Plant spraying foliar fertilizer

Abstract

The invention discloses a plant spraying leaf fertilizer which is prepared by the following steps: weighing 40-60g of white vinegar, 40-60g of brown sugar, 40-60g of urea, 40-60g of 45-degree corn liquor and 450-550g of beer, adding the white vinegar, the brown sugar, the urea, the corn liquor and the beer into the beer, uniformly stirring, adding 40 jin of water into per jin of the mixture for dilution, and spraying the diluted mixture on leaf surfaces. The foliar fertilizer is elaborately prepared from common raw materials, is free of chemical pesticide components, is green, environment-friendly and residue-free, and meets the requirements of the market on green agricultural products. The bactericidal composition has obvious effects on powdery mildew, gray mold and anthracnose in the aspect of disease control, and can form a protective film, change leaf surface microenvironment, supplement nutrition and enhance plant resistance. And in the aspect of pest control, the smell and components can repel pests and reduce insect disaster loss. Moreover, the foliar fertilizer is balanced in nutrition, can promote plant growth, improve crop quality and yield and increase the income of farmers, and is an efficient and multifunctional foliar fertilizer for plants.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to a plant spray foliage fertilizer. Background Art

[0002] In the field of agricultural planting, plant pest control and nutritional supplementation have always been the key links to ensure crop yield and quality. Traditional pest control methods mostly rely on chemical pesticides. Although they can control the occurrence of pests and diseases to a certain extent, the long-term use of chemical pesticides has brought many serious problems. On the one hand, chemical pesticide residues on agricultural products pose a potential threat to human health and are difficult to meet the current consumers' growing demand for green and organic agricultural products. For example, in the common cultivation of fruits and vegetables, after a large amount of chemical pesticides are used, even after washing, there may still be trace amounts of pesticide residues. Long-term intake of these residual pesticides will affect the human immune system, nervous system and other functions.

[0003] On the other hand, the abuse of chemical pesticides has also caused damage to the ecological environment, affecting soil structure, polluting water sources, and harming non-target organisms, breaking the ecological balance. Moreover, over time, pests and diseases gradually develop resistance to chemical pesticides, which greatly reduces the effectiveness of prevention and control. Farmers have to increase the amount and frequency of pesticide use, falling into a vicious cycle.

[0004] In terms of plant nutrition supplementation, traditional fertilizers often focus on the supply of macroelements, such as nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, etc., while ignoring the synergistic effects of trace elements and organic nutrients. This results in plants showing a certain increase in growth in the short term, but with obvious deficiencies in stress resistance and quality improvement. For example, many fertilizers simply pursue the lush growth of leaves, but ignore the toughness and strength of the stems, making plants susceptible to infection when faced with diseases such as anthracnose, resulting in reduced production or even total crop failure; during the fruit growth stage, the lack of balanced nutrient supply makes it impossible for the fruit to reach the quality standards of being plump, juicy and having a good taste, affecting the market competitiveness of agricultural products and the economic benefits of growers.

[0005] In addition, traditional pest control and nutritional supplementation measures are often carried out separately, which not only increases the planting cost and labor intensity, but also may have mutual influence or incoordination between the measures, and cannot achieve all-round and comprehensive optimization of plant growth. Therefore, it is of great practical significance and market demand to develop a plant care product that can effectively prevent and control pests and diseases, provide balanced nutrition, and is green, environmentally friendly and residue-free, which also provides a research and development background and opportunity for the plant spray foliar fertilizer of the present invention. Summary of the invention

[0006] The object of the present invention is to provide a plant spray foliar fertilizer to solve the problems raised in the above background technology.

[0007] In order to solve the above technical problems, the technical solution provided by the present invention is: a plant spray foliar fertilizer, which is prepared by the following steps:

[0008] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 40-60 g white vinegar, 40-60 g brown sugar, 40-60 g urea, 40-60 g 45% corn liquor, and 450-550 g beer;

[0009] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0010] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 50 grams of white vinegar, 50 grams of brown sugar, 50 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 500 grams of beer.

[0011] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 40 grams of white vinegar, 60 grams of brown sugar, 40 grams of urea, 60 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 450 grams of beer.

[0012] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 60 grams of white vinegar, 40 grams of brown sugar, 60 grams of urea, 40 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 550 grams of beer.

[0013] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 45 grams of white vinegar, 55 grams of brown sugar, 45 grams of urea, 55 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 480 grams of beer.

[0014] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 55 grams of white vinegar, 44 grams of brown sugar, 55 grams of urea, 45 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 520 grams of beer.

[0015] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 48 grams of white vinegar, 50 grams of brown sugar, 45 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 500 grams of beer.

[0016] Preferably, in step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 55 grams of white vinegar, 55 grams of brown sugar, 55 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 550 grams of beer.

[0017] The method of use of the invention is as follows: dilute one catty of the drug with 40 catties of water, and spray it on the leaves in a spraying manner.

[0018] The advantages of the present invention are: it is carefully prepared from white vinegar, brown sugar, urea, corn liquor and beer, does not contain any chemical pesticide ingredients, is green and environmentally friendly and has no residue, effectively protects the safety of food, and meets the market's urgent demand for green and organic agricultural products.

[0019] Significant results have been achieved in disease prevention and control. For powdery mildew, the foliar fertilizer has multiple ingredients that work together to form a protective film on the leaf surface to resist infection by pathogens. The nutrients it contains can also enhance plant resistance, effectively inhibit the growth of pathogens, and reduce the incidence and degree of harm. For gray mold, its ingredients can change the microenvironment on the leaf surface. The acidity of white vinegar inhibits pathogens, and brown sugar enhances cell activity, curbs the occurrence of diseases, and reduces crop yield losses. For anthracnose, urea supplements nitrogen, enhances the toughness and strength of plant tissues, maintains the integrity of cell structure, reduces the degree of infection and disease, and ensures the healthy growth of crops. Pest control is also excellent. The unique smell and ingredients interfere with the smell and taste of pests, making it difficult for them to inhabit and feed. For example, the smell of corn liquor can repel pests, and the leaf protective film can also physically block damage. Long-term use can reduce pest reproduction and population size, reduce the problem of yield reduction and quality decline caused by pests, and lay a solid foundation for high yield and quality. In addition, foliar fertilizers are nutritionally balanced. Brown sugar provides energy to promote metabolism, urea helps leaf growth and chlorophyll synthesis, and beer contains a variety of trace elements, which are of great significance to plant flowering and fruiting, fruit enlargement and enhanced stress resistance. Regular spraying can make plant leaves green, stems thick, and fruits plump, improve crop quality and yield, and increase farmers' income. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0020] For the purpose of the following detailed description, it should be understood that the present invention may adopt various alternative changes and step sequences, unless expressly specified to the contrary. In addition, except in any operating examples, or otherwise indicated, all numbers representing the amount of ingredients used in the specification and claims should be understood to be modified by the term "about" in all cases. Therefore, unless otherwise indicated, the numerical parameters set forth in the following specification and the attached claims are approximate values ​​that vary according to the desired performance to be obtained by the present invention. At least it is not intended to limit the application of the doctrine of equivalents to the scope of the claims, and each numerical parameter should at least be interpreted according to the number of reported significant figures and by applying ordinary rounding techniques.

[0021] Notwithstanding that the numerical ranges and parameters setting forth the broad scope of the invention are approximations, the numerical values ​​set forth in the specific examples are reported as precisely as possible. Any numerical value, however, inherently contains certain errors necessarily resulting from the standard deviation found in their respective testing measurements.

[0022] In addition, it should be understood that any numerical range described herein is intended to include all subranges subsumed therein. For example, a range of "1 to 10" is intended to include all subranges between (and including) the stated minimum value of 1 and the stated maximum value of 10, i.e., having a minimum value equal to or greater than 1 and a maximum value equal to or less than 10.

[0023] Example 1

[0024] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0025] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 50g white vinegar, 50g brown sugar, 50g urea, 50g 45% corn liquor, and 500g beer;

[0026] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0027] Example 2

[0028] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0029] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 40g white vinegar, 60g brown sugar, 40g urea, 60g 45% corn liquor, and 450g beer;

[0030] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0031] Example 3

[0032] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0033] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 60g white vinegar, 40g brown sugar, 60g urea, 40g 45% corn liquor, and 550g beer;

[0034] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0035] Example 4

[0036] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0037] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 45 grams of white vinegar, 55 grams of brown sugar, 45 grams of urea, 55 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 480 grams of beer;

[0038] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0039] Example 5

[0040] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0041] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 55g white vinegar, 44g brown sugar, 55g urea, 45g 45% corn liquor, and 520g beer;

[0042] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0043] Example 6

[0044] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0045] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 48 grams of white vinegar, 50 grams of brown sugar, 45 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-degree corn liquor, and 500 grams of beer;

[0046] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0047] Example 7

[0048] A plant spray foliar fertilizer is made by the following steps:

[0049] 1) Weigh the raw materials: 55g white vinegar, 55g brown sugar, 55g urea, 50g 45% corn liquor, and 550g beer;

[0050] 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

[0051] Comparative Example 1:

[0052] Production steps:

[0053] Weigh the raw materials: use only 1000 grams of clean water.

[0054] No stirring required.

[0055] Comparative analysis with the embodiment:

[0056] In terms of green environmental protection: neither of them has the problem of chemical pesticide residues, but the comparative example 1 is only water and cannot provide any additional beneficial ingredients for the plants, while the foliar fertilizer in the embodiment can provide plants with a variety of nutrients and protective effects, which is more conducive to the healthy growth of plants and the improvement of the quality of agricultural products, and meets the green organic needs.

[0057] Disease control: In the prevention and control of powdery mildew, for example, in the planting of roses, the incidence of rose powdery mildew in Example 1 is about 15%, while the incidence of rose powdery mildew in Comparative Example 1 is as high as 60%, because the foliar fertilizer in Example 1 can form a protective film and enhance resistance, while clean water has no such effect. For gray mold, when planting strawberries, the yield reduction caused by gray mold of strawberries treated in Comparative Example 1 reaches 40%, while the yield reduction of strawberries in Example 2 is only about 10%. This is because the ingredients of the foliar fertilizer in the example can change the leaf surface microenvironment to inhibit pathogens, while clean water does not have this function. In terms of anthracnose, when planting watermelons, the anthracnose infection rate of watermelons in Comparative Example 1 is 30%, and the anthracnose infection rate of watermelons in Example 3 is controlled within 12%, thanks to the strengthening effect of urea and the like in the example on the toughness of plant tissues.

[0058] In terms of pest control: the proportion of leaves of the cabbage sprayed with clean water in comparative example 1 that were damaged by cabbage worms reached 40%, while the proportion of leaves of the cabbage in Example 4 that were damaged by insects was only about 8%. This is because the smell and protective film of the foliar fertilizer in the example can effectively repel and hinder pests, while clean water cannot play these roles, resulting in serious losses from insect disasters in comparative example 1.

[0059] In terms of nutritional balance: Comparative Example 1 does not provide any nutrients for plants. When planting cucumbers, the cucumber plants treated with Comparative Example 1 are short, the leaves are yellow, the fruits are thin and the yield is low, while the cucumbers in Example 5 have thick green leaves, thick stems, and full fruits. The yield is more than 50% higher than that of Comparative Example 1. This is because the nutrients in brown sugar, urea and beer in the foliar fertilizer of the example can comprehensively promote plant growth and fruit development, while clear water has no such effect.

[0060] Comparative Example 2:

[0061] Production steps:

[0062] Weigh the raw materials: 50 grams of the chemical pesticide carbendazim, diluted at 1:1000; 30 grams of urea, add 800 grams of water to dissolve.

[0063] Stir well and mix.

[0064] Comparative analysis with the examples:

[0065] In terms of green environmental protection: Comparative Example 2 uses the chemical pesticide carbendazim, which will inevitably leave pesticide residues on agricultural products, in sharp contrast to the green environmental protection and no residues of the embodiment. For example, the green vegetables treated in Comparative Example 2 were found to have carbendazim residues, which did not meet the standards of green organic agricultural products, while the green vegetables in Example 6 had no pesticide residues, ensuring food safety.

[0066] In terms of disease prevention and control: although comparative example 2 has a certain inhibitory effect on diseases in the early stage, long-term use of pathogens is prone to drug resistance. For example, in the prevention and control of grape powdery mildew, the disease index of grape powdery mildew treated by comparative example 2 decreased in the early stage, but the subsequent drug resistance of pathogens increased and the disease rebounded seriously. The foliar fertilizer of Example 6 continuously and effectively controls powdery mildew through the synergistic effect of multiple components, and the incidence rate of grape powdery mildew is always maintained at a low level, ensuring the healthy growth and quality of grapes.

[0067] In terms of pest control: the chemical pesticide carbendazim has basically no repellent effect on pests, and may harm beneficial insects and destroy the ecological balance. For example, when controlling apple aphids, although the number of aphids in the orchard treated in Comparative Example 2 has changed to a certain extent due to the growth of leaves caused by urea, the harm of aphids is still serious, and the number of beneficial insects such as ladybugs has decreased. The foliar fertilizer of Example 6 can effectively repel aphids, reduce insect population density, maintain the ecological balance of the orchard, and ensure the yield and quality of apples.

[0068] In terms of nutritional balance: although Comparative Example 2 contains urea, it lacks the multiple nutrients of brown sugar in the foliar fertilizer of the embodiment and the trace elements in beer, and the nutrition is not balanced. For example, when planting tomatoes, the tomato fruits treated with Comparative Example 2 have a sour taste and low hardness, while the tomato fruits of Example 6 are plump and juicy, with high sweetness, and the fruit quality is significantly better than that of Comparative Example 2, because the foliar fertilizer of the embodiment has more comprehensive nutrients and can better promote plant flowering and fruiting and fruit expansion.

[0069] Comparative Example 3:

[0070] Production steps:

[0071] Weigh the raw materials: 80 grams of white vinegar and 900 grams of water.

[0072] Stir well.

[0073] Comparative analysis with the examples:

[0074] Green environmental protection: Comparative Example 3 is relatively environmentally friendly, but due to the lack of a reasonable combination of other nutrients, long-term use may affect the pH balance of the soil, which is not conducive to the long-term healthy growth of plants. It is not as good as the foliar fertilizer in the embodiment, which can comprehensively promote plant growth and ensure the quality of agricultural products, and meet green organic needs.

[0075] Disease prevention and control: In the prevention and control of gray mold, for example, in the planting of lettuce, the gray mold incidence of the lettuce treated in Comparative Example 3 was 30%, while the gray mold incidence of the lettuce in Example 7 was controlled within 10%, because the nutrients such as brown sugar in Example 7 can enhance the resistance of plants to gray mold, while the acidic control effect of white vinegar in Comparative Example 3 is limited. For anthracnose, when planting peppers, the anthracnose infection rate of peppers in Comparative Example 3 is about 20%, and the anthracnose infection rate of peppers in Example 7 can be reduced to about 8%, because the urea and other components in Example 7 can enhance the toughness of plant tissues, while Comparative Example 3 lacks this effect.

[0076] In terms of pest control: the smell of white vinegar in comparative example 3 is not as good as the synergistic effect of multiple components of the foliar fertilizer in example 7. For example, in the planting of beans, the beans treated in comparative example 3 are seriously damaged by bean pod borers, with an insect infestation rate of 25%, while the insect infestation rate of beans in example 7 is only about 5%. Example 7 can more effectively reduce the loss caused by insect pests and ensure the yield and quality of beans.

[0077] In terms of nutritional balance: Comparative Example 3 provides almost no substantial nutrition for plants except for possible adjustment of soil pH, and cannot promote plant stems to be strong and fruits to develop well, etc., like the foliar fertilizer in Example 7. For example, in planting eggplants, the eggplants treated in Comparative Example 3 have thin stems, small fruits and low yields, while the eggplants in Example 7 have thick stems, plump fruits and significantly higher yields, because the foliar fertilizer in Example 7 has balanced nutrition and can better meet the growth needs of plants.

[0078] Comparative Example 4:

[0079] Production steps:

[0080] Weigh the raw materials: 80 grams of brown sugar and 900 grams of water.

[0081] Stir well.

[0082] Comparative analysis with the examples:

[0083] Green environmental protection: Like the example, there is no problem of chemical pesticide pollution. However, comparative example 4 only relies on brown sugar solution, which cannot fully protect plant health and agricultural product quality through the synergistic effect of multiple ingredients like the foliar fertilizer in the example. The comprehensive benefit in green organic planting is not as good as the example.

[0084] In terms of disease prevention and control: in terms of powdery mildew prevention and control, when planting zucchini, the powdery mildew incidence of zucchini treated in Comparative Example 4 was as high as 45%, while the powdery mildew incidence of zucchini in Example 1 was about 15%, because the ingredients such as white vinegar and white wine in the foliar fertilizer of Example 1 can form a protective film and change the leaf surface environment to inhibit pathogens, while Comparative Example 4 lacks these effective ingredients. For anthracnose, when planting pumpkin, the anthracnose infection rate of pumpkin in Comparative Example 4 was 25%, while the anthracnose infection rate of pumpkin in Example 3 could be controlled within 10%, because the nutrient elements such as urea in Example 3 can enhance the resistance of plant tissues, while Comparative Example 4 cannot provide such protection.

[0085] In terms of pest control: Comparative Example 4 does not have an effective ingredient that can interfere with pests. For example, spinach is severely infested by aphids, with an insect population density of about 15 per plant, while the insect population density of spinach in Example 4 is only about 5 per plant. The foliar fertilizer in Example 4 can effectively repel pests, reduce losses caused by insect disasters, and ensure the growth and quality of spinach, while Comparative Example 4 cannot do so.

[0086] In terms of nutritional balance: although the comparative example 4 contains some nutrients of brown sugar, it lacks nitrogen from urea and trace elements in beer, and the nutrition is not comprehensive. For example, in the planting of cabbage, the cabbage leaves treated by the comparative example 4 are thin, light green in color, and low in yield, while the cabbage leaves of the embodiment 5 are emerald green and thick, and the yield is high, because the foliar fertilizer of the embodiment 5 has balanced nutrition and can better promote the growth and development of cabbage.

[0087] Comparative Example 5:

[0088] Production steps:

[0089] Weigh the raw materials: 100 grams of a certain brand of foliar fertilizer on the market (the main ingredient is water-soluble fertilizer of a large number of elements) and dilute it at 1:1000.

[0090] Stir well.

[0091] Comparative analysis with the examples:

[0092] Green and environmental protection: This brand of foliar fertilizer may contain some chemically synthesized additives or impurities, and there is a certain potential risk of pollution. Unlike the foliar fertilizer in the example, which is completely made of natural raw materials, it can ensure green and environmental protection without residue, and meet the market's strict requirements for green organic agricultural products.

[0093] In terms of disease prevention and control: when preventing and controlling gray mold, for example, when planting strawberries, the gray mold incidence of strawberries treated with Comparative Example 5 is 20%, while the gray mold incidence of strawberries treated with Example 2 is only about 8%, because the synergistic effect of nutrients such as white vinegar acid and brown sugar in the foliar fertilizer of Example 2 can effectively curb gray mold, while Comparative Example 5 lacks such a targeted prevention and control mechanism. For anthracnose, when planting watermelons, the anthracnose infection rate of watermelons in Comparative Example 5 is about 15%, while the anthracnose infection rate of watermelons in Example 3 can be controlled within 10%, because the various components in the foliar fertilizer of Example 3 can enhance the toughness and resistance of plant tissues, while Comparative Example 5 is relatively weak.

[0094] In terms of pest control: the comparative example 5 has no obvious pest repellent effect. For example, when planting cucumbers, the proportion of leaves damaged by thrips reaches 30%, while the proportion of leaves damaged by thrips in the cucumbers of Example 6 is only about 10%. The smell and protective film of the foliar fertilizer of Example 6 can effectively resist pests, reduce losses caused by insect disasters, and ensure the yield and quality of cucumbers, while the comparative example 5 performs poorly in this regard.

[0095] In terms of nutritional balance: Comparative Example 5 mainly provides a large number of elements, lacks the multiple nutrients of brown sugar in the foliar fertilizer of the embodiment and the trace elements in beer, and the nutrition is not balanced and comprehensive. For example, when planting tomatoes, the tomato fruit treated in Comparative Example 5 has a general taste and flavor, and the fruit hardness and color are poor, while the tomato fruit of Example 7 is plump and juicy, bright in color, and has a good taste, because the foliar fertilizer of Example 7 can provide plants with richer and more balanced nutrition, promote the high-quality development of fruits, and improve the market competitiveness of agricultural products and the economic benefits of growers.

[0096] Through the detailed comparison between the above comparative examples and the embodiments, it can be fully proved that the plant spray foliar fertilizer of the present invention has significant advantages and unique values ​​in green environmental protection, disease control, pest control, and nutritional balance to promote growth, and provides an efficient, safe and environmentally friendly plant maintenance solution for agricultural production.

[0097] The above description is only a preferred specific implementation manner of the present invention, but the protection scope of the present invention is not limited thereto. Any technician familiar with the technical field can make equivalent replacements or changes according to the technical scheme and inventive concept of the present invention within the technical scope disclosed by the present invention, which should be covered by the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A plant spray foliar fertilizer, characterized in that: Made by the following steps: 1) Weigh the raw materials: 40-60 g white vinegar, 40-60 g brown sugar, 40-60 g urea, 40-60 g 45% corn liquor, and 450-550 g beer; 2) Add white vinegar, brown sugar, urea and 45-degree corn liquor into the beer and stir well.

2. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 50 grams of white vinegar, 50 grams of brown sugar, 50 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 500 grams of beer.

3. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 40 grams of white vinegar, 60 grams of brown sugar, 40 grams of urea, 60 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 450 grams of beer.

4. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 60 grams of white vinegar, 40 grams of brown sugar, 60 grams of urea, 40 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 550 grams of beer.

5. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 45 grams of white vinegar, 55 grams of brown sugar, 45 grams of urea, 55 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 480 grams of beer.

6. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 55 grams of white vinegar, 44 grams of brown sugar, 55 grams of urea, 45 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 520 grams of beer.

7. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 48 grams of white vinegar, 50 grams of brown sugar, 45 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 500 grams of beer.

8. A plant spray foliar fertilizer according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step 1), the raw materials are weighed: 55 grams of white vinegar, 55 grams of brown sugar, 55 grams of urea, 50 grams of 45-proof corn liquor, and 550 grams of beer.