全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

广布种香附子坪用价值评价与水分胁迫形态生理响应
Evaluation of Turf Value and Morphological and Physiological Response to Water Stress of Cyperus rotundus L.

DOI: 10.12677/br.2024.134039, PP. 363-370

Keywords: 广布种香附子,评价,水分胁迫,形态,生理
Cyperus rotundus L.
, Evaluation, Water Stress, Morpholog, Physiology

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

目的:比较香附子在淹水和干旱胁迫下的抗性生理和叶片表皮细胞形态的响应,为野草香附子应用于抗旱和抗涝性坪用植被提供依据。方法:本实验对香附子各项指标进行坪用价值分析;采用双套盆法对野草香附子进行淹水(S)、持续干旱(G)和正常供水(CK)共3个处理的水分胁迫试验,分别于处理7d后测定野草香附子的各项生理指标;在大田条件下,采用景观–生态–应用草坪质量评价体系,综合评价野草香附子的草坪应用价值。结果:结果表明,香附子的坪用价值较高,适宜作草坪植物;香附子在不同水分胁迫下,各项形态指标表现出显著差异,其中干旱胁迫和淹水胁迫下香附子的MDA含量比CK下降8.4%和11.4%,SOD活性比CK分别上升7.2%和16.6%,Pro含量比CK分别上升18.9%和21.5%。结论:野草香附子能够适应较严酷的淹水环境和干旱环境,且更加耐淹水胁迫,野草香附子可以适应我国干旱和多雨地区园林草坪建植种推广种植。
Objective: To compare the resistance physiology and leaf epidermal cell morphology response of Cyperus rotundus L. under flooding and drought stress, and provide the basis for the application of Cyperus rotundus L. to drought and waterlogging resistant flat vegetation. Method: In this experiment, the application value of each index of Cyperus rotundus L. is analyzed. Water stress tests were carried out on Cyperus rotundus L. with three treatments: Flooding (S), persistent drought (G) and normal water supply (CK), and the physiological indexes of Cyperus rotundus L. were determined after 7 days of treatment, and the morphology of epidermal cells of its leaves was observed. Under the field condition, the landscape-ecology-application lawn quality evaluation system was adopted to comprehensively evaluate the application value of Cyperus rotundus L. lawn. Result: The results showed that Cyperus rotundus L. had a higher value in lawn and was suitable for lawn plant; under different water stress, the plant morphological indexes showed significant differences. Under drought stress and flooding stress, MDA content decreased by 8.4% and 11.4%, SOD activity increased by 7.2% and 16.6%, and Pro content increased by 18.9% and 21.5%, respectively, compared with CK. The number of stomata in the lower epidermis of Cyperus rotundus L. under flooding stress was similar to that in the normal water supply group. The number of stomata decreased obviously in drought stress group. The number of cells in the upper epidermis was the highest in the drought stress group, followed by the normal management group, and the lowest in the flooded group. In the comparison of upper epidermal cell length, the flooded group was the longest, followed by the normal management group, and the drought stress group was the shortest. Conclusion: Cyperus rotundus L. can adapt to harsher waterlogged environment and drought environment, and more tolerant to waterlogged stress, Cyperus rotundus L. can adapt to China’s arid and rainy areas of garden lawn planting and promotion of planting.

References

[1]  蔡沙. 水分胁迫对醉马草幼苗生长及其生理特性的影响[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆农业大学, 2021.
[2]  Pyankov, V.I., Gunin, P.D., Tsoog, S., et al. (2000) C4 Plants in the Vegetation of Mongolia: Their Natural Occurrence and Geographical Distribution in Relation to Climate. Oecologia, 123, 15-31.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050985
[3]  段娜, 王佳, 刘芳, 等. 植物抗旱性研究进展[J]. 分子植物育种, 2018, 16(15): 5093-5099.
[4]  Mates, J.M. (2000) Effects of Antioxidant Enzymes in the Molecular Control of Reactive Oxygen Species Toxicology. Toxicology, 153, 83-104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0300-483X(00)00306-1
[5]  史宝胜, 刘冬云, 张晓磊, 等. 水分胁迫对金叶榆含水量、细胞质膜相对透性和抗氧化系统的影响[J]. 西北农业学报, 2010, 19(9): 88-92.
[6]  季杨, 张新全, 彭燕, 等. 干旱胁迫对鸭茅根、叶保护酶活性、渗透物质含量及膜质过氧化作用的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(3): 144-151.
[7]  邸锐, 杨春燕. 干旱胁迫下极细链格孢激活蛋白对大豆幼苗形态、叶片含水量、细胞质膜相对透性和抗氧化酶的影响[J]. 华北农学报, 2016, 31(S1): 213-218.
[8]  Li, J., Cang, Z., Jiao, F., et al. (2017) Influence of Drought Stress on Photosynthetic Characteristics and Protective Enzymes of Potato at Seedling Stage. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 16, 82-88.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2015.03.001
[9]  郑祥. 土壤水分含量对南荻根状茎萌发、幼苗生长及其生理的影响[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 南昌: 江西师范大学, 2018.
[10]  李玲. 植物生理学模块实验指导[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2009.
[11]  焦蓉, 刘好宝, 刘贯山, 等. 论脯氨酸累积与植物抗渗透胁迫[J]. 中国农学通报, 2011, 27(7): 216-221.
[12]  Kishor, P.B.K., Sangam, S., Amrutha, R.N., et al. (2005) Regulation of Proline Biosynthesis, Degradation, Uptake and Transport in Higher Plants: Its Implications in Plant Growth and Abiotic Stress Tolerance. Current Science, 88, 424-438.
[13]  Tanner, J.J. (2008) Structural Biology of Proline Catabolism. Amino Acids, 35, 719-730.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00726-008-0062-5
[14]  Vendruscolo, E.C.G., Schuster, I., Pileggi, M., et al. (2007) Stress-Induced Synthesis of Proline Confers Tolerance to Water Deficit in Transgenic Wheat. Journal of Plant Physiology, 164, 1367-1376.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2007.05.001
[15]  Hoque, M.A., Okuma, E., Banu, M.N.A., et al. (2007) Exogenous Proline Mitigates the Detrimental Effects of Salt Stress More than Exogenous Betaine by Increasing Antioxidant Enzyme Activities. Journal of Plant Physiology, 164, 553-561.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2006.03.010
[16]  谭淑端, 张守君, 张克荣, 等. 长期深淹对三峡库区三种草本植物的恢复生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 武汉植物学研究, 2009, 27(4): 391-396.
[17]  谭淑端, 朱明勇, 党海山, 等. 三峡库区狗牙根对深淹胁迫的生理响应[J]. 生态学报, 2009, 29(7); 3685-3691.
[18]  谭淑端, 朱明勇, 张克荣, 等. 植物对水淹胁迫的响应与适应[J]. 生态学杂志, 2009, 28(9): 1871-1877.
[19]  王吉. 糯玉米近等基因系耐涝性差异机理及遗传研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 沈阳: 沈阳农业大学, 2018.
[20]  王灿灿. 香附子块茎抑菌和除草活性成分研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 南宁: 广西大学, 2020.
[21]  薛晶. 甘蔗附灭对甘蔗天恶性杂草香附子的防除实验[J]. 广西糖业, 2011(4): 6-7.
[22]  郭怡卿, 赵国晶. 旱地恶性杂草-黄香附与紫香附[J]. 云南农业科技, 1992(4): 16-17.
[23]  Andrews, F.W. (1940) A Study of Nut Grsass (Cyperus rotundus L.) in the Cotton Soil of the Gezira. Annals of Botany, 4, 177-193.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a086324
[24]  刘旭, 陈瑞梅, 郭泉水, 肖文发. 香附子对不同土壤水分梯度的适应性研究[J]. 中国要业, 2012(16): 13-14.
[25]  张晶, 刘利, 徐慧荣, 金娟. 香附化学成分及药理作用价值研究新进展[J]. 化学工程师, 2021, 35(3): 54-62.
[26]  郑海, 王莹, 徐娟, 等. 两栖植物香附子的解剖结构和组织化学研究[J/OL]. 草业学报, 2024: 1-10.
http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/62.1105.S.20240314.0922.008.html
[27]  黄丽容, 郭晓云, 胡营, 等. 香附子全长转录组测序及生物信息学分析[J]. 中国现代中药, 2023, 25(7): 1428-1440.
[28]  义珊池. 旱地杂草香附子耐水淹的适应性机制初步研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 南宁: 广西大学, 2023.
[29]  杨曼, 张佑麟, 徐振东, 费永俊. 水分胁迫对黑壳楠和香樟幼苗生理特性的影响[J]. 南方农业学报, 2015, 46(8): 1449-1454.
[30]  潘艳艳, 张义飞, 宿鹏鹍, 等. 郁金香物候期及特性[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2021, 49(8): 137-140.
[31]  刘建秀. 草坪坪用价值综合体系的探讨——I. 评价体系的建立[J]. 中国草地, 1998(1): 44-47.
[32]  刘建秀. 草坪坪用价值综合体系的探讨——II. 评价体系的应用[J]. 中国草地, 2000(3): 54-56.
[33]  黄广远, 祁芳梅. 6种草坪草在荆州坪用价值的对比分析[J]. 长江大学学报, 2005, 2(11): 37-39, 66.
[34]  张巨明, 麦靖雯, 武鑫, 徐彦花. 3种冷季草坪草建植的混合草坪比较与评价[J]. 广东农业科学, 2019, 46(7): 46-52.
[35]  王艳, 丁莎, 骆俊, 费永俊. 涝渍胁迫下牡丹的生理响应[J]. 长江大学学报, 2011(8): 34-38.
[36]  盖盼盼, 马尚宇, 耿兵婕, 等. 渍水和增温对小麦根系形态、生理和地上部物质积累的影响[J]. 南京农业大学学报, 2022, 45(4): 637-646.
[37]  李珣, 黄小丽, 费永俊. 植被砼上14个狗牙根叶片表皮细胞比较研究[J]. 长江大学学报, 2013(10): 31-36.
[38]  刘泽彬, 程瑞梅, 肖文发, 郭泉水, 等. 淹水对三峡库区消落带香附子生长及光合特性的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2013, 32(8): 15-22.
[39]  产祝龙, 胡涛, 王增裕, 等. 草坪学研究现状未来挑战和发展趋势[J]. 中国科学基金, 2023, 37(4): 623-631.

Full-Text

comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133

WeChat 1538708413