Crops ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (3): 190-194.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.03.026

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Adaptability Analysis of Oil-Fodder Rapeseed Lines in Lhasa Region

Long Weihua1(), Li Yazhen2, Wang Yakun2, Wang Yongfeng2, Huang Zhen3, Nimaciren 4, Zhang Xingguo2()   

  1. 1College of Rural Revitalization, Jiangsu Open University, Nanjing 210036, Jiangsu, China
    2College of Agronomy, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, Henan, China
    3College of Agriculture, Northwest A&F University, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, China
    4Agricultural Technology Extension Station of Qushui County, Lhasa 850600, Tibet, China
  • Received:2024-02-18 Revised:2024-03-23 Online:2025-06-15 Published:2025-06-03

RichHTML

0

PDF (PC)

16

Abstract:

The introduction and screening of new oil-fodder Brassica napus lines with high yield and high efficiency is an important measure to promote the high-quality development of agriculture in Tibet. The indicators of agronomic traits and feeding traits were analyzed, five rapeseed lines (designated as PB1-PB5) were introduced from outside the Tibet region, and Zangyou No.5 served as the control (CK). The results showed that the ripening period of the introduced lines were equal to or earlier than that of CK; The indicators such as the number of primary branches, the number of siliques on the main inflorescence and the 1000-grain weight were at the same level with those of CK, and the number of grains per silique was generally higher. The yield of PB5 was significantly higher than that of CK, and the feeding traits of PB5 showed the best performance among all the tested lines. The oleic acid content of PB2, PB4 and PB5 was about 70%. The comprehensive analysis showed PB5 was the best oil-fodder B.napus line suitable for planting in Lhasa region.

Key words: Oil-fodder Brassica napus, Agronomic characteristic, Feeding related indexes, Lhasa area

Table 1

Comparison of the growth period of the tested varieties (lines)"

品种（系）
Variety
(line)		 播种期（月-日）
Sowing
(month-day)		 五叶期（月-日）
Five-leaf stage
(month-day)		 初花期（月-日）
Initial flowering
(month-day)		 终花期（月-日）
Final flowering
(month-day)		 成熟期（月-日）
Maturity
(month-day)		 成熟期比CK提前天数
Maturity days earlier
than CK (d)
PB1 03-28 05-15 06-10 07-01 08-16 0
PB2 03-28 05-17 06-07 06-30 08-14 2
PB3 03-28 05-23 06-07 07-02 08-15 1
PB4 03-28 05-10 06-05 07-01 08-13 3
PB5 03-28 05-23 06-04 07-01 08-13 3
CK 03-28 05-18 06-12 07-01 08-16 －

Table 2

Comparison of the agronomy traits of the tested varieties (lines)"

品种
（系）
Variety
(line)		 株高
Plant
height
(cm)		 分枝点高度
Height of the
branch point
(cm)		 一次分枝数
Number of
the primary
branches		 主花序长度
Length of the main
inflorescence
(cm)		 主花序角果数
Number of siliques
on the main
inflorescence		 单株总角果数
Total number
of siliques
per plant		 角果长度
Silique
length
(cm)		 每角粒数
Number of
grains per
silique		 千粒重
1000-grain
weight
(g)
PB1 116.67bc 33.78bc 6.44b 57.00b 58.33ab 130.44c 7.41bc 23.63b 3.45c
PB2 114.44c 25.44d 7.22ab 53.89c 58.11ab 159.89b 8.26ab 25.44ab 3.79bc
PB3 116.28bc 33.44bc 6.33b 57.11b 52.11c 167.78ab 7.63bc 25.26ab 3.94ab
PB4 119.89b 30.56c 7.78a 57.00b 58.56ab 149.89bc 10.20a 27.67a 4.19a
PB5 125.11b 39.06a 5.22c 57.44b 55.33bc 178.22a 9.51a 28.15a 3.82bc
CK 134.94a 20.02e 7.67a 64.61a 63.33a 152.78bc 6.88c 21.93b 3.90ab

Table 3

Yield comparison of the tested varieties (lines)"

品种（系）
Variety (line)		 小区产量
Plot yield (kg)		 产量
Yield (kg/hm2)		 差异显著性
Significant difference (5%)		 比CK平均增产
Average yield increase compared with CK (%)
PB1 5.94 2968.70 b -7.33
PB2 5.74 2868.80 c -10.45
PB3 5.59 2792.21 c -12.84
PB4 6.60 3295.04 a 2.86
PB5 6.79 3389.94 a 5.82
CK 6.41 3203.46 ab 0.00

Table 4

Comparison of the feed indicators of the tested varieties (lines)"

品种（系）
Variety
(line)		 干物质含量
Dry matter
content (%)		 粗蛋白质含量
Crude protein
content (%)		 粗脂肪含量
Crude fat
content (%)		 粗灰分含量
Crude ash
content (%)		 中性洗涤纤维含量
Neutral detergent
fiber content (%)		 酸性洗涤纤维含量
Acid detergent
fiber content (%)		 F值排名
F-value
ranking
PB1 89.76a 17.14a 5.71ab 10.96ab 37.07c 18.95c 3518.42（4）
PB2 90.32a 12.13b 4.94b 9.26bc 45.66ab 27.54a 3126.20（5）
PB3 89.78a 17.33a 6.88a 11.39a 40.15bc 20.82c 5394.72（3）
PB4 89.83a 12.26b 6.50a 8.76c 39.27bc 23.10b 2111.26（6）
PB5 90.41a 13.33b 5.73ab 9.70b 51.96a 31.20a 5882.21（1）
CK 89.39a 18.87a 6.88a 12.18a 37.42c 19.82c 5812.88（2）

Table 5

Comparison of the grain quality traits of the tested varieties (lines)"

品种（系）
Variety
(line)		 含油量
Oil content
(%)		 蛋白质
Protein
(%)		 硫苷
Glucosinolates
(μmol/g)		 棕榈酸
Palmitic
acid (%)		 硬脂酸
Stearic
acid (%)		 油酸
Oleic
acid (%)		 亚油酸
Linoleic
acid (%)		 亚麻酸
Linoleic
acid (%)		 二十碳烯酸
Eicosacenoic
acid (%)		 芥酸
Erucic
acid (%)
PB1 53.81a 18.05a 22.93b 4.05ab 1.08a 65.08b 17.34a 12.19a 3.15a 0.45b
PB2 53.42a 17.64a 21.18b 4.09a 0.91a 71.98ab 17.34a 11.99a 2.61a 0.13b
PB3 48.77b 18.35a 15.02c 4.16a 1.16a 66.80b 17.37a 11.39a 2.97a 0.55b
PB4 52.20a 15.81a 15.17c 3.88b 0.96a 71.51a 14.88b 10.65a 2.83a 0.16c
PB5 49.22b 17.79a 14.59c 4.19a 1.26a 69.07ab 15.57b 9.75a 3.22a 0.98b
CK 51.24ab 16.30a 100.35a 3.45b 0.81a 59.83c 15.43b 11.68a 3.89a 8.33a
[1] 华水金, 杨勇, 唐琳, 等. 西藏油菜产业现状及发展建议. 西藏农业科技, 2022(3):1-6.
[2] 汪波, 刘姝, 甘丽, 等. 油菜多功能利用技术模式. 长江蔬菜, 2019(6):29-31.
[3] 张晓庆, 参木友. 西藏草地畜牧业发展现状与重点任务. 中国草地学报, 2020, 42(5):158-163.
[4] 汪波, 宋丽君, 王宗凯, 等. 我国饲料油菜种植及应用技术研究进展. 中国油料作物学报, 2018, 40(5):695-701.
doi: 10.7505/j.issn.1007-9084.2018.05.012
[5] 毕影东, 樊超, 周广生, 等. 北方寒区饲肥兼用型油菜综合利用研究进展. 中国油料作物学报, 2023, 45(3):437-443.
doi: 10.19802/j.issn.1007-9084.2022080
[6] 赵娜, 杨雪海, 陈芳, 等. 青贮饲用油菜对育肥期山羊生产性能及瘤胃发酵性能的影响. 畜牧与兽医, 2020, 52(12):35-38.
[7] 毛鑫, 赵家宇, 刘桂琼, 等. 饲料油菜FTMR的羔羊强度育肥效果研究. 中国饲料, 2019(11):66-68.
[8] 赵娜, 杨雪海, 魏金涛, 等. 不同生长期饲用油菜的营养价值和青贮发酵品质. 草业科学, 2020, 37(5):933-941.
[9] 杨雪海, 郭万正, 黄少文, 等. 不同生长阶段的油菜饲用营养价值评价研究. 饲料工业, 2017, 38(21):19-22.
[10] 卞能飞, 孙东雷, 巩佳莉, 等. 花生烘烤食用品质评价及指标筛选. 中国农业科学, 2022, 55(4):641-652.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2022.04.002
[11] 赵彩霞, 袁玉婷. 优质油菜大地95在西藏主要农区的适应性分析. 作物杂志, 2023(2):51-56
[12] 杨涛, 拥嘎, 朱霞, 等. 西藏主要甘蓝型油菜品种在山南河谷农区的表现分析. 陕西农业科学, 2022, 68(3):14-17.
[13] 杨涛. 西藏油菜品种与川西高原油菜品种对比分析. 西藏农业科技, 2021(4):39-43.
[14] 刘孟君, 任越, 达娃顿珠, 等. 当前西藏肉羊产业发展现状、问题及相应对策. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2018, 39(1):60-68
[15] 德吉央宗. 西藏地区畜牧养殖业的发展与前景分析. 南方农业, 2016, 10(21):176-178.
[16] 陈初红, 袁成立, 扎西群措. 拉萨市耕地耕层土壤容重分布变异特征. 西藏科技, 2021(9):3-6.
[1] Qu Zhihua, Zhang Lili, Hu Yang, Qiao Haiming, Li Feng, Bai Wei. Agronomic Characteristics Evaluation on Introduced Flax Germplasm Resources [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(6): 47-53.
[2] Gao Zuoli, Jiang Shuaichen, Liu Yujia, Xu Zhihui, Liu Haifeng. Selection of Colored Rice Varieties Suitable for Planting in Yanbian Region [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(6): 62-68.
[3] Li Qingfeng, Gao Jie, Peng Qiu. Genetic Diversity Analysis of Agronomic and Quality Characteristics of Amaranthus Resources in Guizhou Province [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(4): 60-64.
[4] Pan Wenjing, Sun Yanan, Gao Lusi, Qu Mengnan, Zhang Weiyao, Fu Chunxu, Jiang Shibo, Jiang Chengxi, Fu Yashu, Wang Jinxing. Comprehensive Evaluation of Agronomic Characteristics of Soybean Resources in China and Europe [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(4): 91-97.
[5] Lu Yingji, Yang Xiaomeng, Pu Xiaoying, Li Xia, Yang Liʼe, Yang Yanbin, Zeng Yawen. Effects of Sowing and Seedling Cutting in Different Seasons on Agronomic Characteristics of Superior Barley Varieties [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(3): 215-220.
[6] Guo Yingjie, Liu Yang, Liu Xiaojie, Wei Wei, Wang Yao, Zhang Shuai, Wang Zhenshan, Yan Liuyan, Zhu Xuehai, Jia Xiaoping. The Agronomic Characteristics and Sensitivity Identification to GA3 of a Dwarf Mutant Hai 5 in Panicum miliaceum L. [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(3): 80-85.
[7] Gao Zhenxian, Cao Qiao, Shan Zilong, Fu Xiaoyi, Han Ran, He Mingqi, Shi Zhanliang, Zheng Shusong. Preliminary Study on the Influence of Late Spring Coldness on 323 Winter Wheat Germplasm Resources [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(3): 86-93.
[8] Cao Zhimin, Fan Baojie, Liu Changyou, Zhang Zhixiao, Cao Yumei, Wang Yan, Su Qiuzhu, Wang Shen, Liu Jianjun, Tian Jing. Effects of 60Co on the Main Agronomic Characteristics of Mungbean and Creation of Specific Mutants [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(2): 30-35.
[9] Su Cuicui, Wu Lingling, Zhao Xi, Shi Zhiguo, Zhou Yanfang, Wei Yujie. Effects of Sowing Date on the Growth, Quality and Yield of Safflower in Gansu Yellow River Irrigation Area [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(1): 176-183.
[10] Xiao Mingkun, Liu Guanghua, Song Jiming, Liu Qian, Duan Chunfang, Jiang Tailing, Zhang Linhui, Yan Wei, Shen Shaobin, Zhou Yingchun, Xiong Xiankun, Luo Xin, Bai Lina, Li Yuexian. Analysis of Agronomic Characteristics of Different Cassava Varieties (Lines) and Screening of High-Yielding Varieties (Lines) [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(4): 77-82.
[11] Wang Siyu, Zuo Wenbo, Zhu Kaili, Guo Huimin, Xing Bao, Guo Yuqing, Bao Yuying, Yang Xiushi, Ren Guixing. Analysis and Evaluation of Agronomic Characteristics and Nutritional Qualities of 71 Quinoa Accessions [J]. Crops, 2022, 38(3): 63-72.
[12] Wang Huifang, Zhang Xi, Feng Xiaohu, Li Yifan, Zhang Hong, Zhao Songchao, Zhao Mingqin. Effects of Different Plant Growth Regulators on the Growth and Development of Flue-Cured Tobacco [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 173-177.
[13] Sun Zhengran, Wu Hao, Zhang Cuiping, Zhang Jinli, He Daohua. Developing and Screening of Chemical Regulator for Cotton Topping [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 112-117.
[14] Bai Wei, Hu Yang, Yang Sumei, Zhang Baoying, Cui Jinli, Jin Tao, Bai Haihua. Analysis on Agronomic Characteristics of Confectionery Sunflower Local Resources in Northwest Hebei [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 54-59.
[15] Xu Lin, Wu Kaichao, Pang Tian, Deng Zhinian, Zhang Ronghua, Huang Chengfeng, Huang Hairong, Li Yijie, Liu Xiaoyan, Qin Wenxian, Wang Weizan. Effects of Root Promoting Agent on the Development and Yield in Single Bud of Sugarcane [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(6): 132-136.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!