





中国农业科学 ›› 2021, Vol. 54 ›› Issue (8): 1613-1626.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.08.004
收稿日期:2020-06-22
接受日期:2020-08-17
出版日期:2021-04-16
发布日期:2021-04-25
联系方式:
袁圆,E-mail: 2788049152@qq.com。
基金资助:
YUAN Yuan1(
),WANG Bo1,ZHOU GuangSheng1,LIU Fang2,HUANG JunSheng3,KUAI Jie1(
)
Received:2020-06-22
Accepted:2020-08-17
Published:2021-04-16
Online:2021-04-25
摘要:
【目的】茎秆倒伏是制约我国油菜生产效益提高的重要因素,研究不同播期及密度下油菜茎秆抗倒性变化规律及其生理机制,为油菜高产抗倒栽培提供理论及技术支撑。【方法】本研究以华油杂62和沣油520为材料,设置2个播期(9月25日、10月25日)和4个密度(15×104、30×104、45×104和60×104 株/hm2)裂区试验,测定产量及其构成,茎秆抗折力、倒伏指数、显微结构、主要成分及木质素合成关键酶活性等指标。【结果】(1)9月25日播种(T1),密度从15×104hm-2增至60×104hm-2,油菜单株产量、单株角果数及每角粒数均下降,小区产量在45×104 hm-2处理达峰值,此时倒伏指数最小,抗倒能力最强,产量及抗倒性协同提高;播期推迟至10月25日(T2),在任何密度下,小区产量、单株产量、单株角果数及每角粒数均显著降低,但地上部鲜重下降更明显,导致迟播油菜的倒伏指数下降、抗倒性增强。(2)适期播种时,密度增大,株高和茎秆干重均显著降低,倒伏指数呈先降后增的趋势,易倒伏部位从主茎中上部转移至主茎中下部,茎秆维管束长度/髓腔外组织宽度和维管束面积/茎横截面积等指标参数逐渐增加,茎秆木质素和纤维素含量呈先增后降趋势。油菜播期从T1推迟至T2,株高和茎秆干重均显著降低,茎秆木质素、纤维素含量显著下降,但植株地上部鲜重降幅较大,倒伏指数下降,抗倒性增强。逐步回归分析表明木质素是改善输导组织结构、协调倒伏指数及小区产量的关键指标,茎秆木质素含量及群体木质素总量高,可同时获得较强的茎秆抗倒性及较高的小区产量。(3)适期播种,密度从15×104hm-2增至60×104hm-2时,与木质素合成相关的过氧化物酶(POD)、肉桂醇脱氢酶(CAD)、苯丙氨酸解氨酶(PAL)及4-香豆酰-CoA连接酶(4CL)酶活性增强,油菜播期从T1推迟至T2,木质素合成酶POD、CAD、PAL、4CL的活性均显著降低。【结论】不同播期条件下,优化种植密度,可显著提高油菜的群体产量;且播期推迟,可通过进一步增大种植密度弥补单株产量的不足,晚播密植条件下茎秆木质素合成能力增强,木质素含量增加,协调了高产和抗倒的矛盾。
袁圆,汪波,周广生,刘芳,黄俊生,蒯婕. 播期和种植密度对油菜产量和茎秆抗倒性的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(8): 1613-1626.
YUAN Yuan,WANG Bo,ZHOU GuangSheng,LIU Fang,HUANG JunSheng,KUAI Jie. Effects of Different Sowing Dates and Planting Densities on the Yield and Stem Lodging Resistance of Rapeseed[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2021, 54(8): 1613-1626.
表1
2017—2019年油菜生育期及气象数据"
| 播期 Sowing date | 品种 Variety | 密度 Density | 2017-2018 | 2018-2019 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 生育期 Growth days (d) | 有效积温 Effective accumulated temperature (℃) | 降雨量 Rainfall (mm) | 生育期 Growth days (d) | 有效积温 Effective accumulated temperature (℃) | 降雨量 Rainfall (mm) | |||
| T1 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 218 | 2772.2 | 207.3 | 218 | 2669.9 | 492.8 |
| D2 | 216 | 2727.5 | 207.3 | 216 | 2623.5 | 492.8 | ||
| D3 | 214 | 2678.6 | 206.3 | 214 | 2581.4 | 492.8 | ||
| D4 | 213 | 2653.4 | 206.3 | 213 | 2564.0 | 492.8 | ||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 210 | 2586.1 | 206.1 | 210 | 2519.2 | 449.5 | |
| D2 | 208 | 2548.0 | 206.1 | 208 | 2478.0 | 449.5 | ||
| D3 | 206 | 2516.1 | 199.3 | 206 | 2433.3 | 449.5 | ||
| D4 | 205 | 2494.2 | 181.8 | 205 | 2415.4 | 448.4 | ||
| T2 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 191 | 2318.3 | 183.0 | 193 | 2010.4 | 475.9 |
| D2 | 189 | 2275.3 | 180.0 | 192 | 1974.8 | 453.1 | ||
| D3 | 188 | 2254.8 | 180.0 | 191 | 1949.8 | 453.1 | ||
| D4 | 187 | 2234.6 | 180.0 | 190 | 1927.4 | 453.1 | ||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 185 | 2195.1 | 144.2 | 187 | 1995.8 | 474.7 | |
| D2 | 184 | 2172.7 | 144.2 | 186 | 1955.9 | 474.7 | ||
| D3 | 183 | 2150.4 | 144.2 | 185 | 1933.3 | 474.7 | ||
| D4 | 182 | 2126.3 | 144.2 | 184 | 1909.2 | 474.7 | ||
表2
不同播期和密度对油菜产量及产量构成的影响"
| 年份 Year | 播期 Sowing date | 品种 Variety | 密度 Density | 单株角果数 Effective pods per plant | 每角粒数 Seeds per pod | 千粒重 1000-seed weight (g) | 单株产量 Yield per plant (g) | 成株率 Survival rate (%) | 实际产量 Yield (kg·hm-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-2018 | T1 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 315.0b | 17.41a | 3.68a | 20.51a | 93.60a | 2742.3c |
| D2 | 185.0ef | 17.00ab | 3.76a | 11.82d | 87.93bc | 2901.0b | |||
| D3 | 156.8gh | 16.46bcd | 3.60a | 9.24e | 84.22cd | 3290.9a | |||
| D4 | 103.7k | 16.14cde | 3.69a | 6.11h | 82.59de | 2649.1cd | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 372.4a | 16.88b | 3.18bc | 19.99a | 93.53a | 2555.7de | ||
| D2 | 222.8d | 16.58bcd | 3.08bcd | 11.39d | 87.06bc | 2939.5b | |||
| D3 | 172.6fg | 15.45fgh | 3.13bcd | 8.36f | 81.57de | 2731.0c | |||
| D4 | 128.4ij | 15.03h | 3.04cde | 7.03g | 77.30fg | 2625.9cde | |||
| T2 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 262.9c | 16.63bc | 3.26b | 14.25b | 94.51a | 1866.0i | |
| D2 | 171.8fg | 16.17cde | 3.23bc | 8.96ef | 88.57b | 2261.0gh | |||
| D3 | 141.7hi | 15.88ef | 3.19bc | 7.19g | 83.99cd | 2467.1ef | |||
| D4 | 106.9k | 15.01h | 3.19bc | 5.12i | 79.91ef | 2484.9def | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 274.3c | 16.07de | 3.02cde | 13.33c | 96.94a | 1857.7i | ||
| D2 | 190.8e | 15.66efg | 2.92de | 8.73ef | 87.36bc | 2203.5gh | |||
| D3 | 154.9h | 15.38fgh | 2.94de | 6.99g | 79.94ef | 2362.2fg | |||
| D4 | 113.5jk | 15.29gh | 2.87e | 4.99i | 75.55g | 2126.8h | |||
| 2018-2019 | T1 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 284.0b | 16.26a | 3.58c | 17.19a | 97.60a | 2311.5c |
| D2 | 173.6e | 16.00ab | 3.77ab | 10.45b | 93.10ab | 2704.5ab | |||
| D3 | 139.6g | 15.77bcd | 3.79a | 8.28d | 84.50c | 2854.7a | |||
| D4 | 96.1ij | 15.49de | 3.70b | 5.52f | 83.30c | 2655.0b | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 312.6a | 16.16a | 3.30de | 16.60a | 95.20a | 2113.5d | ||
| D2 | 182.6de | 15.80bcd | 3.26ef | 9.67bc | 93.30ab | 2660.3b | |||
| D3 | 152.7fg | 15.50de | 3.29ef | 7.75de | 83.80c | 2534.6b | |||
| D4 | 102.3ij | 15.34ef | 3.21 f | 5.06 fg | 80.70 cde | 2339.1 c | |||
| T2 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 194.1 cd | 16.04ab | 3.21f | 10.00bc | 94.80a | 1384.5h | |
| D2 | 141.4fg | 15.95abc | 3.24ef | 7.31e | 84.40c | 1669.5fg | |||
| D3 | 108.7hi | 15.66cd | 3.37d | 5.74f | 78.30def | 1792.0ef | |||
| D4 | 86.0j | 15.06f | 3.28ef | 4.26gh | 76.90ef | 1932.7e | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 206.0c | 15.73bcd | 2.94g | 9.39c | 89.70b | 1198.2i | ||
| D2 | 157.4f | 15.32ef | 2.92g | 7.05e | 82.20cd | 1514.6gh | |||
| D3 | 123.4h | 15.13f | 2.98g | 5.58f | 77.30ef | 1836.3ef | |||
| D4 | 89.8j | 14.74g | 2.95g | 3.90h | 75.60f | 1570.7g | |||
| 方差分析Variance analyses | |||||||||
| 2017-2018 | T | ** | ** | ** | ** | NS | ** | ||
| V | ** | ** | ** | * | ** | ** | |||
| D | ** | ** | NS | ** | ** | ** | |||
| T×V | ** | * | ** | NS | NS | NS | |||
| T×D | ** | NS | NS | ** | NS | ** | |||
| V×D | ** | NS | NS | * | * | ** | |||
| T×V×D | ** | * | NS | NS | NS | ** | |||
| 2018-2019 | T | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ||
| V | ** | ** | ** | ** | * | ** | |||
| D | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | |||
| T×V | NS | * | ** | NS | NS | NS | |||
| T×D | ** | NS | NS | ** | * | ** | |||
| V×D | ** | NS | ** | NS | NS | * | |||
| T×V×D | ** | NS | NS | NS | NS | * | |||
表3
不同播期和密度对油菜茎秆主要成分的影响"
| 年份 Year | 播期 Sowing date | 品种 Variety | 密度 Density | 酸不溶木质素 Acid insoluble lignin | 酸溶木质素 Soluble lignin | 总木质素 Total lignin | 半纤维素 Hemicel lulose | 纤维素 Cellulose | 可溶性糖 Soluble sugar |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017-2018 | T1 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 24.00bc | 1.73abc | 25.73abcd | 19.03cde | 34.74bc | 3.44a |
| D2 | 24.23abc | 1.70abc | 25.93abc | 20.11b | 36.00ab | 3.24b | |||
| D3 | 24.96a | 1.57c | 26.53a | 21.13a | 37.25a | 3.05c | |||
| D4 | 23.38cde | 1.73abc | 25.11cde | 18.75def | 35.98ab | 3.40a | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 22.43fg | 1.83ab | 24.26fg | 18.66def | 32.78cd | 3.29b | ||
| D2 | 23.74bcd | 1.80ab | 25.54bcd | 18.61def | 34.84bc | 3.11c | |||
| D3 | 24.53ab | 1.74abc | 26.26ab | 19.84bc | 35.61ab | 3.06c | |||
| D4 | 23.78bcd | 1.77ab | 25.55bcd | 19.33bcd | 34.78bc | 3.27b | |||
| T2 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 21.84g | 1.73abc | 23.57g | 16.96hi | 29.14e | 3.08c | |
| D2 | 22.72ef | 1.72abc | 24.43efg | 17.56gh | 30.89de | 2.86e | |||
| D3 | 24.03bc | 1.68abc | 25.71abcd | 17.98fg | 31.51d | 2.71f | |||
| D4 | 24.48ab | 1.63bc | 26.11ab | 18.09efg | 32.61d | 2.68f | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 21.73g | 1.87a | 23.59g | 16.91hi | 22.32h | 2.96d | ||
| D2 | 22.32fg | 1.82ab | 24.14fg | 17.22ghi | 23.79gh | 2.72f | |||
| D3 | 23.08def | 1.82ab | 24.90def | 16.301i | 25.46fg | 2.70f | |||
| D4 | 23.36cde | 1.81ab | 25.17cde | 17.95fg | 27.09f | 2.63f | |||
| 2018-2019 | T1 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 24.43b | 2.03bcde | 26.46b | 18.32abc | 27.97cd | 5.50a |
| D2 | 25.43a | 1.99cdef | 27.42a | 18.90a | 28.85bc | 4.87c | |||
| D3 | 25.66a | 1.94efg | 27.60a | 19.25a | 32.45a | 4.06h | |||
| D4 | 22.58cd | 2.11ab | 24.68cd | 17.10defg | 27.88cd | 4.41f | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 20.96fgh | 2.06abcd | 23.02efg | 17.38cdef | 26.70de | 4.96b | ||
| D2 | 22.44cd | 1.98def | 24.42cd | 18.10abcd | 29.06bc | 4.49e | |||
| D3 | 23.20c | 1.85gh | 25.05c | 18.36abc | 30.59b | 3.21l | |||
| D4 | 21.22efg | 2.01bcde | 23.23ef | 17.53bcde | 28.96bc | 4.33f | |||
| T2 | 华油杂62 HZ 62 | D1 | 20.23hi | 1.91fgh | 22.14gh | 17.44cde | 26.36de | 5.04b | |
| D2 | 21.17efgh | 1.88gh | 23.05efg | 17.62bcde | 26.75de | 4.57d | |||
| D3 | 22.04de | 1.86gh | 23.90de | 18.21abcd | 28.14cd | 4.18g | |||
| D4 | 23.40c | 1.76i | 25.16c | 18.63ab | 28.90bc | 3.76j | |||
| 沣油520 FY 520 | D1 | 19.73i | 2.13a | 21.87h | 15.13h | 23.71g | 4.80c | ||
| D2 | 20.55ghi | 2.08abc | 22.64fgh | 16.15g | 24.68fg | 3.95i | |||
| D3 | 21.84def | 1.87gh | 23.71de | 16.30fg | 26.01ef | 3.43k | |||
| D4 | 23.06c | 1.84hi | 24.90c | 16.64efg | 27.01de | 3.36k | |||
| 方差分析Variance analyses | |||||||||
| 2017-2018 | T | ** | NS | ** | ** | ** | ** | ||
| V | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | |||
| D | ** | NS | ** | ** | ** | ** | |||
| T×V | NS | NS | NS | NS | ** | NS | |||
| T×D | ** | NS | ** | ** | * | ** | |||
| V×D | NS | NS | NS | ** | NS | * | |||
| T×V×D | ** | NS | ** | NS | NS | NS | |||
| 2018-2019 | T | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ||
| V | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | |||
| D | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | |||
| T×V | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | NS | |||
| T×D | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | ** | |||
| V×D | NS | ** | NS | NS | NS | ** | |||
| T×V×D | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | ** | |||
表4
茎秆主要成分与倒伏指数和小区产量的回归系数及显著性检验"
| 播期 Sowing date | 因变量 Dependent variable | 自变量 Independent variable | 回归系数 Regression coefficients | 校准误 Calibration error | 标准系数 Standard coefficient | 显著性Saliency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| T | P | ||||||
| T1 | 倒伏指数 Lodging index | 酸溶木质素soluble lignin | 0.412 | 0.124 | 0.414 | 3.334 | 0.002 |
| 总木质素Total lignin | -0.042 | 0.016 | -0.328 | -2.643 | 0.011 | ||
| 小区产量 Yield | 群体可溶性糖Group soluble sugar | -2.399 | 0.382 | -0.654 | -6.283 | 0.000 | |
| 群体总木质素Group total lignin | 0.670 | 0.085 | 0.821 | 7.889 | 0.000 | ||
| T2 | 倒伏指数 Lodging index | 酸溶木质素soluble lignin | -0.078 | 0.013 | -0.636 | -6.226 | 0.000 |
| 总木质素Total lignin | 0.285 | 0.105 | 0.278 | 2.721 | 0.009 | ||
| 小区产量 Yield | 群体总木质素Group total lignin | 1.144 | 0.071 | 1.001 | 16.074 | 0.000 | |
| 群体可溶性糖Group soluble sugar | -3.392 | 0.643 | -0.329 | -5.274 | 0.000 | ||
| [1] | 刘成, 冯中朝, 肖唐华, 马晓敏, 周广生, 黄凤洪, 李加纳, 王汉中. 我国油菜产业发展现状、潜力及对策. 中国油料作物学报, 2019,41(4):485-489. |
| LIU C, FENG Z C, XIAO T H, MA X M, ZHOU G S, HUANG F H, LI J N, WANG H Z. Development, potential and adaptation of Chinese rapeseed industry. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2019,41(4):485-489. (in Chinese) | |
| [2] | 蒯婕, 孙盈盈, 左青松, 廖庆喜, 冷锁虎, 程雨贵, 曹石, 吴江生, 周广生. 机械收获模式下直播冬油菜密度与行距的优化. 作物学报, 2016,42(6):898-908. |
| KUAI J, SUN Y Y, ZUO Q S, LIAO Q X, LENG S H, CHENG Y G, CAO S, WU J S, ZHOU G S. Optimization of plant density and row spacing for mechanical harvest inwinter rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2016,42(6):898-908. (in Chinese) | |
| [3] | 蒯婕, 王积军, 左青松, 陈红琳, 高建芹, 汪波, 周广生, 傅廷栋. 长江流域直播油菜密植效应及其机理研究进展. 中国农业科学, 2018,51(24):4625-4632. |
| KUAI J, WANG J J, ZUO Q S, CHEN H L, GAO J Q, WANG B, ZHOU G S, FU T D. Effects and mechanism of higher plant density on directly-sown rapeseed in the Yangtze River Basin of China. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018,51(24):4625-4632. (in Chinese) | |
| [4] | BERRY P M, SPINK J H, GAY A P, CRAIGON J. A comparison of root and stem lodging risks among winter wheat cultivars. Journal of Agricultural Science, 2003,141:191-202. |
| [5] | 雷小龙, 刘利, 刘波, 黄光忠, 马荣朝, 任万军. 杂交籼稻F优498机械化种植的茎秆理化性状与抗倒伏性. 中国水稻科学, 2014,28(6):612-620. |
| LEI X L, LIU L, LIU B, HUANG G Z, MA R C, REN W J. Physical and chemical characteristics and lodging resistance of culm of indica hybrid rice F you 498 under mechanical planting. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2014,28(6):612-620. (in Chinese) | |
| [6] | 吴莲蓉. 油菜茎秆生化成分和倒伏相关性研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2015. |
| WU L R. Study on the stem biochemical components in rapeseed and their relationship with lodging characters[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2015. (in Chinese) | |
| [7] | 李华英. 种植密度和播期对冬小麦籽粒产量和抗倒性能的影响[D]. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2015. |
| LI H Y. Effects of plant density and sowing date on grain yieldand lodging resistance of winter wheat[D]. Taian: Shandong Agricultural University, 2015. (in Chinese) | |
| [8] | BHAGAT K P, SAIRAM R K, DESHMUKH P S, KUSHWAHA S R. Biochemical analysis of stem in lodging tolerant and susceptible wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes under normal and late sown conditions. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 2011,16:68-74. |
| [9] | TANAKA K, MURATA K, YAMAZAKI M, ONOSATO K, MIYAO A, HIROCHIKA H. Three distinct rice cellulose synthase catalytic subunit genes required for cellulose synthesis in the secondary wall. Plant Physiology, 2003,133:78-83. |
| [10] |
LI X Y, ZUO Q S, CHANG H B, BAI G P, KUAI J, ZHOU G S. Higher density planting benefits mechanical harvesting of rapeseed in the Yangtze River basin of China. Field Crops Research, 2018,218:97-105.
doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.01.013 |
| [11] | 孙盈盈. 不同栽培措施对油菜产量及抗倒性的影响[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2016. |
| SUN Y Y. Effect of different cultivation measures on rapeseed yieldand lodging resistance[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2016. (in Chinese) | |
| [12] | 李小勇, 周敏, 王涛, 张兰, 周广生, 蒯婕. 种植密度对油菜机械收获关键性状的影响. 作物学报, 2018,44(2):278-287. |
| LI X Y, ZHOU M, WANG T, ZHANG L, ZHOU G S, KUAI J. Effects of planting density on the mechanical harvesting characteristics of semi-winter rapeseed. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2018,44(2):278-287. (in Chinese) | |
| [13] | CROOK M J, ENNOS A R. The effect of nitrogen and growth regulators on stem and root characteristics associated with lodging in two cultivars of winter wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany, 1995,46(289):931-938. |
| [14] |
LI X J, LI S Y, LIN J X. Effect of GA3 spraying on lignin and auxin contents and the correlated enzyme activities in bayberry (Myrica rubra Bieb.) during flower-bud induction. Plant Science, 2003,164:549-556.
doi: 10.1016/S0168-9452(03)00004-9 |
| [15] | 赵小红, 白羿雄, 王凯, 姚有华, 姚晓华, 吴昆仑. 种植密度对2个青稞品种抗倒伏及秸秆饲用特性的影响. 作物学报, 2020,46(4):586-595. |
| ZHAO X H, BAI Y X, WANG K, YAO Y H, YAO X H, WU K L. Effects of planting density on lodging resistance and straw forage characteristics in two hulless barley varieties. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020,46(4):586-595. (in Chinese) | |
| [16] |
VANHOLME R, MORREEL K, RALPH J, BOERJAN W. Lignin engineering. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 2008,11:278-285.
doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2008.03.005 pmid: 18434238 |
| [17] | 汪灿, 阮仁武, 袁晓辉, 胡丹, 杨浩, 林婷婷, 何沛龙, 李燕, 易泽林. 荞麦茎秆解剖结构和木质素代谢及其与抗倒性的关系. 作物学报, 2014,40(10):1846-1856. |
| WANG C, RUAN R W, YUAN X H, HU D, YANG H, LIN T T, HE P L, LI Y, YI Z L. Relationship of anatomical structure and lignin metabolism with lodging resistance of culm in buckwheat. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014,40(10):1846-1856. (in Chinese) | |
| [18] | 束红梅, 赵新华, 周治国, 郑密, 王友华. 不同棉花品种纤维比强度形成的温度敏感性差异机理研究. 中国农业科学, 2009,42(7):2332-2341. |
| SHU H M, ZHAO X H, ZHOU Z G, ZHENG M, WANG Y H. Physiological mechanisms of variation in temperature-sensitivity of cotton fiber strength formation between two cotton cultivars. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2009,42(7):2332-2341. (in Chinese) | |
| [19] | SONG X, LIU F L, ZHENG P Y, ZHANG X K, LU G Y, FU G P, CHENG Y. Correlation analysis between agronomic traits and yield of rapeseed (Brassica napusL.) for high-density planting. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010,43(9):1800-1806. |
| [20] | OZER H. Sowing date and nitrogen rate effects on growth, yield and yield components of two summer rapeseed cultivars. European Journal of Agronomy, 2003,19(3):453-463. |
| [21] | MATINFAR M, MATINFAR M, MAHJOOR M, SHIRANI RAD A H, MAHMODI R. Effect of plant density on yield and yield seed components of rapeseed (Brassica napus) cultivars. Journal of Crop Ecophysiology, 2013,6(4):405-414. |
| [22] |
LI H G, CHENG X, ZHANG L P, HU J H, ZHANG F G, CHEN B Y, XU K, GAO G Z, LI H, LI L X, HUANG Q, LI Z Y, YAN G X, WU X M. An integration of genome-wide association study and gene co-expression network analysis identifies candidate genes of stem lodging-related traits in Brassica napus. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2018,9:796.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00796 pmid: 29946333 |
| [23] |
KATAHIRA R, SLUITER J B, SCHELL D J, DAVIS M F. Degradation of carbohydrates during dilute sulfuric acid pretreatment can interfere with lignin measurements in solid residues. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2013,61(13):3286-3292.
pmid: 23428141 |
| [24] |
PEI Y J, LI Y Y, ZHANG Y B, YU C B, FU T D, ZOU J, TU Y Y, PENG L C, CHEN P. G-lignin and hemicellulosic monosaccharides distinctively affect biomass digestibility in rapeseed. Bioresour Technol, 2016,203:325-333.
doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.12.072 pmid: 26748046 |
| [25] | 周广生, 梅方竹, 周竹青, 朱旭彤. 小麦不同品种耐湿性生理指标综合评价及其预测. 中国农业科学, 2003,36(11):1378-1382. |
| ZHOU G S, MEI F Z, ZHOU Z Q, ZHU X T. Comprehensive evaluation and forecast on physiological indices of waterlogging resistance of different wheat varieties. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2003,36(11):1378-1382. (in Chinese) | |
| [26] | 吕丽华, 陶洪斌, 夏来坤, 张雅杰, 赵明, 赵久然, 王璞. 不同种植密度下的夏玉米冠层结构及光合特性. 作物学报, 2008,34(3):447-455. |
| LÜ L H, TAO H B, XIA L K, ZHANG Y J, ZHAO M, ZHAO J R, WANG P. Canopy structure and photosynthesis traits of summer maize under different planting densities. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2008,34(3):447-455. (in Chinese) | |
| [27] | 胡焕焕, 刘丽平, 李瑞奇, 李慧玲, 李雁鸣. 播种期和密度对冬小麦品种河农822产量形成的影响. 麦类作物学报, 2008,28(3):490-495. |
| HU H H, LIU L P, LI R Q, LI H L, LI Y M. Effect of sowing date and planting density on the yield formation of a winter wheat cultivar Henong 822. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2008,28(3):490-495. (in Chinese) | |
| [28] | LIU W G, DENG Y C, HUSSAIN S, ZOU J L, YUAN J, LUO L, YANG C Y, YUAN X Q, YANG W Y. Relationship between cellulose accumulation and lodging resistance in the stem of relay intercropped soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Field Crops Research, 2016,196:261-267. |
| [29] | 崔海岩, 靳立斌, 李波, 张吉旺, 赵斌, 董树亭, 刘鹏. 遮阴对夏玉米茎秆形态结构和倒伏的影响. 中国农业科学, 2012,45(17):3497-3505. |
| CUI H Y, JIN L B, LI B, ZHANG J W, ZHAO B, DONG S T, LIU P. Effects of shading on stalks morphology, structure and lodging of summer maize in field. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2012,45(17):3497-3505. (in Chinese) | |
| [30] | 佘恒志, 聂姣, 李英双, 刘星贝, 胡丹, 马珊, 次仁卓嘎, 汪灿, 吴东倩, 阮仁武, 易泽林. 不同抗倒伏能力甜荞品种茎秆木质素及其单体合成特征. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(7):1202-1209. |
| SHE H Z, NIE J, LI Y S, LIU X B, HU D, MA S, CIREN Z G, WANG C, WU D Q, RUAN R W, YI Z L. Lignin and lignin monomer synthetic characteristics of culm incommon buckwheat with different lodging resistance capabilities. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017,50(7):1202-1209. (in Chinese) | |
| [31] | 卢昆丽, 尹燕枰, 王振林, 李勇, 彭佃亮, 杨卫兵, 崔正勇, 杨东清, 江文文. 施氮期对小麦茎秆木质素合成的影响及其抗倒伏生理机制. 作物学报, 2014,40(9):1686-1694. |
| LU K L, YIN Y P, WANG Z L, LI Y, PENG D L, YANG W B, CUI Z Y, YANG D Q, JIANG W W. Effect of nitrogen fertilization timing on lignin synthesis of stem and physiological mechanism of lodging resistance in wheat. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014,40(9):1686-1694. (in Chinese) | |
| [32] | 师恭曜. 甘蓝型油菜茎秆抗倒伏性构成因素的鉴定与评价[D]. 郑州: 郑州大学, 2010: 27-31. |
| SHI G Y. Characterization and evaluation of stem lodging resistance in rapeseed (Brassica Campestris L.)[D]. Zhengzhou: Zhengzhou University, 2010: 27-31. (in Chinese) |
| [1] | 彭廷燊, 陆久焱, 吴美林, 严雨欣, 刘宏周, 南文斌, 秦小健, 李明, 龚俊义, 梁永书. 多年生水稻黄糯2号和长白7号产量相关性状的QTL分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(7): 1361-1379. |
| [2] | 朱琦, 贾振鹏, Tahir SHAH, 徐晨晟, 李芷琦, 吕会帅, 朱鹏超, 韦小敏, 黄冬琳, 孙艳妮, 曹卫东, 高亚军, 王朝辉, 张达斌. 绿肥配施增效产品降低旱地麦田温室气体排放及碳足迹[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(7): 1507-1522. |
| [3] | 王玉萍, 符质, 孙佳莹, 穆晓萌, 刘慧淋, 郭进云, 宋文菁, 侯雷平, 赵海亮. 苗期施用褪黑素对番茄短期低温胁迫的缓解作用与应用效果评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(7): 1523-1535. |
| [4] | 苏一帆, 杨瞻旭, 王迪, 冒俊呈, 魏萌萌, 陈泽, 白欣冉, 楚天歌, 马昌宁, 乔明菲, 孙权, 胡大刚. 2, 4-表油菜素内酯对苹果果实采后贮藏性能的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(7): 1536-1551. |
| [5] | 王佳诺, 陈桂平, 李盼, 王丽萍, 南运有, 何蔚, 樊志龙, 胡发龙, 柴强, 殷文, 赵连豪. 免耕地膜两年覆盖提高绿洲灌区玉米产量的灌浆期光合生理机制[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(6): 1189-1202. |
| [6] | 周新杰, 任昊, 陈应龙, 张吉旺, 赵斌, 任佰朝, 刘鹏, 王洪章. 过氧化钙对渍涝农田夏玉米根系形态及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(6): 1203-1216. |
| [7] | 何继航, 张擎, 吕相月, 薛吉全, 徐淑兔, 刘建超. 不同保绿型玉米杂交种氮效率评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(6): 1217-1230. |
| [8] | 刘海卿, 金姣姣, 孙万仓, 柴鹏, 祁伟亮, 杨刚, 李婵, 骆雪梅, 苏芸芸, 秦雪雪. 甘蓝型冬油菜越冬期矮生长点形态建成及多激素调控机制[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(5): 951-966. |
| [9] | 郝琨, 陈洪德, 张威, 钟韵, 党美荣, 朱士江, 黄志坤, 金英. 基于柑橘产量、品质及水氮利用的涌泉根灌水氮综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(4): 862-873. |
| [10] | 郭富城, 唐海江, 郝馨怡, 马国林, 杨九菊, 黄霖锋, 田蕾, 王彬, 罗成科. 不同灌溉方式对宁夏盐渍化土壤水盐运移、水稻产量及水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(4): 750-764. |
| [11] | 申丽琼, 何林丽, 刘倪, 陆俊杏, 朱波, 张涛. 钾营养水平对油菜苗期抗湿害能力及内源激素平衡的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(3): 528-542. |
| [12] | 延廷霖, 杜娅丹, 胡笑涛, 王贺, 李晓雁, 王玉明, 牛文全, 谷晓博. 加气滴灌下氮肥有机替代对亏缺灌溉棉花产量和水分利用效率的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(3): 602-618. |
| [13] | 杨锐, 陈敬东, 黄郢, 谢伶俐, 张学昆, 周登文, 刘清云, 徐劲松, 许本波. 长江上游油菜高产品系遗传改良与构型分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(2): 250-264. |
| [14] | 陈桂平, 韦金贵, 郭瑶, 李盼, 王菲儿, 仇海龙, 冯福学, 殷文. 宽窄行与增密对绿洲灌区玉米光合特性及资源利用的协同效应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(2): 278-291. |
| [15] | 蔡廷阳, 朱玉鹏, 李瑞东, 吴宗声, 徐一帆, 宋雯雯, 徐彩龙, 吴存祥. 苗期叶损伤对黄淮海夏大豆光合特性、荚果分布及产量形成的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2026, 59(2): 292-304. |
|
||