Gradient Quantitative Evaluation of Water Saving and Drought Resistance Characteristics of Hybrid Rice Combinations

doi:10.11923/j.issn.2095-4050.cjas2021-0025

Abstract

Abstract:

To accurately evaluate the water-saving and drought-resistant trait of hybrid rice, study the expression pattern of this trait under the condition of quantitative water control treatment, and establish the quantitative evaluation technology system, four gradient quantitative water control trials were designed, including 100%, 80%, 60% and 40% field capacity. Ten hybrid rice combinations were treated under the four gradients from returning green stage after transplanting to mature stage. The results showed that there were significant differences on absolute water content in soil among the four gradient treatments. Different combinations had significant differences on grain yield per plant with 80% field capacity and 60% field capacity. There were also significant differences on yield drought resistant index and water use efficiency among the gradients. These single indexes were difficult to be directly used for the variety comparison with drought resistance as the distinguishing feature, and without giving consideration to the water use efficiency. Through the construction and calculation analysis of logarithm comprehensive index of drought resistant index with multiple gradients and multiple traits, the overall unified quantitative evaluation index of water-saving and drought-resistant trait was formed. The evaluation results of 10 combinations by the new indexes were consistent with the field observation results on drought resistance. The gradient quantitative evaluation technology system of water-saving and drought-resistant trait of hybrid rice and the logarithm comprehensive index of three drought-resistant indexes with multiple gradients and multiple traits established by the study have the better evaluation effect, and are suitable for accurate evaluation of water-saving and drought-resistant trait of hybrid rice.

Key words: Oryza sativa, Water Saving and Drought Resistance, Water Use Efficiency, Quantitative Evaluation, Complex Evaluation Index

CLC Number:

S511

Kang Haiqi, Pan Yinghua, Sun Xiaowen, Han Youxue, Gao Lijun, Cao Yan, Gao Ju, Kang Jiarong, Li Xingyue, Zhang Hong. Gradient Quantitative Evaluation of Water Saving and Drought Resistance Characteristics of Hybrid Rice Combinations[J]. Journal of Agriculture, 2021, 11(10): 1-8.

Figures/Tables 8

References 20

[1]	Belder P, Spiertz J H J, Bouman B A M, et al. Nitrogen economy and water productivity of lowland rice under water-saving irrigation[J]. Field Crops Research, 2005, 93(2):169-185. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2004.09.022 URL
[2]	朱士江, 王忠波, 张忠学, 等. 寒地水稻覆膜灌溉耗水规律及水分生产效率试验研究[J]. 灌溉排水学报, 2011, 30(6):97-99.
[3]	聂晓, 王毅勇, 刘兴土, 等. 控制灌溉下三江平原稻田耗水量和水分利用效率研究[J]. 农业系统科学与综合研究, 2011, 27(2):228-232.
[4]	张鸿, 姜心禄, 郑家国. 四川丘陵季节性干旱区水稻田间耗水量研究[J]. 杂交水稻, 2012, 27(1):71-74.
[5]	罗利军, 梅捍卫, 余新桥, 等. 节水抗旱稻及其发展策略[J]. 科学通报, 2011, 56(11):804-811.
[6]	栗雨勤, 张文英, 王有增, 等. 作物抗旱性鉴定指标研究及进展[J]. 河北农业科学, 2004, 8(1):58-61.
[7]	兰巨生, 胡福顺. 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.
[8]	胡标林, 余守武, 万勇, 等. 东乡普通野生稻全生育期抗旱性鉴定[J]. 作物学报, 2007, 33(3):425-432.
[9]	高吉寅, 胡荣海, 路漳, 等. 水稻等品种苗期抗旱生理指标的探讨[J]. 中国农业科学, 1984, 4(1):41-45.
[10]	王贺正, 马均, 李旭毅, 等. 水分胁迫对水稻结实期一些生理性状的影响[J]. 作物学报, 2006, 31(11):1485-1489.
[11]	严明建, 黄文章, 胡景涛, 等. 应用隶属函数法鉴定水稻的抗旱性[J]. 杂交水稻, 2009, 24(5):76-79.
[12]	聂元元, 邹桂花, 李瑶, 等. 水稻第2染色体上抗旱相关性状QTL的精细定位[J]. 作物学报, 2012, 38(6):988-995.
[13]	胡继芳, 刘传增, 马波, 等. 耐旱水稻种质资源的筛选初探[J]. 北方水稻, 2011, 41(2):14-16,20.
[14]	郭贵华, 刘海艳, 李刚华, 等. ABA缓解水稻孕穗期干旱胁迫生理特性的分析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2014, 47(22):4380-4391.
[15]	蔡亮. 持续中度水分胁迫对水稻耗水量和产量的影响[J]. 节水灌溉, 2010(10):29-31.
[16]	陈静, 万佳, 高晓玲, 等. 水稻抗旱生理及抗旱相关基因的研究进展[J]. 中国农学通报, 2006, 22(2):56-60.
[17]	饶玉春, 戴志俊, 朱怡彤, 等. 水稻抗干旱胁迫的研究进展[J]. 浙江师范大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 43(4):417-429.
[18]	黄艳玲, 王慧, 方玉, 等. 节水抗旱稻的研究进展[J]. 杂交水稻, 2018, 33(6):1-5.
[19]	王英, 张浩, 马军韬, 等. 水稻抗旱研究进展与展望[J]. 热带作物学报, 2018, 39(5):1038-1043.
[20]	栗雨勤, 张文英, 王有增, 等. 作物抗旱性鉴定指标研究及进展[J]. 河北农业科学, 2004, 8(1):58-61.

梯度处理	GYP/g	PPP	FGP	KGW/g	GWUE/(kg/m³)	BWUE/(kg/m³)
100%田间持水量	11.88^a,A	6.01^a,A	90.24^a,A	26.47^a,A	0.56^a,A	1.01^a,A
80%田间持水量	14.92^a,A	6.36^a,A	95.49^a,A	27.43^a,A	0.59^a,A	1.06^a,A
60%田间持水量	13.8^a,A	5.40^a,A	52.94^c,B	26.85^a,A	0.71^a,A	1.04^a,A
40%田间持水量	0.05^a,B	1.66^b,B	0.74^c,C	1.77^b,B	0.05^b,B	1.06^a,A

梯度处理	GYP/g	PPP	FGP	KGW/g	GWUE/(kg/m³)	BWUE/(kg/m³)
100%田间持水量	11.88^a,A	6.01^a,A	90.24^a,A	26.47^a,A	0.56^a,A	1.01^a,A
80%田间持水量	14.92^a,A	6.36^a,A	95.49^a,A	27.43^a,A	0.59^a,A	1.06^a,A
60%田间持水量	13.8^a,A	5.40^a,A	52.94^c,B	26.85^a,A	0.71^a,A	1.04^a,A
40%田间持水量	0.05^a,B	1.66^b,B	0.74^c,C	1.77^b,B	0.05^b,B	1.06^a,A

组合名称	GYP/g	PPP	FGP	KGW/g	GWUE/(kg/m³)	BWUE/(kg/m³)
皖旱两优232	12.9^a,A	6.4^a,A	76.8^a,A	20.7^a,A	0.54^a,A	1.14^a,A
荃优116	11.3^ab,AB	4.0^b,A	74.7a^b,A	21.0^a,A	0.49^a,A	1.13^a,A
雅优旱禾	11.9^a,AB	5.2^ab,A	70.2^ab,A	22.1^a,A	0.54^a,A	1.16^a,A
雅优57	11.0^ab,AB	4.1^b,A	55.8^ab,A	20.9^a,A	0.48^a,A	1.11^a,A
雅禾518	11.5^a,AB	5.1^ab,A	57.3^ab,A	20.2^a,A	0.51^a,A	1.11^a,A
荃9优86	10.7^ab,AB	4.1^b,A	71.3^ab,A	18.4^a,A	0.50^a,A	1.07^a,A
旱优554	10.1^ab,AB	4.1^b,A	74.4^ab,A	18.9^a,A	0.46^a,A	1.07^a,A
旱优737	7.3^b,B	6.5^a,A	53.3^ab,A	21.7^a,A	0.37^a,A	1.00^a,A
旱优783	9.2^ab,AB	5.4^ab,A	64.5^ab,A	22.3^a,A	0.42^a,A	1.09^a,A
旱优73	10.0^ab,AB	4.9^ab,A	63.0^b,A	21.8^a,A	0.44^a,A	1.06^a,A

组合名称	GYP/g	PPP	FGP	KGW/g	GWUE/(kg/m³)	BWUE/(kg/m³)
皖旱两优232	12.9^a,A	6.4^a,A	76.8^a,A	20.7^a,A	0.54^a,A	1.14^a,A
荃优116	11.3^ab,AB	4.0^b,A	74.7a^b,A	21.0^a,A	0.49^a,A	1.13^a,A
雅优旱禾	11.9^a,AB	5.2^ab,A	70.2^ab,A	22.1^a,A	0.54^a,A	1.16^a,A
雅优57	11.0^ab,AB	4.1^b,A	55.8^ab,A	20.9^a,A	0.48^a,A	1.11^a,A
雅禾518	11.5^a,AB	5.1^ab,A	57.3^ab,A	20.2^a,A	0.51^a,A	1.11^a,A
荃9优86	10.7^ab,AB	4.1^b,A	71.3^ab,A	18.4^a,A	0.50^a,A	1.07^a,A
旱优554	10.1^ab,AB	4.1^b,A	74.4^ab,A	18.9^a,A	0.46^a,A	1.07^a,A
旱优737	7.3^b,B	6.5^a,A	53.3^ab,A	21.7^a,A	0.37^a,A	1.00^a,A
旱优783	9.2^ab,AB	5.4^ab,A	64.5^ab,A	22.3^a,A	0.42^a,A	1.09^a,A
旱优73	10.0^ab,AB	4.9^ab,A	63.0^b,A	21.8^a,A	0.44^a,A	1.06^a,A