Crops ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (4): 253-262.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2024.04.033

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Physiological Identification and Comprehensive Evaluation of Drought Resistance of Different Maize Varieties

Li Chunqing1(), Liu Xiangyu2, Yan Peng1, Zhou Liuqian3, Lu Lin1, Dong Zhiqiang1, Xu Jiang1()   

  1. 1Institute of Crop Sciences, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences / Key Laboratory of Crop Physiology and Ecology of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Beijing 100081, China
    2Turpan Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Turpan 838000, Xinjiang, China
    3College of Life Science and Technology, Xinjiang University, Urumqi 830046, Xinjiang, China
  • Received:2023-07-10 Revised:2023-08-28 Online:2024-08-15 Published:2024-08-14

RichHTML

5

PDF (PC)

280

Abstract:

A total of 42 maize cultivars were selected as the test materials and treated with normal irrigation, moderate and severe drought stress in the experimental base of Turpan Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences. The changes of chlorophyll (Chl) content, malondialdehyde (MDA) content, proline (Pro) content, the activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD), catalase (CAT) and peroxidase (POD) in ear leaf of maize at grain filling stage, and also grain yield were measured. The grey correlation analysis, drought resistance index (DI), drought resistance evaluation values (D-value), weighted drought resistance index (WDI-value) and cluster analysis were used to screen physiological indexes closely related to drought resistance, and the drought resistance of different maize varieties was evaluated comprehensively. The results showed that the correlation degree between the six physiological indexes and the comprehensive drought resistance index (CDI) under moderate drought stress were SOD (0.803), Chl (0.796), MDA (0.788), CAT (0.770), proline (0.756) and POD (0.755); Under severe drought stress, the correlation degree between the six physiological indexes and the CDI were SOD (0.725), MDA (0.724), Chl (0.718), proline (0.692), CAT (0.681) and POD (0.667). Based on the D value and WDI value, the drought resistance evaluation results of the two methods had some differences, but the drought resistance ranking of different varieties was basically the same. The correlation analysis of average DI of yield and values of (CD) and (CWDI) were positively correlated. According to the CWDI value, the 42 maize varieties were divided into high drought resistance, medium drought resistance, and low drought resistance, among which included two high drought resistant varieties, and 13 medium drought resistant varieties, 27 low drought resistant varieties. Variance analysis showed that the DI of yield of high resistance maize group was significantly higher than that of medium resistance and low resistance. In conclusion, the above six physiological indexes of maize leaves combined can be used as reference indexes for physiological identification of drought resistance of maize varieties at the grain filling stage. Liaodan 145 and Jinhua 150 have strong drought resistance among 42 tested varieties.

Key words: Maize, Drought resistance, Identification index, Grey correlation analysis, System clustering analysis

Fig.1

Monthly precipitation and mean temperature during maize growing season in 2017 and 2018"

Table 1

Test maize varieties"

品种
Variety		 审定年份
Approval year		 品种
Variety		 审定年份
Approval year		 品种
Variety		 审定年份
Approval year
辽单145 Liaodan 145 2006 MC670 2016 吉单101 Jidan 101 1985
锦华150 Jinhua 150 2014 联创808 Lianchuang 808 2015 丹玉13 Danyu 13 1987
郑单1002 Zhengdan 1002 2014 辽单585 Liaodan 585 2018 先玉335 Xianyu 335 2004
泽玉501 Zeyu 501 2017 农大108 Nongda 108 1998 中科玉505 Zhongkeyu 505 2015
辽单1211 Liaodan 1211 2009 泽玉402 Zeyu 402 2006 农华127 Nonghua 127 2018
郑单958 Zhengdan 958 2000 农华816 Nonghua 816 2015 裕丰303 Yufeng 303 2015
辽单575 Liaodan 575 2018 农华101 Nonghua 101 2010 泽尔沣99 Zeerfeng 99 2015
陕单650 Shandan 650 2018 陕单609 Shandan 609 2011 KX9384 2004
掖单13 Yedan 13 1998 农华205 Nonghua 205 2014 KX3564 2009
秋乐368 Qiule 368 2017 辽单586 Liaodan 586 2018 增玉1572 Zengyu 1572 2017
陕单620 Shandan 620 2018 泽玉8911 Zeyu 8911 2017 郑单538 Zhengdan 538 2010
登海618 Denghai 618 2013 金通152 Jintong 152 2016 增玉1317 Zengyu 1317 2017
四单8 Sidan 8 1990 吉单180 Jidan 180 1996 辽单586 Liaodan 586 2004
陕单628 Shandan 628 2017 登海605 Denghai 605 2010 英粒子Yinglizi 1943

Table 2

Different distributions of DI of indexes in tested varieties"

指标
Index		 频次Frequency
0≤DI<0.2 0.2≤DI<0.4 0.4≤DI<0.6 0.6≤DI<0.8 0.8≤DI<1.0 1.0≤DI<1.2 1.2≤DI<1.4 1.4≤DI<1.6 1.6≤DI<1.8 1.8≤DI<2.0 DI≥2.0
Chl 0 0 3 7 15 10 1 4 0 0 2
MDA 0 0 0 8 16 13 4 1 0 0 0
SOD 0 2 0 6 5 11 10 5 0 2 1
CAT 0 1 5 11 5 3 4 5 1 1 6
POD 2 3 4 6 5 3 5 4 2 2 6
Pro 0 0 4 10 3 3 5 5 2 6 5

Table 3

Correlation degree and correlation order between different parameters and CDI of maize"

指标
Index		 中度干旱Moderate drought 重度干旱Severe drought
关联度Correlation degree 权重Weight 关联序Correlation order 关联度Correlation degree 权重Weight 关联序Correlation order
SOD 0.803 0.169 1 0.725 0.172 1
Chl 0.796 0.172 2 0.718 0.170 3
MDA 0.788 0.162 3 0.724 0.172 2
CAT 0.770 0.165 4 0.681 0.161 5
Pro 0.756 0.171 5 0.692 0.164 4
POD 0.755 0.162 6 0.667 0.158 6

Table 4

The WDI and D values of different maize varieties under different drought treatments"

品种
Variety		 中度干旱Moderate drought 重度干旱Severe drought
加权抗旱指数
WDI		 排序
Ranking		 D值
D value		 排序
Ranking		 加权抗旱指数
WDI		 排序
Ranking		 D值
D value		 排序
Ranking
辽单145 Liaodan 145 2.721 1 0.475 4 1.820 3 0.468 6
锦华150 Jinhua 150 2.412 2 0.458 5 1.624 6 0.464 7
郑单1002 Zhengdan 1002 1.739 3 0.554 2 1.648 5 0.459 8
掖单13 Yedan 13 1.631 4 0.451 6 0.958 34 0.294 34
泽玉501 Yeyu 501 1.552 5 0.482 3 1.738 4 0.662 1
辽单575 Liaodan 575 1.475 6 0.410 8 1.359 9 0.364 19
秋乐368 Qiule 368 1.447 7 0.392 12 1.164 19 0.360 21
陕单650 Shandan 650 1.420 8 0.612 1 1.392 8 0.469 5
四单8 Sidan 8 1.416 9 0.382 15 0.989 31 0.325 28
陕单628 Shandan 628 1.398 10 0.394 11 0.993 28 0.350 25
登海618 Denghai 618 1.395 11 0.404 9 1.166 18 0.375 16
联创808 Lianchuang 808 1.319 12 0.346 20 0.984 32 0.337 27
农华205 Nonghua 205 1.221 13 0.358 18 0.969 33 0.228 41
泽玉402 Zeyu 402 1.186 14 0.328 23 1.064 26 0.343 26
登海605 Denghai 605 1.177 15 0.312 25 1.253 11 0.358 22
MC670 1.147 16 0.309 27 1.301 10 0.428 10
农大108 Nongda 108 1.138 17 0.347 19 1.142 20 0.316 31
吉单101 Jidan 101 1.125 18 0.365 16 0.871 40 0.267 37
泽玉8911 Zeyu 8911 1.083 19 0.360 17 1.115 22 0.392 14
农华101 Nonghua 101 1.063 20 0.389 14 1.171 17 0.548 2
辽单585 Liaodan 585 1.048 21 0.331 22 1.233 12 0.318 30
农华816 Nonghua 816 1.032 22 0.399 10 1.196 16 0.422 11
郑单958 Zhengdan 958 1.020 23 0.311 26 1.839 2 0.526 3
辽单1211 Liaodan 1211 1.017 24 0.286 29 1.857 1 0.415 13
陕单609 Shandan 609 1.011 25 0.342 21 1.209 15 0.459 9
陕单620 Shandan 620 0.989 26 0.418 7 1.515 7 0.470 4
中科玉505 Zhongkeyu 505 0.983 27 0.253 38 0.991 29 0.272 35
泽尔沣99 Zeerfeng 99 0.959 28 0.267 33 0.900 38 0.224 42
辽单586 Liaodan 586 0.948 29 0.389 13 1.230 13 0.421 12
金通152 Jintong 152 0.904 30 0.253 37 1.229 14 0.362 20
KX3564 0.904 31 0.305 28 0.938 36 0.314 32
丹玉13 Danyu 13 0.877 32 0.263 35 1.119 21 0.368 18
先玉335 Xianyu 335 0.865 33 0.285 30 1.086 23 0.352 23
KX9384 0.860 34 0.243 39 0.991 30 0.295 33
郑单538 Zhengdan 538 0.828 35 0.232 40 0.897 39 0.233 40
吉单180 Jidan 180 0.817 36 0.275 32 1.025 27 0.324 29
农华127 Nonghua 127 0.815 37 0.319 24 1.084 24 0.373 17
裕丰303 Yufeng 303 0.807 38 0.137 42 1.067 25 0.377 15
增玉1317 Zengyu 1317 0.758 39 0.277 31 0.946 35 0.267 38
英粒子Yinglizi 0.755 40 0.257 36 0.715 42 0.269 36
增玉1572 Zengyu 1572 0.742 41 0.265 34 0.848 41 0.240 39
辽单565 Liaodan 565 0.630 42 0.190 41 0.931 37 0.350 24

Table 5

Ranking of yield DI, CWDI and CD values of tested varieties"

品种Variety CWDI值CWDI value 排序Ranking CD值CD value 排序Ranking 产量抗旱指数DI of yield 排序Ranking
辽单145 Liaodan 145 2.361 1 0.472 5 0.761 3
锦华150 Jinhua 150 2.095 2 0.461 6 1.004 1
郑单1002 Zhengdan 1002 1.695 3 0.512 3 0.481 4
泽玉501 Zeyu 501 1.651 4 0.587 1 0.437 13
辽单1211 Liaodan 1211 1.560 5 0.363 19 0.533 8
郑单958 Zhengdan 958 1.547 6 0.447 7 0.908 2
辽单575 Liaodan 575 1.420 7 0.389 15 0.423 5
陕单650 Shandan 650 1.407 8 0.550 2 0.258 10
掖单13 Yedan 13 1.382 9 0.389 14 0.436 6
秋乐368 Qiule 368 1.321 10 0.416 9 0.319 11
陕单620 Shandan 620 1.308 11 0.446 8 0.386 24
登海618 Denghai 618 1.291 12 0.391 13 0.398 23
四单8 Sidan 8 1.241 13 0.356 20 0.721 14
陕单628 Shandan 628 1.230 14 0.373 18 0.526 30
MC670 1.230 15 0.378 16 0.355 17
联创808 Lianchuang 808 1.176 16 0.342 22 0.356 9
辽单585 Liaodan 585 1.148 17 0.325 26 0.371 26
农大108 Nongda 108 1.141 18 0.333 24 0.359 28
泽玉402 Zeyu 402 1.129 19 0.329 25 0.461 15
农华816 Nonghua 816 1.120 20 0.411 10 0.638 19
农华101 Nonghua 101 1.120 21 0.482 4 0.648 21
陕单609 Shandan 609 1.119 22 0.410 11 0.259 18
农华205 Nonghua 205 1.110 23 0.308 33 0.553 7
辽单586 Liaodan 586 1.108 24 0.406 12 0.376 25
泽玉8911 Zeyu 8911 1.100 25 0.377 17 0.502 12
金通152 Jintong 152 1.092 26 0.318 31 0.269 39
吉单180 Jidan 180 1.082 27 0.319 29 0.419 22
登海605 Denghai 605 1.040 28 0.292 36 0.288 37
吉单101 Jidan 101 1.015 29 0.324 27 0.312 35
丹玉13 Danyu 13 1.013 30 0.280 37 0.357 29
先玉335 Xianyu 335 0.988 31 0.323 28 0.352 32
中科玉 505 Zhongkeyu 505 0.987 32 0.263 39 0.297 36
农华127 Nonghua 127 0.969 33 0.317 32 0.459 16
裕丰303 Yufeng 303 0.955 34 0.223 42 0.431 20
泽尔沣99 Zeerfeng 99 0.931 35 0.248 40 0.262 40
KX9384 0.931 36 0.319 30 0.508 34
KX3564 0.921 37 0.343 21 0.352 33
增玉1572 Zengyu 1572 0.907 38 0.298 34 0.509 27
郑单538 Zhengdan 538 0.864 39 0.233 41 0.276 38
增玉1317 Zengyu 1317 0.863 40 0.335 23 0.493 31
辽单565 Liaodan 565 0.810 41 0.294 35 0.441 41
英粒子Yinglizi 0.736 42 0.263 38 0.369 42

Table 6

Correlation coefficients between DI of yield, CWDI and CD values"

指标
Index		 相关系数Correlation coefficient
产量抗旱指数
DI of yield		 CWDI值
CWDI value		 CD值
CD value
产量DI DI of yield 1.000 0.826** 0.588**
CWDI值CWDI value 1.000 0.719**
CD值CD value 1.000

Fig.2

WPGMA clustering of different maize varieties based on CWDI"

Fig.3

Regression analysis of CWDI and the year"

[1] 陈印军, 王琦琪, 向雁. 我国玉米生产地位、优势与自给率分析. 中国农业资源与区划, 2019, 40(1):7-16.
[2] Gong Z Z, Xiong L M, Shi H Z, et al. Plant abiotic stress response and nutrient use efficiency. Science China (Life Sciences), 2020, 63(5):635-674.
[3] 国务院第三次全国国土调查领导小组办公室, 自然资源部, 国家统计局. 第三次全国国土调查主要数据公报. 自然资源通讯, 2021(17):7-8.
[4] Zhang Q, Zhang J Q, Wang C Y. Risk assessment of drought disaster in typical area of corn cultivation in China. Theoretical & Applied Climatology, 2017, 128(3/4):533-540.
[5] 黄静, 张运, 汪明秀, 等. 近17年新疆干旱时空分布特征及影响因素. 生态学报, 2020, 40(3):333-344.
[6] Shemi R, Wang R, Gheith E M S, et al. Effects of salicylic acid, zinc and glycine betaine onmorpho-physiological growth and yield of maize under drought stress. Scientific Reports, 2021, 11(1):3195.
[7] Seleiman M F, Al-Suhaibani N, Ali N, et al. Drought stress impacts on plants and different approaches to alleviate its adverse effects. Plants (Basel), 2021, 10(2):259.
[8] Gao C, Li X W, Sun Y W, et al. Water requirement of summer maize at different growth stages and the spatiotemporal characteristics of agricultural drought in the Huaihe River Basin, China. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 2019, 136(3/4):1289-1302.
[9] Zhu J K. Abiotic stress signaling and responses in plants. Cell, 2016, 167(2):313-324.
[10] Zhang Q, Liu H, Wu X, et al. Identification of drought tolerant mechanisms in a drought-tolerant maize mutant based on physiological, biochemical and transcriptomic analyses. BMC Plant Biology, 2020, 20(1):315-329.
doi: 10.1186/s12870-020-02526-w pmid: 32620139
[11] Romdhane L, Farooq M, Cortivo C D, et al. Morphological and biochemical changes in maize under drought and salinity stresses in a semi-arid environment. Plant Biosystems, 2020, 154(3):396-404.
doi: 10.1080/11263504.2019.1635221
[12] 刘成, 杨炳鹏, 孙宝成, 等. 转LOS5玉米的大田抗旱性鉴定. 中国农业科学, 2016, 49(23):4469-4479.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2016.23.001
[13] 孟雨, 田文仲, 温鹏飞, 等. 基于不同发育阶段协同的小麦品种抗旱性综合评判. 作物学报, 2023, 49(2):570-582.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2023.21008
[14] 李龙, 王兰芬, 武晶, 等. 普通菜豆品种苗期抗旱性鉴定. 作物学报, 2015, 41(6):963-971.
[15] Shahzad A, Gul H, Ahsan M, et al. Comparative genetic evaluation of maize inbred lines at seedling and maturity stages under drought stress. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, 2023, 42:989-1005.
[16] 周长军. 黑龙江西部半干旱地区玉米产量与农艺性状灰色关联度分析. 中国种业, 2020(5):49-52.
[17] 赵龙, 刘翔宇, 徐江, 等. 43个玉米品种在新疆吐鲁番旱区表现和抗旱类群划分. 新疆农业科学, 2021, 58(12):2183-2191.
[18] 李合生. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2000:134-137.
[19] 卢霖, 董志强, 董学瑞, 等. 乙矮合剂对不同密度夏玉米花粒期不同部位叶片衰老特性的影响. 作物学报, 2016, 42(4):561-573.
[20] Bates L S, Waldren R P, Teare I D. Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant and Soil, 1973, 39(1):205-207.
[21] 张海燕, 解备涛, 汪宝卿, 等. 不同甘薯品种抗旱性评价及耐旱指标筛选. 作物学报, 2019, 45(3):419-430.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2019.84087
[22] 朱亚迪, 王慧琴, 王洪章, 等. 不同夏玉米品种大喇叭口期耐热性评价和鉴定指标筛选. 作物学报, 2022, 48(12):3130-3143.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.13079
[23] 王玉斌, 平俊爱, 牛皓, 等. 粒用高粱种质中后期抗旱性鉴定筛选与分类指标评价. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(22):4039-4052.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.22.009
[24] Qi M, Liu X D, Li Y B, et al. Photosynthetic resistance and resilience under drought, flooding and rewatering in maize plants. Photosynthesis Research, 2021, 148(1/2):1-15.
[25] Avramova V, Abdelgawad H, Zhang Z, et al. Drought induces distinct growth response, protection, and recovery mechanisms in the maize leaf growth zone. Plant Physiology, 2015, 169(2):1382-1396.
doi: 10.1104/pp.15.00276 pmid: 26297138
[26] Hussain H A, Men S, Hussain S, et al. Maize tolerance against drought and chilling stresses varied with root morphology and antioxidative defense system. Plants, 2020, 9(6):720.
[27] 杜彩艳, 段宗颜, 张乃明, 等. 云南主栽玉米品种抗旱性鉴定与评价. 干旱地区农业研究, 2015, 33(4):181-189.
[28] 吴伟, 陈学珍, 谢皓, 等. 干旱胁迫下大豆抗旱性鉴定. 分子植物育种, 2005, 3(2):188-194.
[29] 孟雨, 温鹏飞, 丁志强, 等. 基于热红外图像的小麦品种抗旱性鉴定与评价. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(13):2538-2551.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.13.005
[30] Wang N, Wang Y T, Yu J L, et al. Prioritization of feasible physiological parameters in drought tolerance evaluation in sorghum: A grey relational analysis. Zemdirbyste-Agriculture, 2015, 102(4):457-464.
[31] 李瑞东, 尹阳阳, 宋雯雯, 等. 增密对不同分枝类型大豆品种同化物积累和产量的影响. 作物学报, 2022, 48(4):942-951.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.14045
[32] 尹光华, 沈业杰, 张颖, 等. 玉米品种抗旱生理生化指标研究. 华北农学报, 2010, 25(增2):88-92.
[33] 赵天宏, 沈秀瑛, 杨德光, 等. 灰色关联度分析在玉米抗旱生理鉴定中的应用. 辽宁农业科学, 2003(1):1-4.
[34] 徐洪文, 宋凤斌, 朱先灿, 等. 不同生育时期玉米苞叶叶绿素荧光特性差异分析. 华北农学报, 2009, 24(6):74-77.
doi: 10.7668/hbnxb.2009.06.015
[35] 邵惠芳, 陈征, 许嘉阳, 等. 两种烟草幼苗叶片对不同强度干旱胁迫的生理响应比较. 植物生理学报, 2016, 52(12):1861-1871.
[36] 李敏, 苏慧, 李阳阳, 等. 黄淮海麦区小麦耐热性分析及其鉴定指标的筛选. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(16):3381-3392.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.16.002
[37] 徐银萍, 潘永东, 刘强德, 等. 大麦种质资源成株期抗旱性鉴定及抗旱指标筛选. 作物学报, 2020, 46(3):136-149.
[38] 李龙, 毛新国, 王景一, 等. 小麦种质资源抗旱性鉴定评价. 作物学报, 2018, 44(7):988-999.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2018.00988
[39] 程慧金, 梁晓玲, 韩登旭, 等. 我国不同年代主要玉米品种耐旱性鉴定与评价. 新疆农业科学, 2012, 49(4):602-609.
[40] 孙琦, 张世煌, 郝转芳, 等. 不同年代玉米品种苗期耐旱性的比较分析. 作物学报, 2012, 38(2):315-321.
[1] Ma Yanhua, Sun Dequan, Li Suiyan, Lin Hong, Pan Liyan, Li Donglin, Fan Jinsheng, Wu Jianzhong, Yang Guowei. Comprehensive Evaluation of Main Agronomic Traits and Screening of Excellent Germplasms of Maize Landraces in Heilongjiang Province [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 103-112.
[2] Yang Ke, Jiang Chunxia, Zhang Wei, Liu Enke, Zhai Guangqian, Zhang Dongmei. Study on the Effects of Different Treatments on Mechanical Harvest Broken Rate of Maize Grains [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 138-143.
[3] Wang Fugui, Zou Runhou, Gao Julin, Wang Zhen, Cheng Zhipeng, Hao Qi, Zhang Yuezhong, Wang Zhigang. Effects of Straw Returning Methods on Soil Water and Heat and Seedling Growth and Yield of Spring Maize in Eastern Region of Inner Mongolia [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 223-231.
[4] Li Qingchao, Zhang Dengfeng, Li Chunhui, Yang Shan, Liu Jianxin, Wu Xun. Genetic Diversity Analysis and Comprehensive Evaluation of Maize Landraces in Southwest China [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 24-32.
[5] Wang Lu, Deng Jie, Zhang Ze, Zhao Mengwei, Che Xinyang, Wang Guangyi, Guo Xu, Zhang Haiyang, He Lin, Weng Jianfeng, Xu Jingyu. Identification and Evaluation of Drought Tolerant Germplasm Resources at Seedling Stage of Maize under PEG Stress [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 43-53.
[6] Liu Qianqian, Li Ran, Zhou Tingfang, Zhang Ze, Shangguan Xiaochuan, Pan Yue, Zhang Degui, Yong Hongjun, Li Mingshun, Han Jienan. Identification of Salt Tolerance of 211 Maize Inbred Lines at Germination Stage [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 62-70.
[7] Fan Yu, Feng Liang, Wang Junzhen, Yang Qiaohui, Ren Yuanhang, Zhang Kaixuan, Zou Liang, Zhou Meiliang, Xiang Dabing. Nutritional Composition Analysis of Different Oats Varieties [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(4): 71-81.
[8] Guo Haibin, Zhang Jungang, Wang Wenwen, Xue Zhiwei, Xu Haitao, Feng Xiaoxi, Wang Bingong, Wang Chengye. Response of Photosynthetic Characteristics, Root Growth and Yield of Summer Maize to Subsoiling and Increasing Density in Lime Concretion Black Soil [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(3): 109-118.
[9] Zhang Lin, Wu Wenming, Zhou Dengfeng, Peng Chen, Wang Shiji. Responses of Growth and Yield of Fresh-Eating Maize “Caitiannuo 100” to Autumn Sowing Date under Facility Cultivation [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(3): 175-179.
[10] Xu Rongqiong, Zhang Yifei, Du Jiarui, Yin Xuewei, Yang Kejun, Sun Yishan, Li Zesong, Li Guibin, Lu Yuxin, Liu Haichen, Li Weiqing, Li Jiayu. Effects of Foliar Spraying Calcium Fertilizer on Lodging Resistance and Yield Formation of Spring Maize [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(3): 223-230.
[11] Li Jiaqi, Shi Jianguo, Chen Qihang, Chang Fengyun, Duan Yizhong, Chai Guaiqiang, Jia Lei, Chen Tao. Effects of Film Mulching on Rhizosphere Soil Microbial Community of Maize in Wind-Sand Grassy Beach Area of Northern Shaanxi Province [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(3): 238-246.
[12] Qing Chen, Liu Zhengxue, Li Yanjie. Effects of Compound Microbial Fertilizer on Drought Resistance of Maize Seedlings under Drought Stress by Transcriptome Analysis [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(3): 32-39.
[13] Ma Hongzhen, Xu Haitao, Wang Yue, Feng Xiaoxi, Xu Bo, Zhang Jungang, Guo Haibin, Wang Youhua. Analysis of Genetic Diversity and Genetic Distance of Maize Inbred Lines Based on Phenotypic Traits of Husks [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(3): 54-63.
[14] Wang Huaiping, Yang Mingda, Zhang Suyu, Li Shuai, Guan Xiaokang, Wang Tongchao. Effects of Different Water-Saving Irrigation Modes on Growth, Yield, and Water Utilization of Summer Maize [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 206-212.
[15] Zhang Qian, Ren Wen, Zhao Bingbing, Zhou Miaoyi, Li Hanshuai, Liu Ya, Du Hewei. Cloning and Bioinformatics Analysis of ZmMAPKKK21 Gene in Maize [J]. Crops, 2024, 40(2): 30-39.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!