Isopyrazam and Its Mixture Against Powdery Mildew of Four Different Cucurbit Crops in the Field

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0133

Abstract

Abstract:

To screen effective fungicides to control powdery mildew of cucurbit crops, clarify the field control efficiency of isopyrazam and its mixture on powdery mildew of balsam pear, zucchini, melon and watermelon, and provide a scientific scheme for the green control of powdery mildew of cucurbit crops, some field control efficacy trials were carried out for three years according to the guidelines of field efficacy test GB/T 17980.30—2000. According to the development of different crops and diseases, by 2-4 times applications with 7-14 days intervals and spraying at the initial stage of powdery mildew, the control efficiency of isopyrazam 11.2% EC 67.2 g(a.i.)/hm² (preparation 600 mL/hm²) and isopyrazam· azoxystrobin 29% SC 87-261 g(a.i.)/hm² (preparation 300-900 mL/hm²) were more than 80%. The duration was 10-14 days, significantly higher than that of the conventional dosage of azoxystrobin· boscalid 30% SC, difenoconazole 10% WG, triadimefon 25% WP or myclobutanil 12.5% EC. Therefore, isopyrazam 11.2% EC and isopyrazam· azoxystrobin 29% SC have good control efficiency on powdery mildew of balsam pear, zucchini, melon and watermelon, which indicated that they are worthy of further research and development.

Key words: isopyrazam, cucurbit crops, powdery mildew, field application technology

WEN Junhui, YAO Beibei, CAI Jianying, ZHU Qi, ZHONG Guohua. Isopyrazam and Its Mixture Against Powdery Mildew of Four Different Cucurbit Crops in the Field[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(4): 112-118.

Figures/Tables 9

References 25

[1]	GLAWE D A. The powdery mildews: A Review of the world's most familiar (yet poorly known) plant pathogens[J]. Annual review of phytopathology, 2008, 46:27-51. doi: 10.1146/annurev.phyto.46.081407.104740 pmid: 18680422
[2]	FRANTZESKAKIS L, KRACHER B, KUSCH S, et al. Signatures of host specialization and a recent transposable element burst in the dynamic one-speed genome of the fungal barley powdery mildew pathogen[J]. BMC Genomics, 2018, 19:381. doi: 10.1186/s12864-018-4750-6 pmid: 29788921
[3]	PANSTRUGA R, KUHN H. Mutual interplay between phytopathogenic powdery mildew fungi and other microorganisms[J]. Molecular plant pathology, 2019, 20:463-470. doi: 10.1111/mpp.12771 pmid: 30467940
[4]	TAKAMATSU S. Phylogeny and evolution of the powdery mildew fungi (Erysiphales, Ascomycota) inferred from nuclear ribosomal DNA sequences[J]. Mycoscience, 2004, 45(2):147-157. doi: 10.1007/S10267-003-0159-3 URL
[5]	聂金泉. 苦瓜白粉病的发生及防治[J]. 广东农村实用技术, 2007(3):11.
[9]	周益林, 段霞瑜, 盛宝钦. 植物白粉病的化学防治进展[J]. 农药学学报, 2001, 3(2):12-18.
[7]	DEAN R, VAN KAN Z J A L, PRETORIUS A, et al. The top 10 fungal pathogens in molecular plant pathology[J]. Molecular plant pathology, 2012, 13:414-430. doi: 10.1111/j.1364-3703.2011.00783.x pmid: 22471698
[8]	CARDOSO J E, VIANA F M P, OOTANI M A, et al. First report of Erysiphe quercicola causing powdery mildew on cashew in Brazil[J]. Plant disease, 2017, 101:1327-1328.
[6]	綦聪. 美洲南瓜白粉病病原菌鉴定及抗病基因的精细定位[D]. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2019.
[10]	马建华, 吴晓燕, 张蓉, 等. 黃瓜白粉病的化学防治现状及新防治药剂率选[J]. 北方园艺, 2007(1):82.
[11]	尹国香, 王全华, 孙世川, 等. 腈菌唑防治西葫芦白粉病试验研究[J]. 农药, 2002, 41(6):13.
[12]	祁之秋, 王建新, 陈长军, 等. 现在杀菌剂抗性研究进展[J]. 农药, 2006, 45(10):655-959.
[13]	杨连来, 慕卫, 刘峰, 等. 黄瓜白粉病菌对已唑醇抗性诱导及抗性菌株生物学性状的研究[J]. 农药学学报, 2007, 9(1):29-33.
[14]	VAN AUBEL G, BUONATESTA R, VAN CUTSEM P. COS-OGA: A novel oligosaccharidic elicitor that protects grapes and cucumbers against powdery mildew[J]. Crop protection, 2014, 65(1):129-137. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2014.07.015 URL
[15]	HARALD W, HANS T, DENIS G et al. Sedaxane, isopyrazam and solatenol™: novel broad-spectrum fungicides inhibiting succinate dehydrogenase (SDH) - synthesis challenges and biological aspects[J]. Chimia, 2015, 69(7):425-434. doi: 10.2533/chimia.2015.425 pmid: 28482975
[16]	YAO H Z, XU X, ZHOU Y, et al. Impacts of isopyrazam exposure on the development of early-life zebrafish (Danio rerio)[J]. Environmental science and pollution research international, 2018, 25(24):23799-23808. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-2449-5 pmid: 29876854
[17]	CONSTANTIN Y, NADIA S Y. SDHI fungicide toxicity and associated adverse outcome pathways: What can zebrafish tell us?[J]. International journal of molecular sciences, 2021, 22(22):12362-12362. doi: 10.3390/ijms222212362 URL
[18]	AJIGBOYE O O, MURCHIE E, RAY R V. Foliar application of isopyrazam and epoxiconazole improves photosystem II efficiency, biomass and yield in winter wheat[J]. Pesticide biochemistry and physiology, 2014, 114:52-60. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2014.07.003 pmid: 25175650
[19]	胡健, 仇学平, 谷莉莉, 等. 吡唑萘菌胺·嘧菌酯对黄瓜白粉病的防效试验[J]. 上海蔬菜, 2021(3):43-44,51.
[20]	陈瑾, 田宝华, 赖瑞联, 等. 新型复配剂250 g/L吡唑萘菌胺·苯醚甲环唑悬浮剂对黄瓜白粉病的田间防效[J]. 农药, 2020, 59(10):760-762.
[21]	夏宏义, 吴伟, 曾祥国, 等. 6种杀菌剂对草莓白粉病的田间防效[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2020, 61(7):1402-1403.
[22]	申瑞平, 宋莹莹, 王秋红. 两种新型琥珀酸脱氢酶抑制剂的抑菌活性比较[J]. 农药科学与管理, 2014, 35(8):52-57.
[23]	HE L M, CUI K D, MA D C et al. Activity, translocation, and persistence of isopyrazam for controlling cucumber powdery mildew[J]. Plant disease, 2017, 101(7):1139-1144. doi: 10.1094/PDIS-07-16-0981-RE URL
[24]	禾丽菲, 李晓旭, 朱佳美, 等. 不同杀菌剂对黄瓜靶斑病菌的毒力作用特性比较[J]. 农药学学报, 2018, 20(1):25-32.
[25]	HUANG X P, SONG Y F, LI B X, et al. Baseline sensitivity of isopyrazam against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum and its efficacy for the control of Sclerotinia stem rot in vegetables[J]. Crop protection, 2019, 122:42-48. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2019.04.010 URL

供试药剂	剂量/[g(a.i.)/hm²]	苦瓜		西葫芦		甜瓜		西瓜
供试药剂	剂量/[g(a.i.)/hm²]	3 d	7 d	3 d	7 d	3 d	7 d	3 d	7 d
CK	0	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
11.2%吡唑萘菌胺EC	67.2	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
29%吡唑萘菌胺∙嘧菌酯SC	87	-	-	-	-	-	-	\	\
	174	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	261	-	-	-	-	\	\	\	\
30%醚菌酯∙啶酰菌胺SC	202.5	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
10%苯醚甲环唑WG	100	-	-	-	-	\	\	\	\
25%三唑酮WP	240	\	\	\	\	++	++	\	\
12.5%腈菌唑EC	45	\	\	\	\	\	\	+	-

供试药剂	剂量/[g(a.i.)/hm²]	苦瓜		西葫芦		甜瓜		西瓜
供试药剂	剂量/[g(a.i.)/hm²]	3 d	7 d	3 d	7 d	3 d	7 d	3 d	7 d
CK	0	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
11.2%吡唑萘菌胺EC	67.2	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
29%吡唑萘菌胺∙嘧菌酯SC	87	-	-	-	-	-	-	\	\
	174	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
	261	-	-	-	-	\	\	\	\
30%醚菌酯∙啶酰菌胺SC	202.5	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
10%苯醚甲环唑WG	100	-	-	-	-	\	\	\	\
25%三唑酮WP	240	\	\	\	\	++	++	\	\
12.5%腈菌唑EC	45	\	\	\	\	\	\	+	-

供试药剂	剂量	9DA1	9DA2	9DA3	7DA4	14DA4	21DA4
11.2%吡唑萘菌胺EC	67.2 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	88.81±2.27a	84.72±2.65a	88.08±4.55ab	79.44±4.19b
29%吡唑萘菌胺∙嘧菌酯SC	87 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	94.88±2.32a	86.39±5.41a	84.18±4.08b	81.89±3.1b
	174 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	95.71±2.79a	88.61±4.04a	87.2±1.72ab	81.89±3.1b
	261 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	100.00±0.00a	92.5±4.47a	91.72±1.4a	87.78±1.92a
30%醚菌酯∙啶酰菌胺SC	202.5 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	91.67±7.22a	75.71±1.24b	66.95±0.48b	45.11±0.58c	33.33±3.34c
10%苯醚甲环唑WG	100 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	46.67±13.77b	13.69±14.32c	12.04±12.53c	0.00±0.00d	0.00±0.00d

供试药剂	剂量	9DA1	9DA2	9DA3	7DA4	14DA4	21DA4
11.2%吡唑萘菌胺EC	67.2 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	88.81±2.27a	84.72±2.65a	88.08±4.55ab	79.44±4.19b
29%吡唑萘菌胺∙嘧菌酯SC	87 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	94.88±2.32a	86.39±5.41a	84.18±4.08b	81.89±3.1b
	174 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	95.71±2.79a	88.61±4.04a	87.2±1.72ab	81.89±3.1b
	261 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	100.00±0.00a	100.00±0.00a	92.5±4.47a	91.72±1.4a	87.78±1.92a
30%醚菌酯∙啶酰菌胺SC	202.5 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	91.67±7.22a	75.71±1.24b	66.95±0.48b	45.11±0.58c	33.33±3.34c
10%苯醚甲环唑WG	100 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00	46.67±13.77b	13.69±14.32c	12.04±12.53c	0.00±0.00d	0.00±0.00d

供试药剂	剂量	9DA1	9DA2	9DA3	7DA4	14DA4	21DA4
11.2%吡唑萘菌胺EC	67.2 g(a.i.)/hm²	97.78±3.85ab	96.45±0.39b	85.02±2.09b	82.64±3.55b	86.25±2.17ab	80.04±2.29b
29%吡唑萘菌胺∙嘧菌酯SC	87 g(a.i.)/hm²	95.55±3.85ab	95.33±1.77b	87.3±1.10b	84.86±3.13ab	80.42±5.05b	70.57±1.67c
	174 g(a.i.)/hm²	97.78±3.85ab	96.45±0.39b	91.84±2.19a	86.58±2.79ab	84.17±3.15ab	75.90±3.37bc
	261 g(a.i.)/hm²	100.00±0.00a	100.00±0.00a	93.65±0.55a	89.17±3.63a	88.75±4.51a	87.56±1.77a
30%醚菌酯∙啶酰菌胺SC	202.5 g(a.i.)/hm²	88.55±7.42bc	83.78±4.02c	75.97±2.62c	63.06±3.37c	43.75±6.25c	28.43±6.56d
10%苯醚甲环唑WG	100 g(a.i.)/hm²	84.1±7.11c	49.33±1.15d	11.43±4.15d	10.83±3.63d	2.08±3.61d	0.00e