去早果枝对转基因抗虫棉生长生理的调控效应
|
摘要
本试验以转基因抗虫棉国欣棉6号(2010)和农大棉8号(2011)为材料,进行大田试验,设置了2个播期和4个去早果枝方式(去掉基部1个、2个、3个果枝及不去果枝的对照)处理,研究了去早果枝对转基因抗虫棉生长生理的调控作用。旨在探寻去早果枝技术对棉花早衰的调控机理,为生产上棉花早衰的防控提供技术指导和理论支持。试验结果表明:
1.去掉早期果枝后,推迟了棉花的生育进程,去早期果枝越多,推迟时间越长。2个播期中R1,R2和R3处理的生育期均比对照分别推迟3d,6d和9d。适量去除早期果枝有利于棉花在最佳开花结铃期内开花结铃,充分利用最佳开花结铃期内的光热资源。
2.去掉早期果枝后增加了早播棉花的株高、茎粗和叶面积指数。2010年第1播期中,R1,R2和R3的株高均显著高于对照,但在第2播期中去早果枝处理与对照相比,差异不明显;2011年各处理的株高也均无明显差异;各去早果枝处理的茎粗在2年试验的第1播期中虽然高于对照,但差异未达显著性水平;在2年试验的第1播期中,R1,R2和R3的叶面积指数在生育后期(8月20日以后)均显著高于对照,但在第2播期,各处理间差异未达到显著性水平。
3.适量去除早期果枝后,早播棉田果枝数和果节数不减或略有增加,节枝比提高,有助于塑造棉花合理株型。果枝数R1处理2年2个播期均表现与对照相当,R3处理则显著低于对照。各处理间的果节数差异不显著。节枝比R1、R2、R3处理在2010年第1播期显著高于对照,其余处理差异不显著。
去掉早期果枝后,由于中后期营养条件的改善,增加了棉花的成铃率并降低了脱落率和烂铃率。对于第1播期,去早果枝处理能提高单株结铃数,且在2011年达差异显著水平,对于第2播期,去早果枝处理的单株结铃数降低,但与对照差异不显著。第1播期的去早果枝处理脱落率明显降低,但第2播期各处理表现升降不一,年度之间表现也不一致,但差异不显著。无论第1播期还是第2播期,去早果枝处理能显著降低单株烂铃率。
4.去早果枝处理均明显提高了早播棉中后期的单株干物质积累量和营养器官干物质分配率,但在第2播期中各处理间差异不显著;各处理的生殖器官干物质积累量和分配率也无明显差异。去掉早期果枝后,由于后期仍保持一定的营养生长,干物质积累量较高,能在一定程度上缓解棉花早衰的发生。
5.去掉早期1个果枝能够提高早播棉后期叶绿素含量并改善光合性能。2年试验均表明,适期早播的情况下,去掉早期1个果枝有利于提高棉花生育后期主茎功能叶叶绿素的含量,其中R1表现明显,但在第2播期各处理间均无明显差异;2010年第1播期中,R1的Chl a/b在8月20日和9月5日均显著高于对照,在2011年各处理间的差异均未达到差异显著性水平。
6.去掉早期果枝后(1个或2个)能够改善早播棉中后期氮代谢水平,促进蛋白质的合成。2010年各处理的蛋白质含量在7月3日左右达到最大值,而2011年各处理均在7月18日左右达到最大值。在2010年第1播期中,R1的蛋白质含量在棉花生育后期(8月20日和9月5日)显著高于对照,第2播期中各处理间的差异均未达到显著性水平;2011年第1播期中,R1和R2的蛋白含量最大值均极显著高于对照,其余各处理间差异不明显。
7.去掉早期果枝后,由于同化合成能力加强,使得早播棉中后期的碳水化合物含量增加,为产量形成提供一定的物质基础。各处理的可溶性糖含量在2010年差异均不明显;在2011年第1播期中,R1的主茎功能叶可溶性糖含量自7月18日至8月20日开花结铃盛期极显著高于对照。在2010年第1播期中,R1, R2和R3的淀粉含量在8月20日显著高于对照,但在第2播期中R1,R2和R3的淀粉含量在吐絮初期阶段显著低于对照;在2011第1播期中R1和R2处理的淀粉含量分别在8月20日和7月18日显著高于对照。
8.在2011年,各去早果枝处理的SOD活性与对照相比均无明显差异;在2010年,各处理的POD活性和MDA的含量也均无明显差异;但在2011年第1播期中,R1和R3的POD活性在9月20日极显著高于对照,R1的MDA含量在9月20日显著小于对照,在第2播期中R3的MDA含量在8月20日显著小于对照,但R1和R2在9月20日却明显高于对照,其余各时期处理间差异不明显。
9.去掉早期果枝使得棉花的成铃重心向上向外发生移动。去掉早期果枝后,R2和R3的伏前桃比例显著减少,秋桃的比例显著增加,而各处理的伏桃比例无明显变化,说明去掉早期果枝后是通过秋桃比例的增加来补偿因果枝去除造成的棉铃损失。R2和R3的下部成铃比例显著降低,上部成铃比例和外围成铃比例显著增高,但各处理的中部成铃所占比例无明显差异。
10.去早果枝(1个或2个)有利于提高棉花子棉产量,但对纤维品质无明显影响。第1播期中R1和R2的子棉产量均显著高于对照,各处理间皮棉产量差异不明显,2011年第1播期中R1的单位面积有效铃数显著高于对照,2年试验各处理的单铃重和衣分均无明显差异。去掉早期果枝虽然对棉花个别品质指标有改善作用,但多数未达显著水平。
Using transgenic Bt cotton Guoxinmian 6 (2010) and Nongdamian 8(2011) as material, a field experiment was conducted in Baoding, with two sowing date treatment, in each sowing date ,plants were treated normally(CK),or by removing one basal fruiting branches ,removing two basal fruiting branches (R2) and removing three basal fruiting branches(R3), the effect of early fruiting branches removal(EFBR) on growth and development and physiological characteristics were studied through a two years experiment. With the objective of finding a way to delay he premature senescence process and to provide a theoretical basis for high yield and quality in cotton production . The results indicated as follow:
1.The removal of EFBR delayed the growth and development process. The more fruiting branches removal, the more delay time is longer. Under the treatments of R1, R2 and R3, the whole growth stage was delayed by 3 days, 6 days and 9 days respectively. Proper amount of EFBR could make cotton blooming and flowering at the best growth period.
2.The research indicates vegetive growth was enhanced after early fruiting branches removal , plant height and stem diameter increased in the first sowing under the treatment of EFBR. With the treatments of EFBR, the leaf area index (LAI) was significantly higher than control in the later growth period in the first sowing of two year experiment, but there was no obvious difference in the second sowing .
3.The research indicates, after EFBR in the first sowing , there was no decrease or a increase on total fruiting branches number and fruit nods, and the ratio of fruiting branches number and fruit nod number was promoted , it could shape a ideal cotton plant type. There was no significant difference in the number of fruiting branches between R1 and CK, but R3 was significantly lower than CK. There was no significant difference in fruit nod number between treatments. The ratio of fruiting branches number and fruit nod of R1, R2 and R3 were significantly higher than CK in the first sowing of 2010.
After the removal, because of vegetive growth was enhanced, the boll number per plant was promoted, the abscission rate and rotten boll rate were lowered. Under the treatment of early fruiting branches removal ,the boll number per plant was promoted in the first sowing ,but there was no significant difference in the second sowing .With the treatment of early fruiting branches removal, the abscission rate and rotten boll rate were both significantly lower than control.
4.The result indicates vegetative growth was promoted in the late growth period after early fruiting branches removal, dry matter accumulation was increased, and it could delay the premature senescence process to some degree. Under the treatment of early fruiting branches removal, the dry matter accumulation and the dry matter accumulation rate of vegetative organs were significantly increased in the first sowing , but there was no obvious difference between treatments in the second sowing, and there was also no significant difference in reproductive organ dry matter accumulation and the dry matter distribution rate of reproductive organ between treatments.
5.The result indicates the chlorophyll content was promoted and photosynthetic characteristic was improved at the later growth stage after one early fruiting branches removal. Two years experiment both indicated that Chlorophyll content in main stem functional leaves was promoted after EFBR at the later growth stage in the case of early sowing, especially the plants with one early fruiting branches removal were significantly higher than control, there were no significant differences in the second sowing. In the first sowing of 2010, the Chl a/b of R1 was significantly higher than control on August 20th and September 5th , but there were no significant differences in the year of 2011.
6.The research indicates the nitrogen metabolism was improved after one or two early fruiting branches removal, it promoted the the soluble protein content and could delay the premature senescence process to some degree. The soluble protein content in main stem functional leaves of each treatment achieved its maximum on July 3th, but each treatment achieved its maximum on July 18th in the year of 2011. In the first sowing of 2010, the protein content of R1 was significantly higher than CK at the later growth period (Aug 29th and Sep 5th), in the second sowing, the differences between treatments were not obvious. In the first sowing of 2011, the maximum protein content in main stem leaves under the treatment of R1and R2 were both significantly higher than CK , there were no significant differences between other treatments.
7. After EFBR, the ability of assimilation and synthesis was promoted , the carbohydrates content was increased in the late growth period, it provided a basis for high yield production. There was no significant difference in soluble sugar content between removal and control in 2010. In the first sowing of 2011, soluble sugar content in main stem leaves of R1 was significantly higher than control. Under the treatment of EFRB, the starch content was higher than control in the first sowing of 2010, but it was significantly lower than control in the initial boll opening stage in the second sowing, there was no significant difference in starch content in main stem leaves between removal and control in 2011.
8.This research indicates that there was no obvious difference in the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD) between removal and control. In the first sowing of 2011, the peroxidase (POD) activity in main stem functional leaves under the treatments of R1 and R3 was significantly higher than control at the later growth stage , malondialde(MDA) in leaves under the treatment of R1 was significantly lower than control on Sep 20th , but it was higher than control in the second sowing.
9. After the early fruiting branches removal, the pre-summer boll ratio of R2 and R3 were significantly decreased and the autumn boll ratio were significantly increased, but there was no obvious variation in the summer boll ratio. The result indicates, it could compensate the pre-summer boll loss by increase the autumn boll ratio after early fruiting branches removal. On the spatial distribution of the bolls, the lower boll ratio was decreased and the upper boll ratio was increased, the internal surround boll ratio decreased and the external boll ratio increased .It indicates early fruiting branches removal promoted the bolling center shift from lower part to higher part.
10.The results indicated that early fruiting branches removal could promote the seed cotton yield , but it had no obvious effect on fiber quality. With the treatment of R1 and R2, the seed cotton yield was significantly higher than CK in the first sowing, but there was no difference in lint yield . Under the treatment of R1, the valid boll number per unit area was significantly higher CK in the first sowing of 2011, but there was no obvious variation in boll weight and lint. Some fiber quality indexes were improved after the removal, but the difference between treatments was not significant.
1.去掉早期果枝后,推迟了棉花的生育进程,去早期果枝越多,推迟时间越长。2个播期中R1,R2和R3处理的生育期均比对照分别推迟3d,6d和9d。适量去除早期果枝有利于棉花在最佳开花结铃期内开花结铃,充分利用最佳开花结铃期内的光热资源。
2.去掉早期果枝后增加了早播棉花的株高、茎粗和叶面积指数。2010年第1播期中,R1,R2和R3的株高均显著高于对照,但在第2播期中去早果枝处理与对照相比,差异不明显;2011年各处理的株高也均无明显差异;各去早果枝处理的茎粗在2年试验的第1播期中虽然高于对照,但差异未达显著性水平;在2年试验的第1播期中,R1,R2和R3的叶面积指数在生育后期(8月20日以后)均显著高于对照,但在第2播期,各处理间差异未达到显著性水平。
3.适量去除早期果枝后,早播棉田果枝数和果节数不减或略有增加,节枝比提高,有助于塑造棉花合理株型。果枝数R1处理2年2个播期均表现与对照相当,R3处理则显著低于对照。各处理间的果节数差异不显著。节枝比R1、R2、R3处理在2010年第1播期显著高于对照,其余处理差异不显著。
去掉早期果枝后,由于中后期营养条件的改善,增加了棉花的成铃率并降低了脱落率和烂铃率。对于第1播期,去早果枝处理能提高单株结铃数,且在2011年达差异显著水平,对于第2播期,去早果枝处理的单株结铃数降低,但与对照差异不显著。第1播期的去早果枝处理脱落率明显降低,但第2播期各处理表现升降不一,年度之间表现也不一致,但差异不显著。无论第1播期还是第2播期,去早果枝处理能显著降低单株烂铃率。
4.去早果枝处理均明显提高了早播棉中后期的单株干物质积累量和营养器官干物质分配率,但在第2播期中各处理间差异不显著;各处理的生殖器官干物质积累量和分配率也无明显差异。去掉早期果枝后,由于后期仍保持一定的营养生长,干物质积累量较高,能在一定程度上缓解棉花早衰的发生。
5.去掉早期1个果枝能够提高早播棉后期叶绿素含量并改善光合性能。2年试验均表明,适期早播的情况下,去掉早期1个果枝有利于提高棉花生育后期主茎功能叶叶绿素的含量,其中R1表现明显,但在第2播期各处理间均无明显差异;2010年第1播期中,R1的Chl a/b在8月20日和9月5日均显著高于对照,在2011年各处理间的差异均未达到差异显著性水平。
6.去掉早期果枝后(1个或2个)能够改善早播棉中后期氮代谢水平,促进蛋白质的合成。2010年各处理的蛋白质含量在7月3日左右达到最大值,而2011年各处理均在7月18日左右达到最大值。在2010年第1播期中,R1的蛋白质含量在棉花生育后期(8月20日和9月5日)显著高于对照,第2播期中各处理间的差异均未达到显著性水平;2011年第1播期中,R1和R2的蛋白含量最大值均极显著高于对照,其余各处理间差异不明显。
7.去掉早期果枝后,由于同化合成能力加强,使得早播棉中后期的碳水化合物含量增加,为产量形成提供一定的物质基础。各处理的可溶性糖含量在2010年差异均不明显;在2011年第1播期中,R1的主茎功能叶可溶性糖含量自7月18日至8月20日开花结铃盛期极显著高于对照。在2010年第1播期中,R1, R2和R3的淀粉含量在8月20日显著高于对照,但在第2播期中R1,R2和R3的淀粉含量在吐絮初期阶段显著低于对照;在2011第1播期中R1和R2处理的淀粉含量分别在8月20日和7月18日显著高于对照。
8.在2011年,各去早果枝处理的SOD活性与对照相比均无明显差异;在2010年,各处理的POD活性和MDA的含量也均无明显差异;但在2011年第1播期中,R1和R3的POD活性在9月20日极显著高于对照,R1的MDA含量在9月20日显著小于对照,在第2播期中R3的MDA含量在8月20日显著小于对照,但R1和R2在9月20日却明显高于对照,其余各时期处理间差异不明显。
9.去掉早期果枝使得棉花的成铃重心向上向外发生移动。去掉早期果枝后,R2和R3的伏前桃比例显著减少,秋桃的比例显著增加,而各处理的伏桃比例无明显变化,说明去掉早期果枝后是通过秋桃比例的增加来补偿因果枝去除造成的棉铃损失。R2和R3的下部成铃比例显著降低,上部成铃比例和外围成铃比例显著增高,但各处理的中部成铃所占比例无明显差异。
10.去早果枝(1个或2个)有利于提高棉花子棉产量,但对纤维品质无明显影响。第1播期中R1和R2的子棉产量均显著高于对照,各处理间皮棉产量差异不明显,2011年第1播期中R1的单位面积有效铃数显著高于对照,2年试验各处理的单铃重和衣分均无明显差异。去掉早期果枝虽然对棉花个别品质指标有改善作用,但多数未达显著水平。
Using transgenic Bt cotton Guoxinmian 6 (2010) and Nongdamian 8(2011) as material, a field experiment was conducted in Baoding, with two sowing date treatment, in each sowing date ,plants were treated normally(CK),or by removing one basal fruiting branches ,removing two basal fruiting branches (R2) and removing three basal fruiting branches(R3), the effect of early fruiting branches removal(EFBR) on growth and development and physiological characteristics were studied through a two years experiment. With the objective of finding a way to delay he premature senescence process and to provide a theoretical basis for high yield and quality in cotton production . The results indicated as follow:
1.The removal of EFBR delayed the growth and development process. The more fruiting branches removal, the more delay time is longer. Under the treatments of R1, R2 and R3, the whole growth stage was delayed by 3 days, 6 days and 9 days respectively. Proper amount of EFBR could make cotton blooming and flowering at the best growth period.
2.The research indicates vegetive growth was enhanced after early fruiting branches removal , plant height and stem diameter increased in the first sowing under the treatment of EFBR. With the treatments of EFBR, the leaf area index (LAI) was significantly higher than control in the later growth period in the first sowing of two year experiment, but there was no obvious difference in the second sowing .
3.The research indicates, after EFBR in the first sowing , there was no decrease or a increase on total fruiting branches number and fruit nods, and the ratio of fruiting branches number and fruit nod number was promoted , it could shape a ideal cotton plant type. There was no significant difference in the number of fruiting branches between R1 and CK, but R3 was significantly lower than CK. There was no significant difference in fruit nod number between treatments. The ratio of fruiting branches number and fruit nod of R1, R2 and R3 were significantly higher than CK in the first sowing of 2010.
After the removal, because of vegetive growth was enhanced, the boll number per plant was promoted, the abscission rate and rotten boll rate were lowered. Under the treatment of early fruiting branches removal ,the boll number per plant was promoted in the first sowing ,but there was no significant difference in the second sowing .With the treatment of early fruiting branches removal, the abscission rate and rotten boll rate were both significantly lower than control.
4.The result indicates vegetative growth was promoted in the late growth period after early fruiting branches removal, dry matter accumulation was increased, and it could delay the premature senescence process to some degree. Under the treatment of early fruiting branches removal, the dry matter accumulation and the dry matter accumulation rate of vegetative organs were significantly increased in the first sowing , but there was no obvious difference between treatments in the second sowing, and there was also no significant difference in reproductive organ dry matter accumulation and the dry matter distribution rate of reproductive organ between treatments.
5.The result indicates the chlorophyll content was promoted and photosynthetic characteristic was improved at the later growth stage after one early fruiting branches removal. Two years experiment both indicated that Chlorophyll content in main stem functional leaves was promoted after EFBR at the later growth stage in the case of early sowing, especially the plants with one early fruiting branches removal were significantly higher than control, there were no significant differences in the second sowing. In the first sowing of 2010, the Chl a/b of R1 was significantly higher than control on August 20th and September 5th , but there were no significant differences in the year of 2011.
6.The research indicates the nitrogen metabolism was improved after one or two early fruiting branches removal, it promoted the the soluble protein content and could delay the premature senescence process to some degree. The soluble protein content in main stem functional leaves of each treatment achieved its maximum on July 3th, but each treatment achieved its maximum on July 18th in the year of 2011. In the first sowing of 2010, the protein content of R1 was significantly higher than CK at the later growth period (Aug 29th and Sep 5th), in the second sowing, the differences between treatments were not obvious. In the first sowing of 2011, the maximum protein content in main stem leaves under the treatment of R1and R2 were both significantly higher than CK , there were no significant differences between other treatments.
7. After EFBR, the ability of assimilation and synthesis was promoted , the carbohydrates content was increased in the late growth period, it provided a basis for high yield production. There was no significant difference in soluble sugar content between removal and control in 2010. In the first sowing of 2011, soluble sugar content in main stem leaves of R1 was significantly higher than control. Under the treatment of EFRB, the starch content was higher than control in the first sowing of 2010, but it was significantly lower than control in the initial boll opening stage in the second sowing, there was no significant difference in starch content in main stem leaves between removal and control in 2011.
8.This research indicates that there was no obvious difference in the activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD) between removal and control. In the first sowing of 2011, the peroxidase (POD) activity in main stem functional leaves under the treatments of R1 and R3 was significantly higher than control at the later growth stage , malondialde(MDA) in leaves under the treatment of R1 was significantly lower than control on Sep 20th , but it was higher than control in the second sowing.
9. After the early fruiting branches removal, the pre-summer boll ratio of R2 and R3 were significantly decreased and the autumn boll ratio were significantly increased, but there was no obvious variation in the summer boll ratio. The result indicates, it could compensate the pre-summer boll loss by increase the autumn boll ratio after early fruiting branches removal. On the spatial distribution of the bolls, the lower boll ratio was decreased and the upper boll ratio was increased, the internal surround boll ratio decreased and the external boll ratio increased .It indicates early fruiting branches removal promoted the bolling center shift from lower part to higher part.
10.The results indicated that early fruiting branches removal could promote the seed cotton yield , but it had no obvious effect on fiber quality. With the treatment of R1 and R2, the seed cotton yield was significantly higher than CK in the first sowing, but there was no difference in lint yield . Under the treatment of R1, the valid boll number per unit area was significantly higher CK in the first sowing of 2011, but there was no obvious variation in boll weight and lint. Some fiber quality indexes were improved after the removal, but the difference between treatments was not significant.
引文
[1]王淑民,项时康.冀鲁豫棉花生产现状与前景[J].棉花学报,1997 ,9(2): 57-63.
[2]夏敬源.控制棉铃虫爆发成灾的APM对策[J].棉花学报, 1994, 6(1): 1-8.
[3] Deraton W R et al. Background and performance Bt cotton[D]. 1996年美国棉花带论文集.
[4]涂松林,施爱民.我国转基因抗虫棉研究利用现状与展望[J].江西棉花, 2001, 6 (4): 31-33.
[5]夏敬源.棉花害虫生物生态控制关键技术研究[J].棉花学报,1997,8(5):225-228.
[6]陈素彬,王朝生,柴友荣,等.转Bt基因棉花抗红铃虫性的鉴定团[J].中国棉花,1997,15(12):5-17
[7]张存信.抗虫棉的开发和利用[J].天津农业科学[J]. 2000, (3): 41-44.
[8]王仁样.中国转基因抗虫棉的应用及发展对策[J].棉花学报, 2003, 15(3): 180-184.
[9]李汝忠,郭庆正,葛逢珠.转基因抗虫棉研究利用现状与前瞻[J].山东农业科学,1997,(2):47-50.
[10]何忠伟,周文新,陈艳芬,等.中国转基因抗虫棉发展的现状与对策[J] .科技和产业,2004, (11): 27-30.
[11]夏敬源,马志强,田明军.国产转基因抗虫棉的发展成就及其作用[J].中国农技推广2004, (6): 4-6.
[12]曹桂艳.外源基因棉抗虫性研究与应用进展[J].辽宁农业科学,2001,10(1):33-35.
[13]邢朝柱,靖深蓉,袁有禄,等.转Bt基因棉花性状表现、存在问题及对策[J].安徽农业科学,1998, 26 ( 3 ) : 201-204.
[14]何钟佩,田晓莉,王保民,等.转基因抗虫棉生育特点及其化控栽培技术体系的研究[C]中国棉花学会2004年年会论文汇编.宜昌,2004,8:194-196.
[15]丁双阳,何钟佩,段留生.抗虫棉中棉所30号种子萌发过程中生理变化的研究[J].中国农业大学学报,1998,3(增刊):52-57.
[16]田晓丽,杨培珠,王保民,等.转Bt基因抗虫棉源器官的建成及其功能[J].棉花学报,2003,15(2):91-96.
[17]于凤玲,秦新敏,宋燕青,等.新棉33B的生育特性及主要栽培措施[J].中国棉花,1996,26(8):42-43.
[18]田晓莉,杨培珠,段留生,等.转Bt基因抗虫棉源库关系的初步研究[J].棉花学报,1999,11(3):151-156.
[19] CARTER R, Clower J, Young R,et al. Transgenic Bt cotton. consultants views and obseyattions[C] //Proc Belt Cotton Conf,1997: 875.
[20]WILSON F D. Yield components and fiber propertiesof insect resistant cotton lines containing aBacillusthuringiensistoxin gene[J].Crop Sci,1994,34:38-41.
[21]张宝红,丰嵘.棉花的抗虫性与抗虫棉[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社,2000.
[22]夏敬源.抗虫棉在棉铃虫综合治理中的作用研究初探[J].中国棉花,1995(8)
[23]赵海祯,梁哲军,等.转基因抗虫棉生物学特性研究[J].中国棉花,2002,29(10):10～11.
[24]郭三堆,崔洪志,倪万潮,等.双价抗虫转基因棉花研究[J].中国农业科学,1999,32(3)1～7.
[25]谢德意.转基因抗虫棉研究进展、问题及对策[J].中国棉花,2001,28(2):6～8.
[26]陈德华,吴云康,段海,等.转基因抗虫棉杂交种生长规律及生理特性的研究[J].中国棉花,1997,24(6):15～17.
[19]金珠群,等.中棉所系列抗棉铃虫品种在浙江慈溪的表现[J].中国棉花,1996,23(3):15～16
[20]徐立华,陈祥龙等.转基因抗虫棉杂交种生育特性及栽培技术[J].江苏农业科学,1997.(4):27～28.
[27]吴云康,等.棉花高产优化调控技术[M].中国农业出版社,1993
[28]师维军,李雪源,等.转基因抗虫棉在新疆的表现研究[J].新疆农业大学学报,2000,23(4):59～65.
[29]靖深蓉,等.抗虫杂交棉的选育与利用研究[J].中国棉花,1997,24(7):15～17.
[30]胡国祥,涂松林,施爱民.陆地棉多抗种质Bt103的选育及表现[J].中国棉花,1999,(11).
[31]吴德祥,姚霞林,等.沿江棉区转基因抗虫棉高产栽培技术研究[J].安徽农学通报,2003,9(1):52～53.
[32]李胄,刘有良,刘党培.陆地棉皮棉产量与植株性状相关性研究[J].西北农业学报,1997,6(3):44～49.
[33]陈仲方.棉花产量结构模式研究及其育种上应用意义[J].作物学报,1981,7(4):233～240.
[34]陈德华,王兆龙,吴云康,等.转基因抗虫棉杂交种光合生产及干物质分配特点研究[J].棉花学报,1998,10(1):33～37.
[35]唐灿明,朱广春,等.铃重及其构成因素的相关分析[J].中国棉花,1990,l7(6):9～10.
[36]高缪主编.棉花优化成铃及其调控[M].江苏科技出版社,1995.
[37]陈德华,等.棉花最佳成铃模式研究[J].棉花学报,1992,4(增刊):108～120.
[38]闵友信,等.肥料投入攀升之风不应再长—再论地膜棉高产施肥原理[J].塔里木农垦大学学报.1997.9(1):13.
[39]梁德印,等.钾营养对棉花养分吸收和干物质积累的影响[J].中国农业科学,1992,25(2):69～74.
[40]吴征彬,王平样,等.抗虫棉若干性状研究[J].华中农业大学学报,1997,l6(5):326～329.
[41]潘学标,韩湘玲,董占山.棉花生长发育模拟模型COTGROW的建立:光合作用和干物质生产分配[J].棉花学报,1997,9(3):132～141.
[42]孙学振,施培,单世华,等.株型对棉株C同化物生产及运输分配的影响[J].棉花学报,2000,12(5):238～24.
[43]GAN S S.Amasino R M. Inhibition of leaf senescence by auto-regulated production of cytokinin[J]. Science,1995,270(22):1986-1988.
[44]李静,沈法富,于东海,等.转基因抗早衰棉的获得[J].西北植物学报,2004,24(8):1419-1423.
[45]张存信.棉花早衰及其预防技术[J].天津农学院学报,2003,6(2): 41-44.
[46]代建龙,董合忠,李维江,等.棉花早衰的表现及其机理[J].植物生理科学,2008,3(24): 210-214.
[47]Pettigrew WT. Potassium deficiency increase specific leaf weight of leaf glucose levels in field-grown cotton[J]. Agron. 1999,91:962-968.
[48]扬青华,王俊振.棉花异常生育诊断与调控[J].河南农业科学,2001,(8):16-17.
[49]姜瑞云,王宏,黄祯茂.浅谈棉花早衰[J].中国棉花,1996,23(3):7-8.
[50]郑家焕,戴玉淑,王建波.棉花早衰的表现及防治途径[J].中国棉花,2000,27(3):40-41.
[51]董合忠,李维江,唐薇,等.棉花生理性早衰研究进展[J].棉花学报,2005,17(1):56-60.
[52]屠乃美,官春云.作物源-库关系研究的现状[J].作物研究,1995,9:44-48.
[53]崔世有,蔡立旺,高文翔.棉花产量研究及其育种利用[J].中国棉花,1997,24(12):2-4.
[54]GUINN G,Brummett D L. Leaf age,decline in photosynthesis,and changes in abscisic acid,indole-3-acecytokine in cotton leaves[J]. Field CropRes.1993,32:269-275.
[55]沈法富,喻树迅,范术丽,等.棉花叶片衰老过程中激素和膜脂过氧化的关系[J].植物生理与分子生物学报, 2003,29: 589-592.
[56]PETTIGREW W T,McCarty J C,Vaughn K C.Leaf senescence-like characteristics contribute to cotton’s premature photosynthetic decline[J].Photosynthesis Res,2000,65:187-195.
[57]喻树迅,黄祯茂,姜瑞云,等.几个短季棉品种叶片衰老特征的研究[J].棉花学报,1994,6(增刊):31~35.
[58]李付广.双价基因抗虫棉生理生化特征研究[J].棉花学报,2003,l5(3):131~137.
[59]Halliwell B. Chlorop last Metabolism,the structure and function of chlorop tasts in green leaf cells[M].Oxford:Charenden Press,1981,186.
[60]魏道智,宁书菊.叶部激素变化与小麦的整体衰老[J].广西植物,2002,22(4):382~384.
[61]林植芳,李双顺,林桂珠,等.水稻叶片的衰老与超氧化物歧化酶活性及脂质过氧化作用的关系[J].植物学报,1984,26(6):605~615.
[62]曹显祖,朱床森,顾自奋.关于杂交水稻结实率的研究[J].江苏农业科学,1981,1:1~7.
[63]宋松泉,傅家瑞.杂交水稻叶片衰老与膜脂过氧化作用的关系[J].中山大学学报论丛,1995,1:15~19.
[64]郑家焕,戴玉淑,王建波.棉花早衰的表现及防治途径[J].中国棉花,2000,3:30.
[65]岳寿松,于振文,余松烈等.不同生育时期施氮对冬小麦旗叶衰老和粒重的影响[J].中国农业科学,1997,30(2):42-46.
[66]赵会杰,邹琦,郭天才等.密度和追肥时期对重穗型冬小麦品种L906群体辐射和光合特性的调控效[J].作物学报,2002,28(2):270-277.
[67]李明,李文雄.肥料和密度对寒地高产玉朱源库性状及产量的调节作用[J].中国农业科学,2004,37(8):1130-1137.
[68]孙学振,王振林,张红.源库比对麦套棉干物质生产与产量构成的影响[J].中国棉花,1995,22(12):18-19.
[69]陈德华,吴云康,段海,等.棉花群体叶面积载荷量与产量关系及对源的调节效应研究[J].棉花学报,1996,8(2):109-112.
[70]Bednarz C W, Roberts P M.Spatial Yield Distribution in Cotton Following Early-season Gloral Bud Removal[J]. Crop Sci. 2001,41:1800-1808.
[71]Jones MA, Wells R, Guthrie D S.Cotton Response to Seasonal Patters of Flower Removal,Ⅰ.Yield and Fiber Quality[J]. Crop Sci, 1996,633-638.
[72]Kennedy C W,Smith J R,Jones J E.Effect of Early Season Square Removal on Three Leaf Types of Cotton[J]. Crop Sci. 1986, 26:139-145.
[73]Kletter E,Wallach D.Effects of fruiting form removal on cotton reproductive development[J].Field Crops Res.1982, 5:69-84.
[74]Pettigrew W T, Heinholt W R, Meredith J R. Early Season Floral Bud Removal and Cotton Growth, Yield and Fiber Quality[J]. Agron. J, 1992, 84:209-214.
[75]李跃强,宣维健,王红托,等.棉花对棉铃虫为害超补偿作用的生理机制[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(3):267-271.
[76]SadrasVO. Compensatory growth in cotton after loss ofreproductive organs. Field Crops Research, 1995,40: 1-18.
[77] KLETTER E Wallach, Effects of fruiting forms removal on cotton reproductive development [ J]. Field Crops Res, 1982, 5: 69-84.
[78] BEDNARZ C W, Roberts P M. Spatial yield distri-bution in cotton following early-season floral bud re-moval[J]. Crop Sci, 2001, 41: 1800-1808.
[79] PETTIGREW W T, Heitholt J.J, Meredith W R,Early season floral bud removal and cotton growth, yield, and fiber quality [J]. Agron J, 1992, 84:209-214.
[80]马宗斌.不同方法除蕾对棉花生育和产量的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,1990,24(1):108-116.
[81]邓绍华,蒋国柱,潘晓康.棉花摘除早蕾后的生育、生理效应及优质增产机理研究[J].作物学报,1991,17(6):401-408.
[82]李跃强,宣维健,王红托,等.棉花对棉铃虫为害超补偿作用的生理机制[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(3):267-271.
[83] SADRAS V O, Wilson L J. Recovery of cotton crops after early season damage by Thrips (thysanoptera)[J]. Crop Sci. 1998, 38: 399-409.
[84] DUMKA D, Bednarz C W, Maw B W. Delayed initiation of fruiting as a mechanism of improved drought avoidance in cotton. Crop Sci. 2004, 44: 528-534.
[85]毛正轩.去除早果枝对棉花产量的不利影响[J].作物杂志,1994,(2):31-32.
[86]蒋国柱,邓绍华.棉花优质高产结铃模式调节及配套技术[J].中国棉花, 1993, 18 (4):19-20.
[87]Ji C-L, Yu J-Z, Liu Y-L, et al. Study on source and sink characteristics ofhigh-yielding cotton varieties. Cotton Science, 2000,12(6): 298-301.
[88]Sun H-C, Li C-D, WangW-X, et al. Study on physiological characteristicsof lower“boll-leaf system”with the changes of source/sink ratios in cotton at the early flowering. Cotton Science, 2004,16(5): 286-290.
[89]Chen D-H, Wu Y-K, Dun H,et al. Study on the relationship of sink capacity of unit leaf area to yield and regulation effect to source in cotton population. Cotton Science(棉花学报), 1996,8(2): 109-112.
[90]董合忠,牛曰华,李维江等.不同整枝方式对棉花源库关系的调节效应[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(4):819-824.
[91]牛曰华,董合忠,李维江.去早果枝对抗虫棉产量、品质和早衰的影响[J].棉花学报,2007,1991(1):52-56.
[92]董合忠,李维江,唐薇,等.不同基因型抗虫棉的光合生产与叶源特征[J].棉花学报,2005,17(6):328-333.
[93] WRIGHT P R. Premature senescence of cotton-predominantly potassium disorder caused by an im-balance of source and sink [J]. Plant and Soil, 1999, 211: 231-23.
[94]陈德华,吴云康.棉花群体叶面积载荷量与产量关系及对源的调节效应研究[J].棉花学报,1996,8(2):109-112.
[95]Read S M, Northcote D H. Minimization of variation in the response to different protein of the Coomassic Blue G dye dinding: assay for Protein [J]. Anal.Biochem, 1981, 116: 53~64.
[96]赵世杰.叶绿素的定量测定[A].邹琦.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业出版社, 2000,72~75.
[97]邹琦.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000,72~75.
[98]华东师范大学.植物生理学实验指导[Ml.北京:人民教育出版社,1980.
[99]周桂生,封超年,周青,等.不同栽培方式对高品质棉花生长发育·产量和纤维品质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2006,34(1):62-64.
[100]计汪栋,施国新,杨海燕,等.铜胁迫对竹叶眼子菜叶生理指标和超微结构的影响[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(12):2727-2732.
[101]周嘉槐,张智勇,茆敦俊,等.杂交水稻空秕粒生理的研究[M].北京植物生理学会编.植物生理生化进展,北京:科学出版社. 1984,40-59.
[102] STEWART S D, Layton M B, Williams M R, et al. Response of cotton to prebloom square loss[J]. Field and Forage Crops, 94(2): 388-396.
[103]MALIK M N A, Edwards D G, Evenson J P. Effects of flower bud removal and nitrogen supply ongrowth and development of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)[J]. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 1981, 8: 285-291.
[104]侯彩霞,汤章城.细胞相容性物质的生理功能及其作用机制.植物生理通讯,1999,35(1):1-7.
[105]段咏新,李松泉,傅家瑞.钙对延缓杂交水稻叶片衰老的作用机理.杂交水稻,1997,12(6):23-25.
[106]林植芳,李双顺,林桂珠,孙谷畴,郭俊彦.水稻叶片的衰老与超氧化物歧化酶活性及脂质过氧化作用的关系.植物学报,1984,26(6):605-615.
[107]BEDNARZ C W, Roberts P M. Spatial yield distribution in cotton following early-season floral bud removal[J]. Crop Science,2001, 41: 1800-1808.
[108]PETTIGREW W T,Heitholt J J, Meredith W R. Early season floral bud removal and cotton growth, yield, and fiber quality[J]. Agronomy Journal, 1992, 84:209-214.
[109]马宗斌.不同方法除蕾对棉花生育和产量的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,1990,24(1):108-116.
[2]夏敬源.控制棉铃虫爆发成灾的APM对策[J].棉花学报, 1994, 6(1): 1-8.
[3] Deraton W R et al. Background and performance Bt cotton[D]. 1996年美国棉花带论文集.
[4]涂松林,施爱民.我国转基因抗虫棉研究利用现状与展望[J].江西棉花, 2001, 6 (4): 31-33.
[5]夏敬源.棉花害虫生物生态控制关键技术研究[J].棉花学报,1997,8(5):225-228.
[6]陈素彬,王朝生,柴友荣,等.转Bt基因棉花抗红铃虫性的鉴定团[J].中国棉花,1997,15(12):5-17
[7]张存信.抗虫棉的开发和利用[J].天津农业科学[J]. 2000, (3): 41-44.
[8]王仁样.中国转基因抗虫棉的应用及发展对策[J].棉花学报, 2003, 15(3): 180-184.
[9]李汝忠,郭庆正,葛逢珠.转基因抗虫棉研究利用现状与前瞻[J].山东农业科学,1997,(2):47-50.
[10]何忠伟,周文新,陈艳芬,等.中国转基因抗虫棉发展的现状与对策[J] .科技和产业,2004, (11): 27-30.
[11]夏敬源,马志强,田明军.国产转基因抗虫棉的发展成就及其作用[J].中国农技推广2004, (6): 4-6.
[12]曹桂艳.外源基因棉抗虫性研究与应用进展[J].辽宁农业科学,2001,10(1):33-35.
[13]邢朝柱,靖深蓉,袁有禄,等.转Bt基因棉花性状表现、存在问题及对策[J].安徽农业科学,1998, 26 ( 3 ) : 201-204.
[14]何钟佩,田晓莉,王保民,等.转基因抗虫棉生育特点及其化控栽培技术体系的研究[C]中国棉花学会2004年年会论文汇编.宜昌,2004,8:194-196.
[15]丁双阳,何钟佩,段留生.抗虫棉中棉所30号种子萌发过程中生理变化的研究[J].中国农业大学学报,1998,3(增刊):52-57.
[16]田晓丽,杨培珠,王保民,等.转Bt基因抗虫棉源器官的建成及其功能[J].棉花学报,2003,15(2):91-96.
[17]于凤玲,秦新敏,宋燕青,等.新棉33B的生育特性及主要栽培措施[J].中国棉花,1996,26(8):42-43.
[18]田晓莉,杨培珠,段留生,等.转Bt基因抗虫棉源库关系的初步研究[J].棉花学报,1999,11(3):151-156.
[19] CARTER R, Clower J, Young R,et al. Transgenic Bt cotton. consultants views and obseyattions[C] //Proc Belt Cotton Conf,1997: 875.
[20]WILSON F D. Yield components and fiber propertiesof insect resistant cotton lines containing aBacillusthuringiensistoxin gene[J].Crop Sci,1994,34:38-41.
[21]张宝红,丰嵘.棉花的抗虫性与抗虫棉[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社,2000.
[22]夏敬源.抗虫棉在棉铃虫综合治理中的作用研究初探[J].中国棉花,1995(8)
[23]赵海祯,梁哲军,等.转基因抗虫棉生物学特性研究[J].中国棉花,2002,29(10):10～11.
[24]郭三堆,崔洪志,倪万潮,等.双价抗虫转基因棉花研究[J].中国农业科学,1999,32(3)1～7.
[25]谢德意.转基因抗虫棉研究进展、问题及对策[J].中国棉花,2001,28(2):6～8.
[26]陈德华,吴云康,段海,等.转基因抗虫棉杂交种生长规律及生理特性的研究[J].中国棉花,1997,24(6):15～17.
[19]金珠群,等.中棉所系列抗棉铃虫品种在浙江慈溪的表现[J].中国棉花,1996,23(3):15～16
[20]徐立华,陈祥龙等.转基因抗虫棉杂交种生育特性及栽培技术[J].江苏农业科学,1997.(4):27～28.
[27]吴云康,等.棉花高产优化调控技术[M].中国农业出版社,1993
[28]师维军,李雪源,等.转基因抗虫棉在新疆的表现研究[J].新疆农业大学学报,2000,23(4):59～65.
[29]靖深蓉,等.抗虫杂交棉的选育与利用研究[J].中国棉花,1997,24(7):15～17.
[30]胡国祥,涂松林,施爱民.陆地棉多抗种质Bt103的选育及表现[J].中国棉花,1999,(11).
[31]吴德祥,姚霞林,等.沿江棉区转基因抗虫棉高产栽培技术研究[J].安徽农学通报,2003,9(1):52～53.
[32]李胄,刘有良,刘党培.陆地棉皮棉产量与植株性状相关性研究[J].西北农业学报,1997,6(3):44～49.
[33]陈仲方.棉花产量结构模式研究及其育种上应用意义[J].作物学报,1981,7(4):233～240.
[34]陈德华,王兆龙,吴云康,等.转基因抗虫棉杂交种光合生产及干物质分配特点研究[J].棉花学报,1998,10(1):33～37.
[35]唐灿明,朱广春,等.铃重及其构成因素的相关分析[J].中国棉花,1990,l7(6):9～10.
[36]高缪主编.棉花优化成铃及其调控[M].江苏科技出版社,1995.
[37]陈德华,等.棉花最佳成铃模式研究[J].棉花学报,1992,4(增刊):108～120.
[38]闵友信,等.肥料投入攀升之风不应再长—再论地膜棉高产施肥原理[J].塔里木农垦大学学报.1997.9(1):13.
[39]梁德印,等.钾营养对棉花养分吸收和干物质积累的影响[J].中国农业科学,1992,25(2):69～74.
[40]吴征彬,王平样,等.抗虫棉若干性状研究[J].华中农业大学学报,1997,l6(5):326～329.
[41]潘学标,韩湘玲,董占山.棉花生长发育模拟模型COTGROW的建立:光合作用和干物质生产分配[J].棉花学报,1997,9(3):132～141.
[42]孙学振,施培,单世华,等.株型对棉株C同化物生产及运输分配的影响[J].棉花学报,2000,12(5):238～24.
[43]GAN S S.Amasino R M. Inhibition of leaf senescence by auto-regulated production of cytokinin[J]. Science,1995,270(22):1986-1988.
[44]李静,沈法富,于东海,等.转基因抗早衰棉的获得[J].西北植物学报,2004,24(8):1419-1423.
[45]张存信.棉花早衰及其预防技术[J].天津农学院学报,2003,6(2): 41-44.
[46]代建龙,董合忠,李维江,等.棉花早衰的表现及其机理[J].植物生理科学,2008,3(24): 210-214.
[47]Pettigrew WT. Potassium deficiency increase specific leaf weight of leaf glucose levels in field-grown cotton[J]. Agron. 1999,91:962-968.
[48]扬青华,王俊振.棉花异常生育诊断与调控[J].河南农业科学,2001,(8):16-17.
[49]姜瑞云,王宏,黄祯茂.浅谈棉花早衰[J].中国棉花,1996,23(3):7-8.
[50]郑家焕,戴玉淑,王建波.棉花早衰的表现及防治途径[J].中国棉花,2000,27(3):40-41.
[51]董合忠,李维江,唐薇,等.棉花生理性早衰研究进展[J].棉花学报,2005,17(1):56-60.
[52]屠乃美,官春云.作物源-库关系研究的现状[J].作物研究,1995,9:44-48.
[53]崔世有,蔡立旺,高文翔.棉花产量研究及其育种利用[J].中国棉花,1997,24(12):2-4.
[54]GUINN G,Brummett D L. Leaf age,decline in photosynthesis,and changes in abscisic acid,indole-3-acecytokine in cotton leaves[J]. Field CropRes.1993,32:269-275.
[55]沈法富,喻树迅,范术丽,等.棉花叶片衰老过程中激素和膜脂过氧化的关系[J].植物生理与分子生物学报, 2003,29: 589-592.
[56]PETTIGREW W T,McCarty J C,Vaughn K C.Leaf senescence-like characteristics contribute to cotton’s premature photosynthetic decline[J].Photosynthesis Res,2000,65:187-195.
[57]喻树迅,黄祯茂,姜瑞云,等.几个短季棉品种叶片衰老特征的研究[J].棉花学报,1994,6(增刊):31~35.
[58]李付广.双价基因抗虫棉生理生化特征研究[J].棉花学报,2003,l5(3):131~137.
[59]Halliwell B. Chlorop last Metabolism,the structure and function of chlorop tasts in green leaf cells[M].Oxford:Charenden Press,1981,186.
[60]魏道智,宁书菊.叶部激素变化与小麦的整体衰老[J].广西植物,2002,22(4):382~384.
[61]林植芳,李双顺,林桂珠,等.水稻叶片的衰老与超氧化物歧化酶活性及脂质过氧化作用的关系[J].植物学报,1984,26(6):605~615.
[62]曹显祖,朱床森,顾自奋.关于杂交水稻结实率的研究[J].江苏农业科学,1981,1:1~7.
[63]宋松泉,傅家瑞.杂交水稻叶片衰老与膜脂过氧化作用的关系[J].中山大学学报论丛,1995,1:15~19.
[64]郑家焕,戴玉淑,王建波.棉花早衰的表现及防治途径[J].中国棉花,2000,3:30.
[65]岳寿松,于振文,余松烈等.不同生育时期施氮对冬小麦旗叶衰老和粒重的影响[J].中国农业科学,1997,30(2):42-46.
[66]赵会杰,邹琦,郭天才等.密度和追肥时期对重穗型冬小麦品种L906群体辐射和光合特性的调控效[J].作物学报,2002,28(2):270-277.
[67]李明,李文雄.肥料和密度对寒地高产玉朱源库性状及产量的调节作用[J].中国农业科学,2004,37(8):1130-1137.
[68]孙学振,王振林,张红.源库比对麦套棉干物质生产与产量构成的影响[J].中国棉花,1995,22(12):18-19.
[69]陈德华,吴云康,段海,等.棉花群体叶面积载荷量与产量关系及对源的调节效应研究[J].棉花学报,1996,8(2):109-112.
[70]Bednarz C W, Roberts P M.Spatial Yield Distribution in Cotton Following Early-season Gloral Bud Removal[J]. Crop Sci. 2001,41:1800-1808.
[71]Jones MA, Wells R, Guthrie D S.Cotton Response to Seasonal Patters of Flower Removal,Ⅰ.Yield and Fiber Quality[J]. Crop Sci, 1996,633-638.
[72]Kennedy C W,Smith J R,Jones J E.Effect of Early Season Square Removal on Three Leaf Types of Cotton[J]. Crop Sci. 1986, 26:139-145.
[73]Kletter E,Wallach D.Effects of fruiting form removal on cotton reproductive development[J].Field Crops Res.1982, 5:69-84.
[74]Pettigrew W T, Heinholt W R, Meredith J R. Early Season Floral Bud Removal and Cotton Growth, Yield and Fiber Quality[J]. Agron. J, 1992, 84:209-214.
[75]李跃强,宣维健,王红托,等.棉花对棉铃虫为害超补偿作用的生理机制[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(3):267-271.
[76]SadrasVO. Compensatory growth in cotton after loss ofreproductive organs. Field Crops Research, 1995,40: 1-18.
[77] KLETTER E Wallach, Effects of fruiting forms removal on cotton reproductive development [ J]. Field Crops Res, 1982, 5: 69-84.
[78] BEDNARZ C W, Roberts P M. Spatial yield distri-bution in cotton following early-season floral bud re-moval[J]. Crop Sci, 2001, 41: 1800-1808.
[79] PETTIGREW W T, Heitholt J.J, Meredith W R,Early season floral bud removal and cotton growth, yield, and fiber quality [J]. Agron J, 1992, 84:209-214.
[80]马宗斌.不同方法除蕾对棉花生育和产量的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,1990,24(1):108-116.
[81]邓绍华,蒋国柱,潘晓康.棉花摘除早蕾后的生育、生理效应及优质增产机理研究[J].作物学报,1991,17(6):401-408.
[82]李跃强,宣维健,王红托,等.棉花对棉铃虫为害超补偿作用的生理机制[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(3):267-271.
[83] SADRAS V O, Wilson L J. Recovery of cotton crops after early season damage by Thrips (thysanoptera)[J]. Crop Sci. 1998, 38: 399-409.
[84] DUMKA D, Bednarz C W, Maw B W. Delayed initiation of fruiting as a mechanism of improved drought avoidance in cotton. Crop Sci. 2004, 44: 528-534.
[85]毛正轩.去除早果枝对棉花产量的不利影响[J].作物杂志,1994,(2):31-32.
[86]蒋国柱,邓绍华.棉花优质高产结铃模式调节及配套技术[J].中国棉花, 1993, 18 (4):19-20.
[87]Ji C-L, Yu J-Z, Liu Y-L, et al. Study on source and sink characteristics ofhigh-yielding cotton varieties. Cotton Science, 2000,12(6): 298-301.
[88]Sun H-C, Li C-D, WangW-X, et al. Study on physiological characteristicsof lower“boll-leaf system”with the changes of source/sink ratios in cotton at the early flowering. Cotton Science, 2004,16(5): 286-290.
[89]Chen D-H, Wu Y-K, Dun H,et al. Study on the relationship of sink capacity of unit leaf area to yield and regulation effect to source in cotton population. Cotton Science(棉花学报), 1996,8(2): 109-112.
[90]董合忠,牛曰华,李维江等.不同整枝方式对棉花源库关系的调节效应[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(4):819-824.
[91]牛曰华,董合忠,李维江.去早果枝对抗虫棉产量、品质和早衰的影响[J].棉花学报,2007,1991(1):52-56.
[92]董合忠,李维江,唐薇,等.不同基因型抗虫棉的光合生产与叶源特征[J].棉花学报,2005,17(6):328-333.
[93] WRIGHT P R. Premature senescence of cotton-predominantly potassium disorder caused by an im-balance of source and sink [J]. Plant and Soil, 1999, 211: 231-23.
[94]陈德华,吴云康.棉花群体叶面积载荷量与产量关系及对源的调节效应研究[J].棉花学报,1996,8(2):109-112.
[95]Read S M, Northcote D H. Minimization of variation in the response to different protein of the Coomassic Blue G dye dinding: assay for Protein [J]. Anal.Biochem, 1981, 116: 53~64.
[96]赵世杰.叶绿素的定量测定[A].邹琦.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业出版社, 2000,72~75.
[97]邹琦.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:中国农业出版社,2000,72~75.
[98]华东师范大学.植物生理学实验指导[Ml.北京:人民教育出版社,1980.
[99]周桂生,封超年,周青,等.不同栽培方式对高品质棉花生长发育·产量和纤维品质的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2006,34(1):62-64.
[100]计汪栋,施国新,杨海燕,等.铜胁迫对竹叶眼子菜叶生理指标和超微结构的影响[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(12):2727-2732.
[101]周嘉槐,张智勇,茆敦俊,等.杂交水稻空秕粒生理的研究[M].北京植物生理学会编.植物生理生化进展,北京:科学出版社. 1984,40-59.
[102] STEWART S D, Layton M B, Williams M R, et al. Response of cotton to prebloom square loss[J]. Field and Forage Crops, 94(2): 388-396.
[103]MALIK M N A, Edwards D G, Evenson J P. Effects of flower bud removal and nitrogen supply ongrowth and development of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)[J]. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology, 1981, 8: 285-291.
[104]侯彩霞,汤章城.细胞相容性物质的生理功能及其作用机制.植物生理通讯,1999,35(1):1-7.
[105]段咏新,李松泉,傅家瑞.钙对延缓杂交水稻叶片衰老的作用机理.杂交水稻,1997,12(6):23-25.
[106]林植芳,李双顺,林桂珠,孙谷畴,郭俊彦.水稻叶片的衰老与超氧化物歧化酶活性及脂质过氧化作用的关系.植物学报,1984,26(6):605-615.
[107]BEDNARZ C W, Roberts P M. Spatial yield distribution in cotton following early-season floral bud removal[J]. Crop Science,2001, 41: 1800-1808.
[108]PETTIGREW W T,Heitholt J J, Meredith W R. Early season floral bud removal and cotton growth, yield, and fiber quality[J]. Agronomy Journal, 1992, 84:209-214.
[109]马宗斌.不同方法除蕾对棉花生育和产量的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,1990,24(1):108-116.