基于表型性状的毛竹核心种质构建

doi:10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20240680

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的: 为得出较为可靠的毛竹核心种质群体，促进毛竹种质有效利用和分子遗传学研究。方法: 本研究以432份毛竹种质为对象，基于15个表型特征，采用10%的总体取样率进行逐步系统聚类分析。结合2种遗传距离计算方法、3种取样技术和7种聚类算法，从多维度优化核心种质的取样方案。在确定最佳取样方案后，设置八种取样比例筛选最佳总体比例，并比较分组取样与未分组直接取样的效果。最终，通过多指标评估体系全面检验核心种质的代表性。结果: 采用10%取样比例、优先取样法、欧氏距离法和最短距离法相结合，是构建毛竹核心种质的最佳策略。不分组取样构建的最佳核心种质在方差差异百分率方面优于分组取样构建的核心种质，显示出更好的构建效果。通过表型性状的t检验、符合率检验和主成分分析，验证了所构建的43份核心种质能够有效避免遗传冗余，并充分代表原始种质。结论: 本研究首次构建了能够代表原始毛竹种质表型多样性的核心种质，为种质资源的收集、保护和有效利用提供支撑。

关键词: 毛竹, 表型性状, 核心种质, 取样策略, 评价参数

Abstract:

Objective: This study aims to establish a reliable core germplasm population of Phyllostachys edulis (Moso bamboo), promoting its effective utilization and facilitating molecular genetics research. Method: In this study, a total of 432 P. edulis germplasm accessions were targeted, and a stepwise systematic clustering analysis was conducted based on 15 phenotypic traits with an overall sampling rate of 10%. The sampling scheme for core germplasm was optimized from multiple dimensions, by incorporating two genetic distance calculation methods, three sampling techniques, and seven clustering algorithms. After determining the optimal sampling scheme, eight sampling proportions were set to screen the best overall proportion, and the effectiveness of group-based sampling was compared with direct sampling without grouping. Finally, the representativeness of the core germplasm was comprehensively evaluated through a multi-indicator assessment system. Result: The study found that a combination of 10% sampling ratio, priority sampling method, Euclidean distance method, and minimum distance method was the optimal strategy for constructing the core germplasm of P. edulis. The core germplasm constructed by ungrouped sampling (NGcore) exhibited a higher variance difference percentage (VD) than that constructed with grouped sampling (LCore and PCore), indicating better performance. T-tests, coincidence rate tests, and principal component analysis of the phenotypic traits demonstrated that the selected 43 core accessions effectively avoided genetic redundancy and adequately represented the original germplasm. Conclusion: This study has successfully constructed a core germplasm that represents the phenotypic diversity of the original P. edulis germplasm, laying a foundation for the collection, conservation, and effective utilization of germplasm resources.

Key words: Phyllostachys edulis, phenotypic traits, core germplasm, sampling strategies, evaluation parameters

中图分类号:

S718.46

谷瑞,范少辉,魏松坡,刘广路. 基于表型性状的毛竹核心种质构建[J]. 林业科学, 2025, 61(9): 101-112.

Rui Gu,Shaohui Fan,Songpo Wei,Guanglu Liu. Construction of a Core Germplasm of Moso Bamboo Based on Phenotypic Traits[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2025, 61(9): 101-112.

图/表 9

表1

表2

核心种质子集的评价参数"

遗传距离 Genetic distance	取样方法 Sampling methods	聚类方法 Clustering methods	均值差异百分率 Mean difference percentage（%）	方差差异百分率 Variance difference percentage（%）	极差符合率 Concordance rate of range（%）	变异系数 Coefficient of variation（%）
欧氏距离 Euclidean distance	随机取样法 Random sampling	最短距离法 Single linkage	6.67	86.67	90.59	134.27
		最长距离法 Complete linkage	0.00	6.67	86.39	118.01
		非加权类平均法 Unweighted average linkage method	0.00	53.33	85.69	121.95
		离差平方和法 Ward’s method	0.00	26.67	83.05	116.30
		中间距离法 Median method	0.00	6.67	83.38	112.44
		可变类平均法 Flexible beta method	0.00	20.00	86.27	119.23
		可变法 Ward’s flexible method	0.00	26.67	87.35	119.25
	优先取样法 Preferred sampling	最短距离法 Single linkage	0.00	100.00	100.00	154.03
		最长距离法 Complete linkage	0.00	93.33	100.00	147.03
		非加权类平均法Unweighted average linkage method	0.00	100.00	100.00	150.00
		离差平方和法 Ward’s method	0.00	100.00	100.00	143.74
		中间距离法 Median method	0.00	100.00	100.00	144.74
		可变类平均法 Flexible beta method	0.00	100.00	100.00	144.88
		可变法 Ward’s flexible method	0.00	100.00	100.00	146.17
	偏离度取样法 Deviation sampling	最短距离法 Single linkage	6.67	100.00	98.80	149.66
		最长距离法 Complete linkage	0.00	80.00	92.98	131.20
		非加权类平均法Unweighted average linkage method	0.00	93.33	95.55	139.15
		离差平方和法 Ward’s method	0.00	100.00	96.74	140.65
		中间距离法 Median method	0.00	53.33	85.70	118.81
		可变类平均法 Flexible beta method	0.00	100.00	96.48	141.58
		可变法 Ward’s flexible method	0.00	100.00	95.14	135.93
马氏距离 Mahalanobis distance	随机取样法 Random sampling	最短距离法 Single linkage	6.67	86.67	90.59	134.27
		最长距离法 Complete linkage	0.00	26.67	80.66	114.12
		非加权类平均法 Unweighted average linkage method	0.00	20.00	85.38	116.22
		离差平方和法 Ward’s method	0.00	6.67	83.84	116.60
		中间距离法 Median method	0.00	20.00	89.68	115.44
		可变类平均法 Flexible beta method	0.00	6.67	79.78	114.45
		可变法 Ward’s flexible method	0.00	13.33	80.77	110.45
	优先取样法 Preferred sampling	最短距离法 Single linkage	0.00	93.33	100.00	148.15
		最长距离法 Complete linkage	0.00	93.33	100.00	144.66
		非加权类平均法 Unweighted average linkage method	0.00	93.33	100.00	145.71
		离差平方和法 Ward’s method	0.00	100.00	100.00	146.87
		中间距离法 Median method	0.00	93.33	100.00	142.72
		可变类平均法 Flexible beta method	0.00	93.33	100.00	141.33
		可变法 Ward’s flexible method	0.00	93.33	100.00	140.47
	偏离度取样法 Deviation sampling	最短距离法 Single linkage	6.67	93.33	95.41	145.42
		最长距离法 Complete linkage	6.67	93.33	93.49	153.01
		非加权类平均法Unweighted average linkage method	0.00	93.33	97.07	156.30
		离差平方和法 Ward’s method	0.00	100.00	95.71	154.34
		中间距离法 Median method	6.67	86.67	92.93	139.87
		可变类平均法 Flexible beta method	0.00	86.67	92.51	149.91
		可变法 Ward’s flexible method	0.00	100.00	95.35	152.82

表2

表3

表4

表5

图1

表6

表7

表8

参考文献 0

	艾　叶, 陈　璐, 兰思仁, 等. 基于形态学性状构建建兰品种核心种质. 分子植物育种, 2019, 17 (23): 7924- 7934.
	Ai Y, Chen L, Lan S R, et al. Construction of core collection of Cymbidium ensifolium varieties based on morphological traits. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2019, 17 (23): 7924- 7934.
	陈建华, 曲凯伦, 张云程, 等. 基于表型性状的酸枣核心种质构建. 沈阳农业大学学报, 2024, 55 (2): 176- 186. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1700.2024.02.005
	Chen J H, Qu K L, Zhang Y C, et al. Construction of Ziziphus jujuba var. spinosa core collection based on phenotypic traits. Journal of Shenyang Agricultural University, 2024, 55 (2): 176- 186. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-1700.2024.02.005
	董英山, 庄炳昌, 赵丽梅, 等. 2000. 中国野生大豆遗传多样性中心. 作物学报, 26(5): 521−527.
	Dong Y S, Zhuang B C, Zhao L M, et al. 2000. The genetic diversity centers of annual wild soybean in China. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 26(5): 521−527. ［in Chinese］
	董玉琛, 曹永生, 张学勇, 等. 中国普通小麦初选核心种质的产生. 植物遗传资源学报, 2003, 4 (1): 1- 8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1810.2003.01.002
	Dong Y C, Cao Y S, Zhang X Y, et al. Establishment of candidate core collections in Chinese common wheat germplasm. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2003, 4 (1): 1- 8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1810.2003.01.002
	董玉慧. 2008. 枣树农艺性状遗传多样性评价与核心种质构建. 保定: 河北农业大学.
	Dong Y H. 2008. Evaluation of genetic diversity of agronomic traits of jujube and construction of core germplasm. Baoding: Hebei Agricultural University.［in Chinese］
	郭　琪. 2019. 刺槐种质资源的遗传多样性评价及核心种质构建. 北京: 北京林业大学.
	Guo Q. 2019. Genetic diversity evaluation and core collection construction of Robinia pseudoacacia germplasm resources. Beijing:Beijing Forestry University.［in Chinese］
	胡建斌, 马双武, 王吉明, 等. 基于表型性状的甜瓜核心种质构建. 果树学报, 2013, 30 (3): 404- 411.
	Hu J B, Ma S W, Wang J M, et al. Establishment of a melon (Cucumis melo) core collection based on phenotypic characters. Journal of Fruit Science, 2013, 30 (3): 404- 411.
	蒋维昕. 2013. 毛竹的遗传结构及群体演化. 南京: 南京林业大学.
	Jiang W X. 2013. Genetic structure and population evolution of Phyllostachys pubescens. Nanjing: Nanjing Forestry University.［in Chinese］
	郎彬彬, 黄春辉, 朱　博, 等. 基于果实相关性状的江西野生毛花猕猴桃初级核心种质的构建方法研究. 果树学报, 2016, 33 (7): 794- 803.
	Lang B, Huang C H, Zhu B, et al. Study on the method of constructing a primary core collection of Jiangxi wild Actinidia eriantha based on fruit traits. Journal of Fruit Science, 2016, 33 (7): 794- 803.
	李国强, 李锡香, 沈　镝, 等. 基于形态数据的大白菜核心种质构建方法的研究. 园艺学报, 2008, 35 (12): 1759- 1766. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0513-353X.2008.12.006
	Li G Q, Li X X, Shen D, et al. Studies on the methods of constructing Chinese cabbage core germplasm based on the morphological data. Acta Horticulturae Sinica, 2008, 35 (12): 1759- 1766. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0513-353X.2008.12.006
	李洪果, 陈达镇, 劳庆祥, 等. 基于表型性状初步构建格木核心种质. 分子植物育种, 2019, 17 (20): 6881- 6890.
	Li H G, Chen D Z, Lao Q X, et al. Preliminary construction of core collection of Erythrophleum fordii based on phenotypic traits. Molecular Plant Breeding, 2019, 17 (20): 6881- 6890.
	李洪果, 杜红岩, 贾宏炎, 2018. 利用表型性状构建杜仲雄性资源核心种质. 分子植物育种, 16(2): 591−601.
	Li H G, Du H Y, Jia H Y, et al. 2018. Establishment of male core collection of Eucommia ulmoides based on phenotypic traits. Molecular Plant Breeding, 16(2): 591−601. ［in Chinese］
	李洪果, 杜庆鑫, 王　淋, 等. 2017. 利用表型数据构建杜仲雌株核心种质. 分子植物育种, 15(12): 5197−5209.
	Li H G, Du Q X, Wang L, et al. 2017. Establishment of female core collection of Eucommia ulmoides oliv. based on phenotypic characters. Molecular Plant Breeding, 15(12): 5197−5209. ［in Chinese］
	李慧峰, 陈天渊, 黄咏梅, 等. 2013. 基于形态性状的甘薯核心种质取样策略研究. 植物遗传资源学报, 14(1) : 91−96.
	Li H F, Chen T Y, Huang Y M, et al. 2013. Sampling strategies of sweet potato core collection based on morphological traits. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 14(1): 91−96. ［in Chinese］
	李　娟, 江昌俊. 中国茶树核心种质的初步构建. 安徽农业大学学报, 2004, 31 (3): 282- 287. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-352X.2004.03.007
	Li J, Jiang C J. Preliminary construction of core germplasm of Chinese tea plants. Journal of Anhui Agricultural University, 2004, 31 (3): 282- 287. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-352X.2004.03.007
	李秀兰, 贾继文, 王军辉, 等. 灰楸形态多样性分析及核心种质初步构建. 植物遗传资源学报, 2013, 14 (2): 243- 248. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1810.2013.02.009
	Li X L, Jia J W, Wang J H, et al. Morphological diversity analysis and preliminary construction of core collection of Catalpa fargesii Bureau. Journal of Plant Genetic Resources, 2013, 14 (2): 243- 248. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1810.2013.02.009
	李自超, 张洪亮, 曹永生, 等. 中国地方稻种资源初级核心种质取样策略研究. 作物学报, 2003, 29 (1): 20- 24. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2003.01.004
	Li Z C, Zhang H L, Cao Y S, et al. Studies on the sampling strategy for primary core collection of Chinese ingenious rice. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2003, 29 (1): 20- 24. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2003.01.004
	刘德浩, 张方秋, 张卫华. 基于地理种源分组和表型数据构建尾叶桉核心种质. 西南林业大学学报, 2013, 33 (5): 1- 8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1914.2013.05.001
	Liu D H, Zhang F Q, Zhang W H. Construction of core germplasm of Eucalyptus urophylla based on geographical origin grouping and phenotypic data. Journal of Southwest Forestry University, 2013, 33 (5): 1- 8. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1914.2013.05.001
	刘子记, 曹振木, 朱　婕, 等. 甜椒核心种质资源比较构建研究. 东北农业大学学报, 2016, 47 (1): 21- 29. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9369.2016.01.004
	Liu Z J, Cao Z M, Zhu J, et al. Comparative study on the construction of sweet pepper core collection. Journal of Northeast Agricultural University, 2016, 47 (1): 21- 29. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9369.2016.01.004
	刘子记, 牛　玉, 朱　婕, 等. 苦瓜核心种质资源构建法的比较. 华南农业大学学报, 2017, 38 (1): 31- 37. doi: 10.7671/j.issn.1001-411X.2017.01.006
	Liu Z J, Niu Y, Zhu J, et al. Comparison of different methods to construct core collections of Momordica charantia. Journal of South China Agricultural University, 2017, 38 (1): 31- 37. doi: 10.7671/j.issn.1001-411X.2017.01.006
	刘遵春, 张春雨, 张艳敏, 等. 利用数量性状构建新疆野苹果核心种质的方法. 中国农业科学, 2010, 43 (2): 358- 370. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2010.02.017
	Liu Z C, Zhang C Y, Zhang Y M, et al. Study on method of constructing core collection of Malus sieversii based on quantitative traits. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2010, 43 (2): 358- 370. doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2010.02.017
	马玉敏. 2009. 中国野生板栗(Castanea mollissim Blume)群体遗传结构和核心种质构建方法. 泰安: 山东农业大学.
	Ma Y M. 2009. Population genetic structure and method of constructing core collection for Castanea mollissima Blume. Tai'an: Shandong Agricultural University.［in Chinese］
	施建敏, 杨光耀, 郭起荣, 等. 2008. 江西毛竹表型特征地理变异研究. 江西农业大学学报, (5): 824−828.
	Shi J M, Yang G Y, Guo Q R, et al. 2008. Geographic variation in phenotypic traits of moso bamboo (Phyllostachys edulis) in Jiangxi Province. Journal of Jiangxi Agricultural University, 30(5): 824−828. ［in Chinese］
	魏志刚, 高玉池, 刘桂丰, 等. 白桦核心种质初步构建. 林业科学, 2009, 45 (10): 74- 80. doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20091013
	Wei Z G, Gao Y C, Liu G F, et al. Preliminary construction of core collection of Betula platyphylla germplasm. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2009, 45 (10): 74- 80. doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20091013
	吴河饶, 任青艳, 陈　莹, 等. 基于农艺性状的榕江茶核心种质构建. 西北植物学报, 2023, 43 (11): 1931- 1941. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1000-4025.2023.11.1931
	Wu H R, Ren Q Y, Chen Y. et al. Construction of core germplasm of Camellia yungkiangensis based on agronomic traits. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2023, 43 (11): 1931- 1941. doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1000-4025.2023.11.1931
	徐海明, 邱英雄, 胡　晋, 等. 不同遗传距离聚类和抽样方法构建作物核心种质的比较. 作物学报, 2004, 30 (9): 932- 936. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2004.09.016
	Xu H M, Qiu Y X, Hu J, et al. Methods of constructing core collection of crop germplasm by comparing different genetic distances cluster methods and sampling strategies. Acta Agronomica Sinica, 2004, 30 (9): 932- 936. doi: 10.3321/j.issn:0496-3490.2004.09.016
	于晓池, 李　凤, 欧　阳, 等. 基于表型的灰楸核心种质构建. 林业科学研究, 2021, 34 (6): 38- 45.
	Yu X C, Li F, Ou Y, et al. Construction of core collection of Catalpa fargesii bur. based on phenotype. Forest Research, 2021, 34 (6): 38- 45.
	于秀明, 杜　雨, 汪　鹏, 等. 基于表型性状的新疆野生黄花苜蓿核心种质构建. 草地学报, 2023, 31 (10): 3032- 3039.
	Yu X M, Du Y, Wang P, et al. Construction of Xinjiang wild alfalfa core collection based on phenotypic traits. China Industrial Economics, 2023, 31 (10): 3032- 3039.
	张　欢, 王　东, 段　帆, 等. 基于水青树叶表型性状的核心种质资源库构建策略. 林业科学研究, 2019, 32 (2): 166- 173.
	Zhang H, Wang D, Duan F, et al. Construction strategy of core collection based on leaf phenotypic traits of Tetracentron sinense. Forest Research, 2019, 32 (2): 166- 173.
	张　婷, 闫伟红, 李志勇, 2024. 基于表型探讨 76 份沙芦草核心种质构建策略. 中国种业, (2): 93−102.
	Zhang T, Yan W H, Li Z Y, et al. 2024. Exploring the construction strategies of core collection in 76 Agropyron mongolicum based on phenotype. China Seed Industry, (2): 93−102. ［in Chinese］
	张闻博, 费本华, 田根林, 等. 不同地区毛竹生长和表型性状的比较. 东北林业大学学报, 2019, 47 (1): 1- 5. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2019.01.001
	Zhang W B, Fei B H, Tian G L, et al. Comparison of growth and phenotypic traits of moso mamboo (Phyllostachys edulis) from different regions. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2019, 47 (1): 1- 5. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2019.01.001
	郑轶琦, 郭　琰, 房淑娟, 等. 利用表型数据构建狗牙根初级核心种质. 草业学报, 2014, 23 (4): 49- 60. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20140406
	Zheng Y Q, Guo Y, Fang S J, et al. Constructing pre-core collection of Cynodondactylon based on phenotypic data. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23 (4): 49- 60. doi: 10.11686/cyxb20140406
	Chen W, Hou L, Zhang Z Y, et al. Genetic diversity, population structure, and linkage disequilibrium of a core collection of Ziziphus jujuba assessed with genome-wide SNPs developed by genotyping-by-sequencing and SSR markers. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2017, 8, 575.
	Coan M M D, Senhorinho H J C, Pinto R J B. 2018. Genome-wide association study of resistance to ear rot by in a tropical field maize and popcorn core collection. Crop Science, 58: 564−578.
	Ellstrand N C, Roose M L. Patterns of genetypic diversity in clonal plants species. America Journal of Botany, 1987, 74, 123- 131. doi: 10.1002/j.1537-2197.1987.tb08586.x
	Esselman E J, Jianqiang L, Crawford D J, et al. Clonal diversity in the rare Calamagrostis Porteri ssp. insperata (Poaceae): comparative results for allozymes and random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and intersimple sequence repeat (ISSR) markers. Molecular Ecology, 1999, 8 (3): 443- 451. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-294X.1999.00585.x
	Frankel O H, Brown A H D. 1984. Current plant genetic resources: a critical appraisal//Chopra V L. Genetics: New Frontier. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing, 1−11.
	Gu R, Fan S H, Wei S P, et al. 2023. Developments on core collections of plant genetic resources: do we know enough? Forests, 14(5): 926.
	Hamerick J L, Golt M J. 1990. Allozyme diversity in plant species// Brown A H, Clegg M J, et al(eds): Plant population on genetics, breeding and genetic resources. Sunderland: Sinauser Associate, 43−63.
	Hu J, Zhu J, Xu H M. Methods of constructing core collections by stepwise clustering with three sampling strategies based on the genotypic values of crops. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2000, 101 (1): 264- 268.
	Jiang W X, Zhang W J, Ding Y L. 2013. Development of polymorphicmicrosatellite markers for Phyllostachys edulis (Poaceae), an importantbamboo species in China. Applications in Plant Sciences, 1(7): 1200012.
	Li X N, Zhou Y, Bu Y P, et al. Genome-wide association analysis for yield-related traits at the R6 stage in a Chinese soybean mini core collection. Genes & Genomics, 2021, 43 (8): 897- 912.
	Lv J, Li C, Zhou C, et al. Genetic diversity analysis of a breeding population of Eucalyptus cloeziana F. Muell. (Myrtaceae) and extraction of a core germplasm collection using microsatellite markers. Industrial Crops and Products, 2020, 145 (3): 112- 157.
	Song X M, Ge T T, Li Y, et al. Genome-wide identification of SSR and SNP markers from the non-heading Chinese cabbage for comparative genomic analyses. BMC Genomics, 2015, 16 (1): 328. doi: 10.1186/s12864-015-1534-0

性状Traits		均值 Mean	标准差 Standard deviation	变异系数 CV(%)	变异幅度Variation range	H'
生长性状 Growth traits	DBH	10.148	1.497	14.750	5.45～13.40	2.017
	BD	11.681	1.798	15.392	5.60～16.00	2.041
	TCH	15.573	2.292	14.718	8.80～22.80	2.053
	TNN	61.400	7.988	13.010	25.00～75.00	1.961
	HFB	7.257	1.785	24.603	3.00～13.75	2.064
	NNFB	27.100	4.037	14.895	14.00～37.00	2.063
	IL	24.410	2.856	11.699	14.40～34.00	2.035
	CW	2.269	0.347	15.293	1.17～3.60	2.058
结构性状 Structural traits	ACWTB	16.372	2.465	15.054	6.14～24.45	2.030
	AWTH	10.045	1.516	15.088	5.38～18.18	1.963
	CCD	79.410	12.918	16.267	39.46～116.15	2.013
叶片性状 Leaf traits	LA	10.419	2.055	19.721	4.87～18.72	2.042
	LL	10.004	1.018	10.176	6.51～13.70	2.048
	LW	1.479	0.162	10.970	1.02～1.99	2.059
	LT	1.288	0.158	12.297	0.86～1.99	2.038

组别 Group	多样性指数 Shannon-Wiener index	样本数 Sample number	遗传多样性法Genetic diversity method		简单比例法Simple proportional method		对数比例法Logarithmic proportional method		平方根比例法Square root proportional method
组别 Group	多样性指数 Shannon-Wiener index	样本数 Sample number	多样性占比 Genetic ratio（%）	10%	样本数占比 Sample ratio（%）	10%	样本数占比 Sample ratio（%）	10%	样本数占比 Sample ratio（%）	10%
安徽 Anhui	10.777	24	38.74	3	5.56	2	6.48	3	6.17	3
福建 Fujian	11.052	30	39.73	3	6.94	3	6.94	3	6.90	3
河南 Henan	10.039	12	36.09	3	2.78	1	5.07	2	4.36	2
云南 Yunnan	9.583	6	34.45	2	1.39	1	3.65	2	3.09	1
广西 Guangxi	10.959	27	39.40	3	6.25	3	6.72	3	6.55	3
湖南 Hunan	11.846	47	42.59	3	10.88	5	7.85	4	8.64	4
江西 Jiangxi	11.870	48	42.67	3	11.11	5	7.89	4	8.73	4
江苏 Jiangsu	10.039	12	36.09	2	2.78	1	5.07	2	4.36	2
浙江 Zhejiang	11.553	42	41.53	3	9.72	4	7.62	3	8.16	4
湖北 Hubei	11.364	38	40.86	3	8.80	4	7.42	3	7.77	3
重庆Chongqing	10.959	27	39.40	3	6.25	3	6.72	3	6.55	3
陕西 Shaanxi	10.390	18	37.35	3	4.17	1	5.89	3	5.34	2
甘肃 Gansu	9.040	2	32.50	1	0.46	1	1.41	1	1.78	1
广东Guangdong	11.309	36	40.66	3	8.33	4	7.31	3	7.56	3
四川 Sichuan	11.391	39	40.95	3	9.03	4	7.47	3	7.87	3
贵州 Guizhou	10.777	24	38.74	3	5.56	2	6.48	3	6.17	3

性状Traits	种质Collection	最小值 Min.	最大值 Max.	均值Mean	变异系数CV（%）	多样性指数 Shannon-Wiener index	t
DBH	OC	5.45	13.40	10.15	14.75	2.02	0.51
DBH	CC	5.45	13.40	9.90	24.30	1.80
BD	OC	5.60	16.00	11.68	15.39	2.04	0.85
BD	CC	5.60	16.00	11.59	25.11	1.94
TCH	OC	8.80	22.80	15.57	14.72	2.05	0.61
TCH	CC	8.80	22.80	15.27	25.04	1.98
TNN	OC	25.00	75.00	61.40	13.01	1.96	0.16
TNN	CC	25.00	75.00	58.65	20.89	1.94
HFB	OC	3.00	13.75	7.26	24.60	2.06	0.68
HFB	CC	3.00	13.75	7.44	38.55	2.03
NNFB	OC	14.00	37.00	27.10	14.90	2.06	0.43
NNFB	CC	14.00	37.00	26.35	22.96	2.04
IL	OC	14.40	34.00	24.41	11.70	2.03	0.42
IL	CC	14.40	34.00	24.96	17.13	2.01
CW	OC	1.17	3.60	2.27	15.29	2.06	0.63
CW	CC	1.17	3.60	2.30	17.56	1.92
ACWB	OC	6.14	24.45	16.37	15.05	2.03	0.28
ACWB	CC	6.14	24.45	15.70	25.00	1.99
AWTH	OC	5.38	18.18	10.05	15.09	1.96	0.87
AWTH	CC	5.38	18.18	10.11	25.38	1.92
CCD	OC	39.46	116.15	79.41	16.27	2.01	0.76
CCD	CC	39.46	116.15	78.43	26.52	1.88
LA	OC	4.87	18.72	10.42	19.72	2.04	0.28
LA	CC	4.87	18.72	10.96	29.01	1.97
LL	OC	6.51	13.70	10.00	10.18	2.05	0.42
LL	CC	6.51	13.70	10.20	15.09	2.02
LW	OC	1.02	1.99	1.48	10.97	2.06	0.39
LW	CC	1.02	1.99	1.51	16.08	2.06
LT	OC	0.86	1.99	1.29	12.30	2.04	0.24
LT	CC	0.86	1.99	1.33	17.27	1.94

性状Traits	最小值符合率 Min. coincidence rate	最大值符合率 Max. coincidence rate	均值符合率 Mean coincidence rate	多样性指数符合率 Coincidence rate of Shannon-Wiener index
DBH	100.00	100.00	97.56	89.15
BD	100.00	100.00	99.25	95.20
TCH	100.00	100.00	98.05	96.19
TNN	100.00	100.00	95.52	98.90
HFB	100.00	100.00	97.44	98.51
NNFB	100.00	100.00	97.23	99.07
IL	100.00	100.00	97.77	98.91
CW	100.00	100.00	98.62	93.30
ACWB	100.00	100.00	95.88	98.24
AWTH	100.00	100.00	99.34	97.88
CCD	100.00	100.00	98.77	93.33
LA	100.00	100.00	94.82	96.67
LL	100.00	100.00	98.03	98.85
LW	100.00	100.00	97.79	99.96
LT	100.00	100.00	96.72	95.18

主成分 Component	原始种质Original collection				核心种质 Core collection
主成分 Component	特征根 Eigen value	贡献率 Contribution percentage（%）	累积贡献率 Cumulative contribution percentage（%）	前3名主要贡献性状 The top three contributing traits	特征根 Eigen value	贡献率 Contribution percentage（%）	累积贡献率 Cumulative contribution percentage（%）	前3名主要贡献性状 The top three contributing traits
PC1	2.391	38.10	38.10	DBH，CCD，BD	2.484	41.12	41.12	DBH，CCD，BD
PC2	1.797	21.53	59.63	LA，LW，LL	1.942	25.14	66.26	LA，LW，LL
PC3	1.094	7.97	67.61	CW，HFB，IL	1.075	7.71	73.97	LT，ACWTB，CW
PC4	1.049	7.331	74.94	IL，CW，NNFB	1.041	7.22	81.19	CW，AWTH，ACWTB