中国马铃薯
中國馬鈴藷
중국마령서
CHINESE POTATO
2015年
2期
107-111
,共5页
马铃薯%疮痂病%拌种%沟施%防治效果
馬鈴藷%瘡痂病%拌種%溝施%防治效果
마령서%창가병%반충%구시%방치효과
potato%common scab%seed dressing%furrow application%control effect
马铃薯疮痂病被视为马铃薯生产中的第四大病害，严重影响马铃薯的外观、等级和品质。为求得防效好的马铃薯疮痂病防治方法，试验采用种薯处理与土壤处理相结合的方法进行田间比较试验。试验品种为‘尤金’，供试微生物制剂有5种，化学药剂1种。对照为常规处理，即不采取任何拌种与沟施。结果表明，防治效果以处理5最好，达到55.17%，处理5是在常规药剂（滑石粉+甲托+链霉素）拌种下，微生物肥料2（薯益生）沟施；其次为处理6防治效果达50.08%，处理6是在常规药剂拌种下，化学药剂爱可（化学药剂1）沟施。处理5、6的发病率及病情指数均显著低于对照。处理5的产量为1767 kg/667m2，处理6的产量为1740 kg/667m2，但与对照产量（1646 kg/667m2）差异不显著。
馬鈴藷瘡痂病被視為馬鈴藷生產中的第四大病害，嚴重影響馬鈴藷的外觀、等級和品質。為求得防效好的馬鈴藷瘡痂病防治方法，試驗採用種藷處理與土壤處理相結閤的方法進行田間比較試驗。試驗品種為‘尤金’，供試微生物製劑有5種，化學藥劑1種。對照為常規處理，即不採取任何拌種與溝施。結果錶明，防治效果以處理5最好，達到55.17%，處理5是在常規藥劑（滑石粉+甲託+鏈黴素）拌種下，微生物肥料2（藷益生）溝施；其次為處理6防治效果達50.08%，處理6是在常規藥劑拌種下，化學藥劑愛可（化學藥劑1）溝施。處理5、6的髮病率及病情指數均顯著低于對照。處理5的產量為1767 kg/667m2，處理6的產量為1740 kg/667m2，但與對照產量（1646 kg/667m2）差異不顯著。
마령서창가병피시위마령서생산중적제사대병해，엄중영향마령서적외관、등급화품질。위구득방효호적마령서창가병방치방법，시험채용충서처리여토양처리상결합적방법진행전간비교시험。시험품충위‘우금’，공시미생물제제유5충，화학약제1충。대조위상규처리，즉불채취임하반충여구시。결과표명，방치효과이처리5최호，체도55.17%，처리5시재상규약제（활석분+갑탁+련매소）반충하，미생물비료2（서익생）구시；기차위처리6방치효과체50.08%，처리6시재상규약제반충하，화학약제애가（화학약제1）구시。처리5、6적발병솔급병정지수균현저저우대조。처리5적산량위1767 kg/667m2，처리6적산량위1740 kg/667m2，단여대조산량（1646 kg/667m2）차이불현저。
Potato common scab is regarded as the fourth disease in potato production, which seriously affects the appearance, the grade and quality of potato. In order to obtain a better potato scab disease prevention method, the experiment adopted the method of combining the seed dressing with furrow application to make the comparison test. The tested variety was 'Youjin', and five microbial inoculants and one chemical agent were used. The control was conventional treatment, i.e, no any seed dressing and furrow application were applied. The control effects of the treatment 5, dressing seeds with conventional agent (talcum+thiophanate methyl+streptomycin) combined with furrow application of microbial fertilizer 2 (Shuyisheng), was the best, reaching 55.17%, fol owed by the treatment 6, dressing seeds with the conventional agent combined with furrow application of the chemical agent 1 (Aike), with control effect being 50.08%. The incidence and the disease index of the treatments 5 and 6 were significantly lower than those of the control. The yield of the treatment 5 was 1 767 kg/667m2, and treatment 6 was 1 740 kg/667m2, but both were not significantly different from the control (1 646 kg/667m2).
