彩叶桦新品种幼龄期生长适应性早期分析

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202206038

国家林草科技领军期刊
中国精品科技期刊
中国高校百佳科技期刊
江苏省新闻出版政府奖期刊奖
RCCSE林学权威期刊（A+）
CSCD核心期刊
Scopus数据库收录期刊
中文核心期刊
SCD核心期刊

作者加群：102861116

微信公众号：南京林业大学学报

高级检索

南京林业大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2024, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (1): 124-130.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202206038

彩叶桦新品种幼龄期生长适应性早期分析

张曦文¹(), 陈旭¹, 吴军², 孙国飞³, 吴力国⁴, 赵长海⁵, 代伟昭⁶, 刘桂丰¹^,^*()

1.林木遗传育种国家重点实验室(东北林业大学),黑龙江哈尔滨 150040
2.黑龙江省林木良种繁育中心, 黑龙江鹤岗 154100
3.佳木斯市孟家岗林场, 黑龙江佳木斯 154000
4.龙江县错海林场,黑龙江齐齐哈尔 161142
5.宁安市小北湖母树林林场,黑龙江牡丹江 157400
6.五常宝龙店种子林场,黑龙江哈尔滨 150211

收稿日期:2022-06-20 修回日期:2022-12-03 出版日期:2024-01-30 发布日期:2024-01-24
通讯作者: 刘桂丰
基金资助:
大学生创新训练项目(202110225236);黑龙江省应用技术研究与开发计划项目(GA19B201)

Growth adaptability analysis of new varieties of color-leafed birch at a young age

ZHANG Xiwen¹(), CHEN Xu¹, WU Jun², SUN Guofei³, WU Liguo⁴, ZHAO Changhai⁵, DAI Weizhao⁶, LIU Guifeng¹^,^*()

1. State Key Laboratory of Tree Genetics and Breeding, Northeast Forestry University, Harbin 150040, China
2. Heilongjiang Forest Breeding Center,Hegang 154100, China
3. Mengjiagang Forest Farm, Jiamusi City, Heilongjiang Province, Jiamusi 154000, China
4. Longjiang County Cuohai Forest Farm, Qiqihar 161100, China
5. Xiaobeihu Seed Production Stand of Ning’an City, Mudunjiang 157400, China
6. Baolongdian Seed Forest Farm, Harbin 150211, China

Received:2022-06-20 Revised:2022-12-03 Online:2024-01-30 Published:2024-01-24
Contact: LIU Guifeng

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】通过彩叶桦新品种的多地点试验,研究其在不同立地条件下的生长表现及稳定性,为选择适应性强的优良新品种提供科学依据。【方法】以彩叶桦新品种6个品系及对照为研究对象,在立地条件不同的6个参试点造林。各参试点试验林均按完全随机区组设计,设置5个区组,区组内每小区定植5~15株,株行距2 m×3 m。调查各参试点彩叶桦新品种幼龄期的树高、地径、保存率等性状,利用DPS统计分析软件对其进行多点联合方差分析及稳定性分析。【结果】①树高、地径生长量在品种间和地点间的差异以及品种与地点的交互作用均表现极显著(P < 0. 01),对开展彩叶桦新品选择及稳定性分析具有重要意义。②彩叶桦新品种中,‘朝霞’系列RG12、RG11生长表现较好,其中:RG12在帽儿山、宝龙店、孟家岗、鹤岗4个参试点的树高、地径生长量最大,其较各参试点试验群体均值分别提高了22.2%、38.3%、18.0%、9.8%和72.2%、43.2%、21.5%、19.1%;RG11在小北湖参试点的树高、地径生长量最大,较当地试验群体均值提高了23.3%和21.5%;‘紫霞’系列紫2在错海参试点的树高生长表现较好,其较当地参试点群体均值提高了9.8%;其他彩叶桦生长表现一般或较差。③在6个彩叶桦新品种中,‘紫霞’系列新品种的保存率较高,平均为90.1%;而‘朝霞’系列新品种保存率较低,平均为78.7%。④依据各品种树高、地径的速生性和稳定性参数综合评价认为RG11较好。【结论】彩叶桦的生长性状在品种间和地点间存在显著差异,品种与地点存在显著交互作用。据幼龄期的分析初步确定‘朝霞’系列RG11的速生性较高、稳定性较强,可在全部6个参试点推广。

关键词: 彩叶桦新品种, 生长适应性, 多地点试验, 品种稳定性

Abstract:

【Objective】 The growth performance and stability of new varieties of color-leafed birch were studied under different multi-environment site conditions to provide a scientific basis for selecting excellent new varieties with good adaptability. 【Method】 Six strains of color-leafed birch new varieties and controls were tested at six different sites. A randomized complete block design was used in this study. Each site had 5 blocks, and each plot had 5-15 plants with a 2 m×3 m plant spacing. Tree height, ground diameter, and preservation rate were measured at an early age, and multi-site joint combined variance and stability analyses were conducted using the DPS statistical analysis software. 【Result】 (1) The differences in tree height and ground diameter growth between varieties and locations, and the interaction between varieties by location, were significant (P < 0.01). Therefore, conducting a selection and stability analysis of new birch varieties was important. (2) Among the new birch varieties, the strains RG12 and RG11 showed better growth performance. RG12 had the highest tree height and ground diameter growth at the following four testing sites: Maoershan, Baolongdian, Mengjiagang, and Hegang. RG12 increased by 22.2%, 38.3%, 18.0%, 9.8% and 72.2%, 43.2%, 21.5%, and 19.1% over the population mean, respectively. RG11 had the highest tree height and ground diameter growth at the Xiaobeihu site and increased by 23.3% and 21.5% over local controls, respectively. The tree height growth of Purple 2 in the ‘Zixia’ series performed well in the Cuohai site, with an increase of 9.8% compared to the arerage of the local pilot group. The other color-leafed birch varieties exhibited medium or poor growth performance. (3) Among the six new strains, the conservation rate of the new varieties of the “Zixia” series was 90.1% and was higher than average, while for the new varieties of the “Zhaoxia” series it was 78.7% and was lower than average. (4) Based on the growth and stability parameters of tree height and ground diameter, RG11 was the best variety. 【Conclusion】 The growth traits of color-leafed birch varieties differed significantly, which indicated that variety had a significant effect, as well as location and the variety-location interaction. According to the analysis of trees at a young age, our preliminary results showed that RG11 had rapid growth and stability, and could be promoted at all six testing site regions.

Key words: new varieties of color-leafed birch, growth adaptability, multi-site test, stability of varieties

中图分类号:

张曦文,陈旭,吴军,等. 彩叶桦新品种幼龄期生长适应性早期分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2024, 48(1): 124-130.

ZHANG Xiwen, CHEN Xu, WU Jun, SUN Guofei, WU Liguo, ZHAO Changhai, DAI Weizhao, LIU Guifeng. Growth adaptability analysis of new varieties of color-leafed birch at a young age[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2024, 48(1): 124-130.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202206038.

图/表 7

图1

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

表6

参考文献 28

[1]	姚红梅. 彩叶植物对提升城市园林景观的重要作用及应用前景[J]. 内蒙古农业科技, 2011, 39(6): 98-99.
	YAO H M. The important role and application prospect of color leafed plants in improving urban landscape[J]Inn Mong Agric Sci Technol, 2011, 39(6): 98-99. DOI: 10.3969/j.jssn.1007-0907.2011.06.048.
[2]	董俊岚. 北京彩叶树种资源及其在城市绿化中的应用[J]. 绿化与生活, 2005(1):21-22.
	DONG J L. Color-leafed tree species resources in Beijing and their application in urban greening[J]. Green Life, 2005(1):21-22.
[3]	田世龙, 马庆, 王阳, 等. 紫叶桦与裂叶桦杂交子代的种子活力及叶片性状分离[J]. 林业科学研究, 2019, 32(3):40-48.
	TIAN S L, MA Q, WANG Y, et al. Segregation of seed vigor and leaf traits in hybrid progenies of Betula pendula ‘Purple Rain’ and Betula pendula ‘Dplecprlicp’[J]. For Res, 2019, 32(3):40-48.DOI: 10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2019.03.006.
[4]	宋莹莹, 翟晓鸥, 郁永英, 等. 风箱果新品种‘金盏’的选育[J]. 防护林科技, 2018(7):75-76.
	SONG Y Y, ZHAI X O, YU Y Y, et al. New varieties of Physocarpus amurensis: Physocarpus amurensis × opulifolius ‘Luteus’[J]. Prot For Sci Technol, 2018(7):75-76.DOI: 10.13601/j.issn.1005-5215.2018.07.034.
[5]	马立华, 郁永英, 谭振平, 等. 锦带花属2个新品种[J]. 植物研究, 2010, 30(5):629-631.
	MA L H, YU Y Y, TAN Z P, et al. New varieties of Weigela[J]. Bull Bot Res, 2010, 30(5):629-631.
[6]	翟晓鸥, 郁永英, 李长海, 等. 彩叶梾木新品种‘辉煌’的选育[J]. 防护林科技, 2021(1):60-62.
	ZHAI X O, YU Y Y, LI C H, et al. Selection of new varieties of color-leaf cornusstolonifera: Cornus ‘Huihuang’[J]. Prot For Sci Technol, 2021(1):60-62.DOI: 10.13601/j.issn.1005-5215.2021.01.021.
[7]	王颖, 翟晓鸥, 李长海, 等. 丁香新品种‘瑜霞’的选育[J]. 防护林科技, 2018(8):73-74.
	WANG Y, ZHAI X O, LI C H, et al. New variety of Syringa velutina: Syringa velutina’Yuxia’[J]. Prot For Sci Technol, 2018(8):73-74.DOI: 10.13601/j.issn.1005-5215.2018.08.031.
[8]	刘桂丰, 张姝慧, 李慧玉, 等. 彩叶桦‘紫霞1号’新品种[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2021, 45(5):245-246.
	LIU G F, ZHANG S H, LI H Y, et al. Betula pendula‘Zixia 1’:a new birch cultivar[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2021, 45(5):245-246.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202006049.
[9]	姜静, 金冬雪, 李慧玉, 等. 白桦新品种‘朝霞1号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2020, 47(增刊2):3124-3125.
	JIANG J, JIN D X, LI H Y, et al. A new birch cultivar ‘Zhaoxia 1’[J]. Acta Hortic Sin, 2020, 47(S2):3124-3125.DOI: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0564.
[10]	姜静, 郑雨, 李慧玉, 等. 白桦新品种‘朝霞2号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2020, 47(增刊2):3126-3127.
	JIANG J, ZHENG Y, LI H Y, et al. A new birch cultivar ‘Zhaoxia 2’[J]. Acta Hortic Sin, 2020, 47(S2):3126-3127.DOI: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2020-0617.
[11]	GANG H X, LI R H, ZHAO Y M, et al. Loss of GLK1 transcription factor function reveals new insights in chlorophyll biosynthesis and chloroplast development[J]. J Exp Bot, 2019, 70(12):3125-3138.DOI: 10.1093/jxb/erz128.
[12]	刘宇, 徐焕文, 尚福强, 等. 3个地点白桦种源试验生长稳定性分析[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2016, 38(5):50-57.
	LIU Y, XU H W, SHANG F Q, et al. Growth stability of Betula platyphylla provenances from three sites[J]. J Beijing For Univ, 2016, 38(5):50-57.DOI: 10.13332/j.1000-1522.20150463.
[13]	王军辉, 顾万春, 李斌, 等. 桤木优良种源/家系的选择研究:生长的适应性和遗传稳定性分析[J]. 林业科学, 2000, 36(3):59-66.
	WANG J H, GU W C, LI B, et al. Study on selection of Alnus cremastogyne provenance/family:analysis of growth adaptation and genetic stability[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2000, 36(3):59-66.DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2000.03.010.
[14]	董虹妤, 刘青华, 金国庆, 等. 马尾松3代种质幼林生长性状遗传效应及其与环境互作[J]. 林业科学研究, 2015, 28(6):775-780.
	DONG H Y, LIU Q H, JIN G Q, et al. Genetic effects of growth traits for the third generation Pinus massoniana germplasm and the interaction with environment[J]. For Res, 2015, 28(6):775-780.DOI: 10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2015.06.003.
[15]	阮梓材, 胡德活, 陈仲. 杉木子代基因型×环境互作和稳定性的研究[J]. 广东林业科技, 1992, 8(4):13-19.
	RUAN Z C, HU D H, CHEN Z. Study on genotype × environment interaction and stability of Chinese fir progeny[J]. Guangdong For Sci Technol, 1992, 8(4):13-19.
[16]	唐启义. DPS数据处理系统:实验设计、统计分析及数据挖掘[M]. 2版. 北京: 科学出版社, 2010.
	TANG Q Y. DPS data processing system[M]. 2nd ed. Beijing: Science Press, 2010.
[17]	ZHANG H, ZHOU X Y, GU W, et al. Genetic stability of Larix olgensis provenances planted in different sites in northeast China[J]. For Ecol Manag, 2021, 485:118988.DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2021.118988.
[18]	NAGAMITSU T, NAGASAKA K, YOSHIMARU H, et al. Provenance tests for survival and growth of 50-year-old Japanese larch (Larix kaempferi) trees related to climatic conditions in central Japan[J]. Tree Genet Genomes, 2014, 10(1):87-99.DOI: 10.1007/s11295-013-0666-0.
[19]	YEISER J L, van BUIJTENEN J P, LOWE W. Genotype×environment interactions and seed movement for Loblolly pine in the Western Gulf Region[J]. Silvae Genetica, 1981, 30(6):196-200.
[20]	HANNRUP B, JANSSON G, DANELL. Genotype by environment interaction in Pinus sylvestris L.in southern Sweden[J]. Silvae Genet, 2008, 57(1/2/3/4/5/6):306-311.DOI: 10.1515/sg-2008-0046.
[21]	油松种源协作组. 油松不同生态型的适应性的研究[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 1987, 9(1):11-23.
	The Cooperation Group of the Provenance Test of Pinus tabulaeformis. A preliminary study on the adaptability of provenances of Pinus tabulaeformis[J]. J Beijing For Univ, 1987, 9(1):11-23.
[22]	晏姝, 胡德活, 郑会全, 等. 16年生杉木2代种子园家系区域测定分析[J]. 森林与环境学报, 2018, 38(4):414-418.
	YAN S, HU D H, ZHENG H Q, et al. Regional experiment on 16-year-old families of the 2nd generation seed orchard of Cunninghamia lanceolata[J]. J For Environ, 2018, 38(4):414-418.DOI: 10.13324/j.cnki.jfcf.2018.04.005.
[23]	赵兴堂, 夏德安, 曾凡锁, 等. 水曲柳生长性状种源与地点互作及优良种源选择[J]. 林业科学, 2015, 51(3):140-147.
	ZHAO X T, XIA D A, ZENG F S, et al. Provenances by sites interaction of growth traits and provenance selection of Fraxinus mandshurica[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2015, 51(3):140-147.DOI: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20150318.
[24]	王保松, 韩杰峰, 郭群, 等. 35杨等黑杨派杨树无性系区域化试验[J]. 江苏林业科技, 2010, 37(4):1-5.
	WANG B S, HAN J F, GUO Q, et al. Regional cultivation test of 8 clones in aigeiros section including Populus deltoides CL ‘35/66’[J]. J Jiangsu For Sci Technol, 2010, 37(4):1-5.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-7380.2010.04.001.
[25]	刘宁, 丁昌俊, 李波, 等. 12个欧美杨无性系生长初期基因型与环境的互作效应[J]. 林业科学, 2020, 56(8):63-72.
	LIU N, DING C J, LI B, et al. Effects of genotype by environment interaction of 12 Populus × euramericana clones in their early growth[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2020, 56(8):63-72.DOI: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20200808.
[26]	吕东林, 林琳, 郭译文, 等. 紫雨桦耐盐性及花色苷合成相关基因的表达特性[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 42(2):25-32.
	LYU D L, LIN L, GUO Y W, et al. Characterization of gene expression in anthocyanin synthesis and salt tolerance of Betula pendula ‘Purple Rain’[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2018, 42(2):25-32.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201704048.
[27]	宋佳宝, 刘煜光, 周晓慧, 等. 瞬时热胁迫对秋季3种植物叶片光系统Ⅱ活性和色素含量的影响[J]. 西部林业科学, 2021, 50(6):140-148.
	SONG J B, LIU Y G, ZHOU X H, et al. Effects of transient thermal stress on chlorophyll fluorescence parameters and pigments content in leaves of three plants in autumn[J]. J West China For Sci, 2021, 50(6):140-148.DOI: 10.16473/j.cnki.xblykx1972.2021.06.019.
[28]	张伟龙, 李雕, 杨静慧, 等. 土壤盐碱对彩叶树叶片主成分影响的红外光谱分析[J]. 天津农学院学报, 2020, 27(3):7-13.
	ZHANG W L, LI D, YANG J H, et al. Infrared spectroscopy analysis of effects of different soil salinity on salt tolerance of 8 color-leaf trees[J]. J Tianjin Agric Univ, 2020, 27(3):7-13.DOI: 10.19640/j.cnki.jtau.2020.03.002.

序号 No.	试验地 test point	地理因子 geographical factor			气候因子 climatic factors
序号 No.	试验地 test point	经度 longitude (E)	纬度 latitude (N)	海拔/m altitude	5—8月降水/mm May-August precipitation	年均降水量/ mm average annual precipitation	1月均温/℃ average temperature in January	7月均温/℃ average temperature in July	年均气温/℃ average annual temperature
1	龙江县错海 Cuohai	122°51'	47°27'	340	338.5	465.0	-17.7	23.5	3.4
2	尚志市帽儿山 Maoershan	127°31'	45°16'	400	397.9	723.8	-17.5	23.2	2.4
3	五常市宝龙店 Baolongdian	127°46'	44°54'	423	435.0	620.9	-17.15	21.8	3.4
4	宁安县小北湖 Xiaobeihu	128°42'	44°11'	810	377.6	650.0	-17.05	22.2	2.5
5	桦南县孟家岗 Mengjiagang	130°42'	46°25'	250	377.8	550.0	-14.25	22.2	2.7
6	鹤岗市东山区 Hegang	129°55'	47°23'	750	482.5	667.2	-16.05	21.9	2.8

品系 strain	错海 Cuohai	帽儿山 Maoershan	宝龙店 Baolongdian	小北湖 Xiaobeihu	孟家岗 Mengjiagang	鹤岗 Hegang	均值 mean
CK	90.0	86.7	91.3	96.3	94.7	100.0	94.5
RG1	90.0	90.0	90.0	60.0	73.3	92.3	82.6
RG8	60.0	68.4	87.5	23.1	100.0	98.0	72.8
RG11	56.3	80.0	86.7	53.3	100.0	100.0	79.4
RG12	80.0	60.0	70.0	80.0	90.0	100.0	80.0
紫1 Purple 1	100.0	75.0	100.0	80.0	80.0	100.0	89.2
紫2 Purple 2	86.7	86.7	80.0	66.7	93.3	100.0	91.1
均值mean	79.4	74.7	86.5	65.5	90.2	98.6	84.2

性状 trait	变异来源 source of variation	df	SS	MS	F	P
树高 tree height	地点内区组	24	0.468 8	0.019 5	0.499 5	0.975 3
	品种(品系)	5	51.637 7	10.327 5	264.076 4	0
	地点	6	16.615 8	2.769 3	70.811 1	0
	品种(品系)×地点	30	14.619 4	0.487 3	12.460 6	0
	试验误差	144	5.631 6	0.039 1
地径 ground diameter	地点内区组	24	2.174 4	0.090 6	1.564 0	0.057 1
	品种(品系)	5	62.705 4	12.541 1	216.510 4	0
	地点	6	42.186 9	7.031 2	121.381 6	0
	品种(品系)×地点	30	42.705 7	1.423 5	24.573 0	0
	试验误差	144	8.340 4	0.057 9

品系 strain	错海Cuohai		帽儿山Maoershan		宝龙店Baolongdian		小北湖Xiaobeihu		孟家岗Mengjiagang		鹤岗Hegang		平均mean
品系 strain	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter
CK	2.67 a	3.92 a	2.10 b	2.27 b	3.82 b	3.27 a	1.92 ab	3.90 a	1.86 bc	1.67 b	2.82 a	3.89 a	2.53 A	3.15 A
RG12	2.20 b	3.60 a	2.31 a	3.65 a	4.30 a	3.05 a	1.66 bc	1.40 e	2.10 a	1.98 a	2.79 ab	3.80 a	2.56 A	2.91 B
RG11	1.98 c	3.05 b	1.80 c	2.09 b	3.31 c	2.14 b	2.12 a	3.45 b	1.69 de	1.61 b	2.75 ab	3.50 b	2.28 B	2.64 C
紫2 Purple 2	2.24 b	2.60 c	1.86 c	1.40 d	3.29 c	1.94 b	1.59 c	2.89 c	1.88 b	1.62 b	2.47 c	2.81 d	2.22 B	2.21 D
RG1	1.85 c	2.89 bc	1.70 c	2.15 b	2.79 d	1.96 b	1.49 c	3.28 b	1.55 f	1.61 b	2.67 b	3.33 c	2.01 C	2.54 C
RG8	1.80 c	2.65 c	1.72 c	1.60 c	2.04 e	1.07 d	1.60 c	2.71 c	1.61 ef	1.31 c	2.35 c	2.71 d	1.85 D	2.01 E
紫1 Purple 1	1.57 d	1.64 d	1.76 c	1.65 c	2.22 e	1.46 c	1.61 c	2.26 d	1.75 cd	1.61 b	1.93 d	2.26 e	1.81 D	1.81 F
平均mean	2.04 C	2.91 B	1.89 D	2.12 C	3.11 A	2.13 C	1.72 E	2.84 B	1.78 DE	1.63 D	2.54 B	3.19 A

品系 strain	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter
RG1	Y₁=-0.210 3 + 1.018 43 x	Y₁=-0.037 7 + 1.181 11 x
RG8	Y₂= 0.948 3 + 0.414 70 x	Y₂=-0.087 5 + 1.168 76 x
RG11	Y₃=-0.124 8 + 1.100 99 x	Y₃=-0.057 0 + 1.299 81 x
CK	Y₄=-0.371 6 + 1.331 87 x	Y₄=-0.050 9 + 1.484 47 x
紫1 Purple 1	Y₅= 0.938 0 + 0.398 26 x	Y₅= 0.076 6 + 0.424 50 x
紫2 Purple 2	Y₆=-0.162 8 + 1.094 14 x	Y₆=-0.017 2 + 0.965 17 x
RG12	Y₇=-1.016 7 + 1.641 60 x	Y₇= 0.173 7 + 0.476 19 x

彩叶桦新品种幼龄期生长适应性早期分析

Growth adaptability analysis of new varieties of color-leafed birch at a young age

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 7

参考文献 28

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者

读者

审稿

品系 strain	速生性参数 rapid growth parameters				稳定性参数 stability parameters				回归系数 regression coefficient		适应地区 adaptation area		综合评价 comprehensive evaluation
	生长量 increment		效应值 effect size		方差 variance		变异度 degree of variation		回归系数 regression coefficient		适应地区 adaptation area		综合评价 comprehensive evaluation
	树高/m tree height	地径/cm ground diameter	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter	树高 tree height	地径 ground diameter
RG12	2.559 1	3.154	0.380 9	0.686 3	0.183	0.23	16.69 4	15.210 6	1.641 6	1.484 5	E2	E1、E2、E6	较好	好
CK	2.529 5	2.911	0.351 3	0.444 3	0.064	1.01	10.024 1	34.551 7	1.331 9	0.476 2	E1—E6,	E2、E5	好	较好
RG11	2.273 4	2.637	0.095 2	0.170 0	0.043	0.06	9.144 9	9.457 9	1.101 0	1.299 8	E1—E6	E1—E6	较好	较好
紫2 Purple 2	2.220 5	2.537	0.042 2	0.070 0	0.018	0.04	6.123 5	8.217 1	1.094 1	1.181 1	E1—E6	E1—E6	较好	较好
RG1	2.008 1	2.209	-0.170 2	-0.258 1	0.023	0.08	7.577 3	12.521 5	1.018 4	0.965 2	E1—E6	E1—E6	一般	一般
RG8	1.851 7	2.009	-0.326 6	-0.458 4	0.136	0.10	19.904 0	16.169 0	0.414 7	1.168 8	E3—E6	E1、E4、 E6	较差	较差
紫1 Purple 1	1.805 5	1.813	-0.372 8	-0.653 8	0.117	0.17	18.966 8	23.292 7	0.398 3	0.424 5	E4—E6	E4、E5	不好	不好