Crops ›› 2024, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (2): 62-70.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2024.02.008

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Screening of Nitrogen High-Efficiency Varieties and Comprehensive Evaluation of Nitrogen Efficiency of Sea Island Cotton

Duan Songjiang1(), Mulidier∙Baibolati1, Peng Zengying1, Shen Yingying1, Wu Yifan1, Fu Jincheng1, Guo Rensong2, Zhang Jusong1()   

  1. 1Agriculture College, Xinjiang Agricultural University / Research Center of Cotton Engineering, Ministry of Education, Urumqi 830052, Xinjiang, China
    2Institute of Economic Crops, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, Xinjiang, China
  • Received:2022-10-02 Revised:2023-11-12 Online:2024-04-15 Published:2024-04-15

RichHTML

5

PDF (PC)

79

Abstract:

In order to screen nitrogen-efficient sea island cotton varieties, supplement the harvest screening indexes and improve the cotton nitrogen efficiency evaluation system, three nitrogen fertilizer treatments of low nitrogen (0 kg/ha, N0), medium nitrogen (240 kg/ha, N1) and high nitrogen (480 kg/ha, N2) were set up to comprehensively evaluate the type of nitrogen efficiency of the sea island cotton, screen out nitrogen-efficient sea island cotton varieties, and determine the evaluation indexes for screening nitrogen-efficient sea island cotton varieties in harvesting period by correlation analysis, principal component analysis and subordinate function analysis using 12 sea island cotton varieties bred in the past 20 years. The results showed that the coefficient of variation of most of the indicators of the sea island cotton varieties for testing under different nitrogen fertilizer levels were greater than 10%, and the 19 evaluation indicators were subjected to principal component analysis. Under N1 and N2 levels, the cumulative contribution rate of the four principal components were 86.68% and 88.03%, respectively. Among the four principal components, 12 indicators, such as plant height, number of fruiting shoots, stem and leaf biomass, reproductive organ biomass, etc, accounted for a large proportion of the four principal components, and the indicators were significant (P < 0.05) or extremely significant (P < 0.01) positive correlation. Based on the comprehensive score of the principal components, the comprehensive evaluation value of nitrogen efficiency and lint yield, one nitrogen-efficient variety, three nitrogen-medium- efficient varieties and three nitrogen-low-efficient varieties were screened out. In summary, Miancheng 10 was identified as a nitrogen-efficient variety, and it was concluded that SPAD, reproductive organ biomass, reproductive organ nitrogen accumulation, total aboveground nitrogen accumulation, number of bolls per plant, seed cotton yield, lint yield, and nitrogen fertilizer agronomic utilization rate could be used as the core indexes for the screening of nitrogen-efficient varieties.

Key words: Sea island cotton, Nitrogen efficiency evaluation, Variety screening

Table 1

Soil base fertility"

土壤深度
Soil depth (cm)		 全氮
Total nitrogen (g/kg)		 有机质
Organic matter (g/kg)		 水解性氮
Hydrolyzed nitrogen (mg/kg)		 速效磷
Available P (mg/kg)		 速效钾
Available K (mg/kg)
0~10 0.42 8.26 35.0 26.3 83
10~20 0.49 7.65 66.4 32.9 89
20~30 0.46 7.08 44.4 32.0 87
30~40 0.30 5.90 40.6 16.6 103
40~50 0.24 4.24 35.0 7.3 138
50~60 0.25 4.06 51.7 26.6 145

Table 2

Test materials and years"

编号Number 品种Variety 年份Year 缩略词Abbreviation
1 新海14号 1998 XH14
2 新海21号 2003 XH21
3 新海24号 2005 XH24
4 新海28号 2007 XH28
5 新海35号 2010 XH35
6 新海39号 2012 XH39
7 新海43号 2013 XH43
8 新海45号 2014 XH45
9 新海53号 2015 XH53
10 新海61号 2017 XH61
11 新海62号 2017 XH62
12 棉城10号 2018 MC10

Table 3

Variation statistics of main traits of island cotton under different nitrogen treatments"

指标
Index		 N0 N1 N2
平均值
Average		 变幅
Range		 变异系数
CV (%)		 平均值
Average		 变幅
Range		 变异系数
CV (%)		 平均值
Average		 变幅
Range		 变异系数
CV (%)
PH (cm) 82.35 64.20~102.50 1.00 85.92 70.70~110.00 14.27 87.61 62.80~113.40 17.43
NFB 10.26 7.70~12.00 12.87 11.14 8.60~12.30 8.91 11.20 9.10~12.10 7.84
SPAD 56.67 54.10~59.10 2.92 56.18 53.40~60.20 3.10 55.56 53.20~57.50 2.47
SLB (g/plant) 27.82 16.20~44.50 28.15 31.57 17.30~42.20 23.93 30.86 23.30~43.80 20.95
ROB (g/plant) 40.02 29.40~48.90 15.21 48.61 36.70~75.90 19.23 50.72 36.00~61.30 16.22
APB (g/plant) 67.31 50.70~90.00 17.83 80.98 59.70~116.20 17.76 81.58 59.30~99.00 16.58
SLNA (g/plant) 0.33 0.19~0.58 33.08 0.45 0.32~0.63 23.70 0.44 0.33~0.63 20.94
RONA (g/plant) 0.36 0.29~0.50 15.07 0.52 0.39~0.84 21.48 0.54 0.39~0.70 17.37
APNA (g/plant) 0.69 0.52~1.07 22.12 0.98 0.73~1.41 19.18 0.98 0.74~1.29 16.90
BNP 6.73 6.10~8.40 10.49 7.36 6.50~8.60 8.09 7.28 6.30~9.30 9.39
BW (g) 3.25 3.00~3.40 3.63 3.29 3.00~3.60 5.09 3.32 3.10~3.80 6.33
LP (%) 0.33 0.32~0.34 2.13 0.33 0.32~0.34 1.60 0.33 0.32~0.37 3.69
SCY (kg/hm2) 4339.13 3707.70~5507.20 11.38 5002.96 4224.20~6201.50 9.66 5002.08 4513.80~6015.10 7.97
LCY (kg/hm2) 1426.60 1210.80~1742.70 10.40 1621.20 1381.80~2039.96 9.75 1639.30 1484.20~1928.40 6.87
aNUE (kg/kg) － － － 2.77 1.00~4.20 34.57 1.38 0.68~2.48 36.14
NPFP (kg/kg) － － － 20.85 17.60~25.80 9.66 10.42 9.40~12.53 7.97
NRE (%) － － － 28.36 7.43~51.71 49.72 14.19 8.07~21.15 36.81
pNUE (kg/kg) － － － 12.05 5.00~21.90 49.90 11.49 3.21~25.91 58.87
iNUE (kg/kg) － － － 7.14 5.90~9.40 17.00 7.27 5.97~8.86 12.70

Table 4

Correlation analysis of 19 indexes at the harvest period of 12 sea island cotton cultivars under different nitrogen fertilizer levels"

指标
Index		 PH NFB SPAD SLB ROB APB SLNA RONA APNA BNP BW LP SCY LCY aNUE NPFP NRE pNUE iNUE
PH 0.327 -0.047 0.750** 0.306 0.586* 0.706* 0.151 0.484 0.380 0.379 -0.511 0.497 0.412 -0.157 0.497 -0.058 0.271 -0.334
NFB 0.267 0.403 0.154 0.462 0.383 0.015 0.407 0.255 0.648* 0.168 0.082 0.713** 0.715** 0.063 0.713** -0.057 0.328 0.170
SPAD -0.310 -0.050 -0.028 0.256 0.153 -0.119 0.208 0.058 0.273 -0.379 0.530 0.139 0.233 0.323 0.139 0.378 -0.154 0.072
SLB 0.896** 0.337 -0.096 0.528 0.814** 0.944** 0.548 0.864** 0.407 0.627* -0.254 0.474 0.421 0.135 0.474 0.416 -0.106 -0.772**
ROB 0.628* 0.818** -0.302 0.691* 0.913** 0.475 0.932** 0.832** 0.659* 0.375 0.022 0.756** 0.764** 0.092 0.756** 0.555 -0.353 -0.473
APB 0.810** 0.659* -0.230 0.898** 0.939** 0.784** 0.850** 0.955** 0.599* 0.571 -0.133 0.718** 0.694* 0.079 0.719** 0.528 -0.269 -0.677*
SLNA 0.653* 0.236 0.144 0.900** 0.566 0.774** 0.463 0.841** 0.244 0.708* -0.304 0.342 0.276 0.009 0.343 0.361 -0.163 -0.824**
RONA 0.540 0.728** 0.081 0.696* 0.842** 0.845** 0.605* 0.868** 0.591* 0.404 0.194 0.649* 0.672* 0.127 0.649* 0.638* -0.461 -0.587*
APNA 0.668* 0.534 0.131 0.890** 0.782** 0.901** 0.892** 0.899** 0.496 0.646* -0.044 0.589* 0.568 0.099 0.589* 0.602* -0.375 -0.817**
BNP 0.198 0.421 0.043 0.486 0.556 0.571 0.619* 0.520 0.626* 0.063 -0.169 0.835** 0.811** 0.221 0.835** 0.163 0.309 -0.037
BW 0.022 0.067 0.657* 0.143 -0.152 -0.024 0.260 0.136 0.230 -0.294 -0.246 0.396 0.337 0.047 0.396 0.208 -0.082 -0.514
LP -0.690* -0.583* 0.024 -0.657* -0.646* -0.706* -0.505 -0.571 -0.610* -0.270 -0.252 -0.131 0.025 0.380 -0.131 0.574 -0.506 0.043
SCY 0.331 0.516 0.429 0.626* 0.560 0.640* 0.742** 0.751** 0.835** 0.703* 0.339 -0.553 0.986** 0.190 1.000** 0.240 0.214 -0.028
LCY 0.066 0.327 0.510 0.434 0.367 0.431 0.637* 0.630* 0.704* 0.680* 0.270 -0.155 0.904** 0.280 0.986** 0.347 0.130 0.003
aNUE -0.563 -0.193 0.233 -0.618* -0.373 -0.522 -0.478 -0.365 -0.468 -0.356 0.085 0.284 -0.142 -0.003 0.191 0.586* -0.014 0.070
NPFP 0.331 0.515 0.430 0.626* 0.559 0.639* 0.742** 0.750** 0.835** 0.702* 0.341 -0.551 1.000** 0.905** -0.142 0.241 0.214 -0.028
NRE 0.126 0.769** -0.148 0.166 0.705* 0.508 0.101 0.673* 0.433 0.401 -0.185 -0.293 0.313 0.206 -0.299 0.313 -0.724** -0.500
pNUE -0.412 -0.571 0.196 -0.441 -0.576* -0.561 -0.320 -0.529 -0.474 -0.394 0.064 0.391 -0.244 -0.049 0.817** -0.244 -0.747** 0.554
iNUE -0.811** -0.519 0.128 -0.881** -0.825** -0.923** -0.770** -0.828** -0.896** -0.390 -0.148 0.729** -0.563 -0.330 0.542 -0.563 -0.479 0.557

Table 5

Loading matrices of each factor at different nitrogen fertilizer levels"

指标
Index		 N1 N2
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4 PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4
PH 0.58 0.12 -0.58 0.21 0.7 -0.36 -0.55 -0.04
NFB 0.51 0.67 0.14 -0.11 0.68 -0.14 0.53 -0.36
SPAD 0.17 0.18 0.67 0.13 0.02 0.85 0.04 -0.24
SLB 0.81 -0.31 -0.33 0.29 0.88 -0.08 -0.45 0.12
ROB 0.89 0.00 0.22 -0.31 0.87 -0.30 0.22 -0.04
APB 0.97 -0.14 -0.05 -0.09 0.95 -0.22 -0.08 0.03
SLNA 0.73 -0.44 -0.43 0.22 0.83 0.22 -0.37 0.25
RONA 0.86 -0.14 0.31 -0.31 0.91 0.04 0.20 -0.13
APNA 0.93 -0.34 -0.04 -0.05 0.97 0.15 -0.10 0.05
BNP 0.71 0.55 0.08 0.00 0.67 0.14 0.33 0.58
BW 0.59 -0.27 -0.39 0.11 0.14 0.60 -0.32 -0.64
LP -0.08 -0.18 0.87 0.05 -0.72 0.09 0.20 0.39
SCY 0.83 0.52 0.02 -0.02 0.81 0.54 0.11 0.07
LCY 0.81 0.50 0.18 0.00 0.61 0.69 0.21 0.27
aNUE 0.19 0.05 0.52 0.76 -0.53 0.46 0.23 -0.14
NPFP 0.83 0.52 0.02 -0.02 0.81 0.54 0.11 0.07
NRE 0.53 -0.47 0.63 0.23 0.55 -0.33 0.68 -0.21
pNUE -0.16 0.76 -0.49 0.30 -0.61 0.48 -0.23 0.14
iNUE -0.57 0.76 0.16 0.06 -0.90 0.20 0.23 0.14
特征值Eigenvalue 8.71 3.49 3.12 1.15 10.26 3.12 1.97 1.37
贡献率Contribution rate (%) 45.82 18.39 16.43 6.03 54.00 16.44 10.36 7.22
累计贡献率Cumulative contribution rate (%) 45.82 64.22 80.65 86.68 54.00 70.45 80.81 88.03

Table 6

Comprehensive score values of nitrogen efficiency principal components of sea island cotton"

序号
Number		 品种
Variety		 N1 N2
综合得分
Comprehensive
score		 排序
Ranking		 综合得分
Comprehensive
score		 排序
Ranking
1 新海14号 -1.71 12 -2.21 12
2 新海21号 0.10 5 -1.09 10
3 新海24号 -1.57 11 -0.21 5
4 新海28号 0.81 3 2.07 2
5 新海35号 -0.42 9 -0.24 6
6 新海39号 0.38 4 -0.71 8
7 新海43号 1.07 2 0.45 4
8 新海45号 -0.48 8 -0.96 9
9 新海53号 -0.38 7 -1.90 11
10 新海61号 -0.30 6 1.45 3
11 新海62号 -1.12 10 -0.60 7
12 棉城10号 3.62 1 3.95 1

Table 7

Membership function values and comprehensive evaluation values of various varieties of sea island cotton"

序号
Number		 品种
Variety		 N1 N2
μ(X1) μ(X2) μ(X3) μ(X4) D值
D value		 排序
Ranking		 μ(X1) μ(X2) μ(X3) μ(X4) D值
D value		 排序
Ranking
1 新海14号 0.12 0.00 0.53 0.58 0.20 12 0.00 0.77 0.62 1.00 0.18 10
2 新海21号 0.26 0.71 0.83 0.87 0.51 3 0.20 0.67 0.94 0.58 0.32 9
3 新海24号 0.00 0.57 0.70 0.35 0.28 11 0.45 0.07 0.89 0.31 0.37 8
4 新海28号 0.57 0.70 0.00 0.67 0.50 4 0.80 0.90 0.00 0.25 0.65 2
5 新海35号 0.11 1.00 0.70 0.92 0.48 6 0.36 0.89 0.81 0.00 0.36 5
6 新海39号 0.40 0.29 0.84 0.94 0.50 5 0.28 0.74 0.76 0.42 0.35 7
7 新海43号 0.49 0.38 1.00 1.00 0.60 2 0.54 0.21 0.87 0.44 0.47 4
8 新海45号 0.39 0.12 0.17 0.97 0.33 9 0.39 0.07 0.08 0.29 0.28 11
9 新海53号 0.21 0.49 0.88 0.69 0.43 8 0.12 0.40 0.63 0.58 0.14 12
10 新海61号 0.21 0.97 0.40 0.59 0.44 7 0.75 0.00 0.80 0.30 0.59 3
11 新海62号 0.16 0.34 0.67 0.00 0.29 10 0.28 0.94 0.55 0.59 0.37 6
12 棉城10号 1.00 0.62 0.85 0.28 0.84 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 0.99 1
指标权重Index weight 0.52 0.22 0.19 0.07 0.61 0.19 0.12 0.08

Fig.1

Clustering of comprehensive evaluation values of nitrogen efficiency of different sea island cotton cultivars"

Fig.2

Scatter plot of lint yield at different nitrogen levels"

[1] 孔庆平. 我国海岛棉生产概况及比较优势分析. 中国棉花, 2002, 29(12):19-23.
[2] 巨晓棠, 张福锁. 关于氮肥利用率的思考. 生态环境, 2003, 12(2):192-197.
[3] Harvey P H. Hereditary variation in plant nutrition. Genetics, 1939, 24(4):437-461.
doi: 10.1093/genetics/24.4.437 pmid: 17246932
[4] Stringfield G, Salter R M. Differential response of corn varieties to fertility levels and to seasons. Journal of Agricultural Research, 1934, 49(11):991-1000.
[5] Tyagi B S, Foulkes J, Singh G, et al. Identification of wheat cultivars for low nitrogen tolerance using multivariable screening approaches. Agronomy, 2020, 10(3):417.
doi: 10.3390/agronomy10030417
[6] 刘秋员, 周磊, 田晋钰, 等. 长江中下游地区常规中熟粳稻氮效率综合评价及高产氮高效品种筛选. 中国农业科学, 2021, 54(7):1397-1409.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2021.07.007
[7] 阮新民, 施伏芝, 罗志祥, 等. 水稻苗期氮高效品种评价与筛选的初步研究. 中国稻米, 2010, 16(2):22-25.
[8] 郭松, 曾祥忠, 陈琨, 等. 川中丘区玉米氮高效品种筛选及增产潜力分析. 核农学报, 2020, 34(11):2569-2577.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.11.2569
[9] 孟自力, 朱伟, 朱倩, 等. 小麦氮高效品种的筛选及评价. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(13):52-57.
[10] 杨豫龙, 赵霞, 王帅丽, 等. 黄淮海中南部玉米氮高效品种筛选及产量性状分析. 玉米科学, 2022, 30(1):23-32.
[11] 陈晨, 龚海青, 张敬智, 等. 不同基因型水稻苗期氮营养特性差异及综合评价. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(10):1347-1355.
[12] 韩璐, 张薇. 棉花苗期氮营养高效品种筛选. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27(1):84-88.
[13] 李雪妮, 盛建东, 侯静, 等. 不同棉花品种苗期氮效率筛选的初步研究. 新疆农业大学学报, 2007, 30(3):44-48.
[14] 王准, 张恒恒, 董强, 等. 棉花耐低氮和氮敏感种质筛选及验证. 棉花学报, 2020, 32(6):538-551.
doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.wzsmz.20201023
[15] Zhang H H, Fu X Q, Wang X G, et al. Identification and screening of nitrogen efficient cotton genotypes under low and normal nitrogen environments at the seedling stage. Journal of Cotton Research, 2018, 1(2):3-13.
doi: 10.1186/s42397-018-0002-1
[16] 钟思荣, 龚丝雨, 张世川, 等. 作物不同基因型耐低氮性和氮效率研究进展. 核农学报, 2018, 32(8):1656-1663.
doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2018.08.1656
[17] 董桂春, 王余龙, 周娟, 等. 不同氮素籽粒生产效率类型籼稻品种氮素分配与运转的差异. 作物学报, 2009, 35(1):149-155.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2009.00149
[18] 李文娟, 何萍, 高强, 等. 不同氮效率玉米干物质形成及氮素营养特性差异研究. 植物营养与肥料学报, 2010, 16(1):51-57.
[19] 祝令晓, 宋世佳, 李浩然, 等. 基于耐低氮综合指数的棉花苗期耐低氮品种筛选. 作物学报, 2022, 48(7):1800-1812.
doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1006.2022.14085
[20] 贵会平, 董强, 张恒恒, 等. 棉花苗期耐低氮基因型初步筛选. 棉花学报, 2018, 30(4):326-337.
doi: 10.11963/1002-7807.ghpsmz.20180720
[21] 郑顺利, 赵一超, 陈金湘, 等. 棉花苗期氮效率对其产量性状和品质性状的影响. 中国农学通报, 2014, 30(15):220-226.
[22] 李亚楠, 刘雪艳, 师亚琴, 等. 陕A群、陕B群选育的玉米自交系氮效率评价. 中国生态农业学报, 2016, 24(11):1521-1528.
[23] 崔文芳, 高聚林, 屈佳伟, 等. 氮高效玉米杂交种的筛选及氮效率相关特性分析. 玉米科学, 2016, 24(4):72-82.
[24] 张恒, 陈艳琦, 任杰莹, 等. 西南麦区小麦苗期氮高效品种筛选及指标体系构建. 四川农业大学学报, 2022, 40(1):10-18,27.
[25] 赵化田, 王瑞芳, 许云峰, 等. 小麦苗期耐低氮基因型的筛选与评价. 中国生态农业学报, 2011, 19(5):1199-1204.
[26] 常晓, 郭志军, 王小博, 等. 玉米自交系氮高效指标的筛选及综合评价. 玉米科学, 2019, 27(1):17-24.
[27] 周广生, 梅方竹, 周竹青, 等. 小麦不同品种耐湿性生理指标综合评价及其预测. 中国农业科学, 2003, 36(11):1378-1382.
[1] 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.
[2] Guo Hongxia, Wang Chuangyun, Deng Yan, Zhao Li, Zhang Liguang, Guo Hongxia, Qin Lixia, Gao Fei, Xi Ruizhen. Response of Quinoa to Low Nitrogen Stress [J]. Crops, 2023, 39(3): 221-229.
[3] Sujun Zhang,Liyuan Tang,Cunjing Liu,Zhenxing Jiang,Jina Chi,Haiyan Tian,Xinghe Li,Jianhong Zhang,Xiangyun Zhang. Association Analysis of Fiber Quality with SSR Markers in Gossypium barbadense L. [J]. Crops, 2016, 32(4): 93-100.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!