Crops ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (5): 155-164.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.05.021

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Effects of Chemical Mutagens on Seed Germination and Main Agronomic Traits of M1 Generation of Flax ʻDingya 23ʼ

Li Ying(), Zhao Yongwei, Chen Ying, Ma Weiming(), Li Wenzhen, Zhang Haijie   

  1. Dingxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Dingxi 743000, Gansu, China
  • Received:2025-03-24 Revised:2025-05-15 Online:2025-10-15 Published:2025-10-21
  • Contact: Ma Weiming E-mail:liy9461613@163.com;719774470@qq.com

RichHTML

1

PDF (PC)

310

Abstract:

To enhance flax seed germination, improve agronomic traits, and breed superior germplasms with high oil and α-linolenic acid content, this study analyzed the effects of concentrations and soaking time of two chemical mutagens, EMS and NaN3 on flax seeds. The experiment focused on the effects of mutagen concentration and soaking time on germination rate, germination potential, relative mortality, and key agronomic traits of the M1 generation. The results showed that both chemical mutagens significantly inhibited seed germination and reduced germination potential and germination rate, negatively impacted the main agronomic traits of M1 generation. The optimal semi-lethal dose for EMS was found to be a 1.4% concentration for 12 h, which resulted in a relative lethal rate of 51.89%. For NaN3, optimal semi-lethal doses were 4.0% for 16 h and 8.0% for 8 h, with relative mortality of 54.69% and 48.09%, respectively. The agronomic traits of the M1 generation varied depending on the mutagen concentration and soaking time. Under EMS treatment, the variation in most traits increased with higher concentrations and longer treatment times, except for capsule diameter. Under NaN3 treatment, the variability of most traits (excluding seed weight per plant and capsule numbers per plant) also increased with longer soaking times at a given concentration. This study successfully identified effective relative-lethal treatments and materials with mutations in flower color, plant type, and cotyledon traits, and provided essential data for chemical mutagenesis breeding in flax.

Key words: Chemical mutagens, Flax, Seed germination, Relative mortality, Agronomic trait

Table 1

EMS mutagenesis treatment of flax seed"

处理
Treatment		 浓度
Concentration (%)		 浸种时间
Soaking time (h)
A1T1 0.0(CK) 4
A1T2 0.0(CK) 8
A1T3 0.0(CK) 12
A1T4 0.0(CK) 16
A2T1 0.2 4
A2T2 0.2 8
A2T3 0.2 12
A2T4 0.2 16
A3T1 0.8 4
A3T2 0.8 8
A3T3 0.8 12
A3T4 0.8 16
A4T1 1.4 4
A4T2 1.4 8
A4T3 1.4 12
A4T4 1.4 16
A5T1 2.0 4
A5T2 2.0 8
A5T3 2.0 12
A5T4 2.0 16

Table 2

NaN3 mutagenesis treatment of flax seed"

处理
Treatment		 浓度
Concentration (%)		 浸种时间
Soaking time (h)
C1T1 0.0(CK) 4
C1T2 0.0(CK) 8
C1T3 0.0(CK) 12
C1T4 0.0(CK) 16
C2T1 0.5 4
C2T2 0.5 8
C2T3 0.5 12
C2T4 0.5 16
C3T1 1.0 4
C3T2 1.0 8
C3T3 1.0 12
C3T4 1.0 16
C4T1 4.0 4
C4T2 4.0 8
C4T3 4.0 12
C4T4 4.0 16
C5T1 8.0 4
C5T2 8.0 8
C5T3 8.0 12
C5T4 8.0 16
C6T1 12.0 4
C6T2 12.0 8
C6T3 12.0 12
C6T4 12.0 16

Table 3

Effects of EMS treatment on seed germination and plant growth of flax %"

处理
Treatment		 发芽势
Germination potential		 发芽率
Germination rate		 相对致死率
Relative mortality		 成株率
Planting rate		 成株数较对照
Plant compared with CK
A1T1 73.37±6.44aA 78.84±11.26aA － 52.39 －
A1T2 72.67±5.03aA 68.00±2.00aA － 51.71 -1.30
A1T3 64.00±12.17aA 70.67±5.03aA － 48.00 -8.38
A1T4 83.25±6.34aA 83.90±1.86aA － 48.00 -8.38
A2T1 72.00±3.46abcA 78.67±13.61abcA 0.22 36.44 -30.44
A2T2 70.50±7.40abA 79.21±4.52aA 15.80 57.03 －
A2T3 63.06±3.50aA 81.84±6.25aA 16.49 63.14 10.71
A2T4 41.09±7.26bB 59.58±3.25bB 28.99 57.33 0.53
A3T1 72.53±9.29abA 81.27±11.64abA 3.08 42.44 -25.58
A3T2 58.67±5.77abcA 78.67±5.77abAB 15.69 33.33 -41.56
A3T3 40.00±7.21bB 64.00±7.21bB 9.44 59.65 －
A3T4 27.89±7.73cB 51.70±7.17cB 38.38 60.67 1.71
A4T1 59.05±2.59bcA 67.77±2.36bcA 0.08 64.00 7.29
A4T2 43.08±12.41bcA 68.06±13.92bCB 14.04 40.12 -32.74
A4T3 15.33±6.43cC 34.00±12.49cC 51.89 31.07 -47.91
A4T4 1.33±2.31dC 8.67±8.33dC 89.67 82.76 －
A5T1 58.30±11.65cA 71.12±3.41cA 9.80 58.67 -29.11
A5T2 36.67±14.47cA 60.67±12.70cB 10.78 43.67 -47.23
A5T3 29.33±3.06bcBC 57.33±9.87bcBC 18.87 8.00 -90.33
A5T4 1.33±1.15dC 18.67±5.77dC 77.75 8.00 -90.33

Table 4

Effect of NaN3 treatment on seed germination and plant growth of flax %"

处理
Treatment		 发芽势
Germination potential		 发芽率
Germination rate		 相对致死率
Relative mortality		 成株率
Planting rate		 成株数较对照
Plant compared with CK
C1T1 61.00±15.56bA 73.00±42.72aA － 61.80 －
C1T2 80.67±10.07aA 68.67±12.86aAB － 76.97 24.55
C1T3 43.33±27.15bA 56.00±17.78abABC － 60.67 -1.83
C1T4 78.50±8.05aA 83.86±7.04aA － 26.67 -56.85
C2T1 64.69±11.33abA 72.19±6.59aAB 1.10 33.89 -45.17
C2T2 66.00±12.00aAB 72.67±11.02aA -5.82 11.33 -81.66
C2T3 66.40±11.48aA 66.44±11.35aA -18.64 56.03 －
C2T4 53.33±5.77bB 68.67±8.08abAB 18.12 75.33 34.45
C3T1 69.09±5.43abA 69.09±8.45abAB 5.36 81.85 46.08
C3T2 56.31±15.33abAB 64.37±9.45abAB 6.26 36.67 -34.56
C3T3 62.00±15.62aA 62.00±8.33aAB -10.71 16.72 -70.16
C3T4 57.71±14.01bAB 59.70±14.56bcBC 28.81 12.00 -78.58
C4T1 35.42±12.67cB 52.78±8.42bB 27.70 59.06 －
C4T2 37.33±26.10bcBC 58.00±14.42abAB 15.54 75.17 27.28
C4T3 13.37±8.03cB 42.23±6.53bcBCD 24.59 65.40 10.74
C4T4 13.33±5.03cC 38.00±3.46deCDE 54.69 52.08 -11.81
C5T1 36.93±1.60cB 69.81±3.31aAB 4.37 30.00 -49.20
C5T2 13.48±8.32cdC 35.65±10.57cC 48.09 19.80 -66.48
C5T3 4.67±4.16cB 36.23±5.17cCD 35.30 75.33 －
C5T4 5.36±4.15cC 22.11±10.30eE 73.64 60.35 -19.88
C6T1 28.67±4.62cB 54.00±8.00bAB 26.03 48.67 -35.40
C6T2 11.33±6.11dC 44.67±7.57bcBC 34.95 21.64 -71.27
C6T3 8.00±3.46cB 30.67±4.62cD 45.24 9.51 -87.38
C6T4 10.00±8.72cC 25.33±9.87eDE 69.79 2.00 -97.35

Table 5

Variance analysis on agronomic characteristics of flax M1 germination under EMS treatments"

变异来源
Source of variation		 自由度
df		 株高
Plant height (cm)		 工艺长度
Technical length (cm)		 单株有效果数
Capsule number per plant		 蒴果直径
Capsule diameter (mm)
均方MS F值F-value 均方MS F值F-value 均方MS F值F-value 均方MS F值F-value
浓度Concentration (C) 4 208.1031 11.2358** 289.8773 25.6463** 253.9115 2.2977 0.515 13.0670**
时间Time (T) 3 186.7797 10.0845** 224.1255 19.8290** 51.1864 0.4632 0.2627 6.6642**
浓度×时间C×T 12 26.8647 1.4505 42.8547 3.7915** 264.3564 2.3922* 0.0861 2.1837*
变异来源
Source of variation		 茎粗
Stem diameter (mm)		 每果粒数
Seeds of per capsule		 单株粒重
Seed weight per plant (g)		 千粒重
1000-seed weight (g)
均方MS F值F-value 均方MS F值F-value 均方MS F值F-value 均方MS F值F-value
浓度Concentration (C) 0.1603 2.3889 26.1162 35.6442** 1.5555 12.3926** 0.3990 1.1843
时间Time (T) 0.0278 0.4137 12.5433 17.1194** 0.3909 3.1145* 4.1196 12.2278**
浓度×时间C×T 0.0610 0.9086 1.3570 1.8521 0.1765 1.4064 0.3629 1.0770

Fig.1

Effect of EMS treatments on characteristics of M1 germination of flax"

Table 6

Variance analysis on agronomic characteristics of flax M1 germination under NaN3 treatments"

Fig.2

Effects of NaN3 treatment on characteristics of M1 germination of flax"

[1] 谢启光, 徐小冬. 植物生物钟在农业生产中应对全球变暖的应用. 植物学报, 2024, 59(4):635-650.
doi: 10.11983/CBB23136
[2] 邓欣. 亚麻分子标记的开发及产量相关性状的关联分析. 北京: 中国农业科学院, 2013.
[3] 伊六喜, 斯钦巴特尔, 贾霄云, 等. 胡麻种质资源、育种及遗传研究进展. 中国麻业科学, 2017, 39(2):81-87.
[4] 王斌, 赵利, 侯静静. 化学诱变剂EMS对胡麻种子的诱变效应. 寒旱农业科学, 2022(10):73-77.
[5] Chantreau M, Grec S, Gutierrez L, et al. PT-Flax (phenotyping and TILLinG of flax): development of a flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) mutant population and TILLinG platform for forward and reverse genetics. BMC Plant Biology, 2013, 13:159.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2229-13-159 pmid: 24128060
[6] You F M, Cloutier S, Rashid K Y, et al. Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) genomics and breeding//Advances in plant breeding strategies:industrial and food crops. Berlin: Springer International Publishing, 2019:277-317.
[7] 乔广军. 诱变在我国亚麻育种及资源创新中的利用. 中国麻业, 2006, 28(1):17-20.
[8] 张瑞成, 李魏, 潘素君, 等. 化学诱变在种质资源改良上的应用. 分子植物育种, 2017, 15(12):5189-5196.
[9] 刘翔. EMS诱变技术在植物育种中的研究进展. 激光生物学报, 2014, 23(3):197.
[10] 钮力亚, 于亮, 付晶, 等. 叠氮化钠在农作物育种中的应用. 河北农业科学, 2010, 14(12):52-53,57.
[11] 王芳, 魏章焕, 陆兴苗, 等. 化学诱变甘薯新品种甬紫薯1号的选育. 浙江农业学报, 2015, 27(12):2061-2064.
[12] 陈灿. 化学诱变对水稻诱变后代组织结构及农艺性状和生理特性的影响. 长沙:湖南农业大学, 2010.
[13] 颜志勤. 三种化学诱变剂在杉木育种中的应用研究. 福州:福建农林大学, 2013.
[14] 曹冠男. EMS诱导4种小麦效应研究及突变体的筛选. 杨凌:西北农林科技大学, 2018.
[15] 张晓勤, 薛大伟, 周伟辉, 等. 用甲基磺酸乙酯(EMS)诱变的大麦浙农大3号突变体的筛选和鉴定. 浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2011, 37(2):169-174.
[16] 杨建胜, 孙万仓, 刘自刚, 等. EMS诱变对北方白菜型冬油菜农艺性状与品质的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2018, 36(1):213-220.
[17] Kumari A, Paul S, Sharma V. Genetic diversity analysis using RAPD and ISSR markers revealed discrete genetic makeup in relation to fibre and oil content in Linum usitatissimum L. genotypes. Nucleus, 2018, 61(1):45-53.
[18] Pan G, Chen A G, et al. Genome-wide development of simple sequence repeats database for flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) and its use for genetic diversity assessment. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 2020, 67(4):865-874.
[19] Zhang J P, Wang L M, et al. Genomic comparison and population diversity analysis provide insights into the domestication and improvement of flax. Science, 2020, 23(4):100967.
[20] 刘彩月. 胡麻EMS突变体库的构建及抗ALS类除草剂与高油酸突变体的鉴定分析. 呼和浩特:内蒙古大学, 2023.
[21] 冯学金, 郭秀娟, 杨建春, 等. 诱变技术在亚麻育种中的应用. 核农学报, 2017, 31(7):1310-1316.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2017.07.1310
[22] 赵利, 王斌. 60Co-γ射线辐射胡麻种子的诱变效应研究. 中国油料作物学报, 2021, 43(5):834-842.
[23] 曹亚萍, 武银玉, 范绍强, 等. EMS诱变技术在小麦上的应用. 激光生物学报, 2019, 28(5):394.
[24] 赵福永, 郑娇, 何芳, 等. EMS与NaN3对甘蓝型油菜和芥菜型油菜诱变的效果. 江西农业学报, 2010, 22(9):6-9.
[25] 黎诗艳, 阮景军, 范昱, 等. EMS诱变剂处理对苦荞种子萌发及主要农艺性状的影响. 分子植物育种, 2021, 19(3):914-922.
[26] 杜园园, 刘永忠, 李万星, 等. 大豆EMS化学诱变处理条件分析. 安徽农业科学, 2012, 40(35):16995-16996.
[27] 刘建霞, 张梦丽, 李慧, 等. 苦荞麦种子与幼苗对叠氮化钠诱变的响应. 江苏农业科学, 2019, 47(10):85-88.
[28] 李娟宁, 吕英, 赵桂琴, 等. 化学诱变剂EMS和MNU对燕麦种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响. 草原与草坪, 2021, 41(3):108-118.
[29] 许燕, 谢永平, 郑楚群, 等. EMS诱变花生珍珠红1号创制优良新种质. 核农学报, 2020, 34(7):1369-1377.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.07.1369
[30] 蔺豆豆, 赵桂琴, 柴继宽, 等. 叠氮化钠诱变燕麦M1代的主要性状分析. 草地学报, 2022, 30(3):587-593.
doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2022.03.010
[31] 姜振峰, 刘志华, 李文滨, 等. 叠氮化钠对大豆M1的生物学诱变效应. 核农学报, 2006, 20(3):208-210.
[32] 李燕红, 高世庆, 任扬, 等. 小麦核质互作杂交种农艺性状和籽粒性状的杂种优势分析. 麦类作物学报, 2021, 41(10):1228-1237.
[33] 彭波, 徐庆国, 陈灿. 三种化学诱变剂对不同水稻品种的生物学效应研究. 湖南人文科技学院学报, 2007, 24(4):22-26.
[1] Zhu Lingyu, Yang Qiaohui, Liu Yixun, Yuan Jian, Wang Minghua, Xiang Dabing, Zou Liang, Wang Junzhen, Fan Yu. Photosynthetic Characteristics and Agronomic Traits of Wild and Cultivated Oats during Filling Process [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 167-174.
[2] Gao Yanmei, Feng Pengrui, Chen Weiwei, Zhang Meng, Zhang Yongqing. Physiological Response of Quinoa Seedlings with Drought Resistance to Drought Stress [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 182-188.
[3] Yang Wengao, Yuan Wenjue, Li Zhaoguang, He Guiqing, He Qiongji, Wang Rui, Li Yan, Ye Lei, Hou Zhijiang. Effects of Winter Sowing Date on Agronomic Traits and Yield of Quinoa in Northwestern Yunnan, China [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 257-265.
[4] Liu Xiaohan, Tang Yujie, Liu Xinyu, Qiao Zhengyan, Shi Guishan, Yu Miao, Li Yang, Wang Nai, Qi Hongying, Chen Bingru. Analysis of Combining Ability and Heterosis of Main Traits in Core Parents of Sorghum for Spring-Sown Early-Maturing Regions [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 47-53.
[5] Gao Fengyun, Yi Liuxi, Zhou Yu, Siqinbateer , He Ruichao, Jia Xiaoyun. Analysis of Genetic Diversity of Flax Germplasm Resources [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 60-71.
[6] Li Wenjun, Guo Yanping, Yang Shenghua, Shao Yang. Analysis of Genetic Diversity of Main Agronomic Traits of 513 Faba Bean Germplasm Resources [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 85-93.
[7] Yu Huaxian, An Rudong, Tao Lianan, Lang Rongbin, Bian Xin, Zhang Yu, Liu Xinlong, Liu Jiayong, Zhao Liping, Liu Hongbo, Zhang Gemin, Zhang Baoqing. Comprehensive Evaluation of Reciprocal Cross Hybrids between 57NG208 and Nanjian Chewing Cane Based on Agronomic Traits [J]. Crops, 2026, 42(1): 94-103.
[8] Chen Zhihao, Wang Ting, Chang Xuhong, Wang Yanjie, Liu Xiwei, Yang Yushuang, Wang Yujiao, Wang Demei, Zhao Guangcai. Comprehensive Analysis of Yield and Quality Traits of Wheat Lines in the Northern Huang-Huai Winter Wheat Region [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 148-155.
[9] Qin Nana, Huang Linhua, Chen Ying, Wang Shengmou, Xie Yong, Miao Kai, Li Wanming, Qi Lan. Effects of Foliar Propionyl Brassinolide Application on Photosynthesis, Agronomic Traits and Yield of Summer Soybean [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 164-171.
[10] Yan Xiaowen, Liang Junchao, Zeng Pan, Zhou Hongying, Wang Zhiqi, Le Meiwang, Sun Jian. Effects of Late Sowing on Main Agronomic Traits and Yield of Autumn Sesame [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 189-194.
[11] Yang Shan, Zhang Zhi, Guo Yueqi, Luo Rui, Deng Jianglong, Guo Xiaoyi, Zhou Lihong. Effect of Lees-Based Microbial Inoculants on the Yield of Liquor-Making Sorghum and Soil Physicochemical Properties [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 210-215.
[12] Chen Guoli, Xu Chaofeng, Wei Changmin, Wang Ruyin, Zhang Yanfang, Li Haoyuan, Zhang Jun. Analysis of Genotype and Environmental Interaction Effects of New Silage Corn Varieties in Henan Province [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(6): 91-99.
[13] Zhao Caixia, Baima Yangzhen, Yang Guanghuan, Tang Lin. Identification and Cluster Analysis of Agronomic Traits in Different Types of Rapeseed Resources [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 120-127.
[14] Wu Liguo, Li Xiaohui, Zhao Qing, Chen Xiaolong, Pan Jing, Liu Wangqing, Bai Haibo, Li Qianrong. Genetic Diversity Analysis of Agronomic Traits of Spring Wheat Varieties (Lines) in Ningxia [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 147-154.
[15] Du Hanmei, Tan Lu, Li Shengchun, Wang Qinghai, Xu Zhou, Wu Dandan, Wang Anhu. Cadmium Tolerance of Tartary Buckwheat during Germination Stage and Its Effects on Physiological Characteristics of Seedlings [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(5): 209-220.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!