十八个小麦品种(系)拔节期耐渍性的综合评价

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2023.06.01

浙江农业学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (6): 1235-1242.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2023.06.01

十八个小麦品种(系)拔节期耐渍性的综合评价

余桂红(), 宋桂成, 张鹏, 王化敦, 范祥云

江苏省农业科学院粮食作物研究所江苏南京210014

收稿日期:2022-07-22 出版日期:2023-06-25 发布日期:2023-07-04
作者简介:余桂红(1971—),女,湖北随州人,博士,研究员,从事小麦遗传育种研究。E-mail: njyugh@qq.com
基金资助:
国家现代农业技术产业技术体系(CARS-03)

Comprehensive evaluation of waterlogging tolerance of 18 wheat varieties at jointing stage

YU Guihong(), SONG Guicheng, ZHANG Peng, WANG Huadun, FAN Xiangyun

Institute of Food Crops, Jiangsu Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Nanjing 210014, China

Received:2022-07-22 Online:2023-06-25 Published:2023-07-04

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为探明小麦在拔节期的耐渍性,采用盆钵栽培渍水的方法,对18个小麦品种(系)进行拔节期的耐渍性状鉴定和评价。结果表明,11个小麦性状对拔节期渍水胁迫的敏感性为单株产量>有效穗数>主茎绿叶数>分蘖数>叶长>叶绿素含量>主穂总质量>千粒重>株高>主穗穗长>主穗小穗数。用主成分分析法将11个调查性状转化为4个综合指标,4个综合指标的累积贡献率为82.66%。计算4个综合指标的隶属函数值,获得18个品种(系)的耐渍综合评价值(D)为0.14~0.78,平均值为0.55,变异系数为25.40%。用K-means法进行聚类分析,将18个品种(系)分为高度耐渍、耐渍、耐渍性中等、渍敏感和高度渍敏感5类,各类的品种(系)数量分别为1、6、5、5和1个,其中,宁麦23、宁麦21、鄂麦803、华麦18P10、宁麦13、宁1710和漯麦163共7个品种(系)的拔节期耐渍性达到耐渍以上水平。耐渍综合评价值与单株产量、叶绿素含量、株高、主穂总质量、主茎绿叶数的耐渍系数呈极显著(P<0.01)正相关。

关键词: 小麦, 耐渍性, 拔节期, 耐渍系数

Abstract:

In order to explore the waterlogging tolerance of wheat at jointing stage, the waterlogging tolerance of 18 wheat varieties (lines) were identified and evaluated by pot cultivation waterlogging method. The results showed that the sensitivity of 11 wheat traits to waterlogging stress during jointing stage was as follows: yield per plant>number of effective panicle>number of green leaves per main shoot>number of tillers>leaf length>chlorophyll content>total weight of main spike>1 000-grain weight>plant height>length of main spike>spikelet number per main spike. The 11 investigated traits were transformed into 4 comprehensive indexes by using principal component analysis, and the cumulative contribution rate of the 4 comprehensive indexes was 82.66%. The membership function value of the 4 comprehensive indexes calculated, the comprehensive evaluation values (D) of waterlogging resistance of 18 varieties were distributed between 0.14-0.78 with average value 0.55 and coefficient of variation 25.40%. Through cluster analysis by using K-means method, 18 varieties were divided into 5 categories: high resistance (1 variety), resistance (6 varieties), moderate resistance (5 varieties), sensitivity (5 varieties) and high sensitivity (1 variety). There were 7 varieties including Ningmai23, Ningmai21, Emai803, Huamai18P10, Ningmai13, Ning1710 and Luomai163 whose waterlogging tolerance reached the level of resistance or above. The D value of waterlogging tolerance had significant positive correlation with the waterlogging tolerance coefficient of 5 traits including yield per plant, chlorophyll content, plant height, total weight of main spike and number of green leaves per main shoot at P<0.01 level.

Key words: wheat, waterlogging tolerance, jointing stage, waterlogging tolerance coefficient

中图分类号:

S512.1

余桂红, 宋桂成, 张鹏, 王化敦, 范祥云. 十八个小麦品种(系)拔节期耐渍性的综合评价[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(6): 1235-1242.

YU Guihong, SONG Guicheng, ZHANG Peng, WANG Huadun, FAN Xiangyun. Comprehensive evaluation of waterlogging tolerance of 18 wheat varieties at jointing stage[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 2023, 35(6): 1235-1242.

图/表 6

参考文献 22

[1]	XU Z Y, SHEN Q F, ZHANG G P. The mechanisms for the difference in waterlogging tolerance among sea barley, wheat and barley[J]. Plant Growth Regulation, 2022, 96(3): 431-441.
[2]	吴洪颜, 张佩, 徐敏, 等. 长江中下游地区冬小麦春季涝渍害灾损风险时空分布特征[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2018, 27(5): 1152-1158.
	WU H Y, ZHANG P, XU M, et al. Spatial-temporal variations of the risk of winter wheat loss suffered from spring waterlogging disaster in the middle and Lower Yangtze River Reaches[J]. Resources and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2018, 27(5): 1152-1158. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[3]	任菲莹, 熊勤学. 基于分布式水文模型的小麦渍害对气候变化响应研究[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2020, 40(10): 1265-1274.
	REN F Y, XIONG Q X. Response of wheat sub-surface waterlogging to climate changing using DHSVM model simulations[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2020, 40(10): 1265-1274. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[4]	金之庆, 石春林. 江淮平原小麦渍害预警系统(WWWS)[J]. 作物学报, 2006, 32(10): 1458-1465.
	JIN Z Q, SHI C L. An early warning system to predict waterlogging injuries for winter wheat in the Yangtze-Huai Plain(WWWS)[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2006, 32(10): 1458-1465. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[5]	张淑贞, 朱建强, 杨威, 等. 江汉平原小麦湿害分析及其防控措施[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2011, 50(19): 3916-3920.
	ZHANG S Z, ZHU J Q, YANG W, et al. Wet injury of wheat and its prevention in Jianghan Plain[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 50(19): 3916-3920. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[6]	罗干, 于学奎, 黄建华, 等. 江淮地区小麦渍(湿)害及防控措施[J]. 现代农业科技, 2019(12): 46-47.
	LUO G, YU X K, HUANG J H, et al. Waterlogging (wet) damage and prevention measures in wheat in Jianghuai area[J]. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology, 2019(12): 46-47. (in Chinese)
[7]	宋桂成, 史高玲, 张平平, 等. 拔节期渍水对小麦籽粒品质相关性状的影响[J]. 核农学报, 2021, 35(1): 238-244.
	SONG G C, SHI G L, ZHANG P P, et al. Effect of jointing waterlogging on grain quality in wheat[J]. Journal of Nuclear Agricultural Sciences, 2021, 35(1): 238-244. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[8]	李金才, 董琦, 余松烈. 不同生育期根际土壤淹水对小麦品种光合作用和产量的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2001, 27(4): 434-441.
	LI J C, DONG Q, YU S L. Effect of waterlogging at different growth stages on photosynthesis and yield of different wheat cultivars[J]. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2001, 27(4): 434-441. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[9]	吴元奇, 李朝苏, 樊高琼, 等. 渍水对四川小麦生理性状及产量的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(4): 1162-1170.
	WU Y Q, LI C S, FAN G Q, et al. Effect of waterlogging on physical traits and yield of wheat in Sichuan, China[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2015, 26(4): 1162-1170. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[10]	林一波, 杨晓艳, 刘芬兰. 50个小麦品种耐湿性的初步鉴定[J]. 上海农业学报, 1994, 10(2): 79-84.
	LIN Y B, YANG X Y, LIU F L. A study on evaluation of waterlogging tolerance in wheat varieties (Triticum aestivum L.)[J]. Acta Agriculturae Shanghai, 1994, 10(2): 79-84. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[11]	佟汉文, 高春保, 邹娟, 等. 湖北稻茬小麦新品种(系)孕穗期耐渍性的鉴定与评价[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(12): 1635-1642.
	TONG H W, GAO C B, ZOU J, et al. Evaluation of waterlogging tolerance of wheat varieties at booting stage in Hubei rice-wheat rotation system[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2016, 36(12): 1635-1642. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[12]	周广生, 周竹青, 朱旭彤. 用隶属函数法评价小麦的耐湿性[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2001, 21(4): 34-37.
	ZHOU G S, ZHOU Z Q, ZHU X T. Evaluation on the waterlogging resistance of wheat by subordinate function[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2001, 21(4): 34-37. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[13]	鲍晓鸣. 小麦耐湿性的鉴定时期及鉴定指标[J]. 上海农业学报, 1997, 13(2): 32-38.
	BAO X M. Study on identification stage and index of waterlogging tolerance in various wheat genotypes(Triticum aestivum L.)[J]. Acta Agriculturae Shanghai, 1997, 13(2): 32-38. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[14]	DE SAN CELEDONIO R P, ABELEDO L G, MIRALLES D J. Identifying the critical period for waterlogging on yield and its components in wheat and barley[J]. Plant Soil, 2014, 378(1): 265-277.
[15]	丁锦峰, 苏盛楠, 梁鹏, 等. 拔节期和花后渍水对小麦产量、干物质及氮素积累和转运的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2017, 37(11): 1473-1479.
	DING J F, SU S N, LIANG P, et al. Effect of waterlogging at elongation or after anthesis on grain yield and accumulation and remobilization of dry matter and nitrogen in wheat[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2017, 37(11): 1473-1479. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[16]	刘杨, 石春林, 刘晓宇, 等. 渍害胁迫时期和持续时间对冬小麦产量及其构成因素的影响[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2018, 38(2): 239-245.
	LIU Y, SHI C L, LIU X Y, et al. Effect of waterlogging stress duration at different growth stages on yield and its components of winter wheat[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2018, 38(2): 239-245. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[17]	李梅芳, 褚瑶顺, 梁少川, 等. 小麦孕穗期湿害的主要性状及形态指标[J]. 湖北农业科学, 1995, 34(1): 18-21.
	LI M F, ZHU Y S, LIANG S C, et al. Main traits and morphological indexes of waterlogging at booting stage in wheat[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 1995, 34(1): 18-21. (in Chinese)
[18]	张婷婷, 于崧, 于立河, 等. 松嫩平原春小麦耐盐碱性鉴定及品种(系)筛选[J]. 麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(8): 1008-1019.
	ZHANG T T, YU S, YU L H, et al. Saline-alkaline tolerance identification and varieties (lines) screening of spring wheat in Songnen Plain[J]. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2016, 36(8): 1008-1019. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[19]	马一鸣. 浙江省大麦品种资源耐湿性研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 1990, 2(4): 145-150.
	MA Y M. Study on wet-tolerance in barley germplasm resources of Zhejiang Province[J]. Acta Agriculturae Zhejiangensis, 1990, 2(4): 145-150. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[20]	SETTER T L, WATERS I. Review of prospects for germplasm improvement for waterlogging tolerance in wheat, barley and oats[J]. Plant and Soil, 2003, 253(1): 1-34.
[21]	赵旭, 王林权, 周春菊, 等. 盐胁迫对不同基因型冬小麦发芽和出苗的影响[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2005, 23(4): 108-112.
	ZHAO X, WANG L Q, ZHOU C J, et al. Effects of salt stress on germination and emergence of different winter wheat genotypes[J]. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2005, 23(4): 108-112. (in Chinese with English abstract)
[22]	魏凤珍, 李金才, 董琦. 孕穗期至抽穗期湿害对耐湿性不同品种冬小麦光合特性的影响(简报)[J]. 植物生理学通讯, 2000, 36(2): 119-122.
	WEI F Z, LI J C, DONG Q. Effects of wet damage on photosynthetic characteristics of winter wheat varieties with different Waterlogging tolerance from booting stage to heading stage (brief report)[J]. Plant Physiology Communications, 2000, 36(2): 119-122. (in Chinese)

品种(系)	LL	NGLMS	NT	CC	PH	EP	SNMS	LMS	TWMS	TGW	YP
Variety (line)
宁1710 Ning 1710	0.77	0.83	0.72	0.86	0.88	0.78	0.97	0.96	1.15	1.01	0.72
华麦18P10 Huamai 18P10	0.75	0.78	0.86	0.90	0.91	0.62	0.97	0.90	0.93	1.07	0.71
襄麦1501 Xiangmai 1501	0.74	0.83	0.84	0.88	0.95	0.69	0.98	0.98	0.91	0.90	0.71
信麦239 Xinmai 239	0.81	0.83	0.77	0.91	0.90	0.65	0.91	0.82	0.62	1.06	0.52
信麦179 Xinmai 179	0.78	0.68	0.75	0.92	0.94	0.87	1.00	0.95	0.88	0.83	0.69
鄂麦803 Emai 803	0.84	0.83	0.76	0.94	1.00	0.77	0.99	0.92	0.86	1.00	0.69
鄂麦605 Emai 605	0.77	0.76	0.84	0.86	0.92	0.88	0.97	0.93	0.74	0.90	0.60
鄂711367 E 711367	0.81	0.71	0.74	0.87	0.95	0.64	1.02	1.03	1.01	0.86	0.69
漯麦163 Luomai 163	0.78	0.79	0.86	0.92	1.01	0.72	0.97	0.95	0.91	0.88	0.78
长麦5号Changmai 5	0.80	0.77	0.76	0.93	0.95	0.82	0.97	0.95	0.95	0.89	0.66
兆丰36 Zhaofeng 36	0.79	0.67	0.75	0.95	1.00	0.81	0.97	0.94	0.95	0.90	0.79
扬18528 Yang 18528	0.74	0.76	0.75	0.88	0.94	0.83	1.00	0.92	0.87	0.88	0.70
扬麦20 Yangmai 20	0.79	0.71	0.64	0.90	0.89	0.74	0.99	0.92	0.76	0.88	0.72
扬麦25 Yangmai 20	0.75	0.59	0.67	0.77	0.78	0.44	0.92	0.88	0.71	0.95	0.43
郑麦1354 Zhenmai 1354	0.80	0.65	0.62	0.90	0.91	0.64	1.02	0.95	1.01	0.96	0.79
宁麦21 Ningmai 21	0.79	0.76	0.86	0.93	0.92	0.79	0.99	0.90	0.94	0.96	0.91
宁麦23 Ningmai 23	0.83	0.75	0.75	0.95	0.99	0.78	1.00	1.00	1.19	0.96	0.91
宁麦13 Ningmai 13	0.88	0.77	0.76	0.91	0.96	0.91	0.99	0.98	1.03	0.89	0.77

品种(系)	LL	NGLMS	NT	CC	PH	EP	SNMS	LMS	TWMS	TGW	YP
Variety (line)
宁1710 Ning 1710	0.77	0.83	0.72	0.86	0.88	0.78	0.97	0.96	1.15	1.01	0.72
华麦18P10 Huamai 18P10	0.75	0.78	0.86	0.90	0.91	0.62	0.97	0.90	0.93	1.07	0.71
襄麦1501 Xiangmai 1501	0.74	0.83	0.84	0.88	0.95	0.69	0.98	0.98	0.91	0.90	0.71
信麦239 Xinmai 239	0.81	0.83	0.77	0.91	0.90	0.65	0.91	0.82	0.62	1.06	0.52
信麦179 Xinmai 179	0.78	0.68	0.75	0.92	0.94	0.87	1.00	0.95	0.88	0.83	0.69
鄂麦803 Emai 803	0.84	0.83	0.76	0.94	1.00	0.77	0.99	0.92	0.86	1.00	0.69
鄂麦605 Emai 605	0.77	0.76	0.84	0.86	0.92	0.88	0.97	0.93	0.74	0.90	0.60
鄂711367 E 711367	0.81	0.71	0.74	0.87	0.95	0.64	1.02	1.03	1.01	0.86	0.69
漯麦163 Luomai 163	0.78	0.79	0.86	0.92	1.01	0.72	0.97	0.95	0.91	0.88	0.78
长麦5号Changmai 5	0.80	0.77	0.76	0.93	0.95	0.82	0.97	0.95	0.95	0.89	0.66
兆丰36 Zhaofeng 36	0.79	0.67	0.75	0.95	1.00	0.81	0.97	0.94	0.95	0.90	0.79
扬18528 Yang 18528	0.74	0.76	0.75	0.88	0.94	0.83	1.00	0.92	0.87	0.88	0.70
扬麦20 Yangmai 20	0.79	0.71	0.64	0.90	0.89	0.74	0.99	0.92	0.76	0.88	0.72
扬麦25 Yangmai 20	0.75	0.59	0.67	0.77	0.78	0.44	0.92	0.88	0.71	0.95	0.43
郑麦1354 Zhenmai 1354	0.80	0.65	0.62	0.90	0.91	0.64	1.02	0.95	1.01	0.96	0.79
宁麦21 Ningmai 21	0.79	0.76	0.86	0.93	0.92	0.79	0.99	0.90	0.94	0.96	0.91
宁麦23 Ningmai 23	0.83	0.75	0.75	0.95	0.99	0.78	1.00	1.00	1.19	0.96	0.91
宁麦13 Ningmai 13	0.88	0.77	0.76	0.91	0.96	0.91	0.99	0.98	1.03	0.89	0.77

结果	LL	NGLMS	NT	CC	PH	EP	SNMS	LMS	TWMS	TGW	YP
Result
平均值Mean	0.790	0.748	0.761	0.899	0.933	0.743	0.979	0.938	0.912	0.932	0.711
最大值Max	0.880	0.830	0.860	0.950	1.010	0.910	1.020	1.030	1.190	1.070	0.910
最小值Min	0.740	0.590	0.620	0.770	0.780	0.440	0.910	0.820	0.620	0.830	0.430
标准差Standard deviation	0.036	0.068	0.072	0.043	0.054	0.115	0.029	0.047	0.145	0.068	0.117
变异系数CV/%	4.6	9.1	9.4	4.8	5.8	15.5	2.9	5.0	15.8	7.3	16.4

结果	LL	NGLMS	NT	CC	PH	EP	SNMS	LMS	TWMS	TGW	YP
Result
平均值Mean	0.790	0.748	0.761	0.899	0.933	0.743	0.979	0.938	0.912	0.932	0.711
最大值Max	0.880	0.830	0.860	0.950	1.010	0.910	1.020	1.030	1.190	1.070	0.910
最小值Min	0.740	0.590	0.620	0.770	0.780	0.440	0.910	0.820	0.620	0.830	0.430
标准差Standard deviation	0.036	0.068	0.072	0.043	0.054	0.115	0.029	0.047	0.145	0.068	0.117
变异系数CV/%	4.6	9.1	9.4	4.8	5.8	15.5	2.9	5.0	15.8	7.3	16.4

指标Index	LL	NGLMS	NT	CC	PH	EP	SNMS	LMS	TWMS	TGW
NGLMS	0.119
NT	-0.172	0.580^**
CC	0.499^*	0.343	0.253
PH	0.417^*	0.394	0.401^*	0.811^**
EP	0.344	0.337	0.251	0.567^**	0.577^**
SNMS	0.227	-0.094	-0.137	0.360	0.466^*	0.394
LMS	0.246	-0.034	-0.043	0.150	0.469^*	0.300	0.725^**
TWMS	0.282	0.101	-0.021	0.331	0.399	0.280	0.602^**	0.755^**
TGW	0.007	0.356	0.098	-0.009	-0.275	-0.403^*	-0.449^*	-0.545^*	-0.048
YP	0.301	0.148	0.187	0.689^**	0.612^**	0.455^*	0.677^**	0.497^*	0.728^**	-0.119

十八个小麦品种(系)拔节期耐渍性的综合评价

Comprehensive evaluation of waterlogging tolerance of 18 wheat varieties at jointing stage

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 6

参考文献 22

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

项目 Item	综合指标 Comprehensive index
项目 Item	F₁	F₂	F₃	F₄
特征值Eigenvalue	4.56	2.22	1.22	1.10
贡献率Contribution rate/%	41.42	20.20	11.07	9.97
累积贡献率	41.42	61.62	72.69	82.66
Cumulative contribution rate/%
权重Weight	0.50	0.24	0.13	0.12

品种(系) Variety (line)	综合指标Comprehensive index				隶属函数值Membership function value
品种(系) Variety (line)	F₁	F₂	F₃	F₄	μ₁	μ₂	μ₃	μ₄
宁1710 Ning 1710	-0.09	0.03	0.85	1.72	0.65	0.43	0.76	0.98
华麦18P10 Huamai 18P10	-0.58	1.17	0.50	1.78	0.54	0.74	0.66	1.00
襄麦1501 Xiangmai 1501	0.06	0.34	-1.39	1.51	0.68	0.52	0.11	0.91
信麦239 Xinmai 239	-1.61	2.13	1.00	-1.30	0.30	1.00	0.81	0
信麦179 Xinmai 179	0.38	-0.77	-1.17	-1.01	0.75	0.22	0.17	0.10
鄂麦803 Emai 803	0.48	1.10	0.95	-0.88	0.78	0.72	0.79	0.14
鄂麦605 Emai 605	-0.42	0.42	-1.75	-0.41	0.57	0.54	0.00	0.29
鄂711367 E 711367	0.51	-1.51	-0.17	0.57	0.78	0.02	0.46	0.61
漯麦163 Luomai 163	0.54	0.72	-1.05	0.32	0.79	0.62	0.21	0.53
长麦5号Changmai 5	0.32	0.17	-0.33	-0.63	0.74	0.47	0.42	0.22
兆丰36 Zhaofeng 36	0.59	-0.12	-0.10	-0.82	0.80	0.39	0.49	0.16
扬18528 Yang 18528	-0.03	-0.25	-1.29	0.13	0.66	0.36	0.14	0.46
扬麦20 Yangmai 20	-0.35	-0.90	0.13	-1.20	0.59	0.18	0.55	0.03
扬麦25 Yangmai 20	-2.96	-1.46	0.22	0.13	0	0.03	0.58	0.47
郑麦1354 Zhenmai 1354	0.12	-1.57	1.65	0.12	0.69	0	1.00	0.46
宁麦21 Ningmai 21	0.46	0.81	0.09	0.52	0.77	0.64	0.54	0.59
宁麦23 Ningmai 23	1.47	-0.19	1.33	0.59	1.00	0.37	0.91	0.61
宁麦13 Ningmai 13	1.11	-0.12	0.54	-1.16	0.92	0.39	0.67	0.05

品种(系) Variety(line)	D	排名 Rank	耐渍性分级 Grade	品种 Variety	D	排名 Rank	耐渍性分级 Grade
宁麦23 Ningmai 23	0.78	1	HT	长麦5号Changmai5	0.56	10	M
宁麦21 Ningmai 21	0.68	2	T	郑麦1354 Zhenmai1354	0.53	11	M
鄂麦803 Emai 803	0.68	3	T	鄂711367 E711367	0.53	12	M
华麦18P10 Huamai 18P10	0.65	4	T	信麦239 Xinmai239	0.50	13	S
宁麦13 Ningmai 13	0.65	5	T	扬18528 Yang18528	0.49	14	S
宁1710 Ning 1710	0.64	6	T	信麦179 Xinmai179	0.46	15	S
漯麦163 Luomai 163	0.63	7	T	鄂麦605 Emai605	0.45	16	S
襄麦1501 Xiangmai 1501	0.59	8	M	扬麦20 Yangmai20	0.41	17	S
兆丰36 Zhaofeng 36	0.58	9	M	扬麦25 Yangmai25	0.14	18	HS

[1]	张均, 张博, 胡碧博, 刘京亮, 张晓宇, 李春阳, 熊盛婷, 郭彬彬, 王秀存, 马超. 小麦SWEET和SUT家族基因鉴定与表达分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(9): 1825-1839.
[2]	刘胜男, 朱建义, 李明, 赵浩宇, 熊涛, 汤永禄, 周小刚, 李朝苏. 稻茬免耕带旋播种小麦的田间杂草防除效果与小麦产量[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(10): 2129-2137.
[3]	杨晓雨, 马指挥, 魏青, 牛志鹏, 陈安琪, 胡正冲, 王林生. 一个小麦芒长基因的初步定位及候选基因预测[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2025, 37(1): 14-23.
[4]	沈峥嵘, 戴远兴, 郭留明, 汪芷瑶, 张恒木. 中国小麦花叶病毒(CWMV)外壳蛋白(CP)特异性抗体的制备与应用[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(9): 2042-2050.
[5]	齐学礼, 李莹, 段俊枝. 耐盐基因在小麦耐盐基因工程中的应用[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(6): 1447-1457.
[6]	李晶晶, 李闯, 路亚南, 郑文明. 小麦类硫素基因家族鉴定及表达分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(4): 729-737.
[7]	张永彬, 李想, 满卫东, 刘明月, 樊继好, 胡皓然, 宋利杰, 刘玮佳. 融合Sentinel-1/2数据和机器学习算法的冬小麦产量估算方法研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(12): 2812-2822.
[8]	刘永安, 黄业昌, 岳高红, 高锡腾, 邓立章, 潘彬荣. 优质小麦品种温麦10号籽粒蛋白质组学分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2024, 36(11): 2437-2446.
[9]	娄渊根, 李闯, 李晶晶, 邢国珍, 路亚南, 郑文明. 小麦HP基因家族鉴定和分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(9): 2023-2032.
[10]	杨凯, 陈凯, 李红梅, 赵忠娟, 扈进冬, 李纪顺, 杨合同. 哈茨木霉LTR-2与产脲节杆菌DnL1-1协同对小麦茎基腐病的防治效果与机理[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(6): 1385-1395.
[11]	任开明, 王犇, 杨文俊, 樊永惠, 张文静, 马尚宇, 黄正来. 施氮对稻茬弱筋小麦生长特性、品质与产量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(4): 769-779.
[12]	鲁帅, 罗晓刚, 刘全伟, 张屹, 孟洋昊, 李洁, 张景来. 有机无机复混肥对小麦生长、土壤养分和重金属含量的影响[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(4): 922-930.
[13]	白卫卫, 赵雪妮, 罗斌, 赵薇, 黄硕, 张晗. 基于YOLOv5的小麦种子发芽检测方法研究[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(2): 445-454.
[14]	朱永基, 陶新宇, 陈小芳, 苏祥祥, 刘吉凯, 李新伟. 基于无人机多光谱影像植被指数与纹理特征的冬小麦地上部生物量估算[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(12): 2966-2976.
[15]	宋盼盼, 常会庆, 李岚坤, 王启震. 叶面阻控剂在轻度镉污染石灰性麦田上的降镉效果[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2023, 35(11): 2655-2663.