水分胁迫下不同耐旱性糜子叶片保护酶活性及膜脂过氧化特性
|
摘要
选取耐旱品种陇糜4号和旱敏感品种晋黍7号,利用防雨旱棚与人工控水相结合的方法,研究了水分胁迫对糜子产量、叶片保护酶活性及膜脂过氧化作用的影响。结果表明,与CK处理相比,水分胁迫降低了糜子的穗数、穗粒数和千粒重,重度水分胁迫下差异达显著(P<0.05)水平,且旱敏感品种晋黍7号的降低幅度大于耐旱品种陇糜4号。整个生育时期,糜子叶片的SOD、POD和CAT活性表现为先升高后降低的趋势,在抽穗期达到最大值;水分胁迫降低了糜子叶片的SOD、POD和CAT活性,与对照相比,重度水分胁迫下达到显著性差异(P<0.05),重度水分胁迫下,耐旱品种陇糜4号SOD活性2年内平均降低22.58%,而旱敏感品种晋黍7号2年内平均降低44.94%。水分胁迫处理增加了糜子叶片的膜脂过氧化产物MDA含量和可溶性糖的含量,随着生育期的推进,糜子叶片可溶性糖含量表现为先升后降的趋势,在灌浆期表现为最大值。相关性分析结果表明,糜子产量与叶绿素含量、SOD活性、POD活性和CAT活性呈正相关关系。
To evaluate the effects of soil water stress on the yield of broomcorn millet,activities of endogenous enzymes,membrane protective system,and membrane lipid peroxidation of leaves in broomcorn millet,two different drought tolerance broomcorn millet varieties were used for a pot trial with rain-protection shed and artificial water control system. The results showed that spikes,grains per spike,and thousand-kernel weight decreased compared with CK and significantly decreased at P < 0.05 under severe water stress( SS) treatment. The activities of SOD,POD,and CAT in broomcorn millet leaves increased first and then decreased throughout the growth period with a peak at the heading stage. Meanwhile,the activities of SOD,POD,and CAT decreased under water stress.Significant differences were observed under severe water stress compared to the control group at P<0.05 level. For example,the activity of SOD of drought-tolerant variety( Longmi 4) decreased by 22.58% on average within two years under severe water stress,while that of the drought-sensitive variety( Jinshu 7) decreased by 44.94% on average within two years. However,the contents of MDA and soluble sugar of broomcorn millets were increased by water stress. The soluble sugar content increased first and then decreased throughout the growth period,and peaked at the filling stage. The correlation analysis indicated that the yield of broomcorn millets was positively correlated with chlorophyll content,SOD activity,POD activity,and CAT activity. This study provided an important evidence why Longmi 4 can survive better than Jinshu 7 under conditions of drought stress.
To evaluate the effects of soil water stress on the yield of broomcorn millet,activities of endogenous enzymes,membrane protective system,and membrane lipid peroxidation of leaves in broomcorn millet,two different drought tolerance broomcorn millet varieties were used for a pot trial with rain-protection shed and artificial water control system. The results showed that spikes,grains per spike,and thousand-kernel weight decreased compared with CK and significantly decreased at P < 0.05 under severe water stress( SS) treatment. The activities of SOD,POD,and CAT in broomcorn millet leaves increased first and then decreased throughout the growth period with a peak at the heading stage. Meanwhile,the activities of SOD,POD,and CAT decreased under water stress.Significant differences were observed under severe water stress compared to the control group at P<0.05 level. For example,the activity of SOD of drought-tolerant variety( Longmi 4) decreased by 22.58% on average within two years under severe water stress,while that of the drought-sensitive variety( Jinshu 7) decreased by 44.94% on average within two years. However,the contents of MDA and soluble sugar of broomcorn millets were increased by water stress. The soluble sugar content increased first and then decreased throughout the growth period,and peaked at the filling stage. The correlation analysis indicated that the yield of broomcorn millets was positively correlated with chlorophyll content,SOD activity,POD activity,and CAT activity. This study provided an important evidence why Longmi 4 can survive better than Jinshu 7 under conditions of drought stress.
引文
[1]时振振,李胜,马绍英,等.不同品种小麦抗氧化系统对水分胁迫的响应[J].草业学报,2015,24(7):68-78.
[2] Li X Q,Jin S H. Effects of drought stress on gas exchange andchlorophyll fluorescence characteristics in Eremochloa ophiuroides[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin,2010,26(8):170-174.
[3]王璐,张永清,李鹏,等.不同黍稷品种对生土栽培的生物学响应[J].中国生态农业学报,2011,19(3):728-730.
[4]屈洋,苏旺,李翠,等.陕北半干旱区沟垄覆膜集水模式下糜子边际效应及生理特性[J].应用生态学报,2014,25(3):776-782.
[5]林凡云,胡银岗,宋国琦,等.糜子抗旱及复水相关基因的c DNA-AFLP差异显示[J].干旱地区农业研究,2006,24(3):95-99.
[6] Hu X Y,Wang J F,Lu P,et al. Assessment of genetic diversityin broomcorn millet(Panicummiliaceum L.)using SSR markers[J]. Journal of Genetics and Genomics,2009,36(8):491-500.
[7]王纶,王星玉,温琪汾,等.中国黍稷种质资源蛋白质和脂肪含量的鉴定分析[J].植物遗传资源学报,2007,8(2):165-169.
[8]杨淑慎,高俊凤,李学俊,等.杂交春性小麦叶片衰老与保护酶系统活性的研究[J].中国农业科学,2004,37(3):460-463.
[9]张英,冯佰利,鱼欢,等.抗旱小麦籽粒灌浆期旗叶衰老与活性氧代谢研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(2):53-56.
[10] Srivalli B,Khanna-Chopra R. Introduction of new isoforms of su-peroxide dismutase and catalase enzymes in the flag leaf of wheatduring monocarpic senescence[J]. Biochemical and BiophysicalResearch Communication,2001,288(4):1037-1042.
[11]高小丽,孙健敏,高金锋,等.不同基因型绿豆叶片衰老与活性氧代谢研究[J].中国农业科学,2008,41(9):2873-2880.
[12] Song H,Gao X L,Zhang P P,et al. Leaf senescence and physio-logical characters in different adzuki bean(Vigna angularis)cul-tivars(lines)[J]. Journal of food,Agriculture&Environment,2012,10(3-4):610-615.
[13]董守坤,马玉玲,李爽,等.干旱胁迫及复水对大豆坏血酸-谷胱甘肽循环的影响[J].东北农业大学学报,2018,49(1):10-18.
[14] Dai H P,Zhang P P,Lu C,et al. Leaf senescence and reactiveoxygen species metabolism,of broomcorn millet(Panicummilia-ceum L.)under drought condition[J]. Australian Journal of CropScience,2011,5(12):1655-1660.
[15]冯佰利,高小丽,王长发,等.干旱条件下不同温型小麦叶片衰老与活性氧代谢特性的研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2005,13(4):74-76.
[16]葛体达,隋方功,白莉萍,等.水分胁迫下夏玉米根叶保护酶活性变化及其对膜脂过氧化作用的影响[J],中国农业科学,2005,38(5):922-928.
[17]王旭军,徐庆国,杨知建.水稻叶片衰老生理的研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2005,21(3):187-190.
[18]李向东,王晓云,张高英,等.花生叶片衰老过程中某些酶活性的变化[J].植物生理学报,2001,27(4):353-358.
[19]代惠萍,冯佰利,高金锋,等.糜子叶片衰老与活性氧代谢研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(1):217-220.
[20]刘紫娟,李萍,宗毓铮,等.干旱胁迫对糜子生理及产量的影响[J].山西农业科学,2016,44(9):1279-1283.
[21]张艾英,郭二虎,范惠萍,等.谷子不同生育时期水分胁迫抗旱生理特性研究[J].山西农业科学,2014,42(7):669-671.
[22]张志良,瞿伟菁.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2003.
[23]刘景辉,赵海超,任永峰,等.土壤水分胁迫对燕麦叶片渗透调节物质含量的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(7):1432-1436.
[24]李翠,赵伟洁,张大爱,等.水分胁迫对糜子物质生产及光合特性的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2014,42(1):1-7.
[25]任鹏,赵宝平,刘瑞芳,等.水分胁迫对燕麦穗颖渗透调节和抗氧化能力的影响[J].西北植物学报,2014,34(10):2049-2055.
[26]王娟,李德全,谷令坤.不同抗旱性玉米幼苗根系抗氧化系统对水分胁迫的反应[J].西北植物学报,2002,22(2):285-290.
[27] Yang C W,Wang P,Li C Y,et al. Comparison of effects of saltand alkali stresses on the growth and photosynthesis of wheat[J].Photosynthetica,2008,46(1):107-114.
[28]宋新颖,邬爽,张洪生,等.土壤水分胁迫对不同品种冬小麦生理特性的影响[J].华北农学报,2014,29(2):174-180.
[29]代惠萍,冯佰利,贾根良,等.糜子根系与旗叶协同衰老的生理生化机理研究[J].西北植物学报,2008,28(8):1663-1668.
[30]周瑜,刘佳佳,张盼盼,等.糜子叶片防御酶系及抗氧化物质对黑穗病菌胁迫的响应[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(17):3298-3307.
[2] Li X Q,Jin S H. Effects of drought stress on gas exchange andchlorophyll fluorescence characteristics in Eremochloa ophiuroides[J]. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin,2010,26(8):170-174.
[3]王璐,张永清,李鹏,等.不同黍稷品种对生土栽培的生物学响应[J].中国生态农业学报,2011,19(3):728-730.
[4]屈洋,苏旺,李翠,等.陕北半干旱区沟垄覆膜集水模式下糜子边际效应及生理特性[J].应用生态学报,2014,25(3):776-782.
[5]林凡云,胡银岗,宋国琦,等.糜子抗旱及复水相关基因的c DNA-AFLP差异显示[J].干旱地区农业研究,2006,24(3):95-99.
[6] Hu X Y,Wang J F,Lu P,et al. Assessment of genetic diversityin broomcorn millet(Panicummiliaceum L.)using SSR markers[J]. Journal of Genetics and Genomics,2009,36(8):491-500.
[7]王纶,王星玉,温琪汾,等.中国黍稷种质资源蛋白质和脂肪含量的鉴定分析[J].植物遗传资源学报,2007,8(2):165-169.
[8]杨淑慎,高俊凤,李学俊,等.杂交春性小麦叶片衰老与保护酶系统活性的研究[J].中国农业科学,2004,37(3):460-463.
[9]张英,冯佰利,鱼欢,等.抗旱小麦籽粒灌浆期旗叶衰老与活性氧代谢研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(2):53-56.
[10] Srivalli B,Khanna-Chopra R. Introduction of new isoforms of su-peroxide dismutase and catalase enzymes in the flag leaf of wheatduring monocarpic senescence[J]. Biochemical and BiophysicalResearch Communication,2001,288(4):1037-1042.
[11]高小丽,孙健敏,高金锋,等.不同基因型绿豆叶片衰老与活性氧代谢研究[J].中国农业科学,2008,41(9):2873-2880.
[12] Song H,Gao X L,Zhang P P,et al. Leaf senescence and physio-logical characters in different adzuki bean(Vigna angularis)cul-tivars(lines)[J]. Journal of food,Agriculture&Environment,2012,10(3-4):610-615.
[13]董守坤,马玉玲,李爽,等.干旱胁迫及复水对大豆坏血酸-谷胱甘肽循环的影响[J].东北农业大学学报,2018,49(1):10-18.
[14] Dai H P,Zhang P P,Lu C,et al. Leaf senescence and reactiveoxygen species metabolism,of broomcorn millet(Panicummilia-ceum L.)under drought condition[J]. Australian Journal of CropScience,2011,5(12):1655-1660.
[15]冯佰利,高小丽,王长发,等.干旱条件下不同温型小麦叶片衰老与活性氧代谢特性的研究[J].中国生态农业学报,2005,13(4):74-76.
[16]葛体达,隋方功,白莉萍,等.水分胁迫下夏玉米根叶保护酶活性变化及其对膜脂过氧化作用的影响[J],中国农业科学,2005,38(5):922-928.
[17]王旭军,徐庆国,杨知建.水稻叶片衰老生理的研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2005,21(3):187-190.
[18]李向东,王晓云,张高英,等.花生叶片衰老过程中某些酶活性的变化[J].植物生理学报,2001,27(4):353-358.
[19]代惠萍,冯佰利,高金锋,等.糜子叶片衰老与活性氧代谢研究[J].干旱地区农业研究,2008,26(1):217-220.
[20]刘紫娟,李萍,宗毓铮,等.干旱胁迫对糜子生理及产量的影响[J].山西农业科学,2016,44(9):1279-1283.
[21]张艾英,郭二虎,范惠萍,等.谷子不同生育时期水分胁迫抗旱生理特性研究[J].山西农业科学,2014,42(7):669-671.
[22]张志良,瞿伟菁.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2003.
[23]刘景辉,赵海超,任永峰,等.土壤水分胁迫对燕麦叶片渗透调节物质含量的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(7):1432-1436.
[24]李翠,赵伟洁,张大爱,等.水分胁迫对糜子物质生产及光合特性的影响[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版),2014,42(1):1-7.
[25]任鹏,赵宝平,刘瑞芳,等.水分胁迫对燕麦穗颖渗透调节和抗氧化能力的影响[J].西北植物学报,2014,34(10):2049-2055.
[26]王娟,李德全,谷令坤.不同抗旱性玉米幼苗根系抗氧化系统对水分胁迫的反应[J].西北植物学报,2002,22(2):285-290.
[27] Yang C W,Wang P,Li C Y,et al. Comparison of effects of saltand alkali stresses on the growth and photosynthesis of wheat[J].Photosynthetica,2008,46(1):107-114.
[28]宋新颖,邬爽,张洪生,等.土壤水分胁迫对不同品种冬小麦生理特性的影响[J].华北农学报,2014,29(2):174-180.
[29]代惠萍,冯佰利,贾根良,等.糜子根系与旗叶协同衰老的生理生化机理研究[J].西北植物学报,2008,28(8):1663-1668.
[30]周瑜,刘佳佳,张盼盼,等.糜子叶片防御酶系及抗氧化物质对黑穗病菌胁迫的响应[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(17):3298-3307.