大麦种子萌发期抗旱性鉴定指标的筛选及抗旱性评价

鞠乐，齐军仓，贺雪，王丹，侯忠庆，付强，熊显鹏

(1. 石河子大学农学院，新疆石河子 832003；2. 南阳市农业科学院，河南南阳 473000)



大麦种子萌发期抗旱性鉴定指标的筛选及抗旱性评价

鞠乐1, 2，齐军仓1，贺雪1，王丹1，侯忠庆1，付强1，熊显鹏1

(1. 石河子大学农学院，新疆石河子 832003；2. 南阳市农业科学院，河南南阳 473000)

【目的】研究大麦种子萌发期形态指标与抗旱性的关系，构建抗旱性评价方法。【方法】采用20%PEG8000模拟干旱胁迫，测定其9项形态指标。采用相关性分析及因子分析等筛选大麦种子萌发期抗旱性鉴定指标，并运用隶属函数法对101份大麦材料进行抗旱性综合评价。【结果】这9项形态指标与抗旱性均呈显著的相关关系。【结论】发芽势、发芽率、胚根长、胚芽长、胚芽鞘长、胚根干重、胚芽干重、根冠比、物质转运速率等指标均可作为大麦种子萌发期重要的抗旱性鉴定指标。采用隶属函数法筛选出Z027S078T、新引D7为抗旱性极强的材料；垦啤6号、贝赖勒斯为抗旱性极弱的材料。

大麦；萌发期；抗旱性评价

0 引 言

【研究意义】随着全球气候变化，干旱已成为制约作物生长发育主要因子，由旱灾所造成的损失对社会生活及经济发展产生不可估量的影响，选育抗旱品种已成了全世界关注的问题。在我国北方地区，大多种植在没有灌溉条件的雨养农业区，往往由于播种后土壤墒情不足而影响出苗，进而限制了产量的提高。而植物整个生活史中，种子萌发期对水分最为敏感又是最为脆弱的阶段，若能度过此阶段，植物的抗逆能力和对环境适应力将会大大提高[1-4]。【前人研究进展】作物抗旱性随着生育期变化而有所差异[5]，种子是重要繁殖材料，萌发阶段抗旱性在某种程度可以反映该种子的抗旱程度[6]。种子萌发初期依靠吸胀作用吸收水分，随后主要是胚根从外界吸收水分及矿物质，进行物质交换，发达根系对促进作物苗期抗旱能力非常有利，所以逆境下植物根系生长情况在一定程度上可以反映出作物抗逆性[7]，幼苗高度及根长在某种程度上也可以衡量幼苗的发育状况。Bouslama M.[8]1983年曾提出可以用种子发芽势、发芽率及萌发指数作为渗透胁迫下的种子萌发指标。张霞等[9]提出种子萌发期抗旱性评价方法。【本研究切入点】大麦是公认抗逆性较强的作物之一[10-13]，虽然对于小麦[14-16]、玉米[17-18]、水稻[19]、油菜[20]、裸燕麦[21]、偃麦草[22]等作物种子萌发期抗旱性做出很多研究，但关于大麦种子萌发期抗旱性的研究相对较少。研究大麦种子萌发期形态指标与抗旱性的关系。【拟解决的关键问题】通过20%PEG8000模拟干旱胁迫对101份大麦材料进行干旱处理，对其形态指标进行测定分析，研究这些指标与抗旱性的关系，采用因子分析筛选种子萌发期大麦抗旱性鉴定指标，以构建大麦种子萌发期抗旱性评价的方法体系。

1 材料与方法

1.1 材 料

101份大麦材料在石河子大学试验站进行田间抗旱性鉴定，根据株高筛选。

1.2 方 法

1.2.1 试验设计

采用20%PEG8000作为胁迫处理溶液模拟干旱胁迫，进行发芽试验，重复3次，发芽试验参照鞠乐等[23](2013)试验方法。

1.2.2 指标测定

发芽势(germination potential，GP)、发芽率(germination rate，GR)、最大胚根长(radicle length，RL)、胚芽长(germ length，GL)、胚芽鞘长(germ scabbard length，GSL)、幼苗干重(seedling dry weight，SDW)、胚根干重(radicle dry weight，RDW)、胚芽干重(germ dry weight，GDW)等指标测量方法以及根冠比(root-shoot ratio，RSR)、物质转运速率(material transfer rate，MTR)、抗旱系数等计算方法均参照鞠乐等[23](2013)。

1.3 数据统计

采用DPSv7.05版软件对各指标进行相关性分析、因子分析，并采用隶属函数法对101份大麦材料进行抗旱性评价。

2 结果与分析

2.1 筛选抗性鉴定指标

2.1.1 各形态指标间相关性

在大麦种子萌发期测定干旱胁迫处理下和对照条件下各形态指标，为降低大麦材料间的遗传背景差异，试验采取抗旱系数进行数据处理，并对各形态指标进行相关性分析。这9项形态指标间均存在显著或极显著的相关性。表1

表1 各形态指标间相关性数列矩阵
Table 1 The correlation series matrix between the morphological index

相关系数Correlationcoefficient发芽势GP发芽率GR最大胚根长RL胚芽长GL胚芽鞘长GSL胚根干重RDW胚芽干重GDW根冠比RSR物质转运速率MTRGP100059∗∗027∗∗031∗∗028∗∗027∗∗037∗∗-010034∗∗GR059∗∗100023∗030∗∗027∗∗042∗∗031∗∗012038∗∗RL027∗∗023∗100061∗∗064∗∗068∗∗053∗∗021∗065∗∗GL031∗∗030∗∗061∗∗100073∗∗056∗∗077∗∗-020∗076∗∗GSL028∗∗027∗∗064∗∗073∗∗100044∗∗057∗∗-014056∗∗RDW027∗∗042∗∗068∗∗056∗∗044∗∗100060∗∗047∗∗083∗∗GDW037∗∗031∗∗053∗∗077∗∗057∗∗060∗∗100-032∗∗085∗∗RSR-010012021∗-020∗-014047∗∗-032∗∗100005MTR034∗∗038∗∗065∗∗076∗∗056∗∗083∗∗085∗∗005100

2.1.2 因子分析

研究表明，以0.9作为主因子的特征值累积比例的临界值，从表2可以看出主因子数M=5，这时5个主因子所包含的信息量占总体信息量的93.75%，几乎含盖了全部信息量，相应得到的因子载荷矩阵(方差极大正交旋转结果)。

因子1是由胚芽长、胚根干重、胚芽干重、物质转运速率所决定；因子2由根冠比决定；因子3由发芽势决定；因子4由胚根长决定；因子5由发芽率决定。对这5个主成分进行相关结构分析，对各指标的方差贡献率分别为GP(97.76%)、GR(96.82%)、RL(88.71%)、GL (85.46%)、GSL (93.33%)、RDW (95.51%)、GDW (95.20%)、RSR (95.87%)、(95.08%)。因这5个主成分对各指标的方差贡献率均高于85%，可以推测发芽势、发芽率、胚根长、胚芽长、胚芽鞘长、胚根干重、胚芽干重、根冠比、物质转运速率等均可作为大麦种子萌发期重要的抗旱性鉴定指标。根据各主因子所包含信息量情况，可将胚芽长、胚根干重、胚芽干重、物质转运速率等划为抗旱性主要鉴定指标；根冠比、发芽势、胚根长、发芽率等为重要指标。表2，表3

表2 因子分析特征值
Table 2 Characteristic value of factor analysis

No特征值Eigenvalue百分率Variancecontribution(%)累计百分率Accumulativevariancecontribution(%)1465615173475173472151031678156851623121861353958205574063117011789067450421546828937502602397266309641327018922102498515580070207797992953900634070471000000

2.2 抗旱性评价

2.2.1 隶属函数法综合评价

作物抗旱性不仅是由多种基因共同控制的复杂的综合性状，又是在生存环境中受各种因素影响。研究通常会对各指标进行综合分析，来作为判断作物抗旱性强弱的依据。试验采用模糊隶属函数法对101份大麦材料抗旱性综合评价，同时赋予不同指标权重，101份大麦材料不同指标的抗旱系数及加权平均隶属函数值按大小顺序排列。表4

根据下列标准分抗旱级别(Drought resistance level，DRL)：

1级-极强，隶属函数值在0.8以上；

2级-强，隶属函数值在0.6～0.8；

3级-中等，隶属函数值在0.4～0.6；

4级-弱，隶属函数值在0.2～0.4；

5级-极弱，隶属函数值在0.2以下。

研究表明，筛选到2个抗旱性极强的品种(Z027S078T和新引D7)、7个抗旱性强的品种(新引D9、新啤2号、新啤1号、P09-9、吉啤2号、Z182U038V和Poland)、41个中等抗旱性品种、49个抗旱性弱的品种及2个抗旱性极弱的品种(垦啤6号、贝赖勒斯)。表4

表3 因子载荷矩阵
Table 3 The matrix of factor loading

因子1因子2因子3因子4因子5X101626-00674091300119703141X20193201210032790103708933X304388036730251706926-01287X406644-01647005220599001564X502888-00952004810901401612X60731905601009890251001814X708794-02541016710279200904X8-0074309691-00732-0053700768X90901901332013230289801352

注：X1-发芽势；X2-发芽率；X3-胚根长；X4-胚芽长；X5-胚芽鞘长；X6-胚根干重；X7-胚芽干重；X8-根冠比；X9-物质转运速率

Note:X1 - germination potential;X2 - germination percentage,X3 - radicle length;X4 - germ length;X5 - germ scabbard length;X6 - radicle dry weight;X7 - plumule dry weight;X8 - root-shoot ratio;X9 - material transfer rate

表4 101份大麦材料各指标抗旱系数的加权隶属函数值
Table 4 The weighted membership function of drought resistance coefficient of 101 barley material

材料名称加权隶属函数值材料名称加权隶属函数值材料名称加权隶属函数值Z027S078T0．8558新引D504322甘啤2号03551新引D708214甘啤3号04317豫大麦2号03515新引D907713塔城二棱04233XANAOU03511新啤2号07621Fornualu04209Q/D00603496新啤1号07242XANADU0420391-24303478P09-906863冀农065604189PRESTIGE03463吉啤2号06530Abee04164Bank03460Z182U038V06468SumDson04161Sampson03410Poland06017Z090M060M04149Tevcel03407CONRAD05813PAINE04137苏鉴4403370Baronesse05640Empress041132007C/11103336Crystal05503Z039P046Q04093SD96-403264Tremois05399Klages04058P10-103256CDCKendall05244苏啤4号04052Jeresey03253CDCUnity05197CEYLOW04048Barke03218MERIT05166Stirling04026蒙黑二棱03148来色衣04940Seebe03968Alexis03078HARRINGTON04914Cork03953CDCRinty03037Z109M050M04912韭奇10号03896NEVADA02944GRAPHIC04895Z028S039T03869西安91-202939石引2号04862Madras03863驻大麦3号02927TRADITION04808Morrison03858甘木二棱02844C-704799CDCStratus03844CDCThompson02799CDCManley04792Z040S010T03844法瓦维特02755SD97-504665Z180U055V03829Logan02666JevseH04622甘啤4号03807EF(98)-202664C-1304599Phoenix03784红引1号02554Bonous04569Stein03773P11-602415苏鉴2004516矮杆早03672Steffi02392Cima04397Sullane03668垦啤5号02212CDCFleet04370COLLINS03649甘啤7号02026Z037P017Q-104364京啤1号03619垦啤6号01795苏鉴2104348Q/D00503576贝赖勒斯01758红日啤2号04347矮早三03559

3 讨 论

抗旱性鉴定指标通常分为产量、形态及生理生化指标3类。种子萌发期，种子发芽率、发芽势、发芽指数、活力指数反映植物种子发芽速度、发芽整齐度和幼苗健壮度的趋势，常作为评价种子发芽的指标。试验结果表明，这9项形态指标均可作为大麦种子萌发期重要的抗旱性鉴定指标，这与曹俊梅[24]、张玉梅等[25]研究结果基本一致。根据各主因子所包含信息量情况，可将这9项指标划分为二个层次，与张霞等[9]提出的抗旱性评价体系具有类同之处。

作物抗旱性是由多因素协同作用而形成的复杂性状，并在生境中受各种因素的影响。鉴于作物抗旱机理的复杂性，至今仍没有发现哪一性状可以单独作为作物抗旱性鉴定指标，并且各抗旱性鉴定指标对作物抗旱性的贡献率不同，因此，通常采用对各指标进行综合分析，作为判断作物抗旱性强弱的依据。关于作物抗旱性评价方法，如抗旱系数法[26]、聚类分析法[27]、五级评分法[28]、隶属函数法[29]等被广泛应用于植物抗旱性研究中。各种评价方法各有利弊，目前仍无统一规范，而模糊隶属函数法因其在进行作物抗旱性评价时快速又合理，同时还可以避免单一指标的片面性，而深受广大研究者的青睐。试验运用隶属函数法筛选出2个抗旱性极强的材料(Z027S078T、新引D7)；抗旱性极弱的材料(垦啤6号、贝赖勒斯)。作物抗旱性评价是一个复杂的问题仍需进一步研究，今后应对大麦不同生育期的抗旱性做出深层次系统的研究。

4 结 论

4.1 发芽势、发芽率、胚根长、胚芽长、胚芽鞘长、胚根干重、胚芽干重、根冠比、物质转运速率等均可作为大麦种子萌发期重要的抗旱性鉴定指标。可将胚芽长、胚根干重、胚芽干重、物质转运速率可划为抗旱性主要鉴定指标；根冠比、发芽势、胚根长、发芽率为重要指标。

4.2 运用隶属函数法筛选出Z027S078T、新引D7、新引D9、新啤2号、新啤1号、P09-9、吉啤2号、Z182U038V、Poland等9个抗旱性强的大麦材料，其中Z027S078T及新引D7为抗旱性极强的材料；垦啤6号、贝赖勒斯这2个抗旱性极弱的材料。

References)

[1] Ungar, I. A. (1991). Ecophysiology of vascular halophytes.EcophysiologyofVascularHalophytes.

[3] 辛金霞, 李春燕, 刘荣堂, 等. 一年生黑麦草、高羊茅及杂交羊茅黑麦草种子萌发期抗旱性研究[J]. 湖南农业科学, 2010,(5):121-124.

XIN Jin-xia, LI Chun-yan, LIU Rong-tang, et al. (2010). Drought Resistance of Annual Ryegrass, Tall Fescue and Hybrid Festulolium in Seed Germination Stage [J].HunanAgriculturalSciences, (5):121-124. (in Chinese)

[4] 薛建国, 韩建国, 王显国, 等. NaCl和PEG对华北驼绒藜和梭梭种子萌发的影响[J]. 草地学报, 2008, 16(5):470-474.

XUE Jian-guo, HAN Jian-guo, WANG Xian-guo, et al. (2008). Effects of NaCl and PEG on Seed Germination of Two Xerophytic Species Ceratoides arborescens and Haloxylon ammodendron [J].ActaAgrestiaSinica, 16(5):470-474. (in Chinese)

[5] 孙彩霞, 沈秀瑛. 不同基因型玉米种子萌发特性与芽、苗期抗旱性的关系[J]. 种子, 2001,118(5):32-33.

SUN Cai-xia, SHEN Xiu-ying. (2001). Relationship between Seed Germination and its Drought Resistance of Shoot-seedling in Different Genotype Maize [J].Seed, 118(5):32-33. (in Chinese)

[6] 宋丽华, 刘雯雯, 陈淑芬. PEG处理对臭椿种子萌发的影响[J]. 农业科学研究, 2005,26(4):25-29.

SONG Li-hua, LIU Wen-wen, CHEN Shu-fen. (2005). Effect of PEG on Seed Germination of Ailanthus altissimo[J].JournalofAgriculturalSciences, 26(4):25-29. (in Chinese)

[7] 马闯, 张文辉, 刘新成. 等渗的盐分和水分胁迫对杠柳种子萌发的影响[J]. 植物研究, 2008,28(4):465-470.

MA Chuang , ZHANG Wen-hui, LIU Xin-cheng. (2008). Effects of Iso-osmotic Potential Salt and Water Stress on the Seed Germ ination of Periploca sepium Bge [J].BulletinofBotanicalResearch, 28(4):465-470. (in Chinese)

[8] Bouslama, M., & Schapaugh, W. T. (1984). Stress tolerance in soybeans. i. evaluation of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance.CropScience, 24(5):933-937.

[9] 张霞, 谢小玉. PEG胁迫下甘蓝型油菜种子萌发期抗旱鉴定指标的研究[J]. 西北农业学报, 2012,21(2):72-77.

ZHANG Xia, XIE Xiao-yu. (2012). Studies on Identification Indexes of Drought Resistance by PEG during Seed Germination of Rapeseed (BrassicanapusL.) [J].ActaAgriculturaeBoreali-occidentalisSinica, 21(2):72-77. (in Chinese)

[10] González, A., MartiiN, I., Ayerbe, L., González, A., & MartiiN, I. (1999). Barley yield in water-stress conditions.FieldCropsResearch, 62(1):23-34.

[11] Sinebo, W. (2005). Trade off between yield increase and yield stability in three decades of barley breeding in a tropical highland environment.FieldCropsResearch, 92(1):35-52.

[12] Katerji, N., Mastrorilli, M., Hoorn, J. W. V., Lahmer, F. Z., Hamdy, A., & Oweis, T. (2009). Durum wheat and barley productivity in saline-drought environments.EuropeanJournalofAgronomy, 31(1):1-9.

[13]汪军成,孟亚雄,徐先良,等. 大麦苗期抗旱性鉴定及评价[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2013,31(4):135-143.

WANG Jun-cheng, MENG Ya-xiong, XU Xian-liang, et al. (2013). Identification and assessment on drought-resistance ofHordeumvulgareL. at seedling stage [J].AgriculturalResearchintheAridAreas, 31(4):135-143. (in Chinese)

[14]景蕊莲,昌小平. 用渗透胁迫鉴定小麦种子萌发期抗旱性的方法分析[J]. 植物遗传资源学报,2003,4(4):292-296.

JING Rui-lian, CHANG Xiao-ping. (2003). Methods for Identifying Drought Resistance at Germination Stage of Wheat by Osmotic Stress [J].JournalofPlantGeneticResources, 4(4):292-296. (in Chinese)

[15]许红,刘杨,王威雁,等. 冬小麦种子萌发期抗旱性的基因型差异[J]. 麦类作物学报,2014,34(10):1 426-1 432.

XU Hong, LIU Yang, WANG Wei-yan, et al. (2014). Genotype Difference of Winter Wheat Drought Resistance at Seed Germination Stage [J].JournalofTriticeaeCrops, 34(10):1,426-1,432. (in Chinese)

[16]周国雁,隆文杰,雷涌涛,等. PEG处理下小麦种子萌发期的性状变化与品种抗旱性级别划分[J]. 西南农业学报,2015,28(6):2 348-2 354.

ZHOU Guo-yan, LONG Wen-jie, LEI Yong-tao, et al. (2015). Changes of Traits at Seed Germination Stage and Classification of Drought Resistance of Wheat Varieties under Polyethylene Glycol (PEG) Treat Conditions [J].SouthwestChinaJournalofAgriculturalSciences, 28(6):2,348-2,354. (in Chinese)

[17]冷益丰,张彪,赵久然,等. 转基因玉米种子萌发期抗旱性鉴定[J]. 干旱地区农业研究, 2013,31(1):177-182.

LENG Yi-feng, ZHANG Biao, ZHAO Jiu-ran, et al. (2013). Identification of drought resistance of transgenic maize during seed germination stage [J].AgriculturalResearchintheAridAreas, 31(1):177-182 (in Chinese)

[18]董志强,贾秀领,张丽华,等. 玉米种子萌发期抗旱性鉴定方法及不同杂交种抗旱性比较研究[J]. 华北农学报,2012,27(1):178-183.

DONG Zhi-qiang，JIA Xiu-ling，ZHANG Li-hua，et al. (2012). Study on Methods for Drought Resistance Identification at Seed Germination Stage and Evaluation of Hybrid Seeds in Maize [J].ActaAgriculturaeBoreali-Sinica, 27(1):178-183. (in Chinese)

[19]安永平,强爱玲,张媛媛,等. 渗透胁迫下水稻种子萌发特性及抗旱性鉴定指标研究[J]. 植物遗传资源学报,2006,7(4):421-426.

AN Yong-ping, QIANG Ai-ling, ZHANG Yuan-yuan, et al. (2006). Study on Characteristics of Germination and Drought-resistance Index by Osmotic Stress in Rice [J].JournalofPlantGeneticResources, 7(4):421-426. (in Chinese)

[20]原小燕,符明联,何晓莹. 不同抗旱性油菜种子萌发期抗旱指标比较研究[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2012,30(5):77-81.

YUAN Xiao-yan, FU Ming-lian, HE Xiao-ying.(2012). The comparative study on drought resistance index of rape with different drought resistance in germination [J].AgriculturalResearchintheAridAreas, 30(5):77-81. (in Chinese)

[21]李威,周青平. 六种裸燕麦品种种子萌发期抗旱性的研究[J]. 草业与畜牧,2008,154(9):5-8,10.

LI Wei, ZHOU Qing-ping.(2008). Study on the Drought Resistance of 6 naked oats seeds in the Germination Period [J].Prataculture&AnimalHusbandry, 154(9):5-8,10. (in Chinese)

[22]李培英,孙宗玖,阿不来提. PEG模拟干旱胁迫下29份偃麦草种质种子萌发期抗旱性评价[J]. 中国草地学报,2010,(1):32-39.

LI Pei-ying, SUN Zong-jiu, Abulaiti. (2010). Evaluation of Drought Resistance of 29 Accessions of Elytrigria repensat Seed Germination Stage under PEG-6000 Stress[J].ChineseJournalofGrassland, 32(1):32-39. (in Chinese)

[23] 鞠乐,齐军仓,贺雪,等. 大麦种子萌发期对渗透胁迫的响应及抗旱性鉴定指标的筛选[J]. 干旱地区农业研究,2013,31(1):172-176.

JU Le, QI Jun-cang, HE Xue, et al. (2013). The response of barley to osmotic stress during germination stage and the screening of drought resistance indicators [J].AgriculturalResearchintheAridAreas, 31(1):172-176. (in Chinese)

[24]曹俊梅,周安定,吴新元,等. 不同基因型冬小麦抗旱性鉴定及相关抗旱指标分析[J]. 新疆农业科学,2011,48(12):2 157-2 164.

CAO Jun-mei, ZHOU An-ding, WU Xin-yuan, et al. (2011). Drought Resistance and Related Indexes Analysis of Different Genotypes Winter Wheat Cultivars [J].XinjiangAgriculturalSciences, 48(12):2,157-2,164. (in Chinese)

[25]张玉梅. 控水条件下小麦不同抗旱性鉴定指标的研究[D].莱阳: 莱阳农学院硕士论文,2006.

ZHANG Yu-mei. (2006).Studiesondrought-resistanceidentificationindexesofdifferentwheatcultivarsunderwatercontrolcondition[D]. Master Dissertation. Laiyang Agricultural University, Laiyang. (in Chinese)

[26]兰巨生, 胡福顺, 张景瑞. 作物抗旱指数的概念和统计方法[J]. 华北农学报, 1990,5(2):20-25.

LAN Ju-sheng, HU Fu-shun, ZHANG Jing-rui. (1990). The Conee Ptand Statistieal Resistanee Index Methodof Drought in Crops [J].ActaAgriculturaeBoreali-Sinica, 5(2):20-25. (in Chinese)

[27]马文广, 崔华威, 李永平, 等. 20个烟草品种干旱胁迫下发芽和苗期生理特性及耐旱性评价[J]. 种子, 2012,31(2):25-30.

MA Wen-guang, CUI Hua-wei, LI Yong-ping, et al. (2012). Physiological Characteristics of 20 Tobacco Cultivars under Drought Stress and Assessment of Their Drought Tolerance at Germination and Seedling Stages [J].Seed, 31(2):25-30. (in Chinese)

[28]赵海明, 孙桂枝, 王学敏, 等. 百脉根种质苗期抗旱性鉴定及综合评价[J]. 草原与草坪, 2011,31(6):18-25.

ZHAO Hai-ming, SUN Gui-zhi, WANG Xue-min, et al. (2011). Comprehensive evaluation and identification of drought resistance ofLotuscorniculatusin seedling stage [J].GrasslandandTurf, 31(6):18-25. (in Chinese)

[29]石永红, 万里强, 刘建宁, 等. 多年生黑麦草抗旱性主成分及隶属函数分析[J]. 草地学报, 2010,18(5):669-672.

SHI Yong-hong, WAN Li-qiang, LIU Jian-ning, et al. (2010). Analysis of the Principal Components and the Subordinate Function of Lolium perenne Drought Resistance [J].ActaAgrestiaSinica, 18(5):669-672. (in Chinese)

Fund project:The earmarked fund for Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System (CARS-05); Science and technology research and development program of Shihezi University "special plan for animal and plant breeding "(gxjs2015-yz02)

Screening Drought Resistance Identification Index and Drought Resistance Evaluation in Barley during Seed Germination Period

JU Le1, 2, QI Jun-cang1, HE Xue1, WANG Dan1, HOU Zhong-qing1, FU Qiang1, XIONG Xian-peng1

(1.College of Agronomy, Shihezi University, Shihezi Xinjiang 832003, China；2.NanyangAcademyofAgriculturalScience，NanyangHenan473000,China)

【Objective】 To study the relationship between morphological indexes and drought resistance during seed germination in barley is to build drought resistance evaluation method.【Method】In the experiment, the nine morphological indexes of barley treated by 20% (W/V) PEG8000 solution as drought stress treatment were determined. The drought resistance identification indexes of barley during seed germination were screened by correlation analysis and factor analysis and the drought resistances of 101 barley cultivars were evaluated by the method of membership function.【Result】There were significant relationships between the 9 morphological indexes and drought resistance of barley during seed germination.【Conclusion】The 9 indexes can be regarded as drought resistance identification index of barley during seed germination. Z027S078T and Xinyin D7 were screened as high drought resistance cultivars, while Ganpi 6 and Beilaileisi were screened as drought sensitive cultivars by the method of membership function.

barley (HordeumvulgareL.); germination period; drought resistance evaluation

10.6048/j.issn.1001-4330.2016.11.006

2016-05-04

现代农业产业技术体系建设专项资金资助(CARS-05)；石河子大学科学技术研究发展计划“动植物育种专项计划”(gxjs2015-yz02)

鞠乐(1987-)，女，河南邓州人，硕士，研究方向为大麦、棉花、谷子遗传育种与栽培，(E-mail)695112004@qq.com

齐军仓(1971-)，男，陕西宝鸡人，教授，博士生导师，研究方向为大麦遗传育种与栽培，(E-mail)shzqjc@qq.com

S512.3

A

1001-4330(2016)11-2008-07