低氮胁迫下不同苦荞品种开花前土壤养分含量特征
|
摘要
为了揭示耐低氮苦荞品种在胁迫环境下的优势,以耐低氮的迪庆苦荞(DQ)和不耐低氮的黑丰1号(HF)为材料,采用盆栽试验研究了开花前低氮胁迫下不同苦荞品种种植后造成的土壤养分含量差异。结果表明:低氮处理下两品种差异显著,HF土壤的含水量、pH值以及全氮含量分别比DQ高33.78%,1.43%,50%,而DQ土壤的NO~-_3-N含量、氨氧化酶活性显著高于HF 49.2%,97%。因此,迪庆苦荞可能通过吸收较多的水分、养分来适应低氮胁迫,并且通过提高氨氧化酶活性,加速硝化作用转化出更多的有效态氮供植物吸收利用。所以,对于未来贫瘠土壤上苦荞的种植应考量其耐瘠性的差异,选育耐瘠性强的品种来增加效益。
In order to reveal the advantages of low-nitrogen-resistant varieties of Fagopyrum tataricum under stress conditions, pot experiments were conducted to study the differences in soil nutrient contents of two varieties of Fagopyrum tataricum(DQ, low N resistance and HF, low N sensitive) under low N stress before flowering. The results showed that the two varieties were significantly different under low nitrogen treatment. The soil moisture, pH and total N content in the field of HF were 33.78%, 1.43% and 50% higher than those in the field of DQ, respectively; however, the NO~-_3-N content and ammonium oxidase activity in the field of DQ were 49.2% and 97% higher than those in the field of HF. DQ may adapt to the nitrogen stress through the ways of absorbing more water, and convert more available N for plant absorption and utilization by increasing the ammonium oxidase activity. Therefore, the cultivation of Fagopyrum tataricum should consider the differences of varieties in order to increase efficiency on poor soil in the future.
In order to reveal the advantages of low-nitrogen-resistant varieties of Fagopyrum tataricum under stress conditions, pot experiments were conducted to study the differences in soil nutrient contents of two varieties of Fagopyrum tataricum(DQ, low N resistance and HF, low N sensitive) under low N stress before flowering. The results showed that the two varieties were significantly different under low nitrogen treatment. The soil moisture, pH and total N content in the field of HF were 33.78%, 1.43% and 50% higher than those in the field of DQ, respectively; however, the NO~-_3-N content and ammonium oxidase activity in the field of DQ were 49.2% and 97% higher than those in the field of HF. DQ may adapt to the nitrogen stress through the ways of absorbing more water, and convert more available N for plant absorption and utilization by increasing the ammonium oxidase activity. Therefore, the cultivation of Fagopyrum tataricum should consider the differences of varieties in order to increase efficiency on poor soil in the future.
引文
[1] 张彦东,白尚斌.氮素形态对树木养分吸收和生长的影响[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(11):2044-2048.
[2] 杨苗.施氮对桉树林生长季土壤养分动态及温室气体通量的影响[D].河南焦作:河南理工大学,2015.
[3] 张定一,张永清,杨武德,等.不同基因型小麦对低氮胁迫的生物学响应[J].小麦研究,2006,32(1):1349-1354.
[4] 吴雅薇,李强,豆攀,等.低氮胁迫对不同耐低氮玉米品种苗期伤流液性状及根系活力的影响[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2017,23(2):278-288.
[5] 于欢.花前夜间增温下不同施氮量对麦田土壤养分及微生物的影响[D].南京:南京农业大学,2016.
[6] 陈伟,皇甫倩华,孙从建,等.大气O3升高对小麦根际土壤微生物量和氮素转化酶活性的影响[J].土壤通报,2017,48(3):623-630.
[7] 张美俊,乔治军,杨武德,等.不同糜子品种对低氮胁迫的生物学响应[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2014(3):661-669.
[8] 郭程瑾,张立军,崔喜荣,等.氮胁迫条件下中国春—代换系小麦苗期耐低氮特征研究[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2011,17(1):29-37.
[9] 张楚,张永清,路之娟,等.低氮胁迫对不同苦荞品种苗期生长和根系生理特征的影响[J].西北植物学报,2017,37(7):1331-1339.
[10] 张雄,王立祥,柴岩,等.小杂粮生产可持续发展探讨[J].中国农业科学,2003,36(12):1595-1598.
[11] 路之娟,张永清,张楚,等.不同基因型苦荞苗期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J].中国农业科学,2017,50(17):3311-3322.
[12] 张楚,张永清,路之娟,等.苗期耐低氮基因型苦荞的筛选及其评价指标[J].作物学报,2017,43(8):1205-1215.
[13] 张经廷,刘云鹏,李旭辉,等.夏玉米各器官氮素积累与分配动态及其对氮肥的响应[J].作物学报,2013,39(3):506-514.
[14] 鲁如坤.土壤农业化学分析方法[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社,2000.
[15] Cheang H S,Pell M D.The sound of sarcasm[J].Speech Communication,2008,50(5):366-381.
[16] 梁国鹏,Houssou A.Albert,吴会军,等.施氮量对夏玉米根际和非根际土壤酶活性及氮含量的影响[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(6):1917-1924.
[17] 张南翼.模拟增温和氮沉降对松嫩草原土壤养分状况的影响[D].长春:东北师范大学,2013.
[18] 马兴华,于振文,梁晓芳,等.施氮量和底施追施比例对土壤硝态氮和铵态氮含量时空变化的影响[J].应用生态学报,2006,17(4):630-634.
[19] 马宗斌,熊淑萍,何建国,等.氮素形态对专用小麦中后期根际土壤微生物和酶活性的影响[J].生态学报,2008,28(4):1544-1551.
[20] Allison S D,Czimczik C I,Treseder K K.Microbial activity and soil respiration under nitrogen addition in Alaskan boreal forest[J].Global Change Biology,2008,14(5):1156-1168.
[21] Allison S D,Vitousek P M.Responses of extracellular enzymes to simple and complex nutrient inputs[J].Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2005,37(5):937-944.
[22] 方运霆,莫江明,周国逸.离子交换树脂袋法研究森林土壤硝态氮及其对氮沉降增加的响应[J].生态环境学报,2005,4(4):483-487.
[23] 谢孟林,李强,查丽,等.低氮胁迫对不同耐低氮性玉米品种幼苗根系形态和生理特征的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2015,23(8):946-953.
[24] 汪晓丽,陶玥玥,盛海君,等.硝态氮供应对小麦根系形态发育和氮吸收动力学的影响[J].麦类作物学报,2010,30(1):129-134.
[25] 苏冰莹,颜丽,关连珠,等.长期不同施肥对黑土无机磷组分的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2010(3):4-7.
[26] 李奕林.不同水稻品种根际土壤硝化特征研究[D].南京:南京农业大学,2007.
[27] 杨柳燕,王楚楚,孙旭,等.淡水湖泊微生物硝化反硝化过程与影响因素研究[J].水资源保护,2016,32(1):12-22.
[28] 杨迪,马瑞,黄文斌,等.养分和水分胁迫下2年生落叶松根系有机酸的分泌行为研究[J].安徽农业科学,2013(36):13932-13934.
[29] 戢林,李廷轩,张锡洲,等.水稻氮高效基因型根系分泌物中有机酸和氨基酸的变化特征[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2012,18(5):1046-1055.
[30] Gao W,Cheng S,Fang H,et al.Effects of simulated atmospheric nitrogen deposition on inorganic nitrogen content and acidification in a cold-temperate coniferous forest soil[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2013,33(2):114-121.
[2] 杨苗.施氮对桉树林生长季土壤养分动态及温室气体通量的影响[D].河南焦作:河南理工大学,2015.
[3] 张定一,张永清,杨武德,等.不同基因型小麦对低氮胁迫的生物学响应[J].小麦研究,2006,32(1):1349-1354.
[4] 吴雅薇,李强,豆攀,等.低氮胁迫对不同耐低氮玉米品种苗期伤流液性状及根系活力的影响[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2017,23(2):278-288.
[5] 于欢.花前夜间增温下不同施氮量对麦田土壤养分及微生物的影响[D].南京:南京农业大学,2016.
[6] 陈伟,皇甫倩华,孙从建,等.大气O3升高对小麦根际土壤微生物量和氮素转化酶活性的影响[J].土壤通报,2017,48(3):623-630.
[7] 张美俊,乔治军,杨武德,等.不同糜子品种对低氮胁迫的生物学响应[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2014(3):661-669.
[8] 郭程瑾,张立军,崔喜荣,等.氮胁迫条件下中国春—代换系小麦苗期耐低氮特征研究[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2011,17(1):29-37.
[9] 张楚,张永清,路之娟,等.低氮胁迫对不同苦荞品种苗期生长和根系生理特征的影响[J].西北植物学报,2017,37(7):1331-1339.
[10] 张雄,王立祥,柴岩,等.小杂粮生产可持续发展探讨[J].中国农业科学,2003,36(12):1595-1598.
[11] 路之娟,张永清,张楚,等.不同基因型苦荞苗期抗旱性综合评价及指标筛选[J].中国农业科学,2017,50(17):3311-3322.
[12] 张楚,张永清,路之娟,等.苗期耐低氮基因型苦荞的筛选及其评价指标[J].作物学报,2017,43(8):1205-1215.
[13] 张经廷,刘云鹏,李旭辉,等.夏玉米各器官氮素积累与分配动态及其对氮肥的响应[J].作物学报,2013,39(3):506-514.
[14] 鲁如坤.土壤农业化学分析方法[M].北京:中国农业科技出版社,2000.
[15] Cheang H S,Pell M D.The sound of sarcasm[J].Speech Communication,2008,50(5):366-381.
[16] 梁国鹏,Houssou A.Albert,吴会军,等.施氮量对夏玉米根际和非根际土壤酶活性及氮含量的影响[J].应用生态学报,2016,27(6):1917-1924.
[17] 张南翼.模拟增温和氮沉降对松嫩草原土壤养分状况的影响[D].长春:东北师范大学,2013.
[18] 马兴华,于振文,梁晓芳,等.施氮量和底施追施比例对土壤硝态氮和铵态氮含量时空变化的影响[J].应用生态学报,2006,17(4):630-634.
[19] 马宗斌,熊淑萍,何建国,等.氮素形态对专用小麦中后期根际土壤微生物和酶活性的影响[J].生态学报,2008,28(4):1544-1551.
[20] Allison S D,Czimczik C I,Treseder K K.Microbial activity and soil respiration under nitrogen addition in Alaskan boreal forest[J].Global Change Biology,2008,14(5):1156-1168.
[21] Allison S D,Vitousek P M.Responses of extracellular enzymes to simple and complex nutrient inputs[J].Soil Biology & Biochemistry,2005,37(5):937-944.
[22] 方运霆,莫江明,周国逸.离子交换树脂袋法研究森林土壤硝态氮及其对氮沉降增加的响应[J].生态环境学报,2005,4(4):483-487.
[23] 谢孟林,李强,查丽,等.低氮胁迫对不同耐低氮性玉米品种幼苗根系形态和生理特征的影响[J].中国生态农业学报,2015,23(8):946-953.
[24] 汪晓丽,陶玥玥,盛海君,等.硝态氮供应对小麦根系形态发育和氮吸收动力学的影响[J].麦类作物学报,2010,30(1):129-134.
[25] 苏冰莹,颜丽,关连珠,等.长期不同施肥对黑土无机磷组分的影响[J].中国土壤与肥料,2010(3):4-7.
[26] 李奕林.不同水稻品种根际土壤硝化特征研究[D].南京:南京农业大学,2007.
[27] 杨柳燕,王楚楚,孙旭,等.淡水湖泊微生物硝化反硝化过程与影响因素研究[J].水资源保护,2016,32(1):12-22.
[28] 杨迪,马瑞,黄文斌,等.养分和水分胁迫下2年生落叶松根系有机酸的分泌行为研究[J].安徽农业科学,2013(36):13932-13934.
[29] 戢林,李廷轩,张锡洲,等.水稻氮高效基因型根系分泌物中有机酸和氨基酸的变化特征[J].植物营养与肥料学报,2012,18(5):1046-1055.
[30] Gao W,Cheng S,Fang H,et al.Effects of simulated atmospheric nitrogen deposition on inorganic nitrogen content and acidification in a cold-temperate coniferous forest soil[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2013,33(2):114-121.