Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2023, Vol. 39 ›› Issue (15): 22-29.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0539
Previous Articles Next Articles
JIN Shiqiao1(), JIN Fang1, LIU Fengze1, REN Xuezhen1, SUN Quan1, XU Naiyin2(
)
Received:
2022-07-06
Revised:
2022-10-27
Online:
2023-05-25
Published:
2023-05-22
JIN Shiqiao, JIN Fang, LIU Fengze, REN Xuezhen, SUN Quan, XU Naiyin. Seed Quality Indexes’ Models for Cereal Crops in China: Simulation and Application[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(15): 22-29.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2022-0539
作物名称 | 种子类别 | 样本容量 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
纯度 | 净度 | 发芽率 | 水分 | 总计 | ||
水稻 | 常规种 | 2209 | 3958 | 4856 | 4112 | 15135 |
杂交种 | 6719 | 9631 | 10543 | 9393 | 36286 | |
小麦 | 常规种 | 2914 | 3661 | 5571 | 3878 | 16024 |
玉米 | 杂交种 | 11670 | 16886 | 20038 | 16564 | 65158 |
合计 | 23512 | 34136 | 41008 | 33947 | 132603 |
作物名称 | 种子类别 | 样本容量 | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
纯度 | 净度 | 发芽率 | 水分 | 总计 | ||
水稻 | 常规种 | 2209 | 3958 | 4856 | 4112 | 15135 |
杂交种 | 6719 | 9631 | 10543 | 9393 | 36286 | |
小麦 | 常规种 | 2914 | 3661 | 5571 | 3878 | 16024 |
玉米 | 杂交种 | 11670 | 16886 | 20038 | 16564 | 65158 |
合计 | 23512 | 34136 | 41008 | 33947 | 132603 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
水稻常规种 | 96.495 | -446.761 | 4.485 | 0.9912 | 2.41 | 2.96% | 非常好 | |
水稻杂交种 | 96.669 | -143.495 | 1.451 | 0.9834 | 3.35 | 4.36% | 非常好 | |
小麦常规种 | 93.692 | -457.091 | 4.595 | 0.9975 | 1.43 | 1.91% | 非常好 | |
玉米杂交种 | 97.542 | -116.444 | 1.184 | 0.9947 | 2.10 | 2.81% | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
水稻常规种 | 96.495 | -446.761 | 4.485 | 0.9912 | 2.41 | 2.96% | 非常好 | |
水稻杂交种 | 96.669 | -143.495 | 1.451 | 0.9834 | 3.35 | 4.36% | 非常好 | |
小麦常规种 | 93.692 | -457.091 | 4.595 | 0.9975 | 1.43 | 1.91% | 非常好 | |
玉米杂交种 | 97.542 | -116.444 | 1.184 | 0.9947 | 2.10 | 2.81% | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
水稻 | 97.382 | -341.996 | 3.431 | 0.9667 | 4.32 | 5.33 | 好 | |
小麦 | 100.433 | -468.623 | 4.706 | 0.9928 | 2.58 | 3.41 | 非常好 | |
玉米 | 99.461 | -497.983 | 4.989 | 0.9774 | 2.90 | 3.22 | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
水稻 | 97.382 | -341.996 | 3.431 | 0.9667 | 4.32 | 5.33 | 好 | |
小麦 | 100.433 | -468.623 | 4.706 | 0.9928 | 2.58 | 3.41 | 非常好 | |
玉米 | 99.461 | -497.983 | 4.989 | 0.9774 | 2.90 | 3.22 | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
水稻常规种 | 98.904 | -32.151 | 0.353 | 0.9981 | 1.52 | 2.22 | 非常好 | |
水稻杂交种 | 100.331 | -27.919 | 0.321 | 0.9995 | 0.90 | 1.59 | 非常好 | |
小麦常规种 | 98.829 | -31.653 | 0.345 | 0.9952 | 2.39 | 3.42 | 非常好 | |
玉米杂交种 | 98.071 | -45.720 | 0.482 | 0.9935 | 2.43 | 3.06 | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
水稻常规种 | 98.904 | -32.151 | 0.353 | 0.9981 | 1.52 | 2.22 | 非常好 | |
水稻杂交种 | 100.331 | -27.919 | 0.321 | 0.9995 | 0.90 | 1.59 | 非常好 | |
小麦常规种 | 98.829 | -31.653 | 0.345 | 0.9952 | 2.39 | 3.42 | 非常好 | |
玉米杂交种 | 98.071 | -45.720 | 0.482 | 0.9935 | 2.43 | 3.06 | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
南方籼稻 | 101.302 | 25.321 | -2.148 | 0.9993 | 1.09 | 2.21 | 非常好 | |
北方粳稻 | 101.647 | 21.141 | -1.550 | 0.9987 | 1.41 | 2.91 | 非常好 | |
南方粳稻 | 103.978 | 19.894 | -1.521 | 0.9967 | 2.27 | 5.20 | 好 | |
小麦 | 103.949 | 21.425 | -1.792 | 0.9964 | 2.46 | 5.73 | 好 | |
北方玉米 | 101.153 | 16.422 | -1.390 | 0.9994 | 1.01 | 2.30 | 非常好 | |
南方玉米 | 103.279 | 23.788 | -1.968 | 0.9977 | 1.97 | 4.75 | 非常好 |
种子类别 | 模型参数估计 | 模型检验 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
C1 | C2 | C3 | R2 | RMSE | CDOM | 模拟精度 | ||
南方籼稻 | 101.302 | 25.321 | -2.148 | 0.9993 | 1.09 | 2.21 | 非常好 | |
北方粳稻 | 101.647 | 21.141 | -1.550 | 0.9987 | 1.41 | 2.91 | 非常好 | |
南方粳稻 | 103.978 | 19.894 | -1.521 | 0.9967 | 2.27 | 5.20 | 好 | |
小麦 | 103.949 | 21.425 | -1.792 | 0.9964 | 2.46 | 5.73 | 好 | |
北方玉米 | 101.153 | 16.422 | -1.390 | 0.9994 | 1.01 | 2.30 | 非常好 | |
南方玉米 | 103.279 | 23.788 | -1.968 | 0.9977 | 1.97 | 4.75 | 非常好 |
指标 | 种子类别 | 国家标准 | 标准修订建议 | 不同达标率下各指标的模拟阈值/% | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
阈值 /% | 样本 达标率% | 阈值 /% | 模拟 达标率% | 85% | 87% | 89% | 90% | 91% | 93% | 95% | |||
纯度 | 常规水稻 | 99.0 | 90.6 | 99.0 | 90.7 | 99.2 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.0 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 98.7 | |
杂交水稻 | 96.0 | 95.3 | 97.0 | 90.8 | 97.5 | 97.4 | 97.2 | 97.1 | 97.0 | 96.7 | 96.1 | ||
常规小麦 | 99.0 | 83.9 | 98.8 | 89.7 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 98.8 | 98.8 | 98.7 | 98.4 | 98.3 | ||
杂交玉米 | 96.0 | 91.7 | 96.0 | 91.8 | 96.7 | 96.6 | 96.4 | 96.3 | 96.1 | 95.8 | 95.3 | ||
净度 | 水稻 | 98.0 | 97.1 | 99.0 | 88.7 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 98.9 | 98.8 | 98.6 | |
小麦 | 99.0 | 94.3 | 99.0 | 94.3 | 99.2 | 99.2 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.0 | 99.0 | ||
玉米 | 99.0 | 97.8 | 99.4 | 88.4 | 99.5 | 99.4 | 99.4 | 99.4 | 99.3 | 99.3 | 99.2 | ||
发芽率 | 常规水稻 | 85.0 | 88.8 | 85.0 | 88.5 | 86.0 | 85.4 | 84.9 | 84.5 | 84.2 | 83.3 | 82.0 | |
杂交水稻 | 80.0 | 91.0 | 80.0 | 90.7 | 81.6 | 81.1 | 80.6 | 80.2 | 79.9 | 79.1 | 78.0 | ||
小麦 | 85.0 | 89.8 | 85.0 | 90.0 | 86.5 | 86.0 | 85.4 | 85.0 | 84.6 | 83.7 | 82.4 | ||
玉米 | 85.0 | 97.2 | 90.0 | 89.5 | 91.0 | 90.6 | 90.1 | 89.9 | 89.6 | 88.8 | 87.7 | ||
水分 | 籼稻 | 13.0 | 94.3 | 13.0 | 94.3 | 12.6 | 12.6 | 12.7 | 12.8 | 12.8 | 12.9 | 13.1 | |
北方粳稻 | 16.0 | 99.1 | 15.0 | 90.6 | 14.7 | 14.8 | 14.9 | 15.0 | 15.0 | 15.2 | 15.4 | ||
南方粳稻 | 14.5 | 93.2 | 14.5 | 93.2 | 14.1 | 14.2 | 14.3 | 14.3 | 14.4 | 14.5 | 14.6 | ||
小麦 | 13.0 | 90.0 | 13.0 | 90.1 | 12.8 | 12.9 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 13.1 | 13.3 | ||
北方玉米 | 16.0 | 100.0 | 13.2 | 88.3 | 13.0 | 13.1 | 13.2 | 13.3 | 13.4 | 13.6 | 13.8 | ||
南方玉米 | 13.0 | 88.6 | 13.2 | 92.9 | 12.9 | 12.9 | 13.0 | 13.1 | 13.1 | 13.2 | 13.3 |
指标 | 种子类别 | 国家标准 | 标准修订建议 | 不同达标率下各指标的模拟阈值/% | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
阈值 /% | 样本 达标率% | 阈值 /% | 模拟 达标率% | 85% | 87% | 89% | 90% | 91% | 93% | 95% | |||
纯度 | 常规水稻 | 99.0 | 90.6 | 99.0 | 90.7 | 99.2 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.0 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 98.7 | |
杂交水稻 | 96.0 | 95.3 | 97.0 | 90.8 | 97.5 | 97.4 | 97.2 | 97.1 | 97.0 | 96.7 | 96.1 | ||
常规小麦 | 99.0 | 83.9 | 98.8 | 89.7 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 98.8 | 98.8 | 98.7 | 98.4 | 98.3 | ||
杂交玉米 | 96.0 | 91.7 | 96.0 | 91.8 | 96.7 | 96.6 | 96.4 | 96.3 | 96.1 | 95.8 | 95.3 | ||
净度 | 水稻 | 98.0 | 97.1 | 99.0 | 88.7 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.0 | 98.9 | 98.9 | 98.8 | 98.6 | |
小麦 | 99.0 | 94.3 | 99.0 | 94.3 | 99.2 | 99.2 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.1 | 99.0 | 99.0 | ||
玉米 | 99.0 | 97.8 | 99.4 | 88.4 | 99.5 | 99.4 | 99.4 | 99.4 | 99.3 | 99.3 | 99.2 | ||
发芽率 | 常规水稻 | 85.0 | 88.8 | 85.0 | 88.5 | 86.0 | 85.4 | 84.9 | 84.5 | 84.2 | 83.3 | 82.0 | |
杂交水稻 | 80.0 | 91.0 | 80.0 | 90.7 | 81.6 | 81.1 | 80.6 | 80.2 | 79.9 | 79.1 | 78.0 | ||
小麦 | 85.0 | 89.8 | 85.0 | 90.0 | 86.5 | 86.0 | 85.4 | 85.0 | 84.6 | 83.7 | 82.4 | ||
玉米 | 85.0 | 97.2 | 90.0 | 89.5 | 91.0 | 90.6 | 90.1 | 89.9 | 89.6 | 88.8 | 87.7 | ||
水分 | 籼稻 | 13.0 | 94.3 | 13.0 | 94.3 | 12.6 | 12.6 | 12.7 | 12.8 | 12.8 | 12.9 | 13.1 | |
北方粳稻 | 16.0 | 99.1 | 15.0 | 90.6 | 14.7 | 14.8 | 14.9 | 15.0 | 15.0 | 15.2 | 15.4 | ||
南方粳稻 | 14.5 | 93.2 | 14.5 | 93.2 | 14.1 | 14.2 | 14.3 | 14.3 | 14.4 | 14.5 | 14.6 | ||
小麦 | 13.0 | 90.0 | 13.0 | 90.1 | 12.8 | 12.9 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 13.1 | 13.3 | ||
北方玉米 | 16.0 | 100.0 | 13.2 | 88.3 | 13.0 | 13.1 | 13.2 | 13.3 | 13.4 | 13.6 | 13.8 | ||
南方玉米 | 13.0 | 88.6 | 13.2 | 92.9 | 12.9 | 12.9 | 13.0 | 13.1 | 13.1 | 13.2 | 13.3 |
[1] |
王春平, 张万松, 陈翠云, 等. 中国种子生产程序的革新及种子质量标准新体系的构建[J]. 中国农业科学, 2005, 38(1):163-170.
|
[2] |
张万松, 王春平, 张爱民, 等. 国内外农作物种子质量标准体系比较[J]. 中国农业科学, 2011(5):884-897.
|
[3] |
朱佩, 王桂林, 李冰. 种子质量检验在现代种业体系中的发展与应用[J]. 种业导刊, 2008(5):18-19.
|
[4] |
晋芳, 金石桥, 周泽宇, 等. 中国种子质量和检验标准的现状与发展[J]. 中国种业, 2020(1):25-27.
|
[5] |
杜晓伟, 周泽宇, 胡从九, 等. 以新发展理念为统领加强种子质量标准体系建设[J]. 中国种业, 2019(4):1-5.
|
[6] |
张力科, 金石桥. 中国农作物种子质量现状与质量提升策略分析[J]. 中国种业, 2019(3):3-6.
|
[7] |
付玲, 高明鑫, 谭小莉, 等. 湖北省农作物种子质量监管现状、问题及建议措施[J]. 中国种业, 2020(7):19-23.
|
[8] |
中华人民共和国农业部. 粮食作物种子第1部分:禾谷类[S]. 全国农作物种子标准化技术委员会, 2008.
|
[9] |
唐启义. DPS数据处理系统.第一卷,基础统计及实验设计(第4版)[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2017.
|
[10] |
doi: 10.1016/S2095-3119(13)60206-3 URL |
[11] |
doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2015.02.010 URL |
[12] |
|
[13] |
曹卫星, 罗卫红. 作物系统模拟及智能管理[M]. 北京: 华文出版社, 2003.
|
[14] |
陈兵林, 曹卫星, 周治国. 棉花单铃干物质积累分配的分期动态模拟及检验[J]. 中国农业科学, 2006, 39(3):487-493.
|
[15] |
许乃银, 李健. GGE双标图的信息比校正原理与应用——以长江流域棉花品种生态区划分为例[J]. 中国生态农业学报, 2015, 23(9):1169-1177.
|
[16] |
doi: 10.1016/S0308-521X(03)00030-1 URL |
[17] |
许琨. 种子质量标准的确定方法研究[J]. 种子, 1995(4):14-18.
|
[18] |
王菁. 加强中国水稻种子质量体系建设的探讨[J]. 中国种业, 2018(4):1-4.
|
[19] |
盖钧镒, 刘康, 赵晋铭. 中国作物种业科学技术发展的评述[J]. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(17):3303-3315.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.17.001 |
[20] |
李恩普, 毛雪飞. 国外种子质量检验体系发展现状与启示[J]. 中国种业, 2011(8):8-11.
|
[21] |
李干琼, 董晓霞, 王启现. 加拿大种业管理经验与启示[J]. 种业导刊, 2011(1):37-40.
|
[22] |
晋芳, 赵建宗, 金石桥, 等. 中国种子企业检验室检验能力分析及提高检验室能力水平的对策[J]. 中国农技推广, 2018, 34(7):6-9.
|
[23] |
王惠玉, 侯军岐. 中国种业企业质量管理体系构建与实施[J]. 中国种业, 2021(3):7-9.
|
[24] |
王建华, 何志昆, 茹藓. 健康度检验在种子检验中的重要性及其发展[J]. 种子, 2002(1):41-43.
|
[25] |
成雪峰, 张凤云. 种子检验技术的现状与展望[J]. 种子, 2009(8):58-62.
|
[1] | ZHANG Zhong, MA Quanlin, ZHANG Dekui, WEI Linyuan, CHEN Fang, QI Fujun. Effects of Exogenous Hormone on Seed Germination of Agriophyllum squarrosum [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(9): 40-44. |
[2] | YANG Zhuoying, LIANG Xiaojing, ZENG Xiangyan, WEI Xiaojuan, WU Siyu, LI Baocai. Annual Growth Rhythm and Biomass Allocation of Cinnamomum cassia Presl Seedlings [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(8): 21-26. |
[3] | WU Longmei, ZHANG Yue, LIU Yan, ZOU Jixiang, YANG Taotao, BAO Xiaozhe, HUANG Qing, CHEN Qingchun, JIANG Yaozhi, LIANG Qiaoli, ZHANG Bin. Direct Seeding Rice: Research Progress and Development Strategy [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(6): 1-5. |
[4] | ZHENG Jian, RUI Danping, GAO Xianyu, ZHANG Huiyun, SONG Yunlian, PAN Jihong, YU Weilin, WANG Yuequan, LIU Siyuan, ZHENG Pingqing, LUO Xinping. Fruit Quality Performance of Litchi chinensis ‘Guiwei’ and Regional Test Cultivars in Yongde of Yunnan [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(4): 44-51. |
[5] | RUAN Mingju, WANG Rui, ZHANG Hui, YANG Yuege, ZENG Qianchun. Preliminary Study on Introduction of Moringa to Yuanmou of Yunnan [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(2): 16-21. |
[6] | TIAN Subo, GUO Yanchun, SONG Yuxiao, LI Chuanxing, WANG Kunting, LI Yingjie, GUO Jiajin, LIN Guiyu, DING Junyang, ZHANG Jingmin, HU Yongjun, XIA Haibo. Effects of Vegetable Straw Fermentation and Recycling Seedling Substrate on the Growth of Tomato Seedlings [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(16): 20-24. |
[7] | YUE Xinli, ZHAN Runsheng, NIU Yayu, WANG Hui, XING Baolong, MA Tao. Effects of NaCl Stress on Seed Germination and Seedling Growth of Daylily [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(16): 35-40. |
[8] | LIU Erxi, HU Zhongli, ZHAO Chufeng, WANG Lin, ZHU Yongyao, YANG Chaozhu. Study on Growth Characteristics and Suitable Harvest Period of Amorphophallus konjac Seeds [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(15): 46-51. |
[9] | HU Jingyu, FENG Guojun, LIU Dajun, YANG Xiaoxu, YAN Zhishan, LIU Chang. Effects of Exogenous Put on Seed Germination and Resistance of Snap Bean Seeds Under Salt Stress [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(15): 52-58. |
[10] | GUO Huihui, LIN Congfa, JIANG Yuanbin, XU Shaoxiang, LIN Zeyu, PAN Xianghua. Identification of Salt Tolerance for Sweet Potato Tissue Culture Seedlings [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(12): 21-27. |
[11] | ZHAO Jianan, CAO Xiaodong, SHANG Liping, TONG Xiaoli, LI Baojun, ZHAO Yajun, LUO Bin, WANG Hao. Effects of Picking Flowering Stalk on Agronomic Traits and Economic Benefits of Brassica napus L. [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(12): 28-34. |
[12] | LIU Yang, YANG Jiaqing, YU Xurun, XIONG Fei. miRNA in Regulating Seed Development and the Response to Abiotic Stress in Plant: A Review [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(12): 86-92. |
[13] | DAI Lvye, ZHANG Xin, TENG Yingzi, GU Yiyin, CHEN Li, KONG Xiaoping, HAN Yingyan. Effects of LED Light Intensity on Purple Leaf Lettuce Seedlings [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(10): 24-30. |
[14] | WEI Shasha, CHEN Lei, CUI Mengmeng, LI Qingbin, CAI Nadan, QIN Benben, QIU Jianrong. Correlation Between Seedling Cultivation Effects of Four Strawberry Varieties in Field and Meteorological Factors [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(10): 95-100. |
[15] | KANG Yunqiang, LI Lingling, XIE Junhong, ZHANG Jian, DU Changliang, ZECHARIAH Effah. Adaptability and Wind Erosion Resistance of Winter Rapeseed in Semi-arid Area of Central Gansu [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2023, 39(1): 31-36. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||