Method for preventing and treating postharvest diseases of fruits by using phenethyl alcohol and application of method

Abstract

The invention provides a method for preventing and treating postharvest diseases of fruits through phenethyl alcohol and application of the method, and relates to the technical field of fruit disease prevention and treatment. The method disclosed by the invention comprises the following steps: after being picked, fruits are soaked in 45% phenethyl alcohol 800-10000 times liquid, and the fruits are naturally placed and aired after being aired; or after being picked, the fruits are fumigated by 20-1500 [mu] L / L phenethyl alcohol at room temperature for 1-3 days, and the fruits are stored in a ventilated warehouse after being packaged. The method disclosed by the invention is operated at normal temperature, does not need special equipment, is simple and easy to implement, is convenient to operate, reduces the damage of diseases in the storage period to fruits, prolongs the shelf life, reduces the pollution caused by common chemical preservatives, is safe and non-toxic to human bodies, is efficient, has no drug resistance to pathogenic bacteria, and does not pollute the environment.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention belongs to the technical field of fruit disease prevention and control, and specifically relates to a method for preventing and controlling post-harvest fruit diseases by utilizing phenylethanol and application thereof. Background Art

[0002] Fruits are very easy to be damaged during harvesting, storage and transportation, and are infected by post-harvest fungi, which causes the fruit to rot and lead to serious economic losses. During the post-harvest storage period, there are two main types of diseases that cause fruit rot: one is physiological diseases caused by adverse environmental factors; the other is infectious diseases caused by fungi. At present, the prevention and control methods for post-harvest storage and transportation diseases of fruits mainly include chemical control, physical control and biological control. Among them, chemical control mostly uses fungicides, but the large-scale use of fungicides has caused the increase of pathogen resistance, thereby reducing its original bactericidal efficacy and shortening its service life; compared with chemical treatment, simple physical control has a shorter disease control time and the control effect is not long enough; biological control refers to a new preservation method that uses antagonism between microorganisms to screen microbial strains or antibiotics that do not cause harm to agricultural products to prevent and control post-harvest diseases. However, the biocontrol efficacy of currently screened biocontrol bacteria and other substances is not as good as that of chemical fungicides, and they are selective for pathogens, and the control effect is unstable, which is easily affected by environmental factors such as post-harvest temperature. Therefore, how to prevent and control fungal diseases during fruit storage and transportation, extend storage time, and improve preservation effect has become a major issue in the fruit industry.

[0003] PhenylethylAlcohol, molecular formula C8H 10 O, a colorless viscous liquid, slightly soluble in water, soluble in organic solvents such as oil, alcohol, ether, etc. Phenylethanol is an aromatic primary alcohol widely found in nature, with a delicate and lasting rose aroma. It is widely used as a spice in perfumes, cosmetics, detergents, synthetic rose oils and soaps, and as a flavoring agent in food and beverages. Summary of the invention

[0004] In view of this, the object of the present invention is to provide a method for preventing and controlling post-harvest diseases of fruits using phenylethanol and its application, wherein the method can reduce the damage of diseases to fruits during storage, extend the shelf life, and reduce the pollution caused by common chemical preservatives.

[0005] In order to achieve the above-mentioned object of the invention, the present invention provides the following technical solutions:

[0006] The invention provides a method for preventing and controlling post-harvest diseases of fruits by using phenylethanol. The method comprises the following steps: soaking the fruits with 45% phenylethanol after picking, and placing them to dry naturally after air drying; or fumigating the fruits with 20-1500 μL / L phenylethanol at room temperature after picking, and storing them in a ventilated warehouse after packaging.

[0007] Preferably, the 45% phenylethanol is diluted and then used to soak the fruits.

[0008] More preferably, the dilution multiple is 800 to 10,000 times.

[0009] Preferably, the soaking time is 3 to 10 minutes.

[0010] Preferably, the fumigation time is 1 to 3 days.

[0011] Preferably, the method further comprises spraying the fruits with 45% phenylethanol 7 days before the fruits are picked.

[0012] More preferably, the 45% phenylethanol is diluted and then sprayed on fruits.

[0013] Preferably, the fruit comprises one or more of mango, banana, grape, lychee, passion fruit, strawberry, dragon fruit, persimmon and sugar apple.

[0014] The invention also provides application of the method in fruit preservation.

[0015] The invention also provides application of the method in inducing disease resistance of fruits.

[0016] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:

[0017] The present invention uses headspace solid phase microextraction-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry technology to separate and identify an active substance phenylethanol in the flesh of the diseased and healthy junction of mango infected by anthrax fungi. The experimental results show that phenylethanol is a defense substance produced by mango, and the substance has the biological activity of inducing fruit resistance. The present invention uses the biologically active substance phenylethanol in the storage and preservation of fruits such as mango, banana, grape, lychee, passion fruit, strawberry, dragon fruit, persimmon, and sugar apple. After the fruit is picked, the fruit is soaked with 800-10,000 times of 45% phenylethanol solution for 3-10 minutes; or after the fruit is picked, the fruit is fumigated with 20-1500 μL / L phenylethanol at room temperature for 1-3 days. The method of the present invention is operated at room temperature, does not require special equipment, is simple and easy to operate, reduces the damage of diseases to fruits during storage, prolongs the shelf life, reduces the pollution caused by ordinary chemical preservatives, is safe and non-toxic to the human body, is highly effective, has no drug resistance to pathogens, and does not pollute the environment. It is a pollution-free biological antiseptic and disease prevention technology. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0018] Figure 1 This is the VOCs test result of diseased mangoes placed naturally;

[0019] Figure 2 This is the VOCs test result of naturally placed disease-free mangoes;

[0020] Figure 3 The VOCs test results of diseased mangoes after inoculation with anthrax spore suspension;

[0021] Figure 4 The VOCs test results of healthy mango fruit tissues that were not inoculated with anthrax spore suspension;

[0022] Figure 5 The incidence of mango lesions 3 days after the mangoes were fumigated with different concentrations of phenylethanol. From left to right, the treatment concentrations of phenylethanol are 0μL / L, 2μL / L, 20μL / L, 80μL / L, 300μL / L, and 1500μL / L.

[0023] Figure 6 The disease conditions of post-harvest mangoes soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is the blank control treatment, B is the 45% prochloraz 1000-fold solution treatment, C is the 45% phenylethanol 800-fold solution treatment, D is the 45% phenylethanol 1000-fold solution treatment, and E is the 45% phenylethanol 1200-fold solution treatment;

[0024] Figure 7 The disease incidence of mangoes fumigated with phenylethanol at different concentrations. The treatment concentrations of phenylethanol from the top row to the bottom row are 0μL / L, 2μL / L, 20μL / L, 80μL / L, 300μL / L, and 1500μL / L.

[0025] Figure 8 The disease situation of mango fruits after spraying phenylethanol before harvesting and soaking in phenylethanol after harvesting. In the figure, A is the blank control group, B is the non-bagging treatment, and C is the bagging treatment;

[0026] Fig. 9 The disease incidence of bananas soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is a blank control treatment, B is a 45% prochloraz 1000-fold solution treatment, C is a 45% phenylethanol 800-fold solution treatment, D is a 45% phenylethanol 1000-fold solution treatment, E is a 45% phenylethanol 1200-fold solution treatment;

[0027] Fig.10 The disease incidence of grapes soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is the blank control treatment, B is the 45% prochloraz 1000 times liquid treatment, C is the 45% phenylethanol 1500 times liquid treatment, D is the 45% phenylethanol 2000 times liquid treatment, E is the 45% phenylethanol 4000 times liquid treatment;

[0028] Fig.11The disease incidence of litchi soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is the blank control treatment, B is the 45% prochloraz 1000 times liquid treatment, C is the 45% phenylethanol 800 times liquid treatment, D is the 45% phenylethanol 1000 times liquid treatment, E is the 45% phenylethanol 1200 times liquid treatment;

[0029] Fig.12 The disease situation of passion fruit soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is the blank control treatment, B is the 1000-fold solution of 45% prochloraz, C is the 1500-fold solution of 45% phenylethanol, D is the 2000-fold solution of 45% phenylethanol, and E is the 4000-fold solution of 45% phenylethanol;

[0030] Fig.13 The incidence of strawberries soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is a blank control treatment, B is a 45% prochloraz 1000-fold solution treatment, C is a 45% phenylethanol 1500-fold solution treatment, D is a 45% phenylethanol 2000-fold solution treatment, E is a 45% phenylethanol 4000-fold solution treatment;

[0031] Fig.14 The incidence of strawberries fumigated with different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is 0 μL / L of phenylethanol treatment, B is 20 μL / L of phenylethanol treatment, C is 60 μL / L of phenylethanol treatment, D is 180 μL / L of phenylethanol treatment, and E is 540 μL / L of phenylethanol treatment;

[0032] Fig.15 The incidence of pitaya after soaking in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is a blank control treatment, B is a 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution treatment, C is a 45% phenylethanol 2000 times solution treatment, D is a 45% phenylethanol 6000 times solution treatment, E is a 45% phenylethanol 10000 times solution treatment;

[0033] Fig.16 The disease situation of persimmons soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol, A in the figure is the blank control treatment, B is the 45% prochloraz 1000 times liquid treatment, C is the 45% phenylethanol 1000 times liquid treatment, D is the 45% phenylethanol 1500 times liquid treatment, E is the 45% phenylethanol 5000 times liquid treatment, F is the 45% phenylethanol 10000 times liquid treatment;

[0034] Fig.17 This is the disease situation of sugar-apple fruits soaked in different concentrations of phenylethanol. The treatments from the top to the bottom in the figure are the blank control treatment, the disease situation of sugar-apple fruits soaked in 1000 times of 45% phenylethanol solution, the disease situation of sugar-apple fruits soaked in 1500 times of 45% phenylethanol solution, and the disease situation of sugar-apple fruits soaked in 3000 times of 45% phenylethanol solution. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0035] The present invention provides a method for preventing and controlling post-harvest diseases of fruits by using phenylethanol, the method comprising the following steps: soaking the fruits with 45% phenylethanol after picking, drying and then naturally placing them to dry; or fumigating the fruits with 20-1500 μL / L phenylethanol at room temperature after picking, and storing them in a ventilated warehouse after packaging. In the present invention, the 45% phenylethanol can be prepared by using a conventional organic solvent. The present invention preferably uses 0.05% Tween 80 to prepare a 45% phenylethanol mother liquor, and then dilutes the 45% phenylethanol mother liquor with a 0.05% Tween 80 solution.

[0036] In the present invention, the dilution multiple is preferably 800 to 10,000 times, more preferably 6,000 times, 1,000 to 8,000 times, or 2,000 to 4,000 times. The present invention can perform dilution treatments at different multiples according to different fruits. The present invention can still achieve a good effect of preventing and controlling diseases in fruits after diluting phenylethanol.

[0037] In the present invention, the soaking time is preferably 3 to 10 minutes, more preferably 5 minutes or 4 to 8 minutes.

[0038] In the present invention, the fumigation time is preferably 1 to 3 days, more preferably 2 days.

[0039] In the present invention, the method preferably further comprises spraying the fruit with 45% phenylethanol 7 days before the fruit is picked. In the present invention, the 45% phenylethanol can be prepared using a conventional organic solvent. In the present invention, 0.05% Tween 80 is preferably used to prepare a 45% phenylethanol mother liquor, and then the 45% phenylethanol mother liquor is diluted with a 0.05% Tween 80 solution. In the present invention, the dilution multiple is preferably 800 to 2000 times, more preferably 1500 times or 1000 to 1800 times.

[0040] In the present invention, the fruit includes but is not limited to one or more of mango, banana, grape, lychee, passion fruit, strawberry, pitaya, persimmon and sugar apple.

[0041] The invention also provides application of the method in fruit preservation.

[0042] The invention also provides application of the method in inducing disease resistance of fruits.

[0043] The technical solutions provided by the present invention are described in detail below in conjunction with the embodiments, but they should not be construed as limiting the protection scope of the present invention.

[0044] The experimental methods in the following examples are conventional methods unless otherwise specified. The experimental materials used in the following examples are commercially available products unless otherwise specified.

[0045] Example 1

[0046] Mango infected with anthrax produces volatile substance phenylethanol

[0047] (1) Test pathogens, test fruits, and test drugs

[0048] Test pathogen: Colletotrichum sp.

[0049] Experimental Fruit: Taiwan Agricultural Products

[0050] Test reagents: phenylethanol, saturated sodium chloride, 1-octanol, etc.

[0051] (2) Test methods

[0052] The ripe fruits of Taiwanese farmers were collected and placed at room temperature. When the fruits showed typical symptoms of anthracnose, the tissues at the junction of diseased and healthy mangoes and healthy mangoes from the same batch were taken out, and the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in them were identified using headspace solid phase microextraction and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

[0053] Anthrax spores were inoculated on Tainong mangoes. When the disease was obvious, the diseased and healthy mango tissues and healthy mango tissues of the corresponding maturity were taken, and the VOCs components were identified using headspace solid phase microextraction and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

[0054] according to Figure 1 to Figure 4 The results showed that the mass spectrometry peak of phenylethanol appeared at a retention time of about 13.9 min in the fruit tissues of the naturally diseased farmers in Taiwan. Figure 1 ), while no mass spectrometric peak of phenylethanol was detected in healthy mango fruit tissues of corresponding maturity placed at room temperature ( Figure 2 In addition, the mass spectrum peak of phenylethanol was detected at a retention time of about 13.9 min in the diseased tissue inoculated with anthrax spores ( Figure 3 ), while no mass spectrometric peak of phenylethanol was detected in healthy mango fruit tissue that was not inoculated with pathogens ( Figure 4 ). The results showed that mangoes infected with anthracnose produced volatile phenylethanol.

[0055] Example 2

[0056] This example verifies the induction resistance of phenylethanol to mango fruit

[0057] (1) Test pathogens, test fruits, and test drugs

[0058] Test pathogen: Colletotrichum sp.

[0059] Experimental fruit: slightly green after being picked from the orchard

[0060] Test agents: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80, sodium hypochlorite

[0061] (2) Test methods

[0062] The mangoes were fumigated in sealed jars with 2, 20, 80, 300, and 1500 μL / L phenylethanol for 3 days after harvest, and no phenylethanol was added as a blank control. Then the mangoes were disinfected with 2% sodium hypochlorite, washed with 0.05% Tween 80, and then washed twice with sterile water. After the mangoes were dried, four holes were pierced on the surface of the fruit with a sterile toothpick, and 20 μL of 1*10 7 cfu / mL suspension of anthrax spores was injected into the hole with a syringe, and a moistened filter paper was placed over the hole. Sterile water was added every day to maintain humidity. The inoculated mangoes were placed in a plastic box, lined with kitchen paper, and sterile water was added to keep the moisture.

[0063] Each treatment had 5 fruits and each treatment was repeated 2 times. The treated mangoes were kept moist at 28℃. When the blank control was obviously diseased, the diameter of the lesions was measured with a vernier caliper using the cross method, and the LSD method was used for significant difference analysis.

[0064] Table 1 Differences in resistance of mango fruit induced by fumigation with different concentrations of phenylethanol

[0065] Phenylethanol fumigation concentration (μL / L) Diameter of lesion (cm) 0μL / L (blank control) 5.91±0.42A 2μL / L 5.18±0.52AB 20μL / L 4.62±0.32B 80μL / L 5.31±0.51AB 300μL / L 5.31±0.43AB 1500μL / L 4.33±0.34B

[0066] Note: Different letters in the table indicate extremely significant differences (P < 0.01). After fumigating mangoes with 0, 2, 20, 80, 300, and 1500 μL / L phenylethanol for 3 days, mangoes were disinfected with 2% sodium hypochlorite, washed with 0.05% Tween 80, and then washed twice with sterile water. Then, anthracnose spore suspension was inoculated and cultured at 28°C for 12 days. The diameter of anthracnose lesions of mangoes in each treatment was measured.

[0067] According to Table 1 and Figure 5 It can be seen that the diameter of mango anthracnose lesions treated with 20μL / L and 1500μL / L phenylethanol was significantly smaller than that of mango anthracnose lesions without fumigation (blank control) (P<0.01). The results showed that fumigation of post-harvest mangoes with 20μL / L and 1500μL / L phenylethanol induced resistance in mango fruits.

[0068] Example 3

[0069] This example studies the control effect of phenylethanol immersion treatment on postharvest diseases of mangoes

[0070] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0071] Experimental fruit: slightly green after being picked from the orchard

[0072] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0073] (2) Test methods

[0074] The harvested mangoes were soaked in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 800 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1200 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) were used as each treatment solution. The soaked fruits were then placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 8 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0075] Observe the disease situation every day. When the blank control becomes obviously diseased, refer to the symptom grading standard of "Technical Procedures for Identification of Disease and Pest Resistance of Tropical Crop Germplasm Resources" edited by Xie Yixian and Fu Yueguan and the following formula to investigate the disease situation.

[0076] Level 0: no lesions; Level 1: lesion area accounts for less than 5% (including 5%) of the fruit area; Level 3: lesion area accounts for 6% to 15% of the fruit area; Level 5: lesion area accounts for 16% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 7: lesion area accounts for 26% to 50% of the fruit area; Level 9: lesion area accounts for more than 50% (including 50%) of the fruit area.

[0077] Good fruit rate (%) = number of good fruits / total number of fruits × 100%; disease index = ∑ (number of disease-grade fruits × number of disease-grade representatives) / (total number of surveyed fruits × number of representatives of the most serious disease grade) × 100; disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0078] The data were sorted out using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average good fruit rate, average disease index and average disease prevention effect.

[0079] Table 2 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on post-harvest disease prevention of mangoes

[0080] deal with Good fruit rate (%) Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 27.50±9.41Bce 38.61±6.34Aa -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 62.50±2.83Aab 17.50±3.44Bb 55.12±2.68Bb 45% phenylethanol 800 times dilution 75.00±1.92Aa 9.44±2.51Bb 75.99±4.40Aa 45% phenylethanol 1000 times solution 47.50±4.38ABbcd 18.61±2.00Bb 50.24±2.63Bb 45% phenylethanol 1200 times dilution 47.50±2.76ABbc 13.61±2.66Bb 65.08±1.17ABab

[0081] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0082] According to Table 2 and Figure 6As shown in Figures A to E, the good fruit rate of mangoes treated with 800 times dilution of 45% phenylethanol was significantly higher than that of untreated mangoes (blank control) (P < 0.05), and the disease index of mangoes treated with 800 times dilution of 45% phenylethanol, 1000 times dilution of 45% phenylethanol and 1200 times dilution of 45% phenylethanol was extremely significantly lower than that of the blank control (P < 0.01).

[0083] The control effects of 800 times, 1000 times and 1200 times of 45% phenylethanol were 75.99%, 50.24% and 65.08% respectively, and the control effect of 1000 times of 45% prochloraz was 55.12%. The disease control effects of 1000 times and 1200 times of 45% phenylethanol were equivalent to that of 1000 times of 45% prochloraz, and the disease control effect of 800 times of 45% phenylethanol was significantly higher than that of 1000 times of 45% prochloraz.

[0084] The results showed that treatment with 800, 1000 and 1200 times of 45% phenylethanol had an anti-corrosion and anti-disease effect on mango, and the prevention efficiency could reach 75.99%.

[0085] Example 4

[0086] This example studies the control effect of phenylethanol fumigation on postharvest diseases of mangoes

[0087] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0088] Experimental fruit: slightly green after being picked from the orchard

[0089] Test agent: Phenylethanol

[0090] (2) Test methods

[0091] In a sealed cylinder, a culture dish with a diameter of 11 cm was placed at the bottom, and dry filter paper was placed in each culture dish. Different amounts of phenylethanol were dripped into the filter paper, so that the fumigation concentrations of phenylethanol were 2μL / L, 20μL / L, 80μL / L, 300μL / L, and 1500μL / L, respectively. No phenylethanol was added to the blank control group. Mangoes were placed on the partition, covered with a lid, and the lid was sealed with a sealing film. The experiment set up one treatment with 3 replicates, one replicate with 4 fruits, and one replicate with a sealed cylinder. After 3 days of fumigation at 28±2℃, the filter paper with phenylethanol was taken out.

[0092] Observe the disease situation every day. When the blank control becomes obviously diseased, refer to the symptom grading standard of "Technical Procedures for Identification of Disease and Pest Resistance of Tropical Crop Germplasm Resources" edited by Xie Yixian and Fu Yueguan and the following formula to investigate the disease situation.

[0093] Level 0: no lesions; Level 1: lesion area accounts for less than 5% (including 5%) of the fruit area; Level 3: lesion area accounts for 6% to 15% of the fruit area; Level 5: lesion area accounts for 16% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 7: lesion area accounts for 26% to 50% of the fruit area; Level 9: lesion area accounts for more than 50% (including 50%) of the fruit area.

[0094] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0095] The data were sorted using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average disease index and the average disease prevention effect.

[0096] Table 3 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol fumigation on post-harvest disease prevention of mangoes

[0097] Phenylethanol fumigation concentration (μL / L) Average disease index Average control effect (%) 0μL / L (blank control) 33.33ABb -- 2μL / L 37.65±1.3ABab -12.96 20μL / L 12.96±1.54Cc 61.11±3.25Aa 80μL / L 32.72±2.31Bb 1.85 300μL / L 46.91±0.71Aa -40.74 1500μL / L 16.98±3.12Cc 49.07±12.47Aa

[0098] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0099] According to Table 3 and Figure 7 It can be seen that the disease index of mangoes treated with 20μL / L and 1500μL / L fumigation was significantly lower than that of the blank control (P<0.01), and the prevention efficiency against post-harvest diseases of mangoes was 61.11% and 49.07% respectively.

[0100] The results showed that 20μL / L and 1500μL / L fumigation treatments had anti-corrosion and anti-disease effects on mango, with the highest protection rate reaching 60.11%.

[0101] Example 5

[0102] This example studies the control effect of spraying phenylethanol before harvesting + soaking phenylethanol after harvesting on postharvest diseases of mangoes

[0103] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0104] Experimental Fruit: Taiwan Agricultural Products

[0105] Test drugs: phenylethanol, Tween 80

[0106] (2) Test methods

[0107] 7 days before picking, the fruits were sprayed with 1500 times of 45% phenylethanol solution, and the treatment was divided into bagging treatment and non-bagging treatment. The fruits were picked and returned to the laboratory and soaked in 1500 times of 45% phenylethanol solution. The blank control was not treated. One of the treatments was repeated 4 times, and one repeat had 10 fruits. The disease situation was observed every day. When the blank control was obviously diseased, the disease situation was investigated according to the symptom grading standard and the following formula of "Technical Regulations for Identification of Disease and Pest Resistance of Tropical Crop Germplasm Resources" edited by Xie Yixian and Fu Yueguan.

[0108] Level 0: no lesions; Level 1: lesion area accounts for less than 5% (including 5%) of the fruit area; Level 3: lesion area accounts for 6% to 15% of the fruit area; Level 5: lesion area accounts for 16% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 7: lesion area accounts for 26% to 50% of the fruit area; Level 9: lesion area accounts for more than 50% (including 50%) of the fruit area.

[0109] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0110] The data were sorted using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average disease index and the average disease prevention effect.

[0111] Table 4 Pre-harvest spraying of phenylethanol + post-harvest soaking in phenylethanol on the control effect of post-harvest diseases of mangoes

[0112] deal with Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 43.89±4.94Aa -- No bagging 32.22±3.38Aa 22.87±8.95Aa Bagging 36.11±3.92Aa 15.34±7.41Aa

[0113] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0114] According to Table 4 and Figure 8 From A to C, we can see that the control effect of spraying phenylethanol before harvesting and soaking phenylethanol after harvesting on the diseases of post-harvest mangoes is 22.87% and 15.34% respectively. The results show that spraying phenylethanol before harvesting and soaking phenylethanol after harvesting have a certain control effect on post-harvest diseases of mangoes.

[0115] Example 6

[0116] This example studies the effect of phenylethanol soaking on the prevention and control of banana postharvest diseases

[0117] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0118] Test fruit: green unripe Guangxi banana

[0119] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0120] (2) Test methods

[0121] The harvested bananas were soaked in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 800 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1200 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) were used as each treatment solution. The soaked fruits were then placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 10 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0122] Observe the disease situation every day. When the blank control becomes obviously diseased, refer to the symptom grading standard of "Technical Procedures for Identification of Disease and Pest Resistance of Tropical Crop Germplasm Resources" edited by Xie Yixian and Fu Yueguan and the following formula to investigate the disease situation.

[0123] Level 0: no lesions; Level 1: lesion area accounts for less than 5% (including 5%) of the fruit area; Level 3: lesion area accounts for 6% to 15% of the fruit area; Level 5: lesion area accounts for 16% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 7: lesion area accounts for 26% to 50% of the fruit area; Level 9: lesion area accounts for more than 50% (including 50%) of the fruit area.

[0124] Good fruit rate (%) = number of good fruits / total number of fruits × 100%; disease index = ∑ (number of disease-grade fruits × number of disease-grade representatives) / (total number of surveyed fruits × number of representatives of the most serious disease grade) × 100; disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0125] The data were sorted using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average disease index and the average disease prevention effect.

[0126] Table 5 The control effect of different concentrations of phenylethanol on banana postharvest diseases

[0127] deal with Good fruit rate (%) Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 0A 48.61±6.46ABa -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 0A 20.14±1.48ABb 52.12±5.59Aa 45% phenylethanol 800 times dilution 0A 58.33±7.03Aa -22.48 45% phenylethanol 1000 times solution 6.25±11.95Aa 22.22±6.33ABb 57.59±5.88Aa 45% phenylethanol 1200 times dilution 3.125±10.35Aa 17.01±3.49Bb 63.95±2.7Aa

[0128] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0129] According to Table 5 and Fig. 9From Figures A to E, it can be seen that the disease index of bananas treated with 1000-fold and 1200-fold diluted 45% phenylethanol was significantly lower than that of the blank control (P < 0.05), and the protective effects were 57.59% and 63.95%, respectively, which were equivalent to the protective effect of 1000-fold diluted 45% prochloraz.

[0130] The results showed that 45% phenylethanol 1000 times and 1200 times diluted treatments had a preventive effect on banana postharvest diseases, with a preventive efficiency of up to 63.95%.

[0131] Example 7

[0132] This example studies the effect of phenylethanol soaking on the prevention and control of postharvest diseases of grapes

[0133] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0134] Test fruit: Seedless white

[0135] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0136] (2) Test methods

[0137] The harvested grapes were soaked in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1500 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 2000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 4000 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) as each treatment solution. Then the soaked fruits were placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 8 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0138] The incidence was observed every day. When the blank control showed obvious disease, the incidence was investigated according to the method of Yu Feifei et al., based on the grading of the lesion area to the total area and the following formula.

[0139] Level 0: no lesions; Level 1: lesions < 1 / 4; Level 2: 1 / 4 ≤ lesions < 1 / 2; Level 3: 1 / 2 ≤ lesions < 3 / 4; Level 4: 3 / 4 ≤ lesions.

[0140] Good fruit rate (%) = number of good fruits / total number of fruits × 100%; disease index = ∑ (number of disease-grade fruits × number of disease-grade representatives) / (total number of surveyed fruits × number of representatives of the most serious disease grade) × 100; disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0141] The data were sorted out using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average good fruit rate, average disease index and average disease prevention effect.

[0142] Table 6 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on post-harvest grape disease prevention

[0143] deal with Good fruit rate (%) Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 43.75±3.62BCc 52.34±3.5Bb -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 87.5±6.34Aa 5.47±4.77Dd 90.72±6.33Aa 45% phenylethanol 1500 times dilution 59.37±1.81Bb 28.13±1.83Cc 45.35±2.36Bb 45% phenylethanol 2000 times solution 0De 89.06±1.56Aa -78.84 45% phenylethanol 4000 times dilution 28.12±1.94Cd 59.38±0.74Bb -18.61

[0144] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences of p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences of p < 0.05

[0145] According to Table 6 and Fig.10 From A to E, we can see that the disease index of grapes treated with 1500 times 45% phenylethanol solution was significantly lower than that of the blank control (P<0.01), and the disease prevention effect was 45.35%. The results showed that the treatment with 1500 times 45% phenylethanol solution had a preventive effect on postharvest grape diseases.

[0146] Example 8

[0147] This example studies the control effect of phenylethanol soaking on postharvest diseases of litchi

[0148] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0149] Experimental Fruit: Concubine's Smile

[0150] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0151] (2) Test methods

[0152] Litchi was soaked in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 800 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1200 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) were used as each treatment solution. Then the soaked fruits were placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 10 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0153] The disease situation was observed every day. When the disease in the blank control was obvious, the fruit disease situation grading standard was referred to the method of Jiang Xuanliang et al., and the disease situation was investigated using the following formula.

[0154] Level 0 means no lesions or water stains; Level 1 means less than 1 / 4 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains; Level 2 means 1 / 4 to 1 / 2 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains; Level 3 means 1 / 2 to 3 / 4 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains; Level 4 means more than 3 / 4 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains.

[0155] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0156] The data were sorted out using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average good fruit rate, average disease index and average disease prevention effect.

[0157] Table 7 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on post-harvest disease prevention of litchi

[0158] deal with Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 68.75±2.09Aa -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 64.38±2.08Aa 6.43±1.27Aa 45% phenylethanol 800 times dilution 65.00±0.61Aa 5.01±5.4ABab 45% phenylethanol 1000 times solution 61.88±2.21Aa 10.13±1.84Aa 45% phenylethanol 1200 times dilution 65.00±4Aa 5.88±5.79ABab

[0159] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0160] According to Table 7 and Fig.11 From A to E, we can see that the control effects of 800, 1000 and 1200 times dilution of 45% phenylethanol on litchi postharvest diseases are 5.01%, 10.13% and 5.88%, which are equivalent to the control effect of 1000 times dilution of 45% prochloraz. The results show that 800, 1000 and 1200 times dilution of 45% phenylethanol have certain control effects on litchi postharvest diseases.

[0161] Example 9

[0162] This example studies the control effect of phenylethanol soaking on passion fruit postharvest diseases

[0163] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0164] Test fruit: Golden passion fruit

[0165] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0166] (2) Test methods

[0167] The passion fruit was soaked in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1500 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 2000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 4000 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) as each treatment solution. Then the soaked fruit was placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 8 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0168] The disease situation was observed every day. When the disease in the blank control was obvious, the fruit disease situation grading standard was referred to the method of Wang Honglin et al., and the disease situation was investigated using the following formula.

[0169] Level 0 means no lesions or water stains; Level 1 means less than 1 / 4 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains; Level 2 means 1 / 4 to 1 / 2 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains; Level 3 means 1 / 2 to 3 / 4 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains; Level 4 means more than 3 / 4 of the fruit area is diseased or has water stains.

[0170] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0171] The data were sorted out using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average good fruit rate, average disease index and average disease prevention effect.

[0172] Table 8 The control effect of different concentrations of phenylethanol on passion fruit postharvest diseases

[0173]

[0174]

[0175] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0176] According to Table 8 and Fig.12From A to E, it can be seen that the disease index of passion fruit treated with 45% phenylethanol 1500 times solution was significantly lower than that of blank control (P < 0.01). The control effects of 45% phenylethanol 1500 times solution, 2000 times solution and 4000 times solution were 18.17%, 9.81% and 15.04% respectively. The control effect of 45% phenylethanol 1500 times solution was equivalent to that of 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution. The results showed that soaking in 45% phenylethanol 1500 times solution had a preventive effect on postharvest diseases of passion fruit.

[0177] Example 10

[0178] This example studies the control effect of phenylethanol soaking on postharvest strawberry diseases

[0179] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0180] Experimental Fruit: Cream Strawberry

[0181] Test agent: Phenylethanol

[0182] (2) Test methods

[0183] The harvested strawberries were soaked in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 1000 times solution of 45% prochloraz, 1500 times solution of 45% phenylethanol solution, 2000 times solution of 45% phenylethanol solution, and 4000 times solution of 45% phenylethanol solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) were used as each treatment solution. The soaked fruits were then placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment was set up with 4 replicates for one treatment, 8 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0184] The disease situation was observed every day. When the blank control was obviously diseased, the fruit disease situation grading standard was referred to the method of Si Linyuan et al., and the disease situation was investigated using the following formula.

[0185] Level 0: no rot, no lesions; Level 1: the rot area is less than 10% of the fruit area; Level 2: the rot area accounts for 10% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 3: the rot area accounts for 25% to 40% of the fruit area; Level 4: the rot area is greater than 40% of the total fruit area.

[0186] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0187] The data were sorted out using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average good fruit rate, average disease index and average disease prevention effect.

[0188] Table 9 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on post-harvest strawberry disease prevention

[0189] deal with Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 81.25±3.56Aa -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 38.28±2.64Bc 53.25±3.96Aa 45% phenylethanol 1000 times solution 71.09±3.78Aab 12.75±7.61Bb 45% phenylethanol 1500 times dilution 57.81±3.85ABb 29.25±7.55ABab 45% phenylethanol 2000 times solution 69.53±4.75Aab 14.70±15.5Bb

[0190] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0191] From Table 9 and Fig.13 From A to E, it can be seen that the disease index of strawberries treated with 1500 times diluted 45% phenylethanol was significantly lower than that of the blank control (P < 0.01), and the disease prevention effect was 29.25%, which was equivalent to that of 1000 times diluted 45% prochloraz.

[0192] The results showed that soaking in 1500 times diluted 45% phenylethanol had a preventive and therapeutic effect on post-harvest diseases of strawberries.

[0193] Embodiment 11

[0194] This example studies the control effect of phenylethanol fumigation on postharvest strawberry diseases

[0195] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0196] Experimental Fruit: Cream Strawberry

[0197] Test agent: Phenylethanol

[0198] (2) Test methods

[0199] In a sealed cylinder, a culture dish with a diameter of 11 cm was placed at the bottom, and dry filter paper was placed in each culture dish. Different amounts of phenylethanol were dripped into the filter paper to make the fumigation concentrations of phenylethanol reach 20μL / L, 60μL / L, 180μL / L, and 540μL / L, respectively. No phenylethanol was added to the blank control group. Mangoes were placed on the partition, covered with a lid, and the lid was sealed with a sealing film. The experiment was set up with 4 replicates per treatment, 8 fruits per replicate, and a sealed cylinder per replicate. After fumigation at 28±2℃ for 24 hours, the filter paper with phenylethanol was taken out.

[0200] The disease situation was observed every day. When the blank control was obviously diseased, the fruit disease situation grading standard was referred to the method of Si Linyuan et al., and the disease situation was investigated using the following formula.

[0201] Level 0: no rot, no lesions; Level 1: the rot area is less than 10% of the fruit area; Level 2: the rot area accounts for 10% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 3: the rot area accounts for 25% to 40% of the fruit area; Level 4: the rot area is greater than 40% of the total fruit area.

[0202] Good fruit rate (%) = number of good fruits / total number of fruits × 100%; disease index = ∑ (number of disease-grade fruits × number of disease-grade representatives) / (total number of surveyed fruits × number of representatives of the most serious disease grade) × 100; disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0203] The data were sorted out using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average good fruit rate, average disease index and average disease prevention effect.

[0204] Table 10 The control effect of different concentrations of phenylethanol fumigation on post-harvest strawberry diseases

[0205] Phenylethanol fumigation concentration (μL / L) Good fruit rate (%) Average disease index Average control effect (%) 0μL / L (blank control) 77.50±1.66ABab 10.00±1.39Aa -- 20μL / L 60.00±5.5Bb 13.13±3.62Aa -21.67 60μL / L 80.00±9.33ABab 5.63±4.72Aab 51.67 180μL / L 92.50±6.7Aa 2.50±3.86Ab 80 540μL / L 77.50±5.28ABab 10.00±3.78Aa 10

[0206] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0207] From Table 10 and Fig.14 From A to E, we can see that the disease index of strawberries treated with 180μL / L phenylethanol fumigation was significantly lower than that of the blank control (P<0.05). The control effects of 60μL / L, 180μL / L and 540μL / L phenylethanol fumigation were 51.67%, 80% and 10% respectively.

[0208] The results showed that phenylethanol fumigation had a preventive and therapeutic effect on post-harvest strawberry diseases, with a preventive efficiency of up to 80%.

[0209] Example 12

[0210] This example studies the effect of phenylethanol soaking treatment on the prevention and control of postharvest diseases of pitaya

[0211] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0212] Test fruit: Pitaya

[0213] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0214] (2) Test methods

[0215] The harvested pitaya was placed in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 2000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 6000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 10000 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) as each treatment solution. Then the soaked fruit was placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 8 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0216] The disease situation was observed every day. When the blank control showed obvious disease, the ulcer disease situation of all fruits was graded according to the method of Lin Shanyu et al., and the disease situation was investigated using the following formula.

[0217] Level 0: no lesions; Level 1: the lesion area accounts for less than 5% of the total area of ​​the fleshy stem (fruit); Level 3: the lesion area accounts for 6% to 10% of the total area of ​​the fleshy stem (fruit); Level 5: the lesion area accounts for 11% to 25% of the total area of ​​the fleshy stem (fruit); Level 7: the lesion area accounts for 26% to 50% of the total area of ​​the fleshy stem (fruit); Level 9: the lesion area accounts for more than 51% of the total area of ​​the fleshy stem (fruit).

[0218] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0219] The data were sorted using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average disease index and the average disease prevention effect.

[0220] Table 11 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on postharvest disease prevention of pitaya

[0221] deal with Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 67.36±10.76ABa -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 11.11Cc 81.84±2.389Aa 45% phenylethanol 2000 times solution 20.83±4.12BCbc 70.04±3.173Aa 45% phenylethanol 6000 times dilution 59.02±5.30ABCab 13.66±6.730Bb 45% phenylethanol 10000 times dilution 80.55±13.79Aa -17.80

[0222] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0223] According to Table 11 and Fig.15 As shown in Figures A to E, the disease index of pitaya treated with 2000 times 45% phenylethanol solution was significantly lower than that of the blank control (P < 0.01).

[0224] The control effects of 2000-fold and 6000-fold dilutions of 45% phenylethanol were 70.03% and 12.92% respectively, and the control effect of 1000-fold dilution of 45% prochloraz was 81.84%. The disease control effect of 2000-fold dilution of 45% phenylethanol was equivalent to that of 1000-fold dilution of 45% prochloraz, with no significant difference.

[0225] The results showed that soaking in 2000 times diluted 45% phenylethanol had a preventive and therapeutic effect on post-harvest diseases of pitaya, with a preventive efficiency of up to 70.03%.

[0226] The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principle of the present invention. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present invention.

[0227] Embodiment 13

[0228] This example studies the effect of phenylethanol soaking on the prevention and control of postharvest diseases of persimmon

[0229] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0230] Test fruit: Persimmon

[0231] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0232] (2) Test methods

[0233] The harvested persimmons were placed in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% prochloraz 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1500 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 5000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 10000 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) were used as each treatment solution. The soaked fruits were then placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment set up 4 replicates for one treatment, 8 fruits for one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box for one replicate.

[0234] Observe the incidence of the disease every day, and when the blank control becomes obviously ill, use the following formula to investigate the incidence of the disease.

[0235] Level 0, no lesions; Level 1: The lesion area accounts for less than 5% of the fruit area; Level 3: The lesion area accounts for 6% to 15% of the fruit area; Level 5: The lesion area accounts for 16% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 7: The lesion area accounts for 26%-50% of the fruit area; Level 9: The lesion area accounts for more than 51% of the fruit area.

[0236] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0237] The data were sorted using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average disease index and the average disease prevention effect.

[0238] Table 12 Effects of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on post-harvest disease prevention of persimmons

[0239] deal with Good fruit rate (%) Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 0A 92.36±6.88Aab -- 45% Prochloraz 1000 times dilution 0A 61.81±11.46Aab 33.89±10.61Aa 45% phenylethanol 1000 times solution 37.50±17.32Bb 64.58±11.21Aab 31.17±10.20Aa 45% phenylethanol 1500 times dilution 0A 58.33±12.07Ab 37.68±11.3Aa 45% phenylethanol 5000 times dilution 0A 98.61±3.41Aa -7.63 45% phenylethanol 10000 times dilution 0A 66.67±10.53Aab 28.50±9.53Aa

[0240] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0241] According to Table 12 and Fig.16 As shown in Figures A to F, the good fruit rate of persimmons treated with 1000 times 45% phenylethanol solution was significantly higher than that of the blank control (P < 0.01).

[0242] The control effects of 1000 times, 1500 times and 10000 times of 45% phenylethanol were 31.17%, 37.68% and 12.92% respectively, and the control effect of 1000 times of 45% prochloraz was 33.89%. The disease control effects of 1000 times, 1500 times and 10000 times of 45% phenylethanol were equivalent to those of 1000 times of 45% prochloraz, with no significant difference.

[0243] The results showed that soaking in 1000-fold, 1500-fold and 10000-fold dilutions of 45% phenylethanol had a preventive and therapeutic effect on postharvest diseases of persimmon, with the highest preventive effect reaching 37.68%.

[0244] Embodiment 14

[0245] This example studies the effect of phenylethanol soaking on the prevention and control of postharvest diseases of Custard Apple

[0246] (1) Experimental fruits and experimental drugs

[0247] Test fruit: Custard apple

[0248] Test drugs: phenylethanol, prochloraz, Tween 80

[0249] (2) Test methods

[0250] The harvested sugar apples were placed in each treatment solution for 5 minutes, of which 0.05% Tween 80 solution was used as a blank control solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1000 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 1500 times solution, 45% phenylethanol solution 3000 times solution (phenylethanol was dissolved in 0.05% Tween 80 as a mother solution, and then diluted with 0.05% Tween 80 solution) were used as each treatment solution. Then the soaked fruits were placed in a fresh-keeping box, covered with a lid, and placed at 28±2℃. The experiment was set up with one treatment and one replicate, four fruits in one replicate, and one fresh-keeping box in one replicate.

[0251] Observe the incidence of the disease every day, and when the blank control becomes obviously ill, use the following formula to investigate the incidence of the disease.

[0252] Level 0: no rot, no lesions; Level 1: the rot area is less than 10% of the fruit area; Level 2: the rot area accounts for 10% to 25% of the fruit area; Level 3: the rot area accounts for 25% to 40% of the fruit area; Level 4: the rot area is greater than 40% of the total fruit area.

[0253] Disease index = ∑ (number of disease level results × number of disease level representatives) / (total number of surveyed results × number of representatives of the most serious disease level) × 100; Disease prevention effect (%) = (blank control disease index - treatment disease index) / blank control disease index × 100%.

[0254] The data were sorted using Excel software, and variance analysis was performed using DPS software according to the arcsine square root transformation and Ducan's new multiple range method to calculate the average disease index and the average disease prevention effect.

[0255] Table 13 Effect of different concentrations of phenylethanol soaking on disease prevention of sugar apple after harvest

[0256] deal with Good fruit rate (%) Average disease index Average control effect (%) Blank control 0 50 -- 45% phenylethanol 1000 times solution 0 31.25 37.5 45% phenylethanol 1500 times dilution 25 25 50 45% phenylethanol 3000 times dilution 0 50 0

[0257] Note: Capital letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.01, and lowercase letters indicate significant differences at p < 0.05

[0258] According to Table 13 and Fig.17 It can be seen that the disease index of sugar-apple fruit treated with 1000 times and 1500 times of 45% phenylethanol was lower than that of the blank control, and the prevention efficiency was 37.5% and 50% respectively.

[0259] The results showed that soaking in 1000-fold and 1500-fold diluted 45% phenylethanol had a preventive and therapeutic effect on post-harvest diseases of sugar-apple fruit, with the highest preventive effect reaching 50%.

[0260] The above is only a preferred embodiment of the present invention. It should be pointed out that for ordinary technicians in this technical field, several improvements and modifications can be made without departing from the principle of the present invention. These improvements and modifications should also be regarded as the scope of protection of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for preventing and controlling postharvest diseases of fruits using phenylethanol, characterized in that: The method comprises the following steps: soaking the fruits with 45% phenylethanol after picking, and leaving them to dry naturally after drying; or fumigating the fruits with 20-1500 μL / L phenylethanol at room temperature after picking, and storing them in a ventilated warehouse after packaging.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The 45% phenylethanol is diluted and then used to soak the fruits.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that The dilution multiple is 800 to 10,000 times.

4. The method according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that: The soaking time is 3 to 10 minutes.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that: The fumigation time is 1 to 3 days.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The method further comprises spraying the fruits with 45% phenylethanol 7 days before the fruits are picked.

7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that The 45% phenylethanol was diluted and then sprayed on the fruits.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that The fruits include one or more of mango, banana, grape, lychee, passion fruit, strawberry, dragon fruit, persimmon and sugar apple.

9. Use of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8 in the preservation and freshness of fruits.

10. Use of the method according to any one of claims 1 to 8 in inducing disease resistance in fruits.

Images