草业学报 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (5): 196-203.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2023218
• 研究简报 • 上一篇
孟晨1,2,3(), 鲁雪莉1,2,3, 宋亦汝4, 张成省1,2,3, 李义强1,2,3, 项海芹5, 徐宗昌1,2,3()
收稿日期:
2023-06-27
修回日期:
2023-07-28
出版日期:
2024-05-20
发布日期:
2024-02-03
通讯作者:
徐宗昌
作者简介:
E-mail: xuzongchang@caas.cn基金资助:
Chen MENG1,2,3(), Xue-li LU1,2,3, Yi-ru SONG4, Cheng-sheng ZHANG1,2,3, Yi-qiang LI1,2,3, Hai-qin XIANG5, Zong-chang XU1,2,3()
Received:
2023-06-27
Revised:
2023-07-28
Online:
2024-05-20
Published:
2024-02-03
Contact:
Zong-chang XU
摘要:
土壤盐渍化是制约我国农业发展的重要问题之一。利用药用植物对盐碱地进行生物改良,是盐碱地资源化利用的有效手段。本研究用2%浓度的NaCl对11份益母草苗期材料进行盐胁迫处理,测定株高、根长、叶面积、地上鲜重、根鲜重等12个指标,采用主成分分析、隶属函数分析及耐盐性综合评价分析对各样本的耐盐性进行了综合评价。结果表明,益母草各指标差异较大,变异系数为13.58%~59.89%,地上鲜重、地上干重、根鲜重及叶面积4个指标受盐胁迫的影响较大,且12个性状指标间存在不同程度的相关性。叶绿素含量、主根直径、地上部分及根的干鲜重可以作为益母草苗期耐盐性评价指标。综合耐盐等级划分和耐盐性综合评价结果,筛选到苗期较为耐盐的益母草材料HY199和HY203。以上结果将会为益母草的盐碱地种植提供理论依据。
孟晨, 鲁雪莉, 宋亦汝, 张成省, 李义强, 项海芹, 徐宗昌. 11份益母草种质材料苗期耐盐性评价与鉴定[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(5): 196-203.
Chen MENG, Xue-li LU, Yi-ru SONG, Cheng-sheng ZHANG, Yi-qiang LI, Hai-qin XIANG, Zong-chang XU. Evaluation and identification of salt tolerance of 11 Leonurus germplasm lines at the seedling stage[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2024, 33(5): 196-203.
编号Number | 产地Place of origin |
---|---|
HY154 | 山东省青岛市即墨区Jimo district, Qingdao city, Shandong Province |
HY162 | 山东省潍坊市下营镇Xiaying town, Weifang city, Shandong Province |
HY186 | 山东省青岛市王演庄村Wangyanzhuang village, Qingdao city, Shandong Province |
HY193 | 江苏省宿迁市泗阳县Siyang county, Suqian city, Jiangsu Province |
HY197 | 山东省青岛市城阳区Chengyang district, Qingdao city, Shandong Province |
HY198 | 广东省广州市白云区Baiyun district, Guangzhou city, Guangdong Province |
HY199 | 山东省潍坊市寿光市Shouguang city, Weifang city, Shandong Province |
HY202 | 江苏省宿迁市沐阳县Muyang county, Suqian city, Jiangsu Province |
HY203 | 广东省揭阳市榕城区Rongcheng district, Jieyang city, Guangdong Province |
HY206 | 河北省石家庄市辛集市Xinji city, Shijiazhuang city, Hebei Province |
HY207 | 江苏省淮安市清江浦区Qingjiangpu district, Huaian city, Jiangsu Province |
表1 材料编号及来源
Table 1 Material number and origins
编号Number | 产地Place of origin |
---|---|
HY154 | 山东省青岛市即墨区Jimo district, Qingdao city, Shandong Province |
HY162 | 山东省潍坊市下营镇Xiaying town, Weifang city, Shandong Province |
HY186 | 山东省青岛市王演庄村Wangyanzhuang village, Qingdao city, Shandong Province |
HY193 | 江苏省宿迁市泗阳县Siyang county, Suqian city, Jiangsu Province |
HY197 | 山东省青岛市城阳区Chengyang district, Qingdao city, Shandong Province |
HY198 | 广东省广州市白云区Baiyun district, Guangzhou city, Guangdong Province |
HY199 | 山东省潍坊市寿光市Shouguang city, Weifang city, Shandong Province |
HY202 | 江苏省宿迁市沐阳县Muyang county, Suqian city, Jiangsu Province |
HY203 | 广东省揭阳市榕城区Rongcheng district, Jieyang city, Guangdong Province |
HY206 | 河北省石家庄市辛集市Xinji city, Shijiazhuang city, Hebei Province |
HY207 | 江苏省淮安市清江浦区Qingjiangpu district, Huaian city, Jiangsu Province |
Salt tolerance class | |||
---|---|---|---|
表2 盐胁迫后益母草苗期盐害症状
Table 2 Symptoms of L. heterophyllus at seedling stage under salt stress
Salt tolerance class | |||
---|---|---|---|
图1 苗期耐盐性单株分类标准1: 高耐盐Highly salt-tolerant; 2: 耐盐Salt-tolerant; 3: 中耐盐Moderately salt-tolerant; 4: 敏感Salt-sensitive; 5: 高敏感Highly salt-sensitive.
Fig.1 Standard of individual classification for salt tolerance of L. heterophyllus at seedling stage
Salt tolerance class | |||
---|---|---|---|
表3 益母草盐害指数与分级
Table 3 Salt injury index and grade of L. heterophyllus
Salt tolerance class | |||
---|---|---|---|
指标 Index | 最大值 Maximum value | 最小值 Minimum value | 极差 Range | 平均值 Mean value | 标准差 Standard deviation | 变异系数 Variable coefficient (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PH (cm) | 7.90 | 3.77 | 4.13 | 5.63 | 1.60 | 28.47 |
RL (cm) | 11.09 | 7.20 | 3.89 | 8.78 | 1.19 | 13.58 |
LA (mm2) | 77.42 | 16.38 | 61.03 | 48.94 | 22.02 | 45.00 |
MSD (mm) | 1.28 | 0.46 | 0.82 | 0.84 | 0.27 | 31.55 |
MRD (mm) | 0.87 | 0.49 | 0.37 | 0.65 | 0.13 | 20.33 |
AFW (mg) | 106.91 | 12.61 | 94.30 | 52.40 | 31.38 | 59.89 |
RFW (mg) | 47.37 | 11.39 | 35.98 | 25.30 | 0.01 | 46.55 |
ADW (mg) | 10.74 | 2.19 | 8.55 | 6.37 | 3.17 | 49.73 |
RDW (mg) | 4.52 | 1.37 | 3.15 | 2.41 | 0.97 | 40.06 |
CCA (mg·L-1) | 4.99 | 1.66 | 3.33 | 2.81 | 1.00 | 35.55 |
CCB (mg·L-1) | 4.01 | 2.21 | 1.80 | 2.98 | 0.74 | 24.92 |
MDA (μmol·g-1 FW) | 16.01 | 8.01 | 8.00 | 12.58 | 3.13 | 24.84 |
表4 盐胁迫下益母草各性状变异分析
Table 4 Variation analysis of characters in L. heterophyllus under salt stress
指标 Index | 最大值 Maximum value | 最小值 Minimum value | 极差 Range | 平均值 Mean value | 标准差 Standard deviation | 变异系数 Variable coefficient (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PH (cm) | 7.90 | 3.77 | 4.13 | 5.63 | 1.60 | 28.47 |
RL (cm) | 11.09 | 7.20 | 3.89 | 8.78 | 1.19 | 13.58 |
LA (mm2) | 77.42 | 16.38 | 61.03 | 48.94 | 22.02 | 45.00 |
MSD (mm) | 1.28 | 0.46 | 0.82 | 0.84 | 0.27 | 31.55 |
MRD (mm) | 0.87 | 0.49 | 0.37 | 0.65 | 0.13 | 20.33 |
AFW (mg) | 106.91 | 12.61 | 94.30 | 52.40 | 31.38 | 59.89 |
RFW (mg) | 47.37 | 11.39 | 35.98 | 25.30 | 0.01 | 46.55 |
ADW (mg) | 10.74 | 2.19 | 8.55 | 6.37 | 3.17 | 49.73 |
RDW (mg) | 4.52 | 1.37 | 3.15 | 2.41 | 0.97 | 40.06 |
CCA (mg·L-1) | 4.99 | 1.66 | 3.33 | 2.81 | 1.00 | 35.55 |
CCB (mg·L-1) | 4.01 | 2.21 | 1.80 | 2.98 | 0.74 | 24.92 |
MDA (μmol·g-1 FW) | 16.01 | 8.01 | 8.00 | 12.58 | 3.13 | 24.84 |
指标 Index | PH | RL | LA | MSD | MRD | AFW | RFW | ADW | RDW | CCA | CCB |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RL | |||||||||||
LA | |||||||||||
MSD | |||||||||||
MRD | |||||||||||
AFW | |||||||||||
RFW | |||||||||||
ADW | |||||||||||
RDW | |||||||||||
CCA | |||||||||||
CCB | |||||||||||
MDA |
表5 益母草盐胁迫下各个指标相关性分析
Table 5 Correlation analysis of each index in L. heterophyllus under salt stress
指标 Index | PH | RL | LA | MSD | MRD | AFW | RFW | ADW | RDW | CCA | CCB |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RL | |||||||||||
LA | |||||||||||
MSD | |||||||||||
MRD | |||||||||||
AFW | |||||||||||
RFW | |||||||||||
ADW | |||||||||||
RDW | |||||||||||
CCA | |||||||||||
CCB | |||||||||||
MDA |
指标 Index | 主成分因子Principal component factor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | |
PH | 0.154 | -0.086 | -0.213 | 0.008 |
RL | -0.163 | 0.053 | 0.179 | 0.451 |
LA | 0.070 | 0.237 | -0.235 | -0.418 |
MSD | 0.135 | -0.082 | -0.229 | 0.308 |
MRD | 0.189 | 0.106 | 0.205 | -0.224 |
AFW | 0.158 | 0.042 | -0.378 | 0.363 |
RFW | -0.029 | 0.298 | -0.066 | 0.343 |
ADW | -0.107 | -0.259 | -0.004 | 0.089 |
RDW | -0.068 | 0.306 | 0.064 | 0.149 |
CCA | 0.190 | 0.013 | 0.356 | 0.136 |
CCB | 0.170 | -0.015 | 0.422 | 0.131 |
MDA | -0.118 | 0.069 | 0.060 | -0.225 |
特征值Eigenvalue | 4.348 | 2.937 | 1.457 | 1.125 |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 36.232 | 24.478 | 12.142 | 9.379 |
累计贡献率Cumulative contribution rate (%) | 36.232 | 60.710 | 72.852 | 82.230 |
表6 主成分的特征值及累计贡献率
Table 6 Eigenvalues and cumulative contribution of principal component
指标 Index | 主成分因子Principal component factor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | |
PH | 0.154 | -0.086 | -0.213 | 0.008 |
RL | -0.163 | 0.053 | 0.179 | 0.451 |
LA | 0.070 | 0.237 | -0.235 | -0.418 |
MSD | 0.135 | -0.082 | -0.229 | 0.308 |
MRD | 0.189 | 0.106 | 0.205 | -0.224 |
AFW | 0.158 | 0.042 | -0.378 | 0.363 |
RFW | -0.029 | 0.298 | -0.066 | 0.343 |
ADW | -0.107 | -0.259 | -0.004 | 0.089 |
RDW | -0.068 | 0.306 | 0.064 | 0.149 |
CCA | 0.190 | 0.013 | 0.356 | 0.136 |
CCB | 0.170 | -0.015 | 0.422 | 0.131 |
MDA | -0.118 | 0.069 | 0.060 | -0.225 |
特征值Eigenvalue | 4.348 | 2.937 | 1.457 | 1.125 |
贡献率Contribution rate (%) | 36.232 | 24.478 | 12.142 | 9.379 |
累计贡献率Cumulative contribution rate (%) | 36.232 | 60.710 | 72.852 | 82.230 |
品种 Germplasm | 主成分因子Principal component factor | 隶属函数Membership function | D值 D-value | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | ||
HY198 | 1.449 | -1.103 | 1.305 | 0.617 | 0.862 | 0.361 | 1.000 | 0.761 | 0.722 |
HY199 | 1.914 | -0.137 | 0.169 | -0.329 | 1.000 | 0.655 | 0.665 | 0.500 | 0.791 |
HY202 | 0.506 | 0.049 | -2.091 | -0.281 | 0.584 | 0.712 | 0.000 | 0.513 | 0.528 |
HY203 | 0.229 | 0.995 | 0.253 | 1.484 | 0.502 | 1.000 | 0.690 | 1.000 | 0.735 |
HY206 | -1.468 | -2.288 | 0.040 | 0.310 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.627 | 0.676 | 0.170 |
HY207 | 0.013 | -0.455 | -1.183 | 0.376 | 0.438 | 0.558 | 0.268 | 0.694 | 0.478 |
HY154 | -0.375 | 0.892 | 0.840 | -1.050 | 0.323 | 0.969 | 0.863 | 0.301 | 0.593 |
HY162 | -0.692 | 0.920 | -0.083 | 0.589 | 0.229 | 0.977 | 0.591 | 0.753 | 0.565 |
HY186 | -0.634 | 0.761 | -0.290 | 0.875 | 0.247 | 0.929 | 0.531 | 0.832 | 0.558 |
HY193 | -0.079 | 0.032 | -0.220 | -2.139 | 0.411 | 0.707 | 0.551 | 0.000 | 0.473 |
HY197 | -0.862 | 0.334 | 1.259 | -0.451 | 0.179 | 0.799 | 0.986 | 0.466 | 0.515 |
表7 每份鉴定种质的主成分值、隶属函数值与综合评价D值
Table 7 Principal component values, membership function and D-value of each germplasm
品种 Germplasm | 主成分因子Principal component factor | 隶属函数Membership function | D值 D-value | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
F1 | F2 | F3 | F4 | R1 | R2 | R3 | R4 | ||
HY198 | 1.449 | -1.103 | 1.305 | 0.617 | 0.862 | 0.361 | 1.000 | 0.761 | 0.722 |
HY199 | 1.914 | -0.137 | 0.169 | -0.329 | 1.000 | 0.655 | 0.665 | 0.500 | 0.791 |
HY202 | 0.506 | 0.049 | -2.091 | -0.281 | 0.584 | 0.712 | 0.000 | 0.513 | 0.528 |
HY203 | 0.229 | 0.995 | 0.253 | 1.484 | 0.502 | 1.000 | 0.690 | 1.000 | 0.735 |
HY206 | -1.468 | -2.288 | 0.040 | 0.310 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.627 | 0.676 | 0.170 |
HY207 | 0.013 | -0.455 | -1.183 | 0.376 | 0.438 | 0.558 | 0.268 | 0.694 | 0.478 |
HY154 | -0.375 | 0.892 | 0.840 | -1.050 | 0.323 | 0.969 | 0.863 | 0.301 | 0.593 |
HY162 | -0.692 | 0.920 | -0.083 | 0.589 | 0.229 | 0.977 | 0.591 | 0.753 | 0.565 |
HY186 | -0.634 | 0.761 | -0.290 | 0.875 | 0.247 | 0.929 | 0.531 | 0.832 | 0.558 |
HY193 | -0.079 | 0.032 | -0.220 | -2.139 | 0.411 | 0.707 | 0.551 | 0.000 | 0.473 |
HY197 | -0.862 | 0.334 | 1.259 | -0.451 | 0.179 | 0.799 | 0.986 | 0.466 | 0.515 |
1 | Zhang J, Guo W B, Yan L, et al. Identification and evaluation of salt-alkali tolerance and screening of salt-alkali tolerant germplasm of oat (Avena sativa L.). Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2023, 49(6): 1551-1561. |
张静, 郭文博, 晏林, 等. 燕麦种质资源耐盐碱性鉴定评价及耐盐碱种质筛选. 作物学报, 2023, 49(6): 1551-1561. | |
2 | Hu L L, Wang S H, Wang L X, et al. Identification of salt tolerance and screening of salt tolerant germplasm of mungbean (Viga radiate L.) at seedling stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2022, 48(2): 367-379. |
胡亮亮, 王素华, 王丽侠, 等. 绿豆种质资源苗期耐盐性鉴定及耐盐种质筛选. 作物学报, 2022, 48(2): 367-379. | |
3 | Sun J, Xu X Y, Ma Z K, et al. Identification of salt-tolerant germplasm and analysis of its physiological response during barely germination. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2019, 37(6): 16-23. |
孙建, 徐晓芸, 马增科, 等. 大麦发芽期耐盐性种质鉴定及其生理响应特征分析. 干旱地区农业研究, 2019, 37(6): 16-23. | |
4 | Tian S H, Tao C X, Zhang F. Evaluation on salt tolerance of twenty medicinal plants at seedling stage. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 49(8): 49-54. |
田淑慧, 陶翠霞, 张锋. 20种药用植物的苗期耐盐性及其评价. 山东农业科学, 2017, 49(8): 49-54. | |
5 | Cui X G, Lu Z G. Effect of different sodium salt stress on seed germination of Leonurus artemisia. Hubei Agricultural Sciences, 2011, 50(22): 4657-4659, 4663. |
崔兴国, 芦站根. 不同钠盐胁迫对益母草种子发芽的影响. 湖北农业科学, 2011, 50(22): 4657-4659, 4663. | |
6 | Han D F, Zhou Y H, Zhang L H, et al. Effects of Na2CO3 and NaHCO3 mixed stress on seed germination of Leonurus japonicas. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2012, 40(3): 222-223. |
韩德复, 周艳辉, 张丽辉, 等. Na2CO3和NaHCO3混合胁迫对益母草种子萌发的影响. 江苏农业科学, 2012, 40(3): 222-223. | |
7 | Tan Y J. Study on the resource chemistry and quality evaluation of Leonurus japonicas Houtt. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, 2019. |
谭亚杰. 益母草资源化学与质量标准研究. 南京: 南京中医药大学, 2019. | |
8 | Qiao J J. Study on quality evaluation of Leonuri herba. Nanjing: Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, 2022. |
乔晶晶. 益母草药材质量评价研究. 南京: 南京中医药大学, 2022. | |
9 | Tao W X, Cheng S H, Ji J C, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of salinity tolerance of rice variety resources and screening of salinity tolerance indexes. Jiangsu Agricultural Science, 2022, 50(18): 180-187. |
陶维旭, 程生海, 冀俊超, 等. 水稻品种资源耐盐性综合评价及耐盐指标筛选. 江苏农业科学, 2022, 50(18): 180-187. | |
10 | Sun X J, Jiang Q Y, Hu Z, et al. Identification and evaluation of wheat germplasm resources at seedling stage. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2023, 49(4): 1132-1139. |
孙现军, 姜奇彦, 胡正, 等. 小麦种质资源苗期耐盐性鉴定评价. 作物学报, 2023, 49(4): 1132-1139. | |
11 | Li J P, Wang X P, Liu S J, et al. Salt tolerance of maize at seedling stage: Identification and evaluation method. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2022, 38(18): 28-34. |
李俊萍, 王秀萍, 刘素娟, 等. 玉米苗期耐盐性鉴定评价方法研究. 中国农学通报, 2022, 38(18): 28-34. | |
12 | Zhou X W, Zhang X R, Sun H X, et al. Evaluation of salt tolerance of soybean germplasms at germination and seedling stages. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, 2022, 53(3): 257-264. |
周秀文, 张晓蕊, 孙贺祥, 等. 大豆种质萌发期和苗期耐盐性评价. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2022, 53(3): 257-264. | |
13 | Li B, Lv Y, Yang M X, et al. Effects of saline-alkali stress on physiology and molecular mechanism of Brassica napus L. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica, 2022, 37(3): 86-93. |
李班, 吕莹, 杨明煊, 等. 盐碱胁迫对甘蓝型油菜生理及分子机制的影响. 华北农学报, 2022, 37(3): 86-93. | |
14 | Zelm E V, Zhang Y X, Testerink C. Salt tolerance mechanisms of plants. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 2020, 71: 403-433. |
15 | Zhang Y W, Zhang L F, Li W, et al. Evaluation on salt tolerance of soybean at germination and seedling stages using membership function. Shandong Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 48(1): 21-25. |
张彦威, 张礼凤, 李伟, 等. 大豆发芽期和苗期耐盐性的隶属函数分析. 山东农业科学, 2016, 48(1): 21-25. | |
16 | Chen Y Q, Su K Q, Chen T X, et al. Effects of complex saline-alkali stress on seed germination and seedling physiological characteristics of Achnatherum inebrians. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2021, 30(3): 137-157. |
陈雅琦, 苏楷淇, 陈泰祥, 等. 混合盐碱胁迫对醉马草种子萌发及幼苗生理特性的影响. 草业学报, 2021, 30(3): 137-157. | |
17 | He X Q. Multivariate statistical analysis. Beijing: China Renmin University Press, 2015: 152-174. |
何晓群. 多元统计分析. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2015: 152-174. | |
18 | Sun D L, Bian N F, Chen Z D, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of salt tolerance and screening for salt tolerant accessions of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) at germination stage. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2017, 18(6): 1079-1087. |
孙东雷, 卞能飞, 陈志德, 等. 花生萌发期耐盐性综合评价及耐盐种质筛选. 植物遗传资源学报, 2017, 18(6): 1079-1087. | |
19 | Yu F R, Li Y D, Cheng Y Q, et al. Identification and evaluation of salt tolerance of Tigernut germplasm resources at seedling stage. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2023, 41(2): 1-10, 85. |
于馥榕, 李毅丹, 程云清, 等. 油莎豆种质资源苗期耐盐性鉴定与评价. 干旱地区农业研究, 2023, 41(2): 1-10, 85. | |
20 | Li J W, Liu J H, Zhao B P, et al. Evaluation of salt tolerance of oat materials at seedling stage and selection of the relative index. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University, 2022, DOI: 10.13327/j.jjlau.2021.1623. |
李俊伟, 刘景辉, 赵宝平, 等. 燕麦苗期耐盐性评价及鉴定指标筛选. 吉林农业大学学报, 2022, DOI: 10.13327/j.jjlau.2021.1623. | |
21 | Zhang X C, Xue X X, Jiang S, et al. Identification of mixed saline-alkali tolerance and screening of indicators in soybean at germination stage. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-occidentalis Sinica, 2020, 29(3): 374-381. |
张新草, 薛项潇, 姜深, 等. 大豆种质发芽期耐盐碱性鉴定及指标筛选. 西北农业学报, 2020, 29(3): 374-381. | |
22 | Yu R G, Zhang D, Yu X Y, et al. Comparison analysis of salinity tolerance and screening of salinity tolerance indicators in 13 Brassica rapa L. ssp. chinensis varieties at seedling stage. Journal of Yunnan Agricultural University (Natural Science), 2022, 37(1): 24-31. |
余如刚, 张迪, 余心悦, 等. 13种小白菜苗期耐盐比较分析及耐性指标筛选. 云南农业大学学报(自然科学), 2022, 37(1): 24-31. |
[1] | 张译尹, 李雪颖, 王斌, 宋珂辰, 兰剑, 胡海英. 盐胁迫对不同种质小黑麦幼苗水分利用效率和渗透调节的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(4): 87-98. |
[2] | 张珈敏, 关皓, 李海萍, 贾志锋, 马祥, 刘文辉, 陈有军, 陈仕勇, 蒋永梅, 甘丽, 周青平, 杨丽雪. 混播比例及乳酸菌剂对燕麦-饲用豌豆发酵TMR品质及瘤胃降解特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(1): 169-181. |
[3] | 杨小涵, 伍国强, 魏明, 王北辰. HKT在植物离子稳态和响应非生物逆境胁迫中的作用[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(5): 190-202. |
[4] | 曹玉莹, 苏雪萌, 周正朝, 郑群威, 岳佳辉. 黄土高原典型草本植物根-土复合体抗剪性能的空间差异性及其影响因素研究[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(5): 94-105. |
[5] | 朱丽丽, 张业猛, 李万才, 赵亚利, 李想, 陈志国. 39个我国不同生态区培育的青贮玉米品种在青海高原适应性研究[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(4): 68-78. |
[6] | 王园, 王晶, 李淑霞. 紫花苜蓿MsBBX24基因的克隆及耐盐性分析[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(3): 107-117. |
[7] | 苗涵, 魏莱, 杨燕萍, 车永和. 海水胁迫下冰草幼苗期耐盐性指标筛选[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(3): 200-211. |
[8] | 李春艳, 王艳, 李欣瑞, 李英主, 李明峰, 陈丽丽, 雷雄, 闫利军, 游明鸿, 季晓菲, 张昌兵, 吴婍, 苟文龙, 李达旭, 鄢家俊, 白史且. 中国野生老芒麦形态多样性研究与种质利用潜力分析[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(3): 67-79. |
[9] | 孟晨, 鲁雪莉, 王菊英, 魏云冲, 张成省, 李义强, 徐宗昌. 不同类型盐胁迫对小黑麦种子萌发的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(12): 171-180. |
[10] | 徐宗昌, 鲁雪莉, 魏云冲, 孟晨, 张梦超, 张缘杨, 王萌, 王菊英, 张成省, 李义强. 航天诱变野大豆SP1群体苗期耐盐性鉴定与评价[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(11): 168-178. |
[11] | 王珊珊, 谷海涛, 谢慧芳, 何绍冬, 甘长波, 卫小勇, 孔广超. 113份饲草型六倍体小黑麦种质饲草产量与品质性状的评价[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(1): 192-202. |
[12] | 李瑞强, 王玉祥, 孙玉兰, 张磊, 陈爱萍. 盐胁迫对5份无芒雀麦苗期生长和生理生化的影响及综合性评价[J]. 草业学报, 2023, 32(1): 99-111. |
[13] | 陈子英, 常单娜, 韩梅, 李正鹏, 严清彪, 张久东, 周国朋, 孙小凤, 曹卫东. 47份箭筈豌豆品种(系)在青海作秋绿肥的能力评价[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(2): 39-51. |
[14] | 何海锋, 吴娜, 刘吉利, 许兴. 盐碱条件下施磷对柳枝稷生长发育及耐盐性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2022, 31(10): 64-74. |
[15] | 吴廷美, 林慧龙, 范迪, 籍常婷, 赵玉婷, 魏靖琼. 冻原高山草地牧户家畜养殖规模影响因素分析——以青海省为例[J]. 草业学报, 2021, 30(9): 117-126. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||