中国水稻科学 ›› 2017, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (2): 175-184.DOI: 10.16819/j.1001-7216.2017.6099
邵在胜1, 穆海蓉1, 赵轶鹏1,3, 贾一磊1, 彭斌1, 杨连新1, 王云霞2,*()
出版日期:
2017-03-20
发布日期:
2017-03-10
通讯作者:
王云霞
基金资助:
Zaisheng SHAO1, Hairong MU1, Yipeng ZHAO1,3, Yilei JIA1, Bin PENG1, Lianxin YANG1, Yunxia WANG2,*()
Online:
2017-03-20
Published:
2017-03-10
Contact:
Yunxia WANG
摘要:
【目的】 研究臭氧胁迫下不同敏感型水稻叶片表观响应特征,为耐性水稻品种的选育提供参考。【方法】 利用自然光气体熏蒸平台,以23个水稻品种或株系为供试材料,臭氧设置室内对照(10 nL/L)和高臭氧浓度(100 nL/L)两个处理。采用组内最小平方和动态聚类方法,根据供试材料地上部最终生物量对高浓度臭氧的响应从小到大依次分为A、B和C 3个类别,研究臭氧胁迫下不同敏感类型水稻叶片伤害指数(LBS)特别是顶3叶叶色值(SPAD值,土壤、作物分析仪器开发)的动态响应及其与最终生长量变化的关系。【结果】 臭氧胁迫使A、B和C 3类水稻成熟期地上部生物量平均分别下降19%、39%和52%,后两者降幅达极显著水平。臭氧处理水稻的LBS随生育期推移呈明显的增加趋势,但不同敏感类型水稻间均无显著差异,各测定时期表现一致。与对照相比,臭氧胁迫使不同测定时期的叶片SPAD值显著下降,降幅随熏蒸时间延长和叶位下移明显增加。全生育期平均,臭氧胁迫使所有供试材料倒1叶、倒2叶和倒3叶SPAD值分别下降11%、18%和30%,均达极显著水平。与此不同,臭氧胁迫对叶片SPAD值的影响不同水稻类型间无显著差异,不同测定时期趋势相同。相关分析表明,尽管臭氧胁迫水稻成熟期地上部生物量的响应与部分测定时期LBS存在一定的相关性,但其与所有测定时期叶片SPAD值变化的相关性均不显著,不同叶位趋势一致。【结论】在本研究条件下,臭氧熏蒸叶片的伤害指数和SPAD值的响应均不宜作为水稻生长对臭氧耐性程度的评价指标。
中图分类号:
邵在胜, 穆海蓉, 赵轶鹏, 贾一磊, 彭斌, 杨连新, 王云霞. 臭氧胁迫对不同敏感型水稻叶片伤害的比较研究[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2017, 31(2): 175-184.
Zaisheng SHAO, Hairong MU, Yipeng ZHAO, Yilei JIA, Bin PENG, Lianxin YANG, Yunxia WANG. A Comparative Study of Ozone-induced Leaf Injury of Rice with Different Ozone Sensitivity[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2017, 31(2): 175-184.
处理 Treatment | 臭氧浓度 Ozone concentration / (nL·L-1) | 温度 Temperature /℃ | 湿度 Relative humidity /% | 光照 Illumination /klx | 大气压力 Atmosphere pressure /kPa |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ambient | 67.7 | 32.1 | 65.9 | 28.0 | 99.5 |
C-O3 | 10.4±2.32 | 32.2±0.04 | 69.0±0.46 | 26.8±2.79 | 99.4±0.17 |
E-O3 | 100.1±0.06 | 32.2±0.04 | 69.3±0.05 | 29.0±1.19 | 99.3±0.17 |
表1 臭氧熏蒸期间自然光气体熏蒸平台的控制情况(9:00-17:00)
Table 1 The performance of greenhouse-type gas fumigation platforms during the period of ozone fumigation(9:00-17:00).
处理 Treatment | 臭氧浓度 Ozone concentration / (nL·L-1) | 温度 Temperature /℃ | 湿度 Relative humidity /% | 光照 Illumination /klx | 大气压力 Atmosphere pressure /kPa |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ambient | 67.7 | 32.1 | 65.9 | 28.0 | 99.5 |
C-O3 | 10.4±2.32 | 32.2±0.04 | 69.0±0.46 | 26.8±2.79 | 99.4±0.17 |
E-O3 | 100.1±0.06 | 32.2±0.04 | 69.3±0.05 | 29.0±1.19 | 99.3±0.17 |
类型 Type | 最小值 Min/ % | 最大值 Max/ % | 平均数 Mean±SE/% | F值 F-value | 显著性水平Significance level | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.05 | 0.01 | |||||
A(n=18) | -6.4 | -24.9 | -19.2±6.0 | 5.0 | a | A |
B(n=78) | -31.7 | -44.2 | -38.5±1.1 | 82.0 | b | B |
C(n=42) | -47.0 | -63.3 | -51.8±2.0 | 61.3 | c | C |
表2 不同类型水稻地上部生物量对臭氧胁迫响应的统计分析
Table 2 Statistical analysis of ozone-induced changes in the above-ground biomass of different types of rice.
类型 Type | 最小值 Min/ % | 最大值 Max/ % | 平均数 Mean±SE/% | F值 F-value | 显著性水平Significance level | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
0.05 | 0.01 | |||||
A(n=18) | -6.4 | -24.9 | -19.2±6.0 | 5.0 | a | A |
B(n=78) | -31.7 | -44.2 | -38.5±1.1 | 82.0 | b | B |
C(n=42) | -47.0 | -63.3 | -51.8±2.0 | 61.3 | c | C |
图5 臭氧胁迫对不同类型水稻各测定时期倒1叶SPAD值的影响
Fig. 5. Effects of ozone stress on SPAD value of the first leaf from the top of different types of rice at different testing stages.
图6 臭氧胁迫对不同类型水稻各测定时期倒2叶SPAD值的影响
Fig. 6. Effects of ozone stress on SPAD value of the second leaf from the top of different types of rice at different testing stages.
图7 臭氧胁迫对不同类型水稻各测定时期倒3叶SPAD值的影响
Fig. 7. Effects of ozone stress on SPAD value of the third leaf from the top of different types of rice at different testing stages.
时期 Stage | O3 | 类型 Type(T) | 叶位 Leaf position(LP) | O3×T | O3×LP | O3×T×LP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
移栽后23 d DAT23 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.479 | <0.01 | 0.827 |
移栽后53 d DAT53 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.017 | <0.01 | 0.949 |
移栽后67 d DAT67 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.101 | <0.01 | 0.989 |
移栽后81 d DAT81 | <0.01 | 0.769 | <0.01 | 0.064 | <0.01 | 0.673 |
全生育期平均 Mean | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.098 | <0.01 | 0.890 |
表3 不同类型水稻顶3叶SPAD均值对臭氧胁迫响应的显著性检验(P值)
Table 3 Analysis of variance for ozone-induced changes in mean SPAD value of three leaves from the top of different types of rice (P value).
时期 Stage | O3 | 类型 Type(T) | 叶位 Leaf position(LP) | O3×T | O3×LP | O3×T×LP |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
移栽后23 d DAT23 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.479 | <0.01 | 0.827 |
移栽后53 d DAT53 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.017 | <0.01 | 0.949 |
移栽后67 d DAT67 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.101 | <0.01 | 0.989 |
移栽后81 d DAT81 | <0.01 | 0.769 | <0.01 | 0.064 | <0.01 | 0.673 |
全生育期平均 Mean | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.098 | <0.01 | 0.890 |
指标 Index | DAT10 | DAT12 | DAT19 | DAT27 | DAT41 | DAT59 | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
r | 0.293 | 0.293 | 0.420 | 0.513 | 0.354 | 0.474 | 0.450 |
P-value | 0.175 | 0.174 | 0.046 | 0.012 | 0.097 | 0.022 | 0.031 |
表4 水稻不同生长期LBS与地上部最终生物量对臭氧胁迫响应的相关分析
Table 4 Correlation analysis of rice LBS at different growth stages and ozone-induced changes in above-ground part biomass.
指标 Index | DAT10 | DAT12 | DAT19 | DAT27 | DAT41 | DAT59 | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
r | 0.293 | 0.293 | 0.420 | 0.513 | 0.354 | 0.474 | 0.450 |
P-value | 0.175 | 0.174 | 0.046 | 0.012 | 0.097 | 0.022 | 0.031 |
叶位 Leaf position | 指标 Index | DAT23 | DAT53 | DAT67 | DAT81 | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
倒1叶 First leaf from the top of rice | r | 0.263 | 0.253 | 0.146 | 0.116 | 0.270 |
P-value | 0.225 | 0.244 | 0.507 | 0.597 | 0.212 | |
倒2叶 Second leaf from the top of rice | r | 0.090 | 0.091 | 0.202 | -0.045 | 0.112 |
P-value | 0.682 | 0.678 | 0.354 | 0.837 | 0.612 | |
倒3叶 Third leaf from the top of rice | r | -0.040 | 0.130 | 0.057 | 0.009 | 0.078 |
P-value | 0.856 | 0.555 | 0.798 | 0.966 | 0.725 |
表5 水稻不同生长期叶片SPAD值对臭氧胁迫的响应与地上部最终生物量响应的相关分析
Table 5 Correlation analysis of ozone-induced changes in rice leaf SPAD value at different growth stages and final above-ground part biomass.
叶位 Leaf position | 指标 Index | DAT23 | DAT53 | DAT67 | DAT81 | Mean |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
倒1叶 First leaf from the top of rice | r | 0.263 | 0.253 | 0.146 | 0.116 | 0.270 |
P-value | 0.225 | 0.244 | 0.507 | 0.597 | 0.212 | |
倒2叶 Second leaf from the top of rice | r | 0.090 | 0.091 | 0.202 | -0.045 | 0.112 |
P-value | 0.682 | 0.678 | 0.354 | 0.837 | 0.612 | |
倒3叶 Third leaf from the top of rice | r | -0.040 | 0.130 | 0.057 | 0.009 | 0.078 |
P-value | 0.856 | 0.555 | 0.798 | 0.966 | 0.725 |
[1] | Fiscus E L, Booker F L, Burkey K O.Crop responses to ozone: Uptake, modes of action, carbon assimilation and partitioning.Plant Cell Environ, 2005, 28: 997-1011. |
[2] | Yamaji K, Ohara T, Uno I, Kurokawa J, Pochanart P, Akimoto H.Future prediction of surface ozone over east Asia using Models-3 Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System and Regional Emission Inventory in Asia.J Geophys Res, 2008, 113(D8): D08306. |
[3] | Cooper O R, Parrish D D, Stohl A, Trainer M, Nédélec P, Thouret V, Cammas J P, Oltmans S J, Johnson B J, Tarasick D, Leblanc T, McDermid I S, Jaffe D, Gao R, Stith J, Ryerson T, Aikin K, Campos T, Weinheimer A, Avery M A. Increasing springtime ozone mixing ratios in the free troposphere over western North America.Nature, 2010, 463(7279): 344-348. |
[4] | IRRI. Rice Almanac: Source Book for the Most Important Economic Activity on Earth. 3rd. Oxford: CABI Publishing, 2002. |
[5] | Feng Z W, Jin M H, Zhang F Z, Huang Y Z.Effects of ground-level ozone(O3)pollution on the yields of rice and winter wheat in Yangtze River delta.J Environ Sci-China, 2003, 15: 360-362. |
[6] | Pang J, Kobayashi K, Zhu J G.Yield and photosynthetic characteristics of flag leaves in Chinese rice(Oryza sativa L.) varieties subjected to free-air release of ozone. Agr Ecosyst Environ, 2009, 132: 203-211 |
[7] | 彭斌, 李潘林, 周楠, 赖上坤, 朱建国, 杨连新, 王余龙. 不同秧苗素质和移栽密度条件下臭氧胁迫对水稻光合作用、物质生产和产量的影响. 生态学报, 2013, 33( 12) : 3668-3675. |
Peng B, Li P L, Zhou N, Lai S K, Zhu J G, Yang L X, Wang Y L.Effects of ozone stress on photosynthesis, dry matter production and yield of rice under different seedling quality and plant density.Acta Ecol Sin, 2013, 33(12): 3668-3675. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[8] | 彭斌, 赖上坤, 李潘林, 王云霞, 朱建国, 杨连新, 王余龙. 不同密度下臭氧胁迫对 Ⅱ 优 084 水稻光合作用和物质生产的影响——FACE 研究. 应用生态学报, 2015, 26(1): 17-24. |
Peng B, Lai S K, Li P L, Wang Y X, Zhu J G, Yang L X, Wang Y L.Effects of ozone stress on photosynthesis and dry matter production of rice Ⅱ-you 084 under different planting densities. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2015, 26(1): 17-24. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[9] | 金明红, 冯宗炜, 张福珠. 臭氧对水稻叶片膜脂过氧化和抗氧化系统的影响. 环境科学, 2000, 21(3): 1-5. |
Jin M H, Feng Z W, Zhang F Z.Effects of ozone on membrane lipid peroxidation and antioxidantsystem of rice leaves.Chin J Envir Sci, 2000, 03: 1-5. (in Chinese with English abstract)) | |
[10] | 黄益宗, 隋立华. 臭氧污染胁迫下植物的抗氧化系统调节机制. 生态毒理学报, 2013, 04: 456-464. |
Huang Y Z, Sui L H.Antioxidant mechanism of plants under ozone stress.Asian J Ecotoxicol, 2013, 04: 456-464. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[11] | Frei M.Breeding of ozone resistant rice: Relevance, approaches and challenges.Environ Pollut, 2015, 197: 144-155. |
[12] | 杨连新, 王余龙, 石广跃, 王云霞, 朱建国, Kobayashi K, 赖上坤. 近地层高臭氧浓度对水稻生长发育影响研究进展. 应用生态学报, 2008, 19(4): 901-910. |
Yang L X, Wang Y L, Shi G Y, WangY X, Zhu J G, Kobayashi K, Lai S K. Responses of rice growth and development to elevated near-surface layer ozone (O3) concentration: a review.Chin J Appl Ecol, 2008, 19(4): 901-910. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[13] | Kobayashi K, Okada M, Nouchi I.Effects of ozone on dry matter partitioning and yield of Japanese cultivars of rice (Oryza sativa L.).Agr Ecosyst Environ, 1995, 53(2): 109-122. |
[14] | Pandey A K, Majumder B, Keski-Saari S, Kontunen-Soppela S, Mishra A, Sahu N, Pandey V, Oksanen E.Searching for common responsive parameters for ozone tolerance in 18 rice cultivars in India: Results from ethylenediurea studies.Sci Total Environ, 2015, 532: 230-238. |
[15] | Hur J S, Kim P G, Yun S C, Park E W.Indicative responses of rice plant to atmospheric ozone.Plant Pathol J, 2000, 16(3): 130-136. |
[16] | Sagar V K, William J M.Atmospheric ozone: Formation and effects on vegetation.Environ Pollut, 1988, 50(1-2): 101-137. |
[17] | Wissuwa M, Ismail A M, Yanagihara S.Effects of zinc deficiency onrice growth and genetic factors contributing to tolerance.Plant Physiol, 2006, 142(2): 731-741. |
[18] | Frei M, Tanaka J P, Wissuwa M.Genotypic variationin tolerance to elevated ozone in rice: dissection of distinct genetic factors linked to tolerance mechanisms. J Exp Bot, 2008, 59(13): 3741-3752. |
[19] | Sawadw H, Kohno Y.Differential ozone sensitivity of rice cultivars as indicatedby visible injury and grain yield.Plant Biol, 2009, 1435-8603. |
[20] | Picchi V, Iriti M, Quaroni S, Saracchi M, Viola P, Faoro F.Climate variations and phenological stages modulate ozone damages in field-grown wheat. A three-year study with eight modern cultivars in Po Valley (Northern Italy).Agr Ecosyst Environ, 2010, 135(4): 310-317. |
[21] | Olszyk D M,Wise C.Interactive effects of elevated CO2 and O3 on rice and flacca tomato.Agr Ecosyst Environ, 1997, 66(1): 1-10. |
[22] | Phothi R, Umponstira C, Sarin C, Siriwong W, Nabheerong N.Combining effects of ozone and carbon dioxide application on photosynthesis of Thai jasmine rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivar Khao Dawk Mali 105. Aust J Crop Sci, 2016, 10(4): 591-597. |
[23] | Sawada H, Komatsu S, Nanjo Y, Khan N A, Kohno Y.Proteomic analysis of rice response involved in reduction of grain yield under elevated ozone stress.Environ Exp Bot, 2012, 77: 108-116. |
[24] | 赵轶鹏, 邵在胜, 宋琪玲, 赖上坤, 周娟, 王云霞, 秦超, 杨连新, 王余龙. 一种新型自然光气体熏蒸平台: 系统结构与控制精度. 农业环境科学学报, 2012, 31(11): 2082-2093. |
Zhao Y P, Shao Z S, Song Q L, Lai S K, Zhou J, Wang Y X, Qin C, Yang L X, Wang Y L.System structure and control accuracy of a solar-illuminated gas fumigation platform. J Agro-Environ Sci, 2012, 31(11): 2082-2093. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[25] | Wang Y X, Yang L X, Meike H, Shao Z S, Pariasca-Tanaka J, Wissuwa M, Frei M.Pyramiding of ozone tolerance QTLsOzT8 and OzT9 confers improved tolerance to season-long ozone exposure in rice. Environ Exp Bot, 2014, 104: 26-33. |
[26] | 顾世梁, 莫惠栋. 动态聚类的一种新方法一最小组里平方和法. 江苏农学院学报, 1989, 10(4): 1-8. |
Gu S L, Mo H D.A new dynamic clustering method- MinSSw mehtod.J Jiangsu Agric Coll, 1989, 10(4): 1-8. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[27] | Ainsworth E A.Rice production in a changing climate: A meta-analysis of responses to elevated carbon dioxide and elevated ozone concentration.Glob Change Biol, 2008, 14: 1642-1650. |
[28] | Ueda Y, Siddique S, Frei M.A novel gene OsORAP1 enhances cell death inozone stress in rice (Oryza sativa L.).Plant Physiol, 2016, 169: 873-889. |
[29] | Tausz M, Grulke N E, Wieser G.Defense and avoidance of ozone under global change.Environ Pollut, 2007, 147(3): 525-531. |
[30] | Nouchi I, Ito O, Harazono Y, Kobayashi K.Effects of chronic ozone exposure on growth, root respiration and nutrient uptake of rice plants.Environ Pollut, 1991, 74(2): 149-164. |
[31] | Shi G Y, Yang L X, Wang Y X, Kobayashi K, Zhu J G, Tang H Y, Pan S T, Chen T, Liu G, Wang Y L.Impact of elevated ozone concentration on yield of four Chinese rice cultivars under fully open-air field conditions.Agr Ecosyst Environ, 2009, 131(3): 178-184. |
[32] | 邵在胜, 沈士博, 贾一磊, 穆海蓉, 王云霞, 杨连新, 王余龙. 臭氧浓度增加对不同敏感型水稻元素吸收与分配的影响. 农业环境科学学报, 2016, 35(9): 1642-1652. |
Shao Z S, Shen S B, Jia Y L, Mu H R, Wang Y X, Yang L X, Wang Y L.Impact of Ozone Stress on Element Absorption and Distribution of Rice Genotypes with Different Ozone Sensitivity.J Agro-Environ Sci, 2016, 35(9): 1642-1652. (in Chinese with English abstract) | |
[33] | 邵在胜, 沈士博, 贾一磊, 穆海蓉, 王云霞, 杨连新, 王余龙. 臭氧胁迫对不同敏感型水稻生长和产量形成的影响. 中国农业科学, 2016, 17: 3319-3331. |
Shao Z S, Shen S B, Jia Y L, Mu H R, Wang Y X, Yang L X, Wang Y L.Impact of ozone stress on growth and yield formation of rice genotypes with different ozone sensitivity.Sci Agric Sin, 2016 17: 3319-3331. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[1] | 任志奇, 薛可欣, 董铮, 李小湘, 黎用朝, 郭玉静, 刘文强, 郭梁, 盛新年, 刘之熙, 潘孝武. 水稻外卷叶突变体ocl1的鉴定及基因定位[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 337-346. |
[2] | 肖乐铨, 李雷, 戴伟民, 强胜, 宋小玲. 转cry2A*/bar基因水稻与杂草稻杂交后代的苗期生长特性[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 347-358. |
[3] | 李刚, 高清松, 李伟, 张雯霞, 王健, 程保山, 王迪, 高浩, 徐卫军, 陈红旗, 纪剑辉. 定向敲除SD1基因提高水稻的抗倒性和稻瘟病抗性[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 359-367. |
[4] | 汪胜勇, 陈宇航, 陈会丽, 黄钰杰, 张啸天, 丁双成, 王宏伟. 水稻减数分裂期高温对苯丙烷类代谢及下游分支代谢途径的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 368-378. |
[5] | 董立强, 杨铁鑫, 李睿, 商文奇, 马亮, 李跃东, 隋国民. 株行距配置对超高产田水稻产量及根系形态生理特性的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 392-404. |
[6] | 韩聪, 何禹畅, 吴丽娟, 郏丽丽, 王磊, 鄂志国. 水稻碱性亮氨酸拉链(bZIP)蛋白家族功能研究进展[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(4): 436-448. |
[7] | 沈雨民, 陈明亮, 熊焕金, 熊文涛, 吴小燕, 肖叶青. 水稻内外稃异常发育突变体blg1 (beak like grain 1)的表型分析与精细定位[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 225-232. |
[8] | 段敏, 谢留杰, 高秀莹, 唐海娟, 黄善军, 潘晓飚. 利用CRISPR/Cas9技术创制广亲和水稻温敏雄性不育系[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 233-243. |
[9] | 程玲, 黄福钢, 邱一埔, 王心怡, 舒宛, 邱永福, 李发活. 籼稻材料570011抗褐飞虱基因的遗传分析及鉴定[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 244-252. |
[10] | 王文婷, 马佳颖, 李光彦, 符卫蒙, 李沪波, 林洁, 陈婷婷, 奉保华, 陶龙兴, 符冠富, 秦叶波. 高温下不同施肥量对水稻产量品质形成的影响及其与能量代谢的关系分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 253-264. |
[11] | 刘嫒桦, 李小坤. 不同肥料施用与稻米品质关系的整合分析[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 276-284. |
[12] | 杨晓龙, 王彪, 汪本福, 张枝盛, 张作林, 杨蓝天, 程建平, 李阳. 不同水分管理方式对旱直播水稻产量和稻米品质的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 285-294. |
[13] | 魏晓东, 宋雪梅, 赵凌, 赵庆勇, 陈涛, 路凯, 朱镇, 黄胜东, 王才林, 张亚东. 硅锌肥及其施用方式对南粳46产量和稻米品质的影响[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 295-306. |
[14] | 林聃, 江敏, 苗波, 郭萌, 石春林. 水稻高温热害模型研究及其在福建省的应用[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 307-320. |
[15] | 郑承梅, 孙金秋, 刘梦杰, 杨永杰, 陆永良, 郭怡卿, 唐伟. 水稻田糠稷种子萌发和出苗特性及化学防除药剂筛选[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2023, 37(3): 321-328. |
阅读次数 | ||||||
全文 |
|
|||||
摘要 |
|
|||||