|Table of Contents|

ScreeningofCerasushumilisinGravel-mulchedFieldBasedonFuzzyComprehensiveEvaluationMethod

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2019年03
Page:
189-196
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
ScreeningofCerasushumilisinGravel-mulchedFieldBasedonFuzzyComprehensiveEvaluationMethod
Author(s):
ZHANGLuyao1; SHENHui1; 2; 3; TIANJuncang1; 2; 3
(1.CollegeofCivilandHydraulicEngineering,NingxiaUniversity，Yinchuan,Ningxia750021；2.NingxiaResearchCenterofTechnologyonWater-SavingIrrigationandWaterResourcesRegulation,Yinchuan,Ningxia750021;3.EngineeringResearchCenterfortheEfficientUtilizationofWaterResourcesinModernAgriculturalinAridRegions,Yinchuan,Ningxia750021)
Keywords:
Keywords:gravel-mulchedfield; Cerasushumilis; variety; comprehensivebenefits; fuzzycomprehensiveevaluationmethod
PACS:
-
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20181628
Abstract:
Abstract:Underthefieldexperimentcondition，taking10differentvarieties（lines）ofthree-yearsCerasushumilisasthetestmaterials,theplantheight,stemdiameter,chlorophyllrelativecontent,yieldandfruitqualityofthemwereresearchedandanalyzed.Andthefuzzycomprehensiveevaluationmethodwasintroducedatthesametime.ThecomprehensivebenefitsevaluationsystemofthedifferentvarietiesofCerasushumilisingravel-mulchedfieldwasbuildwith10indexeswhichwereincludedinyield,qualityandbiologicalcharacteristics.Then,theAnalyticHierarchyProcess(AHP)todefinitetheweightofeachevaluationindexwasadopted,andthemembershipfunctionaswellastheevaluationmatrixoffivelevelswascombined.Finally,thecomprehensivebenefitsevaluationvaluesofthedifferentvarietiesofCerasushumilisingravel-mulchedfieldwascalculatedbyfuzzycomprehensiveevaluationmathematicsmodel,inordertoprovidetheoreticalbasisandtechnicalsupporttothedevelopmentoftheCerasushumilisaswellasgravel-mulchedfieldindustry.Theresultsshowedthatthe‘No5’hadthebestyieldin10varieties（lines）,‘No4’hadthehighestcalciumcontentofitsfruitandthechlorophyllrelativecontentofitsbladeinthesamecondition.RankingthecomprehensivebenefitsevaluationvaluesofthedifferentvarietiesofCerasushumilis,‘No6’wasthebest,followingthe‘07-14’‘No5’‘03-25’‘No4’‘No7’‘S-D’,thenwasthe‘23-04’‘03-35’,theworstwas‘No9’.Accordingtotheanalysisresultsofsinglefactor,the‘No5’and‘No4’hadbetteradaptationingravel-mulchedfield.TheCerasushumilisbearfruitsdepenedonalienationpollination,the‘No6’‘07-14’and‘No5’wereselectedtoplantingravel-mulchedfielddependontherankoffuzzycomprehensivebenefits.

References:

[1]哈小丽,韩占江,梁继业.不同欧李品种(系)光合与水分利用特性比较[J].北方园艺,2017(2):7-11.[2]周文才,巢军,孙颖,等.不同钙果品系引种试验[J].南方林业科学,2017,45(1):14-16,31.[3]赵建成.钙果的种植与加工[M].太原:山西经济出版社,2014:1-21.[4]开建荣,王晓静.不同压砂地龄土壤肥力及硒砂瓜品质分析[J].北方园艺,2017(3):168-172.[5]边雅茹,田军仓.灌水量对压砂地欧李光合作用及产量的影响[J].节水灌溉,2017(2):34-38.[6]邢天钧.中卫香山地区压砂地引种欧李造林试验研究[J].宁夏农林科技,2014,55(4):18-19.[7]李正祥.多品种比较试验用邓肯新复极差法的统计与分析方法[J].中国甜菜糖业,1983(2):16-18.[8]唐启义.DPS数据处理系统[M].3版.北京:科学出版社,2013:87-145.[9]孙福东,魏凤荣.应用Excel巧解模糊综合评价法[J].统计与决策,2011(23):172-174.[10]晋艳云,高万林,张晗,等.基于模糊综合评价法的玉米新品种种子价值评估[J].中国种业，2015(10):18-21.[11]金彪,孙明艳,李海防.基于AHP-模糊综合评价法的桂林“两江四湖”旅游景区植物景观评价[J].北方园艺,2017(1):203-207.[12]孙明明,王秀芳,王梅,等.基于模糊综合评价法的河北省农业科技创新风险投资影响因素分析[J].北方园艺,2014(22):208-211.[13]母冰洁,张世军,卜芳侠,等.韩城市欧李新品系引进试验[J].陕西林业科技,2016(4)：41-45.[14]李海潮,韦开卫,王斌,等.原子吸收法测定31种蔬菜水果中的微量元素含量[J].国外医学(医学地理分册),2013,34(3):187-190.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2019-03-15