豫烟新品种生理特性的研究
|
摘要
以河南省自育烤烟新品种豫烟6号、豫烟7号和豫烟10号为研究对象,比较分析其在自然条件下,生长发育关键时期(伸根期、旺长前期和旺长后期)土壤含水量、根系形态、根系活力、叶片脯氨酸含量和超氧化物歧化酶活性等生理特性的差异。结果表明,旺长后期,3个豫烟新品种的根系形态差异最大,其中豫烟7号的总根长、根表面积和根体积最大,豫烟6号次之,豫烟10号最小;旺长后期的根系活力和土壤含水量最低时的叶片脯氨酸含量及各时期叶片超氧化物歧化酶活性的大小顺序均为豫烟7号>豫烟6号>豫烟10号。在河南省烟区,豫烟7号的环境适应能力较强,豫烟6号次之,豫烟10号较差。
Using Henan province self-bred Yuyan new varieties Yuyan 6, Yuyan 7 and Yuyan 10 as research subjects, the soil moisture, root morphology and activity, leaf proline and superoxide dismutase(SOD) activity in three critical periods of growth and development(root-extended period, early and late vigorous growth periods) were determined and compared among the three Yuyan new varieties under natural conditions. The results showed that : compared with other sampling periods, in the late vigorous growth stage, the root morphology among the three Yuyan new varieties differed most, the root length, surface and volume of Yuyan 7, Yuyan 6 and Yuyan 10 were in a significantly descending order. The root activity in late vigorous growth stage, leaf proline content when the soil moisture is the lowest and leaf superoxide dismutase in all the three critical periods were all following the pecking order of Yuyan 7>Yuyan 6>Yuyan 10. Therefore, in Henan province tobacco growing areas, the environmental adaptation ability of Yuyan 7 is stronger, which is followed by Yuyan 6, Yuyan 10 has the worst environmental adaptability.
Using Henan province self-bred Yuyan new varieties Yuyan 6, Yuyan 7 and Yuyan 10 as research subjects, the soil moisture, root morphology and activity, leaf proline and superoxide dismutase(SOD) activity in three critical periods of growth and development(root-extended period, early and late vigorous growth periods) were determined and compared among the three Yuyan new varieties under natural conditions. The results showed that : compared with other sampling periods, in the late vigorous growth stage, the root morphology among the three Yuyan new varieties differed most, the root length, surface and volume of Yuyan 7, Yuyan 6 and Yuyan 10 were in a significantly descending order. The root activity in late vigorous growth stage, leaf proline content when the soil moisture is the lowest and leaf superoxide dismutase in all the three critical periods were all following the pecking order of Yuyan 7>Yuyan 6>Yuyan 10. Therefore, in Henan province tobacco growing areas, the environmental adaptation ability of Yuyan 7 is stronger, which is followed by Yuyan 6, Yuyan 10 has the worst environmental adaptability.
引文
[1]丁燕芳,孙计平,尚晓颖,等.干旱对不同烤烟品种叶片细胞膜伤害和保护酶活性的影响[J].西南农业学报,2016,28(6):2746-2749.
[2]王仁刚,林世峰,张吉顺,等.主成分分析鉴定烟草品种抗旱性的生理指标筛选[J].湖南农业科学,2015(11):7-9,12.
[3]陈征,许嘉阳,范艺宽,等.不同烤烟品种幼苗形态结构及光合参数对干旱胁迫响应机制的差异[J].中国生态农业学报,2016,24(11):1508-1520.
[4]杨铁钊,张小全,殷全玉,等.烤烟新品种豫烟10号的选育及特征特性[J].中国烟草学报,2015,21(3):48-56.
[5]杨铁钊,殷全玉,丁永乐,等.烟草气孔特性、抗氧化酶活性与臭氧伤害的关系[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(5):672-679.
[6]尚晓颖,刘化冰,张小全,等.干旱胁迫对不同烤烟品种根系生长和生理特征的影响[J].西北植物学报,2010,30(2):357-361.
[7] LI Y F,ZHENG Y,JAGADEESWARAN G,et al. Characterization of small RNAs and their target genes in wheat seedlings using sequencing-based approaches[J].Plant Sci,2013,203:17-24.
[8] SUN F L,GUO G H,DU J K,et al. Whole-genome discovery of miRNAs and their targets in wheat(Triticum aestivum L.)[J].BMC Plant Biol,2014,14:142.
[9]冯慧芳,薛立,任向荣,等.4种阔叶幼苗对PEG模拟干旱的生理响应[J].生态学报,2011,31(2):371-382.
[10]邵惠芳,陈征,许嘉阳,等.两种烟草幼苗叶片对不同强度干旱胁迫的生理响应比较[J].植物生理学报,2016,52(12):1861-1871.
[11]汪邓民,吴福如,杨红娟,等.干旱对不同烤烟品种的生理及其烟株生长势的影响[J].烟草科技,2001(10):39-41.
[12]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:北京高等教育出版社,2000.
[13]欧仕仪,董仁瑞,孙福增.植物体内游离脯氨酸提取方法的改进[J].植物生理学通讯,1998,4(1):45-46.
[14]白玉章,金锦子.玉米根系活力测定法的改良[J].玉米科学,1994,2(4):44-47.
[15]王韶唐.植物生理生化进展[M].北京:科学出版社,1993.
[16]陈征,许嘉阳,范艺宽,等.不同烤烟品种幼苗形态结构及光合参数对干旱胁迫响应机制的差异[J].中国生态农业学报,2016,24(11):1508-1520.
[17]王思思,张吉旺,刘鹏,等.干旱对不同玉米品种苗期根系生理生化特性的影响[J].山东农业科学,2009(6):36-38.
[18]袁有波,李继新,丁福章,等.干旱胁迫对烤烟叶片脯氨酸和可溶性蛋白质含量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2008,36(21):8891-8892.
[19]王建华,刘鸿先,俆同.超氧化物歧化酶在植物逆境和衰老生理中的作用[J].植物生理学通讯,1989(1):1-2.
[20]覃鹏,刘叶菊,刘飞虎.干旱处理对烟草叶片SOD和POD活性的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2005(2):28-30.
[2]王仁刚,林世峰,张吉顺,等.主成分分析鉴定烟草品种抗旱性的生理指标筛选[J].湖南农业科学,2015(11):7-9,12.
[3]陈征,许嘉阳,范艺宽,等.不同烤烟品种幼苗形态结构及光合参数对干旱胁迫响应机制的差异[J].中国生态农业学报,2016,24(11):1508-1520.
[4]杨铁钊,张小全,殷全玉,等.烤烟新品种豫烟10号的选育及特征特性[J].中国烟草学报,2015,21(3):48-56.
[5]杨铁钊,殷全玉,丁永乐,等.烟草气孔特性、抗氧化酶活性与臭氧伤害的关系[J].植物生态学报,2004,28(5):672-679.
[6]尚晓颖,刘化冰,张小全,等.干旱胁迫对不同烤烟品种根系生长和生理特征的影响[J].西北植物学报,2010,30(2):357-361.
[7] LI Y F,ZHENG Y,JAGADEESWARAN G,et al. Characterization of small RNAs and their target genes in wheat seedlings using sequencing-based approaches[J].Plant Sci,2013,203:17-24.
[8] SUN F L,GUO G H,DU J K,et al. Whole-genome discovery of miRNAs and their targets in wheat(Triticum aestivum L.)[J].BMC Plant Biol,2014,14:142.
[9]冯慧芳,薛立,任向荣,等.4种阔叶幼苗对PEG模拟干旱的生理响应[J].生态学报,2011,31(2):371-382.
[10]邵惠芳,陈征,许嘉阳,等.两种烟草幼苗叶片对不同强度干旱胁迫的生理响应比较[J].植物生理学报,2016,52(12):1861-1871.
[11]汪邓民,吴福如,杨红娟,等.干旱对不同烤烟品种的生理及其烟株生长势的影响[J].烟草科技,2001(10):39-41.
[12]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:北京高等教育出版社,2000.
[13]欧仕仪,董仁瑞,孙福增.植物体内游离脯氨酸提取方法的改进[J].植物生理学通讯,1998,4(1):45-46.
[14]白玉章,金锦子.玉米根系活力测定法的改良[J].玉米科学,1994,2(4):44-47.
[15]王韶唐.植物生理生化进展[M].北京:科学出版社,1993.
[16]陈征,许嘉阳,范艺宽,等.不同烤烟品种幼苗形态结构及光合参数对干旱胁迫响应机制的差异[J].中国生态农业学报,2016,24(11):1508-1520.
[17]王思思,张吉旺,刘鹏,等.干旱对不同玉米品种苗期根系生理生化特性的影响[J].山东农业科学,2009(6):36-38.
[18]袁有波,李继新,丁福章,等.干旱胁迫对烤烟叶片脯氨酸和可溶性蛋白质含量的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2008,36(21):8891-8892.
[19]王建华,刘鸿先,俆同.超氧化物歧化酶在植物逆境和衰老生理中的作用[J].植物生理学通讯,1989(1):1-2.
[20]覃鹏,刘叶菊,刘飞虎.干旱处理对烟草叶片SOD和POD活性的影响[J].中国烟草科学,2005(2):28-30.