Rice Science ›› 2026, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (2): 245-259.DOI: 10.1016/j.rsci.2025.12.005
收稿日期:2025-11-06
接受日期:2025-12-23
出版日期:2026-03-28
发布日期:2026-04-01
. [J]. Rice Science, 2026, 33(2): 245-259.
| Variety type | Variety | Biomass at heading (t/hm2) | Biomass at maturity (t/hm2) | Yield (t/hm2) | Harvest index | DBPGF [kg/(hm2·d)] | Biomass production type | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | ||||||||
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 16.23 a | 15.25 a | 25.68 a | 25.43 a | 11.56 a | 13.09 a | 0.45 a | 0.51 a | 210.0 a | 226.1 a | High-yield and high-efficiency | |||||
| Shanyou 63 | 14.77 b | 14.80 a | 25.77 a | 23.92 b | 11.11 ab | 11.26 b | 0.43 b | 0.47 b | 219.9 a | 202.7 b | High-yield and high-efficiency | ||||||
| Liangyoupeijiu | 14.29 b | 14.98 a | 24.85 a | 22.90 b | 10.14 b | 10.86 bc | 0.41 c | 0.47 b | 192.0 ab | 176.0 c | General | ||||||
| C Liangyou 513 | 14.97 b | 13.33 b | 22.67 b | 19.93 c | 7.43 c | 10.36 cd | 0.33 d | 0.52 a | 171.0 b | 146.6 d | General | ||||||
| Mean | 15.06 A | 14.59 A | 24.74 A | 23.04 A | 10.06 A | 11.39 A | 0.40 A | 0.49 A | 198.2 A | 187.9 A | |||||||
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 11.03 a | 11.95 a | 20.40 ab | 21.36 a | 9.05 b | 10.24 ab | 0.44 ab | 0.48 a | 220.4 a | 235.4 a | High-yield and high-efficiency | |||||
| Nangeng 5718 | 10.99 a | 13.22 a | 22.11 a | 21.42 a | 9.83 a | 9.98 b | 0.44 ab | 0.47 a | 217.6 b | 205.2 b | High-yield and high-efficiency | ||||||
| Suxiu 867 | 10.36 a | 10.18 b | 19.07 b | 19.32 b | 8.72 b | 6.86 d | 0.46 a | 0.35 b | 187.0 c | 182.8 c | General | ||||||
| Yangnongdao 1 | 10.20 a | 10.04 b | 19.15 b | 18.51 b | 7.92 c | 8.28 c | 0.41 b | 0.45 a | 176.7 c | 169.4 c | General | ||||||
| Mean | 10.64 B | 11.85 B | 20.18 B | 20.15 B | 8.88 B | 8.84 B | 0.44 A | 0.44 A | 200.4 A | 197.1 A | |||||||
Table 1. Aboveground biomass at different growth stages, yields, harvest index, and daily biomass production rates during the grain-filling period (DBPGF) in 2023‒2024, and biomass production types of tested rice varieties.
| Variety type | Variety | Biomass at heading (t/hm2) | Biomass at maturity (t/hm2) | Yield (t/hm2) | Harvest index | DBPGF [kg/(hm2·d)] | Biomass production type | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | ||||||||
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 16.23 a | 15.25 a | 25.68 a | 25.43 a | 11.56 a | 13.09 a | 0.45 a | 0.51 a | 210.0 a | 226.1 a | High-yield and high-efficiency | |||||
| Shanyou 63 | 14.77 b | 14.80 a | 25.77 a | 23.92 b | 11.11 ab | 11.26 b | 0.43 b | 0.47 b | 219.9 a | 202.7 b | High-yield and high-efficiency | ||||||
| Liangyoupeijiu | 14.29 b | 14.98 a | 24.85 a | 22.90 b | 10.14 b | 10.86 bc | 0.41 c | 0.47 b | 192.0 ab | 176.0 c | General | ||||||
| C Liangyou 513 | 14.97 b | 13.33 b | 22.67 b | 19.93 c | 7.43 c | 10.36 cd | 0.33 d | 0.52 a | 171.0 b | 146.6 d | General | ||||||
| Mean | 15.06 A | 14.59 A | 24.74 A | 23.04 A | 10.06 A | 11.39 A | 0.40 A | 0.49 A | 198.2 A | 187.9 A | |||||||
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 11.03 a | 11.95 a | 20.40 ab | 21.36 a | 9.05 b | 10.24 ab | 0.44 ab | 0.48 a | 220.4 a | 235.4 a | High-yield and high-efficiency | |||||
| Nangeng 5718 | 10.99 a | 13.22 a | 22.11 a | 21.42 a | 9.83 a | 9.98 b | 0.44 ab | 0.47 a | 217.6 b | 205.2 b | High-yield and high-efficiency | ||||||
| Suxiu 867 | 10.36 a | 10.18 b | 19.07 b | 19.32 b | 8.72 b | 6.86 d | 0.46 a | 0.35 b | 187.0 c | 182.8 c | General | ||||||
| Yangnongdao 1 | 10.20 a | 10.04 b | 19.15 b | 18.51 b | 7.92 c | 8.28 c | 0.41 b | 0.45 a | 176.7 c | 169.4 c | General | ||||||
| Mean | 10.64 B | 11.85 B | 20.18 B | 20.15 B | 8.88 B | 8.84 B | 0.44 A | 0.44 A | 200.4 A | 197.1 A | |||||||
| Variety type | Variety | Acanopy [μmol/(m2·s)] | Aleaf [μmol/(m2·s)] | gs [mol/(m2·s)] | E [mmol/(m2·s)] | Kleaf [mmol/(m2·s·Mpa)] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 45.04 a | 26.95 a | 0.44 a | 9.34 a | 14.77 a |
| Shanyou 63 | 37.60 b | 23.91 b | 0.40 ab | 8.38 b | 11.06 b | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 33.64 c | 22.83 bc | 0.39 ab | 8.42 ab | 11.27 b | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 34.81 c | 21.40 c | 0.35 b | 7.00 c | 8.84 c | |
| Mean | 37.77 B | 23.77 A | 0.40 A | 8.28 A | 11.48 A | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 46.72 a | 26.16 a | 0.36 a | 7.28 a | 10.90 a |
| Nangeng 5718 | 40.75 b | 23.85 b | 0.33 a | 7.33 a | 10.65 a | |
| Suxiu 867 | 36.20 c | 19.98 c | 0.30 a | 6.66 a | 9.34 a | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 41.77 b | 21.19 c | 0.30 a | 6.80 a | 8.80 a | |
| Mean | 41.36 A | 22.80 A | 0.32 B | 7.02 B | 9.92 A |
Table 2. Canopy photosynthetic rate, leaf photosynthetic parameters, and leaf hydraulic conductance of tested rice varieties.
| Variety type | Variety | Acanopy [μmol/(m2·s)] | Aleaf [μmol/(m2·s)] | gs [mol/(m2·s)] | E [mmol/(m2·s)] | Kleaf [mmol/(m2·s·Mpa)] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 45.04 a | 26.95 a | 0.44 a | 9.34 a | 14.77 a |
| Shanyou 63 | 37.60 b | 23.91 b | 0.40 ab | 8.38 b | 11.06 b | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 33.64 c | 22.83 bc | 0.39 ab | 8.42 ab | 11.27 b | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 34.81 c | 21.40 c | 0.35 b | 7.00 c | 8.84 c | |
| Mean | 37.77 B | 23.77 A | 0.40 A | 8.28 A | 11.48 A | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 46.72 a | 26.16 a | 0.36 a | 7.28 a | 10.90 a |
| Nangeng 5718 | 40.75 b | 23.85 b | 0.33 a | 7.33 a | 10.65 a | |
| Suxiu 867 | 36.20 c | 19.98 c | 0.30 a | 6.66 a | 9.34 a | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 41.77 b | 21.19 c | 0.30 a | 6.80 a | 8.80 a | |
| Mean | 41.36 A | 22.80 A | 0.32 B | 7.02 B | 9.92 A |
| Variety type | Variety | SLupper (μm) | SLlower (μm) | SDupper (No./mm2) | SDlower (No./mm2) | SDupper/SDlower | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 16.80 a | 17.55 a | 696.89 b | 599.19 c | 1.16 a | |
| Shanyou 63 | 15.82 ab | 16.12 ab | 705.52 ab | 607.62 bc | 1.16 a | ||
| Liangyoupeijiu | 14.57 bc | 14.44 bc | 717.14 a | 662.31 a | 1.08 b | ||
| C Liangyou 513 | 13.56 c | 13.69 c | 689.94 b | 625.14 b | 1.10 b | ||
| Mean | 15.19 A | 15.45 A | 702.37 A | 623.56 A | 1.13 B | ||
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 17.31 a | 14.39 ab | 693.58 a | 523.23 a | 1.33 a | |
| Nangeng 5718 | 16.21 ab | 15.05 a | 641.39 ab | 521.55 a | 1.23 a | ||
| Suxiu 867 | 15.14 b | 13.79 b | 599.00 b | 479.35 a | 1.25 a | ||
| Yangnongdao 1 | 15.87 ab | 14.06 ab | 528.36 c | 459.10 a | 1.15 a | ||
| Mean | 16.13 A | 14.32 B | 615.58 B | 495.81 B | 1.24 A | ||
Table 3. Stomatal traits of tested rice varieties.
| Variety type | Variety | SLupper (μm) | SLlower (μm) | SDupper (No./mm2) | SDlower (No./mm2) | SDupper/SDlower | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 16.80 a | 17.55 a | 696.89 b | 599.19 c | 1.16 a | |
| Shanyou 63 | 15.82 ab | 16.12 ab | 705.52 ab | 607.62 bc | 1.16 a | ||
| Liangyoupeijiu | 14.57 bc | 14.44 bc | 717.14 a | 662.31 a | 1.08 b | ||
| C Liangyou 513 | 13.56 c | 13.69 c | 689.94 b | 625.14 b | 1.10 b | ||
| Mean | 15.19 A | 15.45 A | 702.37 A | 623.56 A | 1.13 B | ||
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 17.31 a | 14.39 ab | 693.58 a | 523.23 a | 1.33 a | |
| Nangeng 5718 | 16.21 ab | 15.05 a | 641.39 ab | 521.55 a | 1.23 a | ||
| Suxiu 867 | 15.14 b | 13.79 b | 599.00 b | 479.35 a | 1.25 a | ||
| Yangnongdao 1 | 15.87 ab | 14.06 ab | 528.36 c | 459.10 a | 1.15 a | ||
| Mean | 16.13 A | 14.32 B | 615.58 B | 495.81 B | 1.24 A | ||
| Variety type | Variety | VLA (mm/mm2) | VHmajor (μm) | VHminor (μm) | VWmajor (μm) | VWminor (μm) | BSCmajor | BSCminor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 4.06 a | 175.9 a | 73.96 a | 188.5 a | 61.29 a | 28.0 a | 15.0 a |
| Shanyou 63 | 3.74 b | 130.2 d | 55.34 c | 152.4 c | 46.03 b | 23.0 b | 12.0 b | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 3.62 bc | 139.4 c | 64.30 b | 159.2 b | 52.17 ab | 24.0 b | 11.5 b | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 3.42 c | 146.1 b | 55.69 c | 155.7 c | 48.76 b | 23.0 b | 12.0 b | |
| Mean | 3.71 A | 146.2 A | 63.32 A | 163.0 A | 52.92 A | 24.4 A | 12.4 A | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 3.88 a | 146.2 b | 64.45 a | 172.9 a | 48.38 a | 24.5 ab | 11.5 a |
| Nangeng 5718 | 3.76 a | 157.8 a | 63.46 a | 173.0 a | 56.64 a | 26.5 a | 13.0 a | |
| Suxiu 867 | 3.66 a | 165.0 a | 63.99 a | 170.9 ab | 43.25 a | 24.0 b | 11.5 a | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 3.64 a | 132.2 c | 65.06 a | 156.9 b | 61.38 a | 24.0 b | 11.5 a | |
| Mean | 3.73 A | 148.2 A | 64.27 A | 168.1 A | 53.72 A | 24.7 A | 11.9 A |
Table 4. Leaf vein traits of tested rice varieties.
| Variety type | Variety | VLA (mm/mm2) | VHmajor (μm) | VHminor (μm) | VWmajor (μm) | VWminor (μm) | BSCmajor | BSCminor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 4.06 a | 175.9 a | 73.96 a | 188.5 a | 61.29 a | 28.0 a | 15.0 a |
| Shanyou 63 | 3.74 b | 130.2 d | 55.34 c | 152.4 c | 46.03 b | 23.0 b | 12.0 b | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 3.62 bc | 139.4 c | 64.30 b | 159.2 b | 52.17 ab | 24.0 b | 11.5 b | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 3.42 c | 146.1 b | 55.69 c | 155.7 c | 48.76 b | 23.0 b | 12.0 b | |
| Mean | 3.71 A | 146.2 A | 63.32 A | 163.0 A | 52.92 A | 24.4 A | 12.4 A | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 3.88 a | 146.2 b | 64.45 a | 172.9 a | 48.38 a | 24.5 ab | 11.5 a |
| Nangeng 5718 | 3.76 a | 157.8 a | 63.46 a | 173.0 a | 56.64 a | 26.5 a | 13.0 a | |
| Suxiu 867 | 3.66 a | 165.0 a | 63.99 a | 170.9 ab | 43.25 a | 24.0 b | 11.5 a | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 3.64 a | 132.2 c | 65.06 a | 156.9 b | 61.38 a | 24.0 b | 11.5 a | |
| Mean | 3.73 A | 148.2 A | 64.27 A | 168.1 A | 53.72 A | 24.7 A | 11.9 A |
| Variety type | Variety | Sm (μm2/μm2) | Sc (μm2/μm2) | Tcw (μm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 28.75 a | 23.57 a | 0.235 bc |
| Shanyou 63 | 23.40 b | 20.81 b | 0.233 c | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 22.00 b | 19.92 b | 0.249 ab | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 22.63 b | 18.83 b | 0.261 a | |
| Mean | 24.19 A | 20.78 A | 0.244 B | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 28.74 a | 24.65 a | 0.227 b |
| Nangeng 5718 | 26.28 ab | 22.27 ab | 0.242 b | |
| Suxiu 867 | 23.53 b | 20.82 ab | 0.294 a | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 25.20 ab | 19.31 b | 0.291 a | |
| Mean | 25.94 A | 21.76 A | 0.264 A |
Table 5. Leaf mesophyll anatomical structure of tested rice varieties.
| Variety type | Variety | Sm (μm2/μm2) | Sc (μm2/μm2) | Tcw (μm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 28.75 a | 23.57 a | 0.235 bc |
| Shanyou 63 | 23.40 b | 20.81 b | 0.233 c | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 22.00 b | 19.92 b | 0.249 ab | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 22.63 b | 18.83 b | 0.261 a | |
| Mean | 24.19 A | 20.78 A | 0.244 B | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 28.74 a | 24.65 a | 0.227 b |
| Nangeng 5718 | 26.28 ab | 22.27 ab | 0.242 b | |
| Suxiu 867 | 23.53 b | 20.82 ab | 0.294 a | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 25.20 ab | 19.31 b | 0.291 a | |
| Mean | 25.94 A | 21.76 A | 0.264 A |
| Variety type | Variety | LAI | Daily LAI decay rate during heading to 20 d after heading | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jointing | Heading | 20 d after heading | |||
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 4.36 b | 6.21 c | 5.66 d | 0.027 b |
| Shanyou 63 | 5.95 a | 9.67 a | 9.17 a | 0.025 b | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 5.69 a | 9.07 ab | 8.29 b | 0.039 ab | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 4.80 b | 8.51 b | 7.55 c | 0.048 a | |
| Mean | 5.20 A | 8.37 A | 7.67 A | 0.035 A | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 4.73 a | 6.97 ab | 6.64 a | 0.017 b |
| Nangeng 5718 | 4.09 ab | 6.76 b | 6.46 ab | 0.015 b | |
| Suxiu 867 | 3.68 b | 5.63 c | 5.11 c | 0.026 b | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 4.19 ab | 7.51 a | 5.86 b | 0.083 a | |
| Mean | 4.17 B | 6.72 B | 6.02 B | 0.035 A | |
Table 6. Leaf area index (LAI) at different growth stages and leaf area decay rate of tested rice varieties from heading to 20 d after heading.
| Variety type | Variety | LAI | Daily LAI decay rate during heading to 20 d after heading | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jointing | Heading | 20 d after heading | |||
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 4.36 b | 6.21 c | 5.66 d | 0.027 b |
| Shanyou 63 | 5.95 a | 9.67 a | 9.17 a | 0.025 b | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 5.69 a | 9.07 ab | 8.29 b | 0.039 ab | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 4.80 b | 8.51 b | 7.55 c | 0.048 a | |
| Mean | 5.20 A | 8.37 A | 7.67 A | 0.035 A | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 4.73 a | 6.97 ab | 6.64 a | 0.017 b |
| Nangeng 5718 | 4.09 ab | 6.76 b | 6.46 ab | 0.015 b | |
| Suxiu 867 | 3.68 b | 5.63 c | 5.11 c | 0.026 b | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 4.19 ab | 7.51 a | 5.86 b | 0.083 a | |
| Mean | 4.17 B | 6.72 B | 6.02 B | 0.035 A | |
| Variety type | Variety | LIM (%) | LIB (%) | KL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 83.80 b | 94.99 b | 0.184 a |
| Shanyou 63 | 92.43 a | 98.68 a | 0.186 a | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 90.75 a | 98.89 a | 0.221 a | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 90.09 a | 97.70 a | 0.175 a | |
| Mean | 89.27 A | 97.57 A | 0.191 B | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 85.79 a | 98.11 ab | 0.308 a |
| Nangeng 5718 | 85.44 a | 98.26 a | 0.342 a | |
| Suxiu 867 | 85.88 a | 97.39 bc | 0.268 ab | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 89.06 a | 96.62 c | 0.218 b | |
| Mean | 86.54 A | 97.59 A | 0.284 A |
Table 7. Light interception rate and light extinction coefficient of tested rice varieties.
| Variety type | Variety | LIM (%) | LIB (%) | KL |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid | Yongyou 2640 | 83.80 b | 94.99 b | 0.184 a |
| Shanyou 63 | 92.43 a | 98.68 a | 0.186 a | |
| Liangyoupeijiu | 90.75 a | 98.89 a | 0.221 a | |
| C Liangyou 513 | 90.09 a | 97.70 a | 0.175 a | |
| Mean | 89.27 A | 97.57 A | 0.191 B | |
| Japonica | Huaidao 5 | 85.79 a | 98.11 ab | 0.308 a |
| Nangeng 5718 | 85.44 a | 98.26 a | 0.342 a | |
| Suxiu 867 | 85.88 a | 97.39 bc | 0.268 ab | |
| Yangnongdao 1 | 89.06 a | 96.62 c | 0.218 b | |
| Mean | 86.54 A | 97.59 A | 0.284 A |
Fig. 1. Correlations between rice biomass production characteristics, leaf photosynthetic parameters, and leaf morphological and anatomical traits across different varieties.
Fig. 2. Correlations between rice biomass production characteristics, canopy photosynthetic rate, and canopy photosynthetic parameters across different varieties. HD, Heading stage; MA, Maturity stage; DBPGF, Daily biomass production rate during the grain filling period; Acanopy, Canopy photosynthetic rate; LAIJ, Leaf area index at jointing; LAIHD, Leaf area index at heading; LAIHD20, Leaf area index at 20 d after heading; LAIHD-HD20, Leaf area decay rate from heading to 20 d after heading; LIM, Light interception rate at the middle of the canopy; LIB, Light interception rate at the bottom of the canopy; KL, Light extinction coefficient. Values in the box of the upper triangle are the correlation coefficient of the parameter on its corresponding left side and the parameters on the lower side. Data were from 2023. *, P ≤ 0.05; **, P ≤ 0.01; ***, P ≤ 0.001 by one-way analysis of variance.
Fig. 3. Average SPAD value of the top three leaves of tested hybrid and japonica rice varieties at 30 d after heading. SPAD, Relative value of chlorophyll content, indicating the green degree of leaves. Parameters were compared among varieties based on the least significant difference (LSD) test at the 0.05 probability level, and different lowercase letters above bars indicate significant differences among varieties within a variety type.
Fig. 4. Path analysis of leaf and canopy eco-physiological photosynthetic factors affecting rice yield and biomass production.
| [1] | Adachi S, Nakae T, Uchida M, et al. 2013. The mesophyll anatomy enhancing CO2 diffusion is a key trait for improving rice photosynthesis. J Exp Bot, 64(4): 1061-1072. |
| [2] | Bailey-Serres J, Parker J E, Ainsworth E A, et al. 2019. Genetic strategies for improving crop yields. Nature, 575: 109-118. |
| [3] | Brodribb T J, Feild T S, Jordan G J. 2007. Leaf maximum photosynthetic rate and venation are linked by hydraulics. Plant Physiol, 144(4): 1890-1898. |
| [4] | Carriquí M, Cabrera H M, Conesa M À, et al. 2015. Diffusional limitations explain the lower photosynthetic capacity of ferns as compared with angiosperms in a common garden study. Plant Cell Environ, 38(3): 448-460. |
| [5] | Chen Q, Zhang Y, Yang B, et al. 2022. Biomass producing characteristics of high yield and high efficiency groups in direct seeding rice and its regulating approaches. J Yangzhou Univ: Agric Life Sci, 43(6): 1-12. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [6] | Else M A, Coupland D, Dutton L, et al. 2001. Decreased root hydraulic conductivity reduces leaf water potential, initiates stomatal closure and slows leaf expansion in flooded plants of castor oil (Ricinus communis) despite diminished delivery of ABA from the roots to shoots in xylem sap. Physiol Plant, 111(1): 46-54. |
| [7] | Ermakova M, Danila F R, Furbank R T, et al. 2020. On the road to C4 rice: Advances and perspectives. Plant J, 101(4): 940-950. |
| [8] | Flexas J, Barbour M M, Brendel O, et al. 2012. Mesophyll diffusion conductance to CO2: An unappreciated central player in photosynthesis. Plant Sci, 193: 70-84. |
| [9] | Flexas J, Clemente-Moreno M J, Bota J, et al. 2021. Cell wall thickness and composition are involved in photosynthetic limitation. J Exp Bot, 72(11): 3971-3986. |
| [10] | Flood P J, Harbinson J, Aarts M G M. 2011. Natural genetic variation in plant photosynthesis. Trends Plant Sci, 16(6): 327-335. |
| [11] | Furbank R, Kelly S, von Caemmerer S. 2023. Photosynthesis and food security: The evolving story of C4 rice. Photosynth Res, 158(2): 121-130. |
| [12] | Giuliani R, Koteyeva N, Voznesenskaya E, et al. 2013. Coordination of leaf photosynthesis, transpiration, and structural traits in rice and wild relatives (Genus Oryza). Plant Physiol, 162(3): 1632-1651. |
| [13] | Gu J F, Yin X Y, Stomph T J, et al. 2014. Can exploiting natural genetic variation in leaf photosynthesis contribute to increasing rice productivity? A simulation analysis. Plant Cell Environ, 37(1): 22-34. |
| [14] | Gu J F, Chen Y, Zhang H, et al. 2017. Canopy light and nitrogen distributions are related to grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency in rice. Field Crops Res, 206: 74-85. |
| [15] | Huang G J, Zhang Q Q, Yang Y H, et al. 2022. Interspecific variation in the temperature response of mesophyll conductance is related to leaf anatomy. Plant J, 112(1): 221-234. |
| [16] | Huang L Y, Yang D S, Li X X, et al. 2019. Coordination of high grain yield and high nitrogen use efficiency through large sink size and high post-heading source capacity in rice. Field Crops Res, 233: 49-58. |
| [17] | Huang X H, Wang Z X, Huang J L, et al. 2021. Mesophyll conductance variability of rice aquaporin knockout lines at different growth stages and growing environments. Plant J, 107(5): 1503-1512. |
| [18] | Li S, Hamani A K M, Zhang Y Y, et al. 2021. Coordination of leaf hydraulic, anatomical, and economical traits in tomato seedlings acclimation to long-term drought. BMC Plant Biol, 21(1): 536. |
| [19] | Liu F, Zhang X Y, Zhao B H, et al. 2021. Mass production characteristics of high-efficiency and high-yield rice. J Yangzhou Univ: Agric Life Sci, 42(3): 74-81. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [20] | Liu X, Li Y. 2016. Varietal difference in the correlation between leaf nitrogen content and photosynthesis in rice (Oryza sativa L.) plants is related to specific leaf weight. J Integr Agric, 15(9): 2002-2011. |
| [21] | Long S P, Zhu X G, Naidu S L, et al. 2006. Can improvement in photosynthesis increase crop yields? Plant Cell Environ, 29(3): 315-330. |
| [22] | Long S P, Marshall-Colon A, Zhu X G. 2015. Meeting the global food demand of the future by engineering crop photosynthesis and yield potential. Cell, 161(1): 56-66. |
| [23] | Long S P, Wang Y, Carmo-Silva E, et al. 2025. Feeding from the sun: Successes and prospects in bioengineering photosynthesis for food security. Cell, 188: 6700-6719. |
| [24] | Makino A. 2003. Rubisco and nitrogen relationships in rice: Leaf photosynthesis and plant growth. Soil Sci Plant Nutr, 49(3): 319-327. |
| [25] | Muir C D, Hangarter R P, Moyle L C, et al. 2014. Morphological and anatomical determinants of mesophyll conductance in wild relatives of tomato (Solanum Sect. Lycopersicon, Sect. Lycopersicoides; Solanaceae). Plant Cell Environ, 37( 6): 1415-1426. |
| [26] | Niu S L, Wu M Y, Han Y, et al. 2010. Nitrogen effects on net ecosystem carbon exchange in a temperate steppe. Glob Change Biol, 16(1): 144-155. |
| [27] | Ocheltree T W, Nippert J B, Prasad P V V. 2012. Changes in stomatal conductance along grass blades reflect changes in leaf structure. Plant Cell Environ, 35(6): 1040-1049. |
| [28] | Ouyang W J, Struik P C, Yin X Y, et al. 2017. Stomatal conductance, mesophyll conductance, and transpiration efficiency in relation to leaf anatomy in rice and wheat genotypes under drought. J Exp Bot, 68(18): 5191-5205. |
| [29] | Peng S B, Huang J L, Zhong X H, et al. 2002. Research strategy in improving fertilizer-nitrogen use efficiency of irrigated rice in China. Sci Agric Sin, 35(9): 1095-1103. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [30] | Roig-Oliver M, Fullana-Pericàs M, Bota J, et al. 2021. Adjustments in photosynthesis and leaf water relations are related to changes in cell wall composition in Hordeum vulgare and Triticum aestivum subjected to water deficit stress. Plant Sci, 311: 111015. |
| [31] | Sack L, Holbrook N M. 2006. Leaf hydraulics. Annu Rev Plant Biol, 57: 361-381. |
| [32] | Sack L, Scoffoni C. 2012. Measurement of leaf hydraulic conductance and stomatal conductance and their responses to irradiance and dehydration using the Evaporative Flux Method (EFM). J Vis Exp, (70): e4179. |
| [33] | Scafaro A P, von Caemmerer S, Evans J R, et al. 2011. Temperature response of mesophyll conductance in cultivated and wild Oryza species with contrasting mesophyll cell wall thickness. Plant Cell Environ, 34(11): 1999-2008. |
| [34] | Schneider C A, Rasband W S, Eliceiri K W. 2012. NIH Image to ImageJ: 25 years of image analysis. Nat Methods, 9(7): 671-675. |
| [35] | Shin D, Lee S, Kim T H, et al. 2020. Natural variations at the Stay-Green gene promoter control lifespan and yield in rice cultivars. Nat Commun, 11(1): 2819. |
| [36] | Taniguchi Y, Ohkawa H, Masumoto C, et al. 2008. Overproduction of C4 photosynthetic enzymes in transgenic rice plants: An approach to introduce the C4-like photosynthetic pathway into rice. J Exp Bot, 59(7): 1799-1809. |
| [37] | Taylaran R D, Adachi S, Ookawa T, et al. 2011. Hydraulic conductance as well as nitrogen accumulation plays a role in the higher rate of leaf photosynthesis of the most productive variety of rice in Japan. J Exp Bot, 62(11): 4067-4077. |
| [38] | Terashima I, Hanba Y T, Tholen D, et al. 2011. Leaf functional anatomy in relation to photosynthesis. Plant Physiol, 155(1): 108-116. |
| [39] | Welker J M, Fahnestock J T, Henry G H R, et al. 2004. CO2 exchange in three Canadian High Arctic ecosystems: Response to long-term experimental warming. Glob Change Biol, 10(12): 1981-1995. |
| [40] | Wu L L, de Boer H J, Zhang Z X, et al. 2020. The coordinated increase in stomatal density and vein dimensions during genetic improvement in rice. Agron J, 112(4): 2791-2804. |
| [41] | Wu Z. 2020. Seed setting characteristics and response to weak light stress of rice varieties with high efficiency. Yangzhou, China: Yangzhou University. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [42] | Xie W Y, Ke Y G, Cao J B, et al. 2021. Knock out of transcription factor WRKY53 thickens sclerenchyma cell walls, confers bacterial blight resistance. Plant Physiol, 187(3): 1746-1761. |
| [43] | Xie W Y, Xue X, Wang Y, et al. 2025. Natural mutation in Stay-Green (OsSGR) confers enhanced resistance to rice sheath blight through elevating cytokinin content. Plant Biotechnol J, 23(3): 807-823. |
| [44] | Xiong D L, Nadal M. 2020. Linking water relations and hydraulics with photosynthesis. Plant J, 101(4): 800-815. |
| [45] | Xiong D L, Yu T T, Zhang T, et al. 2015a. Leaf hydraulic conductance is coordinated with leaf morpho-anatomical traits and nitrogen status in the genus Oryza. J Exp Bot, 66(3): 741-748. |
| [46] | Xiong D L, Liu X, Liu L M, et al. 2015b. Rapid responses of mesophyll conductance to changes of CO2 concentration, temperature and irradiance are affected by N supplements in rice. Plant Cell Environ, 38(12): 2541-2550. |
| [47] | Xiong D L, Flexas J, Yu T T, et al. 2017. Leaf anatomy mediates coordination of leaf hydraulic conductance and mesophyll conductance to CO2 in Oryza. New Phytol, 213(2): 572-583. |
| [48] | Yamori W, Nagai T, Makino A. 2011. The rate-limiting step for CO2 assimilation at different temperatures is influenced by the leaf nitrogen content in several C3 crop species. Plant Cell Environ, 34(5): 764-777. |
| [49] | Ye M, Peng S B, Li Y. 2019. Intraspecific variation in photosynthetic nitrogen-use efficiency is positively related to photosynthetic rate in rice (Oryza sativa L.) plants. Photosynthetica, 57(1): 311-319. |
| [50] | Ye M, Zhang Z C, Huang G J, et al. 2020. High leaf mass per area Oryza genotypes invest more leaf mass to cell wall and show a low mesophyll conductance. AoB Plants, 12(4): plaa028. |
| [51] | Ye M, Wu M, Zhang H, et al. 2021. High leaf vein density promotes leaf gas exchange by enhancing leaf hydraulic conductance in Oryza sativa L. plants. Front Plant Sci, 12: 693815. |
| [52] | Ye M, Wu M, Zhang Y, et al. 2022. Physiological factors limiting leaf net photosynthetic rate in C3 crops like rice and approaches for improving it. Agronomy, 12(8): 1830. |
| [53] | Ye M, Wang Z Y, Wu M, et al. 2024. Optimized leaf anatomy improves photosynthetic producing capacity of mid-season indica rice in the Yangtze River Basin during the genetic improvement. Eur J Agron, 158: 127196. |
| [54] | Yoshida S. 1981. Fundamentals of Rice Crop Science. Manila, the Philippines: International Rice Research Institute. |
| [55] | Yuan L P. 2012. Conceiving of breeding further super-high-yield hybrid rice. Hybrid Rice, 27(6): 1-2. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [56] | Yuan S, Peng S B. 2017. Input-output energy analysis of rice production in different crop management practices in central China. Energy, 141: 1124-1132. |
| [57] | Zhang Q. 2020. Studies on the mechanisms of the responses of stomatal conductance and photosynthesis to different light environments in Oryza. Wuhan, China: Huazhong Agricultural University. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [58] | Zhang X. 2019. Group growth characteristics and nitrogen utilization efficiency of rice varieties with high efficiency. Yangzhou: Yangzhou University. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [59] | Zhang Y. 2023. Carbon and nitrogen metabolizing characteristics of high-yield and high-efficiency rice varieties and its responses to nitrogen levels and low light stress. Yangzhou, China: Yangzhou University. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [60] | Zhang Y D, Zhu Z, Chen T, et al. 2020. Breeding and characteristics of a new japonica rice variety Nangeng 5718 with good eating quality. China Rice, 26(4): 100-102. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
| [61] | Zhou Z X, Struik P C, Gu J F, et al. 2023. Leaf-colour modification affects canopy photosynthesis, dry-matter accumulation and yield traits in rice. Field Crops Res, 290: 108746. |
| [62] | Zhu X G, Long S P, Ort D R. 2010. Improving photosynthetic efficiency for greater yield. Annu Rev Plant Biol, 61: 235-261. |
| No related articles found! |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||
