常用杀虫剂对滇西南稻区白背飞虱种群的室内和田间药效评价  

Indoor and field control effect of common insecticides against Sogatella furcifera in southwest Yunnan rice area

作　　者：金灿 杨林仙 罗茜艳 陆静 崔凯[5] 赵亚梅 尹定云 李向永[2] 刘莹 赵雪晴[2] 谌爱东[2] 尹艳琼[2] JIN Can;YANG Lin-xian;LUO Xi-yan;LU Jing;CUI Kai;ZHAO Ya-mei;YIN Ding-yun;LI Xiang-yong;LIU Ying;ZHAO Xue-qing;SHEN Ai-dong;YIN Yan-qiong(College of Resource Plant,Yunnan University,Kunming 650504,China;Institute of Agricultural Environmental Resources,Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Key Laboratory for Green Prevention and Control of Agricultural Cross border Pests,Kunming 650205,China;Shuangjiang Plant Protection Station,Shuangjiang,Yunnan 677399,China;Eshan Branch of Yuxi Tobacco Company,Eshan,Yunnan 653200,China;Jiangsu Kesheng Group Co.,Ltd.,Jianhu,Jiangsu 224700,China;Lincang Plant Protection Station,Lincang,Yunnan 677099,China)

机构地区：[1]云南大学资源植物研究院,昆明650504 [2]云南省农业科学院农业环境资源研究所/云南省农业跨境有害生物绿色防控重点实验室,昆明650205 [3]双江县植保植检站,云南双江677399 [4]玉溪市烟草公司峨山县分公司,云南峨山653200 [5]江苏克胜集团股份有限公司,江苏建湖224700 [6]临沧市植保植检站,云南临沧677099

出　　处：《西南农业学报》2024年第10期2217-2223,共7页Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences

基　　金：云南省重大科技专项(202102AE090003);云南省科技人才与平台计划(202005AC160031)。

摘　　要：[目的]明确滇西南稻区白背飞虱种群对7种杀虫剂的抗药性水平和7种杀虫剂对白背飞虱的田间防治效果,并对白背飞虱主要天敌蜘蛛和黑肩绿盲蝽的安全性进行评价,为田间防治白背飞虱的药剂选用提供参考依据。[方法]利用稻茎浸渍法开展白背飞虱对7种杀虫剂的室内抗药性监测,测定室内毒力LC_(50)和抗性倍数RR;采用植保无人机的施药方式对7种杀虫剂开展防治白背飞虱的田间药效试验,分析药后3和7 d白背飞虱的百株虫量和校正防效,以及天敌蜘蛛和黑肩绿盲蝽的百株虫量和校正虫口减退率。[结果]抗药性监测:与敏感种群比较,10%三氟苯嘧啶SC、25%吡蚜酮SC、60%烯啶虫胺SP、22%氟啶虫胺腈SC、25%噻虫嗪WG、25%吡虫啉SP和25%呋虫胺OD对滇西南白背飞虱种群的LC_(50)分别为0.18、1.31、0.84、2.40、0.66、0.96和6.43 mg/L,抗性倍数RR分别为0.42、2.74、3.07、4.83、6.87、8.81和31.99倍。该种群对呋虫胺为中等抗性,对吡虫啉和噻虫嗪为低抗性,对其余药剂敏感。田间药效试验:7种杀虫剂药后7 d对白背飞虱的校正防效为85.35%~95.91%,其中氟啶虫胺腈的防效相对较差,其余药剂间防效差异不显著(P>0.05,下同)。天敌安全性评价:药后7 d白背飞虱的主要天敌蜘蛛类和黑肩绿盲蝽的校正虫口减退率分别为30.37%~51.10%和43.90%~86.10%,7种药剂对蜘蛛类和黑肩绿盲蝽均会产生药害,其中对蜘蛛相对较安全,对黑肩绿盲蝽相对欠安全。[结论]7种杀虫剂田间防治滇西南白背飞虱种群效果良好,推荐作为常用田间防治药剂使用。其中,吡蚜酮和三氟苯嘧啶防效更佳,对天敌安全性较好。应注意将呋虫胺与其他药剂轮换使用。【Objective】In order to provide a reference basis for the selection of insecticides for field control of white backed planthopper,Sogatella furcifera(WBPH),the resistance levels of WBPH population to 7 kinds of insecticides in southwest Yunnan rice area,as well as the field control effects of these insecticides against WBPH were studied,and the safety of insecticides against the main natural enemies of WBPH,spider and Cyrtorhinus lividipennis,was evaluated.【Method】The research group used the method of rice stem impregnation to monitor the indoor resistance of WBPH to 7 kinds of insecticides,and analyzed the indoor toxicity(LC_(50))and resistance Ratio(RR).Meanwhile,the research group conducted field efficacy test of 7 kinds of insecticides against WBPH by using plant protection UAV to spray,and analyzed the WBPH's number of 100 plants and corrected control effect on the 3^(rd)day and 7^(th)day after treatment,the same as natural enemies.【Result】Resistance monitoring:Compared with sensitive populations,the LC_(50)of triflumezopyrim 10%SC,pymetrozine 25%SC,nitenpyram 60%SP,sulfoxaflor 22%SC,thiamethoxam 25%WG,imidacloprid 25%SP and dinotefuran 25%OD to WBPH populations in southwest Yunnan were 0.18,1.31,0.84,2.40,0.66,0.96 and 6.43 mg/L,and RR were 0.42,2.74,3.07,4.83,6.87,8.81 and 31.99,respectively.The WBPH population in southwest Yunnan had developed medium resistance to dinotefuran and low resistance to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam,while other insecticides were sensitive.Field efficacy test:The corrected control effects of the 7 kinds of insecticides against WBPH were 85.35%-95.91%in the 7^(th)day after treatment.The control effect of sulfoxaflor was relatively poor,and there was no significant difference among other insecticides.Natural enemy safety evaluation:The corrected population decline rates of the natural enemies and C.lividipennis were 30.37%-51.10%and 43.90%-86.10%in the 7^(th)day after Phosphide treatment.All the insecticides were harmful to spider and Cyrtorhinus lividipennis,however sp

关 键 词：白背飞虱 杀虫剂 田间药效 抗药性监测 天敌安全性评价 

分 类 号：S435.11[农业科学—农业昆虫与害虫防治]