| |
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA La Estanzuela; INIA Treinta y Tres. |
|
Fecha : |
05/02/2016 |
|
Actualizado : |
26/02/2019 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Nacionales |
|
Autor : |
BERETTA, A.; BASSAHUN, D.; MUSSELLI, R.; TORRES, D. |
|
Afiliación : |
ANDRES NICOLAS BERETTA BLANCO, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; DANIEL FERNANDO BASSAHUN RODRIGUEZ, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; BEATRIZ RAQUEL MUSSELLI NEGRIN, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; DEBORAH LUCIANA TORRES GUERRERO, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay. |
|
Título : |
Medición de pH del suelo con papel reactivo. (Soil pH measurement with reactive paper test.) |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2015 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Agrociencia Uruguay, 2015, v. 19, n. 2, p. 68-74. |
|
ISSN : |
1510-0839 |
|
Idioma : |
Español |
|
Notas : |
Historia del artículo: Recibido: 25/6/14 Aceptado: 6/2/15. |
|
Contenido : |
RESUMEN.
Los papeles reactivos al pH (tirillas) podrían ser útiles para medir pH del suelo. El objetivo fue evaluar la precisión y exactitud de estas medidas. Se comparó la medición de pH (suelo:agua 1:2,5) en 51 muestras de suelo, por tres métodos: con electrodo (pH_electrodo); con tirilla inmediatamente de ser sumergida en el sobrenadante luego de 20 minutos de reposo (pH_T); y con la misma tirilla luego de dos horas de secada, rehumedecida y lavada (pH_T_RL). Se utilizaron tirillas Millipore®, graduadas por unidad de pH, estimándose los valores intermedios. Se analizó carbono orgánico del suelo (COS) y conductividad eléctrica (CE) en cada muestra. Los valores pH_electrodo fueron tomados como referencia. Las lecturas pH_T y pH_T_RL tuvieron una relación aceptable (R2 de 0,50 y 0,48, respectivamente) con pH_electrodo, aunque subestimaron en promedio 0,44 y 0,21 unidades de pH, respectivamente. Con el contenido de carbono orgánico y pH_T o pH_T_RL, se estimó satisfactoriamente el valor de pH_electrodo y la diferencia promedio fue de -0,02 y 0,24 unidades de pH, respectivamente. Hubo concordancia aceptable al clasificar la acidez del suelo por pH_electrodo, por pH_T_RL o por pH estimado a partir de pH_T y carbono orgánico. Al realizar una calibración entre lecturas de pH con tirillas en función del contenido de COS y las mediciones de pH con electrodo, es posible utilizar las lecturas de pH con tirilla como una medida orientativa para clasificar la acidez del suelo.
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
SUMMARY.
The pH test papers (strips) may be useful for measuring soil pH. The pH values for 51 samples were measured. The objective was evaluate the precision and accuracy of these measures. We compared three methods to measure the pH (soil:water 1:2.5): electrode (pH_electrodo); paper test strips either immediately after inmersion (pH_T), or two hours after inmersion (pH_T_RL). Millipore® pH paper strips graduated per unit of pH were used. Electrical conductivity (EC) and soil organic carbon (SOC) were analyzed in each sample. The pH_electrodo values were taken as reference. The pH_T and pH_T_RL values had an acceptable relationship with pH_electrode values, with R2 of 0.50 and 0.48, respectively. These methods, however, underestimated the average pH_electrodo values in 0.44 and 0.21 pH units, respectively. When the value of pH_electrodo was estimated by organic carbon, pH_T or pH_T_RL showed acceptable fits were obtained and the average differences between pH_electrodo and estimated pH_electrodo were -0.02 and 0.24 units, respectively. Therefore, would be no differences when assigning soils to acidity classes if pH were measured by pH_T_RL methods or estimated by pH_T or pH_T_RL and organic carbon. The pH measured by strip can be used as value to classify soil acidity if previously a calibration based on SOC contents and pH measurements by electrode was made. MenosRESUMEN.
Los papeles reactivos al pH (tirillas) podrían ser útiles para medir pH del suelo. El objetivo fue evaluar la precisión y exactitud de estas medidas. Se comparó la medición de pH (suelo:agua 1:2,5) en 51 muestras de suelo, por tres métodos: con electrodo (pH_electrodo); con tirilla inmediatamente de ser sumergida en el sobrenadante luego de 20 minutos de reposo (pH_T); y con la misma tirilla luego de dos horas de secada, rehumedecida y lavada (pH_T_RL). Se utilizaron tirillas Millipore®, graduadas por unidad de pH, estimándose los valores intermedios. Se analizó carbono orgánico del suelo (COS) y conductividad eléctrica (CE) en cada muestra. Los valores pH_electrodo fueron tomados como referencia. Las lecturas pH_T y pH_T_RL tuvieron una relación aceptable (R2 de 0,50 y 0,48, respectivamente) con pH_electrodo, aunque subestimaron en promedio 0,44 y 0,21 unidades de pH, respectivamente. Con el contenido de carbono orgánico y pH_T o pH_T_RL, se estimó satisfactoriamente el valor de pH_electrodo y la diferencia promedio fue de -0,02 y 0,24 unidades de pH, respectivamente. Hubo concordancia aceptable al clasificar la acidez del suelo por pH_electrodo, por pH_T_RL o por pH estimado a partir de pH_T y carbono orgánico. Al realizar una calibración entre lecturas de pH con tirillas en función del contenido de COS y las mediciones de pH con electrodo, es posible utilizar las lecturas de pH con tirilla como una medida orientativa para clasificar la acidez del suelo.
.-.-.-.-... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
CARBONO ORGÁNICO DEL SUELO; COLORIMETRÍA; COLORIMETRY; ORGANIC CARBON; POTENCIOMETRÍA; POTENTIOMETRY; TÉCNICAS ANALÍTICAS; VALORACIÓN POTENCIOMÉTRICA. |
|
Thesagro : |
PH DEL SUELO. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
P33 Química y física del suelo |
|
URL : |
http://www.ainfo.inia.uy/digital/bitstream/item/5484/1/Agrociencia2015v19-n2-p.68-74-BERETTA.pdf
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 03779naa a2200289 a 4500
001 1054173
005 2019-02-26
008 2015 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a1510-0839
100 1 $aBERETTA, A.
245 $aMedición de pH del suelo con papel reactivo. (Soil pH measurement with reactive paper test.)
260 $c2015
500 $aHistoria del artículo: Recibido: 25/6/14 Aceptado: 6/2/15.
520 $aRESUMEN. Los papeles reactivos al pH (tirillas) podrían ser útiles para medir pH del suelo. El objetivo fue evaluar la precisión y exactitud de estas medidas. Se comparó la medición de pH (suelo:agua 1:2,5) en 51 muestras de suelo, por tres métodos: con electrodo (pH_electrodo); con tirilla inmediatamente de ser sumergida en el sobrenadante luego de 20 minutos de reposo (pH_T); y con la misma tirilla luego de dos horas de secada, rehumedecida y lavada (pH_T_RL). Se utilizaron tirillas Millipore®, graduadas por unidad de pH, estimándose los valores intermedios. Se analizó carbono orgánico del suelo (COS) y conductividad eléctrica (CE) en cada muestra. Los valores pH_electrodo fueron tomados como referencia. Las lecturas pH_T y pH_T_RL tuvieron una relación aceptable (R2 de 0,50 y 0,48, respectivamente) con pH_electrodo, aunque subestimaron en promedio 0,44 y 0,21 unidades de pH, respectivamente. Con el contenido de carbono orgánico y pH_T o pH_T_RL, se estimó satisfactoriamente el valor de pH_electrodo y la diferencia promedio fue de -0,02 y 0,24 unidades de pH, respectivamente. Hubo concordancia aceptable al clasificar la acidez del suelo por pH_electrodo, por pH_T_RL o por pH estimado a partir de pH_T y carbono orgánico. Al realizar una calibración entre lecturas de pH con tirillas en función del contenido de COS y las mediciones de pH con electrodo, es posible utilizar las lecturas de pH con tirilla como una medida orientativa para clasificar la acidez del suelo. .-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-. SUMMARY. The pH test papers (strips) may be useful for measuring soil pH. The pH values for 51 samples were measured. The objective was evaluate the precision and accuracy of these measures. We compared three methods to measure the pH (soil:water 1:2.5): electrode (pH_electrodo); paper test strips either immediately after inmersion (pH_T), or two hours after inmersion (pH_T_RL). Millipore® pH paper strips graduated per unit of pH were used. Electrical conductivity (EC) and soil organic carbon (SOC) were analyzed in each sample. The pH_electrodo values were taken as reference. The pH_T and pH_T_RL values had an acceptable relationship with pH_electrode values, with R2 of 0.50 and 0.48, respectively. These methods, however, underestimated the average pH_electrodo values in 0.44 and 0.21 pH units, respectively. When the value of pH_electrodo was estimated by organic carbon, pH_T or pH_T_RL showed acceptable fits were obtained and the average differences between pH_electrodo and estimated pH_electrodo were -0.02 and 0.24 units, respectively. Therefore, would be no differences when assigning soils to acidity classes if pH were measured by pH_T_RL methods or estimated by pH_T or pH_T_RL and organic carbon. The pH measured by strip can be used as value to classify soil acidity if previously a calibration based on SOC contents and pH measurements by electrode was made.
650 $aPH DEL SUELO
653 $aCARBONO ORGÁNICO DEL SUELO
653 $aCOLORIMETRÍA
653 $aCOLORIMETRY
653 $aORGANIC CARBON
653 $aPOTENCIOMETRÍA
653 $aPOTENTIOMETRY
653 $aTÉCNICAS ANALÍTICAS
653 $aVALORACIÓN POTENCIOMÉTRICA
700 1 $aBASSAHUN, D.
700 1 $aMUSSELLI, R.
700 1 $aTORRES, D.
773 $tAgrociencia Uruguay, 2015$gv. 19, n. 2, p. 68-74.
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA La Estanzuela (LE) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
|
|
|
Registro completo
|
|
Biblioteca (s) : |
INIA Las Brujas. |
|
Fecha actual : |
15/06/2021 |
|
Actualizado : |
15/06/2021 |
|
Tipo de producción científica : |
Artículos en Revistas Indexadas Internacionales |
|
Circulación / Nivel : |
Internacional - -- |
|
Autor : |
PRETI, M.; KNIGHT, A.L.; MUJICA, V.; BASOALTO, E.; FAVARO, R.; ANGELI, S. |
|
Afiliación : |
MICHELE PRETI, Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy.; ALAN LEE KNIGHT, Instar Biologicals, Yakima, WA, USA.; MARIA VALENTINA MUJICA TELIZ, INIA (Instituto Nacional de Investigación Agropecuaria), Uruguay; ESTEBAN BASOALTO, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Instituto de Producción y Sanidad Vegetal, Universidad Austral de Chile, Valdivia, Chile.; RICCARDO FAVARO, Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy.; SERGIO ANGELI, Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy. |
|
Título : |
Developing female removal for Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in organic pear in the USA and Italy. |
|
Complemento del título : |
Original contribution. |
|
Fecha de publicación : |
2021 |
|
Fuente / Imprenta : |
Journal of Applied Entomology, 2021. OPEN ACCESS. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12918 |
|
ISSN : |
0931-2048 |
|
DOI : |
https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12918 |
|
Idioma : |
Inglés |
|
Notas : |
Article history: Received 10 February 2021; Revised 19 May 2021; Accepted 20 May 2021; First published: 05 June 2021.
Corresponding author: Angeli, S.; Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy; email:sergio.angeli@unibz.it |
|
Contenido : |
ABSTRACT.
Seventeen trials were conducted using traps baited with kairomone-based lures to evaluate female removal (FR) as an effective management tactic for codling moth, Cydia pomonella, L., in organic pear, Pyrus communis L., production in Italy and USA during 2019?2020. Studies included paired plots (0.4?1.4 ha) treated with or without 60 traps ha?1 in cultivars Bartlett and Abate Fétel. Paired plots were also treated together with or without mating disruption (MD) and with similar spray programmes. Three-, four-, and five-component lures were used with several trap types: green, clear or green/white bucket traps and orange delta traps. The three-component lure consisted of (E,E)-8,10-dodecadien-1-ol (sex pheromone, PH), (E,Z)-2,4-ethyl decadienoate (pear ester, PE) and acetic acid (AA); the four-component lure was PE, (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene (DMNT), 6-ethenyl-2,2,6-trimethyloxan-3-ol (pyranoid linalool oxide, LOX), and AA, and the five-component lure had PH added. Preliminary studies were also conducted to evaluate the trapping efficacy of non-saturating bucket traps. A clear bucket trap baited with PE/DMNT/LOX + AA captured 97-fold more codling moth females than an orange delta trap baited with PH/PE. However, female captures did not differ between traps when both were baited with the four-component lure. Fruit injury from codling moth was significantly reduced with the implementation of FR in both pear production regions. At harvest, mean fruit protection in the USA studies was 65% and 27% in Italy. This difference was likely associated with the four-component lure being less effective in Italy than in the USA. Nevertheless, results demonstrate that FR can be a useful approach to remove females immigrating into orchards and as a new tactic to reduce pest pressure in selected areas of orchards allowing both MD and organic insecticide programmes to be more effective. Further studies should investigate the cost-benefit of matching the intensity of FR to variable pest pressures.
© 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Entomology published by Wiley-VCH GmbH. MenosABSTRACT.
Seventeen trials were conducted using traps baited with kairomone-based lures to evaluate female removal (FR) as an effective management tactic for codling moth, Cydia pomonella, L., in organic pear, Pyrus communis L., production in Italy and USA during 2019?2020. Studies included paired plots (0.4?1.4 ha) treated with or without 60 traps ha?1 in cultivars Bartlett and Abate Fétel. Paired plots were also treated together with or without mating disruption (MD) and with similar spray programmes. Three-, four-, and five-component lures were used with several trap types: green, clear or green/white bucket traps and orange delta traps. The three-component lure consisted of (E,E)-8,10-dodecadien-1-ol (sex pheromone, PH), (E,Z)-2,4-ethyl decadienoate (pear ester, PE) and acetic acid (AA); the four-component lure was PE, (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene (DMNT), 6-ethenyl-2,2,6-trimethyloxan-3-ol (pyranoid linalool oxide, LOX), and AA, and the five-component lure had PH added. Preliminary studies were also conducted to evaluate the trapping efficacy of non-saturating bucket traps. A clear bucket trap baited with PE/DMNT/LOX + AA captured 97-fold more codling moth females than an orange delta trap baited with PH/PE. However, female captures did not differ between traps when both were baited with the four-component lure. Fruit injury from codling moth was significantly reduced with the implementation of FR in both pear production regions. At harvest, mean fruit protection in... Presentar Todo |
|
Palabras claves : |
Bucket trap; Codling moth; Mass trapping; Organic pest management. |
|
Thesagro : |
PYRUS COMMUNIS. |
|
Asunto categoría : |
F01 Cultivo |
|
URL : |
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jen.12918
|
|
Marc : |
LEADER 03209naa a2200277 a 4500
001 1062137
005 2021-06-15
008 2021 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
022 $a0931-2048
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12918$2DOI
100 1 $aPRETI, M.
245 $aDeveloping female removal for Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera$bTortricidae) in organic pear in the USA and Italy.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2021
500 $aArticle history: Received 10 February 2021; Revised 19 May 2021; Accepted 20 May 2021; First published: 05 June 2021. Corresponding author: Angeli, S.; Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy; email:sergio.angeli@unibz.it
520 $aABSTRACT. Seventeen trials were conducted using traps baited with kairomone-based lures to evaluate female removal (FR) as an effective management tactic for codling moth, Cydia pomonella, L., in organic pear, Pyrus communis L., production in Italy and USA during 2019?2020. Studies included paired plots (0.4?1.4 ha) treated with or without 60 traps ha?1 in cultivars Bartlett and Abate Fétel. Paired plots were also treated together with or without mating disruption (MD) and with similar spray programmes. Three-, four-, and five-component lures were used with several trap types: green, clear or green/white bucket traps and orange delta traps. The three-component lure consisted of (E,E)-8,10-dodecadien-1-ol (sex pheromone, PH), (E,Z)-2,4-ethyl decadienoate (pear ester, PE) and acetic acid (AA); the four-component lure was PE, (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene (DMNT), 6-ethenyl-2,2,6-trimethyloxan-3-ol (pyranoid linalool oxide, LOX), and AA, and the five-component lure had PH added. Preliminary studies were also conducted to evaluate the trapping efficacy of non-saturating bucket traps. A clear bucket trap baited with PE/DMNT/LOX + AA captured 97-fold more codling moth females than an orange delta trap baited with PH/PE. However, female captures did not differ between traps when both were baited with the four-component lure. Fruit injury from codling moth was significantly reduced with the implementation of FR in both pear production regions. At harvest, mean fruit protection in the USA studies was 65% and 27% in Italy. This difference was likely associated with the four-component lure being less effective in Italy than in the USA. Nevertheless, results demonstrate that FR can be a useful approach to remove females immigrating into orchards and as a new tactic to reduce pest pressure in selected areas of orchards allowing both MD and organic insecticide programmes to be more effective. Further studies should investigate the cost-benefit of matching the intensity of FR to variable pest pressures. © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Entomology published by Wiley-VCH GmbH.
650 $aPYRUS COMMUNIS
653 $aBucket trap
653 $aCodling moth
653 $aMass trapping
653 $aOrganic pest management
700 1 $aKNIGHT, A.L.
700 1 $aMUJICA, V.
700 1 $aBASOALTO, E.
700 1 $aFAVARO, R.
700 1 $aANGELI, S.
773 $tJournal of Applied Entomology, 2021. OPEN ACCESS. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12918
Descargar
Esconder MarcPresentar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original : |
INIA Las Brujas (LB) |
|
|
Biblioteca
|
Identificación
|
Origen
|
Tipo / Formato
|
Clasificación
|
Cutter
|
Registro
|
Volumen
|
Estado
|
Volver
|
| Expresión de búsqueda válido. Check! |
|
|
