4.4 Article

Estimation of soybean rust uredospore terminal velocity, dry deposition, and the wet deposition associated with rainfall

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLANT PATHOLOGY
卷 123, 期 4, 页码 377-386

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10658-008-9374-2

关键词

Epidemiology; Kudzu; Phakopsora pachyrhizi; Rainfall rate; Scavenging coefficient

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using models from atmospheric chemistry and physics, this study examined the wet deposition of single uredospores of soybean rust caused by Phakopsora pachyrhizi associated with rainfall and its importance compared with dry deposition. First, a measurement of the terminal velocity of freshly collected P. pachyrhizi uredospores was conducted in Nanning, China. The observed terminal velocities associated with different sizes of the uredospore clumps were fitted by negative exponential models. The average terminal velocity of single uredospores (0.0187 m s(-1)) determined by the fitted models was used to estimate the dry deposition. The wet deposition of single uredospores associated with different rainfall rates was determined numerically using coupled models, in which raindrop capture efficiency of uredospores was based on Slinn's semi-empirical model. The results showed that at a rainfall rate of 0.5 mm h(-1), wet deposition can remove 50% of the single uredospores in the air within 1 h. If the rainfall rate is 5 mm h(-1), 10 min is sufficient to remove 50% of the uredospores. The dry deposition of the single uredospores was estimated with simplified scenarios: i.e., assuming the uredospore cloud was continuously from 1,000 to 2,000 m in height above a field with a uniform concentration. In the first 16 h, almost no uredospores reached the ground, while the wet deposition caused by 2 mm h(-1) rainfall within 30 min was even much greater than dry deposition of 24 h duration. The comparisons indicated that the wet deposition of soybean rust uredospores was much more efficient than the dry deposition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据