不同居群马蔺抗旱性评价及生理指标变化分析

草业学报 ›› 2009, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (5): 18-24.

不同居群马蔺抗旱性评价及生理指标变化分析

孟林,毛培春,张国芳

北京市农林科学院北京草业与环境研究发展中心,北京 100097

收稿日期:2008-12-17 出版日期:2009-10-20 发布日期:2009-10-20
作者简介:孟林(1966-),男,内蒙古乌兰察布人,副研究员,博士。E-mail:menglin9599@sina.com
基金资助:
北京市自然科学基金项目(6062012)和北京市科技计划项目(Z09090501040902)资助。

Evaluation of drought resistance and analysis of physiological index variation for different Chinese Iris populations

MENG Lin, MAO Pei-chun, ZHANG Guo-fang

Beijing Research and Development Center for Grasses and Environment, Beijing Academy of
Agriculture and Forestry Sciences, Beijing 100097, China

Received:2008-12-17 Online:2009-10-20 Published:2009-10-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 对我国北方不同居群的15份野生马蔺种质材料采用温室苗期模拟旱境胁迫-复水方法,于干旱胁迫0,5,10,15,20,25 d和复水后5 d分别取样测定叶片相对电导率(REC)、游离脯氨酸(Pro)、丙二醛(MDA)、叶绿素SPAD值、相对含水量(RWC)、植株相对生长率(RGR)等生理与生长指标,利用欧氏最大距离法聚类分析划分为强抗旱、中度抗旱和弱抗旱3个抗旱级别,研究其生理指标的变化趋势和规律。结果显示,在连续干旱胁迫下,3个抗旱级别马蔺种质材料的REC、Pro和MDA均呈逐渐增加趋势,增幅表现为强抗旱<中度抗旱<弱抗旱,于胁迫前20 d三者间REC差异不显著,但胁迫到25 d时,呈显著差异(P<0.05);于胁迫前15 d 三者间Pro、MDA差异不显著,但胁迫到20和25 d时,差异均显著(P<0.05)。3个抗旱级别种质的叶绿素SPAD 值和RWC呈逐渐下降趋势,降幅表现为强抗旱<中度抗旱<弱抗旱,分别于胁迫到20和25 d达到显著差异(P<0.05)。复水后,各指标均有不同程度的恢复。

Abstract: The drought resistance of 15 germplasms of Iris lactea var chinensis from different populations in northern China at the seedling stage was comprehensively identified and evaluated in a green house using the simulated drought stress and rewatering method. The relative electrical conductivity rate (REC), content of malondialdehyde(MDA), free proline accumulation (Pro), relative water content of leaves (RWC), SPAD value of chlorophyll, and relative growth rates (RGR) were measured at 0, 5, 10, 15, 20 and 25 d of drought stress and at 5 d after rewatering. Three drought resistant classes (high drought resistance (HDR), medium drought resistance (MDR), and weak drought resistance (WDR)) were classified using the maximum distance cluster method, and the variation trends and rules of physiological indexes were analyzed. The REC, Pro, and MDA of three different drought resistant classes showed a gradual increasing trend in the order HDR<MDR<WDR. The REC showed no significant difference between the three drought resistant classes before stress day 20, but there was a significant (P<0.05) difference at 25 d. There was no significant difference in Pro or MDA between the three drought resistant classes before stress day 15, but there was a significant (P<0.05) difference at days 20 and 25. The SPAD value of chlorophyll and RWC showed gradual decreasing trends in the order HDR<MDR<WDR. The SPAD value and RWC had significant differences at days 20 and 25 between the three drought resistant classes. The physiological indexes recovered to different degrees after rewatering.

中图分类号:

Q945.79

孟林,毛培春,张国芳. 不同居群马蔺抗旱性评价及生理指标变化分析[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(5): 18-24.

MENG Lin, MAO Pei-chun, ZHANG Guo-fang. Evaluation of drought resistance and analysis of physiological index variation for different Chinese Iris populations[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(5): 18-24.

参考文献

[1]陈默君,贾慎修. 中国饲用植物. 北京:中国农业出版社,2000. 1441.
[2] 孟林,张国芳,赵茂林. 水保护坡观赏优良地被植物——马蔺. 农业新技术,2003,(3):38-39.
[3] 牟少华,韩蕾,孙振元. 鸢尾属植物马蔺(Iris lactea var. chinensis)的研究现状与开发利用建议. 莱阳农学院学报,2005,22(2):125-128.
[4] 王桂芹.不同生态环境马蔺植物体解剖结构比较.内蒙古民族大学学报(自然科学版),2002,17(2):127-129.
[5] 刘德福,陈世璜,陈敬文,等.马蔺的繁殖特性及生态地理分布的研究.内蒙古农牧学院学报,1998,19(1):1-6.
[6] Waddick J W, Zhao Y T. Iris of China, Protland, Oregon, USA: Timber Press, 1992.
[7] 樊润成.盐碱荒地旱生植物马蔺的研究.内蒙古农业科技,1991,(5):17-18.
[8] 刘广军.野生地被植物马蔺的栽培技术及应用.吉林蔬菜,1996,(1):27.
[9] 徐秀梅,张新华,王汉杰. Co⁶⁰-r射线辐照对马蔺种子萌发的影响.南京农业大学学报,2003,27(1):55-58.
[10] 刘孟颖,高洋,于世达,等. 马蔺的组织培养及无性系建立的研究. 辽宁农业科学,2007,(6):4-6.
[11] 赵燕燕.鸢尾属几种植物的抗旱性研究.南京:南京林业大学硕士学位论文, 2007.
[12] 史晓霞,毛培春,张国芳,等. 15份马蔺材料苗期抗旱性比较. 草地学报,2007,16(4):352-358.
[13] 史晓霞,张国芳,孟林,等. 马蔺叶片解剖结构特征与其抗旱性关系研究. 植物研究,2008,28(5):584-588.
[14] 华孟,王坚. 土壤物理学附实验指导. 北京:北京农业大学出版社,1993.44.
[15] 邹琦. 植物生理学实验指导. 北京:中国农业出版社,2000.159-173.
[16] 卢纹岱. SPSS for Windows 统计分析(第3版). 北京:电子工业出版社,2007.391-443.
[17] 王忠. 植物生理学. 北京:中国农业出版社,2000.434.
[18] 张力君,易津,贾光宏,等. 9种禾草对干旱胁迫的生理反应.内蒙古农业大学学报,2000,21(4):14-19.
[19] 孙铁军,苏日古嘎,马万里,等.10 种禾草苗期抗旱性的比较研究.草业学报,2008,17(4):42-49.
[20] 陈之欢. 水分胁迫对两种旱生花卉生理生化的影响.中国农学通报,2002,18(2):20-23.
[21] 云锦凤,高卫华,孙彦. 四种冰草属牧草苗期抗旱性研究.中国草地,1991,(增刊):1-7.
[22] 云岚,米福贵,云锦凤,等. 六个苜蓿品种幼苗对水分胁迫的响应及其抗旱性.中国草地,2004,26(2):15-20
[23] 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.干旱区研究,2008,25(2):232-235.
[24] 林植芳,李双顺,林桂珠,等. 水稻叶片超氧化物歧化酶活性及脂膜过氧化作用. 植物学报,1984,26(6):605-615.
[25] 曲涛,南志标.作物和牧草对干旱胁迫的响应及机理研究进展.草业学报,2008,17(2):126-135.
[26] 胡化广,刘建秀,宣继萍,等.结缕草属植物的抗旱性初步评价.草业学报,2007,16(1):47-51.