论文部分内容阅读
为了比较Glaszmann和程侃声等对亚洲栽培稻的分类体系,将Glaszmann氏提供的197个水稻品种的同功酶位点原始记录和程氏对它们就6个形态性状的评分作了主成分分析和聚类分析。结果显示二人的分类基本一致,数值分类也表明栽培稻可以只分籼粳两个亚种,处于中间的少数品种可称为偏籼或偏粳。程氏采用的“性状指数法”似更为便利而有效,特别适于田间及育种工作,虽然带有一定的经验成分,但加以生化或数值分类的检验,即可弥补该法的不足,有助于澄清个别不够明确和错划的事例。因此,我们建议为求得最佳的分类系统,最好运用二种以上的方法,相互补充校正。
In order to compare the classification system of cultivated rice in Asia with Glaszmann and Chengkansheng, the principal component analysis (GCS) of 197 isozymes loci of Glaszmann and the morphological traits of 6 morphological traits Class analysis The results showed that the two groups were basically the same, the classification also showed that cultivated rice can be divided into indica and japonica two subspecies, in the middle of a few species can be called partial indica or partial japonica. The “Trait Index Method” adopted by Cheng seems to be more convenient and effective. It is especially suitable for field and breeding work. Although it has certain empirical components, the biochemical or numerical classification test can make up for the deficiencies of this law. For example, Help to clarify some cases that are not clear and misplaced. Therefore, we suggest that in order to get the best classification system, it is better to use two or more methods to complement each other.