不同小麦品种物质积累转运与抗倒性差异及其对多效唑的响应
|
摘要
为明确不同小麦品种物质积累转运与抗倒性的关系及其对多效唑的响应,采用二因素裂区设计,以小麦品种(矮抗58、良星66、济麦22、烟农19、安农0305、皖麦29、偃展4110和新麦20)为主区,以多效唑喷施时期(倒五叶期、倒四叶期、倒三叶期和对照)为副区,研究不同小麦品种干物质积累与分配和植株抗倒伏能力的差异及喷施多效唑对其的调控作用。结果表明,矮抗58的营养器官花前贮藏物质的转运量、转运效率及其对籽粒的贡献率均最小,抗倒伏能力最强。皖麦29和良星66在茎鞘中积累的干物质较多,花前营养器官贮藏物质的转运量和花后干物质积累量均较高,产量较高,抗倒性也较强。多效唑对小麦物质积累运转的影响及抗倒性的增加效果均以在倒五叶期喷施效果最好,其次为倒四叶期。与对照相比,倒五叶多效唑处理下,营养器官花前贮藏物质的转运量及其对籽粒贡献率的降幅分别为4.59%～26.03%和5.99%～30.38%,成熟期叶片、茎鞘和穗轴+颖壳的干物质积累量的增幅分别为17.33%～31.98%、19.07%～38.62%和7.14%～39.23%,花后干物质的积累量及其对籽粒贡献率的增幅分别为0.19%～25.35%和3.28%～14.63%,重心高度的降幅为4.66%～8.15%,机械强度和抗倒伏指数的增幅分别为11.30%～36.79%和10.68%～46.58%。综上,皖麦29和良星66的产量高,抗倒性好。多效唑能同步增加成熟期干物质在籽粒和茎鞘中的积累量和茎鞘的干物质分配比例,实现小麦高产和抗倒性间的协调,适宜喷施时期为倒五叶时期。本研究结果为小麦抗倒伏栽培提供了理论依据和技术支持。
In order to understand the relationship between transportation and lodging resistance of different wheat varieties and their sensitivity to paclobutrazol, we had adopted a two-factor split plot design with wheat cultivars(Aikang 58, Liangxing 66, Jimai 22, Yannong 19, Annong 0305, Wanmai 29, Yanzhang 4110 and Xinmai 20) as main-plot and paclobutrazol spraying stages(reciprocal fifth leaf treatment, reciprocal fourth leaf treatment, reciprocal third leaf treatment and contrast) as sub-plot to study dry matter accumulation, lodging resistance and yield in wheat varieties and the regulation of paclobutrazol on them. The result showed that AK58 has lowest translocation amount, translocation rate and contribution rate to grain about storage materials in vegetative organs before anthesis, so it has the best anti-lodging performance. As for Wanmai29 and Liangxing 66, they had more accumulation of dry matter in stem+sheath, and higher translocation amount of storage materials in vegetative organs pre anthesis and dry matter accumulation amount after anthesis. At the same time, its yield and lodging resistance were both higher. Moreover, the paclobutrazol effects on wheat dry matter accumulation and transportation and the increase of lodging resistance were largest in reciprocal fifth leaf treatment, followed by reciprocal fourth leaf treatment. Comparing with control, in reciprocal fifth leaf treatment, translocation amount and contribution rate of storage materials in vegetative organs pre anthesis reduced by 4.59%～26.03% and 5.99%～30.38%, and dry matter distribution amount in leaf, stem+sheath and spike +glume at mature period increased by 17.33%～31.98%, 19.07%～38.62% and 7.14%～39.23%, respectively. Moreover, the accumulation amount and contribution rate of dry matter after anthesis increased by 0.19%～25.35% and 3.28%～14.63%, and gravity center height reduced by 4.66%～8.15%, so mechanical strength and lodging resistance index increased by 11.30%～36.79% and 10.68%～46.58%, respectively. In conclusion, Wanmai 29 and Liangxing 66 have high yield and lodging resistance, so they are suitable for large area planting. Paclobutrazol treatment can increase dry matter accumulation in grain and stem sheath and stem sheath dry matter allocation proportion at mature, and achieve the coordination between high yield and lodging resistance. The reciprocal fifth leaf stage is the best stage to spray paclobutrazol to improve the anti-lodging performance. This study provides theoretical basis and technical support for the cultivation of wheat in lodging resistance.
In order to understand the relationship between transportation and lodging resistance of different wheat varieties and their sensitivity to paclobutrazol, we had adopted a two-factor split plot design with wheat cultivars(Aikang 58, Liangxing 66, Jimai 22, Yannong 19, Annong 0305, Wanmai 29, Yanzhang 4110 and Xinmai 20) as main-plot and paclobutrazol spraying stages(reciprocal fifth leaf treatment, reciprocal fourth leaf treatment, reciprocal third leaf treatment and contrast) as sub-plot to study dry matter accumulation, lodging resistance and yield in wheat varieties and the regulation of paclobutrazol on them. The result showed that AK58 has lowest translocation amount, translocation rate and contribution rate to grain about storage materials in vegetative organs before anthesis, so it has the best anti-lodging performance. As for Wanmai29 and Liangxing 66, they had more accumulation of dry matter in stem+sheath, and higher translocation amount of storage materials in vegetative organs pre anthesis and dry matter accumulation amount after anthesis. At the same time, its yield and lodging resistance were both higher. Moreover, the paclobutrazol effects on wheat dry matter accumulation and transportation and the increase of lodging resistance were largest in reciprocal fifth leaf treatment, followed by reciprocal fourth leaf treatment. Comparing with control, in reciprocal fifth leaf treatment, translocation amount and contribution rate of storage materials in vegetative organs pre anthesis reduced by 4.59%～26.03% and 5.99%～30.38%, and dry matter distribution amount in leaf, stem+sheath and spike +glume at mature period increased by 17.33%～31.98%, 19.07%～38.62% and 7.14%～39.23%, respectively. Moreover, the accumulation amount and contribution rate of dry matter after anthesis increased by 0.19%～25.35% and 3.28%～14.63%, and gravity center height reduced by 4.66%～8.15%, so mechanical strength and lodging resistance index increased by 11.30%～36.79% and 10.68%～46.58%, respectively. In conclusion, Wanmai 29 and Liangxing 66 have high yield and lodging resistance, so they are suitable for large area planting. Paclobutrazol treatment can increase dry matter accumulation in grain and stem sheath and stem sheath dry matter allocation proportion at mature, and achieve the coordination between high yield and lodging resistance. The reciprocal fifth leaf stage is the best stage to spray paclobutrazol to improve the anti-lodging performance. This study provides theoretical basis and technical support for the cultivation of wheat in lodging resistance.
引文
[1] Piera-Chavez F J, Berry P M, Foulkes M J, Molero G, Reynolds M P. Avoiding lodging in irrigated spring wheat Ⅰ Stem and root structural requirements [J]. Field Crops Research, 2016, 196:325-336
[2] Kendall S L, Holmes H, White C A, Clarke S M, Berry P M. Quantifying lodging-induced yield losses in oilseed rape[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 211:106-113
[3] Martinez-Vazquez P. Crop lodging induced by wind and rain[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2016, 228/229:265-275
[4] 李振丽, 程瑞婷, 李瑞奇,李雁鸣. 行距配置和化控对冬小麦茎秆质量和抗倒性能的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2013, 33(3): 507-513
[5] Acreche M M, Slafer G A. Lodging yield penalties as affected by breeding in Mediterranean wheats [J].Field Crops Research, 2011, 122: 40-48
[6] Piera-Chavez F J, Berry P M, Foulkes M J, Molero G, Reynolds M P. Avoiding lodging in irrigated spring wheat Ⅱ Genetic variation of stem and root structural properties[J]. Field Crops Research, 2016, 196:64-74
[7] 刘慧婷,李瑞奇,王红光, 李东晓,李浩然. 密度和施氮量对强筋小麦藁优2018产量和抗倒性的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(12): 1619-1626
[8] 王慧, 张明伟, 雷晓伟, 余明杰, 顾后文, 李春燕, 朱新开, 郭文善. 植物生长调节剂拌种对扬麦13茎秆生长及籽粒产量的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(2): 206-214
[9] Van den berg E, Labuschagne M T. The interaction of stem strength with plant density and nitrogen application in wheat progeny from parents with varying stem strength [J]. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section B-Soil and Plant Science, 2012, 62(3): 251-255
[10] 胡昊. 小麦茎秆特性与抗倒伏关系及其调控研究[D].郑州: 河南农业大学, 2013
[11] 邵庆勤, 信彩云, 姜东, 蔡剑, 戴廷波, 曹卫星. 多效唑处理对小麦抗倒伏能力的影响[C]//中国作物学会栽培专业委员会小麦学组第十五次全国小麦栽培科学学术研讨会论文集. 北京:中国作物学会, 2013: 395-403
[12] 陈晓光, 王振林, 彭佃亮, 李勇, 蔡铁, 王平, 陈二影. 种植密度与喷施多效唑对冬小麦抗倒伏能力和产量的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2011, 22(6): 1465-1470
[13] 梁靖越, 张敬昇, 王昌全, 李冰, 向毫, 尹斌, 罗晶. 控释尿素对小麦籽粒产量和氮素利用率的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2018, 32(1): 157-164
[14] 熊乐, 马富裕, 樊华, 张伟, 崔静, 郑重. 冬灌与化学调控互作对滴灌春小麦抗倒伏能力和产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2012, 32(5): 932-936
[15] 吴琼, 杨克军, 张翼飞, 王玉凤, 张文超, 陈天宇, 张鹏飞, 庞晨, 尹雪巍, 王怀鹏, 杨丽, 武鹏, 唐春双, 刘慧迪. 不同基因型玉米耐密植抗倒性分析及其鉴定指标的筛选[J]. 玉米科学, 2017, 25(6): 79-86
[16] Wang C, Hu D, Liu X, She H, Ruan R, Yang H, Yi Z, Wu D. Effects of uniconazole on the lignin metabolism and lodging resistance of culm in common buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum M.) [J]. Field Crops Research, 2015, 180:46-53
[17] Kamran M, Cui W, Ahmad Ⅰ, Meng X, Zhang X, Su W, Chen J, Ahmad S, Fahad S, Han Q. Correction to: effect of paclobutrazol, a potential growth regulator on stalk mechanical strength, lignin accumulation and its relation with lodging resistance of maize[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2018, 84(2): 317-332
[18] Dwivedi S K, Arora A, Kumar S. Paclobutrazol-induced alleviation of water-deficit damage in relation to photosynthetic characteristics and expression of stress markers in contrasting wheat genotypes[J]. Photosynthetica, 2017, 55(2): 351-359
[19] 胡昊, 李莎莎, 华慧, 孙蒙蒙, 康娟, 夏国军, 王晨阳. 不同小麦品种主茎茎秆形态结构特征及其与倒伏的关系[J].麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(10): 1343-1348
[20] 鲍思敬,杨兆生,许红霞, 巩万魁, 梁文科. 多效唑对小麦不同品种主要性状的效应研究[J].河南农业大学学报, 1995, 29(2): 192-195,199
[21] 姚海坡, 董志强, 吕丽华, 申海平, 姚艳荣, 张丽华, 贾秀领. 不同植物生长调节剂对冬小麦茎秆特性和产量的影响[J].华北农学报, 2015(S1): 152-156
[22] 陈晓光, 石玉华, 王成雨, 尹燕枰, 宁堂原, 史春余, 李勇, 王振林. 氮肥和多效唑对小麦茎秆木质素合成的影响及其与抗倒伏性的关系[J].中国农业科学, 2011,44(17): 3529-3536
[23] 文廷刚, 陈昱利, 杜小凤, 吴传万, 钱新民, 吴雪芬, 王伟中. 不同植物生长调节剂对小麦籽粒灌浆特性及粒重的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2014, 34(1): 84-90
[24] Peng D, Chen X, Yin Y, Yang W, Tang Y, Wang Z. Lodging resistance of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): lignin accumulation and its related enzymes activities due to the application of paclobutrazol or gibberellin acid [J]. Field Crops Research, 2014, 157(2): 1-7
[25] 崔梦, 章星传, 闫素辉, 邵庆勤. 高密度下不同小麦品种干物质积累及产量构成分析[J].安徽农业科学, 2017, 45(16): 41-43,62
[26] 张小涛, 黄玉芳, 马晓晶, 叶优良. 播种量和施氮量对不同基因型冬小麦干物质累积、转运及产量的影响[J].植物生理学报, 2017, 53(6): 1067-1076
[27] 仝星星, 宋希云, 刘树堂, 姜雯. 小麦-玉米轮作耕作方式对玉米灌浆成熟期叶片衰老生理特性的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2015, 29(5): 954-960
[28] 于显枫, 张绪成, 王红丽. 高浓度CO2下氮素对小麦叶片干物质积累及碳氮关系的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2012, 26(7): 1058-1063
[29] 霍李龙,苗芳,贾丽芳,王长发. 种植方式对关中灌区冬小麦冠层光合及产量性状的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(8): 1-6
[30] 田中伟, 王方瑞, 戴廷波, 蔡剑, 姜东, 曹卫星. 小麦品种改良过程中物质积累转运特性与产量的关系[J]. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(4): 801-808
[31] 王丽特, 徐照丽, 杨利云, 段胜智, 崔明昆, 龚明. 4种化学调控剂对烟草幼苗耐冷性及其光合特性的效应研究[J].西北植物学报, 2015, 35(4): 801-808
[32] 余常兵, 张树杰, 谢立华, 李银水, 胡小加, 廖星. 多效唑拌种对油菜生长及产量的影响[J].湖北农业科学, 2014,53(22): 5364-5368
[33] 杨阳, 蒯婕, 吴莲蓉, 刘婷婷, 孙盈盈, 左青松, 周广生, 吴江生. 多效唑处理对直播油菜机械收获相关性状及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2015, 41(6): 938-945
[34] 邓忠, 白丹, 翟国亮, 赵红书, 冯俊杰, 韩启彪, 张文正. 不同植物生长调节剂对新疆棉花干物质积累、产量和品质的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2011, 29(3): 122-127
[35] 赵超鹏, 周琴, 曹春信, 韩亮亮, 江巧君, 江海东. 多效唑对多花黑麦草物质积累和种子产量的影响[J].草业科学, 2010,27 (3): 72-75
[36] 刘璐, 王朝辉, 刁超朋, 王森, 李莎莎. 旱地不同小麦品种产量与干物质及氮磷钾需求间的关系[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24(3): 1-9
[37] 李法计, 徐学欣, 何中虎, 肖永贵, 陈新民, 王志敏. 三种限水灌溉水平下中麦175干物质积累与水分利用特性解析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(2): 374-385
[38] 王树丽. 播期和种植密度对小麦群体结构与氮素利用效率的影响[D].泰安: 山东农业大学, 2012:10
[39] 郑亭, 陈溢, 樊高琼, 李金刚, 李朝苏, 荣晓椒, 李国瑞, 杨文钰, 郭翔. 株行配置对带状条播小麦群体光环境及抗倒伏性能的影响[J].中国农业科学, 2013, 46(8): 1571-1582
[40] 王丹, 丁位华, 冯素伟, 胡铁柱, 李淦, 李笑慧, 杨艳艳, 茹振钢. 不同小麦品种茎秆特性及其与抗倒性的关系[J]. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(5): 1496-1502
[41] Liu Y, Zhang J, Hu Y G, Chen J. Dwarfing genes Rht4 and Rht-B1b affect plant height and key agronomic traits in common wheat under two water regimes[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 204:242-248
[42] 程瑞婷. 春季追氮与多效唑化控对冬小麦生育动态的影响 [D].保定: 河北农业大学, 2013:32-34
[2] Kendall S L, Holmes H, White C A, Clarke S M, Berry P M. Quantifying lodging-induced yield losses in oilseed rape[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 211:106-113
[3] Martinez-Vazquez P. Crop lodging induced by wind and rain[J]. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 2016, 228/229:265-275
[4] 李振丽, 程瑞婷, 李瑞奇,李雁鸣. 行距配置和化控对冬小麦茎秆质量和抗倒性能的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2013, 33(3): 507-513
[5] Acreche M M, Slafer G A. Lodging yield penalties as affected by breeding in Mediterranean wheats [J].Field Crops Research, 2011, 122: 40-48
[6] Piera-Chavez F J, Berry P M, Foulkes M J, Molero G, Reynolds M P. Avoiding lodging in irrigated spring wheat Ⅱ Genetic variation of stem and root structural properties[J]. Field Crops Research, 2016, 196:64-74
[7] 刘慧婷,李瑞奇,王红光, 李东晓,李浩然. 密度和施氮量对强筋小麦藁优2018产量和抗倒性的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(12): 1619-1626
[8] 王慧, 张明伟, 雷晓伟, 余明杰, 顾后文, 李春燕, 朱新开, 郭文善. 植物生长调节剂拌种对扬麦13茎秆生长及籽粒产量的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(2): 206-214
[9] Van den berg E, Labuschagne M T. The interaction of stem strength with plant density and nitrogen application in wheat progeny from parents with varying stem strength [J]. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica Section B-Soil and Plant Science, 2012, 62(3): 251-255
[10] 胡昊. 小麦茎秆特性与抗倒伏关系及其调控研究[D].郑州: 河南农业大学, 2013
[11] 邵庆勤, 信彩云, 姜东, 蔡剑, 戴廷波, 曹卫星. 多效唑处理对小麦抗倒伏能力的影响[C]//中国作物学会栽培专业委员会小麦学组第十五次全国小麦栽培科学学术研讨会论文集. 北京:中国作物学会, 2013: 395-403
[12] 陈晓光, 王振林, 彭佃亮, 李勇, 蔡铁, 王平, 陈二影. 种植密度与喷施多效唑对冬小麦抗倒伏能力和产量的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2011, 22(6): 1465-1470
[13] 梁靖越, 张敬昇, 王昌全, 李冰, 向毫, 尹斌, 罗晶. 控释尿素对小麦籽粒产量和氮素利用率的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2018, 32(1): 157-164
[14] 熊乐, 马富裕, 樊华, 张伟, 崔静, 郑重. 冬灌与化学调控互作对滴灌春小麦抗倒伏能力和产量的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2012, 32(5): 932-936
[15] 吴琼, 杨克军, 张翼飞, 王玉凤, 张文超, 陈天宇, 张鹏飞, 庞晨, 尹雪巍, 王怀鹏, 杨丽, 武鹏, 唐春双, 刘慧迪. 不同基因型玉米耐密植抗倒性分析及其鉴定指标的筛选[J]. 玉米科学, 2017, 25(6): 79-86
[16] Wang C, Hu D, Liu X, She H, Ruan R, Yang H, Yi Z, Wu D. Effects of uniconazole on the lignin metabolism and lodging resistance of culm in common buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum M.) [J]. Field Crops Research, 2015, 180:46-53
[17] Kamran M, Cui W, Ahmad Ⅰ, Meng X, Zhang X, Su W, Chen J, Ahmad S, Fahad S, Han Q. Correction to: effect of paclobutrazol, a potential growth regulator on stalk mechanical strength, lignin accumulation and its relation with lodging resistance of maize[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2018, 84(2): 317-332
[18] Dwivedi S K, Arora A, Kumar S. Paclobutrazol-induced alleviation of water-deficit damage in relation to photosynthetic characteristics and expression of stress markers in contrasting wheat genotypes[J]. Photosynthetica, 2017, 55(2): 351-359
[19] 胡昊, 李莎莎, 华慧, 孙蒙蒙, 康娟, 夏国军, 王晨阳. 不同小麦品种主茎茎秆形态结构特征及其与倒伏的关系[J].麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(10): 1343-1348
[20] 鲍思敬,杨兆生,许红霞, 巩万魁, 梁文科. 多效唑对小麦不同品种主要性状的效应研究[J].河南农业大学学报, 1995, 29(2): 192-195,199
[21] 姚海坡, 董志强, 吕丽华, 申海平, 姚艳荣, 张丽华, 贾秀领. 不同植物生长调节剂对冬小麦茎秆特性和产量的影响[J].华北农学报, 2015(S1): 152-156
[22] 陈晓光, 石玉华, 王成雨, 尹燕枰, 宁堂原, 史春余, 李勇, 王振林. 氮肥和多效唑对小麦茎秆木质素合成的影响及其与抗倒伏性的关系[J].中国农业科学, 2011,44(17): 3529-3536
[23] 文廷刚, 陈昱利, 杜小凤, 吴传万, 钱新民, 吴雪芬, 王伟中. 不同植物生长调节剂对小麦籽粒灌浆特性及粒重的影响[J].麦类作物学报, 2014, 34(1): 84-90
[24] Peng D, Chen X, Yin Y, Yang W, Tang Y, Wang Z. Lodging resistance of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.): lignin accumulation and its related enzymes activities due to the application of paclobutrazol or gibberellin acid [J]. Field Crops Research, 2014, 157(2): 1-7
[25] 崔梦, 章星传, 闫素辉, 邵庆勤. 高密度下不同小麦品种干物质积累及产量构成分析[J].安徽农业科学, 2017, 45(16): 41-43,62
[26] 张小涛, 黄玉芳, 马晓晶, 叶优良. 播种量和施氮量对不同基因型冬小麦干物质累积、转运及产量的影响[J].植物生理学报, 2017, 53(6): 1067-1076
[27] 仝星星, 宋希云, 刘树堂, 姜雯. 小麦-玉米轮作耕作方式对玉米灌浆成熟期叶片衰老生理特性的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2015, 29(5): 954-960
[28] 于显枫, 张绪成, 王红丽. 高浓度CO2下氮素对小麦叶片干物质积累及碳氮关系的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2012, 26(7): 1058-1063
[29] 霍李龙,苗芳,贾丽芳,王长发. 种植方式对关中灌区冬小麦冠层光合及产量性状的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(8): 1-6
[30] 田中伟, 王方瑞, 戴廷波, 蔡剑, 姜东, 曹卫星. 小麦品种改良过程中物质积累转运特性与产量的关系[J]. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(4): 801-808
[31] 王丽特, 徐照丽, 杨利云, 段胜智, 崔明昆, 龚明. 4种化学调控剂对烟草幼苗耐冷性及其光合特性的效应研究[J].西北植物学报, 2015, 35(4): 801-808
[32] 余常兵, 张树杰, 谢立华, 李银水, 胡小加, 廖星. 多效唑拌种对油菜生长及产量的影响[J].湖北农业科学, 2014,53(22): 5364-5368
[33] 杨阳, 蒯婕, 吴莲蓉, 刘婷婷, 孙盈盈, 左青松, 周广生, 吴江生. 多效唑处理对直播油菜机械收获相关性状及产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2015, 41(6): 938-945
[34] 邓忠, 白丹, 翟国亮, 赵红书, 冯俊杰, 韩启彪, 张文正. 不同植物生长调节剂对新疆棉花干物质积累、产量和品质的影响[J].干旱地区农业研究, 2011, 29(3): 122-127
[35] 赵超鹏, 周琴, 曹春信, 韩亮亮, 江巧君, 江海东. 多效唑对多花黑麦草物质积累和种子产量的影响[J].草业科学, 2010,27 (3): 72-75
[36] 刘璐, 王朝辉, 刁超朋, 王森, 李莎莎. 旱地不同小麦品种产量与干物质及氮磷钾需求间的关系[J]. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2018, 24(3): 1-9
[37] 李法计, 徐学欣, 何中虎, 肖永贵, 陈新民, 王志敏. 三种限水灌溉水平下中麦175干物质积累与水分利用特性解析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(2): 374-385
[38] 王树丽. 播期和种植密度对小麦群体结构与氮素利用效率的影响[D].泰安: 山东农业大学, 2012:10
[39] 郑亭, 陈溢, 樊高琼, 李金刚, 李朝苏, 荣晓椒, 李国瑞, 杨文钰, 郭翔. 株行配置对带状条播小麦群体光环境及抗倒伏性能的影响[J].中国农业科学, 2013, 46(8): 1571-1582
[40] 王丹, 丁位华, 冯素伟, 胡铁柱, 李淦, 李笑慧, 杨艳艳, 茹振钢. 不同小麦品种茎秆特性及其与抗倒性的关系[J]. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(5): 1496-1502
[41] Liu Y, Zhang J, Hu Y G, Chen J. Dwarfing genes Rht4 and Rht-B1b affect plant height and key agronomic traits in common wheat under two water regimes[J]. Field Crops Research, 2017, 204:242-248
[42] 程瑞婷. 春季追氮与多效唑化控对冬小麦生育动态的影响 [D].保定: 河北农业大学, 2013:32-34