低温胁迫对不同藜麦幼苗生理生化特性的影响
|
摘要
为探究低温胁迫对藜麦幼苗生理生化特性的影响,以红藜、白藜、黑藜3种不同藜麦为实验材料,采取小盆暗萌发、营养土育苗的方法,在人工模拟低温胁迫环境下(4℃)分别处理不同的时间。结果表明:1)白藜和红藜游离脯氨酸含量随着低温胁迫时间的延长先上升后下降,黑藜的脯氨酸含量随着时间的变化逐渐上升。2)不同藜麦的丙二醛含量随时间的变化均呈先上升再下降的趋势,出现最大值的时间不同,但波动都比较小,恢复条件之后含量均相对上升。3)不同藜麦幼苗过氧化物酶(POD)的活性在低温期间持续上升,解除胁迫后活性下降。4)随着低温胁迫时间的延长,不同藜麦幼苗的超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性先上升后下降,在48 h达到最大值。实验表明:低温胁迫不同的时间对3种藜麦生理生化指标影响程度不同,随着时间的延长,各指标的变化趋于稳定。抗寒性强弱依次为:黑藜、白藜、红藜。
To explore the effect of low temperature stress on physiological and biochemical indexes of quinoa seedlings. Taking three different quinoas(red quinoa, white quinoa, black quinoa) as experiment material, the methods of small basin dark germination and nutrient soil seedling were adopted, and the time was treated respectively in the artificially simulated low temperature stress environment(4 ℃). The results showed that: 1) The content of free proline in white quinoa and red quinoa seedlings first increased and then decreased with the extension of low temperature stress time, and the proline content of black quinoa seedlings gradually increased with time. 2) The MDA content of different quinoa seedlings tended to increase first and then fall again. The maximum time was different, but the fluctuations were relatively small. After the recovery conditions, the contents were all increased relatively. 3) POD activity of different quinoa seedlings continued to increase during low temperature, and decreased after cold stress was released. 4) With the prolongation of low temperature stress, the SOD activity of different quinoa seedlings first increased and then decreased, reached the maximum at 48 h. The experiment showed that the different time of low temperature stress could affect the physiological and biochemical indexes of three quinoa seedlings in different degrees, and the change of the indicators tended to be stable with the extension of time. The order of cold resistance is: black quinoa, white quinoa, red quinoa in order.
To explore the effect of low temperature stress on physiological and biochemical indexes of quinoa seedlings. Taking three different quinoas(red quinoa, white quinoa, black quinoa) as experiment material, the methods of small basin dark germination and nutrient soil seedling were adopted, and the time was treated respectively in the artificially simulated low temperature stress environment(4 ℃). The results showed that: 1) The content of free proline in white quinoa and red quinoa seedlings first increased and then decreased with the extension of low temperature stress time, and the proline content of black quinoa seedlings gradually increased with time. 2) The MDA content of different quinoa seedlings tended to increase first and then fall again. The maximum time was different, but the fluctuations were relatively small. After the recovery conditions, the contents were all increased relatively. 3) POD activity of different quinoa seedlings continued to increase during low temperature, and decreased after cold stress was released. 4) With the prolongation of low temperature stress, the SOD activity of different quinoa seedlings first increased and then decreased, reached the maximum at 48 h. The experiment showed that the different time of low temperature stress could affect the physiological and biochemical indexes of three quinoa seedlings in different degrees, and the change of the indicators tended to be stable with the extension of time. The order of cold resistance is: black quinoa, white quinoa, red quinoa in order.
引文
[1]刘敏国,杨倩,杨梅,等.藜麦的饲用潜力及适应性[J].草业科学,2017,34(6):1264-1271.
[2]Stikic R,Glamoclija D,Demin M,et al.Agronomical and nurtional evaluation of quinoa seed (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as an ingredient in bread formulations[J].Journal of Cereal Science,2012,55(2):132-138.
[3]Ruales J,Nair B.Properties of starch and dietary fibre en quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd)seeds[J].Plant Foods for Human Nutrition,1994,45:223-246.
[4]刘建霞,侍亚敏,温日宇,等.晋藜1号种子及幼苗对叠氮化钠诱变的响应[J].种子,2018,37(01):80-83.
[5]杨发荣,刘文瑜,黄杰,等.不同藜麦品种对盐胁迫的生理响应及耐盐性评价[J].草业学报,2017,26(12):77-88.
[6]刘建霞,温日宇,张晴雯,等.3种盐胁迫下静乐藜麦种子与幼苗抗逆指标的检测[J].种子,2018,37(02):82-85.
[7]李丽丽,姜奇彦,牛风娟,等.藜麦耐盐机制研究进展[J].中国农业科技导报,2016,18(2):31-40.
[8]戚维聪,张体付,陈曦,等.藜麦的耐盐性评价及在滨海盐土的试种表现[J].核农学报,2017,31(1):0145-0155.
[9]张紫薇,庞春花,张永清,等.渗NaCl和PEG胁迫及复水处理对藜麦种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J].作物杂志,2017(01):119-126.
[10]范玉贞.菠菜抗寒性生理机制的研究[J].北方园艺,2009(11):63-65.
[11]许英,陈建华,朱爱国,等.低温胁迫下植物响应机理的研究进展[J].中国麻业科学,2015,40(01):40-49.
[12]张南,秦智伟.低温处理对菠菜生理生化指标的影响[J].中国蔬菜,2007(11):22-24.
[13]郭子武,李宪利,高东升,等.植物低温胁迫响应的生化与分子生物学机制研究进展[J].中国生态农业学报,2004,12(2):54-57.
[14]孙玉洁,王国槐.植物抗寒生理的研究进展[J].作物研究,2009(05):293-297.
[15]王忠.植物生理学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1999.
[16]彭筱娜,易自力,蒋建雄.植物抗寒性研究进展[J].生物技术通报,2007(04):15-18.
[17]于凤玲,支庆祥.低温对植物的危害以及植物的抗寒性[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2009,30(9):190.
[18]蔡庆生.植物生理学实验[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社.
[19]赵福庚.植物逆境生理生态学[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2004:137-139.
[20]邵怡若,许建新,薛立,等.低温胁迫时间对4种幼苗生理生化及光合特性的影响[J].生态学报,2013,33(14):4237-4247.
[21]Chen S Y.Injury of membrane lipid peroxidation to plant cell[J].Plant Physiology Communications,1991,27(2):84-90.
[22]吴海宁,罗兴录,樊吴静.低温胁迫对不同木薯品种幼苗生理特性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2013(11):1791-1799.
[23]Liu H Y,Zhu Z J,Lu G H.Effect of low temperature stress on chilling tolerance and protective system against active oxygen of grafted watermelon[J].Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2004,15(4):659-662.
[24]王小媚,任惠,刘业强,等.低温胁迫对杨桃品种抗寒生理生化指标的影响[J].西南农业学报,2016,11(02):270-275.
[2]Stikic R,Glamoclija D,Demin M,et al.Agronomical and nurtional evaluation of quinoa seed (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) as an ingredient in bread formulations[J].Journal of Cereal Science,2012,55(2):132-138.
[3]Ruales J,Nair B.Properties of starch and dietary fibre en quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd)seeds[J].Plant Foods for Human Nutrition,1994,45:223-246.
[4]刘建霞,侍亚敏,温日宇,等.晋藜1号种子及幼苗对叠氮化钠诱变的响应[J].种子,2018,37(01):80-83.
[5]杨发荣,刘文瑜,黄杰,等.不同藜麦品种对盐胁迫的生理响应及耐盐性评价[J].草业学报,2017,26(12):77-88.
[6]刘建霞,温日宇,张晴雯,等.3种盐胁迫下静乐藜麦种子与幼苗抗逆指标的检测[J].种子,2018,37(02):82-85.
[7]李丽丽,姜奇彦,牛风娟,等.藜麦耐盐机制研究进展[J].中国农业科技导报,2016,18(2):31-40.
[8]戚维聪,张体付,陈曦,等.藜麦的耐盐性评价及在滨海盐土的试种表现[J].核农学报,2017,31(1):0145-0155.
[9]张紫薇,庞春花,张永清,等.渗NaCl和PEG胁迫及复水处理对藜麦种子萌发及幼苗生长的影响[J].作物杂志,2017(01):119-126.
[10]范玉贞.菠菜抗寒性生理机制的研究[J].北方园艺,2009(11):63-65.
[11]许英,陈建华,朱爱国,等.低温胁迫下植物响应机理的研究进展[J].中国麻业科学,2015,40(01):40-49.
[12]张南,秦智伟.低温处理对菠菜生理生化指标的影响[J].中国蔬菜,2007(11):22-24.
[13]郭子武,李宪利,高东升,等.植物低温胁迫响应的生化与分子生物学机制研究进展[J].中国生态农业学报,2004,12(2):54-57.
[14]孙玉洁,王国槐.植物抗寒生理的研究进展[J].作物研究,2009(05):293-297.
[15]王忠.植物生理学[M].北京:中国农业出版社,1999.
[16]彭筱娜,易自力,蒋建雄.植物抗寒性研究进展[J].生物技术通报,2007(04):15-18.
[17]于凤玲,支庆祥.低温对植物的危害以及植物的抗寒性[J].畜牧与饲料科学,2009,30(9):190.
[18]蔡庆生.植物生理学实验[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社.
[19]赵福庚.植物逆境生理生态学[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2004:137-139.
[20]邵怡若,许建新,薛立,等.低温胁迫时间对4种幼苗生理生化及光合特性的影响[J].生态学报,2013,33(14):4237-4247.
[21]Chen S Y.Injury of membrane lipid peroxidation to plant cell[J].Plant Physiology Communications,1991,27(2):84-90.
[22]吴海宁,罗兴录,樊吴静.低温胁迫对不同木薯品种幼苗生理特性的影响[J].南方农业学报,2013(11):1791-1799.
[23]Liu H Y,Zhu Z J,Lu G H.Effect of low temperature stress on chilling tolerance and protective system against active oxygen of grafted watermelon[J].Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2004,15(4):659-662.
[24]王小媚,任惠,刘业强,等.低温胁迫对杨桃品种抗寒生理生化指标的影响[J].西南农业学报,2016,11(02):270-275.