不同生育期脆性突变水稻细胞壁组分动态变化研究

草业学报 ›› 2010, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (1): 151-157.

不同生育期脆性突变水稻细胞壁组分动态变化研究

苏衍菁¹,赵国琦^1*,王小山¹,严长杰²,吕宗友¹

1.扬州大学动物科学与技术学院,江苏扬州 225009;
2.扬州大学植物功能基因组学教育部重点实验室
江苏省作物遗传生理重点实验室,江苏扬州 225009

收稿日期:2009-03-01 出版日期:2010-01-25 发布日期:2010-02-20
作者简介:苏衍菁(1986-),男,江苏南通人,硕士。E-mail:syjyzedu@163.com
基金资助:
科技部支撑项目(2006BAD04A03-07)资助。

Kinetic study on cell wall components for brittleness mutation rice at different growth stages

SU Yan-jing¹, ZHAO Guo-qi¹, WANG Xiao-shan¹, YAN Chang-jie², LV Zhong-you¹

1.College of Animal Science and Technology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China;
2.Key
Laboratory of Plant Functional Genomics, Ministry of Education/Jiangsu Key Laboratory of
Crop Genetics and Physiology, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225009, China

Received:2009-03-01 Online:2010-01-25 Published:2010-02-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 试验以伽马射线辐射选育的脆性突变(brittleness mutation,BM)水稻和亲本中花11(Zhonghua 11)为材料,分析分蘖期、抽穗期(约50％抽穗)、成熟期细胞壁纤维组成动态变化特点。结果表明,1)整个生育期BM水稻都具有茎叶易折的特点。2)对照亲本各部位的纤维素含量有先升高后降低的变化趋势,半纤维素含量前期变化不显著,后期显著下降;BM水稻各部位的纤维素含量则表现出逐渐升高的趋势,半纤维素含量尽管有逐渐下降的趋势,但变化不显著。3)与对照亲本相比,BM水稻细胞壁纤维组分变化较大:分蘖期,BM水稻茎、叶、鞘纤维素含量分别极显著下降34.69%, 25.89%和28.85%(P<0.01),而半纤维素含量则分别极显著上升15.77%, 31.31%和19.32%(P<0.01);抽穗期, BM水稻茎、叶、鞘纤维素含量分别极显著下降32.31%,32.25%和34.69%(P<0.01),而半纤维素含量则分别极显著上升25.39%,32.78%和20.91%(P<0.01);成熟期,两者纤维素差异不显著,但BM水稻茎、叶、鞘半纤维素含量依然极显著高于对照亲本。鉴于以上特征,BM水稻具有作为饲料稻的潜在优势。

Abstract: The kinetic changes of cell wall components between brittleness mutation (BM) rice [Obtained by gamma-ray (γ) treatment] for seeds and its wild type from japonica variety Zhonghua-11 was investigated. 1) BM-rice stem and leaves had brittle and fragile characters in all growth stages. 2) For wild type rice, cellulose content increased during vegetative growth, and then decreased during reproductive growth. Hemi-cellulose content was not changed significantly in the forward process, but decreased drastically in the backward process. For BM-rice, cellulose content was increased gradually over the whole life of the plant. Hemi-cellulose content showed a decreasing trend, but this was not significant between the growth stages. 3) At the tillering stage, the cellulose content of BM-rice stem, leaf and sheath significantly decreased (P<0.01) by 34.69%, 25.89% and 28.85%, respectively compared with that of wild type but the corresponding hemi-cellulose content significantly increased (P<0.01) by 15.77%, 31.31% and 19.32%, respectively. At the heading stage, the cellulose content of BM-rice stem, leaf and sheath significantly decreased (P<0.01) by 32.31%, 32.25% and 34.69%, respectively and the hemi-cellulose content significantly decreased (P<0.01) by 25.39%, 32.78% and 20.91%, respectively. At maturation, BM-rice and CK-rice cellulose content were not significantly (P>0.05) different, but hemi-cellulose contents of BM-rice stem, leaf and sheath were significantly higher than those of the CK-rice. Above all, BM-rice has a potential advantage for utilization as a fodder-rice.

中图分类号:

Q942
S511.03

苏衍菁,赵国琦,王小山,严长杰²,吕宗友. 不同生育期脆性突变水稻细胞壁组分动态变化研究[J]. 草业学报, 2010, 19(1): 151-157.

SU Yan-jing, ZHAO Guo-qi, WANG Xiao-shan, YAN Chang-jie, LV Zhong-you. Kinetic study on cell wall components for brittleness mutation rice at different growth stages[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(1): 151-157.

参考文献

[1] 沈恒胜,陈君琛,倪德斌.稻草硅化和溶解特性对稻草纤维降解率及其利用的影响[J].中国农业科学, 2001, 34(6): 672-678.
[2] Liu J X, rskov E R. Cellulase treatment of untreated and steam pre-treated rice straw-effect on in vitro fermentation characteristics[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2000, 88: 189-200.
[3] Weimer P J, Mertens D R, Severin B F, et al. FIBEX-treated rice straw as a feed ingredient for lactating dairy cows[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2003, 103: 41-50.
[4] Selim A S M, Pan J, Takano T, et al. Effect of ammonia treatment on physical strength of rice straw, distribution of straw particles and particle-associated bacteria in sheep rumen[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2004, 115: 117-128.
[5] Abou-El-Enin O H, Fadel J G, Mackill D J. Differences in chemical composition and fibre digestion of rice straw with, and without, anhydrous ammonia from 53 rice varieties[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1999, 79: 129-136.
[6] Yan C J, Yan S, Zeng X H, et al. Fine mapping and isolation of Bc7 (t), allelic to OsCesA4[J].Journal of Genetics and Genomics, 2007, 34(11): 1019-1027.
[7] Su Y J, Yan C J, Zhao G Q, et al. Analysis of cell wall components and ultra-structure for brittleness mutation rice[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2008, 16(6): 594-660.
[8] Van Soest P J, Robertson J B, Lewis A. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition[J]. Journal of Dairy Science, 1991, 74: 3583-3598.
[9] Yoshida S, Ohnishi Y, Kitagishi K. Histochemistry of silicon in rice plant Ⅱ.Localization of silicon within rice tissue[J]. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 1962, 8(1): 36-41.
[10] Juliano B O. Rice hull and rice straw[A]. Rice Chemical and Technology[M]. Minnesota: American Association of Cereal Chemists Inc, 1985: 689-755.
[11] Hossain M T, Mori R, Soga K, et al. Growth promotion and increase in cell wall extensibility by silicon in rice and some other Poaceae seedings[J]. Journal of Plant Research, 2002, 115: 23-27.
[12] 翁仁宪,武田友四郎,县和一.水稻稻谷产量与生物质产量的相关性研究[J].日作纪, 1982, 51(4): 500-509.
[13] Agbagla-Dohnani A, Noziere P, Gaillard-Martinie B,et al. Effect of silica content on rice straw ruminal degradation[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 2003, 140: 183-192.
[14] Van Soest P J. Rice straw, the role of silica and treatments to improve quality[J].Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2006, 130: 137-171.
[15] Habib G, Shah S B A, Inayat K. Genetic variation in morphological characteristics, chemical composition and in vitro digestibility of straw from different wheat cultivars[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1995, 55: 263-274.
[16] 党佩珍,张凤样,王绛辉.秸秆养牛新技术[M].南昌:江西科学技术出版社,1997.
[17] Keys J E, DeBarthe J V. Cellulose and hemi-cellulose digestibility in the stomach, small intestine and large intestine of swine[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 1974, 39: 53-56.
[18] Allen M S. Physical constrains on voluntary intake of forage by ruminants[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 1996, 74: 3063-3075.
[19] Miron J. Field yield, ensiling properties and digestibility by sheep of silages from two forage sorghum varieties[J]. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 2007, 136(3-4): 203-215.
[20] 张建国,刘向东,曹致中,等.饲料稻研究现状及发展前景[J].草业学报, 2008, 17(5): 151-155.
[21] 张石蕊,易学武,贺喜,等.不同精粗比全混合日粮饲养技术对南方奶牛采食行为、产奶性能和血清游离氨基酸的影响[J].草业学报, 2008, 17(3): 23-30.
[22] 江院,张向前,卢小良.光周期与氮肥互作对华农1号青饲玉米碳氮代谢相关酶的影响[J].草业学报, 2008, 17(4): 92-101.
[23] IsIam M R, Ishida M, Ando S, et al. Estimation of nutritive value of whole crop rice silage and its effect on milk production performance by dairy cows[J]. Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Science, 2004, 17(10): 1383-1389.
[24] 张佩华,王加启,贺建华,等.青贮对饲料稻秸秆DM和NDF瘤胃降解特性的影响[J].草业科学, 2008, 25(6): 80-84.