Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences ›› 2022, Vol. 59 ›› Issue (1): 70-78.DOI: 10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2022.01.009
• Crop Genetics and Breeding·Molecular Genetics·Cultivation Physiology·Germplasm Resources • Previous Articles Next Articles
XIE Xiaoqing(), TANG Huaijun, ZHANG Lei, SUN Baocheng, LIU Cheng(
)
Received:
2021-01-21
Online:
2022-01-20
Published:
2022-02-18
Correspondence author:
LIU Cheng
Supported by:
通讯作者:
刘成
作者简介:
谢小清(1987-),女,四川人,助理研究员,研究方向为粮食作物抗旱性,(E-mail) 472030054@qq.com
基金资助:
CLC Number:
XIE Xiaoqing, TANG Huaijun, ZHANG Lei, SUN Baocheng, LIU Cheng. Study on the Theoretical Model of Watering Ratio and Drought Resistance under Proportional Irrigation of Maize[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2022, 59(1): 70-78.
谢小清, 唐怀君, 张磊, 孙宝成, 刘成. 欠量灌溉供水率胁迫强度与玉米产量的规律分析[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2022, 59(1): 70-78.
生育期 Growth Stage | 水分处理 Water Treat. (m3/ hm2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T1(0%) | T2(20%) | T3(40%) | T4(60%) | T5(80%) | T6(100%) | |
播种期 Sowing | 675 | 675 | 675 | 675 | 675 | 675 |
拔节期 Jointing | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
喇叭口 Trumpet | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
开花期 Flowering | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆初期 Early Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆中期 Middle Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆后期 Later Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆末期 Final Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
总灌水量 Total Irrigated | 675 | 1 620 | 2 565 | 3 510 | 4 455 | 5 400 |
Table 1 Irrigation scheme and total water amount
生育期 Growth Stage | 水分处理 Water Treat. (m3/ hm2) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
T1(0%) | T2(20%) | T3(40%) | T4(60%) | T5(80%) | T6(100%) | |
播种期 Sowing | 675 | 675 | 675 | 675 | 675 | 675 |
拔节期 Jointing | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
喇叭口 Trumpet | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
开花期 Flowering | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆初期 Early Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆中期 Middle Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆后期 Later Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
灌浆末期 Final Grouting | 0 | 135 | 270 | 405 | 540 | 675 |
总灌水量 Total Irrigated | 675 | 1 620 | 2 565 | 3 510 | 4 455 | 5 400 |
处理 Treat | 2017年 | 2018年 | 2019年 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
人工 供水量 Total irrigation amount | 自然 供水量 Rainfall amount | 供水 总量 Total water amount | 供水率 Total watering ratio | 人工 供水量 Total irrigation amount | 自然 供水量 Rainfall amount | 供水 总量 Total water amount | 供水率 Total watering ratio | 人工 供水量 Total irrigation amount | 自然 供水量 Rainfall amount | 供水 总量 Total water amount | 供水率 Total watering ratio | |
T1 | 870 | 1 057 | 1 928 | 0.30 | 675 | 660 | 1 335 | 0.22 | 750 | 642 | 1 392 | 0.19 |
T2 | 1 770 | 1 057 | 2 828 | 0.44 | 1 620 | 660 | 2 280 | 0.38 | 1 950 | 642 | 2 592 | 0.35 |
T3 | 2 670 | 1 057 | 3 728 | 0.58 | 2 565 | 660 | 3 225 | 0.53 | 3 150 | 642 | 3 792 | 0.51 |
T4 | 3 570 | 1 057 | 4 628 | 0.72 | 3 510 | 660 | 4 170 | 0.69 | 4 350 | 642 | 4 992 | 0.68 |
T5 | 4 470 | 1 057 | 5 528 | 0.86 | 4 455 | 660 | 5 115 | 0.84 | 5 550 | 642 | 6 192 | 0.84 |
T6 | 5 370 | 1 057 | 6 428 | 1.00 | 5 400 | 660 | 6 060 | 1.00 | 6 750 | 642 | 7 392 | 1.00 |
Table 2 Amount of irrigation and rain and total watering ratio in 2017-2019 (m3/hm2)
处理 Treat | 2017年 | 2018年 | 2019年 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
人工 供水量 Total irrigation amount | 自然 供水量 Rainfall amount | 供水 总量 Total water amount | 供水率 Total watering ratio | 人工 供水量 Total irrigation amount | 自然 供水量 Rainfall amount | 供水 总量 Total water amount | 供水率 Total watering ratio | 人工 供水量 Total irrigation amount | 自然 供水量 Rainfall amount | 供水 总量 Total water amount | 供水率 Total watering ratio | |
T1 | 870 | 1 057 | 1 928 | 0.30 | 675 | 660 | 1 335 | 0.22 | 750 | 642 | 1 392 | 0.19 |
T2 | 1 770 | 1 057 | 2 828 | 0.44 | 1 620 | 660 | 2 280 | 0.38 | 1 950 | 642 | 2 592 | 0.35 |
T3 | 2 670 | 1 057 | 3 728 | 0.58 | 2 565 | 660 | 3 225 | 0.53 | 3 150 | 642 | 3 792 | 0.51 |
T4 | 3 570 | 1 057 | 4 628 | 0.72 | 3 510 | 660 | 4 170 | 0.69 | 4 350 | 642 | 4 992 | 0.68 |
T5 | 4 470 | 1 057 | 5 528 | 0.86 | 4 455 | 660 | 5 115 | 0.84 | 5 550 | 642 | 6 192 | 0.84 |
T6 | 5 370 | 1 057 | 6 428 | 1.00 | 5 400 | 660 | 6 060 | 1.00 | 6 750 | 642 | 7 392 | 1.00 |
年份 Year | 处理 Treat | 供水率Φ Watering ratio | 各品种的单株产量 Yield of hybrid(g/plant) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 新玉67号 | 新玉69号 | |||||
T1 | 0.30 | 141.2 | 138.8 | ||||
T2 | 0.44 | 201.4 | 179.1 | ||||
T3 | 0.58 | 224.6 | 187.1 | ||||
T4 | 0.72 | 256.0 | 202.6 | ||||
T5 | 0.86 | 256.5 | 203.2 | ||||
T6 | 1.00 | 256.5 | 203.3 | ||||
2018 | 新玉9号 | 新玉24号 | 新玉38号 | 新玉54号 | 张玉1233 | ||
T1 | 0.22 | 58.0 | 18.3 | 60.3 | 74.4 | 56.4 | |
T2 | 0.38 | 83.8 | 80.1 | 152.4 | 116.1 | 158.3 | |
T3 | 0.53 | 94.4 | 128.0 | 186.2 | 138.8 | 193.2 | |
T4 | 0.69 | 115.4 | 195.3 | 194.8 | 158.9 | 193.2 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 119.5 | 206.5 | 230.0 | 148.9 | 224.0 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 123.3 | 238.9 | 268.3 | 168.7 | 235.0 | |
2019 | 新玉23号 | 新玉46号 | 新玉60号 | 先玉335 | 郑单958 | ||
T1 | 0.19 | 20.7 | 18.6 | 4.5 | 47.9 | 12.5 | |
T2 | 0.35 | 51.5 | 63.2 | 47.7 | 111.5 | 47.8 | |
T3 | 0.51 | 123.5 | 143.5 | 106.9 | 187.6 | 126.9 | |
T4 | 0.68 | 187.5 | 183.0 | 187.4 | 228.9 | 179.8 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 248.2 | 224.3 | 257.0 | 256.9 | 230.9 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 247.1 | 234.9 | 256.4 | 267.5 | 233.8 |
Table 3 Yield of 12 hybrids at different watering ratio in 2017-2019
年份 Year | 处理 Treat | 供水率Φ Watering ratio | 各品种的单株产量 Yield of hybrid(g/plant) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 新玉67号 | 新玉69号 | |||||
T1 | 0.30 | 141.2 | 138.8 | ||||
T2 | 0.44 | 201.4 | 179.1 | ||||
T3 | 0.58 | 224.6 | 187.1 | ||||
T4 | 0.72 | 256.0 | 202.6 | ||||
T5 | 0.86 | 256.5 | 203.2 | ||||
T6 | 1.00 | 256.5 | 203.3 | ||||
2018 | 新玉9号 | 新玉24号 | 新玉38号 | 新玉54号 | 张玉1233 | ||
T1 | 0.22 | 58.0 | 18.3 | 60.3 | 74.4 | 56.4 | |
T2 | 0.38 | 83.8 | 80.1 | 152.4 | 116.1 | 158.3 | |
T3 | 0.53 | 94.4 | 128.0 | 186.2 | 138.8 | 193.2 | |
T4 | 0.69 | 115.4 | 195.3 | 194.8 | 158.9 | 193.2 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 119.5 | 206.5 | 230.0 | 148.9 | 224.0 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 123.3 | 238.9 | 268.3 | 168.7 | 235.0 | |
2019 | 新玉23号 | 新玉46号 | 新玉60号 | 先玉335 | 郑单958 | ||
T1 | 0.19 | 20.7 | 18.6 | 4.5 | 47.9 | 12.5 | |
T2 | 0.35 | 51.5 | 63.2 | 47.7 | 111.5 | 47.8 | |
T3 | 0.51 | 123.5 | 143.5 | 106.9 | 187.6 | 126.9 | |
T4 | 0.68 | 187.5 | 183.0 | 187.4 | 228.9 | 179.8 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 248.2 | 224.3 | 257.0 | 256.9 | 230.9 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 247.1 | 234.9 | 256.4 | 267.5 | 233.8 |
年份 Year | 处理 Treat | 供水率Φ Watering ratio | 各品种的抗旱系数γ Drought Resistance Coefficient of hybrid | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 新玉67号 | 新玉69号 | |||||
T1 | 0.30 | 0.55 | 0.68 | ||||
T2 | 0.44 | 0.79 | 0.88 | ||||
T3 | 0.58 | 0.88 | 0.92 | ||||
T4 | 0.72 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
T5 | 0.86 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
T6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
2018 | 新玉9号 | 新玉24号 | 新玉38号 | 新玉54号 | 张玉1233 | ||
T1 | 0.22 | 0.47 | 0.08 | 0.22 | 0.44 | 0.24 | |
T2 | 0.38 | 0.68 | 0.34 | 0.57 | 0.69 | 0.67 | |
T3 | 0.53 | 0.77 | 0.54 | 0.69 | 0.82 | 0.82 | |
T4 | 0.69 | 0.94 | 0.82 | 0.73 | 0.94 | 0.82 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 0.97 | 0.86 | 0.86 | 0.88 | 0.95 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
2019 | 新玉23号 | 新玉23号 | 新玉46号 | 新玉60号 | 先玉335 | ||
T1 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.05 | |
T2 | 0.35 | 0.21 | 0.27 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 0.20 | |
T3 | 0.51 | 0.50 | 0.61 | 0.42 | 0.70 | 0.54 | |
T4 | 0.68 | 0.76 | 0.78 | 0.73 | 0.86 | 0.77 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.99 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
Table 4 Drought resistance coefficient of 12 hybrids at different watering ratio in 2017-2019
年份 Year | 处理 Treat | 供水率Φ Watering ratio | 各品种的抗旱系数γ Drought Resistance Coefficient of hybrid | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 新玉67号 | 新玉69号 | |||||
T1 | 0.30 | 0.55 | 0.68 | ||||
T2 | 0.44 | 0.79 | 0.88 | ||||
T3 | 0.58 | 0.88 | 0.92 | ||||
T4 | 0.72 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
T5 | 0.86 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
T6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||||
2018 | 新玉9号 | 新玉24号 | 新玉38号 | 新玉54号 | 张玉1233 | ||
T1 | 0.22 | 0.47 | 0.08 | 0.22 | 0.44 | 0.24 | |
T2 | 0.38 | 0.68 | 0.34 | 0.57 | 0.69 | 0.67 | |
T3 | 0.53 | 0.77 | 0.54 | 0.69 | 0.82 | 0.82 | |
T4 | 0.69 | 0.94 | 0.82 | 0.73 | 0.94 | 0.82 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 0.97 | 0.86 | 0.86 | 0.88 | 0.95 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |
2019 | 新玉23号 | 新玉23号 | 新玉46号 | 新玉60号 | 先玉335 | ||
T1 | 0.19 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.02 | 0.18 | 0.05 | |
T2 | 0.35 | 0.21 | 0.27 | 0.19 | 0.42 | 0.20 | |
T3 | 0.51 | 0.50 | 0.61 | 0.42 | 0.70 | 0.54 | |
T4 | 0.68 | 0.76 | 0.78 | 0.73 | 0.86 | 0.77 | |
T5 | 0.84 | 1.00 | 0.95 | 1.00 | 0.96 | 0.99 | |
T6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
年份 Year | 材料名称 Hybrid | 模型参数Parameters | 计算值与实际值的相关系数 Correl. of estimation and actual | 残差预测偏差 RPD Residual prediction deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Φh | k | ||||
2017 | 新玉67号 | 0.285 | 3.29 | 0.987 | 5.42 |
新玉69号 | 0.238 | 3.35 | 0.990 | 6.34 | |
2018 | 新玉9号 | 0.246 | 2.09 | 0.973 | 3.91 |
新玉24号 | 0.476 | 3.54 | 0.992 | 7.43 | |
新玉38号 | 0.363 | 2.26 | 0.974 | 4.18 | |
新玉54号 | 0.251 | 2.16 | 0.983 | 5.21 | |
张玉1233 | 0.313 | 2.87 | 0.986 | 5.75 | |
2019 | 新玉23号 | 0.497 | 4.51 | 0.991 | 6.40 |
新玉46号 | 0.455 | 3.83 | 0.995 | 9.49 | |
新玉60号 | 0.531 | 5.04 | 0.991 | 6.59 | |
先玉335 | 0.374 | 2.99 | 0.992 | 7.23 | |
郑单958 | 0.488 | 4.49 | 0.995 | 8.84 | |
Minimum | 0.238 | 2.09 | 0.973 | 3.91 | |
Maximum | 0.531 | 5.04 | 0.995 | 9.49 | |
Mean | 0.376 | 3.37 | 0.987 | 6.40 |
Table 5 Parameters and fitting performance of water drought resistance coefficient model of 12 Maize Hybrids
年份 Year | 材料名称 Hybrid | 模型参数Parameters | 计算值与实际值的相关系数 Correl. of estimation and actual | 残差预测偏差 RPD Residual prediction deviation | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Φh | k | ||||
2017 | 新玉67号 | 0.285 | 3.29 | 0.987 | 5.42 |
新玉69号 | 0.238 | 3.35 | 0.990 | 6.34 | |
2018 | 新玉9号 | 0.246 | 2.09 | 0.973 | 3.91 |
新玉24号 | 0.476 | 3.54 | 0.992 | 7.43 | |
新玉38号 | 0.363 | 2.26 | 0.974 | 4.18 | |
新玉54号 | 0.251 | 2.16 | 0.983 | 5.21 | |
张玉1233 | 0.313 | 2.87 | 0.986 | 5.75 | |
2019 | 新玉23号 | 0.497 | 4.51 | 0.991 | 6.40 |
新玉46号 | 0.455 | 3.83 | 0.995 | 9.49 | |
新玉60号 | 0.531 | 5.04 | 0.991 | 6.59 | |
先玉335 | 0.374 | 2.99 | 0.992 | 7.23 | |
郑单958 | 0.488 | 4.49 | 0.995 | 8.84 | |
Minimum | 0.238 | 2.09 | 0.973 | 3.91 | |
Maximum | 0.531 | 5.04 | 0.995 | 9.49 | |
Mean | 0.376 | 3.37 | 0.987 | 6.40 |
[1] | 张强, 姚玉璧, 李耀辉, 等. 中国干旱事件成因和变化规律的研究进展与展望[J]. 气象学报, 2020, 78(3):500-521. |
ZHANG Qiang, YAO Yubi, LI Yaohui, et al. Progress and Prospect on the Study of Causes and Variation Regularity of Droughts in China[J]. Acta Meteorologica Sinica, 2020, 78(3):500-521. | |
[2] | 王琦琪, 陈印军. 我国玉米种植的优势分析[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2018, 20(3):1-9. |
WANG Qiqi, CHEN Yinjun. Advantages Analysis of Corn Planting in China[J]. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 2018, 20(3):1-9. | |
[3] | 任志强, 王晓清, 卜华虎, 等. 玉米抗旱育种研究进展[J]. 山西农业科学, 2019, 47(7):1291-1294. |
REN Zhiqiang, WANG Xiaoqing, BU Huahu, et al. Research Progress in Drought Resistance Breeding of Maize[J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 47(7):1291-1294. | |
[4] | 崔静宇, 关小康, 杨明达, 等. 基于主成分分析的玉米萌发期抗旱性综合评定[J]. 玉米科学, 2019, 27(5):62-72. |
CUI Jingyu, GUAN Xiaokang, YANG Mingda, et al. Integrative Evaluation of Maize Drought Tolerance in Germination Period by PCA Method[J]. Journal of Maize Sciences, 2019, 27(5):62-72. | |
[5] | 刘化涛, 黄学芳, 黄明镜 等. 拔节期干旱对春玉米产量性状及抗旱性的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2016,(2):89-94. |
LIU Huatao, HUANG Xuefang, HUANG Mingjing, et al. Effects of Drought Stress at Jointing Stage on Yield and Drought Resistance in Spring Maize[J]. Crops, 2016,(2):89-94. | |
[6] | 邹成林, 谭华, 郑德波, 等. 广西玉米品种开花期抗旱性鉴定与评价[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2019, 37(2):136-143. |
ZOU Chenglin, TAN Hua, ZHENG Debo, et al. Identification and Evaluation of Drought Tolerance of Different Maize Varieties During Flowering Stage in Guangxi[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2019, 37(2):136-143. | |
[7] |
杨杰, 韩登旭, 王业建, 等. 26份自交系田间抗旱性鉴定与评价[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2019, 56(8):1388-1396.
DOI |
YANG Jie, HAN Dengxu, WANG Yejian, et al. Drought Tolerance Identification and Evaluation of 26Maize Inbred Lines under Natural Drought[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2019, 56(8):1388-1396.
DOI |
|
[8] | 李娇, 韩鹏, 穆云森, 等. 玉米灌浆期干旱胁迫对产量性状及生理生化的影响[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2020, 48(18):107-110. |
LI Jiao, HAN Peng, MU Yunsen, et al. Effects of drought stress on yield characters, physiological and biochemical characteristics in maize at the filling stage[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 48(18):107-110. | |
[9] | 唐怀君, 谢小清, 赵连佳, 等. 欠量灌水方法用于玉米抗旱性鉴定和评价研究[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2017, 54(5):804-810. |
TANG Huaijun, XIE Xiaoqing, ZHAO Lianjia, et al. Study on the Evaluation and Identification of Maize Drought Resistance by Using the Method of water shortage irrigation[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 54(5):804-810. | |
[10] | Liu C, SUN B, Tan H, et al. Simple nonlinear model for the relationship between maize yield and cumulative water amount[J]. Journal of Integrative Agriculture, 2017, 15(4):856-866. |
[11] | 刘秀英. 玉米生理参数及农田土壤信息高光谱监测模型研究[D]. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2016. |
LIU Xiuying. Monitoring Model of Physiological Parameters of Corn and Farmland Soil Information Based on Hyper-spectral Reflectance[D]. Yangling: Northwest A & F University, 2016. | |
[12] | Blank H. Optimal irrigation decisions with limited water. Ph D journal. Colorado State University, Collins, CO. Briggs L J. 1914. Relative water requirements of plants[J]. Journal of Agricultural Research, 1975: (3):1-63. |
[13] | Jensen M E . Consumptive use of water and irrigation water requirements[J]. New York by American Society of Civil Engineers, 1973. |
[14] | Minhas B S, Parikh K S, Srinivasan T N. Towards the structure of a production function for wheat yields with dated in Puts of irrigation water[J]. Water Resources Research, 1974, (10):383-393. |
[16] | Stewart J I, Hagan R M. Functions to Predict Effects of Crop, Water Deficits[J]. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Division, 1969, (95):91-104. |
[17] | Stewart J I, Hagan R M, Pruitt W O. Production Functions and Predicted Irrigation Programmers for Principal Crops as Required for Water Resources Planning and Increased Water Use Efficiency[J]. Final Report U.S. Department of Interior, Washington D.C. 1976: 80. |
[18] | 刘成, 杨炳鹏, 孙宝成, 等. 转LOS5玉米的大田抗旱性鉴定[J]. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(23):4469-4479. |
LIU Cheng, YANG Bingpeng, SUN Baocheng, et al. Field Identification of Drought Tolerance of LOS5 Transgenic Maize[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2016, 49(23):4469-4479. | |
[19] |
唐怀君, 谢小清, 张磊, 等. 应用缺次灌溉和半产需水量模型鉴定玉米杂交种的抗旱性[J]. 新疆农业科学, 2018, 55(11):1994-2001.
DOI |
TANG Huaijun, XIE Xiaoqing, ZHANG Lei, et al. Drought Resistance of Maize Hybrid was Identified by the Model of Water Shortage Irrigation and Half-yield Water Requirement Demand[J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2018, 55(11):1994-2001.
DOI |
[1] | ZENG Wanying, GENG Hongwei, CHENG Yukun, LI Sizhong, QIAN Songting, GAO Weishi, ZHANG Liming. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance during the rapid growth stage of sugar beet cultivars [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(9): 2140-2151. |
[2] | LI Jinyao, XU Guiqing, WANG Lisheng, LU Ping, SHI Dongfang, ZHENG Weihua. Study on the effect of N fertilization on drought resistance of Calligonum caput-medusae seedlings [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(9): 2330-2340. |
[3] | SONG Mei, Buka Ouerna, LI Guoping, LING Yizhang. Studies on the heredity disciplinarian of cold hardiness of hybrids progenies of apples in northern Xinjiang [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(7): 1689-1695. |
[4] | WANG Yizhao, YANG Qizhi, LIU Yuxiu, Alayi Nurkamali, Vladimir Shvidchenko, ZHANG Zhengmao. Evaluation of drought resistance of different Kazakhstan spring wheat at seeding stage under PEG-6000 stress [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(6): 1352-1360. |
[5] | ZHANG Guoru, TANG Yaping, SHI Linyuan, YUAN Lei, ZHANG Yong, YANG Shengbao. Genetic properties of interspecific crosses in pepper [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(3): 632-641. |
[6] | YANG Minghua, LIAO Biyong, LIU Qiang, FENG Guorui, Dawulai Jiekeshan, Buayixiamu Namanti, LIU Qi, Aierjuma Tuluhan, PENG Yuncheng. Comprehensive evaluation of dehydration of maize hybrid combinations based on principal component analysis [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 61(2): 318-325. |
[7] | Bayinhua , LIANG Long, HE Pengfei, LI Jiaying, HE Xin, HE Sangang, LI Wenrong. Comparison of early growth performance of offspring of kazakh sheep with different hybrid combinations [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(9): 2331-2340. |
[8] | FENG Mei, LIU Chaoqin, CHEN Jie, LIU Wenlong, YANG Zhigang, TIAN Jieying, HUANG Xin. Analysis of character variation and heterosis of F1 generation of different crosses in wheat [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(8): 1858-1865. |
[9] | YANG Minghua, LIU Qiang, LIAO Biyong, PEN Yuncheng, Buayxam Namat, Dawulai Jiekeshan. Comprehensive evaluation of lodging resistance of NCII maize combinations [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(4): 832-840. |
[10] | SHANG Jing, PANG Hongbo, WANG Lanlan, LI Xuemei, WANG Yanqiu, LI Yueying. Study on the relationship between auxin and sorghum heterosis [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(4): 841-846. |
[11] | WANG Yong, Sulaiman Aizezi, LI Yuling, SUN Feng, WU Guohong, YANG Tao, GUO Pingfeng. Genetic analysis of nuclear characters of hybrids of ruby seedless and hongqitezao grape [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(4): 872-879. |
[12] | TANG Xixi, Mubarek Ayup, XU Panyun, YU Qiuhong, GUO Chunmiao, ZHANG Ping, GONG Peng. Response of root anatomical structure of different rootstock resources of almond to drought stress [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(4): 897-907. |
[13] | CHEN Liangliang, ZHANG Meng, GUO Liping, QI Tingxiang, ZHANG Xuexian, TANG Huini, WANG Hailin, QIAO Xiuqin, WU Jianyong, XING Chaozhu. Heterosis Performance and Their Parental Combining Ability Analysis of F1 and F2 Hybrids of Upland Cotton at Seedling Stage [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(2): 261-271. |
[14] | JIA Yonghong, WEI Haipeng, HOU Dianliang, ZENG Chaowu, Nasirula Keremu, LIANG Xiaodong. Evaluation of correlation between drought resistance and agronomic traits of self-breeding spring wheat varieties in Xinjiang [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(12): 2940-2948. |
[15] | DUAN Yanyan, HU Jing, QI Bingqin, PAN Zhiyuan, WU Haonan, GOU Ling. Response of reciprocal cross to lodging resistance and planting density of maize hybrids [J]. Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 60(12): 2949-2961. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||