防治糜子丝黑穗病的杀菌剂筛选及田间防治效果研究

doi:10.11686/cyxb2015514

草业学报 ›› 2016, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (9): 132-141.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2015514

防治糜子丝黑穗病的杀菌剂筛选及田间防治效果研究

刘佳佳^1,2**, 周瑜^1,2**, 张盼盼³, 晁桂梅^1,2, 朱明旗^2,4, 冯佰利^1,2*

1.西北农林科技大学农学院,陕西杨凌 712100;
2.旱区作物逆境生物学国家重点实验室,陕西杨凌 712100;
3.国家杂粮工程技术研究中心, 黑龙江八一农垦大学,黑龙江大庆 163319;
4.西北农林科技大学植物保护学院,陕西杨凌712100

收稿日期:2015-11-16 出版日期:2016-09-20 发布日期:2016-09-20
通讯作者: E-mail:7012766@163.com
作者简介:刘佳佳(1990-),女,河北石家庄人,在读硕士。E-mail:ljjzl2014@163.com。周瑜(1987-),女,重庆合川人,在读博士。E-mail:yuzhou@nwsuaf.edu.cn。 **共同第一作者These authors contributed equally to this work.
基金资助:
国家谷子糜子产业技术体系专项资金(CARS-07-13.5-A9),科技支撑计划项目(2014BAD07B03)和国家自然科学基金(31371529)资助

Efficacy of fungicides for control of head smut (Sporisorium destruens) in broomcorn millet

LIU Jia-Jia^1,2,**, ZHOU Yu^1,2,**, ZHANG Pan-Pan³, CHAO Gui-Mei^1,2, ZHU Ming-Qi^2,4, FENG Bai-Li^1,2,*

1.College of Agronomy, Northwest A & F University, Yangling 712100, China;
2.State Key Laboratory of Crop Stress Biology for Arid Areas, Yangling 712100, China;
3.National Coarse Cereals Engineering Research Center, Heilongjiang August First Agricultural University, Daqing 163319, China;
4.College of Plant Protection, Northwest A & F University, Yangling 712100, China

Received:2015-11-16 Online:2016-09-20 Published:2016-09-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为筛选防治糜子丝黑穗病的高效药剂,采用琼脂平板孢子萌芽法测定了6种杀菌剂对糜子丝黑穗病菌的室内毒力,并通过两年田间小区试验评价了杀菌剂对糜子丝黑穗病的药效及糜子植株生长的影响。室内毒力测定结果表明,戊唑醇对丝黑穗病菌的毒力最强,EC₅₀值为0.1127 μg/mL,其次为烯唑醇、苯醚甲环唑、甲基硫菌灵和多菌灵,EC₅₀值分别为1.0634,6.1775,12.4969和54.4021 μg/mL,福美双的毒力最弱,EC₅₀值为1169.6448 μg/mL。药剂处理与对照相比,发芽率均有显著降低,随浓度的增高,种子活力下降,其中烯唑醇对种子萌发抑制作用最大,发芽率和发芽势均最小。田间药效试验结果与室内毒力测定结果一致,戊唑醇防效最好,其次为烯唑醇、甲基硫菌灵、多菌灵,苯醚甲环唑仅在浓度高时防效较好,福美双防治效果最差。植株生长影响评价结果表明,多菌灵显著降低主茎倒二叶面积、主茎倒三叶面积、叶干重和分蘖数。与对照相比,各药剂处理下的单株粒重均有不同程度的减少,但产量均增加,其中戊唑醇处理下的产量两年均最高,而福美双在2014年没有显著增产效果。因此,在6种供试药剂中,戊唑醇能以最低浓度获得最好的防治效果,可在实际生产中推广利用。

Abstract: Six fungicides potentially useful for control head smut in broomcorn millet (Panicum miliaceum) were assessed for toxicity and field efficacy against Sporisorium destruens by assessing teliospore germination on agar medium in a laboratory and the growth of broomcorn millet in the field over two seasons. The results of laboratory toxicity tests showed that tebuconazole exhibited the greatest inhibition of S. destruens, with the EC₅₀ (median effective concentration) value of 0.1127 μg/mL, followed by diniconazole, difenoconazole, thiophanate-methyl and carbendazim with the EC₅₀ values of 1.0634, 6.1775, 12.4969 and 54.4021 μg/mL, respectively. Thiram showed the lowest toxicity with the EC₅₀ value of 1169.6448 μg/mL. Compared with the control (no fungicide), fungicide treatments significantly decreased the germination rate and vigor of broomcorn millet seeds. Diniconazole reduced germination and vigor the most. The results of field efficacy trials were similar; tebuconazole had the best control efficacy, followed by diniconazole, thiophanate-methyl and carbendazim. The control efficacy of difenoconazole was good only at high concentration. Thiram had the poorest control efficacy. Carbendazim significantly reduced the area of the second and the third leaf, dry weight of leaves and the number of tillers. Compared with the control, all fungicide treatments reduced grain weight but increased the grain yield. Broomcorn millet yields following tebuconazole application were the highest in both years, while thiram didn’t significantly increase yield in 2014. In summary, tebuconazole produced the best control efficacy at the lowest application rate and could be used for broomcorn millet production.

刘佳佳, 周瑜, 张盼盼, 晁桂梅, 朱明旗, 冯佰利. 防治糜子丝黑穗病的杀菌剂筛选及田间防治效果研究[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(9): 132-141.

LIU Jia-Jia, ZHOU Yu, ZHANG Pan-Pan, CHAO Gui-Mei, ZHU Ming-Qi, FENG Bai-Li. Efficacy of fungicides for control of head smut (Sporisorium destruens) in broomcorn millet[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(9): 132-141.

参考文献

[1] Lin R F, Chai Y. Minor Grain Crops in China[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2002: 69-70.
[2] Qiao Z J. Present situation and developing thought of broomcorn millet industry. Crops, 2013, 5: 25-27.
[3] Wang L, Wang X Y, Wen Q F, et al . Identification and evaluation of resistance to dustbrand in Chinese proso millet germplasm resources. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2008, 9(4): 497-501.
[4] Guo F Z, Zhang H, Lu S L, et al . The cause of maize head smut and control measure. Jilin Agriculture, 2012, (1): 54.
[5] Li L X, Wang H P. Occurrence regularity of Karnal bunt of wheat and control measure. Modern Agricultural Sciences and Technology, 2011, 22: 27.
[6] Zhang C P. Smut of oat and control measure. Modern Agriculture, 1999, (2): 14.
[7] Gao Z J, Zhu L H, Guo W H, et al . The medicine mixs influence the black ear disease of the son of proso. Inner Mongolia Agricultural Science and Technology, 2013, (5): 68-69.
[8] Wang W Y. Screening of fungicides to control broomcorn millet smut. Agricultural Development & Equipments, 2013, (4): 48.
[9] Liang H Y, Li H, Yang R D, et al . Study on control effect of different agents on broomcorn millet smut. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Science, 2015, 43(6): 737-739, 750.
[10] Wang X Y. China Proso Millet Variety Resources Set[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1990.
[11] Fang Z D. Research of Plant Pathology Method[M]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1998: 151-154.
[12] Li J Q, Liu H B, Liu X L, et al . Effects of five fungicides on the virulence and germinated structure of the teliospore of Tilletia foetid . Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2000, (1): 41-46.
[13] Wang X Y. Broomcorn Millet ( Panicum miliaceum L.) Germplasm Description Specifications and Standards[M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 2006: 7-24.
[14] Liu T R. Smut Fungi and Smut Diseases[M]. Beijing: Agriculture Press, 1984: 382-386.
[15] Phipps P M. Soybean and peanut seed treatment: new developments and needs. Plant Disease, 1984, 68(1): 76-77.
[16] Wu Z Y, Zhang Y B, Zhang Y X. The current situation, products and development trend of seed treatments. World Pesticide, 2015, 37(3): 29-32.
[17] Cheng S M, Song J Y, Xia G J, et al . Effect of compound fludioxoid by seeding coating for controlling wheat sharp eyespot and wheat take-all. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2002, 22(1): 76-79.
[18] Sun B J, Yuan H X, Xing X P, et al . Control effect of different seed treatments to wheat take-all. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2008, 28(4): 709-712.
[19] Zhang C X, Nan Z B, Li C J, et al . Studies progress of fungicide seed treatments on the control of turfgrass diseases. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2006, 15(6): 14-22.
[20] Waard M A, Georgopoulos S G, Hollomon D W, et al . Chemical control of plant diseases: problems and prospects. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 1993, 31(1): 403-421.
[21] Lazarovits G. Modern Selective Fungicides: Properties, Applications and Mechanisms of Action[M]// Lyr H Edited. Longman Scientific & Technical, Essex. New York: Copublished in the US with Wiley, 1987: 205-232.
[22] Zhu Y H, Wang Z R, Li B Q. Encyclopedia of Agricultural Chemicals[M]. Beijing: Three Gorges Press of China, 2006.
[23] Qi Z Q, Zhou M G. Antifungal activity of tebuconazole to Rhizoctonia cerealis . Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2003, 5(3): 80-84.
[24] Wang H C, Zhou M G, Zhang Y J, et al . Fungicidal activity of tebuconazole against Rhizoctonia solani and its application to rice. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2008, 9(4): 357-362.
[25] Qu J L, Li X J, Zhang Y, et al . Evaluation of fungitoxicity of tebuconazole against Alternaria mali and Physalospora piricola on apple in laboratory and in field. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2007, 9(2): 149-152.
[26] Liu F, Mu W, Zhang W J, et al . Control of rice blight on dry nursery seedling by fungicide and physiological regulation on rice seedling. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2004, 6(2): 37-42.
[27] Wang Y L, Yang D B, Yuan H Z, et al . Effects of seed-coating tebuconazole and difenoconazole on emergence of maize seeds and response of seedlings at chilling stress. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2009, 11(1): 59-64.
[28] Nan Z B, Ge G Z, Li C J. Effect of pesticides on field controlling root rot of Vicia faba . Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2002, 13(8): 943-947.
[29] Li J T, Fan H F, Wang J M, et al . Toxicity and field control efficacy of four fungicides against Sclerotium rolfsii . Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2013, 35(6): 686.
[1] 林汝法, 柴岩. 中国小杂粮[M]. 北京: 中国农业科技出版社, 2002: 69-70.
[2] 乔志军. 糜子产业发展现状与思路. 作物杂志, 2013, 5: 25-27.
[3] 王纶, 王星玉, 温琪汾, 等. 中国黍稷种质资源抗黑穗病鉴定评价. 植物遗传资源学报, 2008, 9(4): 497-501.
[4] 郭凤芝, 张弘, 鹿树丽, 等. 玉米丝黑穗病的发病原因及防治措施. 吉林农业, 2012, (1): 54.
[5] 李利欣, 王慧平. 小麦腥黑穗病发病规律及防治措施. 现代农业科技, 2011, 22: 27.
[6] 张翠萍. 莜麦的黑穗病及其防治. 现代农业, 1999, (2): 14.
[7] 高志军, 朱利华, 郭威虎, 等. 药剂拌种对糜子丝黑穗病的影响. 内蒙古农业科技, 2013, (5): 68-69.
[8] 王婉莹. 糜子黑穗病防治药剂筛选试验总结. 农业开发与装备, 2013, (4): 48.
[9] 梁海燕, 李海, 杨如达, 等. 不同药剂对糜子黑穗病的防治效果. 山西农业科学, 2015, 43(6): 737-739, 750.
[10] 王星玉. 中国黍稷品种资源特性鉴定集[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1990.
[11] 方中达. 植病研究方法[M]. 第三版. 北京:中国农业出版社, 1998: 151-154.
[12] 李健强, 刘洪斌, 刘西莉, 等. 5种药剂对小麦光腥黑穗病菌的毒力和孢子萌发形态结构的影响. 农药学学报, 2000, (1): 41-46.
[13] 王星玉. 黍稷种质资源描述规范和数据标准[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006: 7-24.
[14] 刘惕若. 黑粉菌与黑粉病[M]. 北京: 农业出版社, 1984: 382-386.
[16] 伍振毅, 张一宾, 张翼翾. 种子处理剂的现状,品种及发展趋向. 世界农药, 2015, 37(3): 29-32.
[17] 程水明, 宋家永, 夏国军, 等. 复方适乐时拌种防治小麦纹枯病和全蚀病的试验研究. 麦类作物学报, 2002, 22(1): 76-79.
[18] 孙炳剑, 袁虹霞, 邢小萍, 等. 不同种子处理剂对小麦全蚀病的防治效果. 麦类作物学报, 2008, 28(4): 709-712.
[19] 张成霞, 南志标, 李春杰, 等. 杀菌剂拌种防治草坪草病害的研究进展. 草业学报, 2006, 15(6): 14-22.
[22] 朱永和, 王振荣, 李步青. 农药大典[M]. 北京: 中国三峡出版社农业科教出版中心, 2006.
[23] 祁之秋, 周明国. 戊唑醇对小麦纹枯病菌的抑菌作用. 农药学学报, 2003, 5(3): 80-84.
[24] 汪汉成, 周明国, 张艳军, 等. 戊唑醇对立枯丝核菌的抑制作用及在水稻上的应用. 农药学学报, 2008, 9(4): 357-362.
[25] 曲健禄, 李晓军, 张勇, 等. 戊唑醇对苹果斑点落叶病菌及轮纹病菌的毒力和药效评价. 农药学学报, 2007, 9(2): 149-152.
[26] 刘峰, 慕卫, 张文吉, 等. 杀菌剂对水稻旱育秧立枯病的控制作用及其对秧苗的生理效应. 农药学学报, 2004, 6(2): 37-42.
[27] 王雅玲, 杨代斌, 袁会珠, 等. 低温胁迫下戊唑醇和苯醚甲环唑种子包衣对玉米种子出苗和幼苗的影响. 农药学学报, 2009, 11(1): 59-64.
[28] 南志标, 葛高祖, 李春杰. 数种农药对蚕豆根腐病的田间防效. 应用生态学报, 2002, 13(8): 943-947.
[29] 李建涛, 范怀峰, 王建美, 等. 四种杀菌剂对花生白绢病菌的毒力及田间控制作用. 中国油料作物学报, 2013, 35(6): 686.

防治糜子丝黑穗病的杀菌剂筛选及田间防治效果研究

Efficacy of fungicides for control of head smut (Sporisorium destruens) in broomcorn millet

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 0

编辑推荐

Metrics