留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

甘蓝型油菜苗期耐旱性综合评价与耐旱性鉴定指标筛选

李阳阳 李驰 任俊洋 李志 张晋峰 吕蓉蓉 张恒 吴丹 王芹 周清元 殷家明 李加纳 刘列钊 唐章林

李阳阳, 李驰, 任俊洋, 李志, 张晋峰, 吕蓉蓉, 张恒, 吴丹, 王芹, 周清元, 殷家明, 李加纳, 刘列钊, 唐章林. 甘蓝型油菜苗期耐旱性综合评价与耐旱性鉴定指标筛选[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2021, 29(8): 1327-1338. doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.200877
引用本文: 李阳阳, 李驰, 任俊洋, 李志, 张晋峰, 吕蓉蓉, 张恒, 吴丹, 王芹, 周清元, 殷家明, 李加纳, 刘列钊, 唐章林. 甘蓝型油菜苗期耐旱性综合评价与耐旱性鉴定指标筛选[J]. 中国生态农业学报(中英文), 2021, 29(8): 1327-1338. doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.200877
LI Yangyang, LI Chi, REN Junyang, LI Zhi, ZHANG Jinfeng, LYU Rongrong, ZHANG Heng, WU Dan, WANG Qin, ZHOU Qingyuan, YIN Jiaming, LI Jiana, LIU Liezhao, TANG Zhanglin. Comprehensive evaluation and identification trait selection of drought resistance at the seedling stage of Brassica napus L.[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2021, 29(8): 1327-1338. doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.200877
Citation: LI Yangyang, LI Chi, REN Junyang, LI Zhi, ZHANG Jinfeng, LYU Rongrong, ZHANG Heng, WU Dan, WANG Qin, ZHOU Qingyuan, YIN Jiaming, LI Jiana, LIU Liezhao, TANG Zhanglin. Comprehensive evaluation and identification trait selection of drought resistance at the seedling stage of Brassica napus L.[J]. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture, 2021, 29(8): 1327-1338. doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.200877

甘蓝型油菜苗期耐旱性综合评价与耐旱性鉴定指标筛选

doi: 10.13930/j.cnki.cjea.200877
基金项目: 

国家重点研发计划项目 2018YFD0100500

重庆市社会事业与民生保障科技创新主题专项 cstc2016shms-ztzx80010

详细信息
    作者简介:

    李阳阳, 主要研究方向为油菜耐旱性机理研究。E-mail: liyangyangswu@163.com

    通讯作者:

    刘列钊, 主要研究方向为油菜耐旱性机理研究, E-mail: liezhao2003@126.com

    唐章林, 主要研究方向为油菜耐旱性品种选育, E-mail: tangzhlin@swu.edu.cn

  • 中图分类号: S326;S565.4

Comprehensive evaluation and identification trait selection of drought resistance at the seedling stage of Brassica napus L.

Funds: 

the National Key R&D Program of China 2018YFD0100500

the Science & Technology Innovation Project of Chongqing Social Undertakings & Livelihood Security cstc2016shms-ztzx80010

More Information
  • 摘要: 我国油菜生产经常遭受干旱胁迫而影响产量和品质,综合评价油菜种质资源的耐旱性,筛选耐旱种质,确定耐旱性鉴定指标,是耐旱新品种培育和耐旱机理研究的基础性工作。本研究利用229份甘蓝型油菜种质资源,在苗期设置干旱胁迫组和正常灌溉(对照)组,测定地上和地下部鲜重和干重及叶片过氧化物酶活性、丙二醛含量、脯氨酸含量、可溶性蛋白含量、可溶性糖含量和相对含水量10个性状,采用耐旱系数、聚类分析、隶属函数、主成分分析和灰色关联度分析等方法对其耐旱性进行综合评价。结果显示,苗期干旱胁迫使甘蓝型油菜幼苗地上和地下部干重和鲜重及叶片相对含水量和可溶性蛋白含量显著降低,使叶片过氧化物酶活性、丙二醛含量、可溶性糖含量和脯氨酸含量显著升高,而地下部干重在正常灌溉组与干旱胁迫组之间差异不显著。229份种质资源划分为8个类群,各类群表现出不同的耐旱特性。RR002、9801C、炎81-2、07037、浙油758和09-P64-1为耐旱材料,11-P30、CY16PXW-35、08-P35、09-P36、甲972和A148为干旱敏感材料。地上部鲜重、叶片脯氨酸含量和可溶性糖含量可作为甘蓝型油菜苗期综合耐旱性快速、简便、准确的鉴定指标。
  • 图  1  229份甘蓝型油菜的8个类群各性状耐旱系数值的热图和多重比较

    对于同一性状, 不同大、小写字母分别表示类型间差异达P < 0.01和P < 0.05显著水平。SFW: 地上部鲜重; SDW: 地上部干重; RFW: 地下部鲜重; RDW: 地下部干重; POD: 叶片过氧化物酶活性; MDA: 叶片丙二醛含量; PROTEIN: 叶片可溶性蛋白含量; PRO: 叶片脯氨酸含量; RWC: 叶片相对含水量; SUG: 叶片可溶性糖含量。

    Figure  1.  Heatmap and multiple comparisons for drought resistance index values of traits in 8 groups of 229 Brassic napus accessions

    For one trait, different capital and lowercase letters mean significant differences among groups at P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 levels, respectively. SFW: shoot fresh weight; SDW: shoot dry weight; RFW: root fresh weight; RDW: root dry weight; POD: leaf peroxidase activity; MDA: leaf malonaldehyde content; PROTEIN: leaf soluble protein content; PRO: leaf proline content; RWC: leaf relative water content; SUG: leaf soluble sugar content.

    图  2  甘蓝型油菜耐旱材料和干旱敏感材料各性状耐旱系数值热图

    红线以上为耐旱材料, 红线以下为干旱敏感材料。SFW: 地上部鲜重; SDW: 地上部干重; RFW: 地下部鲜重; RDW: 地下部干重; POD: 叶片过氧化物酶活性; MDA: 叶片丙二醛含量; PROTEIN: 叶片可溶性蛋白含量; PRO: 叶片脯氨酸含量; RWC: 叶片相对含水量; SUG: 叶片可溶性糖含量。

    Figure  2.  Heatmap of drought resistance index values of traits of drought resistant and sensitive accessions of Brassic napus

    Accessions above the red line are drought-resistant and those below the red line are drought-sensitive. SFW: shoot fresh weight; SDW: shoot dry weight; RFW: root fresh weight; RDW: root dry weight; POD: leaf peroxidase activity; MDA: leaf malonaldehyde content; PROTEIN: leaf soluble protein content; PRO: leaf proline content; RWC: leaf relative water content; SUG: leaf soluble sugar content.

    表  1  干旱处理和正常灌溉处理下229份甘蓝型油菜各性状的变化

    Table  1.   Trait changes of 229 Brassic napus accessions under drought stress and well watering conditions

    性状
    Trait
    处理
    Treatment
    平均值
    Average
    标准差
    Standard error
    最小值
    Min
    最大值
    Max
    变异系数
    Coefficient of variation
    地上部鲜重
    Shoot fresh weight (g·plant–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 45.109**(A) 11.407 21.247 81.800 0.253
    干旱处理Drought stress 8.656**(B) 2.483 4.327 17.990 0.287
    地上部干重
    Shoot dry weight (g·plant–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 3.063**(A) 0.776 1.170 6.237 0.253
    干旱处理Drought stress 1.354**(B) 0.392 0.505 3.288 0.289
    地下部鲜重
    Root fresh weight (g·plant–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 1.241**(A) 0.515 0.173 3.094 0.414
    干旱处理Drought stress 0.790**(B) 0.272 0.227 1.621 0.344
    地下部干重
    Root dry weight (g·plant–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 0.333**(A) 0.093 0.089 0.691 0.279
    干旱处理Drought stress 0.348**(A) 0.077 0.172 0.628 0.221
    叶片过氧化物酶活性
    Leaf peroxidase activity (U·g–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 5.987**(B) 0.994 3.681 9.723 0.166
    干旱处理Drought stress 6.907**(A) 1.284 2.682 10.434 0.186
    叶片丙二醛含量
    Leaf malonaldehyde content (μmol·g–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 0.030**(B) 0.011 0.011 0.073 0.371
    干旱处理Drought stress 0.057**(A) 0.025 0.022 0.182 0.447
    叶片可溶性蛋白含量
    Leaf soluble protein content (mg·g–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 7.380**(A) 2.507 2.799 16.195 0.340
    干旱处理Drought stress 1.987**(B) 0.697 0.708 4.671 0.351
    叶片脯氨酸含量
    Leaf proline content (mg·g–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 1.786**(B) 1.517 0.125 13.237 0.849
    干旱处理Drought stress 3.546**(A) 2.017 0.254 13.271 0.569
    叶片相对含水量
    Leaf relative water content (%)
    正常灌溉Well watering 94.117**(A) 4.079 70.086 99.965 0.043
    干旱处理Drought stress 72.259**(B) 7.509 54.926 96.282 0.104
    叶片可溶性糖含量
    Leaf soluble sugar content (mg·g–1)
    正常灌溉Well watering 16.355**(B) 4.774 6.199 37.745 0.292
    干旱处理Drought stress 31.153**(A) 5.971 16.401 50.094 0.192
    “**”表示不同材料间差异达P < 0.01显著水平; 不同大写字母表示各性状在干旱处理和正常灌溉间差异达P < 0.01显著水平。“**” shows significant difference at P < 0.01 probability level among accessions. Different capital letters show significant differences at P < 0.01 probability level between drought stress and well watering.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  2  229份甘蓝型油菜聚类为不同类群数时各性状耐旱系数值差异的F

    Table  2.   F-values of differences of trait drought resistance indexes when 229 Brassic napus accessions clusting-analyzed into different cluster group numbers

    性状
    Trait
    类群数Group number
    2 3 4 5 6 7 8
    叶片过氧化物酶活性Leaf peroxidase activity 0.489 0.715 12.104** 9.059** 7.548** 6.453** 12.331**
    地上部鲜重Shoot fresh weight 26.750** 33.086** 58.725** 44.722** 36.595** 30.552** 40.273**
    地上部干重Shoot dry weight 46.248** 65.830** 63.557** 48.365** 38.818** 32.323** 29.134**
    地下部干重Root dry weight 38.043** 67.687** 59.565** 44.475** 36.575** 42.757** 40.889**
    地下部鲜重Root fresh weight 11.921** 24.513** 19.320** 14.526** 11.577** 19.368** 17.046**
    叶片丙二醛含量Leaf malonaldehyde content 50.342** 82.932** 56.235** 60.838** 48.967** 40.951** 35.821**
    叶片可溶性蛋白含量Leaf soluble protein content 0.006 0.185 9.628** 7.340** 49.138** 42.310** 36.506**
    叶片脯氨酸含量Leaf proline content 17.476** 17.839** 14.067** 117.741** 94.409** 78.327** 67.303**
    叶片相对含水量Leaf relative water content 0.228 0.248 0.781 1.117 1.017 1.046 3.697**
    叶片可溶性糖含量Leaf soluble sugar content 0.371 0.189 3.303* 2.797* 4.261** 18.019** 15.594**
    “**”和“*”分别表示各类群间性状差异达P < 0.01和P < 0.05显著水平。“**” and “*” show significant difference in traits among groups at P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 probability levels, respectively.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  3  229份甘蓝型油菜的部分极端材料的平均隶属函数值、主成分因子综合值、综合关联度和类群

    Table  3.   Average values of subordinative function, composite values of principal component factors and comprehensive relation degrees of some extreme materials in 229 Brassic napus accessions and their groups

    材料名称
    Accession name
    来源地
    Source
    平均隶属函数值
    Average value of subordinative function
    主成分因子综合值
    Composite value of principal component factors
    综合关联度
    Comprehensive relation degree
    类群
    Group

    Value
    排序
    Rank

    Value
    排序
    Rank

    Value
    排序
    Rank
    科里纳Kelina 重庆Chongqing 0.1033 227 0.7811 217 0.8772 222
    炎81-2 Yan81-2 重庆Chongqing 0.3148 8 1.3903 8 0.8983 6
    SWU40 重庆Chongqing 0.2961 10 1.2003 32 0.8937 23
    SWU44 重庆Chongqing 0.3381 4 1.2326 25 0.8962 13
    SWU59 重庆Chongqing 0.2400 37 1.3770 11 0.8948 15
    CY12PXW-6 四川Sichuan 0.3500 2 1.2908 21 0.8963 12
    CY16PXW-35 四川Sichuan 0.1223 222 0.7263 223 0.8770 225
    wx10213 湖南Hunan 0.1434 203 0.7196 224 0.8789 216
    10-804 湖南Hunan 0.1411 208 0.6731 227 0.8768 226
    631 湖南Hunan 0.2492 31 1.6645 3 0.9119 3
    1360 湖南Hunan 0.2083 70 1.7604 2 0.9242 2
    07037 湖北Hubei 0.3154 7 1.3807 10 0.8968 10
    RR002 湖北Hubei 0.3744 1 1.5993 4 0.9048 4
    宁油1号Ningyou 1 湖北Hubei 0.3331 5 1.3065 18 0.8968 9
    11-9-700 湖北Hubei 0.3039 9 1.3080 17 0.8956 14
    09-P64-1 湖北Hubei 0.3473 3 2.2955 1 0.9571 1
    11-P74-8父本
    Male parent of 11-P74-8
    湖北Hubei 0.1366 214 0.7644 219 0.8780 219
    甲972 Jia 972 湖北Hubei 0.0840 229 0.6112 229 0.8737 229
    甲预05棚Jiayu 05 Peng 湖北Hubei 0.1187 224 0.8147 212 0.8795 215
    浙油758 Zheyou 758 浙江Zhejiang 0.2878 11 1.4124 7 0.8972 8
    垦C1 Ken C1 陕西Shaanxi 0.1250 220 0.7721 218 0.8778 221
    GY284 陕西Shaanxi 0.1258 218 0.7384 222 0.8771 224
    A82 江西Jiangxi 0.1501 196 0.7552 220 0.8801 210
    A148 瑞典Sweden 0.1144 226 0.6761 226 0.8767 227
    08-P35 湖北Hubei 0.1204 223 0.7055 225 0.8772 223
    09-P36 湖北Hubei 0.0952 228 0.6681 228 0.8759 228
    10-P29 湖北Hubei 0.1233 221 0.8305 206 0.8797 214
    11-P30 湖北Hubei 0.1258 219 0.7526 221 0.8780 220
    12-P01 湖北Hubei 0.1168 225 0.8235 209 0.8788 217
    9801C 甘肃Gansu 0.3315 6 1.4178 6 0.8982 7
    SWU41 重庆Chongqing 0.2584 23 1.5867 5 0.9014 5
    SWU69 重庆Chongqing 0.2381 40 1.3873 9 0.8964 11
    229份材料详情可扫本文首页OSID码查看。Scan the OSID code in the first page of this article to view the details of 229 accessions.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  4  229份甘蓝型油菜各主成分因子的特征值、贡献率和特征向量值

    Table  4.   Eigen values of all indexes and their contributions and loading matrix of principal component factors of 229 Brassic napus accessions

    因子
    Factor
    特征值
    Eigen value
    累计贡献率
    Cumulative contribution (%)
    特征向量值Eigen vector
    叶片过氧化物酶活性
    Leaf peroxidase activity
    地上部鲜重
    Shoot fresh weight
    地上部干重
    Shoot dry weight
    地下部干重
    Root dry weight
    地下部鲜重
    Root fresh weight
    叶片丙二醛含量
    Leaf malonaldehyde content
    叶片可溶性蛋白含量
    Leaf soluble protein content
    叶片脯氨酸含量
    Leaf proline content
    叶片相对含水量
    Leaf relative water content
    叶片可溶性糖含量
    Leaf soluble sugar content
    1 2.630 26.302 0.026 0.511 0.494 0.544 0.431 –0.004 0.069 0.035 0.075 –0.031
    2 1.476 41.059 –0.350 –0.178 –0.196 0.145 0.278 0.391 –0.053 –0.426 0.429 0.434
    3 1.151 52.564 –0.024 0.163 0.096 –0.160 –0.266 0.412 0.698 0.363 0.230 0.158
    4 1.012 62.680 0.668 –0.075 –0.054 0.052 0.055 –0.324 0.314 –0.286 –0.022 0.503
    5 0.913 71.807 0.262 –0.133 –0.003 0.068 0.158 0.379 –0.423 0.568 –0.236 0.428
    6 0.878 80.591 0.357 0.077 –0.088 –0.013 –0.118 –0.109 –0.310 0.205 0.813 –0.183
    7 0.820 88.792 0.479 –0.040 –0.111 0.011 0.141 0.609 0.057 –0.314 –0.128 –0.498
    8 0.596 94.749 –0.058 –0.242 –0.485 0.123 0.582 –0.211 0.340 0.370 0.040 –0.224
    9 0.298 97.730 0.018 –0.729 0.644 –0.018 0.097 –0.026 0.093 0.035 0.140 –0.120
    10 0.227 100.000 0.016 0.245 0.189 –0.796 0.507 –0.025 –0.062 –0.048 0.049 0.059
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  5  229份甘蓝型油菜的平均隶属函数值、主成分因子综合值和综合关联度的相关性

    Table  5.   Correlations among average value of subordinative function, composite value of principal component factors and comprehensive relation degree of 229 Brassic napus accessions

    性状
    Trait
    平均隶属函数值
    Average value of subordinative function
    主成分因子综合值
    Composite value of principal component factors
    主成分因子综合值
    Composite value of principal component factors
    0.78**
    综合关联度
    Comprehensive relation degree
    0.74** 0.94**
    “**”表示相关性达P < 0.01显著水平。“**” shows significant correlation at P < 0.01 probability level.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  6  甘蓝型油菜各性状耐旱系数值与平均隶属函数值、主成分因子综合值和综合关联度的相关性

    Table  6.   Correlations between drought resistance index value of each trait and average value of subordinative function, composite value of principal component factors and comprehensive relation degree

    性状
    Trait
    叶片过氧化物酶活性
    Leaf peroxidase activity
    地上部鲜重
    Shoot fresh weight
    地上部干重
    Shoot dry weight
    地下部干重
    Root dry weight
    地下部鲜重
    Root fresh weight
    叶片丙二醛含量
    Leaf malonaldehyde content
    叶片可溶性蛋白含量
    Leaf soluble protein content
    叶片脯氨酸含量
    Leaf proline content
    叶片相对含水量
    Leaf relative water content
    叶片可溶性糖含量
    Leaf soluble sugar content
    平均隶属函数值
    Average value of subordinative function
    0.21** 0.69** 0.66** 0.69** 0.56** 0.27** 0.42** 0.22** 0.25** 0.22**
    主成分因子综合值
    Composite value of principal component factors
    0.13* 0.40** 0.42** 0.53** 0.47** 0.18** 0.11 0.62** 0.13 0.42**
    综合关联度
    Comprehensive relation degree
    0.21** 0.38** 0.39** 0.44** 0.40** 0.15* 0.15* 0.70** 0.09 0.26**
    “**”和“*”分别表示相关性达P < 0.01和P < 0.05显著水平。“**” and “*” show significant correlation at P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 levels, respectively.
    下载: 导出CSV

    表  7  229份甘蓝型油菜各性状耐旱系数的相关系数

    Table  7.   Correlation coefficients of trait drought resistance index values in 229 Brassic napus accessions

    性状
    Trait
    叶片过氧化物酶活性
    Leaf peroxidase activity
    地上部鲜重
    Shoot fresh weight
    地上部干重
    Shoot dry weight
    地下部干重
    Root dry weight
    地下部鲜重
    Root fresh weight
    叶片丙二醛含量
    Leaf malonaldehyde content
    叶片可溶性蛋白含量
    Leaf soluble protein content
    叶片脯氨酸含量
    Leaf proline content
    叶片相对含水量
    Leaf relative water content
    地上部鲜重
    Shoot fresh weight
    0.053
    地上部干重
    Shoot dry weight
    0.044 0.676**
    地下部干重
    Root dry weight
    0.011 0.592** 0.571**
    地下部鲜重
    Root fresh weight
    –0.031 0.343** 0.314** 0.691**
    叶片丙二醛含量
    Leaf malonaldehyde content
    –0.130* –0.046 –0.049 0.004 0.071
    叶片可溶性蛋白含量
    Leaf soluble protein content
    0.038 0.170* 0.102 –0.011 –0.048 0.065
    叶片脯氨酸含量
    Leaf proline content
    0.083 0.140* 0.133* –0.057 –0.114 –0.006 0.028
    叶片相对含水量
    Leaf relative water content
    –0.090 0.087 –0.033 0.124 0.080 0.133 0.033 –0.093
    叶片可溶性糖含量
    Leaf soluble sugar content
    –0.034 –0.151* –0.074 0.043 0.071 0.107 0.059 –0.089 0.119
    “**”和“*”分别表示相关性达P < 0.01和P < 0.05显著水平。“**” and “*” show significant correlation at P < 0.01 and P < 0.05 levels, respectively.
    下载: 导出CSV
  • [1] ZHU J K. Abiotic stress signaling and responses in plants[J]. Cell, 2016, 167(2): 313-324 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.029
    [2] BAC-MOLENAAR J A, GRANIER C, KEURENTJES J J, et al. Genome-wide association mapping of time-dependent growth responses to moderate drought stress in Arabidopsis[J]. Plant, Cell & Environment, 2016, 39(1): 88-102 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26138664
    [3] MARSHALL A, AALEN R B, AUDENAERT D, et al. Tackling drought stress: RECEPTOR-LIKE KINASES present new approaches[J]. The Plant Cell, 2012, 24(6): 2262-2278 doi: 10.1105/tpc.112.096677
    [4] MITTLER R. Oxidative stress, antioxidants and stress tolerance[J]. Trends in Plant Science, 2002, 7(9): 405-410 doi: 10.1016/S1360-1385(02)02312-9
    [5] LI L H, YI H L. Effect of sulfur dioxide on ROS production, gene expression and antioxidant enzyme activity in Arabidopsis plants[J]. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2012, 58: 46-53 doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2012.06.009
    [6] CAO Y, LUO Q X, TIAN Y, et al. Physiological and proteomic analyses of the drought stress response in Amygdalus Mira (Koehne) roots[J]. BMC Plant Biology, 2017, 17(1): 53 doi: 10.1186/s12870-017-1000-z
    [7] HATAMI M, HADIAN J, GHORBANPOUR M. Mechanisms underlying toxicity and stimulatory role of single-walled carbon nanotubes in Hyoscyamus niger during drought stress simulated by polyethylene glycol[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2017, 324: 306-320 doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.10.064
    [8] HE F, SHENG M, TANG M. Effects of Rhizophagus irregularis on photosynthesis and antioxidative enzymatic system in Robinia pseudoacacia L. under drought stress[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8: 183 http://pubmedcentralcanada.ca/pmcc/articles/PMC5311038/
    [9] SHEIKH MOHAMMADI M H, ETEMADI N, ARAB M M, et al. Molecular and physiological responses of Iranian perennial ryegrass as affected by trinexapac ethyl, paclobutrazol and abscisic acid under drought stress[J]. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 2017, 111: 129-143 doi: 10.1016/j.plaphy.2016.11.014
    [10] 路之娟, 张永清, 张楚, 等. 不同基因型苦荞苗期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(17): 3311-3322 doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.17.006

    LU Z J, ZHANG Y Q, ZHANG C, et al. Comprehensive evaluation and indicators of the drought resistance of different genotypes of Fagopyrum tataricum at seedling stage[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(17): 3311-3322 doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.17.006
    [11] 王璐璐, 杨斌, 肖华贵, 等. PEG-6000模拟干旱胁迫下油菜的根系特性与抗旱性[J]. 种子, 2017, 36(8): 93-95 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-2690.2017.08.065

    WANG L L, YANG B, XIAO H G, et al. Root system characteristics and drought resistance of rape under drought stress by PEG-6000[J]. Seed, 2017, 36(8): 93-95 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-2690.2017.08.065
    [12] 胡承伟, 张学昆, 邹锡玲, 等. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下甘蓝型油菜的根系特性与抗旱性[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2013, 35(1): 48-53 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201301009.htm

    HU C W, ZHANG X K, ZOU X L, et al. Root structure and drought tolerance of rapeseed under PEG imposed drought[J]. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2013, 35(1): 48-53 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201301009.htm
    [13] 庞红喜, 赵兰芝. 干旱胁迫下不同油菜新品种萌发期耐旱性的比较[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2016, 44(19): 38-41 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2016.19.015

    PANG H X, ZHAO L Z. Comparison in drought resistance of different rapeseed varieties in germination period under drought stress[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 44(19): 38-41 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0517-6611.2016.19.015
    [14] 董小云, 米超, 刘自刚, 等. PEG模拟水分胁迫对白菜型冬油菜幼苗生长及生长特性的影响[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2018, 52(3): 313-321 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NNXB201803002.htm

    DONG X Y, MI C, LIU Z G, et al. Response of winter rapessed seeding growth and physiological characteristics under PEG drought tolerance[J]. Journal of Henan Agricultural University, 2018, 52(3): 313-321 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NNXB201803002.htm
    [15] 陈致富, 李勤菲, 张永晶, 等. 白菜型油菜品种萌发期的抗旱性鉴定与筛选[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2015, 16(1): 15-22 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZWYC201501004.htm

    CHEN Z F, LI Q F, ZHANG Y J, et al. Identification and screening of resources with tolerance against drought stress in Brassica rapa during germination stage[J]. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2015, 16(1): 15-22 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZWYC201501004.htm
    [16] 许媛君, 张生萍, 马晓岗, 等. 白菜型油菜种质资源抗旱鉴定[J]. 青海大学学报: 自然科学版, 2016, 34(1): 1-8 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QHXZ201601001.htm

    XU Y J, ZHANG S P, MA X G, et al. The drought resistance identification of Brassica rape germplasm[J]. Journal of Qinghai University: Natural Science Edition, 2016, 34(1): 1-8 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-QHXZ201601001.htm
    [17] 原小燕, 符明联, 李根泽, 等. 甘蓝型与芥菜型油菜种间杂交后代DH系抗旱性评价[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2015, 37(1): 62-71 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201501010.htm

    YUAN X Y, FU M L, LI G Z, et al. Evaluation of drought resistance of DH lines from hybrid of B. napus and B. juncea[J]. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2015, 37(1): 62-71 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201501010.htm
    [18] 朱宗河, 郑文寅, 张学昆. 甘蓝型油菜耐旱相关性状的主成分分析及综合评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2011, 44(9): 1775-1787 doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.09.003

    ZHU Z H, ZHENG W Y, ZHANG X K. Principal component analysis and comprehensive evaluation on morphological and agronomic traits of drought tolerance in rapeseed (Brassica napus L. )[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2011, 44(9): 1775-1787 doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2011.09.003
    [19] 涂玉琴, 汤洁, 涂伟凤, 等. 与蔊菜属间杂交产生的甘蓝型油菜新材料的抗旱性综合评价[J]. 西南农业学报, 2016, 29(7): 1506-1513 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNYX201607003.htm

    TU Y Q, TANG J, TU W F, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of novel Brassica napus germplasm derived from intergeneric hybridizations with Rorippa indica[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 29(7): 1506-1513 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XNYX201607003.htm
    [20] 谢小玉, 张霞, 张兵. 油菜苗期抗旱性评价及抗旱相关指标变化分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2013, 46(3): 476-485 doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2013.03.004

    XIE X Y, ZHANG X, ZHANG B. Evaluation of drought resistance and analysis of variation of relevant parameters at seedling stage of rapeseed (Brassica napus L. )[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2013, 46(3): 476-485 doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2013.03.004
    [21] 桂月晶. 油菜抗旱指标筛选及抗旱相关基因的表达分析[D]. 开封: 河南大学, 2011: 23-59

    GUI Y J. Screening of drought resistance indexes and expression of drought-resistant related genes in Brassica napus L. [D]. Kaifeng: Henan University, 2011: 23-59
    [22] 洪双, 李浩, 许鲲, 等. 甘蓝型油菜微核心种质耐旱鉴定与评价指标筛选[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2018, 40(2): 209-217 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201802006.htm

    HONG S, LI H, XU K, et al. Identification of a mini-core collection of Brassica napus accessions for drought tolerance and selection of evaluation indices[J]. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2018, 40(2): 209-217 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201802006.htm
    [23] 牛远, 李玲芬, 杨修艳, 等. 氯化胆碱和海藻糖对油菜蕾薹期干旱胁迫的缓解效应研究和耐旱指标筛选[J]. 核农学报, 2020, 34(4): 860-869 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNXB202004023.htm

    NIU Y, LI L F, YANG X Y, et al. Drought tolerance effects of choline chloride and trehalose on rapeseed (Brassica napus L. ) at bud stage under drought stress and selection of related indices[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 34(4): 860-869 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HNXB202004023.htm
    [24] 侯林涛. 甘蓝型油菜种子老化处理后发芽指数QTL定位及生理分析[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2017: 18-20

    HOU L T. Germination index QTL mapping and physiological analysis for Brassica napus L. seed after artificial aging treatment[D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2017: 18-20
    [25] 王丹丹. 甘蓝型油菜遗传图谱构建及苗期耐旱相关性状的QTL定位[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2014: 20-21

    WANG D D. Mapping and QTL analysis of genes to drought tolerance in Brassica napus L. [D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2014: 20-21
    [26] 唐启义. DPS数据处理系统: 实验设计、统计分析及数据挖掘[M]. 2版. 北京: 科学出版社, 2010

    TANG Q Y. DPS Data Processing System: Experimental Design, Statistical Analysis and Data Mining (Second Edition)[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2010
    [27] 郭雪松. 油菜种质资源耐旱性的鉴定[D]. 重庆: 西南大学, 2009: 9-13

    GUO X S. Evaluation on drought tolerance ability of rapeseed resources[D]. Chongqing: Southwest University, 2009: 9-13
    [28] 李莉, 杨雷, 杨莉, 等. 应用灰色关联分析法综合评价草莓种质资源[J]. 河北农业科学, 2008, 12(4): 18-19, 21 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HBKO200804007.htm

    LI L, YANG L, YANG L, et al. A comprehensive assessment on strawberry germplasm resource by using the grey relevant analysis method[J]. Journal of Hebei Agricultural Sciences, 2008, 12(4): 18-19, 21 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HBKO200804007.htm
    [29] 张朋飞, 武军艳, 孙万仓, 等. 干旱胁迫对白菜型冬油菜苗期生理特性的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2015, 24(2): 84-90 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XBNX201502016.htm

    ZHANG P F, WU J Y, SUN W C, et al. Effect of drought stress on physiological character of winter rape (Brassica campestris L. ) at seedling stage[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Occidentalis Sinica, 2015, 24(2): 84-90 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XBNX201502016.htm
    [30] 王卫芳. 油菜苗期抗旱性评价及生理机制研究[D]. 武汉: 华中农业大学, 2018: 13-18

    WANG W F. Evaluation and physiological mechanism of drought resistance in rape seedling stage[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong Agricultural University, 2018: 13-18
    [31] 孔宪旺, 孙明茂. 水稻不同种质苗期耐旱性综合评价[J]. 江西农业学报, 2019, 31(4): 1-7 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8581.2019.04.001

    KONG X W, SUN M M. Comprehensive evaluation of drought tolerance of different rice germplasms at seedling stage[J]. Acta Agriculturae Jiangxi, 2019, 31(4): 1-7 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8581.2019.04.001
    [32] 蔡东芳, 张书芬, 何俊平, 等. 甘蓝型油菜抗旱性鉴定研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(28): 7-12 doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16090004

    CAI D F, ZHANG S F, HE J P, et al. Drought resistance identification in Brassica napus[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2017, 33(28): 7-12 doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb16090004
    [33] 田宏先, 李小玉, 施毅, 等. 晋北区地方油菜品种苗期抗旱性比较[J]. 山西农业科学, 2020, 48(9): 1411-1417 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2481.2020.09.11

    TIAN H X, LI X Y, SHI Y, et al. Comparison of drought resistance of Brassica juncea varieties in northern Shanxi[J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(9): 1411-1417 doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-2481.2020.09.11
    [34] 田宏先, 施毅, 王瑞霞. 春油菜光合作用及其相关生理特性对苗期干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 种业导刊, 2020, (4): 7-12 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-MLWZ202004003.htm

    TIAN H X, SHI Y, WANG R X. Response of photosynthesis and related physiological characteristics of Brassica juncea to drought stress at seedling stage[J]. Journal of Seed Industry Guide, 2020, (4): 7-12 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-MLWZ202004003.htm
    [35] 田宏先, 王瑞霞, 施毅, 等. 油菜根系对苗期水分胁迫的形态及生理响应[J]. 农业科技通讯, 2020, (8): 148-153 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KJTX202008051.htm

    TIAN H X, WANG R X, SHI Y, et al. Morphological and physiological responses of roots to water stress at seedling stage in Brassica juncea[J]. Bulletin of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020, (8): 148-153 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-KJTX202008051.htm
    [36] 原小燕, 铁朝良, 符明联, 等. 甘芥种间杂交后代DH系花期抗旱性评价[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2017, 35(2): 79-88 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHDQ201702015.htm

    YUAN X Y, TIE C L, FU M L, et al. Drought resistance evaluation of DH lines from interspecific hybrid of B. napus and B. juncea in flowering stage[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2017, 35(2): 79-88 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-GHDQ201702015.htm
    [37] 王瑞霞, 李小玉, 田宏先. 晋北区芥菜型油菜抗旱性鉴定及综合抗旱指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2020, 22(11): 42-51 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NKDB202011006.htm

    WANG R X, LI X Y, TIAN H X. Drought resistance identification and comprehensive drought resistance index screening of rapeseed (Brassica juncea L. )in north Shanxi[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020, 22(11): 42-51 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-NKDB202011006.htm
    [38] 陈娇, 谢小玉, 张小短, 等. 甘蓝型油菜苗期抗旱性鉴定及综合抗旱指标筛选[J]. 中国油料作物学报, 2019, 41(5): 713-722 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201905009.htm

    CHEN J, XIE X Y, ZHANG X D, et al. Seedling drought resistance and parameter screening of rapeseed[J]. Chinese Journal of Oil Crop Sciences, 2019, 41(5): 713-722 https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGYW201905009.htm
  • 加载中
图(2) / 表(7)
计量
  • 文章访问数:  105
  • HTML全文浏览量:  24
  • PDF下载量:  23
  • 被引次数: 0
出版历程
  • 收稿日期:  2020-10-29
  • 录用日期:  2021-02-10
  • 刊出日期:  2021-08-01

目录

    /

    返回文章
    返回