Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences ›› 2024, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (1): 184-189.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.01.020
• Agricultural Product Analysis and Detection·Forestry·Agricultural Information·Plant Protection • Previous Articles Next Articles
SHEN Yuyang1(), WANG Xian2, CHEN Li1, GUO Xiaoling3, MIAO Yu3, DONG Yusheng3, CHEN Zhijun3, FANG Furong2, XIANG Li3(), GAO Haifeng1()
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)Supported by:
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()
通讯作者:
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)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:
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.
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.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.xjnykx.com/EN/10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2024.01.020
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) | - |
Tab.1 Experiment design
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) | - |
处理 Treat- ment | 药后35 d 35 days after treatment | 药后50 d 50 days after treatment | |
---|---|---|---|
株防效 Control effect(%) | 株防效 Control effect(%) | 鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%) | |
1 | 87.03 ± 2.07a | 94.87 ± 1.00a | 97.17 ± 1.23a |
2 | 87.18 ± 3.38a | 93.76 ± 2.12a | 96.35 ± 1.63a |
3 | 86.46 ± 3.19a | 97.98 ± 2.02a | 99.10 ± 0.90a |
4 | 87.93 ± 3.37a | 94.58 ± 3.09a | 97.92 ± 1.79a |
5 | 88.21 ± 2.31a | 96.37 ± 2.46a | 98.06 ± 1.39a |
6 | 79.83 ± 3.36a | 93.70 ± 3.15a | 96.64 ± 1.88a |
7 | 77.44 ± 3.33a | 91.70 ± 1.63a | 96.96 ± 0.52a |
8 | 83.69 ± 2.11a | 86.96 ± 0.98a | 95.62 ± 1.97a |
9 | - | - | - |
Tab.2 The control effect of different treatments on Chenopodium glaucum
处理 Treat- ment | 药后35 d 35 days after treatment | 药后50 d 50 days after treatment | |
---|---|---|---|
株防效 Control effect(%) | 株防效 Control effect(%) | 鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%) | |
1 | 87.03 ± 2.07a | 94.87 ± 1.00a | 97.17 ± 1.23a |
2 | 87.18 ± 3.38a | 93.76 ± 2.12a | 96.35 ± 1.63a |
3 | 86.46 ± 3.19a | 97.98 ± 2.02a | 99.10 ± 0.90a |
4 | 87.93 ± 3.37a | 94.58 ± 3.09a | 97.92 ± 1.79a |
5 | 88.21 ± 2.31a | 96.37 ± 2.46a | 98.06 ± 1.39a |
6 | 79.83 ± 3.36a | 93.70 ± 3.15a | 96.64 ± 1.88a |
7 | 77.44 ± 3.33a | 91.70 ± 1.63a | 96.96 ± 0.52a |
8 | 83.69 ± 2.11a | 86.96 ± 0.98a | 95.62 ± 1.97a |
9 | - | - | - |
处理 Treat- ment | 药后35 d 35 days after treatment | 药后50 d 50 days after treatment | |
---|---|---|---|
株防效 Control effect(%) | 株防效 Control effect(%) | 鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%) | |
1 | 76.14 ± 7.80a | 96.43 ± 1.79a | 95.30 ± 3.74a |
2 | 81.51 ± 6.85a | 92.61 ± 1.71a | 93.63 ± 1.37a |
3 | 83.91 ± 4.42a | 92.30 ± 4.21a | 94.52 ± 2.74a |
4 | 71.89 ± 6.95a | 86.51 ± 6.75a | 94.51 ± 2.75a |
5 | 81.64 ± 6.11a | 96.48 ± 3.52a | 98.12 ± 1.88a |
6 | 73.25 ± 5.54a | 91.56 ± 2.50a | 94.63 ± 1.43a |
7 | 83.17 ± 5.52a | 96.66 ± 1.99a | 97.43 ± 1.46a |
8 | 76.93 ± 2.50a | 94.96 ± 5.04a | 95.93 ± 4.07a |
9 | - | - | - |
Tab.3 The control effect of different treatments on Fallopia convolvulus
处理 Treat- ment | 药后35 d 35 days after treatment | 药后50 d 50 days after treatment | |
---|---|---|---|
株防效 Control effect(%) | 株防效 Control effect(%) | 鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%) | |
1 | 76.14 ± 7.80a | 96.43 ± 1.79a | 95.30 ± 3.74a |
2 | 81.51 ± 6.85a | 92.61 ± 1.71a | 93.63 ± 1.37a |
3 | 83.91 ± 4.42a | 92.30 ± 4.21a | 94.52 ± 2.74a |
4 | 71.89 ± 6.95a | 86.51 ± 6.75a | 94.51 ± 2.75a |
5 | 81.64 ± 6.11a | 96.48 ± 3.52a | 98.12 ± 1.88a |
6 | 73.25 ± 5.54a | 91.56 ± 2.50a | 94.63 ± 1.43a |
7 | 83.17 ± 5.52a | 96.66 ± 1.99a | 97.43 ± 1.46a |
8 | 76.93 ± 2.50a | 94.96 ± 5.04a | 95.93 ± 4.07a |
9 | - | - | - |
处理 Treat- ment | 药后35 d 35 days after treatment | 药后50 d 50 days after treatment | |
---|---|---|---|
株防效 Control effect(%) | 株防效 Control effect(%) | 鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%) | |
1 | 83.08 ± 4.18a | 95.14 ± 0.25a | 95.74 ± 2.94a |
2 | 84.05 ± 4.69a | 92.90 ± 1.80a | 94.15 ± 1.00a |
3 | 84.75 ± 1.61a | 95.17 ± 2.42a | 95.17 ± 2.42a |
4 | 81.03 ± 5.59a | 91.04 ± 3.53a | 94.93 ± 2.50a |
5 | 84.64 ± 4.43a | 96.02 ± 3.06a | 98.08 ± 1.81a |
6 | 76.47 ± 2.03a | 92.45 ± 2.49a | 94.80 ± 1.29a |
7 | 81.51 ± 4.46a | 94.38 ± 1.83a | 97.39 ± 1.31a |
8 | 79.88 ± 2.51a | 90.87 ± 3.34a | 95.81 ± 3.80a |
9 | - | - | - |
Tab.4 The control effect of different treatments on broadleaf weeds
处理 Treat- ment | 药后35 d 35 days after treatment | 药后50 d 50 days after treatment | |
---|---|---|---|
株防效 Control effect(%) | 株防效 Control effect(%) | 鲜质量防效 Fresh Weight control effect (%) | |
1 | 83.08 ± 4.18a | 95.14 ± 0.25a | 95.74 ± 2.94a |
2 | 84.05 ± 4.69a | 92.90 ± 1.80a | 94.15 ± 1.00a |
3 | 84.75 ± 1.61a | 95.17 ± 2.42a | 95.17 ± 2.42a |
4 | 81.03 ± 5.59a | 91.04 ± 3.53a | 94.93 ± 2.50a |
5 | 84.64 ± 4.43a | 96.02 ± 3.06a | 98.08 ± 1.81a |
6 | 76.47 ± 2.03a | 92.45 ± 2.49a | 94.80 ± 1.29a |
7 | 81.51 ± 4.46a | 94.38 ± 1.83a | 97.39 ± 1.31a |
8 | 79.88 ± 2.51a | 90.87 ± 3.34a | 95.81 ± 3.80a |
9 | - | - | - |
[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. |
[1] | XIANG Li, WANG Xian, DONG Yusheng, GUO Xiaoling, FANG Furong, CHEN Zhijun, MA Yanming, MIAO Yu. Effects of exogenous butyric acid on yield and quality of barley under drought stress [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2173-2181. |
[2] | JU Le, QI Juncang, CHEN Peiyu, NIU Yinting, YIN Zhigang. Effects of drought stress on seed germination, seedling growth and physiological characteristics of barley [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(8): 1879-1886. |
[3] | YANG Jinyu, WANG Xihe, SUN Jiusheng. Effect of hydroponic culture on amino acid composition of whole plant barley and wheat seedlings and comparative analysis [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(7): 1589-1595. |
[4] | WANG Feifei, GU Yangyang, YU Guoqi, CHENG Jingye, PAN Hui, WANG Shunmeng, ZHU Juan, LYU Chao, GUO Baojian, XU Rugen. Grain and malt quality analysis of malting barley [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(5): 1134-1140. |
[5] | SONG Lingyu, QI Juncang, ZHANG Song, QIU Ying, SHANG Jifei, FENG Caijun. Effects of Different Silicon Treatments on Barley Germination under Drought Stress [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(2): 317-325. |
[6] | YANG Jinyu, SUN Jiusheng, QIAO Xiaoyan, HUAI Guolong. Effects of Different Light Quality Ratios on the Growth of Hydroponic Forage Barley [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(8): 1871-1876. |
[7] | SU Panlong, ZHAI Yujia, LIU Xinyuan, YANG Desong. Effects of Soil Sealing Treatments with 6 Herbicides on the Growth of Isatis indigotica Seedlings [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(3): 725-734. |
[8] | ZHANG Donghai, WEI Junmei, CHEN Bing, JI Guangpeng, WANG Fan, NIU Linglei. Evaluation on Effects of Herbicide Sprayed on Cotton Fields before Sowing by UAV [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(12): 3022-3029. |
[9] | MA YanMing, ZHAO LianJia, WANG Wei, AN Xuechun, XIANG Li, MIAO Yu. Genetic Diversity Analysis of Main Agronomic Characters of Barley Germplasm Resources [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(11): 2628-2636. |
[10] | SU Panlong, LI Tao, LIU Xinyuan, WU Cailan, YANG Desong. The Control Effect, Herbicidal Spectrum and Safety Evaluation of 42% Fluridone Compounded with 33% Pendimethalin EC on Weeds in Cotton Fields [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(1): 162-169. |
[11] | SONG Ruijiao, FENG Caijun, QI Juncang. Effects of Hydrogen-Rich Water on Barley Seed Germination under Drought Stress [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(1): 79-85. |
[12] | WANG Xian, NIE Shihui, XIANG Li, ZHANG Jinshan, LI Peng, FANG Furong. Effects of Drought Stress on Agronomic Characters, Yield and Quality of Barley from Central Asia [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(1): 86-94. |
[13] | DING Shiqiang, FU Kaiyun, DING Xinhua, HE Jiang, Tursun Ahmat, GUO Wenchao. Prevention and Control Techniques of Ragweed and Giant Ragweed Based on Synergistic Effect of Synergistic Agent and Herbicide [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 58(8): 1493-1500. |
[14] | ZHU Yuyong, ZHAO Bingmei, ZHANG Qiang, DING Lili, MA Jiangfeng, LI Xianchao, JIAN Ying, WANG Lin, WANG Xueyi, JIAO Wenkai. Preliminary Study of 4 Spray-adjuvants on The Reduction of Herbicide Application in Cotton Fields of Early Maturing Cotton Region in Northern Xinjiang [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 58(7): 1291-1296. |
[15] | CHEN Li, LI Jing, SHEN Yuyang, ZHAO Haiyan, LIU Qi, LI Guangkuo, GAO Haifeng. Evaluation of Control Efficacy of Herbicide Reduction in Walnut-Wheat Intercropping [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 58(3): 532-539. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||