Chinese Journal OF Rice Science ›› 2015, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (5): 467-474.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001G7216.2015.05.003
• Orginal Article • Previous Articles Next Articles
Tao CHEN, Hao WU, Ya-dong ZHANG, Zhen ZHU, Qing-yong ZHAO, Li-hui ZHOU, Shu YAO, Ling ZHAO, Xin YU, Chun-fang ZHAO, Cai-lin WANG*()
Received:
2015-01-15
Revised:
2015-05-04
Online:
2015-09-10
Published:
2015-09-10
Contact:
Cai-lin WANG
About author:
*Corresponding author:E-mail:clwang@jaas.ac.cn
陈涛, 吴昊, 张亚东, 朱镇, 赵庆勇, 周丽慧, 姚姝, 赵凌, 于新, 赵春芳, 王才林*()
通讯作者:
王才林
作者简介:
*通讯录作者:E-mail:clwang@jaas.ac.cn
基金资助:
CLC Number:
Tao CHEN, Hao WU, Ya-dong ZHANG, Zhen ZHU, Qing-yong ZHAO, Li-hui ZHOU, Shu YAO, Ling ZHAO, Xin YU, Chun-fang ZHAO, Cai-lin WANG. Improving Resistance to Rice Stripe Disease and Eating Quality of Wuyujing 3 by Pyramiding Stv-bi and Wx-mq[J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2015, 29(5): 467-474.
陈涛, 吴昊, 张亚东, 朱镇, 赵庆勇, 周丽慧, 姚姝, 赵凌, 于新, 赵春芳, 王才林. 聚合Stv-bi和Wx-mq基因改良武育粳3号条纹叶枯病抗性和食味品质[J]. 中国水稻科学, 2015, 29(5): 467-474.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.ricesci.cn/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1001G7216.2015.05.003
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 条纹叶枯病发病率 Occurance of RSD/% | 抗性水平 Resistance level | |
---|---|---|---|
江苏南京 Nanjing,Jiangsu | 江苏盐都 Yandu,Jiangsu | ||
K01 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.20±0.20 | 高抗HR |
K02 | 1.41±0.21 | 1.55±0.30 | 高抗HR |
K03 | 1.15±0.31 | 1.48±0.32 | 高抗HR |
K04 | 0.20±0.00 | 0.41±0.20 | 高抗HR |
K05 | 0.26±0.23 | 0.94±0.23 | 高抗HR |
K06 | 0.26±0.11 | 0.87±0.23 | 高抗HR |
K07 | 2.73±0.50 | 3.74±0.51 | 高抗HR |
K08 | 0.07±0.12 | 0.40±0.20 | 高抗HR |
K09 | 0.88±0.31 | 1.48±0.31 | 高抗HR |
K10 | 0.79±0.39 | 1.28±0.12 | 高抗HR |
武育粳3 WYJ3 | 64.82±0.80 | 68.97±0.41 | 高感HS |
Table 1 Comparison of the resistance to rice stripe disease for improved lines and Wuyujing 3.
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 条纹叶枯病发病率 Occurance of RSD/% | 抗性水平 Resistance level | |
---|---|---|---|
江苏南京 Nanjing,Jiangsu | 江苏盐都 Yandu,Jiangsu | ||
K01 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.20±0.20 | 高抗HR |
K02 | 1.41±0.21 | 1.55±0.30 | 高抗HR |
K03 | 1.15±0.31 | 1.48±0.32 | 高抗HR |
K04 | 0.20±0.00 | 0.41±0.20 | 高抗HR |
K05 | 0.26±0.23 | 0.94±0.23 | 高抗HR |
K06 | 0.26±0.11 | 0.87±0.23 | 高抗HR |
K07 | 2.73±0.50 | 3.74±0.51 | 高抗HR |
K08 | 0.07±0.12 | 0.40±0.20 | 高抗HR |
K09 | 0.88±0.31 | 1.48±0.31 | 高抗HR |
K10 | 0.79±0.39 | 1.28±0.12 | 高抗HR |
武育粳3 WYJ3 | 64.82±0.80 | 68.97±0.41 | 高感HS |
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 株高 PH/cm | 穗长 PL/cm | 单株穗数 PP | 单株实粒数 FGPL | 单株颖花数 SPL | 每穗实粒数 FGPA | 每穗颖花数 SPA | 结实率 SSR/% | 千粒重 TGW/g | 单株产量 GWP/g |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
K01 | 97.9 | 15.7 | 14.3 | 1397.9 | 1452.2 | 98.6 | 102.6 | 96.3 | 25.0 | 33.6 |
K02 | 99.4 | 15.0 | 14.6 | 1421.1 | 1475.3 | 97.2 | 101.0 | 96.2 | 24.7 | 32.7 |
K03 | 99.1 | 15.4 | 14.3 | 1289.6 | 1354.7 | 90.8 | 95.5 | 95.2 | 24.7 | 31.2 |
K04 | 99.8 | 15.9 | 14.9 | 1336.7 | 1383.6 | 89.3 | 92.6 | 96.5 | 24.9 | 32.3 |
K05 | 99.7 | 15.5 | 13.4 | 1249.0 | 1291.6 | 93.6 | 96.8 | 96.7 | 25.9 | 32.1 |
K06 | 101.5 | 15.3 | 13.9 | 1324.7 | 1372.3 | 95.3 | 98.8 | 96.4 | 25.5 | 33.7 |
K07 | 100.2 | 15.9 | 13.4 | 1288.7 | 1329.5 | 96.3 | 99.4 | 96.9 | 25.1 | 32.2 |
K08 | 100.2 | 15.1 | 14.0 | 1322.9 | 1390.8 | 94.7 | 99.6 | 95.1 | 25.5 | 32.8 |
K09 | 100.0 | 15.6 | 13.7 | 1292.0 | 1347.2 | 94.3 | 98.4 | 95.8 | 25.6 | 33.0 |
K10 | 99.5 | 15.8 | 14.7 | 1348.4 | 1391.1 | 92.0 | 95.0 | 96.7 | 24.7 | 33.2 |
武育粳3号 WYJ 3 | 98.6 | 15.6 | 13.6 | 1258.5 | 1325.4 | 93.6 | 98.6 | 95.0 | 25.9 | 32.8 |
Table 2 Comparison of main agronomic and yield traits for improved lines and Wuyujing 3.
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 株高 PH/cm | 穗长 PL/cm | 单株穗数 PP | 单株实粒数 FGPL | 单株颖花数 SPL | 每穗实粒数 FGPA | 每穗颖花数 SPA | 结实率 SSR/% | 千粒重 TGW/g | 单株产量 GWP/g |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
K01 | 97.9 | 15.7 | 14.3 | 1397.9 | 1452.2 | 98.6 | 102.6 | 96.3 | 25.0 | 33.6 |
K02 | 99.4 | 15.0 | 14.6 | 1421.1 | 1475.3 | 97.2 | 101.0 | 96.2 | 24.7 | 32.7 |
K03 | 99.1 | 15.4 | 14.3 | 1289.6 | 1354.7 | 90.8 | 95.5 | 95.2 | 24.7 | 31.2 |
K04 | 99.8 | 15.9 | 14.9 | 1336.7 | 1383.6 | 89.3 | 92.6 | 96.5 | 24.9 | 32.3 |
K05 | 99.7 | 15.5 | 13.4 | 1249.0 | 1291.6 | 93.6 | 96.8 | 96.7 | 25.9 | 32.1 |
K06 | 101.5 | 15.3 | 13.9 | 1324.7 | 1372.3 | 95.3 | 98.8 | 96.4 | 25.5 | 33.7 |
K07 | 100.2 | 15.9 | 13.4 | 1288.7 | 1329.5 | 96.3 | 99.4 | 96.9 | 25.1 | 32.2 |
K08 | 100.2 | 15.1 | 14.0 | 1322.9 | 1390.8 | 94.7 | 99.6 | 95.1 | 25.5 | 32.8 |
K09 | 100.0 | 15.6 | 13.7 | 1292.0 | 1347.2 | 94.3 | 98.4 | 95.8 | 25.6 | 33.0 |
K10 | 99.5 | 15.8 | 14.7 | 1348.4 | 1391.1 | 92.0 | 95.0 | 96.7 | 24.7 | 33.2 |
武育粳3号 WYJ 3 | 98.6 | 15.6 | 13.6 | 1258.5 | 1325.4 | 93.6 | 98.6 | 95.0 | 25.9 | 32.8 |
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 江苏溧水 Lishui,Jiangsu | 江苏泰州 Tai zhou,Jiangsu | 两地平均 Average | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
产量 Yield /(kg·hm-2) | 位次 Ranking | 产量 Yield/(kg·hm-2) | 位次 Order | 产量 Yield/(kg·hm-2) | 位次 Ranking | |||
K01 | 7 543.5 | 5 | 10 680.0 | 4 | 9 111.8 | 3 | ||
K02 | 7 362.0 | 10 | 10 740.0 | 3 | 9 051.0 | 5 | ||
K03 | 7 335.0 | 11 | 10 132.5 | 10 | 8 733.8 | 11 | ||
K04 | 7 422.0 | 9 | 10 822.5 | 2 | 9 122.3 | 2 | ||
K05 | 7 485.0 | 6 | 10 035.0 | 11 | 8 760.0 | 10 | ||
K06 | 7 755.0 | 2 | 10 732.5 | 1 | 9 243.8 | 1 | ||
K07 | 7 887.0 | 1 | 10 155.0 | 9 | 9 021.0 | 6 | ||
K08 | 7 618.5 | 4 | 10 305.0 | 7 | 8 961.8 | 8 | ||
K09 | 7 740.0 | 3 | 10 432.5 | 6 | 9 086.3 | 4 | ||
K10 | 7 437.0 | 7 | 10 545.0 | 5 | 8 991.0 | 7 | ||
武育粳3号 WYJ3 | 7 429.5 | 8 | 10 257.0 | 8 | 8 843.3 | 9 |
Table 3 Comparison of the practical yield for improved lines and Wuyujing 3.
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 江苏溧水 Lishui,Jiangsu | 江苏泰州 Tai zhou,Jiangsu | 两地平均 Average | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
产量 Yield /(kg·hm-2) | 位次 Ranking | 产量 Yield/(kg·hm-2) | 位次 Order | 产量 Yield/(kg·hm-2) | 位次 Ranking | |||
K01 | 7 543.5 | 5 | 10 680.0 | 4 | 9 111.8 | 3 | ||
K02 | 7 362.0 | 10 | 10 740.0 | 3 | 9 051.0 | 5 | ||
K03 | 7 335.0 | 11 | 10 132.5 | 10 | 8 733.8 | 11 | ||
K04 | 7 422.0 | 9 | 10 822.5 | 2 | 9 122.3 | 2 | ||
K05 | 7 485.0 | 6 | 10 035.0 | 11 | 8 760.0 | 10 | ||
K06 | 7 755.0 | 2 | 10 732.5 | 1 | 9 243.8 | 1 | ||
K07 | 7 887.0 | 1 | 10 155.0 | 9 | 9 021.0 | 6 | ||
K08 | 7 618.5 | 4 | 10 305.0 | 7 | 8 961.8 | 8 | ||
K09 | 7 740.0 | 3 | 10 432.5 | 6 | 9 086.3 | 4 | ||
K10 | 7 437.0 | 7 | 10 545.0 | 5 | 8 991.0 | 7 | ||
武育粳3号 WYJ3 | 7 429.5 | 8 | 10 257.0 | 8 | 8 843.3 | 9 |
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 碾米品质 Milling quality | 外观品质 Appearance quality | 食味品质 Eating quality | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
糙米率 Brown rice rate /% | 精米率 Milled rice rate /% | 整精米率 Head milled rice rate/% | 粒长 Grain length/mm | 长宽比 Length-width ratio | 垩白粒率 Chalky rice rate /% | 垩白度 Chalkiness degree /% | 胶稠度 Gel consistency | 碱消值 Alkali value | 直链淀粉含量 Amylose content /% | |||
K01 | 79.5 | 71.8 | 68.5 | 4.72 | 1.65 | 8.5** | 1.2** | 80.8** | 5.8 | 8.2** | ||
K02 | 78.7 | 70.2 | 65.8 | 4.46 | 1.65 | 24.2** | 4.2** | 81.2** | 5.8 | 8.2** | ||
K03 | 78.7 | 70.9 | 68.0 | 4.53 | 1.68 | 13.7** | 2.9** | 79.7** | 5.8 | 7.5** | ||
K04 | 79.8 | 71.9 | 68.1 | 4.53 | 1.66 | 14.7** | 2.9** | 80.1** | 5.7 | 7.5** | ||
K05 | 80.3 | 72.5 | 68.6 | 4.98 | 1.63 | 23.9** | 4.0** | 81.1** | 5.8 | 7.6** | ||
K06 | 80.3 | 71.8 | 68.7 | 4.95 | 1.63 | 14.1** | 2.1** | 81.2** | 5.8 | 7.6** | ||
K07 | 79.2 | 71.2 | 68.5 | 4.74 | 1.69 | 13.7** | 2.9** | 81.5** | 5.8 | 8.1** | ||
K08 | 79.5 | 71.2 | 68.2 | 4.93 | 1.66 | 12.2** | 2.2** | 81.7** | 5.7 | 8.7 ** | ||
K09 | 79.7 | 72.4 | 69.2 | 4.93 | 1.67 | 18.0** | 4.0** | 81.7** | 5.7 | 8.9 ** | ||
K10 | 78.7 | 71.6 | 69.1 | 4.70 | 1.66 | 21.8** | 4.5** | 82.2** | 5.8 | 8.9** | ||
武育粳3号 WYJ3 | 78.8 | 70.1 | 67.1 | 4.99 | 1.61 | 45.2 | 9.2 | 75.8 | 5.8 | 14.2 |
Table 4 Comparison of main quality traits for improved lines and Wuyujing 3.
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 碾米品质 Milling quality | 外观品质 Appearance quality | 食味品质 Eating quality | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
糙米率 Brown rice rate /% | 精米率 Milled rice rate /% | 整精米率 Head milled rice rate/% | 粒长 Grain length/mm | 长宽比 Length-width ratio | 垩白粒率 Chalky rice rate /% | 垩白度 Chalkiness degree /% | 胶稠度 Gel consistency | 碱消值 Alkali value | 直链淀粉含量 Amylose content /% | |||
K01 | 79.5 | 71.8 | 68.5 | 4.72 | 1.65 | 8.5** | 1.2** | 80.8** | 5.8 | 8.2** | ||
K02 | 78.7 | 70.2 | 65.8 | 4.46 | 1.65 | 24.2** | 4.2** | 81.2** | 5.8 | 8.2** | ||
K03 | 78.7 | 70.9 | 68.0 | 4.53 | 1.68 | 13.7** | 2.9** | 79.7** | 5.8 | 7.5** | ||
K04 | 79.8 | 71.9 | 68.1 | 4.53 | 1.66 | 14.7** | 2.9** | 80.1** | 5.7 | 7.5** | ||
K05 | 80.3 | 72.5 | 68.6 | 4.98 | 1.63 | 23.9** | 4.0** | 81.1** | 5.8 | 7.6** | ||
K06 | 80.3 | 71.8 | 68.7 | 4.95 | 1.63 | 14.1** | 2.1** | 81.2** | 5.8 | 7.6** | ||
K07 | 79.2 | 71.2 | 68.5 | 4.74 | 1.69 | 13.7** | 2.9** | 81.5** | 5.8 | 8.1** | ||
K08 | 79.5 | 71.2 | 68.2 | 4.93 | 1.66 | 12.2** | 2.2** | 81.7** | 5.7 | 8.7 ** | ||
K09 | 79.7 | 72.4 | 69.2 | 4.93 | 1.67 | 18.0** | 4.0** | 81.7** | 5.7 | 8.9 ** | ||
K10 | 78.7 | 71.6 | 69.1 | 4.70 | 1.66 | 21.8** | 4.5** | 82.2** | 5.8 | 8.9** | ||
武育粳3号 WYJ3 | 78.8 | 70.1 | 67.1 | 4.99 | 1.61 | 45.2 | 9.2 | 75.8 | 5.8 | 14.2 |
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 气味 Odor | 外观 Appearance | 口感 Palatability | 味道 Fragrance | 综合评价 Comprehensive score | 食味值 Taste value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
K01 | 0.10 | 0.80 | 1.40** | 0.90* | 1.50** | 0.96** |
K02 | 0.20 | 1.10* | 1.30* | 1.20** | 1.50** | 1.13** |
K03 | 0.10 | 0.40 | 0.70 | 0.50 | 0.80 | 0.51 |
K04 | 0.10 | 0.90* | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.90 | 0.74 |
K05 | 0.10 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 0.58 |
K06 | 0.00 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00* | 1.38* | 0.84* |
K07 | 0.10 | 1.20** | 1.70** | 1.60** | 1.90** | 1.42** |
K08 | 0.10 | 1.10* | 1.40** | 0.90* | 1.50** | 1.02** |
K09 | 0.00 | 0.90* | 1.30* | 1.30** | 1.40* | 1.10** |
K10 | 0.20 | 0.90* | 1.30* | 1.20** | 1.20* | 1.16** |
武育粳3号 WYJ 3 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
Table 5 Scores of taste indices of improved lines and Wuyujing 3.
品系或品种 Line (Variety) | 气味 Odor | 外观 Appearance | 口感 Palatability | 味道 Fragrance | 综合评价 Comprehensive score | 食味值 Taste value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
K01 | 0.10 | 0.80 | 1.40** | 0.90* | 1.50** | 0.96** |
K02 | 0.20 | 1.10* | 1.30* | 1.20** | 1.50** | 1.13** |
K03 | 0.10 | 0.40 | 0.70 | 0.50 | 0.80 | 0.51 |
K04 | 0.10 | 0.90* | 0.90 | 0.70 | 0.90 | 0.74 |
K05 | 0.10 | 0.70 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.70 | 0.58 |
K06 | 0.00 | 0.50 | 1.00 | 1.00* | 1.38* | 0.84* |
K07 | 0.10 | 1.20** | 1.70** | 1.60** | 1.90** | 1.42** |
K08 | 0.10 | 1.10* | 1.40** | 0.90* | 1.50** | 1.02** |
K09 | 0.00 | 0.90* | 1.30* | 1.30** | 1.40* | 1.10** |
K10 | 0.20 | 0.90* | 1.30* | 1.20** | 1.20* | 1.16** |
武育粳3号 WYJ 3 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
[1] | 江祺祥, 杨明方, 王子明, 等. 中粳稻新品种武育粳3号的选育及其利用. 江苏农业科学, 1993(3): 8-10. |
[2] | 陈志德, 仲维功, 杨杰, 等. 武育粳3号产量和品质性状分析及其对水稻育种的启示. 金陵科技学院学报, 2007, 23(4): 50-53. |
[3] | 潘学彪, 陈宗祥, 左示敏, 等. 以分子标记辅助选择育成抗条纹叶枯病水稻新品种“武陵粳1号”. 作物学报, 2009, 35(10): 1851-1857. |
[4] | 王才林, 陈涛, 张亚东, 等. 通过分子标记辅助选择培育优良食味水稻新品种. 中国水稻科学, 2009, 23(1): 25-30. |
[5] | 王才林, 张亚东, 朱镇, 等. 优良食味粳稻新品种南粳5055的选育及利用. 农业科技通讯, 2012(2): 84-88. |
[6] | 王才林, 张亚东, 朱镇, 等. 优良食味粳稻新品种南粳9108的选育与利用. 江苏农业科学, 2013, 41(9): 86-88. |
[7] | Sato M, Ando I, Numaguchi K, et al.Breeding of low amylose content paddy rice variety ‘Milky Queen’ with good eating quality.Jpn J Breeding, 1996, 46(suppl 1): 221. |
[8] | Dellaporta S L, Wood J, Hicks J B.A plant DNA minipreparation: VersionⅡ.Plant Mol Biol Rep, 1983, 1(1): 19-21. |
[9] | 姚姝, 陈涛, 张亚东, 等. 分子标记辅助选择聚合水稻暗胚乳基因Wx-mq和抗条纹叶枯病基因Stv-bi. 中国水稻科学, 2010, 24(4): 341-347. |
[10] | 陈涛, 骆名瑞, 张亚东, 等. 利用四引物扩增受阻突变体系PCR 技术检测水稻低直链淀粉含量基因Wx-mq. 中国水稻科学, 2013, 27(5): 529-534. |
[11] | Washio O, Ezuka A, Sakurgi Y, et al.Studies on the breeding of rice varieties resistant to stripe disease: Varietal difference in resistance to rice stripe disease.Jpn J Breeding, 1976, 17(1): 91-98. |
[12] | 周彤, 周益军, 程兆榜, 等. 粳稻品种对水稻条纹叶枯病的抗性鉴定及抗病品种镇稻88的遗传分析. 植物保护学报, 2007, 35(5): 475-479. |
[13] | 梁乃亭, 魏玉波. 稻米食味品尝试验与结果评价方法. 新疆农业科学, 1995(6): 238-239. |
[14] | 李建粤, 毛万霞, 杨丽君, 等. 利用安全性转基因技术导入反义蜡质基因降低稻米直链淀粉含量. 科学通报, 2004, 49(24): 2556-2561. |
[15] | 孙业盈, 吕彦, 董春林, 等. 水稻Wx基因与稻米AC、GC和GT的遗传关系. 作物学报, 2005, 31(5): 535-539. |
[16] | 张玉荣, 周显青, 杨兰兰. 大米食味品质评价方法的研究现状与展望. 中国粮油学报, 2009, 24(8): 155-159. |
[17] | 盛生兰, 翟虎渠, 杨图南. 江苏省粳稻高产育种的回首与展望. 中国稻米, 1997, 3(4): 9-12. |
[18] | 王才林, 张亚东, 朱镇, 等. 抗条纹叶枯病优良食味粳稻新品种选育研究. 北方水稻, 2011, 41(1): 67-71. |
[19] | 张光恒, 曾大力, 郭龙彪, 等. 葡萄糖焦磷酸酶基因与巨胚基因聚合创建营养功能稻. 中国水稻科学, 2007, 21(6): 567-572. |
[20] | 庄杰云, 朱玉君, 屠国庆, 等. 多基因聚合育成优质高产杂交稻新组合中优161. 杂交水稻, 2010, 25(5): 12-14. |
[21] | 陈宗祥, 左示敏, 张亚芳, 等. 水稻抗纹枯病QTL qSB-9TQ和抗条纹叶枯病基因Stv-bi的聚合育种. 作物学报, 2012, 38(7): 1178-1186.<inline-graphic xlink:href="1001-7216-29-5-467/img_4.jpg"/> |
[1] | GUO Zhan, ZHANG Yunbo. Research Progress in Physiological,Biochemical Responses of Rice to Drought Stress and Its Molecular Regulation [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 335-349. |
[2] | WEI Huanhe, MA Weiyi, ZUO Boyuan, WANG Lulu, ZHU Wang, GENG Xiaoyu, ZHANG Xiang, MENG Tianyao, CHEN Yinglong, GAO Pinglei, XU Ke, HUO Zhongyang, DAI Qigen. Research Progress in the Effect of Salinity, Drought, and Their Combined Stresses on Rice Yield and Quality Formation [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 350-363. |
[3] | XU Danjie, LIN Qiaoxia, LI Zhengkang, ZHUANG Xiaoqian, LING Yu, LAI Meiling, CHEN Xiaoting, LU Guodong. OsOPR10 Positively Regulates Rice Blast and Bacterial Blight Resistance [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 364-374. |
[4] | CHEN Mingliang, ZENG Xihua, SHEN Yumin, LUO Shiyou, HU Lanxiang, XIONG Wentao, XIONG Huanjin, WU Xiaoyan, XIAO Yeqing. Typing of Inter-subspecific Fertility Loci and Fertility Locus Pattern of indica-japonica Hybrid Rice [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 386-396. |
[5] | DING Zhengquan, PAN Yueyun, SHI Yang, HUANG Haixiang. Comprehensive Evaluation and Comparative Analysis of Jiahe Series Long-Grain japonica Rice with High Eating Quality Based on Gene Chip Technology [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 397-408. |
[6] | HOU Xiaoqin, WANG Ying, YU Bei, FU Weimeng, FENG Baohua, SHEN Yichao, XIE Hangjun, WANG Huanran, XU Yongqiang, WU Zhihai, WANG Jianjun, TAO Longxing, FU Guanfu. Mechanisms Behind the Role of Potassium Fulvic Acid in Enhancing Salt Tolerance in Rice Seedlings [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 409-421. |
[7] | LÜ Zhou, YI Binghuai, CHEN Pingping, ZHOU Wenxin, TANG Wenbang, YI Zhenxie. Effects of Nitrogen Application Rate and Transplanting Density on Yield Formation of Small Seed Hybrid Rice [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 422-436. |
[8] | HU Jijie, HU Zhihua, ZHANG Junhua, CAO Xiaochuang, JIN Qianyu, ZHANG Zhiyuan, ZHU Lianfeng. Effects of Rhizosphere Saturated Dissolved Oxygen on Photosynthetic and Growth Characteristics of Rice at Tillering Stage [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 437-446. |
[9] | WU Yue, LIANG Chengwei, ZHAO Chenfei, SUN Jian, MA Dianrong. Occurrence of Weedy Rice Disaster and Ecotype Evolution in Direct-Seeded Rice Fields [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 447-455. |
[10] | LIU Fuxiang, ZHEN Haoyang, PENG Huan, ZHENG Liuchun, PENG Deliang, WEN Yanhua. Investigation and Species Identification of Cyst Nematode Disease on Rice in Guangdong Province [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(4): 456-461. |
[11] | CHEN Haotian, QIN Yuan, ZHONG Xiaohan, LIN Chenyu, QIN Jinghang, YANG Jianchang, ZHANG Weiyang. Research Progress on the Relationship Between Rice Root, Soil Properties and Methane Emissions in Paddy Fields [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(3): 233-245. |
[12] | MIAO Jun, RAN Jinhui, XU Mengbin, BO Liubing, WANG Ping, LIANG Guohua, ZHOU Yong. Overexpression of RGG2, a Heterotrimeric G Protein γ Subunit-Encoding Gene, Improves Drought Tolerance in Rice [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(3): 246-255. |
[13] | YIN Xiaoxiao, ZHANG Zhihan, YAN Xiulian, LIAO Rong, YANG Sijia, Beenish HASSAN, GUO Daiming, FAN Jing, ZHAO Zhixue, WANG Wenming. Signal Peptide Validation and Expression Analysis of Multiple Effectors from Ustilaginoidea virens [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(3): 256-265. |
[14] | ZHU Yujing, GUI Jinxin, GONG Chengyun, LUO Xinyang, SHI Jubin, ZHANG Haiqing, HE Jiwai. QTL Mapping for Tiller Angle in Rice by Genome-wide Association Analysis [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(3): 266-276. |
[15] | WEI Qianqian, WANG Yulei, KONG Haimin, XU Qingshan, YAN Yulian, PAN Lin, CHI Chunxin, KONG Yali, TIAN Wenhao, ZHU Lianfeng, CAO Xiaochuang, ZHANG Junhua, ZHU Chunqun. Mechanism of Hydrogen Sulfide, a Signaling Molecule Involved in Reducing the Inhibitory Effect of Aluminum Toxicity on Rice Growth Together with Sulfur Fertilizer [J]. Chinese Journal OF Rice Science, 2024, 38(3): 290-302. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||