3种植物生长调节剂对黄花风铃木幼苗生长及生理特性的影响
|
摘要
以黄花风铃木(Tabebuiachrysantha)幼苗为试验材料,采用L16(45)正交试验设计,测定并比较了各个浓度组合处理下黄花风铃木幼苗的生长指标以及生理特性,研究3种植物生长调节剂(GGR、IAA、PP333)不同组合对黄花风铃木幼苗的生长和抗性生理交互作用影响,得出提高黄花风铃木幼苗的抗性的最佳浓度组合。结果表明,11号处理(GGR浓度为400 mg·L-1、IAA浓度为400 mg·L-1、PP333浓度为400 mg·L-1)根系各生长指标大于其他组合处理,地径增长量8号处理最大,11号处理次之。8号、11号、15号苗高生长量高于其他处理。3种植物生长调节剂中GGR对黄花风铃木幼苗根系生长,地径增长和苗高增长起主导作用,IAA和PP333作用不明显。11号处理幼苗的可溶性蛋白、超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性均大于其他处理组,丙二醛(MDA)含量最低,而过氧化物酶(POD)活性则是4、11和12号处理明显高于其他处理组合。经分析得出GGR对黄花风铃木幼苗的可溶性蛋白、SOD以及POD起主导作用,IAA和PP333作用不明显。PP333对黄花风铃木幼苗MDA含量影响显著,IAA和GGR对MDA含量作用不明显。通过对黄花风铃木幼苗各个指标综合分析结果表明,不同生长调节剂的适宜浓度组合为11号处理(GGR浓度为400 mg·L-1、IAA浓度为400 mg·L-1、PP333浓度为400 mg·L-1),在此浓度下黄花风铃木幼苗生长情况及抗性生理最佳。本实验揭示GGR、IAA和PP333 3种植物生长调节剂交互作用对黄花风铃木幼苗的影响,为植物生长调节剂在提高园林植物抗逆性,培育抗性品种等方面的运用提供更多的理论支持和依据。
In order to study the interaction of combinations of three plant growth regulators(GGR, IAA and PP333) on the growth and resistance physiological of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, and obtain the best concentration combination for improving the resistance of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, we chosen Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings as experimental materials, used L16(45) orthogonal experiment design, measured and compared the growth and physiological characteristics of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings. The results showed that root growth index and growth amount of seedling height with No. 11 treatment(GGR 400 mg·L-1, IAA 400 mg·L-1, PP333 400 mg·L-1) was greater than those with other combination treatments, and which had the largest growth ground diameter with No.8 treatment, followed by No. 11. Among the three plant growth regulators, GGR played a leading role in the root growth index, growth amount of seedling height and diameter of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, but IAA and PP333 had no significant effect. The soluble protein and superoxide dismutase(SOD) activity in the seedlings with No. 11 treatment were greater than those with other treatment groups, while the content of malondialdehyde(MDA) in the seedlings with No. 11 treatment was the lowest, and the activities of peroxidase(POD) in the seedlings with No. 4,No. 11 and No. 12 treatments were significantly higher than those with other treatments. The results showed that:GGR plays a leading role in the soluble protein, SOD activity and POD activity of the Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings,and IAA and PP333 have no obvious effect; PP333 has significant effect on the content of MDA in Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, but IAA and GGR have no significant effect on the content of MDA. The results of the comprehensive analysis of each index of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings showed that the suitable concentration combination of different growth regulators is No.11 treatment(GGR 400 mg ·L-1, IAA 400 mg ·L-1, PP333 400 mg ·L-1). Under this concentration, the root growth and resistance physiology of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings are the best. In this study,we preliminarily studied the interaction of GGR, IAA and PP333 on the Tabebuia chrysantha seedling, which will provide more theoretical support and basis for the application of plant growth regulators in improving stress tolerance of garden plants and breeding resistant varieties.
In order to study the interaction of combinations of three plant growth regulators(GGR, IAA and PP333) on the growth and resistance physiological of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, and obtain the best concentration combination for improving the resistance of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, we chosen Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings as experimental materials, used L16(45) orthogonal experiment design, measured and compared the growth and physiological characteristics of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings. The results showed that root growth index and growth amount of seedling height with No. 11 treatment(GGR 400 mg·L-1, IAA 400 mg·L-1, PP333 400 mg·L-1) was greater than those with other combination treatments, and which had the largest growth ground diameter with No.8 treatment, followed by No. 11. Among the three plant growth regulators, GGR played a leading role in the root growth index, growth amount of seedling height and diameter of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, but IAA and PP333 had no significant effect. The soluble protein and superoxide dismutase(SOD) activity in the seedlings with No. 11 treatment were greater than those with other treatment groups, while the content of malondialdehyde(MDA) in the seedlings with No. 11 treatment was the lowest, and the activities of peroxidase(POD) in the seedlings with No. 4,No. 11 and No. 12 treatments were significantly higher than those with other treatments. The results showed that:GGR plays a leading role in the soluble protein, SOD activity and POD activity of the Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings,and IAA and PP333 have no obvious effect; PP333 has significant effect on the content of MDA in Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings, but IAA and GGR have no significant effect on the content of MDA. The results of the comprehensive analysis of each index of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings showed that the suitable concentration combination of different growth regulators is No.11 treatment(GGR 400 mg ·L-1, IAA 400 mg ·L-1, PP333 400 mg ·L-1). Under this concentration, the root growth and resistance physiology of Tabebuia chrysantha seedlings are the best. In this study,we preliminarily studied the interaction of GGR, IAA and PP333 on the Tabebuia chrysantha seedling, which will provide more theoretical support and basis for the application of plant growth regulators in improving stress tolerance of garden plants and breeding resistant varieties.
引文
[1]张静,廖绍波,孙冰,等.观赏树种黄花风铃木花期物候与花形态[J].浙江农林大学学报,2017,34(4):759-764.
[2]李玲莉,王宝宁,张鹏.黄花风铃木在重庆的引种栽培[J].园林科技,2016(1):11-15.
[3]钟海智,林耿,陈志刚,等.黄花风铃木种苗培育技术[J].广东林业科技,2015,31(2):146-148.
[4]尚秀华,高丽琼,张沛健,等.3种风铃木扦插繁殖技术研究[J].桉树科技,2016,33(1):38-42.
[5]王艳,任吉君,赵春兰,等.黄花风铃木种子萌发的研究[J].种子,2011,30(5):98-99.
[6]李进华,林茂,孙开道,等.黄花风铃木园林用容器大苗培植关键技术[J].农业研究与应用,2016(2):75-77.
[7]张锋,潘康标,田子华.植物生长调节剂研究进展及应用对策[J].现代农业科技,2012(1):193-195.
[8]樊海潮,顾万荣,尉菊萍,等.植物生长调节剂增强玉米抗倒伏能力的机制[J].江苏农业学报,2017,33(2):253-262.
[9]谷小红,郭宝林,田景,等.植物生长调节剂在药用植物生长发育和栽培中的应用[J].中国现代中药,2017,19(2):295-305,310.
[10]董俊,冯英丽,包园园,等.植物生长调节剂对花生生长发育和产量的影响[J].辽宁农业科学,2018(1):33-36.
[11]王秀梅,张云,秦景逸,等.植物生长调节剂对甜樱桃移栽苗生长发育的影响[J].江苏农业科学,2018,46(10):130-133.
[12]项洪涛.三种植物生长调节剂对马铃薯碳代谢生理及产量品质的影响[D].大庆:黑龙江八一农垦大学,2013.
[13]刘昆成.三种植物生长调节剂对格木幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2013.
[14]陈兵.植物生长调节剂对红花木莲幼苗生长和生理特性的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2014.
[15]刘洋.烯效唑和激动素对绿豆根系建成与生长发育及产量的影响[D].大庆:黑龙江八一农垦大学,2016.
[16]杨传杰,罗毅,孙林,等.水分胁迫对覆膜滴灌棉花根系活力和叶片生理的影响[J].干旱区研究,2012,29(5):802-810.
[17]刘昆成,於艳萍,王凌晖,等.三种植物生长调节剂对格木幼苗根系生长的影响[J].北方园艺,2013,13(5):66-68.
[18]马晓蒙.植物生长调节剂对圆齿野鸦椿苗木生长以及抗旱生理的影响[D].南昌:江西农业大学,2012.
[19]张翠梅,师尚礼,吴芳,等.干旱胁迫对不同抗旱性苜蓿品种根系生长及生理特性影响[J].中国农业科学,2018,51(5):868-882.
[20]郭晖,王妞,张家洋,等.土壤重金属胁迫下3种观赏植物生理抗性[J].西北林学院学报,2017,32(3):62-66,70.
[21]王玲利,刘超,曾明,等.采后处理对“黄冠”梨膜脂过氧化和保护酶活性的影响[J].中国南方果树,2017,46(2):132-136.
[22]王琰,陈建文,狄晓艳,等.水分胁迫下不同油松种源SOD、POD、MDA及可溶性蛋白比较研究[J].生态环境学报,2011,20(10):1449-1453.
[23]林艳,郭伟珍,徐振华,等.大叶女贞抗寒性及冬季叶片丙二醛和可溶性糖含量的变化[J].中国农学通报,2012,28(25):68-72.
[24]符玉英.水分亏缺诱导的氧化胁迫和植物的抗氧化作用[J].科技与创新,2018,33(8):54-55.
[2]李玲莉,王宝宁,张鹏.黄花风铃木在重庆的引种栽培[J].园林科技,2016(1):11-15.
[3]钟海智,林耿,陈志刚,等.黄花风铃木种苗培育技术[J].广东林业科技,2015,31(2):146-148.
[4]尚秀华,高丽琼,张沛健,等.3种风铃木扦插繁殖技术研究[J].桉树科技,2016,33(1):38-42.
[5]王艳,任吉君,赵春兰,等.黄花风铃木种子萌发的研究[J].种子,2011,30(5):98-99.
[6]李进华,林茂,孙开道,等.黄花风铃木园林用容器大苗培植关键技术[J].农业研究与应用,2016(2):75-77.
[7]张锋,潘康标,田子华.植物生长调节剂研究进展及应用对策[J].现代农业科技,2012(1):193-195.
[8]樊海潮,顾万荣,尉菊萍,等.植物生长调节剂增强玉米抗倒伏能力的机制[J].江苏农业学报,2017,33(2):253-262.
[9]谷小红,郭宝林,田景,等.植物生长调节剂在药用植物生长发育和栽培中的应用[J].中国现代中药,2017,19(2):295-305,310.
[10]董俊,冯英丽,包园园,等.植物生长调节剂对花生生长发育和产量的影响[J].辽宁农业科学,2018(1):33-36.
[11]王秀梅,张云,秦景逸,等.植物生长调节剂对甜樱桃移栽苗生长发育的影响[J].江苏农业科学,2018,46(10):130-133.
[12]项洪涛.三种植物生长调节剂对马铃薯碳代谢生理及产量品质的影响[D].大庆:黑龙江八一农垦大学,2013.
[13]刘昆成.三种植物生长调节剂对格木幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2013.
[14]陈兵.植物生长调节剂对红花木莲幼苗生长和生理特性的影响[D].南宁:广西大学,2014.
[15]刘洋.烯效唑和激动素对绿豆根系建成与生长发育及产量的影响[D].大庆:黑龙江八一农垦大学,2016.
[16]杨传杰,罗毅,孙林,等.水分胁迫对覆膜滴灌棉花根系活力和叶片生理的影响[J].干旱区研究,2012,29(5):802-810.
[17]刘昆成,於艳萍,王凌晖,等.三种植物生长调节剂对格木幼苗根系生长的影响[J].北方园艺,2013,13(5):66-68.
[18]马晓蒙.植物生长调节剂对圆齿野鸦椿苗木生长以及抗旱生理的影响[D].南昌:江西农业大学,2012.
[19]张翠梅,师尚礼,吴芳,等.干旱胁迫对不同抗旱性苜蓿品种根系生长及生理特性影响[J].中国农业科学,2018,51(5):868-882.
[20]郭晖,王妞,张家洋,等.土壤重金属胁迫下3种观赏植物生理抗性[J].西北林学院学报,2017,32(3):62-66,70.
[21]王玲利,刘超,曾明,等.采后处理对“黄冠”梨膜脂过氧化和保护酶活性的影响[J].中国南方果树,2017,46(2):132-136.
[22]王琰,陈建文,狄晓艳,等.水分胁迫下不同油松种源SOD、POD、MDA及可溶性蛋白比较研究[J].生态环境学报,2011,20(10):1449-1453.
[23]林艳,郭伟珍,徐振华,等.大叶女贞抗寒性及冬季叶片丙二醛和可溶性糖含量的变化[J].中国农学通报,2012,28(25):68-72.
[24]符玉英.水分亏缺诱导的氧化胁迫和植物的抗氧化作用[J].科技与创新,2018,33(8):54-55.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |