Excellent Beta vulgaris Germplasm Resources: Screening and Evaluation

doi:10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2021-0294

Abstract

Abstract:

This study aims at screening and evaluating excellent Beta vulgaris (sugar beet) germplasms, and providing reliable information for their scientific application in breeding. 277 sugar beet germplasms were divided based on eight main traits including root yield, sugar content, harmful non-sugar substances and main diseases’ resistance. The germplasms were screened and evaluated. 37 high yield type germplasms with beet yield over 52 t/hm² were screened out, as well as 88 high sugar type germplasms with sugar content over 17% were selected, out of which there were 4 high-yield and high-sugar ones, 21 high-yield and medium-sugar ones and 72 medium-yield and high-sugar ones. Harmful non-sugar substances of these germplasms were analyzed, resulted in 25 germplasms of low potassium (K) content (less than 3.79 mmol/100g), 96 of low sodium (Na) (less than 2.00 mmol/100g), and 49 of low α-nitrogen (α-N) (less than 4.76 mmol/100g). Among these germplasms, there were 4 with low content in both K and Na, 4 of low K and α-N content, 20 of low Na and α-N content, and 3 germplasms which were low in all the three harmful non-sugar substances. 10 germplasms were found to be highly resistant to Cercospora leaf spot (CLS) and moderately resistant to damping-off, 5 were highly resistant to CLS and resistant to root rot, 14 were resistant to CLS and moderately resistant to damping-off, 5 were resistant to both CLS and root rot, and 3 were resistant to CLS and moderately resistant to root rot. These results suggest that among current sugar beet germplasms, normal or high yield type ones are insufficient, while high sugar type ones are abundant; germplasms are sufficient in CLS resistance, while inadequate in damping-off and root rot resistance, and with flat resistant levels.

Key words: Beta vulgaris (sugar beet), excellent germplasm, screening, evaluation, root yield, sugar content, harmful non-sugar substances, disease resistance

CLC Number:

S566.3

Chen Li, Zhao Chunlei, Li Yanli, Wang Xi, Cui Ping. Excellent Beta vulgaris Germplasm Resources: Screening and Evaluation[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2021, 37(27): 45-52.

Figures/Tables 8

References 31

[1]	潘智, 杨枝煌. 中国甜菜糖业现状及其应对[J]. 中国糖料, 2014(01):68-73.
[2]	曲文章, 崔广臣, 陈连江, 等. 中国甜菜学[M]. 哈尔滨: 黑龙江人民出版社, 2003:19-30.
[3]	陈丽, 刘景泉, 程大友, 等. 优质抗病甜菜新品种中甜204的选育[J]. 中国糖料, 2001(2):3-5.
[4]	Saito K, Hosokawa S. Statistical analysis of resistance to leaf-spot disease (Cercospora beticola) in sugar beet[J]. Japanese journal of breeding [J]. 1964, 14(2):20-24.
[5]	Zhang Y F, Li G L, Wang X F, et al. Transcriptomic profiling of taproot growth and sucrose accumulation in sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L. ) at different developmental stages[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 12(4):e0175454. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175454 URL
[6]	高妙珍. 甜菜根重和含糖率相关关系的研究[J]. 中国糖料, 1995(1):16-19.
[7]	杨瑞红, 李占学. 甜菜含糖率与根重关系的研讨[J]. 中国甜菜糖业, 1994(4):9-12.
[8]	邵科, 李满红, 李国龙, 等. 甜菜生育期根重与含糖率增长关系及其变化规律的研究[J]. 中国甜菜糖业, 2018(1):1-9.
[9]	郑子英, 崔平. 甜菜品种资源的品质研究[J]. 中国甜菜糖业, 1994(3):16-19.
[10]	程大友, 伊尚武. 关于糖甜菜工艺品质的研究及其育种现状[J]. 中国甜菜, 1990(2):43-46.
[11]	Fernando Gil J, Liebe S, Thiel H, et al. Massive up-regulation of LBD transcription factors and EXPANSINs highlights the regulatory programs of rhizomania disease[J]. Mol Plant Pathol, 2018, 19(10):2333-2348. doi: 10.1111/mpp.12702 pmid: 30011123
[12]	Taguchi K, Ogata N, Kubo T, et al. Quantitative trait locus responsible for resistance to Aphanomyces root rot (black root) caused by Aphanomyces cochlioides Drechs. in sugar beet[J]. TheorAppl Genet, 2009, 118(2):227-34. doi: 10.1007/s00122-008-0891-3 URL
[13]	Vogel J, Kenter C, Holst C, et al. New Generation of Resistant Sugar Beet Varieties for Advanced Integrated Management of Cercospora Leaf Spot in Central Europe[J]. Front Plant Sci, 2018, 27, 9:222. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00222 URL
[14]	陈丽, 赵春雷, 李彦丽, 等. 中国甜菜主要种质资源抗病性鉴定与评价[J]. 中国农学通报, 2020, 36(26):14-21.
[15]	黎裕, 王天宇. 美国植物种质资源保护与研究利用[J]. 作物杂志, 2018(6):1-9.
[16]	Li J, Lühmann A K, Weißleder K, et al. Genome-wide distribution of genetic diversity and linkage disequilibrium in elite sugar beet germplasm[J]. BMC Genomics, 2011, 12:484. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-12-484 URL
[17]	刘景泉. 甜菜品质性状的遗传相关与评价方法[J]. 中国甜菜, 1990(1):51-57.
[18]	Prune P-E, Olivier G, Bruno D, et al. Discovery of interesting new polymorphisms in a sugar beet (elite exotic) progeny by comparison with an elite panel[J]. Theor Appl Genet., 2019, 132(11):3063-3078. doi: 10.1007/s00122-019-03406-0 URL
[19]	Ewa M W, Sławomir J K. Content of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in soil in a multi-annual fertilization regime[J]. Environ Monit Assess, 2020, 92(5):314.
[20]	Guy A, Eduardo B, Dudy B-Z. The sugar beet gene encoding the sodium/proton exchanger 1 (BvNHX1) is regulated by a MYB transcription factor[J]. Planta, 2010, 232(1):187-195. doi: 10.1007/s00425-010-1160-7 URL
[21]	乔志文. 甜菜褐斑病发生时间动态规律研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2019, 35(6):83-88.
[22]	乔志文, 陆安军, 韩成贵. 黑龙江省甜菜立枯病病区和品种抗病性分类研究[J]. 中国农学通报, 2018(34):152-158.
[23]	王叶琼, 於丽华, 王皙玮. 甜菜根腐病的发生及防治研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2017, 33(22):126-132.
[24]	乔志文, 张杰, 赵海英. 国外甜菜褐斑病、根腐病、黄化病毒病研究进展[J]. 中国糖料, 2011(3):55-59.
[25]	Monteiro F, Frese L, Castro S, et al. Genetic and Genomic Tools to Asssist Sugar Beet Improvement: The Value of the Crop Wild Relatives[J]. Front Plant Sci, 2018, 9:74. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2018.00074 pmid: 29467772
[26]	崔平. 中国甜菜种质资源性状特征及遗传多样性分析[J]. 中国糖料, 2010(3):46-48.
[27]	邹奕, 吴则东, 兴旺, 等. 甜菜种质资源遗传多样性研究进展[J]. 中国糖料, 2018(5):73-76,80.
[28]	崔平. 甜菜种质资源描述规范和数据标准[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006:76-83.
[29]	杨在中. 对甜菜单株后代观察株效的计算[J]. 中国甜菜糖业, 1998, 2:9-12
[30]	邓先勇, 陶胜国. 制糖废蜜糖分损失的影响因素及其计算[J]. 企业科技与发展, 2013(15):45-46.
[31]	何凤仪. 甜菜糖灰分的影响因素及其控制研究[D]. 广州:华南理工大学, 2009:16-22.

病害	高抗(HR)	抗病(R)	中抗(MR)	中感(MS)	感病(S)	高感(HS)
立枯病	-	DI≤3	3.0<DI≤6.0	-	6<DI≤9	DI>9
褐斑病	DI≤20	20<DI≤30	30<DI≤40	40<DI≤50	50<DI≤60	DI>60
根腐病	-	DI≤5.0	5<DI≤10	-	10<DI≤20	DI>20

病害	高抗(HR)	抗病(R)	中抗(MR)	中感(MS)	感病(S)	高感(HS)
立枯病	-	DI≤3	3.0<DI≤6.0	-	6<DI≤9	DI>9
褐斑病	DI≤20	20<DI≤30	30<DI≤40	40<DI≤50	50<DI≤60	DI>60
根腐病	-	DI≤5.0	5<DI≤10	-	10<DI≤20	DI>20

统计描述值	块根产量/ (t/hm²)	含糖率/%	钾含量/ (mmol/100g)	钠含量/ (mmol/100g)	α-N含量/ (mmol/100g)	立枯病病情指数	褐斑病病情指数	根腐病病情指数
平均	44.72	16.41	4.73	2.51	5.95	17.06	29.81	29.16
标准误差	0.38	0.07	0.05	0.05	0.08	0.52	0.71	0.76
标准差	6.28	1.09	0.86	0.88	1.26	8.70	11.88	12.58
变异系数	14.05	6.63	18.20	35.26	21.22	51.02	39.86	43.14
最小值	23.00	13.20	3.18	0.80	2.67	2.50	7.60	1.70
最大值	63.70	18.97	7.98	5.90	12.37	41.70	63.10	70.20
观测数	277	277	277	277	277	277	277	277

统计描述值	块根产量/ (t/hm²)	含糖率/%	钾含量/ (mmol/100g)	钠含量/ (mmol/100g)	α-N含量/ (mmol/100g)	立枯病病情指数	褐斑病病情指数	根腐病病情指数
平均	44.72	16.41	4.73	2.51	5.95	17.06	29.81	29.16
标准误差	0.38	0.07	0.05	0.05	0.08	0.52	0.71	0.76
标准差	6.28	1.09	0.86	0.88	1.26	8.70	11.88	12.58
变异系数	14.05	6.63	18.20	35.26	21.22	51.02	39.86	43.14
最小值	23.00	13.20	3.18	0.80	2.67	2.50	7.60	1.70
最大值	63.70	18.97	7.98	5.90	12.37	41.70	63.10	70.20
观测数	277	277	277	277	277	277	277	277

经济类型	划分标准		种质资源数量	平均块根产量/(t/hm²)	平均含糖率/%
经济类型	块根产量/t	含糖率/%	种质资源数量	平均块根产量/(t/hm²)	平均含糖率/%
高产高糖型(EZ)	[52,∞)	[17.0,∞)	4	53.10	17.61
高产中糖型(EN)	[52,∞)	[15.5,17.0)	21	54.46	16.02
高产低糖型(EL)	[52,∞)	(0,15.5)	12	55.22	14.50
中产高糖型(NZ)	[38,52)	[17.0,∞)	72	43.91	17.55
中产中糖型(NN)	[38,52)	[15.5,17.0)	98	45.15	16.41
中产低糖型(NL)	[38,52)	(0,15.5)	31	45.96	14.77
低产高糖型(LZ)	(0,38)	[17.0,∞)	12	35.85	17.49
低产中糖型(LN)	(0,38)	[15.5,17.0)	19	35.42	16.26
低产低糖型(LL)	(0,38)	(0,15.5)	8	31.91	14.64