3种类型多子芋生长动态的观察与比较

园艺学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (1): 161-163.

3种类型多子芋生长动态的观察与比较

黄新芳;柯卫东;李双梅;叶元英;刘义满;刘玉平;彭　静;李　峰;傅新发;林处发;黄来春

(武汉市蔬菜科学研究所, 武汉430065)

收稿日期:2005-07-28 修回日期:2005-09-25 出版日期:2006-02-25 发布日期:2006-02-25

Observation and Comparison of Growing Development among Three Types of Taro with Multi-cormels

Huang Xinfang;KeWeidong; Li Shuangmei; Ye Yuanying; Liu Yiman; Liu Yuping; Peng Jing; Li Feng;Fu Xinfa; Lin Chufa; and Huang Laichun

(Wuhan Vegetable Science Institute, Wuhan 430065, China)

Received:2005-07-28 Revised:2005-09-25 Online:2006-02-25 Published:2006-02-25

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以‘走马羊’ (叶柄紫色, 芽白色) 、‘江汉芋’ (叶柄绿色, 芽白色) 、‘红杆芋’ (叶柄乌绿
色, 芽淡红色) 为材料, 对3种类型多子芋生长动态进行了观察与比较。结果表明: (1) ‘江汉’熟性最早, ‘走马羊’其次, ‘红杆芋’最晚; (2) 熟性越晚, 叶片生长速度越快; (3) 分株出现的早晚是子芋形成早晚的标志, 分株数量反映了不同类型品种的分蘖特性, 与子芋数及子芋与孙芋的总数不呈正相关;(4) 球茎发育过程中, 各级球茎干物质积累存在库源关系。

关键词: 芋, 多子芋, 生长动态

Abstract: ‘Zoumayang taro’ (purple petiole, white bud) , ‘Jianghan taro’ ( green petiole, whitebud) and‘Red-petiole taro’ (purple-red petiole, pale red bud) were selected for observation and comparison of growing development among these three types of taro 〔Colocasia esculenta (L. ) Schott〕with multicormels. It indicated thatmaturity of‘Jianghan taro’was the ealiest, ‘Zoumaoyang taro’was the next earliest, and ‘Red-petiole taro’was the latest. The later the maturity was, the faster the leaf grew. Earliness or lateness of tiller appearing was an indicator of that of the first grade cormel formation. Numbers of tillers, which reflected the tillering charactor of different types of cultivars, had no positive correlation with numbers of the first grade cormels and total cormels. The source-sink relationship of drymatter accumulation exists among
corm, the first grade cormels and the second cormels.

Key words: Colocasia esculenta (L. ) Schott, Taro with multi-cormels, Growing development

黄新芳;柯卫东;李双梅;叶元英;刘义满;刘玉平;彭　静;李　峰;傅新发;林处发;黄来春. 3种类型多子芋生长动态的观察与比较[J]. 园艺学报, 2006, 33(1): 161-163.

Huang Xinfang;KeWeidong;Li Shuangmei;Ye Yuanying;Liu Yiman;Liu Yuping;Peng Jing;Li Feng;Fu Xinfa;Lin Chufa;and Huang Laichun. Observation and Comparison of Growing Development among Three Types of Taro with Multi-cormels[J]. ACTA HORTICULTURAE SINICA, 2006, 33(1): 161-163.

[1]	李勇军, 李维祥, 熊正伟, 汪义华, 丁铭, . 珠芽类魔芋新品种‘兴迈4号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2022, 49(S1): 95-96.
[2]	刘金梅, 徐晔春, 钟荣辉, 尤毅, 李冬梅, 叶远俊. 花叶芋新品种‘碧血丹心’与‘粉红佳人’[J]. 园艺学报, 2022, 49(8): 1839-1840.
[3]	张宇, 门果桃, 兰开龙, 赵举. 菊芋新品种‘蒙芋1号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2020, 47(S2): 3001-3002.
[4]	赵孟良, 钟启文, 李莉, 田闵玉. 菊芋新品种‘青芋5号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2020, 47(S2): 3003-3004.
[5]	刘星月, 朱强龙, 李慧英, 孙静宇, 李必聪, 张宏玉, 黄英金, 方加军, 周庆红, . 红芽芋脱毒试管芋诱导及植株再生[J]. 园艺学报, 2020, 47(12): 2427-2438.
[6]	吴学尉1，李梅1,，郑莉1,，袁丽梅2，刘丹丹1，叶辉1，吴治成3，张乙盛4. 珠芽类魔芋新品种‘临芋1号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2019, 46(S2): 2815-2816.
[7]	潘开华1，赵琴1，董坤1，吴康1，焦亚1，杨柱琼1，张石富1，李春花2，尹桂芳2，王艳青2，卢文洁2，王莉花2,，孙道旺2,. 魔芋新品种‘富魔1号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2018, 45(S2): 2779-2780.
[8]	朱晓威，崔文雪，张二金，王磊磊，余徐润，熊飞*?. ‘槟榔芋’和‘香沙芋’母芋与子芋淀粉形态和理化性质的比较[J]. 园艺学报, 2018, 45(7): 1314-1326.
[9]	马继琼，杨奕，尹桂芳，孙道旺，许明辉，王玲. 魔芋新品种‘云魔芋迷乐2号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2017, 44(s2): 2703-2704.
[10]	吴学尉1，叶辉1,，刘丹丹1，吴治成2，李琳1，杨雨嫣1，王丽花3,，吴昊林2. 珠芽类魔芋新品种‘耿芋2号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2017, 44(s2): 2705-2706.
[11]	季延海1,3，赵孟良2，武占会1,3，梁浩1,3，刘明池1,2,*. 番茄栽培基质中菊芋发酵秸秆的适宜配比研究[J]. 园艺学报, 2017, 44(8): 1599-1608.
[12]	王立，殷剑美*，韩晓勇，张培通，郭文琦，李春宏. 芋淀粉合成酶AGPase基因的克隆及表达分析[J]. 园艺学报, 2016, 43(6): 1117-1125.
[13]	顾绘1,2，陈赛男1，李良俊1,*，程立宝1. 芋淀粉分支酶SBE基因的克隆与表达分析[J]. 园艺学报, 2016, 43(10): 2049-2058.
[14]	尹桂芳，马继琼，孙道旺，杨奕，王玲*. 魔芋新品种‘云魔芋迷乐3号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2015, 42(S2): 2877-2878.
[15]	杨朝柱1,*，牟方贵1，刘二喜1,4，赵青华1，张锋2，孙治平2，潘娅妮1，覃宇1，赵西选3，降巧龙1，刘小芳1. 魔芋杂交新品种‘鄂魔芋1号’[J]. 园艺学报, 2015, 42(S2): 2879-2880.