大豆品种产量源流库指标相互关系分析

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2026.16.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】评估大豆品种产量源、流、库指标对产量的贡献程度，明确产量形成过程中源、流、库各指标之间的相互关系，揭示影响大豆产量形成的关键生理机制，为大豆育种提供理论依据。【方法】以大豆结荚期和鼓粒期为关键时期，采用¹³C同位素标记技术，系统分析齐黄34、临豆9号、潍豆9号、菏豆12在多生育时期的光合特性、器官物质积累及干物重变化，从源、流、库三方面对品种间生理特征进行综合评价。通过雷达图对各类指标进行整合分析，旨在阐明不同大豆品种产量形成过程中源、流、库关系的差异及其协同特征。【结果】（1）源、流、库各指标与产量的相关性不同，与大豆产量的相关性强弱依次为：叶面积指数>百粒重>净光合速率>栅栏组织厚度>实际光化学效率>谷氨酰胺合成酶活性>谷氨酸合成酶活性>筛管平均直径>气孔导度>主叶脉直径。（2）源、流、库各指标存在互作。源库互作表现为：净光合速率、气孔导度、蒸腾速率与百粒重呈正相关关系；源流互作表现为：栅栏组织厚度与净光合速率、叶片厚度与净光合速率呈正相关关系；库流互作表现为：百粒重与筛管平均直径呈正相关关系。（3）不同大豆品种间源、流、库的表现有差异，齐黄34的叶面积指数、栅栏组织厚度、叶片厚度、净光合速率、实际光化学效率、主茎荚的持续积累能力、产量、百粒重、谷氨酰胺合成酶活性、谷氨酸合成酶活性、3 d主茎荚的转运能力、主茎荚的持续转运能力均高于其他3个品种。菏豆12的主叶脉直径、潍豆9号的株粒数、临豆9号的分枝荚碳吸收能力则高于其他3个品种，表明大豆高产的形成不依赖于单一的指标，而是源、流、库3个系统性指标的协同作用。【结论】在4个供试品种中，齐黄34产量显著高于其他品种，主要优势在于较高的叶面积指数、较强的物质转运能力及较大的百粒重。在大豆育种中，为选育源、流、库协调的大豆高产品种，应基于实际光化学效率、净光合速率和叶面积指数等指标筛选高光效种质资源，再结合叶片与维管束解剖结构评价同化物运输效率，最后综合氮代谢酶活性及库容性状判断产量潜力，实现高产大豆品种的高效选育。

关键词: 大豆, 品种, 产量, 源流库, 相关性

Abstract:

【Objective】 To evaluate the contributions of source, flow and sink traits to soybean yield, clarify the relationships among these traits during yield formation, reveal the key physiological mechanisms underlying soybean yield formation, and provide a theoretical basis for soybean breeding. 【Method】 Qihuang 34, Lindou 9, Weidou 9, and Hedou 12 were investigated during the pod-setting and seed-filling stages. The photosynthetic performance, assimilate partitioning, and dry matter accumulation were analyzed throughout plant development by using ¹³C isotope labeling. Source-flow-sink traits were comprehensively evaluated, and radar chart analysis was applied to characterize the coordination of these traits among cultivars during yield formation.【Result】 (1) The correlations between source, flow and sink traits and yield varied considerably. The contributions of these traits to yield ranked as follows: leaf area index > 100-seed weight > net photosynthetic rate > palisade tissue thickness > effective quantum yield of PSII (ΦPSII) > glutamine synthetase activity > glutamate synthase activity > mean sieve tube diameter > stomatal conductance > midrib diameter. (2) Significant interactions were observed among source, flow and sink traits. Source-sink interactions were reflected by positive correlations of net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance and transpiration rate with 100-seed weight. Source-flow interactions were indicated by positive correlations of palisade tissue thickness and leaf thickness with net photosynthetic rate, whereas flow-sink interactions were represented by a positive correlation between mean sieve tube diameter and 100-seed weight. (3) Source, flow and sink traits differed markedly among cultivars. Qihuang 34 exhibited higher leaf area index, palisade tissue thickness, leaf thickness, net photosynthetic rate, ΦPSII, sustained dry matter accumulation in main stem pods, yield, 100-seed weight, glutamine synthetase activity, glutamate synthase activity, 3-day assimilate translocation to main stem pods and sustained assimilate translocation than the other three cultivars. Hedou 12 showed the largest midrib diameter, Weidou 9 had the highest seed number per plant, and Lindou 9 exhibited the greatest carbon assimilation capacity of branch pods. These results indicate that high soybean yield depends on the coordinated regulation of source, flow and sink traits rather than on any single trait.【Conclusion】 Among the four cultivars, Qihuang 34 achieved the highest yield owing to its larger leaf area index, stronger assimilate transport capacity, and greater 100-seed weight. Breeding high-yield soybean cultivars with coordinated source, flow and sink characteristics should prioritize germplasm with high photosynthetic efficiency based on ΦPSII, net photosynthetic rate and leaf area index, followed by evaluation of assimilate transport efficiency using leaf and vascular bundle anatomical traits and assessment of yield potential through nitrogen metabolism enzyme activities and sink capacity.

Key words: soybean, cultivar, yield, source-flow-sink, correlation

王柯, 宫浩然, 王玉斌, 张彦威, 王彩洁, 刘鑫, 徐冉. 大豆品种产量源流库指标相互关系分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(16): 3519-3540.

WANG Ke, GONG HaoRan, WANG YuBin, ZHANG YanWei, WANG CaiJie, LIU Xin, XU Ran. Analysis of Interrelationships Among Yield Source, Flow, and Sink Traits in Soybean Cultivars[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2026, 59(16): 3519-3540.

图/表 18

表1

图1

图2

表2

图3

图4

图5

图6

表3

图7

图8

图9

图10

表4

图11

图12

图13

图14

参考文献 38

[1]	殷瑞锋. 未来我国大豆进口量仍将保持高位[J]. 中国农民合作社, 2023(10): 28-31.
	Yin R F. China’s soybean imports will remain at a high level in the future[J]. China Farmers’ Cooperatives, 2023(10): 28-31. (in Chinese)
[2]	郭勇, 姜思琦, 于莉莉, 徐江源, 洪慧龙, 邱丽娟. 基于国内外大豆品种比较的中国大豆品种改良路径探索[J]. 大豆科学, 2024, 43(4): 395-401.
	Guo Y, Jiang S Q, Yu L L, Xu J Y, Hong H L, Qiu L J. Exploration of pathway on the improvement of Chinese soybean varieties based on comparison between China and foreign countries[J]. Soybean Science, 2024, 43(4): 395-401. (in Chinese)
[3]	丁艳明. 中美两国大豆生产成本对比及2024年生产展望[J]. 黑龙江粮食, 2024(6): 18-19, 23.
	Ding Y M. Comparison of soybean production cost between China and the United States and production prospect in 2024[J]. Heilongjiang Grain, 2024(6): 18-19, 23. (in Chinese)
[4]	周宇, 孙童, 张艳红, 汝艳, 苏坦, 王帅, 朱金燕, 胡金龙, 熊强强, 张洪程, 周年兵. 施氮量对不同源库类型粳稻物质积累与氮素吸收的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(11): 2096-2117. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.11.004.
	Zhou Y, Sun T, Zhang Y H, Ru Y, Su T, Wang S, Zhu J Y, Hu J L, Xiong Q Q, Zhang H C, Zhou N B. Effects of nitrogen fertilization levels on matter accumulation and nitrogen uptake in different source and library types of Japonica rice[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58(11): 2096-2117. DOI: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.11.004. (in Chinese)
[5]	Bonfanti L, Sazon L A, Specht J E, Howard R, Carciochi W D, Grassini P, Linquist J L, Andrade J F, Cafaro La Menza N. Soybean seed yield distribution within the canopy as affected by nitrogen supply[J]. Crop Science, 2025, 65(2): e70033. doi: 10.1002/csc2.v65.2
[6]	于治广. 不同水分条件下燕麦产量形成的源库流关系研究[D]. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2021.
	Yu Z G. Study on the source-sink-flow relationship of oat yield formation under different water conditions[D]. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2021. (in Chinese)
[7]	Théroux-Rancourt G, Herrera J C, Voggeneder K, de Berardinis F, Luijken N, Nocker L, Savi T, Scheffknecht S, Schneck M, Tholen D. Analyzing anatomy over three dimensions unpacks the differences in mesophyll diffusive area between Sun and shade Vitis vinifera leaves[J]. AoB Plants, 2023, 15(2): plad001.
[8]	Aneja P, Sanyal R, Ranjan A. Leaf growth in third dimension: A perspective of leaf thickness from genetic regulation to ecophysiology[J]. New Phytologist, 2025, 245(3): 989-999. doi: 10.1111/nph.20246 pmid: 39511951
[9]	Li Z D, Yu X X, Jia G D. The anatomical structure of woody plants in arid habitats is closely related to nonstructural carbohydrates storage[J]. Forest Ecosystems, 2022, 9: 100073. doi: 10.1016/j.fecs.2022.100073
[10]	Li X L, Wang S, Zhu L X, Zhang P, Qi H, Zhang K, Sun H C, Zhang Y J, Lei X P, Li A C, Wang Z B, Li C D, Liu L T. Leaf hydraulic decline coordinates stomatal and photosynthetic limitations through anatomical adjustments under drought stress in cotton[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2025, 16: 1622308. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2025.1622308
[11]	Chang W, Chen H Q, Jiao G X, Dou Y, Liu L, Qu C M, Li J N, Lu K. Biomolecular strategies for vascular bundle development to improve crop yield[J]. Biomolecules, 2022, 12(12): 1772. doi: 10.3390/biom12121772
[12]	Stanfield R C, Bartlett M K. Coordination between phloem loading and structure maintains carbon transport under drought[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 787837. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.787837
[13]	Pegler J L, Grof C P, Patrick J W. Sugar loading of crop seeds - a partnership of phloem, plasmodesmal and membrane transport[J]. The New Phytologist, 2023, 239(5): 1584-1602. doi: 10.1111/nph.v239.5
[14]	Li J, He C C, Liu S H, Guo Y T, Zhang Y X, Zhang L J, Zhou X, Xu D Y, Luo X, Liu H Y, Yang X R, Wang Y, Shi J, Yang B, Wang J, Wang P R, Deng X J, Sun C H. Research progress and application strategies of sugar transport mechanisms in rice[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2024, 15: 1454615. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1454615
[15]	Hammad H M, Chawla M S, Jawad R, Alhuqail A, Bakhat H F, Farhad W, Khan F, Mubeen M, Shah A N, Liu K, Harrison M T, Saud S, Fahad S. Evaluating the impact of nitrogen application on growth and productivity of maize under control conditions[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 885479. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.885479
[16]	Specht J E, Cannon S B, Cregan P B, Diers B W, Grant D, Graham M A, Hudson M E, Hyten D L, Jiang G L, Nguyen H T. Soybean genomics research community strategic plan: A vision for 2024: 2028[J]. The Plant Genome, 2024, 17(2): e20472. doi: 10.1002/tpg2.v17.2
[17]	Paul M J, Watson A, Griffiths C A. Linking fundamental science to crop improvement through understanding source and sink traits and their integration for yield enhancement[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2020, 71(7): 2270-2280. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erz480 pmid: 31665486
[18]	Slafer G A, Foulkes M J, Reynolds M P, Murchie E H, Carmo-Silva E, Flavell R, Gwyn J, Sawkins M, Griffiths S. A ‘wiring diagram’ for sink strength traits impacting wheat yield potential[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2023, 74(1): 40-71. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erac410
[19]	Fang L, Struik P C, Girousse C, Yin X Y, Martre P. Source-sink relationships during grain filling in wheat in response to various temperature, water deficit, and nitrogen deficit regimes[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2024, 75(20): 6563-6578. doi: 10.1093/jxb/erae310 pmid: 39021198
[20]	Du X B, Zhang X Y, Chen X F, Jin W J, Huang Z P, Kong L C. Drought stress reduces the photosynthetic source of subtending leaves and the transit sink function of podshells, leading to reduced seed weight in soybean plants[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2024, 15: 1337544. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2024.1337544
[21]	Hou Z H, Huang H, Wang Y N, Chen L Y, Yue L, Liu B H, Kong F J, Yang H. Molecular regulation of shoot architecture in soybean[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2026, 49(7): 3518-3531. doi: 10.1111/pce.v49.7
[22]	Rosado-Souza L, Yokoyama R, Sonnewald U, Fernie A R. Understanding source-sink interactions: Progress in model plants and translational research to crops[J]. Molecular Plant, 2023, 16(1): 96-121. doi: 10.1016/j.molp.2022.11.015
[23]	Umburanas R C, Kawakami J, Ainsworth E A, Favarin J L, Anderle L Z, Dourado-Neto D, Reichardt K. Changes in soybean cultivars released over the past 50 years in southern Brazil[J]. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12: 508. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-04043-8 pmid: 35017557
[24]	李照君, 田汝美, 蒲艳艳, 宫永超, 刘艳, 刘玉芹, 李娜娜, 丁汉凤. 大豆光合指标日变化规律及其与产量关系研究[J]. 大豆科学, 2020, 39(4): 577-586.
	Li Z J, Tian R M, Pu Y Y, Gong Y C, Liu Y, Liu Y Q, Li N N, Ding H F. Study on diurnal variation of photosynthetic index and its relationship with yield in soybean[J]. Soybean Science, 2020, 39(4): 577-586. (in Chinese)
[25]	刘薇, 王玉斌, 李伟, 张礼凤, 王彩洁, 徐冉, 戴海英, 张彦威. 大豆品种齐黄34广适性的遗传分析[J]. 山东农业科学, 2023, 55(5): 22-27.
	Liu W, Wang Y B, Li W, Zhang L F, Wang C J, Xu R, Dai H Y, Zhang Y W. Genetic analysis of wide adaptability of soybean cultivar qihuang 34[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 55(5): 22-27. (in Chinese)
[26]	Gonnet S, Díaz P. Glutamine synthetase and glutamate synthase activities in relation to nitrogen fixation in Lotus spp.[J]. Revista Brasileira de Fisiologia Vegetal, 2000, 12(3): 195-202. doi: 10.1590/S0103-31312000000300003
[27]	O’Neal D, Joy K W. Glutamine synthetase of pea leaves. I. Purification, stabilization, and pH optima[J]. Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 1973, 159(1): 113-122. doi: 10.1016/0003-9861(73)90435-9 pmid: 4150338
[28]	Groat R G, Vance C P. Root Nodule Enzymes of Ammonia Assimilation in Alfalfa (Medicago sativa l.): Developmental patterns and response to applied nitrogen[J]. Plant Physiology, 1981, 67(6): 1198-1203. doi: 10.1104/pp.67.6.1198 pmid: 16661836
[29]	Yamazaki R, Katsube-Tanaka T, Ogiso-Tanaka E, Kawasaki Y, Shiraiwa T. High source-sink ratio at and after sink capacity formation promotes green stem disorder in soybean[J]. Scientific Reports, 2022, 12: 10440. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-14298-4 pmid: 35729247
[30]	Du X B, Zhang X Y, Wei Z, Lei W X, Hu G Y, Huang Z P, Kong L C. Photosynthetic characteristics of subtending leaves and their relationships with soybean pod development under heat, drought and combined stresses[J]. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 2023, 209(1): 204-215. doi: 10.1111/jac.v209.1
[31]	Nowak R, Szczepanek M, Błaszczyk K, Hassanpouraghdam M B. Response of photosynthetic efficiency parameters and leaf area index of alternative barley genotypes to increasing sowing density[J]. Scientific Reports, 2024, 14: 29779. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-81783-3
[32]	宋杰, 任昊, 赵斌, 张吉旺, 任佰朝, 李亮, 王少祥, 黄金苓, 刘鹏. 施钾量对夏玉米维管组织结构与物质运输性能的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2022, 48(11): 2908-2919. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.23005
	Song J, Ren H, Zhao B, Zhang J W, Ren B Z, Li L, Wang S X, Huang J L, Liu P. Effect of potassium application on vascular tissue structure and material transport properties in summer maize (Zea mays L.)[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(11): 2908-2919. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.23005
[33]	Li H, Sun J, Zhang Y, Wang N, Li T S, Dong H Y, Yang M L, Xu C, Hu L M, Liu C Y, Chen Q S, Foyer C H, Qi Z M. Soybean oil and protein: Biosynthesis, regulation and strategies for genetic improvement[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2026, 49(7): 3730-3746. doi: 10.1111/pce.v49.7
[34]	Kambhampati S, Aznar-Moreno J A, Bailey S R, Arp J J, Chu K L, Bilyeu K D, Durrett T P, Allen D K. Temporal changes in metabolism late in seed development affect biomass composition[J]. Plant Physiology, 2021, 186(2): 874-890. doi: 10.1093/plphys/kiab116 pmid: 33693938
[35]	Fortunato S, Nigro D, Lasorella C, Marcotuli I, Gadaleta A, de Pinto M C. The role of glutamine synthetase (GS) and glutamate synthase (GOGAT) in the improvement of nitrogen use efficiency in cereals[J]. Biomolecules, 2023, 13(12): 1771. doi: 10.3390/biom13121771
[36]	Peinado-Torrubia P, Álvarez R, Lucas M, Franco-Navarro J D, Durán-Gutiérrez F J, Colmenero-Flores J M, Rosales M A. Nitrogen assimilation and photorespiration become more efficient under chloride nutrition as a beneficial macronutrient[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2022, 13: 1058774. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1058774
[37]	Gessler A, Zweifel R. Beyond source and sink control-toward an integrated approach to understand the carbon balance in plants[J]. New Phytologist, 2024, 242(3): 858-869. doi: 10.1111/nph.v242.3
[38]	Teng Z N, Chen Y K, Meng S, Duan M J, Zhang J H, Ye N H. Environmental stimuli: A major challenge during grain filling in cereals[J]. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2023, 24(3): 2255. doi: 10.3390/ijms24032255

品种Variety	审定区域Approval status	有效分枝Effective branches	特性Characteristic
齐黄34 Qihuang 34	国家审定Approved by the state	1.3	高产、优质High yield, high quality
菏豆12 Hedou 12	国家审定Approved by the state	1.0—3.0	高产、优质High yield, high quality
临豆9号Lindou 9	国家审定Approved by the state	3.7	高蛋白型High-protein
潍豆9号Weidou 9	山东省审定Approved by Shandong province	1.9	高油型High-oil

年份Year	品种Cultivar	栅栏组织厚度Palisade tissue thickness (μm)	叶片厚度Leaf thickness (μm)
2023	齐黄34 Qihuang 34	102.67±6.76a	195.50±4.85a
	菏豆12 Hedou 12	93.57±1.93b	184.27±2.18a
	潍豆9号Weidou 9	91.53±1.56b	187.13±0.85a
	临豆9号Lindou 9	95.23±2.31b	191.73±10.89a
2024	齐黄34 Qihuang 34	119.00±13.13b	218.90±11.80a
	菏豆12 Hedou 12	79.30±9.72c	172.20±3.34b
	潍豆9号Weidou 9	80.50±1.37c	165.10±2.44b
	临豆9号Lindou 9	98.60±2.12a	212.40±4.52a

年份 Year	品种 Cultivar	主叶脉直径 Midrib diameter (μm)	次叶脉直径 Secondary vein diameter (μm)	叶柄直径 Petiole diameter (μm)	筛管平均直径 Mean sieve tube diameter (μm)
2023	齐黄34 Qihuang 34	458.33±4.71c	185.90±13.36b	3180.83±15.09a	72.75±2.79a
	菏豆12 Hedou 12	716.33±12.30a	148.40±1.10c	2913.60±16.80b	67.78±3.90a
	潍豆9号Weidou 9	547.73±5.86b	195.00±4.52ab	2883.33±8.46b	67.67±1.81a
	临豆9号Lindou 9	368.20±2.85d	204.67±6.35a	2717.50±25.67c	70.05±0.74a
2024	齐黄34 Qihuang 34	584.63±5.12b	179.70±9.92b	2899.50±30.74b	126.80±7.94b
	菏豆12 Hedou 12	686.67±2.87a	143.97±6.93c	2688.53±33.33d	92.92±4.17c
	潍豆9号Weidou 9	587.47±1.30b	138.87±7.26c	2783.20±31.32c	83.80±5.85c
	临豆9号Lindou 9	420.33±2.06c	204.53±1.40a	3131.17±17.80a	121.97±4.57a

年份 Year	品种 Cultivar	株粒数 Grains per plant	百粒重 100-grain weight (g)	株数 Plants per hectare (plants/hm²)	产量 Yield (kg·hm^-2)	经济系数 Harvest index
2023	齐黄34 Qihuang 34	113.28±9.26ab	26.32±0.47a	143850.16±617.61a	3556.16±93.61a	0.52±0.02ab
	菏豆12 Hedou 12	104.45±5.51bc	24.81±0.53ab	149307.18±1217.73a	3446.93±94.9ab	0.53±0.01a
	潍豆9号Weidou 9	122.96±5.51a	19.48±1.85c	158772.30±5986.74a	3285.60±120.07bc	0.50±0.01b
	临豆9号Lindou 9	93.24±8.57c	23.10±0.83b	154006.30±1805.22a	3213.44±106.71b	0.50±0.02ab
2024	齐黄34 Qihuang 34	127.90±10.00a	26.49±1.23a	160269.12±2038.59a	3680.84±137.69a	0.52±0.02a
	菏豆12 Hedou 12	117.30±11.53ab	22.39±1.35b	150406.47±1210.47a	3360.94±75.51b	0.51±0.03a
	潍豆9号Weidou 9	113.97±6.69ab	20.01±0.64b	154585.85±959.76a	3337.15±46.85b	0.50±0.03a
	临豆9号Lindou 9	100.50±9.49b	20.30±1.10ab	162570.85±1302.93a	3254.55±75.12b	0.50±0.04a