4种观赏草的耐阴特性研究及评价

doi:10.11686/cyxb2018375

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为了探究4种观赏草在不同遮阴条件下的耐阴状况,选取蓝羊茅、崂峪苔草、拂子茅和披针叶苔草4种观赏草为研究对象,采用人工搭棚模拟遮阴法,对上述4种观赏草的形态指标和叶绿素含量、叶绿素a/b、可溶性糖含量、超氧化物歧化酶(superoxide dismutase,SOD)活性、过氧化物酶(peroxidase,POD)活性等生理指标进行测定,以确定4种观赏草的耐阴性强弱。结果表明,不同遮阴处理后,4种观赏草的株高、冠幅、叶长、叶绿素含量、SOD和POD活性随着遮阴度的增加先上升后降低且较CK差异显著(P<0.05),而叶绿素a/b和可溶性糖含量随着遮阴度的增加而降低,且较CK差异显著(P<0.05)。不同品种间在各指标变化中存在差异,蓝羊茅和拂子茅T₁(遮阴度48.5%)处理的株高、冠幅、叶长、叶绿素含量、SOD和POD活性比其他处理升高更显著,崂峪苔草和披针叶苔草T₂(遮阴度70.0%)处理的株高、冠幅、叶长、叶绿素含量、SOD和POD活性比其他处理升高更显著。在整个试验过程中,4种观赏草可通过增加形态指标、叶绿素含量、SOD和POD活性,降低叶绿素 a/b的响应机制适应遮阴环境。此外,4种观赏草对遮阴的响应机制和耐阴能力大小存在差异,崂峪苔草和披针叶苔草忍受遮阴强度为70%的中度遮阴环境,而蓝羊茅和拂子茅忍受遮阴度为48.5%的轻度遮阴环境。通过隶属函数法综合分析可知,4种观赏草的耐阴性大小顺序为:披针叶苔草>崂峪苔草>拂子茅>蓝羊茅。

关键词: 观赏草, 形态指标, 生理指标, 耐阴性, 隶属函数分析

Abstract: This study investigated the shade tolerance of four ornamental grass and sedge cultivars Festuca glauca, Calamagrostis epigeios, Carex lanceolata and Carex giraldiana under different shading treatments. Morphological indices, chlorophyll levels, chlorophyll a∶b ratio, soluble sugar, activity of superoxide dismutase (SOD) and peroxidase (POD) were determined under artificial shading treatments (CK, unshaded; T₁, 48.5% shade; T₂, 70% shade; T₃, 87% shade) to evaluate the resistance to the four ornamental grass and sedge cultivars to shading. With moderately increased shade, plant height, crown diameter, leaf length, chlorophyll content, SOD and POD activity were increased, but under more severe shade they were decreased, compared to CK plants. Chlorophyll a∶b ratio and soluble sugar content were significantly decreased by shading, compared to control plants. There were different patterns of change among the different parameters measured in the different cultivars. The increases in plant height, crown width, leaf length, chlorophyll content, SOD activity and POD activity of F. glauca and C. epigeios for T₁ were significantly higher than those of other treatments. By comparison, for the same parameters in C. giraldiana and C. lanceolata values were markedly higher in T₂ than in the other treatments. In this experiment, the four ornamental species tested responded to shading by etiolation responses, increased chlorophyll content, and SOD and POD activities and reduced chlorophyll a:b ratio. In addition, there were differences in the response mechanism and shade tolerance of the four ornamental grasses and sedges. C. giraldiana and C. lanceolata were shown to be tolerant of moderate shade with a shade intensity of 70%; while F. glauca and C. epigeios only tolerated endure a light shading environment with a shading degree of 48.5%. A subordinate function analysis indicated that the shade tolerance of four ornamental grasses and sedges ranked: C. lanceolata>C. giraldiana>C. epigeios>F. glauca.

Key words: ornamental grass, morphological criteria, physiological index, shade tolerance, subordination function analysis

张朝铖, 蒋倩, 吴志, 何新杰, 蒋凯, 高静雅, 李翔, 王宁. 4种观赏草的耐阴特性研究及评价[J]. 草业学报, 2019, 28(7): 60-72.

ZHANG Chao-cheng, JIANG Qian, WU Zhi, HE Xin-jie, JIANG Kai, GAO Jing-ya, LI Xiang, WANG Ning. Studies of the shade-tolerance of four ornamental grass and sedge cultivars[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2019, 28(7): 60-72.

参考文献

[1] Wu J Y, Teng W J, Yuan X H.Evaluation and application of ornamental grasses in Beijing. Chinese Landscape Architecture, 2008, (12): 21-24.
武菊英, 滕文军, 袁小环. 适宜北京地区的观赏草评价与应用. 中国园林, 2008, (12): 21-24.
[2] Chen C, Yuan X H, Yang X J, et al. Research summary and landscape application of ornamental grasses. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2015, 31(19): 135-143.
陈超, 袁小环, 杨学军, 等. 观赏草的研究概况和园林应用. 中国农学通报, 2015, 31(19): 135-143.
[3] Chen Y.Bibliometric analysis of ornamental grasses in china. Pratacultural Science, 2011, 28(8): 1435-1438.
陈莹. 观赏草研究文献分析. 草业科学, 2011, 28(8): 1435-1438.
[4] Shi J C.Study on relationship of shade-resistance and chlorophyll content of Carex giraldiana. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2007, (3): 240-243.
石进朝. 涝峪苔草叶绿素含量与耐阴性研究. 中国农学通报, 2007, (3): 240-243.
[5] Zhang C T, Zhu X L, Cai K F, et al. Evaluation of shade tolerance of Carex species available for garden-environment planting. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2010, 32(4): 207-212.
张春桃, 朱小楼, 蔡开锋, 等. 薹草的耐阴性研究及园林适用环境分析. 北京林业大学学报, 2010, 32(4): 207-212.
[6] Wang Q H, Yuan X H, Wu J Y, et al. Index system and fuzzy synthetic assessment in landscape evaluation of ornamental grasses. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008, (2): 381-386.
王庆海, 袁小环, 武菊英, 等. 观赏草景观效果评价指标体系及其模糊综合评判. 应用生态学报, 2008, (2): 381-386.
[7] Li Z L, Guo K X, Zhou S B, et al. Effect of light intensity on biological characteristics, physiological indexes and flavone content of Kalimeris indica. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(4): 162-170.
李中林, 郭开秀, 周守标, 等. 光强对马兰形态、生理及黄酮类化合物含量的影响. 草业学报, 2014, 23(4): 162-170.
[8] Gommers C M, Visser E J, St Onge K R, et al. Shade tolerance: When growing tall is not an option. Trends in Plant Science, 2013, 18(2): 65-71.
[9] Dougherty R F, Quinn L D, Voigt T B, et al. Response of naturalized and ornamental biotypes of miscanthus sinensis to soil-moisture and shade stress. Northeastern Naturalist, 2015, 22(2): 372-386.
[10] Wang Y, Su X H, Peng Z H.Review of studies on plant shade-tolerance. Forest Research, 2002, (3): 349-355.
王雁, 苏雪痕, 彭镇华. 植物耐阴性研究进展. 林业科学研究, 2002, (3): 349-355.
[11] Liu Z H.Study on shade-tolerance of several ornamental grasses of the genus Pennisetum. Tai’an: Shandong Agricultural University, 2009.
刘宗华.几种(品种)狼尾草属观赏草的耐阴性研究. 泰安: 山东农业大学, 2009.
[12] Li Y L, Gui K Y, Tang Q R, et al. Review of studies on shade-tolerance of ground cover plants. Modern Horticulture, 2008, (5): 4-5.
李炎林, 桂克印, 唐前瑞, 等. 地被植物耐阴性研究进展. 现代园艺, 2008, (5): 4-5.
[13] Yang Z M, Chen Y, Han L B, et al. Effects of different light intensity on characters and physiological indexes of festuca arundinacea. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2007, 16(6): 23-29.
杨志民, 陈煜, 韩烈保, 等. 不同光照强度对高羊茅形态和生理指标的影响. 草业学报, 2007, 16(6): 23-29.
[14] Wang X, Zhang X Q, Liu J P.The main physiological reaction of turf grass to shading stress. Pratacultural Science, 2006, 23(4): 86-90.
王迅, 张新全, 刘金平. 草坪草对遮阴胁迫的生理反应. 草业科学, 2006, 23(4): 86-90.
[15] Cang J, Zhao H J.Plant physiology experiment course. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2013.
苍晶, 赵会杰. 植物生理实验教程. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2013.
[16] Hu X X, Duan Y X, Jin H X, et al. Shade tolerance of four Rhododendron varieties. Journal of Zhejiang Agriculture and Forestry University, 2018, 35(1): 88-95.
胡肖肖, 段玉侠, 金荷仙, 等. 4个杜鹃花品种的耐阴性. 浙江农林大学学报, 2018, 35(1): 88-95.
[17] Wei P.Study on the effect of shade on growth and development of native Bermudagrass in Sichuan. Ya’an : Sichuan Agricultural University, 2005.
魏萍. 遮阴对四川野生狗牙根生长发育的影响. 雅安: 四川农业大学, 2005.
[18] Li Z F.Experimental guidance of plant physiology. Chengdu: Southwest Jiaotong University Press, 2015.
李仲芳. 植物生理学实验指导. 成都: 西南交通大学出版社, 2015.
[19] Guo X, Xie F, Yan Q Q, et al. Effect of fulvic acid on drought resistance of nursery stocks in a dry valley of the Bailongjiang River, Gansu. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(8): 86-94.
郭星, 谢飞, 闫倩倩, 等. 黄腐酸对白龙江干旱河谷5种苗木抗旱性的影响. 草业学报, 2018, 27(8): 86-94.
[20] Liu Q C, Liu Q H, Ma Z X, et al. A study on the tolerance of Lauraceae obtusiloba. Acta Prataculturea Sinica, 2013, 22(6): 93-99.
刘庆超, 刘庆华, 马宗骧, 等. 三桠乌药耐阴性研究. 草业学报, 2013, 22(6): 93-99.
[21] Qin F F, Shen Y X, Zhou J G, et al. Seedling morphology and growth responses of nine Medicago sativa varieties to shade conditions. Acta Prataculturea Sinica, 2010, 19(3): 204-211.
覃凤飞, 沈益新, 周建国, 等. 遮阴条件下9个紫花苜蓿品种苗期形态及生长响应. 草业学报, 2010, 19(3): 204-211.
[22] Gao J, Wang Z H, Wei Y T.Study on shade tolerance of 5 ground-covering plants introduced in Jinzhong. Shanxi Forestry Science and Technology, 2018, 47(2): 34-37.
高娟, 王志红, 卫永太. 晋中市引种5种园林地被植物的耐阴性研究. 山西林业科技, 2018, 47(2): 34-37.
[23] Wittmann C, Aschan G, Pfanz H.Leaf and twig photosynthesis of young beech (Fagus sylvatica) and aspen (Populus tremula) trees grown under different light regime.Basic and Applied Ecology, 2001, 2(2): 145-154.
[24] Jason J G, Thomas G R, Pharr D M.Photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence, and carbohydrate content of illicium taxa grown under varied irradiance. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 2004, 129(1): 46-53.
[25] Zhou H, Li J L, Huang W Q, et al. Comparisons on shade-tolerance and ornamental quality of several turfgrasses under different shading conditions. Grassland and Turf, 2010, 30(6): 19-25.
周红, 李建龙, 黄武强, 等. 不同遮阴条件下几种草坪草的耐阴性及观赏品质比较. 草原与草坪, 2010, 30(6): 19-25.
[26] Lin S Y, Zhang Q F, Chen Q X.Shade-tolerance of ten species of garden plants. Journal of Northeast Forestry University, 2007, (7): 32-34.
林树燕, 张庆峰, 陈其旭. 10种园林植物的耐阴性. 东北林业大学学报, 2007, (7): 32-34.
[27] Mu H R, Jiang D, Dai T B, et al. Effects of shading on photosynthetic and chlorophyll fluorescence characteristics of wheat flag leaves. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2008, 41(2): 599-606.
牟会荣, 姜东, 戴廷波, 等. 遮阴对小麦旗叶光合及叶绿素荧光特性的影响. 中国农业科学, 2008, 41(2): 599-606.
[28] Luo Y, Xi J B, Tan X H, et al. Evaluation of shade tolerance of nine warm-season turfgrass and selection of their shade tolerant indices. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(5): 239-247.
罗耀, 席嘉宾, 谭筱弘, 等. 9种暖季型草坪草耐阴性综合评价及其指标的筛选. 草业学报, 2013, 22(5): 239-247.
[29] Jiang H D, Sun X F, Wu C, et al. Effects of light and seeding rates on the growth and turf quality of tall fescue (Festuca arundinecea). Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2000, 9(4): 63-67.
江海东, 孙小芳, 吴春, 等. 光照和播种量对高羊茅生长及草坪质量的影响. 草业学报, 2000, 9(4): 63-67.
[30] Zeng X P, Zhao P, Cai X A, et al. Shade-tolerance of 25 low subtropical plants. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2006, (4): 88-95.
曾小平, 赵平, 蔡锡安, 等. 25种南亚热带植物耐阴性的初步研究. 北京林业大学学报, 2006, (4): 88-95.
[31] Jiang J L, Sun Y.Ecophysiological and morphological responses of Carex rigescens from different sources to different shading levels. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2013, (6): 1136-1143.
江佳琳, 孙彦. 遮阴强度对不同来源白颖苔草形态和生理指标的影响. 草地学报, 2013, (6): 1136-1143.