免费文献传递   相关文献

Studies on the Constructing of Pepper Core Collection Based on Phenotypic Data

基于表型数据的辣椒核心种质构建研究



全 文 :书!"#$%&
,2016,36(4):0804-0810
犃犮狋犪犅狅狋.犅狅狉犲犪犾.犗犮犮犻犱犲狀狋.犛犻狀.
  !"#$:10004025(2016)04080407               犱狅犻:10.7606/j.issn.10004025.2016.04.0804
%&(
:20160118;)*&%+(:20160330
,-./

( ) * + % , -
(31260479),. ! / ) * + % , - (20133BAB20010),. ! / 0 1 2 3 + 4 5 6 7 8 9 :
(JXXTCX2015005)
0123

; <(1988-),=,>?@A4BC,DEFGHIJKLMNOPC$%QR4B。Email:leixxgang@163.com

STUV

W%X

YZ4B[

@AC\]

DEFG^_`HIMa78NOPC$QR4B
。Email:19889766@163.com
,456789:;<=>?@ABC
! "1,2,#$%1,& 1,( )1,2,*+,1
(1..!/23+%bHIcd4Be,fg330200;2..!23h% 2%b,fg330045)
D E:ijklmn603opqMarst,uv_wxyhz{|O}5~。,28€‚nƒ„yv,…†
‡ˆ‰Š

‹Œu‰Š

y‰ŠŽJKxy‰Š‘’“”~•–oy

‰—4M~•–‰Š‘、6M˜
™–š›œ2M–Œ‘>žpqŸ Ma¡nU†œ¢_。£_ƒ¤:(1)‡ˆ‰Š、‹Œu‰Š、y‰
Š

JKxy‰Š‘¥¦nstoy§¨¦Ÿ Maoy©ªr24.2%、22.2%、21.1%、17.8%,«¤JK
xy‰Š‘”~–y¬n­®¯°±²

³–´µ¶·
。(2)¸ ˜™–š›r15%¹,JK
xy‰Š‘žn¨¦Ÿ MaJKxy
(I)º»±h,ƒ„l¼‰Š(RPR)½¾98%;¸ ˜™–š›½
¾20%¹,RPR¿、ÀÁÂy(CV)œÃÄÅÆÇ(CR)È*‹Éʵ,ËI¿ÌÍÎz;«¤15%rÆÏn˜™–
š›
。(3)Іy‰Š‘œ‰Š‘,>15%n˜™–š›Ñ,Ò`–žnŸ MaI¿、RPR¿、
CV¿ŽCR¿¶ÓÔՖ。(4)Ö4Buve×ØnÙڌ۱Ü>ƒ„Ý‹žÞßàá91oManpq
Ÿ Ma

FGH

pq

ƒ„yv

Ÿ Ma

–š›

–Œ‘
IJKL$
:Q346 !MNOP:A
犛狋狌犱犻犲狊狅狀狋犺犲犆狅狀狊狋狉狌犮狋犻狀犵狅犳犘犲狆狆犲狉犆狅狉犲犆狅犾犲犮狋犻狅狀
犅犪狊犲犱狅狀犘犺犲狀狅狋狔狆犻犮犇犪狋犪
LEIGang1,2,ZHOUKunhua1,FANGRong1,WUYin1,2,CHENXuejun1
(1VegetableandFlowerInstitute,JiangxiAcademyofAgriculturalSciences,Nanchang330200,China;2ColegeofAgronomy,
JiangxiAgriculturalUniversity,Nanchang330045,China)
犃犫狊狋狉犪犮狋:Themethodtoconstructpeppercoregermplasmbasedonphenotypicdatawasstudiedwith603
accessionswhichweredividedinto5groupsbythefruitshapeindex.Fourtypesofsamplingproportion
methodsingroup,sixoveralsamplingscalesandtwosamplingmethodswerecomparedbythephenotypic
dataof28characters.Themainresultswereasfolows:(1)Theproportionsofmaterialsselectedbypro
portionalratio,squarerootratio,logarithmratioanddiversityratioinprimarycoregermplasm were
24.2%,22.2%,21.1%and17.8%,respectively,whichilustratedthatthebestpropersamplingpropor
tionwithingroupwasbasedonindexofgeneticdiversitywhichenabledthesamplednumberorproportion
fromdifferentgroupstendtobalance.(2)Theindexofgeneticdiversity(I)ofthecoregermplasmestab
lishedaccordingtothemethodofgeneticdiversityindexproportionreachedmaximumandtheratioofphe
notypicretained(RPR)reached98%whentheoveralsamplingscaleincreasedto15%.Althoughthepro
portionofphenotypesretained,coefficientofvariation(CV)andthecoincidencerateofrange(CR)alin
creasedgently,thegeneticdiversityindexofthepreconcentratedcoregermplasmdecreasedaccordingly
whentheoveralsamplingscaleincreasedtoover20%.So15%oftheoveralsamplingsizesweremoreap
propriate.(3)Usinglogarithmicratiomethodanddiversityratio,under15%ofthetotalsamplesize,theI,
RPR,CVandCRofthecoregermplasmconstructedbyclustersamplingweremuchhigherthanthatby
randomsampling.(4)Basedontheoptimizedsamplingscheme,thecoregermplasmof91accessionsofpep
pergermplasmwereestablished.
犓犲狔狑狅狉犱狊:pepper;phenotypicdata;coregermplasm;samplingscale;samplingmethod
  Ÿ Ma(Corecolection)âx†ãänŒ‘
¦åæ€MastnãçO

i±znsty¬œ
JKèéê±hëìílmæ€îïð™nJK

[1]。
Ÿ Manžâ2U$Maîïñ¥4
BNò¢Ð†n,ó

ôõ•ö÷žÝø

z
ù

úû



ýIiŽHIU$

_þU$ÿ80
!M2U$nŸ Ma
[25]。
pq
(犆犪狆狊犻犮狌犿spp.)r^+pq"HIU$,
â#DE_I$ã

>¡÷ò400!%n&
()
[6]。
>*+n&,Ú¾ë¡

w}ß-.n
/M`„

•È*pqMaîï20‚

/
aœ121345ßã64B
[7~10],
Ë789:
?

@Aâ>Ÿ MažÝ‹
Bn4BC9

DiEF+4

LMœCGpqM
aî;nHI

rò¢JÓpqMaîïÐ
†¢Ç

K4Bi603opqMarLs,,28
€ƒ„‚

MNßpqŸ Mažn–OP

žÞß,ƒ„yvnpqŸ Ma

1 stœŒ‘
1.1 QRST
QLpqMastR603o,àápq"n3
€&M
(C.犪狀狀狌狌犿、C.犮犺犻狀犲狀狊犲œC.犳狉狌狋犲狊犮犲狀狊)
ŽMSst



•st560o,ê):30
€/T)UV

öst43o。603st¡,274o
W)(HIMaîï¡+X

|!¶Y.!/2
3+%bHIcd4BeJQ

1.2 UVRWXY
LZ2014%10[\2015%3[>]f^
_]`ab45

cdrÝø
。2014%10[8e
…†fghijkMLl
,11[6eímnoä
#

Ópqr

ps90cm,tpä#u5,vw
34cm,tostä#12v。xyi‘zq15{’|
l}5

~S€Nš&‚6

1.3 78Z[\K]XY
1.3.1 ^_`a\78Z[ ƒ„n‚R28
€

à…21€†‡ƒ„‚œ7€y¬‚。†
‡ƒ„‚ò

ˆ‰

ˆŠ‰‹

ˆƒŒ

Ž
‘

c’“C‚”

c•‰‹

c–—çw‚

c˜‰
‹

c˜c™‰‹

cš*›

šœ‰‹

cjž
‘

cŸ w‚

¡_‰‹

¢_‰‹

£_c¤¥
ò¦

_§žˆ‘

_w

_’“C¨w‚

_§“C
‚”œ_§p©

y¬‚ò



DˆÓ

ªc
Š«



_*

_sœ_¬­ì

ƒ„Œ‘œ®¯iŽ†‡ƒ„‚nOZ°
¿±²K³´nŒ‘
[11]
45

y¬‚©v®¯Ä
(δ)œ¶¿(X),µ1Zn<X-2δ,10Zn≥X+2δ
45®¯Ú

tZ$S‚Ä0.5δ。
1.3.2 bcXY Ÿ Ma–ŒÛ4BOr3
€¶ª

ãâ·ä¸ª/O~Œ‘

Yâ·ä~•
–OPœ˜™–‰Š
,^
â·ä~•–Œ‘

(1)O~Œ‘:pq_wÀÚ-.,K4B©v
_wxy犉s(_*/_s)hz{603oMaOr5
~

¹1~àá144ost,_„xy>0.1≤犉s
≤2;¹2~71o,_„xy2<犉s≤3;¹3~144
o

_„xy3<犉s≤5;¹4~149o,_„xy5
<犉s≤9;¹5~95o,_wxy犉s>9。
(2)–OPN˜™–‰Š:①–OP:³
†‡ˆ‰Š
(Proportionalratio,P)、‹Œu‰Š
(Squarerootratio,S)、y‰Š(Logarithmicrati
o,L)œJKxy‰Š(Geneticdiversityin
dexratio,G)4M–OP,ž¨¦Ÿ Ma,F
¡¦å±ÏŒ‘
。②˜™–‰Š:|º5%、
10%、15%、20%、30%œ40%R6M˜™–‰
Š

i4BžpqŸ ManÏ»–‰Š

(3)~•–Œ‘:…†Â<Ò`–œÔÕ
–2MŒ‘。Â<Ò`–±¼Zewdieÿ[12]n
Œ‘

½>Ò`þ‚¾¡

Ù¿¦–JKwÀ±›Á
¡ò@ƒ„‚nst

tÁ¦–1o,ˆÃ}Á
nstÄÅ¥¦

¥¦nstœ4¥ÑÆÒ`

Ä»eÇstº»eHny¬

ÔՖÈi
15%–š›,>xy‰Šœy–‰Š
5084+              ; <,ÿ:,ƒ„yvnpqŸ Maž4B
Ñ45

(4)Ÿ Ma–ŒÛ|’:uvB‡O~¸È
œ–OP¸€

|’ßpqŸ Mažn26M
É6–ŒÛ

F¡Ê¦±ËŒÛ

(5)Ÿ Ma–ŒÛ¢_n>?:uvcÌ4
B}_
[1316]
OA¦åßJKxy
(Indexof
geneticdiversity,I)、ÀÁÂy(Coefficientofvari
ation,CV)、ƒ„l¼‰Š(Ratioofphenotypere
tained,RPR)œÃÄÅÆÇ(Coincidencerateof
range,CR)4€±y,pq¨¦Ÿ Maò¢4
5>?œÍZ

yv¨€œ”±yn’“¶>Excel¡45,
Â<Ò`ΆSPSS17.0ÏÐ,Ò`Œ‘…†ÑÒ
wÀ±ÓwÀ‘

2 £_NOÔ
2.1 debcfgY9hi
©vpq_„xy犉sÕ¸ªstO}5~,>
5%、10%、15%、20%、30%œ40%˜™–š›
Ñ

…†‡ˆ‰Š

‹Œu‰Š

y‰ŠŽJK
xy‰Š‘’“”~–oy

ƒ1)。i¹Ⅱ
~rŠ

Ö~/y71o,§˜styn11.8%。
>15%n˜™–š›Ñ,4M‰Š‘¥¦nst
oy§¨¦Ÿ Maoy©ªr‡ˆ‰Š12.1%、
y‰Š17.8%、‹Œu‰Š15.5%、xy
‰Š22.2%。N‡ˆ‰Š‚‰,Ö3M‰Š‘¥¦
51 jkbcXlmndop>?q7rstup<=>?9fg
Table1 Accessionsofselectedgermplasmfromeachgroupandtheratiooftheselectedgermplasmnumber
tothecorrespondingprecorecolectionsunderdifferentsamplingstrategies
–
‰Š‘
Methodof
samplingratio
O~
Group
¸ª
jk/
Original
colection
˜™–š› Theoveralsamplesize
5%

Number %
10%

Number %
15%

Number %
20%

Number %
30%

Number %
40%

Number %
‡ˆ‰Š
Proportional
ratio(P)
Ⅰ 144 7 23.3 14 23.3 22 24.2 29 24.0 43 23.8 58 24.0
Ⅱ 71 4 13.3 8 13.3 11 12.1 14 11.6 21 11.6 28 11.6
Ⅲ 144 7 23.3 14 23.3 22 24.2 29 24.0 43 23.8 58 24.0
Ⅳ 149 7 23.3 15 25.0 22 24.2 30 24.8 45 24.9 60 24.8
Ⅴ 95 5 16.7 9 15.0 14 15.4 19 15.7 29 16.0 38 15.7
ƒTotal 603 30 60 91 121 181 242
y‰Š
Logarithmic
ratio(L)
Ⅰ 144 6 20.0 13 21.3 19 21.1 25 20.8 38 21.0 51 21.1
Ⅱ 71 5 16.7 11 18.0 16 17.8 22 18.3 32 17.7 43 17.8
Ⅲ 144 6 20.0 13 21.3 19 21.1 25 20.8 38 21.0 51 21.1
Ⅳ 149 7 23.3 13 21.3 19 21.1 25 20.8 38 21.0 51 21.1
Ⅴ 95 6 20.0 11 18.0 17 18.9 23 19.2 35 19.3 46 19.0
ƒTotal 603 30 61 90 120 181 242
‹Œu‰Š
Square
ratio(S)
Ⅰ 144 7 22.6 13 22.0 20 22.2 27 22.1 40 22.1 53 22.1
Ⅱ 71 5 16.1 9 15.3 14 15.5 19 15.6 28 15.5 37 15.4
Ⅲ 144 7 22.6 13 22.0 20 22.2 27 22.1 40 22.1 53 22.1
Ⅳ 149 7 22.6 13 22.0 20 22.2 27 22.1 41 22.7 54 22.5
Ⅴ 95 5 16.1 11 18.6 16 17.8 22 18.0 32 17.7 43 18.0
ƒTotal 603 31 59 90 122 181 240
JK
xy‰Š
Genetic
diversity
index
ratio(G)
Ⅰ 144 7 24.1 14 23.3 21 23.3 28 23.1 42 23.1 56 23.1
Ⅱ 71 7 24.1 13 21.7 20 22.2 27 22.3 41 22.5 54 22.3
Ⅲ 144 6 20.7 13 21.7 20 22.2 26 21.5 39 21.4 52 21.5
Ⅳ 149 5 17.2 11 18.3 16 17.8 22 18.2 33 18.1 44 18.2
Ⅴ 95 4 13.8 9 15.0 13 14.4 18 14.9 27 14.8 36 14.9
ƒTotal 603 29 60 90 121 182 242
608 ! " # $ % &                   36
nstoy¶Êµ

|¡JKxy‰Š‘Ê
µ±

͍¹Ⅳ~ê«,Ö~/y149o,§
˜™n24.7%,>15%n–š›Ñ,4M‰Š‘
¥¦nstoy§¨¦Ÿ Maoy©ªr‡ˆ‰
Š24.2%、y‰Š21.1%、‹Œu‰Š22.2%、
JKxy‰Š17.8%。Ö3M‰Š‘¥¦
nstoy‰‡ˆ‰Š¶Î×

iJKxy
‰ŠÎ×±

|!”~n£_؂Ù

ÚÛ
,4
M‰Š‘”~–y¬¶·n­®¯°iJK
xy‰Š±Ü

2.2 vwbcxy9hi
©v4M–‰Š‘œ6€˜™–š›,…
†Â<Ò`–×Ø24€¨¦Ÿ Ma。OA†
JKxy
(I)、ÀÁÂy(CV)、ƒ„l¼‰Š
¾1 É6–ŒÛžn24€¨¦Ÿ Ma
nJKxy‰—
Fig.1 Comparisonofindicesofgeneticdiversity
of24precorecolectionsunderdifferent
samplingstrategies
¾2 É6–ŒÛžn24€¨¦Ÿ Ma
nÀÁÂy‰—
Fig.2 Comparisonofcoefficientsofvariation
of24precorecolectionsunder
differentsamplingstrategies
(RPR)œÃÄÅÆÇ(CR)4€±y24€¨¦Ÿ
 Ma45‰—

F¾1ÚiÝÞ,˜™–š›F10%ʵ»
15%¹,¨ ¦Ÿ ManI¿¶hßʵ,ົ±
h

¸–š›F15%Bá»20%¹,”¨¦Ma
nI¿Øhßâã。äÖ,I¿¶Ô“–š›nÊ
µÉåÎz

惤
,¸
–š›½¾15%$Ö,
¨¦Ÿ Manç!ìʵ

”‚ÀÁOèn¶
ãÑâ

F¾2Ý»,xy‰Š‘žn¨¦Ÿ
 ManCV¿¶—|é3MŒ‘h。”¨¦Ÿ 
ManCV¿>–š›F5%Bá»20%¹Éå
Êh

¸–š›êëʵ»30%¹,ìߏ
‰Šœy‰Šžn¨¦Ÿ ManCV¿ò—
¾3 É6–ŒÛžn24€¨¦Ÿ Ma
nƒ„l¼‰‰—
Fig.3 Comparisonofratiosofphenotypicretained
of24precorecolectionsunder
differentsamplingstrategies
¾4 É6–ŒÛžn24€¨¦Ÿ Ma
nÃÄÅÆlj—
Fig.4 Comparisonofcoincidencerateofrange
of24precorecolectionsunder
differentsamplingstrategies
7084+              ; <,ÿ:,ƒ„yvnpqŸ Maž4B
52 debcXY9fz
Table2 Comparisonofdifferentsamplingmethods
–‰Š‘
Methodofsamplingratio
˜™–š›
Theoveralsamplesize
–Œ‘
Samplingmethod
JKxy

ÀÁÂy
CV
ÃÄÅÆÇ
CR
ƒ„l¼‰Š
RPR
xy‰Š
Diversityindexproportion
15%
R 0.966 0.8563 0.8391 0.9669
S 1.091 0.8916 0.9690 0.9834
y‰Š
Logarithmicproportion
15%
R 0.969 0.8431 0.7986 0.9504
S 1.086 0.8791 0.9690 0.9834
53 up<=>?4{|W}N9X~K]
Table.3 Varianceanalysisof4testingindexofprecorecolections
ÍZx®
TestingIndex
ÀÁêï
Variationsource
‹Œœ
SS
)Yì
DF
¶Œ
MS
犉¿
犉value
JKxy

–‰ŠSamplingratios 0.0004555 3 0.00015183 3.36
–š›Samplingsize 0.00821475 5 0.00164295 43.54
ÀÁÂy
CV
–‰ŠSamplingratios 0.002597 3 0.00086567 4.05
–š›Samplingsize 0.005317748 5 0.0010635496 7.48
ƒ„l¼‰
RPR
–‰ŠSamplingratios 0.000216228 3 0.000072076 0.70
–š›Samplingsize 0.020922979 5 0.0041855958 51.29
ÃÄÅÆÇ
CR
–‰ŠSamplingratios 0.000234792 3 0.000078264 0.02
–š›Samplingsize 0.079431875 5 0.015886375 218.83
h浚

‡ˆ‰Šœ‹Œu‰Š¶zßÑâ

–
š›F30%ʵ»40%¹,쇈‰Š‘ö,|
é3M~•–‰Š‘žn¨¦Ÿ MaCV¿
ؗhßìÎz

”¨¦Ÿ ManRPR¿Ô–š›nʵ
¶Éåʵ

»30%¹º»±h99%(¾3)。˜™
–š›F5%ʵ»10%¹,”–‰Š‘ž
n¨¦Ÿ ManRPR¿¶hßʵ,íàغ»
ß96%iB。¸–š›r15%¹,ì߇ˆ‰Š
‘

|é3M~•–‰Š‘žn¨¦Ÿ Ma
nRPR¿¶º»ß98%。¸˜™–š›½¾
30%,”¨¦Ÿ ManRPR¿Éîʵ,ä¹S
¾Êµ–š›êʵŸ ManÀÁ-ìn¢_
ïð

F¾4ÚiÝÞ,¸ –š›h15%¹,”
¨¦Ÿ ManCR¿ÀÚ¶ñ‹É,͖š
›F5%Bá»10%¹,CR¿Êµnßì±h,ê
ëʵ»15%,CR¿Êµ‚Î×,«¤–š›
F5%ʵ»15%¥¦stoyʵn6¹,òÊ
µßŸ ManÃÄ


,¸
–š›º»15%
¹

”¨¦Ÿ ManCR¿¶Åóô½¾ß95%,
àxy‰Š‘œy‰Š‘×Øn¨¦Ÿ 
ManCR¿º»ß97%,«¤¨¦Ÿ MaõÜ
ílm߸ªð™nÃÄ

2.3 decXY9hi
†JKxy

ÀÁÂy

ÃÄÅÆǎƒ
„l¼‰Šê‰—ÍZ15%–š›Ñ~•…†
xy‰Šœy‰Š‘

45ÔÕöœÂ
<ö×Øn¨¦Ÿ Ma

£_ۃ2。É÷â
xy‰Šøây‰Š

S¾Â<–×Ø
n¨¦Ÿ Man4€x®¶‰ÔՖnh,«
¤Â<–¯ò¢â㟠Manç!ì

JáM
aÀÁ-ì

S¾4M–‰Š‘œ6M–š›iŽÒ
`Oԝžn¨¦Ÿ Man”ÍZx®45ŒÄ


£_

ƒ3)ƒ¤,”ÍZx®>6€–š›
nÄÁغ»ßÃùú݋

͍4€–‰Š
‘

ûòCVœ犐º»ßùú݋。YäÚÛ,–
š›DEüýŸ Man犐、CV、RPRŽCR,͖
‰ŠÈüýŸ ð™n犐œCV,þÍS¾É6
n–‰Š‘œ–š›žnŸ ManÀÁ-
ìòùúnÄÁ

3 N÷
>U$Ÿ Maž¾ë¡

ãÿ!¿·äO
~Œ‘

ÛnO~®¯œŒ‘à…퀎23C
”O~
[14]、
µO`™ÂO~
[17]
Žyv~ÆO
~
[15,18]
ÿ

pq_wÀÁ-.

ã%Cpq
(犆.犪狀
808 ! " # $ % &                   36
狀狌狌犿)5€ÀM("#q、*q、ÁCq、$%qœ&
q

nO`½â,|_wÀÁ@(
[6]。
K4B
QLstàáã%CpqeòÀM

_wxyÀÚ
h

Àß>0.61~23.33$S,K)Ά_wxy
¸ª/45ßƀO~

r4ã*ʦÙÚpq
Ÿ Ma–ŒÛ+äß,ó

>O~,óB

·ä~•–‰ŠâèE*,


-²ÿ
[17]
>žh.IŸ Ma¹

‰—
߇ˆ‰Š‘

y‰Š‘

‹Œu‰Š‘ŽJK
xy‰Š‘4M–OP,/rJKx
y‰Š‘¢_´Ë

K4B£_òƒ¤

JK
xy‰Š‘>JÓ¨¦Ÿ Maƒ„l¼‰Š

ÀÁÂyŽ~•–¬n­®Œ;¢_¶—Ü

Ë-)½ÿ
[14]
œ-l0ÿ
[18]
n4B£_1òeÉ
6

þä

>·ä–OP¹

E©vMastny
¬

O~23ŽJKÿT4ê¦åô5¦±
ٌ‘

6Ÿ Man˜™–š›

7c&8n˜
™–‰Š>5%~40%[4]。Yonezawaÿ[19]/
r20%~30%‰—ÆÏ,Caslerÿ[20]/rã
1000onî‰Š»>6.54%~26.04%$
S

Ëeò4BØ9òJQã€<ãn˜™–‰
Š

æDEâÉ6U$Maîï>jkëì

JK
 ‚ 3 œ • ç J K £  B m > — h Ä Á

Zewdieÿ[12],21€w”‚,i10%n–š
›žßpqŸ Ma

K)S¾‰—24€¨¦
Ÿ MaJKxy
(I)、ÀÁÂy(CV)、ƒ„
l¼‰
(RPR)ŽÃÄÅÆÇ(CR),/r15%âK
4BÏÆn–š›

K4B‰—ßO~23ÑÔՖœÂ<Ò`
–ežŸ Man¢_

:0Â<–>âã
ç!ì

ʵJKœÀÁ-ìŒ;¶—ÔÕ
– ¢ Ç Ó

æ N • ö 4 B £ _ â ã ;
n
[1214,17,18]。
ÔÕöâ,eò¸ªstÿ6
Ý<

S¾ÔÕöÚ×ØMaîï±,KnÀ
Á
[21]。
ÍÒ`–=>߸ªð™nJK£

?
@stÉ6nA·

>—×ʵç!ìn,óBl
B߸ªð™nÀÁ-ì

=Ÿ MažnE
Iœ7n

§CΆ¡õׅ†ÔÕö‘

D>ã
64B¡UŒ‘‰—
[22]。
,28€ƒ„‚yv,K4BžnpqŸ
 Ma±Ë–ŒÛr

µ²_wxyhz45O
~

~•…†JKxy‰Š‘·ä–¬

˜
™–š›r15%,³†ÑÒwÀ±ÓwÀ‘45
~•Ò`ö×؟ Ma

EÍF

eØ91oŸ
 Ma¸ª/Gò—Ün1ƒ

€!M

[1] FRANKELOH.Geneticperspectivesofgermplasmconserva
tion[M]//ArberW,LlimenseeK,PeacockWJ,犲狋犪犾,(eds).
GeneticManipulation:ImpactOnManandSociety.Cambridge,
UK:CambridgeUniversityPress,1984:161170.
[2] HIJ,KLM,Nb,ÿ.#$Ÿ Ma4B4O[J].#$
JKîï%&
,2003,4(3):279284.
CUIYH,QIULJ,CHANGRZ,犲狋犪犾.Advancesinresearch
oncorecolectionofplantgermplasmresources[J].犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳
犘犾犪狀狋犌犲狀犲狋犻犮犚犲狊狅狌狉犮犲狊,2003,4(3):279284.
[3] PQR,ST,-U+,ÿ._þŸ Ma4B4O[J].#$
JKîï%&
,2010,11(3):380385.
WANGYK,WUGL,LIDK,犲狋犪犾.Advancesincorecolec
tionoffruitgermplasm[J].犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳 犘犾犪狀狋犌犲狀犲狋犻犮犚犲
狊狅狌狉犮犲狊,2010,11(3):380385.
[4] W%X,; V,xWJ,ÿ.HIŸ Ma4B4O[J]..!
23h%%&
,2015,37(1):6066.
CHENXJ,LEIG,ZHOUKH,犲狋犪犾.Reviewofthestudieson
corecolectionforvegetables[J].犃犮狋犪犃犵狉犻犮狌犾狋狌狉犪犲犝狀犻狏犲狉狊犻
狋犪狋犻狊犑犻犪狀犵狓犻犲狀狊犻狊,2015,37(1):6066.
[5] .}+,XYZ, [,ÿ.\]^MaîïnISSRJK
OÔN_ZŸ MaXnž
[J].!"#$%&,2009,
29(12):24012407.
BAICK,YUJR,YUF,犲狋犪犾.Geneticdiversityandconstruc
tionofprimarycoregermplasmin犆狅狉狀狌狊狅犳犳犻犮犻狀犪犾犻狊byISSR
marker[J].犃犮狋犪犅狅狋.犅狅狉犲犪犾.犗犮犮犻犱犲狀狋.犛犻狀,2009,29(12):
24012407.
[6] ¡23+%bHIcd4Be.¡HI&%[M]."`:
¡23Þab
,2010:730.
[7] c-d,eJf,ghi,ÿ.pq_§}j¾ë¡kC¥C、p
q¥Žl$aá¬nÀÚ
[J]..m23%&,2000,16(1):
6162.
LIUJB,ZHAOHL,SUNJB,犲狋犪犾.ContentsofVc,capsa
icineanddrymatterduringtheripeningofhotpepper[J].
犑犻犪狀犵狊狌犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳犃犵狉犻犮狌犾狋狌狉犪犲犛犮犻犲狀犮犲,2000,16(1):6162.
[8] P‡n,opq,r%s,ÿ.¡pqÙÁMaîï>?[J].
.m23%&
,2001,17(4):244247.
WANGSB,YUANXH,ZOUXX,犲狋犪犾.EvaluationofChi
neseexcelentpeppergermplasms[J].犑犻犪狀犵狊狌犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳犃犵
狉犻犮狌犾狋狌狉犪犲犛犮犻犲狀犮犲,2001,17(4):244247.
9084+              ; <,ÿ:,ƒ„yvnpqŸ Maž4B
[9] tuv,wxy,wz{,ÿ.É6,þ„pq|ƎC*@
}|nýÎ
[J].ΆC”%&,2006,17(10):18771882.
SUIXL,ZHANGZX,ZHANGBX,犲狋犪犾.Photosynthetic
andgrowthcharacteristicsofdifferentecotype犆犪狆狊犻犮狌犿under
weaklight[J].犆犺犻狀犲狊犲犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳犃狆狆犾犻犲犱犈犮狅犾狅犵狔,2006,17
(10):18771882.
[10] Œ~,xWJ,€<,ÿ.¡‚pqMa20‚=ä
Nƒ21>?
[J].#$JKîï%&,2014,15(1):
186191.
FANGR,ZHOUKH,MAHG,犲狋犪犾.Identificationofagro
nomictraitsandevaluationofresistanceto犘犺狔狋狅狆犺狋犺狅狉犪
犮犪狆狊犻犮犻in犆.犳狉狌狋犲狊犮犲狀狊inChina[J].犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳犘犾犪狀狋犌犲狀犲狋
犻犮犚犲狊狅狌狉犮犲狊,2014,15(1):186191.
[11] ; <.pqMaîïJKOԎ_ZŸ Maž
[D].fg:.!23h%,2015.
[12] ZEWDIEY,TONGN,BOSLANDP.Establishingacorecol
lectionof犆犪狆狊犻犮狌犿usingaclusteranalysiswithenlightened
selectionofaccessions[J].犌犲狀犲狋犻犮犚犲狊狅狌狉犮犲狊犪狀犱犆狉狅狆犈狏狅
犾狌狋犻狅狀,2004,51(2):147151.
[13] ORTIZR,RUIZTAPIAEN,MUJICASANCHEZA.Sam
plingstrategyforacorecolectionof犘犲狉狌狏犻犪狀狇狌犻狀狅犪germ
plasm[J].犜犺犲狅狉犲狋犻犮犪犾犪狀犱犃狆狆犾犻犲犱犌犲狀犲狋犻犮狊,1998,96(3):
475483.
[14] -)½,w„…,†_),ÿ.‡fíŒøMîMa–
ŒÛ4B
[J].¡23+%,2000,33(5):17.
LIZC,ZHANGHL,ZENGY W,犲狋犪犾.Studyonsampling
schemesofcorecolectionoflocalvarietiesofriceinYunnan
,China[J].犛犮犻犲狀狋犻犪犃犵狉犻犮狌犾狋狌犪犛犻狀犻犮犪,2000,33(5):17.
[15] wˆê,w‰),PŠ‹,ÿ.ž#ŒùŸ Man–
OP4B
[J].#$JKîï%&,2008,9(2):151156.
   ZHANGEL,ZHANGZW,WANGTY,犲狋犪犾.Studieson
samplingstrategiestodevelopcorecolectionofChineseoat
germplasm[J].犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳犘犾犪狀狋犌犲狀犲狋犻犮犚犲狊狅狌狉犮犲狊,2008,9
(2):151156.
[16] HUJ,ZHUJ,XUHM.Methodsofconstructingcorecolec
tionsbystepwiseclusteringwiththreesamplingstrategies
basedonthegenotypicvaluesofcrops[J].犜犺犲狅狉犲狋犻犮犪犾犪狀犱
犃狆狆犾犻犲犱犌犲狀犲狋犻犮狊,2000,101(1):264268.
[17] -²,-Ž, ,ÿ.,w”yvnh.IŸ M
ažŒ‘n4B
[J].‘0%&,2008,35(2):17591766.
   LIGQ,LIXX,SHEND,犲狋犪犾.Studiesonthemethodsof
constructingChinesecabbagecoregermplasmbasedonthe
morphologicaldata[J].犃犮狋犪犎狅狉狋犻犮狌犾狋狌狉犪犲犛犻狀犻犮犪,2008,35
(2):17591766.
[18] -l0,x’“,w”•,ÿ.¡¸–—/MŸ Ma–O
P4B
[J].˜"23h%%&,2009,32(4):2025.
   LIBY,ZHOUXM,ZHANGQX,犲狋犪犾.Studiesonsampling
strategiesforestablishingacorecolectionofChinesetreepe
ony[J].犑狅狌狉狀犪犾狅犳犃犵狉犻犮狌犾狋狌狉犪犾犝狀犻狏犲狉狊犻狋狔狅犳犎犲犫犲犻,2009,
32(4):2025.
[19] YONEZAWA K,NOMURA T,MRISHIMA H.Sampling
strategiesforuseinstratifiedgermplasmcolections[M]//
HODGKINT,BROWN A H D,HINTUM VAN T H L,
MORALESAV,(eds).CoreColectionsofPlantGeneticRe
sources.InternationalPlantGeneticResourcesInstitute(IP
GRI),AWileySaycePublication,1995,3554.
[20] CASLERMD.Patternsofvariationinacolectionofperen
nialryegrassaccessions[J].犆狉狅狆狊犛犮犻犲狀犮犲,1995,35(4):
11691177.
[21] BROWNAHD.Corecolections:apracticalapproachtoge
neticresources management[J].犌犲狀狅犿犲,1989,31(2):
818824.
[22] BASIGALUPH,BAMESDK,STRUCKERRE.Develop
mentofcorecolectionforperennial犕犲犱犻犮犪犵狅plantintroduc
tions[J].犆狉狅狆狊犛犮犻犲狀犮犲,1995,35(4):11631168.

!"

#$%
)  
018 ! " # $ % &                   36