PEG模拟干旱胁迫下11份野生冰草种质资源萌发期抗旱性评价

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2025.03.022

新疆农业科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 62 ›› Issue (3): 723-731.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2025.03.022

• 植物保护·土壤肥料·微生物 • 上一篇下一篇

PEG模拟干旱胁迫下11份野生冰草种质资源萌发期抗旱性评价

伊风艳¹(), 孙世贤², 郭呈宇¹, 闫晓红², 房永雨¹, 杨鼎¹, 丁海君¹()

1.内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院,呼和浩特 010031
2.中国农业科学院草原研究所,呼和浩特 010010

收稿日期:2024-08-18 出版日期:2025-03-20 发布日期:2025-05-14
通信作者: 丁海君(1979-),女,内蒙古赤峰人,研究员,博士,研究方向为牧草遗传育种,(E-mail) dinghaijun99@163.com
作者简介:伊风艳(1984-),女,内蒙古通辽人,副研究员,博士,研究方向为牧草遗传育种与种子生态学,(E-mail) yifengyanonly88@126.com
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(32060393);生态草业可持续发展专项(2023CYZX01);内蒙古自治区科技重大专项(2021ZD0031);内蒙古自治区技术攻关项目(2021GG0056)

Drought resistance evaluation of 11 wild Agropyron cristatum germplasm at germination stage under PEG simulated stress

YI Fengyan¹(), SUN Shixian², GUO Chengyu¹, YAN Xiaohong², FANG Yongyu¹, YANG Ding¹, DING Haijun¹()

1. Inner Mongolia Academy of Agricultural and Animal Husbandry Sciences, Hohhot 010031, China
2. Institute of Grassland Research, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Hohhot 010010, China

Received:2024-08-18 Published:2025-03-20 Online:2025-05-14
Supported by:
National Natural Science Foundation of China(32060393);Ecological Grass Industry Sustainable Development Project of Inner Mongolia(2023CYZX01);Major Science and Technology Project of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region(2021ZD0031);Technical Research Project of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region(2021GG0056)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】通过PEG模拟水分胁迫筛选出耐旱冰草种质资源。【方法】收集11份野生冰草为试验材料,分析不同浓度的聚乙二醇(PEG-6000)模拟干旱胁迫对其种子相对发芽势(PGR)、相对发芽率(RGP)、相对发芽指数(RGI)、相对活力指数(RVI)、相对苗高(RSH)和相对根长(RRL)的影响,并采用隶属函数法对抗旱性进行综合评价。【结果】PEG模拟干旱胁迫对11份野生冰草种质资源萌发期各指标均有影响,且材料间差异明显,但各项指标均随着PEG浓度的增加呈下降趋势。低浓度(5%)的干旱胁迫对A₁、A₈和A₉各项萌发指标具有一定的促进作用,尤其是对RGR,RGI和RVI。随着PEG处理浓度的增加,11份野生冰草种质资源的各项萌发指标均受到了不同程度的抑制,尤其是对RSH和RRL抑制作用较强,当浓度达到25%时,A₃和A₄各项指标均被完全抑制。6个萌发指标间存在极显著正相关关系,相关系数在0.831~0.981,RGP与RGI的相关性最高。11份野生冰草种质资源的D值范围在0.387 7~0.504 5,其中,A₁和A₉的抗旱性优于其他材料。【结论】随着PEG-6000 浓度的增加,11份野生冰草种质资源萌发期各个指标均表现出明显的差异,其抗旱性强弱依次为A₁>A₉>A₆>A₂>A₇>A₅>A₈>A₁₀>A₁₁>A₄>A₃。

关键词: 野生冰草; 种质资源; 种子萌发; 抗旱性

Abstract:

【Objective】The germplasm resources of drought tolerant Agropyron cristatum were screened by PEG simulated water stress.【Methods】The seeds of 11 A. cristatum germplasm resources collected were used as the testing materials to evaluate the effects of different Polyethylene glycol (PEG-6000) concentration on six seed germination indexes (relative germination rate, relative germination potential, relative germination index, relative vitality index, relative seedling height and relative root length), and drought resistance of these materials was was comprehensively evaluated by using the membership function method.【Results】The results showed that PEG simulated drought stress had significant effects on the germination stage of 11 A. cristatum germplasm resources, and there were significant differences among the materials, but the indexes showed a decreasing trend with the increase of PEG concentration. Low concentration of drought stress had a certain promotion on germination indexes of A₁, A₈ and A₉, especially on RGR, RGI and RVI. The germination indexes of 11 A. cristatum germplasm resources was inhibited with the increase of PEG stress concentration, and the inhibition effect on RSH and RRL was stronger, when the concentration reached 25%, the A₃ and A₄ indexes were completely inhibited. Correlation analysis showed that there was a significant correlation between the six indicators, and the correlation coefficient was 0.831 to 0.981, RGP has the highest correlation with RGI. The germination indexes of 11 A. cristatum germplasm resources were evaluated by membership function method and with D value range of 0.387,7 to 0.504,5, and the drought resistance of A1 and A9 was better than those of other materials.【Conclusion】There are differences in the indexes of the germplasm resources at the germination stage of 11 A. cristatum germplasm resources under drought stress with the increase of PEG-6000 concentration, and the drought resistance is as follows: A₁>A₉>A₆>A₂>A₇>A₅>A₈>A₁₀>A₁₁>A₄>A₃.

Key words: wild Agropyron cristatum; germplasm resources; seed germination; drought resistance

中图分类号:

S543

伊风艳, 孙世贤, 郭呈宇, 闫晓红, 房永雨, 杨鼎, 丁海君. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下11份野生冰草种质资源萌发期抗旱性评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2025, 62(3): 723-731.

YI Fengyan, SUN Shixian, GUO Chengyu, YAN Xiaohong, FANG Yongyu, YANG Ding, DING Haijun. Drought resistance evaluation of 11 wild Agropyron cristatum germplasm at germination stage under PEG simulated stress[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2025, 62(3): 723-731.

图/表 6

参考文献 25

[1]	张佳宁, 刘坤. 植物调节萌发时间和萌发地点的机制[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(1): 328-338. DOI
	ZHANG Jianing, LIU Kun. Mechanisms for plants detecting the optimum time and place to germinate[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(1): 328-338. DOI
[2]	符开欣, 刘新, 张新全, 等. 六份川西北短芒披碱草种质萌发期抗旱性评价[J]. 中国草地学报, 2017, 39(2): 41-47.
	FU Kaixin, LIU Xin, ZHANG Xinquan, et al. Evaluation of drought resistance of six Elymus breviaristatus accessions from the northwest plateau of Sichuan Province at germination stage[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2017, 39(2): 41-47.
[3]	樊瑀, 董淑琦, 原向阳, 等. 谷子种质资源萌发期抗旱性综合评价及抗旱指标筛选[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2022, 27(6): 42-54.
	FAN Yu, DONG Shuqi, YUAN Xiangyang, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of foxtail millet germplasm resources during germination period and drought resistance index screening[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2022, 27(6): 42-54.
[4]	李培英, 孙宗玖, 阿不来提. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下29份偃麦草种质种子萌发期抗旱性评价[J]. 中国草地学报, 2010, 32(1): 32-39.
	LI Peiying, SUN Zongjiu, Abulaiti. Evaluation of drought resistance of 29 accessions of elytrigria Repens at seed germination stage under PEG-6000 stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2010, 32(1): 32-39.
[5]	王平, 王沛, 孙万斌, 等. 8份披碱草属牧草苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草地学报, 2020, 28(2): 397-404. DOI
	WANG Ping, WANG Pei, SUN Wanbin, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of eight Elymus germplasms at seedling stage[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2020, 28(2): 397-404. DOI
[6]	孙可蒙, 隋晓青, 王玉祥, 等. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下12份新疆野生无芒雀麦种质萌发期抗旱性评价[J]. 草原与草坪, 2020, 40(6): 102-107, 117.
	SUN Kemeng, SUI Xiaoqing, WANG Yuxiang, et al. Evaluation of drought resistance for 12 Bromus inermis germplasms in Xinjiang under PEG stress at germination stage[J]. Grassland and Turf, 2020, 40(6): 102-107, 117.
[7]	云锦凤, 赵彦, 石凤敏, 等. 蒙古冰草肌动蛋白基因片段的克隆与组织表达分析[J]. 草业学报, 2011, 20(2): 170-176.
	YUN Jinfeng, ZHAO Yan, SHI Fengmin, et al. Cloning and analysis on tissue specific expression of a Actin gene fragment from Agropyron mongolicum[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(2): 170-176.
[8]	Zhao Y, Gao C P, Shi F L, et al. Transcriptomic and proteomic analyses of drought responsive genes and proteins in Agropyron mongolicum Keng[J]. Current Plant Biology, 2018, 14: 19-29.
[9]	曾亮, 袁庆华, 王方, 等. 冰草属植物种质资源遗传多样性的ISSR分析[J]. 草业学报, 2013, 22(1): 260-267.
	ZENG Liang, YUAN Qinghua, WANG Fang, et al. Genetic diversity analysis of Agropyron germplasm resources by ISSR[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(1): 260-267.
[10]	杨靖, 张晓明, 陈越, 等. 内蒙古30份冰草属种质资源表型性状遗传多样性分析[J]. 中国草地学报, 2023, 45(9): 1-11.
	YANG Jing, ZHANG Xiaoming, CHEN Yue, et al. Genetic diversity analysis of phenotypic traits of 30 Agropyron genus germplasm resources in Inner Mongolia[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2023, 45(9): 1-11.
[11]	焦树英, 韩国栋. 若干禾本科牧草在荒漠草原区的适应性及其生产性能和营养价值评价[J]. 草地学报, 2007, 15(4): 327-334. DOI
	JIAO Shuying, HAN Guodong. The adaptation and evaluation of perennial grasses in desert steppe area[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2007, 15(4): 327-334. DOI
[12]	刘洁琼. 不同冰草品种(系)生产性能及营养品质的比较研究[D]. 秦皇岛: 河北科技师范学院, 2023.
	LIU Jieqiong. Comparative study on production performance and nutritional quality of different Agropyron varieties (lines)[D]. Qinhuangdao: Hebei Normal University of Science & Technology, 2023.
[13]	李晓全, 高有汉, 刘扬, 等. 我国北方9份旱生—沙生植物蒙古冰草遗传多样性研究[J]. 草业学报, 2016, 25(3): 77-85. DOI
	LI Xiaoquan, GAO Youhan, LIU Yang, et al. The genetic diversity of 9 populations of dry-desert Agropyron mongolicumcollected in northern China[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2016, 25(3): 77-85. DOI
[14]	Rajjou L, Duval M, Gallardo K, et al. Seed germination and vigor[J]. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 2012, 63: 507-533. DOI PMID
[15]	徐恒恒, 黎妮, 刘树君, 等. 种子萌发及其调控的研究进展[J]. 作物学报, 2014, 40(7): 1141-1156.
	XU Hengheng, LI Ni, LIU Shujun, et al. Research progress in seed germination and its control[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2014, 40(7): 1141-1156.
[16]	王彦荣. 种子引发的研究现状[J]. 草业学报, 2004, 13(4): 7-12.
	WANG Yanrong. Current status of seed priming research[J]. Acta Pratacultural Science, 2004, 13(4): 7-12.
[17]	王慧慧, 王普昶, 赵钢, 等. 干旱胁迫下白刺花种子大小与萌发对策[J]. 生态学报, 2016, 36(2): 335-341.
	WANG Huihui, WANG Puchang, ZHAO Gang, et al. Seed size and germination strategy of Sophora davidii under drought stress[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2016, 36(2): 335-341.
[18]	Soeda Y, Konings M C J M, Vorst O, et al. Gene expression programs during Brassica oleracea seed maturation, osmopriming, and germination are indicators of progression of the germination process and the stress tolerance level[J]. Plant Physiology, 2005, 137(1): 354-368.
[19]	廖博通, 陈琳, 唐可兰, 等. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下辣椒种子萌发特性及抗旱性评价[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2022, 35(3): 64-69.
	LIAO Botong, CHEN Lin, TANG Kelan, et al. Germination and drought tolerance evaluation of pepper seeds under PEG simulated drought stress[J]. China Cucurbits and Vegetables, 2022, 35(3): 64-69.
[20]	杨旭东, 聂慧, 侯建华, 等. PEG模拟干旱胁迫对向日葵种子萌发的影响[J]. 种子, 2016, 35(5): 71-75.
	YANG Xudong, NIE Hui, HOU Jianhua, et al. Effect of polyethylene glycol(PEG)simulated drought stress on seed germination of sunflower[J]. Seed, 2016, 35(5): 71-75.
[21]	蔺豆豆, 赵桂琴, 琚泽亮, 等. 15份燕麦材料苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(11): 108-121. DOI
	LIN Doudou, ZHAO Guiqin, JU Zeliang, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of 15 oat varieties at the seedling stage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(11): 108-121. DOI
[22]	张辰昊, 热孜亚·艾力, 晁跃辉, 等. 21份杂花苜蓿种质萌发期抗旱性评价[J]. 中国草地学报, 2022, 44(3): 58-65.
	ZHANG Chenhao, Reziya ili, CHAO Yuehui, et al. Evaluation of drought resistance of 21 variegated alfalfa cultivars during germination[J]. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2022, 44(3): 58-65.
[23]	黄莉娟, 赵丽丽, 唐华江, 等. 不同毛花雀稗种质对干旱胁迫的响应及其抗旱性评价[J]. 西南农业学报, 2019, 32(11): 2557-2563.
	HUANG Lijuan, ZHAO Lili, TANG Huajiang, et al. Drought stress responses of six Paspalum dilatatum germplasms and drought resistance evaluation[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 32(11): 2557-2563.
[24]	毛培春, 孟林, 高洪文, 等. 20份无芒雀麦种质材料苗期抗旱性综合评价及光合特性分析[J]. 草地学报, 2011, 19(4): 619-624, 630. DOI
	MAO Peichun, MENG Lin, GAO Hongwen, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance and photosynthetic characteristic of 20 Bromus inermis leyss. accessions at seedling stage[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2011, 19(4): 619-624, 630. DOI
[25]	石永红, 万里强, 刘建宁, 等. 多年生黑麦草抗旱性主成分及隶属函数分析[J]. 草地学报, 2010, 18(5): 669-672. DOI
	SHI Yonghong, WAN Liqiang, LIU Jianning, et al. Analysis of the principal components and the subordinate function of Lolium perenne drought resistance[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2010, 18(5): 669-672. DOI

编号 No	采集地点 Collection site	海拔 Altitude(km)	生境 Habitat	土壤类型 Soil type	千粒重 1000-grain weight(g)
A₁	包头市达茂旗	1 630	天然草地	沙壤土	1.796
A₂	包头市达茂旗	1 584	天然草地	沙壤土	1.810
A₃	包头市大青山	1 358	-	壤土	2.311
A₄	锡林浩特市白音锡勒牧场	1 100	天然草地	沙壤土	1.880
A₅	锡林浩特市白音锡勒牧场	1 235	天然草地	沙壤土	2.252
A₆	锡林浩特市	1 010	天然草地	沙壤土	1.760
A₇	锡林浩特市白音锡勒牧场	1 278	天然草地	壤土	1.851
A₈	锡林浩特市朝克乌拉苏木	919	天然草地	沙壤土	1.795
A₉	锡林浩特市毛登牧场	1 125	天然草地	沙壤土	1.862
A₁₀	锡林郭勒盟正镶白旗	1 374	天然草地	壤土	1.655
A₁₁	锡林郭勒盟正蓝旗	1291	沙地	沙土	1.963

编号 No	采集地点 Collection site	海拔 Altitude(km)	生境 Habitat	土壤类型 Soil type	千粒重 1000-grain weight(g)
A₁	包头市达茂旗	1 630	天然草地	沙壤土	1.796
A₂	包头市达茂旗	1 584	天然草地	沙壤土	1.810
A₃	包头市大青山	1 358	-	壤土	2.311
A₄	锡林浩特市白音锡勒牧场	1 100	天然草地	沙壤土	1.880
A₅	锡林浩特市白音锡勒牧场	1 235	天然草地	沙壤土	2.252
A₆	锡林浩特市	1 010	天然草地	沙壤土	1.760
A₇	锡林浩特市白音锡勒牧场	1 278	天然草地	壤土	1.851
A₈	锡林浩特市朝克乌拉苏木	919	天然草地	沙壤土	1.795
A₉	锡林浩特市毛登牧场	1 125	天然草地	沙壤土	1.862
A₁₀	锡林郭勒盟正镶白旗	1 374	天然草地	壤土	1.655
A₁₁	锡林郭勒盟正蓝旗	1291	沙地	沙土	1.963

编号 No	相对发芽率RGP					相对发芽势RGR
编号 No	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%
A₁	106.73^Aa	84.06^Cb	62.20^Cc	38.63^Bd	7.56^Be	116.42^Ca	91.79^DEb	63.24^Eb	6.13^Fc	0.00^Ad
A₂	92.37^CDa	79.68^CDb	70.34^Bc	25.65^Dd	9.32^ABe	138.38^Aa	126.51^Bb	94.19^ABb	17.68^Ec	0.00^Ad
A₃	78.30^Ea	61.01^Fb	36.77^Dc	16.07^Ed	0.00^Ee	97.22^Da	75.56^FGb	59.44^Ec	9.44^Fd	0.00^Ae
A₄	100.74^Ba	92.54^Bb	81.36^Ac	18.65^Ed	0.00^Ee	98.85^Da	78.26^Fb	58.95^Ec	7.23^Fd	0.00^Ae
A₅	97.04^BCa	84.32^Cb	72.41^Bc	34.33^Cd	7.46^Be	105.56^Da	96.39^CDb	85.48^Cc	25.54^CDd	0.00^Ae
A₆	100.90^Ba	78.45^Eb	62.96^Cc	39.65^Bd	9.49^ABe	126.52^Ba	123.48^Ba	100.25^Ab	53.03^Ac	0.00^Ad
A₇	88.19^Da	83.48^Cb	71.67^Bc	46.46^Ad	8.66^ABe	103.92^Da	100.11^Ca	88.45^BCb	34.53^Bc	0.00^Ae
A₈	102.31^ABa	80.16^CDb	72.55^Bc	39.71^Bd	4.58^Ce	128.43^Ba	86.82^Eb	83.01^Cb	50.87^Ac	0.00^Ad
A₉	104.48^Aa	96.44^Ab	74.11^Bc	36.60^BCd	2.68^De	141.90^Aa	135.64^Aa	83.42^Cb	20.88^DEc	0.00^Ad
A₁₀	106.98^Aa	100.00^Ab	86.19^Ac	39.60^Bd	9.89^Ae	122.55^BCa	100.00^Cb	73.41^Dc	22.43^DEd	0.00^Ae
A₁₁	75.84^Ea	62.62^Fb	40.68^Dc	31.90^Cd	7.67^Be	64.90^Ea	63.43^Ha	41.16^Fb	29.29^Cc	0.00^Ad

编号 No	相对发芽率RGP					相对发芽势RGR
编号 No	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%
A₁	106.73^Aa	84.06^Cb	62.20^Cc	38.63^Bd	7.56^Be	116.42^Ca	91.79^DEb	63.24^Eb	6.13^Fc	0.00^Ad
A₂	92.37^CDa	79.68^CDb	70.34^Bc	25.65^Dd	9.32^ABe	138.38^Aa	126.51^Bb	94.19^ABb	17.68^Ec	0.00^Ad
A₃	78.30^Ea	61.01^Fb	36.77^Dc	16.07^Ed	0.00^Ee	97.22^Da	75.56^FGb	59.44^Ec	9.44^Fd	0.00^Ae
A₄	100.74^Ba	92.54^Bb	81.36^Ac	18.65^Ed	0.00^Ee	98.85^Da	78.26^Fb	58.95^Ec	7.23^Fd	0.00^Ae
A₅	97.04^BCa	84.32^Cb	72.41^Bc	34.33^Cd	7.46^Be	105.56^Da	96.39^CDb	85.48^Cc	25.54^CDd	0.00^Ae
A₆	100.90^Ba	78.45^Eb	62.96^Cc	39.65^Bd	9.49^ABe	126.52^Ba	123.48^Ba	100.25^Ab	53.03^Ac	0.00^Ad
A₇	88.19^Da	83.48^Cb	71.67^Bc	46.46^Ad	8.66^ABe	103.92^Da	100.11^Ca	88.45^BCb	34.53^Bc	0.00^Ae
A₈	102.31^ABa	80.16^CDb	72.55^Bc	39.71^Bd	4.58^Ce	128.43^Ba	86.82^Eb	83.01^Cb	50.87^Ac	0.00^Ad
A₉	104.48^Aa	96.44^Ab	74.11^Bc	36.60^BCd	2.68^De	141.90^Aa	135.64^Aa	83.42^Cb	20.88^DEc	0.00^Ad
A₁₀	106.98^Aa	100.00^Ab	86.19^Ac	39.60^Bd	9.89^Ae	122.55^BCa	100.00^Cb	73.41^Dc	22.43^DEd	0.00^Ae
A₁₁	75.84^Ea	62.62^Fb	40.68^Dc	31.90^Cd	7.67^Be	64.90^Ea	63.43^Ha	41.16^Fb	29.29^Cc	0.00^Ad

编号 No	相对发芽指数RGI					相对活力指数RVI
编号 No	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%
A₁	112.50^BCa	86.76^CDb	58.55^Dc	24.19^EFd	4.12^De	121.27^Aa	87.99^Bb	47.95^CDc	12.96^EFd	1.28^Be
A₂	109.62^Da	98.81^Bb	72.27^BCc	22.28^Fd	5.68^ABe	100.18^Ca	85.43^BCb	46.20^Dc	12.67^EFd	0.45^Ee
A₃	86.20^Fa	62.50^Eb	37.01^Cc	12.99^Gd	0.00^Ge	88.49^Da	56.94^EFb	26.82^Ec	3.50^Gd	0.00^Gd
A₄	101.68^Ea	90.07^Cb	72.15^BCc	10.83^Gd	0.00^Ge	104.11^Ca	83.14^BCb	45.89^Dc	4.57^Gd	0.00^Ge
A₅	110.47^Da	90.74^Cb	76.07^Bc	26.47^EFd	4.85^BCDe	101.72^Ca	75.48^Db	51.83^BCc	11.41^EFd	0.56^Ee
A₆	117.19^ABa	105.88^Ab	74.40^CBc	38.08^ABd	5.12^BCe	106.33^BCa	94.95^Ab	59.86^Ac	26.82^Ad	0.98^Ce
A₇	87.84^Fa	82.01^Db	72.84^BCc	32.62^CDd	4.42^CDe	78.97^Ea	58.48^Eb	45.33^Dc	16.38^CDd	0.64^DEe
A₈	121.93^Aa	80.56^Db	68.19^Cc	35.48^BCd	2.46^Ee	127.82^Aa	75.72^Db	52.53^Bc	18.45^Bd	0.37^EFe
A₉	109.44^Da	107.40^Aa	75.92^Bb	24.90^EFc	1.54^Fd	122.83^Aa	98.34^Ab	59.03^Ac	11.06^Fd	0.19^FGe
A₁₀	112.95^BCa	106.45^Ab	90.33^Ac	41.18^Ad	6.21^Ae	112.75^Ba	95.83^Ab	44.31^Dc	18.97^BCd	1.59^Ae
A₁₁	72.63^Ga	65.15^Eb	44.13^Ec	28.59^DEd	4.81^BCDe	70.47^Fa	51.98^Fb	28.18^Ec	14.62^DEd	0.85^CDe

PEG模拟干旱胁迫下11份野生冰草种质资源萌发期抗旱性评价

Drought resistance evaluation of 11 wild Agropyron cristatum germplasm at germination stage under PEG simulated stress

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 25

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

编号 No	相对苗高RSH					相对根长RRL
编号 No	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%	5%	10%	15%	20%	25%
A₁	112.06^Aa	104.90^Ab	95.47^Ac	69.01^BCd	37.82^Ae	105.25^BCa	99.34^Ab	74.01^ABc	44.37^BCd	26.91^Ae
A₂	81.35^Fa	76.95^Gab	69.99^Eb	68.98^BCb	5.15^EFc	98.55^DEa	93.20^ABCb	59.69^Dc	48.42^Bd	10.12^CDe
A₃	111.80^Aa	96.86^Bb	69.75^Ec	34.77^Ed	0.00^Fe	95.31^DEa	86.44^CDEb	74.63^ABc	20.68^Gd	0.00^Ee
A₄	95.60^DEa	89.35^CDEab	83.95^BCb	52.31^Dc	0.00^Fd	107.40^Ba	94.07^ABb	53.78^Ec	36.79^Dd	0.00^Ee
A₅	92.42^Ea	81.68^FGb	72.07^DEc	61.71^Cd	14.63^CDe	91.82^EFa	84.33^DEFb	65.55^Cc	30.83^EFd	9.47^De
A₆	100.80^CDa	95.80^BCb	86.07^BCc	76.14^ABd	20.57^Ce	83.43^Ga	80.67^EFab	75.80^Ab	64.14^Ac	17.26^Bd
A₇	95.04^DEa	88.18^DEFa	78.23^CDb	76.86^Ab	16.30^CDc	86.91^FGa	61.48^Gb	52.91^Ec	34.68^DEd	13.25^Ce
A₈	102.74^BCab	92.90^BCDa	84.37^BCb	68.20^Cc	10.47^DEd	106.90^BCa	95.06^ABb	70.36^Bc	37.12^Dd	18.74^Be
A₉	106.88^ABa	106.23^Aa	83.64^Bb	68.03^Cc	10.73^DEd	115.80^Aa	82.02^DEFb	73.87^ABb	28.87^Fc	12.64^CDd
A₁₀	99.14^CDa	91.99^BCDb	71.43^DEc	67.43^Cc	38.63^Ad	100.23^CDa	88.77^BCDb	35.43^Fc	32.89^DEFc	17.32^Bd
A₁₁	99.10^CDa	83.68^EFb	71.57^DEc	63.94^Cd	27.39^Be	95.71^DEa	77.55^Fb	58.65^Dc	42.43^Cd	11.10^CDe

萌发指标 Germination index	相对发芽势 RGR	相对发芽率 RGP	相对发芽指数 RGI	相对活力指数 RVI	相对苗高 RSH	相对根长 RRL
RGR	1
RGP	0.940^**	1
RGI	0.968^**	0.981^**	1
RVI	0.944^**	0.945^**	0.966^**	1
RSH	0.837^**	0.839^**	0.859^**	0.831^**	1
RRL	0.894^**	0.902^**	0.899^**	0.930^**	0.900^**	1

编号 No	隶属函数值The value of the membership function						D值 D value	排序 Ranking
编号 No	相对发芽率 RGP	相对发芽势 RGR	相对发芽指数 RGI	相对活力指数 RVI	相对苗高 RSH	相对根长 RRL	D值 D value	排序 Ranking
A₁	0.549 0	0.463 0	0.480 1	0.525 6	0.502 4	0.506 0	0.504 5	1
A₂	0.509 1	0.422 2	0.528 3	0.468 9	0.525 6	0.469 3	0.484 9	4
A₃	0.409 9	0.533 3	0.351 0	0.400 7	0.467 5	0.411 9	0.430 3	10
A₄	0.387 8	0.351 3	0.432 3	0.377 6	0.387 9	0.395 5	0.387 7	11
A₅	0.427 3	0.380 7	0.537 0	0.454 3	0.520 2	0.594 8	0.483 6	6
A₆	0.544 6	0.481 8	0.524 7	0.460 2	0.466 8	0.499 7	0.496 3	3
A₇	0.466 1	0.407 1	0.528 6	0.548 6	0.463 8	0.493 7	0.483 9	5
A₈	0.426 4	0.443 6	0.489 9	0.534 1	0.558 0	0.435 1	0.478 8	7
A₉	0.527 2	0.402 1	0.478 3	0.576 6	0.532 1	0.500 1	0.501 7	2
A₁₀	0.443 3	0.371 6	0.504 0	0.521 7	0.518 3	0.447 6	0.465 1	8
A₁₁	0.418 2	0.366 5	0.456 6	0.476 6	0.589 4	0.387 8	0.444 8	9

[1]	盛杨倩, 周嘉琦, 黄杨捷, 张美琪, 薛娜娜. 苦豆子浸提液对哈密瓜种子萌发的化感效应[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2025, 62(3): 732-738.
[2]	王勇攀, 马君, 李晨宇, 姚梦瑶, 王子轩, 黄灵芝, 朱海艳, 刘皖蓉, 李波, 杨洋, 高文伟. 基于卷积神经网络和合成数据集训练鉴定棉花种子萌发期的耐盐性[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2025, 62(2): 261-269.
[3]	刘宜洋, 周鹏, 刘晶晶, 王晓敏, 胡新华, 付金军, 高艳明, 李建设. 103份番茄种质资源精简化栽培下遗传多样性分析及综合评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2025, 62(2): 324-334.
[4]	巩雪花, 王小武, 付开赟, 贾尊尊, 吐尔逊·阿合买提, 乔小燕, 叶晓琴, 郭文超, 丁新华. 新疆绿洲灌区玉米田杂草种子库及环境因子对杂草种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(S1): 49-59.
[5]	曾婉盈, 耿洪伟, 程宇坤, 李思忠, 钱松廷, 高卫时, 张立明. 甜菜品系叶丛快速生长期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2140-2151.
[6]	张帆, 陈晓露, 王洁, 侯献飞, 贾东海, 顾元国, 苗昊翠, 李强. 混合盐碱胁迫对花生种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2168-2182.
[7]	李金瑶, 徐贵青, 王立生, 吕平, 石东方, 郑伟华. 氮肥对头状沙拐枣幼苗抗旱性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(9): 2330-2340.
[8]	董志多, 徐菲, 付秋萍, 黄建, 祁通, 孟阿静, 付彦博, 开赛尔·库尔班. 不同类型盐碱胁迫对棉花种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1831-1844.
[9]	奚瑞, 陈怡佳, 李宁, 余庆辉, 王强, 秦勇. 外源2, 4-表芸苔素内酯对盐胁迫下不同盐敏感型番茄种子萌发的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1983-1992.
[10]	王一钊, 杨其志, 刘玉秀, 阿拉依·努尔卡马力, Vladimir Shvidchenko, 张正茂. 20%PEG胁迫下评价引进哈萨克斯坦不同春小麦种质苗期的抗旱性 [J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1352-1360.
[11]	杨君妍, 闫淼, 吴海波, 杨文莉, 王豪杰, 毛建才, 翟文强, 李俊华. 高温对不同厚皮甜瓜品种种子萌发的影响及其耐热性综合评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1386-1396.
[12]	张宏芝, 王立红, 时佳, 孔德鹏, 王重, 高新, 李剑峰, 王春生, 夏建强, 樊哲儒, 张跃强. 土壤水分对不同抗旱性春小麦品种叶片保护性酶活性及产量的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(5): 1041-1047.
[13]	杨璐, 王娜, 范少丽, 程平, 李宏, 汪阳东. 黑桑种质资源表型性状变异特征分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(5): 1172-1181.
[14]	张国儒, 唐亚萍, 石林媛, 袁雷, 张勇, 杨生保. 辣椒种间杂交遗传特性[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(3): 632-641.
[15]	周小云, 张军高, 梁晶, 龚静云, 周广威, 张少民, 雷斌. 低温和水分胁迫条件下萎锈灵对棉花种子萌发及幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(12): 3051-3060.