Study on annual pesticide control model of Empoasca vitis under dynamic monitoring in Yunnan black tea area

doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2021.18.017

Abstract

Abstract: Combined with the annual dynamic monitoring of Empoasca vitis （Gothe） in tea garden of Fengqing county of Yunnan province, four green prevention and control modes were used to study the prevention and control effect of Empoasca vitis （Gothe） in tea garden, and the cost was calculated. Two times of botanical biological pesticides and one time of chemical pesticides were used to prevent and control the Empoasca vitis （Gothe） in tea garden on June 16, June 24 and July 22, respectively. The results showed that the prevention and control model was pruning + stone sulfur mixture garden sealing+blue board+biological pesticide （450 times dilution of 0.6% rotenone）+chemical pesticide （1 000 times dilution of 6% ethyl doxycycline）. Under this mode of control, the average correction control effect of 7 days after three times of treatment were 78.85%, 64.650% and 76.20%, respectively, and which increased by 25.11, 41.63 and 22.68 percentage points compared with conventional control, respectively. Compared with conventional control, the output value increased by 2 100 yuan/hm², and the ratio of output to investment was 14.6.

Key words: tea, Empoasca vitis（Gothe）, dynamic monitoring, pesticide

CLC Number:

S435.711

LI Jin-long, YU Xiang-shuai, LUO Mei-yun, LONG Ya-qin, LUO Zi-wen, CHEN Lin-bo, WANG Yun-gang. Study on annual pesticide control model of Empoasca vitis under dynamic monitoring in Yunnan black tea area[J]. HUBEI AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2021, 60(18): 86-91.

References 28

[1]	王庆森,王定锋,吴光远.我国茶树假眼小绿叶蝉研究进展[J].福建农业学报,2013,28(6):615-623.
[2]	QIN D Z,ZHANG L,XIAO Q,et al.Clarification of the identity of the tea green leafhopper based on morphological comparison between Chinese and Japanese specimens[J].PloS one,2015,10(9):e0139202.
[3]	郑际雄. 云南茶叶主产区茶树病虫害综合防治策略[J].中国茶叶加工,2018(3):51-54.
[4]	王敏. 小绿叶蝉不同为害程度对茶叶品质的影响[D].广州:华南农业大学,2016.
[5]	张忠新,李浩宇,杨忠星,等.茶树假眼小绿叶蝉发生规律及防治技术研究[J].江苏农业科学,2011(1):147-149.
[6]	王勇,周成建,刘雄,等.不同色板诱杀茶假眼小绿叶蝉效果比较[J].中国植保导刊,2014,34(10):32-33.
[7]	李慧玲,张辉,王定锋,等.不同颜色色板对假眼小绿叶蝉和天敌缨小蜂及其它蜂类的引诱效应[J].茶叶学报,2015,56(3):184-188.
[8]	曹馨月,王迎春,龚雪蛟,等.小贯小绿叶蝉区域性发生规律和综合防治[J].中国植保导刊,2018,38(12):25-32.
[9]	熊兴平. 假眼小绿叶蝉防治研究进展[J].茶叶科学技术,2003(4):1-5.
[10]	庄家祥,傅建炜,苏庆泉,等.福建省茶小绿叶蝉抗药性的地区差异[J].茶叶科学,2009,29(2):154-158.
[11]	王明,王希,何玲,等.植保无人机低空低容量喷雾在茶园的雾滴沉积分布及对茶小绿叶蝉的防治效果[J].植物保护,2019,45(1):62-68,87.
[12]	赵丰华,吕立哲,任红楼,等.24%的溴虫腈防治茶尺蠖和假眼小绿叶蝉药效试验研究[J].天津农业科学,2013,19(6):64-66.
[13]	文兆明,韦静峰,彭有兵,等.几种植物源杀虫剂防治茶小绿叶蝉效果比较试验[J].中国农学通报,2008(1):379-383.
[14]	谢万森. 6种农药对茶小绿叶蝉的田间防效[J].中国植保导刊,2019,39(11):75-76,87.
[15]	庄占兴,刘钰,庄治国,等.哒螨灵对茶小绿叶蝉活性和田间应用效果[J].农药,2016,55(7):541-543.
[16]	GBT 17980.56—2004,农药田间药效试验准则(二)[S].
[17]	柳采秀,方屹豪,苍涛,等.6种杀虫剂防治茶小绿叶蝉田间药效评价[J].浙江农业科学,2018,59(12):2212-2213,2217.
[18]	朱来佳,贝文勇,左华贵,等.3种低水溶性农药防治茶假眼小绿叶蝉药效研究[J].基层农技推广,2017,5(8):43-45.
[19]	童军,付义,段巧枝,等.低毒生物农药30%茶皂素水剂防治茶小绿叶蝉田间试验[J].湖北植保,2017(1):20-22.
[20]	高秀兵,赵华富,张正秋,等.在茶假眼小绿叶蝉防治中应用静电喷雾器的效果分析[J].西北农业学报,2012,21(12):202-206.
[21]	段永春,白小宁.4种植物源杀虫剂在茶树假眼小绿叶蝉防治中的应用[J].中国植保导刊,2011,31(9):45-47.
[22]	朱平阳,姚晓明,罗文文,等.茶假眼小绿叶蝉绿色防控技术试验[J].中国植保导刊,2014,34(10):34-37.
[23]	田新湖,陈益生.鱼藤酮等生物农药防治茶假眼小绿叶蝉药效试验[J].上海农业科技,2012(1):127-128.
[24]	王华建,李继,周铁锋,等.虫螨腈防治茶假眼小绿叶蝉试验[J].浙江农业科学,2012(6):864-865.
[25]	曾明森. 虫螨腈添加APG0810助剂在不同施药方法下对茶小绿叶蝉的室内防效研究[J].中国茶叶,2020,42(7):29-31.
[26]	郭华伟,姚惠明,唐美君,等.2种植物源杀虫剂对茶小绿叶蝉的防治效果[J].浙江农业科学,2016,57(7):991-993.
[27]	SI F, ZOU R B, JIAO S S, et al.Inner filter effect-based homogeneous immunoassay for rapid detection of imidacloprid residue in environmental and food samples[J]. Ecotoxicology and environmental safety,2018, 148:862-868.
[28]	HU X R,DAI D J,WANG H D,et al.Rapid on-site evaluation of the development of resistance to quinone outside inhibitors in Botrytis cinerea[J].Scientific reports,2017,7:13861.