小偃麦衍生品系的赤霉病抗性评价

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91015

Abstract

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

ZHANG Xiao-Jun,XIAO Jin,WANG Hai-Yan,QIAO Lin-Yi,LI Xin,GUO Hui-juan,CHANG Li-Fang,ZHANG Shu-Wei,YAN Xiao-Tao,CHANG Zhi-Jian,WU Zong-Xin. Evaluation of resistance to Fusarium head blight in Thinopyrum-derived wheat lines[J].Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020, 46(01): 62-73.

Figures/Tables 7

Supplementary table 1

Responses of the 119 wheat lines derived from Thinopyrum to Fusarium head blight under different environments"

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
编号 No.	材料名称 Lines	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	严重度分级 Severity degree	抗性评价 FHB resistance
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
编号 No.	材料名称 Lines	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	严重度分级 Severity degree	抗性评价 FHB resistance
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
编号 No.	材料名称 Lines	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	严重度分级 Severity degree	抗性评价 FHB resistance
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
编号 No.	材料名称 Lines	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	严重度分级 Severity degree	抗性评价 FHB resistance
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

Supplementary table 1

Table 1

Fig. 1

Table 2

Table 3

Fig. 2

Table 4

References 35

[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

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

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
TAI8335	冀麦26//晋麦33/TAI8335 Jimai 26//Jinmai 33/TAI8335	6			3
TAI8505	太原768//冀麦26/TAI8505 Taiyuan 768//Jimai 26/ATI8505	3		3
合计 Total		119	13	61	41	4

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^*

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

RichHTML360

PDF

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 35

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

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
亲本来源 Source of parents	亲本名称 Name of parents	最小 Min.	最大 Max.	极差 Range	平均 Average	严重度分级 Severity degree	抗性评价 FHB resistance	染色体数目 Number of chromosomes
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

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
材料名称 Line	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	染色体数目 Number of chromosomes
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

[1]	Zhai Sheng-Nan, Cao Xin-You, Li Hao-Sheng, Li Ji-Hu, Li Fa-Ji, Liu Jin-Dong, Xia Xian-Chun, Lyu Ying-Ying, Ma Rui-Feng, Wang Ying, Geng Hong-Wei, Liu Jian-Jun. Analysis of the genetic effects of allelic variation at the Pod-A1, Pod-D1, and Pod-2D loci on peroxidase activity in wheat grains [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1593-1603.
[2]	Xi Qian-Hui, Xu Zi-Yuan, Liu Meng-Meng, Wang Hong-Yi, Lang Kai-Lin, Jing Zhen-Hai, Chen Feng, Zhao Lei. Genome-wide association study and candidate gene prediction of grain copper content in wheat [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1604-1617.
[3]	Mao Jia-Qi, Huang Peng-Yu, Zhao Jia-Jia, Zheng Xing-Wei, Wu Bang-Bang, Hao Yu-Qiong, Qu Fei, Liu Cheng, Ma Peng-Tao, Zheng Jun. Evaluation of powdery mildew resistance in wheat cultivars and molecular detection of resistance genes in Shanxi province, China [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1669-1681.
[4]	Hu Chuan, Zhao Kai-Nan, Huang Xiu-Li, Wu Jin-Zhi, Ren Kai-Ming, Wang He-Zheng, Fu Guo-Zhan, Huang Ming, Li You-Jun. Effects of tillage methods and nitrogen rates on yield and quality of dryland wheat under one-off irrigation [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1830-1846.
[5]	Chen Xue-Yan, He Hua-Chuan, Li Zheng-Jia, Dong Xin-Pan, Li Ou-Qi, Liu Xiao-Yun, Li Dan-Ping, Chen Zhi-Wei, Liu Guo-Xia, Lyu Sheng-Yuan, Wu Yin-Ying, Zhao Zhen-Dong, Cao Xin-You, Wan He-Ping. Dynamic changes in root organic acid secretion and its transcriptional regulatory mechanisms in ‘Jimai 60’ seedlings under combined salinity-alkalinity stress in hydroponics [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1859-1875.
[6]	Gao Pei-Yang, Li Jin-Xuan, Dong Yu-Kui, Shi Yu, Zhang Zhen, Zhang Yong-Li. Response of wheat tillering and spike formation to nitrogen rate under supplementary irrigation based on soil moisture content [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1847-1858.
[7]	Zhang Xian-Feng, Guo Li-Jian, Li Kang-Chun, Kong Bin-Xue, Liu Yu-Fang, Che Zhuo, Yang De-Long. Identification of the ABHD6 gene family and development of functional markers for grain weight in wheat [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(6): 1711-1727.
[8]	Yao Shu, Guo Kai-Yue, Zhai Hui-Hui, Yao Jia-Hui, Deng Wen-Qi, Yan Ling, Huang Chi, Gao Yang, Yu Yan-Ran, Zhao Zhen-Bang, Li Ying-Hui, Wang Xiao-Bo, Li Jia-Jia. Comprehensive evaluation of low-iron tolerance and screening of elite germplasm at the soybean seedling stage [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1373-1387.
[9]	Wang Zhuang-Zhuang, Wu Zi-Jun, Zhang Yong-Xin, Zhang Xin-Yuan, Yuan Li-Xue, Chen Ru-Xue, Liu Shi-Ju, Duan Jian-Zhao, Feng Wei, Wang Tong-Chao, Wang Yong-Hua. Optimized water-nitrogen synergy enhances winter wheat yield and nitrogen use efficiency in clay-loam fluvo-aquic soils of southeastern Henan, China [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1501-1521.
[10]	He Wan-Long, Geng Hong-Wei, Zhang Fei-Fei, Mikereayi·Ababaikere , Luo Zi-Yang, Li Peng-Cheng, Zhou Zhao-Yu, Cheng Yu-Kun. Development of a deep learning-based image recognition system for major wheat diseases [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1401-1417.
[11]	Zhang Zhen, Feng Lian-Jie, Shi Yu, Yu Zhen-Wen, Zhang Yong-Li. Yield formation of wheat with different ear types under water-saving supplementary irrigation conditions [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(5): 1522-1535.
[12]	Hou Si-Yu, Wang Guo-Cui, Wei Jin-Gui, Xie Wei-Xin, Yin Wen, Fan Zhi-Long, Chai Qiang, Hu Fa-Long. Effects of green manure combined with chemical nitrogen fertilizer on dry matter accumulation and yield formation of wheat in arid irrigation areas of northwestern China [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(4): 1208-1219.
[13]	Shang Yun-Qiu, Zhao Zhu, Chen Huan, Ding Yong-Gang, Qiao Yu-Qiang, Li Wei, Zhang Xiang-Qian, Cao Cheng-Fu, Du Shi-Zhou. Effects of long-term tillage practices on grain-filling and yield formation in rain-fed wheat [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(4): 1236-1250.
[14]	Qiao Yu-Xin, Li Cheng-Yue, Kang Xiao-Yu, Zhang Xin-Qi, Jia Shao-Hui, Liu Qian, Cao Ya-Li, Shi Xin-Rui, Hao Xing-Yu, Li Ping. Study on the effects of long-term no-tillage straw mulching on wheat yield improvement in dryland areas based on the APSIM model [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(4): 1181-1192.
[15]	Li Can, Zhang Xi-Wei, Zhu Bo-Tao, Zhang Pei-Pei. Functional characterization of wheat GSK kinase TaSK41 and screening for interacting proteins [J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2026, 52(3): 677-687.