Crops ›› 2018, Vol. 34 ›› Issue (4): 37-41.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2018.04.007

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Field Identification of Different Broom Corn Millet Varieties Lodging Resistance and Evaluation Index Selection and Analysis

Liang Haiyan,Li Hai,Lin Fengxian,Zhang Xiangyu,Zhang Zhi,Song Xiaoqiang   

  1. Institute of Crops in High Latitude & Cold Climate Area, Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Datong 037008, Shanxi, China
  • Received:2018-04-25 Revised:2018-06-12 Online:2018-08-20 Published:2018-08-23

RichHTML

15

PDF (PC)

167

Abstract:

The lodging resistance of 45 varieties of millet was identified in the field. Among them, 7 varieties with different lodging grades were selected to analyze the relationship between plant agronomy, mechanical properties and lodging grade in the field. The results showed that the lodging grade of 7 varieties including Ningmi 13, Longmi 7, Longmi 8, Yanshu 8 etc. were 0, and they had better lodging resistance. The study on 7 varieties of different lodging grades showed that the correlation coefficient between lodging coefficient and field lodging grade was the largest, which reached the extremely significant level. The mechanical strength of plant, root weight and plant height were the major influencing factors of lodging coefficient. The influence of mechanical strength was the greatest, followed by the root weight.

Key words: Broom corn millet, Lodging resistance, Field identification, Evaluation index

Fig.1

The difference of lodging property of different broom corn millet varieties"

Table 1

Agronomic characters of different broom corn millet varieties"

品种
Variety		 倒伏级别
Lodging level		 基部1~4节平均茎基粗(cm)
Basal 1-4 nodes mean stem diameter		 株高(cm)
Plant height		 穗长(cm)
Spike length		 穗重(g)
Panicle weight		 根重(g)
Root weight		 地上部分鲜重(g)
Above-ground fresh weight
宁糜13号
Ningmi 13		 0 0.94 151.50 33.67 14.25 9.58 73.91
内糜5号
Neimi 5		 1 0.85 117.67 44.17 21.08 7.81 66.15
晋黍5号
Jinshu 5		 2 0.91 143.67 29.60 27.00 8.80 81.74
雁黍11号
Yanshu 11		 2 0.65 174.17 40.17 26.02 10.37 87.45
晋黍8号
Jinshu 8		 3 0.69 135.00 33.00 12.00 4.18 60.44
内糜3号
Neimi 3		 4 0.64 180.17 45.33 21.99 5.23 73.30
晋黍1号
Jinshu 1		 4 0.71 164.17 28.60 15.49 3.91 51.24

Table 2

Mechanical properties of different broom corn millet varieties"

品种
Variety		 倒伏级别
Lodging level		 重心高度(cm)
Gravity center
height		 基部1~4节平均
节间充实度(g/cm)
Basal 1-4 nodes mean
internodes fullness		 抗折力(N)
Breaking
resistance		 机械强度
(N·cm)
Mechanical
strength		 倒伏指数
Lodging
index		 倒伏系数
Lodging coefficient
宁糜13号Ningmi 13 0 69.93 0.51 54.64 342.61 15.09 3.41
内糜5号Neimi 5 1 77.50 0.43 37.17 288.33 17.78 3.46
晋黍5号Jinshu 5 2 51.47 0.49 36.92 328.88 20.44 4.06
雁黍11号Yanshu 11 2 74.97 0.56 46.56 320.69 12.79 4.58
晋黍8号Jinshu 8 3 80.00 0.31 36.75 260.10 18.59 7.50
内糜3号Neimi 3 4 86.67 0.37 33.20 267.91 23.71 9.28
晋黍1号Jinshu 1 4 78.17 0.29 23.76 167.25 23.95 12.87

Table 3

Correlation coefficient between broom corn millet plant agronomy, mechanical properties and lodging level in the field"

株高
Plant
height		 重心高度
Gravity
center height		 基部1~4节平均充实度
Basal 1-4 nodes mean internodes fullness		 基部1~4节平均茎基粗
Basal 1-4 nodes mean stem diamete		 穗长
Spike
length		 穗重
Panicle
weight		 根重
Root
weight		 地上部分鲜重
Above-ground
fresh weight		 抗折力
Breaking
resistance		 机械强度
Mechanical strength		 倒伏指数
Lodging
index		 倒伏系数
Lodging coefficient
倒伏级别
Lodging level		 0.491 0.727 -0.636 -0.709 -0.164 0.018 -0.727 -0.473 -0.927** -0.818* 0.782* 0.982**

Table 4

Path analysis between lodging coefficient and agronomic, mechanical characters of broom corn millet plants"

自变量
Independent variable		 与倒伏系数的
简单相关系数
Simple correlation coefficient with lodging coefficient		 通径系数
(直接作用）
Path coefficient (Direct action)		 间接通径系数Indirect path coefficient 合计（间接作用）
Total (Indirect effects)
机械强度
Mechanical strength		 株高
Plant
height		 根重
Root
weight
机械强度Mechanical strength -0.9240 -0.5600 - -0.0562 -0.3069 -0.3630
株高Plant height 0.4630 0.3720 0.0846 - 0.0071 0.0917
根重Root weight -0.8470 -0.3560 -0.4827 -0.0074 - -0.4902
[1] 柴岩, 王玉玺, 王智才 . 糜子. 北京:中国农业科学技术出版社, 1999.
[2] 柴岩 . 糜子. 北京:中国农业出版社, 1992.
[3] 徐启程, 孙常春, 徐立辉 . 小麦抗倒伏的力学分析. 华侨大学学报(自然科学版), 2012,33(6):667-670.
[4] 王勇, 李晴祺 . 小麦品种抗倒性评价方法研究. 华北农学报, 1995,10(3):84-88.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-7091.1995.03.018
[5] 蒲定福, 周俊儒, 李邦发 , 等. 根倒伏小麦抗倒性评价方法研究. 西北农业学报, 2000,9(1):58-61.
doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2000.1.015
[9] 李金才, 尹均, 魏凤珍 . 播种密度对冬小麦茎秆形态特征和抗倒指数的影响. 作物学报, 2005,31(5):662-666.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2005.05.023
[7] 王勇, 李斯深, 李安飞 , 等. 小麦种质抗倒性评价和抗倒性状的相关与通径分析. 西北植物学报, 2000,20(1):79-85.
[8] 杨惠杰, 杨仁崔, 李义珍 , 等. 水稻茎秆性状与抗倒性的关系. 福建农业学报, 2000,15(2):1-7.
[9] 张秋英, 欧阳由男, 戴伟民 , 等. 水稻基部节间性状与倒伏相关性分析及QTL定位. 作物学报, 2005,31(6):712-717.
[10] 黄海, 陈德龙, 常莹 , 等. 玉米品种抗倒能力差异及其机制研究. 南京农业大学学报, 2014,37(4):22-30.
doi: 10.7685/j.issn.1000-2030.2014.04.004
[11] 王莹, 杜建林 . 大麦根倒伏抗性评价方法及其倒伏系数的通径分析. 作物学报, 2001,27(6):941-945.
[12] 田伯红 . 禾谷类作物抗倒伏性的研究方法与谷子抗倒性评价. 植物遗传资源学报, 2013,14(2):265-269.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1810.2013.02.012
[13] 刘艳丽, 田伯红, 张建新 , 等. 谷子育成品种的抗倒性评价. 河北农业科学, 2014,18(4):8-12.
[14] 王星玉, 王伦, 崔彩霞 , 等. 黍稷种质资源描述规范和数据标准. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006.
[1] Wenhui Huang, Hui Wang, Desheng Mei. Research Progress on Lodging Resistance of Crops [J]. Crops, 2018, 34(4): 13-19.
[2] Yue Song,Dabing Xiang,Houbing Huang,Yu Fan,Shuang Wei,Sai Zhang. Lodging Resistance Identification and Evaluation of Different Tartary Buckwheat Cultivars [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(6): 65-71.
[3] Yulin Han,Guihong Yin,Guangyu Yang,Jianwei Tang,Lina Wang,Feng Huang,Qian Zhang,Nannan Li,Yongjun Lü,Shuncheng Li,Shaokui Zou,Yan Gao. Relation of the Stem Characters and Lodging Resistance of Zhoumai 22 [J]. Crops, 2017, 33(2): 34-37.
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 .