草业学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (12): 129-142.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2021049
• 研究论文 • 上一篇
张伟1(), 周青平1, 陈有军1(), 潘静1, 金晓明2, 孙万斌3, 贾志锋4
收稿日期:
2021-02-02
修回日期:
2021-07-05
出版日期:
2021-11-11
发布日期:
2021-11-11
通讯作者:
陈有军
作者简介:
Corresponding author. E-mail: 119238256@qq.com基金资助:
Wei ZHANG1(), Qing-ping ZHOU1, You-jun CHEN1(), Jing PAN1, Xiao-ming JIN2, Wan-bin SUN3, Zhi-feng JIA4
Received:
2021-02-02
Revised:
2021-07-05
Online:
2021-11-11
Published:
2021-11-11
Contact:
You-jun CHEN
摘要:
为筛选出适宜在呼伦贝尔地区种植的优质燕麦品种,测定10个引进燕麦品种(青燕1号、青海444、加燕2号、青引1号、林纳、青海甜燕麦、青引2号、莫妮卡、青莜3号、骏马)的田间农艺性状、饲草产量、营养成分及籽粒产量,使用相对饲喂价值(RFV)和粗饲料分级指数(GI)对饲草品质进行评价,使用灰色关联度分析法综合评价各品种的生产性能。结果表明,供试燕麦品种在呼伦贝尔地区早熟,生育周期73~88 d。青海444株高最高,达到113.22 cm(P<0.05);且其开花期的鲜草产量和干草产量均最高,分别为36623.3和9990.5 kg·hm-2(P<0.05)。各品种燕麦的鲜、干草产量与生育周期、株高、旗叶长、旗叶宽、茎粗、穗长呈极显著正相关(P<0.01),与叶茎比和干鲜比呈极显著负相关(P<0.01)。籽粒产量最高的是青引1号,达到5348.85 kg·hm-2,与加燕2号无显著差异(P>0.05),但显著高于其他品种(P<0.05)。籽粒产量与生育周期、株高、茎粗、穗长、轮层数和千粒重呈极显著正相关(P<0.01),与小穗数呈极显著负相关(P<0.01)。粗脂肪含量最高的是乳熟期青燕1号(P<0.05),粗蛋白含量最高的是抽穗期青引1号(P<0.05),粗灰分含量最高的是抽穗期青燕1号(P<0.05),干物质最高的是抽穗期青引2号(P<0.05)。GI与RFV饲草等级划分总体趋势相同。综合分析得出,青引1号、加燕2号和青海444的生产性能、营养品质及饲喂价值表现较好,综合排名靠前,具有作为优质燕麦品种在呼伦贝尔地区推广种植的潜力。
张伟, 周青平, 陈有军, 潘静, 金晓明, 孙万斌, 贾志锋. 呼伦贝尔地区10个引进燕麦品种生产性能及饲草品质比较[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(12): 129-142.
Wei ZHANG, Qing-ping ZHOU, You-jun CHEN, Jing PAN, Xiao-ming JIN, Wan-bin SUN, Zhi-feng JIA. Comparison of production performance and forage quality of ten introduced oat varieties in Hulunbuir, China[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(12): 129-142.
品种 Varieties | 生育期Phenological phases (月-日 Month-day) | 生育周期 Growth duration (d) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
播种期 Seeding time | 出苗期 Seedling stage | 拔节期 Jointing stage | 孕穗期 Booting stage | 抽穗期 Heading stage | 开花期 Flowering stage | 乳熟期 Milking stage | 完熟期 Ripe stage | ||
A | 05-19 | 05-31 | 06-23 | 07-01 | 07-05 | 07-13 | 07-19 | 08-05 | 78 |
B | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-20 | 07-01 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-19 | 08-05 | 79 |
C | 05-19 | 06-03 | 06-28 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-15 | 07-25 | 08-10 | 83 |
D | 05-19 | 06-03 | 06-28 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-15 | 07-25 | 08-15 | 88 |
E | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-25 | 07-01 | 07-08 | 07-13 | 07-20 | 08-10 | 83 |
F | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-20 | 07-01 | 07-09 | 07-15 | 07-20 | 08-10 | 83 |
G | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-20 | 06-27 | 07-04 | 07-09 | 07-15 | 07-30 | 73 |
H | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-25 | 07-01 | 07-08 | 07-15 | 07-20 | 08-10 | 83 |
I | 05-19 | 05-31 | 06-28 | 07-05 | 07-13 | 07-19 | 07-25 | 08-15 | 88 |
J | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-13 | 06-20 | 06-27 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-30 | 73 |
表1 不同燕麦品种生育期
Table 1 The phenological phases of different oat varieties
品种 Varieties | 生育期Phenological phases (月-日 Month-day) | 生育周期 Growth duration (d) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
播种期 Seeding time | 出苗期 Seedling stage | 拔节期 Jointing stage | 孕穗期 Booting stage | 抽穗期 Heading stage | 开花期 Flowering stage | 乳熟期 Milking stage | 完熟期 Ripe stage | ||
A | 05-19 | 05-31 | 06-23 | 07-01 | 07-05 | 07-13 | 07-19 | 08-05 | 78 |
B | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-20 | 07-01 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-19 | 08-05 | 79 |
C | 05-19 | 06-03 | 06-28 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-15 | 07-25 | 08-10 | 83 |
D | 05-19 | 06-03 | 06-28 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-15 | 07-25 | 08-15 | 88 |
E | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-25 | 07-01 | 07-08 | 07-13 | 07-20 | 08-10 | 83 |
F | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-20 | 07-01 | 07-09 | 07-15 | 07-20 | 08-10 | 83 |
G | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-20 | 06-27 | 07-04 | 07-09 | 07-15 | 07-30 | 73 |
H | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-25 | 07-01 | 07-08 | 07-15 | 07-20 | 08-10 | 83 |
I | 05-19 | 05-31 | 06-28 | 07-05 | 07-13 | 07-19 | 07-25 | 08-15 | 88 |
J | 05-19 | 05-30 | 06-13 | 06-20 | 06-27 | 07-05 | 07-10 | 07-30 | 73 |
图2 不同燕麦品种株高及生长速率比较*表示在0.05水平下,抽穗期青海甜燕麦与青引1号的生长速率显著高于其他品种。* indicate that the growth rate of Qinghai sweet oats and Qingyin No. 1 at the heading stage was significantly higher than other varieties at the 0.05 level.
Fig.2 Comparison of the plant height and growth rate in different oat varieties
图3 不同燕麦品种鲜草产量和干草产量比较不同小写字母表示相同生育期差异显著(P<0.05),下同。Different small letters in the same growth period show significant differences at P<0.05 level, the same below.
Fig.3 Comparison of fresh grass yield sand hay yields of different oat varieties
品种 Varieties | 茎粗 Plant diameter (mm) | 茎节数 Stalk pitch (No.) | 旗叶长 Leaf length (cm) | 旗叶宽 Leaf width (mm) | 穗长 Spike length (cm) | 叶茎比 Leaf-stem ratio | 干鲜比 Dry-fresh ratio |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 4.77±0.83a | 4.10±0.32cd | 19.86±2.45b | 11.25±2.68d | 15.75±3.25bc | 0.52±0.04cde | 0.30±0.01de |
B | 4.89±0.36a | 3.90±0.32cd | 23.37±2.36a | 14.46±1.24bc | 15.56±1.95bc | 0.43±0.01f | 0.27±0.01f |
C | 4.63±0.28a | 4.30±0.01c | 20.57±1.55b | 15.57±2.04b | 18.50±3.41a | 0.58±0.04bc | 0.28±0.02ef |
D | 4.83±0.46a | 3.80±0.52d | 24.42±1.97a | 14.67±1.32bc | 16.92±1.23abc | 0.52±0.05cde | 0.30±0.01de |
E | 4.37±0.30ab | 4.00±0.01cd | 19.49±1.93b | 13.07±1.50cd | 13.36±1.15d | 0.74±0.06a | 0.42±0.01a |
F | 4.56±0.58ab | 5.00±0.01b | 19.00±1.14b | 18.89±1.03a | 17.14±2.31abc | 0.48±0.01def | 0.29±0.01def |
G | 3.59±0.32c | 4.00±0.01cd | 19.42±2.02b | 13.27±0.99cd | 15.16±0.79cd | 0.56±0.01bcd | 0.36±0.01b |
H | 4.08±0.53b | 5.60±0.01a | 16.10±1.85c | 13.02±1.66cd | 15.75±0.94bc | 0.45±0.06ef | 0.29±0.01def |
I | 4.40±0.53ab | 5.00±0.48b | 12.68±1.70d | 13.31±2.17cd | 17.81±1.95ab | 0.40±0.03f | 0.33±0.02c |
J | 2.60±0.41d | 4.00±0.79cd | 13.24±1.42d | 12.13±0.90d | 9.20±2.17e | 0.65±0.09b | 0.34±0.02bc |
表2 不同燕麦品种饲草产量相关性状比较
Table 2 Comparison of grass yield related traits among different oat varieties
品种 Varieties | 茎粗 Plant diameter (mm) | 茎节数 Stalk pitch (No.) | 旗叶长 Leaf length (cm) | 旗叶宽 Leaf width (mm) | 穗长 Spike length (cm) | 叶茎比 Leaf-stem ratio | 干鲜比 Dry-fresh ratio |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 4.77±0.83a | 4.10±0.32cd | 19.86±2.45b | 11.25±2.68d | 15.75±3.25bc | 0.52±0.04cde | 0.30±0.01de |
B | 4.89±0.36a | 3.90±0.32cd | 23.37±2.36a | 14.46±1.24bc | 15.56±1.95bc | 0.43±0.01f | 0.27±0.01f |
C | 4.63±0.28a | 4.30±0.01c | 20.57±1.55b | 15.57±2.04b | 18.50±3.41a | 0.58±0.04bc | 0.28±0.02ef |
D | 4.83±0.46a | 3.80±0.52d | 24.42±1.97a | 14.67±1.32bc | 16.92±1.23abc | 0.52±0.05cde | 0.30±0.01de |
E | 4.37±0.30ab | 4.00±0.01cd | 19.49±1.93b | 13.07±1.50cd | 13.36±1.15d | 0.74±0.06a | 0.42±0.01a |
F | 4.56±0.58ab | 5.00±0.01b | 19.00±1.14b | 18.89±1.03a | 17.14±2.31abc | 0.48±0.01def | 0.29±0.01def |
G | 3.59±0.32c | 4.00±0.01cd | 19.42±2.02b | 13.27±0.99cd | 15.16±0.79cd | 0.56±0.01bcd | 0.36±0.01b |
H | 4.08±0.53b | 5.60±0.01a | 16.10±1.85c | 13.02±1.66cd | 15.75±0.94bc | 0.45±0.06ef | 0.29±0.01def |
I | 4.40±0.53ab | 5.00±0.48b | 12.68±1.70d | 13.31±2.17cd | 17.81±1.95ab | 0.40±0.03f | 0.33±0.02c |
J | 2.60±0.41d | 4.00±0.79cd | 13.24±1.42d | 12.13±0.90d | 9.20±2.17e | 0.65±0.09b | 0.34±0.02bc |
性状 Traits | 生育周期Growth duration | 株高 Plant height | 旗叶长 Leaf length | 旗叶宽 Leaf width | 茎粗 Plant diameter | 茎节数 Stalk pitch number | 穗长 Spike length | 叶茎比 Leaf-stem ratio | 干鲜比 Dry-fresh ratio |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
干草产量Hay yields | 0.635** | 0.376** | 0.429** | 0.695** | 0.488** | 0.230* | 0.483** | -0.636** | -0.633** |
鲜草产量Fresh yields | 0.479** | 0.551** | 0.452** | 0.728** | 0.472** | 0.199 | 0.462** | -0.695** | -0.847** |
表3 燕麦饲草产量及相关性状相关性分析
Table 3 The Pearson’s rank correlation coefficient between the grass yield related traits of oat cultivars
性状 Traits | 生育周期Growth duration | 株高 Plant height | 旗叶长 Leaf length | 旗叶宽 Leaf width | 茎粗 Plant diameter | 茎节数 Stalk pitch number | 穗长 Spike length | 叶茎比 Leaf-stem ratio | 干鲜比 Dry-fresh ratio |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
干草产量Hay yields | 0.635** | 0.376** | 0.429** | 0.695** | 0.488** | 0.230* | 0.483** | -0.636** | -0.633** |
鲜草产量Fresh yields | 0.479** | 0.551** | 0.452** | 0.728** | 0.472** | 0.199 | 0.462** | -0.695** | -0.847** |
品种 Varieties | 轮层数 Round layers (No.) | 小穗数 Spikelet number (No.) | 千粒重 Thousand kernel weight (g) | 籽粒产量 Grain yield (kg·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 5.10±0.10ab | 50.33±5.81b | 29.23±1.15d | 4264±65.84c |
B | 4.80±0.13ab | 35.11±6.85e | 35.60±1.42c | 4709±78.63b |
C | 5.40±0.16a | 23.22±1.92f | 40.10±0.90b | 5159±116.54a |
D | 5.20±0.20ab | 26.22±3.03f | 46.43±0.27a | 5349±162.23a |
E | 5.00±0.01ab | 26.89±3.52f | 29.10±0.17d | 4218±95.90cd |
F | 5.13±0.13ab | 41.00±2.45cd | 46.00±0.40a | 3695±42.44efg |
G | 4.40±0.16c | 87.56±1.81a | 35.80±0.30c | 3887±30.52def |
H | 5.10±0.10ab | 40.33±2.69cd | 38.83±3.25bc | 4031±168.21cde |
I | 5.10±0.10ab | 38.22±1.72de | 24.83±0.87e | 3649±181.84fg |
J | 3.40±0.24d | 43.11±5.06c | 35.57±1.47c | 3373±51.70g |
表4 不同燕麦品种籽粒产量相关性状比较
Table 4 Comparison of grain yield related traits among different oat varieties
品种 Varieties | 轮层数 Round layers (No.) | 小穗数 Spikelet number (No.) | 千粒重 Thousand kernel weight (g) | 籽粒产量 Grain yield (kg·hm-2) |
---|---|---|---|---|
A | 5.10±0.10ab | 50.33±5.81b | 29.23±1.15d | 4264±65.84c |
B | 4.80±0.13ab | 35.11±6.85e | 35.60±1.42c | 4709±78.63b |
C | 5.40±0.16a | 23.22±1.92f | 40.10±0.90b | 5159±116.54a |
D | 5.20±0.20ab | 26.22±3.03f | 46.43±0.27a | 5349±162.23a |
E | 5.00±0.01ab | 26.89±3.52f | 29.10±0.17d | 4218±95.90cd |
F | 5.13±0.13ab | 41.00±2.45cd | 46.00±0.40a | 3695±42.44efg |
G | 4.40±0.16c | 87.56±1.81a | 35.80±0.30c | 3887±30.52def |
H | 5.10±0.10ab | 40.33±2.69cd | 38.83±3.25bc | 4031±168.21cde |
I | 5.10±0.10ab | 38.22±1.72de | 24.83±0.87e | 3649±181.84fg |
J | 3.40±0.24d | 43.11±5.06c | 35.57±1.47c | 3373±51.70g |
性状 Traits | 生育周期 Growth duration | 株高 Plant height | 茎粗 Plant diameter | 穗长 Spike length | 轮层数 Round layers | 小穗数 Spikelet number | 千粒重 Thousand kernel weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
籽粒产量Grain yield | 0.404** | 0.316** | 0.555** | 0.400** | 0.489** | -0.465** | 0.386** |
表5 燕麦籽粒产量及相关性状相关性分析
Table 5 The Pearson’s rank correlation coefficient between the grain yield related traits of oat cultivars
性状 Traits | 生育周期 Growth duration | 株高 Plant height | 茎粗 Plant diameter | 穗长 Spike length | 轮层数 Round layers | 小穗数 Spikelet number | 千粒重 Thousand kernel weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
籽粒产量Grain yield | 0.404** | 0.316** | 0.555** | 0.400** | 0.489** | -0.465** | 0.386** |
品种 Varieties | 生育时期 Growth stages | 干物质消化率 DDM (%DM) | 干物质采食量 DMI (%BW) | 相对饲喂价值 RFV | 干物质随意采食量VDMI (kg·d-1) | 产乳净能 NEL (MJ·kg-1) | 分级指数 GI (MJ·d-1) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 抽穗期Heading stage | 67.36±0.17bc | 2.28±0.01c | 118.93±1.07c | 13.67±0.09c | 6.89±0.02bc | 12.02±0.31c |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.45±0.83e | 2.04±0.05e | 100.32±3.71d | 12.23±0.29e | 6.32±0.12e | 9.15±0.58e | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.24±0.42e | 2.11±0.03cd | 105.01±2.02d | 12.65±0.18cd | 6.43±0.06e | 9.66±0.27de | |
B | 抽穗期Heading stage | 67.63±0.42b | 2.29±0.02c | 120.16±1.61c | 13.75±0.09c | 6.93±0.06b | 12.27±0.39c |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.87±0.19d | 2.07±0.03e | 102.29±1.28d | 12.40±0.18e | 6.38±0.03de | 9.24±0.42e | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 65.70±0.94c | 2.11±0.03cd | 107.28±3.06d | 12.64±0.20cd | 6.65±0.14c | 9.85±0.59de | |
C | 抽穗期Heading stage | 65.71±0.16d | 2.20±0.03d | 111.90±1.66d | 13.18±0.18d | 6.65±0.02d | 12.10±0.31c |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.89±0.23de | 2.07±0.01e | 102.67±0.58d | 12.44±0.07e | 6.38±0.03de | 9.62±0.01de | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.40±0.39de | 2.29±0.07ab | 114.17±4.40bc | 13.72±0.45ab | 6.46±0.06de | 11.18±0.85bc | |
D | 抽穗期Heading stage | 64.66±0.01e | 2.11±0.01e | 105.67±0.69ef | 12.65±0.08e | 6.50±0.01e | 11.06±0.13d |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.32±0.43e | 2.01±0.07f | 98.66±2.61d | 12.06±0.40e | 6.30±0.06e | 9.18±0.48e | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.02±0.51e | 2.05±0.02d | 101.67±1.84d | 12.29±0.13d | 6.40±0.08e | 9.22±0.45de | |
E | 抽穗期Heading stage | 65.38±0.31d | 2.15±0.03de | 108.73±1.94de | 12.87±0.18de | 6.60±0.05d | 11.24±0.33d |
开花期Flowering stage | 66.38±0.82c | 2.26±0.03bc | 116.19±1.03b | 13.55±0.19bc | 6.75±0.12c | 12.35±0.11b | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.77±0.26cde | 2.15±0.13cd | 108.12±6.92cd | 12.92±0.78cd | 6.51±0.04cde | 10.29±1.31cd | |
F | 抽穗期Heading stage | 64.59±0.32e | 2.08±0.04e | 104.18±2.54f | 12.48±0.26e | 6.48±0.05e | 9.64±0.59e |
开花期Flowering stage | 66.22±0.09c | 2.15±0.03e | 110.56±1.64c | 12.92±0.19d | 6.73±0.01c | 10.17±0.38cd | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.27±0.42e | 2.04±0.06d | 101.86±2.89d | 12.27±0.34d | 6.44±0.06e | 8.93±0.45e | |
G | 抽穗期Heading stage | 66.98±0.65c | 2.38±0.04b | 123.69±2.25b | 14.29±0.21b | 6.84±0.10c | 13.56±0.35b |
开花期Flowering stage | 64.74±0.56d | 2.19±0.05d | 109.96±3.12c | 13.14±0.28cd | 6.51±0.08d | 10.62±0.43c | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 68.11±0.06a | 2.34±0.03a | 123.74±1.73a | 14.06±0.20a | 7.01±0.01a | 12.54±0.46a | |
H | 抽穗期Heading stage | 65.26±0.38d | 2.14±0.07de | 108.48±3.39de | 12.87±0.44de | 6.58±0.06d | 10.26±0.60e |
开花期Flowering stage | 65.74±0.46c | 2.20±0.02cd | 112.02±1.16c | 13.19±0.14cd | 6.66±0.07c | 11.66±0.31b | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.82±0.86cde | 2.08±0.04d | 104.26±0.95d | 12.45±0.21d | 6.52±0.13cde | 9.08±0.21de | |
I | 抽穗期Heading stage | 64.12±0.26e | 2.10±0.03e | 104.36±1.69f | 12.60±0.16e | 6.42±0.04e | 10.10±0.32e |
开花期Flowering stage | 68.51±0.80a | 2.34±0.04a | 124.17±3.23a | 14.03±0.26a | 7.07±0.12a | 13.35±0.76a | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 65.36±0.45cd | 2.27±0.07ab | 115.22±4.25b | 13.64±0.42ab | 6.60±0.07cd | 11.70±0.75ab | |
J | 抽穗期Heading stage | 68.85±0.03a | 2.50±0.04a | 133.26±2.37a | 14.98±0.26a | 7.12±0.01a | 15.64±0.71a |
开花期Flowering stage | 67.47±0.06b | 2.27±0.01b | 118.83±0.33b | 13.63±0.03b | 6.91±0.01b | 12.40±0.15b | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 66.82±0.42b | 2.22±0.06bc | 114.76±3.73b | 13.29±0.35bc | 6.81±0.06b | 11.47±0.65abc |
表6 不同燕麦品种DDM、DMI、RFV、VDMI、NEL、GI指数比较
Table 6 Comparison of DDM, DMI, RFV, VDMI, NEL and GI of different oat varieties
品种 Varieties | 生育时期 Growth stages | 干物质消化率 DDM (%DM) | 干物质采食量 DMI (%BW) | 相对饲喂价值 RFV | 干物质随意采食量VDMI (kg·d-1) | 产乳净能 NEL (MJ·kg-1) | 分级指数 GI (MJ·d-1) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | 抽穗期Heading stage | 67.36±0.17bc | 2.28±0.01c | 118.93±1.07c | 13.67±0.09c | 6.89±0.02bc | 12.02±0.31c |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.45±0.83e | 2.04±0.05e | 100.32±3.71d | 12.23±0.29e | 6.32±0.12e | 9.15±0.58e | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.24±0.42e | 2.11±0.03cd | 105.01±2.02d | 12.65±0.18cd | 6.43±0.06e | 9.66±0.27de | |
B | 抽穗期Heading stage | 67.63±0.42b | 2.29±0.02c | 120.16±1.61c | 13.75±0.09c | 6.93±0.06b | 12.27±0.39c |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.87±0.19d | 2.07±0.03e | 102.29±1.28d | 12.40±0.18e | 6.38±0.03de | 9.24±0.42e | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 65.70±0.94c | 2.11±0.03cd | 107.28±3.06d | 12.64±0.20cd | 6.65±0.14c | 9.85±0.59de | |
C | 抽穗期Heading stage | 65.71±0.16d | 2.20±0.03d | 111.90±1.66d | 13.18±0.18d | 6.65±0.02d | 12.10±0.31c |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.89±0.23de | 2.07±0.01e | 102.67±0.58d | 12.44±0.07e | 6.38±0.03de | 9.62±0.01de | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.40±0.39de | 2.29±0.07ab | 114.17±4.40bc | 13.72±0.45ab | 6.46±0.06de | 11.18±0.85bc | |
D | 抽穗期Heading stage | 64.66±0.01e | 2.11±0.01e | 105.67±0.69ef | 12.65±0.08e | 6.50±0.01e | 11.06±0.13d |
开花期Flowering stage | 63.32±0.43e | 2.01±0.07f | 98.66±2.61d | 12.06±0.40e | 6.30±0.06e | 9.18±0.48e | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.02±0.51e | 2.05±0.02d | 101.67±1.84d | 12.29±0.13d | 6.40±0.08e | 9.22±0.45de | |
E | 抽穗期Heading stage | 65.38±0.31d | 2.15±0.03de | 108.73±1.94de | 12.87±0.18de | 6.60±0.05d | 11.24±0.33d |
开花期Flowering stage | 66.38±0.82c | 2.26±0.03bc | 116.19±1.03b | 13.55±0.19bc | 6.75±0.12c | 12.35±0.11b | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.77±0.26cde | 2.15±0.13cd | 108.12±6.92cd | 12.92±0.78cd | 6.51±0.04cde | 10.29±1.31cd | |
F | 抽穗期Heading stage | 64.59±0.32e | 2.08±0.04e | 104.18±2.54f | 12.48±0.26e | 6.48±0.05e | 9.64±0.59e |
开花期Flowering stage | 66.22±0.09c | 2.15±0.03e | 110.56±1.64c | 12.92±0.19d | 6.73±0.01c | 10.17±0.38cd | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.27±0.42e | 2.04±0.06d | 101.86±2.89d | 12.27±0.34d | 6.44±0.06e | 8.93±0.45e | |
G | 抽穗期Heading stage | 66.98±0.65c | 2.38±0.04b | 123.69±2.25b | 14.29±0.21b | 6.84±0.10c | 13.56±0.35b |
开花期Flowering stage | 64.74±0.56d | 2.19±0.05d | 109.96±3.12c | 13.14±0.28cd | 6.51±0.08d | 10.62±0.43c | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 68.11±0.06a | 2.34±0.03a | 123.74±1.73a | 14.06±0.20a | 7.01±0.01a | 12.54±0.46a | |
H | 抽穗期Heading stage | 65.26±0.38d | 2.14±0.07de | 108.48±3.39de | 12.87±0.44de | 6.58±0.06d | 10.26±0.60e |
开花期Flowering stage | 65.74±0.46c | 2.20±0.02cd | 112.02±1.16c | 13.19±0.14cd | 6.66±0.07c | 11.66±0.31b | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 64.82±0.86cde | 2.08±0.04d | 104.26±0.95d | 12.45±0.21d | 6.52±0.13cde | 9.08±0.21de | |
I | 抽穗期Heading stage | 64.12±0.26e | 2.10±0.03e | 104.36±1.69f | 12.60±0.16e | 6.42±0.04e | 10.10±0.32e |
开花期Flowering stage | 68.51±0.80a | 2.34±0.04a | 124.17±3.23a | 14.03±0.26a | 7.07±0.12a | 13.35±0.76a | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 65.36±0.45cd | 2.27±0.07ab | 115.22±4.25b | 13.64±0.42ab | 6.60±0.07cd | 11.70±0.75ab | |
J | 抽穗期Heading stage | 68.85±0.03a | 2.50±0.04a | 133.26±2.37a | 14.98±0.26a | 7.12±0.01a | 15.64±0.71a |
开花期Flowering stage | 67.47±0.06b | 2.27±0.01b | 118.83±0.33b | 13.63±0.03b | 6.91±0.01b | 12.40±0.15b | |
乳熟期Milking stage | 66.82±0.42b | 2.22±0.06bc | 114.76±3.73b | 13.29±0.35bc | 6.81±0.06b | 11.47±0.65abc |
品种 Variety | 等权Equal weighted | 加权Weighted | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
关联度 Correlative degree | 排序 Order | 关联度 Correlative degree | 排序 Order | |
A | 0.5817 | 6 | 0.6014 | 6 |
B | 0.6500 | 3 | 0.6687 | 3 |
C | 0.7021 | 2 | 0.7212 | 2 |
D | 0.7146 | 1 | 0.7322 | 1 |
E | 0.6075 | 5 | 0.6094 | 5 |
F | 0.6350 | 4 | 0.6423 | 4 |
G | 0.4787 | 9 | 0.4818 | 9 |
H | 0.5739 | 7 | 0.5823 | 7 |
I | 0.5528 | 8 | 0.5675 | 8 |
J | 0.4189 | 10 | 0.4158 | 10 |
表7 不同燕麦品种的关联度及排名
Table 7 The rank and relational grade of oat varieties
品种 Variety | 等权Equal weighted | 加权Weighted | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
关联度 Correlative degree | 排序 Order | 关联度 Correlative degree | 排序 Order | |
A | 0.5817 | 6 | 0.6014 | 6 |
B | 0.6500 | 3 | 0.6687 | 3 |
C | 0.7021 | 2 | 0.7212 | 2 |
D | 0.7146 | 1 | 0.7322 | 1 |
E | 0.6075 | 5 | 0.6094 | 5 |
F | 0.6350 | 4 | 0.6423 | 4 |
G | 0.4787 | 9 | 0.4818 | 9 |
H | 0.5739 | 7 | 0.5823 | 7 |
I | 0.5528 | 8 | 0.5675 | 8 |
J | 0.4189 | 10 | 0.4158 | 10 |
1 | Pan Q M, Xue J G, Tao J, et al. Current status of grassland degradation and measures for grassland restoration in Northern China. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2018, 63(17): 1642-1650. |
潘庆民, 薛建国, 陶金, 等. 中国北方草原退化现状与恢复技术. 科学通报, 2018, 63(17): 1642-1650. | |
2 | Shen H H, Zhu Y K, Zhao X, et al. Analysis of current grassland resources in China. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2016, 61(2): 139-154. |
沈海花, 朱言坤, 赵霞, 等. 中国草地资源的现状分析. 科学通报, 2016, 61(2): 139-154. | |
3 | Fang J Y, Jing H C, Zhang W H, et al. The concept of “Grass-based Livestock Husbandry” and its practice in Hulunbuir, Inner Mongolia. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2018, 63(17): 1619-1631. |
方精云, 景海春, 张文浩, 等. 论草牧业的理论体系及其实践. 科学通报, 2018, 63(17): 1619-1631. | |
4 | Fang J Y, Pan Q M, Gao S Q, et al. “Small vs. Large Area” principle: Protecting and restoring a large area of natural grassland by establishing a small area of cultivated pasture. Pratacultural Science, 2016, 33(10): 1913-1916. |
方精云, 潘庆民, 高树琴, 等. “以小保大”原理: 用小面积人工草地建设换取大面积天然草地的保护与修复. 草业科学, 2016, 33(10): 1913-1916. | |
5 | Zhang X S, Tang H P, Dong X B, et al. The dilemma of steppe and it is transformation in China. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2016, 61(2): 165-177. |
张新时, 唐海萍, 董孝斌, 等. 中国草原的困境及其转型. 科学通报, 2016, 61(2): 165-177. | |
6 | Yang H P, Sun Z M. Chinese oat. Beijing: Agricultural Publishing House, 1989. |
杨海鹏, 孙泽民. 中国燕麦. 北京: 农业出版社, 1989. | |
7 | Lin B Q, Chen W H, Jiang W B. Present situation and prospect of forage crop development in Hulunbuir. Inner Mongolia Agricultural Science and Technology, 2002(S1): 24-26. |
林宝奇, 陈文贺, 蒋万波. 呼伦贝尔市发展饲草作物的现状和前景. 内蒙古农业科技, 2002(S1): 24-26. | |
8 | Ding W Q, Li P, Hou X Y, et al. Vulnerability of herder households under the framework of sustainable livelihoods in the grassland of Northern China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(8): 1-11. |
丁文强, 李平, 侯向阳, 等. 可持续生计视角下中国北方草原区牧户脆弱性评价研究. 草业学报, 2017, 26(8): 1-11. | |
9 | Chi X X, Yiru G L T, Zhao Y G, et al. Analysis on the development of herbage industry in Hulunbuir, Inner Mongolia. Grassland and Prataculture, 2017, 29(3): 11-14. |
迟晓雪, 义如格勒图, 赵育国, 等. 内蒙古呼伦贝尔牧草产业发展分析. 草原与草业, 2017, 29(3): 11-14. | |
10 | Jan S F, Khan M R, Iqbal A, et al. Genetic diversity in exotic oat germplasm & resistance against barley yellow dwarf virus. Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, 2020(27): 2622-2631. |
11 | Fan J W, Du Y L, Turner N C, et al. Changes in root morphology and physiology to limited phosphorus and moisture in a locally-selected cultivar and an introduced cultivar of Medicago sativa L. growing in alkaline soil. Plant and Soil, 2015, 392(1/2): 215-226. |
12 | Lu P N, Liu J H, Li Q, et al. Comparison of quality and yield of different oat varieties in saline-alkali land. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2016, 36(11): 1510-1516. |
卢培娜, 刘景辉, 李倩, 等. 盐碱地不同燕麦品种的品质及产量比较. 麦类作物学报, 2016, 36(11): 1510-1516. | |
13 | Ju Z L, Zhao G Q, Chai J K, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of nutritional value and silage fermentation quality of different oat varieties in central Gansu Province. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(9): 77-86. |
琚泽亮, 赵桂琴, 柴继宽, 等. 不同燕麦品种在甘肃中部的营养价值及青贮发酵品质综合评价. 草业学报, 2019, 28(9): 77-86. | |
14 | Zhou Q P, Gou X L, Tian L H, et al. Performances of early and late maturing oat varieties in cold regions. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2018, 63(17): 1722-1730. |
周青平, 苟小林, 田莉华, 等. 寒冷区早晚熟燕麦品种的生产性能分析. 科学通报, 2018, 63(17): 1722-1730. | |
15 | Garcia S C, Fulkerson W J, Brookes S U. Dry matter production, nutritive value and efficiency of nutrient utilization of a complementary forage rotation compared to a grass pasture system. Grass & Forage Science, 2010, 63(3): 284-300. |
16 | Wood S, Seguin P, Tremblay G F, et al. Predicting pre-harvest forage nutritive value of spring and summer growth of alfalfa-grass mixtures. Agronomy Journal, 2019, 111(6): 1-10. |
17 | Begna S, Angadi S, Stamm M, et al. Winter canola: A potential dual-purpose crop for the United States Southern great plains. Agronomy Journal, 2017, 109(6): 2508-2520. |
18 | Yang J, Hou L, Bai W, et al. A dual-purpose model for spring-sown oats in cold regions of Northern China. Agronomy, 2019, 9(11): 721-739. |
19 | Jia C H, Qian W X, Tursunary·Samat, et al. Roughage nutritional value evaluation indices and research methods. Pratacultural Science, 2017, 34(2): 415-427. |
贾存辉, 钱文熙, 吐尔逊阿依·赛买提, 等. 粗饲料营养价值指数及评定方法. 草业科学, 2017, 34(2): 415-427. | |
20 | Zhou Q P. Cultivation and management of oats in alpine region. Nanjing: Phoneix Science Press, 2014: 240-242. |
周青平. 高原燕麦的栽培与管理. 南京: 江苏凤凰科学技术出版社, 2014: 240-242. | |
21 | P´erez H N, Diaz S, Gamier E, et al. New handbook for stand-ardised measurement of plant functional traits worldwide. Australian Journal Botany, 2013(61): 167-234. |
22 | Yang S. Feed analysis and quality test technology. Beijing: Beijing Agricultural University Press, 1993: 21-28. |
杨胜. 饲料分析及饲料质量检测技术. 北京: 北京农业大学出版社, 1993: 21-28. | |
23 | Jiang H X, Bai S S, Wang Z F, et al. Effect of fineness and filter bag on NDF and ADF contents of forage. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2018, 26(2): 467-473. |
姜慧新, 柏杉杉, 王兆凤, 等. 粉碎细度与滤袋对饲草NDF与ADF含量的影响. 草地学报, 2018, 26(2): 467-473. | |
24 | Rohweder D A, Barnes R F, Neal J. Proposed hay grading standards based on laboratory analyses for evaluating quality. Journal of Animalence, 1978(3): 747-759. |
25 | Zhang J K, Lu D X, Liu J X, et al. The present research situation and progress of crude fodder quality evaluation index. Pratacultural Science, 2004, 21(9): 55-61. |
张吉鹍, 卢德勋, 刘建新, 等. 粗饲料品质评定指数的研究现状及其进展. 草业科学, 2004, 21(9): 55-61. | |
26 | Liu G, Zhao G Q, Wei L M, et al. Application of grey system theory based on entropy weight method in comprehensive evaluation of oat varieties. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2007(3): 84-89. |
刘刚, 赵桂琴, 魏黎明, 等. 基于熵权赋权法的灰色系统理论在燕麦品种综合评价中的应用. 中国草地学报, 2007(3): 84-89. | |
27 | Peng X Q, Zhou Q P, Liu W H, et al. A comparative analysis of growth characteristics of six oat cultivars in the north-western Sichuan alpine region. Pratacultural Science, 2018, 35(5): 1208-1217. |
彭先琴, 周青平, 刘文辉, 等. 川西北高寒地区6个燕麦品种生长特性的比较分析. 草业科学, 2018, 35(5): 1208-1217. | |
28 | Kelman W M, Dove H. Growth and phenology of winter wheat and oats in a dual-purpose management system. Crop and Pasture Science, 2009, 60(10): 921-932. |
29 | Liu W H, Yan H B, Zhou Q P, et al. Comparative experiment of 6 oats in Xining area. Chinese Qinghai Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 2005, 35(1): 2-3. |
刘文辉, 颜红波, 周青平, 等. 西宁地区六种燕麦品种比较试验. 青海畜牧兽医杂志, 2005, 35(1): 2-3. | |
30 | Ji Y J, Zhou Q P, Wang P, et al. Effect of nitrogen fertilizer on the growth rate of oat. Chinese Qinghai Journal of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 2013, 43(1): 4-7. |
纪亚君, 周青平, 王朋, 等. 氮肥对燕麦生长速率的影响. 青海畜牧兽医杂志, 2013, 43(1): 4-7. | |
31 | Zhou Q L. Introduction experiment of 16 oat varieties in the alpine pastoral area of Tibet. Modern Agricultural Science and Technology, 2020(1): 33-34. |
周启龙. 16个燕麦品种在西藏高寒牧区的引种试验. 现代农业科技, 2020(1): 33-34. | |
32 | Asif M, Tunc C E, Yazici M A, et al. Effect of predicted climate change on growth and yield performance of wheat under varied nitrogen and zinc supply. Plant and Soil, 2019, 434(1/2): 1-14. |
33 | Gao Y M, Sa R N, Sun L L, et al. Preliminary study on introduction experiment of oats in Tongliao area of Inner Mongolia. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2017, 38(5): 32-35. |
高亚敏, 萨日娜, 孙琳丽, 等. 内蒙古通辽地区燕麦引种试验初步研究. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2017, 38(5): 32-35. | |
34 | Wu Y N, Li Z Q. Analysis of forage oat at nutrient content dynamic in different growth stages. China Dairy Cattle, 2015(3): 60-63. |
吴亚楠, 李志强. 饲用燕麦不同生育期养分含量动态变化分析. 中国奶牛, 2015(3): 60-63. | |
35 | Yang J, Liu W H, Liang G L, et al. Traits correlated with lodging resistance of oat strains in the alpine region. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(12): 50-60. |
杨晶, 刘文辉, 梁国玲, 等. 高寒地区不同燕麦品系抗倒伏相关性状分析. 草业学报, 2020, 29(12): 50-60. | |
36 | Sun J P, Dong K H, Kuai X Y, et al. Comparison of productivity and feeding value of introduced oat varieties in the agro-pasture ecotone of Northern Shanxi. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2017, 26(11): 222-230. |
孙建平, 董宽虎, 蒯晓妍, 等. 晋北农牧交错区引进燕麦品种生产性能及饲用价值比较. 草业学报, 2017, 26(11): 222-230. | |
37 | Lei X, You M H, Bai S Q, et al. Genetic diversity analysis and multivariate evaluation of agronomic traits of 50 oat germplasm lines in Northwest Sichuan. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(7): 131-142. |
雷雄, 游明鸿, 白史且, 等. 川西北高原50份燕麦种质农艺性状遗传多样性分析及综合评价. 草业学报, 2020, 29(7): 131-142. | |
38 | Jiao W H, Liu J H, Qi B J, et al. Studying agronomic traits and quality of oat varieties by GGE biplot. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2011, 27(1): 24-29. |
焦伟红, 刘景辉, 齐冰洁, 等. 用GGE双标图分析燕麦品种 (系)农艺与品质性状. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27(1): 24-29. | |
39 | Zhang G Y, Ma H P, Shao X M, et al. A comparative study of yield and nutritive value of nine imported oat varieties in the valley region of Tibet, China. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(5): 121-131. |
张光雨, 马和平, 邵小明, 等. 西藏河谷区9个引进燕麦品种的生产性能和营养品质比较研究. 草业学报, 2019, 28(5): 121-131. | |
40 | Qi B J, Liu J H, Zhang Z Y, et al. Genetic diversity of biological characters in oat germplasm. Journal of Triticeae Crops, 2008, 28(4): 594-599. |
齐冰洁, 刘景辉, 张智勇, 等. 燕麦种质资源生物学性状的遗传多样性. 麦类作物学报, 2008, 28(4): 594-599. | |
41 | Zhou Q P, Yan H B, Liang G L, et al. Analysis of the forage and grain productivity of oat cultivars. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(10): 120-130. |
周青平, 颜红波, 梁国玲, 等. 不同燕麦品种饲草和籽粒生产性能分析. 草业学报, 2015, 24(10): 120-130. | |
42 | Wang C H, Yang J Q, Wang Y X, et al. Effects of the different harvesting time and different drying ways on nutrient levels in alfalfa meal. Acta Zoonutrimenta Sinica, 2004(2): 60-64. |
王常慧, 杨建强, 王永新, 等. 不同收获期及不同干燥方法对苜蓿草粉营养成分的影响. 动物营养学报, 2004(2): 60-64. | |
43 | Guo M Y, Wu Y L, Xu L J, et al. Correspondence analysis of nutrient contents in six gramineous herbages in Hulunber. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2017, 25(5): 1160-1164. |
郭明英, 吴艳玲, 徐丽君, 等. 呼伦贝尔地区6种禾本科牧草养分对应分析. 草地学报, 2017, 25(5): 1160-1164. | |
44 | Zhu L, Li S Q. Effect of soil surface mulching on the maize source-sink relationship of nitrogen accumulation and dry matter transfer. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2017, 50(13): 2528-2537. |
朱琳, 李世清. 地表覆盖对玉米籽粒氮素积累和干物质转移“源-库”过程的影响. 中国农业科学, 2017, 50(13): 2528-2537. | |
45 | Liu M, Yang D, Zhang J, et al. Determination of GI value of sheep roughage in Bayannur City of Inner Mongolia. Animal Husbandry and Feed Science, 2018, 39(6): 51-54. |
刘敏, 杨东, 张娟, 等. 内蒙古巴彦淖尔市绵羊粗饲料GI值测定. 畜牧与饲料科学, 2018, 39(6): 51-54. | |
46 | Fu B Z, Gao X Q, Gao Y F, et al.Correlation analysis of the main agronomic traits and performance of 21 alfalfa varieties. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2015, 24(11):174-182. |
伏兵哲, 高雪芹, 高永发, 等. 21个苜蓿品种主要农艺性状关联分析与综合评价. 草业学报, 2015, 24(11): 174-182. |
[1] | 李俊年, 康绍华, 杨冬梅, 何纤, 李双, 陶双伦. 葛藤草粉替代苜蓿草粉对波杂山羊血清生化指标、养分表观消化率和生产性能的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(8): 146-153. |
[2] | 徐强, 田新会, 杜文华. 高寒牧区黑麦和箭筈豌豆混播对草产量和营养品质的影响研究[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(8): 49-59. |
[3] | 汪雪, 刘晓静, 赵雅姣, 王静. 根系分隔方式下紫花苜蓿/燕麦间作氮素利用及种间互馈特征研究[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(8): 73-85. |
[4] | 袁英良, 唐丹, 鲁英, 冉桂霞, 郭艳芹. 吉林地区麦后复种饲用油菜与燕麦混播效应研究[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(7): 167-178. |
[5] | 李进, 陈仕勇, 赵旭, 田浩琦, 陈智华, 周青平. 基于SCoT标记的饲用燕麦品种遗传结构及指纹图谱分析[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(7): 72-81. |
[6] | 聂秀美, 慕平, 赵桂琴, 何海鹏, 吴文斌, 蔺豆豆, 苏伟娟, 张丽睿. 贮藏年限对裸燕麦种带真菌和真菌毒素的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(6): 106-120. |
[7] | 高鹏, 魏江铭, 李瑶, 张丽红, 赵祥, 杜利霞, 韩伟. 山西省大同市早播饲用燕麦叶部真菌病害病原鉴定及影响因素分析[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(6): 82-93. |
[8] | 肖逸, 杨忠富, 聂刚, 韩佳婷, 帅杨, 张新全. 12个多花黑麦草品种(系)在成都平原的生产性能和营养价值综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(5): 174-185. |
[9] | 王辛有, 曹文侠, 王小军, 刘玉祯, 高瑞, 王世林, 安海涛, 邓秀霞, 王文虎. 河西地区豆禾混播草地生产性能对刈割高度与施肥的响应[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(4): 99-110. |
[10] | 刘凯强, 刘文辉, 贾志锋, 梁国玲, 马祥. 干旱胁迫对‘青燕1号’燕麦产量及干物质积累与分配的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(3): 177-188. |
[11] | 贾雨雷, 廖真, 汪丽芳, 卜建超, 林标声, 林辉, 苏德伟, 鲁国东, 林占熺. 化肥减量配施菌草固氮菌肥对巨菌草生长、营养品质及土壤养分的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(3): 215-223. |
[12] | 沙栢平, 谢应忠, 高雪芹, 蔡伟, 伏兵哲. 地下滴灌水肥耦合对紫花苜蓿草产量及品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(2): 102-114. |
[13] | 刘建新, 刘瑞瑞, 贾海燕, 卜婷, 李娜. NaHS引发提高裸燕麦种子活力的生理机制[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(2): 135-142. |
[14] | 蔺豆豆, 赵桂琴, 琚泽亮, 宫文龙. 15份燕麦材料苗期抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(11): 108-121. |
[15] | 刘建新, 刘瑞瑞, 贾海燕, 刘秀丽, 卜婷, 李娜. 外源半胱氨酸缓解裸燕麦镧胁迫的生理机制[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(11): 122-131. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||