陆地棉亲本间遗传距离与杂种优势的相关性研究

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.09.002

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】通过1 500个陆地棉杂交组合分析杂种优势与其亲本间数量性状遗传距离的相关性,探讨能否利用大规模杂交组合亲本间遗传距离提高陆地棉杂种优势预测效果,以期为棉花杂交育种和杂种优势利用提供理论指导。【方法】选择来自15个国家和中国23个省（市）的305份陆地棉核心种质为亲本,采用L×T（Line×Tester）杂交设计配制1 500个杂交组合。2012—2013年,在中国南北方13个生态环境下考察其株高、单铃重、衣分、纤维长度等10个产量和纤维品质相关性状,分析F₁杂种优势、亲本间遗传距离和群体结构,并采用4种方式（Cor1—Cor4）计算遗传距离与杂种优势的相关性。【结果】10个性状中亲优势（MPH）均值的变幅为1.70%—7.40%,平均为4.36%,按父本不同将F₁分成5组（A,E）,其MPH均值A>E>B>C>D;超亲优势（HB）均值的变幅为-4.17%—1.87%,平均为-0.17%,A、B和E组的HB均值皆为正。10个性状在5组中除D、E组的马克隆值之外,其他性状普遍具有明显的中亲优势,其中,单铃重和纤维长度的中亲优势在5组中均以正优势为主（达80%以上）,最大值分别为34.01%和9.83%,对应的超亲优势分别为24.25%和5.80%。F₁和亲本差异显著性分析表明单铃重、株高、纤维长度、伸长率和整齐度指数整体表现出一定的超亲优势。父本（测试种）与300个母本之间的遗传距离介于2.280—61.430,平均为21.550,5个测试种与母本间的平均遗传距离D>C>E>A>B,其中,最近值为11.721,最远值为33.271。按最小方差聚类,将305个陆地棉亲本划分为2个主群,包括5个亚群。4种遗传距离与杂种优势的相关性分析结果显示,因样本量、遗传距离变幅和父本不同其结果有所差异,相关性随样本量的增大而有所增强。其中,Cor1是Cor2结果的整体体现;Cor3与Cor1和Cor2相比,部分性状的中亲优势与遗传距离的相关性有所不同;Cor4的相关性最弱。综合来看,遗传距离与衣分、断裂比强度、整齐度指数和纺纱均匀性指数的中亲优势呈显著正相关,遗传距离与其他性状的中亲优势的相关性因采用的分析方案不同,结果有所不同;在4种方案中,除整齐度指数外,遗传距离与超亲优势的相关性整体表现负相关。其中,遗传距离与马克隆值、纤维长度和衣分的超亲优势相关性较强。【结论】陆地棉亲本间数量性状遗传距离与杂种优势有一定的线性关系,不同性状的杂种优势与遗传距离的相关性存在正负和强弱差异,且样本量越大相关性越强。说明基于大规模杂交组合研究陆地棉亲本间遗传距离与杂种优势的关系效果显著。

关键词: 陆地棉, 核心种质, 数量性状, L×T, 遗传距离, 聚类分析, 杂种优势预测

Abstract:

【Objective】The correlation between heterosis and genetic distance (GD) of quantitative traits between parents was analyzed by 1500 hybrid combinations in upland cotton, and the possibility of using GD between parents of large-scale combinations to improve the efficiency of hybrid vigour prediction of upland cotton was discussed in order to provide theoretical guidance for cotton hybrid breeding and utilization of heterosis.【Method】305 upland cotton core collections from 15 countries and 23 provinces (municipalities) of China were selected as parents, and 1500 cross combinations were produced by L×T (Line×Tester) cross design. From 2012 to 2013, ten yield and fiber quality related traits, including plant height (PH), boll weight (BW), boll number per plant (BN), lint percentage (LP), fiber length (FL), fiber strength (FS), fiber elongation (FE), fiber length uniformity (FU), micronaire (MIC) and spinning consistent index (SCI), were investigated in 13 ecological conditions in north and south China. F₁ hybrids mid-parent heterosis (MPH), heterobeltiosis (HB), GD between parents and population structure were analyzed. The correlation between GD and hybrid vigour was calculated by four schemes (Cor1-Cor4). 【Result】The mean values of MPH of the ten traits ranged from 1.70% to 7.40%, with an average of 4.36%, and F₁ hybrids were divided into 5 groups (A-E) according to different male parents, the mean values of MPH: A>E>B>C>D. The mean values of HB ranged from -4.17% to 1.87%, with an average of -0.17%, and the average values of group A, B, and E were positive. In 5 groups, except for MIC of group D and E, other 9 traits had obvious MPH, among them, MPH of BW and FL were mainly positive (more than 80%) in the 5 groups, the maximum MPH values were 34.01% and 9.83% respectively, and the corresponding HB values were 24.25% and 5.80% respectively. The significant difference analysis between F₁ hybrids and their parents indicated that BW, PH, FL, FE, and FU showed some HB. The GDs between male parents (testers) and 300 female parents ranged from 2.280 to 61.430, with an average of 21.550. The mean GDs between 5 testers and female parents: D>C>E>A>B, in which the nearest value was 11.721, and the farthest value was 33.271. According to “Ward” clustering method, 305 upland cotton parents were divided into two groups, including five subgroups. The results of four correlation analysis methods between GD and heterosis showed that the consequences varied with the sample size, the range of GD, and the male parent, the correlation increased with the sample size. Cor1 was the overall embodiment of Cor2 results; compared with Cor1 and Cor2, Cor3 had different correlations between MPH and GD in some traits; Cor4 had the weakest correlations. To sum up, the genetic distance was positively correlated with the MPH of LP, FS, FU, and SCI, the correlation between GD and MPH of other traits was different due to the different analysis schemes. In the four schemes, except for FU, the relationship between GD and HB was negatively correlated on the whole, and there was a strong correlation between genetic distance and HB of MIC, FL and LP. 【Conclusion】There is a linear relationship between GD of quantitative traits and hybrid vigour in upland cotton. The correlations are positive or negative, strong or weak due to different traits, and the larger the sample size, the stronger the correlation. Thus, the large-scale hybrid combinations are used to well study the relationship between GD and heterosis in upland cotton.

Key words: upland cotton, core collection, quantitative trait, L×T, genetic distance, cluster analysis, heterosis prediction

曲玉杰, 孙君灵, 耿晓丽, 王骁, ZareenSarfraz, 贾银华, 潘兆娥, 何守朴, 龚文芳, 王立如, 庞保印, 杜雄明. 陆地棉亲本间遗传距离与杂种优势的相关性研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(9): 1488-1501.

QU YuJie, SUN JunLing, GENG XiaoLi, WANG Xiao, Zareen Sarfraz, JIA YinHua, PAN ZhaoE, HE ShouPu, GONG WenFang, WANG LiRu, PANG BaoYin, DU XiongMing. Correlation Between Genetic Distance of Parents and Heterosis in Upland Cotton[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(9): 1488-1501.

图/表 8

表1

图1

表2

陆地棉10个数量性状杂种优势"

性状 Trait	分组 Group	中亲优势MPH			超亲优势HB
性状 Trait	分组 Group	变幅 Range (%)	均值 Mean (%)	正（负）优势组合数 No. of F₁s with positive (negative) heterosis	变幅 Range (%)	均值 Mean (%)	正（负）优势组合数 No. of F₁s with positive (negative) heterosis
PH	A	-5.69—24.29	9.67	286（14）	-8.67—19.98	5.08	243（57）
	B	-7.07—16.79	5.08	267（33）	-15.81—14.16	1.29	183（117）
	C	-1.93—22.05	10.16	298（2）	-8.26—15.36	3.87	242（58）
	D	-7.77—13.02	3.45	254（46）	-22.39—4.34	-6.03	17（283）
	E	-6.25—11.99	2.57	227（72）	-16.40—6.74	-2.28	76（223）
BW	A	-12.48—34.01	15.55	298（2）	-21.65—24.25	8.58	284（16）
	B	-19.71—26.00	8.29	291（9）	-22.75—19.28	2.51	220（80）
	C	-13.87—17.57	5.82	276（24）	-19.93—12.21	-0.15	149（151）
	D	-13.81—24.95	7.16	285（15）	-20.97—18.79	2.69	224（76）
	E	-12.72—30.82	9.68	289（10）	-20.78—20.24	2.08	195（104）
LP	A	-4.72—9.30	2.62	260（40）	-8.80—5.04	-1.45	96（204）
	B	-3.06—11.96	3.38	275（25）	-17.14—6.68	-1.06	107（193）
	C	-16.00—13.33	3.35	268（32）	-25.18—3.97	-5.32	22（278）
	D	-0.38—13.14	5.07	297（3）	-13.54—7.80	0.30	186（114）
	E	-14.04—7.54	0.87	195（104）	-20.33—4.20	-4.42	51（248）
BN	A	2.10—50.41	23.35	300（0）	-13.52—22.49	7.03	265（35）
	B	-3.72—67.89	20.77	295（5）	-16.86—34.80	7.45	243（57）
	C	-13.03—34.73	4.81	215（85）	-27.49—10.85	-9.91	18（282）
	D	-18.18—39.5	2.36	169（131）	-31.41—5.50	-13.38	5（295）
	E	-11.18—75.92	26.20	290（9）	-22.14—47.65	10.61	245（54）
FL	A	-1.59—7.33	2.93	291（9）	-5.69—6.08	0.88	219（81）
	B	-3.79—5.03	1.45	255（45）	-8.61—4.09	-0.44	122（178）
	C	-5.62—6.79	1.88	264（36）	-12.08—4.68	-0.17	147（153）
	D	-3.69—6.65	1.93	269（31）	-7.61—4.26	-1.35	78（222）
	E	-4.13—9.83	2.75	283（16）	-10.79—5.80	0.79	205（94）
续表2 Continued table 2
性状 Trait	分组 Group	中亲优势MPH			超亲优势HB
性状 Trait	分组 Group	变幅 Range (%)	均值 Mean (%)	正（负）优势组合数 No. of F₁s with positive (negative) heterosis	变幅 Range (%)	均值 Mean (%)	正（负）优势组合数 No. of F₁s with positive (negative) heterosis
FS	A	-6.68—8.60	0.53	163（137）	-12.11—4.40	-2.98	32（268）
	B	-5.91—10.75	1.02	201（99）	-11.47—5.43	-1.97	76（224）
	C	-4.99—12.19	3.08	272（28）	-11.44—9.62	0.38	177（123）
	D	-7.54—12.55	2.03	228（72）	-16.52—6.33	-2.46	66（234）
	E	-9.01—12.78	1.96	212（87）	-15.61—10.40	-1.04	124（175）
MIC	A	-6.75—11.80	3.95	262（38）	-13.06—7.12	-1.54	108（192）
	B	-8.70—10.91	2.13	243（57）	-16.29—5.22	-1.66	90（210）
	C	-10.38—8.33	0.03	154（146）	-15.67—5.78	-5.00	23（277）
	D	-11.10—6.40	-3.19	23（277）	-18.40—2.27	-7.64	1（299）
	E	-14.4—19.63	-0.42	128（171）	-22.09—4.52	-5.22	20（279）
FU	A	-0.87—2.76	0.78	277（23）	-1.31—1.64	0.18	185（115）
	B	-1.22—2.60	0.30	223（77）	-2.01—1.47	-0.31	76（224）
	C	-1.02—2.14	0.44	241（59）	-2.38—1.70	-0.12	118（182）
	D	-0.55—2.22	0.81	289（11）	-1.60—1.69	0.15	184（116）
	E	-1.81—1.97	0.39	224（75）	-2.13—1.41	-0.13	120（179）
FE	A	-3.64—3.82	0.36	181（119）	-7.25—1.36	-2.04	12（288）
	B	-1.83—3.95	0.63	211（89）	-4.57—2.90	-0.50	99（201）
	C	-3.17—4.13	0.93	246（54）	-4.42—3.57	-0.11	142（158）
	D	-3.75—3.19	0.23	178（122）	-5.82—1.63	-1.39	36（264）
	E	-4.38—10.46	3.28	261（38））	-7.21—8.96	0.47	164（135）
SCI	A	-6.77—15.10	2.42	226（74）	-13.31—9.08	-2.42	78（222）
	B	-11.15—11.87	0.85	180（120）	-17.11—7.75	-2.94	50（250）
	C	-8.74—17.67	4.59	275（25）	-21.08—10.57	0.08	151（149）
	D	-6.42—18.16	6.09	288（12）	-14.11—11.77	-0.78	133（167）
	E	-10.00—16.34	3.88	258（41）	-16.43—12.82	-0.25	152（147）
均值Mean	A	1.59—11.71	6.21	300（0）	-3.54—4.73	1.13	236（64）
	B	-0.07—10.37	4.39	299（1）	-3.87—4.94	0.24	172（128）
	C	-0.71—8.11	3.51	298（2）	-6.88—2.33	-1.64	39（261）
	D	-1.31—6.55	2.59	188（12）	-7.41—0.55	-2.99	3（297）
	E	0.11—11.52	5.12	299（0）	-4.93—5.53	0.06	150（149）
总均值Total mean		1.70—7.40	4.36		-4.17—1.87	-0.64

表2

图2

表3

表4

表5

表6

参考文献 39

[1]	CHEN Z J, SCHEFFLER B E, ELIZABETH D, TRIPLETT B A, TIANZHEN Z, WANGZHEN G, XIAOYA C, STELLY D M, RABINOWICZ P D, TOWN C D . Toward sequencing cotton (Gossypium) genomes. Plant Physiology, 2007,145(4):1303-1310.
[2]	ZHANG J, FANG H, ZHOU H P, SANOGO S, MA Z . Genetics, breeding, and marker-assisted selection for verticillium wilt resistance in cotton. Crop Science, 2014,54(4):1289-1303. doi: 10.2135/cropsci2013.08.0550
[3]	FANG L, WANG Q, HU Y, JIA Y, CHEN J, LIU B, ZHANG Z, GUAN X, CHEN S, ZHOU B . Genomic analyses in cotton identify signatures of selection and loci associated with fiber quality and yield traits. Nature Genetics, 2017,49(7):1089-1098. doi: 10.1038/ng.3887 pmid: 28581501
[4]	彭倩, 薛亚东, 张向歌, 李慧敏, 孙高阳, 李卫华, 谢慧玲, 汤继华 . 利用单片段代换系测交群体定位玉米产量相关性状的杂种优势位点. 作物学报, 2016,42(4):482-491. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2016.00482
	PENG Q, XUE Y D, ZHANG X G, LI H M, SUN G Y, LI W H, XIE H L, TANG J H . Identification of heterotic loci for yield and ear traits using CSSL test population in maize. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2016,42(4):482-491. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2016.00482
[5]	LI D Y, HUANG Z Y, SONG S H, XIN Y Y, MAO D H, LV Q M, ZHOU M, TIAN D M, TANG M F, ZHUNL H . Integrated analysis of phenome, genome, and transcriptome of hybrid rice uncovered multiple heterosis-related loci for yield increase. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016,113(41):E6026-E6035. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1610115113 pmid: 27663737
[6]	DUVICK D N . The contribution of breeding to yield advances in maize (Zea mays L.). Advances in Agronomy, 2005,86(5):83-145. doi: 10.1016/S0065-2113(05)86002-X
[7]	傅廷栋 . 油菜杂种优势研究利用的现状与思考. 中国油料作物学报, 2008: 1-5.
	FU T D . On research and application of heterosis in rapessed. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2008: 1-5. (in Chinese)
[8]	邢朝柱, 靖深蓉, 邢以华 . 中国棉花杂种优势利用研究回顾和展望. 棉花学报, 2007,19(5):337-345. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2007.05.003
	XING C Z, JING S R, XING Y H . Review and prospect on cotton heterosis utilization and study in China. Cotton Science, 2007,19(5):337-345. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2007.05.003
[9]	袁有禄, 靖深蓉 . 世界棉花杂种优势利用研究进展, 问题与前景. 中国棉花, 2000,27(8):2-5. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-632X.2000.08.001
	YUAN Y L, JING S R . Advances, problems and prospects of heterosis utilization of cotton in the world. China Cotton, 2000,27(8):2-5. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-632X.2000.08.001
[10]	WU Y T, YIN J M, GUO W Z, ZHU X F, ZHANG T Z . Heterosis performance of yield and fibre quality in F₁ and F₂ hybrids in upland cotton. Plant Breeding, 2010,123(3):285-289. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0523.2004.00990.x
[11]	邢朝柱, 喻树迅 . 棉花杂种优势表达机理研究进展. 棉花学报, 2004,16(6):379-382. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2004.06.012
	XING C Z, YU S X . Progress of cotton heterosis expression mechanisms. Cotton Science, 2004,16(6):379-382. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2004.06.012
[12]	NEI M. Genetic Distance and Molecular Phylogeny. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington, 1987, 193-223.
[13]	徐静斐, 汪路应 . 水稻杂种优势和配合力的初步研究. 遗传, 1980,2(2):17-19.
	XU J P, WANG L Y . Preliminary study on heterosis and combining ability of rice. Hereditas, 1980,2(2):17-19. (in Chinese)
[14]	MOLL R H, LONNQUIST J H, FORTUNO J V, JOHNSON E C . The relationship of heterosis and genetic divergence in maize. Genetics, 1965,52(1):139-144. doi: 10.0000/PMID17248265 pmid: 17248265
[15]	GHADERI A, ADAMS M W, NASSIB A M . Relationship between genetic distance and heterosis for yield and morphological traits in dry edible bean and faba bean1. Crop Science, 1984,24(1):37-42. doi: 10.2135/cropsci1984.0011183X002400010009x
[16]	ALI M, COPELAND L O, ELIAS S G, KELLY J D . Relationship between genetic distance and heterosis for yield and morphological traits in winter canola (Brassica napus L.). Theoretical & Applied Genetics, 1995,91(1):118-121. doi: 10.1007/BF00220867 pmid: 24169676
[17]	TEKLEWOLD A, BECKER H C . Comparison of phenotypic and molecular distances to predict heterosis and F₁ performance in Ethiopian mustard (Brassica carinata A. Braun). Theoretical & Applied Genetics, 2006,112(4):752-759. doi: 10.1007/s00122-005-0180-3 pmid: 16365759
[18]	王学德, 潘家驹 . 棉花亲本遗传距离与杂种优势间的相关性研究. 作物学报, 1990,16(1):32-38. doi: 10.1007/BF02015343
	WANG X D, PAN J J . Studies on the relationship between genetic distance of parents and yield heterosis in hybrid cotton. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 1990,16(1):32-38. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/BF02015343
[19]	赵玉昌, 曹栓柱, 曹新川 . 陆地棉数量性状遗传距离与杂种优势关系的研究. 塔里木大学学报, 2008,20(1):19-22. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-0568.2008.01.006
	ZHAO Y C, CAO S Z, CAO X C . Study of the relationship between genetic distance and heterosis in upland cotton. Journal of Tarim University, 2008,20(1):19-22. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-0568.2008.01.006
[20]	郝德荣, 何林池, 刘水东, 周金凤, 邢建美, 黄昭平 . 抗虫棉数量性状遗传距离与杂种优势关系的研究. 金陵科技学院学报, 2008,24(4):50-55. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-755X.2008.04.012
	HAO D R, HE L C, LIU S D, ZHOU J F, XING J M, HUANG S P . Study of the relationship between genetic distance and heterosis in insect resistant cotton. Journal of Jinling Institute of Technology, 2008,24(4):50-55. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-755X.2008.04.012
[21]	陈强, 杨祖荣, 王谧, 范玉刚 . 几个陆地棉表型遗传距离与杂种优势之间的关系研究. 江西农业学报, 2011,23(5):25-26. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8581.2011.05.009
	CHEN Q, YANG Z R, WANG M, FAN Y G . Research on relationship between phenotypic genetic distance and heterosis of several upland cotton combinations. Acta Agriculture Jiangxi, 2011,23(5):25-26. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8581.2011.05.009
[22]	赵仁渠, 杨明 . 样本对小麦遗传距离与杂种优势关系的影响. 生物数学学报, 1994(1):48-53. doi: 10.1007/BF02007173
	ZHAO R Q, YANG M . Studies on the effects of sample on the relationship between genetic distance and heterosis in wheat. Journal of Biomathematics, 1994(1):48-53. (in Chinese) doi: 10.1007/BF02007173
[23]	代攀虹, 孙君灵, 贾银华, 杜雄明, 王谧 . 利用表型数据构建陆地棉核心种质. 植物遗传资源学报, 2016,17(6):961-968. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2016.06.001
	DAI P H, SUN J L, JIA Y H, DU X M, WANG M . Construction of core collection of upland cotton based on phenotypic data. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2016,17(6):961-968. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2016.06.001
[24]	代攀虹, 孙君灵, 何守朴, 王立如, 贾银华, 潘兆娥, 庞保印, 杜雄明, 王谧 . 陆地棉核心种质表型性状遗传多样性分析及综合评价. 中国农业科学, 2016,49(19):3694-3708. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.19.003
	DAI P H, SUN J L, HE S P, WANG L R, JIA Y H, PAN Z E, PANG B Y, DU X M, WANG M . Comprehensive evaluation and genetic diversity analysis of phenotypic traits of core collection in upland ctton. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016,49(19):3694-3708. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.19.003
[25]	KEMPTHORNE O, FINNEY D J . An introduction to genetic statistics. Aibs Bulletin, 1957,39(2):69-79. doi: 10.2307/1292411
[26]	BORCARD D, GILLET F, LEGENDRE P . Numerical Ecology with R. Springer, 2011: 332-334.
[27]	GB —2007《棉花细绒棉》条款解释. 中国纤检, 2007(7):6-14. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-4466.2007.07.002
	GB 1103—2007《Cotton–Upland cotton》Interpretation. China Fiber Inspection, 2007(7):6-14. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-4466.2007.07.002
[28]	MILLER M, SONG Q, SHI X, JUENGER T E, CHEN Z J . Natural variation in timing of stress-responsive gene expression predicts heterosis in intraspecific hybrids of Arabidopsis. Nature Communications, 2015,6:7453-7455.
[29]	张锡顺, 杨建国, 杨若菡, 徐宁生, 刘旭云, 杜刚 . 蓖麻数量性状遗传距离与杂种优势关系的研究. 中国农业科学, 2006,39(3):209-216. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2006.03.029
	ZHANG X S, YANG J G, YANG R H, XU N S, LIU X Y, DU G . Study of the relationship between genetic distance and heterosis in castor. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2006,39(3):209-216. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2006.03.029
[30]	武耀廷, 张天真, 朱协飞, 王广明 . 陆地棉遗传距离与杂种F₁、F₂产量及杂种优势的相关分析. 中国农业科学, 2002,35(1):22-28. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2002.01.005
	WU Y T, ZHANG T Z, ZHU X F, WANG G M . Relationship between F₁, F₂ yield, heterosis and genetic distance measured by molecular markers and parent performance in cotton. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2002,35(1):22-28. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0578-1752.2002.01.005
[31]	杨代刚, 马雄风, 周晓箭, 张先亮, 白凤虎, 王海风, 孟清芹, 裴小雨, 喻树迅 . 陆地棉配合力与杂种优势、遗传距离的相关性分析. 棉花学报, 2012,24(3):191-198. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2012.03.001
	YANG D G, MA X F, ZHOU X J, ZHANG X L, BAI F H, WANG H F, MENG Q Q, PEI X Y, YU S X . Correlation among combining ability, heterosis and genetic distance in upland cotton. Cotton Science, 2012,24(3):191-198. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2012.03.001
[32]	宿俊吉, 陈红, 余渝, 林海, 宁新柱, 李吉莲, 刘萍, 刘丽, 相吉山, 邓福军 . 陆地棉遗传距离与纤维品质性状中亲优势及F₁、F₂表现的相关性研究. 棉花学报, 2013,25(2):142-147. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2013.02.008
	SU J J, CHEN H, YU Y, LIN H, NING X Z, LI J L, LIU P, LIU L, XIANG J S, DENG F J . The relationship of genetic distance to mid-parent heterosis and manifestations of F₁&F₂ of fiber quality traits in upland cotton. Cotton Science, 2013,25(2):142-147. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-7807.2013.02.008
[33]	ZHANG J F, ABDELRAHEEM A, WU J X . Heterosis, combining ability and genetic effect, and relationship with genetic distance based on a diallel of hybrids from five diverse Gossypium barbadense cotton genotypes. Euphytica, 2017,213(9):208-222. doi: 10.1007/s10681-017-1997-y
[34]	CHRISTIAN R, ANGELIKA C E, CHRISTOPH G, JAN L, FRANK T, RONAN S, THOMAS A, MARK S, LOTHAR W, MELCHINGER A E . Genomic and metabolic prediction of complex heterotic traits in hybrid maize. Nature Genetics, 2012,44(2):217-220.
[35]	桑世飞, 王会, 梅德圣, 刘佳, 付丽, 王军, 汪文祥, 胡琼 . 利用全基因组SNP芯片分析油菜遗传距离与杂种优势的关系. 中国农业科学, 2015,48(12):2469-2478. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.12.020
	SANG S F, WANG H, MEI D S, LIU J, FU L, WANG J, WANG W X, HU Q . Correlation analysis between heterosis and genetic distance evaluated by genome-wide SNP chip in Brassica napus. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015,48(12):2469-2478. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.12.020
[36]	YANG M, WANG X, REN D, HUANG H, XU M, HE G, DENG X W . Genomic architecture of biomass heterosis in Arabidopsis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017,114(30):8101-8106.
[37]	孙正文, 匡猛, 马峙英, 王省芬 . 利用CottonSNP63K芯片构建棉花品种的指纹图谱. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(24):4692-4704. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.24.003
	SUN Z W, KUANG M, MA Z Y, WANG S F . Using cotton SNP63K chip to construct fingerprint map of cotton varieties. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017,50(24):4692-4704. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.24.003
[38]	WANG M, TU L, LIN M, LIN Z, WANG P, YANG Q, YE Z, SHEN C, LI J, ZHANG L . Asymmetric subgenome selection and cis-regulatory divergence during cotton domestication. Nature Genetics, 2017,49(4):579-590. doi: 10.1038/ng.3807 pmid: 28263319
[39]	MA Z, HE S, WANG X, SUN J, ZHANG Y, ZHANG G, WU L, LI Z, LIU Z, SUN G . Resequencing a core collection of upland cotton identifies genomic variation and loci influencing fiber quality and yield. Nature Genetics, 2018,50(6):803-813. doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0119-7 pmid: 29736016

编号 Serial No.	相关性分析方案 Correlation analysis schemes
Cor1	Dt_ij vs F_ijk
Cor2	Dt_ij-m vs F_ijk-m
Cor3	Dt_Aj vs F_Ajk,Dt_Bj vs F_Bjk,Dt_Cj vs F_Cjk,Dt_Dj vs F_Djk,Dt_Ejvs F_Ejk
Cor4	Dt_Aj-m vs F_Ajk-m,Dt_Bj-m vs F_Bjk-m,Dt_Cj-m vs F_Cjk-m,Dt_Dj-m vs F_Djk-m,Dt_Ej-m vs F_Ejk-m

性状 Trait	与遗传距离的相关性系数 Correlation coefficient with genetic distance
性状 Trait	中亲优势MPH	超亲优势HB
PH	0.0115	-0.2798***
BW	-0.1618***	-0.1250***
LP	0.2459***	-0.1234***
BN	-0.3870***	-0.5277***
FL	0.0109	-0.3482***
FS	0.1890***	-0.1055***
MIC	-0.3627***	-0.5161***
FU	0.1764***	0.0921***
FE	-0.0495	-0.0315
SCI	0.3530***	-0.0634*

性状 Trait	与遗传距离的相关性系数 Correlation coefficient with genetic distance
	中亲优势MPH					超亲优势HB
	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ	Ⅳ	Ⅴ	Ⅰ	Ⅱ	Ⅲ	Ⅳ	Ⅴ
PH	0.2433***	-0.0173	0.0870	-0.1815***	0.0196	-0.0037	-0.3721***	-0.1579**	-0.5368***	-0.1613
BW	-0.1003	-0.1486**	-0.2628***	-0.2738***	-0.2346**	-0.0008	-0.0864	-0.1819***	-0.2451***	-0.4287***
LP	0.3801***	0.2978***	0.2879***	0.1346**	0.2462**	-0.0562	-0.0356	-0.0852	-0.0949	-0.4010***
BN	-0.5678***	-0.4537***	-0.5135***	-0.3352***	0.0049	-0.6861***	-0.6001***	-0.6672***	-0.4586***	-0.0976
FL	-0.0951	0.0630	-0.0964	0.0163	-0.2031*	-0.4566***	-0.3952***	-0.2698***	-0.0866	-0.5788***
FS	-0.0239	0.1614***	0.2813***	0.1780***	0.2144*	-0.2216**	-0.1698***	0.1662**	0.0818	-0.0685
MIC	-0.2862***	-0.3924***	-0.4440***	-0.4387***	-0.1036	-0.4695***	-0.5275***	-0.4915***	-0.5194***	-0.1980*
FU	0.1141	0.2487***	0.1173*	0.1518**	0.1791*	-0.0189	0.2020***	0.0613	0.1870***	-0.2032*
FE	-0.3579***	-0.1354**	-0.1053	0.0999	0.1257	-0.2300**	-0.1320**	0.0370	0.1207*	-0.0573
SCI	0.1834**	0.4003***	0.4058***	0.3726***	0.2354**	-0.2461***	-0.0577	0.2116***	0.2357***	-0.2630**

性状 Trait	与遗传距离的相关性系数 Correlation coefficient with genetic distance
	中亲优势MPH					超亲优势HB
	A	B	C	D	E	A	B	C	D	E
PH	-0.11067	0.0312	0.0017	0.0052	0.1615**	-0.1641**	-0.0833	0.0051	-0.3327***	0.0227
BW	0.1073	-0.0282	0.1353*	0.2430***	0.0554	-0.0087	-0.0669	0.1034	0.1466*	0.0074
LP	0.1419*	0.1554**	0.0350	0.1358*	-0.1145*	-0.0849	-0.3894***	-0.1031	-0.2701***	-0.3032***
BN	0.1857**	0.1712**	0.1544**	0.0346	0.1311*	0.0608	0.0268	0.0603	-0.2319***	0.1402*
FL	0.1765**	0.0001	0.1664**	0.2205***	-0.1417*	-0.1908***	-0.3943***	-0.0480	-0.3636***	-0.3814***
FS	0.1470*	0.1501**	0.0881	0.0730	-0.1812**	-0.2267***	-0.3329***	-0.2339***	-0.3668***	-0.2409***
MIC	0.0100	0.0416	-0.0033	-0.0042	-0.0834	-0.2506***	-0.3376***	-0.2372***	-0.4879***	-0.1338*
FU	0.0130	0.1898***	0.0281	0.1364*	0.0113	-0.0461	-0.0260	-0.0401	0.0644	-0.0909
FE	0.2138***	0.0941	0.2281***	0.1783**	0.0139	0.1112	-0.1177*	0.0892	-0.0334	-0.0138
SCI	0.0193	0.1416*	0.0804	0.1335*	-0.0742	-0.3766***	-0.3699***	-0.2454***	-0.4021***	-0.2531***