322份花生种质资源黄曲霉侵染抗性的评价

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.12.003

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】黄曲霉毒素污染是制约花生产业良性发展的重要因素之一，评价国内外育种材料抗性水平，发掘新的抗性材料，为抗性新品种培育及遗传学研究提供种质资源。【方法】2020—2021年连续2年对国内外322份花生种质进行繁殖和收获，以强侵染力、高产毒的黄曲霉As 3.4408为接种用菌株，采用室内接种法，对3个“环境”繁殖的花生籽仁进行黄曲霉侵染抗性鉴定，并对其植物学类型、株型、籽仁营养品质等进行测定与分析，综合评价和筛选性状优异的抗性材料。【结果】从供试材料中筛选出13份抗黄曲霉侵染材料，占鉴定资源总数的4.04%，且大部分属于普通型花生，其中，包含2份稳定高抗材料（C203和C206），未获得对黄曲霉侵染免疫的种质。统计分析表明，322份花生种质黄曲霉侵染指数表现为连续变异，广义遗传力大于0.80，表明花生对黄曲霉菌的抗性受基因型和“环境”的显著影响，且表型变异主要由遗传因素控制。相关性分析表明，不同“环境”繁殖种质的侵染指数之间均呈极显著正相关关系（P<0.001），同一份种质在不同“环境”收获后的侵染抗性表型较为一致。籽仁营养品质与抗性之间的相关性分析发现，供试花生种质的黄曲霉侵染指数与其营养品质性状无显著相关关系。对不同植物学类型和株型花生种质的侵染抗性分析表明，抗黄曲霉菌侵染的材料在普通型/蔓生型花生种质中占比更高。【结论】不同“环境”繁殖花生种质响应黄曲霉侵染的表型较为稳定，种质之间侵染抗性的差异主要受基因型控制，遗传较为稳定。鉴定获得的稳定高抗材料C203和C206，可作为优异抗源用于黄曲霉抗性基因挖掘和抗黄曲霉花生品种改良。

关键词: 花生, 黄曲霉, 种质资源, 抗性评价, 优异抗源

Abstract:

【Objective】Aflatoxin contamination is one of the important factors that hinders sustainable development of the peanut industry. Precise evaluation of germplasm resources from China and abroad for resistance to A. flavus infection and creation of new resistant germplasms will facilitate the development of resistant cultivars. 【Method】The A. flavus infection index of 322 peanut germplasm lines were characterized following in-vitro inoculation of seeds harvested from 3 different “environments” (CA2020, CS2020, CS2021). Aspergillus flavus strain As 3.4408, known for its strong infectivity and high toxin production, was used as the inoculation strain. The botanical type, plant type and nutritional quality of kernels were measured and analyzed. Accessions exhibiting resistance with novel traits were comprehensively evaluated and screened. 【Result】Thirteen accessions with stable resistance were identified, accounting for 4.04% of the total germplasm lines evaluated, most of which belonged to var. hypogaea, including two with stable and high resistance (C203 and C206), while no accession was observed to be immune to Aspergillus flavus infection. The frequency distribution of infection index of 322 accessions exhibited continuous variation, with the broad-sense heritability exceeding 0.8, indicating that the A. flavus-resistance of kernels was significantly influenced by genotypes and “environments”, and the phenotypic variation was primarily controlled by genetic factors. Correlation analysis revealed significant positive correlation of infection index of accessions among the different “environments” (P<0.001), and the phenotype of each accession harvested from various “environments” was relatively consistent. Additionally, no significant correlation was found between nutritional quality and infection index. Comparative analysis of infection index among peanut accessions of different botanical and plant types revealed that var. hypogaea/prostrate-type peanuts were more likely to exhibit resistance to A. flavus infection within the existing peanut germplasm resources. 【Conclusion】The phenotypes of peanut germplasms harvested from different “environments” in response to A. flavus infection were relatively stable. Variation of kernels resistance to A. flavus infection was primarily controlled by genotype. Accessions C203 and C206, exhibiting stable and high resistance, can serve as excellent resistant parents for the mining of aflatoxin resistance genes and for the improvement of peanut varieties resistant to aflatoxin contamination.

Key words: peanut, Aspergillus flavus, genetic resources, resistance evaluation, novel resistance resource

崔梦杰, 孙子淇, 齐飞艳, 刘华, 徐静, 杜培, 黄冰艳, 董文召, 韩锁义, 张新友. 322份花生种质资源黄曲霉侵染抗性的评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(12): 2303-2315.

CUI MengJie, SUN ZiQi, QI FeiYan, LIU Hua, XU Jing, DU Pei, HUANG BingYan, DONG WenZhao, HAN SuoYi, ZHANG XinYou. Evaluation of 322 Peanut Germplasms for Resistance to Aspergillus flavus Infection[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(12): 2303-2315.

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.0578-1752.2025.12.003

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2025/V58/I12/2303

图/表 13

表1

表2

图1

图2

表3

表4

表5

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

图8

参考文献 41

[1]	BUROW M D, SIMPSON C E, STARR J L, PATERSON A H. Transmission genetics of chromatin from a synthetic amphidiploid to cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). broadening the gene pool of a monophyletic polyploid species. Genetics, 2001, 159(2): 823-837.
[2]	SETTALURI V S, KANDALA C V K, PUPPALA N, SUNDARAM J. Peanuts and their nutritional aspects: a review. Food and Nutrition Sciences, 2012, 3(12): 1644-1650.
[3]	HUANG L, HE H Y, CHEN W G, REN X P, CHEN Y N, ZHOU X J, XIA Y L, WANG X L, JIANG X G, LIAO B S, JIANG H F. Quantitative trait locus analysis of agronomic and quality-related traits in cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2015, 128(6): 1103-1115.
[4]	万书波, 王才斌, 郭峰, 单世华. 山东花生产业现状、问题及“十二五”发展对策. 山东农业科学, 2011, 43(1): 114-118.
	WAN S B, WANG C B, GUO F, SHAN S H. Present situation, problems and development countermeasures of peanut industry in Shandong province in the twelfth Five-Year Plan. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 43(1): 114-118. (in Chinese)
[5]	CARDWELL K F, HENRY S H. Risk of exposure to and mitigation of effect of aflatoxin on human health: a west African example. Journal of Toxicology: Toxin Reviews, 2004, 23(2/3): 217-247.
[6]	FAROMBI O E. Aflatoxin contamination of foods in developing countries Implications for hepatocellular carcinoma and chemopreventive strategies. African Journal of Biotechnology, 2006, 5: 1-14.
[7]	LIAO B S, ZHUANG W J, TANG R H, ZHANG X Y, SHAN S H, JIANG H F, HUANG J Q. Peanut aflatoxin and genomics research in China: progress and perspectives. Peanut Science, 2009, 36(1): 21-28.
[8]	SONI P, GANGURDE S S, ORTEGA-BELTRAN A, KUMAR R, PARMAR S, SUDINI H K, LEI Y, NI X Z, HUAI D X, FOUNTAIN J C, et al. Functional biology and molecular mechanisms of host- pathogen interactions for aflatoxin contamination in groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) and maize (Zea mays L.). Frontiers in Microbiology, 2020, 11: 227.
[9]	DORNER J W. Management and prevention of mycotoxins in peanuts . Food Additives & Contaminants Part A, Chemistry, Analysis, Control, Exposure & Risk Assessment, 2008, 25(2): 203-208.
[10]	CHULZE S N, PALAZZINI J M, TORRES A M, BARROS G, PONSONE M L, GEISEN R, SCHMIDT-HEYDT M, KÖHL J. Biological control as a strategy to reduce the impact of mycotoxins in peanuts, grapes and cereals in Argentina. Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A, 2015, 32(4): 471-479.
[11]	BHATNAGAR-MATHUR P, SUNKARA S, BHATNAGAR- PANWAR M, WALIYAR F, SHARMA K K. Biotechnological advances for combating Aspergillus flavus and aflatoxin contamination in crops. Plant Science, 2015, 234: 119-132.
[12]	MEHAN V K, MCDONALD D, RAJAGOPALAN K. Resistance of peanut genotypes to seed infection by Aspergillus flavus in field trials in India1. Peanut Science, 1987, 14(1): 17-21.
[13]	YU B L, HUAI D X, HUANG L, KANG Y P, REN X P, CHEN Y N, ZHOU X J, LUO H Y, LIU N, CHEN W G, LEI Y, PANDEY M K, SUDINI H, VARSHNEY R K, LIAO B S, JIANG H F. Identification of genomic regions and diagnostic markers for resistance to aflatoxin contamination in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). BMC Genetics, 2019, 20(1): 32.
[14]	郭静佩. 花生品种对黄曲霉菌的抗性鉴定和抗侵染机制研究[D]. 新乡: 河南师范大学, 2012.
	GUO J P. Identification of resistance of peanut varieties to Aspergillus flavus and study on anti-infection mechanism[D]. Xinxiang: Henan Normal University, 2012. (in Chinese)
[15]	NIGAM S N, WALIYAR F, ARUNA R, REDDY S V, KUMAR P L, CRAUFURD P Q, DIALLO A T, NTARE B R, UPADHYAYA H D. Breeding peanut for resistance to aflatoxin contamination at ICRISAT. Peanut Science, 2009, 36(1): 42-49.
[16]	MEHAN V K, MCDONALD D, HARAVU L J, JAYANTHI S. Groundnut Aflatoxin Problem:Review and Literature Database. India: Groundnut Aflatoxin Problem Review & Literature Database Press, 1991.
[17]	WANG H M, LEI Y, WAN L Y, YAN L Y, LV J W, DAI X F, REN X P, GUO W, JIANG H F, LIAO B S. Comparative transcript profiling of resistant and susceptible peanut post-harvest seeds in response to aflatoxin production by Aspergillus flavus. BMC Plant Biology, 2016, 16: 54.
[18]	WANG H M, LEI Y, YAN L Y, WAN L Y, REN X P, CHEN S L, DAI X F, GUO W, JIANG H F, LIAO B S. Functional genomic analysis of Aspergillus flavus interacting with resistant and susceptible peanut. Toxins, 2016, 8(2): 46.
[19]	NAYAK S N, AGARWAL G, PANDEY M K, SUDINI H K, JAYALE A S, PUROHIT S, DESAI A, WAN L Y, GUO B Z, LIAO B S, VARSHNEY R K. Aspergillus flavus infection triggered immune responses and host-pathogen cross-talks in groundnut during in-vitro seed colonization. Scientific Reports, 2017, 7(1): 9659.
[20]	KORANI W A, CHU Y, HOLBROOK C, CLEVENGER J, OZIAS-AKINS P. Genotypic regulation of aflatoxin accumulation but not Aspergillus fungal growth upon post-harvest infection of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) seeds. Toxins, 2017, 9(7): 218.
[21]	洪彦彬, 李少雄, 刘海燕, 周桂元, 陈小平, 温世杰, 梁炫强. SSR标记与花生抗黄曲霉性状的关联分析. 分子植物育种, 2009, 7(2): 360-364.
	HONG Y B, LI S X, LIU H Y, ZHOU G Y, CHEN X P, WEN S J, LIANG X Q. Correlation analysis of SSR markers and host resistance to Aspergillus flavus infection in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.). Molecular Plant Breeding, 2009, 7(2): 360-364. (in Chinese)
[22]	王后苗. 花生抗黄曲霉菌产毒机制的研究[D]. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2016.
	WANG H M. Study on the mechanism of peanut resistance to Aspergillus flavus[D]. Beijing: Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, 2016. (in Chinese)
[23]	CUI M J, HAN S Y, WANG D, HAIDER M S, GUO J J, ZHAO Q, DU P, SUN Z Q, QI F Y, ZHENG Z, HUANG B Y, DONG W Z, LI P W, ZHANG X Y. Gene co-expression network analysis of the comparative transcriptome identifies hub genes associated with resistance to Aspergillus flavus L. in cultivated peanut (Arachis hypogae a L.). Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 899177.
[24]	FU J Y, GU M, YAN H L, ZHANG M H, XIE H L, YUE X F, ZHANG Q, LI P W. Protein biomarker for early diagnosis of microbial toxin contamination: Using Aspergillus flavus as an example. Food Frontiers, 2023, 4(4): 2013-2023.
[25]	柴芃沛. 河南省花生种质黄曲霉抗性鉴定及抗性相关PAL基因家族分析[D]. 郑州: 郑州大学, 2021.
	CHAI P P. Identification of Aspergillus flavus resistance of peanut germplasm in Henan Province and analysis of PAL gene family related to resistance[D]. Zhengzhou: Zhengzhou University, 2021. (in Chinese)
[26]	DING Y B, QIU X K, LUO H Y, HUANG L, GUO J B, YU B L, SUDINI H, PANDEY M, KANG Y P, LIU N, ZHOU X J, CHEN W G, CHEN Y N, WANG X, HUAI D X, YAN L Y, LEI Y, JIANG H F, VARSHNEY R, LIU K D, LIAO B S. Comprehensive evaluation of Chinese peanut mini-mini core collection and QTL mapping for aflatoxin resistance. BMC Plant Biology, 2022, 22(1): 207. doi: 10.1186/s12870-022-03582-0 pmid: 35448951
[27]	王兴军, 赵传志, 李婷婷, 夏晗, 侯蕾, 马德源, 李爱芹, 仇静静, 赵术珍, 李膨呈. 一种快速鉴定花生品种对黄曲霉抗性的方法: 中国, CN106119337A. 2016-11-16.
	WANG X J, ZHAO C Z, LI T T, XIA H, HOU L, MA D Y, LI A Q, QIU J J, ZHAO S Z, LI P C. A method for rapid evaluation of peanut varieties resistance to Aspergillus flavus: China, CN106119337A. 2016-11-16. (in Chinese)
[28]	张奇, 李培武, 张兆威, 丁小霞, 周海燕, 李冉, 雷永, 王圣玉. 花生黄曲霉侵染抗性鉴定方法. 中华人民共和国行业标准 NY/T2310-2013. 中华人民共和国农业部. 2013.
	ZHANG Q, LI P W, ZHANG Z W, DING X X, ZHOU H Y, LI R, LEI Y, WANG S Y. Evaluation method of peanut resistance to Aspergillus flavus infection. Criterion of the People’s Republic of China NY/T 2310-2013. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of People’s Republic of China. 2013. (in Chinese)
[29]	秦利, 刘华, 杜培, 董文召, 黄冰艳, 韩锁义, 张忠信, 齐飞艳, 张新友. 基于近红外光谱法的花生籽仁中蔗糖含量的测定. 中国油料作物学报, 2016, 38(5): 666-671. doi: 10.7505/j.issn.1007-9084.2016.05.018
	QIN L, LIU H, DU P, DONG W Z, HUANG B Y, HAN S Y, ZHANG Z X, QI F Y, ZHANG X Y. Determination of sucrose content in peanut seed kernel based on near infrared spectroscopy. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2016, 38(5): 666-671. (in Chinese) doi: 10.7505/j.issn.1007-9084.2016.05.018
[30]	MENG L, LI H H, ZHANG L Y, WANG J K. QTL IciMapping: Integrated software for genetic linkage map construction and quantitative trait locus mapping in biparental populations. The Crop Journal, 2015, 3(3): 269-283.
[31]	禹山林. 中国花生品种及其系谱. 上海: 上海科学技术出版社, 2008.
	YU S L. Peanut Varieties and Their Pedigrees in China . Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific & Technical Press, 2008. (in Chinese)
[32]	崔梦杰, 柴芃沛, 郭俊佳, 黄冰艳, 董文召, 韩锁义, 张新友. 花生抗黄曲霉菌侵染和产毒机制研究进展. 中国油料作物学报, 2021, 43(4): 562-572.
	CUI M J, CHAI P P, GUO J J, HUANG B Y, DONG W Z, HAN S Y, ZHANG X Y. Progress in research on mechanism of resistance to Aspergillus flavus L. infection and aflatoxin production in peanut. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2021, 43(4): 562-572. (in Chinese)
[33]	KHAN S A, CHEN H, DENG Y, CHEN Y H, ZHANG C, CAI T C, ALI N, MAMADOU G, XIE D Y, GUO B Z, VARSHNEY R K, ZHUANG W J. High-density SNP map facilitates fine mapping of QTLs and candidate genes discovery for Aspergillus flavus resistance in peanut (Arachis hypogaea). Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2020, 133(7): 2239-2257.
[34]	周桂元, 梁炫强, 李一聪, 黎穗临, 李少雄. 抗黄曲霉花生种皮纹理超微结构的研究. 中国油料作物学报, 1999, 21(1): 17-19.
	ZHOU G Y, LIANG X Q, LI Y C, LI S L, LI S X. Comparative study on seed coat ultrastructure of resistant and susceptiblevarieties to Aspergillus flavas in peanut. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 1999, 21(1): 17-19. (in Chinese)
[35]	BASHA S M, MUSINGO M N, MOHANTY B, DORNER J W, COLE R J. Factors affecting phytoalexin production in peanut seed. Journal of Plant Physiology, 1990, 136(2): 143-148.
[36]	梁炫强. 花生抗黄曲霉侵染和产毒机制以及抗性遗传规律的研究[D]. 广州: 华南师范大学, 2002.
	LIANG X Q. Study on the mechanism of peanut resistance to Aspergillus flavus infection and aflatoxin production and the genetic regulation of resistance[D]. Guangzhou: South China Normal University, 2002. (in Chinese)
[37]	梁炫强, 潘瑞炽, 宾金华. 花生抗黄曲霉侵染机理的研究进展. 中国油料作物学报, 2000, 22(3): 77-80.
	LIANG X Q, PAN R C, BIN J H. Research progress of peanut resistance to Aspergillus flavus infection. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Scieves, 2000, 22(3): 77-80. (in Chinese)
[38]	梁炫强, 潘瑞炽, 周桂元. 花生种子胰蛋白酶抑制剂与抗黄曲霉侵染的关系. 作物学报, 2003, 29(2): 295-299.
	LIANG X Q, PAN R C, ZHOU G Y. Relationship of trypsin inhibitor in peanut seed and resistance to Aspergillus flavus invasion. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2003, 29(2): 295-299. (in Chinese)
[39]	WANG H M, LEI Y, YAN L Y, CHENG K, DAI X F, WAN L Y, GUO W, CHENG L Q, LIAO B S. Deep sequencing analysis of transcriptomes in Aspergillus flavus in response to resveratrol. BMC Microbiology, 2015, 15: 182.
[40]	CUERO R G, OSUJI G O. Aspergillus flavus-induced chitosanase in germinating corn and peanut seeds: A. flavus mechanism for growth dominance over associated fungi and concomitant aflatoxin production. Food Additives and Contaminants, 1995, 12(3): 479-483.
[41]	孙大容. 花生育种学. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1998.
	SUN D R. Peanut Breeding. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 1998. (in Chinese)

侵染程度分级 Scale	描述 Description
0	花生籽仁表面未见绿色孢子No visible green spores on peanut kernels
1	籽仁表面的黄曲霉菌孢子覆盖率1%—10%，花生籽仁的种皮表面有零星绿色孢子 1%-10% coverage rate of A. flavus spores on the surface of peanut kernels, visible sporadic green spores
2	籽仁表面的黄曲霉菌孢子覆盖率11%—20%，有部分厚实的孢子层 11%-20% coverage rate of A. flavus spores on the surface of peanut kernels, visible thick spore layers
3	籽仁表面的黄曲霉菌孢子覆盖率21%—50%，有厚实的孢子层 21%-50% coverage rate of A. flavus spores on the surface of peanut kernels, visible thick spore layers
4	籽仁表面的黄曲霉菌孢子覆盖率51%—80%，厚实的孢子层连成一片 51%-80% coverage rate of A. flavus spores on the surface of peanut kernels, thick spore layers in patches
5	籽仁表面的黄曲霉菌孢子覆盖率81%—100%，有大面积厚实的孢子层 81%-100% coverage rate of A. flavus spores on the surface of peanut kernels, large area of thick spore layer

侵染指数 Infection index	抗性 Resistance
0.00	免疫Immune
≤15.00	高抗Highly resistant
15.00—30.00	中抗Moderately resistant
30.00—60.00	中感Moderately susceptible
≥60.00	高感Highly susceptible

编号 Number	侵染指数Infection index			植物学类型 Botanical type	株型 Plant type
编号 Number	CA2020	CS2020	CS2021	植物学类型 Botanical type	株型 Plant type
C115	20.33	19.00	26.67	普通型var. hypogaea	直立Erect type
C130	23.33	16.00	16.33	普通型var. hypogaea	半蔓生Semi-prostrate type
C172	16.67	16.33	11.00	普通型var. hypogaea	直立Erect type
C174	23.33	24.00	25.50	珍珠豆型var. vulgaris	直立Erect type
C203	12.67	4.33	2.33	普通型var. hypogaea	蔓生Prostrate type
C206	14.00	10.33	6.00	普通型var. hypogaea	直立Erect type
C220	28.00	23.00	22.78	普通型var. hypogaea	直立Erect type
C270	23.67	17.33	26.67	普通型var. hypogaea	直立Erect type
C273	20.33	17.00	5.33	普通型var. hypogaea	半蔓生Semi-prostrate type
C331	14.33	27.00	25.50	普通型var. hypogaea	半蔓生Semi-prostrate type
C344	20.67	18.67	23.00	普通型var. hypogaea	蔓生Prostrate type
C354	12.33	20.33	26.33	普通型var. hypogaea	蔓生Prostrate type
C368	19.33	22.00	15.00	普通型var. hypogaea	半蔓生Semi-prostrate type

收获地点 Harvest location	极小值 Min	极大值 Max	均值 Mean	标准差 SD	变异系数 CV (%)	偏度 Skewness	峰度 Kurtosis
CA2020	12.33	100.00	64.78	22.27	34.38	-0.42	-0.73
CS2020	4.33	96.67	52.74	20.25	38.39	0.24	-0.70
CS2021	2.33	98.67	53.44	22.28	41.68	0.18	-0.73

性状 Trait	来源 Source	Ⅲ型平方和 Type Ⅲ sum of squares	自由度 df	均方 Mean squares	F	P	遗传力 Heritability
侵染指数Infection index	环境Environment	112954.1490	2	56477.0740	364.2900	0.000***	0.83
	基因型Genotype	1032836.0000	321	3217.5580	20.7540	0.000***
	基因型✕环境Genotype✕Environment	402614.2190	642	627.1249	4.0451	0.000***
	误差Error	305966.0480	1932	158.3680