EMS诱变对晋谷21号种子萌发的影响
发布时间:2021-12-18 15:56
为确定EMS诱变处理晋谷21号种子的最适条件,加快品种改良进程,获得性状稳定的突变材料和后代群体,利用EMS诱变晋谷21号种子,采用不同诱变浓度(0.8%、0.9%、1.0%、1.1%、1.2%)和不同处理时间(8 h、9 h、10 h、11 h),分别测定种子发芽势、发芽率、茎长和胚根长。结果表明,晋谷21号种子的发芽势与发芽率均随着EMS浓度的增大而降低,且茎长和胚根长受抑制,提前浸种的种子1.0%EMS处理10 h发芽率接近50%,最终确定1.0%EMS 10 h组合为晋谷21号种子最佳诱变条件。M1代植株出现白化苗、黄化苗、分蘖等现象。本研究为晋谷21号突变体库的建立及其他物种种子诱变提供思路,为种质资源的创新及开展功能基因组研究提供了材料。
【文章来源】:种子. 2020,39(11)北大核心
【文章页数】:5 页
【部分图文】:
不同浓度EMS处理对晋谷21号种子茎长和胚根长的影响
表1 EMS处理对晋谷21号种子发芽势和发芽率的影响 处理组 EMS浓度/% 发芽势/% 相对发芽势/% 发芽率/% 相对发芽率/% ck 0 94.54+1.31 b 100.00 b 98.54+1.23 b 100.00 b 0.8 77.33+1.01 a 81.80+1.45 a 78.64+1.04 a 79.81+1.43 a 0.9 65.67+1.03 a 69.46+1.15 a 66.59+0.84 a 67.57+1.14 a 8 h+浸种 1.0 58.62+0.96 a 62.01+1.08 a 64.90+0.68 a 65.86+1.57 a 1.1 50.67+0.43 a 53.60+1.12 a 52.15+1.54 a 52.92+2.31 a 1.2 33.67+0.63 abc 35.61+0.79 a 35.23+1.13 a 35.75+2.76 a 0.8 70.14+1.71 c 74.39+1.23 c 72.41+1.01 b 73.48+2.16 b 0.9 54.33+1.12 c 57.47+1.06 c 56.34+1.12 b 57.17+1.83 b 8 h+不浸 1.0 50.67+0.43 ab 53.60+0.43 ab 62.90+0.95 b 63.83+1.01 b 1.1 44.33+1.46 b 46.89+1.21 b 45.93+1.23 b 46.61+2.37 b 1.2 39.24+0.19 a 41.51+1.19 a 34.88+1.05 a 35.40+1.84 a 0.8 65.67+1.17 b 69.46+1.31 b 69.66+0.94 c 70.70+2.59 c 0.9 59.33+0.63 b 62.75+0.89 b 61.40+1.03 c 62.31+2.88 c 9 h+浸种 1.0 48.25+0.61 b 51.04+1.05 b 59.02+0.57 c 59.89+0.97 c 1.1 42.33+0.56 a 44.77+1.13 a 47.45+1.06 c 48.15+2.29 c 1.2 32.05+0.84 bc 33.90+0.97 bc 29.34+0.97 b 29.77+1.46 b 0.8 58.67+1.86 cd 62.06+2.45 cd 58.55+0.87 d 59.42+1.53 d 0.9 41.67+2.42 e 44.08+3.23 e 43.22+0.97 d 43.86+1.74 d 9 h+不浸 1.0 39.25+0.53 b 41.52+1.14 b 47.78+0.47 d 48.49+1.16 d 1.1 30.15+2.40 c 31.89+2.73 c 37.65+0.69 d 38.21+2.28 d 1.2 22.13+0.60 a 23.41+0.59 a 24.81+0.69 c 25.18+1.67 c 0.8 55.02+2.33 d 58.20+0.53 b 62.91+0.84 e 63.84+2.12 e 0.9 48.67+1.71 d 51.48+1.42 d 50.12+1.06 e 50.86+3.25 e 10 h+浸种 1.0 41.33+1.66 c 43.72+1.36 c 49.03+0.85 e 49.75+1.81 e 1.1 35.67+1.83 b 37.73+1.97 b 41.63+0.94 e 42.24+1.37 e 1.2 23.67+1.63 d 25.04+2.07 d 21.47+0.62 d 21.79+1.39 d 0.8 52.67+0.76 d 55.71+1.17 d 54.97+0.68 f 55.78+2.26 f 0.9 42.33+0.73 bc 44.77+0.86 bc 44.22+0.89 f 44.88+1.63 f 10 h+不浸 1.0 40.08+2.13 cd 42.39+3.14 cd 43.72+0.46 e 44.37+2.07 e 1.1 26.53+0.97 a 28.06+1.52 a 30.31+1.12 f 30.76+3.24 f 1.2 20.12+0.43 ab 21.28+1.29 ab 19.48+0.58 e 19.77+1.27 e 0.8 45.67+3.23 e 48.31+4.12 e 54.44+1.02 g 55.24+1.14 g 0.9 40.05+2.06 de 42.36+2.74 de 42.99+1.04 f 43.63+1.49 f 11 h+浸种 1.0 38.33+2.26 d 40.54+3.37 d 40.68+0.79 f 41.28+1.32 f 1.1 23.67+1.53 b 25.04+1.95 b 28.58+0.68 g 29.01+2.17 g 1.2 13.33+2.66 e 14.10+1.49 e 16.02+0.54 f 16.26+0.96 f 0.8 41.08+3.13 e 43.45+2.96 e 42.87+0.57 h 43.51+1.15 h 0.9 38.14+2.06 de 40.34+4.17 de 40.65+0.98 g 41.25+2.63 g 11 h+不浸 1.0 37.67+2.33 d 39.85+3.46 d 47.08+1.24 g 47.78+2.94 g 1.1 21.62+1.71 b 22.87+2.63 b 23.38+0.54 h 23.73+1.52 h 1.2 16.05+1.13 cd 16.98+1.92 cd 17.71+0.49 g 17.97+1.29 g 注:同列不同小写字母表示差异达显著水平(p<0.05)。图2 不同浓度EMS处理对晋谷21号种子茎长和胚根长的影响
【参考文献】:
期刊论文
[1]黄瓜EMS诱变突变体库的构建[J]. 齐晓花,李倩倩,叶思佳,杨国志,徐强,许学文,陈学好. 分子植物育种. 2019(18)
[2]EMS不同浓度和处理时间对华南5号木薯种子的影响[J]. 仇婷婷,李瑞梅,周杨骄,林雪君,姚远,刘姣,符少萍,胡新文,郭建春. 分子植物育种. 2019(09)
[3]EMS诱变处理芸豆(Phaseolous vulgaris L.)种子条件分析[J]. 陈喜明,韩云丽,张广峰,乔治军,高克昌,徐嘉,赵力. 种子. 2018(11)
[4]EMS诱变对蒙古国黄花苜蓿种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 伊风艳,孙海莲,王晓娟,邱晓,吴玉霞. 种子. 2018(10)
[5]多年生黑麦草EMS诱变与耐旱性评价[J]. 董文科,路旭平,姜寒玉,马晖玲. 核农学报. 2018(10)
[6]EMS诱导的盛农1号小麦突变体筛选与鉴定[J]. 孙玉龙,朱欣欣,何瑞士,李俊畅,安俊航,焦志鑫,姜玉梅,李巧云,牛吉山. 麦类作物学报. 2018(07)
[7]甲基磺酸乙酯(EMS)诱变对羊草种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 臧辉,武自念,孔令琪,张继泽,任卫波. 分子植物育种. 2018(17)
[8]谷子十里香的EMS诱变分析[J]. 宋振君,李志勇,全建章,石灿,刘磊,马继芳,王永芳,白辉. 华北农学报. 2017(S1)
[9]亚洲棉EMS诱变条件优化与突变体筛选[J]. 孔德培,屈凌波,张雪妍,刘记,王鹏,李付广. 棉花学报. 2017(04)
[10]甲基磺酸乙酯对抗除草剂谷子品种的诱变效应[J]. 王春芳,王蕊,刘国庆,张温典,芦敬华,李伟. 湖北农业科学. 2017(05)
本文编号:3542720
【文章来源】:种子. 2020,39(11)北大核心
【文章页数】:5 页
【部分图文】:
不同浓度EMS处理对晋谷21号种子茎长和胚根长的影响
表1 EMS处理对晋谷21号种子发芽势和发芽率的影响 处理组 EMS浓度/% 发芽势/% 相对发芽势/% 发芽率/% 相对发芽率/% ck 0 94.54+1.31 b 100.00 b 98.54+1.23 b 100.00 b 0.8 77.33+1.01 a 81.80+1.45 a 78.64+1.04 a 79.81+1.43 a 0.9 65.67+1.03 a 69.46+1.15 a 66.59+0.84 a 67.57+1.14 a 8 h+浸种 1.0 58.62+0.96 a 62.01+1.08 a 64.90+0.68 a 65.86+1.57 a 1.1 50.67+0.43 a 53.60+1.12 a 52.15+1.54 a 52.92+2.31 a 1.2 33.67+0.63 abc 35.61+0.79 a 35.23+1.13 a 35.75+2.76 a 0.8 70.14+1.71 c 74.39+1.23 c 72.41+1.01 b 73.48+2.16 b 0.9 54.33+1.12 c 57.47+1.06 c 56.34+1.12 b 57.17+1.83 b 8 h+不浸 1.0 50.67+0.43 ab 53.60+0.43 ab 62.90+0.95 b 63.83+1.01 b 1.1 44.33+1.46 b 46.89+1.21 b 45.93+1.23 b 46.61+2.37 b 1.2 39.24+0.19 a 41.51+1.19 a 34.88+1.05 a 35.40+1.84 a 0.8 65.67+1.17 b 69.46+1.31 b 69.66+0.94 c 70.70+2.59 c 0.9 59.33+0.63 b 62.75+0.89 b 61.40+1.03 c 62.31+2.88 c 9 h+浸种 1.0 48.25+0.61 b 51.04+1.05 b 59.02+0.57 c 59.89+0.97 c 1.1 42.33+0.56 a 44.77+1.13 a 47.45+1.06 c 48.15+2.29 c 1.2 32.05+0.84 bc 33.90+0.97 bc 29.34+0.97 b 29.77+1.46 b 0.8 58.67+1.86 cd 62.06+2.45 cd 58.55+0.87 d 59.42+1.53 d 0.9 41.67+2.42 e 44.08+3.23 e 43.22+0.97 d 43.86+1.74 d 9 h+不浸 1.0 39.25+0.53 b 41.52+1.14 b 47.78+0.47 d 48.49+1.16 d 1.1 30.15+2.40 c 31.89+2.73 c 37.65+0.69 d 38.21+2.28 d 1.2 22.13+0.60 a 23.41+0.59 a 24.81+0.69 c 25.18+1.67 c 0.8 55.02+2.33 d 58.20+0.53 b 62.91+0.84 e 63.84+2.12 e 0.9 48.67+1.71 d 51.48+1.42 d 50.12+1.06 e 50.86+3.25 e 10 h+浸种 1.0 41.33+1.66 c 43.72+1.36 c 49.03+0.85 e 49.75+1.81 e 1.1 35.67+1.83 b 37.73+1.97 b 41.63+0.94 e 42.24+1.37 e 1.2 23.67+1.63 d 25.04+2.07 d 21.47+0.62 d 21.79+1.39 d 0.8 52.67+0.76 d 55.71+1.17 d 54.97+0.68 f 55.78+2.26 f 0.9 42.33+0.73 bc 44.77+0.86 bc 44.22+0.89 f 44.88+1.63 f 10 h+不浸 1.0 40.08+2.13 cd 42.39+3.14 cd 43.72+0.46 e 44.37+2.07 e 1.1 26.53+0.97 a 28.06+1.52 a 30.31+1.12 f 30.76+3.24 f 1.2 20.12+0.43 ab 21.28+1.29 ab 19.48+0.58 e 19.77+1.27 e 0.8 45.67+3.23 e 48.31+4.12 e 54.44+1.02 g 55.24+1.14 g 0.9 40.05+2.06 de 42.36+2.74 de 42.99+1.04 f 43.63+1.49 f 11 h+浸种 1.0 38.33+2.26 d 40.54+3.37 d 40.68+0.79 f 41.28+1.32 f 1.1 23.67+1.53 b 25.04+1.95 b 28.58+0.68 g 29.01+2.17 g 1.2 13.33+2.66 e 14.10+1.49 e 16.02+0.54 f 16.26+0.96 f 0.8 41.08+3.13 e 43.45+2.96 e 42.87+0.57 h 43.51+1.15 h 0.9 38.14+2.06 de 40.34+4.17 de 40.65+0.98 g 41.25+2.63 g 11 h+不浸 1.0 37.67+2.33 d 39.85+3.46 d 47.08+1.24 g 47.78+2.94 g 1.1 21.62+1.71 b 22.87+2.63 b 23.38+0.54 h 23.73+1.52 h 1.2 16.05+1.13 cd 16.98+1.92 cd 17.71+0.49 g 17.97+1.29 g 注:同列不同小写字母表示差异达显著水平(p<0.05)。图2 不同浓度EMS处理对晋谷21号种子茎长和胚根长的影响
【参考文献】:
期刊论文
[1]黄瓜EMS诱变突变体库的构建[J]. 齐晓花,李倩倩,叶思佳,杨国志,徐强,许学文,陈学好. 分子植物育种. 2019(18)
[2]EMS不同浓度和处理时间对华南5号木薯种子的影响[J]. 仇婷婷,李瑞梅,周杨骄,林雪君,姚远,刘姣,符少萍,胡新文,郭建春. 分子植物育种. 2019(09)
[3]EMS诱变处理芸豆(Phaseolous vulgaris L.)种子条件分析[J]. 陈喜明,韩云丽,张广峰,乔治军,高克昌,徐嘉,赵力. 种子. 2018(11)
[4]EMS诱变对蒙古国黄花苜蓿种子萌发和幼苗生长的影响[J]. 伊风艳,孙海莲,王晓娟,邱晓,吴玉霞. 种子. 2018(10)
[5]多年生黑麦草EMS诱变与耐旱性评价[J]. 董文科,路旭平,姜寒玉,马晖玲. 核农学报. 2018(10)
[6]EMS诱导的盛农1号小麦突变体筛选与鉴定[J]. 孙玉龙,朱欣欣,何瑞士,李俊畅,安俊航,焦志鑫,姜玉梅,李巧云,牛吉山. 麦类作物学报. 2018(07)
[7]甲基磺酸乙酯(EMS)诱变对羊草种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J]. 臧辉,武自念,孔令琪,张继泽,任卫波. 分子植物育种. 2018(17)
[8]谷子十里香的EMS诱变分析[J]. 宋振君,李志勇,全建章,石灿,刘磊,马继芳,王永芳,白辉. 华北农学报. 2017(S1)
[9]亚洲棉EMS诱变条件优化与突变体筛选[J]. 孔德培,屈凌波,张雪妍,刘记,王鹏,李付广. 棉花学报. 2017(04)
[10]甲基磺酸乙酯对抗除草剂谷子品种的诱变效应[J]. 王春芳,王蕊,刘国庆,张温典,芦敬华,李伟. 湖北农业科学. 2017(05)
本文编号:3542720
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/nykjlw/nzwlw/3542720.html
最近更新
教材专著