粒用高粱幼苗期耐苏打盐碱综合评价与指标鉴选

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.01.003

中国农业科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (1): 30-42.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.01.003

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇下一篇

粒用高粱幼苗期耐苏打盐碱综合评价与指标鉴选

乔钲岩¹^,²(), 于淼¹(), 唐玉劼¹, 石贵山¹, 刘新宇¹^,², 刘晓涵¹^,³, 王新鼎¹^,², 李扬¹, 王鼐¹^,^*(), 陈冰嬬¹^,^*()

¹ 吉林省农业科学院作物资源研究所，吉林公主岭 136100
² 吉林农业大学农学院，长春 130118
³ 齐齐哈尔大学生命科学与农林学院，黑龙江齐齐哈尔 161000

收稿日期:2024-06-09 接受日期:2024-09-02 出版日期:2025-01-01 发布日期:2025-01-07
通信作者:
王鼐，E-mail：wang-nai@163.com。
陈冰嬬，E-mail：chenbingru1979@163.com。
联系方式: 乔钲岩，E-mail：15039961556@163.com。于淼，E-mail：yumiao910816@163.com。乔钲岩和于淼为同等贡献作者。
基金资助:
吉林省科技发展计划(20240601065RC); 农业农村部国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-06)

Comprehensive Evaluation for Soda Salinity and Alkalinity in Sorghum Seedling Stage and Selection of Indicators

QIAO ZhengYan¹^,²(), YU Miao¹(), TANG YuJie¹, SHI GuiShan¹, LIU XinYu¹^,², LIU XiaoHan¹^,³, WANG XinDing¹^,², LI Yang¹, WANG Nai¹^,^*(), CHEN BingRu¹^,^*()

¹ Crop Resources Research Institute of Jilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Gongzhuling 136100, Jilin
² College of Agronomy, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun 130118
³ College of Life Sciences and Agriculture and Forestry, Qiqihar University, Qiqihar 161000, Heilongjiang

Received:2024-06-09 Accepted:2024-09-02 Published:2025-01-01 Online:2025-01-07

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】筛选苏打盐碱胁迫液浓度和耐盐碱测定指标，建立大批量耐盐碱鉴定方法；对粒用高粱核心种质的耐盐碱特性进行综合评价，筛选耐盐碱种质，为进一步培育耐盐碱亲本和杂交种提供种质基础。【方法】松嫩平原盐碱土的主要成分是Na₂CO₃和NaHCO₃。采用50 mmol·L^-1 NaHCO₃﹕Na₂CO₃=9﹕1为胁迫液模拟松嫩平原中度盐碱土环境，胁迫液的pH为9.19、含盐量为0.21%。以苗高、根长、苗鲜重、根鲜重、苗干重、根干重、根冠比鲜重、根冠比干重8个性状为测定指标，鉴定285份粒用高粱核心种质苗期的耐盐碱特性。采用主成分分析筛选粒用高粱苗期耐盐碱鉴定指标并建立幼苗期耐盐碱评价数学模型，采用聚类分析将285份高粱种质的耐盐碱特性分级，筛选出耐盐碱性较强的种质。【结果】50 mmol·L^-1盐碱胁迫对285份高粱种质的8个指标均表现出抑制作用，8个性状的平均耐盐碱系数分别为0.794、0.785、0.565、0.554、0.802、0.638、0.978和0.841，并且盐碱胁迫下各指标之间均呈现出显著正相关性；主成分分析筛选出苗高、根鲜重可作为高粱幼苗期苏打盐碱胁迫鉴定评价的指标；采用多元线性回归分析归纳出高粱幼苗期耐盐碱特性评价模型Y=0.097X4+0.171X2+ 0.201X6+0.157X1+0.105X3-0.147，可用于多个指标的综合评价；聚类分析将285份粒用高粱核心种质耐盐碱特性划分为强耐盐碱、耐盐碱、中间型、敏感型、极敏感型5个等级，其中，强耐盐种质8份、耐盐碱种质8份、中间型种质112份、敏感型种质134份、极敏感型种质23份。将耐盐碱种质和极敏感型种质种植在吉林省西部苏打盐碱地中度盐碱土（pH 8.5—9.5、含盐量0.3%）进行验证，强耐盐碱种质平均出苗率为45.4%、平均苗高为23 cm；耐盐碱种质平均出苗率为31.3%、平均苗高20.9 cm；极敏感型种质平均出苗率为20%、平均苗高12.3 cm。【结论】以50 mmol·L^-1苏打盐碱浓度（NaHCO₃﹕Na₂CO₃=9﹕1）从285份高粱种质资源中筛选出8份强耐苏打盐碱的种质，8份耐盐碱种质，筛选出苗高和根鲜重2个性状作为高粱幼苗期大批量耐盐碱筛选的鉴定评价指标。

关键词: 苏打盐碱土, 高粱, 苗期, 耐盐碱, 综合评价

Abstract:

【Objective】This study was conducted to screen the concentration of soda saline-alkali stress solution and the determination index of saline-alkali tolerance, to establish the identification method of saline-alkali tolerance to large-scale identification of sorghum germplasms. The saline-alkali tolerance of the core germplasms of grain sorghum were comprehensively evaluated, and the saline-alkali tolerant germplasms were identified and selected to provide a germplasm basis for further breeding of saline-alkali tolerant parents and hybrids.【Method】The main components of saline-alkali soil of in The Songnen Plain are Na₂CO₃ and NaHCO₃. This experiment used 50 mmol·L^-1 NaHCO₃﹕Na₂CO₃=9﹕1 as a stress solution to simulate the moderate saline-alkali environment in Songnen Plain, the pH is 9.19, Salinity is 0.21%. Eight traits, including seedling height, root length, seedling fresh weight, root fresh weight, seeding dry weight, root dry weight, root-shoot ratio fresh weight and root-shoot ratio dry weight were used as measurement indexes and the saline-alkali tolerance characteristics of 285 sorghum core germplasms at seedling stage were identified. Principal component analysis was used to screen the salt-alkali tolerance identification indexes of grain sorghum at seedling stage and establish a mathematical model for salt-alkali tolerance evaluation at seedling stage. The saline-alkaline tolerance of 285 sorghum germplasms was classified by cluster analysis, and the germplasms with strong saline-alkaline tolerance were screened.【Result】50 mmol·L^-1saline-alkali stress showed inhibitory effects on 8 indexes of 285 sorghum germplasms, the average values of saline -alkali resistance coefficients are 0.794, 0.785, 0.565, 0.554, 0.802, 0.638, 0.978, and 0.841.Under saline alkali stress, 8 indexes showed significant positive correlations; the seedling height and root fresh weight could be used as the indexes for the identification and evaluation of soda saline-alkali stress in sorghum seedling stage by principal component analysis; The evaluation model of saline-alkali tolerance characteristics of sorghum seedlings was summarized by multiple linear regression analysis Y=0.097X4+0.171X2+0.201X6+0.157X1+0.105X3- 0.147, it can be used for comprehensive evaluation of multiple indicators. 285 grain sorghum core collections were divided into 5 grades by cluster analysis, strong saline-alkali tolerance, saline-alkali tolerance, intermediate type, sensitive type and extremely sensitive type, Among them, there were 8 strong salt-tolerant germplasms, 8 salt-tolerant germplasms, 112 intermediate germplasms, 134 sensitive germplasms and 23 extremely sensitive germplasms. The saline-alkali tolerant germplasm and extremely sensitive germplasm were planted in the moderate saline-alkali soil (pH 8.5-9.5, Salinity 0.3%) for verification in Zhenlai County of western Jilin Province. The average seedling emergence rate of strong saline-alkali tolerant germplasm was 45.4%, and the average seedling height was 23 cm. The average seedling emergence rate of salt-tolerant germplasm was 31.3%, and the average height was 20.9 cm. The average emergence rate of extremely sensitive germplasm was 20%, and the average seedling height was 12.3 cm.【Conclusion】8 strong soda saline-alkali tolerant germplasms and 8 saline-alkali tolerant germplasms were screened out from 285 sorghum germplasms resources with 50 mmol·L^-1 soda saline-alkali concentration (NaHCO₃﹕Na2CO₃=9﹕1). The seedling height and root fresh weight could be used as the preferred evaluation indexes for the identification of saline-alkali tolerance at seedling stage.

Key words: soda saline alkali soil, sorghum, seedling stage, salt alkali resistance, comprehensive evaluation

乔钲岩, 于淼, 唐玉劼, 石贵山, 刘新宇, 刘晓涵, 王新鼎, 李扬, 王鼐, 陈冰嬬. 粒用高粱幼苗期耐苏打盐碱综合评价与指标鉴选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(1): 30-42.

QIAO ZhengYan, YU Miao, TANG YuJie, SHI GuiShan, LIU XinYu, LIU XiaoHan, WANG XinDing, LI Yang, WANG Nai, CHEN BingRu. Comprehensive Evaluation for Soda Salinity and Alkalinity in Sorghum Seedling Stage and Selection of Indicators[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(1): 30-42.

0
/ / 推荐

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Reference Manager|ProCite|BibTeX|RefWorks

链接本文: https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.01.003

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2025/V58/I1/30

图/表 9

表1

表2

图1

表3

图2

表4

表5

图3

图4

参考文献 49

[1]	HUANG R D. Research progress on plant tolerance to soil salinity and alkalinity in sorghum. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2018, 17(4): 739-746.
[2]	HERNÁNDEZ J A. Salinity tolerance in plants: Trends and perspectives. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2019, 20(10): 2408.
[3]	伊力亚尔·买买提. 外源Si对NaCl处理下的番茄幼苗生理特性和光合特性的影响[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆农业大学, 2016.
	ILYAR M. Effects of exogenous Si on physiological and photosynthetic characteristics of tomato seedlings under NaCl treatment[D]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Agricultural University, 2016. (in Chinese)
[4]	王树玉, 张佳麒, 程梓峻, 李仁明, 薛佳妮, 宁尚栋, 余徐明, 侯佳宝, 石勇, 刘会芳, 王明明, 梁正伟. 苏打盐碱地稻米品质研究进展与展望. 农业资源与环境学报, 2024, 41(4): 856-867.
	WANG S Y, ZHANG J Q, CHENG Z J, LI R M, XUE J N, NING S D, YU X M, HOU J B, SHI Y, LIU H F, WANG M M, LIANG Z W. Research progress and prospect in rice grain quality in sodic/ saline-sodic soils mainly characterized by the soil salts NaHCO₃ and Na₂CO₃. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2024, 41(4): 856-867. (in Chinese)
[5]	CHI C M, WANG Z C. Characterizing salt-affected soils of Songnen Plain using saturated paste and 1﹕5 soil-to-water extraction methods. Arid Land Research and Management, 2010, 24(1): 1-11.
[6]	许晓鸿, 刘肃, 赵英杰, 徐子棋, 杨献坤, 滕美瑶, 王大中, 赵书军. 吉林省西部不同环境因子对苏打盐碱地分布的影响. 水土保持通报, 2018, 38(1): 89-95.
	XU X H, LIU S, ZHAO Y J, XU Z Q, YANG X K, TENG M Y, WANG D Z, ZHAO S J. Effects of different environmental factors on distribution of soda saline-alkaline land in western Jilin Province. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 2018, 38(1): 89-95. (in Chinese)
[7]	HAQUE M N, MORRISON G M, PERRUSQUÍA G, GUTIERRÉZ M, AGUILERA A F, CANO-AGUILERA I, GARDEA-TORRESDEY J L. Characteristics of arsenic adsorption to sorghum biomass. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2007, 145(1/2): 30-35.
[8]	GRIEBEL S, ADEDAYO A, TUINSTRA M R. Genetic diversity for starch quality and alkali spreading value in sorghum. The Plant Genome, 2021, 14(1): e20067.
[9]	袁杰, 王学强, 贾春平, 张燕红, 赵志强, 王奉斌, 李自超. 水稻苗期耐盐性的综合鉴定及评价. 分子植物育种, 2020, 18(19): 6474-6482.
	YUAN J, WANG X Q, JIA C P, ZHANG Y H, ZHAO Z Q, WANG F B, LI Z C. Comprehensive identification and evaluation of rice salt tolerance at seedling stage. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2020, 18(19): 6474-6482. (in Chinese)
[10]	KRISHNAMURTHY S L, SHARMA P C, DEWAN D, LOKESHKUMAR B M, RATHOR S, WARRAICH A S, VINAYKUMAR N M, LEUNG H, SINGH R K. Genome wide association study of MAGIC population reveals a novel QTL for salinity and sodicity tolerance in rice. Physiology and Molecular Biology of Plants, 2022, 28(4): 819-835. doi: 10.1007/s12298-022-01174-8 pmid: 35592486
[11]	武博洋, 彭云玲, 赵小强, 方鹏. 玉米苗期在盐胁迫下耐盐相关QTL分析. 分子植物育种, 2019, 17(1): 154-160.
	WU B Y, PENG Y L, ZHAO X Q, FANG P. Salt tolerance related QTL analysis in maize seedling stage under salt stress. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2019, 17(1): 154-160. (in Chinese)
[12]	YANG X H, LU C M. Photosynthesis is improved by exogenous glycinebetaine in salt-stressed maize plants. Physiologia Plantarum, 2005, 124(3): 343-352.
[13]	陈春舟, 马占军, 孟亚雄, 马小乐, 王化俊, 李葆春. 小麦种质资源抗旱耐盐性评价及种质筛选. 分子植物育种, 2021, 19(14): 4820-4835.
	CHEN C Z, MA Z J, MENG Y X, MA X L, WANG H J, LI B C. Evaluation and screening of wheat germplasm resources for drought and salt tolerance. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2021, 19(14): 4820-4835. (in Chinese)
[14]	SINGH A K, CHAURASIA S, KUMAR S, SINGH R, KUMARI J, YADAV M C, SINGH N, GABA S, JACOB S R. Identification, analysis and development of salt responsive candidate gene based SSR markers in wheat. BMC Plant Biology, 2018, 18(1): 249.
[15]	ZHOU S Q, MOU H W, ZHOU J, ZHOU J F, YE H, NGUYEN H T. Development of an automated plant phenotyping system for evaluation of salt tolerance in soybean. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 2021, 182: 106001.
[16]	CAI X X, JIA B W, SUN M Z, SUN X L. Insights into the regulation of wild soybean tolerance to salt-alkaline stress. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 1002302.
[17]	CAO Y C, ZHANG X C, JIA S H, KARIKARI B, ZHANG M J, XIA Z Y, ZHAO T J, LIANG F Q. Genome-wide association among soybean accessions for the genetic basis of salinity-alkalinity tolerance during germination. Crop and Pasture Science, 2021, 72(4): 255-267.
[18]	徐宁, 陈冰嬬, 王明海, 包淑英, 王桂芳, 郭中校. 绿豆品种资源萌发期耐碱性鉴定. 作物学报, 2017, 43(1): 112-121.
	XU N, CHEN B R, WANG M H, BAO S Y, WANG G F, GUO Z X. Identification of alkali tolerance of mungbean germplasm resources during germination. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2017, 43(1): 112-121. (in Chinese)
[19]	李小雷, 何瑞超, 贾学宇, 王雪, 鲍红春, 吴小燕, 于卓. 19份绿豆种子萌发期耐盐性鉴定与评价. 种子, 2022, 41(5): 109-115.
	LI X L, HE R C, JIA X Y, WANG X, BAO H C, WU X Y, YU Z. Evaluation and identification of 19 mung bean seeds for salt tolerance during germination. Seed, 2022, 41(5): 109-115. (in Chinese)
[20]	XU N, CHEN B R, CHENG Y X, SU Y F, SONG M Y, GUO R Q, WANG M H, DENG K P, LAN T J, BAO S Y, WANG G F, GUO Z X, YU L H. Integration of GWAS and RNA-seq analysis to identify SNPs and candidate genes associated with alkali stress tolerance at the germination stage in mung bean. Genes, 2023, 14(6): 1294.
[21]	王珊珊, 钟雪梅, 文莎, 王桂娟, 曾长立, 沈金雄, 傅廷栋, 万何平. 甘蓝型油菜萌发期耐盐碱性高效鉴定及抗性资源筛选. 中国油料作物学报, 2023, 45(6): 1166-1173. doi: 10.19802/j.issn.1007-9084.2023213
	WANG S S, ZHONG X M, WEN S, WANG G J, ZENG C L, SHEN J X, FU T D, WAN H P. Efficient identification and screening of salt and alkaline tolerance in rapeseeds (Brassica napus L.)during germination stage. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2023, 45(6):1166-1173. (in Chinese)
[22]	马盼盼, 赵曾强, 祝建波, 孙国清. 棉花耐旱耐盐碱生理和分子机制研究进展. 中国农业科技导报, 2021, 23(2): 27-36. doi: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2019.0718
	MA P P, ZHAO Z Q, ZHU J B, SUN G Q. Physiological and molecular mechanisms of drought and salt tolerance in cotton. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2021, 23(2): 27-36. (in Chinese)
[23]	高建明, 夏卜贤, 袁庆华, 罗峰, 韩芸, 桂枝, 裴忠有, 孙守钧. 高粱种质材料幼苗期耐盐碱性评价. 应用生态学报, 2012, 23(5): 1303-1310
	GAO J M, XIA B X, YUAN Q H, LUO F, HAN Y, GUI Z, PEI Z Y, SUN S J. Salt-alkaline tolerance of sorghum germplasm at seedling stage. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2012, 23(5): 1303-1310. (in Chinese)
[24]	DARGAN K S, ABROL I P, BHUMBLA D R. Performance of rice varieties in a highly saline sodic soil as influenced by plant population. Agronomy Journal, 1974, 66(2): 279-280.
[25]	韩毅强, 高亚梅, 杜艳丽, 张玉先, 杜吉到, 张文慧, 潘绍玉. 大豆耐盐碱种质资源鉴定. 中国油料作物学报, 2021, 43(6): 1016-1024. doi: 10.19802/j.issn.1007-9084.2020353
	HAN Y Q, GAO Y M, DU Y L, ZHANG Y X, DU J D, ZHANG W H, PAN S Y. Identification of saline-alkali tolerant germplasm resources of soybean during the whole growth stage. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2021, 43(6): 1016-1024. (in Chinese)
[26]	宝力格, 陆平, 史梦莎, 许月, 刘敏轩. 中国高粱地方种质芽期苗期耐盐性筛选及鉴定. 作物学报, 2020, 46(5): 734-744. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.94138
	BAO L G, LU P, SHI M S, XU Y, LIU M X. Screening and identification of Chinese sorghum landraces for salt tolerance at germination and seedling stages. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020, 46(5): 734-744. (in Chinese)
[27]	张士超, 袁芳, 郭建荣, 韩国良, 孙利珍, 王帅, 王宝山. 利用隶属函数值法对甜高粱苗期耐盐性的综合评价. 植物生理学报, 2015, 51(6): 893-902.
	ZHANG S C, YUAN F, GUO J R, HAN G L, SUN L Z, WANG S, WANG B S. Comprehensive evaluation on salt-tolerance of Sorghum bicolor seedlings by subordinate function values analysis. Plant Physiology Journal, 2015, 51(6): 893-902. (in Chinese)
[28]	尚培培, 李丰先, 周宇飞, 彭峥, 高铭悦, 韩熠, 许文娟, 黄瑞冬. 混合碱(NaHCO₃和Na₂CO₃)胁迫对高粱幼苗渗透调节和离子平衡的影响. 生态学杂志, 2015, 34(7): 1924-1929.
	SHANG P P, LI F X, ZHOU Y F, PENG Z, GAO M Y, HAN Y, XU W J, HUANG R D. Effects of mixed alkaline (NaHCO₃ and Na₂CO₃) stress on osmotic regulation and ion balance of sorghum seedlings. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2015, 34(7): 1924-1929. (in Chinese)
[29]	李玉明, 石德成, 李毅丹, 王岳琼. 混合盐碱胁迫对高粱幼苗的影响. 杂粮作物, 2002, 22(1): 41-45.
	LI Y M, SHI D C, LI Y D, WANG Y Q. Effect of complex alkali-saline stress on sorghum seedlings. Horticulture & Seed, 2002, 22(1): 41-45. (in Chinese)
[30]	孙璐, 周宇飞, 汪澈, 肖木辑, 陶冶, 许文娟, 黄瑞冬. 高粱品种萌发期耐盐性筛选与鉴定. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(9): 1714-1722. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.09.006.
	SUN L, ZHOU Y F, WANG C, XIAO M J, TAO Y, XU W J, HUANG R D. Screening and identification of sorghum cultivars for salinity tolerance during germination. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012, 45(9): 1714-1722. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.09.006. (in Chinese)
[31]	崔江慧, 谢登磊, 常金华. 高粱材料耐盐性综合评价方法的初步建立与验证. 植物遗传资源学报, 2012, 13(1): 35-41. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2012.01.006
	CUI J H, XIE D L, CHANG J H. Establishment and verification of comprehensive evaluation method for salt tolerance of sorghum materials. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2012, 13(1): 35-41. (in Chinese)
[32]	ZHANG H L, YU F F, XIE P, SUN S Y, QIAO X H, TANG S Y, CHEN C X, YANG S, MEI C, YANG D K, WU Y R, XIA R, LI X, LU J, LIU Y X, XIE X W, MA D M, XU X, LIANG Z W, FENG Z H, HUANG X H, YU H, LIU G F, WANG Y C, LI J Y, ZHANG Q F, CHEN C, OUYANG Y D, XIE Q. A Gγ protein regulates alkaline sensitivity in crops. Science, 2023, 379(6638): eade8416.
[33]	王秀玲, 程序, 李桂英. 甜高粱耐盐材料的筛选及芽苗期耐盐性相关分析. 中国生态农业学报, 2010, 18(6): 1239-1244.
	WANG X L, CHENG X, LI G Y. Screening sweet sorghum varieties of salt tolerance and correlation analysis among salt tolerance indices in sprout stage. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2010, 18(6): 1239-1244. (in Chinese)
[34]	王晨, 陈吉宝, 庞振凌, 李南南, 董海鸿, 李丹丹. 甜高粱对混合盐碱胁迫的响应及耐盐碱种质鉴定. 作物杂志, 2016(1): 56-61.
	WANG C, CHEN J B, PANG Z L, LI N N, DONG H H, LI D D. The response and screening of germplasm tolerant to mixed saline-alkali stress in sweet sorghum. Crops, 2016(1): 56-61. (in Chinese)
[35]	DUN X L, TAO Z S, WANG J, WANG X F, LIU G H, WANG H Z. Comparative transcriptome analysis of primary roots of Brassica napus seedlings with extremely different primary root lengths using RNA sequencing. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2016, 7: 1238.
[36]	孙东雷, 卞能飞, 陈志德, 邢兴华, 徐泽俊, 齐玉军, 王晓军, 王幸. 花生萌发期耐盐性综合评价及耐盐种质筛选. 植物遗传资源学报, 2017, 18(6): 1079-1087. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2017.06.010
	SUN D L, BIAN N F, CHEN Z D, XING X H, XU Z J, QI Y J, WANG X J, WANG X. Comprehensive evaluation of salt tolerance and screening for salt tolerant accessions of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) at germination stage. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2017, 18(6): 1079-1087. (in Chinese)
[37]	高玉坤, 杨溥原, 项晓冬, 魏世林, 任根增, 殷丛培, 梁红凯, 崔江慧, 常金华. 不同耐盐高粱品种全生育期对盐胁迫的响应. 华北农学报, 2020, 35(6): 113-121. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20191411
	GAO Y K, YANG P Y, XIANG X D, WEI S L, REN G Z, YIN C P, LIANG H K, CUI J H, CHANG J H. Response of different salt tolerant sorghum varieties to salt stress in the whole growth period. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2020, 35(6): 113-121. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20191411
[38]	付丽, 刘加珍, 陶宝先, 陈永金, 郭雯雯, 贾一灿, 尚婉滢. 盐生植物对盐渍土壤环境的适应机制研究综述. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(15): 32-39.
	FU L, LIU J Z, TAO B X, CHEN Y J, GUO W W, JIA Y C, SHANG W Y. Adaptive mechanism of halophytes to saline soil environment: A review. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(15): 32-39. (in Chinese)
[39]	蔺吉祥, 李晓宇, 唐佳红, 王俊锋, 李卓琳, 张兆军, 穆春生. 温度与盐、碱胁迫交互作用对小麦种子萌发的影响. 作物杂志, 2011(6): 113-116.
	LIN J X, LI X Y, TANG J H, WANG J F, LI Z L, ZHANG Z J, MU C S. Effects of temperature, salinity, alkalinity and their interactions on seed germination of wheat. Crops, 2011(6): 113-116. (in Chinese)
[40]	刘杰, 张美丽, 张义, 石德成. 人工模拟盐、碱环境对向日葵种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响. 作物学报, 2008, 34(10): 1818-1825. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2008.01818
	LIU J, ZHANG M L, ZHANG Y, SHI D C. Effects of simulated salt and alkali conditions on seed germination and seedling growth of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.). Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2008, 34(10): 1818-1825. (in Chinese)
[41]	SHI D C, WANG D L. Effects of various salt-alkaline mixed stresses on Aneurolepidium chinense (Trin.) Kitag. Plant and Soil, 2005, 271(1): 15-26.
[42]	温刘君, 朴顺姬, 易津. 4种小麦族牧草种子耐盐补偿生长特性研究. 中国草地学报, 2009, 31(6): 30-32, 38.
	WEN L J, PIAO S J, YI J. Studies on the salt tolerance compensatory growth characteristics of four triticeae accessions’ seeds. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2009, 31(6): 30-32, 38. (in Chinese)
[43]	白玉娥. 根茎类禾草耐盐性评价及生理基础的研究[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2004.
	BAI Y E. Evaluation of salt tolerance of rhizomatous grasses and study on their physiological basis[D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2004. (in Chinese)
[44]	楚乐乐, 罗成科, 田蕾, 张银霞, 杨淑琴, 李培富. 植物对碱胁迫适应机制的研究进展. 植物遗传资源学报, 2019, 20(4): 836-844. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.20181129004
	CHU L L, LUO C K, TIAN L, ZHANG Y X, YANG S Q, LI P F. Research advance in plants’ adaptation to alkali stress. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2019, 20(4): 836-844. (in Chinese)
[45]	CHEN C W, YANG Y W, LUR H S, TSAI Y G, CHANG M C. A novel function of abscisic acid in the regulation of rice (Oryza sativa L.)root growth and development. Plant & Cell Physiology, 2006, 47(1): 1-13.
[46]	马晓军, 金峰学, 杨姗, 杨德光, 李晓辉. 作物耐盐碱数量性状基因座(QTL)定位. 分子植物育种, 2015, 13(1): 221-227.
	MA X J, JIN F X, YANG S, YANG D G, LI X H. Mapping QTLs for salt & alkaline tolerance in crops. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2015, 13(1): 221-227. (in Chinese)
[47]	段文学, 张海燕, 解备涛, 汪宝卿, 张立明. 甘薯苗期耐盐性鉴定及其指标筛选. 作物学报, 2018, 44(8): 1237-1247. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.01237
	DUAN W X, ZHANG H Y, XIE B T, WANG B Q, ZHANG L M. Identification of salt tolerance and screening for its indicators in sweet potato varieties during seedling stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2018, 44(8): 1237-1247. (in Chinese)
[48]	李萍, 燕佳琦, 张鹤, 张燕, 陶顺仙, 张琪, Aldiyar, 徐爱遐, 黄镇. 146份甘蓝型油菜种质芽期耐盐性筛选及评价. 西北农业学报, 2021, 30(6): 848-859.
	LI P, YAN J Q, ZHANG H, ZHANG Y, TAO S X, ZHANG Q, ALDIYAR, XU A X, HUANG Z. Screening and evaluation of salt tolerance for 146 Brassica napus germplasms at germination stage. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2021, 30(6): 848-859. (in Chinese)
[49]	薛天源, 鲁金春子, 何思晓, 余忆, 陈敬东, 文静, 沈金雄, 傅廷栋, 曾长立, 万何平. 286份甘蓝型油菜种质苗期耐盐碱性综合评价. 植物遗传资源学报, 2024, 25(3): 356-372. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.20230827002
	XUE T Y, LU J, HE S X, YU Y, CHEN J D, WEN J, SHEN J X, FU T D, ZENG C L, WAN H P. Comprehensive evaluation on saline-alkali tolerance of 286 Brassica napus germplasm at seedling stage. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2024, 25(3): 356-372. (in Chinese)

Na⁺浓度 Na⁺ concentration (mmol·L^-1)	pH	电导率 TDS (ms·cm^-1)	盐度Salinity (%)
0(CK)	7.18	0.33	0.00
25	9.15	2.21	0.11
50	9.19	4.04	0.21
75	9.33	5.80	0.31
100	9.21	7.49	0.40
150	9.29	10.63	0.58
200	9.27	17.75	1.01

序号 No.	性状 Traits	测定方法 Measurement method
1	苗高SH (cm)	用直尺测量最长叶片顶部到茎基部的距离 Measure the distance from the top of the longest leaf to the base of the stem with a ruler
2	根长RL (cm)	用直尺测量籽粒节点到主根根尖的距离 Measure the distance from the grain node to the root tip of the main root using a ruler
3	苗鲜重SFW (g)	用分析天平称量籽粒节点以上整个株苗的重量 Weigh the entire seedling above the grain node using an analytical balance
4	根鲜重RFW (g)	用分析天平称量籽粒节点以下整个根部的重量 Weigh the entire root below the grain node using an analytical balance
5	苗干重SDW (g)	测完鲜重的株苗于烘箱烘干，用分析天平称量干重 After measuring the fresh weight of the seedlings, dry them in an oven and weigh the dry weight using an analytical balance
6	根干重RDW (g)	测完鲜重的根部于烘箱烘干，用分析天平称量干重 After measuring the fresh weight of the roots, dry them in an oven and weigh the dry weight using an analytical balance
7	根冠比鲜重RSFW	根鲜重与苗鲜重的比值 Ratio of root fresh weight to seedling fresh weight
8	根冠比干重RSDW	根干重与苗干重的比值 Ratio of root dry weight to seedling dry weight

性状 Traits	最小值 Min	中位数 Median	最大值 Max	平均数 Mean	标准差 SD	偏度 Skew	峰度 Kurt	变异系数 CV (%)
苗高SH (cm)	0.340	0.798	1.411	0.794	0.144	0.350	1.202	18.17
根长RL (cm)	0.382	0.763	1.454	0.785	0.194	0.572	0.452	24.73
苗鲜重SFW (g)	0.096	0.536	1.581	0.565	0.211	0.819	1.742	37.36
根鲜重RFW (g)	0.102	0.521	1.573	0.554	0.264	0.882	1.035	47.75
苗干重SDW (g)	0.102	0.790	1.768	0.802	0.217	0.512	2.373	26.99
根干重RDW (g)	0.093	0.632	1.398	0.638	0.245	0.488	-0.053	38.43
根冠比鲜重RSFW	0.273	0.927	3.716	0.978	0.576	1.899	4.494	54.52
根冠比干重RSDW	0.117	0.753	3.740	0.841	0.404	2.607	12.482	48.04

指标 <BOLD>T</BOLD>raits	主成分Principal component
指标 <BOLD>T</BOLD>raits	PC1	PC2
苗高SH	0.813	-0.265
根长RL	0.654	0.094
苗鲜重SFW	0.686	-0.595
根鲜重RFW	0.935	0.101
苗干重SDW	0.662	-0.609
根干重RDW	0.869	0.266
根冠比鲜重RSFW	0.441	0.728
根冠比干重RSDW	0.420	0.759
特征值Eigen value	3.998	1.992
贡献率Contribution (%)	49.976	24.901
累计贡献率 Cumulative contribution (%)	49.976	74.877

多元回归方程 Multiple regression equation	相关系数 r	判定系数 R²	F值 F value	P值 P value
Y=0.433X4+0.106	0.908	0.825	776.288	≤0.001
Y=0.357X4+0.203X2-0.005	0.948	0.900	734.972	≤0.001
Y=0.211X4+0.194X2+0.184X6-0.037	0.971	0.943	899.738	≤0.001
Y=0.127X4+0.157X2+0.193X6+0.232X1-0.146	0.991	0.983	2345.029	≤0.001
Y=0.097X4+0.171X2+0.201X6+0.157X1+0.105X3-0.147	0.998	0.996	7601.871	≤0.001

粒用高粱幼苗期耐苏打盐碱综合评价与指标鉴选

Comprehensive Evaluation for Soda Salinity and Alkalinity in Sorghum Seedling Stage and Selection of Indicators

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 49

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	唐桂梅, 李卫东, 周宇霞, 孔佑涵, 肖晓玲, 彭颖姝, 张力, 符红艳, 刘洋, 黄国林. 基于表型性状分析蕙兰种质资源遗传多样性[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(2): 339-354.
[2]	李培松, 陆永迪, 郭郁, 张启鹏, 刘韬奋, 王天合, 杨明凤, 向导, 田景山, 张旺锋. 基于棉花公证检验数据的新疆原棉品质区域分布规律[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(1): 58-74.
[3]	周全, 路秋梅, 赵张晨, 武宸冉, 符笑歌, 赵玉娇, 韩勇, 蔺怀龙, 陈微林, 牟丽明, 李兴茂, 王长海, 胡银岗, 陈亮. 244份春小麦苗期抗旱性的鉴定[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(9): 1646-1657.
[4]	郭磊, 黄晨艳, 宋宏峰, 沈志军, 张斌斌, 马瑞娟, 孙朦, 何鑫, 俞明亮. 桃苗圃适用除草剂的筛选、混配与安全性评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(9): 1734-1747.
[5]	吴玉珍, 黄龙雨, 周大云, 黄义文, 付守阳, 彭军, 匡猛. 中国棉花审定品种SSR指纹库的构建与综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(8): 1430-1443.
[6]	卫乃翠, 陶金博, 苑名杨, 张彧, 开梦想, 乔玲, 武棒棒, 郝宇琼, 郑兴卫, 王娟玲, 赵佳佳, 郑军. 山西小麦苗期耐低磷特性及遗传分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(5): 831-845.
[7]	王语, 张渝鹏, 朱冠亚, 廖航烯, 侯文峰, 高强, 王寅. 局部供氮对干旱胁迫下玉米苗期生长发育和水氮利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(5): 919-934.
[8]	韩立杰, 才宏伟. 高粱遗传转化研究进展[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(3): 454-468.
[9]	潘静, 孟志浩, 王森, 王海波, 何平, 常源升, 郑文燕, 李林光, 王琛, 王平, 何晓文. 苹果‘金冠’和‘长富2号’正反交F₁代果实品质性状多样性及综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(24): 4945-4963.
[10]	戎亚思, 李丰, 张鹏钰, 王东勇, 苏小雨, 田媛, 高桐梅. 基于主成分-聚类分析芝麻盛花期耐高温评价及品种筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(20): 3957-3973.
[11]	王小军, 王金兰, 琚泽亮, 梁国玲, 贾志锋, 刘文辉, 马祥, 马金秀, 李文. 环青海湖地区不同饲用燕麦品种生产性能和营养品质综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(19): 3730-3742.
[12]	周罕觅, 马林爽, 孙旗立, 陈佳庚, 李纪琛, 苏裕民, 陈诚, 吴奇. 基于多目标综合评价的苹果水氮综合调控[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(18): 3654-3670.
[13]	李玉姗, 肖菁, 马越, 田超, 赵连佳, 王帆, 宋羽, 蒋程瑶. 169份番茄种质资源表型性状遗传多样性分析及综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(18): 3671-3683.
[14]	翟彩娇, 葛礼姣, 程玉静, 仇亮, 王小秋, 刘水东. 基于表型性状与SSR标记的冬瓜、节瓜种质资源遗传多样性分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(17): 3440-3457.
[15]	杨文辉, 罗灏程, 董二伟, 王劲松, 王媛, 刘秋霞, 黄晓磊, 焦晓燕. 长期不同施肥和深翻对玉米高粱轮作体系作物钾利用及土壤钾形态的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2024, 57(12): 2390-2403.