JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY ›› 2022, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (3): 117-126.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202103038
Previous Articles Next Articles
CHEN Han(), WANG Dongsheng, BAI Bing, LI Jiafeng, CHEN Kexin, CHENG Beibei*()
Received:
2021-03-23
Accepted:
2021-07-29
Online:
2022-05-30
Published:
2022-06-10
Contact:
CHENG Beibei
E-mail:1243553200@qq.com;beibei87613@126.com
CLC Number:
CHEN Han, WANG Dongsheng, BAI Bing, LI Jiafeng, CHEN Kexin, CHENG Beibei. Phenotypic diversity of 21 Hibiscus cultivars[J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(3): 117-126.
Table 1
The germplasm of 21 cultivars Hibiscus syriacus"
编号 No. | 品种名 name of cultivar | 样品图 sample | 编号 No. | 品种名 name of cultivar | 样品图 sample | 编号 No. | 品种名 name of cultivar | 样品图 sample |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | ‘白花单瓣’ ‘Totus Albus’ | 8 | ‘红心’ ‘Red heart’ | 15 | ‘雪纺’ ‘Chiffon’ | |||
2 | ‘黛安娜’ ‘Diana’ | 9 | ‘蓝莓冰沙’ ‘Blueberry moothie’ | 16 | ‘薰衣草雪纺’ ‘Lavandula chiffon’ | |||
3 | ‘弗洛鲁’ ‘Floru’ | 10 | ‘玫瑰’ ‘Rose’ | 17 | ‘胭脂红’ ‘Carmine’ | |||
4 | ‘粉色巨人’ ‘Pink giant’ | 11 | ‘牡丹’ ‘Paeoniflorus’ | 18 | ‘长苞’ ‘Longibracteatus’ | |||
5 | ‘粉色雪纺’ ‘Pink chiffon’ | 12 | ‘木桥’ ‘Woodbridge’ | 19 | ‘紫色法国酒馆’ ‘Purple French Cabaret’ | |||
6 | ‘汉帛’ ‘Hanbo’ | 13 | ‘千丝绊’ ‘Qiansiban’ | 20 | ‘紫玉’ ‘Shigyoku’ | |||
7 | ‘红色法国酒馆’ ‘Red French Cabaret’ | 14 | ‘柔粉红心’ ‘Soft pink’ | 21 | ‘紫柱’ ‘Purple pillar’ |
Table 2
The main morphological characters and value assignment criteria for Hibiscus syriacus"
序号 No. | 代号 code | 形态性状 morphological characters | 记载标准 criteria for documenting |
---|---|---|---|
1 | GS | 生长习性growth situation | 直立erect=1,半直立half erect=2,开opening=3,下垂drooping =4 |
2 | DB | 枝条密集程度density of branches | 稀疏sparse=1,中等moderate=2, 密集dense=3 |
3 | CNS | 当年生枝条的颜色color of new shoots | 绿色green=1, 棕色brown=2, 紫色purple=3 |
4 | LP | 叶柄长度length of petiole | 随机测10个叶柄长度,取平均值average length of petioles from ten leaves randomly sampled |
5 | LL | 叶片长度length of leaves | 随机测10 片叶的全叶长,取平均值average length of ten leaves randomly sampled |
6 | WL | 叶片宽度 width of leave | 随机测10 片叶的全叶宽,取平均值average width of ten leaves randomly sampled |
7 | AL | 叶片长宽比 aspect ratio of leave | 随机测10 片叶的长宽比,取平均值average aspect ratio of ten leaves randomly sampled |
8 | LBC | 叶片基部性状 leaf base character | 急尖sharp point=1,钝尖blunt point=2,圆circles=3 |
9 | GCDL | 叶片绿色着色程度 green coloring degree of leaves | 淡light=1,中度medium=2,浓thick=3 |
10 | DLC | 叶片裂片深浅无 degree of leaf crack | 无none=1,非常浅very shallow=2,浅shallow=3, 中medium=4,深deep=5 |
11 | BSU | 叶片表面起伏 blade surface undulation | 无或很弱none or very weak=1,中medium=2,强strong=3 |
12 | LMS | 叶缘锯齿 leaf margin serration | 少less=1,中medium=2, 多much=3 |
13 | LFL | 叶片是否花叶 leaves or flower leaf | 是yes=1,否no=2 |
14 | LC | 叶片颜色组成 leaf color | 绿色green=1,黄绿色green and yellow=2 |
15 | LFS | 花梗长度 length of flower stalk | 随机测10 朵花的花梗长,取平均值average length of ten flowers stalk randomly sampled |
16 | PS | 重瓣性 pleiopetaly state | 单瓣single=1,半重瓣semidouble=2,全重瓣double=3 |
17 | FC | 花色 flower color | 采用RHS标准比色卡测量(粉红pink and red=1,紫粉purple and pink=2,浅粉light pink=3,白色white=4,粉色pink=5,紫色purple=6,紫红色purple red=7,蓝紫色blue purple=8) |
18 | FCN | 花色数 flower color number | 1种one=1,2种two=2 |
19 | PDS | 雄蕊瓣化程度 petalization degree ofstamen | 无瓣化none=1,少数less=2,中度general=3,重度more=4 |
20 | SOP | 最外层花瓣片的生长姿态 the shape of the outermost petals | 直straight=1,开open=2, 水平horizontal=3 |
21 | PRR | 花瓣之间相对关系 petal relative relationship | 严重分离serious separate=1,稍微分离light separate=2, 轻度重叠slight overlap=3,中等重叠moderate overlap=4,严重重叠erious overlap=5 |
22 | DF | 花径大小diameter of flower | 随机测10 朵花的直径,取平均值average diameter of ten flowers randomly sampled |
23 | FH | 花内是否有花晕 floral halo | 无no=1,有yes=2 |
24 | HAS | 花晕相对花瓣面积大小 halo area size | 无none=1,小small=2,大big=3 |
25 | LDH | 花晕密集处长度 length of the denseness of halo | 随机取10 朵花,各测其中1片花瓣的花晕长度,取平均值average length of floral halo of ten flowers randomly sampled |
26 | LP2 | 花瓣长度 length of petal | 随机取10朵花,测每朵花最外和最内层各1个花瓣长度,取平均值average length of outer and inner petals of ten flowers randomly sampled |
27 | WP | 花瓣宽度 width of petal | 随机取10 朵花,测每朵花最外和最内层各1个花瓣长度,取平均值average width of outer and inner petals of ten flowers randomly sampled |
28 | PS2 | 花瓣形状 petal shape | 阔椭圆形broad elliptical=1,椭圆形ellipse=2,窄椭圆形narrow ellipse=3 |
29 | MCIP | 花瓣内部主色 main color inside petals | 粉色pink=1,紫色purple=2, 白色white=3, 蓝紫色blue purple=4 |
30 | ISCP | 花瓣内部次色 the inner secondary color of petals | 无色none=1,红色red=2,深红色oxblood red=3 |
31 | DPS | 花瓣次色的分布 the distribution of petal subchrome | 没有none=1,基部base=2 |
32 | LS | 雄蕊柱长度length of stamen | 随机取10 朵花,测每朵花最外和最内层各1个雄蕊长度,取平均值average length of outer and inner stamens of ten flowers randomly sampled |
33 | PW | 花瓣呈波浪形 the petals are wavy | 弱weak=1,中medium=2,强strong=3 |
34 | PC | 花瓣具裂 petals with cleft | 弱weak=1,中medium=2,强strong=3 |
Table 3
Diversity analysis of quantitative characters of Hibiscus cultivars"
序号 No. | 性状 character | 代号 code | 平均值 mean | 最小值 min | 最大值 max | 标准偏差 SD | 变异系数/% CV | H' |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 叶柄长度 | LP | 2.319 | 0.800 | 5.150 | 1.004 | 43.295 | 4.269 0 |
2 | 叶片长度 | LL | 7.033 | 5.390 | 8.600 | 0.741 | 10.536 | 4.384 7 |
3 | 叶片宽度 | WL | 4.482 | 3.380 | 5.870 | 0.708 | 15.797 | 4.375 2 |
4 | 叶片长宽比 | AL | 1.610 | 1.290 | 1.880 | 0.169 | 10.497 | 4.384 6 |
5 | 花梗长度 | LFS | 1.804 | 1.100 | 2.630 | 0.418 | 23.171 | 4.355 6 |
6 | 花径大小 | DF | 8.302 | 5.160 | 12.150 | 1.822 | 21.947 | 4.360 1 |
7 | 花晕密集处长度 | LDH | 1.284 | 0.000 | 2.500 | 0.521 | 40.576 | 4.217 9 |
8 | 花瓣长度 | LP2 | 4.653 | 3.500 | 6.590 | 1.038 | 22.308 | 4.359 0 |
9 | 花瓣宽度 | WP | 3.083 | 2.170 | 6.050 | 0.825 | 26.760 | 4.349 5 |
10 | 雄蕊柱长度 | LS | 4.060 | 2.650 | 5.650 | 0.884 | 21.773 | 4.358 9 |
平均值mean | 0.813 | 23.666 | 4.341 5 |
Table 4
Frequency distributions and diversity indexes on qualitative characteristics of Hibiscus cultivars"
序号 No. | 代号 code | 不同级别表型分布频率phenotypic degree | H' | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | |||
1 | FC | 0.095 | 0.190 | 0.190 | 0.143 | 0.048 | 0.190 | 0.095 | 0.048 | 4.198 0 |
2 | GS | 0.714 | 0.095 | 0.190 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.211 6 |
3 | DB | 0.143 | 0.571 | 0.286 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.324 5 |
4 | CNS | 0.905 | 0.095 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.349 7 |
5 | LBC | 0.571 | 0.381 | 0.048 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.284 7 |
6 | GCDL | 0.190 | 0.667 | 0.143 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.326 7 |
7 | DLC | 0.140 | 0.240 | 0.330 | 0.190 | 0.100 | — | — | — | 4.265 2 |
8 | BSU | 1.000 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.392 3 |
9 | LMS | 0.190 | 0.670 | 0.140 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.326 7 |
10 | LFL | — | 1.000 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.392 3 |
11 | LC | 1.000 | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.392 3 |
12 | PS | 0.430 | 0.190 | 0.380 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.234 7 |
13 | FCN | 0.330 | 0.670 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.329 3 |
14 | PDS | 0.380 | 0.100 | 0.140 | 0.380 | — | — | — | — | 4.175 8 |
15 | SOP | 0.100 | 0.710 | 0.190 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.286 3 |
16 | PRR | 0.190 | 0.670 | 0.140 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.364 4 |
17 | FH | 0.100 | 0.900 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.371 9 |
18 | HAS | 0.100 | 0.900 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.371 9 |
19 | PS2 | 0.430 | 0.430 | 0.140 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.273 7 |
20 | MCIP | 0.430 | 0.380 | 0.140 | 0.050 | — | — | — | — | 4.241 0 |
21 | ISCP | 0.330 | 0.480 | 0.190 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.284 9 |
22 | DPS | 0.330 | 0.670 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.329 3 |
23 | PW | 0.290 | 0.520 | 0.190 | — | — | — | — | — | 4.296 4 |
24 | PC | 0.570 | 0.430 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 4.306 9 |
Table 5
Correlation coefficients among phenotypic traits of Hibiscus cultivars"
性状 traits | GS | DB | CNS | LP | LL | WL | AL | LBC | GCDL | DLC | BSU | LMS | LFL | LC | LFS | PS | FC |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
GS | 1 | ||||||||||||||||
DB | 0.335 | 1 | |||||||||||||||
CNS | -0.195 | 0.181 | 1 | ||||||||||||||
LP | -0.292 | -0.267 | -0.137 | 1 | |||||||||||||
LL | 0.031 | -0.128 | 0.165 | 0.673** | 1 | ||||||||||||
WL | 0.142 | -0.036 | 0.375 | 0.361 | 0.702** | 1 | |||||||||||
AL | -0.171 | -0.059 | -0.334 | 0.092 | -0.090 | -0.763** | 1 | ||||||||||
LBC | 0.024 | 0.200 | 0.289 | -0.477* | -0.226 | 0.042 | -0.290 | 1 | |||||||||
GCDL | -0.055 | -0.241 | 0.027 | -0.350 | -0.045 | -0.250 | 0.371 | 0.208 | 1 | ||||||||
DLC | -0.698** | -0.100 | 0.179 | -0.048 | -0.110 | -0.017 | -0.077 | 0.099 | 0.132 | 1 | |||||||
BSU | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | ||||||
LMS | 0.258 | 0.148 | -0.255 | 0.257 | 0.150 | 0.025 | 0.090 | -0.074 | -0.295 | -0.294 | b | 1 | |||||
LFL | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | |||||
LC | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | b | ||||
LFS | -0.111 | -0.223 | -0.206 | 0.085 | 0.044 | 0.044 | -0.005 | -0.263 | 0.145 | 0.290 | b | 0.153 | b | b | 1 | ||
PS | -0.302 | 0.012 | 0.017 | 0.036 | -0.176 | 0.000 | -0.125 | -0.138 | -0.004 | 0.266 | b | -0.281 | b | b | 0.231 | 1 | |
FC | 0.074 | -0.041 | 0.387 | -0.198 | 0.218 | 0.265 | -0.206 | 0.336 | 0.324 | 0.062 | b | -0.079 | b | b | 0.059 | 0.233 | 1 |
FCN | -0.212 | -0.316 | -0.115 | 0.050 | -0.019 | -0.178 | 0.214 | -0.115 | 0.117 | 0.087 | b | -0.059 | b | b | 0.134 | -0.375 | -0.327 |
PDS | -0.191 | 0.136 | -0.006 | 0.107 | 0.000 | 0.124 | -0.130 | -0.136 | -0.030 | 0.171 | b | -0.216 | b | b | 0.197 | 0.936** | 0.147 |
SOP | 0.331 | -0.068 | -0.099 | -0.445* | -0.003 | -0.002 | 0.000 | -0.075 | 0.380 | 0.038 | b | -0.329 | b | b | 0.099 | 0.016 | 0.290 |
PRR | 0.362 | 0.407 | 0.027 | -0.024 | 0.129 | 0.022 | 0.100 | 0.349 | 0.137 | -0.294 | b | 0.281 | b | b | -0.368 | -0.189 | -0.079 |
DF | -0.094 | -0.204 | 0.082 | -0.044 | 0.085 | -0.062 | 0.152 | -0.256 | 0.006 | 0.049 | b | -0.068 | b | b | -0.033 | -0.541* | -0.107 |
FH | -0.623** | -0.435* | 0.105 | 0.172 | 0.089 | 0.158 | -0.138 | -0.289 | -0.027 | 0.517* | b | -0.309 | b | b | 0.365 | 0.344 | 0.008 |
HAS | -0.623** | -0.435* | 0.105 | 0.172 | 0.089 | 0.158 | -0.138 | -0.289 | -0.027 | 0.517* | b | -0.309 | b | b | 0.365 | 0.344 | 0.008 |
LDH | -0.546* | -0.408 | -0.006 | 0.148 | -0.027 | 0.063 | -0.126 | -0.275 | -0.227 | 0.418 | b | -0.120 | b | b | 0.390 | 0.049 | -0.209 |
LP2 | 0.191 | 0.007 | 0.105 | -0.262 | -0.113 | 0.106 | -0.233 | 0.025 | -0.042 | 0.044 | b | 0.035 | b | b | 0.242 | -0.628** | -0.343 |
WP | 0.196 | 0.018 | 0.601** | -0.286 | 0.055 | 0.400 | -0.502* | 0.370 | -0.031 | -0.027 | b | -0.333 | b | b | -0.189 | -0.417 | 0.118 |
PS2 | -0.184 | -0.335 | -0.331 | 0.431 | 0.013 | -0.139 | 0.190 | -0.017 | -0.034 | -0.108 | b | 0.439* | b | b | 0.204 | -0.249 | -0.156 |
MCIP | 0.345 | 0.225 | 0.073 | -0.463* | -0.113 | -0.129 | 0.074 | 0.372 | 0.370 | -0.171 | b | 0.079 | b | b | -0.040 | -0.136 | 0.576** |
ISCP | -0.133 | -0.480* | -0.163 | 0.239 | 0.089 | -0.015 | 0.085 | -0.180 | -0.017 | -0.082 | b | 0.100 | b | b | 0.099 | -0.384 | -0.321 |
DPS | -0.212 | -0.316 | -0.115 | 0.050 | -0.019 | -0.178 | 0.214 | -0.115 | 0.117 | 0.087 | b | -0.059 | b | b | 0.134 | -0.375 | -0.327 |
LS | 0.159 | -0.248 | -0.117 | -0.157 | -0.367 | -0.159 | -0.093 | -0.009 | -0.016 | -0.165 | b | 0.123 | b | b | 0.040 | -0.051 | -0.044 |
PW | -0.267 | -0.078 | 0.045 | 0.068 | 0.159 | 0.144 | -0.055 | 0.232 | 0.352 | 0.401 | b | 0.110 | b | b | 0.389 | 0.303 | 0.579** |
PC | -0.277 | 0.108 | 0.047 | 0.209 | 0.152 | 0.103 | 0.029 | -0.211 | -0.096 | 0.189 | b | -0.263 | b | b | 0.062 | 0.796** | 0.073 |
性状 traits | FCN | PDS | SOP | PRR | DF | FH | HAS | LDH | LP2 | WP | PS2 | MCIP | ISCP | DPS | LS | PW | PC |
FCN | 1 | ||||||||||||||||
PDS | -0.405 | 1 | |||||||||||||||
SOP | 0.000 | 0.033 | 1 | ||||||||||||||
PRR | -0.059 | -0.030 | -0.152 | 1 | |||||||||||||
DF | 0.405 | -0.551** | 0.276 | -0.421 | 1 | ||||||||||||
FH | 0.459* | 0.249 | 0.099 | -0.591** | 0.296 | 1 | |||||||||||
HAS | 0.459* | 0.249 | 0.099 | -0.591** | 0.296 | 1.000** | 1 | ||||||||||
LDH | 0.506* | -0.041 | 0.064 | -0.749** | 0.507* | 0.819** | 0.819** | 1 | |||||||||
LP2 | 0.280 | -0.619** | 0.161 | -0.227 | 0.528* | -0.049 | -0.049 | 0.346 | 1 | ||||||||
WP | 0.030 | -0.390 | 0.109 | -0.028 | 0.334 | -0.158 | -0.158 | 0.012 | 0.608** | 1 | |||||||
PS2 | 0.000 | -0.350 | -0.604** | -0.034 | -0.050 | -0.132 | -0.132 | -0.030 | 0.022 | -0.262 | 1 | ||||||
MCIP | -0.395 | -0.164 | 0.188 | -0.116 | 0.029 | -0.453* | -0.453* | -0.328 | 0.055 | 0.159 | -0.011 | 1 | |||||
ISCP | 0.854** | -0.425 | 0.062 | -0.133 | 0.348 | 0.392 | 0.392 | 0.552** | 0.312 | 0.022 | 0.110 | -0.439* | 1 | ||||
DPS | 1.000** | -0.405 | 0.000 | -0.059 | 0.405 | 0.459* | 0.459* | 0.506* | 0.280 | 0.030 | 0.000 | -0.395 | 0.854** | 1 | |||
LS | 0.075 | -0.107 | -0.032 | -0.289 | 0.109 | -0.184 | -0.184 | 0.148 | 0.261 | 0.223 | 0.030 | 0.297 | 0.219 | 0.075 | 1 | ||
PW | -0.099 | 0.212 | 0.043 | -0.133 | -0.080 | 0.192 | 0.192 | 0.126 | -0.177 | -0.155 | 0.142 | 0.378 | -0.126 | -0.099 | 0.037 | 1 | |
PC | -0.408 | 0.888** | -0.059 | -0.096 | -0.354 | 0.281 | 0.281 | -0.002 | -0.628** | -0.369 | -0.334 | -0.145 | -0.504* | -0.408 | -0.234 | 0.121 | 1 |
Table 6
Principal component analysis of phenotypic characters of Hibiscus cultivars"
表型性状 phenotypic | 主成分 principle component | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
GS | 0.017 | -0.311 | 0.605 | -0.302 | 0.446 | 0.010 | 0.328 | -0.063 | -0.206 | |
DB | -0.313 | 0.087 | 0.226 | -0.289 | -0.198 | -0.197 | 0.027 | -0.528 | 0.336 | |
CNS | -0.166 | 0.551 | 0.347 | -0.259 | -0.252 | 0.211 | -0.094 | -0.110 | 0.216 | |
LP | -0.077 | -0.411 | -0.226 | -0.624 | 0.299 | 0.009 | 0.019 | 0.267 | 0.412 | |
LL | -0.082 | 0.060 | 0.162 | -0.634 | 0.619 | 0.143 | -0.166 | 0.248 | 0.195 | |
WL | -0.138 | 0.589 | -0.034 | -0.689 | 0.221 | 0.185 | 0.090 | 0.211 | -0.028 | |
AL | 0.097 | -0.735 | 0.158 | 0.403 | 0.201 | -0.095 | -0.294 | -0.032 | 0.208 | |
LBC | -0.021 | 0.735 | 0.051 | 0.187 | -0.180 | 0.297 | 0.384 | -0.045 | 0.047 | |
GCDL | -0.028 | 0.277 | 0.168 | 0.555 | 0.346 | 0.342 | -0.131 | 0.438 | 0.078 | |
DLC | -0.194 | 0.399 | -0.205 | 0.214 | -0.213 | 0.049 | -0.433 | -0.082 | 0.490 | |
LMS | 0.213 | -0.232 | -0.467 | -0.309 | 0.405 | 0.127 | 0.211 | -0.479 | 0.105 | |
LFS | 0.049 | 0.099 | -0.675 | 0.144 | 0.413 | 0.153 | -0.352 | 0.015 | -0.127 | |
表型性状 phenotypic | 主成分 principle component | |||||||||
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ||
PS | -0.901 | -0.223 | -0.138 | 0.177 | -0.115 | -0.035 | 0.161 | 0.085 | 0.102 | |
FC | -0.434 | 0.451 | 0.206 | 0.316 | 0.425 | 0.192 | 0.027 | -0.300 | -0.177 | |
FCN | 0.828 | -0.216 | 0.147 | 0.211 | -0.032 | 0.262 | 0.138 | 0.035 | 0.212 | |
PDS | -0.913 | -0.273 | -0.069 | 0.050 | -0.058 | -0.077 | 0.108 | 0.162 | 0.122 | |
SOP | -0.084 | -0.059 | 0.710 | 0.271 | 0.388 | -0.165 | -0.186 | 0.066 | -0.046 | |
PRR | -0.035 | -0.224 | 0.159 | -0.045 | -0.216 | 0.869 | -0.031 | -0.106 | 0.112 | |
DF | 0.588 | 0.077 | 0.439 | -0.104 | 0.220 | -0.421 | -0.223 | -0.106 | 0.066 | |
LDH | 0.633 | 0.165 | -0.338 | -0.044 | -0.005 | -0.584 | 0.043 | -0.057 | 0.158 | |
LP2 | 0.766 | 0.452 | -0.147 | -0.115 | -0.075 | -0.152 | -0.328 | -0.002 | -0.114 | |
WP | 0.324 | 0.749 | 0.307 | -0.237 | -0.241 | 0.024 | -0.076 | 0.216 | 0.033 | |
PS2 | 0.317 | 0.056 | -0.838 | -0.057 | 0.110 | 0.225 | -0.005 | 0.018 | -0.289 | |
MCIP | -0.174 | 0.596 | 0.089 | 0.324 | 0.515 | -0.302 | 0.217 | -0.092 | -0.001 | |
ISCP | 0.815 | -0.351 | 0.077 | 0.110 | 0.077 | 0.180 | 0.178 | 0.028 | 0.095 | |
DPS | 0.828 | -0.216 | 0.147 | 0.211 | -0.032 | 0.262 | 0.138 | 0.035 | 0.212 | |
LS | 0.289 | 0.257 | -0.276 | 0.282 | -0.001 | -0.357 | 0.523 | 0.347 | 0.309 | |
PW | -0.295 | 0.344 | -0.303 | 0.340 | 0.552 | 0.147 | 0.028 | -0.226 | 0.345 | |
PC | -0.838 | -0.174 | -0.111 | -0.035 | -0.124 | -0.211 | -0.059 | 0.186 | 0.011 | |
特征值 eigenvalue | 6.572 | 4.277 | 3.347 | 2.873 | 2.506 | 2.267 | 1.393 | 1.323 | 1.241 | |
方差贡献率/% variance contribution rate | 22.661 | 14.747 | 11.541 | 9.907 | 8.643 | 7.818 | 4.803 | 4.562 | 4.278 | |
累计贡献率/% cumulative contribution rate | 22.661 | 37.408 | 48.949 | 58.856 | 67.499 | 75.317 | 80.120 | 84.682 | 88.960 |
[1] | 黄家禄. 扶桑的品类及繁殖栽培[J]. 中国花卉盆景, 1995(12):10-11. |
HUANG J L. Species and propagation of Hibiscus japonicus[J]. Chinese Flower Bonsai, 1995(12):10-11. | |
[2] |
SHIM K K, HA Y M. Genetic resources for new cultivar breeding of selected Asian ornamentals[J]. Acta Hortic, 2003(620):389-393.DOI: 10.17660/actahortic.2003.620.49.
doi: 10.17660/actahortic.2003.620.49 |
[3] | SONG H, PARK I, LEE G J, et al. Induced mutation breeding of rose of Sharon (Hibiscus syriacus) using gamma-ray in Korea[J]. 2006, 35(10):354-360. |
[4] | KWON S H, WON JL, KIM J R. Radiosensitivity and mutation frequency in soybean[J]. Korean Journal of Breeding, 1980, 43(3):134-142. |
[5] | 张莹, 曹玉芬, 霍宏亮, 等. 基于花表型性状的梨种质资源多样性研究[J]. 园艺学报, 2016, 43(7):1245-1256. |
ZHANG Y, CAO Y F, HUO H L, et al. Research on diversity of pear germplasm resources based on flowers phenotype traits[J]. Acta Hortic Sin, 2016, 43(7):1245-1256.DOI: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2015-0936.
doi: 10.16420/j.issn.0513-353x.2015-0936 |
|
[6] | 国家林业和草原局. 植物新品种特异性、一致性、稳定性测试指南·木槿和朱槿:LY/T 3209-2020[S]. 北京: 中国标准出版社, 2020. |
NFGA. Guidelines for the conduct of tests for distinctness,uniformity and stability:rose of Sharon(Hibiscus syriacus L.)and China Rose(Hibiscus rosa-sinensis L.):LY/T 3209-2020: Beijing: Standards Press of China, 2020. | |
[7] | 潘月, 叶康, 秦俊. 木槿品种在上海园林中的应用评价[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2019, 47(11):116-120. |
PAN Y, YE K, QIN J. Evaluation of langscape application value of Hibiscus syriacus introduced in Shanghai[J]. Guizhou Agric Sci, 2019, 47(11):116-120.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3601.2019.11.024.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3601.2019.11.024 |
|
[8] |
方精云, 沈泽昊, 唐志尧, 等. “中国山地植物物种多样性调查计划” 及若干技术规范[J]. 生物多样性, 2004, 12(1):5-9.
doi: 10.17520/biods.2004002 |
FANG J Y, SHEN Z H, TANG Z Y, et al. The protocol for the survey plan for plant species diversity of China’s mountains[J]. Biodivers Sci, 2004, 12(1):5-9.DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-0094.2004.01.002.
doi: 10.3321/j.issn:1005-0094.2004.01.002 |
|
[9] | 杨静, 刘海英, 钱春荣, 等. 黑龙江省水稻品种SSR标记遗传多样性分析[J]. 东北农业大学学报, 2008, 39(6):1-10. |
YANG J, LIU H Y, QIAN C R, et al. Analysis on genetic diversity of rice varieties in Heilongjiang Province by using SSR[J]. J Northeast Agric Univ, 2008, 39(6):1-10.DOI: 10.19720/j.cnki.issn.1005-9369.2008.06.001.
doi: 10.19720/j.cnki.issn.1005-9369.2008.06.001 |
|
[10] | 赵庆勇, 张亚东, 朱镇, 等. 采用SSR标记和表型性状聚类对杂交粳稻亲本的遗传多样性研究[J]. 杂交水稻, 2010, 25(4):68-74. |
ZHAO Q Y, ZHANG Y D, ZHU Z, et al. Genetic diversity of parental lines in Japonica hybrid rice based on cluster analysis of SSR markers and phenotypic characters[J]. Hybrid Rice, 2010, 25(4):68-74.DOI: 10.16267/j.cnki.1005-3956.2010.04.005.
doi: 10.16267/j.cnki.1005-3956.2010.04.005 |
|
[11] | 向贵生, 王其刚, 蹇洪英, 等. 云南川滇蔷薇天然居群表型多样性分析[J]. 云南大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 40(4):786-794. |
XIANG G S, WANG Q G, JIAN H Y, et al. Phenotypic diversity of natural population of Rosa soulieana in Yunnan[J]. J Yunnan Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2018, 40(4):786-794.DOI: 10.7540/j.ynu.20170224.
doi: 10.7540/j.ynu.20170224 |
|
[12] | 张琳, 郭丽丽, 郭大龙, 等. 牡丹杂交F1代性状分离规律及混合遗传分析[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018, 42(6):51-60. |
ZHANG L, GUO L L, GUO D L, et al. Separation analysis and mixed genetic analysis of phenotypic traits in F1 progenies of tree peony[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2018, 42(6):51-60.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201712034.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201712034 |
|
[13] | 李叶芳, 马诗雨, 宋杰, 等. 大白花杜鹃三个天然居群的表型多样性分析[J]. 北方园艺, 2019(1):115-120. |
LI Y F, MA S Y, SONG J, et al. Phenotypic diversity of three natural populations of Rhododendron decorum[J]. North Hortic, 2019(1):115-120.DOI: 10.11937/bfyy.20181582.
doi: 10.11937/bfyy.20181582 |
|
[14] | 索玉静, 孙鹏, 韩卫娟, 等. 柿雄花表型及花粉形态多样性研究[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2019, 24(2):48-60. |
SUO Y J, SUN P, HAN W J, et al. Study on the male flower phenotype and pollen morphology diversity of persimmon[J]. J China Agric Univ, 2019, 24(2):48-60.DOI: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2019.02.06.
doi: 10.11841/j.issn.1007-4333.2019.02.06 |
|
[15] | 李芳, 霍达, 王进. 西南红山茶花表型性状的变异[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2019, 47(4):84-88. |
LI F, HUO D, WANG J. Variation of phenotypic traits of Camellia pitardii flower[J]. Guizhou Agric Sci, 2019, 47(4):84-88.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3601.2019.04.018.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-3601.2019.04.018 |
|
[16] | 吴根松, 孙丽丹, 郝瑞杰, 等. 梅花种质资源表型多样性研究[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2011, 39(20):12008-12009,12012. |
WU G S, SUN L D, HAO R J, et al. Study on the phenotypic diversity of P.mume sieb.et Zucc.Germ plasm resources[J]. J Anhui Agric Sci, 2011, 39(20):12008-12009,12012.DOI: 10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2011.20.216.
doi: 10.13989/j.cnki.0517-6611.2011.20.216 |
|
[17] | 曾方玉, 周丽君, 阮成江. 木槿与野西瓜苗花特征和繁育系统的比较研究[J]. 广西植物, 2008, 28(6):750-754. |
ZENG F Y, ZHOU L J, RUAN C J. Comparative study on floral traits and breeding system of Hibiscus syriacus and H.trionum[J]. Guihaia, 2008, 28(6):750-754.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3142.2008.06.010.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3142.2008.06.010 |
|
[18] | 张艳红, 王晶. 木槿的开花特性与繁育系统的初步研究[J]. 辽东学院学报(自然科学版), 2016, 23(2):122-125. |
ZHANG Y H, WANG J. Blooming characteristics and breeding system of Hibiscus syriacus Linn[J]. J East Liaoning Univ (Nat Sci),2016, 23(2):122-125.DOI: 10.14168/j.issn.1673-4939.2016.02.08.
doi: 10.14168/j.issn.1673-4939.2016.02.08 |
|
[19] |
柳江群, 尹明宇, 左丝雨, 等. 长柄扁桃天然种群表型变异[J]. 植物生态学报, 2017, 41(10):1091-1102.
doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2017.0104 |
LIU J Q, YIN M Y, ZUO S Y, et al. Phenotypic variations in natural populations of Amygdalus pedunculata[J]. Chin J Plant Ecol, 2017, 41(10):1091-1102.DOI: 10.17521/cjpe.2017.0104.
doi: 10.17521/cjpe.2017.0104 |
|
[20] | 张海平, 房伟民, 陈发棣, 等. 部分睡莲属植物形态性状的多样性分析[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2009, 32(4):47-52. |
ZHANG H P, FANG W M, CHEN F D, et al. Investigation on the morphological diversity of taxa in genus Nymphaea[J]. J Nanjing Agric Univ, 2009, 32(4):47-52. | |
[21] | 范义昌, 柴珊珊, 张曼曼, 等. 宁夏沙枣种质资源表型多样性分析[J]. 北方园艺, 2018(23):37-43. |
FAN Y C, CHAI S S, ZHANG M M, et al. Phenotypic genetic diversity of Elaeagnus angustifolia resources from Ningxia[J]. North Hortic, 2018(23):37-43.DOI: 10.11937/bfyy.20181511.
doi: 10.11937/bfyy.20181511 |
|
[22] | 韦晓霞, 赖瑞联, 陈瑾, 等. 橄榄种质资源花序表型性状遗传多样性研究[J]. 热带亚热带植物学报, 2019, 27(1):1-10. |
WEI X X, LAI R L, CHEN J, et al. Studies on genetic diversity on inflorescence phenotypic characteristics of Canarium album germplasm resource[J]. J Trop Subtrop Bot, 2019, 27(1):1-10.DOI: 10.11926/jtsb.3940.
doi: 10.11926/jtsb.3940 |
|
[23] | 陈恒新, 刘连芬, 钱关泽, 等. 海棠(Malus spp.)品种分类研究进展[J]. 聊城大学学报(自然科学版), 2007, 20(2):57-61. |
CHEN H X, LIU L F, QIAN G Z, et al. Advances in classification for cultivars of crabapple(Malus spp.)[J]. J Liaocheng Univ (Nat Sci Ed),2007, 20(2):57-61.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6634.2007.02.017.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-6634.2007.02.017 |
|
[24] | 肖芬, 王晓红, 王玉勤, 等. 27个木槿品种的数量分类和主成分分析[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2019, 39(2):59-64. |
XIAO F, WANG X H, WANG Y Q, et al. Numerical classification and principal component analysis of 27 Hibiscus syriacus cultivars[J]. J Central South Univ For Technol, 2019, 39(2):59-64.DOI: 10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x.2019.02.010.
doi: 10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x.2019.02.010 |
|
[25] | 刘龙昌, 向其柏. 桂花品种数量分类研究[J]. 福建林学院学报, 2004, 24(3):233-236. |
LIU L C, XIANG Q B. Study on numerical taxonomy of sweet Osmanthus cultivars[J]. J Fujian Coll For, 2004, 24(3):233-236.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-389X.2004.03.010.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-389X.2004.03.010 |
|
[26] | 唐东芹. 桂花品种数量分类研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报, 1998, 22(1):233-236. |
TANG D Q. A study on numerical classification of the cultivars of sweet Osmanthus [Osmanthus fragrans (Thunb.) Lour.][J]. J Nanjing For Univ, 1998, 22(1):233-236. |
[1] | CHENG Wenqiang, XU Yang, WU Kaiyun, ZHAO Xianmin, GONG Bangchu. Comparison of three comprehensive evaluation methods to evaluate the quality of persimmon fruit [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2023, 47(4): 61-72. |
[2] | JI Linlin, CHEN Suchuan, WU Zhihui, CHANG Jun, TAO Rupeng, ZHOU Misheng, CAI Xinling. Variation and cluster analysis on the main economic characters and nutrients of fruit from Carya cathayensis and C. dabieshanensis fine trees [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2022, 46(1): 131-137. |
[3] | WU Hong, YAN Liping, LI Chengzhong, XIA Qun, ZHOU Xia, ZHAO Baoyuan. Morphological characteristics and wind dispersal characteristics of samara of common Acer species [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2021, 45(2): 103-110. |
[4] | BAI Wenyu, FENG Maosong, TIE Liehua, WANG Yalin, GAO Jiaxiang, LAI Juan, DAI Xiaokang. Biomass and its allocation characteristics of one-year-old grafted seedlings of different clones of Alnus ledgeriana [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2021, 45(2): 87-95. |
[5] | YUE Zhi, YING Tianhui, MA Qun. Algorithm and quantization in historical garden research in Xinghua Village, Nanjing, in the Ming and Qing dynasties [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(5): 25-33. |
[6] | QIAO Dongya, WANG Peng, WANG Shu’an, LI Linfang, GAO Lulu, YANG Rutong, WANG Qing, LI Ya. Genetic diversity analysis of Lagerstroemia germplasm resourcesbased on SNP markers [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2020, 44(4): 18-25. |
[7] | HUANG Jinsi, XI Xiaotong, DING Xiaolei, YE Jianren. Study on the population differentiation of Bursaphelenchus xylophilus in Guangdong Province by SNP markers [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(6): 25-31. |
[8] | ZHAI Dacai, FANG Zhen, WU Jinfei, YAO Qi, BAI Xiaohui, YANG Lichun, HAO Qingqing, ZHANG Yan. Analysis on the character diversity of Ormosia hosiei seeds from different producing regions [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(04): 63-69. |
[9] | ZHENG Sunyuan, ZHU Hong, JIN Siyu, WANG Mengjuan, SUN Jie, GU Chengcheng, PEI Yinwei, WANG Xianrong, DUAN Yifan. Environment-dependent phenotypic variation of Osmanthus fragrans [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(02): 38-46. |
[10] | PU Jing,ZHANG Jing, ZHAO Cong, FAN Junjun, JIANG Wenlong, ZHANG Wangxiang,WANG Gaiping. Analysis and evaluation on flower color characteristics of the Malus ‘Purple Prince' half-sib progenies [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2019, 43(01): 18-24. |
[11] | ZHANG Wangxiang, FAN Junjun, YANG Ping, ZHOU Ting,PU Jing, CAO Fuliang. Analysis of phenotypic characteristics of the Malus ‘Purple Prince’ half-sib progenies at the seedling stage [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2017, 41(06): 33-40. |
[12] | HAN Zhiqiang, YUAN Deyi, CHEN Wentao, LI Chengxiang, XIE Kaiyao. Synthetical evaluation of the fruit quality of Ziziphus jujuba Mill. under different combinations of boron,zinc microelement fertilizer [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2015, 39(02): 40-46. |
[13] | GU Yu, SHI Gangying, LI Zhen, WANG Xianrong. Karyotype parameters analysis and genetic relationship discussion of Cerasus(Rosaceae) [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2014, 38(增刊): 25-29. |
[14] | HUANG Fuzhao,LÜ Dayong,WANG Fusheng,FAN Yi,WEN Zhongbin. Site classification of Phyllostachys nidularia Munro in Liangping county,Chongqing city [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2012, 36(02): 142-146. |
[15] | DING Sheng. Cluster analysis on construction of regional forestry socialization service system [J]. JOURNAL OF NANJING FORESTRY UNIVERSITY, 2011, 35(05): 103-106. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||