1、28 2 1 9 9 7 M6 jvJournalof NortheastAgriculturalUniversity28 (2): 112j118June1997l : 1996- 04- 10 M1Ys邹德堂 秋太权 赵宏伟 崔成焕( jv jW:150030)K1研究表明, 基部挫折重、光合速率、生物产量等性状对水稻倒伏指数具有较大的负效应, 株高、鲜重等性状则具有较大的正效应, 其中以基部挫折重的直接作用最大。按基部挫折重大, 光合速率和生物产量高的方向选择, 有利于抗倒伏性和产量性状的改良。1oM , ,M1,Ysms |S511. 1, S5010 前 言 F 1+B, F T,B
2、t+ BW i =41,y4V,N 4 F b 7,S= FM1t,TBq12rb k T F ? Sa F ? b k b M11“, FW44 Ib1 材料与方法1989 M,45 s (“) : j415a 862302a 17a qq9r,7aao|aCaa =aW (2(cm)7(g) /o|(gccm)100)q3rb , l u |“10 Ib:rsa 3 b kL.M1Ys, l u ( b2 结果与分析V1 A, T#FW (i“AsbV2d9TV , M1s,o|aCa 3 a; qars AAM1,WAM1b7o|7M19rAA b xzo|7W1“, ? P4 F ?
3、bB Y 1V1 T#FWZsTable1VarianceanalysisofvariouscharactersofparentsandcrossesinriceCharacter Lodgingindexo|SetbackweightWLengthof basalinternodeOuterdiameterof basal stem =Inner diameterof basal stemCWall thicknessof basal stem7Freshweighty (ZM S in genotypes3300.29 36653.82 3.8790. 52390.776 0.0111 1
4、2. 98 (ZMS in errer74. 01 881. 03 0. 094 4. 610- 3 4.510- 3 410- 4 0. 60F 44.60* * 41.60* * 41. 27* * 113. 57* * 106.44* * 27.75* * 21.63* *Characterrs Effecricetiller number3 Growrh periodPanide3 Biologicdweight; qPhorosyn-theticrateRdantheighty (ZMS in genotypes 22.392 25.74 1.0805 134. 82 24.90 2
5、4.90 (ZMS in errer 2. 041.010.0479 13. 120. 475 0. 475F 10.98* * 25. 49* * 22.559* * 10.28* * 52. 42* * 52.42F0. 01= (24, 28) = 2.20, YsbV3TV , F( ) DKv o| Q 3 a; qb ( ) DvlGQ7aaCrsb2. 1o| Yo| Y VM1 Mr A,T ( A,7OVa 3 ; q MY b DKvb o| 4 F ? 1y ,4 F,o|T1SBb2. 2 Y L.M1rA, Y“ r1. 1698,1 y,o| 3 ( ,y7 c11
6、3c2 ;: M1YsV2 jM1sTable2Coefficientsamongthelodgingindexandagronomiccharnctersofricec114c jv28 V3+ ( P)Y“ Table3Thepabheoefficientsoftheagrommiccharacterstothelodying index “1P 1P 3P 4P 5P 6P 7P 8P 9P riyo|( 1) X1Sebback werght - 1. 7575 0. 1531 - 0. 2101 0. 1460 1. 2544 0. 2805 - 0. 3223 - 0. 1400
7、- 0. 0508 - 0. 6467W( 2) X2Lengbh of basal internode 0. 5394 - 0. 4990 - 0. 0190 - 0. 1478 0. 1821 0. 3429 0. 0479 0. 2581 - 0. 0675 0. 675( 3) X3Outer diameter of basal stem - 1. 3271 0. 0340 - 0. 2782 0. 0982 1. 3048 0. 2193 0. 0131 - 0. 0949 - 0. 1786 - 0. 2095C( 4) X4Wall thickness of bosal stem
8、 - 0. 8366 0. 2404 - 0. 0873 0. 3068 0. 4071 - 0. 3529 - 0. 0442 - 0. 1469 0. 0062 - 0. 50917( 5) X5Fresh werght - 1. 4287 - 0. 0590 - 0. 2307 0. 0809 1. 5431 0. 2220 - 0. 1214 - 0. 0187 - 0. 1660 - 0. 183( 6) X6Dart height - 0. 4214 - 0. 1463 - 0. 0512 - 0. 0926 0. 2929 1. 1698 - 0. 6076 - 0. 0754
9、0. 0868 0. 15143 ( 7) X7Biologicd w eighe - 0. 5933 0. 0251 0. 0037 0. 0142 0. 1963 0. 7444 - 0. 9547 - 0. 0250 0. 1960 - 0. 3432; q( 8) X8Phorosyntheric rate - 0. 5882 0. 3078 - 0. 0619 0. 1077 0. 0691 0. 2108 - 0. 0571 - 0. 4184 0. 0110 - 0. 3063rs ( 9) X9Effecrice tiller number 0. 2963 0. 1117 0.
10、 1648 0. 0064 - 0. 8498 0. 3368 - 0. 6206 - 0. 0153 0. 3015 - 0. 2681 L.M1“ rco| 3 M1,y7L.M1“ r$d ,V Y A, Es AbyN, F 4V, a| l irTb2. 37 Y7 Y“ 1. 5431,L.M1“ rAb7o|L.M1“ 0. 8129* * ,7 L.M1“ rco| vbyN,VL.M1“ , ? 7 Y,VY V A A, a7 Vr4 F ? rTb2. 4; q Y; q L.M1“ - 0. 3063* * , Y“ - 0. 4184, ; q 1Tb; qYVo|
11、WY“ r-0. 5882,L.M1“ 0. 3347* * , ; qy,o| vbyN, F 4V,4 ; qy 11b2. 5 Y L.M1“ - 0. 2095,7Y“ - 0. 2782, Y,byN,T FS Vb2. 6W YW L.M1“ 0. 6750* * ,7 Y“ - 0. 4990, M T W,Vo|aa; q B vWY“ , WL.M1, W r,7 O| qv, c115c2 ;: M1YsW qaa 3 v,WC4 V zt,1o|bVF2L. (V4) A, L. ( ,yNs F2 V4bV4F2L. Table 4Theheridity ability
12、of thecharatersinF2gereratim3 讨 论3. 11 T F ? S F V,ABS ? F ? b - ; kq1, 3, 4, 5r, K4aKeLZE $ s)Eq6rba(1981) , F F T ?4 F F ? , 3q7rbyN,s)BS, ? Q F F T f /s,7 Bs 8, ,s)E s KbyN, Bc116c jv28 ZE -4/, ? Q F ? sb =a ,( 1959)4 ?V U F ? , L=dB,i O ? V U Ws, aT F ? Sq3rb9M? L “AM1q8rb3. 21WM1 M1s “, h 4 4 t
13、 b 7M1“ ?Q W1“,1“ s Y,V7 ?iVC?C bYs VM1“ s, M SB“ , ?Q1M GMTvlb B“, M1“ $ qv ,7 M1“ $ l (V2),“ ? Nt M1bYs,BtY“ M1“ MQbyN, ? M1“ W1“,1 jY“ ,L k bW “b j, 1 V Hq bTV, vT, b 7 F,i 3 ,B4 b kT9A U,o| YKv, H, ; qaY 9 3mYbi O,“ S/ ,s m C,o|a; qaWY,| byN, VYV4o|v, aa; qaWY, r F “b4 小 结4. 1M1aYsV ,o|a; qa 3 T
14、r,7a Tr, o|TKvbo|va; q 3 av aZ_4, F b4. 2 BL., F2E“L. , 4“ E, F2 V F (VCF4, Fb H, 4 H,To|; q4,rTzb ID1 !. null null1null null, 1983, 33 ( 4) : 411j4222. )Bl null null null nullnull1null null, T, 1982, 51 ( 3) : 360j3683 = . F, j/ , 1989, 44 ( 9) : 41j454 , null nullcnull null Snull null 2, j#, 1958,
15、33 ( 6) : 893j896, 33 ( 7): 1022j10275 !.null 3 null_E,Knull,1961,( 3)“: 77j816b. null$null? 3null1null null L, j/, 1968, A15: 1j1757ar. nullTnull null null null1null null, T, 1981, 50 ( 3) : 357j3648 !/ l. /null1null nullT 3 , T, 1973, 42 (Y2) : 53j549= 3. FGC- 2; qN , j S0 ? , 1985.c117c2 ;: M1YsC
16、ORRELATIONANDPATHANALYSISONTHELOD-GINGINDEXANDOTHERCHARACTERSINRICEZou Detang, Qiu Taiquan, Zhao Hongwei, Cui Chenghuan(Department of Genetics and Breeding, NortheastAgricultural University, Harbin, 150030PRC)ABSTRACTThe results of this study showed tlat the characters of the basal setback weight, p
17、hoto-synthetic rate and biological yield had negative effects on the lodging index of rice, but tteplant weight and fresh weight had the positive effects. Among the characters mentionedabove, the basal setback weight played leading direct roles. It was proposed that the selectionof higher basal setback weight, photosynthetic rate and biological yield was benificial to thebreeding of rice varieties with high lodging resistance and yield.KEYWORDS: rice, lodging index, correlation, path analysisBTe:;, 3, 33 , jv j, =, jv j jp Vbc118c jv28