碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響

全文

(1)植物保護學會會刊. 45：101-116, 2003. 101. 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響姚美吉 1*. 1. ꕸ 2. ꕸ. 羅幹成 1. 萬㆒怒 2. 쏺깰뙭 륁ꥥ라륁띾룕엧꧒ ꗎ냊 ꑪ뻇ꗍ 띾뻷륱ꑵ땻꡴. (. ꣼ꓩ듁ꅇ. 뗘ꗁ냪 91 ꙾ 4 ꓫ 20 ꓩ). 멋 ꯀ과Ꙏ*ꅂ 띆 ꅂ롕ꑀꯣ 듓ꭏ라ꕚ 45：101－116. 2003. 닕. 굮. 뵖ꛌ뭐빐냢샴맒맯ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ깠싎땯ꗍ. 뱶암. 뷕걤ꕘ뱴ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ꧱롭꧳ꯇ럅롧ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꯡꅁ깠싎 땯ꗍ ꟎땯뉻셗ꛌ 땯ꗍꛌ뙈ꅝSitophilus oryzae (L.)ꅞ 싎볆 ꧳ꗕꛌꅃ 끑ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ귬ꙝꅁꕈ ꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖뭳롧 10 맯ꛌ뙈 Ꝛꑀ뙧 뵟뵜 셗ꛌ꧎ꗕꛌꅁ롧쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁ 셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈 땯ꗍ볆 116 ꅁ뭐뵟뵜 ꛌ뙈볆깴 엣뗛ꅁ롧ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꅁ셗 ꛌ ꛌ뙈볆 780 ꅁꭨ ꧳뵟뵜 ꛌ뙈볆ꅝ155 ꅞ ꅃ뵖ꛌꯡ ꗕꛌꅁ롧쁸 ꙳ꑀ귓ꓫ때ꛌ뙈땯ꗍꅁ롧ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꯡꛌ뙈땯ꗍ볆 0.3 ꅁ뭐셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈볆 ꧺ엣깴 ꅃꕈꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖뭳쁸꙳ 귓ꓫ 뵟뵜ꅁ ꩇꗧ곛꛼ꅁ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ 볆 ꧳ꗕꛌꅃ엣ꗜ뵟뵜뵖뭳 셗ꛌ껉ꅁ뛈 ꕨ뽯듟때ꩫ ꕨꛌ뙈Ꝛ꧎ 싎ꅁꙝ ꛌ뙈녋ꯗ 듮ꓖꅃ셗ꛌꙁ뵖뭳 ꗕꛌ껉ꅁꙝ뵖 ꑪ ꓀뵫 뱨뛈돑굆ꣅ ꓀ꅁ 맯ꛌ뙈Ꝛ꧎ 싎 ꧺ엣꽽썡꣏싎볆뱀듮ꅃꕈꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖뭳ꯡ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌꅂꓴ걾 ꗕꛌ 깠싎곛ꅁ ꕄ굮깠싎ꛌ뙈ꕾꅁꥼ 뵟뵜 땯ꗍ 뿁 ꅝCadra cautella (Walker)ꅞ꓎ꕾꛌ뫳 ꅝCorcyra cephalonica (Stainton)ꅞꅁ엣ꗜꑰꕝꛌ깠싎 ꕝꝴ 녱뵟뵜꧒녡꣓ 싎 ꕾꅁ뵖ꛌ샴맒 ꛃ걖꧒뱗ꕛ 깠싎ꑝ걏ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ깠싎땯ꗍ ꕴꑀ꣓ ꅃꑰꕝ룋ꛌ뵖ꛌꯡ쁸싃꧳ 10ꉊ샴맒ꅁ 뷗셗ꛌ꧎ꗕꛌ깠싎 땯ꗍ ꫱ ꧳륳ꅁ뭐ꯇ럅샴맒쁸싃 ꧺ엣깴 ꅁꙝ ꝑꗎꝃ럅샴맒쁸싃녎꿠 껄 ꝃꑰꕝ룋 ꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍꅃ (쏶쇤뗼ꅇ뵖ꛌ샴맒ꅂ쁸싃럅ꯗꅂ뵟뵜ꅂ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌꅂꛌ뙈) * 덱끔Ꝁ꫌ꅃE-mail: [email protected].

(2) 102. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. 뫼 ꑰꕝ룋ꛌꙝ싎깠냝썄덑끨덦뉶ꗾ꙾꛴ 군곹Ꙣ 5ꉈꕈꑗꅁ덹 롧샙ꑗ ꑪ 띬 ꅃ 뷕걤꣤끨덦ꛌ 깠싎곛ꅁꕄ굮 ꛌ뙈 ꅝSitophilus oryzae (L.)ꅞ 깠꧒덹 ꅃꙢꕈ 덜Ꙩ돸ꝩ ꯼ꕘꛌ뙈 ꧶ 깠 뻣 (6, 17) 뵟뵜 ꅁꕂ뵟뵜 ꛌ뙈 땯ꗍ녋ꯗꗧ곆ꝃ (2, 3) ꅃꛓ뵖ꛌ 걱 덜Ꙩ뵜뻷ꅁ꣤뻷 녠꙳Ꙣ덜Ꙩ 깥꧶뉍 득ꛌꅁ 덜Ꙩ 깠싎 듾ꗍ ꅁꙝ 뇀뷗ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠싎땯 ꗍ ꑪ ꓀ꕘ꧳뵖ꛌ 걱꧒덹 ꛃ걖ꅃ꭯ ꛌ냓꓏ Ꙣ꣤띳ꯘ뵖ꛌ뱴꣏ꗎꫬ듁ꅁꗍ ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ깠싎땯ꗍꣃ ꧺ엣 ꝃꅁꙝ ꕄ 굮깠싎땯ꗍ귬ꙝ귈녯뙩ꑀꡂ 끑ꅃ 뵟뵜 깠싎 땯ꗍꅁꕄ굮ꕈ뵜엻 （Rhyzopertha dominica Fabricius）볆뙱돌 Ꙩ (2, 3) ꅁ뵖뭳ꯡ 셗ꛌꭨꕈꛌ뙈 돌Ꙩ볆(5, 7) ꅃ꫱꙾꣓뷕걤ꛌ냓 쁸뵜샴맒ꅁ땯뉻ꛌ뙈 볆뙱 뱗ꕛ쇍뛕ꅁ덶 뵟뵜 땯ꗍ깠 (5) 싎 쁵뛕뫘 ꅃꕂ뇀듺뵖뭳ꯡ 셗ꛌ ꛌ 뙈땯ꗍꅁꕩ꿠 ꛛ꧳쁸싃뵟뵜ꑷꭉꑊ ꛌ 뙈싎 ꅃ ꑆ룑ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍꕄ굮귬 ꙝꅁ걏녱뵟뵜 걱ꭉꑊ꧒녡꣓ꅁ꧎걏뵖ꛌ 걱덑깠싎 ꛃ걖꧒덹 ꅁ 맪엧녱꣢ꓨ 뙩ꛦ 끑ꅁꗽꕈꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖뭳롧ꛌ뙈 셣듞륌 뵟뵜 셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌꅁꙁꡃꓫ뷕걤 ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ볆 엜꓆ꅃ끷맯ꛌ냓 뵖ꛌ샴 맒ꅁ 맪믚뷕걤ꛌ냓 쁸뵜깠싎엜꓆ꅁꗧ 뷕걤롧ꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꛌꯡ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌꅂꓴ 걾ꗕꛌ깠싎땯ꗍ볆엜꓆ꅃ 뙩ꑀꡂꑆ룑ꛃ 걖땻ꯗꅁꙐ껉꣺ꛌ냓쁸뵜ꅁ녡Ꙟ륁룕꧒ꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뙩ꛦ뵖ꛌꝀ 맯럓닕ꅁꣃ뷕걤뵖 뭳ꯡ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌꅂꓴ걾ꗕꛌ깠싎땯ꗍ볆 엜꓆ꅃ ꑆ룑뵖ꛌ샴맒맯깠싎녋ꯗ뱶암 ꕾꅁꟳ싧뉍ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠싎ꕄ굮땯ꗍ귬ꙝꅃ 小包裝米蟲害防治㆒直是個難題，為安全起見較少使用化學防治，防治㆖偏向於物理防治 (4, 15, 28, 29) 。因米象對溫溼度變. 第2期. 2003. 化敏感且低溫環境會延長其生長期，在溫控超市環境，米象發生數能明顯降低，卻無法完全抑制米象發生 (5) 。針對碾製後小包裝糙米或白米，本實驗將其放置於室溫及 10℃低溫冰箱㆗，以比較其害蟲之發生數，並評估低溫儲藏環境對阻絕害蟲發生效果，開發最佳防蟲之道。. ꟷ껆뭐ꓨꩫ ꣑룕ꟷ껆 ꣑룕ꛌ뙈ꭙꕈ셗ꛌ륽꡼ꅁ꧱롭꧳直筒 곁볾뉾ꅝꑦ깼 8cmꅂ 16.5cmꅞ ꅁꙁ꧳ ꯭럅뵣 륽꡼ꅁ륽꡼샴맒 30ꇓ2ꉊꅁ곛맯 럃ꯗ 75ꇓ10 % RHꅁ때ꗺ럓ꅃ꧒ 룕엧 뵟뵜ꅂ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌꅂꓴ걾ꗕꛌ ꗑ맼꓆ ꫡ뻂뙭꫷뱛ꛌ맪띾 ꕱꅝ 뫙 A 뱴ꅞ꓎ 굝껟 굢료십ꑳꓴꛌ맪띾꫑ꗷ ꕱ ꅝ 뫙 B 뱴ꅞ ꣑ꅃ뵟뵜듁ꝏ 89 ꙾ꑇ듁 Ꝁꅁ뵟뵜쁸싃껉 곹 귓ꓫꅁ꫷뱛ꛌ ꣑ 뵟뵜 ꫄뵟ꅁꑳꓴꛌ ꣑뵟뵜 뵟ꅃ ꕈꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꛌ맯셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯 ꗍ 뱶암 ꛌ냓 ꣑뵟뵜ꯡꗽ꓀룋 3kg 룋ꅁ꧱ 롭꧳Ꙃ뵣ꅁ럅ꯗ덝ꥷ 륳ꑕ 15ꉊꅁꝎ귡ꑀ 걐듁ꯡꙁꙞ럅ꅁꣃꕈ뽺뫴뽺 득꽤 싎ꅁꝀ 싎ꗎ뵟뵜ꅃ꣺ 9 ꕝ때싎뵟뵜ꅁ ꡃꕝ 500gꅁꡃꕝ ꑊ 10 맯ꛐ꓆ 3 ꓑ ꛌ뙈 싎ꅁꗴ꣤셣듞 7 ꓑꅁ7 ꓑꯡ녎 싎ꗾ ꅃ3 ꕝ뵟뵜뫻꯹뉻 맯럓닕ꅁ3 ꕝꗎꑰ 뵜뻷ꅝStake testing huskerꅞ닦듟 셗 ꛌꅁꣃꕈꓑ 곶뿽꣤ 뙱ꅁ 뫢뵖셗뉶ꅝ뵖 셗뉶ꇗ뵖ꯡ셗ꛌ / 귬뵟뵜 ꅞ ꅃꕴ 3 ꕝ 쑾쓲ꗎꑰ 뫫ꛌ뻷ꅝMcGill No.2 millerꅞ 뵖 ꗕꛌꅁꙐ볋 ꣤ 뙱ꣃ 뫢뵖ꗕ뉶ꅝ뵖 ꗕ뉶 ꇗ 뵖ꯡꗕꛌ / 귬뵟뵜 ꅞꅃ뵟뵜 ꓎덂뉺ꯡ셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌ꧱롭꧳꯭럅뵣 ꅝ30 ꇓ2ꉊꅁ75ꇓ10 % RHꅞ ꅃ뵖ꛌꯡꡃꓫ뷕걤ꑀ ꛌ뙈 싎꓎ 싎볆ꅁ 싎ꙁ꧱Ꙟꅁ 싎.

(3) 103. 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. ꅁ덳쓲뷕걤ꑔ귓ꓫꅃ뷕걤꧒녯ꛌ뙈 싎볆ꅁ꣤깴 ꕈ엜ꓨ꓀꩒ꅝANOVAꅞ뙩 ꛦ샋ꥷꅁ굙 F 귈륆꣬엣뗛ꅝP<0.05ꅞ ꅁꙁ以 Duncan’s 多變域測驗分析進行多重比較其顯著性 (25) ，以了解小型碾米機對米象卵及初齡幼蟲的影響。相同方法，在 7 ㆝繁殖後移除成蟲，不立即碾米，再放置到 14 ㆝ 時，才將處理的稻穀碾製為糙米及白米。同樣調查並分析米象蟲數變化，以了解小型碾米機對米象幼蟲影響。 ꕈꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꛌ맯ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍ 뱶암 뵟뵜Ꙣ쁸싃규깷 ꓓ꫅ꕝ뙩ꛦ쁈뻷꣺ 볋ꅁꙕ꣺뵟뵜 6 ꕝꅁꡃꕝ 1kgꅁ꣺볋껉꓎ 1ꅂ 3 귓ꓫꯡ샋걤뵟뵜 ꧒ 땯ꗍ깠싎뫘쏾꓎ 셠싎볆ꅝꕝꝴ 싎꓎ 싎ꅞꅃꙁꕈ곛Ꙑ뵟뵜 ꣓ ꅁꝑꗎ꣤뱴냏 ꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뙩ꛦ뵖ꛌ 셗ꛌ꧎ꗕꛌꅁꙁ꓀ꝏꙢ꣤셗ꛌ병뿩ꕘꑦ쁈뻷 ꣺볋셗ꛌꅁꙢ뫫ꛌ뻷 뫝쁈뻷꣺볋ꗕꛌꅁꗕ ꛌ롧ꓴ걾뻷ꯡ 生產線末端쁈뻷꣺볋ꓴ걾 ꗕꛌꅁꡃ ꙕ 1 kgꅁꕈꛌ냓 냓ꭾ꓆뛬 덕 룋뛱 ꑰꕝ룋ꛌꅁꡃ덂뉺 6 뷆ꅃ꧒ 볋 ꭾꙢ꣺볋ꯡꅁ 녡Ꙟ륁룕꧒꧱롭꧳ꯇ럅쁸싃 ꯇꅝ럅ꯗ뵤돲곹 25ꇐ32 ꉊꅞ쁸싃ꅁꙢ덂뉺 ꯡ 1ꅂ3 귓ꓫꯡ샋걤셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌ꓎ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ ꧒ 땯ꗍ깠싎 뫘쏾꓎셠싎볆ꅃ뷕걤꧒녯 싎볆ꅁꙁ以 Duncan’s 多變域測驗分析所有害蟲發生的顯著性，顯著水準為 5 %。取樣日期分別 2001/4/26 及 2001/5/3。 ꕈꛌ냓룕엧곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ 녡Ꙟ 300kg Ꙣ륁룕꧒륁쏀닕꧒쓝뵖ꛌ뱴뙩ꛦ뵖ꛌꅁ녎 륁룕꧒ꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷꧒덂뉺 볋ꭾꝀ 맯럓 닕ꅃ꧒ 걹땻뭐ꛌ냓뵖ꛌ뱴 ꗾ곛Ꙑꅁꙁ 덂뉺ꯡ 1ꅂ3 귓ꓫꯡ샋걤셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌ꓎ꓴ걾 ꗕꛌ ꧒ 땯ꗍ깠싎 쏾꓎셠싎볆ꅁꣃ뙩 ꛦꙕ깠싎땯ꗍ 닎군꓀꩒。針對稻穀在不同碾米環境㆘，所生產之糙米、白米及水洗白米，分別比較經米商大型碾米機與農試所大型碾米機碾米後，儲藏於室溫㆘米. 象之發生，兩環境之米象數以 t-test 進行分析，顯著水準為 5 %。 ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ쁸싃꧳ 10ꉊꝃ럅Ꙃ뵣맯셗ꛌ꓎ꗕ ꛌ깠싎땯ꗍ 뱶암 ꧒ 룕엧걹땻뭐닄ꑇ ꓀ꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷 덂뉺걹땻ꑪ교곛Ꙑꅁ뛈 깴ꝏ 볋ꭾ Ꙣ꣺볋ꯡꅁ 녡Ꙟ륁룕꧒꧱롭꧳ 10ꇓ0.5ꉊ ꝃ럅Ꙃ뵣 쁸싃ꅁꙐ볋Ꙣ덂뉺ꯡ 1ꅂ3 귓ꓫ ꯡ샋걤셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌ꓎ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ ꧒ 땯ꗍ 깠싎뫘쏾꓎셠싎볆ꅃ뷕걤꧒녯 싎볆ꙁ뙩 ꛦ닎군꓀꩒。相同碾米環境，比較低溫儲藏環境對米象發生之影響，兩者之米象發生數以 t-test 進行分析，顯著水準為 5 %。. ꩇ ꕈꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꛌ맯셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯 ꗍ 뱶암 뵟뵜롧ꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖뭳ꯡ쁸꧱ꑔ귓ꓫ 듁 ꅁ뷕걤ꛌ뙈뇚롳볆뙱엜꓆ꅁ ꩇ롧 Duncan’s Ꙩ엜냬듺엧꓀꩒ꯡꙃ꧳ꫭꑀꅃ닄 ꑀ꟥룕엧ꅁꙢꛌ뙈 럭ꓑꝙ뙩ꛦ뵖뭳 셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌꅃ뵟뵜 ꛌ뙈볆뙱엜꓆ꅁ닄 1ꅂ 2ꅂ3 귓ꓫ꓀ꝏ 83.7ꅂ110ꅂ155 ꅁ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈볆뙱ꭨ꓀ꝏ 116ꅂ126ꅂ780 ꅁ ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈볆뙱꓀ꝏ 0ꅂ0.3ꅂ0.3 ꅃꙢ 닄ꑀ귓ꓫ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈볆뙱뭐뵟뵜 ꧒땯ꗍ 볆뙱 깴 엣뗛ꅁ꛽ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈볆 뙱ꭨ뭐뵟뵜꓎셗ꛌ 깴 엣뗛ꅃ닄ꑇ귓ꓫ ꓀꩒ ꩇ뭐닄ꑀ귓ꓫ곛Ꙑꅁ닄ꑔ귓ꓫꭨꝥ 뉻셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈볆뙱 ꧳뵟뵜ꅂꗕꛌꅁꛌ 뙈땯ꗍ 엣뗛깴 ꅃ뵟뵜뵖 셗ꛌ 뵖셗 뉶 79.7 %ꅁꗕꛌ 뵖ꗕ뉶 63.9 %ꅃ뵟 뵜롧ꛌ뙈쓀꧱셣듞 7 ꓩꅁꛌ뙈굙 Ꝛꛜ 뵟뵜 Ꝛ꧎ꫬ쓖 싎ꅁꗑ뵖뭳ꯡ ꩇ엣ꗜ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈Ꝛ꧎ꫬ쓖 싎ꣃ ꙝ 뵜ꛓ덑꽽썡ꅁꛓꗕꛌꭨꙝꙁ롧륌뫫ꛌ뻷뵖 뵫 뱨 ꛓ꣏ꛌ뙈Ꝛ꧎ꫬ쓖 싎꣼꣬ꧺ 엣뛋깠ꅁ꣏ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ엣뗛듮ꓖꅃ.

(4) 104. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. 第2期. 2003. ꫭꑀꅂꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷맯뵟뵜ꅂ셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ 뱶암 Table 1. The occurrence of Sitophilus oryzae in rough rice, brown rice, and milled rice processed with small rice-husking machine Treatment. After 1 month. No. of insects1) After 2 months. After 3 months. 2). 7 days after releasing S. oryzae to husk Brown rice3) Milled rice5) Rough rice. 116 a 4) 0b 84 a. 126 a 0.3 b 110 a. 780 a 0.3 b 155 b. 14 days after releasing S. oryzae to husk Brown rice Milled rice Rough rice. 96 b 0c 155 a. 131 a 0b 166 a. 698 a 0c 230 b. 1). Both alive and dead pests were counted. Alive pests were released back in sample rice. Ten pairs of S. oryzae were released in rough rice,and remove after 7 days. 3) Rough rice was husked to brown rice by Stake testing husker. 4) Means for three rice samples with different letters significantly differ by Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≦ 0.05). 5) Brown rice was husked to milled rice by McGill No.2 miller.. 2). 닄ꑇ꟥ꭨ쑾쓲꧱롭 7 ꓑꅝ싷닄ꑀꓑ쓀 ꧱Ꙁ 14 ꓑꅞꯡ뙩ꛦ뵖 ꅁ ꯡ닄 1ꅂ2ꅂ3 귓ꓫ뷕걤 ꛌ뙈싎볆엜꓆ꅁ꓀ꝏ 뵟뵜 155ꅂ166ꅂ230 ꅁ셗ꛌ 96ꅂ131ꅂ698 ꅁꛓꗕꛌ 때ꛌ뙈땯ꗍꅃ뵟뵜뵖 셗 ꛌ 뵖셗뉶 78.7 %ꅁꗕꛌ 뵖ꗕ뉶 64 %ꅃꕈ뵖 껉 뇀듺뵟뵜굙덑 깠 ꕄ굮 ꛌ뙈 싎ꅁꗑ닄ꑀ귓ꓫ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ 룻뵟뵜 ꓖꅁꗕꛌꭨ때땯ꗍꅁ뵟뵜ꅂ셗ꛌꅂ ꗕꛌꑔ꫌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ ꧺ엣깴 ꅁ엣 ꗜ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈 싎ꕩ꿠꣼뵜뱶암ꅁ ꝃ 깠싎땯ꗍꅃꗕꛌ롧뵜꓎뫫ꛌ륌땻ꅁꛌ뙈 싎꧒꣼뱶암ꭨꟳꧺ엣ꅁ ꗾ때ꛌ뙈 싎 땯ꗍꅃ 쁸싃뵟뵜 뽮뵜깠싎땯ꗍ 엜꓆ Ꙣꛌ냓규깷뙩ꛦ꣺볋뵟뵜ꅁ꣤깠싎셠 싎볆엜꓆뷕걤꓀꩒ ꩇ꙰ꫭꑇꅃA 뱴 ꫄ 뵟ꅁ꣺볋껉Ꙁ땯뉻 5 뫘깠싎ꅁ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ 뵜엻ꅂ돁 ꅝSitotroga cerealella (Olivier)ꅞ ꅂ. 샀뵜땳ꅝTribolium castaneum (Herbst)ꅞ꓎ 뻦엞뵜땳ꅝLophocateres pusillus Klugꅞ ꅁꡃ ꓧ뵟뵜 ꓀ꝏꝴ 4.3ꅂ6.8ꅂ1.0ꅂ0.5ꅂ 0.3 ꅁꕈ뵜엻땯ꗍ돌Ꙩꅁ꛻꧒ 깠싎볆 52.7 %ꅁ 볆 뙱 ꑗ 롧 ꓀ ꩒ 뭐 ꛌ 뙈 때 엣 뗛 깴 ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎ꭨ 엣뗛깴 ꅃꙁ롧ꑀ귓 ꓫ쁸싃ꅁꙕ깠싎꓀ꝏ 22.5ꅂ12.0ꅂ30.3ꅂ 1.0ꅂ0.3 ꅁꕈ돁 볆뙱돌Ꙩꅁ꛻ 45.7 %ꅁ ꛌ뙈 ꅁ꛻ 33.9 %ꅁ뵜엻닄ꑔꅁ ꛜ 18.1 %ꅃ땯ꗍꑗ돁 뭐ꛌ뙈깴 엣뗛ꅁ뭐꣤ ꕌ깠싎ꭨ 엣뗛깴 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꙕ 깠싎꓀ꝏ 212ꅂ61.5ꅂ46.3ꅂ1.0ꅂ0.8 ꅁ ꛌ뙈볆뙱 ꧳꣤ꕌ깠싎ꅁ꛻ 65.9 %ꅁ뭐 ꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꝥ엣뗛깴 ꅃ B뱴 뵟ꅁ꣺볋껉ꗧ땯뉻 5 뫘깠싎ꅁ ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ뵜엻ꅂ돁 ꅂ샀뵜땳꓎뻦엞 뵜땳ꅁ싎곛뭐 A 뱴곛Ꙑꅃ꣺볋껉싎볆꓀ꝏ 1.8ꅂ1.3ꅂ0.9ꅂ0.5ꅂ0.2 ꅁꕈꛌ뙈땯 ꗍ돌Ꙩꅁ꛻ 38.3 %ꅁ볆뙱ꑗ롧꓀꩒뭐뵜엻ꅂ 돁 때엣뗛깴 ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎ꭨ 엣뗛깴.

(5) 105. 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. ꫭꑇ.ꅂ뵟뵜꣺볋ꯡ꧳ Ꙑ쁸싃듁 뽮뵜깠싎땯ꗍ싎볆 엜꓆ Table 2. The occurrence fluctuations of stored-product insects in rough rice stored for various periods after sampling Rice and species of insects Factory A4) Sitophilus oryzae Rhyzopertha dominica Sitotroga cerealella Tribolium castaneum Lophocateres pusillus Factory B6) S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus. Sampling1) after 1 month after 3 months No. of insects 2) PR(%)3) No. of insects PR(%) No. of insects PR(%) 4.3 6.8 1.0 0.5 0.3. ab5) a bc bc c. 33.3 52.7 7.8 3.9 2.3. 22.5 12.0 30.3 1.0 0.5. ab bc a c c. 33.9 18.1 45.7 1.5 0.8. 212 62 46 1.0 0.8. a b b b b. 65.9 19.1 14.4 0.3 0.2. 1.8 1.3 0.9 0.5 0.2. a ab ab b b. 38.3 27.7 19.1 10.6 4.3. 40.3 6.9 1.8 1.3 0.2. a b b b b. 65.3 11.2 2.9 2.1 0.3. 244.0 18.6 5.8 1.3 7.8. a b b b b. 87.9 6.7 2.1 0.5 2.8. 1). Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags. No. of insects /kg, both alive and dead pests were counted. Alive pests were released back in rough rice. 3) PR, (population ratio): (number of insects of one species/total number of insects) × 100. 4) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Jinduen concrete bin. 5) Means for five insect species with different letters significantly differ by Duncan’s multiple range test (p≦0.05). 6) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Sunsweet concrete bin.. 2). ꅃꙁ쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁꙕ깠싎 40.3ꅂ6.9ꅂ 1.8ꅂ1.3ꅂ0.2 ꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ꛻ 65.3 %ꅁ 땯ꗍꑗ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 엣뗛깴 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ 귓ꓫꯡꅁꙕ깠싎 244ꅂ18.6ꅂ5.8ꅂ1.3ꅂ 7.8 ꅁꛌ뙈볆뙱 ꧳꣤ꕌ깠싎ꅁ꛻ 87.9 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꝥ엣뗛깴 ꅃ ꕈꑪ 암. 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꛌ맯셗ꛌ. 깠싎땯ꗍ. 뱶. Ꙣꛌ냓꧒꣺볋 뵟뵜롧뵖뭳ꯡꅁ셗ꛌ 쁸싃꧳ꯇ럅샴맒롧ꑀ귓ꓫ꓎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ뷕 걤ꙕ뫘깠싎 땯ꗍ뫘쏾꓎볆뙱ꣃ꓀꩒꣤ 깴 ꧊ꅁ ꩇ꙰ꫭꑔꅃA 뱴꫄뵟뵖뭳 셗 ꛌꙢꯇ럅샴맒쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꙀ땯뉻 5 뫘 뽮뵜깠싎ꅁ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ뵜엻ꅂ돁 ꅂ 뿁 ꓎ꕾꛌ뫳 ꅁꭥꑔ뫘ꗧ땯ꗍꙢ뵟뵜. ꅁꯡ꣢뫘ꭨ Ꙣ뵟뵜 ꕘ뉻ꅃꛌ뙈땯ꗍ ꧳꣤ꕌ깠싎ꅁ륆ꡃ ꓧ 49.2 ꅁ꛻ 94.6 %ꅁ볆뙱ꑗ롧꓀꩒뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣 깴 ꅃ롧쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩ ꅁ 륆 247 ꅁ꛻ 74.5 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎땯ꗍꝥ 엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁ꣤ ꕾꛌ뫳 싎륆 50 ꅁꕂ Ꙣꑀꕝ 깠ꅁꕩ꿠 뵖ꛌ샴맒 ꛃ걖덹 ꅃ 곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ ꅁꙢ륁룕꧒뵖뭳셗ꛌꅁ 쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ볆뙱 16.8 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꭨ땯뉻 5 뫘깠싎ꅁ ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ뵜엻ꅂ돁 ꅂ 뿁 ꓎ꕾ ꛌ뫳 ꅁ볆뙱 룻 A 뱴뵖ꛌ샴맒 ꓖꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈 ꕄꅁ륆 68 ꅁ꛻ 73.4 %ꅃ꣤ 돁 ꅁ꛻ 20.7 %ꅃꛌ뙈 땯ꗍ볆뭐꣤ꕌ깠 싎 ꝥ엣뗛꧊깴 ꅃ.

(6) 106. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. 第2期. 2003. ꫭꑔꅂ뵟뵜뵖뭳 셗ꛌꯡ꧳ Ꙑ쁸싃듁 ꓎럅ꯗꑕ뽮뵜깠싎땯ꗍ싎볆 Table 3. Number of insects in brown rice stored for various periods and temperatures after sampling Species Factory A3) husked in Factory A Sitophilus oryzae Rhyzopertha dominica Sitotroga cerealella Tribolium castaneum Lophocateres pusillus Cadra cautella Corcyra cephalonica husked in TARI S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica Factory B4) husked in Factory B S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica husked in TARI S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica 1). Room temperature after 1 month after 3 months No. of No. of PR(%)2) PR(%) insects insects 1). 49.2 1.0 0.3 0 0 0.3 1.2. a b b b b b b. 16.8 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 19.8 1.2 0.3 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 17.0 0.5 1.3 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 94.6 1.9 0.6 0 0 0.6 2.3. 10 ℃ after 1 month after 3 months No. of No. of PR(%) PR(%) insects insects. 247.0 4.2 19.5 0.2 0 10.5 50.0. a b b b b b b. 74.5 1.3 5.9 0.1 0 3.2 15.1. 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0. 68.0 0.2 19.2 0 0 4.8 0.5. a c b c c bc c. 73.4 0.2 20.7 0 0 5.2 0.5. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 93.0 5.6 1.4 0 0 0 0. 182.0 2.0 25.3 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 87.0 1.0 12.1 0 0 0 0. 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0. 90.4 2.7 6.9 0 0 0 0. 139.0 0.5 27.2 0.2 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 83.3 0.3 16.3 0.1 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. a a a a a a a. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. No. of insects /kg, both live and dead pests were counted. Alive pests were released back in brown rice. Means for seven insect species with different letters significantly differ by Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≦ 0.05). 2) PR, (population ratio): (number of insects of one species/total number of insects) × 100. 3) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Jinduen concrete bin. 4) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Sunsweet concrete bin..

(7) 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. Ꙣ B 뱴 뵟뵖뭳 셗ꛌ롧쁸싃ꑀ귓 ꓫꯡꅁ뷕걤깠싎곛꓎싎볆ꅁꙀ땯뉻 3 뫘 ꅁ ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ뵜엻ꅂ돁 ꅃꕈꛌ뙈꛻Ꙩ볆ꅁ 륆 19.8 ꅁ꛻ 93 %ꅃ롧륌ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꅁ 깠싎곛뭐쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ곛ꙐꅁꙀ 3 뫘ꅁ ꕈ ꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ륆 182 ꅁ꛻ 87 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ 깠싎땯ꗍꝥ엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁ꣤ 돁 륆 25.3 ꅁ꛻ 12.1 %ꅃ뭐ꛌ냓 B 뱴곛Ꙑ뵟 뵜꣓ ꅁꙢ륁룕꧒뵖뭳 셗ꛌ롧쁸싃ꑀ귓 ꓫꯡꅁ땯뉻 3 뫘깠싎ꅁ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ뵜엻ꅂ 돁 ꅃ볆뙱 ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ륆 17 ꅁ꛻ 90.4 %ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꭨ땯뉻 4 뫘ꅁ뱗 ꕛ 샀 뵜 땳 ꑀ 뫘 ꅁ ꕈ ꛌ 뙈 돌 Ꙩ ꅁ 륆 139 ꅁ꛻ 83.3 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎땯ꗍꝥ엣뗛꧊ 깴 ꅁ꣤ 돁 륆 27.2 ꅁ꛻ 16.3 %ꅃ ꓱ룻ꛌ냓뱴냏뭐륁룕꧒뵖ꛌ뱴 셗 ꛌꅁ쁸싃Ꙣꯇ럅샴맒ꑕꛌ뙈 땯ꗍꅁ땯뉻 쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁA 뱴싎볆 ꧳륁룕꧒ꅁ꣢ ꫌뙩ꛦ t-test ꓀꩒ 엣뗛깴 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓 ꓫꯡꅁA 뱴싎볆 ꧳륁룕꧒ꅁ꣢꫌꭯때 엣뗛깴 ꅃꙐ볋맯 B 뱴셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ 뙩ꛦ t-test ꓱ룻ꅁ땯뉻꣢뱴냏 뷗쁸싃ꑀ 귓ꓫ꧎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁ 때엣뗛깴 ꅃ ꕈꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꛌ맯ꗕꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍ 뱶암 A 뱴뵜 셗ꛌꯡꅁꙁ롧륌뫫ꛌ뻷뵖 ꗕꯡ쁸싃꧳ꯇ럅샴맒ꅁ롧ꑀ귓ꓫ꓎ꑔ귓ꓫ ꯡ뷕걤ꙕ뫘뽮뵜깠싎땯ꗍ뫘쏾꓎볆뙱ꣃ ꓀꩒꣤깴 ꧊ꅁ ꩇ꙰ꫭꕼꅃA 뱴ꗕꛌꙢ ꯇ럅샴맒쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ 뫘ꅁ싎볆 2.3 ꅃ롧쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁ땯 뉻 2 뫘깠싎ꅁꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ륆 11.2 ꅁ꛻ 59.3 %ꅁ볆뙱ꑗ롧꓀꩒뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣 깴 ꅃꕴꑀ뫘 뿁 싎ꅁ싎볆 7.7 ꅁ꛻ 40.7 %ꅃ 뿁 Ꙣ뵟뵜 ꕘ뉻ꅁꗧꕩ꿠 뵖ꛌ샴맒ꛃ걖덹 ꅃ 곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ ꅁꙢ륁룕꧒뵖뭳ꗕꛌ ꅁ 쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ땯뉻 3 뫘깠싎ꅁ꓀ꝏ ꛌ 뙈ꅂ샀뵜땳꓎ꕾꛌ뫳 ꅁꛌ뙈꓎ꕾꛌ뫳. 107. 0.7 ꅁꙕ꛻ 43.8 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣깴 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꭨ땯뉻 4 뫘깠 싎ꅁ뱗ꕛ 뿁 ꑀ뫘ꅁ볆뙱ꑗ꓏ꛓꕈ 뿁 돌Ꙩꅁ꛽ 싎륆 8.5 ꅁ꛻ 67.5 %ꅃ꣤ ꛌ뙈ꅁ륆 3.2 ꅁ꛻ 25.4 %ꅃ 뿁 ꓎ꛌ뙈Ꙣ볆뙱ꑗ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣깴 ꅃ Ꙣ B 뱴뵖ꗕꯡ ꗕꛌ롧쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ ꯡꅁ뷕걤꣤깠싎뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ 1.8 ꅃ롧륌ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꅁ땯뉻 2 뫘깠싎ꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ륆 9.7 ꅁ꛻ 75.2 %ꅁ뭐꣤ ꕌ깠싎땯ꗍꝥ엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁꕴꑀ뫘 뿁 ꅁ륆 3.2 ꅁ꛻ 24.8 %ꅃ곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ Ꙣ륁룕꧒뵖뭳ꗕꛌ롧쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁ땯 뉻 3 뫘깠싎ꅁ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ돁 ꓎ꕾꛌ뫳 ꅃꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ 0.7 ꅁ꛻ 53.8 %ꅃ 쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꭨ땯뉻 4 뫘ꅁ뱗ꕛ 뿁 ꑀ뫘ꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ 5.0 ꅁ꛻ 79.4 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎땯ꗍꝥ엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁ꣤ 뿁 륆 0.7 ꅁ꛻ 11.1 %ꅁ 싎ꅃ Ꙑ볋ꓱ룻ꛌ냓뱴냏뭐륁룕꧒뵖ꛌ뱴 ꧒뵖뭳ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃Ꙣꯇ럅샴맒ꑕꛌ뙈 땯 ꗍꅁ땯뉻쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁA 뱴싎볆 ꧳륁 룕꧒ꅁ꣢꫌ 엣뗛깴 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ ꅁ A 뱴 싎볆쇶 ꧳륁룕 ꧒ꅁ꣢ ꫌때엣 뗛깴 ꅃꙐ볋맯 B 뱴ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ뙩ꛦꓱ 룻ꅁ땯뉻꣢뱴냏 뷗쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ꧎ꑔ귓ꓫ ꯡꅁ 때엣뗛깴 ꅃ ꑪ 뵖ꛌ덝돆맯ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍ 뱶암 Ꙣꛌ냓뱴냏 ꗕꛌꙁ롧ꓴ걾뻷ꯡꅁꓴ 걾ꗕꛌ쁸싃꧳ꯇ럅샴맒ꑕ롧ꑀ귓ꓫ꓎ꑔ 귓ꓫꯡꅁ뷕걤깠싎땯ꗍ뫘쏾꓎볆뙱ꣃ꓀꩒ ꣤깴 ꧊ꅁ ꩇ꙰ꫭ ꅃA 뱴ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꙢ ꯇ럅샴맒쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ 뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ 뫘ꅁ싎볆 5.3 ꅃ롧쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁ땯 뉻 3 뫘깠싎ꅁꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩ 19.8 ꅁ꛻ 93 %ꅁ볆뙱ꑗ롧꓀꩒뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣깴.

(8) 108. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. 第2期. 2003. ꫭꕼꅂ셗ꛌꙁ뵖뭳 ꗕꛌꯡ꧳ Ꙑ쁸싃듁 ꓎럅ꯗꑕ뽮뵜깠싎땯ꗍ싎볆 Table 4. Number of insects in milled rice stored for various periods and temperatures after sampling Species Factory A3) husked in Factory A Sitophilus oryzae Rhyzopertha dominica Sitotroga cerealella Tribolium castaneum Lophocateres pusillus Cadra cautella Corcyra cephalonica husked in TARI S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica Factory B4) husked in Factory B S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica husked in TARI S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica 1). Room temperature after 1 month after 3 months No. of No. of PR(%)2) PR(%) insects insects 1). 2.3 0 0 0 0 0 0. a 100 b 0 0 b b 0 b 0 b 0 b 0. 0.7 0 0 0.2 0 0 0.7. a b b b b b a. 1.8 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 0.7 0 0.3 0 0 0 0.3. a b b b b b b. 43.8 0 0 12.5 0 0 43.8. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 53.8 0 23.1 0 0 0 23.1. 10 ℃ after 1 month after 3 months No. of No. of PR(%) PR(%) insects insects. 11.2 0 0 0 0 7.7 0. a b b b b b b. 59.3 0 0 0 0 40.7 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 3.2 0 0 0.2 0 8.5 0.7. a b b b b a b. 25.4 0 0 1.6 0 67.5 5.6. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 9.7 0 0 0 0 3.2 0. a b b b b b b. 75.2 0 0 0 0 24.8 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0. 5.0 0 0.3 0 0 0.7 0.3. a b b b b b b. 79.4 0 4.8 0 0 11.1 4.8. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. a 100 b 0 b 0 b 0 b 0 b 0 b 0. No. of insects /kg, both live and dead pests were counted. Alive pests were released back in brown rice. Means for seven insect species with different letters significantly differ by Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≦ 0.05). 2) PR, (population ratio): (number of insects of one species/total number of insects) × 100. 3) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Jinduen concrete bin. 4) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Sunsweet concrete bin..

(9) 109. 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. ꫭ ꅂꗕꛌꙢꓴ걾 뫫ꗕꛌꯡ꧳ Ꙑ쁸싃듁 ꓎럅ꯗꑕ뽮뵜깠싎땯ꗍ싎볆 엜꓆ Table 5. Number of insects in water-washed milled rice stored for various periods and temperature after sampling Species Factory A3) husked in Factory A Sitophilus oryzae Rhyzopertha dominica Sitotroga cerealella Tribolium castaneum Lophocateres pusillus Cadra cautella Corcyra cephalonica husked in TARI S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica Factory B4) husked in Factory B S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica husked in TARI S. oryzae R. dominica S. cerealella T. castaneum L. pusillus C. cautella C. cephalonica 1). Room temperature after 1 month after 3 months No. of No. of PR(%)2) PR(%) insects insects 1). 5.3 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 0.7 0 0 0.2 0 0 0.3. a b b b b b ab. 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 1.5 0 0 0 0 0 0. a b b b b b b. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 10 ℃ after 1 month after 3 months No. of No. of PR(%) PR(%) insects insects. 19.8 0 0.2 0 0 1.3 0. a b b b b b b. 93.0 0 0.9 0 0 6.1 0. 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0. 2.7 0 0 0.2 0 2.0 0.3. a b b b b b b. 51.9 0 0 3.8 0 38.5 5.8. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 9.5 0 0 0 0 1.7 0. a b b b b b b. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 8.7 0 0 0 0 0.7 0. a b b b b b b. 58.3 0 0 16.7 0 0 25.0. a a a a a a a. 100 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0. a 100 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0. a 100 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0. 84.8 0 0 0 0 15.2 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0. a 100 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0. 92.6 0 0 0 0 7.4 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0. a 100 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0. No. of insects /kg, both live and dead pests were counted. Alive pests were released back in brown rice. Means for seven insect species with different letters significantly differ by Duncan’s multiple range test (p ≦ 0.05). 2) PR, (population ratio): (number of insects of one species/total number of insects) × 100. 3) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Jinduen concrete bin. 4) Rice sampled had been stored for 5 months in bags from Sunsweet concrete bin..

(10) 110. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. ꅃꕴ꣢뫘꓀ꝏ 돁 ꓎ 뿁 ꅁ 뿁 Ꙣ뵟뵜 ꕘ뉻ꅁ꣤ 싎볆 1.3 ꅁ꛻ 6.1 %ꅃ곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ ꅁꙢ륁룕꧒ 뵖뭳 ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ땯뉻 3 뫘깠싎ꅁ꓀ꝏ ꛌ뙈ꅂ샀뵜땳꓎ꕾꛌ뫳 ꅁꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩ륆 0.7 ꅁ꛻ 58.3 %ꅁ뭐 ꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣깴 ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꭨ 땯뉻 4 뫘깠싎ꅁ뱗ꕛ 뿁 ꑀ뫘ꅁꕈꛌ 뙈돌Ꙩ륆 2.7 ꅁ꛻ 51.9 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎 ꧺ엣깴 ꅃ꣤ 뿁 싎륆 2.0 ꅁ꛻ 38.5 %ꅃ Ꙣ B 뱴ꗕꛌ롧ꓴ걾뻷ꯡ ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ 롧쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁ뷕걤꣤깠싎뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈 ꑀ뫘ꅁ 0.5 ꅃ롧륌ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꅁ땯뉻 2 뫘깠싎ꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ륆 9.5 ꅁ꛻ 84.8 %ꅁ뭐꣤ꕌ깠싎땯ꗍꝥ엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁ ꕴꑀ뫘 뿁 ꅁ륆 1.7 ꅁ꛻ 15.2 %ꅃ 곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ Ꙣ륁룕꧒뵖뭳 ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ 롧쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁ뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ 1.5 ꅃ롧륌ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꅁ땯뉻 2 뫘깠싎ꅁ ꕈꛌ뙈돌Ꙩꅁ륆 8.7 ꅁ꛻ 92.6 %ꅁ뭐 ꣤ꕌ깠싎땯ꗍꝥ엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁꕴꑀ뫘 뿁 ꅁ륆 0.7 ꅁ꛻ 7.4 %ꅃ 뙩ꑀꡂꓱ룻ꛌ냓뱴냏뭐륁룕꧒뵖ꛌ뱴 롧ꓴ걾뻷ꯡ ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃Ꙣꯇ럅샴맒 ꑕꛌ뙈 땯ꗍꅁ땯뉻쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ꧎ꑔ귓ꓫ ꯡꅁA 뱴싎볆 ꧳륁룕꧒ꅁ꣢꫌ 엣 뗛깴 ꅃꙐ볋맯 B 뱴ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ 뙩ꛦꓱ룻ꅁ ꩇ뭐ꗕꛌ곛Ꙑꅁ꣢뱴냏 뷗 쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ꧎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁ 때엣뗛깴 ꅃ 뵟뵜뵖뭳ꯡ꧱롭꧳ 10ꉊꝃ럅Ꙃ뵣쁸싃맯 셗ꛌ꓎ꗕꛌ깠싎땯ꗍ 뱶암 ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ쁸싃샴맒ꗑꯇ럅꟯ 10ꉊ 샴맒ꅁ셗ꛌ 깠싎엜꓆뷕걤 ꩇ꙰ꫭꑔ ꅁ Ꙣ A 뱴꫄뵟뵜ꯡ 셗ꛌꅁꙢ 10ꉊꑕ쁸 싃ꑀ귓ꓫ뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ싎볆ꑝꧺ엣ꑕ ꅁ뛈 0.3 ꅁ뭐ꯇ럅 싎볆곛깴 164 ꅃ 쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꗧ뛈 ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ싎볆뛈 0.5 ꅁ뭐ꯇ럅 싎볆곛깴ꟳꙨꅁ륆 494. 第2期. 2003. ꅃ곛Ꙑ뵟뵜꣓ ꅁꙢ륁룕꧒뵜ꯡ 셗 ꛌꅁ쁸싃Ꙣ 10ꉊ샴맒ꑕꅁ 싎껄ꩇꟳ꣎ ꅁ Ꙣꑀ귓ꓫ꓎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ 땯뉻 깠싎 깠ꅃꙢ B 뱴꣺볋 셗ꛌꑝ 쏾꛼ ꩇꅁ 10ꉊꑕ쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁꗧ뛈 ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘 ꅁ 싎볆 0.2 ꅁꑔ귓ꓫꯡ 0.3 ꅃB 뱴 뵟뵜Ꙣ륁룕꧒뵜ꯡ셗ꛌꅁ쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ 때깠싎땯ꗍꅁꑔ귓ꓫꯡꗧ뛈땯뉻ꛌ뙈ꑀ 뫘ꅁ싎볆 0.3 ꅃ엣땍ꝃ럅샴맒꿠ꧺ엣 ꟭꣮깠싎 셣듞ꅁ꣏깠싎곛ꟳ돦꿂ꅁꕂ꣏ 깠싎 땯ꗍ볆 ꫱꧳때싎 멁ꅃ ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ쁸싃꧳ 10ꉊ샴맒ꑕꅁ깠싎 엜꓆뷕걤 ꩇ꙰ꫭꕼꅁ꟭꣮깠싎땯ꗍꟳꧺ 엣ꅁA 뱴꫄뵟Ꙣ꣤ꛌ뱴꓎륁룕꧒꧒ꗍ ꗕꛌꅁ 뷗쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ꧎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ 땯 뉻깠싎ꅃꙢ B 뱴꣺볋 ꗕꛌꅁ10ꉊꑕ쁸 싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁ때깠싎땯ꗍꅁꑔ귓ꓫꯡ뛈ꛌ 뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ싎볆 0.2 ꅃB 뱴 뵟Ꙣ륁룕 ꧒뵖뭳 ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃Ꙣ 10ꉊ샴맒ꑕꅁꙐ 볋롧ꑀ귓ꓫ꓎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ 때깠싎땯ꗍꅃ ꙁ롧ꓴ걾뻷 ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃꧳ 10ꉊ샴 맒ꑕ깠싎엜꓆꙰ꫭ ꅁ ꩇ쏾꛼꧳셗ꛌ꓎ ꗕꛌꅁ싎볆 ꧺ엣 ꝃꅁA 뱴Ꙣ꣤ꛌ뱴ꗍ ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡ뛈ꛌ뙈ꑀ 뫘ꅁ싎볆 0.2 ꅁꑔ귓ꓫꯡ싎볆 뱗ꕛꅃ 곛Ꙑ뵜 Ꙣ륁룕꧒ꗍ ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꅁ쁸싃 ꑀ귓ꓫ때깠싎땯ꗍꅁꑔ귓ꓫꯡ뛈ꛌ뙈ꑀ 뫘ꅁ싎볆 0.2 ꅃꙢ B 뱴꣺볋 ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꅁ 쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫꯡꅁ때깠싎땯ꗍꅁꑔ귓ꓫꯡ뛈 ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ싎볆 0.3 ꅃꙢ륁룕꧒뵖뭳 ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꅁ ꩇ곛꛼ꅁ뛈ꛌ뙈ꑀ뫘ꅁ싎 볆돌Ꙩ뛈 0.2 ꅁꗧ ꫱꧳때싎샴맒ꅃ 곛Ꙑ뵖ꛌ샴맒ꅁ돦ꓱ룻쁸싃럅ꯗ맯ꛌ 뙈땯ꗍ 뱶암ꅁ땯뉻ꛌ냓 뱴냏꧒ꗍ 셗ꛌꅁ 뷗쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ꧎ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁꯇ럅 ꅝ 곹 30ꉊꅞꑕꛌ뙈볆 ꧳ 10ꉊ 싎볆ꅁ꣢샴맒 ꛌ뙈볆 ꧺ엣깴 ꅃ 끷맯ꗕꛌ꓎ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍꅁꑝ 쏾 ꛼ ꩇꅁꯇ럅ꑕꛌ뙈볆 ꧳ 10ꉊ 싎 볆ꅁ꣢꫌싎볆ꑪꙨꝥ엣뗛깴 ꅃ.

(11) 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. 끑. 뷗. 뵟뵜ꕄ굮ꕝꝴ뽯듟뭐셗ꛌ꣢ ꓀ꅁ뽯 듟걏뵟뵜ꕾ돲닕 ꅁꗑ 뽯ꅂꕾ뽯ꅂ끨꓆ ꕾ뽯꓎ꑰ셊뙢 ꧒닕 ꅁ 냭땷ꕾꫭ닕 ꅁ꿠ꭏ앀뵟뵜 덑꧸싎꧒ 깠ꅃꕈ 덜 Ꙩ돸ꝩ ꯼ꕘꛌ뙈 ꧶ 깠뽯듟 뻣 뵟뵜 (6, 17, 33)ꅁ꛽뽯듟굙 꽽띬꧎ꛛ땍뗵뙽 ꫌ꅁꛌ뙈ꝙ꿠뙩ꑊ꣤ ꣺ ꧎셣듞ꅃ 맪 엧쓀꧱ꛌ뙈꧳뵟뵜 ꅁꛌ뙈싎볆ꣃ 듮ꓖ ꕂ덶ꓫ뱗ꕛꅁ엣ꗜ뵟뵜 뉖싸뽯듟꽽띬뵟 뵜ꅂ덑꣤ꕌ깠싎 깠륌 뵜닉ꅂ셗ꛌ꧎롈 ꛌ ꅁ ꣑ꛌ뙈셣듞꫅ ꅃ뵟뵜롧뵜 륌땻ꅁ닦ꕨ뵟듟 ꗷ돑ꑕ ꓀ 셗ꛌꅃꗑ 맪엧뷕걤 ꩇ엣ꗜꅁꛌ뙈롧ꑀ귓ꓫ셣듞 볆Ꙣ셗ꛌ 뭐뵟뵜 ꣃ때엣뗛깴 ꅁ엣 뵜륌땻ꣃ 껄꽽썡ꛌ뙈Ꝛ닉ꅃꗑꛌ뙈 Ꝛ닟꧊ꛓ뷗ꅁ꣤ Ꝛꭄ ꗍꙢ뵟뵜ꕾ 돲ꅁꛓ걏믛싎ꝑꗎ뱌돱Ꙣ뵜닉 굆 걽ꅁ Ꝛ뫛ꙁ Ꝛ꧳뫛 ꅁꣃꗎꗍ듞꫾ ꓀ ꩣ 녎 Ꝛꓕ ꯊ (24) ꅃꙝ 뽯 듟 뻣뵟뵜꿠꫽뻗ꛌ뙈ꭉꑊꅁ꛽ꛌ뙈곰꽽뽯듟 ꫽ ꯡ꧒ Ꝛ꓏녯뗛ꭏ믙ꅁ ꙝ뵜륌 땻ꛓ덑뇆 ꧎꽽썡 (5) ꅃ 셗ꛌꙁ롧뫫ꛌ뻷뵖ꗕ륌땻ꅁ녎뫘ꗖ ꅂ 꽝ꓟꅂ뵫 뱨꓎굆뵖 ꯡꅁ꧒돑ꑕ ꓀ ꝙ ꗕꛌꅁ ꕨ ꓀곹꛻셗ꛌ 뙱 10 %ꅃꗑ 맪엧 ꅁꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖뭳ꯡ ꗕꛌꅁꛌ뙈셣듞볆 ꝃ꧳뵟뵜꓎셗ꛌꅁꕂ ꧺ엣깴 ꅁ엣ꗜ뵖 ꗷ 걏ꛌ뙈Ꝛ꧎ 싎ꗍ꙳꫅ ꅃꛌ뙈ꝚꙢ맥꓆ 싎ꯡ ꅁ ꣤꣺ ꛦ 곹 90 %듂Ꙗ뭐굆굌곛꓏ ꓨ Ꙗ뇗ꛦ덅 ꑀ걱뙚싷ꯡꅁꙁꩵꛌ닉뙧쏤덅 (8, 33) ꅃꛜ 쓖 싎ꅁꑾ신Ꙗ덅ꑊꛌ닉 ꓟ ꛬ꓆ ꅃꛌ뙈ꫬ쓖 싎꧳ꛌ닉꣺ 껉ꅁꙝ때ꩫ덅곯ꛌ닉 Ꙑꓟ땷ꯗ샴 ꅁ ꙝ 뛈꿠샴 뵫 뱨ꛌ닉뙧쏤 ꛦ덅 (14) ꅃꗑ 맪엧 ꩇ엣 ꗜ뵖 ꗕ륌땻 ꅁ뵔 맪 껄꽽썡ꛌ뙈Ꝛ꧎뛋깠 싎ꅃ ꛌ뙈쓀꧱ꑔ귓ꓫꯡꅁ셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈볆. 111. ꧳뵟뵜꧎ꗕꛌꅁꕂ 엣뗛깴 ꅃCho ꑈ꯼ꕘꛌ뙈ꕈ셗ꛌ륽빩꣤ Ꙣ뱗듞뉶 ꧳ꗕꛌ (23)ꅁRyoo ꥍ Cho 땯뉻ꛌ뙈Ꙣ셗 ꛌ Ꝛ볆 ꧳ ꗕ ꛌ ꧎ 뵟 뵜 (31) ꅃ Arakaki ꥍ Takahashi ꗧ꯼ꕘꗉꛌ뙈Ꙣ셗 ꛌ 땯ꗍ볆 ꗕꛌ 35 (18)ꅃꕂ셗ꛌ 띌껰귔 샣ꯗ룻뵟뵜꓎ꗕꛌ띌 ꅁꕈ 돸ꝩ꯼ꕘꅁ샴맒샣ꯗ띕 ꅁꛌ뙈뱗듞띕Ꙩ (10, 11, 16, 21, 26, 35) ꅃꙝ 럭셗ꛌꙢ ꕨ꫽뻗 ꛌ뙈 Ꝛ 뽯듟ꯡꅁꙝ꣤ꕾ뱨 뵫 뱨룻 걘덮ꅁ빁Ꙙꛌ뙈 Ꝛꛦ ꅁꕂꙝ샣ꯗ ꧳ 뵟뵜꓎ꗕꛌꅁ꣏ꛌ뙈Ꙣ셗ꛌ셣듞ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ 볆뙱 ꧳뵟뵜꓎ꗕꛌꅃ 뵟뵜 깠싎곛ꕈ 뷕걤 ꩇ ꕈ뵜 엻볆뙱돌Ꙩꅁꛓꛌ뙈땯ꗍꣃ Ꙩꅁ녠Ꙣ 5 %ꕈꑕ (2, 3, 7)ꅃ꛽돌꫱곣ꡳ ꩇ꭯땯뉻Ꙣ뵖 ꛌ뱴 뵟뵜 ꛌ뙈 덶 쁵뛕뫘쇍 뛕 (5)ꅁ 뷕걤ꑝ 곛꛼ ꩇꅁꛌ뙈ꓱ뉶 ꑷ덶 ꧳뵜엻꧎돁 ꅃ뵟뵜 깠싎곛뭐 ꕈ 곛꛼ꅁ꛽볆뙱ꑗꅁꙢ A 뱴꣺볋 ꫬꅁ ꛌ뙈ꑷ꛻셠싎볆 33.3 %ꅁ볆뙱녱 4.3 ꛌ뙈롧ꑔ귓ꓫ셣듞꣬ 212 ꅁ꛻셠싎볆 65.9 %ꅃꛓ B 뱴ꛌ뙈ꓱ뉶ꟳ 륆 38.3 %ꅁ 녱 1.8 뱗듞꣬ 244 ꅁ꛻셠싎볆 87.9 %ꅁ ꧳꣤ꕌ깠싎셣듞볆ꅃ곆ꛜ ꝃ꧳ 쓀꧱ 10 맯ꛌ뙈셣듞볆ꅁ꣤귬ꙝꕩ꿠 뵜 엻ꅂ돁 ꓎꣤ꕌ깠싎 깠ꅁ덹 ꭉꑊꓕ ꅁ ꣏ꛌ뙈뱗ꕛ꣤ Ꝛ꓎ 깠뻷라ꅃ 셗ꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ꣼ꑪ 뵖ꛌ덝돆뱶 암뭐ꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷뱶암믡 곛꛼ꅁA 뱴꣺볋 뵟뵜ꅁ꓀꣢ꙡ뙩ꛦ뵜ꅁ ꩇ엣ꗜꛌ뙈싎 볆ꣃ ꧺ엣 ꝃꅁ싎 ꕄ굮 녱뵟뵜ꑷ덑 깠 뵜닉ꛓ꣓ꅁꛓ A 뱴꧒ꗍ 셗ꛌꅁ ꛌ뙈볆룻륁룕꧒ꗍ 셗ꛌ ꅁꕂ 엣 뗛깴 ꅁ뇀듺 뵟뵜녡꣓ 싎 ꕾꅁꥼꕝ ꝴ뵜걹땻ꛃ걖꧒덹 ꅃꛓ B 뱴꣺볋뵟 뵜꓀꣢ꙡ뙩ꛦ뵜ꅁ ꩇꗧ쏾꛼ꅁꛌ뙈싎 볆 ꧺ엣 ꝃꅁ꛽꣢ꙡ뵜ꯡꛌ뙈땯ꗍ ꣃ때엣뗛깴 ꅁ뇀듺꣤싎 돦꿂녱뵟뵜 ꛓ꣓ꅁ뵜 ꛃ걖뱶암 ꅃ.

(12) 112. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. 뵟뵜Ꙣ뵜륌땻쇶맯ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ때ꧺ 엣뱶암ꅁ꛽맯뵜엻뭐돁 ꭨ ꗍ ꑪ뱶암 (5) ꅁ맯뵜엻ꛓ ꅁꙢ A 뱴뷕걤쁸싃ꑀ귓ꓫ ꯡ뵟뵜 싎볆셣듞ꛜ 12 ꅁ뵜ꯡ셗ꛌ ꭨ뛈 1 ꧎ ꗾꡓ ꅃB 뱴뷕걤ꑝ 쏾꛼ 뉻뙈ꅁ뵜엻Ꙣ뵜ꯡ싎볆 ꧺ엣ꑕ ꅃꕴ ꑀ뵟뵜 ꕄ굮깠싎돁 ꅁ뵜륌땻맯싎볆 뱶암뭐뵜엻 곛꛼ꅁꙢ셗ꛌ 싎볆 엣뗛ꑕ ꅃ뇀듺꣤귬ꙝꕩ꿠ꙝ뵜엻뭐 돁 Ꝛꕄ굮쉈꫾꧳뵟뵜ꫭ ꧎ ꗍ꧳ 뵜닉 ꅁ맥꓆ꯡ 싎 뵜닉ꫭ ꙁ덅ꑊ (1, 12, 13) 뵜닉 ꫸ ꅃꙝ Ꙣ뵜걹땻맯뵜 엻뭐돁 Ꝛ ꗍ ꑪ꽽썡껄ꩇꅁ뻉교깠 싎볆뙱ꧺ엣듮ꓖꅃ 샀뵜땳꓎뻦엞뵜땳꣢뫘깠싎Ꙣ뵟뵜 땯ꗍꓖꅁꙢ뵜ꯡ볆뙱ꟳꓖꅁ룻쏸럇뵔 뗻꛴ꅁ꛽꣢깠싎 Ꝛ닟꧊ 곛꛼ꅁ ꗍꙢ뵜닉ꫭ ꧎뗵셟 (12, 13) ꅁꙝ Ꙣ 뵜륌땻ꝙꕩ꿠꣼꽽썡꧎쁈ꛌ셒덑뇆 ꅃꙢ ꛌ냓꣺볋셗ꛌ 땯뉻 뿁 ꓎ꕾꛌ뫳 ꅁ ꣢뫘깠싎Ꙣ뵟뵜 땯뉻ꅁꛓꙢꗕ ꛌ꓎ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ 땯뉻꣤ 싎땯ꗍꅁꕂꙢ꣺ 볋껉 Ꙣ뵖ꛌ뱴땯뉻꣤ 싎ꅁꕂ꣤ Ꝛ닟 ꧊ꗧ걏 ꗍꙢ뵜 ꫭ ꅁꕂ 싎 굀쓈꿠 ꑏ ꅁ돟 ꗍ Ꙣ 롈깨 ꧎ 뱨 (32) ꅁꙝ 뇀 듺덯꣢깠싎땯ꗍ ꣼뵖ꛌ걹땻ꛃ걖꧒교ꅃ ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍꅁꙢꑪ 뵖ꛌ덝돆꧒ 녯 ꩇꑝ쏾꛼ꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷ꅁꑀ꿫ꑪ 뵖 ꛌ뻷ꗕꛌ 뵖ꗕ뉶곹Ꙣ 72ꇐ75 % ꅁ ꛓꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷 뵖ꗕ뉶곹Ꙣ 63ꇐ64 %ꅁ ꙝ Ꙣꑪ 뵖ꛌ뻷뵖ꗕꯡꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈땯 ꗍ룻ꑰ 뵖ꛌ뻷꧒뵖뭳 ꅃꗕꛌ 싎볆 뭐뵟뵜꧎셗ꛌ 싎볆곛ꓱꅁꑓꧺ엣 ꝃ ꅁ 엣 뵖ꗕ 걱녎뵫 뱨뵖 ꅁ맯ꛌ뙈땯ꗍ ꧺ엣뱶암ꅁꕂ뵖ꗕ땻ꯗ띕Ꙩꛌ뙈땯ꗍ띕 ꓖ (28) ꅃ ꝑꗎ 뵖ꛌ뉶 뷕 뻣ꅁ뵔 맪ꕩ ꝃ ꛌ뙈땯ꗍꅁ 믝ꓱ룻ꗍ 뭐깠싎땯ꗍ 롧샙띬 ꅁ뿯뻜돌꣎뵖ꛌ뉶ꕈ샲녯돌ꙮ 껄꽱ꅃ뫫ꛌ륌땻 맯ꛌ뙈 ꗍ ꑪ뱶 암ꕾꅁ맯꣤ꕌ깠싎ꗧ ꑪ뱶암ꅁ 뷗뵜. 第2期. 2003. 엻ꅂ돁 깠싎ꅁ깠싎볆 ꟳ엣뗛 ꝃ ꅃ ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍ뭐ꗕꛌ곛꛼ꅁ꣤륌땻 뱗ꕛꓴ걾뻷 뱑쏺륌땻꓎Ꙩꑀ 쁸꙳ 병ꅁ ꓀꣺볋 ꓴ걾ꗕꛌ ꛌ뙈볆 ꧳ ꗕꛌ 땯ꗍꅁ ꕩ꿠 ꣺볋 엜 ꕾ ꅁ ꣤싎볆뱗ꕛ ꓀ꗧꕩ꿠ꙝ걹땻뱗ꕛ꧒덹 ꛃ걖꧒교ꅃ 쁸싃껉 ꫸땵ꅁ맯깠싎 땯ꗍꑝ ꑀꥷ땻ꯗ뱶암ꅁ뵟뵜 깠싎볆엜꓆ꅁꛌ뙈 Ꙣ쁸싃ꑔ귓ꓫꯡ싎볆 ꧳꣤ꕌ깠싎ꅁꕩ 꿠뭐깠싎 셣듞꿠ꑏ꓎ 깠꿠ꑏ 녋꓁ 쏶ꭙꅃꙢ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌ꓎ꓴ걾ꗕꛌꙢ쁸싃ꑀ 귓ꓫꯡ깠싎 뷕걤 ꩇꅁ엣ꗜ깠싎곛룻돦 꿂ꅁꕄ굮 ꛌ뙈ꅁ싎 ꕄ굮녱뵟뵜ꛓ꣓ ꅁ 뵖ꛌ걹땻 ꛃ걖뱶암룻 ꧺ엣ꅃ쁸싃ꑔ귓 ꓫꯡ깠싎곛룻 뷆싸ꅁ ꛌ뙈 Ꙩ볆 ꕾꅁ 뿁 ꧎ꕾꛌ뫳 땯ꗍ덶 뱗 ꕛꅁꙝ 싎 녱뵟뵜ꛓ꣓ꕾꅁ뵖ꛌ샴맒 ꛃ걖꧒덹 깠싎 뱗듞ꑝ꛻곛럭ꓱ 뉶ꅃꑰꕝ룋ꛌꙢꗍ ꯡꅁ꣤빐냢듁 ꫸땵 녠뱶암끨덦 ꓱ뉶ꅁꙝ 껄셙땵ꑰꕝ룋 ꛌ빐냢듁ꅁ ꕵꭐ뙩덦ꑰꕝ룋ꛌ걹덱ꅁꟳ ꕩ ꝃ깠싎 땯ꗍ볆ꅁ녎ꕩ꟯ ꙝ싎깠꧒ 뻉교 끨덦냝썄ꅃ Ꙣ 룕엧 A 뱴꣺볋뵟뵜 ꫄ 뵟ꅁꛓ B 뱴 뵟ꅁ꣢꫌Ꙣ깠싎곛 곛꛼ꅁ싎볆ꑗꗧ때ꧺ엣깴 ꅁ 곣ꡳ꯼ ꕘ Ꙑꭾ뫘뵟뵜ꅁꙢ뵜닉 땷ꯗꑗ ꑪ 깴 ꕾꅁ꣤라뱶암뽯듟 Ꙙ ꗾꅁ덯꣇ꙝ 꿀 라뱶암ꛌ뙈 깠땻ꯗ (9, 34)ꅃ 룕엧 뛈꣺볋ꑀ ꅁ때ꩫ뉠ꑊꓱ룻꣢뫘ꭾ뫘 맪 뷨뱶암ꅁ ꯡꙢꑰꕝ룋ꛌꟳꩠ ꭾ뫘꽓꧊ ꯡꅁ꧎덜ꕩ듂 Ꙑꭾ뫘맯깠싎땯ꗍ 뱶암 뙩ꑀꡂ 끑 (8, 14) ꅃ ꝑꗎꗍ 닎군꓀꩒ꅁ꿠ꧺ엣ꓱ룻ꛌ뙈 Ꙣ뵟뵜ꅂ셗ꛌꅂꗕꛌ땯ꗍ깴 ꅁꙐ껉ꕩꓱ 룻뵖ꛌ륌땻맯ꙕ깠싎뱶암깴 ꅃ꛽Ꙣꫭꑀ 뵟뵜롧ꑔ귓ꓫ쁸싃ꅁꛌ뙈셣듞볆 155 ꅝ볐럇 깴 58.8ꅞꅁꛓꗕꛌ 셣 듞볆 0.3 ꅝ볐럇 깴 0.47ꅞꅁ.

(13) 113. 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. ꣢꫌볆귈깴 곆ꑪꅁ꛽롧 Duncan’s Ꙩ엜 냬듺엧꓀꩒싎볆엣뗛꧊깴 ꅁ꭯ꝥ뉻ꕘ 엣뗛ꅃꕩ꿠ꙝ 뷆볆룻ꓖꅁ꣏볐럇뭾깴 ꅁꙝ ꗍ꓀꩒ꑗ 엣뗛뉻뙈ꅃ 껄룑ꡍꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠싎땯ꗍꅁꙐ껉 덶 쇗ꝋ꣏ꗎ꓆뻇쏄 ꅁ듮ꓖ깠싎Ƛ쏄꧊ 땯ꗍꕾꅁ ꝃ맯샴맒ꛃ걖 ꣓ ꩶ쇍 뛕ꅁꙝ 맯샴맒뱶암ꓖꕂ맯ꑈ꽢ꙷꗾ 뉺 ꩶ꧎ꗍ ꩶ 뙽땯곣ꡳꕄ굮ꓨ Ꙗꅁ때걲 뷨 ꑧ맯ꛌ뙈 ꣎ ꩶ껄 ꩇꅁꙢ냪ꕾꑷ 륍 ꗎ꧳뽮뵜깠싎 ꩶ (19, 20, 22, 27, 30) ꅁ꛽꣏ꗎꙢꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠싎 ꩶꑗꅁꙝ라덹 ꕾ왛룻 듽뽂ꅁꥼ 덑뱳 ꩸ ꗎ (5)ꅃꝑꗎ띌ꩩ ꩶ뽮뵜깠싎ꗧ덶 덑 끑ꅁ꛽ꥼ 덑꣣엩 ꗎ (36, 37) ꅃLucas ꥍ Riudavets ꯼ꕘꝑꗎ뻷뇱 뵖ꛌ끴Ꙙꛌ 뙈 ꑰ 룁 ꅝ Lariophagus distinguendus Förster） 쓀꧱ꕩ녯 ꣎ ꩶ껄ꩇ (29)ꅁ꛽ ꑪ뙱셣듞ꛌ뙈ꑰ룁걏뱶암뇀뱳 굮 ꣮ ꙝꑬꅃ 利用溫度對米象繁殖影響，以往報告曾指出在溫控的超市環境（約 23℃），米象發生數能明顯降低，卻無法完全抑制米象發生 (5)。本實驗進㆒步將小包裝米放置於 10℃低溫冰箱㆗儲藏，結果發現對害蟲發生有極佳的防治效果，僅少量米象發生（0.3 隻），甚至在農試所碾米糙米，均未發生任何害蟲。經㆔個月後亦無繁殖現象。而白米與水洗白米儲藏在 10℃㆘，防蟲效果更佳，已接近無蟲環境，害蟲發生遠低於室溫環境（約 30℃）。利用 10 ℃低溫冰箱儲藏小包裝米，最大優點除米蟲能完全控制外，亦能提升米質，可避免米質老化，占用冰箱空間及可能增加電費支出是限制因子。小包裝米因進口米輸入，逐漸在市場價位㆖產生區隔，㆒般進口米價位約在促銷米之 2－10 倍間，未來良質米或台灣好米要能立足，必須在米質及蟲害㆖能有良好品管控制。冷藏米不只可提供良好儲藏品質，又能有效防治害. 蟲，未來應用在高價位及高品質小包裝米市場，將是非常值得推廣之防治方法。. 쇂. 쏣. 곣ꡳ꧳ꓥ ꯡꅁ꧓ ꧒ ꗎ냊 닕 ꓽ뉍곂돕ꑨ꓎ 돕ꑨ ꝛ ꧲ ꅁ 룕엧듁 ꣃ꧓ 닕Ꟶ쁁쇸ꑰꥪ꓎륁쏀닕뿠 ꧺꭈꅂ 뉍ꑳꗽꗍ ꣳꝕ꓎꫷뱛ꛌ뭐ꑳꓴ ꛌ맪띾 ꕱ ꣑ꟷ껆ꅁ싔 ꑀ꣖교쇂ꅃ. ꓞꗎꓥ쑭 1. ꩌꅃ1958ꅃ엻ꗍ 닟꧊ 왛맮ꅃ륁 띾곣ꡳ 8ꅇ55-66ꅃ 2. ꯀ과Ꙏꅂ 뇓ꥶꅂ 띆 ꅃ1998ꅃ뵟뵜 Ꙑ쁸꙳ꓨ 맯뽮뵜깠싎뇚롳 뱶 암ꅃ 뗘륁띾곣ꡳ 47ꅇ419-429ꅃ 3. ꯀ 과 Ꙏꅂ 띆 ꅃ 1992ꅃ ꕸ 왗 쁸 싃 덕룋 뵟 ꧸싎뫘쏾꓎꣤뇚롳 녋 ꯗ ꅃ 뗘 ꧸ 싎 12ꅇ 161-169ꅃ 4. ꯀ과Ꙏꅂ 띆 ꅃ1999ꅃ볆뫘쑱 ꧊뇾 싎 ꩶ뽮뵜깠싎 껄꽱뗻꛴ꅃ 뗘꧸ 싎 19ꅇ365-376ꅃ 5. ꯀ과Ꙏꅂ 띆 ꅃ2001ꅃ ꩶꑰꕝ룋ꛌ 깠 싎 ꓨ ꩫ 뗻 ꛴ ꅃ 듓 ꭏ 라 ꕚ 43 ꅇ 173-187ꅃ 6. 걸 곃ꅂ둞꩚녤ꅃ1985ꅃ닉뽯 Ꙑ 땻ꯗ꽽띬맯ꛌ뙈꓎ꗉꛌ뙈 ꓞ룕 엧ꅃ 뗘꧸싎 5ꅇ31-36ꅃ 7. 걸 곃ꅂ뛀 셮ꅃ1992ꅃꕸ왗ꙕ쏾뵜규 뵟뵜ꅂ셗ꛌ꓎닊셒 깠싎뷕걤ꅃ 뗘 ꧸싎 12ꅇ269-276ꅃ 8. 까뫻껵ꅂ둞꩚녤ꅃ1984ꅃ셗ꛌ뫘쏾맯ꗉ ꛌ 뙈 Ƛ 싎 ꧊ 샋 ꥷ ꅃ 곬 뻇 륁 띾 32 ꅇ 71-72ꅃ 9. 까뫻껵ꅂ둞꩚녤ꅃ1987ꅃꛌ닉땷ꯗ뭐ꗉ ꛌ뙈 싎 뉠ꯗ 쏶ꭙꅃ 뗘꧸싎 7ꅇ113-118ꅃ 10. 뛀 셮ꅂ쇂싗냪ꅂ끞닔ꅃ1983ꅃ럅샣.

(14) 114. 11.. 12.. 13.. 14.. 15.. 16.. 17.. 18.. 19.. 20.. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. ꯗ맯ꗉꛌ뙈ꅝSitophilus zeamaisꅞ셣듞 뭐땯꡼ 뱶암ꅃ듓ꭏ라ꕚ 25ꅇ41-52ꅃ 셊ꗍꅂ쇂싗냪ꅃ1977ꅃ규깷깠싎ꗍ멁 ꓀꩒ꅃ뵟Ꝁ뭐 깠싎곣끑라녍뿨ꅃ뭏 왗듓 ꭏ앀 ꓟꙌꛦ 60-73 ꅃ 둞꩚녤ꅃ1977ꅃ쁔꿍쏾깠싎Ꙣ규 ꓀ ꝇꅃ뵟Ꝁ뭐 곣끑라녍뿨ꅃꕸ왗듓 ꭏ앀 ꓟꙌꛦ 74-79 ꅃ 둞꩚녤ꅃ1979ꅃ쁔꿍쏾깠싎Ꙣ규뙊 뗜 뵟ꅂꙢ꣓뵟꓎꫸닉꫄뵟 땯ꗍ곣ꡳꅃ곬 뻇땯깩ꓫꕚ 7ꅇ602-608ꅃ 둞꩚녤ꅂ까뫻껵ꅃ1984ꅃꛌ닉땷ꯗ꓎뭐 Ƛ ꗉ ꛌ 뙈 쏶 ꭙ ꅃ 듓 ꭏ 라 ꕚ 26 ꅇ 231-240ꅃ 쇂싗냪ꅂ 셊ꗍꅂ 뫻뙶ꅃ1978ꅃ 뫘 때걲 뷨맯ꗉꛌ뙈ꅝSitophilus zeamaisꅞ ꩶ룕엧ꅃ듓ꭏ라ꕚ 20ꅇ8-15ꅃ 쇂싗냪ꅂ뛀 셮ꅂ걸쑒뇶ꅂ 셊ꗍꅃ 1978ꅃ곛맯샣ꯗ맯뽮뵜ꝴꓴ뙱뭐싎깠띬 뱶암ꅃ듓ꭏ라ꕚ 20ꅇ330-337ꅃ 쇂싗냪ꅂ뛀 셮ꅃ1978ꅃ뵟뽯듟 뻣 ꧊맯ꗉꛌ뙈 Ꝛ뭐셣듞 뱶암ꅃ듓ꭏ라 ꕚ 20ꅇ291-301ꅃ Arakaki, N., and Takahashi, F. 1982. Oviposition preference of rice weevil, Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky (Coleoptera:Curculionidae), for unpolished and polished rice. Jpn. J. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 26: 166-171. Arthur, F. H., and Brown, S. L. 1994. Evaluation of diatomaceous earth (Insecto) and Bacillus thuringiensis formulations for insect control in stored peanuts. J. Entomol. Sci. 29: 176-182. Arthur, F. H. 2002. Survival of Sitophilus oryzae (L.) on wheat treated with diatomaceous earth: impact of biological and environmental parameters on product efficacy. J. Stored. Prod. Res., 38: 305-313.. 第2期. 2003. 21. Breese, M. H. 1960. The infestibility of stored paddy by Sitophilus sasakii (Tak.) and Rhyzopertha dominica (F.) Bull. Entomol. Res. 51: 599-630. 22. Carlson, S. D., and Ball, H. J. 1962. Mode of action and insecticidal value of a diatomaceous earth as a grain protectant. J. Econ. Entomol. 55: 964-970. 23. Cho, K. J., Ryoo, M. I., and Kim, S. Y. 1988. Life table statistics of the rice weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in relation to the preference for rough, brown and polished rice. Korean. J. Entomol. 18: 1-6. 24. Danho, M., Gaspar, C., and Haubruge, E. 2002. The impact of grain quantity on the biology of Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky (Coleoptera:Curculionidae): oviposition, distribution of eggs, adult emergence, body weight and sex ratio. J. Stored. Prod. Res., 38: 259-266. 25. Duncan, D. B. 1951. A significance test for differences between ranked treatments in analysis of variance. Va. J. Sci. 2: 171-189. 26. Howe, R. W. 1965. A summary of estimates of optimal and minimal conditions for population increase of some stored products insects. J. Stored. Prod. Res. 1: 177-184. 27. Hill, S. B. 1986. Diatomaceous earth: a nontoxic pesticide. Macdonald J. 47: 1442. 28. Lucas, E., and Riudavets, J. 2000. Lethal and sublethal effects of rice polishing process on Sitophilus oryzae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 93: 1837-1841. 29. Lucas, E., and Riudavets, J. 2002..

(15) 碾米與銷售環境對小包裝米害蟲發生之影響. 30.. 31.. 32.. 33.. 34.. Biological and mechanical control of Sitophilus oryzae (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) in rice. J. Stored. Prod. Res. 38: 293-304. Ross, T. E. 1981. Diatomaceous earth as a possible alternative to chemical insecticides. Agric. Environ. 6: 43-51. Ryoo, M. I., and Cho, H. W. 1992. Feeding and oviposition preferences and demography of rice weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) reared on mixtures of brown, polished, and rough rice. Environ. Entomol. 21: 549-555. Senguttuvan, T., Kareem, A. A., and Rajendran, R. 1995. Effects of plant products and edible oils against rice moth Corcyra cephalonica Stainton in stored groundnuts. J. Stored. Prod. Res. 31: 207-210. Sharifi, S., and Mills, R. B. 1971. Developmental activities and behavior of the rice weevil inside wheat kernels. J. Econ. Entomol. 64: 1114-1118. Singh, V. S., Bhatia, S. K., and Murthy, B. N. 1980. Effect of hull on the. 115. resistance of barley varieties to the rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae (Linn.) infestation. Indian J. Entomol. 42: 576-581. 35. Throne, J. E. 1994. Life history of immature maize weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on corn stored at constant temperatures and relative humidities in the laboratory. Environ. Entomol. 23: 1459-1471. 36. Tilton, E. W., Brower, J. H., Brown, G. A., and Kirkpatrick, R. L. 1972. Combination of gamma and microwave radiation for control of the Angoumois grain moth in wheat. [Sitotroga cerealella]. J. Econ. Entomol. 65 : 531-533. 37. Tilton, E. W., and Vardell, H. H. 1982. Combination of microwaves and partial vacuum for control of four stored-product insects in stored grain Sitotroga cerealella, Rhysopertha dominica, Sitophilus oryzae, Sitophilus zeamais. J. Ga. Entomol. Soc. 17: 106-112..

(16) 116. 植物保護學會會刊. 第 45 卷. 第2期. 2003. ABSTRACT Yao, M. C.1 *, Lo, K. C.1 , and Wan, Y. N.2 2003. Effects of the milling process and grocery environments on the occurrence of stored-product insects. Plant Prot. Bull. 45: 101-116. (1Department of Applied Zoology, Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute, Wufeng, Taichung, Taiwan 413, ROC; 2Department of Agricultural Machinery Engineering, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan 402, ROC ) Rice pest samplings showed that small-bag brown rice was more prone to rice weevil (Sitophilus oryzae (L.)) infection than was small-bag milled rice after 3 months of storage following commercial milling. In a search for rice weevil sources in small-bag rice, rough rice subjected to a week of egg deposition by 10 pairs of rice weevils was milled into brown rice or milled rice using small milling machinery. After a month of storage, 116 rice weevils were found in the brown rice, and this number did not differ from that found in rough rice; however, 3 months later, 780 rice weevils had developed in the brown rice, a figure much higher than that found in the rough rice. On the other hand, no rice weevil was found in milled rice after a month of storage, and only 0.3 rice weevils on average occurred even after 3 months of storage. After 5 months of storage, rice processed by large milling machinery produced similar results of many more rice weevils occurring in brown rice compared to rough rice. These observations indicate that the mere removal of the husk from rice is insufficient to destroy rice weevil eggs and/or larvae, otherwise pest occurrence rates would have decreased. A further milling process to make brown rice into milled rice removes the major portion of the aleurone layer; meanwhile, this destroys pest eggs and/or larvae and largely reduces pest occurrence rates. Brown rice, milled rice, and washed milled rice processed by large milling machinery were also infected by Cadra cautella W. and Corcyra cephalonica S. which were not found in the rough rice. This led to the notion that stored-product insects might be introduced from other contamination sources through the milling processes in addition to the pest source from husks. After storage at 10 °C, both brown and milled small-bag rice had nearly no pests, a level which is significantly lower than that of rice pests found in rice stored at room temperature. Therefore, low-temperature storage can effectively reduce small-bag rice pest occurrence. (Key words: rice-husking environments, storage temperature, rough rice, brown rice, milled rice, Sitophilus oryzae (L.)) *Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected].

(17)