不同苹果砧木对持续低磷的响应及适应性评价

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.13.010

中国农业科学 ›› 2022, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (13): 2598-2612.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.13.010

不同苹果砧木对持续低磷的响应及适应性评价

解斌¹(),安秀红^1,²,陈艳辉¹(),程存刚¹(),康国栋¹,周江涛¹,赵德英¹,李壮¹,张艳珍¹,杨安¹

¹中国农业科学院果树研究所,辽宁兴城 125100
²河北农业大学/国家北方山区农业工程技术研究中心/河北省山区研究所,河北保定 071001

收稿日期:2021-10-09 接受日期:2021-12-31 出版日期:2022-07-01 发布日期:2022-07-08
通讯作者: 陈艳辉,程存刚
作者简介:解斌,E-mail： sxauxiebin@163.com。
基金资助:
中国农业科学院科技创新工程(CAAS-ASTIP);国家现代苹果产业技术体系(CARS-27);国家重点研发计划(2016YFD0201100);河北省高等学校科学研究项目(QN2020231)

Response and Adaptability Evaluation of Different Apple Rootstocks to Continuous Phosphorus Deficiency

XIE Bin¹(),AN XiuHong^1,²,CHEN YanHui¹(),CHENG CunGang¹(),KANG GuoDong¹,ZHOU JiangTao¹,ZHAO DeYing¹,LI Zhuang¹,ZHANG YanZhen¹,YANG An¹

¹Research Institute of Pomology, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Xingcheng 125100, Liaoning
²Hebei Agricultural University/National Engineering Research Center for Agriculture in Northern Mountainous Areas/Mountainous Areas Research Institute of Hebei Province, Baoding 071001, Hebei

Received:2021-10-09 Accepted:2021-12-31 Online:2022-07-01 Published:2022-07-08
Contact: YanHui CHEN,CunGang CHENG

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究7种苹果砧木幼苗对低磷胁迫的响应特征,评价不同砧木的低磷适应性,为耐低磷苹果砧木的选用及磷高效利用生理机制的研究提供理论依据。【方法】以生产中常用的5种苹果矮化砧木（‘T337’‘Nic29’‘Pajam2’‘B9’‘71-3-150’）、半矮化砧木‘青砧2号’（Qingzhen 2）和乔化砧‘山定子’（Malus baccata (L.) Borkh.）为材料,通过盆栽沙培试验的方法,研究各砧木在正常供磷和低磷条件下树体生长、光合作用、叶片形态及根系构型、生物量积累、磷吸收利用及转运分配的差异。【结果】低磷条件下,‘T337’‘Nic29’‘Pajam2’和‘山定子’的地上部生长和植株生物量积累显著下降,‘山定子’和‘青砧2号’的平均叶面积显著降低,其中‘山定子’的叶片SPAD值与正常供磷相比下降了9.47%。与对照相比,低磷条件下‘B9’的平均叶面积、叶片长度和叶片宽度均显著升高,‘71-3-150’和‘青砧2号’的叶片SPAD值显著提高,‘B9’‘71-3-150’‘Nic29’和‘青砧2号’的F₀显著升高,F_v/F_m显著降低,‘71-3-150’下降最明显。‘T337’‘Nic29’‘山定子’和‘青砧2号’在低磷条件下根系生长均受到明显抑制,根系总表面积、总根长显著降低,其中‘T337’降幅最大;‘B9’和‘71-3-150’的根系总表面积和根总体积均显著增加,植株根冠比显著提高,其中‘71-3-150’根冠比增幅最大,是对照的1.54倍。低磷条件下,‘71-3-150’‘Nic29’‘Pajam2’‘山定子’和‘青砧2号’的磷利用效率和磷转运系数降低,‘71-3-150’‘Nic29’‘Pajam2’和‘山定子’的地上部磷累积量减少,而根系磷含量和累积量高于对照,‘71-3-150’的根系磷累积量增幅最大。采用最大方差法正交旋转得出与耐低磷性最相关的13个主成分因子,利用隶属函数对13个主成分因子进行综合评价,结合聚类分析可以将7种苹果砧木分为4种耐性类型：第Ⅰ类为耐性强的砧木（‘B9’和‘71-3-150’）,第Ⅱ类为耐性较强的砧木（‘T337’和‘青砧2号’）,第Ⅲ类为耐性较弱的砧木（‘Nic29’和‘Pajam2’）,第Ⅳ类为耐性最弱的砧木（‘山定子’）。【结论】低磷条件下,苹果砧木通过减少叶片光合作用的物质消耗,增加植株根系磷累积量,促进根系发育,提高植株根冠比,以适应低磷环境;不同砧木的适应能力存在显著差异。

关键词: 苹果砧木, 耐低磷, 根系构型, 养分吸收, 综合评价

Abstract:

【Objective】The aim of this study was to explore the response characteristics of seven apple rootstock seedlings to low phosphorus stress, and to evaluate the low phosphorus adaptability of different rootstocks, so as to provide the theoretical basis for the selection of low phosphorus-tolerant apple rootstocks and the study of the physiological mechanism of efficient phosphorus utilization.【Method】Five kinds of apple dwarf rootstocks (T337, Nic29, Pajam2, B9 and 71-3-150), a semi-dwarf rootstock (Qingzhen2), and a vigorous rootstock (Malus baccata (L.) Borkh.), which were commonly used in the production of apple, were used as materials. Through the potted sand culture test method, the differences in tree growth, photosynthesis, leaf morphology and root architecture, biomass accumulation, phosphorus absorption and utilization, transportation and distribution of each rootstock under normal phosphorus (NP) and low phosphorus (LP) supply conditions were studied.【Result】Under LP treatment, the shoot growth and plant biomass accumulation of T337, Nic29, Pajam2, and M. baccata (L.) Borkh. were significantly decreased, the average leaf area of M. baccata (L.) Borkh. and Qingzhen2 were decreased notably, and the leaf SPAD value of M. baccata (L.) Borkh. was 9.47% lower than that under NP treatment. Compared with the control, under the condition of LP, the average leaf area, leaf length and leaf width of B9 were significantly increased, while the leaf SPAD values of 71-3-150 and Qingzhen2 were significantly increased; the F₀ values of B9, 71-3-150, Nic29 and Qingzhen2 were significantly increased, while the F_v/F_m values were significantly decreased, and the most obvious decrease was 71-3-150. Under LP condition, the root growth of T337, Nic29, M. baccata (L.) Borkh. and Qingzhen2 were all significantly inhibited, and the total root surface area and total root length were significantly reduced, among which T337 decreased more; the total root surface area and total root volume of B9 and 71-3-150 were significantly increased, while the ratio of root/shoot of B9 and 71-3-150 was significantly increased, and the ratio of root/shoot of 71-3-150 was 1.54 times of the control. Under LP condition, the phosphorus use efficiency and phosphorus transport coefficient of 71-3-150, Nic29, Pajam2, M. baccata (L.) Borkh. and Qingzhen2 decreased, the phosphorus accumulation in shoot of 71-3-150, Nic29, Pajam2 and M. baccata (L.) Borkh. reduced, while the phosphorus content and accumulation in root were higher than those under control, and the root P accumulation of 71-3-150 increased the most. The 13 principal component factors most related to LP tolerance were orthogonally rotated by using the Varimax rotation method, and these factors were comprehensively evaluated by membership function. Combined with cluster analysis, these 7 apple rootstocks could be divided into four tolerance types: Class I was the strongest tolerant rootstock (B9 and 71-3-150), Class II was the strong tolerant rootstock (T337 and Qingzhen2), Class III was the less tolerant rootstock (Nic29 and Pajam2), and class IV was the weakest tolerant rootstock. 【Conclusion】 Under LP condition, the apple rootstocks could adapt to the LP environment by reducing the material consumption of leaf photosynthesis, increasing the phosphorus accumulation in root system, promoting root development, and increasing the ratio of root/shoot. There were significant differences in the adaptability of different rootstocks.

Key words: apple rootstocks, phosphorus deficiency tolerance, root architecture, nutrient absorption, comprehensive evolution

解斌,安秀红,陈艳辉,程存刚,康国栋,周江涛,赵德英,李壮,张艳珍,杨安. 不同苹果砧木对持续低磷的响应及适应性评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(13): 2598-2612.

XIE Bin,AN XiuHong,CHEN YanHui,CHENG CunGang,KANG GuoDong,ZHOU JiangTao,ZHAO DeYing,LI Zhuang,ZHANG YanZhen,YANG An. Response and Adaptability Evaluation of Different Apple Rootstocks to Continuous Phosphorus Deficiency[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2022, 55(13): 2598-2612.

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.0578-1752.2022.13.010

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2022/V55/I13/2598

图/表 13

表1

表2

图1

表3

图2

图3

表4

表5

图4

表6

表7

图5

表8

参考文献 46

[1]	MAI N T P, NGUYEN H N, NGUYEN V H, DUONG V L, NGUYEN P, MAI D C, LEBRUN M, TO H T M. Investigating the genetic variability of 12 vietnamese rice accessions (Oryza sativa L.) in response to phosphorus deficiency. Journal of Biotechnology, 2018, 16(4): 621.
[2]	PLAXTON W C, TRAN H T. Metabolic adaptations of phosphate- starved plants. Plant Physiology, 2011, 156(3): 1006-1015. doi: 10.1104/pp.111.175281. doi: 10.1104/pp.111.175281
[3]	FU X Z, XING F, WANG N Q, PENG L Z, CHUN C P, CAO L, LING L L, JIANG C L. Exogenous spermine pretreatment confers tolerance to combined high-temperature and drought stress in vitro in trifoliate orange seedlings via modulation of antioxidative capacity and expression of stress-related genes. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment, 2014, 28(2): 192-198. doi: 10.1080/13102818.2014.909152. doi: 10.1080/13102818.2014.909152
[4]	HAM B K, CHEN J Y, YAN Y, LUCAS W J. Insights into plant phosphate sensing and signaling. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 2018, 49: 1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2017.07.005. doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2017.07.005
[5]	ZHU Q, WANG H, SHAN Y Z, MA H Y, WANG H Y, XIE F T, AO X. Physiological response of phosphorus-efficient and inefficient soybean genotypes under phosphorus-deficiency. Russian Journal of Plant Physiology, 2020, 67(1): 175-184. doi: 10.1134/S1021443720010276
[6]	张强, 李兴亮, 李民吉, 周贝贝, 孙健, 魏钦平. ‘富士’苹果品质与果实矿质元素含量的关联性分析. 果树学报, 2016, 33(11): 1388-1395. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20160057. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20160057
	ZHANG Q, LI X L, LI M J, ZHOU B B, SUN J, WEI Q P. The correlation analysis between quality characteristics and fruit mineral element contents in ‘Fuji’ apples. Journal of Fruit Science, 2016, 33(11): 1388-1395. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20160057. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20160057
[7]	赵旸, 李卓, 刘明, 肖潇, 王重阳, 孙丹峰, 伦飞. 中国苹果主产区2006—2016年磷元素收支及其环境风险变化. 农业环境科学学报, 2019, 38(12): 2779-2787. doi: 10.11654/jaes.2019-1078. doi: 10.11654/jaes.2019-1078
	ZHAO Y, LI Z, LIU M, XIAO X, WANG C Y, SUN D F, LUN F. Phosphorus budgets and their associated environmental risks in the main apple orchard areas in China from 2006 to 2016. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 2019, 38(12): 2779-2787. doi: 10.11654/jaes.2019-1078. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11654/jaes.2019-1078
[8]	YAN Z J, CHEN S, LI J L, ALVA A, CHEN Q. Manure and nitrogen application enhances soil phosphorus mobility in calcareous soil in greenhouses. Journal of Environmental Management, 2016, 181: 26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.081
[9]	GÜLÜT K Y, ÖZDEMIR O. Phosphorus tolerance levels of different chickpea genotypes. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 2021, 28(9): 5386-5390. doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.05.066
[10]	季萌萌, 彭玲, 文炤, 姜翰, 葛顺峰, 姜远茂. 供磷水平对苹果砧木氮、磷吸收和利用特性的影响. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2015, 21(4): 1016-1021. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2015.0421. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2015.0421
	JI M M, PENG L, WEN Z, JIANG H, GE S F, JIANG Y M. Nitrogen and phosphorus absorption and utilization characteristics of apple rootstocks under different phosphorus levels. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 2015, 21(4): 1016-1021. doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2015.0421. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11674/zwyf.2015.0421
[11]	ZOU X H, WU P F, CHEN N L, WANG P, MA X Q. Chinese fir root response to spatial and temporal heterogeneity of phosphorus availability in the soil. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 2015, 45(4): 402-410. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2014-0384
[12]	董然然, 安贵阳, 赵政阳, 梅立新, 李敏敏. 不同树形矮化自根砧苹果的冠内光照及其生长和产量比较. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(9): 1867-1873.
	DONG R R, AN G Y, ZHAO Z Y, MEI L X, LI M M. Comparison of light interception ability and growth and yield of different apple tree shapes on dwarf rootstock. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2013, 46(9): 1867-1873. (in Chinese)
[13]	马宝焜, 徐继忠, 孙建设. 关于我国苹果矮砧密植栽培的思考. 果树学报, 2010, 27(1): 105-109. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.2010.01.020. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.2010.01.020
	MA B K, XU J Z, SUN J S. Consideration for high density planting with dwarf rootstocks in apple in China. Journal of Fruit Science, 2010, 27(1): 105-109. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.2010.01.020. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.2010.01.020
[14]	王健强, 李佳, 苏怡, 郝奕樊, 左家乐, 石濛, 李中勇, 张学英, 徐继忠.7种苹果矮化砧木的抗旱性评价. 中国果树, 2019(6): 38-41. doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2019.06.008. doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2019.06.008
	WANG J Q, LI J, SU Y, HAO Y F, ZUO J L, SHI M, LI Z Y, ZHANG X Y, XU J Z. Evaluation analysis of different apple dwarfing stocks on drought resistance. China Fruits, 2019(6): 38-41. doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2019.06.008. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2019.06.008
[15]	张德, 张瑞, 张夏燚, 吴玉霞, 赵婷, 张仲兴, 王双成, 王延秀. 不同抗盐性苹果砧木对盐胁迫的生理响应. 干旱地区农业研究, 2021, 39(4): 86-94. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2021.04.11. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2021.04.11
	ZHANG D, ZHANG R, ZHANG X Y, WU Y X, ZHAO T, ZHANG Z X, WANG S C, WANG Y X. Physiological response of different salt-tolerant apple rootstocks to salt stress. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2021, 39(4): 86-94. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2021.04.11. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2021.04.11
[16]	王海波, 程来亮, 常源升, 孙清荣, 陶吉寒, 李林光. 苹果矮化砧‘71-3-150’对冷胁迫的生理与转录组响应. 园艺学报, 2016, 43(8): 1437-1451. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2016-0031. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2016-0031
	WANG H B, CHENG L L, CHANG Y S, SUN Q R, TAO J H, LI L G. Physiological and transcriptome response of apple dwarfing rootstock to cold stress and cold-resistant genes screening. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2016, 43(8): 1437-1451. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2016-0031. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2016-0031
[17]	慈晓彤, 沈兵琪, 王大玮, 王玉昌, 何承忠, 蔡年辉, 段安安. 苹果矮化砧木‘T337’和‘JM7’抗白粉病基因的筛选及分析. 分子植物育种, 2020, 18(19): 6280-6289. doi: 10.13271/j.mpb.018.006280. doi: 10.13271/j.mpb.018.006280
	CI X T, SHEN B Q, WANG D W, WANG Y C, HE C Z, CAI N H, DUAN A N. Screening and analysis of resistant genes to apple dwarf rootstock ‘T337’ and ‘JM7’ powdery mildew. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2020, 18(19): 6280-6289. doi: 10.13271/j.mpb.018.006280. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13271/j.mpb.018.006280
[18]	林冰冰, 韩振海, 王忆, 吴婷, 张新忠. 苹果实生砧木种质资源耐缺铁和耐盐碱性评价. 中国农业大学学报, 2016, 21(1): 48-58. doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2016.01.06. doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2016.01.06
	LIN B B, HAN Z H, WANG Y, WU T, ZHANG X Z. Evaluation onthe tolerance of apple seedling rootstock resources to iron- deficiency, salinity and alkalinity. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2016, 21(1): 48-58. doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2016.01.06. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2016.01.06
[19]	范晓丹, 刘飞, 王衍安, 付春霞, 闫玉静, 沙广利, 束怀瑞. 不同苹果砧木对缺锌胁迫的耐性评价. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(10): 3045-3052. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.20150921.002. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.20150921.002
	FAN X D, LIU F, WANG Y N, FU C X, YAN Y J, SHA G L, SHU H R. Evaluation of zinc deficiency tolerance in different kinds of apple rootstocks. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2015, 26(10): 3045-3052. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.20150921.002. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.20150921.002
[20]	栗振义, 张绮芯, 仝宗永, 李跃, 徐洪雨, 万修福, 毕舒贻, 曹婧, 何峰, 万里强, 李向林. 不同紫花苜蓿品种对低磷环境的形态与生理响应分析. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(20): 3898-3907. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.20.006. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.20.006
	LI Z Y, ZHANG Q X, TONG Z Y, LI Y, XU H Y, WAN X F, BI S Y, CAO J, HE F, WAN L Q, LI X L. Analysis of morphological and physiological responses to low pi stress in different alfalfas. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(20): 3898-3907. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.20.006. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.20.006
[21]	杨楚童, 邹显花, 孙雪莲, 胡亚楠, 吴鹏飞, 马祥庆. 不同磷利用效率杉木在低磷胁迫下的形态及养分分配差异. 西北林学院学报, 2021, 36(4): 94-102. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2021.04.14. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2021.04.14
	YANG C T, ZOU X H, SUN X L, HU Y N, WU P F, MA X Q. Differences in morphology and nutrient distribution of Chinese fir with different phosphorus use efficiency under low phosphorus stress. Journal of Northwest Forestry University, 2021, 36(4): 94-102. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2021.04.14. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7461.2021.04.14
[22]	葛顺峰, 季萌萌, 许海港, 郝文强, 魏绍冲, 姜远茂. 土壤pH对富士苹果生长及碳氮利用特性的影响. 园艺学报, 2013, 40(10): 1969-1975. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2013.10.007. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2013.10.007
	GE S F, JI M M, XU H G, HAO W Q, WEI S C, JIANG Y M. Effects of soil pH on growth, distribution and utilization of carbon and nitrogen of Malus × domestica ‘red fuji’. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2013, 40(10): 1969-1975. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2013.10.007. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2013.10.007
[23]	张强, 李民吉, 周贝贝, 李兴亮, 孙健, 张军科, 魏钦平. 两大优势产区‘富士’苹果园土壤养分与果实品质关系的多变量分析. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(1): 105-114. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201701.030. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201701.030
	ZHANG Q, LI M J, ZHOU B B, LI X L, SUN J, ZHANG J K, WEI Q P. Multivariate analysis of relationship between soil nutrient factors and fruit quality characteristic of ‘Fuji’ apple in two dominant production regions of China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2017, 28(1): 105-114. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201701.030. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201701.030
[24]	蔡泽宇, 张建锋, 陈光才, 张涵丹, 孙士咏, 李晓刚, 秦光华. 柳树新无性系(A42)对富营养水体不同浓度磷的吸收和净化机制. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(10): 3416-3424. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201810.037. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201810.037
	CAI Z Y, ZHANG J F, CHEN G C, ZHANG H D, SUN S Y, LI X G, QIN G H. P absorption and removal mechanism of new Salix clone(A42) on eutrophic water with different P concentrations. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2018, 29(10): 3416-3424. doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201810.037. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201810.037
[25]	张建伟, 石孝均, 徐文静, 张学良, 刘瑞, 魏勇, 赵秋, 张宇亭. 果园绿肥对土壤磷组分及磷素有效性的影响. 水土保持学报, 2021, 35(6): 336-342. doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.045. doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.045
	ZHANG J W, SHI X J, XU W J, ZHANG X L, LIU R, WEI Y, ZHAO Q, ZHANG Y T. Effects of green manure on soil phosphorus fractions and availability in orchard. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021, 35(6): 336-342. doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.045. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13870/j.cnki.stbcxb.2021.06.045
[26]	ZOU X H, WEI D, WU P F, ZHANG Y, HU Y N, CHEN S T, MA X Q. Strategies of organic acid production and exudation in response to low-phosphorus stress in Chinese fir genotypes differing in phosphorus-use efficiencies. Trees, 2018, 32(3): 897-912. doi: 10.1007/s00468-018-1683-2. doi: 10.1007/s00468-018-1683-2
[27]	SU B Q, WANG L F, SHANGGUAN Z P. Morphological and physiological responses and plasticity in Robinia pseudoacacia to the coupling of water, nitrogen and phosphorus. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, 2021, 184(2): 271-281. doi: 10.1002/jpln.202000465
[28]	钟思荣, 陈仁霄, 陶瑶, 龚丝雨, 何宽信, 张启明, 张世川, 刘齐元. 耐低氮烟草基因型的筛选及其氮效率类型. 作物学报, 2017, 43(7): 993-1002. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00993. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00993
	ZHONG S R, CHEN R X, TAO Y, GONG S Y, HE K X, ZHANG Q M, ZHANG S C, LIU Q Y. Screening of tobacco genotypes tolerant to low-nitrogen and their nitrogen efficiency types. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2017, 43(7): 993-1002. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00993. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.00993
[29]	陈凌, 王君杰, 王海岗, 曹晓宁, 刘思辰, 田翔, 秦慧彬, 乔治军. 耐低氮糜子品种的筛选及农艺性状的综合评价. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(16): 3214-3224. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.16.002. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.16.002
	CHEN L, WANG J J, WANG H G, CAO X N, LIU S C, TIAN X, QIN H B, QIAO Z J. Screening of broomcorn millet varieties tolerant to low nitrogen stress and the comprehensive evaluation of their agronomic traits. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(16): 3214-3224. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.16.002. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2020.16.002
[30]	罗燕, 樊卫国. 不同施磷水平下4种柑橘砧木的根际土壤有机酸、微生物及酶活性. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(5): 955-967. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.05.012. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.05.012
	LUO Y, FAN W G. Organic acid content, microbial quantity and enzyme activity in rhizosphere soil of four Citrus rootstocks under different phosphorus levels. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(5): 955-967. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.05.012. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.05.012
[31]	束怀瑞. 果树栽培理论与实践. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2009.
	SHU H R. Theory and Practice of Fruit Tree Cultivation. Beijing: Chinese Agriculture Press, 2009. (in Chinese)
[32]	杨洪强, 束怀瑞. 苹果根系研究. 北京: 科学出版社, 2007.
	YANG H Q, SHU H R. Studies on Apple Roots. Beijing: Science Press, 2007. (in Chinese)
[33]	HE H H, PENG Q, WANG X, FAN C B, PANG J Y, LAMBERS H, ZHANG X C. Growth, morphological and physiological responses of alfalfa (Medicago sativa) to phosphorus supply in two alkaline soils. Plant and Soil, 2017, 416(1/2): 565-584. doi: 10.1007/s11104-017-3242-9. doi: 10.1007/s11104-017-3242-9
[34]	孙淼, 李鹏程, 郑苍松, 刘帅, 刘爱忠, 韩慧敏, 刘敬然, 董合林. 低磷胁迫对不同基因型棉花苗期根系形态及生理特性的影响. 棉花学报, 2018, 30(1): 45-52. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.smdhl.20180103. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.smdhl.20180103
	SUN M, LI P C, ZHENG C S, LIU S, LIU A Z, HAN H M, LIU J R, DONG H L. Effects of low phosphorus stress on root morphology and physiological characteristics of different cotton genotypes at the seedling stage. Cotton Science, 2018, 30(1): 45-52. doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.smdhl.20180103. (in Chinese) doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.smdhl.20180103
[35]	唐荣莉, 王春萍, 王红娟, 吴红, 韩垚, 林清, 雷开荣. 低磷胁迫对辣椒苗期生长和生理特性的影响. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(9): 1933-1942. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.9.009. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.9.009
	TANG R L, WANG C P, WANG H J, WU H, HAN Y, LIN Q, LEI K R. Effects of low phosphorus stress on growth and physiological characteristics of pepper at seedling stage. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 33(9): 1933-1942. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.9.009. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.9.009
[36]	王枫, 王玉凤, 许晓萱, 李嘉欣, 丁冬, 贺琳, 李佐同, 徐晶宇. 低磷胁迫下玉米幼苗生理响应及相关基因表达研究. 玉米科学, 2021, 29(1): 77-84. doi: 10.13597/j.cnki.maize.science.20210112. doi: 10.13597/j.cnki.maize.science.20210112
	WANG F, WANG Y F, XU X X, LI J X, DING D, HE L, LI Z T, XU J Y. Physiological response and related genes expression of maize seedlings under low phosphorus stress. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2021, 29(1): 77-84. doi: 10.13597/j.cnki.maize.science.20210112. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13597/j.cnki.maize.science.20210112
[37]	SIEDLISKA A, BARANOWSKI P, PASTUSZKA-WOŹNIAK J, ZUBIK M, KRZYSZCZAK J. Identification of plant leaf phosphorus content at different growth stages based on hyperspectral reflectance. BMC Plant Biology, 2021, 21(1): 28. doi: 10.1186/s12870-020-02807-4. doi: 10.1186/s12870-020-02807-4
[38]	罗佳, 候银莹, 陈波浪. 低磷胁迫对不同磷效率棉花干物质及养分吸收的影响. 西南农业学报, 2017, 30(1): 155-161. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2017.1.027. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2017.1.027
	LUO J, HOU Y Y, CHEN B L. Effect of phosphorus stress on dry matter accumulation and nutrient absorption of cotton genotypes with different phosphorus efficiency. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 30(1): 155-161. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2017.1.027. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2017.1.027
[39]	LIU D. Root developmental responses to phosphorus nutrition. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 2021, 63(6): 1065-1090. doi: 10.1111/jipb.13090. doi: 10.1111/jipb.13090
[40]	臧成凤, 樊卫国, 潘学军. 供磷水平对铁核桃实生苗生长、形态特征及叶片营养元素含量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(2): 319-330.
	ZANG C F, FAN W G, PAN X J. Effect of phosphorus levels on growth, morphological characteristics and leaf element contents of Juglans sigillata dode seedlings. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(2): 319-330. (in Chinese)
[41]	高艳敏, 栾本荣, 辛贵金, 杨成桓, 高锐, 杜文章, 郭济民, 高永泰. 果树施用氯化钾的效应. 北方果树, 1995(3): 6-8. doi: 10.16376/j.cnki.bfgs.1995.03.002. doi: 10.16376/j.cnki.bfgs.1995.03.002
	GAO Y M, LUAN B R, XIN G J, YANG C H, GAO R, DU W Z, GUO J M, GAO Y T. Effect of potassium chloride application to fruit trees. Northern Fruits, 1995(3): 6-8. doi: 10.16376/j.cnki.bfgs.1995.03.002. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16376/j.cnki.bfgs.1995.03.002
[42]	王兴梅, 杨莉莉, 高义民, 同延安. 不同含氯肥料用量对黄土区苹果产量、品质及氯素分布的影响. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 47(3): 77-84. doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2019.03.011. doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2019.03.011
	WANG X M, YANG L L, GAO Y M, TONG Y N. Effects of chlorine-containing fertilizer dosage on yield, quality of apple and Cl-distribution in Loess Area. Journal of Northwest A & F University (Natural Science Edition), 2019, 47(3): 77-84. doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2019.03.011. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13207/j.cnki.jnwafu.2019.03.011
[43]	张晨光, 赵德英, 袁继存, 徐锴, 程存刚, 闫帅. 矮化自根砧T337对苹果幼树N、P、K累积量和内源激素含量的影响. 植物生理学报, 2016, 52(12): 1950-1958. doi: 10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.2016.0344. doi: 10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.2016.0344
	ZHANG C G, ZHAO D Y, YUAN J C, XU K, CHENG C G, YAN S. Effect of T337 dwarf root stock on N, P, K accumulation and endogenous hormones contents of young apple tree. Plant Physiology Journal, 2016, 52(12): 1950-1958. doi: 10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.2016.0344. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13592/j.cnki.ppj.2016.0344
[44]	郭江云, 张秀芝, 任洪春, 王永章, 原永兵, 刘成连. 矮化自根砧苹果叶片矿质营养周年变化研究. 中国果树, 2013(6): 31-34. doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2013.06.017. doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2013.06.017
	GUO J Y, ZHANG X Z, REN H C, WANG Y Z, YUAN Y B, LIU C L. Annual variation of mineral nutrition in leaves of dwarf self-rooted rootstock apples. China Fruits, 2013(6): 31-34. doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2013.06.017. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16626/j.cnki.issn1000-8047.2013.06.017
[45]	袁继存, 赵德英, 徐锴, 闫帅, 程存刚. 不同砧穗组合对长富2号苹果果实品质的影响初报. 中国南方果树, 2018, 47(6): 107-109, 114. doi: 10.13938/j.issn.1007-1431.20180401. doi: 10.13938/j.issn.1007-1431.20180401
	YUAN J C, ZHAO D Y, XU K, YAN S, CHENG C G. Effects of different scion-rootstock combination on fruit qualities of ‘Nagafu2’ apple. South China Fruits, 2018, 47(6): 107-109, 114. doi: 10.13938/j.issn.1007-1431.20180401. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13938/j.issn.1007-1431.20180401
[46]	刘兴禄, 王红平, 孙文泰, 董铁, 牛军强, 马明. 5个砧木苹果枝条的抗寒性评价. 果树学报, 2021, 38(8): 1264-1274. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20200354. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20200354
	LIU X L, WANG H P, SUN W T, DONG T, NIU J Q, MA M. Cold resistance evaluation of the shoots of 5 apple rootstocks. Journal of Fruit Science, 2021, 38(8): 1264-1274. doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20200354. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20200354

砧木类型 Rootstock	株高生长速率 Growth rate of plant height			根冠比 Ratio of root/shoot
砧木类型 Rootstock	正常供磷 NP (cm·d^-1)	低磷处理 LP (cm·d^-1)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP	低磷处理 LP	相对值 Relative value
T337	6.29±0.07a	4.72±0.36b	0.75	0.15	0.13	0.89
B9	2.54±0.32b	6.22±0.30a	2.44	0.23	0.18	0.79
71-3-150	0.19±0.09a	0.42±0.05a	2.14	0.18	0.30	1.62
Nic29	8.13±0.92a	3.89±0.43b	0.48	0.16	0.16	0.99
Pajam2	3.63±0.37a	2.66±0.09a	0.73	0.22	0.25	1.15
山定子 M.baccata	3.71±0.16a	0.90±0.42b	0.24	0.78	0.78	1.01
青砧2号 Qingzhen2	0.54±0.13b	1.99±0.19a	3.66	0.74	0.93	1.26

砧木类型 Rootstock	叶片 Leaf			茎干Stem			根系Root
砧木类型 Rootstock	正常供磷 NP (g/plant)	低磷处理 LP (g/plant)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (g/plant)	低磷处理 LP (g/plant)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (g/plant)	低磷处理 LP (g/plant)	相对值 Relative value
T337	39.960± 4.019a	38.917± 1.191a	0.97	53.877± 1.879b	73.420± 1.286a	1.36	40.243± 0.740a	37.583± 0.229b	0.93
B9	32.630± 1.912a	41.747± 2.591a	1.28	45.467± 1.711b	64.787± 1.268a	1.42	44.620± 1.732a	57.207± 0.780b	1.28
71-3-150	14.170± 1.586a	15.087± 4.860a	1.06	41.783± 4.607a	56.157± 6.018a	1.34	17.077± 1.376b	44.983± 5.030a	2.63
Nic29	45.353± 3.306a	37.393± 3.616a	0.82	73.413± 0.739a	56.293± 2.096b	0.77	40.317± 5.955a	33.353± 2.728a	0.75
Pajam2	51.370± 2.095a	51.197± 2.590a	1.00	150.233± 25.531a	131.517± 7.192a	0.88	74.333± 9.841a	85.807± 3.559a	1.15
山定子 M.baccata	57.537± 6.249a	36.65± 2.753a	0.64	137.287± 8.743a	92.443± 8.116b	0.67	208.020± 20.051a	125.557± 3.401b	0.60
青砧2号 Qingzhen2	42.673± 3.649a	52.250± 1.250a	1.22	91.880± 7.762a	113.463± 2.541a	1.23	124.350± 17.898a	142.017± 11.874a	1.14

砧木类型 Rootstock	平均叶面积 Average leaf surface			叶片长度 Leaf length			叶片宽度 Leaf width
砧木类型 Rootstock	正常供磷 NP (cm²)	低磷处理 LP (cm²)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (cm²)	低磷处理 LP (cm²)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (cm²)	低磷处理 LP (cm²)	相对值 Relative value
T337	25.56±1.93a	30.62±1.01a	1.20	7.87±0.37a	8.33±0.17a	1.06	3.37±0.20a	3.63±0.04a	1.08
B9	23.50±0.46b	34.56±1.08a	1.47	6.71±0.17b	8.92±0.18a	1.33	3.44±0.07b	3.84±0.07a	1.12
71-3-150	18.16±1.74a	19.58±4.21a	1.08	6.35±0.39a	6.58±0.81a	1.04	2.83±0.11a	2.83±0.24a	1.00
Nic29	23.63±2.15a	21.71±2.05a	0.92	7.09±0.19a	6.89±0.40a	0.97	3.25±0.20a	3.11±0.11a	0.96
Pajam2	31.52±0.43a	25.24±1.23a	0.80	8.52±0.23a	7.76±0.21a	0.91	3.59±0.08a	3.21±0.11a	0.89
M.baccata	20.34±0.14a	12.03±0.37b	0.59	8.24±0.34a	6.67±0.02b	0.81	2.20±0.15a	2.10±0.16a	0.96
青砧2号 Qingzhen2	19.70±0.40a	14.26±0.13b	0.72	6.96±0.36a	5.54±0.06a	0.80	2.51±0.16a	2.62±0.07a	1.04

砧木类型 Rootstock	叶片Leaf			茎干Stem			根系Root
砧木类型 Rootstock	正常供磷 NP (mg·g^-1)	低磷处理 LP (mg·g^-1)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (mg·g^-1)	低磷处理 LP (mg·g^-1)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (mg·g^-1)	低磷处理 LP (mg·g^-1)	相对值 Relative value
T337	2.97±0.08a	3.05±0.05a	1.03	2.77±0.36a	2.35±0.03a	0.85	4.86±0.05b	6.39±0.05a	1.31
B9	3.06±0.21a	3.17±0.08a	1.04	2.75±0.05a	2.47±0.25a	0.90	5.37±0.23a	6.13±0.75a	1.14
71-3-150	4.15±0.07a	3.37±0.13a	0.88	2.57±0.10a	2.53±0.05a	1.00	7.80±1.18b	19.61±0.21a	2.51
Nic29	2.80±0.09a	2.85±0.03a	1.02	1.66±0.06a	1.85±0.05a	1.11	7.75±0.56a	7.96±0.42a	1.03
Pajam2	3.67±0.20a	3.54±0.13a	0.96	2.58±0.22a	0.76±0.07a	1.07	10.41±0.48a	12.12±0.49a	1.13
山定子M.baccata	3.17±0.07a	3.03±0.30a	0.96	2.31±0.04a	2.34±0.05a	1.01	9.28±0.70b	15.71±0.11a	1.69
青砧2号 Qingzhen2	3.17±0.07a	3.03±0.30a	0.96	2.72±0.06a	2.60±0.14a	0.95	5.50±0.19a	6.02±0.46a	1.09

砧木类型 Rootstock	叶片 Leaf			茎干 Stem			根系 Root
砧木类型 Rootstock	正常供磷 NP (mg)	低磷处理 LP (mg)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (mg)	低磷处理 LP (mg)	相对值 Relative value	正常供磷 NP (mg)	低磷处理 LP (mg)	相对值 Relative value
T337	44.63±5.04a	45.60±0.82a	1.02	74.02±10.68a	66.38±7.68a	0.90	31.53±0.43a	37.66±2.31a	1.19
B9	45.44±5.50a	47.55±6.98a	1.05	45.75±4.86a	60.33±7.20a	1.04	39.06±3.66a	39.01±3.22a	1.00
71-3-150	28.04±3.64a	26.10±5.39a	0.93	55.16±5.92a	72.23±8.91a	1.31	43.62±3.74b	194.55±19.81a	4.46
Nic29	54.98±5.28a	52.76±3.56a	0.96	48.47±3.57a	51.79±3.85a	1.07	65.87±12.81a	65.42±1.18a	0.99
Pajam2	82.32±7.91a	66.59±9.50a	0.81	174.36±20.23a	152.31±20.85a	0.87	154.47±10.87b	239.12±5.47a	1.56
山定子 M. baccata	82.13±9.47a	47.75±1.02b	0.58	169.20±5.68a	116.92±8.94b	0.69	704.68±65.82a	817.64±17.91a	1.16
青砧2号 Qingzhen2	60.11±4.98a	67.43±2.22a	1.12	128.96±15.29a	140.04±2.31a	1.09	271.49±45.08a	433.68±47.58a	1.60

不同苹果砧木对持续低磷的响应及适应性评价

Response and Adaptability Evaluation of Different Apple Rootstocks to Continuous Phosphorus Deficiency

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 13

参考文献 46

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

指标 Index	正常供磷 NP			低磷处理 LP
指标 Index	主成分1 PCP1	主成分2 PCP2	主成分3 PCP3	主成分1 PCP1	主成分2 PCP2	主成分3 PCP3
I₁	-0.321	0.151	0.787	0.881	-0.118	-0.208
I₂	0.936	-0.060	0.090	-0.714	0.298	-0.519
I₃	0.480	0.548	0.610	0.266	0.734	-0.397
I₄	0.577	0.768	0.065	-0.145	0.962	-0.125
I₅	0.948	0.198	0.230	-0.557	0.600	-0.491
I₆	0.494	0.274	0.684	-0.354	0.895	0.058
I₇	0.378	0.231	0.725	-0.451	0.815	-0.100
I₈	0.589	0.757	0.047	-0.401	0.889	-0.199
I₉	0.940	0.200	0.168	-0.639	0.649	-0.298
I₁₀	-0.252	0.886	-0.332	0.311	0.888	0.142
I₁₁	0.944	0.179	0.247	-0.426	0.846	-0.101
I₁₂	-0.454	0.819	0.220	0.960	-0.091	0.128
I₁₃	0.256	0.859	0.422	0.835	-0.006	0.020
I₁₄	-0.886	0.334	0.058	0.976	-0.114	0.156
I₁₅	-0.430	0.391	0.506	0.194	0.049	0.544
I₁₆	-0.381	0.257	-0.204	0.118	-0.201	0.888
I₁₇	-0.013	-0.052	0.106	0.106	0.236	-0.903
I₁₈	-0.017	0.221	-0.902	-0.018	0.258	0.685
I₁₉	-0.081	0.144	-0.283	0.046	0.639	0.121
I₂₀	0.317	0.663	-0.321	-0.636	-0.066	0.479
I₂₁	0.579	0.699	0.256	0.077	0.762	-0.242
I₂₂	0.650	0.729	-0.001	-0.374	0.896	-0.090
I₂₃	0.963	0.172	0.162	-0.807	0.325	-0.428
I₂₄	0.945	0.293	0.139	-0.774	0.447	-0.409
I₂₅	-0.920	-0.195	0.248	0.785	-0.312	-0.161
I₂₆	-0.853	-0.069	0.062	0.918	-0.303	-0.185
特征值 Eigenvalue	10.943	6.143	4.025	8.974	8.647	4.128
方差贡献率 Variance contribution rate	44.140	24.778	26.236	35.272	33.988	16.226
累计贡献率 Cumulative percentage	44.140	68.918	85.154	35.272	69.260	85.485

砧木类型 Rootstock	I₁	I₂	I₅	I₉	I₁₁	I₁₂	I₁₃	I₁₄	I₂₃	I₂₄	I₂₅	I₂₆	I	排名 Rank
T337	0.041	0.040	0.042	0.062	0.068	0.058	0.076	0.077	0.036	0.033	0.084	0.066	0.684	3
B9	0.066	0.034	0.050	0.072	0.084	0.084	0.084	0.084	0.034	0.045	0.082	0.084	0.803	1
71-3-150	0.061	0.084	0.084	0.074	0.062	0.056	0.057	0.057	0.084	0.084	0.034	0.034	0.770	2
Nic29	0.037	0.046	0.037	0.044	0.052	0.050	0.048	0.054	0.033	0.034	0.074	0.075	0.585	5
Pajam2	0.041	0.055	0.047	0.084	0.046	0.044	0.034	0.036	0.042	0.038	0.050	0.053	0.569	6
山定子M.baccata	0.034	0.047	0.034	0.034	0.034	0.035	0.048	0.034	0.036	0.035	0.043	0.054	0.465	7
Qingzhen 2	0.084	0.062	0.047	0.061	0.041	0.034	0.067	0.056	0.042	0.041	0.074	0.061	0.670	4

指标 Index	相关性系数 Correlation coefficient	指标 Index	相关性系数 Correlation coefficient
I₁	0.6617	I₁₄	0.8202
I₂	0.1567	I₁₅	0.4742
I₃	0.8378	I₁₆	0.4635
I₄	0.9353	I₁₇	-0.5016
I₅	0.6671	I₁₈	0.0297
I₆	0.3430	I₁₉	-0.5545
I₇	0.2450	I₂₀	0.2020
I₈	0.7520	I₂₁	0.7595
I₉	0.6052	I₂₂	0.7477
I₁₀	-0.2393	I₂₃	0.4114
I₁₁	0.8336	I₂₄	0.5821
I₁₂	0.7488	I₂₅	0.2995
I₁₃	0.7354	I₂₆	0.1335

[1]	李前,秦裕波,尹彩侠,孔丽丽,王蒙,侯云鹏,孙博,赵胤凯,徐晨,刘志全. 滴灌施肥模式对玉米产量、养分吸收及经济效益的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(8): 1604-1616.
[2]	王洋洋,刘万代,贺利,任德超,段剑钊,胡新,郭天财,王永华,冯伟. 基于多元统计分析的小麦低温冻害评价及水分效应差异研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(7): 1301-1318.
[3]	王秀秀,邢爱双,杨茹,何守朴,贾银华,潘兆娥,王立如,杜雄明,宋宪亮. 陆地棉种质资源表型性状综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(6): 1082-1094.
[4]	卞能飞, 孙东雷, 巩佳莉, 王幸, 邢兴华, 金夏红, 王晓军. 花生烘烤食用品质评价及指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(4): 641-652.
[5]	沈倩,张思平,刘瑞华,刘绍东,陈静,葛常伟,马慧娟,赵新华,杨国正,宋美珍,庞朝友. 棉花出苗期耐冷综合评价体系的构建及耐冷指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(22): 4342-4355.
[6]	胡馨, 张职亮, 张飞, 邓波, 房伟民. 大花型茶专用菊杂交后代株系的综合评价与筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(20): 4036-4051.
[7]	王劲松,董二伟,刘秋霞,武爱莲,王媛,王立革,焦晓燕. 行距和密度对籽粒饲用高粱产量和品质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(16): 3123-3133.
[8]	刘媛,袁亮,张水勤,赵秉强,李燕婷. 不同分子量聚天冬氨酸对小麦根系生长和养分吸收的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(13): 2526-2537.
[9]	徐晓,任根增,赵欣蕊,常金华,崔江慧. 中国高粱地方品种和育成品种穗部表型性状精准鉴定及综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(11): 2092-2108.
[10]	范文静,刘明,赵鹏,张强强,吴德祥,郭鹏宇,朱晓亚,靳容,张爱君,唐忠厚. 甘薯苗期耐低氮基因型筛选及不同氮效率类型综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(10): 1891-1902.
[11]	刘秋员,周磊,田晋钰,程爽,陶钰,邢志鹏,刘国栋,魏海燕,张洪程. 长江中下游地区常规中熟粳稻氮效率综合评价及高产氮高效品种筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(7): 1397-1409.
[12]	张彦,王劲松,董二伟,武爱莲,王媛,焦晓燕. 中晚熟区主要高粱品种耐瘠性综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(23): 4954-4968.
[13]	赵瑞,张旭辉,张程炀,郭泾磊,汪妤,李红霞. 小麦种质资源成株期氮效率评价及筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(18): 3818-3833.
[14]	李敏, 苏慧, 李阳阳, 李金鹏, 李金才, 朱玉磊, 宋有洪. 黄淮海麦区小麦耐热性分析及其鉴定指标的筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(16): 3381-3392.
[15]	刘星,曹红霞,廖阳,周宸光,李黄涛. 滴灌模式对苹果光合特性、产量及灌溉水利用的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(15): 3264-3278.