常用农药在水稻叶片上的润湿能力分析

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.09.008

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 【目的】研究稻田常用农药大容量喷雾和弥雾浓度下药液在稻叶上的润湿性能。【方法】采用Zisman图法测定稻叶的临界表面张力，并将其与采用国家标准GB 5549-90的方法测定的52种农药田间使用浓度下药液的表面张力值进行比较分析；采用表面张力法测定药液中表面活性剂的临界胶束浓度，并借助5种制剂来分析说明药液在稻叶上的润湿性。【结果】南粳44、南京11和武香糯8333 3种稻叶正、反面的临界表面张力估值介于29.90—32.88 mN•m-1。大容量喷雾和弥雾时，药液的表面张力小于稻叶临界表面张力的农药分别为21和23种，其中药液中表面活性剂浓度高于临界胶束浓度的农药分别为19和21种；其余农药的药液表面张力则大于稻叶的临界表面张力或药液中的表面活性剂浓度低于临界胶束浓度。大容量喷雾和弥雾时，5%井冈霉素AS、70%吡虫啉WDG 2种农药药液的表面张力分别为46.84和46.53 mN•m-1、49.48和40.24 mN•m-1，在稻叶上的接触角均大于100°，润湿性差；50%甲基硫菌灵SC 药液的表面张力均为35.89 mN•m-1，在稻叶上的接触角介于98.59°—53.76°，润湿性较差至好；4%阿维菌素ME、1.8%阿维菌素EC 2种农药的药液表面张力分别为29.98和29.13 mN•m-1、27.67和27.67 mN•m-1，在稻叶上的接触角均小于60°，润湿性好。【结论】稻田常用农药中多数在大容量喷雾和弥雾浓度下药液的润湿性较差。

关键词: 农药, 表面活性剂, 表面张力, 临界表面张力, 临界胶束浓度

Abstract: 【Objective】 The objective of this study is to research the wettability of pesticide solutions at concentrations of high volume spray and atomizing spray used in paddy fields.【Method】The critical surface tension (CST) of rice leaf was determined by Zisman method and surface tension of 52 pesticides at concentrations of high volume spray and atomizing spray was measured followed by national standard (GB 5549-90). The relationship between the CST and the surface tension of pesticides was compared and analyzed. The critical micelle concentration (CMC) of surfactant in each pesticide was also measured according to the change of surface tension of pesticide solutions and 5 pesticides were used to illustrate the wettability of solutions on rice leaf.【Result】The estimated CST values of the adaxial and abaxial surface of rice leaves ranged from 29.90 to 32.88 mN•m-1. The surface tension values of 21 pesticide solutions at concentrations of high volume spray and 23 pesticide solutions at concentrations of atomizing spray were both less than the estimated CST values of rice leaves. Among which, surfactants in 19 pesticides at concentrations of high volume spray and 21 pesticides at concentrations of atomizing spray were above CMC. The surface tension values of the rest pesticides were more than the estimated CST values of rice leaves or the surfactants were below CMC. The surface tensions of solutions of 5% validamycin AS and 70% imidacloprid WDG at concentrations of high volume spray and atomizing spray were 46.84 and 46.53 mN•m-1, 49.48 and 40.24 mN•m-1，respectively. So the contact angles (＞100°) on rice leaves were indicative of poor wetting. The surface tensions of solutions of 50% thiophanate-methyl SC were both more than 35.89 mN•m-1, and the contact angles (98.59°-53.76°) exhibited poor to good wettability. On the contrary, the surface tensions of solutions of 4% avermectins ME and 1.8% avermectins EC were 29.98 and 29.13 mN•m-1, 27.67 and 27.67 mN•m-1, respectively. So the contact angles (＜60°) were regarded as good wetting【Conclusion】The wettability of most pesticide solutions on rice leaf is poor, so categories as well as contents of the surfactant in most pesticide remain to be adjusted.

Key words: pesticide, surfactant, surface tension, critical surface tension (CST), critical micelle concentration (CMC)

徐广春, 顾中言, 徐德进, 许小龙, 董玉轩. 常用农药在水稻叶片上的润湿能力分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(9): 1731-1740.

XU Guang-Chun, GU Zhong-Yan, XU De-Jin, XU Xiao-Long, DONG Yu-Xuan. Wettability Analysis of Pesticides on Rice Leaf[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(9): 1731-1740.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.09.008

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2012/V45/I9/1731

参考文献

[1]钱允辉, 王志强, 张夕林, 陆自强. 水稻中后期相关农药使用次数与农药残留量动态关系的研究. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(9): 2678-2685.

Qian Y H , Wang Z Q, Zhang X L, Lu Z Q. Studies on the dynamics of pesticide residues and application frequency at the middle-late stage of rice. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(9): 2678-2685. (in Chinese)

[2]何雄奎. 改变我国植保机械和施药技术严重落后的现状. 农业工程学报, 2004, 20(1): 13-15.

He X K. Improving severe draggling actuality of plan protection machinery and its application techniques. Transactions of the CSAE, 2004, 20(1): 13-15. (in Chinese)

[3]袁会珠, 齐淑华, 杨代斌. 药液在作物叶片的流失点和最大稳定持留量研究. 农药学学报, 2000, 2(4): 66-71.

Yuan H Z, Qi S H, Yang D B. Study on the point of run-off and the maximum retention of spray liquid on crop leaves. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2000, 2(4): 66-71. (in Chinese)

[4]Haque M M, Mackill D J, Ingram K T. Inheritance of leaf epicuticular wax content in rice. Crop Science, 1992, 32(4): 865-868.

[5]Graham-Bryce I J. A consideration of the effectiveness and disadvantages of current methods and of the scope for improvement. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 1977, 281: 163-179.

[6]顾中言. 植物的亲水疏水特性与农药药液行为的分析. 江苏农业学报, 2009, 25(2): 276-281.

Gu Z Y. Analysis of the relationship between hydrophilic or hydrophobic property of plant and action of pesticides solution on plants leaves. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2009, 25(2): 276-281. (in Chinese)

[7]顾中言, 许小龙, 韩丽娟. 不同表面张力的杀虫单微乳剂药滴在水稻叶面的行为特性. 中国水稻科学, 2004, 18(2): 176-180.

Gu Z Y, Xu X L, Han L J. Action of drops of monosultap ME with different surface tension on the rice leaf. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2004, 18(2): 176-180. (in Chinese)

[8]Yu Y, Zhu H, Frantz J M, Reding M E, Chan K C, Ozkan H E. Evaporation and coverage area of pesticide droplets on hairy and waxy leaves. Biosystems Engineering, 2009, 104: 324-334.

[9]邱占奎, 袁会珠, 李永平, 纪明山, 黄雄英, 逢森. 添加有机硅表面活性剂对低容量喷雾防治小麦蚜虫的影响. 植物保护, 2006, 32(2): 34-37.

Qiu Z K, Yuan H Z, Li Y P, Ji M S, Huang X Y, Pang S. Influence of the surfactant silwet408 on wheat aphids control efficacy using low volume spraying. Plant Protection, 2006, 32(2): 34-37. (in Chinese)

[10]张晓光, 董金凤. 一种新型有机硅表面活性剂提高药液润湿性能的研究. 化学研究与应用, 2008, 20(6): 663-666.

Zhang X G, Dong J F. Study on the wetting property of a new trisiloxane surfactant on the pesticide solutions. Chemical Research and Application, 2008, 20(6): 663-666. (in Chinese)

[11]Pedibhotla V K, Hall F R, Holmsen J. Deposit characteristics and toxicity of fipronil formulations for tobacco budworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) control on cotton. Crop Protection, 1999, 18: 493-499.

[12]Zhang Y, Zhang G Y, Han F. The spreading and superspeading behavior of new glucosamide-based trisiloxane surfactants on hydrophobic foliage. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, 2006, 276: 100-106.

[13]Gaskin R E, Steele K D, Forster W A. Characterising plant surfaces for spray adhesion and retention. New Zealand Plant Protection, 2005, 58: 179-183.

[14]Muller C, Riederer M. Plant surface properties in chemical ecology. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 2005, 31(11): 2621-2651.

[15]Shih F F, Daigle K W, Champagne E T. Effect of rice wax on water vapour permeability and sorption properties of edible pullulan films. Food Chemistry, 2011, 127: 118-121.

[16]屠豫钦. 农药剂型和制剂与农药的剂量转移. 农药学学报, 1999, 1(1): 1-6.

Tu Y Q. Pesticide formulation and dose transfer. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 1999, 1(1): 1-6. (in Chinese)

[17]Wirth W, Storp S, Jacobsen W. Mechanisms controlling leaf retention of agricultural spray solutions. Pesticide Science, 1991, 33(4): 411-420.

[18]顾中言, 陈明亮, 许小龙, 韩丽娟. 表面活性剂TX-10对溶液表面张力及水稻植株持液量的影响. 江苏农业学报, 2006, 22(4): 394-397.

Gu Z Y, Chen M L, Xu X L, Han L J. Effects of surfactant TX-10 on surface tension of solutions and solution retention on rice plant. Jiangsu Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2006, 22(4): 394-397. (in Chinese)

[19]刘晓燕, 曹坳程, 尹洪宗, 郭章碧, 白洁. 有机硅提高除草剂在紫茎泽兰叶片上的润湿性能的研究. 生态环境学报, 2010, 19(3): 692-696.

Liu X Y, Cao A C, Yin H Z, Guo Z B, Bai J. Study on enchancement of wetting property of herbicide on Eupatorium adenophrum spreng leaves by silicone surfactant. Ecology and Environmental Sciences, 2010, 19(3): 692-696. (in Chinese)

[20]吴文君, 胡兆农, 姬志勤. 从应用毒理学的角度讨论我国农药制剂存在的几个问题. 农药, 2000, 39(5): 1-3.

Wu W J, Hu Z N, Ji Z Q. Discussing on several problems of pesticidal formulations. Pesticides, 2000, 39(5): 1-3. (in Chinese)

[21]华乃震. 提高农药品种药效的增强剂(Ⅱ). 农药, 2010, 49(2): 79-82.

Hua N Z. Enhancer of increasement pesticide products efficacy(Ⅱ). Agrochemicals, 2010, 49(2): 79-82. (in Chinese)

[22]Gaskin R E, Steele K D. A comparison of sticker adjuvants for their effects on retention and rainfastening of fungicide sprays. New Zealand Plant Protection, 2009, 62: 339-342.

[23]Gaskin R E, Pathan A K. Characterising plant surfaces and adjuvant interactions to improve pesticide spray retention and coverage on avocados. New Zealand Avocado Growers’ Association Annual Research Report, 2006, 6: 63-70.

[24]杜文琴, 巫莹柱. 接触角测量的量高法和量角法的比较. 纺织学报, 2007, 28(7): 29-32.

Du W Q, Wu Y Z. Comparison of hypsometry and goniometry in contact angel measurement. Journal of Textile Research, 2007, 28(7): 29-32. (in Chinese)

[25]庞红宇, 黄琴, 马琛, 杜凤沛. 雾滴体积和测量时间与雾滴接触角的关系. 河南农业科学, 2005(12): 51-54.

Pang H Y, Huang Q, Ma C, Du F P. Studies on relation of droplet contact angel to droplet volume and measuring time. Journal of Henan Agricultural Science, 2005(12): 51-54. (in Chinese)

[26]Puente D W M, Baur P. Wettability of soybean (Glycine max L.) leaves by foliar sprays with respect to developmental changes. Pest Management Science, 2011, 67: 798-806.

[27]顾中言, 许小龙, 韩丽娟. 几种植物临界表面张力值的估测. 现代农药, 2002(2): 18-20.

Gu Z Y, Xu X L, Han L J. Study on the measure of the critical surface tension of plants. Modern Agrochemicals, 2002(2): 18-20. (in Chinese)

[28]屠豫钦, 李秉礼. 农药应用工艺学导论. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2006: 33-36.

Tu Y Q, Li B L. Introduction to Application Technology of Pesticides. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2006: 33-36. (in Chinese)

[29]蒋庆哲, 宋昭峥, 赵密福, 柯明. 表面活性剂科学与应用. 北京: 中国石化出版社, 2006.

Jiang Q Z, Song Z Z, Zhao M F, Ke M. Surfactant Science and Application. Beijing: China Petrochemical Press, 2006. (in Chinese)