Toxicity Effects of Common Fungicides on Tobacco Bacterial Wilt Caused by Ralstonia solanacearum

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas20190900194

Abstract

Abstract:

To screen out the effective fungicides to control tobacco bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia solanacearum, the toxicity of five fungicides, including streptomycin sulfate, ethylallicin, octyllamine acetate, Kejunkang and Qingkuling, to tobacco bacterial wilt bacteria was determined with plate inhibition zone method while their efficacy was tested by pot experiment in greenhouse by inoculating pathogen first and then irrigating drugs. The results showed that the five fungicides could inhibit the growth of tobacco bacterial wilt. There was a significant positive correlation between the concentration of fungicides and the inhibition effect. The correlation between the concentration of fungicides and the inhibition effect was significant. The EC₅₀ of 72% Streptomycin sulphate, 80% ethylallicin, 1.8% octyllamine acetate, 3% Kejunkang and 50% Qingkuling was 43.50, 154.69, 116.75, 123.43 and 37.86 mg/L, respectively. Pot experiment showed that 50% Qingkuling had the highest inhibition rate against tobacco bacterial wilt, with the control efficacy of 88.6%; followed by 72% streptomycin sulfate, with the control efficacy of 79.6%. 1.8% octyllamine acetate, 80% ethylallicin and 3% Kejunkang had poor control effects on tobacco bacterial wilt with control efficacy of 75.6%, 56.7% and 52.3%, respectively.

Key words: Tobacco Bacterial Wilt, Fungicides, Compounded Agent, Toxicity Determination, Pot Experiment

CLC Number:

S482.2

Lin Tianran, Lu Yihui, Zeng Wenlong, Lin Xiaolu, Lai Rongquan, Tang Mingqiang, Peng Shuilian. Toxicity Effects of Common Fungicides on Tobacco Bacterial Wilt Caused by Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2020, 10(8): 33-37.

Figures/Tables 4

References 27

[1]	Fock I, Ducreux G, Sihachakr D, et al. Resistance to bacterial wilt in somatic hybrids between Solanum tuberosum and Solanum phureja[J]. Plant Science, 2000,160(1):165-167. doi: 10.1016/s0168-9452(00)00375-7 URL pmid: 11164589
[2]	孔凡玉. 烟草青枯病的综合防治[J]. 烟草科技, 2003,189(4):42-43.
[3]	Huet G. Breeding for resistances to Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. Front Plant Sci, 2014,5:715. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00715 URL pmid: 25566289
[4]	Liu L, Sun C, Liu X, et al. Effect of calcium cyanamide, ammonium bicarbonate and lime mixture, and ammonia water on survival of Ralstonia solanacearum and microbial community[J]. Sci Rep, 2016,6:19037. doi: 10.1038/srep19037 URL pmid: 26738601
[5]	Li M, Zhang H Y, Zhou X K, et al. Biological control tobacco bacterial wilt and black shank and root colonization by bio-organic fertilizer containing bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa NXHG29[J]. Applied Soil Ecology, 2018,129:136-144. doi: 10.1016/j.apsoil.2018.05.011 URL
[6]	陈勇, 唐春生, 刘爱中, 等. 4种药剂对烟草青枯病的防治效果研究[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2008(4):93-95.
[7]	Bai W, Kong F, Lin Y, et al. Extract of Syringa oblata: a new biocontrol agent against tobacco bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. Pestic Biochem Physiol, 2016,134:79-83. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2016.04.002 URL pmid: 27914543
[8]	Xu W M, Han F F, He M, et al. Inhibition of tobacco bacterial wilt with sulfone derivatives containing an 1, 3, 4-oxadiazole moiety[J]. J Agric Food Chem, 2012,60:1036-1041. doi: 10.1021/jf203772d URL pmid: 22208183
[9]	尚志强. 云南烤烟青枯病发病规律及其综合防治[J]. 农业网络信息, 2006(10):113-115.
[10]	龚广生, 肖祖凤, 肖忠圣. 赣中烟草黑胫病与青枯病发生原因及防治对策[J]. 烟草科技, 1994(6):43-44.
[11]	司升云, 蔡定军, 吴仁锋, 等. 农药室内生物测定数据处理系统[CP/DK]. 武汉:武汉市农业科学院蔬菜研究所, 2006.
[12]	谭福杰. 杀虫剂混用的生物测定方法[J]. 昆虫知识, 1986(6):279-284.
[13]	姜乾坤, 彭阁, 王瑞, 等. 抗青枯内生细菌的筛选及其对烟草青枯病的防治效果[J]. 中国烟草科学2017, 38(5):13-17.
[14]	王秋萍, 张承, 龙友华, 等. 药肥混用对烟草病害防控及生长、品质产量的影响[J]. 农药, 2019,58(1):70-72,81.
[15]	汤鸣强, 沈凤娟, 姚源琼, 等. 喷施宝叶面肥对农药胁迫下土壤脲酶活性的影响[J]. 广东农业科学, 2019,46(1):58-63.
[16]	Hayward A C. Biology and epidemiology of bacterial wilt caused by Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 1991,29:65-87. URL pmid: 18479193
[17]	Yuliar, Nion Y A, Toyota K. Recent trends in control methods for bacterial wilt diseases caused by Ralstonia solanacearum[J]. Microbes and Environments, 2015,30(1):1-11. doi: 10.1264/jsme2.ME14144 URL pmid: 25762345
[18]	肖田, 姚廷山, 于庆涛. 青枯无致病力菌株对烟草青枯病的诱导抗性与控病作用[J]. 西南农业学报, 2015,28(1):207-211.
[19]	何永宏, 曾乙心, 刘林, 等. 温度和品种抗性对烟草青枯病潜育期的影响[J]. 烟草科技, 2017,50(6):16-20.
[20]	孙广宇, 宗兆锋. 植物病理学实验技术[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2002: 116-118.
[21]	黄保宏, 高正良, 周本国, 等. 四种杀菌剂对烟草青枯病菌的毒力比较[J]. 中国烟草学报, 2014(70):72-75.
[22]	贾春燕, 郑洪波, 张茹萍, 等. 防治烟草青枯病的药剂筛选[J]. 山东农业科学, 2010,8:76-78.
[23]	邱昆鹏, 陈晓红, 李乃会, 等. 3种药剂对烟草青枯病的防治效果[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2015,43(17):78-81.
[24]	左娟, 向金友, 程智敏, 等. 不同药剂对烟草青枯病的防治研究[J]. 现代农业科技, 2011(4):143-146.
[25]	周运瑶, 张斌, 林海秀, 等. 不同药剂对海南茄子青枯病病原菌的室内药效测定[J]. 海南热带海洋学院学报, 2016,23(5):76-81.
[26]	毕涛. 山东省烟草青枯病病原鉴定及化学药剂和生防菌株的筛选[D]. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2014.
[27]	王梅, 尹显慧, 龙友华, 等. 几种杀菌剂对番茄青枯病菌的毒力测定及田间药效[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2015,43(4):151-153.

药剂名称	梯度1	梯度2	梯度3	梯度4	梯度5
72%农用硫酸链霉素SP	80	40	27	20	16
1.8%辛菌胺醋酸盐AS	800	533	400	267	133
3%克菌康WP	200	100	50	40	33
50%青枯灵	800	400	270	200	160
80%乙蒜素	800	400	270	200	160

药剂名称	梯度1	梯度2	梯度3	梯度4	梯度5
72%农用硫酸链霉素SP	80	40	27	20	16
1.8%辛菌胺醋酸盐AS	800	533	400	267	133
3%克菌康WP	200	100	50	40	33
50%青枯灵	800	400	270	200	160
80%乙蒜素	800	400	270	200	160

药剂名称	毒力回归方程	EC₅₀(mg/L)	相关系数?
72%农用硫酸链霉素SP	y=0.00893x+1.4113	43.50	0.87645
1.8%辛菌胺醋酸盐AS	y=0.00352x+0.99112	116.75	0.95642
3%克菌康WP	y=0.00162x+1.1171	123.43	0.95349
50%青枯灵	y=0.00922x+0.99075	37.86	0.87205
80%乙蒜素	y=0.00232x+1.4113	154.69	0.85642

药剂名称	毒力回归方程	EC₅₀(mg/L)	相关系数?
72%农用硫酸链霉素SP	y=0.00893x+1.4113	43.50	0.87645
1.8%辛菌胺醋酸盐AS	y=0.00352x+0.99112	116.75	0.95642
3%克菌康WP	y=0.00162x+1.1171	123.43	0.95349
50%青枯灵	y=0.00922x+0.99075	37.86	0.87205
80%乙蒜素	y=0.00232x+1.4113	154.69	0.85642

复配组合(V_青枯灵:V_{农用硫酸链霉素})	毒力回归方程	EC₅₀/(mg/L)	相关系数?	共毒系数(CTC)
1:1	y=0.00346x+1.1695	169.83	0.99334	43.89
1:3	y=0.00245x+1.1069	93.64	0.82239	148.48
3:1	y=0.00331x+1.7929	180.94	0.50511	28.15