不同抗旱基因对小麦千粒质量的影响

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20193893

华北农学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (3): 69-76. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193893

所属专题： 小麦；抗旱节水；生物技术；栽培生理；

• 耕作栽培·生理生化 • 上一篇下一篇

不同抗旱基因对小麦千粒质量的影响

杨锴¹^,², 程小虎³, 赵杰², 黄冀楠², 于翠红², 张丽², 胡梦芸², 孙丽静², 李辉², 王清涛¹, 张颖君²

¹ 河北工程大学园林与生态工程学院,河北邯郸 056038
² 河北省农林科学院粮油作物研究所,河北省作物遗传育种实验室,河北石家庄 050035
³ 定西市农业科学研究院,甘肃定西 743000

收稿日期:2022-11-28 出版日期:2023-06-28
通讯作者:
王清涛(1979-),男,山东聊城人,讲师,博士,主要从事园艺生态学研究。
张颖君(1977-),男,河北固安人,副研究员,博士,主要从事小麦分子育种研究。
作者简介:
杨锴(1997-),男,黑龙江黑河人,硕士,主要从事小麦分子生物学研究。
杨锴、程小虎为同等贡献作者。
基金资助:
河北省农林科学院科技创新专项课题(2022KJCXZX-LYS-1); 河北省农林科学院科技创新专项课题(2022KJCXZX-LYS-20); 河北省省级科技计划(20326345D); 河北省省级科技计划(C2020402022); 河北省省级科技计划(C2022301004); 现代种业科技创新专项-小麦现代种业科技创新团队(21326318D); 河北省现代农业产业技术体系项目(HBCT2018010201); 河北省农林科学院科技创新人才队伍建设(C21R0311)

Effect of Different Drought Resistance Genes on Thousand Grains Weight of Wheat

YANG Kai¹^,², CHENG Xiaohu³, ZHAO Jie², HUANG Jinan², YU Cuihong², ZHANG Li², HU Mengyun², SUN Lijing², LI Hui², WNAG Qingtao¹, ZHANG Yingjun²

¹ School of Landscape and Ecological Engineering,Hebei University of Engineering,Handan 056038,China
² Institute of Cereal and Oil Crops,Hebei Academy of Agriculture and Forestry Sciences,Hebei Provincial Laboratory of Crop Genetics and Breeding,Shijiazhuang 050035,China
³ Dingxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences,Dingxi 743000,China

Received:2022-11-28 Published:2023-06-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了阐明不同抗旱基因对小麦粒质量的影响,以352份黄淮麦区主栽品种(或品系)为试验材料,设置正常灌溉和干旱2个试验处理,从2019-2021年连续3 a进行小麦粒质量数据调查。分别利用1-fehw3、TaDreb-B1和Cwi-4A 3个抗旱基因的KASP标记对试验材料进行检测,研究不同抗旱基因对小麦粒质量的影响。结果显示,3个基因的KASP标记可以对试验材料进行很好的基因分型,1-fehw3和Cwi-4A基因的KASP标记分型效果比TaDreb-B1基因标记更优。1-fehw3、TaDreb-B1和Cwi-4A 3个基因的优势等位基因型分布频率分别为36.9%,41.1%,35.1%。利用1-fehw3、TaDreb-B1和Cwi-4A 3个基因进行单独检测时,在不同年份和不同条件下,抗旱基因型与不抗旱基因型品种间千粒质量均未达到显著水平。当以2个基因进行联合检测时,1-fehw3+TaDreb-B1在2019年正常灌溉和2020年干旱2个环境下抗旱基因型较不抗旱基因型千粒质量达到显著水平;1-fehw3+Cwi-4A在2019干旱和2020干旱2个环境下千粒质量达到显著水平;TaDreb-B1+Cwi-4A在2020年干旱环境下千粒质量达到显著水平。当以1-fehw3、TaDreb-B1和Cwi-4A 3个基因进行联合检测时,除2020年正常灌溉条件之外其余5个环境下抗旱基因型千粒质量均显著高于不抗旱基因型。结果表明,由于抗旱性是由多基因控制的复杂性状,单个抗旱基因对小麦抗旱性的贡献率较小,但通过分子标记辅助选择手段进行多个基因聚合育种,可以显著提高小麦抗旱性。

关键词: 小麦, 抗旱基因, 千粒质量

Abstract:

To clarify the effect of different drought resistance genes on wheat grain weight, 352 main varieties (or lines) in Huang and Huai Valley wheat region were used as experimental materials. Two experimental treatments were designed, normal irrigation and drought condition. Grain weight data were investigated for three consecutive years from 2019 to 2021. KASP markers of three drought resistance genes (1-fehw3, TaDreb-B1 and Cwi-4A) were used to genotype the experimental materials, and the effects of different drought resistance genes on wheat grain weight were studied. The results showed that the KASP markers of the three genes could be used for genotyping of the experimental materials, and the effects of KASP marker of 1-fehw3 and Cwi-4A genes were better than that of TaDreb-B1 gene. The distribution frequency of the dominant alleles of 1-fehw3,TaDreb-B1 and Cwi-4A genes was 36.9%, 41.1% and 35.1%, respectively. When genotyping by single gene marker, the thousand grain weight between drought resistant and susceptible genotypes did not reach a significant level in different years and conditions. When tested using two gene markers, 1-fehw3+TaDreb-B1 showed significant differences in thousand grains weight between drought resistant and susceptible genotypes under normal irrigation in 2019 and drought in 2020; 1-fehw3+Cwi-4A reached a significant level in the 2019 and 2020 drought environments; TaDreb-B1+Cwi-4A achieved a significant level in 2020 drought environment. When tested using three genes (1-fehw3, TaDreb-B1 and Cwi-4A) markers, the thousand grains weight of drought resistant genotypes was significantly higher than that of drought susceptible genotypes in all five environments except for irrigation conditions in 2020. The results indicated that because drought resistance was a complex trait controlled by multiple genes, the contribution of a single drought resistance gene to wheat drought resistance was relatively small. However, using molecular marker assisted selection for multi gene pyramiding breeding could significantly improve wheat drought resistance.

Key words: Wheat, Drought resistant genes, Thousand grains weight

杨锴, 程小虎, 赵杰, 黄冀楠, 于翠红, 张丽, 胡梦芸, 孙丽静, 李辉, 王清涛, 张颖君. 不同抗旱基因对小麦千粒质量的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(3): 69-76. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193893.

YANG Kai, CHENG Xiaohu, ZHAO Jie, HUANG Jinan, YU Cuihong, ZHANG Li, HU Mengyun, SUN Lijing, LI Hui, WNAG Qingtao, ZHANG Yingjun. Effect of Different Drought Resistance Genes on Thousand Grains Weight of Wheat[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2023, 38(3): 69-76. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20193893.

http://www.hbnxb.net/CN/Y2023/V38/I3/69

图/表 9

参考文献 35

[1]	Boyer J S. Plant productivity and environment[J]. Science, 1982, 218(4571):443-448. doi:10.1126/science.218.4571.443. doi: 10.1126/science.218.4571.443 pmid: 17808529
[2]	Valliyodan B, Nguyen H T. Understanding regulatory networks and engineering for enhanced drought tolerance in plants[J]. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 2006, 9(2):189-195.doi:10.1016/j.pbi.2006.01.019. doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2006.01.019 pmid: 16483835
[3]	Baldoni E, Genga A, Cominelli E. Plant MYB transcription factors:Their role in drought response mechanisms[J]. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2015, 16(7):15811-15851.doi:10.3390/ijms160715811. doi: 10.3390/ijms160715811 pmid: 26184177
[4]	Castilhos G, Lazzarotto F, Spagnolo-Fonini L, Bodanese-Zanettini M H, Margis-Pinheiro M. Possible roles of basic helix-loop-helix transcription factors in adaptation to drought[J]. Plant Science, 2014, 223:1-7.doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.02.010. doi: 10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.02.010 pmid: 24767109
[5]	Chen L G, Song Y, Li S J, Zhang L P, Zou C S, Yu D Q. The role of WRKY transcription factors in plant abiotic stresses[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2012, 1819(2):120-128.doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.09.002. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.09.002 pmid: 21964328
[6]	Mizoi J, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. AP2/ERF family transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2012, 1819(2):86-96.doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.08.004. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.08.004 pmid: 21867785
[7]	Nakashima K, Takasaki H, Mizoi J, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. NAC transcription factors in plant abiotic stress responses[J]. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta, 2012, 1819(2):97-103.doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.10.005. doi: 10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.10.005 pmid: 22037288
[8]	Nakashima K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Shinozaki K. The transcriptional regulatory network in the drought response and its crosstalk in abiotic stress responses including drought,cold,and heat[J]. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2014, 5:170.doi:10.3389/fpls.2014.00170. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2014.00170 pmid: 24904597
[9]	Wu Y R, Deng Z Y, Lai J B, Zhang Y Y, Yang C P, Yin B J, Zhao Q Z, Zhang L, Li Y, Yang C W, Xie Q. Dual function of Arabidopsis ATAF1 in abiotic and biotic stress responses[J]. Cell Research, 2009, 19(11):1279-1290.doi:10.1038/cr.2009.108. doi: 10.1038/cr.2009.108
[10]	Sakuma Y, Maruyama K, Qin F, Osakabe Y, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K. Dual function of an Arabidopsis transcription factor DREB2A in water-stress-responsive and heat-stress-responsive gene expression[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2006, 103(49):18822-18827.doi:10.1073/pnas.0605639103. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0605639103 pmid: 17030801
[11]	Zhang Z Y, Liu X, Wang X D, Zhou M P, Zhou X Y, Ye X G, Wei X N. An R2R3 MYB transcription factor in wheat,TaPIMP1,mediates host resistance to Bipolaris sorokiniana and drought stresses through regulation of defense-and stress-related genes[J]. The New Phytologist, 2012, 196(4):1155-1170.doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04353.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2012.04353.x URL
[12]	Raineri J, Wang S H, Peleg Z, Blumwald E, Chan R L. The rice transcription factor OsWRKY47 is a positive regulator of the response to water deficit stress[J]. Plant Molecular Biology, 2015, 88(4/5):401-413.doi:10.1007/s11103-015-0329-7. doi: 10.1007/s11103-015-0329-7 URL
[13]	Lawson T, Blatt M R. Stomatal size,speed,and responsiveness impact on photosynthesis and water use efficiency[J]. Plant Physiology, 2014, 164(4):1556-1570.doi:10.1104/pp.114.237107. doi: 10.1104/pp.114.237107 pmid: 24578506
[14]	Farquhar G D, Ehleringer J R, Hubick K T. Carbon isotope discrimination and photosynthesis[J]. Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology, 1989, 40:503-537.doi:10.1146/annurev.pp.40.060189.002443. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pp.40.060189.002443 URL
[15]	Franks P J, Adams M A, Amthor J S, Barbour M M, Berry J A, Ellsworth D S, Farquhar G D, Ghannoum O, Lloyd J, McDowell N, Norby R J, Tissue D T, von Caemmerer S.Sensitivity of plants to changing atmospheric CO₂ concentration:From the geological past to the next century[J]. The New Phytologist, 2013, 197(4):1077-1094.doi:10.1111/nph.12104. doi: 10.1111/nph.12104 URL
[16]	Des Marais D L, Auchincloss L C, Sukamtoh E, McKay J K, Logan T, Richards J H, Juenger T E. Variation in MPK12 affects water use efficiency in Arabidopsis and reveals a pleiotropic link between guard cell size and ABA response[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2014, 111(7):2836-2841.doi:10.1073/pnas.1321429111. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1321429111 pmid: 24550314
[17]	Chaerle L, Saibo N, Van Der Straeten D.Tuning the pores:Towards engineering plants for improved water use efficiency[J]. Trends in Biotechnology, 2005, 23(6):308-315.doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2005.04.005. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2005.04.005 pmid: 15922083
[18]	Geiger D, Scherzer S, Mumm P, Stange A, Marten I, Bauer H, Ache P, Matschi S, Liese A, Al-Rasheid K A S, Romeis T, Hedrich R. Activity of guard cell anion channel SLAC1 is controlled by drought-stress signaling kinase-phosphatase pair[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009, 106(50):21425-21430.doi:10.1073/pnas.0912021106. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0912021106 pmid: 19955405
[19]	Mustilli A C, Merlot S, Vavasseur A, Fenzi F, Giraudat J. Arabidopsis OST1 protein kinase mediates the regulation of stomatal aperture by abscisic acid and acts upstream of reactive oxygen species production[J]. The Plant Cell, 2002, 14(12):3089-3099.doi:10.1105/tpc.007906. doi: 10.1105/tpc.007906 URL
[20]	Yang Z Y, Liu J H, Tischer S V, Christmann A, Windisch W, Schnyder H, Grill E. Leveraging abscisic acid receptors for efficient water use in Arabidopsis[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113(24):6791-6796.doi:10.1073/pnas.1601954113. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1601954113
[21]	Cutler S R, Rodriguez P L, Finkelstein R R, Abrams S R. Abscisic acid:emergence of a core signaling network[J]. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 2010, 61:651-679.doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112122. doi: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112122 pmid: 20192755
[22]	Zhao Y, Chan Z L, Gao J H, Xing L, Cao M J, Yu C M, Hu Y L, You J, Shi H T, Zhu Y F, Gong Y H, Mu Z X, Wang H Q, Deng X, Wang P C, Bressan R A, Zhu J K. ABA receptor PYL9 promotes drought resistance and leaf senescence[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016, 113(7):1949-1954.doi:10.1073/pnas.1522840113. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1522840113 pmid: 26831097
[23]	Pizzio G A, Rodriguez L, Antoni R, Gonzalez-Guzman M, Yunta C, Merilo E, Kollist H, Albert A, Rodriguez P L. The PYL4 A194T mutant uncovers a key role of PYR1-LIKE4/PROTEIN PHOSPHATASE 2CA interaction for abscisic acid signaling and plant drought resistance[J]. Plant Physiology, 2013, 163(1):441-455.doi:10.1104/pp.113.224162. doi: 10.1104/pp.113.224162 pmid: 23864556
[24]	Santiago J, Rodrigues A, Saez A, Rubio S, Antoni R, Dupeux F, Park S Y, Márquez J A, Cutler S R, Rodriguez P L. Modulation of drought resistance by the abscisic acid receptor PYL5 through inhibition of clade A PP2Cs[J]. The Plant Journal, 2009, 60(4):575-588.doi:10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.03981.x. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2009.03981.x pmid: 19624469
[25]	Rubio S, Rodrigues A, Saez A, Dizon M B, Galle A, Kim T H, Santiago J, Flexas J, Schroeder J I, Rodriguez P L. Triple loss of function of protein phosphatases type 2C leads to partial constitutive response to endogenous abscisic acid[J]. Plant Physiology, 2009, 150(3):1345-1355.doi:10.1104/pp.109.137174. doi: 10.1104/pp.109.137174 pmid: 19458118
[26]	Zhang J J, Xu Y J, Chen W, Dell B, Vergauwen R, Biddulph B, Khan N, Luo H, Appels R, Van den Ende W.A wheat 1-FEH w3 variant underlies enzyme activity for stem WSC remobilization to grain under drought[J]. The New Phytologist, 2015, 205(1):293-305.doi:10.1111/nph.13030. doi: 10.1111/nph.13030 URL
[27]	Wei B, Jing R L, Wang C S, Chen J B, Mao X G, Chang X P, Jia J Z. Dreb1 genes in wheat(Triticum aestivum L.):development of functional markers and gene mapping based on SNPs[J]. Molecular Breeding, 2009, 23(1):13-22.doi:10.1007/s11032-008-9209-z. doi: 10.1007/s11032-008-9209-z URL
[28]	Jiang Y M, Jiang Q Y, Hao C Y, Hou J, Wang L F, Zhang H N, Zhang S N, Chen X H, Zhang X H. A yield-associated gene TaCWI,in wheat:Its function,selection and evolution in global breeding revealed by haplotype analysis[J]. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2015, 128(1):131-143.doi:10.1007/s00122-014-2417-5. doi: 10.1007/s00122-014-2417-5 URL
[29]	Rasheed A, Wen W E, Gao F M, Zhai S N, Jin H, Liu J D, Guo Q, Zhang Y J, Dreisigacker S, Xia X C, He Z H. Development and validation of KASP assays for genes underpinning key economic traits in bread wheat[J]. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2016, 129(10):1843-1860. doi:10.1007/s00122-016-2743-x. doi: 10.1007/s00122-016-2743-x pmid: 27306516
[30]	袁谦, 张锋, 张中州, 甄士聪, 望俊森, 赵永涛, 鲁进恒, 范志业. 国审小麦品种漯麦18重要功能基因的KASP标记检测[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(24): 56-59. doi:10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2021.24.009. doi: 10.15889/j.issn.1002-1302.2021.24.009
	Yuan Q, Zhang F, Zhang Z Z, Zhen S C, Wang J S, Zhao Y T, Lu J H, Fan Z Y. KASP marker detection of important functional genes of national wheat variety Luomai 18[J]. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 49(24): 56-59.
[31]	高振贤, 赵彦坤, 班进福, 张国丛, 曹巧, 傅晓艺, 底琮瀚, 史占良. 河北省小麦重要农艺性状的KASP标记检测[J]. 分子植物育种, 2021, 19(2):518-528.doi:10.13271/j.mpb.019.000518. doi: 10.13271/j.mpb.019.000518
	Gao Z X, Zhao Y K, Ban J F, Zhang G C, Cao Q, Fu X Y, Di Z H, Shi Z L. Detection of important agronomic traits of wheat by KASP markers in Hebei Province[J]. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2021, 19(2):518-528.
[32]	王志伟, 乔祥梅, 王志龙, 杨金华, 程加省, 程耿, 于亚雄. 云南小麦品种(系)抗逆性相关基因的KASP标记检测[J]. 西南农业学报, 2020, 33(8):1601-1607.
	Wang Z W, Qiao X M, Wang Z L, Yang J H, Cheng J S, Cheng G, Yu Y X. Identification of genes associated with stress resistance in Yunnan wheat cultivars(lines)by KASP assays[J]. Southwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2020, 33(8):1601-1607.doi:10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.8.001. doi: 10.16213/j.cnki.scjas.2020.8.001
[33]	张海萍, 常成, 游光霞, 张秀英, 闫长生, 肖世和, 司红起, 卢杰, 马传喜. 中国小麦微核心种质及地方品种籽粒休眠特性的分子标记鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2010, 36(10):1649-1656. doi:10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01649. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2010.01649
	Zhang H P, Chang C, You G X, Zhang X Y, Yan C S, Xiao S H, Si H Q, Lu J, Ma C X. Identification of molecular markers associated with seed dormancy in mini core collections of Chinese wheat and landraces[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2010, 36(10):1649-1656. doi: 10.1016/S1875-2780(09)60077-8 URL
[34]	王瑞, 刘红彦, 李洪连, 王俊美, 伊艳杰. 小麦抗白粉病基因Pm6的PCR标记鉴定[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2007, 27(3):421-424. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1009-1041.2007.03.012. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-1041.2007.03.012
	Wang R, Liu H Y, Li H L, Wang J M, Yi Y J. Identification of PCR markers linked to wheat powdery mildew resistance gene Pm6[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2007, 27(3):421-424.
[35]	王俊美. 小麦抗白粉病基因Pm4、Pm6的PCR鉴定[D]. 杨凌: 西北农林科技大学, 2005.
	Wang J M. PCR identification of wheat powdery mildew resistance genes Pm4 and Pm6[D]. Yangling: Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University, 2005.

基因名称 Gene name	抗旱基因型 (上游引物1) Resistant type (up-stream primer 1)	不抗旱基因型 (上游引物2) Susceptible type (up-stream primer 2)	通用引物 (下游引物) General primer (down-stream primer)
1-fehw3	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCT	AGGAAGACGGCCCGAGCT TT
TaDreb-B1	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGT	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGG	TTTCACCTTGTGATATGGAT TGCCTTGAT
Cwi-4A	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTTTTATT TAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCATAAAC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTTTTAT TTAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCACAAAT	CATCGAATTGAAGAAAAGT TCACGC

基因名称 Gene name	抗旱基因型 (上游引物1) Resistant type (up-stream primer 1)	不抗旱基因型 (上游引物2) Susceptible type (up-stream primer 2)	通用引物 (下游引物) General primer (down-stream primer)
1-fehw3	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCTC CCCCCTTCCTTCTGTCT	AGGAAGACGGCCCGAGCT TT
TaDreb-B1	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTCCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGT	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTCT GCGCACTTTCTTCTTCCTGG	TTTCACCTTGTGATATGGAT TGCCTTGAT
Cwi-4A	GAAGGTGACCAAGTTCATGCTTTTATT TAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCATAAAC	GAAGGTCGGAGTCAACGGATTTTTAT TTAAAATTTGATGAACTTTTCACAAAT	CATCGAATTGAAGAAAAGT TCACGC

环境 Environments	抗旱基因型 Resistant type		不抗旱基因型 Susceptible type		P值 P value
环境 Environments	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	P值 P value
2021正常2021 Normal	130	51.27	222	51.05	0.344
2020正常2020 Normal	115	49.36	199	49.32	0.471
2019正常2019 Normal	112	44.48	200	44.40	0.434
2021干旱2021 Drought	128	46.01	222	46.16	0.374
2020干旱2020 Drought	128	48.68	217	48.70	0.482
2019干旱2019 Drought	114	44.62	201	44.91	0.340

环境 Environments	抗旱基因型 Resistant type		不抗旱基因型 Susceptible type		P值 P value
环境 Environments	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	P值 P value
2021正常2021 Normal	130	51.27	222	51.05	0.344
2020正常2020 Normal	115	49.36	199	49.32	0.471
2019正常2019 Normal	112	44.48	200	44.40	0.434
2021干旱2021 Drought	128	46.01	222	46.16	0.374
2020干旱2020 Drought	128	48.68	217	48.70	0.482
2019干旱2019 Drought	114	44.62	201	44.91	0.340

环境 Environments	抗旱基因型 Resistant type		不抗旱基因型 Susceptible type		P值 P value
环境 Environments	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	样本量 Sample number	平均值/g Average	P值 P value
2021正常2021 Normal	140	51.34	201	50.98	0.253
2020正常2020 Normal	123	49.66	183	49.14	0.147
2019正常2019 Normal	122	44.80	180	44.18	0.103
2021干旱2021 Drought	138	46.31	202	46.04	0.283
2020干旱2020 Drought	137	48.86	197	48.48	0.201
2019干旱2019 Drought	121	44.75	184	44.63	0.401

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

不同抗旱基因对小麦千粒质量的影响

Effect of Different Drought Resistance Genes on Thousand Grains Weight of Wheat

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 35

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	崔永增, 韩江伟, 姚海坡, 姚艳荣, 吕丽华, 贾秀领. 有机肥替代氮肥对冬小麦氮素吸收利用的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(1): 135-142.
[2]	李凯丽, 耿明状, 王胜, 郝维浩, 卢杰, 陈璨, 司红起. *安农1687抗条锈病候选基因TraesCS2A01G070700鉴定与分析*[J]. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(1): 150-155.
[3]	赵欣雨, 康占海, 王羽, 李艳艳, 高维芳, 李星. 50个小麦品种抗叶锈基因鉴定[J]. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(1): 156-164.
[4]	张自阳, 周谦, 王依, 王志伟, 朱启迪, 茹振钢, 刘明久. *小麦倒春寒响应基因TaJAZ6的克隆、表达模式及亚细胞定位分析*[J]. 华北农学报, 2024, 39(1): 27-36.
[5]	姚楚玄, 焦博, 秘彩莉, 杨帆, 张磊, 周硕, 柴建芳. 小麦品质育种2个早代选择参数的比较与优化[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(S1): 34-38.
[6]	李义, 康占海, 董素芬, 王羽, 李艳艳, 赵欣雨, 李星. 75份国内外小麦品种抗叶锈性鉴定及基因分析[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(S1): 362-370.
[7]	庄文锋, 翟军, 刘超, 李德正, 孔令让, 李安飞, 杨猛. 基本苗和行距对山农38小麦产量和光能利用的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(S1): 95-101.
[8]	朱紫鑫, 张玉璐, 贾靖, 李文璐, 赵露迪, 孟繁港, 盖红梅, 徐学欣, 赵长星. 不同品种(系)彩色小麦干物质积累转运和产量形成分析[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(5): 128-138.
[9]	窦佳欣, 田甜, 王鹏, 刘媛, 陈涛, 张沛沛, 杨德龙. 小麦茎秆蔗糖积累转运全基因组关联分析[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(5): 39-50.
[10]	郭媛, 马指挥, 王世雨, 牛志鹏, 杨晓雨, 魏青, 陈安琪, 王林生. 小麦科大116×科大101 F₂群体穗长主效QTL定位及候选基因预测[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(5): 84-93.
[11]	向桂丽, 乌日娜, Yamamoto Naoki, 吴一超, 蒋进, 廖明莉, 魏淑红, 彭正松, 杨在君. *小麦Tappc3A基因克隆及功能预测*[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(4): 28-37.
[12]	王美玲, 蒋文月, 葛雨洋, 朱新开, 李春燕, 朱敏, 郭文善, 丁锦峰. 拔节期不同程度渍水对小麦根系生长和籽粒产量的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(4): 83-90.
[13]	李淑靖, 吴金芝, 黄明, 王春平, 李友军, 汪洪涛, 赵雯馨, 黄修利, 李文娜, 李爽. 旱地条件下不同地理来源小麦品种的产量与氮磷钾积累利用差异[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(4): 129-140.
[14]	王犇, 任开明, 马尚宇, 樊永惠, 张文静, 黄正来. 不同类型肥料对稻茬弱筋小麦产量与品质的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(4): 159-166.
[15]	何璐, 张利茹, 杨若汧, 杨晰, 杜雨璠, 郑博研, 李瑞奇, 王红光. 限水灌溉时期对冬小麦各叶层衰退和群体光合的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2023, 38(4): 167-173.

模态框（Modal）标题

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容

不同抗旱基因对小麦千粒质量的影响

Effect of Different Drought Resistance Genes on Thousand Grains Weight of Wheat

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 9

参考文献 35

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价