新疆荒漠绿洲区大麦田阔叶杂草化学防除药效评价

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.01.020

新疆农业科学 ›› 2024, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (1): 184-189.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.01.020

• 农产品分析检测·林业·农业信息·植物保护 • 上一篇下一篇

新疆荒漠绿洲区大麦田阔叶杂草化学防除药效评价

沈煜洋¹(), 王仙², 陈利¹, 郭小玲³, 苗雨³, 董裕生³, 陈智军³, 方伏荣², 向莉³(), 高海峰¹()

1.新疆农业科学院植物保护研究所/农业农村部西北荒漠绿洲作物有害生物综合治理重点实验室/农业部库尔勒作物有害生物科学观测实验站,乌鲁木齐 830091
2.新疆农业科学院粮食作物研究所/农业农村部荒漠绿洲作物生理生态与耕作重点实验室,乌鲁木齐 830091
3.新疆农业科学院奇台麦类试验站,新疆奇台 831800

收稿日期:2023-05-10 出版日期:2024-01-20 发布日期:2024-02-21
通信作者: 高海峰(1983-),男,河南人,研究员,研究方向为粮食作物病虫草害防治,(E-mail)ghf20044666@163.com; 向莉(1984-),女,新疆人,高级农艺师,硕士,研究方向为大麦遗传育种与栽培,(E-mail)44340471@qq.com
作者简介:沈煜洋(1993-),男,甘肃人,助研,硕士,研究方向为粮食作物病虫草害防治,(E-mail)sansirosoul@163.com
基金资助:
国家大麦青稞产业技术体系(CARS-05-20B);新疆农业科学院青年科技骨干创新能力培养项目(xjnkq-2020012);新疆维吾尔自治区公益性科研院所基本科研业务经费项目(KY2022026)

Evaluation of chemical efficacy of broadleaf weed control in barley fields in the desert oasis area of Xinjiang

SHEN Yuyang¹(), WANG Xian², CHEN Li¹, GUO Xiaoling³, MIAO Yu³, DONG Yusheng³, CHEN Zhijun³, FANG Furong², XIANG Li³(), GAO Haifeng¹()

1. Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management on Crop in Northwestern Oasis,MOARA / Scientific Observing and Experimental Station of Crop Pests of MOARA in Korla /Institute of Plant Protection,Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Urumqi 830091, China
2. Key Laboratory of Desert Oasis Crop Physiology,Ecology and Tillage,MOARA / Institute of Food Crops,Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Urumqi 830091,China
3. Qitai Triticeae Crops Experiment Station,Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Qitai Xinjiang 830012,China

Received:2023-05-10 Online:2024-01-20 Published:2024-02-21
Correspondence author: GAO Haifeng(1983-),male,research fellow. research area:integrated control of diseases,pests and weeds for grain crops,(E-mail)ghf20044666@163.com; XIANG Li(1984-),female,native of Fuhai,Xinjiang,Senior agronomist,Master,research direction:barley genetics,breeding and cultivation,(E-mail) 44340471@qq.com
Supported by:
National Barley and Highland Barley Industry Technology System Project(CARS-05-20B);Innovation Ability Training Project for Young Sci-Tech Backbone Talents Sponsored by Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences(xjnkq-2020012);Project of Basic Scientific R &D Program of Public Welfare Research Institutions of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(KY2022026)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】筛选对大麦田阔叶杂草具有较好防效的除草剂,为荒漠绿洲生态区安全高效应用除草剂提供依据。【方法】采用随机区组的方法,调查各药剂处理小区的杂草株数和地上部分鲜质量,评价供试药剂对大麦田阔叶杂草的防除效果及安全性。【结果】药后50 d,20%双氟·氟氯酯WG 19.50 g/hm²、10%双唑草酮OD 37.50 g/hm²、200 g/L氯氟吡氧乙酸EC 210.00 g/hm²、22%氟吡·双唑酮OD 165.00 g/hm²、50% 2甲·氯·双氟SC 450.00 g/hm²、87.5% 2,4-滴异辛酯EC 577.50 g/hm²、25%辛酰溴苯腈EC 562.50 g/hm²和75%苯磺隆WG 22.50 g/hm²对阔叶杂草灰绿藜和卷茎蓼的株防效和鲜质量防效较好,防效分别为90.87%~96.02%和94.15%~98.08%,各处理株防效和鲜质量防效之间均无显著性差异。【结论】20%双氟·氟氯酯WG、10%双唑草酮OD、200 g/L氯氟吡氧乙酸EC、22%氟吡·双唑酮OD、50% 2甲·氯·双氟SC、87.5% 2,4-滴异辛酯EC、25%辛酰溴苯腈EC和75%苯磺隆WG可防除大麦田灰绿藜、卷茎蓼等阔叶杂草,且对大麦生长安全,可在大田合理轮换使用。

关键词: 荒漠绿洲区; 大麦; 阔叶杂草; 除草剂; 药效评价

Abstract:

【Objective】 The purpose of this study is to screen herbicides with good efficacy against broadleaf weeds in barley fields and provide a basis for safe and efficient application of herbicides in desert oasis ecological zones. 【Methods】 A randomized block design was conducted to this study and the number of weed plants and the fresh mass of above-ground parts in each treatment plot were investigated to evaluate the effectiveness of the test agents on broadleaf weeds and the safety of the barley plants in barley fields. 【Results】 50 d after herbicides application,20% florasulam- halauxifen-methyl WG 19.50 g/hm²,10% bipyrazone OD 37.50 g/hm²,200 g/L fluroxypyr EC 210.00 g/hm²,22% bipyrazone-fluroxypyr 165.00 g/hm²,50% MCPA-isooctyl-fluroxypyr-florasulam SC 450.00 g/hm²,87.5% 2,4-D isooctyl ester EC 577.50 g/hm²,25% bormoxynil octanoate EC 562.50 g/hm²and 75% tribenuron methyl WG 22.50 g/hm²all had great control effects of the quantity and fresh weight of weeds on Chenopodium glaucum with the range from 90.87% to 96.02% and on Fallopia convolvulus with the range from 94.15% to 98.08%. There was no significant difference between the treatment strains and fresh quality. 【Conclusion】 20% florasulam- halauxifen-methyl WG,10% bipyrazone OD,200 g/L fluroxypyr EC,22% bipyrazone-fluroxypyr OD,50% MCPA-isooctyl-fluroxypyr-florasulam SC,87.5% 2,4-D isooctyl ester EC,25% bormoxynil octanoate EC and 75% tribenuron methyl WG have the capability to control broadleaf weeds like Chenopodium glaucum and Polygonum capitatum in barley fields,and it is safe for barley growth and can be used in reasonable rotation in barley fields.

Key words: desert-oasis area; barley; broadleaf weed; herbicide; control effect evaluation

沈煜洋, 王仙, 陈利, 郭小玲, 苗雨, 董裕生, 陈智军, 方伏荣, 向莉, 高海峰. 新疆荒漠绿洲区大麦田阔叶杂草化学防除药效评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(1): 184-189.

SHEN Yuyang, WANG Xian, CHEN Li, GUO Xiaoling, MIAO Yu, DONG Yusheng, CHEN Zhijun, FANG Furong, XIANG Li, GAO Haifeng. Evaluation of chemical efficacy of broadleaf weed control in barley fields in the desert oasis area of Xinjiang[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(1): 184-189.

图/表 4

参考文献 17

[1]	冯辉, 王树杰, 郜战宁, 等. 3种除草剂对大麦田杂草防除效果及产量效应[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2017,(6):57-59,63.
	FENG Hui, WANG Shujie, GAO Zhanning, et al. Control effects,barley yield response of three herbicides and their mixtures on weeds in barley field[J]. Hunan Agricultural Sciences, 2017,(6):57-59,63.
[2]	赵云, 李鹏兵, 孔建平, 等. 不同生育时期追施氮肥对啤酒大麦生长动态及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2020, 57(12):2176-2185. DOI
	Zhao Yu, Li Pengbin, Kong Jianping, et al. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer application on growth dynamics and quality of malting barley in different growth periods[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 57(12):2176-2185.
[3]	李广阔, 王仙, 杨安沛, 等. 新疆奇台大麦种植区主要杂草防除药效初报[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2017, 54(10):1887-1892. DOI
	LI Guangkuo, WANG Xian, YANG Anpei, et al. Preliminary report on efficacy of main weeds chemical control in barley growing area of Qitai,Xinjiang[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 54(10):1887-1892. DOI
[4]	Swanton C J, Nkoa R, Blackshaw R E. Experimental methods for crop-weed competition studies[J]. Weed Science, 2015, 63(SP1):2-11. DOI URL
[5]	刘敏. 不同农艺措施及化学除草剂对饲用燕麦田杂草防除的初步研究[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2020.
	LIU Min. Preliminary study on different agronomic measures and chemical herbicides for weed control in forage Oat fields[D].. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2020.
[6]	顾江涛, 赵斌, 季昌好, 等. 江淮地区大麦田除草剂筛选试验[J]. 中国农学通报, 2012, 28(36):269-272.
	GU Jiangtao, ZHAO Bin, JI Changhao, et al. Herbicides Screening in Barley Field of Jianghuai Region[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012, 28(36):269-272.
[7]	Bhullar M S, Kaur S, Kaur T, et al. Control of broadleaf weeds with post-emergence herbicides in four barley(Hordeum spp.) cultivars[J]. Crop Protection, 2013, 43:216-222. DOI URL
[8]	郭翔, 张帆, 金宗来, 等. 大麦对新除草剂丙酯草醚敏感反应的生理作用和细胞学特性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(18):3750-3758. DOI
	GUO Xiang, ZHANG Fan, JIN Zonglai, et al. Physiological Effect and Cytological Characterization Regarding Susceptible Response of New Herbicide ZJ0273 in Barley[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2011, 44(18):3750-3758. DOI
[9]	王燕, 沈煜洋, 陈利, 等. 3种增效剂对双氟·氟氯酯防除春麦田阔叶杂草增效作用评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(6):1450-1457. DOI
	WANG Yan, SHEN Yuyang, CHEN Li, et al. Assessment of Synergism of Florasulam Halauxifen-methyl Added with Three Synergists on Controlling Broad Leaf Weeds in Spring Wheat Field[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(6):1450-1457. DOI
[10]	连磊, 路兴涛, 吴进龙, 等. 有效防除麦田抗性杂草荠菜的新型除草剂—双唑草酮[J]. 农药学学报, 2020, 22(3):461-467.
	LIAN Lei, LU Xingtao, WU Jinlong, et al. Novel herbicide bipyrazone for the control of resistant shepherd's purse(Capsella bursa-pastoris(L.) Medik.) in wheat[J]. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2020, 22(3):461-467.
[11]	施毅, 杨富, 姜超. 晋北燕麦田2种除草剂施用量筛选及防治[J]. 山西农业科学, 2020, 48(9):1510-1513.
	SHI Yi, YANG Fu, JIANG Chao. Study on Application Amount Screening and Control of Two Herbicides in Oat Field in North Shanxi Province[J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(9):1510-1513.
[12]	高新菊, 王恒亮, 陈威, 等. 双氟磺草胺与2甲4氯异辛酯的联合作用及药效评价[J]. 河南农业科学, 2015, 44(2):77-81.
	GAO Xinju, WANG Hengliang, CHEN Wei, et al. Evaluation on drug effect of joint action of florasulam and MCPA-isooctyl[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 44(2):77-81.
[13]	李美, 高兴祥, 高宗军, 等. 双氟磺草胺、2甲4氯联合作用及作物安全性评价[J]. 植物保护学报, 2013, 40(6):557-563.
	LI Mei, GAO Xingxiang, GAO Zongjun, et al. Weed control effect and crop response to florasulam plus MCPA[J]. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica, 2013, 40(6):557-563.
[14]	朱春杰. 90% 2,4-滴异辛酯乳油防除玉米田、大豆田阔叶类杂草效果评价[J]. 辽宁农业科学, 2013,(5):71-73.
	ZHU Chunjie. Evaluation of the effectiveness of 90% 2,4-D isooctyl ester EC in the control of broadleaf weeds in corn and soybean fields[J]. Liaoning Agricultural Sciences, 2013,(5):71-73.
[15]	马勇. 噻吩磺隆与2,4-D 异辛酯对小麦产量及品质的影响[J]. 黑龙江农业科学, 2013,(10):51-54.
	MA Yong. Effect of Thifensulfuron-methul and Isooctyl 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetate on wheat yield and quality[J]. Heilongjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2013,(10):51-54.
[16]	高兴祥, 安传信, 李美, 等. 喹草酮与辛酰溴苯腈复配应用于小麦田的除草效果及对小麦的安全性[J]. 植物保护学报, 2021, 48(2):407-414.
	GAO Xingxiang, AN Chuanxin, LI Mei, et al. Evaluate quinotrione and bromoxynil octanoate for weed control in wheat field[J]. Journal of Plant Protection, 2021, 48(2):407-414.
[17]	袁卉馥, 牛瑞明. 75% 苯磺隆WG 在莜麦田间除草效果[J]. 农药, 2009, 48(3):218-220.
	YUAN Huifu, NIU Ruiming. Experiment of tribenuron-methyle 75 % WG for controlling weeds in the naked oats field[J]. Agrochemicals, 2009, 48(3):218-220.

处理 Treat- ment	药后35 d 35 days after treatment	药后50 d 50 days after treatment
处理 Treat- ment	株防效 Control effect(%)	株防效 Control effect(%)	鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%)
1	87.03 ± 2.07^a	94.87 ± 1.00^a	97.17 ± 1.23^a
2	87.18 ± 3.38^a	93.76 ± 2.12^a	96.35 ± 1.63^a
3	86.46 ± 3.19^a	97.98 ± 2.02^a	99.10 ± 0.90^a
4	87.93 ± 3.37^a	94.58 ± 3.09^a	97.92 ± 1.79^a
5	88.21 ± 2.31^a	96.37 ± 2.46^a	98.06 ± 1.39^a
6	79.83 ± 3.36^a	93.70 ± 3.15^a	96.64 ± 1.88^a
7	77.44 ± 3.33^a	91.70 ± 1.63^a	96.96 ± 0.52^a
8	83.69 ± 2.11^a	86.96 ± 0.98^a	95.62 ± 1.97^a
9	-	-	-

处理 Treat- ment	药后35 d 35 days after treatment	药后50 d 50 days after treatment
处理 Treat- ment	株防效 Control effect(%)	株防效 Control effect(%)	鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%)
1	87.03 ± 2.07^a	94.87 ± 1.00^a	97.17 ± 1.23^a
2	87.18 ± 3.38^a	93.76 ± 2.12^a	96.35 ± 1.63^a
3	86.46 ± 3.19^a	97.98 ± 2.02^a	99.10 ± 0.90^a
4	87.93 ± 3.37^a	94.58 ± 3.09^a	97.92 ± 1.79^a
5	88.21 ± 2.31^a	96.37 ± 2.46^a	98.06 ± 1.39^a
6	79.83 ± 3.36^a	93.70 ± 3.15^a	96.64 ± 1.88^a
7	77.44 ± 3.33^a	91.70 ± 1.63^a	96.96 ± 0.52^a
8	83.69 ± 2.11^a	86.96 ± 0.98^a	95.62 ± 1.97^a
9	-	-	-

处理 Treat- ment	药后35 d 35 days after treatment	药后50 d 50 days after treatment
处理 Treat- ment	株防效 Control effect(%)	株防效 Control effect(%)	鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%)
1	76.14 ± 7.80^a	96.43 ± 1.79^a	95.30 ± 3.74^a
2	81.51 ± 6.85^a	92.61 ± 1.71^a	93.63 ± 1.37^a
3	83.91 ± 4.42^a	92.30 ± 4.21^a	94.52 ± 2.74^a
4	71.89 ± 6.95^a	86.51 ± 6.75^a	94.51 ± 2.75^a
5	81.64 ± 6.11^a	96.48 ± 3.52^a	98.12 ± 1.88^a
6	73.25 ± 5.54^a	91.56 ± 2.50^a	94.63 ± 1.43^a
7	83.17 ± 5.52^a	96.66 ± 1.99^a	97.43 ± 1.46^a
8	76.93 ± 2.50^a	94.96 ± 5.04^a	95.93 ± 4.07^a
9	-	-	-

处理 Treat- ment	药后35 d 35 days after treatment	药后50 d 50 days after treatment
处理 Treat- ment	株防效 Control effect(%)	株防效 Control effect(%)	鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%)
1	76.14 ± 7.80^a	96.43 ± 1.79^a	95.30 ± 3.74^a
2	81.51 ± 6.85^a	92.61 ± 1.71^a	93.63 ± 1.37^a
3	83.91 ± 4.42^a	92.30 ± 4.21^a	94.52 ± 2.74^a
4	71.89 ± 6.95^a	86.51 ± 6.75^a	94.51 ± 2.75^a
5	81.64 ± 6.11^a	96.48 ± 3.52^a	98.12 ± 1.88^a
6	73.25 ± 5.54^a	91.56 ± 2.50^a	94.63 ± 1.43^a
7	83.17 ± 5.52^a	96.66 ± 1.99^a	97.43 ± 1.46^a
8	76.93 ± 2.50^a	94.96 ± 5.04^a	95.93 ± 4.07^a
9	-	-	-

处理 Treat- ment	药后35 d 35 days after treatment	药后50 d 50 days after treatment
处理 Treat- ment	株防效 Control effect(%)	株防效 Control effect(%)	鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%)
1	83.08 ± 4.18^a	95.14 ± 0.25^a	95.74 ± 2.94^a
2	84.05 ± 4.69^a	92.90 ± 1.80^a	94.15 ± 1.00^a
3	84.75 ± 1.61^a	95.17 ± 2.42^a	95.17 ± 2.42^a
4	81.03 ± 5.59^a	91.04 ± 3.53^a	94.93 ± 2.50^a
5	84.64 ± 4.43^a	96.02 ± 3.06^a	98.08 ± 1.81^a
6	76.47 ± 2.03^a	92.45 ± 2.49^a	94.80 ± 1.29^a
7	81.51 ± 4.46^a	94.38 ± 1.83^a	97.39 ± 1.31^a
8	79.88 ± 2.51^a	90.87 ± 3.34^a	95.81 ± 3.80^a
9	-	-	-

新疆荒漠绿洲区大麦田阔叶杂草化学防除药效评价

Evaluation of chemical efficacy of broadleaf weed control in barley fields in the desert oasis area of Xinjiang

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 4

参考文献 17

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

处理 Treat- ment	药剂 Herbicides	用量 Dosage (g/hm²)
1	20%双氟·氟氯酯WG	19.50
2	10%双唑草酮OD	37.50
3	200 g/L氯氟吡氧乙酸EC	210.00
4	22%氟吡·双唑酮OD	165.00
5	50% 2甲·氯·双氟SC	450.00
6	87.5% 2,4-滴异辛酯EC	577.50
7	25%辛酰溴苯腈EC	562.50
8	75%苯磺隆WG	22.50
9	空白对照(CK)	-

[1]	向莉, 王仙, 董裕生, 郭小玲, 方伏荣, 陈智军, 马艳明, 苗雨. 外源丁酸对干旱胁迫下大麦产量及品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(9): 2173-2181.
[2]	鞠乐, 齐军仓, 陈培育, 牛银亭, 阴志刚. 干旱胁迫对大麦种子萌发、幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(8): 1879-1886.
[3]	杨金钰, 王西和, 孙九胜. 水培对全株大麦和小麦苗氨基酸组成的影响及对比分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(7): 1589-1595.
[4]	王菲菲, 谷洋洋, 于国琦, 程婧晔, 潘惠, 王顺猛, 朱娟, 吕超, 郭宝健, 许如根. 啤酒大麦的籽粒外观品质与麦芽品质指标的差异性分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(5): 1134-1140.
[5]	赵斌荣, 田晓曦, 柴军发, 景亮亮, 张红艳, 洪波, 贾彦霞. 西蓝花田桃蚜的室内药剂筛选及田间药效评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(3): 547-554.
[6]	冯彩军, 宋瑞娇, 宋凌宇, 张松, 齐军仓. 2,4-表芸苔素内酯浸种对干旱胁迫下大麦种子萌发及幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(2): 309-316.
[7]	宋凌宇, 齐军仓, 张松, 邱英, 尚纪霏, 冯彩军. 不同硅处理方式对干旱胁迫下大麦萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(2): 317-325.
[8]	马宇, 吕二锁, 巴图, 徐寿军, 徐广祥, 李建波, 杜慧婷, 刘志萍. 大麦新品种蒙啤麦5号丰产稳产适应性分析及应用评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(11): 2727-2734.
[9]	杨金钰, 孙九胜, 乔小燕, 槐国龙. 不同光质配比对水培牧草大麦生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(8): 1871-1876.
[10]	陈利, 沈煜洋, 崔燕华, 张航, 杨安沛, 范贵强, 雷钧杰, 李广阔, 高海峰. 荒漠绿洲麦区小麦白粉病发生危害及药效评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(5): 1189-1195.
[11]	苏攀龙, 翟羽佳, 刘新元, 杨德松. 6种除草剂土壤封闭处理对板蓝根幼苗期生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(3): 725-734.
[12]	张栋海, 魏俊梅, 陈兵, 吉光鹏, 王凡, 牛蛉磊. 无人机播前喷施除草剂防除棉田杂草效果评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(12): 3022-3029.
[13]	马艳明, 赵连佳, 王威, 安学春, 向莉, 苗雨. 大麦种质资源表型性状遗传差异分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(11): 2628-2636.
[14]	初占宇, 贾培松, 罗影, 努尔孜亚·亚力买买提, 付永平, 李玉. 白灵菇褐腐病防治药剂药效评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(11): 2682-2687.
[15]	宋瑞娇, 冯彩军, 齐军仓. 富氢水对干旱胁迫下大麦种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(1): 79-85.