欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2020, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (01): 62-73.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91015

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇    下一篇

小偃麦衍生品系的赤霉病抗性评价

张晓军1,2,肖进3,王海燕3,乔麟轶1,李欣1,郭慧娟1,常利芳1,张树伟1,阎晓涛1,畅志坚1,2,*(),武宗信4,*()   

  1. 1 山西省农业科学院作物科学研究所/作物遗传与分子改良山西省重点实验室, 山西太原 030031
    2 农业部黄土高原作物基因资源与种质创制重点实验室, 山西太原 030031
    3 南京农业大学作物遗传与种质创新国家重点实验室, 江苏南京 210095
    4 山西省农业科学院棉花研究所, 山西运城 044000
  • 收稿日期:2019-02-16 接受日期:2019-08-09 出版日期:2020-01-12 网络出版日期:2019-07-16
  • 通讯作者: 畅志坚,武宗信
  • 作者简介:E-mail: zxjemail@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    本研究由国家重点研发计划项目(2017YFD0100600);山西省重点研发计划项目(201803D221018-5);山西省重点研发计划项目(201703D211007);山西省重点研发计划项目(201803D421020);山西省农业科学院项目(YGG17123);山西省农业科学院项目(YCX2018D2YS01);和山西省重点科技创新平台资助(201605D151002)

Evaluation of resistance to Fusarium head blight in Thinopyrum-derived wheat lines

ZHANG Xiao-Jun1,2,XIAO Jin3,WANG Hai-Yan3,QIAO Lin-Yi1,LI Xin1,GUO Hui-juan1,CHANG Li-Fang1,ZHANG Shu-Wei1,YAN Xiao-Tao1,CHANG Zhi-Jian1,2,*(),WU Zong-Xin4,*()   

  1. 1 Institute of Crop Science, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Shanxi Key Laboratory of Crop Genetics and Molecular Improvement, Taiyuan 030006, Shanxi, China
    2 Key Laboratory of Crop Gene Resources and Germplasm Enhancement on Loess Plateau of Ministry of Agriculture, Taiyuan 030006, Shanxi, China
    3 State Key Laboratory of Crop Genetics and Germplasm Enhancement, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing 210095, Jiangsu, China
    4 Institute of Cotton, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Yuncheng 044000, Shanxi, China
  • Received:2019-02-16 Accepted:2019-08-09 Published:2020-01-12 Published online:2019-07-16
  • Contact: Zhi-Jian CHANG,Zong-Xin WU
  • Supported by:
    This study was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China(2017YFD0100600);Key R&D Program of Shanxi Province(201803D221018-5);Key R&D Program of Shanxi Province(201703D211007);Key R&D Program of Shanxi Province(201803D421020);Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences(YGG17123);Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences(YCX2018D2YS01);Shanxi Key Scientific and Technological Innovation Platform(201605D151002)

RichHTML

17

PDF

760

摘要：

由镰孢属(Fusarium)真菌侵染引起的赤霉病是严重威胁小麦生产的重要病害之一, 但小麦育种中可直接利用的抗源非常有限。采用单花滴注法接种赤霉菌株F0609, 对来源于中间偃麦草或长穗偃麦草的119份小偃麦衍生品系进行3年6个环境的抗病鉴定, 发现平均病小穗率<10%的材料有13份, 抗性评价为抗病(R); 平均病小穗率介于10%~25%之间的材料有61份, 抗性评价为中抗(MR); 其余45份材料的平均病小穗率介于25%~50%或>50%, 抗性评价为中感或高感(MS和S)。在13份高抗赤霉病材料中, CH16387的抗性显著优于苏麦3号和望水白, CH16371和CH16379的抗性显著优于望水白, 其余10个品系与抗病对照苏麦3号和望水白的抗性水平相当。这13份材料分别来自小麦-中间偃麦草部分双二倍体TAI8045和小麦-长穗偃麦草部分双二倍体TAP8430与普通小麦的杂交组合, TAI8045抗性显著优于对照品种望水白, TAP8430与苏麦3号和望水白的抗性相当, 而杂交组合中的小麦亲本对赤霉病表现感病, 推测这些材料的抗性可能来自TAI8045和TAP8430。这些抗病材料为小麦抗赤霉病育种提供了新的种质资源。

关键词: 小麦, 赤霉病, 偃麦草, 遗传改良, 种质资源

Abstract:

Fusarium head blight (FHB) caused by Fusarium graminearum is one of the most destructive fungal diseases in wheat production; however, only limited sources of resistance are available in wheat. In this study, we evaluated 119 lines derived from the crosses between wheat and wheat-Thinopyrum partial amphiploids for their resistance to F. graminearum isolate F0609 over six environments during 2016 to 2018 cropping seasons using single floret inoculation method. Among the wheat-Thinopyrum lines tested, 45 were moderately or highly susceptible, with 25%-50% or >50% of the average percentage of diseased spikelets (PDS), 61 were moderately resistant (MR) with 10%-25% of the average PDS, and 13 lines were identified as resistant (R), with the average PDS less than 10%. For the FHB resistance of the 13 resistant lines, CH16387 was superior to ‘Sumai 3’ and ‘Wangshuibai’, the most widely used source of resistance to FHB, CH16371 and CH16379 were superior to ‘Wangshuibai’, and the remaining ten lines were comparable to ‘Wangshuibai’ or ‘Sumai 3’, in terms of number of infected spikelets per spike and percentage of infected spikelets. Furthermore, the average PDS in these resistant lines over the six environments showed a similar distribution, suggesting a relatively stable FHB resistance. The donor parents, wheat-alien partial amphiploids, involved in development of these resistant derivatives, included wheat-Th. intermedium partial amphiploid TAI8045 and wheat-T.ponticum partial amphiploid TAP8430. As both TAI8045 and TAP8430 were resistant, but all the wheat parents were susceptible, it was likely that the resistance to FHB in these lines identified originated from TAI8045 and TAP8430. These derivatives can serve as novel sources to enhance resistance of wheat to FHB.

Key words: wheat, Fusarium head blight, Thinopyrum, genetic improvement, germplasm resources

附表1

119份小偃麦衍生品系不同环境下的赤霉病抗性"

编号
No.		 材料
名称
Lines		 6个环境病小穗率
PDS in six environments
(%)		 6个环境病小穗率分布
PDS distribution in six
environments		 严重度分级
Severity degree		 抗性评价
FHB
resistance
2018
太原
Taiyuan		 2018
成都
Chengdu		 2018
南京
Nanjing		 2017
太原
Taiyuan		 2017
南京
Nanjing		 2016
南京
Nanjing		 最小
Min		 最大
Max		 极差
Range		 平均
Average
1 苏麦3号
Sumai 3		 16.8 3.6 7.9 5.1 4.0 5.1 3.6 16.8 13.2 7.1 1 R
2 望水白
Wangshuibai		 13.9 6.1 12.3 9.6 7.5 6.8 6.1 13.9 7.8 9.4 1 R
3 CH16387 8.7 4.9 4.4 4.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 8.7 7.4 4.2**a 1 R
4 CH16371 15.1 7.3 4.6 4.6 2.0 3.0 2.0 15.1 13.1 5.0**b 1 R
5 CH16379 7.0 10.2 7.2 5.1 2.0 4.2 2.0 10.2 8.2 6.0*b 1 R
6 CH16373 10.5 4.2 5.1 4.8 10.0 4.0 4.0 10.5 6.5 6.7 1 R
7 CH16352 7.3 11.6 5.5 4.2 - 6.0 4.2 11.6 7.3 6.7 1 R
8 CH16388 6.5 7.8 14.5 4.0 4.6 2.0 2.0 14.5 12.5 6.7 1 R
9 CH16419 6.5 11.4 6.6 4.8 - 4.0 4.0 11.4 7.4 6.7 1 R
10 CH16367 12.5 9.2 9.3 4.6 2.8 3.0 2.8 12.5 9.7 7.0 1 R
11 CH16378 11.0 5.1 - 4.9 - - 4.9 11.0 6.1 7.1 1 R
12 CH16374 9.4 9.8 8.3 5.4 9.2 3.0 3.0 9.8 6.8 7.5 1 R
13 CH16375 12.4 10.4 7.1 5.3 8.6 2.0 2.0 12.4 10.4 7.6 1 R
14 CH16427 8.4 10.5 - 5.9 - 6.7 5.9 10.5 4.6 7.7 1 R
15 CH16432 5.8 12.1 - 12.7 - 4.6 4.6 12.7 8.1 8.4 1 R
16 CH16390 6.7 17.2 20.0 3.7 9.0 4.0 3.7 20.0 16.3 10.1 2 MR
17 CH16424 - 17.6 - 6.8 - 6.1 6.1 17.6 11.5 10.2 2 MR
18 CH16399 7.1 10.6 - 7.3 - 17.0 7.1 17.0 9.8 10.5 2 MR
19 CH16431 11.9 9.5 - 6.5 - 15.0 6.5 15.0 8.6 10.7 2 MR
20 CH16369 11.3 11.5 14.0 16.0 10.0 3.0 3.0 16.0 13.0 11.0 2 MR
21 CH16389 11.4 14.1 17.6 15.7 5.0 3.0 3.0 17.6 14.6 11.1 2 MR
22 CH1357 11.2 13.3 - 10.0 - 11.0 10.0 13.3 3.3 11.4 2 MR
编号
No.		 材料
名称
Lines		 6个环境病小穗率
PDS in six environments
(%)		 6个环境病小穗率分布
PDS distribution in six
environments		 严重度分级
Severity degree		 抗性评价
FHB
resistance
2018
太原
Taiyuan		 2018
成都
Chengdu		 2018
南京
Nanjing		 2017
太原
Taiyuan		 2017
南京
Nanjing		 2016
南京
Nanjing		 最小
Min		 最大
Max		 极差
Range		 平均
Average
23 CH16423 5.0 12.3 12.0 11.1 23.0 6.0 5.0 23.0 18.0 11.6 2 MR
24 CH16392 16.9 14.9 - 10.0 - 4.6 4.6 16.9 12.2 11.6 2 MR
25 CH16346 24.3 8.1 - 4.1 - 10.0 4.1 24.3 20.2 11.6 2 MR
26 CH16381 15.8 10.2 24.0 8.6 8.0 5.0 5.0 24.0 19.0 11.9 2 MR
27 CH16118 8.5 20.4 - 8.1 - 12.1 8.1 20.4 12.3 12.3 2 MR
28 CH16372 23.7 19.3 14.0 9.1 5.0 3.0 3.0 23.7 20.7 12.3 2 MR
29 CH16368 27.4 11.0 20.0 4.8 12.0 2.0 2.0 27.4 25.4 12.9 2 MR
30 CH16426 24.0 12.0 - 7.1 - 8.8 7.1 24.0 16.9 12.9 2 MR
31 CH16360 13.4 7.1 - 4.7 - 27.0 4.7 27.0 22.3 13.0 2 MR
32 CH16380 10.8 15.8 29.0 18.4 1.0 4.0 1.0 29.0 28.0 13.2 2 MR
33 CH16409 17.6 10.2 - 19.5 - 6.0 6.0 19.5 13.5 13.3 2 MR
34 CH16359 22.6 18.5 8.0 19.1 12.0 2.0 2.0 22.6 20.6 13.7 2 MR
35 CH16417 10.8 12.3 - 12.0 - 20.4 10.8 20.4 9.6 13.9 2 MR
36 CH16408 5.0 28.5 - 13.3 - 8.8 5.0 28.5 23.5 13.9 2 MR
37 CH16376 42.7 6.2 11.0 5.6 15.0 3.0 3.0 42.7 39.7 13.9 2 MR
38 CH1349 24.5 7.5 - 6.8 - 17.0 6.8 24.5 17.7 14.0 2 MR
39 CH1556 24.5 13.3 - 6.3 - 12.1 6.3 24.5 18.2 14.0 2 MR
40 CH16366 11.4 8.0 8.0 23.9 28.0 6.0 6.0 28.0 22.0 14.2 2 MR
41 CH16382 8.7 18.2 26.0 22.8 11.0 5.0 5.0 26.0 21.0 15.3 2 MR
42 CH16391 11.3 13.1 29.0 6.8 29.0 3.0 3.0 29.0 26.0 15.4 2 MR
43 CH16403 23.1 20.9 - 7.1 - 11.0 7.1 23.1 16.1 15.5 2 MR
44 CH16377 14.0 16.9 - 6.2 - 26.0 6.2 26.0 19.8 15.8 2 MR
45 CH16440 23.6 12.6 - 11.0 - 17.6 11.0 23.6 12.6 16.2* 2 MR
46 CH16439 27.8 15.4 - 13.1 - 9.5 9.5 27.8 18.3 16.5 2 MR
47 CH16404 20.2 13.7 14.9 25.4 21.0 4.0 4.0 25.4 21.4 16.5* 2 MR
48 CH16342 29.7 23.7 11.0 9.6 17.0 10.0 9.6 29.7 20.1 16.8*c 2 MR
49 CH16393 17.5 6.7 - 30.8 - 13.3 6.7 30.8 24.1 17.1 2 MR
50 CH16425 21.8 20.5 - 6.5 - 20.2 6.5 21.8 15.3 17.2* 2 MR
51 CH16386 13.3 19.5 21.9 26.4 15.0 8.0 8.0 26.4 18.4 17.3* 2 MR
52 CH16397 8.8 17.4 50.0 8.7 18.0 3.0 3.0 50.0 47.0 17.7 2 MR
53 CH16406 20.4 33.8 - 4.6 - 12.0 4.6 33.8 29.2 17.7 2 MR
54 CH16384 23.9 10.4 13.0 19.6 30.0 10.0 10.0 30.0 20.0 17.8* 2 MR
55 CH16418 23.0 31.0 - 6.1 - 12.0 6.1 31.0 24.9 18.0 2 MR
56 CH16394 31.9 14.7 - 13.1 - 12.5 12.5 31.9 19.5 18.1 2 MR
57 CH16104 29.7 18.7 - 18.4 - 10.0 10.0 29.7 19.7 19.2* 2 MR
58 CH16365 - 26.2 14.0 4.0 46.0 7.0 4.0 46.0 42.0 19.4 2 MR
59 CH16422 18.8 31.9 26.0 6.0 30.0 5.0 5.0 31.9 26.9 19.6*c 2 MR
60 CH16412 14.4 37.3 - 14.9 - 14.0 14.0 37.3 23.3 20.1*c 2 MR
61 CH16430 27.1 17.6 - 28.4 - 11.0 11.0 28.4 17.4 21.0* 2 MR
62 CH16442 30.9 14.5 - 21.4 - 19.5 14.5 30.9 16.4 21.6** 2 MR
63 CH16370 37.5 35.3 7.0 36.9 11.0 3.0 3.0 37.5 34.5 21.8* 2 MR
编号
No.		 材料
名称
Lines		 6个环境病小穗率
PDS in six environments
(%)		 6个环境病小穗率分布
PDS distribution in six
environments		 严重度分级
Severity degree		 抗性评价
FHB
resistance
2018
太原
Taiyuan		 2018
成都
Chengdu		 2018
南京
Nanjing		 2017
太原
Taiyuan		 2017
南京
Nanjing		 2016
南京
Nanjing		 最小
Min		 最大
Max		 极差
Range		 平均
Average
64 CH16416 49.9 8.3 - 7.9 - - 7.9 49.9 42.0 22.0* 2 MR
65 CH16445 26.0 26.2 - 18.8 - 17.6 17.6 26.2 8.6 22.2** 2 MR
66 CH16421 13.4 51.1 - 12.1 - 12.0 12.0 51.1 39.1 22.2* 2 MR
67 CH16420 11.1 40.6 - 26.1 - 11.0 11.0 40.6 29.6 22.2*c 2 MR
68 CH16351 32.0 12.1 - 35.9 - 9.4 9.4 35.9 26.6 22.4* 2 MR
69 CH16341 23.9 16.0 - 18.4 - 32.0 16.0 32.0 16.0 22.6** 2 MR
70 CH16443 27.9 16.3 - 23.9 - - 16.3 27.9 11.6 22.7** 2 MR
71 CH16449 - 25.3 - 20.2 - 23.6 20.2 25.3 5.1 23.0** 2 MR
72 CH16112 30.1 20.3 - 15.0 - 27.0 15.0 30.1 15.1 23.1** 2 MR
73 CH16383 30.6 14.0 - 15.7 - 33.0 14.0 33.0 19.0 23.3**a 2 MR
74 CH16414 40.2 20.3 - 6.7 - 27.1 6.7 40.2 33.4 23.6* 2 MR
75 CH16401 17.1 8.3 85.0 11.4 17.0 3.0 3.0 85.0 82.0 23.6* 2 MR
76 CH16415 21.5 6.7 - 21.4 - 49.0 6.7 49.0 42.3 24.6* 2 MR
77 CH16410 15.0 38.6 - 21.8 - - 15.0 38.6 23.6 25.1* 3 MS
78 CH16435 25.3 - - 19.5 - 31.0 19.5 31.0 11.5 25.2** 3 MS
79 CH16362 38.1 33.9 - 13.0 - 18.0 13.0 38.1 25.0 25.8* 3 MS
80 CH16438 16.9 31.9 - 15.4 - 39.7 15.4 39.7 24.3 26.0** 3 MS
81 CH16348 32.1 41.4 - 18.8 - 13.0 13.0 41.4 28.4 26.3* 3 MS
82 CH16364 18.8 53.6 13.0 8.1 59.0 6.0 6.0 59.0 53.0 26.4* 3 MS
83 CH1364 36.5 21.5 - 31.1 - 17.0 17.0 36.5 19.5 26.6** 3 MS
84 CH16402 33.3 21.5 - 27.4 - 25.0 21.5 33.3 11.9 26.8** 3 MS
85 CH16396 12.2 34.1 35.3 40.0 - 13.0 12.2 40.0 27.9 26.9** 3 MS
86 CH16385 30.0 34.2 - 23.7 - 20.2 20.2 34.2 14.0 27.0** 3 MS
87 CH16343 31.1 60.6 9.0 28.2 - 8.0 8.0 60.6 52.6 27.4* 3 MS
88 CH16433 18.6 47.4 - 18.8 - 26.2 18.6 47.4 28.9 27.8* 3 MS
89 CH16340 28.8 32.3 - 31.1 - 19.1 19.1 32.3 13.2 27.8** 3 MS
90 CH16437 39.7 20.5 - 21.8 - 31.9 20.5 39.7 19.1 28.5** 3 MS
91 CH16407 38.2 43.3 - 18.9 - 14.1 14.1 43.3 29.2 28.6* 3 MS
92 CH16405 26.4 11.4 85.0 9.5 31.0 9.0 9.0 85.0 76.0 28.7* 3 MS
93 CH16354 52.7 12.9 - 30.5 - 19.3 12.9 52.7 39.8 28.8* 3 MS
94 CH16444 38.1 23.1 - 31.0 - 29.0 23.1 38.1 15.0 30.3** 3 MS
95 CH16395 16.8 52.3 91.0 6.0 14.0 2.0 2.0 91.0 89.0 30.4* 3 MS
96 CH16428 33.4 40.2 - 11.3 - 38.4 11.3 40.2 28.9 30.8** 3 MS
97 CH16429 31.8 31.8 - 27.8 - 31.9 27.8 31.9 4.1 30.8** 3 MS
98 CH16413 23.2 44.4 - 24.4 - 31.8 23.2 44.4 21.2 31.0** 3 MS
99 CH16344 38.6 23.1 - 36.0 - 30.0 23.1 38.6 15.5 31.9** 3 MS
100 CH16358 35.6 46.8 - 14.0 - 34.2 14.0 46.8 32.9 32.6** 3 MS
101 CH16441 52.2 19.2 - 31.0 - 30.0 19.2 52.2 33.0 33.1** 3 MS
102 CH16398 30.1 49.8 - 16.5 - 37.5 16.5 49.8 33.3 33.5** 3 MS
103 CH16448 6.1 57.5 - 38.5 - 31.8 6.1 57.5 51.5 33.5* 3 MS
104 CH16447 31.7 37.7 - 40.2 - 27.1 27.1 40.2 13.0 34.2** 3 MS
编号
No.		 材料
名称
Lines		 6个环境病小穗率
PDS in six environments
(%)		 6个环境病小穗率分布
PDS distribution in six
environments		 严重度分级
Severity degree		 抗性评价
FHB
resistance
2018
太原
Taiyuan		 2018
成都
Chengdu		 2018
南京
Nanjing		 2017
太原
Taiyuan		 2017
南京
Nanjing		 2016
南京
Nanjing		 最小
Min		 最大
Max		 极差
Range		 平均
Average
105 CH16363 51.7 79.7 29.0 24.6 20.0 2.0 2.0 79.7 77.7 34.5* 3 MS
106 CH16347 53.9 37.2 - 30.1 - 24.4 24.4 53.9 29.5 36.4** 3 MS
107 CH16446 46.0 41.0 - 28.2 - 34.1 28.2 46.0 17.8 37.3** 3 MS
108 CH16361 62.7 42.8 - 9.0 - - 9.0 62.7 53.7 38.2* 3 MS
109 CH1673 50.8 - 57.0 32.1 - 16.0 16.0 57.0 41.0 39.0** 3 MS
110 CH16436 40.8 46.2 - 23.1 - 51.1 23.1 51.1 28.0 40.3** 3 MS
111 CH16411 17.0 75.4 51.1 24.8 - 39.7 17.0 75.4 58.4 41.6** 3 MS
112 CH16355 47.9 64.0 - 23.2 - 34.1 23.2 64.0 40.8 42.3** 3 MS
113 CH16345 33.4 73.8 - 21.5 - 46.0 21.5 73.8 52.2 43.7** 3 MS
114 CH16400 47.4 80.2 74.9 20.6 - 15.0 15.0 80.2 65.2 47.6** 3 MS
115 CH16357 40.2 54.5 62.7 27.8 - 55.0 27.8 62.7 34.9 48.0** 3 MS
116 CH16356 36.3 58.6 - 37.5 - 60.7 36.3 60.7 24.5 48.3** 3 MS
117 CH16353 53.2 82.1 - 43.1 - 21.1 21.1 82.1 61.0 49.9** 3 MS
118 CH16434 38.4 96.3 - 31.0 - 35.3 31.0 96.3 65.2 50.2** 4 S
119 CH16106 78.4 61.4 - 40.2 - 41.4 40.2 78.4 38.3 55.3** 4 S
120 CH16350 63.8 93.9 - 53.6 - 55.6 53.6 93.9 40.4 66.7** 4 S
121 CH16349 95.0 100.0 - 33.6 - 46.0 33.6 100.0 66.4 68.6** 4 S
122 周麦27
Zhoumai 27		 64.3 57.0 63.0 58.6 38.6 53.9 38.6 64.3 25.8 55.9** 4 S
123 Alondra’s 53.1 65.5 63.8 51.7 48.1 61.4 48.1 65.5 17.4 57.3** 4 S

表1

小偃麦衍生品系亲本的病小穗率及抗性评价"

亲本来源
Source of parents		 亲本名称
Name of parents		 病小穗率 PDS (%) 严重度分级
Severity
degree		 抗性评价
FHB
resistance		 染色体数目
Number of chromosomes
最小
Min.		 最大
Max.		 极差
Range		 平均
Average
长穗偃麦草Th. ponticum TAP8430 4.4 5.9 1.5 5.4 1 R 56
中间偃麦草Th. intermedium TAI8045 1.1 4.5 3.4 3.3*a 1 R 56
TAI8505 7.0 20.8 13.8 14.6**b 2 MR 56
TAI8335 20.4 65.4 45.0 34.5** 3 MS 56
普通小麦Wheat 太原768 Taiyuan 768 36.0 50.0 14.0 42.1** 3 MS 42
冀麦26 Jimai 26 40.0 52.2 12.2 47.3** 3 MS 42
晋春5号Jinchun 5 48.5 70.0 21.5 58.7** 4 S 42
中8701 Zhong 8701 29.2 84.0 54.8 63.6** 4 S 42
苏麦3号Sumai 3 1.4 24.0 22.6 7.1 1 R 42
望水白Wangshuibai 1.4 28.0 26.6 9.4 1 R 42
周麦27 Zhoumai 27 38.6 64.3 25.7 55.9** 4 S 42
Alondra’s 48.1 65.5 17.4 57.3** 4 S 42

图1

小偃麦衍生品系亲本对赤霉病的抗性反应(山西太原, 2018) "

表2

119份小偃麦衍生品系的赤霉病抗性评价"

供体亲本Donor parent 系谱来源
Pedigree		 品系个数
Number of lines		 抗病
R		 中抗
MR		 中感
MS		 感病
S
TAP8430 太原768//冀麦26/TAP8430 Taiyuan 768//Jimai 26/TAP8430 73 1 20 19 4
中8701//冀麦26/TAP8430 Zhong 8701//Jimai 26/TAP8430 2 14 4
中8701//京繁309/TAP8430 Zhong 8701//Jingfan 309/TAP8430 1 2 6
TAI8045 京繁309//晋春5号/TAI8045 Jingfan 309//Jinchun 5/TAI8045 37 8 11 1
太原768//冀麦26/TAI8045 Taiyuan 768//Jimai 26/TAI8045 1 7 4
京繁309//冀麦26/TAI8045 Jingfan 309//Jimai 26/TAI8045 3 2
TAI8335 中8701//晋麦33/TAI8335 Zhong 8701//Jinmai 33/TAI8335 6 1 2
冀麦26//晋麦33/TAI8335 Jimai 26//Jinmai 33/TAI8335 3
TAI8505 太原768//冀麦26/TAI8505 Taiyuan 768//Jimai 26/ATI8505 3 3
合计 Total 119 13 61 41 4

表3

13份小偃麦衍生品系不同环境下的抗病性"

材料名称
Line		 6个环境病小穗率
PDS in six environments (%)		 6个环境病小穗率分布
PDS distribution in six environments		 染色体数目
Number of chromosomes
2018
太原
Taiyuan		 2018
成都
Chengdu		 2018
南京
Nanjing		 2017
太原
Taiyuan		 2017
南京
Nanjing		 2016
南京
Nanjing		 最小
Min.		 最大
Max.		 极差
Range		 平均
Average
CH16387 8.7 4.9 4.4 4.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 8.7 7.4 4.2**a 42
CH16371 15.1 7.3 4.6 4.6 2.0 3.0 2.0 15.1 13.1 5.0** b 42
CH16379 7.0 10.2 7.2 5.1 2.0 4.2 2.0 10.2 8.2 6.0* b 42
CH16373 10.5 4.2 5.1 4.8 10.0 4.0 4.0 10.5 6.5 6.7 42
CH16352 7.3 11.6 5.5 4.2 - 6.0 4.2 11.6 7.3 6.7 42
CH16388 6.5 7.8 14.5 4.0 4.6 2.0 2.0 14.5 12.5 6.7 42
CH16419 6.5 11.4 6.6 4.8 - 4.0 4.0 11.4 7.4 6.7 42
CH16367 12.5 9.2 9.3 4.6 2.8 3.0 2.8 12.5 9.7 7.0 42
CH16378 11.0 5.1 - 4.9 - - 4.9 11.0 6.1 7.1 42
CH16374 9.4 9.8 8.3 5.4 9.2 3.0 3.0 9.8 6.8 7.5 42
CH16375 12.4 10.4 7.1 5.3 8.6 2.0 2.0 12.4 10.4 7.6 42
CH16427 8.4 10.5 - 5.9 - 6.7 5.9 10.5 4.6 7.7 42
CH16432 5.8 12.1 - 12.7 - 4.6 4.6 12.7 8.2 8.4 42
苏麦3号Sumai 3 16.8 3.6 7.9 5.1 4.0 5.1 3.6 16.8 13.2 7.1 42
望水白Wangshuibai 13.9 6.1 12.3 9.6 7.5 6.8 6.1 13.9 7.8 9.4 42
周麦27 Zhoumai 27 64.3 57.0 63.0 58.6 38.6 53.9 38.6 64.3 25.7 55.9 42
Alondra’s 53.1 65.5 63.8 51.7 48.1 61.4 48.1 65.5 17.4 57.3 42

图2

抗病材料和感病材料对赤霉病的反应类型(山西太原, 2018) a: 13个抗病反应为R的材料; b: 抗病反应为S的部分材料。"

表4

13个抗病品系在不同环境条件下赤霉病病小穗率的相关系数"

环境
Environment		 2018太原
2018 Taiyuan		 2018成都
2018 Chengdu		 2018南京
2018 Nanjing		 2017太原
2017 Taiyuan		 2017南京
2017 Nanjing
2018成都 2018 Chengdu -0.2764*
2018南京 2018 Nanjing 0.0562 -0.0724
2017太原 2017 Taiyuan 0.0398 0.0247 -0.0686
2017南京 2017 Nanjing 0.0818 -0.0851 -0.0264 0.4086**
2016南京 2016 Nanjing 0.2281 0.0080 -0.0756 0.3199* 0.3141*
[1] 程顺和, 张勇, 别同德, 高德荣, 张伯桥 . 中国小麦赤霉病的危害及抗性遗传改良. 江苏农业学报, 2012,28:938-942.
Cheng S H, Zhang Y, Bie T D, Gao D R, Zhang B Q . Damage of wheat Fusarium head blight (FHB) epidemics and genetic improvement of wheat for scab resistance in China. Jiangsu J Agric Sci, 2012,28:938-942 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[2] 曾娟, 姜玉英 . 2012年我国小麦赤霉病暴发原因分析及持续监控与治理对策. 中国植保导刊, 2013,33(4):37-41.
Zeng J, Jiang Y Y . Analysis and continuous monitoring and control countermeasures of wheat FHB disease outbreak in China in 2012. China Plant Protect, 2013,33(4):37-41 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[3] Bai G H, Shaner G . Management and resistance in wheat and barley toFusarium head blight. Annu Rev Phytopathol, 2004,42:135-161.
doi: 10.1146/annurev.phyto.42.040803.140340 pmid: 15283663
[4] Stepient L, Chelkowski J . Fusarium head blight of wheat: pathogenic species and their mycotoxins. World Mycotoxin J, 2010,3:107-119.
doi: 10.1093/gbe/evz225 pmid: 31609418
[5] Gilbert J, Haber S . Overview of some recent research developments inFusarium head blight of wheat. Can J Plant Pathol, 2013,35:149-174.
doi: 10.1080/07060661.2013.772921
[6] 张爱民, 阳文龙, 李欣, 孙家柱 . 小麦抗赤霉病研究现状与展望. 遗传, 2018,40:858-873.
Zhang A M, Yang W L, Li X, Sun J Z . Current status and perspective on research against Fusarium head blight in wheat. Hereditas(Beijing), 2018,40:858-873 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[7] Cuthbert P A, Somers D J, Thomas J, Cloutier S, Brule-Babel A . Fine mapping Fhb1, a major gene controlling Fusarium head blight resistance in bread wheat(Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet, 2006,112:1465-147.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-006-0249-7
[8] Cuthbert P A, Somers D J, Brule-Babel A . Mapping of Fhb2 on chromosome 6BS: a gene controlling Fusarium head blight field resistance in bread wheat(Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet, 2007,114:429-437.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-006-0439-3
[9] Xue S L, Li G Q, Jia H Y, Xu F, Lin F, Tang M Z, Wang Y, An X, Xu H B, Zhang L X, Kong Z X, Ma Z Q . Fine mapping Fhb4, a major QTLs conditioning resistance to Fusarium infection in bread wheat(Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet, 2010,121:147-156.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-010-1298-5
[10] Xue S L, Xu F, Tang M Z, Zhou Y, Li G Q, An X, Lin F, Xu H B, Jia H Y, Zhang L X, Kong Z X, Ma Z Q . Precise mappingFhb5, a major QTLs conditioning resistance to Fusarium infection in bread wheat(Triticum aestivum L.). Theor Appl Genet, 123:1055-1063.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-011-1647-z pmid: 21739138
[11] Qi L L, Pumphrey M O, Friebe B, Chen P D, Gill B S . Molecular cytogenetic characterization of alien introgressions with geneFhb3 for resistance to Fusarium head blight disease of wheat. Theor Appl Genet, 2008,117:1155-1166.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-008-0853-9
[12] Cainong J C, Bockus W W, Feng Y G, Chen P D, Qi L L, Sehgal S K, Danilova T V, Koo D H, Friebe B, Gill B S . Chromosome engineering, mapping, and transferring of resistance toFusarium head blight disease from Elymus tsukushiensis into wheat. Theor Appl Genet, 2015,128:1019-1027.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-015-2485-1 pmid: 25726000
[13] Guo J, Zhang X L, Hou Y L, Cai J J, Shen X R, Zhou T T, Xu H H, Ohm H W, Wang H W, Li A F, Han F P, Wang H G, Kong L R . High-density mapping of the major FHB resistance geneFhb7 derived from Thinopyrum ponticum and its pyramiding with Fhb1 by marker-assisted selection. Theor Appl Genet, 2015,128:2301-2316.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-015-2586-x pmid: 26220223
[14] Bai G H, Kolb F L, Shaner G, Domier L L . Amplified fragment length polymorphism markers linked to a major quantitative trait locus controlling scab resistance in wheat. Phytopathology, 1999,89:343-348.
doi: 10.1094/PHYTO.1999.89.4.343 pmid: 18944781
[15] 中华人民共和国农业行业标准NY/T 1443.4-2007, 小麦病虫性评价技术规范, 第4部分: 小麦抗赤霉病评价技术规范.
Agricultural Standard of the People’s Republic of China, NY/T 1443.4-2007. Rules for Resistance Evaluation of Wheat to Diseases and Insect Pests, Part 4. Rule for Resistance Evaluation to Wheat Scab (in Chinese).
[16] Han F P, Fedak G, Benabdelmouna A, Armstrong K C, Ouellet T . Characterization of six wheat ×Thinopyrum intermedium derivativesby GISH, RFLP and multicolor GISH. Genome, 2003,46:490-495.
doi: 10.1139/g03-032 pmid: 12834067
[17] Zhang L, Luo P G, Ren Z L, Zhang H Y . Controlling fusarium head blight of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with genetics. Adv Biosci Biotech, 2011,2:263-270.
doi: 10.3835/plantgenome2015.04.0028 pmid: 27898754
[18] Wang X E, Chen P D, Liu D J, Zhang P, Zhou B, Friebe B, Gill B S . Molecular cytogenetic characterization ofRoegneria ciliaris chromosome additions in common wheat. Theor Appl Genet, 2001,102:651-657.
doi: 10.1007/s001220051693
[19] 王林生, 张雅莉, 南广慧 . 普通小麦-大赖草易位系T5AS-7Lr.7LrS分子细胞遗传学鉴定. 作物学报, 2018,44:1442-1447.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.01442
Wang L S, Zhang Y L, Nan G H . Molecular and cytogenetic identification of Triticum aestivum-Leymus racemosus translocation line T5AS-7Lr.7LrS. Acta Agron Sin, 2018,44:1442-1447 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.01442
[20] 丁春邦, 周永红 . 小麦族拟鹅观草属研究进展. 四川农业大学学报, 2004,22:269-273.
Ding C B, Zhou Y H . Advances in research on Pseudoroegneria in the tribe Triticeae. J Sichuan Agric Univ, 2004,22:269-273 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[21] 王益, 康厚扬, 原红军, 蒋云, 张海琴, 周永红 . 普通小麦与华山新麦草衍生后代的农艺性状和细胞遗传学研究. 四川农业大学学报, 2008,26:405-410.
Wang Y, Kang H Y, Yuan H J, Jiang Y, Zhang H Q, Zhou Y H . Cytogenetic and morphological studies on the derivative progenies of Triticum aestivum × Psathyrostachys huashanica. J Sichuan Agric Univ, 2008,26:405-410 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[22] 张璐璐, 陈士强, 李海凤, 刘慧萍, 戴毅, 高勇, 陈建民 . 小麦-长穗偃麦草7E抗赤霉病易位系培育. 中国农业科学, 2016,49:3477-3488.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.18.002
Zhang L L, Chen S Q, Li H F, Liu H P, Dai Y, Gao Y, Chen J M . Development of wheat- Thinopyrum elongatum translocation lines resistant to Fusarium head blight. Sci Agric Sin, 2016,49:3477-3488 (in Chinese with English abstract).
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.18.002
[23] 丛雯雯, 郭长虹 . 小麦近缘野生植物的赤霉病抗源筛选及其利用. 分子植物育种, 2010,8:1043-1049.
Cong W W, Guo C H . Selection and utilization of resistance sources to Fusarium head blight in wheat wild relatives. Mol Plant Breed, 2010,8:1043-1049 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[24] Li H J, Wang X M . Thinopyrum ponticum and Th. intermedium: the promising source of resistance to fungal and viral diseases of wheat. J Genet Genomics, 2009,36:557-565.
doi: 10.1016/S1673-8527(08)60147-2
[25] Oliver R E, Cai X, Xu S S, Chen X, Stack R W . Wheat-alien species derivatives: a novel source of resistance toFusarium head blight in wheat. Crop Sci, 2005,45:1353-1360.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2004.0503
[26] Zeng J, Cao W, Fedak G, Sun S, Mccallum B, Fetch T, Xue A, Zhou Y . Molecular cytological characterization of two novel durum-Thinopyrum intermedium partial amphiploids with resistance to leaf rust, stem rust and Fusarium head blight. Hereditas, 2013,150:10-16.
doi: 10.1111/j.1601-5223.2012.02262.x
[27] Turner M K, De Haan L R, Jin Y, Anderson J . Wheatgrass-wheat partial amphiploids as a novel source of stem rust andFusarium head blight resistance. Crop Sci, 2013,53:1994-2005.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2012.10.0584
[28] Fu S, Lv Z, Qi B, Guo X, Li J, Liu B, Han F . Molecular cytogenetic characterization of wheat-Thinopyrum elongatum addition, substitution and translocation lines with a novel source of resistance to wheat Fusariumhead blight. J Genet Genomics, 2013,39:103-110.
doi: 10.1016/j.jgg.2011.11.008 pmid: 22361509
[29] Liu Z H, Xu M, Xian Z P, Li X, Chen W Q, Luo P G . Registration of the novel wheat lines L658, L693, L696, and L699, with resistance toFusarium head blight, stripe rust, and powdery mildew. J Plant Regist, 2015,9:121-124.
doi: 10.3198/jpr2014.01.0003crg
[30] Zhang X L, Shen X R, Hao Y F, Cai J J, Ohm H W, Kong LR . A genetic map ofLophopyrum ponticum chromosome 7E, harboring resistance genes to Fusarium head blight and leaf rust. Theor Appl Genet, 2011,122:263-270.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-010-1441-3
[31] 史文琦, 杨立军, 冯洁, 张旭, 曾凡松, 向礼波, 汪华, 喻大昭 . 小麦赤霉病流行区镰刀菌致病种及毒素化学型分析. 植物病理学报, 2011,41:486-494.
Shi W Q, Yang L J, Feng J, Zhang X, Zeng F S, Xiang L B, Wang H, Yu D Z . Analysis on the population structure of Fusarium pathogenic spp. and its mycotoxin chemotypes in Fusarium head blight epidemic region. Acta Phytopathol Sin, 2011,41:486-494 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[32] 俞刚, 陈利锋, 谢卫平, 柴一秋 . 禾谷镰孢的产毒与致病性. 南京农业大学学报, 2001,24(4):19-23.
Yu G, Chen L F, Xie W P, Chai Y Q . Correlation of trichothecene producing potential to pathogenicity of Fusarium graminearum on wheat. J Nanjing Agric Univ, 2001,24(4):19-23 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[33] 刘易科, 佟汉文, 朱展望, 陈泠, 邹娟, 张宇庆, 焦春海, 高春保 . 小麦赤霉病抗性改良研究进展. 麦类作物学报, 2016,36:51-57.
Liu Y K, Tong H W, Zhu Z W, Chen L, Zou J, Zhang Y Q, Jiao C H, Gao C B . Review on improvement of Fusarium head blight resistance in wheat. J Triticeae Crops, 2016,36:51-57 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[34] 唐洪, 彭恒, 刘明龙, 杨建华, 吴吉林 . 小麦赤霉病田间病情与抽穗扬花期气象条件和病粒率关系. 中国植保导刊, 2012,32(7):10-12.
Tang H, Peng H, Liu M L, Yang J H, Wu J L . Relationships among field condition of wheat scab and climate and percentage of Fusarium infected kernels at the heading and flowering stage. China Plant Protect, 2012,32:10-12 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[35] Mesterhazy A . Types and components of resistance toFusarium head blight of wheat. Plant breed, 1995,114:377-386.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-003-1272-6 pmid: 12768240
[1] 毛嘉琦, 黄朋雨, 赵佳佳, 郑兴卫, 武棒棒, 郝宇琼, 屈非, 刘成, 马朋涛, 郑军. 山西小麦品种白粉病抗性评价及抗病基因分子检测[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1669-1681.
[2] 胡川, 赵凯男, 黄修利, 吴金芝, 任开明, 王贺正, 付国占, 黄明, 李友军. 一次灌溉下耕作方式和氮肥用量对旱地小麦产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1830-1846.
[3] 陈雪燕, 何华川, 李政嘉, 董新盼, 李藕琪, 刘小云, 李丹萍, 陈志伟, 刘国霞, 吕胜源, 吴印莹, 赵振东, 曹新有, 万何平. 水培盐碱复合胁迫下‘济麦60’苗期根系有机酸分泌动态变化及其转录调控机制[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1859-1875.
[4] 马小倩, 秦娜, 代书桃, 秦家范, 李小艳, 王淑婷, 刘忠玲, 李君霞. 175份谷子种质在2种环境下的表型变异分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1757-1773.
[5] 翟胜男, 曹新有, 李豪圣, 李吉虎, 李法计, 刘金栋, 夏先春, 吕莹莹, 马瑞峰, 王颖, 耿洪伟, 刘建军. 小麦Pod-A1、Pod-D1和Pod-2D位点等位变异对籽粒过氧化物酶活性的遗传效应分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1593-1603.
[6] 习千辉, 徐梓瑗, 刘梦梦, 王宏艺, 郎凯琳, 井震海, 陈锋, 赵磊. 小麦籽粒铜含量的全基因组关联分析及候选基因预测[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1604-1617.
[7] 高沛阳, 李瑾璇, 董宇奎, 石玉, 张振, 张永丽. 测墒补灌下小麦分蘖发生和成穗对施氮量的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1847-1858.
[8] 张献丰, 郭利建, 李康春, 孔斌雪, 刘玉芳, 车卓, 杨德龙. 小麦ABHD6基因家族鉴定与粒重功能标记开发[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1711-1727.
[9] 王壮壮, 武紫君, 张永新, 张芯源, 袁丽雪, 陈如雪, 刘世举, 段剑钊, 冯伟, 王同朝, 王永华. 豫东南黏壤潮土区水氮优化协同提高冬小麦产量和氮素利用效率[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1501-1521.
[10] 姚术, 郭凯悦, 翟慧慧, 姚佳慧, 邓文琪, 闫玲, 黄驰, 高阳, 俞嫣然, 赵振邦, 李英慧, 王晓波, 李佳佳. 大豆苗期耐低铁综合评价及优异种质筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1373-1387.
[11] 何万龙, 耿洪伟, 张飞飞, 米克热阿依·阿巴白克热, 罗紫洋, 李鹏程, 周钊宇, 程宇坤. 基于深度学习的小麦重要病害图像识别系统的研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1401-1417.
[12] 张振, 冯连杰, 石玉, 于振文, 张永丽. 节水补灌下不同穗型小麦产量形成差异研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1522-1535.
[13] 侯思宇, 王国璀, 韦金贵, 谢玮欣, 殷文, 樊志龙, 柴强, 胡发龙. 绿肥配施化学氮肥对西北干旱灌区小麦干物质积累及产量形成的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1208-1219.
[14] 尚云秋, 赵竹, 陈欢, 丁永刚, 乔玉强, 李玮, 张向前, 曹承富, 杜世州. 长期定位耕作方式对雨养小麦籽粒灌浆和产量形成的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1236-1250.
[15] 乔宇馨, 李程越, 康晓玉, 张鑫琪, 贾绍辉, 刘倩, 曹亚丽, 史鑫蕊, 郝兴宇, 李萍. 基于APSIM模型的长期免耕秸秆覆盖对旱地小麦增产效应研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(4): 1181-1192.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

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