Rice Science ›› 2022, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (2): 189-196.DOI: 10.1016/j.rsci.2022.01.007
• Research Paper • Previous Articles
Luo Haowen1,2,3, He Longxin1,2,3, Du Bin1,2,3, Pan Shenggang1,2,3, Mo Zhaowen1,2,3, Yang Shuying4, Zou Yingbin4, Tang Xiangru1,2,3()
Received:
2021-05-07
Accepted:
2021-08-02
Online:
2022-03-28
Published:
2022-02-09
Contact:
Tang Xiangru
Luo Haowen, He Longxin, Du Bin, Pan Shenggang, Mo Zhaowen, Yang Shuying, Zou Yingbin, Tang Xiangru. Epoxiconazole Improved Photosynthesis, Yield Formation, Grain Quality and 2-Acetyl-1-Pyrroline Biosynthesis of Fragrant Rice[J]. Rice Science, 2022, 29(2): 189-196.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
Treatment | Grain yield (t/hm2) | No. of effective panicles per m2 | No. of grains per panicle | Seed-setting rate (%) | 1000-grain weight (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | |||||
CK | 5.84 ± 0.11 bc | 281.33 ± 9.07 a | 147.88 ± 2.13 a | 73.73 ± 1.73 c | 19.84 ± 0.24 e |
EP1 | 5.66 ± 0.14 c | 278.00 ± 3.61 a | 143.35 ± 1.88 a | 73.55 ± 0.48 c | 20.00 ± 0.41 de |
EP2 | 5.97 ± 0.09 b | 282.00 ± 11.53 a | 146.65 ± 1.43 a | 75.31 ± 1.37 bc | 20.31 ± 0.25 cd |
EP3 | 6.40 ± 0.08 a | 284.00 ± 15.52 a | 143.19 ± 2.63 a | 77.91 ± 1.91 ab | 20.46 ± 0.21 c |
EP4 | 6.46 ± 0.09 a | 279.67 ± 14.57 a | 145.22 ± 2.29 a | 80.22 ± 0.50 a | 21.24 ± 0.27 a |
EP5 | 6.41 ± 0.19 a | 268.67 ± 13.28 a | 140.57 ± 0.81 a | 79.65 ± 1.75 a | 20.85 ± 0.30 b |
2019 | |||||
CK | 5.91 ± 0.08 c | 267.33 ± 15.50 a | 147.34 ± 2.16 a | 74.57 ± 1.28 c | 19.95 ± 0.16 d |
EP1 | 5.73 ± 0.21 c | 263.33 ± 14.05 a | 144.96 ± 2.39 a | 73.41 ± 0.96 c | 19.64 ± 0.09 d |
EP2 | 6.18 ± 0.16 b | 276.33 ± 10.12 a | 146.43 ± 2.68 a | 74.53 ± 0.80 c | 20.38 ± 0.24 c |
EP3 | 6.38 ± 0.14 ab | 268.33 ± 17.39 a | 145.29 ± 2.53 a | 78.10 ± 1.47 b | 20.44 ± 0.20 bc |
EP4 | 6.31 ± 0.17 ab | 265.67 ± 20.23 a | 147.17 ± 2.21 a | 79.81 ± 0.72 a | 21.19 ± 0.16 a |
EP5 | 6.54 ± 0.09 a | 293.00 ± 5.57 a | 142.94 ± 2.37 a | 80.42 ± 0.67 a | 20.76 ± 0.21 b |
2020 | |||||
CK | 5.77 ± 0.22 c | 281.00 ± 15.62 a | 147.81 ± 2.24 a | 73.82 ± 1.41 c | 19.99 ± 0.27 d |
EP1 | 5.87 ± 0.10 bc | 280.67 ± 19.86 a | 148.66 ± 0.47 a | 73.89 ± 1.48 c | 20.27 ± 0.22 cd |
EP2 | 6.10 ± 0.13 b | 270.67 ± 16.74 a | 141.31 ± 1.56 a | 74.64 ± 0.90 c | 20.44 ± 0.20 c |
EP3 | 6.44 ± 0.14 a | 283.67 ± 18.88 a | 142.82 ± 1.83 a | 77.69 ± 2.02 b | 21.01 ± 0.03 b |
EP4 | 6.52 ± 0.17 a | 283.33 ± 17.01 a | 144.78 ± 1.45 a | 80.39 ± 0.50 a | 21.13 ± 0.16 ab |
EP5 | 6.50 ± 0.14 a | 278.33 ± 18.34 a | 145.81 ± 3.51 a | 79.06 ± 0.83 ab | 21.43 ± 0.32 a |
Table 1. Effects of epoxiconazole on grain yield and yield related traits of fragrant rice.
Treatment | Grain yield (t/hm2) | No. of effective panicles per m2 | No. of grains per panicle | Seed-setting rate (%) | 1000-grain weight (g) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | |||||
CK | 5.84 ± 0.11 bc | 281.33 ± 9.07 a | 147.88 ± 2.13 a | 73.73 ± 1.73 c | 19.84 ± 0.24 e |
EP1 | 5.66 ± 0.14 c | 278.00 ± 3.61 a | 143.35 ± 1.88 a | 73.55 ± 0.48 c | 20.00 ± 0.41 de |
EP2 | 5.97 ± 0.09 b | 282.00 ± 11.53 a | 146.65 ± 1.43 a | 75.31 ± 1.37 bc | 20.31 ± 0.25 cd |
EP3 | 6.40 ± 0.08 a | 284.00 ± 15.52 a | 143.19 ± 2.63 a | 77.91 ± 1.91 ab | 20.46 ± 0.21 c |
EP4 | 6.46 ± 0.09 a | 279.67 ± 14.57 a | 145.22 ± 2.29 a | 80.22 ± 0.50 a | 21.24 ± 0.27 a |
EP5 | 6.41 ± 0.19 a | 268.67 ± 13.28 a | 140.57 ± 0.81 a | 79.65 ± 1.75 a | 20.85 ± 0.30 b |
2019 | |||||
CK | 5.91 ± 0.08 c | 267.33 ± 15.50 a | 147.34 ± 2.16 a | 74.57 ± 1.28 c | 19.95 ± 0.16 d |
EP1 | 5.73 ± 0.21 c | 263.33 ± 14.05 a | 144.96 ± 2.39 a | 73.41 ± 0.96 c | 19.64 ± 0.09 d |
EP2 | 6.18 ± 0.16 b | 276.33 ± 10.12 a | 146.43 ± 2.68 a | 74.53 ± 0.80 c | 20.38 ± 0.24 c |
EP3 | 6.38 ± 0.14 ab | 268.33 ± 17.39 a | 145.29 ± 2.53 a | 78.10 ± 1.47 b | 20.44 ± 0.20 bc |
EP4 | 6.31 ± 0.17 ab | 265.67 ± 20.23 a | 147.17 ± 2.21 a | 79.81 ± 0.72 a | 21.19 ± 0.16 a |
EP5 | 6.54 ± 0.09 a | 293.00 ± 5.57 a | 142.94 ± 2.37 a | 80.42 ± 0.67 a | 20.76 ± 0.21 b |
2020 | |||||
CK | 5.77 ± 0.22 c | 281.00 ± 15.62 a | 147.81 ± 2.24 a | 73.82 ± 1.41 c | 19.99 ± 0.27 d |
EP1 | 5.87 ± 0.10 bc | 280.67 ± 19.86 a | 148.66 ± 0.47 a | 73.89 ± 1.48 c | 20.27 ± 0.22 cd |
EP2 | 6.10 ± 0.13 b | 270.67 ± 16.74 a | 141.31 ± 1.56 a | 74.64 ± 0.90 c | 20.44 ± 0.20 c |
EP3 | 6.44 ± 0.14 a | 283.67 ± 18.88 a | 142.82 ± 1.83 a | 77.69 ± 2.02 b | 21.01 ± 0.03 b |
EP4 | 6.52 ± 0.17 a | 283.33 ± 17.01 a | 144.78 ± 1.45 a | 80.39 ± 0.50 a | 21.13 ± 0.16 ab |
EP5 | 6.50 ± 0.14 a | 278.33 ± 18.34 a | 145.81 ± 3.51 a | 79.06 ± 0.83 ab | 21.43 ± 0.32 a |
Fig. 1. Effects of epoxiconazole on soil and plant analyzer development (SPAD) value (A-C) and net photosynthetic rate (D-F) at grain-filling stage in fragrant rice. CK, Foliar spray with distilled water; EP1, Foliar spray with 0.02 g/L epoxiconazole; EP2, Foliar spray with 0.04 g/L epoxiconazole; EP3, Foliar spray with 0.08 g/L epoxiconazole; EP4, Foliar spray with 0.16 g/L epoxiconazole; EP5, Foliar spray with 0.32 g/L epoxiconazole. Data are Mean ± SE (n = 3). Different lowercase letters above the error bars indicate significant difference (P < 0.05) among different treatments.
Fig. 2. Effects of epoxiconazole on 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2-AP) content at harvest stage of fragrant rice. CK, Foliar spray with distilled water; EP1, Foliar spray with 0.02 g/L epoxiconazole; EP2, Foliar spray with 0.04 g/L epoxiconazole; EP3, Foliar spray with 0.08 g/L epoxiconazole; EP4, Foliar spray with 0.16 g/L epoxiconazole; EP5, Foliar spray with 0.32 g/L epoxiconazole. Data are Mean ± SE (n = 3). Different lowercase letters above the error bars indicate significant difference (P < 0.05) among different treatments.
Treatment | Proline content (μg/g) | P5C (μmol/g) | Δ1-pyrroline (μmol/g) | MG (μg/g) |
---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | ||||
CK | 11.18 ± 0.99 c | 1.10 ± 0.02 b | 0.94 ± 0.01 c | 26.11 ± 1.36 a |
EP1 | 11.07 ± 0.19 c | 1.07 ± 0.06 b | 0.91 ± 0.00 c | 26.77 ± 1.02 a |
EP2 | 12.94 ± 0.84 b | 1.10 ± 0.02 b | 0.93 ± 0.02 c | 24.41 ± 1.66 a |
EP3 | 16.12 ± 0.41 a | 1.51 ± 0.15 a | 1.05 ± 0.02 b | 20.65 ± 1.35 b |
EP4 | 16.39 ± 1.10 a | 1.42 ± 0.15 a | 1.16 ± 0.03 a | 20.60 ± 0.11 b |
EP5 | 16.51 ± 0.64 a | 1.29 ± 0.15 a | 1.17 ± 0.01 a | 20.26 ± 0.68 b |
2019 | ||||
CK | 11.06 ± 0.86 c | 1.10 ± 0.04 b | 0.92 ± 0.02 c | 26.60 ± 1.38 a |
EP1 | 10.91 ± 1.31 c | 1.07 ± 0.06 b | 0.97 ± 0.03 c | 24.63 ± 0.35 b |
EP2 | 13.49 ± 0.83 b | 1.12 ± 0.01 b | 0.94 ± 0.03 c | 23.98 ± 0.19 b |
EP3 | 16.41 ± 1.39 a | 1.35 ± 0.16 a | 1.07 ± 0.02 b | 21.94 ± 0.71 c |
EP4 | 16.68 ± 1.20 a | 1.32 ± 0.17 a | 1.14 ± 0.02 a | 19.65 ± 1.67 d |
EP5 | 17.43 ± 0.25 a | 1.28 ± 0.16 a | 1.12 ± 0.01 ab | 19.66 ± 0.79 d |
2020 | ||||
CK | 11.29 ± 0.72 c | 1.05 ± 0.05 b | 0.96 ± 0.03 c | 26.97 ± 0.68 a |
EP1 | 11.96 ± 1.07 bc | 1.10 ± 0.04 b | 0.98 ± 0.02 c | 26.22 ± 1.53 a |
EP2 | 13.00 ± 0.71 b | 1.04 ± 0.04 b | 0.95 ± 0.03 c | 23.97 ± 1.69 a |
EP3 | 16.81 ± 1.03 a | 1.39 ± 0.17 a | 1.06 ± 0.03 b | 21.09 ± 1.32 b |
EP4 | 15.29 ± 0.22 a | 1.30 ± 0.23 a | 1.17 ± 0.02 a | 20.80 ± 1.16 b |
EP5 | 16.46 ± 0.64 a | 1.28 ± 0.07 a | 1.15 ± 0.02 a | 20.37 ± 1.84 b |
Table 2. Effects of epoxiconazole on contents of proline, pyrroline- 5-carboxylic acid (P5C), ∆1-pyrroline and methylglyoxal (MG) in fragrant rice.
Treatment | Proline content (μg/g) | P5C (μmol/g) | Δ1-pyrroline (μmol/g) | MG (μg/g) |
---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | ||||
CK | 11.18 ± 0.99 c | 1.10 ± 0.02 b | 0.94 ± 0.01 c | 26.11 ± 1.36 a |
EP1 | 11.07 ± 0.19 c | 1.07 ± 0.06 b | 0.91 ± 0.00 c | 26.77 ± 1.02 a |
EP2 | 12.94 ± 0.84 b | 1.10 ± 0.02 b | 0.93 ± 0.02 c | 24.41 ± 1.66 a |
EP3 | 16.12 ± 0.41 a | 1.51 ± 0.15 a | 1.05 ± 0.02 b | 20.65 ± 1.35 b |
EP4 | 16.39 ± 1.10 a | 1.42 ± 0.15 a | 1.16 ± 0.03 a | 20.60 ± 0.11 b |
EP5 | 16.51 ± 0.64 a | 1.29 ± 0.15 a | 1.17 ± 0.01 a | 20.26 ± 0.68 b |
2019 | ||||
CK | 11.06 ± 0.86 c | 1.10 ± 0.04 b | 0.92 ± 0.02 c | 26.60 ± 1.38 a |
EP1 | 10.91 ± 1.31 c | 1.07 ± 0.06 b | 0.97 ± 0.03 c | 24.63 ± 0.35 b |
EP2 | 13.49 ± 0.83 b | 1.12 ± 0.01 b | 0.94 ± 0.03 c | 23.98 ± 0.19 b |
EP3 | 16.41 ± 1.39 a | 1.35 ± 0.16 a | 1.07 ± 0.02 b | 21.94 ± 0.71 c |
EP4 | 16.68 ± 1.20 a | 1.32 ± 0.17 a | 1.14 ± 0.02 a | 19.65 ± 1.67 d |
EP5 | 17.43 ± 0.25 a | 1.28 ± 0.16 a | 1.12 ± 0.01 ab | 19.66 ± 0.79 d |
2020 | ||||
CK | 11.29 ± 0.72 c | 1.05 ± 0.05 b | 0.96 ± 0.03 c | 26.97 ± 0.68 a |
EP1 | 11.96 ± 1.07 bc | 1.10 ± 0.04 b | 0.98 ± 0.02 c | 26.22 ± 1.53 a |
EP2 | 13.00 ± 0.71 b | 1.04 ± 0.04 b | 0.95 ± 0.03 c | 23.97 ± 1.69 a |
EP3 | 16.81 ± 1.03 a | 1.39 ± 0.17 a | 1.06 ± 0.03 b | 21.09 ± 1.32 b |
EP4 | 15.29 ± 0.22 a | 1.30 ± 0.23 a | 1.17 ± 0.02 a | 20.80 ± 1.16 b |
EP5 | 16.46 ± 0.64 a | 1.28 ± 0.07 a | 1.15 ± 0.02 a | 20.37 ± 1.84 b |
Treatment | Brown rice rate (%) | Milled rice rate (%) | Head rice rate (%) | Protein content (%) | Amylose content (%) | Chalky rice rate (%) | Chalkiness area ratio (%) | Chalkiness degree |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | ||||||||
CK | 78.58 ± 0.34 a | 66.00 ± 0.56 a | 53.51 ± 0.33 a | 8.63 ± 0.12 c | 18.53 ± 0.15 c | 10.45 ± 0.90 b | 10.07 ± 0.40 ab | 3.35 ± 0.61 a |
EP1 | 79.23 ± 0.26 a | 65.67 ± 1.01 a | 53.43 ± 0.14 a | 8.60 ± 0.10 c | 18.57 ± 0.15 bc | 10.83 ± 0.81 ab | 9.80 ± 0.35 abc | 2.54 ± 0.73 a |
EP2 | 79.67 ± 0.14 a | 66.13 ± 0.75 a | 53.37 ± 0.13 a | 8.87 ± 0.06 b | 18.63 ± 0.12 bc | 10.37 ± 0.60 b | 8.41 ± 0.87 cd | 2.70 ± 0.52 a |
EP3 | 78.94 ± 0.65 a | 66.31 ± 0.59 a | 53.55 ± 0.17 a | 9.10 ± 0.10 a | 18.57 ± 0.12 bc | 7.38 ± 0.99 c | 7.90 ± 1.24 d | 3.10 ± 0.39 a |
EP4 | 78.84 ± 0.32 a | 65.95 ± 0.66 a | 53.71 ± 0.30 a | 8.50 ± 0.10 c | 18.73 ± 0.06 b | 8.37 ± 0.74 c | 9.15 ± 0.65 bcd | 2.47 ± 0.29 a |
EP5 | 78.77 ± 0.73 a | 65.67 ± 0.47 a | 53.27 ± 0.21 a | 8.10 ± 0.10 d | 19.20 ± 0.10 a | 12.11 ± 0.78 a | 10.92 ± 0.62 a | 2.97 ± 0.68 a |
2019 | ||||||||
CK | 78.67 ± 0.71 a | 66.55 ± 0.13 a | 53.50 ± 0.30 a | 8.67 ± 0.06 b | 18.43 ± 0.06 c | 10.34 ± 1.12 b | 10.92 ± 1.46 ab | 3.34 ± 0.28 a |
EP1 | 79.79 ± 0.05 a | 66.17 ± 0.73 a | 53.60 ± 0.49 a | 8.63 ± 0.12 bc | 18.53 ± 0.15 c | 10.70 ± 0.93 b | 9.85 ± 1.09 bc | 2.84 ± 0.52 a |
EP2 | 78.94 ± 0.40 a | 66.45 ± 0.66 a | 53.55 ± 0.10 a | 8.80 ± 0.10 b | 18.57 ± 0.15 c | 8.38 ± 0.41 c | 9.23 ± 0.88 bcd | 2.96 ± 0.69 a |
EP3 | 79.00 ± 0.82 a | 66.08 ± 0.42 a | 53.29 ± 0.28 a | 9.20 ± 0.17 a | 18.60 ± 0.17 c | 6.35 ± 0.33 d | 7.90 ± 0.60 d | 2.74 ± 0.64 a |
EP4 | 78.84 ± 0.37 a | 66.03 ± 0.74 a | 53.57 ± 0.42 a | 8.43 ± 0.06 cd | 18.90 ± 0.10 b | 8.46 ± 1.30 c | 9.15 ± 0.68 cd | 2.45 ± 0.40 a |
EP5 | 79.40 ± 0.61 a | 65.78 ± 0.59 a | 53.56 ± 0.13 a | 8.23 ± 0.12 d | 19.27 ± 0.06 a | 12.18 ± 0.59 a | 12.17 ± 0.28 a | 2.94 ± 0.45 a |
2020 | ||||||||
CK | 78.68 ± 0.57 a | 65.80 ± 0.28 a | 53.35 ± 0.30 a | 8.60 ± 0.10 bc | 18.57 ± 0.12 b | 10.88 ± 0.58 ab | 10.13 ± 1.07 ab | 2.54 ± 0.41 b |
EP1 | 79.11 ± 0.58 a | 66.56 ± 0.14 a | 53.54 ± 0.27 a | 8.57 ± 0.12 bc | 18.53 ± 0.06 b | 10.03 ± 0.78 abc | 11.52 ± 0.62 a | 3.05 ± 0.26 ab |
EP2 | 79.85 ± 0.11 a | 65.71 ± 0.57 a | 53.39 ± 0.16 a | 8.80 ± 0.10 b | 18.53 ± 0.15 b | 9.43 ± 0.40 bcd | 9.24 ± 1.33 bc | 2.91 ± 0.67 ab |
EP3 | 78.69 ± 0.13 a | 65.70 ± 0.09 a | 53.54 ± 0.20 a | 9.10 ± 0.17 a | 18.60 ± 0.10 b | 7.92 ± 0.74 d | 7.69 ± 1.26 c | 3.00 ± 0.92 ab |
EP4 | 79.01 ± 0.43 a | 66.39 ± 0.42 a | 53.41 ± 0.34 a | 8.43 ± 0.15 c | 18.70 ± 0.01 b | 9.04 ± 1.51 cd | 9.03 ± 0.81 bc | 3.12 ± 0.15 ab |
EP5 | 79.21 ± 0.54 a | 65.67 ± 0.19 a | 53.31 ± 0.08 a | 8.10 ± 0.17 d | 19.03 ± 0.06 a | 11.07 ± 0.52 a | 11.67 ± 0.87 a | 3.78 ± 0.30 a |
Table 3. Effects of epoxiconazole on grain quality attributes of fragrant rice.
Treatment | Brown rice rate (%) | Milled rice rate (%) | Head rice rate (%) | Protein content (%) | Amylose content (%) | Chalky rice rate (%) | Chalkiness area ratio (%) | Chalkiness degree |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2018 | ||||||||
CK | 78.58 ± 0.34 a | 66.00 ± 0.56 a | 53.51 ± 0.33 a | 8.63 ± 0.12 c | 18.53 ± 0.15 c | 10.45 ± 0.90 b | 10.07 ± 0.40 ab | 3.35 ± 0.61 a |
EP1 | 79.23 ± 0.26 a | 65.67 ± 1.01 a | 53.43 ± 0.14 a | 8.60 ± 0.10 c | 18.57 ± 0.15 bc | 10.83 ± 0.81 ab | 9.80 ± 0.35 abc | 2.54 ± 0.73 a |
EP2 | 79.67 ± 0.14 a | 66.13 ± 0.75 a | 53.37 ± 0.13 a | 8.87 ± 0.06 b | 18.63 ± 0.12 bc | 10.37 ± 0.60 b | 8.41 ± 0.87 cd | 2.70 ± 0.52 a |
EP3 | 78.94 ± 0.65 a | 66.31 ± 0.59 a | 53.55 ± 0.17 a | 9.10 ± 0.10 a | 18.57 ± 0.12 bc | 7.38 ± 0.99 c | 7.90 ± 1.24 d | 3.10 ± 0.39 a |
EP4 | 78.84 ± 0.32 a | 65.95 ± 0.66 a | 53.71 ± 0.30 a | 8.50 ± 0.10 c | 18.73 ± 0.06 b | 8.37 ± 0.74 c | 9.15 ± 0.65 bcd | 2.47 ± 0.29 a |
EP5 | 78.77 ± 0.73 a | 65.67 ± 0.47 a | 53.27 ± 0.21 a | 8.10 ± 0.10 d | 19.20 ± 0.10 a | 12.11 ± 0.78 a | 10.92 ± 0.62 a | 2.97 ± 0.68 a |
2019 | ||||||||
CK | 78.67 ± 0.71 a | 66.55 ± 0.13 a | 53.50 ± 0.30 a | 8.67 ± 0.06 b | 18.43 ± 0.06 c | 10.34 ± 1.12 b | 10.92 ± 1.46 ab | 3.34 ± 0.28 a |
EP1 | 79.79 ± 0.05 a | 66.17 ± 0.73 a | 53.60 ± 0.49 a | 8.63 ± 0.12 bc | 18.53 ± 0.15 c | 10.70 ± 0.93 b | 9.85 ± 1.09 bc | 2.84 ± 0.52 a |
EP2 | 78.94 ± 0.40 a | 66.45 ± 0.66 a | 53.55 ± 0.10 a | 8.80 ± 0.10 b | 18.57 ± 0.15 c | 8.38 ± 0.41 c | 9.23 ± 0.88 bcd | 2.96 ± 0.69 a |
EP3 | 79.00 ± 0.82 a | 66.08 ± 0.42 a | 53.29 ± 0.28 a | 9.20 ± 0.17 a | 18.60 ± 0.17 c | 6.35 ± 0.33 d | 7.90 ± 0.60 d | 2.74 ± 0.64 a |
EP4 | 78.84 ± 0.37 a | 66.03 ± 0.74 a | 53.57 ± 0.42 a | 8.43 ± 0.06 cd | 18.90 ± 0.10 b | 8.46 ± 1.30 c | 9.15 ± 0.68 cd | 2.45 ± 0.40 a |
EP5 | 79.40 ± 0.61 a | 65.78 ± 0.59 a | 53.56 ± 0.13 a | 8.23 ± 0.12 d | 19.27 ± 0.06 a | 12.18 ± 0.59 a | 12.17 ± 0.28 a | 2.94 ± 0.45 a |
2020 | ||||||||
CK | 78.68 ± 0.57 a | 65.80 ± 0.28 a | 53.35 ± 0.30 a | 8.60 ± 0.10 bc | 18.57 ± 0.12 b | 10.88 ± 0.58 ab | 10.13 ± 1.07 ab | 2.54 ± 0.41 b |
EP1 | 79.11 ± 0.58 a | 66.56 ± 0.14 a | 53.54 ± 0.27 a | 8.57 ± 0.12 bc | 18.53 ± 0.06 b | 10.03 ± 0.78 abc | 11.52 ± 0.62 a | 3.05 ± 0.26 ab |
EP2 | 79.85 ± 0.11 a | 65.71 ± 0.57 a | 53.39 ± 0.16 a | 8.80 ± 0.10 b | 18.53 ± 0.15 b | 9.43 ± 0.40 bcd | 9.24 ± 1.33 bc | 2.91 ± 0.67 ab |
EP3 | 78.69 ± 0.13 a | 65.70 ± 0.09 a | 53.54 ± 0.20 a | 9.10 ± 0.17 a | 18.60 ± 0.10 b | 7.92 ± 0.74 d | 7.69 ± 1.26 c | 3.00 ± 0.92 ab |
EP4 | 79.01 ± 0.43 a | 66.39 ± 0.42 a | 53.41 ± 0.34 a | 8.43 ± 0.15 c | 18.70 ± 0.01 b | 9.04 ± 1.51 cd | 9.03 ± 0.81 bc | 3.12 ± 0.15 ab |
EP5 | 79.21 ± 0.54 a | 65.67 ± 0.19 a | 53.31 ± 0.08 a | 8.10 ± 0.17 d | 19.03 ± 0.06 a | 11.07 ± 0.52 a | 11.67 ± 0.87 a | 3.78 ± 0.30 a |
[1] | Ajigboye O O, Murchie E, Ray R V. 2014. Foliar application of isopyrazam and epoxiconazole improves photosystem II efficiency, biomass and yield in winter wheat. Pest Biochem Physiol, 114: 52-60. |
[2] | Alam M M, Tanaka T, Nakamura H, Ichikawa H, Kobayashi K, Yaeno T, Yamaoka N, Shimomoto K, Takayama K, Nishina H, Nishiguchi M. 2015. Overexpression of a rice heme activator protein gene (OsHAP2E) confers resistance to pathogens, salinity and drought, and increases photosynthesis and tiller number. Plant Biotechnol J, 13(1): 85-96. |
[3] | Banu M N A, Hoque M A, Watanabe-Sugimoto M, Islam M M, Uraji M, Matsuoka K, Nakamura Y, Murata Y. 2010. Proline and glycinebetaine ameliorated NaCl stress via scavenging of hydrogen peroxide and methylglyoxal but not superoxide or nitric oxide in tobacco cultured cells. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem, 74(10): 2043-2049. |
[4] | Bao G G, Ashraf U, Wang C L, He L X, Wei X S, Zheng A X, Mo Z W, Tang X R. 2018. Molecular basis for increased 2-acetyl- 1-pyrroline contents under alternate wetting and drying (AWD) conditions in fragrant rice. Plant Physiol Biochem, 133: 149-157. |
[5] | Bertelsen J R, de Neergaard E, Smedegaard-Petersen V. 2001. Fungicidal effects of azoxystrobin and epoxiconazole on phyllosphere fungi, senescence and yield of winter wheat. Plant Pathol, 50(2): 190-205. |
[6] | Chen Y, Yao J, Wang W X, Gao T C, Yang X, Zhang A F. 2013. Effect of epoxiconazole on rice blast and rice grain yield in China. Eur J Plant Pathol, 135(4): 675-682. |
[7] | Duan M Y, Cheng S R, Lu R H, Lai R F, Zheng A X, Ashraf U, Fan P S, Du B, Luo H W, Tang X R. 2019. Effect of foliar sodium selenate on leaf senescence of fragrant rice in South China. Appl Ecol Environ Res, 17(2): 3343-3351. |
[8] | Feng H Y, Jiang H L, Wang M, Tang X R, Duan M Y, Pan S G, Tian H, Wang S L, Mo Z W. 2019. Morphophysiological responses of different scented rice varieties to high temperature at seedling stage. Chin J Rice Sci, 33(1): 68-74. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[9] | Huang L C, Dai L P, Wang L, Leng Y J, Yang Y L, Xu J, Hu J, Rao Y C, Zhang G H, Zhu L, Dong G J, Guo L B, Qian Q, Zeng D L. 2015. Genetic dissection for chlorophyll content of the top three leaves during grain filling in rice (Oryza sativa L.). J Plant Growth Regul, 34(2): 381-391. |
[10] |
Kaziem A E, Gao B B, Li L S, Zhang Z X, He Z Z, Wen Y, Wang M H. 2020. Enantioselective bioactivity, toxicity, and degradation in different environmental mediums of chiral fungicide epoxiconazole. J Hazard Mater, 386: 121951.
PMID |
[11] |
Kaziem A E, He Z Z, Li L S, Wen Y, Wang Z, Gao Y Y, Wang M H. 2021. Changes in soil and rat gut microbial diversity after long-term exposure to the chiral fungicide epoxiconazole. Chemosphere, 272: 129618.
PMID |
[12] | Kong L L, Ashraf U, Cheng S R, Rao G S, Mo Z W, Tian H, Pan S G, Tang X R. 2017. Short-term water management at early filling stage improves early-season rice performance under high temperature stress in South China. Eur J Agron, 90: 117-126. |
[13] | Li M J, Ashraf U, Tian H, Mo Z W, Pan S G, Anjum S A, Duan M Y, Tang X R. 2016. Manganese-induced regulations in growth, yield formation, quality characters, rice aroma and enzyme involved in 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline biosynthesis in fragrant rice. Plant Physiol Biochem, 103: 167-175. |
[14] | Liu S M, Fu L Y, Chen J P, Wang S, Liu J L, Jiang J, Che Z P, Tian Y E, Chen G Q. 2020. Baseline sensitivity and control efficacy of epoxiconazole against Fusarium graminearum in Henan Province, China. Eur J Plant Pathol, 157: 825-833. |
[15] | Liu X W, Huang Z L, Li Y Z, Xie W J, Li W, Tang X R, Ashraf U, Kong L L, Wu L M, Wang S L, Mo Z W. 2020. Selenium- silicon (Se-Si) induced modulations in physio-biochemical responses, grain yield, quality, aroma formation and lodging in fragrant rice. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 196: 110525. |
[16] | Luo H W, He L X, Du B, Wang Z M, Zheng A X, Lai R F, Tang X R. 2019. Foliar application of selenium (Se) at heading stage induces regulation of photosynthesis, yield formation, and quality characteristics in fragrant rice. Photosynthetica, 57(4): 1007-1014. |
[17] | Luo H W, He L X, Du B, Pan S G, Mo Z W, Duan M Y, Tian H, Tang X R. 2020. Biofortification with chelating selenium in fragrant rice: Effects on photosynthetic rates, aroma, grain quality and yield formation. Field Crops Res, 255: 107909. |
[18] | Mo Z W, Li W, Pan S G, Fitzgerald T L, Xiao F, Tang Y J, Wang Y L, Duan M Y, Tian H, Tang X R. 2015. Shading during the grain filling period increases 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline content in fragrant rice. Rice, 8: 9. |
[19] | Mo Z W, Li Y H, Nie J, He L X, Pan S G, Duan M Y, Tian H, Xiao L Z, Zhong K Y, Tang X R. 2019. Nitrogen application and different water regimes at booting stage improved yield and 2-acetyl- 1-pyrroline (2AP) formation in fragrant rice. Rice, 12(1): 74. |
[20] | Pan S G, Wen X C, Wang Z M, Ashraf U, Tian H, Duan M Y, Mo Z W, Fan P S, Tang X R. 2017. Benefits of mechanized deep placement of nitrogen fertilizer in direct-seeded rice in South China. Field Crops Res, 203: 139-149. |
[21] | Pan Y Y, Chen Y B, Wang C R, Li H, Huang D Q, Zhou D G, Wang Z D, Zhao L, Gong R, Zhou S C. 2015. Metabolism of γ-aminobutyrate and 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline analyses at various grain developmental stages in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Chin J Rice Sci, 35(2): 121-129. (in Chinese with English abstract) |
[22] |
Poonlaphdecha J, Gantet P, Maraval I, Sauvage F X, Menut C, Morère A, Boulanger R, Wüst M, Gunata Z. 2016. Biosynthesis of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline in rice calli cultures: Demonstration of 1-pyrroline as a limiting substrate. Food Chem, 197: 965-971.
PMID |
[23] | van den Bossche H, Willemsens G, Cools W, Marichal P, Lauwers W. 1983. Hypothesis on the molecular basis of the antifungal activity of N-substituted imidazoles and triazoles. Biochem Soc Trans, 11(6): 665-667. |
[24] | Wakte K, Zanan R, Hinge V, Khandagale K, Nadaf A, Henry R. 2017. Thirty-three years of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline, a principal basmati aroma compound in scented rice (Oryza sativa L.): A status review. J Sci Food Agric, 97(2): 384-395. |
[25] | Wakte K V, Kad T D, Zanan R L, Nadaf A B. 2011. Mechanism of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline biosynthesis in Bassia latifolia Roxb. flowers. Physiol Mol Biol Plants, 17(3): 231-237. |
[26] | Xie W J, Kong L L, Ma L, Ashraf U, Pan S G, Duan M Y, Tian H, Wu L M, Tang X R, Mo Z W. 2020. Enhancement of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (2AP) concentration, total yield, and quality in fragrant rice through exogenous γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) application. J Cereal Sci, 91: 102900. |
[27] | Yan B P, Ye F, Gao D P. 2015. Residues of the fungicide epoxiconazole in rice and paddy in the Chinese field ecosystem. Pest Manag Sci, 71(1): 65-71. |
[28] | Yoshihashi T, Huong N T T, Inatomi H. 2002. Precursors of 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline, a potent flavor compound of an aromatic rice variety. J Agric Food Chem, 50(7): 2001-2004. |
[29] | Zhang W Y, Chen Y J, Wang Z Q, Yang J C. 2017. Polyamines and ethylene in rice young panicles in response to soil drought during panicle differentiation. Plant Growth Regul, 82: 491-503. |
[30] | Zhang Z C, Zhang S F, Yang J C, Zhang J H. 2008. Yield, grain quality and water use efficiency of rice under non-flooded mulching cultivation. Field Crops Res, 108(1): 71-81. |
[31] | Zhao R M, Luo H W, Wang Z M, Hu L. 2020. Benefits of continuous plow tillage to fragrant rice performance. Agron J, 112(5): 4171-4181. |
[32] | Zhao Z X, Sun R X, Su Y, Hu J Y, Liu X L. 2021. Fate, residues and dietary risk assessment of the fungicides epoxiconazole and pyraclostrobin in wheat in twelve different regions, China. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 207: 111236. |
[1] | JI Dongling, XIAO Wenhui, SUN Zhiwei, LIU Lijun, GU Junfei, ZHANG Hao, Tom Matthew HARRISON, LIU Ke, WANG Zhiqin, WANG Weilu, YANG Jianchang. Translocation and Distribution of Carbon-Nitrogen in Relation to Rice Yield and Grain Quality as Affected by High Temperature at Early Panicle Initiation Stage [J]. Rice Science, 2023, 30(6): 12-. |
[2] | Lu Xuedan, Li Fan, Xiao Yunhua, Wang Feng, Zhang Guilian, Deng Huabing, Tang Wenbang. Grain Shape Genes: Shaping the Future of Rice Breeding [J]. Rice Science, 2023, 30(5): 379-404. |
[3] | Prafulla Kumar Behera, Debabrata Panda. Germplasm Resources, Genes and Perspective for Aromatic Rice [J]. Rice Science, 2023, 30(4): 294-305. |
[4] | Van Quoc Giang, Huynh Ky, Nguyen Chau Thanh Tung, Nguyen Loc Hien, Nguyen van Manh, Nguyen Nhut Thanh, Vo Cong Thanh, Swee Keong Yeap. Novel Deletion in Exon 7 of Betaine Aldehyde Dehydrogenase 2 (BADH2) [J]. Rice Science, 2023, 30(2): 104-112. |
[5] | Liu Yantong, Li Ting, Jiang Zhishu, Zeng Chuihai, He Rong, Qiu Jiao, Lin Xiaoli, Peng Limei, Song Yongping, Zhou Dahu, Cai Yicong, Zhu Changlan, Fu Junru, He Haohua, Xu Jie. Characterization of a Novel Weak Allele of RGA1/D1 and Its Potential Application in Rice Breeding [J]. Rice Science, 2022, 29(6): 522-534. |
[6] | Yousef Alhaj Hamoud, Hiba Shaghaleh, Wang Ruke, Willy Franz Gouertoumbo, Amar Ali Adam hamad, Mohamed Salah Sheteiwy, Wang Zhenchang, Guo Xiangping. Wheat Straw Burial Improves Physiological Traits, Yield and Grain Quality of Rice by Regulating Antioxidant System and Nitrogen Assimilation Enzymes under Alternate Wetting and Drying Irrigation [J]. Rice Science, 2022, 29(5): 473-488. |
[7] | Saichompoo Uthomphon, Narumol Possawat, Nakwilai Pawat, Thongyos Peeranut, Nanta Aekchupong, Tippunya Patompong, Ruengphayak Siriphat, Itthisoponkul Teerarat, Bueraheng Niranee, Cheabu Sulaiman, Malumpong Chanate. Breeding Novel Short Grain Rice for Tropical Region to Combine Important Agronomical Traits, Biotic Stress Resistance and Cooking Quality in Koshihikari Background [J]. Rice Science, 2021, 28(5): 479-792. |
[8] | Panigrahy Madhusmita, Das Subhashree, Poli Yugandhar, Kumar Sahoo Pratap, Kumari Khushbu, C. S. Panigrahi Kishore. Carbon Nanoparticle Exerts Positive Growth Effects with Increase in Productivity by Down-Regulating Phytochrome B and Enhancing Internal Temperature in Rice [J]. Rice Science, 2021, 28(3): 289-300. |
[9] | Jan Mehmood, Shah Gulmeena, Yuqing Huang, Xuejiao Liu, Peng Zheng, Hao Du, Hao Chen, Jumin Tu. Development of Heat Tolerant Two-Line Hybrid Rice Restorer Line Carrying Dominant Locus of OsHTAS [J]. Rice Science, 2021, 28(1): 99-108. |
[10] | Yuyu Chen, Aike Zhu, Pao Xue, Xiaoxia Wen, Yongrun Cao, Beifang Wang, Yue Zhang, Liaqat Shah, Shihua Cheng, Liyong Cao, Yingxin Zhang. Effects of GS3 and GL3.1 for Grain Size Editing by CRISPR/Cas9 in Rice [J]. Rice Science, 2020, 27(5): 405-413. |
[11] | Hossain Prodhan Zakaria, Qingyao Shu. Rice Aroma: A Natural Gift Comes with Price and the Way Forward [J]. Rice Science, 2020, 27(2): 86-100. |
[12] | Chuan Tong, Lei Liu, L. E. Waters Daniel, Jin-song Bao. Association Mapping and Marker Development of Genes for Starch Lysophospholipid Synthesis in Rice [J]. Rice Science, 2016, 23(6): 287-296. |
[13] | Ur Rehman Hafeez, Kamran Muhammad, Maqsood Ahmed Basra Shahzad, Afzal Irfan, Farooq Muhammad. Influence of Seed Priming on Performance and Water Productivity of Direct Seeded Rice in Alternating Wetting and Drying [J]. Rice Science, 2015, 22(4): 189-196. |
[14] | Swar Oo Kyaw, Kongjaimun Alisa, Khanthong Srisawat, Yi Myint, Tin Myint Tin, Korinsak Siriporn, Lanceras Siangliw Jonaliza, Myo Myint Khin, Vanavichit Apichart, Malumpong Chanate, Toojinda Theerayut. Characterization of Myanmar Paw San Hmwe Accessions Using Functional Genetic Markers [J]. Rice Science, 2015, 22(2): 53-64. |
[15] | LIU Qi-hua, WU Xiu, CHEN Bo-cong, MA Jia-qing, GAO Jie. Effects of Low Light on Agronomic and Physiological Characteristics of Rice Including Grain Yield and Quality [J]. RICE SCIENCE, 2014, 21(5): 243-251. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||