摘要
应用模糊综合评判方法,以甘蔗杂交组合优劣影响最大的4个因素(锤度、茎径、株高和丛有效茎)为评价性状,对由优良亲本配制的12个杂交组合进行了综合评判。结果表明,有5个杂交组合(桂糖02-208×ROC22、桂糖02-619×ROC22、崖城07-71×粤糖93-159、桂糖02-1156×ROC22、崖城06-140×ROC22)综合优集b1值都超过0.300,被评判为优级,3个组合被评判为较优级,2个组合被评判为一般级,2个组合被评判为差级。4个优组合都以ROC22为父本,1个优组合以粤糖93-159为父本。最优组合和较优组合的实际入选率也比较高,在今后配制杂交组合时可重点利用。
Applying the method of Fuzzy Comprehensive Judgment, 12 hybrid combinations crossed by excellent parents were comprehensively evaluated with the characters of Brix, stalk diameter, stalk height and number of millable stalks as evaluation index. The four characters were the dominant factors which determined the quality of sugarcane cross combinations. The evaluation result indicted 5 cross combinations（GT02-208×ROC22, GT02-619×ROC22, YC07-71×YT93-159, GT02-1156×ROC22, and YC06-140×ROC22） was the ＂excellent＂ combination with high integrated connection degree value（above 0.300）. 3 cross combinations was the ＂better＂ combinations. 2 cross combinations was the ＂general＂ combination and 2 was the ＂less inferior＂. ROC22 was the male parent in four excellent combinations while YT93-159 was the male parent in one excellent combination. The ＂excellent＂ combinations and the ＂better＂ combinations had high selection ration of crosses. The cross combinations could be used for future breeding practice.
作者
谢静
邱永生
吴建涛
胡后祥
周峰
张垂明
吉家乐
许环映
王勤南
XIE Jing;QIU Yong-sheng;WU Jian-tao;HU Hou-xiang;ZHOU Feng;ZHANG Chui-ming;JI Jia-le;XU Huan-yin;WANG Qin-nan(Guangdong Provincial Bioengineering Institute（Guangzhou Sugarcane Industry Research Institute）/Guangdong Key Lab of Sugarcane Improvement ＆ Biorefinery,Guangzhou 510316;Guangdong Scientific Observation Test Station of Sugarcane Germplasm Resources and Utilization,Ministry of Agriculture,Sanya,Hainan 572025)
出处
《甘蔗糖业》
2018年第3期1-8,共8页
Sugarcane and Canesugar
基金
现代农业产业技术体系建设专项资金(CARS-17-01-07)
广东省科技计划项目(2017A030303049
2016A020210016)
广东省科学院实施创新驱动发展能力建设专项项目(2017GDASCX-0105)
广东省科学院科研平台环境与能力建设专项资金项目(2016GDASPT-0306)
广东省软科学研究计划项目(2016A030303019)
关键词
甘蔗
杂交组合
模糊综合评判
评价
Sugarcane
Cross combination
Fuzzy comprehensive judgment
Evaluation
