化学农药与二化螟盘绒茧蜂对控制二化螟的不相容 *

doi:10.7679/j.issn.2095-1353.2020.094

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】 近年来,多个地区二化螟 Chilo suppressalis（Walker）发生危害加重,对水稻生产造成新的重大威胁。由于水稻二化螟对常规防治药剂产生了抗药性,二化螟盘绒茧蜂 Cotesia chilonis (Munakata) 作为田间二化螟幼虫的优势寄生蜂,正逐渐引起大家关注。本论文通过研究室内繁殖的二化螟盘绒茧蜂对田间二化螟的防治效果,以探明室内繁殖的二化螟盘绒茧蜂的防控能力;同时研究多种环境友好型农药对田间二化螟的防治效果,并分析比较药剂防治对二化螟盘绒茧蜂寄生控制的影响。【方法】 设置2个放蜂密度和7种不同药剂处理,通过全查法系统调查不同处理小区的枯心数、白穗数、枯孕穗数、残留活虫数等变化以分析比较防效。【结果】 2个放蜂密度（125头蜂茧和250头蜂茧）处理下都可有效减少二化螟对水稻的为害;但2个放蜂密度之间无显著性差异。同时,放蜂密度高,寄生率就高。药剂实验结果发现溴氰虫酰胺悬浮剂防效最佳,氯虫苯甲酰胺悬浮剂和苏云金杆菌悬浮剂次之,杀虫双的防效最差。不同剂量的溴氰虫酰胺悬浮剂防治效果也有较大差异。此外,放蜂处理的小区二化螟盘绒茧蜂具有最高的寄生率,但无论那种农药处理都显著降低了二化螟被二化螟盘绒茧蜂寄生的寄生率。【结论】 二化螟盘绒茧蜂在田间对水稻二化螟具有一定的防控能力,但放蜂密度和技术仍然需要进一步研究。同时,所试验的7种杀虫剂均显著降低了二化螟绒茧蜂的控害效能,与释放二化螟绒茧蜂不兼容。在水稻二化螟药剂防治时不仅要考虑防治效果和使用剂量,还应考虑对天敌以及生态环境的影响。因此,本实验的结果为后续建立以二化螟盘绒茧蜂为中心的二化螟绿色防控体系提供了理论和实践基础。

关键词: 二化螟, 二化螟盘绒茧蜂, 防控, 农药, 寄生率

Abstract:

[Objectives] Increasing crop damage by Chilo suppressalis (Walker) in recent years poses a major threat to rice production. Due to the resistance of C. suppressalis to multiple pesticides, the parasitic wasp Cotesia chilonis is gradually becoming more popular as a biological control for the larvae of C. suppressalis in the field. The aim of this study was to clarify the ability of insectary-reared C. chilonis to control C. suppressalis in the field, and investigate the effects of various environmentally-friendly pesticides on both C. suppressalis and C. chilonis. [Methods] The number of dead heart leaves, white ears and dead boot stages of rice, and the number of live C. suppressalis larvae, following releases of two different densities (125 and 250 cocoons) of C. chilonis and seven different pesticide treatments, was quantified and to compared. [Results] Both densities of C. chilonis reduced C. suppressalis damage to the rice plants; there was no significant difference between the two densities of C. chilonis in this respect, although more C. suppressalis were parasitized after the higher density of C. chilonis were released. Among the different pesticide treatments, cyantraniliprole was the best, followed by chlorantraniliprole, and Bacillus thuringiensis and dimehypo were the worst. There were also large differences in the effectiveness of different doses of cyantraniliprole. The high parasitic rate was found where C. chilonis was released but all pesticide treatments significantly reduced the number of C. suppressalis larvae parasitized by C. chilonis. [Conclusion] C. chilonis can effectively control C. suppressalis in the field, but the optimal density and methodology of releasing C. chilonis requires further investigation. Although C. suppressalis were parasitized by C. chilonis where the later were released, all seven insecticides tested significantly reduced the proportion of C. suppressalis that were parasitized, indicating that the use of these pesticides is incompatible with the release of C. chilonis as a biological control. The control of C. suppressalis should consider not only the pesticide dosages required to control this pest, but also potential pesticide damage to its natural enemies and the environment as a whole. The results of this experiment provide both a theoretical and practical basis for the subsequent establishment of a more environmentally-friendly strategy for controlling C. suppressalis based on the use of C. chilonis as a biological control.

Key words: Chilo suppressalis, Cotesia chilonis, control, pesticide, parasitic rate

何馥晶, 朱凤, 严卫飞, 陆明星, 杭三保, 杜予州. 化学农药与二化螟盘绒茧蜂对控制二化螟的不相容 ^*[J]. 应用昆虫学报, 2020, 57(4): 921-929.

Fu-Jing HE, Feng ZHU, Wei-Fei YAN, Ming-Xing LU, San-Bao HANG, Yu-Zhou DU. The incompatibility of using both insecticides and Cotesia chilonis to control Chilo suppressalis in the field[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology, 2020, 57(4): 921-929.

图/表 5

参考文献 22

[1]	Chang JH, He YP , 2016. Research progress on resistance of Chilo suppressalis to commonly used pesticides. Journal of Yangtze University (Nature Science Edition), 13(9):4-6.
	[ 常菊花, 何月平 , 2016. 二化螟对常用杀虫剂的抗性研究进展. 长江大学学报(自然版), 13(9):4-6.]
[2]	Chen HC, Lou YG, Cheng JA , 2002. The research and application of Cotesia chilonis. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 18(2):90-93.
	[ 陈华才, 娄永根, 程家安 , 2002. 二化螟绒茧蜂研究与应用概况. 中国生物防治, 18(2):90-93.]
[3]	Hang DL, Jiao ZW, Zhao YW, Yang XW, Xia BW, Sun W , 2011. Control of first generation Chilo suppressalis by releasing Trichogramma confusum Viggiani in rice field. Journal of Agricultural Catastrophology, 1(1):28-30.
	[ 杭德龙, 焦兆文, 赵有文, 杨学文, 夏必文, 孙蔚 , 2011. 稻田释放拟澳洲赤眼蜂防治一代二化螟研究. 农业灾害研究, 1(1):28-30.]
[4]	Hang SB, Chen PH, Wu DZ , 1989 a. Ecophysiology characteristic research of Cotesia chilonis. Journal of Jiangsu Agricultural College, 10(1):23-26.
	[ 杭杉葆, 陈培红, 吴达璋 , 1989a. 二化螟绒茧蜂生态学特性的研究. 江苏农学院学报, 10(1):23-26.]
[5]	Hang SB, Lin GL , 1989b. Ecophysiology characteristic research of Cotesia chilonis. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 5(1):16-19.
	[ 杭杉葆, 林冠伦 , 1989b. 二化螟绒茧蜂生物学特性的研究. 生物防治通报, 5(1):16-19.]
[6]	He JH, Chen ZF, Xu JS , 1979. Natural Enemies of Rice Pests in Zhejiang Province. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Science and Technology Press. 241-245.
	[ 何俊华, 陈樟福, 徐加生 , 1979. 浙江省水稻害虫天敌图册. 杭州: 浙江科技出版社. 241-245.]
[7]	He YP, Zhang JF, Gao CF, Su JY, Chen JM, Shen JL , 2013. Regressiom analysis of dynamics of insecticide resistance in field populations of Chilo suppressalis(Lepidoptera: Crambidae) during 2002-2011 in China. Journal of Economic Entomology, 106(4):1832-1837. doi: 10.1603/EC12469 URL
[8]	Hong Y , 2015. High virulence to Chilo suppressalis’s fungus for biology and solid-phase culturetechnique. Master dissertation. Anhui: Anhui Agricultural University.
	[ 洪勇 , 2015. 对二化螟高毒力真菌的生物学及固相培养技术研究. 硕士学位论文. 安徽: 安徽农业大学.]
[9]	Hu J, Chen WM, Zhang ZZ, Zheng XS, Jin JC, Su JY, Gao CF, Shen JL , 2010. Insecticide resistance monitoring of Chilo suppressalis in the drainage area of the Yangtze river, China. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 24(5):509-515. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7216.2010.05.011 URL
	[ 胡君, 陈文明, 张真真, 郑雪松, 靳建超, 苏建亚, 高聪芬, 沈晋良 , 2010. 长江流域稻区二化螟抗药性监测. 中国水稻科学, 24(5):509-515.]
[10]	Jiang MX, Zhu ZR, Zhu JL, Zhu ML, Liao XG, Wang ZJ, Cheng JA , 1999. Study on parasitism of rice striped stem borer, Chilo suppressalis, in different habitats. Chinese Journal of Biological Control, 15(4):145-149.
	[ 蒋明星, 祝增荣, 朱金良, 诸茂龙, 廖璇刚, 王正军, 程家安 , 1999. 不同生境中水稻二化螟的自然寄生情况. 中国生物防治, 15(4):145-149.]
[11]	Kazuo I, Yamazaki S, Machimura N , 1974. Studies on the parasite, Cotesia chilonis Munakata, on the rice stem borer, Chilo suppressalis Walker.Ⅱ. Generations in a year and the parasitism. Proceedings of Association for Plant Protection of Hokuriku, 22:43-47.
[12]	Li QY, Li ZL, Lu MX, Cao SS, Du YZ , 2019. Selection of valid reference genes for quantitative real-time PCR in Cotesia chilonis(Hymenoptera: Braconidae) exposed to different temperatures. PLoS ONE, 14(12):e0226139. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226139 URL pmid: 31877150
[13]	Liu JB, Liu ZQ, Yuan Q, Hu RX, Chen JB, Dai L , 2019. Analysis of new characteristics of Chilo suppressalis(Walker) outbreak ——Taking Qijiang city as an example. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology, ( 11):208-214.
	[ 刘景波, 刘志强, 袁清, 胡瑞湘, 陈剑宝, 戴亮 , 2019. 水稻二化螟大发生新特征分析——以沅江市为例. 农业科技通讯, ( 11):208-214.]
[14]	Lu MX, Du YZ, Liu ZX, Hua J, Liu PY, Li JY , 2013. Diapause, signal and molecular characteristics of overwintering Chilo suppressalis. Scientific Reports, 3:3211. doi: 10.1038/srep03211 URL pmid: 24226906
[15]	Lu MX, Lu ZZ, Du YZ , 2014. Methods and technologies for surveying and forecasting the rice stem borers. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology, 51(4):1125-1129.
	[ 陆明星, 陆自强, 杜予州 , 2014. 水稻钻蛀性螟虫田间调查及测报技术. 应用昆虫学报, 51(4):1125-1129.]
[16]	Luo GH, Li XH, Han ZJ, Guo HF, Yang Q, Wu M, Zhang ZC, Liu BS, Qian L, Fang JC , 2014. Molecular characterization of the piggyBac-like element, a candidate marker for phylogenetic research of Chilo suppressalis (Walker) in China. Biomedcentral Molecular Biology, 15(28):28-29.
[17]	Ma H, Yang J, Ji XL, Chen BC, Xu J, Li JL, Lin XQ , 2018. Susceptibility of Chilo suppressalis from Shandong to six insecticides. Journal of Northern Rice, 48(5):6-10.
	[ 马惠, 杨军, 纪祥龙, 陈博聪, 徐进, 李景岭, 林香青 , 2018. 山东稻区二化螟对6种药剂的敏感度研究. 北方水稻, 48(5):6-10.]
[18]	Pan DD , 2018. Analysis the transcription of Chilo suppressalis under parasitic stress of Cotesia chilonis and differentially expressed CSHSPs. Master dissertation. Yangzhou: Yangzhou University.
	[ 潘丹丹 , 2018. 二化螟盘绒茧蜂寄生胁迫下的二化螟转录组分析及差异性表达的热激蛋白研究. 硕士学位论文. 扬州: 扬州大学.]
[19]	Pan DD, Cao SS, Lu MX, Hang SB, Du YZ , 2018. Genes encoding heat shock proteins in the endoparasitoid wasp, Cotesia chilonis, and their expression in response to temperatures. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 17(5):1012-1022. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(17)61737-4 URL
[20]	Pan DD, Liu ZX, Lu MX, Cao SS, Yan WF, Du YZ , 2016. Species investigation and Occurrence dynamic of parasitic wasps of the rice stem borer, Chilo suppressalis Walker (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in Yangzhou. Journal of Environmental Entomology, 38(6):1106-1113.
	[ 潘丹丹, 刘中现, 陆明星, 曹爽爽, 严卫飞, 杜予州 , 2016. 扬州地区水稻二化螟寄生蜂种类及主要寄生蜂发生动态. 环境昆虫学报, 38(6):1106-1113.]
[21]	Xu HQ, Liu YY, Zhu GD, Xue M , 2014. Comparison of toxicity and safety evaluation of 16 kinds of pesticides on Trichogramma ostriniae and Encarsia Formosa. Journal of Environmental Entomology, 36(6):959-964.
	[ 徐华强, 刘艳艳, 祝国栋, 薛明 , 2014. 16种不同类型农药对两种寄生蜂的毒性比较和安全性评价. 环境昆虫学报, 36(6):959-964.]
[22]	Zhao DD, Zhou LQ, Zhang S, Yao R, Qiu YX, Gao CF , 2017. Resistance monitoring and cross-resistance to the diamides in the rice stem borer, Chilo suppressalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 31(3):307-314.
	[ 赵丹丹, 周丽琪, 张帅, 姚蓉, 邱运霞, 高聪芬 , 2017. 二化螟对双酰胺类杀虫剂的抗药性监测和交互抗性研究. 中国水稻科学, 31(3):307-314.]

处理编号 Treatments number	药剂名称 Pesticides name	制剂用量 Preparations dosage
1	25%杀虫双水剂 25% dimehypo aqueous solution	750 a.i.g/hm²
2	4 000 IU/μL苏云金杆菌悬浮剂 4 000 IU/μL Bacillus thuringiensis suspension	1 875 mL/hm²
3	1.8%阿维菌素乳油 1.8% abamectin emulsion	600 mL/hm²
4	40%毒死蜱乳油 40% chlorpyrifos emulsion	1 500 mL/hm²
5	200 g/L氯虫苯甲酰胺悬浮剂 200 g/L chlorantraniliprole suspension	150 mL/hm²
6	19%溴氰虫酰胺悬浮剂 19% cyantraniliprole suspension	150 mL/hm²
7	19%溴氰虫酰胺悬浮剂 19% cyantraniliprole suspension	225 mL/hm²
8	清水 Water	—

处理编号 Treatments number	药剂名称 Pesticides name	制剂用量 Preparations dosage
1	25%杀虫双水剂 25% dimehypo aqueous solution	750 a.i.g/hm²
2	4 000 IU/μL苏云金杆菌悬浮剂 4 000 IU/μL Bacillus thuringiensis suspension	1 875 mL/hm²
3	1.8%阿维菌素乳油 1.8% abamectin emulsion	600 mL/hm²
4	40%毒死蜱乳油 40% chlorpyrifos emulsion	1 500 mL/hm²
5	200 g/L氯虫苯甲酰胺悬浮剂 200 g/L chlorantraniliprole suspension	150 mL/hm²
6	19%溴氰虫酰胺悬浮剂 19% cyantraniliprole suspension	150 mL/hm²
7	19%溴氰虫酰胺悬浮剂 19% cyantraniliprole suspension	225 mL/hm²
8	清水 Water	—

放蜂日期 Date of releasing C. chilonis	危害指标及防效 Injury index and control effect	处理1 Treatment 1	处理2 Treatment 2	对照 Control
放蜂日8.16 The day of releasing C. chilonis August 16^th	平均枯心数 The average number of dead heart	17.60±3.70^a	20.00±4.09a	16.50±4.50a
放蜂后7 d Seven days after releasing C. chilonis	平均枯心数 The average number of dead heart	21.00±3.08^b	21.20±3.85^b	38.50±4.50^a
放蜂后7 d Seven days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	45.45±8.00^a	44.93±10.01^a	0^b
放蜂后14 d Fourteen days after releasing C. chilonis	平均枯心数 The average number of dead heart	22.60±2.50^a	29.00±2.88^a	34.00±9.00^a
放蜂后14 d Fourteen days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	33.59±7.33^a	14.71±8.47^ab	0^b
放蜂后21 d Twenty-one days after releasing C. chilonis	平均白穗数 The average number of white head	13.80±2.73^b	15.60±1.54^ab	24.00±1.00_a
放蜂后21 d Twenty-one days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	42.50±11.37^a	35.00±6.40^a	0^b
放蜂后28 d Twenty-eight days after C. chilonis	平均枯穗数 The average number of dead head	17.20±3.84^a	19.60±3.53^a	31.00±4.00^a
放蜂后28 d Twenty-eight days after C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	44.51±12.38^a	36.78±11.39^a	0^b
放蜂后35 d Thirty-five days after releasing C. chilonis	平均残活虫数 The average number of residual larvae	18.20±2.78^b	15.60±4.61^b	32.50±4.50^b
放蜂后35 d Thirty-five days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	44.00±8.46_a	52.00±14.19^a	0^b

放蜂日期 Date of releasing C. chilonis	危害指标及防效 Injury index and control effect	处理1 Treatment 1	处理2 Treatment 2	对照 Control
放蜂日8.16 The day of releasing C. chilonis August 16^th	平均枯心数 The average number of dead heart	17.60±3.70^a	20.00±4.09a	16.50±4.50a
放蜂后7 d Seven days after releasing C. chilonis	平均枯心数 The average number of dead heart	21.00±3.08^b	21.20±3.85^b	38.50±4.50^a
放蜂后7 d Seven days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	45.45±8.00^a	44.93±10.01^a	0^b
放蜂后14 d Fourteen days after releasing C. chilonis	平均枯心数 The average number of dead heart	22.60±2.50^a	29.00±2.88^a	34.00±9.00^a
放蜂后14 d Fourteen days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	33.59±7.33^a	14.71±8.47^ab	0^b
放蜂后21 d Twenty-one days after releasing C. chilonis	平均白穗数 The average number of white head	13.80±2.73^b	15.60±1.54^ab	24.00±1.00_a
放蜂后21 d Twenty-one days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	42.50±11.37^a	35.00±6.40^a	0^b
放蜂后28 d Twenty-eight days after C. chilonis	平均枯穗数 The average number of dead head	17.20±3.84^a	19.60±3.53^a	31.00±4.00^a
放蜂后28 d Twenty-eight days after C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	44.51±12.38^a	36.78±11.39^a	0^b
放蜂后35 d Thirty-five days after releasing C. chilonis	平均残活虫数 The average number of residual larvae	18.20±2.78^b	15.60±4.61^b	32.50±4.50^b
放蜂后35 d Thirty-five days after releasing C. chilonis	防效±SE (%) Control effect ±SE (%)	44.00±8.46_a	52.00±14.19^a	0^b

供试药剂 Test pesticides	螟害株数 Injured seedling number	残留活虫数 Residual larvae number	防效（%） Control effect (%)
25%杀虫双水剂 25% dimehypo aqueous solution	10.75±4.37^a	25.75±4.87^ab	23.70±14.43^c
4 000 IU/μL苏云金杆菌悬浮剂 4 000 IU/μL bacillus thuringiensis suspension	3.25±1.65^ab	12.00±3.08^ab	64.45±9.13a^b
1.8%阿维菌素乳油 1.8% abamectin emulsion	9.75±1.49^ab	11.25±1.44^ab	66.67±4.26a^b
40%毒死蜱乳油 40% chlorpyrifos emulsion	7.00±1.58^ab	19.50±2.02^ab	42.22±5.99b^c
200 g/L氯虫苯甲酰胺悬浮剂 200 g/L chlorantraniliprole suspension	3.50±1.19^ab	8.50±2.22^ab	74.82±6.57^ab
19%溴氰虫酰胺150 mL/hm²19% cyantraniliprole suspension 10 mL/hm²	5.50±1.32^ab	8.50±0.65^ab	74.82±1.91^ab
19%溴氰虫酰胺225 mL/hm²19% cyantraniliprole suspension 15 mL/hm²	1.00±0.41^b	5.50±1.04^b	83.71±3.08^a
对照区 Control	7.75±1.18^ab	33.75±5.63^a	—