Antwi F B, Olson D L, Knodel J J
Department of Land Resources and Environmental Sciences, Montana State, University, Bozeman, MT 59717, USA.
J Econ Entomol. 2007 Jun;100(3):710-6. doi: 10.1603/0022-0493(2007)100[710:ceaepo]2.0.co;2.
From 2001 to 2004, field studies were conducted to evaluate the effect of the ecorational insecticides SpinTor (spinosad), BotaniGard (Beauveria bassiana), Neemix (azadirachtin), and Surround (kaolin) against crucifer flea beetle on canola, Brassica napus L., at the cotyledon stage. The ecorational treatments were compared with a standard foliar chemical insecticide, Capture (bifenthrin), and the chemical seed treatment insecticide Helix XTra (thiamethoxam). This study indicated that flea beetle injury was lower for Helix XTra, Capture, and the ecorational insecticide SpinTor. SpinTor was less effective when flea beetle populations were relatively high (200-300 per trap-week). Yields for chemical insecticide treatments were always greater than SpinTor, with differences being the smallest (68-374 kg/ha) at low levels of flea beetle feeding injury. Differences were greatest when canola seedling injury was high (775-1,364 kg/ha). Yield differences between the conventional insecticides and BotaniGard, Neemix, and Surround were 119-439 and 61-2,248 kg/ha at low and high flea beetle feeding injury, respectively. Although yield differences between SpinTor and chemical insecticides were relatively small at lower levels of flea beetle injury, net losses ranged from $47 to $151/ha when SpinTor was used as an alternative to a standard chemical seed treatment, Helix XTra. This suggests that SpinTor would not be a viable alternative to the chemical insecticide. Net losses ranged from $30 to $266/ha when BotaniGard, Neemix, and Surround were used as alternatives to the seed treatment.
2001年至2004年期间，开展了田间研究，以评估生态合理杀虫剂斯皮诺杀（多杀菌素）、绿僵菌制剂（球孢白僵菌）、印楝素制剂（印楝素）和高岭土制剂（高岭土）对油菜（甘蓝型油菜）子叶期十字花科跳甲的防治效果。将这些生态合理处理方法与标准叶面化学杀虫剂凯安保（联苯菊酯）以及化学种子处理杀虫剂锐胜（噻虫嗪）进行了比较。该研究表明，锐胜、凯安保和生态合理杀虫剂斯皮诺杀的跳甲危害较低。当跳甲种群数量相对较高（每个诱捕器每周200 - 300只）时，斯皮诺杀的效果较差。化学杀虫剂处理的产量总是高于斯皮诺杀，在跳甲取食危害较低水平时，差异最小（68 - 374千克/公顷）。当油菜幼苗受害严重时（775 - 1364千克/公顷），差异最大。在跳甲取食危害低水平和高水平时，传统杀虫剂与绿僵菌制剂、印楝素制剂和高岭土制剂之间的产量差异分别为119 - 439千克/公顷和61 - 2248千克/公顷。尽管在跳甲危害较低水平时，斯皮诺杀与化学杀虫剂之间的产量差异相对较小，但当使用斯皮诺杀替代标准化学种子处理剂锐胜时，净损失范围为47至151美元/公顷。这表明斯皮诺杀并非化学杀虫剂的可行替代品。当使用绿僵菌制剂、印楝素制剂和高岭土制剂替代种子处理剂时，净损失范围为30至266美元/公顷。
