Kit qua nghidn cdu khoa hgc BVTV-Sd 1/2018
BLAST cua NCBI. Ca hai mdu n i m S-NK-DL-09 vd mau S-TT-AP-01 d i u cd dd tuang d i n g 99%
vdi Fusarium solani dup'c Sharma vd cdng s y phdn Idp tgi khu vyc mien Tdy An DO c6 md so Ngdn hdng gen KU872821.1. Tuy nhidn, dd bao phu eua m l u S-TT-AP-01 so vdi F. solani cd md KU872821.1 dgt 100%, trong khi dd mau S-NK- OL-09 so vdi F. solani c6 ma KU872821.1 chi ed 98%. Nhu vay, vdi dd tuang d i n g cao 99% cd the khing dinh r i n g mau nam Fusarium sp. gdy b$nh vdng Id lan H i Didp Id lodi F. solani.
3. K^T LUAN
Ty Id bdnh vdng la lan H i Di^p tai Ldm D i n g dao ddng t d 0 - 5,2% vd tdng dan t d thdng 3 d i n thdng 8.
Cdc giong lan H 6 Di$p hoa mdu tring c6 t^ Id bdnh vdng Id eao nhit (0,3 - 5,2%), tiep den Id giong fan HO Di^p ed hoa mdu vdng (0,3 - 4,0%) vd tiiap nhit Id gilng hoa mdu tfm vd hong phan (0 - 3,3%).
Giai dogn tu xd 1;? d i n ra hoa cd tJ Id bdnh vdng Id cao hon so vdi giai doan cdy con.
Dya vdo ddc diem sinh hoc, hinh thdi hpc vd trinh t y vOng ITS - rDNA cua n i m Fusarium sp.
dd xdc dinh dup'c tdc nhdn gdy ra bdnh vdng Id lan H i Di0p Id lodi nam Fusarium solani.
T A I LIEU THAM K H A O 1 Burgess, W.L, B A. Summerrel. S. Bullock, K.P. Gott, and D. Backhouse, 1994. Laboratory Manual for Fusarium Research. 3"^ edition, University of Sydney, Australia, 133 pages
2. Lee, S.B., M.G. Mllgroom, and J.W. Taylor.
1988. A rapid, high yield mini-prep method for isolation of total genomic DNA from fungi. Fungal Genetics Reports: Voi. 35, Article 11.
3. NguySn Quang Thgch, Nguyen Thj Ly Anh, NguySn Thj Ldm Hai. 2005. Lan H6 Di$p - Ky^ thu$t chpn t^o, nhSn gi6ng va nuoi trong. Nhd xuat ban Ndng nghiep, Hd Npi, Vi#t Nam, 40 trang.
4. Shivas, R.G., and D.R. Beasley, 2005.
Management of plant pathogen collections.
Commonwealth Publishing, Australia. 85 pages.
5. Su, J.F., Y C. Lee, CW. Chen. T.F. Hsieh, and J.H. Huang, 2010. Sheath and Root Rot of Phalaenopsis Caused by Fusarium solani Acta horticulturae Journal, 878: 389 - 397.
6. White, T.J., T.D. Bruns. S.B. Lee, and J.W.
Taylor, 1990. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA Genes for phylogenetics. In:
PCR-Protocots and Applications, pp: 315-322. Innis, N„ D. Gelfand, J. Sninsky and T. White (eds.). A Laboratory Manual. Academic Press, New York, USA.
Phan bi^n: TS. Trjnh Xuan Hogt
HIEU use CUA MOT S 6 THU6C B A O VE THLTC VAT H 6 A HQC TRO" N A M bOl V a i BENH RUNG L A CAO SU [Corynespora cassiicola)
T R E N B O N G R U O N G TAI THLFA T H I E N H U ^
Field Efficacy of Chemical Fungicides on Rubber Leaf Fall Disease
(Corynespora cassiicola) in Thua Thien Hue Province, VietnamTrdn Dang H 6 a \ Le Khic Phiiic^ vd Ngd Thgch Qujrnh Huydn^
Ngiy nhan bdi. 07.12.2017 Ngiy chip nh$n:18.12.2017
Abstract
Field experiments were conducted in order to evaluate the efficacy of four chemical fungicides difenoconazole (Score 250EC). difenoconazole + propiconazole (Tilt Super 300EG), epoxiconazole (Opus 75EC), tebuconazole (Nativo 760WG) for controling rubber leaf fall disease (Corynespora cassiicola (Berk. & Curt.) Wei) in Thua Thien Hue province, Vietnam. The results shows that all four , . tested fungicies were efficacy against the rubber leaf fall disease. The efficacy was high with Score 250EC (64.4 1. Tnrdng Dai hoc Nong Ldm, Dai hpc Hu§ . 69.9%) and Tilt Super 300EC (55.4 - 69.4%) on mbber 2.ChicgcTr6ngtr9tvaBaovdthycv|tPhCiYen planted at both two different ecological zones, e.g.
Ket qua nghidn cdu khoa hpc B V T V - S o 1/2018
upland areas at Huong Tra district and high land areas at Nam Dong district As results, Score 250EC and Tilt Super 300EC should be used to control the rubber leaf ^11 disease in Thua Thien Hue province.
Keywords: Chemical fungicides, Corynespora cassiicola, field efficacy, leaf ^11, rubber 1. BAT VAN D g
B$nh ryng Id Corynespora do n i m Corynespora cassiicola (Berk & Curt.) Wei gdy ra, gay hai nghidm trpng d nhilu nude trdng cao su trdn t h i gidi (Phan Thdnh DOng, 2004). C Vidt Nam, bdnh dup'c ghi nhdn lan ddu vdo thang 8 ndm 1999, gdy hgi ndng trdn ddng vd tinh RRIC 103. RRIC 104 vd LH 88/372. Trdn cdy cao su, bdnh gdy hai d fat ca cdc bp phdn trdn mdt d i t nhu: Id, cuong vd c h i i (Phan Thdnh DQng, 2004).
Trong cac thd nghidm in vitro ehi ra r i n g Carbendazim dc c h l mam bpnh phat t r i l n hodn toan d nong dd 25 ppm a . i . Trong thi nghidm trdn vudn uam Maneozeb (0,2%), Carbendazim (0,5%) va to hap Metalaxy! + Maneozeb (0,2%) deu cd hieu qua phdng trj bpnh (Manju, 2006).
Cac logi thuoc dd dup'c bdo cdo cd hieu qua phdng trj nam C. cassiicola Id: Nhdm thude tiep xue nhu: Bordeaux, Maneozeb, Captafol, Chlorothalonil. Nhdm thuoc luu d i n nhu.
Carbendazim, Tridemorph, Hexaconazole. Cdc thulc hdn hpp nhu: Metalaxyl + Maneozeb (0,2%), Benomyl vd Thiram, Copper Oxychloride (21%) + Maneozeb (20%), Propineb (56%) + Oxadixyl (10%), Maneozeb (63%) + Carbendazim (12%), Hexaconazole + Captan.
Difenoconazole cflng dupe bdo cdo cd hidu qua phdng trj b§nh (Srinivas vd Idicula, 2006), Tuy
td ra cd hieu qua trong phdng trd bpnh nhung thulc hod hpc dd Idm cho cde chOng n i m khdng thude xuat hi$n (Takeuehi e( al., 2006; Ishii et al., 2007)
C/ tinh Thda Thidn H u l , bdnh rung Id cao su gdy hgi ndng vd p h i biln d hau h i t cdc vCing tring cao su, anh hudng Idn d i n sinh trudng, phdt trien vd ndng suit mu. Nguyen Thj Thu Thuy vd cs (2016) dd xac dmh tdc nhdn gdy bdnh ryng Id cao su tgi Thua Thidn H u l Id do n i m Corynespora cassiicola gdy ra, Ddnh gid hidu lyc tru bpnh rung Id cao su cOa 9 logi thuoc hda hpc cho t h l y 4 logi t h u l c (Score 250EC, Tilt Super 300EC. Opus 75EC vd Nativo 750WG) Id cd hidu lyc phdng trd bdnh rung Id phdng thi nghidm (Nguyen Thj Thu Thdy vd cs, 2016). Tuy nhidn hidu lyc trd bdnh trdn d i n g rupng eua cdc logi thuoc cd t h i khdc so vdi hidu lyc trong phdng thf nghidm. Muc dich cCia nghidn cdu ndy Id ddnh gid hidu luc cua ede logi thulc hda hpc doi vdi bdnh ryng Id eao su trdn dong ru$ng tai tinh Thua Thidn Hue.
2. VAT LIEU VA PHUXyNG PHAP NGHIEN COU 2.1 Vat l i | u nghien c d u
Thd nghidm 4 logi thuoc d bdng 1 g I m 4 logi thulc hda hpc tru bdnh.
Bang 1. Cac loai thudc va ndng dp thi nghidm Tdn thuanq mai
Score 250EC Tilt Super 300EC Opus 75EC Nativo 750WG
Hoat c h i t Difenoconazole 250g/L Difenoconazole 150g/L + Propiconazole 150g/L Epoxiconazole 92%.
Trifloxystrobin 250 g/kg Tebuconazole: 500 q/kq
Cdnq ty ddnq qdi Syngenta Syngenla
BASF Bayer
Ndnq d$ phun 0,1%
0,05%
0,2%
0,03%
2.2 Phuang phdp nghien c d u
B l tri thi nghidm trdn vudn cao su kiln thilt ca bdn gilng RRIM 600 tgi xd Huang Hda, huydn Nam Bdng vd- xd Huang Binh, thi xd Huong Trd, tinh Thda Thidn Hue t d thdng 01/2016 d i n thdng 5/2016. Mdi thi nghidm dypc bo tri theo k h i i hodn todn n g l u nhidn g I m 4
cdng thdc thi nghidm (4 logi thulc) vd d l i chdng (phun nude Id), 3 l l n Idp lai. Mdi d thf nghj$m g I m 3 hdng cdy cao su. Gida hai edng thue thi ngi$m cd 1 hdng cdy cao su cdch iy. T i l n hdnh phun thulc khi cdy eao su mdi nhii mam (nhu chdn chim).
Theo ddi thi nghidm trude vd sau phun thulc 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, 21 ngdy. Theo ddi 15 cdy c6 djnh /
K i t qua nghien cdu khoa hoc B V T V - S d 1/2018
d thi nghidm (5 cdy/ hdng). M l i cdy chpn 2 tdn Id d 2 hudng ddi nhau, phdn d p bdnh vd tinh tl 1$
b$nh (TLB) vd chf s6 b$nh (CSB). Phdn cap b§nh theo Phan Thanh DOng vd Phan Dinh Thao (2012) (Bang 2). Tinh dudng cong t i l n triln didn tich ti Id bdnh vd cht s6 bdnh AUDPC (Area Under Disease Progress Curve) theo Campbell
and Madden (1990). Cdn c d vdo chi s6 AUDPC d l ttnh hidu lyc phdng trd b^nh (HLPT%) cOa cdc logi thuoc so vdi d l i chdng. X d ly phuang sai mdt nhdn t l (One way ANOVA) sau dd so sdnh Turkey de ddnh gid s y sai khdc ve hi$u lyc eua cdc logi t h u l c thi nghidm.
Bang 2. Phan cdp b#nh rung la cao su Corynespora ti^a tren toan bp tan Id d p bdnh
Capo C l p 1 d p 2 d p 3 d p 4 c i p 5
Mdc dd bi hgi Khdng benh
Mdt vdi vet benh, nhin ky mdi thly Cd nhilu v i t bpnh trdn tdn Id It han y* tdn Id bi runq T d VA - VI tdn Id bi rynq
Trdn % tdn Id bj mnq, cd nhieu cdnh bj c h i t 3. K£T QUA NGHIEN cCru vA THAO LUAN
3.1 H i f u lipc phdng t r d benh rung la cao su cDa cdc ioai thudc hda hpc t^i Hyo-ng Trd, Thfipa Thidn Hud
Tnrdc khi phun thulc. tl Id bdnh d cdc edng thdc thi nghipm t h i p vd It b i l n d i n g (td 0,7% tdi 1,9%) Sau phun ttiulc 1 - 3 ngdy, ti Id bdnh gida cdc cdng thdc khdng ed sy khdc bidt Ndm ngdy sau khi phun thuoc, 6 Id bdnh d doi chdng tdng 0,4% vd cdng thdc cd tl 1$ tang cao Id Nativo 750WG (0,9%), Opus 75EC (0,6%). Ngdy thd 7 t i t ca cdc cdng thdc vd d l i chdng d i u tdng ^ong dd d d l i chdng vd Opus 75EC tdng thdm 0,6%.
d cdng thdc Score 250EC chi tdng nhp 0.1%. &
ngdy thd 14 sau khi phun d doi chdng tf Id bdnh tdng 2,4% t u 3,0% len 5,4%, d Nativo 750WG tdng 1,5%, Opus 75EC tdng 1.3% vd Tilt Super
300EC tdng 0,8%. Cdn Score 250EC chi tdng 0,4%. Sau khi phun 21 ngdy ti Id d tat ca cdc edng thue d i u tdng tuy nhidn d doi chdng tdng eao nhit 5.0% so vdi ngdy thd 14, t i l p dd Id Nativo 750WG tdng 3,2%. Opus 75EC tdng 2,8%. Tilt Super 300EC tdng 2.3% vd Score 250EC chl tdng 1,0% (Bang 3),
AUDPC d cdng thdc phun Score 250EC dgt thap nhat (32,6), hidu lyc phdng trd so d l i chdng dat 66,9%, sai khde vdi cde loai thuoe edn lai.
Cdng thdc phun thuoc Nativo 750WG ed chl s i AUDPC dat cao nhat trong ede edng thdc x d ly thulc (62.3). hidu lyc phdng trd dgt t h i p nhit (36,7%). Trong khi dd hi$u lyc phdng trd cua edng thdc x d 1^ thuoc Tilt Super 300EC Id 55,4%
vd cdng thdc s d dyng thuoc Opus 75EC Id 40,4% (Bang 3).
Bang 3. Ti 1^ benh vd chi s6 bpnh rgng la cao su tru>dc va sau khi phun t h u l c d H v a n g Trd
Logi thu6c ToFdc pliun
Sau phun ttiuoc (ngSy) 1 1 3 1 5 1 7 1 14 1 21
AUDPC HLPT
(%)
Vl$b$nhpi) Score 250EC Nativo 750WG Tilt Super 300EC Opus 75EC 0di ctlu-nq
1,0a 0.7a 0,9a 0,8a 1,9b
1,0a 0,7a 0,9a 0,8a 1,9b
1,0a 0,7a 0,9a 0,8a 2,0b
1,2a 1,6b 1,1a 1,4ab 2,4c
1,3a 2,0b 1,5a 2,0b 3,0c
1,7a 3,5b 2,3a 3,3ab 5,4c
2,7a 6.7b 4,6ab
6,1b 10,4c
32,ea 62,3c 43,9ab 58.7b 96,4d
66,9c 36,7a 65,4b 40,4ab
-
K i t qua nghidn c d u khoa hpc B V T V - S 6 1/2018
Loai tlluoc Trudc ptiun
Sau phun tliu6c (ngdy) 1 1 3 1 5 1 7 1 14 1 21
AUDPC HLPT
(%)
Chls6b$nhl%) Score
250EC Nativo 75WG Tiit Super 250EC Opus 75EC Boi cllCfriq
0,3a 0,3a 0,3a 0,3a 0,5a
0,3a 0,3a 0.3a 0.3a 0.5a
0.3a 0.3a 0.3a 0.3a 0.5a
0.4a 0.4a 0.5a 0.5a 0.6a
0.4a 0.6ab 0.8b 0.6ab 0.7ab
0.5a 0.9a 1.3b 1.0ab 1.5b
0.8a 1,6b 2,5c 2.4c 3,7d
9.8a 16.3b 23.4c 20,0c 29,3d
66,6d 44,4c 20,3a 31,7b
-
Ghi chO: Gii tn cOng chl tiSu (tl 1$ b$nh hoic chl s6 b$nh) trong cCing m$t c0t c6 cdc chir cdi khdc nhau thi hi$n su- sai khic c6 j? nghTa th6ng k§ (P<0.05).
Tuang t y , ehl s6 bdnh ryng Id cao su d cdc cdng thdc x d ly t h u l c cd s y khdc nhau.
AUDPC d cdng thdc x u ly thuoc Score 250EC dgt thap n h i t (9,8), Nativo 750WG (16,3), Tilt Super 300EC (23,4), Opus 75EC (20,0). d l i chdng (29,3). Hidu lye phdng t r d khi ddnh gid chi s6 bpnh cho t h l y Score 250EC cho hi$u lye eao n h i t (66,6%) vd sai khde cd y nghTa vdi cdc logi t h u l c cdn lai eho hipu lyc t h i p han (Natio 750WG' 44,4%, Tilt Super 300EC:
20,3%, Opus 75EC' 31,7%). O l l u ndy cho thdy t h u l c Score 250EC khdng nhdng han c h l s y phdt trien, Idy lan cua bdnh md cdn hgn c h l mdc dd gdy hgi cOa bdnh ryng Id cao su (Bang 3).
3.2 Hieu IIFC phdng t r d benh rung Id cao su cua cdc logi thufic hoa hoc tai Nam Ddng Trudc khi phun t h u l c , ti Id bdnh ryng id eao su d Nam Ddng khdng cd s y khac bi§t Idn d cdc cdng thdc thi nghidm (ti Id bdnh dao d | n g t d 0,9-1,6%). Sau khi phun t h u l c 1 ngdy. tJ Id b$nh thay d l i khdng ddng ke (dao ddng t d 0,9 - 1.7%). Sau khi phun 3 ngdy d edng thdc phun Score 250EC tdng 0.3%, Tilt Super 300EC tang 0,4%, Opus 75EC tang 0,2% vd Nativo 75WG tang 0,3% cdn doi chdng tdng 0,7%. Sy chdnh l$ch gida ti 1$ b^nh cua doi chdng vd edng thdc x d IJ t h u l c Id khdng cao.
Ngdy thd 5 sau khi phun d Score 250EC tdng 0,4%, Tiit Super 300EC tdng 0,2%, Opus 75EC tdng 0,3% vd Nativo 750WG tdng 0,4% cdn doi chdng tdng 1,1% Ci ngdy ndy ti 1$ bdnh cd
tdng nhp so vdi nhdng ngdy d trudc dd. Sau khi phun 7 ngdy s y chdch Idch nhau gida d l i chdng vd cdc cdng thdc Id khdng nhilu vd Score 250EC tdng 0,5%, Tilt Super 300EC tdng 0,4%, Opus 75EC tdng 0,2% vd Nativo 750WG tdng 0,3% cdn doi chdng tdng 1,1%.
Sau khi phun 14 ngdy cd s y chdnh l$ch nhau rd ret gida ti 1$ b$nh d cdc edng thdc vdi d l i chdng vd ti 1$ bdnh d Score 250EC h i u nhu khdng tdng vd ehdeh Ipeh vdi ngdy 5 sau khi phun Id 0 , 1 % vd Tilt Super 300EC tdng 0,4%, Opus 75EC tdng 0,5% vd Nativo 750WG tdng 0,5% cdn d l i chdng tdng 5%. Sau khi phun 21 ngdy thi s y chdnh Idch gida ti 1$ bdnh d cdng thdc vd doi chdng r i t rd rdt. T i 1$ bpnh d cdng thdc doi chdng cao han Score 250EC Id 7 , 1 % , Tilt Super 300EC 7,2%, Opus 75EC 7.4%.
Nativo 750WG 6,6%. Sy tdng TLB d B l i chdng so vdi cdng thdc cOng cd s y sai khdc Idn.
Score 250EC tang 0.5%, Tilt Super 300EC tdng 0,5%, Opus 75EC tdng 0,4% vd Nativo 750WG tdng 0,8% cdn d l i chdng tdng 4,6%
(Bang 4).
AUDPC v l tl Id b#nh cho t h l y cdng thdc d l i chdng dgt cao n h i t (125.9), t i l p d i n Id Opus 75EC (47,1), Score 250EC (44,8), Nativo 750WG (41,0). t h i p n h i t Id Tilt Super 300EC (38,6). Bang 4 cho t h l y hi$u lyc phdng trd cua t h u l c Tilt Super 300EC dgt cao n h i t (69,4%), khdng sai khdc vdi t h u l c Nativo 750WG (67,5%) vd Score 250EC (64,4%) nhung cd sai khde cd y nghTa t h i n g kd vdi t h u l c Opus 75EC (62,6%) (Bang 4).
Kit qua nghidn cdu khoa hpc BVTV-S51/2018
Bdng 4. Ti 1$ b^nh va c h i s 6 b | n h rung Id cac su t r u ^ c vd sau khi phun thudc o* Nam Dong Loai
thu6c Tru-dc
phun
Sau phun (ngdy)
1 1 3 1 5 1 7 1 14 1 21
AUDPC HLPT
(%)
Vl$b$nh(%) Score
250EC Nativo 75WG Tilt Super 250EC Opus 75EC Doi chCrnq
1.1a 0.9a 1.0a 1.1a 1.6a
1.1a 0,9a 1,0a 1,1a 1,7a
1,4a 1,3a 1,2a 1,4a 2,4b
1,8a 1,5a 1,5a 1,8a 3,6b
2,3a 1,9a 1,7a 2,1a 4,6b
2,4a 2,3a 2,2a 2,6a 7,6b
2.9a 2.Sa 2.6a 3.4b 11.0c
44.8ab 41.0a 38.6a 47.1b 125.90
64.4ab 67.5b 69.4b 62.6a
Chlsd b$nh (%) Score
250EC Nativo 75WG Tiit Super 250EC Opus 75EC Q6I chCrng
0.3a 0.3a 0.3a 0.3a 0.3a
0,3a 0,3a 0,3a 0,3a 0,4a
0,3a 0.4a 0.4a 0.3a 0,6b
0,4a 0,4a 0,4a 0,5a 1,0b
0,6a 0,5a 0,5a 0,6a 1,4b
0,6a 0,7ab 0,6a 0,8b 2,5c
0.8a 0.9ab 0.7a 1.1b 3.6o
11.4a 12,2ab 10.8a 14,1b 40.0c
71.5bc 69.5b 73.0c 64.9a
Ghi chO: Gii trj cOng chi tiiu (tl t$ b$nh hodc chl s6 b$nh) trong cOng m^t c^t c6 cic chO cii khdc nhau thi hi$n sw sai khic c6 j? nghJa thdng /<d (P<0.05).
Tnj-dc khi phun thuoc, chi so bdnh rung Id d cde cdng thdc Id 0,3%. Sau khi phun thulc 1 ngdy, chi so bdnh dao ddng t d 0.3 - 0,4% . Sau khi phun thulc 3 ngdy, chi s i bpnh dao ddng t d 0,3 - 0.6%. Sau khi phun 5 ngdy chi s i bdnh cd sy thay doi dd Id Score 250EC tdng 0,1%, Tilt Super 300EC tdng 0,1%, Opus 75EC tdng 0,2%
vd Nativo 750WG tdng 0,2% cdn d l i chdng tdng 0,1% Sau khi phun 7 ngdy chi s i bdnh tiep tyc cd s y biln ddng nhp. Chi so bdnh d cdng thdc xd ly Score 250EC khdng thay doi, Tilt Super 300EC tdng 0,2%, Opus 75EC tdng 0,3% vd Nativo 750WG tdng 0 , 1 % cdn d l i chdng tdng 0,1%. Sau khi phun 14 ngdy chi so b$nh cd s y thay doi. Score 250EC tdng chi 0,1%, Tilt Super 250EC tdng 0,3%, Opus 75EC tang 0,5% vd Nativo 75WG tdng 0,4% cdn d l i chdng tdng 0,8%, d giai dogn ndy d l i chdng cd chi s6 bdnh cao nhit vd cao han Score 250EC 1%, Tilt Super 300EC 0,6%, Opus 75EC 0,2% vd Nativo 750WG 0,5%. Sau khi phun 21 ngdy chi s i bdnh
gida cdng thdc vdi d l i chdng cd thay doi. Score 250EC tdng 0.3%. Tilt Super 300EC tdng 0,7%.
Opus 75EC tdng 1.2% vd Nativo 750WG tdng 1,4% cdn d l i chdng tdng 2,2%. d giai dogn nay CSB cua d l i chdng v i n cao nhit vd cao han Score 250EC 2,9%. Tilt Super 300EC 2.1%, Opus 75EC 1,2% vd Nativo 750WG 1,3% (bdng 4),
AUDPC v l ehl so b$nh d cde cdng thdc xd 1^
thulc dao ddng t d 10,8 (Tilt Super 250EC) den 14.1 (Opus 75EC), cdng thdc Nativo 750WG dgt 12,2, cdng thdc x d l# thulc Score 250EC Id 11,4, doi chdng dgt 40,0. Hi$u lyc phdng trtr khi ddnh gid ve chi s i b§nh cho t h l y cdng thdc x d ly thulc Tilt Super 300EC dgt 73,0% khdng sai khdc vdi thuoe Score 250EC (71,5%), Ngtivo 750WG dat 69,5% vd t h i p nhit Id Opus 75EC dgt 64,9% (Bang 4).
4.K£TLUANVAD£NGH|
Cdc logi thulc Score 250EC, Tilt Super 300EC. Opus 75EC vd Nativo 750WG d i u cd
Ket qua nghien c d u khoa hpc B V T V - S o 1/2018
kha ndng phdng trd bdnh rung Id cao d mdc d | khdc nhau d Thda Thidn Hue. Thuoc Score 250EC (hi$u lyc 64,4 - 69,9%) vd Tilt Super 300EC (hi$u lyc 55,4 - 69,4%) Id hidu lyc eao d ca hai vfing sinh thdi (vCing gd d l i d thj xd Huang Trd va vCing nui d huydn Nam Odng).
Sd dyng thulc Score 250EC, nong dd 0,1% vd Tilt Super 300EC, nong dd phun 0.05% d l phdng tri b#nh njng la eao su tgi Thda Thidn H u l .
d n nghidn cdu thdi gian va so lan phun thulc phCi hpp de tang hieu qua phdng trd b$nh n,ing Id cao su cOa cac loai thuoe.
Lm cim ort: Biy li kit qui cOa di tdi Khoa hoc vd COng ngh$ cip tinh duvyc ngin sich nhd nude tinh ThCra Thiin Hui diu tw, md s6 TTH.2015-KC.08.
TAI LIEU THAM K H A O 1 Campbell, C. L, L V. Madden, 1990. Temporal analysis of epidemics 1: description and comparison of disease progress cun/es, in Introduction to Plant Disease Epidemiology, John Wiley, New York, pp.
161-2021,
2. Ishii, H . Yano, K, Date, H., Fumta, Y., Sagehashi, Y., Yamaguchi, T., Sugiyama, T., Nishimura, K. Hasama. 2007. Molecular characterization and diagnosis of Qol resistance in cucumber and eggplant fungal pathogens.
Phytopathology, 97:1458-66.
3. Manju, M. J, 2006. Chemical control of Corynespora leaf fall disease. Corynespora leaf disease of Hevea brasiliensis Strategies for management (C. Kuruvilla Jacob, P Snnivas, 0. Bindu Roy). Rubber Research Institute of India, Kottayam, Kerala. India, p. 102-108.
4. Nguyen Thj Thu Thuy, Phan Th| Mpng Mo", Trin E)dng Hod, 2016 Nghiin cdu xdc i^nh tdc nhSn va budc diu danh gia hi^u qua mpt so thuoc hod hpc dli vdi benh njng Id cao su tai Thda Thidn Hul. T9p chl Bao v$ thiyc v$t. S6 4 (267): 21 - 27.
5. Phan Thdnh Dung, 2004. Ky thu$t b§o v$ thuc v$t cay cao su. Nha xult ban Ndng Nghiep.
6. Phan Thanh DQng, Phan Binh Thao, 2012. Quy trinh ky thuat cay cao su. T|p dodn cdng nghiep cao su Viet Nam, trang 138.
7. Srinivas P. and Idicula S.P , 2006. Fungicides in Corynespora leaf fall disease management. A Laboratory Manual for International Training on Strategies for Management of Corynespora Leaf Fall Disease of Hevea Brasiliensis (C.K. Jacob, P. Srinivas.
C. Bindu Roy). Rubber Research Institute of India, Kottayam, India, p. 40 - 49
8. Takeuehi. T., Kubo, C , H. Ishii. 2006. Sensitivity of Chiba Prefecture isolates of Corynespora cassiicola, the cause of Corynespora leaf spot on cucumber, to several fungicides. Annal report of the Kanto-Tosan Plant Protedion Society, 53: 55-60.
Phin bl^n: TS. Nguydn Thj Nhung
NGHIDN CLfU K H A NANG LPC C H ^ C O A NANO D C ) N G - SILICA CTC C H ^ s y PHAT TRI^N CUA N A M Pyricularia oryzea G A Y B E N H DAO ON HAI LUA Inhibition Effects of Copper - Silica Nanoparticles Against Rice Blast Disease
Caused by Pyricularia oryzae
Nguydn Thj Thu Thiliy^ Dd Thj Sen^ vd T r i n Thdi Hda^
Ngdy nhin bii: 03.12.2018 Ngdy chip nhin:15.12.2018
Rice blast disease, caused by Pyricularia oryzae. is the most serious biotic threat to rice (Oryza sativa L.) production worldwide. It causes severe yield losses in Vietnam especially in epidemic years. The fungus is highly variable so disease control is a challenge. In this study.
1. Khoa Ndng hpc, Trudng 9gi Hpc Ndng Ldm, Dgi hpc Hul
2. Khoa Hda, Trudng Dgi Hpc Khoa Hpc, Dgi hgc Hul 3. Ciy ban nhdn dan huypn Nui Thdnh, ti'nh Quang Nam
the effect of copper-silica nanoparticles (20-30 nm) against rice leaf blast fungus was evaluated under conditions both in vitro and in vivo. The application of five concentrations of copper-silica nanoparticles to the culture of P. oryzae showed significant inhibition of both
