干旱胁迫对六种旱生灌木生长及水分生理特征的影响
|
摘要
通过盆栽控水的方法,对6种旱生灌木:柠条锦鸡儿(毛条Caragana korshinskii )、沙木蓼(Atraphaxis bracteata)、蒙古岩黄芪(杨柴Hedysarum mongolicum.)、细枝岩黄芪(花棒Hedysarum scoparium)、互叶醉鱼草(Buddleja alternifolia)、四翅滨藜(Atriplex canescens)进行生物量、水分利用效率、水分生理特征和PV参数进行研究,以期为毛乌素沙区植被恢复以及造林树种的选择提供一定的理论依据,试验结果表明:
(1)在中度的干旱胁迫下,六种灌木的生长良好,生物量鲜重差异不显著。所以它们都能很好的适应中度干旱胁迫。重度干旱胁迫时,四翅滨藜合成的干物质的量都是最大,同时也有一个较大的水分蒸腾量,说明虽然重度干旱胁迫对它的生理活动造成了影响,但是其仍然能够顺利的完成同化物的合成,表现出对重度干旱胁迫的适应;醉鱼草,水分利用效率很低的;在重度干旱胁迫时,生物量大幅的下降,蒸腾耗水量也急剧减少,说明其不能适应重度的干旱胁迫;沙木蓼与毛条,各指标较为接近,但毛条的水分利用效率要稍高于沙木蓼;杨柴和花棒,能对水分胁迫迅速做出反应,提高水分利用效率,来相对增加干物质的积累,是对干旱胁迫适应的表现。
(2)运用隶属函数值法综合分析PV参数和水分参数得出,中度干旱胁迫下,它们的抗旱性的由强到弱是:毛条>沙木蓼>四翅滨藜>杨柴>花棒>醉鱼草;而在重度干旱胁迫下,该顺序变为:沙木蓼>毛条>四翅滨藜>杨柴>花棒>醉鱼草。
(3)植物的抗旱性是由多种抗旱途径或方式共同作用,在不同的生命时期采用不同的适应方式,四翅滨藜的适应方式既有高水势下延迟脱水,也有低水势忍耐脱水的能力;杨柴、花棒、毛条具有较低的蒸腾、较高的水分利用效率和低的清晨叶水势,是高水势下延迟脱水型植物及耐旱型植物;醉鱼草在中度胁迫时生长良好,但重度的干旱胁迫严重抑制生长,电导率增大,同化物合成急剧减少,明显不适应重度的干旱胁迫。
Through potted cultivate we studied six shrubs’biomass, water use efficiency,water physical characters and PV parameters. And we hoped to provide a theoretical basis for Mu Us Sandland of vegetation restoration and the selection of species. The six shrubs are: Caragana korshinskii, Atraphaxis bracteata,Hedysarum mongolicum,Hedysaru-m scoparium, Buddleja alternifolia, and Atriplex canescens. And the results were as follows:
1)Under moderate drought stress,six shrubs grow well, biomass fresh weight difference was not significant. So they can be well adapting to moderate drought stress. Under severe drought stress,Atyiplex canescens had the largest biomass and also had the largest water transpiration. It meant that although severe drought stress had an impact on physical activity, it is still able to successfully complete the synthesis of assimilation and had adaptation to the severe drought stress. Buddleja alternifolia, under severe drought stress had low water use efficiency, the biomass sharp declined and transpiration also reduced dramatically. The results showed that the Buddleja alternifolia can not adapt to severe drought stress. Atraphaxis bracteata and Caragana korshinskii had similar performance, while Caragana korshinskii had a higher water use efficiency than Atraphaxis bracteata, Hedysarum mongolicum and Hedysarum scoparium can adapt to drought stess. They can respond to water stress quickly, increase water use efficiency to improve the biomass.
2)We can conclude from the analysis of the PV parameters and water parameters by subordinate function, In moderate drought stress, The order of drought-resistant ability is Caragana korshinskii > Atraphaxis bracteata>Atyiplex canescen>,Hedysarum mongolicum > Hedysarum scoparium.> Buddleja alternifolia. But in severe drought stress, The order is Atraphaxis bracteata>Caragana korshinskii >Atyiplex canescen>Hedysarum mongolicum > Hedysarum scoparium.> Buddleja alternifolia.
3)Plants can against drought through a variety of ways working together, in different life periods use different ways, Atriplexcanescens adapt to the drought stress by high-water potential of delayed dehydration, while low water potential dehydration; Hedysarum mongolicum, Hedysarum scoparium, Caragana korshinskii had a low transpiration, high water use efficiency and low water potential of the early morning, belong to a high-water potential delay of dehydration and drought-resistant plants; Buddleja alternifolia in moderate stress grass grow well, however, the severe drought stress seriously inhibit growth, electrical conductivity increased dramatically, synthesis of assimilation reduced sharply, obviously not adapt to the severe drought stress.
(1)在中度的干旱胁迫下,六种灌木的生长良好,生物量鲜重差异不显著。所以它们都能很好的适应中度干旱胁迫。重度干旱胁迫时,四翅滨藜合成的干物质的量都是最大,同时也有一个较大的水分蒸腾量,说明虽然重度干旱胁迫对它的生理活动造成了影响,但是其仍然能够顺利的完成同化物的合成,表现出对重度干旱胁迫的适应;醉鱼草,水分利用效率很低的;在重度干旱胁迫时,生物量大幅的下降,蒸腾耗水量也急剧减少,说明其不能适应重度的干旱胁迫;沙木蓼与毛条,各指标较为接近,但毛条的水分利用效率要稍高于沙木蓼;杨柴和花棒,能对水分胁迫迅速做出反应,提高水分利用效率,来相对增加干物质的积累,是对干旱胁迫适应的表现。
(2)运用隶属函数值法综合分析PV参数和水分参数得出,中度干旱胁迫下,它们的抗旱性的由强到弱是:毛条>沙木蓼>四翅滨藜>杨柴>花棒>醉鱼草;而在重度干旱胁迫下,该顺序变为:沙木蓼>毛条>四翅滨藜>杨柴>花棒>醉鱼草。
(3)植物的抗旱性是由多种抗旱途径或方式共同作用,在不同的生命时期采用不同的适应方式,四翅滨藜的适应方式既有高水势下延迟脱水,也有低水势忍耐脱水的能力;杨柴、花棒、毛条具有较低的蒸腾、较高的水分利用效率和低的清晨叶水势,是高水势下延迟脱水型植物及耐旱型植物;醉鱼草在中度胁迫时生长良好,但重度的干旱胁迫严重抑制生长,电导率增大,同化物合成急剧减少,明显不适应重度的干旱胁迫。
Through potted cultivate we studied six shrubs’biomass, water use efficiency,water physical characters and PV parameters. And we hoped to provide a theoretical basis for Mu Us Sandland of vegetation restoration and the selection of species. The six shrubs are: Caragana korshinskii, Atraphaxis bracteata,Hedysarum mongolicum,Hedysaru-m scoparium, Buddleja alternifolia, and Atriplex canescens. And the results were as follows:
1)Under moderate drought stress,six shrubs grow well, biomass fresh weight difference was not significant. So they can be well adapting to moderate drought stress. Under severe drought stress,Atyiplex canescens had the largest biomass and also had the largest water transpiration. It meant that although severe drought stress had an impact on physical activity, it is still able to successfully complete the synthesis of assimilation and had adaptation to the severe drought stress. Buddleja alternifolia, under severe drought stress had low water use efficiency, the biomass sharp declined and transpiration also reduced dramatically. The results showed that the Buddleja alternifolia can not adapt to severe drought stress. Atraphaxis bracteata and Caragana korshinskii had similar performance, while Caragana korshinskii had a higher water use efficiency than Atraphaxis bracteata, Hedysarum mongolicum and Hedysarum scoparium can adapt to drought stess. They can respond to water stress quickly, increase water use efficiency to improve the biomass.
2)We can conclude from the analysis of the PV parameters and water parameters by subordinate function, In moderate drought stress, The order of drought-resistant ability is Caragana korshinskii > Atraphaxis bracteata>Atyiplex canescen>,Hedysarum mongolicum > Hedysarum scoparium.> Buddleja alternifolia. But in severe drought stress, The order is Atraphaxis bracteata>Caragana korshinskii >Atyiplex canescen>Hedysarum mongolicum > Hedysarum scoparium.> Buddleja alternifolia.
3)Plants can against drought through a variety of ways working together, in different life periods use different ways, Atriplexcanescens adapt to the drought stress by high-water potential of delayed dehydration, while low water potential dehydration; Hedysarum mongolicum, Hedysarum scoparium, Caragana korshinskii had a low transpiration, high water use efficiency and low water potential of the early morning, belong to a high-water potential delay of dehydration and drought-resistant plants; Buddleja alternifolia in moderate stress grass grow well, however, the severe drought stress seriously inhibit growth, electrical conductivity increased dramatically, synthesis of assimilation reduced sharply, obviously not adapt to the severe drought stress.
引文
[1] 卢欣石.中国苜蓿审定品种秋眠性研究[J].中国草地,1998,12 (3):1~5.
[2] 慈龙骏.我国荒漠化发生机理与防治对策[J].第四纪研究,1998, (2) :95~110.
[3] 王林和,姚洪林.沙地治理与利用的现实途径——毛乌素沙地中日合作研究综述[J].内蒙古林学院学报(自然科学版),1995,17(4):1~8.
[4] 张国盛,王林和,董智,等.毛乌素沙地主要固沙灌(乔)木林地水分平衡研究[J].内蒙古农业大学学报,2002,23(3):1~9.
[5] 张国盛,王林和,董智,等.毛乌素沙区风沙土机械组成及含水率的季节变化[J].中国沙漠,1999,19(2):145~150.
[6] 张晓然,吴鸿,胡正海.毛乌素沙地 10 种重要沙生植物叶的形态结构与环境的关系[J].西北植物学报,1997,17(5):54~60.
[7] 郑元润.毛乌素沙地中几种植物水分特性的研究[J].干旱区研究,1985,15(2):17~21.
[8] 温国胜,张国盛,张明如,等.干旱胁迫条件下臭柏的气孔蒸腾与角质层蒸腾[J].浙江林学院学报,2003,20(3):268~272.
[9] 温国胜,张国盛,吉川贤.干旱胁迫对臭柏水分特性的影响[J].林业科学,2004,40(5):84~87.
[10] 黎祜琛,邱治军.树木抗旱性及抗旱造林技术研究综述[].世界林业研究,2003,16(4):17~22.
[11] 顾振瑜,胡景江,文建雷,等.元宝枫对干旱适应性的研究[J].西北林学院学报,1999,14(2):1~6.
[12] 邹春静,韩士杰,徐文铎,等.沙地云杉生态型对干旱胁迫的生理生态相应[J].应用生态学报.2003,14(9):1446~1450.
[13] 张莉,续九如.水分胁迫下刺槐不同无性系生理生化反应的研究[J].林业科学,2003,39(4):162~167.
[14] 陈少瑜,郎南军,李吉跃,等.干旱胁迫下 3 树种苗木叶片相对含水量、质膜相对透性和脯氨酸含量的变化[J].西部林业科学,2004,33(3):30~34.
[15] 李彦慧,周怀军,杨敏生,等.廊坊杨苗期的抗旱性研究[J].西北林学院学报,2004,19(1):27~31.
[16] 陈颖,谢寅峰,沈惠娟.银杏幼苗对水分胁迫的生理响应[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2002,26(2):55~58.
[17] Levit, J.Response of Plant to Environmental Stresses.Academic Press, NewYork,1972.
[18] Levit, J. Response of Plant to Environmental Stresses.Academic Press, NewYork and London, 1980,Vol.2.
[19] Turner N .C .Adaptation to water deficits:A changing perspective.Aust.J .Plant P hysiol.,1983 .13: 175~190.
[20] KnappA K .Variation among biomesin temporal dynamics of above groundp rimaryp roduction[J]. Nature .2001,29(1):481~484.
[21] Cline R.G,Campell. G S, Seasonal and diuma water rela tions of selected forest species, Ecology, 1976,57(2):367~373.
[22] Schlet P.J, Morshall PE ,1982. Growth and water ralation of balek locust and pin seeding exposed to control water stress. Can J. For, Res, 13:334~335.
[23] 肖冬梅,王森,姬兰柱.水分胁迫对长白山阔叶红松林主要树种生长及生物量分配的影响. 生态学杂志,2004,23(5):93~97.
[24] 戴建良.侧柏种源抗旱性测定和选择[D].北京林业大学硕士论文,1996.
[25] 杨敏生,裴保华,张树常.树木抗旱性研究进展[J].河北林果研究,1997,12(1):87~89.
[26] 李吉跃.植物耐早性及其机理[J].北京林业大学学报,1991,13(3):92~100.
[27] 彭柞登,李吉跃,沈熙环.林木抗早性育种的现状与思考[J]北京林业大学学报,1998: 20 (4):98~103.
[28] Slavik B 著,张崇浩等译.植物与水分关系研究法[M].北京:科学出版社,1986.
[29] 汤章城.植物对水分胁迫的反应和适应:植物对干旱的反应和适应[J].植物生理学通讯,1983,7(4):1~7.
[30] 吴明国,林建荣,张光恒.水陆稻杂交组合叶片相对含水量的遗传研究[J].中国水稻科学,2004,18(6):570~571.
[31] 尹春英,李春阳.杨树抗旱性研究进展[J].应用与环境生物学报,2003,9(6):662~668.
[32] 章应峰,费世民,王鹏等.干旱地区树木耐旱性研究现状评述[J].四川林业科技,2001,22(4):24~30.
[33] 蒋德明.科尔沁沙地荒漠化过程与生态恢复.中国环境出版社(M),003.143~144.
[34] 宇万太,于永强.植物地下生物量研究进展[J].应用生态学报,12(6):927~932.
[35] ZhaoY.,FernandezG.C.J.,BowmanD.C.,NowakR.S.Selection criteria for drought resistance breeding in turfgrass.J. of the American Society for Horticultural Science,1994,119(6):1317~1324.
[36] 王云龙,许振株,周广胜.水分胁迫对羊草光合产物分配及其气体交换特征的影响[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(2):803~809.
[37] 刘中民,几种主要沙生植物的特性及其栽培的研究四.治沙研究.北京:科学出版社,1965,(5): 109~111.
[38] 蒋瑾.沙坡头地区主要固沙植物生理学特性的研究[J].林业科学,1983, (2): 113~120.
[39] 刘英心.沙生植物的根系[M].流沙治理研究(二).银川:宁夏人民出版社,1991,185~209.
[40] 刘新民,赵哈林,赵爱芬.科尔沁沙地风沙环境与植被[M].北京:科学出版社,1996.64~68.
[41] 李胜功.樟子松沙地适应性的初步研究[J].中国沙漠,1994, 14(1): 60~67.
[42] 王康富.辽宁省章古台主妥固沙植物的习性[M].林业集刊,科学出版社,1959, (3): 182~197.
[43] 肖冬梅,王 淼,姬兰柱.水分胁迫对长白山阔叶红松林主要树种生长及生物量分配的影响[J].生态学杂志,2004,23(5):93~97).
[44] 张岁歧,山仑.植物水分利用效率及其研究进展[J].干旱地区农业研究,2002,12(4):2~5.
[45] 李吉跃,TEREBCEJB.多重复干旱循环对苗木气体交换和水分利用效率的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,1992,21(3):1~8.
[46] 梁宗锁,李有新,康绍忠.影响夏玉米单叶WUE的冠层因子分析[J],西北农业学报,1996,5(1): 13~16.
[47] 山仑,植物水分利用效率和半干旱地区农业用水.植物生理学通讯,1994,30(1):61~66.
[48] 罗青红,李志军.树木水分生理生态特性及抗旱性研究进展[J].塔里木大学学报 2005,17,(2):29~ 33.
[49] 张卫强,贺康宁,王正宁,等.光辐射强度对侧柏油松幼苗光合特性和水分利用效率的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2006,4(2):108~113.
[50] 刘奉觉,郑世楷,巨关升,等.树木蒸腾耗水测算技术的比较研究[J].林业科学,1997,33(2):117-126.
[51] 文建雷,刘志龙,王姝清.水分胁迫条件下元宝枫的光合特征及水分利用效率[J].西北林学院学报 2003,18(2):1~3.
[52] 曹福亮,张德徉,方升左.盐胁迫对南方 7 个造林树种生理特性的影响[J].山东林业科技,1997,(6): 7~17.
[53] 吴明国,林建荣,张光恒.水陆稻杂交组合叶片相对含水量的遗传研究[J].中国水稻科学,2004 ,18(6):570~571.
[54] Marshall,J.Rutledge,R.Blumwald,E, Dumboroff, E.: Reduction in turgid water volume in jack pine,whites pruce and blacks pruce in response to d rought and paclobutrazol[J].TreePhysiol. 2000 ,(20):701~707.
[55] 蒲锦春.我国沙漠植物的水分饱和亏[J].中国沙漠,1989,9(3):44~53.
[56] 王涛,吕薇,薛娴,等.中国北方沙漠化土地时空演变分析[J].中国沙漠,2003,23(3):230~235.
[57] 王涛.我国沙漠化研究的若干问题——2.沙漠化的研究内容[J].中国沙漠,2003,23(5):477~482.
[58] 周欢水,申建军.中国西部沙漠化的分布、动态及其对生态环境建设的影响[J].中国沙漠,2002,22(2):112~117.
[59] 付爱红,陈亚宁,李卫红,等.干旱、盐胁迫下的植物水势研究与进展[J].中国沙漠.2005,25(5):744~ 749.
[60] 赵萍,孙向阳,黄丽江.毛乌素沙地沙生植物蒸腾规律及其与环境因子间关系,林业科学研究 2004,17(增刊):67~71.
[61] 张建国,李吉跃.北方主要造林树种耐早机理及其分类模型的研究[J].北京林业大学学报,1993,15.1~3。
[62] 时连辉,牟志美,姚 健.不同桑树品种在土壤水分胁迫下膜伤害和保护酶活性变化[J].蚕业科学 2005,31,(1):13~17.
[63] Kramer. P.T , Kozlowski J.T 著,汪振儒等译.木本植物生理学[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1985.
[64] 刘彦琴,张丰雪,杨敏生.电导率在白杨杂种无性系耐旱鉴定中的应用[J].河北林果研究,1997 (4):301~305.
[65] Scholander P F,,Hemmel H T,Hemmingsen E A,et a1.Hydrostatic pressure and osmotic potential of leaves of mangrove and some other plants[J].Proc Natl Acad Sci USA,1964,52:l19~125.
[66] Scholander P F,Hammel H T,Bradstreet E D,et a1.Sap pressure in vascular plants[J].Science, 1965,148:339~346.
[67] Tyree M T,Hammel H T.The measurement of the turgor pressure and the water relations of plants by the pressure—bomb technique[J].J Exp Bot,1972,23:267~282.
[68] Tyree M T,Dainty J,Benis M.The water relations of hemlock(Tsuga Canadensis).Some equilibrium water relations as measured by the pressure-bomb technique [J].Can J Bot,1973,51(1): 471~1 480.
[69] Tyree M T.Negative turgor pressure in plant cells,fact or fallacy [J].Can J Bot,1976,54:2738~2746.
[70] Tyree M T,Jarvis P G.Water in tissue and cells[C].Berlin:Springer—Verlag,1981.
[71] Cheung Y N S,Tyree M T,Dainty J.Water relations parameters on single leaves obtained in a pressure bomb and some ecological interpretations[J].Can J Bot,1975,42:1342~1346.
[72] Cheung Y N S,Tyree M T,Dainty J.Some possible sources of error in determining bulk elastic moduli and other parameters from pressure—volume curves of shoots and leaves[J].Can J Bot,1976,43:758~765.
[73] Richter H.A diagram for the description of water relations in plant cells and organs[J].J Exp Bot,1978,29:1197~1203.
[74] Schulte P,Hinckley T.A comparison of pressure volume curve data analysis technique[J].J Exp Bot,1985,36:l 590~ l 602.
[75] 李吉跃.PV 技术在油松侧柏苗木抗旱特性研究中的应用[J].北京林业大学学报,1989,1(11):3~11.
[76] Levitt,J. Response of Plants to Environmental Stress.Vo1.1 Water Radition Salt and other Stress.Academic Press New York.1976.
[77] 王孟本,李洪建,柴宝峰,等.黄土区树种抗旱性指数的研究[J].植物研究,1999,3(19):341~346.
[78] 王万里.压力室(Pressure chamber)在植物水分状况研究中的应用[J].植物生理学通讯,1984,(3): 52~57.
[79] Wiilson JR etal.Adaption to water stress of the leaf water realtion of four tropical species Aust I .Plant physiol,1980(7):208-220.
[80] 李庆梅,徐化成.油松 P-V 曲线主要水分参数随季节和种源的变化[J].植物生态学报,1992,16(4): 326~335.
[81] 高俊凤主编.植物生理学试验技术[M].世界图书出版社,2000.
[82] 张志良主编.植物生理学实验指导[M].高等教育出版社,1990.
[83] 施积炎等,不同家系马尾松苗木水分参数的研究.林业科学,2004,40(3):51~55.
[84] 李洪建,狄晓艳,陈建文,王孟本. 一种用 sigmaplot 求 PV 曲线水分参数 ψtlp 的方法[J].植物研究, 2004,124(1):71~75.
[85] 沈繁宜,李吉跃.植物叶组织弹性模量新的计算方法[J].北京林业大学学报,1994,16(1):35~40.
[86] 郑勇平.PV 曲线在杨树耐旱性鉴别中的应用[J].浙江林学院学报,1992,9(1):36~41.
[87] 孙书存,陈灵芝.东灵山地区辽东栎叶的生长及其光合作用[J].生态学报,2000,20(2):212~217.
[88] 肖春旺,刘玉成.不同光环境的四川大头茶幼苗的生态适应[J].生态学报,1999,19(3):422~426.
[89] 董 鸣,阿拉腾宝,邢雪荣,等.根茎禾草沙鞭的克隆基株及分株种群特征[J].植物生态学报,1999,23(4):302~310.
[90] 肖春旺,董 鸣,周广胜,等.鄂尔多斯高原沙柳幼苗对模拟降水量变化的响应[J].生态学报,2001,21(1):171~176.
[91] Huston M A Smith T M. Plant succession Life historu and competition [J] American Naturalist ,1987,130(2):168~198.
[92] Tilman D Plant strategies and the Structure and Dynamics of Plant Communities [M].Princeton. Princeton University Press 1988. 52~97.
[93] 朱教君,康宏樟,李智辉.不同水分胁迫方式对沙地樟子松幼苗光合特性的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2006,28(2):57~63.
[94] 胡国臣,王忠.城市污水处理厂二级污水用于城市绿化的研究[J].农业环境与发展 1999,61(3): 29~32.
[95] 马全林,王继和,张盹明,等.沙区五种果树抗旱性的综合评价[M]/王继和.甘肃治沙理与实践.兰州:兰州大学出版社,1999:219~224.
[96] 蒋志荣.沙冬青抗旱机理的探讨[J].中国沙漠,2000,20(1):70~74.
[97] 郑勇平.PV 曲线在杨树耐旱性鉴别中的应用,浙江林学院学报,1992,9(1):36~41.
[98] 杨敏生,裴宝华,于冬梅.水分胁迫对毛白杨杂种无性系苗木维持.生态学报,1997,17(4):364~370.
[99] 李吉跃,张建国,姜金璞.京西山区人工林水分参数研究(II),1994,16(2):1~7.
[100] 施积炎,丁贵杰,袁小凤.不同家系马尾松苗木水分参数的研究[J].林业科学,2004,40(3):51～55.
[101] 张建国,李吉跃.京西山区人工林水分参数的研究.北京林业大学学报.1994,16(1):1~10.
[102] 董学军,杨宝珍,郭柯.几种沙生植物水分生理生态特征的研究[J].植物生态学报,1994,18(1): 86~94.
[103] 郭建平,高素华,王连敏,等.杨柴对高 CO2 和土壤干旱胁迫的响应[J].植物资源与环境学报,2002, 11(1):14~16.
[104] 肖春旺,周广胜,马风云.施水量变化对毛乌素沙地优势植物形态和生长的影响[J].植物生态学报,2002,26(1):69~76.
[2] 慈龙骏.我国荒漠化发生机理与防治对策[J].第四纪研究,1998, (2) :95~110.
[3] 王林和,姚洪林.沙地治理与利用的现实途径——毛乌素沙地中日合作研究综述[J].内蒙古林学院学报(自然科学版),1995,17(4):1~8.
[4] 张国盛,王林和,董智,等.毛乌素沙地主要固沙灌(乔)木林地水分平衡研究[J].内蒙古农业大学学报,2002,23(3):1~9.
[5] 张国盛,王林和,董智,等.毛乌素沙区风沙土机械组成及含水率的季节变化[J].中国沙漠,1999,19(2):145~150.
[6] 张晓然,吴鸿,胡正海.毛乌素沙地 10 种重要沙生植物叶的形态结构与环境的关系[J].西北植物学报,1997,17(5):54~60.
[7] 郑元润.毛乌素沙地中几种植物水分特性的研究[J].干旱区研究,1985,15(2):17~21.
[8] 温国胜,张国盛,张明如,等.干旱胁迫条件下臭柏的气孔蒸腾与角质层蒸腾[J].浙江林学院学报,2003,20(3):268~272.
[9] 温国胜,张国盛,吉川贤.干旱胁迫对臭柏水分特性的影响[J].林业科学,2004,40(5):84~87.
[10] 黎祜琛,邱治军.树木抗旱性及抗旱造林技术研究综述[].世界林业研究,2003,16(4):17~22.
[11] 顾振瑜,胡景江,文建雷,等.元宝枫对干旱适应性的研究[J].西北林学院学报,1999,14(2):1~6.
[12] 邹春静,韩士杰,徐文铎,等.沙地云杉生态型对干旱胁迫的生理生态相应[J].应用生态学报.2003,14(9):1446~1450.
[13] 张莉,续九如.水分胁迫下刺槐不同无性系生理生化反应的研究[J].林业科学,2003,39(4):162~167.
[14] 陈少瑜,郎南军,李吉跃,等.干旱胁迫下 3 树种苗木叶片相对含水量、质膜相对透性和脯氨酸含量的变化[J].西部林业科学,2004,33(3):30~34.
[15] 李彦慧,周怀军,杨敏生,等.廊坊杨苗期的抗旱性研究[J].西北林学院学报,2004,19(1):27~31.
[16] 陈颖,谢寅峰,沈惠娟.银杏幼苗对水分胁迫的生理响应[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2002,26(2):55~58.
[17] Levit, J.Response of Plant to Environmental Stresses.Academic Press, NewYork,1972.
[18] Levit, J. Response of Plant to Environmental Stresses.Academic Press, NewYork and London, 1980,Vol.2.
[19] Turner N .C .Adaptation to water deficits:A changing perspective.Aust.J .Plant P hysiol.,1983 .13: 175~190.
[20] KnappA K .Variation among biomesin temporal dynamics of above groundp rimaryp roduction[J]. Nature .2001,29(1):481~484.
[21] Cline R.G,Campell. G S, Seasonal and diuma water rela tions of selected forest species, Ecology, 1976,57(2):367~373.
[22] Schlet P.J, Morshall PE ,1982. Growth and water ralation of balek locust and pin seeding exposed to control water stress. Can J. For, Res, 13:334~335.
[23] 肖冬梅,王森,姬兰柱.水分胁迫对长白山阔叶红松林主要树种生长及生物量分配的影响. 生态学杂志,2004,23(5):93~97.
[24] 戴建良.侧柏种源抗旱性测定和选择[D].北京林业大学硕士论文,1996.
[25] 杨敏生,裴保华,张树常.树木抗旱性研究进展[J].河北林果研究,1997,12(1):87~89.
[26] 李吉跃.植物耐早性及其机理[J].北京林业大学学报,1991,13(3):92~100.
[27] 彭柞登,李吉跃,沈熙环.林木抗早性育种的现状与思考[J]北京林业大学学报,1998: 20 (4):98~103.
[28] Slavik B 著,张崇浩等译.植物与水分关系研究法[M].北京:科学出版社,1986.
[29] 汤章城.植物对水分胁迫的反应和适应:植物对干旱的反应和适应[J].植物生理学通讯,1983,7(4):1~7.
[30] 吴明国,林建荣,张光恒.水陆稻杂交组合叶片相对含水量的遗传研究[J].中国水稻科学,2004,18(6):570~571.
[31] 尹春英,李春阳.杨树抗旱性研究进展[J].应用与环境生物学报,2003,9(6):662~668.
[32] 章应峰,费世民,王鹏等.干旱地区树木耐旱性研究现状评述[J].四川林业科技,2001,22(4):24~30.
[33] 蒋德明.科尔沁沙地荒漠化过程与生态恢复.中国环境出版社(M),003.143~144.
[34] 宇万太,于永强.植物地下生物量研究进展[J].应用生态学报,12(6):927~932.
[35] ZhaoY.,FernandezG.C.J.,BowmanD.C.,NowakR.S.Selection criteria for drought resistance breeding in turfgrass.J. of the American Society for Horticultural Science,1994,119(6):1317~1324.
[36] 王云龙,许振株,周广胜.水分胁迫对羊草光合产物分配及其气体交换特征的影响[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(2):803~809.
[37] 刘中民,几种主要沙生植物的特性及其栽培的研究四.治沙研究.北京:科学出版社,1965,(5): 109~111.
[38] 蒋瑾.沙坡头地区主要固沙植物生理学特性的研究[J].林业科学,1983, (2): 113~120.
[39] 刘英心.沙生植物的根系[M].流沙治理研究(二).银川:宁夏人民出版社,1991,185~209.
[40] 刘新民,赵哈林,赵爱芬.科尔沁沙地风沙环境与植被[M].北京:科学出版社,1996.64~68.
[41] 李胜功.樟子松沙地适应性的初步研究[J].中国沙漠,1994, 14(1): 60~67.
[42] 王康富.辽宁省章古台主妥固沙植物的习性[M].林业集刊,科学出版社,1959, (3): 182~197.
[43] 肖冬梅,王 淼,姬兰柱.水分胁迫对长白山阔叶红松林主要树种生长及生物量分配的影响[J].生态学杂志,2004,23(5):93~97).
[44] 张岁歧,山仑.植物水分利用效率及其研究进展[J].干旱地区农业研究,2002,12(4):2~5.
[45] 李吉跃,TEREBCEJB.多重复干旱循环对苗木气体交换和水分利用效率的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,1992,21(3):1~8.
[46] 梁宗锁,李有新,康绍忠.影响夏玉米单叶WUE的冠层因子分析[J],西北农业学报,1996,5(1): 13~16.
[47] 山仑,植物水分利用效率和半干旱地区农业用水.植物生理学通讯,1994,30(1):61~66.
[48] 罗青红,李志军.树木水分生理生态特性及抗旱性研究进展[J].塔里木大学学报 2005,17,(2):29~ 33.
[49] 张卫强,贺康宁,王正宁,等.光辐射强度对侧柏油松幼苗光合特性和水分利用效率的影响[J].中国水土保持科学,2006,4(2):108~113.
[50] 刘奉觉,郑世楷,巨关升,等.树木蒸腾耗水测算技术的比较研究[J].林业科学,1997,33(2):117-126.
[51] 文建雷,刘志龙,王姝清.水分胁迫条件下元宝枫的光合特征及水分利用效率[J].西北林学院学报 2003,18(2):1~3.
[52] 曹福亮,张德徉,方升左.盐胁迫对南方 7 个造林树种生理特性的影响[J].山东林业科技,1997,(6): 7~17.
[53] 吴明国,林建荣,张光恒.水陆稻杂交组合叶片相对含水量的遗传研究[J].中国水稻科学,2004 ,18(6):570~571.
[54] Marshall,J.Rutledge,R.Blumwald,E, Dumboroff, E.: Reduction in turgid water volume in jack pine,whites pruce and blacks pruce in response to d rought and paclobutrazol[J].TreePhysiol. 2000 ,(20):701~707.
[55] 蒲锦春.我国沙漠植物的水分饱和亏[J].中国沙漠,1989,9(3):44~53.
[56] 王涛,吕薇,薛娴,等.中国北方沙漠化土地时空演变分析[J].中国沙漠,2003,23(3):230~235.
[57] 王涛.我国沙漠化研究的若干问题——2.沙漠化的研究内容[J].中国沙漠,2003,23(5):477~482.
[58] 周欢水,申建军.中国西部沙漠化的分布、动态及其对生态环境建设的影响[J].中国沙漠,2002,22(2):112~117.
[59] 付爱红,陈亚宁,李卫红,等.干旱、盐胁迫下的植物水势研究与进展[J].中国沙漠.2005,25(5):744~ 749.
[60] 赵萍,孙向阳,黄丽江.毛乌素沙地沙生植物蒸腾规律及其与环境因子间关系,林业科学研究 2004,17(增刊):67~71.
[61] 张建国,李吉跃.北方主要造林树种耐早机理及其分类模型的研究[J].北京林业大学学报,1993,15.1~3。
[62] 时连辉,牟志美,姚 健.不同桑树品种在土壤水分胁迫下膜伤害和保护酶活性变化[J].蚕业科学 2005,31,(1):13~17.
[63] Kramer. P.T , Kozlowski J.T 著,汪振儒等译.木本植物生理学[M].北京:中国林业出版社,1985.
[64] 刘彦琴,张丰雪,杨敏生.电导率在白杨杂种无性系耐旱鉴定中的应用[J].河北林果研究,1997 (4):301~305.
[65] Scholander P F,,Hemmel H T,Hemmingsen E A,et a1.Hydrostatic pressure and osmotic potential of leaves of mangrove and some other plants[J].Proc Natl Acad Sci USA,1964,52:l19~125.
[66] Scholander P F,Hammel H T,Bradstreet E D,et a1.Sap pressure in vascular plants[J].Science, 1965,148:339~346.
[67] Tyree M T,Hammel H T.The measurement of the turgor pressure and the water relations of plants by the pressure—bomb technique[J].J Exp Bot,1972,23:267~282.
[68] Tyree M T,Dainty J,Benis M.The water relations of hemlock(Tsuga Canadensis).Some equilibrium water relations as measured by the pressure-bomb technique [J].Can J Bot,1973,51(1): 471~1 480.
[69] Tyree M T.Negative turgor pressure in plant cells,fact or fallacy [J].Can J Bot,1976,54:2738~2746.
[70] Tyree M T,Jarvis P G.Water in tissue and cells[C].Berlin:Springer—Verlag,1981.
[71] Cheung Y N S,Tyree M T,Dainty J.Water relations parameters on single leaves obtained in a pressure bomb and some ecological interpretations[J].Can J Bot,1975,42:1342~1346.
[72] Cheung Y N S,Tyree M T,Dainty J.Some possible sources of error in determining bulk elastic moduli and other parameters from pressure—volume curves of shoots and leaves[J].Can J Bot,1976,43:758~765.
[73] Richter H.A diagram for the description of water relations in plant cells and organs[J].J Exp Bot,1978,29:1197~1203.
[74] Schulte P,Hinckley T.A comparison of pressure volume curve data analysis technique[J].J Exp Bot,1985,36:l 590~ l 602.
[75] 李吉跃.PV 技术在油松侧柏苗木抗旱特性研究中的应用[J].北京林业大学学报,1989,1(11):3~11.
[76] Levitt,J. Response of Plants to Environmental Stress.Vo1.1 Water Radition Salt and other Stress.Academic Press New York.1976.
[77] 王孟本,李洪建,柴宝峰,等.黄土区树种抗旱性指数的研究[J].植物研究,1999,3(19):341~346.
[78] 王万里.压力室(Pressure chamber)在植物水分状况研究中的应用[J].植物生理学通讯,1984,(3): 52~57.
[79] Wiilson JR etal.Adaption to water stress of the leaf water realtion of four tropical species Aust I .Plant physiol,1980(7):208-220.
[80] 李庆梅,徐化成.油松 P-V 曲线主要水分参数随季节和种源的变化[J].植物生态学报,1992,16(4): 326~335.
[81] 高俊凤主编.植物生理学试验技术[M].世界图书出版社,2000.
[82] 张志良主编.植物生理学实验指导[M].高等教育出版社,1990.
[83] 施积炎等,不同家系马尾松苗木水分参数的研究.林业科学,2004,40(3):51~55.
[84] 李洪建,狄晓艳,陈建文,王孟本. 一种用 sigmaplot 求 PV 曲线水分参数 ψtlp 的方法[J].植物研究, 2004,124(1):71~75.
[85] 沈繁宜,李吉跃.植物叶组织弹性模量新的计算方法[J].北京林业大学学报,1994,16(1):35~40.
[86] 郑勇平.PV 曲线在杨树耐旱性鉴别中的应用[J].浙江林学院学报,1992,9(1):36~41.
[87] 孙书存,陈灵芝.东灵山地区辽东栎叶的生长及其光合作用[J].生态学报,2000,20(2):212~217.
[88] 肖春旺,刘玉成.不同光环境的四川大头茶幼苗的生态适应[J].生态学报,1999,19(3):422~426.
[89] 董 鸣,阿拉腾宝,邢雪荣,等.根茎禾草沙鞭的克隆基株及分株种群特征[J].植物生态学报,1999,23(4):302~310.
[90] 肖春旺,董 鸣,周广胜,等.鄂尔多斯高原沙柳幼苗对模拟降水量变化的响应[J].生态学报,2001,21(1):171~176.
[91] Huston M A Smith T M. Plant succession Life historu and competition [J] American Naturalist ,1987,130(2):168~198.
[92] Tilman D Plant strategies and the Structure and Dynamics of Plant Communities [M].Princeton. Princeton University Press 1988. 52~97.
[93] 朱教君,康宏樟,李智辉.不同水分胁迫方式对沙地樟子松幼苗光合特性的影响[J].北京林业大学学报,2006,28(2):57~63.
[94] 胡国臣,王忠.城市污水处理厂二级污水用于城市绿化的研究[J].农业环境与发展 1999,61(3): 29~32.
[95] 马全林,王继和,张盹明,等.沙区五种果树抗旱性的综合评价[M]/王继和.甘肃治沙理与实践.兰州:兰州大学出版社,1999:219~224.
[96] 蒋志荣.沙冬青抗旱机理的探讨[J].中国沙漠,2000,20(1):70~74.
[97] 郑勇平.PV 曲线在杨树耐旱性鉴别中的应用,浙江林学院学报,1992,9(1):36~41.
[98] 杨敏生,裴宝华,于冬梅.水分胁迫对毛白杨杂种无性系苗木维持.生态学报,1997,17(4):364~370.
[99] 李吉跃,张建国,姜金璞.京西山区人工林水分参数研究(II),1994,16(2):1~7.
[100] 施积炎,丁贵杰,袁小凤.不同家系马尾松苗木水分参数的研究[J].林业科学,2004,40(3):51～55.
[101] 张建国,李吉跃.京西山区人工林水分参数的研究.北京林业大学学报.1994,16(1):1~10.
[102] 董学军,杨宝珍,郭柯.几种沙生植物水分生理生态特征的研究[J].植物生态学报,1994,18(1): 86~94.
[103] 郭建平,高素华,王连敏,等.杨柴对高 CO2 和土壤干旱胁迫的响应[J].植物资源与环境学报,2002, 11(1):14~16.
[104] 肖春旺,周广胜,马风云.施水量变化对毛乌素沙地优势植物形态和生长的影响[J].植物生态学报,2002,26(1):69~76.