16种杀菌剂对3种水稻病原细菌的室内抑菌效果研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2023.06.006

中国稻米 ›› 2023, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (6): 28-32.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2023.06.006

16种杀菌剂对3种水稻病原细菌的室内抑菌效果研究

侯雨萱¹^,^*(), 于林¹, 李阳², 谌江华³

¹中国水稻研究所/水稻生物育种全国重点实验室，杭州 311400
²丽水市土肥植保能源总站，浙江丽水 323000
³宁波市农业科学研究院，浙江宁波 315040

收稿日期:2023-05-16 出版日期:2023-11-20 发布日期:2023-11-21
通讯作者: *houyuxuan@caas.cn
基金资助:
浙江省“三农九方”科技协作计划项目(2022SNJF009)

Indoor Bacteriostatic Effects of 16 Fungicides against Three Pathogenic Bacteria from Rice

HOU Yuxuan¹^,^*(), YU Lin¹, LI Yang², CHEN Jianghua³

¹China National Rice Research Institute/State Key Laboratory of Rice Biology and Breeding, Hangzhou 311400, China
²Soil Fertilizer, Plant Protection and Energy Station of Lishui City, Lishui, Zhejiang 323000, China
³Ningbo Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Ningbo, Zhejiang 315040, China

Received:2023-05-16 Online:2023-11-20 Published:2023-11-21
Contact: *houyuxuan@caas.cn

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

近年来，稻黄单胞杆菌致病变种（Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae）为致病菌的水稻白叶枯病“老病新发”，菠萝泛菌（Pantoea ananatis）和阿氏肠杆菌（Enterobacter asburiae）引起的水稻叶部病害突现流行，迫切需要筛选高效药剂精准防控。本研究采用平板抑菌圈法测定了16种杀菌剂对3种病原细菌的抑菌活性。结果表明，40%链霉素、80%乙蒜素、3%中生菌素、35%喹啉铜四霉素和6%春雷霉素这5种抗生素类杀菌剂同时对上述3种病原细菌具有显著抑菌作用；其中，80%乙蒜素（10 000 mg/L）对黄单胞致病变种FY517的抑菌效果最佳，抑菌圈为22.2 mm；而40%链霉素（10 000 mg/L）对菠萝泛菌SX1和阿氏肠杆菌HZ27抑菌效果最佳，抑菌圈分别为27.8 mm和24.2 mm。

关键词: 水稻, 稻黄单胞杆菌致病变种, 菠萝泛菌, 阿氏肠杆菌, 杀菌剂, 抑菌作用

Abstract:

In recent years, rice leaf diseases caused by Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae, Pantoea ananatis and Enterobacter asburiae respectively, are emerging and prevalent. It is urgent to screen effective fungicides for accurate controlling these bacterial diseases infecting rice leaf. In this study, the plate inhibition zone method was used to measure the bacteriostatic activity of 16 fungicides against three above pathogenic bacteria. The results showed that five antibiotics, including 40% streptomycin, 80% ethylicin, 3% zhongshegnmycin, 35% quinolone-copper tetramycin and 6% priminomycin had the significant bacteriostatic effect on three pathogenic bacteria. Among them, 80% ethoallicin (10 000 mg/L) showed the best bacteriostatic effect on Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae isolate FY517, and the inhibition zone was 22.2 mm. Otherwise, 40% streptomycin (10 000 mg/L) had the best inhibitory effect on Pantoea ananatis isolate SX1 and Enterobacter asburiae isolate HZ27, and the inhibition zone was 27.8 mm and 24.2 mm, respectively.

Key words: rice, Xanthomonas oryzae pv. oryzae, Pantoea ananatis, Enterobacter asburiae, fungicides, antibacteria effect

中图分类号:

侯雨萱, 于林, 李阳, 谌江华. 16种杀菌剂对3种水稻病原细菌的室内抑菌效果研究[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 28-32.

HOU Yuxuan, YU Lin, LI Yang, CHEN Jianghua. Indoor Bacteriostatic Effects of 16 Fungicides against Three Pathogenic Bacteria from Rice[J]. China Rice, 2023, 29(6): 28-32.

图/表 3

表1 16种杀菌剂对水稻上3种病原细菌的室内抑菌效果

图1 5种抗生素类药剂对3种病原细菌形成的抑菌圈平板中心点，药剂原液；右，10X稀释；上，100X稀释；下，1000 X稀释；左，清水。FY517，稻黄单胞杆菌致病变种；SX1，菠萝泛菌；HZ27，阿氏肠杆菌。

图2 5种抗生素类药剂对3种病原细菌的抑菌活性比较 A，杀菌剂浓度为原液（10 000 mg/L）；B，原液稀释10倍（1 000 mg/L）。FY517，稻黄单胞杆菌致病变种；SX1，菠萝泛菌；HZ27，阿氏肠杆菌。

参考文献 26

[1]	冯洁. 植物病原细菌分类最新进展[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(12):2305-2 314.
[2]	MEW T W. Current stantus and future prospects of research on bacterial blight rice[J]. Annu Review of Phytopathology, 1987, 25: 359-382.
[3]	章琦. 水稻白叶枯病抗性的遗传及改良[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007.
[4]	KIM M K, RYU J S, LEE Y, et al. First report of Pantoea sp. induced soft rot disease of Pleurotus eryngii in Korea[J]. Plant Disease, 2007.
[5]	COUTINHO T A, VENTER S N. Pantoea ananatis: An unconventional plant pathogen[J]. Molecular Plant Pathology, 2009, 10 (3): 325-335.
[6]	ALIPPI A M, LOPEZ A C. First report of leaf spot disease of maize caused by Pantoea ananatis in Argentina[J]. Plant Disease, 2010.
[7]	CARR E A, BONASERA J M, ZAID A M, et al. First report of bulb disease of onion caused by Pantoea ananatis in New York[J]. Plant Disease, 2010.
[8]	DE MAAYER P, Chan W Y, VENTER S N, et al. Genome sequence of Pantoea ananatis LMG20103, the causative agent of Eucalyptus blight and dieback[J]. Journal of Bacteriology, 2010, 192 (11): 2 936-2 937.
[9]	EGOROVA M, MAZURIN E, IGNATOV A N. First report of Pantoea ananatis causing grain discolouration and leaf blight of rice in Russia[J]. New Disease Reports, 2015.
[10]	KINI K, AGNIMONHAN R, AFOLABI O, et al. First report of a new bacterial leaf blight of rice caused by Pantoea ananatis and Pantoea stewartii in Togo[J]. Plant Disease, 2017, 101: 241.
[11]	KINI K, AGNIMONHAN R, AFOLABI O, et al. First report of a new bacterial leaf blight of rice caused by Pantoea ananati and Pantoea stewartii in Benin[J]. Plant Disease, 2017, 101: 242.
[12]	KRAWCZYK K, WIELKOPOLAN B, OBREPALSKA-STEPLOWSKA A. Pantoea ananatis, a new bacterial pathogen affecting wheat plants (Triticum L.) in Poland[J]. Pathogens, 2020.
[13]	YU L, YANG C D, JI Z J, et al. First report of new bacterial leaf blight of rice caused by Pantoea ananatis in southeast China[J]. Plant Disease, 2021.
[14]	DING X, LU C, HAO M, et al. First report of new bacterial leaf streak of rice caused by pantoea ananatis in China[J]. Plant Disease, 2022, 106: 1 747.
[15]	DONI F, SUHAIMI N S M, IRAWAN B, et al. Associations of Pantoea with rice plants: As friends or foes?[J]. Agriculture-Basel, 2021.
[16]	LV L, LUO J, AHMED T, et al. Beneficial effect and potential risk of Pantoea on rice production[J]. Plants, 2022.
[17]	JONES J B, CHASE A R, HARRIS G K. Evaluation of the biolog GN microplate system for identification of some plant-pathogenic bacteria[J]. Plant Disease, 1993, 77: 553-558.
[18]	WANG G F, XIE G L, ZHU B, et al. Identification and characterization of the Enterobacter complex causing mulberry (Morus alba) wilt disease in China[J]. European Journal of Plant Pathology, 2010, 126 (4): 465-478.
[19]	XUE Y, HU M, CHEN S S, et al. Enterobacter asburiae and Pantoea ananatis causing rice bacterial blight in China[J]. Plant Disease, 2021, 105: 2 078-2 088.
[20]	翟婧, 吴水祥, 赵丽稳, 等. 宁波市水稻白叶枯病重发原因分析与防控对策思考[J]. 中国植保导刊, 2022, 42(8):85-88.
[21]	王华弟, 陈剑平, 严成其, 等. 中国南方水稻白叶枯病发生流行动态与绿色防控技术[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2017, 29(12):2051-2 059.
[22]	吴水祥, 徐抗冬, 狄蕊, 等. 几种药剂防治水稻白叶枯病效果试验[J]. 湖北植保, 2022(2): 38-40.
[23]	余山红, 应俊杰. 67种药剂对水稻白叶枯病菌的室内毒力学[J]. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(8):1821-1 824.
[24]	王大会, 蒋承宇, 王忠宇, 等. 一种烟草细菌性叶枯病病原鉴定及防治药剂筛选[J]. 中国烟草科学, 2021, 42(3):65-70.
[25]	DONI F, ISHAK M N, SUHAIMI N M, et al. Leaf blight disease of rice caused by Pantoea: Profile of an increasingly damaging disease in rice[J]. Tropical Plant Pathology, 2023, 48 (1): 1-10.
[26]	蒙姣荣, 蒙月月, 朱丽玲, 等. 广西桑树细菌性枯萎病菌生物学特性及防治药剂筛选[J]. 广西植保, 2015, 28(3):1-7.

16种杀菌剂对3种水稻病原细菌的室内抑菌效果研究

Indoor Bacteriostatic Effects of 16 Fungicides against Three Pathogenic Bacteria from Rice

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 3

参考文献 26

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	占小登, 王凯, 曹立勇. 近年我国水稻遗传育种研究进展与展望[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 1-4.
[2]	崔元江, 吕阳, 胡海涛, 吴世强, 郭龙彪. 近年我国水稻分子生物学研究进展[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 10-15.
[3]	孙平勇, 舒服, 李天春, 许国冬, 张武汉, 何强, 邓华凤. 优质两系杂交水稻爽两优132高产制种技术[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 114-115.
[4]	从夕汉, 阮新民, 施伏芝, 杜弘杨, 罗彦长, 罗玉祥, 罗志祥. 广适籼型两系不育系7011S的选育与应用[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 116-118.
[5]	张欣欣, 明珂, 冯国忠. 水稻病虫害生物防治应用研究进展[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 16-20.
[6]	白成鑫, 高嘉聪, 曾檬, 赵泓博, 赵鑫, 王帅, 王楠. 3种Maillard反应前体物质对稻草木质素腐解及腐殖质组成的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 39-43.
[7]	刘佳欣, 吴周周, 周婵婵, 阿娜, 李漪濛, 王术. 水稻倒伏性状与抗倒途径研究进展[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 44-48.
[8]	郑广杰, 陶怡, 沈兴连, 叶昌, 徐亚楠, 褚光, 徐春梅, 王丹英. 水稻种子萌发出苗研究及直播生产上相关难题[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 49-55.
[9]	朱均林, 褚光, 章秀福. 近年我国水稻栽培学科若干热点领域研究进展与展望[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 5-9.
[10]	徐杰, 石浩, 杨柳, 刘厚清, 鲍春辉, 马昀钊, 吴文福. 中日粳稻适时收割对产量及品质影响的研究进展[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 67-72.
[11]	王忍, 黄璜, 陈灿, 马微微, 马昀君, 张印, 马学虎, 罗雨聪, 陈烈臣, 罗明德. 湖南稻鸭生态种养水稻品种优选研究[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 83-86.
[12]	徐富贤, 高尚卿, 孔晓谦, 徐魏, 伍燕翔, 徐麟, 魏林, 肖鹏飞, 佘恒志, 陈凯, 龚飞, 蒋鹏, 张林, 郭晓艺, 刘茂. 杂交水稻机械收获减少稻谷产量损失度的关键技术研究[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(6): 99-102.
[13]	罗锡坤, 李敏, 张恒栋, 张发丽, 罗德强, 江学海, 周维佳. 不同类型杂交稻品种在贵州兴义的高产潜力及氮肥利用特性研究[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(5): 105-109.
[14]	李睿, 于广星, 陈盈, 董立强, 王双, 李跃东. 基质粒径对水稻秧苗素质的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(5): 110-113.
[15]	张发丽, 王荣基, 张恒栋, 何志旺, 张建冲. 黔西南地区水稻超高产原因分析[J]. 中国稻米, 2023, 29(5): 114-118.