长江中下游麦区小麦新品种穗发芽抗性及鉴定方法研究
详细信息    查看全文 | 推荐本文 |
  • 英文篇名:Evaluation and Determination Method of Pre-harvest Sprouting Resistance of New Wheat Cultivars in Middle and Lower Reaches of Yangtze River
  • 作者:朱冬梅 ; 李曼 ; 李东升 ; 吴素兰 ; 张晓 ; 张伯桥
  • 英文作者:ZHU Dongmei;LI Man;LI Dongsheng;WU Sulan;ZHANG Xiao;ZHANG Boqiao;Ministry Agriculture Key Laboratory of Wheat Biology and Genetic Breeding in the Middle and Lower Yangtze River/Lixiahe Institute of Agricultural Sciences;
  • 关键词:小麦 ; 穗发芽 ; FN ; SN
  • 英文关键词:wheat;;pre-harvest sprouting;;FN;;SN
  • 中文刊名:HNXB
  • 英文刊名:Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences
  • 机构:江苏里下河地区农业科学研究所/农业部长江中下游小麦生物学与遗传育种重点实验室;
  • 出版日期:2018-01-31 15:10
  • 出版单位:核农学报
  • 年:2018
  • 期:v.32
  • 基金:国家重点研发计划(2016YFD0101802);; 国家现代农业产业技术体系(CARS-3-1-1;CARS-3-2-11);; 优质专用弱筋小麦新品种选育(CX(14)2002)
  • 语种:中文;
  • 页:HNXB201804020
  • 页数:7
  • CN:04
  • ISSN:11-2265/S
  • 分类号:177-183
摘要
为鉴定长江中下游麦区主推品种的穗发芽(PHS)抗性,筛选高抗穗发芽种质资源,探讨简单、高效测定穗发芽的方法,本研究以长江中下游麦区小麦新品种为试验材料,利用田间穗发芽法(GP)、降落值(FN)法和搅拌值(SN)法对本麦区小麦新品种的穗发芽抗性进行鉴定。结果表明,田间穗发芽率与FN、SN呈极显著负相关,FN法与SN法均可作为评价小麦穗发芽抗性的有效方法。SN与FN呈极显著正相关,相关系数为0.957,SN法测试时间短,样品用量少,品种间SN变幅大,能更准确地鉴定穗发芽抗性差异小的品种。聚类分析结果表明,白皮小麦鄂麦170、襄麦35、红皮小麦宁麦19、宁麦21、信麦8811、皖西麦0638和宁麦23为一类,田间穗发芽率最高为62.36%,FN<150 s,SN<100 cp,穗发芽抗性弱;扬麦25、扬麦23、扬富麦101、扬麦16、苏科麦1号、扬麦20、宁麦22、镇麦10号、扬麦21为二类,田间穗发芽率小于1%,FN>250 s,SN>900 cp,穗发芽抗性强;其他品种抗性中等,为三类。综上,SN法是鉴定穗发芽抗性的高效方法之一,可把SN>900 cp作为抗穗发芽指标。本研究为长江中下游麦区抗穗发芽种质资源的筛选及穗发芽抗性育种提供了科学依据。
        To evaluate the pre-harvest sprouting(PHS) resistance,screen PHS resistant wheat cultivars,and explore an efficient,simple and rapid identification method of PHS resistance,the germination percentage(GP) of spike,the falling numbers(FN) and the stirring numbers(SN) were measured in the new wheat cultivars from middle and lower reaches of Yangtze river in this study. The results indicated that the GP was found to be highly significant negative correlated with FN and SN. FN and SN can be used as an effective method to evaluate the PHS resistance of wheat. SN was significantly positive associated with FN,and the correlation coefficient was as high as 0. 957. In view of the shorter test time,less sample consumption and larger variability of SN test,it was more accurate to identify the varieties with little PHS difference. Cluster analysis results showed that, white wheat Emai170 and Xiangmai35, red wheat Ningmai19,Ningmai21,Xinmai8811,Wanximai0638 and Ningmai23 were susceptive to PHS,with the highest GP value 62. 36%, FN < 150 s, SN < 100 cp; Yangmai25, Yangmai23,Yangfumai101, Yangmai16, Sukemai1,Yangmai20,Ningmai22,Zhenmai10 and Yangmai21 showed higher resistance to PHS,which the GP value was less than 1%,FN > 250 s,SN > 900 cp. Other varieties were moderately resistant to PHS. In conclusion,the SN test is an efficient way to identify the PHS resistance,and the SN value above 900 cp can be used as a criterion of PHS resistance.Results of this study provide a scientific basis for the identification of germplasm resourses of PHS resistance in wheat breeding.
引文
[1]肖世和,闫长生,张海萍,孙果忠.小麦穗发芽研究[M].北京:中国农业科学技术出版社,2002:92-99
    [2]Xiao S H,Zhang X Y,Yan C S,Lin H.Germplasm improvement for pre-harvest sprouting resistance in Chinese white-grained:an overview of the current in strategy[J].Euphytica,2002,126:35-38
    [3]闫长生,张海萍,海林,张秀英,胡琳,胡汉桥,蒲宗君,肖世和.中国小麦品种穗发芽抗性差异的研究[J].作物学报,2006,32(4):580-587
    [4]魏旭.两个与小麦穗发芽抗性相关标记鉴定内蒙古春小麦育种亲本的穗发芽抗性[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2014
    [5]董静,秦丹丹,许甫超,李梅芳,徐晴,葛双桃,周伟乐.小麦穗发芽抗性的分子机制和育种研究进展[J].湖北农业科学,2015,54(22):5509-5514
    [6]Gale M D,Lenton J R.Pre-harvest in wheat:a complex genetic and physiological problem affecting breadmaking quality in UK wheats[J].Aspects of Applied Biology,1987,15:115-124
    [7]王志龙,于亚雄,王志伟,程加省,乔祥梅,杨金华.小麦穗发芽抗性鉴定及机制分析[J].西南农业学报,2016,29(11):2513-2519
    [8]王冬勤,赖佳.小麦穗发芽的发生与防治[J].四川农业科技,2015(6):11-12
    [9]黄涛,李和平,张兆顺,高春保,朱旭彤,廖玉才.小麦穗发芽抗性与选择效应研究[J].华中农业大学学报,2007,26(1):11-14
    [10]孙果忠,游光霞,孙京燕,张秀英,武淑祯,苑菲,王海波,肖世和.我国小麦主推品种穗发芽抗性鉴定及相关分子标记的评价[J].华北农学报,2010,25(4):6-11
    [11]张静,林泽川,曹立勇,沈希宏.水稻种子穗发芽与休眠性遗传研究进展[J].核农学报,2013,27(8):1136-1142
    [12]董静,李梅芳,许甫超,秦丹丹,张俊成,朱霞,彭惠,胡婧.湖北小麦材料穗发芽抗性评价[J].湖北农业科学,2011,50(24):5040-5043
    [13]马文洁,张传量,宋晓朋,冯洁,崔紫霞,孙道杰.不同麦区小麦品种穗发芽抗性及其与穗部性状的相关性[J].麦类作物学报,2016,36(10):1269-1274
    [14]杨燕,张春利,陈新民,王德森,夏兰芹,刘忠峰.红粒春小麦穗发芽抗性鉴定及相关分子标记的有效性验证[J].麦类作物学报,2011,31(1):54-59
    [15]朱冬梅,张晓祥,王玲,方正武,江伟,张晓,高德荣.长江中下游麦区主要小麦品种穗发芽抗性及鉴定方法比较[J].麦类作物学报,2014,34(7):944-949
    [16]方正武,李玉营,马东方,王晓玲,高德荣.长江中下游麦区小麦材料穗发芽抗性评价[J].西北农业学报,2015,24(2):33-38
    [17]Mares D J,Ellison F W,Derera N F.Third International Symposium on Preharvest Sprouting in Cereals[M].Golden:Westview Press Boulder,1983:22-28
    [18]张海峰,Zemetra R S,Liu C T.冬小麦穗发芽抗性及鉴定方法的研究[J].作物学报,1989,15(2):116-122
    [19]任江萍,陈焕丽,王振云,尹钧,李永春,牛洪斌,宋晓.小麦穗发芽与籽粒内可溶性糖和α-淀粉酶活性的品种差异[J].西北农业学报,2007,16(1):22-25
    [20]吴颖,胡汉桥,王罡,张艳贞,季静.春小麦α-淀粉酶活性及其与穗发芽抗性的关系[J].吉林农业大学学报,2002,24(2):22-25
    [21]徐成彬,吴兆苏.小麦收获前穗发芽的生理生化特性研究[J].中国农业科学,1988,21(3):14-21
    [22]Finney P L.Effect of wheat variety on the relationship between falling numbers and Alpha-Amylase activity[J].Cereal Chem.1985,62(4):258-262
    [23]马勇.黑龙江省春小麦品种穗发芽敏感性研究[J].中国种业,2015(2):49-50
    [24]马丽,李治,任天恒,唐宗祥,晏本菊,任正隆.普通小麦穗发芽抗性相关分子标记在RIL群体中的验证与评价[J].麦类作物学报,2014,34(4):435-442
    [25]胡汉桥,王罡,张艳贞,张领兵,杜娟.春小麦穗发芽抗性鉴定及机理研究[J].麦类作物学报,2001,21(3):13-17
    [26]车京玉,王岩,李长辉,马勇,高凤梅,张起昌,刘宁涛,邹东月,田超,邵立刚.春小麦穗发芽影响因素及特性研究[J].大麦与谷类科学,2015(3):11-14
    [27]张新生,胡汉桥,杨德光.春小麦α-淀粉酶及抑制蛋白与穗发芽的关系[J].吉林农业大学学报,2003,25(2):131-133
    [28]Ross A S,Walker C E,Booth R I,Orth R A,Wrigley C W.The rapid visco-analyzer:a new technique for the estimation of sprout damage[J].Cereal Foods World,1987,32:827-829
    [29]王凤宝,杨雪,付金锋,董立峰,马理.低酚酶活性选择对小麦穗发芽的影响[J].核农学报,2015,29(5):899-907
    [30]商业部谷物油脂化学研究所.SB/T 10139-1993馒头用小麦粉[S].山东:标准化研究院,1993