不同种源单叶蔓荆盐胁迫下生理生化特性及耐盐性评价
|
摘要
以国内7个不同沿海省单叶蔓荆为试验材料,设置3个盐分梯度:0、0.6%、1.2%盐溶液,对当年扦插单叶蔓荆苗进行盐胁迫处理。通过对枝条、叶面积增长量,CAT、SOD、POD抗氧化酶活性,脯氨酸、可溶性糖、可溶性蛋白质量分数和丙二醛摩尔质量浓度等指标的测定,观测其在盐胁迫下的一系列生理生化反应。试验结果表明:随盐胁迫加剧,不同种源各指标对盐胁迫反应不一,不呈单一变化趋势,不同种源的单叶蔓荆对盐胁迫反应具有显著差异性。盐胁迫明显抑制枝条和叶面积增长量;随盐胁迫加剧,各种源CAT、SOD、POD活性总体呈上升趋势;可溶性糖、可溶性蛋质量分数在低强度胁迫下降低在高强度胁迫下升高;脯氨酸质量分数呈不同变化趋势;丙二醛摩尔质量浓度在高强度胁迫下呈上升趋势。利用隶属函数法对参试材料进行综合评价,得出7个种源抗盐能力由大到小依次为:山东、海南、辽宁、广东、福建、广西、浙江。
We studied the salt stress on Vitex trifolia var. simplicifolia from seven different coastal provinces in China. Three salt gradients of 0,0.6% and 1.2% salt solutions were used to treat the cutting seedlings that were cultivated in the same year.A series of physiological and biochemical reactions under salt stress were observed by measuring the growth of branches and leaf area,activities of antioxidant enzymes( CAT,SOD,POD),and contents of proline,soluble sugar,soluble protein and the molality of malondialdehyde( MDA). With the increase of salt stress,the reaction of V. trifolia var. simplicifolia from different provenances varied differently,and there was no single trend. The response to salt stress differed significantly in the seedlings from different provenances. Salt stress significantly inhibited the growth of branch and leaf area. With the increase of salt stress,the activities of CAT,SOD and POD were increased. The contents of soluble sugar and soluble protein were decreased under lower intensity salt stress,but increased under higher intensity salt stress; however,the proline content did not vary in the same trend,and the molality of MDA content was increased with high intensity salt stress. By subordinate function value analysis,the comprehensive evaluation of the tested materials was made,and the salt-resistance ability order of the seven provenances V. trifolia var. simplicifolia from high to low was Shandong,Hainan,Liaoning,Guangdong,Fujian,Guangxi,and Zhejiang.
We studied the salt stress on Vitex trifolia var. simplicifolia from seven different coastal provinces in China. Three salt gradients of 0,0.6% and 1.2% salt solutions were used to treat the cutting seedlings that were cultivated in the same year.A series of physiological and biochemical reactions under salt stress were observed by measuring the growth of branches and leaf area,activities of antioxidant enzymes( CAT,SOD,POD),and contents of proline,soluble sugar,soluble protein and the molality of malondialdehyde( MDA). With the increase of salt stress,the reaction of V. trifolia var. simplicifolia from different provenances varied differently,and there was no single trend. The response to salt stress differed significantly in the seedlings from different provenances. Salt stress significantly inhibited the growth of branch and leaf area. With the increase of salt stress,the activities of CAT,SOD and POD were increased. The contents of soluble sugar and soluble protein were decreased under lower intensity salt stress,but increased under higher intensity salt stress; however,the proline content did not vary in the same trend,and the molality of MDA content was increased with high intensity salt stress. By subordinate function value analysis,the comprehensive evaluation of the tested materials was made,and the salt-resistance ability order of the seven provenances V. trifolia var. simplicifolia from high to low was Shandong,Hainan,Liaoning,Guangdong,Fujian,Guangxi,and Zhejiang.
引文
[1]宋天英,方志伟,王福兴.药用固沙先锋植被单叶蔓荆综合效益研究[J].河北林果研究,1998,13(S1):30-32.
[2]杨洁,左长清.蔓荆在鄱阳湖风沙区的适应性及防风作用研究[J].水土保持研究,2004,11(1):47-49.
[3]陈体强,朱金荣,吴锦忠,等.单叶蔓荆子化学成分研究初报[J].中国野生植物资源,2006,25(5):50-52.
[4]梁芳,周香珍,曹岚.我国单叶蔓荆药用植物资源调查[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(35):21638-21640.
[5]王连红,姚明志,李保进,等.胶东沙质海岸单叶蔓荆现状及保护对策[J].浙江农业科学,2017,58(4):632-634.
[6]张志良,瞿伟菁.植物生理学实验指导[M].3版.北京:高等教育出版社,2003:123-276.
[7]任文佼,李清河,王赛宵,等.盐胁迫下不同种源籽蒿的生理生化特性与耐盐性评价[J].东北林业大学学报,2013,41(2):10-13.
[8]杨升,张华新,刘涛.16个树种盐胁迫下的生长表现和生理特性[J].浙江农林大学学报,2012,29(5):744-754.
[9]李源,刘贵波,高洪文,等.紫花苜蓿种质耐盐性综合评价及盐胁迫下的生理反应[J].草业学报,2010,19(4):79-86.
[10]刘寅.天津滨海耐盐植物筛选及植物耐盐性评价指标研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2011.
[11]杨帆,丁菲,杜天真.土壤盐胁迫对构树幼苗生理特性的影响[J].江西农业大学学报,2008,30(4):684-688.
[12]刘凤歧,刘杰淋,朱瑞芬,等.4种燕麦对Na Cl胁迫的生理响应及耐盐性评价[J].草业学报,2015,24(1):183-189.
[13]张露婷,吴江,梅丽,等.喜树种源耐盐能力评价及耐盐指标筛选[J].林业科学,2011,47(11):66-72.
[14] SANADA Y,UEDA H,KUNBAYASHI K,et al. Novel lightdark change of proline levels in halophyte(Mesembryanthemum crystallinum L.)and glycophytes(Hordeum vulgare L. and Triticum aestivum L.)leaves and roots under salt stress[J]. Plant&Cell Physiology,1995,36(6):965-970.
[15]张永锋,梁正伟,隋丽,等.盐碱胁迫对苗期紫花苜蓿生理特性的影响[J].草业学报,2009,18(4):230-235.
[16] LIU J,ZHU J K. Proline accumulation and salt-stress-Induced gene expression in a salt-hypersensitive mutant of arabidopsis[J].Plant Physiology,1997,114(2):591-596.
[17]周广生,梅方竹,周竹青,等.小麦不同品种耐湿性生理指标综合评价及其预测[J].中国农业科学,2003,36(11):1378-1382.
[18]刘晶,才华,刘莹,等.两种紫花苜蓿苗期耐盐生理特性的初步研究及其耐盐性比较[J].草业学报,2013,22(2):250-256.
[19]袁琳,克热木·伊力,张利权.NaCl胁迫对阿月浑子实生苗活性氧代谢与细胞膜稳定性的影响[J].植物生态学报,2005,29(6):985-991.
[20]刘奕琳,万福绪,娄晓瑞.盐胁迫对10个墨西哥柏种源幼苗生理生化的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2013,37(4):29-33.
[21]薄鹏飞,孙秀玲,孙同虎,等.Na Cl胁迫对海滨木槿抗氧化系统和渗透调节的影响[J].西北植物学报,2008,28(1):113-118.
[22]宋立奕.盐胁迫对青檀幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[D].南京:南京林业大学,2004.
[2]杨洁,左长清.蔓荆在鄱阳湖风沙区的适应性及防风作用研究[J].水土保持研究,2004,11(1):47-49.
[3]陈体强,朱金荣,吴锦忠,等.单叶蔓荆子化学成分研究初报[J].中国野生植物资源,2006,25(5):50-52.
[4]梁芳,周香珍,曹岚.我国单叶蔓荆药用植物资源调查[J].安徽农业科学,2011,39(35):21638-21640.
[5]王连红,姚明志,李保进,等.胶东沙质海岸单叶蔓荆现状及保护对策[J].浙江农业科学,2017,58(4):632-634.
[6]张志良,瞿伟菁.植物生理学实验指导[M].3版.北京:高等教育出版社,2003:123-276.
[7]任文佼,李清河,王赛宵,等.盐胁迫下不同种源籽蒿的生理生化特性与耐盐性评价[J].东北林业大学学报,2013,41(2):10-13.
[8]杨升,张华新,刘涛.16个树种盐胁迫下的生长表现和生理特性[J].浙江农林大学学报,2012,29(5):744-754.
[9]李源,刘贵波,高洪文,等.紫花苜蓿种质耐盐性综合评价及盐胁迫下的生理反应[J].草业学报,2010,19(4):79-86.
[10]刘寅.天津滨海耐盐植物筛选及植物耐盐性评价指标研究[D].北京:北京林业大学,2011.
[11]杨帆,丁菲,杜天真.土壤盐胁迫对构树幼苗生理特性的影响[J].江西农业大学学报,2008,30(4):684-688.
[12]刘凤歧,刘杰淋,朱瑞芬,等.4种燕麦对Na Cl胁迫的生理响应及耐盐性评价[J].草业学报,2015,24(1):183-189.
[13]张露婷,吴江,梅丽,等.喜树种源耐盐能力评价及耐盐指标筛选[J].林业科学,2011,47(11):66-72.
[14] SANADA Y,UEDA H,KUNBAYASHI K,et al. Novel lightdark change of proline levels in halophyte(Mesembryanthemum crystallinum L.)and glycophytes(Hordeum vulgare L. and Triticum aestivum L.)leaves and roots under salt stress[J]. Plant&Cell Physiology,1995,36(6):965-970.
[15]张永锋,梁正伟,隋丽,等.盐碱胁迫对苗期紫花苜蓿生理特性的影响[J].草业学报,2009,18(4):230-235.
[16] LIU J,ZHU J K. Proline accumulation and salt-stress-Induced gene expression in a salt-hypersensitive mutant of arabidopsis[J].Plant Physiology,1997,114(2):591-596.
[17]周广生,梅方竹,周竹青,等.小麦不同品种耐湿性生理指标综合评价及其预测[J].中国农业科学,2003,36(11):1378-1382.
[18]刘晶,才华,刘莹,等.两种紫花苜蓿苗期耐盐生理特性的初步研究及其耐盐性比较[J].草业学报,2013,22(2):250-256.
[19]袁琳,克热木·伊力,张利权.NaCl胁迫对阿月浑子实生苗活性氧代谢与细胞膜稳定性的影响[J].植物生态学报,2005,29(6):985-991.
[20]刘奕琳,万福绪,娄晓瑞.盐胁迫对10个墨西哥柏种源幼苗生理生化的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2013,37(4):29-33.
[21]薄鹏飞,孙秀玲,孙同虎,等.Na Cl胁迫对海滨木槿抗氧化系统和渗透调节的影响[J].西北植物学报,2008,28(1):113-118.
[22]宋立奕.盐胁迫对青檀幼苗生长及生理特性的影响[D].南京:南京林业大学,2004.