三种农药防治水稻害虫室内及田间探索研究

论文摘要

本文在室内和田间研究了3种杀虫剂,锐劲特、乙虫腈和扑虱灵不同剂量和不同应用时间对稻飞虱的控制效果及对水稻植株生理生化的影响。室内(盆载水稻)试验结果表明3种杀虫剂的防效随使用浓度和时间而变。其中锐劲特在药后20、30、40d防效超过65%,但40d后防效逐渐下降。乙虫腈在试验期间防效最高。扑虱灵的防效不够理想,尤其是40d后。药后60d,锐劲特和扑虱灵无防效,然后乙虫腈却处理具有较好的防效。另外,所以处理在药后随时间而逐渐下降。药后40d扑虱灵变为负效应,只有乙虫腈处理有较好的效果。田间试验表明不同处理在不同时间防效差异显著。从药后到40d,除扑虱灵外所有处理均超过60%。40d后,所有处理防效迅速下降。锐劲特随药后时间而下降。乙虫腈和扑虱灵防效开始上升而后下降。扑虱灵在整个试验期间防效低于55%。40d后,所有处理防效显著下降。生化测定表明所有处理水稻植株体内草酸含量随处理后天数增加而下降,在40d前与对照相比表现明显差异,但40d后锐劲特和扑虱灵处理逐渐下降,到药后50d,处理与对照无显著差异。然而,药后60d乙虫腈处理草酸含量显著低于对照。所有处理水稻植株还原糖含量随处理后天数增加逐渐下降。锐劲特处理开始增加而后下降,扑虱灵相反,开始下降,然后上升。乙虫腈始终比对照增加。另外测定了锐劲特的残留动态。回收试验表明锐劲特的回收率在86~91.6%,变异系数4.72~5.36%,下测限度为5μg/kg。

论文目录

• ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
• ABSTRACT
• 摘要
• Chapter One Introduction
• Chapter Two Literature review
• 2.1 History of rice cultivation
• 2.2 Insect pests of rice
• 2.2.1 Rice leaf folder and brown plant hopper
• 2.2.2 Insect Damage
• 2.3 Insecticides research on BPH and LF
• 2.4 Fipronil （Regent） insecticide
• 2.4.1 Fipronil residues in food
• 2.4.2 Fipronil residue in water and soil of rice fields
• 2.5 Resistance and cross resistance
• 2.6 Sustainable agriculture
• 2.7 Environmental fate
• 2.8 Human health impacts
• Chapter Three Material and Methods
• 3.1 Location
• 3.2 Materials
• 3.2.1 Rice Varity
• 3.2.2 Insects
• 3.2.3 Pesticides
• 3.3 Methods
• 3.3.1 Treatments and designs of experiment
• 3.3.1.1 Experiment in rice fields
• 3.3.1.2 The Experiments in the lab
• 3.3.2 Calculation of control efficacy against C.medinalis
• 3.3.3 Control efficacy against BPH
• 3.3.4 Determination of fipronil residue and impacts on physiology and Biochemistry in potted rice plants
• 3.3.4.1 Determination of fipronil residue
• 3.3.4.2 Determination of reducing sugar
• 3.3.4.3 Determination of oxalic acid
• 3.3.4.4 Determination of glutathione-S-transferase （GSTS）
• 3.3.5 Statistical Analysis
• Chapter Four Results
• 4.1 Effect of different treatments on control efficacy of BPH in the lab
• 4.2 Comparison of control efficacy of different treatments under the Field experiment
• 4.2.1 Comparison of control efficacy of different treatments against C.medinalis
• 4.2.2 Comparison of control efficacy of different treatments against BPH
• 4.3 Comparison of residual content of regent in rice plants following different treatments
• 4.4 Effect of different treatments on the reducing sugar in rice plants
• 4.5 Effect of different treatments on the oxalic acid in rice plants
• 4.6 Effect of different treatments on the glutathione-S-transferase （GSTS） in Rice plants
• Chapter Five Discussion
• 5.1 Effect of control efficacy of different treatments against BPH in the lab Experiments
• 5.2 Comparison of control efficacy of different treatments against C. medinalis
• 5.3 Effects of insecticides on biochemical substances in rice plants
• Chapter six Summary and conclusion
• References