欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (2): 367-379.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.04283

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇    下一篇

绿豆种质资源苗期耐盐性鉴定及耐盐种质筛选

胡亮亮(), 王素华(), 王丽侠, 程须珍*(), 陈红霖*()   

  1. 中国农业科学院作物科学研究所, 北京 100081
  • 收稿日期:2020-12-28 接受日期:2021-04-26 出版日期:2022-02-12 网络出版日期:2021-05-18
  • 通讯作者: 程须珍,陈红霖
  • 作者简介:胡亮亮, E-mail: 931629850@qq.com;
    王素华, E-mail: wangsuhua@caas.cn
  • 基金资助:
    本研究由国家重点研发计划项目(2019YFD1000702);本研究由国家重点研发计划项目(2019YFD1000700);中国农业科学院科技创新工程项目, 农作物种质资源保护与利用专项(2019NWB036-07);国家农作物种质资源共享服务平台(NICGR2019);国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项资助(CARS-08)

Identification of salt tolerance and screening of salt tolerant germplasm of mungbean (Vigna radiate L.) at seedling stage

HU Liang-Liang(), WANG Su-Hua(), WANG Li-Xia, CHENG Xu-Zhen*(), CHEN Hong-Lin*()   

  1. Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2020-12-28 Accepted:2021-04-26 Published:2022-02-12 Published online:2021-05-18
  • Contact: CHENG Xu-Zhen,CHEN Hong-Lin
  • Supported by:
    This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China(2019YFD1000702);This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China(2019YFD1000700);the Agricultural Science and Technology Innovation Program (ASTIP) in CAAS, the Crop Germplasm Resources Protection(2019NWB036-07);the National Infrastructure for Crop Germplasm Resources Project from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China(NICGR2019);the China Agriculture Research System(CARS-08)

RichHTML

56

PDF

894

摘要：

土壤盐渍化已成为影响中国农业生产的重要问题, 筛选耐盐绿豆种质资源对于盐渍化土地利用具有重要意义。本研究对346份国内外绿豆种质苗期用150 mmol L -1 NaCl进行胁迫处理, 测定了株高、地上部鲜重、根鲜重、地上部干重、根干重、根长、根体积等12个指标, 采用主成分分析和隶属函数分析、耐盐性综合评价分析及聚类分析对各样本的耐盐性进行了综合评价和归类, 并采用逐步回归分析建立了耐盐性预测回归方程。结果表明, 处理组与对照组各性状评价指标存在极显著差异, 且12个指标的耐盐系数间均存在着不同程度的相关性。结合盐害症状等级划分与耐盐性综合评价结果, 筛选到苗期高耐盐(1级)绿豆26份, 耐盐(3级)绿豆65份, 对盐分敏感(7级)绿豆74份, 对盐分极敏感(9级)绿豆18份。其中来自江西的C04125、菲律宾的C06310等10份耐盐能力最强, 可作为绿豆耐盐育种的优异种质资源。地上部鲜重、根鲜重、根干重、根长、根体积和根分枝数可以作为绿豆苗期耐盐性评价指标。

关键词: 绿豆, 种质资源, 苗期, 耐盐性, 综合评价

Abstract:

Soil salinization has become one of the important factors affecting agricultural production in China. It is of great significance to screen germplasm resources of mungbean [Vigna radiate (L.) Wilczek] for the utilization of salinized land. In the present study, the seedlings of 346 domestic and foreign collections of mungbean were exposed to 150 mmol L -1 NaCl. To evaluate the salt-tolerance of different mungbean genotypes at seedling stage, 12 indicators were calculated, including plant height, fresh weight of above-ground part, fresh weight of root, dry weight of above-ground part, dry root weight, root length, and root volume. Salt tolerance of each sample was comprehensively evaluated and classified by principal component analysis, membership function analysis, salt tolerance comprehensive evaluation, and cluster analysis; and the regression equation of salt tolerance prediction was established by stepwise regression analysis. The results revealed that there were significant differences between treatment group and control group in each trait evaluation index, and the salt tolerance coefficients of the 12 indicators were correlated to some content. Combining the classification of salt damage symptoms and the comprehensive evaluation results of salt tolerance, 26 mungbean germplasms with high salt tolerance, 65 germplasms with high salt tolerance, 74 germplasms with salt sensitive, and 18 germplasms with extremely salt sensitive were selected at seedling stage. Among them, 10 varieties such as C04125 from Jiangxi and C06310 from the Philippines had the strongest salt tolerance, which could be used as excellent resources for mungbean salt tolerance breeding. Above-ground fresh weight, root fresh weight, root dry weight, root length, root volume, and root branch number could be used to predict salt tolerance of mungbean at seedling stage.

Key words: mungbean [Vigna radiate (L.) Wilczek], germplasm resources, seeding stage, salt tolerance, comprehensive evaluation

表1

盐胁迫后绿豆苗期的盐害症状"

等级
Grade		 耐盐性
Salt tolerance		 表型特征
Symptom
1 高耐盐
Highly salt-tolerant		 生长正常, 未出现盐害症状。
Normal growth, no symptoms were observed.
3 耐盐
Salt-tolerant		 生长基本正常, 少数叶片边缘出现青枯或卷缩。
The growth is basically normal, and a few leaves appear withered or curled on the edge.
5 中耐盐
Mediumly salt-tolerant		 叶片面积一半左右出现青枯或卷缩。
About half of the leaf area appear withered or curled.
7 敏感
Salt-sensitive		 叶片大部分面积干枯坏死, 生长严重受阻。
Most of the leaves are dry and necrotic, and the growth is severely blocked.
9 高敏感
Highly salt-sensitive		 严重受害, 植株完全枯萎。
Severely damaged, the plant is completely withered.

图1

苗期耐盐性单株分类记载法的标准 1: 高耐盐, 生长正常, 未出现盐害症状; 3: 耐盐, 生长基本正常, 少数叶片边缘出现青枯或卷缩; 5: 中耐盐, 叶片面积一半左右出现青枯或卷缩; 7: 敏感, 叶片大部分面积干枯坏死, 生长严重受阻; 9: 高敏感, 严重受害, 植株完全枯萎。"

图2

正常条件和盐胁迫条件下的12个性状表型差异 CK: 对照; ST: 盐处理; PH: 株高; AFW; 地上部鲜重; RFW: 根鲜重; ADW: 地上部干重; RDW: 根干重; RL: 根长; RSA: 根表面积; RAD: 根平均直径; RLPV: 单位体积根长; RV: 根体积; RT; 根尖数; RF: 根分枝数。** 表示P < 0.01的显著水平。"

表2

绿豆盐胁迫下各性状耐盐系数描述性统计"

性状
Trait		 最小值
Min.		 最大值
Max.		 平均值
Mean		 标准差
SD		 变异系数
CV (%)
PH 0.355 0.998 0.730 0.14 19.08
AFW 0.159 1.104 0.596 0.23 39.42
RFW 0.113 1.044 0.684 0.22 32.30
ADW 0.206 1.077 0.711 0.19 26.54
RDW 0.220 0.998 0.713 0.19 26.08
RL 0.156 1.026 0.633 0.24 37.86
RSA 0.148 1.134 0.719 0.21 28.62
RAD 0.574 1.144 0.873 0.08 9.61
RLPV 0.156 1.053 0.630 0.24 37.61
RV 0.140 1.085 0.796 0.18 22.73
RT 0.049 0.998 0.647 0.27 42.11
RF 0.112 0.999 0.607 0.24 40.12

表3

绿豆盐胁迫下各性状耐盐系数相关性分析"

性状
Trait		 PH AFW RFW ADW RDW RL RSA RAD RLPV RV RT
AFW 0.53*
RFW 0.17 0.40*
ADW 0.64* 0.74** 0.21
RDW 0.45* 0.63* 0.75** 0.61*
RL 0.46* 0.40* 0.40* 0.44* 0.52*
RSA 0.31 0.39 0.46* 0.35 0.52* 0.93**
RAD -0.58* -0.21 -0.06 -0.40* -0.24 -0.57* -0.26
RLPV 0.46* 0.40* 0.40* 0.44* 0.52* 0.99** 0.93** -0.57*
RV 0.08 0.30 0.46* 0.19 0.44* 0.71** 0.91** 0.13 0.71**
RT 0.38 0.34 0.18 0.37 0.35 0.72** 0.60* -0.57* 0.72** 0.38
RF 0.37 0.34 0.35 0.38 0.44* 0.90 ** 0.87** -0.45* 0.90** 0.69* 0.66*

表4

前5个主成分的特征值及特征向量描述"

性状
Trait		 主成分因子 Comprehensive factors
F1 F2 F3 F4 F5
PH -0.22 0.46 0.10 -0.04 -0.57
AFW -0.23 0.38 -0.24 -0.37 0.39
RFW -0.19 -0.02 -0.53 0.55 0.07
ADW -0.23 0.48 -0.10 -0.34 0.04
RDW -0.26 0.19 -0.41 0.36 0.01
RL -0.38 -0.15 0.15 0.02 -0.10
RSA -0.36 -0.28 -0.03 -0.13 -0.12
RAD 0.20 -0.26 -0.51 -0.43 0.03
RLPV -0.38 -0.15 0.15 0.02 -0.10
RV -0.37 -0.39 -0.25 -0.31 -0.13
RT -0.30 -0.04 0.31 0.08 0.67
RF -0.37 -0.19 0.13 -0.04 -0.07
特征值Eigen values 6.29 2.01 1.59 0.82 0.45
贡献率Contribution rate (%) 52.39 16.78 13.24 6.80 3.71
累计贡献率Accumulative contribution rate (%) 52.39 69.18 82.41 89.21 92.93

表5

不同基因型绿豆耐盐性综合评价D值"

品种
Variety		 D值
D-value		 排名
Rank		 品种
Variety		 D值
D-value		 排名
Rank		 品种
Variety		 D值
D-value		 排名
Rank		 品种
Variety		 D值
D-value		 排名
Rank
C05290 0.663 164 C03069 0.592 253 C06292 0.741 44 C06227 0.568 270
C05495 0.747 36 C03070 0.549 283 C06293 0.758 21 C06228 0.541 291
C05506 0.683 126 C03071 0.708 96 C06294 0.699 105 C06230 0.663 165
C05668 0.678 135 C03072 0.602 241 C06295 0.703 99 C06231 0.406 340
C05786 0.513 308 C03078 0.609 232 C06296 0.769 12 C06232 0.547 285
C05787 0.762 19 C03079 0.702 101 C06297 0.757 23 C06233 0.502 313
C05798 0.526 300 C03086 0.621 223 C06298 0.538 293 C06234 0.453 331
C06117 0.748 35 C03090 0.669 151 C06299 0.792 4 C06235 0.562 275
C06118 0.626 219 C03094 0.740 47 C06300 0.413 339 C06236 0.724 65
C05788 0.722 67 C03140 0.720 75 C06302 0.740 46 C06237 0.663 162
C06397 0.631 210 C03606 0.538 294 C06303 0.789 5 C06238 0.643 188
C06396 0.664 159 C03656 0.717 88 C06304 0.458 328 C06241 0.642 190
C06386 0.632 208 C03608 0.545 289 C06305 0.636 201 C06242 0.341 343
C05636 0.674 140 C03609 0.772 8 C06306 0.727 60 C06243 0.631 211
C06398 0.711 94 C03610 0.754 28 C06307 0.615 229 C06244 0.582 261
C06390 0.746 38 C03601 0.768 13 C06308 0.756 25 C06246 0.561 277
C06391 0.744 39 C03651 0.682 128 C06309 0.547 286 C06247 0.664 161
C05503 0.583 260 C03273 0.755 26 C06310 0.804 2 C06248 0.607 236
C06392 0.717 83 C03279 0.777 7 C06311 0.721 71 C06249 0.522 301
C06393 0.796 3 C03280 0.719 78 C06312 0.743 40 C06251 0.657 173
C06394 0.751 31 C03284 0.733 56 C06313 0.740 48 C06253 0.575 266
C06383 0.567 271 C03289 0.638 197 C06314 0.738 50 C06254 0.477 321
C06384 0.672 146 C03304 0.670 149 C06315 0.673 145 C06255 0.719 77
C05249 0.507 311 C03305 0.432 336 C06316 0.721 69 C06256 0.533 295
C05248 0.726 62 C03312 0.695 108 C06317 0.695 106 C06257 0.643 189
C06385 0.664 160 C03316 0.741 45 C06318 0.454 329 C06258 0.717 86
C04717 0.720 76 C03319 0.695 107 C06319 0.638 196 C06259 0.512 309
C06387 0.736 54 C03320 0.680 131 C06320 0.501 314 C06260 0.662 167
C06389 0.657 175 C03334 0.715 91 C06321 0.462 327 C06261 0.437 334
C06388 0.740 49 C03380 0.748 34 C06322 0.596 248 C06262 0.520 302
C05635 0.751 30 C03381 0.674 138 C06323 0.750 32 C06263 0.454 330
C05637 0.715 92 C03383 0.685 120 C06324 0.653 179 C06264 0.516 306
C06402 0.716 90 C03384 0.639 195 C06325 0.607 234 C06265 0.648 185
C03413 0.684 121 C03385 0.721 70 C06326 0.699 104 C06266 0.588 257
C03416 0.721 72 C03397 0.472 323 C06327 0.607 235 C06267 0.432 335
C06395 0.685 119 C03399 0.684 123 C06328 0.584 259 C06268 0.741 43
C06405 0.547 284 C03400 0.769 11 C06329 0.500 316 C06269 0.466 325
C05179 0.701 103 C03401 0.590 256 C06330 0.615 228 C06270 0.770 10
C06179 0.562 276 C03402 0.768 15 C06331 0.718 81 C06271 0.645 187
C06403 0.665 158 C03405 0.723 66 C06332 0.768 14 C06272 0.618 226
C06404 0.725 63 C03434 0.674 141 C06333 0.720 74 C06273 0.576 264
C03414 0.635 202 C03435 0.684 122 C06334 0.683 124 C06274 0.667 155
C04702 0.687 116 C03436 0.725 64 C06335 0.682 127 C06275 0.566 274
C03923 0.759 20 C03440 0.757 22 C06336 0.547 287 C06276 0.717 89
C00376 0.573 267 C03441 0.547 288 C06337 0.633 204 C06277 0.711 93
C00377 0.681 130 C03442 0.593 251 C06338 0.722 68 C06278 0.658 172
C00381 0.637 199 C03471 0.754 29 C06339 0.718 82 C06279 0.476 322
C00385 0.516 304 C03472 0.702 102 C06340 0.632 206 C06280 0.552 281
C00389 0.554 279 C03484 0.632 207 C06341 0.479 320 C05900 0.566 273
C00391 0.707 97 C03485 0.667 156 C06342 0.778 6 C05901 0.617 227
C00396 0.593 250 C03486 0.683 125 C06343 0.597 246 C05902 0.678 134
C00399 0.494 317 C03526 0.673 144 C06344 0.464 326 C05903 0.444 333
C00834 0.592 254 C03527 0.676 137 C06345 0.612 230 C05904 0.721 73
C00840 0.630 212 C03528 0.541 290 C06346 0.569 269 C05905 0.651 182
C00848 0.742 41 C03529 0.444 332 C06347 0.717 85 C05906 0.640 194
C00858 0.693 111 C03530 0.694 110 C06348 0.692 113 C05907 0.632 205
C01606 0.592 255 C03593 0.619 225 C06349 0.567 272 C05908 0.659 171
C01607 0.604 239 C03594 0.681 129 C06350 0.690 115 C05909 0.665 157
C01609 0.671 147 C03595 0.667 154 C06351 0.630 213 C05910 0.577 263
C01610 0.692 114 C03596 0.677 136 C06352 0.596 247 C05911 0.608 233
C01611 0.594 249 C03597 0.603 240 C06353 0.619 224 C05912 0.628 218
C01623 0.651 183 C03598 0.625 220 C06200 0.650 184 C05913 0.491 318
C01627 0.655 177 C03599 0.766 16 C06201 0.571 268 C05914 0.647 186
C01630 0.528 299 C04081 0.514 307 C06202 0.728 59 C05915 0.610 231
C01633 0.601 242 C04082 0.641 193 C06203 0.755 27 C05916 0.662 166
C01635 0.764 17 C04083 0.490 319 C06204 0.660 170 C05917 0.736 52
C01651 0.718 80 C04084 0.735 55 C06205 0.653 178 C05918 0.679 133
C01657 0.668 153 C04085 0.652 180 C06206 0.173 346 C05919 0.635 203
C01660 0.605 238 C04086 0.703 100 C06208 0.529 298 C05920 0.657 174
C01740 0.517 303 C04125 0.829 1 C06209 0.670 150 C05921 0.652 181
C01741 0.628 215 C04126 0.540 292 C06210 0.587 258 C05922 0.763 18
C01742 0.692 112 C04127 0.637 198 C06211 0.468 324 C05923 0.661 168
C01751 0.624 221 C04558 0.750 33 C06212 0.674 143 C05924 0.516 305
C01752 0.770 9 C04559 0.710 95 C06213 0.717 87 C05925 0.674 139
C01753 0.628 216 C04560 0.680 132 C06214 0.599 244 C05926 0.600 243
C01754 0.599 245 C04561 0.741 42 C06215 0.503 312 C05927 0.674 142
C01755 0.706 98 C06281 0.624 222 C06216 0.687 117 C05928 0.660 169
C01815 0.606 237 C06282 0.593 252 C06217 0.552 282 C05929 0.377 341
C02056 0.694 109 C06283 0.641 192 C06218 0.670 148 C05930 0.341 342
C02058 0.575 265 C06284 0.727 61 C06219 0.501 315 C05931 0.731 57
C02071 0.746 37 C06285 0.669 152 C06220 0.561 278 C05932 0.552 280
C02072 0.686 118 C06286 0.736 53 C06221 0.426 338 C05933 0.532 296
C02073 0.663 163 C06287 0.656 176 C06222 0.637 200 C05934 0.718 79
C02077 0.212 345 C06288 0.736 51 C06223 0.731 58 C05935 0.292 344
C02078 0.628 217 C06289 0.431 337 C06224 0.641 191 C05937 0.630 214
C02081 0.632 209 C06290 0.756 24 C06225 0.507 310
C02103 0.717 84 C06291 0.579 262 C06226 0.531 297

图3

346份绿豆种质基于D值的聚类图"

[1] Li W H, Zhang H Z, Zeng Y L, Xiang L J, Lei Z H, Huang Q X, Li T Y, Shen F, Cheng Q. A salt tolerance evaluation method for sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) at the seed germination stage. Sci Rep, 2020,10:10626.
[2] 刘谢香, 常汝镇, 关荣霞, 邱丽娟. 大豆出苗期耐盐性鉴定方法建立及耐盐种质筛选. 作物学报, 2020,46:1-8.
Liu X X, Chang R Z, Guan R X, Qiu L J. Establishment of screening method for salt tolerant soybean at emergence stage and screening of tolerant germplasm. Acta Agron Sin, 2020,46:1-8 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[3] 王佳丽, 黄贤金, 钟太洋, 陈志刚. 盐碱地可持续利用研究综述. 地理学报, 2011,66:673-684.
Wang J L, Huang X J, Zhong T Y, Chen Z G. Review on sustainable utilization of salt-affected land. Acta Geogr Sin, 2011,66:673-684 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[4] Qadir M, Quillérou E, Nangia V, Murtaza G, Singh M, Thomas R J, Drechsel P, Nobl A D. Economics of salt-induced land degradation and restoration. Nat Resour Forum, 2014,38:282-295.
[5] 郝德荣, 程玉静, 徐辰武, 冒宇翔, 彭长俊, 薛林. 玉米耐盐种质筛选及群体遗传结构分析. 植物遗传资源学报, 2013,14:1153-1160.
Hao D R, Cheng Y J, Xu C W, Mao Y X, Peng C J, Xue L. Screening of maize germplasms for salt-tolerance and evaluation of population genetic structure. J Plant Genet Resour, 2013,14:1153-1160 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[6] 吴其褒, 胡国成, 柯登寿, 栾维江, 杨巍, 孙宗修, 陈慧哲. 俄罗斯水稻种质资源的苗期耐盐鉴定. 植物遗传资源学报, 2008,9:32-35.
Wu Q B, Hu G C, Ke D S, Luan W J, Yang W, Sun Z X, Chen H Z. Evaluation of russian rice germplasm in salt tolerance at seedling stage. J Plant Genet Resour, 2008,9:32-35 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[7] 马雅琴, 翁跃进. 引进春小麦种质耐盐性的鉴定评价. 作物学报, 2005,31:58-64.
Ma Y Q, Weng Y J. Evaluation for salt tolerance in spring wheat cultivars introduced from abroad. Acta Agron Sin, 2005,31:58-64 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[8] Chinnusamy V, Zhu J, Zhu J K. Salt stress signaling and mechanisms of plant salt tolerance. Genet Eng, 2006,27:141-177.
[9] 杨淑华, 巩志忠, 郭岩, 龚继明, 郑绍建, 林荣呈, 杨洪全, 毛龙, 秦峰, 罗利军, 张天真, 储成才, 赖锦盛, 晁代印, 关雪莹, 彭佳师, 黄朝峰, 蒋才富, 王瑜, 杨永青, 施怡婷. 中国植物应答环境变化研究的过去与未来. 中国科学: 生命科学, 2019,49:1457-1478.
Yang S H, Gong Z Z, Guo Y, Gong J M, Zheng S J, Lin R C, Yang H Q, Mao L, Qin F, Luo L J, Zhang T Z, Chu C C, Lai J S, Chao D Y, Guan X Y, Peng J S, Huang C F, Jiang C F, Wang Y, Yang Y Q, Shi Y T. Studies on plant responses to environmental change in China: the past and the future. Sci Sin (Vitae), 2019,49:1457-1478 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[10] 程须珍, 王素华. 中国绿豆品种资源研究. 作物品种资源, 1998, ( 4):9-11.
Cheng X Z, Wang S H. Research on Chinese mungbean germplasm resources. Crop Germplasm Resour, 1998, ( 4):9-11 (in Chinese).
[11] 陈红霖, 胡亮亮, 杨勇, 郝曦煜, 李姝彤, 王素华, 王丽侠, 程须珍. 481份国内外绿豆种质农艺性状及豆象抗性鉴定评价及遗传多样性分析. 植物遗传资源学报, 2020,21:549-559.
Chen H L, Hu L L, Yang Y, Hao X Y, Li S T, Wang S H, Wang L X, Cheng X Z. Evaluation and genetic diversity analysis of agronomic traits and bruchid resistance using 481 worldwide mungbean germplasms. J Plant Genet Resour, 2020,21:549-559 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[12] 焦广音, 任建华, 逯贵生, 降彩霞. 绿豆品种资源耐盐性鉴定与研究. 作物品种资源, 1997, (2):38-40.
Jiao G Y, Ren J H, Lu G S, Jiang C X. Identification and research on salt tolerance of mungbean variety resources. Crop Germplasm Resour, 1997, ( 2):38-40 (in Chinese).
[13] 徐宁, 陈冰嬬, 王明海, 包淑英, 王桂芳, 郭中校. 绿豆品种资源萌发期耐碱性鉴定. 作物学报, 2017,43:112-121.
Xu N, Chen B X, Wang M H, Bao S Y, Wang G F, Guo Z X. Identification of alkali tolerance of mungbean germplasm resources during germination. Acta Agron Sin, 2017,43:112-121 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[14] Mishra S, Alavilli H, Lee BH, Panda S K, Sahoo L. Cloning and functional characterization of a vacuolar Na+/H+ antiporter gene from mungbean (VrNHX1) and its ectopic expression enhanced salt tolerance in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS One, 2014,9:e106678.
[15] Chen H L, Liu L P, Wang L X, Wang S H, Cheng X Z. VrDREB2A, a DREB-binding transcription factor from Vigna radiata, increased drought and high-salt tolerance in transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana. J Plant Res, 2016,129:263-273.
[16] Hosseini M, Powell A, Bingham I. Comparison of the seed germination and early seedling growth of soybean in saline conditions. Seed Sci Res, 2002,12:165-172.
[17] 于崧, 梁海芸, 郭潇潇, 张翼飞, 史京京, 付鸾鸿. 不同基因型绿豆苗期耐盐碱性分析及其鉴定指标的筛选. 干旱地区农业研究, 2018,36(4):223-232.
Yu S, Liang H Y, Guo X X, Zhang Y F, Shi J J, Fu L H. Analysis of saline-alkaline tolerance and determination of saline-alkaline tolerance evaluation indicators in seeding stage of different mungbean genotypes. Agric Res Arid Areas, 2018,36(4):223-232 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[18] Ali M, Afzal S, Parveen A, Kamran M, Javed M R, Abbasi G H, Malik Z, Riaz M, Ahmad S, Chattha M S, Ali M, Ali Q, Uddin M Z, Rizwan M, Ali S. Silicon mediated improvement in the growth and ion homeostasis by decreasing Na + uptake in maize (Zea mays L.) cultivars exposed to salinity stress. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2021,158:208-218.
[19] Wang S Q, Hu Y G, She K J, Zhou L L, Meng F L. Gray relational grade analysis of agronomical and physic-biochemical traits related to drought tolerance in wheat. Sci Agric Sin, 2007,40:2452-2459.
[20] 马帅国, 田蓉蓉, 胡慧, 吕建东, 田蕾, 罗成科, 张银霞, 李培富. 粳稻种质资源苗期耐盐性综合评价与筛选. 植物遗传与资源学报, 2020,21:1089-1101.
Ma S G, Tian R R, Hu H, Lyu J D, Tian L, Luo C K, Zhang Y X, Li P F. Comprehensive evaluation and selection of rice (Oryza sativa japonica) germplasm for saline tolerance at seeding stage. J Plant Genet Res, 2020,21:1089-1101 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[21] 杨奇勇, 冯发林, 巢礼义. 多目标决策的农业抗旱能力综合评价. 灾害学, 2007,22(2):5-8.
Yang Q Y, Feng F L, Chao L Y. Comprehensive evaluation on ability of coping with agriculture drought by using multi-objective decision. J Catastrophol, 2007,22(2):5-8 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[22] 牛远, 杨修艳, 戴存凤, 王博文, 任高磊, 吴静磊, 王飞兵, 陈新红. 大豆芽期和苗期耐盐性评价指标筛选. 大豆科学, 2018,37:215-223.
Niu Y, Yang X Y, Dai C F, Wang B W, Ren G L, Wu J L, Wang F B, Chen X H. Related indices selection of soybean salt tolerance at germination and seedling stages. Soybean Sci, 2018,37:215-223 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[23] 王秀华, 张寒, 潘香逾, 刘国锋, 赵岩. 玉米成株期耐盐性评价与耐盐资源筛选. 分子植物育种, 2020,18:685-692.
Wang X H, Zhang H, Pan X Y, Liu G F, Zhao Y. Evaluation of salt tolerance and selection of salt tolerant germplasm in maize at adult stage. Mol Plant Breed, 2020,18:685-692 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[24] 孙璐, 周宇飞, 汪澈, 肖木辑, 陶冶, 许文娟, 黄瑞冬. 高粱品种萌发期耐盐性筛选与鉴定. 中国农业科学, 2012,45:1714-1722.
Sun L, Zhou Y F, Wang C, Xiao M J, Tao Y, Xu W J, Huang R D. Screening and identification of sorghum cultivars for salinity tolerance during germination. Sci Agric Sin, 2012,45:1714-1722 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[25] 任富莉, 潘映红, 张笑笑, 蒲伟军, 牟永莹, 李玉斌, 张桦, 朱莉. 基于多重表型的高粱耐盐性综合评价方法. 中国农业科技导报, 2019,21(6):152-162.
Ren F L, Pan Y H, Zhang X X, Pu W J, Mu Y Y, Li Y B, Zhang H, Zhu L. Comprehensive evaluation method for sorghum salt tolerance based on multilevel phenotypic analysis. J Agric Sci Technol, 2019,21(6):152-162 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[26] 程须珍, 王素华, 王丽侠. 绿豆种质资源描述规范和数据. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006. pp 48-58.
Cheng X Z, Wang S H, Wang L X. Descriptors and Data Standard for Mungbean [Vigna radiata (L.) Wilczek]. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2006. pp 48-58(in Chinese with English abstract).
[27] Kim Y, Mun B G, Khan A L, Waqas M, Kim H, Shahzad R, Imran M, Yun B W, Lee I J. Regulation of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species by salicylic acid in rice plants under salinity stress conditions. PLoS One, 2018,13:e0192650.
[28] Zhang J L, Shi H Z. Physiological and molecular mechanisms of plant salt tolerance. Photosynth Res, 2013,115:1-22.
[29] 郭玉静, 马宗琪, 宋佳慧, 何晓彤, 于梦斐, 王颖. 绿豆盐胁迫响应机制研究进展. 山东农业科学, 2021,53(1):137-142.
Guo Y J, Ma Z Q, Song J H, He X T, Yu M W, Wang Y. Research progress on the mechanism of mungbean in response to salt stress. Shandong Agric Sci, 2021,53(1):137-142 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[30] Shen Q F, Yu J H, Fu L B, Wu L Y, Dai F, Jiang L X, Wu D Z, Zhang G P. Ionomic, metabolomic and proteomic analyses reveal molecular mechanisms of root adaption to salt stress in tibetan wild barley. Plant Physiol Biochem, 2018,123:319-330.
[31] Deinlein U, Stephan AB, Horie T, Luo W, Xu G, Schroeder J I. Plant salt-tolerance mechanisms. Trends Plant Sci. 2014,19:371-379.
[32] Liang W J, Ma X L, Wan P, Liu L Y. Plant salt-tolerance mechanism: a review. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 2018,495:286-291.
[33] Jiang Z H, Zhou X P, Tao M, Yuan F, Liu L L, Wu F H, Wu X M, Xiang Y, Niu Y, Liu F, Li C J. Plant cell-surface GIPC sphingolipids sense salt to trigger Ca 2+ influx . Nature, 2019,572:341-346.
[34] Suzuki N, Bassil E, Hamilton J S, Inupakutika A M, Zandalinas I S, Tripathy D, Luo Y, Dion E, Fukui G, Kumazaki A, Nakano R, Rivero M R, Verbeck F G, Azad K R, Blumwald E, Mittler R. ABA is required for plant acclimation to a combination of salt and heat stress. PLoS One, 2016,11:e0147625.
[35] Li W Q, Yamaguchi S, Khan M A, An P, Liu X J, Tran L P. Roles of gibberellins and abscisic acid in regulating germination of suaeda salsa dimorphic seeds under salt stress. Front Plant Sci, 2016,6:1235.
[36] Iqbal N, Umar S, Per T S, Khan N A. Ethephon increases photosynthetic-nitrogen use efficiency, proline and antioxidant metabolism to alleviate decrease in photosynthesis under salinity stress in mustard. Plant Signal Behav, 2017,12:e1297000.
[37] Erdal S, Aydn M, Genisel M, Taspnar S M, Gorcek Z. Effects of salicylic acid on wheat salt sensitivity. Afr J Biotechnol, 2011,10:5713-5718.
[38] 王乐政, 高凤菊, 华方静, 曹鹏鹏. 不同绿豆品种萌发期耐盐性研究. 山东农业科学, 2015,47(9):31-35.
Wang L Z, Gao F J, Hua F J, Cao P P. Study on salt tolerance of different mungbean varieties at germination stage. Shandong Agric Sci, 2015,47(9):31-35 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[39] 田小霞, 毛培春, 张琳, 郭强, 孟林. 苜蓿属植物苗期耐盐指标筛选及耐盐性综合评价. 植物资源与环境学报, 2018,27(2):46-56.
Tian X X, Mao P C, Zhang L, Guo Q, Meng L. Screening on salt tolerance index and comprehensive evaluation of salt tolerance of Medicago Linn. plants at seedling stage. J Plant Res Environ, 2018,27:46-56 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[40] 宝力格, 陆平, 史梦莎, 许月, 刘敏轩. 中国高粱地方种质芽期苗期耐盐性筛选及鉴定. 作物学报, 2020,46:734-744.
Bao L G, Lu P, Shi S S, Xu Y, Liu M X. Screening and identification of Chinese sorghum landraces for salt tolerance at germination and seedling stages. Acta Agron Sin, 2020,46:734-744 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[41] 孙现军, 姜奇彦, 胡正, 张惠媛, 徐长兵, 邸一桓, 韩龙植, 张辉. 水稻资源全生育期耐盐性鉴定筛选. 作物学报, 2019,45:1656-1663.
Sun X J, Jiang Q Y, Hu Z, Zhang H Y, Xu C B, Di Y H, Han L Z, Zhang H. Screening and identification of salt-tolerant rice germplasm in whole growth period. Acta Agron Sin, 2019,45:1656-1663 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[42] 于崧, 郭潇潇, 梁海芸, 付鸾鸿, 史京京, 张翼飞, 闯磊. 不同基因型绿豆萌发期耐盐碱性分析及其鉴定指标的筛选. 植物生理学报, 2017,53:1629-1639.
Yu S, Guo X X, Liang H Y, Fu L H, Shi J J, Zhang Y F, Chuang L. Analysis of saline-alkaline tolerance and determination of saline-alkaline tolerance evaluation indicators in germination stage of different mungbean genotypes. Plant Physiol Commun, 2017,53:1629-1639 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[1] 张钰坤, 陆赢, 崔看, 夏石头, 刘忠松. 芥菜种子颜色调控基因TT8的等位变异及其地理分布分析[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1325-1332.
[2] 周文期, 强晓霞, 王森, 江静雯, 卫万荣. 水稻OsLPL2/PIR基因抗旱耐盐机制研究[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(6): 1401-1415.
[3] 陈小红, 林元香, 王倩, 丁敏, 王海岗, 陈凌, 高志军, 王瑞云, 乔治军. 基于高基元SSR构建黍稷种质资源的分子身份证[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(4): 908-919.
[4] 宋丽君, 聂晓玉, 何磊磊, 蒯婕, 杨华, 郭安国, 黄俊生, 傅廷栋, 汪波, 周广生. 饲用大豆品种耐荫性鉴定指标筛选及综合评价[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(9): 1741-1752.
[5] 张鹤, 蒋春姬, 殷冬梅, 董佳乐, 任婧瑶, 赵新华, 钟超, 王晓光, 于海秋. 花生耐冷综合评价体系构建及耐冷种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(9): 1753-1767.
[6] 王琰琰, 王俊, 刘国祥, 钟秋, 张华述, 骆铮珍, 陈志华, 戴培刚, 佟英, 李媛, 蒋勋, 张兴伟, 杨爱国. 基于SSR标记的雪茄烟种质资源指纹图谱库的构建及遗传多样性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(7): 1259-1274.
[7] 党科, 宫香伟, 吕思明, 赵冠, 田礼欣, 靳飞, 杨璞, 冯佰利, 高小丽. 糜子/绿豆间作模式下施氮量对绿豆叶片光合特性及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(6): 1175-1187.
[8] 吴然然, 林云, 陈景斌, 薛晨晨, 袁星星, 闫强, 高营, 李灵慧, 张勤雪, 陈新. 绿豆雄性不育突变体msm2015-1的遗传学与细胞学分析[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(5): 860-868.
[9] 赵佳佳, 乔玲, 武棒棒, 葛川, 乔麟轶, 张树伟, 闫素仙, 郑兴卫, 郑军. 山西省小麦苗期根系性状及抗旱特性分析[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(4): 714-727.
[10] 蒙姜宇, 梁光伟, 贺亚军, 钱伟. 甘蓝型油菜耐盐和耐旱相关性状的QTL分析[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(3): 462-471.
[11] 孙志广, 王宝祥, 周振玲, 方磊, 迟铭, 李景芳, 刘金波, Bello Babatunde Kazeem, 徐大勇. 水稻萌发耐淹性种质资源筛选及QTL定位[J]. 作物学报, 2021, 47(1): 61-70.
[12] 李健, 王逸茹, 张凌霄, 孙明昊, 秦阳, 郑军. 玉米ZmCIPK24-2基因在盐胁迫应答中的功能研究[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(9): 1351-1358.
[13] 赵孟良,王丽慧,任延靖,孙雪梅,侯志强,杨世鹏,李莉,钟启文. 257份菊芋种质资源表型性状的遗传多样性[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(5): 712-724.
[14] 宝力格,陆平,史梦莎,许月,刘敏轩. 中国高粱地方种质芽期苗期耐盐性筛选及鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(5): 734-744.
[15] 张晓军,肖进,王海燕,乔麟轶,李欣,郭慧娟,常利芳,张树伟,阎晓涛,畅志坚,武宗信. 小偃麦衍生品系的赤霉病抗性评价[J]. 作物学报, 2020, 46(01): 62-73.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

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