| 下同。*ValuesaresignificantlydifferentatP，byt-test.Thesameasbelow.
表4非嗜食植物次生物质对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾幼虫的拒食作用(非选择性试验)
Table4Antifeedingeffectsofsecondarysubstancesofnon-preferableplantonlarvaeofT.immissariainnon-selectivetest
|
植物编号
Plant code
|
24h
|
|
48h
|
|
取食面积
Feeding area/cm
|
拒食率
Antifeeding rate/%
|
取食面积
Feeding area/cm
|
拒食率
Antifeeding rate/%
|
|
1
|
1.55±0.08
|
29.33±0.03 bcde
|
|
2.15±0.24
|
28.61±0.01 bcde
|
|
2
|
2.00±0.14
|
8.51±0.08 ef
|
|
2.94±0.20
|
1.35±0.16 g
|
|
3
|
2.01±0.18
|
7.99±0.11 f
|
|
2.83±0.29
|
5.49±0.05 fg
|
|
4
|
1.91±0.07
|
12.83±0.04 def
|
|
2.71±0.35
|
8.15±0.13 efg
|
|
5
|
1.70±0.18
|
23.13±0.06 bcde
|
|
2.41±0.25
|
18.93±0.08 cdefg
|
|
6
|
1.64±0.14
|
24.54±0.10 bcde
|
|
2.43±0.35
|
19.49±0.03 bcdefg
|
|
7
|
1.95±0.13
|
11.43±0.01 ef
|
|
2.80±0.31
|
6.75±0.01 fg
|
|
8
|
1.30±0.26
|
41.89±0.09 bc
|
|
2.05±0.27
|
32.14±0.01 bc
|
|
9
|
1.70±0.10
|
22.17±0.06 bcde
|
|
2.71±0.29
|
9.77±0.02 defg
|
|
10
|
1.67±0.13
|
24.13±0.04 bcde
|
|
2.26±0.36
|
25.53±0.04 bcdef
|
|
11
|
0.47±0.10
|
79.12±0.03 a
|
|
0.59±0.20
|
80.86±0.05 a
|
|
12
|
1.12±0.14
|
49.49±0.04 b
|
|
1.77±0.20
|
41.02±0.01 b
|
|
13
|
1.48±0.15
|
32.90±0.04 bcd
|
|
2.07±0.13
|
30.27±0.05 bcd
|
|
14
|
1.33±0.17
|
40.02±0.06 bc
|
|
1.89±0.25
|
37.37±0.01 bc
|
|
CK
|
2.20±0.13
|
-
|
|
3.01±0.35
|
-
|
2.3非嗜食植物次生物质对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾幼虫存活率的影响
试验结果表明，供试的14种植物提取液中，只有非洲山毛豆和洋紫荆2种提取物对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾2龄幼虫的存活率有影响，处理24h后的存活率分别为60%和85%，IIPC为0.60和0.85；处理48h后的存活率分别为25%和65%，IIPC为0.25和0.65。另12种供试植物提取物对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾2龄幼虫的成活率没有影响（表5）。
表5非嗜食植物次生物质对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾2龄幼虫存活的影响
Table5Effectsofsecondarysubstancesofnon-preferableplant
onsurvivalof2instarslarvaeofThalassodesimmissaria
|
植物编号
Plant code
|
24h
|
|
48h
|
|
存活率
Survival rate/%
|
IIPC
|
存活率
Survival rate/%
|
IIPC
|
|
1
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
2
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
3
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
4
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
5
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
6
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
7
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
8
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
9
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
10
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
11
|
60.0±0.1 c
|
0.60
|
|
25.0±0.1 c
|
0.25
|
|
12
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100 a
|
1.00
|
|
13
|
100.0 a
|
1.00
|
|
100 a
|
1.00
|
|
14
|
85.0±0.1 b
|
0.85
|
|
65.0±0.1 b
|
0.65
|
|
CK
|
100.0 a
|
-
|
|
100.0 a
|
-
|
3讨论
本研究所测试的14种非嗜食植物次生物质对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾的产卵和幼虫取食、存活均有不同程度的影响。其中，非洲山毛豆对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾表现出优异的生物活性，对成虫具有持久的产卵抑制作用，对幼虫有显著的拒食作用和杀虫活性。非洲山毛豆生长迅速枝叶产量大，是一种理想的杀虫植物。其提取物对菜粉蝶（Pierisrapae）、粘虫（Mythimnaseparata）、斜纹夜蛾（Spodopteralitura）和小菜蛾（Plutellaxylostella）等多种鳞翅目害虫有拒食活性。而非洲山毛豆对粗胫翠尺蛾的产卵抑制、拒食和杀虫的生物活性本文属首次报道。试验中发现，荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾幼虫取食经非洲山毛豆处理的叶片后，幼虫先是行动变迟缓，继而停止取食，进而虫体变黑、出水、不能化蛹，这表明非洲山毛豆对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾生长发育也有明显的抑制作用。
植物与植食性昆虫在长期的协同进化过程中发展了各种次生物质以防御植食者的侵袭，植物次生物质对植食性昆虫起化学防御作用。非嗜食植物次生物质对昆虫的影响主要表现为3方面：⑴干扰产卵行为，对成虫寻找寄主、选择产卵场所以及在产卵过程中起着干扰作用；⑵干扰取食行为，由于拒食而引起逃避或死亡；⑶干扰正常生理活动，引起营养不良、致畸、致残、降低生殖能力，甚至中毒死亡。显然，非洲山毛豆次生物质在以上3个方面都对粗胫翠尺蛾产生了影响。但其作用机理还有待进一步研究。据报道，非洲山毛豆提取物中的主要成分为鱼藤酮类化合物，而非洲山毛豆提取物中对粗胫翠尺蛾起作用的有效成分有待进一步分离和鉴定。
化学合成杀虫剂的大量使用带来了害虫抗药性、再猖獗和残留等严重问题，从植物中分离提取出对昆虫有活性的物质，特别是昆虫忌避剂、拒食剂和生长发育抑制剂的试验研究受到广泛重视。非嗜食植物次生物质来源于天然，对人畜及天敌安全，不污染环境。此外，其作用机理与化学农药不同，害虫不容易产生抗药性。从植物中提取具有驱避和拒食作用的活性物质喷洒在寄主植物上，以阻止害虫趋近、产卵和取食，可起到保护寄主植物免受为害的作用。非嗜食植物次生物质将有可能替代化学杀虫剂应用于荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾的防治。而深入研究非嗜食植物次生物质的活性化合物种类和结构，以及该类化合物对害虫的生物活性和作用方式，进而研究开发新的药剂，将有可能为解决化学防治带来的“3R”问题开辟新的途径。
4结论
(1)本研究测试的14种植物提取物中，对荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾活性最强的是非洲山毛豆，处理后1d对成虫的产卵抑制率为84.44%，对2龄幼虫的选择性拒食率为87.50%、非选择性拒食率为78.82%，处理2龄幼虫后24h和48h的存活率分别为60.0%和25.0%。
(2)非洲山毛豆生长迅速，枝、叶等活性部位产量大，在荔枝粗胫翠尺蛾防治方面将有着广阔的开发应用前景，但在剂型加工及产业化生产工艺等方面尚需作进一步研究。
参考文献
1 CHEN Bing-xu, DONG Yi-zhi, CHEN Liu-sheng, LU Heng, CHENG Jia-ning, WANG An-yong, WANG Min. Identification and biologicalcharacteristics of Thalassodes immissaria, an emerald moth infesting litchi[J]. Journal of Fruit Science, 2010, 27(2): 242-245.
2 CHEN Jia-ning, ZENG Xin-nian, CHEN Bing-xu, DONG Yi-zhi, LU Heng. Occurrence and control of Geometrid moth in Litchi orchard[J].Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, 2010, 31(8):1428-1433
3 QIN Jun-de. The relationship between insect and plant[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 1987: 39. (in Chinese)
4 Blum M S. Semiochemical parsimony in the Arthropoda[J]. Annual Review of Entomology, 1996, 41: 353-374.
5 Foster S O, Harris O. Behavioral manipulation methods for pest management[J]. Annual Review ofEntomology, 1997, 42: 123-146.
6 Pickett J A, Wadhams L J, woodcock C M. The chemical ecology of aphids[J]. Annual Review of Entomology, 1992,(37): 67-90.
7 Dikon R A. Natural products and plant disease resistance[J]. Nature, 2001, 411: 843-847.
8 Rausher M D. Co-evolution and plant resistance to natural enemies [J]. Nature, 2001, 411: 857-864.
9 ZHANG Xing, ZHAO Shan-huan. The antifeeding and repellent effects of meliaceus plants to some insectpests[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural College, 1983, 4(3): 1-7.
10 XIAN Ji-dong, PANG Xiong-fei, LIANG Guang-wen, ZHOU Xian-jun, FAN Wu. The effects of secondary of non-preferableplant on conopomorpha sinensis Bradley[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University (Natural Science Edition), 2002, 23(4): 11-14.
11 ZENG Zan-an, LIANG Guang-wen. The olfactory responses and repellent effects of different plant protection agents on of Conopomorpha sinensis Bradley[J]. GuangdongAgricultural Sciences, 2008 (1): 53-55.
12 PENG Hai-hui. Effect of taxis and oviposition taxis of Conopomorpha sinensis Bradley to plant extracts[D]. Guangzhou: South China Agricultural University, 2005.
13 LI Da-jing, LIU Chun-quan, WANG Zhen-yu. Parameter optimization for ultrasonic extraction of Xanthophyllfrom Marigold flower(Tagetes erecta)[J]. Journal of Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2005, 21(4): 374-377.
14 PANG Xiong-fei, ZHANG Mao-xin, HOU You-ming, JIAO Yi, CEN Yi-jing. Evaluation of plant protectionagainst pest insects[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2000, 11(1): 108-110.
15 HUANG Ji-guang, ZHOU Li-juan, XU Han-hong, AN Yu-xing. Recent advances in the insecticidal plant, Tephrosia vogelii[J]. Plant protection, 2006, 32(1): 18-21.
16 ZHANG Ye-guang. Biological activities and active ingredients of Tephrosia vogelii extracts against Pieris rapae[D]. Guangzhou: South China Agricultural University, 1990.
17 Zhang Ye-guang, XU Han-hong, HUANG Ji-guang, ZHAO Shan-huan. Studies on the inhibiting action of Tephrosia vogelii Hook to the growth and development of Pieris rapae L.[J]. Plant protection, 2001, 27(3): 12-15.
18 ZHANG Ye-guang, XU Han-hong, HUANG Ji-guang, Chiu Shin-foon. The antifeeding activity of Tephrosia vogelii(Hook)against species of Lepidoptera[J]. Journal of South China Agricultural University, 2000, 21(4): 26-29.
19 PANG Xiong-fei. Plant protectants and plant immune engineering against insect pests[J]. World Sci-Tech Research and Development, 1999, 21(2): 24-28.
20 ZHANG Mao-xin, LING Bing, PANG Xiong-fei. Progress and application of oviposition deterrents ofnon-preferable plants on insect[J]. Natural Enemies of Insects, 2003, 25(1): 28-35.
21 Zeng X N. Botanical insecticides and antifeedants: new sources and prospects[J]. Translated Collection of Pesticide,1995, 17(3): 21-24.
22 Zhao Shan-huan. Prospects for insecticides and chemical control of pest insects of agriculturalimportance[J]. Journal of Northwest Agricultural University, 1993, 21(3): 73-81. 3/3 首页 上一页 1 2 3 |
