Effect of different spray amounts of plant protection drones on the control effect of the Chilo suppressalis

doi:10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20230456

Abstract

Abstract:

Plant protection drones with different spray amounts were used to control resistant Chilo suppressalis, and the control effect of it on the second and third generations of Chilo suppressalis were studied. The results showed that the spray amounts of the plant protection drone was positively correlated with the control effect of the Chilo suppressalis, and with the increase of the spray amounts, the seedling preservation effect and the insecticidal effect increased, and the best spray amount of 667 m² was 4 L, followed by the spray amount of 3 L, and the spray amount of 2 L was poor. When the same agent, dosage and spray amount were used, the effect of the second-generation was significantly better than that of the third-generation Chilo suppressalis. After 667 m² spraying with 4 L treatment, the seedling preservation effects of the second-generation Chilo suppressalis were 90.97% and 86.09% on the 15 and 20 days after treatment, respectively, and the seedling preservation effects of the third-generation Chilo suppressalis were 66.13% and 56.68% on the 15 and 20 days after treatment. Therefore, it is recommended that the spray amount of 667 m² should exceed 4 L when using plant protection drones to control resistant Chilo suppressalis in late rice production period or high temperature season.

Key words: UAVs, different spray amounts, Chilo suppressalis, preventive effect

CLC Number:

S435

FANG Tiefei, YAO Xiaoming, ZHOU Yujie. Effect of different spray amounts of plant protection drones on the control effect of the Chilo suppressalis[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(7): 1663-1666.

Figures/Tables 2

References 12

[1]	刘万才, 刘振东, 黄冲, 等. 近10年农作物主要病虫害发生危害情况的统计和分析[J]. 植物保护, 2016, 42(5): 1-9, 46.
[2]	徐红星, 杨亚军, 郑许松, 等. 二十一世纪以来我国水稻害虫治理成就与展望[J]. 应用昆虫学报, 2019, 56(6): 1163-1177.
[3]	刘杰, 曾娟, 杨清坡, 等. 2023年农作物重大病虫害发生趋势预报[J]. 中国植保导刊, 2023, 43(1): 32-35.
[4]	陈豪明, 周宇杰, 骆琴, 等. 植保无人机全程解决水稻病虫草害效果评价[J]. 中国稻米, 2020, 26(5): 97-101.
[5]	邵国民, 骆琴, 何信富, 等. 植保无人机防除水稻直播田杂草效果评价[J]. 中国稻米, 2019, 25(6): 89-92.
[6]	袁秋生, 黄洪, 唐涛. 植保无人机防治水稻二化螟和稻纵卷叶螟的效果研究[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2021(11): 55-58.
[7]	应俊杰, 杨俞娟, 周奶弟, 等. 不同器械施药对水稻白叶枯病防效比较及无人机飞防新技术[J]. 中国稻米, 2021, 27(3): 103-104, 110.
[8]	卢小平, 肖冬芽, 甘贱根, 等. 4种施药器械对水稻基部病虫害的防效比较及经济效益分析[J]. 江西农业学报, 2018, 30(5): 61-64.
[9]	杨燕, 周宇杰, 骆琴, 等. 不同器械和药剂对水稻褐飞虱的防治效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2021, 62(12): 2468-2469, 2472.
[10]	周晓欣, 陈奕璇, 石鑫, 等. 植保无人飞机喷雾雾滴蒸发性能测定方法及应用[J]. 现代农药, 2021, 20(3): 20-25.
[11]	林金元, 王国宾, 况慧云, 等. 喷雾助剂对雾滴粒径、抗蒸发及植保无人机喷施雾滴飘移的影响[J]. 上海农业学报, 2022, 38(2): 81-87.
[12]	宋睿, 沈国清, 张永涛, 等. 植保无人机飞防助剂的筛选及其性能评价[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2021, 37(2): 333-339.

处理	药后15 d			药后20 d
处理	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%
1	37.67 b B	6.40 b B	68.32±0.24 c C	58.33 b B	13.54 b B	52.95±3.18 c C
2	33.33 b B	3.72 c C	81.64±0.56 b B	37.00 c C	6.52 c C	77.35±1.09 b B
3	19.67 c C	1.81 d C	90.97±1.29 a A	24.00 d D	4.00 d D	86.09±0.28 a A
CK	80.67 a A	20.22 a A	0	90.00 a A	28.76 a A	0

处理	药后15 d			药后20 d
处理	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%
1	37.67 b B	6.40 b B	68.32±0.24 c C	58.33 b B	13.54 b B	52.95±3.18 c C
2	33.33 b B	3.72 c C	81.64±0.56 b B	37.00 c C	6.52 c C	77.35±1.09 b B
3	19.67 c C	1.81 d C	90.97±1.29 a A	24.00 d D	4.00 d D	86.09±0.28 a A
CK	80.67 a A	20.22 a A	0	90.00 a A	28.76 a A	0

处理	药后15 d			药后20 d
处理	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%	百丛虫量	杀虫效果/%
1	95.00 a A	37.23 b B	22.89±2.40 a A	97.67 a AB	67.04 b A	5.56±4.62 c C	319.00 b B	21.31±7.50 a A
2	90.67 a A	30.54 c C	36.75±1.66 b B	90.67 b B	40.89 c B	42.46±1.57 b B	189.67 c C	53.36±1.83 b A
3	60.00 b B	16.36 d D	66.13±3.50 c C	82.33 c C	30.74 d C	56.68±2.95 a A	134.67 d D	66.83±1.38 c B
CK	95.67 a A	48.28 a A	0	99.67 a A	71.07 a A	0	406.33 a A	0

处理	药后15 d			药后20 d
处理	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%	丛为害率/%	株为害率/%	保苗效果/%	百丛虫量	杀虫效果/%
1	95.00 a A	37.23 b B	22.89±2.40 a A	97.67 a AB	67.04 b A	5.56±4.62 c C	319.00 b B	21.31±7.50 a A
2	90.67 a A	30.54 c C	36.75±1.66 b B	90.67 b B	40.89 c B	42.46±1.57 b B	189.67 c C	53.36±1.83 b A
3	60.00 b B	16.36 d D	66.13±3.50 c C	82.33 c C	30.74 d C	56.68±2.95 a A	134.67 d D	66.83±1.38 c B
CK	95.67 a A	48.28 a A	0	99.67 a A	71.07 a A	0	406.33 a A	0

[1]	JU Yawen, XU Peng, FU Yousheng, CAO Kaige. Research on the prevention and control of wheat scab by endophytic fungal fermentation broth [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(6): 1429-1433.
[2]	WU Shuinv, FANG Yihao. Field efficacy demonstration of 200 g·L^-1 chlorantraniliprole and 150 g·L^-1 indoxacarb against Spodoptera frugiperda on maize [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(6): 1441-1444.
[3]	SHEN Zujin, SHEN Yuejun, YAO Zhangliang, XU Weidong, LU Qiang. Screening test of pesticides for the prevention and control of rice bakanae disease [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(5): 1203-1207.
[4]	LI Jianzhong, SHEN Ying, LIANG Weifang, JIANG Jianfeng, XU Gangyong, WANG Xiaodong, CHEN Jianbing, YANG Yong. Application of normalized prevention and control technology of rice bacterial leaf blight [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(4): 957-961.
[5]	FANG Yunfeng, YAO Zhangliang. Two kinds of intelligent monitoring and evaluation system to rice leaf roller Cnaphalocrocis medinalis and rice stem borer Chilo suppressalis [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(3): 652-656.
[6]	FU Sheng, REN Jie, YANG Fengli. Effect of 9 herbicides on weed control effect and yield in single-cropping late rice direct seeding field [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(3): 657-660.
[7]	QI Yueyue, SHAO Yu, ZHANG Ping, HU Zonglin, NIU Jianguo, FENG Xingkai, HU Yongyang. Combined virulence of prothioconazole and fluazole hydroxylamine compounds against fusarium head blight [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(3): 667-671.
[8]	ZHANG Fuqiang, ZHANG Hongjie, ZHANG Guo, YU Julong, WANG Junwen, QI Junsheng. Comparison of the application effects of two kinds of immune inducers and conventional agents in wheat [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(3): 672-675.
[9]	Jihui WEN, Yi YAO, Yibo LI, Qisheng SONG, Zhi WANG. Application of sexual attractants in the detection and booby-trapping of rice leaf roller [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(2): 385-389.
[10]	ZHANG Fuxian, SHEN Shengfa, SHAO Xiaowei, WU Liehong. Experimental study on the occurrence of sweet potato weevil in the field [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(1): 139-143.
[11]	LI Zilin, YANG Ji, LIU Xiaohui, MA Yiwen, TANG Yuanxiang, LI Xuewei. Comparative study on the control effects of different agents on tobacco viral disease [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(1): 162-165.
[12]	WANG Xiaofei, ZHOU Changyong, LI Meixia, MAO Jia, CHEN Yali, QI Yingjie, QIAN Xin, CHEN Xianghua, ZHENG Lei, CAO Kaige. Field control effect of 22.4% fluazole aniline seed treatment suspension on rice diseases [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 65(1): 170-174.
[13]	. [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 64(12): 2920-2922.
[14]	. [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 64(12): 2923-2925.
[15]	. [J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 64(12): 2939-2943.