欢迎访问作物学报,今天是

作物学报 ›› 2014, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (07): 1259-1273.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.01259

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇    下一篇

重要胡麻栽培品种的抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选

罗俊杰1,欧巧明1,*,叶春雷1,王方1,王镛臻2,陈玉梁1,*   

  1. 1 甘肃省农业科学院生物技术研究所, 甘肃兰州 730070;2 甘肃农业大学资源与环境学院, 甘肃兰州 730070
  • 收稿日期:2013-11-18 修回日期:2014-03-04 出版日期:2014-07-12 网络出版日期:2014-04-09
  • 通讯作者: 欧巧明, E-mail: ouqiaoming@163.com, Tel: 0931-7612685; 陈玉梁, E-mail: chenyl925@163.com, Tel: 0931-7616636
  • 基金资助:

    本研究由国家现代农业产业体系建设专项(CARS-17-SYZ-6)资助。

Comprehensive Valuation of Drought Resistance and Screening of Indices of Important Flax Cultivars

LUO Jun-Jie1,OU Qiao-Ming1,*,YE Chun-Lei1,WANG Fang1,WANG Yong-Zhen2,CHEN Yu-Liang1,*   

  1. 1 Biotechnology Institute, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou 730070, China; 2 College of Resources and Environmental Sciences, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou 730070, China
  • Received:2013-11-18 Revised:2014-03-04 Published:2014-07-12 Published online:2014-04-09
  • Contact: 欧巧明, E-mail: ouqiaoming@163.com, Tel: 0931-7612685; 陈玉梁, E-mail: chenyl925@163.com, Tel: 0931-7616636

摘要:

以15份国内胡麻栽培品种为材料, 设自然降雨和正常灌水2个处理, 考察与抗旱性相关的7个农艺性状、8个生理生化指标及产量指标, 采用综合抗旱系数、因子分析、隶属函数、聚类分析和灰色关联度分析相结合的方法, 对其抗旱性进行综合评价、抗旱型划分和评价指标筛选。结果显示, 相关性状指标对干旱胁迫的反应及关联程度各异, 可优先选择与抗旱性关系密切的产量及其相关性状、光合作用因子、叶片抗氧化因子等相关生理生化性状;因子分析表明, 6个公因子可代表胡麻抗旱性90.89%的原始数据信息量。基于抗旱性度量值(drought resistance comprehensive evaluation values, D值)和加权抗旱系数(weight drought resistance coefficient, WDC值)的各品种抗旱性排序相近, 位居前6位的抗旱品种相同。各品种D值与综合抗旱系数(comprehensive drought resistance coefficient, CDC值)、WDC值、产量抗旱系数(yield drought resistance coefficient, Y值)之间均呈极显著正相关, 而各品种Y值与CDC、WDC值间极显著正相关;据D值将供试品种划分为5个抗旱级别, 可较好地反映品种的选育条件及适应地区。试验结果说明以D值为主要参数, 以WDC为辅助评价参数, 评价以产量为主要考量目标的胡麻抗旱性是适宜且准确的;以抗旱性综合评价方法进行胡麻抗旱性综合评价、抗旱型划分、评价指标筛选是准确的。

关键词: 胡麻, 农艺性状, 生理生化指标, 抗旱性综合评价, 隶属函数

Abstract:

Seven main agronomic traits, eight physiological indices and yield index of 15 main flax cultivars in China were measured during maturity under the conditions of irrigation and natural rainfall. Comprehensive drought resistance coefficient (CDC value), factor analysis, subordinate function coefficients, clustering analysis, grey relational analysis were used to evaluate the drought resistance, classify drought resistance type and select evaluation indices in tested flax cultivars. The response to drought stress and correlations of tested traits and indices were different. Yield and photosynthesis factors as well as leaf antioxidant factors were closely associated with drought resistance, so could be used as priority indicator of drought resistance evaluation. Factor analysis showed that six common factors could represent 90.89% of the original information of flax drought resistance data. The ranks of drought resistance of tested flax cultivars based on drought resistance comprehensive evaluation values (D value) and weight drought resistance coefficient (WDC value) were similar, the drought resistance was the same for six flax cultivars, arranging from the first to third in drought resistance. D values of tested flax cultivars had significant and positive correlation with CDC value, WDC value and Y value. Y values of tested flax cultivars also had very significant and positive correlation with CDC value and WDC value. According to D value clustering analysis, tested cultivars were divided into five grades in drought resistance, reflecting the diffirence of cultivars in breeding condition and adaptive region growing well. Drought resistance evaluated mainly with yield by D value as index and WDC value as auxiliary index in flax were appropriate and accurate. Drought resistance comprehensive evaluation methods can be used in studying exactly drought resistance evaluation, classification of drought resistant type and screening evaluation indices in flax.

Key words: Flax, Agronomic traits, Physiological and biochemical indices, Drought resistance comprehensive evaluation, Subordinate function coefficients

[1]王士强, 胡银岗, 佘奎军, 周琳璘, 孟凡磊. 小麦抗旱相关农艺性状和生理生化性状的灰色关联度分析. 中国农业科学, 2007, 40: 2452–2459



Wang S Q, Hu Y G, She K J, Zhou L L, Meng F L. Gray relational grade analysis of agronomical and physi-biochemical traits related to drought tolerance in wheat. Sci Agric Sin, 2007, 40: 2452–2459 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[2]祁旭升, 王兴荣, 许军, 张建平, 米君. 胡麻种质资源成株期抗旱性评价. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43: 3076–3087



Qi X S, Wang X R, Xu J, Zhang J P, Mi J. Drought-resistance evaluation of flax germplasm at adult plant stage. Sci Agric Sin, 2010, 43: 3076–3087 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[3]赵利, 党占海, 张建平, 关天霞, 田彩萍. 不同类型胡麻品种资源品质特性及其相关性研究. 干旱地区农业研究, 2008, 26(5): 6–9



Zhao L, Dang Z H, Zhang J P, Guan T X, Tian C P. Study on quality characters and correlation of different types of flax germplasm. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2008, 26(5): 6–9 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[4]张木清, 陈如凯. 作物抗旱分子生理与遗传改良. 北京: 科学出版社, 2005. pp 22–23



Zhang M Q, Chen R K. Molecular Physiological and Genetic Improvement of Crop Drought Tolerance. Beijing: Science Press, 2005. pp22–23 (in Chinese)



[5]张正斌. 作物抗旱节水的生理遗传育种基础. 北京: 科学出版社, 2003. pp 67–209



Zhang Z B. Fundamentals of Physiological and Genetic Breeding Basis in Crop Drought Resistance and Water Saving. Beijing: Science Press, 2003. pp 67–209 (in Chinese)



[6]Kamoshita A, Babu R C, Boopathi N M, Fukai S. Phenotypic and genotypic analysis of drought-resistance traits for development of rice cultivars adapted to rainfed environments. Field Crops Res, 2008, 109: 1–23



[7]Upadhyaya H D. Variability for drought resistance related traits in the mini core collection of peanut. Crop Sci, 2005, 45: 1432–1440



[8]Hura T, Hura K, Grzesiak S. Physiological and biochemical parameters for identification of QTLs controlling the winter triticale drought tolerance at the seedling stage. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2009, 47: 210–214



[9]王贺正, 马均, 李旭毅, 李艳, 张荣萍, 汪仁全. 水稻开花期一些生理生化特性与品种抗旱性的关系. 中国农业科学, 2007, 40: 399–404



Wang H Z, Ma J, Li X Y, Li Y, Zhang R P, Wang R Q. Relationship between some physiological and biochemical characteristics and drought tolerance at rice flowering stage. Sci Agric Sin, 2007, 40: 399–404 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[10]武斌, 李新海, 肖木辑, 谢传晓, 郝转芳, 李明顺, 张世煌. 53份玉米自交系的苗期耐旱性分析. 中国农业科学, 2007, 40: 665–676



Wu B, Li X H, Xiao M J, Xie C X, Hao Z F, Li M S, Zhang S H. Genetic variation in fifty three maize inbred lines in relation to drought tolerance at seedling stage. Sci Agric Sin, 2007, 40: 665–676 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[11]白志英, 李存东, 孙红春, 赵金锋. 小麦代换系抗旱生理指标的主成分分析及综合评价. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41: 4264–4272



Bai Z Y, Li C D, Sun H C, Zhao J F. Principal component analysis and comprehensive evaluation on physiological indices of drought resistance in wheat substitution. Sci Agric Sin, 2008, 41: 4264–4272 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[12]李贵全, 张海燕, 季兰, 赵二开, 刘建兵, 李玲, 张家蓉. 不同大豆品种抗旱性综合评价. 应用生态学报, 2006, 17: 2408–2412



Li G Q, Zhang H Y, Ji L, Zhao E K, Liu J B, Li L, Zhang J R. Comprehensive evaluation on drought-resistance of different soybean varieties. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2006, 17: 2408–2412 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[13]孔照胜, 武云帅, 岳爱琴, 李贵全, 彭永康. 不同大豆品种抗旱性生理指标综合分析. 华北农学报, 2001, 16(3): 40–45



Kong Z S, Wu Y S, Yue A G, Li G Q, Peng Y K. Comprehensive analysis of physiological indexes for drought resistance in different soybean varieties. Acta Agric Boreali-Sin, 2001, 16(3): 40–45 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[14]朱宗河, 郑文寅, 张学昆. 甘蓝型油菜耐旱相关性状的主成分分析及综合评价. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44: 1775–1787



Zhu Z H, Zheng W Y, Zhang X K. Principal component analysis and comprehensive evaluation on morphological and agronomic traits of drought tolerance in rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Sci Agric Sin, 2011, 44: 1775–1787 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[15]谢小玉, 张霞, 张兵. 油菜苗期抗旱性评价及抗旱相关指标变化分析. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46: 476–485



Xie X Y, Zhang X, Zhang B. Evaluation of drought resistance and analysis of variation of relevant parameters at seedling stage of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Sci Agric Sin, 2013, 46: 476–485 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[16]孟庆立, 关周博, 冯佰利, 柴岩, 胡银岗. 谷子抗旱相关性状的主成分与模糊聚类分析. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42: 2667–2675



Meng Q L, Guan Z B, Feng B L, Chai Y, Hu Y G. Principal component analysis and fuzzy clustering on drought tolerance related traits of foxtail millet (Setaria italica). Sci Agric Sin, 2009, 42: 2667–2675 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[17]徐蕊, 王启柏, 张春庆, 吴承来. 玉米自交系抗旱性评价指标体系的建立. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42: 72–84



Xu R, Wang Q B, Zhang C Q, Wu C L. Drought resistance evaluation system of maize inbred. Sci Agric Sin, 2009, 42: 72–84 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[18]罗俊杰, 石有太, 陈玉梁, 王红梅, 刘新星. 甘肃不同色彩陆地棉抗旱指标筛选及评价研究. 核农学报, 2012, 26: 952–959



Luo J J, Shi Y T, Chen Y L, Wang H M, Liu X X. Screening and wvaluation of drought tolerant indices of colored upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) in Gansu. Acta Agric Nucl Sin, 2012, 26: 952–959 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[19]石仓吉. 亚麻品种抗旱性评价研究. 干旱地区农业研究, 2008, 26(5): 1–5



Shi C J. Research on assessment of flax drought resistance. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2008, 26(5): 1–5 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[20]邹琦. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000. pp 41–184



Zou Q. Guidebook of Plant Physiology Experiments. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000. pp 41–184 (in Chinese)



[21]王玉富, 粟建光. 亚麻种质资源描述规范和数据标准. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006. pp 1–99



Wang Y F, Su J G. Descriptors and Data Standard for Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.). Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2006. pp 1–99 (in Chinese)



[22]兰巨生. 农作物综合抗旱性评价方法的研究. 西北农业学报, 1998, 7(3): 85–87



Lan J S. Comparison of evaluating methods for agronomic drought resistance in crops. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 1998, 7(3): 85–87 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[23]尹利, 逯晓萍, 傅晓峰, 李美娜, 郭建. 高丹草杂交种灰色关联分析与评判. 中国草地学报, 2006, 28: 21–25



Yin L, Lu X P, Fu X F, Li M N, Guo J. The grey relation analysis and evaluation of hybrid pacesetter. Chin J Grassl, 2006, 28: 21–25 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[24]张霞, 谢小玉. PEG胁迫下甘蓝型油菜种子萌发期抗旱鉴定指标的研究. 西北农业学报, 2012, 21(2): 72–77



Zhang X, Xie X Y. Studies on identification indexes of drought resistance by PEG during seed germination of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Acta Agric Boreali-Occident Sin, 2012, 21(2): 72–77 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[25]Chernyad’ev I I, Monakhova O F. Effects of cytokinin preparations on the pools of pigments and proteins of wheat cultivars differing in their tolerance to water stress. Appl Biochem Micro, 2003, 39: 524–531



[26]Tambussi E A, Nogués S, Araus J L. Ear of durum wheat under water stress: water relations and photosynthetic metabolism. Planta, 2005, 221: 446–458



[27]Manschadi A M, Hammer G L, Christopher J T, de Voil P. Genotypic variation in seedling root architectural traits and implications for drought adaptation in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plant Soil, 2008, 303: 115–129



[28]Condon A G, Richards RA, Rebetzke G J, Farquhar G D. Breeding for high water use efficiency. J Exp Bot, 2004, 55: 2447–2460



[29]Subrahmanyam D, Subash N, Haris A, Sikka A K. Influence of water stress on leaf photosynthetic characteristics in wheat cultivars differing in their susceptibility to drought. Photosynthetica, 2006, 44: 125–129



[30]陈玉梁, 石有太, 罗俊杰, 王蒂, 厚毅清, 李忠旺, 张秉贤. 甘肃彩色棉花抗旱性农艺性状指标的筛选鉴定. 作物学报, 2012, 38: 1680–1687



Chen Y L, Shi Y T, Luo J J, Wang D, Hou Y Q, Li Z W, Zhang B X. Screening of drought tolerant agronomic trait indices of colored cotton varieties (lines) in Gansu province. Acta Agron Sin, 2012, 38: 1680–1687 (in Chinese with English abstract)



[31]陈玉梁, 石有太, 罗俊杰, 李忠旺, 厚毅清, 王蒂. 干旱胁迫对彩色棉花农艺、品质性状及水分利用效率的影响. 作物学报, 2013, 39: 2074–2082



Chen Y L, Shi Y T, Luo J J, LI Z W, Hou Y Q, Wand D. Effect of drought stress on agronomic traits, quality, and WUE in different colored upland cotton varieties (lines). Acta Agron Sin, 2013, 39: 2074–2082 (in Chinese with English abstract)

[1] 张颖星, 宋裕祯, 王跃, 曹越, 曹晓宁, 王瑞云. EMS诱导糜子优异性状突变体的筛选及表型分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1388-1400.
[2] 李瑞, 余意雯, 王敦亮, 田婷, 孙灵湘, 陶玥玥, 孙华. 长江中下游油菜薹油兼用模式菜籽产量特征比较研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 620-630.
[3] 迟晓元, 刘庆, 张君, 赵旭红, 李美, 于天一, 潘丽娟, 许静, 姜骁, 殷祥贞, 马俊卿, 陈娜. 不同花生品种(系)耐盐碱性田间鉴定及各性状指标相关性研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 85-98.
[4] 杨锐, 陈敬东, 黄郢, 张学昆, 周登文, 刘清云, 徐劲松, 谢伶俐, 许本波. 基于北纬30°分界的长江中游油菜增产策略研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 99-117.
[5] 王菲菲, 张胜忠, 杨贵华, 苗华荣, 胡晓辉, 张则林, 刘莎莎, 乔利仙, 单世华, 陈静. 331份花生种质苗期耐盐性综合评价和强耐盐种质鉴选[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 279-294.
[6] 尹丽娜, 张锐, 陈国欢, 白磊, 李俊, 郭华春, 杨芳. 不同马铃薯品种块茎创伤愈合能力的比较[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(9): 2399-2411.
[7] 孟然, 李赵嘉, 冯薇, 陈悦, 刘路平, 杨春燕, 鲁雪林, 王秀萍. 大豆不同生育时期耐盐性综合评价及耐盐种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(8): 1991-2008.
[8] 陈于婷, 丁晓雨, 许本波, 张学昆, 徐劲松, 殷艳. 气候变暖对冬油菜产量、品质及重要农艺性状的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(2): 516-525.
[9] 李琰, 李雨晨, 于爱萍, 陈爱萍. 8份无芒雀麦种质资源的草产量与营养品质的综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(12): 3377-3386.
[10] 蒋昂辰, 李琰, 李雨晨, 张晶, 陈爱萍. 21份无芒雀麦种质农艺性状及种子产量的综合评价与优异种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(11): 2958-2970.
[11] 桂灵星, 凌溪铁, 唐兆成, 罗文臻, 朱盼珍, 仇泽宇, 张保龙. 宁麦36抗甲氧咪草烟矮秆突变体的鉴定及农艺性状分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(11): 2923-2932.
[12] 姜骁, 赵健鑫, 毕竞男, 许静, 殷祥贞, 赵旭红, 潘丽娟, 陈娜, 马俊卿, 韩鹏, 杨珍, 迟晓元. 中国北方主产区主要地理和气候因子对花生农艺性状和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(10): 2805-2820.
[13] 聂波涛, 刘德泉, 陈健, 崔正果, 侯云龙, 陈亮, 邱红梅, 王跃强. 北方春大豆品种农艺和品质性状分析与综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(9): 2248-2266.
[14] 李长喜, 董占鹏, 关永虎, 刘金伟, 李航, 梅拥军. 南疆陆地棉农艺性状与皮棉产量性状的遗传贡献及决策系数分析[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(6): 1486-1502.
[15] 刘园园, 董建科, 应静文, 梅文祥, 程刚, 郭晶晶, 焦文标, 宋波涛. 利用野生种Solanum boliviense创制马铃薯抗寒种质[J]. 作物学报, 2024, 50(6): 1384-1393.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!