Crops ›› 2021, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (4): 32-37.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2021.04.005

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comprehensive Evaluation of New Sugarcane Clones by DTOPSIS Method

Guo Qiang1,2(), Ma Wenqing1,2, Qin Changxian1, Shi Zesheng1, Peng Chong1, Bi Dejin1, He Hongliang1, Liang Yongjian1, Tang Liqiu1,2()   

  1. 1Guangxi South Subtropical Agricultural Science Research Institute, Longzhou 532415, Guangxi, China
    2Province and Ministry Co-Sponsored Collaborative Innovation Center of Sugar Industry, Nanning 530004, Guangxi, China
  • Received:2020-11-16 Revised:2021-03-14 Online:2021-08-15 Published:2021-08-13
  • Contact: Tang Liqiu E-mail:570761004@qq.com;401754719@qq.com

RichHTML

4

PDF (PC)

343

Abstract:

The nine new sugarcane clones were evaluated comprehensively by variance analysis and the DTOPSIS method taking ROC22 as a control in new-planted cane and two years ratoon crops. The results showed that the smut rates of Guitang 11-80, Guitang 11-2142, and Liutang 10-21 were higher than ROC22 in two years ratoon crops, while the smut rates of other clones were lower than ROC22. Among them, the smut rate of Guitang 10-517 was 0 in the first year ratoon, and the smut rate of Guitang 10-434 was 0 in two years ratoon crops. The DTOPSIS analysis results showed that the Ci of Guitang 10-3006 and Guitang 10-517 were lower than that of ROC22, the two clones were characterized by lower cane yield and lower sucrose content. The Ci of Guitang 10-2018, Guitang 10-434, Hetang 11-145, and Guitang 10-2003 were higher than that of ROC22, the four clones were characterized by higher cane yield, higher sucrose content, and strong resistance, they are suitable for planting in Chongzuo and other sugarcane planting areas with the similar environmental conditions.

Key words: Sugarcane, New clones, DTOPSIS method, Comprehensive evaluation

Table 1

Main agronomic traits of different sugarcane lines"

编号
Number		 品系
Line		 出苗率Germination
rate (%)		 宿根发株率
Ratoon
germination
rate (%)		 分蘖率
Tillering
rate (%)		 株高
Plant
height
(cm)		 茎径
Stalk
diameter
(cm)		 有效茎数
（条/hm2）
Millable stalk
(strip/hm2)		 枯心率
Withered
heart
rate (%)		 梢腐病率
Pokkah
boeng
rate (%)
1 河糖11-145
Hetang 11-145		 37.95b 128.75bcd 101.43a 320.07ab 2.70cde 51 005bc 9.03ab 1.91bc
2 ROC22 (CK) 20.15e 98.63d 82.33abc 312.06ab 2.86abc 51 627bc 5.56bc 3.36b
3 桂糖10-3006
Guitang 10-3006		 28.64bcde 143.80b 65.39cd 292.12cde 2.93ab 46 389c 8.36ab 1.76bc
4 桂糖11-80
Guitang 11-80		 50.68a 121.97bcd 48.64d 306.71abc 3.00ab 51 640bc 8.77ab 2.03bc
5 桂糖10-434
Guitang 10-434		 34.55bc 147.60b 61.72cd 284.70de 2.80bcd 53 558bc 6.76ab 2.37b
6 桂糖10-2018
Guitang 10-2018		 31.21bcd 132.18bc 92.51ab 303.72bcd 2.57e 58 412b 6.06bc 0.22c
7 桂糖11-2142
Guitang 11-2142		 55.53a 117.75bcd 79.86abc 321.93a 2.53e 76 111a 6.85ab 1.43bc
8 桂糖10-2003
Guitang 10-2003		 23.64de 191.47a 83.33abc 302.82bcd 2.81bcd 47 910c 8.38ab 3.05b
9 桂糖10-517
Guitang 10-517		 21.36de 100.54d 85.17abc 279.07e 3.02a 45 476c 7.45ab 5.94a
10 柳糖10-21
Liutang 10-21		 28.94bcde 133.50bc 67.63bcd 299.88cd 2.64de 47 129c 11.50a 5.65a

Fig.1

Smut rates of different tested sugarcane lines Different lowcase letters represent significant difference at 5% level"

Table 2

Cane yields of different sugarcane lines g/hm2"

品系编号
Line
number		 新植蔗
（2017年）
New-planted cane		 第1年宿根
（2018年）
First ratoon		 第2年宿根
（2019年）
Second ratoon		 平均
Average
1 89 365.53bc 90 595.69ab 96 984.61ab 92 315.28bc
2 92 460.78bc 67 460.65cd 87 540.12bc 82 487.18bc
3 87 936.95bc 72 698.78cd 82 936.92c 81 190.88bc
4 103 492.58b 76 508.32bcd 79 762.30c 86 587.73bc
5 95 000.48bc 87 698.85ab 102 619.56a 95 106.30b
6 85 238.52bc 79 206.75bc 97 143.34ab 87 196.20bc
7 132 937.17a 99 206.85a 107 064.03a 113 069.35a
8 94 206.82bc 70 000.35cd 83 016.29c 82 407.82bc
9 89 206.80bc 65 555.88d 85 555.98bc 80 106.22c
10 78 413.09c 70 317.81cd 86 984.56bc 78 571.82c

Table 3

Sucrose contents of different sugarcane lines %"

品系编号
Line
number		 新植蔗
（2017年）
New-planted cane		 第1年宿根
（2018年）
First ratoon		 第2年宿根
（2019年）
Second ratoon		 平均
Average
1 14.77 15.09 15.99 15.28
2 14.05 14.12 15.68 14.62
3 13.82 14.06 13.99 13.96
4 14.63 14.06 14.67 14.45
5 15.91 15.00 16.50 15.80
6 14.49 14.82 15.30 14.87
7 13.40 12.50 14.55 13.48
8 14.97 15.45 14.86 15.09
9 14.26 14.73 14.86 14.62
10 12.85 13.17 13.97 13.33

Fig.2

Sucrose contents of different sugarcane lines"

Table 4

Sugar yields of different sugarcane lines kg/hm2"

品系编号
Line
number		 新植蔗
（2017年）
New-planted cane		 第1年宿根
（2018年）
First ratoon		 第2年宿根
（2019年）
Second ratoon		 平均
Average
1 13 196.47 13 674.04 15 508.24 14 126.25
2 12 987.52 9 525.94 13 727.03 12 080.16
3 12 156.40 10 220.06 11 605.52 11 327.33
4 15 136.16 10 759.86 11 703.04 12 533.02
5 15 114.55 13 152.49 16 933.36 15 066.80
6 12 347.04 11 739.94 14 861.43 12 982.80
7 17 814.43 12 403.73 15 575.96 15 264.71
8 14 106.53 10 812.48 12 338.24 12 419.08
9 12 721.67 9 656.46 12 709.86 11 696.00
10 10 073.08 9 264.22 12 150.54 10 495.95

Table 5

Comprehensive evaluation results by DTOPSIS method"

品系
Line		 Si+ Si- Si++Si- Ci Ci排序
Ci order
河糖11-145 Hetang 11-145 0.0609 0.0921 0.1530 0.6020 3
新台糖22号 ROC22 0.0823 0.0644 0.1467 0.4390 5
桂糖10-3006 Guitang 10-3006 0.0767 0.0568 0.1335 0.4255 6
桂糖10-434 Guitang 10-434 0.0562 0.1007 0.1569 0.6418 2
桂糖10-2018 Guitang 10-2018 0.0422 0.0969 0.1391 0.6966 1
桂糖10-2003 Guitang 10-2003 0.0667 0.0777 0.1444 0.5381 4
桂糖10-517 Guitang 10-517 0.0876 0.0526 0.1402 0.3752 7
[1] Li Y R, Yang L T. Sugarcane agriculture and sugar industry in China. Sugar Tech, 2015,17(1):1-8.
[2] Li Y R, Song X P, Wu J M, et al. Sugar industry and improved sugarcane farming technologies in China. Sugar Tech, 2016,18(6):603-611.
[3] 李杨瑞. 关于广西的甘蔗育种. 广西糖业, 2019(3):3-9.
[4] 罗奥柔, 韦贵剑, 韦维, 等. 桂糖44号在喀斯特地区的产量表现及其构成因素分析. 南方农业学报, 2019,50(11):2459-2464.
[5] 王小明, 李大成, 廖政达, 等. 糖料蔗新品种农艺性状及产量的比较. 作物杂志, 2019(1):50-55.
[6] 李佳慧, 欧克玮, 谭秦亮, 等. 甘蔗新品种(系)在广西防城港蔗区的品比试验总结. 种子, 2020,39(1):117-121.
[7] 谭秦亮, 朱鹏锦, 程琴, 等. 不同甘蔗品种(系)的产量构成因素及品质比较. 作物杂志, 2019(3):49-54.
[8] 覃耀冠, 周忠凤, 周颀, 等. 广西甘蔗新品种区试柳州点7个甘蔗新品种DTOPSIS法综合评价. 南方农业学报, 2014,45(6):938-943.
[9] 孙玉勇, 钟坤, 莫皓蓝, 等. 利用DTOPSIS法综合评价甘蔗新品种. 南方农业学报, 2016,47(3):348-352.
[10] 吴志会, 白玉龙, 董玉武, 等. DTOPSIS法综合评价冀中北冬小麦新品种的初步研究. 麦类作物学报, 2005,25(6):116-119.
[11] 杨昆, 吴才文, 覃伟, 等. DTOPSIS法和灰色关联度法在甘蔗新品种综合评价中的应用比较. 西南农业学报, 2015,28(4):1542-1547.
[12] 陈学川, 王宽, 徐红亚, 等. 长江流域春大豆的DTOPSIS法综合评价. 南方农业, 2013(1):11-14.
[13] 宋秀丽, 吴玥, 杨锡朗, 等. 基于熵值赋权的DTOPSIS法与灰色关联度分析在玉米品种综合评价中的比较. 玉米科学, 2020,28(2):41-46.
[14] 李文砚, 黄丽君, 卢美瑛, 等. DTOPSIS法在苹婆不同品系综合评价中的应用. 南方农业学报, 2019,50(7):1527-1533.
[15] 经艳芬, 周清明, 段惠芬, 等. 国家七轮区试甘蔗品种在云南瑞丽点表现的DTOPSIS法综合评价. 西南农业学报, 2012,25(4):1177-1180.
[1] Feng Yanfei, Yang Wei, Ren Guoxin, Deng Jie, Li Wenlong, Gao Shuren. Comprehensive Evaluation of Some Maize Hybrids in Heilongjiang Province [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(4): 46-50.
[2] Li Zilin, Lu Yachun, Zhao Leifeng, Fan Dongsheng, Wei Zhong, Zhou Wenliang, Huang Liguang, Huang Yang, Huang Jingpeng, Gu Xinquan, Nian Fuzhao. Comprehensive Evaluation of the Suitability of Tobacco Planting Soil Fertility in Jingxi City [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 155-160.
[3] Qu Xiangchun, Wang Nai, Shi Guishan, Yu Miao, Li Haiqing, Gao Yue, Xu Ning, Chen Bingru. Application in Similarity-Difference Analysis Method on Evaluation of Grain Sorghum Hybrids [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(3): 46-50.
[4] Fan Yegeng, Chen Rongfa, Yan Haifeng, Zhou Huiwen, Weng Mengling, Huang Xing, Luo Ting, Zhou Zhongfeng, Qiu Lihang, Wu Jianming. Effects of Sugarcane Rotation Green Fodder Corn and Peanut on Sugarcane Growth and Soil Properties [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 104-111.
[5] Zhou Qilong. Grey Relational Grade Evaluation of 19 Oat Varieties Introduced in Ali of Tibet [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 26-31.
[6] Qi Jianshuang, Xia Laikun, Huang Bao, Li Chunying, Ma Zhiyan, Ding Yong, Gu Limin, Zhang Jun, Zhang Fengqi, Mu Xinyuan, Tang Baojun, Zhao Faxin, Zhang Lanxun. Discussion on the Application in the Regional Experiment of Maize Varieties by Entropy DTOPSIS Mode and Grey Situation Decision Methods [J]. Crops, 2021, 37(1): 60-67.
[7] 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.
[8] Xie Jinlan, Lin Li, Li Changning, Luo Ting, Mo Zhanghong. Effects of Intercropping Mungbean Straw Returning on Sugarcane Growth and Nitrogen Metabolism under Nitrogen Fertilizer Reduction [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(4): 164-169.
[9] Zhang Yang, Zhang Wei, Zhao Weijun, Shao Rongfeng, Wang Guan, Xue Dingding, Li Jinmei. Variety Screening and Study of Cultivation Technology for Forage Triticale Varieties Based on Principal Component and Grey Relation Analysis [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(3): 117-124.
[10] Fan Yegeng,Yan Haifeng,Chen Rongfa,Qiu Lihang,Zhou Huiwen,Huang Xing,Weng Mengling,Wu Jianming,Li Yangrui,Wei Shengman. The Difference of Single Bud Seedling of the Third Generation of Sugarcane Virus-Free Plantlets with Different Seedcane Sizes and Transplanting Effect [J]. Crops, 2020, 36(2): 194-199.
[11] Xie Linyan,Di Yining,Liu Lufeng,Wu Qinglian,Shen Xianyue,Xu Rong,Meng Yu,He Lilian,Li Fusheng. Isolation and ITS Sequence Identification of the Pathogen Causing Red Rot Disease on Sugarcane [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(5): 196-199.
[12] Li Jing,Nan Ming. Analysis of Agronomic Characters and Genetic Diversity of 62 Winter Wheat Germplasms from Russia and Ukraine in Northwest China [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(5): 9-14.
[13] Wang Xiaoming,Liao Zhengda,He Yixiang,Sun Xiaobo,Wei Zenglin,Wei Xi,Su Xide. Comparative Analysis on Agronomic and Quality Characters of Sugarcane with Equivalent Fertilizer Formula [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(4): 191-195.
[14] Jin Yulong,Bai Ting,Zhu Mingxia,Liu Xiaojiao,Wang Shanshan,Zhang Zhiwei,Hu Yun,Zhang Yuhong. Comprehensive Evaluation of Quality of Nine Tibetan Barley Landlaces by Factor Analysis [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(4): 55-60.
[15] Guo Qingrui,Wang Mengfei,Guo Fengqin,Yin Jianjun,Zhang Xiaojuan,Wang Li. Comprehensive Evaluation of Grain and Forage Maize Varieties in High Latitude and Cold Area of Shanxi Province [J]. Crops, 2019, 35(4): 61-68.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!