欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 52 ›› Issue (10): 3142-3152.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2026.64020

• 研究简报 • 上一篇    

西北地区马铃薯基因型与环境互作效应分析及优异品种筛选

张连瑞1,*(), 唐振三2, 何振明1, 宋金凤1, 栾倩倩3, 杨秋华4   

  1. 1 甘肃省张掖市山丹县农业技术推广中心, 甘肃山丹 734100
    2 甘肃农业大学 / 干旱生境作物学国家重点实验室, 甘肃兰州 730070
    3 甘肃省农业工程技术研究院, 甘肃兰州 730030
    4 广西壮族自治区玉林市博白县经济作物站, 广西博白 537600
  • 收稿日期:2026-02-10 接受日期:2026-07-15 出版日期:2026-10-12 网络出版日期:2026-07-27
  • 通讯作者: 张连瑞, E-mail: sdxzlr@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    甘肃省陇原青年英才资金、甘肃省重点人才项目(2026RCXM016);张掖市科技计划项目(ZY2024BJ16);山丹县科技计划项目(SD2025JSYF02)

Deciphering genotype×environment interaction effect and selection of superior potato varieties in the oasis irrigation area of Northwest China

Zhang Lian-Rui1,*(), Tang Zhen-San2, He Zhen-Ming1, Song Jin-Feng1, Luan Qian-Qian3, Yang Qiu-Hua4   

  1. 1 Agricultural Technology Extension Center of Shandan County, Shandan 734100, Gansu, China
    2 Gansu Agricultural University / State Key Laboratory of Arid Land Crop Science, Lanzhou 730070, Gansu, China
    3 Gansu Academy of Agri-Engineering Technology, Lanzhou 730030, Gansu, China
    4 Economic Crops Station of Bobai County, Bobai 537600, Guangxi, China
  • Received:2026-02-10 Accepted:2026-07-15 Published:2026-10-12 Published online:2026-07-27
  • Contact: Zhang Lian-Rui, E-mail: sdxzlr@126.com
  • Supported by:
    Longyuan Young Talents Fund of Gansu Province, the Key Talent Program of Gansu Province(2026RCXM016);Science and Technology Program of the Zhangye City(ZY2024BJ16);Science and Technology Program of the Shandan County(SD2025JSYF02)

RichHTML

3

PDF

71

摘要：

解析马铃薯基因型在不同年份及试点环境下的性状表现, 明确基因型与环境互作(G×E)对表型变异的影响, 筛选关键性状优异且稳定的基因型及其适宜环境, 为特定区域品种选育及合理布局提供依据。本研究以17份马铃薯品种为供试材料, 2023—2025年连续种植于甘肃省张掖市山丹县清泉镇、位奇镇和霍城镇, 测定植株农艺性状(株高、茎粗、主茎数)和块茎产量组分(单株结薯数、单株产量、小区产量)。采用联合方差分析与基因型与环境互作效应(GGE)双标图评价基因型适应性、稳定性及试点区分力和代表性; 采用多性状稳定性指数(MTSI)进行综合筛选。联合方差分析表明, 除茎粗外, 其余农艺与产量性状在基因型、年份及试点间均差异显著。基因型效应及其与年份、试点的互作是引起基因型表型变异的主要因素。单株结薯数基因型效应占比最高(50.04%), 其次为单株薯重(36.72%)和小区产量(20.92%); 在互作效应中, 茎粗的基因型×年份×试点互作效应占比最高(36.85%), 主茎数、小区产量及单株薯重次之, 分别为27.35%、25.89%和25.04%。对照品种大西洋、陇薯23号和中薯18号在株高、产量等关键性状上表现优异且稳定性高。清泉与霍城试点对基因型具有较强的区分力和环境代表性, 且2024—2025年试点区分力整体优于2023年。GGE双标图及MTSI可有效鉴定基因型并筛选出理想试点环境。大西洋、陇薯23号等基因型在关键性状上表现优异且稳定, 2024—2025年的清泉与霍城试点可代表理想环境用于品种精准评价与推广。

关键词: 马铃薯, 互作效应, 试点评价, GGE双标图, 多性状稳定性指数, 品种筛选

Abstract:

This study aimed to analyze the phenotypic performance of potato genotypes across years and environments, clarify the effects of genotype-by-environment (G×E) interactions, and identify superior and stable genotypes for key traits, together with their suitable environments, thereby providing a basis for targeted breeding and rational variety deployment in specific regions. Seventeen potato varieties were used as test materials and cultivated from 2023 to 2025 at three sites in Qingquan town, Weiqi town, and Huocheng town, Shandan county, Zhangye city, Gansu province. Plant traits, including plant height, stem diameter, and number of main stems, as well as tuber yield components, including number of tubers per plant, tuber weight per plant, and plot yield, were evaluated. Genotype adaptability and stability, together with the discriminating ability and representativeness of test environments, were first assessed using combined ANOVA and GGE biplot analysis, followed by comprehensive selection using the multi-trait stability index (MTSI). Combined analysis of variance revealed significant differences among genotypes, years, and test sites for all measured agronomic and yield traits, except stem diameter. Genotype effects and their interactions with years and sites were the main sources of phenotypic variation. Among the genotype effects, the number of tubers per plant contributed the most to variation, accounting for 50.04%, followed by tuber weight per plant (36.72%) and plot yield (20.92%). Among the interaction effects, the genotype × year × test site interaction explained the largest proportion of variation in stem diameter (36.85%), followed by number of stems (27.35%), plot yield (25.89%), and tuber weight per plant (25.04%). GGE biplot and MTSI analyses identified Atlantic (CK), Longshu 23, and Zhongshu 18 as superior and stable genotypes for key traits, including plant height and yield. Environmental evaluation identified Qingquan town and Huocheng town as the most discriminating and representative test environments for genotype assessment. In addition, the overall discriminating ability of the test sites improved from 2023 to the 2024-2025 period. These results indicate that GGE biplot and MTSI analyses can effectively identify superior genotypes and select optimal trial environments. In particular, Atlantic and Longshu 23 showed both high performance and strong stability across key traits, while the Qingquan and Huocheng sites in the 2024-2025 trials represented ideal environments for reliable variety evaluation and targeted promotion.

Key words: potato, interaction effects, pilot evaluation, GGE biplot, multivariate trait stability index, variety screening

表1

17份供试材料"

序号
Code		 品种
Variety		 来源
Source		 序号
Code		 品种
Variety		 来源
Source
G1 克新1号 Kexin 1 黑龙江农业科学院
Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China		 G10 陇薯23号Longshu 23 甘肃省农业科学院
Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China
G2 陇薯红1号 Longshuhong 1 甘肃省农业科学院
Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China		 G11 甘农薯9号Gannongshu 9 甘肃农业大学
Gansu Agricultural University, China
G3 云薯304
Yunshu 304		 云南省农业科学院
Yunnan Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China		 G12 甘农薯7号Gannongshu 7 甘肃农业大学
Gansu Agricultural University, China
G4 Innovator 荷兰 Netherlands G13 青薯2号Qingshu 2 青海省农林科学院
Qinghai Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, China
G5 甘引9号 Ganyin 9 定西马铃薯研究所
Dingxi Potato Research Institute, China		 G14 青薯9号Qingshu 9 青海省农林科学院
Qinghai Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, China
G6 夏波蒂
Shepody		 加拿大 Canada G15 陇薯17号Longshu 17 甘肃省农业科学院
Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China
G7 冀张薯12号Jizhangshu 12 张家口市农业科学院
Zhangjiakou Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China		 G16 中薯18号Zhongshu 18 中国农业科学院蔬菜花卉研究所
Institute of Vegetables and Flowers, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China
G8 陇薯10号Longshu 10 甘肃省农业科学院
Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China		 G17 大西洋
Atlantic (CK)		 美国 USA
G9 天薯11号Tianshu 11 天水市农业科学研究所
Tianshui Institute of Agricultural Sciences, China

表2

试点环境"

试点
Location		 土壤类型
Soil type		 海拔
Altitude (m)		 年降雨量
Annual rainfall (mm)		 年日照时数
Annual sunshine duration (h)		 年均温度
Mean annual temperature (℃)		 无霜期
Frostless period (d)
清泉镇
Qingquan town (QQ)		 灌漠土
Irrigated desert soil		 1760 177 2819 5.6 142
位奇镇
Weiqi town (WQ)		 灌漠土
Irrigated desert soil		 2041 210 2821 5.5 108
霍城镇
Huocheng town (HC)		 栗钙土
Chestnut soil		 2380 230 2620 7.0 123

图1

2023-2025年3个试点下马铃薯性状表现差异 不同小写字母表示同一试点内不同年份间差异显著, 不同大写字母表示同一年份内不同试点间差异显著(P ≤ 0.05)。误差线表示标准误(SE)。多重比较采用Duncan检验。QQ: 清泉镇; WQ: 位奇镇; HC: 霍城镇。"

表3

马铃薯农艺及产量性状方差分析"

性状
Trait		 变异来源
Source of variation		 平方和
Sum of square		 自由度
df		 均方
Mean square		 F-value P-value
株高
Plant height (cm)		 基因型 Genotype (G) 33,321.67 16 2082.60 119.15 < 0.001
环境 Environment (E) 12,462.63 2 6231.32 356.61 < 0.001
年份 Year (Y) 13,329.06 2 6664.53 381.30 < 0.001
基因型×环境G×E 54,022.80 32 1688.21 96.59 < 0.001
基因型×年份G×Y 60,155.33 32 1879.85 107.55 < 0.001
年份×环境Y×E 53,796.76 4 13,449.19 769.47 < 0.001
基因型×年份×环境G×Y×E 7885.57 64 1231.34 70.45 < 0.001
残差 Residual 5033.79 288 17.48
总变异Total 311,315.29 458
茎粗
Stem diameter (cm)		 基因型 Genotype (G) 4.97 16 0.31 98.68 < 0.001
环境 Environment (E) 1.63 2 0.82 259.38 < 0.001
年份 Year (Y) 2.73 2 1.37 433.23 < 0.001
基因型×环境G×E 10.35 32 0.32 102.66 < 0.001
基因型×年份G×Y 11.47 32 0.36 113.80 < 0.001
年份×环境Y×E 1.13 4 0.28 89.59 < 0.001
基因型×年份×环境G×Y×E 19.39 64 0.30 96.16 < 0.001
残差 Residual 0.91 288 0.00
总变异Total 52.62 458
主茎数
Number of main stems per plant		 基因型 Genotype (G) 69.33 16 4.33 9.04 < 0.001
环境 Environment (E) 3.29 2 1.65 3.43 0.034
年份 Year (Y) 8.94 2 4.47 9.32 < 0.001
基因型×环境G×E 99.37 32 3.11 6.48 < 0.001
基因型×年份G×Y 133.73 32 4.18 8.71 < 0.001
年份×环境Y×E 2.59 4 0.65 1.35 0.025
基因型×年份×环境G×Y×E 174.76 64 2.73 5.69 < 0.001
残差 Residual 138.11 288 0.48
总变异Total 638.86 458
单株结薯数
Number of tubers per plant		 基因型 Genotype (G) 579.35 16 36.21 572.12 < 0.001
环境 Environment (E) 2.70 2 1.35 21.48 < 0.001
年份 Year (Y) 3.31 2 1.66 26.32 < 0.001
基因型×环境G×E 105.95 32 3.31 52.59 < 0.001
基因型×年份G×Y 239.14 32 7.47 118.70 < 0.001
年份×环境Y×E 14.91 4 3.73 59.21 < 0.001
基因型×年份×环境G×Y×E 193.01 64 3.02 47.90 < 0.001
残差 Residual 18.13 288 0.06
总变异Total 1157.75 458
单株薯重
Weight per potato plant
 基因型 Genotype (G) 27.77 16 1.74 1217.17 < 0.001
环境 Environment (E) 1.09 2 0.56 383.88 < 0.001
年份 Year (Y) 1.36 2 0.68 477.86 < 0.001
基因型×环境G×E 12.55 32 0.39 274.76 < 0.001
基因型×年份G×Y 12.92 32 0.40 283.14 < 0.001
年份×环境Y×E 0.54 4 0.14 95.23 < 0.001
基因型×年份×环境G×Y×E 18.94 64 0.30 207.52 < 0.001
残差 Residual 0.41 288 0.00
总变异Total 75.63 458
小区产量
Plot yield of
small-sized tuber		 基因型 Genotype (G) 208,631.61 16 13,039.48 241.14 < 0.001
环境 Environment (E) 45,300.25 2 22,650.13 418.87 < 0.001
年份 Year (Y) 111,508.21 2 55,754.10 1031.05 < 0.001
基因型×环境G×E 131,286.24 32 4102.70 75.87 < 0.001
基因型×年份G×Y 137,598.89 32 4299.97 79.52 < 0.001
年份×环境Y×E 87,950.41 4 21,987.60 406.61 < 0.001
基因型×年份×环境G×Y×E 258,185.04 64 4034.14 74.60 < 0.001
残差 Residual 15,573.55 288 54.07
总变异Total 997,052.96 458

图2

适应性分析"

图3

稳定性分析 缩写同图2。GGE双标图参数: Transform = 0; scaling = 1; centering = 2; SVP = 2。A: 株高; B: 茎粗; C: 主茎数; D: 单株结薯数; E: 单株薯重; F: 小区产量。"

图4

试点环境区分力和代表性分析 缩写同图2。GGE双标图参数: Transform = 0; scaling = 1; centering = 2; SVP = 2。A: 株高; B: 茎粗; C: 主茎数; D: 单株结薯数; E: 单株薯重; F: 小区产量。"

图5

MTSI和相关性分析 A: MTSI分析; B: 相关性分析。缩写同图2。PH: 株高; SD: 茎粗; NMS: 主茎数; TNP: 单株结薯数; TWP: 单株薯重; TY: 小区产量。**、***分别表示在0.01和0.001水平上显著相关。"

[1] 周丙月, 袁剑龙, 张玉梅, 等. 马铃薯品种(系)农艺性状的适应性和稳定性分析. 核农学报, 2023, 37: 274-289.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.1000-8551.2023.02.0274
Zhou B Y, Yuan J L, Zhang Y M, et al. Analysis of genotype and environment interaction, adaptability and stability of agronomic traits of potato varieties (lines). J Nucl Agric Sci, 2023, 37: 274-289 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.1000-8551.2023.02.0274
[2] 许乃银, 荣义华, 李健, 等. GGE双标图在陆地棉高产稳产和适应性分析中的应用: 以长江流域棉区国审棉花新品种‘鄂杂棉30’为例. 中国生态农业学报, 2017, 25: 884-892.
Xu N Y, Rong Y H, Li J, et al. Evaluation of upland cotton yield stability and adaptability using GGE-biplot analysis: a case study of ‘Ezamian 30’ cotton cultivar in Yangtze River Valley. Chin J Eco-Agric, 2017, 25: 884-892 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[3] 胡亮亮, 周洪妹, 王晓磊, 等. 小豆产量相关性状的基因型与环境互作效应及稳定性分析. 作物学报, 2025, 51: 2581-2594.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.54049
Hu L L, Zhou H M, Wang X L, et al. Analysis of genotype × environment interaction and stability of yield-related traits in adzuki bean (Vigna angularis). Acta Agron Sin, 2025, 51: 2581-2594 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.54049
[4] 岳海旺, 李春杰, 李媛, 等. 河北省春播玉米品种产量稳定性及试点辨别力综合分析. 核农学报, 2018, 32: 1267-1280.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2018.07.1267
Yue H W, Li C J, Li Y, et al. Comprehensive analysis of yield stability and testing site discrimination of spring sowing maize variety in Hebei province. J Nucl Agric Sci, 2018, 32: 1267-1280 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2018.07.1267
[5] 汪扬媚, 刘言, 冯奎, 等. 川西高原不同马铃薯品种农艺性状与产量的关系研究. 中国农学通报, 2025, 41(6): 29-37.
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0312
Wang Y M, Liu Y, Feng K, et al. Relationship between agronomic traits and yield of different potato varieties in western Sichuan Plateau region. Chin Agric Sci Bull, 2025, 41(6): 29-37 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2024-0312
[6] 叶夕苗, 程鑫, 安聪聪, 等. 马铃薯产量组分的基因型与环境互作及稳定性. 作物学报, 2020, 46: 354-364.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.94089
Ye X M, Cheng X, An C C, et al. Genotype × environment interaction and stability of yield components for potato lines. Acta Agron Sin, 2020, 46: 354-364 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.94089
[7] Gu J H, Evers J B, Driever S M, et al. Branching response to stem density and its impact on yield in hybrid potato grown from true seeds and seedling tubers. Field Crops Res, 2024, 317: 109548.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2024.109548
[8] 祝洪沙, 金彦君, 李成东, 等. 马铃薯冠层温度基因型与环境互作及与气孔密度和产量关系的研究. 西北农业学报, 2025, 34: 433-445.
Zhu H S, Jin Y J, Li C D, et al. Genotypic-environmental interactions of canopy temperature in potato and its relationship with stomatal density and yield. Acta Agric Boreali-Occident Sin, 2025, 34: 433-445 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[9] Zhou B Y, Yuan J L, Liang L J, et al. Genotype ×  environment interactions for potato yield and quality traits: identification of ideotypes adapted in different ecological regions of Northwest China. BMC Plant Biol, 2025, 25: 737.
doi: 10.1186/s12870-025-06741-1
[10] 段惠敏, 王郁, 程李香, 等. 马铃薯块茎末端糖化适应性、稳定性及薯条加工型品种(系)筛选. 作物学报, 2023, 49: 262-276.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.24024
Duan H M, Wang Y, Cheng L X, et al. Tuber sugar-end adaptability, stability, and screening of French fries processing varieties in potato. Acta Agron Sin, 2023, 49: 262-276 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.24024
[11] 郑世文, 唐振三, 李文丽, 等. 马铃薯品种(系)水溶性维生素含量适应性及稳定性综合分析. 干旱地区农业研究, 2026, 44(1): 1-10.
Zheng S W, Tang Z S, Li W L, et al. Comprehensive analysis of the adaptability and stability of water-soluble vitamin content in potato varieties (lines). Agric Res Arid Areas, 2026, 44(1): 1-10 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[12] Yuan J L, Cheng L X, Liang Y C, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of potato cooking quality of advanced lines based on the genotype-by-storage environment interaction. LWT, 2024, 203: 116313.
doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2024.116313
[13] 卓峰琦, 唐振三, 雷雨俊, 等. 基于烹饪方式及回生温度筛选低升糖马铃薯品种(系). 作物学报, 2025, 51: 2538-2546.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.54023
Zhuo F Q, Tang Z S, Lei Y J, et al. Screening of low glycemic potato varieties (lines) based on cooking methods and regeneration temperature. Acta Agron Sin, 2025, 51: 2538-2546 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2025.54023
[14] 蒋彤晖, 叶夕苗, 余斌, 等. 甘肃省马铃薯区试品种产量性状和环境鉴别力评价分析. 核农学报, 2022, 36: 1262-1272.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2022.06.1262
Jiang T H, Ye X M, Yu B, et al. Evaluation and analysis of yield traits and environmental discriminability of potato varieties in regional trial of Gansu province. J Nucl Agric Sci, 2022, 36: 1262-1272 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2022.06.1262
[15] 严威凯. 双标图分析在农作物品种多点试验中的应用. 作物学报, 2010, 36: 1805-1819.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01805
Yan W K. Optimal use of biplots in analysis of multi-location variety test data. Acta Agron Sin, 2010, 36: 1805-1819 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[16] 吕娇艳, 王芳, 邢晓宁, 等. 基于GGE双标图和TOPSIS法对麦套花生品种的综合评价. 干旱地区农业研究, 2025, 43(4): 1-10.
Lyu J Y, Wang F, Xing X N, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of peanut varieties interplanted with wheat using GGE biplot and TOPSIS analysis. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2025, 43(4): 1-10 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[17] 王晓斌, 王瀚, 胡开明, 等. 基于层次分析法和GGE双标图对引进马铃薯种质资源的综合评价. 植物遗传资源学报, 2017, 18: 1067-1078.
doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2017.06.009
Wang X B, Wang H, Hu K M, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of introduced potato germplasms resources based on the analytical hierarchy process and GGE-biplot. J Plant Genet Resour, 2017, 18: 1067-1078 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2017.06.009
[18] 李建武, 李高峰, 文国宏, 等. 甘肃省多点联合试验马铃薯产量要素稳定性及试点鉴别力分析. 西北农业学报, 2022, 31: 1422-1434.
Li J W, Li G F, Wen G H, et al. Analysis of yield component stability of potato clones and trial discrimination in combined trial of Gansu province. Acta Agric Boreali-Occident Sin, 2022, 31: 1422-1434 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[19] Singamsetti A, Shahi J P, Zaidi P H, et al. Genotype × environment interaction and selection of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids across moisture regimes. Field Crops Res, 2021, 270: 108224.
[20] Taleghani D, Rajabi A, Saremirad A, et al. Stability analysis and selection of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes using AMMI, BLUP, GGE biplot and MTSI. Sci Rep, 2023, 13: 10019.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-37217-7 pmid: 37340073
[21] Memon J, Patel R, Parmar D J, et al. Deployment of AMMI, GGE-biplot and MTSI to select elite genotypes of Castor (Ricinus communis L.). Heliyon, 2023, 9: e13515.
[22] Behera P P, Singode A, Bhat B V, et al. Genetic gains in forage sorghum for adaptive traits for non-conventional area through multi-trait-based stability selection methods. Front Plant Sci, 2024, 15: 1248663.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1248663
[23] 张永成, 田丰. 马铃薯试验研究方法. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2007.
Zhang Y C, Tian F. Research Methods of Potato Experiment. Beijing: China Agricultural Science and Technology Press, 2007 (in Chinese).
[24] 门福义, 刘梦芸. 马铃薯栽培生理. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1995.
Men F Y, Liu M Y. Potato Cultivation Physiology. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1995 (in Chinese).
[25] Olivoto T, Lúcio A D C, da Silva J A G, et al. Mean performance and stability in multi-environment trials II: selection based on multiple traits. Agron J, 2019, 111: 2961-2969.
doi: 10.2134/agronj2019.03.0221
[26] 许乃银, 赵素琴, 张芳, 等. 基于GYT双标图对西北内陆棉区国审棉花品种的分类评价. 作物学报, 2021, 47: 660-671.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04135
Xu N Y, Zhao S Q, Zhang F, et al. Retrospective evaluation of cotton varieties nationally registered for the Northwest Inland cotton growing regions based on GYT biplot analysis. Acta Agron Sin, 2021, 47: 660-671 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2021.04135
[27] Kuru B, Abera N, Mulualem T. Genotype × environment interaction and yield stability of finger millet (Eleusine coracana L.) genotypes based on AMMI, GGE and MTSI analysis in humid lowland areas of Ethiopia. Field Crops Res, 2025, 322: 109707.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2024.109707
[28] Subramani P, Nalliappan G K, Narayana M, et al. Selection of superior and stable fodder maize hybrids using MGIDI and MTSI indices. Crop Breed Appl Biotechnol, 2024, 24: e498624418.
[29] Gowda K H, Chauhan V B S, Nedunchezhiyan M, et al. Genotype × environment interaction analysis and simultaneous selection using AMMI, BLUP, GGE biplot and MTSI under drought condition in sweet potato. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr, 2025, 25: 3797-3814.
[30] Ponsiva S T, Senthilkumar N, Vanitha J, et al. Detection of superior rice genotypes and yield stability using AMMI and MTSI models. Electron J Plant Breed, 2024, 15: 405-413.
[1] 吴张晶, 李世贵, 马俊, 张宁, 司怀军. 马铃薯淀粉含量相关SSR标记的遗传多样性分析及综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(8): 2509-2520.
[2] 崔庆晗, 栗锦烨, 董亚瑞, 孙春燕, 贾玉鑫. 马铃薯单倍体种质资源的创制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 1966-1974.
[3] 马晨铭, 哈斯图亚, 常泓博, 梁擎天, 游乐, 吴尚蓉. 基于叶绿素荧光成像系统的马铃薯叶片叶绿素含量估测[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(7): 2193-2206.
[4] 陈国欢, 张锐, 李艳迪, 赵佳琪, 任湧涛, 张天赐, 郭华春, 李俊, 杨芳. 外源硒叶面喷施对浅紫色马铃薯块茎花青素合成的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1876-1890.
[5] 王文辕, 燕雪嘉, 刘玉霖, 孙晓彤, 李亚楠, 唐鑫华, 石瑛. 耐弱光马铃薯品种筛选及转录因子编码基因StPIF3的克隆与功能分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1631-1645.
[6] 田立涛, 丁宁, 王树林, 齐恩芳, 张荣, 王蕊蕊, 马利雯, 李建武, 杨江伟. 马铃薯Argonaute基因家族鉴定及晚疫病诱导表达分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1116-1126.
[7] 张宇, 刘芳, 蔡诚诚, 杨小华, 吉阿么石扎, 杨元军, 王西瑶. 溴乙烷与赤霉素协同处理破除马铃薯块茎休眠的机理初探[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 825-838.
[8] 汪玲, 胡好, 宋家凤, 程洁蓝, 陈颖, 郑婷婷, 吕钊彦, 朱晓彪, 侯华兰. 马铃薯UDP-糖基转移酶基因StUGT52的克隆及功能验证[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 665-676.
[9] 徐强, 谢奎忠, 胡新元, 岳云, 董博, 罗爱花. 连作对马铃薯根际土壤线虫群落结构与功能的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 527-538.
[10] 杨飚, 杜帅康, 张继旺, 石瑛, 张丽莉. 马铃薯III类POD基因家族的全基因组鉴定及其表达谱分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 405-420.
[11] 雷鹏, 李丽, 袁剑龙, 夏露露, 周小成, 张峰. 马铃薯产量和类黄酮含量的基因型与环境互作分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(10): 3006-3022.
[12] 崔一凡, 孙晓彤, 石瑛. 马铃薯MDH基因家族的全基因组鉴定及表达分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(10): 2875-2885.
[13] 周华, 刘丽华, 张笑晴, 许乃银, 屈平平, 李宏博, 刘阳娜, 张明明, 李亚会, 许栩, 徐剑文, 庞斌双. 基于BLUP-GGE双标图的北部冬麦区小麦品种试验环境评价[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(10): 2886-2897.
[14] 姬炫彤, 卞春松, 金黎平, 李森, 秦军红, 李广存. 不同耐旱型马铃薯根际微生物对干旱的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 165-177.
[15] 田甲春, 葛霞, 李守强, 李梅, 田世龙, 张亚倩, 程建新, 李玉梅. 低O2高CO2贮藏环境延缓马铃薯块茎衰老的作用机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 262-278.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!
京ICP备15008789号-2