Crops ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (5): 63-70.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2018.05.010

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Evaluation of 22 Main Popularized Varieties by Variety Regional Trails in Jilin Province

Su Guihua1,Li Chunlei1,2,Su Yichen1   

  1. 1 Maize Research Institute, Jilin Academy of Agricultural Sciences/National Engineering Laboratory for Maize, Gongzhuling 136100, Jilin, China
    2 Jilin Jinong Hi-Tech Development Ltd, Gongzhuling 136100, Jilin, China
  • Received:2018-03-21 Revised:2018-06-26 Online:2018-10-15 Published:2018-10-12
  • Contact: Yichen Su

RichHTML

7

PDF (PC)

239

Abstract:

Data of twenty-two main maize varieties in Fuyu, Yushu and Gongzhuling between 2015-2017 were analyzed using the linear model and stability parameter analysis method. The study shows that the locations and varieties×locations did not reach a significant or extremely significant level. Other variations reached a significant or very significant level. The average yield amplitude of varieties was 8 673.9-10 324.6kg/ha and the moisture content amplitude of varieties was 19.3%-26.6%. The average yield of 3 locations from high to low was Gongzhuling, Fuyu and Yushu. The average yield of 3 locations from high to low were 2017, 2016 and 2015. The interaction effects of varieties×locations from high to low were Yushu, Gongzhuling and Fuyu. That is, some varieties were adapted to specific environment condition. We analyzed 22 varieties by high yield and stability parameters of 3 locations in 3 years, the varieties of Hengyu 218, Jidan 50, Jidi 816, Youdi 919, Dika 159, Heyu 89, Jinyuan 15, Nonghua 101, Xianyu 335 were excellent in this study. The Correlation analysis of yield and water content showed that Jidi 816, Xianyu 335, Dika 159, Jinyuan 15, Tiannong 9, Youdi 919 were superior.

Key words: Maize, Jilin Province, Main popularized variety, Reginal experiment

Table 1

The tested materials and sources"

编号Code 品种Variety 审定编号Approved number 选育单位Breeding unit
V1 吉农大935 吉审玉2011033 吉林农大科茂种业有限责任公司
V2 天农九 吉审玉2011012 抚顺天农种业有限公司
V3 优迪919 吉审玉2016039 吉林省鸿翔农业集团鸿翔种业有限公司
V4 迪卡159 吉审玉2015020 中种国际种子有限公司
V5 禾育35 吉审玉2014033 吉林省禾冠种业有限公司
V6 禾育47 吉审玉2014027 吉林省禾冠种业有限公司
V7 禾育89 吉审玉2013025 吉林省禾冠种业有限公司
V8 雄玉581 吉审玉2015016 南通大熊种业科技有限公司
V9 宏兴1号 吉审玉2013017 吉林省宏兴种业有限公司
V10 九单318 吉审玉2015019 吉林市农业科学院
V11 恒育218 吉审玉2012026 吉林省恒昌农业开发有限公司
V12 美育339 吉审玉2009015 吉林省吉育种业有限公司
V13 吉单50 吉审玉2010035 吉林省农业科学院
V14 吉单558 吉审玉2012022 吉林省农业科学院
V15 吉第816 吉审玉2012041 吉林省吉育种业有限公司
V16 金园15 吉审玉2014023 吉林省金园种苗有限公司
V17 良玉66 吉审玉2015036 丹东登海良玉种业
V18 良玉918 国审玉2014005 丹东登海良玉种业
V19 良玉99 国审玉2012008 丹东登海良玉种业
V20 农华101 国审玉2010008 北京金色农华种业有限公司
V21 先玉335 国审玉2004017 铁岭先锋种子研究有限公司
V22 郑单958 国审玉20000009 河南农业科学院粮食作物研究所

Table 2

Basic informations of three testing locations"

编号
Code		 地点
Location		 经度
Longitude		 纬度
Latitude		 海拔(m)
Altitude		 年均活动积温(℃)
Active accumulated temperature		 生态气候
Acoclimatic
E1 扶余县-永平乡 125°07′ 45°15′ 180 3 198 半干旱农业生态区
E2 榆树市 126°49′ 44°84′ 195 3 176 半干旱农业生态区
E3 公主岭-陶屯镇 124°57′ 44°01′ 245 3 265 半湿润农业生态区

Table 3

Average yield of different maize varieties of Fuyu, Yushu and Gongzhuling in 2015-2017 kg/hm2"

品种
Variety		 年份Year 平均产量
Average yield		 子粒含水量(%)
Grain moisture
content
2015 2016 2017
E1 E2 E3 E1 E2 E3 E1 E2 E3
V1 7 766.3 9 414.3 8 889.0 8 522.8 7 911.9 10 333.5 9 840.8 9 509.0 9 435.8 9 069.3 21.2
V2 7 078.7 10 822.6 10 077.0 9 209.9 8 337.9 10 876.7 9 735.0 10 561.2 9 027.4 9 525.2 22.8
V3 8 698.6 10 370.4 9 723.2 8 842.5 9 675.0 11 407.5 7 414.4 9 639.4 13 251.3 9 891.4 24.3
V4 8 243.1 9 842.3 8 762.8 9 745.5 11 252.5 11 174.0 8 428.5 10 684.2 12 662.2 10 088.3 23.3
V5 8 127.4 8 371.8 9 697.9 10 527.6 10 588.4 8 457.0 7 963.7 9 088.0 11 970.3 9 421.4 22.8
V6 8 823.6 7 886.5 8 567.3 9 737.0 9 588.0 10 596.1 7 601.4 8 332.8 13 431.2 9 396.0 23.1
V7 9 125.2 9 744.6 8 844.4 11 348.7 8 653.7 9 502.8 7 446.2 10 202.5 12 632.0 9 722.2 25.0
V8 6 947.7 10 189.4 9 190.5 9 597.7 8 867.2 9 888.5 7 275.0 9 468.0 10 351.2 9 086.1 22.0
V9 6 683.4 10 829.7 8 383.8 9 237.8 9 105.0 9 617.3 8 457.8 9 919.3 10 034.8 9 141.0 21.6
V10 7 129.9 9 545.1 10 020.0 8 166.4 7 820.1 9 348.5 7 959.8 10 216.0 8 956.4 8 795.8 19.3
V11 8 245.5 8 693.3 9 727.6 11 098.8 11 880.3 11 409.1 8 353.0 9 436.9 12 355.5 10 133.3 26.1
V12 6 297.2 8 130.0 8 377.5 10 102.5 10 177.5 10 980.5 7 807.5 7 830.0 8 362.5 8 673.9 22.2
V13 7 855.5 10 301.3 10 016.7 11 344.1 11 237.3 11 362.5 8 350.0 9 855.0 10 890.0 10 134.7 26.1
V14 7 507.9 8 803.6 8 640.0 8 153.2 9 397.5 8 069.7 7 635.0 8 925.0 12 556.7 8 854.3 23.6
V15 7 840.6 9 998.2 10 039.3 11 522.0 11 267.9 10 477.4 8 435.4 10 853.5 12 487.5 10 324.6 22.1
V16 8 445.5 9 643.2 9 480.2 9 513.3 11 314.2 9 734.0 7 337.7 10 468.1 13 352.8 9 921.0 23.3
V17 7 644.2 8 521.4 10 301.2 10 862.1 10 901.6 11 060.8 7 761.6 8 564.5 10 769.5 9 598.5 23.9
V18 7 521.6 8 911.9 8 602.5 12 024.8 10 914.8 11 745.0 8 208.0 8 445.0 9 202.5 9 508.4 25.4
V19 7 580.3 9 113.6 7 815.2 10 855.3 10 354.4 9 607.2 7 466.9 9 593.1 12 758.7 9 460.5 25.7
V20 7 724.9 9 600.0 9 561.8 9 617.3 10 765.5 9 597.8 7 707.3 10 421.2 13 201.3 9 799.7 26.3
V21 8 416.6 9 405.7 9 366.4 9 963.6 10 608.0 9 727.4 9 330.7 10 210.3 12 752.3 9 975.7 22.4
V22 7 348.9 8 695.7 9 289.7 9 229.9 11 149.9 9 614.8 6 225.8 9 934.3 12 681.8 9 352.3 26.6

Table 4

Basic statistics of yield traits"

项目Item 年份 Year 平均产量
Average
yield
2015 2016 2017
E1 E2 E3 E1 E2 E3 E1 E2 E3
总产Total yield 171 052.6 219 222.8 176 741.5 206 834.6 221 768.6 212 157.3 203 374.0 224 588.1 253 123.7 209 873.6
均值Mean 7 775.2 9 964.7 8 033.7 9 401.6 10 080.4 9 643.5 9 244.3 10 208.6 11 505.6 9 539.7
中位数Median 7 745.6 9 741.3 7 883.7 9 479.7 10 471.4 9 747.2 9 328.0 10 111.0 12 421.5 9 516.8
极差Range 2 828.0 3 871.6 3 615.0 2 943.2 4 060.2 3 023.5 2 486.0 3 675.3 5 068.7 1 650.7
方差Variance 502 282.4 1 226 610.0 692 293.0 697 226.0 1 460 407.0 684 156.6 465 395.5 970 770.8 2 842 316.0 220 140.2
标准差Standard Deviation 708.8 1 107.5 832.0 835.0 1 208.5 827.1 682.2 985.3 1 685.9 469.2
变异系数Variation coefficient (%) 9.11 11.12 10.36 8.88 11.99 8.58 7.38 9.65 14.65 4.89

Table 5

Frequency distribution of average yield of maize grain yield"

平均产量组中值(kg/hm2)
Class mid-value of average yield		 样本数
Sample number		 理论值
Theoretical value		 比例(%)
Ratio		 累计次数
Accumulated times		 累计比例(%)
Accumulated ratio
8 811.5 3 1.54 13.64 3 13.64
9 086.6 3 3.23 13.64 6 27.27
9 361.7 4 4.79 18.18 10 45.45
9 636.8 4 5.04 18.18 14 63.64
9 911.9 4 3.76 18.18 18 81.82
10 187.0 4 1.99 18.18 22 100.00

Table 6

Variance analysis of yield"

变异来源Variation source 方差Variance 自由度Degree of freedom 均方Mean square F
地点内年份内区组间Locations and annuals of block 5 486 162.8 9 609 573.6
年份间Annuals 202 789 689.1 2 101 394 844.6 439.28**
地点间Locations 114 710 853.5 2 57 355 426.7 1.70
品种间Varieties 83 215 247.8 21 3 962 630.8 3.26**
地点×年份Location×annual 134 998 577.3 4 33 749 644.3 146.20**
品种×年份Variety×annual 50 995 029.6 42 1 214 167.4 5.26**
地点×品种Location×variety 97 394 171.5 42 2 318 908.8 1.15
地点×品种×年份Location×variety×annual 169 138 373.8 84 2 013 552.1 8.72**
误差Error 193 902.63 189.00 1 025.9

Table 7

Two direction table of yield of variety×location and variety×annual kg/hm2"

品种×地点平均产量Average yield of variety×location 品种×年份平均产量Average yield of variety×annual
品种
Variety		 E1 E2 E3 品种效应
Variety effect		 品种
Variety		 2015 2016 2017 品种效应
Variety effect
V1 8 689.9 8 922.8 9 595.2 9 069.3 V1 8 710.0 8 945.0 9 552.8 9 069.3
V2 9 326.1 9 474.8 9 774.5 9 525.1 V2 8 674.5 9 907.2 9 993.7 9 525.1
V3 9 597.4 9 975.0 10 101.7 9 891.4 V3 8 318.5 9 894.9 11 460.7 9 891.4
V4 8 949.4 10 724.0 10 591.7 10 088.3 V4 8 805.7 10 593.0 10 866.3 10 088.3
V5 8 732.4 9 857.7 9 674.0 9 421.4 V5 8 872.9 9 349.4 10 041.8 9 421.4
V6 8 425.8 9 973.7 9 788.5 9 396.0 V6 8 720.7 8 602.4 10 864.9 9 396.0
V7 9 238.1 9 835.0 10 093.6 9 722.2 V7 9 306.7 9 533.6 10 326.4 9 722.2
V8 8 775.9 9 451.1 9 031.4 9 086.1 V8 7 940.1 9 508.2 9 810.1 9 086.1
V9 8 632.3 9 320.1 9 470.6 9 141.0 V9 8 126.3 9 951.4 9 345.3 9 141.0
V10 8 898.3 8 445.0 9 044.0 8 795.8 V10 7 752.0 9 193.8 9 441.6 8 795.8
V11 8 888.8 11 462.7 10 048.5 10 133.3 V11 9 232.4 10 003.5 11 164.0 10 133.3
V12 7 601.6 10 420.2 8 000.0 8 673.9 V12 8 069.1 8 712.5 9 240.2 8 673.9
V13 9 391.1 11 314.6 9 698.3 10 134.7 V13 9 183.2 10 464.5 10 756.4 10 134.7
V14 8 317.2 8 540.1 9 705.6 8 854.3 V14 7 765.4 9 042.0 9 755.5 8 854.3
V15 9 292.7 11 089.1 10 592.1 10 324.7 V15 9 266.0 10 706.5 11 001.4 10 324.7
V16 9 189.6 10 187.1 10 386.2 9 921.0 V16 8 432.2 10 475.2 10 855.7 9 921.0
V17 8 822.3 10 941.5 9 031.9 9 598.5 V17 8 756.0 9 329.1 10 710.5 9 598.5
V18 8 345.3 11 561.5 8 618.5 9 508.4 V18 9 251.4 9 423.9 9 850.0 9 508.4
品种×地点平均产量Average yield of variety×location 品种×年份平均产量Average yield of variety×annual
品种
Variety		 E1 E2 E3 品种效应
Variety effect		 品种
Variety		 2015 2016 2017 品种效应
Variety effect
V19 8 169.7 10 272.3 9 939.6 9 460.5 V19 8 634.1 9 687.0 10 060.4 9 460.5
V20 8 962.3 9 993.5 10 443.3 9 799.7 V20 8 349.8 10 262.2 10 787.0 9 799.7
V21 9 063.0 10 099.7 10 764.4 9 975.7 V21 9 237.0 10 074.6 10 615.4 9 975.7
V22 8 444.7 9 998.2 9 613.9 9 352.3 V22 7 601.5 9 926.6 10 528.8 9 352.3
地点效应
Location effect		 8 807.0 10 084.5 9 727.6 9 539.7 年份效应
Annual effect		 8 591.2 9 708.5 10 319.5

Table 8

Effects of location×annual interaction kg/hm2"

地点
Location		 年份Year 地点效应
Location effect
2015 2016 2017
E1 7 775.1 9 401.6 9 244.3 8 807.0
E2 9 964.7 10 080.4 10 208.5 10 084.5
E3 8 033.7 9 643.5 11 505.6 9 727.6
年份效应
Annual effect		 8 591.2 9 708.5 10 319.5 -

Table 9

Effects of variety×location interaction"

品种
Variety		 E1 E2 E3 品种效应
Variety effect
V1 353.3 -691.3 338.0 -470.4
V2 533.6 -595.1 61.5 -14.6
V3 438.8 -461.2 22.4 351.7
V4 -406.2 90.8 315.4 548.6
V5 43.8 -108.5 64.8 -118.4
V6 -237.5 32.9 204.6 -143.7
V7 248.6 -432.0 183.4 182.5
V8 422.5 -179.8 -242.6 -453.6
V9 224.0 -365.8 141.7 -398.7
V10 835.3 -895.6 60.3 -743.9
V11 -511.8 784.6 -272.8 593.6
V12 -339.6 1201.4 -861.8 -865.8
V13 -10.8 635.1 -624.3 595.0
V14 195.6 -859.0 663.4 -685.4
V15 -299.2 219.6 79.6 784.9
V16 1.4 -278.7 277.3 381.3
V17 -43.5 798.1 -754.6 58.8
V18 -430.4 1 508.2 -1 077.8 -31.3
V19 -558.1 266.9 291.2 -79.2
V20 -104.7 -351.0 455.7 260.0
V21 -180.0 -420.8 600.8 436.0
V22 -174.8 101.1 73.7 -187.4
地点效应Location effect -732.7 544.8 187.9

Table 10

Analysis of the productivity and the stability of yield"

品种
Variety		 丰产性参数Fertility parameter 稳定性参数Stability parameter 适应区Adaption area 综合评价Comprehensive evaluation
产量Yield 效应Effect 方差Variance 变异度Variability (%) 地点Location 参考Reference
V11 10 133.3Aab 593.617 475 966.2 6.808 E1~E3 很好
V13 10 134.7Aab 594.995 396 597.1 6.214 E1~E3 很好
V15 10 324.7Aa 784.939 72 054.5 2.600 E1~E3 很好
V3 9 891.4Aab 351.650 202 852.6 4.553 E1~E3 好
V4 10 088.3Aab 548.617 136 383.7 3.661 E1~E3 好
V7 9 722.2Aab 182.523 141 032.7 3.863 E1~E3 好
V16 9 921.0Aab 381.284 77 272.8 2.802 E1~E3 好
V20 9 799.7Aab 259.961 170 907.4 4.219 E1~E3 好
V21 9 975.7Aab 435.978 285 256.9 5.354 E1~E3 好
V2 9 525.1Aab -14.566 321 371.5 5.952 E1~E3 较好
V5 9 421.4Aab -118.355 8 941.2 1.004 E1~E3 较好
V6 9 396.0Aab -143.699 49 662.1 2.372 E1~E3 较好
V17 9 598.5Aab 58.823 604 150.9 8.098 E1~E3 较好
V18 9 508.4Aab -31.272 1 810 884.0 14.153 E2 较好
V19 9 460.5Aab -79.211 233 747.4 5.110 E1~E3 较好
V22 9 352.3Aab -187.411 23 114.5 1.626 E1~E3 较好
V1 9 069.3Aab -470.444 358 520.4 6.602 E1~E3 一般
V8 9 086.1Aab -453.588 134 844.5 4.041 E1~E3 一般
V9 9 141.0Aab -398.711 102 027.0 3.494 E1~E3 一般
V14 8 854.3Aab -685.416 608 106.2 8.807 E1~E3 一般
V10 8 795.8Aab -743.911 751 702.1 9.857 E1~E3 较差
V12 8 673.9Ab -865.805 1 150 759.0 12.367 E1~E3 较差

Table 11

Frequency distribution of average grain moisture content"

平均子粒含水量组中值(%)
Class mid-value of average grain moisture content		 样本数
Sample number		 理论值
Theoretical value		 比例(%)
Ratio		 累计次数
Accumulated times		 累计比例(%)
Accumulated ratio
20 1 0.83 4.35 1 4.35
21 1 2.62 4.35 2 8.70
22 5 5.18 21.74 7 30.43
24 9 6.34 39.13 16 69.57
25 2 4.81 8.70 18 78.26
26 5 2.34 21.74 23 100.00

Fig.1

Correlation analysis of yield-grain moisture content of 22 maize varieties"

[1] 路明, 刘文国, 岳尧海 , 等. 20年间吉林省玉米品种的产量及其相关性状分析. 玉米科学, 2011,19(5):59-63.
[2] 舒坤良, 王洪丽, 刘文明 , 等. 吉林省玉米供给侧结构性改革路径与对策研究. 玉米科学, 2016,24(6):165-169.
[3] 陈霞燕, 王连喜, 任景全 , 等. 吉林省春玉米生产潜力及其敏感性分析. 作物杂志, 2016(6):91-98.
[4] 李春雷, 王敏, 孟令聪 , 等. 吉林省玉米种质基础及2001~2013年品种推广分析. 玉米科学, 2016,24(5):15-25.
[5] 周广成, 陈现平, 李猛 , 等. 6个玉米杂交种生态稳定性分析. 安徽农业科学, 2001(2):153-154.
[6] 莫惠栋 . 作物品种区域试验的方差分析(续). 江苏农学院学报, 1983(4):49-55.
[7] 赵祖亮, 曲艺伟, 刘哲 , 等. 玉米产量的品种与环境互作效应空间分布规律. 农业工程学报, 2015,31(24):232-238.
[8] 苏义臣, 苏桂华, 金明华 , 等. GGE双标图在玉米区域试验中的应用. 吉林农业科学, 2015,40(3):4-7.
[9] 杨锦忠, 郝建平, 姚宏亮 , 等. 基于AMMI模型的玉米区域试验地点鉴别力的重演性研究. 玉米科学, 2011,19(4):145-148.
[10] 魏凤乐 . 新选育玉米杂交种适应区选择及高产稳产比较分析. 吉林农业科学, 1989(3):27-33.
[11] 沈恩庭, 房春兴, 唐怀坡 . 适合玉米机收的含水量与产量关系试验研究. 安徽农学通报, 2013,19(24):31-32,101.
[12] 张春荣, 岳竞之, 张莉 , 等. 玉米子粒含水量与穗部性状的相关分析. 玉米科学, 2007(1):59-61.
[1] Chen Guangzhou,Wang Guangfu,Qu Jianzhou,Si Leiyong,Jin Yan,Xu Shutu,Xue Jiquan,Lu Haidong. Study on Grain Dehydration Rate and Correlation Analysis of Major Related Characters in Different Maize Inbred Lines [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 33-39.
[2] Wu Ronghua,Zhuang Kezhang,Liu Peng,Zhang Chunyan. Response of Summer Maize Yield to Meteorological Factors in Lunan Region [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 104-109.
[3] Li Shaokun,Zhang Wanxu,Wang Keru,Han Dongsheng,Yang Xiaoxia,Chen Yongsheng,Yu Wanbing,Liu Chaowei,Zhang Guoqiang,Liu Fenghe,Chen Jianglu,Yang Jingjing,Li Lulu,Xie Ruizhi,Hou Peng,Ming Bo. Study on Maize Mechanical Grain Harvest in Northern Xinjiang [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 127-131.
[4] Gao Wenjun,Yang Guoyi,Gao Xinzhong,Yu Zhu,Xu Qingfang,Yuan Xiangyang,Sun Yaowu. The Effects of Nitrogen, Phosphorus, or Potassium Fertilizer on the Yield and Silage Quality of Maize [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(5): 144-149.
[5] Hongyan Li,Yonghong Wang,Rulang Zhao,Wenjie Zhang,Bo Ming,Ruizhi Xie,Keru Wang,Lulu Li,Shang Gao,Shaokun Li. The Construction and Application of Maize Grain Dehydration Model in Yellow River Irrigation and Pumping Irrigation District in Ningxia [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 149-153.
[6] Shaokun Li,Wanxu Zhang,Keru Wang,Wanbing Yu,Yongsheng Chen,Dongsheng Han,Xiaoxia Yang,Chaowei Liu,Guoqiang Zhang,Yizhou Wang,Fenghe Liu,Jianglu Chen,Jingjing Yang,Ruizhi Xie,Peng Hou,Bo Ming. The Selection of High Yield Maize Cultivars Suitable for Dense Planting and Grain Mechanical Harvesting in North of Xinjiang [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 62-68.
[7] Yanli Fan,Hui Dong,Baishan Lu,Yaxing Shi,Ning Gao,Yamin Shi,Li Xu,Shengli Xi,Cuifen Zhang,Yanhui Liu. Effects of Sowing Date on Starch Gelatinization Characteristics of Different Waxy Maize Varieties [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 79-83.
[8] Jingjing Yang,Jianglu Chen,Ruizhi Xie,Xiaowei Zhang,Bianhong Ding,Xinming Wu,Shaokun Li,Dongfang Li. Effects of Seed Weight Difference on the Evenness of Related Germination Indexes in Maize [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 180-184.
[9] Shaokun Li,Keru Wang,Yanbo Wang,Haiyan Zhao,Yuzhong Shen,Dandan Cai,Wanxin Xiao,Wenye Jiang,Zhaofu Huang,Lichao Zhai,Ruizhi Xie,Peng Hou,Bo Ming. The Quality of Mechanical Harvesting Maize Grain and Its Influencing Factors in Central Liaoning Province [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 162-167.
[10] Lei Shi,Guohong Wang,Yanbo Wang,Dawei Wang,Haiyan Zhao. Preliminary Study on Grain Dehydration Rate of Maize Hybrids and Their Parents [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 84-89.
[11] Keru Wang,Shaokun Li,Yanbo Wang,Haiyan Zhao,Yuzhong Shen,Dandan Cai,Wanxin Xiao,Wenye Jiang,Zhaofu Huang,Lichao Zhai,Lulu Li,Ruizhi Xie,Peng Hou,Bo Ming. Screening Maize Varieties Suitable for Mechanical Harvesting Grain in the Central Liaoning Province [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(3): 97-102.
[12] Lulu Li,Ruizhi Xie,Keru Wang,Bo Ming,Peng Hou,Shaokun Li. Effects of Peeling Husk on Grain Dehydration of Maize [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 114-117.
[13] Rui Li,Jianrong Bai,Xiuhong Wang,Congzhuo Zhang,Xiaomei Zhang,Lei Yan,Ruijuan Yang. Population Genetic Diversity of 144 Sweet Maizes [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 17-24.
[14] Zhongnan Li,Yueren Wang,Shenghui Wu,Haitao Qu,Zhengxue Xu,Guangfa Li. Factor Analysis on GCA Effect Value of Main Traits of Maize [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 25-29.
[15] Songtao Liu,Guo Liu,Tinashe Zenda,Hongyu Jin,Xuan Wang,Huijun Duan. Screening of High Yield and Stable Varieties of Summer Maize in Different Ecological of Hebei Province [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(2): 56-60.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] Guangcai Zhao,Xuhong Chang,Demei Wang,Zhiqiang Tao,Yanjie Wang,Yushuang Yang,Yingjie Zhu. General Situation and Development of Wheat Production[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 1 -7 .
[2] Baoquan Quan,Dongmei Bai,Yuexia Tian,Yunyun Xue. Effects of Different Leaf-Peg Ratio on Photosynthesis and Yield of Peanut[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 102 -105 .
[3] Xuefang Huang,Mingjing Huang,Huatao Liu,Cong Zhao,Juanling Wang. Effects of Annual Precipitation and Population Density on Tiller-Earing and Yield of Zhangzagu 5 under Film Mulching and Hole Sowing[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 106 -113 .
[4] Wenhui Huang, Hui Wang, Desheng Mei. Research Progress on Lodging Resistance of Crops[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 13 -19 .
[5] Yun Zhao,Cailong Xu,Xu Yang,Suzhen Li,Jing Zhou,Jicun Li,Tianfu Han,Cunxiang Wu. Effects of Sowing Methods on Seedling Stand and Production Profit of Summer Soybean under Wheat-Soybean System[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 114 -120 .
[6] Mei Lu,Min Sun,Aixia Ren,Miaomiao Lei,Lingzhu Xue,Zhiqiang Gao. Effects of Spraying Foliar Fertilizers on Dryland Wheat Growth and the Correlation with Yield Formation[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 121 -125 .
[7] Xiaofei Wang,Haijun Xu,Mengqiao Guo,Yu Xiao,Xinyu Cheng,Shuxia Liu,Xiangjun Guan,Yaokun Wu,Weihua Zhao,Guojiang Wei. Effects of Sowing Date, Density and Fertilizer Utilization Rate on the Yield of Oilseed Perilla frutescens in Cold Area[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 126 -130 .
[8] Pengjin Zhu,Xinhua Pang,Chun Liang,Qinliang Tan,Lin Yan,Quanguang Zhou,Kewei Ou. Effects of Cold Stress on Reactive Oxygen Metabolism and Antioxidant Enzyme Activities of Sugarcane Seedlings[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 131 -137 .
[9] Jie Gao,Qingfeng Li,Qiu Peng,Xiaoyan Jiao,Jinsong Wang. Effects of Different Nutrient Combinations on Plant Production and Nitrogen, Phosphorus and Potassium Utilization Characteristics in Waxy Sorghum[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 138 -142 .
[10] Na Shang,Zhongxu Yang,Qiuzhi Li,Huihui Yin,Shihong Wang,Haitao Li,Tong Li,Han Zhang. Response of Cotton with Vegetative Branches to Plant Density in the Western of Shandong Province[J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 143 -148 .