JP4436426B2 - Soil reduction disinfection method, soil reduction disinfectant, soil wetting disinfection method, soil wetting disinfectant and soil disinfectant irrigation system - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to a soil reduction disinfection method, a soil reduction disinfectant, a soil wetting disinfection method, a soil wetting disinfectant, and a soil disinfectant irrigation system. Specifically, soil remediation method, soil reductive disinfectant for controlling soil pests such as phytopathogenic fungi and nematodes in soil, germination control of weeds; soil pest control such as phytopathogenic fungi and nematodes in soil, weed control The present invention relates to a soil moistening / disinfecting method, a soil moistening / disinfecting agent for germination control, and the like, and a soil disinfectant irrigation system for controlling pest pathogens, nematodes and other soil pests during weeding, and weed germination control.

When cultivation of a single crop is repeated in a field or horticultural facility, phytopathogenic fungi and nematodes in the soil increase, and growth often deteriorates and witheres. Such continuous cropping failures are mostly caused by phytopathogenic fungi and nematodes in the soil, leading to a decrease in crop yield and quality. In order to avoid these soil diseases and enable continuous cultivation in a certain field, various drugs and methods have been used conventionally.

Among them, soil sterilization by soil fumigation is one of the effective methods to control pests inhabiting the soil surface or the surface of the soil to grow the crops soundly, and various drugs are used. There are problems to some extent. For example, methyl bromide, which has been used in the world's most abundant and wide-ranging crops as a soil disinfectant, was designated as an ozone-depleting substance at the 1992 Montreal Protocol Parties Meeting and decided to be abolished in 2005 It was done. Therefore, countries around the world are promoting the development of alternative technologies and drugs to switch to control that does not rely on methyl bromide. Currently, phytopathogens including methyl bromide control, pest control such as nematodes, and weed control agents include chlorpicrin, DD (1,3-dichloropropene), sodium N-methyldithiocarbamate, methyl Isothiocyanate, dazomet and the like are known.

However, the above drugs have the following problems.
(1) Chlorpicrin is a drug that is difficult for users to handle due to its tearing and irritation properties, and it can cause irritating odors and other damage not only to workers but also to the vicinity.
(2) Although DD, sodium N-methyldithiocarbamate, and methylisothiocyanate are effective against soil nematodes, they cannot be said to be sufficient for phytopathogenic fungi and have little expectation of weed control.
(3) Dazomet agents require sufficient soil moisture retention and use of covering materials, and if treated with low soil moisture, gasification is insufficient and the residual period of chemicals in the soil becomes longer, resulting in phytotoxicity after planting. Occurs.

In view of the above-mentioned problems, research and development have been conducted on methods capable of soil disinfection without resorting to chemical control. Hot water disinfection methods, steam disinfection methods, and solar heat disinfection methods have been proposed and implemented in part. Has been. The solar heat disinfection method is aimed at killing plant pathogens under low oxygen conditions by solar heat and organic oxygen reduction, killing pests such as nematodes, and suppressing weed germination, but it is effective if the temperature is high or if the clear sky does not continue Not right.

As an improvement method, a soil reduction disinfection method has been proposed in which rice bran or bran is soaked in the soil (soil), thoroughly irrigated, covered with a transparent plastic film, and exposed to sunlight for 3 to 4 days. (Non-Patent Document 1). In addition, a soil mixture that is easily degradable by soil and microorganisms and contains organic matter (eg, crop residue containing bran, rice bran, sucrose, rice straw, etc.) mixed in a predetermined mixing ratio with the soil. The filling step of filling a resin bag having water impermeability (for example, a polyethylene bag), and the soil mixture filled in the resin bag by the filling step with water having a volume exceeding the field capacity Supplying and making the soil mixture infiltrated, closing the bag mouth of the resin bag, blocking the ventilation of the soil mixture and the outside air, filling the interior of the soil mixture and There has been proposed a reduction and disinfection method by soil filling, characterized in that it comprises a standing step of standing the sealed resin bag under a predetermined temperature condition (Patent Document 1).

However, the method of Non-Patent Document 1 requires a rice bran, bran or the like to be sown from the surface of the soil to a depth of 20 to 30 cm, that is, soil, but is difficult by human power and requires a cultivator. There is a problem. In addition, rice bran, bran and the like are bulky, so there is a problem that transportation and storage to agricultural land are not easy. When rice bran, bran, etc. are sown into the soil and put into a reduced state, there is a problem that the bad odor is bad and may cause pollution.

The reductive disinfection method by soil filling described in Patent Document 1 aims at disinfection of soil used for small-scale agriculture or home gardening, that is, soil reconstitution disinfection of only a desired amount of soil. It is not intended to be disinfected. The standing process is remarkably long, being about 3 weeks at 20 ° C. or higher. Rice bran, bran, etc. contain a large amount of nitrogen, so the soil after soil disinfection has an excessive amount of nitrogen, and depending on the crop, the growth is hindered, making it difficult to grow. The weight ratio of the organic matter to the soil in the reductive disinfection method by soil filling described in Patent Document 1 is in the range of 0.5% by weight or more and 10.0% by weight or less, and this reductive disinfection method is applied to the entire field of 1 hectare. Then, approximately 15 to 30 t / ha of bran and rice bran are required (the “soil”, which is a soil layer for cultivating and cultivating crops, is 30 cm from the surface, and the specific gravity of “soil” is 1000 kg / m. ³ ).

As an improvement method of the reductive disinfection method described in Non-Patent Document 1, sterilizing a subsoil is characterized by irrigating a molasses aqueous solution to the soil, maintaining the soil temperature in a range of 25 to 40 ° C., and reducing the soil. A soil disinfecting method has been proposed that is effective and that can effectively control soil pests present in the subsoil (Patent Document 2).

The molasses aqueous solution in the soil disinfection method described in Patent Document 2 is diluted by 0.4% to 0.8%, and an amount of 0.4 to 1.2 t / 10a (= 4 to 12 t / ha) is required. . Therefore, molasses requires an amount of 16 to 96 kg / ha. However, molasses is viscous liquid or solid, and there is a problem that it is not easy to dissolve and dilute in water on agricultural land. There is also a problem that ants are generated in large quantities. Furthermore, there is also a problem that the time to reach 25-40 ° C until the subsoil is very limited.

On the other hand, a 70% aqueous ethanol solution commonly used as a disinfectant in medical facilities and general households is effective for sterilization and control of phytopathogenic fungi, but it is inconvenient to transport and handle a high concentration ethanol aqueous solution for agriculture and horticulture. However, it is described in Patent Document 3 that there is a problem. Furthermore, water, brewed vinegar containing acetic acid bacteria, distilled liquor (eg, Binga liquor with an alcohol content of 42%, shochu liquor with an alcohol content of 40%) and sugarcane juice are prepared by mixing and standing. Pest control composition 1 liter; 50-50 liters of water; 1-2 liters of distilled liquor and 0.5-1 liter of sugarcane juice is proposed. Patent Document 4 describes that no disease occurred. However, even if the agricultural and horticultural spray solution described in Patent Document 4 is sprayed on crops, alcohol, that is, ethanol and acetic acid, are likely to volatilize, so the sustainability of the effect is questionable. Moreover, there is a problem that it is not easy to obtain sugarcane juice outside Okinawa. Furthermore, since sugarcane juice contains nitrogen, there is also a problem that the soil after soil disinfection becomes excessive in nitrogen. In the first place, this invention is not intended for soil disinfection.

"FY2002 Japanese Society of Plant Pathology (October 24-25, 2002) JP 2005-112815 A JP 2004-323395 A Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 11-292711 JP-A-4-312507

As a result of intensive research to develop a soil reduction disinfection method, a soil reduction disinfectant, a soil wetting disinfection method, a soil wetting disinfectant, and a soil disinfectant irrigation system that do not have the above-mentioned problems, It was found that an aqueous ethanol solution and an aqueous solution of low-concentration ethanol and acetic acid are effective for soil disinfection and have no such problems, and the present invention has been completed. In addition, a method for effectively disinfecting soil even with a low concentration of ethanol has been found, and the present invention has been completed.
The object of the present invention is to control phytopathogenic fungi and pests such as nematodes in soil, and suppress weed germination, while being an extremely safe and easy-to-handle compound. Soil reduction disinfection method, soil reduction disinfectant; extremely safe and simple, can control phytopathogenic fungi and pests such as nematodes in soil, and can suppress germination of weeds Soil wetting and disinfecting methods, soil wetting and disinfecting agents; soil disinfecting agents for controlling phytopathogenic fungi and nematodes and other pests in soil, and simple soil disinfecting agents for suppressing weed germination in soil It is to provide a soil disinfectant irrigation system that can efficiently supply soil.

The purpose of this is “[1] soil containing an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more) to make it flooded and holding the soil while suppressing evaporation of water and ethanol. Soil sterilization method characterized by disinfecting as a reduced state.
[2] The soil reductive disinfection method according to [1], wherein the ethanol content is 0.1 vol% or more and 7.0 vol% or less.
[2-1] The ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more, preferably 0.4% by volume or more, more preferably 0.5% by volume or more, and 7.0% by volume or less. [2] The soil reduction disinfection method according to [2].
[3] The soil reductive disinfection method according to [1], [2] or [2-1], wherein the disinfection is soil pest control or weed germination control.
[4] Soil reductive disinfection method according to any one of [1] to [3], wherein the soil is soil before sowing or before planting, and the soil is flooded from the bottom to the ground surface. .
[5] Using a liquid fertilizer mixer, ethanol is mixed into water to prepare an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.1 to 20% by volume). The soil reduction disinfection method according to [4], wherein the soil is submerged by irrigation.
[6] The soil reduction and disinfection method according to any one of [1] to [5], wherein the evaporation of water and ethanol is controlled by covering the surface of the soil treated with an ethanol aqueous solution with a plastic film or sheet.
[7] The soil reduction and disinfection method according to any one of [1] to [3], wherein the ethanol evaporation suppression is performed by enclosing the ethanol aqueous solution-treated soil in a plastic film bag.
[8] The soil reductive disinfection method according to any one of [1] to [7], wherein ethanol is a by-product ethanol obtained in the distillation purification process of fermented ethanol.
[9] An aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (however, the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more, and acetic acid is 0.1 to 20% by volume of ethanol) is put in a soiled state and water A soil reduction disinfection method characterized in that the soil is sterilized in a reduced state by holding while suppressing evaporation of ethanol and acetic acid.

[10] A soil-reducing disinfectant comprising an ethanol aqueous solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more).
[11] The soil-reducing disinfectant according to [10], wherein the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more and 7.0% by volume or less.
[11-1] The ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more, preferably 0.4% by volume or more, more preferably 0.5% by volume or more, and 7.0% by volume or less. [11] The soil reduction disinfectant according to [11].
[12] The soil reduction disinfectant according to [10], [11] or [11-1], wherein the disinfection in the soil reduction disinfectant is soil pest control or weed germination control.
[13] The soil-reducing disinfectant according to any one of [10] to [12], wherein ethanol is a by-product ethanol obtained in the distillation purification process of fermented ethanol.
[14] The soil-reducing disinfectant according to any one of [10] to [13], wherein the soil is soil before sowing or before planting.
[15] A soil-reducing disinfectant comprising an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (provided that the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more and acetic acid is 0.1 to 20% by volume of ethanol).

[16] The soil is soaked with an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more) and kept in a moist state (including a flooded state) while suppressing evaporation of water and ethanol. A soil moistening and disinfecting method characterized by disinfecting soil.
[17] The soil moistening / disinfecting method according to [16], wherein the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more and 10% by volume or less.
[17-1] The soil moistening / disinfecting method according to [17], wherein the ethanol content is 0.5% by volume or more, preferably 1.5% by volume or more and 10.0% by volume or less.
[18] The soil moistening / disinfecting method according to [16], [17] or [17-1], wherein the disinfection is suppression of germination of soil pests or weeds.
[19] The soil according to any one of [16] to [18], wherein the soil is soil before sowing or before planting, and the surface is moistened (including a flooded state) from the bottom of the soil. Soil moistening disinfection method.
[20] Using a liquid fertilizer mixer, ethanol is mixed into water to prepare an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3 to 20% by volume), and the aqueous ethanol solution is made into soil using a irrigation tube. The soil moistening / disinfecting method according to [19], wherein the soil is moistened by irrigation.
[21] The soil wetting and disinfecting method according to any one of [16] to [20], wherein the evaporation of water and ethanol is suppressed by covering the surface of the soil treated with an ethanol aqueous solution with a plastic film or sheet.
[22] The soil wetting and disinfecting method according to any one of [16] to [18], wherein the ethanol evaporation suppression is performed by enclosing the aqueous ethanol-treated soil in a plastic film bag.
[23] The soil moistening / disinfecting method according to any one of [16] to [22], wherein the ethanol is a by-product ethanol obtained in a distillation purification process of fermented ethanol.
[24] An aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (however, the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more, and acetic acid is 0.1 to 20% by volume of ethanol) in the soil. A soil moisturizing and disinfecting method characterized in that the soil is disinfected by holding water, ethanol and acetic acid while suppressing evaporation.

[25] A soil-humidifying disinfectant comprising an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more).
[26] The soil wetting and disinfecting agent according to [25], wherein the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more and 10% by volume or less.
[26-1] The soil-humidifying disinfectant according to [26], wherein the ethanol content is 0.5% by volume or more, preferably 1.5% by volume or more and 10.0% by volume or less.
[27] The soil wetting disinfectant according to [25], [26] or [26-1], wherein the disinfecting in the soil wetting disinfecting agent is suppression of germination of soil pests or weeds.
[28] The soil-humidifying disinfectant according to any one of [25] to [27], wherein ethanol is a by-product ethanol obtained in the distillation purification process of fermented ethanol.
[29] The soil moistening disinfectant according to any one of [25] to [28], wherein the soil is soil before sowing or before planting.

[30] Many branches of a water supply pipe having one end connected to a water supply source and the other end connected to an irrigation tube inlet, a liquid fertilizer mixer, an ethanol aqueous solution storage tank, or an ethanol aqueous solution storage tank and an acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank An aqueous solution of ethanol in an aqueous ethanol solution storage tank, or an aqueous ethanol solution storage tank and an acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank, which is disposed in the middle of a water supply pipe connecting the water supply source and the irrigation tube inlet. The soil disinfectant irrigation system is characterized in that the ethanol aqueous solution and the acetic acid aqueous solution are mixed into the water flowing through the water supply pipe at a constant ratio.
[31] A water supply pipe having one end connected to a water supply source and the other end connected to an irrigation tube inlet, a flow resistance device provided in the middle of the water supply pipe, and an upstream side and a downstream side of the flow resistance device Bypass piping to be communicated, closing valves provided at the inlet and outlet of the bypass piping, liquid fertilizer mixer provided in the middle of the bypass piping, ethanol aqueous solution storage tank, or ethanol aqueous solution storage tank and acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank And a multi-branched irrigation tube, and the liquid fertilizer mixer is disposed in the middle of a water supply pipe connecting the water supply source and the irrigation tube inlet, the ethanol aqueous solution in the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank, or the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank and It is characterized in that the ethanol aqueous solution and the acetic acid aqueous solution in the acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank are mixed into the water flowing in the water supply pipe at a constant ratio. Soil disinfectant irrigation system. Is achieved.

Since the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention uses an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid, it is extremely safe, and no harmful components remain in the crops cultivated in the sterilized soil. There are no ants swarming like molasses. Since low concentration is acceptable, only a small amount of high concentration ethanol or high concentration acetic acid is required, so transportation, storage and handling are easy. Easy to prepare by water dilution in the field. Since it is an aqueous solution, it can be quickly and easily penetrated into the soil and into the soil layer. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it is difficult to permeate even with a polyethylene film, and it is easy to suppress evaporation with a plastic film such as polyethylene. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it can be sterilized by reducing the soil, especially the soil, in a short period even at a relatively low ground temperature such as 10-20 ° C. Pest pathogens and nematodes such as nematodes can be effectively controlled, and weed germination can be effectively suppressed.

The soil reduction disinfectant of the present invention has ethanol and water, or ethanol and acetic acid and water as main components, so it is extremely safe, and no harmful components remain in the crops cultivated in the disinfected soil. Low cost. Since low concentrations are acceptable, only a small amount of high-concentration ethanol or high-concentration acetic acid, which is a stock solution, can be transported, stored and handled. Ethanol is extremely water-soluble and can be easily prepared by diluting with water in the field. Since it is an aqueous solution, it can be quickly and easily penetrated into the soil and into the soil layer. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it is difficult to permeate even with a polyethylene film or sheet, and it is easy to suppress evaporation with a plastic film or sheet such as polyethylene. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it can be sterilized by reducing the soil, especially the soil, in a short period even at a relatively low ground temperature such as 10-20 ° C. Pest pathogens and nematodes such as nematodes can be effectively controlled, and weed germination can be effectively suppressed.

Since the soil moistening / disinfecting method of the present invention uses an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid, it is extremely safe and does not cause harmful components to remain in crops cultivated in the disinfected soil. And ants do not flock like molasses. Since low concentration is acceptable, only a small amount of high concentration ethanol or high concentration acetic acid is required, so transportation, storage and handling are easy. Easy to prepare by water dilution in the field. Since it is an aqueous solution, it can be quickly and easily penetrated into the soil and into the soil layer. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it is difficult to permeate even with a polyethylene film, and it is easy to suppress evaporation with a plastic film such as polyethylene. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it can be sterilized by wetting and disinfecting soil, especially soil, in a short period of time even at relatively low soil temperatures of 10-20 ° C. It is possible to effectively control phytopathogenic fungi, pests such as nematodes, and to effectively suppress weed germination.

The soil moisturizing disinfectant of the present invention has ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid and water as the main components, so it is extremely safe and no harmful components remain in crops cultivated in the disinfected soil. , Low cost. Since low concentration is acceptable, only a small amount of high concentration ethanol or high concentration acetic acid is required, so transportation, storage and handling are easy. Ethanol is extremely water-soluble and can be easily prepared by diluting with water in the field. Since it is an aqueous solution, it can be quickly and easily penetrated into the soil and into the soil layer. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it is difficult to permeate even with a polyethylene film or sheet, and it is easy to suppress evaporation with a plastic film or sheet such as polyethylene. Since it is mainly composed of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid, it can be sterilized by wetting and disinfecting soil, especially soil, in a short period of time even at relatively low soil temperatures of 10-20 ° C. It is possible to effectively control phytopathogenic fungi, pests such as nematodes, and to effectively suppress weed germination.

The soil disinfectant irrigation system of the present invention can easily and quickly dilute high-concentration ethanol and high-concentration acetic acid with water to make a low-concentration aqueous solution, and quickly irrigates the soil under the soil without requiring manual labor. be able to.

FIG. 1 is a piping system diagram of a soil disinfectant irrigation system for irrigating an aqueous ethanol solution into soil. FIG. 2 is a piping diagram of a soil disinfectant irrigation system for irrigating a soil with an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid. FIG. 3 is a piping system diagram of a soil disinfectant irrigation system (with bypass piping) for irrigating an aqueous ethanol solution into soil. FIG. 4 is a piping system diagram of a soil disinfectant irrigation system (with bypass piping) for irrigating a soil with an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid. FIG. 5 is a piping diagram of a soil disinfectant irrigation system (automatic system) for irrigating an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid into soil. FIG. 6 is a cross-sectional view showing a state where irrigation is performed from the irrigation tube branch to the soil. FIG. 7 shows changes in the redox potential of the soil. FIG. 8 shows the redox potential and oxygen concentration of the soil. FIG. 9 shows the relationship between the treatment amount of ethanol or the like and the germination rate of lettuce seeds. FIG. 10 shows the relationship between the treatment amount of ethanol or the like and the number of lettuce. FIG. 11 shows the relationship between the treatment amount of ethanol or the like and the weight of lettuce. FIG. 12 shows the relationship between the treatment amount of ethanol and the like and the vegetation coverage of lettuce. FIG. 13 shows the bactericidal effect of ethanol against tomato bacterial wilt. FIG. 14 shows the bactericidal effect of ethanol against tomato bacterial wilt FIG. 15 shows the bactericidal effect of acetic acid against tomato bacterial wilt. FIG. 16 shows the bactericidal effect against cucumber vine split fungi such as ethanol. FIG. 17 shows the bactericidal effect against tomato bacterial wilt such as ethanol. FIG. 18 shows changes in the concentration of acetic acid in soil water. FIG. 19 shows changes in the concentration of acetic acid in soil water. FIG. 20 shows changes in the concentration of acetic acid in soil water. FIG. 21 shows the film transmission rate of ethanol. FIG. 22 shows the film transmission rate of chlorpicrin. FIG. 23 shows the film transmission rate of dichloropropene. FIG. 24 shows the film transmission rate of methyl isothiocyanate.

Explanation of symbols

1 Water supply pipe 2 Liquid fertilizer mixer 2 'Liquid fertilizer mixer (with pump)
DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 3 Filter 4 Flow adjustment valve 5 Ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 6 Acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 7 Irrigation tube 7a Irrigation tube branch part 8 Flow resistance device 9 Bypass piping 10 Shut-off valve 11 Flowmeter 12 Control panel 12a Control microcomputer 13 Film 14 Disinfection object soil

The soil reduction disinfectant used in the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention and the soil reduction disinfectant of the present invention are ethanol aqueous solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more) or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (however, The ethanol content is 0.1 volume% or more, and the acetic acid is 0.1 to 20 volume% of ethanol). In the present invention, the volume% which is a unit of an ethanol aqueous solution or the like is a value at an atmospheric temperature of 15 ° C. The lower limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution is preferably 0.3% by volume, more preferably 0.4% by volume, and still more preferably 0.5% by volume from the viewpoint of the reduction and disinfection effect. The upper limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution or in the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution is not particularly limited. However, if the ethanol content is too high, the ethanol content is wasted, and from the viewpoints of flammability and economy, the aqueous ethanol solution or the ethanol and acetic acid solution is wasted. The ethanol content in the aqueous solution is preferably 60% by volume, more preferably 20% by volume, and even more preferably 7% by volume.
The

Here, when harmful nematodes such as root-knot nematodes and nematode nematodes are to be controlled, the lower limit of the ethanol content is preferably 0.35% by volume, more preferably 0.5% by volume in terms of control effect. It is.
In the case of controlling plant pathogenic fungi such as tomato, cucumber, eggplant, cucumber and pumpkin, such as bacterial wilt, vine split fungus and wilt disease, the lower limit of the ethanol content is preferable in terms of control effect 0.35% by volume, more preferably 0.4% by volume, and still more preferably 0.6% by volume.
Moreover, the soil reduction disinfectant of this invention also has the meaning of the germination inhibitor of weeds. When suppressing weed germination, that is, when weeds are to be controlled, the lower limit of the ethanol content is preferably 0.35% by volume, more preferably 0 from the viewpoint of the control effect, although it depends on the type of weeds. 0.4% by volume, and more preferably 0.6% by volume.
The preferable ethanol content in the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid is the same as above. A soil-reducing disinfectant composed of an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid contains acetic acid, so that it has a large disinfecting effect and has a high rate of reduction in soil. Moreover, it becomes an equivalent reduction state even at a lower ground temperature than ethanol alone.

The ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution means the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution in the soil to be disinfected. It is preferable to supply a large amount of an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid having a low ethanol content (for example, less than 20% by volume) to the dry soil so that the ethanol can diffuse evenly in the soil. When there is a lot of water in the soil, the ethanol aqueous solution or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid supplied to the soil has a high ethanol content in consideration of the water in the soil (for example, 60% by volume in an extreme case) Good. However, the ethanol content is more preferably 0.1% by volume to 20% by volume so that ethanol can diffuse evenly in the soil.

Ethanol for producing an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid may be either industrially synthesized ethanol or ethanol by a brewing method. Absolute ethanol (also known as anhydrous alcohol, containing 99.5% by volume or more of ethanol at 15 ° C), ethanol (also known as alcohol, containing 95.1 to 95.6% by volume of ethanol at 15 ° C), disinfecting ethanol (also known as : Alcohol for disinfection, including 76.9-81.4% by volume of ethanol at 15 ° C.). Purified ethanol (preferably 95 to 99.5% by volume of the total amount is ethanol and the rest is water) may be used, but by-product ethanol obtained in the distillation purification process of fermented ethanol is preferable in terms of cost. By-product ethanol includes ethanol as an essential component (about 80 to 90% by volume of the total amount), water (about 10 to 5% by volume of the total amount), methanol, 1-propanol, 2-propanol, 2 -Lower alcohols such as methyl-1-propanol, 1-butanol, 2-butanol, 2-methyl-1-butanol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, 1-pentanol and the like are included in any combination; Alcohol fermentation-derived components such as acetaldehyde, crotonaldehyde, acetone, methyl acetate, ethyl acetate, acetal are included in any combination. These components other than ethanol (10 to 5% by volume of the total amount) vary depending on the raw materials for ethanol fermentation, fermentation conditions, and the like, and the types and contents of components other than ethanol vary.

Acetic acid for making an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid may be either industrially synthesized acetic acid or acetic acid by a brewing method, or vinegar. Since pure acetic acid is called glacial acetic acid and is crystalline at room temperature, an acetic acid aqueous solution (the acetic acid content is, for example, 5 to 50% by volume) is preferable, and vinegar that is an acetic acid 5% aqueous solution is also preferable.

Water for diluting ethanol and acetic acid is not particularly limited as long as it is water suitable for the growth of plants and crops. Examples include agricultural water, well water, tap water, rain water, river water, and lake water.

The soil reduction disinfectant used in the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention and the target soil of the soil reduction disinfectant of the present invention are for growing plants and crops (vegetables such as fruit vegetables, leaf vegetables, root vegetables, flowers, fruit trees, etc.) If it is soil of this, it will not specifically limit. Examples include soil in farmland, fields, greenhouses; soil used in flower beds, pots, planters, soil in greenhouses, etc .; soil for preparing culture soils. From the viewpoint of the disinfecting effect, it is preferable to use soil or soil before sowing or before planting rather than soil or soil on which plants or crops are grown. The depth of the soil varies depending on the type of the cultivated crop, and is usually 20 cm to 50 cm, and the average is 30 cm, but is not limited.

The object of disinfection of the soil reduction disinfection method and the soil reduction disinfectant of the present invention is soil pests or weed seeds, that is, nematodes, phytopathogenic fungi, insect larvae, adult insects, plant viruses, weed seeds in the soil. Etc. The soil pest in the present invention means nematode, phytopathogenic fungi, insect larvae, adult insects, and plant viruses.
Examples of nematodes include root-knot nematodes and nectar nematodes. Any plant pathogenic bacteria may be used as long as it is transmitted using soil as a medium. For example, bacterial rot (Ralstonia solaceararum), soft rot fungus (Erwinia carotovora), seedling blight fungus (Pythium spp.), Plague fungus ( Phytophthora spp.), Verticillium dahliae, Fusarium oxysporum, Fusarium oxysporum, Plasmodiophoramin, Blast fungus ), Helicobasidium mompa, White coat fungus (Rose) linia necatrix, root rot fungus (Aphanomyces eutieches), root rot fungus (Aphanomyces raphani), black rot fungus (Sclerotium cepivores), Spongosporatesporum Agrobacterium tumefaciens, cephalosporia gramineum, deciduous fungi (Cephalosporidium regata), Helicothosporum sativum, p. ) Is exemplified. Examples of insect larvae include bark beetles, caterpillars, scarab beetles, and beetle larvae. Examples of plant viruses include nematode-borne viruses and microorganism-borne viruses.
The weeds in the seeds of weeds may be weeds grown in domestic or foreign farms, gardens, home gardens, etc., and broad-leaved weeds such as, for example, Abutilon theophrasti, Amaranthus retroflexus, Sendangusa (Bidens pilosa), Shiroza (Chenoposium album), Galium arsen (Ipomoea purpure), Ipomoea spp., Sesbania (Sesbania) Xanthium strumaria); Gramineae weeds, for example, lopecurus mosuroides), oat (Avena fatus), crabgrass (Digitaria sanguinalls), barnyardgrass (Echinochloa crus-galli), goosegrass (Eleusine indica) and giant foxtail (Setaria faberii), green foxtail (Setaria, viridis) Setaria (Setaria spp, such as. ); Cyperaceae weeds such as Cyperus esculentus are exemplified.

The soil-reducing disinfectant used in the soil-reducing disinfecting method of the present invention and the soil-reducing disinfectant of the present invention contain an amount of the soil, in particular, a submerged state from the bottom of the soil to the ground surface. That is, it contains more than the field capacity.

The soil reductive disinfection method of the present invention is an aqueous solution of ethanol (provided that the ethanol content is at least 0.1% by volume) or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (provided that the ethanol content is at least 0.1% by volume). , Acetic acid is 0.1 to 20% by volume of ethanol) to make it in a submerged state, and hold the water and ethanol or water, ethanol and acetic acid while suppressing evaporation to disinfect the soil in a reduced state It is characterized by. Since it is in a reduced state, it exhibits an excellent control effect even at very low concentrations of ethanol.
The preferable lower limit and upper limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution in the soil reduction disinfection method are as described in paragraphs [0022] and [0023].

Aqueous ethanol (but ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or higher) or aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (but ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or higher, acetic acid is ethanol) In an amount of 0.1 to 20% by volume), and the soil, in particular, the soil is reduced to eliminate nematodes and phytopathogenic fungi. Alternatively, weed seeds should not germinate.
The preferable lower limit and upper limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution in the soil reduction disinfection method are as described in paragraphs [0022] and [0023].

In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, the preferred amount of ethanol per 10 kg of soil is 10 to 200 ml in terms of 95% by volume ethanol, and the preferred amount of water per 10 kg of soil is 2000 to 7000 ml, more preferably 3000 to 5000 ml. It is. Of course, it varies depending on the type of soil, water content, maximum water absorption, etc., so it is only a guide.

In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, when the soil is cropping, it is submerged from the bottom of the cropping to the ground surface, that is, by holding it for several days or more so as to contain more than the field capacity. The soil can be reduced. The number of days for holding the reduced state varies depending on the ethanol concentration, the temperature, and the ground temperature. The retention days become shorter as the temperature and the ground temperature rise. As a guide, if the holding temperature is 5 to 40 ° C., the necessary holding days are 20 to 3 days. In any case, when the soil is in a reduced state, the water accumulated on the soil and the soil surface becomes dark and stinks so that the evaporation of water and ethanol, or water, ethanol and acetic acid is suppressed until that happens. Hold. If it is further maintained after being reduced, it can effectively control nematodes and phytopathogenic fungi and suppress germination of weed seeds. The aqueous ethanol solution and the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution used in this method are as described above.

Here, the water capacity of the field is “the water content when a large amount of rainfall or irrigation and the downward movement of water due to gravity becomes very small”, “the maximum water capacity that can be retained by the soil, excluding gravity water” Is defined as In other words, drainage is almost over after 1 day or more after sufficient rainfall or irrigation, and soil moisture becomes constant if surface evaporation is suppressed. This constant moisture is the field capacity. More specifically, the water discharged within 24 hours from the water retention amount (corresponding to the maximum water capacity) in a state where the soil is completely saturated with water (φ = 0 kPa, pF = 0) is called gravity water. At this time, the water retention amount in the state where there is an air pore (coarse pore) formed by discharging gravity water is defined as the field water capacity (φ = −6 kPa, pF = 1.8). Here, φ corresponds to the matrix potential due to the surface tension of water in the soil water and the adsorption force of the soil particles, and the negative common logarithm of the matrix potential φ is pF (= log (−10.2φ)). It is customarily expressed as

In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, if there is a dry portion where the aqueous solution of ethanol or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid does not spread in the soil, the portion is not disinfected, so the bottom of the soil is created by the aqueous solution of ethanol or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid. It is possible to quickly reduce to the ground surface by making it flooded, that is, by making the amount of the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid in the soil more than the required amount of water in the field. As described above, when the soil contains a sufficient aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid, the decomposition reaction of the ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid contained in the soil by microorganisms and the reduction of the soil are sufficiently performed.

In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, when the soil is a soil, ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid and water evaporate as they are, so the surface of the soil is covered with a plastic film or sheet and the ethanol and water are covered. Or it is preferable to suppress evaporation of ethanol, acetic acid and water. If the soil is a relatively small amount of soil used in flower beds, pots, planters, etc., or a relatively small amount of soil for preparing culture soil, ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid, and water will evaporate as they are. It is preferable to seal it in a film bag and hold it for several days. In the soil reduction disinfection method, it is preferable to hold the soil in the bag until the soil is in a reduced state. The reduction state can be recognized by the soil color becoming black and becoming odorous. Moreover, it understands by measuring the oxidation-reduction potential of soil.

In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, the plastic film or sheet for suppressing evaporation of ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid and water, and the plastic film bag suppress evaporation of soil fumigants such as methyl bromide and chloropicrin. Any plastic film or sheet or plastic film bag may be used. Examples of suitable plastics include polyethylene, polypropylene, polyolefins other than these, polyvinyl chloride, nylon, and laminates thereof. However, ethanol is less expensive because it has a lower plastic film permeability than methyl bromide or chloropicrin. Polyethylene with high environmental safety is suitable. Of course, other sheets (rubber-coated cloth), bags (rubber-drawn bags) and containers (plastic containers, metal containers) that do not allow ethanol, acetic acid, and water to permeate may be used.

In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, if the soil contains an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.1% by volume or more) or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid, The activity of microorganisms in the soil is reduced, and in the soil reduction and disinfection method, the speed at which it is reduced is reduced, and it takes a significant number of days. Therefore, the air temperature and the ground temperature are at least 5 ° C., preferably 10 ° C. or higher, and more preferably 15 ° C. or higher. However, since the nematode and phytopathogenic fungi die due to the high fever when the ground temperature becomes extremely high, the upper limit temperature is about 50 ° C.

In the soil reduction disinfection method, ethanol is mixed into water using a liquid fertilizer mixer (however, the ethanol content is 0.1 vol% to 60 vol%, preferably 0.1 vol% to 20 vol%). ) or ethanol and acetic acid brought mixed into water (provided that, the ethanol content is 0.1 volume% to 60 volume%, good Mashiku is 0.1 volume% to 20 volume%, acetate content When the soil is irrigated with an irrigation tube or irrigation tube (0.1 to 20% of ethanol), the soil can be efficiently immersed in an aqueous solution with an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid.

Next, the soil wetting and disinfecting method and soil wetting and disinfecting agent of the present invention will be described.
The soil wetting and disinfecting agent used in the soil wetting and disinfecting method of the present invention and the soil wetting and disinfecting agent of the present invention include an ethanol aqueous solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more) or ethanol and acetic acid. It is characterized by comprising an aqueous solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more, and acetic acid is 0.1 to 20% by volume of ethanol). In the present invention, the volume% which is a unit of an ethanol aqueous solution or the like is a value at an atmospheric temperature of 15 ° C. The lower limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution is preferably 0.5% by volume, more preferably 1.5% by volume from the viewpoint of the disinfection effect. The upper limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution or in the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution is not particularly limited, but if the ethanol content is too high, it is wasted, and from the viewpoint of flammability and economy, the ethanol content or the ethanol and acetic acid The ethanol content in the aqueous solution is preferably 60% by volume, more preferably 20% by volume, and even more preferably 10% by volume.

Here, in the case of controlling harmful nematodes such as root-knot nematodes and nematode nematodes, the lower limit of the ethanol content is preferably 1.5% by volume, more preferably 1.6% by volume in terms of control effect. More preferably, it is 2.0% by volume.
When controlling plant phytopathogenic fungi such as tomato, cucumber, eggplant, cucumber and pumpkin, such as bacterial wilt fungus, vine split fungus, and wilt disease, depending on the type of phytopathogenic fungi, The lower limit of the ethanol content is preferably 3.0% by volume.
Moreover, the soil moistening disinfectant of the present invention also has a meaning of a weed germination inhibitor. In the case of suppressing weed germination, that is, when weeds are to be controlled, the lower limit of the ethanol content is preferably 0.3% by volume, more preferably 0.4% by volume, in terms of control effect, Preferably it is 0.8 volume%.
The preferable ethanol content in the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid is the same as above. A soil moisturizing disinfectant composed of an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid has a large disinfecting effect by containing acetic acid.

The ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution means the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution in the soil to be disinfected. It is preferable to supply a large amount of an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid having a low ethanol content (for example, less than 20% by volume) to the dry soil so that the ethanol can diffuse evenly in the soil. When there is a lot of water in the soil, the ethanol aqueous solution or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid supplied to the soil has a high ethanol content in consideration of the water in the soil (for example, 60% by volume in an extreme case) Good. However, the ethanol content is more preferably 0.5% by volume to 20% by volume so that ethanol can diffuse evenly in the soil.

Ethanol for making an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid is as described in the description of the soil reductive disinfection method and the soil reductive disinfectant.

Acetic acid for producing an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid is as described in the explanation of the soil reductive disinfection method and the soil reductive disinfectant.

The water for diluting ethanol and acetic acid is as described in the explanation of the soil reduction disinfecting method and the soil reduction disinfectant.

The target soil of the soil moistening / disinfecting method of the present invention and the soil moistening / disinfecting agent of the present invention are as described in the description of the soil reducing / disinfecting method and soil reducing / disinfecting agent.

The disinfecting object of the soil wetting disinfecting method of the present invention and the soil wetting disinfecting agent of the present invention is as described in the explanation of the soil reducing disinfecting method and the soil reducing disinfecting agent. In addition, the soil pest in the present invention means nematode, phytopathogenic fungi, insect larvae, adult insects, and plant viruses.

The soil moisturizing disinfectant of the present invention may be contained in an amount that moistens the whole soil, or may be contained in an amount that makes it more moistened, or may be in a flooded state, that is, contained in the soil in an amount that exceeds the field capacity. May be.

The soil moistening / disinfecting method of the present invention comprises an aqueous solution of ethanol (provided that the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more) or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (provided that the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more). Yes, acetic acid is 0.1 to 20% by volume of ethanol) and moistened (including flooded state) and held while suppressing evaporation of water and ethanol or water, ethanol and acetic acid. It is characterized by disinfecting the soil.
The preferable lower limit and upper limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution in the soil moistening / disinfecting method are as described in paragraphs [0041] and [0042].

Aqueous ethanol (but ethanol content is 0.3 volume% or more) or aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid (however, ethanol content is 0.3 volume% or more, acetic acid is ethanol) Of 0.1 to 20% by volume) and moisturizes the soil, especially the soil, to kill nematodes and phytopathogenic fungi. Alternatively, weed seeds should not germinate.
The preferable lower limit and upper limit of the ethanol content in the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution in the soil moistening / disinfecting method are as described in paragraphs [0041] and [0042].

In the soil wetting and disinfecting method of the present invention, the preferred amount of ethanol per 10 kg of soil is 10 to 200 ml in terms of 95% by volume ethanol, and the preferred amount of water per 10 kg of soil is 0 to 5000 ml, more preferably 2500 to 500 ml. 4000 ml. Of course, it varies depending on the type of soil, water content, maximum water absorption, etc., so it is only a guide. In the soil reduction disinfection method of the present invention, the preferred amount of ethanol per 10 kg of soil is 10 to 200 ml in terms of 95% by volume ethanol, and the preferred amount of water per 10 kg of soil is 2000 to 7000 ml, more preferably 3000 to 5000 ml. It is. Of course, it varies depending on the type of soil, water content, maximum water absorption, etc., so it is only a guide.

In the soil moistening / disinfecting method of the present invention, when the soil is a soil, the entire soil is kept wet for several days or more, or is submerged from the bottom of the soil to the ground surface. That is, soil can be sterilized by holding in a moist state for several days or more so as to contain more than the field capacity. The number of retention days for disinfection varies depending on the ethanol concentration, temperature, and ground temperature. The retention days become shorter as the temperature and the ground temperature rise. As a guide, if the holding temperature is 5 to 40 ° C., the necessary holding days are 20 to 3 days. Furthermore, when held, effective control of nematodes and plant pathogens and suppression of germination of weed seeds become effective. The aqueous ethanol solution and the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution used in this method are as described above.

Here, the amount of water required in the field is as described in the explanation of the soil reduction and disinfection method.

In the soil moistening / disinfecting method of the present invention, if there is a dry part where the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid does not spread in the soil, the part is not disinfected, so the entire soil is treated with the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid. Wet state. When the soil is soil, the soil is made wet from the bottom to the surface. Thus, when the soil contains a sufficient aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid, the decomposition reaction of the ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid contained in the soil by microorganisms is sufficiently performed.

In the soil moistening / disinfecting method of the present invention, when the soil is a soil, ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid and water evaporate as they are, so that the surface of the soil is covered with a plastic film or sheet and It is preferable to suppress evaporation of water or ethanol, acetic acid and water. If the soil is a relatively small amount of soil used in flower beds, pots, planters, etc., or a relatively small amount of soil for preparing culture soil, ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid, and water will evaporate as they are. It is preferable to seal it in a film bag and hold it for several days.

In the soil wetting and disinfecting method of the present invention, the plastic film or sheet and the plastic film bag for suppressing the evaporation of ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid and water are as described in the explanation of the soil reducing and disinfecting method.

In the soil wetting and disinfecting method of the present invention, even if the soil contains an ethanol aqueous solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3% by volume or more) or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid, Microbial activity in the soil is reduced. Therefore, the air temperature and the ground temperature are at least 5 ° C., preferably 10 ° C. or higher, and more preferably 15 ° C. or higher. However, since the nematode and phytopathogenic fungi die due to the high fever when the ground temperature becomes extremely high, the upper limit temperature is about 50 ° C.

In the soil wet disinfection method, ethanol is mixed into water using a liquid fertilizer mixer (however, the ethanol content is 0.3 to 60% by volume, preferably 0.3 to 20% by volume). Or ethanol and acetic acid are mixed in water (however, the ethanol content is 0.3 to 60% by volume, preferably 0.3 to 20% by volume, and the acetic acid content is 0.5% by volume of ethanol). When the soil is irrigated with a irrigation tube or irrigation tube, the soil can be efficiently wetted with an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid.

Next, the soil disinfectant irrigation system of the present invention will be described.
The soil disinfectant irrigation system of the present invention is exemplified by the type shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the type shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, and the type shown in FIG. The soil disinfectant irrigation system of FIGS. 1 and 2 is a type of soil disinfectant irrigation system without a bypass pipe, one end of which is connected to a water source not shown and the other end is connected to the inlet of the irrigation tube 7. A water supply pipe 1 connected, a liquid fertilizer mixer 2, an ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 or an ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 and an acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 6, and a multi-branched irrigation tube 7 are provided. An ethanol aqueous solution in the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 or an ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 and an ethanol aqueous solution and an acetic acid aqueous solution in the acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 6 are arranged in the middle of the water supply pipe 1 connecting the supply source and the inlet of the irrigation tube 7. The water flowing in the water supply pipe 1 is mixed at a constant ratio. 3 is a filter, 4 is a flow rate adjusting valve, and 7a is a irrigation tube branch. In the figure, the solid line arrow indicates the flow direction of the water supply, and the wavy line arrow indicates the direction in which the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous acetic acid solution flows. Of course, the ethanol content of the aqueous ethanol solution in the storage tank is larger than the intended ethanol content of the aqueous ethanol solution in the soil, and is preferably 20% by volume or more and 60% by volume or less. The same applies to acetic acid in the storage tank, preferably 5% by volume or more and 50% by volume or less.

In FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the water that has flowed through the water supply pipe 1 from a water supply source (not shown) is subjected to removal of earth and sand by the filter 3, and stored in the ethanol storage tank 5 or the ethanol aqueous solution by the liquid fertilizer mixer 2. The ethanol aqueous solution 5a in the tank 5 and the acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 6 or the ethanol aqueous solution 5a and the acetic acid aqueous solution 6a are mixed into the water in the water supply pipe 1 at a preset mixing ratio (a constant ratio). The mixing ratio (constant ratio) is such that the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution has the predetermined concentration (dilution ratio) described in paragraphs [0022] to [0024] and paragraphs [0041] to [0043]. The soil reduction disinfectant and soil moistening disinfectant described in paragraph numbers [0022] to [0024] and paragraph numbers [0041] to [0043] are prepared. The liquid fertilizer mixer 2 is preferably a proportional type. The flow rate to the soil is adjusted by the flow rate adjusting valve 4. The soil is discharged as indicated by arrows from a plurality of holes in the irrigation tube branch 7a. The aqueous ethanol solution and the aqueous acetic acid solution are mixed in advance at a predetermined mixing ratio, and may be mixed into the water in the water supply pipe 1 from one storage tank.

The soil disinfectant irrigation system shown in FIGS. 3 and 4 is a type of soil disinfectant irrigation system having a bypass pipe. Although not shown, one end is connected to a water supply source and the other end is an irrigation tube 7. A water supply pipe 1 connected to the inlet of the gas flow, a flow resistance device 8 (a ball valve structure or an orifice structure is exemplified) provided in the middle of the water supply pipe 1, an upstream side and a downstream side of the flow resistance device 8 A bypass pipe 9 that communicates with each other, a shut-off valve 10 provided at an inlet and an outlet of the bypass pipe 9, a liquid manure mixer 2 provided in the middle of the bypass pipe 9, and an aqueous ethanol storage tank 5 or an aqueous ethanol storage A tank 5 and an acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 6 and a multi-branched irrigation tube 7 are provided, and the liquid fertilizer mixer 2 is provided in the middle of the water supply pipe 1 connecting the water supply source and the inlet of the irrigation tube 7. The ethanol aqueous solution in the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 6 or the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 and the ethanol aqueous solution in the acetic acid storage tank 6 and the acetic acid aqueous solution are mixed in the water flowing in the water supply pipe 1 at a certain ratio. Features. In addition, 3 is a filter, 4 is a flow regulating valve, 7a is a irrigation tube branch part, the solid line arrow in the figure shows the flow direction of water supply, and the wavy line arrow shows the direction through which ethanol or acetic acid flows. Of course, the ethanol content of the aqueous ethanol solution in the storage tank is larger than the intended ethanol content of the aqueous ethanol solution in the soil, and is preferably 20% by volume or more and 60% by volume or less. The same applies to acetic acid in the storage tank, preferably 5% by volume or more and 50% by volume or less.

The operation will be described with reference to FIGS. The water that has flowed through the water supply pipe 1 from a water supply source (not shown) is removed by the filter 3 from the earth and sand. Due to the action of the flow resistance device 8, a differential pressure is generated between the upstream side and the downstream side, and a flow of water through the bypass pipe 9 is generated. By this flow of water, the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 or the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 and the ethanol aqueous solution 5a or the ethanol aqueous solution 5a and the acetic acid aqueous solution 6a in the acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 6 are previously adjusted and set in the liquid fertilizer mixer. It is mixed into the water passing through the bypass pipe 9 at a constant ratio. The mixing ratio (constant ratio) is such that the aqueous ethanol solution or the aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution has the predetermined concentration (dilution ratio) described in paragraphs [0022] to [0024] and paragraphs [0041] to [0043]. The soil reduction disinfectant and soil moistening disinfectant described in paragraph numbers [0022] to [0024] and paragraph numbers [0041] to [0043] are prepared. The liquid fertilizer mixer 2 is preferably a proportional type. In this case, since the ratio of the flow rate flowing through the flow resistance device 8 and the flow rate flowing through the bypass pipe 9 is constant according to the flow resistance in these flow paths, the aqueous ethanol solution 5a mixed in the bypass pipe 9 is used. Alternatively, the mixing ratio with respect to the total flow rate flowing through the piping of the aqueous ethanol solution 5a and the aqueous acetic acid solution 6a is constant. The flow rate to the soil is adjusted by the flow rate adjusting valve 4. The soil is discharged as indicated by arrows from a plurality of holes in the irrigation tube branch 7a. The aqueous ethanol solution and the aqueous acetic acid solution are previously mixed at a predetermined mixing ratio, and may be mixed into the water in the pipe from one storage tank. Further, by closing the shut-off valve 10, it is possible to irrigate only with water.

An automatic system is also conceivable. For example, in the soil disinfectant irrigation system of FIG. 5, the control microcomputer 12 a in the control panel 12 is set in advance with the flow rate value obtained by the flow meter 11 connected to the water supply pipe 1. The injection amount of the ethanol aqueous solution 5a is calculated from the predetermined concentration (dilution ratio) of the ethanol aqueous solution or the ethanol and acetic acid aqueous solution, and the ethanol aqueous solution 5a and the acetic acid aqueous solution from the ethanol aqueous solution storage tank 5 and the acetic acid aqueous solution storage tank 6 are calculated. The pump of each liquid fertilizer mixing device 2 'for pumping 6a is controlled, respectively, and the mixing amount of the aqueous ethanol solution 5a and the acetic acid aqueous solution 6a becomes the respective mixing ratio (constant ratio) according to the flow rate of water in the water supply pipe 1. In this way, proportional control is performed. The mixing ratio is set so that an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous solution of ethanol and acetic acid has a predetermined concentration (dilution ratio) described in paragraph numbers [0022] to [0024] and paragraph numbers [0041] to [0043]. , Paragraph Nos. [0022] to [0024] and Paragraph Nos. [0041] to [0043] are prepared. A dotted line in the figure represents a signal. The flow rate to the soil is adjusted by a flow rate adjusting valve 4 (which may be an electromagnetic valve). The soil is discharged as indicated by arrows from a plurality of holes in the irrigation tube branch 7a. Ethanol and acetic acid are mixed in advance at the predetermined mixing ratios described in paragraphs [0022] to [0024] and paragraphs [0041] to [0043], and paragraphs [0022] to [0024] and paragraphs [0041] are added. ]-[0043] soil moistening disinfectant and soil reductive disinfectant may be prepared and mixed into the water in the pipe from the one storage tank, or only ethanol 5a may be mixed. By closing the shut-off valve 10, irrigation with only water becomes possible. Of course, the ethanol content of the aqueous ethanol solution in the storage tank is larger than the intended ethanol content of the aqueous ethanol solution in the soil, and is preferably 20% by volume or more and 60% by volume or less. The same applies to acetic acid in the storage tank, preferably 5% by volume or more and 50% by volume or less.

The water supply source of the water supply pipe only needs to have water pressure, and is preferably an agricultural water supply. However, water may be pulled from a well, a water tank, or the like with a pump. Examples of the water supply pipe and the irrigation tube include a plastic pipe, a rubber pipe, and a hose. The disinfectant is discharged from the irrigation tube branch 7a as shown by the arrow. In any soil disinfectant irrigation system, the soil 14 to which the soil disinfectant is irrigated can be covered with the film 13 as shown in FIG. 6 to suppress the evaporation of ethanol and water or ethanol, acetic acid and water. In the soil 14 to which the disinfectant is irrigated, the irrigation tube may be constantly fixed to the soil. However, in the case where the disinfectant is not always fixed, the soil disinfectant is firstly irrigated by the soil disinfectant irrigation system in terms of work efficiency. It is preferable to remove the irrigation tube from the soil surface and then cover the soil with the film 13. The film 13 is preferably fixed by filling the edge of the film 13 with soil 14 and pressing it.

In any system, the moisture content of the soil is measured in advance, and after irrigation with an aqueous ethanol solution or an aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution, the aqueous ethanol solution or aqueous ethanol and acetic acid solution in the soil is a predetermined amount of ethanol or a predetermined amount. The concentration of ethanol or ethanol and acetic acid is preferably set so as to contain ethanol and acetic acid.

（２）試験条件
（１）の薬剤入り汚染土壌を詰めたポリ袋をプランター（同じ試験区のもの３つ×１４試験区＝４２個）に入れ、３２℃の一定環境（恒温室）に１週間（2005年9月27日〜2005年10月4日）置いた。その後、各ポリ袋の土壌を乾燥させ、攪拌後、約２週間後にキュウリ苗（品種：ときわ地這キュウリ）を播種した。

（３）試験結果
a) 湿潤状態、還元状態の観察結果

b) センチュウの防除効果

根こぶ指数＝試験区の根こぶ程度の平均値÷4×100
根こぶ程度
０：根こぶ無し
１：根こぶがわずかに認められるが被害は目立たない
２：一見して根こぶが認められ、大きな根こぶやつながった根こぶは認められない
３：大小の根こぶが多数認められ、根こぶに覆われて太くなった根も認められるが、根域全体の50%以下である
４：多くの根が根こぶだらけで太くなっている
防除価＝試験区の根こぶ程度／無処理区の根こぶの程度×１００

（４）考察
表３のとおり、試験区A-2〜A-5のエタノール濃度、水量でのネコブセンチュウのセンチュウ密度は０．０／生土２０ｇ〜１．７頭／生土２０ｇであり、防除価は８２点〜１００点であることから、圃場要水量以上の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入によりセンチュウ密度を著しく減少させる効果が判明した。また、試験区B-1〜B-3においては、無処理区である試験区Gに比べ、センチュウ密度を抑えることができた。土壌を湿潤化させる程度の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入によりセンチュウ密度を著しく減少させる効果が判明した。
[Example 1-1 to Example 1-7], [Comparative Example 1-1 to Comparative Example 1-7]
The wet state and the reduced state were observed when an aqueous ethanol solution, water, bran or DD was contained in the soil, and further the control effect of root-knot nematode was examined.
(1) 10 kg test specimen of root-knot nematode-contaminated soil (water content 5% by weight) made of polyethylene (hereinafter referred to as plastic bag) (Nihon Sanipack Co., Ltd., 45 L for business use, product No .: N-43 horizontal 650 mm x vertical 800 mm x Then, the chemicals shown in Table 1 and a predetermined amount of water were placed in the soil in the plastic bag and mixed, and the plastic bag was sealed. Ethanol was diluted with water and then placed in the soil. The test sections A-2 to A-5 correspond to the soil reduction disinfection method, and the test sections B-1 to B-3 correspond to the soil moistening disinfection method.

(2) Put plastic bags filled with drug-contaminated soil of test condition (1) into a planter (3 in the same test area x 14 test areas = 42) and put it in a constant environment (constant temperature room) of 32 ° C. Week (September 27, 2005-October 4, 2005) Thereafter, the soil of each plastic bag was dried, and after stirring, cucumber seedlings (variety: Tokiwa Chikuji Cucumber) were sown after about 2 weeks.

(3) Test results
a) Observation results of wet state and reduced state

b) Nematode control effect

Root Hump Index = Average value of the degree of galling in the test area ÷ 4 x 100
Degree of nodules 0: No nodules 1: Slightly nodules are observed, but damage is not noticeable 2: At first glance, nodules are observed, large or connected root nodules are not recognized 3: Large and small roots A large number of knots are observed, and roots covered with roots and thickened are also observed, but less than 50% of the whole root area 4: Many roots are thick with roots and bumps Root hump degree / Non-treated ridge hump degree x 100

(4) Discussion As shown in Table 3, the nematode density of root-knot nematodes in the test areas A-2 to A-5 was 0.0 / raw soil 20g to 1.7 heads / 20g of soil, and the control Since the value is 82 to 100 points, it has been found that the nematode density is significantly reduced by soil injection of water in excess of the required amount of water in the field and a certain amount of ethanol. Moreover, in the test plots B-1 to B-3, the nematode density was able to be suppressed as compared with the test plot G which is an untreated plot. The effect of significantly reducing nematode density by soil injection of water and a certain amount of ethanol to moisten the soil was found.

（２）試験条件
（１）の薬剤入り汚染土壌を詰めたポリ袋をプランター（同じ試験区のもの３つ×１３試験区＝３９個）に入れ、３５℃の恒温室（暗条件）に、2006年10月12日〜2006年11月6日の間、保持した。
また、土壌の酸化還元電位は、試験区１〜４、９の土壌を別途調製してビニール袋に詰め、その各ビニール袋の土壌内に電極を挿して計測した。なお、試験中は電極を挿したままであり、ビニール袋の口は閉じてあった。

（３）試験結果
不織布製の各袋から病原菌を取り出し、青枯病菌は選択培地を用いて、希釈平板法により菌密度を調査した。キュウリつる割病菌は選択培地上にワラを置床し、菌の生育の有無を調査した。また、酸化還元電位については、ビニール袋に電極を挿したまま計測した。

ａ) 湿潤状態、還元状態、酸化還元電位の変化の観察結果
表５に湿潤状態、還元状態の観察結果を示す。

また、図７に、試験区１〜４、９の土壌の酸化還元電位を示す。酸化還元電位は、試験区９の水処理区では徐々に低下したが、試験区１〜４ではいずれの試験区も同様に、急激に低下した。エタノール濃度による差は認められなかった。

ｂ) 青枯病菌の防除効果
表６に青枯病菌密度の調査結果を示す。

試験区１３の無処理区の青枯病菌の密度が1.77×10⁵ CFU/mlであったのに対し、試験区１では5.00×10³ CFU/g、試験区２〜４では0.00〜1.67×10² CFU/gと菌密度が低い。圃場要水量以上の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入および土壌還元化により青枯病病原菌密度を著しく減少させる効果が判明した。また、試験区５〜７では、2.96×10³〜2.44×10⁴ CFU/ml と、試験区１３の無処理区1.77×10⁵ CFU/ml に比べ、菌密度が低い。土壌を湿潤化させる程度の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入により青枯病病原菌密度を減少させる効果が判明した。

ｃ) キュウリつる割病菌の防除効果
表７にキュウリつる割病菌の生育の有無の調査結果を示す。

キュウリつる割病は、試験区３、試験区４で、菌の生育が認められなく、試験区１、試験区２では、試験区１３の無処理区の検出率100％に対して、低い検出率となっている。圃場要水量以上の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入および土壌還元化によりキュウリ萎凋病菌検出率を著しく減少させる効果が判明した。また、試験区７では、試験区１３の無処理区の検出率100％に対して、低い検出率となっている。土壌を湿潤化させる程度の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入によりキュウリ萎凋病菌検出率を減少させる効果が判明した。[Example 1-8 to Example 1-14], [Comparative Example 1-8 to Comparative Example 1-13]
Changes in the wet state, reduction state, and redox potential were observed when an aqueous ethanol solution, water, bran, or chlorpicrin was added to the soil, and the control effect against bacterial wilt and cucumber vine split fungi was examined.

(1) Specimen First, two types of bacterial wilt fungus and cucumber vine split fungus for embedding in soil were prepared as follows.

Bacterial wilt: About 10 ⁹ CFU of the culture solution was adsorbed on perlite, and a 95-mm x 70-mm non-woven bag (tea pack: made of polypropylene, polyester, rayon) was filled with 1 teaspoon full of teaspoon.
Cucumber vine split fungus: cultured with 1-2 cm of straw for 2 months, and about 10 straws were packed in a tea-pack non-woven bag (tea pack: polypropylene, polyester, made of rayon).

The soil is 2 kg of field soil (sand loam) (water content 15% by weight). 2 kg of this soil (water content 15% by weight) is packed in a plastic bag, and the non-woven bag filled with perlite to which the above-mentioned bacterial wilt is adsorbed and cucumber vine split bacteria are adsorbed in the soil. A soil bag contaminated with bacterial wilt fungus and cucumber vine split fungus was created. And the chemical | medical agent shown in Table 4 and predetermined amount of water were put into this soil in a plastic bag, and were mixed, and the plastic bag was sealed. Ethanol was diluted with water and then placed in the soil. Test groups 1 to 4 correspond to the soil reduction disinfection method, and test groups 5 to 7 correspond to the soil moistening disinfection method.

(2) Put a plastic bag packed with chemical-contaminated soil of test condition (1) in a planter (3 in the same test area x 13 test areas = 39), and put it in a constant temperature room (dark condition) at 35 ° C. Retained between 12 October 2006 and 6 November 2006.
Moreover, the oxidation-reduction potential of the soil was measured by separately preparing the soils of the test sections 1 to 4 and 9 and filling them in plastic bags, and inserting electrodes into the soils of the respective plastic bags. During the test, the electrode was inserted and the mouth of the plastic bag was closed.

(3) Test results The pathogenic bacteria were taken out from each non-woven bag, and the bacterial density of the bacterial wilt bacteria was examined by a dilution plate method using a selective medium. The cucumber vine split fungus was placed on a selective medium to investigate the presence or absence of the growth of the fungus. The oxidation-reduction potential was measured with the electrode inserted in the plastic bag.

a) Observation results of changes in wet state, reduced state and redox potential Table 5 shows the observation results of wet state and reduced state.

Moreover, in FIG. 7, the oxidation-reduction potential of the soil of the test groups 1-4, 9 is shown. The oxidation-reduction potential gradually decreased in the water treatment section of the test section 9, but in the test sections 1 to 4, all the test sections similarly decreased rapidly. There was no difference due to ethanol concentration.

b) Control effect of bacterial wilt fungus Table 6 shows the results of investigation of bacterial wilt fungus density.

The density of bacterial wilt fungus in the untreated group of the test group 13 was 1.77 × 10 ⁵ CFU / ml, whereas in the test group 1, it was 5.00 × 10 ³ CFU / g, and in the test groups 2 to 4, 0.00-1.67 × 10 ² CFU / g and low bacterial density. The effect of significantly reducing the bacterial density of bacterial wilt pathogens by soil injection and soil reduction with more water than the field water requirement and a certain amount of ethanol was found. In the test groups 5 to 7, the bacterial density is lower than 2.96 × 10 ^{3 to} 2.44 × 10 ⁴ CFU / ml and 1.77 × 10 ⁵ CFU / ml in the untreated group of the test group 13. The effect of reducing the density of bacterial wilt pathogens by injecting soil with a certain amount of water and a certain amount of ethanol to moisten the soil was found.

c) Control effect of cucumber vine split fungus Table 7 shows the results of investigation on the presence or absence of growth of cucumber vine split fungus.

The cucumber vine split disease was not detected in the test group 3 and test group 4, and the detection rate was low in the test group 1 and test group 2, compared to the detection rate of 100% in the untreated group of the test group 13. It has become a rate. It was found that the cucumber wilt fungus detection rate was significantly reduced by soil injection and soil reduction with more water than the required amount of water and a certain amount of ethanol. Further, in the test zone 7, the detection rate is lower than the detection rate of 100% in the untreated zone of the test zone 13. The effect of reducing the cucumber wilt fungus detection rate by injecting water with a certain amount of water to wet the soil and a certain amount of ethanol was found.

（２）試験条件
2006年9月4日に、表８に示す薬剤を所定量の水で希釈後、各試験区（それぞれ３区画）の土壌に流し込み、土壌と良く撹拌した。プラスチックフィルムで被覆密閉し、さらに、ビニールハウスを閉め切った。３週間後にハウスを開放し、土壌を乾燥させ、耕耘後、2006年10月12日に２週間育苗した苗(品種：新ときわ地這きゅうり））を定植した。なお、試験区1〜4は、土壌還元消毒法に相当する。

（３）試験結果
2006年11月13日に株を掘り取り、根こぶの発生程度を調査した。

センチュウの防除効果
表９に根こぶ着生株数率、根こぶ着生度、防除価を示す。

・根こぶ着株率＝根こぶ着生程度別株数の総数／調査株数×１００
・根こぶ着生度（根こぶ指数）＝（（根こぶ着生程度（０〜４）×根こぶ着生程度別株数）の合計）／調査株数／４×１００
つまり、根こぶ着生度（根こぶ指数）＝調査区の根こぶ着生程度で重み付けした平均値÷４×１００である。
・防除価=処理区の根こぶ程度／無処理区の根こぶの程度×１００

＜程度別調査株数における程度＞
０：根こぶが無い。
１：根こぶがわずかに認められるが被害は目立たない。
２：一見して根こぶが認められる。大きな根こぶ、つながった根こぶは認められない。
３：大小の根こぶが多数認められる。根こぶに覆われて太くなった根も認められるが、根域全体の50%以下である。
４：多くの根が根こぶだらけで太くなっている。

（４）考察
表９のとおり、根こぶ着生程度からみた防除効果は、試験区１〜４で認められた。特には試験区４では、根こぶが全く着生していなかった。試験区１〜４のサツマイモネコブセンチュウの防除価は７６．３点〜１００点であることから、圃場要水量以上の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入によりサツマイモセンチュウを著しく減少させる効果が判明した。[Example 1-15 to Example 1-18], [Comparative Example 1-14 to Comparative Example 1-17]
Sweet potatoes containing an aqueous ethanol solution, water, bran, or soylein (mixture of DD and chloropicrin (chlorpicrin 40.0%, 1,3-dichloropropene (DD) 52.0%)) in the soil in the greenhouse The control effect of root-knot nematode was examined.
(1) The soil in the test specimen greenhouse (water content 15.2% by weight) was sterilized on one side, and after confirming that the pathogen was gone, the sweet potato nematode was planted and contaminated. And the soil in the greenhouse (water content 15.2% by weight) was partitioned with a concrete frame. The area of each section is 1.6 m ² .

(2) Test conditions
On September 4, 2006, the chemicals shown in Table 8 were diluted with a predetermined amount of water, poured into the soil of each test section (each of the three sections), and stirred well with the soil. The plastic film was covered and sealed, and the greenhouse was closed. After 3 weeks, the house was opened, the soil was dried, and after plowing, seedlings (cultivar: Shintokiwa cucumber) grown for 2 weeks on October 12, 2006) were planted. Test sections 1 to 4 correspond to the soil reduction disinfection method.

(3) Test results
On November 13, 2006, we dig up the stock and investigated the extent of the occurrence of the humps.

Control effect of nematode Table 9 shows the root nodule growth rate, root nodule growth degree, and control value.

-Root bump rate = total number of strains by degree of root bump growth / number of surveyed strains x 100
・ Root nodule growth degree (root nodule index) = (total of (nodules degree (0-4) × number of stocks by degree of nodule formation)) / number of surveyed strains / 4 × 100
That is, the degree of root nodules (root nodules index) = average value weighted by the degree of root nodules in the survey area ÷ 4 × 100.
・ Control value = degree of hump in treated area / degree of hump in untreated area x 100

<Degree in the number of surveyed stocks by degree>
0: There is no root bump.
1: A slight hump is recognized, but damage is not conspicuous.
2: A gall is recognized at first glance. Large roots and connected roots are not allowed.
3: Many large and small root bumps are observed. Although thick roots covered by the roots are also observed, they are less than 50% of the total root area.
4: Many roots are full of roots and thick.

(4) As shown in Table 9, the control effect as seen from the degree of root nodule formation was recognized in the test sections 1 to 4. In particular, in the test section 4, the nodules were not formed at all. Since the control value of the sweet potato nematode in the test sections 1 to 4 is 76.3 to 100 points, the effect of significantly reducing the sweet potato nematode by injecting water in excess of the required amount of water in the field and a certain amount of ethanol into the soil was found.

（２）試験条件
2006年9月7日に、表１０に示す薬剤を所定量の水で希釈後、各試験区（それぞれ２区画）の土壌に流し込み、土壌と良く撹拌した。ポリエチレンフィルムで被覆密閉し、さらに、ビニールハウスを閉め切った。３週間後にハウスを開放し、土壌を乾燥させ、耕耘後、2006年10月3日にホンレンソウの種を播種した。各区画に、種を300粒以上播種し、発芽後間引き、100株とした。なお、試験区1〜4は、土壌還元消毒法に相当する。

（３）試験結果
2006年11月10日に発病株を観察した。また、地際直下の直根を横断して導管の褐変を肉眼観察した。さらに、地際直下の直根の横断片を選択培地上に置床し、萎凋病菌の感染の有無を調査した。

＜ホウレンソウ萎凋病発病調査結果＞
表１１に萎凋株率、根部褐変率、検出率、防除価を示す。なお、各数値は、以下の通り算出した。萎凋病発病株とは、生育中、肉眼的に生育が悪く萎凋したり、立ち枯れしたりしたものである。
萎凋株率＝萎凋病発病株数／調査株数×１００ （調査株数：１００×２）
根部褐変率＝根部褐変発現株数／調査株数×１００ （調査株数：３０×２）
検出率＝検出株数／調査株数×１００ （調査株数：３０×２）
防除価＝（１−試験区の褐変率／試験区８の褐変率)×１００

いずれの試験区でも発病株はほとんど認められなかった。地際部直下の根部の褐変の程度は、試験区１〜試験区４（エタノール水溶液処理区）で10〜18.3％、試験区８（無処理区）の69.2%に比べると、防除効果が認められた。圃場要水量以上の水と一定量のエタノールの土壌注入および土壌還元化によりホウレンソウ萎凋病を防除する効果が判明した。
[Example 1-19 to Example 1-22], [Comparative Example 1-18 to Comparative Example 1-21]
Spinach wilt fungus when ethanol solution, water, bran or soyline (mixture of DD and chloropicrin (chlorpicrin 40.0%, 1,3-dichloropropene (DD) 52.0%)) is contained in the soil in the greenhouse The control effect of was investigated.
(1) Specimen First, spinach wilt fungus for embedding in soil was prepared as follows.

Spinach wilt fungus HI4-32: cultured with 1-2 cm straw for 2 months, about 10 were packed in a non-woven bag of 95 mm x 70 mm (tea pack: polypropylene, polyester, rayon).

Non-woven bag filled with straw that adsorbs spinach wilt fungus prepared above after sterilizing all the soil in the greenhouse (water content 16.4% by weight) and confirming that the fungus has disappeared Was buried in the soil, and the soil was contaminated with spinach wilt fungus.
And the soil in the greenhouse (water content 15.2% by weight) was partitioned with a concrete frame. The area of each section is 1.6 m ² .

(2) Test conditions
On September 7, 2006, the chemicals shown in Table 10 were diluted with a predetermined amount of water, poured into the soil of each test section (each of the two sections), and stirred well with the soil. The film was hermetically sealed with a polyethylene film, and the greenhouse was closed. After 3 weeks, the house was opened, the soil was dried, and after plowing, seeds of Honsou were sown on October 3, 2006. In each compartment, more than 300 seeds were sown and thinned after germination to 100 strains. Test sections 1 to 4 correspond to the soil reduction disinfection method.

(3) Test results
On November 10, 2006, the pathogenic strain was observed. In addition, the browning of the conduit was observed with the naked eye across the direct root immediately below the ground. Furthermore, a horizontal fragment of the root immediately below the ground was placed on a selective medium, and the presence or absence of the wilt disease was examined.

<Results of spinach wilt pathogenesis>
Table 11 shows the wilting strain rate, root browning rate, detection rate, and control value. Each numerical value was calculated as follows. The wilt disease-causing strain is one that grows badly and grows wilt or withered during growth.
Dwarf strain rate = number of strains causing wilt disease / number of surveyed strains × 100 (number of surveyed strains: 100 × 2)
Root browning rate = Root browning expression number / Investigation strain number × 100 (Investigation strain number: 30 × 2)
Detection rate = number of detected strains / number of surveyed strains × 100 (number of surveyed strains: 30 × 2)
Control value = (1− browning rate of test zone / browning rate of test zone 8) × 100

Almost no diseased strain was found in any of the test plots. The degree of browning of the root part directly under the ground is 10 to 18.3% in the test zone 1 to the test zone 4 (ethanol aqueous solution treatment zone), and the control effect is recognized compared with 69.2% in the test zone 8 (no treatment zone). It was. The effect of controlling spinach wilt disease was confirmed by soil injection and soil reconstitution with more water than the field water requirement and a certain amount of ethanol.

（２）試験条件
（１）の試験体（同じ試験区のもの４つ×５試験区＝２０個）を２５℃の恒温室（暗条件）に、１週間保持し、その後上蓋を開けて恒温室の外（室内）に放置した。
各試験区の土壌の酸化還元電位と酸素濃度を、２５℃の恒温室における１週間に３０分間隔で測定した。土壌の酸化還元電位は、Orion 617900 pHutureTM QuatrodeTM pH複合電極（pH/ORP/Temp）を用いて測定し、酸素濃度は、酸素濃度計（FOXY Fiber Optic Oxygen Sensors (OptoSerius)、FOXY-T1000-RTD）を用いて測定した。なお、pH/ORP電極の外径が12.9 mm、酸素濃度計の酸素センサーの外径が6.35 mmであるので、プラスチック容器の上蓋にこの大きさより少し大きな穴をあけ、この穴からpH/ORP電極と酸素センサーを土壌中に挿し込み、上蓋の穴にシリコーンゴムシーラントを充填し、気密性を保つようにした。

（４）試験結果
ａ) 発芽抑制効果
各プラスチック容器のコムギ（農林61号、100粒）、レタス（グレートレークス366号、200粒）、イネ（コシヒカリ、100粒）の発芽している種の数を調査し、発芽率を算出した。表１３に、各試験区における発芽率を示す。各試験区は、同じ試験区において、試験体は４つずつであるので、その平均値も記載した。
試験区２、試験区３のエタノール水溶液を充填した土壌における種の発芽率が、薬剤を水、フスマ、糖蜜とした試験区における発芽率より著しく低く、エタノール水溶液による土壌還元消毒の発芽抑制効果を確認できた。

ｂ) 土壌酸化還元状態、酸素濃度の把握
各試験区の土壌の酸化還元電位、酸素濃度を図８に示す。試験区１では、還元状態とならず、試験区２、試験区３で試験開始から急激に還元状態に移行している。また、酸素濃度も、試験区１では、ゆっくりと酸素濃度が低下しているが、試験区２、試験区３では、試験開始から急激に酸素濃度が低下した。[Example 2-1 to Example 2-2, Comparative Example 2-1 to Comparative Example 2-3]
<Sprouting suppression test, soil redox state, and oxygen concentration determination test>
The germination inhibitory effect of wheat, lettuce and rice seeds when water, ethanol aqueous solution, bran or molasses was contained in the soil was evaluated. Wheat, lettuce, and rice have the same germinability as weeds, so they were substituted. At the same time, the redox potential and oxygen concentration of the soil were observed.

(1) Specimen
First, in 20 plastic containers (made of polypropylene, internal dimensions 160 x 160 x 154 mm, internal volume: 3.94 L, with top lid for sealing), 3,540 g of Kuroboku soil (moisture content 17.4% by weight) in Agricultural Environment Technology Laboratory Respectively. The drugs in the five test groups shown in Table 12 were mixed in each of four plastic container soils and sealed with a container top lid. The drug was filled into a plastic container so that there was no air in the container. In addition, ethanol and molasses, which are drugs, are diluted with a predetermined amount of water so as to have the concentrations shown in Table 12. In the case of bran, 30 g of bran and water were mixed and stirred, and then filled into a plastic container.
In each container, wheat (Norin 61, 100 grains), lettuce (Great Lakes 366, 200 grains) and rice (Koshihikari, 100 grains) were simultaneously sown at a soil depth of about 1 cm in the container. Test areas 2 and 3 correspond to the soil reduction and disinfection method.

(2) Test specimens of test condition (1) (4 in the same test section × 5 test sections = 20) are kept in a constant temperature room (dark condition) at 25 ° C. for one week, and then the top lid is opened and the temperature is kept constant. Left outside the room (indoor).
The oxidation-reduction potential and oxygen concentration of the soil in each test area were measured at intervals of 30 minutes per week in a constant temperature room at 25 ° C. The redox potential of the soil was measured using an Orion 617900 pHutureTM QuatrodeTM pH composite electrode (pH / ORP / Temp), and the oxygen concentration was measured using an oximeter (FOXY Fiber Optic Oxygen Sensors (OptoSerius), FOXY-T1000-RTD) It measured using. Since the outer diameter of the pH / ORP electrode is 12.9 mm and the outer diameter of the oxygen sensor of the oximeter is 6.35 mm, a hole slightly larger than this size is made in the top lid of the plastic container, and the pH / ORP electrode is opened from this hole. The oxygen sensor was inserted into the soil, and the hole in the top lid was filled with silicone rubber sealant to keep it airtight.

(4) Test results a) Inhibition of germination Each plastic container of wheat (Norin 61, 100 grains), lettuce (Great Lakes 366, 200 grains), rice (Koshihikari, 100 grains) The number was investigated and the germination rate was calculated. Table 13 shows the germination rate in each test section. Since each test group has four specimens in the same test group, the average value is also described.
The germination rate of seeds in the soil filled with aqueous ethanol solution in Test Zone 2 and Test Zone 3 is significantly lower than the germination rate in the test zone where the chemicals are water, bran, and molasses. It could be confirmed.

b) Grasp of soil redox state and oxygen concentration Fig. 8 shows the redox potential and oxygen concentration of the soil in each test section. In the test group 1, it is not in the reduced state, but in the test group 2 and the test group 3, the state is rapidly shifted to the reduced state from the start of the test. In addition, the oxygen concentration was slowly decreased in the test group 1, but in the test group 2 and the test group 3, the oxygen concentration was rapidly decreased from the start of the test.

[Example 3] Weed germination inhibition test A weed germination inhibition test using lettuce seeds was performed as follows.
25 g of air-dried soil (black soil of Agricultural Environment Technology Laboratory field, moisture content 27.4% by weight) in a 50 ml Erlenmeyer flask with stopper was added, and after adding the ethanol aqueous solution shown in FIG. It hold | maintained in the thermostat set to (degreeC). One week later, the color and odor of the soil were observed, the germination state of the lettuce seeds was observed, and the germination rate is shown in FIG. As shown in FIG. 9, germination of lettuce was suppressed at a dilute ethanol concentration. The germination rate of lettuce decreased as the ethanol concentration increased and as the amount added increased. In particular, when the ethanol concentration was 0.8% by volume, 1.6% by volume and 3.2% by volume, the germination rate was 0%, and a remarkable effect was observed. It is known that lettuce seeds have germinability similar to that of weeds. From these facts, it was found that a weed germination inhibitory effect can be obtained by adding a dilute aqueous ethanol solution to the soil and holding it for 1 week. This test corresponds to the soil moistening / disinfecting method.

表１４のとおり土壌１０L当りエタノール１００ｍｌ（エタノール７．１５容量％）以上でネコブセンチュウのセンチュウ密度０頭／生土２０ｇであり、また、エタノール５０ｍｌ（エタノール３．７１容量％）においても平均４頭／生土２０ｇであることから、一定量のエタノール水溶液の土壌注入によりセンチュウ密度を著しく減少させる効果が判明した。
[Example 4-1 to Example 4-5], [Comparative Example 4-1 to Comparative Example 4-2]
Soil moistening and disinfection of root-knot nematode with an aqueous ethanol solution was performed as follows.
A planter (60 cm × 15 cm × 10 cm) was filled with 10 L (11.7 kg) of root-knot nematode growing soil (soil moisture was 11.1 wt%), and a predetermined amount of ethanol was injected and sealed with a white plastic bag. The root-knot nematode density was examined by the Beerman method for 10 days at room temperature of 18-25 ° C. ALC in Table 14 is ethanol, and the density of ethanol treatment was injected stepwise to compare nematode densities. Moreover, all were performed by six planters and the nematode density was calculated | required. In the soil, ethanol is diluted with soil-containing water to form an ethanol aqueous solution having the concentration shown in Table 14. The examples in this test correspond to the soil moistening / disinfecting method.

As shown in Table 14, the density of root-knot nematode nematode is 0 head / 20 g of raw soil when ethanol is 100 ml (ethanol 7.15 vol%) or more per 10 liters of soil, and an average of 4 heads / 50 ml of ethanol (ethanol 3.71 vol%) Since it was 20 g of raw soil, the effect of significantly reducing nematode density by soil injection with a certain amount of aqueous ethanol solution was found.

図１０〜１２のとおりエタノール添加量又は副生アルコール添加量が多くなるほど雑草の本数、重量、植被率とも減少した。特に土壌１０ｋｇ当りエタノール、副生エタノール１００ｍｌで顕著な効果が認められた。これらのことからエタノール、副生アルコール、エタノールと酢酸の混合液のいずれも土壌中に注入し、密封下で一定期間保持することによって、雑草発芽抑制効果を得られることが判明した。
[Example 5] Weed germination inhibition test The weed germination inhibition test was conducted as follows.
A plastic bag was charged with 10 kg of soil (soil type is loam soil, water content is 1.8% by weight), and a predetermined amount of a chemical such as ethanol was added thereto and sealed, and placed at 25 ° C. for 7 days. After the treatment, the entire amount of soil was returned to the planter, watered and left as it was, and the growth of weeds was observed. Since the seasonal pattern outside temperature was low, the test was conducted in a house (room temperature is 20 ° C. or higher). In addition, the test plots are as shown in Table 15, and the test was repeated three times in one plot. After about 70 days, the vegetation coverage of the growing weeds was measured, then each weed was cut one by one above the soil surface and the number and weight were measured. The treatment date was December 20, 2004, and the test result measurement date was March 1, 2005. The test results are shown in FIGS. The examples in this test correspond to the soil moistening / disinfecting method.

As shown in FIGS. 10 to 12, the number of weeds, the weight, and the vegetation coverage decreased as the amount of ethanol added or by-product alcohol added increased. In particular, significant effects were observed with 100 ml of ethanol and 100 ml of by-product ethanol. From these facts, it was revealed that weed germination inhibitory effect can be obtained by injecting all of ethanol, by-product alcohol, and a mixed solution of ethanol and acetic acid into the soil and keeping it sealed for a certain period of time.

[Reference Example 1] Bactericidal power test against cucumber vine split fungus The ethanol bactericidal power test against cucumber vine split fungus was performed as follows.
Dilute ethanol (concentration 99.5% by volume; Wako Pure Chemical Reagent special grade) with sterile distilled water to a predetermined concentration (0, 5, 10, 20% by volume) with sterile distilled water, and add 10 mL to a sterile test tube with a screw cap. I took them one by one. To this, 0.1 mL of a spore suspension of a cucumber vine split strain previously prepared is added, and the mixture is allowed to stand at 20 ° C. After the addition of the spore solution, the test solution was collected at regular intervals, diluted as appropriate, and smeared plate culture was performed in PDA medium (25 ° C., 3 to 5 days). The number of surviving bacteria was measured from the number of colonies produced. The result is shown in FIG. When immersed in 20% by volume of ethanol, after one day, it becomes below the detection limit (<10 ² CFU / mL), and it can be said that a very high effect is obtained as a fumigant. In addition, even at 10% by volume of ethanol, 4.5 × 10 ² CFU / mL after 6 days of immersion and below the detection limit after 9 days. Therefore, it was suggested that even 10 volume% ethanol can be sufficiently sterilized after immersion for 7 to 9 days. Note that with 5% by volume of ethanol, no change was observed in the number of surviving spores even after 2 weeks of immersion, and a bactericidal effect at this concentration cannot be expected at room temperature. From the above results, it was suggested that if a concentration of 10% by volume or more of ethanol is maintained in soil at room temperature, a high bactericidal effect can be obtained against spore-cured spore fungus spores for about one week.

エタノール10容量％単独では4時間経過後でも殺菌効果が認められず（図１４）、酢酸0.1容量％単独では検出限界以下まで殺菌されるのに2時間を要したが（図１５）、エタノール10容量％及び酢酸0.1容量％を混合すると30分以内で殺菌され、相乗効果が認められた（図１６）。なお、エタノール10容量％と酢酸0.2容量％の混合では10分以内に殺菌されたが、これは酢酸濃度が高くなると酢酸単独の殺菌効果が大きくなるためであり、エタノールも同様に濃度が高くなるとその殺菌効果は顕著となることが図１４、図１５から確認できる。本試験の結果、単独ではそれほど大きくない殺菌効果を示す濃度のエタノール、酢酸を混合して使用すると殺菌効果が大きくなることから、相乗効果を有すことが判明した。[Reference Example 2] Bactericidal power test against tomato bacterial wilt fungus The bactericidal power test of ethanol and acetic acid against tomato bacterial wilt fungus was performed as follows.
The test is a test for observing a change in bactericidal power due to ethanol concentration (Test A), a test for observing a change in bactericidal power due to an acetic acid concentration (Test B), and a test for observing the bactericidal effect when ethanol and acetic acid are combined (Test B). It is roughly divided into Test C) (Table 16). The test procedure was as follows. First, 1 platinum ear of the test strain (Ralstonia solanacearum Kochi Tomato 3-2) was inoculated into 10 mL of Nutrient broth (Difco) and cultured at 25 ° C. with shaking. Then dilute ethanol (99.5% by volume; Wako Pure Chemical Reagent Special Grade) or acetic acid (99.7% by volume; Wako Pure Chemical Reagent Special Grade) with sterilized distilled water to a predetermined concentration (Table 16), and place it in a sterile test tube. Dispense 10 mL each. To this, 0.1 mL of the diluted bacterial broth culture solution was added so that the initial bacterial count was about 10 ⁶ CFU / mL. This was allowed to stand at 20 ° C., 0.1 mL of the solution was sampled at regular intervals (Table 16), diluted as appropriate, and smeared plate cultured with nutrient agar. After culturing at 25 ° C. for 2 to 3 days, the number of colonies produced was counted, and the number of surviving bacteria in the solution was measured. The test results are shown in FIGS.

Bactericidal effects were not observed even after 4 hours had passed with 10% ethanol alone (FIG. 14), and 2 hours were required to sterilize below the detection limit with 0.1% by volume acetic acid alone (FIG. 15). When volume% and 0.1 volume% acetic acid were mixed, the mixture was sterilized within 30 minutes, and a synergistic effect was observed (FIG. 16). In addition, the mixture of ethanol 10 volume% and acetic acid 0.2 volume% was sterilized within 10 minutes. This is because the sterilization effect of acetic acid alone increases as the concentration of acetic acid increases. It can be confirmed from FIGS. 14 and 15 that the sterilizing effect becomes remarkable. As a result of this test, it was found that the use of a mixture of ethanol and acetic acid at concentrations that show a bactericidal effect that is not so large alone increases the bactericidal effect, and thus has a synergistic effect.

エタノール20容量％単独及び酢酸0.1〜0.2容量％単独では4時間経過後も殺菌効果がほとんどないが、エタノール20容量％及び酢酸0.1容量％を混合すると、10分以内で検出限界以下まで殺菌された。また、同じ条件で酢酸濃度を0.2容量％に上げると、さらに殺菌力が向上した。よって、青枯病菌と同様、キュウリつる割病菌に対しても、エタノール及び酢酸の併用により、殺菌力の向上が期待できることが判明した。[Reference Example 3] Bactericidal power test against cucumber vine split fungus The ethanol and acetic acid bactericidal tests against cucumber vine split fungus were performed as follows.
A test strain (Cusarium oxysporum f. Sp. Cucumerium MAFF 74404) was cultured in PDA medium at 25 ° C. for 2 months. Directly add physiological saline with surfactant (SDS 0.01%, NaCl 0.85%), scrape the surface of the medium with a platinum loop, and pipette to suspend mold spores. The mixture was further stirred to disperse the spores, filtered through sterilized gauze to remove mycelia, and then washed with sterilized physiological saline to adjust the spore concentration to about 10 ⁶ CFU / mL. Ethanol (99.5% by volume; Wako Pure Chemical Reagent Special Grade) and acetic acid (99.7% by volume; Wako Pure Chemical Reagent Special Grade) are diluted to the prescribed concentration (Table 17) with sterilized distilled water, and 10 mL each is dispensed into sterile test tubes. Then, 0.1 mL of the spore suspension was added and allowed to stand at 20 ° C. (the number of spores was about 10 ⁴ CFU / mL). After a fixed time (Table 17), 0.1 mL was collected, diluted appropriately, inoculated into PDA medium, and cultured at 25 ° C. for 5 days. From the number of colonies generated, the number of surviving bacteria in the solution was measured. The results are shown in FIG.

Ethanol 20% by volume and acetic acid 0.1-0.2% by volume alone have almost no bactericidal effect after 4 hours, but when ethanol 20% by volume and acetic acid 0.1% by volume were mixed, it was sterilized to below the detection limit within 10 minutes. . Further, when the acetic acid concentration was increased to 0.2% by volume under the same conditions, the sterilizing power was further improved. Therefore, it was found that, as with bacterial wilt fungus, sterilizing power can be expected to improve against cucumber vine split fungus by the combined use of ethanol and acetic acid.

図１８は、エタノール濃度0.2容量％、図１９は、エタノール濃度2.0容量％、図２０はエタノール濃度20.0容量％のエタノール水溶液を用いた結果である。図１８〜図２０のとおり土壌中に酢酸が生成することを確認できた。Reference Example 4 Ethanol Acetic Acid Conversion Test It was confirmed by the following that ethanol was converted to acetic acid in soil.
25 g of air-dried soil (Agricultural Environment Technology Laboratory field, black soil, water content 27.4% by weight) 25 g was put into a 50 ml Erlenmeyer flask with stopper, and after adding an ethanol aqueous solution, it was sealed and set to 25 ° C. It was kept in a thermostat. In order to analyze acetic acid produced over time, distilled water was added, and after ultrasonic extraction for 5 minutes, filtered using Whatman's Mini-UniPrep Syringeless Filter, Polyvinylydene fluoride (PVDF, Pore size 0.45μm) LC-UV analysis was performed under the conditions shown in Table 18. Three types of ethanol aqueous solutions having ethanol concentrations of 0.2 vol%, 2.0 vol%, and 20.0 vol% were used.

18 shows the results of using an ethanol aqueous solution with an ethanol concentration of 0.2 vol%, FIG. 19 with an ethanol concentration of 2.0 vol%, and FIG. 20 with an ethanol concentration of 20.0 vol%. It was confirmed that acetic acid was generated in the soil as shown in FIGS.

[Reference Example 5] Soil fumigant coating material transmission rate test Generally, when soil sterilization (soil fumigation) is performed, a coating material (plastic film) is used. Soil in which ethanol is coated with a gas barrier coating material (plastic film) with an oxygen gas permeability of a predetermined value or less by a transpiration machine composed of a heating part, nozzle, air blowing part, chemical tank, pressurized air, etc. There is a soil fumigation method that diffuses between the surface of the soil and the film. Here, the coating material permeation rate test of the soil fumigant was conducted.
With reference to the JIS Z 0208 moisture permeability test, a cup made of corrosion-resistant stainless steel (SUS316) (permeation test area 5 cm ² , internal volume about 15 ml) can be made and the film can be fixed without using O-rings Processed to become. 5-10 ml of soil fumigant was poured into this container and kept at 15, 30, 45, 60 ° C. for 23 hours in a thermostatic device. The air in the thermostatic device was always ventilated (about 10 L / min) so that the concentration of the fumigant was sufficiently low compared to the inside of the container. The measurement was performed in triplicate, a 0.05 mm-thick plastic film was provided, and the permeation rate was determined from the weight loss of the fumigant using a balance before and after the treatment (FIGS. 21 to 24). In addition, the symbol in a figure means the following coating | covering materials (plastic film).
PE: Polyethylene
PVC: Polyvinyl chloride
PE + α: Polyethylene (talc talc: the film surface is treated with hydrous magnesium silicate (3MgO · 4SiO2 · H2O))
Toago Barrier (Barrier Star): EVOH / Alloy Resin Organoloy: Polyamide / Alloy Resin
EVOH: Ethylene-vinyl alcohol copolymer resin
PET: Polyethylene terephthalate
CTFE: Trifluoroethylene chloride resin
ETFE: Tetrafluoroethylene-ethylene copolymer
FEP: Tetrafluoroethylene-hexafluoropropylene copolymer
PFA: Tetrafluoroethylene-perfluorovinyl ether copolymer In general, the gas permeation rate is measured using a permeation cell having a structure in which a test film is fixed between two upper and lower measurement cells. It is difficult to condense the fumigant gas in the measuring device. In the measurement method implemented this time, the fumigant gas reached the saturated vapor pressure inside the container, and the upper part is open, so a sufficiently low gas concentration is maintained compared to the inside of the container, and a sufficient concentration gradient is maintained during the measurement. It is close to the actual usage scene. Also, by not using the O-ring, the loss of fumigant gas due to PTFE, Viton, etc., which was the cause of over-evaluation when measuring barrier films, could be avoided.
The coefficient of variation in each measurement was 9-15%, and good results were obtained. Although the minimum measurable permeation rate depends on the performance of the balance used, it is 0.09 g / m ² / hr, which can be proposed as a simple measurement method. As a result of this test, conventional polyethylene and polyvinyl chloride films have an extremely low fumigant gas retention function, and thus a barrier film must be introduced.
However, plastic film transmission rate of the ethanol in the case of a polyethylene film and PVC film compared to other fumigant, respectively ^{1.0~12 g / m 2 /hr/50μm,4.8~17 g /} m 2 / hr / 50μm, which is less than 1/70 that of other fumigant gases. This indicates that a conventional agricultural film has sufficient gas retention without using a barrier film and can prevent leakage into the environment.

The soil reduction disinfecting method and the soil reducing disinfectant of the present invention are useful as methods and agents for controlling soil pests and controlling weed germination that damage crops. In addition, it is composed of environmentally friendly ingredients as an alternative to the methyl bromide (soil fumigant) that causes ozone depletion, and because it is safe to handle, it does not affect workers, the human body, and the surrounding environment. It is useful as a soil disinfecting method and a soil disinfectant because it has a very high soil disinfecting effect without causing harmful components to remain in the crop harvested in the soil after disinfection. INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY The soil moistening / disinfecting method and soil moistening / disinfecting agent of the present invention are useful as methods and agents for controlling soil pests and controlling weed germination that damage crops. In addition, it is composed of environmentally friendly ingredients as an alternative to the methyl bromide (soil fumigant) that causes ozone depletion, and because it is safe to handle, it does not affect workers, the human body, and the surrounding environment. It is useful as a soil disinfecting method and a soil disinfectant because it has a very high soil disinfecting effect without causing harmful components to remain in the crop harvested in the soil after disinfection. INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY The soil disinfectant irrigation system of the present invention is useful for rapidly irrigating the soil reductive disinfectant and soil wet disinfectant from the bottom of the soil to the ground surface without requiring manual labor in fields and horticultural facilities. .

Claims (7)

The soil for growing crops contains an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is not less than 0.3% and not more than 7.0% by volume) and is submerged, while suppressing the evaporation of water and ethanol. A soil reduction / disinfection method characterized in that the soil is kept in a reduced state to control soil pests or to suppress germination of weeds. 2. The soil reductive disinfection method according to claim 1, wherein the soil for growing the crop is a soil before sowing or before planting, and the soil is flooded from the bottom of the soil to the ground surface. Using a liquid fertilizer mixer, ethanol is mixed into water to prepare an aqueous ethanol solution (however, the ethanol content is 0.3 to 20% by volume), and the aqueous ethanol solution is irrigated to the soil using a irrigation tube. The soil reduction disinfection method according to claim 2, wherein the soil is put into a flooded state. The soil reduction disinfection method according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the evaporation of water and ethanol is suppressed by covering the surface of soil treated with an aqueous ethanol solution with a plastic film or sheet. The soil reduction disinfection method according to claim 1, wherein the ethanol evaporation is suppressed by enclosing the aqueous ethanol-treated soil in a plastic film bag. The soil reduction disinfection method according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein ethanol is by-product ethanol obtained in a distillation purification process of fermented ethanol. The soil reduction disinfection method according to claim 2, wherein the submerged state is to contain an ethanol aqueous solution in an amount equal to or greater than the field capacity.

Images