Crops ›› 2020, Vol. 36 ›› Issue (4): 45-52.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2020.04.007

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Study on the Evaluation of Stay-Green Traits of Wheat and Its Correlation with Yield-Related Traits under Different Water Conditions

Yang Bin1,2(), Yan Xue1(), Wen Hongwei2,3, Wang Shuguang1, Lu Lahu2, Fan Hua1, Jing Ruilian4, Sun Daizhen1()   

  1. 1College of Agronomy, Shanxi Agricultural University, Taigu 030801, Shanxi, China
    2Institute of Wheat, Shanxi Agricultural University, Linfen 041000, Shanxi, China
    3Shanxi Province Key Laboratory of Organic Dry Farming, Taiyuan 030000, Shanxi, China
    4Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China
  • Received:2019-11-20 Revised:2019-12-03 Online:2020-08-15 Published:2020-08-11
  • Contact: Sun Daizhen E-mail:sxxmsyb83@126.com;yanxue092@163.com;sdz64@126.com

RichHTML

5

PDF (PC)

251

Abstract:

To provide support for rapidly selecting stay-green lines and for accelerating drought-resistant and high photosynthetic efficiency breeding processes, phenotypic indicators suitable for evaluating stay-green traits should be found out under multiple environmental conditions. In this study, the SPAD value, green leaf area duration (GLAD) and the change of senescence parameters under different water conditions of flag leaves in different periods of grain-filling were analyzed using recombinant inbred lines (RIL) population of 306 lines (Hanxuan 10×Lumai 14), and the correlations between them and yield-related traits were studied. The results showed that the changes of SPAD value and GLAD in RIL population were dynamic and complex processes during the whole grain-filling period, while the senescence-related parameters could not reflect the dynamic process. Under the two water conditions, SPAD value at the late filling-grain stage (20, 25 and 30 days after anthesis) was significant or highly significant correlation with grain width, grain thickness, 1000-grain weight and yield per plant. Under irrigation conditions, the GLAD 10, 13, 16, 19 and 22 days after anthesis was highly significantly correlated with the yield per plant. However, the GLAD was not significantly correlated with yield per plant under drought stress. Under different environmental conditions, compared with GLAD, the SPAD value of flag leaf has a better correlation with senescence parameters and yield-related traits in the late grain-filling stage, and the measurement of the SPAD value is relatively simple, which is more suitable for selecting stay-green lines.

Key words: Wheat, Stay-green trait, Yield, Correlation analysis

Table 1

SPAD value, green leaf area duration and senescence related parameters of flag leaves during different grain filling stages under two water conditions"

性状
Trait		 亲本Parent t值
t value		 RIL群体RIL population
旱选10号
Hanxuan 10		 鲁麦14
Lumai 14		 平均值
Mean		 标准差
Standard
deviation		 偏度
Skewness		 峰度
Kurtosis		 最小值
Minimum		 最大值
Maximum		 变异系数
Coefficient of
variation (%)
SPAD-S1 56.97/56.37 61.51/59.67 4.39*/5.99* 57.26/56.39 2.44/2.33 -0.12/-0.05 -0.08/-0.26 49.42/50.16 64.34/62.66 4.27/4.13
SPAD-S2 55.38/54.18 59.93/56.87 5.75*/3.23ns 56.24/55.44 2.53/2.56 0.02/-0.22 -0.12/0.16 48.82/45.97 64.12/61.16 4.42/4.62
SPAD-S3 53.88/51.97 59.34/52.06 9.09*/0.12ns 55.10/52.71 3.22/3.27 -0.78/-0.52 2.11/0.68 35.90/39.58 61.84/59.92 5.85/6.21
SPAD-S4 52.74/49.34 55.79/42.46 5.73*/20.05** 50.97/46.88 6.44/8.44 -1.19/-1.61 2.71/2.97 1.48/3.58 60.55/57.92 12.64/18.01
SPAD-S5 42.98/25.95 41.43/10.12 0.35ns/7.56* 34.61/18.94 9.30/12.30 -0.65/0.35 -0.03/-0.65 0.00/0.00 55.82/49.32 35.53/64.95
SPAD-S6 15.97/3.25 12.34/1.74 1.72ns/8.13* 12.96/3.97 2.12/2.87 0.85/0.70 1.81/1.20 0.00/0.00 42.55/20.38 43.58/76.82
SPAD-S7 3.71/0.00 2.11/0.00 4.82*/- 2.04/- 0.12/- 1.20/- 1.75/- 0.00/0.00 6.22/0.00 95.95/-
GLAD-D1 8.15/8.13 8.73/7.75 5.00*/3.99ns 8.53/8.32 0.34/0.43 -0.79/-0.93 0.88/1.40 7.00/6.67 9.00/9.00 3.98/5.17
GLAD-D2 8.00/7.92 8.60/6.58 5.20*/6.70* 8.30/8.03 0.49/0.59 -1.10/-1.83 1.13/1.90 4.25/4.10 9.00/9.00 5.87/7.33
GLAD-D3 7.93/6.65 7.93/5.14 1.43ns/5.60* 7.86/7.12 0.84/1.35 -0.65/-0.81 0.55/0.59 2.37/2.40 9.00/8.67 10.68/18.88
GLAD-D4 7.40/5.00 6.53/2.40 6.21*/9.37* 6.93/5.29 1.29/1.89 -1.63/-0.93 1.72/1.37 1.05/0.22 8.80/8.00 18.67/35.75
GLAD-D5 4.50/0.62 3.53/0.00 3.35ns/- 3.93/1.55 1.03/1.60 -0.15/1.19 -0.84/1.12 0.00/0.00 8.00/7.40 51.57/43.09
GLAD-D6 1.32/0.00 0.40/0.00 6.72*/- 1.02/0.22 1.35/0.64 1.73/1.80 2.85/1.88 0.00/0.00 6.25/4.20 62.52/85.77
GLAD-D7 0.30/0.00 0.00/0.00 -/- 0.10/0.03 0.35/0.19 4.34/1.47 2.01/1.62 0.00/0.00 2.75/2.40 77.30/87.16
MRS (%/d) 15.13/13.97 13.21/15.86 5.39*/9.97** 16.15/16.34 4.60/5.22 -0.26/-0.30 -0.40/-0.35 6.30/5.57 37.10/33.63 28.70/31.94
TMRS (d) 22.86/20.12 22.20/18.86 0.53ns/5.32* 22.69/20.65 1.67/1.67 -0.25/-0.63 1.10/2.94 16.14/13.26 26.73/25.85 7.37/8.10
PGMS (%) 29.80/29.61 32.91/30.19 5.15*/0.93ns 31.33/31.08 1.63/2.30 2.41/1.64 1.95/0.87 26.87/25.50 45.52/42.53 5.21/7.41
75%G 20.88/17.75 19.45/16.20 1.63ns/2.45ns 20.04/17.96 1.81/2.08 -1.13/-1.68 0.89/0.92 8.85/5.80 24.67/23.21 9.04/11.60
50%G 22.28/19.52 21.91/17.84 0.84ns/5.17* 21.91/19.85 1.66/1.72 -0.43/-1.04 0.91/1.07 15.19/11.06 26.70/25.07 7.56/8.68
25%G 23.60/20.92 23.48/19.14 0.33ns/4.76* 23.39/21.35 1.73/1.69 -0.13/-0.24 0.68/1.26 16.92/14.68 28.46/27.05 7.38/7.90
Ts (d) 18.15/14.95 12.71/12.97 4.96*/6.25* 16.37/14.23 2.65/3.31 -2.10/-1.98 1.08/1.78 8.26/2.03 22.11/19.86 16.23/19.86
To (d) 29.60/24.47 25.22/20.91 4.80*/9.65* 25.03/23.02 1.98/1.92 0.05/0.53 0.19/2.43 18.75/16.17 30.80/29.38 7.92/9.35

Table 2

Distribution characteristics of yield-related traits under different two water conditions"

性状
Trait		 亲本Parent t值
t value		 RIL群体RIL population
旱选10号
Hanxuan 10		 鲁麦14
Lumai 14		 平均值
Mean		 标准差
Standard
deviation		 偏度
Skewness		 峰度
Kurtosis		 最小值
Minimum		 最大值Maximum 变异系数Coefficient of
variation (%)
千粒重
1000-grain weight (g)		 38.54/37.52 39.12/34.02 2.83ns/5.39* 39.33/37.36 4.51/4.13 -0.49/0.17 1.31/0.03 26.28/25.22 48.80/50.40 11.47/11.57
单株产量
Yield per plant (g)		 5.20/3.99 4.93/1.92 3.59ns/6.45* 4.31/2.94 1.58/0.97 0.49/0.54 0.01/0.02 1.24/0.72 9.11/5.59 36.78/33.13
单株穗数
Spike number per plant		 4.16/3.13 3.24/1.94 2.60ns/4.78* 3.36/2.63 0.96/0.77 0.60/1.23 0.91/0.46 1.50/1.35 7.25/6.98 40.62/47.23
穗粒数
Grain number per spike		 43.40/41.24 33.02/32.99 5.75*/5.10* 40.33/36.35 6.22/6.08 0.17/-0.06 0.32/0.29 24.39/16.67 56.60/51.47 15.43/16.71
粒长Grain length (mm) 6.55/6.29 6.68/6.26 0.52ns/1.88ns 6.74/6.59 0.32/0.32 0.00/-0.03 0.00/0.13 5.89/5.59 7.73/7.70 4.76/4.89
粒宽Grain width (mm) 3.48/3.35 3.07/3.03 7.35*/6.36* 3.30/3.19 0.18/0.18 0.50/-0.54 0.97/2.22 2.76/2.24 4.01/3.74 5.53/5.61
粒厚
Grain thickness (mm)		 3.14/2.95 3.03/2.91 4.35*/4.84* 3.11/2.99 0.19/0.20 0.34/0.03 0.00/0.00 2.65/2.48 3.69/3.57 5.99/6.58

Table 3

Correlation coefficients of the SPAD value and yield related traits under two water conditions"

性状Trait SPAD-S1 SPAD-S2 SPAD-S3 SPAD-S4 SPAD-S5 SPAD-S6 SPAD-S7
粒长Grain length -0.06/0.01 -0.07/0.03 -0.01/0.04 -0.07/0.07 0.09/0.04 -0.02/-0.02 -0.06/0.04
粒宽Grain width -0.04/0.09 -0.03/0.07 -0.03/0.07 -0.09/0.05 0.21**/0.20** -0.26**/0.13* -0.13*/0.22**
粒厚Grain thickness -0.02/0.04 -0.05/0.02 -0.03/0.02 -0.04/-0.05 0.06/0.19** -0.24**/0.18** -0.10/0.21**
千粒重
1000-grain weight		 -0.04/-0.07 -0.03/-0.05 -0.05/0.09 -0.12*/0.07 0.15**/0.22** -0.12*/0.18** -0.17**/0.19**
单株产量
Yield per plant		 -0.05/0.11 -0.08/0.15* -0.17**/0.15* -0.27**/0.15** 0.27**/0.17** -0.23**/0.13* -0.20**/0.15**
单株穗数
Spike number per plant		 -0.04/0.11 -0.06/0.12* -0.13*/0.12* -0.19**/0.08 0.18**/0.01 -0.07/-0.10 -0.02/-0.06
穗粒数
Grain number per spike		 -0.14*/0.19** -0.16**/0.23** -0.22**/0.20** -0.27**/0.21** 0.26**/0.17** -0.04/0.10 -0.03/0.07

Table 4

Correlation coefficients of the green leaf area duration and yield traits under two water conditions"

性状Trait GLAD-D1 GLAD-D2 GLAD-D3 GLAD-D4 GLAD-D5 GLAD-D6 GLAD-D7
粒长Grain length -0.16**/0.17** 0.14*/0.12* 0.12*/0.07 0.11*/0.03 0.05/0.03 -0.01/0.03 -0.09/0.02
粒宽Grain width -0.03/0.05 0.05/-0.01 0.05/0.03 0.12*/0.13* 0.30**/0.18** -0.29**/0.14* -0.16**/0.04
粒厚Grain thickness -0.05/0.07 0.01/-0.01 0.03/0.06 0.05/0.04 0.12*/0.15* -0.23**/0.19** -0.16**/0.08
千粒重
1000-grain weight		 -0.07/0.21** 0.07/0.16** 0.16**/0.15** 0.17**/0.13* 0.20**/0.14* -0.11/0.08 -0.05/0.05
单株产量
Yield per plant		 -0.15**/0.11 0.16**/0.09 0.22**/0.04 0.20**/0.06 0.19**/0.07 -0.09/0.07 -0.04/0.10
单株穗数
Spike number per plant		 -0.11*/0.04 0.10/0.02 0.15*/-0.02 0.12*/-0.02 0.09/-0.06 -0.08/-0.12* -0.08/-0.14*
穗粒数
Grain number per spike		 -0.18**/0.08 0.23**/0.10 0.23**/0.04 0.19**/0.07 0.16**/0.10 -0.02/0.14* -0.06/0.02

Table 5

Correlation coefficients of the senescence related parameters and yield traits under two water conditions"

性状Trait MRS TMRS PGMS Ts To 75%G 25%G 50%G
粒长Grain length -0.09/-0.09 0.05/0.02 -0.05/0.08 -0.11/0.06 -0.00/-0.06 0.09/0.03 0.03/-0.03 0.06/0.00
粒宽Grain width -0.12*/0.12* 0.28**/0.15** -0.08/0.06 -0.03/-0.03 -0.30**/0.20** 0.17**/0.05 0.29**/0.17** 0.25**/0.12*
粒厚Grain thickness -0.08/0.10 0.14*/0.08 -0.13*/0.13* -0.06/-0.10 -0.19**/0.16** 0.04/-0.03 0.16**/0.11 0.11/0.04
千粒重
1000-grain weight		 -0.04/-0.07 0.19**/0.11 -0.04/0.18** -0.16**/0.01 -0.15*/0.13* 0.20**/0.06 0.18**/0.12* 0.20**/0.10
单株产量
Yield per plant		 -0.21**/-0.20** 0.15**/-0.04 -0.07/-0.02 -0.29**/0.13* -0.03/-0.13* 0.26**/0.07 0.11/-0.07 0.19**/0.00
单株穗数
Spike number per plant		 -0.19**/-0.09 0.06/-0.07 -0.08/0.01 -0.21**/0.05 -0.04/-0.11 0.16**/0.07 0.02/-0.09 0.09/-0.05
穗粒数
Grain number per spike		 -0.16**/-0.15* 0.12*/-0.01 -0.02/-0.08 -0.21**/0.13* -0.03/-0.10 0.19**/0.08 0.09/-0.04 0.14*/0.02
[1] 贾丽 . 持绿小麦的筛选及同化物的积累与转运. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2008.
[2] Yang D L, Jing R L, Chang X P , et al. Quantitative trait loci mapping for chlorophyll fluorescence and associated traits in wheat (Triticum aestivum). Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 2007,49(5):646-654.
[3] 陈晓平, 杨德龙, 栗孟飞 , 等. 干旱胁迫条件下小麦RILs群体花后旗叶持绿性遗传特性及其与粒重的相关性. 干旱地区农业研究, 2014,32(6):57-63.
[4] 解芳, 翟国伟, 邹桂花 , 等. 干旱胁迫对高粱苗期抗旱生理特性的影响. 浙江农业学报, 2012,24(5):753-757.
[5] 黄瑞冬, 孙璐, 肖木辑 , 等. 持绿型高粱B35灌浆期对干旱的生理生化响应. 作物学报, 2009,35(3):560-565.
[6] You S C, Cho S H, Zhang H , et al. Quantitative trait loci associated with functional stay-green SNU-SG1 in rice. Molecules and Cells, 2007,24(1):83-94.
[7] Zhang K, Zhang Y, Chen G , et al. Genetic analysis of grain yield and leaf chlorophyll content in common wheat. Cereal Research Communications, 2009,37(4):499-511.
[8] Vijayalakshmi K, Fritz A K, Paulsen G M , et al. Modeling and mapping QTL for senescence-related traits in winter wheat under high temperature. Molecular Breeding, 2010,26(2):163-175.
[9] 石慧清 . 持绿型小麦对花后高温的耐性研究. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2011.
[10] 王鑫 . 小麦滞绿突变体tasg1的抗盐生理机制研究. 泰安:山东农业大学, 2014.
[11] Joshi A K, Kumari M, Singh V P , et al. Stay green trait: variation,inheritance and its association with spot blotch resistance in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Euphytica, 2007,153(1):59-71.
[12] 王建国, 杜桂娟 . 玉米持绿性评价方法的探讨. 辽宁农业科学, 2003(5):1-4.
[13] 刘志红 . 玉米持绿性评价及遗传分析. 雅安:四川农业大学, 2012.
[14] Wang S, Liang Z, Sun D , et al. Quantitative trait loci mapping for traits related to the progression of wheat flag leaf senescence. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 2015,153(7):1234-1245.
[15] 梁增浩 . 不同水分条件下小麦持绿相关性状的QTL定位. 晋中:山西农业大学, 2013.
[16] 钱雪娅 . 不同水分条件下小麦重要农艺性状的遗传分析及QTL定位. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2009.
[17] Blacklow W M, Incoll L D . Nitrogen stress of winter wheat changed the determinants of yield and the distribution of nitrogen and total dry matter during grain filling. Functional Plant Biology, 1981,8(2):191-200.
[18] Saleh M S, Al-Doss A A, Elshafei A A, , et al. Identification of new TRAP markers linked to chlorophyll content,leaf senescence,and cell membrane stability in water-stressed wheat. Biologia Plantarum, 2014,58(1):64-70.
[19] Bogard M, Jourdan M, Allard V , et al. Anthesis date mainly explained correlations between post-anthesis leaf senescence,grain yield,and grain protein concentration in a winter wheat population segregating for flowering time QTLs. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2011,62(10):3621-3636.
[20] Guo P, Baum M, Varshney R K , et al. QTLs for chlorophyll and chlorophyll fluorescence parameters in barley under post-flowering drought. Euphytica, 2008,163(2):203-214.
[21] Thomas H, Howarth C J . Five ways to stay green. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2000,51(SI):329-337.
[22] 武永胜, 薛晖, 刘洋 , 等. 持绿型小麦叶片衰老和叶绿素荧光特征的研究. 干旱地区农业研究, 2010,28(4):117-122,127.
[23] Gong Y H, Zhang J, Gao J Y , et al. Slow export of photoassimilate from stay-green leaves during late grain-filling stage in hybrid winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science, 2005,191(4):292-299.
[24] Spano G, Perrotta C, Platani C , et al. Physiological characterization of 'stay green' mutants in durum wheat. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2003,54(386):1415-1420.
[25] Reynolds M P, Rajaram S, Sayre K D . Physiological and genetic changes of irrigated wheat in the post-green revolution period and approaches for meeting projected global demand. Crop Science, 1999,39(6):1611-1621.
[26] Gorny A G, Garczynski S . Genotypic and nutrition-dependent variation in water use efficiency and photosynthetic activity of leaves in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Journal of Applied Genetics, 2002,43(2):145-160.
[1] Zhang Xiaoyan, Wang Xiaonan, Cao Kun, Sun Yufeng. Correlation Analysis of Fiber Yield and Yield Components in Five Industrial Hemp Varieties (Lines) [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 121-126.
[2] Qin Hongde, Rong Yihua, Huang Xiaoli, Hu Aibing, Zhou Jiahua, Yan Xianhui, Li Wei, Zhang Xianhong, Li Hongju, Yang Guozheng. Responses of Cotton to Planting Densities and Nitrogen Rates under Direct Seeding in Summer with Simplified Fertilization [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 127-134.
[3] Cao Changlin, Lü Huiqing, Hao Zhiping, Gao Xiang, Zhou Zhongyu. Effects of Foliar Spraying Zinc and Boron Fertilizer on the Yield and Quality of Jin Buckwheat (Bitter) No.5 [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 135-142.
[4] Fan Yuanyuan, Wu Haimei, Pang Lei, Lu Jianlong, Xia Bowen, Yang Xuhai. Effects of Straw Mulching on Wheat Yield in Different Ecological Regions in Northern Semi-Arid Areas of China Based on Meta Analysis [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 143-149.
[5] Li Qiang, Kong Fanlei, Yuan Jichao. Effects of Interannual Meteorological Factors on Maize Dry Matter Accumulation and Yield in the Hilly Area of Southwest China [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 150-157.
[6] Liu Dongjun, Song Weifu, Yang Xuefeng, Zhao Lijuan, Song Qingjie, Zhang Chunli, Xin Wenli, Xiao Zhimin. Progress of Wheat Fhb1 Gene Locating and Cloning and Its Utilization in the Resistance Breeding [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 16-20.
[7] Hu Jifang. Effects of Water Control on Growth and Development and Yield of Different Upland Rice Varieties during Jointing-Booting Stage [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 178-182.
[8] Chen Ying, Du Baozhi, Wang Wenxuan, Lu Cuihua, Liu Chun’an, Dai Guijin, Yu Guangxing, Liu Xianping, Gong Diankai. Investigation on the Pattern of Fertilizer and Density for Rice Stable Yield under Low Nitrogen Rate Cultivation in Different Regions of Liaoning Province [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 183-187.
[9] Yang Yongqing, Gao Fangfang, Ma Yajun, Chen Xin, Zhang Jie. Effects of Different Fertilizer Treatments on Yield, Quality and Economic Benefit of Foxtail Millet in Dry Farming Area of Shanxi Province [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 195-201.
[10] Zhang Qian, Li Yaofa, Wang Shulin, Wang Yan, Feng Guoyi, Lin Yongzeng, Liang Qinglong, Lei Xiaopeng, Qi Hong. Effects of Strip-Planting of Cotton-Wheat on Cotton Aphid [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 206-210.
[11] Yang Ziguang, Guo Lilei, Zhang Ke, Sun Junwei, Meng Limei. Development Trend of the Major Traits of Winter Wheat Varieties (Lines) in the Huang-Huai Dryland [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 30-36.
[12] Wang Zhongqiu, Ying Pengfei, Chen Mengtao, He Qiongying, Hu Xin. Analysis of Grain and Quality Traits of Chromosome Arm Substitution Lines of Triticum dicoccoides in the Background of Triticum aestivum [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 37-44.
[13] Chen Weiguo, Zhang Zheng, Shi Yugang, Cao Yaping, Wang Shuguang, Li Hong, Sun Daizhen. Drought-Tolerance Evaluation of 211 Wheat Germplasm Resources [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 53-.
[14] Shan Zilong, Ban Jinfu, Zhao Yankun, Cao Qiao, Tian Guoying, He Mingqi, Gao Zhenxian. Detection of Quality-Related Genes in the Wheat Varieties Authorized in Hebei Province by KASP Markers [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 64-71.
[15] Xu Yuanyuan, Zhao Peng, Hong Quanchun, Zhu Xiaoqin, Pei Dongli. Isolation and Expression Analysis of Transcription Factor Gene TaMYB70 in Wheat [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 84-90.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!