中国农业科学 ›› 2019, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (6): 1009-1020.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.06.005
揣红运1,石延霞1,柴阿丽1,杨杰2,谢学文1(),李宝聚1(
)
收稿日期:
2018-10-31
接受日期:
2019-01-09
出版日期:
2019-03-16
发布日期:
2019-03-22
通讯作者:
谢学文,李宝聚
作者简介:
揣红运,E-mail: 805724482@qq.com。
基金资助:
CHUAI HongYun1,SHI YanXia1,CHAI ALi1,YANG Jie2,XIE XueWen1(),LI BaoJu1(
)
Received:
2018-10-31
Accepted:
2019-01-09
Online:
2019-03-16
Published:
2019-03-22
Contact:
XueWen XIE,BaoJu LI
摘要:
【目的】获得对多主棒孢(Corynespora cassiicola)抑菌活性高的杀菌剂乙霉威和腐霉利的最佳混配比例,将其加工成微粉剂并确定其对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的防治效果。【方法】采用菌丝生长速率法,测定乙霉威与腐霉利不同配比混合物对多主棒孢的毒力,以Wadley公式评价其协同作用,明确最佳增效组合;通过单因素试验、正交试验筛选载体、助剂及最优配比,确定其最佳配方后,利用气流粉碎机超微粉碎加工成微粉剂,测定其对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的防治效果。【结果】乙霉威与腐霉利以质量比1﹕1、1﹕4进行混配时,对多主棒孢菌株HG09112606、FQ07091401、HG11011509均表现为毒力增效作用,增效系数分别为3.19、2.53、1.68;1.99、1.77、1.98,其中1﹕1的混配组合增效作用较为明显。以质量分数为10%的乙霉威·腐霉利为有效成分,3%的萘磺酸钠盐甲醛缩合物NNO为分散剂,3%的十二烷基硫酸钠K12为表面活性剂,1%的聚氧乙烯烷基醚为稳定剂,15%的白炭黑和补足至100%的硅藻土为载体而研制的10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂粒径为6.18 μm,分散指数95.18%,浮游性指数86.26,含水率1.24%,坡度角67°,热贮分解率4.12%,各项检测结果均符合标准。在盆栽试验中,10%乙霉威?腐霉利微粉剂在用药量为100 g a.i./hm2时喷粉对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的防治效果为89.82%,显著高于对照药剂35%苯甲·咪鲜胺水乳剂、43%氟菌·肟菌酯悬浮剂在推荐用量时喷雾的防治效果;在田间试验中,10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂在用量为100 g a.i./hm 2时喷粉对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的防治效果为84.39%,与35%苯甲·咪鲜胺水乳剂在用量为300 g a.i./hm 2、43%氟菌·肟菌酯悬浮剂在用量为90 g a.i./hm 2时的喷雾防治效果无显著性差异。【结论】乙霉威和腐霉利混配使用对多主棒孢具有不同程度的毒力增效作用;按照选定的配方加工成的10%乙霉威?腐霉利微粉剂粒径小,分散指数、浮游性指数高,贮存稳定,在黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的防治方面具有广阔的应用前景。
揣红运,石延霞,柴阿丽,杨杰,谢学文,李宝聚. 10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂的研制及其 对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的防治效果[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(6): 1009-1020.
CHUAI HongYun,SHI YanXia,CHAI ALi,YANG Jie,XIE XueWen,LI BaoJu. Development of 10% Diethofencarb·Procymidone Micropowder and Its Control Efficacy to Cucumber Corynespora Leaf Spot[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(6): 1009-1020.
表1
不同载体对10%乙霉威·腐霉利混配制剂的影响"
处理Treatment | 分散指数Dispersion index (%) | 浮游性指数Planktonic index | 坡度角Slope angle (°) |
---|---|---|---|
凹凸棒土Attapulgite | 85.13±0.04b | 68.55±0.78b | 76.00 |
硅藻土Diatomite | 85.85±0.05b | 78.11±2.07a | 69.00 |
白炭黑Carbon-white | 91.16±0.04a | 60.67±0.88c | 67.00 |
煅烧高岭土Kaolin | 90.23±0.04a | 61.88±0.98c | 71.00 |
膨润土Bentonite | 90.76±0.05a | 71.88±0.98b | 73.00 |
滑石粉Talc | 87.08±0.06b | 53.22±1.63d | 69.00 |
图2
助剂的筛选 1:萘磺酸钠盐甲醛缩合物Formaldehyde condensates of sodium naphthalene sulfonate salt (NNO);2:萘磺酸盐类Naphthalene sulfonate (D10);3:聚羧酸盐类 Carboxylates (T36);4:烷基萘磺酸盐Alkyl naphthalene sulfonate (Morwet EFW);5:木质素磺酸盐Lignosulfonate (DM02);6:十二烷基硫酸钠Sodium dodecyl sulfate (K12);7:聚氧乙烯烷基醚Polyoxyethylene alkyl ether;8:聚氧乙烯芳基硫酸盐Polyoxyethylene aryl sulfate;9:聚氧乙烯脂肪酸酯Polyoxyethylene fatty acid ester。1—3影响值为分散指数The influence value of 1-3 is dispersion index;4—6影响值为吸附时间The influence value of 4-6 is adsorption time;7—9影响值为分解率The influence value of 7-9 is decomposition rate 根据Duncan’s最小显著性差异测定,柱上不同小写字母表示差异显著(P<0.05)According to a Duncan’s least-significant difference, different lowercases on the bars indicate significant difference (P<0.05) "
表2
载体和助剂配比优化的正交试验结果"
序号 Number | 因素Factor | 分散指数 Dispersion index (%) | 浮游性指数 Planktonic index | 坡度角 Slope angle (°) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
载体 Carrier (%) | 分散剂 Dispersant (%) | 表面活性剂 Surfactant (%) | 稳定剂 Stabilizer (%) | |||||
1 | 15.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 | 0.50 | 93.56±0.15b | 83.17±0.27a | 68.00 | |
2 | 15.00 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 1.00 | 95.18±0.34a | 86.26±0.37a | 67.00 | |
3 | 15.00 | 4.00 | 4.00 | 1.50 | 92.47±1.23b | 83.18±1.16a | 67.00 | |
4 | 20.00 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 1.50 | 81.26±1.26d | 80.16±0.94b | 74.00 | |
5 | 20.00 | 3.00 | 4.00 | 0.50 | 83.39±0.79c | 79.45±1.26b | 70.00 | |
6 | 20.00 | 4.00 | 2.00 | 1.00 | 80.17±0.87d | 78.16±0.36b | 76.00 | |
7 | 25.00 | 2.00 | 4.00 | 1.00 | 78.56±0.60e | 78.12±0.95b | 79.00 | |
8 | 25.00 | 3.00 | 2.00 | 1.50 | 80.17±1.15d | 75.36±1.56c | 77.00 | |
9 | 25.00 | 4.00 | 3.00 | 0.50 | 75.25±0.42f | 75.27±0.18c | 75.00 | |
分散指数Dispersion index | K1 | 281.21 | 253.38 | 253.90 | 252.20 | |||
K2 | 244.82 | 258.74 | 251.69 | 253.91 | ||||
K3 | 233.98 | 247.89 | 254.42 | 253.90 | ||||
k1 | 93.74 | 84.46 | 84.63 | 84.07 | ||||
k2 | 81.61 | 86.25 | 83.90 | 84.64 | ||||
k3 | 77.99 | 82.63 | 84.81 | 84.63 | ||||
极差R | 15.74 | 3.62 | 0.91 | 0.57 | ||||
浮游性指数 Planktonic index | K1 | 252.61 | 241.45 | 236.69 | 237.89 | |||
K2 | 237.77 | 241.07 | 241.69 | 242.54 | ||||
K3 | 228.75 | 236.61 | 240.75 | 238.70 | ||||
k1 | 84.20 | 80.48 | 78.90 | 79.30 | ||||
k2 | 79.26 | 80.36 | 80.56 | 80.85 | ||||
k3 | 76.25 | 78.87 | 80.25 | 79.57 | ||||
极差R | 7.95 | 1.61 | 1.67 | 1.55 | ||||
坡度角 Slope angle | K1 | 202.00 | 221.00 | 221.00 | 213.00 | |||
K2 | 220.00 | 214.00 | 216.00 | 222.00 | ||||
K3 | 231.00 | 218.00 | 216.00 | 218.00 | ||||
k1 | 67.33 | 73.67 | 73.67 | 71.00 | ||||
k2 | 73.33 | 71.33 | 72.00 | 74.00 | ||||
k3 | 77.00 | 72.67 | 72.00 | 72.67 | ||||
极差R | 9.67 | 2.33 | 1.67 | 3.00 |
表3
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂热贮稳定性"
样品 Sample | 名称 Name | 保留时间 Keep time (min) | 浓度 Concentration (μg·mL-1) | 峰面积 Peak area | 热贮分解率 Thermal storage decomposition rate (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
标样98.5%腐霉利和95%乙霉威 Standard 98.5% procymidone· 95% diethofencarb | 乙霉威Diethofencarb | 18.07 | 50.00 | 57666.00 | — |
腐霉利Procymidone | 19.14 | 50.00 | 36991.00 | ||
热贮前10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂 Before thermal storage 10% diethofencarb· procymidone micropowder | 乙霉威Diethofencarb | 18.07 | 45.38 | 52167.00 | — |
腐霉利Procymidone | 19.14 | 46.76 | 127708.00 | ||
热贮后10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂 After thermal storage 10% diethofencarb· procymidone micropowder | 乙霉威Diethofencarb | 18.07 | 42.10 | 49756.00 | 4.12 |
腐霉利Procymidone | 19.14 | 46.28 | 129915.00 |
表4
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂主要性能指标"
性能指标 Performance index | 微粉剂标准 Micropowder standard | 测定结果 Determination result |
---|---|---|
有效成分Active ingredient (%) | — | 10.00 |
细度Fineness (μm) | ≤10.00 | 6.18 |
含水率Water content (%) | <1.50 | 1.24 |
分散指数 Dispersion index (%) | >20.00 | 95.18 |
浮游性指数Planktonic index | >85.00 | 86.26 |
坡度角 Slope angle (°) | 65.00-75.00 | 67.00 |
分解率Decomposition rate (%) | <5.00 | 4.12 |
表5
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的盆栽防治效果"
处理 Treatment | 使用剂量 Dosage (g a.i./hm2) | 施药方式 Processing method | 病情指数 Disease index | 防治效果 Control efficacy (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂 10% diethofencarb·procymidone DL | 100 | 喷粉Powder injection | 6.50 | 89.82±0.73a |
150 | 5.76 | 90.99±0.32a | ||
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂 10% diethofencarb·procymidone DL | 100 | 喷雾Spray | 12.60 | 80.27±0.29c |
150 | 7.7 | 87.95±0.56b | ||
10%乙霉威·腐霉利可湿性粉剂 10% diethofencarb·procymidone WP | 100 | 喷雾Spray | 13.68 | 78.58±1.12c |
150 | 9.69 | 84.83±1.72d | ||
35%苯甲·咪鲜胺水乳剂 35% difenoconazole·prochloraz EW | 300 | 喷雾Spray | 8.56 | 86.60±1.15b |
43%氟菌·肟菌酯悬浮剂 43% fluopyram·trifloxystrobin SC | 90 | 喷雾Spray | 9.33 | 85.39±1.46d |
CK | — | — | 63.87 | — |
表6
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂对黄瓜棒孢叶斑病的田间防治效果"
处理 Treatment | 使用剂量 Dosage (g a.i/hm2) | 施药方式 Processing method | 病情指数 Disease index | 防治效果 Control efficacy (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂 10% diethofencarb·procymidone DL | 100 | 喷粉Powder injection | 6.69 | 84.39±0.98b |
150 | 3.97 | 90.74±0.39a | ||
10%乙霉威·腐霉利微粉剂 10% diethofencarb·procymidone DL | 100 | 喷雾Spray | 9.94 | 76.80±1.52f |
150 | 7.07 | 83.11±0.95c | ||
10%乙霉威·腐霉利可湿性粉剂 10% diethofencarb·procymidone WP | 100 | 喷雾Spray | 13.10 | 69.42±0.99e |
150 | 7.61 | 82.24±1.30c | ||
35%苯甲·咪鲜胺水乳剂 35% difenoconazole·prochloraz EW | 300 | 喷雾Spray | 6.13 | 85.69±0.60b |
43%氟菌·肟菌酯悬浮剂 43% fluopyram·trifloxystrobin SC | 90 | 喷雾Spray | 6.65 | 84.48±0.41b |
CK | — | — | 42.85 | — |
[1] | 禾丽菲, 李晓旭, 朱佳美, 慕卫, 刘峰 . 不同杀菌剂对黄瓜靶斑病菌的毒力作用特性比较. 农药学学报, 2018,20(1):25-32. |
HE L F, LI X X, ZHU J M, MU W, LIU F . Comparison of toxicity properties of different types of fungicides against Corynespora cassiicola on cucumber. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2018,20(1):25-32. (in Chinese) | |
[2] | 谢学文, 张自心, 武军, 石延霞, 柴阿丽, 李宝聚 . 黄瓜棒孢叶斑病病原菌RFP标记转化株的构建. 中国蔬菜, 2018(3):45-49. |
XIE X W, ZHANG Z X, WU J, SHI Y X, CHAI A L, LI B J . Construction of RFP transformation as a marker inCorynespora cassiicola from cucumber. China Vegetables, 2018(3):45-49. (in Chinese) | |
[3] |
詹家绥, 吴娥娇, 刘西莉, 陈凤平 . 植物病原真菌对几类重要单位点杀菌剂的抗药性分子机制. 中国农业科学, 2014,47(17):3392-3404.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.17.007 |
ZHAN J S, WU E J, LIU X L, CHEN F P . Molecular basis of resistance of phytopathogenic fungi to several site-specific fungicides. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014,47(17):3392-3404. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.17.007 |
|
[4] | 黄大野 . 基于微管蛋白靶标的几种蔬菜主要病原真菌耐药性与抗药性机理的研究[D]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2012. |
HUANG D Y . Tolerance and resistance mechanism of several main pathogenic fungi of vegetable base on tubulin[D]. Shenyang: Shenyang Agricultural University, 2012. (in Chinese) | |
[5] |
ISHII H, YANO K, DATE H, FURUTA A, SAGEHASHI Y, YAMAGUCHI T, SUGIYAMA T, NISHIMURA K, HASAMA W . Molecular characterization and diagnosis of QoI resistance in cucumber and eggplant fungal pathogens. Phytopathology, 2007,97(11):1458-1466.
doi: 10.1094/PHYTO-97-11-1458 pmid: 18943516 |
[6] | 小林羲明, 蒋忠锦 . 农药新型—“DL粉剂”和“FD粉剂”. 精细化工中间体, 1983(4):52-55. |
XIAOLIN X M, JIANG Z J . New pesticides-‘DL Powder’ and ‘FD Powder’.Fine Chemical Intermediates, 1983(4):52-55. (in Chinese) | |
[7] |
王美琴, 刘慧平, 韩巨才, 高俊明 . 番茄叶霉病菌对多菌灵、乙霉威及代森锰锌抗性检测. 农药学学报, 2003,5(4):30-36.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-7303.2003.04.005 |
WANG M Q, LIU H P, HAN J C, GAO J M . Detecting the resistance of Fulvia fulva to carbendazim, diethofencarb and mancozeb. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2003,5(4):30-36. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1008-7303.2003.04.005 |
|
[8] | HASAMA W, MORITA S, KATO T . Control of Corynespora target leaf spot of cucumber by use of negatively-correlated cross resistance between benzimidazole fungicides and diethofencarb. Annals of the Phytopathological Society of Japan, 1991,57(3):319-325. |
[9] | 秦天琳, 闫军民 . 50%农利灵WP防治辣椒灰霉病药效试验. 甘肃农业, 2012(9):95. |
QIN T L, YAN J M . Experimental study on the efficacy of 50% agri-pharmaceutical WP in the control of pepper gray mold.Gansu Agriculture, 2012(9):95. (in Chinese) | |
[10] |
谌江华, 姚红燕, 王丽丽, 柴伟纲, 孙梅梅 . 宁波设施蔬菜灰霉病菌对2种杀菌剂的抗性检测. 长江蔬菜, 2016(4):82-84.
doi: 10.3865/j.issn.1001-3547.2016.04.032 |
CHEN J H, YAO H Y, WANG L L, CHAI W G, SUN M M . Resistance detection ofBotrytis cinerea to two fungicides on protected vegetables of Ningbo City. Journal of Changjiang Vegetables, 2016(4):82-84. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3865/j.issn.1001-3547.2016.04.032 |
|
[11] | 秦宝福 . 苦皮藤素微粉剂的研制及应用[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2004. |
QIN B F . Studies on formulation of celangulin flo-dust and its application[D]. Yangling: Northwest A&F University, 2004. (in Chinese) | |
[12] |
赵卫松, 鹿秀云, 郭庆港, 王培培, 商俊燕, 年冠臻, 张晓云, 董丽红, 李社增, 马平 . 防治番茄灰霉病的枯草芽胞杆菌BAB-1粉尘剂研制. 中国生物防治学报, 2018,34(1):99-108.
doi: 10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2018.01.012 |
ZHAO W S, LU X Y, GUO Q G, WANG P P, SHANG J Y, NIAN G Z, ZHANG X Y, DONG L H, LI S Z, MA P . A preparation of Bacillus subtilis BAB-1 DPC against tomato gray mold. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 2018,34(1):99-108. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2018.01.012 |
|
[13] |
李姝江, 方馨玫, 曾艳玲, 樊苏恒, 朱天辉 . 解淀粉芽孢杆菌BA-12可湿性粉剂研制及对核桃根腐病的防治效果. 中国生物防治学报, 2016,32(5):619-626.
doi: 10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2016.05.011 |
LI S J, FANG X M, ZENG Y L, FAN S H, ZHU T H . Preparation of wettable powder of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens BA-12 and its control effect on walnut root rot. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 2016,32(5):619-626. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.16409/j.cnki.2095-039x.2016.05.011 |
|
[14] | ISHII H, HOLLOMON D W . Fungicide Resistance in Plant Pathogens. Principles and a Guide to Practical Management. Springer, 2015. |
[15] |
张鹏, 王文桥, 黄啟良, 孟润杰, 赵建江, 马志强, 韩秀英, 张小风 . 40%氟菌·唑醚悬浮剂的研制及其对马铃薯晚疫病田间防治效果. 中国农业科学, 2013,46(15):3142-3150.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2013.15.008 |
ZHANG P, WANG W Q, HUANG Q L, MENG R J, ZHAO J J, MA Z Q, HAN X Y, ZHANG X F . Development of 40% fluopicolide·pyraclostrobin suspension concentrate and its controlling efficacy to potato late blight in the field. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2013,46(15):3142-3150. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2013.15.008 |
|
[16] |
马涛, 汤达祯, 张贵才, 葛际江, 蒋平 . 表面活性剂在油水界面的吸附行为. 应用化工, 2007,36(10):1017-1020.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-3206.2007.10.024 |
MA T, TANG D Z, ZHANG G C, GE J J, JIANG P . Adsorption behavior of surfactant in oil-water interface. Applied Chemical Industry, 2007,36(10):1017-1020. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-3206.2007.10.024 |
|
[17] |
LIANG R J . Orthogonal test design for optimization of the extraction of polysaccharides from Phascolosoma esulenta and evaluation of its immunity activity. Carbohydrate Polymers, 2008,73(4):558-563.
doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2007.12.026 pmid: 26048221 |
[18] | 凌世海 . 农药剂型加工——固体制剂. 3版. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2003. |
LING S H. Pesticide Formulation——Solid Formulations. 3rd ed. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2003. ( in Chinese) | |
[19] | 揣红运, 谢学文, 石延霞, 柴阿丽, 李宝聚 . 精量电动弥粉机应用技术. 农业工程技术, 2017,37(31):21-23, 28. |
CHUAI H Y, XIE X W, SHI Y X, CHAI A L, LI B J . Application technology of precision electric pulverized machine. Agricultural Engineering Technology, 2017,37(31):21-23, 28. (in Chinese) | |
[20] |
阚琳娜, 李宝聚, 纪明山, 张宗俭, 石延霞 . 黄瓜褐斑病防治药剂的活体筛选. 中国蔬菜, 2007(4):22-24.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6346.2007.04.007 |
KAN L N, LI B J, JI M S, ZHANG Z J, SHI Y X . In vivo studies on screening effective fungicides against Corynespora cassiicola. China Vegetables, 2007(4):22-24. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6346.2007.04.007 |
|
[21] | HASAMA W . Occurrence and characteristics of resistant strains of Corynespora melonis against benzimidazole compounds. Annals of the Phytopathological Society of Japan, 1991,57(3):312-318. |
[22] | FURUKAWA T, USHIYAMA K, KISHI K . Corynespora leaf spot of scarlet sage caused by Corynespora cassiicola. Journal of General Plant Pathology, 2008,74(2):117-119. |
[23] |
邢光耀 . 几种药剂混配对黄瓜靶斑病的防治试验. 长江蔬菜, 2013(8):50-51.
doi: 10.3865/j.issn.1001-3547.2013.08.018 |
XING G Y . Control efficacy of several mixed fungicides on cucumber target leaf spot.Changjiang Vegetables, 2013(8):50-51. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3865/j.issn.1001-3547.2013.08.018 |
|
[24] | 郑雪松, 张潜坤, 陈宇, 茹李军, 张晓波, 丑靖宇, 王文桥, 李淼 . 唑菌酯及其混剂防治黄瓜靶斑病室内及田间药效试验. 农药, 2015,54(5):378-380. |
ZHENG X S, ZHANG Q K, CHEN Y, RU L J, ZHANG X B, CHOU J Y, WANG W Q, LI M . Lab and field efficacy of mixtures containing pyraoxystrobin against Corynespora cassiicola. Agrochemicals, 2015,54(5):378-380. (in Chinese) | |
[25] |
ISHII H . QoI fungicide resistance: current status and the problems associated with DNA-based monitoring//GISI U. Recent Developments in Management of Plant Diseases. Springer Science+ Business Media, 2010: 37-45.
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-8804-9_3 |
[26] |
孟润杰, 王文桥, 吴杰, 韩秀英, 周大伟, 宁昭玉 . 噻呋酰胺与嘧菌酯混配对马铃薯黑痣病菌增效作用及其田间防效. 植物保护学报, 2018,45(2):367-372.
doi: 10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2018.2016083 |
MENG R J, WANG W Q, WU J, HAN X Y, ZHOU D W, NING Z Y . Synergistic interaction and field control effect of mixtures of thifluzamide with azoxystrobin against Rhizoctonia solani. Journal of Plant Protection, 2018,45(2):367-372. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2018.2016083 |
|
[27] | 王晓坤, 郭贝贝, 高杨杨, 慕卫, 刘峰 . 六种三唑类杀菌剂对番茄叶霉病菌的毒力及其安全性和田间防效评价. 植物保护学报, 2017,44(4):671-678. |
WANG X K, GUO B B, GAO Y Y, MU W, LIU F . The toxicity of six triazole fungicides to Cladosporium fulvum and their safety and field efficacy in the control of tomato leaf mold. Journal of Plant Protection, 2017,44(4):671-678. (in Chinese) | |
[28] |
刘振华, 张林, 罗远婵, 张道敬, 李元广 . 基于极端顶点混料试验设计的多粘类芽孢杆菌可湿性粉剂载体优化. 农药学学报, 2014,16(4):445-451.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-7303.2014.04.12 |
LIU Z H, ZHANG L, LUO Y C, ZHANG D J, LI Y G . Optimization of Paenibacillus polymyxa wettable powder based on the extreme vertex mixture design. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2014,16(4):445-451. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-7303.2014.04.12 |
|
[29] | 袁会珠, 齐淑华, 杨代斌 . 温室大棚粉尘法施药技术研究. 植物保护学报, 2000,27(4):364-368. |
YUAN H Z, QI S H, YANG D B . Studies on cloudy-dusting in plastic tunnel. Journal of Plant Protection, 2000,27(4):364-368. (in Chinese) | |
[30] | 郑建秋, 张云, 胡荣娟, 王艳梅 . 保护地蔬菜粉尘施药技术. 中国植保导刊, 1995(5):20-21. |
ZHENG J Q, ZHANG Y, HU R J, WANG Y M . Application technology of vegetable dust in protected land. China Plant Protection, 1995(5):20-21. (in Chinese) | |
[31] |
赵国庆, 崔文德, 李朝恒, 刘纪高 . 粉尘剂在棚室蔬菜上的使用技术. 长江蔬菜, 2000(7):20-21.
doi: 10.3865/j.issn.1001-3547.2000.07.013 |
ZHAO G Q, CUI W D, LI C H, LIU J G . Application technology of dust on greenhouse vegetables.Changjiang Vegetables, 2000(7):20-21. (in Chinese)
doi: 10.3865/j.issn.1001-3547.2000.07.013 |
[1] | 李桂香,李秀环,郝新昌,李智文,刘峰,刘西莉. 山东省多主棒孢对三种常用杀菌剂的敏感性监测及对氟吡菌酰胺的抗性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(7): 1359-1370. |
[2] | 路粉,孟润杰,吴杰,赵建江,李洋,毕秋艳,韩秀英,李敬华,王文桥. 马铃薯晚疫病菌对霜脲氰抗性动态监测及药效验证[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(18): 3556-3564. |
[3] | 周京龙,冯自力,魏锋,赵丽红,张亚林,周燚,冯鸿杰,朱荷琴. 棉花内生细菌YUPP-10及其分泌蛋白CGTase对棉花枯萎病的防治作用及机理[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(17): 3691-3701. |
[4] | 解昆仑,刘莉铭,刘美,彭斌,吴会杰,古勤生. 小西葫芦黄花叶病毒dsRNA的原核表达及其对ZYMV的防治效果[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(8): 1583-1593. |
[5] | 周华飞,杨红福,姚克兵,庄义庆,束兆林,陈志谊. FliZ调控枯草芽孢杆菌Bs916生物膜形成 及其对水稻纹枯病的防治效果[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(1): 55-64. |
[6] | 刘波,陈倩倩,王阶平,阮传清,陈燕萍,夏江平,车建美,陈峥,潘志针,文笑,朱育菁,张海峰,郑雪芳. 整合微生物组菌剂的提出、研发与应用[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(14): 2450-2467. |
[7] | 禾丽菲,陈乐乐,肖斌,赵时峰,李秀环,慕卫,刘峰. 番茄叶霉病菌对咯菌腈敏感基线的建立及田间防治效果评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(8): 1475-1483. |
[8] | 孙炳学,石延霞,朱发娣,谢学文,柴阿丽,李宝聚. 多主棒孢SdhB-H278R突变位点AS-real-time PCR 定量检测体系的建立[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(24): 4647-4658. |
[9] | 曹海潮,李秀环,王晓坤,白海秀,慕卫,刘峰. 吡唑醚菌酯及三唑类杀菌剂对番茄颈腐根腐病的防治效果[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(21): 4065-4075. |
[10] | 路粉,赵建江,刘晓芸,孟润杰,吴杰,韩秀英,王文桥. 马铃薯晚疫病菌对甲霜灵的抗性监测及替代药剂防治效果[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(14): 2700-2710. |
[11] | 黄学屏,宋昱菲,罗健,赵时峰,慕卫,刘峰. 蔬菜菌核病菌对氟吡菌酰胺的敏感性及防病应用潜力评估[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(14): 2711-2718. |
[12] | 顾中言,徐德进,徐广春. 田间药液用量影响农药单位剂量防治效果的原因分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(13): 2513-2523. |
[13] | 高杨杨,禾丽菲,李北兴,林琎,慕卫,刘峰. 山东省辣椒炭疽病病原菌的鉴定及高效防治药剂的筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(8): 1452-1464. |
[14] | 蓝月,胡月,王琰,郭艳珍,赵恒科,何林,钱坤. 界面聚合制备乙草胺微胶囊及其杂草控制效果和环境残留[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(14): 2739-2747. |
[15] | 马玉琴,魏 偲,茆振川,杨宇红,冯东昕,谢丙炎. 生防型菌肥对黄瓜生长及根结线虫病的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(15): 2945-2954. |
|