不同矮化中间砧对瑞雪苹果果实品质的影响

樊 娟1,孙鲁龙1,刘振中1,杨舜博1,朱佳顺2,史 涛2,赵政阳1*

1西北农林科技大学园艺学院,陕西杨凌 712100;2庆城县苹果试验示范站,甘肃庆城 745100)

摘 要:【目的】探究不同矮化中间砧对苹果新品种瑞雪果实品质的影响,为其在甘肃陇东产区矮化砧木的筛选利用提供参考。【方法】以新疆野苹果为基砧,M9-T337、SH6、SH38和SC1为中间砧,嫁接瑞雪苹果为试验材料,M26中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果为对照,比较不同砧穗组合果实品质的差异。【结果】不同中间砧瑞雪苹果平均单果质量为M9-T337>M26>SH38>SC1>SH6;在果形指数方面无明显差异;SH6、SH38和SC1L*值和b*显著高于对照M26,果面光洁;SH6、SH38和SC1在可溶性固形物含量、果糖含量、固酸比、可溶性总糖含量和甜度值均高于M26和M9-T337,其中SH6和SC1表现最为突出,固酸比在52 以上,总糖含量(w,后同)在135 mg·g-1以上,果糖含量在67 mg·g-1以上,甜度值在178 以上;SC1(65.63µg·kg-1)和SH38(68.45µg·kg-1)的酯类物质含量显著高于对照M26(65.63µg·kg-1),SH6的烯烃类物质含量最高,是对照M26的3倍以上,醛类物质含量以SC1、SH6、SH38较高;SH6、SH38和SC1的类黄酮和维生素C含量均显著高于对照M26,M9-T337最低,SH6的总酚含量显著高于其他矮化中间砧。通过隶属函数法,综合评价得出不同砧穗组合的果实品质从高到低排序为SH6、SC1、SH38、M26、M9-T337【结论】综合各项果实品质指标,SH6的瑞雪苹果果实品质最优,SC1和SH38次之,但作为甘肃陇东地区发展瑞雪苹果矮化中间砧栽培的候选砧木还需综合考虑生长结果情况。

关键词:瑞雪苹果;砧穗组合;矮化中间砧;果实品质

矮化密植是现代苹果栽培发展的趋势,矮化砧木的选择与利用是实现矮化的关键环节[1-2]。近年来随着我国苹果矮化栽培面积的不断扩大,我国大部分苹果主产区以利用矮化中间砧的方式为主[3-4],合适的中间砧可以有效协调树体营养生长与生殖生长的关系,通过调控树体中养分的吸取和运送,促进果实发育过程中有机化合物的代谢和积累,进而提高果实品质[5-6]。不同矮化砧木嫁接品种对果实品质的影响主要体现在外观品质、糖酸含量、香气物质以及功能性成分方面[7]。糖和酸是影响果实风味的主要因素[8],张秉宇等[9]研究发现中间砧GM256、M7可以显著提高寒富苹果的糖酸含量和甜味指数,从而提升其果实口感;阎振立等[10]研究发现不同砧木对华冠果实芳香物质绝对含量有较大影响,嫁接在M26中间砧上的华冠香气物质含量高于八棱海棠实生砧;王大江等[11]研究发现不同砧木蜜脆苹果酚类物质含量有差异,矮化中间砧可以从整体上提高苹果果实功能性成分含量。

瑞雪苹果是西北农林科技大学自主选育的优质黄绿色晚熟、短枝型苹果新品种,果形高桩,肉质细脆,酸甜适口,香气浓郁,在甘肃陇东产区综合表现突出,发展前景广阔[12-13]。目前大量的研究主要关注不同区域[14]、不同采收期[15]、不同果袋[16]等方面对瑞雪果实品质的影响,但是关于不同矮化中间砧对该品种果实品质影响的研究还十分有限。因此,笔者在本研究中利用在甘肃陇东地区抗寒性和生长表现较好的SH 系(SH38、SH6、SC1[17]和本地利用较多的M26和M9-T337 5 种矮化砧木嫁接瑞雪品种为试验材料,通过不同中间砧对瑞雪果实品质影响的比较分析,旨在筛选出适宜瑞雪的矮化中间砧,以期为甘肃陇东产区瑞雪新品种的优质丰产高效栽培提供理论依据。

1 材料和方法

1.1 试验地点

试验于2020 年和2021 年在甘肃省庆阳市庆城县西北农林科技大学庆城苹果试验示范站(36°00′13′′N,107°54′56′′E;海拔1285 m)进行。该站处于黄土高原中部地带,属温带大陆性气候,年平均降雨量537 mm,主要集中在夏季,年均温度9.4 ℃,年均日照时数长2420 h,年均无霜期191 d。园区土壤为黄绵土,pH 为7.2~7.8。试验园苗木栽植后,利用水肥一体化系统进行灌溉,行内清耕并覆盖黑色地布,常规病虫害管理。

1.2 试验材料

以不同矮化中间砧(M9-T337、SH6、SH38和SC1)嫁接瑞雪苹果品种(Malus domestica‘Ruixue’)为试验材料,以目前生产上栽培最为广泛的M26中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果为对照,基砧均为新疆野苹果,各砧穗组合名称以所用的矮化中间砧表示,各矮化中间砧长度均为30 cm,株行距1 m × 3 m,树形为细长纺锤形。于2011 年春季栽植1 年生新疆野苹果组培苗,于同年8 月采集M9-T337、SH6、SH38和SC1和M26的中间砧接穗于地面5 cm处进行芽接,2012春季进行成品苗移栽,2017年春季嫁接瑞雪苹果品种。2020年和2021 年分别为4 年生和5 年生苹果树。试验采用随机区组设计,每个小区10 株树,每个处理3 次重复。

1.3 测定指标与方法

2020 年和2021 年10 月下旬瑞雪苹果果实成熟后(利用淀粉染色法确定各砧穗组合的成熟期),在每种砧穗组合中,分别选取每株树冠东南方向中上部顶花芽果实3个,20株,共60个果实,带回实验室进行常规果实品质指标测定。利用百分之一天平称量果实单果质量;利用数显游标卡尺测量果实的纵径和横径,得到果形指数=纵径/横径;使用Minolta CR-400型色差计测量果面色泽参数(L*:果皮亮度,a*:果皮红绿色度,b*:果皮黄蓝色度);利用GY-1 型果实硬度计测定果实硬度;利用PR-100型数字糖度计测定可溶性固形物含量(%);利用FFRUIT ACIDZTY METER GMK-835 型酸度计测定酸度;固酸比通过计算可溶性固形物含量与酸度的比值来获得。

于2021年10月下旬选取不同砧穗组合各10棵树,从每棵树的外围中部随机选择3个大小一致、色泽均匀、无病虫害和机械损伤的顶花芽成熟果实,立即带回实验室进行存样,用削皮机器削取果皮,厚度小于0.5 mm,迅速在液氮中进行速冻,并进行混样,存放于−80 ℃冰箱,用于香气物质含量、糖组分以及功能性营养成分含量的测定。

香气物质含量的测定:利用顶空固相微萃取法进行香气物质的提取,3 次重复,利用GC-MSQP-2010气相色谱-质谱联用仪进行果实香气成分测定,具体操作参照邓瑞等[18]的方法。各成分相对含量采用峰面积归一化法计算,选择3-壬酮为内标计算各组分含量:各组分含量(μg·kg-1)=(组分峰面积/内标的峰面积)×内标质量浓度(g·L-1)×10 μL/样品质量(g)。

糖组分含量的测定:样品制备参考王艳颖等[19]的方法,使用Sugar-Pak TM I(300 mm×6.5 mm)色谱柱(美国Waters公司)和2414示差折光检测器(美国Waters公司)进行糖组分测定,柱温80 ℃,流动相为超纯水,流速0.5 mL·min- 1,检测池温度35 ℃,进样量20 μL。果糖、葡萄糖、蔗糖,山梨醇(美国Sigma公司)标样配成不同浓度测定,采用外标法定量。甜度值=果糖含量×1.75+蔗糖含量×1+葡萄糖含量×0.7+山梨醇含量×0.4。

维生素C含量:利用钼蓝比色法进行测定,具体参照孙鹏等[20]的方法。

总酚、黄酮含量的测定:具体参照宋伊真等[21]的方法并稍作改动。称取0.2 g 果肉粉,加入2 mL 的HCl-甲醇溶液,在4 ℃遮光条件下进行提取,离心取上清液,用于测定吸光值。

1.4 砧穗组合的综合效果评价方法

根据试验结果,本研究结合变异系数法和隶属函数法对参评指标赋予不同权重并计算各砧穗组合综合评价指数[22],依据综合指数大小对砧穗组合效果进行排序。计算公式如下:

权重系数:Wi=CVi/∑i=1CVi),CVi代表i 指标的变异系数;

隶属函数值:Xj=(X-Xmin)/(Xmax-Xmin),其中X表示测定指标的平均值,Xmin表示测定指标的最小值,Xmax表示测定指标的最大值。

综合评价指数:Pij=∑i=jWi×Xj)。

1.5 数据处理

利 用Microsoft Office Excel 2013(Microsoft,Redmond,USA)和Origin V9(OriginLab Corp.,Northampton,MA,USA)软件对所获得的数据进行处理和作图,并结合SPSS 22.0(SPSS,Inc.,Chicago,USA)软件对数据进行方差分析,统计分析采用单因素ANOVA 的LSD 比较处理间的差异显著性(p<0.05)。

2 结果与分析

2.1 不同矮化中间砧对瑞雪果实外在品质的影响

综合两年调查结果,不同矮化中间砧上嫁接瑞雪苹果,果实外在品质存在差异(表1)。L*值反映果实光泽明亮度,a*值和b*值分别代表绿色饱和度和黄色饱和度。SC1、SH38和SH6L*值显著高于对照M26,平均达到97%以上,果实光洁度更好,M9-T337L*值最低;SH6a*值绝对值最低,绿色饱和度低;SC1、SH6和SH38b*值均较大,黄色饱和度高,果实偏黄色,显著高于对照M26p<0.05),M9-T337与对照M26差异不显著。SC1、SH38和SH6的单果质量显著低于对照M26,果个偏小,M9-T337与对照M26相比无明显差异。各中间砧果实的果形指数无显著差异。

表1 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪苹果果实外在品质的差异
Table 1 Difference in the fruit external quality among different dwarfing interstocks in Ruixue apples

注:数据是3 个重复的平均值±标准误差,同一列不同小写字母表示不同矮化中间砧之间达到5%显著性差异水平。下同。
Note: Values are the means ± SD of three replicates, the different small letters indicated significance at 0.05 level among different dwarf interstocks.The same below.

中间砧Interstocks SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337树龄Tree age 4年生4-years old SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337 M26 5年生5-years old果形指数Fruit shape index 0.92±0.14 a 0.92±0.11 a 0.92±0.06 a 0.93±0.09 a 0.91±0.10 a 0.98±0.01 a 0.96±0.01 a 0.97±0.01 a 0.97±0.01 a 0.97±0.01 a M26色差Chromatic aberration L*95.94±2.58 a 91.69±2.08 ab 94.92±3.02 a 85.10±2.53 b 87.58±3.06 b 102.79±2.39 a 102.58±2.04 a 106.53±1.23 a 93.88±1.70 b 90.26±1.61 b a*-13.14±1.43 b-9.55±1.89 ab-6.06±1.28 a-8.25±2.19 ab-9.55±1.64 ab-19.43±0.71 b-20.06±0.86 c-11.01±0.85 a-21.05±0.79bc-21.94±1.01bc b*60.52±1.52 a 58.26±1.32 ab 59.87±1.99 a 54.53±1.60 bc 56.19±1.88 ab 66.60±1.87 a 65.23±1.29 a 67.91±0.81 a 59.81±1.15 b 58.02±1.00 b单果质量Fruit mass/g 246.46±4.42 c 276.57±9.98 b 258.41±7.90 bc 307.98±7.09 a 311.01±7.27 a 217.33±5.22 d 234.80±3.17 c 170.80±2.21 e 272.88±3.89 a 253.46±2.94 b

2.2 不同矮化中间砧对瑞雪苹果果实内在品质的影响

2.2.1 糖酸含量及硬度 果实的糖酸含量反映果实内在风味,不同矮化中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果果实糖酸含量差异显著(p<0.05,表2)。两年均以SH6的可溶性固形物含量最高,在16%以上,显著高于对照M26,其他中间砧与对照M26 无显著差异。酸度以SH6、SH38和SC1的高于对照M26。各中间砧的固酸比均处于较高水平,SH6、SC1、SH38的固酸比均显著高于M9-T337和M26,说明SH 系可以显著提高瑞雪苹果的糖酸含量,使果实风味更佳;SH6的硬度显著高于对照M26,达到9.5 kg·cm-2,其他3 种中间砧的硬度与对照M26无显著差异。

表2 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪苹果果实可溶性固形物含量、酸度和硬度的差异
Table 2 Difference in the fruit soluble sugar,titratable acid and firmness of Ruixue apple among different dwarfing interstocks

中间砧Interstocks SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337 4年生4-years old M26 SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337 5年生5-years old M26 w(可溶性固形物)Soluble solids content/%14.98±0.18 b 14.98±0.22 b 16.31±0.27 a 14.12±0.17 b 14.01±0.16 b 15.67±0.16 b 14.92±0.19 b 16.98±0.16 a 14.97±0.11 b 14.80±0.13 b酸度Titratable acid content/%0.33±0.013 a 0.34±0.021 a 0.34±0.031 a 0.32±0.010 b 0.31±0.006 b 0.31±0.011 b 0.30±0.005 bc 0.33±0.012 a 0.29±0.005 bc 0.28±0.006 c固酸比Solid acid ratio 46.39±1.26 a 46.12±3.11 a 47.97±2.25 a 44.67±1.46 b 45.93±1.01 ab 52.34±0.82 a 52.50±0.90 a 52.00±1.43 a 47.88±1.61 b 46.52±0.86 b硬度Fresh firmness/(kg·cm-2)7.71±0.13 b 7.64±0.16 b 9.56±0.26 a 7.83±0.13 b 7.60±0.11 b 7.18±0.14 b 7.04±0.08 b 9.61±0.14 a 6.86±0.06 b 7.08±0.07 b

不同矮化中间砧瑞雪苹果果实的糖组分含量差异显著(p<0.05,表3)。SH6和SC1的总糖和果糖含量显著高于对照M26,M9-T337和SH38与对照M26无显著差异;M9-T337的蔗糖含量显著低于其他中间砧;SH6的山梨醇含量显著高于对照M26,为6.44 mg·g-1,其余中间砧与对照M26无显著差异;SH6的甜度值最高,达到181.49,其次是SC1>SH38>M26>M9-T337。2.2.2 香气物质含量 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪果实香气成分种类总含量差异显著(p<0.05,表4)。各中间砧香气物质总含量为SC1>SH38>M9-T337>SH6>M26,SC1、SH38和SH6的醛类物质含量均显著高于对照M26,其中SH6最高,达到70.84µg·kg-1,比对照M26高出了13.95µg·kg-1;SH38的酯类物质含量最高,显著高于其他中间砧,比对照M26高出了5.68µg·kg-1;M9-T337的醇类物质总含量显著高于其他中间砧,是对照M26的1.5倍左右;SH系中间砧的烯烃类物质显著高于对照M26和M9-T337,其中以SH6的烯烃类物质含量最高,是对照M26的4.55 倍;SH38的其他香气成分最高,达到4.13µg·kg-1,比对照M26高出3倍左右;SC1、SH38和SH6的醛类物质与烯烃类物质含量均较高,说明SH系有利于瑞雪苹果香气物质的积累。

表3 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪苹果果实中各种糖含量差异
Table 3 Difference in the contents of sugars in Ruixue apple among different dwarfing interstocks

中间砧Interstocks SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337 M26 w(果糖)Fructose/(mg·g-1)67.91±3.88 a 63.38±3.65 b 67.24±1.14 a 60.64±0.47 b 59.43±0.57 b w(蔗糖)Sucrose/(mg·g-1)47.21±1.87 ab 46.19±1.97 ab 49.04±2.00 a 43.71±0.39 b 44.89±0.46 ab w(葡萄糖)Glucose/(mg·g-1)15.29±2.78 a 13.63±1.39 a 17.44±1.43 a 12.68±0.10 a 13.32±0.19 a w(山梨醇)Sorbitol/(mg·g-1)4.64±0.63 b 4.47±0.04 b 6.44±0.08 a 4.57±0.06 b 4.96±0.23 b w(总糖)Soluble sugar/(mg·g-1)135.06±9.14 ab 127.68±3.98 b 140.16±4.64 a 121.59±1.00 b 122.35±1.20 b甜度值Sweetness value 178.61 168.40 181.49 160.53 160.20

表4 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪果实香气物质种类含量的差异
Table 4 Difference in the content of aroma substances in Ruixue apple among different dwarfing interstocks

w/(µg·kg-1)中间砧Interstocks SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337 M26醛类Aldehydes 70.84±0.020 a 62.57±0.145 b 62.70±0.120 b 58.69±0.230 c 56.89±0.230 d酯类Esters 65.63±0.196 b 68.45±0.181 a 49.29±0.130 e 60.72±0.105 c 58.46±0.199 d醇类Alcohols 35.62±0.085 d 38.35±0.180 c 41.54±0.048 b 43.34±0.127 a 28.38±0.274 e烯烃类Olefins 5.15±0.005 d 8.70±0.003 b 10.24±0.008 a 6.55±0.003 c 2.25±0.011 e其他Others 1.92±0.003 c 4.13±0.021 a 2.15±0.014 b 1.55±0.014 d 1.24±0.008 e总含量Total contents 179.16±0.124 a 182.12±0.206 a 165.92±0.176 b 170.85±0.098 b 147.22±0.287 c

由图1可知,酯类物质和醛类物质在5种矮化中间砧中相对含量的占比最高,整体都在40%左右,拥有同等的重要性,醇类物质相对含量占比较高,在15%左右,烯烃类次之,其他类物质占比最低;SC1、SH6的醛类物质含量高于酯类物质含量,SH38、M9-T337和M26的酯类物质含量高于醛类物质含量,SC1、M26中间砧中,醛类物质含量是醇类物质2倍左右。

图1 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪苹果果实香气物质种类相对含量所占比例的差异
Fig.1 Difference in the proportion of relative content of aroma substances in Ruixue apple among different dwarfing interstocks

2.2.3 功能性营养成分含量 比较不同矮化中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果的功能性营养物质含量(表5),发现SH 系功能性营养成分含量均较高,SH6可显著提高果实中总酚、类黄酮和维生素C 含量,SC1和SH38次之。SH6的总酚含量(0.32 mg·g-1)显著高于对照M26(0.24 mg·g-1),M9-T337的总酚含量最低,为0.23 mg·g-1;类黄酮含量以SH6最高,SH38和SC1次之,均显著高于对照M26。总类黄酮含量在各中间砧中均较低,其中M9-T337的含量最低,仅为0.014 mg·g-1,显著低于对照M26,SC1和SH38与对照M26无显著差异。以SH6、SH38和SC1为中间砧的维生素C 含量均显著高于对照M26,M9-T337与对照M26无显著差异。各中间砧可溶性蛋白含量无显著差异。

表5 不同矮化中间砧瑞雪苹果果实功能性营养物质含量的差异
Table 5 Effects of different dwarfing interstocks on the content of phenolic substances of Ruixue apples

中间砧Interstocks SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337 M26 w(总酚)Total phenols/(mg·g-1)0.24±0.005 b 0.24±0.005 b 0.32±0.001 a 0.23±0.002 b 0.24±0.001 b w(总类黄酮)Total flavonoids/(mg·g-1)0.020±0.004 a 0.020±0.002 a 0.016±0.002 b 0.014±0.001 c 0.020±0.002 a w(类黄酮)Flavonoids/(mg·g-1)0.178±0.002 b 0.173±0.007 b 0.234±0.005 a 0.167±0.002 bc 0.156±0.001 c w(维生素C)Vitamin C/(mg·g-1)82.77±0.39 a 81.72±0.25 a 82.44±0.57 a 80.04±0.25 b 78.92±0.47 b w(可溶性蛋白质)Soluble protein/(mg·kg-1)5.19±0.10 a 5.28±0.12 a 5.58±0.15 a 5.49±0.16 a 5.64±0.16 a

2.3 砧穗组合综合效果排序

通过选取具有显著差异的果实品质指标,以L*值、单果质量、硬度、可溶性固形物含量、酸度、固酸比,以及总糖、果糖、蔗糖、醛类物质、酯类物质、烯烃类物质、总酚、类黄酮、维生素C 含量作为评价指标。通过变异系数法对指标赋予不同权重,同时计算各指标的隶属函数值(表6),通过隶属函数综合评价法得出瑞雪苹果5种矮化中间砧组合果实品质指标的综合评价指数排序:SH6>SC1>SH38>M26>M9-T337

表6 不同砧穗组合各指标隶属函数值及综合评价结果
Table 6 Membership function and comprehensive indexes of different interstock-scion combinations

注:X1.L*X2. 单果质量;X3. 硬度;X4. 可溶性固形物含量;X5. 酸度;X6. 固酸比;X7. 可溶性总糖含量;X8. 果糖含量;X9. 蔗糖含量;X10. 醛类物质含量;X11. 酯类物质含量;X12. 烯烃类物质含量;X13. 总酚含量;X14. 类黄酮含量;X15. 维生素C 含量。
Note:X1.L*;X2.Fruit mass;X3.Firmness;X4.Soluble solids content;X5.Titratable acid content;X6.Solid acid ratio;X7.Soluble sugar content;X8.Fructose content;X9.Sucrose content;X10.Aldehydes content;X11.Esters content;X12.Olefins content;X13.Total phenols content;X14.Flavonoids content;X15.Vitamin C content.

中间砧Interstocks SC1 SH38 SH6 M9-T337隶属函数值Membership function 排序Order M26综合指数Comprehensive index 0.348 0.346 0.353 0.270 0.295 23154变异系数CV/%权重Weight X1 0.06 0.09 0.06 0.12 0.08 6.04 0.09 X2 0.09 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 5.57 0.08 X3 0.07 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.04 5.73 0.09 X4 0.48 0.33 0.60 0.37 0.38 3.56 0.05 X5 0.40 0.31 0.43 0.27 0.26 9.25 0.14 X6 0.50 0.52 0.42 0.43 0.46 4.73 0.07 X7 0.36 0.40 0.37 0.32 0.27 5.23 0.08 X8 0.43 0.98 0.39 0.27 0.31 3.52 0.05 X9 0.40 0.39 0.39 0.42 0.40 4.94 0.07 X10 0.54 0.47 0.58 0.30 0.20 1.93 0.03 X11 0.43 0.45 0.43 0.29 0.49 4.66 0.07 X12 0.52 0.33 0.56 0.37 0.30 2.80 0.04 X13 0.47 0.24 0.54 0.33 0.48 1.97 0.03 X14 0.61 0.70 0.69 0.35 0.58 3.16 0.05 X15 0.40 0.43 0.38 0.43 0.55 3.98 0.06

3 讨 论

本研究结果表明,在甘肃陇东地区,不同矮化中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果,果实的外观品质(色泽、大小和果形指数)和内在品质(硬度、糖酸含量、香气物质和功能性营养成分)均存在较大差异。

果实色泽、大小和果形指数是衡量果实外观品质的重要指标,很大程度上决定果实的价格。在本研究中,各中间砧的平均单果质量为M9-T337>M26>SH38>SC1>SH6,M系单果质量整体高于SH系,这与闫树堂[23]在富士上的研究结果类似。而不同中间砧在果形指数方面无显著差异,这与王骞等[24]、王海波等[25]的研究结果类似,5年生瑞雪苹果果形指数均在0.97以上,果实一致性好,果形高桩。L*值是反映果实光泽明亮度的最基本参数,a*值代表绿色饱和度和b*反映黄色饱和度[26],SH6嫁接瑞雪苹果的a*值的绝对值显著低于其他矮化中间砧,b*值较大,说明该砧木的瑞雪果实果面表色偏向于黄色,其他砧木更偏重于绿色,这可能与苹果果实中色素的种类(花青苷、叶绿素、胡萝卜素)、含量以及分布情况有关[27],这对于黄绿色品种瑞雪来说,具有一定的生产实践意义。

矮化中间砧通过改变果实的激素含量和营养物质的比例,使得果实中糖酸含量增加,风味改善[6,9]。刘国荣等[6]研究发现SH38和SH5的中间砧嫁接红富士可溶性固形物含量高于M26。在本研究中,SH6嫁接瑞雪苹果可溶性固形物含量显著提高,这与李民吉等[28]在富士上的研究结果类似。糖组分的含量和比例决定果实的风味和口感,当果实中的含糖量处于较高水平时,适宜的酸度更易被消费者所接受[29]。果糖是苹果中主要的糖组分,其次是葡萄糖和蔗糖,本研究中,不同中间砧果糖含量SC1>SH6>SH38>M9-T337>M26,SH6的蔗糖含量显著高于M9-T337,SH系的总糖含量和甜度值均高于M9-T337和M26,则SH系中间砧可以改善瑞雪果实的风味,这可能是不同矮化中间砧分配同化物的能力不同,从而促进糖酸积累的程度不同,导致单糖组分存在差异[30-31]

香气物质是评价果实品质和区分品种特征的关键指标,赵玲玲等[32]研究发现八棱海棠嫁接红将军苹果酯类物质和醇类含量显著高于M26。陶茹等[33]研究发现嫁接在M26中间砧上的嘎啦苹果酯类物质含量增加了70.50%,SH38中间砧上醛类物质含量最高。在本研究中,SH38和SC1的酯类物质含量显著高于对照M26,醇类物质以M9-T337较高,SH 系次之,均显著高于对照M26,这与前人研究不太一致,可能是由于砧木、品种以及栽培措施的不同造成果实香气物质含量存在差异[10]。苹果中主要呈香物质为酯类、醛类和醇类[34-35],瑞雪属于醛类香气物质和烯烃类物质含量较高的青香型苹果[36],在本研究中,SC1、SH6、SH38的酯类物质和烯烃类物质含量均高于对照M26,其中SH6的烯烃类物质含量是对照M26的3倍以上,说明SH 系更有利于瑞雪苹果呈香物质的积累,使果实香味浓郁。

矮化中间砧对果实功能性成分的影响是多方面的。宋伊真等[21]研究发现嫁接在M26上的烟富6 苹果果实中的总酚和类黄酮含量最高,李青山等[37]研究发现SH38的中间砧可显著提高华红苹果果肉的总酚含量。在本研究中,以SH6的总酚含量和类黄酮含量最高,SC1和SH38次之,显著高于对照M26,SH6、SC1和SH38的维生素C含量也显著高于对照M26,M9-T337与对照M26相比差异不显著。说明SH 系有利于提高瑞雪品种的功能性营养成分含量。

变异系数法是一种能有效衡量指标变异程度的赋权法,在进行多个指标综合评价时,各指标的取值差异一定程度上反映出不同矮化中间砧在果实品质方面的差异,变异系数越大的指标受砧木的影响越大,则该指标应赋予的权重越大[22]。笔者在本研究中应用变异系数法确立了砧穗组合各评价指标的权重系数,采用隶属函数法对不同砧穗组合效果进行了综合评价,结果显示各砧穗组合果实品质综合评价指数从大到小排序为SH6、SC1、SH38、M26、M9-T337,说明SH6果实品质方面的综合效果最优,其次是SC1和SH38,但是经过笔者多年在甘肃陇东地区雨养果园中对几种矮化中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果生长结果情况的调查,发现SH6中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果表现为树势偏弱且产量低,适应性较差,半矮化砧木SC1和SH38嫁接短枝型的瑞雪苹果,生长表现好,产量优。

4 结 论

不同的矮化中间砧嫁接瑞雪苹果能够显著地影响果实的内外在品质,SH6、SH38和SC1的果实果面光洁、内在风味佳、香气浓郁且功能性营养成分含量较高,果实品质优,其中SH6更为突出,但作为甘肃陇东地区发展瑞雪苹果矮化中间砧栽培的候选砧木还需综合考虑生长结果情况。

参考文献 References:

[1] 韩明玉.苹果矮砧集约栽培技术模式刍议[J].中国果树,2015(3):76-79.

HAN Mingyu. Discussion on the technical mode of intensive cultivation of apple dwarfing rootstocks[J]. China Fruits,2015(3):76-79.

[2] ROBINSON T.Recent advances and future directions in orchard planting systems[J].Acta Horticulturae,2007,732:367-381.

[3] 马宝焜,徐继忠,孙建设. 关于我国苹果矮砧密植栽培的思考[J].果树学报,2010,27(1):105-109.

MA Baokun,XU Jizhong,SUN Jianshe. Consideration for high density planting with dwarf rootstocks in apple in China[J].Journal of Fruit Science,2010,27(1):105-109.

[4] 李丙智,韩明玉,张林森,雷小明.我国矮砧苹果生产现状与发展缓慢的原因分析及建议[J].烟台果树,2010(2):1-4.

LI Bingzhi,HAN Mingyu,ZHANG Linsen,LEI Xiaoming.The suggestion and analysis of the causes of slow development on short anvil apple production in China present situation[J].Yantai Fruits,2010(2):1-4.

[5] 陈学森,韩明玉,苏桂林,刘凤之,过国南,姜远茂,毛志泉,彭福田,束怀瑞.当今世界苹果产业发展趋势及我国苹果产业优质高效发展意见[J].果树学报,2010,27(4):598-604.

CHEN Xuesen,HAN Mingyu,SU Guilin,LIU Fengzhi,GUO Guonan,JIANG Yuanmao,MAO Zhiquan,PENG Futian,SHU Huairui. Discussion on today’s world apple industry trends and the suggestions on sustainable and efficient development of apple industry in China[J]. Journal of Fruit Science,2010,27(4):598-604.

[6] 刘国荣,陈海江,徐继忠,马宝焜,张媛.矮化中间砧对‘红富士’苹果果实品质的影响[J].河北农业大学学报,2007,30(4):24-26.

LIU Guorong,CHEN Haijiang,XU Jizhong,MA Baokun,ZHANG Yuan. The effect of different dwarfing interstocks on‘Red Fuji’apple fruit quality[J]. Journal of Hebei Agricultural University,2007,30(4):24-26.

[7] 张蕊芬,万述伟,葛红娟,黄粤,马荣群,沙广利.砧木对苹果接穗果实影响研究进展[J]. 山东农业科学,2018,50(10):151-155.

ZHANG Ruifen,WAN Shuwei,GE Hongjuan,HUANG Yue,MA Rongqun,SHA Guangli.Advances in research of rootstocks influencing apple fruits[J]. Shandong Agricultural Sciences,2018,50(10):151-155.

[8] WU J H,GAO H Y,ZHAO L,LIAO X J,CHEN F,WANG Z F,HU X S. Chemical compositional characterization of some apple cultivars[J].Food Chemistry,2007,103(1):88-93.

[9] 张秉宇,刘志.不同砧穗组合对‘寒富’苹果果实品质的影响[J].北方园艺,2014(7):30-32.

ZHANG Bingyu,LIU Zhi.Effect of different scion-stock combinations on the quality of‘Hanfu’apple[J]. Northern Horticulture,2014(7):30-32.

[10] 阎振立,张全军,过国南,赵锁印,张顺妮,李玉萍.产地和砧木对华冠苹果芳香物质及风味的影响[J]. 果树学报,2007,24(3):263-267.

YAN Zhenli,ZHANG Quanjun,GUO Guonan,ZHAO Suoyin,ZHANG Shunni,LI Yuping. Effects of producing area and rootstock on aromatic components and flavor of Huaguan apple[J].Journal of Fruit Science,2007,24(3):263-267.

[11] 王大江,王昆,高源,刘立军,龚欣,赵继荣.不同矮化中间砧对‘蜜脆’苹果植株生长及果实功能性成分含量影响的综合评价[J].果树学报,2016,33(6):686-693.

WANG Dajiang,WANG Kun,GAO Yuan,LIU Lijun,GONG Xin,ZHAO Jirong. Comprehensive evaluation of the relationship between dwarfing interstocks and growth power and functional ingredients in the‘Honeycrisp’apple[J]. Journal of Fruit Science,2016,33(6):686-693.

[12] 高华,赵政阳,王雷存,刘振中,武月妮,杨亚州,张伯虎.苹果新品种‘瑞雪’的选育[J].果树学报,2016,33(3):374-377.

GAO Hua,ZHAO Zhengyang,WANG Leicun,LIU Zhenzhong,WU Yueni,YANG Yazhou,ZHANG Bohu.Breeding report new apple cultivar‘Ruixue’[J]. Journal of Fruit Science,2016,33(3):374-377.

[13] 徐华.‘瑞阳’、‘瑞雪’苹果在不同产区主要品质的差异分析[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2019.

XU Hua. The differences analysis of qualities of‘Ruiyang’and‘Ruixue’apple varieties in different production areas[D].Yangling:Northwest A&F University,2019.

[14] 李征.‘瑞阳’、‘瑞雪’苹果在黄土高原不同区域果实品质差异分析[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2017.

LI Zheng. Fruit quality analysis of‘Ruiyang’and‘Ruixue’in different regions of the loess plateau[D].Yangling:Northwest A&F University,2017.

[15] 刘洪冲,王新茹,姚悦,余庭庭,马慧,周会玲.‘瑞雪’苹果不同采收期果实品质及耐贮性[J].北方园艺,2022(7):38-46.

LIU Hongchong,WANG Xinru,YAO Yue,YU Tingting,MA Hui,ZHOU Huiling. Fruit quality and storage tolerance of‘Ruixue’apple at different harvesting periods[J].Northern Horticulture,2022(7):38-46.

[16] 樊淼淼,陶茹,张天皓,王辉,王爽,孙鲁龙,高华.不同果袋对‘瑞雪’苹果果实品质的影响[J].果树学报,2020,37(9):1326-1335.

FAN Miaomiao,TAO Ru,ZHANG Tianhao,WANG Hui,WANG Shuang,SUN Lulong,GAO Hua. Effect of fruit bagging with different types of bags on fruit quality of‘Ruixue’apple[J].Journal of Fruit Science,2020,37(9):1326-1335.

[17] 张旭.富士苹果不同砧穗组合在甘肃陇东地区抗寒性和生长结果表现差异分析[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2020.

ZHANG Xu. The difference analysis of cold resistance and growth performance of‘Fuji’apple different root-stock combinations in Longdong area of Gansu[D]. Yangling:Northwest A&F University,2020.

[18] 邓瑞,袁仲玉,夏雪,刘振中,史涛,高华,赵政阳.套袋对‘瑞雪’苹果果实品质的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2018,46(7):117-123.

DENG Rui,YUAN Zhongyu,XIA Xue,LIU Zhenzhong,SHI Tao,GAO Hua,ZHAO Zhengyang. Influence of bagging on quality of‘Ruixue’apple[J]. Journal of Northwest A& F University(Natural Science Edition),2018,46(7):117-123.

[19] 王艳颖,胡文忠,庞坤,马垄.高效液相色谱-蒸发光散射法测定苹果中可溶性糖的含量[J].食品与发酵工业,2008(6):129-131.

WANG Yanying,HU Wenzhong,PANG Kun,MA Long. Determination of the soluble sugars in apple by high performance liquid chromatography with evaporative light scattering detector(HPLC-ELSD)[J]. Food and Fermentation Industries,2008(6):129-131.

[20] 孙鹏,王宁,孙先锋.两种方法对苹果中维生素C 含量测定的比较[J].湖北农业科学,2011,50(16):3386-3388.

SUN Peng,WANG Ning,SUN Xianfeng. Comparison of two methods for detecting vitamin C in apple[J]. Hubei Agricultural Sciences,2011,50(16):3386-3388.

[21] 宋伊真,王芝云,沙广利,张玉刚,祝军,戴洪义.不同砧穗组合的苹果果实总酚、类黄酮和果皮色素含量变化的研究[J].青岛农业大学学报(自然科学版),2014,31(3):172-176.

SONG Yizhen,WANG Zhiyun,SHA Guangli,ZHANG Yugang,ZHU Jun,DAI Hongyi.Research on the dynamic changes of total phenols,flavonoids and pericarp pigment content in apples derived from different stock-scion combinations during growth and development period[J].Journal of Qingdao Agricultural University(Natural Science Edition),2014,31(3):172-176.

[22] 李艳,王鹏新,刘峻明,张树誉,李俐.基于条件植被温度指数的冬小麦主要生育时期干旱监测效果评价:Ⅱ.改进的层次分析法和变异系数法组合赋权[J].干旱地区农业研究,2014,32(1):236-239.

LI Yan,WANG Pengxin,LIU Junming,ZHANG Shuyu,LI Li.Evaluation of drought monitoring effects in the main growing stages of winter wheat by using thevegetation temperature condition index:Ⅱ.Improved analytic hierarchy process and variationco efficient method[J].Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas,2014,32(1):236-239.

[23] 闫树堂.矮化中间砧影响红富士苹果果实大小机理的研究[D].保定:河北农业大学,2004.

YAN Shutang. Study on the mechanism of influencing fruit size of red‘Fuji’apple for interstocks[D]. Baoding:Hebei Agricultural University,2004.

[24] 王骞,杨廷桢,高敬东,蔡华成,李春燕,杜学梅,王淑婷,弓桂花.不同砧木对‘长富2 号’幼树生长及果实品质的影响[J].中国农学通报,2017,33(23):16-21.

WANG Qian,YANG Tingzhen,GAO Jingdong,CAI Huacheng,LI Chunyan,DU Xuemei,WANG Shuiting,GONG Guihua. Effects of different rootstocks on tree growth and fruit quality of Malus pumila‘NagafuNo.2’[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin,2017,33(23):16-21.

[25] 王海波,李慧峰,李云,何平,杨建明,李林光.M26中间砧对‘泰山嘎拉’苹果果实品质和味感的影响[J].河北林果研究,2014,29(3):267-270.

WANG Haibo,LI Huifeng,LI Yun,HE Ping,YANG Jianming,LI Linguang. Effect of M26 interstock on fruit qualities and taste of Malus domestica cv.Taishan Gala[J].Forestry and Ecological Sciences,2014,29(3):267-270.

[26] 孟蕊.苹果果皮色泽遗传特性及花青苷合成相关基因的表达分析[D].杨凌:西北农林科技大学,2017.

MENG Rui.Analysis of genetics of apple skin color and expression of genes involved in anthocyanin synthesis[D]. Yangling:Northwest A&F University,2017.

[27] 刘志,伊凯,王冬梅,杨巍,杨锋,张景娥.富士苹果果实外观品质性状的遗传[J].果树学报,2004,21(6):505-511.

LIU Zhi,YI Kai,WANG Dongmei,YANG Wei,YANG Feng,ZHANG Jing’e.Study on the inheritance of external characteristics of‘Fuji’apple fruit[J]. Journal of Fruit Science,2004,21(6):505-511.

[28] 李民吉,张强,李兴亮,周贝贝,杨雨璋,周佳,张军科,魏钦平.SH 系矮化中间砧对‘富士’苹果树体生长、产量和果实品质的影响[J].园艺学报,2018,45(10):1999-2007.

LI Minji,ZHANG Qiang,LI Xingliang,ZHOU Beibei,YANG Yuzhang,ZHOU Jia,ZHANG Junke,WEI Qinping. Effects of five different dwarfing interstocks of SH on growth、light distribution、yield and fruit quality in‘Fuji’apple trees[J].Acta Horticulturae Sinica,2018,45(10):1999-2007.

[29] HECKE K,HERBINGER K,VEBRIC R TROBEC M,TOPLAK H,STAMPAR F,KEPPEL H,DRILL D. Sugar-acid-and phenol contents in apple cultivars from organic and integrat-ed fruit cultivation[J]. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition,2006,60(9):1136-1140.

[30] 李春燕,杨廷桢,高敬东,王骞,蔡华成,杜学梅,王淑婷.砧木对苹果接穗品种果实品质影响的研究进展[J].山西农业科学,2020,48(1):114-116.

LI Chunyan,YANG Tingzhen,GAO Jingdong,WANG Qian,CAI Huacheng,DU Xuemei,WANG Shuting. Research progress on effect of rootstock on fruit quality of scion variety in apple[J]. Journal of Shanxi Agricultural Sciences,2020,48(1):114-116.

[31] 闫树堂,徐继忠,陈海江.不同矮化中间砧红富士苹果内源激素与果实细胞分裂关系研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2005,28(3):31-33.

YAN Shutang,XU Jizhong,CHEN Haijiang. Study on the relationship between cell division in the fruits of‘Red Fuji’apple on different interstocks and endogenous hormones contents[J].Journal of Hebei Agricultural University,2005,28(3):31-33.

[32] 赵玲玲,姜中武,宋来庆,刘美英,唐岩,孙燕霞,李元军.不同砧木对红将军苹果果实品质和香气物质的影响[J].华北农学报,2014,29(S1):234-238.

ZHAO Lingling,JIANG Zhongwu,SONG Laiqing,LIU Meiying,TANG Yan,SUN Yanxia,LI Yuanjun. Effects of different rootstocks on fruit quality and aroma components of red general Fuji apple[J]. Acta Agriculturae Boreali-Sinica,2014,29(S1):234-238.

[33] 陶茹,张天皓,吴丹,樊淼淼,孙鲁龙,刘振中,高华.不同矮化中间砧对‘嘎啦’苹果果实品质的影响[J].甘肃农业大学学报,2021,56(1):72-84.

TAO Ru,ZHANG Tianhao,WU Dan,FAN Miaomiao,SUN Lulong,LIU Zhenzhong,GAO Hua. Effects of different dwarfing interstocks on fruit quality of Gala apple[J]. Journal of Gansu Agricultural University,2021,56(1):72-84.

[34] MANNUCCI A,SERRA A,REMORINI D,CASTAGNA A,MELE M,SCARTAZZA A,RANIERI A.Aroma profile of Fuji apples treated with gelatin edible coating during their storage[J].LWT-Food Science and Technology,2017,85(A):28-36.

[35] DISON J,HEWETTE W. Factors affecting apple aroma flavor vola-tile concentration[J]. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science,2000,28(3):155-173.

[36] 孟智鹏,陈荣鑫,杨舜博,闫雷玉,杨亚州,赵政阳.苹果新品种‘瑞雪’、‘瑞香红’及其亲本香气物质差异分析[J].食品工业科技,2021,42(21):50-56.

MENG Zhipeng,CHEN Rongxin,YANG Shunbo,YAN leiyu,YANG Yazhou,ZHAO Zhengyang. Analysis on the difference of aroma volatile compounds in new apple cultivars‘Ruixue’,‘Ruixianghong’and their parents[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry,2021,42(21):50-56.

[37] 李青山,高源,王昆,孙思邈,路翔,李连文,冯建荣,王大江.不同矮化中间砧对‘华红’苹果果实中总酚及组分含量的影响[J].果树学报,2022,39(7):1-18.

LI Qingshan,GAO Yuan,WANG Kun,SUN Simiao,LU Xiang,LI Lianwen,FENG Jianrong,WANG Dajiang. Effects of different dwarfing interstocks on the total phenols and compounds of polyphenols in‘Huahong’apple[J]. Journal of Fruit Science,2022,39(7):1-18.

Effects of different dwarfing interstocks on fruit quality of Ruixue apple

FAN Juan1, SUN Lulong1, LIU Zhenzhong1, YANG Shunbo1, ZHU Jiashun2, SHI Tao2, ZHAO Zhengyang1*
(1College of Horticulture, Northwest A & F University, Yangling 712100, Shaanxi, China;2Qingcheng Station of Apple Experiment and Demonstration,Qingcheng 745100,Gansu,China)

Abstract:【Objective】Dwarf and dense planting is the development trend of modern apple cultivation.The selection and utilization of dwarfing rootstocks are the key links to achieve dwarfness. More than 80%of the existing dwarf cultivation areas in China use interstocks.The Ruixue apple has a good fruit shape, crispy flesh, and sweet and sour taste, with strong aroma. It has an outstanding comprehensive performance in the Longdong production area of Gansu province. At present, most studies related to this cultivar mainly focused on the effects of different regions,harvest periods,and fruit bagging on the fruit quality of Ruixue, and there have been few studies on the effects of different dwarfing interstocks on the fruit quality of this variety. Therefore, this study explored the effect of different dwarfing interstocks on the fruit quality of Ruixue apple with an aim to provide reference for the screening and utilization of dwarfing interstocks in the Longdong production area of Gansu.【Methods】The experiment was carried out in 2020 and 2021 at the Qingcheng Apple Experiment Station of Northwest A&F University in Gansu.Different dwarfing interstocks(M9-T337,SH6,SH38 and SC1)were grafted with Ruixue apple(Malus domestica Borkh. Ruixue), and the most widely used M26 interstock was used as the control.One-year-old Xinjiang wild apple tissue cultured seedlings were planted in the spring of 2011. In August of the same year, the interstock scions of M9-T337, SH6, SH38 and SC1 and M26 were collected for budding at 5 cm above the ground.The grafted seedlings were transplanted in the spring of 2012.In the spring of 2017, Ruixue scions were grafted onto the grafted seedlings. In 2020 and 2021, when the apple trees were 4 to 5-year-old, the differences in fruit appearance quality (color, fruit shape index, fruit mass) and internal quality (firmness, sugar and acid content, aroma substances, and functional nutrients)of each stock-scion combination were compared.The effects of dwarfing interstocks on fruit quality were evaluated based on membership values of functional ingredients calculated by the method of membership function, and all the collected data were analyzed using SPSS 22.0. The data obtained were processed and graphed using Microsoft Office Excel 2013 (Microsoft, Redmond, USA) and Origin V9(OriginLab Corp.,Northampton,MA,USA)software.【Results】The results showed that the average fruit mass of apples with different interstocks Ruixue was in the order of M9-T337>M26>SH38>SC1>SH6.There was no significant difference in fruit shape index, which was above 0.97.The uniformity of fruit was good, and the fruit shape was high pile. The L* value is a parameter reflecting the glossiness and brightness of the fruit;the a*value represents the green saturation and b*reflects the yellow saturation. The L* and b* of SH6, SH38 and SC1 were significantly higher than those of the control(M26), and the fruit surface was smooth and the appearance quality was excellent. The SH6, SH38 and SC1 were better than M26 and M9-T337 in the soluble solids content, fructose and soluble solid/acid ratio,especially the total soluble sugar and sweetness value, among which SH6 and SC1 were the most outstanding, with soluble solid to acid ratio of 52, a total sugar content above 135 mg·g-1, a fructose content above 67 mg·g-1,and a sweetness value above 178.Ruixue apple belongs to the green-flavored apple with high contents of esters and olefins. The contents of esters and olefins in SC1 (65.63 μg·kg-1)and SH38 (68.45 μg·kg-1) were significantly higher than those in the control (65.63 μg·kg-1). The content of olefins in SH6 was the highest, which was more than 3 times that of the control. The aldehyde substances were higher in SC1,SH6 and SH38.It was shown that SH series was conducive to the accumulation of fragrant substances in Ruixue fruit, and the fragrance was strong. The contents of flavonoids and Vc in SH6,SH38 and SC1 were significantly higher than those in M26,and were the lowest in M9-T337.The total phenolic content in SH6 was significantly higher than that of the other dwarfing interstocks.【Conclusion】Grafting Ruixue apple with different dwarfing interstocks can significantly affect the internal and external quality of the fruit. The comprehensive evaluation based on membership function analysis showed that,the SH6,SH38 and SC1 fruits had smooth fruit surface,good internal flavor,strong aroma and high functional nutrient content, and excellent fruit quality, of which SH6 was more prominent. However, after years of investigation on the growth of apples grafted on several dwarfing interstocks in rain orchards in Longdong area of Gansu province, we found that Ruixue apples grafted on SH6 interstock showed weak tree vigor and low yield. Therefore, the candidate rootstocks for cultivation still need to be comprehensively evaluated taking the tree growth in consideration in Longdong of Gansu.

Key words:Ruixue apple;Rootstock-scion combination;Dwarfing interstocks;Fruit quality

中图分类号:S661.1

文献标志码:A

文章编号:1009-9980(2023)04-0680-10

DOI:10.13925/j.cnki.gsxb.20220318

收稿日期:2022-06-27

接受日期:2022-11-14

基金项目:国家现代农业(苹果)产业技术体系建设专项(CARS-27);中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金(2452020033);甘肃省2020年度试验示范站(基地)科技创新与成果转化项目(TGZX2020-31)

作者简介:樊娟,女,在读硕士研究生,研究方向为果树栽培与生理。Tel:18195586422,E-mail:1743227242@qq.com

*通信作者Author for correspondence.Tel:13891819690,E-mail:zhaozy@nwsuaf.edu.cn