|Table of Contents|

Comprehensive Evaluation of Related Traits in Seed-used Zucchini

《北方园艺》[ISSN:1001-0009/CN:23-1247/S]

Issue:
2026年3
Page:
8-15
Research Field:
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Comprehensive Evaluation of Related Traits in Seed-used Zucchini
Author(s):
DONG ChenchenLEI FengjinLIU QinghuaHE HongweiZHANG Guoqiang
(Institute of Cotton,Shanxi Agricultural University,Yuncheng,Shanxi 044000)
Keywords:
seed-used zucchiniprincipal component analysiscomprehensive evaluationgrey correlation degree
PACS:
S642.6
DOI:
10.11937/bfyy.20252297
Abstract:
Taking 109 seed-used zucchini samples as the experimental materials,various methods such as correlation analysis,principal component analysis,cluster analysis,membership function value and grey correlation analysis were adopted to study 9 key traits of seed-used zucchini and conduct a comprehensive evaluation,in order to provide reference for the subsequent breeding and identification of seed-used zucchini varieties.The results showed that the rotten fruit characteristics of seed-used zucchini varieties were significantly negatively correlated with total yield and aging tolerance.The number of fruits per plant was significantly negatively correlated with the length and width of the seeds.An ideal seed-used zucchini variety should have aging tolerance,moderate fruiting ability,and low rotten fruit rate,thereby enhancing the yield and quality of the seeds.Principal component analysis of nine traits of seed-used zucchini screened out four principal components,with a cumulative contribution rate of 75.47%.After normalizes the scores of the four principal components through the fuzzy membership function,a comprehensive evaluation index for seed-used zucchini was constructed based on the contribution rate weights of the four principal components D=0.41F1+0.24F2+0.18F3+0.17F4.Based on the two methods of grey relational degree analysis and comprehensive evaluation of D value,three varieties,namely Z-76,Z-95 and Z-5,were identified.They ranked among the top five in both evaluation mechanisms and can be regarded as the key points for demonstration and promotion in the next step.

References:

[1]KARANJA J,MUGENDI J B,KHAMIS F M,et al.Nutritional composition of the pumpkin (Cucurbita spp.) seed cultivated from selected regions in Kenya[J].Journal of Horticulture Letters,2014,4(3):195-200.[2]ALIU S,RUSINOVCI I,SALIHU S,et al.Nutritive values and seed chemical variability of pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo L.) populations[J].Journal of Food,Agriculture & Environment,2016,14(2):28-33.[3]NAKIC〖JX-+0.8mm〗〖KG-*2〗' S N,RADE D,KEVIN D,et al.Chemical characteristics of oils from naked and husk seeds of Cucurbita pepo L.[J].European Journal of Lipid Science and Technology,2006,108(11):936-943.[4]刘战霞,吴宏,郭慧静,等.不同烘制预处理方式下裸仁南瓜籽烘烤工艺的比较[J].现代食品科技,2023,39(1):213-221.[5]SOJAK M,GOWACKI S.Analysis of giant pumpkin (Cucurbita maxima) drying kinetics in various technologies of convective drying[J].Journal of Food Engineering,2010,99(3):323-329.[6]陈荣贤.中国籽用南瓜产业现状[C].武威:中国园艺学会南瓜分会籽用南瓜新品种展示及产业发展研讨会,2012.[7]魏照信,陈荣贤,殷晓燕,等.中国籽用南瓜产业现状及发展趋势[J].中国蔬菜,2013(9):10-13.[8]任建忠,魏照信.籽用南瓜市场变化与产业发展策略[J].中国蔬菜,2018(5):16-19.[9]赵盟,王春超,张仁旭,等.中国大麦育成品种产量相关性状鉴定评价[J].植物遗传资源学报,2022,23(5):1371-1382.[10]MISHRA S,SARKAR U,TARAPHDER S,et al.Principal component analysis[J].International Journal of Livestock Research,2017,7:60-78.[11]杨梅,鲜东锋,李治华,等.豌豆鲜籽粒营养与风味品质的综合评价[J].中国粮油学报,2024,39(12):64-72.[12]李燕,贺燕,邹金浩,等.基于主成分和聚类分析的不同品种淮山淀粉品质评价[J].中国粮油学报,2023,38(10):223-230.[13]郑云霄,刘文斯,赵永锋,等.玉米种质资源的抗倒伏性评价及鉴定指标筛选[J].植物遗传资源学报,2019,20(6):1588-1596.[14]麻一博,贾晓艳,刘亚捷,等.玉米种质资源苞叶相关性状鉴定及综合评价[J].植物遗传资源学报,2023,24(6):1568-1579.[15]于伟,刘卫东,柳李旺,等.隶属函数法对12个茄种幼苗期耐盐性的筛选与鉴定[J].江苏农业科学,2015,43(11):228-230.[16]杨学乐,王艳兰,王素华,等.湖南省绿豆种质资源收集与鉴定评价[J].植物遗传资源学报,2025,26(7):1278-1291.[17]沈丽.机采长绒棉主要农艺性状的灰色关联度分析[J].广东蚕业,2022,56(8):29-31,44.[18]杜逍,郭文文,吴莹,等.基于品种比较试验建立陆地棉综合评价体系[J].植物遗传资源学报,2025,26(4):656-671.[19]朱红艳,魏照信,张永久.籽用西葫芦果皮硬度与籽粒饱满度相关性研究[J].中国蔬菜,2021(7):69-73.[20]杨涛,黄雅婕,李生梅,等.海岛棉种质资源表型性状的遗传多样性分析及综合评价[J].中国农业科学,2021,54(12):2499-2509.[21]王治会,岳翠男,李琛,等.江西省茶树种质化学特性多样性分析与鉴定评价[J].江苏农业学报,2020,36(1):172-179.[22]薛香,郜庆炉,杨忠强.小麦品质性状的主成分分析[J].中国农学通报,2011,27(7):38-41.[23]要燕杰,高翔,吴丹,等.小麦农艺性状与品质特性的多元分析与评价[J].植物遗传资源学报,2014,15(1):38-47.[24]焦茹玉,朱羿霖,谢其均,等.186份甘蓝型油菜种子萌发期耐盐性鉴定[J].植物遗传资源学报,2024,25(12):2081-2093.[25]司宝华,吕明皓,马文舒,等.六种蝴蝶兰新品种高温生理响应及耐热性评价[J].北方园艺,2025(12):82-88.[26]李忠旺,陈玉梁,罗俊杰,等.棉花抗旱品种筛选鉴定及抗旱性综合评价方法[J].干旱地区农业研究,2017,35(1):240-247.[27]刘光辉,陈全家,吴鹏昊,等.棉花花铃期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J].植物遗传资源学报,2016,17(1):53-62,69.[28]逯涛,曾庆涛,张文,等.主成分分析及灰色关联度分析综合评价棉花产量与品质[J].新疆农业科学,2023,60(5):1099-1109.[29]王靖,孔令国,李宝强,等.基于熵值赋权的DTOPSIS法对小麦品种的综合评价研究[J].中国农学通报,2023,39(12):1-7.[30]张会芳,冯丽丽,段俊枝,等.基于14个性状的118份小麦遗传多样性分析及综合评价[J].江苏农业科学,2022,50(18):99-108.[31]张子豪,李想成,吴昊天,等.基于灰色关联度分析和聚类分析的丰产高效小麦品种综合评价与筛选[J].江苏农业科学,2022,50(10):194-200.[32]孟雨,田文仲,温鹏飞,等.基于不同发育阶段协同的小麦品种抗旱性综合评判[J].作物学报,2023,49(2):570-582.[33]李龙,毛新国,王景一,等.小麦种质资源抗旱性鉴定评价[J].作物学报,2018,44(7):988-999.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2026-02-24