首页 | 官方网站   微博 | 高级检索  
     

不同诱捕技术对松褐天牛的诱捕效果
引用本文:王四宝,刘云鹏,樊美,苗雪霞,赵学球,李增智,司胜利,黄勇平.不同诱捕技术对松褐天牛的诱捕效果[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(3):505-508.
作者姓名:王四宝  刘云鹏  樊美  苗雪霞  赵学球  李增智  司胜利  黄勇平
作者单位:1. 中国科学院上海生命科学院植物生理生态研究所,上海,200032;中国科学院研究生院,北京,100039
2. 安徽农业大学安徽省微生物防治重点实验室,合肥,230036
3. 中国科学院上海生命科学院植物生理生态研究所,上海,200032
基金项目:中国科学院知识创新工程重大项目 (KSCX1 SW 1 3 0 2 0 1 ),国家自然科学基金重点项目 ( 30 330 5 0 0 ),安徽省教育厅自然科学研究项目 ( 2 0 0 4KJ1 44,2 0 0 2KJ1 1 0ZD),上海市科委重点项目 ( 0 1JC1 40 5 1 ),国家“863”计划资助项目 ( 2 0 0 3AA2 4 90
摘    要:通过不同引诱剂、不同诱芯、不同诱捕器和不同缓释量对松褐天牛的诱捕试验,结果表明,4种引诱剂对松褐天牛都有一定的引诱效果.其中,引诱剂MA2K 05的效果最好,引诱活性平均为26.3头/诱捕器,对其它鞘翅目和半翅目昆虫也有引诱作用;引诱剂MA2K 13活性次之,平均21.3头/诱捕器;MA2K 11最弱,平均13.8头/诱捕器.3种诱芯A、B和C的引诱效果分别为14.73、4.25和20.3头/诱捕器,其中诱芯C内引诱剂总量为诱芯A或诱芯B的2.5倍,且诱芯C内的引诱剂3~5 d需添加一次,而诱芯A和诱芯B的引诱活性能持续1个月以上,因此,诱芯B较为理想.宣州诱捕器引诱效果显著高于日式诱捕器,分别为36.4和9.7头/诱捕器.不同剂量诱捕结果表明,随着诱芯缓释量的增加,诱捕效果也相应提高,当剂量从20 ml上升至80 ml时,诱捕效果增加不显著;当诱剂达120 ml时,引诱效果显著增加.

关 键 词:引诱剂  诱捕器  诱芯  松褐天牛
文章编号:1001-9332(2005)03-0505-04
收稿时间:2003-12-30
修稿时间:2003年12月30

Field attraction effects of different trapping methods on Monochamus alternatus
WANG Sibao,LIU Yunpeng,FAN Meizhen,MIAO Xuexia,ZHAO Xieqiu,Li Zengzhi,SI Shengli,Huang Yongping.Field attraction effects of different trapping methods on Monochamus alternatus[J].Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2005,16(3):505-508.
Authors:WANG Sibao  LIU Yunpeng  FAN Meizhen  MIAO Xuexia  ZHAO Xieqiu  Li Zengzhi  SI Shengli  Huang Yongping
Affiliation:Institute of Plant Physiology Ecology, Shanghai Institutes of Biological Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai 200032, China. wangsibao@hotmail.com
Abstract:A comparative study on the field attraction effects of different attractant, trap, lure and controlled-releasing amount on Monochamus alternatus showed that four test attractants had a certain trapping ability to Monochamus alternatus, among which, MA2K05 was the strongest, with a mean capture efficiency of 26.3 individuals each trap and being attractive to other species of Loleoptera and Hemiptera; MA2K13 took the second place, with 21.3 individuals each trap; while MA2K11 was the weakest, with 13.8 individuals each trap. Among the three lures tested, lures C (60 ml plastic cup with 2 of 5 cm round holes on the cover) and B (20 ml specified controlled-releasing plastic bottle) had a comparatively stronger effect, with a capture efficiency of 34.25 and 20.3 individuals each trap, respectively; while lure A (20 ml specified controlled-releasing plastic bottle, the releasing amount being smaller than that of lure B) was the weakest, with 14.7 individuals each trap. Because the attractant volume of lure C was 1.5 times larger than that of lures B and A, and the attractant for lure C was appended every 3-5 d, while that for lures B and A could be used for more than a month with once appended, lure B was the best on the whole. As for the test traps, Xuanzhou trap was superior to imitated Japanese trap, with a trapping efficiency of 36.4 and 9.7 individuals each trap, respectively. The attractiveness of attractants was not significantly enhanced when the dosage was increased from 20 ml to 80 ml, but significantly improved when it was up to 120 ml.
Keywords:Attractant  Trap  Lure    Monochamus alternatus
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录!
点击此处可从《应用生态学报》浏览原始摘要信息
点击此处可从《应用生态学报》下载全文
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司    京ICP备09084417号-23

京公网安备 11010802026262号