欢迎访问作物学报，今天是
作物学报

作物学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (8): 1894-1904.doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.14114

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇    下一篇

基于三维模型重构的花生网纹厚度性状QTL分析

张胜忠1(), 胡晓辉1, 慈敦伟1, 杨伟强1, 王菲菲1, 邱俊兰2, 张天雨3, 钟文3, 于豪諒4, 孙冬平4, 邵战功5, 苗华荣1,*(), 陈静1,*()   

  1. 1山东省花生研究所, 山东青岛 266100
    2威海市种子管理站, 山东威海 264200
    3山东省种子管理总站, 山东济南 250100
    4烟台枫林食品股份有限公司, 山东烟台 264108
    5莱西市农业农村局, 山东青岛 266600
  • 收稿日期:2021-07-01 接受日期:2021-11-29 出版日期:2022-08-12 网络出版日期:2021-12-28
  • 通讯作者: 苗华荣,陈静
  • 作者简介:E-mail: 593318769@qq.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金项目(32001584);山东省农业良种工程(2020LZGC001);山东省农业科学院创新工程(CXGC2021A09);山东省农业科学院创新工程(CXGC2021A46);青岛市科技惠民示范引导专项(20-3-4-26-nsh)

QTLs analysis for reticulation thickness based on reconstruction of three dimensional models in peanut pods

ZHANG Sheng-Zhong1(), HU Xiao-Hui1, CI Dun-Wei1, YANG Wei-Qiang1, WANG Fei-Fei1, QIU Jun-Lan2, ZHANG Tian-Yu3, ZHONG Wen3, YU Hao-Liang4, SUN Dong-Ping4, SHAO Zhan-Gong5, MIAO Hua-Rong1,*(), CHEN Jing1,*()   

  1. 1Shandong Peanut Research Institute, Qingdao 266100, Shandong, China
    2Weihai Seed Management Station, Weihai 264200, Shandong, China
    3Shandong Seed Administration Station, Jinan 250100, Shandong, China
    4Yantai Fenglin Foodstuff Co., Ltd, Yantai 264108, Shandong, China
    5Agricultural and Rural Bureau of Laixi City, Qingdao 266600, Shandong, China
  • Received:2021-07-01 Accepted:2021-11-29 Published:2022-08-12 Published online:2021-12-28
  • Contact: MIAO Hua-Rong,CHEN Jing
  • Supported by:
    National Natural Science Foundation of China(32001584);Breeding Project from Department Science & Technology of Shandong Province(2020LZGC001);Agricultural Scientific and the Technological Innovation Project of Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences(CXGC2021A09);Agricultural Scientific and the Technological Innovation Project of Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences(CXGC2021A46);Qingdao People's Livelihood Science and Technology Program(20-3-4-26-nsh)

RichHTML

27

PDF

248

摘要：

荚果网纹厚度, 不仅是花生重要的品种特性, 也与花生适宜机械化收获特性密切相关。为探索花生荚果网纹厚度遗传基础, 本研究开发了一种基于三维模型重构测定网纹厚度的方法, 并且以品种花育36号和品系6-13配组衍生的181个重组自交系(recombinant inbred line, RIL)群体为材料, 考察了该RIL群体2019—2020年在山东青岛、东营和威海3个环境下表型数据。结果表明, 横向和纵向网纹厚度在RIL群体中均表现为连续分布和超亲遗传, 广义遗传率分别为0.92和0.91。利用前期构建的高密度遗传图谱, 共定位到11个与网纹厚度相关加性QTL, 其中6个与横纹厚度相关, 5个与纵纹厚度相关, 表型贡献率范围为5.21%~11.06%。定位到2个主效位点qLA2和qLO9, 可在不同环境下表达, 其增效等位基因分别来自花育36号和6-13。共定位到22对上位性QTL, 共涉及34个位点, 表型贡献率范围为0.55%~4.37%, 其中10对与横纹厚度相关, 12对与纵纹厚度相关。本研究结果将为花生相关性状基因定位和分子育种提供重要的参考。

关键词: 花生, 荚果网纹, QTL, 加性, 上位性

Abstract:

The thickness of pod reticulation is not only an important criterion of peanut taxonomy, but also an agronomy trait related to peanut mechanical harvesting. To explore the genetic mechanism of reticulation thickness of peanut pods, a novel phenotyping method was developed to determine the reticulation thickness through reconstructing three dimensional (3D) models of pods. Meanwhile, a recombinant inbred line (RIL) population (181 lines) was derived from a cross between Huayu 36 and 6-13 and planted in three environments from 2019 to 2020, including Qingdao, Dongying, and Weihai of Shandong province. Phenotypic data of the RIL population were collected from these three environments. Two related traits, thicknesses of latitudinal and longitudinal protuberant veins (reticulations), had continuous and transgressive distributions in the RIL population, with broad-sense heritablities of 0.92 and 0.91, respectively. Based on a previous high density genetic map, a total of 11 additive QTLs were identified explaining phenotypic variations of 5.21%-11.06%, among which six QTLs were related to thickness of latitudinal protuberant vein and five related to thickness of longitudinal protuberant vein. Two major loci, qLA2 and qLO9 could be detected in more than one environments, with contributing alleles coming from Huayu 36 and 6-13, respectively. A total of 22 pairs of epistatic QTLs involving 34 loci were identified explaining phenotypic variations of 0.55%-4.37%, among which 10 pairs of interactions were related to thickness of latitudinal protuberant vein and 12 pairs were related to thickness of longitudinal protuberant vein. These results provide valuable information for further gene mapping and molecular breeding in peanut.

Key words: peanut, pod reticulation, QTLs, additive, epistatic

图1

基于花生荚果三维模型构建评价网纹深度的流程图 A: 相机拍摄的不同位置; B: 拍摄获得的图像序列; C: 图像特征点匹配; D: 构建荚果的稀疏点云; E: 构建荚果的稠密点云; F: 重构荚果三维模型表面; G: 提取特殊点三维坐标。白色矩形框代表网纹测定区域。红-绿-蓝图标表示三维图形。"

图2

2种荚果网纹厚度测定方法比较 A: 7个花生品种(系)的荚果照片; B: 7个花生品种(系)荚果的三维模型; C: 基于网纹去除法测定荚果网纹厚度; D: 基于三维模型法测定荚果网纹厚度。不同小写字母(a、b、c和d)代表经多重比较(LSD)在0.05水平差异显著。红-绿-蓝图标表示三维图形。"

图3

亲本和部分RIL家系的荚果网纹厚度表型变异 红-绿-蓝图标表示三维图形。"

表1

亲本和RIL群体表型数据统计"

性状
Trait		 环境Environment 亲本Parents RIL群体RIL population
花育36号Huayu 36 6-13 平均值Mean 标准差SD 最小值Min. 最大值Max. 峰度Kurt. 偏度Skew. Shapiro-Wilk
横纹厚度
LA (mm)		 E1 0.2431 0.0293** 0.1902 0.0829 0.0167 0.4448 -0.12 0.10 0.989*
E2 0.2320 0.0514** 0.1731 0.0914 0.0147 0.4854 0.54 0.60 0.977**
E3 0.1961 0.0496** 0.1993 0.0909 0.0101 0.4854 0.26 0.31 0.986*
纵纹厚度
LO (mm)		 E1 0.4003 0.7165** 0.4884 0.1138 0.2704 0.7673 -0.27 0.50 0.970
E2 0.3811 0.7356** 0.4871 0.1277 0.2538 0.9096 -0.11 0.37 0.981**
E3 0.4278 0.7490** 0.4777 0.1340 0.1788 0.8519 0.74 0.81 0.948

图4

不同环境下RIL群体荚果网纹厚度的频率分布 E1: 2019青岛; E2: 2019东营; E3: 2020威海。E1: 2019 Qingdao; E2: 2019 Dongying; E3: 2020 Weihai."

表2

荚果网纹相关性状方差分析"

性状Trait 来源Source 自由度DF 方差SS 标准差MS F值F-value P值P value 遗传率h2
横纹厚度
LA		 基因型G 169 0.0851 0.0005 20.4911 P<0.001 0.92
环境E 2 0.0015 0.0007 29.6624 P<0.001
基因型×环境G × E 252 0.0148 0.0001 2.3888 P<0.001
误差Error 833 0.0205 0
纵纹厚度
LO		 基因型G 169 0.1643 0.0010 13.9010 P<0.001 0.91
环境E 2 0.0003 0.0002 2.2961 P<0.001
基因型×环境G × E 252 0.0311 0.0001 1.7620 P<0.001
误差Error 832 0.0582 0.0001

图5

不同环境下定位的QTL在连锁群上的分布 红色和蓝色分别表示横纹厚度和纵纹厚度。"

表3

花生荚果网纹性状相关QTL信息"

性状
Trait		 QTL 环境Env. 染色体Chr. 标记区间
Marker interval		 置信区间
C.I. (cM)		 LOD 加性效应Add 贡献率PVE (%)
横纹厚度
LA		 qLA2 E1 2 Marker938-Marker875 0-3.9 3.31 -0.0030 11.06
E2 2 Marker938-Marker875 0-5.6 2.91 -0.0029 6.08
E3 2 Marker938-Marker864 0-2.8 3.70 -0.0039 7.44
qLA3 E1 3 Marker1868-Marker1876 24.8-34.2 2.93 0.0028 5.62
qLA12 E3 12 Marker6681-Marker6697 91-105.2 2.64 0.0021 5.21
qLA15 E1 15 Marker9048-Marker9075 35-53.1 2.83 -0.0034 5.34
qLA16.1 E1 16 Marker9463-Marker10015 0.9-11.2 4.30 0.0047 10.79
qLA16.2 E2 16 Marker10139-Marker10315 19.3-24.8 3.59 -0.0034 7.55
纵纹厚度
LO		 qLO4 E1 4 Marker2874-3754F 35-53.1 3.21 -0.0034 8.31
E3 4 Marker2874-3754F 34.3-52.7 3.10 -0.0040 8.74
qLO9 E1 9 Marker4980-Marker5581 0.9-11.2 3.76 0.0047 10.96
E2 9 Marker4980-Marker5533 1-11.2 3.85 0.0050 10.99
qLO12 E3 12 Marker6697-Marker6722 96-105.5 4.07 0.0045 10.71
qLO17 E2 17 Marker10418-Marker10431 0-8.4 2.61 -0.0033 6.05
qLO19 E2 19 Marker11749-Marker11769 11.5-15.5 3.10 0.0047 7.26

表4

荚果网纹相关性状上位性QTL信息"

性状
Trait		 QTLi 染色体Chr. 标记区间
Marker interval		 QTLj 染色体Chr. 标记区间
Marker interval		 LOD 上位性效应
AA		 贡献率
PVE (%)
横纹厚度
LA		 Epi-qLA1 1 Marker344-Marker340 Epi-qLA7 7 AHGS0035-AHGS1954 5.57 0.0015 2.72
Epi-qLA2 2 Marker862-Marker746 Epi-qLA3.1 3 Marker1177-Marker1191 5.73 0.0021 2.64
Epi-qLA3.2 3 Marker1894-Marker1906 Epi-qLA10.3 10 Marker5972-Marker5996 5.24 0.0016 2.58
Epi-qLA3.2 3 Marker1894-Marker1906 Epi-qLA12 12 Marker6650-Marker6653 5.03 0.0017 2.82
Epi-qLA3.2 3 Marker1894-Marker1906 Epi-qLA16 16 Marker10343-Marker10344 5.44 0.0021 2.77
Epi-qLA5.1 5 Marker3174-Marker3169 Epi-qLA5.2 5 Marker3064-Marker3055 5.32 0.0023 1.77
Epi-qLA5.2 5 Marker3064-Marker3055 Epi-qLA10.2 10 Marker5872-Marker5972 6.93 0.0027 3.50
Epi-qLA5.1 5 Marker3174-Marker3169 Epi-qLA19 19 AHGS1634-Marker11752 5.26 -0.0015 2.65
Epi-qLA8 8 Marker4781-Marker4778 Epi-qLA9 9 Marker5648-Marker5656 5.93 0.0016 3.17
Epi-qLA9 9 Marker5648-Marker5656 Epi-qLA10.1 10 Marker5953-Marker5941 5.90 -0.0016 3.15
纵纹厚度
LO		 Epi-qLO1.1 1 Marker25-Marker11 Epi-qLO15 15 Marker8480-Marker8432 5.44 0.1933 2.40
Epi-qLO1.2 1 Marker597-Marker601 Epi-qLO11.2 11 Marker6349-Marker6352 5.55 0.0957 3.69
Epi-qLO3 3 Marker1177-Marker1191 Epi-qLO11.1 11 Marker6220-Marker6275 9.91 -0.1251 4.37
Epi-qLO5 5 Marker3174-Marker3169 Epi-qLO10.2 10 Marker5872-Marker5972 5.46 -0.1136 3.51
Epi-qLO6.1 6 Marker3659-Marker3660 Epi-qLO20 20 Marker12781-Marker12791 6.64 0.1012 0.55
Epi-qLO6.2 6 Marker4191-Marker4236 Epi-qLO8.1 8 Marker4862-Marker4875 6.99 -0.1060 3.32
Epi-qLO7 7 Marker4658-Marker4605 Epi-qLO18 18 Marker11664-Marker11669 5.06 -0.1120 3.76
Epi-qLO8.2 8 AGGS1495-Marker4770 Epi-qLO15.2 15 Marker8513-Marker8628 6.83 -0.1403 1.91
Epi-qLO10.1 10 Marker5877-Marker5872 Epi-qLO11.1 11 Marker6220-Marker6275 5.39 0.2010 1.57
Epi-qLO10.2 10 Marker5872-Marker5972 Epi-qLO15.2 15 Marker8513-Marker8628 6.75 0.2029 3.89
Epi-qLO10.2 10 Marker5872-Marker5972 Epi-qLO16 17 Marker10786-C123 5.04 0.1245 2.59
Epi-qLO13 13 Marker6815-Marker6823 Epi-qLO15.1 15 Marker8503-Marker8489 5.52 0.1190 3.37
[1] FAO FAO Statistical Database. Rome, Italy. Available: http://faostat.fao.org.
[2] 禹山林. 中国花生品种及其系谱. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2008. pp 55-58.
Yu S L. Chinese Peanut Cultivars and Their Pedigrees. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and Technical Publishers, 2008. pp 55-58. (in Chinese)
[3] Mondal S, Badigannavar A M. Identification of major consensus QTLs for seed size and minor QTLs for pod traits in cultivated groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). 3 Biotech, 2019, 9: 347.
doi: 10.1007/s13205-019-1881-7
[4] Patil V H. Genetic Studies in Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.). MS Thesis of Poona University, Poona, India, 1965.
[5] Jadhav G D, Shinde N N. Studies in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea). India J Agric Res, 1979, 13: 93-96.
[6] Murthy T G K, Tiwari S P, Reddy P S. A linkage group for genes governing pod characters in peanut.v Euphytica, 1988, 39: 43-46.
doi: 10.1007/BF00025109
[7] Manoharan V, Ramalingam R S. Inheritance of testa colour and pod reticulation in groundnut. Madras Agric J, 1992, 79: 646-648.
[8] 周金超, 杨鑫雷, 崔顺立, 侯名语, 陈焕英, 穆国俊, 刘立峰. 花生SSR标记与农艺性状的相关性. 作物学报, 2014, 40: 1197-1204.
Zhou J C, Yang X L, Cui S L, Hou M Y, Chen H Y, Mu G J, Liu L F. Correlation between SSR markers and agronomic traits in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Acta Agron Sin, 2014, 40: 1197-1204. (in Chinese with English abstract)
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2014.01197
[9] 郭慧敏. 栽培种花生染色体片段置换系群体的构建及部分农艺性状QTL定位. 河北农业大学硕士学位论文,河北保定, 2014.
Guo H M. Construction of Chromosome Segement Substitution Lines and QTLs Mapping for Agronomic Traits in Cultivated Peanut. MS Thesis of Agricultural University of Hebei, Baoding, Hebei, China, 2014. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10] Hu W J, Zhang C, Jiang Y Q, Huang C L, Liu Q, Xiong L Z, Yang W N, Chen F. Nondestructive 3D image analysis pipeline to extract rice grain traits using X-ray computed tomography. Plant Phenomics, 2020, 2020: 1-12.
[11] Su Y, Xiao L T. 3D visualization and volume-based quantification of rice chalkiness in vivo by using high resolution micro-CT. Rice, 2020, 13: 69.
doi: 10.1186/s12284-020-00429-w
[12] Dornbusch T, Wernecke P, Diepenbrock W. A method to extract morphological traits of plant organs from 3D point clouds as a database for an architectural plant model. Ecol Model, 2007, 200: 119-129.
[13] Ivanov N, Boissard P, Chapron M, Andrieu B. Computer stereo plotting for 3-D reconstruction of a maize canopy. Agric For Meteorol, 1995, 75: 85-102.
doi: 10.1016/0168-1923(94)02204-W
[14] Biskup B, Scharr H, Schurr U, Rascher U. A stereo imaging system for measuring structural parameters of plant canopies. Plant Cell Environ, 2007, 30: 1299-1308.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2007.01702.x
[15] McCarthy C L, Hancock N H, Raine S R. Applied machine vision of plants: a review with implications for field deployment in automated farming operations. Intel Serv Robot, 2010, 3: 209-217.
[16] Pound M P, French A P, Murchie E H, Pridmore P. Automated recovery of three-dimensional models of plant shoots from multiple color images. Plant Physiol, 2014, 166: 1688-1698.
doi: 10.1104/pp.114.248971
[17] 胡鹏程, 郭焱, 李保国, 朱晋宇, 马韫韬. 基于多视角立体视觉的植株三维重建与精度评估. 农业工程学报, 2015, 31(11): 209-214.
Hu P C, Guo Y, Li B G, Zhu J Y, Ma Y T. Three-dimensional reconstruction and its precision evaluation of plant architecture based on multiple view stereo method. TCSA Engin, 2015, 31(11): 209-214. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[18] Lowe D G. Distinctive image features from scale-invariant keypoints. Int J Comput Vision, 2004, 60: 91-110.
doi: 10.1023/B:VISI.0000029664.99615.94
[19] 艾海舟, 兴军亮. 计算机视觉--算法与应用. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2012. pp 237-290.
Ai H Z, Xing J L. Computer Vision:Algorithms and Applications. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2012. pp 237-290. (in Chinese)
[20] Furukawa Y, Ponce J. Accurate, dense, and robust multiview stereopsis. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell, 2010, 32: 1362-1376.
doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2009.161
[21] Kazhdan M, Hoppe H. Screened poisson surface reconstruction. ACM Trans Graph, 2013, 32: 29.
[22] Meng L, Li H H, Zhang L Y, Wang J K. QTL IciMapping: integrated software for genetic linkage map construction and quantitative trait locus mapping in biparental populations. Crop J, 2015, 3: 269-283.
doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2015.01.001
[23] Liu N, Guo J B, Zhou X J, Wu B, Huang L, Luo H Y, Chen Y N, Chen W G, Lei Y, Huang Y, Liao B S, Jiang H F. High-resolution mapping of a major and consensus quantitative trait locus for oil content to a -0.8-Mb region on chromosome A08 in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Theor Appl Genet, 2020, 133: 37-49.
doi: 10.1007/s00122-019-03438-6
[24] Zhang S Z, Hu X H, Miao H R, Chu Y, Cui F G, Yang W Q, Wang C M, Shen Y, Xu T T, Zhao L B, Zhang J C, Chen J. QTL identification for seed weight and size based on a high-density SLAF-seq genetic map in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). BMC Plant Biol, 2019, 19: 537.
doi: 10.1186/s12870-019-2164-5
[25] Silva L C, Wang S, Zeng Z B. Composite interval mapping and multiple interval mapping: procedures and guidelines for using Windows QTL Cartographer. Methods Mol Biol, 2012, 871: 75-119.
[26] Voorrips R E. Mapchart: software for the graphical presentation of linkage map and QTL. J Hered, 2002, 93: 77-78.
pmid: 12011185
[27] McCouch S R, Cho Y G, Yano M, Paul E, Blinstrub M, Morishima H, Kinosita T. Report on QTL nomenclature. Rice Genet Newl, 1997, 14: 11-13.
[28] Chen Y N, Ren X P, Zheng Y L, Zhou X J, Huang L, Yan L Y, Jiao Y Q, Chen W G, Huang S M, Wan L Y, Lei Y, Liao B S, Huai D X, Wei W H, Jiang H F. Genetic mapping of yield traits using RIL population derived from Fuchuan Dahuasheng and ICG6375 of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Mol Plant, 2017, 37: 17.
[29] Wang Z J, Huai D X, Zhang Z H, Cheng K, Kang Y P, Wan L Y, Yan L Y, Jiang H F, Lei Y, Liao B S. Development of a high-density genetic map based on specific length amplified fragment sequencing and its application in quantitative trait loci analysis for yield-related traits in cultivated peanut. Front Plant Sci, 2018, 9: 827.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00827
[30] Hagiwara W E, Onishi K, Takamure O I, Sano Y. Transgressive segregation due to linked QTLs for grain characteristics of rice. Euphytica, 2006, 150: 27-35.
doi: 10.1007/s10681-006-9085-8
[31] Balakrishnan D, Surapaneni M, Yadavalli V R, Addanki K R, Mesapogu S, Beerelli K, Neelamraju S. Detecting CSSLs and yield QTLs with additive, epistatic and QTL × environment interaction effects from Oryza sativa × O. nivara IRGC81832 cross. Sci Rep, 2020, 10: 7766.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-64300-0 pmid: 32385410
[32] Li Z K, Luo L J, Mei H W, Wang Q Y, Tabien R, Zhong D B, Ying C S, Stansel J W, Khush G S, Paterson A H. Overdominant epistatic loci are the primary genetic basis of inbreeding depression and heterosis in rice: I. Biomass and grain yield. Genetics, 2001, 158: 1737-1753.
doi: 10.1093/genetics/158.4.1737 pmid: 11514459
[33] Carlbog O, Haley C S. Epistasis: too often neglected in complex trait studies? Nat Rev Genet, 2004, 5: 618-625.
doi: 10.1038/nrg1407
[1] 郑玉珍, 齐飞艳, 孙子淇, 刘华, 秦利, 石磊, 王娟, 汪蒙蒙, 韩锁义, 徐静, 苗利娟, 黄冰艳, 董文召, 郑峥, 张新友. 花生籽仁总超长链脂肪酸和7种脂肪酸组分的QTL定位[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1646-1657.
[2] 陆一楚, 李振影, 买春海, 赵晓蕊, 王利祥. 夜间复合体关键基因AhLUX1正向调控花生结瘤的功能研究[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(6): 1658-1668.
[3] 谷春苗, 王润风, 黄璐, 刘浩, 鲁清, 李海芬, 李少雄, 何双呈, 洪彦彬, 陈小平, 谭斌, 余倩霞. 花生WOX基因家族的全基因组分析及不定芽再生候选基因的鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(5): 1326-1340.
[4] 刘长友, 王珅, 时会影, 沈颖超, 孙蕾, 王彦, 张志肖, 苏秋竹, 田静, 范保杰. 基于饭豆基因资源的小豆远缘杂交群体抗豆象QTL定位[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 936-944.
[5] 于天一, 王春晓, 肖丽, 钟召迪, 王宣仓, 赵勇, 路亚, 吴月, 吴正锋. 不同结瘤特性花生品种氮素累积、产量及品质特性对氮肥用量的响应[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(3): 881-894.
[6] 张胜忠, 李国卫, 戈立江, 王菲菲, 胡晓辉, 苗华荣, 李燕, 钟文, 陈静. 花生机械脱壳损伤相关农艺指标筛选与QTL定位[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(2): 644-652.
[7] 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.
[8] 金欣欣, 宋亚辉, 苏俏, 杨永庆, 王瑾. 高产高油高油酸花生品种的生长发育及干物质生产特征[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 191-201.
[9] 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.
[10] 孙辰硕, 张月, 田泽锴, 晏立英, 康彦平, 陈玉宁, 王欣, 淮东欣, 王前前, 姜慧芳, 罗怀勇, 黄莉, 廖伯寿, 王志慧, 雷永. 花生种质果柄强度的遗传分化与主要影响因子分析[J]. 作物学报, 2026, 52(1): 118-130.
[11] 张飞飞, 何万龙, 焦文娟, 白斌, 耿洪伟, 程宇坤. 小麦抗条锈病相关性状元分析及候选基因分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(8): 2111-2127.
[12] 万书波, 张佳蕾, 高华鑫, 王才斌. 中国花生高产栽培研究进展与展望[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(7): 1703-1711.
[13] 胡蒙, 沙丹, 张晟瑞, 谷勇哲, 张世碧, 李静, 孙君明, 邱丽娟, 李斌. 大豆分枝数QTL定位及候选基因筛选[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(7): 1747-1756.
[14] 邵顺伟, 陈卓, 兰振东, 蔡兴奎, 邹华芬, 李晨曦, 唐景华, 朱熙, 张彧, 董建科, 金辉, 宋波涛. 基于BSA-seq技术的块茎芽眼深度QTL定位分析[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(7): 1725-1735.
[15] 杨海洋, 吴林宣, 李博纹, 石翰峰, 袁禧龙, 刘金朝, 蔡海荣, 陈诗怡, 郭涛, 王慧. 基于QTL定位发现的OsWRI3调控水稻种子的落粒性[J]. 作物学报, 2025, 51(7): 1712-1724.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

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