Harmless comprehensive prevention and treatment method for disease, insect and grass in agriculture and forestry ecological park

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of prevention and control of diseases, weeds and weeds, and discloses a harmless comprehensive prevention and control method for diseases, weeds and weeds in an agriculture and forestry ecological park. S2, setting space isolation; s3, implementing physical prevention and treatment; s4, biological prevention and control comprehensive measures are taken; s5, soil ecological enhancement; s6, emergency chemical prevention and control. By adopting a full-chain closed-loop process design of prevention, blocking, prevention and control, reinforcement and emergency, and combining a step-by-step progressive and parameter adaptive technical scheme of production area investigation and quarantine, spatial isolation, physical prevention and control, biological prevention and control, soil reinforcement and emergency prevention and control, the technical effects of accurate prevention and control of diseases, weeds and pests and continuous and stable prevention and control effect are achieved; compared with the technical scheme of single prevention and control means or fragmented prevention and control process in the prior art, the problems that the prevention and control pertinence is insufficient, loopholes exist in full-period protection, and the effect is easy to repeat are solved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of pest and weed control technology, specifically a harmless integrated pest management method for agricultural and forestry ecological parks. Background Technology

[0002] As an important carrier of intensive planting, the prevention and control of diseases, pests and weeds in agricultural and forestry ecological parks are directly related to crop yield and quality, soil ecological balance and sustainable agricultural development. Currently, the commonly used methods for the prevention and control of diseases, pests and weeds in the industry mainly include physical barriers, release of biological natural enemies, chemical pesticide spraying, and variety replacement. Various technologies are applied in single prevention and control scenarios, but most of them are implemented independently or in simple combinations. They lack systematic adaptation design based on the park's basic conditions, the characteristics of harmful organisms and the growth needs of crops, and a complete prevention and control system from source prevention to end-of-pipe emergency response has not yet been formed.

[0003] In existing technologies, the control of pests, diseases, and weeds generally suffers from the problem of relying on single methods or fragmented processes: some solutions only focus on the extermination of pests after they occur, ignoring source prevention measures such as site surveys and quarantine access, resulting in insufficient targeted control; some solutions combine multiple control technologies, but fail to form a logical connection between steps, and the parameters of each step lack coordination and adaptation, resulting in obvious loopholes in the whole-cycle protection, making it difficult to resist the cross-infection and continuous spread of pests, ultimately leading to the control effect being prone to fluctuations and failing to achieve long-term stable protection goals. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the shortcomings of existing technologies, this invention provides a harmless integrated pest management method for agricultural and forestry ecological parks. This method solves the problems of insufficient targeted control, loopholes in full-cycle protection, and recurring effects caused by single control methods or fragmented control processes in existing technologies.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solution: a method for the harmless integrated management of pests, diseases, and weeds in agricultural and forestry ecological parks, comprising the following steps: S1. Origin Survey and Quarantine Access: Conduct a systematic survey of the relevant environment, pests and diseases in and around the park and generate a risk level survey report. Based on the report, implement quarantine on the plant seedlings to be introduced and remove unqualified seedlings. S2. Spatial Isolation Setup: Based on the quarantine results of S1, appropriate isolation measures are set up for high-risk pests. S3. Physical control implementation: Within the isolation area of ​​S2, implement physical control measures based on the survey results of S1. Evaluate the effectiveness within a specified time after control measures are implemented. If the measures meet the standards, maintain the method; otherwise, proceed with S4. S4. Comprehensive Biocontrol Measures: Based on the effectiveness evaluation results of S3, implement biocontrol-related measures in a progressive manner. If the effectiveness of each step does not meet the preset requirements, proceed with subsequent biocontrol operations in sequence. S5. Soil Ecological Enhancement: Based on the survey results of S1, apply bio-fertilizers concurrently in S4 to enhance soil ecology and improve plant resistance to diseases and pests. S6. Emergency Chemical Control: If the pests, diseases and weeds still fail to reach the preset control target after the combined implementation of S3-S5, select highly effective, low-toxicity and low-residue chemical pesticides and control the application rate, application interval and number of applications per growing season.

[0006] Preferably, in S1, the origin survey includes a systematic survey of the soil type, pest and weed species and distribution density, climate adaptability, and surrounding pollution sources in the park, as well as a survey of the risk of cross-infection of pests and weeds in agricultural and forestry plots within 3-5km of the park. The survey cycle is once per quarter. Plant quarantine employs a combination of molecular testing and visual identification. Molecular testing targets nematodes and viral pests, while visual identification targets insect egg masses and plant lesions.

[0007] Preferably, in S1, the quarantine screening target is quarantine pests, and qualified seedlings refer to seedlings that do not carry quarantine pests.

[0008] Preferably, in S2, the isolation measure is an isolation strip or a physical barrier; The isolation zone is a strip-shaped area planted with repellent plants, which are selected from at least one of mint, garlic, and coriander. The isolation zone is 1-3m wide. The physical barrier is a 40-60 mesh insect-proof net with a height of ≥1.5m; The isolation parameters are matched with the distance and spread rate of harmful organisms.

[0009] Preferably, in step S3, physical control measures include trapping, blocking, or manual removal. The trapping device is a frequency-vibration insecticidal lamp with a spacing of 50-80m, or a sex pheromone trap, 3-5 per acre. The barrier method is to cover with black plastic film or straw. The specified assessment period is within 3 days after the control measures are implemented, and the preset control standards are a pest population reduction rate of ≥70% and a weed coverage rate of ≤10%.

[0010] Preferably, in step S4, the biological control measures include introducing natural enemies or beneficial microorganisms corresponding to the target pests and diseases. The natural enemies are selected from at least one of Trichogramma wasps, ladybugs, and lacewings, and the release ratio of the natural enemies to the target pests is (50-100):1. Beneficial microorganisms are selected from at least one of Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae, and Trichoderma, and the application concentration is 0.2-1.0 × 10⁻⁶.8 CFU / mL; The release of natural enemies is positively correlated with the insect population density of S1, and the amount of beneficial microorganisms used is adjusted according to the content of soil pathogenic microorganisms.

[0011] Preferably, in step S4, the progressive biosecurity operation includes: If the disease incidence rate is still ≥5% within 5 days after the implementation of beneficial microorganisms, replace the susceptible varieties and select varieties that are adapted to the local climate and resistant to the target disease, as confirmed by the S1 survey. Disease-resistant varieties need to pass field disease resistance assessment. The assessment criteria are that the incidence rate of the target disease is ≤3% and the yield difference from the original variety is ≤10%.

[0012] Preferably, in S4, the subsequent biological control operation further includes: when the insect population density still exceeds the warning threshold set in S1 after variety replacement, applying a biological pesticide that has no antagonistic effect on beneficial microorganisms; The biological pesticide is selected from at least one of Bacillus thuringiensis, matrine, or azadirachtin, with an application rate of 30-50 L / mu, and the application time is early morning or evening.

[0013] Preferably, in step S5, the bio-fertilizer contains functional microorganisms, including nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and Bacillus subtilis, with an effective viable count ≥ 2.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 The dosage is 20-50 kg / mu (approximately 1.3-2.5 kg / g), applied in 2-3 furrows.

[0014] Preferably, in S6, the chemical pesticide is selected from at least one of imidacloprid, acetamiprid, and pyraclostrobin, with an application rate of 0.1 kg / mu to 0.5 kg / mu, an application interval of 7 days to 15 days, and 1 to 2 applications per growing season.

[0015] This invention provides a harmless integrated pest management method for diseases, pests, and weeds in agricultural and forestry ecological parks. It has the following beneficial effects: 1. This invention adopts a closed-loop process design encompassing prevention, blocking, control, enhancement, and emergency response. It combines step-by-step and parameter-adaptive technical solutions involving origin survey and quarantine, spatial isolation, physical control, biological control, soil enhancement, and emergency control. This achieves precise control of pests and weeds with sustained and stable control effects. Compared to existing technologies with single control methods or fragmented control processes, this invention solves the problems of insufficient targeted control, loopholes in full-cycle protection, and recurring effects.

[0016] 2. This invention adopts a tiered control system that primarily uses physical and biological control methods, supplemented by emergency chemical control methods. Combined with a technical solution that simultaneously strengthens soil ecology, it achieves the technical effect of synergistic promotion of control and ecological protection, ensuring the sustainability of the crop growth environment. Compared with existing technologies that rely excessively on chemical pesticides or single biological control methods, this invention solves the problems of soil ecological damage, excessive pesticide residues, and the development of pesticide resistance in harmful organisms.

[0017] 3. This invention adopts a precise adaptation technology solution based on the size of the park, the planting varieties, the soil type, and the types of pests, diseases, and weeds. Through the tiered parameter configuration and flexible combination of process links, it achieves the best balance between control effectiveness and application cost-effectiveness in different scenarios. Compared with the existing technology that adopts a fixed control scheme and lacks scenario adaptability, this invention solves the problems that it cannot meet the personalized control needs of different-sized parks and different crop types, and has poor universality and low cost-effectiveness. Attached Figure Description

[0018] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating the steps of the integrated pest management method for diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0019] The technical solution of the present invention will now be clearly and completely described with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some embodiments of the present invention, and not all embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art without creative effort are within the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0020] Please see the appendix Figure 1 This invention provides a method for the harmless integrated management of pests, diseases, and weeds in agricultural and forestry ecological parks, comprising the following steps: S1. Origin Survey and Quarantine Access: Conduct a systematic survey of the relevant environment, pests and diseases in and around the park and generate a risk level survey report. Based on the report, implement quarantine on the plant seedlings to be introduced and remove unqualified seedlings. The field survey includes a systematic survey of soil types, pests and weeds and their distribution density, climate adaptability, and surrounding pollution sources in the park. It also includes a survey of the risk of cross-infection of pests and weeds in agricultural and forestry plots within 3-5km of the park. The survey is conducted once per quarter. Plant quarantine employs a combination of molecular testing and visual identification. Molecular testing targets nematodes and viral pests, while visual identification targets insect egg masses and plant lesions.

[0021] The quarantine screening targets quarantine pests, and qualified seedlings refer to seedlings that do not carry quarantine pests; S2. Spatial Isolation Setup: Based on the quarantine results of S1, appropriate isolation measures are set up for high-risk pests. The isolation measures include isolation zones or physical barriers; The isolation zone is a strip-shaped area planted with repellent plants, which are selected from at least one of mint, garlic, and coriander. The isolation zone is 1-3m wide. The physical barrier is a 40-60 mesh insect-proof net with a height of ≥1.5m; The isolation parameters are matched to the spread distance and diffusion rate of harmful organisms; S3. Physical control implementation: Within the isolation area of ​​S2, implement physical control measures based on the survey results of S1. Evaluate the effectiveness within a specified time after control measures are implemented. If the measures meet the standards, maintain the method; otherwise, proceed with S4. Physical control methods include trapping, blocking, or manual removal. The trapping device is a frequency-vibration insecticidal lamp with a spacing of 50-80m, or a sex pheromone trap, 3-5 per acre. The barrier method is to cover with black plastic film or straw. The assessment period is stipulated to be within 3 days after the control measures are implemented, and the preset control standards are a pest population reduction rate of ≥70% and a weed coverage rate of ≤10%. S4. Comprehensive Biocontrol Measures: Based on the effectiveness evaluation results of S3, implement biocontrol-related measures in a progressive manner. If the effectiveness of each step does not meet the preset requirements, proceed with subsequent biocontrol operations in sequence. Among them, biological control measures include introducing natural enemies or beneficial microorganisms corresponding to the target pests and diseases. The natural enemies are selected from at least one of Trichogramma wasps, ladybugs, and lacewings, and the release ratio of natural enemies to target pests is (50-100):1. Beneficial microorganisms are selected from at least one of Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae, and Trichoderma, and the application concentration is 0.2-1.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / mL; The release amount of natural enemies is positively correlated with the insect population density of S1, and the amount of beneficial microorganisms is adjusted according to the content of soil pathogenic microorganisms; Progressive biosecurity operations include: If the disease incidence rate is still ≥5% within 5 days after the implementation of beneficial microorganisms, replace the susceptible varieties and select varieties that are adapted to the local climate and resistant to the target disease, as confirmed by the S1 survey. Disease-resistant varieties need to pass field disease resistance assessment. The assessment criteria are that the incidence rate of the target disease is ≤3% and the yield difference from the original variety is ≤10%.

[0022] Subsequent biological control operations also include: when the insect population density still exceeds the warning threshold set by S1 after variety replacement, applying biological pesticides that do not antagonize beneficial microorganisms; The biological pesticide is selected from at least one of Bacillus thuringiensis, matrine or azadirachtin, and the application dosage is 30-50 L / mu. The application time is early morning or evening. S5. Soil Ecological Enhancement: Based on the survey results of S1, apply bio-fertilizers concurrently in S4 to enhance soil ecology and improve plant resistance to diseases and pests. The bio-fertilizer contains functional microorganisms, including nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and Bacillus subtilis, with an effective viable count ≥ 2.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / g, the application rate is 20-50 kg / mu, applied in 2-3 furrows; S6. Emergency Chemical Control: If the pests, diseases and weeds still fail to reach the preset control target after the combined implementation of S3-S5, select highly effective, low-toxicity and low-residue chemical pesticides and control the application rate, application interval and number of applications per growing season. Among them, the chemical pesticide is selected from at least one of imidacloprid, acetamiprid, and pyraclostrobin, with an application rate of 0.1 kg / mu to 0.5 kg / mu, an application interval of 7 to 15 days, and 1 to 2 applications per growing season.

[0023] The following is a description with reference to specific embodiments: Example 1 S1. Origin Survey and Quarantine Access: A systematic survey will be conducted on the soil type (sandy loam), pests and diseases (aphids, cabbage caterpillars, barnyard grass, downy mildew and their distribution density), climate suitability (subtropical monsoon climate), and surrounding pollution sources (no industrial pollution sources). Simultaneously, the risk of cross-infection of pests and diseases in agricultural and forestry plots within a 3km radius of the park will be surveyed. The survey cycle will be once per quarter. Plant quarantine will be implemented using a combination of molecular detection and visual identification. Molecular detection will target nematodes and viral pests, while visual identification will target cabbage caterpillar egg masses and downy mildew lesions. The quarantine screening targets quarantine pests. Vegetable seedlings carrying such pests will be removed, and qualified seedlings without quarantine pests will be retained. S2. Spatial Isolation Setup: Based on the S1 quarantine results, and considering the transmission characteristics of aphids, a high-risk pest, a strip-shaped isolation zone for planting mint is set up as an isolation measure. The isolation zone is 1m wide, and the isolation parameters are matched with the aphid transmission distance of about 50m and the diffusion rate of about 1m / day. A 40-mesh insect-proof net is set up at the boundary of the park as a physical barrier, with a height of 1.5m, to block the invasion of external pests. S3. Physical control implementation: Within the isolation area of ​​S2, based on the pattern of frequent aphid and cabbage caterpillar activity confirmed by the survey in S1, physical control is implemented by trapping and blocking. Frequency-vibrating insecticidal lamps are set up at a spacing of 50m, and 3 pheromone traps are set up per acre to target cabbage caterpillars. The ground is covered with black mulch to block the growth of barnyard grass. An evaluation is conducted within 3 days after the control. If the insect population reduction rate is ≥70% and the weed coverage rate is ≤10%, this physical control method is maintained. If the standard is not met, S4 is implemented. S4. Integrated Biological Control Measures: If the assessment results of S3 are not met, firstly, introduce the natural enemy of the target pest, the cabbage caterpillar, the Trichogramma wasp, at a release ratio of 50:1 (natural enemy to target pest). Then, introduce the beneficial microorganism Beauveria bassiana at a concentration of 0.2 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / mL, the release of Trichogramma wasps was positively correlated with the population density of cabbage caterpillars in the S1 survey. The dosage of Beauveria bassiana was adjusted according to the content of soil pathogens and downy mildew pathogens. If the incidence of downy mildew was still ≥5% within 5 days after the application of Beauveria bassiana, the susceptible variety, the original common cabbage, was replaced with a cabbage variety that was adapted to the local climate and resistant to downy mildew, as confirmed by the S1 survey. This resistant variety was identified through field resistance testing, with the criteria being a downy mildew incidence rate ≤3% and a yield difference of ≤10% from the original variety. When the aphid population density still exceeded the warning threshold set by S1 after variety replacement, matrine, a biological pesticide that has no antagonistic effect with Beauveria bassiana, was applied at a dosage of 30L / mu in the early morning. S5. Soil Ecological Enhancement: Based on the soil test results of S1, the sandy loam soil has moderate fertility. Bio-fertilizer is applied concurrently with the application of bio-pesticides in S4. The bio-fertilizer contains functional microorganisms such as nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and Bacillus subtilis, with an effective viable count ≥2.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / g, the application rate is 20kg / mu, applied in two furrows, once before planting and once during the growing season; S6. Emergency Chemical Control: If the pests, diseases and weeds still do not reach the preset control target after the combined implementation of S3-S5, then use the highly effective, low-toxicity and low-residue chemical pesticide imidacloprid at a rate of 0.1 kg / mu, with an application interval of 7 days and one application per growing season.

[0024] Example 2 S1. Origin Survey and Quarantine Access: A systematic survey will be conducted on the soil type (loam), pests and diseases (red spider mites, aphids, goosegrass, powdery mildew and their distribution density), climate adaptability (temperate continental climate), and the distance from surrounding pollution sources. Simultaneously, the risk of cross-infection of pests and diseases in agricultural and forestry plots within a 4km radius of the park will be surveyed. The survey will be conducted once per quarter. Plant quarantine will be implemented using a combination of molecular detection and visual identification. Molecular detection will target nematodes and viral pests, while visual identification will target red spider mite egg masses and powdery mildew lesions. The quarantine screening targets quarantine pests. Seedlings carrying such pests will be removed, and qualified seedlings without quarantine pests will be retained. S2. Spatial Isolation Setup: Based on the S1 quarantine results, and considering the transmission characteristics of the high-risk pest red spider, a combination of isolation zones and physical barriers is set up. The isolation zone is a strip-shaped area for planting garlic and coriander, 2m wide, with isolation parameters matching the red spider's transmission distance of approximately 80m and diffusion rate of approximately 0.8m / day. A 50-mesh insect-proof net is set up at the park boundary as a physical barrier, 2.0m high, balancing the blocking effect with ventilation requirements. S3. Physical control implementation: Within the isolation area of ​​S2, based on the pattern of frequent activity of spider mites and aphids in the evening confirmed by the survey in S1, physical control is implemented by combining trapping, blocking and manual removal. Frequency vibration insecticidal lamps are set up at a spacing of 65m, and 4 pheromone traps are set up per acre to target aphids. In the Chinese medicinal herb planting area, straw is used to block the growth of goosegrass. Weeds that have escaped the trap are manually removed once a month. An evaluation is carried out within 3 days after the control. When the insect population reduction rate is ≥70% and the weed coverage rate is ≤10%, this physical control method is maintained. If the standard is not met, S4 is implemented. S4. Integrated Biological Control Measures: If the assessment results of S3 are not met, firstly, introduce the natural enemies of the target pests, spider mites and aphids, namely ladybugs and lacewings, at a release ratio of 75:1. Then, introduce beneficial microorganisms, Metarhizium anisopliae and Trichoderma, at a concentration of 0.6 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / mL, the release of natural enemies is positively correlated with the insect population density in the S1 survey. The dosage of beneficial microorganisms is adjusted according to the content of powdery mildew pathogens in the soil. If the incidence of powdery mildew is still ≥5% within 5 days after the implementation of beneficial microorganisms, the original common wolfberry variety that is susceptible to the disease will be replaced with a wolfberry variety that is adapted to the local climate and resistant to powdery mildew, as confirmed by the S1 survey. This resistant variety will be identified through field resistance testing, with the criteria being a powdery mildew incidence rate ≤3% and a yield difference of ≤10% from the original variety. When the insect population density still exceeds the warning threshold set by S1 after variety replacement, the biological pesticides Bacillus thuringiensis and azadirachtin, which have no antagonistic effect with beneficial microorganisms, will be applied at a dosage of 40L / mu in the evening. S5. Soil Ecological Enhancement: Based on the good soil fertility results from S1, bio-fertilizer was applied concurrently with the application of bio-pesticides in S4. The bio-fertilizer contained functional microorganisms, including nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and Bacillus subtilis, with an effective viable count ≥2.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 The application rate is 35 kg / mu (approximately 15 kg / g), applied in two furrows: once before the fruit trees sprout and once during the fruit enlargement period. S6. Emergency Chemical Control: If the pests, diseases and weeds still do not reach the preset control target after the combined implementation of S3-S5, select highly effective, low-toxicity and low-residue chemical pesticides acetamiprid and pyraclostrobin at a rate of 0.3 kg / mu, with an application interval of 10 days and one application per growing season.

[0025] Example 3 S1. Origin Survey and Quarantine Access: A systematic survey will be conducted on the soil type (clay), pests and weeds (rice planthopper, rice leaf roller, crabgrass, sheath blight and their distribution density), climate adaptability (subtropical humid climate), and surrounding pollution sources (no direct pollution sources). Simultaneously, the risk of cross-infection of pests and weeds in agricultural and forestry plots within a 5km radius of the park will be surveyed. The survey cycle will be once per quarter. Plant quarantine will be implemented using a combination of molecular detection and visual identification. Molecular detection will target nematodes and viral pests, while visual identification will target rice leaf roller egg masses and sheath blight lesions. The quarantine screening targets quarantine pests. Seedlings carrying such pests will be removed, and qualified seedlings without quarantine pests will be retained. S2. Spatial Isolation Setup: Based on the S1 quarantine results, and considering the transmission characteristics of the high-risk pest rice planthopper, a combination of isolation strips and physical barriers is set up. The isolation strip is a strip-shaped area for planting garlic, 3m wide, with isolation parameters matching the rice planthopper's transmission distance of approximately 100m and diffusion rate of approximately 1.2m / day. A 60-mesh insect-proof net is set up at the boundary of the park as a physical barrier, 3.0m high, to enhance the barrier effect. S3. Physical control implementation: Within the isolation area of ​​S2, based on the pattern of frequent nocturnal activity of rice planthoppers and rice leaf rollers confirmed by the survey in S1, physical control is implemented by combining trapping, blocking, and manual removal. Frequency-vibrating insecticidal lamps are deployed at intervals of 80m, and 5 pheromone traps are deployed per acre to target rice leaf rollers. In grain crop planting areas, straw mulching is used to block the growth of crabgrass. Weeds that have escaped the traps are manually removed twice a month. An evaluation is conducted within 3 days after the control. If the insect population reduction rate is ≥70% and the weed coverage rate is ≤10%, this physical control method is maintained. If the standard is not met, S4 is implemented. S4. Integrated Biological Control Measures: If the assessment results of S3 are not met, firstly, introduce the natural enemies of the target pests, rice leaf roller and rice planthopper, namely the Trichogramma wasp and ladybug, at a release ratio of 100:1. Then, introduce the beneficial microorganisms Metarhizium anisopliae and Trichoderma, at an application concentration of 1.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / mL, the release of natural enemies is positively correlated with the insect population density in the S1 survey. The amount of beneficial microorganisms used is adjusted according to the content of soil pathogenic microorganisms and sheath blight pathogens. If the incidence of sheath blight is still ≥5% within 5 days after the implementation of beneficial microorganisms, the original ordinary rice variety that is susceptible to the disease will be replaced with a rice variety that is adapted to the local climate and resistant to sheath blight, as confirmed by the S1 survey. This resistant variety will be identified through field resistance identification. The identification criteria are that the incidence of sheath blight is ≤3% and the yield difference from the original variety is ≤10%. When the insect population density still exceeds the warning threshold set by S1 after variety replacement, the biological pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis, which has no antagonistic effect with beneficial microorganisms, will be applied at a dosage of 50L / mu in the early morning. S5. Soil Ecological Enhancement: Based on the soil test results of S1, the clay fertility is moderate to low. Bio-fertilizer is applied concurrently with the application of bio-pesticides in S4. The bio-fertilizer contains functional microorganisms such as nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and Bacillus subtilis, with an effective viable count ≥2.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 The dosage is 50 kg / mu (approximately 330 kg / acre), applied in three furrows: once before sowing, once during tillering, and once during heading. S6. Emergency Chemical Control: If the pests and weeds still do not reach the preset control target after the combined implementation of S3-S5, then use highly effective, low-toxicity, and low-residue chemical pesticides imidacloprid and pyraclostrobin at a rate of 0.5 kg / mu, with an application interval of 15 days and two applications per growing season.

[0026] Comparative Example 1 Unlike Example 2, the S2 spatial isolation setting only uses physical barriers, eliminates the planting of isolation strips, and does not additionally lay out strip isolation strips for planting garlic and coriander. All other process parameters are the same as in Example 2.

[0027] Comparative Example 2 Unlike Example 2, the physical control method in S3 only uses trapping, eliminating the blocking and manual removal operations. The medicinal herb planting area does not carry out straw covering or manual weed removal operations. All other process parameters are the same as in Example 2.

[0028] Comparative Example 3 Unlike Example 2, the implementation order of the S4 integrated biological control measures was adjusted. Biological pesticides were applied first, followed by the introduction of natural enemies and beneficial microorganisms. All other process parameters were the same as in Example 2.

[0029] Comparative Example 4 Unlike Example 2, in S5 soil ecological enhancement, no bio-fertilizer was applied; instead, conventional chemical fertilizer was used. Conventional nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium compound fertilizer was applied concurrently with the application of bio-pesticides in S4. No functional microorganisms were added. All other process parameters were the same as in Example 2.

[0030] Comparative Example 5 Unlike Example 2, the S6 emergency chemical control method cancels the application of chemical pesticides and instead strengthens biological control. Acetamiprid and pyraclostrobin chemical pesticides are not selected. All other process parameters are the same as in Example 2.

[0031] Table 1, Performance Test Data for Examples 1-3

[0032] Table 2, Performance Test Data for Comparative Examples 1-5

[0033] Based on the differences between Examples 1-3 and Comparative Examples 1-5 and the performance test data table, it can be seen that the key factors in this invention are the step-by-step progression and parameter adaptation of the core process collaborative design of origin survey and quarantine access, spatial isolation setting, physical control, biological control integrated measures, soil ecological enhancement, and emergency chemical control; the combined use of isolation zones and physical barriers in key process links; the synergy of trapping, blocking and manual removal; the progressive control of natural enemies, beneficial microorganisms and biological pesticides; the simultaneous implementation of biofertilizers and control measures; the adaptability of parameters in each step; the matching of isolation zone width with the spread distance of harmful organisms; the adaptation of natural enemy release ratio with insect population density; and the compatibility of biofertilizer dosage with soil fertility. These factors have a significant impact on the control effect of diseases, pests and weeds, crop yield, soil ecological stability, comprehensive control cost and application adaptability. Moreover, there is a synergistic effect among these factors, including prevention, control and enhancement of the entire chain, complementarity of physical and biological control, and linkage between soil ecology and plant resistance enhancement.

[0034] Comparative Example 1, by omitting the spatial isolation setup process and not employing the physical blocking technology of combining isolation strips and insect-proof nets, saw a reduction in the population of the main pests, red spider mites, at only 75% and aphids at 72%, representing decreases of 18 and 19 percentage points respectively compared to Example 2; the incidence of powdery mildew was 5%, an increase of 3 percentage points compared to Example 2; the weed coverage rate was 10%, an increase of 2 percentage points compared to Example 2; and the crop yield was 180 kg / mu, a decrease of 10% compared to Example 2. This demonstrates the core role of spatial isolation as the "first line of defense" in blocking the invasion of harmful organisms and reducing the pressure of pest control. Comparative Example 2 replaced the integrated biological control measures with single biological pesticide spraying, eliminating the processes of introducing natural enemies, applying beneficial microorganisms, and replacing disease-resistant varieties. The spider mite population decreased by 80% and aphid population by 78%, respectively, a decrease of 13 percentage points compared to Example 2; the incidence of powdery mildew was 4%, an increase of 2 percentage points compared to Example 2; although the integrated control cost was reduced to 280 yuan / mu, the control effect was not sustainable, highlighting the synergistic control value of the progressive system of biological control natural enemies, microorganisms, disease-resistant varieties, and biological pesticides. Comparative Example 3 replaced physical control with manual removal alone, eliminating trapping and barrier techniques. The weed coverage rate was 18%, an increase of 10 percentage points compared to Example 2; the reduction rate of major pests was 13 percentage points lower on average compared to Example 2; and the crop yield was 170 kg / mu, a decrease of 15% compared to Example 2. The low control efficiency due to the lack of targeted trapping and full-area barrier techniques confirms the necessity of synergistic use of multiple physical control methods. Comparative Example 4 omitted the soil ecological enhancement process and did not apply bio-fertilizer containing functional microorganisms; the number of beneficial microorganisms in the soil was only 0.5 × 10⁻⁶. 8The CFU / g was 80% lower than in Example 2; the crop yield was 190 kg / mu, a 5% decrease compared to Example 2; the plant disease resistance was insufficient during long-term control, and the incidence of powdery mildew remained at 4%, highlighting the fundamental role of soil ecological enhancement in improving plant resistance and consolidating control effects; Comparative Example 5 replaced emergency chemical control with enhanced biological control. Although the amount of chemical pesticides used was 0, the incidence of powdery mildew was 6% and the weed coverage rate was 12%, which were 4 percentage points and 4 percentage points higher than those in Example 2, respectively. The comprehensive control cost rose to 400 yuan / mu, which was 14.3% higher than that in Example 2. The lack of emergency backup measures led to the failure of control in extreme cases, which confirms the rationality of physical, biological and chemical tiered control.

[0035] The core control indicators in the examples all meet the industry requirements for harmless control in agricultural and forestry ecological parks: the reduction rate of major pests is 91%-95%, the incidence rate of major diseases is ≤2%, the weed coverage rate is ≤8%, and the number of beneficial microorganisms in the soil is ≥2.2×10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / g and crop yield remained at the conventional level for the variety; in the 250-mu medium-sized orchard, the main pests of fruit trees and medicinal herbs decreased by 93% for spider mites and 91% for aphids, the incidence of powdery mildew was 2%, the weed coverage rate was 8%, and the number of beneficial microorganisms in the soil was 2.5 × 10⁻⁶. 8 With a CFU / g concentration, a crop yield of 200 kg / mu, and a comprehensive control cost of 350 yuan / mu, the optimal balance between control effectiveness, ecological protection, and cost control is achieved. Although the minimum value of 10 mu in Example 1 and the maximum value of 100 mu in Example 3 show some boundary effects due to differences in park size and crop varieties, for example, in Example 1, the bio-fertilizer application rate was 20 kg / mu, and the number of beneficial soil microorganisms was 2.2 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / g; Example 3: Chemical pesticide application rate was 0.5 kg / mu, cost was 380 yuan / mu, but all core indicators were significantly better than the comparative example, confirming the rationality of the process steps, parameter range and application scenario of the present invention.

[0036] In Examples 1-3, processes S1-S6 form a closed-loop synergy: Example 2 utilizes a survey range adapted to a gradient of 3km-4km-5km, a 2m wide isolation zone with 50-mesh insect netting, a combination of trapping, blocking, and manual removal, a natural enemy ratio of 75:1, and a beneficial microbial concentration of 0.6×10⁻⁶. 8The optimal parameter combination of CFU / mL, 40L / mu of biopesticide, and 35kg / mu of biofertilizer applied in two furrows, combined with precise adaptation of each step to the planting variety (goji berry), soil type (loam), and pests and diseases (red spider mites, aphids, powdery mildew), maximizes the overall control efficacy. Example 1, with minimum parameter configuration of 1m isolation strip width, 50:1 natural enemy ratio, and 20kg / mu of biofertilizer, is suitable for a centralized management scenario in a small vegetable park, while still maintaining the core efficacy of ≥92% insect population reduction and ≤2% disease incidence. As a result, the parameters of each step, such as matching the survey cycle with the vegetable growth cycle, the physical control method with the pest activity pattern, and the biological control intensity with the insect population density, ensure that the control standards are met. Example 3 uses the maximum parameters to configure the isolation strip width of 3m, the natural enemy ratio of 100:1, and the bio-fertilizer of 50kg / mu applied in 3 furrows to meet the large-scale control needs of large grain and cash crop parks. The rice planthopper population reduction rate is 95% and the incidence of sheath blight is 2%, which meets the continuous control needs of heavy-load planting scenarios and reflects the synergistic flexibility of technology and application scenarios.

[0037] Comparative Examples 1-5 suffered from a break in the prevention and control system due to the absence or unreasonable replacement of a single process step. For example, Comparative Example 1 lacked an isolation zone, leading to the continuous invasion of external harmful organisms. Comparative Example 3 relied solely on manual removal, resulting in insufficient prevention and control coverage and a comprehensive decline in core indicators. Example 1 had a slightly inferior ecological enhancement effect due to the minimum parameter configuration. Example 3 had a slightly lower cost-effectiveness than Example 2 due to the increased labor and material consumption caused by the maximum parameter configuration. However, neither of these examples affected the core prevention and control effectiveness.

[0038] In summary, this invention, through a full-chain process design encompassing prevention, blocking, control, enhancement, and emergency response, combined with the tiered application and parameter adaptation of physical, biological, and chemical control methods, solves the problems of traditional pest and weed control in agricultural and forestry parks, such as limited methods, ecological damage, and unsustainable control. It significantly improves the accuracy, ecological compatibility, and scenario adaptability of control. Example 2 achieves optimal overall performance, with a simple process flow that is easy to scale up and promote. Examples 1-3 cover small, medium, and large-scale parks and different scenarios such as vegetables, fruits, medicinal herbs, and grain and cash crops, verifying the universality and flexibility of the process. It provides replicable, highly stable, and harmless integrated pest management solutions for agricultural and forestry ecological parks of different sizes and planting types.

[0039] Table 3, GB testing standards for performance testing in Tables 1 and 2.

[0040] Reduction rate of major pest populations Five to eight representative sampling points were set up within the park, each with an area of ​​10-20 square meters. 2 Before control, investigate the number of live target pests in the sampling point and record the initial insect population density; 7-10 days after control, re-inspect the number of live pests at the same sampling point. The insect population reduction rate (%) is calculated using the formula: (Initial insect population - Post-treatment insect population) / Initial insect population × 100; Major disease incidence The diagonal five-point sampling method was used, with 20-30 crop plants investigated at each sampling point. According to the disease grading standard, grade 0: no lesions; grade 1: lesion area <10%; grade 3: lesion area 10%-30%; grade 5: lesion area >30%, the number of diseased plants and the disease grade were recorded. The incidence rate (%) is calculated using the formula: (Number of infected plants / Total number of plants surveyed) × 100. weed coverage Using the quadrat method, 5-6 1m×1m quadrats are set up and evenly distributed in the park. The proportion of weed coverage area in the quadrats is measured visually or by grid method. The average value of all quadrats is taken as the weed coverage rate of the park. Crop yield Grain and oil crops: Select three 20m harvest periods. 2 For crops in the planting area, after threshing, they are dried, weighed, and the yield per mu is calculated. For fruits, vegetables, and medicinal herbs, the harvesting period is divided into 3 consecutive harvests. The total yield is recorded, and the yield per mu is calculated based on the planting area, after deducting impurities. Number of beneficial soil microorganisms Soil samples were collected from the 0-20cm soil layer in the park. Stones and plant debris were removed, and the samples were sieved through a 2mm sieve. The dilution plate count method was used. Nitrogen-fixing bacteria were cultured on Assumption medium, and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria were cultured on Mongkina medium. After incubation, the number of colonies was counted and converted into the number of microorganisms per gram of dry soil (CFU / g). Chemical pesticide application rate Record the pesticide application concentration, application rate per acre, application frequency and interval, calculate the pure pesticide application rate per acre (kg / acre) based on the actual total application, and verify compliance by comparing with the recommended dosage range in the standard; Soil fertility level The soil organic matter, available nitrogen, available phosphorus, and available potassium content are tested and classified according to the soil fertility grading index: Level 1: good fertility; Level 2: medium fertility; Level 3: low fertility.

[0041] Although embodiments of the invention have been shown and described, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes, modifications, substitutions and alterations can be made to these embodiments without departing from the principles and spirit of the invention, the scope of which is defined by the appended claims and their equivalents.

Claims

1. A harmless integrated pest management method for diseases, pests, and weeds in agricultural and forestry ecological parks, characterized in that, Includes the following steps: S1. Origin Survey and Quarantine Access: Conduct a systematic survey of the relevant environment, pests and diseases in and around the park and generate a risk level survey report. Based on the report, implement quarantine on the plant seedlings to be introduced and remove unqualified seedlings. S2. Spatial Isolation Setup: Based on the quarantine results of S1, appropriate isolation measures are set up for high-risk pests. S3. Physical control implementation: Within the isolation area of ​​S2, implement physical control measures based on the survey results of S1. Evaluate the effectiveness within a specified time after control measures are implemented. If the measures meet the standards, maintain the method; otherwise, proceed with S4. S4. Comprehensive Biocontrol Measures: Based on the effectiveness evaluation results of S3, implement biocontrol-related measures in a progressive manner. If the effectiveness of each step does not meet the preset requirements, proceed with subsequent biocontrol operations in sequence. S5. Soil Ecological Enhancement: Based on the survey results of S1, apply bio-fertilizers concurrently in S4 to enhance soil ecology and improve plant resistance to diseases and pests. S6. Emergency Chemical Control: If the pests, diseases and weeds still fail to reach the preset control target after the combined implementation of S3-S5, select highly effective, low-toxicity and low-residue chemical pesticides and control the application rate, application interval and number of applications per growing season.

2. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S1, the origin survey includes a systematic survey of the soil type, pests and weeds and their distribution density, climate adaptability, and surrounding pollution sources in the park. It also includes a survey of the risk of cross-infection of pests and weeds in agricultural and forestry plots within 3-5km of the park. The survey cycle is once per quarter. Plant quarantine employs a combination of molecular testing and visual identification. Molecular testing targets nematodes and viral pests, while visual identification targets insect egg masses and plant lesions.

3. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S1, the quarantine screening target is quarantine pests, and qualified seedlings refer to seedlings that do not carry quarantine pests.

4. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S2, the isolation measure is an isolation strip or a physical barrier; The isolation zone is a strip-shaped area planted with repellent plants, which are selected from at least one of mint, garlic, and coriander. The isolation zone is 1-3m wide. The physical barrier is a 40-60 mesh insect-proof net with a height of ≥1.5m; The isolation parameters are matched with the distance and spread rate of harmful organisms.

5. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S3, physical control methods include trapping, blocking, or manual removal. The trapping device is a frequency-vibration insecticidal lamp with a spacing of 50-80m, or a sex pheromone trap, 3-5 per acre. The barrier method is to cover with black plastic film or straw. The specified assessment period is within 3 days after the control measures are implemented, and the preset control standards are a pest population reduction rate of ≥70% and a weed coverage rate of ≤10%.

6. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S4, the biological control measures include introducing natural enemies or beneficial microorganisms corresponding to the target pests and diseases. The natural enemies are selected from at least one of Trichogramma wasps, ladybugs, and lacewings, and the release ratio of the natural enemies to the target pests is (50-100):

1. Beneficial microorganisms are selected from at least one of Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae, and Trichoderma, and the application concentration is 0.2-1.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 CFU / mL; The release of natural enemies is positively correlated with the insect population density of S1, and the amount of beneficial microorganisms used is adjusted according to the content of soil pathogenic microorganisms.

7. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S4, the progressive biosecurity operation includes: If the disease incidence rate is still ≥5% within 5 days after the implementation of beneficial microorganisms, replace the susceptible varieties and select varieties that are adapted to the local climate and resistant to the target disease, as confirmed by the S1 survey. Disease-resistant varieties need to pass field disease resistance assessment. The assessment criteria are that the incidence rate of the target disease is ≤3% and the yield difference from the original variety is ≤10%.

8. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S4, the subsequent biological control operation also includes: when the insect population density still exceeds the warning threshold set in S1 after variety replacement, applying a biological pesticide that has no antagonistic effect on beneficial microorganisms. The biological pesticide is selected from at least one of Bacillus thuringiensis, matrine, or azadirachtin, with an application rate of 30-50 L / mu, and the application time is early morning or evening.

9. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S5, the bio-fertilizer contains functional microorganisms, including nitrogen-fixing bacteria, phosphate-solubilizing bacteria, and Bacillus subtilis, with an effective viable count ≥ 2.0 × 10⁻⁶. 8 The dosage is 20-50 kg / mu (approximately 1.3-2.5 kg / g), applied in 2-3 furrows.

10. The method for integrated pest management of diseases, pests, and weeds in an agricultural and forestry ecological park according to claim 1, characterized in that: In S6, the chemical pesticide is selected from at least one of imidacloprid, acetamiprid, and pyraclostrobin, with an application rate of 0.1 kg / mu to 0.5 kg / mu, an application interval of 7 to 15 days, and 1 to 2 applications per growing season.

Images