六种铜制剂对主要甜瓜生长指标、产量和品质的影响

doi:10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.12.016

新疆农业科学 ›› 2023, Vol. 60 ›› Issue (12): 3008-3017.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2023.12.016

六种铜制剂对主要甜瓜生长指标、产量和品质的影响

杨志毅¹(), 王惠林¹(), 王瑞¹, 王超楠¹^,²(), 徐宝林³, 邱火箭³

1.新疆农业大学园艺学院,乌鲁木齐 830052
2.新疆农业大学园艺学博士后流动站,乌鲁木齐 830052
3.新疆西域种业股份有限公司,新疆昌吉 831100

收稿日期:2023-04-07 出版日期:2023-12-20 发布日期:2024-01-03
作者简介:杨志毅(1994-),女,河南鹤壁人,硕士研究生,研究方向为西甜瓜栽培生理与遗传育种,(E-mail)yangzhiyi2022@126.com
基金资助:
新疆维吾尔自治区科技计划项目(2020NC008);新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金项目(2022D01B27);2022年新疆维吾尔自治区优秀博士后普通人员项目;国家自然科学基金地区基金项目(32360761)

Effects of six copper preparations on growth index, yield and quality of major melons

YANG Zhiyi¹(), WANG Huilin¹(), WANG Rui¹, WANG Chaonan¹^,²(), XU Baolin³, QIU Huojian³

1. College of Horticulture, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052,China
2. Horticulture Postdoctoral Mobile Station, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052,China
3. Xinjiang Westland Seeds Industry Co., Ltd, Changji Xinjiang 831100,China

Received:2023-04-07 Published:2023-12-20 Online:2024-01-03
Supported by:
The S & T Research Program Project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(2020NC008);Natural Science Foundation Project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region(2022D01B27);2022 Xinjiang Outstanding Postdoctoral General Personnel Project;Regional Science Fund Project of National Natural Science Foundation of China(32360761)

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】研究六种铜制剂对甜瓜主蔓长、茎粗、最大功能叶叶面积、最大功能叶节位、叶绿素相对含量SPAD值单瓜重、中心含糖量,病叶率和铜害指数的影响,比较六种铜制剂对甜瓜铜害的影响程度,筛选出六种铜制剂中最佳药剂,为甜瓜生产中铜制剂的安全使用提供参考依据。【方法】采用田间试验,在甜瓜苗期开始叶面喷施不同浓度的六种铜制剂,测定主蔓长、茎粗最大功能叶叶面积等生长指标,在甜瓜铜害发生盛期统计病叶率及铜害指数。【结果】六种铜制剂在稀释1 000倍液下,对甜瓜各项生长指标、单瓜重影响较小,其中46%可杀得叁仟可湿性粉剂影响最小,病叶率和铜害指数分别为9.00%和14.83%;除B₄、C₄处理之外,六种铜制剂不同稀释倍液对甜瓜中心含糖量均无显著影响;随着铜制剂浓度的增大,铜害发生程度越来越严重,六种铜制剂在稀释500倍液下,甜瓜植株铜害加剧。【结论】六种铜制剂中,99%乙酸铜对甜瓜植株极易产生铜害,99%硫酸铜次之,33.5%喹啉铜悬浮剂、30%琥胶肥酸铜可湿性粉剂、23%松脂酸铜乳油和46%可杀得叁仟水分散粒剂对甜瓜相对安全。

关键词: 甜瓜; 铜制剂; 生长指标; 产量品质; 铜害

Abstract:

【Objective】To study the effects of six copper preparations on the main vine length, stem diameter, maximum functional leaf area, maximum functional leaf node position, relative chlorophyll content SPAD value, single melon weight, central sugar content, diseased leaf rate and copper damage index of melon. By comparing the influence of the six copper preparations on melon copper damage, the best agent among the six copper preparations was selected to provide a reference for the safe use of copper preparations in muskmelon production.【Methods】Through field experiments, six kinds of copper preparations with different concentrations were sprayed on the leaf surface at the melon seedling stage, the growth indicators such as the length of the main vine and the maximum functional leaf area of stem diameter were measured, and the diseased leaves were counted at the peak of copper damage in melon rate and copper damage index.【Results】The six kinds of copper preparations had little effect on various growth indexes and single melon weight when diluted 1,000 times. Among them, 46% could kill 3,000 WP. The rate of diseased leaves and copper damage index were 9% and 14.83; except for B₄ and C₄ treatments, the 6 kinds of copper preparations with different dilution times had no significant effect on the sugar content in the center of melon; When the six copper preparations were diluted 500 times, the copper damage of melon plants was aggravated.【Conclusion】Among the six copper preparations, 99% copper acetate was very easy to cause copper damage to melon plants, 99% copper sulfate was the second, and 33.5% quinoline copper suspending agent 30% copper succinate WP, 23% copper rosinate EC and 46% that can kill three thousand water dispersible granules are relatively safe for melon.

Key words: muskmelon; copper-based pesticides; growth index; yield and quality; copper pollution

中图分类号:

S652

杨志毅, 王惠林, 王瑞, 王超楠, 徐宝林, 邱火箭. 六种铜制剂对主要甜瓜生长指标、产量和品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(12): 3008-3017.

YANG Zhiyi, WANG Huilin, WANG Rui, WANG Chaonan, XU Baolin, QIU Huojian. Effects of six copper preparations on growth index, yield and quality of major melons[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(12): 3008-3017.

图/表 10

参考文献 31

[1]	鲁思梦, 王贤磊, 宁雪飞, 等. 甜瓜 MR-1 细菌性果斑病抗病基因QTL定位分析展[J]. 分子植物育种, 2019, 17(9):2924-2931.
	LU Simeng, WANG Xianlei, NING Xuefei, et al. QTL mapping analysis of melon MR-1[J]. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2019, 17(9):2924-2931.
[2]	蔡大维, 卜庆鑫, 陈晓明. 中国甜瓜出口现状、问题及对策:基于直接出口角度[J]. 现代商贸工业 2018, 39(32):49-50.
	CAI Dawei, BU Qingxin, CHEN Xiaoming. Current situation, problems and countermeasures of Chinese melon export: based on the direct export perspective[J]. Modern trade and industry, 2018, 39(32):49-50.
[3]	杨渡. 浅谈新疆甜瓜产业发展[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2002, (1):1-5.
	YANG Du. On the Development of Xinjiang Melon Industry[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2002,(1):1-5.
[4]	沈亮, 张一宾. 全球铜制剂的市场及其发展趋向展[J]. 世界农药, 2016, 38(2):10-11.
	SHEN Liang, ZHANG Yibin. Global copper preparation market and its development trend exhibition[J]. World Pesticides, 2016, 38 (2):10-11.
[5]	周永海. 甜瓜种质资源耐热性评价及外源物质对热胁迫的缓解效应[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2021.
	ZHOU Yonghai. Evaluation of heat resistance of melon germplasm resources and the mitigation effect of exogenous substances on heat stress[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2021.
[6]	杨奎, 王惠林, 孙思琼, 等. 不同包衣成分处理西瓜带细菌性果斑病种子对幼苗的防治效果[J]. 种子科技, 2021, 39(13):6-9,12.
	YANG Kui, WANG Huilin, SUN Siqiong, et al. Treatment effect of watermelon belt bacterial fruit spot disease seeds with different coating ingredients[J]. Seed Technology, 2021, 39 (13):6-9,12.
[7]	吴亚男, 高必达, 杨玉文, 等. 植物相关细菌铜抗性研究进展[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2012, 51(11):2169-2171.
	WU Yanan, GAO Bida, YANG Yuwen, et al. Progress in copper resistance in plant-associated bacteria[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2012, 51(11):2169-2171.
[8]	惠隽雄. 铜制剂在防治苹果病害中产生药害原因分析及对策展[C]. 长沙:第二十一届全国农药械“双交会”, 2005.
	HUI Juanxiong. Cause analysis and countermeasures of copper preparation in the prevention and control of apple diseases[C]. Changsha: The 21st National Pesticide Equipment "Double Fair", 2005.
[9]	史学功, 张建梅, 张祥申. 谈谈铜制剂的药害及其预防展[J]. 烟台果树, 2005,(3):48.
	SHI Xuegong, ZHANG Jianmei, ZHANG Xiangshen. Talk about the drug harm of copper preparation and its prevention exhibition[J]. Yantai Fruit Tree, 2005,(3):48.
[10]	王忠跃. 铜制剂及在世界上的发展[J]. 中外葡萄与葡萄酒, 2001,(2):34.
	WANG Zhongyue. Copper preparations and their development in the world[J]. Sino-Overseas Grapevine & Wine, 2001,(2):34.
[11]	黄玉梅, 张杨雪, 刘庆林, 等. 水杨酸对盐胁迫下百日草种子萌发及幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2015, 24(7):97-105. DOI
	HUANG Yumei, ZHANG Yangxue, LIU Qinglin, et al. Effect of salicylic acid on seed germination and physiological characteristics of perzina seedlings under salt stress[J]. Journal of Grass Industry, 2015, 24(7):97-105.
[12]	王玉萍, 董雯, 张鑫, 等. 水杨酸对盐胁迫下花椰菜种子萌发及幼苗生理特性的影响展[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21 (1):213-219.
	WANG Yuping, DONG Wen, ZHANG Xin, et al. Effect of salicylic acid on cauliflower seed germination and seedling physiology under salt stress[J]. Grass Industry Journal, 2012, 21(1):213-219.
[13]	蔡健, 梁展鹏, 梁文斌, 等不同药剂及浓度对“玉菇”甜瓜的药害程度分析[J]. 上海农业科技, 2021,(2):134-135.
	CAI Jian, LIANG Zhanpeng, LIANG Wenbin, et al. Analysis of the drug harm degree of "jade mushroom" melon caused by different agents and concentrations[J]. Shanghai Agricultural Science and Technology, 2021,(2):134-135.
[14]	Maksymiec W. Effect of copper on cellular processes in higher plants[J]. Photosynthetica, 1998, 34(3):321-342. DOI URL
[15]	Yruela, Inmaculada. Copper in plants[J]. Brazilian Journal of Plant Physiology, 2005, 17(1):145-156. DOI URL
[16]	Kolbert Z, Pet A, Lehotai, Nóra, et al. Long-term copper (Cu²⁺) exposure impacts on auxin, nitric oxide (NO) metabolism and morphology of Arabidopsis thaliana L.[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2012, 68(2):151-159. DOI URL
[17]	Ali M B, Singh N, Shohael A M, et al. Phenolics metabolism and lignin synthesis in root suspension cultures of Panax ginseng in response to copper stress[J]. Plant Science, 2006, 171(1):147-154. DOI URL
[18]	Kovac J, Lux A, Vaculik M. Formation of a subero-lignified apical deposit inroot tip of radish (Raphanus sativus) as a response to copper stress[J]. Annals of Botany, 2018,(5):5.
[19]	Hippler F, W R. Mechanisms of copper stress alleviation in Citrus trees after metal uptake by leaves or roots. Environ[J]. Environmental Science & Pollution Research, 2018, 25(13):13134-13146.
[20]	Roy S K. Proteome characterization of copper stress responses in the roots of sorghum. Biometals 2017, (30):765-785.
[21]	Hu Z, Fu Q, Zheng J, et al. Transcriptomic and metabolomic analyses reveal that melatonin promotes melon root development under copper stress by inhibiting jasmonic acid biosynthesis[J]. Horticulture Research, 2020, 7 (1):15. DOI
[22]	王威, 刘宗愉, 蒋悟生, 等. Cu²⁺ 对大蒜生长的影响及大蒜根、叶及蒜瓣对Cu²⁺的累积展[J]. 西北植物学报, 2001, 21 (2):306-312.
	WANG Wei, LIU Zongyu, JIANG Wusheng, et al. Effects of Cu²⁺ on garlic growth and the cumulative spread of garlic roots, leaves and garlic cloves on Cu²⁺[J]. Northwest Journal of Botany, 2001, 21(2):306-312.
[23]	赵艳, 徐迎春, 柴翠翠, 等. 铜胁迫对狭叶香蒲生长及生理特性的影响[J]. 广西植物, 2010, 30 (3):367-372.
	ZHAO Yan, XU Yingchun, CHAI Cuicui, et al. Effect of copper stress on growth and physiological characteristics of leaf leaf[J]. Guangxi Plants, 2010, 30(3):367-372.
[24]	贾云鹤. 不同浓度可杀得叁仟对西瓜幼苗生长发育的影响[J]. 中国瓜菜, 2019, 32(1):31-32,36.
	JIA Yunhe. Effect of different concentrations of three thousand cells on the growth and development of watermelon seedlings[J]. Chinese Melon and Vegetables, 2019, 32(1):31-32,36.
[25]	盛积贵, 李晓梅, 窦三丰. 铜胁迫对辣椒种子发芽及其幼苗生长的影响展[J]. 北方园艺, 2013,(7):22-24.
	SHENG Jigui, LI Xiaomei, DOU Sanfeng. Effect of copper stress on germination and seedling growth of pepper seeds[J]. Northern Horticulture, 2013,(7):22-24.
[26]	王海鸥, 弓爱君, 刘杰民, 等. 施加磷元素后对小麦抗重金属铜毒性的影响展[J]. 环境污染治理技术与设备, 2006, 7 (5):54-59.
	WANG Haiou, GONG Aijun, LIU Jiemin, et al. Exhibition of influence on heavy metal copper toxicity after applying phosphorus[J]. Environmental Pollution Control Technology and Equipment, 2006, 7 (5):54-59.
[27]	裴雪霞. 冬小麦锰、锌、铜营养研究现状展[J]. 小麦研究, 2000, 21 (2):28-29.
[28]	Dong K, Han H S, Lee K D, et al. Plant growth promoting rhizobacteria effect on antioxidant status,photosynthesis, mineral uptake and growth of lettuce under soil salinity[J]. Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 2005, 1(3):210-215.
[29]	Yruela I, Montoya G, Picorel R. The inhibitory mechanism of Cu(II)on the photosystem II electron transport from higher plants[J]. Photosynthesis Research, 1992, 33:227-233. DOI PMID
[30]	Bernal M, Sánchez-Testillano P, Risueño M, et al. Excess copper induces structural changes in cultured photosynthetic soybean cells[J]. Functional Plant Biology, 2006, (33):1001-1012.
[31]	潘雪峰, 李明, 赵盼, 等. 铜胁迫对穿心莲幼苗生长及生理特性的影响展[J]. 科学学报, 2015, 33 (2):218-225.
	PAN Xuefeng, LI Ming, ZHAO Pan, et al. to show the influence of copper stress on the growth and physiological characteristics of heart-piercing lotus seedlings[J]. Journal of Science, 2015, 33(2):218-225.

处理 Treatment	农药名称 Pesticide name	稀释倍液 Dilute times liquid	处理 Treatment	农药名称 Pesticide name	稀释倍液 Dilute times liquid
A₁	46%可杀得叁仟水分散粒剂	1 000	D₁	33.5%喹啉铜悬浮剂	1 000
A₂		750	D₂		750
A₃		500	D₃		500
A₄		250	D₄		250
B₁	99%硫酸铜	1 000	E₁	30%琥胶肥酸铜可湿性粉剂	1 000
B₂		750	E₂		750
B₃		500	E₃		500
B₄		250	E₄		250
C₁	99%乙酸铜	1 000	F₁	23%松脂酸铜乳油	1 000
C₂		750	F₂		750
C₃		500	F₃		500
C₄		250	F₄		250
CK	清水

处理 Treatment	农药名称 Pesticide name	稀释倍液 Dilute times liquid	处理 Treatment	农药名称 Pesticide name	稀释倍液 Dilute times liquid
A₁	46%可杀得叁仟水分散粒剂	1 000	D₁	33.5%喹啉铜悬浮剂	1 000
A₂		750	D₂		750
A₃		500	D₃		500
A₄		250	D₄		250
B₁	99%硫酸铜	1 000	E₁	30%琥胶肥酸铜可湿性粉剂	1 000
B₂		750	E₂		750
B₃		500	E₃		500
B₄		250	E₄		250
C₁	99%乙酸铜	1 000	F₁	23%松脂酸铜乳油	1 000
C₂		750	F₂		750
C₃		500	F₃		500
C₄		250	F₄		250
CK	清水

级别 level	铜害程度描述 Description of the degree of copper damage
0	叶片正常,无黄化
1	叶片边缘轻微黄化,约占叶片总面积的20%以下
3	叶片黄化面积约占叶片总面积的20%~40%
5	叶片黄化面积约占叶片总面积的40%~60%
7	叶片黄化面积约占60%以上,严重时甚至完全黄化

级别 level	铜害程度描述 Description of the degree of copper damage
0	叶片正常,无黄化
1	叶片边缘轻微黄化,约占叶片总面积的20%以下
3	叶片黄化面积约占叶片总面积的20%~40%
5	叶片黄化面积约占叶片总面积的40%~60%
7	叶片黄化面积约占60%以上,严重时甚至完全黄化

处理 Treatment	主蔓长 Main vine length (m)	茎粗 Stem thickness (mm)	叶面积 Leaf area (cm²)	最大功能叶节位(节) Maximum functional leaf node position (node)
CK	1.92±0.11^a	14.55±0.58^a	360.45±15.71^a	8.00±0.53^ghi
A₁	1.91±0.10^a	14.07±0.92^ab	352.71±37.04^ab	8.00±0.67^ij
A₂	1.73±0.08^bcdefg	14.07±0.42^ab	319.13±58.53^abc	8.00±0.67^hi
A₃	1.62±0.05^fgh	12.95±0.36^cdef	279.56±18.76^de	10.00±0.73^bcdefg
A₄	1.53±0.06^g	12.79±0.46^def	269.86±20.61^de	10.00±0.87^bcde
B1	1.83±0.04^abcde	13.38±0.49^bcde	326.97±12.27^abc	9.00±0.60^efghi
B₂	1.68±0.08^efg	12.40±0.57^ef	265.02±16.03^def	9.00±0.88^bcdefgh
B₃	1.56±0.07^g	12.14±0.58^ef	231.51±37.10^f	10.00±0.53^bcd
B₄	1.34±0.21^h	10.53±0.93^f	194.50±44.06^g	12.00±0.67^a
C₁	1.81±0.03^abcde	12.97±0.66^cdef	323.30±20.00^abc	10.00±0.50^bcd
C₂	1.80±0.10^abcde	13.06±0.87^bcde	269.82±23.32^de	11.00±0.50^abc
C₃	1.70±0.08^defg	12.41±0.77^ef	254.39±22.92^ef	11.00±0.44^ab
C₄	1.60±0.13^gh	10.70±0.68^f	243.40±31.00^ef	11.00±1.09^ab
D₁	1.88±0.11^ab	13.93±0.81^abc	360.45±15.71^a	8.00±0.59ⁱ
D₂	1.86±0.14^abc	13.31±0.52^bcde	348.81±42.20^ab	9.00±0.78^defgh
D₃	1.85±0.13^abc	13.16±0.64^bcde	332.67±24.28^abc	10.00±1.12^bcde
D₄	1.84±0.09^abcd	13.15±0.67^bcde	314.70±28.51^bc	11.00±0.97^ab
E₁	1.87±0.02^abc	14.05±0.36^ab	340.56±32.05^ab	10.00±0.67^bcdef
E₂	1.87±0.06^abc	13.54±0.47^bcd	331.88±18.77^abc	10.00±0.67^bcde
E₃	1.77±0.10^abcde	13.53±0.71^bcd	330.61±23.90^abc	10.00±0.97^bcde
E₄	1.72±0.13^cdefg	13.25±0.50^bcde	319.26±13.30^abc	10.00±1.12^bcde
F₁	1.90±0.07^a	13.93±0.81^abc	344.45±24.26^ab	9.00±0.71^fghi
F₂	1.90±0.11^a	13.55±0.45^bcd	338.94±15.62^ab	9.00±0.77^defgh
F₃	1.87±0.08^abc	13.44±0.52^bcd	337.92±19.78^ab	9.00±0.53^fghi
F₄	1.76±0.12^abcdef	13.16±0.72^bcde	295.03±19.85^cd	10.00±0.60^bcde

六种铜制剂对主要甜瓜生长指标、产量和品质的影响

Effects of six copper preparations on growth index, yield and quality of major melons

在线阅读

PDF下载

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 10

参考文献 31

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

指标 Indexes	主蔓长 Main vine length(m)	茎粗 Stem thickness (mm)	叶面积 Leaf area (cm²)	最大功能叶节位 Maximum functional leaf node position (section)	叶绿素相对含量 SPAD值 Relative chlorophyll content SPAD value	中心糖含量 Central sugar content (%)	单瓜重 Single melon weight (kg)
病叶率 Diseased leaf rate	-0.791^**	-0.807^**	-0.826^**	0.807^**	-0.768^**	-0.800^**	-0.851^**
铜害指数 Copper damage index	-0.701^**	-0.858^**	-0.844^**	0.826^**	-0.847^**	-0.691^**	-0.800^**

处理 Treat- ment	隶属函数值 Subordinate function value									隶属平均值 AMF	排名 Rank
处理 Treat- ment	u₁	u₂	u₃	u₄	u₅	u₆	u₇	u₈	u₉	隶属平均值 AMF	排名 Rank
CK	1.000	11.931	1.000	0.000	1.000	1.000	1.000	0.000	0.000	1.881	1
A₁	0.983	11.451	0.953	0.000	1.000	1.000	0.983	0.143	0.130	1.849	2
A₂	0.672	11.451	0.751	0.000	0.889	0.718	0.825	0.256	0.180	1.749	7
A₃	0.483	10.331	0.513	0.500	0.605	0.256	0.726	0.709	0.406	1.614	19
A₄	0.328	10.171	0.454	0.500	0.510	0.154	0.587	0.794	0.628	1.569	20
B₁	0.845	10.761	0.798	0.250	0.908	0.769	0.905	0.182	0.326	1.749	6
B₂	0.586	9.781	0.425	0.250	0.506	0.718	0.706	0.387	0.596	1.551	21
B₃	0.379	9.521	0.223	0.500	0.130	0.205	0.705	0.654	0.900	1.469	23
B₄	0.000	7.911	0.000	1.000	0.000	0.154	0.000	1.000	1.000	1.229	25
C₁	0.810	10.351	0.776	0.500	0.590	0.795	0.392	0.506	0.461	1.687	16
C₂	0.793	10.441	0.454	0.750	0.498	0.667	0.265	0.689	0.657	1.690	15
C₃	0.621	9.791	0.361	0.750	0.192	0.154	0.268	0.775	0.774	1.521	22
C₄	0.448	8.081	0.295	0.750	0.134	0.000	0.224	0.947	0.981	1.318	24
D₁	0.879	11.221	0.878	0.000	0.670	1.000	0.702	0.145	0.211	1.745	8
D₂	0.862	10.691	0.930	0.250	0.659	1.000	0.678	0.236	0.265	1.730	11
D₃	0.897	10.541	0.833	0.500	0.544	0.949	0.670	0.356	0.387	1.742	10
D₄	0.931	10.531	0.724	0.750	0.452	0.821	0.643	0.471	0.752	1.786	4
E₁	0.914	11.431	0.904	0.500	0.582	0.769	0.914	0.213	0.273	1.833	3
E₂	0.914	10.921	0.828	0.500	0.441	0.564	0.762	0.347	0.431	1.745	9
E₃	0.741	10.911	0.820	0.500	0.356	0.359	0.532	0.609	0.555	1.709	14
E₄	0.655	10.631	0.752	0.500	0.203	0.231	0.446	0.736	0.698	1.650	18
F₁	0.966	11.351	0.880	0.250	0.636	0.718	0.926	0.117	0.179	1.780	5
F₂	0.966	10.931	0.870	0.250	0.421	0.718	0.863	0.144	0.226	1.710	13
F₃	0.914	10.821	0.864	0.250	0.356	0.692	0.753	0.422	0.402	1.719	12
F₄	0.724	10.541	0.606	0.500	0.264	0.692	0.580	0.488	0.543	1.660	17

[1]	张浩, 梁其干, 张学军, 符小发, 陈积豪, 周勃, 黄远. 刺角瓜砧木抗性分析及其嫁接对甜瓜品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1963-1968.
[2]	陈积豪, 张浩, 梁其干, 符小发, 张学军, 毛建才. 减施化肥增施蚯蚓粪有机肥对连作甜瓜的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(8): 1969-1975.
[3]	卡地尔阿依·买买提, 周婷婷, 韩盛, 梅丽克汗·热西提, 玉山江·麦麦提. 不同甜瓜品种遗传转化再生体系的建立与基因编辑植株的快速获取[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(7): 1666-1672.
[4]	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.
[5]	刘阳, 张郑啸, 白羽嘉, 冯作山. 链格孢菌侵染对甜瓜不同组织活性氧代谢的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(6): 1397-1406.
[6]	马凌, 沈琦, 康琪, 张忠祥, 贾宏涛, 王成. 甜瓜不同生长阶段5种重金属在植株中富集分配的变化及关联分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(4): 892-899.
[7]	杨文莉, 许丽蓉, 刘斌, 凌悦铭, 李寐华, 杨永, 范蓉, 黎玉顺, 张永兵, 张学军. 盐胁迫对薄皮甜瓜‘灰鼠’离子平衡、膜脂过氧化及渗透调节物质积累的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(4): 900-907.
[8]	梁其干, 张浩, 胡国智, 陈积豪, 冯烔鑫, 曹庆, 王敏, 符小发, 闫淼, 高强, 张学军, 周勃, 王豪杰. 施肥调控对设施甜瓜生长与产量、品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(3): 599-606.
[9]	张伟, 杨国慧, 于辉. 2,4-表油菜素内酯对干旱胁迫下西瓜幼苗生长及相关基因表达的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(3): 615-622.
[10]	李超, 杨英, 郑贺云, 杨建丽, 陈伟, 杨咪, 孙玉萍. 基于SSR荧光标记分析新疆甜瓜种质资源遗传多样性与群体结构[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(11): 2614-2625.
[11]	沈悦, 凌悦铭, 段晓宇, 杨文莉, 李寐华, 王懿柔, 王惠林, 张学军. 甜瓜抗霜霉病KASP分子标记的开发与验证[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(11): 2626-2634.
[12]	姚军, 秦勇, 郑贺云, 张翠环, 再吐娜·买买提, 汪志伟, 耿新丽. 无花果叶提取液复合保鲜膜的研制及其在甜瓜保鲜上的应用[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2024, 61(1): 118-126.
[13]	郑贺云, 姚军, 李超, 张翠环, 耿新丽. 不同贮藏温度对甜瓜品质的影响及预测模型建立[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(8): 1950-1957.
[14]	姚军, 郑贺云, 张翠环, 再吐娜·买买提, 耿新丽. LED持续光照处理对甜瓜贮藏特性及糖代谢的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(7): 1689-1697.
[15]	李自芹, 李文绮, 贾文婷, 李宇辉, 刘成江. 氯化钙与1-MCP对西州蜜甜瓜采后贮藏品质的影响[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2023, 60(7): 1698-1704.