植保无人飞机施药场景下杀虫剂对不同稻区稻飞虱的防治效果比较

    Comparative efficacy of insecticides against rice planthopper by unmanned aerial vehicle across different rice-growing regions

    • 摘要: 稻飞虱是严重威胁水稻产量和品质的主要害虫之一,长期依赖化学防治,已导致其对多类杀虫剂产生抗性,且不同稻区稻飞虱的发生具有地域差异性和时空动态性。为明确植保无人飞机喷施药剂在稻飞虱防控工作中的可行性,并筛选不同稻区虫口基数差异下的高效药剂,以实现农药、农机、农艺的协同应用,本研究于江苏、湖南和广东等稻区开展田间试验,对比分析了植保无人飞机在不同施药液量(30 L/hm2和37.5 L/hm2)和背负式电动喷雾器(675 L/hm2)对稻飞虱防治效果的差异,并比较了相同药剂在不同稻区,以及同一稻区内不同药剂对稻飞虱的防治效果。结果表明:植保无人飞机在两种施药液量下喷施药剂,对稻飞虱的防治效果无显著差异,且与背负式电动喷雾器的防治效果相当;同一药剂在不同稻区以及同一稻区不同药剂对稻飞虱的防治效果均存在差异。植保无人飞机在施药液量为30 L/hm2和37.5 L/hm2条件下,江苏省稻区,50%烯啶虫胺水分散粒剂(WG)在240 g/hm2剂量和20%三氟苯嘧啶水分散粒剂(WG)在135 g/hm2剂量对稻飞虱的防治效果最佳,药后14 d达94.88%~95.18%;湖南省稻区, 20%三氟苯嘧啶水分散粒剂(WG)在135 g/hm2剂量表现最佳,药后3~14 d防治效果达90.30%~93.57%;广东省稻区, 20%呋虫胺水分散粒剂(WG)在600 g/hm2剂量、50%烯啶虫胺可溶粒剂(SG)在240 g/hm2剂量和20%三氟苯嘧啶水分散粒剂(WG)在135 g/hm2剂量,药后14 d的防治效果达95.70%~97.17%。综上,植保无人飞机采用30 L/hm2的施药液量即可有效防治稻飞虱,且不同稻区需基于虫口基数和药剂特性科学选配适宜药剂。本研究结果可为稻飞虱的绿色高效防控提供新思路,为制定植保无人飞机防治稻飞虱区域化策略提供科学依据。

       

      Abstract: Rice planthoppers are among the most destructive pests, posing a significant threat to both rice yield and quality. Long-term reliance on chemical control has led to resistance against multiple classes of insecticides, and these resistances exhibit regional variability and spatiotemporal dynamics across rice-growing areas. To evaluate the feasibility of using unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for rice planthopper control and to screen for highly effective pesticides under varying initial pest densities across different rice-growing regions, thereby promoting the synergistic application of pesticides, agricultural machinery, and agronomic practices, field trials were conducted in the rice-producing areas, including Jiangsu, Hunan, and Guangdong provinces. This study comparatively analyzed the control efficacy against rice planthoppers among UAVs at different spray volumes (30 L/hm2 and 37.5 L/hm2) and knapsack electric sprayers (675 L/hm2). Furthermore, it compared the efficacy of the same insecticide across different rice-growing regions and that of different insecticides within the same region. The results showed no significant difference in control efficacy between the two UAV spray volumes, and both were comparable to the knapsack electric sprayers. Control efficacy varied significantly for the same insecticide across different regions and among different insecticides within the same region. Under the UAV spray volume of 30 L/hm2 and 37.5 L/hm2, in Jiangsu, nitenpyram 50% SG at 240 g/hm2 and triflumezopyrim 20% WG at 135 g/hm2 provided the best control, with control efficacy reaching 94.88%-95.18% at 14 days after application. In Hunan, triflumezopyrim 20% WG at 135 g/hm2 demonstrated the best performance, achieving 90.30%-93.57% control efficacy from 3 to 14 days after application. In Guangdong, dinotefuran 20% WG at 600 g/hm2, nitenpyram 50% SG at 240 g/hm2, and triflumezopyrim 20% WG at 135 g/hm2 resulted in control efficacies of 95.70%-97.17% at 14 days after application. In summary, UAV application with a spray volume of 30 L/hm2 proved effective control of rice planthoppers. Optimizing pesticide selection requires a tailored approach that accounts for initial pest population density and pesticide characteristics across different rice-growing regions. This study provides new insights for the sustainable and efficient management of rice planthoppers and offers a scientific basis for developing region-specific UAV control strategies.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回