Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis ›› 2022, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (1): 104-111.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2022.01.13
• Plant Protection • Previous Articles Next Articles
WU Yanjun1(), HONG Wenying1, ZHANG Zhongmei2, WU Yao1, MIAO Qiang2
Received:
2020-09-30
Online:
2022-01-25
Published:
2022-02-05
CLC Number:
WU Yanjun, HONG Wenying, ZHANG Zhongmei, WU Yao, MIAO Qiang. Epidemic dynamic and prediction model of cucumber powdery mildew under protected cultivation[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2022, 34(1): 104-111.
Fig.1 Epidemic dynamic curves of cucumber powdery mildew in protected cultivation during 2007-2019 a, The first ten days of the month; b, The middle ten days of the month; c, The last ten days of the month. The same as below.
年份Year | Y1 | X2 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X10 | X16 | X25 | X30 | X32 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007 | 26.2 | 12.74 | 11 | 105.4 | 13.45 | 5.45 | 16.50 | 3.43 | 11.62 | 61.9 | 3.12 |
2008 | 54.8 | 12.75 | 8 | 154.9 | 2.96 | 2.61 | 17.10 | 2.65 | 15.34 | 75.6 | 2.12 |
2009 | 36.8 | 11.12 | 15 | 109.6 | 10.58 | 4.53 | 17.55 | 3.49 | 14.69 | 168.4 | 2.29 |
2010 | 46.2 | 10.28 | 15 | 118.5 | 29.22 | 4.60 | 14.02 | 3.45 | 16.33 | 109.6 | 2.60 |
2011 | 29.2 | 9.97 | 9 | 148.8 | 4.39 | 2.81 | 17.29 | 4.20 | 13.93 | 77.9 | 2.65 |
2012 | 16.6 | 10.15 | 19 | 103.7 | 22.05 | 4.13 | 19.00 | 2.64 | 15.07 | 64.3 | 2.44 |
2013 | 51.93 | 12.26 | 13 | 130.1 | 8.89 | 4.13 | 16.91 | 3.94 | 13.19 | 79.2 | 3.15 |
2014 | 45.45 | 12.73 | 12 | 127.2 | 6.20 | 4.87 | 16.99 | 1.96 | 14.97 | 90.0 | 1.85 |
2015 | 53.19 | 11.68 | 16 | 102.2 | 13.50 | 4.31 | 17.33 | 4.88 | 13.13 | 72.9 | 2.58 |
2016 | 38.77 | 12.30 | 10 | 128.1 | 5.08 | 3.80 | 17.63 | 1.93 | 15.83 | 105.9 | 2.81 |
2017 | 42.86 | 11.33 | 14 | 121.3 | 16.68 | 2.06 | 18.71 | 3.53 | 12.83 | 101.1 | 1.85 |
2018 | 32.49 | 13.41 | 16 | 144.1 | 4.87 | 4.46 | 18.95 | 4.03 | 15.24 | 177.9 | 3.27 |
2019 | 69.82 | 12.41 | 18 | 127.1 | 9.12 | 3.12 | 18.13 | 4.12 | 17.38 | 118.5 | 2.52 |
Table 1 The predictive factor for occurrence amount of powdery mildew in spring cucumber under protected cultivation
年份Year | Y1 | X2 | X5 | X6 | X7 | X8 | X10 | X16 | X25 | X30 | X32 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007 | 26.2 | 12.74 | 11 | 105.4 | 13.45 | 5.45 | 16.50 | 3.43 | 11.62 | 61.9 | 3.12 |
2008 | 54.8 | 12.75 | 8 | 154.9 | 2.96 | 2.61 | 17.10 | 2.65 | 15.34 | 75.6 | 2.12 |
2009 | 36.8 | 11.12 | 15 | 109.6 | 10.58 | 4.53 | 17.55 | 3.49 | 14.69 | 168.4 | 2.29 |
2010 | 46.2 | 10.28 | 15 | 118.5 | 29.22 | 4.60 | 14.02 | 3.45 | 16.33 | 109.6 | 2.60 |
2011 | 29.2 | 9.97 | 9 | 148.8 | 4.39 | 2.81 | 17.29 | 4.20 | 13.93 | 77.9 | 2.65 |
2012 | 16.6 | 10.15 | 19 | 103.7 | 22.05 | 4.13 | 19.00 | 2.64 | 15.07 | 64.3 | 2.44 |
2013 | 51.93 | 12.26 | 13 | 130.1 | 8.89 | 4.13 | 16.91 | 3.94 | 13.19 | 79.2 | 3.15 |
2014 | 45.45 | 12.73 | 12 | 127.2 | 6.20 | 4.87 | 16.99 | 1.96 | 14.97 | 90.0 | 1.85 |
2015 | 53.19 | 11.68 | 16 | 102.2 | 13.50 | 4.31 | 17.33 | 4.88 | 13.13 | 72.9 | 2.58 |
2016 | 38.77 | 12.30 | 10 | 128.1 | 5.08 | 3.80 | 17.63 | 1.93 | 15.83 | 105.9 | 2.81 |
2017 | 42.86 | 11.33 | 14 | 121.3 | 16.68 | 2.06 | 18.71 | 3.53 | 12.83 | 101.1 | 1.85 |
2018 | 32.49 | 13.41 | 16 | 144.1 | 4.87 | 4.46 | 18.95 | 4.03 | 15.24 | 177.9 | 3.27 |
2019 | 69.82 | 12.41 | 18 | 127.1 | 9.12 | 3.12 | 18.13 | 4.12 | 17.38 | 118.5 | 2.52 |
年份Year | Y2 | X34 | X36 | X38 | X39 | X40 | X41 | X46 | X49 | X62 | X64 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007 | 43.2 | 10.80 | 67.39 | 9 | 189.9 | 3.97 | 1.90 | 11 | 1.43 | 3 | 10.45 |
2008 | 32.6 | 8.20 | 69.42 | 12 | 225.4 | 3.80 | 1.62 | 11 | 2.40 | 3 | 0.59 |
2009 | 54.4 | 8.44 | 68.74 | 9 | 204.7 | 7.68 | 3.33 | 18 | 2.21 | 1 | 0.29 |
2010 | 32.8 | 9.20 | 76.87 | 16 | 156.9 | 8.91 | 1.81 | 9 | 2.39 | 1 | 0.24 |
2011 | 27.6 | 6.70 | 69.55 | 12 | 185.2 | 4.30 | 1.82 | 20 | 2.26 | 3 | 0.37 |
2012 | 44.1 | 14.99 | 64.16 | 9 | 230.5 | 1.71 | 2.05 | 16 | 2.24 | 1 | 0 |
2013 | 49.1 | 6.06 | 50.81 | 4 | 289.5 | 0.27 | 1.56 | 10 | 2.78 | 4 | 15.04 |
2014 | 26.4 | 7.10 | 77.77 | 15 | 155.8 | 6.92 | 2.55 | 19 | 2.73 | 0 | 0 |
2015 | 48.6 | 24.59 | 80.68 | 18 | 118.6 | 13.14 | 3.86 | 14 | 2.89 | 7 | 1.48 |
2016 | 20.8 | 5.92 | 73.65 | 14 | 204.1 | 2.61 | 2.60 | 8 | 2.04 | 5 | 1.69 |
2017 | 41.5 | 20.39 | 66.19 | 10 | 272.9 | 2.45 | 2.61 | 16 | 2.00 | 3 | 0.83 |
2018 | 14.3 | 9.70 | 72.94 | 15 | 240.8 | 5.13 | 1.70 | 13 | 1.53 | 2 | 0.23 |
2019 | 40.1 | 13.73 | 78.32 | 14 | 152.5 | 7.37 | 3.68 | 12 | 2.48 | 3 | 0.88 |
Table 2 The predictive factor for occurrence amount of powdery mildew in autumn cucumber under protected cultivation
年份Year | Y2 | X34 | X36 | X38 | X39 | X40 | X41 | X46 | X49 | X62 | X64 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2007 | 43.2 | 10.80 | 67.39 | 9 | 189.9 | 3.97 | 1.90 | 11 | 1.43 | 3 | 10.45 |
2008 | 32.6 | 8.20 | 69.42 | 12 | 225.4 | 3.80 | 1.62 | 11 | 2.40 | 3 | 0.59 |
2009 | 54.4 | 8.44 | 68.74 | 9 | 204.7 | 7.68 | 3.33 | 18 | 2.21 | 1 | 0.29 |
2010 | 32.8 | 9.20 | 76.87 | 16 | 156.9 | 8.91 | 1.81 | 9 | 2.39 | 1 | 0.24 |
2011 | 27.6 | 6.70 | 69.55 | 12 | 185.2 | 4.30 | 1.82 | 20 | 2.26 | 3 | 0.37 |
2012 | 44.1 | 14.99 | 64.16 | 9 | 230.5 | 1.71 | 2.05 | 16 | 2.24 | 1 | 0 |
2013 | 49.1 | 6.06 | 50.81 | 4 | 289.5 | 0.27 | 1.56 | 10 | 2.78 | 4 | 15.04 |
2014 | 26.4 | 7.10 | 77.77 | 15 | 155.8 | 6.92 | 2.55 | 19 | 2.73 | 0 | 0 |
2015 | 48.6 | 24.59 | 80.68 | 18 | 118.6 | 13.14 | 3.86 | 14 | 2.89 | 7 | 1.48 |
2016 | 20.8 | 5.92 | 73.65 | 14 | 204.1 | 2.61 | 2.60 | 8 | 2.04 | 5 | 1.69 |
2017 | 41.5 | 20.39 | 66.19 | 10 | 272.9 | 2.45 | 2.61 | 16 | 2.00 | 3 | 0.83 |
2018 | 14.3 | 9.70 | 72.94 | 15 | 240.8 | 5.13 | 1.70 | 13 | 1.53 | 2 | 0.23 |
2019 | 40.1 | 13.73 | 78.32 | 14 | 152.5 | 7.37 | 3.68 | 12 | 2.48 | 3 | 0.88 |
模型编号 Model No. | 预测模型 Prediction model | R2 |
---|---|---|
1 | Y1=392.889+7.056X2+6.724X5-0.403X6-2.593X7-19.339X8-19.034X10-3.779X16- 1.391X25-0.036X30-0.678X32 | 0.998 6** |
2 | Y2=69.839+0.911X34+0.405X36-5.617X38-0.078X39+2.194X40+0.979X41-0.860X46+ 5.054X49-0.033X62-0.623X64 | 0.997 4** |
Table 3 The prediction models for occurrence amount of cucumber powdery mildew in protected cultivation
模型编号 Model No. | 预测模型 Prediction model | R2 |
---|---|---|
1 | Y1=392.889+7.056X2+6.724X5-0.403X6-2.593X7-19.339X8-19.034X10-3.779X16- 1.391X25-0.036X30-0.678X32 | 0.998 6** |
2 | Y2=69.839+0.911X34+0.405X36-5.617X38-0.078X39+2.194X40+0.979X41-0.860X46+ 5.054X49-0.033X62-0.623X64 | 0.997 4** |
预测对象 Forecasting object | a | a1 | a2 | t/d | δ | SD | 结论 Conclusion |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
春黄瓜病指高峰值 | 41.87 | 69.82 | 75.55 | 7 | 14.08 | 81.85 | 准确Accurate |
The maximum value of disease index in spring cucumber | |||||||
秋黄瓜病指高峰值 | 36.58 | 40.14 | 44.88 | 7 | 11.96 | 78.53 | 准确Accurate |
The maximum value of disease index in autumn cucumber |
Table 4 The model verification of cucumber powdery mildew in protected cultivation
预测对象 Forecasting object | a | a1 | a2 | t/d | δ | SD | 结论 Conclusion |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
春黄瓜病指高峰值 | 41.87 | 69.82 | 75.55 | 7 | 14.08 | 81.85 | 准确Accurate |
The maximum value of disease index in spring cucumber | |||||||
秋黄瓜病指高峰值 | 36.58 | 40.14 | 44.88 | 7 | 11.96 | 78.53 | 准确Accurate |
The maximum value of disease index in autumn cucumber |
[1] | TUTTLE MCGRATH M. Diseases of cucurbits and their management[M]// Diseases of fruits and vegetables volume I. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004,455-510. |
[2] |
PÉREZ-GARCÍA A, ROMERO D, FERNÁNDEZ-ORTUÑO D, et al. The powdery mildew fungus Podosphaera fusca(synonym Podosphaera xanthii), a constant threat to cucurbits[J]. Molecular Plant Pathology, 2009, 10(2): 153-160.
DOI URL |
[3] | 吴燕君, 王政逸, 洪文英. 瓜白粉病重发期高效药剂的选择及控制技术探讨[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2016, 57(12): 2060-2063. |
WU Y J, WANG Z Y, HONG W Y . Selection of medicaments and control technology for cucurbits powdery mildew[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 57(12): 2060-2063. (in Chinese) | |
[4] | 周生茂, 班美玲, 尚小红, 等. 瓜类蔬菜白粉病及其抗性分子遗传的研究进展[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2013, 25(6): 1456-1461. |
ZHOU S M, BAN M L, SHANG X H, et al. Progress in powdery mildew and molecular genetics of its resistance in cucurbits vegetable[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2013, 25(6): 1456-1461.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[5] | 扈晓杰, 朱祝军. 硅对黄瓜白粉病抗性及叶片质外体抗氧化酶活性的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2008, 20(1): 67-71. |
HU X J, ZHU Z J. Effects of silicon on resistance of powdery mildew and the activities of antioxidative enzymes in leaf apoplast of cucumber[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2008, 20(1): 67-71.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[6] | 周益林, 段霞瑜, 盛宝钦. 植物白粉病的化学防治进展[J]. 农药学学报, 2001, 3(2): 12-18. |
ZHOU Y L, DUAN X Y, SHENG B Q. Development of chemical control for powdery mildew on plants[J]. Chinese Journal of Pesticide Science, 2001, 3(2): 12-18.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[7] | 彭志荣, 毛雪琴, 姜华, 等. 生防菌株MT-06对黄瓜白粉病的防治及其定殖力测定[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2012, 24(4): 624-629. |
PENG Z R, MAO X Q, JIANG H, et al. Evaluation of biological control strain MT-06 for managing cucumber powdery mildew by pot tests and its colonization measurement on cucumber[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2012, 24(4): 624-629.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[8] | 韩欢欢, 马韬, 谢冰. 瓜类蔬菜白粉病抗性诱导及其抗病机制研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2012, 28(25): 124-128. |
HAN H H, MA T, XIE B. Progress on the resistance inducing to cucurbits powdery mildew and its mechanism[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012, 28(25): 124-128.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[9] | 吴燕君, 洪文英, 黄凯美, 等. 长瓜白粉病药剂筛选及应用[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2014(10): 1572-1573. |
WU Y J, HONG W Y, HUANG K M, et al. Screening test of reagents controlling powdery mildew on calabash gourds[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2014(10): 1572-1573. (in Chinese) | |
[10] | 吴燕君, 洪文英, 李丹, 等. 新型杀菌剂对黄瓜关键病害的综合控制效果[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2019, 60(2): 257-260. |
WU Y J, HONG W Y, LI D, et al. Comprehensive control effects of novel fungicide against key diseases of cucumbers[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 60(2): 257-260. (in Chinese) | |
[11] | 王爱英. 黄瓜白粉病流行主导因素及病害防治的初步研究[D]. 保定:河北农业大学, 2003. |
WANG A Y. Primary studies on key factors influencing the epidemic of cucumber powdery mildew and disease control[D]. Baoding: Hebei Agricultural University, 2003. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[12] | 严慧霞. 南瓜白粉病品种抗病性及抗病机理研究[D]. 兰州:甘肃农业大学, 2009. |
YAN H X. Study on disease resistance and mechanism of different pumpkin cultivars[D]. Lanzhou: Gansu Agricultural University, 2009. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[13] | 徐宁, 刘凤权, 胡白石, 等. 室内模拟塑料大棚黄瓜白粉病流行预测模型的建立[J]. 植物保护, 2004, 30(6): 52-55. |
XU N, LIU F Q, HU B S, et al. Forecasting models for epidemics of cucumber powdery mildew (Pseudoperonospora cubensis)under simulated plastic tunnel condition[J]. Plant Protection, 2004, 30(6): 52-55.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[14] | 尹哲, 原锴, 谷培云, 等. 京郊温室大棚黄瓜白粉病流行预测模型构建[J]. 中国植保导刊, 2014, 34(3): 46-48. |
YING Z, YUAN K, GU P Y, et al. Forecasting model construction of cucumber powdery mildew in greenhouse in Beijing Suburb[J]. China Plant Protection, 2014, 34(3): 46-48. (in Chinese) | |
[15] | 李磊福, 孙秋玉, 史娟, 等. 宁夏温室瓜菜白粉病菌鉴定及病害流行预测模型构建[J]. 植物保护学报, 2017, 44(5): 788-795. |
LI L F, SUN Q Y, SHI J, et al. Pathogen identification and forecasting model construction of cucurbit powdery mildew in greenhouse in Ningxia[J]. Journal of Plant Protection, 2017, 44(5): 788-795.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[16] | 唐启义, 李绍石. 病虫测报应验程度判定模式[J]. 中国植保导刊, 1988, 8(1): 1-5. |
TANG Q Y, LI S S. Discriminant models for the prediction accuracy of disease forecasting[J]. China Plant Protection, 1988, 8(1): 1-5. (in Chinese) | |
[17] | 汪爱娟, 洪文英, 吴燕君, 等. 浙江塘栖枇杷黄毛虫种群数量特征及预测模型[J]. 浙江农林大学学报, 2016, 33(4): 712-717. |
WANG A J, HONG W Y, WU Y J, et al. Quantitative population characteristics and a prediction model for Melanographia flexilineata from Tangqi, Zhejiang[J]. Journal of Zhejiang A & F University, 2016, 33(4): 712-717.(in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[18] | 王道泽, 洪文英, 吴燕君, 等. 杭州地区地下害虫成虫发生规律及其预测模型研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2012, 24(6): 1050-1057. |
WANG D Z, HONG W Y, WU Y J, et al. Study on the occurrence regularity and prediction model of underground pest adults in Hangzhou district[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2012, 24(6): 1050-1057.(in Chinese with English abstract) |
[1] | YU Xinru, HE Hongmei, WANG Xiangyun, LI Yanjie, XU Lingying, ZHAO Xueping, ZHANG Changpeng. Deposition and residue of acetamiprid under protected celery cultivation [J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2020, 32(12): 2211-2217. |
[2] | CHEN Chongjun, LIU Yuxue, FENG Yu, WANG Jianfang. Effects of bamboo charcoal addition on nitrogen and phosphorus loss and microbial community structures in greenhouse vegetable soil [J]. , 2018, 30(1): 123-128. |
[3] | NI Zhongying, SHI Yijun, XIE Guoxiong, ZHANG Mingkui. Soil environmental quality of typical protected farmlands in Hangzhou [J]. , 2017, 29(12): 2091-2096. |
[4] | YANG Chunlan, XUE Dawei*, BAO Junhong. Study on analysis method of storage time of Huangshanmaofeng tea by electronic nose [J]. , 2016, 28(4): 676-. |
[5] | HONG Wenying1, WU Yanjun1, LIN Wencai2, WANG Aijuan3, ZHANG Zhouna3, ZHAO Li1. Control efficacy and benefit assessment of the control mode based on “green techniques” against leafy vegetable pests#br# [J]. , 2014, 26(4): 986-. |
[6] | CHEN Qi;ZHANG Guanchen;SU Jinle. Construction and evaluation of the prediction model for florescence of peony in Luoyang City Henan Province [J]. , 2013, 25(1): 0-78. |
[7] | WANG Daoze;HONG Wenying;WU Yanjun;WANG Aijuan;WEI Jiqian. Study on the occurrence regularity and prediction model of underground pest adults in Hangzhou district [J]. , 2012, 24(6): 0-1057. |
[8] | PENG Zhirong;MAO Xueqin;#;JIANG Hua;CHAI Rongyao;ZHANG Zhen;WANG Yanli;WANG Jiaoyu;QIU Haiping;SUN Guochang;*. Evaluation of biological control strain MT06 for managing cucumber powdery mildew by pot tests and its colonization measurement on cucumber [J]. , 2012, 24(4): 0-629. |
Viewed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full text 942
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Abstract 964
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||