【24h】

IMPROVEMENT OF ANAEROBIC SOIL DISINFESTATION

机译:厌氧土壤消毒的改进

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

With increasing worldwide restrictions for soil fumigants, growers loose an important tool to control soilborne pests and pathogens.Environmentally friendly alternatives are urgently needed and anaerobic soil disinfestation (ASD) may be one of them. Traditional ASD with fresh grass is already applied in open field vegetables but the mode of action is unknown. Therefore, trials were performed under controlled conditions using soil-filled buckets, in which several processed defined organic materials were incorporated and compared with fresh grass. The effect of inundation was also studied. Target organisms were Pratylenchus penetrans,Meloidogyne hapla, Globodera pallida and Verticillium dahiiae.Results showed that grass (traditional ASD) was less effective than the organic materials. All materials proved to be effective at 16°C against all target organisms. However, exposure time, dosages, soil type and the temperature at which the experimentswere performed influenced the effectiveness. P. penetrans was eliminated most easily whereas V. dahiiae was most difficult to control. Efficacy was higher in sandy soil than in light marine clay. Inundation at 16°C proved to be effective against P. penetrans and G. pallida in both soil types at sufficient exposure times. A soil temperature of 8°C was sometimes too low for efficacy.Gas production of CO2, NH3, H2S, CH4 and N2O and gas consumption of O2 and production of fatty acids during ASD proved to depend on type of organic materials, soil type, temperature, dosage and exposure time.This first step in unravelling the mode of action has already shown several critical parameters for efficacy. Additional knowledge about the complete mechanisms of action may lead to a more reliable, effective and quicker soil disinfestation.
机译:随着全球对土壤熏蒸剂的限制日益严格,种植者失去了控制土壤传播病虫害和病原体的重要工具,迫切需要环保的替代品,厌氧土壤杀虫剂(ASD)可能是其中之一。传统的带有新鲜草的ASD已用于露天蔬菜中,但作用方式尚不清楚。因此,试验是在受控条件下使用装满土壤的水桶进行的,其中掺入了几种经过加工的确定有机材料,并与新鲜草进行了比较。还研究了淹没的影响。靶标生物为Prattylenchus penetrans,Meloidogyne hapla,Globodera pallida和Verticillium dahiiae。结果表明,草(传统ASD)的效果不如有机材料。事实证明,所有材料在16°C时对所有目标生物均有效。然而,暴露时间,剂量,土壤类型和进行实验的温度影响了有效性。 P. penetrans最容易消除,而V. dahiiae最难控制。沙质土壤的功效高于轻质海洋粘土。事实证明,在足够的暴露时间下,在两种土壤中,16°C的淹没对P. penetrans和G. pallida都是有效的。土壤温度有时无法达到8°C,以至于无法发挥功效.ASD期间产生的CO2,NH3,H2S,CH4和N2O的气体产生,O2的气体消耗和脂肪酸的产生取决于有机物质的类型,土壤类型,阐明作用方式的第一步已经显示了几个关键的功效参数。有关完整的作用机制的其他知识可能会导致更可靠,更有效和更快的土壤除害。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号