Impacting Factors of Lodging Resistance and Yield of Wheat: The Genetic and Correlation Study

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2020-0103

Abstract

Abstract:

The aim is to provide a basis for improving lodging resistance and yield of wheat. 82 recombinant inbred lines (RILs) from the same combination of Triticum dicoccoides were used as materials. The correlation between lodging resistance impacting factors and yield of wheat were analyzed in the test station of Northwest A & F University. The results showed that: (1) there was a negative correlation between plant height and lodging resistance, while there was a positive correlation between stem thickness and lodging resistance; the order of the lodging resistance of the characters was: plant height>stem thickness>grain weight per spike>grain weight per plant; (2) the grain width and grain number per spike were extremely and significantly correlated to grain weight per spike (0.413^**, 0.767^**); (3) lodging decreased thousand kernels weight and grain weight per panicle resulting in yield reduction; (4) the hybrid segregation generations of the impacting factors of lodging resistance and yield factors, such as spikelets, kernels per spike, grain number per spike, showed the genetic characteristics of closing to low parent, the frequency of descendants close to high parent was 1.5988%, the minimum of plants should be kept at 120 in F₂. Thicker stem wall, moderate plant height, bigger and fuller kernel as well as grain number per spike should be selected in hybrid segregation generations for lodging resistance and high yield in breeding.

Key words: wheat, stem thickness, lodging resistance, yield factors, genetic characteristics

CLC Number:

S512.1

Wang Rui, Duan Shaowei, Guo Yong, Kong Lingrang, Zhang Yongke. Impacting Factors of Lodging Resistance and Yield of Wheat: The Genetic and Correlation Study[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(6): 24-29.

Figures/Tables 5

References 22

[1]	Kelbert A J, Spaner D, Briggs K G, et al. The association of culm anatomy with lodging susceptibility in modern spring wheat genotypes[J]. Euphytica, 2004. doi: 10.1007/s10681-017-2012-3 URL pmid: 32009665
[2]	Wang J, Zhu J, Lin Q, et al. Effects of stem structure and cell wall components on bending strength in wheat[J]. Science Bulletin, 2006,51(7):815-823.
[3]	姚金保, 张平平, 任丽娟, 等. 小麦抗倒指数遗传及其与茎秆特性的相关分析[J]. 作物学报, 2011,37(3):452-458
[4]	Berry P M, Berry S T. Understanding the genetic control of lodging-associated plant characters in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)[J]. Euphytica, 2015,205(3):671-689.
[5]	Tomm G O, Didonet A D, Sandri J L, et al. Lodging in Wheat: Relationships with Soil Fertility and Plant Characteristics in Southern Brazil//Wheat in a Global Environment January 2001[M]. 2001: 647-653.
[6]	Vashchenko V F, Serkin N V, Nam V V. Influence of exogenous phytohormone on the productivity and adaptation of winter barley varieties to lodging[J]. Russian Agricultural ences, 2014,40(3):175-176.
[7]	Berry PM S J G A. A comparison of root and stem lodging risks among winter wheat cultivars[J]. Agric Sci, 2003: 141-191.
[8]	Berry P M, Kendall S, Rutterford Z, et al. Historical analysis of the effects of breeding on the height of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) and consequences for lodging[J]. Euphytica, 2015,203(2):375-383.
[9]	Valentine J J D J J. Genetic improvement in oats with specific reference to winter-hardiness and lodging resistance of winter oats and improvement of naked oats[J]. HGCA Research Project No 145.Home-Grown Cereals Authority, London, 1997.
[10]	Easson DL W E P S. The effects of weather, seed rate and cultivar on lodging and yield in winter wheat[J]. Agric Sci, 1993,121:145-156.
[11]	Weibel RO P J. Effect of artificial lodging on winter wheat grain yield and quality[J]. Agron J, 1964,56:487-488.
[12]	Stapper M F R. Genotype, sowing date and plant spacing influence on high-yielding irrigated wheat in southern New South Wales. II. Growth, yield and nitrogen use[J]. Aust, 1990,41:1021-1041.
[13]	Fischer RA S M. Lodging effects on high yielding crops of irrigated semi-dwarf wheat[J]. Field Crops Res, 1987,17:245-248.
[14]	邱献锟, 赵基洪, 牛宏伟, 等. 水稻大粒种质单穗重与穗部性状相关及回归分析[J]. 现代农业科技, 2013(18):16-17.
[15]	陈玉花, 张清山, 陆博. 小麦茎秆与单穗重的相关性分析[J]. 数学的实践与认识, 2012(05):75-79.
[16]	董琦, 王爱萍, 梁素明. 小麦基部茎节形态结构特征与抗倒性的研究[J]. 山西农业大学学报:自然科学版, 2003(03):188-191.
[17]	王晖, 陈佳慧, 王文文, 等. 小麦籽粒构型与粒重性状的遗传分析[J]. 山东农业科学, 2011(11):13-16.
[18]	闵东红, 王辉, 孟超敏, 等. 不同株高小麦品种抗倒伏性与其亚性状及产量相关性研究[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2001(04):76-79.
[19]	朱新开, 郭文善, 李春燕, 等. 小麦株高及其构成指数与产量及品质的相关性[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2009(06):1034-1038.
[20]	Berry P M, Sylvester-Bradley R, Berry S. Ideotype design for lodging-resistant wheat[J]. Euphytica, 2007,154(1-2):165-179.
[21]	蒋雪峰, 赵健伍, 杨璐, 等. 对小麦发育后期茎秆抗倒性问题的研究[J]. 数学的实践与认识, 2012(15):1-11.
[22]	于雪, 张万琴, 陆博, 等. 小麦茎杆抗倒伏的模型分析[J]. 河南科技学院学报:自然科学版, 2013(6):33-36.

类型	株高均值/cm	0.05差异显著性	茎秆外径/mm	茎壁厚度/mm	0.05差异显著性	品系数
站杆	95.53	a	7.6	1.39	a	32
成熟期倒伏	116.46	b	7.3	1.19	a	31
抽穗期倒伏	119.57	b	7.1	1.13	b	19
总计	109.00					82

类型	株高均值/cm	0.05差异显著性	茎秆外径/mm	茎壁厚度/mm	0.05差异显著性	品系数
站杆	95.53	a	7.6	1.39	a	32
成熟期倒伏	116.46	b	7.3	1.19	a	31
抽穗期倒伏	119.57	b	7.1	1.13	b	19
总计	109.00					82

倒伏类型	单穗重/g	0.05差异显著性	单株重/g	0.05差异显著性	标准偏差	观测数量
0-0	1.7789	a	24.2824	a	0.37627	38
0-1	1.5579	b	22.5459	a	0.28820	39
1-1	1.3440	b	31.6640	a	0.18420	5
总计	1.6473				0.35066	82

倒伏类型	单穗重/g	0.05差异显著性	单株重/g	0.05差异显著性	标准偏差	观测数量
0-0	1.7789	a	24.2824	a	0.37627	38
0-1	1.5579	b	22.5459	a	0.28820	39
1-1	1.3440	b	31.6640	a	0.18420	5
总计	1.6473				0.35066	82

模型		截距	通径系数	回归系数	t	否定显著性的概率	t_0.05,_n-m_-1
1	单株重	-0.709	0.204	0.009	1.912	0.060	1.992
	成熟期茎壁厚		0.063	0.128	0.610	0.544
	株高		0.418	0.015	4.288	0.000
	单穗重		-0.381	-0.544	-3.333	0.001
2	单株重	-0.585	0.192	0.009	1.841	0.069	1.991
	株高		0.417	0.015	4.296	0.000
	单穗重		-0.353	-0.505	-3.385	0.001
3	株高	-0.449	0.393	0.014	4.027	0.000	1.990
3	单穗重		-0.279	-0.399	-2.858	0.005