects of Several Herbicides on the Growth and Development of Maize [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(15): 142-146. |
[8] | Xueying Wang, Yan Jin, Shouzhu Liu. Wheat Field Weeds with Different Community Structures: Chemical Control and Herbicide Susceptibility [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(9): 117-121. |
[9] | Sun Bin, Wang Suping, Zhang Jiajia, Yu Siqin, Chen Gang. 3% Sigma Oil Suspension Concentrate Combined with 3% Fluperazine and Butachl Suspension Concentrate Controlling Weeds in Winter Wheat Field: Field Efficacy Evaluation [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2020, 36(6): 117-120. |
[10] | 黄义召,谢娜,赵孔平,王豪 and 王金信. The Mixture of Halosulfuron-methyl with Nicosulfuron: the Effect and Safety of Weed Control in Maize Fields [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(35): 93-97. |
[11] | 申建芳,,,, and . Stress of Pendimethalin on Oat and Oat Plant Repair Under Stress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2018, 34(7): 152-156. |
[12] | . Effect of Diquat on Dehydration and Seed Quality of Ripening Flax [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2017, 33(4): 25-29. |
[13] | . Study on Control Efficacy of Combination of Glyphosate and 2, 4-D in Mikania micrantha [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012, 28(21): 237-241. |
[14] | Xue Yong, Wu Yude, Li Chuenfeng, Whu Guangshi. The Test of Herbicide Safety on Zhaodong Alfalfa [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2006, 22(12): 342-342. |
[15] | Liu Guibo, Xie Nan, Zhao Haiming, Qiao Renfu. A Study on the Effect of 41% Yibingcao-you to Exterminate Weeds in Pennisetum Field [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2006, 22(9): 380-380. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||