
Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin ›› 2026, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (16): 200-208.doi: 10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-1040
Previous Articles Next Articles
A Yun1(
), CHEN Caijin2(
), TAN Yuchen3(
), TONG Jianfu1, SU Xiaohan1, LIU Huixiang1, ZHU Yongming1, HUANG Danni1
Received:2025-12-28
Revised:2026-05-08
Online:2026-08-25
Published:2026-08-20
CLC Number:
A Yun, CHEN Caijin, TAN Yuchen, TONG Jianfu, SU Xiaohan, LIU Huixiang, ZHU Yongming, HUANG Danni. Study on Agronomic Traits and Nutritional Quality of Poa Forages in Response to Water Deficit[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(16): 200-208.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.casb.org.cn/EN/10.11924/j.issn.1000-6850.casb2025-1040
| 性状 | 因素 | 均方 | F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鲜重 | 品种 | 0.03 | 32.71 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 0.21 | 271.11 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.00 | 4.42 | 0.01 | |
| 干重 | 品种 | 0.01 | 74.75 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 0.03 | 279.11 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.00 | 10.43 | 0.00 | |
| 株高 | 品种 | 26.67 | 40.32 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 140.21 | 211.96 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 2.93 | 4.43 | 0.01 | |
| 地上相对 含水量 | 品种 | 205.70 | 82.57 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 1108.47 | 444.94 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 22.46 | 9.02 | 0.00 |
| 性状 | 因素 | 均方 | F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鲜重 | 品种 | 0.03 | 32.71 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 0.21 | 271.11 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.00 | 4.42 | 0.01 | |
| 干重 | 品种 | 0.01 | 74.75 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 0.03 | 279.11 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.00 | 10.43 | 0.00 | |
| 株高 | 品种 | 26.67 | 40.32 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 140.21 | 211.96 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 2.93 | 4.43 | 0.01 | |
| 地上相对 含水量 | 品种 | 205.70 | 82.57 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 1108.47 | 444.94 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 22.46 | 9.02 | 0.00 |
| 性状 | 因素 | 均方 | F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 粗蛋白(CP) | 品种 | 3.92 | 24.37 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 20.53 | 127.81 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.39 | 2.40 | 0.08 | |
| 粗脂肪(EE) | 品种 | 0.09 | 6.81 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 1.75 | 132.80 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.11 | 8.22 | 0.00 | |
| 粗灰分(Ash) | 品种 | 1.58 | 12.99 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 2.37 | 19.50 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.42 | 3.44 | 0.02 | |
| 中性洗涤纤维(NDF) | 品种 | 11.28 | 10.82 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 119.82 | 114.93 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.81 | 0.78 | 0.55 | |
| 酸性洗涤纤维(ADF) | 品种 | 8.02 | 15.80 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 66.20 | 130.46 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.48 | 0.94 | 0.46 | |
| 相对饲喂价值(RFV) | 品种 | 80.73 | 21.10 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 842.88 | 220.35 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 5.05 | 1.32 | 0.29 |
| 性状 | 因素 | 均方 | F | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 粗蛋白(CP) | 品种 | 3.92 | 24.37 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 20.53 | 127.81 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.39 | 2.40 | 0.08 | |
| 粗脂肪(EE) | 品种 | 0.09 | 6.81 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 1.75 | 132.80 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.11 | 8.22 | 0.00 | |
| 粗灰分(Ash) | 品种 | 1.58 | 12.99 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 2.37 | 19.50 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.42 | 3.44 | 0.02 | |
| 中性洗涤纤维(NDF) | 品种 | 11.28 | 10.82 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 119.82 | 114.93 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.81 | 0.78 | 0.55 | |
| 酸性洗涤纤维(ADF) | 品种 | 8.02 | 15.80 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 66.20 | 130.46 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 0.48 | 0.94 | 0.46 | |
| 相对饲喂价值(RFV) | 品种 | 80.73 | 21.10 | 0.00 |
| 水分亏缺 | 842.88 | 220.35 | 0.00 | |
| 品种×水分亏缺 | 5.05 | 1.32 | 0.29 |
| 性状 | 正常供水 | 水分中度亏缺 | 水分中度亏缺 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD | LD | BJ | CD | LD | BJ | CD | LD | BJ | |||
| 鲜重 | 0.98 | 0.64 | 0.54 | 0.98 | 0.58 | 0.56 | 1.00 | 0.89 | 0.79 | ||
| 干重 | 0.97 | 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.97 | 0.46 | 0.54 | 0.99 | 0.68 | 0.77 | ||
| 株高 | 0.98 | 0.63 | 0.47 | 0.99 | 0.67 | 0.56 | 0.99 | 0.72 | 0.70 | ||
| 相对含水量RWC | 1.00 | 0.88 | 0.77 | 0.98 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 0.97 | 0.56 | 0.45 | ||
| 蛋白质CP | 0.99 | 0.76 | 0.73 | 1.00 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.98 | 0.56 | 0.53 | ||
| 粗脂肪EE | 0.97 | 0.78 | 1.00 | 0.78 | 0.99 | 0.67 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.65 | ||
| 相对饲喂价值RFV | 1.00 | 0.74 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.79 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.99 | ||
| 等权关联度值 | 0.98 | 0.70 | 0.71 | 0.96 | 0.69 | 0.65 | 0.98 | 0.75 | 0.70 | ||
| 加权关联度值 | 2.30 | 1.68 | 1.72 | 2.20 | 1.62 | 1.54 | 2.26 | 1.76 | 1.65 | ||
| 排序 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| 性状 | 正常供水 | 水分中度亏缺 | 水分中度亏缺 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CD | LD | BJ | CD | LD | BJ | CD | LD | BJ | |||
| 鲜重 | 0.98 | 0.64 | 0.54 | 0.98 | 0.58 | 0.56 | 1.00 | 0.89 | 0.79 | ||
| 干重 | 0.97 | 0.51 | 0.45 | 0.97 | 0.46 | 0.54 | 0.99 | 0.68 | 0.77 | ||
| 株高 | 0.98 | 0.63 | 0.47 | 0.99 | 0.67 | 0.56 | 0.99 | 0.72 | 0.70 | ||
| 相对含水量RWC | 1.00 | 0.88 | 0.77 | 0.98 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 0.97 | 0.56 | 0.45 | ||
| 蛋白质CP | 0.99 | 0.76 | 0.73 | 1.00 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.98 | 0.56 | 0.53 | ||
| 粗脂肪EE | 0.97 | 0.78 | 1.00 | 0.78 | 0.99 | 0.67 | 0.94 | 1.00 | 0.65 | ||
| 相对饲喂价值RFV | 1.00 | 0.74 | 0.99 | 1.00 | 0.79 | 0.91 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.99 | ||
| 等权关联度值 | 0.98 | 0.70 | 0.71 | 0.96 | 0.69 | 0.65 | 0.98 | 0.75 | 0.70 | ||
| 加权关联度值 | 2.30 | 1.68 | 1.72 | 2.20 | 1.62 | 1.54 | 2.26 | 1.76 | 1.65 | ||
| 排序 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | ||
| 性状 | 直接通径系数 | 鲜重 | 株高 | RWC | CP | EE | Ash | NDF | ADF | RFV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1→y | X2→y | X3→y | X4→y | X5→y | X6→y | X7→y | X8→y | X9→y | ||
| 鲜重 | 0.96 | 0.89 | 0.77 | 0.64 | -0.44 | -0.15 | -0.08 | -0.07 | 0.65 | |
| 株高 | 0.90 | 0.95 | 0.78 | 0.68 | -0.48 | -0.16 | -0.08 | -0.07 | 0.65 | |
| RWC | 0.92 | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.82 | -0.39 | -0.12 | -0.054 | -0.06 | 0.51 | |
| CP | 0.86 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.87 | -0.38 | -0.12 | -0.05 | -0.06 | 0.49 | |
| EE | -0.58 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.62 | 0.57 | -0.14 | -0.05 | -0.04 | 0.43 | |
| Ash | -0.18 | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.63 | 0.55 | -0.46 | -0.06 | -0.05 | 0.50 | |
| NDF | 0.09 | -0.84 | -0.78 | -0.562 | -0.51 | 0.33 | 0.11 | 0.06 | -0.69 | |
| ADF | 0.07 | -0.92 | -0.87 | -0.76 | -0.71 | 0.38 | 0.14 | 0.08 | -0.68 | |
| RFV | 0.70 | 0.8 | 0.83 | 0.67 | 0.60 | -0.36 | -0.13 | -0.09 | -0.07 |
| 性状 | 直接通径系数 | 鲜重 | 株高 | RWC | CP | EE | Ash | NDF | ADF | RFV |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| X1→y | X2→y | X3→y | X4→y | X5→y | X6→y | X7→y | X8→y | X9→y | ||
| 鲜重 | 0.96 | 0.89 | 0.77 | 0.64 | -0.44 | -0.15 | -0.08 | -0.07 | 0.65 | |
| 株高 | 0.90 | 0.95 | 0.78 | 0.68 | -0.48 | -0.16 | -0.08 | -0.07 | 0.65 | |
| RWC | 0.92 | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.82 | -0.39 | -0.12 | -0.054 | -0.06 | 0.51 | |
| CP | 0.86 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.87 | -0.38 | -0.12 | -0.05 | -0.06 | 0.49 | |
| EE | -0.58 | 0.73 | 0.73 | 0.62 | 0.57 | -0.14 | -0.05 | -0.04 | 0.43 | |
| Ash | -0.18 | 0.80 | 0.81 | 0.63 | 0.55 | -0.46 | -0.06 | -0.05 | 0.50 | |
| NDF | 0.09 | -0.84 | -0.78 | -0.562 | -0.51 | 0.33 | 0.11 | 0.06 | -0.69 | |
| ADF | 0.07 | -0.92 | -0.87 | -0.76 | -0.71 | 0.38 | 0.14 | 0.08 | -0.68 | |
| RFV | 0.70 | 0.8 | 0.83 | 0.67 | 0.60 | -0.36 | -0.13 | -0.09 | -0.07 |
| [1] |
景美玲, 马玉寿, 李世雄, 等. 早熟禾属3种牧草在祁连山区的适应性表现[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2014, 42(12):250-252.
|
| [2] |
杨慧茹, 马玉寿, 李世雄, 等. 青海草地早熟禾栽培草地植被特征及土壤物理性状动态[J]. 草业科学, 2011, 28(6):910-914.
|
| [3] |
何克燕, 王佳豪, 张燕, 等. 青海扁茎早熟禾形态特征与生物量对磷添加的响应[J]. 草业科学, 2022, 39(11):2414-2423.
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
doi: 10.1111/ele.v28.4 URL |
| [6] |
岑慧芳, 钱文武, 朱慧森, 等. 干旱胁迫对草地早熟禾叶片显微结构和光合特征的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2023, 31(5):1368-1377.
doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2023.05.011 |
| [7] |
王君玲, 刘颖. 草地早熟禾对干旱胁迫的响应研究进展[J]. 青海畜牧兽医杂志, 2022, 52(5):62-65.
|
| [8] |
蔺亚平, 杨成行, 苏家豪, 等. 6种高寒禾草对干旱胁迫的生理响应及抗旱性评价[J]. 草业科学, 2021, 38(12):2397-2405.
|
| [9] |
侯云鹏, 张明, 文殷花, 等. 干旱缺水对陇中旱作区饲草型小黑麦产量及营养品质的影响[J]. 寒旱农业科学, 2025, 4(1):34-38.
|
| [10] |
李想, 张紫森, 徐冰, 等. 拉萨河谷喷灌不同灌溉量对小黑麦生物量与品质的影响分析[J]. 节水灌溉, 2023(1):91-97.
|
| [11] |
孔建禄, 曾湧, 李世成, 等. 干旱胁迫对玉米生长、生理指标及品质的影响[J]. 玉米科学, 2023, 31(4):91-98.
|
| [12] |
何佩瑾, 孙安妮, 李琳, 等. 干旱胁迫和复水对大豆叶片光合特性及品质产量的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2025:1-11.
|
| [13] |
鲍士旦. 土壤农化分析[M]. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000:257-357.
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
doi: 10.1186/s12870-025-07742-w |
| [16] |
张杰雪, 王占青, 全小龙, 等. 5种禾草种子萌发及幼苗生长对干旱胁迫的响应和抗旱性评价[J]. 草原与草坪, 2022, 42(1):21-28.
|
| [17] |
李积兰, 李希来, 魏卫东, 等. 干旱胁迫对青海冷地早熟禾和青海中华羊茅丸粒种子幼苗生长的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2015, 24(10):143-149.
|
| [18] |
doi: 10.3390/agronomy15122719 URL |
| [19] |
作建芬, 林益超, 刘维维, 等. 聚乙二醇-6000模拟干旱胁迫对三种牧草种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 生态学报, 2025, 45(13):6414-6426.
|
| [20] |
顾涛, 包赛很那, 韩有健, 等. 干旱胁迫对3种禾本科牧草种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 种子, 2024, 43(12):123-127.
|
| [21] |
包明芳, 秦燕, 陈彩锦, 等. 111份紫花苜蓿种质资源苗期表型抗旱性鉴定评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58(19):3825-3836.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.19.003 |
| [22] |
张然, 李佳缙, 王铭, 等. 11份草地早熟禾种质材料对PEG-6000胁迫的生理响应和耐旱性评价[J]. 草原与草坪, 2021, 41(2):113-121.
|
| [23] |
周豪, 王君玲, 刘颖, 等. 干旱胁迫对青海草地早熟禾光合作用的影响[J]. 青海大学学报, 2025, 43(1):24-29.
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
孙宇阳. 基于PEG模拟与自然干旱胁迫的无芒雀麦种质抗旱性评价及生理响应研究[D]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆农业大学, 2025:21-27.
|
| [26] |
汪精海, 齐广平, 康燕霞, 等. 干旱半干旱地区紫花苜蓿营养品质对水分胁迫的响应[J]. 草业科学, 2017, 34(1):112-118.
|
| [27] |
郭莹, 杨芳萍, 张雪婷, 等. 六倍体小黑麦在甘肃生态区域的生产潜力及饲用特性综合评价[J]. 草业科学, 2022, 39(4):1-9.
|
| [28] |
doi: 10.1017/S0029665114001566 URL |
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
doi: 10.1002/jsfa.6709 pmid: 24771545 |
| [32] |
于明含, 杨蕾, 吕慧, 等. 幼苗期梭梭对干旱胁迫的响应及其耐旱阈值分析[J]. 生态学报, 2025(3):1-9.
|
| [33] |
王兴荣, 张彦军, 陈光荣, 等. 干旱胁迫对大豆光合、产量及品质的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023(2):150-159.
|
| [34] |
doi: 10.3390/app9030499 URL |
| [35] |
|
| [1] | LIAO Yuanyuan, ZHENG Zhangyun, ZHANG Zitao, CHEN Li, XIA Chuanlin, REN Jiequn, TAN Lixin. Analysis of Phenotypic and Leaf Nutritional Traits of 42 Mulberry Germplasm Resources [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(4): 105-116. |
| [2] | WANG Yueqing, LI Lifeng, WANG Jieqiong, YUE Yulu, LU Jiading, CAI Haixia, YANG Zhibo, LI Defeng. Study on Production Performance of Forage Oats in Western Henan Under Late Sowing Condition [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(12): 162-169. |
| [3] | ZENG Hongli, ZHANG Zhaohui, SHI Shihua, TAN Zhengbao, ZHU Baoxie, WANG Xiaoli, WEI Xiaoxing. Comprehensive Evaluation of Adaptability of 13 Forage Oat Varieties in Saline-alkali Soils of Qaidam Desert [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2026, 42(10): 163-170. |
| [4] | DANG Haihong, HE Keyan, HE Lili, LI Jiyun, WANG Jiahao, WANG Xiaoli, WANG Qian, WEI Xiaoxing. Comprehensive Evaluation of Production Performance and Nutritional Value of Eight Oat Varieties in Maduo Region [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(34): 112-120. |
| [5] | HUANG Lijia, ZHANG Zhaojuan, GUO Yuchun, ZHANG Xin. Analysis of Main Characters and SSR Genetic Diversity of 14 Color Potato Varieties [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(32): 17-22. |
| [6] | XIANG Weiwei, WANG Yusi, PENG Jun, WANG Jianwu, CHEN Hua. Effects of Two Rhizosphere Promoting Bacteria on Nutritional Quality of Rice [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(3): 158-164. |
| [7] | ZHANG Penghui, ZENG Chunxiao, KE Jing, CHEN Xiaowen, WANG Jun, YAN Xin, CHEN Liting, WANG Chenghui. Analysis of Hybridization Effects Between Oujiang Color Common Carps with Different Body Colors and Wild Common Carp [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(29): 146-156. |
| [8] | BEI Yitong, ZHANG Xiaoying, WANG Kuanhao, GAO Jinxu, SUN Xinbo. Research Progress of Crop Production Based on Remote Sensing Technology [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(27): 149-156. |
| [9] | QI Ruchun, WANG Jing, ZHANG Jinmei, LIU Jili, SUN Haojie. Selection of Salt-tolerant Silage Maize Varieties in Saline-alkali Land of Ningxia Yellow River Irrigation Area [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(24): 20-29. |
| [10] | LIU Yu, LI Xinxin, PAN Xingliang, WANG Chongqing, ZHANG Wen, LIANG Jingbo, LI Fuhuang, LIU Jun. Potential Mechanism of Yeast Improving Production Performance of Laying Hens Based on Transcriptome Technology [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(24): 104-110. |
| [11] | MENG Fanqi, LI Ke, WANG Qing, LIU Yongpeng, MA Chunye, SUN Jian, HUANG Dahua, LIU Zhijian, ZHANG Yongyue. Quality Changes of Dual-purpose Sweet Potato During Storage Period [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(23): 139-144. |
| [12] | HAN Chengwei, HAO Futing, FU Guilin, XUE Faxin, ZHANG Yan, SONG Chunlin, WU Qiuping, JIANG Fei. Effects of Different Fertilization Methods on Yield and Quality of Waxy Corn, Soil Fertility and Economic Benefits [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(22): 7-12. |
| [13] | WEN Junli, CHEN Qin, GUO Yuanyuan, ZHANG Li, LI Yang, KANG Dexian, SONG Huanzhong, CHEN Zhendong. Effects of Cultivation Methods on Growth and Quality of Water Spinach [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2025, 41(18): 65-74. |
| [14] | DAI Xinyu, LIU Cong, LI Qi, DEKYI Droma, WU Dongli. Study on Drought of Spring Maize Based on Scintillation Flux and Soil Moisture [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(8): 68-73. |
| [15] | ZHOU Hanlin, WU Chun, ZHANG Gaowei, WANG Xuanpeng. Effects Comparison of MABR Membranes and Microecological Preparations on Water Quality and its Nutrient Quality in Eriocheir sinensis Ponds [J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2024, 40(32): 157-164. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||