施肥对日光温室香瓜茄根系生长及形态的影响
|
摘要
为探究香瓜茄各生育时期根系生长动态及其对施肥的响应,本研究在施肥和不施肥条件下,借助微根管技术原位观察香瓜茄生长期间根系形态特征参数,即根长密度(RLD)、根表面积密度(RSAD)、根直径(RD)、根体积密度(RVD)和根尖数(NRT)的变化,同期测定植株生物量和单果重。结果表明,香瓜茄根系生物量、RLD、RSAD、RVD和NRT均随着生育进程显著增加,但相对增长率呈先增大后降低的趋势,于伸蔓期达到峰值。开花坐果期,根干重日均增幅最大,分别为177.5 mg·株~(-1)·d~(-1)(有机肥)和117.5 mg·株~(-1)·d~(-1)(不施肥),在此期间RLD、RSAD和NRT在土壤剖面中的分布由上层为主转为下层为主。施用有机肥条件下,香瓜茄各生育时期(苗期除外)根冠比、根生物量、RLD、RSAD、NRT(成熟期除外)均显著高于不施肥处理,根生物量和形态特征参数的相对增长率也显著高于不施肥处理。施肥条件下,上层土壤中香瓜茄RLD、RSAD和NRT均明显高于不施肥处理。2种处理下,香瓜茄根系生物量和根系形态特征参数间呈极显著正相关。施肥条件下,根系形态特征参数与产量构成因素呈负相关,不施肥处理的根形态参数与产量性状相关性不显著。伸蔓期至开花结果期为香瓜茄根系生长最快的时期,施用有机肥使香瓜茄根系生长速率更高,快速生长时期更集中,上层土壤中的分布比例更大;不施肥处理使香瓜茄根系持续生长时期更长,向下生长更明显。本研究结果为香瓜茄温室科学施肥提供了理论依据。
To study the effect of different fertilization regimes on root growth dynamics of pepino( Solanum murcatum),the dry weight of plant organ,root morphological parameters such as root length density( RLD),root surface area density( RSAD),root diameter( RD),root volume density( RVD) and root tip number( RTN) were determined in situ with the minirhizotrons technique during pepino developmental stages. Additionally,fruit traits were observed at first harvest stage under two fertilization regimes. The results showed that the root biomass,RLD,RSAD,RVD and RTN increased significantly with the growth of pepino plants,however,the relative growth rate increased to the maximum at stage of shoot elongation,and then decreased. RLD,RSAD and NRT distribution transferred from upper layer of the soil profile to deeper soil volume at flowering stage,when the root dry weight increased most significantly with maximum daily increase rate of 177. 5 mg·plant~(-1)( organic fertilizer) and 117. 5 mg·plant~(-1)( no fertilizer). Root growth of pepino plants responded notably to fertilization,the root/shoot ratio,root biomass,RLD,RSAD and NRT in plots applying organic fertilizer were significantly higher than those under non-fertilization at all but the seedling stage. Daily increase rate of root biomass and relative increase rates of root morphological parameters under organic fertilizer were significantly higher than those under no fertilizer. There were significant positive correlations among root dry weight and morphological indicators in fertilizing and non-fertilization treatments. Under fertilization treatments,negative correlations were found between root morphology and fruit yield traits. The quickest root growth stage of pepino was found from the shoot elongation to flowering stage,and application of organic fertilizer contributed to the faster root growth,more concentrated growth duration and higher distribution ratio in upper soil profile,while non-fertilization induced longer root growth duration and deeper root distribution. This study provided a theoretical basis for the scientific fertilization of pepino.
To study the effect of different fertilization regimes on root growth dynamics of pepino( Solanum murcatum),the dry weight of plant organ,root morphological parameters such as root length density( RLD),root surface area density( RSAD),root diameter( RD),root volume density( RVD) and root tip number( RTN) were determined in situ with the minirhizotrons technique during pepino developmental stages. Additionally,fruit traits were observed at first harvest stage under two fertilization regimes. The results showed that the root biomass,RLD,RSAD,RVD and RTN increased significantly with the growth of pepino plants,however,the relative growth rate increased to the maximum at stage of shoot elongation,and then decreased. RLD,RSAD and NRT distribution transferred from upper layer of the soil profile to deeper soil volume at flowering stage,when the root dry weight increased most significantly with maximum daily increase rate of 177. 5 mg·plant~(-1)( organic fertilizer) and 117. 5 mg·plant~(-1)( no fertilizer). Root growth of pepino plants responded notably to fertilization,the root/shoot ratio,root biomass,RLD,RSAD and NRT in plots applying organic fertilizer were significantly higher than those under non-fertilization at all but the seedling stage. Daily increase rate of root biomass and relative increase rates of root morphological parameters under organic fertilizer were significantly higher than those under no fertilizer. There were significant positive correlations among root dry weight and morphological indicators in fertilizing and non-fertilization treatments. Under fertilization treatments,negative correlations were found between root morphology and fruit yield traits. The quickest root growth stage of pepino was found from the shoot elongation to flowering stage,and application of organic fertilizer contributed to the faster root growth,more concentrated growth duration and higher distribution ratio in upper soil profile,while non-fertilization induced longer root growth duration and deeper root distribution. This study provided a theoretical basis for the scientific fertilization of pepino.
引文
[1]沈浦,罗盛,吴正锋,王才斌,于天一,郑永美,孙学武,郑亚萍.花生磷吸收分配及根系形态对不同酸碱度叶面磷肥的响应特征[J].核农学报,2015,29(12):2418-2424
[2]潘艳花,马忠明,吕晓东,杜少平,薛亮.不同供钾水平对西瓜幼苗生长和根系形态的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2012,20(5):536-541
[3]王运涛,于林清,李景柱,孙娟娟,谢继红.低温胁迫对5份苜蓿品种根系形态特征的影响[J].草地学报,2016,24(1):101-106
[4]邱新强,高阳,黄玲,李新强,孙景生,段爱旺.冬小麦根系形态性状及分布[J].中国农业科学,2013,46(11):2211-2219
[5]戢林,李廷轩,张锡洲,余海英.氮高效利用基因型水稻根系形态和活力特征[J].中国农业科学,2012,45(23):4770-4781
[6]刘莹,盖钧镒,吕彗能.作物根系形态与非生物胁迫耐性关系的研究进展[J].植物遗传资源学报,2003,4(3):265-269
[7]魏海燕,张洪程,张胜飞,杭杰,戴其根,霍中洋,许轲,马群,张庆,刘艳阳.不同氮利用效率水稻基因型的根系形态与生理指标的研究[J].作物学报,2008,34(3):429-436
[8]丁红,张智猛,戴良香,宋文武,康涛,慈敦伟.不同抗旱性花生品种的根系形态发育及其对干旱胁迫的响应[J].生态学报,2013,33(17):5169-5176
[9]陈海英,余海英,陈光登,李廷轩.低磷胁迫下磷高效基因型大麦的根系形态特征[J].应用生态学报,2015,26(10):3020-3026
[10]罗佳,候银莹,程军回,王宁宁,陈波浪.低磷胁迫下不同磷效率基因型棉花的根系形态特征[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(12):2280-2289
[11]王晓茹,董合林,李永旗,李鹏程,刘敬然,刘爱忠,孙淼,赵新华,李亚兵,张思平.棉花不同品种钾吸收效率差异的根系形态学和生理学机理[J].棉花学报,2016,28(2):152-159
[12]熊淑萍,王小纯,李春明,马新明,杜少勇,张营武,蔺世召.冬小麦根系时空分布动态及产量对不同氮源配施的响应[J].植物生态学报,2011,35(7):759-768
[13]于水强,王政权,史建伟,全先奎,梅莉,孙玥,贾淑霞,于立忠.水曲柳和落叶松细根寿命的估计[J].植物生态学报,2007,31(1):102-109
[14]翟丙年,孙春梅,王俊儒,李生秀.氮素亏缺对冬小麦根系生长发育的影响[J].作物学报,2003,29(6):913-918
[15]韩配配,秦璐,李银水,廖祥生,徐子先,余常兵,胡小加,谢立华,廖红,廖星.不同营养元素缺乏对甘蓝型油菜苗期生长和根系形态的影响[J].中国油料作物学报,2016,38(1):88-97
[16]刘立军,王康君,卞金龙,熊溢伟,陈璐,王志琴,杨建昌.水稻产量对氮肥响应的品种间差异及其与根系形态生理的关系[J].作物学报,2014,40(11):1999-2007
[17]邱新强,高阳,李新强,黄玲,段爱旺.黄淮平原冬小麦不同品种根系生长差异[J].应用生态学报,2012,23(7):1832-1838
[18]周本智,张守攻,傅懋毅.植物根系研究新技术Minirhizotron的起源、发展和应用[J].生态学杂志,2007,26(2):253-260
[19]Herrera J M,Stamp P,Liedgens M.Interannual variability in root growth of spring wheat(Triticum aestivum L.)at low and high nitrogen supply[J].European Journal of Agronomy,2007,26(3):317-326
[20]郑麟,陈清浩,董祖林,伍有声.南美香瓜梨引种栽培初报[J].中国果树,1988(2):19-21
[21]蒲凌奎,朱元珍,祝英,蒲训.人参果漫谈[J].甘肃农业,2008,258(1):82-84
[22]Lim T K.Solanum Muricatum[M]//Lim T K.Edible Medicinal and Non-medicinal Palnts.Netherlands:Springer,2013:389-394
[23]Johnson M G,Tingey D T,Phillips D L,Storm M J.Advancing fine root research with minirhizotrons[J].Environmental&Experimental Botany,2001,45(3):263-289
[24]Herraiz F J,Vilanova S,Plazas M,Gramazioa P,Andújara I,Rodríguez-Burruezoa A,Fitaa A,Andersonb G J,Prohensa J.Phenological growth stages of pepino(Solanum muricatum)according to the BBCH scale[J].Scientia Horticulturae,2015,183:1-7
[25]Su J Y,Qi Z,Li H W,Li B,Jing R L.Detection of QTLs for phosphorus use efficiency in relation to agronomic performance of wheat grown under phosphorus sufficient and limited conditions.[J].Plant Science,2009,176(6):824-836
[26]张永清,苗果园.不同施肥水平下黍子根系对干旱胁迫的反应[J].作物学报,2006,32(4):601-606
[27]张和平,刘晓楠.华北平原冬小麦根系生长规律及其与氮肥磷肥和水分的关系[J].华北农学报,1993,8(4):76-82
[28]王千,张淑香,依艳丽.钾镁水平对番茄苗期生长、根系形态及钾素吸收和生理利用效率的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2012(2):51-55
[29]Zhang H,Rong H,Pilbeam D.Signalling mechanisms underlying the morphological responses of the root system to nitrogen in Arabidopsis thaliana[J].Journal of Experimental Botany,2007,58(9):2329-2338
[30]胡香玉,郭九信,田广丽,高丽敏,沈其荣,郭世伟.不同供氮模式对水稻根系形态及生理特征的影响[J].中国水稻科学,2017,31(1):72-80
[31]王力朋,晏紫伊,李吉跃,王军辉,何茜,苏艳,陈博,马建伟,董菊兰.指数施肥对楸树无性系生物量分配和根系形态的影响[J].生态学报,2012,32(23):7452-7462
[32]田中伟,樊永惠,殷美,王方瑞,蔡剑,姜东,戴廷波.长江中下游小麦品种根系改良特征及其与产量的关系[J].作物学报,2015,41(4):613-622
[33]李玉英,胡汉升,程序,孙建好,李隆.种间互作和施氮对蚕豆/玉米间作生态系统地上部和地下部生长的影响[J].生态学报,2011,31(6):1617-1630
[34]燕晓娟,张岁岐,王宗仁,孙婴婴.半干旱地区不同年代冬小麦品种根系生长和水分利用效率对种植密度的响应[J].水土保持研究,2013,20(6):32-36
[2]潘艳花,马忠明,吕晓东,杜少平,薛亮.不同供钾水平对西瓜幼苗生长和根系形态的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2012,20(5):536-541
[3]王运涛,于林清,李景柱,孙娟娟,谢继红.低温胁迫对5份苜蓿品种根系形态特征的影响[J].草地学报,2016,24(1):101-106
[4]邱新强,高阳,黄玲,李新强,孙景生,段爱旺.冬小麦根系形态性状及分布[J].中国农业科学,2013,46(11):2211-2219
[5]戢林,李廷轩,张锡洲,余海英.氮高效利用基因型水稻根系形态和活力特征[J].中国农业科学,2012,45(23):4770-4781
[6]刘莹,盖钧镒,吕彗能.作物根系形态与非生物胁迫耐性关系的研究进展[J].植物遗传资源学报,2003,4(3):265-269
[7]魏海燕,张洪程,张胜飞,杭杰,戴其根,霍中洋,许轲,马群,张庆,刘艳阳.不同氮利用效率水稻基因型的根系形态与生理指标的研究[J].作物学报,2008,34(3):429-436
[8]丁红,张智猛,戴良香,宋文武,康涛,慈敦伟.不同抗旱性花生品种的根系形态发育及其对干旱胁迫的响应[J].生态学报,2013,33(17):5169-5176
[9]陈海英,余海英,陈光登,李廷轩.低磷胁迫下磷高效基因型大麦的根系形态特征[J].应用生态学报,2015,26(10):3020-3026
[10]罗佳,候银莹,程军回,王宁宁,陈波浪.低磷胁迫下不同磷效率基因型棉花的根系形态特征[J].中国农业科学,2016,49(12):2280-2289
[11]王晓茹,董合林,李永旗,李鹏程,刘敬然,刘爱忠,孙淼,赵新华,李亚兵,张思平.棉花不同品种钾吸收效率差异的根系形态学和生理学机理[J].棉花学报,2016,28(2):152-159
[12]熊淑萍,王小纯,李春明,马新明,杜少勇,张营武,蔺世召.冬小麦根系时空分布动态及产量对不同氮源配施的响应[J].植物生态学报,2011,35(7):759-768
[13]于水强,王政权,史建伟,全先奎,梅莉,孙玥,贾淑霞,于立忠.水曲柳和落叶松细根寿命的估计[J].植物生态学报,2007,31(1):102-109
[14]翟丙年,孙春梅,王俊儒,李生秀.氮素亏缺对冬小麦根系生长发育的影响[J].作物学报,2003,29(6):913-918
[15]韩配配,秦璐,李银水,廖祥生,徐子先,余常兵,胡小加,谢立华,廖红,廖星.不同营养元素缺乏对甘蓝型油菜苗期生长和根系形态的影响[J].中国油料作物学报,2016,38(1):88-97
[16]刘立军,王康君,卞金龙,熊溢伟,陈璐,王志琴,杨建昌.水稻产量对氮肥响应的品种间差异及其与根系形态生理的关系[J].作物学报,2014,40(11):1999-2007
[17]邱新强,高阳,李新强,黄玲,段爱旺.黄淮平原冬小麦不同品种根系生长差异[J].应用生态学报,2012,23(7):1832-1838
[18]周本智,张守攻,傅懋毅.植物根系研究新技术Minirhizotron的起源、发展和应用[J].生态学杂志,2007,26(2):253-260
[19]Herrera J M,Stamp P,Liedgens M.Interannual variability in root growth of spring wheat(Triticum aestivum L.)at low and high nitrogen supply[J].European Journal of Agronomy,2007,26(3):317-326
[20]郑麟,陈清浩,董祖林,伍有声.南美香瓜梨引种栽培初报[J].中国果树,1988(2):19-21
[21]蒲凌奎,朱元珍,祝英,蒲训.人参果漫谈[J].甘肃农业,2008,258(1):82-84
[22]Lim T K.Solanum Muricatum[M]//Lim T K.Edible Medicinal and Non-medicinal Palnts.Netherlands:Springer,2013:389-394
[23]Johnson M G,Tingey D T,Phillips D L,Storm M J.Advancing fine root research with minirhizotrons[J].Environmental&Experimental Botany,2001,45(3):263-289
[24]Herraiz F J,Vilanova S,Plazas M,Gramazioa P,Andújara I,Rodríguez-Burruezoa A,Fitaa A,Andersonb G J,Prohensa J.Phenological growth stages of pepino(Solanum muricatum)according to the BBCH scale[J].Scientia Horticulturae,2015,183:1-7
[25]Su J Y,Qi Z,Li H W,Li B,Jing R L.Detection of QTLs for phosphorus use efficiency in relation to agronomic performance of wheat grown under phosphorus sufficient and limited conditions.[J].Plant Science,2009,176(6):824-836
[26]张永清,苗果园.不同施肥水平下黍子根系对干旱胁迫的反应[J].作物学报,2006,32(4):601-606
[27]张和平,刘晓楠.华北平原冬小麦根系生长规律及其与氮肥磷肥和水分的关系[J].华北农学报,1993,8(4):76-82
[28]王千,张淑香,依艳丽.钾镁水平对番茄苗期生长、根系形态及钾素吸收和生理利用效率的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2012(2):51-55
[29]Zhang H,Rong H,Pilbeam D.Signalling mechanisms underlying the morphological responses of the root system to nitrogen in Arabidopsis thaliana[J].Journal of Experimental Botany,2007,58(9):2329-2338
[30]胡香玉,郭九信,田广丽,高丽敏,沈其荣,郭世伟.不同供氮模式对水稻根系形态及生理特征的影响[J].中国水稻科学,2017,31(1):72-80
[31]王力朋,晏紫伊,李吉跃,王军辉,何茜,苏艳,陈博,马建伟,董菊兰.指数施肥对楸树无性系生物量分配和根系形态的影响[J].生态学报,2012,32(23):7452-7462
[32]田中伟,樊永惠,殷美,王方瑞,蔡剑,姜东,戴廷波.长江中下游小麦品种根系改良特征及其与产量的关系[J].作物学报,2015,41(4):613-622
[33]李玉英,胡汉升,程序,孙建好,李隆.种间互作和施氮对蚕豆/玉米间作生态系统地上部和地下部生长的影响[J].生态学报,2011,31(6):1617-1630
[34]燕晓娟,张岁岐,王宗仁,孙婴婴.半干旱地区不同年代冬小麦品种根系生长和水分利用效率对种植密度的响应[J].水土保持研究,2013,20(6):32-36