斑茅野生种抗旱性鉴定
|
摘要
【目的】筛选出抗旱性优良的育种材料,为甘蔗的抗旱育种以及分子辅助育种提供理论依据。【方法】文章以8个不同无性系斑茅野生种为试验材料,正常浇水为对照(CK),在甘蔗伸长期初期需水量最大时进行干旱胁迫,测定细胞膜透性、丙二醛含量、叶绿素含量、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白、脯氨酸含量、POD活性、SOD活性等抗旱生理指标,并对各指标变幅进行模糊隶属函数分析。【结果】8个不同无性系材料抗旱性由强到弱依次为斑茅90-14>斑茅83-180>斑茅Ⅱ91-125>斑茅Ⅰ91-39>斑茅92-37>斑茅89-8>斑茅93-77>斑茅82-53。【结论】在伸长期干旱胁迫下,斑茅90-14在渗透调节、抗氧化系统、物质代谢等方面都表现出了积极的生理响应。
【Objective】The research aimed to screen out the breeding materials with good drought resistance,and provide the theoretical basis for drought resistance and molecular assisted breeding of sugarcane. 【Method】Eight typical species of E. arundinaceum were used as test materials,normal watering was used as control(CK),drought stress was needed when the water requirement was the largest in the early stage of sugarcane elongation,and cell membrane permeability,malondialdehyde content,chlorophyll content were determined. Soluble sugar,soluble protein,proline content,POD activity,SOD activity and other physiological indicators of drought resistance,and the variable amplitude of each index was analyzed by fuzzy membership function. 【Result 】The results of comprehensive evaluation showed that the drought resistance of eight species was ranked as Banmao 90-14 > Banmao 83-180 > BanmaoⅡ91-125 >‘BanmaoⅠ91-39 > Banmao 92-37> Banmao 89-8 > Banmao 93-77 > Banmao 82-53. 【Conclusion】Under the drought stress during the elongation stage,Echinococcus sp. 90-14 showed a positive physiological response in terms of osmoregulation,antioxidant system,and material metabolis.
【Objective】The research aimed to screen out the breeding materials with good drought resistance,and provide the theoretical basis for drought resistance and molecular assisted breeding of sugarcane. 【Method】Eight typical species of E. arundinaceum were used as test materials,normal watering was used as control(CK),drought stress was needed when the water requirement was the largest in the early stage of sugarcane elongation,and cell membrane permeability,malondialdehyde content,chlorophyll content were determined. Soluble sugar,soluble protein,proline content,POD activity,SOD activity and other physiological indicators of drought resistance,and the variable amplitude of each index was analyzed by fuzzy membership function. 【Result 】The results of comprehensive evaluation showed that the drought resistance of eight species was ranked as Banmao 90-14 > Banmao 83-180 > BanmaoⅡ91-125 >‘BanmaoⅠ91-39 > Banmao 92-37> Banmao 89-8 > Banmao 93-77 > Banmao 82-53. 【Conclusion】Under the drought stress during the elongation stage,Echinococcus sp. 90-14 showed a positive physiological response in terms of osmoregulation,antioxidant system,and material metabolis.
引文
[1]王继华,张木清,曹干.甘蔗抗旱育种研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2011,37(12):34-35.
[2]金伟.水分胁迫对抗旱性不同甘蔗品种生态生理效应的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2012.
[3]王继华,张木清,曹干.甘蔗抗旱育种研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2011,37(12):34-35.
[4]桂意云,杨荣仲,周会.干旱及复水条件下甘蔗的生理响应与抗旱性简易鉴定[J].广东农业科学,2009(9):19-21.
[5]刘三梅,杨清辉,李秀年,等.不同生育时期干旱胁迫对甘蔗形态指标及生理特性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2016,47(8).
[6]经艳芬,段惠芬,杨李和,等.云南蛮耗斑茅血缘抗旱性品系筛选及鉴定指标的比较研究[J].中国糖料,2008(1):7-10.
[7]张建波,鄢家俊,白史且,等.斑茅野生种质资源SRAP遗传多样性研究[J].农业生物技术学报,2013,21(10):1193-1202.
[8]梁振华,韦巧云,邱文武.几个甘蔗新品种的抗旱性比较研究[J].农业研究与应用,2015,6:004.
[9]陆国盈,劳丽萍,韩世健,等.5个甘蔗新品种(系)的抗旱性研究[J].安徽農業科學,2011,39(3):1341-1345.
[10]谢金兰,吴建明,黄杏,等.我国甘蔗新品种(系)的抗旱性研究[J].江苏农业科学,2015,43(3):108-112.
[11]苍晶,赵会杰.植物生理学实验教程[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2013.
[12]张宪政.作物生理研究法[M].北京:农业出版社,1989:195-200.
[13]焦洁.考马斯亮蓝G-250染色法测定苜蓿中可溶性蛋白含量[J].农业工程技术,2016,36(17):33-34.
[14]金伟,杨丽涛,英潘,等.不同甘蔗品种对干旱和复水的生态生理响应[J].南方农业学报,2012,43(12):1945-1951.
[15]黄有总,徐建云.几个甘蔗新品种的抗旱性和抗寒性比较研究[J].广西农业生物科学,2002,21(2):101-104.
[16]何平,尹以龙,何丽莲,等.宿根甘蔗抗旱指标的综合分析及评价[J].云南农业大学学报(自然科学),2016,31(1):22r29.
[17]金伟,杨丽涛,英潘,等.不同甘蔗品种对干旱和复水的生态生理响应[J].南方农业学报,2012,43(12):1945-1951.
[18]唐仕云.甘蔗伸长期不同水分处理的效应研究[D].南宁:广西大学,2005.
[19]刘家勇,陈学宽,夏红明,等.干旱胁迫下气温对甘蔗叶绿素荧光动力学参数的影响[J].西南农业学报,2018(3):478-482.
[20]杨晓康.干旱胁迫对不同抗旱花生品种生理特性,产量和品质的影响[D].泰安:山东农业大学,2012.
[21]吴凯朝,黄诚梅,邓智年,等.干旱后复水对甘蔗伸长期生理生化特性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2015,46(7).
[22]俞世雄,李芬,李绍林,等.水分胁迫对小麦新品系叶绿素含量的影响[J].云南农业大学学报,2014.
[23]滕峥,韦继敏,梁林顺,等.几个甘蔗品种(系)农艺性状及抗旱生理生化性状比较[J].广西农业科学,2011,42(7):728-731.
[24]姚瑞亮.乙烯利对甘蔗节间过氧化物酶活性的影响及酶细胞化学[J].广西农业生物科学,1999,18(3):169-172.
[25]张娜,赵宝平,张艳丽,等.干旱胁迫下燕麦叶片抗氧化酶活性等生理特性变化及抗旱性比较[J].干旱地区农业研究,2013(1):166-171.
[2]金伟.水分胁迫对抗旱性不同甘蔗品种生态生理效应的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2012.
[3]王继华,张木清,曹干.甘蔗抗旱育种研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2011,37(12):34-35.
[4]桂意云,杨荣仲,周会.干旱及复水条件下甘蔗的生理响应与抗旱性简易鉴定[J].广东农业科学,2009(9):19-21.
[5]刘三梅,杨清辉,李秀年,等.不同生育时期干旱胁迫对甘蔗形态指标及生理特性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2016,47(8).
[6]经艳芬,段惠芬,杨李和,等.云南蛮耗斑茅血缘抗旱性品系筛选及鉴定指标的比较研究[J].中国糖料,2008(1):7-10.
[7]张建波,鄢家俊,白史且,等.斑茅野生种质资源SRAP遗传多样性研究[J].农业生物技术学报,2013,21(10):1193-1202.
[8]梁振华,韦巧云,邱文武.几个甘蔗新品种的抗旱性比较研究[J].农业研究与应用,2015,6:004.
[9]陆国盈,劳丽萍,韩世健,等.5个甘蔗新品种(系)的抗旱性研究[J].安徽農業科學,2011,39(3):1341-1345.
[10]谢金兰,吴建明,黄杏,等.我国甘蔗新品种(系)的抗旱性研究[J].江苏农业科学,2015,43(3):108-112.
[11]苍晶,赵会杰.植物生理学实验教程[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2013.
[12]张宪政.作物生理研究法[M].北京:农业出版社,1989:195-200.
[13]焦洁.考马斯亮蓝G-250染色法测定苜蓿中可溶性蛋白含量[J].农业工程技术,2016,36(17):33-34.
[14]金伟,杨丽涛,英潘,等.不同甘蔗品种对干旱和复水的生态生理响应[J].南方农业学报,2012,43(12):1945-1951.
[15]黄有总,徐建云.几个甘蔗新品种的抗旱性和抗寒性比较研究[J].广西农业生物科学,2002,21(2):101-104.
[16]何平,尹以龙,何丽莲,等.宿根甘蔗抗旱指标的综合分析及评价[J].云南农业大学学报(自然科学),2016,31(1):22r29.
[17]金伟,杨丽涛,英潘,等.不同甘蔗品种对干旱和复水的生态生理响应[J].南方农业学报,2012,43(12):1945-1951.
[18]唐仕云.甘蔗伸长期不同水分处理的效应研究[D].南宁:广西大学,2005.
[19]刘家勇,陈学宽,夏红明,等.干旱胁迫下气温对甘蔗叶绿素荧光动力学参数的影响[J].西南农业学报,2018(3):478-482.
[20]杨晓康.干旱胁迫对不同抗旱花生品种生理特性,产量和品质的影响[D].泰安:山东农业大学,2012.
[21]吴凯朝,黄诚梅,邓智年,等.干旱后复水对甘蔗伸长期生理生化特性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2015,46(7).
[22]俞世雄,李芬,李绍林,等.水分胁迫对小麦新品系叶绿素含量的影响[J].云南农业大学学报,2014.
[23]滕峥,韦继敏,梁林顺,等.几个甘蔗品种(系)农艺性状及抗旱生理生化性状比较[J].广西农业科学,2011,42(7):728-731.
[24]姚瑞亮.乙烯利对甘蔗节间过氧化物酶活性的影响及酶细胞化学[J].广西农业生物科学,1999,18(3):169-172.
[25]张娜,赵宝平,张艳丽,等.干旱胁迫下燕麦叶片抗氧化酶活性等生理特性变化及抗旱性比较[J].干旱地区农业研究,2013(1):166-171.