黑龙江中上游地区早熟野生大豆种质资源的抗旱性鉴定
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Drought Tolerance Evaluation of the Early-Maturing Annual Wild Soybeans from the Upper and Middle Reaches of Heilongjiang River
  • 作者:崔杰印 ; 武婷婷 ; 宋雯雯 ; 贾鸿昌 ; 吴纪安 ; 韩天富
  • 英文作者:CUI Jie-yin;WU Ting-ting;SONG Wen-wen;JIA Hong-chang;WU Ji-an;HAN Tian-fu;Institute of Crop Sciences,Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences/Key Laboratory of Soybean Biology(Beijing) ,Ministry of Agriculture;Heihe Branch of Heilongjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences;
  • 关键词:野生大豆 ; 干旱胁迫 ; 抗旱性鉴定 ; D值
  • 英文关键词:wild soybean(Glycine soja);;drought stress;;evaluation of drought tolerance;;D value
  • 中文刊名:ZWYC
  • 英文刊名:Journal of Plant Genetic Resources
  • 机构:中国农业科学院作物科学研究所/农业农村部北京大豆生物学重点实验室;黑龙江省农业科学院黑河分院;
  • 出版日期:2018-08-24 10:01
  • 出版单位:植物遗传资源学报
  • 年:2018
  • 期:v.19
  • 基金:国家现代农业产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-04);; 中国农业科学院农业科技创新工程
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:ZWYC201806010
  • 页数:10
  • CN:06
  • ISSN:11-4996/S
  • 分类号:59-68
摘要
一年生野生大豆是栽培大豆的祖先种,具有遗传变异丰富、蛋白质含量高、抗逆性强等特点。我国东北北部地区野生大豆分布广泛,但对该地区野生大豆种质资源的性状鉴定和育种利用相对滞后。本试验选用来自黑龙江中上游地区、生育期相近的30份野生大豆资源,在人工控制水分的条件下进行全生育期多性状抗旱性鉴定。试验结果表明,不同性状对干旱胁迫的反应存在一定差异,其中产量和株高反应敏感,生育期性状及百粒重反应钝感。对所得抗旱性度量值(D)进行聚类分析,将供试材料划分为5个级别,其中I级(高度抗旱型) 2份(锦05017,C05038)、II级(中度抗旱型) 4份、III级(弱抗旱型) 12份、IV级(水分敏感型) 10份、V级(水分高度敏感型) 2份。抗旱性度量值(D)与营养生长期(V)、分枝数及单株产量呈极显著正相关,与生殖生长期(R)及R/V比值呈负相关,表明在干旱胁迫条件下,营养生长期(V)相对较长、生殖生长期(R)相对较短、R/V较小的材料抗旱性较高。综上所述,根据多性状指标计算的抗旱性度量值(D)是评价野生大豆资源抗旱性的可靠指标。营养生长期、R/V、分枝数和单株产量等性状可作为野生大豆抗旱性评价的简便指标。
        As the ancestor of cultivated soybean,wild soybean with annual habit(Glycine soja Sieb. et Zucc.)represents abundant genetic diversity,high protein content,strong tolerance to stresses,etc. The wild soybean was widely distributed in northeast part of China,but exploration and breeding application remained largely delayed. By using thirty wild soybean accessions that were collected from upper and middle reaches of the Heilongjiang River,we evaluated the drought tolerance both in normal irrigation and drought stress treatments using multiple indices. The results showed the differences in responses of various traits of wild soybeans to drought stress,i. e.,that yield and plant height were sensitive to drought stress whereas 100-seed weight and maturity traits were insensitive. These accessions were classified into five groups according to the drought tolerance comprehensive value(D). Two accessions(Jin 05017 and C05038) were classified into grade I(highly-tolerant),four accessions in grade II(medium-tolerant),12 in grade III(weakly-tolerant),10 in grade IV(water-sensitive) and 2 in grade V(highly-sensitive to water). D value,as the comprehensive index of drought tolerance,positively correlated to vegetative growth period(V),branch number and seed yield per plant,and negatively correlated to reproductive period(R) and the ration ofR to V(R/V). That indicated that wild soybeans with longer vegetative growth period,shorter reproductive period and smaller R/V ratio became tolerant to drought stress. Taken together,this work suggested the D value as the comprehensive index based on multiple traits might be a reliable indicator for evaluating the drought tolerance of wild soybeans. Alternatively,vegetative period,R/V ration,branch number and seed yield per plant can be used as simple indices for drought tolerance evaluation.
引文
[1] Lesk C,Rowhani P,Ramankutty N. Influence of extreme weather disasters on global crop production. Nature,2016,529:84-87
    [2] Hu Y N,Liu Y J,Tang H J,XuY L,Pan J. Ontribution of drought to potential crop yield reduction in a wheat-maize rotation region in the North China Plain. Journal of Integrative Agriculture,2014,13:1509-1519
    [3] von Uexkull N,Croicu M,Fjelde H,Buhaug H. Civil conflict sensitivity to growing-season drought. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences,USA,2016,113(44):12391-12396
    [4]杨如萍,包振贤,陈光荣.大豆抗旱性研究进展.作物杂志,2012(5):8-12
    [5] He X Y,Zheng H F,Guo R C,Ren Z B,Zhang D,Lin J X. Spatial and temporal analysis of drought risk during the crop-growing season over northeast China. Natural Hazards,2014,71:275-289
    [6]韩晓敏,延军平.东北农牧交错带旱涝特征对气候变化的响应.水土保持通报,2015,35(2):257-262
    [7]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
    [8]李金玉,赵晋铭,韩天富,盖钧镒.气候变化对大豆的影响及其对策研究//《气候变化对作物生产的影响及对策》课题组.气候变化对作物生产的影响及对策.北京:中国农业出版社,2013:152-171
    [9] Wang K,Li X,Li F. Phenotypic diversity of the big seed type subcollection of wild soybean(Glycine soja Sieb. et Zucc.)in China.Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution,2008,55(8):1335-1346
    [10] Guo J,Liu Y,Wang Y,Chen J,Li Y,Huang H,Qiu L,Wang Y.Population structure of the wild soybean(Glycine soja)in China:Implications from microsatellite analyses. Annals of Botany,2012,110(4):777-785
    [11] Ku Y S,Au-Yeung W K,Yung Y L,Li M W,Wen C Q,Liu X,Lam H M. Drought stress and tolerance in soybean//Board J E A. Comprehensive Survey of International Soybean Research-Genetics,Physiology,Agronomy and Nitrogen Relationships. Rijeka:InTech,2013:209-237
    [12]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
    [13] Korte L L,Specht J E,Williams J H,Sorensen R C. Irrigation of soybean genotypes during reproductive ontogeny II. yield component responses. Crop Sciences,1983,23(3):521-527
    [14] Eck H V,Mathers A C,Musick J T. Plant water stress at various growth stages and growth and yield of soybeans. Field Crops Research,1987,17(1):1-16
    [15] Desclaux D,Huynh T T,Roumet P. Identification of soybean plant characteristics that indicate the timing of drought stress. Crop Science,2000,40(3):716-722
    [16]林汉明,常汝镇,邵桂花,刘忠堂.中国大豆耐逆研究.北京:中国农业出版社,2009:1-25
    [17]刘学义.大豆抗旱性评定方法的探讨.中国油料,1986(4):25-28
    [18]邱丽娟,常汝镇.大豆种质资源描述规范和数据标准.北京:中国农业出版社,2006:30-75
    [19] Oya T,Nepomuceno A L,Neumaier N,Farias J R B,Tobita S,Ito O. Drought tolerance characteristics of Brazilian soybean cultivars—Evaluation and characterization of drought tolerance of various Brazilian soybean cultivars in the field. Plant Production Science,2004,7:129-137
    [20]王燕平,任海祥,孙晓环.不同基因型大豆花荚期抗旱性综合评价.植物遗传资源学报,2015,16(1):37-44
    [21]王兴荣,张彦军,苟作旺,祁旭升,刘章雄.大豆种质资源抗旱性综合评价.干旱地区农业研究,2015,33(5):17-23,40
    [22]王兴荣,张彦军,李玥,刘天鹏,张金福,祁旭升.干旱胁迫对大豆生长的影响及抗旱性评价方法与指标筛选.植物遗传资源学报,2018,19(1):49-56
    [23]乔亚科,杨晓倩,乔潇,王迪,刘晨光,王林红,李桂兰.大豆基于形态及生理指标的抗旱性评价及相关性分析.大豆科学,2014,33(5):667-673
    [24] Kunert K J,Vorster B J,Fenta B A,Kibido T,Dionisio G,Foyer C H. Drought stress responses in soybean roots and nodules. Frontiers in Plant Science,2016,7:1015
    [25]史宏,刘学义.野生大豆抗旱性鉴定及研究.大豆科学,2003(4):264-268
    [26] Fehr W R,Caviness C E. Stages of soybean development. Special Report 80,Cooperative Extension Service,Agriculture and Home Economic Experiment Station. Ames,Iowa:Iowa State University,1977:1-11
    [27]唐启义,冯明光. DPS数据处理系统:实验设计、统计分析及模型优化.北京:科学出版社,2006:19-44
    [28]刘光辉,陈全家,吴鹏昊,曲延英,高文伟,杨军善,杜荣光.棉花花铃期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选.植物遗传资源学报,2016,17(1):53-62,69
    [29]张文英,智慧,柳斌辉,谢俊雪,李积铭,李伟,贾冠清,王永芳,李海权,柴杨,栗雨勤,刁现民.谷子孕穗期抗旱指标筛选.植物遗传资源学报,2012,13(5):765-772
    [30]谢季坚.农业科学中的模糊数学方法.武汉:华中理工大学出版社,1993:100-193
    [31]吴存祥,李继存,沙爱华,曾海燕,孙石,杨光明,周新安,常汝镇,年海,韩天富.国家大豆品种区域试验对照品种的生育期组归属.作物学报,2012,38(11):1977-1987
    [32]吕彩霞,郭建秋,王英,冷建田,杨光明,侯文胜,吴存祥,韩天富.对大豆耐萎蔫材料PI471938根系和地上部的性状鉴定、遗传分析及QTL定位.作物学报,2010,36(9):1476-1483
    [33]王金陵.干旱情形下大豆萌发力与种粒大小关系之研究.哈农学报,1950,1(2):60-73
    [34]王金陵.大豆性状之演化.农报,1947(12):6-11
    [35]孙志强,田佩占,王继安.东北大豆生育期结构的初步研究.大豆科学,1990(9):198-205
    [36]韩天富,盖钧镒,陈风云,邱家驯.生育期结构不同的大豆品种的光周期反应和农艺性状.作物学报,1998,24(5):550-557
    [37] Wang Y,Cheng L,Leng J,Leng J T,Wu C X,Shao G H,Hou W S,Han T F. Genetic analysis and quantitative trait locus identification of the reproductive to vegetative growth period ratio in soybean(Glycine max(L.)Merr). Euphytica,2015,201:275-284

© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号

地址:北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编:100083

电话:办公室:(+86 10)66554848;文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新:66554700