糜子核心种质成株期抗旱性鉴定评价与抗旱种质筛选

doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.21.003

中国农业科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 56 ›› Issue (21): 4163-4174.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2023.21.003

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 • 上一篇下一篇

糜子核心种质成株期抗旱性鉴定评价与抗旱种质筛选

王倩¹^,³(), 董孔军²(), 薛亚鹏¹^,³, 刘少雄¹, 王若楠¹^,³, 杨佳琪¹, 陆平¹, 王瑞云³, 杨天育²(), 刘敏轩¹()

¹ 中国农业科学院作物科学研究所，北京 100081
² 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所，兰州 730070
³ 山西农业大学农学院，山西太谷 030801

收稿日期:2023-04-28 接受日期:2023-06-12 出版日期:2023-11-01 发布日期:2023-11-06
通信作者:
刘敏轩，E-mail：liuminxuan@caas.cn。
杨天育，E-mail：13519638111@163.com
联系方式: 王倩，E-mail：457836483@qq.com。董孔军，E-mail：broommillet@163.com。王倩和董孔军为同等贡献作者。
基金资助:
国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-06-14.5-A2); 农作物种质资源保护与利用专项(2022NWB036-06); 中国农业科学院科技创新工程

Identification and Evaluation of Drought Tolerance and Screening of Drought-Tolerant Germplasm for Core Germplasms in Proso Millet at Adult Stage

WANG Qian¹^,³(), DONG KongJun²(), XUE YaPeng¹^,³, LIU ShaoXiong¹, WANG RuoNan¹^,³, YANG JiaQi¹, LU Ping¹, WANG RuiYun³, YANG TianYu²(), LIU MinXuan¹()

¹ Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081
² Crop Research Institute, Gansu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Lanzhou 730070
³ College of Agronomy, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu 030801, Shanxi

Received:2023-04-28 Accepted:2023-06-12 Published:2023-11-01 Online:2023-11-06

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】干旱是影响糜子生长发育及产量的主要制约因素之一，筛选优异抗旱资源及鉴定指标，为抗旱品种的选育和抗旱分子机制的研究奠定基础。【方法】以200份糜子核心种质资源为研究对象，于2021—2022年在甘肃敦煌连续开展2年的田间成株期抗旱性鉴定，试验设置正常灌水和干旱胁迫2个处理，测定叶面积（leaf area，LA）、主茎直径（main stem diameter，MSD）、主茎节数（number of main stem nodes，NMSN）、主穗长（main panicle length，MPL）、穗下节间长度（peduncle length，PL）、株高（plant height，PH）、单株草重（straw weight per plant，SWPP）、单株穗重（panicle weight per plant，PWPP）、单株粒重（grain weight per plant，GWPP）、千粒重（thousand grain weight，TGW）和小区产量（yield per plot，YPP）11个指标，采用综合抗旱系数（CDTC值）、抗旱指数（DRI值）和抗旱性度量值（D值）对糜子成株期抗旱性进行综合评价。【结果】在不同水分处理条件下，叶面积、主茎直径、主茎节数、主穗长、穗下节间长度、株高、单株草重、单株穗重、单株粒重、千粒重和小区产量11个指标在不同种质间均表现为显著差异。干旱胁迫处理下，糜子的生长受到抑制，11个指标测定值均较正常灌水处理明显降低，且小区产量对干旱胁迫较敏感。相关性分析发现，11个测定指标的抗旱系数间均呈现出一定的相关性，其中，单株穗重和单株粒重的相关性最强，相关系数为0.943。主成分分析将11个鉴定指标转换成6个主成分，累计方差贡献率达80.667%。基于CDTC值、DRI值和D值的糜子资源抗旱性排序基本一致。根据D值利用聚类分析将200份糜子种质资源抗旱性划分为4类，第Ⅰ类为强抗旱型有10份，第Ⅱ类为抗旱型有70份，第Ⅲ类为干旱敏感型有81份，第Ⅳ类为干旱极敏感型有39份。株高、单株粒重、单株穗重和主穗长与D值的相关性较高，相关系数分别为0.756、0.697、0.696和0.679。通过逐步回归分析构建了糜子成株期抗旱评价的回归方程：Y=-1.509+0.362X₁+0.174X₂+0.349X₃+0.389X₄+0.307X₅+0.251X₆+0.218X₇。【结论】抗旱性度量值法适宜于糜子成株期抗旱性评价；筛选出巴林左疙塔黍（00000525）、高台乌糜子（00002677）和民乐红糜子（00002687）等10份强抗旱性材料；株高、单株穗重和主穗长可作为糜子成株期抗旱性鉴定的主要指标。

关键词: 糜子, 大田成株期, 抗旱鉴定, 抗旱种质筛选

Abstract:

【Objective】Drought is one of the major constraints influencing on the growth, development, and yield of proso millet. To screen excellent drought-tolerant accessions and identification indicators will promote the drought-tolerant varieties breeding and drought tolerance molecular mechanisms analysis of proso millet.【Method】In this study, 200 core germplasm accessions of proso millet were used to identify field drought tolerance at adult stage in 2021-2022 at Dunhuang, Gansu province, with two treatments of normal irrigation and drought stress. Eleven morphological indicators, such as leaf area (LA), main stem diameter (MSD), number of main stem nodes (NMSN), main panicle length (MPL), peduncle length (PL), plant height (PH), straw weight per plant (SWPP), panicle weight per plant (PWPP), grain weight per plant (GWPP), thousand grain weight (TGW), and yield per plot (YPP) were determined. Comprehensive drought tolerance coefficient (CDTC value), drought resistance index (DRI value), and drought resistance comprehensive evaluation value (D value) were combined to identify the drought tolerance of proso millet at adult stage.【Result】There were significant differences in all eleven indexes among different accessions under different water treatments, including leaf area, main stem diameter, number of main stem nodes, main panicle length, peduncle length, plant height, straw weight per plant, panicle weight per plant, grain weight per plant, thousand grain weight, and yield per plot. The growth of proso millet was inhibited under drought stress treatments. Compared with the normal irrigation treatments, all the eleven indexes under drought treatments were significantly reduced, and yield per plot was more sensitive to drought treatments. The correlation analysis found that certain degrees of correlation existed among the drought tolerance coefficients of all traits, the correlation between panicle weight per plant and grain weight per plant was strongest, with a correlation coefficient of 0.943. Eleven evaluation indexes were converted into six comprehensive indexes by principal component analysis, with a cumulative variance contribution of 80.667%. The drought tolerance ranking of proso millet accessions based on CDTC value, DRI value and D value was generally consistent. The 200 proso millet accessions were classified into four categories according to D value cluster analysis, 10 of cluster Ⅰ were highly drought tolerant, 70 of cluster Ⅱ were drought tolerant, 81 of cluster Ⅲ were drought sensitive, and 39 of cluster Ⅳ were highly drought sensitive. Plant height, grain weight per plant, panicle weight per plant and main panicle length were highly correlated with D value, with correlation coefficients of 0.756, 0.697, 0.696 and 0.679, respectively. The regression equation for the drought tolerance evaluation was constructed by stepwise regression analysis: Y=-1.509+0.362X₁+0.174X₂+0.349X₃+0.389X₄+0.307X₅+ 0.251X₆+0.218X₇.【Conclusion】The drought resistance comprehensive evaluation value method could be suitable for evaluating the drought resistance of proso millet at adult stage. Ten accessions with highly drought tolerance, such as Balinzuogedashu (00000525), Gaotaiwumizi (00002677) and Minlehongmizi (00002687). Plant height, panicle weight per plant and main panicle length could be used as primary evaluation indexes for drought tolerance of proso millet at adult stage.

Key words: proso millet, adult stage in the field, drought tolerance identification, drought tolerant germplasm screening

王倩, 董孔军, 薛亚鹏, 刘少雄, 王若楠, 杨佳琪, 陆平, 王瑞云, 杨天育, 刘敏轩. 糜子核心种质成株期抗旱性鉴定评价与抗旱种质筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(21): 4163-4174.

WANG Qian, DONG KongJun, XUE YaPeng, LIU ShaoXiong, WANG RuoNan, YANG JiaQi, LU Ping, WANG RuiYun, YANG TianYu, LIU MinXuan. Identification and Evaluation of Drought Tolerance and Screening of Drought-Tolerant Germplasm for Core Germplasms in Proso Millet at Adult Stage[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2023, 56(21): 4163-4174.

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.0578-1752.2023.21.003

https://www.chinaagrisci.com/CN/Y2023/V56/I21/4163

图/表 9

图1

表1

表2

图2

表3

表4

表5

图3

表6

参考文献 38

[1]	ZHANG D Z, PANHWAR R B, LIU J J, GONG X W, LIANG J B, LIU M X, LU P, GAO X L, FENG B L. Morphological diversity and correlation analysis of phenotypes and quality traits of proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) core collections. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2019, 18(5): 958-969. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(18)61997-5
[2]	LIU M X, XU Y, HE J H, ZHANG S, WANG Y Y, LU P. Genetic diversity and population structure of broomcorn millet (Panicum miliaceum L.) cultivars and landraces in China based on microsatellite markers. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2016, 17(3): 370. doi: 10.3390/ijms17030370
[3]	WANG R Y, WANG H G, LIU X Y, LIAN S, CHEN L, QIAO Z J, MCINERNEY C, WANG L. Drought-induced transcription of resistant and sensitive common millet varieties. The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 2017, 27(4): 1303-1314.
[4]	YANG Q H, ZHANG W L, LI J, GONG X W, FENG B L. Physicochemical properties of starches in proso (non-waxy and waxy) and foxtail millets (non-waxy and waxy). Molecules, 2019, 24(9): 1743. doi: 10.3390/molecules24091743
[5]	NIELSEN D C, VIGIL M F. Water use and environmental parameters influence proso millet yield. Field Crops Research, 2017, 212: 34-44. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.06.025
[6]	柴岩. 糜子. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 1999.
	CHAI Y. Broomcorn Millet. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 1999. (in Chinese)
[7]	李翠兰, 戚淑芬. 吉林省粟类作物生产现状及对策. 湖北农业科学, 2009, 48(4): 1011-1013.
	LI C L, QI S F. Current situation and countermeasures of millet crop production in Jilin Province. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2009, 48(4): 1011-1013. (in Chinese)
[8]	CARPENTER J L, HOPEN H J. A comparison of the biology of wild and cultivated proso millet (Panicum miliaceum). Weed Science, 1985, 33(6): 795-799. doi: 10.1017/S0043174500083363
[9]	DAS S, KHOUND R, SANTRA M, SANTRA D. Beyond bird feed: Proso millet for human health and environment. Agriculture, 2019, 9(3): 64. doi: 10.3390/agriculture9030064
[10]	饶玉春, 戴志俊, 朱怡彤, 姜嘉骥, 马若盈, 王予烨, 王跃星. 水稻抗干旱胁迫的研究进展. 浙江师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2020, 43(4): 417-429.
	RAO Y C, DAI Z J, ZHU Y T, JIANG J J, MA R Y, WANG Y Y, WANG Y X. Advances in research of drought resistance in rice. Journal of Zhejiang Normal University (Natural Sciences), 2020, 43(4): 417-429. (in Chinese)
[11]	李瑞雪, 孙任洁, 汪泰初, 陈丹丹, 李荣芳, 李龙, 赵卫国. 植物抗旱性鉴定评价方法及抗旱机制研究进展. 生物技术通报, 2017, 33(7): 40-48. doi: 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2017-0023
	LI R X, SUN R J, WANG T C, CHEN D D, LI R F, LI L, ZHAO W G. Research progress on identification and evaluation methods, and mechanism of drought resistance in plants. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2017, 33(7): 40-48. (in Chinese)
[12]	李龙, 毛新国, 王景一, 昌小平, 柳玉平, 景蕊莲. 小麦种质资源抗旱性鉴定评价. 作物学报, 2018, 44(7): 988-999. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.00988
	LI L, MAO X G, WANG J Y, CHANG X P, LIU Y P, JING R L. Drought tolerance evaluation of wheat germplasm resources. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2018, 44(7): 988-999. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.00988
[13]	孟雨, 田文仲, 温鹏飞, 丁志强, 张学品, 贺利, 段剑钊, 刘万代, 郭天财, 冯伟. 基于不同发育阶段协同的小麦品种抗旱性综合评判. 作物学报, 2023, 49(2): 570-582. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.21008
	MENG Y, TIAN W Z, WEN P F, DING Z Q, ZHANG X P, HE L, DUAN J Z, LIU W D, GUO T C, FENG W. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of wheat varieties based on synergy of different developmental stages. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2023, 49(2): 570-582. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.21008
[14]	李其勇, 朱从桦, 李星月, 武丙琳, 易军, 符慧娟, 陈德西, 张鸿. 水稻芽期抗旱性综合评价及鉴定指标鉴选. 西北农业学报, 2023, 32(1): 18-32.
	LI Q Y, ZHU C H, LI X Y, WU B L, YI J, FU H J, CHEN D X, ZHANG H. Comprehensive evaluation and identification index of drought resistance at germination stage of rice. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2023, 32(1): 18-32. (in Chinese)
[15]	李海明, 刘绍东, 张思平, 李阳, 陈静, 马慧娟, 沈倩, 赵新华, 李存东, 庞朝友. 陆地棉种质资源花铃期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选. 植物遗传资源学报, 2019, 20(3): 583-597. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.20181008003
	LI H M, LIU S D, ZHANG S P, LI Y, CHEN J, MA H J, SHEN Q, ZHAO X H, LI C D, PANG C Y. Identification and indices screening of drought tolerance at flowering and boll setting stage in upland cotton germplasm resources. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2019, 20(3): 583-597. (in Chinese)
[16]	鞠乐, 齐军仓, 成禄艳, 赵佳, 廖永兵. 大麦种子萌发期对干旱胁迫的生理响应及其抗旱性评价. 西南农业学报, 2013, 26(1): 93-98.
	JU L, QI J C, CHENG L Y, ZHAO J, LIAO Y B. Physiological response of barley to drought stress during seed germination period and drought resistance evaluation. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 26(1): 93-98. (in Chinese)
[17]	汪军成, 孟亚雄, 徐先良, 王晋, 赖勇, 李葆春, 马小乐, 王化俊. 大麦苗期抗旱性鉴定及评价. 干旱地区农业研究, 2013, 31(4): 135-143.
	WANG J C, MENG Y X, XU X L, WANG J, LAI Y, LI B C, MA X L, WANG H J. Identification and assessment on drought-resistance of Hordeum vulgare L. at seedling stage. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2013, 31(4): 135-143. (in Chinese)
[18]	徐银萍, 潘永东, 刘强德, 姚元虎, 贾延春, 任诚, 火克仓, 陈文庆, 赵锋, 包奇军, 张华瑜. 大麦种质资源成株期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选. 作物学报, 2020, 46(3): 448-461. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91031
	XU Y P, PAN Y D, LIU Q D, YAO Y H, JIA Y C, REN C, HUO K C, CHEN W Q, ZHAO F, BAO Q J, ZHANG H Y. Drought resistance identification and drought resistance indexes screening of barley resources at mature period. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2020, 46(3): 448-461. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2020.91031
[19]	王玉斌, 平俊爱, 牛皓, 楚建强, 杜志宏, 吕鑫, 李慧明, 张福耀. 粒用高粱种质中后期抗旱性鉴定筛选与分类指标评价. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(22): 4039-4052. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.22.009
	WANG Y B, PING J A, NIU H, CHU J Q, DU Z H, LÜ X, LI H M, ZHANG F Y. Evaluation of identification and classification index for drought resistance at middle and late growth stage in grain Sorghum germplasms. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2019, 52(22): 4039-4052. (in Chinese)
[20]	张文英, 智慧, 柳斌辉, 彭海成, 李伟, 王永芳, 李海权, 栗雨勤, 刁现民. 谷子全生育期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选. 植物遗传资源学报, 2010, 11(5): 560-565. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2010.05.008
	ZHANG W Y, ZHI H, LIU B H, PENG H C, LI W, WANG Y F, LI H Q, LI Y Q, DIAO X M. Indexes screening for drought resistance test of foxtail millet. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2010, 11(5): 560-565. (in Chinese)
[21]	王兰芬, 武晶, 景蕊莲, 程须珍, 王述民. 绿豆种质资源成株期抗旱性鉴定. 作物学报, 2015, 41(8): 1287-1294.
	WANG L F, WU J, JING R L, CHENG X Z, WANG S M. Identification of mungbean germplasm resources resistant to drought at adult stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2015, 41(8): 1287-1294. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2015.01287
[22]	张盼盼, 冯佰利, 王鹏科, 高小丽, 高金锋, 宋慧, 张小东, 柴岩. PEG胁迫下糜子苗期抗旱指标鉴选研究. 中国农业大学学报, 2012, 17(1): 53-59.
	ZHANG P P, FENG B L, WANG P K, GAO X L, GAO J F, SONG H, ZHANG X D, CHAI Y. Study on identification of drought-resistance indexes at seedling stage in broomcorn millet under PEG stress. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2012, 17(1): 53-59. (in Chinese)
[23]	刘天鹏, 董孔军, 何继红, 任瑞玉, 张磊, 杨天育. 糜子育成品种芽期抗旱性鉴定与评价研究. 植物遗传资源学报, 2014, 15(4): 746-752. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2014.04.010
	LIU T P, DONG K J, HE J H, REN R Y, ZHANG L, YANG T Y. Identification and evaluation on the drought resistance of broomcorn millet bred cultivars at germinating stage. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2014, 15(4): 746-752. (in Chinese)
[24]	董孔军, 刘天鹏, 何继红, 任瑞玉, 张磊, 杨天育. 糜子育成品种苗期抗旱性评价与鉴定指标筛选. 植物遗传资源学报, 2015, 16(5): 968-975. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2015.05.007
	DONG K J, LIU T P, HE J H, REN R Y, ZHANG L, YANG T Y. Evaluation and identification indexes selection on the drought resistance of broomcorn millet elite cultivars at seeding stage. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2015, 16(5): 968-975. (in Chinese)
[25]	邵欢欢, 陆平, 史梦莎, 王璐琳, 乔治军, 刘敏轩, 王瑞云. 黍稷芽、苗期抗旱性评价及抗旱资源鉴定. 分子植物育种, 2021, 19(4): 1284-1296.
	SHAO H H, LU P, SHI M S, WANG L L, QIAO Z J, LIU M X, WANG R Y. Evaluation and identification of broomcorn millet resources for drought resistance at germination and seedling stages. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2021, 19(4): 1284-1296. (in Chinese)
[26]	何继红, 刘天鹏, 董孔军, 刘敏轩, 陆平, 任瑞玉, 张磊, 杨天育. 糜子育成品种成株期抗旱性鉴定与评价. 植物遗传资源学报, 2016, 17(1): 45-52. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2016.01.008
	HE J H, LIU T P, DONG K J, LIU M X, LU P, REN R Y, ZHANG L, YANG T Y. Evaluation and identification on the drought resistance of broomcorn millet bred cultivars at adult stage. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2016, 17(1): 45-52. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2016.01.008
[27]	刘宁, 王威, 颜国荣, 肖菁, 白玉亭, 柏仲祥, 昌小平, 刘志勇, 景蕊莲. 黍稷农家种种质资源抗旱性的田间鉴定. 新疆农业科学, 2016, 53(3): 581-588.
	LIU N, WANG W, YAN G R, XIAO J, BAI Y T, BO Z X, CHANG X P, LIU Z Y, JING R L. Identification and evaluation of drought- resistance in Panicum miliaceum germplasm resources in grey desert soil. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 53(3): 581-588. (in Chinese)
[28]	江佰阳, 白文斌, 张建华, 范娜, 史丽娟. 高粱抗旱性鉴定方法及分子生物学研究进展. 生物技术通报, 2021, 37(4): 260-272. doi: 10.13560/j.cnki.biotech.bull.1985.2020-0941
	JIANG B Y, BAI W B, ZHANG J H, FAN N, SHI L J. Advances in studies on identification methods and molecular biology of drought resistance in Sorghum. Biotechnology Bulletin, 2021, 37(4): 260-272. (in Chinese)
[29]	ZOU J, HU W, LI Y X, HE J Q, ZHU H H, ZHOU Z G. Screening of drought resistance indices and evaluation of drought resistance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2020, 19(2): 495-508. doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(19)62696-1
[30]	张彦军, 苟作旺, 王兴荣, 陈伟英, 祁旭升. 胡麻种质萌发期抗旱性综合评价. 植物遗传资源学报, 2015, 16(3): 520-527. doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2015.03.012
	ZHANG Y J, GOU Z W, WANG X R, CHEN W Y, QI X S. Comprehensive valuation of drought resistance of flax germplasm in germination. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2015, 16(3): 520-527. (in Chinese) doi: 10.13430/j.cnki.jpgr.2015.03.012
[31]	肖继兵, 刘志, 辛宗绪, 李俊志, 陈国秋, 朱晓东, 孙占祥. 基于主成分分析和隶属函数的谷子全生育期耐旱性鉴定. 干旱地区农业研究, 2022, 40(6): 34-44.
	XIAO J B, LIU Z, XIN Z X, LI J Z, CHEN G Q, ZHU X D, SUN Z X. Identification of drought tolerance in foxtail millet during its entire growth period based on principal component analysis and membership function. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2022, 40(6): 34-44. (in Chinese)
[32]	祁旭升, 刘章雄, 关荣霞, 王兴荣, 苟作旺, 常汝镇, 邱丽娟. 大豆成株期抗旱性鉴定评价方法研究. 作物学报, 2012, 38(4): 665-674.
	QI X S, LIU Z X, GUAN R X, WANG X R, GOU Z W, CHANG R Z, QIU L J. Comparison of evaluation methods for drought-resistance at soybean adult stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2012, 38(4): 665-674. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2012.00665
[33]	汪灿, 周棱波, 张国兵, 徐燕, 张立异, 高旭, 高杰, 姜讷, 邵明波. 酒用糯高粱资源成株期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(8): 1388-1402. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.08.004
	WANG C, ZHOU L B, ZHANG G B, XU Y, ZHANG L Y, GAO X, GAO J, JIANG N, SHAO M B. Drought resistance identification and drought resistance indices screening of liquor-making waxy sorghum resources at adult plant stage. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(8): 1388-1402. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.08.004
[34]	WANG H G, CHEN L, WANG J J, CAO X N, DONG J L, WANG L, YANG T Y, QIAO Z J. Comprehensive assessment of drought resistance of proso millet germplasm resources in Shanxi. Agricultural Science & Technology, 2015, 16(9): 1916-1920.
[35]	李忠旺, 陈玉梁, 罗俊杰, 石有太, 冯克云, 陈子萱. 棉花抗旱品种筛选鉴定及抗旱性综合评价方法. 干旱地区农业研究, 2017, 35(1): 240-247.
	LI Z W, CHEN Y L, LUO J J, SHI Y T, FENG K Y, CHEN Z X. Screening and evaluation for drought resistance of cotton varieties. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2017, 35(1): 240-247. (in Chinese)
[36]	王兴荣, 李玥, 张彦军, 李永生, 汪军成, 徐银萍, 祁旭升. 青稞种质资源成株期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选. 作物学报, 2022, 48(5): 1279-1287. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.11048
	WANG X R, LI Y, ZHANG Y J, LI Y S, WANG J C, XU Y P, QI X S. Drought resistance identification and drought resistance indexes screening of Tibetan hulless barley resources at adult stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(5): 1279-1287. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.11048
[37]	胡亮亮, 王素华, 王丽侠, 程须珍, 陈红霖. 绿豆种质资源苗期耐盐性鉴定及耐盐种质筛选. 作物学报, 2022, 48(2): 367-379. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.04283
	HU L L, WANG S H, WANG L X, CHENG X Z, CHEN H L. Identification of salt tolerance and screening of salt tolerant germplasm of mungbean (Vigna radiate L.) at seedling stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(2): 367-379. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.04283
[38]	田宏先, 李海, 杨如达, 张翔宇, 梁海燕. 不同糜子品种抗旱鉴定试验. 山西农业科学, 2015, 43(4): 391-392, 396.
	TIAN H X, LI H, YANG R D, ZHANG X Y, LIANG H Y. Different drought resistance identification of broomcorn millet variety test. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Sciences, 2015, 43(4): 391-392, 396. (in Chinese)

性状 Trait	处理 Treatment	平均值 Average	最小值 Min	最大值 Max	标准偏差 SD	变异系数 CV	t值 t-value	相关系数 r
株高 PH (cm)	WW	148.37	79.10	182.51	23.01	0.16	-30.823	0.839
株高 PH (cm)	DS	119.80	73.57	146.03	15.42	0.13	-30.823	0.839
穗下节间长度 PL (cm)	WW	22.87	16.53	32.03	2.49	0.11	-7.548	0.708
穗下节间长度 PL (cm)	DS	21.86	15.68	28.00	2.46	0.11	-7.548	0.708
主茎直径 MSD (cm)	WW	7.41	4.36	9.10	1.02	0.14	-3.175	0.910
主茎直径 MSD (cm)	DS	7.31	4.22	9.08	0.97	0.13	-3.175	0.910
主茎节数 NMSN	WW	7.32	6.43	8.00	0.34	0.05	-19.921	0.719
主茎节数 NMSN	DS	6.95	6.03	7.82	0.36	0.05	-19.921	0.719
主穗长 MPL (cm)	WW	36.62	21.01	45.72	4.31	0.12	-17.773	0.799
主穗长 MPL (cm)	DS	33.28	21.28	44.02	4.03	0.12	-17.773	0.799
叶面积 LA (cm²)	WW	54.32	26.56	68.66	8.86	0.16	-9.354	0.851
叶面积 LA (cm²)	DS	51.20	25.40	69.78	8.28	0.16	-9.354	0.851
单株草重 SWPP (g)	WW	25.65	6.18	59.38	9.32	0.36	-6.362	0.902
单株草重 SWPP (g)	DS	23.83	6.77	50.07	8.72	0.37	-6.362	0.902
单株穗重 PWPP (g)	WW	18.20	9.73	30.57	3.71	0.20	-16.056	0.537
单株穗重 PWPP (g)	DS	14.60	8.68	23.72	2.50	0.17	-16.056	0.537
单株粒重 GWPP (g)	WW	11.06	4.87	19.42	2.61	0.24	-17.256	0.546
单株粒重 GWPP (g)	DS	8.30	3.75	15.15	2.00	0.24	-17.256	0.546
千粒重 TGW (g)	WW	5.97	4.50	7.03	0.61	0.10	-11.638	0.832
千粒重 TGW (g)	DS	5.69	4.18	6.85	0.58	0.10	-11.638	0.832
小区产量 YPP (g)	WW	216.92	61.68	446.72	86.14	0.40	-16.619	0.805
小区产量 YPP (g)	DS	156.78	44.50	385.92	66.83	0.43	-16.619	0.805

性状Trait	最小值Min	最大值Max	平均值Average	标准偏差SD	变异系数CV
株高PH	0.644	1.034	0.815	0.072	0.089
穗下节间长度PL	0.771	1.247	0.959	0.081	0.085
主茎直径MSD	0.835	1.237	0.990	0.061	0.062
主茎节数NMSN	0.857	1.060	0.950	0.035	0.037
主穗长MPL	0.708	1.126	0.911	0.070	0.077
叶面积LA	0.696	1.241	0.947	0.088	0.093
单株草重SWPP	0.523	1.461	0.942	0.163	0.173
单株穗重PWPP	0.531	1.246	0.820	0.152	0.185
单株粒重GWPP	0.452	1.376	0.770	0.181	0.232
千粒重TGW	0.783	1.131	0.954	0.059	0.061
小区产重YPP	0.399	1.319	0.743	0.188	0.253

性状 Trait	主成分Principal component
性状 Trait	第1主成分 PC1	第2主成分 PC2	第3主成分 PC3	第4主成分 PC4	第5主成分 PC5	第6主成分 PC6
株高PH	0.691	0.425	-0.074	-0.310	-0.086	0.035
穗下节间长度PL	0.149	0.597	-0.245	0.519	-0.015	0.061
主茎直径MSD	0.330	0.145	0.509	0.086	0.662	0.386
主茎节数NMSN	0.325	0.574	0.009	-0.363	-0.376	0.405
主穗长MPL	0.564	0.491	-0.050	0.308	0.087	-0.206
叶面积LA	0.379	0.326	0.462	-0.193	0.008	-0.638
单株草重SWPP	0.231	-0.239	0.690	0.392	-0.314	0.113
单株穗重PWPP	0.821	-0.404	-0.001	0.142	-0.158	0.086
单株粒重GWPP	0.831	-0.409	-0.061	0.059	-0.129	0.063
千粒重TGW	0.549	-0.091	-0.399	0.223	0.299	-0.022
小区产量YPP	0.561	-0.427	-0.205	-0.350	0.106	-0.126
特征值 Eigenvalues	3.209	1.814	1.222	0.968	0.832	0.800
贡献率Contribution rate (%)	29.174	16.487	11.105	8.966	7.595	7.340
累积贡献率Cumulative contribution (%)	29.174	45.660	56.766	65.732	73.327	80.667

排名 Rank	序号 Number	材料名称 Material name	CDTC值 CDTC value	序号 Number	材料名称 Material name	DRI值 DRI value	序号 Number	材料名称 Material name	D值 D value
1	188	糜子 Mizi	1.083	194	黄糜子 Huangmizi	4.252	80	巴林左疙塔黍 Balinzuogedashu	0.692
2	80	巴林左疙塔黍 Balinzuogedashu	1.070	93	灵武70天 Lingwu70tian	3.111	12	高台乌糜子 Gaotaiwumizi	0.671
3	33	骨都白 Gudoubai	1.066	193	花糜子 Huamizi	2.966	14	民乐红糜子 Minlehongmizi	0.659
4	109	白圪塔糜 Baigedami	1.046	192	糜子 Mizi	2.845	33	骨都白 Gudoubai	0.648
5	107	小青糜 Xiaoqingmi	1.030	188	糜子 Mizi	2.730	109	白圪塔糜 Baigedami	0.638
6	81	五原黑黍子 Wuyuanheishuzi	1.026	186	白糜子 Baimizi	2.545	199	笊篱白 Zhaolibai	0.633
7	190	黄糜子 Huangmizi	1.022	191	额敏红糜 Eminhongmi	2.511	51	黄糜子 Huangmizi	0.630
8	28	古浪半个红 Gulangbangehong	1.018	51	黄糜子 Huangmizi	2.410	52	白糜子 Baimizi	0.626
9	51	黄糜子 Huangmizi	1.003	127	小白黍 Xiaobaishu	2.376	53	红鹌鹑尾 Honganchunwei	0.625
10	29	S02036	0.997	31	小黍子 Xiaoshuzi	2.275	97	小黄糜子 Xiaohuangmizi	0.625

指标Index	CDTC值CDTC value	DRI值DRI value	D值D value
CDTC值CDTC value	1
DRI值DRI value	0.580**	1
D值D value	0.685**	0.515**	1

糜子核心种质成株期抗旱性鉴定评价与抗旱种质筛选

Identification and Evaluation of Drought Tolerance and Screening of Drought-Tolerant Germplasm for Core Germplasms in Proso Millet at Adult Stage

RichHTML

PDF

赞

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 38

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

指标 Index	相关系数 Correlation coefficient	P值 P value
株高PH	0.756	0.000
穗下节间长度PL	0.341	0.000
主茎直径MSD	0.448	0.000
主茎节数NMSN	0.446	0.000
主穗长MPL	0.679	0.000
叶面积LA	0.318	0.000
单株草重SWPP	0.138	0.000
单株穗重PWPP	0.696	0.000
单株粒重GWPP	0.697	0.000
千粒重TGW	0.491	0.000
产量YPP	0.372	0.000

[1]	马智秀, 柴少华, 郭岩, 石兴, 杨清华, 高金锋, 高小丽, 冯佰利, 杨璞. 基于GYT双标图分析对国家糜子区域试验品种的综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(16): 3062-3076.
[2]	薛亚鹏, 丁艺冰, 王宇卓, 王晓丹, 曹晓宁, SANTRA Dipak K, 陈凌, 乔治军, 王瑞云. 基于荧光SSR构建中国糜子核心种质DNA分子身份证[J]. 中国农业科学, 2023, 56(12): 2249-2261.
[3]	王君杰,田翔,秦慧彬,王海岗,曹晓宁,陈凌,刘思辰,乔治军. 光周期对糜子生长发育及叶片内源激素的调控效应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(2): 286-295.
[4]	董明,降彦苗,李海权,耿玲玲,刘建烨,乔志红,刘国庆. 光周期变化对糜子形态建成及幼穗发育进程的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(6): 1118-1125.
[5]	王君杰,王海岗,曹晓宁,陈凌,刘思辰,田翔,秦慧彬,乔治军. 糜子不同性状光周期敏感性的综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(3): 474-485.
[6]	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[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(16): 3214-3224.
[7]	陈小红,何杰丽,石甜甜,邵欢欢,王海岗,陈凌,高志军,王瑞云,乔治军. 基于转录组测序开发糜子SSR标记[J]. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(10): 1940-1949.
[8]	寇淑君, 霍阿红, 付国庆, 纪军建, 王瑶, 左振兴, 刘敏轩, 陆平. 利用荧光SSR分析中国糜子的遗传多样性和群体遗传结构[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(9): 1475-1477.
[9]	罗艳, 屈洋, 杨清华, 张伟丽, 宫香伟, 李境, 高小丽, 高金锋, 杨璞, 王鹏科, 冯佰利. 播期对糜子农艺性状及淀粉理化性质的影响[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(22): 4154-4165.
[10]	宫香伟,党科,李境,罗艳,赵冠,杨璞,高小丽,高金锋,王鹏科,冯佰利. 糜子绿豆间作模式下糜子光合物质生产及水分利用效率[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(22): 4139-4153.
[11]	石甜甜, 何杰丽, 高志军, 陈凌, 王海岗, 乔治军, 王瑞云. 利用EST-SSR评估糜子资源遗传差异[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(22): 4100-4109.
[12]	袁雨豪, 杨清华, 党科, 杨璞, 高金锋, 高小丽, 王鹏科, 陆平, 刘敏轩, 冯佰利. 糜子资源耐盐性评价与盐胁迫生理响应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(22): 4066-4078.
[13]	王君杰,陈凌,王海岗,曹晓宁,刘思辰,田翔,秦慧彬,乔治军. 糜子叶片氮含量和籽粒蛋白质含量高光谱监测研究[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(15): 2593-2603.
[14]	宫香伟，韩浩坤，张大众，李境，王孟，薛志和，杨璞，高小丽，冯佰利. 氮肥运筹对糜子生育后期干物质积累与转运及叶片氮素代谢的调控效应[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(6): 1045-1056.
[15]	薛延桃，陆平，乔治军，刘敏轩，王瑞云. 基于SSR标记的黍稷种质资源遗传多样性及亲缘关系研究 [J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(15): 2846-2859.