magistrsko delo
Anja Pustoslemšek (Author), Stanislav Trdan (Mentor), Magda Rak Cizej (Co-mentor)

Abstract

Navadna pršica (Tetranychus urticae) je pomemben škodljivec hmelja. Za njeno zatiranje je v Sloveniji registrirano majhno število kemičnih pripravkov, tudi zato je škodljivec razvil odpornost na nekatere aktivne snovi. Leta 2015 smo v proizvodnem hmeljišču v Spodnji Savinjski dolini za varstvo hmelja pred navadno pršico vnesli plenilsko pršico Neoseiulus californicus. Učinkovitost plenilca smo spremljali s štetjem mobilnih osebkov in jajčec navadne pršice na listih hmelja na treh različnih višinah hmelja. Štetje smo opravili v štirih terminih, v vseh treh dekadah julija in prvi dekadi avgusta. Za primerjavo smo navadno pršico spremljali na rastlinah, kjer nismo nanašali akaricidov (negativna kontrola) in na rastlinah, kjer smo uporabljali akaricide za varstvo hmelja pred navadno pršico (pozitivna kontrola). Uporabili smo pripravka z aktivnima snovema abamektin (Vertimec Pro) in heksitiazoks (Nissorun 10 WP). Na rastlinah, kjer smo izvajali biotično varstvo, je število mobilnih oblik navadne pršice najprej upadlo, nato pa se ni več bistveno spreminjalo. Z gospodarskega vidika je pomemben podatek delež poškodovanosti storžkov hmelja. V vsakem obravnavanem postopku smo v štiri razrede, glede na poškodbe storžkov, razvrstili po 30 storžkov s srednje in 30 storžkov z zgornje višine rastline. V vseh obravnavanjih je bil največji delež nepoškodovanih in malo poškodovanih storžkov (0-5 % poškodb). Deleži poškodovanih storžkov se niso bistveno razlikovali med biotičnim (22,2 ± 6,3 %) in kemičnim varstvom (25,0 ± 5,0 % in 24,8 ± 5,6 %) ter kontrolo (25,0 ± 7,2 %).

Keywords

hmeljarstvo;Humulus lupulus;biotično varstvo rastlin;navadna pršica;Tetranychus utricae;plenilska pršica;Neoseiulus californicus;poljski poskus;

Data

Language: Slovenian
Year of publishing:
Typology: 2.09 - Master's Thesis
Organization: UL BF - Biotechnical Faculty
Publisher: [A. Turnšek]
UDC: 632.937.1.03:595.42(043.2)
COBISS: 9382009 Link will open in a new window
Views: 518
Downloads: 122
Average score: 0 (0 votes)
Metadata: JSON JSON-RDF JSON-LD TURTLE N-TRIPLES XML RDFA MICRODATA DC-XML DC-RDF RDF

Other data

Secondary language: English
Secondary title: Biological control of two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae Koch) on hop with predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus (McGregor)
Secondary abstract: Two-spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae) is an important pest of hop. For its control in Slovenia only few acaricides are registered, and also for this reason the pest already developed the resistance to some active ingredients. In 2015, we used for the first time the predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus against two-spotted spider mite in hop garden in Spodnja Savinjska dolina. The efficacy of the predator was evaluated with counting the mobile stages and eggs of two-spotted spider mite on the leaves of hop on three different heights. The countings were performed four times, namely in all three decades of July and in the first decade of August. For comparison, two-spotted spider mites were monitored in hop plants, where no acaricides were used (negative control), and in hop plants, where acaricides were applied for controlling the mites (positive control). The acaricides we used in positive control were Vertimec Pro (active ingredient Abamectin), and Nissorun 10 WP (a.i. Hexythiazox). In the plants, where we used the biological control agents, the number of mobile stages decreased in the beginning, but afterwards the their number was stable. From the economical point of view, the percentage of hop cones injured from the two-spotted spider mite, is the most important. In all four treatments we classified 30 hop cones from the middle height and 30 hop cones from the highest height in four classes regarding the % of damage caused by two-spotted spider mite. In all four treatments we recorded the highest % of healthy (without injuries) and only slightly injured hop cones (0-5 % injuries). The % of injured hop cones was not statistically different among the treatments (control 25,0 ± 2,7 %, biological control 22,2 ± 6,3 %, FFS1 25,0 ± 5,0 %, FFS2 24,8 ± 5,6 %).
Secondary keywords: hop;biotic control;two-spotted spider mite;predatory mite;field experiment;
Type (COBISS): Master's thesis/paper
Study programme: 0
Embargo end date (OpenAIRE): 1970-01-01
Thesis comment: Univ. v Ljubljani, Biotehniška fak., Oddelek za agronomijo
Pages: IX, 41 f.
ID: 11356409