[1]何海洋,彭方仁*,李小飞,等.薄壳山核桃果园虫害调查分析[J].江苏林业科技,2015,42(02):10-14.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2015.02.003]
 HE Hai-yang,PENG Fang-ren*,LI Xiao-fei,et al.Investigation on pest damage of Carya illinoensis orchard[J].Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science &Technology,2015,42(02):10-14.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2015.02.003]
点击复制

薄壳山核桃果园虫害调查分析()
分享到:

江苏林业科技[ISSN:1001-7380/CN:32-1236/S]

卷:
第42卷
期数:
2015年02期
页码:
10-14
栏目:
试验研究
出版日期:
2015-04-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
Investigation on pest damage of Carya illinoensis orchard
文章编号:
1001-7380(2015)02-0010-04
作者:
何海洋1彭方仁1*李小飞1曹 凡1李永荣2勒栋梁2
1.南京林业大学林学院,江苏 南京 210037;
2.南京绿宙薄壳山核桃科技有限公司,江苏 南京 210014
Author(s):
HE Hai-yang1 PENG Fang-ren1* LI Xiao-fei1 CAO Fan1 LI Yong-rong2 LE Dong-liang2
1. College of Forestry, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China;
2. Nanjing Green Universe Pecan Science &
Technology Co., Ltd, Nanjing 210014, China
关键词:
薄壳山核桃 虫害调查 混交林 防治措施
Keywords:
Carya illinoensis Investigation of pests damage Mixed forest Control measure
分类号:
S664; S763.1
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2015.02.003
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
对多种模式6年生薄壳山核桃果园的虫害情况进行了调查分析。结果表明:果园虫害主要以蛀干害虫天牛和食叶害虫刺蛾为主,其中天牛虫害率高达61.95%,严重受害率为6.46%; 薄壳山核桃园中混交林分虫害率高于纯林,且不同混交林分之间虫害程度差异明显,虫害率为57.49%~81.40%。邻近杨树林果园的虫害最为严重,严重受害果树约占43.24%。对严重危害薄壳山核桃果园的2类害虫天牛和刺蛾的危害特点、发生规律以及防治方法进行了详细介绍。
Abstract:
The pest damage of 6-year-old Carya illinoensis orchardwith multiple intercropping modes in Luhe District of Nanjing was investigated. Results showed that the main pestdamage of orchard were caused by Cerambycidae pests boring trunks and Limacodidae pests eating leaves.The Cerambycidae damage rate of orchard was as high as 61.95%, with the seriousdamage of 6.46%. The damage rate of mixed forest was much higher than that of pure forest’s of Carya illinoensis and the damage rate of different mixed forests was different, about 57.49%~81.40%. The pest damage of Carya illinoensis forest around poplar forest was the most serious, with the damaged trees accounting for 43.24%. The two families of pest which seriously damaged the growth of Carya illinoensis were introduced in detail from the characteristics of damage, outbreaks and epidemics and their control methods.

参考文献/References:

[1] 朱海军,刘广勤,曹福亮,等.施锌对薄壳山核桃幼苗生长及体内锌分配的影响[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2012,36(4):75-78.
[2] Williams B. Raising top quality pecans[M]. Korea: Capstone Publishers, 2001: 21-24.
[3] 彭方仁,李永荣,郝明灼,等.我国美国山核桃生产现状与产业化发展策略[J].林业科技开发,2012,26(4):1-4.
[4] 巨云为,曹 霞,叶 健,等.美国薄壳山核桃虫害研究综述[J].中国森林病虫,2014,33(1):29-34.
[5] 周其新.薄壳山核桃瘤蚜的初步观察[J].安徽林业科技,1995(1):37-38.
[6] 黄胜根,邵慰忠,麻建强,等.薄壳山核桃瘤蚜的发生规律及其防治[J].浙江林业科技,2004,24(5):32-33.
[7] 杨建华,李淑芳,陈 鹏,等.美国山核桃主要蛀干类害虫的发生与防治[J].安徽农业科学,2010,38(31):17522-17525.
[8] 杨建华,陈 鹏,李淑芳,等.云斑白条天牛产卵刻槽在美国山核桃树干上的分布[J].中国森林病虫,2010,29(2):18-20.
[9] Ganong C N, Dussourd D E, Swanson J D. Girdling by notodontid caterpillars: distribution and occurrence[J]. Anthropod Plant Interactions, 2012(6): 621-633.
[10] Cottrell T E, Wood B W. Pecan weevil management: Past, present and toward a future strategy[J]. Southwestern Entomologist, 2003(27): 75-84.
[11] Carpenter T L, Neel W W, Hedin P A. Review of host plant resistance of pecan Carya illinoensis to Insecta and Acarina[J]. Bulletin of the ESA, 1979, 25(4): 251-257.
[12] Stoetzel M B. Life histories of the four species of Phylloxera on pecan[J]. Special Publication, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Stations, 1985(38): 59-62.
[13] 莫正海,张计育,翟 敏,等.薄壳山核桃在南京的开花物候期观察和比较[J].植物资源与环境学报,2013,22(1):57-62.
[14] 李孟楼,郭新荣,庄世红,等.混交林的多样性及其光肩星天牛的抗性研究[J].林业科学,2005,41(1):157-164.
[15] 高宝嘉,张执中.封山育林对植物群落结构及多样性的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,1992,14(2):46-63.

相似文献/References:

[1]吕运舟,窦全琴,蒋泽平.薄壳山核桃愈伤组织诱导的影响因素[J].江苏林业科技,2015,42(05):29.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2015.05.009]
 LYU Yun-zhou,DOU Quan-qin,JIANG Ze-ping.Impact factors of the callus inducement and growth of Carya illinoensis in vitro culture[J].Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science &Technology,2015,42(02):29.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2015.05.009]
[2]张 斌,王晓丽,陈 婷,等.薄壳山核桃砧木不同处理对嫁接苗生长的影响[J].江苏林业科技,2016,43(03):25.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2016.03.007]
 ZHANG Bin,WANG Xiao-li,CHEN Ting,et al.Trial of Carya illinoensis rind grafting in the field with different rootstock treatment[J].Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science &Technology,2016,43(02):25.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2016.03.007]
[3]陈文霞,吴文浩,彭方仁.江苏丘陵地区薄壳山核桃适宜栽培模式及其产业发展对策[J].江苏林业科技,2016,43(03):53.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2016.03.014]
[4]吕运舟,董筱昀,黄利斌,等.‘波尼’等5个薄壳山核桃品种生长及早期结实特性比较[J].江苏林业科技,2017,44(06):10.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2017.06.003]
 LYU Yun-zhou,DONG Xiao-yun,HUANG Li-bin,et al.Comparison of fruiting characteristics of five Carya illionoensis cultivars[J].Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science &Technology,2017,44(02):10.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2017.06.003]
[5]仲磊,董筱昀.江苏薄壳山核桃和油用牡丹发展现状与对策[J].江苏林业科技,2018,45(03):46.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2018.03.012]
[6]陈 于,王 敏,朱灿灿,等.常州金坛地区不同薄壳山核桃品种黑斑病抗性田间调查[J].江苏林业科技,2018,45(06):26.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2018.06.007]
 Chen Yu,Wang Min,Zhu Cancan,et al.Field investigation of resistance against black spot of different pecan varieties in Jintan, Changzhou[J].Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science &Technology,2018,45(02):26.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2018.06.007]
[7]朱苏堂,李春,焦佃进,等.侧枝下月牙形剥皮对薄壳山核桃生长量及产量的影响[J].江苏林业科技,2019,46(06):38.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2019.06.008]
[8]吕运舟,施士争,吴静*.不同间种模式对白茶春梢叶色参数与色素含量的影响[J].江苏林业科技,2020,47(04):13.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2020.04.003]
 Lyu Yunzhou,Shi Shizheng,Wu Jing*.Effects of different agroforestry system on leaf color parameters and pigment content of spring tip of White tea[J].Journal of Jiangsu Forestry Science &Technology,2020,47(02):13.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2020.04.003]
[9]孙迎辉,郑华英*,解春霞,等.利用天敌昆虫防治薄壳山核桃天牛试验初探[J].江苏林业科技,2020,47(04):22.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2020.04.005]
[10]吕运舟,黄利斌,何雅萍.短截对不同薄壳山核桃品种新发枝的影响[J].江苏林业科技,2021,48(03):5.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2021.03.002]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2014-10-29; 修回日期:2014-12-18
基金项目:林业公益性行业科研专项“美国山核桃产业化开发的关键技术研究与示范”(201304711); 江苏省高校优势学科建设工程资助项目(PAPD)
作者简介:何海洋(1991-),男,安徽滁州人,硕士研究生,主要从事经济林栽培与育种研究。E-mail: 157390798@qq.com。 *通信作者:彭方仁(1963-),男,湖北阳新人,教授,博士生导师,主要从事森林培育与经济林栽培的教学与科研工作。E-mail: frpeng@njfu.edu.cn。
更新日期/Last Update: 2015-04-30