乌鲁木齐周边几种野生灌木对干旱和盐胁迫的响应
|
摘要
木本猪毛菜(Salsola arbucula Pall.)、刺旋花(Convolvulos tragacanthoides Turcz.)、长枝木蓼(Atraphaxis virgata (Regel) Krassn.)、刺木蓼(A. spinosa Linn.)和刺叶锦鸡儿(Caragana acanthophylla Kom.)为乌鲁木齐周边植被组成的重要种,在维持本地生态系统的稳定中发挥着重要作用。本研究第1阶段,通过盆栽控水控盐法分别研究了木本猪毛菜、刺旋花、长枝木蓼和刺木蓼四种灌木对干旱胁迫的响应,木本猪毛菜、刺旋花、长枝木蓼和刺叶锦鸡儿四种灌木幼苗对盐胁迫的响应。第2阶段,选择胁迫下生长量较大的刺叶锦鸡儿和长枝木蓼,研究了其幼苗对干旱和盐分交叉胁迫的响应。主要结论如下:
干旱胁迫对刺旋花的生物量影响最小,对长枝木蓼和木本猪毛菜影响较大。刺旋花叶片叶绿素含量高,渗透调节主要通过可溶性糖的积累来实现,干旱胁迫对其膜系统破坏较小。木本猪毛菜主要靠积累脯氨酸来完成渗透调节。脯氨酸和可溶性糖两种渗透调节物质对刺木蓼和长枝木蓼的渗透调节均起重要作用。隶属函数计算知,四种灌木的抗旱能力排序:刺旋花>刺木蓼>木本猪毛菜>长枝木蓼。
盐胁迫下,低浓度盐促进了两种木蓼的生长,对刺叶锦鸡儿和木本猪毛菜影响不明显。木本猪毛菜叶片脯氨酸含量较低,刺叶锦鸡儿最高。两种木蓼通过脯氨酸和可溶性糖的积累进行渗透调节,丙二醛含量低表明膜系统受破坏小,刺叶锦鸡儿和木本猪毛菜则冰儿去啊女含量较高。隶属函数计算知,四种灌木耐盐性排序为:长枝木蓼>刺木蓼>刺叶锦鸡儿>木本猪毛菜。
刺叶锦鸡儿和长枝木蓼在干旱和盐分交叉胁迫下,生长表现出交叉适应性。轻度交叉胁迫下,两种灌木的生物量均大于轻度干旱或盐分单因子胁迫处理。但是,中、重度交叉胁迫处理下,两种灌木生物量比单因子胁迫处理小,且长枝木蓼生物量生长的抑制程度高于刺叶锦鸡儿。从交叉胁迫的生理响应来看,两种灌木也表现出交叉适应性。交叉胁迫处理下,两种灌木的脯氨酸积累量大于相同程度的单因子胁迫处理。比较而言,相同处理下,刺叶锦鸡儿叶片脯氨酸含量的增幅大于长枝木蓼,而长枝木蓼可溶性糖含量的增幅更大。同等程度的交叉胁迫处理对长枝木蓼的膜系统破坏更严重。隶属函数运算知,刺叶锦鸡儿对干旱和盐分交叉迫胁的耐受能力比长枝木蓼强。作为乡土豆科固氮灌木,该物种在乌鲁木齐周边等干旱、半干旱区退化生态系统植被恢复重建中具有较高的潜在应用价值。
Salsola arbucula, Convolvulos tragacanthoides, A. traphaxis virgata, A. spinosa and Caragana acanthophylla are important component of vegetation around Urumqi. They play an important role in maintaining ecosystem stability in the area.
The response to drought stress of S. arbucula, C. tragacanthoides, A. spinosa and A. virgata were studied with controlling water by potted planting.The results showed that the hight, basal diameter and the biomass of the four shrub species were differently decreased at three levels of drought stress.The distribution of the biomass were also affected. C. tragacanthoides were least decreased, and A. virgata were the most decreased. At the three level of drought stress, the contents of malondialdehyde (MDA), proline and solube sugar were higher than that in the control at different level, and the content of chlorophyll were contrary. Analysis by fuzzy membership functions, it showed that their drought resistance descending order was as following: C. tragacanthoides > A. spinosa > S. arbucula > A. virgata
S. arbucula, A. virgata, A. spinosa and C. acanthophylla seedlings were studied with controlling salt by potted planting to research of their growth and physiological charcteristics. The results showed that compared with control, the growth and biomasse of A. virgata and A. spinosa were enhanced with mild salt treatment. At the same time, the growth and biomasse of S. arbucula and C. acanthophylla had no significant changes. The chlorophyll contents of A. virgata increased progressively with salt treatment, and had no significant effect on chlorophyll (a/b) ratio with moderate and severe salt stress. The proline contents of Salsola arbucula was the lowest of the four shrub species, and had not increased at the three salt stress levels. Proline and solube sugar play an important role in the osmotic adjustment of A. virgata and A. spinosa. And the osmotic adjustment of C. acanthophylla were mainly by solube sugar. Analysis by fuzzy membership functions, it showed that their salt resistance descending order was as following: A. virgata > A. spinosa > C. acanthophylla > S. arbucula
Seedlings of A. virgata and C. acanthophylla were grown in pots with varied soil drought and salt (NaCl) levels (alone and in combination) to determine their effects on the growth and biomass allocation of the seedlings. The results showed that there were significant effects of soil salt and water contents on symptoms and survival rate, the relative height growth, relative basal diameter growth, biomass and its allocation of the seedlings. According to the results we found that the two shrubs were acclimated moderate stress (drought, salt and their combination). The growth of seedlings displays intercrossing adaptability under mild intercrossing stress. C. acanthophylla were more tolerant to drought stress, but A. virgata were more tolerant to salt stress. C. acanthophylla grew better under intercrossing of drought and salt stress.
As for physiological charcteristics of the two shrub seedlings under drought and salt stress, the results showed that the contents of osmo-regulation substances increased significantly, which played an active role on resistance. Because of the cell membrane lipid peroxidation, the MDA content in leaves of C. acanthophylla rapidly increased with increased salt concentration, as well as A. virgata under drought stress. With increasing of the stress,the leaf chlorophyll contents of the two shrubs decreased gradually. In a word, C. acanthophylla grew better under intercrossing of drought and salt stress.
干旱胁迫对刺旋花的生物量影响最小,对长枝木蓼和木本猪毛菜影响较大。刺旋花叶片叶绿素含量高,渗透调节主要通过可溶性糖的积累来实现,干旱胁迫对其膜系统破坏较小。木本猪毛菜主要靠积累脯氨酸来完成渗透调节。脯氨酸和可溶性糖两种渗透调节物质对刺木蓼和长枝木蓼的渗透调节均起重要作用。隶属函数计算知,四种灌木的抗旱能力排序:刺旋花>刺木蓼>木本猪毛菜>长枝木蓼。
盐胁迫下,低浓度盐促进了两种木蓼的生长,对刺叶锦鸡儿和木本猪毛菜影响不明显。木本猪毛菜叶片脯氨酸含量较低,刺叶锦鸡儿最高。两种木蓼通过脯氨酸和可溶性糖的积累进行渗透调节,丙二醛含量低表明膜系统受破坏小,刺叶锦鸡儿和木本猪毛菜则冰儿去啊女含量较高。隶属函数计算知,四种灌木耐盐性排序为:长枝木蓼>刺木蓼>刺叶锦鸡儿>木本猪毛菜。
刺叶锦鸡儿和长枝木蓼在干旱和盐分交叉胁迫下,生长表现出交叉适应性。轻度交叉胁迫下,两种灌木的生物量均大于轻度干旱或盐分单因子胁迫处理。但是,中、重度交叉胁迫处理下,两种灌木生物量比单因子胁迫处理小,且长枝木蓼生物量生长的抑制程度高于刺叶锦鸡儿。从交叉胁迫的生理响应来看,两种灌木也表现出交叉适应性。交叉胁迫处理下,两种灌木的脯氨酸积累量大于相同程度的单因子胁迫处理。比较而言,相同处理下,刺叶锦鸡儿叶片脯氨酸含量的增幅大于长枝木蓼,而长枝木蓼可溶性糖含量的增幅更大。同等程度的交叉胁迫处理对长枝木蓼的膜系统破坏更严重。隶属函数运算知,刺叶锦鸡儿对干旱和盐分交叉迫胁的耐受能力比长枝木蓼强。作为乡土豆科固氮灌木,该物种在乌鲁木齐周边等干旱、半干旱区退化生态系统植被恢复重建中具有较高的潜在应用价值。
Salsola arbucula, Convolvulos tragacanthoides, A. traphaxis virgata, A. spinosa and Caragana acanthophylla are important component of vegetation around Urumqi. They play an important role in maintaining ecosystem stability in the area.
The response to drought stress of S. arbucula, C. tragacanthoides, A. spinosa and A. virgata were studied with controlling water by potted planting.The results showed that the hight, basal diameter and the biomass of the four shrub species were differently decreased at three levels of drought stress.The distribution of the biomass were also affected. C. tragacanthoides were least decreased, and A. virgata were the most decreased. At the three level of drought stress, the contents of malondialdehyde (MDA), proline and solube sugar were higher than that in the control at different level, and the content of chlorophyll were contrary. Analysis by fuzzy membership functions, it showed that their drought resistance descending order was as following: C. tragacanthoides > A. spinosa > S. arbucula > A. virgata
S. arbucula, A. virgata, A. spinosa and C. acanthophylla seedlings were studied with controlling salt by potted planting to research of their growth and physiological charcteristics. The results showed that compared with control, the growth and biomasse of A. virgata and A. spinosa were enhanced with mild salt treatment. At the same time, the growth and biomasse of S. arbucula and C. acanthophylla had no significant changes. The chlorophyll contents of A. virgata increased progressively with salt treatment, and had no significant effect on chlorophyll (a/b) ratio with moderate and severe salt stress. The proline contents of Salsola arbucula was the lowest of the four shrub species, and had not increased at the three salt stress levels. Proline and solube sugar play an important role in the osmotic adjustment of A. virgata and A. spinosa. And the osmotic adjustment of C. acanthophylla were mainly by solube sugar. Analysis by fuzzy membership functions, it showed that their salt resistance descending order was as following: A. virgata > A. spinosa > C. acanthophylla > S. arbucula
Seedlings of A. virgata and C. acanthophylla were grown in pots with varied soil drought and salt (NaCl) levels (alone and in combination) to determine their effects on the growth and biomass allocation of the seedlings. The results showed that there were significant effects of soil salt and water contents on symptoms and survival rate, the relative height growth, relative basal diameter growth, biomass and its allocation of the seedlings. According to the results we found that the two shrubs were acclimated moderate stress (drought, salt and their combination). The growth of seedlings displays intercrossing adaptability under mild intercrossing stress. C. acanthophylla were more tolerant to drought stress, but A. virgata were more tolerant to salt stress. C. acanthophylla grew better under intercrossing of drought and salt stress.
As for physiological charcteristics of the two shrub seedlings under drought and salt stress, the results showed that the contents of osmo-regulation substances increased significantly, which played an active role on resistance. Because of the cell membrane lipid peroxidation, the MDA content in leaves of C. acanthophylla rapidly increased with increased salt concentration, as well as A. virgata under drought stress. With increasing of the stress,the leaf chlorophyll contents of the two shrubs decreased gradually. In a word, C. acanthophylla grew better under intercrossing of drought and salt stress.
引文
[1]魏云杰,许模.新疆土壤盐渍化成因及其防治对策研究[J].地球与环境,2005,33:593-597.
[2]陶勇.乌鲁木齐城市绿化现状分析与发展建议国务院发展研究中心信息网.2010.1.19
[3] Edward P,Pamela L. Comparative ecophysiology of Tamarix ramosissima and native trees in western U.S. riparian zones[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2005,61:419-446.
[4]赵晓英,陈怀顺,孙成权.恢复生态学:生态恢复的原理与方法.北京:中国环境科学出版社,2001.
[5]中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会.中国植物志[M].北京:科学出版社,1998.
[6]刘媖心主编.中国沙漠植物志(第一卷)[M].北京:科学出版社,1987.
[7]李芳兰,包维楷,吴宁.白刺花幼苗对不同强度干旱胁迫的形态与生理响应[J].生态学报,2009,29(10):5406-5416.
[8]姚华.三种锦鸡儿属植物对干旱胁迫的响应[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆师范大学,2009.
[9]张新时.毛乌素沙地的生态背景及其草地建设的原则与优化模式[J].植物生态学报, 1994,18(1):1-16
[10]李林芝,邵麟惠,于应文,等.柴达木荒漠4种灌木叶片解剖结构与其抗旱性的研究[J].草原与草坪,2009,134(3):20-23.
[11]高松,苏培玺,严巧娣,等. C4荒漠植物猪毛菜与木本猪毛菜的叶片解剖结构及光合生理特征[J].植物学报,2009,33(2)347-354.
[12]邵麟惠,杨占武,于应文,等.柴达木荒漠6种灌木主要渗透调节物质分布特征和抗旱性研究[J].草原与草坪,2007,120 (1):19-23.
[13]严巧娣,苏培玺,陈宏彬,等.五种C4荒漠植物光合器官中含晶细胞的比较分析[J].植物生态学报,2008,32(4)873-882.
[14]董正武,赵晓英,徐郑伟.乌鲁木齐周边四种野生灌木的生境特性[J].新疆师范大学学报(自然科学版),2009,28(4):24-28.
[15]王晓炜,常水晶,迪利夏提,等.新疆猪毛菜属植物染色体数及核型分析[J].西北植物学报, 2008,28(1):0065-0071.
[16]常水晶.新疆猪毛菜属植物分类学研究[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2008.
[17]孙书存,刘照光.岷江上游刺旋花种群格局研究[J].应用与环境生物学报,1997,3(3): 193-198.
[18]黎燕琼,刘兴良,郑绍伟.岷江上游干旱河谷四种灌木的抗旱生理动态变化[J].生态学报, 2007,27(3):870-878.
[19] Yanqiong L, Xingliang L. Drought-resistant physiological characteristics of four shrub species in arid valley of Minjiang River, China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2007,27(3), 870-878.
[20]孙书存,钱能斌.刺旋花种群形态参数的通径分析与亚灌木个体生物量建模[J].应用生态学报,1999,2(2).
[21]李晓梅.乌鲁木齐周边三种野生灌木种子萌发研究[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆师范大学,2010.
[22]于斯琴高娃.东阿拉善荒漠特有、特征灌木种子萌发对水分的响应[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2006.
[23]叶卫英,尹林克,钱翌,等.乌鲁木齐市周边荒山植物群落类型及其物种多样性[J].新疆农业大学学报,2005,28(1):44-48.
[24]贾宝全,黄培祐.刺木蓼和大果白刺在准噶尔盆地南缘沙区侵移定居的初步研究[J].新疆大学学报(自然科学版),1992,9(4):89-94.
[25]李晓梅,赵晓英,于瑞德.成熟时间和干贮藏对两种木蓼种子萌发的影响[J].生态学报2010,30(14):3727-3732.
[26]李晓梅,赵晓英,王志勇,等.刺木蓼和长枝木蓼种子休眠的解除及萌发条件[J].植物研究2010,30(5):600-603.
[27]高志海,胡影,张吨明.木蓼属6种植物水分生理特征的主成分分析[J].甘肃林业科技, 1991,3:15-18.
[28] Moustafa A, Mohammed S. Environment and vegetation in the montane Saint Catherine area, south Sinai, Egypt[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,1996,34:331-349.
[29] Liu Z, Yan Q, Li X. Seed mass and shape, germination and plant abundance in a desertified grassland in northeastern Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,2007,(69): 198-221.
[30] Li X R, He M Z,Duan Z H. Recovery of topsoil physicochemical properties in revegetated sites in the sand-burial ecosystems of the Tengger Desert, northern China[J].Geomorphology, 2007,88:254-265.
[31]周其兴,杨永平,张明理.锦鸡儿属植物14个种类的核型[J].植物研究,2002,22(4): 492-498.
[32]李晓梅,赵晓英,赵法,等.新疆3种锦鸡儿属植物种子萌发对温度和土壤水分的响应[J].草业科学,2009,26(10):140-145.
[33]姚华,赵晓英,郭名军,等.三种锦鸡儿属植物幼苗出土对埋深的响应[J].新疆师范大学学报(自然科学版),2009,28(3):84-88.
[34]余叔文,汤章城.植物生理和子生物学[M].北京:科学出版,1998,739-751.
[35]邵麟惠,于应文,张德罡.灌木抗旱机理研究[J].草业科学,2007,24(3):22-27.
[36]俞海生,李宝军,张宝文,等.灌木林主要生态作用的探讨[J].内蒙古林业科技,2003,(4): 15-18.
[37]闫志坚,杨持,高天明.我国西部灌木植被的生态经济价值[J].生态环境,2007,3(30): 129-138.
[38]任庆成,杨铁钊,刘培玉,等.物植抗旱性研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2009,25(15):76-79.
[39]王淼,李秋荣,郝占庆,等.土壤水分变化对长白山主要树种蒙古栎幼树生长的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(10):1765-1700.
[40]贺少轩,梁宗锁,蔚丽珍,等.土壤干旱对两个种源野生酸枣幼苗生理和生长特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(7):1387-1393.
[41]姚华,赵晓英,?李晓梅,等.四种灌木幼苗对水分胁迫的生长响应[J].干旱区研究,2009, 26(5):720-726.
[42] Turnet N C. Concurrent comparisons of stomata behavior,water status,and evaporation of maize in soil at high or low water potential[J].Plant Physiology,1975,55:932-936.
[43]王霞,侯平,尹林克.植物对干旱胁迫的适应机理[J].干旱区研究,2001,18(2):42-46.
[44] Ain-Lhout F, Zunegui M, Barradas M C. Comparison of proline accumulation in two mediterranean shrubs subjected to natural and experimental water deficit[J]. Plant and Soil, 2001,230:175–183.
[45]于金慧,柏明娥,方伟,等.干旱胁迫对4种灌木生理生化特性的影响[J].浙江林学院学报2009,26(4):485-489.
[46] Villagra P E, Cavagnaro J B. Water stress effects on the seedling growth of Prosopis argentina and Prosopis alpataco[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2006,64:390–400.
[47]杨九艳,杨吉力,杨明博,等. 5种锦鸡儿属植物渗透调节物质的变化[J].内蒙古大学学报, 2005,36(6):677-682.
[48].Vilela A E,Rennella M J, Ravetta D A. Responses of tree-type and shrub-type Prosopis (Mimosaceae)taxa to water and nitrogen availabilities[J].Forest Ecology and Management, 2003,186:327-337.
[49]李磊,贾志清,朱雅娟,等.我国干旱区植物抗旱机理研究进展[J].中国沙漠,2010,30(5): 1053-1059.
[50]夏鹏云,吴军,乔俊鹏,等.干旱胁迫对大叶冬青叶片生理特性的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,2010,44(1):47-51.
[51]刘涛,李柱,安沙舟,等.干旱胁迫对木地肤幼苗生理生化特性的影响[J].干旱区研究, 2008,25(2):231-235.
[52]霍红,张勇,陈年来,等.干旱胁迫下五种荒漠灌木苗期的生理响应和抗旱评价[J].干旱区资源与环境,2011,25(1):185-189.
[53]王宇超,王得祥,彭少兵,等.干旱胁迫对木本滨藜生理特性的影响[J].林业科学,2010, 46(1):61-67.
[54]赵可夫.盐生植物及其对盐渍生境的适应生理[M].北京:中国科学技术出版社,2005.
[55]汤章城.植物对水分胁迫的适应性[J].植物生理学通讯,1983,98(4):1-7.
[56]郑青松,刘兆普,刘友良.等渗的盐分和水分胁迫对芦荟幼苗生长和离子分布的效应[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(6):823-827.
[57]郭洪海,董晓霞,孔令安,等.盐胁迫下饲料酸模植株生长及其与Na+、K+、Cl-的关系[J].山东农业科学,1998,6:26-29.
[58].Adam M. Effect of Soil Salinity on nutrient uptake, growth, and gecorative value of four ground cover shrubs[J].Journal of Plant Nutrition,2004,27(6):977-989.
[59]曾玲玲,季生栋,王俊强,等.植物耐盐机理的研究进展[J].黑龙江农业科学2009,5: 156-159.
[60]杨涓,许兴.盐胁迫下植物有机渗透调节物质积累的研究进展[J].宁夏农学院学报,2003, 24(4):87-91.
[61]刘昀,邓银霞,郑易.植物耐盐的分子机理研究进展[J].西北植物学报,2010,38(2): 6087-6115.
[62]吕芝香,王正刚.盐胁迫小麦苗吡咯-5-羧酸还原酶活性和游离脯氨酸积累[J].植物生理学报,1993,19(2):111-117.
[63] Petrusa L M, Winicol L. Proline status in salt tolerant and salt sensitive alfalfa cell lines and plants in response to NaCl[J].Plant Physiology Biochem,1997,35:303-310.
[64]李卫国,宋尚文,孙明高,等.盐分胁迫对桑树叶片中渗透调节物质含量的影响[J].蚕业科学,2010,36(2):0313-0318.
[65]夏方山,董秋丽,董宽虎.盐胁迫对碱地风毛菊苗期生理特性的影响[J].草原与草坪,2010, 30(3):21-28.
[66]李婧男,刘强,贾志宽.盐胁迫对沙冬青幼苗生长与生理特性的影响[J].植物研究,2009, 29(5):553-558.
[67] Maslenkoval T, Zanev L P. Adaptation to salinity as monitored by PSⅡoxygenevolving reactions in barley thylakoids [J].Plant Physiology,1993,142:629-634.
[68]郑文菊,张承烈.盐生和中生环境中宁枸杞叶显微和超微结构的研究[J].草业科学,1998, 7(3):72-76.
[69] Ludlow M M, Muchow C. A critical evaluation of traits for improving crop yields in water limited environments[J].Advances in Agronomy,1990,43:107-153.
[70]. Munns R. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress[J]. Plant, Cell and Environment, 2002,25:239–250.
[71]赵黎芳,张金政,张启翔,等.盐和水分预处理对扶芳藤幼苗抗寒性的影响[J].植物研究, 2004,24(3):313-316.
[72]李洪山,张晓岚,周培之.不同胁迫预处理对梭梭幼苗抗旱性和抗冷性的影响[J].干旱区研究.1994,11(2):23-26.
[73] Yu Q,Rengel Z. Drought and salinity differentially influence activities of superoxide dismutases in narrow-leafed lupins[J].Plant Science,1999,142:1-11.
[74]曹帮华,毛培利,牟洪香. PEG预处理对刺槐种子抗盐性的影响[J].种子,2004,23(3):19-21.
[75] Silva E.N, Ribeiro R.V, Ferreira-Silva S.L.. Comparative effects of salinity and water stress on photosynthesis, water relations and growth of Jatropha curcas plants[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,2010,74:1130-1137.
[76]汪贵斌,曹福亮.土壤盐分及水分含量对落羽杉幼苗生长的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2004,15(12):2396-2400.
[77] Volker Stiller, Soil salinity and drought alter wood density and vulnerability to xylem cavitation of baldcypress (Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich.) seedlings[J].Environmental and Experimental Botany,67(2009):164-171.
[78]孔艳菊,孙明高,魏海霞,等.土壤盐分及干旱胁迫对皂角幼苗生长和叶片保水力的影响[J].河北农业大学学报, 2007,30(1):39-44.
[79]孔红岭,孙明高,孔艳菊,等.盐分、干旱及其交叉胁迫对皂角幼苗生长性状的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报(自然科学版),2007,27(1):55-59.
[80]孔红岭,孙明高,孙方行,等.盐、旱及其交叉胁迫对紫荆光合性能的影响[J].西北林学院学报,2007,22(5):42-44.
[81]孔艳菊.皂角、君迁子和紫荆苗木对盐旱交叉胁迫反应的研究[D].济南:山东农业大学,2007.
[82]庄伟伟,李进,曹满航,等. NaCl与干旱胁迫对银沙槐幼苗渗透调节物质含量的影响[J].西北植物学报,2010,30(10):2010-2015.
[83] Juan-Pablo M, Stanley L. Is osmotic adjustment required for water stressresistance in the Mediterranean shrub Atriplex halimus L.[J]. Journal of Plant Physiology,2004,161: 1041-1051.
[84]王新育.荒山绿化是改善大环境的重要举措----乌鲁木齐荒山绿化中存在的问题与对策[J].中国林业,2009(11):38.
[85]于子江,李新琪,海热提·涂尔逊.乌鲁木齐城市环境可持续度研究[J].干旱区资源与环境, 2002,16(2):15-21.
[86]李妮,尹林克,王喜勇,等.乌鲁木齐主要植被类型及其分布[J].新疆农业科学,2009,46(4): 818-823.
[87]郭卫华,李波,黄永梅,等.不同程度的水分胁迫对中间锦鸡儿幼苗气体交换特征的影响[J].生态学报,2004,24(12):2716-2722.
[88] Zeng B. Functional equilibrium between photosynthetic and above ground nonphotosynthetic structures of plants: Evidence from a pruning experiment with three subtropical tree species[J]. Acta Botanica Sinica,2003,45(2):152-157.
[89]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2000.
[90]庄丽,陈亚宁,陈明,等.模糊录属法在塔里木河荒漠植物抗旱性评价中的应用[J].干旱区地理,2005,28(6):367-372.
[91]贺海波,李彦.干旱、盐胁迫条件下两种盐生植物生物量分配对策的研究[J].干旱区研究,2008,25(2):242-247.
[92]汤章城.植物干旱生理生态研究[J].生态学报,1983,3(3):196-209.
[93] Iannucci A. Water deficit effects on osmotic adjustment and solute accumulation in leaves of annual clovers[J]. European Journal of Agronomy,2002,16:111-122.
[94]李云荫.植物抗旱生理概述[J].生态农业研究,1996,4(1):37-41.
[95]陈健妙,郑青松,刘兆普,等.麻疯树(Jatropha curcas L.)幼苗生长和光合作用对盐胁迫的响应[J].生态学报,2009,29(3):1356-1365.
[96]杨淑萍,危常州,梁永超.盐胁迫对海岛棉不同基因型幼苗生长及生理生态特征的影响[J].生态学报,2010,30(9):2322-2331.
[97]裘丽珍,黄有军,黄坚钦,等.不同耐盐性植物在盐胁迫下的生长与生理特性比较研究[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2006,32(4):420-427.
[98]克热木,侯江涛,买合木提,等.盐胁迫对扁桃光合特性和叶绿体超微结构的影响[J].西北植物学报,2006,26(11):2220-2226.
[99]肖雯,贾恢先,蒲陆梅.几种盐生植物抗盐生理指标的研究[J].西北植物学报2000,20(5): 818-825.
[100]李宏,邓江宇,张红,等. NaCl胁迫对盐桦幼苗生理特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009, 29(11):2281-2287.
[101]杨颖丽,张超强,李科文,等. NaCl处理下两种补血草种子萌发和幼苗抗性的比较[J].植物研究,2008,28(1):73-78.
[102]窦全琴,焦秀洁,张敏,等.土壤NaCl含量对榉树幼苗生理特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(10):2063-2069.
[103]杨升,张华新,张丽.植物耐盐生理生化指标及耐盐植物筛选综述[J].西北林学院学报2010,25(3):59-65.
[104] Pe′rez J G,Robles J M. Response to drought and salt stress of lemon‘Fino 49’under field conditions: Water relations, osmotic adjustment and gas exchange[J].Scientia Horticulturae, 2009,122:83-90.
[105]宇万太,于永强.植物地下生物量研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2001,6:926-932.
[106] Elizamar R, Rejane A. Physiological responses to salt stress in young umbu plants[J]. Environmental and Experimental Botany,2007,63:147-157.
[107] Ghoulam C, Foursy A, Fares K. Effects of salt stress on growth, inorganic ions and praline accumulation in relation to osmotic adjustment in five sugar beet cultivars[J].Environmental and Experimental Botany,2002,47:39-50.
[108]孙存华,李扬,贺鸿雁,等.藜对干旱胁迫的生理生化反应[J].生态学报,2005,25(10): 2556-2561.
[109]张海燕,赵可夫.盐分和水分胁迫对盐地碱蓬幼苗渗透调节效应的研究[J].植物学报,1998,40(1):56-60.
[110]张建锋,邢尚军,郗金标,等.树木耐盐的生理指标测定[J].东北林业大学学报,2003,31(6): 90-93.
[111]王邦锡,黄久常.不同植物在水分胁迫条件下脯氨酸的积累与抗旱性的关系[J].植物生理学报,1989,15(1):46-51.
[112]汪月霞,孙国荣,王建波,等. NaCl胁迫下星星草幼苗MDA含量与膜透性及叶绿素荧光参数之间的关系[J].生态学报,2006,26(1):122-128.
[113]廖岩,陈桂珠.三种红树植物对盐胁迫的生理适应[J].生态学报,2007,27(6):2208-2214.
[2]陶勇.乌鲁木齐城市绿化现状分析与发展建议国务院发展研究中心信息网.2010.1.19
[3] Edward P,Pamela L. Comparative ecophysiology of Tamarix ramosissima and native trees in western U.S. riparian zones[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2005,61:419-446.
[4]赵晓英,陈怀顺,孙成权.恢复生态学:生态恢复的原理与方法.北京:中国环境科学出版社,2001.
[5]中国科学院中国植物志编辑委员会.中国植物志[M].北京:科学出版社,1998.
[6]刘媖心主编.中国沙漠植物志(第一卷)[M].北京:科学出版社,1987.
[7]李芳兰,包维楷,吴宁.白刺花幼苗对不同强度干旱胁迫的形态与生理响应[J].生态学报,2009,29(10):5406-5416.
[8]姚华.三种锦鸡儿属植物对干旱胁迫的响应[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆师范大学,2009.
[9]张新时.毛乌素沙地的生态背景及其草地建设的原则与优化模式[J].植物生态学报, 1994,18(1):1-16
[10]李林芝,邵麟惠,于应文,等.柴达木荒漠4种灌木叶片解剖结构与其抗旱性的研究[J].草原与草坪,2009,134(3):20-23.
[11]高松,苏培玺,严巧娣,等. C4荒漠植物猪毛菜与木本猪毛菜的叶片解剖结构及光合生理特征[J].植物学报,2009,33(2)347-354.
[12]邵麟惠,杨占武,于应文,等.柴达木荒漠6种灌木主要渗透调节物质分布特征和抗旱性研究[J].草原与草坪,2007,120 (1):19-23.
[13]严巧娣,苏培玺,陈宏彬,等.五种C4荒漠植物光合器官中含晶细胞的比较分析[J].植物生态学报,2008,32(4)873-882.
[14]董正武,赵晓英,徐郑伟.乌鲁木齐周边四种野生灌木的生境特性[J].新疆师范大学学报(自然科学版),2009,28(4):24-28.
[15]王晓炜,常水晶,迪利夏提,等.新疆猪毛菜属植物染色体数及核型分析[J].西北植物学报, 2008,28(1):0065-0071.
[16]常水晶.新疆猪毛菜属植物分类学研究[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆农业大学,2008.
[17]孙书存,刘照光.岷江上游刺旋花种群格局研究[J].应用与环境生物学报,1997,3(3): 193-198.
[18]黎燕琼,刘兴良,郑绍伟.岷江上游干旱河谷四种灌木的抗旱生理动态变化[J].生态学报, 2007,27(3):870-878.
[19] Yanqiong L, Xingliang L. Drought-resistant physiological characteristics of four shrub species in arid valley of Minjiang River, China[J].Acta Ecologica Sinica,2007,27(3), 870-878.
[20]孙书存,钱能斌.刺旋花种群形态参数的通径分析与亚灌木个体生物量建模[J].应用生态学报,1999,2(2).
[21]李晓梅.乌鲁木齐周边三种野生灌木种子萌发研究[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆师范大学,2010.
[22]于斯琴高娃.东阿拉善荒漠特有、特征灌木种子萌发对水分的响应[D].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2006.
[23]叶卫英,尹林克,钱翌,等.乌鲁木齐市周边荒山植物群落类型及其物种多样性[J].新疆农业大学学报,2005,28(1):44-48.
[24]贾宝全,黄培祐.刺木蓼和大果白刺在准噶尔盆地南缘沙区侵移定居的初步研究[J].新疆大学学报(自然科学版),1992,9(4):89-94.
[25]李晓梅,赵晓英,于瑞德.成熟时间和干贮藏对两种木蓼种子萌发的影响[J].生态学报2010,30(14):3727-3732.
[26]李晓梅,赵晓英,王志勇,等.刺木蓼和长枝木蓼种子休眠的解除及萌发条件[J].植物研究2010,30(5):600-603.
[27]高志海,胡影,张吨明.木蓼属6种植物水分生理特征的主成分分析[J].甘肃林业科技, 1991,3:15-18.
[28] Moustafa A, Mohammed S. Environment and vegetation in the montane Saint Catherine area, south Sinai, Egypt[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,1996,34:331-349.
[29] Liu Z, Yan Q, Li X. Seed mass and shape, germination and plant abundance in a desertified grassland in northeastern Inner Mongolia, China[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,2007,(69): 198-221.
[30] Li X R, He M Z,Duan Z H. Recovery of topsoil physicochemical properties in revegetated sites in the sand-burial ecosystems of the Tengger Desert, northern China[J].Geomorphology, 2007,88:254-265.
[31]周其兴,杨永平,张明理.锦鸡儿属植物14个种类的核型[J].植物研究,2002,22(4): 492-498.
[32]李晓梅,赵晓英,赵法,等.新疆3种锦鸡儿属植物种子萌发对温度和土壤水分的响应[J].草业科学,2009,26(10):140-145.
[33]姚华,赵晓英,郭名军,等.三种锦鸡儿属植物幼苗出土对埋深的响应[J].新疆师范大学学报(自然科学版),2009,28(3):84-88.
[34]余叔文,汤章城.植物生理和子生物学[M].北京:科学出版,1998,739-751.
[35]邵麟惠,于应文,张德罡.灌木抗旱机理研究[J].草业科学,2007,24(3):22-27.
[36]俞海生,李宝军,张宝文,等.灌木林主要生态作用的探讨[J].内蒙古林业科技,2003,(4): 15-18.
[37]闫志坚,杨持,高天明.我国西部灌木植被的生态经济价值[J].生态环境,2007,3(30): 129-138.
[38]任庆成,杨铁钊,刘培玉,等.物植抗旱性研究进展[J].中国农学通报,2009,25(15):76-79.
[39]王淼,李秋荣,郝占庆,等.土壤水分变化对长白山主要树种蒙古栎幼树生长的影响[J].应用生态学报,2004,15(10):1765-1700.
[40]贺少轩,梁宗锁,蔚丽珍,等.土壤干旱对两个种源野生酸枣幼苗生理和生长特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(7):1387-1393.
[41]姚华,赵晓英,?李晓梅,等.四种灌木幼苗对水分胁迫的生长响应[J].干旱区研究,2009, 26(5):720-726.
[42] Turnet N C. Concurrent comparisons of stomata behavior,water status,and evaporation of maize in soil at high or low water potential[J].Plant Physiology,1975,55:932-936.
[43]王霞,侯平,尹林克.植物对干旱胁迫的适应机理[J].干旱区研究,2001,18(2):42-46.
[44] Ain-Lhout F, Zunegui M, Barradas M C. Comparison of proline accumulation in two mediterranean shrubs subjected to natural and experimental water deficit[J]. Plant and Soil, 2001,230:175–183.
[45]于金慧,柏明娥,方伟,等.干旱胁迫对4种灌木生理生化特性的影响[J].浙江林学院学报2009,26(4):485-489.
[46] Villagra P E, Cavagnaro J B. Water stress effects on the seedling growth of Prosopis argentina and Prosopis alpataco[J].Journal of Arid Environments,2006,64:390–400.
[47]杨九艳,杨吉力,杨明博,等. 5种锦鸡儿属植物渗透调节物质的变化[J].内蒙古大学学报, 2005,36(6):677-682.
[48].Vilela A E,Rennella M J, Ravetta D A. Responses of tree-type and shrub-type Prosopis (Mimosaceae)taxa to water and nitrogen availabilities[J].Forest Ecology and Management, 2003,186:327-337.
[49]李磊,贾志清,朱雅娟,等.我国干旱区植物抗旱机理研究进展[J].中国沙漠,2010,30(5): 1053-1059.
[50]夏鹏云,吴军,乔俊鹏,等.干旱胁迫对大叶冬青叶片生理特性的影响[J].河南农业大学学报,2010,44(1):47-51.
[51]刘涛,李柱,安沙舟,等.干旱胁迫对木地肤幼苗生理生化特性的影响[J].干旱区研究, 2008,25(2):231-235.
[52]霍红,张勇,陈年来,等.干旱胁迫下五种荒漠灌木苗期的生理响应和抗旱评价[J].干旱区资源与环境,2011,25(1):185-189.
[53]王宇超,王得祥,彭少兵,等.干旱胁迫对木本滨藜生理特性的影响[J].林业科学,2010, 46(1):61-67.
[54]赵可夫.盐生植物及其对盐渍生境的适应生理[M].北京:中国科学技术出版社,2005.
[55]汤章城.植物对水分胁迫的适应性[J].植物生理学通讯,1983,98(4):1-7.
[56]郑青松,刘兆普,刘友良.等渗的盐分和水分胁迫对芦荟幼苗生长和离子分布的效应[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(6):823-827.
[57]郭洪海,董晓霞,孔令安,等.盐胁迫下饲料酸模植株生长及其与Na+、K+、Cl-的关系[J].山东农业科学,1998,6:26-29.
[58].Adam M. Effect of Soil Salinity on nutrient uptake, growth, and gecorative value of four ground cover shrubs[J].Journal of Plant Nutrition,2004,27(6):977-989.
[59]曾玲玲,季生栋,王俊强,等.植物耐盐机理的研究进展[J].黑龙江农业科学2009,5: 156-159.
[60]杨涓,许兴.盐胁迫下植物有机渗透调节物质积累的研究进展[J].宁夏农学院学报,2003, 24(4):87-91.
[61]刘昀,邓银霞,郑易.植物耐盐的分子机理研究进展[J].西北植物学报,2010,38(2): 6087-6115.
[62]吕芝香,王正刚.盐胁迫小麦苗吡咯-5-羧酸还原酶活性和游离脯氨酸积累[J].植物生理学报,1993,19(2):111-117.
[63] Petrusa L M, Winicol L. Proline status in salt tolerant and salt sensitive alfalfa cell lines and plants in response to NaCl[J].Plant Physiology Biochem,1997,35:303-310.
[64]李卫国,宋尚文,孙明高,等.盐分胁迫对桑树叶片中渗透调节物质含量的影响[J].蚕业科学,2010,36(2):0313-0318.
[65]夏方山,董秋丽,董宽虎.盐胁迫对碱地风毛菊苗期生理特性的影响[J].草原与草坪,2010, 30(3):21-28.
[66]李婧男,刘强,贾志宽.盐胁迫对沙冬青幼苗生长与生理特性的影响[J].植物研究,2009, 29(5):553-558.
[67] Maslenkoval T, Zanev L P. Adaptation to salinity as monitored by PSⅡoxygenevolving reactions in barley thylakoids [J].Plant Physiology,1993,142:629-634.
[68]郑文菊,张承烈.盐生和中生环境中宁枸杞叶显微和超微结构的研究[J].草业科学,1998, 7(3):72-76.
[69] Ludlow M M, Muchow C. A critical evaluation of traits for improving crop yields in water limited environments[J].Advances in Agronomy,1990,43:107-153.
[70]. Munns R. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress[J]. Plant, Cell and Environment, 2002,25:239–250.
[71]赵黎芳,张金政,张启翔,等.盐和水分预处理对扶芳藤幼苗抗寒性的影响[J].植物研究, 2004,24(3):313-316.
[72]李洪山,张晓岚,周培之.不同胁迫预处理对梭梭幼苗抗旱性和抗冷性的影响[J].干旱区研究.1994,11(2):23-26.
[73] Yu Q,Rengel Z. Drought and salinity differentially influence activities of superoxide dismutases in narrow-leafed lupins[J].Plant Science,1999,142:1-11.
[74]曹帮华,毛培利,牟洪香. PEG预处理对刺槐种子抗盐性的影响[J].种子,2004,23(3):19-21.
[75] Silva E.N, Ribeiro R.V, Ferreira-Silva S.L.. Comparative effects of salinity and water stress on photosynthesis, water relations and growth of Jatropha curcas plants[J]. Journal of Arid Environments,2010,74:1130-1137.
[76]汪贵斌,曹福亮.土壤盐分及水分含量对落羽杉幼苗生长的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2004,15(12):2396-2400.
[77] Volker Stiller, Soil salinity and drought alter wood density and vulnerability to xylem cavitation of baldcypress (Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich.) seedlings[J].Environmental and Experimental Botany,67(2009):164-171.
[78]孔艳菊,孙明高,魏海霞,等.土壤盐分及干旱胁迫对皂角幼苗生长和叶片保水力的影响[J].河北农业大学学报, 2007,30(1):39-44.
[79]孔红岭,孙明高,孔艳菊,等.盐分、干旱及其交叉胁迫对皂角幼苗生长性状的影响[J].中南林业科技大学学报(自然科学版),2007,27(1):55-59.
[80]孔红岭,孙明高,孙方行,等.盐、旱及其交叉胁迫对紫荆光合性能的影响[J].西北林学院学报,2007,22(5):42-44.
[81]孔艳菊.皂角、君迁子和紫荆苗木对盐旱交叉胁迫反应的研究[D].济南:山东农业大学,2007.
[82]庄伟伟,李进,曹满航,等. NaCl与干旱胁迫对银沙槐幼苗渗透调节物质含量的影响[J].西北植物学报,2010,30(10):2010-2015.
[83] Juan-Pablo M, Stanley L. Is osmotic adjustment required for water stressresistance in the Mediterranean shrub Atriplex halimus L.[J]. Journal of Plant Physiology,2004,161: 1041-1051.
[84]王新育.荒山绿化是改善大环境的重要举措----乌鲁木齐荒山绿化中存在的问题与对策[J].中国林业,2009(11):38.
[85]于子江,李新琪,海热提·涂尔逊.乌鲁木齐城市环境可持续度研究[J].干旱区资源与环境, 2002,16(2):15-21.
[86]李妮,尹林克,王喜勇,等.乌鲁木齐主要植被类型及其分布[J].新疆农业科学,2009,46(4): 818-823.
[87]郭卫华,李波,黄永梅,等.不同程度的水分胁迫对中间锦鸡儿幼苗气体交换特征的影响[J].生态学报,2004,24(12):2716-2722.
[88] Zeng B. Functional equilibrium between photosynthetic and above ground nonphotosynthetic structures of plants: Evidence from a pruning experiment with three subtropical tree species[J]. Acta Botanica Sinica,2003,45(2):152-157.
[89]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:高等教育出版社,2000.
[90]庄丽,陈亚宁,陈明,等.模糊录属法在塔里木河荒漠植物抗旱性评价中的应用[J].干旱区地理,2005,28(6):367-372.
[91]贺海波,李彦.干旱、盐胁迫条件下两种盐生植物生物量分配对策的研究[J].干旱区研究,2008,25(2):242-247.
[92]汤章城.植物干旱生理生态研究[J].生态学报,1983,3(3):196-209.
[93] Iannucci A. Water deficit effects on osmotic adjustment and solute accumulation in leaves of annual clovers[J]. European Journal of Agronomy,2002,16:111-122.
[94]李云荫.植物抗旱生理概述[J].生态农业研究,1996,4(1):37-41.
[95]陈健妙,郑青松,刘兆普,等.麻疯树(Jatropha curcas L.)幼苗生长和光合作用对盐胁迫的响应[J].生态学报,2009,29(3):1356-1365.
[96]杨淑萍,危常州,梁永超.盐胁迫对海岛棉不同基因型幼苗生长及生理生态特征的影响[J].生态学报,2010,30(9):2322-2331.
[97]裘丽珍,黄有军,黄坚钦,等.不同耐盐性植物在盐胁迫下的生长与生理特性比较研究[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2006,32(4):420-427.
[98]克热木,侯江涛,买合木提,等.盐胁迫对扁桃光合特性和叶绿体超微结构的影响[J].西北植物学报,2006,26(11):2220-2226.
[99]肖雯,贾恢先,蒲陆梅.几种盐生植物抗盐生理指标的研究[J].西北植物学报2000,20(5): 818-825.
[100]李宏,邓江宇,张红,等. NaCl胁迫对盐桦幼苗生理特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009, 29(11):2281-2287.
[101]杨颖丽,张超强,李科文,等. NaCl处理下两种补血草种子萌发和幼苗抗性的比较[J].植物研究,2008,28(1):73-78.
[102]窦全琴,焦秀洁,张敏,等.土壤NaCl含量对榉树幼苗生理特性的影响[J].西北植物学报,2009,29(10):2063-2069.
[103]杨升,张华新,张丽.植物耐盐生理生化指标及耐盐植物筛选综述[J].西北林学院学报2010,25(3):59-65.
[104] Pe′rez J G,Robles J M. Response to drought and salt stress of lemon‘Fino 49’under field conditions: Water relations, osmotic adjustment and gas exchange[J].Scientia Horticulturae, 2009,122:83-90.
[105]宇万太,于永强.植物地下生物量研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2001,6:926-932.
[106] Elizamar R, Rejane A. Physiological responses to salt stress in young umbu plants[J]. Environmental and Experimental Botany,2007,63:147-157.
[107] Ghoulam C, Foursy A, Fares K. Effects of salt stress on growth, inorganic ions and praline accumulation in relation to osmotic adjustment in five sugar beet cultivars[J].Environmental and Experimental Botany,2002,47:39-50.
[108]孙存华,李扬,贺鸿雁,等.藜对干旱胁迫的生理生化反应[J].生态学报,2005,25(10): 2556-2561.
[109]张海燕,赵可夫.盐分和水分胁迫对盐地碱蓬幼苗渗透调节效应的研究[J].植物学报,1998,40(1):56-60.
[110]张建锋,邢尚军,郗金标,等.树木耐盐的生理指标测定[J].东北林业大学学报,2003,31(6): 90-93.
[111]王邦锡,黄久常.不同植物在水分胁迫条件下脯氨酸的积累与抗旱性的关系[J].植物生理学报,1989,15(1):46-51.
[112]汪月霞,孙国荣,王建波,等. NaCl胁迫下星星草幼苗MDA含量与膜透性及叶绿素荧光参数之间的关系[J].生态学报,2006,26(1):122-128.
[113]廖岩,陈桂珠.三种红树植物对盐胁迫的生理适应[J].生态学报,2007,27(6):2208-2214.