Crops ›› 2025, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (4): 111-117.doi: 10.16035/j.issn.1001-7283.2025.04.014

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Identification of Salt Tolerance and Variety Screening of Flax in Moderately Saline-Alkali Soil

Wang Shengtai(), Zhao Baoxie(), Du Shikun, Li Yuyang, Yu Hualin, Li Rongxin   

  1. Baiyin Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Baiyin 730900, Gansu, China
  • Received:2025-03-17 Revised:2025-05-15 Online:2025-08-15 Published:2025-08-12

RichHTML

2

PDF (PC)

125

Abstract:

To investigate the performance of 11 main traits of sesame under moderate saline-alkali stress in field conditions, 14 flax varieties were used as materials, and multiple analysis methods were applied to comprehensively analysis the various traits of flax varieties. The joint analysis variance revealed that saline-alkali treatment had highly significant effects on multiple traits including plant height, number of lateral branches, number of effective fruits, number of grains per fruit, and yield, showing significant effect on 1000-seed weight and grain weight per plant. Analysis of salt tolerance indexes demonstrated significant differences among various traits, with all indices being below 1 except for processing length, fruit layer thickness, and number of grains per fruit. PCA of membership function values derived from salt tolerance indices categorized the 11 traits into five principal components, collectively explaining 89.30% of the total variance. Cluster analysis based on comprehensive salt tolerance index classified the 14 flax accessions into five groups, with Longya 13 and Longya 16 identified as extremely salt-tolerant varieties, and Longya 15 as strongly salt-tolerant-all suitable for cultivation in similar saline-alkali soils. Correlation analysis showed that the number of effective fruits, number of lateral branches, and fruit layer thickness exhibited the strongest correlations with D-value, establishing them as key indicators for flax salt tolerance evaluation.

Key words: Flax, Identification of salt tolerance, Agronomic indicator, Yield, Variety screening

Table 1

Flax varieties and sources"

编号
Code		 品种
Variety		 审定（登记）编号
Approval (registration) number		 适宜地区
Suitable region		 来源
Source
F01 坝亚15号 张科开评字(2020)第026号 冀北、山西和内蒙古等相似生态类型区 张家口市农业科学院
F02 定亚24号 甘审油2014005 甘肃省胡麻产区 定西市农业科学研究院
F03
 定亚25号
 GPD亚麻（胡麻）（2019）620006
 甘肃定西、兰州、平凉、白银、庆阳、张掖及河北、山西、内蒙古、新疆、宁夏等地区 定西市农业科学研究院
F04 晋亚14号 GPD亚麻（胡麻）（2020）140010 山西、内蒙古、河北、甘肃及新疆胡麻产区 山西农业大学高寒区作物研究所
F05 晋亚15号 GPD亚麻（胡麻）（2020）140011 山西胡麻产区春播 山西农业大学高寒区作物研究所
F06 陇亚10号 甘审油2005002 甘肃低位、中位山旱地 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所
F07 陇亚13号 甘审油2014004 甘肃兰州、定西、白银、平凉、张掖等地 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所
F08
 陇亚14号
 GPD亚麻（胡麻）（2018）620015
 甘肃兰州、天水、平凉、庆阳以及内蒙古、新疆、河北等全国胡麻主产区 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所
F09
 陇亚15号
 GPD亚麻（胡麻）（2019）620013
 甘肃兰州、白银、庆阳、天水及宁夏固原、新疆伊犁等地区春季 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所
F10
 陇亚16号
 GDP亚麻（胡麻）（2021）620005
 甘肃兰州、白银、定西、平凉、庆阳、张掖等地区春季 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所
F11
 陇亚17号
 甘认胡麻2017001
 甘肃、山西、河北、内蒙古等省区的山、川、水、旱地 甘肃省农业科学院作物研究所
F12 内亚10号 蒙认麻2015001号 内蒙古呼和浩特、乌兰察布、锡林郭勒盟 内蒙古自治区农牧业科学院
F13 宁亚21号 宁审油2015002 宁夏南部山区旱地、水浇地 宁夏农林科学院固原分院
F14 伊亚6号 国品鉴胡麻 2016001 内蒙古、河北、甘肃及新疆胡麻产区 新疆伊犁州农业科学研究所

Table 2

Soil fertility characteristics of the test site"

土壤类型
Soil type		 pH 有机质
Organic
matter
(g/kg)		 碱解氮
Alkaline
hydrolyzable
nitrogen (mg/kg)		 有效磷
Available
phosphorus
(mg/kg)		 速效钾
Available
potassium
(mg/kg)		 全氮
Total
nitrogen
(g/kg)		 全磷
Total
phosphorus
(g/kg)		 全钾
Total
potassium
(g/kg)
盐碱地Saline-alkali soil 8.71 8.62 30.55 9.45 96.95 0.61 0.68 18.30
对照CK 7.55 17.55 47.05 15.85 263.50 1.11 0.80 19.65

Table 3

Analysis of variance for soil water-soluble salt content"

差异来源Source of difference 平方和Sum of squares 自由度df 均方Mean square F值F-value P值P-value F临界值F-crit
组间Between groups 23.90 1 23.90 278.67 1.68E-07 5.32
组内Within group 0.69 8 0.09
总计Total 24.59 9

Fig.1

Analysis of variance of soil water-soluble salt content at the test site ***: P < 0.001."

Table 4

Analysis of morphology and yield indicators of flax"

处理
Treatment		 性状
Trait		 C1
(d)		 C2
(cm)		 C3
(cm)		 C4
(cm)		 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9
(g)		 C10
(g)		 C11
(kg/hm2)
CK 均值 116.00 69.48 44.94 6.20 0.62 5.60 30.62 6.32 6.85 1.30 2432.16
标准差 3.70 5.16 5.90 1.19 0.39 0.64 7.99 0.74 0.72 0.39 333.94
最大值 124.00 79.40 58.54 8.26 1.71 6.32 47.79 7.67 8.43 2.05 2907.16
最小值 110.00 59.70 36.78 4.55 0.10 4.17 18.50 5.09 5.54 0.60 1714.29
变异系数CV (%) 3.19 7.43 13.13 19.28 62.57 11.41 26.10 11.70 10.58 30.30 13.73
SL 均值 115.29 60.96 45.27 5.44 0.25 5.15 18.05 7.54 6.43 0.92 1894.91
标准差 2.87 4.23 6.18 1.54 0.16 0.61 3.08 0.44 0.39 0.22 372.08
最大值 121.00 67.69 54.79 8.67 0.67 6.00 23.09 8.36 6.98 1.38 2750.01
最小值 111.00 53.67 35.03 2.85 0.11 4.36 13.93 6.97 5.43 0.64 1485.72
变异系数CV (%) 2.49 6.95 13.65 28.38 61.61 11.87 17.06 5.90 6.06 23.74 19.64

Table 5

Combined variance analysis of flax traits under different treatments"

变异Variation C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11
环境Environment (E) 3.57 508.78** 0.77 3.97 0.94** 1.41 1104.61** 10.42** 1.22* 1.00* 2 020 444.77**
基因Gene (G) 20.57** 31.18 43.06 1.44 0.09 0.35 35.76 0.43 0.47 0.09 100 425.57
环境 ×基因 E ×G 10.68** 65.29** 40.04 1.62 0.15 0.43 112.10* 1.14* 0.52 0.16 237 569.80
误差Error 1.34 13.42 29.91 2.37 0.09 0.43 37.58 0.32 0.21 0.11 149 531.24

Table 6

Analysis of salt tolerance indices for various traits in flax"

项目Item C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11
均值Mean 0.99 0.88 1.04 1.01 0.83 0.95 0.65 1.21 0.95 0.83 0.83
标准差SD 0.02 0.11 0.32 0.71 1.07 0.25 0.27 0.20 0.11 0.54 0.42
最大值Max. 1.02 1.08 1.80 3.03 3.77 1.35 1.13 1.74 1.19 2.13 1.91
最小值Min. 0.95 0.65 0.59 0.26 0.06 0.58 0.28 0.98 0.75 0.27 0.48
变异系数CV (%) 2.48 12.51 30.40 70.73 127.75 26.46 42.07 16.41 11.54 64.40 50.43

Fig.2

PCA scree plot of salt tolerance index for flax variety various traits"

Table 7

Principal component analysis of salt tolerance indices for various traits in flax"

因子
Factor		 主成分Principal component
1 2 3 4 5
C1 0.33 0.28 -0.21 -0.12 0.54
C2 0.20 0.42 0.01 0.22 -0.36
C3 0.32 0.12 0.28 0.59 -0.02
C4 -0.29 0.39 -0.20 -0.18 -0.01
C5 0.29 0.18 0.16 -0.36 -0.66
C6 0.36 0.32 0.19 0.16 0.27
C7 -0.20 0.29 0.52 -0.24 0.11
C8 -0.17 -0.03 0.66 -0.20 0.21
C9 0.04 0.47 -0.23 -0.30 0.09
C10 -0.43 0.25 0.05 0.38 -0.05
C11 -0.44 0.28 -0.11 0.25 -0.06
特征值Eigenvalue 3.34 2.84 1.65 1.13 0.85
方差百分比
Percentage of variance (%)		 30.39
 25.86
 15.03
 10.30
 7.71
累计贡献率
Cumulative contribution rate (%)		 30.39
 56.25
 71.28
 81.58
 89.30

Table 8

Comprehensive salt tolerance indexes (D-values) of flax varieties"

品种编号
Variety number		 品种
Variety		 D值
D-value		 排序
Sorting
F01 坝亚15号 0.30 8
F02 定亚24号 0.33 6
F03 定亚25号 0.12 13
F04 晋亚14号 0.11 14
F05 晋亚15号 0.35 4
F06 陇亚10号 0.25 9
F07 陇亚13号 0.57 1
F08 陇亚14号 0.15 12
F09 陇亚15号 0.45 3
F10 陇亚16号 0.54 2
F11 陇亚17号 0.32 7
F12 内亚10号 0.23 10
F13 宁亚21号 0.19 11
F14 伊亚6号 0.34 5
均值Mean 0.30
标准差Standard deviation 0.14
变异系数CV (%) 46.94

Fig.3

Cluster analysis of salt tolerance in flax varieties"

Fig.4

Correlation among salt tolerance index of various traits and comprehensive salt tolerance index D-values in flax *: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01."

[1] 马野夫. 24份大豆品种耐盐碱性筛选与鉴定. 安徽农业科学, 2024, 52(14):5-27.
[2] 刘嘉斌, 田军仓, 赵广兴, 等. 不同砂滤料配比对宁夏引黄灌区盐碱地暗管排水非全流过滤的影响. 东北农业大学学报, 2023, 54(3):61-70.
[3] 王金鹏, 田军仓. 沙质盐碱地不同品种水稻生长、光合、产量及品质的差异性分析. 西北工程技术学报, 2024, 23(3):219-225.
[4] 李丹丹, 沈晖, 田军仓, 等. 盐碱地改良综述. 现代农业科技, 2023(24):153-159.
[5] 姚丹丹, 朱爱国, 邱财生, 等. 张掖耐盐碱亚麻品种筛选与示范研究. 中国麻业科学, 2024, 46(4):222-228.
[6] 郑彩霞, 赵宝勰, 俞华林, 等. 沿黄灌区不同种植密度对胡麻产量和植株性状的效应. 寒旱农业科学, 2024, 3(9):839-842.
[7] 崔政军, 刘栋, 吴兵, 等. 水氮耦合对旱地胡麻产量形成与花后氮素积累转运的影响. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(3):909-918.
[8] 温映红, 李海, 丁超, 等. 糜子品种农艺性状和盐碱耐受性综合评价. 山西农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2023, 43(6):26-33.
[9] 李雨阳, 赵宝勰, 杜世坤, 等. 2021年甘肃省胡麻品种区域试验白银试点参试材料综合评价. 寒旱农业科学, 2024, 3(7):623-627.
[10] 王雍臻, 罗俊杰, 刘新星, 等. 基于农艺性状的15个胡麻品种抗旱性评价. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2013, 48(6):45-51,58.
[11] 祁旭升, 王兴荣, 许军, 等. 胡麻种质资源成株期抗旱性评价. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43(15):3076-3087.
[12] 马瑞芳, 潘逸明, 王琳琳, 等. 浙西南地区矮生菜豆品种引进对比试验. 浙江农业科学, 2022, 63(9):2024-2026.
doi: 10.16178/j.issn.0528-9017.20213303
[13] 袁宇婷, 张晓燕, 吴谷丰, 等. 基于主成分和隶属函数分析的大豆种质资源耐盐性综合评价. 大豆科学, 2025, 44(1):22-32.
[14] 刘昌文, 张胜全, 雷均杰, 等. 喀什地区耐盐碱冬小麦品种(系)筛选研究. 中国种业, 2024(9):77-83.
[15] 鲁如坤. 土壤农业化学分析方法. 北京: 中国农业科学技术出版社, 2000.
[16] 王玉高, 粟建光. 亚麻种质资源描述规范和数据标准. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2006.
[17] 王秋菊, 李明贤, 赵宏亮, 等. 黑龙江省水稻种质资源耐盐碱筛选与评价. 作物杂志, 2012(4):116-120.
[18] 伏晓昭, 佘奎军, 程晋龙, 等. 玉米杂交种耐盐碱性的主成分分析及综合评价. 甘肃农业大学学报, 2024, 59(1):65-73.
[19] 金文海, 王慧, 范惠玲, 等. 107份青海高原耐盐碱蚕豆种质筛选及评价. 种子, 2024, 43(10):20-26.
[20] 魏海鹏, 梁晓东, 曾潮武, 等. 小麦耐盐种质研究方法及进展. 农业科技通讯, 2024(6):143-146.
[21] 李雪, 沙栢平, 高雪芹, 等. 不同紫花苜蓿种质材料萌发期耐盐性鉴定与综合评价. 草地学报, 2020, 28(2):437-445.
doi: 10.11733/j.issn.1007-0435.2020.02.018
[22] 陈雪梅, 刘骅峻, 杨曌, 等. 盐碱胁迫对苜蓿种子萌发性状的影响及耐盐碱性评价. 黑龙江农业科学, 2024(3):64-70.
[23] 郭媛, 邱财生, 龙松华, 等. 耐盐碱亚麻种质的筛选与综合评价. 中国麻业科学, 2015, 37(6):285-290.
[24] 王雍臻. 胡麻关键生育期抗旱特性及其评价方法研究. 兰州: 甘肃农业大学, 2013.
[25] 王艳霞. 向日葵苗期耐盐碱性鉴定及相关性状全基因组关联分析. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2023.
[26] 王慧敏, 李明昊, 李云, 等. 谷子品种(系)萌发期耐盐碱性鉴定及评价. 作物杂志, 2023(2):57-66.
[27] 李媛媛, 陈博, 姚立蓉, 等. 283份小麦品种(系)萌发期耐盐碱性评价及种质筛选. 中国农业科技导报, 2021, 23(3):25-33.
doi: 10.13304/j.nykjdb.2020.0203
[1] Sun Xianyin, Zhang Jibo, Lü Guangde, Qi Xiaolei, Sun Yingying, Mi Yong, Mu Qiuhuan, Yin Xundong, Wang Ruixia, Qian Zhaoguo, Gao Minggang. Comparison of High and Stable Yield Characteristics of Different Genotypes of Wheat under Dryland and Supplemental Irrigation Conditions [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 104-110.
[2] Li Xiushi, Li Yingtao, Fu Yuhua, Luo Renshan, Li Shouling, Shang Kun, Zhu Jiabao, Yu Chun. The Impact of Different Ecological Conditions on Yield of Coix Varieties [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 157-163.
[3] Wang Xingya, Chen Yuhan, Zhang Mengwen, Sun Linlin, Chen Lirong, Guo Yuqiu, Gong Kuijie. The Effects of ABA Application at Different Stages on Maize Grain Filling and Dehydration [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 173-180.
[4] Zhou Qi, Zhang Jing, Wang Zhenlong, Shi Zhiguo, Deng Chaochao, Chang Hao, Liu Yang, Zhou Yanfang. Effects of Green Manure Incorporation and Nitrogen Fertilizer Reduction on Soil Quality, Oat Yield and Quality in Hexi Irrigation District of Gansu Province [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 188-196.
[5] Yan Dingwei, Yang Jianxin, Guo Jie, Liang Yifan, Luo Fei, Fu Guangming, Li Junzheng, Chang Jianbo, Zhang Yulin, Ji Xiaoming. Effects of Different Water-Retaining Agents on the Bacterial Community Structure of Tobacco-Planting Soil and the Yield and Quality of Flue-Cured Tobacco [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 197-205.
[6] Chu Peiyu, Han Xicai, Wang Pan, Li Duo, Zhu Hao, Jin Xijun, Song Xinling, Cao Hongxun, Xia Zunmin, Wang Xiaonan. Effects of CaCl2 on Growth and Physiology of Flax Seedlings Under Water Stress [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 206-213.
[7] Li Yun, Wang Jing, Liu Yankun, Zhao Guanghui, Zheng Minna. Regulation of Yield and Lodging Resistance of Stem in Tartary Buckwheat by Paclobutrazol Leaf Spraying [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 231-237.
[8] Dong Yang, Yan Feng, Zhao Fuyang, Hou Xiaomin, Li Qingquan, Li Qingchao, Liu Yue, Lan Ying, Yang Huiying, Wang Bingxue, Xu Yan. Effects of Different Herbicide Application Schemes on Foxtail Millet Growth and Soil Microorganisms [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 238-244.
[9] Luo Xinggang, Wan Haiyuan, An Lirong, Li Yonghai, Luo Xingyu, Zhang Xuekai, Liang Weiyun, Zhu Jianqiang. Effects of Different Varieties and Nitrogen Application Rate on Border Effect, Yield, and Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat under Ridge Tillage with Drill Sowing [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 251-258.
[10] Wu Fengjie, Hou Nan, Qi Xiangkun, Yang Kejun, Fu Jian, Wang Yufeng. Effects of Different Nitrogen Application Rates on Main Nutritional Quality and Yield of Waxy Corn in Semi-Arid Area [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 267-275.
[11] Wang Zhigang, Liu Qiang, Wang Jin, Gong Jingjin, Yao Qunying. Simulation of Response of Spring Wheat Yield and Biomass to Nitrogen Application Rate and Sowing Date in Dryland under Future Meteorological Conditions [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(4): 276-282.
[12] He Yunxia, Ma Jianhui, Zhang Daijing, Liu Donghua, Chao Xiaoyan, Chen Huiping, Li Chunxi. Study on the Effect of Different Nitrogen Fertilizer Synergists on Reducing Gaseous Nitrogen Loss and Increasing Yield in Wheat Field of Northern Henan [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(3): 108-115.
[13] Wang Yi, Ren Yongfu, Zhang Zhengpeng, Ding Defang, Zhang Jing, Liu Yihong, Sun Duoxin, Chen Guangrong. The Effects of Different Covering Materials on Soil Environment and Maize Yield in Hexi Irrigation Area [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(3): 149-155.
[14] Cao Zhengnan, Zhao Zhendong, Hu Bo, Yu Han, Ning Xiaohai, Zhao Zeqiang, Cao Liyong. Effects of Nitrogen Fertilizer and Promoting Rot Bacteria Fertilizer on Decomposition Effect of Returning Rice Straw to Field and Yield in Cold Regions [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(3): 172-177.
[15] Hou Nan, Wu Fengjie, Qi Xiangkun, Wang Yufeng, Yang Kejun, Fu Jian. Effects of Different Nitrogen Application Levels on Carbon Metabolism of Waxy Maize during Filling Period in Black Soil Area [J]. Crops, 2025, 41(3): 178-184.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!