草业学报 ›› 2026, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (4): 29-41.DOI: 10.11686/cyxb2025176
刘朝荣1(
), 陈永成1, 陈莹1, 张旭东1, 胡天宇1, 苏力合1, 张凡凡1, 王旭哲1, 姚琨2, 马春晖1(
)
收稿日期:2025-05-07
修回日期:2025-06-25
出版日期:2026-04-20
发布日期:2026-02-07
通讯作者:
马春晖
作者简介:Corresponding author. E-mail: chunhuima@126.com基金资助:
Chao-rong LIU1(
), Yong-cheng CHEN1, Ying CHEN1, Xu-dong ZHANG1, Tian-yu HU1, Li-he SU1, Fan-fan ZHANG1, Xu-zhe WANG1, Kun YAO2, Chun-hui MA1(
)
Received:2025-05-07
Revised:2025-06-25
Online:2026-04-20
Published:2026-02-07
Contact:
Chun-hui MA
摘要:
为探究不同羊草品种(品系)对新疆北疆地区盐碱土的适应性,采用盆栽试验,以灰色羊草(HS)、中科一号羊草(ZK)、黄岗梁羊草(HGL)、赤峰羊草(CF)、东北羊草(DB)为对象,设置农田土(CK)、轻度(S1)、中度(S2)、重度(S3)、极重度(S4)5个盐碱胁迫强度,对盐碱胁迫下羊草生长、光合、生理特性和营养品质等进行观测和分析,利用聚类分析和模糊隶属函数法综合评价5份羊草的耐盐碱性。结果表明,轻度盐碱胁迫对羊草生长特性、光合速率和营养品质具有一定的促进作用。随着胁迫强度的增加,羊草农艺性状(株高、分蘖数、叶片数、茎粗、地上和地下部分干重)、光合特性(净光合速率、蒸腾速率、气孔导度、胞间CO2浓度)和光合色素(叶绿素a、叶绿素b、叶绿素a+b、类胡萝卜素)下降,羊草叶片相对电导率、丙二醛、渗透调节物质(脯氨酸、可溶性蛋白、可溶性糖)含量增加,抗氧化酶(过氧化物酶、过氧化氢酶、超氧化物歧化酶)活性升高,营养品质降低,且同一指标在羊草间存在品种差异(P<0.05)。基于聚类分析和耐盐碱性综合评价D值,羊草耐盐碱性排序为HS>HGL>ZK>CF>DB,灰色羊草和黄岗梁羊草综合表现较好,具有在新疆地区盐碱地进一步推广种植的价值。本研究结果可为区域化羊草品种筛选、后期羊草推广种植和盐碱地改良利用提供理论基础。
刘朝荣, 陈永成, 陈莹, 张旭东, 胡天宇, 苏力合, 张凡凡, 王旭哲, 姚琨, 马春晖. 新疆盐碱化土壤下不同羊草的耐盐碱性差异研究[J]. 草业学报, 2026, 35(4): 29-41.
Chao-rong LIU, Yong-cheng CHEN, Ying CHEN, Xu-dong ZHANG, Tian-yu HU, Li-he SU, Fan-fan ZHANG, Xu-zhe WANG, Kun YAO, Chun-hui MA. Differences in saline-alkali tolerance of five Leymus chinensis cultivars grown in saline-alkali soil from Xinjiang[J]. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2026, 35(4): 29-41.
处理 Treatment | 农田土壤含量 Content of farmland soil (%) | pH | 电导率 Electrical conductivity (dS·m-1) | 总盐 Total salt (%) | Cl- (g·kg-1) | HCO3- (g·kg-1) | SO42- (g·kg-1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 100 | 7.42 | 0.71 | 0.1 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 1.23 |
| S1 | 90 | 7.63 | 1.49 | 0.2 | 0.27 | 0.12 | 3.32 |
| S2 | 70 | 7.87 | 2.84 | 0.4 | 0.48 | 0.17 | 6.54 |
| S3 | 50 | 8.06 | 4.04 | 0.8 | 0.73 | 0.23 | 12.87 |
| S4 | 0 | 8.34 | 6.99 | 1.2 | 1.03 | 0.32 | 19.91 |
表1 土壤理化性质
Table 1 Soil physical and chemical properties
处理 Treatment | 农田土壤含量 Content of farmland soil (%) | pH | 电导率 Electrical conductivity (dS·m-1) | 总盐 Total salt (%) | Cl- (g·kg-1) | HCO3- (g·kg-1) | SO42- (g·kg-1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CK | 100 | 7.42 | 0.71 | 0.1 | 0.16 | 0.08 | 1.23 |
| S1 | 90 | 7.63 | 1.49 | 0.2 | 0.27 | 0.12 | 3.32 |
| S2 | 70 | 7.87 | 2.84 | 0.4 | 0.48 | 0.17 | 6.54 |
| S3 | 50 | 8.06 | 4.04 | 0.8 | 0.73 | 0.23 | 12.87 |
| S4 | 0 | 8.34 | 6.99 | 1.2 | 1.03 | 0.32 | 19.91 |
图1 盐碱胁迫对羊草农艺性状的影响HS: 灰色羊草Huise L. chinensis; ZK: 中科一号羊草Zhongke No. 1 L. chinensis; HGL: 黄岗梁羊草Huanggangliang L. chinensis; CF: 赤峰羊草Chifeng L. chinensis; DB: 东北羊草Dongbei L. chinensis. 不同小写字母表示同一盐碱胁迫处理下不同羊草间差异显著(P<0.05),不同大写字母表示同一羊草在不同盐碱胁迫处理下差异显著(P<0.05),下同。Different lowercase letters indicate significant differences among different L. chinensis under the same saline-alkali stress treatment (P<0.05), while different uppercase letters indicate significant differences of the same L. chinensis under different saline-alkali stress treatments (P<0.05). The same below.
Fig.1 Effect of saline-alkali stress on agronomic traits of L. chinensis
材料 Material | 处理 Treatment | 农艺性状 Agronomic character | 光合特性 Photosynthetic characteristics | 生理特性 Physiological characteristics | 营养品质 Nutritional quality | 综合平均值 Composite average value | 耐盐碱性排序 Order of saline-alkali tolerance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HS | CK | 0.79 | 0.72 | 0.37 | 0.46 | 0.58Ac | 0.59 | 4 | 1 |
| S1 | 0.94 | 0.91 | 0.40 | 0.54 | 0.69Aa | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.65 | 0.73 | 0.50 | 0.63 | 0.63Ab | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.38 | 0.50 | 0.68 | 0.79 | 0.59Ac | 3 | |||
| S4 | 0.21 | 0.36 | 0.63 | 0.52 | 0.43Ad | 5 | |||
| ZK | CK | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.37 | 0.43 | 0.59Ab | 0.55 | 2 | 3 |
| S1 | 0.93 | 0.94 | 0.39 | 0.51 | 0.69Aa | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.62 | 0.69 | 0.48 | 0.59 | 0.59Bb | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.32 | 0.41 | 0.57 | 0.73 | 0.51Cc | 3 | |||
| S4 | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.35Bd | 4 | |||
| HGL | CK | 0.82 | 0.72 | 0.35 | 0.45 | 0.58Ac | 0.58 | 3 | 2 |
| S1 | 0.93 | 0.85 | 0.39 | 0.54 | 0.68Aa | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.69 | 0.68 | 0.47 | 0.66 | 0.63Ab | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.38 | 0.46 | 0.66 | 0.78 | 0.57Bd | 4 | |||
| S4 | 0.24 | 0.31 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.43Ae | 5 | |||
| CF | CK | 0.75 | 0.59 | 0.32 | 0.29 | 0.49Bb | 0.45 | 3 | 4 |
| S1 | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.33 | 0.45 | 0.59Ba | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.41 | 0.53 | 0.50Cb | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.24 | 0.29 | 0.47 | 0.64 | 0.41Dc | 4 | |||
| S4 | 0.06 | 0.14 | 0.40 | 0.42 | 0.26Cd | 5 | |||
| DB | CK | 0.76 | 0.59 | 0.32 | 0.28 | 0.49Bb | 0.43 | 2 | 5 |
| S1 | 0.88 | 0.76 | 0.33 | 0.44 | 0.60Ba | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.41 | 0.49 | 0.48Db | 3 | |||
| S3 | 0.25 | 0.18 | 0.47 | 0.66 | 0.39Ec | 4 | |||
| S4 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.31 | 0.39 | 0.20Dd | 5 | |||
表2 盐碱胁迫下5份羊草的综合评价与排序
Table 2 Comprehensive evaluation and ranking of five L. chinensis under saline-alkali stress
材料 Material | 处理 Treatment | 农艺性状 Agronomic character | 光合特性 Photosynthetic characteristics | 生理特性 Physiological characteristics | 营养品质 Nutritional quality | 综合平均值 Composite average value | 耐盐碱性排序 Order of saline-alkali tolerance | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HS | CK | 0.79 | 0.72 | 0.37 | 0.46 | 0.58Ac | 0.59 | 4 | 1 |
| S1 | 0.94 | 0.91 | 0.40 | 0.54 | 0.69Aa | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.65 | 0.73 | 0.50 | 0.63 | 0.63Ab | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.38 | 0.50 | 0.68 | 0.79 | 0.59Ac | 3 | |||
| S4 | 0.21 | 0.36 | 0.63 | 0.52 | 0.43Ad | 5 | |||
| ZK | CK | 0.81 | 0.76 | 0.37 | 0.43 | 0.59Ab | 0.55 | 2 | 3 |
| S1 | 0.93 | 0.94 | 0.39 | 0.51 | 0.69Aa | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.62 | 0.69 | 0.48 | 0.59 | 0.59Bb | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.32 | 0.41 | 0.57 | 0.73 | 0.51Cc | 3 | |||
| S4 | 0.14 | 0.25 | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.35Bd | 4 | |||
| HGL | CK | 0.82 | 0.72 | 0.35 | 0.45 | 0.58Ac | 0.58 | 3 | 2 |
| S1 | 0.93 | 0.85 | 0.39 | 0.54 | 0.68Aa | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.69 | 0.68 | 0.47 | 0.66 | 0.63Ab | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.38 | 0.46 | 0.66 | 0.78 | 0.57Bd | 4 | |||
| S4 | 0.24 | 0.31 | 0.62 | 0.55 | 0.43Ae | 5 | |||
| CF | CK | 0.75 | 0.59 | 0.32 | 0.29 | 0.49Bb | 0.45 | 3 | 4 |
| S1 | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.33 | 0.45 | 0.59Ba | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.54 | 0.52 | 0.41 | 0.53 | 0.50Cb | 2 | |||
| S3 | 0.24 | 0.29 | 0.47 | 0.64 | 0.41Dc | 4 | |||
| S4 | 0.06 | 0.14 | 0.40 | 0.42 | 0.26Cd | 5 | |||
| DB | CK | 0.76 | 0.59 | 0.32 | 0.28 | 0.49Bb | 0.43 | 2 | 5 |
| S1 | 0.88 | 0.76 | 0.33 | 0.44 | 0.60Ba | 1 | |||
| S2 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.41 | 0.49 | 0.48Db | 3 | |||
| S3 | 0.25 | 0.18 | 0.47 | 0.66 | 0.39Ec | 4 | |||
| S4 | 0.06 | 0.03 | 0.31 | 0.39 | 0.20Dd | 5 | |||
| [1] | Lyu H, Zhao Y, Gong X L, et al. Review of techniques and case studies for saline-alkali land amelioration in the coastal regions of China. Hydrogeology and Engineering Geology, 2025, 52(2): 25-43. |
| 吕航, 赵月, 龚绪龙, 等. 我国滨海盐碱地改良技术综述及案例研究. 水文地质工程地质, 2025, 52(2): 25-43. | |
| [2] | Yang J S, Yao R J, Wang X P, et al. Research on salt-affected soils in China: history, status quo and prospect. Acta Pedologica Sinica, 2022, 59(1): 10-27. |
| 杨劲松, 姚荣江, 王相平, 等. 中国盐渍土研究: 历程、现状与展望. 土壤学报, 2022, 59(1): 10-27. | |
| [3] | Zhang Y F, Li W Y, Hu H, et al. Research status and prospect of saline-alkaline land improvement. Jiangsu Agricultural Sciences, 2017, 45(18): 7-10. |
| 张翼夫, 李问盈, 胡红, 等. 盐碱地改良研究现状及展望. 江苏农业科学, 2017, 45(18): 7-10. | |
| [4] | Lyu N, Shi L, Dai Y Y, et al. Reclamation of saline-alkali soils in Xinjiang: A review. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage, 2024, 43(12): 1-10. |
| 吕宁, 石磊, 戴昱余, 等. 新疆盐碱地治理利用研究回顾与启示. 灌溉排水学报, 2024, 43(12): 1-10. | |
| [5] | Zhu J F, Cui Z R, Wu C H, et al. Research advances and prospect of saline and alkali land greening in China. World Forestry Research, 2018, 31(4): 70-75. |
| 朱建峰, 崔振荣, 吴春红, 等. 我国盐碱地绿化研究进展与展望. 世界林业研究, 2018, 31(4): 70-75. | |
| [6] | Zhu T C. Bio-ecology of Leymus chinensis. Changchun: Jilin Science and Technology Press, 2004. |
| 祝廷成. 羊草生物生态学. 长春: 吉林科学技术出版社, 2004. | |
| [7] | Liang R F, Wu Z N, Li Z Y, et al. Effects of low-temperature and light on seed germination of Leymus chinensis. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2021, 43(12): 33-39. |
| 梁润芳, 武自念, 李志勇, 等. 低温和光照对羊草种子萌发的影响. 中国草地学报, 2021, 43(12): 33-39. | |
| [8] | Mu L L, Zhuang X, You J, et al. Evaluation of saline-alkali tolerance of 35 Leymus chinensis germplasm during germination. Heilongjiang Animal Science and Veterinary Medicine, 2024(18): 91-96. |
| 牟林林, 庄煦, 尤佳, 等. 35份羊草种质材料萌发期耐盐碱性评价. 黑龙江畜牧兽医, 2024(18): 91-96. | |
| [9] | Liang X, Hou X Y, Wang Y R, et al. Comprehensive evaluation on saline-alkali tolerance of Leymus chinensis germplasm resources. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2019, 41(3): 1-9. |
| 梁潇, 侯向阳, 王艳荣, 等. 羊草种质资源耐盐碱性综合评价. 中国草地学报, 2019, 41(3): 1-9. | |
| [10] | Ren J J, Wang F, Li Y L, et al. Effects of delinting treatment with hydrochloric acid on oxidation resistance of Bothriochloa ischaemum. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2025, 33(6): 1862-1868. |
| 任建军, 王菲, 李尹琳, 等. 盐酸脱绒处理对白羊草种子抗氧化性能的影响. 草地学报, 2025, 33(6): 1862-1868. | |
| [11] | Huang L H, Liang Z W, Ma H Y, et al. Effects of saline-sodic stress on the photosynthesis rate, transpiration rate and water use efficiency of Leymus chinensis. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2009, 18(5): 25-30. |
| 黄立华, 梁正伟, 马红媛, 等. 苏打盐碱胁迫对羊草光合、蒸腾速率及水分利用效率的影响. 草业学报, 2009, 18(5): 25-30. | |
| [12] | Wang X. The physiological response of the atioxidant system in Leymus chinensis to different alkali-saline stress. Changchun: Jilin University, 2015. |
| 王鑫. 羊草抗氧化系统对盐碱胁迫的响应特征. 长春: 吉林大学, 2015. | |
| [13] | Xu Y Q. The response of rhizosphere effect and photosynthetic physiology of gray green and yellow green ecotypes of Leymus chinensis to salt-alkaline stress. Changchun: Northeast Normal University, 2019. |
| 徐月乔. 盐碱胁迫下灰绿型与黄绿型羊草根际效应和光合生理响应. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2019. | |
| [14] | Yao Y, Xu Y Q, Wang G, et al. Salt-alkalinze stress induced rhizosphere effects and photosynthetic physiological response of two ecotypes of Leymus chinensis in Songnen meadow steppe. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2020, 53(13): 2584-2594. |
| 姚远, 徐月乔, 王贵, 等. 盐碱胁迫下松嫩草地2种生态型羊草根际效应及光合生理响应. 中国农业科学, 2020, 53(13): 2584-2594. | |
| [15] | Bai W Y, Hou X Y, Wu Z N, et al. Advances in studies on morphological plasticity of Leymus chinensis rhizome. Pratacultural Science, 2019, 36(3): 821-834. |
| 白乌云, 侯向阳, 武自念, 等. 羊草根茎克隆形态可塑性研究进展. 草业科学, 2019, 36(3): 821-834. | |
| [16] | Li H Z. Study on dynamic changes of the oasis soil salinization in the lower reaches of Kaidu River Basin, Xinjiang based on RS and GIS. Urumqi: Xinjiang Normal University, 2010. |
| 李会志. 基于RS/GIS的开都河流域下游绿洲土壤盐渍化动态变化研究. 乌鲁木齐: 新疆师范大学, 2010. | |
| [17] | Song W X. Evaluation of salt-tolerant accessions and analysis on the transcriptome of endure salt stress in Bromus inermis Lyess. Yinchuan: Ningxia University, 2024. |
| 宋文学. 无芒雀麦耐盐性评价与耐盐转录组学分析. 银川: 宁夏大学, 2024. | |
| [18] | Flowers T J, Colmer T D. Salinity tolerance in halophytes. New Phytologist, 2008, 179(4): 945-963. |
| [19] | Song J X, Anjum S A, Zong X F, et al. Combined foliar application of nutrients and 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) improved drought tolerance in Leymus chinensis by modulating its morpho-physiological characteristics. Crop and Pasture Science, 2017, 68(5): 474-482. |
| [20] | Song W Z, Loik M E, Cui H Y, et al. Effect of nitrogen addition on leaf photosynthesis and water use efficiency of the dominant species Leymus chinensis (Trin.) Tzvelev in a semi-arid meadow steppe. Plant Growth Regulation, 2022, 98(1): 91-102. |
| [21] | Bao F X, Chen N, Wang N, et al. Identification of soda saline-alkali tolerance of cold-resistant alfalfa germplasm at seedling stage based on membership function method. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2024, 32(12): 3827-3835. |
| 包凤轩, 陈宁, 王楠, 等. 基于隶属函数法鉴定抗寒苜蓿种质苗期耐苏打盐碱性. 草地学报, 2024, 32(12): 3827-3835. | |
| [22] | Luo J J, Xiao Y Z, Hou M L, et al. Effects of different additives on quality and vitamin content of mixed silage of alfalfa and Leymus chinensis. Acta Agrestia Sinica, 2025, 33(3): 992-1000. |
| 罗俊杰, 肖燕子, 侯美玲, 等. 不同添加剂对苜蓿与羊草混合青贮品质及维生素含量的影响. 草地学报, 2025, 33(3): 992-1000. | |
| [23] | Nasr S M, Parsakhoo A, Naghavi H, et al. Effect of salt stress on germination and seedling growth of Prosopis juliflora (Sw.). New Forests, 2012, 43(1): 45-55. |
| [24] | Wang Z Q, Wu C Y, Yang Z, et al. Effect of saline-alkali stress on growth, physiological and biochemical characteristics of wild jujube seedlings. Agricultural Research in the Arid Areas, 2018, 36(2): 153-160. |
| 王志强, 吴翠云, 杨哲, 等. 盐碱胁迫对酸枣幼苗生长及生理生化特性的影响. 干旱地区农业研究, 2018, 36(2): 153-160. | |
| [25] | Xiong X, Gui W Y, Liu M H, et al. Evaluation of salt tolerance in different alfalfa varieties under uniform and non-uniform salt stress. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2018, 27(9): 67-76. |
| 熊雪, 桂维阳, 刘沫含, 等. 不同紫花苜蓿品种在均匀与不均匀盐胁迫下的耐盐性评价. 草业学报, 2018, 27(9): 67-76. | |
| [26] | Calabrese E J, Baldwin L A. Hormesis: The dose-response revolution. Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, 2003(43): 175-197. |
| [27] | Li J K. Proteomic and physiological responses to salt (NaCl) stress in Leymus chinensis. Harbin: Northeast Agricultural University, 2018. |
| 李佶恺. 盐(NaCl)胁迫对羊草生理及蛋白质组变化的影响. 哈尔滨: 东北农业大学, 2018. | |
| [28] | Huang L H, Liang Z W, Ma H Y, et al. Biological characteristics and physiological responses of Leymus chinensis seeded in soils with different pH. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2008, 27(7): 1084-1088. |
| 黄立华, 梁正伟, 马红媛, 等. 直播羊草在不同pH土壤环境下的生物学特性和生理反应. 生态学杂志, 2008, 27(7): 1084-1088. | |
| [29] | Chen Y Y, Li Y Y, Sun P, et al. Interactive effects of salt and alkali stresses on growth, physiological responses and nutrient (N, P) removal performance of Ruppia maritima. Ecological Engineering, 2017(104): 177-183. |
| [30] | Yan G. Physiological and metabolic mechanisms underlying the effects of salt and alkali stress on the growth of Leymus chinensis at the seedling stage and adult stage and their differences. Changchun: Northeast Normal University, 2024. |
| 闫阁. 盐碱胁迫影响幼苗期与成株期羊草生长的生理代谢机制及其差异. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2024. | |
| [31] | Zhou C, Yang Y F. Physiological response to salt-alkali stress in experimental populations in two ecotypes of Leymus chinensis in the Songnen Plains of China. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2003, 14(11): 1842-1846. |
| 周婵, 杨允菲. 松嫩平原两个生态型羊草实验种群对盐碱胁迫的生理响应. 应用生态学报, 2003, 14(11): 1842-1846. | |
| [32] | Yan H, Zhao W, Yin S J, et al. Different physiological responses of Leymus chinensis to NaCl and Na2CO3. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2006, 15(6): 49-55. |
| 颜宏, 赵伟, 尹尚军, 等. 羊草对不同盐碱胁迫的生理响应. 草业学报, 2006, 15(6): 49-55. | |
| [33] | Peng Y L, Gao Z W, Gao Y, et al. Eco-physiological characteristics of alfalfa seedlings in response to various mixed salt-alkaline stresses. Journal of Integrative Plant Biology, 2008, 50(1): 29-39. |
| [34] | Yang C N, Chong J N, Li C Y, et al. Osmotic adjustment and ion balance traits of an alkali resistant halophyte Kochia sieversiana during adaptation to salt and alkali conditions. Plant and Soil, 2007, 294(1/2): 263-276. |
| [35] | Anjum S A, Niu J H, Wang R, et al. Regulation mechanism of exogenous 5-aminolevulinic acid on growth and physiological characters of Leymus chinensis (Trin.) under high temperature stress. Philippine Agricultural Scientist, 2016, 99(3): 253-259. |
| [36] | Tourajzadeh O, Piri H, Naserin A. Effect of nano biochar addition and deficit irrigation on growth, physiology and water productivity of quinoa plants under salinity conditions. Environmental and Experimental Botany, 2023, 217: 105564. |
| [37] | Niu X Y, Ma R. The response of physiological characteristics of leaves of red sand seedlings to drought stress. Pratacultural Science, 2023, 40(10): 2483-2492. |
| 牛欣益, 马瑞. 红砂幼苗叶片生理特性对干旱胁迫的响应. 草业科学, 2023, 40(10): 2483-2492. | |
| [38] | Liu A R, Zhao K F. Osmotica accumulation and its role in osmotic adjustment in Thellungiella halophila under salt stress. Journal of Plant Physiology and Molecular Biology, 2005, 31(4): 389-395. |
| 刘爱荣, 赵可夫. 盐胁迫下盐芥渗透调节物质的积累及其渗透调节作用. 植物生理与分子生物学学报, 2005, 31(4): 389-395. | |
| [39] | Liu B S, Kang C L, Wang X, et al. Physiological and biochemical response characteristics of Leymus chinensis to saline-alkali stress. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 2014, 30(23): 166-173. |
| 刘滨硕, 康春莉, 王鑫, 等. 羊草对盐碱胁迫的生理生化响应特征. 农业工程学报, 2014, 30(23): 166-173. | |
| [40] | Li S J, Huang Y J, Li Y F. Homeostatic responses and growth of Leymus chinensis under incrementally increasing saline-alkali stress. PeerJ, 2021(9): 10768. |
| [41] | Sa D W. Study on the characteristics of nutritional quality changes and fungal community structure of alfalfa after cutting in saline-alkali soil. Hohhot: Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, 2021. |
| 撒多文. 盐碱地紫花苜蓿刈割后营养品质变化特征与真菌群落结构研究. 呼和浩特: 内蒙古农业大学, 2021. | |
| [42] | Wang Y K, Yang Y R, Wang D L. Effects of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi on ion absorption and distribution in Leymus chinensis under saline-alkaline stress. Acta Prataculturae Sinica, 2020, 29(12): 95-104. |
| 王英逵, 杨玉荣, 王德利. 盐碱胁迫下AMF对羊草的离子吸收和分配作用. 草业学报, 2020, 29(12): 95-104. | |
| [43] | Yu H R, Jia Y S, Jia P F, et al. Comprehensive evaluation of growth, yield and quality of alfalfa in different saline-alkali soil. Chinese Journal of Grassland, 2019, 41(4): 143-149. |
| 于浩然, 贾玉山, 贾鹏飞, 等. 不同盐碱度对紫花苜蓿产量及品质的影响. 中国草地学报, 2019, 41(4): 143-149. | |
| [44] | Cao M. Effects of saline-alkali stress on the individual and clonal growth traits of Leymus chinensis. Changchun: Northeast Normal University, 2017. |
| 曹明. 盐碱胁迫对羊草个体生长及克隆繁殖性状的影响. 长春: 东北师范大学, 2017. |
| [1] | 马苹, 刘志国, 沙煜舒, 刘亚玲, 妥小梅, 伏兵哲, 高雪芹. 紫花苜蓿苗期氮利用特性及氮高效品种的筛选[J]. 草业学报, 2026, 35(4): 112-123. |
| [2] | 李建建, 徐夕雯, 张源, 王欢, 王浩然, 李晓慧, 沈会权, 沈绍斌, 宗俊勤, 郭海林. 南京地区饲用大麦主要农艺性状与营养品质评价[J]. 草业学报, 2026, 35(3): 114-127. |
| [3] | 童玉花, 王晓彤, 马永龙, 杨金辉, 余冬雯, 李淑霞. 壳聚糖浸种对盐碱胁迫下紫花苜蓿种子萌发的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2026, 35(3): 245-256. |
| [4] | 刘沂欣, 隋晓青, 王鑫尧, 郎梦卿, 孙凌子寅, 吉尔尔格. 外源褪黑素对盐胁迫下紫花苜蓿的缓解作用[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(9): 206-214. |
| [5] | 郭亮, 胡雨彤, 廖雨, 龚成毓, 杨晓燕, 管上淇, 鞠成琦. 磷添加和丛枝菌根真菌对羊草根系构型以及植株养分吸收利用的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(8): 165-178. |
| [6] | 项凌飞, 张峰举, 麻冬梅, 刘金龙, 兰剑, 邓建强, 胡海英, 王斌, 蔡春江, 马巧利. 氮磷钾配施对盐碱地湖南稷子生产性能和营养品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(7): 185-195. |
| [7] | 白小红, 陈文燕, 李琴, 王奕璇, 张雪, 王磊, 曲文杰, 朱林. 不同种源乌拉尔甘草种子萌发及幼苗生长比较研究[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(7): 196-209. |
| [8] | 高守舆, 刘文静, 李钰莹, 向清源, 许佳俊, 舒蕾淇, 李肇中. 苗期白羊草对盐胁迫的生理生化响应及其耐盐阈值的界定[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(3): 164-174. |
| [9] | 马利利, 蒋福祯, 马玉寿, 祁凯斌, 贾顺斌, 李正鹏. 粒径配比、施肥量以及播量耦合对矿区煤矸石基质的改良效果[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(3): 71-84. |
| [10] | 王文虎, 梁国玲, 刘文辉, 王凤宇, 李文. 青藏高原区8份老芒麦资源农艺性状与生产性能综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2025, 34(2): 123-132. |
| [11] | 关皓, 许多, 李海萍, 贾志锋, 马祥, 刘文辉, 陈有军, 李欣洋, 黄艳玲, 周青平, 陈仕勇. 高寒地区17个燕麦品种营养品质及瘤胃降解特性研究[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(9): 185-198. |
| [12] | 卜祥琪, 李姗姗, 段莹娜, 王迎春, 郑琳琳. 一氧化氮对盐碱胁迫下盐地碱蓬抗逆性及饲用品质的影响[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(9): 60-69. |
| [13] | 陆姣云, 田宏, 熊军波, 吴新江, 刘洋, 张鹤山. 14份乡土狼尾草材料幼苗的耐冷性综合评价[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(8): 98-111. |
| [14] | 张昭, 伏莹莹, 孙浩文, 孙逢雪, 闫慧芳. 不同品种燕麦种子活力鉴定与耐贮藏性评价[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(6): 165-174. |
| [15] | 亓雯雯, 马红媛, 李亚晓, 杜艳, 孙梦丹, 武海涛. 优质牧草新品种选育方法研究进展[J]. 草业学报, 2024, 33(6): 187-202. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||