4种不同石竹属植物的抗旱性分析
|
摘要
以瞿麦(Dianthus superbus L.)、常夏石竹(Dianthus plumarius)、中国石竹(Dianthus chinensis L.)和须苞石竹(Dianthus barbatus L.) 4种不同石竹属植物幼苗为试材,采用自然干旱胁迫法对其进行处理,测定不同干旱胁迫下石竹幼苗的形态和生理指标,并用隶属函数法对4种石竹属植物的抗旱性进行综合评价,旨在筛选出适合山西省栽培和利用的石竹属抗旱性种质资源。研究结果表明:随着干旱胁迫程度的加剧,4种石竹属植物幼苗的土壤含水量和叶片相对含水量均下降,处理第12 d时各处理组叶片相对含水量和对照相比分别下降64.14%、59.44%、80.84%和78.58%;丙二醛(MDA)含量第10 d时处理组和对照组相比上升451.61%、353.45%、724.32%和647.95%;处理组和对照组相比超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)活性在第8 d分别上升77.58%、90.68%、29.05%和81.52%;脯氨酸(Pro)含量持续上升,叶绿素(Chl)、可溶性蛋白质含量以及超氧化物歧化酶(SOD)的活性呈先上升后下降的趋势;干旱胁迫处理第10 d时,Dt SOD和Dt POD基因在常夏石竹和瞿麦中表达水平较高,分别为对照组的2.5倍和2.25倍。利用隶属函数法分析得出4种不同石竹属植物的抗旱性从强到弱依次为:常夏石竹>瞿麦>须苞石竹>中国石竹。
The seedlings of four different Dianthus plants(Dianthus superbus L.,Dianthus plumarius,Dianthus chinensis L.,and Dianthus barbatus L.) were used as test plants to evaluate their drought tolerance under natural drought stress.Morphological and physiological indexes related to the drought tolerance were measured,and the comprehensive evaluation method of drought tolerance capacity was evaluated using subordinate function value analysis on four different Dianthus plants.The results indicated that soil water content and relative water content of leaves of Dianthus plants were decreased with increasing severity of drought stress. Compared with the control,after drought stress of 12 d,the relative water content of leaves decreased by 64.14%、59.44%、80.84%、and 78.58%in all 4 studied plants,respectively.The content of malondialdehyde(MDA) increased 451.61%、353.44%、724.32%,and 647.95% after 10 d drought stress. The activity of superoxide dismutase(SOD) increased 77.58%、90.68%、29.05%,and 81.52% at day 8. The content of proline(Pro) increased while the content of chlorophyll(Chl) and the activity of superoxidedismutase(SOD) went up first and then decreased. At day 10,Dt SOD and Dt POD genes showed rising trend in Dianthus plumarius and Dianthus superbus L. increased 2.5 and 2.25 times over that of control. The order of the drought tolerance of four Dianthus plants was Dianthus plumarius>Dianthus superbus>Dianthus barbatus>Dianthus chinensis.
The seedlings of four different Dianthus plants(Dianthus superbus L.,Dianthus plumarius,Dianthus chinensis L.,and Dianthus barbatus L.) were used as test plants to evaluate their drought tolerance under natural drought stress.Morphological and physiological indexes related to the drought tolerance were measured,and the comprehensive evaluation method of drought tolerance capacity was evaluated using subordinate function value analysis on four different Dianthus plants.The results indicated that soil water content and relative water content of leaves of Dianthus plants were decreased with increasing severity of drought stress. Compared with the control,after drought stress of 12 d,the relative water content of leaves decreased by 64.14%、59.44%、80.84%、and 78.58%in all 4 studied plants,respectively.The content of malondialdehyde(MDA) increased 451.61%、353.44%、724.32%,and 647.95% after 10 d drought stress. The activity of superoxide dismutase(SOD) increased 77.58%、90.68%、29.05%,and 81.52% at day 8. The content of proline(Pro) increased while the content of chlorophyll(Chl) and the activity of superoxidedismutase(SOD) went up first and then decreased. At day 10,Dt SOD and Dt POD genes showed rising trend in Dianthus plumarius and Dianthus superbus L. increased 2.5 and 2.25 times over that of control. The order of the drought tolerance of four Dianthus plants was Dianthus plumarius>Dianthus superbus>Dianthus barbatus>Dianthus chinensis.
引文
[1]张双喜,徐兆师,张改生,等.转W16小麦抗旱新品系的创制及抗旱生理机制分析[J].中国农业科学,2011,44(24):4971-4979.
[2]段娜,王佳,刘芳,陈海玲,等.植物抗旱性研究进展[J].分子植物育种,2018,16(15):5093-5099.
[3]孙新竹.常夏石竹(Dianthus plumarius)抗旱性初步研究[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2006.
[4]姚侠妹,偶春,卓丽环,等.引种地被石竹的水分生理特性和抗旱性[J].东北林业大学学报,2012,40(05):46-50+70.
[5]侯彦林,李敬亚,米长虹,等.土壤墒情诊断理论和方法[J].生态学杂志,2017:36(12):3329-3335.
[6]张智猛,万书波,戴良香,等.花生抗旱性鉴定指标的筛选与评价[J].植物生态学报,2011,35(1):100-109.
[7]钱瑭璜,雷江丽,庄雪影.华南地区8种常见园林地被植物抗旱性比较研究[J].西北植物学报,2012,32(4):759-766.
[8]赵海泉.基础生物学实验指导植物生理学分册[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2008:1.
[9]伍春莲.黄芪愈伤组织的培养及其蛋白质含量的测定[J].西华师范大学学报(自然科学版),2009,30(2):138-140.
[10]高俊凤.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006:210-211+228.
[11]裴宗平,余莉琳,汪云甲,等.4种干旱区生态修复植物的苗期抗旱性研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2014,28(3):204-208.
[12]李柏贞,周广胜.干旱指标研究进展[J].生态学报,2014,34(05):1043-1052.
[13]刘周.北丝石竹的种子繁殖及干旱胁迫对其影响的研究[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2012.
[14] Rigoberto R S,JosuéK S,Jorge A A G,et al. Biomass distribution,maturity acceleration and yield in drought stressed common bean cultivars[J]. Field Crops Research,2004,85(2):203-211.
[15]彭远英,颜红海,郭来春,等.燕麦属不同倍性种质资源抗旱性状评价及筛选[J].生态学报,2011,31(9):2478-2491.
[16]张常青,洪波,李建科,等.地被菊花幼苗耐旱性评价方法研究[J].中国农业科学,2005,38(4):789-796.
[17]吴芹,张光灿,裴斌,等.3个树种对不同程度土壤干旱的生理生化响应[J].生态学报,2013,33(12):3648-3656.
[18]裴斌,张光灿,张淑勇,等.土壤干旱胁迫对沙棘叶片光合作用和抗氧化酶活性的影响[J].生态学报,2013,33(5):1386-1396.
[19]田又升,王志军,于航,等.干旱胁迫对不同抗旱性棉花品种抗氧化酶活性及基因表达的影响[J].西北植物学报,2015,35(12):2483-2490.
[20] Umezawa T,Fujita M,Fujita Y,et al. Engineering drought tolerance in plants:discovering and tailoring genes to unlock the future[J]. Current Opinion in Biotechnology,2006,17(2):113-122.
[21]杜成忠.不同甘蔗品种抗旱性的生理和分子机制[D].南宁:广西大学,2018.
[22]马宗仁,刘荣堂.牧草抗旱生理的基本原理[M].兰州:兰州大学出版社,1993.
[2]段娜,王佳,刘芳,陈海玲,等.植物抗旱性研究进展[J].分子植物育种,2018,16(15):5093-5099.
[3]孙新竹.常夏石竹(Dianthus plumarius)抗旱性初步研究[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2006.
[4]姚侠妹,偶春,卓丽环,等.引种地被石竹的水分生理特性和抗旱性[J].东北林业大学学报,2012,40(05):46-50+70.
[5]侯彦林,李敬亚,米长虹,等.土壤墒情诊断理论和方法[J].生态学杂志,2017:36(12):3329-3335.
[6]张智猛,万书波,戴良香,等.花生抗旱性鉴定指标的筛选与评价[J].植物生态学报,2011,35(1):100-109.
[7]钱瑭璜,雷江丽,庄雪影.华南地区8种常见园林地被植物抗旱性比较研究[J].西北植物学报,2012,32(4):759-766.
[8]赵海泉.基础生物学实验指导植物生理学分册[M].北京:中国农业大学出版社,2008:1.
[9]伍春莲.黄芪愈伤组织的培养及其蛋白质含量的测定[J].西华师范大学学报(自然科学版),2009,30(2):138-140.
[10]高俊凤.植物生理学实验指导[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2006:210-211+228.
[11]裴宗平,余莉琳,汪云甲,等.4种干旱区生态修复植物的苗期抗旱性研究[J].干旱区资源与环境,2014,28(3):204-208.
[12]李柏贞,周广胜.干旱指标研究进展[J].生态学报,2014,34(05):1043-1052.
[13]刘周.北丝石竹的种子繁殖及干旱胁迫对其影响的研究[D].哈尔滨:东北林业大学,2012.
[14] Rigoberto R S,JosuéK S,Jorge A A G,et al. Biomass distribution,maturity acceleration and yield in drought stressed common bean cultivars[J]. Field Crops Research,2004,85(2):203-211.
[15]彭远英,颜红海,郭来春,等.燕麦属不同倍性种质资源抗旱性状评价及筛选[J].生态学报,2011,31(9):2478-2491.
[16]张常青,洪波,李建科,等.地被菊花幼苗耐旱性评价方法研究[J].中国农业科学,2005,38(4):789-796.
[17]吴芹,张光灿,裴斌,等.3个树种对不同程度土壤干旱的生理生化响应[J].生态学报,2013,33(12):3648-3656.
[18]裴斌,张光灿,张淑勇,等.土壤干旱胁迫对沙棘叶片光合作用和抗氧化酶活性的影响[J].生态学报,2013,33(5):1386-1396.
[19]田又升,王志军,于航,等.干旱胁迫对不同抗旱性棉花品种抗氧化酶活性及基因表达的影响[J].西北植物学报,2015,35(12):2483-2490.
[20] Umezawa T,Fujita M,Fujita Y,et al. Engineering drought tolerance in plants:discovering and tailoring genes to unlock the future[J]. Current Opinion in Biotechnology,2006,17(2):113-122.
[21]杜成忠.不同甘蔗品种抗旱性的生理和分子机制[D].南宁:广西大学,2018.
[22]马宗仁,刘荣堂.牧草抗旱生理的基本原理[M].兰州:兰州大学出版社,1993.