披碱草属（Elymus L.）植物形态解剖学研究
摘要
本文以搜集自内蒙古、北京、宁夏、甘肃、新疆、青海及西藏7省区的披碱草属5种18份野生种质为材料,从形态特征、叶表皮特征和茎叶横切面解剖结构等方面作了深入细致的比较研究,主要研究结果如下:
1.选用19个性状指标,对披碱草、圆柱披碱草、垂穗披碱草、麦宾草和老芒麦表型特征研究结果显示,旗叶长、旗叶宽、每穗轴小穗数、穗轴第一节间长、外稃芒长、颖长和颖芒长7个性状的变异系数较高,是披碱草属植物产生变异的主要性状。
2.供试的5个种18份材料叶下表皮和横切面结构组成相同,表明披碱草属植物是一个自然分类群。但是叶下表皮细胞大小、气孔器大小、副卫细胞形状和垂周壁形态、主脉维管束高度、上表皮厚度、角质层厚度、叶中脉突起度及叶缘形状种间差异性显著(P<0.05),可将上述形态差异和量化指标作为披碱草属种间分类的依据之一。气孔指数、气孔长宽比可作为检测植物抗性强弱的依据之一。
3.叶下表皮特征指标中,气孔器长度、气孔器宽度、长细胞长度及副卫细胞形状5个生态因子(海拔高度、经度、纬度、年均温度和年降雨量)具有不同程度相关性,其中,气孔器长度、长细胞长度、副卫细胞形状与纬度呈极显著正相关,气孔器宽度与海拔高度呈显著负相关。
4. 2份不同来源麦宾草茎的结构比较,来自宁夏六盘山的材料,其茎内维管组织较来自新疆的材料发达,具有较强的输导和支持作用。与成熟期相比,抽穗期的茎横切面表现为组织分化不成熟,中部没有显示出髓腔。
5.叶下表皮细胞中某些显著的形态差异,叶片横切面解剖结构中某些量化指标的差异,可尝试作为遗传标记,鉴别披碱草属植物种间和种内的遗传变异。
In this study, 18 wild germplasm materials of 5 species of Elymus L. were collected from seven provinces such as Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, Gansu, Xinjiang, Qinghai and Tibet. Comparative studied were carried deeply and carefully from morphological characteristics, leaf epidermal features, transverse section structures of leaves and stems, the main results as follows:
1. Phenotypic variation was assessed by measuring 19 characters to Elymus subiricus L., Elymus excelsus T., Elymus dahuricus T., Elymus cylindricus(Franch.)Honda and Elymus nutans. The results showed that the different characters had different variation, some characters including flag leaf length, flag leaf width, number of spikelet, the first internode length, lemma awn length, glume length, glume awn length had higher coefficient of variance than others. These seven features are the main variance characters.
2. The anatomaical structures of leaves were the same among these species, comprised of leaf epidermal cells, leaf tissues and leaf veins. While vascular bundle diameter, upper epidermis thickness, cuticular thickness, midrib enation and the morphology of leaf margin had significant variation among species (P<0.05).
3. The characteristics of lower epidermis cells of five species were familiar with regular shape and dense arrangement. While the size of lower epidermis cell and stomata apparatus, the morphology of subsidiary cell and anticlinal wall had significant variation among species(P<0.05). The morphological variation and quantitative parameters can be considered as the principle of the species classification of Elymus L., stomatal index and stomatal length as the parameters of Elymus L. resistance.
4. Among the lower epidermis indices, stomata length, stomata width, the length of long cell and the shape of subsidiary cell had different correlation with five ecological factors, such as altitude, latitude, longitude, annual average temperature and annual precipitation. Stomata length, long cell length and the shape of subsidiary showed very significant positive correlation with latitudes, while stomata width showed significant negative correlation with altitude.
5. Compared of stem anatomic structure of two Elymus excelsus T. from different source, the result showed that a material of Ningxia was better than anther of Xinjiang because of the Ningxia material having a strong vascular tissue. The strong vascular tissue leaded to a strong effect of transportation and support.
Compared the heading stage with maturing stage of stem anatomic structure, it was showed some different characters. The stem transverse section of heading stage had some characters as followed. The outer had a leaf sheath transverse section which was wide and the immaturity tissue; the inside was the main stem transverse section which had undifferentiating vascular bundle; pith cavity did not exist in the middle stem.
6. The main prominent morphological difference of leaf lower epidermic cell and the quantitative varivance indexs of the leaf transverse section can be tried as genetic mark to identifiy the intraspecific and interspecific genetic variation of Elymus L.
1.选用19个性状指标,对披碱草、圆柱披碱草、垂穗披碱草、麦宾草和老芒麦表型特征研究结果显示,旗叶长、旗叶宽、每穗轴小穗数、穗轴第一节间长、外稃芒长、颖长和颖芒长7个性状的变异系数较高,是披碱草属植物产生变异的主要性状。
2.供试的5个种18份材料叶下表皮和横切面结构组成相同,表明披碱草属植物是一个自然分类群。但是叶下表皮细胞大小、气孔器大小、副卫细胞形状和垂周壁形态、主脉维管束高度、上表皮厚度、角质层厚度、叶中脉突起度及叶缘形状种间差异性显著(P<0.05),可将上述形态差异和量化指标作为披碱草属种间分类的依据之一。气孔指数、气孔长宽比可作为检测植物抗性强弱的依据之一。
3.叶下表皮特征指标中,气孔器长度、气孔器宽度、长细胞长度及副卫细胞形状5个生态因子(海拔高度、经度、纬度、年均温度和年降雨量)具有不同程度相关性,其中,气孔器长度、长细胞长度、副卫细胞形状与纬度呈极显著正相关,气孔器宽度与海拔高度呈显著负相关。
4. 2份不同来源麦宾草茎的结构比较,来自宁夏六盘山的材料,其茎内维管组织较来自新疆的材料发达,具有较强的输导和支持作用。与成熟期相比,抽穗期的茎横切面表现为组织分化不成熟,中部没有显示出髓腔。
5.叶下表皮细胞中某些显著的形态差异,叶片横切面解剖结构中某些量化指标的差异,可尝试作为遗传标记,鉴别披碱草属植物种间和种内的遗传变异。
In this study, 18 wild germplasm materials of 5 species of Elymus L. were collected from seven provinces such as Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, Gansu, Xinjiang, Qinghai and Tibet. Comparative studied were carried deeply and carefully from morphological characteristics, leaf epidermal features, transverse section structures of leaves and stems, the main results as follows:
1. Phenotypic variation was assessed by measuring 19 characters to Elymus subiricus L., Elymus excelsus T., Elymus dahuricus T., Elymus cylindricus(Franch.)Honda and Elymus nutans. The results showed that the different characters had different variation, some characters including flag leaf length, flag leaf width, number of spikelet, the first internode length, lemma awn length, glume length, glume awn length had higher coefficient of variance than others. These seven features are the main variance characters.
2. The anatomaical structures of leaves were the same among these species, comprised of leaf epidermal cells, leaf tissues and leaf veins. While vascular bundle diameter, upper epidermis thickness, cuticular thickness, midrib enation and the morphology of leaf margin had significant variation among species (P<0.05).
3. The characteristics of lower epidermis cells of five species were familiar with regular shape and dense arrangement. While the size of lower epidermis cell and stomata apparatus, the morphology of subsidiary cell and anticlinal wall had significant variation among species(P<0.05). The morphological variation and quantitative parameters can be considered as the principle of the species classification of Elymus L., stomatal index and stomatal length as the parameters of Elymus L. resistance.
4. Among the lower epidermis indices, stomata length, stomata width, the length of long cell and the shape of subsidiary cell had different correlation with five ecological factors, such as altitude, latitude, longitude, annual average temperature and annual precipitation. Stomata length, long cell length and the shape of subsidiary showed very significant positive correlation with latitudes, while stomata width showed significant negative correlation with altitude.
5. Compared of stem anatomic structure of two Elymus excelsus T. from different source, the result showed that a material of Ningxia was better than anther of Xinjiang because of the Ningxia material having a strong vascular tissue. The strong vascular tissue leaded to a strong effect of transportation and support.
Compared the heading stage with maturing stage of stem anatomic structure, it was showed some different characters. The stem transverse section of heading stage had some characters as followed. The outer had a leaf sheath transverse section which was wide and the immaturity tissue; the inside was the main stem transverse section which had undifferentiating vascular bundle; pith cavity did not exist in the middle stem.
6. The main prominent morphological difference of leaf lower epidermic cell and the quantitative varivance indexs of the leaf transverse section can be tried as genetic mark to identifiy the intraspecific and interspecific genetic variation of Elymus L.
引文
1.安守芹,张称意,王玉魁,等.四种沙生植物营养器官的比较解剖研究.中国草地, 1996, 3: 30～36.
2.蔡联炳,郭延平.禾本科植物叶片表皮结构细胞主要类型的演化与系统分类和发育途径的探讨.西北植物学报, 1995, 15(4): 323～335.
3.蔡联炳,郭延平.禾本科植物叶片表皮结构细胞主要类型的演化与系统分类和发育途径的探讨(续).西北植物学报, 1996, 16(1): 65～72.
4.蔡联炳,张同林.根据叶解剖特征试论赖草属及其相关类群间的亲缘关系.西北植物学报, 2006, 26(3): 0537～0543.
5.蔡联炳.青海鹅观草属的叶片表皮微形态特征及其分类意义的探讨.西北植物学报,1997, 17(5): 48～53.
6.蔡联炳.鹅观草属部分种的叶表皮微形态特征及其分类学意义.植物研究, 2000, 20(4): 372～378.
7.陈默君,贾慎修.中国饲用植物.北京:中国农业出版社,2002.
8.陈守良,金岳杏,吴竹君,等.叶表皮细胞结构在国产狗尾草属(Setaria Beauv.)分组水平上的应用.植物研究,1985, 5(2): 105～112.
9.陈守良,金岳杏,吴竹君.禾本科叶片表皮微形态图谱.南京:江苏科学技术出版社, 1988.
10.陈守良.中国植物志(第九卷第一分册).北京:科学出版社,1996.
11.初庆刚,杨永昌.中国芨芨草属叶表皮特征及其分类意义.莱阳农学院学报,1991, 8(3): 159～165.
12.段喜华,孙立夫,马书荣,等.不同海拔高度泡沙参叶片形态研究.植物研究, 2003, 23(3): 334～336.
13.高海娟.冰草生态生物学及细胞学初步研究[硕士学位论文].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2007.
14.高卫华,云锦凤,杨静,韩文生.冰草属牧草营养器官解剖学研究.内蒙古草业,1990, 4:19～22.
15.耿以礼.中国主要植物图说(禾本科).北京:科学出版社, 1959, 283～557.
16.郭本兆.中国植物志.北京:科学出版社,1987.
17.郭敏,强科斌,等.华扁穗草叶片的形态解剖结构观察.甘肃农业大学学报,2007, 42(1): 82～87.
18.胡正海.植物比较解剖学在中国50年的进展和展望.西北植物学报,2003, 23(2): 344～355.
19.解新明,马万里,杨莉,等.燕麦族部分属种的叶表皮特征在分类及系统演化中的应用研究.内蒙古师范大学报(自然科学汉文版),1998, 27(1): 62～65.
20.解新明,杨锡麟.冰草属植物叶片解剖特征及其分类价值.内蒙古师大学报(自然科学汉文版),1994, 1: 53～58.
21.李芳兰,包维楷.植物叶片形态解剖结构对环境变化的响应与适应.植物学报,2005,22(增刊):118～127.
22.李淑娟,周青平,颜红波,祁生娥. 4种披碱草属野生牧草在高寒地区农艺性状及生产性能的评价.草原与草坪, 2007, 121(2): 34～36.
23.李艳,秦海,李法曾.山东小麦族植物叶表皮微形态的研究.武汉植物学研究,2006, 24(2): 163～166.
24.李扬汉.禾本科作物的形态与解剖.上海:上海科技出版社,1979.
25.李正理,张新英.植物解剖学.北京:高等教育出版社,1983.
26.刘穆.种子植物形态解剖学导论.北京:科学出版社,2001.
27.刘世彪,陈菁,胡正海. 7种番荔枝果树的叶片结构及其与抗寒性关系研究.果树学报,2004, 21(3): 241～246.
28.刘玉红.我国11种披碱草的核型研究.武汉植物学研究,1985, 3(4):325～330.
29.卢宝荣,salomon B.种间杂种染色体配对所揭示的披碱草属植物StY基因组分化及其进化意义.生物多样性,2004,12(2):213～226.
30.卢红双,徐柱,马玉宝,等.披碱草属穗型下垂类种质的形态学鉴定及其聚类分析.云南农业大学学报, 2008, 23(2): 150～161.
31.陆静梅,李建东,景德长,等.星星草Puccinellia tenuiflora(Turcz.) Scribn.et Merr.解剖研究.东北师大学报(自然科学版),1994,1:63～66.
32.陆静梅,李建东.同种不同生态环境植物解剖结构比较研究.东北师大学报(自然科学版),1994,3:100～103.
33.马海英,彭华,王跃华.禾本科广义拂子茅属的叶表皮形态研究.植物分类学报, 2006, (44): 371～392.
34.马青枝,李造哲.披碱草和野大麦及其杂种苗期抗旱性研究.中国草地学报, 2005, 27(6): 23～27.
35.祁娟,徐柱,马玉宝,等.披碱草属六种野生牧草苗期抗旱胁迫的生理变化.中国草地学报,2008, 30(5): 18～24.
36.任文伟,钱吉,吴霆,郑师章.不同地理种群羊草的形态解剖结构的比较研究.复旦学报(自然科学版),1999,38(5): 561～564.
37.税玉民,李启任,黄素华.云南秋海棠属叶表皮及毛被的扫描电镜观察.云南植物研究,1999, 2l(3): 309～316.
38.孙建萍,袁庆华.披碱草属种质资源研究进展.草业科学,2005, 22(12):2～5.
39.唐宗周.甘肃草原禾本科饲用植物资源分布及利用前景.草原与草坪,2006, 117(4): 69～72.
40.王虹,邓彦斌,徐秀珍,等.新疆10种旱生、盐生植物的解剖学研究.新疆大学学报,1998, 11: 66～73.
41.王润辉,夏念和,林汝顺.莿竹属和牡竹属(竹亚科)叶表皮微形态特征.热带亚热带植物学报,2002, 10(1): 22～26.
42.王勋陵,王静.植物的形态结构与环境.兰州:兰州大学出版社,1989,l05～138.
43.王勋陵,马骥.从旱生植物叶结构探讨其生态适应的多样性.生态学报, 1999,19(6): 787～792.
44.王灶安.植物学实验图说.北京:农业出版社,1992.
45.谢可军,文乐元.鹅观草属与披碱草属分类学的历史与现状.草原与草坪, 2000, 91(4) : 6～9.
46.徐柱.中国禾草属志.呼和浩特:内蒙古人民出版社,1997.
47.徐柱.中国牧草手册.北京:化学工业出版社,2004.
48.严学兵,郭玉霞,周禾,王堃.披碱草属植物分类及遗传多样性研究.草业科学,2005, 22(7):1～7.
49.严学兵,周禾,王堃,郭玉霞.披碱草属植物形态多样性及其主成分分析.草地学报,2005,13(2):111～116.
50.杨利民.中国东北样带草原段关键种-羊草茎、叶显微结构的生态可塑性及群落功能群组成和多样性研究[博士后研究工作报告].北京:中国科学院植物研究所,2006.
51.杨瑞武,周永红,郑有良,等.赖草属11个物种的形态学特征比较研究.四川农业大学学报,2003, 21(3): 196～200.
52.杨瑞武,周永红,郑有良.小麦族披碱草属、鹅观草属和猬草属模式种的C带研究.云南植物研究, 2003 , 25 (1) : 71～77.
53.于喜凤,周志强,等.新疆禾本科短命植物旱麦草地营养器官解剖研究.新疆师范大学报(自然科学版),1996, 15(2): 51～54.
54.袁庆华,张吉宇,张文淑,等.披碱草和老芒麦野生居群生物多样性研究.草业学报, 2003, 12(5):44～49.
55.袁庆华,张文淑,苏加楷.披碱草属野生居群表型遗传多样性研究. 2002年学术研讨会论文集.
56.张志耘,卢宝荣,温洁.稻属叶表皮结构特征及其系统学意义.植物分类学报,1998,36(1): 8～
18.
57.赵惠如.禾本科植物叶片的解剖与分类的初步研究.南京师大学报(自然科学版),1984, 4: 72～79.
58.赵庆芳.青藏高原东部嵩草属植物遗传多样性研究[博士学位论文].兰州:兰州大学,2006.
59.周德宝.不同披碱草抗寒性的研究.阴山学刊(自然科学版), 1996, 13(3): 36～39.
60.周玲玲,阎平,唐素英,等.芨芨草营养器官的解剖学研究.石河子大学学报(自然科学报),2002,6(4):298～302.
61.周世权,马恩伟.植物分类学.北京:中国林业出版社,1995.
62.周永红,郑有良,杨俊良,颜济,贾继增.10种披碱草属植物的RAPD分析及其系统学意义.植物分类研究,1999,37 (5) : 425～432.
63.周智彬,李培军.我国旱生植物的形态解剖学研究.干旱区研究,2002,19(1):35～40.
64.朱宇旌,张勇,胡自治,等.小花碱茅茎适应盐胁迫的显微结构研究.中国草地, 2000, 5: 6～9.
65. Barthlott W. Epidermis and seed surface characters of plants. Nord J Bot, 1981, 1: 345～355.
66. Baum B R, Yang J-L, Yen C. Taxonomic separation of Kengyilia (Poaceae: Triticeae) in relation to nearest related Roegneria, Elymus and Agropyron, based on some morphological characters. Pl Syst Evol , 1995, 194 : 123～132.
67. Clayton W D, Renvoize S A. Genera Graminum. London: H.M. Stationery Office Publication,1986,187～255.
68. Dewey D R. The genomic system of classification as a guide to intergeneric hybridization with theperennial Triticeae. In: Gustafson J Ped. Gene manipulation in plant improvement. New York :Plenum Publishing Corporation ,1984, 209～279.
69. Duval-Jouve, J. Histotaxie des feuilles de Graminées. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot, 1875, 6(1):294～371.
70. Ellis, R. P. A review of comparative leaf blade anatomy in the systematics of the Poaceae: The past twenty-five years. In: T. R. Soderstorm et al (eds.). Grass systematics and evolution. Washington, Smithonian Institution Press, 1986, 3～10.
71. Feisl, Fany. Anatomical characteristics of leaves and woods of Fagus lucida and their relationship to ecological factors in Mountain Fanjingshan. Guizhou. China. Acta Botanica Sinica. 1999, 41(9): 1002～1009.
72. H. Motomura, T. Fujii, M. Suzuki. Silica Deposition in Relation to Ageing of Leaf Tissues in Sasa veitchii (Carrieáre) Rehder (Poaceae: Bambusoideae). Annals of Botany, 2004, 93: 235～248.
73. Irena Gielwanowska, Ewa Szczuka, Jozef Bednara, Ryszard Gorecki. Anatomical features and ultrastructure of deschampsia Antarctica (Poaceae) leaves from different growing habitats. Annals of Botany, 2005, 96: 1109～1119.
74. Jones J H. Evolution of the Fagaceae: the implications of foliar feature. Ann Mo Bot Gard, 1986, 73: 228～275.
75. L?ve A. Conspectus of the triticeae. Feddes Report, 1984, 95: 425～521.
76. Lu B R. Genomic relationships within the Elymus parviglumis group (Triticeae: Poaceae).Plant Systematic Evolution, 1993, 187:191～211.
77. Macfarlane, T. D. & L. Watson. The classification of Poaceae subfamily Pooideae. Taxon. 1982, 31(2): 178～203.
78. Nevski S A. TribeⅫHordeae Benth. In: Komarov V L, Roshevits R Y, Shishkin B Keds. Leningrad : Flora USRR, 1934, 2: 590～728.
79. Prat H. La systématique des Graminées. Ann Sci Nat Bot, 1936, 18: 165～258.
80. Setten AK van, Koek-Noorman J. Studies in AnnonaceaeⅥ. A leaf anatomical survey of genera of Annonaceae in the Neotropics. Bot. Jahrb. Syst., 1986,108 (1):17～50.
81. Thomasson, J. R. Fossil grasses: 1820-1986 and beyond. In T. R. Soderstrom, K. W. Hilu, C. S. Campbell, and M. A. Barkworkth [eds.], Grass systematics and evolution, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 1987, 159～167.
82. Tzvelev N N. Tribe 3. Triticeae Dumort. In: Poaceae USRR. Leningrad: Nauka, 1976, 147～181.
2.蔡联炳,郭延平.禾本科植物叶片表皮结构细胞主要类型的演化与系统分类和发育途径的探讨.西北植物学报, 1995, 15(4): 323～335.
3.蔡联炳,郭延平.禾本科植物叶片表皮结构细胞主要类型的演化与系统分类和发育途径的探讨(续).西北植物学报, 1996, 16(1): 65～72.
4.蔡联炳,张同林.根据叶解剖特征试论赖草属及其相关类群间的亲缘关系.西北植物学报, 2006, 26(3): 0537～0543.
5.蔡联炳.青海鹅观草属的叶片表皮微形态特征及其分类意义的探讨.西北植物学报,1997, 17(5): 48～53.
6.蔡联炳.鹅观草属部分种的叶表皮微形态特征及其分类学意义.植物研究, 2000, 20(4): 372～378.
7.陈默君,贾慎修.中国饲用植物.北京:中国农业出版社,2002.
8.陈守良,金岳杏,吴竹君,等.叶表皮细胞结构在国产狗尾草属(Setaria Beauv.)分组水平上的应用.植物研究,1985, 5(2): 105～112.
9.陈守良,金岳杏,吴竹君.禾本科叶片表皮微形态图谱.南京:江苏科学技术出版社, 1988.
10.陈守良.中国植物志(第九卷第一分册).北京:科学出版社,1996.
11.初庆刚,杨永昌.中国芨芨草属叶表皮特征及其分类意义.莱阳农学院学报,1991, 8(3): 159～165.
12.段喜华,孙立夫,马书荣,等.不同海拔高度泡沙参叶片形态研究.植物研究, 2003, 23(3): 334～336.
13.高海娟.冰草生态生物学及细胞学初步研究[硕士学位论文].呼和浩特:内蒙古农业大学,2007.
14.高卫华,云锦凤,杨静,韩文生.冰草属牧草营养器官解剖学研究.内蒙古草业,1990, 4:19～22.
15.耿以礼.中国主要植物图说(禾本科).北京:科学出版社, 1959, 283～557.
16.郭本兆.中国植物志.北京:科学出版社,1987.
17.郭敏,强科斌,等.华扁穗草叶片的形态解剖结构观察.甘肃农业大学学报,2007, 42(1): 82～87.
18.胡正海.植物比较解剖学在中国50年的进展和展望.西北植物学报,2003, 23(2): 344～355.
19.解新明,马万里,杨莉,等.燕麦族部分属种的叶表皮特征在分类及系统演化中的应用研究.内蒙古师范大学报(自然科学汉文版),1998, 27(1): 62～65.
20.解新明,杨锡麟.冰草属植物叶片解剖特征及其分类价值.内蒙古师大学报(自然科学汉文版),1994, 1: 53～58.
21.李芳兰,包维楷.植物叶片形态解剖结构对环境变化的响应与适应.植物学报,2005,22(增刊):118～127.
22.李淑娟,周青平,颜红波,祁生娥. 4种披碱草属野生牧草在高寒地区农艺性状及生产性能的评价.草原与草坪, 2007, 121(2): 34～36.
23.李艳,秦海,李法曾.山东小麦族植物叶表皮微形态的研究.武汉植物学研究,2006, 24(2): 163～166.
24.李扬汉.禾本科作物的形态与解剖.上海:上海科技出版社,1979.
25.李正理,张新英.植物解剖学.北京:高等教育出版社,1983.
26.刘穆.种子植物形态解剖学导论.北京:科学出版社,2001.
27.刘世彪,陈菁,胡正海. 7种番荔枝果树的叶片结构及其与抗寒性关系研究.果树学报,2004, 21(3): 241～246.
28.刘玉红.我国11种披碱草的核型研究.武汉植物学研究,1985, 3(4):325～330.
29.卢宝荣,salomon B.种间杂种染色体配对所揭示的披碱草属植物StY基因组分化及其进化意义.生物多样性,2004,12(2):213～226.
30.卢红双,徐柱,马玉宝,等.披碱草属穗型下垂类种质的形态学鉴定及其聚类分析.云南农业大学学报, 2008, 23(2): 150～161.
31.陆静梅,李建东,景德长,等.星星草Puccinellia tenuiflora(Turcz.) Scribn.et Merr.解剖研究.东北师大学报(自然科学版),1994,1:63～66.
32.陆静梅,李建东.同种不同生态环境植物解剖结构比较研究.东北师大学报(自然科学版),1994,3:100～103.
33.马海英,彭华,王跃华.禾本科广义拂子茅属的叶表皮形态研究.植物分类学报, 2006, (44): 371～392.
34.马青枝,李造哲.披碱草和野大麦及其杂种苗期抗旱性研究.中国草地学报, 2005, 27(6): 23～27.
35.祁娟,徐柱,马玉宝,等.披碱草属六种野生牧草苗期抗旱胁迫的生理变化.中国草地学报,2008, 30(5): 18～24.
36.任文伟,钱吉,吴霆,郑师章.不同地理种群羊草的形态解剖结构的比较研究.复旦学报(自然科学版),1999,38(5): 561～564.
37.税玉民,李启任,黄素华.云南秋海棠属叶表皮及毛被的扫描电镜观察.云南植物研究,1999, 2l(3): 309～316.
38.孙建萍,袁庆华.披碱草属种质资源研究进展.草业科学,2005, 22(12):2～5.
39.唐宗周.甘肃草原禾本科饲用植物资源分布及利用前景.草原与草坪,2006, 117(4): 69～72.
40.王虹,邓彦斌,徐秀珍,等.新疆10种旱生、盐生植物的解剖学研究.新疆大学学报,1998, 11: 66～73.
41.王润辉,夏念和,林汝顺.莿竹属和牡竹属(竹亚科)叶表皮微形态特征.热带亚热带植物学报,2002, 10(1): 22～26.
42.王勋陵,王静.植物的形态结构与环境.兰州:兰州大学出版社,1989,l05～138.
43.王勋陵,马骥.从旱生植物叶结构探讨其生态适应的多样性.生态学报, 1999,19(6): 787～792.
44.王灶安.植物学实验图说.北京:农业出版社,1992.
45.谢可军,文乐元.鹅观草属与披碱草属分类学的历史与现状.草原与草坪, 2000, 91(4) : 6～9.
46.徐柱.中国禾草属志.呼和浩特:内蒙古人民出版社,1997.
47.徐柱.中国牧草手册.北京:化学工业出版社,2004.
48.严学兵,郭玉霞,周禾,王堃.披碱草属植物分类及遗传多样性研究.草业科学,2005, 22(7):1～7.
49.严学兵,周禾,王堃,郭玉霞.披碱草属植物形态多样性及其主成分分析.草地学报,2005,13(2):111～116.
50.杨利民.中国东北样带草原段关键种-羊草茎、叶显微结构的生态可塑性及群落功能群组成和多样性研究[博士后研究工作报告].北京:中国科学院植物研究所,2006.
51.杨瑞武,周永红,郑有良,等.赖草属11个物种的形态学特征比较研究.四川农业大学学报,2003, 21(3): 196～200.
52.杨瑞武,周永红,郑有良.小麦族披碱草属、鹅观草属和猬草属模式种的C带研究.云南植物研究, 2003 , 25 (1) : 71～77.
53.于喜凤,周志强,等.新疆禾本科短命植物旱麦草地营养器官解剖研究.新疆师范大学报(自然科学版),1996, 15(2): 51～54.
54.袁庆华,张吉宇,张文淑,等.披碱草和老芒麦野生居群生物多样性研究.草业学报, 2003, 12(5):44～49.
55.袁庆华,张文淑,苏加楷.披碱草属野生居群表型遗传多样性研究. 2002年学术研讨会论文集.
56.张志耘,卢宝荣,温洁.稻属叶表皮结构特征及其系统学意义.植物分类学报,1998,36(1): 8～
18.
57.赵惠如.禾本科植物叶片的解剖与分类的初步研究.南京师大学报(自然科学版),1984, 4: 72～79.
58.赵庆芳.青藏高原东部嵩草属植物遗传多样性研究[博士学位论文].兰州:兰州大学,2006.
59.周德宝.不同披碱草抗寒性的研究.阴山学刊(自然科学版), 1996, 13(3): 36～39.
60.周玲玲,阎平,唐素英,等.芨芨草营养器官的解剖学研究.石河子大学学报(自然科学报),2002,6(4):298～302.
61.周世权,马恩伟.植物分类学.北京:中国林业出版社,1995.
62.周永红,郑有良,杨俊良,颜济,贾继增.10种披碱草属植物的RAPD分析及其系统学意义.植物分类研究,1999,37 (5) : 425～432.
63.周智彬,李培军.我国旱生植物的形态解剖学研究.干旱区研究,2002,19(1):35～40.
64.朱宇旌,张勇,胡自治,等.小花碱茅茎适应盐胁迫的显微结构研究.中国草地, 2000, 5: 6～9.
65. Barthlott W. Epidermis and seed surface characters of plants. Nord J Bot, 1981, 1: 345～355.
66. Baum B R, Yang J-L, Yen C. Taxonomic separation of Kengyilia (Poaceae: Triticeae) in relation to nearest related Roegneria, Elymus and Agropyron, based on some morphological characters. Pl Syst Evol , 1995, 194 : 123～132.
67. Clayton W D, Renvoize S A. Genera Graminum. London: H.M. Stationery Office Publication,1986,187～255.
68. Dewey D R. The genomic system of classification as a guide to intergeneric hybridization with theperennial Triticeae. In: Gustafson J Ped. Gene manipulation in plant improvement. New York :Plenum Publishing Corporation ,1984, 209～279.
69. Duval-Jouve, J. Histotaxie des feuilles de Graminées. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot, 1875, 6(1):294～371.
70. Ellis, R. P. A review of comparative leaf blade anatomy in the systematics of the Poaceae: The past twenty-five years. In: T. R. Soderstorm et al (eds.). Grass systematics and evolution. Washington, Smithonian Institution Press, 1986, 3～10.
71. Feisl, Fany. Anatomical characteristics of leaves and woods of Fagus lucida and their relationship to ecological factors in Mountain Fanjingshan. Guizhou. China. Acta Botanica Sinica. 1999, 41(9): 1002～1009.
72. H. Motomura, T. Fujii, M. Suzuki. Silica Deposition in Relation to Ageing of Leaf Tissues in Sasa veitchii (Carrieáre) Rehder (Poaceae: Bambusoideae). Annals of Botany, 2004, 93: 235～248.
73. Irena Gielwanowska, Ewa Szczuka, Jozef Bednara, Ryszard Gorecki. Anatomical features and ultrastructure of deschampsia Antarctica (Poaceae) leaves from different growing habitats. Annals of Botany, 2005, 96: 1109～1119.
74. Jones J H. Evolution of the Fagaceae: the implications of foliar feature. Ann Mo Bot Gard, 1986, 73: 228～275.
75. L?ve A. Conspectus of the triticeae. Feddes Report, 1984, 95: 425～521.
76. Lu B R. Genomic relationships within the Elymus parviglumis group (Triticeae: Poaceae).Plant Systematic Evolution, 1993, 187:191～211.
77. Macfarlane, T. D. & L. Watson. The classification of Poaceae subfamily Pooideae. Taxon. 1982, 31(2): 178～203.
78. Nevski S A. TribeⅫHordeae Benth. In: Komarov V L, Roshevits R Y, Shishkin B Keds. Leningrad : Flora USRR, 1934, 2: 590～728.
79. Prat H. La systématique des Graminées. Ann Sci Nat Bot, 1936, 18: 165～258.
80. Setten AK van, Koek-Noorman J. Studies in AnnonaceaeⅥ. A leaf anatomical survey of genera of Annonaceae in the Neotropics. Bot. Jahrb. Syst., 1986,108 (1):17～50.
81. Thomasson, J. R. Fossil grasses: 1820-1986 and beyond. In T. R. Soderstrom, K. W. Hilu, C. S. Campbell, and M. A. Barkworkth [eds.], Grass systematics and evolution, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, 1987, 159～167.
82. Tzvelev N N. Tribe 3. Triticeae Dumort. In: Poaceae USRR. Leningrad: Nauka, 1976, 147～181.