• 百种中国杰出学术期刊
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 中国高校百佳科技期刊
  • 中国高校精品科技期刊
  • 中国国际影响力优秀学术期刊
  • 中国科技核心期刊

留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

杀菌剂田间试验防病效果的4种常用计算公式比较分析

李雄 张楠 李贤宾 苍涛 杨峻 黄中乔 苗建强 刘西莉

李雄, 张楠, 李贤宾, 苍涛, 杨峻, 黄中乔, 苗建强, 刘西莉. 杀菌剂田间试验防病效果的4种常用计算公式比较分析[J]. 农药学学报. doi: 10.16801/j.issn.1008-7303.2021.0077
引用本文: 李雄, 张楠, 李贤宾, 苍涛, 杨峻, 黄中乔, 苗建强, 刘西莉. 杀菌剂田间试验防病效果的4种常用计算公式比较分析[J]. 农药学学报. doi: 10.16801/j.issn.1008-7303.2021.0077
Xiong LI, Nan ZHANG, Xianbin LI, Tao CANG, Jun YANG, Zhongqiao HUANG, Jianqiang MIAO, Xili LIU. Comparative analysis of the four formulas commonly used for calculating the control efficacy of fungicides on disease in field trials[J]. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science. doi: 10.16801/j.issn.1008-7303.2021.0077
Citation: Xiong LI, Nan ZHANG, Xianbin LI, Tao CANG, Jun YANG, Zhongqiao HUANG, Jianqiang MIAO, Xili LIU. Comparative analysis of the four formulas commonly used for calculating the control efficacy of fungicides on disease in field trials[J]. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science. doi: 10.16801/j.issn.1008-7303.2021.0077

杀菌剂田间试验防病效果的4种常用计算公式比较分析

doi: 10.16801/j.issn.1008-7303.2021.0077
基金项目: “十三五”国家重点研发计划项目 (2016YFD0201305)
详细信息
    作者简介:

    李雄,男,博士研究生,E­mail:ica_lixiong@163.com

    通讯作者:

    刘西莉,通信作者 (Author for correspondence),女,博士,教授,主要从事杀菌剂药理学和病原菌抗药性研究,E-mail:seedling@nwafu.edu.cn

  • 中图分类号: S482.2

Comparative analysis of the four formulas commonly used for calculating the control efficacy of fungicides on disease in field trials

  • 摘要: 田间药效试验是农药登记试验管理中重要的组成部分,其中病害防治效果计算公式的适用性、有效性和精确性,对科学合理评价杀菌剂对病害的田间防治效果至关重要。目前常用的几种计算公式在适用性和计算误差上存在差异,而对于常用公式之间的比较至今尚未见系统的研究报道。本研究通过理论推导、数值模拟等方式比较验证了多个变量不同组合条件下4种常用计算公式的防治效果变化趋势,准确评价了常用计算公式的应用范围和计算结果的稳定性,并对处理区药后观测的病情指数进行了修正。结果表明:在固定处理区和对照区药后病情指数条件下,4种常用公式计算结果对处理区、对照区初始病情指数差异的敏感程度表现不同;当处理区施药前后病情指数变化极小时,采用公式(1)、(3)和杨信东公式(4)计算防治效果会出现计算结果不依赖对照区病情指数的情况,且当处理区药后病情指数低于药前病情指数时,计算结果会大于100%,出现防效值溢出现象,而Henderson-Tilton公式(公式(2))是以施药前后病情指数变化率来计算防治效果,可以有效规避结果偏差或防效值溢出;而当对照区初始病情指数较大,且病情发生速率快时,建议采用杨信东公式(4)计算防治效果,可以减少处理区和对照区因药后病情指数差异而带来的误差。综合考虑田间施药前后的各种影响因素,在确保病害发生初期施药条件下公式(2)更具适用性和准确性。
  • 图  1  处理区、对照区施药前后病情指数不同变化条件下4种防治效果计算公式计算结果变化

    注:A为对照区初始病情指数变化下P1P2P3P4的变化趋势;B为处理区初始病情指数变化下P1P2P3P4的变化趋势;C为处理区病情指数变化极小时P1P2P3P4的变化趋势;D为处理区药后病情指数小于药前病情指数时P1P2P3P4的变化趋势。

    Figure  1.  The trend of calculation results from the four formulas commonly used for calculating the efficacy of disease control under the different disease indexes of the treated group and the control group before and after treatment

    Note:A plot shows the trend of P1, P2, P3 and P4 with the change of initial disease index in the control group; B plot shows the trend of P1, P2, P3 and P4 with the change of initial disease index in the treated group; C plot shows the trend of P1, P2, P3 and P4 with the extremely small change of disease index in the treated group; D shows the trend of P1, P2, P3 and P4 when the disease index in the treated group is reduced after treatment.

    图  2  处理区、对照区施药前后病情指数成比例变化条件下4种防治效果计算公式计算结果变化

    注:图中绿色、黑色、紫色、蓝色圆形面积大小代表4种公式计算防治效果数值大小,A图为处理区施药前后病情指数保持不变,对照区施药前后病情指数成比例变化时,4种公式计算的防效值的变化;B图为对照区施药前后病情指数保持不变,处理区施药前后病情指数成比例变化时,4种公式计算的防效值的变化。

    Figure  2.  The trend of calculation results from the four formulas commonly used for calculating the efficacy of disease control under proportional change of disease indexes of the treated group and the control group before and after treatment, the final and initial disease index in treatment and control

    Note:The size of the green, black and purple circles in the figure represent the four formulas to calculate the efficacy of disease control. A plot shows the trend of P1, P2, P3 and P4 by given disease indexes of the treated group and the proportional change of the control group before and after treatment; B plot shows the trend of P1, P2, P3 and P4 by given disease indexes of the control group and the proportional change of the treated group before and after treatment

    表  1  四种常用的病害防治效果计算公式模拟计算不同组合因子下的防治效果对比

    Table  1.   The comparison of simulation results from four formulas commonly used for calculating the control efficacy of fungicides on disease under different combinations of factors

    组别
    Group
    序号
    No.
    处理区病情指数
    Disease index in the treated group
    对照区病情指数
    Disease index in the control group
    P1P2P3P4
    IPT0IPT1 ICK0ICK1
    A 1 1 10 0.4 20 54.08 80.00 81.63 83.67
    2 1 10 0.6 20 53.61 70.00 72.16 75.26
    3 1 10 0.8 20 53.12 60.00 62.50 66.67
    4 1 10 1 20 52.63 50.00 52.63 57.89
    5 1 10 1.2 20 52.13 40.00 42.55 48.94
    6 1 10 1.4 20 51.61 30.00 32.26 39.79
    7 1 10 1.6 20 51.09 20.00 21.74 30.44
    8 1 10 1.8 20 50.55 10.00 10.99 20.88
    B 9 0.6 10 1 20 50.53 16.67 17.54 26.71
    10 0.8 10 1 20 51.58 37.50 39.47 46.20
    11 1.2 10 1 20 53.69 58.33 61.4 57.90
    12 1.4 10 1 20 54.74 64.29 67.67 65.70
    13 1.6 10 1 20 55.79 68.75 72.37 71.26
    14 1.8 10 1 20 56.84 72.22 76.02 78.69
    C 15 1 5 1 20 78.95 75.00 78.95 82.27
    16 1 8 1 20 63.16 60.00 63.16 67.96
    17 1 15 1 20 26.32 25.00 26.32 30.65
    18 1 10 1 15 35.71 33.33 35.71 39.29
    19 1 10 1 25 62.50 60.00 62.50 57.89
    20 1 10 1 30 68.97 66.67 68.97 75.86
    21 1 10 1 35 73.53 71.43 73.53 80.88
    D 22 1 10 1.5 30 68.42 50.00 52.63 63.16
    23 1 10 0.5 20 53.85 75.00 76.92 79.49
    24 1 5 1 25 83.33 80.00 83.33 86.84
    25 1 2.5 1 30 94.83 91.67 94.83 96.29
    26 0.5 5 1 20 76.32 50.00 52.63 60.11
    27 1.5 15 1 20 28.95 50.00 52.63 55.42
    E 28 1 1.01 1 1.5 98.00 32.67 98.00 98.00
    29 1 1.01 1 3 99.50 66.33 99.50 99.52
    30 1 1.01 1 6 99.80 83.17 99.80 99.82
    31 1 1.01 1 12 99.91 91.58 99.91 99.92
    32 1 1.01 1 24 99.95 95.79 99.95 99.97
    33 1 1.01 1 48 99.99 97.9 99.99 99.99
    F 34 1 0.8 1 20 102.22 96.00 102.22 100.85
    35 1 0.6 1 20 104.44 97.00 104.44 101.70
    36 1 0.4 1 20 106.67 98.00 106.67 102.54
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] ABBOTT W S. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide[J]. J Am Mosq Control Assoc, 1987, 3(2): 302-303.
    [2] HENDERSON C F, TILTON E W. Tests with acaricides against the brown wheat mite[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1955, 48(2): 157-161. doi: 10.1093/jee/48.2.157
    [3] YOUSSEF N N, MCMANUS W R. Captan: a promising fungicide for management of chalkbrood diseases in the alfalfa leafcutting bee[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1985, 78(2): 428-431. doi: 10.1093/jee/78.2.428
    [4] HURLBERT S H. Pseudoreplication and the design of ecological field experiments[J]. Ecol Monogr, 1984, 54(2): 187-211. doi: 10.2307/1942661
    [5] RETNAKARAN A. Effect of 3 new moult-inhibiting insect growth regulators on the spruce budworm[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1980, 73(4): 520-524. doi: 10.1093/jee/73.4.520
    [6] FLEMING R, RETNAKARAN A. Evaluating single treatment data using Abbott's formula with reference to insecticides[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1985, 78(6): 1179-1181. doi: 10.1093/jee/78.6.1179
    [7] ALADESANWA R D, OLADIMEJI M O. Optimizing herbicidal efficacy of glyphosate isopropylamine salt through ammonium sulphate as surfactant in oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) plantation in a rainforest area of Nigeria[J]. Crop Prot, 2005, 24(12): 1068-1073. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2005.02.013
    [8] SOLOMON J D. Comparative effectiveness of gallery-injected insecticides and fumigants to control carpenterworms (Lepidoptera: Cossidae) and oak clearwing borers (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae)[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1985, 78(2): 485-488. doi: 10.1093/jee/78.2.485
    [9] AYSAN Y, KARATAS A, CINAR O. Biological control of bacterial stem rot caused by Erwinia chrysanthemi on tomato[J]. Crop Prot, 2003, 22(6): 807-811. doi: 10.1016/S0261-2194(03)00030-9
    [10] PHILOGÈNE B J, ARNASON J T, BERG C W, et al. Synthesis and evaluation of the naturally occurring phototoxin, alpha-terthienyl, as a control agent for larvae of Aedes intrudens, Aedes atropalpus (Diptera: Culicidae) and Simulium verecundum (Diptera: Simuliidae)[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1985, 78(1): 121-126. doi: 10.1093/jee/78.1.121
    [11] RETNAKARAN A, GRANT G G. Control of the oak-leaf shredder, Croesia semipurpurana (Kearfott) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), by aerial application of diflubenzuron[J]. Can Entomol, 1985, 117(3): 363-369. doi: 10.4039/Ent117363-3
    [12] NORD J C, DEBARR G L, OVERGAARD N A, et al. Low-volume applications of azinphosmethyl, fenvalerate, and permethrin for control of coneworms (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and seed bugs (Hemiptera: Coreidae and Pentatomidae) in southern pine seed orchards[J]. J Econ Entomol, 1985, 78(6): 1589-1595.
    [13] 杨信东, 高洁, 马贵龙, 等. 植物病害疫情控制效果计算公式的改进[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 1999, 21(3): 46-48. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5684.1999.03.011

    YANG X D, GAO J, MA G L, et al. Improvement on the calculation formula of plant disease control effect[J]. J Jilin Agric Univ, 1999, 21(3): 46-48. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5684.1999.03.011
    [14] XU M M. Modelling plant disease epidemics[J]. Eur J Plant Pathol, 2003. doi: 10.1023/A:1026018005613
    [15] 李宁, 殷徽, 常海滨, 等. 3种新型杀菌剂防治水稻纹枯病田间药效试验(英文)[J]. 农业科学与技术, 2015, 16(3): 551-552, 577.

    LI N, YIN H, CHANG H B. The effect of three new fungicides against rice sheath blight in field experiment[J]. Agric Sci Technol, 2015, 16(3): 551-552, 577.
    [16] 杨竹轩, 李晓军. 对于农药田间药效试验数据处理几个问题的浅见[J]. 农药科学与管理, 2003, 24(9): 26-28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-5480.2003.09.011

    YANG Z X, LI X J. Several problems on data-processing of pesticide experiment in field[J]. Pestic Sci Admin, 2003, 24(9): 26-28. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-5480.2003.09.011
  • 加载中
图(2) / 表(1)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  38
  • HTML全文浏览量:  12
  • PDF下载量:  5
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2021-02-09
  • 录用日期:  2021-03-15
  • 网络出版日期:  2021-04-09

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回