塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘3个沙拐枣种的抗旱特性比较

doi:10.11686/cyxb20140315

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 采用盆栽试验,研究了网状、心形和红皮沙拐枣在干旱胁迫和复水过程中的生理生态响应特征,并采用隶属函数法对3个沙拐枣种的抗旱性进行综合评价。结果表明,干旱胁迫下,红皮沙拐枣的相对含水量、水势和叶绿素含量均较高,但在复水后,恢复较慢。在干旱和中等灌溉处理下红皮沙拐枣的MDA含量最低,质膜损伤程度最轻,复水后恢复却较慢;在最高灌溉处理下,红皮沙拐枣的MDA含量却最高,复水后恢复也最快。干旱处理后3个沙拐枣种均有大量的渗透调节物质(脯氨酸和可溶性糖)累积,在最低灌溉量下为心形>红皮>网状沙拐枣,中等和最高灌溉处理下则为网状>心形>红皮沙拐枣,复水后降低幅度则为心形>红皮>网状沙拐枣。不同处理下心形沙拐枣的根冠比均显著高于其他种,网状沙拐枣相对较低。抗旱性综合评价结果为红皮>网状>心形沙拐枣。可见,各项测定指标的种间差异和综合评价结果并不完全一致,总体来看红皮沙拐枣对干旱胁迫的适应性最强,可优先推荐在当地种植。

Abstract: The influence of drought stress and re-watering on the ecophysiological characteristics of Calligonum cancellatum, C. cordatum, and C. rubicundun was studied in a pot experiment under three irrigation treatments. The comprehensive drought resistance of the three Calligonum was compared with their subordinate function. Under water stress, relative water content, water potential, and chlorophyll content of assimilating branches were higher for C. rubicundun, but recovered more slowly after re-watering compared with those of other species. After water stress, the malondialdehyde (MDA) content was lower and recovered more slowly for C. rubicundun under drought and medium irrigation treatments, but was higher and recovered more quickly at high irrigation levels compared with other species. There was a large number of osmotic adjustment substances (soluble sugar and proline) accumulated in the assimilating branches of the three Calligonum under water stress. The contents of osmotic adjustment substances under drought treatment were in the following order: C. cordatum>C. rubicundun>C. cancellatum, but under medium and high irrigation treatments they were C. cancellatum>C. cordatum>C. rubicundun. However, the contents of osmotic adjustment substances in C. cordatum decreased more significantly compared to other species after re-watering. In addition, C. cordatum had significantly higher root/shoot ratios than the other species. Based on the determined indexes under water stress, the comprehensive drought resistance was in the following order: C. rubicundun>C. cancellatum>C. cordatum. Obviously, the difference of each ecophysiological parameter among species was not consistent with that of comprehensive evaluation. Overall, C. rubicundun can be introduced for shelterbelt construction because of its strong tolerance and adaptability to drought stress in the southern fringe of the Taklimakan Desert.

中图分类号:

S793.102

黄彩变,曾凡江,雷加强. 塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘3个沙拐枣种的抗旱特性比较[J]. 草业学报, 2014, 23(3): 136-143.

HUANG Cai-bian,ZENG Fan-jiang,LEI Jia-qiang. Comparison of drought resistance among three Calligonum in the Southern Fringe of the Taklamakan Desert[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2014, 23(3): 136-143.

参考文献

Reference：
[1]Pan B R. Desert Joan - Calligonum[J]. Life World, 2010, 6: 30-33.
[2]Mao Z M. Flora of Xinjiang( 1th Volume)[M]. Urumqi: Xinjiang Science and Technology Health Press, 1993: 265.
[3]Li Z , Peng Y, Su X Y. Physiological responses of white clover by different leaf types associated with anti-oxidative enzyme protection and osmotic adjustment under drought stress[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(2): 257-263.
[4]Zhong P F, Su S P, Li Y. Comprehensive evaluation of drought resistance of Reaumuria soongorica from four geographical populations[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2011, 20(5): 26-33.
[5]Liu J N, Shi Y H, Hou Z H, et al. Drought resistance evaluation of four seedling chicory[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(2): 241-248.
[6]Wu Q, Zhang G C, Pei B, et al. Physiological and biochemical responses to different soil drought stress in three tree species[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2013, 33(12): 3648-3656.
[7]Xie X J, Lan D P, Bai J W. A comprehensive assessment of drought-resistance of three wild rocky-slope grasses[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(4): 75-80.
[8]Meng L, Mao P C, Zhang G F. Evaluation of drought resistance and analysis of physiological index variation for different Chinese Iris populations[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(5): 18-24.
[9]Zeng F J, Li X Y, Zhang X M, et al. Water physiological characteristics of four perennial plant species around Cele Oasis in Xinjiang[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2009, 20(11): 2632-2638.
[10]Su P X, Zhao A F, Zhang L X, et al. Characteristic in photosynthesis,transpiration and water use efficiency of Haloxylon ammodendron and Calligonum mongolicum of desert species[J]. Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 2003, 23(1): 11-17.
[11]Li X Y, Thomas F M, Foetzki A, et al. The responses of Calligonum caput-medusae to changes of water conditions under natural environment[j]. Acta Phytoecologica Sinica, 2003, 27(4): 516-521.
[12]Liu Z, Zeng F J, An G X, et al. Influence of irrigation amounts on seedling growth and biomass allocation of Calligonum caput-medusae at the southern fringe of the Taklimakan Desert[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2012, 32(6): 1655-1661.
[13]Song C, Zeng F J, Liu B, et al. Influence of water condition on morphological characteristics and biomass of Calligonum caput-medusae Schrenk seedlings[J]. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2012, 31(9): 2225-2233.
[14]Yu L, Liu Y H, Zhou L P, et al. A study on the changes of ascorbic acid and related physiological indexes in different cultivars of Zoysia under drought stress[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(4): 106-115.
[15]Liu A R, Zhang Y B, Zhong Z H, et al. Effects of salt stress on the growth and osmotica accumulation of Coleus blumei[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(2): 211-218.
[16]Shu Z, Zhang X S, Chen J, et al. The simplification of chlorophyll content measurement[J]. Plant Physiology Journal, 2010, 46(4): 399-402.
[17]Li H S, Sun Q, Zhao S J, et al. Experimental principles and techniques of plant physiology and biochemistry[M]. Beijing: Higher Education Press, 2000.
[18]Song J Z, Li P P, Fu W G. Effect of water stress and rewatering on the physiological and biochemical characteristics of Phalaris arundinacea[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2012, 21(2): 62-69.
[19]Yang Y J, Zheng M Z, Qin W Z, et al. Responses of tall fescue and perennial ryegrass turfgrasses to drought stress and re-watering treatment[J]. Pratacultural Science, 2012, 29(3): 370-376.
[20]Chen M, Hou X C, Fan X F, et al. Drought tolerance analysis of Miscanthus sinensis‘Gracillimu’seedlings[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(3): 184-189.
[21]Shi X X, Mao P C, Zhang G F, et al. The comparison of drought resistance on 15 chinese Iris Germplasm at seedling stage[J]. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2007, 15(4): 352-358.
[22]Fan S L, Yuan Z H, Feng L J, et al. Effects of drought stress on physiological and biochemical parameters of Dahlia pinnata[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2011, 22(3): 651-657.
[23]Liang G L, Zhou Q P, Yan H B, et al. The identification of drought resistance of four species of Festuca L.at seedlings stage[J]. Acta Agrectir Sinica, 2009, 17(2): 206-212.
[24]Zou C J, Han S J, Xu W D, et al. Eco-physiological responses of Picea mongolica ecotypes to drought stress[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(9): 1446-1450.
[25]Hao S R, Guo X P, Wang W M, et al. Effects of water stress and rewatering at shooting stage of rice on chlorophyll pigments in leaves[J]. Journal of Hohai University(Natural Sciences), 2006, 34(4): 397-400.
[26]Wang Q, Sun J X, An Y. The effect of the population properties and stress-tolerance physiological characteristics of Zoysia grass under water stresses[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(2): 33-38.
[27]Song Z J, Li P Y, A B L T, et al. Osmotic adjustment substance responses of four Elytrigia repens re-watered after drought stress[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(5): 52-57.
[28]Elsheery N I, Cao K F. Gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence, and osmotic adjustment in two mango cultivars under drought stress[J]. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2008, 30(6): 769-777.
[29]Peng Y Y, Yan H M, Guo L C, et al. Evaluation and selectionon drought-resistance of germplasm resources of Avena species with different types of ploidy[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2011, 31(9): 2478-2491.
[30]Luo W C, Zeng F J, Liu B, et al. Photosynthetic and physiological characteristics of introduced plants at the desert-oasis ecotone[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2013, 22(2): 273-280.
[31]Zhang J X, Nguyen H T, Blum A. Genetic analysis of osmotic adjustment in crop plants[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 1999, 50: 291-302.
[32]Wang B, Yang X Z, Dai S L. Comprehensive analysis in drought resistance of four landscape trees[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University, 2013, 35(1): 95-102.
[33]Sun J, Zeng J, Wang Y J, et al. Evaluation and screening of drought stress tolerance in 20 cut chrysanthemum varieties[J]．Journal of Nanjing Agricultural University, 2013, 36(1): 24-28.
[34]Guo W, Li B, Zhang X, et al. Architectural plasticity and growth responses ofHippophae rhamnoides andCaragana intermedia seedlings to simulated water stress[J]. Journal of Arid Environments, 2007, 69(3): 385-399.
参考文献：
[1]潘伯荣. 沙漠圣女——沙拐枣[J]. 生命世界, 2010, 6: 30-33.
[2]毛祖美. 新疆植物志( 第一卷)[M]. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆科技卫生出版社, 1993: 265.
[3]李州, 彭燕, 苏星源. 不同叶型白三叶抗氧化保护及渗透调节生理对干旱胁迫的响应[J]. 草业学报, 2013, 22(2): 257-263.
[4]种培芳, 苏世平, 李毅. 4个地理种群红砂的抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2011, 20(5): 26-33.
[5]刘建宁, 石永红, 侯志宏, 等. 4份菊苣种质材料苗期抗旱性评价[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(2): 241-248.
[6]吴芹, 张光灿, 裴斌, 等. 3 个树种对不同程度土壤干旱的生理生化响应[J]. 生态学报, 2013, 33(12): 3648-3656.
[7]谢贤健, 兰代萍, 白景文. 三种野生岩生草本植物的抗旱性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(4): 75-80.
[8]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.
[9]曾凡江, 李向义, 张希明, 等. 新疆策勒绿洲外围四种多年生植物的水分生理特征[J]. 应用生态学报, 2009, 20(11): 2632-2638.
[10]苏培玺, 赵爱芬, 张立新, 等. 荒漠植物梭梭和沙拐枣光合作用、蒸腾作用及水分利用效率特征[J]. 西北植物学报, 2003, 23(1): 11-17.
[11]李向义, Thomas F M, Foetzki A, 等. 自然状况下头状沙拐枣对水分条件变化的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2003, 27(4): 516-521.
[12]刘镇, 曾凡江, 安桂香, 等. 塔克拉玛干沙漠南缘头状沙拐枣幼苗生长和生物量分配对不同灌溉量的响应[J]. 中国沙漠, 2012, 32(6): 1655-1661.
[13]宋聪, 曾凡江, 刘波, 等. 不同水分条件对头状沙拐枣幼苗形态特征及生物量的影响[J]. 生态学杂志, 2012, 31(9): 2225-2233.
[14]俞乐, 刘拥海, 周丽萍, 等. 干旱胁迫下结缕草叶片抗坏血酸与相关生理指标变化的品种差异研究[J]. 草业学报, 2013, 22(4): 106-115.
[15]刘爱荣, 张远兵, 钟泽华, 等. 盐胁迫对彩叶草生长和渗透调节物质积累的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2013, 22(2): 211-218.
[16]舒展, 张晓素, 陈娟, 等. 叶绿素含量测定的简化[J]. 植物生理学通讯, 2010, 46(4): 399-402.
[17]李合生, 孙群, 赵世杰, 等. 植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M]. 北京: 高等教育出版社, 2000.
[18]宋家壮, 李萍萍, 付为国. 水分胁迫及复水对虉草生理生化特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2012, 21(2): 62-69.
[19]杨有俊, 郑明珠, 秦伟志, 等. 干旱及复水处理下坪用黑麦草和高羊茅抗旱特性比较[J]. 草业科学, 2012, 29(3): 370-376.
[20]陈敏, 侯新村, 范希峰, 等. 细叶芒苗期耐旱性分析[J]. 草业学报, 2013, 22(3): 184-189.
[21]史晓霞, 毛培春, 张国芳, 等. 15份马蔺材料苗期抗旱性比较[J]. 草地学报, 2007, 15(4): 352-358.
[22]范苏鲁, 苑兆和, 冯立娟, 等. 干旱胁迫对大丽花生理生化指标的影响[J]. 应用生态学报, 2011, 22(3): 651-657.
[23]梁国玲, 周青平, 颜红波, 等. 羊茅属4 种牧草苗期抗旱性鉴定[J]. 草地学报, 2009, 17(2): 206-212.
[24]邹春静, 韩士杰, 徐文铎, 等. 沙地云杉生态型对干旱胁迫的生理生态响应[J]. 应用生态学报, 2003, 14(9): 1446-1450.
[25]郝树荣, 郭相平, 王为木, 等. 水稻拔节期水分胁迫及复水对叶片叶绿体色素的影响[J]. 河海大学学报（自然科学版）, 2006, 34(4): 397-400.
[26]王齐, 孙吉雄, 安渊. 水分胁迫对结缕草种群特征和生理特性的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(2): 33-38.
[27]孙宗玖, 李培英, 阿不来提, 等. 干旱复水后4 份偃麦草渗透调节物质的响应[J]. 草业学报, 2009, 18(5): 52-57.
[28]Elsheery N I, Cao K F. Gas exchange, chlorophyll fluorescence, and osmotic adjustment in two mango cultivars under drought stress[J]. Acta Physiologiae Plantarum, 2008, 30(6): 769-777.
[29]彭远英, 颜红海, 郭来春, 等. 燕麦属不同倍性种质资源抗旱性状评价及筛选[J]. 生态学报, 2011, 31(9): 2478-2491.
[30]罗维成, 曾凡江, 刘波, 等. 绿洲-沙漠过渡带引种植物光合生理特征研究[J]. 草业学报, 2013, 22(2): 273-280.
[31]Zhang J X, Nguyen H T, Blum A. Genetic analysis of osmotic adjustment in crop plants[J]. Journal of Experimental Botany, 1999, 50: 291-302.
[32]王斌, 杨秀珍, 戴思兰. 4 种园林树木抗旱性的综合分析[J]. 北京林业大学学报, 2013, 35(1): 95-102.
[33]孙静, 曾俊, 王银杰, 等. 20 个切花菊品种抗旱性评价与筛选[J]．南京农业大学学报, 2013, 36(1): 24-28.
[34]Guo W, Li B, Zhang X,et al. Architectural plasticity and growth responses of Hippophae rhamnoides and Caragana intermedia seedlings to simulated water stress[J]. Journal of Arid Environments， 2007, 69(3): 385-399.