Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2023, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (25): 122-129.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0734
Previous Articles Next Articles
LI Fang(), ZHANG Juefeng, ZHONG Haiying, CHEN Jianming()
Received:
2022-08-25
Revised:
2023-05-24
Online:
2023-09-05
Published:
2023-08-28
LI Fang, ZHANG Juefeng, ZHONG Haiying, CHEN Jianming. Screening and Field Application Evaluation of Chemicals for Zizania latifolia Diseases Prevention and Control[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(25): 122-129.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0734
药剂 | 处理1 | 处理2 | 处理3 | 处理4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
氟环唑 | 0.0625 | 0.0833 | 0.1250 | 0.2500 |
吡唑醚菌酯 | 0.0100 | 0.0125 | 0.0167 | 0.0250 |
嘧啶核苷类抗生素 | 0.0240 | 0.0300 | 0.0400 | 0.0600 |
噻呋酰胺 | 0.0096 | 0.0120 | 0.0160 | 0.0240 |
矿物油 | 1.2375 | 1.6500 | 2.4750 | 4.9500 |
啶氧菌酯 | 0.2813 | 0.3750 | 0.5625 | 1.1250 |
萎锈灵 | 0.0048 | 0.0060 | 0.0080 | 0.0120 |
药剂 | 处理1 | 处理2 | 处理3 | 处理4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
氟环唑 | 0.0625 | 0.0833 | 0.1250 | 0.2500 |
吡唑醚菌酯 | 0.0100 | 0.0125 | 0.0167 | 0.0250 |
嘧啶核苷类抗生素 | 0.0240 | 0.0300 | 0.0400 | 0.0600 |
噻呋酰胺 | 0.0096 | 0.0120 | 0.0160 | 0.0240 |
矿物油 | 1.2375 | 1.6500 | 2.4750 | 4.9500 |
啶氧菌酯 | 0.2813 | 0.3750 | 0.5625 | 1.1250 |
萎锈灵 | 0.0048 | 0.0060 | 0.0080 | 0.0120 |
药剂 | 处理1 | 处理2 | 处理3 | 处理4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
氟环唑 | 0.01250 | 0.01563 | 0.02083 | 0.03125 |
吡唑醚菌酯 | 0.1560 | 0.3125 | 0.6250 | 1.2500 |
嘧啶核苷类抗生素 | 0.024 | 0.030 | 0.040 | 0.060 |
噻呋酰胺 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 4.8 |
矿物油 | 4.95 | 9.90 | 19.80 | 39.60 |
啶氧菌酯 | 0.225 | 0.300 | 0.450 | 0.900 |
萎锈灵 | 0.12 | 0.16 | 0.24 | 0.48 |
药剂 | 处理1 | 处理2 | 处理3 | 处理4 |
---|---|---|---|---|
氟环唑 | 0.01250 | 0.01563 | 0.02083 | 0.03125 |
吡唑醚菌酯 | 0.1560 | 0.3125 | 0.6250 | 1.2500 |
嘧啶核苷类抗生素 | 0.024 | 0.030 | 0.040 | 0.060 |
噻呋酰胺 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 2.4 | 4.8 |
矿物油 | 4.95 | 9.90 | 19.80 | 39.60 |
啶氧菌酯 | 0.225 | 0.300 | 0.450 | 0.900 |
萎锈灵 | 0.12 | 0.16 | 0.24 | 0.48 |
药剂处理 | 9月6日药前病指 | 9月16日 | 9月26日 | 10月13日 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | ||||
处理1 | 2.96±0.74a | 3.75±0.32c | 91.76a | 5.66±0.73b | 73.19a | 7.91±0.72c | 79.30a | ||
处理2 | 2.59±0.74a | 7.78±2.35bc | 38.43b | 14.51±3.08a | 21.36b | 17.37±0.21b | 48.06b | ||
处理3 | 2.59±0.37a | 11.69±1.09ab | 7.48c | 16.06±3.50a | 12.86b | 20.14±1.42b | 39.78bc | ||
处理4 | 2.59±0.37a | 6.80±0.82bc | 46.18b | 17.22±3.78a | 6.85b | 19.3±0.84b | 42.29b | ||
处理5 | 2.22±0.64a | 4.06±0.32c | 62.51b | 15.53±3.44a | 3.95b | 21.09±0.86b | 26.39c | ||
处理6 | 3.33±1.11a | 8.04±0.42bc | 50.51b | 17.47±4.31a | 27.39b | 19.24±0.81b | 55.28b | ||
处理7(CK) | 2.96±0.37a | 14.44±1.55a | — | 21.23±4.79a | — | 38.22±1.3a | — |
药剂处理 | 9月6日药前病指 | 9月16日 | 9月26日 | 10月13日 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | ||||
处理1 | 2.96±0.74a | 3.75±0.32c | 91.76a | 5.66±0.73b | 73.19a | 7.91±0.72c | 79.30a | ||
处理2 | 2.59±0.74a | 7.78±2.35bc | 38.43b | 14.51±3.08a | 21.36b | 17.37±0.21b | 48.06b | ||
处理3 | 2.59±0.37a | 11.69±1.09ab | 7.48c | 16.06±3.50a | 12.86b | 20.14±1.42b | 39.78bc | ||
处理4 | 2.59±0.37a | 6.80±0.82bc | 46.18b | 17.22±3.78a | 6.85b | 19.3±0.84b | 42.29b | ||
处理5 | 2.22±0.64a | 4.06±0.32c | 62.51b | 15.53±3.44a | 3.95b | 21.09±0.86b | 26.39c | ||
处理6 | 3.33±1.11a | 8.04±0.42bc | 50.51b | 17.47±4.31a | 27.39b | 19.24±0.81b | 55.28b | ||
处理7(CK) | 2.96±0.37a | 14.44±1.55a | — | 21.23±4.79a | — | 38.22±1.3a | — |
药剂处理 | 9月8日药前病指 | 9月18日 | 9月28日 | 10月15日 | 10月15日(锈病) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | |||||
处理1 | 75.83±0.61a | 71.86±3.17a | 9.50b | 80.36±2.84bc | 16.63b | 88.50±2.92a | 8.47b | 26.86±1.31ab | 17.12b | |||
处理2 | 72.56±1.68a | 67.08±4.46a | 11.70b | 75.23±5.71c | 18.44b | 86.98±0.61a | 5.99b | 26.88±1.64ab | 17.06b | |||
处理3 | 77.18±3.66a | 69.19±3.28a | 14.39b | 94.16±2.25ab | 4.02c | 91.09±0.61a | 7.44b | 19.94±0.98b | 38.48b | |||
处理4 | 77.30±2.57a | 41.42±3.94b | 48.82a | 67.82±2.66c | 30.98a | 61.31±5.94b | 37.80a | 7.01±0.42c | 78.37a | |||
处理5 | 79.52±1.35a | 46.88±2.34b | 43.69a | 77.21±1.49c | 23.62a | 59.37±3.94b | 41.44a | 5.03±0.96c | 84.48a | |||
处理6(CK) | 75.75±1.26a | 79.31±3.47a | — | 96.29±0.93a | — | 96.60±1.29a | — | 32.41±4.80a | — |
药剂处理 | 9月8日药前病指 | 9月18日 | 9月28日 | 10月15日 | 10月15日(锈病) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | 病指 | 防效/% | |||||
处理1 | 75.83±0.61a | 71.86±3.17a | 9.50b | 80.36±2.84bc | 16.63b | 88.50±2.92a | 8.47b | 26.86±1.31ab | 17.12b | |||
处理2 | 72.56±1.68a | 67.08±4.46a | 11.70b | 75.23±5.71c | 18.44b | 86.98±0.61a | 5.99b | 26.88±1.64ab | 17.06b | |||
处理3 | 77.18±3.66a | 69.19±3.28a | 14.39b | 94.16±2.25ab | 4.02c | 91.09±0.61a | 7.44b | 19.94±0.98b | 38.48b | |||
处理4 | 77.30±2.57a | 41.42±3.94b | 48.82a | 67.82±2.66c | 30.98a | 61.31±5.94b | 37.80a | 7.01±0.42c | 78.37a | |||
处理5 | 79.52±1.35a | 46.88±2.34b | 43.69a | 77.21±1.49c | 23.62a | 59.37±3.94b | 41.44a | 5.03±0.96c | 84.48a | |||
处理6(CK) | 75.75±1.26a | 79.31±3.47a | — | 96.29±0.93a | — | 96.60±1.29a | — | 32.41±4.80a | — |
[1] |
陶忠富. 浙江茭白种植现状及发展建议[J]. 中国果菜, 2020, 40(8):73-76.
|
[2] |
doi: 10.1007/s00284-010-9673-7 URL |
[3] |
doi: 10.1007/s11557-011-0765-y URL |
[4] |
徐晓峰, 闫宁, 张敬泽, 等. 雄茭、灰茭、正常茭形态指标及光合特性研究[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2011(16):31-33.
|
[5] |
陈建明, 周锦连, 王来亮. 茭白病虫草害识别与生态控制[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2016:14-20.
|
[6] |
马雅敏, 蔡婉玲, 施德云, 等. 3种杀菌剂对茭白主要病害的防治效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2020, 61(11):2300-2303.
|
[7] |
叶琪明, 顾国平, 李建荣, 等. 茭白锈病和胡麻斑病的发生规律及其无害化防治[J]. 浙江农业学报, 200315(3):144-148.
|
[8] |
陈建明, 丁新天, 潘远勇, 等. 4种杀菌剂对茭白锈病的防治效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2013(11):1463-1465.
|
[9] |
杨绍丽, 吴仁锋, 蔡翔. 茭白胡麻叶斑病研究进展[J]. 蔬菜, 2020(12):22-26.
|
[10] |
钟海英, 张珏锋, 陈建明, 等. 植物免疫诱抗剂对茭白胡麻叶斑病的控制效果[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2018(4):38-40
|
[11] |
李芳, 张珏锋, 钟海英, 等. 利用离体叶片相对病斑面积快速鉴定茭白对胡麻叶斑病的抗性[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(5):1091-1093,1097.
|
[12] |
蔡再华, 王迪轩, 李友志. 茭白胡麻叶斑病(叶枯病)的显微识别与综合防治[J]. 长江蔬菜, 2019(11):58-59.
|
[13] |
蒋冬阳, 陈夕军, 陈银凤, 等. 茭白叶斑病病原鉴定及其对5种杀菌剂的敏感性测定[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2022, 35(10):34-41.
|
[14] |
彭辉, 杨梦飞, 葛鑫涛, 等. 茭白叶黑斑病的病原鉴定和防治药剂筛选[J]. 植物病理学报, 2022, 52(5):857-862.
|
[15] |
马雅敏, 施德云, 邓曹仁, 等. 防治茭白锈病的药剂筛选及安全性评价[J]. 中国植保导刊, 2021, 41(6):87-89.
|
[16] |
翁丽青, 张珏锋, 陈建明, 等. 几种化学杀菌剂对茭白胡麻叶斑病的控制效果[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2021, 34(2):65-67.
|
[17] |
杨凤丽, 宓盛, 沈瑛瑛. 几种药剂对茭白锈病田间防效研究[J]. 农业科学通讯, 2020(10):130-132.
|
[18] |
杨凤丽, 宓盛, 沈瑛瑛. 7种药剂对茭白胡麻叶斑病的田间防效研究[J]. 蔬菜, 2020(10):49-52.
|
[19] |
唐启义, 冯明光. 实用统计分析及其DPS数据处理系统[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002:43-80.
|
[20] |
程小梅, 龚碧涯, 彭亚军, 等. 矿物油-杀菌剂联用防控柑橘砂皮病试验[J]. 中国果树, 2020(3):84-86.
|
[1] | CHI Yanyan, LIN Shaoyuan, CHEN Bingxu, XU Shu. Toxicity and Field Efficacy of Tetraniliprole Against Spodoptera frugiperda [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(7): 111-115. |
[2] | XIA Lijuan, XU Zhonghuai, DONG Xuejuan, WAN Li. Bacillus velezensis: Toxicity and Field Efficacy Against Cucumber Powdery Mildew and Its Safety Evaluation [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(6): 111-115. |
[3] | ZHANG Ao, LI Biao, HE Shu, XIONG Bingjie, YAN Xingru, HUANG Youguo, WANG Shu, SHI Rui. Effect of Microbial Fungicide Application on the Quality of Forest Panax notoginseng [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(25): 54-63. |
[4] | LI Rumei, LIU Tongjin, LIANG Hui, FENG Yizhi, LIANG Lin, LI Ruijuan, YU Jianlei. Residue Behavior of Thiamethoxam in Chinese Flowering Cabbage Analyzed by Performance Liquid Chromatography-tandem Mass Spectrometry [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(20): 133-137. |
[5] | WU Zhenping, WU Jie, YANG Zhaoguang, ZHAO Pei, QIAO Yanyan. Toxicity of Four Botanical Insecticides to Phenacoccus solenopsis and Safety Evaluation to Predator Propylaea japonica [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(12): 111-115. |
[6] | LIAN Xiuye. Cadmium Enrichment Characteristics of 15 Rice Varieties and the Safety Risk Assessment [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(12): 139-145. |
[7] | DAI Yanna, LIU Qinghai. Residue Dynamics and Safety Evaluation of Cyromazine and Its Metabolite Melamine on Celery in Plateau Facility Environment [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(10): 117-122. |
[8] | LV Xingchen, MENG Jun. Blockchain-Based Agricultural Traceability: Advantages and Challenges [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(9): 157-164. |
[9] | LI Shuangmei, HUANG Xinfang, PENG Jing, ZHU Honglian, LIU Yuping, LI Minghua, ZHONG Lan, JI Qun, KUANG Jing, KE Weidong. Main Nutrient Components and Heavy Metal Contents of Watercress Germplasm Resources: Determination and Evaluation [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(36): 56-61. |
[10] | ZHANG Bo, SHI Feng, SONG Fuqiang. AMF Complex Fungicides: Effects on Photosynthesis and Growth of Rice in Cold Region [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(33): 15-22. |
[11] | ZHANG Huimin, BAO Guangling, ZHOU Xiaotian, GAO Linlin, HU Hongxiang, MA Youhua. Safety Assessment of Heavy Metals in Specific Crops of Strictly Controlled Farmland [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(3): 52-58. |
[12] | CUI Yanhua, ZHOU Tingting, SHEN Yuyang, CHEN Li, LIN Guocang, YANG Anpei, ZHANG Hang, LEI Junjie, LI Guangkuo, GAO Haifeng. Ultra-low Dose Spray of Small Plant Protection UAV: Control Effect on Wheat Powdery Mildew in Desert Oasis Wheat Region [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(27): 147-150. |
[13] | HONG Ciqing, SUN Yuyao, MO Wenjing, FANG Yun, CHEN Fangrong, GUI Fangze, GUAN Xiong, PAN Xiaohong. Effects of Nano-silver Prepared from Tea Extract on Soil Microorganisms [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(23): 56-63. |
[14] | WU Cuixia, XU Jiali, SONG Min, YANG Lina, ZHANG Tiantian, MA Chong. Control Efficacy of 7 Pre-emergence Herbicides Against Weeds in Winter Wheat Field [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(21): 105-111. |
[15] | 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. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||