Attractant with low sugar-acid ratio and application thereof

Abstract

According to the attractant with the low sugar-acid ratio and the application of the attractant, through correlation analysis of waxberry fruit quality indexes and the number of fruit flies, it is found that the total acid content, the citric acid content, the malic acid content, the oxalic acid content and the number of the fruit flies are all in significant positive correlation; the trapping and killing effect of the low-sugar-acid-ratio attractant is better than that of a high-sugar-acid-ratio attractant Different treatment results show that acid in the attractant with the low sugar-acid ratio mainly affects the trapping and killing effect of the attractant, and acetic acid is obvious in control effect, low in cost and long in lasting effect; the use time of the attractant should be about 20 days before harvesting (when the acid content of the fruits is accumulated at the highest).

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to the field of fruit fly control, and in particular to a low sugar-acid ratio attractant and application thereof. Background Art

[0003] At present, the prevention and control methods of bayberry fruit flies mainly include agricultural prevention, physical prevention, chemical prevention and biological prevention. Among them, agricultural prevention methods are generally used 30 days before bayberry picking. Agricultural measures such as clearing the garden and cutting off the food chain can effectively reduce the insect source base number. The cycle is long and the labor and time costs are high. Biological control uses the light-repellent nature of fruit flies and kills them by hanging yellow boards, which has a more obvious effect. In addition, the use of cold chain transportation and strict control of storage temperature (recommended temperature 2℃~5℃) can also effectively reduce the number of fruit flies. However, biological control requires a high cost and has a slow effect. At present, in the production process, people generally use chemical prevention methods, which are fast, efficient and easy to use. However, the use of chemical drugs is easy to cause environmental pollution, and is toxic to humans and animals, and may also cause pests to develop drug resistance. Therefore, it is urgent to find a green, environmentally friendly and cost-effective way to prevent and control fruit flies.

[0004] Killing fruit flies through physical control methods can greatly improve the quality and safety of bayberry fruit, which is generally achieved by preparing attractants or making traps.

[0005] Patent document CN109619099A discloses a fruit fly food attractant, which includes 3 to 8 parts of brown sugar, 0.1 to 0.8 parts of grape vinegar and other substances to prepare a food attractant capsule with a high sugar-vinegar ratio. The attractant contains a high proportion of brown sugar, and the production steps are complicated and the production cost is high, which is not conducive to practical application.

[0006] Most existing fruit fly attractants are based on attractants with a high sugar-vinegar ratio, with sugar as the main ingredient. The ratio of sugar to vinegar varies, and the attractant killing effects of attractants with different ratios are also different, which is not conducive to specific operations in agricultural prevention and control. Therefore, developing a fruit fly attractant with high cost performance, strong attracting power, easy preparation and use, suitable for standardized production, non-toxic and non-polluting, and applying it to field monitoring and prevention of fruit flies is an urgent problem to be solved in the current bayberry pest control. Summary of the invention

[0007] In view of the problems existing in the prior art, the present invention provides a low sugar-acid ratio attractant and its application. Through the correlation analysis between the quality index of bayberry fruit and the number of fruit fly insects, it is found that the total acid content, citric acid content, malic acid content, oxalic acid content of the fruit and the number of insects are all significantly positively correlated; it is determined that the attractant with a low sugar-acid ratio has a better killing effect than the attractant with a high sugar-acid ratio. The results of different treatments show that the acid in the low sugar-acid ratio attractant mainly affects the killing effect of the attractant. The selection of acetic acid has obvious prevention effect, low cost and long lasting effect; the use time of the attractant should be about 20 days before harvesting (when the fruit acid content accumulates to the highest).

[0008] On the one hand, the present invention provides a low sugar-acid ratio attractant, comprising sugar and acid, wherein the mass ratio of sugar to acid is 1-5:1-5.

[0009] A good attractant should not only have a strong killing effect, but also consider the production cost and production process. Existing physical control attractants are mainly fruit attractants and high sugar-vinegar ratio attractants, with various formula ingredients, different proportions, and complicated processes. In the actual production process, the cost is high, the time required is long, time-consuming and labor-intensive, and it is not conducive to standardized production. The low sugar acid attractant provided by the present invention has simple ingredients, low cost, and significant killing effect, and is suitable for production and application in the actual control process.

[0010] In some embodiments, the mass ratio of sugar to acid in the attractant is 1:2.

[0011] Furthermore, the attractant also includes a microbial source attractant.

[0012] Microbial attractants include viruses, Bacillus thuringiensis, Trichoderma, and Paecilomyces lilacinus. Viral microbial pesticides, such as the nuclear polyhedrosis virus of Spodoptera litura, are specific and are used to control specific pests. Bacillus thuringiensis is a microbial insecticide that kills pests by producing crystalline toxins. Trichoderma and Paecilomyces lilacinus are microbial fungicides and microbial nematicides, respectively, which protect plants from diseases by inhibiting the growth of pathogens. These microbial attractants play an important role in the prevention and control of diseases and insect pests, especially in reducing the use of chemical pesticides and protecting the ecological environment.

[0013] Furthermore, the sugar in the attractant is one or more of brown sugar, white sugar or glucose, and the acid is one or more of acetic acid, citric acid or malic acid.

[0014] Furthermore, the acid is acetic acid.

[0015] Some studies have shown that the main factor that attracts fruit flies is the volatile substances in the fruit, such as ethyl acetate. Bayberry fruit mainly contains citric acid, malic acid, etc., which volatilize as the bayberry fruit develops. However, in the production and preparation of attractants, due to the high cost of citric acid, acetic acid, which is cheaper, is generally used. Acetic acid is volatile and can also be used as a substance to attract fruit flies.

[0016] In some embodiments, the mass ratio of the sugar, acid, water, and microbial attractant is 1:2:17:0.05.

[0017] In the physical control of bayberry, fruit fly attractants are generally made of sugar, alcohol and vinegar, which have a certain effect on luring and killing fruit flies. However, the ingredients and proportions of different attractants are different, and most of them are attractants with a high sugar-vinegar ratio. However, according to the principle that the volatile substances in bayberry fruit attract fruit flies, sugar is not the decisive factor in attracting fruit flies. In actual production, reducing the amount of sugar and increasing the proportion of acid can reduce costs and improve the control effect of fruit flies.

[0018] In another aspect, the present invention provides a low sugar-acid ratio attractant product, which comprises the low sugar-acid ratio attractant as described above.

[0019] Furthermore, the attractant includes sugar, acid, water, and a microbial source, wherein the mass ratio of the sugar, acid, water, and microbial source attractant is 1-5:1-5:15-20:0.01-0.05.

[0020] In some embodiments, the attractant includes sugar, acid, water, and a microbial source, wherein the mass ratio of sugar, acid, water, and microbial source attractant is 1:2:17:0.05.

[0021] In yet another aspect, the present invention provides a method for controlling bayberry fruit flies, the method comprising the low sugar-acid ratio attractant as described above.

[0022] Furthermore, the specific operation steps of the method are as follows: the attractant bottle is hung on the peripheral branches about 1.5m above the ground, one bottle is hung on each tree (about 10m apart), and 3 bottles are hung every time, which is set as one test area (3 test areas in total, each test area is more than 10m apart). When the fruit is ripe, the ripe fruit in the test area is collected, and about 500g of fruit from the hanging tree and the surrounding trees are evenly collected with one attractant bottle hanging as the center, and the collection is repeated 3 times in each area.

[0023] In another aspect, the present invention provides a use of a low sugar-acid ratio solution as an agent for improving the control rate of bayberry fruit flies, wherein the mass ratio of sugar to acid in the low sugar-acid solution is 1-5:1-5.

[0024] Furthermore, the attractant includes sugar, acid, water, and a microbial source, wherein the mass ratio of the sugar, acid, water, and microbial source attractant is 1-5:1-5:15-20:0.01-0.05.

[0025] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following advantages and effects:

[0026] 1. Correlation analysis proved that the total acid, citric acid, malic acid and oxalic acid contents were significantly positively correlated with the insect population, indicating that the fruit acid content in bayberry may be the main factor in attracting fruit flies;

[0027] 2. It provides an attractant with a low sugar-acid ratio. Acid is the main factor that determines the effect of the attractant, and the prevention effect is obvious and lasting;

[0028] 3. It is clarified that the attractant should be used about 20 days before harvest, that is, when the fruit acid content accumulates to the highest level;

[0029] 4. Low cost, simple preparation and use, conducive to practical production application. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0030] The present invention is further described in detail below in conjunction with the examples. It should be noted that the examples described below are intended to facilitate the understanding of the present invention and do not have any limiting effect on it. The reagents used in this example are all known products and were obtained by purchasing commercially available products.

[0031] Example 1: Determination of the quality and insect population of bayberry fruit under open field cultivation conditions

[0032] The soluble solid content of bayberry fruits from Xianju and Huangyan was measured by PAL-1 handheld sugar meter, repeated 3 times; the fruit hardness was measured by TA-XT-plus texture analyzer, with a probe diameter of 5mm and a downward pressure speed of 1mm / s, and the results were expressed in N. The total sugar content was measured by DNS colorimetry; the total acid was detected by national standard acid-base titration, referring to the national standard GBT12456-2008 method; vitamin C (Vc) was determined by fast blue salt colorimetry; total flavonoids were determined by NaNO2-Al(NO3)3-NaOH colorimetry; oxalic acid was determined by titanium trichloride colorimetry; glucose, fructose, sucrose, citric acid, malic acid, total amino acids, total phenols, total anthocyanins and other indicators were determined by Nominkoda (Wuhan) Biotechnology Co., Ltd. kits. Excel 2021 was used to calculate the mean and variance of fruit quality data and insect population, and the results are shown in Table 1.

[0033] Table 1 Fruit quality and insect population under open field cultivation conditions

[0034]

[0035] According to Table 1, the quality of bayberry fruit in Xianju base is mainly in terms of total amino acids (10.08 μmol·g -1 ), Vc content (1461.15μg·g -1 ), total anthocyanins (9.67 μg·g -1 ), total acid (8.37 g·kg -1 ), citric acid (9.18 mg·g -1 ), malic acid (0.87 μmol·g -1 ), oxalic acid (2.65 mg g -1 ) and other indicators are higher than those of the fruits from the Huangyan base, and the average number of insects per fruit (6.98) is slightly higher than that of the fruits from the Huangyan base (6.43).

[0036] Example 2: Correlation analysis between bayberry fruit quality and insect population

[0037] In order to further understand the correlation between bayberry fruit quality and insect population, the correlation analysis was conducted on the sugar and acid content in the fruit and the insect population. SPSS20 was used to calculate the correlation between fruit quality and insect population. The average insect population = fruit fly population / bayberry fruit number.

[0038] Table 2 Correlation between bayberry fruit quality and insect population

[0039]

[0040] Note: * indicates significant correlation at p < 0.05 level

[0041] As shown in Table 2, the total acid content, citric acid content, malic acid content, and oxalic acid content were significantly positively correlated with the number of insects, and there was no significant correlation with other indicators. This indicates that the fruit acid content in bayberry may be the main factor in attracting fruit flies, and the acid content can be appropriately increased when preparing bayberry fruit fly attractants. The acid content changes in the process of bayberry fruit ripening show a trend of first rising and then falling, reaching a peak at the end of May and the beginning of June. Therefore, the prevention and control measures for fruit flies should be carried out in advance in early June.

[0042] Example 3: Low sugar-acid ratio attractant provided by the present invention

[0043] Weigh white sugar (Shandong Gushuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), acetic acid (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), and microbial attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) in a mass ratio of (1-5):(1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 1:2:0.05, and dissolve in water to form an aqueous solution. The percentage ratio of white sugar, acetic acid, and microbial attractant in the aqueous solution is 4.99%:9.98%:0.25%.

[0044] Example 4, high sugar-acid ratio attractant

[0045] Weigh white granulated sugar (Shandong Gushuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), acetic acid (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), and microbial source attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) in a mass ratio of (1-5):(1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 2:1:0.05, and dissolve in water to form an aqueous solution. The percentage ratio of white granulated sugar, acetic acid, and microbial source attractant in the aqueous solution is 9.98%:4.99%:0.25%.

[0046] Example 5, sugar-free attractant

[0047] Acetic acid (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) and microbial attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) are weighed in a mass ratio of (1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 2:0.05, and dissolved in water to form an aqueous solution, in which the percentage ratio of acetic acid to microbial attractant in the aqueous solution is 10.50%:0.26%.

[0048] Embodiment 6, non-acid attractant

[0049] White granulated sugar (Shandong Gushuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) and microbial attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) are weighed in a mass ratio of (1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 1:0.05, and dissolved in water to form an aqueous solution. The content ratio of white granulated sugar to microbial attractant in the aqueous solution is 5.54%:0.28%.

[0050] Example 7, low sugar-acid ratio attractant with acetic acid replaced by citric acid

[0051] Weigh white sugar (Shandong Gushuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), citric acid (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), and microbial attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) in a mass ratio of (1-5):(1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 1:2:0.05, and dissolve in water to form an aqueous solution. The content ratio of white sugar, citric acid, and microbial attractant in the aqueous solution is 4.99%:9.98%:0.25%.

[0052] Example 8, low sugar-acid ratio attractant with acetic acid replaced by malic acid

[0053] Weigh white sugar (Shandong Gushuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), malic acid (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), and microbial attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) in a mass ratio of (1-5):(1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 1:2:0.05, and dissolve in water to form an aqueous solution. The content ratio of white sugar, malic acid, and microbial attractant in the aqueous solution is 4.99%:9.98%:0.25%.

[0054] Example 9: Low sugar-acid ratio attractant with acetic acid replaced by oxalic acid

[0055] Weigh white granulated sugar (Shandong Gushuo Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), oxalic acid (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.), and microbial source attractant (Hangzhou Disiaxiang Biotechnology Co., Ltd.) in a mass ratio of (1-5):(1-5):(0.02-0.06); in this embodiment, the preferred ratio is 1:2:0.05, and dissolve in water to form an aqueous solution. The content ratio of white granulated sugar, oxalic acid, and microbial source attractant in the aqueous solution is 4.99%:9.98%:0.25%.

[0056] Example 10: Attractant treatment

[0057] The attractant bottles were hung on the outer branches about 1.5m above the ground, with one bottle hung on each tree (about 10m apart), and 3 bottles were hung to form a test area (3 test areas in total, each test area was more than 10m apart). When the fruits were ripe, the ripe fruits in the test area were collected, with the tree where the attractant bottle was hung as the center, and about 500g of fruits were evenly collected from the hanging tree and the surrounding trees, with 3 replicates collected in each area.

[0058] Example 11: Cultivation and treatment of Romaine lettuce

[0059] 40-50 days before harvesting, the high-yield bayberry trees were covered with 40-mesh insect-proof nets, and all pesticides, hormones and nutrient solutions were stopped. When the fruits were ripe, the ripe fruits in the test area were collected, with a weight of about 500g, and the collection was repeated 3 times. The fruits were stored at room temperature to culture fruit fly larvae.

[0060] Example 12: Early-stage facility cultivation treatment

[0061] The height of the greenhouse is 4.5m, the spacing between plants is 5m, and the distance between the bayberry tree crown and the top of the greenhouse is 1.5-2.0m. The steel frame structure is built according to the terrain and covered with transparent plastic film. When the fruit is ripe, the ripe fruit in the test area is collected. The fruit is about 500g, and the collection is repeated 3 times. The fruit is stored at room temperature to cultivate fruit fly larvae.

[0062] Example 13: Fruit fly control efficacy test under different treatment methods

[0063] The attractants in Examples 3 to 9 were simultaneously applied in the method of Example 10, and Example 11, Example 12 and open field cultivation treatment (control) were set up to conduct a fruit fly control test. Control effect = (average insect population of control - average insect population of treatment) / average insect population of control × 100%

[0064] Table 3 Analysis of fruit fly control effectiveness under different treatments

[0065]

[0066] Note: * indicates significant difference at p<0.05 level, ** indicates significant difference at p<0.01 level, *** indicates significant difference at p<0.001 level

[0067] From the comparison of Examples 3 to 6, it can be seen that the effect of killing fruit flies with the low sugar-acid ratio attractant (411.81 heads) is significantly better than that with the high sugar-acid ratio attractant (308.24 heads), with a prevention efficiency of 65.58%; the effect of killing fruit flies with the sugar-free attractant (371.52 heads) is better than that with the high sugar-acid ratio attractant (308.24 heads), with a prevention efficiency of 48.44%; and the effect of killing fruit flies with the acid-free attractant (257.09 heads) is lower than that of the other three attractants, with a prevention efficiency of 25.54%.

[0068] At the same time, by comparing Examples 3, 7, 8, and 9, it can be seen that the effect of killing fruit flies by attractants with low sugar-acid ratios prepared by using different types of acids is significantly improved compared with that of attractants with high sugar-acid ratios. However, under the condition of low sugar-acid ratios, there are differences in the effects of using different acids. Among them, acetic acid in the low sugar-acid ratio attractant provided by the present invention is not only cheap, but also more effective.

[0069] Comparison of Examples 3, 4, 11, and 12 shows that the average insect population of the low sugar-acid ratio attractant is 2.61 per fruit, which is lower than the 4.31 per fruit of the high sugar-acid ratio attractant, and higher than the Luoman cultivation and early facility cultivation. In general, the early facility cultivation fruit has the least fruit fly population, with a prevention effect of 77.57%. It is speculated that this should be related to the early formation of a relatively independent space after early facility cultivation, which reduces the base number of fruit flies in the environment and reduces the harm of fruit flies to the greatest extent; the fruit fly population of the Luoman cultivation fruit is relatively small, with a prevention effect of 71.96%, which is a relatively ideal physical prevention and control measure; the fruit fly prevention effect of the low sugar-acid ratio attractant is 65.58%, which is higher than the prevention effect of the high sugar-acid ratio attractant (32.87%). Properly increasing the acetic acid content in the attractant and reducing the sugar-acid ratio will improve the prevention effect of the attractant, which is also a relatively ideal fruit fly prevention and control measure.

[0070] Example 14: Fruit fly protection test at different hanging times

[0071] In order to further determine the hanging time of the attractant in Example 3, different protective efficacy tests were carried out on attractants with low sugar-acid ratio according to the phenological period of bayberry fruit development in Yuyao, Lanxi, Sanmen and other places.

[0072] Table 4 Effects of different hanging time of low sugar-acid ratio attractants on the number of fruit flies

[0073]

[0074] According to Table 4, the effect of attractants hung at the end of May and the beginning of June is significantly better than that hung in the first and middle ten days of June. For example, the effect of attractants hung on May 25 at Yuyao base was 63.64%, on June 2 was 44.61%, and on June 8 was 37.37%. The best effect of attractants hung on May 25 at Lanxi base was 64.01%, and the effect of attractants hung on June 2 at Sanmen base was 63.70%. Therefore, it is recommended that the time of hanging attractants should be when the fruit acid content reaches the highest and before the first peak arrives (i.e., early June), so as to reduce the base number of fruit flies in the first high incidence period as much as possible and reduce the damage caused by fruit flies.

[0075] The embodiments described above provide a detailed description of the technical solutions of the present invention. It should be understood that the above are only specific embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Any modifications, supplements or similar substitutions made within the scope of the principles of the present invention should be included in the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A low sugar-acid ratio attractant, characterized in that: It comprises sugar and acid, wherein the mass ratio of sugar to acid is 1-5:1-5.

2. The attractant according to claim 1, characterized in that Also included are attractants of microbial origin.

3. The attractant according to claim 2, characterized in that The sugar is one or more of brown sugar, white sugar or glucose, and the acid is one or more of acetic acid, citric acid or malic acid.

4. The attractant according to claim 3, characterized in that The acid is acetic acid.

5. The attractant according to claim 4, characterized in that The mass ratio of the sugar, acid, water and microbial source attractant is 1-5:1-5:15-20:0.01-0.

05.

6. A low sugar-acid ratio attractant product, characterized in that: The invention comprises the low sugar-acid ratio attractant as described in any one of claims 1 to 5.

7. A method for controlling bayberry fruit flies, characterized in that: The invention comprises the low sugar-acid ratio attractant as described in any one of claims 1 to 5.

8. The method according to claim 7, characterized in that The specific operation steps are as follows: the attractant is prepared and placed in an attractant bottle, and the attractant is hung on a tree branch.

9. Use of a low sugar-acid ratio solution as an agent for improving the control rate of bayberry fruit flies, characterized in that: The mass ratio of sugar to acid in the low sugar-acid solution is 1-5:1-5.

10. The use according to claim 9, characterized in that The attractant comprises sugar, acid, water and microorganism source, wherein the mass ratio of sugar, acid, water and microorganism source attractant is 1-5:1-5:15-20:0.01-0.05.

Images