Comprehensive Evaluation of Chrysanthemum morifolium Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis and Grey Correlation Degree

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2024-0100

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to explore a simple and feasible comprehensive evaluation method of Chrysanthemum morifolium, and select suitable C. morifolium varieties for cultivation in Zhengzhou, C. morifolium varieties were used as test materials, the comprehensive evaluation of 9 agronomic traits was carried out using grey correlation degree, correlation analysis and principal component analysis. The results showed that 9 agronomic traits of C. morifolium varieties were different, and the coefficient of variation was 6.07%-34.42%. According to the analysis of the gray correlation, the correlation between each agronomic trait and C. morifolium yield was as follows: branch number> flower number> crown width> plant height> fresh weight of single flower> leaf length> flower diameter> leaf width. The results indicated that the number of branches, the number of flowers and the width of crown should be paid attention to in the breeding and introduction of C. morifolium. The results of principal component analysis showed that the first highest score of C. morifolium ‘Wuyuanhuangju’ was consistent with the first highest yield of fresh C. morifolium, and the top four highest scores of principal component analysis were consistent with the top four highest yield of fresh C. morifolium. Therefore, the comprehensive evaluation method based on principal component analysis and grey correlation degree can be effectively evaluated, the selected varieties of C. morifolium ‘Wuyuanhuangju’, C. morifolium ‘Jinsihuangju’, C. morifolium ‘Huaihuang’ and C. morifolium ‘Huaibai’ can be popularized and applied in Zhengzhou and its surrounding areas.

Key words: Chrysanthemum morifolium, agronomic characters, grey correlation analysis, principal components analysis, comprehensive evaluation

LIANG Guan, ZUO Hongjuan, LA Guixiao, LIU Yongkang, CAO Hui, LU Cuihong, ZHAO Zhengwei, ZHANG Xiaoshen. Comprehensive Evaluation of Chrysanthemum morifolium Varieties Based on Principal Component Analysis and Grey Correlation Degree[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2024, 14(12): 40-44.

Figures/Tables 5

References 27

[1]	国家药典委员会. 中华人民共和国药典[S]. 北京: 中国医药科技出版社, 2015:310-311.
[2]	常相伟, 魏丹丹, 陈栋杰, 等. 药用和茶用菊花资源形成源流与发展文化[J]. 中国现代中药, 2019, 21(1):116-123,145.
[3]	程建徽, 吴江. 药(茶)用菊花品种(系)主要农艺性状的灰色关联度分析[J]. 浙江农业学报, 2007, 19(3):229-232.
[4]	蒋琴杰, 王艺光, 房伟民, 等. 叶用型食用菊品种筛选[J]. 核农学报, 2020, 34(1):10-16. doi: 10.11869/j.issn.100-8551.2020.01.0010
[5]	韩霜. 22个菊花品种耐阴指标筛选与综合评价分析[J]. 河北农业大学学报, 2015, 38(6):46-51. doi: 10.13320/j.cnki.jauh.2015.0134
[6]	王旭, 高致明, 张红瑞, 等. 6个药用菊花栽培类型生长势及抗性综合评价[J]. 河南农业大学学报, 2012, 46(2):131-135.
[7]	沈珍, 毛燕, 吴德智, 等. 50个大菊品种形态学性状比较分析[J]. 农业科学与技术, 2016, 17(2):317-322.
[8]	马婉茹, 房伟民, 王海滨, 等. 多头切花菊品种茎、枝特性评价体系构建与品种评价[J]. 中国农业科学, 2019, 52(14):2515-2524. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2019.14.010
[9]	李嘉伟, 李晓宇, 史亚东, 等. 基于田间和花部性状的茶用菊品系高产及适应性评价[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2022, 45(1):37-46.
[10]	许兰杰, 梁慧珍, 余永亮, 等. 菊花种质综合评价体系构建及优异种质筛选[J]. 北方园艺, 2022(12):55-63.
[11]	王青, 戴思兰, 何晶, 等. 灰色关联法和层次分析法在盆栽多头小菊株系选择中的应用[J]. 中国农业科学, 2012, 45(17):3653-3660. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2012.17.024
[12]	聂洧洁, 王晨赫, 马婉茹, 等. 切花小菊品种花枝性状综合评价[J]. 园艺学报, 2021, 48(6):1150-1162. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0599
[13]	赵倩茹, 房伟民, 管志勇, 等. 切花小菊49个品种绿心特性分析和综合评价标准的构建[J]. 园艺学报, 2017, 44(12):2338-2350. doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2017-0403
[14]	葛礼娇, 方馨妍, 张云月, 等. 菊花苗期氮高效品种资源筛选及氮效率评价体系建立[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2021, 44(6):1054-1062.
[15]	李建领, 韩正洲, 池莲锋, 等. 基于色泽和化学成分的野菊花种质资源评价[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2022, 47(19):5217-5223.
[16]	陈乐, 刘引, 陈昌婕, 等. 药用及茶用菊花种质资源农艺性状的遗传多样性分析[J]. 分子植物育种, 2022, 20(15):5172-5188.
[17]	颜鸿远, 刘引, 徐扬, 等. 药用和茶用菊花种质资源的矿质元素分析评价[J]. 中国中药杂志, 2021, 46(2):272-280.
[18]	黄振, 柳志勇, 王顺利, 等. 我国药用菊花品种资源调查与产业现状分析[J]. 中药材, 2020, 43(6):1325-1329.
[19]	盛蒂, 郭亚勤, 王旭东, 等. 七种栽培类型菊花的植物学特征、产量及有效成分比较研究[J]. 中草药, 2006, 37(6):914-917.
[20]	胡小霞, 邓丽娟, 刘睿婷, 等. 基于主成分分析的大蒜药用质量评价[J]. 食品工业科技, 2023, 44(12):293-299.
[21]	丁丁, 郑伶杰, 王红宝, 等. 滨海地区不同茶菊品种农艺性状及有效成分综合评价[J]. 中国农业科技导报, 2023, 25(10):45-53.
[22]	GONG J Y, CHU B Q, GONG L X, et al. Comparison of phenolic compounds and the antioxidant activities of fifteen Chrysanthemum morifolium Ramat cv. 'Hangbaiju' in China[J]. Antioxidants, 2019, 8(8):325.
[23]	CHEN Y, LIU Y, CHEN C J, et al. Analysis on genetic diversity of agronomic traits in Chrysanthemum germplasm for medicinal and tea use[J]. Molecular plant breeding, 2022, 20(15):5172-5188.
[24]	魏常敏, 周文伟, 许卫猛, 等. 基于主成分和灰色关联度分析的鲜食糯玉米组合综合评价[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2020, 48(7):9-13.
[25]	范继征, 石达金, 吕巨智, 等. 基于关联度,主成分和聚类分析的西南区玉米新组合评价[J]. 种子, 2020, 39(1):102-110.
[26]	杨芳, 张成, 乔岩. 陇东旱地冬小麦新品系产量与农艺性状的灰色关联度及主成分分析[J]. 陇东学院学报, 2015, 26(1):4-9.
[27]	左红娟, 曹辉, 王峰, 等. 15个淀粉甘薯主要农艺性状的综合评价[J]. 陕西农业科学, 2024, 70(1):46-51.

品种	株高/cm	冠幅/cm	叶长/cm	叶宽/cm	分枝数/个	花径/cm	单花鲜重/g	花朵数/朵	产量/(kg/hm²)
杭黄菊	74.28	52.56	5.4	4.1	23.5	3.21	1.53	93	11135.40
怀黄菊1号	75.41	55.13	6.2	3.8	25.9	3.25	1.67	106	12728.85
杭白菊	74.23	53.78	4.9	3.5	24.1	3.24	1.61	96	11399.85
怀白菊	76.54	57.61	5.6	3.6	25.3	3.29	1.66	105	12243.45
婺源皇菊	78.84	60.25	6.1	3.9	26.7	3.45	1.78	109	13071.75
贡菊	77.46	55.32	5.5	4.1	24.4	3.20	1.62	94	11374.65
金丝皇菊	76.31	56.15	6.4	4.2	25.1	4.35	1.96	95	12012.45
京菊	74.37	51.56	5.0	3.3	24.6	3.18	1.64	97	11837.10
平均值	75.93	55.30	5.64	3.81	24.95	3.40	1.68	99.38	11975.40
标准差	4.61	8.69	1.5	0.9	3.2	1.17	0.34	16.0	1936.35
变异系数/%	6.07	15.71	26.60	23.62	12.83	34.42	20.24	16.10	16.17

品种	株高/cm	冠幅/cm	叶长/cm	叶宽/cm	分枝数/个	花径/cm	单花鲜重/g	花朵数/朵	产量/(kg/hm²)
杭黄菊	74.28	52.56	5.4	4.1	23.5	3.21	1.53	93	11135.40
怀黄菊1号	75.41	55.13	6.2	3.8	25.9	3.25	1.67	106	12728.85
杭白菊	74.23	53.78	4.9	3.5	24.1	3.24	1.61	96	11399.85
怀白菊	76.54	57.61	5.6	3.6	25.3	3.29	1.66	105	12243.45
婺源皇菊	78.84	60.25	6.1	3.9	26.7	3.45	1.78	109	13071.75
贡菊	77.46	55.32	5.5	4.1	24.4	3.20	1.62	94	11374.65
金丝皇菊	76.31	56.15	6.4	4.2	25.1	4.35	1.96	95	12012.45
京菊	74.37	51.56	5.0	3.3	24.6	3.18	1.64	97	11837.10
平均值	75.93	55.30	5.64	3.81	24.95	3.40	1.68	99.38	11975.40
标准差	4.61	8.69	1.5	0.9	3.2	1.17	0.34	16.0	1936.35
变异系数/%	6.07	15.71	26.60	23.62	12.83	34.42	20.24	16.10	16.17

	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
X₂	0.893^**	1.000
X₃	0.519	0.641	1.000
X₄	0.416	0.299	0.630	1.000
X₅	0.700	0.800^*	0.684	-0.002	1.000
X₆	0.246	0.313	0.654	0.503	0.229	1.000
X₇	0.471	0.527	0.738^*	0.348	0.535	0.922^**	1.000
X₈	0.519	0.714^*	0.450	-0.229	0.899^**	-0.112	0.203	1.000
X₉	0.580	0.723^*	0.660	-0.078	0.984^**	0.186	0.501	0.929^**

	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
X₂	0.893^**	1.000
X₃	0.519	0.641	1.000
X₄	0.416	0.299	0.630	1.000
X₅	0.700	0.800^*	0.684	-0.002	1.000
X₆	0.246	0.313	0.654	0.503	0.229	1.000
X₇	0.471	0.527	0.738^*	0.348	0.535	0.922^**	1.000
X₈	0.519	0.714^*	0.450	-0.229	0.899^**	-0.112	0.203	1.000
X₉	0.580	0.723^*	0.660	-0.078	0.984^**	0.186	0.501	0.929^**

项目	X₁	X₂	X₃	X₄	X₅	X₆	X₇	X₈
关联度	0.8198	0.8421	0.7534	0.6234	0.9225	0.7388	0.8085	0.9178
排序	4	3	6	8	1	7	5	2