去苞叶对玉米子粒脱水过程的影响

doi:10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2018.02.020

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为明确苞叶层数对玉米子粒脱水过程的影响,2015-2016年以郑单958和先玉335为试验材料,设置乳熟期（授粉后25~26d）不同程度去苞叶处理,分析苞叶层数对子粒含水率的影响。结果显示：（1）去除1层、2层和3层苞叶后,子粒含水率与同一时期不去苞叶对照差异不显著;去除4~6层苞叶后,子粒脱水过程受到不同程度的影响;去除全部苞叶后,子粒含水率在测定期间始终显著低于对照处理,2个品种表现一致。（2）去除全部苞叶后,郑单958和先玉335百粒干重显著下降,降幅为9.77%~13.29%和15.40%~16.37%,而其他去苞叶处理的百粒干重与对照无显著差异。

结论

去除全部苞叶后显著降低百粒干重,生产中应慎重过早扒去全部苞叶;适当减少苞叶层数有利于子粒脱水,且不降低子粒重量,在选育脱水快、适合机械粒收的品种时应予以考虑。

关键词: 玉米, 苞叶, 苞叶层数, 子粒含水率

Abstract:

In 2015 and 2016, the experiment was designed with varying peeling-husk treatments to indentify the effects of husk layers on maize grain moisture content using Zhengdan 958 and Xianyu 335 cultivars. Results showed that: (1) There weren’t significant differences in grain moisture content among the one, two, three layer peeling-husk treatments and CK at same sampling time; the four to six layer peeling-husk treatments affected grain dry-down process on varying degrees; grain moisture content in the all layer peeling-husk treatment was significantly lower than CK throughout sampling time. (2) Under the all layer peeling-husk treatments, 100-grain weight of Zhengdan 958 and Xianyu 335 were significantly reduced by 9.77%-13.29% and 15.40%-16.37%. 100-grain weight had no difference between the other treatments and CK. It should be cautious to peel all the husks too early since the 100-grain weight substantially decreased under the all layer peeling-husk treatment. Reducing the layer number of husk was conducive to grain dehydration and did not reduce the grain weight, which should be considered in breeding the high dehydration rate cultivars suitable for mechanical grain harvesting.

Key words: Maize, Husk, Layer number of husk, Grain moisture content

李璐璐,谢瑞芝,王克如,明博,侯鹏,李少昆. 去苞叶对玉米子粒脱水过程的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2018 (2): 114–117

Lulu Li,Ruizhi Xie,Keru Wang,Bo Ming,Peng Hou,Shaokun Li. Effects of Peeling Husk on Grain Dehydration of Maize[J]. Crops, 2018(2): 114–117

图/表 3

表1

表2

表3

参考文献 21

[1]	Mathre D E, Johnston R H, Martin J M . Sources of resistance to Cephalosporium gramineum in Triticum and Agropyron species. Euphytica, 1985,34(2):419-424. doi: 10.1007/BF00022937
[2]	孙生林, 张树光, 薛继生 , 等. 玉米粒含水量与果穗性状相关性的研究. 黑龙江八一农垦大学学报, 1993,7(1):12-17.
[3]	张树光, 冯学民, 高树仁 , 等. 玉米成熟期籽粒含水量与果穗性状的关系. 中国农学通报, 1994(2):15-17.
[4]	李艳杰, 史纪明, 鞠成梅 , 等. 玉米籽粒水分与品种性状相关性研究初报. 玉米科学, 2000,8(4):37-38. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-0906.2000.04.012
[5]	吕香玲, 兰进好, 张宝石 . 玉米果穗脱水速率的研究. 西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2006,34(2):48-52. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1671-9387.2006.02.011
[6]	张立国, 范骐骥, 陈喜昌 , 等. 玉米生理成熟后籽粒脱水速率与主要农艺性状的相关分析. 黑龙江农业科学, 2012(3):1-5.
[7]	Cavalieri A J, Smith O S . Grain filling and field drying of a set of maize hybrid released from 1930 to 1982. Crop Science, 1985,25(5):856-860. doi: 10.2135/cropsci1985.0011183X002500050031x
[8]	Cross H Z . A selection procedure for ear drying-rates in early maize. Euphytica, 1985,34(2):409-418. doi: 10.1007/BF00022936
[9]	Kang M S, Zuber M S, Colbert T R , et al. Effect of certain agronomic traits on and relationship between rates of grain moisture reduction and grain fill during filling period in maize. Field Crop Research, 1986,14(4):339-346.
[10]	Kang M S, Zuber M S . Combining ability for grain moisture,husk moisture,and maturity in maize with yellow and white endosperms. Crop Science, 1989,29(3):689-692.
[11]	王殊华, 王云生, 张永林 . 试论降低玉米籽粒含水量提高我省玉米商品粮质量. 黑龙江农业科学, 1987(1):42-45.
[12]	闫淑琴, 苏俊, 李春霞 , 等. 玉米籽粒灌浆、脱水速率的相关与通径分析. 黑龙江农业科学, 2007(4):1-4.
[13]	张林, 张宝石, 王霞 , 等. 玉米收获期籽粒含水量与主要农艺性状相关分析. 东北农业大学学报, 2009,40(10):9-12.
[14]	张冬梅, 刘洋, 赵永锋 , 等. 不同杂种优势群玉米籽粒灌浆速率分析. 中国农业科学, 2014,47(17):3323-3335. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2014.17.001
[15]	乔江方, 李川, 刘京宝 , 等. 夏玉米子粒含水率和子粒灌浆的粒位差异及其关系研究. 玉米科学, 2016(1):56-62. doi: 10.13597/j.cnki.maize.science.20160111
[16]	雷蕾, 王威振, 方伟 , 等. 影响夏玉米生理成熟后子粒脱水的相关因素分析. 玉米科学, 2016,24(3):103-109.
[17]	李璐璐, 雷晓鹏, 谢瑞芝 , 等. 夏玉米机械粒收质量影响因素分析. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(11):2044-2051. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.010
[18]	柴宗文, 王克如, 郭银巧 , 等. 玉米机械粒收质量现状及其与含水率的关系. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(11):2036-2043.
[19]	王克如, 李少昆 . 玉米籽粒脱水速率影响因素分析. 中国农业科学, 2017,50(11):2027-2035. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2017.11.008
[20]	宋凤斌, 徐洪文 . 玉米苞叶光合生理特性研究进展. 玉米科学, 2008,16(4):31-34.
[21]	秦营营 . 玉米籽粒黑层形成和乳线消失与粒重及生理特征的关系研究. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2014.

相关文章 15

[1]	陈广周王广福渠建洲司雷勇金岩徐淑兔薛吉全路海东. 不同玉米自交系子粒脱水速率及其#br# 与主要影响性状的相关分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (5): 33–39
[2]	苏桂华李春雷, 苏义臣. 吉林省22 份主推玉米品种区域试验评价[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (5): 63–70
[3]	吴荣华庄克章刘鹏张春艳. 鲁南地区夏玉米产量对气象因子的响应[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (5): 104–109
[4]	李少昆张万旭, 王克如韩冬生杨小霞陈永生. 北疆玉米大田机械粒收质量调查[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (5): 127–131
[5]	高文俊杨国义高新中玉柱许庆方原向阳孙耀武. 氮磷钾肥对青贮玉米产量和品质的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (5): 144–149
[6]	李红燕,王永宏,赵如浪,张文杰,明博,谢瑞芝,王克如,李璐璐,高尚,李少昆. 宁夏引/扬黄灌区玉米子粒脱水模型的构建与应用[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (4): 149–153
[7]	李少昆,张万旭,王克如,俞万兵,陈永生,韩冬生,杨小霞,刘朝巍,张国强,王浥州,柳枫贺,陈江鲁,杨京京,谢瑞芝,侯鹏,明博. 北疆玉米密植高产宜粒收品种筛选[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (4): 62–68
[8]	樊艳丽,董会,卢柏山,史亚兴,高宁,史亚民,徐丽,席胜利,张翠芬,刘焱辉. 播期对不同糯玉米品种淀粉糊化特性的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (4): 79–83
[9]	杨京京,陈江鲁,谢瑞芝,张小伟,丁变红,吴新明,李少昆,李东方. 玉米种子粒重差异对相关发芽指标整齐度的影响[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (3): 180–184
[10]	李少昆,王克如,王延波,赵海岩,沈玉忠,蔡丹丹,肖万欣,姜文野,黄兆福,翟立超,谢瑞芝,侯鹏,明博. 辽宁中部地区玉米机械粒收质量及其限制因素研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (3): 162–167
[11]	史磊,王国宏,王延波,王大为,赵海岩. 玉米杂交种及其亲本子粒脱水速率初步研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (3): 84–89
[12]	王克如,李少昆,王延波,赵海岩,沈玉忠,蔡丹丹,肖万欣,姜文野,黄兆福,翟立超,李璐璐,谢瑞芝,侯鹏,明博. 辽宁中部适宜机械粒收玉米品种的筛选[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (3): 97–102
[13]	李锐,白建荣,王秀红,张丛卓,张效梅,闫蕾,杨瑞娟. 144份甜玉米群体的遗传多样性分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (2): 17–24
[14]	李忠南,王越人,邬生辉,曲海涛,许正学,李光发. 玉米主要性状GCA效应值的因子分析[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (2): 25–29
[15]	刘松涛,刘过,ZendaTinashe,晋宏宇,王萱,段会军. 河北省不同生态区夏玉米丰产、稳产性品种筛选研究[J]. 作物杂志, 2018, (2): 56–60

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

处理 Treatment	日期Date
处理 Treatment	9-03	9-08	9-14	9-20	9-27	10-03	10-13	10-17	10-22	10-28	11-02
ZD958-CK	55.92	55.18a	46.41ab	40.03a	36.15a	34.59a	29.18a	26.26a	25.15a	22.60a	19.95ab
ZD958-1	55.92	56.01a	48.56a	40.19a	35.73a	33.20a	29.44a	26.50a	22.76ab	23.71a	20.69a
ZD958-2	55.92	54.39a	48.16a	40.94a	36.33a	33.31a	27.11bc	25.11a	23.00ab	22.66a	20.96a
ZD958-3	55.92	54.09a	47.82a	40.70a	36.79a	33.02a	28.97ab	26.54a	22.56ab	22.19a	19.44abc
ZD958-4	55.92	55.46a	48.18a	40.62a	36.62a	33.57a	26.15cd	21.19b	22.20ab	21.33ab	17.45bcd
ZD958-5	55.92	54.26a	46.07ab	40.16a	34.06a	29.34b	24.30d	18.18bc	18.40bc	18.58bc	16.99cd
ZD958-no	55.92	49.05b	44.15b	37.08b	33.18a	27.22b	17.73e	15.60c	15.60c	16.88c	15.99d
XY335-CK	55.51	51.88a	46.10abc	43.69a	37.98a	32.69a	25.50a	23.28a	20.47a	19.02a	17.14ab
XY335-1	55.51	51.66a	47.33a	42.22a	36.88ab	32.28a	26.12a	22.22ab	20.09a	19.19a	18.39a
XY335-2	55.51	50.87a	46.81abc	42.66a	36.28ab	30.84ab	25.02ab	23.61a	20.38a	18.82a	16.67bc
XY335-3	55.51	51.52a	46.29abc	43.65a	36.40ab	30.96ab	24.92ab	21.26ab	19.00ab	18.53a	15.23c
XY335-4	55.51	50.29a	47.10ab	40.62ab	34.95bc	32.02a	25.57a	18.83bc	17.26bc	17.50ab	15.30c
XY335-5	55.51	50.38a	44.68bcd	40.62ab	33.32c	28.60bc	22.64b	18.90bc	14.75cd	15.26b	13.09d
XY335-6	55.51	50.32a	44.57cd	38.01bc	33.17c	27.67c	19.80c	16.49cd	15.34cd	15.24b	12.96d
XY335-no	55.51	47.11b	42.53d	35.45c	30.51d	26.53c	13.15d	13.46d	13.21d	15.22b	11.93d

处理 Treatment	日期 Date
处理 Treatment	8-25	8-30	9-04	9-09	9-15	9-20	10-01	10-07	10-16
ZD958-CK	49.46	43.92b	42.51a	36.11a	32.79a	31.86a	26.86a	22.73a	19.68a
ZD958-4	49.46	44.04b	42.39a	35.08ab	32.84a	31.04a	27.07a	23.22a	20.71a
ZD958-no	49.46	43.24b	39.39b	33.96b	30.59b	27.49b	18.88b	15.42b	15.66b
XY335-CK	48.12	45.93a	40.26a	35.66a	32.78a	27.33a	19.62a	16.52a	14.38a
XY335-4	48.12	44.67a	41.21a	36.35a	33.34a	26.11a	18.65ab	15.63a	14.65a
XY335-no	48.12	40.54b	35.59b	31.04b	24.37b	17.43b	15.82b	12.35b	13.19b

年份 Year	处理 Treatment	百粒干重(g) 100-grain dry weight
2015	ZD958-CK	34.80a
	ZD958-1	34.80a
	ZD958-2	34.38a
	ZD958-3	33.60a
	ZD958-4	33.24a
	ZD958-5	34.45a
	ZD958-no	31.40b
	XY335-CK	37.45a
	XY335-1	37.12a
	XY335-2	37.37a
	XY335-3	37.21a
	XY335-4	36.21a
	XY335-5	36.47a
	XY335-6	35.55a
	XY335-no	31.32b
2016	ZD958-CK	31.16a
	ZD958-4	31.99a
	ZD958-no	27.02b
	XY335-CK	33.31a
	XY335-4	32.90a
	XY335-no	28.18b