Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2022, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (4): 1-9.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0337
ZHAI Caijiao1(), ZHANG Jiao1(
), CUI Shiyou1, CHEN Pengjun2
Received:
2021-03-31
Revised:
2021-09-23
Online:
2022-02-05
Published:
2022-03-16
Contact:
ZHANG Jiao
E-mail:szgszcj18@163.com;zhangjiao0609@126.com
CLC Number:
ZHAI Caijiao, ZHANG Jiao, CUI Shiyou, CHEN Pengjun. Effects of Salt Stress on the Panicle Traits and Yield Components of Rice Cultivars[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(4): 1-9.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0337
项目 | 穗长 | 穗重 | 着粒密度 | 每穗粒重 | 每穗实粒数 | 每穗空瘪粒数 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
盐逆境 | 1.19 | 16.12* | 9.37* | 13.71* | 12.94* | 2.78 |
品种 | 28.20** | 38.62** | 24.52** | 37.41** | 56.30** | 36.93** |
盐逆境×品种 | 0.88 | 3.21 | 2.81 | 2.78 | 3.61* | 3.24 |
项目 | 穗长 | 穗重 | 着粒密度 | 每穗粒重 | 每穗实粒数 | 每穗空瘪粒数 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
盐逆境 | 1.19 | 16.12* | 9.37* | 13.71* | 12.94* | 2.78 |
品种 | 28.20** | 38.62** | 24.52** | 37.41** | 56.30** | 36.93** |
盐逆境×品种 | 0.88 | 3.21 | 2.81 | 2.78 | 3.61* | 3.24 |
处理 | 品种 | 枝梗数/个 | 总粒数/个 | 实粒数/个 | 空瘪粒数/个 | 结实率/% | 总粒重/g | 千粒重/g | 贡献率/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S0 | V1 | 9.68b | 62.19a | 57.79b | 4.40a | 92.93b | 1.50a | 26.93a | 50.90b |
V2 | 9.90b | 64.00a | 61.50a | 2.50b | 96.07a | 1.55a | 25.36c | 62.43a | |
V3 | 11.06a | 62.74a | 59.62ab | 3.12ab | 95.06a | 1.52a | 25.98b | 48.00b | |
平均 | 10.22A | 62.97A | 59.64A | 3.34AB | 94.69A | 1.52A | 26.09A | 53.78B | |
S1 | V1 | 9.53b | 56.85b | 54.06b | 2.79a | 95.10a | 1.38a | 25.78a | 54.06b |
V2 | 8.59c | 58.01ab | 55.02ab | 3.00a | 94.82a | 1.39a | 25.20b | 65.34a | |
V3 | 10.82a | 61.15a | 58.71a | 2.44a | 96.02a | 1.46a | 25.54a | 49.18c | |
平均 | 9.65AB | 58.67B | 55.93B | 2.74B | 95.31A | 1.41AB | 25.51B | 56.19AB | |
S2 | V1 | 8.50b | 54.43b | 48.20c | 6.22a | 88.55b | 1.21b | 25.16b | 58.35b |
V2 | 8.49b | 56.31b | 53.18b | 3.14b | 94.49a | 1.16b | 24.68c | 68.02a | |
V3 | 10.89a | 61.75a | 59.62a | 2.13b | 96.53a | 1.53a | 25.64a | 48.62c | |
平均 | 9.29B | 57.50B | 53.66B | 3.83A | 93.19B | 1.30B | 25.16C | 58.33A |
处理 | 品种 | 枝梗数/个 | 总粒数/个 | 实粒数/个 | 空瘪粒数/个 | 结实率/% | 总粒重/g | 千粒重/g | 贡献率/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S0 | V1 | 9.68b | 62.19a | 57.79b | 4.40a | 92.93b | 1.50a | 26.93a | 50.90b |
V2 | 9.90b | 64.00a | 61.50a | 2.50b | 96.07a | 1.55a | 25.36c | 62.43a | |
V3 | 11.06a | 62.74a | 59.62ab | 3.12ab | 95.06a | 1.52a | 25.98b | 48.00b | |
平均 | 10.22A | 62.97A | 59.64A | 3.34AB | 94.69A | 1.52A | 26.09A | 53.78B | |
S1 | V1 | 9.53b | 56.85b | 54.06b | 2.79a | 95.10a | 1.38a | 25.78a | 54.06b |
V2 | 8.59c | 58.01ab | 55.02ab | 3.00a | 94.82a | 1.39a | 25.20b | 65.34a | |
V3 | 10.82a | 61.15a | 58.71a | 2.44a | 96.02a | 1.46a | 25.54a | 49.18c | |
平均 | 9.65AB | 58.67B | 55.93B | 2.74B | 95.31A | 1.41AB | 25.51B | 56.19AB | |
S2 | V1 | 8.50b | 54.43b | 48.20c | 6.22a | 88.55b | 1.21b | 25.16b | 58.35b |
V2 | 8.49b | 56.31b | 53.18b | 3.14b | 94.49a | 1.16b | 24.68c | 68.02a | |
V3 | 10.89a | 61.75a | 59.62a | 2.13b | 96.53a | 1.53a | 25.64a | 48.62c | |
平均 | 9.29B | 57.50B | 53.66B | 3.83A | 93.19B | 1.30B | 25.16C | 58.33A |
项目 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 实粒数 | 空瘪粒数 | 结实率 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | 贡献率 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
盐逆境 | 6.88 | 9.97* | 15.13* | 7.84* | 15.76* | 13.61* | 255.49** | 8.54* |
品种 | 132.41** | 8.37** | 16.82** | 8.66** | 12.00** | 6.81* | 55.70** | 67.76** |
盐逆境×品种 | 7.98** | 2.59 | 4.88* | 3.36* | 4.65* | 4.37* | 14.60** | 1.04 |
项目 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 实粒数 | 空瘪粒数 | 结实率 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | 贡献率 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
盐逆境 | 6.88 | 9.97* | 15.13* | 7.84* | 15.76* | 13.61* | 255.49** | 8.54* |
品种 | 132.41** | 8.37** | 16.82** | 8.66** | 12.00** | 6.81* | 55.70** | 67.76** |
盐逆境×品种 | 7.98** | 2.59 | 4.88* | 3.36* | 4.65* | 4.37* | 14.60** | 1.04 |
处理 | 品种 | 枝梗数/个 | 总粒数/个 | 实粒数/个 | 空瘪粒数/个 | 结实率/% | 总粒重/g | 千粒重/g | 贡献率/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S0 | V1 | 23.92a | 73.88a | 56.32a | 17.57a | 76.32c | 1.23b | 25.65a | 49.10a |
V2 | 15.75b | 43.37b | 37.28c | 6.10b | 86.26b | 0.91c | 24.08b | 37.57b | |
V3 | 23.22a | 66.58a | 64.62a | 1.97c | 97.05a | 1.51a | 23.42c | 52.00a | |
平均 | 20.97A | 61.28A | 52.74A | 8.54A | 86.54A | 1.22A | 24.38A | 46.22A | |
S1 | V1 | 19.29a | 57.56a | 46.32b | 11.24a | 80.14b | 1.07a | 23.11a | 45.94b |
V2 | 13.26b | 36.69b | 29.52c | 7.17ab | 80.09b | 0.67b | 22.39b | 34.66c | |
V3 | 22.57a | 66.26a | 60.83a | 5.43b | 91.70a | 1.31a | 21.43c | 50.82a | |
平均 | 18.37B | 53.50B | 45.56AB | 7.95A | 83.98AB | 1.02B | 22.31C | 43.81AB | |
S2 | V1 | 17.26b | 51.99b | 34.53b | 17.46a | 67.08b | 0.89b | 22.91b | 41.65b |
V2 | 13.35c | 33.46c | 25.03b | 8.43b | 74.97b | 0.62c | 21.96c | 31.98c | |
V3 | 23.07a | 65.21a | 63.08a | 2.14c | 96.68a | 1.51a | 23.93a | 51.38a | |
平均 | 17.89B | 50.22B | 40.88B | 9.34A | 79.58B | 1.01B | 22.93B | 41.67B |
处理 | 品种 | 枝梗数/个 | 总粒数/个 | 实粒数/个 | 空瘪粒数/个 | 结实率/% | 总粒重/g | 千粒重/g | 贡献率/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S0 | V1 | 23.92a | 73.88a | 56.32a | 17.57a | 76.32c | 1.23b | 25.65a | 49.10a |
V2 | 15.75b | 43.37b | 37.28c | 6.10b | 86.26b | 0.91c | 24.08b | 37.57b | |
V3 | 23.22a | 66.58a | 64.62a | 1.97c | 97.05a | 1.51a | 23.42c | 52.00a | |
平均 | 20.97A | 61.28A | 52.74A | 8.54A | 86.54A | 1.22A | 24.38A | 46.22A | |
S1 | V1 | 19.29a | 57.56a | 46.32b | 11.24a | 80.14b | 1.07a | 23.11a | 45.94b |
V2 | 13.26b | 36.69b | 29.52c | 7.17ab | 80.09b | 0.67b | 22.39b | 34.66c | |
V3 | 22.57a | 66.26a | 60.83a | 5.43b | 91.70a | 1.31a | 21.43c | 50.82a | |
平均 | 18.37B | 53.50B | 45.56AB | 7.95A | 83.98AB | 1.02B | 22.31C | 43.81AB | |
S2 | V1 | 17.26b | 51.99b | 34.53b | 17.46a | 67.08b | 0.89b | 22.91b | 41.65b |
V2 | 13.35c | 33.46c | 25.03b | 8.43b | 74.97b | 0.62c | 21.96c | 31.98c | |
V3 | 23.07a | 65.21a | 63.08a | 2.14c | 96.68a | 1.51a | 23.93a | 51.38a | |
平均 | 17.89B | 50.22B | 40.88B | 9.34A | 79.58B | 1.01B | 22.93B | 41.67B |
项目 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 实粒数 | 空瘪粒数 | 结实率 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | 贡献率 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
盐逆境 | 15.07* | 8.52* | 9.01* | 0.79 | 9.39* | 9.59* | 9082.695** | 5.84 |
品种 | 41.90** | 46.91** | 66.49** | 37.68** | 30.68** | 53.44* | 934.591** | 96.81** |
盐逆境×品种 | 1.91 | 2.03 | 2.3 | 2.71 | 2.21 | 1.69 | 859.719** | 1.48 |
项目 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 实粒数 | 空瘪粒数 | 结实率 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | 贡献率 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
盐逆境 | 15.07* | 8.52* | 9.01* | 0.79 | 9.39* | 9.59* | 9082.695** | 5.84 |
品种 | 41.90** | 46.91** | 66.49** | 37.68** | 30.68** | 53.44* | 934.591** | 96.81** |
盐逆境×品种 | 1.91 | 2.03 | 2.3 | 2.71 | 2.21 | 1.69 | 859.719** | 1.48 |
处理 | 品种 | 产量/(kg/m2) | 有效穗数/(穗/m2) | 每穗粒数/个 | 千粒重/g | 结实率/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S0 | V1 | 0.86a | 350.19a | 136.07a | 26.79a | 83.95b |
V2 | 0.84b | 389.10a | 107.37b | 25.27c | 92.01a | |
V3 | 0.85a | 303.50b | 129.32a | 25.89b | 96.09a | |
平均 | 0.85A | 347.60AB | 124.25A | 25.98A | 90.68A | |
S1 | V1 | 0.80b | 342.41a | 114.41a | 25.60a | 87.64b |
V2 | 0.78c | 381.32a | 94.70b | 25.13c | 89.18ab | |
V3 | 0.96a | 350.19a | 127.41a | 25.31b | 93.80a | |
平均 | 0.85A | 357.97A | 112.17B | 25.35B | 90.21A | |
S2 | V1 | 0.71b | 330.88ab | 106.42b | 24.48b | 77.94c |
V2 | 0.63c | 365.75a | 89.77c | 24.56b | 87.12b | |
V3 | 0.83a | 303.50b | 126.96a | 25.27a | 96.63a | |
平均 | 0.72B | 333.38B | 107.72B | 24.77C | 87.23B |
处理 | 品种 | 产量/(kg/m2) | 有效穗数/(穗/m2) | 每穗粒数/个 | 千粒重/g | 结实率/% |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
S0 | V1 | 0.86a | 350.19a | 136.07a | 26.79a | 83.95b |
V2 | 0.84b | 389.10a | 107.37b | 25.27c | 92.01a | |
V3 | 0.85a | 303.50b | 129.32a | 25.89b | 96.09a | |
平均 | 0.85A | 347.60AB | 124.25A | 25.98A | 90.68A | |
S1 | V1 | 0.80b | 342.41a | 114.41a | 25.60a | 87.64b |
V2 | 0.78c | 381.32a | 94.70b | 25.13c | 89.18ab | |
V3 | 0.96a | 350.19a | 127.41a | 25.31b | 93.80a | |
平均 | 0.85A | 357.97A | 112.17B | 25.35B | 90.21A | |
S2 | V1 | 0.71b | 330.88ab | 106.42b | 24.48b | 77.94c |
V2 | 0.63c | 365.75a | 89.77c | 24.56b | 87.12b | |
V3 | 0.83a | 303.50b | 126.96a | 25.27a | 96.63a | |
平均 | 0.72B | 333.38B | 107.72B | 24.77C | 87.23B |
处理 | 品种 | 有效穗数 | 每穗粒数 | 千粒重 | 结实率 | 穗长 | 穗重 | 一次枝梗 | 二次枝梗 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | |||||||||
S1 | V1 | 2.22 | 15.92 | 4.44 | -4.40 | 4.53 | 10.14 | 1.55 | 8.59 | 8.00 | 4.27 | 19.36 | 22.09 | 13.01 | 9.90 | |
V2 | 2.00 | 11.80 | 0.55 | 3.08 | 2.02 | 15.95 | 13.23 | 9.36 | 10.32 | 0.63 | 15.81 | 15.40 | 26.37 | 7.02 | ||
V3 | -15.38 | 1.48 | 2.24 | 2.38 | 0.80 | 9.49 | 2.17 | 2.53 | 3.95 | 1.69 | 2.80 | 0.48 | 13.25 | 8.50 | ||
S2 | V1 | 5.51 | 21.79 | 8.62 | 7.16 | 5.91 | 23.43 | 12.19 | 12.48 | 19.33 | 6.57 | 27.84 | 29.63 | 27.64 | 10.68 | |
V2 | 6.00 | 16.39 | 2.81 | 5.31 | 7.38 | 27.63 | 14.24 | 12.02 | 25.16 | 2.68 | 15.24 | 22.85 | 31.87 | 8.80 | ||
V3 | 0 | 1.82 | 2.39 | -0.56 | -1.72 | 0.32 | 1.54 | 1.58 | -0.66 | 1.31 | 0.65 | 2.06 | 0 | -2.18 |
处理 | 品种 | 有效穗数 | 每穗粒数 | 千粒重 | 结实率 | 穗长 | 穗重 | 一次枝梗 | 二次枝梗 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 总粒重 | 千粒重 | |||||||||
S1 | V1 | 2.22 | 15.92 | 4.44 | -4.40 | 4.53 | 10.14 | 1.55 | 8.59 | 8.00 | 4.27 | 19.36 | 22.09 | 13.01 | 9.90 | |
V2 | 2.00 | 11.80 | 0.55 | 3.08 | 2.02 | 15.95 | 13.23 | 9.36 | 10.32 | 0.63 | 15.81 | 15.40 | 26.37 | 7.02 | ||
V3 | -15.38 | 1.48 | 2.24 | 2.38 | 0.80 | 9.49 | 2.17 | 2.53 | 3.95 | 1.69 | 2.80 | 0.48 | 13.25 | 8.50 | ||
S2 | V1 | 5.51 | 21.79 | 8.62 | 7.16 | 5.91 | 23.43 | 12.19 | 12.48 | 19.33 | 6.57 | 27.84 | 29.63 | 27.64 | 10.68 | |
V2 | 6.00 | 16.39 | 2.81 | 5.31 | 7.38 | 27.63 | 14.24 | 12.02 | 25.16 | 2.68 | 15.24 | 22.85 | 31.87 | 8.80 | ||
V3 | 0 | 1.82 | 2.39 | -0.56 | -1.72 | 0.32 | 1.54 | 1.58 | -0.66 | 1.31 | 0.65 | 2.06 | 0 | -2.18 |
处理 | 穗长 | 穗重 | 每穗粒数 | 着粒密度 | 一次枝梗 | 二次枝梗 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 千粒重 | 结实率 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 千粒重 | 结实率 | ||||||
S0 | 0.38 | 0.45 | 0.77** | 0.70* | -0.05 | -0.34 | 0.95** | -0.62 | 0.80** | 0.84** | 0.61 | 0.05 | |
S1 | 0.98** | 0.77** | 0.81** | 0.30 | 0.93** | 0.69* | 0.19 | 0.48 | 0.78** | 0.76* | 0.83** | 0.78** | |
S2 | 0.71* | 0.94** | 0.95** | 0.82** | 0.88** | 0.68* | 0.95** | 0.36 | 0.90** | 0.90** | 0.98** | 0.76* |
处理 | 穗长 | 穗重 | 每穗粒数 | 着粒密度 | 一次枝梗 | 二次枝梗 | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 千粒重 | 结实率 | 枝梗数 | 总粒数 | 千粒重 | 结实率 | ||||||
S0 | 0.38 | 0.45 | 0.77** | 0.70* | -0.05 | -0.34 | 0.95** | -0.62 | 0.80** | 0.84** | 0.61 | 0.05 | |
S1 | 0.98** | 0.77** | 0.81** | 0.30 | 0.93** | 0.69* | 0.19 | 0.48 | 0.78** | 0.76* | 0.83** | 0.78** | |
S2 | 0.71* | 0.94** | 0.95** | 0.82** | 0.88** | 0.68* | 0.95** | 0.36 | 0.90** | 0.90** | 0.98** | 0.76* |
[1] | 向栋良, 陈美招, 郑雪, 等. 基于供需平衡的2050年中国粮食安全研究[J]. 农业科学, 2020, 10(8):590-601. |
[2] | 陈君, 张长宽, 林康, 等. 江苏沿海滩涂资源围垦开发利用研究[J]. 河海大学学报:自然科学版, 2011, 39(2):213-219. |
[3] | 袁隆平. 建议加快海水稻品种审定,1年内可增产300亿kg粮食[J]. 粮食加工, 2019, 44(1):37. |
[4] |
张晓祥, 严长清, 徐盼, 等. 近代以来江苏沿海滩涂围垦历史演变研究[J]. 地理学报, 2013, 68(11):1549-1558.
doi: 10.11821/dlxb201311010 |
[5] | 王相平, 杨劲松, 姚荣江, 等. 苏北滩涂水稻微咸水灌溉模式及土壤盐分动态变化[J]. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(7):54-63. |
[6] | 张蛟, 翟彩娇, 崔士友. 微咸水灌溉滩涂稻田盐分动态及其水稻产量表现[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2018, 34(4):799-803. |
[7] | 张蛟, 崔士友, 胡帅栋, 等. 水稻种植对沿海滩涂土壤有机碳及碳库管理指数的影响[J]. 中国土壤与肥料, 2020, 3:107-112. |
[8] | 董桂春, 李进前, 董燕萍, 等. 产量构成因素及穗部性状对籼稻品种库容的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2009, 23(5):523-528. |
[9] | 徐正进, 邵国军, 韩勇, 等. 东北三省水稻产量和品质及其与穗部性状关系的初步研究[J]. 作物学报, 2006(12):1878-1883. |
[10] | 左静红, 李景鹏, 杨福. 不同土壤类型对北方粳稻穗部性状及产量构成的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2013, 32(1):59-63. |
[11] | 杨福, 梁正伟, 王志春, 等. 水稻耐盐碱品种(系)筛选试验与省区域试验产量性状的比较[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 2007(6):596-600. |
[12] | 李红宇, 潘世驹, 钱永德, 等. 混合盐碱胁迫对寒地水稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2015, 46(12):2100-2105. |
[13] |
ZENG L, SHANNON M C. Salinity effects on seedling growth and yield components of rice[J]. Crop science, 2000, 40(4):996-1003.
doi: 10.2135/cropsci2000.404996x URL |
[14] | 吕艳超. 施氮量对盐胁迫下寒地粳稻生长发育籽粒淀粉积累及产质量的影响[D]. 哈尔滨:东北农业大学, 2016. |
[15] |
MARIA E B G, MARJORIE P D, JAMES A E, et al. Physiological responses of contrasting rice genotypes to salt stress at reproductive stage[J]. Rice science, 2019, 26(4):207-219.
doi: 10.1016/j.rsci.2019.05.001 URL |
[16] | 张瑞珍, 邵玺文, 童淑媛, 等. 盐碱胁迫对水稻源库与产量的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2006, 20(1):116-118. |
[17] | 杨福, 梁正伟, 王志春. 苏打盐碱胁迫对水稻品种长白9号穗部性状及产量构成的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2010, 25(S2):59-61. |
[18] |
ZENG L, SHANNON M C, GRIEVE C M. Evaluation of salt tolerance in rice genotypes by multiple agronomic parameters[J]. Euphytica, 2002, 127(2):235-245.
doi: 10.1023/A:1020262932277 URL |
[19] | 周根友, 翟彩娇, 邓先亮, 等. 盐逆境对水稻产量、光合特性及品质的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2018, 32(2):146-154. |
[20] |
沙汉景, 胡文成, 贾琰, 等. 外源水杨酸、脯氨酸和γ-氨基丁酸对盐胁迫下水稻产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2017, 43(11):1677-1688.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2017.01677 |
[21] | 孙志国, 刘冉, 吴昊, 等. 保水缓释肥对盐胁迫下水稻生长和光合特性的调控[J]. 土壤学报, 2016, 53(3):757-767. |
[22] | 沈建凯, 郑华斌, 尹明, 等. 暗直播栽培对水稻穗部性状及产量的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2014(4):84-87. |
[23] |
REN D Y, LI Y F, HE G H, et al. Multifloret spikelet improves rice yield[J]. New phytologist, 2020, 225(6):2301-2306.
doi: 10.1111/nph.v225.6 URL |
[24] |
吴家富, 杨博文, 向珣朝, 等. 不同水稻种质在不同生育期耐盐鉴定的差异[J]. 植物学报, 2017, 52(1):77-88.
doi: 10.11983/CBB16192 |
[25] | 罗成科, 肖国举, 张峰举, 等. 不同浓度复合盐胁迫对水稻产量和品质的影响[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2017, 31(1):137-141. |
[26] | 陆佳岚, 王净, 马成, 等. 长江流域中稻产量和品质性状差异与其生育期气象因子的相关性[J]. 江苏农业学报, 2020, 36(6):1361-1372. |
[27] | 杜彦修, 季新, 张静, 等. 弱光对水稻生长发育影响研究进展[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2013, 21(11):1307-1317. |
[28] |
FU J, XU Y J, CHEN L, et al. Changes in enzyme activities involved in starch synjournal and hormone concentrations in superior and inferior spikelets and their association with grain filling of super rice[J]. Rice science, 2013, 20(2):120-128.
doi: 10.1016/S1672-6308(13)60116-X URL |
[29] |
ZHAO Q, HAO X Y, IZHAR Ali, et al. Characterization and grouping of all primary branches at various positions on a rice panicle based on grain growth dynamics[J]. Agronomy, 2020, 10(2):223.
doi: 10.3390/agronomy10020223 URL |
[30] | 黄升谋, 邹应斌, 刘春林. 杂交水稻两优培九强、弱势粒结实生理研究[J]. 作物学报, 2005(1):102-107. |
[31] |
YANG J C, CAO Y Y, ZHANG H, et al. Involvement of polyamines in the post-anjournal development of inferior and superior spikelets in rice[J]. Planta, 2008, 228(1):137-149.
doi: 10.1007/s00425-008-0725-1 URL |
[32] | 杨东雷, 董伟欣, 张迎迎, 等. 赤霉素调节植物对非生物逆境的耐性[J]. 中国科学:生命科学, 2013, 43(12):1119-1126. |
[33] |
PANIGRAHI R, KARIALI E, PANDA B B, et al. Controlling the trade-off between spikelet number and grain filling: the hierarchy of starch synjournal in spikelets of rice panicle in relation to hormone dynamics[J]. Functional plant biology, 2019, 46(6):507-523.
doi: 10.1071/FP18153 URL |
[34] | 邹德堂, 李姣. 寒地粳稻二次枝梗数和结实率遗传分析[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2014, 45(4):18-24. |
[1] | HONG Senrong, ZHU Yingying, LI Ziying, HU Mingyan, OUYANG Kehui. The Plantlets of Medicago polymorpha L. and Medicago sativa L. Under Salt Stress: Transcriptome Analysis and Salt Tolerance Gene Screening [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(3): 111-118. |
[2] | LIU Qingsong, JIA Yanli, XIAO Yu, GUO Zhiding, JI Mingmei, ZHAO Zhongxiang, HUANG Sufang, YUE Mingqiang, LIU Zhen, YAN Xudong, XU Yupeng. Effects of Salt Stress on Physiological and Growth Traits of Alfalfa [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(8): 96-101. |
[3] | ZHANG Yuyang, ZHOU Xue, LIU Lingyi, XU Wujun, REN Xuqin, WANG Guanglong, XIONG Aisheng. Garlic Chitinase Gene AsCHI1: Identification and Its Response to Salt Stress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(5): 23-29. |
[4] | LI Sen, FENG Di, ZHANG Jingmin, ZHU Haiyan, PENG Dianliang, WANG Zhihe, WANG Qinqin. Effects of Fulvic Acid Potassium on Germination and Seedling Growth of Cherry Radish Under NaCl Solution Hydroponics [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(5): 48-53. |
[5] | YI Jiawen, FENG Di, ZHU Wei, QI Na, TENG Fengkui, LU Xiaoyin. Salt Tolerance of Rice Varieties at Germination Stage: A Comparative Study [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(33): 10-14. |
[6] | WANG Yang, ZHANG Rui, ZHOU Yuqing, LIU Yonghao, SHAHID Hussain, LIU Gaosheng, DAI Qigen. Analysis of Research Situation of Rice Salt Tolerance in China Based on Bibliometrics [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(31): 147-153. |
[7] | GUO Dongsen, WANG Lin, WEI Qishun, CUI Lianming, ZHOU Ying, GUO Chengbao. Physiological Regulation Effect of Feather Biodegradation Liquid on Chinese Cabbage Growth in Response to Salt Stress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(25): 25-29. |
[8] | HUANG Pingsheng, LIU Shinan, LI Ting, QIN Yonghua. Effects of Exogenous Silicon on Photosynthesis and Chlorophyll Fluorescence Characteristics and Antioxidant Enzymes of Cryptocarya concinna Seedlings Under Salt Stress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(23): 32-38. |
[9] | XING Qiming, JIN Wenjie, ZHOU Libin, LI Wenjian, LIU Ruiyuan, MA Jianzhong. Salt Tolerance of Plant Increased by Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria: Research Progress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(11): 46-52. |
[10] | Wang Mingquan, Fu Lixin, Li Guoliang, Hu Guanghui, Ren Honglei, Hu Shaoxin, Yang Jianfei, Liu Chang, Gong Shichen. The Photosynthesis Mechanism of Tolerant and Sensitive Maize Germplasm Resources Under Salt Tolerance at Seedling Stage [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(5): 8-14. |
[11] | Ma Huimin, Sun Peilin, Ma Chunquan. Salt Tolerance Function of Transcription Factor BvM14-GAI [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(34): 34-42. |
[12] | Wang Shuang, Li Haiying. PUB Gene in Sugar Beet Response to Salt Stress: Bioinformatics Analysis [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(33): 120-127. |
[13] | Jia Lin, Liu Luyao, Wang Pengshan, Li Zhiming, Zhang Jinlong, Li Xinzheng, Tian Xiaoming, Wang Guoqiang. Salt-tolerance and Soil Improvement Mechanism of Suaeda salsa: Research Progress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(3): 73-80. |
[14] | Zhu Yongxing, Guan Yajing, Li Xin, Zhang Chunyi. Ion Changes and Transcriptome Analysis of Maize Under Salt Stress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(24): 110-115. |
[15] | Du Xiaoxue, Huang Yuanyuan, Ma Chunquan, Li Haiying. Transcription Factor BvM14-Dof 3.4 in Response to Salt Stress: Functional Study [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(21): 119-125. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||