野生稻SSSLs孕穗期对干旱胁迫的响应

doi:10.7668/hbnxb.20195230

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为揭示水稻孕穗期的抗旱机理,以6份由南方野生稻和展颖野生稻构建的单片段代换系(SSSLs)及其亲本华粳籼74(HJX74)为试验材料,进行盆栽干旱处理,测定干旱处理0,5,10 d和复水5 d后的6个生化指标和结实期后的11个农艺性状,并结合相关性分析、主成分分析对7个材料的耐旱能力进行综合评价。结果表明,干旱胁迫条件下7个材料之间的农艺性状存在极显著差异,材料M78-1与HJX74在相对穗长、相对空粒数、相对穗粒数存在极显著差异,M148与HJX74在相对瘪粒数存在极显著差异,M107与HJX74在相对穗长和相对二次枝梗数存在极显著差异;在孕穗期鉴定到6个耐旱QTLs,包括相对穗长(qRPL1-1、qRPL2-1)、相对二次枝梗数(qRNSB2-1)、相对瘪粒数(qRNDG11-1)、相对空粒数(qRNEG1-1)和相对穗粒数(qRGNP1-1),分布在1,2,11号染色体上。超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性和过氧化物酶(POD)活性在干旱5 d后分别增加3.76%~18.20%,31.88%~100.00%,而丙二醛浓度降低41.07%~81.65%;干旱10 d后SOD和POD的活性出现下降趋势,分别降低9.20%~48.53%,44.74%~79.79%,而丙二醛浓度相比于干旱5 d出现显著升高;脯氨酸、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白等渗透调节物质在处理5,10 d阶段持续上升,复水5 d后各生化指标基本恢复正常水平。综合分析结果显示,在干旱胁迫下相对结实率、POD和脯氨酸的特征向量和贡献率最大,表明这3种指标更能代表水稻孕穗期的耐旱情况。综上,干旱胁迫会影响水稻孕穗期各项农艺性状与生化指标,同时水稻也会调节自身代谢过程响应干旱胁迫。

关键词: 水稻, 孕穗期, 干旱胁迫, 农艺性状, 生化指标, 耐旱综合评价

Abstract:

To reveal the mechanism of drought resistance rice in booting stage,six single chromosome segments substitution lines (SSSLs) constructed from Oryza meridionalis and O.glumaepatula and their recipient parent Huajingxian 74 (HJX74) were used as experimental materials for potted drought treatment.Six biochemical indexes during 0,5,10 days of drought treatment and 5 days of rewatering and 11 agronomic traits after setting stage were measured,and the drought tolerance of 7 materials was comprehensivly evaluated by correlation analysis and principal component analysis.The result showed that under drought stress,there were extremely significant difference in agronomic traits among the 7 materials.There were extremely significant difference between M78-1 and HJX74 in relative panicle length,relative empty grain number and relative grain number per panicle,and there was extremely significant difference between M148 and HJX74 in relative dented grain number,there were extremely significant differences between M107 and HJX74 in relative panicle length and relative number of secondary branches; six drought-tolerant QTLs were identified at booting stage,including qRPL1-1,qRPL2-1,qRNSB2-1,qRNDG11-1,qRNEG1-1,qRGNP1-1,which were distributed on chromosomes 1,2,and 11.The superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity and peroxidase(POD) activity increased by 3.76%—18.20% and 31.88%—100.00% after 5 days of drought,while malondialdehyde (MDA)concentration decreased by 41.07%—81.65%.After 10 days of drought,SOD activity and POD activity decreased by 9.20%—48.53% and 44.74%—79.79%,while malondialdehyde (MDA)concentration was extremely significantly higher than that on the 5th day of drought.Osmoregulatory substances such as proline,soluble sugar and soluble protein continued to increase at the 5 d and 10 d drought treatment stages,and the biochemical indexes basically returned to normal level after 5 days of rewater.The comprehensive analysis revealed that the eigenvector and contribution rates of relative seed setting rate,POD activity and proline were the largest,indicating that these three indexes could better represent the drought tolerance of rice at booting stage.In conclusion,drought stress can affect agronomic traits and biochemical indexes of rice at booting stage,and rice can regulate its metabolic process in response to drought stress.

Key words: Rice, Booting stage, Drought stress, Agronomic trait, Biochemical index, Comprehensive evaluation of drought tolerance

陈科, 廖冰, 刘国利, 黄秀艳, 何平. 野生稻SSSLs孕穗期对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 华北农学报, 2025, 40(2): 81-91. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20195230.

CHEN Ke, LIAO Bing, LIU Guoli, HUANG Xiuyan, HE Ping. Response to Drought Stress of Wild Rice SSSLs at Booting Stage[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2025, 40(2): 81-91. doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.20195230.

http://www.hbnxb.net/CN/Y2025/V40/I2/81

图/表 9

参考文献 33

[1]	Yang X L, Wang B F, Chen L, Li P, Cao C G. The different influences of drought stress at the flowering stage on rice physiological traits,grain yield,and quality[J]. Scientific Reports, 2019, 9(1):3742.doi:10.1038/s41598-019-40161-0.
[2]	王莺, 张强, 王劲松, 韩兰英, 王素萍, 张良, 姚玉璧, 郝小翠, 王胜. 21世纪以来干旱研究的若干新进展与展望[J]. 干旱气象, 2022, 40(4):549-566.doi:10.11755/j.issn.1006-7639(2022)-04-0549.
	Wang Y, Zhang Q, Wang J S, Han L Y, Wang S P, Zhang L, Yao Y B, Hao X C, Wang S. New progress and prospect of drought research since the 21st century[J]. Journal of Arid Meteorology, 2022, 40(4):549-566.
[3]	张强, 韩兰英, 王胜, 王兴, 林婧婧. 影响南方农业干旱灾损率的气候要素关键期特征[J]. 科学通报, 2018, 63(23):2378-2392.doi:10.1360/N972018-00240.
	Zhang Q, Han L Y, Wang S, Wang X, Lin J J. The affected characteristic of key period's climate factor on the agricultural disaster loss caused by drought in the South China[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2018, 63(23):2378-2392.
[4]	Wen J Y, Zeng Y F, Chen Y P, Fan F F, Li S Q. Genic male sterility increases rice drought tolerance[J]. Plant Science, 2021, 312:111057.doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2021.111057.
[5]	江学海, 李刚华, 王绍华, 罗德强, 周维佳, 刘正辉, 李敏, 丁艳锋. 不同生育阶段干旱胁迫对杂交稻产量的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2015, 38(2):173-181.doi:10.7685/j.issn.1000-2030.2015.02.001.
	Jiang X H, Li G H, Wang S H, Luo D Q, Zhou W J, Liu Z H, Li M, Ding Y F. Effect of drought stress at different growth stages on grain yield of indica hybrid rice[J]. Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2015, 38(2):173-181.
[6]	Zhang J M, Zhang S Q, Cheng M, Jiang H, Zhang X Y, Peng C H, Lu X H, Zhang M X, Jin J X. Effect of drought on agronomic traits of rice and wheat:a meta-analysis[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2018, 15(5):839.doi:10.3390/ijerph15050839.
[7]	段素梅, 杨安中, 吴文革, 陈刚, 许有尊. 孕穗期干旱胁迫对超级稻后期光合性能及产量的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2017, 35(6): 104-108,260. doi:10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2017.06.16.
	Duan S M, Yang A Z, Wu W G, Chen G, Xu Y Z. Effects of drought stress at booting stage on photosynthesis and yield of Super rice[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2017, 35(6):104-108,260.
[8]	黄秀艳, 栗俊波, 廖冰, 傅雪琳, 何平. 野生稻单片段代换系芽期耐旱性评价及QTLs鉴定[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(4):32-40.doi:10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2023.04.04.
	Huang X Y, Li J B, Liao B, Fu X L, He P. Evaluation of drought tolerance and identification of QTLs in single-segment substitution lines of wild rice at bud stage[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2023, 41(4):32-40.
[9]	Kamarudin Z S, Yusop M R, Tengku Muda Mohamed M, Ismail M R, Harun A R. Growth performance and antioxidant enzyme activities of advanced mutant rice genotypes under drought stress condition[J]. Agronomy, 2018, 8(12):279.doi:10.3390/agronomy8120279.
[10]	Sharma P, Dubey R S. Drought induces oxidative stress and enhances the activities of antioxidant enzymes in growing rice seedlings[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2005, 46(3):209-221.doi:10.1007/s10725-005-0002-2.
[11]	陈艳艳, 杨洋, 孟桂元, 周静. 水稻生长发育对水分胁迫响应研究[J]. 分子植物育种, 2019, 17(8):2685-2691.doi:10.13271/j.mpb.017.002685.
	Chen Y Y, Yang Y, Meng G Y, Zhou J. Study on response of rice growth and development to water stress[J]. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2019, 17(8):2685-2691.
[12]	Zulfiqar F, Ashraf M. Proline alleviates abiotic stress induced oxidative stress in plants[J]. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 2023, 42(8):4629-4651.doi:10.1007/s00344-022-10839-3.
[13]	马孝松, 曾贤军, 李恩熙, 梅捍卫, 罗利军, 刘鸿艳. 水稻耐旱性及其研究进展[J]. 上海农业学报, 2022, 38(4):36-45.doi:10.15955/j.issn1000-3924.2022.04.05.
	Ma X S, Zeng X J, Li E X, Mei H W, Luo L J, Liu H Y. Advances of drought tolerance researches in rice[J]. Acta Agriculturae Shanghai, 2022, 38(4):36-45.
[14]	尚蓉霞, 余欣, 尤翠翠, 何海兵, 李娟, 武立权. 水稻孕穗期干旱-高温交叉胁迫的生理适应机制[J]. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2019, 54(6):39-46,54.doi:10.13432/j.cnki.jgsau.2019.06.006.
	Shang R X, Yu X, You C C, He H B, Li J, Wu L Q. Adaptation physiological mechanism of rice under dual stress of drought and high temperature in booting stage[J]. Journal of Gansu Agricultural University, 2019, 54(6):39-46,54.
[15]	Melandri G, AbdElgawad H, Riewe D, Hageman J A, Asard H, Beemster G T S, Kadam N, Jagadish K, Altmann T, Ruyter-Spira C, Bouwmeester H. Biomarkers for grain yield stability in rice under drought stress[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2020, 71(2):669-683.doi:10.1093/jxb/erz221. pmid: 31087074
[16]	黄珂, 刘清, 寻敏, 刘丹, 苏益, 萧浪涛. 籼型和粳型水稻响应孕穗期干旱胁迫的生理特性差异[J]. 南方农业学报, 2021, 52(10):2717-2726.doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-1191.2021.10.011.
	Huang K, Liu Q, Xun M, Liu D, Su Y, Xiao L T. Difference of physiological characteristics between Indica rice and Japonica rice in response to drought stress at booting stage[J]. Journal of Southern Agriculture, 2021, 52(10):2717-2726.
[17]	廖冰, 黄秀艳, 陈科, 傅雪琳, 何平. 野生稻单片段代换系苗期耐旱性评价及QTL鉴定[J]. 广东农业科学, 2024, 51(3):70-80.doi:10.16768/j.issn.1004-874X.2024.03.007.
	Liao B, Huang X Y, Chen K, Fu X L, He P. Evaluation of drought tolerance and identification of QTL in single-segment substitution lines of wild rice at seedling stage[J]. Guangdong Agricultural Sciences, 2024, 51(3):70-80.
[18]	刘文萍, 刘霞霞, 韩俊梅, 文飞, 吕伟, 王若鹏. 芝麻苗期干旱生理生化指标响应特征及其基因表达分析[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2024, 42(1):152-158.doi:10.7606/j.issn.1000-7601.2024.01.15.
	Liu W P, Liu X X, Han J M, Wen F, Lyu W, Wang R P. Response characteristics of physiological and biochemical indices and gene expression analysis of sesame during seedling stage under drought[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2024, 42(1):152-158.
[19]	戴海芳, 武辉, 阿曼古丽·买买提阿力, 王立红, 麦麦提·阿皮孜, 张巨松. 不同基因型棉花苗期耐盐性分析及其鉴定指标筛选[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(7):1290-1300.doi:10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.07.005.
	Dai H F, Wu H, Amanguli M, Wang L H, Maimaiti A, Zhang J S. Analysis of salt-tolerance and determination of salt-tolerant evaluation indicators in cotton seedlings of different genotypes[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2014, 47(7):1290-1300.
[20]	张文英, 智慧, 柳斌辉, 谢俊雪, 李积铭, 李伟, 贾冠清, 王永芳, 李海权, 柴杨, 栗雨勤, 刁现民. 谷子孕穗期抗旱指标筛选[J]. 植物遗传资源学报, 2012, 13(5):765-772.doi:10.13430/j.cnki.pngr.2012.05.013.
	Zhang W Y, Zhi H, Liu B H, Xie J X, Li J M, Li W, Jia G Q, Wang Y F, Li H Q, Chai Y, Li Y Q, Diao X M. Screening of indexes for drought tolerance testat booting stage in foxtail millet[J]. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2012, 13(5):765-772.
[21]	邵玺文, 张瑞珍, 齐春艳, 童淑媛, 杨沫, 黄世琳, 孙长占. 拔节孕穗期水分胁迫对水稻生长发育及产量的影响[J]. 吉林农业大学学报, 2004, 26(3):237-241.doi:10.13327/j.jjlau.2004.03.001.
	Shao X W, Zhang R Z, Qi C Y, Tong S Y, Yang M, Huang S L, Sun C Z. Effects of water stress on growth and yield of rice in jointing-booting stage[J]. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2004, 26(3):237-241.
[22]	胡明明, 龚静, 兰艳, 彭立功, 王锦, 段强, 吴超越, 李天. 不同生育时期水分胁迫对水稻产量及品质的影响[J]. 江西农业大学学报, 2021, 43(5):971-982.doi:10.13836/j.jjau.2021106.
	Hu M M, Gong J, Lan Y, Peng L G, Wang J, Duan Q, Wu C Y, Li T. Effects of water stress at different growth stages on rice yield and quality[J]. Acta Agriculturae Universitatis Jiangxiensis, 2021, 43(5):971-982.
[23]	朱海平, 李贵勇, 夏琼梅, 龙瑞平, 邓安凤, 黄军, 相罕章, 杨从党. 不同时期干旱胁迫对水稻产量和生长特性的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2017, 23(4):135-138.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2017.04.027.
	Zhu H P, Li G Y, Xia Q M, Long R P, Deng A F, Huang J, Xiang H Z, Yang C D. Effects of drought stress on yield and growth characteristics of rice in different periods[J]. China Rice, 2017, 23(4):135-138. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2017.04.027
[24]	赵宏伟, 田雪飞, 于美芳, 沙汉景, 贾琰, 李艳玲. 孕穗期干旱胁迫对寒地粳稻干物质积累、转运及产量形成影响[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2016, 47(11):1-8.doi:10.19720/j.cnki.issn.1005-9369.2016.11.001.
	Zhao H W, Tian X F, Yu M F, Sha H J, Jia Y, Li Y L. Effect of drought stress at booting stage on dry matter accumulation,transportation and yield formation of cold-region rice[J]. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University, 2016, 47(11):1-8.
[25]	Sabar M, Shabir G, Shah S M, Aslam K, Naveed S A, Arif M. Identification and mapping of QTLs associated with drought tolerance traits in rice by a cross between Super Basmati and IR55419-04[J]. Breeding Science, 2019, 69(1):169-178.doi:10.1270/jsbbs.18068. pmid: 31086495
[26]	郭展, 张运波. 水稻对干旱胁迫的生理生化响应及分子调控研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2024, 38(4): 335-349. doi:10.16819/j.1001-7216.2024.230410.
	Guo Z, Zhang Y B. Research progress in physiological,biochemical responses of rice to drought stress and its molecular regulation[J]. Chinese Journal of Rice Science, 2024, 38(4):335-349. doi: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2024.230410
[27]	Mittler R, Zandalinas S I, Fichman Y, Van Breusegem F. Reactive oxygen species signalling in plant stress responses[J]. Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, 2022, 23(10):663-679.doi:10.1038/s41580-022-00499-2.
[28]	Ali M F, Muday G K. Reactive oxygen species are signaling molecules that modulate plant reproduction[J]. Plant,Cell & Environment, 2024, 47(5):1592-1605.doi:10.1111/pce.14837.
[29]	陈亮, 汪本福, 江元元, 曹凑贵, 李萍. 孕穗期干旱及复水对水稻叶片生理生化和产量的影响[J]. 中国稻米, 2016, 22(1):59-64.doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2016.01.013.
	Chen L, Wang B F, Jiang Y Y, Cao C G, Li P. Effects of drought and re-watering on rice physiological and biochemical indexes of leaves and grain yield at booting stage[J]. China Rice, 2016, 22(1):59-64. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-8082.2016.01.013
[30]	尉荣蓉, 隋亚珍, 许萌萌, 刘杨, 赵昕. 干旱胁迫对分蘖期转基因水稻抗旱性生理生化指标的影响[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2013, 41(11): 4747-4749,4796. doi:10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2013.11.125.
	Yu R R, Sui Y Z, Xu M M, Liu Y, Zhao X. Effects of drought stress on physiological and biochemical indices of drought-resistance in genetically modified rice tillering stage[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2013, 41(11):4747-4749,4796..
[31]	张林, 陈翔, 吴宇, 于敏, 蔡洪梅, 柳彬彬, 倪芊芊, 刘绿洲, 许辉, 房浩, 李金才. 脯氨酸在植物抗逆中的研究进展[J]. 江汉大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 51(1):42-51.doi:10.16389/j.cnki.cn42-1737/n.2023.01.006.
	Zhang L, Chen X, Wu Y, Yu M, Cai H M, Liu B B, Ni Q Q, Liu L Z, Xu H, Fang H, Li J C. Research progress of proline in plant stress resistance[J]. Journal of Jianghan University (Natural Science Edition), 2023, 51(1):42-51.
[32]	Blum A. Osmotic adjustment is a prime drought stress adaptive engine in support of plant production[J]. Plant,Cell & Environment, 2017, 40(1):4-10.doi:10.1111/pce.12800.
[33]	Ozturk M, Turkyilmaz Unal B, García-Caparrós P, Khursheed A, Gul A, Hasanuzzaman M. Osmoregulation and its actions during the drought stress in plants[J]. Physiologia Plantarum, 2021, 172(2):1321-1335.doi:10.1111/ppl.13297.

性状 Traits	HJX74	X24	M77	M78-1	M107	M135	M148
RPH	0.75±0.10A	0.77±0.08A	0.82±0.06A	0.83±0.07A	0.81±0.11A	0.67±0.23A	0.80±0.06A
RPL	0.80±0.21B	0.83±0.13B	0.92±0.10B	0.99±0.05A	1.01±0.10A	0.84±0.14B	0.88±0.09B
RNPB	0.92±0.09A	0.87±0.12A	0.92±0.22A	1.00±0.10A	1.07±0.13A	0.82±0.17A	0.90±0.11A
RNSB	0.62±0.37B	0.63±0.31B	0.49±0.18B	1.04±0.14B	1.59±0.67A	0.59±0.46B	0.67±0.25B
RNFG	0.11±0.11A	0.02±0.03A	0.118±0.17A	0.04±0.07A	0.03±0.05A	0.14±0.15A	0.12±0.06A
RNDG	0.58±0.77B	0.73±1.10B	0.73±0.71B	0.14±0.20B	0.06±0.13B	0.66±0.86B	4.84±4.06A
RNEG	0.91±0.49B	1.38±0.47B	1.23±0.53B	1.72±0.28A	1.15±0.48B	0.65±0.58B	0.62±0.42B
RGW	0.08±0.08A	0.01±0.02A	0.09±0.15A	0.02±0.03A	0.02±0.04A	0.13±0.13A	0.08±0.05A
RTGW	0.25±0.27A	0.27±0.33A	0.23±0.34A	0.26±0.20A	0.25±0.38A	0.57±0.35A	0.62±0.28A
RGNP	0.58±0.25B	0.70±0.22B	0.64±0.19B	0.95±0.16A	0.65±0.28B	0.43±0.28B	0.43±0.27B
RSSR	0.25±0.27A	0.04±0.06A	0.24±0.35A	0.03±0.06A	0.03±0.05A	0.40±0.35A	0.25±0.16A

性状 Traits	HJX74	X24	M77	M78-1	M107	M135	M148
RPH	0.75±0.10A	0.77±0.08A	0.82±0.06A	0.83±0.07A	0.81±0.11A	0.67±0.23A	0.80±0.06A
RPL	0.80±0.21B	0.83±0.13B	0.92±0.10B	0.99±0.05A	1.01±0.10A	0.84±0.14B	0.88±0.09B
RNPB	0.92±0.09A	0.87±0.12A	0.92±0.22A	1.00±0.10A	1.07±0.13A	0.82±0.17A	0.90±0.11A
RNSB	0.62±0.37B	0.63±0.31B	0.49±0.18B	1.04±0.14B	1.59±0.67A	0.59±0.46B	0.67±0.25B
RNFG	0.11±0.11A	0.02±0.03A	0.118±0.17A	0.04±0.07A	0.03±0.05A	0.14±0.15A	0.12±0.06A
RNDG	0.58±0.77B	0.73±1.10B	0.73±0.71B	0.14±0.20B	0.06±0.13B	0.66±0.86B	4.84±4.06A
RNEG	0.91±0.49B	1.38±0.47B	1.23±0.53B	1.72±0.28A	1.15±0.48B	0.65±0.58B	0.62±0.42B
RGW	0.08±0.08A	0.01±0.02A	0.09±0.15A	0.02±0.03A	0.02±0.04A	0.13±0.13A	0.08±0.05A
RTGW	0.25±0.27A	0.27±0.33A	0.23±0.34A	0.26±0.20A	0.25±0.38A	0.57±0.35A	0.62±0.28A
RGNP	0.58±0.25B	0.70±0.22B	0.64±0.19B	0.95±0.16A	0.65±0.28B	0.43±0.28B	0.43±0.27B
RSSR	0.25±0.27A	0.04±0.06A	0.24±0.35A	0.03±0.06A	0.03±0.05A	0.40±0.35A	0.25±0.16A

性状 Traits	最小值 Min	最大值 Max	均值 Mean	标准偏差 s	变异系数 CV
RPH	0.34	0.98	0.78	0.12	15.49
RPL	0.57	1.18	0.90	0.14	15.72
RNPB	0.56	1.31	0.93	0.16	16.76
RNSB	0.00	2.66	0.80	0.51	63.18
RNFG	0.00	0.53	0.08	0.11	133.19
RNDG	0.00	9.75	1.11	2.20	201.04
RNEG	0.17	2.04	1.10	0.58	53.36
RGW	0.00	0.53	0.08	0.11	133.19
RTGW	0.00	1.02	0.35	0.34	96.29
RGNP	0.00	1.13	0.63	0.28	45.00
RSSR	0.00	1.06	0.18	0.25	142.82

性状 Traits	最小值 Min	最大值 Max	均值 Mean	标准偏差 s	变异系数 CV
RPH	0.34	0.98	0.78	0.12	15.49
RPL	0.57	1.18	0.90	0.14	15.72
RNPB	0.56	1.31	0.93	0.16	16.76
RNSB	0.00	2.66	0.80	0.51	63.18
RNFG	0.00	0.53	0.08	0.11	133.19
RNDG	0.00	9.75	1.11	2.20	201.04
RNEG	0.17	2.04	1.10	0.58	53.36
RGW	0.00	0.53	0.08	0.11	133.19
RTGW	0.00	1.02	0.35	0.34	96.29
RGNP	0.00	1.13	0.63	0.28	45.00
RSSR	0.00	1.06	0.18	0.25	142.82

性状 Character	SSSL	QTL	染色体 Chromosome	位置 Position	加性效应 Additive effect	表型贡献率/% Phenotypic contribution rate
相对穗长 RPL	M78-1	qRPL1-1	Chr.1	RM499—RM001—RM243	0.04	7.43
	M107	qRPL2-1	Chr.2	PSM118—RM492—RM071	0.05	7.67
相对二次枝梗数 RNSB	M107	qRNSB2-1	Chr.2	PSM118—RM492—RM071	0.12	14.42
相对瘪粒数 RNDG	M148	qRNDG11-1	Chr.11	PSM417—PSM346—PSM176	0.21	18.75
相对空粒数 RNEG	M78-1	qRNEG1-1	Chr.1	RM499—RM001—RM243	0.09	10.33
相对穗粒数 RGNP	M78-1	qRGNP1-1	Chr.1	RM499—RM001—RM243	0.07	9.01

选择文件类型/文献管理软件名称

选择包含的内容