岩溶石漠化区四种牧草植物光合生理适应性特征

草业学报 ›› 2010, Vol. 19 ›› Issue (3): 212-219.

岩溶石漠化区四种牧草植物光合生理适应性特征

韦兰英¹,曾丹娟¹,张建亮^1,2,尤业明^1,2,焦继飞^1,2,黄玉清¹

1.广西壮族自治区中国科学院广西植物研究所,广西桂林 541006;
2.广西师范大学,广西桂林 541004

收稿日期:2009-04-28 出版日期:2010-03-25 发布日期:2010-06-20
作者简介:韦兰英(1980-),女,广西桂林人,助研,硕士。E-mail:weilanyingccn@163.com
基金资助:
广西重大科技成果引进与产业化示范项目(桂科合0630004-7A-22)和广西植物研究所基本科研业务费 (桂植业09027)资助。

The photosynthetic characteristics of four forage grasses in Karst rock desertification areas

WEI Lan-ying¹, ZENG Dan-juan¹, ZHANG Jian-liang^1,2, YOU Ye-ming^1,2, JIAO Ji-fei^1,2, HUANG Yu-qing¹

1. Guangxi Institute of Botany, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region and Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Guilin 541006, China;
2. Guangxi Normal University, Guilin 541004, China

Received:2009-04-28 Online:2010-03-25 Published:2010-06-20

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 以类玉米、紫花苜蓿、菊苣和杂交狼尾草4种牧草植物为研究对象,通过测定其叶片结构性状、光合生理特征以及土壤理化特性,研究其对岩溶石漠化环境的生理适应性的差异。结果表明,4种牧草植物的叶面积(LA)、叶干重(DW)、叶绿素含量(Chl)和比叶面积(SLA)差异显著,反映出4种牧草植物叶片结构性状差异种间较大;同科植物类玉米和杂交狼尾草光合能力相近,而不同科植物如菊苣和紫花苜蓿光合能力差异较大,但其水分利用效率(WUE)和潜在水分利用效率(WUEi)相近;相比较而言,类玉米和杂交狼尾草具有较强的光合能力和较高的水分利用效率,而菊苣和紫花苜蓿的光合能力和水分利用效率相对较低。4种牧草对0～10和10～20cm土层土壤含水量的影响差异不大,但对土壤容重的影响存在差异。相关分析表明,4种牧草植物蒸腾速率(T_r)与0～10cm土层土壤含水量为显著的正相关关系,而10～20cm土层土壤含水量对大气饱和蒸汽压亏缺(V_pdl)影响较大。相比较而言,类玉米和杂交狼尾草具有较高的P_n,WUE和WUEi,对岩溶环境具有良好的适应性。

Abstract: The photosynthetic and leaf traits of four grasses (Zea diploperennis, Medicago sativa, Cichorium intybus, and Pennisetum americanum×Purpureum) were studied in field conditions, together with soil water content and soil bulk density to clarify their physiological adaptability to the Karst rocky desertification environment. There were significant differences of leaf area (LA), dry matter(DW), Chl, specific leaf area (SLA) among these four forage grasses. Zea diploperennis had the greatest LA and DW, while M. sativa had the lowest. SLA was in the sequence C. intybus>M. sativa>Z. diploperennis>P. americanum×Purpureum. M. sativa had the most Chl but there were no obvious differences of Chl between the other three forage grasses, indicating the great differences of the leaf structural traits among these four forage grasses. Z. diploperennis and P. americanum×Purpureum had high P_n, but low T_r and g_s and therefore large WUE and WUEi, but C. intybus and M. sativa were the opposite. This indicated that the intrafamily species Z. diploperennis and P. americanum×Purpureum had similar photosynthetic capacities, while the interfamily species C. intybus and M. sativa had significantly different photosynthetic capacities, even though they shared similar WUE and WUEi. There was no significant difference in water contents in the 0-10 and 10-20 cm soil layers below these four forage grasses, showing that they had little effect on soil water content. However, these different grasses did affect soil bulk density. Correlation analysis showed a significant positive correlation between T_r and water content in the 0-10 cm soil layer for all grasses, and the water content of the 10-20 cm soil layer greatly affected their V_pdl. Comparatively, Z. diploperennis and P. americanum×Purpureum had greater P_n, WUE and WUEi, indicating better adaptability to the Karst environment.

中图分类号:

韦兰英,曾丹娟,张建亮,尤业明,焦继飞,黄玉清. 岩溶石漠化区四种牧草植物光合生理适应性特征[J]. 草业学报, 2010, 19(3): 212-219.

WEI Lan-ying, ZENG Dan-juan, ZHANG Jian-liang, YOU Ye-ming, JIAO Ji-fei, HUANG Yu-qing. The photosynthetic characteristics of four forage grasses in Karst rock desertification areas[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2010, 19(3): 212-219.

参考文献

[1] 王世杰. 喀斯特石漠化-中国西南最严重的生态地质环境问题[J]. 矿物岩石地球化学通报, 2003, 22(2): 120-126.
[2] 李先琨, 何成新, 蒋忠诚. 岩溶脆弱生态区生态恢复、重建的原理与方法[J]. 中国岩溶, 2003, 22(1): 12-17.
[3] 段新慧, 周自玮. 石漠化地区不同豆科牧草品种与经济幼林共生性研究[J]. 草业科学, 2007, 24(1): 41-43.
[4] 曾馥平, 王克林. 桂西北喀斯特地区6种退耕还林(草)模式的效应[J]. 农村生态环境, 2005, 21(2): 18-22.
[5] 孟军江, 唐成斌, 钱晓刚, 等. 喀斯特山区退耕坡地紫花苜蓿引种栽培试验[J]. 贵州农业科学, 2005, 33(6): 51-53.
[6] 向佐湘, 方宝华, 杨知建, 等. 桂西北峰丛洼地4种牧草生产力分析[J]. 草业科学, 2007, 24(12): 48-51.
[7] Fausto M S, Gunther V M. Ecophysiological studies of Mediterranean plant species at the Castelporziano Estate[J]. Atmospheric Environment, 1997, 31: 51-60.
[8] Ueda Y S, Nishihara H, Tomita Y O. Photosynthetic response of Japanese rose species Rosa bracteata and Rosa rugosa to temperature and light[J]. Scientia Horticulturae, 2000, 84: 365-371.
[9] Midgley G F, Aranibar J N, Mantlana K B, et al. Photosynthetic and gas exchange characteristics of dominant woody plants on a moisture gradient in an African savanna[J]. Global Change Biology, 2004, 10: 309-317.
[10] Robert J, James W D, Kyle E H, et al. Soil nutrients influence spatial distributions of tropical tree species[J]. PNAS, 2007, 104(3):864-869.
[11] Guo W H, Li B, Huang Y M, et al. Effects of different water stresses on eco-physiological characteristics of Hippophae rhamnoides seedlings[J]. Acta Botanica Sinica, 2003, 45(10): 1238-1244.
[12] Cao B, Dang Q L, Zhang S R. Relationship between photosynthesis and leaf nitrogen concentration in ambient and elevated[CO₂] in white birch seedlings[J]. Tree Physiology, 2007, 27: 891-899.
[13] Plusa M, Aubya I, Verlaqueb M, et al. Seasonal variations in photosynthetic irradiance response curves of macrophytes from a Mediterranean coastal lagoon[J]. Aquatic Botany, FEB, 2005, 81(2): 157-173.
[14] Denis V, E′ric G, Arnier B, et al. Specific leaf area and dry matter content estimate thickness in Laminar leaves[J]. Annals of Botany, 2005, 96: 1129-1136.
[15] 郑淑霞, 上官周平. 黄土高原油松和刺槐叶片光合生理适应性比较[J]. 应用生态学报, 2007, 18(1): 16-22.
[16] 胡守林, 万素梅, 贾志宽, 等. 黄土高原半湿润区不同生长年限苜蓿叶片光合性能研究[J]. 草业学报, 2008, 17(5): 60-67.
[17] Abdulkhaliq A, Shoaibi A L. Photosynthetic response of Elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum) to NaCl salinity[J]. Journal of Biological Sciences, 2008, 8(3): 610-615.
[18] 万素梅, 贾志宽, 杨宝平. 苜蓿光合速率日变化及其与环境因子的关系[J]. 草地学报, 2009, 17(1): 27-31.
[19] 徐祥明, 曹建华, 李小方, 等. 岩溶环境下牧草光合速率日动态和水分利用效率研究[J]. 江苏农业科学, 2007, (3): 161-165.
[20] Camacho R F, Fernandez S J, Chisti M Y, et al. A Mechanistic model of photosynthesis in microalgae[J]. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 2003, 81(4): 459-473.
[21] 郑淑霞, 上官周平. 8种阔叶树种叶片气体交换特征和叶绿素荧光特性比较[J]. 生态学报, 2006, 26(4): 1080-1087.
[22] Penuelas J, Filella I, Llusia J, et al. Comparative field study of spring and summer leaf gas exchange and photobiology of the Mediterranean trees Quercus ilex and Phillyrea latifolia[J]. Journal of Experiment Botany, 1998, 49:229-238.
[23] Kazakou E, Navas M L. Variation in intensity of competition along a Mediterranean successional gradient[C]. Proceedings 10th Medecos Conference, Millpress, Rotterdam, 2004.
[24] 李玉霖, 崔建垣, 苏永中. 不同沙丘生境主要植物比叶面积和叶干物质含量的比较[J]. 生态学报, 2005, 25(2): 304-311.
[25] Bhagsari A S, Brown R H. Leaf photosynthesis and its correlation with leaf area[J]. Crop Science, 1986, 26: 127-132.
[26] Hart R H, Pearce R B, Chatterton N J, et al. Alfalfa yield, specific leaf weight, CO₂ exchange rate, and morphology[J]. Crop Science, 1978, 18: 649-653.
[27] 张光灿, 刘霞, 贺康宁, 等. 金矮生苹果叶片气体交换参数对土壤水分的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2004, 28(1): 66-72.
[28] 许振柱, 周广胜, 李晖. 羊草叶片气体交换参数对温度和土壤水分的响应[J]. 植物生态学报, 2004, 28(3): 300-304.