[1]孙海菁,王树凤,陈益泰*.不同枫香种源对淹水胁迫的响应[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2012,36(03):043-48.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.03.010]
 SUN Haijing,WANG Shufeng,CHEN Yitai*.Response to waterlogging stress of different five Liquidambar formosana provenances[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2012,36(03):043-48.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.03.010]
点击复制

不同枫香种源对淹水胁迫的响应
分享到:

《南京林业大学学报(自然科学版)》[ISSN:1000-2006/CN:32-1161/S]

卷:
36
期数:
2012年03期
页码:
043-48
栏目:
研究论文
出版日期:
2012-05-30

文章信息/Info

Title:
Response to waterlogging stress of different five Liquidambar formosana provenances
作者:
孙海菁王树凤陈益泰*
中国林业科学研究院亚热带林业研究所,浙江 富阳 311400
Author(s):
SUN Haijing WANG Shufeng CHEN Yitai*
Institute of Subtropical Forestry, Chinese Academy of Forestry, Fuyang 311400, China
关键词:
枫香 种源 淹水胁迫 生物量 形态学参数
Keywords:
Liquidambar formosana provenances waterlogging biomass morphology
分类号:
S718.43
DOI:
10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.03.010
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
采用随机区组试验设计,研究了人工模拟淹水胁迫对永康、邵武、南丹、南昌、泾县5个种源的枫香(Liquidambar formosana)2年生苗生长的影响。经过120 d的淹水处理, 5个种源枫香的存活率均为100%,永康、泾县和南昌种源出现了少量不定根,而邵武和南丹种源未产生不定根。淹水抑制了枫香的干物质生产能力,其中对永康种源的抑制效应最明显,淹水胁迫下其干质量只有对照的64%; 而对南昌种源干物质积累的影响最小,其生物量积累达对照的90%; 同时发现,淹水胁迫下枫香种源地上部生物量积累和苗高生长变化不大,而根系生物量明显下降,导致根冠比下降,说明淹水胁迫对枫香地下部影响远远大于地上部,从而改变了干物质分配模式。随着淹水时间的延长,枫香叶绿素含量明显下降。淹水胁迫下不同种源枫香根系形态学参数也发生了变化,其中南丹种源的根系总长(TL)、根长密度(RLD)以及比根长(SRL)均有所增加,这可能是根系在缺氧环境下的一种适应性变化。根据5个种源在淹水胁迫下的生长状况和生物量积累,可以认为南昌和南丹种源较适合在低湿地推广。
Abstract:
The 2-year-old seedlings of 5 sweet gum(Liquidambar formosana Hance)provenances from Yongkang, Shaowu, Nandan, Nanchang, Jingxian were investigated under waterlogging stress. We studied the influence of the seedlings after the treatment of waterlogging. The results showed that, throughout the 120-day waterlogging period, the survival rates of seedlings of 5 formosan sweet gum provenances were 100%. Seedlings from Yongkang, Jingxian and Shaowu developed adventitious roots at the stem base, whereas no adventitious root was observed in Nanchang and Nandan. The dry matter production of 5 formosan sweet gum provenances seedlings were greatly inhibited under waterlogging stress, seedlings from Yongkang produced only 64% dry matter compared with that of CK, while little influence was found in seedlings from Nanchang, of which 90% of dry matter were produced compared with that of CK. We also found the shoot biomass and seedling height changed very little, Whereas root biomass decreased significantly, which resulted obviously in decrement of root-shoot ratio. With the prolonging of waterlogging stress, chlorophyll content in leaves of 5 formosan sweet gum provenances decreased significantly. Root morphology indexes also changed under waterlogging stress, interestingly, the total length of root, root length density and specific root length of Nandan provenance increased under waterlogging stress, which would be considered as the adaptation of roots in conquering anoxic environment. According to the growth and biomass accumulation of 5 formosan sweet gum provenances under waterlogging stress, we can conclude gum species from Nanchang and Nandan provenances would be more suitable for planting in intermittent flooding areas.

参考文献/References:

[1] 衣英华,樊大勇,谢宗强,等.模拟淹水对枫杨和栓皮栎气体交换、叶绿素荧光和水势的影响[J].植物生态学报,2006,30(6):960-968.
[2] Close D C,Davidson N J.Long-term waterlogging:nutrient,gas exchange photochemical and pigment characteristics of Eucalyptus nitens saplings[J].Russian Journal of Plant Physiology,2003,50:843-847.
[3] Jackson M B. Ethylene as a growth promoting hormone under flooded conditions [C]//Wareing P F. Plant Growth Regulators. London: Academic Press, 1982.
[4] 潘向艳,季孔庶,方彦.淹水胁迫下杂交鹅掌楸无性系叶片内源激素含量的变化[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2008,32(1):29-32.
[5] Kozlowski T T. Responses of woody plants to flooding and salinity[J]. Tree Physiol Monogr,1997,17(1):1-29.
[6] 何贵平,陈益泰,唐雪元,等.枫香地理种源幼林生长性状变异研究[J].江西农业大学学报,2005,27(4):585-589.
[7] 施季森,成铁龙,王洪云.中国枫香育种研究现状[J].林业科技开发,2002,16(3):17-19.
[8] 冷华妮,陈益泰,段红平,等.磷胁迫对不同种源枫香生长及氮、磷吸收利用率的影响[J].应用生态学报,2009,20(4):754-760.
[9] 徐庆,潘云芬,程元启,等.安徽升金湖淡水森林湿地适生树种筛选[J].林业科学,2008,44(12):7-14.
[10] Smethurst C F,Shabala S. Screening methods for waterlogging tolerance in Lucerne:comparative analysis of waterlogging effects on chlorophyll fluorescence, photosynthesis, biomass and chlorophyll content[J]. Functional Plant Biology, 2003, 30(3):335-343.
[11] Jie Song. Root morphology is related to the phenotypic variation in waterlogging tolerance of two populations of Suaeda salsa under salinity[J]. Plant and Soil, 2009,324(1-2):231-240.
[12] 徐锡增,唐罗忠,程淑婉.涝渍胁迫下杨树内源激素及其他生理反应[J].南京林业大学学报,1999,23(1):1-5.
[13] Jackson M B, Colmer T D. Response and adaptation by plants to flooding stress[J]. Annals of Botany, 2005, 96(4): 501-505.
[14] Gravatt, D A, Kirby C J. Patterns of photosynthesis and starch allocation in seedlings of four bottomland hardwood tree species subjected to flooding[J]. Tree Physiol, 1998, 18(6): 411-417.
[15] Kozlowski T T. Response of woody plants to flooding[C]// Kozlowski T T. Flooding and Plant Growth. Orlando: Academic Press,1984.
[16] Frye J, Grosse W. Growth response to flooding and recovery of deciduous trees[J]. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung, 1992, 47: 683-689.
[17] Glenz C, Schlaepfer R, Iorgulescu I, et al. Flooding tolerance of Central European tree and shrub species[J]. Forest Ecology and Management, 2006,285(1-3):1-13.
[18] Drew M C. Soil aeration and plant root metabolism[J]. Soil Sci, 1992, 154(4):259-268.
[19] Hughes F M, Harris T, Richards K, et al. Woody riparian species response to different soil moisture conditions: laboratory experiments on Alnus incana (L.)Moench[J]. Global Ecol Biogeography Lett, 1997(6): 247-256.
[20] Naidoo G, Naidoo S. Waterlogging responses of Sporobolus virginicus (L.)Kunth[J]. Oecologia,1992, 90(3):445-450.
[21] Joly C A. Flooding tolerance: a reinterpretation of Craw-ford’s metabolic theory[J]. Proc R Soc Edinburgh,1994,102:343-354.
[22] Rubio G, Oesterheld M, Alvarez C R, et al. Mechanisms for the increase in phosphorus uptake of waterlogged plants: soil phosphorus availability,root morphology and uptake kinetics[J]. Oecologia, 1997,112(2):150-155.

相似文献/References:

[1]邓送求,闫家锋,关庆伟*.南京紫金山枫香风景林空间结构分析[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2010,34(04):117.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2010.04.026]
 DENG Song qiu,YAN Jia feng,GUAN Qing wei*.Spatial structure of scenic forest of Liquidamabar formosana in Nanjing Zijin Mountain[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2010,34(03):117.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2010.04.026]
[2]杨瑞卿,楚秀丽,杨万霞,等.不同种源青钱柳苗期光合特征及变异分析[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2012,36(04):041.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.04.008]
 YANG Ruiqing,CHU Xiuli,YANG Wanxia,et al.Variation in photosynthetic characteristics of Cyclocarya paliurus seedlings from different provenances[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2012,36(03):041.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2012.04.008]
[3]王家源,郭 杰,喻方圆*.不同种源苦楝种子生物学特性差异[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2013,37(01):049.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2013.01.008]
 WANG Jiayuan,GUO Jie,YU Fangyuan*.The differences of seed biological characters in Melia azedarach L. from different provenances[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2013,37(03):049.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2013.01.008]
[4]成铁龙,施季森*.枫香半同胞子代遗传变异研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2005,29(01):029.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2005.01.007]
 CHENG Tie-long,SHI Jisen*.Genetic Variation of the Half-sib Progeny of Liquidambar f ormosana Hance[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2005,29(03):029.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2005.01.007]
[5]柳学军,曹福亮*,汪贵斌,等.落羽杉优良种源选择[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2006,30(02):047.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2006.02.011]
 LIU Xue-jun,CAO Fu liang*,WANG Gui-bin,et al.A Primary Study on Selection of Superior Provenance of Taxodium distichum (L.) Rich[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2006,30(03):047.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2006.02.011]
[6]侯伯鑫,林峰,余格非,等.福建柏地理种源试验幼林期综合评价[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2006,30(03):041.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2006.03.008]
 HOU Bo-xin,LIN Feng,YU Ge-fei,et al.Synthetic Assessment on the Geographical Provenance at Youthful Stand of Fokienia hodginsii[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2006,30(03):041.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2006.03.008]
[7]高捍东,陈凤毛,施季森.枫香种子成熟期的研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2000,24(03):026.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2000.03.007]
 Gao Handong\ Chen Fengmao\ Shi Jisen.A Study on Maturation of Liquidambar formosana Seeds[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2000,24(03):026.[doi:10.3969/j.jssn.1000-2006.2000.03.007]
[8]李 彦,周晓东,方升佐*,等.光照和种源对青钱柳叶三萜类化合物积累的影响[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2015,39(05):052.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2015.05.009]
 LI Yan,ZHOU Xiaodong,FANG Shengzuo*,et al.Influence of illumination intensity and provenance on triterpenoid accumulation in the leaves of Cyclocarya paliurus seedlings[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2015,39(03):052.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2015.05.009]
[9]倪建中,王 伟,郁书君,等.不同种源木棉生长及光合特性研究[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2015,39(06):185.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2015.06.033]
 NI Jianzhong,WANG Wei,YU Shujun,et al.Analysis of growth traits and photosynthetic characteristics of Bombax ceiba among different provenances[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2015,39(03):185.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2015.06.033]
[10]冯源恒,杨章旗*,李火根*,等.不同时期广西马尾松优良种源的遗传多样性变化趋势[J].南京林业大学学报(自然科学版),2016,40(05):041.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2016.05.007]
 FENG Yuanheng,YANG Zhangqi*,LI Huogen*,et al.A study on changes of genetic diversity for nearly 50 years in superior provenances of Pinus massoniana in Guangxi[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University(Natural Science Edition),2016,40(03):041.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.2016.05.007]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2011-03-29 修回日期:2011-08-10 基金项目:“十一五”国家科技支撑计划(2006BAD03A0105); 中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务费专项资金项目(FISF6144); 浙江省林木种业重点创新团队项目(2011R09035-02) 第一作者:孙海菁,副研究员,博士。*通信作者:陈益泰,研究员。E-mail: ytc.yalin@yahoo.com.cn。引文格式:孙海菁,王树凤,陈益泰. 不同枫香种源对淹水胁迫的响应[J]. 南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2012,36(3):43-48.
更新日期/Last Update: 2012-05-30